![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The "Objectivity" Objective
Mar. 26th, 2011 01:20 pmCredit ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
forioscribe with sparking this. He received some manuscript pages he wrote some time ago and in one piece he quoted author William Burroughs:
‘You must learn to exist and to live without religion, without country, and without allies. You must learn to see what is in front of you without prejudice.’
Not to do much cherry-picking here, but I think that line is at the heart of what his post was about and it caused a reaction within me immediately. In my comment back, I said,
//Let's be honest. Objectivity is impossible for human beings. We can present the facts of something that balances them for the viewer, but that is an active choice. The "Blank Slate" does not exist.
Our opinions are given to us through parents, peers, our society, our teachers... the things we read, the things we see and hear. We can choose to ignore them, we can suppress or stifle their appearances in what we say or do, but they're still there.//
And as I was writing that, a kind of sad truth came back to me regarding everything in how humans interact with each other, and have done, probably since our appearance on this planet.
The self-interested nature of humanity has really never been more apparent than it is right now. But "humanity" is something that is, at times, so vastly different that it appears to be disconnected from oneself. We can look at the circumstances of someone, ridicule or pity them, think to ourselves, "that's not me," and walk away. We can celebrate our own triumphs, give our friends and allies pats on the back and note how fantastic we are. The point is the difference between "us" and "them" is the issue, and that brings us back to the Burroughs quote.
One of the reasons I'm not a fan of science fiction is that there is, more often than not, a huge disconnect between the societies of those far-off worlds (some of them being Earth) and what we think of when it comes to our collective history. How did we go from what we know to be true, to some sort of "Totalitarian" or even "Utopian" society? Those questions are all too often never asked and even fewer times answered, but if I'm asked to buy into the tale, that's the first thing I want to know.
The reason that fascinates me, that question of how we got from point A, our current history, to point B, some reorganized planet that is still known as Earth, yet only mildly resembles the Earth we know, is knowing what is true about human nature.
"There's definitely, definitely, definitely no logic to human behaviour" sings Björk, but there is a logic to it. It's just that it's a very, very, very self-interested logic. And that gets back to the Us v. Them concept.
The overriding issue with humans is pretty simple. Humans don't want to change. We have been handed our opinions from our parents and their parents all the way back through the history of humanity... it's possible that it's engraved on our DNA as well. This is who we are.
Might it be genetic? We are starting to interact more closely with each other now, in a way that isn't always about conflict. Typically, the point of going somewhere foreign was to poach materials and resources or to defeat an enemy. And yes, that's still going on in many places. But the other element is that some people are connecting with others that have like minds. And that is starting to create some new ways of thinking, and possibly a new kind of human.
In one of those sci-fi style writings, in a perfect society, there is no prejudice. Of course, one of those rarely asked questions is what is this "perfect" society? What's perfect about it and to whom is it most perfect? There's always a pecking order, a pyramid design and someone invariably is at the top, while everyone else is trudging along at the base.
Let's amend that previous statement. Humans don't want to change, unless the change is beneficial. It's like being a child. You certainly can't wait to be a grownup! Then you can do all the things you had never been permitted to do, like stay up all night or smoke cigars and drink whiskey, just like Dad! But that's not the case when you're an adult and all that's looking at you is old age, infirmity and the losing the ability to do all of the stuff you loved earlier in life.
But change is at the core of these stories. Why would humans agree to a situation that let "Big Brother" rule? Change is something we try to avoid, especially if it's something we don't like! And it's that ego, that Terrible Two Temper Tantrum that is always right there, an integral part of what being human is about, and that's the element that unplugs most of those concepts.
So, what is humanity, anyhow? We have these various people from different parts of the planet. We all look somewhat the same. We all look incredibly different. We speak different languages, and we even speak different dialects of the same language.
Ted Turner, the media magnate and philanthropist stated something I consider crucially important on an appearance on "Late Show with David Letterman," dated November 10, 2008. The topic was Turner's visit with Fidel Castro in Cuba. Letterman displayed this photo...
