I like to believe that I am a mentally stable and fit as an individual. How much of this holds true depends on from which viewpoint one is observing me from. I just came out of this class that echoes the concept of nature- "survival of the fittest". Over the past week, I have become extremely close to this person I knew in the past, and he echoes the same, that one has to do all one can to survive. "Live for yourself, not for the world". I keep telling him that he is the opposite of being humble and a pain in the ass (which he truly is!). But that hasn't stopped him from growing close or really taken away from who he is as an individual. This makes me wonder, is life naturally about just fighting it out?
The point is not to question this, but I wonder what exactly is the nature of the fiber of our society? Is it the survival of the fittest, those who are smart enough to manipulate, who can predict the social movements or cause them? Or is it one where there is space for the survival of all, the intellectuals, the marginalized, the down trodden, and of curse the lost soul (aka - me)? I see the parties today from the Congress, the BJP, to the Shiv Sena, the TMC, and all others promise to bring a change, to protect and provide and then come to power and fail miserably. In the rat race to get ahead, garner support and gain power, the vehicles of our great democracy seem to be money, and those who can manage or monger it. Is this the nature of our society?
If so, will it survive the test of time and the demand of the natural order? A number of questions and honestly, I can't seem to find it in me today to answer any of them. The upcoming elections to pose the same questions, in a much more simplified terms. I as a bystander will watch, as a citizen will hope, but mainly as an optimist will wish for a world, where humanism will overcome. In the book that I am reading right now Suketu Mehta says that the poor come to vote as they have much to gain or loose, and the middle classes don't bother much as the processes don't affect them much. Yet, with the scams, the inflation, the increasing incidence of corruption, the loss of faith in democracy reflects the need of the middle class to participate in the social activities.
Nobody wants to be alone, yes, I agree.
ReplyDeleteBut we've come alone and we shall go alone. It's every man for himself. We do need a social life and all, but that again is for our very own personal satisfaction, to have companions, for self-development, opinions and advice, etc. Basically, you benefit from it.
I'm not asking you to be a social engineer or anything of the sort, all I'm saying is that we're human, we're programmed to be selfish and think about ourselves more than others.
True, sometimes, we might go outta our way to do some good for other people, but that might be either because we believe in karma, or because of a sub-conscious state of guilt within, due to the inability to live with yourself knowing that there are people who could benefit from you and you didn't help. You wanna get rid of that guilt, so you can live peacefully. Your benfit.
Give it some thought Ankita, and you shall see that more often than not, every human deed comes with a self-satisfying survival motive embedded deep within.
I don't disagree that the natural instinct is to fight for survival, but the point is that we are the thinking animals, who can experience emotions that others (I am assuming here), can't. I did think about it, but I personally have seen a number of examples where people have made sacrifices, or just done things that they would not do otherwise for someone, whether out of love or hate is besides the point. Yes, this stems from their own feelings so is innately selfish, but there is also a sense of the other, and for a lucky few only for other!
ReplyDeleteWhen you do things for others purely out of care or love or whatever, it does gives you a feeling of peace. So you're catering to your comforts there.
ReplyDeleteSurvival of the fittest is a part of evolutionary theory and yes, when Scholars apply it in the society it turns into social Darwinism. But I think it was Marx who discussed about the difference between animals and human being. Spider built its web in a same manner may be since last thousands of years. But human being is a creative animal and this makes a difference.
ReplyDeleteMy point it survival of the fittest can be applied to animals and though human being are basically animals they are different from animals in many many ways. There is a clear demarcation by which we can track those differences. For e.g. language etc.
What I feel when a person help someone without considering his personal profits or interest, we actually coming out of the survival instinct. This is just a simple example. But there are so many examples where people have given up their lives for others. What you will call them? If you say that satisfaction is the gain out of helping others then there won’t be any subject for selfless activity.
Once Gandhi’s famous disciple Vinoba Bhave remarked that “eating when you are hungry is nature and giving half of your bread to other when you are hungry is culture”. So animals are governed by nature and hence come under the strong instinct of survival but human being is a cultured animal. There is a difference when culture plays the role.
But again you need to prove your color and have a stand also. This cannot be relative or subjective according to me. Whether you are animal or a human being?
Otherwise there is a famous sher that says
ना खुदा मिला ना हि विसाले सनम
ना रहे इधरके ना उधरके ||