Human nature is the least productive concept ever. It is only ever brought up to defend the status quo and declare it as inevitable. It is a mystical concept impervious to examination. Whether it's "God" or "human nature" it's just a term for an abstract master that keeps us all in bondage.

>Human nature is the least productive concept ever. It is only ever brought up to defend the status quo and declare it as inevitable. It is a mystical concept impervious to examination.

Actually it's the exact opposite: very pragmatic and empirically verified.

It's exactly what people, in statistical quantities, tend to do over what they tend not to do.

Plus, most of it is shared with our animal siblings.

Except if you think that an Elephant or a Cat doesn't have certain natural characteristics (insticts, behaviors, traits) based on their species.

Do you see a specific claim backed up with empirical research in the above usage of human nature? I don't. Do people ever? Any time someone brings up human nature they could omit the term and just talk about the research itself. They don't. Human nature is a rhetorical shortcut. You can't assail human nature, you can't examine it like scientific evidence. It is intellectual laziness to make any argument from human nature.

>Do you see a specific claim backed up with empirical research in the above usage of human nature? I don't.

That's because it's a casual online conversation. I don't stuff my responses with citations when I'm not writing a paper.

>Do people ever?

Yes. There are tons of research on human psychology, cognition, physiology, evolutionary traits, instincts and other aspects of what colloquially is called "human nature".

Do you think animals have a "nature"? If so, why are humans any different? Sure, we can reflect on our behavior and try and change it, but it's undeniable there are innate drivers that can be hard to overcome.

I take issue with the way "human nature" is used, not the idea that we have a nature. It is almost always unproductive. Even so, most who make an argument from human nature always convince me that they know nothing about other human beings within a sentence or two.

Oh I got it. Fair point. It doesn't add much to a complex conversation.

I imagine it'd be more like changing human behaviors, and the societal conditions in which they are shaped.

So, have any society ever changed those exact behaviors?