The question is not why humans cry, but why they laugh. I love to laugh. Sometimes I love a good cry.
But we are all wired to laugh. We do it more often than crying. Even when bombs are falling, we will try. We will try until there is no food. No blankets. No water. No love.
— Ni Ha, The Apple Book
You like to read.
You don’t want another dystopian novel, though they have their place …
You want to think about your journey as well as others’.
You believe in the Golden Rule’
You are here to engage in all of that.
Helen J. Batchelder
An historian-philosopher with roots in psychology, anthropology, biology, and music, drawn to the thread that ties all the parts of a person together — the loose, strong ribbon from the time of your inception to who you are right this second — as well as what ties all things and people together with their pasts.
The deep past.
Thanks to books including David Wengow and the late David Graeber’s The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity, we are able to know that people who lived over tens of thousands of years ago made the same concessions we do concerning loved ones, one of the examples being a civilization that was thought to be barbaric but whose items and postures in grave sites indicate a capacity for a great deal of compassion. If compassion was understood 20,000 years ago, in what way might someone on our maternal or paternal line have used or expressed it?
To look for commonalities such as compassion in our ancestors — our very ancient ancestors — is heart-warming and it also gives our own lives context. We can begin to think of ourselves as the most current rendition of Homo sapiens, which ought to give us pause and grant us peace. Instead, everywhere: Conflict.
To look for sources of whatever causes conflict, with or without war, is usually frightening because we understand the repercussions and know how quick a person can snap. In the case of war, we usually do know the leaders involved and their interests and their allies and their allies’ interests and the impediments toward advancement thereof and we think we know the cause. But to say, oh, so and so behaved this way — the Spanish, for instance, who cut off the hands or feet of indigenous peoples — in order to achieve dominance; well, isn’t that evil? And what about the people who flock to the side of such evil? And those ones over there on the margins, not really understanding what’s evil, but not necessarily committed to helping it out … ? And by the way why are we so unused to using the word evil? What would be better? Grandiose Ideas of Dominance?
The Iliad begins with the word “Anger.” Romeo and Juliet begins with a gesture of disrespect. I want us to discuss all of this. To try to root out the real causes. To participate, there is just one rule: provide research. Do not be opinionated: back up what you’re saying with research and share your sources.
To get started, see The Leading Question.