Are you human?

[Coolydudey]

What makes us human? So many cliché answers, but it's not love, curiosity, the will to explore. Nor is it Interstellar's answer of the idiosyncracy of human relationships, our very fundamental requirement for some social interaction. No, it's actually very different - any emotion humans experience is felt by animals in a way that is (ever more obviously) very similar to ours. Love, grief, friendship. Sure, quantitatively in importance and complexity, qualitatively in depth, emotions in animals appear different, but they are not. What really underlies the nature of being human is having a bigger brain. And we may even by the above largely ignore the fact that this also gives us more significant emotional capacity, because although it is important it is not significantly dividing or distinctive. Essentially, what is human is intelligence, logic, abstraction from the world. And maybe music on a second thought; because while for example visual art does more or less fall into abstraction, music is different. Music is scientifically proven to be very unique in the way it acts on the brain, bypassing various pathways and directly affecting the emotions. And it seems to be something that doesn't affect animals much. It really is incredibly strange how three frequencies (a major chord) can produce a sense of warmth and happiness, and then just changing one of them slightly (a minor chord) immediately creates a sense of gloom. This particular thing is the one thing that's always puzzled me the most about everything I've ever known.
Anyway, enough on that sidetrack. Intelligence and music. And mainly intelligence at that, because music seems almost accidental (although maybe it is not after all a coincidence).

Seems a bit dull, does it not?

 

[Grayman]

Animals react to vibrations also. It is proportional to the species ability to socialize and communicate. I thought there was a video on that here...

 

[Analyzer]

Why We Do Not Behave Like Human Beings

 

[Thurlor]

So, if we discover (or are discovered by) an alien species that possesses intelligence and music and any other human trait you care to mention are they also to be considered human?

It seems as though people are always trying to set themselves apart from the rest of nature in some way or other. We are smarter, we have better forms of communication, we create more, etc.

To be human is to be the descendent of humans.

 

[Sockrates]

We are able to think rationally, that is what makes us human and superior to every other animal on this planet.

 

[Black Rose]

biological humans are bipeds evolved from African apes have language to communicate
virtual humans will soon have sapience and sentience, people is them and them they become us

 

[Grayman]

We are able to think rationally, that is what makes us human and superior to every other animal on this planet.

Self aware
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJeIdVX0Nqg
Curiosity + Testing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nEpsW2kEFA
... and more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMkvpCT8IA

 

[The Gopher]

Yes.

 

[PhoenixRising]

What is a human being defined by? I don't think that we possess anything entirely unique from the rest of the animal kingdom - not intelligence, emotion, nor creativity. I think that, as Coolydudey alluded, a human mind is just a more complex version of what exists in other species. Other animals may well have less advanced versions of our logic, abstract thought, and maybe even music (it's hard to say what a bird's song means to the bird), but these traits may not be obvious to us because they're expressed subtly and in foreign ways.

I think what makes us human, beyond the specific anatomy of our bodies, is the specific architecture of our psyche. It's not the general process of thinking that differentiates us from other species, but what direction our psychic energy is routed. A dog, for instance, clearly has a sexual drive, but it's not usually sparked by the sight of a human being. Same for humans, we're not generally attracted to dogs, but we are attracted to others of our species. This indicates different information being associated with the same instinct, resulting in different impetuses and behaviors between species.

EDIT: @Coolydudey - Thanks for clarifying your point. I agree that when it comes down to it, the differences between humans and animals are rather nuanced, not nearly as dramatic or exciting as what some would assert. I think that the most probable place to find a quantifiable difference between humans and animals is within a biological definition. But, as far as quantifying and comparing the human and animal experience, I think that's tricky. The only experience we're truly aware of is our own, we can't claim to know what another human's experience is, let alone another type of animal that can't even describe it to us. However, if your question is why we engage in such things as math and philosophy while other animals don't, I think that has a lot to do with the direction of our instincts. Our instinct for survival happened to find a primary direction in understanding. The more we understand our environment and ourselves, the more intelligently we can respond and ensure our survival. I think, this is likely where our impetus for higher thought originated, and that the complexity of our brains is a result of our constant seeking for new ways of understanding. Math and philosophy, as well as complex language and art are all methods of gaining new and deeper perspectives on the world.

