[TrnsltLife]

The problem is, we are animals, even though we are divine offspring as well. We have an ability to moderate our behavior to a degree, but we are also governed by physiological instinct.

Try making inappropriate eye contact with a human male. You'll probably live to make it to the next experiment, even if you do get punched. Now try it with a gorilla or chimp.

Sexual cues, hunger, aggression/submission postures and responses, whether calls (i.e. communication, speech) engenders trust and connection or mistrust and threat. These things can't be completely overcome, and if they could, our species would have lost the underlying structure and template that allows us to build the greater achievements of self-control and civilization.

[rixed]

Your point is unclear to me. Are we like chimps, or are we not?

[dukeyukey]

Yes and no.

The instinct is still there. Of course it is. We can override it in a way other creatures probably can't, but expecting people to not be influenced by instinct and such is a non-starter.

[rixed]

The baseline for human behavior is set by expectations. Some tens of thousand years ago we also had the instinct to savagely kill whoever lived in the nearby village.

[Shaanie]

Did we though, or did we make a calculated decision that in a place with limited resources it'd be better for us to eliminate the competition?

[rixed]

My point was about the mutual influence between instincts and expected behaviours. But you seem to swap instincts for conscious interest. That would be another discussion, but I don't believe homo economicus ever walked on this planet.

[ryanmcbride]

jumping to a mad level of conclusions here to justify your discomfort with other people