headermask image

header image

How we make each other feel.

“I’ve learned that

people will forget what you said,

people will forget what you did,

but people will never forget

how you made them feel.”

Maya Angelou

Here’s a quote that seems universally true of human nature. What does that tell us?

If human nature were all about being compassionate and easily affected by the words and actions of others, you’d think we could develop protocols for dealing with one another a bit more smoothly.

Nope. No such luck.

And yet, doesn’t it seem correct to assume that natural selection would have favored groups of human beings that looked after one another–you know, safety in numbers and all that? The cynic quickly adds, however, that wealth and circumstances will make the final cuts in determining the genetic makeup–and perhaps the psychology–of future generations. (Where do innate instincts stop and learned traits pick up the slack anyway?)

What strikes me as frightening and ironic is that there are a fair number of ladder-climbing power-mongers in today’s world who sincerely believe that compassion and charity are signs of weakness–and these people tend to reach positions of influence, in turn becoming the worst kind of role model.

One of my fav philosophy professors, Bernard Williams, once took a look at my band-name emblazoned t-shirt and asked me, ‘What machine, exactly, do you propose we rage against?’ As usual, he caught me off guard, but I think I’ve got an answer for him now.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds

5 Comments so far (Add 1 more)

  1. You (and readers) might be interested in Stanford Uni Engineering Prof Bob Sutton who is doing a great job of marketing his latest book The No Asshole Rule.

    Your post sounds suspiciously like it’s verging on the naive and cliched “can’t we all just get alonnnngggg?” (to be said in annoying, whiny voice). Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind, even tho it might offend some, and there are folks who aim that high and don’t really care either if they offend or if people get (temporarily) upset. So I’m not sure I agree.

    As for raging against the machine, that reminded me of this very cool video that is all the rage of the edtech blogosphere. The Machine is Us. tho the title is rather ominous, I’m not sure that is the maker’s intention. Anyway, it’s cool. Check it out.

    1. Marco Polo on February 20th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
  2. Enjoyed the links Marco.
    The No Asshole Rule seems to be along the lines of what I was getting at. And your reference to the Web 2.0 in 5 minutes link provides a nice lead in to the following point: What I am suggesting is not that ‘we all just get alonnnngggg,’ but that something is wrong with human nature when the goal for a fair number of people on this planet is to become ‘fuck you rich’–a term used by John Battelle to describe
    the creators of You Tube after being bought out by Google (which happens to be run by another pair of ‘fuck you rich’ young men). That phrase does not describe a shrewd attitude that helps one to succeed, but rather the license to be an unfeeling prick –if you so choose– once you join the ranks of the wealthiest and most famous among us. Now, I’m not claiming that all powerful people will exercise their right to be assholes, but I would argue that the desire to be above the rules is counter-productive, anti-social, and far too glorified in the media.

    2. realityonastick on February 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
  3. The Bob sutton link is great, Marc. I added his blog to my list for future checking.

    3. lifebeyondsixty on February 21st, 2007 at 9:47 am
  4. It put it down to spiritual bankruptcy. It is nothing to do with ‘ can’t we all get along’, we don’t have to get along but we do have to give a shit about other people.
    Some people are running around accumulating power and wealth, when what the planet needs,
    is a massive change in group consciousness.
    Some spiritual evolution please.

    4. Miss Behaving on February 21st, 2007 at 10:38 am
  5. Miss Behaving: Apart from my sophomoric aversion to all things spiritually defined, I think you’ve hit it on the head. It reminds me of a riveting
    1971 discussion between Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucalt which revolved largely around the concept of human nature and whether or not it is helpful to appeal to idealistic notions of universal human characteristics when considering issues related to political philosophy. Unfortunately, many viewers called the exchange a ‘debate’ and felt the need to determine a winner and loser….but we’ve already covered my thoughts on that ;-)

    5. realityonastick on February 21st, 2007 at 9:08 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*