So, I think it's more the particular method of addressing instinct that separates us from other animals than it is a fundamentally different functionality or experience.

 

[Coolydudey]

I see my ideas didn't go down so well - what I was getting at is that although we share all our traits with animals, what distinguishes us from them is an important difference observable in our ability to think rationally. Because, although animals have intelligence as well, they cannot abstract from the world (to almost any extent), which is why I specifically mentioned this in my OP. For example, maths, philosophy, etc. are all definitively human and not animal. And the ability to pursue these things is closely linked to intelligence and in fact often called intelligence, which is why I later dropped the specificity and referred simply to intelligence - which I don't think I was ultimately wrong in doing, although I could have explained better.

Also, I am also not trying to distinguish us from every other object in the universe, or provide a biological definition. I am trying to put my finger on what seems to make the human experience so different to the animal experience.

Anyway, I want to raise the question at the end of my post again. Does it not just seem a little dull somehow?

 

[Sockrates]

Self aware
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJeIdVX0Nqg
Curiosity + Testing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nEpsW2kEFA
... and more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMkvpCT8IA

Can they build? Can they construct? Can they communicate clearly? Can they think rationally? Can they think long term?

The answer is yes to some of the questions, but note the questions that are answered with a no. Fairly simple comparison.

 

[Grayman]

Can they build? Can they construct? Can they communicate clearly? Can they think rationally? Can they think long term?

The answer is yes to some of the questions, but note the questions that are answered with a no. Fairly simple comparison.

I didn't get any nos. Beavers build and construct damns, birds build nests. Dolphins and orca's communicate clearly to each other and can act as a unit. Humans cannot even agree the other person thinks rationally. Squirrels plan for winter by foraging nuts. But hey I get it. Its about quality of thought.

 

[ZenRaiden]

So, if we discover (or are discovered by) an alien species that possesses intelligence and music and any other human trait you care to mention are they also to be considered human?

It seems as though people are always trying to set themselves apart from the rest of nature in some way or other. We are smarter, we have better forms of communication, we create more, etc.

To be human is to be the descendent of humans.

Basically we might find a humanoid of some form in space and we will have hard time telling them apart from us. Maybe they will just have bigger ears or smaller noses or better thumbs or slightly higher IQ. Who knows.

As for now I think being human is specifically linked to the human experience we have both subjective and objective and the fact that we are separate species. Then depending of what is the definition of species the humans are a species.

 

[Yellow]

What distinguishes us from them is an important difference observable in our ability to think rationally. Because, although animals have intelligence as well, they cannot abstract from the world (to almost any extent)... For example, maths, philosophy, etc. are all definitively human and not animal.

Maths, philosophy, etc. are human inventions. I don't think they define us as a species, but more as a culture (in the broadest possible meaning of the word). However, I would hesitate to claim that no other animal species can abstract from the world. We currently have no way to be confident about that claim. As our own definition of intelligence broadens, and as we learn new ways to assess the intelligence of other species, we may be able to test their level of abstraction.

Think about it: There are intelligent species with significantly different brain structures, organs, physical abilities (e.g. the octopus) that we just sit in wonder at their talents. I mean, an octopus kidnapped from the wild can learn by watching a captive peer (which is a demonstration of abstraction). They can also communicate in a way that is extremely complex and completely alien to us. We measure intelligence in ways that are tangible and observable according to our current collective comprehension, leaving huge potential gaps in our understanding of the intellect of other species.

I am trying to put my finger on what seems to make the human experience so different to the animal experience.

The more we learn, the slimmer the gap becomes. Probably because we are all animals that evolved under the conditions of the same planet (differences across the eons aside). But there are a few things that humans all do that are both abstract and instinct.

We tell stories with the intention of preserving the past and predicting the future. As far as explaining phenomena, we know that other animals can tell simple (inventive) stories. Specifically, we have an instance of a lying gorilla.
But our stories tell tales, pass on historic events, and share cumulative knowledge. Our narrative predictions use the past information with present in an attempt to predict the future. And man, do we depend on those predictions. Ever get stood up for a date? or go out hiking and have it unexpectedly rain?

As far as something not-so-unique but innately human, we have music. Birds create songs (some more creative than others) and we took those songs and went wild with them. Of course, we have overwhelming evidence to support that many plants and animals appreciate music, at least on a physical level, but it seems pretty clear that we love it best. But more fundamentally, music (or specifically song) is an instinctual part of child rearing. We have this urge to sing to babies in order to soothe and entertain them.

