Why do people so often speak of loosing humanity, or not being able to call yourself human as a bad thing? As nearly the worst thing that could happen?
What is so valuable about being human that people are afraid to loose it?
Really... I'm confused. I don't understand this viewpoint at all.
Because humans are supposedly the (self proclaimed) most civilized species. People think when they lose their "humanity" they'll become like animals; uncivilized, fierce, whatever. They probably imagine themselves eating their own children if they lost their humanity.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
Why do people so often speak of loosing humanity, or not being able to call yourself human as a bad thing? As nearly the worst thing that could happen?
What is so valuable about being human that people are afraid to loose it?
Really... I'm confused. I don't understand this viewpoint at all. |
Possibly it has to do with the fact that most of us start in life with a very clear and almost idealistic sense of what is right and what is wrong, and therefore also a clear sense of what could be hurtful to others. There are so many ugly things happening in life however, people going through hell and horror and doing horrible things to people, so much so that some tend to build a very thick skin around their feelings. Outwardly it would then appear that they have lost their humanity when they have "lost" their ability to care about horrible things. Some may even be happy to have horrible things happen to others, life can have become so bizarre to them that the inhuman part of life becomes a kind of justification for their own inhuman experiences.
Probably happens quite a lot in war, when the evil parts of ourselves get severely tested. I got a sense of that in the poems I read of some of the soldiers of World War I, probably one of the most brutal wars in the last century.
http://www.world-war-pictures.com/war-poems/Insensibility-by-Wilfred-Owen.htmHmm...I sort of agree(ish).
I certainly don't think we are born with an innate sense of right and wrong. Even if you think those terms are absolute (which I don't) then it certainly takes a while for an infant to pick those values up. There may be some 'hard wired' ethics, but most of it is learned.
I think the difference with humans is that we can imitate, and by extension, empathise with others. We have the mental kit to be able to put ourselves in the position of another person. For sure this ability is not present in everyone - psychopaths, as an example, generally lack empathic abilities. I'm not sure how 'innate' it is (ie how much of it is genetic and how much of it is conditioning/learned behaviour) but that, to me, forms the basis of what we call our 'humanity'.
| Quote: |
| Why do people so often speak of loosing humanity, or not being able to call yourself human as a bad thing? As nearly the worst thing that could happen? |
only some do, some dont believe in loosing humanity a killer is just as humane as anyone else, its just that he was raised with different set of beliefs on whats humane and whats not.
i.e some serial killers give their victims a friendly appearance as a way too be kinder before killing them.
| Quote: |
| What is so valuable about being human that people are afraid to loose it? |
nothing we are just animals who are able too think far ahead....
| Quote: |
| Really... I'm confused. I don't understand this viewpoint at all. |
so am iI think it has a lot to do with how a lot of people see themselves in the world. There are quite a few people who believe that humans are the end result of evolution, that humans have the innate right to rule the world. Losing humanity to them means that they will be back down to the level of animals, whom they believe they have control over. It's a self-centered point of view, in my opinion.
Perhaps all species, if they are/were capable of such a thought process, would also be paranoid or fearful of losing their "identity?"
Humanity - the context is all people is one... Well if we treat each other wrong ot let say different then the word humanity comes along.
So the next question is:
Humanity = communism???
| spinout wrote: |
| Humanity - the context is all people is one... |
*shudder*
All the more reason to try and git rid of this 'humanity'... There are a lot of people that I don't want to 'be one' with.Jusaism 101 states
http://www.jewfaq.org/human.htm
| Quote: |
On the question of human nature, as in most areas of abstract belief in Judaism, there is a lot of room for personal opinion. There is no dogma on the subject, no required belief about the nature of humanity. There are a variety of contrary opinions expressed on the subject, and one is no less a Jew (and no less a good Jew) for disagreeing with any or all of these opinions. Nevertheless, there are certain ideas that seem to reflect the majority opinion in Jewish thought that are worth discussing.
In the Image of G-d
The Bible states that humanity was created in the image of G-d, but what does it mean to be created in the image of G-d?
