Nini hasa maana ya utu?

@ Makedha

Will come back when prepared to explain the two terms of Consciousness!

The Consciousness which can DIGEST and ASSIMILATE any type of stress to Completeness!! (Ufahamu Maalum)

The Second case is NON Digestive and assimilative Consciousness!! (Ufahamu wa Kawaida)
 
EMT said:
Hapo kwenye red, kwa hiyo kile kitendo cha chui kwenye video hapo juu kilikuwa sio cha "ufahamu muhimu" kwa sababu "ufahamu muhimu" haupatikani kwa wanyama? Unafikiri wanyama hawana ufahamu?
Click to expand...

Gaijin said:
Kwa kuongezea suali la MTM hapo, huo ufahamu maalum tunaupimaje?
Click to expand...

Baada ya kuelezea Ufahamu maalum yaani Digestive and assimilative consciousness ... It will be very obvious kuwa Wanyama wana Ufahamu gani

Na ufahamu gani unafanya Mtu kuwa na UTU na ni ufahamu gani unafanya Mnyama kuwa na UNYAMA!

Na baada ya hapo kumpima Unyama kwa Mnyama na Utu kwa mtu ... itakuwa very ease ... !!

If under stress you will be able to consciously digest and assimilate it to completeness that stress ... you will not suppress the stress, you will not react, you will not emit negative emotions you will have patience, stillness, ..etc

We will see if any animal can real pass this test!!

We will see if all human beings can pass through this test!!

We will see who will pass it!

Tutaomba volunteer ... we Pressure, Stress, put him in rough conditions, rude, cruel ...abuse..etc and wait to see .. the degree of negative emotions emissions ... kujua kuwa his consciousness can not completely digest and assimilate the stress to completeness ...!!

We will certainly know What is animal and what is not animal ...
... and also what is animal in Human!!!
 
GAIJIN
Mimi nakubali kuwa miongoni mwa hao waliokwisha kuupoteza utu wao wa asili; hivyo najipa haki ya kuuliza "utu ni nini?" @Azimio jipya

Na ikiwa utu wa taifa umeanza kupotea na wengi wanakufa wakiwa karibu na unyama kuliko utu, utamhukumu vipi mwenzio kwa kukosa utu?


utu kwa mwangalio mwingine ni kujaribu kujiweka kwenye viatu vya mhusika na kujaribu kuangaliai jee ungalikuwa ni wewe ungalichukua uamuzi kama aliochukua mhusika?kama usingefanya hivyo na watu wengine wasio punguani walioshuhudia wanasema wasingefanya hivyo basi hilo tendo sii la kiutu.kwa mtizamo wa kamusi nadhani neno considerate ndio muafaka.

sitamhukumu mwenzangu,lakini hali hiyo haiwezi kuachwa hivyo hivyo.
kwa kuwa utu ni lulu,basi taifa lililoanza kupoteza utu inabidi turudi kwenye mstari wa utu ambao ndio unaozaa matunda yenye faida kwa jamii yote.
 
Azimio Jipya,

Umm... So you know of studies that have been conducted about the way humans and animals react to stressful conditions and you are going to tell us about them, is that what you are saying?

Could you also define what you mean with "completeness"? Based on the way you use it, it's just not very clear (to me at least).
 
blackwizard said:
UTU- humanity, human nature.:eyebrows:Tunatambua usemi wa waswahili Utu wa Mtu ni utu.Kwa maana hiyo jamii ndiyo inasema nini ni human nature
Click to expand...
You mean Utu wa mtu ni Watu?
this makes sense only kama utu ni relative concept all the times. But mimi naamini kua Utu una positive definition ambayo at any time, under all circumstances Utu unabaki na naana ile ile... na hiyo ndio definition ningependa kupata.

Relativity ni sawa ila shida yake it creates vagueness na kwa mtindo wa relativity nothing is true, not even the relativity theory!
 
paulss said:
Wakuu baada ya miezi kadhaa ya kudadafua tafsiri ya neneo UTU je hii ndio tafsiri iliyopatikana? au hii ni conclusion ya Azimio Jipya tu
Naona kama tafsiri hii haijashiba uzuri
Click to expand...
paulss, hakuna mpinzani!!:nono::nono:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Its not that simple, the deep studies are complicated for this forum Roulette will agree with me ...

But its psychological facts that, Animal and human have different way to react and adapt to STRESS!

Its known that human being with real Character will never REACT to Stress but rather will ACT! You will only be able to distinguish the two Because RE ACTION goes with emission of negative emotions! While ACTION doesn't have the negative emotion as display!!

