Are They Human Yet?Chapter 1: Species This species, our target species, is a species like any
other. Homo sapiens,
for all its delusions of grandeur, obsession with its uniqueness,
convictions it's The One, The People, The Chosen, etc., is in its essence
a species like all the rest. It is from and of and by its planet. It arose from Earth terrain via Earth seas by Earth events,
like any other. Its continued
survival is centered there, still -- Earth-based, in Earth processes, from
Earth resources. This, of course, is a truism for The Project.
All societies on all the planets we know behave thus, at this point
in their development. Nevertheless, it hurts not to re-affirm its application and
applicability in any individual case.
As here, and now. The molecular essence of all life here is DNA
(deoxyribonucleic acid) and its associated molecules (RNAs, etc). It was only about half a century prior to this Thispian visit
when humankind began to decode its essence by understanding its structure.
And now, the first step nears completion.
The specific human code is being deciphered gene by gene.
Round One draws to a close. And it turns out (likeness of all life-on-Earth
confirmed) that the DNA of human genes works exactly like the DNA of all
other known organisms on the planet.
It is a feature common to all life on Earth
-- working within and through and by means of this common DNA
system. (We will not quibble, here, or in this report more generally,
over minor -- and only apparent exceptions.
Viruses, for example, can invade the cells of other organisms and
convince their DNA to reproduce the invader-virus' genetic materials,
which are often just RNA. The
general principle stands: all
life on Earth is based on, reproduces via a version of the DNA-based
system. There are no exceptions.)
Including humankind. 1.2
The Basics of (Human) Life The continued survival of each individual Homo
sapiens requires a few essential
substances from its environment.
They include things like air, water, food, a temperature within its
range of tolerance, and protection from significant dangers or threats in
its surroundings. Each human being needs oxygen to breathe.
Each extracts it from the atmosphere of
Earth. The process of
breathing, combined with its associated apparatus (lungs, blood supply,
etc) carries the oxygen to the individual cells of its body.
There, the oxygen combines with (now chemical) foods to provide
energy to the cell -- to fuel the activities of the cell, in fact. Humans require oxygen constantly throughout their
lives. Deprivation of more
than a few minutes results in the death of significant numbers of brain
cells. Before long, functions
critical to continued human life are threatened. Water is another essential element for human
existence. It is common
knowledge, now, that the human body is more than 90% water.
The species may be less aware that this water dependence (including
things such as the salinity of its blood) can be traced directly to its
evolutionary heritage. Its
remote ancestors -- they first appeared hundreds of millions of years in
the past -- evolved in the oceans of the planet, first.
Water was the environment for them, then.
Critical life history stages (such as the basics of reproduction,
sperm meeting egg) still occur in aqueous settings for most of the
planet's organisms. And Homo
sapiens is no exception here, either. Humans have very sophisticated systems for the
management and processing of their water needs.
A balance between retention and excretion is sustained in many
ways. At the cellular level
it is accomplished by ways and means that are never available to his
consciousness, yet nonetheless real for that.
Specialized organs have also developed to handle these processes,
and their functioning is another essential element in continued survival. Deprived of water, individual humans can survive
for hours, or even days, depending upon the immediate circumstances of
their surroundings. Water,
though on a less critical timeline than oxygen, is still an essential
element in human survival, nonetheless.
The need can be measured in hours or days (rather than minutes) but
it is as critically essential to survival, ultimately. Food is another item in humanity's ultimate,
non-negotiable survival kit. Originating,
originally, from its mother -- from the body of its mother -- food sources
become more diverse and widespread (and less reliable, as a result) with
age. The developing fetus within the mother's womb is
totally dependent upon the food she supplies.
It comes in chemical form, dissolved in her bloodstream, and
arrives at the fetus after crossing various membrane boundaries in her
placenta. This same system removes the by-products or excreta produced
by the fetus, as well, working in the other direction. (The human fetus, of course, lives in a totally
aqueous environment within its mother's womb -- reconfirming our
observations, above, on the evolutionary primacy of the water habitat. That environment is re-created inside the womb of the human
mother, and it is only after birth that her newborn child lives in the
world of air, and absorbs oxygen from that atmosphere through its own
lungs.) After birth, of course, for some period of time (it
can extend up to several years in certain circumstances) the human child
is primarily, if not totally, dependent upon its mother for its food. This is the milk of her breasts, one of the most nutritious
(and the species now knows defensive -- full of important protective as
well as nutritious -- chemicals) substances available.
