No one warned me. No one told me that 50% of adult life is tending to your obligations (school, work, family, hobbies). And the other 48% is adapting to change. Meanwhile the other 2% is the actual fun and “freedom” of being “grown” that our 6 year old selves dreamed of (just kidding, but you get the idea). And so, with the start of this new year, I have been thinking a lot about the two—my responsibilities and how to hustle to make my life easier in the long run, and secondly, how to cope with life destroying these very same plans.
​
    You see, 2016 was a crazy for me. I think it was for everyone. Prince died, after all! Well, for one, I went on an unexpected health journey.  I never saw myself as one of those health guru types. I quit my job for an internship. And now I’ve quit that internship for one another, both of which I had thought at one time that I would be finishing the rest of my academic career there (the job and first internship)! I changed career paths. I lost some friends who I thought would be my future childrens’ godparents. I lost some lovers who I thought I would be having kids with some day! I, the in-her-comfort-zone introvert, went on a vacation by myself. I was on the planning committee of my university’s annual Diversity Conference. I did a lot more crazy things that were unusual for me, in 2016. 

          ​Haiti is under the world’s magnifying glass again. Why? Haiti has been set back again. Another natural disaster –this time by the name of Hurricane Matthew—has hit Haiti terribly, spiraling the country into despair, medical emergency, and public unrest over the past few weeks. Up to 1000 people have been reported dead. Over thousands have lost their home. And the most concerning issue is that hundreds of thousands are without food and fresh, clean water. Public health experts fear that cholera will resurface again in such conditions. Corpses are not being disposed of properly and that may be contaminating what few sources of water there are, thus leading to the fast-killing infectious disease. This is due to lack of infrastructure and organization of resources, especially in post-2010 earthquake Haiti. Much of Haiti has been in disarray since the earthquake. Reports say that Haitians did not know the storm was coming and that there was not much national attention given to prepare for disaster relief. It has been some time that the storm has passed, but Haitian residents are now saying that foreign aid has been slow. Other nearby Caribbean countries survived Matthew without a death. Some nations have had a handful of deaths, but regardless, in comparison to Haiti’s death toll it is miniscule. It seems that the heart of the Caribbean, Haiti, can never catch a break.                          
 
 
       My cousin was telling me her grievances with the media’s negative undertones when discussing Hurricane Matthew and Haiti. “Hurricane Matthew has struck Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.” “Time and time again, you will hear news reporters refer to Haiti as “the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.”  Newscasts may mean well, after all it is a fact. Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. The majority of Haitian people are politically disenfranchised, economically disadvantaged, and culturally stigmatized. This is a nation crying for help. But as my cousin told me, the takeaway message that media agencies presents to its viewers (could be intentionally) is that Haiti is this way by its own doing, by its own accord. If only the Haitian people would Westernize and then they wouldn’t be a charity case anymore. Simple, right! This country needs to pull itself by its own bootstraps! It is not our right that we help them, is what they are saying –in fact it is a privilege and the Haitian people should be thankful we grant foreign aid period! This is the underlying message that one can hear in the unspoken language of Western politicians, Western media, and even among their citizens. And without fail, with every report of a problem in Haiti from the recent hurricane to the Earthquake in 2010 to the political unrest during Aristide’s reign, there lies implicit classism, racism, and a negative portrayal of a post-colonial society that is simply trying to overcome with the cards that were dealt to them.

                        You should always watch what you say, because you could actually make an impact. It was a Saturday afternoon and I remember feeling exhausted, eyes weary, at any moment If I am presented with a bed I would with no regret lay myself down. Her lips moved with so much passion and conviction, she went  on and on about her near death experience driving her car on a icy highway. But later after careful questioning it was determined that she had really bad tires & her front brake pads were done, i guess the road wasn't as Icy after all, just no common sense.Then she proceeded to talk about how she went home to cook her potato casserole.Then started reasoning with herself as to what should should wear at a private party the following weekend.She would go on for what seemed like hours in a matter of 35 minutes. Its amazing how a girl rambling can make one concern himself with the power of words and language.
The whole time i was intrigue by not only her words and form of expression but her language and the meaning she brought to it. What does language mean to you?  Well, to me I understand language as something that either unifies or barricades people. It can benefit you or it can show you no favor.

