Understanding a human being is a complex process that can involves understanding the nature of life. Being a human being entails making interactions with hundreds of fundamental principles that concerns the nature of life. Attempting to understand the nature of human beings is equal to making efforts to define what one is. This type of inquiry is quite controversial because a human is a curious creature. One might begin to define a human being depending on visible attributes or personalities. Even though not people are equal because of different individual and cultural variations, humans exhibit similar characteristics to animals, particularly mammals. This paper argues that defining a human being is a complex process that relates to defining what constitutes life.
Different disciplines have tried to come up with different definitions of what constitutes being a human being. According to anthropologists, human beings are animals with idiosyncrasies and characteristics that distinguish them as a unique species (Holmes, and Kate 38). As such, anthropologists use universal characteristics that all people share everywhere to define the aspects that constitute a human being. On the other hand, philosophists argue that the appropriate way to study human beings is studying man. Man is an eternal being and forms the best source of answering the questions regarding what is a human being. Philosophy relies on the study of essential information that unites human kind. It combines spiritual principles (spirit, soul, and selfhood). Religious studies defines human beings as objects that resemble a supreme being. Biology and other theories have different definitions of what constitutes a human being. Based on these complexities, we can argue that indeed, a human being constitutes complex perspectives that relate to life.
Work Cited
Holmes, Bob, and Kate Douglas. "The Nature Of The Beast. (Cover Story)." New Scientist 214.2861 (2012): 38-43
