Homo Symbolicus or Homo Bellicus

Rational thought and logical actions might be expected to be the way forward for a species which name is Homo Sapiens (the "wise man" or the "knowing man"). Yet in so many ways Homo Sapiens in general, although having access to vast amount of information and knowledge, does not seem to operate in a rational proactive manner with a firm basis in known facts, but rater in an emotional reactional manner influenced by symbols or tokens of perceived and questionable meaning often in the context of being for or against something.

The term Homo Symbolicus was used by the Romanian philosopher Mircea Eliade as a more fitting name on the species.

The emotional drive behind the behavior of our species has its evolutionary reasons. We have evolved from more primitive species that are even further away from any ideal of a rational being. If there is such a being. The term ideal implies that we are actually referring to a symbolic concept, in this case the symbol of a rational being.

It could be that there is no such thing as a perfectly rational being. It could be impossibility. It could be impossibility either because one can never know all facts that really influence our conclusion or because the calculating powers to arrive at a rational solution are insufficient. Hence we are left with an approximation, a feeling or limited rationality on a subset of relevant facts.

Maybe our species should be named Homo Sapiens Modica ("the limited knowing man").

In many ways our interpersonal arguments and disagreements revolve around the question what subset of knowledge should be selected as a basis for rational analysis or even if there should be any rational analysis at all. In many cases we decide immediately for a symbolic action based on our feelings. We make a stand and then defend it regardless of any rational thoughts based on known facts that our position may be contrary to our intention or interest. In this case it becomes just a matter of strength (and chance) who will prevail or who will be “right”. This method incites struggle between individuals and war between nations. This is also an excuse for not attempting rational analysis.

In the end (established) power, violence or war is how we solve our disagreements. Rational conclusions and new knowledge require discipline and hard work and are hard to digest.

To quote the physician Max Planck: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Maybe our species should be named Home Bellicus (“the warlike man”).