Clearly, we are not created in the physical image of G-d, because Judaism steadfastly maintains that G-d is incorporeal and has no physical appearance. Rambam points out that the Hebrew words translated as "image" and "likeness" in Gen. 1:27 do not refer to the physical form of a thing. The word for "image" in Gen. 1:27 is "tzelem," which refers to the nature or essence of a thing, as in Psalm 73:20, "you will despise their image (tzel'mam)." You despise a person's nature and not a person's physical appearance. The word for physical form, Rambam explains, is "to'ar," as in Gen. 39:6, "and Joseph was beautiful of form (to'ar) and fair to look upon." Similarly, the word used for "likeness" is "damut," which is used to indicate a simile, not identity of form. For example, "He is like (damuno) a lion" in Ps. 17:12 refers not to similar appearance, but to similar nature.
What is it in our nature that is G-d-like? Rashi explains that we are like G-d in that we have the ability to understand and discern. Rambam elaborates that by using our intellect, we are able to perceive things without the use of our physical senses, an ability that makes us like G-d, who perceives without having physical senses.
The Dual Nature
In Genesis 2:7, the Bible states that G-d formed (vayyitzer) man. The spelling of this word is unusual: it uses two consecutive Yods instead of the one you would expect. The rabbis inferred that these Yods stand for the word "yetzer," which means impulse, and the existence of two Yods here indicates that humanity was formed with two impulses: a good impulse (the yetzer tov) and an evil impulse (the yetzer ra).
The yetzer tov is the moral conscience, the inner voice that reminds you of G-d's law when you consider doing something that is forbidden. According to some views, it does not enter a person until his 13th birthday, when he becomes responsible for following the commandments. See Bar Mitzvah.
The yetzer ra is more difficult to define, because there are many different ideas about it. It is not a desire to do evil in the way we normally think of it in Western society: a desire to cause senseless harm. Rather, it is usually conceived as the selfish nature, the desire to satisfy personal needs (food, shelter, sex, etc.) without regard for the moral consequences of fulfilling those desires.
The yetzer ra is not a bad thing. It was created by G-d, and all things created by G-d are good. The Talmud notes that without the yetzer ra (the desire to satisfy personal needs), man would not build a house, marry a wife, beget children or conduct business affairs. But the yetzer ra can lead to wrongdoing when it is not controlled by the yetzer tov. There is nothing inherently wrong with hunger, but it can lead you to steal food. There is nothing inherently wrong with sexual desire, but it can lead you to commit rape, adultery, incest or other sexual perversion.
The yetzer ra is generally seen as something internal to a person, not as an external force acting on a person. The idea that "the devil made me do it" is not in line with the majority of thought in Judaism. Although it has been said that Satan and the yetzer ra are one and the same, this is more often understood as meaning that Satan is merely a personification of our own selfish desires, rather than that our selfish desires are caused by some external force.
People have the ability to choose which impulse to follow: the yetzer tov or the yetzer ra. That is the heart of the Jewish understanding of free will. The Talmud notes that all people are descended from Adam, so no one can blame his own wickedness on his ancestry. On the contrary, we all have the ability to make our own choices, and we will all be held responsible for the choices we make. |
I know this is a very long quote which I dont usually do. But I felt the entire context was relevant to the question of humanity, and what exactly defines us as humans and differentiates us from the rest of nature.
This of course is a opinion based on a theological perspective which many dont adhere to.
Some may differentiate the definition of humanity vs. human nature..I propose they are entertwined and inseperable, the good nature and the bad nature combine to create humanity. | BinahZ wrote: |
I know this is a very long quote which I dont usually do. But I felt the entire context was relevant to the question of humanity, and what exactly defines us as humans and differentiates us from the rest of nature.
This of course is a opinion based on a theological perspective which many dont adhere to.
Some may differentiate the definition of humanity vs. human nature..I propose they are entertwined and inseperable, the good nature and the bad nature combine to create humanity. |
Does this mean that humanity is religion based? In other words people who are non-religious would all be considered to be inhumane? Or could you find a way to apply some of the quote to those who are non-religious?religion is not humanity... therefore there are a group called the humanists... that have the ceremonies just like the religions, but without the religious inhumanity...
deanhills wrote:
| Quote: |
| Does this mean that humanity is religion based? In other words people who are non-religious would all be considered to be inhumane? Or could you find a way to apply some of the quote to those who are non-religious? |
It is for those who are religious in that sense. For others I would say the attributes still apply, its just the source that differs. I think the whole thing is just a little ploy to make all of us think we're special- same as the notion that "God created us in his likeness". We tend to have a need to "rise above" all the other creatures because we think we are the most intellectual, we think we are the most responsible, and we think we make the most significant effects to the world.
