What Shahrur Says
Shahrur states that “desires are the developed form of instincts when knowledge and awareness are available.” He explains this with the example of food: “The process of filling the stomach is an instinct, whereas the type of food and the way it is processed and prepared are connected to human knowledge; from this, desires in food arise.”
In the same example, he places prepared and manufactured foods on the side of desires, linking them to human knowledge of fire and methods of processing. He also notes that sexual intercourse is a human animal instinct, “but it has been accompanied by human desires.”
Atlas Explanation
The intended distinction is not a denial of the existence of instinct in food or sex; rather, it separates the level of the original need from the conscious human manner in which satisfaction is sought. Thus, desire here should not be reduced to an involuntary impulse, nor equated with instinct merely because both domains are connected to food or sex.
This claim atom belongs within a reading of The State and Society, and is adjacent to the topic of Freedom, the Human Being, and Responsibility insofar as awareness and knowledge are present in human action, without this atom alone establishing a detailed judgment concerning freedom or responsibility.
Synthetic Inference
The example may be synthesized as follows: knowledge does not eliminate instinct, but—in this conception—it produces renewed forms of satisfying it, such that desires become capable of diversification in accordance with the diversity of knowledge and means of production. This is an inference based on Shahrur’s examples concerning food, not an independent definition of every form of human desire.
Open Question and Limits of the Evidence
The available evidence does not provide a detailed criterion for deciding every mixed case between bodily need and conscious choice. Nor does it establish an independent definition of “want”; therefore, want is not treated on this page as synonymous with either desire or instinct.