What is a Human Being? (Buddhists, souls, translation, prophecy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...show a wide range of emotions, and write things like Romeo and Juliet, I also don't believe that we are any more "advanced" in other aspects than many other animals.
Our brain power
The fact that your sentence about "Romeo and Juliet" falls conveniently where it does, (sandwiched between the biological) makes June's point that much easier:
We are more than just the sum total of our biological makeup, our brains, and whatever neurology is contributing. A whole lot happens to be said about what goes into making a human being in the play you refer to, above. June knows that you have read it; therefore, how do you reconcile these two seemingly contradictory elements of human nature? Are we really just the sum total of our biology?
I believe what makes us human beings is much different than the other answers given to this thread. You could say it is our ability to care for or love another of our kind, but I see the same instinct in animals all the time. Our larger brain may make us more intelligent but animals make up for their smaller brains with instincts that we, the evolved, have lost. The real thing that sets us apart is our conscience. We, as humans, have the ability to do bad or good things by choice and know perfectly well the consequences of our actions. We can choose to be good or bad, while animals just run with their genetic programming. We are special because we can choose who we are and what we are about. No other creature on this planet has that ability. They are born into a certain role, and they play it until the end. We, on the other hand, have an open hand to do whatever we feel is right for us. Right or wrong, the choice is ours and we have the brains to understand which is which. That is what I believe sets us apart from the animals. And that is what makes us accountable for what we do with this life.
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 06-09-2008 at 08:38 PM..
Reason: left out a word
As opposed to what, June? The sum total of our....????
We are self reflective. We are the only creatures that know that we know. (Think: Descartes.)
We are the only creatures for whom striving for, and obtaining meaning in our lives carries any real significance and importance.
Granted, I need my brain in order to exist, to think and maintain ongoing abililty for consciousness. But June does not feel that what comprises a "human being," thereby setting us apart from all other mammels, can be so readily reduced to the mere biological component of our human nature.
Because even with the physical, (biological) as the basis, we do seem to not be limited to that, as Maslow (for instance) points out. We are able, and do, establish a hierarchy of needs in our lives.
My little dog Misha has no room, no need, no desire for "peak experiences." (Nor is he capable of having any, unless he's up to something that June doesn't know about.)
We are self reflective. We are the only creatures that know that we know. (Think: Descartes.)
We are the only creatures for whom striving for, and obtaining meaning in our lives carries any real significance and importance.
Granted, I need my brain in order to exist, to think and maintain ongoing abililty for consciousness. But June does not feel that what comprises a "human being," thereby setting us apart from all other mammels, can be so readily reduced to the mere biological component of our existence.
Because even with the physical, (biological) as the basis, we do seem to not be limited to that, as Maslow (for instance) points out. We are able, and do, establish a hierarchy of needs in our lives.
My little dog Misha has no room, no need, no desire for "peak experiences." (Nor is he capable of having any, unless he's up to something that June doesn't know about.)
Humans, however, do and can.
Take gentle multi-dimensional care.
June,
I don't think you understand exactly what I was getting at. Yes, I agree with what you say in terms of us requiring a heirarchy of needs such as Maslow points out. Yes, we are the only beings that do such a thing. That DOES make us "special" when compared to the rest of the animal kingdom. But, I don't think it makes us "superior".
While I fully recognize the ability for us to appreciate wonderful things in life such as science, art, music, sonnets, plays, love, etc... these are things that are a result of biological processes within the mind. People really get freaked out when we boil it down to "biological". I think there is a stigma of high school biology class where we dissect earthworms and frogs when someone says the word "biology". But, that is far from the truth.
It almost seems that there is a double standard. For, what we consider good, most people want to make the leap outside the realm of biology but that which is bad is often seen as biological (resulting from genetics). A prime example would be schizophrenia. We know that schizophrenia is a genetic trait that can have profound effects on the mind. We realize that what causes schizophrenia is the result of a genetic misnomer. Taking a look at John Nash we would realize that his brilliance was probably also a result of his schizophrenia. Why is there a double standard attached to that? That which is bad is now genetic but that which is good is "spiritual"?
My overall point was that we are the way we are due to evolutionary progress. What might we make of homo habilis or homo heidelbergensis or even Lucy? Did they have the same capabilities and ethical standards that we did? The ability to perceive and react in such ways? Were they able to write plays and sonnets? Obviously not, but they are our evolutionary ancestors (who had much smaller cranial cavities as well). This tells me that with the growth of the brain came our abilities to perceive and recognize all things "beautiful" as well as create things that we also perceive to be "beautiful". And, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder I certainly put it in quotations. One would think that we would all agree on what is beautiful or what is fascinating if there were something else behind this. Our cognition and our ability to appeal to the emotions of others like us is indeed "special" but it doesn't make us superior on the grand scheme of things.
The human mind is capable of some wonderful things but also of some horribly atrocious things. Might it be suggestible to say that which is atrocious is indeed the primitive aspect of man? Man, if you will, in his "survival mode".