...kind of makes me think of religion (Christianity) in a sense.
| tingkagol wrote: |
I think the whole thing is just a little ploy to make all of us think we're special- same as the notion that "God created us in his likeness". We tend to have a need to "rise above" all the other creatures because we think we are the most intellectual, we think we are the most responsible, and we think we make the most significant effects to the world.
...kind of makes me think of religion (Christianity) in a sense. |
We are above all other known animals in terms of intellectuality. What are you talking about? I fail to recall the last time I saw a raccoon calculating the distance of the nearest neighboring solar system or utilizing scientific method. | Hogwarts wrote: |
| tingkagol wrote: | I think the whole thing is just a little ploy to make all of us think we're special- same as the notion that "God created us in his likeness". We tend to have a need to "rise above" all the other creatures because we think we are the most intellectual, we think we are the most responsible, and we think we make the most significant effects to the world.
...kind of makes me think of religion (Christianity) in a sense. |
We are above all other known animals in terms of intellectuality. What are you talking about? I fail to recall the last time I saw a raccoon calculating the distance of the nearest neighboring solar system or utilizing scientific method. |
Obviously I'm not saying raccoons are smarter than us. I'm just toying with the idea that maybe intellect isn't a sole prerequisite to the preservation of the environment (since we call ourselves its stewards). I mean, it did do its part in destroying the environment.
...Or the idea that maybe some things aren't exactly less meaningful just because they are inept. Well at least that's what I think the topic starter was trying to convey... | Hogwarts wrote: |
Obviously I'm not saying raccoons are smarter than us. I'm just toying with the idea that maybe intellect isn't a sole prerequisite to the preservation of the environment (since we call ourselves its stewards). I mean, it did do its part in destroying the environment.
...Or the idea that maybe some things aren't exactly less meaningful just because they are inept. Well at least that's what I think the topic starter was trying to convey... |
We "think" we are intelligent, but then that is our point of view. We measure other species by our own standards of what are important. I sometimes wonder whether this "intelligence" is more of a "sentence", completely deluding us in thinking we are more rare and special.To me, "loss of humanity" doesn't mean becoming like an animal, it means becoming like a machine or robot, which I find terrifying and sad. Animals are alright. Robots are ****** creepy. "Inhuman" people seem more like robots than animals to me. "Just doing what they're told", whether it's Hitler or "Satan" or "God" or the TV doing the programming.
| Libby wrote: |
| "Inhuman" people seem more like robots than animals to me. "Just doing what they're told", whether it's Hitler or "Satan" or "God" or the TV doing the programming. |
Those people are the most 'human' of all... They exemplify the traits that make humans unique, in more concentrated form. | Libby wrote: |
| To me, "loss of humanity" doesn't mean becoming like an animal, it means becoming like a machine or robot, which I find terrifying and sad. Animals are alright. Robots are ****** creepy. "Inhuman" people seem more like robots than animals to me. "Just doing what they're told", whether it's Hitler or "Satan" or "God" or the TV doing the programming. |
I totally agree with you Libby. Hitler and his Nazi followers in the concentration camps are good examples of inhuman and becoming robots. Our humanity is probably defined by love, compassion, even hate and retribution, they probably make us even more unique than our "intelligence". Our "intelligence" may even cause us to become "inhumane", such as possibly happened with Hitler when he worked on his plan for keeping the German race pure, and became "inhumane" in the process. 
I believe this has to do with rational thought and abstract thought. We are a product of emotions and logic, and we see this in everyday life - accidents, the way everything works etc. I think this has something to do with potential, a human has potential to sacrifice himself for the good of others because his thought process led him to that point (no instinct) but he can also express huge egoism (hatred towards whole races...).
