Why do babies cry when they're sleepy?
Why do babies cry when they’re sleepy? Seriously. How can that have developed? I understand crying when hungry or dirty, but sleepy? Someone once said that babies cry when they’re only 98% happy. And since my baby has recently discovered his screeching voice (which, depending on the look on his face, means either “how dare you leave me alone for five seconds” or “I’m so happy.”), I can’t help but wonder about whether Darwin really was right. Survival of the Fittest? The screamers are the ones that would have been found by the wild animals, right? And since they can’t exactly move yet, well, you know where I’m going with this. I firmly believe that while Darwin correctly described the evolution of species, modern science has deemed much of this theory incorrect for the future. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, but advances in modern medicine have allowed people to survive that just a generation ago would have died off. And certainly, the contributions that many of these people then offer to society make this slap in the face of natural selection quite worthwhile (i.e. Stephen Hawking). Empathy, compassion, tolerance – these are all qualities that should be stronger now.
So maybe that’s the next stage of natural selection. Physically, it is no longer necessary to be perfect. Machines, medicine, and our fellow man make it possible for weaker bodied individuals to survive. But we can only reach the next pinnacle of existence if those who are accepting of change can thrive, while the beliefs of those who are stuck in the old ways do not. It would be easy if there were a road sign that said that this is where society is heading, or should head. But that is too subjective. I’ve read two of Margaret Atwood’s books, “The Handmaid’s Tale” and “Oryx and Crake”, which show – at an ultra scary level – what might happen if extremists reigned.
“The Handmaid’s Tale” is a creepy account of what life would be like if women were assigned roles and were not permitted any freedom. The handmaid would be responsible for bearing children. There would be cooks, maids, etc. But this sexist society would not allow for any individual thought or action.
“Oryx and Crake” goes to the opposite extreme, where genetic engineering is the norm, and there are creatures like rakkunks (raccoon skunk hybrids). Humans are cloned. The ethics are not held in check.
That’s the thing. Who is responsible for deciding what is ethical? What is right? How do you determine the right thing to do? Take the working versus staying home question. At what point is it right for a mom to work? It’s one thing if you HAVE to work, but what if you don’t? Then it becomes a moral question. And that’s really not fair. There are plenty of people who work, have their kids in day care, and the kids turn out just fine. In fact, in the cases that immediately come to mind, they turn out great. And if not, it’s not really fair to assume a causal relationship. I was all set to go back to work when guilt crept in. But that’s not really fair. I cannot proceed with an undercurrent of guilt. I am, in all things, doing what is best for my family. Again and again, through much deliberation, my husband and I decide what would be best, what we could live with, and what choices we should make. Only we know all the factors that go into our decisions, and so really, nobody else can make the decision for us (much as we may like sometimes).
That said, it also then makes it equally unfair to assume to know what is best for someone else. It seems so cut and dry to look at someone else’s life and know what decisions they should make. Clearly if you’re short on cash you should cancel cable. Of course you shouldn’t eat out. But what if cable is the only expense? And the only form of entertainment? What if it actually costs less to eat out than to buy groceries? Without knowing the inner workings of the minds of others, it is hard to know what is best.
Anyhow, food for thought. Kind of an abrupt ending here, and it really has nothing to do with the beginning, but I gotta get some sleep, and I don’t know when I’ll post again (with my kids on spring break for 2 weeks and my impending future employment – which would happen when I don’t normally blog anyhow, but that seems as good an excuse as any). So, I’ll just end with something my husband once said, rather prophetically.
“I hate people who judge others.”
So maybe that’s the next stage of natural selection. Physically, it is no longer necessary to be perfect. Machines, medicine, and our fellow man make it possible for weaker bodied individuals to survive. But we can only reach the next pinnacle of existence if those who are accepting of change can thrive, while the beliefs of those who are stuck in the old ways do not. It would be easy if there were a road sign that said that this is where society is heading, or should head. But that is too subjective. I’ve read two of Margaret Atwood’s books, “The Handmaid’s Tale” and “Oryx and Crake”, which show – at an ultra scary level – what might happen if extremists reigned.
“The Handmaid’s Tale” is a creepy account of what life would be like if women were assigned roles and were not permitted any freedom. The handmaid would be responsible for bearing children. There would be cooks, maids, etc. But this sexist society would not allow for any individual thought or action.
“Oryx and Crake” goes to the opposite extreme, where genetic engineering is the norm, and there are creatures like rakkunks (raccoon skunk hybrids). Humans are cloned. The ethics are not held in check.
That’s the thing. Who is responsible for deciding what is ethical? What is right? How do you determine the right thing to do? Take the working versus staying home question. At what point is it right for a mom to work? It’s one thing if you HAVE to work, but what if you don’t? Then it becomes a moral question. And that’s really not fair. There are plenty of people who work, have their kids in day care, and the kids turn out just fine. In fact, in the cases that immediately come to mind, they turn out great. And if not, it’s not really fair to assume a causal relationship. I was all set to go back to work when guilt crept in. But that’s not really fair. I cannot proceed with an undercurrent of guilt. I am, in all things, doing what is best for my family. Again and again, through much deliberation, my husband and I decide what would be best, what we could live with, and what choices we should make. Only we know all the factors that go into our decisions, and so really, nobody else can make the decision for us (much as we may like sometimes).
That said, it also then makes it equally unfair to assume to know what is best for someone else. It seems so cut and dry to look at someone else’s life and know what decisions they should make. Clearly if you’re short on cash you should cancel cable. Of course you shouldn’t eat out. But what if cable is the only expense? And the only form of entertainment? What if it actually costs less to eat out than to buy groceries? Without knowing the inner workings of the minds of others, it is hard to know what is best.
Anyhow, food for thought. Kind of an abrupt ending here, and it really has nothing to do with the beginning, but I gotta get some sleep, and I don’t know when I’ll post again (with my kids on spring break for 2 weeks and my impending future employment – which would happen when I don’t normally blog anyhow, but that seems as good an excuse as any). So, I’ll just end with something my husband once said, rather prophetically.
“I hate people who judge others.”
posted by BrainHickey | 12:22 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home