Looking at the way all twenty feet of a great white shark roars out of the water, snatching a seal in his mouth, and diving back below can seem quite repulsive to some people. It defies our common ethics, but I see it as a thing of beauty. It is something that only nature can provide. Respect for the sheer power and awesomeness of nature is something that I find to be wholesome and heartwarming. And while that certainly makes up part of what I am as a human being, I also realize that on another level, all of the processes in our brain are indeed biological. So, just as the schizophrenic may act "nuts" by our perceptions as a result of his genetics, why isn't it fair to say that those who appeal to our emotions do so because of genetics? For every action there must be a scientific explanation. Brain scans show different thought processes and centers of the brain - up to and including creativity centers. While I certainly recognize the power of the human mind, I also realize that it is something that could have, under other evolutionary conditions, made us just as agile as great white sharks, just as fast as a cheetah, just as hard shelled as a turtle, or just as good as a mosquito sucking your blood. For me, I think that's a beautiful way of looking at things. I fully respect nature and all that it can provide when looking at it in this way. It's what makes me, GCSTroop, human after all.
I don't think that DNA similarity makes us related to other animals. I think it just shows a common designer. So, appart from DNA content I think that humans can do far more than any type of animal kind. We can not only make tools, but make tools to make tools. We can reason, consider, and have empathy for other living things. We have the power to work individually like some animals yet collectively like the ant. We can observe nature and copy its design from the spider web (to make strong cables and string) to the burr (to make velcro) to the phase variance of hydrogen (to make MRI's).
I think that it goes beyond our ability to think but our emotions as well, we can have strong feelings, feelings for animals of every kind, from the smallest insect to the whale. And yet we can have feelings for issues like starvation of people in countries we have not been in, or people we have not seen. Or feelings for issues like global warming which no one can even detect is happening.
I think that humans have the ability to percieve what events will lead to into the future helping us to make decissions that will affect our lives 10, 20 years or even more into the future. We can build things, and create things. Large things like bridges and buildings and philosophies and religions. Things that affect people in tremendous ways.
Even the smallest human child has more understanding and self awareness than the most well trained orangutang. That spark of whatever it is seems to be present in humans but no other animal kind. I think that all animals are special and have a place in this world and a right to live, but humans have something beyond that is some how a culmination of all our traits and abilities some how combined. So, humans for some reason are unique, they are different than any other animal, bird, fish etc. kind.
Yes, we are the only beings that do such a thing. That DOES make us "special" when compared to the rest of the animal kingdom. But, I don't think it makes us "superior".
People really get freaked out when we boil it down to "biological".
That which is bad is now genetic but that which is good is "spiritual"?
Your intellect and mine is not just "special." It is "superior" as compared to that of other mammels. (And June attests to the fact that your intellect is certainly "superior" to hers as regards to all things biological and scientific!)
June does not know why it is that she gets freaked out when people reduce her humanity, (along with that of the rest of the human race) to mere biology. June is not by any stretch of the imagination saying that "that which is bad is...genetic, but that which is good is 'spiritual.'" Nope, not at all.
What June is saying is that there exists an inter-relationship between the various components that make up or comprise human beings: biological, psychological, social, and spiritual. I am not questioning the existence of the evolutionary process as regards the developing nature (and brain) of man. I would agree that our ability to perceive "beauty" and thereby attribute "creativity" is a subjective entity. Misha, however, has no conceptualization of either beauty or creativity. He is limited, albiet, I suspect that June feeding him tidbits of human food could be perceived by the little guy as being "a thing of beauty!"
I do not feel that there is any objectivity to human perception(s). I am also not saying that our abilities to create meaning, seek out meaning, and the capacity to create is necessarily attributable to the realm of the spiritual. --It can be, but it is subjectively perceived, as well with experienced. The fact that I can validate something does not necessarily mean that I, myself, experience or believe in it. (Then again, it doesn't necessarily mean that I don't!) My subjective experience can exist independently of what I observe.
Mankind can intentionally seek out the "transcendant." He can strive for, and obtain that which is unifying in both himself and others, along with his environment. As such, he can "transcend" both himself, and his environment. Some call that experience "spiritual." I am simply saying that it exists in human beings.
The existence of, and dependence upon the biological functions of the brain do not necessarily negate the existence of other attributes that comprise "human beings."
If June's capacity (on rare occassion) to transcend both herself and her environment (which I grant you is very much dependent on her biology) is simply and only that, then June has a hard time accepting that. June resists that notion, as it does not speak to her experience.
--She may not necessarily be all that certain as to what she attributes it to, but please don't tell her that it is just "her brain."
Please don't tell June that all those artistic masterpieces in the world came about as a result of the artist's "brain" alone...(I know you're gunna...)
Lastly, why do I feel the introduction to the concept of memes coming on here? Perhaps June's brain is merely experiencing a subjective premonition!
Your intellect and mine is not just "special." It is "superior" as compared to that of other mammels. (And June attests to the fact that your intellect is certainly "superior" to hers as regards to all things biological and scientific!)
