We repeat continuously for a great evils of our society is that we live in an individualistic society. But the problem is that all combine both concepts in their charge and do not use the right word. The word to use is not selfishness and individualism.
let's look at what is said Wiki:
Selfishness:
Selfishness is a trait, attitude of a person whose actions or ideas are only oriented by its own interests, without taking into account the needs of others. The term is almost always used in a pejorative. Selfishness, which sees its interests, is distinguished from individualism, which considers the rights, interests and values of individuals (not his only) and favors their autonomy from social and political institutions.
Selfishness is often associated with a lack of empathy, a non-compliance of others, of recklessness. Selfishness is opposed to altruism.
Individualism:
Individualism is a political, social and moral tends to emphasize the rights, interests and value of individuals versus the group. He advocates individual autonomy against various social and political institutions (family, clan, corporation, caste ...) who perform certain rules on him. It thus opposes the requirement of the group to which the individual has duties. But do not confuse individualism and short-sighted selfishness. For if the egoist sees its interests, the individualist considers the interests of individuals and not his alone.
example, be part of an organization is not incompatible with the principle of individualism.
So clearly, according Wiki, individualism and selfishness are not interchangeable.
According to Wiki, selfishness is the opposite of altruism.
I add: individualism is the opposite of collectivism.
What is selfishness? According to Wiki, is someone who thinks only of himself, without regard to others the consequences of his actions and values on others.
But this definition is too superficial because with it, it is possible to play a little on the words and come up with something like, is a selfish individualist who cares about those friends ...
I propose a different definition. An unselfish egoist is a missed or defrocked.
That is the main characteristic of altruism is not "generosity towards others" as some might believe, but rather to define themselves in relation to others.
What is altruism says: you're not a value in itself, it's your neighbor who is your value ... What matters is not you, it's your next ...
But no human can live without self-esteem, without answering the question: Who am I?
And the answer in such a world is: "I think that what my neighbor."
If he is the value, it is his opinion that counts, not mine. What I think of me is nothing, nothing but selfishness altruism you say .... What counts here is what think the other one ... I call that define themselves in terms of others ...
Although some are able to accept this, most people avoid the question (because the response causes a cognitive dissonance) and then find themselves unable to meet the internal need of: Who am I? .. . (This is one of the great evil of our world but this is a different matter.)
Others face this completely reject the other. Having
been conditioned to define themselves to others, but denying the conclusion of altruism they perceive as a denial of self, these people come to see the other as a victim used to be defined.
of altruism is reversed! It is the one that used to feed the "me" instead of feeding others. These people are
esteem in power, in the amount of people they control. They do not seek wealth as such, what they want is someone to be even greater with the wealth of others. By having the submission of others ...
These people are vampires of altruism. But they are also the other side of the same coin.
In a world where the primary value is to give to another, it is expected that there will be people who define themselves as "other" and want to eat it all .. .
What is the general answer to this?
"All you need is love »....
But this is a heartbreaking naivete ... It is said that the sheep Wolf: If you had "love" you do not eat me ... The wolf answered, but I love you .... on my plate ...
Turning to the individual individualistic.
It has value as the first "me". But the main difference is that it does not define "self" in terms of others but by himself.
He refuses the negation of the ego as altruism requests.
But instead of finding his esteem in the operation of the other as is selfish, he finds fulfillment in the face of his own value system. This is achieved by interacting with others in its own interest but he does not need another to do so, then there is way to respect each other.
For the individualist, while the other is just another "me" ...
The other is not the one to "devouring" to be somebody. (Selfishness)
The other is not the one to "feed" to be somebody. (Altruism)
The other can then be equal ... the other may then be worth ... (Individualism)
If you want a just society and respectful of his neighbor, he must realize that it is possible that if this neighbor is not a value used to define themselves. Only when you are somebody in their own right without it you will be able to interact with it as equals, with respect ....
Neither altruism nor selfishness are the way to such a society.
Francis.
0 comments:
Post a Comment