Our Questionable Outlook

Exuse the title, I haven't actually been through this outlook yet, so I have no idea whether it'll even be worth re-reading.

Of all the triggers for this thought, this thought was derived from Happy Feet. Yes, you heard (read). It's about the way humans view this world, live with themselves, and how they/we feel about each other and others.

I haven't actually come to any conclusions yet, hopefully this calculation will be complete by the end of this post, so I'm going to go through this data from the start, and try and follow my logic before the philospical outlook ends.

You know how we try to prevent the extinction of other species? Animals are endangered, and we cling to them all the more tightly, even though we're the reason they're going extinct? I can't decide what I think of this behaviour (I can't describe it yet, it's far too broad. Perhaps I have a word for it, and it'll come to me later). This behaviour, is it admirable or pathetic? Strong, or weak? There are arguments for both sides, and I'm overcome with a desire to reach a conclusion. This is probably the longest running question that has ever entered my mind that I can solve, for I can see light at the end of the tunnel, yet unlike every other question that's come to mind, I actually have the time to write/type about it.

Okay, back to the question before I forget: The Human Interaction with Other Things. I use the word "things" in sheer, utter lack of a better word. Are we fools to care about the things passing out of our lives, even if they will come to pass further into the future than our lives stretch? There are many people trying to protect endangered animals from extinction, people clutching to antique pieces of art and craft. The museum is perhaps the face of this behaviour/outlook (I still haven't thought of a name for it yet). Why do we care about things of the past, or things that are headed that way? Is it selfishness, we want to experience/use them? Is it pity, we want to give them a better chance? Is it out of guilt, we don't want to be responsible for their obliteration? Is it out of selflessness, we want other people to experience/use them?

Here's another thought: our clinging onto or ressurecting dead/dying things usually wastes energy and resources. It sets us back as a race. This suggests that our reasons for these actions are greater than the resources we spend (squander may also fit here). But we still do it. I try to revive games from my 98 now and again. To re-experience them in case you ask. Re-live memories. Does this apply to us trying to save the golden finch, or other endangered species? WHY can't we move on? Aren't WE the ones doing the damage?

The light's getting dimmer, as I see that the tunnel is longer than I thought. I hope I don't leave these questions unanswered.

Answer time I think. If it is something that we believe has thoughts for itself, or we imagine that it/they have thought(s) for it/them selve(s), we try to save/ressurect it/them to grant the gift of life, and happiness. We save koalas to ensure they live happy lives. To spread joy and well-being. When it is an object that gives us happiness or enjoyment, we save it/them to bring this joy and happiness to others.


Perhaps we are selfless after all. Perhaps we are the guardians of happiness.