a new understanding of being human....

[Peter Kropotkin]

this has been a perennial problem for both philosophy
and the society/state.... what does it mean to be human?

some random Greek guy named "Aristotle" said this:
Human beings were rational animals who walked on two legs...
(and the quick response was bringing in a chicken)

and the Christian has another response...the bible was rather clear
about this... that the purpose of man is to glorify god and to enjoy
him forever...but in fact, according to the bible, there are two
definitions of human beings... Adam and Eve, before the fall,
and Adam, Eve and the rest of humanity after the fall...
before the fall, we are in a state of innocence and after, we
are born with guilt and sin...

and that has defined human beings for 2000 years...
but recall that Christianity came from Jews.. both Jesus and Paul,
were devout Jews... and the Torah says this, that man is ''created''
''... in the image of god,'' and therefore of inherent dignity and value...
but also, within the Jewish faith, guilt was around even in the earliest
stages of Judaism... the Torah, the earliest bible, in the book of
Genesis, the brothers of Joseph are burden by their past
mistreatment of the brother and full of fear of Joseph's
retribution....

one way to define guilt is this: guilt signifies alienation from
god as result of sin and only he can absolve one from sin
and guilt......

and shame and guilt has followed human beings since Adam
and Eve... the fall is the introduction of sin and guilt of human beings....

and frankly, there is nothing new or different here...

but what if, what if we change the name of the game....
the beliefs of religions, of Buddhism and Catholicism and
virtually all religions, falls into a couple of similar
categories.... ONE: to be saved.. to find salvation, maybe
the primary reason for religions...TWO: to resolve the guilt
feeling we have...THREE: to escape sin...

but the question really is, is guilt, sin and salvation, really,
really being human?

what if, we say no, no to guilt, no to salvation, no to guilt...
I hold that those three things, sin, guilt, salvation are not
positive, desirable aspects of being human...in fact,
I would argue that those three beliefs are nihilistic...
that they deny human beings and their values....

to be human, truly human means saying no to guilt, no to sin
and no to the concept of salvation...
and in fact, I would go deeper and say, no to god... if you believe
in god, you deny human beings and their values... by putting god
first, you must put human beings second... and that is nihilism...

the next step is equally controversial...we walk away from
ism's and ideologies that are equally nihilistic... for example,
(in no particular order) communism, capitalism, Catholicism,
Hinduism, Buddhism, nationalism, racism and patriotism...
to name a few ism's that are nihilistic....

(again, I have defined Nihilism as being: something that
dehumanizes and/or devalues human beings and their values)

if it doesn't put human beings and their values, first, it is
nihilism...but does that make human beings the first or primary,
beings on earth? no, it doesn't...but as usual, it is nuanced..
and what should we human beings be engage with, if not
isms and religions?

how we should view the world, instead of sin or guilt or seeking
salvation or even through the lens of god or Jesus...
we should engage with values....I engage with a value,
say with justice...and every thought and action are viewed
through the lens of Justice...is this thought justice/equal, or
is this action just/equal, or is this belief, just or equal....

(I have previously defined justice as being a state of equality,
to be just is to be equal.. equal before the law, before the political
process, equal before god, equality in our political, social, economic
and philosophical systems)

I view the world through the lens of justice/equality... everything...
and that is my value, what is your value? is it truth, or love, or hope,
or honesty, or any one of any one of hundreds of possibilities of values....

what value will you view existence through?

and one still might say, religious values? even though religious values
are nihilistic...by being about sin, guilt, salvation, and an oldie but
goody, suffering... religious values are, by their very nature,
nihilistic...putting god ahead of human beings...

and what is the next step of being human?

stay on this same bat station...

Kropotkin

[nemos]

If the answer is short, then live according to conscience. Try not to dissolve and stay. That to me is being human.
The only thing that confuses me is the desire of people to place themselves at the top of the pyramid, very arrogant. I cannot agree with that. I consider myself an organic part of nature. If you like, nature is my deity, and my essence. Do you still think we are the same species?