                 Language the unique thing that is used by the human species as a whole. What is language? Well, language can be one of many various things, it could be the way you speak, the way you use your body, writing or even simply your facial expressions can convey some form of language that communicates with anybody. However to be more precise a language is "the method of human communication, either spoken or written, consisting of words in a structured and conventional way."  What is great about language is that we all have one in some way shape or form, we all use it. Living in america it is almost inevitable to not come across some type of culture that possesses their own special language. Stay with me i'm going somewhere with this, because a lot of times we cannot relate to certain people we do not understand there language, in the literal sense and figurative.

        I can recall my first time being invited into an Asian home, specifically Chinese, immediately I felt like I was in a another world. My friend at the time whom was Chinese invited me into her home and there I was able to witness  various portraits, sculptures, really submerged in her culture within a small 2 bedroom apartment. Her family was very respectful and hospitable. I recall her parents not knowing much english and when I greeted them I had to stand still and bow as a form of communication but come to find out what I had done was not necessary. It was explained to me that I could have just shaken their hands and that would have served as an acceptable greeting. But where did that come from? I realized that I never understood there language (figuratively and literally), I've never built or had enough personal connections with their culture so much so to the point where the basis of my greet came from what I've seen on Television, I was a victim to the stereotype. However my visit to this home became more interesting, there was an awkward moment where the mother started touching my skin and rubbing it and as innocently funny the whole moment was my friend explained that i might have been the first black man she ever touched. We sat at the table where they spoke mandarin the whole time and my friend did her best translating to keep me involved and engaged, by far one of my most memorable experiences.


            I couldn't help but to think how could this situation be perceived by someone looking from a far, a black man interacting with a Chinese family. I even wondered how would people react to a Chinese elderly woman rubbing a black mans skin, an act that can easily be seen as offensive. But so many of us are out of touch with each other, not really informed or involved with one another. This short experience I just shared would be considered an ethno-linguistic experience. In ethno linguistics you study language and culture to see how similar they are, how different and the perception certain groups have of the world. Can language be separated from culture? There is no easy answer because they are both necessary and more vital to humankind then most think. Our history has shown us that when the slaves were being extracted from Africa during the 1600s to the Caribbean islands, many of these slaves did not come from the same tribes, hence created a language barrier.  During the voyage many of these slaves could not speak to one another but there was a common denominator, MUSIC. They communicated with the beat of a drum, the music help them understand each other and through this music they were able to form words that could be interpreted. So can language be separated? It's very possible but it would be for a very short time.

Can Language limit how a person thinks? Only if the person chooses it to be so, but honestly it shouldn't. The ability that we have to speak and interpret different languages is not limiting how we think, it actually expands it. Now if you have read all of this up until this point what is the purpose of all this. In our present world there are so much turmoil and clashes of culture and one of the ways we can remedy these conflicts is by choosing to learn each others music, traveling to other environments outside of our norm. and allowing ourselves to be vulnerable in each others culture and there is not doubt in my mind that many achieve or attempt to do this but it is reasonable to assume that the number of the willing is much lower in contrast to those that do not concern themselves with other races. I'm hoping  your the reader that doesn't concern themselves and my message to you is do not be the problem be the Solution.

In this reflection I will ponder on something that I doubt, a notion that I don’t confide in or trust. Upon my deep thinking I could not help myself but to think of how I doubt man, my inability to have complete faith in human beings. My philosophy on this idea very much relates to the selfish nature of people in general and our intentions behind the acts that we commit for whatever reason, Immanuel Kant ideology. Why is this disease embedded in us, why is selfishness in our nature, it spreads like a virus to a human body, weakening the immune system, weakening our humanity. Some may say that it is natural because it pertains to our survival but who says we wouldn’t survive if we didn’t have it. I believe many people including myself have been acculturated, forced to be in a position where I have to worry about myself and my needs before anybody else’s. Some might have exceptions like family or close friends that might make them selfless however that doesn’t lift the burden of the selfish nature off us.

