Animals & Consciousness

There has been a glaring question in my head ever since I was a boy, and I feel now would be a good time to discuss it. I find it very curious that I am able to reflect on things the way that I do, when so many animals of the earth are not able to do so. Now here I am talking in very worldly terms and without provoking the faithful to miss the point entirely, I will try to say this next part without bringing religion into it. (I should say here that when I speak of animals in this writing, I am referring to mammals. I feel it would be silly to compare ourselves and our minds to that of an insect, or spider, and I hope I do not need to explain why.) So, having said that, I would like to make a statement- that we are all animals of the earth; all the same in regards to being creatures of the earth. Species vary, of course, but we all require certain things to live – air, water, food. We all are born in the same way, relatively speaking, and all animals have minds alike. The general makeup of our physiology seems to be common in most animals - we all have the 5 senses (in most cases), brains to command our body, a mechanism to move physically, and so on and so forth. So similar are these animals to us, yet so different. And what does set us apart from them? This is where my glaring question lies. I can see that they can have and understand emotions, languages, societies, but there seems to be an enormous difference between us and them. And I don’t mean just their physical appearance or even necessarily their habits, for humans have much worse habits than any other animal. But the difference lies in their mind. The conscience, the ability to think ABOUT oneself, not just to think things, but to ask WHY one thought them, is as important a question as any brought forth upon man. How is it that we as a species of animal on the Earth became self-aware? That not only are we able to go about our lives as regular animals, we are able to KNOW that we are doing so! What an ENORMOUS feat to conquer! The fact that I am able to write these things- think about them, and then think about ME thinking about them, is incredible! We are aware that we are aware! What a concept! What a tremendous difference between us and other animals. It would not make sense to think that a chimp or another species similar to us would have these thoughts, and I believe the conscience is why. HOW did this happen?! Let us entertain the idea that we do descend from some type of chimp, (I would use our actual descendants, but we do not have any Neanderthals or primitive homo-sapiens present to compare ourselves to.) We know that a chimp does not have a conscience, is not ‘self-aware’ as I will call it (as oppose to just being ‘aware’ I guess). So how did the jump from being ‘aware’ to ‘self aware’ occur? How did our minds evolve? I have heard theories that when man discovered fire, and was able to harness it for the very first time, something changed in our minds. We became ‘self aware’ in that we discovered that WE were able to manipulate OUR surroundings. But I have found no other writings or inquiries into this question, but perhaps my researching skills are not up to par. Either way, I have nowhere to go from here on this subject. Again I will leave the reader with a parting thought (after thinking awhile the only one I found suitable was the last one we touched on): How DID the jump from ‘aware’ to ‘self-aware’ take place? Where in our animal brains did that happen and HOW? Scientists would probably be best suited for this job, or better yet psychologists. So we will leave it for them to explore this further.