[Peter Kropotkin]

now the next step was found in the existentialist and their viewpoint...

that human beings are born into a ''system'' ''a way of life'' that is
not by choice.... we are ''tossed'' into life... sink or swim....

while that is, regrettable true...however it doesn't leave us high and dry...
by events beyond my control, and before I was even born, I was left
with being hard of hearing, and now deaf... and yes, I had no control over
this... but I have a couple of different choices I could have made about it...
I could have gone the ''woe unto me'' route and given up... I could have let
the hearing loss defeat me, and I would have a readymade excuse to blame
everyone and anyone for my coming ''failure'' in life.. I could have just given
up.. but I didn't.... I refused to allow my hearing loss, to define who I was...
I didn't view life through my hearing loss...it was just something that
happened, like my being white or male... accidental traits....
my response is my control over my hearing loss....
I am taking control over my hearing loss...I am taking
responsibility of it... I don't have god or man or even chance to blame..
it just is.. and I deal with it as it is...

we are not defined by our accidental traits, we are defined
by our choices, our responses to it... it doesn't matter if there is
or isn't a god... what matters is our response to what life is...
we react to what is in front of us, not what we want to be in front
of us or what we hope (god, heaven, hell, satan) in front of us, but to what is
actually in front of us......

I am deaf... and how do I cope with or handle that.. not what I wish away
or pretend not to happen, but with the reality of being deaf....
I face a reality and how I deal with that reality defines me..
as a human being....and we take that facing reality
and engage with all of life with that reality...
I take accountability/responsibility even if that event I am taking
accountability isn't caused by me or happened long before I was born,
I define myself by my acceptance of that reality that stands before me..
no matter who or what caused it or when...........

one might say, and many do say, that is not my problem..... if not,
so, whose problem, is it? those who came before? they are long gone,
they can't face a problem created by them when they are dead....
and we can, and again, many do, try to pass that problem to the future...
let the future take care of it... and many hold to this belief...
but what does it say or how does that define you if you are willing to
pass a problem to the future, to your children?

it doesn't speak very highly of one who won't take responsibility for
something in their own time.....and even less for someone who passes
a problem to their children....

accepting burden.. even if they are not our burdens...
that is what defines us as human beings....I recall as a child,
I grew up in a family of 5, and whenever something happened, it
was ''I didn't do that'' ''that not my fault'' trying to escape our burdens,
that is what children do..... are you a child?

Kropotkin

[Age]

this has been a perennial problem for both philosophy
and the society/state.... what does it mean to be human?

some random Greek guy named "Aristotle" said this:
Human beings were rational animals who walked on two legs...
(and the quick response was bringing in a chicken)

and the Christian has another response...the bible was rather clear
about this... that the purpose of man is to glorify god and to enjoy
him forever...but in fact, according to the bible, there are two
definitions of human beings... Adam and Eve, before the fall,
and Adam, Eve and the rest of humanity after the fall...
before the fall, we are in a state of innocence and after, we
are born with guilt and sin...

This last bit is referring to 'collectively', and not 'individually' like most of you here have been misinterpreting it.

and that has defined human beings for 2000 years...
but recall that Christianity came from Jews.. both Jesus and Paul,
were devout Jews... and the Torah says this, that man is ''created''
''... in the image of god,'' and therefore of inherent dignity and value...
but also, within the Jewish faith, guilt was around even in the earliest
stages of Judaism... the Torah, the earliest bible, in the book of
Genesis, the brothers of Joseph are burden by their past
mistreatment of the brother and full of fear of Joseph's
retribution....

one way to define guilt is this: guilt signifies alienation from
god as result of sin and only he can absolve one from sin
and guilt......

Even the word 'sin' was still being misinterpreted also, that is; hitherto when this was being written anyway.

and shame and guilt has followed human beings since Adam
and Eve... the fall is the introduction of sin and guilt of human beings....

and frankly, there is nothing new or different here...

but what if, what if we change the name of the game....
the beliefs of religions, of Buddhism and Catholicism and
virtually all religions, falls into a couple of similar
categories.... ONE: to be saved.. to find salvation, maybe
the primary reason for religions...TWO: to resolve the guilt
feeling we have...THREE: to escape sin...

Well if you also ever get around to defining the three words of 'salvation', 'guilt', and 'sin' in a way, which fits perfectly together with each other, then you will also get around to solving what has been actually puzzling you adult human beings for centuries and millennia here, hitherto when this is being written.

but the question really is, is guilt, sin and salvation, really,
really being human?

Why is this, supposedly really the question?

