by Forest Johnson on September 9, 2013

We see a human and think “that is a human”.

Without being aware that this is what we do.

Having identified it as a human, we then expect it to display what we have decided is suitable behaviour, for a human.

We see human behaviour and think “that is right” or that is “wrong”.

Without being aware that this is what we do.

Having decided what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’, we then classify the human into being either acceptable, or not acceptable. Useful or useless.

Either way, though, what we see is a human. We know what humans look like, and how they should behave.

They are, we are lately led to believe, ‘all equal’.

Even though they are either ‘good’ or ‘bad’, ‘right’ or ‘wrong’, ‘useful’ or ‘useless’.

Perhaps we might try looking at humans as we look at other things.

Perhaps it might be more productive to ask ourselves “what does it do?”

What does it do? What use is it? What does it know? How does it fit into life?

While asking the same questions of ourselves.

Not what it is, but what it does.

I’ve never spent much time wondering what a lawnmower is. It is a lawnmower.

I concern myself with finding out what it does and how well it does it.

Sometimes I also wonder why it doesn’t do it any more.

I know, for a fact, that no two lawnmowers are equal.

They don’t always even mow lawns.

It really doesn’t matter very much ‘who‘ a human is.

What matters is what that human can do.

What it can do, defines who it is.

Who it is, does not define what it can do.

Tags: chairness, design, platonic forms

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.