Immortality

Living forever is something that many of men have often dreamed and wondered about. Of course, it is impossible for our bodies to maintain an existence forever (at least not that we know of). We grow old and our body frail, extinguishing from the Earth and it has been this way since the dawn of our existence. I will not begin to argue about souls, or even the afterlife; these are not the objects of immortality, at least not in the way we describe such an idea to be. We want to live on forever on Earth, not just in the wandering of our souls after life or in heaven. These things that I have mentioned have been considered something different than immortality, as if the idea of their ‘being’ going to another place - and never ceasing to do so- is not the exact definition of immortality. But still, they contend it to be something different, so we will not bother ourselves with these ideas, but more so with the type of immortality that could exist here on Earth, amongst observers and critics alike. Since we have already decided that a physical presence cannot be maintained on the Earth forever, we will not explore such a possibility. I suppose one could, but it would come to naught. Another job best left for scientists. So now let us move to the other kind of immortality of which we are all familiar – memories. Great men have lived and died, but only few of them are world renowned – always remembered through the years and always will be. One could probably count these people on their fingers and toes, examples including Michael Jackson, Ghandi or Hitler. Their actions on the Earth have left such an outstanding impression that it lives on through decades. Here I think we may find a type of immortality. For when one is alive and then perishes he leaves behind a legacy, of what he has done, thought and felt. And that is all a person really amount to, is it not? Are we not just the products of our prejudices, our opinions, our loves, our hates? If we were not, would we not be all the same? So if we are a product of these things; these things make up the essential fabric and person of who we are (for a man is nothing but a beast without morals) – could we not say that these things are what make us truly alive? Though we are not talking alive in a literal sense, but in a figurative one. And what if those things were kept alive? What if your morals, ideas, prejudices, philosophies, and everything that you stood for in your life was kept alive in peoples’ memories? Could we not say that Hitler has just as much affect now as he did then? Could we not say that Socrates' true being is still alive and well today? I would think so. The impact these types of people have left on us is as much a part of us as is the dealings we have with our loved ones. They have etched out a place in history, as well as people’s minds. These certain individuals’ legacies STILL affect people today, thousands of years later. When we on Earth only strive to have our feelings, emotions and needs acknowledged by others – felt by others- continuing to have this happen, for thousands of years, or better yet – forever, would be just as immortal as anything I can think of. Having your ‘message’ felt by all in the world, for all the years that men study the past and as well as one another, is immortal in every sense of the word. Many men have achieved such status, and it is curious to see the actions they have taken to achieve such status. Gandhi, who preached love and peace, and Hitler who was the dark opposite are never forgotten in the minds of lucid men. These people live on forever, how good or bad may their message be.