June does not know why it is that she gets freaked out when people reduce her humanity, (along with that of the rest of the human race) to mere biology. June is not by any stretch of the imagination saying that "that which is bad is...genetic, but that which is good is 'spiritual.'" Nope, not at all.
What June is saying is that there exists an inter-relationship between the various components that make up or comprise human beings: biological, psychological, social, and spiritual. I am not questioning the existence of the evolutionary process as regards the developing nature (and brain) of man. I would agree that our ability to perceive "beauty" and thereby attribute "creativity" is a subjective entity. Misha, however, has no conceptualization of either beauty or creativity. He is limited, albiet, I suspect that June feeding him tidbits of human food could be perceived by the little guy as being "a thing of beauty!"
I do not feel that there is any objectivity to human perception(s). I am also not saying that our abilities to create meaning, seek out meaning, and the capacity to create is necessarily attributable to the realm of the spiritual. --It can be, but it is subjectively perceived, as well with experienced. The fact that I can validate something does not necessarily mean that I, myself, experience or believe in it. (Then again, it doesn't necessarily mean that I don't!) My subjective experience can exist independently of what I observe.
Mankind can intentionally seek out the "transcendant." He can strive for, and obtain that which is unifying in both himself and others, along with his environment. As such, he can "transcend" both himself, and his environment. Some call that experience "spiritual." I am simply saying that it exists in human beings.
The existence of, and dependence upon the biological functions of the brain do not necessarily negate the existence of other attributes that comprise "human beings."
If June's capacity (on rare occassion) to transcend both herself and her environment (which I grant you is very much dependent on her biology) is simply and only that, then June has a hard time accepting that. June resists that notion, as it does not speak to her experience.
--She may not necessarily be all that certain as to what she attributes it to, but please don't tell her that it is just "her brain."
Please don't tell June that all those artistic masterpieces in the world came about as a result of the artist's "brain" alone...(I know you're gunna...)
Lastly, why do I feel the introduction to the concept of memes coming on here? Perhaps June's brain is merely experiencing a subjective premonition!
Take gentle creative care.
I'll leave memes out of it, June, although I so badly wanted to "go there".
My point is that we describe awe, wonderment, transcendetalism, love, hate, and emotion after emotion but what does it really boil down to?
I don't think we're really arguing over what the brain can and can't do but rather what comprises our "special" experiences in the brain. What I fail to recognize is why should there be anything more than mere biology, or should I say science, behind it?
What I don't see is that there is anything more to the brain than a biological process. There is a biological reason for neuroepinephrine, dopamine, seratonin, and so on and so forth. June, you work in an industry that is very familiar with this and so you also fully recognize what happens when people do have a chemical imbalance. But, why even need a chemical if things are not biological? Why would the brain even need to be comprised of cells, axons, neurons, and the like? Are our cells, axons, nerves, neurons, seratonin and all the rest merely just a grand coverup for what actually comprises our brain? I doubt it, June. I really do doubt it because even alligators have a medula oblongota comprised of the same thing. It's a lot like saying that the valves, chambers, vessels, and muscular structure of the heart are a coverup for how it acts even though other animals share the same similarities in their hearts (a sea squirts heart acts the same as ours even though it only has one chamber - just thought you might like that. )
We know what happens when genetic information becomes murky or clouded. We know what happens when this information is not "transcribed" correctly. Autism, schizohprenia, Alzheimer's, all diseases affecting the brain all have genetic causes as a result of maligned biology. So, why is it OK to suggest that a special experience is far above and beyond that of the biological realm but something like schizophrenia merely has a genetic cause? I don't think that's very fair.
Looking at schizophrenic patients and their brain scans we realize that there are certain areas that don't quite light up while others do. It seems that if we were to make the comparison between a chamber in the heart and the brain, that one chamber of a schizophrenics brain has a "misfiring chamber". But, what is "lighting up"?? Well, isn't it merely the result of all of those neurons, axons, chemicals, and other biological processes being reflected onto a CT scan? Yes!
Perhaps you don't understand what I mean? Our brains, for all the wonderful things it can do, is sad to put it to you, merely an organ no different than our hearts, skin, or eyes. We do indeed have highly complex brains. Brains that can sense and provide absolutely wonderful things. But, there's nothing more to it than simple science, June.
But, might I ask. Why is it so surreptitiously important to denote the wonderful science and biology behind our brain to something else? As I said before, our brains developed the way they did out of necessity as a result of purely evolutionary and biological functions and I see it as nothing more than that. I think it's a beautiful thing that is quite astonishing on so many levels.
P.S.- Yes, those wonderful masterpieces of art came from someone's brain. That's why we call artistic people artistic, smart people smart, and so on and so forth. It's what their brain is "wired" for.
P.S.S- Sorry I keep editing this. Our brains are indeed superior to that of other animals but that doesn't make us superior beings. Superiority is just as subjective as beauty. As I said in my initial post. We are far less superior when put in a great white shark's environment. For all the thinking, machinations, transcendental thoughts, sonnets, and plays we could write on the subject, it doesn't do much for us when that fin pops up out of the water. Superior? Only in so many ways.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We're not one dimensional beings
