Do you agree or disagree that: observing or studying animals could teach us a lot about human nature.
In daily life so many problems are worth considering carefully. Can we learn a lot of human nature by observing or studying animals? Contrary to the opinion of many people who believe that people cannot learn human instinct from the animals it is my heartfelt belief that, animals are good teachers to human beings.
It would be possible at first to take the view that along with the evolution of human being the weakness of character had changed for the better. Nowadays people become more intelligent than ever before. However, the animals are still low forms of life. For instance human beings have a totally different solution when others provoke them compared with animals. People understand how to sopite the problem in a rational way. Some animals may show their bestial character when other's show hostility to them or they are chasing their quarries. It is their nature, not ours.
I cannot continue!
I need both advantage and disadvantage of observing or studying animals could teach us a lot about human nature.
Thanks!
Well, do you actually believe your thesis? If you have more points to make arguing that animals don't have much to teach us about our own nature, then perhaps you should make that your thesis. In addition to the points you have already listed, you could argue that what makes humans interesting is precisely the reasons that we are different from other animals. If you really want to argue that animals do have a lot to teach us, though, you could focus on the idea that humans evolved from lesser animals, so studying those animals may help us to understand the origins of our own characteristics.
Just for kicks I thought I would respond to some of what you said.
"For instance human beings have a totally different solution when others provoke them compared with animals."
----In a sense humans actually have the same response that animals do when provoked. For the most part, animals, as humans do, tend to respond to negativity with more negativity. If a panther were to harass a bear the panther would probably get attacked physically. If a human were to harass another human the first human would also probably get attacked as well, though it would probably be a verbal attack rather than a physical one. I would argue that humans respond the exact same way that animals do to their environments. Its just that humans have more complicated or reserved responses. The intent is the same however. "If an entity in my environment is trying to cause me harm then I must get away from it or destroy it." Think about nations. When one nation provokes another with military action the second nation will of course respond with violent action just as animals do. Of course humans also do try to find rational solutions to their problems without conflict but animals do this as well. Symbiotic relationships are everywhere in nature and many animals join together to form groups to survive through teamwork. Humans do the exact same thing only on a much larger scale.----
"Some animals may show their bestial character when other's show hostility to them or they are chasing their quarries. It is their nature, not ours."
----Think about this. If someone was chasing you or attacking you would you stop and try to rationalize what was happening to you? Of course not. Your animal insticts would kick in and you would either run for your life or stand and fight.----
So I guess all that would be an argument that supports the notion that humans can learn from animals. However, even if you were going to go the other way you would need to take on these ideas and find their flaws.
People understand how to solve the problem in a rational way.
The advantages of studying animals include the ability to watch what is done based on pure instinct, without a lot of human reasoning. The advantages also include the ability to see how animals act without being influenced by ego. For example, an animal might run away instead of fighting, but a human might stay and get killed because he is too proud to run away!
The disadvantages of studying animals include the fact that they do not act like humans, so they do not demonstrate behavior that reflects human nature. they demonstrate behavior that reflects animal nature. Then again, as Tyler explained, humans are not so different from other animals.
It might help to define what you mean by "human nature." If you mean "that which makes us human, as oppose to just another animal," then you can argue that we should study animals precisely to eliminate from consideration those forms of behavior and personality that animals share with humans, to get at what makes us unique. If by human nature you mean "those characteristic that humans possess, regardless of whether or not animals have them too," then you could argue that we could study animals to learn more about our own instincts, as Tyler suggests. In each case you could take the opposite side, but again your arguments would differ depending upon your definition.