It provides an essential early nutrition and protection for the
newborn. Its withdrawal, for
whatever reason, can be traumatic. Once weaned, the human child is normally still
dependent upon the adults, or perhaps the older children, in its vicinity
to provide it with sustenance at least in its early years.
The lengths of time before an individual can forage and survive on
its own are highly variable depending upon the whole range of resources in
the child's world: climate,
culture, social structure, parents and parenting, siblings, local
abundance of nature, etc. But
the early and prolonged dependence of the helpless human child is
notorious and widely understood by the species itself.
With the possible exception of the extremely old and infirm, there
are no more vulnerable groups of human beings than the youngest of
children. Shelter is probably the other single most critical
'basic' for successful human existence.
Particularly in climates that are outside the comfortable range for
the human body (at either end -- too hot or too cold), then some kind of
protection from those climatic variables becomes essential. It can be as simple as appropriate clothing or as complicated
as dwelling places or structures that provide this protection for much of
the year. And finally, successful human existence requires
some level of protection from what used to be thought of (before the
ascendance of multiple and various human technologies in recent decades
– many have both appeared and multiplied since our previous Thispian
team visited) as the 'vagaries of nature.'
Storms and earthquakes and fires and floods, for example.
Not to mention the socially derived dangers of wars and riots and
crimes and assaults. And
primevally, of course, predators such as large cats (lions and tigers and
leopards, for example) or sharks or rhinos were almost certainly preying
on humans, as and when they could. Once
again, the very old and the very young, the infirm and the incompetent
have generally had relatively little resistance or capability for dealing
with these threats on their own. Parents,
relatives, friends, or some other source(s) of protection have proven
essential to their continued safety, and indeed, existence. Without
such help, their vulnerability almost assures their demise, probably
associated with considerable pain and suffering in the process. 1.3
The 'Higher' Needs of Human Life Early in the twentieth century of their Christian
time-keeping, humans doing science had begun seriously to explore what
became known as ‘psychology.’ That
is, the systematic investigation of their own -- the species’ -- brain
and its functioning. They had dabbled in such study since late in the
previous century in various indirect, and even obscure, ways.
For example, the victims or patients talked, while the doctor or
specialist listened and queried.
They discussed dreams and feelings and loves and hatreds -- to
various levels of detail and with varying levels of candidness.
The major conclusion from all this talking and listening was that
there appeared to be a level of mental activity, or sub-consciousness, not
readily accessible to the functioning adult during its normal waking hours
and daily life. This
conclusion was controversial and difficult and highly contentious, then,
and it remained so for decades. The newer psychology focused more on observable
behaviors. If I provide this
stimulus (food) what will be the response (eat).
If I compound the process (stimulus:
bell, then food) then the response becomes similarly complex
(response: seek, salivate,
then eat) in anticipation. Schools
of psychology took such simple concepts, developed experimentally in dogs
and rats and mice and pigeons and ran with them.
Human behavior, they reasoned, was equally (or nearly so)
predictable. Provide stimulus
‘x,’ get response ‘y.’ End
of story. Many others, of course, disagreed. An egregious exaggeration of human vulnerability,
susceptibility to biological determinism and lack of ‘free will’ (the
latter’s existence and reality having been discussed by human
philosophers for millennia, by then) erupted.
The debates were engaged. Other psychologists began to explore a variety of
possible mechanisms -- other ways and means -- of explaining human
behavior. Some even
speculated and tried to experiment at the level of the physiology of the
human body. How did one nerve cell (or neuron) connect with the next?
How do they communicate with one another?
How are they organized and connected and communicating at the
various levels and sites and sub-sections visible to the anatomist
dissecting the human brain? Complex and intriguing and difficult questions were these, at
first. 1.4
An Hierarchy of Human
Needs And still other psychologists began to explore,
define and document what came to be described as ‘higher’ human needs.
