الإنسان يتصرف فقط وفق الظروف الخارجية والذاتية

كل الأفعال التي يفعلها الإنسان, ما هي إلى استجابات لظروف خارجية وداخلية.... نعم عندما ترى شخصا في الصباح الباكر يسلم على شخص ويساعد أخر, فلا تظن أن هذا الإنسان سما في أخلاقه وإنما هناك عوامل إما خارجية أو داخلية تدفعه لذلك, وعندما تغيب هذه العوامل لن تراه على نفس الأسلوب. وفي المقابل ترى شخصا يشتم ويلعن ويصرخ على زوجته وأبنائه , فلا داعي أن تلومه لأن العوامل هي التي أجبرته أن يتصرف بهذه الطريقة وليس له شأن في ذلك. العوامل الخارجية والذاتية هي التي تشكل كل تصرفاتنا ولن ترى شخصين تحت نفس العوامل يتصرفون بطرق مختلفة وإن حدث ذلك فهو خلل ولكنه لن يحدث لأن لا وجود لأشخاص يتصرفون بطرق مختلفة تحت نفس الظروف.... هذا ما يراه الكاتب مارك تواين وأيضا ما يراه الكاتب السعودي عبد الله القصيمي ... لا مكان لا للتقوى ولا للنظافة ولا للسمو الإنساني وإنما هي العوامل فحسب

 قد يقتنع الكثير بهذا المفهوم وقد يكون صحيحا وقد يحتمل الخطأ. العلم التجريبي اليوم يعلمنا أن نكون شكوكيين في كل المواضع, اي نأخذ موضع السائل ونتساءل... كنت مقتنعا لحد بعيد بما كتبه مارك تواين ولكني لم أقتنع كثيرا بما قاله القصيمي لأني لاحظت أنه يكتب تماما كما كتب مارك تواين وأمثلته لم تكن مقنعة مثل أمثلة تواين 

جميل... لنحلل المسألة بشكل مبسط ومتواضع وقد يكون تحليلي ليس تحليلا نقديا مقنعا كما كانت الفكرة مقنعة. أولا الإنسان يولد في بيئة معينة, وهذه الجملة لصالح الكاتبين لأن البيئة عامل خارجي والشخص وجد نفسه فيها, فهم يرون أنه سيتصرف وفق معطيات البيئة ولكن كلنا نعرف أن يوجد أشخاص من يتعبون لفترة محدودة حتى يغيرو البيئة ومن ثم هم يتغيرون. بالطبع سيقول أي احد أن بتغير البيئة تغير طبعه فإذا نرجع لما قاله تواين وهو أن البيئة تتتحكم بتصرفاته ولكننا وضحنا أن هناك من يناضل لغير البيئة, اي تعب الشخص ليفعل ما ينافي المعطيات ولكن تواين والقصيمي لن يقبلو بهذا لأنهم سيقولون أن ما فعله كان وفقا لعوامل خارجية وداخلية. هنا نأخذ نفسا عميقا ونفكر بموضوعية, هل يوجد أشخاص يكونون تحت ظروف معينة ويلزم عليهم الظروف أن يتصرفوا بطريقة معينة ولكنهم يأبون إلا أن يخالفو ذلك ويفعلو شيء أخر لأهداف بعيدة المدى؟ نعم يوجد, ولكن سيقفز تواين ويقول إذا تأثر بالعمل النفسي, اي الذاتي, ولكن نرد ونقول أنه فعل ذلك بمحض إرادته القوية . فالشخص غير ما سيغره, اي البيئة, برغبة منه إذا هذا الشخص تحكم في البيئة بعكس ما يظن تواين والقصيمي أن البيئة هي التي تتحكم بالأشخاص فقط. إذا أتينا للعوامل الذاتية , يصر القصيمي أن العوامل الداخلية هي من تتحكم بالشخص زيادة على العوامل الخارجية وأنا أقبل هذا من ناحية بيولوجية ولكن أليس بالإمكان للشخص أن يتعب قليلا حتى يغير بيئته الداخلية , ومن ثم تتغير التصرفات المتابعة, ولكنه سيقول أنه عمل ليغير بيئته الداخلية وفقا للدفعة التي كانت موجودة , ونرد أيضا ونقول ولكن هناك من كان في نفس مكانه ولم ينتظر. خلاصة كلامي هو, أليس بالإمكان للشخص أن يجاهد نفسه حتى تتغير بيئته ثم يعمل وفق ما  تطرح له البيئة التي هو شكلها 

Why move to the poles???

