| Welcome to Shejidan. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Emotions: Human/atevi (also Just Human) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 12 2006, 08:35 PM (1,442 Views) | |
| Shevek23 | Dec 29 2006, 02:23 PM Post #16 |
|
Mad Naturalist in Exile
![]()
|
One is grateful to be praised, naid'in! But one also hopes for conversation to continue. |
![]() |
|
| moira | Jan 6 2007, 08:40 AM Post #17 |
|
Senior Bujavid Security
![]()
|
i'm going to try and say this without going off on all possible tangents... wish me luck... this is somewhat mine and somewhat me paraphrasing others here... and it might be completely different from what I said before; it's just a discussion of possible understandings, after all. Bren (at least Bren, at any rate, and the other humans, supposedly) tends to automatically make a distinction between intelligence and emotions. not surprisingly so, as many people do, but one must argue that they are not really separate categories as such, and also that emotions cannot really be reduced down to "feelings"... it seems to me that Bren is often upset because the atevi don't "feel" the same way as humans do... again that is going down the wrong path... he's missing the point. an emotion is not just feeling weak in the knees, or feeling a shiver up your spine, or feeling the blood rush to your face, or even feeling sad, mad, proud... emotions are engagements with the world, and as such, they are much more complicated than that. when a person gets angry, it involves judgement--- one judges that they have been wronged or offended or misled or betrayed--- and it is directed towards something (usually someone) in the world, and it is usually intended to right that wrong or demand justice. when a person gets scared, it is prompted by something in the environment (the mental environment if nothing else), and it is intended to give one the extra boost of speed or to make one stop dead still and hide---it is a direct, usually proper reaction to the world (improper reactions tend more towards phobia and panic than "fear"). and then of course, take an emotion like grief, which is obviously a process, and even involves other emotions like anger and denial--- it is directed at, in this case, a personal loss, and also at one's own future end, and it is intended to give one pause to refigure one's life now that the loss has happened and also to re-evaluate one's life in the light that we all die and maybe need to get our affairs/act together to avoid problems for loved ones and their memory of us. dagnabit I'm going off on a tangent already... well I want to go on in this vein but for now the emphasis is on: emotions are engagements with the world. they do involve a kind of intelligence, they can be quite intelligent actually, even though they are not in the same category as logic, but the important thing is that emotions are engagements with the world. they are part and parcel of the process in which we define ourselves (define who we are are individuals and as communities, etc), which is an ongoing, ever-adjusting process; they are how we connect with each other; and they are how we connect ourselves to our reality. humans (generally speaking, for the purposes of this conversation)... how do I put this? humans are many-tendrilled things. lol. ok, I mean that humans engage with the world in many varied and prolific ways... humans tend to latch on to many people, many things, many places and take all these things into their definitions of themselves (they define themselves in terms of relationships to these things, personally)... humans tend to connect to whatever looks good, whatever looks promising... humans seem to want to connect with their reality in as many ways as possible, as if they are hanging on for dear life. since we're primarily discussing love and man'chi--- Merkins tend to use the word "love" to such an extent that god only knows what it means any more: we love our families, our friends, our sweethearts, our pets, our cars, our homes, our flat-screen tvs, our country, our lofty ideals, our favorite song, our pizza, our new shoes, our cell phones... and we could use all those examples, in the context of defining oneself in terms of relationships to things/reality, but maybe we should stick to "love" referring primarily to people and places one is really bound to... just for now anyway. so humans connect to other humans, not completely indiscriminately... oh no, not indiscriminately. we (whether knowingly or unwittingly/subconsciously) surround ourselves with or attach ourselves to people of a certain kind, and those relationships help to define us. it helps us to feel secure. love being a two-way street in good conditions means that if I love you, then you define me (or figure into my self-definitions of me) and I define you (similarly). being needed by another--- or, more to the point, by all the others that we love--- helps us to feel secure too. our love-relationships (and again, not meaning erotic or even philial love, as love could be for pizza I guess if that's how you define yourself??? people say it, at any rate) define who we are and provide us with peace and stability, such as anything ever does--- that's the purpose behind it all. and humans work that way. but atevi, apparently, to my understanding, are not many-tendrilled things. :atwink they don't latch on to here and there and her and him and everything else. this would not help them to feel secure and peaceful; to them it would be utter chaos and disorder and great unrest. they're not clinging to reality in all kinds of directions. they, instead, find their place in the hierarchy. others test them, and they test others, in the quest for finding out who fits where in the hierarchy, which is an ongoing, ever-adjusting process. bihawa. they find where in the hierarchy they