Other Wordly Affairs

Religion is quite a bold subject, and it tends to hurt many peoples feelings. I will try my best not to take away from anyone else’s convictions, for I believe one cannot possibly know the answer to the all mystical question of a greater being. But what I will do is give my own opinion on the matter, because hard as I may try, I find it hard to come by any facts on the subject that can be strewn against opinion. It all seems to be opinion in some way or another, there is no way around that. Because if it was the opposite- if there were facts to be argued for the existence of a God, there would be no discussion. Because facts are meant to be true, and I have yet to come by someone who can give me truth as to why their God MUST exist, it all seems to be what they think. That leaves me with nothing to do but give my own opinion and state why I think in such ways. I will try to use as many ‘facts’ as possible, but I mostly will be using common sense to guide me. Anyone who cannot stomach a debate on religion, or cannot stomach to question their own convictions without jumping to the conclusion that they would be abandoning them should NOT read further. In order to debate such a subject, one must possess the ability to take a view point opposite of their own. I have done this many times, and it has lead me to the thoughts that I am about to dispense… Over the thousands of years that man has walked the earth, it seems that religion has always been there with us. As far back as we can date our early ancestors worshipped Gods, so it seems that there is something inside us that drives us to such ideas. I would venture to say that these ideas and beliefs have been thought up and contrived to give people what they want: meaning. For whatever reason it is dreadful for a person to think that after death there is nothing, and that everything we do on Earth amounts to nil. The thought of being so alone and so meaningless frightens the majority of people. So much so, that we have contrived our own makers and our own Gods to give us the answers that we could not give ourselves, even going far enough as to give ourselves a paradise after death! Instead of continuing the search for meaning, they cling to faith, using it as a crutch when individuals come to ask the tough questions, and blindly following what it preaches at no expense. It is troublesome, at least, because one has yet to prove that a God exists. And yet, so many take this to be a fact. I suppose one could argue that because so many believe it, it must be true, and consequentially makes it true. But this does not hold to the test. For once the great population thought that the world was flat, and no one could be told otherwise. So we cannot deduce that because people believe it so much, that it is true, because people often believe foolish things. So we ‘without faith’ keep searching for something, some kind of fact, to let us know if such a being exists. But none has presented itself. The faithful argue that there are signs and messages to their credit, but it still relies on the perception of the individual. It still relies on what people think it means. But let us go back to why I think we have made these Gods up for ourselves. I happen to be of the opinion that if I were squashed the same as a lizard, it would amount to no difference. We are both organisms of the Earth, both operate of the same chemicals and natural processes, and both live and die just the same. So why then, has the human race clung to such a fantasy as heaven, when we would not expect the same from a lizard? Of course, the answer is that a lizard cannot consciously think. “I” is not in the lizard’s vocabulary. Why should humans be so different? Well, the fact that I can sit and write divergent thoughts on the subject is a whole matter in itself, but the difference is that a lizard would never worry itself with such things. It has no conscience to tell it to be worried about having no meaning. The fact that we do, enables us to be scared over such trivial things, so much so that we make up answers for ourselves – No one wants to be as meaningless as a lizard, right? So we have God and Heaven, and we have had him and our endgame paradise in many forms over the thousands of years. He is all knowing, and created everything- even has a spot for us in a wonderful place! What a perfect existence to have! Someone thought it all up and we are just pawns in his game! What a beautiful thing faith must be, because it must come with such happiness. To know in your heart that you have a purpose, that someone is watching over you must be very comforting. But it is not suited for the logical type. Too many inconsistencies exist in it to be true, and I find myself leaning more towards the natural aspect of life. All things exist and live off one another, say the faithful, because that is the way God intended it! Never once thinking that maybe some other force may be behind it, one as natural as water running downhill through dirt. It changes and adapts to everything and everyone, all at once. Nature itself is the true designer, in my lowly opinion of course. Now, what of the word ‘God’? What does it really mean to people? In my mind, if there is some other worldly force behind everything, driving everything, ‘God’ is just as good a name for it as any. But it seems silly to think that such a profound figure would be as we’ve made it, taking human form and all. It seems that if there were to be a ‘God’ it would be an all encompassing force – one that can never be found, because it is one with us. But, people will always have their faith for God and heaven, and others will always detest it. In that, I would like to remind all who hold their convictions so tight: that the truth which you seek and cherish, the meaning of our existence, is sought by both sides of the spectrum. Whether one calls it ‘God, or ‘Nature’, or ‘Chance’, it is STILL seen as a force driving things along. Do not be fooled by people’s objections to your opinions, and their hatred, and their sympathy for them. Because they seek meaning exactly the same as all humans do, and as humans have done since we can remember. Is there a God? One could not say for sure. But you could also not say the opposite for sure either. All in all, God will probably always exist, as will the search for the proof of his existence. Hopefully we have stirred up the faithful enough not to be so blind. And hopefully we have riled up the nay-sayers enough to see that they themselves seek meaning, with the convictions they hold to be true. Before now I have mentioned little between the difference of having faith, and being religious. Now, if God were all knowing, and a good servant of his had been good all of their life, why would they have a need for church? Can all the things a good Christian must do to be faithful not be done without giving money to a church? Would God not know that you are faithful, because he is able to hear our thoughts and our prayers? What of church then? What of organized religion? Such a profound being as God could not possibly care whether or not you were late for church, a man-made house of worship- or care that you did not kiss the priests hand, or give him money. Surely he must not be interested in such material things, because such things are only given value by us, man, not Him. So really he must care about virtue, and honesty, and love, (if he were to be up there caring at all of course), because these are the things that make good men, not donations or church attendance records. Faith and belief is a beautiful thing, and inspires hope and love, where religion is just a scheme to control the masses, and exploit this ever so lovely faith. God would not be swayed by such material and trivial matters. As if CHURCH had any effect of God’s opinion of you. He would judge you solely on what is in your heart and mind, not by the actions we perform. Men of good moral character do not commit heinous acts, just as men of indecent moral character DO. But only because it was in their mind in the first place, they were bad before they committed these condemnable actions, or they would not have thought them up. So, if assuming all that I have said is true, a person of real faith and belief would not be swayed by a church labels, boundaries, and convictions of an organized religion. They would see it as a personal matter, and no church should have a say in the relationship between an individual and their God. (Of course, this is if such a relationship exists.) But, over time we have seen that humans seek safety in numbers. And I will end this segment by saying that almost all religious persons I have encountered have been good-hearted, honest people. Over-zealous? Perhaps. Close-minded? Maybe. But it makes no difference. They are still good people. So we will let them have their religion and God. And we will hope and wish that no more death and destruction is brought upon us in the name of these things… That is another matter altogether, and perhaps it is better left for another time in my thoughts.

