Distinct Vs Instinct

The Distinct

The coagulum of our modern social consciousness are prone to understand, and dispose, the concept of distinct to be characteristically connoted—referring to it as characteristics that are unique, peculiar, special and “distinguished.”  This is also applied to with animals, when people personify them as persons, and therefore, make them as distinctive.

The etymology of the word distinct derives from the Latin word, distincten, and it was used to make concise distinctions (not just to distinguish characters from one to the other), but mostly, to make distinctions between species—that is, to specify “action of distinguishing” between different creatures, according to their kind(s)—a separation/discrimination in nature and physiology (which was determined that the human species were distinct—greater than any other species—because of us solely possessing the-Mind’s awareness).  In late Latin, distinctivus, later was applied and attributed to differentiate unique traits and skills in different characters; and even in ranking positions/life (e.g., rich vs royalty).  Once the demarcations between different species were removed, especially, through the introduction of the empirical theory of evolution, even animals are now reasoned among humans that many of them too possess awareness (the-Mind).

The matter of the fact is, that the only thing (or aspect) that makes anything distinctive, is the-Mind (sentience/awareness), so that the-Mind itself is distinctive, and not instinctive.  And since many characteristics and personalities are biologically inherited, they are then not distinctive, but instinctive.  What does this then mean?

Since many characteristics and personalities are instinctively shared among many (in any species), they cannot be distinct, for there are many two characters alike:  However, when it comes to the-Mind, there are no two minds alike.  How’s that? You may ask…  Although inherited physiological characteristics and personalities are shared, how we experience them with our minds is how we (as the human species) become distinctive in comparison to every other mindless (unaware) species.

The immaterial mind of the human material brain, is equipped with seven distinctive actuating tools:  Besides from its major actuating tool (which is sentience—awareness), there is the distinct actuating tool of experience, which is only exclusive to each of its possessor—and this tool is actuated when the-Mind experiences the-Mind itself—solely then enabling the human species to become aware of internal and external experiences—thus making every single mind of the human species, unique (distinctive).  So without a mind, no creature can animate their inherited characteristics and personalities, distinctively.  Hence, the manner and disposition that one is experiencing his/her own inherited character and personality, in full awareness, is what makes him/her distinguishable.  If it wasn’t for the-Mind itself, the human species would be like any other species—just instinctive.

The Instinct

When it comes to the instinct, it can be very confusing with what is distinct.  As written in a few of my previous articles, when consciousness (which is nothing more but material cerebral memory and thought patterns) is applied as one in the same with the-Mind (which is purely sentience—awareness), that is a definite misnomer:  For thoughts and memory retainers are purely instinctive, and can function and be automatically stimulated even without the-Mind (i.e., in the absence of awareness).  That’s right!  Just like all the animal species that most all can think instinctively to survive, automatically, without the-Mind.  Any animal creature doesn’t need to be aware to function with his/her own thoughts and memories (and with some humans too, if their minds somehow become mindless—in sleep, sort of say—while their memory and thought patterns are gradually being developed)—they are automatically stimulated by their five senses that are impacted by anything (e.g., hearing, looking, tasting, touching and smelling).

The concept and application of personification in animals, nature and things, is what causes confusion between what is distinct, and what is instinct.  For example, the aphorism and axiom practice in personifying an idol (e.g., an idol that portrays a god/goddess) does not make the idol itself a person—the same in comparison to personifying an animal (e.g., a canine/feline pet, etc.) does not make it a person; so that the application of personification does not make a creature, nature (or thing), distinctive.

Even though there are variable different characteristic and personality instincts, that does not make them distinct, but only different—and here also lies the confusion when the concept of different is applied as one in the same with distinct.  A creature can be different in instinct, but without the-Mind, that creature cannot still be distinctive, but only different.  Just like flowers: a rose is different in appearance in comparison to a daisy—but they’re just different, and not distinctive:  You may want to personify the rose and the daisy as both being separately distinctive; nevertheless, the application and disposition of personification does not make a person (distinctive)—and likewise with all animals.

Distinctive Manifestations

Unlike all the animal species, the human species are the sole ones to manifest creations and concepts in substances, ideology and reality.  Most people are unaware that most and all of human creations are solely possible because of psychosomatic utilization and distribution—other than just our impacted automatic thought and memory instinctive patterns, because of the-Mind, only humans can also manipulate and maneuver our instinctive thoughts with distinctive influences.  And even though the human instincts are far more superior than all the animal species, without the-Mind, they would still be just instinctive, and not distinctive.

Because of the immaterial mind that’s solely in all humans, other than automatically instinctively impacting changes, we can also willfully and intently influence changes, distinctively.  This is evident in our ability to implement chronology (e.g., menology, chronometry, chronograph/chronometer, etc.)—to charge gender specifics (e.g., cisgender, transgender, agender, etc.)—to utilize thoughts (e.g., rumination, imagination, subvocalization, attribution theory, etc.)—to order identity (e.g., ego, solipsism, ipseity, individualism, name, etc.)—and to influence with the figurative heart (e.g., inclination, intuition, emotions, subjectivity/subjectivism, conscience, faith, etc.) is testimony that such manifestations would not be possible if it weren’t for the sole ability of the human psychosomatic capacity—to materialize in cynreality.

In conclusion, nothing is so distinctive without the-Mind—so that the-Mind itself is distinctive—from and by the-Mind itself.

*

[Article Posted by: Sabiazoth]

[Writing & Concept, Created & Produced by: Sabiazoth]

[Aspaty: Pentaspace, Pastucycle 26, 11 R.M. E.C. (Solar North)]

[Image(s): Unknown]

0 votes

Leave a Reply