Author Topic: Something to Ponder: Humanity's Perpetuation of Negativity  (Read 753 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Synaptic Road

  • Jr. Member
  • Species: A duality: all and none!
  • You see all you know, but don't know all you see!
  • **
  • Male
  • Posts: 57
Something to Ponder: Humanity's Perpetuation of Negativity
« on: July 29, 2015, 12:44:29 pm »
Last night, I was laying in bed and thinking (as I tend to do) – this time, it was about something I've seen happening in humanity on a constant and consistent basis: people responding to negative circumstances with more negativity, thereby perpetuating the overall negative state of humanity and the various societies it has created worldwide.  To be clear, I used the word “overall” because not all of humanity is doing this...however, those people are few and far in-between, and their efforts are being overshadowed by those who are “fighting negativity with more negativity” as well as the effects their actions have not just on humanity, but the world in a holistic sense.  Unfortunately, much of humanity now believes that fighting negativity with more negativity will bring the positive change so much of humanity now calls for.  That approach isn't working, and the repercussions of such “negative endeavors” are making themselves apparent in humanity – in us, and in many ways, the world around us, as well.

Not too long ago, I decided to express the mentality much of humanity has in a “mathematical” manner:

(-c)(-r) = o

Where c represents a particular “circumstance,” r represents the “response” by an individual human to said circumstances, and o represents the “outcome” that the individual seeks.  It looks like a simple multiplication problem, and this is the approach I've seen many, many people taking; the belief that “answering negative circumstances with a negative response – like protesting, rioting, vitriol, and so on – will bring about a positive change or yield a positive outcome."

Here's the problem with that mentality, though: real-life circumstances cannot be approached this way.  I've seen quite a few people argue that “no change ever came without violence” or otherwise “some kind of negativity,” yet I look around and see that such a mentality has actually exacerbated many of the problems people constantly address now.  Things are not actually “getting better” as people seem to think; I've noticed that when one problem is resolved this way, one or more issues takes its place (and I've also noticed that in many instances, these subsequent problems are more problematic than the initial problem ever was), and I've witnessed many instances where a problem is blown completely out of proportion – all because of how so many people believe that answering negativity with more negativity will bring a positive change.

The truth that many people no longer see is that it's actually making things worse in most cases – for people around them, for themselves, and for “humanity” as a collective species.  In the instances where it doesn't make things worse, it simply doesn't help at all.

I pondered this truth and came up with a “mathematical” expression for what I've seen is actually happening:

-n(c^p) = -o

Where c represents a particular “circumstance,” p represents the degree of “perpetuation” of the circumstance in question, n represents the “number” of circumstances the individual does this with, and o represents the actual “outcome.”  This was my initial expression of what I was seeing; the negative sign in front of the left part of the expression is the reason the “outcome” is negative in every instance.  I'd stated that in order to yield a positive outcome, all one really needs to do is remove that negative sign from in front of n – a representation of “responding to negative circumstances in a positive manner,” thereby yielding an (eventual) positive outcome.

However, I'd since pondered my observations, and last night I decided to go back and re-examine my second expression.  Turns out that what's happening isn't as simple as I'd made it out to be initially.

- I've seen people who've fallen so far into corruption – a concept I've already pondered, as well - that they no longer see “positivity,” and those people end up painting positive circumstances black with their own negative perspectives.  Even when the positive circumstances and their effects are all around them and practically in their faces, they still cannot see them – all they see is “more of a cold, cruel world.”
- I've seen how people will “twist” circumstances that are positive or otherwise not intended to be negative into something that's negative.  The first thing that comes to my mind are the myriad labels I see flying around the Internet all the time – many of them have a negative connotation, something that happens when humans give those labels that kind of connotation through stereotyping, face-value judgment, fear-mongering, and many other things that happen far too often in humanity now.  Social media sites are arguably the most convenient way to make this happen.
- I've seen how people exploit positive circumstances solely for their own gain, making others suffer in the process; this in turn has led to those who've suffered to see those positive circumstances in a negative light as a result of their experiences.  Unfortunately, this leads to something I've seen addressed on the Internet a few times: that good intentions are misconstrued as “acts of deceit” or otherwise as negative.  This is something I've had to deal with on social media, despite my intent being nothing more or less than “showing unconditional kindness to others.”

