I am going to be a bit presumptuous and assume that I can pinpoint human existence to two categories of human thrive.
We want.
And we need to be appreciated for it.
You may think - wait a minute - those two things aren't exactly distinct from each other.
They aren't, and that is the point.
Both things are in the end-end (like the very end) the same thing. Just that circumstances tear both apart.
Stay with me for a minute.
What is the optimum of human desire? What is human desire all about? Lets call it bliss.
What is the optimum of social interaction? Lets call it harmony. What means this for the individual involved: social bliss, no?
What happens when self-related and social bliss meet? Total emotional bliss.
To bridge to my intital claims:
What we want is what we yearn. What we yearn is what we want to feel. What we want to feel is bliss.
If we need to be appreciated for what we want, we ideally are appreciated for wanting to feel bliss. The only way to realize this socially is if we all feel socially blissed.
Result of the equation: Individual desire and social desire are two of the same collective aim. We don't need to negate the individual as an individual or some stupid collectivist craze, we merely need to recognize the human individual as the social individual it is to do so.
In the end and all things staying the same - what is in the best interest of the individual is in the best interest of the community or the collective if you prefer this ideologically loaded term.
But - as we witness every day in every corner of the world - there is a distance between the two. There is a distance between individual and collective desire. Because in reality collective desire is not merely the sum of individual desire, but something removed. Something inherently inhuman, something inherently ugly.
There are reasons for that, well explainable reasons, one could say "good" reasons. I am aware of that. We can't just snap our fingers and let this divergence vanish out of existence, that is my opinion, as well. It is there, it is a social reality, it will have to be taken seriously as a consequence, will have to be dealt with accordingly.
But STILL.
To tear this distance down will be the task of human kind. Because in the end - there is nothing but paradise awaiting is.
This is in my opinion no silly dream, no idealistic nonsense. This is in my opinion nothing but what evidence tells us.
But this opinion of mine needs to be something that is clear beyond a doubt. So we can agree and begin the journey. Because and that is the hard part - a journey it will have to be. No authority, no LAW, no guy with a stick can dictate this. No one can dictate. We just been there. If collective desire is inhuman, individual desire can not ever align. This will have to be brought about on the micro level. Macro is helpless; and eventually will stand in the way. But I say eventually, because I tend to agree that initially macro is the only chance we got. Yeah it has to be that complicated. So it can be that wonderful. Call it faith, call it religion. I call it well-spirited pure reason.
Because in the end, pure reason not only tells, it proves to us that what humans ideally need is what I described - and further we know for a fact that humans in principle can be almost anything. So pure reason tells us, that we can manage to bridge that gap between what humans are and could be, that we can bridge the gap between individual and communal desire.
We want.
And we need to be appreciated for it.
You may think - wait a minute - those two things aren't exactly distinct from each other.
They aren't, and that is the point.
Both things are in the end-end (like the very end) the same thing. Just that circumstances tear both apart.
Stay with me for a minute.
What is the optimum of human desire? What is human desire all about? Lets call it bliss.
What is the optimum of social interaction? Lets call it harmony. What means this for the individual involved: social bliss, no?
What happens when self-related and social bliss meet? Total emotional bliss.
To bridge to my intital claims:
What we want is what we yearn. What we yearn is what we want to feel. What we want to feel is bliss.
If we need to be appreciated for what we want, we ideally are appreciated for wanting to feel bliss. The only way to realize this socially is if we all feel socially blissed.
Result of the equation: Individual desire and social desire are two of the same collective aim. We don't need to negate the individual as an individual or some stupid collectivist craze, we merely need to recognize the human individual as the social individual it is to do so.
In the end and all things staying the same - what is in the best interest of the individual is in the best interest of the community or the collective if you prefer this ideologically loaded term.
But - as we witness every day in every corner of the world - there is a distance between the two. There is a distance between individual and collective desire. Because in reality collective desire is not merely the sum of individual desire, but something removed. Something inherently inhuman, something inherently ugly.
There are reasons for that, well explainable reasons, one could say "good" reasons. I am aware of that. We can't just snap our fingers and let this divergence vanish out of existence, that is my opinion, as well. It is there, it is a social reality, it will have to be taken seriously as a consequence, will have to be dealt with accordingly.
But STILL.
To tear this distance down will be the task of human kind. Because in the end - there is nothing but paradise awaiting is.
This is in my opinion no silly dream, no idealistic nonsense. This is in my opinion nothing but what evidence tells us.
But this opinion of mine needs to be something that is clear beyond a doubt. So we can agree and begin the journey. Because and that is the hard part - a journey it will have to be. No authority, no LAW, no guy with a stick can dictate this. No one can dictate. We just been there. If collective desire is inhuman, individual desire can not ever align. This will have to be brought about on the micro level. Macro is helpless; and eventually will stand in the way. But I say eventually, because I tend to agree that initially macro is the only chance we got. Yeah it has to be that complicated. So it can be that wonderful. Call it faith, call it religion. I call it well-spirited pure reason.
Because in the end, pure reason not only tells, it proves to us that what humans ideally need is what I described - and further we know for a fact that humans in principle can be almost anything. So pure reason tells us, that we can manage to bridge that gap between what humans are and could be, that we can bridge the gap between individual and communal desire.