                My grandmother was a wise woman she once told me “We use and live in Mud”, a quote that baffled my brains and it was not until after her death I began to contemplate more on these words she shared with me along with many other brain teasers. The message being transmitted through this quote is equableness; we are all essentially the same. Under Kant's ideas, if one's intentions are pure and are in the best interest of others then these policies and beliefs ensues is an ethical course of action, even if the pure intention creates a negative consequence. Which leads me to thinking; we live in a world that was meant to be used for our own pleasure. A world where everything is free (or at least it used to be), trees bares us fruit, beautiful scenery for our eyes to witness, animals to adore and feed off of, water to cleanse our pores, to even the oxygen we breathe as a result of plant life. Implementing this idea that Kant developed of intention it would seem that human intention has been manipulated way before we were born, as way of stating that intentions can be thought.

                What is the intention behind a man making a discovery that can change lives for the good but refuse to share the knowledge of his/her discovery with others, the only way the discovery would be shared is if there is an advantage. To fully comprehend what I’m saying you must think practically. Take the example somebody finding a cure for aids, in a selfish world it would make sense to charge people money for this cure, using money (a gift from nature), something free to capitalize of another person, selfishness. What if it was the same predicament but in a selfless world, where the cure would be given to those who need with the strict intent of saving lives as oppose to an exchange. It’s like what my grandmother said “we use and live in mud”, everything we have comes from nature, and whether you believe in God or Evolution, the intent of this earth was to provide us with good things, sustainability, beauty and life. But when mans selfish nature grew stronger then the world began to suffer. The greed of chopping down trees to build corporations or print money, the greed of killing more animals than we need to, pollution, various inventions just for the purpose to sell. I understand what my grandmother meant we use mud and live in it, so that means I’m no better than a homeless man because they use the same things I do, they sleep on mud, wood and stones, I cover myself in it (house). So the interesting thoughts I ponder on is why is it that our selfish nature is causing us to take advantage, capitalize, ridicule and kill each other…it’s just mud. Even when there is no exchange for currency, giving a person a gift has its own sense of selfishness because if I get a Christmas present, it will be expected of me to do the same as well or maybe I made a large donation to a foundation but selfishly I would want to be recognized. Can we be unselfish and be truly comfortable with it. I think it would be very difficult and It’s for these reasons why I doubt man, why I don’t fully trust human nature.

        A major question within philosophy is how interpretation influences our perception of reality. Many ideas and numerous perspective have been shared on what justice is. There are dozens of books on the subject matter but one fact remains, everybody has there own version of what justice really looks like. What is really Right and Wrong. When it comes to the topic of Justice and Morals, we have to be careful in analyzing whether how we justify is indeed true and promotes fairness for the alleged unjust or whether how we justify is simply what we think is beneficial for society. Socrates once said that death is a good thing because it frees the soul from the imprisonment of the body. To add my own twist, I believe that justice is good because it implements the morals (hopefully) that has gone missing and imprisons the body through Un-debated consequences, related to crimes affecting the  Justice system as a whole is a culture. . However justice is a western notion that commemorates a concept of moral rightness based on ethics and rationality. The key word in the last sentence is rationality, a word that aligns with reasoning and agreeableness. I believe that justice is required and necessary on fundamental levels but sometimes justice holds no medium and can favor some to a better advantage. In this blog I will elaborate on some of John Rawls thoughts of justice and at same time integrate my ideas of my perceptions on morals and justice.