Anyway, I want to raise the question at the end of my post again. Does it not just seem a little dull somehow?

It is humbling, I suppose. We are animals. So, it makes sense that we aren't very different from other animals. Personally, I find it really exciting.

 

[Enki]

On a lighter note:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dd_qiuWxPs

 

[Sockrates]

I didn't get any nos. Beavers build and construct damns, birds build nests. Dolphins and orca's communicate clearly to each other and can act as a unit. Humans cannot even agree the other person thinks rationally. Squirrels plan for winter by foraging nuts. But hey I get it. Its about quality of thought.

I said that there were questioned that could be answered with a yes. Thanks for providing examples.

 

[PhoenixRising]

Maths, philosophy, etc. are human inventions. I don't think they define us as a species, but more as a culture (in the broadest possible meaning of the word). However, I would hesitate to claim that no other animal species can abstract from the world. We currently have no way to be confident about that claim. As our own definition of intelligence broadens, and as we learn new ways to assess the intelligence of other species, we may be able to test their level of abstraction.

I think you have a brilliant point about culture. Math and philosophy aren't that different in principle from demographic-specific adaptations existent in human cultures. They are ways of addressing the human impetus to understand what reality is. These intellectual methods aren't instinct, but tools that we have developed in response to instinct, something not inborn in us, but that has to be acquired through teaching.

I think your point is very obvious when considering the somewhat recent contact we've had with previously isolated Amazonian tribes. They hadn't developed advanced mathematics, but did have what you noted, a rich mythology (including history and explanations for how the world works) passed down through story. I think you're right that this is a trait we see in humans universally, and that underlies our ability to make judgements/predictions about the world.

 

[Vrecknidj]

Music is scientifically proven to be very unique in the way it acts on the brain, bypassing various pathways and directly affecting the emotions. And it seems to be something that doesn't affect animals much.

1. Science doesn't prove things in the way you're suggesting. 2. "very unique" 3. What "pathways" are you talking about? 4. Where are you getting your "seems" from?

Maths, philosophy, etc. are human inventions.

I'm not comfortable lumping "maths" and "philosophy" and "etc." into one big pile like this. I'm not at all willing to accept your claim that "maths... [is a] human invention." The symbols, yes. The relations, no. (No human being invented the fact that the circumference divided by the diameter of any circle is pi. That fact actually does reveal something about the nature of circles beyond revealing anything about the nature of the human mind.)

 

[Yellow]

I'm not comfortable lumping "maths" and "philosophy" and "etc." into one big pile like this. I'm not at all willing to accept your claim that "maths... [is a] human invention." The symbols, yes. The relations, no. (No human being invented the fact that the circumference divided by the diameter of any circle is pi. That fact actually does reveal something about the nature of circles beyond revealing anything about the nature of the human mind.)

I understand that we've discovered some immutable qualities with math, but there are many things we've established in math that are arbitrary (like the widespread use of base 10). So by invention, I mean that our systems of math are the tools we use to uncover the language of the universe (the formulas we've discovered).

 

[Ms.Nobody]

Do we really think rationally? What's the evidence of this? Our supposed intelligence and superiority is destroying the earth. Perhaps humans just think we're somehow special when really we're just a particularly destructive animal. Daniel Quinn talks about this in his book Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit. He talks about the myth we, the "takers" as he calls the people who partake in the dominant form of living nowadays (the "leavers" live in ways that the native people of North and South America did as well as other indigenous peoples may have and still do), live by that not only separates humans from nature but pits humans against nature. So that we've been battling nature for centuries, essentially trying to win the battle and kill it. This cultural myth says that humans are the end of evolution (or God's finest creation, something along those lines), we are the perfect specimen, and as such it is our duty to tame the unruly natural world. So of course we're killing the earth, of course we can't pin point what exactly makes us "human" or better than the other animals. If we had continued the path of the "leavers" we could have great technologies that work along side nature. Our habitats could be amazing, the earth could be healthy, and the majority of animals (humans included) could be thriving. Humanity needs to stop with all the dichotomies, they're always false.
On a lighter note, I really recommend Daniel Quinn's Ishmael he proposes some very interesting ideas.

