On being Human

Anyone who reads this is, by all accounts, a human being. But then what are human beings? And I don’t just mean the physical attributes of the species Homo Sapiens, I ask what else is there, or should there be, to determine that a human being is truly “human”?

Of course there are the ultimate hypothetical questions – “Why are we here? Why us?” These I cannot answer. Obviously. So what I’ll do is remove some of what I would consider to be the negatives (not in any particular order of importance) from the “equation” that determines a true(?) human.

We are not here just to make money.

We are not here to kill each other.

We are not here to exploit or take unfair advantage of others.

We are not here to enslave others.

We are not here to force either men or women to adopt certain, exclusive, roles.

We are not here to be forced or coerced into believing any one particular belief, or political, system is the only correct one.

We are not here to pillage and destroy the only home we know – Planet Earth.

This narrows things down somewhat. While this may seem like a watered down version of the biblical Ten Commandments - it is not supposed to be. 

These “negatives” hone in on a favourite subject of mine – Ethics.

To avoid falling into the all to human trap, or mind set, of believing that ignoring any of the “negatives” will have few or no consequences, I ask just three questions:-

1.     Would you like it if you were caught up, as a victim, by any of the negatives?

2.     Why not treat everyone, yes everyone, as you would like to be treated?

3.     Furthermore, if everyone, yes EVERYONE, did what you are doing, or proposing to do, would the World be a better place?

If the answer to any of these questions is “No” (as I strongly suspect), then don’t do it.

Simple really!

In my understanding, to be “human”, in the truest sense of the word, is to be ethical. I do not believe there are any viable alternatives. 

Guns

Let there be no confusion about this. Guns were invented for one purpose only – to kill living things. Generally people; people in war situations. Though this, as we are only too aware, is not always the case.

Killing people, by whatever means (outside of war) is generally considered a crime – unlawful killing or manslaughter, if not murder.

There is certainly a case for farmers and other licenced operatives, to be allowed to own guns to shoot and kill vermin. There is also a case to allow licenced guns to be used for competition purposes.

I, personally, can envisage no other reason to own a gun of any description. Who would you want to kill? And why?

I have always believed that violence, of whatever kind, is the last resort of the morally bankrupt. Now for some proponents of gun ownership to state that “It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun”, is still a call to kill. How do you stop a “bad guy with a gun” if not by killing him (or her)?

This argument about good guys with guns etc, just begs the question. Would giving everyone, yes everyone, access to a gun of some sort be a better antidote to violence in society than removing all guns and not allowing anyone to own a gun?

Of course there will always be the criminal element who acquire weapons by illegal means. But they would be very few and relatively easy for the authorities to manage.

So a simple question, everyone with a gun or nobody (apart from those with a licence) with a gun?

You choose.

Where is God?

I have no argument with people who believe in Evolution or alternatively in Creation – I am firmly of the opinion that both can exist alongside each other. Why not? There is only one God, as far I know, and if He made everything (everything from amoeba to plants to animals and us humans) who are we to argue over how He arranged for this wondrous feat to occur?

What I have difficulty in understanding is why whole-hearted believers in “the Book” – be it the Koran, Bible, the Torah or Vedic scriptures - opt so vigorously for one OR the other belief. We just do not know (and are unlikely ever to find out) what He was thinking about at the time.

And does it really matter? We are all here, on this small planet circling an averaged sized sun which is part of a very ordinary galaxy in an unimaginably large universe.

So I ask the question posed by the title of this post – “Where is God?”

If as I believe nothing (repeat nothing) can exist without His knowledge – because He is omnipotent – then everything (repeat everything) has his imprint and is therefore a part of God’s plan. You, me, the trees, the flowers, fish, birds, insects, galaxies – everything is here because He wished it to be so. 

So God is everything.

To fight over who believes what; to kill someone who does not hold to your particular belief system; to start a war to impose your particular form of religious belief on others is insane! To me it gives the lie to their belief in God. To them God is their special God – not your God, not my God and certainly not one over-arching Supreme Being.

And, of course, only they know what their particular, special God wants, therefore they have to enforce this on others. Is this because He tells them to?

All this leads to other important questions that each of us need to answer – “Who am I? Who or What made the universe? What is my relationship to the Who or What?”

So, where is God?

Now it could be virtual war!

