Man and The Human Condition

Man and The Human Condition

(A reflection by Sal Godoij.)

Why do we, human beings, divide ourselves into racial groups: White/Caucasians, Mongoloid/Asian, Semites, Negroid/Black, Native Americans, Other natives, Scandinavian, South Pacific Islanders, Caribbean, etc.?

So, I think it will be ideal to keep together, as a flock, and accept our differences. But this is the ideal, isn't it? And it might never be possible.

It's our human condition, regretfully.

To demonstrate my point, I wonder what it would be like if, instead of our human bodies, we were born into the bodies of zebras. So, we are zebras now, but we keep our human essence. Do you see what I mean? Zebras, I repeat, therefore we all have the same bodies, the same colours, the same striped skin, and all of us grazing the same grass.

But then, because we have kept our human essence, we will inevitably start ogling the other zebras with suspicion, find defects in one or the other, and then start hating them because we're different or because they are different.

And I may observe that the zebra grazing over there has a better shape than mine, and that its skin is more lustrous than mine. And that its stripes are wider or thinner than mine, and that its eyes are bigger, brighter and darker than mine, so now I'm jealous of that f*ng zebra, and I hate it!

And there we will go again, seeking reasons for hate to explode.

On the same token, I wonder if, one day, we inhabit Mars as many people dream of doing. Then, once we have populated Mars for a while, we will naturally start dividing ourselves, firstly taking as an excuse the place we have chosen to live. And so, we will divide into: The Tharsis Plateau People, The Hellas Planitia People, The Amazonis Planitia People, The Isidis People, The Elysium People, The Chryse People, and The Argyre People.

And there is no doubt that, for some reason or another, people from different Planitia will develop differently, with different languages, behaviours, cultures, and so on. Then, being of a common root, humans after all, we will hate each other. And wars will ensue.

Wars, of course, which reflect humans' relentless pursuit of self-destruction.

See? It's not outside us that the problem lies. It's inside us.

Therefore, we must clean ourselves from the inside out. Not the other way around and do so as we learn to live as more advanced creatures.

And we must do this now, before even being serious about flying to Mars, or the Moon, or whatever planet we may come up with the idea of “terraforming and populating."

ANALYSIS OF REFLECTION BY GOOGLE GEMINI 3

This is a poignant and cynical reflection on the "human essence." Sal Godoij suggests that conflict is not a byproduct of our physical differences, but rather a fundamental software glitch in our consciousness.

Here is a breakdown of the text's meaning, imagery, and messages.

1. Extraction of Meaning & Imagery

The Zebra Metaphor: Uniformity vs. Perception

The most striking image is the herd of zebras. By stripping away human racial categories and replacing them with a uniform animal skin, Godoij highlights the absurdity of prejudice.

• The Imagery: A vast field of identical black-and-white stripes.

• The Meaning: Even in a world of total physical symmetry, the "human essence" acts like a high-powered microscope, searching for the tiniest deviation (a thinner stripe, a brighter eye) to justify tribalism. It suggests that envy is the precursor to hatred.

The Martian Diaspora: Geography as a Wedge

The reflection moves from the biological to the topographical. By using real Martian landmarks like Tharsis Plateau and Hellas Planitia, Godoij emphasizes that even if we leave Earth behind, we take our baggage with us.

• The Imagery: Isolated colonies scattered across a red, dusty planet.

• The Meaning: Separation breeds "otherness." Language, culture, and behaviour adapt to the environment, and humans eventually mistake these adaptations for fundamental differences worth fighting over.

2. Core Messages & Themes

Godoij's reflection contains several "hard truths" about the human condition:

• The Illusion of the "External Problem": We often blame racism or xenophobia on physical appearance or borders. Godoij argues these are just convenient hooks. If they didn't exist, we would invent new ones (like stripe width or Martian provinces).

• The Determinism of Conflict: There is a pessimistic thread here suggesting that war is an inevitable output of the human "root." The text calls our pursuit of self-destruction "relentless."

• The Internal Mandate: The final message is one of internal alchemy. The "problem" isn't the world; it's the observer. Therefore, political or social restructuring is useless unless the individual "cleanses" their internal perspective.

3. Analysis and Statistics

Godoij's point about our "human essence" finding ways to divide is supported by sociological data. Humans have a documented "In-group bias" that triggers even over trivial differences.

