I hate politics.
That may be a little strong. I don't really hate politics completely. I hate the bickering and staunch idealism that makes nothing happen. I hate the corruption that takes place, especially when its legal corruption.What I hate the most about politics is how it brings out some of the worst of human nature. I can think of a recent news story for probably each one of the seven deadly sins in some politician's life and it all stems from the one thing that makes capitalism and free markets work: selfishness.
That being said, socialism isn't exactly a great alternative. I may be doing a terrible job running my life but at least I get to decide how I want it ran through my own guiding principles, not some ideals impressed upon me by a group of individuals who decide what the common good is. Here again, it's so easy to fall into the trap of overwhelming selfishness.
Let's stop for a moment here and think about something that you may not have considered: why is selfishness something to be averted? Certainly, there have been quite a few people that have considered selfishness not only to be good but a virtue. How unimaginable that must be to think such things!
But, of course, it's not so simple.
Nietzsche, as misunderstood as he is (and I may be misunderstanding him now myself), brings up a good point in his book On the Genealogy of Morality. An eagle should not be held accountable for being a bird of prey. The eagle is seen as a symbol of strength and, to the contrary of what most in our culture would consider to be the right and appropriate action to take, must use its strength in the form of violence to survive. The Romans regarded this bird as a noble beast and, even in American culture today, it's seen a symbol of great pride. How can this be reconciled with our notion evil as it stems from violence and murder? How can we condemn this selfishness when it is necessary for survival?
Furthermore, we can have some form of gradation that says certain desires of the will are simply "self-serving" or for personal "self-interest" while others are truly selfish. Many people will argue that every action taken falls onto that gradation since every act of the will is, in one form or another, self-serving, be it blatantly obvious through the goal in mind or simply the pleasure of helping someone out. Therefore, every action undertaken, as it provides the one taking it with some conscious or unconscious reward or punishment-averted, is selfish. From this perspective, selfishness is not a virtue but it most certainly is not a vice.
So...
Selfishness is inherently wrong because it preys on the less fortunate?
Selfishness is inherently good because it is necessary for survival?
Selfishness is not inherently good or bad because everything we do has some selfish outcome?
If you've read this expecting an answer, you've come to the wrong place. I cannot answer which one is right or wrong for you because I think the question of the inherent right, wrong, or indifference of selfishness is a flawed question. The concern that needs to be addressed here is one of motive.
Instead, consider the following statement: You have to do what's right by you.
Oh, how I hate that phrase, probably because it's normally comes after a patronizing talk by someone who is either "much older and wiser than me" or has simply run out of helpful things to say. To anyone who says this to me, with the utmost sincerity and respect I must reply, "No, I do not and should not always do what's right by me."
I know it's taken me a while to get here but this is truly my main point in writing this piece and that is to quote the Apostle Paul: "[Love] is not self-seeking... It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." (that's from 1 Cor. 13 for those of you who haven't been to a wedding lately)
Consider with me the divorce rate in the world today. Now, I'm not saying that every marriage is ideal (I know mine can always use some work) but can you imagine how many fewer divorces there would be if people viewed love for one another in the same way that Paul views love? Imagine how many stronger couples there would be in the world today if they considered the true nature of love, which is not romance (sorry ladies but it's true), nor sex (sorry guys but it's true), nor some magical high that you feel as you live "happily ever after."
Love is the willingness to sacrifice yourself for betterment of another and expecting nothing from them in return.
Can love be selfish? In a way, yes. I do indeed feel much better about myself as a person when I sacrifice my needs for those that I love. However, I believe that the better observation here is that it's not self-seeking. The love that sacrifices for the betterment of another expecting nothing in return cannot, by very definition, be self-seeking and while human love cannot be perfect since the lover can always receive, as CS Lewis points out in his poignant but apologetically-awful book The Problem of Pain, we can rest well knowing that our love can be true to its purpose.
What more could you ask for?
No comments:
Post a Comment