Alien Point of View

I find it liberating and illuminating to assume the point of view another person, a person who is different than me.  I read a book in high school entitled, Black Like Me by John Howard Griffin, and it had a profound impact on my thinking.  Griffin was a white journalist who in 1961 dyed his skin very dark and entered the southern United States as a Black Person.  His experiences are amazing.  Ever since, I try to imagine the world through the eyes of others:  A Syrian refugee, an African mother watching her children starve, a Muslim Jihadist who hates America, a fourth generation Mexican American, a hedge fund manager, etc.  I have very little in common with these imaginary people, and I can only guess what they may be thinking or feeling.  But I am enlightened by the mental effort.

It seems only reasonable to advance this mental exercise to include a sentient alien life form.  I picture an incredibly knowledgeable being, carbon based, bipodal who is capable of conversation in my own language.  I picture a female being with luminescent eyes, hairless head, and thin limbs.  Though wise and knowing she is blessed with empathy as well.  She comes to me as I walk a lonely path in a forest at night, with a full moon lighting my way.  I hear crickets and owls and nocturnal beasts scurrying in the dark before a wind and a wush and she stands before me.  Her thin mouth smiles.  I feel no fear as her features hold no anger, no hostility.  Just a smile and a deep curiosity as she gazes at me and me at her for the first time, taking in our similarities and differences.  She tells me her name is Sitio.  We begin a dialog.

She asks why I walk the woods at night in the dark all alone.  I tell her that though there are many humans I love and many humans with whom I enjoy sharing time and space, I feel the need to remove myself from them for alone time, to think, to ponder, to reflect.  Yes, in answer to her question, this was to be such a time.  No, Sitio, I do not want you to leave me to my alone time.  I would much rather spend it with you than alone.  She smiles again.

I have many questions, she says.  As do I!  We both start talking at once and I laugh, she smiles.  That is such a remarkable sound, she says, when you open your mouth and make noises from your diaphragm that have no meaning but sound happy.  They are happy, I reply.  We call it laughter and all humans are capable of it when they are amused or happy.  We have no such sounds, she says.  We smile.  I say that in some ways that strikes me as sad.  Her head cocks as she ponders my response.

You appear to be a female, I say.  Yes, she says.  I am.  We have two genders as do you.  Then you ask your questions first as in our culture we allow women to go first.  Why? She asks.  Are they stronger or superior to males so they go first?  I laugh again.  No, it is an assumption from our past that women are to be coddled and cherished so males allow them to go first to demonstrate our own strength.  Males are chivalrous.  We will give up a seat on a life boat for a woman, or a child.  Amazing she said.  It sounds as though females have tricked you into this assumption that letting them win is somehow a victory for males.  My head cocks as I ponder her response.

She begins:  Why do humans war against each other?  Why do you fight?  Why do you compete?  It seems to result in such waste, so much death, so much hunger.  It results in some having very much and others having very little.  Are some humans more important than other humans?  Wow is all I can say.  I think for a moment, then respond.  We argue that as we evolved we had to compete to survive.  As we advanced it became clear that those who could win in wars and competition had more than those who did not.  So we developed heroes who won and others became losers.  We do that still today.  We have a very hard time imagining a society of collaboration and sharing.  We have always pictured life as a struggle, a competition.  We believe that such struggles and such competitions make us stronger and smarter.  It is in our best interest to compete.

She smiles again.  That of course, is nonsense, she says.  You claim to advance via competition and war when in fact that is what destroys you.  That is what wastes your resources.  If you collaborated and shared rather than vesting so much energy in competition both in your wealth accumulation and war machines then you would be so much better off.  All of you.  Your planet would be healthier.  Everyone would have food, shelter, clothing, medicine.  No human would have basic needs deprived as your resources are so great.  It makes no sense to us.  It appears that you think of yourselves as advanced because you now cook your meat even though you use the same principles to get your meat.

I am stumped.  The issue she has raised as her first question right off the bat is so profound to me my head spins.  What would a cooperative society look like?  How could we curtail our desire to have more and to demonstrate superiority to our neighbors if we did not compete, if we did not want to win?  Is it our nature to compete, or is that learned behavior?  What would it look like to have a culture where we each want for others what we want for ourselves? 

Your eyes are moving rapidly back and forth, she says.  Does that mean you are thinking?  Yes, I guess it does I reply.  Good, she says.

Now tell me about religion.  It appears a large number of humans believe in a deity, a being that they cannot see.  A being with total power and total knowledge.  A being that can punish them or reward them.  A being they pray to, worship, give money to, take pilgrimages in behalf of.  A being who moderates over a heaven of eternal bliss for the spirits of those who die and a being who controls a hell of eternal torture for others who die. A being that rules over all, is capable of doing anything, and created all.  Even more interesting is that humans do not worship the same deity.  There are many deities all of whom have many followers.  Is that accurate?

That is pretty much accurate, I think.  I tell her I come from a Christian heritage so I cannot speak with any knowledge of other belief systems.  I know that there are more Christians than any other faith, followed by Muslims.  Atheists make up the third largest group, more than Buddhists, Hindus and Jews combined.  But, other than atheists, your description sounds mostly Christian.

Sitio asks, are there not only 3 possibilities regarding such a deity?  One is that there is no such deity, two is that there is such a deity and that deity controls everything so that all that happens, good and bad, can be laid at the feet of the deity, or three that there is such a deity but that deity does not intervene in human affairs, perhaps because the deity has a secret plan for humans, or perhaps because such a deity just likes to observe.  None of the three options promotes beseeching and worshipping the deity as all three options eliminate the likelihood of divine intervention.  None of the three possibilities provide evidence of such a being.

Are you and your people atheists then? I ask.  She smiles.  We were never theists so to be atheist has no meaning.  Early in our history there were many things we did not know and did not understand but we simply perceived those things as unknown or challenges.  We did not make up answers, we sought answers.  That is one of the reasons why you are so interesting to us.  You made up answers and despite your knowledge still hold on to those beliefs.

Is there no God?  No heaven, no hell, no life after death? I ask.  We have found no evidence to support any of those beliefs, she says.  There is no life before birth and no life after death.  There are no such mythical places as heaven and hell housing post mortem spirits for all eternity.  In fact we see such beliefs as silly and child-like.  But I do not wish to offend.  Your life form tends to react irrationally if beliefs are challenged.

I ask, what is your moral base?  What is your code of ethics?  Sitio smiles again.  Simple, she says.  If a behavior benefits others it is good.  If a behavior benefits the individual at the expense of others it is bad.  We do not deal with rights or wrongs, just consequences as either good or bad. 

I tell her I do not understand.  Yes you do, you just do not apply that code everywhere and to everyone.  A mother is exhausted caring for her sick child.  She wants to leave and go somewhere to have an alcoholic beverage.  If she does, she leaves the sick child unattended but she benefits.  If she leaves is that good or bad?  OK, I get that.  A “good” mom would stay with the child rather than seek selfish benefits.  But life is more complicated than that.  No, she says, it is not if I am mother to all and child to all.

My head hurts.

Sitio smiles her enigmatic smile again and tells me she has enjoyed our conversation very much.  She learned much and has much to ponder.  I tell her I feel the same.  Good, she says, we shall do this again.

She turns, walks into the woods and with a wind and a wush she is gone. 

Wow.  Not surprising that someone from the stars is over my head.