...and when Letterman asked about it, Turner stated the following:
"We got to be good friends. I went out in the world, I realized that the Cold War was a very dangerous situation with all the nuclear weapons, and I decided, when I started learning about the news and what was going on in the world, that I wanted to be a positive force and see if we could bring the Cold War to a peaceful conclusion. And, so, I just went over to all of the Communist countries and try to get to know everybody and be friends with them... Because if you've got just one good friend in another country, you don't want to go to war with that country because you don't want to hurt your friend."
Therein lies the issue of humanity. Friends and Enemies. Us v. Them. If I'm different from you, then we aren't the same. That's okay if you don't mind the differences, but if you don't like what I am, then there is trouble. You'll harass me, you'll punish me, you might go to war with me. And why? Because I'm different. I don't adhere to your perception of how things should be.
The perception of "How Things Should Be" is at the root of this vile weed that describes all of the problems we are dealing with as a global community, or even at the microcosm of a family. People with money and power get to enact their vision of what that is. The vast majority are lucky enough to just survive in that world.
The other issue is that if we did have that "Utopia" and everyone behaved in a "perfect" way, would it all just be for show? Would people be kind and gentle towards all others because that was what was required by society, while suppressing the hatred of the people they dealt with during those interactions? Of course, there's a whole group of people doing that right now: Customer Service.
Ultimately, you can't legislate what people think. But you can punish them for stating it publicly, as that UCLA student discovered when she made her comments about her Asian classmates after the Japanese Earthquake/Tsunami. For as many youtube videos as you see, how many people are thinking something similar?
The basic elements of humanity do not change. The playing board may be different and the items we use have been upgraded over time, but the stuff that makes us human has not, and that's where the battle needs to begin. I don't want to sound like this is impossible. Okay, the objectivity part is, and I firmly believe that. Part of being a human is based on the subjective empirical elements of personal experience, and there's really no way around that. I'm not even sure we should try to achieve anything that attempts to circumnavigate those elements.
It's through the appearance of difference that we can continue to live our lives the way we do. The fact that you practice a religion I don't follow, or perhaps don't believe in religion at all, or you speak a language that I don't understand can be used as a means of separation. If we are looking for the elements that separate us, we can always find something, and if we want to pick a fight about it, that's just as easily done.
But the fact that we are, at the very soul of our beings, the same, that we have a stake in each other's lives, homes, countries, planet is something we have to address now. And that's the real objective.
forioscribe with sparking this. He received some manuscript pages he wrote some time ago and in one piece he quoted author William Burroughs:‘You must learn to exist and to live without religion, without country, and without allies. You must learn to see what is in front of you without prejudice.’
Not to do much cherry-picking here, but I think that line is at the heart of what his post was about and it caused a reaction within me immediately. In my comment back, I said,
//Let's be honest. Objectivity is impossible for human beings. We can present the facts of something that balances them for the viewer, but that is an active choice. The "Blank Slate" does not exist.
Our opinions are given to us through parents, peers, our society, our teachers... the things we read, the things we see and hear. We can choose to ignore them, we can suppress or stifle their appearances in what we say or do, but they're still there.//
And as I was writing that, a kind of sad truth came back to me regarding everything in how humans interact with each other, and have done, probably since our appearance on this planet.
The self-interested nature of humanity has really never been more apparent than it is right now. But "humanity" is something that is, at times, so vastly different that it appears to be disconnected from oneself. We can look at the circumstances of someone, ridicule or pity them, think to ourselves, "that's not me," and walk away. We can celebrate our own triumphs, give our friends and allies pats on the back and note how fantastic we are. The point is the difference between "us" and "them" is the issue, and that brings us back to the Burroughs quote.
One of the reasons I'm not a fan of science fiction is that there is, more often than not, a huge disconnect between the societies of those far-off worlds (some of them being Earth) and what we think of when it comes to our collective history. How did we go from what we know to be true, to some sort of "Totalitarian" or even "Utopian" society? Those questions are all too often never asked and even fewer times answered, but if I'm asked to buy into the tale, that's the first thing I want to know.
The reason that fascinates me, that question of how we got from point A, our current history, to point B, some reorganized planet that is still known as Earth, yet only mildly resembles the Earth we know, is knowing what is true about human nature.
"There's definitely, definitely, definitely no logic to human behaviour" sings Björk, but there is a logic to it. It's just that it's a very, very, very self-interested logic. And that gets back to the Us v. Them concept.
