The term human has at least two meanings:
- Biological - as a species
- Mental - as a spiritual being
Social should probably not be mentioned here because it refers not to the essence but to the norms of behavior. I don't know if it was meant to be, because the "man" refers directly to the social meaning. A "man", and his quality, is defined by frameworks of social behavior, which in themselves are not strictly defined and can be culturally different and variable.
The mental meaning probably doesn't really apply to you because, strictly speaking, it has no gender, so mentally we are human and it doesn't really matter whether you are man, woman or a representative of another species altogether.
As for the biological person, do you really believe that you belong to another species? It can be checked not only morphologically, but also by the ability to interbreed, because as I was taught at school, representatives of different species do not interbreed, or it is problematic to give viable offspring.
When it comes to self-identification, it is not limited to just one role.
Because without a "man" you are definitely a son, perhaps a father, a representative of your folk and nation, a subject of your country, a representative of race, a representative of faith, ...
If you claim that your primary identification is man, it could indicate that you are willing to surrender your nation, country, family, ... if you have to choose between them and your "Man" identity.
nemos wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 9:48 am
The term human has at least two meanings:
- Biological - as a species
- Mental - as a spiritual being
I separate the two separate meanings for the one word by just USING the two words of 'human being', instead. Doing 'this' then separating the 'biological' from the 'mental' is a VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY PROCESS, indeed. I just USE the 'human' word to MEAN or REFER TO the 'biological' part alone, and, the 'being' word to MEAN or REFER TO the 'mental' or 'spiritual' part alone.
That way there is NO CONFUSION, NO CONFLICT, nor ANY CONTRADICTION, AT ALL here.
nemos wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 9:48 am
Social should probably not be mentioned here because it refers not to the essence but to the norms of behavior. I don't know if it was meant to be, because the "man" refers directly to the social meaning. A "man", and his quality, is defined by frameworks of social behavior, which in themselves are not strictly defined and can be culturally different and variable.
The mental meaning probably doesn't really apply to you because, strictly speaking, it has no gender, so mentally we are human and it doesn't really matter whether you are man, woman or a representative of another species altogether.
As for the biological person, do you really believe that you belong to another species? It can be checked not only morphologically, but also by the ability to interbreed, because as I was taught at school, representatives of different species do not interbreed, or it is problematic to give viable offspring.
When it comes to self-identification, it is not limited to just one role.
Because without a "man" you are definitely a son, perhaps a father, a representative of your folk and nation, a subject of your country, a representative of race, a representative of faith, ...
If you claim that your primary identification is man, it could indicate that you are willing to surrender your nation, country, family, ... if you have to choose between them and your "Man" identity.