In regards to human nature vs. free will, the door has been opened. Are we wired to desire? Are we conditioned to believe and desire material objects? Or, can we separate from our conciousness and analyze situations with no emotion, no lack of logic? I believe individuals can surpass "luck", and "genes". I don't believe we are pre-destined to do specific things. You make a choice, somethimes without being precisely logical, or rational, nonetheless YOU make a choice. There was no map written before the dawn of man that can account for the decisions you, friend, have made, or will make. Therefore, I believe it to be possible to achieve such a society where individuals can think logically and act rationally. Greed, power lust; these are all ideals humans have been conditioned to BELIEVE as inescapable.
I take a portion my ideals from the author and objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand. A bit of a background on her: She escaped Russia during the revolution of 1917. Rand was very anti- communism. Her writings are written with high regards to the individual and no regard to the collectivist society. A couple of her works that I have read are: The Fountainhead and Anthem. She also wrote, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
I took her objectivist philosophy and applied to the ideal of communism, and came out with the base of an ideal that I follow. The individual must be selfish, (Rand also believed that selfishness is a virtue, which I know can sound absurd but read more into it:www.objectivistcenter.org/cth--406-FAQ_Virtue_Selfishness.as
px).
And, quit attempting to "do good", and living the selfless life. The individuals who do so; who live to do good for others, are not living for THEMSELVES. This way of thinking, the selflesness, does nothing for the individual, except hinder their own potential as a true asset to the human community. We can not begin living for each other, until we truely know how to live for ourselves. We must sacrafice the tags, the brands, the labels and the groups. The religion, the race, the class status. This is hinderance to the individual and to the human community on a MASS SCALE. The artists, the thinkers, the philosophers, the non- conformists are hardley appreciated because they rarely conform, they live for themselves, their ideals; their art. And they are the crazy ones? Because they pursue passion, seek truth and know how to appreciate their own attributes and can contribute to the human community. I believe, by seeking passion, which cannot be done unless abolishing the separation of class, social tatus, race, sexuality, sex, gender, religion; the individual will actually SEE what lies within themself. Realize that, and only then can genuinely contribute to the human community. Clothes, cars, money, name; does not shape a person, it creates segregation and ensures the demise of the human community. I will stop here for now. Check out that link and think about what I said. I don't understand how others can be so blind to this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting stuff! And I agree with you, we are not programmed to do certain things. Our decisions are our own; and we are responsible for them. We are not restricted by any set boundaries as some would have us believe. In my opinion the most detrimental boundary of them all is the idea of ‘human nature’; that there is a ‘normal’ way of thinking, feeling and acting. I believe we should be more accepting of our fellow (wo)man, and with it embrace the wonderful diversity we all share.
ReplyDeleteWhich brings me onto the point you made about selfishness being a virtue. I read the link and it is compelling stuff. Being as selfishness has survived over all these years I must say that, from an evolutionary sense, it must be successful; and in that sense Rand is right. I have to say though that I do not see altruism as the flip side to selfishness’ coin; rather I see them as two separate branches coming off of the same tree. They are both as important as one another, because they increase our all important diversity; and if there is one thing our planet loves, it is diversity. No two elephants are the same, no two butterflies, no two bumblebees, no two blades of grass; and no two humans. It is a mighty thing.
And where Ayn Rand rejects altruism, “the view that self-sacrifice is the moral ideal”, I reject “the moral ideal” itself. There is no “moral ideal” as it would contradict our diversity.
Wow, thanks for posting that, its got me thinking…
Wow!!!
ReplyDeletei love what you write.
i've had big issues believing i was selfish.
and to this day.
selfish or not.
i dont know.
ha!
Thanks a lot for voicing your thoughts on this.
ReplyDelete"This way of thinking, the selflesness, does nothing for the individual, except hinder their own potential as a true asset to the human community. We can not begin living for each other, until we truely know how to live for ourselves."
As an artist, I can passionately say that the passion you defend in your letter is ultimately the passion that keeps spirit alive, and with that (spirit being thought) the life that can be good...
GingerSnap - do you seek the ultimate conclusion from how someone will judge your action? ("Your action is selfish/non-selfish!"). Isn't that a way of walking the path of disappointing yourself continuously? You know from within what is good and bad - you've got all you need... But yea - each person must ultimately find out for themselves. Through the journey of their individual lifetime...
ReplyDelete