What being 'human' is, exactly, obviously has existed since you, human beings, have come into Existence. Which obviously was well before such stories were told and around only a couple or so thousand years ago, prior to when these stories are being told and written here, in these days.

what if, we say no, no to guilt, no to salvation, no to guilt...
I hold that those three things, sin, guilt, salvation are not
positive, desirable aspects of being human...in fact,
I would argue that those three beliefs are nihilistic...
that they deny human beings and their values....

Okay, now 'we' are more of what this one and only individual human beings views, sees, thinks, and/or believes is true.

to be human, truly human means saying no to guilt, no to sin
and no to the concept of salvation...

So, if any one does not say no to these things, then according to "peter kropotkin" anyway, they are not human.

and in fact, I would go deeper and say, no to god... if you believe
in god, you deny human beings and their values... by putting god
first, you must put human beings second... and that is nihilism...

Okay.

the next step is equally controversial...we walk away from
ism's and ideologies that are equally nihilistic... for example,
(in no particular order) communism, capitalism, Catholicism,
Hinduism, Buddhism, nationalism, racism and patriotism...
to name a few ism's that are nihilistic....

But we must not walk away from the belief, ism, and ideology that we must say no to guilt, no to sin, no to salvation, and no to God, right?

In other words we should walk away from other religions and come and join "peter kropotkin's" new found religion correct?

(again, I have defined Nihilism as being: something that
dehumanizes and/or devalues human beings and their values)

And what are all of human beings, collective, values "peter kropotkin"?

if it doesn't put human beings and their values, first, it is
nihilism...

So, putting the earth and/or the environment first, for example, so that then human beings have somewhere to live and stay, and thus to lay down their real values, then this is so-called 'nihilism'.

Which, for those who have not yet noticed, is just another 'ism', which some believe actually exists.

but does that make human beings the first or primary,
beings on earth? no, it doesn't...but as usual, it is nuanced..

So, what we now have is if 'it' (whatever that is) does not put human beings and their values first, then 'it' is nihilism, but human beings are now, supposedly, not the first, nor primary, beings on earth anyway.

and what should we human beings be engage with, if not
isms and religions?

how we should view the world, instead of sin or guilt or seeking
salvation or even through the lens of god or Jesus...
we should engage with values....I engage with a value,
say with justice...and every thought and action are viewed
through the lens of Justice...is this thought justice/equal, or
is this action just/equal, or is this belief, just or equal....

Well obviously not considering other people's views, values, and/or judgments as being equal, and/or just, is not really being just and equal, right?

Or, do your own views and values here override others, and thus should absolutely every one agree with, accept, and follow your own personal views and teachings here "peter kropotkin"?

(I have previously defined justice as being a state of equality,
to be just is to be equal.. equal before the law, before the political
process, equal before god, equality in our political, social, economic
and philosophical systems)

This sounds fair enough.

But why are your views, supposedly, more or better than another's views?

I view the world through the lens of justice/equality... everything...
and that is my value,

Are you absolutely sure?

what is your value?

One of them is that no one is better nor worse than another.

is it truth, or love, or hope,
or honesty, or any one of any one of hundreds of possibilities of values....

what value will you view existence through?

and one still might say, religious values? even though religious values
are nihilistic...

Is it really just, equal, and fair to say and claim that another's views are nihilistic, while also saying and claiming that yours are not?

Are you absolutely sure that you view absolutely every thing through a lens of justice and equality?

by being about sin, guilt, salvation, and an oldie but
goody, suffering... religious values are, by their very nature,
nihilistic...putting god ahead of human beings...

1. It was you who just claimed that you human beings are not the first or primary beings on earth. So, who and/or what is, exactly?

2. Why do you imagine, think, and/or believe that sin, guilt, salvation, and/or suffering are 'values'?

and what is the next step of being human?

stay on this same bat station...

Kropotkin

So, now you do not even think what you have just said and claimed here is the full and true picture of 'being human', as there is now, supposedly, a further step of 'being human'.

[Age]

now the next step was found in the existentialist and their viewpoint...

that human beings are born into a ''system'' ''a way of life'' that is
not by choice.... we are ''tossed'' into life... sink or swim....

Well obviously one can only be born into what already exists. They have absolutely no choice in this matter.

while that is, regrettable true...however it doesn't leave us high and dry...
by events beyond my control, and before I was even born, I was left
with being hard of hearing, and now deaf... and yes, I had no control over
this... but I have a couple of different choices I could have made about it...
I could have gone the ''woe unto me'' route and given up...

