The "Human Way" would be yet another gross generalization and probably why it is improbable to define. 

What makes up such a generalization is the "Individual Way." Just as you related our species to others, it is estimable that other species don't have as conspicuous a manner to identify "individuals," though this may be arguable based on observance of the instinctual hierarchy of many, i.e. meerkats (familiar example), apes, etc.

All stems from individual effort and contribution, yet the majority of "group-ings" do not fully concentrate on nor exercise these strengths, in-lue of scrapping for and locking into a "position" (I'm back to speaking of humans). So is that what is the "Human Way"?

Personally, I don't believe so, yet it is prevalent and contributes towards the excuses made by the pessimistic as the "Human Way." Again, demonstrating the short-comings and inaccuracy of generalization., i.e. the difference between "human being" and "human becoming."

Connecting-to-the-Value-of-Why 2005-2008 ©