We have already talked about what is it to give ourselves a good life... But, of course, there is even more to say about this, and it has to do with the decisions we make and their aim... When we take a decision regarding what we really want to do, are we thinking about the implications of that decision? Is it really going to give us the good life we want? The question is: can we say that everything we do because we really want is going to give us a good life? Savater's talks about something very interesting and concrete: treating people as if they were objects, and unfortunately we have to, or at least I have to admit that this is something that heppens quite often simply because we tend to concentrate so much in what we want that we tend to forget two important things: First of all, we usually forget to see if what we want is something good in itself (i.e. not only good for me but also good -or not bad- for someone else so that we can have a good human life) and secondly, we forget the most important thing about giving ourselves a good life: we are so commited to do anything to get what we want that we end up going against someone else (or against ourselves) or treating someone else as an object... In order not to treat people as objects we will have to take into account not only what they can give to us but also what they want, what they need and who they are... We don't have to forget that only human beings can give us those human "things" (such as love, friendship, advices and so on) that we need to have a good life... There is one condition that is a must if we want to live our lives as human beings... we have to be sure that we do not to want to live in anyway, we have to know that not everything is valid for giving us a good life...and that we will only be able to live a good human life if we let others (and help them to) live their lives "humanly"... "There are many ways in which we can live our lives, but some of those ways will not let us live"
3 comentarios:
Have you ever heard of Spencer's theory of Social Darwinism, Alejandra?
Or met people who expressed similar views?
How would you defend your views here in front of such claims?
Looking forward to reading your replies to this!
Gladys
I have to say, Gladys, that I haven't ever heard about Social Darwinism! So I've just visited the link you've given to me here and I have to say that, in spite of the fact that I could anticipate more or less what it was about by reading "Darwinism", I didn't think that it would be So "materialist"...
What Spencer is talking about is by no means away from the reality we are living in... we can all see very easily in our everyday life what he is talking about regarding the rich controlling and dominating the poor... Unluckily all this is part of our reality as well as Death and Life are...However there is a crutial difference between the fact that we are mortal and the fact that rich people is over the poor people... and this difference has to do with the fact that we, as human beings, cannot do anything to prevent us from dying But what we Can do is to avoid going against other human beings in order to get what we want..
But, of course, this is not something that can be possibly solved just by saying it but at least we can think (or start thinking) about the consequences of what we may decide or not and about the limitations that our "power" has... (power regarding what we may decide to do with the resources, materials, things and goods we have...)
We don't have to forget that altough we do have the possibility to have any kind of power or a certain amount of goods or money we do NOT have the RIGHT to use it against someone else...
Money does not mean HAPPYNESS,
money does not mean LOVE,
money does not mean "TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO DOMINATE AND CONTROL OTHERS" (However, many people tend to have a wrong concept regarding what money means...)
The fact that something happens does not exactly mean that it has to be something good (ethically speaking)... I know that there are people who control others just because they are richer than them (rich over poor) but I do NOT believe AT ALL that this can be justified by any "evolutionist" theory... "the strong thriving at the expense of the weak" has NOTHING to do with Ethics and the Good Human Life that I want to live...
I hope I have answered more or less your question Gladys! :)
LOL,
Ale
You certainly have answered my question, Ale! I'd just like to say money isn't the only means of dominating others... And how does education come into this set?
PS: Just to keep exploring something you wouldn't expect to agree with, you may want to try this link: "Might is right". ;-)! Let me know if you ever visit it!
Publicar un comentario