KnowRevolution

I’m in an echo chamber of two. For the most part, the topics I prefer to discuss are limited. Not limited due to any personal limitations of understanding or curiosity, but limited by the lack of others who are willing to explore the topics at hand which they themselves purport to extrapolate upon.

So I find myself once again at my shop with my good friend. He is an observer of humans. It is his fascination, his passion. Yet, with all his perceived understanding of people, we find a division bell that tolls whenever a particular topic rises. The topic of Human Nature.

I am a unique nut. My life has been one that the vast majority of people find oddly unique, yet not so unsettling different that they are driven away. This unique life was formed initially by unique circumstances which later morphed into what I believe to be a broader understanding of what we are. When you experience certain things, you then can if you choose wonder why you reacted to those things the way you did. Dig each one of those levels, those thoughts, and the logical understanding is to see that the levels are nearly infinite and the possibilities nearly endless.

So here we are again. Nature. The cause of this essay itself is to attempt to bring about an edge of awareness that there is something more about the human condition than what is simply known. For context of the conversation, let us assume that most of us are more alike than different. That we are able to be relevant to one another’s existence even though our origins may be widely variant.

First off, I will start by blasting away a concept that I believe the entirety of humanity seems to get wrong. Of course, this is my opinion, but I will process the intuitions with language and step through it one level at a time.

For many, when they argue human nature, they are basing their understanding of nature upon the past. How humans reacted to certain stimulus over periods of time somehow becomes nature. Problem is, the human animal is primarily inductive by nature and deductive by conditioning. The argument from my buddy is most often based upon how humans interact and react to one another within a culture, a society, and a nation but always carries with it the indoctrination of those same things. We are not born into a vaccuum, and yet the nature of the human animal is to be capable of adaptation to most any circumstance, even those that are dangerous. But even there, what is dangerous? And thus, my point. Human nature is not how humans are observed to react, but rather how adaptable an animal they can be.

A newborn baby does not decide for itself that it would like to be part of a society that enjoys murder and violence. But, condition it correctly, and it may find that the occassional violent act is the most efficient and natural way to accomplish a goal- again, with the caveat that it is conditioned correctly. Even with such conditioning, and I have been conditioned as such, there is a desire to not live constantly in that state. This desire is more universal than the inverse.

These inversions are the important part of what the studies miss when discussing human nature. What people are drawn to in their moments away from the conditioned expectations of their societies, groups or cultures speak more to human nature than when the pressures of society or the expectations of performative acts are controlling the dynamic energies of the humans in question. And therein lies an exposed element that few people ever discuss, so follow below a concept that I would hope sparks the curiosity within.

There are two hemispheres to every human brain. Our entire educational system, along with the cookie cutter rinse and repeat methods that disconnected parenting for generations brought about where perceived authority trumps curiosty kills the nurturing of the right hemisphere. How many classes did you experience where there were no rules? No systems, but where things like meditations, breathing exercises, processes to bring your conscious awareness of the present moment to your physical existence were emphasized and taught? Situations created where the answers were not found in deductive reasoning but internalized intuitive guidance? The systems of authority had no problem locking you away for 40-60 hours a week forcing you to recite bullshit that you will never use in your practical lifetime, but not one week did they ever lock you away and give you the assignment to create something out of nothing, and leave it upon you to figure out what that creative endeavor would be.

The fact that this was never part of our culture tells me there is something very sick and nefarious about those who have the power to shape our culture. To set up systems that act as though this other half of what we are does not exist and then in observation of that fact, even intelligent folk would sidestep what nature is and call a society that does almost everything it can to kill that hemisphere a people living following some ideation of ‘human nature’.

What do you think you used when you were an infant to learn to speak? What do you think you used as a baby to mimic body language? As your body was learning to connect with its muscles and gain control over your physical self, your mind was using its right hemisphere to experience the observable around you and then hand it over to the left hemisphere to be set into a system of reference and memory. Your very initial powers of experiencing everything due to the openess and non-judicial willingness of the right hemisphere were driven not by comparisons to other experiences, but by intution alone. Gut feelings were what protected you intitially. Gut feelings let you know you were safe or in danger. Gut feelings were what made so many things so wonderful and fascinating. There was never a lack of things to wonder about. There was, however, a purposeful quelling of the intuitive.

Throughout recent history, the intuitve sides of our brains have held many abilities that are usually never explored. Yet, these abilities have been documented, duplicated and in some cases trained to be brought back to the forefront of certain individuals for usually nefarious purposes by the very systems of power that were intent upon killing off those natural gifts we all had as children to begin with.

If it were our nature to be as we are in so many ways that society runs today, why are we forced to stay in school for so long? Most people can’t truly read or write. Very few need to be able to for the vastness of society to continue. Most people don’t use jack shit for math skills or much else for that matter. The very minimal amounts of skills they use for existnce within their respective socieities are things they could have been monkey taught with very little effort by those that would hire them anyway. Teaching an idiot to run a till or look of a part number happens anyway. Most people that graduate from public school can’t give back exact change because they can’t add or subtract abstractly. So what is the benefit? They are never expected to write anything mroe than a poorly scribbled note at best, and never critiqued on their spelling within that dumpster fire of a note. So again, what for?

It’s just a thought, but I’ll leave on this concept: You cannot convince me that observing how humans interact within these types of systems will ever gie you one iota of insight into human nature when there is such an emphasis on the non-use and dumbing down of the right hemisphere. You can’t even begin to argue about as you have not been able to observe for such a long long time any kind of society where the intuitive were just as emphasized as the deductive. Where the explorative and creative were nurtured as strongly as the authoritative. If it were, and we were still as we are, then I would concede the argument. I would accept this world we live in is the way that humans would choose to live if given the freedom to do whatever they choose while using the fully activated faculties of their minds. But that is simply not the case at all. And another chunk of the story to add to it is that of our history- we only know what we were told by the same powers that insist upon developing the deductive and redundant authority driven culture instead of the self-driven curious intuitive side. Statements about it ‘always being like ‘x” are in and of themselves insincere. You don’t know. Someone with perceived authority told you it was ‘x’, and that is it. You do not have familial generational history that things have always been ‘x’. That of itself should be a warning sign of some type… but for some reason, it is just accepted as normal. And that will be the next topic- Generational Knowledge, Familial History. Enjoy the journey, sit still, and exist.

OM