What is holding humanity back?

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Zinkovich ... in your world of only vegetables, I would literally die. I am allergic to the cellulose in fruits and vegetables to the point of going into anaphylactic shock if I eat too much(a condition more common then one might think) and painless rashes if I eat the average amount for a balanced omnivorous diet(not that big of a deal). So, unfortunately, biology compels me to live off of meat and the sufferring of others- what do I do? Allow myself to starve? I realise the rationality of what you are saying, but listening to you would be a death sentence for me unless I eat only half the average amount of total food I do now. Tell me strong, is it selfish of me to continue living, when what I need to survive will be consumed anyways?

No decision should entail that we forfeit our life.

If I had your choice, I'd take it in a heartbeat- but I don't, so what do you suggest those of us who are allergic to cellulose do?

Unfortunately, I would say such persons must continue eating meat. I would then only hope one such as yourself takes the inconvenient trouble of searching out and finding markets whose animals have been raised and slaughtered in as painless way as possible. Do you do that? Can you at least make a commitment to research the markets in your area on that point?

I would suggest that your condition is a rare one. In the future perhaps gene therapy will be able to remedy that.

What I really like about your answer, which I underlined, is your acceptance of the rationale. Therefore, you do have a responsibility to hold vegetarianism out as the choice we should choose if possible -- despite risking being called a hypocrite. You would have to be strong enough to say that the hypocracy of a person putting forth an idea or solution is irrelevant to the message`s rightfullness or wrongfullness. The message stands on its own, seperate from the messenger.

Since you said you would become a vegetarian in a heartbeat if you could, accepting it would aid in achieving peace, you are under obligation to put that forth as one of your beliefs in remedying the situation in your OP -- without worry of having to explain your personal actions on the matter. Though, I do understand that could lead one with an uncomfortable feeling of inner contradiction.

[Zinkovich]

Well, as much as vegetarianism is an aspect of this debate, I feel it is not the central issue as much as the source of the need to even bring up vegetarianism is. Plus, I think letting your posts in this thread speak for themselves would serve better for your cause then me inserting a memetic "I agree" statement in the OP. Lastly, it would definately make me feel uncomfortable to do such a thing(I really would feel like a hypocrit).

What I want to discuss now, since we got past the sketchier parts of my questions, is the action-based aspect of it. Let's see if we can motivate ourselves to spread a message of peace in the best way possible, while ameliorating the harm of domineering attitudes and the apathy that allows them!

One thing I saw brought up a great deal of religion, and yet religion is not an issue of just human ego, but philosphical conceptualization and the desire for realised truth. How can one deal with such a thing based on actions when it is purely ideological? To quote V for Vendetta: "You can't attack an idea", much less be personal/have a one-to-one talk with it. Considering this, the change would have to be gradual on my part- so, I see two paths here:

1.) Try to move the cultural focus of the religions themselves towards peace, using thier own tenets and reasoning to convince them.
2.) Promote atheism, or at least the reasonable lack of belief in God. I"m not sure I can do this comfortably, for some reason.

Next, we have the desire for power. How do you change the materialistic madmen of America for the better? Can they be changed? How about people like my parents, who view thier material possession as the culmination of thier life and something they earned, and therefore, something they feel a need to focus on at the expense of altruistic actions on thier part? I see multiple paths for this as well:

1.) Ignore it, and work on my current generation, as well as the next one(have children and raise them for the better?)
2.)Actually change my parent's minds, but that's a laughably impossible goal for me and my lack of slick reasoning and one-liners that seem to appeal to thier type.
3.)Give double to charities to make up for my parent's lack of giving
4.) Pawn off my people like my parent's useless junk and glass vases while they're away or by stealing, and use the resulting money for charity(KIDDING!)

Next, we have the politicians and the warmongerers, what about them? How do we motivate the American people to change the system to prevent imperialistic tendencies? How does one become active in political change in the first place? I cannot tihnk of any paths to take on this, because I have little expeirence with politics- I could definately use some advice here!

I've been studying anthropology, linguistics, and psychiatry all my life(although I'm just beginning studies on the college level), but I never realised until now the potential I'm ignoring by just going academic with the job I'll get with my degree. Perhaps I can do something with that as well, so any advice as to what a multilingual(Japanese, Chinese, Protoiroquian) anthropologist such as myself can do is appreciated as well!

