Friday, October 19, 2007

Thoughts on Identity II: Beef, It's What's For Dinner


The first reason to pursue a sense of self that is separate from achievement is because valuing self only for production’s sake leads to destructive trends in society. The world has been permeated with evolutionary social-science for the past 150 years, which has lead to a world where unwanted children and ethnic groups, the poor, elderly, and handicapped have been exterminated in the name of the survival of the fittest. This atheistic worldview has no rational basis for ethics or logically consistent motives to help the weak in the society. While other nations have followed evolutionary thought to its logical conclusions, America, which is also influenced by Greco-Roman law and Judeo-Christian ethics, has been slower in moving toward this end.


A Judeo-Christian understanding of the world promotes the idea that human life is inherently valuable. This was particularly heinous to Nietzsche, who listed the intolerable Christians as the primary detriment to mankind’s evolutionary progress—they wouldn’t let elderly people just die or the plague-infested towns to be quarantined and starved. Buddhism is the only other religion that has regard for life, qua life, but it regards plant, animal, and human life to be equal which both elevates plant and animal life to the level of human dignity, and reduces human life to that of a plant’s. (The effects of these beliefs are exactly what you would think they would be, such as children starving while cows roam the streets, among other problems.) The top three sociologist in the world agree that people groups who agree that life is inherently valuable, will naturally emerge as the greatest force for justice, the quickest responders to disaster, and the most concerned for the poor, the widow, the orphan, and the oppressed. Being someone who believes they have more value than just what they can contribute to society creates a world that has a place for those who do not contribute to the national GDP.

1 comment:

erica dosch said...

Greetings,
Regarding the comment "human dignity"
I would caution against the term, as it suggests all humans are dignified.
It is my impression that when it comes to dignity, some of us are and some of us simply are not.

Regarding the comment " reduced to the level of plants ". Us humans are completely dependent upon plants for our existence. Without plants there would be no air to breathe. Without plants there would be no food to eat.
These stark realities were acknowledged daily by ancient matriarch societies engaged with the Creator's creation as co-creators. Their disposition was not one of superiority, but one of humbleness and gratitude to nature.
Love Always,
Uncle Goober