Selma and Keith, I introduced the idea to the list of our absence of instinct - that we have replaced most of our instincts with reasoned choice. I had read Ashley Montague who said we have absolutely no instincts, which I like but did not completely accept - though I like absolutes as most of this list can attest. You can work with absolutes - if you can find them. You can't do a lot with "perhaps" and "maybe".
Selma, I think my doubts about Montague's absolutes are fading as a result of your post. Reflex action seems to account for the baby's suckling and suchlike. There again, I bet the baby connects losing the pain in the tummy with the thing thrust into her mouth - and reason begins to take over from reflex action. We have always had animals since coming to North America. Always two or three dogs and similar numbers of cats. Also, some peculiarities such as the horse on the roof and the hen that would come through our open door, enter the living room, lay an egg on the television, then leave. (Well, perhaps she wasn't a pet.) Animals are not human though at times they may seem to possess human traits. One gets to know them and they really do become part of the family. When they die there is a sense of loss. We bury our dead animals in the garden or on the mountain. Coming down one day, I met my daughter and her friend riding up to the "Second Lookout" - our name for a view that let's us see over coastal range to the Pacific beyond. The friend's dog was draped across a pommel and they proceeded to bury it by the side of the trail. They weren't happy. On other occasions, I've found myself stifling sobs (men aren't allowed to cry) as the life ebbed from a treasured friend of a decade or more. Yet, they are animals. That's all. Even though they may seem to have human characteristics and we love them. Selma, your query is about the two assumptions about human behavior that should perhaps precede all 'people' studies - in my case Classical Political Economy. (Never mix up CPE with modern economics!) They are: "Man's desires are unlimited." and "Man seeks to satisfy his desires with the least exertion." You can make it "People" if you wish. Keith suggested a third: "People have a curiosity beyond present needs for survival." These are assumptions that are true of every human and serve as a basis for study. The first indicates why he does things, the second, how he proceeds to satisfy those unlimited exertions. The third is still out, but it looks good to me. We can be certain that his first desire will be to survive (otherwise he won't long be part of our study). From thereon, we don't know what his desires may be, though we can make shrewd surmises from his actions. We can assume that as he can reason, he will place his desires in a hierarchy, placing things impossible on the back burner, bringing to the top the strongest desire that is possible. Someone brought up Maslow and his desire structure. As it happens, a friend of mine (and a volunteer Georgist teacher) wrote two best sellers on Maslow - I believe "The Third Force" and "Beyond Failure". I'm sure someone will correct me if my memory has goofed.. Frank added the two assumptions to Maslow's circle of needs. So, a desire I have is to cross an English field again - one that isn't plowed or pasture. The grass and plants grow knee-high and sometimes waist-high. Tired after a long walk, there is nothing better than to lay flat on one's back on this soft cushion, perhaps nibbling a stalk while watching the clouds move across a blue sky. My chance of doing that soon is remote - but it's there awaiting opportunity. One of the problems of our brain-washed society is that mention of our unlimited desires immediately brings nasty thoughts to the fore. It shouldn't. By far the best multiplier of our production effectiveness is cooperation. We can get more for less exertion with cooperation and specialization. So, it seems to be one of the primary desires we have. Or, we wouldn't cooperate so much. The important point with regard to establishing these broad assumptions of human behavior is that if they are true we can use them to solve problems. I have chided Steve for supporting a problem with no solution - overpopulation. However, these two (or three) assumptions can lead us directly to the way to attack the "problem" and solve it. And, of course, to other important problems that cause us alarm and dismay. We could add to these basic assumptions another: "That people seek to advantage themselves." I suppose that adds selfishness to greed and laziness. (Not really - I'm kidding. These thoughts come from observation, with no subjective interpretation of them.) Harry ____________________________________________ Selma wrote: >Humans share have some reflexes (suckling, e.g.) but there are no >biologically determined human behaviors that will allow them to survive >without culture. What humans have that no other animals have is culture-a >way of life of the people in a society that is learned, shared and >transmitted from one generation to the next. > >Humans, through culture, have been able to change their environment whereas >other creatures can only react to their environment. > >I don't know what is meant by the statement that > >"people's desires are unlimited". Desires for ??? I certainly have no >unlimited desire for a supply of poisoned arrows nor do I desire a mink coat >or diamonds. > >Selma > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 3:23 AM >Subject: Intertwined (was Name Dropping) > > >Hi Harry, > >At 17:33 19/03/02 -0800, you wrote: ><<<< >Our ability to sustain ourselves rests squarely on our ability to reason. >Unlike other animals, we don't rely on instincts. > >>>> > >I don't agree. You're falling into the same taxonomic fallacy as >religionists. We're not in a separate category from the rest of animal >life. We have plenty of instincts (from suckling through to rank ordering), >and animals have plenty of reason (ask any dog owner or elephant trainer or >any scientist who studies cetaceans or chimps). > >In my opinion all lifeforms share an inexplicable something, itself shared >with the basic fabric of the universe (of which 90% of its mass/energy >constitution is still totally unknown to physicists). So, in order to >retain our sense of wonderment, I respectfully retain my suggestion of a >third self-evident truth when considering man's role in economics and >history: > >1. People's desires are unlimited >2. People seek to satisfy their desires with the least exertion >3. People have a curiosity beyond present needs for survival > >Keith ****************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of LA Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (818) 352-4141 Fax: (818) 353-2242 *******************************