 

[NefariousRecluse]

http://users.clas.ufl.edu/burt/Chaucer%27swake/Animal.pdf

 

[Reluctantly]

A couple things stand out to me. We have an ability to make tools that make tools, we can manipulate nature to an extent, but most importantly we can question the nature of existence, something no other animals seems to have done.

Of course, an advanced ai could do all of this, but since that's not created yet...

 

[onesteptwostep]

I think what makes us human is our ability to vision heaven, the heaven stemming and sprouting from who we are right now. Drives like love, curiosity, and will nods us to go forward towards this grand design. We are able to see and vision in totalities.

Animals are tribal in nature. Their vision only includes a selective part of the world, their own species and their partners or peers, and thus will often fight amongst one another not realizing the damage it causes. Humans on the other hand learn from their mistakes and will place boundaries between ourselves, like law, to prevent us from going backwards. All animals have a certain degree of evolutionary morality, but humans are the only species who are able to recognize patterns by discernment and will place moral laws or boundaries or limits in prevention of moral disintegration, whatever form that may be. We discern the present and past to see the future.

Other animals, of course, can't do this, since their ability to communicate is far weaker than ours. Not to mention they generally don't have the anatomy to create tools.

 

[NefariousRecluse]

The human spirit, however rare it may be.

 

[NefariousRecluse]

in that we aspire to a vision of ourselves and shape ourselves according to said vision. and as was mentioned before, self-reference. I think this has much to do with our notion of lack, or negation. Zizek makes a strong case for lack in his ontology.

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Spoiler

Do we really think rationally? What's the evidence of this? Our supposed intelligence and superiority is destroying the earth. Perhaps humans just think we're somehow special when really we're just a particularly destructive animal. Daniel Quinn talks about this in his book Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit. He talks about the myth we, the "takers" as he calls the people who partake in the dominant form of living nowadays (the "leavers" live in ways that the native people of North and South America did as well as other indigenous peoples may have and still do), live by that not only separates humans from nature but pits humans against nature. So that we've been battling nature for centuries, essentially trying to win the battle and kill it. This cultural myth says that humans are the end of evolution (or God's finest creation, something along those lines), we are the perfect specimen, and as such it is our duty to tame the unruly natural world. So of course we're killing the earth, of course we can't pin point what exactly makes us "human" or better than the other animals. If we had continued the path of the "leavers" we could have great technologies that work along side nature. Our habitats could be amazing, the earth could be healthy, and the majority of animals (humans included) could be thriving. Humanity needs to stop with all the dichotomies, they're always false.
On a lighter note, I really recommend Daniel Quinn's Ishmael he proposes some very interesting ideas.

A post biased toward highlighting "leavers" that urges us to shoot down false dichotomies.

What about taking -> transforming -> leaving as a larger process?

The human spirit, however rare it may be.

See, I once felt that too... the force of my entire lineage since the dawn of time behind my every action that would allow me to overcome damn near anything. Self-pride and other nonesuch combined into one cohesive achieving glob.

Pretty sure it died a while back when the universal powers at be sprayed it with Raid.

I don't know what I am or what made me what I was. (At least that stage. I know a prior foil's role quite well)

Spoiler

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP5fGz2mW0A

 

[Neckbeard]

In answer to the title, no, I'm not human. I am actually a transethnic autistic trigender asexual walrus.

In answer to the OP, going by the transginger model, you are a human if you think you are.

 

[INTPWolf]

The fact that we perceive ourselves as intelligent is totally subjective. Our level of conscience is just that, a level. Who's to say a squirrel that hides its nuts for the winter doesn't feel like it just made a smart and logical decision and deems itself intelligent based on that. Its just a matter for perception, we are just more complex. If a intelligent being on the next level of consciousness was too look at humans, to them we might just look the same as the squirrel does from our perspective.

 

[propianotuner1]

No other species has the compulsion to ask a question or the desire to learn. It is our theory of mind and curiosity that makes us human.

 

[Reluctantly]

At one point in my life I decided to stop feeling I was human; I think I became a beast instead. I don't much see the value in being human; with all the technology and tools and intelligence at our disposal, we still manage to argue and fight about how to live with one another. It does get realllllly boring realllllly fast...being a beast feels more intelligent and much more interesting.

