Human Motivation

Perhaps one of most reoccurring question of the day would be what motivates someone to do something? A person goes to a kindergarden school and murders the kids in the school, which is most definitely obscene but the question behind this and much of the research and investigation that will be done after the incident would be regarding his motivation. Therefore human motivation still is a mystery to mankind. Well to kickstart us off, here is a TED talk by Dan Ariely that talks about the essentials of human motivation.



What truly motivates us is not the comfort we will pursue after getting money but it is the action itself. Humans are different from rats by a great deal more literally and also in the mind set aspect. We strive to do things as an facet of accomplishment and achievement. Motivation is perhaps a great factor in our actions and when disregarded brings about adversely negative effects such as the lack of interest in the action itself. This was shown with a series of experiment that was seen in the TED talk. Here is another TED talk that talks about human motivation from a slightly different perspective.



Human being pursue and do actions of self interest that bring about an act of self gain and accomplishment but thats not all to the way people operate and function, cause if that were the case free open source maintained websites like wikipedia would not have bore fruit. Another aspect that motivates us human beings essentially is the fact that emotions play a huge role in everything we do. We do certain things to feel certain ways and like the TED talk explains humans are always seeking to discover greater excitement and essentially the purpose to live is to give back to  the community. Robinson talks about the six needs that we humans strive to complete and full fill and there are some reason for human motivation. So back to the situation, what motivates a person to slaughter the kid? What our of the six needs that we were trying to full fill. Was it certainty, uncertainty, significance, connection, growth or contribution. Some of the option maybe significantly wrong but are always worth considering.

If motivation is from a point of self interest but also from a  point of emotion based actions then how do human incentives work. Yet another TED talk about human incentives and the puzzle of motivation and i do realise it might be a bit to much but this just is fascinating.

There isn't much to say after a TED talk, if anything most of it would essentially just be recounting the idea of the TED talk cause they are just so self-explanatory but essentially human incentives also don't work as humans intended them too, money doesn't always drive thought processes neither does it drive the efficiency of the work results which then goes back to the first TED talk people aren't rats, just cause there is more money doesn't make the work any easier and doesn't make the thinking any better if anything it hinders thinking and blocks the vision of success.

So is motivation coherent or is it this intangible moving force? To boil it down people do certain actions either because of self interest and personal gain, but also with a certain love for the action, or out of an emotional obligation to give back to the community. People are motivated by their actions, their work, their success and their achievements and external things such as money may motivate them to a certain point but overall would dampen their work process. 

Past in Present

Perhaps the biggest lie in the world is the lie of living in the present. The human brain is understood the receive the "present", process it and then instruct and output based on the input. The time it takes for the brain to process such information always makes the human mind process information in the past because what is seen is always in the past. Such is the case with what we see, the light from the sunlight takes about eight seconds to reach earth and this light then get reflected of surfaces which then get perceived by out eyes which then has to travel to the brain and then get processed and then the give the best sense of perception in terms of context. Since this isn't a biology less about how we see and how our brain process information, lets think about the connection to Theory Of Knowledge.

The thought of living in the past in present is defiantly evident in our thought process. Much of our decisions if not most of them are based on past experiences, pre-made conceptions, steadfast beliefs and past understandings. Therefore most of our present decision are based on our past and who we are essentially as a person. And if so then much of the future and who you will become as a person will also depend on your past and the the principles and morals that you held on to as a child. The idea is an interesting one and something worth pondering.

The decisions we make in the present our based on the past; with that idea in mind perhaps it is easier to understand why the people casually let it be and walked away. They didn't have a connection or a feeling of necessity to intervene or they didn't feel comfortable arguing about it but on the other hand some people hold on to unweary morals that when they see someone in trouble they oblige themselves to help. As seen in the video many of then just walked passed, understanding this was filmed in the united states, people don't generally have that connection or link to the islamic ideals but others regardless defend victims due to self obligation. Much of the present lies in the roots of the past and therefore the past is a foundation for what makes the present. There cannot for that reason be a present without a past and a future without past. Thats why just forgetting the past makes us incapable of living in the present. But sometimes remembering to much can also have a negative impact interns of feelings and emotions that can cause negative effects on that body.