fit, and, having found their place, they are secure, comfortable, and happy--- as are the others in the hierarchy, now that everyone's niche is well-defined. finding their niche in the hierarchy, and serving the purpose which inherently comes with that niche, defines them. that is all the definition they need. that is the only connection they really need--- any more would throw the arrangement into disarray (although I know that's an oversimplification; an ateva can have competing man'chiin; they're not quite happy in that situation however; also there are lesser man'chiin, I know). also, they derive their purpose from the hierarchal structure, so much so that man'chi only flows one way. while they apparently want the upward flow of man'chi from subordinates (and sometimes from equals? not sure), because it reaffirms their position and purpse, they'd be completely discombobulated if the object of their man'chi (say the aiji/etc) somehow felt man'chi to them, because the hierarchy would collapse, and that would rob them of their purpose. their purpose in life, really, at least to some extent, would be threatened with horrible ambiguity if not outright overturned. atevi always make me think of mandalas, and everything being beautiful, deceptively simple, and in perfect order. this is where they derive their peace and purpose. if a human could find his/her place in an atevi hierarchy (as Bren apparently does, whether he realizes it or not), then he'd get that satisfaction of being needed by his subordinates, appreciated by his equals (those who had similar man'chi, anyway), and fulfilling a purpose for his superior (which is, in a way, also a variation on being needed). so, really, it isn't that the atevi don't feel many of the same things that humans do, they just have different ways of satisfying those emotional needs. they have different ways of engaging with/handling/ connecting to the world/reality. and it's not something that is entirely without intelligence or choice, as long as one is aware of the choices (or the possibility of choices). (how many people would be "in love" if they didn't know the word?) there is potential for at least a human to fit into an atevi society (as we see, with Bren, already)... and maybe for an ateva to fit in with a human society (in theory; I really doubt one could find enough order to keep an ateva sane, living with humans! :rolleyes: I mean, good god, I wish I could find my niche; I wish I knew what my purpose was! I daresay the atevi are onto something!) I'm tired; I talked too much and I'm not sure I said anything clearly... okay I'm just going to bed now. and dream of tangents! |
![]() |
|
| guest:Shevek23 | Jan 6 2007, 03:43 PM Post #18 |
|
Unregistered
|
Moira-ji-- I find this very interesting discussion of yours just as I am about to leave work and my Internet access until tomorrow. I hope I can do justice to it when I return! |
|
|
| Shevek23 | Jan 6 2007, 03:45 PM Post #19 |
|
Mad Naturalist in Exile
![]()
|
PS--the above was from me. I don't know if I'm showing up now as who I am, or if I am being listed as a "guest," but this is Shevek23. And so was that... |
![]() |
|
| moira | Jan 6 2007, 10:35 PM Post #20 |
|
Senior Bujavid Security
![]()
|
one awaits your response, oh brave soul Posted Image |
![]() |
|
| moira | Jan 7 2007, 01:51 AM Post #21 |
|
Senior Bujavid Security
![]()
|
to go further with my last post... to say that emotions are intelligent and involve choice and evaluations is one thing, but can you really choose who you love? traditionally, the answer is no. however, it all has to do with your self-definition, the definition you have for yourself. when a person is stuck in an abusive relationship, and claims that she (she, for the sake of conversation) can't leave because she loves him, and indeed she does love him and she will forgive him anything, regardless--- what therapists/friends work with her about is not trying to tell her that she can't love him and to love somebody else, but to get her to re-evaluate her self-definition. they try to get her to realize that she is a beautiful, worthwhile individual who deserves better, and only when she recognizes that and thinks that of herself will she be able to remove herself from the situation. and, doing so, often she realizes that she does not love him anymore. and it isn't because she just turned off the emotion, and it isn't because of the fact that he hurt her etc (he hurt her for a long time and that didn't bring about this response), it's because she adjusted her self-definition to such a degree that his behavior was no longer seen as tolerable, and she chose to disconnect from him. it is not a cut-and-dry matter, but there is a level of choice here. or, do you choose when you will get angry? if someone behaved deliberately, and did something that is generally unexcusable, but you knew that in *their* culture it was considered highly flattering... you might have to stop and think about whether you should be angry or not. it depends on how he meant it. and the fact that you stop and think means that you do choose. and that there might be a "right" time to be angry and a "wrong" time or circumstance as well. and those evaluations depend on your self-definition (which includes what would be offensive to you). etc etc etc also, the mededeni believed (?) that an ateva could associate with anyone/everyone they met, which is definitely not an absolute reliance on the hierarchy. there seems to be some choice there on some level as well, even beyond what might ordinarily be acknowledged as the level of choice regarding man'chi. and so the question is: to what extent is your self-definition... enculturated? if part of your self-definition is that you are part of a certain culture, and this understanding might be on a level you are or are not highly aware of, then your culture