We human beings have the capacity to think, and go deep through this intricate ability where we are able to calculate the future, reminisce the past, and feel the present with all its wonders and atrocities. It is our great neural connections allow our inner self to work by firing messages form a region to another to come up with a very complex, and fine at the same time, view of our surrounding.

Brought up in a culture where they have many taboos to the point that you feel that you should count what is available for you to deal with and everything else is to be let alone, so that you stay away from the circle of suspicion. Even with all this, when one's brain matures, he is able to find what is really fruitful for the brain and what is not, so growing up in such a culture is no obstacle for my ideas neither of my inner dealings. I searched and read and exposed myself to many of human's accumulated knowledge in different fields, and everything I found was wonderful in relation to the subject it deals with. Keep in mind, that these things that I sought are held forbidden by many of whom I know, and I really hate the way the deal with issues with primitive superficiality.





On the other hand, I found those who were fascinated by what they found out of the culture they were brought up in, to come back and assault all that is in their culture. For your information, every human being is fascinated by what is new to him, as when he sees or reads something very new , certain regions in the brain get activated in a way that was never activated before, and that feeling of finding something new creates an inner want for more of new experience and an abomination of the past routine experiences. The one who is able to realize that this is a normal human feeling will be able to calm himself/herself and deal with his culture in cool manner. I believe that everything is bound to be criticized but one shouldn't criticize what he didn't experience yet, neither should one criticize so forcefully just because of certain wonders that shook him that he wasn't able to control his senses.

We all are part of problems, and for sure we are all solutions to problems.

It is no wonder that we all get stuck in problems directly or indirectly. Keep in mind that there is a wide range of problems, some are social, some are educational, some are personal, and some are in just another category. When we look more closely, we realize that many of the categorize all direct some influence to the social dimension, and for sure that's normal as we are social beings. 

Putting aside the notion of how problems arise, and how we cause problems, I would like to point toward the other part of my heading, we are all solutions to problems. Yes we are, but if we take the initiative to be. We all have dormant ideas and notions that we just keep for ourselves without exposing them to anyone, and sometimes, we take a negative step backward, that we have some ideas which are beneficial, but we implement them in nothing. If we think in a broad way, and act in a specific way, then we will be able to create solutions. If we believe that everything shows its results overtime then we will be able to act with an inner belief that we are doing something helpful. 


One aspect that is of very great important is the trading of ideas. Yes, we should trade ideas with those who have ideas that can alter our negatives into positives, and when we do it, we will realize that everyone carries great ideas. Starting from yourself, by implementing the positive ideas you have, you will feel the change overtime, so don't rush. Allowing others to expose their ideas is another thing too. 

One might ask, "What does this have to do with problems?". Looking closely, you will realize that many things start from ideas, and when these ideas are inhaled deeply and worked upon, our actions change, and as our actions change, we influence those around us, and if that influence is of positive outcomes, then you were part of a solution. 

WE ACT BLIND, BUT WHY?

We all go through many problems every now and then. Our interactions are mixed with many heated up talks. Humans go through intricate interactions with each other, and it is sad that some people attach certain actions just to a single provocation. One example will be enough to make my point clear, as I hope.

