[Barrin92]

I agree mostly with the sceptic takes on human nature. One thing that rubs me the wrong way, and I think is increasingly common when 'human nature' and also evolution is utilised, is a very hard determinism, increasingly popular in some political circles. Such as "if science discovers this or that about human nature, we'll have a much better grip on how humans behave or ought to behave".

But this disregards the dynamism that is central to acquiring knowledge. Once we understand "human nature" if it at all meaningfully exists, this also opens the door to manipulation, which destabilizes the whole enterprise to begin with.

[jhbadger]

"is implies ought" is indeed a fallacy, and even learning that biological instincts, say, support conflict, doesn't mean conflict is good. On the other hand, it is a good thing that we understand that humans and their underlying instincts have been more or less unchanged since the dawn of humanity as evolution works on very long time scales. "Cavemen" had as much internal life as we do ourselves -- they just didn't have as much technology.

[Nomentatus]

That "destabilization" is one of Elon Musk's Five Worthy Goals for humanity, of course.