The excessive addiction to the numbers from the world of finance has caused a real break for me from the otherwise mundane and continuous process of sociological exploration.
However, grabbing enough attention, there has been quite a lot of talk about the inter relationship between the man and the society and about its most apparent form for the commoner - the politics. Much of the talk or cacophony as one would brush it aside, I refer here, is related to the heated debates that took place within the left circles in Kerala, which go beyond the realms of thoughts for the common man and for most of the so called wise men either.For lack of one's ability to comprehend such seemingly weirdly(!) worded linguistic acrobatics, many would probably leave it as high IQ verbiage coming aimlessly from the ivory tower intellectuals.Yet, such is the nature of human-social relationships that the very same aspects one brushes aside as verbiage is exactly the one determines our life of today's and tomorrows and years to come. So let me try to De-classify such seemingly intriguing, yet probably the most simplistic sociological equations. The purpose of this post and probably that of the subsequent ones (!!??) is many folds including basic level awareness and introduction to human systems and my perspectives on how it should evolve.
Since the discussion is about 'us' - It essentially requires to describe 'us'. well , since 'we' forms a collection of 'me' and many 'you', it needs a further clear understanding of 'you' and 'me' who most acceptably(!) called as "human beings".
So the post title is "Being a Human Being" ... and probably it makes sense, as does the following alternate choices
1.Not Being a Human being 2.Being a Non Human Being 3.Being a Human Non Being
(well..!! somebody was talking about verbiage..!!! ;-))
The genetic evolution( or rather more correctly understood as the the plausible solutions of the multi variable - nth degree 'genetic' equation) has resulted in the gradual and yet relatively distinguishable emergence of a group of living creatures, of a particular genetics base. We know them as Homo sapiens and we know we belong just there.
While it is certain and could be proved scientifically as well, that we the so called Human Beings are indeed Homo sapiens, it may be altogether a different task to answer the question, if we all are 'Human enough to be called Human beings..?'
In other words, while the term Homo sapiens and its reference set of gene pool marks a distinct detachment from the other species, we all, just because we possess the same set of gene pool would naturally fit into that group.So we are classified as Homo sapiens .The other classification - that we are human beings depends on the under lying semantic that defines the word : 'Human.'
While we being Homo sapiens is a empirically provable fact , the concept of a human being is not a data based concept but it is based on supposed 'non-physical attributes' the Homo Sapience may possess in 'varying degrees',varying with time space, and in varying degrees from other Homo Sapience too. So , the so called Human being is an 'abstract concept' whereas a Homo Sapience is a 'quantifiable reality' .
So, while two members of the species Homo Sapience can identify themselves quite closely on the basis of the same gene set, they can't be said to be possessing the same degrees of "Humanity" - "Humanness" . Needless to say compared to the genetic set , the degree of Humanity is not an easily measurable quantity and hence is a subjective experience.
With this basic concept of distinctly differentiable homogeneous class of homo sapiens contrasting with a random distribution on humanity amongst the Homo sapience, we can move to the next step.
We have undergone two different kind of evolution process - First -A long term one from animal genetics into Homo sapiens , which provided with innumerable neurons and second - a rather quicker one of evolving a software stack- an evolved humanity over what we call a process of civilization.
PS : Aside:For mathematical fanatics :
While the first kind of evolution - the hard one- had periodic impulsive nature when plotted over time, the second one - the soft one- is gradual and continuous - it is this continuity , that gives it on graph paper, a derivative - a differential with time, with its d/dt is a positive value it will be in a continuous uptrend, however may be the weight historical baggage- the negative coefficients of a infinite series -pull it down.
PS:Aside: - For Software Fanatics
1.Easy way of understanding the concept is considering the analogous and very closely correlated example from the computer world. As well know the hardware (CPU ) has evolved with different set of genetic structure(computational and combination),once the hardware is defined ( as intel X86=evolved and stabilized) the software was evolved on the top of it, in layers. Homo Sapience are akin to the CPU and Humanity=Human beings is the "soft" part that includes an operating system and its semantics.One can run many operation system on the same CPU some talk to each other some doesn't. The semantics , while can be common need not be exactly the same for various systems.
2. Another example is to consider a protocol stack where the physical layer form the visible evolved crystallized part with chips and the different soft layers -logical-sync-data semantics part evolving on the top.It may be noted that different protocols can exist on the same hardware(physical) just like grades of humanity developed on the same basic raw -home sapience- substance , can substantially vary.
The software stack or the logical upper layers of protocol decide why and how the "right" and "wrong" can appear differently to different people. The concept of a "modern state"- the "republic" , in a nutshell is a nascent attempt to loosely bind such variations of different makle/ versions of humanity. That "democracy" is a very basic, nascent and highly simplified system and it is plainly ineffective in dealing with such diversities of humanity under its wings is a matter of observable fact.
The subject is a topic for an encyclopedia itself, so for purpose of focusing onto the subject of the blog- the confrontation of the identities and dilemma of the left- this discussion can be left as brief as possible just to make the entry for the next section- Individual and Society - chicken or egg..? That ,In the next post.
Disclaimer: Written in haste - taking time from the dynamic stocks portfolios that blinks every second. Any syntax , semantic error is regretted.Hope the essence do not get missed.Plan to write a series to make the cross referencing of ideas complete , not sure if patience will allow....
However, grabbing enough attention, there has been quite a lot of talk about the inter relationship between the man and the society and about its most apparent form for the commoner - the politics. Much of the talk or cacophony as one would brush it aside, I refer here, is related to the heated debates that took place within the left circles in Kerala, which go beyond the realms of thoughts for the common man and for most of the so called wise men either.For lack of one's ability to comprehend such seemingly weirdly(!) worded linguistic acrobatics, many would probably leave it as high IQ verbiage coming aimlessly from the ivory tower intellectuals.Yet, such is the nature of human-social relationships that the very same aspects one brushes aside as verbiage is exactly the one determines our life of today's and tomorrows and years to come. So let me try to De-classify such seemingly intriguing, yet probably the most simplistic sociological equations. The purpose of this post and probably that of the subsequent ones (!!??) is many folds including basic level awareness and introduction to human systems and my perspectives on how it should evolve.
Since the discussion is about 'us' - It essentially requires to describe 'us'. well , since 'we' forms a collection of 'me' and many 'you', it needs a further clear understanding of 'you' and 'me' who most acceptably(!) called as "human beings".
So the post title is "Being a Human Being" ... and probably it makes sense, as does the following alternate choices
1.Not Being a Human being 2.Being a Non Human Being 3.Being a Human Non Being
(well..!! somebody was talking about verbiage..!!! ;-))
We The "Homo sapiens":
The genetic evolution( or rather more correctly understood as the the plausible solutions of the multi variable - nth degree 'genetic' equation) has resulted in the gradual and yet relatively distinguishable emergence of a group of living creatures, of a particular genetics base. We know them as Homo sapiens and we know we belong just there.
While it is certain and could be proved scientifically as well, that we the so called Human Beings are indeed Homo sapiens, it may be altogether a different task to answer the question, if we all are 'Human enough to be called Human beings..?'
In other words, while the term Homo sapiens and its reference set of gene pool marks a distinct detachment from the other species, we all, just because we possess the same set of gene pool would naturally fit into that group.So we are classified as Homo sapiens .The other classification - that we are human beings depends on the under lying semantic that defines the word : 'Human.'
We the Human beings:
While we being Homo sapiens is a empirically provable fact , the concept of a human being is not a data based concept but it is based on supposed 'non-physical attributes' the Homo Sapience may possess in 'varying degrees',varying with time space, and in varying degrees from other Homo Sapience too. So , the so called Human being is an 'abstract concept' whereas a Homo Sapience is a 'quantifiable reality' .
So, while two members of the species Homo Sapience can identify themselves quite closely on the basis of the same gene set, they can't be said to be possessing the same degrees of "Humanity" - "Humanness" . Needless to say compared to the genetic set , the degree of Humanity is not an easily measurable quantity and hence is a subjective experience.
With this basic concept of distinctly differentiable homogeneous class of homo sapiens contrasting with a random distribution on humanity amongst the Homo sapience, we can move to the next step.
We have undergone two different kind of evolution process - First -A long term one from animal genetics into Homo sapiens , which provided with innumerable neurons and second - a rather quicker one of evolving a software stack- an evolved humanity over what we call a process of civilization.
PS : Aside:For mathematical fanatics :
While the first kind of evolution - the hard one- had periodic impulsive nature when plotted over time, the second one - the soft one- is gradual and continuous - it is this continuity , that gives it on graph paper, a derivative - a differential with time, with its d/dt is a positive value it will be in a continuous uptrend, however may be the weight historical baggage- the negative coefficients of a infinite series -pull it down.
PS:Aside: - For Software Fanatics
1.Easy way of understanding the concept is considering the analogous and very closely correlated example from the computer world. As well know the hardware (CPU ) has evolved with different set of genetic structure(computational and combination),once the hardware is defined ( as intel X86=evolved and stabilized) the software was evolved on the top of it, in layers. Homo Sapience are akin to the CPU and Humanity=Human beings is the "soft" part that includes an operating system and its semantics.One can run many operation system on the same CPU some talk to each other some doesn't. The semantics , while can be common need not be exactly the same for various systems.
2. Another example is to consider a protocol stack where the physical layer form the visible evolved crystallized part with chips and the different soft layers -logical-sync-data semantics part evolving on the top.It may be noted that different protocols can exist on the same hardware(physical) just like grades of humanity developed on the same basic raw -home sapience- substance , can substantially vary.
The software stack or the logical upper layers of protocol decide why and how the "right" and "wrong" can appear differently to different people. The concept of a "modern state"- the "republic" , in a nutshell is a nascent attempt to loosely bind such variations of different makle/ versions of humanity. That "democracy" is a very basic, nascent and highly simplified system and it is plainly ineffective in dealing with such diversities of humanity under its wings is a matter of observable fact.
The subject is a topic for an encyclopedia itself, so for purpose of focusing onto the subject of the blog- the confrontation of the identities and dilemma of the left- this discussion can be left as brief as possible just to make the entry for the next section- Individual and Society - chicken or egg..? That ,In the next post.
Disclaimer: Written in haste - taking time from the dynamic stocks portfolios that blinks every second. Any syntax , semantic error is regretted.Hope the essence do not get missed.Plan to write a series to make the cross referencing of ideas complete , not sure if patience will allow....
