 What is the essence of human nature?

 What are the theories existed to support your claim?

 How is your theory of personality contribute to the existing theories?
 What are the gray areas of existing theories that you had incorporated and explored in your
theory?
 CONVINCE ME OF YOUR THEORY.

Human nature is driven by:

 The nature and nurture. While these are separate entities in and of themselves, they are
intertwined in constituting the uniqueness of human beings. In the role of nature, genetics play
a role. Genetically endowed characteristics can play a role in human nature as well as the
environment the individual is raised in. to say that one entity is superior than the other is a false
assumption because there is simply no way of knowing what percentage of this factor
contributes to the entirety of a person. Also, exploring the which is which is question would not
bring conclusive statements. Nature and nurture seemed to be the primary foundation of slowly
understanding human nature. Yet, it does not provide much of a substance as to the other
driving forces that makes an individual as what he or she is now. It is to my understanding that
there are certain gray areas in these two or various subsets hidden in plain sight. It is similar to
finding and proving that there is an integer between 3 and 4 which is a far fetched comparison
to human nature. But, it is what I associate it with. On the following sections, we will be looking
at nature and nurture and try to find the many intricacies it holds.
Evolution. I am convinced that part of our human nature is based on the concept of
evolution, a gradual process that we all experience. If we were to simply based our
argument on the most basic idea of genetics, it discredits our ancestors’ unintended and
indirect contribution to our human nature. Through a series of lineages, various changes
can be observed coupled with the fact that for every generation born, a likelihood of
producing a unique human being is produced.
Happiness. The concept in and of itself is subjective yet it is often presented as a
complex puzzle. We are driven by goals that we do not see it yet can produce happiness.
It is not merely satisfaction that is present whenever we accomplish something great or
small. In all ways, there is a tinge of happiness that surrounds this accomplishment and
to me, it is what we are ultimately driven for. Happiness elicits a positive response to
those experiencing it. however, it is important to take note that too much or too little of
something is not always a good thing. Happiness can be overwhelming in the long run
that even the complexities of a human being cannot seemed to stay within this state. It
would be an overwhelming experience. Too little of this ingredient tips the psyche of a
human being and it presents a series of psychological disorders. Little happiness can
sway the person of believing that there is something good in the world that it would
prevent him from being able to realize something new. Novelty can bring happiness. The
novelty of having to learn to play a guitar. The novelty of an experience brings
happiness. Little happiness can then hinder a person’s perspective into achieving a state
of cloud nine. I also have to ask is there a distinct definition for this ultimate goal in life?
it is complicated. I hypothesized that one has to live for many millenia, experience
everything there is to do in life, list it and compare which ones brings you the most joy
based on a scale of 1 to 10. Basically, no such being exists or if it does, it would not be
human anymore. Imagine having to lived for so long and then explore on what makes us
happy and finally have the audacity to publish a research about it, would it be the most
influential research there will ever be to existence? For discussion forum 7: happiness is
not all subjective because we can be happy but the mode to achieving it can have
detrimental effects on our surroundings. For instance, when talking about pedophelia,
what really drives a person to commit horrific acts on a minor is not only a need to
satisfy one’s fixation but also derived from those satisfaction is a certain happiness.
Now, if we were to say that happiness is subjective all throughout the discussion, then
the world would be full of chaos.
Hierarchy of needs and wants. Happiness is subjective, attainable and is realistic.
However, it comes from varying forms in the form of wants and needs. I can say that I
am happy that I finally got the taco that I want for so long. Its happiness for me but is
happiness characterized to be experience for prolonger periods of time? Yes and no.
happiness is still happiness even if it is experienced for brief moments in life. These
hierarchy of needs and wants emits happiness. But is happiness really the product here?
What distinguished happiness from satisfaction? Or happiness from contentment?
Unconsciousness. There are certain acts that arise from this deep and complex hole. I
am convinced that evolution has helped shaped a collective unconscious to which we
can lean on. Unconsciousness may be full of unwanted desires stuffed into this place but
it may hold a pool of answers to our existence. Through conditioning thereby shaping
our minds and behaviors, it may have been that that’s caused our unconscious to not be
recognized. It would be a waste if our unconscious is there only to serve as a stock room
of repressed and unwanted behaviors and desires. Would it be possible that the
unconscious is in fact all mighty and unlocking its secrets to a full extent would make us
closer to our human nature? By saying this, my assumptions are based from a movie I
just saw called “Lucy.” Removing the action aspect of that film poses an underlying
question of “what if we can unlock the 100 percent of our brain? In that film, unlocking
the 100 percent required a medicinal intervention, one that is man-made and was
purposefully created for monetary gains. The unconsciousness is shrouded with mystery
and is often shunned to the side. The unconscious is truly a mystery. The similarity of
unlocking the full potential of unconsciousness would be a similar feat as to unlocking
the secrets that the universe holds. This is still a question borne out of curiosity. it is
pushing the boundaries and crossing the line of what we already know and that is, the
unconscious should be left alone. Yet, I am entrenched with the idea that the
unconsciousness exists not solely on the basis of its known use.
Persona. Everyone of us is not us. A different version or possibly a toned down version
of us exists in the realm of the persona. Looking back at the Hawthorne effect wherein
people act differently in the presence of another person or a crowd can support the idea
of persona. Knowing that somebody is watching our every move can make us mindful of
our actions, thoughts and displayed behavior. Having to regulate this can elicit anxiety
which when left unregulated could turn into a disorder. Having a mask is a necessary
realization that must be met by every individual at some point in their lives. It may
require experimentation that includes numerous trial and error. The persona is a
statement of an individual and represents society. As to where the drive to create this
mask can be stemmed to evolution itself, a type of collective unconscious which the
famous Carl Jung introduced. However, the question rises if in a situation that a man
lives alone in an island devoid of anything but all the necessary survival kits, food, water,
medicine for all eternity, would he be in a position to create a persona in the likely event
that he encounter some people? Still yes. It is unclear to me whether the persona stems
from the collective unconscious or is in and of itself a human survival mechanism which
can be broken down and traced back to biology? The scenario previously mentioned is
impossible and therefore not plausible in the slightest way. Persona is part of our
human nature as a basic mechanism to survive in society. Not having to come up with a
constant persona that the world looks up, creates a negative circumstance to the
individual. A non-forming individual could be an individual. This is different from the
more popular argument of gender dysphoria wherein anyone can identify as anyone or
anything for that matter. The persona is an essential tool for human survival and designs
human nature.