It's certainly an interesting question, because although I'm tempted to say we are still wild, the evidence is hardly available outside the realm of sex. And even that is losing a degree of wild connotation when you notice how sex is just another marketable consumer product like anything else.
As any discussion should begin I think we must find a definition for "wild" before we attribute it to human manifestations. And it's trickier than just checking our handy dictionaries. But I will anyways: not domesticated or cultivated. And aren't we all domesticated and cultivated at the tender or rough hands of our farmer parents? What resides in us that hasn't been treated and nurtured by someone else? Certainly not the forward-thinking part of our brains that picks apart and analyzes the massive load of data that we receive at every second.
What about our fight or flight mechanism? Can we call that wild as it is purely instinctual? Or is that something else that has been treated and molded in us since we were toddlers?
No, ultimately, I don't think humans are still wild. I think we as a species are the domesticators of the wild. We want control and superiority over the wild. While the wild is fueled by survival, humans exist on a plane beyond what we need. We don't just want to survive, we want to live the best way possible. But maybe I'm wrong and that is what it means to be wild, to be ruthless for personal benefit.
And then wouldn't capitalism and the free market be the best symbol for human wildness? It's a virtual jungle where the lions, tigers, and bears (the ones willing to kill) are the kings. So perhaps as long as competition of any kind (war, sport, market economies, male flaunting) exists, then we are still instinctively wild because we put our own well-being ahead of the prey's.
