↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
      

What is a human being?

Our behaviors are linked to three major phenomena:

Our genetic heritage

Our collective behavioral genetic heritage is composed of the following two major elements: social ambition and cognitive dissonance.

Social ambition, is the desire we have to climb up the social hierarchy. It generates an excessive appetite for the game of alliances, which we will call generalized nepotism. It leads to a high level of social violence, in the form of permanent and multiple conflicts of the type 'us versus them'.

The resolution of cognitive dissonance, is the ability we have to reconcile in an irrational way contradictory facts. It gradually leads to lying to oneself, and to harming others in good conscience. It is probably the consequence of the dual nature of the human mind.

Why is it important to know what a human being is from a scientific point of view, and not as a result of simple introspection?

If we want to address the issue 'how to organize collective functioning well,' common sense dictates that we first clearly define our subject, that is, what a human being is.

Marx had carried out a very rigorous analysis of the functioning of capitalism. It is the fact of not having properly defined what a human being is that led him to draw only a naive solution, which caused many misfortunes.
To Marx's credit, at his time, sociological scientific data was not available, and even today, all philosophers allow themselves the same carelessness: starting from a view of the human based on simple introspection or personal experience, and from it deducing a supposed optimum collective organization.

Consequences of human nature at the level of social organization

The natural product of a social organization based on our collective genetic heritage is social violence and normative pressure exerted on individuals.

For a satisfactory social organization, it must take into account this genetic heritage, and limit its negative consequences. In particular, the book From Capital to Reason demonstrates that framing the decision-making process is a necessary condition to build a satisfactory social organization. This requires focusing on how we decide, as opposed to our democratic organizations which focus on who decides.

Similarly, a social organization that falls into one of the following two pitfalls cannot be satisfactory:

Refer to the questions 'What are the consequences of social ambition?' and 'What is cognitive dissonance?'. Then refer to the question 'What is the great discovery of the book From Capital to Reason ?'.

Going beyond our genetic heritage through culture: problem solving

The main cultural contribution, which allows us to go beyond the behaviors dictated by our genetics, is the method of problem solving. It consists of performing a reasoning in four phases:
1. Notice the problem
2. Carry out a serious analysis.
3. Develop a solution, often partial.
4. Implement it.
Only humans are capable of this, in particular because language is a prerequisite for transmitting this technique, which requires long learning.

The game of alliances is the natural functioning that comes from our genetic heritage, and leads to significant social violence. The method of problem solving allows us to go beyond it, both at the family level and at the general level of society. This method of problem solving thus probably constitutes the optimum functioning of a human brain, which is unfortunately rarely achieved, for two reasons: either one of the steps is rushed, or a belief takes the place of a fact and leads to a final ideological solution.

Moreover, the effective resolution of two-person problems is the source of social well-being from the first to the last day of our lives. Feelings are only the consequences and indicators of this, on which it is illusory to try to act.

We could therefore live in a much more satisfactory society, in terms of social cohesion as well as a reduction in social violence, provided we ensure that every person, upon completing their studies, is trained in two-person problem solving and that the social organization of the society favors this problem solving. Such a change is, however, as culturally significant as the adoption of democracy. This site is here to help you take the first steps on this liberating mental journey.

The change related to the modern scientific method

The modern scientific method, invented in the 17th century, allows the formation of a solid corpus of knowledge, which facilitates the analysis phase and especially considerably increases the number of possible solutions. However, to allow an effective problem solving, it requires that individuals are able to differentiate a scientifically solidly established fact from a merely plausible proposition.

Indeed, in this early 21st century, a majority of individuals, including among those who have undertaken long studies, continue to hold absurd reasoning such as: you think that - a scientifically established fact -, I think something else - a merely plausible proposition or a belief -, and our opinions are equal, because otherwise you would claim to be superior to me, so I consider you intolerant and I dismiss your proposition for this reason. sic. Such reasoning is the product of a deeply ingrained belief in a majority of individuals that social status prevails over facts.

Moreover, through their education, the majority of humans continue to simply learn to adopt a socially acceptable behavior, or more personally but stereotypical, in every situation of life. This is done at the expense of the consideration of facts related to each particular situation. But most of all, this greatly limits the ability of adults to progress. Indeed, in a given situation, an individual tends to exchange in a certain mode, on a certain predetermined content, and rejects any other type of exchange he will judge in advance as unsuitable, because it is not in line with what his education or personal experience dictates in such circumstances.

The illusion of altruism, empathy and compassion

One could argue that mutual help, stemming from altruism, empathy, or compassion, are fundamental and positive elements of human nature, and that it is sufficient to cultivate them to make social organization more satisfactory. Unfortunately, in practice, this does not work, because of the power of beliefs and cognitive dissonance. The same individual tends to be altruistic concerning elements that are secondary to him, to maintain a good image of himself, and selfish on what ensures the core of his social position, without even realizing it, because of the self-deception caused by beliefs and cognitive dissonance.

Methodology

In this document, we have chosen 'problem solving' as the only element of human nature to retain at the cultural level. This may seem arbitrary; why not have chosen for example the arts?
This choice is an axiom, in the mathematical sense of the term. We posit a second one on this site, at the level of the question 'What is the purpose of life?' by answering 'collective happiness'. As in mathematics, the solidity of an axiom does not rest on the fact that it is proven, but on the fact that it allows for long developments without contradiction.

Synthesis

(1) Social ambition pushes the individual to use rhetoric, which is more part of the cognitive-affective system (producing an immediate effect based more on the emotions and beliefs of the interlocutors than on their reason) than rational reasoning (taking into account all the facts).

(2) The resolution of cognitive dissonance through beliefs and self-deception leads to the progressive reinforcement of the use of the cognitive-affective system at the expense of rational reasoning.

(3) Motivation is the place where the individual's freedom is exercised, which must, however, remain limited by the respect of facts. In other words, on motivation, reason only intervenes to set limits, the main source remaining the past affective experiences stored in the cognitive-affective system.

(4) Education also contains a conditioning dimension that aims to curb personal choices, limit rational reasoning and problem solving in favor of the application of dogmas and social norms. Emile Durkheim's great mistake is to consider that the stability of society lies in this conditioning, whereas it comes from its ability to practice problem solving.

Deepen

Watch the audiovisual report Caribbean Primates by Jack Silberman and Jean-Christophe Ribot, available on Arte replay.
Defining what a human being is on a scientific basis is the central object of the first part of the book From Capital to Reason.

Consult the questions 'What are the consequences of social ambition? The concept of generalized nepotism.' and 'What is cognitive dissonance?'

Consult the questions 'Why do humans reason wrongly on a large scale?' and 'What are the conditions to be met to produce a serious reasoning? Problem solving.' Then consult the question 'What is the modern scientific method?'

Finally, to complete this description of the human being, refer to the question 'Should we listen to our emotions?' which presents the cognitive-affective system. And 'Tell me how you make decisions, and I will tell you who you are' which presents the different approach to problem solving among different categories of individuals.