 The Nature Of Man (Human Evaluation)~ The UT Instinct ~Chapter 1: The InvestigationIf this is your first visit to this site please read the Glossary Please note: there is an introduction and 17 chapters in this section. If you have not read the introduction and all the chapters preceeding this one you will not understand the points I am trying to make. To gain understanding you should start - at the beginning Chapter 0.
To a certain extent this question should be a simple and easy one to answer, for this is not a question about some strange and alien entity which lives millions of light years away at the other side of the universe; this is not even a question about another different species on this earth with which we have little communication, or of which we have no knowledge or understanding. This is merely a question regarding our own species. It is a question about us. We have at least a few thousand years of history which we can use as evidence to shed light on what we are - that is, apart from the scant knowledge we have of our ‘pre-history’ ancestors. We have daily accounts of human behaviour via the newspapers, radio, and television. Each one of us, in our daily lives, encounters human behaviour when interacting with other members of this species. So where is the problem with understanding this species of ours? Or is there a problem? Is there a mystery? The fact is that most people think they understand humans and therefore they do not see a problem. Humans have already been defined so what am I on about? You may consider that humans have been explained but to come to that conclusion you had to use your evaluation mechanism - but, unless you understand how your evaluation mechanism works, you cannot know whether your conclusion is correct or not!
Did you ever wonder why the behaviour of humans was sometimes very strange and seemingly inexplicable? We see the savage behaviour of the Nazis during WW2 and cannot understand how they considered themselves as being civilised, superior and decent while committing acts of barbaric brutality. So we end up using terms like ‘evil’, and ‘hypocrites’, to pathetically explain away their behaviour, rather than question our definition of humans. This can be said of other atrocities. For example, the destruction of the World Trade Centre in New York in 2001 by members of Islamic extremist organisations who consider that America is the ‘great Satan’, thereby justifying their terrible actions; yet they (the terrorists) are considered by the Americans as being the very personification of evil. The situation seems inexplicable. Well, I hope to demonstrate that the accepted definition we have of the human species is totally incorrect and misleading, thereby creating the anomalies between the presumed definition of the human, on the one hand, and bes actual behaviour on the other. It is the UT Instinct, and the human evaluation mechanism which is at the core of the explanation of our behaviour and the explanation as to why we are so blind to the truth regarding ourselves. What follows is my explanation of the nature of this species. But what follows is not a proof, but merely an explanation - of the evidence. On one level the human is merely a biological animal. Our bodies are made up of cells. Our brain is made up of cells. It is a biological circuit board - cells connected to each other by biological ‘wires’. To think that this collection of cells; which in themselves are only a collection of molecules, which in themselves are only a collection of atoms, which in themselves are tiny packets of enormous levels of nuclear energy, can be rational, intelligent or ‘objectively’ moral, does not make any logical sense whatsoever - it is totally unrealistic. When we look around at the achievements of our species we can easily be lead, or more truthfully - mislead, into thinking that we are intelligent and rational. We, as a species, have actually managed to travel through the totally inhospitable environment of space, landed on the surface and have actually walked on the moon. But it took many inventions and discoveries to get to that wonderful and exciting point in our history. It all started back about a hundred thousand, or maybe even five hundred thousand, years ago when a human threw the first stone, or stick; then discovered fire; then smelting, etc etc, until a human finally put bes footprints in the dust on the moon's surface. Each invention, or discovery, in itself, is usually a small step beyond what was already known. The more that is invented the more that can be invented. There must have been more inventions in the 20th century than any previous century but it would be a major foolish error to think that this demonstrated a greater intelligence in the ‘modern human’ as compared to a human a few centuries, or even a few millennia ago. To be fair and truthful, I think it took more ‘intelligence’ to create the wheel, or to understand and control fire, or to come to the understanding that the never-ending succession of days were actually a sequence which denoted the regular passage of seasons, than it took in the ten or so years of preparation which was required to get us to the moon. Also understand this: when Neil Armstrong put his foot on the moon it was the foot of a man - a man with the same human nature as that of a man born 10,000 years ago. Human nature does not, and CANNOT, change. So the achievement of stepping foot on the moon may give the impression of advancement - but it is an advancement of technology NOT of human nature. When investigating the human species it is absolutely vital and important to look beyond the superficial and subjective, especially as regards human traits (beliefs, culture, morals, values, knowledge etc). It is too easy, and natural, to see ourselves as intelligent, moral and rational and on the surface it may well appear to be the case. The investigation of the human species is, in effect, an investigation of the self and any negative reflection also reflects back on the investigator, so impartiality is practically impossible. So, rather than looking at OUR beliefs, OUR knowledge, OUR morals, OUR culture and OUR values; for we cannot but elevate these traits, view them in a positive light, and justify them; we need to look at and understand the nature of how we both evaluate the world around us and, above all, how we acquire these beliefs, knowledge, morals and values, with which we evaluate ourselves (in a positive light) and others (in a negative light). Although, naturally enough, my world frame of reference is, because of my upbringing, based on the Western tradition, I have attempted to use examples which, hopefully, can be understood by all cultures and peoples. These theories refer to all the human individuals, no matter when, or where, or how be lives. This is about the species. If you are human then this is about you. There are many times I will verbalise the thought processes of humans and, rather than stating, on each and every such occasion, that certain processes are THEIR biased opinion I will usually use inverted commas eg ‘woman are not equal because they do not think the same way’, to demonstrate that these are not facts nor my opinion but the (stupid) subjective opinions, judgments or values of others, and to save repeating the fact that everybody is equal as regards our nature, which would become very very tedious throughout these pages. Please keep this in mind. To give examples of the UT Instinct is a very frustrating experience. I try, as much as possible, to first show the foundation for the necessary existence of the UT Instinct, and the human evaluation mechanism, and then carry on with examples of these in daily life. But, just as there are many facets to each individual human and bes actions, there are also as many facets to any single specific example. There are times when it seems as if I am going in circles - most likely that is because I am! Sometimes one single example - an incident eg Timothy McVeigh and the bombing atrocity in the USA, can shed light and explain the theories to an infinite degree; it is difficult to know when to decide that enough information, or explanation, has been given. That one act is connected to Timothy McVeigh, which is connected to his UT Instinct and his evaluation mechanism which, in turn, is connected to every other member of this species, and their UT Instinct and evaluation mechanism (how they each judge his actions), and thus is connected to every action, and evaluation, of every member of this species. So there is one thing I can truly say about this site - I have left out millions and billions of interconnected examples and explanations of the UT Instinct and the human evaluation mechanism. I have tried to use just enough examples to give you some idea of how varied the situations can be which are influenced by the UT Instinct. No matter how large this manuscript site actually turns out to be - it will always be nothing more than a mere booklet. The Irish have a saying - go n-éirí an bhóthar leat - which means ‘have a good journey’. Discovering the UT Instinct and writing this booklet was a wonderful journey for me - though trying to get it published was nothing less than a depressing ordeal. I don't bother with that now. I hope I have written it well enough for it to be a wonderful enlightening journey for you. Louis Gogan - May 2002.
published: 2006
|
If you want to contact me if there is a specific point you want to make or you want to ask a question about an incident in life which you would like explained within the UT Instinct theory. If you intend to argue a point, or correct an error in the logic - if there are any ;0) PLEASE ONLY DO SO AFTER YOU HAVE CAREFULLY READ EVERYTHING IN THE RELEVANT SECTION. Use the form (if visible) on all the Chapters and Articles pages or email me (especially if it is a longish piece of text).
|