Humans and How They Interact - Assignment Example

Humans And How They Interact The rate at which human beings interact with one another is quite a very powerful thing to consider. Such interaction which can lead to, in ideal circumstances, a very positive outcome. On the other hand, in circumstances which may be seen as less than ideal, the interaction can be perceived more as a curse than a blessing. Unifying humans together is the inner common bond that all share. The common bond which, when discovered, can have a considerable impact upon how behaviors are exhibited by one person towards another. Human beings inherently look for something which they can identify with when they are engaged with other people. Seeking to find something that they can distinctly understand, or even identify with, as it comes to their overall formation of an opinion. To be able to do this enables a clearer idea, or connection, to not just the person for whom a connection is sought, but also that which they are actually saying themselves. In the end, when all is said and done, how humans interact with each other comes down to finding that which we can identify with in another person and seeking to understand such a realization as it comes to a situation(s) which would have occurred in our own lives. Throughout the history of mankind, situations have arisen that have in return shaped not just the physical, but also ideological mindset that in turn translates into what the mind constructs as thoughts, feelings and ultimately the opinions that are had about things at any given moment. While each situation can be quite different as it comes to a given person, at the root of it can be found an underlying thread of similarity in which another person may find solace in the notion that, to some degree, that which was experienced by them does not isolate them from the rest of humanity, but to some degree, would have been felt by someone else as well. In this instance, a connection would be found and people who may have been complete strangers prior to their introduction, would ultimately find their interaction forever changed by this uniform event that would have held some form of significance to all involved. “Many people believe that creating the opportunity for personal contact fosters positive attitudes toward members of other groups. Indeed, this assumption provides the rationale for numerous international exchange programs for high school and college students. There are also international “sister city” programs, wherein a U.S. City pairs itself with a city in another country and encourages the residents of both cities to visit with and stay in one anothers homes. Sometimes, of course, intercultural contact does overcome the obstacles of cultural distance, and positive attitudes between those involved do result,” (Cultural Identity, p. 157). The notion of “sister city” stems from the classification of two individual cities whose geographic, as well as citizenry composite, share distinct and irrefutable things in common. With these distinct similarities, their level of interaction is greatly benefited being that, as sister cities, they are able to find a common bond(s) within themselves. With it being an election year, many voters are concentrating on the candidate for which they feel most identifies with their station in life. The one whose life experience best fits, however close it may be, to the life which they have lead as normal everyday citizens. A person who, if given the opportunity, would work to form the future of the nation in such a manner that would agree with the sense of ideals and agendas that many have but few tend to be as open with as others are. As it comes down to it, the candidate which an individual votes for, in the grand scheme of things, is the person which as far as they are concerned, best exemplifies the qualities which many feel they have personally themselves and also hope to see something similar in their elected officials. To put it simply, every human wants to root for the “under dog”. They seek to interact in some manner with the person that they feel comes from their background. The one who feels as if they have “walked in the shoes” of the average, everyday regular person. For many people, that person is Democratic Presidential Nominee and Illinois Senator Barak Obama. For Senator Obama, his appeal has largely come from his modest upbringing and how he rose to the level of political power that he is at today. The notion of coming from humble beginnings and being able to advance to serious contention in a contest where the prize is President of the United States. It is this background that has enabled the Illinois Senator to interact on a broader scale with a vast spectrum of the electorate. The interaction for which he has had can be attributed to the ability of not just Senator Obama being able to relate his ideals and belief systems through daily interactions with citizens, but also those same people being able to interact in return with the Senator based on the common connection which they would have felt with him. The connection of, to one varying degree or another, being seen as the “under dog” at one point in life and the lengths taken to overcome such a conception. In his speech titled “A More Perfect Union” which he gave in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on March 18, 2008, Obama addresses the notion of a common bond which humans have as a collective whole. In the speech he says that, “...I chose to run for the Presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together- unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction- towards a better future for our children and our grandchildren,” (Obama, 3/18/08). Hope after all, as the Senator so eloquently says, is something for which all humans can identify with. The hope for a better future for anyone who is held dear. Despite whatever walk of life an individual human begin has taken, at the heart of the issue, for many the notion of hope is something that can be understood and rallied behind. Just as the speech asserts, not everyone looks the same or has the same story. This sort of difference is what makes the human race the diverse, multi-layered people that they are. What goes beyond the surface layer of difference is that which delves into the underlying human sensibility as it comes to the notion of holding onto the hope for a better existence. To put it plainly, human interaction in its truest form is greatly benefited by the connection through a common goal despite what looks to be different in the visual sense of observation. From Karl Marxs work “The German Ideology-Part 1” in the sub-section History:Fundamental Conditions, Marx talks about a sort of interaction that, in many ways, mankind can identify with greatly. The notion of familial interaction, which in particular leads to the creation of other men to continue the species. This sort of interaction amongst men and women of a civilization is quite universal in nature and in the long run, something that most people come to expect as a fundamental part of life. The practice of expanding the race for the purpose of carrying on traditions and other practices has been around for centuries and an idea which anyone can find an underlying connection to in understanding and empathizing with. In his text, Marx addresses this when he says that, “..The third circumstance which, from the very outset, enters into historical development, is that men, who daily remake their own life, begin to make other men, to propagate their kind: the relation between man and woman, parents and children, the family. The family, which to begin with is the only social relationship, becomes later, when increased needs create new social relations and the increased population new needs, a subordinate one (except in Germany), and must be treated and analyzed according to the existing empirical data, not according to “the concept of the family,” as is the custom in Germany. These three aspects of social activity are not of course to be taken as three different stages, but just as three aspects or, to make it clear to, the Germans, three “moments,” which have existed simultaneously since the dawn of history and the first men, and which still assert themselves in history today,” (Marx, p.101). While various aspects of Marxs sentiment stray outside of the realm of thinking for however many people with the direction he chooses to take in certain places, as has been said before, humans seek to find something that which they can take away from a situation and be able to compare it somehow to an experience(s) which they may have had throughout the course of their own lives. In the case of the work by Karl Marx, the sentiment for many to identify with is the notion of continuing the species being a crucial part to the continuation of society. Many can understand that, with the passing of generations, familial traditions are in fact passed down for future generations to come. During the daily course of life, humans are consistently writing and re-writing the history of their lives. In seeking to establish their place in civilization, humans do choose procreation as a means of continuing their legacy. The human race is a very unique species in many ways. Their social interaction practices with members of their species are, in essence, best summed up by the fact that as they go about in their understanding of what they are observing, or whom they are talking to, they have the mental capability to delve so much deeper into the underlying psychological facets of the human nature and way of being. The chance to peel away at the fabric and getting a better look at the “bigger picture”. How someone interacts with others is a key indicator of who they are as a person. In a piece dated November 5, 2007 from the American Chronicle written by Szandor Blestman, on the topic of human interaction and as it comes to the Federal Government, writes that, “When humans are born, they are helpless. They are forced to depend upon others for survival. Infants quickly learn who their parents are as these are the people who will feed and protect them. They may come to know an extended family, brothers and sisters, grandparents, uncles and aunts, for the same reason. As the child grows, he learns to interact with these people. He learns to assert himself. He begins to understand that he can interact with people voluntarily, or he can be forced to interact with them. He also learns that people can interact with him voluntarily, or he can force himself upon them. He learns the different methods, subtle and overt, to control himself and others as he grows to adulthood. These are skills he will use for the rest of his life,” (Blestman, 11/05/07). On the surface, human interaction does look to be very complex in nature. The rate at which we choose, or as Blestman says, choose not to, interact with people is quite fascinating to ponder. Everyone, as they have gotten older, has realized the rate at which their individual interactions with others has been based upon life experience. However differing the life experience has been for the individual person, the fact remains that every individual has had an experience(s) which has influenced the way in which they choose to handle the interactions which they will surely have with others throughout the course of their lifetimes. In the end, human interaction is unique to each individual, but has distinct similarity as a whole. The practice of finding something, however big or small, during the course of conversing with someone that can easily be identified with. After doing as such, a common bond is achieved that can lead to an interaction of a species through a commonly shared idea system. Works Cited Blestman, Szandor. “Human Interaction and the Federal Government.” Published: 5 November 2007. Source: American Chronicle. Date Accessed: 20 October 2008. URL: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/42244 “Cultural Differences in Communication/Cultural Identity, Cultural Bases, and Intercultural Contact.” Page: 157 Marx, Karl. (1818-1883) “Selected Excerpts from The German Ideology- Part I.” Sub Category- History: Fundamental Conditions. Page: 101. Obama, Barak. “Remarks of Senator Barak Obama: ‘A More Perfect Union.’” Prepared: 18 March 2008. Location: Philadelphia, PA. Read More