Why are you so sure that all instinct is conscious and that we have
any power over it at all? Surely instincts as genetically embedded
behaviour would just happen and we wouldn't feel of them as abnormal
or normal, just the way we are. Walking on two legs is instinctive,
you don't consciously decide to do it every time and you don't try and
counter it. It just is. If you could ask an animal why it behaved in
an instinctful manner it would not reply 'becuase that is my instinct'
it wouldn't understand what you were asking becuase it wouldn't be
able to see any other way of behaving. Most instincts aren't things
you do, they are 'you'. Taking hold of instincts requires you to be
totally self-conscious and able to see what you do for what it really
is. While humans undoubtedly have this ability of self-consciousness
to a greater extent than any other animal, I'm not convinced we are
Anyway, I personally don't see that getting rid of my 'instinctive'
fear of heights or oncoming cars would be at all a good idea.
CyberLegend aka Jure Sah <jure.sah at guest.arnes.si> wrote in message news:<3C998118.41B36309 at guest.arnes.si>...
> Hello group,
>> PLEASE DO NOT take this as personal offence, as I am still a bit of a
> standard critic at heart, begining my cyberlife on
> <news:comp.ai.philosopyh>. =]
>> In the spirit of the recent few postings I will reveal a grand truth, by
> which grand scientist will notice what I mean by "you're living under a
> rock". Hopefully your grand science will eventualy catch up.
>> Instinct... You grand scientist probably all know the wicked evil sides
> of it, while I will ignore the fact that you refuse to know all of it's
> good sides (P.S.: It's usefull genetic knowledge). The instinct requires
> it's actions in the brain, which can, by some, be found annoying.
>> You probably all know that it isn't a particular chalenge to deactivate
> or counter an instinct, most easily done in a person's childhood. And
> while it is so easy to block out, this is not as without side-effects as
> one would want it. The neural instinct circut still generates neural
> noize (signals that don't do anything other than bother other neural
> functions, most commonly the ones contoling the eye pupil size, but also
> others) and, more importantly: Stress!
>> While these side-effects might not seem as awfull to everybody, I might
> add they can result in memory loss, which is likely to remain
> unavailable for longer periods of time (years) finnaly resulting in less
> thinking capacity, which may be roughly related to IQ (but as in the
> nature of all IQ tests, depends on the test itself).
>> Of course I understand that not everybody knows exactly what all
> instinct is and I am pretty sure that even those who know, don't know it
> all. So I will say, that it's not only the sexual instinct, it is also
> the fear of heights, the fear of fast-moving objects, pack-forming
> instinct (rare), the nail-biting instinct, etc, etc, etc. And while the
> decades-old thought that all humans are equal is still very popular, the
> amount of diffirent instincts in various individuals varies greately and
> is probably geneticaly passed on. Remember: the mind = the brain = the
>> People usualy understand taking rid of these as a practicaly good idea.
> But such action could be compared to middle-age medicine, where we had
> individuals leaking their 'bad blood', just that this time, they're
> leaking their 'bad brain' (if you like it or not, you need it!).
>> And while average humans might think whatever they want to think, they
> are forcing these methods to others as well, others who might have a
> greater number of instincts and to whom the cost of removing all the
> instinct matches up with the cost of removing all of their intelligence
> or sanity. Think of it.
> Cellphone: 0038640809676
>> Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly
>> Digging for info? Try AI Meta Search:
>Http://WWW.AIMetaSearch.Com>> MesonAI -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)