The most notable was Abraham Maslow who developed a so-called
“Hierarchy of (Human) Needs.” It was thought of as a hierarchy because, in general,
investigators of the species Homo sapiens have tended to
work up such a pyramid from the bottom to the top, level by level.
The needs build on one another in the sense that higher level needs
became a central issue or concern when the lower ones were satisfied.
And in general, one was unlikely to be so concerned about higher
level needs in the hierarchy if all one’s attention and most of one’s
time was devoted to meeting the lower levels’ needs. At the bottom were the ‘animal’ or physical
needs we discussed above -- for air, food, water and the like.
Next, are safety needs for protection from dangers and unknowns.
Third, were needs for love and affection and belonging.
The next level was “esteem” needs, feeling satisfied and self
confident and valuable -- having respect for oneself.
And finally at the top of Maslow’s pyramid are
“self-actualization needs,” a devotion to something outside oneself or
a “calling” to be fulfilled. Overall, this hierarchy seemed reasonable to many
human students of human behavior. Of
course, one couldn’t spend much time fulfilling oneself if one were
starving or had to spend half of one’s waking hours hauling water. Human progress and achievements, then, could be categorized
according to the individual’s (and societies’ or cultures’) level in
the hierarchy. Many aspired
to (and achieved) levels three and four in certain societies. Very few, anywhere on the planet, were lucky and gifted and
assertive enough to truly accomplish self-actualization for any
significant period of time. Those
that could and did were highly reqarded, and greatly honored, by those
below. 1.5
The Question of Human
Intelligence Here, then, was human science beginning to explore
some of the questions surrounding human values and goals.
All of this was known to The Project before our arrival.
This was an integral part of our Thispian knowledge or database,
upon arrival (actually, previous to our arrival, from last time).
It was also a journey that human philosophers and wise men,
prophets and potentates, not to mention religious leaders had been taking
for millennia, already. Now,
more recently, “science” joined the fray. There were other social sciences and scientists
looking at similar questions at other levels.
Sociologists explored the universals of how humans in groups
related to one another. Anthropologists
lived with and studied and recorded the behaviors of other cultures,
hurrying to remote, often dangerous, and always challenging corners of
their globe -- usually at great personal sacrifice -- to find out what
they could before these distant cultures disappeared in the rapidly
amalgamating stew of humans on Earth.
Archaeologists dug up physical remains (artifacts) left behind by
ancient, often extinct, societies to figure out who they were and how they
behaved. All seeking, in their own ways and from their own
perspectives, answers to the universal queries of human beings of their
spiritual and intellectual leaders, forever:
Who are we? What are
we? Why are we here? And whence, finally ...? From all directions, in all directions imaginable,
the quest emerged. Debates
raged. The highly improbable
happened and the unbelievable hypotheses became universal dogma, and the
quest moved on. Human
intelligence was now actively seeking the understanding, finally, of
itself, as well as its world. One
of the major distinguishing characteristics of this species, its own
species, Homo sapiens, was its impressive and dominant --
over-riding, really -- intelligence.
The secrets unlocking the whole of the natural world were crumbling
as fast as they could be defined: the
secrets of the atom, the origins of the physical universe, the chemical
composition and functioning of all living matter, the ultimate weapons of
destruction, the list seemed never-ending, then.
Conquest and domination and control of the natural world was
proceeding apace, everywhere on (and sometimes off) the planet, as well. It began to seem as though -- indeed, many were
hoodwinked or self-deceived (blinded?) into believing -- that this
overriding intelligence of this species defined its uniqueness.
They denied -- and would soon prove, any day now even for the
sceptics (the others were already convinced) -- that this species was like
the others, after all. That
it was so smart it could outwit, control, destroy, even manage the rest. Much hubris accompanied the great intelligence of Homo
sapiens, as well, it seems. For many, even most of those who considered the
issue, were tending to believe in this cause, their cause, the triumph of
one species (their species) over all the rest. But there were sceptics, still -- though small in
number and excluded from many of the fora and rewards and awards of the
mainstream’s explorations. They
persisted, however, despite their increasingly harsh tone.
They weren’t very happy in their state of ostracism, of course. They tended to be, these sceptics, people who had
studied history or historical processes (such as biological evolution).
They had, as a group, a very long term perspective on the
planet’s origins and proceedings and inhabitants.
