juryindex

Self & Society
Society & Conformity

by Saad Anis

We all like grey. It represents the comfort of blind conformance, and the reassuring notion of the superfluity of sovereign thought. Aristotle's declaration of man as a "social animal" was perhaps his greatest mistake; for by virtue thereof, the great philosopher implicitly, albeit unwittingly, consigned man to subservience of society – paradoxically nothing greater than the sum total of individuals therein – in all his thought and action.

Adherence to the collective will is inculcated in man from the very beginning, and spells the demise of the best within him, the very quality of creativity which society avowedly nourishes. From the commencement of man's societal and religious tutelage in infancy, the greatest import in cultures the world over, without exception, is attached to the attribute of selflessness, or altruism. The rationale behind selflessness is to put the needs of others before one's own. Prima facie, the principle is relatively harmless and even appealing to general morality. However, it is invariably extended, and has vast ramifications as a consequence. The evident connotation of altruism is the provision of aid, either material or emotive, to those in need and deserving of such assistance in the perception of the donor. Nevertheless, the notion is expanded beyond this immediate association, and transgresses upon almost all aspects of individual life. Its field of influence transcends issues of charity, and seeks to distort personal judgment by compelling acquiescence to collective will under the same axiom of preference of others before self. Naturally, the subsumption of individual personality into the communal mindset inevitably follows. Reason, of course, has been unable to fill the conspicuous logical lacuna resulting from this impetuous leap in the name of humanity.

Conformance to the will of the preponderance is then no longer restricted to substantive issues, and is expanded to include what might normally be regarded as intensely personal, on the pretext that while it might not have a tangible bearing upon others, its aesthetic effects will reverberate through society and might render the social fabric tenuous. That is to say, individual decision-making must be in accord with societal whim, notwithstanding the rational value of collective opinion, simply for the fact that it is the volition of the mainstream. Further, this stance is provided a convenient sanctimonious pedestal by virtue of theological endorsement.

Ergo, man is fashioned in a carefully prescribed mould. He is taught that greatness lies not in the struggle for the fulfillment of dreams, but in the humble sacrifice of aspirations on the altar of communal desire. His tastes are forged not by an individual sense, but by what society deigns fair or foul. His attire, moods, desires and morality are all fashioned by a personal choice, the source of which is societal caprice. What he considers his own objectives in life are in fact decisions made by the collective will in his stead. He invests his entire existence to appear successful in the life chosen for him, merely for the sake of the gods of preponderance to nod in approbation when, at the pathetic culmination of a vapid life, he casts a wistfully servile gaze at them, desperately seeking proof of the veracity of what he knows to be a horrible lie.

Strangely enough, the entire society itself falls an ignorant prey to this cancer of a hankering longing for acceptability. Individualism is lost in a world where every man is akin to an empty shell, aspiring from life whatever the person next to him wills him to desire, who himself craves nothing but the consent of the next man. This slave-chain is endless. It renders humankind sans cognition, a headless monster advertently stumbling on any semblance of individual thought, trampling it mercilessly under the supposedly noble pretext of the "greater good".

The consequence is chilling. It is the demise of creativity in a world where all men are grey and the norm, conformity in the name of an elusive order existent only by the naive consent of the very people being persecuted for its preservation. It is this conditioning that leads men to justify massacres in the name of the betterment of the majority. It is such shameless Babbittry which incites man to cry out that the greatest literature is what is comprehensible to the greatest number, that a crude country song is superior to the finest symphony simply by virtue of its perspicuity, and that kindness is greater than justice.

This is not the way of the artiste, the creator. He stands at the outpost, and realises ideas that society cannot even conceive of in his time. He is selfish in the independence of his thought and the singular pursuit of his dream. He creates, not for the appeasement of society, but for the sake of his satisfaction upon the realisation of his potential. He cares naught for society, yet is its greatest benefactor in spite of his oblivion. He is Galileo, Servetus and Spinoza, one who paves the way forth for the progression of mankind, a resilient confirmation of the position that man is an end in himself, and need strive for no higher purpose than the realisation of his creative intellect.

Of course, true to character, society persecutes her heroes. She repays this debt of the creator by the repressing his creation as with Galileo, burning him at the stake as was the fate of Servetus, and ostracising him as a humiliated heretic, as befell Spinoza.

Rand says that when the first man discovered how to make fire thousands of years ago, he was burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light, for the sin of innovation.

Indeed, we all like grey.