I go to school and I realize that my friend is not cheerful that day especially when I am around. I act as if nothing happened and the next day comes, and I realize the same thing. I meet someone else and suddenly that person starts a topic revolving around the friend I mentioned earlier. I make up a very superficial story and try to tell this person why my friend is no longer happy when he meets me. In reality, I am completely aware that his gloominess is due to a series of interactions that happened between us and I am very sure that I am part of the mistake, yet I act blindly, and deal with the matter superficially, and I strive to convince myself by a false story. Over time, I get used to make up superficial stories to convince myself of something which has a clear reality, but I mar it for certain issues.

This deliberate blind-act is shared by many people, and it allows simple mistakes, which could be mended easily, to grow bigger, and be more devastating. We are killing our inner humanity by convincing ourselves by false issues, instead of standing brave against our misdoings and work to get things better. When one calms himself, and ponders deeper on human interactions, he will realize that its complexity is beautiful, and if we work to deal with it deeply as it is, we will lead happy, healthy, and pleasing lives.

And I am still In a State of Oscillation: On the Theory of Evolution

As I exposed myself to a number of articles, research papers , and books, that discuss the issue of evolution and how natural selection can lead to the formation of different organisms, I have been perplexed from time to time, for the reason that I also use to read on those who oppose the whole notion of evolution ( not charlatans, but people talking by the language of science). 

In fact, it is a matter that someone needs to immerse himself deep into it to come with a stand, and for sure that stand in most cases won't be a permanent one but one that oscillates, as the evidence on one scale might get heavier and change the balance. Many people talk on this issue, some talk using science, but I find that many people are just followers of some scientists without giving themselves the chance to read on opposing views and this is what caused the great extreme that each takes, for it turned from being a scientific notion to being a dogmatic one. I shall jot down some of what struck me today in a simple manner; some of the notions of evolution as presented by Richard Dawkins and the opposing view by Michael Behe. 

Dawkins is an ardent follower of the theory of Evolution and he had published books that discuss the issue in great detail. As I am reading his book the Selfish Gene, I realized that he believes that everything developed from primitive substances, and by numerous modifications over time they were able to create organisms. He thinks that organisms are survival machines meant to be driven by the genes, for the genes to reach their goals and increase their number in the population. By natural selection, survival machines are altered over time to serve the genes in a better way. So, he thinks that every complexity we see has a primitive origin and everything is reducible to the most primitive substance and there is nothing that is impossible to reduce. He made it clear, "We know a lot more about animals and plants than Darwin did, and still not a single case is known to me of a complex organ that could not have been formed by numerous successive slight modifications. I do not believe that such a case will ever be found. If it is . . . I shall cease to believe in Darwinism.' Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1986, p. 91. 

On the other hand, Michael Behe, an American biochemist who is a great expert in his field believes that Evolution theory does not explain everything, yet it explains some things. He thinks that when we get into the realm of Biochemistry , we realize that there are substances which are intricately complex, and can't be reduced to simpler states, and as someone tries to trace these substances back to a simpler form, he gets stuck and finds no way. Behe, puts forward the argument of Intelligent design as an alternative, and this is what made his words receive negative criticism and be regarded as pseudoscience. Many fans of Evolution criticized him, yet the criticism was not to the point, and they meant to attack his belief in an Intelligent design rather than try to refute his words in Biochemistry. He gave the example of the complexity of the flagellum of the Bacteria and many other examples.





We realize that other scientists are aware that The Theory of Evolution doesn't function well when facing complex substances in Biochemistry but they hate the notion of Intelligent Design and I will just quote a Colorado State University biochemist Franklin Harold“We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity ;but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations.” (Harold 2001, 205 The Way of the Cell) 


Concluding, I find this topic to be intricate and interesting at the same time, and one can't make his stand by reading from one scientist or accepting it just because the majority of the educated take it for granted; one must have a deep probe in the issue before making comments and arguing with people while his own basis is fragile. I have been in an ambivalent state so far, as I sometimes find myself arguing for evolution and sometimes showing that it carries no powerful evidence and I am still at the same state of oscillation and I shall complete my search on the issue.