So I revised the second expression on the basis of these observations, because people can and often do respond to positive circumstances in a negative manner:

p(n(c)) = r

Where, c represents a particular “circumstance,” n represents the “number” of circumstances, p represents an individual's “perspective,” and r represents the individual's ultimate “response” to the circumstance in question.  Now, a few notes:

- The “circumstance” can be positive (1), negative (-1), or neither (0).
- The “number” is the only true integer in this part of the expression.
- The individual's “perspective” can be “positive” (1), or “negative,” (-1).  However, I'm well-aware that there are people who “don't really care at all either way” - in other words, apathetic.  Sadly, most of the expressions of apathy I've seen are along the lines of “the world and humanity can burn in hell for all I care.”  This is a negative perception, not a neutral perception, and so would be represented as (-1). The very-seldom expressions of “neutrality” I've ever seen are along the lines of “if people want to ruin themselves and the world, fine by me; if they want to make a change for the better, also fine by me.” Though it's tempting to say that this neutrality should be represented as (0), I've seen plenty of times how an apathetic perspective doesn't actually change anything.  The best way to show this is to remove p from the expression altogether in the case of an apathetic individual.

Here's the next part:

r → o
-r → -o

Where r represents the “response” of an individual, and o represents the “outcome” as a result of said response.  However, I mentioned the “overshadowing” effect of individual humans' collective responses, and the current “overall negative state” of humanity and its aspects, as well as the effects on the world we live on – something we do not “own” nor are 'entitled” to, I should add.  I could make an expression to represent this as well:

-R < R → S & R < -R → -S

Where R represents the “collective individual human responses” and S represents the “overall state of humanity.”  If there are more people responding positively, then the overall state of humanity would be positive; if more negative responses, then the overall state would be negative.

Of course, I see a number of problems with this, as well; the foremost from my perspective being the concept of “change” and how it can (and does) easily throw everything I've just said out the window.  I've seen how humans change, and I've also seen what can trigger it as well.  There are countless factors involved in “how and why people change,” and so it's practically impossible for me to be able to express them in a “mathematical” sense.  Furthermore, everything I've said only takes “humanity” into account, which by itself is a horribly restrictive scope.  I've seen how everything is in some way connected, and all this elaboration is, in truth, nothing more than a tiny speck in an incredibly vast “grand scheme of things.”  Because of the limitations of humanity – of our understanding, life span, and the fact that we're not “gods” - I don't believe that humans could ever truthfully say “We understand everything there is to understand about everything.”  Change is a huge part of this, as things are always happening to shake our theories; of all the sources of change, nature is the one that throws us the most curve-balls and the one that reminds us most often the we're not omniscient, omnipotent, or “omni-anything” by any means and never will be.

This is part of the reason for the meaning of my own lifestyle choice – I'm never going to be “perfect,” and so there will always be new ideas for me to explore and new things for me to learn, both about the world and all things and about myself as an individual.  This is part of the reason I lend my support to others so that they can embrace their individuality in spite of the current society that works to quash it; I want to see people stand on their own as I do, but as themselves.  I want to see others pull the veil from their perspectives as I have so that they can see on a scope similar to my own, and I want to see people draw inspiration from the world and all things in their own unique ways, for the sake of their own unique paths.  I want to see people embrace their own imperfection and make it part of their individual strength instead of shunning that truth and striving for “perfection” that is in fact illusory and unattainable for humans.

As Salvador Dali had said: “Have no fear of perfection – you'll never reach it.”

A quote to take to heart, indeed...but I'll throw my own in as well:

“Each of us walks a different path, yet in the end we all tread the same ground: this planet we call Earth.”

Going back to the “overall current state of things”: no matter how you look at it, it's negative, and the entire world in a holistic sense is being affected – ourselves included.  The positive change so many call for, though...that doesn't start on the “political” level or with 'those who hold power.”  The root cause as I've seen, as well as the solution, lie in something so fundamental that many people don't even see it – yet, those same people are in fact a part of the root cause and the solution, as are everyone else who is human.  I've said this many times before, but I honestly can't say it enough: for the positive change people want to come takes the effort of all of humanity.  If humans continue to respond to negative circumstances with more negativity, then that positive change will not come.

