I earlier made an overly complicated thread regarding inhumanity, that some felt did not ask a much more basic, but equally or or more important question, namely:
What is it to be human or inhuman?

What are to you, human or inhuman traits?

Do you think there are only negative inhuman traits, or are there positive as well?

*EDIT: Inhuman does in no way imply negative humant traits, just traits that you yourself do not see as human.

What exactly do you understand by the term "inhuman"? By its most common use it clearly has negative connotations, meaning lacking certain conditions that are considered human. But this is all related to behavior, and it can be a controversial discussion theme too, since being "inhuman" this way isn't that unusual and it feels like it's just a way to make us believe that humanity is "good".

If you understand by "inhuman" simply "not human", then it doesn't have such a negative connotation attached, or at least not in the same way the other sense of the word has. It would simply group everything that isn't human or isn't closely related to humanity. As simple as that may sound, "human" doesn't have an univocal deffinition, being reffered both to biological status and psychological status, so this ambiguity may carry on even on this way of understanding "inhuman".

It's a question of terms and deffinitions, not really a question about the nature of the human being, at least that is how I see this, well, I might be wrong, who knows 🤣

This week's favorites:

• Golden Kamui

ççççççç[Ô.Ô] tsutopodus© will eat your manga and steal your cats!

Being human means to be merciful, understanding, helpful and friendly to everyone. That's what I think. Unfortunately there are few people with these traits. Nowadays people are selfish, mean and merciless.

Quote from bking

Being human means to be merciful, understanding, helpful and friendly to everyone. That's what I think. Unfortunately there are few people with these traits. Nowadays people are selfish, mean and merciless.

I'm sorry... 'Nowadays'?
Could you give me an example of a time when 'humanity' as a whole wasn't selfish, mean and merciless?

I agree with tsuto, first define what a 'human' is. To me it's just a being of flesh and blood, regardless of nationality, colour or beliefs. The 'human' part is just a shell, a species.
So what you should ask is what (defies)? defines a being. And that, in my opinion, is just something that is (exists). A cat is as much a being as a human.

This reminds me of the question: "Who are you?"... there is no aswer to this, because only you can know yourself and it's impossible to explain this to others.

So what exactly are you asking?

Why does everyone seem to be in a brain fapping mood lately?
Is it some new trend? 🤣

Point & Squirt

Quote from tsuto

What exactly do you understand by the term "inhuman"? By its most common use it clearly has negative connotations, meaning lacking certain conditions that are considered human. But this is all related to behavior, and it can be a controversial discussion theme too, since being "inhuman" this way isn't that unusual and it feels like it's just a way to make us believe that humanity is "good".

If you understand by "inhuman" simply "not human", then it doesn't have such a negative connotation attached, or at least not in the same way the other sense of the word has. It would simply group everything that isn't human or isn't closely related to humanity. As simple as that may sound, "human" doesn't have an univocal deffinition, being reffered both to biological status and psychological status, so this ambiguity may carry on even on this way of understanding "inhuman".

It's a question of terms and deffinitions, not really a question about the nature of the human being, at least that is how I see this, well, I might be wrong, who knows 🤣

Quote from Joentjuh

agree with tsuto, first define what a 'human' is. To me it's just a being of flesh and blood, regardless of nationality, colour or beliefs. The 'human' part is just a shell, a species.
So what you should ask is what (defies)? defines a being. And that, in my opinion, is just something that is (exists). A cat is as much a being as a human.

This reminds me of the question: "Who are you?"... there is no aswer to this, because only you can know yourself and it's impossible to explain this to others.

So what exactly are you asking?

There seem to be a missunderstanding here.
The purpose of this thread is to figure out what human behaviour and characteristics are, in your opinion, not mine.
Neither have i said that being inhuman is in any way inferior to being human, neither that it is negative in other ways.
Neither have i stated that humanity stands any higher than other species.

Quote from Joentjuh

I'm sorry... 'Nowadays'?
Could you give me an example of a time when 'humanity' as a whole wasn't selfish, mean and merciless?