Basis of Division

Real-World Example/Statistic

Physical/Racial

Historically, humans have divided themselves into major groups, such as Caucasians, Africans, and Asians. Genetic studies show humans share 99.9% of their DNA, yet the 0.1% difference is the primary driver of global social stratification.

Geographic

Even within single nations, "regionalism" creates conflict. In many countries, the "North/South" divide leads to significant economic and social friction, mirroring Godoij's Martian "Planitia" theory.

Trivial Differences

The "Minimal Group Paradigm" (Tajfel, 1970) showed that people will discriminate in favour of their own group even when assigned to groups based on something as meaningless as a coin toss.

4. Final Thoughts

Godoij's reflection is a sobering "mirror" held up to the reader. It challenges the idea that "world peace" can be achieved through external means like policy or globalism.

The wit in the writing comes from the "f*ng zebra" line—it's a sharp, humorous way to illustrate how quickly we turn admiration into resentment. The piece is ultimately a call for psychological evolution. We are currently "advanced" in technology (colonizing Mars) but "primitive" in our emotional processing. To survive our own nature, we must grow "inside out."

It's a bleak view, but one that offers a clear, if difficult, solution: individual accountability for one's own tribal instincts.

To explore Sal Godoij's reflection through the lens of philosophy is to see a battle between our "biological hardwiring" and our "intellectual potential." Godoij essentially argues that humans are an evolutionary paradox: we have the intelligence to reach Mars, but the emotional maturity of a territorial predator.

Here is how his reflection aligns with major philosophical schools of thought.

1. Hobbesian Realism: "The War of All Against All."

Godoij's view of the "human essence" as inherently suspicious and prone to conflict mirrors Thomas Hobbes's philosophy.

• The Concept: Hobbes famously described the natural state of humanity as bellum omnium contra omnes (the war of all against all).

• The Connection: When Godoij describes the zebras finding "reasons for hate to explode," he is echoing Hobbes' belief that without a strong internal or external "cleansing," humans are driven by competition, diffidence (distrust), and glory.

• The Martian Parallel: Even on a new planet, Hobbes would agree with Godoij: humans don't need a history of grievances to fight; they only need to perceive a scarcity of "lustrous skin" or "better grass."

2. Stoicism: The "Inside-Out" Solution

The conclusion of the reflection—that we must "clean ourselves from the inside out"—is the core tenet of Stoicism (Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius).

• The Concept: Stoics believe that suffering and conflict do not come from external events (the "other" zebra or the Martian plateau), but from our interpretations of them.

• The Connection: Godoij identifies that the "problem lies inside us." A Stoic would argue that the "jealousy of that f*ng zebra" is a failure of the observer's reason. To become "advanced creatures," as Godoij suggests, one must master one's internal impressions.

3. Existentialism: The Absurdity of Choice

Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus would find Godoij's "zebra" thought experiment fascinating because it deals with Facticity vs. Transcendence.

• The Concept: Facticity is the "stuff" we can't change (being a zebra, being on Mars). Transcendence is our ability to choose our attitude toward that "stuff."

• The Connection: Godoij observes that humans often use their "facticity" (race, location on Isidis Planitia) as an excuse for their behaviour. The existentialist would argue that we choose to be "the Tharsis Plateau People" to avoid the terrifying responsibility of just being "Human."

4. Comparison of Philosophical Alignments

Philosophy

Alignment with Godoij

The "Fix," according to this school

Realism (Hobbes)

Agrees that conflict is our natural state.

Social contracts and strong governance.

Stoicism

Agrees that the problem is internal perception.

Radical self-discipline and logic.

Existentialism

Agrees that we "invent" categories to hate.

Acknowledging our total freedom to choose otherwise.

Evolutionary Psychology

Agrees that "tribalism" is an ancient survival trait.

Awareness of "mismatched" instincts in the modern world.

Final Thoughts: The "Advanced Creature"

Godoij's reflection ends on a hopeful yet demanding note. He suggests we are currently in a "larval" state—intelligent enough to see our flaws, but not yet "clean" enough to transcend them.

The move from "Human" to "Advanced Creature" requires a transition from Biological Reaction (hating the zebra with thinner stripes) to Conscious Action (recognizing the stripe is irrelevant). It is a call for a "Psychological Renaissance" that must happen before we ever set foot on Mars, or we will turn the Red Planet red with our own blood.

It's rare to encounter a piece that so sharply captures the friction between our "animal" instincts and our "Martian" aspirations. It leaves us with a lot to chew on—mostly that the real frontier isn't space, but the space between our own thoughts.