Oh, woe is the contemplative mind! Especially when it leaves the
realm of, say, mysticism, or even just aesthetics.
A contemplative mind contemplating human affairs, cannot but
exhaust itself in convoluted meandering thoughts. Because the contemplative mind has this
peculiar streak of naively looking for something like beauty, harmony; perhaps truth,
even.
Now try and get to beauty and truth in current affairs,
which are made up of battles between individual or collective viewpoints and
interests.
Try and be an impartial spectator, try and reach an overarching
judgment that does justice to all viewpoints. A nervous breakdown is what you are likely to
get, losing yourself in pro’s and con’s, in thoughtfully weighing the respective
grievances and aspirations of the battling parties, in anxiously considering what
position might bring the greatest good for the greatest number (and even
reconsidering whether that the latter is the ultimate criterion, and who is to be the
judge of what that greatest good is)
Far less mentally exhausting, then, to choose the straightforward
course of purposeful thinking about one's self-interest – have the mind concentrating on what humans are fitted
for: ensuring their own survival. At
best, maybe, enlightened self-interest, tempered with some “sympathy, generosity
and public spirit” (Adam Smith).
Ah, but how crooked this enlightened self-interest is ...
“Nothing, unfortunately, has so constantly been refuted by
reality as the credo of “enlightened self-interest,” [...]. Some experience
plus a little reflection teach, on the contrary, that it goes against the very
nature of self-interest to be enlightened. To take as an example from everyday
life the current interest conflict between tenant and landlord: enlightened
interest would focus on a building fit for human habitation, but this interest
is quite different from, and in most cases opposed to, the landlord’s
self-interest in high profit and the tenant’s in low rent.
The common answer of an arbiter, supposedly the spokesman of
“enlightenment,” namely, that in the long
run the interest of the building is in the true interest of both landlord and
tenant, leaves out of account the time
factor, which is of paramount importance for all concerned. Self-interest is interested in the self, and the self dies
or moves out or sells the house; because of its changing condition, that is,
ultimately because of the human condition of mortality, the self qua self
cannot reckon in terms of long range interest, i.e. the interest of a world that survives its inhabitants. Deterioration of
the building is a matter of years; a rent increase or a temporarily lower
profit rate are for today or tomorrow. [...]
Self-interest, when
asked to yield to “true” interest – that is, the interest of the world as
distinguished from that of the self – will always reply, Near is my shirt, but
nearer is my skin. That may not be particularly reasonable, but it is quite
realistic; it is the not very noble but adequate response to the time
discrepancy between men’s private lives and the altogether different life expectancy
of the public world. “
2 comments:
somehow a notion or a way of expressing conflict is needed where it is possible to have conflicting ideas but to live them in a way that it doesn't lead to the annihilation of the opponent.
probably one of the most difficult things in the world...
very wise words, A.
right now, it seems as if the different opposing parties of this world are only bent on annihilating one another ...
Post a Comment