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Blef Actually, except for the non-sequitur about killing and eating animals,...

Why do you think that is a non-sequiter when throughout history we have viewed and degraded other people as non-humans in our treatment of them, often calling them animals, denying them the status of humans, or having what our religions bestow upon us (i.e. a soul), and not to mention turn the implements of animal exploitation onto humans to subjigate them?

There is a definite connection linking all of those together.

StrongHeartsWin hit the nail on the head by identifying religion and its causes as the main culprit. Religion is the root of all evil in the world.

We will agree here, since religion perverts reason so that it blinds those who consume its drug. It is precisely that religio-impacted reason which allows us to be "moral schizophrenics" in our selective mercy of what not to cause suffering to. e.g. We are kind to cats and dogs because we have bound them with a sense of familial relations to us, but we kill the pig for our pleasure -- even though pig cognition has been measured at a higher level than cats or dogs.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Another great and well thought out post by Z!

Quote by: Zinkovich Well, as much as vegetarianism is an aspect of this debate, I feel it is not the central issue as much as the source of the need to even bring up vegetarianism is. Plus, I think letting your posts in this thread speak for themselves would serve better for your cause then me inserting a memetic "I agree" statement in the OP. Lastly, it would definately make me feel uncomfortable to do such a thing(I really would feel like a hypocrit).

I understand and agree to some extent. Although not wholly, I will try to limit bringing the discussion of animals into it. But you should realize, that hypocracy is not the condition that invalidates the message. It is just merely uncomfortable state for the messenger.

Let's see if we can motivate ourselves to spread a message of peace in the best way possible, while ameliorating the harm of domineering attitudes and the apathy that allows them!

Yes! How to affect "apathy" is central to the success of spreading activism for an idea. I think this is a question which has bedeviled all persons who started with an idea for change at some social level in their civilizations. Find it, and all the activist orgs of the world will be knocking on your door.

I think usually the agent that kills apathy is accidental -- like Rosa Parks refusing on a specific day to give up her seat just because she happened to be very tired on that day, or that men of strong moral character happen to exist at a particular time in history -- such as Ghandi. IN the case of Ghandi or MLK, charisma and a combination of humility with strenght of convictions may be needed in the right mix -- and again at the right time.

Is that something that can be cultured and refined and promoted. I would hopoe so, or to say "no" -- that in itself would be pessimistic thought -- the twin of apathy or contentment with the status quo.

Considering this, the change would have to be gradual on my part- so, I see two paths here: 1.) Try to move the cultural focus of the religions themselves towards peace, using thier own tenets and reasoning to convince them.

Exactly! But, how do you move a religion towards peace when its scriptures, the source of their religion, promote it, encourage it, condone it, and expect its believers to partake in it?

I would suggest rather than using their own tenets to move them towards a peaceful view or concept of their religion (which cannot be done because of the contradictions that would arise) and leave the religion still standing on a Neo footing of some kind, it would be best to use their own scriptures in reasoned arguments against it to widdle away at the numbers of adherants to it.

I think the bases or kernel of this could be started with formal reasoning classes at a very early age -- like in kindergarten or first grade, which would undermine the gobbly-gook they get from already lost causes such as indoctrinated parents. Plant that at an early age, then in their teen years their rebellion against parantel views will be even more shored up so as to break the chain.

2.) Promote atheism, or at least the reasonable lack of belief in God. I"m not sure I can do this comfortably, for some reason.

Agreed. But promotion of Atheism or at least at least Agnosticism can only be done with reason. If the tool of reason is not well developed, then there will be nothing to combat religio-reason with.

Next, we have the desire for power. How do you change the materialistic madmen of America for the better? Can they be changed? How about people like my parents, who view thier material possession as the culmination of thier life and something they earned, and therefore, something they feel a need to focus on at the expense of altruistic actions on thier part?

I think the better thought would be where to place one`s recourses for the most efficient payback. If your parents are so indoctrinated on their beliefs and it would take you 1000 hours of talking to change them, but only 100 hours of talking to change 20 people, which should one choose that would have a broader impact on society? Sure, if your parents are very powerful like Bill Gates, then the pay-off would be worth it, but if all things are considerably equal, you should place your recources of time and effort in another direction for maximum affect. It almost borders on viewing one`s parents as a lost cause in the battle -- but if you view the goal of altruism as a battle, then as soldiers must do, they sometimes have to leave a fallen comrad in battle when the urgency of the situation requires it.