So, to conclude, I have a challenge for my fellow humans: go back to the expression about the “overall state of humanity,” and more specifically, look at the current state of humanity now, represented as -S.  I will not tell anyone else how to remove the negative sign in front of S, as that is something each individual must figure out on their own.  That is simply the common objective toward which each individual must make their own effort...and I will tell everyone now that the idea of “eradicating humanity” or  particular “groups” of humans will not bring that positive change.  I have a suggestion, though: stop to consider the importance of humanity's “natural roots.”  Stop to consider the importance of nature, which so much of humanity has now forsaken, and consider it not on an “intellectual” or “scientific” level, but a more basic and natural level.  That's what I do, and that's a huge part of the reason I've been able to see so many of the things I've talked about here.

What kind of world do you – the humans who share this world with me and everything else that isn't human – want to live in, and how much of an effort are you willing to give for such a change?

Endnote: there's a reason I kept putting the word "mathematical" in quotation marks - although it certainly looks like a mathematical or logical expression, it actually neither..  What I've described here is something that logic can certainly be applied to, but isn't "logical" in itself.  In fact, to say what I'm describing is a "high-level analysis" or anything of the sort would be to elevate it far more than necessary.

I've seen this stuff all around me; all I've done is take a different approach to expressing it.  Really, that's it.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 12:53:33 pm by Synaptic Road »

Offline Old Rabbit

  • Species: Rabbit Artist
  • Offical Birthday Wisher.
  • *
  • Male
  • Posts: 14585
    • Art by Oldrabbit
Re: Something to Ponder: Humanity's Perpetuation of Negativity
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2015, 09:38:30 am »
I think man has to fight against his own negativity. Though my post is rather negative about
humanity. I do believe most people in the world only want to live a peaceful life with a home and
family. It's a few who actively desire to control others for their own reasons that cause most of
the negativity in the world.

Man's instinct for survival creates "Greed". It's not our fault, we and all living things are born
with it.. We sense something we we need or want and there it is. Lurking in our thoughts. We may
not be aware of it. But it is there hiding behind emotions or excuses for our thoughts or actions.

Some may call it a need to control others, but a need for gratifcation grows stronger
each time we have it. A habit that comes with the body. Unfortuanty others use this
against the like minded or disfranchised to gain their help in doing harm or destruction.

Fortunately most of us are able to control our base disires and instincts, but there are a few
either due to mental defect or circumstance allow them out to attack and destroy those they feel
are a danger to thier beliefs and or those they care about. Then possibly regret it later or not.

Our reptilian brain that drives our base needs or desires has to be controlled or it will control
or destroy us.

Sometimes I think our emotions will end us all. Love, hate, sadness, fear, anger, ect. But it all
helps us to survive.

Though thousands of years have past since man first thought, but little has changed except
his ability to harm and destroy. Though some of us have better health and lifestyle. In the
ancient past tens of thousands died in useless battles for men or women who thought they
were better than everyone else. So little has changed and perhaps it never will. But we should
not give up hope. We need to help each other feel more  secure in our own lives. Perhaps this
will help us grow more positive over time.

« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 09:48:54 am by Old Rabbit »
oldrabbit.com
My .com site is currently down. Hope to have it up
again soon.
Avatar drawn by me.

Offline Synaptic Road

  • Jr. Member
  • Species: A duality: all and none!
  • You see all you know, but don't know all you see!
  • **
  • Male
  • Posts: 57
Re: Something to Ponder: Humanity's Perpetuation of Negativity
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2015, 01:47:12 pm »
To be honest, your comment made me think of myself a bit - in particular, the part where you talked about "desire."