     It has been determined that the assurance of justice is usually a prerequisite for a good society. John Rawls states “those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties.” I agree with this statement because it has good intentions but what happens when a society chooses a principle to assign that is not necessarily right. One example I can provide is Slavery, a time where blacks were considered lower than the whites but yet dwelled (with one another) on the same soil. It took years for blacks to be recognized as equals to white (some might argue different); you see the problem was justified, however just like it is in war, the blood is still in the sand and our minds suffer the effects of these justifications. Slavery was the type of justification that benefited society (free labor) in numerous ways, creating wealth for our oppressors. . What would Rawls say? Well, according to him Justice is not the same as fairness, it is more the fundamental agreements reached in it that are fair and thus explains the modesty of the name “justice as fairness”, and I perceive this idea to be circumstantial because its intention is good but does not rationalize Slavery or any other unique times in history from my interpretation. How can a person, group of people or a society agree to use another human being as a tool with utter disregard for their freedom. Instead I was lead to question human nature and what is it we seek in life, I find it very ironic that we live in a society that wants fairness but we all take advantage of each other to accumulate wealth or some form of gain. Selfishness is a character trait that all humans have, almost like a disease, permanently in our blood streams and even when we try not to be selfish we still are because the act of unselfishness is selfishness.

         Thus as Rawls states “Men are to decide in advance how they are to regulate their claims against one another.” In this sense Rawls is right, Maybe some of the African men who sold their own people into slavery should of better regulated their claims towards their own kind. Equal and Impartial treatment is a desire we all feel we deserve in any given society. Rules and Laws vary from country to country which supports my claim that justice is principally inspired by culture. Why is it that in America it is frowned upon to drink if you’re underage (21), where as in certain places of Europe alcohol is shelved next to the soda and crackers. Its philosophy is drinking earlier in Europe gives users experience with alcohol so when they reach age 18, they are already used to it and therefore become more responsible with the substance, giving the notion that the user understands it effects. Implementing fairness, justice, is based on perceptions and what society agrees with that is how laws are put in place. On a primitive level law and justice are like soul mates and neither can be affective alone. What Rawls describes “justice as fairness” as a primitive condition of culture. A society without Justice and law is a lost one, no one would know there their place, class, status, fortune or even distribution of assets; the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement.  So it make sense for people to come together to decide what is permitted or not.

              What happens when justice is not properly served? Well, justice will only uphold until someone feels that they are not receiving it accordingly. Thus the resulting conditional state a society would be left at is an unstable one, if people feel they are not receiving what is due to them. Aside from Slavery there are many other examples of the affects that transpire when justice is not properly served such as the Civil Rights movement, Universal Healthcare, French Revolution, Woman in the Middle East, court cases and etc. However is justice really fair or is it just judgment, when a crime is committed and the convicted is found guilty the end result is punishment but my main issue is how the punishment can be justified as fair when it’s all just opinion. She was just 5 years old and her father and stepmother took her life away with utter disregard, her name was Farah Khan. The father was sentenced to life without parole for 25 years and stepmother got 10 years in jail. 25 years? What if Farah had lived to be 100 or 75, can 25 years justify the death of a young child because after those 25 years the killers could be released. Though I may not know all the tedious details of that case, surely how we choose to serve justice as fairness is opinionated. The definition of what is just and fair differs abundantly due to the views and opinions of everyone. Instinctively though humans have a justified reason for everything, the mind reasons and justifies daily to suit our own needs so maybe that is why fairness is not easily attained.

       To conclude despite my pessimistic view I actually believe in justice and the legal system that follows. I believe in justice as an ideal. When Rawls proposed his two principles of justice he suggested that “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage.”Self-explanatory. when the question is asked can there be justice for all? And can all people really be equal? The answer unfortunately to these questions is no. Justice to me is an advantage or disadvantage miraged by the idea of equableness.  In my opinion even when you get justice there are still much more that is unfair, it’s about possession. The ability to recognize what one has and who has less, it could be the millionaire who feels it’s unfair to pay high taxes or the poor man who is unable to get food stamps. Unfortunately many and maybe fortunate for some, will be born in this justice system that has been constructed by society (its everyones responsibility). My reason for those fortunately born in the system implies that some people will be born in certain classes that will benefit them (upper, middle or lower class), at the top of a societies social construct, positioned in a place where they get the head start and others are forced to catch up. Justice fails to embrace all moral relationships and as Rawls would say “We must recognize the limited scope of justice as fairness and of the general type of view it exemplifies.” As long as everyone is different holding different attitude, justice is indeed in the eye of the beholder because every individual has their perceptions of right and wrong.