How does one become active in political change in the first place? I cannot tihnk of any paths to take on this, because I have little expeirence with politics- I could definately use some advice here!

When I was in college there were Young Republican and Democrat clubs that would volunteer for politicians for their campaigns. That may mean ingratiating yourself throught the ladder of command by going door to door, putting up posters and signs or manning phone banks. That is a foot into the door and the way to begin making connections. In politics favors are remembered and rewarded. I regret I didn`t join one of those on-campus clubs.

so any advice as to what a multilingual(Japanese, Chinese, Protoiroquian) anthropologist such as myself can do is appreciated as well!

Nihongo dekiru no? Dono gurai benkyou shite iru no? Nihonjin? Oshiete ne. Ohenji o matte iru.

[Zinkovich]

Yes! How to affect "apathy" is central to the success of spreading activism for an idea. I think this is a question which has bedeviled all persons who started with an idea for change at some social level in their civilizations. Find it, and all the activist orgs of the world will be knocking on your door. I think usually the agent that kills apathy is accidental -- like Rosa Parks refusing on a specific day to give up her seat just because she happened to be very tired on that day, or that men of strong moral character happen to exist at a particular time in history -- such as Ghandi. IN the case of Ghandi or MLK, charisma and a combination of humility with strenght of convictions may be needed in the right mix -- and again at the right time. Is that something that can be cultured and refined and promoted. I would hopoe so, or to say "no" -- that in itself would be pessimistic thought -- the twin of apathy or contentment with the status quo.

It's amazing how powerful circumstance can really be, isn't it? That said, the attitudes brought on by Martin Luther and the rest, to me, is not only defined by thier strength of character. One thing I noticed central to them was a pragmatic attitude that needs to be cultivated amongst academics at this point.

Which is part of my opinion. Out of all the higher-level college students I have had lengthened discussions with, motivating them to even discuss putting thier ideas to action beyond the conceptual stage is near impossible for me. I believe that if academia even further encouraged activity then it does now we'd have even more ideas, and applications thereof in the works.

Sometimes, when one looks back in history they can imagine how many ideas were lost because people did not apply themselves, or lacked confidence. It's about time ideological progressives gained confidence, which brings me to my next goal I want to work towards: motivation.

How does one draw the ideas out of the intellectual realm and make it reality? The simple fact of the matter is that ideas are most fully realised by the person who learned it from thier own synthesization of knowledge and inuition, rather than form a textbook or from a mentor or teacher(unless they are quite talented). Considering this, I think it would be rather rewarding to seek out those who are on the forefront of innovation, and to gather thier advice and ideas from them, or offer support.

While what I am implying is a network of academics geared towards motivating each other to apply things, I think it must go much further than that. For a good example, look at the recent foundation founded by the veritable Richard Dawkins- where's the community? There needs to be more than sharing of ideology, but also a sharing of ALL of the intellects involved.

Of course, I am not the sort that can do such a thing, as I am not well-educated enough at this point, but I'd like to think this idea would be applied in the future. The benefits would be enormous.

Exactly! But, how do you move a religion towards peace when its scriptures, the source of their religion, promote it, encourage it, condone it, and expect its believers to partake in it?

Most scriptures contradict, giving a mixed message of optimism and pessimism depending on the tone. WIth the risk of outright deception, I imagine somebody could memorize the more optimistic passages of the multiple religious scriptures and make a lot of the more malleable laymen reconsider things about the judgement inherent in thier religious viewpoint.

After that, cultural change/shift would no doubt occur. Whether or not its effects would be permanent, though, is questionable.

I would suggest rather than using their own tenets to move them towards a peaceful view or concept of their religion (which cannot be done because of the contradictions that would arise) and leave the religion still standing on a Neo footing of some kind, it would be best to use their own scriptures in reasoned arguments against it to widdle away at the numbers of adherants to it. I think the bases or kernel of this could be started with formal reasoning classes at a very early age -- like in kindergarten or first grade, which would undermine the gobbly-gook they get from already lost causes such as indoctrinated parents. Plant that at an early age, then in their teen years their rebellion against parantel views will be even more shored up so as to break the chain.

