Humanity is as ever changing as the topography of the Earth. Although humans are a simple mess of complex histories, which can vary from individual to individual, the issues are always the same. Misunderstanding, sickness, worry, love, and others are among the culprits in the fabric that makes us/them different-yet so alike.
I believe I understand, however simplistic my view, the everlasting nightmare that is living for most individuals. Barring the religious individual who is lost to no avail in their charismatic view of all things, the individual whom through no fault of their own today sits on the luxury of their rich and full life of endowment, a Nepalese Yogi who lives in the harmony of their life, all else or the vast majority of the remaining us are all just… not at peace.
The necessity to complicate things by way of becoming overbearing with oneself through all things in life is more than baffling, it is uniquely disturbing. At its basis, humanity has never been about love, care, friendship, or anything else so boring and mundane. Having more people around helped our ancestors create more traps, or better fend for themselves through sheer numbers. Later it facilitated farming or gathering, as one goes out the other(s) does another task, thus facilitating life for everyone involved. I can see how developing a sense of care for that person who allows you or helps you accomplish something quicker can easily grow as you become more dependant. As you age, having others being able to pick up after you, or rather do those tasks you no longer can also ensures the continual wellness of the group. Thus, moving forward in time, the facilitation of activities through mediums now available through science, invention, necessity, or other allows us to do much more without the aid of the group. It has somehow migrated, the idea of the group, into a family. The ideals behind the structure itself shifted into something completely different. That’s okay too, no one thing can perpetually be the same as everything is affected in a form or fashion by something other.
Family, friends, acquaintances, and strangers are just some of the different descriptors we use to describe others around us. To admonish that without the Earth I would not have life, is as saying without one’s mother we would not be. However, we place such emphasis on the mother connection and not the Earth one. Why is that; some may hopelessly wander? It is just easier to go with the current I suppose. Sure patriarchal and matriarchal societies should not be excluded in this argument, but the fact remains that a leader is there to capably support the perpetuation of the group of which they are a part of. If an individual(s) has been chosen and they are doing their task favorably, then so be it. That notion is imparted without the sentiment of unity brought about by anything other than the solidarity of the society not particular individuals within. Sure, every whole has its parts with which without there would be no whole, but as such there is no whole without consent from every part.
Are connections truly necessary? A hospital works because every member/part of the staff does their job to the best of their abilities, as does a factory, or even a machine. The moment the whole is disrupted by the individual parts it all falls apart, whoever slowly or otherwise, but the result is the same always. Why families then? Why complicate things? There is no insensibility here beyond the wish for our mental capacity to explore beyond the known norms or set standards. How many children are raised by strangers (foster families) daily? How many adults lead successful lives without parents (who may have lost their lives to different scenarios) who were not with them through their growing years? Those examples should be sufficient to get us going.
I may be wrong -clearly-, but I am of the belief that experience dictates who we are, what we become, and how we are. Some of those experiences come from the individuals whom we grow around, play with, help us study, explain more complex things to us in our professional endeavors, or in other instances. Like cement, or a cake, if the ingredients, or the individual parts are not just right, the result is something that cannot be used. As such, pouring care, the will to do right, or any other thing will certainly be enough for any individual to do well; for whatever definition of well they decide it need be applied to. Where choice is concerned we have no power to do, only to apply; this based on our interpretation of all the stimuli received until said time coupled with our genetic makeup.
Those things I understand. I am not impervious to different thoughts on the matter. I welcome a good argument in which the defense of any subject is justified with the presentation of relevant data and just (see Aristotle for a definition on what just or good is) juxtaposition of idea and fact. I welcome it because I fear the decadence of humanity is linear at this point. To present an example, war is waged to prevent war. The money necessary to feed the hungry is safeguarded and not used until there is enough to feed many instead of those you can now. Medicine is not given to the sick in the event there is a greater sickness, which may very well begin with the already sick. A good example of this linear decadence I can provide with my Western upbringing is that of parenting styles. What is the role of a parent in this society? Is it to use force in order to ingrain something they don’t fully understand into children? Is it perhaps to get to the meaning of things together as a group? Would it be perhaps teaching using the examples of hundreds or thousands before you clearly detailed in a website, blog, paper, book, or other medium? Please, if someone can without speculation say what it is that is the right choice -even if not above-mentioned- then please do express it with enough detail that anyone can understand.
I have questions. I have questions as a parent, I have questions as a former child, and I have questions in general. How can I or anyone else better themselves without first questioning something other? It is important to know, which is why we attend school and study/learn of the structures and guidelines that give us an understanding of the status quo or other matters. It is also important to know where our folly begins and our ego takes the reigns. So simple isn’t it? To say that something or someone is wrong without having any pertinent information to account for that something said? For example, to say that “the way parents today in 2018 raise their children is foolish compared to parenting in the year 1970”, or any other decade of your choosing is in fact wrong or even misguided.