A lot of the problems faced to man especially moral dilemmas are approached from past experiences or external influences. An interesting example is when there is a fight, the social trend is to pull out you phones gather around and film it and therefore when there is another fight you just choose to follow the social trend and choose to do nothing about it like everyone else. However some people can leave things as it is and take action and what kind of person you are depends on the what external influences that you been through. Essentially what man tends to do is move forward in live with the backward trend which leaves no room for irrational trust. Every person you trust has build a foundation of experience in your life. Even banks when lending loans have a look at if you can pay that loan back. 

In conclusion there is no present without past and no present by itself cause your present is past.

Beauty resides in the eye of the Beholder

Beauty as described by google is a combination of qualities, such as shape, color, or form, that pleases the aesthetic senses, especially that of the sight. So then the question arises "To what extent is the beauty in the eye of the beholder?" or "Does beauty simply reside in the object itself?". Perhaps the best way to address this is to watch what dove has to say on beauty, cause we aren't talking about beauty if dove isn't included.

The quote in its most modern form is written by Margeret Wolfe Hungerford, in the book Molly Bawn in 1878, talking in literal sense that perception of beauty is subjective. We think of ourselves as less beautiful, less good looking and generally less attractive which might not always be that true. It is because we are talking about ourselves that we become more subjective of our beauty and tend to be more hard on ourselves which conceals the batty of the person. Another person defenatly has another more subjective perception for your beauty which brings about the idea that beauty doesn't reside in the object but perhaps in the viewer. Every single persons opinion on what is beautiful is varying factor. Different people obviously think that different things are beautiful therefore making beauty an indefinite subjective matter. Beauty is an interaction between an object and a person and it is the subjective part that truly gives beauty colour and brings about light. Dove sheds light on the subjectivity of beauty and how our own beauty varies from us to someone else's decryption of your beauty and it is really significant in order to show that beauty is truly a subjective matter. Therefore what beauty essentially is, is subjective perception.

The most common example of subjective beauty is witnessed in art where the beauty of the art piece is not necessarily admired and adored by everyone and perhaps sometimes even criticised and perhaps hated given extremes. The the idea of subjective beauty truly comes alight with artworks. To give examples below are two pictures that are famous art pieces by famous people.

This is one of the most famous abstract painting that really brings about the idea of beauty. The picture displays the idea of beauty through abstract and the mixture of the different colours truly brings out the different emotions to play. However this is aspect of beauty is only truly appreciated when the person is fully visually able to see the different aspects of the picture. A colour blind person for instance or a visually impaired, or another person on the whole might not necessarily get that same implication of the art work. The beauty of the art to some people is lost and the beauty of the art price is not passed on and not always appreciated by the viewer who is the beholder. Therefore in such a case the beauty of an object generally resided in the eye of the beholder.

This beautiful art piece made by Damien Hirst  that was recently displayed in Qatar, has stirred up a lot of controversy and a lot of people having subjective thoughts against the beauty of the art work. The art work that has jewels on a skull which really marvels the beauty of the skull and amplifies the beauty of the human face at the core.A lot of religious people and some others found this offensive and has indeed caused much controversy for the same art object. So if some people really appreciate the art object and some people find it offensive and hate against it, the beauty of the art cannont be in the art piece it self but will definitely reside in the observer.

However beauty is not always subjective, sometimes have a general objective aesthetic value. For instance there was a research conducted from different cultures and what the researchers found that people with a faces of certain proportion where more liked generally by people. This research concludes that people with certain face proportions are more generally liked and therefore in this case the beauty tends to be more objective, in the person itself. Another case of objective beauty is seen in the Fibonacci sequence which is the patter for a lot of the flowers, trees and many more works of nature. The beauty of the sequence works out to have such great implications on real life that it is truly a beautiful sequence. Again there is a certain objective beauty but not necessarily recognise by everyone.

So does beauty lie in the eye of the beholder? Perhaps in most cases beauty does lie the eye of the beholder and is more subjective in the viewer. But what beauty truly is the appreciation of subjective perception that is to me glorified. It is magnificent that out senses are gifted with the ability to pick up all the sense and all the senses together forming a big picture to identify something and to see something is really by itself true beauty. Perhaps much like what Victor Hugo says, "To love beauty is to see light". We humans take our gift of vision for granted and the gift of seeing the world around us is a beauty by itself. Hugo says that by just seeing light rays you would have come to love beauty. Perhaps we should all just take a moment and appreciate the beauty of the vision of our eyes.