Thursday, June 7, 2012

Humanity is a circle

    Being human means many different things depending on the perspective. During the introductory unit we looked at what it means to be human in the context of the purpose of the hemispheres of the brain, writing and oral language, and various forms of storytelling. In the textbook introduction we read about the differences between the sciences and the humanities, as well as how people perceive art. This has to do with the experience of being human, because in order to lead a balanced and well educated life, one must open themselves up to both aspects of the world. We must have the ability to view art, and we also must have the ability to understand sciences. According to Shlain both the right and left hemispheres have designated purposes, and some tasks require usage of both. Cognitive thinking is a key part of being human, in fact that’s what separates humans from other creatures. Some people have stronger right brain tendencies, meaning they are stronger in fields such the arts, and design. Other people have stronger left brain  traits, and those people tend to be stronger in fields such as math and science.  It’s also possible to have balanced strength between the two hemispheres. The differences in strength helps build a diverse population. In class we experienced storytelling in three different formats, audio, visual, and oral. All three types were different experiences for me as a reader. Being able to experience and process various formats of storytelling is a key part of being a human. Storytelling has been a key part of history for thousands of years, more specifically oral storytelling. Without it we may not have the knowledge of native American traditions that we do.  The information we learned in the unit helps us understand the basic concepts that make us human.
    During the nature unit we explored the role that nature and sacred space plays in humanity. In the Calicott reading he discussed the difference between the native American view on nature, as well as the European view on nature. Europeans view nature as something to be possessed, whereas the Native Americans view it as a live being, and something to be protected. Nature is part of the world we live in and part of the human experience is interacting with nature. Depending on the view of the individual that experience with nature could be moving, if the person has a more Native American view, and if the person has a European view on nature than they would probably view their interaction with nature as an opportunity for power. Timothy Treadwell definitely had a Native American view on nature. He believed that the grizzly maze were a part of him, and when faced with death he chose not to kill the bear that was consuming him alive. Part of the human experience is having something you’d be willing to die for, and while Timothy’s something was a little out there he still had a human experience. Werner Herzog had a very opposing view on nature. He believed that nature is something that should be left alone and undisturbed. He believes that animals don’t have souls, and that they are simply carnivorous monsters. Both Timothy and Werner had opposing views on the role of humans within nature, but the thing that they both had in common was that they had a view. They had experienced the world around them in some context.  We all live on the same earth. We all play some role in the world around us, and as humans we have a responsibility to be involved in the natural world in some way or another. Whether it’s the European influenced agriculture, or the Native American influenced belief of conservation, we as humans have an obligation to nature.
    Beauty and love are two things as humans we crave. Some people go to extreme lengths to become beautiful, others are blessed with beauty and seek to preserve it. Throughout history the perception of beauty has changed. In the film How Art Made the World: More Human Than Human, we saw how in art throughout history the way we perceive beauty has changed. During prehistoric times men perceived larger hips, and swollen reproductive organs as beautiful because during that time everyone was starving and largeness symbolized fertility and health. In today’s society the perception of beautiful is very unrealistic, and distorted. Women who are 5’ 10” and weigh 110 pounds are considered the embodiment of beauty. Everyone is different and we can’t expect everyone to meet the standard upheld by women on the cover of Vogue. As humans we all have insecurities about our bodies, but we should be teaching women to embrace those insecurities instead of going to drastic measures to alter them.  In The Shape of Things, Adam’s exterior was manipulated by Evelyn. She used a man’s greatest biological weakness, sex, to get him to do things he never would have done otherwise. She lead him to believe that he would be more sexually attractive to him if he lost weight, got a nose job, and changed his sense of style. We are all guilty of changing some part of ourselves for another person at some point in our lives. Sometimes that change can be for the better, if and only if the person making the change consents to it. If the change is something that’s forced or if the person doesn’t feel it’s necessary than that is wrong. There are so many people out there that if someone is leading you to believe that they won’t love you unless you lose 20 pounds they aren’t worth it. Love is something that is amazing to experience. If the pull of love is strong enough it has the power to transform even the strongest man into a lovesick puppy. It also has the power to break people.  In the Egyptian love poem Pleasant Songs of the Sweetheart Who Meets You in the Fields the writer describes herself as being blinded by the love she feels for her love, but then he leaves and she is nothing without him. She lays waiting for him years after he left. As humans it is crucial for us to have some sort of love in our life. It’s an instinct rooted deep within our nature. We are aware of the pain that love can bring however, but the instinct to love is so powerful that we ignore it. The perception of beauty has changed throughout history, but love is one emotion that has remained a constant part of human existence.
    There are laws established by society that we must obey in order to maintain a productive society. We have unwritten ethical codes to maintain a morally right society. Various religions have their own ethical codes in order to maintain a good standing with god. The Ten Commandments are probably the most well known religious rules. They have long been the moral compass for both religious and nonreligious people alike. It is common knowledge not to cheat on one’s spouse, as well as not to steal. Some people disregard the moral rules, and ethics that are understood in our society, but most people unconsciously obey them, because it’s simply how it’s done. However are we obligated to follow those rules? Some people don’t think so. In The Stranger Mersault kills a man with little to no remorse. Does that make him immoral ? In the eyes of god yes. As humans we must make decisions on a daily basis regarding our morals. Part of being human is living with the consequences of the choices we make. In Buddhism, there are laws similar to the ten commandments that one must follow in order to achieve enlightenment. The laws are very strict, but for a purpose. Enlightenment is the highest honor one can achieve and must be made difficult to ensure only the most morally right people can achieve the most prestigious religious honor. Not everyone will get there, because not everyone is morally sound, just like in our society how not everyone will graduate Summa Cum Laude, and not everyone will be president. The highest honors people can achieve come to those who work the hardest. Life is not black and white, right and wrong, there are lots of gray areas, it’s a matter of making the choices that are best for you and the life you want to lead.
    The Inner Journey and the Meaning of human existence is a unit that everyone in this class can relate to on some level. In Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, Hamlet experienced a hero’s journey. He avenged his father’s death, by killing his manipulative and murderous uncle. A key part to his journey was that he experienced it on his own. He alone killed his uncle and lost his own live in the process. Not everyone is going to be a hero like Hamlet or Luke Skywalker in Starwars, but that doesn’t make our existence any less important. We all need to strive for happiness within our own life. In the film The Hero’s Journey Bill Moyer interviews Joseph Campbell a famous Mythologist, and Bill Moyer discusses how we need to be able to understand and cope with death. Some people may view that as morbid, but I don’t believe that is meant to be that way. No one is immortal. At some point we are going to be faced with our mortality, and I believe that by understanding that death is imminent, we will be able to live much fuller lives. We should all ask ourselves what we want to see when we look back on our lives 50 years from now. Being human isn’t easy, and not everyone is going to be a hero, but that does not mean life is a waste. The best thing we can do as humans is live our lives and try to experience as much as we can.

