Why we Learn
What separates humans from other animals? If we share some incredibly large percent of our DNA, our genetic material, with every other living thing that we know of, then how in the world are we different?
I think that humanity’s difference in the world comes from our understanding of those things around us. Whether that understanding came from a genetic quirk of evolution, or some sort of sentient overlord, or even something else entirely (black stony monoliths, anyone?) we certainly have an entirely different perception of what surrounds us than any other creature.
That said, I think that American culture- that bastion of society that the whole world seems to embrace- is moving us away from understanding, away from sentience, and toward insecthood. In America, we seem to universally shun knowledge and the acquisition thereof. This isn’t, I suppose, altogether surprising. America is, after all, a nation founded by exiles from understanding.
The pilgrims fled England because they, like countless other groups in the past and today, felt that their understanding of the world was so inflexibly correct that they had to move into a climate more accepting (or more uncaring) of dissension. Where did they seek asylum? If you said America, than you need to brush up on your history! They sought refuge with the Dutch, who didn’t really care about the puritans one way or the other. (Besides, England was happy to unload their political dissidents on anyone else!) But then the pilgrims fled from the Netherlands, because they didn’t like them either. (Aside: Who couldn’t like the Dutch? With a leader named William The Silent, I don’t know how much more accepting a climate they were hoping for! Oooh- that’s right, they complained about the “Dutchification” of their spawn; sorry puritans, I guess with the local customs, your children were getting a little too accepting.)
Anywho, from our ever-so-learned roots, all the way to our present day, we in America seem to regard intelligence as a con rather than a pro. As Mr. Kristof wrote in his excelent Op-Ed column for the New York Times:
From Singapore to Japan, politicians pretend to be smarter and better- educated than they actually are, because intellect is an asset at the polls. In the United States, almost alone among developed countries, politicians pretend to be less worldly and erudite than they are (Bill Clinton was masterful at hiding a brilliant mind behind folksy Arkansas sayings about pigs).
This strange and ultimately disturbing facet of our society is nowhere more evident than the endless debates on the majors (News networks, that is) on Barack Obama’s “elitism”, or lack thereof. Now while most of this is republican smear tactics, there can’t be a smear without someone to smell the mud; and in this case, the American people are sniffing forcefully.
“But what’s the problem?” I ask. “Why can’t Obama be elitist if he wants to be?” We, after all, idolize the elite. Guess which famous multimillionaire has a show on cable television? Bonus points if you can name more than four! We hold our politicians, and ourselves to a certain degree, to a double standard. We say we despise elitism, and yet we love the elite (or love to hate- but is there really a difference?).
This brings me back to my original point. What makes us any different from animals? We’re complex! We learn! We grow! We UNDERSTAND!
Almost, but not quite.
Our only understanding of the world comes from the breadth of our knowledge. “Specialization is for insects” said Robert Heinlien. When we narrow ourselves, and our knowledge, and our attention to the corners of our own tiny social universe- concentrate only on “American Idol”, “Dancing with the stars”, or even “Star Wars”, we’re losing something that makes us unique. If we limit ourselves to “Popular Mechanics” or even “Nature”, we’re missing out on entire facets of human experience. We are, in essence, becoming nothing but any other animal.
And that’s why we learn.
In my oppinion, any human has been learning from the beginning of his life to the certain moment because of not only one reason. Your argument, as I see, means that man should learn to prevent becoming nothing, and your “nothing” means actually “nothing for other people”. By this way, that man still may be the most important “living something” for his dog, or maybe insects, who drink human’s blood, — a man will be just a bottle of food. And will still be something instead of nothing, because if to say theoretically, difficult to differ consequence of blood for insects and meaning of character for other people, and hard to measure either.
On the other hand, keeping learning is not enough to be a human. For example, it’s necessary to keep self up to scratch. And it’s important to be “sociable” (don’t know, how else to say), to be conversable. And now — in our rhytm of life — it’s necessary to make money, to have good job, to be professional. Humanity is constructed of many pieces — huge and microscopic. And only one of them is need in learning.
And have you ever thought that any pet has been also learning while it lives? May be, none of them can think globally or dream about something for the future, but it also learns.
So, the question is not fixed yet, I think.
In response to the prior poster,
My point was that what makes us human as a species is our drive for learning- while things like making money, holding a job, and being a professional are all things that humans do and accomplish, I feel that they don’t separate us from the rest of the living things we know of.
And of course the question isn’t fixed- that’s why we’re thinking (and therefore LEARNING) about it in the first place!