 

[Ex-User (11125)]

I’m not a human...I’m a turtle
people are rushing around me getting stuff done and having their life together whilst I amble slowly in their midst, perpetually confused and dejected...im only useful when amazonian butterflies drink the tears of My Suffering

 

[Cognisant]

The defining trait of the human species is that we're fundamentally insane.

When preyed upon we don't just run or fight back.
We take offense.

Similar behavior has been witnessed in dolphins and elephants, but for the former it's mere pack mentality and for the latter grief and frustration, no other species is quite so psychotic as humans, we've push our predators to the brink of extinction and wiped out any species that has posed an actual threat.

The mere presence of a spider or snake is enough to drive most humans into a murderous state, the killing of lesser vermin barely warrants consideration, no other species on earth is so territorial as to spend an hour chasing a single cockroach whose mere existence the human finds insufferable.

 

[Reluctantly]

The mere presence of a spider or snake is enough to drive most humans into a murderous state, the killing of lesser vermin barely warrants consideration, no other species on earth is so territorial as to spend an hour chasing a single cockroach whose mere existence the human finds insufferable.

lol, it does seem kind of crazy when you put it like that.

 

[Sinny91]

I think we as humans are unfairly represented by tptb.
Good people don't get enough credit.
They would have us believe that we are all fuct up and incapable.

Given the opportunity, humanity would florish.

But yes, we are currently crippled by the weight of parasites on our back.

 

[computerhxr]

It is humbling, I suppose. We are animals. So, it makes sense that we aren't very different from other animals. Personally, I find it really exciting.

I agree with you 100%. I tend to think that the rules of evolution tell us that all species are very advanced. We just evolve in different directions from the branches of the same tree. So everything alive today has evolved the same sum of time. Humans are just blinded by their own self-centered egos.

 

[Russ]

What Makes us human? Genetic heritage.

What separates us from other animals? I believe it to have been a brain defect that allows us to recall specific details of individual memories.

Why are we like this? Genetic heritage.

Am I a human? Yes.

Am I a person? That's where it gets a little hazy.

What do you mean by dull?

 

[Cherry Cola]

Can they build? Can they construct? Can they communicate clearly? Can they think rationally? Can they think long term?

The answer is yes to some of the questions, but note the questions that are answered with a no. Fairly simple comparison.

Which ones are the no's?

Only one I can see is long term thinking, but even that ought to be a matter of degree (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/apes-able-to-think-ahead/).

If you strip away the recent invention of culture and the memetic revolution that followed human beings don't seem all that different from the other sophisticated mammals imo. More of what makes us humans is memetic rather than genetic imo.

Koko the gorilla really is startingly humanlike :O

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

What Makes us human? Genetic heritage.

What separates us from other animals? I believe it to have been a brain defect that allows us to recall specific details of individual memories.

Why are we like this? Genetic heritage.

Am I a human? Yes.

Am I a person? That's where it gets a little hazy.

What do you mean by dull?

Forgive me father for I may have sinned and consumed ethanol this evening to my great delight!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzcoU85mXIA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0E0ynyIUsg

 

[Rudolph Mondal]

The defining trait of the human species is that we're fundamentally insane.

When preyed upon we don't just run or fight back.
We take offense.

Similar behavior has been witnessed in dolphins and elephants, but for the former it's mere pack mentality and for the latter grief and frustration, no other species is quite so psychotic as humans, we've push our predators to the brink of extinction and wiped out any species that has posed an actual threat.

The mere presence of a spider or snake is enough to drive most humans into a murderous state, the killing of lesser vermin barely warrants consideration, no other species on earth is so territorial as to spend an hour chasing a single cockroach whose mere existence the human finds insufferable.

I think this is probably the most honest answer. The sooner we come to accept it the better, I think.

 

[Urakro]

I like cog's answer.

I can't think of anything smart about the topic, only the obvious that it is apparently the evolved adaptation of our biology, our perspective of ourselves, and reacting with the environment.

Just as a traumatized child will have far-reaching consequences in it's adult life, I wonder if that could happen on a grander scale with the evolution of a species.

Aside from that, it's interesting how many people don't see just how 'animal' they are. The motivations for most of human behaviour falls in-line similarly with other social mammals. It's easy to see it differently when we use our gadgets, and live in our square houses, wearing colourful attire, and driving complex machines. But underneath it all, we are still just a different type of monkey.

