Forest Gump—Chemically Incompetent Hence A Happy Bastard

Caution: A little too heavy, if totally incomprehensible, do not worry, I didn’t get it myself, though I wrote it.  

I think, the darker traits of human like—envy, vanity, pride just to name a few, come form the ability of brain to register these emotions through complex chemical processes, which are catalyzed through social parameters, which are equally complex. Net result of such a chemical/social ultra complexity is: how you react in social frame work—ranging from simply emotionally hurting oneself/other, or to the extreme of taking ones/others life. All the adult human brain is capable of doing this, as long as the chemical reactions in it don’t cross the line of sanity, in the lab of social experiments.

Interestingly, rather bizarrely, it’s the social parameters that DRAW this line of sanity.   It’s the reason, why for different societies, different benchmark of sanity, on different issues running from covering your toes in burkha to mutilating your genitals for social acceptance.

For instance, for Evangelical Christians, life begins at inception, so every embryonic cell has soul. Destroying it would be equivalent of taking life, you can imagine what would be like destroying a fetus, but at the same time, has no compunction whatsoever, while eating beef. On the other hand Hindus have no compunction* whatsoever splattering human fetus like any other poultry eggs, while revering bovine as a mother/father. Yet on another hand (my argument has many hands like Hindu Goddess) for Islam, Judaism have similar stringent canonical directives.

It doesn’t mean that only the religious societies are within the arbitrary frame work of insanity, even the ones without it, would have some equivalent sets of rules and regulation to religious one, only to be handed by humans, instead of God—good example would be Mao and Stalin for communist, and tribes of Amazon or Aborigines of Australia by their kabila ka sardar. My lack of knowledge of their values/virtues on these societies stops me from giving any apt analogy to make my point hence  handicapped by ignorance here.

Interestingly, the line that demarcates between sanity/insanity is—equally abstract notion of MORALITY for the God fearing societies, for the others—LOYALTY to whatever they have pledges their loyalty to, political ideology or their tribes. And the one who totally refuses to be strapped within this template of framework are—ANARCHIST.

Right now, I am very comfortable being anarchist, but as I said, it is just the sum game of chemical balance in your head and social parameters, little in my control; I might evolve into something else in the future.

Sorry, to break your surreal delirium—that you thought, you have a Free Will—the highest of the human traits. No, you don’t, that’s just your illusion, and you are just a minion of the Social Matrix (counter part of  the evil software in movie: Matrix).

Your every action is controlled by chemicals in your head, and what chemical to brew in your head is controlled by collective thought of the society—a very complex network and phenomenan, where your loved/near ones have the highest weights in the chemical process, like— God you fear followed by parents, family, friends, followed by teachers, preachers, leaders, followed by total strangers.

Let me prove my point here, why do I not wear a pink shirt in public, because, chemical in my head stops me from purchasing/wearing one, chemicals in my head are prompted in this particular pattern, since I fear that total strangers in the street would think I am a gay, while disposition of color got nothing to do with your sexual orientation. Pink shirt might be insignificant, but actions like what to eat from whom to marry, or who to marry on who eats what, are apparently significant decisions, but you don’t have much say in it, do you? It’s been already laid out for you, you just have to accept and follow—you are a slave to your social parameters, set by your society.The only way to break out of this vicious Matrix is: either be a retard, which is a whole inspiration of writing this crap, which I got from watching the movie Forest Gump last night on TV, or still be aware of your environment, and not give a shit, and be a moral decrepit hence be labeled insane. Going insane, while perfectly sane, would be rather demanding, so the easy way out is to be chemically challenged—a retard. 

On a different note:    lado_brain.jpg Stupid fucking retard—the Forest Gump, fails to register any jealousy, envy, pride, while Jenny—his love interest, keeps running away, and he keeps taking her back, loving her more. Ineffectiveness of his social conditioning makes him perfectly happy and content.   And, how I wish I were Forest Gump, when it comes to love—devoid of any envy, ego, pride and jealousy.  If someone demands unconditional love from me, I am ready to be her Forest Gump, but is she ready to love a RETARD?* I am not aware of any Hindu/Muslim pro-life organization.

7 Comments so far

  1. twaaks on January 16, 2007

    Read this article in the NY times http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/science/16tier.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin, people trying to identify the region in the brain relevant to “the buying impulse”

    For the Darwinian explanation for religion and why is it that all human societies, regardless of original history, have a religion, I refer you to Richard Dawkins a God Delusion. A delightful book that tries to explain the evolutionary reason for a religion. This book has been much villified by the religious people as the devils work. It is an interesting read and does make a compelling case for atheism.

    On the more generic case of reducing all human emotion and behaviour to a confluence of chemistry and social dynamics, it reminds me of an argument that I had a long time ago with someone (who is not important). My contention was similar to the argument that you make, since all human behaviour in the end is chemistry (or bio-chemistry, to make the biologists happy. I had no idea of social dynamics at the time.), one day we would be able to effectively model human behaviour mathematically. In other words, one day, we should be able to “model” or “describe” a human being in pure mathematical terms. The other guy’s contention was that human conciousness was more than “mere” mathamatics and there’s a (for the lack of better word or translation) adhyatmik dimension to it. You can call it a pointless argument, but we had it when we were high! hehehe

  2. keshuvko on January 17, 2007

    I had posted a commment but it did not appear. Dial up ko jhoor speed should be the reason… aba arko lekhna no courage.

  3. Smriti on January 17, 2007

    WOW, truth can sometimes be so relieving!!! I’m deeply touched by your insight..really pleased my mind; will write more when i get time!

    timro lekh haru sarai ramro cha, very impressed.. Mero bahini bhayeko bhayen I would surely want a forest gump for her!! unconditional love sans ‘ego and pride’- is an alluring offer..

  4. gols on January 19, 2007

    sorry guys for not getting back earlier, tied up with other things.

    twaaks,
    that would be a wonderful day, if all the human behaviour could be modeled by mathematics, but i guess for that we need a better tool, the existing mathematics wouldn’t suffice, need something of paradigm shift in that discipline.

    that reminds me of a novel my asimove ‘Foundation’, where the superiour civilization has a way to calcuate the aggregate of Psycho-Analysis of the whole population and hence predict the future.

    but, on the hilarious side, it yet reminds me of another novel ‘Hitch Hicker’s Guide to Galaxy’, where a super-duper computer is fed with a super complex nature of human behaviour, or of that sort is fed into it. after churning for almost few thousands years, the computer comes with the answer of: ‘42′. what researchers can’t make a head of tail of.

    but, whatever, i do and don’t understand this fixation of humans to reduce everything to the smallest: atom, logic, problems and many more.

    KESHUVO,
    i would have loved to read what you had to say, since you are a bio/chemical person, i guess that’s what you study, rather than sentiments filled rambles of mine, regarding brain/chemical.

    Smirti,

    hehe…thanks….that you find me insightful, there is only one person who thinks of me like that, that is me :D.

  5. keshuvko on January 22, 2007

    gols, i was off for some days. just read you comment. i am damn busy. but i will write something about neurotrasmitrers, hormones and other things sometime later. i promise I will.

  6. keshuvko on January 22, 2007

    gols, i was off for some days. just read your comment now.
    i am damn busy these days. but i will write something about neurotrasmitrers, hormones and other things sometime later.
    i promise I will try to.

  7. keshuvko on January 22, 2007

    ***neurotransmitto***
    I am feeling sleepy. so the mistakes…..lau duita comment po bhaechha maathi….thikai chha…gols, btw where have you vanished?

Leave a reply