Wednesday, January 15, 2014

– Task 5: Can it be that some of the character traits we most admire in other persons are also matters of instinct, as with the animals in this passage? If character is a matter of insouciant instinct, can we condemn those who don't have it?



Several years ago, my family had a small mice infestation at our house. We had caught two or three mice in a period of five days. Each one of them had been calmly waiting for us to free them into the woods. Only the last mouse had been acting differently: she panicked, jumped up and down – tried everything possible to get out of the bucket and back into the house. She did not succeed; but we wondered what made her act as she did. What we did not know was that we had caught a mother of three baby mice. The next day when I came into my room I almost stepped on something that looked like a pink gummy bear. When I examined it further I recognized a baby mouse, a tiny hairless body with its eyes closed. … It was astonishing to know that a creature that small and young, not even properly developed had gathered all its strength to search for its mother, and in that sense, to find the only way to be able to survive. This understanding created a great admiration and recognition for the creature’s courage and will to survive, in short for its instinctual character. We felt responsible for those tiny orphans and tried to coddle them up. Unfortunately, they died just about two days after we had found them. Our sadness about their death was probably not caused by the actual death of something we formerly wanted to dispose of. It was much more the sadness that the vigour of life and the will to live – that even the tiniest creatures contain within themselves – had been wasted in the blink of an eye.

Similarly, in the chapter “Brute neighbors”, Henry David Thoreau describes the greatness of animals’ instincts, and his admiration for their instinctually guided existence. He describes the instinct as a kind of universal intelligence and “a wisdom clarified by experience” (Thoreau 247), which actually is not achieved through age or experience, but which is primordial. As Thoreau suggested, instinct must be connected to, what we like to call, favored character traits. Most of the time when acting upon our instinct the result is something truly positive. Thus, instinct must be the origin of good character, of bravery and intelligence. (Thoreau 247) Likewise, Louis Menand, an American writer and academic, discusses character in his article “Head Case” as follows:

“We think that sucking it up, mastering our fears, is a sign of character. But do we think that people who are naturally fearless lack character? We usually think the opposite. Yet those people are just born lucky. Why should the rest of us have to pay a price in dread, shame, and stomach aches to achieve a state of being that they enjoy for nothing?”

If character is a matter of instinct we cannot condemn those who do not have it. But we can condemn those who do not let their instinct be part of their body and mind. Yes, we are human. But we are also animals. We do have an instinct, but we tend to suppress it for the sake of what we call rationality. But we must learn to trust our animalistic side, too. For, it sometimes is the only way to act properly. In a situation of affliction rationality will not be the trait to turn to; only our instinct will be able to help. Thus, instinct is the more genuine trait, and in some situations it is the only thing that will lead us the right way. By letting instinct take the lead once in a while, we can prove real character.


Menand, Louis. 2010. "Head Case" in The New YorkerOnline resource. Web. 10 January 2014. <http://www.buffalo.edu/content/dam/www/news/imported/pdf/April10/NewYorkerPsychiatry.pdf>

Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2006. Print.

No comments:

Post a Comment