and its rules/ideas/concepts about "the way things are" are going to affect you and your self-definition. perhaps the (Ragi?) atevi have the hierarchal-man'chi-structure because that is what came up in their environment (I'd love to dismiss the atevi animal world, since it is going to complicate this lol, but I won't; I just won't discuss it right now). perhaps an ateva brought up in a culture where it was okay for one's superior to feel attachment towards oneself, and that reinforced one's purpose instead of destablizing it (ie, the human way of things), then that ateva wouldn't feel absolutely discombobulated when such a thing occurred. because, to that ateva, such a feeling was not warranted. it would not be "right" under the circumstances. and that ateva would have to be quite enculturated before he truly started to "feel" along the same lines, because you don't think about such things, usually, before you feel them. usually, it is somewhat automatic. pre-processed, based on known data. same with a human raised in a hierarchal-man'chi culture. or a paidhi who finally was actually enculturated in the Ragi scheme of things, who really started to see the order and the method behind the culture and therefore started to be able to process what happened around him, in that culture, at the gut level. because when you think that man'chi is cold and distant and without feeling, that seems to me to be quite wrong. that an atevi only attaches to certain other atevi does not mean that they don't have strong feelings towards those other atevi and are not much happier because of it. and to think that an aiji doesn't need you personally, only needs someone to fill that spot in the hierarchy, that purpose, well... then you need a reality check, to realize that humans don't need a particular person to love as well. any adequate person will do. in fact, part of the process of love is bestowing/projecting favorable attributes upon the beloved in order to make it a better match. if it doesn't work out with one person, then another might come along. and if you had never been born, your partner would not have been doomed to loveless hell forever. there would have been somebody else who fit in with their self-definition at least as well. humans need somebody to love, or at the very selfish least, somebody whose purpose in the relationship is to love them. that's the purpose of the beloved: to connect them with the world and reality and other people and also help to define oneself. and yet that is not to say love is cold and unfeeling. and humans usually don't sit around and deliberate on who they will love or if they should love somebody else instead. it doesn't work quite like that. and neither does man'chi, I'd say. the aiji needs followers, or s/he's a rogue aiji, a failed and crazy person. they need followers, they need the upward flow of man'chi, the way that humans need others to love them, and for the same purpose: to connect them with the world and reality and other people and also help to define oneself. the fact that Ragi atevi are not as loud and obnoxious and brazenly familiar with their emotional displays does not mean they don't feel emotions, after all. that's just cultural too. or for now it is lol |
![]() |
|
| rosebladeaureliuskcir | Feb 5 2007, 01:07 AM Post #22 |
|
Machimi Writer in Hiding
![]()
|
Interesting...though I'd say that Bren's closest associates within his household understand that he must, at times, show his affection for them. They seem perfectly content without this very human reaction to those one cares about, but they also seem to know that, in Bren's acceptance of their view of propriety and order, he is bending to their needs. They need an aiji and need to treat him as their personal aiji (not Tabini-aiji, to make sure that's clear), and so they give this treatment to Bren, who doesn't quite seem to understand the emotional reasons yet. On the other hand, he does acknowledge that if he did not allow these many things they do, they would be deeply offended by his rejection of their efforts...which occasionally has led to vast amusement for us as readers (Invader and Bren's modesty come to mind). Man'chi and love are similar in that they are driving forces, but very different in use and expression. Jago's man'chi for Bren could be taken as love, if her expression was not so atevi. Bren's love for Jago could be taken as a form of man'chi, were he not so human...and he is, still, because he is immersed and assimilating, but will never be completely atevi in his reactions. Ah, I know what I want to say, but I'll have to work it out elsewhere before posting it. Back to work for me... Roseblade A. |
![]() |
|
| KrystalPistol | Feb 15 2007, 07:15 PM Post #23 |
![]()
|
I'm intrigued by what you're saying here. I would agree with your defining emotions as engagements with the environment, and our attempt to define our place in that environment. Otherwise, we would be very confused, with no framework on which to base our actions and reactions to eternal stimuli. Chaos would result and civilization and the progress that can only be acheived through cooperation would be impossible. It seems to me then, that emotions are a tool used for creating a structure in which to operate. Another miracle of evolution, I suppose. Does this then also suggest that there are other evolutionary alternatives to emotion that might acheive the same results? Of course, the atevi concept of man-chi is one possiblilty, as is the frequently considered (in sci-fi literature) concept of the hive mind, in which the individual ceases to be, well, individual I guess, but rather a part of the whole, and therefore does not need to consider his or her place in a societal structure. I wonder then, if such a group intelligence would even include emotions of any kind that we as humans might recognize or relate to, being the isolated creatures we are. There! How's that for a tangent? |
![]() |
|
| Midedeni Heretic | Feb 16 2007, 01:03 AM Post #24 |
![]()
|
As long as we're going off on tangents, this may be a little :ot! , but let me toss it out for consideration/comment... In rereading the Foreigner series a few months back, I was intrigued by the many (apparent) meanings of man'chi. The definition at the back of Foreigner is, "primary loyalty to association or leader." In Precursor, Bren defines the term for Ramirez as, "An ateva's strong instinct to attach to an authority." Those definitions seem to fit most of the personal relationships between individuals. However, in one of the earlier books (Invader?) we learn man'chi may exist between lovers - the impression I got was that it would be reciprocal in this situation. A few other examples: in Foreigner, Djinana says his man'chi is with Malguri. Much later, in Pretender, Bren figures out Algini's man'chi (at least, his primary man'chi) is to the Assassin's Guild. So man'chi can, at least with lovers, apparently does flow both ways. Also, it can be attached to a physical object, or even to an institution. That's not quite covered in the definitions we've been given. It seems to have as many meanings for atevi as "love" can have among humans. I wonder what Bren's dictionary says? |
![]() |
|
| moira | Feb 16 2007, 02:21 AM Post #25 |
|
Senior Bujavid Security
![]()
|
that will definitely do lol
:atwink well, sometimes when I get angry (at an external something), then I feel guilty for getting angry, and then I get frustrated at myself for feeling guilty, and ten I get embarassed for not knowing what to do. etc... ok ok so I'm convoluted! :lol: but, the guilt and frustration and embarassment were not really directed at any external somethings; they are more directed at myself. (although... guilt and embarrasment have an inherent social judgement about them...) therefore, the answer* is, definitely maybe! :baji (I only wish I knew, sigh; I think I talk about it so much precisely because I *cannot* know...)
I wonder myself! it does sound a lot like "love" with all its various meanings to me. am I right in thinking that, at least with living people and not objects like Malguri, man'chi is hierarchal, and can only be reciprocal among atevi at the same level? I am not sure of this at all, btw... I'm not convinced that the atevi are either :UFO |
![]() |
|
| morgaine0000 | Feb 16 2007, 08:23 AM Post #26 |
![]()
|
Throughout the books it is emphasized that a atevi leader has to take good care of his followers. Bren told the Captains that Tabini would not tolerate atevi worker deaths due to carelessness. In one of the earlier books, when they were deciding where to put aerospace factories, it was implied that provincial lords needed to keep their people employed. I have always wondered if the atevi lords feel some protective feelings towards their followers, or whether they are just obligated to treat them well because if they don't, the followers man'chi will stray and they will find a better lord. Another interesting question, is the university. When discussing Cajeiri, Banichi said that if had been born into a family of craftsmen, he would learn their trade from them. Many times it has been mentioned that atevi stay with their households, and don't want to be alone. In Precursor , Bren thought atevi workers might bring their whole households to the station. Many times he has mentioned that a lone ateva is a dangerous thing. Yet the students at the university seem to be separated from their households for extended periods of time. The astronomy students also seemed to have some man'chi feelings to the astronomer emeritus and to the idea of the university (saving the books, for example). |
![]() |
|
| griffinmoon | Feb 16 2007, 04:05 PM Post #27 |
|
Ranger
![]()
|
Morgaine nadi: Consider: the astronomy students may feel man'chi to the astronomy profession, like an assassign. Second, perhaps knowing that family/clan are within traveling reach is sufficient mental ease for them. |
![]() |
|
| Sandi-ji | Mar 3 2007, 12:27 AM Post #28 |
![]()
|
Morgaine-ji, Oneself has also been curious regarding the students at the University, in particular, at a meeting the Astronomer attended, his students were identified as "Security." In re-reading the series, Tabini-ajii has provided persons important to him with security, yet the Astronomer, of a profession fallen from grace and thus vunerable, does not have a Guild presence around him. His felicitous numbers help keep Tabini-ajii in power by nullifying the arguments of the ajii's detractors, yet the Astronomer is not protected from harm. Do you have an opinion as to why this potential weakness is not drawn within Tabini's ma'chi? |
![]() |
|
| Midedeni Heretic | Mar 3 2007, 02:00 AM Post #29 |
![]()
|
I think I recall at one point Tabini asked Grigiji if there was anything he wanted from Tabini; the Astronomer pronounced himself content and promptly took a nap. I suspect he has lots of Guild security around him, but they are probably undercover. |
![]() |
|
| morgaine0000 | Mar 4 2007, 04:01 AM Post #30 |
![]()
|
I agree that he probably has Guild protection. They could simply have signed up as students. Also, the University itself is somewhat isolated. It seems to me that outsider bent on trouble would find it difficult to blend in. Every one who is supposed to be there probably knows each other. His students and staff seemed very protective of him, as well. I found the astronomer interesting in that he seems to be somewhat outside of man'chi. Maybe that is why Bren describes him several times as "child-like." The students and staff are protective to him, but he does not appear to lead them. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Cherryh Grove · Next Topic » |













8:47 AM Jul 11