Answer 'when' could you have made this decision? then you will realize that being able to accept and take responsibility is not a choice one could always have taken, nor has to have taken.

I could have let
the hearing loss defeat me,

The Truly funny thing here is a young child would never ever think, nor ever feel this way, and only an older human would.

and I would have a readymade excuse to blame
everyone and anyone for my coming ''failure'' in life..

Again, absolutely no younger child ever would consider itself or another human being being born deaf was some kind of 'failure' in absolutely any way, shape, nor form at all. However, and obviously adult human beings did, which they then passed this view and belief on, and into, growing children.

I could have just given
up.. but I didn't.... I refused to allow my hearing loss, to define who I was...

Any one who defines who the 'I' is by some sort of physical attribute, really does not yet know what nor what 'I' am, exactly.

I didn't view life through my hearing loss...it was just something that
happened, like my being white or male... accidental traits....
my response is my control over my hearing loss....
I am taking control over my hearing loss...I am taking
responsibility of it... I don't have god or man or even chance to blame..
it just is.. and I deal with it as it is...

we are not defined by our accidental traits, we are defined
by our choices, our responses to it... it doesn't matter if there is
or isn't a god... what matters is our response to what life is...
we react to what is in front of us, not what we want to be in front
of us or what we hope (god, heaven, hell, satan) in front of us, but to what is
actually in front of us......

And, God is in front of you, within you, besides you, and even behind you. However if one chooses to believe that there is no God, then that is perfectly fine as well.

Why they do this is just a direct result of the way they were brought up and raised, which obviously they had no control over, at all.

I am deaf... and how do I cope with or handle that.. not what I wish away
or pretend not to happen, but with the reality of being deaf....

So, the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' to "peter kropotkin" anyway is; 'I am deaf'.

I face a reality and how I deal with that reality defines me..
as a human being....and we take that facing reality
and engage with all of life with that reality...
I take accountability/responsibility even if that event I am taking
accountability isn't caused by me or happened long before I was born,

So, how exactly can you take accountability or responsibility for 'that', which you did not even do, cause, nor create?

I define myself by my acceptance of that reality that stands before me..
no matter who or what caused it or when...........

one might say, and many do say, that is not my problem.....

If any one does say, 'The is not your problem', do you ever question them about what they are actually meaning and/or referring to, exactly?

if not,
so, whose problem, is it? those who came before? they are long gone,
they can't face a problem created by them when they are dead....

1. What 'problem' are you even envisioning and referring to here?

2. No human being created a child to be born deaf.

3. No human body just born with the inability to hear was created, nor caused, like it was some thing created, or caused, on purpose.

and we can, and again, many do, try to pass that problem to the future...

What 'problem'?

I still cannot see absolutely any 'problem' at all here, at all.

let the future take care of it... and many hold to this belief...
but what does it say or how does that define you if you are willing to
pass a problem to the future, to your children?

Firstly there has to be a 'problem' before 'it' could be passed on.

And, obviously, until you explain what the 'problem' is here, exactly, that is; if there is any actual 'problem' here, then there is actually nothing to passed on here, to children.

it doesn't speak very highly of one who won't take responsibility for
something in their own time.....and even less for someone who passes
a problem to their children....

accepting burden.. even if they are not our burdens...
that is what defines us as human beings....

But there is no 'burden' to a human body not having the ability to hear, and absolutely no young child sees absolutely any 'burden' here. Although, obviously some adults may well, and do.

I recall as a child,
I grew up in a family of 5, and whenever something happened, it
was ''I didn't do that'' ''that not my fault'' trying to escape our burdens,
that is what children do..... are you a child?

Kropotkin

Children only 'learn' to not take responsibility, or try to escape so-called 'burdens' if they have 'learned' from adults that it would be more beneficial to try to escape 'burdens' and to not take responsibility.

Children will always tell the Truth/accept responsibility, that is; until they are punished, ridiculed, and/or humiliated for doing so. And then they will 'learn', very quickly, to not tell the Truth/accept responsibility.

[Age]

now the next step was found in the existentialist and their viewpoint...

that human beings are born into a ''system'' ''a way of life'' that is
not by choice.... we are ''tossed'' into life... sink or swim....