4 comments:

  1. Understanding what it means to be human is complex, and I think you succeeded in presenting the complexity of human beings. I would argue that cognition does not set us apart, other animals may have the capability to process and understand some things, which fits the basic definition of cognition. However, you speak of being able to experience and process stories as a key part of being human, and I might add your assertion of “what separates humans from other creatures” after the statement about stories. I find your claim that part of the human experience “is having something you’d be willing to die for” fascinating. I think there probably are things- people- I would be willing to die for, but I wonder how universal that feeling really is. I believe a lot of people could truly experience what it is to be human without finding something they are willing to die for.

    I do not all people are either naturally beautiful or else “go to extreme lengths to become beautiful, though I do agree that society is very focused on beauty. If in prehistoric times being large was beautiful because most people did not have enough food to become large, and now when food is more plentiful beauty ideals are about being skinny, is our society’s current perception of beauty rally any more “unrealistic” and “distorted” than that of any other time period? Ideals have, as you said, most definitely change over time, however it is interesting to consider if our perception is really more off than it used to be, or if our perception of the past is just different.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You did a great job on this post. You really got what it means to be human, not only did you use materials from class, but what is going on today, which was a nice touch. One part I thought you did very well was the love and beauty paragraph. I thought it was great how you made a point of how beauty changes over our human existence and how it always seems to be the unattainable. The part when you say love is "a instinct rooted deep within our nature, I disagree. When we first developed as humans, we did not develop that emotion, and we just produced.

    The other paragraph that you put very good points in was the law and ethics. I thought your point was definitely showed, and that you gave good examples. The one that really stood out was about about not everyone about won't be president and etc... Though I do agree with you about your point, in another point of view people can definitely disagree that people in government are not morally sound. Definitely there has been past greed and other controversies with government officials. Anyways, I though you really did a great job using the material from class, and incorporating it in the post. Very well done!

    ReplyDelete
  3. While I see where you’re coming from, I disagree with several of your assumptions about the basics of humanity and the human experience. In the introduction unit paragraph you state: “Being able to experience and process various formats of storytelling is a key part of being a human.” If this is true, it implies that those are illiterate are less fully human than those who can read, and therefore have access to more formats of storytelling. Does it mean that we are more ‘human’ now, in an age of literacy in most places, than we were as a species before the written language was invented? Then, in the nature and sacred space unit paragraph, you write: “Part of the human experience is having something you’d be willing to die for.” Many people go through life with no such commitment to anything, and does that make them less human? I do not think so. In fact, many people with a cause they feel so passionately about revert to a more animal-like state. They lose rationality, will not see reason, act on emotions and urges rather than logical thought. This does not, to me, seem more human. The willingness to die for another thing, I feel, is quite similar to “As humans it is crucial for us to have some sort of love in our life.” Again, I feel the need to point out that love tends to cause a beast-like reaction, a biological one, rather than the rational thought humans use to separate themselves from animals. No one has ever been in love and become more rational. Inexplicable happiness, lust, love, these are not higher thought processes but base ones needed to continue the species. I find that these statements either exclude a good deal of human beings on the basis of illiteracy or imply that to be fully human one must act like an animal, the very thing we try to avoid with our rationality.

    ReplyDelete