What would help this cause greatly is if one were to able to get a bill for the improvement of basic education passed through congress once and for all. The educational system's low standards are ridiculous, especially on the elementary level. I have seen three cousins go into elementary school for the first time and then proceed to talk about how "special" they are as if they have found religion- one had even come back asking poor mom about god, because the teacher talked to her aobut how "God made her special!". I think this is wrong and elementary needs to move towards teaching actual critical thinking at an early age(yes, it is possible folks. I can give you anthropological examples if you like).

The optimal way to achieve this is require profeciency in general topics at a college level to teach even elementary school.

I think the better thought would be where to place one`s recourses for the most efficient payback. If your parents are so indoctrinated on their beliefs and it would take you 1000 hours of talking to change them, but only 100 hours of talking to change 20 people, which should one choose that would have a broader impact on society? Sure, if your parents are very powerful like Bill Gates, then the pay-off would be worth it, but if all things are considerably equal, you should place your recources of time and effort in another direction for maximum affect. It almost borders on viewing one`s parents as a lost cause in the battle -- but if you view the goal of altruism as a battle, then as soldiers must do, they sometimes have to leave a fallen comrad in battle when the urgency of the situation requires it.

That sounds reasonable. Unfortunately, it is hard to pierce that wall of built up apathy, especially when you're dealing with someone you don't know as well on a personal level. There must be an even more efficient method of making people realise that there are people in the dirt of society, being trampled on by unaware passerbys(metaphorically, of course).

Movies won't work, and neither do books. It's already been tried- so what would be better is something truly momentous and iconic of both the misery of the poor as well as the potentiality of thier future when given aid. Don't ask me what it would be, though, I don't have a clue.

When I was in college there were Young Republican and Democrat clubs that would volunteer for politicians for their campaigns. That may mean ingratiating yourself throught the ladder of command by going door to door, putting up posters and signs or manning phone banks. That is a foot into the door and the way to begin making connections. In politics favors are remembered and rewarded. I regret I didn`t join one of those on-campus clubs.

Sounds like a splendid idea, and luckily for me I am really good friends with the president of the chamber of commerce in in Miami. I'll ask him to pull some strings- hopefully he won't get too upset.

Nihongo dekiru no? Dono gurai benkyou shite iru no? Nihonjin? Oshiete ne. Ohenji o matte iru.

I probably should have mentioned I am going to wind up as a multilingual anthropologist once i'm done. So far I've only studied Protoiroquian(The basis for all Native American languages in m region), and am moving to Japanese this year.

That said, good to know you're proficient in Japanese. I'll be sure to PM you for random bits of advice when I get stuck

Edit: Oh lord my spelling needed some fixing.

[Zinkovich]

If anyone wants to take this thread in a different direction, by all means go ahead! I'd hate to see this thread peter out so soon, when you guys have given me so much to think about so far.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Zinkovich Which is part of my opinion. Out of all the higher-level college students I have had lengthened discussions with, motivating them to even discuss putting thier ideas to action beyond the conceptual stage is near impossible for me. I believe that if academia even further encouraged activity then it does now we'd have even more ideas, and applications thereof in the works.

When I was in college, I did not aspire to actions that would promote an altruistic society. I saw many students join demonstrations that they believed in and felt at the time I had better things to do -- like drink and meat women. Now that I have gotten older, I find myself very concerned with joining groups to promote activism and change in society. I have blossomed late on the desire to act to affect change. You are lucky to be bitten with the bug while in college. I think that will translate into leadership if you follow your passions on the issue.

Sometimes, when one looks back in history they can imagine how many ideas were lost because people did not apply themselves, or lacked confidence.

Yes, the few must be willing to apply actions with confidence in the belief that they are right and despite their few numbers can affect change:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. ~Margaret Mead

How does one draw the ideas out of the intellectual realm and make it reality?

Good question and just noting that it is hard is a good start. I think one has to be a man of action and not dither too long on the road to be taken if the road has not even been built yet, which in this paradigm has not. You just have to do something and gauge the result of that action and then modify it. Since you have not given any real world example of exactly which idea you`d like address, it is hard to give a suggestion about what action may be possible.