The Meaning of Life

The meaning of life is a peculiar subject, and I will not spend too much time analyzing it. I believe the decoding of this matter is best done on an individual basis, with no one coaxing you along the way. But still, I will make a few comments on it, because it fascinates me so. It is not the idea of coming to a conclusive ‘meaning of life’ that wonders me, but the obsession that the human race has displayed for the answer. All sorts of matters, which will be commented on at another time I presume, have been tacked onto finding the answer. Many people have died and fought in religious wars (the best example I can think of), as well as many other endeavors undertook, for better or for worse, in the name of the meaning of life. But again, these will be commented on at another time. Right now we will focus on what the meaning of life may be, instead of all the pleasure and pain the quest for it may have brought upon the human race. Most people of general order associate the meaning of life with some kind of happiness. ‘To be happy’ they say, but such a concept is confusing. Can one ‘be happy’ as a matter of everyday life? Or does this not come from aspects in our life with which we interact with? And if these interactions are letting us ‘be happy’ then are they not the meaning of life-for it was these interactions and situations which bring us happiness? If such were true, then the meaning of life could not be the same for all. What makes one man happy will make another sad, and vice versa. Let’s say that the meaning of life is not to be happy, but something else. Could we really say with any certainty that it would be right? It any more than the notion that happiness is the answer? Let us try. Some say the meaning of life is to reproduce, and this would make sense I suppose. Obviously the object of every animal’s existence is to reproduce, because without it living beings would not exist. Of course there are some who were not meant to bare children, but I feel that is another alley that may take us somewhere we were not expecting. All we will say is that not all creatures could reproduce, because if they did we would be terribly crowded. Now back to the example at hand – the meaning of life being to reproduce offspring. This seems to be a very scientific point of view, and I’m of the opinion they are overlooking themselves. If we are here to only reproduce, then why are we conscious? Why would we not hound around reproducing at a whim and as often as possible- without concern for other crap? Why are we able to love and laugh and think and do all the things that reproducing does not require? If the only reason we are here is to reproduce then we do not need all of those unnecessary bothers! Nor should a dog have a need to chase, or a cat to meow! Why, in such a world, it would only seem fit that we were merely massive, walking reproductive organs! We are not in such a world, however, and I continue to express my thoughts through a computer screen. Which, may I remind you, it just about as far away from reproducing as I could get. So it seems such a scientific view cannot be right (we will not say for sure though, because that would be foolish), and other examples shall be explored in time. Now that we have explored a couple avenues of thought on the subject, I will leave it to the reader to take it further. But, I would like to make light of the things said above: do not take your convictions as fact, and always take others’ with a grain of salt. The meaning of life is ever changing, and in my observations I have found that there is not one meaning of life, but many. It changes just as people grow old and the seasons pass. It would be foolish to think that a concrete answer to this question could exist, but people do. And is it not funny that after a whole spiel about not taking your own opinion as complete fact, I have gone and given mine in such that fashion? We are all human I suppose, and with that I will leave it to the reader.

Political Inquiries

While there is much to be said about such affairs, there are only a couple of matters that I wish to discuss. These are things that have been bouncing around in my head for quite some time now, and it seems only necessary that out of all the things that could be said in this realm these are the ones I will discuss. With that said I would also like to note that when speaking of politics and matters related, I will be referring to America and its model of governing and diplomacy. This would not have been hard to ascertain, but I must say that there is a reason for this: I am American, I was born American, and I think American. I will not pretend to be a well cultured individual, for I have never left the country. Because of this, I will (attempt) to speak only of affairs of which I believe I know, and not of things to which I could not possibly have knowledge of. What I know is what I know, and I know what has happened in America in the past, for it is not long, and how it is now. And I will not contend to know any further. If you are not of American descent, or perhaps do not care for American politics, you may skip this section I suppose, though I highly suggest you do not.

