Misty River ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Social Darwinism Is it inevitable that human societies will select the norms and social values that are most beneficial to their evolution? If this is the case it would seem humans wax towards self destruction. Once a social value is erected, it is passively accepted, its followers believing such changes are ideal. We emphasize the natural over the supernatural here. Only those with certain physical and mental traits will succeed in our ancient society or is it really a fledgeling society? Eventually, all those who look, act or think a certain way, the 'wrong' way, will be knocked off so a new subset of individuals will emerge as the new, dominant group. Though those social instincts of sympathy, moral sentiments seem to be falling by the wayside in society today. Or perhaps they have just evolved to a different level, one in which they are fully internalized but never appear on the outside anymore. We know we should be more compassionate towards others, that we should do the 'right' thing but we no longer know what the 'right' thing is. To us, what is right is selfish hedonism. "If it makes me feel good that is all that matters." So there is no longer the community effect, people don't cling together in clumps for their lifetimes, nurturing relationships to create trust; people seek endlessly ways to sate the creature within that calls for more recognition and more lovers. Is this really the ideal to evolve to? An individuals motives influence humanity. My environment will cause me to be one way or another at some point. Or is my place in society really a fatalistic one? Unable to infleunce the evolution of anything beyond myself? After all, evolution, social darwinism, does not equal progress. It only pushes a person towards being better suited to the changes in their environment. Adaptability, that is all that matters. If you can adapt to a change in society overall, you will succeed beyond your wildest dreams. Become a deviant from that ultimate societal norm and you will suffer yourself into oblivion, a spiritual starvation of the weakest. Or we can take on the stance of Saint Nietzsche. Wherever progress is to ensue, deviating natures are of greatest importance. Every progress of the whole must be preceded by a partial weakening. The strongest natures retain the type, the weaker ones help to advance it. Something similar also happens in the the individual. There is ararely a degeneration, a truncation, or even a vice or any physical or moral loss without an advantage somewhere else. In a warlike and restless clan, for example, the sicklier man may have occasion to be alone, and may therefore become quieter and wiser; the one-eyed man will have one eye the stronger; the blind man will see deeper inwardly, and certainly hear better. To this extent, the famous theory of the survival of the fittest does not seem to me to be the only viewpoint from which to explain the progress of strengthening of a man or of a race. So Saint Nietzsche... how do we determine what the strongest nature is versus the weaker nature? Should the little innocent one who stands atop her ziggurat within in soul decrying the indecencies of certain social structures be toppled by the old hag who has a bigger stick and 'wisdom' of the ages? Would be a shame, the little girl only recently found her way back to the top of her temple. I guess the hag must feel insecure, and in that insecurity forcing her will on the little girl, trying to deflower her mind by shouting profanity from below. Maybe she can placate her with a lollypop. It is not good that the weaker ones are the ones who fall to the side, for it is generally those ones who posess a greater moral compass than the strongest willed. I may loathe Saint Nietzsche for his insights but only because I don't want to lose the weaker sides of myself. The stronger sides seem so much darker. The stronger sides are users and propel me nowhere without a wide swath of charred field behind me, littered with the souls of those its brimfire rends to cinders. This does not seem progressive, or evolutionary, to constantly deceive others along with myself, to hide desires and wants in the shadows. It seems more destructive, selfish, arrogant. That is what I loathe, that in order to move somewhere I have to step over a dead something be it a friendship, a lover, an acquaintence. Is it necessary? I look for a way to avoid it and maybe I do... maybe I am really the one who is being used, which again, places me in the holding tank for extermination of the weaker. Is there a way to escape such things internally? I want to evolve, but I want my little girl on the ziggurat to be the stronger one. Maybe standing on such high ground will keep her aloft from the maelstrom below and she will be high enough up to hear nothing from the old hag. Though perhaps it is time to destroy the more naive aspects of her, what is the point in innately believing or trusting in others anyhow? They just seek to destroy as much to get to their goals. Ah, but that would play into the wants of the old hag and we must not allow her to evolve. When I look beyond myself I see the same attributes in others. They seek to evolve internally, seek to give outwards voice to that which they attach themselves inside but it is often at the expense of something, a friendship, lover, their present self. It is a delicate act to balance, trying to give your love to one while hiding an entire seperate self from them. If only people realized by merging the two they would retain that which they love and equilibrium would be achieved, maybe there would be fewer bodies littering the battlefields. So I hide nothing. The hidden self does not help one progress anywhere except to social isolation. Eventually the hidden self will cause one to lose all they cherish in the nonhidden world. Better to lay out my wares so a person can see what I am, how I am, where I am, why I am. At least in that I can take peace.. I am open to a greater degree than possibly I should be regarding my wants and intentions in life. Which carries me on to another hinderance of evolution, overstating your wants and values, over sharing, over showing. It is good to share but not to pound it into another. I guess there has to be a middle ground somewhere. Does a laissez-faire society ever achieve equilibrium? It has to be good for both sides of the equation in some way or else it would not last to the extent it has. 9:58 a.m. - 2006-09-23 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
||||||
|
||||||