There have been reports in the media about the possibility of the Americans developing autonomous robotic weapons to perform more and more front-line activities. These are robots that (they hope) will think logically and perform many of the tasks currently performed by human soldiers.

The whole reason behind this is to save soldier’s lives. Very laudable and should be encouraged. But I believe this misses the mark by a wide margin.

It misses the mark because it ignores the fact that no one ever really “wins” a war – the long term effects of wars are unforeseeable and normally very unpleasant. The “victors” would have incurred an enormous financial and human cost – to be felt for generations. And the cost to the “losers” is almost incalculable; tremendous damage to infrastructure and housing and huge loss of life in all sectors. So why fight?

I suggest that the robot “phase” be skipped over entirely and that those who wish to satisfy their urge to fight, destroy and to kill engage in a “virtual” war. Computer technology has advanced to the stage where such “wars” could be very realistic – a form of advanced computer game. To develop this concept a stage further robots should be devised that would  fight these “virtual” wars on our behalf!!

Think of all the money that would be saved! Think of all the lives that would be saved! Think of all the productive elements that could be directed into improving the underdeveloped regions of the world! Think of all the money, previously spent on military research, that could be used to improve the general human condition – health care (cancer for one thing), research into mental well-being (depression, schizophrenia and such like) that debilitates millions of people – and then there is food production.

It is completely illogical and defies rational thought that we (that is human beings) should spent vast amounts of money developing new and better ways to kill our fellow beings while millions are starving to death.

Why not fight “virtual” wars and spend the money saved to help our fellow beings!

Think about it.

Distant Death - effects of UAVs or Drones

Amended: 29 September 2019.
There has been recent research into the "moral dissonance" and "sniper syndrome" experienced by pilots of UAV or drone aircraft.

Amended: 8 Dec 2015:
Both the US military and the UK military are now finding that the stress of piloting a UAV (drone) is such that many pilots are "burning out" and suffering psychological problems.

I originally wrote this in 2012 - so while I may have been slightly "ahead" regarding this matter, to me it is a "no brainer" for the following reasons:-

I wonder what it must be like sitting in a chair in front of a large computer screen handling the controls of a Predator drone unmanned aircraft flying 12000 km away? I wonder especially how I would feel at the moment I saw a “target” individual appear on the screen and was authorised to press the “fire’ button sending a missile to destroy that target person? I wonder how I would feel after I witnessed the resulting explosion, knowing that the target individual was now dead or at least very seriously injured? I wonder how I would feel when I went home that night and spoke to my wife and children knowing that, through my actions, I had denied someone the ability to do the very things that I was doing?

Would I be glad that I had rid the Earth of a bad person? Would I be jubilant I had struck a blow for peace? Would I be aware of the irony in what I had done? Would I be interested in hearing the reasons why the person I have just killed – from my desk 12000 km distant – was deemed by my superiors to be a worthy target? Would I care that he had a family and that he loved his wife and children – and that they loved him? Would I care that some injustice, actual or perceived, suffered by this person was blamed on the “Great Satan” America. Would I be interested in hearing that this injustice (actual or perceived) had so affected him that he tried to redress the affects of the injustice in the only effective way he knew – violence against “The West”?

What would I have done differently if I had actually been on the ground seeking this individual? What would have done if I actually confronted him? What would I have done in the heat of the moment amid the flies and dust and heat and the smell of perspiration and fear – his and my own? What would I have done when I saw the expression in his eyes – the surprise; or the determination to kill or be killed; or the fear or pleading for life? What would I have done if I noticed he was unarmed?

In these circumstances would I be chivalrous and ask him to surrender? In these circumstances would I shoot first and damn the consequences?

Maybe, if I was still at my desk, I would compare notes with those at other controls at other desks flying other drones. Maybe I would be competitive and strive to “shoot and outscore” the others. Maybe, just maybe, I might experience a pang of guilt that someone I never knew, but was instructed to kill, died as a result of my actions; someone I knew only from a foreshortened aerial image taken from an altitude of 10 000 metres some 12 000 km from my computer screen.

Surely everyone has a right to live? Who am I to judge otherwise? Who are those unworthy of life? Am I? I wonder.

I wonder too, if at any stage of my day, the sentiments expressed by the famous lines written by John Donne, (1572 – 1631) would cross my mind:

“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

I just wonder at the psychological effects this distant death may have if I had to do this day after day? I wonder.