Grbrlhrgl
I’m writing this entry even as my eyes fight that losing battle to prevent those heavy lids from turning off the lights. Forgive any incomprehensibility. I don’t particularly enjoy playing catch up, but this is what I do now, apparently. Writing. Everyday.
I think, at one point or another, everyone has imagined their future. What they expect, what they foresee, what they hope and what they dream. The things that happen in our minds is, of course, entirely our own business, but I know that somewhere, deep in the dark depths of our collective minds, there is a dreamer. Someone who knows that in our lives, we can only see so many wonders, but who wishes that we could see them all. The thing about wonders is that the amazing human mind is capable of transforming them, usually after a few sightings, into a standard measure. The wonders become the standard by which we judge all other things. The tallest towers, the biggest buildings, the fastest runner. That’s our gift, to try and compete with the best, to always overachieve. Maybe it is our curse too.
For what would life be like without dreams of the future, without the desire to be excellent? There is a city (or perhaps more than one city) in the Netherlands whose motto is that “Normal life is sufficiently abnormal” or something to that effect. They promote mediocrity, in that sense. The tallest poppy is the first to be cut and all that, after all. It is much akin to the pureform Dworkin interpretation of society. These things, gifts, that we’re born with, they’re granted to us through no merit of our own. Those who are born more physically fit, more intellectually capable, more socially adaptable, they did not EARN those gifts. The fact that their parents happen to have the attributes which contribute to the promotion of those factors should not, in itself, grant them better standing or wealth in society than any other. I should repeat that this is my understanding of Dworkian justice. (or was it some other philosopher. I honestly cannot remember) Anyway, social justice in this world puts everyone on even ground. You know what? I don’t want to give you an incomplete picture of this concept. It’s definitely interesting, in terms of a pure meritocracy, but when I read about it I felt that it could never be introduced into society, it is, economically speaking, inefficient.
Most of us, especially those who live in the more wealthy nations, don’t stop to analyse or criticize the foundations on which our society is built. It’s a matter of pragmatism, to realize that things are working and to not “fix em if they ain’t broke”. But, without being too revolutionist or anything about it, we SHOULD question the foundations of our society. We should understand the history which lead up to the values and morals that we now intrinsically believe (as if they were axiomatically true), without a shadow of a doubt. I’m not saying what we have is wrong (I’d like to think it’s right, as far as we can take that notion of right and wrong), but I’m saying it would be wrong not to question, because, once again, our lives are all the better for it. Also, if you’ve read up to this point, feel free to consider the happiness of your being in your home, country, world. For the aim of government is to create happiness, as a general rule. Many of our laws are utilitarian by nature, we deprive criminals and the unsound of certain liberties we wouldn’t dream of depriving ourselves of, because that increases the net happiness of society! The question generally asked in relation to utilitarianism is - if you lived in a city of happiness, contentment, having EVERYTHING, and you knew the entire city happiness is due to the suffering of one child in a basement in the city. Would you be okay with that? Would you rescue the child or allow the city to live on in happiness?
Gah. I’m tired. Goodbye for now. May your lives be happy, or as happy as you’re willing to be without depriving anyone of their liberties.
I think, at one point or another, everyone has imagined their future. What they expect, what they foresee, what they hope and what they dream. The things that happen in our minds is, of course, entirely our own business, but I know that somewhere, deep in the dark depths of our collective minds, there is a dreamer. Someone who knows that in our lives, we can only see so many wonders, but who wishes that we could see them all. The thing about wonders is that the amazing human mind is capable of transforming them, usually after a few sightings, into a standard measure. The wonders become the standard by which we judge all other things. The tallest towers, the biggest buildings, the fastest runner. That’s our gift, to try and compete with the best, to always overachieve. Maybe it is our curse too.
For what would life be like without dreams of the future, without the desire to be excellent? There is a city (or perhaps more than one city) in the Netherlands whose motto is that “Normal life is sufficiently abnormal” or something to that effect. They promote mediocrity, in that sense. The tallest poppy is the first to be cut and all that, after all. It is much akin to the pureform Dworkin interpretation of society. These things, gifts, that we’re born with, they’re granted to us through no merit of our own. Those who are born more physically fit, more intellectually capable, more socially adaptable, they did not EARN those gifts. The fact that their parents happen to have the attributes which contribute to the promotion of those factors should not, in itself, grant them better standing or wealth in society than any other. I should repeat that this is my understanding of Dworkian justice. (or was it some other philosopher. I honestly cannot remember) Anyway, social justice in this world puts everyone on even ground. You know what? I don’t want to give you an incomplete picture of this concept. It’s definitely interesting, in terms of a pure meritocracy, but when I read about it I felt that it could never be introduced into society, it is, economically speaking, inefficient.
Most of us, especially those who live in the more wealthy nations, don’t stop to analyse or criticize the foundations on which our society is built. It’s a matter of pragmatism, to realize that things are working and to not “fix em if they ain’t broke”. But, without being too revolutionist or anything about it, we SHOULD question the foundations of our society. We should understand the history which lead up to the values and morals that we now intrinsically believe (as if they were axiomatically true), without a shadow of a doubt. I’m not saying what we have is wrong (I’d like to think it’s right, as far as we can take that notion of right and wrong), but I’m saying it would be wrong not to question, because, once again, our lives are all the better for it. Also, if you’ve read up to this point, feel free to consider the happiness of your being in your home, country, world. For the aim of government is to create happiness, as a general rule. Many of our laws are utilitarian by nature, we deprive criminals and the unsound of certain liberties we wouldn’t dream of depriving ourselves of, because that increases the net happiness of society! The question generally asked in relation to utilitarianism is - if you lived in a city of happiness, contentment, having EVERYTHING, and you knew the entire city happiness is due to the suffering of one child in a basement in the city. Would you be okay with that? Would you rescue the child or allow the city to live on in happiness?
Gah. I’m tired. Goodbye for now. May your lives be happy, or as happy as you’re willing to be without depriving anyone of their liberties.