The overriding issue with humans is pretty simple. Humans don't want to change. We have been handed our opinions from our parents and their parents all the way back through the history of humanity... it's possible that it's engraved on our DNA as well. This is who we are.
Might it be genetic? We are starting to interact more closely with each other now, in a way that isn't always about conflict. Typically, the point of going somewhere foreign was to poach materials and resources or to defeat an enemy. And yes, that's still going on in many places. But the other element is that some people are connecting with others that have like minds. And that is starting to create some new ways of thinking, and possibly a new kind of human.
In one of those sci-fi style writings, in a perfect society, there is no prejudice. Of course, one of those rarely asked questions is what is this "perfect" society? What's perfect about it and to whom is it most perfect? There's always a pecking order, a pyramid design and someone invariably is at the top, while everyone else is trudging along at the base.
Let's amend that previous statement. Humans don't want to change, unless the change is beneficial. It's like being a child. You certainly can't wait to be a grownup! Then you can do all the things you had never been permitted to do, like stay up all night or smoke cigars and drink whiskey, just like Dad! But that's not the case when you're an adult and all that's looking at you is old age, infirmity and the losing the ability to do all of the stuff you loved earlier in life.
But change is at the core of these stories. Why would humans agree to a situation that let "Big Brother" rule? Change is something we try to avoid, especially if it's something we don't like! And it's that ego, that Terrible Two Temper Tantrum that is always right there, an integral part of what being human is about, and that's the element that unplugs most of those concepts.
So, what is humanity, anyhow? We have these various people from different parts of the planet. We all look somewhat the same. We all look incredibly different. We speak different languages, and we even speak different dialects of the same language.
Ted Turner, the media magnate and philanthropist stated something I consider crucially important on an appearance on "Late Show with David Letterman," dated November 10, 2008. The topic was Turner's visit with Fidel Castro in Cuba. Letterman displayed this photo...
...and when Letterman asked about it, Turner stated the following:
"We got to be good friends. I went out in the world, I realized that the Cold War was a very dangerous situation with all the nuclear weapons, and I decided, when I started learning about the news and what was going on in the world, that I wanted to be a positive force and see if we could bring the Cold War to a peaceful conclusion. And, so, I just went over to all of the Communist countries and try to get to know everybody and be friends with them... Because if you've got just one good friend in another country, you don't want to go to war with that country because you don't want to hurt your friend."
Therein lies the issue of humanity. Friends and Enemies. Us v. Them. If I'm different from you, then we aren't the same. That's okay if you don't mind the differences, but if you don't like what I am, then there is trouble. You'll harass me, you'll punish me, you might go to war with me. And why? Because I'm different. I don't adhere to your perception of how things should be.
The perception of "How Things Should Be" is at the root of this vile weed that describes all of the problems we are dealing with as a global community, or even at the microcosm of a family. People with money and power get to enact their vision of what that is. The vast majority are lucky enough to just survive in that world.
The other issue is that if we did have that "Utopia" and everyone behaved in a "perfect" way, would it all just be for show? Would people be kind and gentle towards all others because that was what was required by society, while suppressing the hatred of the people they dealt with during those interactions? Of course, there's a whole group of people doing that right now: Customer Service.
Ultimately, you can't legislate what people think. But you can punish them for stating it publicly, as that UCLA student discovered when she made her comments about her Asian classmates after the Japanese Earthquake/Tsunami. For as many youtube videos as you see, how many people are thinking something similar?
The basic elements of humanity do not change. The playing board may be different and the items we use have been upgraded over time, but the stuff that makes us human has not, and that's where the battle needs to begin. I don't want to sound like this is impossible. Okay, the objectivity part is, and I firmly believe that. Part of being a human is based on the subjective empirical elements of personal experience, and there's really no way around that. I'm not even sure we should try to achieve anything that attempts to circumnavigate those elements.
It's through the appearance of difference that we can continue to live our lives the way we do. The fact that you practice a religion I don't follow, or perhaps don't believe in religion at all, or you speak a language that I don't understand can be used as a means of separation. If we are looking for the elements that separate us, we can always find something, and if we want to pick a fight about it, that's just as easily done.
But the fact that we are, at the very soul of our beings, the same, that we have a stake in each other's lives, homes, countries, planet is something we have to address now. And that's the real objective.