For example, if I want to promote vegetarianism, one of the actions I may want to do would be to set up a booth for outreach, or pay for a newspaper add and through those programs invite others to join in not only adopting that position, but also request that they help the movement by promoting it.

I think it would be rather rewarding to seek out those who are on the forefront of innovation, and to gather thier advice and ideas from them, or offer support.

I think so, too. But be careful not to fall into the "I need more study under my mentor" before I can consider myself of striking out on my own." I have this friend who was very talented in something and had a mentor, but he never could leave the deciple stage and never developed in his own right. With him it was always, "I need more study" on the point. Sometimes you can study yourself into a pillar of concrete.

Most scriptures contradict, giving a mixed message of optimism and pessimism depending on the tone. WIth the risk of outright deception, I imagine somebody could memorize the more optimistic passages of the multiple religious scriptures and make a lot of the more malleable laymen reconsider things about the judgement inherent in thier religious viewpoint.

Yes, but while the laymen may not catch you are just feeding them one side, if anothe expert who is quite versed in the other side notices what you are doing and then points it out, you will have been discredited. Best to give both sides and just through reason demonstrate how contradictions fall down on themselves. Let the Bibles of the world be their own worse enemies.

I think this is wrong and elementary needs to move towards teaching actual critical thinking at an early age.

Yes. But what parents are going to support critical thinking when they want to lie to their children and tell them that there is a man in a red suit that delivers toys to all the children of the world, and try to keep this belief in them as long as possible. But, the schools should not declare such things as absurd, they should as a child to try and memorise every child`s name in the school and ask them what present they all wanted and try to remember that, and then ask the child if he could do it? If the child says no, then ask him if it is possible without even mentioning Santa. Such an exercise, if not convincing and telling something about falsehoods, would at least set the stage for the mind to begin questioning possibilities and probabilities.

Movies won't work, and neither do books. It's already been tried- so what would be better is something truly momentous and iconic of both the misery of the poor as well as the potentiality of thier future when given aid. Don't ask me what it would be, though, I don't have a clue.

I don`t think there ever will be a set formula, for each person has their own filter in how they accept things. Some would be moved by the words of an intellectual person, others by a personal experience, and still some after a lot of input through words from books from a number of different persons with different parts of the puzzle.

The most effective way would be to have the most powerful platform available to get something across. Celebrities have a fan base. Anchormen have national audiences, Philanthropists have the power of finances. You have to decide how you are going to erect your platform rather than the process or technique of what will convince someone -- because you have control over the former and none over the latter.

That said, good to know you're proficient in Japanese. I'll be sure to PM you for random bits of advice when I get stuck

Sure, if it`s not too hard. <smile>

[The_Genius]

There are several problems humanity faces. Such as : poverty, wars, crimes etc. What we need is a collective effort from every single citizens of this world. and we all know.... its more than impossible.

:rolleyes:

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: The_Genius There are several problems humanity faces. Such as : poverty, wars, crimes etc. What we need is a collective effort from every single citizens of this world. and we all know.... its more than impossible. :rolleyes:

I disagree. That is the recipee for apathy and resignition to the thought, "it is because it always has been and therefore will continue so."

What we need is a collective effort from just enough people who have the ability to get us to the tipping point. After that, with vigilence, we can ride the mementum the rest of the way. Some will get a free ride for sure. The slackers always do.

I don`t think all avenues of approach for a peaceful world has been exhausted or even found out, and Zinkovich is striving to find the missing pieces to the puzzle he or she senses hasn`t been discovered yet and put into play.

I think that such idealism is what is going to bring forth new ways of problem solving and that is the optimism the world needs to address our problems -- not pessimism.

[Zinkovich]

Quote by: The_Genius There are several problems humanity faces. Such as : poverty, wars, crimes etc. What we need is a collective effort from every single citizens of this world. and we all know.... its more than impossible. :rolleyes:

Not every citizen is needed- just a very large majority. Memetics and cultural drift will take care of the rest once people see how better off life is with the shift in attitude.

Pessimistic attitudes are not rooted in logic as they are a denial of the slim potentiality of beneficial results. Really, basing your stance on pure cynicism is not logical, so you're going to have to give me more comprehensive reasoning for the futility of my goals if you want me to consider what you're saying.