I've seen that "desire" and all the forms it takes, as well as how it affects people and contributes to "change" in humans.  It's something that's been a source of mild irritation and frustration for me, and honestly, that's about as negative as I can be about anything in general.  However, if someone asked me "what is your desire?" I don't think I'd be able to answer them.  The reason for this is because I actually don't have any legitimate "desires" at this point.  I already have everything I need (which is very little, ironically) and am content with it all.  My nomadic lifestyle and my focus on benevolence and minimalism, as well as the odds I'm up against as a result...I'd never choose a different path.  It's not because I want to be "different," it's not out of disdain for civilization, society, or humanity (and so it's not because I want to "get away" from all of that), and it's not because I want to "be tough" or to be some sort of "superhuman" or a "hero."

It's simply because this is the most natural path for me.  I'm simply doing what's most natural for me, and it so happens that what's most natural for me involves a lifestyle most people now would cringe at, showing compassion and respect for the world and all things that share it with me (whether or not I "like" or "agree" with any of it).  I don't really feel a "desire" for anything in particular - I love learning about individual differences and learning new things in general, I appreciate support from others, but I dislike the idea of being a freeloader.  As hard as my choice truly is, I can go outside and feel joy and happiness every single day I'm alive, and I believe that if I can do this, then I should share that with others around me - human or not.  This is my compassion, and along with it, I harbor a respect for all things.

However, you mentioned man fighting against his own negativity, and despite my positive outlook on life and everything in general, that doesn't mean I don't have my own dark side as well.  I mentioned the duality of light and darkness in the "corruption" topic I linked to, and your perspective falls into it.

Each human has their own unique balance of light and darkness - in the context of this topic, you could equate it to "positivity" and "negativity."  This means that no human has a perfect, equal amount of either; "perfection" is something that doesn't exist in humanity, despite what so much of humanity now believes.  Each human's "scale" is rigged differently; some toward "light," and some toward "darkness."  Furthermore, no two individuals' scales are rigged the same even within the same "orientation."  This is part of the human fundamental called "individuality," and the common characteristics all throughout are that 1) No human's scale has a perfect balance of light and darkness, and 2) no human is "purely good" or "purely" evil.  Here's the thing, though: echoing what I said in the topic post, I cannot tell you or anyone else who isn't me how your scale is rigged - that's something each individual must figure out for themselves.  Something I also know is that one's duality is "off-balance," the effects will make themselves apparent in the individual's being in some way.  However, these effects will not only be different for each individual, but they will also be perceived differently from the perspectives of others.

In kind, when one achieves a "personal equilibrium" as I call it, the effects will also make themselves apparent in the individual's being in some way; true to "individuality," these effects will also be different for all individuals and will be perceived differently by others.

The thing about "fighting negativity," though, is something I've pondered pretty extensively, and it started with my own.  It's easy now to say the people "should fight negativity and only let their light shine," but have you considered what happens when people are "blinded by light?"  It happens more than people thank, and I can't ever recall an instance that wasn't "negative" in the end.  Just as one can be blinded by darkness, so to can one be blinded by light; to avoid blindness by either side (in other words, "corruption"), one must embrace both sides and assume control of their overall duality.  In order to do this, you can't just look at one side or the other, but both at the same time.  This is why I talked about looking not at either of the sides, but one's personal scale and how it's rigged.  If you fight one side or the other, your scale is just going to be a perpetual see-saw, and you'll always be "struggling," not "fighting."

Managing one's personal scale and not allowing either side to take over and act as a veil while not forsaking outside ideas and perspective and at the same time not allowing them to influence your management...that's what you'd call "self-control," isn't it?  There's a lot more to self-control than "scale management" and "staving off outside influence," but the point is that it's not easy to do.  In fact, this would likely be the most difficult trial for humanity - not just because it's "hard," but because maintaining that self-control is a lifelong endeavor.

Quote from: Old Rabbit
Man's instinct for survival creates "Greed". It's not our fault, we and all living things are born
with it.. We sense something we we need or want and there it is. Lurking in our thoughts. We may
not be aware of it. But it is there hiding behind emotions or excuses for our thoughts or actions.

This makes me think of what my perspective of the "negative aspects of the human psyche."  Greed is one; arrogance, disdain, discontent, misanthropy, bitterness, hatred, animosity, envy, jealousy, loathing, intolerance, spite, vengeance, apathy, and enmity are others.  These are things all humans have the capacity to feel, and I don't believe they are a problem on their own - it's when humans are blinded and controlled by them that we starting having problems like war, terrorism, wanton violence, ecocide, and so on.

