Schadenfreude

Once again, my mind wanders to the mystery that is humanness. What is this human condition we are so quick to blame for our lapses in rationality? What is this unfathomable notion we allude to our primal behaviour?

Curiosity is the lust of the mind. We are inquisitive beings. Thankfully, along with this penchant for discovering the depths of ourselves, we have a sense of rationality to bind us to sanity. People like to believe that the power lies in the majority, and yet, we are NOT a democratic entity. How is it that what we deem right and wrong has been based on how many believe it to be true?

Schadenfreude. This beautiful word is a truth we choose to avoid.
It ought not to be secret that it is 'human condition' to derive pleasure from the pain of others. And we succumb, openly. I have been known to disregard euphemisms on the principle of being honest with myself about the person I am to become. But what has language taught me? Synonyms. I have pride in the fact that my vocabulary is immense, but again, why is it so? Why do we need words that are similar to other words?
It is because we are afraid of being the animals we despise. So we mask our treacherous deeds and intentions with a seemingly amiable motive.

Form follows function.

A person who has been known to give themselves up for the goodwill of others is praised as a martyr, as an admirable soul. Now think of this in context of our natural beings, our primal purpose, if you will. It is our instinct to beat opposition and seek first for ourselves. So technically, there is nothing we do for others out of pure good will, because we seek something, anything, in this bargain.
"You make my dopamine levels go all silly."
Is it inconceivable to believe that people would 'do good' in order to feel good? Empathy is not natural. It is, reader, another of these blasphemous euphemisms.

It is the irony in sterilising the needle before injecting a person on death row. How utterly human of us to shield ourselves from ourselves. And to what cause? Does this make it any more palatable?

Perhaps there is a critical age for learning how to empathise. It's like language, which linguists have discovered will not develop spontaneously or correctly to a child that is not exposed to speech before the onset of puberty. Something to do with lateralisation of the brain, maybe? In any case, it is my opinion that empathy is a result of social conditioning. There is a cut-off point where what you have never learnt becomes an emotion that you can only imitate. You are forever denied the human experience.

We become what we experience. It is not an easy task to be a muse.
Think, to have inspired that, to have known oneself to be the object of an irrational and glorious desire, the source and instrument of love, a thing of beauty...

It has been so profoundly disappointing to be an observer of the human experiment, to see with such clarity, but to be so unmoved. Beating out a shout that echoes unanswered and forever in a dark cave, for a life to be driven by passions so fully regarded.

Is there even one modicum of evidence to suggest that we know the difference between right and wrong?