Loss Of Ability To Be Human Analysis

Loss of Ability to “Be Human” In addition to the environment shaping what it means to be human, without a suitable environment, we actually can lose part of our human nature, showing just how important the environment is in determining the behavior of humans. If what is thought to be human nature can be lost so easily, can it be considered as human nature – intrinsic definition of what it means to be human? Consider the case of a feral child, who has lived isolated from human contact from a young age and has had little experience of human care, behavior and language. As Hull explains, as a result of their isolation, these children cannot speak or understand language or be taught language by the researchers who often work with them (Hull, …show more content…
So, one’s nature is profoundly changed by his culture and upbringing. With human nature being so intrinsically linked to environment, it is impossible to define one human nature which encompasses all of humanity in its many forms. Additionally, think to socialized humans who lack abilities due to their unique biology. Are the mentally and developmentally challenged people unable to be considered as humans because of their inability to communicate and conforms to societal norms? If this sub-population is not considered to be human due to their proposed lack of human nature, despite being genetically Homo sapiens, there will be incredible social policy ramifications. Finally, consider humans with various mental illnesses affecting their social judgement, such as sociopaths and psychopaths. Due to their diminished empathy and remorse, antisocial and disinhibited behavior, they are quite different from a ‘normal human’. Can and should they be treated as human? My answer is yes, they should be. These individuals are biologically damaged and therefore cannot fit in with the narrow definition of human nature. Nonetheless, the are genetically, biologically and evolutionarily human. They should not and cannot be excluded from the Homo sapiens species just because of a lack of human nature, defined through a narrow socio-cultural …show more content…
The past human mind was more attuned to predation, hunting, sexual jealousy and territoriality. Now, there is less emphasis on the physical with our increased dependence on technology. As a result, our minds are probably less attuned to the physical world around us – how many people do you know who can hunt for their own food or avoid a predator? As well, with a heightened emphasis on society and closer communities, we are increasingly associating killing with negative morality. During Homo sapiens’ hunter-gatherer days, killing was common place as it was necessary to sustaining life. As the general population of human moved away from animal farming and the number of global conflicts decreased with only specialized groups engaged in the conflict, the grand majority of humanity is now removed from killing. Now, humans who kill are seen as deviant from the norm, even though killing was so commonplace for our ancestors. Clearly there has been a change in what is considered human nature due to biological and socio-cultural evolution. What was once commonplace is now strange and deviant, a cycle that will repeat itself as our species moves forward. As humans are always changing, human nature by definition will always be changing as well. As a result, there is no such thing as definite human