In the days after the tragic death of Harambe the gorilla, many different discussion topics have been brought up: whether the zoo should have shot him, whether or not the parents are at fault, and so on.
One in particular has caught my attention, however: whether or not we should keep wild animals in captivity. Those who say we shouldn't argue that it's harmful to the animals and morally wrong to keep them from their natural state. Those in the other camp, say that the animals are (generally) happy and healthy, safe from the harm of natural predators and poachers, and that it allows for research opportunities that would otherwise not be possible in the wild. The last of these points sent me on a long rumination about knowledge as a whole - it's value, it's dangers, and when it goes too far.
Knowledge Is What Makes Us Human
If you were to ask me to choose one trait that sets human beings apart from other animals, it would be knowledge. Our innate ability to observe the world around us, draw connections between seemingly disparate pieces of information, and form and test hypotheses to see whether this connection is true allows us to manipulate the world around us and enrich our lives.
Beginning with questions as simple as, "Can I use this stick to reach that piece of fruit?", we have progressed to the point of building massive continent-spanning infrastructure, eradicating once-deadly diseases, and launching a man to the moon. Knowledge has led us down this road to civilization as we know it, and continues to be the single most important force that guides humanity into the future.
We Are Creatures Of Natural Curiosity
Another word comes to mind when describing the human animal: curious. From birth, we are creatures who long to understand more about our world, how we interact with it, and how it interacts back. Infants grab and bite at objects to see how they feel, how they move, how they taste, etc. Young children ask frequent questions, sometimes to the annoyance of their parents, to find the reasons behind how things work and why they are so.
Even teenagers, as apathetic as they may sometimes be towards their studies, continue to learn how other humans work and respond, and how to best go about their own interactions with these often confusing creatures. The thirst for knowledge is a part of our nature that cannot be suppressed, and we continue to learn even if we are not aware of it. It has driven us to create the ever more advanced civilization we call home and is still a core aspect of the human spirit.
Consistently Adding To Our Knowledge Is Critical
There is never a point in life where the human race has said, "We've got it all covered, let's wrap this learning thing up!". There have certainly been dry spells of research over time in certain places, but even in those regions, there was always someone who was adding to the human knowledge base. They were finding new things, disproving faulty old ideas, or transferring knowledge to another form for future generations to utilize.
This continuous drive to improve and update what we know is what keeps civilization moving forward. New ideas are tested, filtering those that work from those that don't. Old ones are updated with the most current theories, or thrown out entirely if they prove incorrect. While no idea will ever be perfectly complete, we continue to refine what we know so that it more accurately reflects reality. The closer to ideal our knowledge is, the better we can make life for our entire species. If we were to ever stagnate our learning as a society, we would fail as a species.
Knowledge And Its Pursuit Leads To Freedom and Happiness...
There is an old adage that goes "ignorance is bliss", but if you were to ask anyone, I doubt that they would say they agree. The ability for people to know and understand what is going on around them, in nature and among other people, is critically important to maintaining a free, functioning society. For nature, knowing what the weather will be several days ahead helps for a family to plan when they will run errands, all the way up to federal governments organizing evacuations before disaster strikes.
In the social sphere, a population's right to know what their leaders and representatives are doing or not doing allows people to make informed decisions about who they choose to lead them, or whether a more radical form of change is warranted. Leaders suppress their population's access to knowledge when they wish to control, suppress, or otherwise deceive them. The results in such situations are inevitably disastrous. The free flow of well-researched, correct information keeps our civilization healthy and functional, and prevents us from being manipulated by those would do so.
...But It Can Also Lead To Destruction And Suffering
In addition to being naturally curious, some humans naturally possess a destructive nature as well. These two aspects combined has led to some of the darkest events in human history. Discoveries originally intended to benefit the human race lead to destruction and harm when in the wrong hands. It is doubtful that Henri Becquerel and Marie Curie intended for their research on radiation to eventually be used for the simultaneous eradication of tens of thousands of people via nuclear weapons.
We see this corruption of knowledge in life everyday, through the wars we fight, and those who would spread false information of "miracle cures" and other perverted claims to make an ill-gotten profit. There are also those who would go too far for the acquisition of knowledge, causing incalculable suffering for the sake of discovery. The immolation of live animals in a nuclear bomb test. The uneducated and uninformed being falsely told they are being treated in a clinical trial, just to see the effects of a deadly disease. Nazi prisoners forced to act as unwilling test subjects in gruesome experiments. None of these acts can be considered justified today, and show just how dangerous unbridled pursuit of understanding can be.
The Grey Area Of Ethics
To combat the dark side of knowledge and how we pursue it, we employ ethics to govern research and experimentation. None of the above-mentioned atrocities would be considered ethical by today's standards, as our morality has advanced with our understanding and we begin to draw the line on what is too far. With these rules, we work to ensure that any knowledge obtained is done so with limited harm to others and our environment, and that we do not open up areas that could lead to unimaginable disasters.
Unfortunately, as with our understanding of the world, no code of ethics will ever be perfect. Without a direct metric to measure it against, there is no definite "right" and "wrong", and it is impossible to see what impact certain research will have in the future. What is deemed as moral changes over time, and what may be considered acceptable by one generation may be considered abhorrent by the next.
