What is the nature of man?

[fakename]

Man is a rational animal. On further reflection I don’t fully understand this.

1. If the above is true, then how can a man be said to “act like an animal” or to pursue a happiness befitting only to animals (like sense pleasure)?
2. If people are rational, and discursive thought is action, then every person acts. But action is something that even animals do. So then the nature of man is the same as the animal nature, but then, it wouldn’t be human nature at all?

Any answers to this?
Thanks!

 

[awatkins69]

Just a passing remark: Man is a rational animal. Other animals are sensory animals.

 

[GEddie]

Man is a rational animal. On further reflection I don’t fully understand this.

1. If the above is true, then how can a man be said to “act like an animal” or to pursue a happiness befitting only to animals (like sense pleasure)?

For a human being “to act like an animal” in no way denies that we are animals. The human body clearly is an animal: its processes are identical to those of the other animals (breathing, digestion, blood chemistry, etc.); our bodies also die like animals. The difference is that our bodies can hold a rational mind, and have certain adaptations to subserve that mind (large head, bipedal limbs, prehensile hands, etc.) Animal body + rational mind = rational animal.

If someone “acts like an animal” it simply means that their actions are driven by physical instinct (which comes with his or her body) rather than by the rational mind. To run from perceived danger; to become sexually attracted; to scratch itchy skin, or even to jerk one’s hand or toes from a hot surface is to “act like an animal,” and this repertoire is a valid part of our human nature.

In fact, the term “animal” means in Latin, “being with a soul”; soul being “anima” in Latin. So even philosophically, we are by definition animals since we have souls.

Sense pleasure can be “animal” but can also be uniquely human. “Animals” (ie, nonhuman species) do not pursue sense pleasure as we do. Despite dogs having far more powerful noses than human beings, dogs do not make or use fragrances. Despite butterflies seeing more colors than we, and birds having far sharper eyes, neither group of creatures has visual arts. Depite pretty much all critters having a sense of taste, no nonhuman species has culinary arts. Meeting physical need is universally animal; “sense pleasure” as a goal is for the most part human.

1. If people are rational, and discursive thought is action, then every person acts. But action is something that even animals do. So then the nature of man is the same as the animal nature, but then, it wouldn’t be human nature at all?

Action, if understood as conscious movement via muscles and limbs (assuming the creature has limbs), is universally animal. What distinguishes “human” action is, again, the mediation of the rational mind. Reflex action, like jerking down your foot when your ankle is tapped or gasping for breath when receiving a faceful of cold water, is an animal response. Creative effort is a “human” action. What makes action human is not that we move our limbs, but that we use them to subserve the purposes of our rational minds.

Again, muscular action + rational (human) mind = rational (human) action.

Any answers to this?
Thanks!

ICXC NIKA

 

[jpjd]

Man is rational because he has intellect and will. He knows and loves. With intellect he has the power to know truth, and with will he has the power to love goodness. You may have heard it said that “grace builds upon nature”. With grace, our intellect has a new power to know truth: faith. And with grace, our will has new powers to love goodness: hope and charity.

Animals have none of this.

This is better explained in Frank Sheed’s book “Theology and Sanity”, or if you prefer the shorter version of the book, read Sheed’s “Theology for Beginners”.

 

[colmcille1]

Very good topic and equally fine responses!
May I further add that man knows his nature fully when he follows His teaching.
God Bless,
Colmcille.

 

[fhansen]

Man is a rational animal. On further reflection I don’t fully understand this.

1. If the above is true, then how can a man be said to “act like an animal” or to pursue a happiness befitting only to animals (like sense pleasure)?
2. If people are rational, and discursive thought is action, then every person acts. But action is something that even animals do. So then the nature of man is the same as the animal nature, but then, it wouldn’t be human nature at all?

Any answers to this?
The term, “rational animal” implies that he’s both. But Catholic teaching tells us that originally man’s impulses were in held in order, by reason. Fallen man, on the other hand, being weakened, has “disordered desires”. i.e. concupiscence, where the flesh is at war with the spirit/reason.

 

[fhansen]

Man is a rational animal. On further reflection I don’t fully understand this.