 

[Nebulous]

From janestri on tumblr

A bug has the same organs you do. A brain and lungs and a heart and a stomach. They’re the same, tucked into a bug-sized body at proportional dimensions.

What makes a bug different from you? What seems you sentient; human? Do bugs have souls?

When a maggot is presented with food, it eats. There is no situation where it does not hold back. A maggot consumes. A maggot survives.

A maggot does not picture the future. It has no plans. It eats.

A cockroach eats and breathes and shits and fucks like you.

What makes you different from a cockroach? A maggot? A fly?

Two things.

If you can withold yourself from the consumption, the destruction — the constant intake and desire and list for whatever you fucking feel like, you have a soul. A maggot can’t hold back, nor does it want to.

A human being plans. It sees ahead. It does things in an order by which it desires, the order in which it sees fit. A fruitless order, sure. Sure. But an order. Human beings invented time. Days. Seconds. Weeks, months, years. A second ticks by. A supercomputer can do a trillion equations in that second. A human can pick its nose. Are we different at all from bugs? Are you? Do you plan? A cockroach has no such thought process. It lives in an infinite second, wholly The Now. And yet, some people think true happiness is found in The Now. People advise this in self help books.

Do those people have souls? Those people who live second by second, going through the same thin motions as you, under the impression that they’ve found some sort of key? Do they still plan? How far do you go to live in The Now?

Hell swarms around us. We are so distracted by our own future, our own rules, our own vision of self importance and desire to continue undistracted. Unawakened. Can you see hell?

Do bugs go to hell? Are they punished for their lust, their thoughtless existence? You walk over them, not noticing as you shatter their exoskeletons and crush those organs. The same organs you have.

Will you go to Hell? For your self importance? Fruitless planning? Your societally imposed ability to hold back?

What happens when you let go?

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

http://janestri.tumblr.com/post/169971052332/janestri-janestri-janestri-janestri

 

[TimePool]

I think one of the most important things, that makes out humans is, that we can reflect on our thoughts. What I mean is called Second-Order Desires by the American philosopher Harry Frankfurt. The most animals simply follow their first-order desires. When these desires conflict the animal would behave strangely. Humans, on the other hand, can reflect on those desires and make their actions fit their individual Second-Order Desires. One of those desires might be to eat healthily. Another desire might be to eat an unhealthy, though delicious meal. Both desires conflict, but the desire to eat healthily is one of a higher order, so the human desires not to desire to eat unhealthy food. Because of this, the subordinate desire will be resisted and thus the conflict is resolved.

So, if we discover (or are discovered by) an alien species that possesses intelligence and music and any other human trait you care to mention are they also to be considered human?

It seems as though people are always trying to set themselves apart from the rest of nature in some way or other. We are smarter, we have better forms of communication, we create more, etc.

To be human is to be the descendent of humans.

Yes, there might be aliens that also can be told apart from earthly animals using these criteria.
But you can´t say, that to be human is to be descendent of humans, because this way the first common ancestor of all living beings on earth would have to be human in order for humans to exist. Then again all living beings on earth would be humans and might also be called animals. It´s more accurate to say a human is a primate which is set apart from apes in criteria like the one above. And then what is a primate? This can be formulated in the same way as to be human. But instead of primate, it would be the evolutionary father of the primate. And instead of ape, it would be the evolutionary brother of the primate. This way it could work.

 

[mr_darker]

being affected by music is part of our programmed responses to different stimuli. human brans work a hell of a lot like fpgas do in electronics, part of why im designing a computer based on them entirely and no processors.
emotions are complex programmed mental reactions to different thins, these rwactions provide the illusion of life, the hard wired belief tha things matter when they really dont, but its ok because we believe things do and it makes no sense to try and undo that else you risk losing desire and humanity, becoming a soulless machine.
mysic is just subliminal hard wired logic thats liteally encoded in our dna to enjoy. Some day when we fully map the logic of human brains and sna engineering, we can edit lifes illusion, make things like the amount of leaves per tree somehow enjoyable like music or food. im really curious to see the new illusions created in the future, but, would always wanna have the human illusion. our set of biases, on behaviors, and our set of stimuli responses.
sry thats probably hard to follow im short on time thi.

 

[DoIMustHaveAnUsername?]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens