"The only good is knowledge, and the only evil is ignorance."
In light of a conversation had earlier today centered around the state of affairs of this country and then reaching deeper, a point was made about a possible solution being eradicating all debts of ownership of all citizens (it was only considered for this country, but for the sake of argument consider all of humanity). From this it was brought up that a change in how human beings think would be necessary – away from the notion of acquiring and retaining wealth, something each of us is raised to believe is the path to security and stability (and others may add happiness and comfort but I contest such ideas for I believe it is not in wealth that happiness and contentment are found). But then an argument was made that it was not this notion, but rather a deeper, more rooted idea need be eradicated before any progress to our human state that I've mentioned in the past can be made – it seems we would need to relinquish the idea of ownership.
And as we talked, I thought back to history seemingly ancient in human terms but a blink in a larger perspective, of how human beings have evolved with the idea of needing possessions. To own. There are innumerable institutions and examples of this – from such basic principles as marriage to slavery to buying a home, property and to corporations and so on. Ownership is defined at least in one way as "the state or fact of exclusive rights and control over property, which may be an object, land or real estate, intellectual property or some other kind of property." There are those who believe exclusive ownership of property underlies much social injustice, and facilitates tyranny and oppression on an individual and societal scale (the basis of socialism), while others consider the striving to achieve greater ownership of wealth as the driving factor behind human technological advancement and increasing standards of living (the basis of capitalism). There is then the ideology known as Vedanta which believes that the root of ownership is the feeling that one is separate from the rest of the Universe. Given this understanding then, it can be surmised that one disconnects oneself from the Universe, and then attempts to reconnect with objects through a relationship which is called ownership. Vedanta believes that the feeling of ownership is an illusion, which remains with oneself as long as one considers oneself as separate from the Universe. When one understands the fundamental reality that there is only one entity called the Universe, there is no need for ownership and one gets rid of this illusion.
And this is where the discussion ended but my thinking continued. I imagine as Carl Sagan has envisioned in his novel Contact and proposed in others a civilization much more highly advanced than what we are now, one that is peaceful and wise. One that has overcome the need of ownership and is deeply rooted in a sense of purpose higher than such flimsy desires. One that is connected with the Universe in a holistic way that we cannot grasp at this moment. I wonder if we as a human race are not at a crossroads, a precipice where perhaps our very existence is in great peril and we must collectively move forward in a delicate way that preserves what we now take for granted (that being this planet and our freedoms) while allowing us to redefine our technologies and ideologies in such a way that we can break free from the constraints we have imposed upon ourselves from centuries past? We must use the knowledge gained from those centuries before us, combined with our great potential, to overcome the odds we face.
7 comments:
I'm curious: why Herotodus?
On a more serious note.
While it's interesting to contemplate a society where everyone shares and no one owns, I'm not sure it would be stable. Human nature seems to always create those who desire power and influence and control, all of which are manifestations of "ownership". And even setting aside those who would use ownership for nefarious purposes (your examples of "tyranny and oppression"), there are legitimate, honest facets to ownership. Who doesn't want to "own" a plot of land as a sanctuary for his family? Or even something smaller, simpler-- a token or trinket that has some significance. To take away ownership, you have to take away that part of us that drives us to excel, to push ourselves, and-- yes-- even to compete. Without a need to compete for resources or objects or (insert whatever motivates you), we are left with no reason to work hard or bask in the reward of a job well done or a thing hard earned. Everyone becomes complacent, and that leads to laziness and eventually... well, the collapse of society.
Why not (Herodotus)? And yes, you make good points but I would counter simply with that is all we have ever known so it is difficult to contemplate a completely different society that is not based on such desires. In our way of thinking over the course of human history, yes - you are correct in the result. But if we were to evolve beyond our current position as we have discussed, is it not possible we would look beyond these things?
Maybe a new way of looking at ownership is through equality. The real issue to Martin's point, is power. I think that if a new way of thinking about power, and that it should be apportioned equally along with resources there would be room for humanity to consider the larger picture. There is no question in my mind that humanity is on a precipice. I think too that many intelligent people know this. The big question to me is will we all sit back and watch it unfold or do something to alter the course. Sadly, at this point it looks more like the last reality tv show will be Survivor Planet, until the camera goes dark.
Interesting, but my first impression is the idea of trying to dole out power equally takes just as much stretch of our collective imagination as does removing the idea of ownership from our society. For the sake of argument, would not removing ownership in turn result in power spread out equally across humanity?
Well, the real answer is I don't know, and maybe. It seems to me that the way equality would be guaranteed is to have equally apportioned ownership, and thus an equal stake in the outcome of all things, thus making them important to each individual. Maybe I see that particular path, lack of ownership, such an unlikely scenario that I see structured power sharing as the first step. Yes, a radical shift in the basis of current society is required, yet, somehow there is a strong sense of unintended consequences to me if power and equality aren't addressed first. But then again anything is possible in a radical restructuring of nearly any system.
And you may be right - that power and equality will have to be addressed first before stripping ourselves of the idea of ownership. By no means am I saying that eradicating all ownership is our salvation, and I'm not sure we're even capable of equality in any form but it seems a radical shift is necessary in order for humanity to endure and mature. I do like your idea of 'structured power sharing.'
Post a Comment