1. If the above is true, then how can a man be said to “act like an animal” or to pursue a happiness befitting only to animals (like sense pleasure)?
2. If people are rational, and discursive thought is action, then every person acts. But action is something that even animals do. So then the nature of man is the same as the animal nature, but then, it wouldn’t be human nature at all?

Any answers to this?
Thanks!

The term, “rational animal” implies that he’s both. But Catholic teaching tells us that originally man’s impulses were in held in order, by reason. Fallen man, on the other hand, being weakened, has “disordered desires”. i.e. concupiscence, where the flesh is at war with the spirit/reason.

 

[Big_Dummy]

Humans are created in God’s image, animals are not. So, ask yourself what attributes does mankind share with God?

Shared (Communicable) Attributes

Grudem classifies the Shared Attributes into five categories:

· Spirituality: inc. Invisibility

· Mental attributes: Knowledge, wisdom, truthfulness

· Moral attributes: Goodness, love, mercy, Purity, Peace, righteousness, jealousy, wrath

· Purpose Attributes: will, freedom, sovereignty

· Summary attributes: Perfection, Blessedness, Beauty, Glory.

leppc.net/kearns/Attributes.htm

 

[fakename]

So from the above responses it seems that humans have certain animal appetites that are only analogous to animal ones in that they are ennobled by reason. Among these is the pleasure found in fine wine or some such thing whereas a purely animal love of food is simply found in the desire to eat.

But I’m still confused about human action and I think it may follow the above formula. That is, if authentically human actions occur, they occur mixed with reason -so speculation is a truly human act while running is an animal act. Humans do both because we are both rational and animal.

So if humans do things that animals can do also, how is it that one can form a definition of either animal or human? Doesn’t a definition need to include that which makes one thing **separate ** from another? But it seems that rational animals are also, to an extent, types of animal?

 

[GEddie]

So from the above responses it seems that humans have certain animal appetites that are only analogous to animal ones in that they are ennobled by reason. Among these is the pleasure found in fine wine or some such thing whereas a purely animal love of food is simply found in the desire to eat.

But I’m still confused about human action and I think it may follow the above formula. That is, if authentically human actions occur, they occur mixed with reason -so speculation is a truly human act while running is an animal act.

True, because (on Earth) only human beings can do the 1st, while human beings and cheetahs, for example can do the 2nd – and cheetahs do it better.

I’d not say that a human action occurs “mixed with reason,” but rather that it is driven in some way by reason. So running is a generally animal action, in that reason is not required but only limbs and senses; while building and sailing a boat is human, because while hands, legs, and senses are required, the rational mind needs to direct their use for this action to be possible.

We “act like animals” when an external action is not driven by reason. This can be good and necessary (like breathing) or negative (like lashing out in anger).

Humans do both because we are both rational and animal.

So if humans do things that animals can do also, how is it that one can form a definition of either animal or human? Doesn’t a definition need to include that which makes one thing **separate ** from another? But it seems that rational animals are also, to an extent, types of animal?

Correct. Logically, “All human beings are animals; but not all animals are human beings.”

Human being is a subset of animal, in that we are an animal that possesses a rational mind. Biologically, a human being generates from other human beings, even if, for whatever reason, the rational mind is not working (e.g., head injury or unconsciousness).

For a rigorous definition of animal, you’d need to see the classical use of the term; it’s Latin, and means “being having a soul.” By that definition, we are animals. So the human definition would include that we are animals who generate from beings having, and in normal functioning possess, a rational mind.

ICXC NIKA

 

[fakename]

Thanks for your replies, thanks very much, they’ve been very helpful.

 

[grannymh]

Human nature is spirit/matter, rational/corporeal, material/non-material, soul and body.

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[Tuno]

Just a passing remark: Man is a rational animal. Other animals are sensory animals.

Except chimps, dolphins and orangutans. They all demonstrate self awareness and applied cognitive discovery.

Man is an Idea in the Mind of God comprised primarily of Conscious awareness and secondarily person.

 

[grannymh]

Except chimps, dolphins and orangutans. They all demonstrate self awareness and applied cognitive discovery.

Self awareness and cognitive ability which my cousin Chilly Chimp demonstrates is well within the range expected of sentient non-human animals. Rationality is a whole other ball game which can be played only on the field of humans.

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16 &17