Kevin's Watch

This topic was inspired by a post in Furls Fire's journal thread.

It's common to use the term "only human" to indicate the limits of one's abilites. When we've been trying to do something, or many things at once, we throw up our hands and cry: I'm only human. There's only so much I can do.

On one level, this is fair enough. Sometimes life simply requires too much of us. Sometimes we are expected to be superhuman. Sometimes that expectation grinds us down, rather than elevating us. We are human.

But after deep thought, the part that I object to is the "only." Only human ultimately implies something about humanity that I disagree with: that we are insignificant. It's easy to assume we are: the world is big, the universe is unimaginably bigger, and we are small. We are prone to use the offending phrase when feeling particularly small- when the sheer scale of the world outside ourselves threatens to overhwelm us. I think this to be a mistake.

Within worldviews such as Furls Fire's, we are not only human by virtue of an eternal soul that survives after death. Within my own worldview, we are not only human because we partake in a unitary All. But even if one doesn't hold that we are more than human, still I would say that "only" does us injustice. In fact, under the strict materialist view I think this becomes just as incredible. If everything arises from matter, consider what matter has brought forth in humanity. Matter has become able to actively and intentionally create, using other matter. Matter has become able to create things that are not matter; ideas, philosophies, emotions. In us, matter has transcended itself. Only, indeed.

What I'm trying to say is that no matter which way you look at the world, humans are pretty darn incredible. And we do our nature a disservice when we tell ourselves- collectively or individually- that we are "only" anything.

Not sure exactly how this relates to your topic, but... I like humans best in all the fantasies, and when playing D&D type things. This race can fly; that race is stronger; another is faster; etc. But humans always find a way to keep up. There was a story in, iirc, Epic Illustrated, which was a Marvel Comics b&w magazine. One showed the distant future. By then, evey human had a superpower. Evolution (Marvel Comics evolution, that is. heh) had given everybody something, just as the mutants of the present have. Except one guy. He was a genetic throwback, I guess. Simply human. I like the thought. It doesn't matter what powers you have, or don't have. What matters is how you use whatever you have.

We're perfectly good as we are.

I think that relates well to my topic, Fist. I know how it is when you just want to bring up your favourite cultural references . Anyway, even given someone was the last human on earth without superpowers, what he could do, by virtue of being human, is pretty incredible as well.

I'm waiting for some hardcore cycnics to come along and blast me .

Cambo wrote: I'm waiting for some hardcore cycnics to come along and blast me .

The only thing that humans can do better than anything else is hate and suck, dude. Animals and bacteria don't make war in Iraq

Really, I think Donaldson sums it up nicely when he says:

It's amazing what people can accomplish when they respect their limitations. I take a sparring class every Saturday morning, and everyone I train with has more speed, strength, and stamina than I do. As they should: they're all much younger than I am. Plus most of them can kick me in the head, and I'm just about flexible enough to reach their waists. But you know what they say about age and cunning. I don't stand around feeling sorry for myself--or, worse, drop out--just because I'm slow, weak, gasping, and stiff. Instead I work on timing, distance, precise technique, and tactics. In other words, I respect my limitations, but I don't use them as an excuse. And it's surprising how often those young guys with all their advantages get frustrated because they can't handle what I'm throwing at them.

When we try to do things without respecting our limitations, that's when "being only human" gets us. When we work within our limitations, that's when we do things "as only a human can."

I don't think the phrase, in the way it is commonly used, is meant in the sense that humans are insignificant - more that we are limited. There can be an element of defeatist attitude, suggesting that those limits are a flaw, I guess. it depends on your perspective whether they are or not, but even if we are flawed because of our limits, that's no reason to feel too bad about it - we are good enough for what we do, which I think is where your response is heading.


But of course the first thing I thought of when I read your post was John Crichton's battle cry in "Crackers Don't Matter": Humans. Are. Superior!

Great posts guys- yes, it was the defeatist attitude I was getting at.

Orlion, thanks for filling the role of resident cynic! Of course, I conveniently left out, but am fully aware, that as far as humans can rise, we can sink just as low. People suck. But they don't "only" suck. They are the only being we know of that sucks as badly as they do. We win again.

Yep, we're pretty amazing.

--A

Murrin wrote:I don't think the phrase, in the way it is commonly used, is meant in the sense that humans are insignificant - more that we are limited. There can be an element of defeatist attitude, suggesting that those limits are a flaw, I guess. it depends on your perspective whether they are or not, but even if we are flawed because of our limits, that's no reason to feel too bad about it - we are good enough for what we do, which I think is where your response is heading.

There are no limits.

in the [i]What good have humans done[/i] thread, Avatar wrote:Completely. Think about it:

Physics tells us that every solid in the universe is composed of billions of tiny particles, with BIG gaps in between them. Yet despite the presence of these big gaps, if nothing else, should at least render objects porous. In "reality", nothing is solid or stable. Ask any Quantum Physicist.

The only reason that we can't walk through walls, or on water, is that we are so indoctrinated into believing it impossible, that our belief makes it so

If we really believed that we could (and I'm not talking about belief in a religious sense, or in an opinion held, but in the sense of knowing it in our bones) there is nothing to prevent us from walking on water. Unfortunatley, we know in our bones that walls are solid. Thus, they are.

Wierd huh?

Believe in the impossible.

Hmm. So whatever limits humans have are there because we put them there? No other reason?

Hahaha, only in theory. In practise, I wouldn't like to jump off a building (without a rope) in order to prove it.

--A

Cambo wrote:Hmm. So whatever limits humans have are there because we put them there? No other reason?

Well no.
You can do the impossible.

You just need any happy little thought.
...and perhaps a sprinkling of pixie dust.

Menolly wrote:

Murrin wrote:I don't think the phrase, in the way it is commonly used, is meant in the sense that humans are insignificant - more that we are limited. There can be an element of defeatist attitude, suggesting that those limits are a flaw, I guess. it depends on your perspective whether they are or not, but even if we are flawed because of our limits, that's no reason to feel too bad about it - we are good enough for what we do, which I think is where your response is heading.

There are no limits.

in the [i]What good have humans done[/i] thread, Avatar wrote:Completely. Think about it:

Physics tells us that every solid in the universe is composed of billions of tiny particles, with BIG gaps in between them. Yet despite the presence of these big gaps, if nothing else, should at least render objects porous. In "reality", nothing is solid or stable. Ask any Quantum Physicist.

The only reason that we can't walk through walls, or on water, is that we are so indoctrinated into believing it impossible, that our belief makes it so

If we really believed that we could (and I'm not talking about belief in a religious sense, or in an opinion held, but in the sense of knowing it in our bones) there is nothing to prevent us from walking on water. Unfortunatley, we know in our bones that walls are solid. Thus, they are.

Wierd huh?

Believe in the impossible.

To take the anti-belief side...
If there were really nothing goin on across those gaps except gap-ness, you couldn't walk on water cuz your brain couldn't tell your feet to do anything, there'd be no connection...in fact no feet, no brain, no you, no anyone, no anything-as-we-know-it.
OTOH, I do know for a certainty that most humans are less limited than they believe, and that almost everything already is not anything-as-we-know-it.

The importance of those gaps, Vraith, and of most of quantum physics, is that it firmly supports the influence of mind over matter. There's not a complete absence of interaction between particles, obviously. But we know there's no matter connecting them. I just saw a guy on the news, rescuing survivors of the Christchurch earthquake, lift a huge block of concrete and toss it aside as if it were made of polystyrene. Now, it should have been physically impossible for him to do that. In a materialistic world, it simply wouldn't happen. The only explanation is some kind of malleability to the laws of physics as we know them.

I'm not suggesting the primacy of mind over matter. Otherwise I'd be jumping off buildings without ropes. I'm just suggesting an interplay. And what little I know of quantum physics backs me up.

Cambo wrote:The importance of those gaps, Vraith, and of most of quantum physics, is that it firmly supports the influence of mind over matter. There's not a complete absence of interaction between particles, obviously. But we know there's no matter connecting them. I just saw a guy on the news, rescuing survivors of the Christchurch earthquake, lift a huge block of concrete and toss it aside as if it were made of polystyrene. Now, it should have been physically impossible for him to do that. In a materialistic world, it simply wouldn't happen. The only explanation is some kind of malleability to the laws of physics as we know them.

I'm not suggesting the primacy of mind over matter. Otherwise I'd be jumping off buildings without ropes. I'm just suggesting an interplay. And what little I know of quantum physics backs me up.

Heh..you say that as if I'd disagree...but really, I think I'd just draw the line of impossible in a slightly different place, and say much of the 'malleability' is in our interpretation/understanding in our description and naming of things as "laws." For instance, the 4 laws of thermodynamics [heh...they added a zeroth law like Asimov did for his robots.] only MUST apply if the universe is a closed system...and we don't know whether it is or not, last I knew.

But, on topic, the only use of "only human" that actually bothers me is when it's used as excuse/justification for "monstrous" actions [which are, of course, simply human actions we don't approve of...sometimes for good reason.] For example, caregivers shaking babies to death cuz they couldn't stand the crying anymore because they're "only human."

I wasn't expecting any particular reaction, I was really just thought-spewing. Didn't mean to sound argumentative.

And yes, that example of shaking the baby is setting the bar for humanity even lower than failure or limitation.

Being human encompasses both ends of the spectrum. It has to. From the best to the worst, we're capable of it all.

--A

But when people say "only human" in regards to atrocities, or even mundane shitty behaviour, it implies that's as far as the specturm goes.

What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel! In apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world - the paragon of animals!

We are an amazing species, capable of such wonder, and horror. What we do to each other and for each other can be extraodinary. So, being "only human"...Heh...ah, "if only".

We are limited only by the limits we place on our heads. What work I do, what achievments I strive to achieve, what help and hope I can give to the lives that cross the path I walk...can only be staunched by my own doubt in myself. At times, it is there, and in those times I call upon the Father to help me cast away that doubt. ~Tracie McKinney-Hammon

Cambo wrote:But when people say "only human" in regards to atrocities, or even mundane shitty behaviour, it implies that's as far as the specturm goes.

Ah, we have such low expectations of ourselves.

Yes, it's a negative conotation. But it shouldn't be.

--A