Edit: Looks like Strongheart beat me to the punch.

[Matt W]

What is holding humanity back? Lack of understanding, for the most part, and a lack of respect.

I'm not talking about day-to-day ignorance, or trying to be someone who harks back to the 'good old days' when it was safe for kids to play on the streets, and so forth. What I'm trying to focus on is that, at the present time, an awful lot of information is flying back & forth, and, for the most part, an average citizen (of any state) is only willing to dip into the surface. People are much too willing to take the simplest, easiest option, no matter how arrogant or ignorant it may be. Look at 'There's no such thing as a good Muslim' down in Misc. Classic example. It's different, so it can't be good, so it must be hated & feared. No attempt to understand, no attempt to respect.

How to deal with it? I honestly am not sure. I've had some fairly intense face-to-face discussions with racists, skinheads, all sorts. And it takes a lot to beat down that barrier. It's something that has to be fought, though.

[StrongHeartsWin]

Quote by: Matt W What is holding humanity back? Lack of understanding, for the most part, and a lack of respect. ...at the present time, an awful lot of information is flying back & forth, and, for the most part, an average citizen (of any state) is only willing to dip into the surface.

Exactly, and not wanting to turn this whole thread into a vegetarian arguement because I promised Zinkovich to refer to it only sparingly, many people are not willing to even dip into the surface of it despite large amounts of information backed up by scientific research showing meat production damaging the environment, using recourses, and being linked to obesity and the slew of health problems that go along with it -- not to mention the moral dilemas that arise from exploitation and the refusal to give up pleasure based on that exploitation when viable good options are available.

People are much too willing to take the simplest, easiest option, no matter how arrogant or ignorant it may be.

Good point once again seen with thoughts like, "I want my protein easy and fast" rather than spending a little time thinking about a viable option that could result in less suffering done to another creature. It is just so simple to say we are the most intelligent so all other lesser intelligent animals must bow down to our might. If that is not arrogance, then what is!? Where is respect in that equation that dooms all animals to a status of exploitation when in this modern world it need not be so for our survival?

I think you hit on some good themes, Matt W.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Human nature holds us back, we are naturally greedy and violent. We are cavemen trying to play God. As individuals we can overcome these impulsions, but as a society there will always be someone who doesn't.

[Battig1370]

What is holding humanity back?

Humans?!

The world is populated with humans and those that have the appearance of humans. The problem is who's who, because they look same.

The humans are humane. They have within them that spirit called love which shows concern and is kind and just. They love their neighbors as the love themselves. On the other hand the humanoid which has the appearance of a human are not humane, but have the attributes that goes along with self -centredness such as, ------"

When the humans become separated from those that are only human in appearance, the new beginning will start for world peace.

Paul

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: The_Genius There are several problems humanity faces. Such as : poverty, wars, crimes etc. What we need is a collective effort from every single citizens of this world. and we all know.... its more than impossible. :rolleyes:

It's not impossible with bioengineering. :]

Though, putting that into practice WOULD be next to impossible.

UNLESS the right minds with enough guts get hold of ELF [extremely low frequency] technology. Look it up.

[Osborn F Enready]

What is holding humanity back?

Its inability to learn from history.

(hell, we can't even record it universally true yet thanks to religions and political/social polarizations, to actually TRY to effectively learn from it.)

[The_Genius]

Its not pessimism......

Its reality....

[Cadre]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer Any resistance or negativity you may feel towards a state without pain would diminish. :] I don't want to derail this thread.. but you're welcome to dig up by old thread on the topic. I believed it is entitled, "The Hedonistic Imperative."

Sorry but, without pain and suffering we would have no frame of reference as to what happiness/contentedness or pleasure would be. Unless I'm missing something else with this Hedonistic Imperative.

Either way it is intriguing and I'm gonna read up on it.

[Cadre]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer It's not impossible with bioengineering. :] Though, putting that into practice WOULD be next to impossible. UNLESS the right minds with enough guts get hold of ELF [extremely low frequency] technology. Look it up.

Yes, but then what's the point, because the changes are being forced. It is a wholly unnatural progression. Perhaps it's these emotions that have permitted our survival for the past few milleniums. I am a firm believer that there must always be struggle and pain in the human condition to ensure that we cherish our existence and are motivated to survive.