First, I would like to speak of a problem I have foreseen since my youth, continue to see it unfolding before me and not in the best ways unfortunately. The constitution itself, which I hold in just about the highest regard as a man could hold such an object, has such foresight that words would not do it justice. It has stood up against trial and tribulation, and I could not speak more highly of it. Now, as for the model in which America is now governing itself, I think it is best left in the time of the founding fathers. The country now, America circa 2011, is much too big for the Representative Republic that our country was based on. Back then it made sense that you could have one or two people represent a state, because the states did not have more than hundreds of thousands of people in them! Now, with millions of people per state, it seems silly that a few could represent the millions. It seems that people no longer trust that they represent them, because how could they? They have masses of people telling them that they voted for this or that, and why aren’t they doing it? How many different policies can a few men and woman represent? It seems illogical, and not so that these people often take the money and run, which seems to be rampant in our government (I won’t even mention the lobbyists!!). In hindsight, a democracy seems to be the only way to really calculate what each individual thinks and wants, but still the sheer numbers of our country blocks us. So here we are, stuck with a feeling that we have no control when in America that is the trust of life. Odd too, that we feel so alone and scared when we are so large in number. What are we to do? These villains have taken over the government, and we are here hurting and wondering how we got ourselves in this mess! Oh! How pitiful are we! Yet, it seems I have heard this somewhere before. Yes! It is every society that has ever lived to see a governing body over itself! People always believe that they live in a critical point in history. As if our lifespan of 80 years means anything in the millions to come. But still there is a problem, and we still think it is the biggest to ever hit a people with governments. At this point in my thoughts, I try to ask myself where all of this nonsense started. At what point did the people of the government stray from being ordinary citizens? Do we not govern ourselves? Are these not the SAME people that grew up watching other politicians with the same thoughts as ours now? Well, they were when they were born of course, and as well as in their lives. But somewhere along the line, they strayed and became something else. Now I am not here to say that every politician in America is crooked and money hungry. I actually believe that a lot of them are good, honest people. But they are, nonetheless, part of the problem. They are ‘career politicians’ as I like to call them. George Washington, among the greatest president the nation has ever seen, was appointed so because he was a good man and a better General. Notice that nowhere in my description of him did I mention politician. He may have well been a fantastic one, but one would not have described him as such back then, and one would not now. So it seems we have an odd problem: instead of everyday, good, hardworking, and honest people governing our country, we have ‘career politicians’. They go to school to become a politician, and they will not win the societies hearts like the candidates so long ago who were voted in. They will just become what they want, a lawmaker, judge, senator, governor, and what have you, but all the while a void grows between the people and the would be politician, and I suppose we only have ourselves to blame. It takes hard work and a lot of money to become a politician in America now, and those good, honest people are not able to come by the means to undertake such a feat. So now we have created a vacuum between people who are able to come by such means, and everyday people, when there should be no such rift. Again, I will stop to say that not one hundred percent of the politicians are bad people, and most really DO want to do well for people. But I’m of the opinion that the number of these people who have been completely honest and ethical in their dealings in life and their rise to power has diminished considerably. Instead of regular honest people dealing in the government, we have career politicians, who spared no life or expense to get their position and power. And it seems that the rift between ‘us and them’ has grown so great that it is almost as if we are in two worlds. And every once in a while, someone from the other side catches a glimpse of the ‘enemy’ and cries afoul of the situation. They go on ‘The Daily Show’, they write books, and we all envy and adore that they have seen past the madness, past the crap that has blinded our politicians. Then they are gone. And it is not until another rare person has an epiphany and decides to speak out that we are encouraged again. Only nothing ever comes of it. I still wonder to this day what will come of it. I see so many of us intellectuals on the internet boards and on the street, but nothing ever comes of it. Am I delusional to think that something will come of it? And am I crazy to think that America is any different from any other ‘oppressed’ nation in the past? It seems to be so. It seems that I am one of those who think they live in a critical time in history. I would not have it any other way, actually. If we could do something, what a beautiful sight it would be, yet I see nothing stopping us. Is it that nobody knows that everyone else is pissed off? That cannot be, because we are all so readily connected at a moments notice. So I am not sure what blocks us from revolution. We are all disgusted and tired and scared, but we take nothing back from them? I suppose it will be a long time till we see a change for the better, because money and greed has corrupted most non-violent ways of pleading with them. And the media will give us no help. Oh! The media… Here I will leave this subject with hopes that I have incited the minds to think about their country and how beautiful it could be.

