Small children have no perception of good and evil. They have no past experiences to refer to as to tell them what is right, and what is wrong. Right and wrong is not built into people, it is something like social etiquette, where it must be picked up as a child grows into adulthood. Therefore, someone has to have told them what is right, and what is wrong.
Those who did tell them, someone else had to tell those people.
Now, you can probably see where I'm going. The chain goes on and on, until we reach the distant past, where we have no recordings of history. From the moment one caveman hit one caveman over the head with a rock, someone declared it wrong.
But who did? From Christianity's viewpoint, it was God. But as the famous Latin quote goes, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?, or "Who Watches the Watchers?"
Yes, this may seem like blasphemy to some (man, I love that word), and I'm pretty sure that this might offend quite a few as well, if they ever get around to reading it (I mean come on, this blog was pretty much meant for my eyes only anyway), but if he was the sole creater, then he must have made up what is wrong and what is right. How do you define what is wrong and what is right? How do you know if this is really right? After all, everyone who has taught us these morals are those who learned them as children themselves.
The only answer to this would be "Because he said so," but now, really. Is this a good answer?
I have no answer to this. Perhaps one day I will, but not today. Not at 2 in the morning.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Humanity (on the other hand)
***Refer to post before this one. This is the same topic, just approaching it from a different angle***
Humans, on a whole, are inconsistent. It is impossible to brand us with any particular pattern or brand, unlike other animals. Inhumane can mean many things, depending on how one interprets it. If we define being "humane" as the ideal of humans, then yes, it is the dictionary definition.
However, if we defined things by the ideals that we hold, then we are merely covering up the truth with words that are, essentially, boosting the idea of humanity being perfect. Nay, humanity is far from perfect, but it is impossible to forget those who strive for perfection.
Yes, it is impossible to obtain perfection, as defining perfection would be difficult, due to the inconstancy of humans. However, striving for perfection in ones personal goals and ideals would lead us to this glamorous idea of "humanity". However, striving for perfection requires a herculean effort that can't be obtained by picking up a copy of Bettering Yourself in 30 days from your local bookstore.
It is possible to obtain this ideal of "humanity", because to be human is to make mistakes, so a perfect human would make mistakes as well.
From the perspective of an all powerful god, then it is impossible to be perfect. But to ourselves, to those we live with it, is possible to spiritually and mentally perfect.
Humans, on a whole, are inconsistent. It is impossible to brand us with any particular pattern or brand, unlike other animals. Inhumane can mean many things, depending on how one interprets it. If we define being "humane" as the ideal of humans, then yes, it is the dictionary definition.
However, if we defined things by the ideals that we hold, then we are merely covering up the truth with words that are, essentially, boosting the idea of humanity being perfect. Nay, humanity is far from perfect, but it is impossible to forget those who strive for perfection.
Yes, it is impossible to obtain perfection, as defining perfection would be difficult, due to the inconstancy of humans. However, striving for perfection in ones personal goals and ideals would lead us to this glamorous idea of "humanity". However, striving for perfection requires a herculean effort that can't be obtained by picking up a copy of Bettering Yourself in 30 days from your local bookstore.
It is possible to obtain this ideal of "humanity", because to be human is to make mistakes, so a perfect human would make mistakes as well.
From the perspective of an all powerful god, then it is impossible to be perfect. But to ourselves, to those we live with it, is possible to spiritually and mentally perfect.
Humanity
In general, words that are used to compare things to humans hold no ground with me. Take, for example, the term "Inhumane." By definition, it means when someone is cruel or heartless that goes against human nature. A person might describe leaving a child without food "inhumane."
However, I have 2 basic arguments with this
1) If it was against human nature, why do so many violate it?
2) When given any amount of thought there is no animal that would abandon its child. Yes, some reptiles and fish would lay eggs and leave their young to live by themselves, but they are a species as a whole. Turtles don't leave out their young out of cruelty, they do it because its hardwired into the turtle. Its what makes the "turtle" what it is.
Certain mammals do indeed abandon their young, but not out of apathy or cruelty.
Rather, it is usually attributed to lack of resources or competition between siblings. Given the chance, if there was no competition between siblings, then they wouldn't shun their young.
Some might even make the argument that certain species eat their young, but this is out of survival. No animal would hunt another for sport. You don't see antelope heads hanging over a lions den.
Humans, on the other hand, have evolved malice, spitefulness, and a lust for power. Next to boredom (refer to previous post), malice, spite, and powerlust have propelled humanity up the evolutionary ladder, but at what cost? Some managed to retain their basic, shall we say, inhumanity, but everyone holds in them some sort of hatred that can't be found in any other animal.
Inhumane is inaccurate. To be inhumane is to act with extreme kindness, and to act with no prejudice.
However, I have 2 basic arguments with this
1) If it was against human nature, why do so many violate it?
2) When given any amount of thought there is no animal that would abandon its child. Yes, some reptiles and fish would lay eggs and leave their young to live by themselves, but they are a species as a whole. Turtles don't leave out their young out of cruelty, they do it because its hardwired into the turtle. Its what makes the "turtle" what it is.
Certain mammals do indeed abandon their young, but not out of apathy or cruelty.
Rather, it is usually attributed to lack of resources or competition between siblings. Given the chance, if there was no competition between siblings, then they wouldn't shun their young.
Some might even make the argument that certain species eat their young, but this is out of survival. No animal would hunt another for sport. You don't see antelope heads hanging over a lions den.
Humans, on the other hand, have evolved malice, spitefulness, and a lust for power. Next to boredom (refer to previous post), malice, spite, and powerlust have propelled humanity up the evolutionary ladder, but at what cost? Some managed to retain their basic, shall we say, inhumanity, but everyone holds in them some sort of hatred that can't be found in any other animal.
Inhumane is inaccurate. To be inhumane is to act with extreme kindness, and to act with no prejudice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