They had learned over and over in their studies that what goes up,
comes down. That ‘in’
matches, or parallels, or even evokes ‘out.’
They even questioned the most basic, sacrosanct beliefs of their
time: in concepts such as
‘progress,’ in the species beyond all species, in the ultimate triumph
of goodness, in the pursuit of contentment, in ....
They were dubbed professional nay-sayers by many, ignored by most.
And yet, they continued their quest.
Their intelligence, their world-view, their understanding drove
them to it. Many of the scientists, now studying new sciences
such as ecology, began to explore anew the connections between this
dominant species, Homo sapiens, and the rest of the natural world
on Earth. They invented terms
like ‘biophilia’ to describe ancient and original ties or feelings or
even emotions between human beings and the world of nature.
More and more, the science of humanity was linking the species with
its physical origins on the planet. And
suggesting that awareness and not denial, that sensitivity and not
avoidance, that responsiveness and not control were appropriate responses
to the species’ past, as well. Such
thinking would attack, ultimately, the hubris not only of human
technologies and ‘progress’ in general, but especially the leaders and
soothsayers who would take the species, faster and faster, down this
control and command and dominance and destruction path.
Perhaps whatever killing and destruction they absolutely had to do
could be tempered by respect and understanding and maybe even a bit of
wonderment for the system that brought them, and sustained them and
would... Or so the sceptics
thought. 1.6
The Quest for Human Uniqueness Human science, then, also continued its invasion of
issues and concerns previously considered to be non-scientific, i.e.,
outside the purview of science or even beyond a scientific methodology or
approach. At the same time,
human science opened up whole new areas of ethical and moral concern --
things that were never dreamed possible were now happening.
Reproduction of the species was becoming just another human
technology -- and rapidly. Events
previously left to the functioning of the reproductive systems of two
coupling adult humans (one male, one female) were now happening in
laboratories around the planet. They were under human control,
technologically, now. Anyone who could afford the technology could
control the process. Designer
babies began to appear. Babies
without heterosexual couples as ‘parents’ began to emerge.
The traditional family of recent Western tradition (one male, one
female, one house, etc) had disappeared before their very eyes.
Most were looking elsewhere. Meanwhile, in the academy, the quest for human
uniqueness was also crashing, though again, many were looking elsewhere,
feigning lack of interest, or non-concern, while secretly mortified.
Hurrying back to church for re-confirmation of ancient needs to
believe. Each of the
‘unique’ human traits had crashed.
Chimpanzees not only used tools but also understood and could use
sign language. They had known
ever since Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace a century and one half
before, that humankind, the species, was descended from common ancestors
with today’s apes and chimpanzees.
Many were still in denial. Where then, and how, to salvage the human species
self-esteem on this point? How
was it -- how were they -- unique? Well,
intelligence might be one area (although the whales and dolphins might yet
give them a run for their money in that area).
As this report has already shown, humans are exceedingly
intelligent animals. Their
brains are about three times the volume of the chimp’s, for example. Their other tantalizing trait for uniqueness is
their sex. Humans are, by the
standards of the animal world, exceedingly sexy.
Though they spend less time at it than, for example, the bonobos
(one species of chimpanzee), they are more blatant, better designed, more
physically dedicated, more obsessive if not more obsessed, then, in its
pursuit. The sex of humans originates early in their
development, as we shall soon see, but its origins are common to both
sexes. The organs of sex in
the human sexes are, as the biologists would say, homologous.
They originate in the same places, but end up doing different
things. Come together, then, human male and female, for all
of your species, now. Apply
your intelligence to your sex for us all to know and share that
understanding, now. As with
all of this report, The Project has decided to focus primarily on the vast
body of knowledge available to the species, now, but unconsolidated,
spread out in the minds of various and sundry experts from all over the
planet. The Project
aspires not only to advance our role, or rather our activities, on
this planet –actually to complete our assignment and get on to the next
-- but perhaps also, to advance the self-awareness and understanding of
the dominant species itself -- dare we hope, in its own and the planet’s
best interest? To begin, let us explore how this species, Homo
sapiens -- in this area where the hidden and unconscious, unknown and
un-admitted have been so controversial for so long – does sex, sexes
itself and its world. We begin with the male.
***
***
*** |