Before anyone says anything, let me clarify: NO, this is not about Salman Khan’s “charity” fashion brand.
The word “human”, biologically means “a bipedal primate belonging to the genus Homo”. But what actually defines humanity?
Usually, when we want to describe an act of extreme cruelty, we use the word “inhumane”, depicting humanity to be some compassionate force which will frown upon such acts. But then, we say things like desires for revenge are “natural human characteristics”, showing that maybe humanity isn’t as compassionate as we wish it to be. But how? How can such conflicting ideas about what is human and what is not exist?
After deep discussion with one of my friends during a painstakingly long bus ride, I stumbled upon the idea, that perhaps we have a definition of humanity, but it is not one that is set in stone. We classify things based on what is good and what is bad or what is fair and what is not; this is what helps us survive. We can tell the difference between a poisonous tree and a source of food only because we classified it early on.
(Tangent: Maybe this is what racism started out as. Maybe first it was just a harmless way of differentiation between people of different origins.)
However, when a definition is given to a word, it is like you are putting a box around it, limiting what it is to a four-walled boundary – and for all one knows, making it lose a little bit of its beauty. The concept of being human is exactly like this, because humanity is not something that can be explained or defined – just like love, or the Internet, or the word “the”.
The best way to conclude this is to just stop thinking.
“Human nature is not obliged to be consistent.”
― Lucy Maud Montgomery
If you enjoyed reading this, please hit that like button and follow my blog to get notified when I update!