Are Humans Still Considered as the Most Rational
5 mins read

Are Humans Still Considered as the Most Rational

In a world where men are not sure they are men and women are not sure they are women. What is certain is uncertain. Over centuries of work, humans considered themselves as the most rational of all animals. Even when animals would retain their birth identities and also exercise their instinctive duties to the best of their capacities. Only to be disrupted once in a while by human confusion in gender and roles from time to time.

The philosophical slogan ‘humans are rational beings’ and the psychological standard ‘humans have a higher thought process’ comes to naught logically. Reason would consider a harmful act illegal and self harm would be taken into serious consideration. Yet in an era or error, where human rights have gotten away from the clause of responsibility. Self harm has becomes a right and their is justification in individuality rather than humanity. ” Its my body I will do what is most comfortable for it” has found common place. This negates the reality of time evolution which spans across 24 hours turning the now into the past in a blink of an eye. For instance what one may want to be as a child changes, at teenage and changes at the youth stage and changes again in an adult state or aging state.

Education was one way to inculcate principles as well as measures that would guide the passage through life. But education has become a centre of diffusion of irrationality while crippling rational thought and intuition. People are trained in thoughts of others which are still under research yet the standard of thought is to cramming for an exam. “One must know only what is given – not beyond.” However in all this there is the flare of rights without responsibility.

If one chooses to use their bodies in a way that gives irreparable damage individually, it is a right yet the consequences of their actions may require support from others whom they called fools for not supporting their right.

The reality that humans are connected and form a support mechanism, most time alienates the right to individual choices. An the current model is designed to champion the individual over the collective. And the collective are groomed to ignore the individual.

When does a right become right. Perhaps when that right meets a reasonable need. For instance the right to health emerges when people require good health services. But it also moves hand in hand with their will to sustain health and contribute to it. Eating all junk and becoming junk, then blaming everyone for ones health does not show a rational mind. It shows forfeited virtues of self control, wisdom, honesty and integrity. The right to food calls for the intellect to consider a food culture that sustains a population both physically and in good health. That is why the practice of handouts de-humanises the beneficiary making them objects.

Can humans be rational beings without knowing their identity anymore or valuing their capacity regardless of race.

Many years ago a baby was a delight to behold because it reminded everyone of the cycle of life. Everyone was born and everyone would die. There was a natural means of depopulation and population control without the thought of conception limitations, fetal termination and many other engagements.

There places on the globe where polygamy is practiced and children are produced in hoards but the population is small because the environment never gives these people a chance to go past their teens or youth. In some parts of the world careers have overtaken the course of reproduction, by the time people think of having children its menopause time. Does the world really need to enforce population control and reinvent it in many ways.

If the experiment of evolution is not happening again and no ape has since transformed to human. Then what is the logic. Apart from a fancy that there is a race referred to as ‘apes’ and is said to be the source of human genome. Could it be evolution was a simple explanation about how humans could have evolved from the black pigment. But the ape theory is still understudy and therefore is not a conclusive standard to be pronounced.

Plato had a conviction that the human soul had the capacity to overcome appetites and desires, allowing for reason to prevail. That conviction would hold today if individual desires at an immediate time did not dictate a life long choice of gender, reproduction, career among others.

Humans have a time evolution reality that changes instantly in a course of seconds, minutes, hours and space. What is desired now can be neglected in the nearest stance. But if desires are becoming the standard. Then its time to publish a book called the end of human reason.