I think identity is a thing of the past. I'm more interested in who (not what) a person is. But many people cling to and find illusionary security in some imagined national, religious, racial, class, caste or neighborhood belonging.
We only belong to ourselves. Anything else is from the devil used for exploitation by unethical personalities.
It's only individual identity that matters and that one is particularly hard to define. Maybe that's why many people prefer to adopt a ready made prefabricated one.
Still it can be impossibly difficult to try to understand the world in its complexity and sophistication all by oneself. We need to believe in something, take some knowledge for granted unable to check it ourselves and that's when group knowledge seems reasonably believable and one is prepared to accept the opinion of priests, scientists, politicians or even soothsayers.
Nevertheless I believe sticking to imagined national, religious, or professional identity robs a person from the opportunity to form an independent, objective and balanced opinion that has more chance to be true. Ignoring truth is not only an unwise choice but outright dangerous for the perpetrators and their environment so that's one liberty that we cannot afford. Striving to assert one's individuality is a right and responsibility to oneself and those around.
If everybody thought how the life too short, never look at that silly things like national,religious,..ect.
ReplyDeleteI'm so glad to read this truth from you.
Truth! If everyone was truthful and everybody followed only truth and strived for only truth. They'd go "mad"! The whole world would descend into anarchy as people realised their identities. We need social identities already made up for us so that there is less conflict. If everyone was individual surely you can agree on the outcome. This is why evolution gave us societies. Sure, keeping the truth to a few people is fine but even then it can send them "mad". Denying a natural gift such as ignoring truth would be silly.
ReplyDeleteAnd only in the west is asserting individuality a right, and even then you are only allowed to be unique not different, for again, the reason of keeping out the anarchy, keeping in the social order.
They are not these people. They are part of us. Stupidity is part of human nature and will remain so in foreseeable future. I don't advocate compromise with criminals. Criminals are to be put away. Criminals can be Americans, Jews, Arabs, Puerto Ricans even Bulgarians that doesn't make them any different.
ReplyDeleteBy cooperation I mean real cooperation between people genuinely set to help each other not from some imagined altruistic motives buy to promote their own self interest. People can achieve great things only in cooperation. Alone we are no better than monkeys.
I don't intend to abandon civilization because of a bunch of criminals whose actions will ultimately lead to their demise because we want let them have their way.
It's not "us" and "them" it what's right and what's wrong.
What's right and what's wrong? Surely you know there is no universal thing. Ethics are a result of the society. No? Only with the society can the ethics of right and wrong be created. We cannot say what The Right and The Wrong is, for it differs by opinion. And even if we did decide, then it is humans opinion on right and wrong. Surely god can only know such things. Are you god?
ReplyDeleteIf you are then tell me, and then we can decide who are criminals so we can lock them up. And decide who is stupid and clever.
Us and them is simply perhaps a bad habit on my part. I mean humans, and yes, including us. Although I don't understand the problem with this language. I'd appreciate if you could explain the thinking.
And also, do tell me what "great things" are. If it is being remembered, then we often remember one person, not a collection. You will hear Alexander the great, not Alexander and that peltast called joe.
Surely you know everyone is selfish, we wouldn't have survived evolution otherwise. We need humans to be selfish so that they will want more, take from the weaker, the better genes survive and the species gets that little bit better. Sure, we have mutual compromise, a phenomena alone to humans. But you cannot deny that we seek our own end, not others. E.g. Alexander went to India not because his men did want to, they wished to stay in Susa, but his men compromised for his great speech and love for their king.
I am 35 and have to find what my true self is. With that said, I try to be an honest and hard working person. Who knows what tomorrow will hold so I hold on to today.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of examples of wrong identifications in Kurt Vonnegut's book "Cat's Cradle". See 'Granfalloon", "karass" in Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteThe idea is that most people consider themselves belonging to groups, based on wrong ties.
Re: Richarg. One little criticism: evolution of humans stopped long ago. Evolution is fueled only by reproduction and these days "better" (so to speak) intellectually and morally individuals and couples produce generally less offspring than, say, dumb people.