Studying Instincts

When it comes to explaining the instinctual/subconscious motivations of human behavior, it is tempting to try to assign a purpose to them. For example, one can easily point out that aggression is a survival mechanism. It seems to make sense, of course, in the context of other similar aggressive conducts that result in observably beneficial outcomes. Those conducts are, however, often observed in animals.

The thing about these hidden motivations is that they are effectively a blank slate for projection. Can instinctual motivations ever make sense in a rational human framework? Indeed they can, but only through references to what already makes sense. The mapping is unfortunately imprecise at best, and quite possibly completely wrong at times. Instincts are by their nature inexplicable not just because humans are largely ignorant of their little nudges but also because their natures may not map directly to reasonable sensibilities.

It may be unsatisfying to say that we simply do not know what reasons lie behind instinctual motivations, yet it may be equally unsatisfying to harbor the distinct possibility that what seems like a perfectly reasonable and proven hypothesis turns out to be simple projection. As they say...it seemed like a good idea at the time.