‘Human ‘is also a title

Although studied to develop a vocation, studied mainly for society to recognize us as BEINGS integrate (humans).

While we all have questions about which came first, the chicken or the egg, I suffer a question like when I wonder if humans act as we could think of, —and then describe in words in our language that we did—, or otherwise, it is language that requires us to take certain actions.

Let me explain it another way:

When we look to end a legal career, pottery or design, we can say to others, no one is entitled to contrariarnos: "I ​​AM counsel”, “I AM potter" or "I AM designer».

My question is whether anyone studied what he studied because he liked it, because it happened to him, because he had nothing better to do or, on the contrary, he studied studied what he needed to say, no one had the right to cross him, "I AM (lawyer, potter or designer)".

Although it seems obvious that all studied because it occurs to us, (for which we are studying as our free will) is admissible assumption that study, first, because we need to BE to others, need to be recognized, because even Sorry we anatomic alive, something leads us to seek our recognition within the community such that we integrate.

As not think we're as free to do what we can think, I tend to think we are gregarious beings, we depend heavily on members of a group feel (family, sports team, nation).

If this were true (which we are deeply social and barely self-sufficient), then, when we seek an identity that others recognize us, what we do is an effort to BE (lawyers, potters, designers). We need titularnos as BEINGS (humans).

Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google):  ‘Ser humano’también es un título.

(Este es el Artículo Nº 2.087)

●●●