If a person who grows in a farm, moves to the city for university, and later marries in suburbia teaches their children how to milk cows, keep the pasture for the animals, the season in which things are planted, and other farm things the child will never need… what exactly is the purpose? The chances of the child actually moving into a farm in this society in which farms are disappearing are very unlikely. Not only that, but with GPS guided tractors clearing fields, and other methods to produce and reproduce animals chances are what you teach will be out of touch anyhow. Clearly, telling a story or two at the dinner table about the farming days or about the car-mechanic days would make more sense than actually teaching a child how to clean and repair a car carburetor in an era where we are moving to electric vehicles.
Like I said, it is easy to provide an empty argument. The fact is that the computerization of things is moving faster than we would like, but this is not to our detriment. But, that I can understand. What do we gain by arguing incessantly over posts on twitter, or Facebook pages, or other public mediums where individuality is not expressed, but thrown at words; a myriad of empty arguments with no hope, without ambition, and as empty as the space between a period and the beginning of a sentence. How is it relevant to anyone -other than my physician- that I do not take my vitamin B supplement to help with my deficiency? That is just an example of something petty, but how is any other sentiment of mine relevant to anyone else? Now extrapolate that to society.
Scientific endeavors come from the idea that something can or cannot be. The structure of those matters is such that the same thing needs to be revisited by someone other, obtain the same results, and then discuss them among professional peers in order to ascertain its validity or not. Were it not for our ability to have these thoughts, as scientists do, there would be no advancements or inventions. Were it not for the disagreeing few who perform feats in order to prove that something is or can be a certain way, we would not have our world in the fashion we have it today. After all, computers -was once said- would never prove useful being what they were. It took a strong-willed sailor/captain to navigate the seas to prove the horizon line was in fact something else we did not yet comprehend. What I mean is that I welcome the difference of opinion that is accompanied by the rational sense of proving its validity. Likewise, I completely dislike and disapprove of empty rhetoric directed at causing sensationalistic responses from those reading; the troll in the room, if you will.
The cause for wanting to understand things oversimplified by the questioning nature I find relevant is in fact what leads me to think that others -clearly not everyone- is lost to their own devices. The need to be informed seems to have morphed without anyone giving notice to what was happening until the systems we have in place today became a standard for knowledge. Places like Reddit, Wikipedia, and others are the response to our times having learned about opinion being what it is today, rather than understanding that opinion is merely unproven and often biased unverified thought(s).
Going outside entails having to deal with the constant need to separate the views of a few with the real feelings and thought of people. We are/become a hive-mind. With everyone reading the same things, discussing the same things, and acting upon those same things -often without reason- is cause for concern given that individuality seems to be disappearing. Is that a bad thing? I truly do not have an answer, however, I do dislike it very much. I dislike it because if I talk to someone about say, the very real threat there is towards Earth via cosmic travelers (asteroids, interstellar objects, or other), they would be bored, or wouldn’t care. Why? Because it’s not being talked about in the media, it has no sensational value and thus is… well, not important. The lack of original thought is breeding more drones than the United States Air Force, or Chinese dove-drone programs.
Times are changing, people are changing, attitudes, and even viruses and illnesses. It is just the nature of things. However, I don’t have to like the change. I understand the sentimentality for it. I understand, but by the heavens above and earth beneath my feet, I cannot stand the way in which old and young are following the change like sheep with the news/media being the herding wolf/dog. I dare not judge. However, reality to me today, through my tired and weary eyes is as such described. There are no unique thoughts, there are no new issues, creativity is all-but-disappearing, computerization is becoming the standard others are battling against via misinformation and lack of will to know more, wars continue, medicine advancements -through robotics/3D-Printers- are mind boggling, and so much more all happening at once. Yet, bias and bigotry still exist, societal classes dominate the landscape of all cities -and their surrounding ghettos- on earth. Famine and medically challenged countries continue in their course, deforestation, the effect and affect of climate change, and so much more plaguing our world yet today. To it all we as members of Humanity demand the verbal participation of others, but of the many so few take steps in any direction.
Psychology says I am a person in need for cognition. In other words, my mental faculties must be fed. Just what is it that this herd can facilitate me with? What is the valuable lesson to be learned? What is the proof to be had for any and all present arguments? This all leaves me with the question of whether I am -or not- a misanthrope as having a reason for things does not make them true. Hence, I am or am I a misanthrope?