Second, I would like to address the problem with our media and news sources. These devices are supposed to be our connection to the people in our government; what they are doing, why they are doing it, how, etc… This because the days of hanging around the courthouse are long gone, and the majority of people have not a way to know of what is happening. So we have the news, which is supposed to be the guide to what is happening in our country and our lives, and all in one hour! But! What if such a device would turn against us! Gasp! I know, it is quite a thought, but let ourselves to be strained so we could see that this has indeed happened, and we are getting worse and worse off because of it. Even the sources which I rely on I cannot completely trust! Now the news sources seem to be completely about ratings, due to how close it has come to being an entertainment show. Otherwise, I would not hear stories about the latest craze here, or how this little girl can catch a ball at a baseball game. The reporting somehow seems to negate what the facts are, but focus on the part of a story they can sensationalize. The headings and names and graphics that they display for us are so flamboyant in nature you would think they are catering to the least common denominator, and trying to incite a riot at the same time! All under the guise that they are just presenting facts and they are yours to decipher and develop opinions about. What people do not seem to notice, is that they have already decided your opinion for you by the way they present it. They slant it so much to one side or the other it is laughable! Of course there will be many a people to discount what I am saying, but there are those of us who see it and can identify it for what it is, and those who detest us are the very people the media pray upon. Countless examples of what I am speaking of can be found, if one were to look. In conducting these charades they have let it leak over to the political realm, and have infested it with such shenanigans also. Instead of focusing on policy and the accountability of what our politicians do, they focus on whether or not the president bowed or shook hands; or if he looked at a woman’s butt or not; or if he does anything that they can possibly sensationalize to obtain ratings. It has become very tiresome, more so because so many people have bought into the hysteria and fear. Anyone remember Swine Flu? (Ah! One did not have to look for examples! I provided one.) And the problem goes deeper than that! It seems the media can sway people whichever way they wish! As far as to say that presidents can be elected, or not elected, based on how the media represents them and their dealings. As not to seem like I am a rambling cynic with nothing to back up these claims I will use an example of which people will criticize me for, but I will use it nonetheless. If the media and news outlets had relayed the information on president Obama in a non-biased way, he would never have been elected. Now this is just mere opinion, but I believe it has its grounds. Obama lacked the experience to take on such a job, and most intellectuals would probably agree with me based on the job he has done (or maybe not, it does not matter). With that said, and him elected president now, I implore one to go back and take a look at the track record of Mr. Obama and the other candidates. And then take a look at how each of them was represented in the media. You will see my point, and you will see why he won with such little background. The media has made it, as I said before, so they can sway the public which way they please. Unless this gap between the cold hard facts and the drivel they feed us is closed, we can see no furtherance of our paradise. Now, after having written all of that, I realize that I may sound opinionated and slanted towards one political party or another, but I assure you I am not. If there was a ‘cold hard facts’ party, that would be the one I would campaign for. Or perhaps the ‘logical thinking in all affairs’ party.

