But science can most certainly tell us what behavior is necessary for assured — or a most
likely human survival.
Not exact matches
Let's just admit we don't know the true origin of any «creator» and understand that morals, ethics and our
human nature come from a deeper nature than we probably understand, but more
likely from a desire to continue the
human race,
survival.
There is a psychological sense of purpose in individual
human mind, which
likely evolved by natural selection as a property of the
human brain which gives advantage to the
survival of the
human race.
A weak moral structure will lead to individuals who act for themselves or with disregard to the needs of the society, resulting in internal conflict and the
likely failure of the society if the members aren't capable of completely independent
survival (and
humans aren't).
Cosleeping remains a cross-cultural
human universal, a species - wide behavior, an expectable and physiologically normal sleeping arrangement
likely designed by natural selection to maximize infant
survival and well - being.
You've most
likely heard of the «fight or flight» response — a
survival alarm system dated way back to the beginning of
human life.
Indeed, new work by Sarah Hrdy (2009) and Lee Gettler (2010) illustrate the important role that direct care and investment by others
likely played throughout
human evolution, causing scientists to consider that we are really «cooperative breeders» insofar as individuals other than the mother have significantly enhanced the
human infant
survival.
There are a few reflexes that
likely assisted in the
survival of babies during
human evolutionary past (e.g., the Moro reflex).
The understanding of
human nature as a predisposed tabula rasa informs us that
survival is the most fundamental
human instinct coded in our genetics and that, when imperiled, it is
likely to trump everything else.
«Although autonomy - establishing behavior is clearly of value in modern Western society, in which daily
survival threats are minimal, it may have become linked to stress reactions over the course of
human evolution, when separation from the larger
human pack was
likely to bring grave danger,» Allen and colleagues write.
This suggests that the
human brain is
likely similarly wired for this state critical to
survival.
A female
survival advantage in
humans is well - documented; women are 4 times more
likely than men to live to 100.
Survival for 1 yr after heart attack was found to be more
likely among people with companion dogs, along the lines of
human social support.
Also, I'm not sure I see strong support for this concluding sentence: «Although polar bears have persisted through previous warm phases, multiple
human - mediated stressors (e.g., habitat conversion, persecution, and accumulation of toxic substances in the food chain) could magnify the impact of current climate change, posing a novel and
likely profound threat to polar bear
survival.»
The other threat is nuclear war which is becoming more
likely as the technology spreads and as climate change imposes increasing problems on
human survival.»
Likely, this desire for intensity is left over from another time in
human history, when it was needed to encourage genetic diversity and
survival of the species.