The Reaction to stress and production of negative emotions is reserved for animals this is there ways and doest not produce any negative effect to them ... Its healthy!

The Action to the stress by human being by not suppressing the stress neither producing negative emotions is unique character only possible for human being not for animals and human being who has this ability is considered has demonstrated human traits at its complete level!

Failing to attain to this human character of digesting the stress psychometabolically that means producing negative emotions of fear, anger, resentments, greed,etc leads to many negative effects to human life few to mention is at healthy and human relation. Negative emotions doesn't bother the animals at all in fact it makes their muscles stronger and grow ... negative emotions for animal evolution is a must and a life, to human being is a death!!

If under maximum stress and you can demonstrate the ability not to suppress it and not producing negative emotions that means you are digesting it and the special name for this is LOVE!!

Love is the ability of not producing neither suppressing negative emotion under pressure/stress! Note that if you dont produce ANGER (The opposite of love), if you dont produce RESENTMENT(the opposite of Love) ... Then LOVE IS THE ABILITY TO CONQUER STRESS BY NOT PRODUCING ANGER, RESENTMENT, AND ALL NEGATIVE EMOTIONS when tested!!

Simplify this by calling LOVE, UTU!!!!:yo:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kuleta hoja ya kuitishwa kwa uchaguzi mpya baada ya mbunge aliyepo kukumbwa na maradhi kutakuwa na mantiki ikiwa mbunge atakayechaguliwa atakuwa amethibitika pasipo mashaka yoyote kwamba yeye hawezi kuugua kamwe na wala hawezi kupata tatizo lolote la kumweka kitandani kwa miaka.

Kumbuka hapa nazungumzia uwezekano wa mbunge huyo kuwa juu ya uwezekano wa kupata ajali, kukumbwa na janga la asili kama kimbunga, radi au mafuriko na kujikuta yuko katika ile hali wanayoiita Waswahili, 'hujafa hujaumbika'.

Ikiwa mleta hoja hana uwezo wa kumleta kwetu mbunge wa jinsi hiyo, namshauri afyate na kukifunga kikopo chake, maaana kakosa 'utu' kiwango kisichovumilika!
 
Mwali,

Makedha I just wanted to bring you to the attention of this ... "utu" kwa kumaanisha vitu kama 'compassion, respect ... AND to me this is the same as LOVE!! That means UTU can also be defined as LOVE here done non technically by Mwali!

That means real love is never affected nor altered by Stress ... :A S-heart-2:
 
Azimio Jipya said:
Its not that simple, the deep studies are complicated for this forum Roulette will agree with me ...
Click to expand...

Too complicated for the great thinkers of this forum? :O
I don't think some complexity will be of any harm to us, I rather think it would be much more to everybody's benefit to have their knowledge of the world enriched by these studies, aside from giving us more substance to debate.

Azimio Jipya,

I think this explanation has helped me comprehend your point better, but the problem I still have with it is that distinction you keep making about human and animal behavior without showing any proof to support the idea that such differences really exist between the way humans and animals act.

You say that a human with real character will never produce (=emit?) negative emotions as a result to stress (=react to stress) even though it rather seems to me (based on personal experience however) that producing negative emotions as a response to stress is what most humans do, which means that many humans do not differ from animals in that aspect.
What do you mean by "a human with real character"? How does a human with real character differ from a human without real character? Which one of the two is more prevalent according to you?

Azimio Jipya,
Without meaning any disrespect or accusation, I have honestly never heard or read that fear and anger is healthy for animal muscular development or doesn't bother animals at all. Stress can make both humans and animals exhibit aggressive/attacking behavior, so why consider the exact same reaction as negative for humans and not for animals?

This is why I think it's really important for you to post the studies you base your standpoint on, so that we have some tangible facts to start with.

Azimio Jipya,

So you believe that only very, very few humans have "utu" if that's how you define it, right? Roulette talked about conscientiously suppressing your negative emotions and promote the positive ones, which is something humans regularly do to guarantee a properly functioning society, but you are going one step further and saying that even suppressing is not enough, a person should rather be able to be left completely unaffected (negatively) by stress, which is something I frankly don't think most people can do... That would mean you believe that a person isn't using his/her "utu" when they feel fear in presence of danger? Or when they're angry because their car broke down on the way to that important meeting they absolutely had to arrive on time at?
 