The Words We Use

I find it quite interesting, the words we use to convey what we mean. As if their actual use should have any real significance to anyone, but alas, they do. Why? Why do the sounds and clicks we utter from our mouths mean so much to us? Are we not confined by them? Are not we bound by the rules and regulations of what has come to be “language”? I cannot help but ask myself, if an Englishmen were to call a ‘pen’ a ‘pen’ and a Frenchman were to call a pen ‘un stylo’ what does that make the words to us? Meaningless? For one could call a ‘tree’ a ‘tree’ and if it just so happened that I would like to call it something different, why couldn’t it be so? What makes the speaking of the vowels and consonants which make the sound ‘tree’ that makes it so? We shall explore this, because it makes little sense to run around calling things that they aren’t –just because you think language is binding, and you’d like to call things as you see them-and you’d be called a fool and locked up for it anyway. So let us explore why this has happened. The stories of the ancient forgers of language (and I do not pretend to be a scholar on this subject) can be taken back very far, but let us not forget that even then, so long ago, the language and the words they used – they made up! For it was to be done no other way- there is no guide to the world telling us what each thing is, so how else was it to be done? So maybe it is that we are confined to the physical attributes of our bodies, for we can only communicate in the ways that our body lets us. So in that, could we say that words and the meaning of words are confined to the noises and moaning from our mouths and throats? I think so. So why then, are we so accustomed to these words and sounds, if they are made up in such a way? Of course, the answer to this question is obvious, for one would have a hard time going about changing language and its meaning, especially under the notion that it is all made up and doesn’t mean anything- for the words they spoke would be contradictory, in that one would expect them to mean something to others, when he’s really advocating for the opposite. This would be a silly position to try and uphold, for the writing on this paper would mean nothing, and therefore be void. So we’ve become accustomed to these ‘words’ because nothing else was laid before us earlier. I assume that had a different mechanism for describing things and feelings had come before words and sounds, we would use it without a notion of doubt. That did not happen though, and I think exploring the different ways of communicating other than with our words is an alley that will lead us far from where we are headed (which is nowhere definite, I remind you). The words and their meanings are here before us, long engraved into us by thousands of years, and of course all in different languages. So instead of looking at a specific word, as we did with the Frenchman’s stylo and the Englishman’s pen, let us look at what they mean. Because on sight or audio the two are not the same, clearly, but they both mean the same thing. Are these meanings set in stone? I might say the word ‘pen’ in twenty different languages, and it still means ‘pen’. But what if one wanted to call it something different why could that not be so? If it had been made up to mean ‘writing utensil’ so long ago why can’t it be made up to mean something else? Of course, language has been in the human race as long as we can figure, and those thousands of years of evolving languages would be hard stopped by such a timid notion. Upon calculation, it would seem that these made up words actually DO mean something. Or men would not be persuaded and offended by them in such ways. For an insult hurled from the mouth hurts just as much as a rock hurled from the fist. No? But why? When the rock strikes, physical pain is felt, and the damage usually can be surveyed. When a verbal insult is thrown, it is only damaging to the person who is offended by what it means. For no one has contracted a black eye by being call an idiot. So it seems that the only meanings the words we use have, are the ones that we apply to them- and it would seem to be awfully logical that way. But as we all know, one could insult a man and have him be offended, and the next man might take it as a compliment. In that, what does the insult and its words really MEAN? It seems that it means whatever the person seems it to mean, and in that process becomes a judgment call. While we know some words have meanings that will never change, such as ‘tree’ or ‘pen’, (only because there is no way to change it, being engraved in us so), others have less concrete meanings and connotations. While these meanings and connotations are widely known and accepted in most sociable situations, it seems still that it is up to the individual to decipher their own meanings and connotations for words, and in that I suppose we could say that words mean everything and nothing at all to us. 

I’ve often felt amusement at an insult such as ‘idiot’ or what have you. Why should such a sound and “word” offend me? It just so happened that instead of using ‘idiot’ to describe something else, it is used as an insult. It could have been ANY word, and if it had been a different word, the ancient forgers as well as modern society would STILL expect me to be offended, because it has been engraved in us in such that way. So instead of being offended, I laugh at the meaninglessness of the word, call the offender a ‘spoon’ and walk away. Hoping that the ridiculousness of it stuns him, just as it stuns me.