Full Human Theory

This is an excerpt from a personal essay I am working on.  Enjoy!

Full Human Being Theory
S.R. Forbes
Today is Friday, November 14, 2008. Yesterday in my gender studies class we had a debate as to whether a Liberalist or Marxist society would be more conducive to women’s rights. The details of the debate at this point are not important. One phrase pinned itself to my mind so strongly however that I am hoping to develop a new philosophical system based upon it. The phrase comes from our professor’s own definition of feminist. Feminists wish for women to be treated as “full human beings.” I thus credit Prof. Bright not just for the title of this essay, but thank her for the thoughts, questions and theories this phrase of a mere three words has brought to my consciousness. This is not an essay on women’s rights or feminism, but rather on what it means to be a “full human being.” Can any of us really claim to be complete? Is this possible? Is it even desirable?

Happiness. In previous essays and thoughts I’ve come to the “conclusion” that happiness is the basis of human activity, that is, we do what we do in order to be happy. What this happiness is is another matter entirely, which I may or may not include in this essay. After much thought and, to be honest, religious contemplation and meditation on the subject, I came to believe that altruism was the best method to attain this aim of happiness and peace in the world. Altruism, for me, was the highest human quality in these past theories. The altruist was most efficient at making the greatest number of people happy, thus in quite a cold, numeric way, altruism is the champion of human philosophy.

Today I shall begin to question this idea.

The first topic to be considered is the current method being utilized to attain happiness and stability along with the assumptions it fabricates that, from my limited perspective, seem to plague society, myself included. I will by no means exclude myself from these ills as I see them in my own habits, thoughts, and wishes. This is the topic of consumerism and happiness. When I look around me, I see everyone everywhere trying to find happiness and avoid suffering. This is a basic Buddhist idea and, as a devout Buddhist, has been one of my basic assumptions. Perhaps this needs to be questioned, but for now it will serve as a basis. Now, I see everyone trying to be happy with various degrees of success, but through the lens of self-interest. Everyone wants a comfortable life with certain luxuries and necessities, interests to keep them occupied and may occasionally ask themselves deeper questions on meaning, death, truth and so forth. Often these questions are soon ignored just as they are raised and one sits at the TV to see what is on.

A phrase that I’ve created for this situation is the following: “Consumerism is the result of our collective discontent.” This is not at all meant to be condescending, in fact it is as much a critique of myself as it is for society. To use Buddhist terminology, I am driven by my desirous attachment to consume and consume various sense pleasures to appease this appetite at my heart. The problem with this method is two fold. First, it does not work; the mouth of this appetite is a black hole. It is never filled or satisfied, rather it is eternally hungry. A true hungry ghost. Second, this appetite destroys our planet as resources are depleted or fought over. Thus, altruism theory came into being; by helping others one increases overall happiness more effectively, efficiently and completely. Anyway, altruism aside, it becomes clear that a life of consumerism is hollow by nature as it does not allow for human development, it does not fulfill the potential of the human mind, it does not better human society, in short, it does not allow one to become a full human being.

But I’ve jumped ahead of myself. The first, most difficult and most necessary step in this theory of the full human being is to define “full human being.” What is a full human being? Is it a natural state or a found state? Does it exist at all? If it exists, would one even want or choose to be fully human? Is it desirable? Does it dwell in extremes or on the firm ground of moderation? Does it necessarily involve spiritual pursuit? Is it related to the inner world or outer world? Many of us want to live a full life and better ourselves, but haven’t the foggiest clue how to do this… Or maybe it’s just me!

Each of these three words must be investigated. Full. As consumerism’s black hole of desirous attachment is never filled, to be a full human being, one must turn away from, if not abandon the consumerist model of happiness completely. We hear the term “Pursuit of Happiness.” We tend not to question this idea, but let us look at it more critically. Why is happiness “pursued?” Is it ever caught or is it the eternal Road Runner of bliss to our Coyote of attachment? Of course, certain necessities are needed for human survival and moderate wealth is needed for comfort, but the extent to which the consumer model has been fattened and gorged upon is quickly showing signs of poisoning. Global warming, wars for oil, increased fear and depression in society, all of these can be traced to a belief. This is the belief we are taught from birth because we don’t know any other method to become full. We are taught that wealth brings happiness and we believe it. This argument is, however, based on my previous model’s assumption that happiness is the ultimate goal for all people.

Interestingly, “full” in this context may not actually be related to happiness. A full life is not necessarily a happy one. In this way we abandon the former basic assumption of happiness. Is there is more to life than happiness, does the full human need something more? Happiness is a feeling which arises from certain minds manifesting, but is to deny or hide the darker side of our psyche preventing us from living a full life. In other words, are a full spectrum of emotions needed to be human? Do we lose something when destructive emotions are purged? This is not to say that we should all let go of inhibition and rage at each other (although this is already all to common) but instead I am asking to be at peace with oneself, are not all facets of this human experience needed to be understood or felt? This is an important question.

In the Matrix, Neo visits the Oracle. Above her door is a plaque which translates into English, “Know thyself.” Understanding all the facets of the human, your human self, is quite similar to this idea. I guess this leads into the next topic. “Human.” Perhaps before knowing what it means to be “full,” we need to know what is being filled. What is a human? What makes up identity and other facets to be understood? Well, to name a few: identity, experience, knowledge, personal opinion/beliefs, perspective. We shall see that perhaps the most important, or at least the most interesting, for me at least, is perspective. How one looks at oneself and world, including one’s place in the world is quite important. Later I hope to investigate whether this perspective can ever be fully understood. Not only that, would one even wish to know thyself so thoroughly? What would one find? Would it be a pleasant experience? I would say that our experiences, knowledge and beliefs make up our perspective and that these are in constant flux. Change is the natural state of reality. Our experiences change our beliefs, and, very interestingly, I feel that our beliefs can change our experiences, as can knowledge. For example, a poet, a botanist, a physicist, a teacher, a student, a monk, even if they observe the same tree will see totally different things. Their beliefs change their experience of that phenomena, the world at large and the self. Their beliefs, formed from past experiences and prior knowledge, effect present experiences which in turn form an ever changing identity and perspective. This identity and perspective then lead to further changes in experience. Soon a cycle forms. Far from being a complex web of a mess, this idea is quite simple. Unity. The various facets of the human live with and within each other, each affecting the other. Perhaps a fullness of being has to do with harmony of these forces? When one is dominant, this leads to a lack of contentment with one’s life? To a more hollow life?

But is this desirable? Would it be a good thing to understand oneself to the core? Maybe the essence of the human experience is a process of constant discovery? The problem with this idea is: What if nothing is left to discover?