Do you believe in humanity?

[Anthropos]

I'd garner more responses this way. Maybe I am left-wing troll though. ;D

But the concept of humanity, as people understand it today, more or less amounts to what I wrote. If you have a different definition or one that conflicts with what I wrote, go ahead and share it. To shorten it up a bit, I think it would mean believing that we have a specifically 'human' quality that can't be diminished based on circumstance. Is that better now? Nice and broad, can be interpreted a hundred different ways.



Believing in a common 'humanity' would obviously lead one to think that convergent civilization is a direct result of our similarity. Are you saying you don't believe that humans civilizations are convergent to some degree? How do you explain the fact that the Mesoamerican civilizations developed agriculture, organized religion, architecture, and a caste-like societal organization, all while being almost totally isolated from the rest of the world? Why can comparisons so easily be drawn between their civilizations and those found in the 'Old World'? What do you mean when you say that I "excluded common origin"? Most normal and/or sane people would accept that we have a common origin, that fact can't be disputed. But I'd guess that those who argue against the humanist interpretation would say that since the time of our common ancestor, human populations have diverged to a greater extent than is accepted by the mainstream. They would probably believe that though humans have much in common, like the simple fact that we all speak and practice a culture, different "paths" that human populations have taken could have fostered more dissimilarity than is normally thought.

Maybe you believe that the differences between individuals are so great that there can't possibly be a human collective?

You are much mistaken about where I come from. I am a Christian.

Concerning the convergent civilization again, I am not disputing that humans have a common origin. But if civilizations are convergent, and if humans have a common origin, then we wouldn't have such different civilizations as those that we have. You seem to think that culture and language, for example, are just barriers that human beings have raised up in spite of their similarities, but that doesn't seem so likely to me, and nor does it support your case. How do you explain that languages that likely do share a common origin at least to some extent, like Greek and Swedish for example, or Finnish and Korean for another example, have since developed to have less and less in common? If you want to know why agriculture developed, then how about it people need to eat or they die, and agriculture is an efficient way for steady food production! If there was really a tendency towards one single civilization as you say, then we wouldn't have a historical record disproving that with much force. History shows a strong tendency towards differentiation, and not convergence. Convergence pretty much only happens when political ties are strong.

The same thing can be seen in genetics even: There is a tendency towards differentiation, not convergence. Genetic differentiation is greater today than ever before.

[Darth Revan]

Your question is somehow ambiguous.

All humans share basic behavioural similarities (reactions to hunger, pain, fear and the like); but not all of them share the same fate.
Just like every life form, humans live and die depending on their individual capacities. Technology enhances, doesn't change, this sempiternal fact.

[dude]

Humanity is fake, you can't believe in it.

[Jackson]

To a certain extent, we are all similar - which is obvious. But i think acting on it any further than that politically would be a mistake, unless it is try and promote peaceful relationships between nations.

I honestly don't think all of humanity could be united without an exterior threat and even then i think it would be a struggle due to our divisive nature, however it is our divisive nature that is fundamental to our progress as a whole. The course of evolution could be seen as biological entities dividing in their approach to life until they become distinct groups by their own right which then develop further along a separate path and bring the ever present biological 'diversity' that certain types bang on about so much. To unite and homogenize on a global level is to reduce global diversity for the sake of short term local political endeavors, it's not progress.

[Leto]

We're all just humans