Makedha, This discussion will only be very meaningful if done to try to Solve a particular Community problem. This can make you comprehend deeply the whole science of negative emotions through emotional intelligence which will eventual enlighten you the core different between Human (UTU) and Animal (UNYAMA) in terms of stress response.

Somewhere else I tried to discuss how the OBJECT SHADOW PHILOSOPHY can help us understand the real nature of our own negative emotions in community development.

I am pesting here the model and the link and you will study and see how far it can take you!!

Re: Why Saitoti lived in fear

This is all about Emotional Intelligence!

If just by seeing a dog you emit negative emotions of fear, worries etc there is a special correlation for this!!

The dog is the Object which causes the negative emotions ... Ok!?

The negative emotions of fear, worries, doubts etc are regarded as the SHADOW from the object, which is the dog ..ok!?

Can you/anyone separate the Shadow from its real Object? NOp!!

The fact is, "the Shadow will always follow the Object"

If you have a substantial amount of fear toward a particular dog .... the creature will always be attracted to you and ignore all people arround and close to it but with less/no negative emotions toward it!

If Saitoti lived in all "reasonable amount" of negative emotions (THE SHADOW) of the Death as (THE REAL OBJECT) ... can any one separate the two?

If a girl is sexually abused at childhood and she holds the Shadow of the event as anger, fear, resentment etc toward the cruel event as the object .... She may find the real event repeating in her life ... because She holds the SHADOW (the negative emotions) ... and it will definitely act as the seed to gravitate the real OBJECT of sexual abuse to replay in her life!!

Saitoti would have benefited with sensible advice to deliberately reduce/cut down the Shadow to have a peaceful long life ahead!!

Here is the link ...

https://www.jamiiforums.com/kenyan-politics/277988-why-saitoti-lived-in-fear.html

What am saying animals have no this alternative! To learn to overcome the shadow so that to have meaningful community life, but human being is or rather it is a must! This is all about Emotional intelligence. You can try to follow some links of What is emotional intelligence with respect to Healthy, Working place, Religion etc and you will be real appreciative that you can overcome your SHADOWS in front of any OBJECT!!!


 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, I'll recapitulate again:

At first, utu was: "the ability to deliberately reduce negative emotions and promote the positive ones (to other people's benefit)."

Based on what you said in your penultimate post, utu was: "the ability to neither produce nor supress negative emotions."

And now it seems to have become: "the ability to not produce negative emotions in association with a specific object."

Which description is the right one in the end? And the ever remaining question is: "What proves that animals don't have it?"
 
I really appreciated your keen observations regarding this matter!

I have some following comments,


Which description is the right one in the end? BOTH statements above represent the same thing. All have the same results which define what is UTU!

And the ever remaining question is: "What proves that animals don't have it?"

I deliberately overlooked this part till we are through with the effect of negative emotions in human being! I gave you some links which indicates several spheres of researchers working hard to understand and overcome negative emotions for the better healthy, working place, well established family, business, performance at schools etc and they come up with the term Emotional intelligence, as the way to manage the negative emotions . All this is to help understand that negative emotions can not be taken as something to toy with. That is to human being, negative emotions can no longer be taken as a commodity for internment ! They are serious part of our being which needs effective attention now than it was in the past.

Finally we will then discuss if Animals needs to be emotionally intelligent as human being! That is, Does negative emotions have detrimental effect to animals as does to human being?
 
I think the misunderstanding happened at the word "suppression" and what it means.

You seem to have defined "(emotional) suppresion" as "avoiding confrontation with (specific emotions)" such that, in the situation of the broken down car, forcing oneself to think about happy things to avoid feeling the anger would be emotional suppression. Is it so?

The definition I rather went by was "To put an end to forcibly; subdue." And based on this definition, if I re-use the example of the car that has broken down, reducing the anger one feels by calmly breathing in and out and repeating to oneself that anger won't help the situation could be considered as emotional suppression.
That is why I thought there was a difference between the two first definitions of utu. Going by the first definition of utu, my definition of emotional suppression would still be considered as an expression of utu while it would not for the two following definitions (which, by the way, are indeed the same, I have noticed after re-reading them more attentively).



If you truly gave me these links, something must be wrong because I am not seeing them. You only gave one link about Saitoti and his obsession with death. I do understand what emotional intelligence (let's go by the definition: "the ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups" and use Daniel Goleman's model as a reference, since he seems to be so popular) is and I understand that negative emotions can be very detrimental to humans. This is a fact of life that sole life experience can prove, so I do not think it is necessary to delay the introduction of the studies you base your standpoint on regarding animals and their way of coping with negative emotions.

​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…