Flower Lounge (23) ---- Think or not ... here I am

Descartes said ‘I think, therefore I am.’ It made him famous. Had he not thought at all, chances are he would still have been, existentially speaking, though probably different, less aware, more akin to wild animals, dictated by basic instincts, swept along by karmic forces, too stupefied to realise or wonder why, but less vain, certainly less celebrated. That’s all.

Contemplation may not be an existential prerequisite as Monsieur Descartes might have suggested, but is very likely the primary distinction between man and beast. Only through deliberate thinking can humans deny, restrain, or indulge basic instincts and develop human nature, for better or for worse. Unfortunately, modern humans are too preoccupied with chasing after nothing, gradually losing interest in trying to understand their existence. Trying to understand one’s existence is a natural, reflexive, down-to-earth human curiosity; it doesn’t have to be arcanely philosophical. 

Paradoxically, humans —- indisputably members of the Animal Kingdom — often call each other ‘animals’ while exchanging insults, a bit like growling dogs calling each other dogs. The Chinese are a tad more technically correct in this regard. They berate adversaries as someone ‘lacking humanity’, or being worse than wild beasts. The biological fact that we are animals isn’t denied, but the implication that humans are a superior breed is clear. This assumption, often taken for granted, actually lacks support. On average, compared with humans, wild animals have stronger legs, sharper claws, greater stamina, better eyesight, more sensitive noses, and mightier jaws. Wild beasts are superior to humans in numerous ways.

Some may suggest that physically inferior humans are superior to wild animals in terms of moral qualities. The evidence isn’t clear on that either. Within the Animal Kingdom, we are arguably the most vain and unnecessarily cruel.

Take eating for example. Carnivores eat other animals uncooked, noisily. That’s regarded beastly by humans who consume sushi and carpaccio raw, albeit with wasabi and condiments. When it comes to carnivorous consumption, humans can in fact be more vicious and cold-blooded. I bet hyaenas won’t clip the beaks off chickens (even if they could), jam-pack them in multi-level cages to tap bluntly at industrial fodders with hormonal additives their entire short lives before slaughtering, labelling, marketing, and wasting. Alfred, this chicken tastes like wet paper. Throw it out, please. Hyaenas would just eat, not waste or make pretentious comments.

Within the teetering Kingdom Animalia, only humans, linen napkins under chins, would discard perfectly good food, or gorge themselves when there’s no need to. More abhorrently, human consumption of fellow animals is increasingly driven by vanity rather than hunger or nutritional needs. When expensive carcasses appear on the table in fancy arrangements, Homo consumers take photos to show off in social media rather than dig in.

What is humanity then? What marks us from our wild beast cousins?

After some thinking behind bars, I came to the conclusion that deliberate thinking is perhaps the only fundamental difference, assuming that wild animals do not consciously engage in in-depth reasoning. 

Through contemplation, we voluntarily control our basic instincts, gradually developing something that can be identified as humanness. Like it or not, it’s at least unique among animals, and might have once given us a critical survival edge. Ironically, some modern Homo sapiens are trying to reverse this one and only advantage we have over other animals by indulging and glorifying basic instincts over thoughtfulness. 

Though we often think down the wrong path, our minds must be given credit for trying to compete and struggle with raw instincts rather than letting them dictate our desires and actions, thereby making us human.

The Correctional Services Department doesn’t actively correct anything. But it does provide an environment which stimulates contemplation. In a harsh way, the prison — at least the one I was in — is an ‘excellent’ place for reflection and meditation. It has been said that a bustling city can be more conducive to enlightenment than a Himalayan cave. Up in the mountains, it’s easy to doze off. Down in the midst of an ugly urban flux, something would always be bugging us, highlighting the merits of transcending this highly irritating dimension.

The prison is at the far end of this irritating dimension. The noise, smoke, people, and general ambience in Flower Lounge collide to create a thought provoking mess, forcefully promoting existential contemplations. At the same time, the ineluctable burdens of life have been temporarily lifted. There’s always food on the table. Rent is free. Work pressure has dissipated. Nobody cares about appearance. Family problems are out of reach. It’s a place with bare minimum facade, free of the common wearies of  life.

Indeed, from talking with the See Hings, I got the impression that most of them spent more time than usual to consider their situation, the future, and life in general, when jailed. Once freed, they would not have the time and energy to muse on stressful reality. More pressing priorities would be sweeping life along at a ruthless pace. Thinking would lead to hesitation, not a very constructive sentiment, especially for those who commit crimes for a living. Only in prison is abstraction a welcome distraction.

* * *

End of story

Link to Epilogue

The Court of Appeal made a long story very short