What It Means to Be Human - Essay Example

of Topic: What does it mean to be human? This paper seeks to respond to what it meansto be human by answering the some specific questions. Does it require certain expression of interest? Are well less human if we we’re deeply asleep? Is there a particular thing need to do that a dog, for example, cannot do (sing, make art, and operate a door knob)? Is humanity conditional—can a person be subhuman or only partially human? And what about the soul: Where do aspects of faith or God fit in? 2.1 Does it require certain expression of interest? Are we less human if we we’re deeply asleep? To be human is to do what humans are supposed to do in this world. It must be accomplishing the purpose of one’s existence. It must involve the power of choice with its related consequences. As to whether humanity does require a certain expression of interest, the answer must be in the affirmative. To illustrate, if one is meant to be a doctor, that person must prove by thoughts and actions that he is indeed a doctor that would serve humanity. The same may be said for a janitor, the said person must be doing his or her job with some sense of dedication or purpose for the accomplishment of the job of the required or him or her. However, we are not less human if we’re deeply asleep because of fatigue or as biologically demanded sometimes. The fulfillment of our personal needs including the biological ones is part of our humanity. To be human therefore satisfying also what we need as we try to accomplish the purposes of for which each of us is directed or led. A human person may be born into this world without a choice upon birth, but his or her parent may have the made choices for that person to be come out alive from the mother’s womb. Hence freedom is presumed to have been exercised by the parents. That exercise of freedom then entails responsibility for consequences. To be human therefore means to be responsible with consequences of choices1 that are given to each of us. Without responsibility there is no sense of having that freedom. But what is that responsibility for? It is responsibility for what may happen by principles of cause and effect. To be able to know the consequences of human actions therefore requires the use of rationality2 and knowledge. There should a role to play for that human person on earth. He must be part of the cause of humanity. To talk about cause of humanity would be asking what is the purpose of human lives and it be returning to the question “What does it mean to be human?” So phrased simply, but answering the same could only be done by answering a more specific question. 2.2. Is there a particular thing need to do that a dog, for example, cannot do (sing, make art, and operate a door knob)? To compare a human being with a dog by arguing that we should be able to do what cannot be done by a dog would be limiting what humans can. In fact the two cannot be compared without committing injustice to the human person. If a person is made to respond upon being compared along this type of reason, the most logical answer would, well, “I am not a dog.” But viewing the comparison from an academic point of view, the most immediate answer to the question must be in the positive. Humans should be more than dogs or other animals. In fact when a human person commits mistakes or acts not in accordance with another’s expectation, the other party making the assessment can indeed reduce a person to an animal by accusation. A murderer for example may cause a family of the victim to accuse the perpetrator or being an animal or inhuman or cruel. As to whether one would sing, make art or operate a knob is better assessed in the context of what role is the person going to play in this big drama of life. Of course, each will have a work to do in order to earn a living as one’s work will be the expression of what can do to society. In an economic world, one has to have value in exchange. A carpenter for example must build cabinet and that for him; such would be a work of art which would have the equivalent of doing his share. If he happens to sing while working, by all means he must be allowed as long he is not harming anybody. 2.3 Is humanity conditional—can a person be subhuman or only partially human? If humanity is defined in terms of accomplishing life’s purpose, the answer to the question may be in the affirmative. A person being killed in his young age by a murderer is a waste of human life, which is part of humanity, caused by the perpetrator. Behaving as murderer contradicts human nature. Calling the murderer as still fully human may raise loud cries from the victims. The murderer even before criminal conviction could be branded as a cruel animal. But humans be they murderers or terrorists or can still be entitled to human rights based on international law standards. Thus, there is such a thing as universal human right. The sudden killing of Colonel Gaddafi in Libya, although he appeared to have been captured alive is raising some concern on human right. He may be the worst person as far as some of the Libyan people and many world leaders are concerned, but he still deserves human right. There is such a thing as presumption of innocence and this is part of universal human right.3 Thus, it can be argued that although a criminal by human standard, the enjoyment of certain rights would seem to make human not less human. Legally killing a person has a human right dimension which means humanity cannot be conditional as long as the universality of human right is concerned. Looking deeper in the human nature may provide further insight. There are basically two perspectives on human nature - optimistic or pessimistic. An optimistic view of life would take things positively and believer of this view would consider the human person as one of divine creation. There is such a concept as man being inherently good and therefore naturally immortal. On other hand, a person may be viewed as nothing more than animal that just have to eat, work, sleep, grow old and die just like any other kind of animals. This latter view is indeed pessimistic as the person has the grave as the eventual destination and that man can fit into what Mark Twain called “the only animal that blushes or needs to.”4 Assumptions could of course explain the two perspectives. When one starts the analysis with humanity alone without God or the concept of a Creator, reasoning would only proceed with what is material devoid of any spiritual dimension. The moment God is put into the discussion an assumption of one causing the other, the view become positive as the spiritual dimension is included. A purpose of life other than grave comes into the picture and the idea of man going back to his creator to be united in spirit becomes a factor to give a deeper meaning. Viewing however from the human perspectives may give a partial truth into answering the question: “What is means to be human?” Plato, a known Greek philosopher of fourth century B.C. contributed to the theory of dualism, a view which “asserts that the immaterial, or the soul, exists apart from the body and pre-existed birth.”5 Plato’s belief that the body is material and therefore bad, but the spirit is immaterial and therefore good caused him to see the solution in controlling of the physical body’s appetite to solve the evils in human society. Plato was seeing not accomplishment of humanity in the evils created but he saw a solution in addressing the need of the physical body.6 Karl Marx has a different theory of human nature. Karl Marx saw an alienation created in case people failed to produce what they need.7 It is for this reason that he wants private ownership eliminated as he sees the same as the evil in capitalism. Thus to him the essence of human nature is communal. This makes his writings as foundation of communism. As to whether he was proven right may be partly wiped out by the 1991 collapse of USSR, which has adopted communism as opposed to capitalism for a long time. The competing economic theory of capitalism as partly supported by Adam Smith’s equilibrium theory of the markets8 appears to have not perfectly stopped the human woes either. The search for the answer to the question then continues. 2.4 And what about the soul: Where do aspects of faith or God fit in? The human life is a complex one. While materially the physical person will have to function in such a way as to maximize its potential or accomplish its purpose, it cannot be denied that man has also a soul which must also fulfill its purpose. The reality of human is recognized theoretically both from theological and secular point of view. That the human soul must fulfill its purpose theologically is that it must eventually attain its purpose of finally uniting with the creator in the end. However before the same could actually happen religions have so many explanations on how it will finally come to an end. The theological perspective of human would place human race as the pinnacle of creation where there wholeness rather than being partially human or subhuman. But such fact of creation entails a freedom to choose fulfillment of the human purpose in being to finally be united with the Creator. Salvation solves paradoxically the human nature which is biblically as sinful despite having been created in God’s image.9 3. Conclusion What it means to be human is therefore not a simple question to answer. The different points of view being made part in this paper may just have partly explained or answered the question. The search for better answer continues from different branch of knowledge. The moment a related question is answered, one would be led into another related question. Works Cited Alfredsson & Eide. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: a common standard of achievement. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 1999, p. 244 Black & Holloway. Theology Matters. College Press. 1998, pp. 92-97 Ferrante, J. & J. Ferrante. Wallace Sociology: a global perspective. Cengage learning, 2006, p. 203 Miller, M. Worlds of capitalism: institutions, governance and economic change in the era of globalization. Routledge, 2005 Rogerson, J & M. Carroll. Theory and practice in Old Testament ethics. Continuum International Publishing Group, 2004 Schweiker, W. et al. Humanity before God: contemporary faces of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic ethics. Fortress Press, 2006, p.301 Twain, et al. Mark Twains book of animals, University of California Press, 2010. 2010, p. 325 Read More