Consider the testing of cosmetics on animals: this was not even considered an issue before, but as we have come to value animals more over time, it has become a hotly debated issue. What is deemed "acceptable" knowledge changes as well; the recent push to alter the genetics of human embryos has led to many governments and scientific bodies decrying such practices out of the fear that it would eventually lead to a class of genetic "haves" and "have-nots". There is no guarantee of this, but is has caused enough fear in people to lead to efforts to stop it. As the morals and beliefs of society remain dynamic, so will the code of ethics that we abide by.
Final Thoughts
Knowledge can be a frightening thing. It can reveal so much of the world to us, yet leave us feeling like we understand less than we had originally thought. It shows us not only the beautiful and wondrous side of reality and human nature, but also the ugly and corrupted side as well. Despite at times making us feeling endangered and helpless, knowledge is not something that should be feared. It is the only method we have to understand the unknown and make us better as people and a species. To deny our curiosity is a sin against our nature as human beings, and when we temper it with ethics, it lets knowledge become the most powerful force to instigate change that we possess.
So what are everyone's thoughts on knowledge, research, and its place in society? Feel free to share!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
2Opinion
Garbage. It's just flat out incorrect.
Good typing practice though.
You have an explanation for that?
I've a long one involving personhood ethics and bringing up how discriminatory this is the disabled and socioeconimucally challenged just on the basis of "Knowledge makes us human" alone.
Then the whole misunderstanding of what ethics is and how you're just bastardizing the term because it makes you feel smarter.
But I'll spare is both my distasteful disdain. You're just wrong.
Wow, aren't we an arrogant little man, hm? Hope your little ramble makes you feel superior. If you are really that offended by my article, just don't read it. Have a wonderful day.
I can't unread things, drivel like this included.
Don't worry. It will wow the others.
If you'd like to stop resorting to insults and instead produce a rational, thought out set of counterpoints, I would genuinely love to hear it. Otherwise, please stop embarrassing yoirswld, it's kind of awkward.
I already produced two.
1. How does this account for the retarded and disadvantaged of using knowledge as the basis for personhood? Or worse human status. I just fixed it for you.
2. What brand of "ethics" are you declaring the pursuit is rightful?
Answer: you've no fucking clue. That's how you wrote this to begin with. You didn't even answer for the two points brought p because you're too busy being "hurt" looking for a "rational discussion" on how you've no goddamn clue what you're on about.
1. I never once said that knowledge is the basis for "personhood", I stated that it separates us from other species. It is what has allowed us to advance from being tribe-dwelling hunters to an organized globe-spanning, while other species have not. I would never argue that someone who is mentally disabled or disadvantaged is somehow "not human" or otherwise inferior. That is an entirely separate discussion from what I was tackling, so I fail to see how you derived this point from my article.
2. I am honestly not sure what you mean by "bastardizing ethics" here. I make no declaration about what it actually right and wrong, save for a few examples that a vast majority of people in this day and age would declare "atrocities", specifically the Tuskegee experiments and Nazi human experimentation. It is simply an examoination of how what we define as "ethical" is bound to change over time, as many aspects of morality are fluid and will certainly vary.
1. I never once said that knowledge is the basis for "personhood", I stated that it separates us from other species.
That... So you're going that route? Fine. Genetics separates is from other species. That's it. I can't believe you shut yourself down just like that.
Look, you got some good typing practice in today. Be proud.
What "route" am I taking, and how am I "shutting myself down"? If you can actually explain what you truly find wrong with my arguments, I am all ears. I truly mean that, I am always up for hearing different opinions. The insults and language make you hard to take seriously, though.
I would really love to know why my article rubs you so wrong. It is not meant to be a deep, perfect exploration of how knowledge is the sole aspect of the human spirit. It is intended to encourage people to not abandon their curiosity out of fear, and to always continue learning. It's an opinion piece, no more, no less.
Their contradictory. If you're literal you're talking biology. If you're philosophical you're referring to personhood. It's that simple. You're really not sure what you're even trying to say.
You're not even making a valid premise. The ability to form a bunch of sentences isn't enough. The basis makes no sense and requires the reader to fill in for you.
And you don't even know it because you know what you're saying even if you don't know how to convey it.
I've given you too much credit.
You just wanted to write a "feel good" that's summarized, by you, in under a sentence.
What a waste of time.
The entire argument is meant to be philosophical, not biological. People have long discussed what is innately human and this is simply my evaluation of things. You are making a concerted effort to paint it black and white, while the whole core of philosophy is that there is no true black and white. If it were, we would't have philosophy! All theories and ideas are imperfect, as is mine. I never claimed it was perfect, and still do not.
If you feel that it was a waste of time, then that's on you, not me. They are called "myTake" for a reason - they are editorials. If you do not agree, that is fine. If you wish to be taken seriously however, it would be wise to begin your discussion with your questions (which were legitimate), not a sweeping insult.
I should have killed myself last year. Humans are infuriatingly dumb. Ironic.
And on that dramatic quote, I take my leave to join the pitifully dumb humans. Good day to you, sir.
Goodday.
Knowledge can be used for both good and evil.