It's true: all life is born with that kind of instinct.  However, "greed" and every other aspect is attributable to the species called "humans."  The reason for this, from my perspective, is because of all species, we humans are the one with the greatest mental and intellectual capacity.  Ours is the greatest emotional range, and we humans are the ones whose actions make the most impact on the world overall - something that's pretty obvious at this point.  However, the "human brain" has its own downfalls; the "blindness in humanity" I keep mentioning is one.  It's what happens when those negative aspects of the human psyche take control.  Thankfully, not all humans are like this even now, but considering the overall negative state of things, those humans and their efforts to bring a positive change are still being overshadowed by those who are blinded by the "other side."  Of course, we can't forget the dual nature of this issue: being blinded by the positive aspects of the human psyche would be no better than the negative side.  As I see it, the issue isn't either "positivity or negativity," but being blinded by either side.

Unfortunately, what I've seen in humanity in general (read: there are exceptions) now is a loss of "natural instinct," substituted by "human intelligence" and "higher thinking."  We humans have all this technology at our disposal that makes our lives easier, but...things still aren't really "good" in the human world right now, even so; regarding "lack of instinct," this becomes most apparent during natural disasters.  When you imagine, for example, a major flood or an approaching tornado, how do you think people react?  During natural disasters, many people panic or are paralyzed by fear, and some even refuse to leave for fear of losing their "prized possessions" or simply because they "think they're safe."

I'm well-aware of how harsh nature can be - and from personal experience, no less.  There's no point in mincing words here: if you're panicking or paralyzed with fear during a natural disaster, or you refuse to leave because you don't want to lose your possessions or you think you'll be safe, you'd be lucky to get out of it unscathed, and in fact, you're probably going to die.  I certainly understand and appreciate the purpose of rescue crew, shelters, and the like, but that is an intellectual response to nature, not an instinctual response.  When I think of an "instinctual" response, I think of "dropping everything without a second thought and high-tailing it out of the area."  The fact that so many people can't or don't do that on their own in the midst of natural disasters and instead need to hear warning sirens or require the assistance of safety crews, and have to rely on technology and weather forecasting instead of themselves doesn't really speak well of humanity's "instinctual" level - at least in that regard.

But then again...humans are continually trying to control nature for the purpose of advancement.  I'm all for learning about nature, but do we really need to control it in the process?  Considering that our roots like in nature, it seems like a "god-complex" of sorts - in other words, arrogance.  However, the fact the humanity still endeavors to control nature for that purpose even though many humans have lose their lives in natural disasters is a testament to "blindness."

Honestly, I often wonder how far back in our history this happened, and why - if humanity in general pondered this, it would likely yield an answer to our own problems today.

Emotions are part of being "human," but the problem, again, is how many humans are controlled by their emotions.  I've seen statements like "emotions are unnecessary and harmful and should be erased," but of course I can't help roll my eyes at that.  Can you say you're "human" if you have no emotions?  Why not try to assume control of them, instead?  I don't believe that emotions will be the end of us all; if anything, blindness to everything around us and in some cases ourselves, along with an overall lack of self-control in humanity, would bring our end.

But as you've said, we should not give up hope, and for me, that's no issue~  Though all these things bother me, one thing I do differently from many, many people is turn "negativity" - in the case, my irritation, frustration, and negative emotions in response to all that's going on - into something positive, both for myself and for others.  Yeah, all this stuff bothers me, but I turn it into "fuel for my own drive," if you will.  All this negative stuff going on spurs me to never falter in my lifestyle choice; considering how hard it truly is, that kind of approach is crucial.  In fact, it's no exaggeration to say that "my survival depends on my drive, my passion, my determination, and my conviction," because I'm not afraid of perilous circumstances - something that would inevitably come with my choice.

And so, I will not lose hope.  Simply being able to go outside and connect with and immerse myself in what's around me keeps me going...and that doesn't take any effort at all, really.  d: