TOK Blog Post

To what extent should we use our own humanity to study human behavior?

Upon reading the question, the first thought that came into my head was the idea of "using" humanity. Interestingly enough, the question outlines humanity as being particular to each individual, as not everybody has the same level of humanity in them. Humanity is defined as the act of being humane, or sympathetic. specifically to the needs of others. The question itself seems to model humanity as some sort of tool that we can turn on or off whenever need be. Obviously, some people in the world are more humane than others, but is it truly possible for those who are humane to be able to disregard their inner conscience? The Milgram experiment is able to explain the answer to this, as test subjects would, though sometimes reluctantly, abide to authority when asked to do something that might put another person's life in danger. This concept that some people will resolve to disregarding their own inner morals because they are asked to do so displays how truly fragile the idea of it is. This is again seen in the Standford Prison "Experiment," where seemingly normal people would completely change when placed in a position of authority, once again proving how weak the idea of humanity is. It is therefore possible that the idea of "Humanity" is something that is a human construct, and not something we can truly call our own.
Bringing this back to the question, it is very applicable to the world of human sciences. Take, for instance, the act of observing Native Americans from a bush. Naturally, we see no problem with it, as we are "observing the creature in its natural habitat." Of course, changing the ones observed into "civilized" people suddenly changes the meaning of the entire observation, as it can now be considered to be "spying." This connects to the idea of the construct of humanity because in this case, no sympathy was felt for those who are considered outsiders and outside the norm, but a certain feeling of discomfort is felt when the idea of people being watched is thought of. There is a certain law about morals that states that experiments that cause stress to the person being tested are not allowed. Experiments such as the Stanford prison experiment and the Milgram experiment would not, in modern day, be allowed. Although much can be learned from experiments such as those, it is obvious that the negative effects they have on people are very noticeable.
In the documentary for the Stanford prison experiment, we learned that prisoners were humiliated, and in some cases, went a little crazy. in 1967, a social experiment called "The Third Wave" experiment was held by the teacher of a sophomore year in Palo Alto, California. In the Experiment, Ron Jones was attempting to show his students how easy it was to be put into a fascist society. The experiment, however, went out of hand after becoming too successful, as the experiment itself turned into its own movement, and went beyond the control of Jones, who was forced to shut it down and explain the experiment to the students. The dangers of experiments like these are evident, as there is actually a heavy load set on the human mind, as it actually starts to believe that what it is experiencing is real.
Applying our own humanity to things might also carry the idea of applying our own personal characteristics to an experiment, changing the overall outcome of what is observed. For instance, one can observe a tribe act as they do, and make judgments based on the observation. As we have discussed in class, however, these observations are often faulty judgments based on our prior knowledge. This is comparable to how one can only truly learn language in the early stages of life, and how later on one doesn't really know to speak the language as fluently as someone who was raised in it. Similarly, one will never understand a culture as well as one who was raised in it, making all observations made to it from an outside perspective. A good example of this is how some cultures might perceive different colors based on what they have already experienced. In this case, the fact that we as people understand that there is a difference in the colors we perceive makes us actually be able to tell the difference between the two cultures, ultimately leading to an efficient study.
Ultimately speaking, the appliance of humanity to the studying of human behavior is a necessary one, as it not only allows for the observer to compare themselves to those being studied, but also makes for a more humane experimentation process. Although we did learn much from the harsh methods of experimentation, there is much we can still learn without hurting the test subject in any way. Even though the idea of humanity is a human construct, it was constructed for a reason.

Word Count- 821