I heard a wise man once say that while man's violent nature can never be mastered (ultimately girdled), it is not a flaw in design but rather a blessing in disguise. If a man's house was being attacked, it is the same violent nature that would cause him to rise up and protect his family. Therefore protect and attack are both instinctual brain commands and violence is the root of both. This is a quite insightful theory and hearing him continue on with his complex logic, I couldn't help but consider man's social nature--doing things for a fellow's respect. Protection is without exception admired by a reasonable man, while the instinct to attack is only admired as the exception, perhaps during a conquest. Why is this if they are both innocent and similarly natured?
I think that attacking is a matter of will, while the desire to protect often acts in spite of will. However, appetite is an instinct too. This is integral to the human creature and God created man to have passions and appetites, hungers--these all make love possible (now Satan has objectively learned about man's instincts and uses them, making the instincts look evil, while they are not. A man will look at a girl and quickly his appetite will grow and he will feel hungry and either desire his appetite curved or satiated, but the fact that he has sexual inclinations is not evil... no those appetites are instinct. <--this has limitless implications). Violence can be a hunger in the way that lust can seek "a good meal." A man can hunger and thirst for righteousness, right? so why can he also not thirst after a rush in the height of superiority?
No comments:
Post a Comment