What Makes a Man a Man? What is a man? The message that the person is.

Many of us at least once in our lives wondered how a person appeared. No less interesting is the riddle of the origin of the Earth. Nobody succeeded in completely removing the veil from these secrets. Philosophers have speculated on these topics for centuries. To date, neither thinkers nor scientists have provided one hundred percent proof of any theory that explains where humans came from on Earth. There are many assumptions, but we will try to distinguish four main groups of hypotheses.

Evolution theory

How did a person appear according to this theory? It is believed to be descended from great apes. The gradual transformation of the species took place under the influence of natural selection. There are four stages of this process:

• The period of existence of the Australopithecus (alternative name - "southern monkeys"). They had already mastered upright posture, were able to manipulate various objects in their hands and built herd relationships. The weight of the Australopithecus was about thirty to forty kilograms, and the height was 1.2-1.3 meters.

• Pithecanthropus (the most ancient man). In addition to all the above characteristics, the ability to make fire and handle it appeared. There were still ape-like features in the form of the facial skeleton and skull.
• Neanderthal (ancient man). The general structure of the skeleton was almost the same as that of modern humans, but the skull had some differences.
• Modern man. Appeared in the late Paleolithic period (from seventy to thirty-five thousand years ago).

Flaws

The inconsistency of the theory considered above is as follows: scientists have not been able to explain how more complex forms of life were formed due to mutations. The catch is that as a result of mutation, individual genes are damaged, therefore, the quality of the new form decreases. Not a single useful result of this process has yet been found.

Guests from other planets

This version of how man appeared is based on the assumption of external interference in the course of the development of our planet. The leading role in the considered theory is assigned to extraterrestrial civilizations. It is thanks to them that people appeared. Simply put, the first human on Earth was a direct descendant of an alien. There are other options as well. Among the most common are the following:

• Homo sapiens came about thanks to the possibilities of genetic engineering.
• The first humans appeared in a homunculated fashion (in vitro).
• The evolutionary development of life on Earth is governed by a higher mind.

Creation theory

How were people born according to this hypothesis? Man was created by God himself from nothing, or the material was not used biological (if we take creationism into account). According to the most famous biblical version, the first people - Eve and Adam - appeared from clay. Representatives of other peoples and beliefs have their own versions on this score. None of them require proof. Faith is the main argument.

In some modern theological movements, a variation of the evolutionary theory is considered, with the amendment that the first man on Earth appeared from a monkey, but by the will of God.

Spatial anomaly theory

How did a person appear according to this hypothesis? It somewhat resembles evolutionary, but has its own characteristics. So, the presence of both random factors and a specific program for the development of life is allowed. There is a humanoid triad (aura, matter and energy) or a spatial anomaly. The latter includes such an element as anthropogenesis. It is argued that the biosphere of humanoid universes develops according to the standard scenario at the level of informational substance (aura). Under favorable conditions, the emergence of a humanoid mind occurs.

More about one of the common theories

Most conservative scientists argue that our earliest ancestors are small arboreal animals, somewhat reminiscent of modern tupai. They inhabited the Earth at least sixty-five million years ago, during the extinction of the dinosaurs. About fifty million years ago, highly organized animals, similar to monkeys, appeared. Over time, the development of one of the groups of primates took a special path, which led to the emergence of great apes twenty-five million years ago.

Today, most representatives of one hundred and eighty groups of primates live in regions of the tropics or subtropics. But it was not always so. About fifty million years ago, the climate on our planet was much warmer, so the ancestors of modern monkeys occupied much larger territories.

Features of life in trees

Early primates perfectly mastered the art of tree climbing. For a successful life at a height, they had to learn how to thoroughly cling to branches and correctly estimate the distance. The first property was developed thanks to movable fingers, and the second - with the participation of eyes directed forward, providing the so-called binocular vision.

The incredible story of "Lucy"

D. Johansen, an American anthropologist, in 1974 managed to make one very important discovery. He carried out excavations on the territory of Ethiopia and found the remains of the female of the aforementioned "southern monkeys". They began to call her "Lucy". The growth of a young female was about one meter. Lucy's teeth and brains bore many similarities to those of the ape. Nevertheless, it is assumed that she was already moving on her own two feet, albeit crooked. Before this discovery, scientists were confident that the "southern monkeys" lived on our planet about 2 million years ago. As for the remains of "Lucy", their age is 3-3.6 million years. Thus, it became known that these creatures lived on Earth more than a million years earlier.

The man who never lived

In 1912, not far from Piltdown (England, Sussex), archaeologists discovered several fragments of the skull and a broken facial bone of our distant ancestor. The unusual find aroused unprecedented public interest. However, after a while, experts began to doubt the value of the find. This is why bone age testing was initiated in 1953. Nobody expected such a result. It turned out that the jaw bone belonged to an orangutan who lived five centuries earlier, and parts of the skull belonged to modern humans. All the remains were simply covered with a special compound, and the teeth were skillfully filed to make them look prehistoric. The "joker" was never found.

Detailed consideration of evolutionary processes and their results

The history of the origin of man says: in the beginning, evolution did not happen so quickly. From the moment our first ancestor appeared to mastering the skill of making rock paintings, it took almost seven million years. However, as soon as the "thinking man" thoroughly settled on Earth, he began to rapidly develop all kinds of abilities. So, only one hundred thousand years separate us from the aforementioned rock art. At present, humans are the dominant form of life on the planet. We were even able to leave Earth and began to explore space.

Now it is difficult to imagine what our descendants will become in a hundred thousand years. One thing is clear: they will be completely different. By the way, in general, we have changed quite a lot over the past four centuries. For example, the armor of the knights of the fifteenth century will hardly fit a modern soldier. The average height of a warrior of those times was 160 cm. And the current supermodel would hardly have put on the dress of her great-great-grandmother, who had a waist of 45 cm and a height of 30 cm lower. As scientists note, if evolutionary processes continue to develop in the same direction, our faces will become flatter, and our jaw will shrink. Our brains will get bigger, and we ourselves will get taller.

Unbearable heat

According to data obtained in the course of recent studies, ancient people mastered upright posture in order to save themselves from overheating. Four million years ago, walking on two legs was much more comfortable on the sultry African plains. Among the main advantages is the following: the rays of the sun fell only on the head of the one who walked upright. Well, those who continued to move with their back bent overheated much more. People who began to walk on two legs sweated less intensely, therefore, they did not need much water to survive. This allowed man to bypass other animals in the incessant struggle for existence.

Hairline

Mastering bipedal locomotion had other significant consequences. So, the bipedal creature no longer needed to have such an extensive and thick hair cover, which previously protected its back from the merciless sun. As a result, only the head remained protected by the hair. Thus, our ancestors became the notorious "naked monkeys".

Blissful coolness

Starting to walk on two legs, our ancestor seemed to open one of the important "evolutionary doors". Having taken a straightened posture, he significantly moved away from the ground, and therefore, from the heat that it emitted. For this reason, the brain began to overheat much less. A cool breeze blowing one or two meters above the ground additionally cooled the body. For the above reasons, the brain has become larger and more active.

Where did the first person appear?

Scientists have found and continue to find the remains of ancient people in various places on the planet. Some of the most widely known excavations took place in a valley near the German village of Neander. Similar remains were later found in France and other countries. Due to the fact that the finds near Neander were the most complete and interesting, our most ancient ancestors began to be called Neanderthals.

Where did the first modern man appear? Previously, scientists believed that this happened in the eastern part of Africa, but later a version appeared about the southern regions. Genetic studies of representatives of indigenous African tribes helped to draw conclusions that refuted the original theory. Nevertheless, such conclusions contradict modern archaeological data, since the most ancient remains of anatomically modern humans were found in eastern Africa - on the territory of modern countries such as Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia. In addition, the information available to date allows us to conclude that the population of the above states is distinguished by the greatest genetic variability when compared with representatives of other regions of the planet. This fact gives the right to consider Africa as the starting point of all waves of the spread of people on Earth.

Conclusion

Questions about how many years ago a person appeared and where exactly this happened still excite the minds of both scientists and ordinary people. There are many versions, and each of them has the right to exist. Unfortunately, over time it becomes more and more difficult to get to the bottom of the truth, as the years inexorably erase the evidence of the past from the face of the Earth ...

Reporting that someone is careless in keeping a commandment that many do not.

Unfortunately, there are a number of commandments that in some communities are so neglected that if some Jews do not follow them, no one condemns them. However, if we tell that a person is careless in keeping this kind of commandment, we will be guilty of committing a sin. lashon-ara.

Eliezer does not understand the importance of Torah study and rarely sits down to study. It is forbidden to inform other people about this, even if many others are careless in fulfilling this commandment.

Clara told a group of friends a fictional story about her heroic deed. Dora knows that most of the story is a deliberate distortion of reality, that is, in fact, the narrator's fantasy. Dora really wants to bring Clara to clean water, so that everyone knows that she is a liar, but she is forbidden to do so. Moreover, Dora is forbidden to say that not the whole story is true - if no one benefits from such a statement. Therefore, any comment by Dora on the topic of Clara's story - lashon-ara.

An ordinary person who observes the commandments behaves carefully towards them so as not to violate any of them, but sometimes he also has breakdowns. If we see that he made a mistake, but we consider it possible to justify him (judging by his actions from the good side), we are obliged to judge him favorably. In such event, we are prohibited from informing others of his misconduct. Perhaps he does not realize that this or that action is prohibited, and therefore repeats it from time to time; those. all to blame is elementary ignorance. Maybe he is not aware of the severity of his violation. Or, for example, he believes that this is allowed by the law, but some people have taken on additional restrictions that are not at all necessary; he, not intending to act in all severity, chose an easier line of behavior for himself - and does not understand that by doing so he is breaking the law.

We must judge a person who keeps the commandments from a justifying point of view only. And if we still have doubts about the true reasons for his reprehensible behavior, we should assume that there are some factors unknown to us that made him do this, and if they were known to us, we would excuse him. Moreover, we are forbidden to dislike this person because of his mistakes.

Shayna Friedman obeys the commandments but doesn't dress modestly enough. If someone explains to Shane that modesty in dress is not just commendable, but an essential element of living the Torah, then she will dress differently. Her friend Paul Zbarskaya is forbidden to humiliate Shane by telling others that she dresses immodestly. Fields will achieve more if he speaks with Sheina in person.

Mr. Berger observes the laws of the Sabbath. But since he never studied seriously in the Jewish educational system, he is not familiar with many of the subtle details of the Sabbath prohibitions. His acquaintance, Herr Neumann, notes that Berger violated the sanctity of the Sabbath in some detail. He is forbidden to tell others about it. Instead, Neumann should speak tactfully with Berger, showing him how to properly observe the Sabbath.

As the great Russian writer Maxim Gorky said: "The only miracle on earth, and all its other miracles are the results of the creativity of his will, reason, imagination." It is difficult to disagree with this statement, of course, everything is God's will, but there is no point in denying that man is currently the most precious work of nature. In the process of our life, we acquire new skills, develop, but sometimes we do not know elementary things about ourselves. Some of them are offered to your attention. Expand your horizons and surprise your friends and acquaintances with the information you receive :)

1. The total weight of bacteria living in the human body is 2 kilograms.
2. A person who smokes a pack of cigarettes a day drinks half a cup of tar a year.
3. Man is the only representative of the animal world capable of drawing straight lines.

4. The length of hair on the head, grown on average by a person during his life, is 725 kilometers.
5. Blondes grow beards faster than brunettes.
6. When a person smiles, 17 muscles “work”.
7. The surface of the lungs is about 100 square meters.
8. Human DNA contains about 80,000 genes.
9. Men are considered dwarfs when they are below 130 cm, women are below 120 cm.
10. Leukocytes in the human body live 2-4 days, and erythrocytes - 3-4 months.
11. The names of the fingers of the French hand: pus, index, major, anyuler, oriculair.
12. Each finger of a person bends approximately 25 million times during its lifetime.
13. The size of a person's heart is approximately equal to the size of his fist. The weight of an adult's heart is 220-260 g.
14. The human body contains only 4 minerals: apatite, aragonite, calcite and cristobalite.
15. The human brain generates more electrical impulses per day than all the phones in the world put together.
16. The phenomenon in which a person loses the ability to see from strong light is called "snow blindness."
17. The 1918-1919 influenza epidemic claimed the lives of more than 20 million people in the United States and Europe.
18. In the human brain, 100,000 chemical reactions take place in one second.
19. Children are born without knee caps. They appear only at the age of 2–6 years.
20. The surface area of ​​human lungs is approximately equal to the area of ​​a tennis court.
21. From the moment of birth, there are already 14 billion cells in the human brain, and this number does not increase until death. On the contrary, after 25 years it decreases by 100 thousand per day. In a minute you spend reading a page, about 70 cells die. After 40 years, brain degradation accelerates sharply, and after 50, neurons (nerve cells) dry out and the volume of the brain shrinks.
22. In psychiatry, a syndrome accompanied by depersonalization, impaired perception of time and space, one's own body and environment is officially (!) Called "Alice in Wonderland."
23. The human small intestine during life has a length of about 2.5 meters. After his death, when the musculature of the intestinal wall relaxes, its length reaches 6 meters.
24. A person has approximately 2 million sweat glands. The average adult loses 540 calories for every liter of sweat. Men sweat about 40% more than women.
25. The right lung of a person holds more air than the left.
26. An adult takes about 23,000 breaths (and exhalations) a day.
27. Throughout her life, the female body reproduces 7 million eggs.
28. The human eye is capable of distinguishing 10,000,000 color shades.
29. There are about 40,000 bacteria in the human mouth.
30. Papaphobia is the fear of the Pope (of Rome) !.
31. Sneezing with open eyes is impossible.
32. There are 33 or 34 vertebrae in the human spine.
33. Women blink about 2 times more often than men.
34. The smallest cells in a man's body are sperm cells.
35. The strongest muscle in the human body is the tongue.
36. There are about 2000 taste buds in the human body.
37. In Mesopotamia, the doctor who treated him was executed for the death of a patient, and blinded for blindness.
38. At birth, there are about 300 bones in a child's body; in adulthood, only 206 of them remain.
39. The human body contains the same amount of fat as needed to produce 7 bars of soap.
40. Nerve impulses in the human body move at a speed of about 90 meters per second.
41. Human hair is about 5000 times thicker than a soap film.
42. 36.8 million - the number of heartbeats in a person in one year.
43. Men are about 10 times more likely to suffer from color blindness than women.
44. Human gastric juice contains 0.4% hydrochloric acid (HCl).
45. Almost half of all human bones are located in the wrists and feet.
46. ​​Medieval doctors, when in doubt about the diagnosis, diagnosed syphilis.
47. People with blue eyes are more sensitive to pain than everyone else.
48. Nails on the fingers grow about 4 times faster than on the feet.
49. During a lifetime, human skin is replaced about 1000 times.
50. There are over 100 different viruses that cause the common cold.
51. Bumping your head against a wall can burn 150 calories per hour.
52. There are about 75 kilometers (!) Of nerves in the body of an adult.
53. Bulimia is an indomitable appetite.
54. Parthenophobia is the fear of virgins.
55. The scientific name of the navel is umbilicus.

What is a man? What are these creatures that live on Earth and call themselves people? For example, Maxim Gorky argued that "man - it sounds proudly"... Many people believe that man is the highest being on Earth. In this regard, I have a question. If this is really so, and man is a supreme being, then how many such people live on Earth?

There are so many robotic people who act mechanically. Who are they? Are they human beings or not? After all, to tell someone that he is not a human being but a robot is a very big insult. Probably few people will like it.

So what is man? When a child is born, they say that a new person has been born. What happens to him next in the course of the so-called development or maturation? A personality or ego is formed in it. And what is it? Isn't this a specific set of habits called character traits? But character is the stereotypical way of responding to external and internal influences of the environment. It's a mechanism.

I would like to understand whether a person is a person? We have a body and what is then formed there, that is, a personality. When they talk about a person, they mean his personality, isn't that so? They can say about him that he is kind, honest, punctual or envious, irritable, shameless, and the like. There are many different definitions of personality, in the minds of the majority, a person and a person are one and the same.

But, if a person is a supreme being, it sounds proudly, then why does he live like this? If we take an unbiased look at how people live, we cannot fail to see constant conflicts in relationships between people, leading to wars and murders. How can someone call himself a supreme being, while destroying another, similar being? Destroying not even because he has some biological need for it. Animals eat each other. We see this in nature. But they don't do this when they are not hungry. They have no reason to kill. Man does not feed on man, while the number of people killed by people is enormous. Can such a being call itself superior?

And if we assume that a person is a supreme being, then can such a being call itself a person? Someone will answer something like this: "Yes, someone kills, but these are not people, they are bandits. I am not like that. I do not do it and I will not do it." But is it? Is not in every person what is in all of humanity? Doesn't each person contribute to what is happening and happened on Earth? After all, war, conflict is a consequence of division, fragmentation of a person's perception of himself, when one fragment of the mind condemns another fragment of it. This is the main reason for conflicts and wars. But isn't this division in each of us? Doesn't each of us bring this separation to the world we live in? Can you call yourself a human when you are internally divided?

Maybe you are simply afraid of the law, punishment, and therefore do not bring your internal and external conflicts to something so criminally punishable? But the essence and cause of any conflict is the same. This is an internal psychological separation. Let's say I have beliefs that I don't want to change. At the same time, I was not involved, did not sit and did not have any special business with the law. But does this mean that I have not contributed to the various conflicts and wars that are now taking place in different parts of the world? Are not their reasons the very same beliefs, which they not only do not want to part with, but also force them on others?

Here I am sitting in front of the TV, watching a report about another armed conflict and saying: "What is this going on? This must be stopped, where is the government looking?" Am I not the same myself? Do I easily part with my beliefs? Haven't you ever tried to impose them on someone else? So what is a man?

Human beings have great reproductive capacity and survival rates. Many species of animals and plants could not survive in the changing conditions of life on Earth or were able to survive only in certain places where the necessary conditions exist for them. Man, on the other hand, survives in a variety of circumstances and conditions. This is one of the distinctive features of the species - the ability to adapt and survive when conditions change, not only physical, but also psychological.

At the same time, for some individual person, the living conditions of other people may seem nightmarish and unbearable. He says that it is better not to live at all than to live in such conditions. If he talks to these other people, he can find out that they are quite satisfied with the way they live, they are used to and, in principle, do not want to change anything. A person can adapt to anything. It seems to me that there is nothing that a person cannot adapt to. That is, the peculiarity of the species is that it is very survivable. But this is life in hell. It's a hell of a life if you look at it with an open mind.

Yes, a person gets used to anything - both in war and in prison, in the most unbearable and insane conditions, he still finds his pleasures and sorrows. At the same time, he says that this is how it should be, that it cannot be otherwise. A person gets used to anything, but if you take an unbiased look at how people live, then is such a life worthy of a higher being? And then the question arises: who created such creatures and doomed them to such a life? If a person is a supreme being, then is that how he should live? Or does the person perform some completely different role? And his amazing survivability, adaptability, unwillingness to consciously change himself is necessary for nature for some purpose? After all, if nature did not suit this, then this species would not develop like this. So it suits her for some reason. But does this suit the person himself?

If we look with an open mind, we can see that most people don't want anything else. Yes, many will say that there are a lot of terrible and bad things around, but very few are ready for really serious changes in their lives. Not just talking, but acting. So what is this view? What is it - a man? Maybe this is only a human possibility? Maybe this is just an opportunity to truly become human? How is a butterfly born from a chrysalis, so, perhaps, from what is now called "man", a man is really born? Maybe each of us has the opportunity to become a Human, but does not use it, considering that he already is? But then what is man now?

What we have? First, the body. The body makes it possible to be in the material world: to move, do something, see, hear, feel at least that which is directly connected with this material world. But what is in the body that governs it? What will psychologists say about this, for example? Psychologists will talk about personality, its formation, features, characteristics, factors influencing it. They will give many definitions of personality and ways of describing it. There are many different classifications that describe what is in the body, that is, personality.

What is personality? They say that you still have to become a person. The teenager is told: "You are not yet a person, but you can become one."... There are certain ideas about what a real person is. There are, for example, ideas about what the real personality of a man is, the real personality of a woman. It is on them that they are guided in education. Upbringing itself is the formation of these personality traits, character traits. So what is formed in the body: a person or a personality? In my opinion, this is a very significant issue. As you can see, I don't take it for granted that a person is a person. I assume that a person is something completely different. That is why I ask: what is brought up in a child? And it seems to me that it is the personality that is being brought up. Personality as a set of certain ideas, habits, beliefs, traits and characteristics that allow something to form in this body, which is a person, and then this person to enter the social environment.

The country needs workers and soldiers. Thus, the child becomes another worker or soldier in society. So who is raising a child: parents or society? I have a question like this. Who does the child belong to? It seems that to parents, but it is through the parents that what society needs is brought up and instilled. Parents are already members of the community. Now they already have a certain body in which they need to be educated, create a personality that will become another member of society. So who does this person belong to: parents or society? And the next question: who owns the parents? Someone may say that they do not belong to anyone. But, if we look with an open mind, we will see that everything that the majority usually call a person is a person, and a person is a kind of combination of what is given by society. There is nothing but what is in society. This is a certain fragment of society, which is called a personality.

So what is a man? What is personality? Does a person want to become a person?

What is personality?

It is just a fragment of society in which certain views, beliefs, opinions and beliefs are somehow concentrated that exist in a particular structure of society. Is personality then something individual? What happens when such a person disappears?

You probably know how a car is assembled. Different parts of which it consists are taken, then they are assembled. And it becomes a car. And if I take and systematically disassemble all this, which is called a car, into parts, and then take them apart to different places, can I say that this set of disparate parts is a car? There was just a car. Now it is no longer there, there is just a set of some parts. Can you call it a car?

So what is personality? When various fragments of some convictions, beliefs, thoughts are concentrated in one place, say, in the body, as well as in the mind, all this is called a person, a person. But if you take what is called a personality and decompose it into its constituent parts, that is, into various beliefs, beliefs, opinions, of which it consists. What will be left? Anything left? Let's take a specific person. Let's say she has beliefs. I will take each of them, highlight and set aside. She has some beliefs. I will take them too, select them and put them aside. Then she has some preferences, for example, of a physical nature. I will also highlight them and put them aside. What will be left? I took and decomposed this personality into its constituent parts.

Now I will return each of these parts to the source from which it came. For example, a person is strongly convinced that only communism can save the country. He has such a strong conviction because he is a communist. I take this conviction and return it to the one who is its owner and creator, that is, to the communist society. Then we take some more conviction from him. For example, that a woman should lead a man. Or vice versa, a man should lead a woman. I again take this belief and return it to where it came from.

Do you think I can find all the sources where these beliefs came from? These are certain fragments of society. Certain beliefs are concentrated in some specific fragments of a given society, that is, in some groups of people who carry these beliefs. Thus, any personality can be decomposed into component parts, and these parts can be returned to where they were taken from. As a result of this, what will remain in the body? I do not mean the physiology of the body, but the psychology of the individual.

Man is called a social animal. So: we see that in a person there really is a social, that is, what came from society, and there is what is from an animal. And if we take and remove everything that came from society, and this is a person, then there will be just an animal walking on two legs.

We have said that the mind is the headquarters for the formation of personality. It contains certain ideas, beliefs, beliefs, and so on. Then the mind begins to use the heart, the emotional sphere in order to saturate all these ideas with energy. And what do we have then? A social animal? But usually an animal kills another animal only when it is hungry, when instinct makes it look for food. A human being can kill another person not because of hunger, but because of some other considerations that were born in his personality. So what does this social "superstructure", that is, personality, give, does it make a person more humane than an ordinary animal?

So, look what kind of evolution a human being has made, passing from an animal state to a social animal state. An animal has no beliefs, so it cannot kill because of beliefs. It can only kill when it is hungry. The personality will kill because of beliefs. For example, because of the belief that she is the strongest, or because of her desire to own something: a woman, a man, a city, position, status, car, enterprise or something else.

Physiological hunger is satisfied with a certain amount of food. Personal hunger is insatiable. Bounded pride, jealousy, anger, resentment are the reaction of a person to unfulfilled desires, for the sake of which she can kill others. And doing it deliberately. A person commits murder deliberately. Who else on Earth commit murder deliberately?

Take the war. Wars take a lot of lives. Aren't the generals pondering how best to destroy the enemy? This is an organized assassination, and it takes a huge number of lives. Of course, we can say that this does not apply to me personally. I have not killed anyone, and I am not going to kill. But doesn't each of us carry division and conflict in our personality?