Well obviously one can only be born into what already exists. They have absolutely no choice in this matter.

while that is, regrettable true...however it doesn't leave us high and dry...
by events beyond my control, and before I was even born, I was left
with being hard of hearing, and now deaf... and yes, I had no control over
this... but I have a couple of different choices I could have made about it...
I could have gone the ''woe unto me'' route and given up...

Answer 'when' could you have made this decision? then you will realize that being able to accept and take responsibility is not a choice one could always have taken, nor has to have taken.

I could have let
the hearing loss defeat me,

The Truly funny thing here is a young child would never ever think, nor ever feel this way, and only an older human would.

and I would have a readymade excuse to blame
everyone and anyone for my coming ''failure'' in life..

Again, absolutely no younger child ever would consider itself or another human being being born deaf was some kind of 'failure' in absolutely any way, shape, nor form at all. However, and obviously adult human beings did, which they then passed this view and belief on, and into, growing children.

I could have just given
up.. but I didn't.... I refused to allow my hearing loss, to define who I was...

Any one who defines who the 'I' is by some sort of physical attribute, really does not yet know what nor what 'I' am, exactly.

I didn't view life through my hearing loss...it was just something that
happened, like my being white or male... accidental traits....
my response is my control over my hearing loss....
I am taking control over my hearing loss...I am taking
responsibility of it... I don't have god or man or even chance to blame..
it just is.. and I deal with it as it is...

we are not defined by our accidental traits, we are defined
by our choices, our responses to it... it doesn't matter if there is
or isn't a god... what matters is our response to what life is...
we react to what is in front of us, not what we want to be in front
of us or what we hope (god, heaven, hell, satan) in front of us, but to what is
actually in front of us......

And, God is in front of you, within you, besides you, and even behind you. However if one chooses to believe that there is no God, then that is perfectly fine as well.

Why they do this is just a direct result of the way they were brought up and raised, which obviously they had no control over, at all.

I am deaf... and how do I cope with or handle that.. not what I wish away
or pretend not to happen, but with the reality of being deaf....

So, the answer to the question, 'Who am 'I'?' to "peter kropotkin" anyway is; 'I am deaf'.

I face a reality and how I deal with that reality defines me..
as a human being....and we take that facing reality
and engage with all of life with that reality...
I take accountability/responsibility even if that event I am taking
accountability isn't caused by me or happened long before I was born,

So, how exactly can you take accountability or responsibility for 'that', which you did not even do, cause, nor create?

I define myself by my acceptance of that reality that stands before me..
no matter who or what caused it or when...........

one might say, and many do say, that is not my problem.....

If any one does say, 'The is not your problem', do you ever question them about what they are actually meaning and/or referring to, exactly?

if not,
so, whose problem, is it? those who came before? they are long gone,
they can't face a problem created by them when they are dead....

1. What 'problem' are you even envisioning and referring to here?

2. No human being created a child to be born deaf.

3. No human body just born with the inability to hear was created, nor caused, like it was some thing created, or caused, on purpose.

and we can, and again, many do, try to pass that problem to the future...

What 'problem'?

I still cannot see absolutely any 'problem' at all here, at all.

let the future take care of it... and many hold to this belief...
but what does it say or how does that define you if you are willing to
pass a problem to the future, to your children?

Firstly there has to be a 'problem' before 'it' could be passed on.

And, obviously, until you explain what the 'problem' is here, exactly, that is; if there is any actual 'problem' here, then there is actually nothing to passed on here, to children.

it doesn't speak very highly of one who won't take responsibility for
something in their own time.....and even less for someone who passes
a problem to their children....

accepting burden.. even if they are not our burdens...
that is what defines us as human beings....

But there is no 'burden' to a human body not having the ability to hear, and absolutely no young child sees absolutely any 'burden' here. Although, obviously some adults may well, and do.

I recall as a child,
I grew up in a family of 5, and whenever something happened, it
was ''I didn't do that'' ''that not my fault'' trying to escape our burdens,
that is what children do..... are you a child?

Kropotkin

Children only 'learn' to not take responsibility, or try to escape so-called 'burdens' if they have 'learned' from adults that it would be more beneficial to try to escape 'burdens' and to not take responsibility.

Children will always tell the Truth/accept responsibility, that is; until they are punished, ridiculed, and/or humiliated for doing so. And then they will 'learn', very quickly, to not tell the Truth/accept responsibility.