Yeah you are right. Of course I am aware of that...just thought of the happy-going manga lives while posting 😛
That's why I wrote "nowadays"^^
I wish life would be more like in manga/anime...

Ah and one more thing! Thinking rational isn't always good. Sometimes you need to use your imagination! Not everything in this world can be explained by rational thinking...

All logical traits a human can possesses and
which are not based on
instincts are human traits.
Biologically those things that posses
the genes of a human are humans, but this
philosophical question although of
neophyte level asks me how I define
the human that we interact with and
what that consciousness we call human is.

To me, there is no inhumanity, since only
animals do things that humans do not
[color=gray](some people might even do those things the animal way,
thus we could even question such things as categorised
traits)[/color] and animals do not have morals, thus they do not
do anything in their wickedness or benevolence.
Wouldn't all things humans do be humane, since
they are carried out by them? If you disagree,
then you probably should look for the differences of
inhuman, immoral and amoral. Just because you find
something evil, it is not necessarily inhuman, just
adverse to your insight of common, human behaviour
conforming to, permitted by, or recognised by law or rules.

This thread seems to suffer from a slight word confusion. I'll try to fix that.
humane = kind or caring behaviour of humans
human = any behaviour of humans regardless of their connotation
inhuman = either cruel in a negative way or just not human in a neutral way

That being said, I think, comparing humans with other animals, the behaviour unique to humans (but not required to be human) is the changing of their environment (agriculture for instance) rather than only adepting to it like other animals.
In that sense the humans most inhuman (in a neutral way) would be nomads, since they travel wherever the animals they live of go and thus adept to their environment a lot.

The question whether the meddling with our environment was a good thing or not is difficult to answer. You could say it was a prerequisite for civilisation, many technological advances and manga. But it also lead to desertification of soil, extinction of animals and most likely to global warming.

[img]http://img.userbars.pl/69/13603.gif[/img]

Quote from stoned philosopher

This thread seems to suffer from a slight word confusion. I'll try to fix that.
humane = kind or caring behaviour of humans
human = any behaviour of humans regardless of their connotation
inhuman = either cruel in a negative way or just not human in a neutral way

Not necessarily.
You'd need to think the Greek way
and believe that humans are good by default.

Put aside about the physical differences separate human (Homo sapiens, a type of animal) from other animals, "human" (traits) are logical thinking and be able to articulate our thoughts (analyze/think about our own thoughts)

So, "inhuman" (traits) = less "human" (traits).

IMO human (homo sapient) possess BOTH "human" traits (we are Homo sapiens) and "inhuman" traits (we are just another type of animals and inherit some of their traits).

So, IMHO human (homo sapient) can behave like "human" (traits) sometime, and "inhuman" (traits) sometime. And behave "inhuman" (traits) doesn't change the fact that we are human (Homo sapiens).

[ Note that there're zero implication of "good" / "bad", "moral" / "immoral" in my post. They're all weak and relative references anyway (read: BAD references). And don't forget that my post is just a narrow POV of another Homo sapiens ]

"As long as we're seeing the same kind of musical vision, yeah, sure. But sometimes when things get hard, you balance out the pros and cons and say, am I being a wimp if I stay or am I being a wimp if I leave?" - D'arcy Wretzky

humans are people who only act for their well being with a strong survival instinct( though that has decrease over the last few centurys) through evolution and the devolopment of the brain they got ethics which is bassecly the emotion pity
so human traits would be every emotion humans have.

inhuman taits would be the absence of emotions (psycophats)

or something like that

[img]http://i718.photobucket.com/albums/ww187/D_dragon/omfgpudding-1.jpg[/img]

wow reminds me of my philosophy lectures back in High school..

[img]http://dragcave.net/image/HbYb.gif[/img] [img]http://dragcave.net/image/PpOf.gif[/img]

Individualism is what makes us 'unique'

[img]http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj11/obinrobin31/FINISHED2-Roger.gif[/img]
[color=black]The Hidden Agenda=[/color][color=red]Gol.D.Ace[/color]

[color=black]This Week's favourite:[/color]
DoLL (Okado Tatsuya)
Xp

The ability to reproduce with others of the Homo sapien species.