JuryFury.com Now Every 15th of the Month ! Online School of Politics JuryFury Chat QuietPoly.com		June 15, 2005 Issue
Areas of Interest THE USA American Foreign Policy US House and Senate US Presidents State & Local Politics Regional Politics Politics of China The British Commonwealth Indian Subcontinent Middle East The European Union Africa Latin America ASEAN NATO United Nations The Non-aligned Movement Eastern Europe New Nations of the 20th Century General Topics Constitutional Law Human Rights Nuclear Disarmament & Treaties International Warfare Environmental Law Peace Treaties Economic & Social Alliances International Organizations Journalism & Media Racism and Democracy Women in the Workplace Family Law Courts and Practices The Judicial System Higher Education Education and Government Health Care & Insurance Rights of the Disabled Copyright & Working Online Legal Representation Legal Insurance Pornography Domestic Violence Religion & Law Workers Rights Employers Rights Prison & Life after Social Organizations Welfare & Poverty Taxation and Democracy Third World Aid Programs Space Exploration Alternative Energy Petroleum Industry & Cars Nuclear Power Programs for the Arts Sports Education Policing the Internet Privacy and freedom Immigration Food and Regulation War on Drugs War on Pharmaceuticals Public Housing Pollution and Control Sexual Harassment Discrimination Electoral Process Consumers Rights Investors Rights Abortion Death Penalty Social Security Gender & Sexuality Grassroots Organization ACLU World Watch Oxfam UNICEF United Negro Fund Ford Foundation (suggestions welcome at our chatsite) Law of the Economy Join I-Traderschoo l, our sister magazine, for debates and news.	Self & Society Society & Conformity by Saad Anis We all like grey. It represents the comfort of blind conformance, and the reassuring notion of the superfluity of sovereign thought. Aristotle's declaration of man as a "social animal" was perhaps his greatest mistake; for by virtue thereof, the great philosopher implicitly, albeit unwittingly, consigned man to subservience of society – paradoxically nothing greater than the sum total of individuals therein – in all his thought and action. Adherence to the collective will is inculcated in man from the very beginning, and spells the demise of the best within him, the very quality of creativity which society avowedly nourishes. From the commencement of man's societal and religious tutelage in infancy, the greatest import in cultures the world over, without exception, is attached to the attribute of selflessness, or altruism. The rationale behind selflessness is to put the needs of others before one's own. Prima facie, the principle is relatively harmless and even appealing to general morality. However, it is invariably extended, and has vast ramifications as a consequence. The evident connotation of altruism is the provision of aid, either material or emotive, to those in need and deserving of such assistance in the perception of the donor. Nevertheless, the notion is expanded beyond this immediate association, and transgresses upon almost all aspects of individual life. Its field of influence transcends issues of charity, and seeks to distort personal judgment by compelling acquiescence to collective will under the same axiom of preference of others before self. Naturally, the subsumption of individual personality into the communal mindset inevitably follows. Reason, of course, has been unable to fill the conspicuous logical lacuna resulting from this impetuous leap in the name of humanity. Conformance to the will of the preponderance is then no longer restricted to substantive issues, and is expanded to include what might normally be regarded as intensely personal, on the pretext that while it might not have a tangible bearing upon others, its aesthetic effects will reverberate through society and might render the social fabric tenuous. That is to say, individual decision-making must be in accord with societal whim, notwithstanding the rational value of collective opinion, simply for the fact that it is the volition of the mainstream. Further, this stance is provided a convenient sanctimonious pedestal by virtue of theological endorsement. Ergo, man is fashioned in a carefully prescribed mould. He is taught that greatness lies not in the struggle for the fulfillment of dreams, but in the humble sacrifice of aspirations on the altar of communal desire. His tastes are forged not by an individual sense, but by what society deigns fair or foul. His attire, moods, desires and morality are all fashioned by a personal choice, the source of which is societal caprice. What he considers his own objectives in life are in fact decisions made by the collective will in his stead. He invests his entire existence to appear successful in the life chosen for him, merely for the sake of the gods of preponderance to nod in approbation when, at the pathetic culmination of a vapid life, he casts a wistfully servile gaze at them, desperately seeking proof of the veracity of what he knows to be a horrible lie. Strangely enough, the entire society itself falls an ignorant prey to this cancer of a hankering longing for acceptability. Individualism is lost in a world where every man is akin to an empty shell, aspiring from life whatever the person next to him wills him to desire, who himself craves nothing but the consent of the next man. This slave-chain is endless. It renders humankind sans cognition, a headless monster advertently stumbling on any semblance of individual thought, trampling it mercilessly under the supposedly noble pretext of the "greater good". The consequence is chilling. It is the demise of creativity in a world where all men are grey and the norm, conformity in the name of an elusive order existent only by the naive consent of the very people being persecuted for its preservation. It is this conditioning that leads men to justify massacres in the name of the betterment of the majority. It is such shameless Babbittry which incites man to cry out that the greatest literature is what is comprehensible to the greatest number, that a crude country song is superior to the finest symphony simply by virtue of its perspicuity, and that kindness is greater than justice. This is not the way of the artiste, the creator. He stands at the outpost, and realises ideas that society cannot even conceive of in his time. He is selfish in the independence of his thought and the singular pursuit of his dream. He creates, not for the appeasement of society, but for the sake of his satisfaction upon the realisation of his potential. He cares naught for society, yet is its greatest benefactor in spite of his oblivion. He is Galileo, Servetus and Spinoza, one who paves the way forth for the progression of mankind, a resilient confirmation of the position that man is an end in himself, and need strive for no higher purpose than the realisation of his creative intellect. Of course, true to character, society persecutes her heroes. She repays this debt of the creator by the repressing his creation as with Galileo, burning him at the stake as was the fate of Servetus, and ostracising him as a humiliated heretic, as befell Spinoza. Rand says that when the first man discovered how to make fire thousands of years ago, he was burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to light, for the sin of innovation. Indeed, we all like grey. About the Author: Please see our list of Contributors.	Yahoo! World News Headlines Our Winners Club Our Contributors Research Links Legal Advice ALL Awards & Internships Become an Activist Join an Organization Get Volunteerism Alert Write Letters to a local Politician Start your own Group Applied Politics Projects Suggest a Project Start your Yahoo Groups Get Internship Credit Funding for Projects Encourage Discussion Join Juryfury Chat Promote Juryfury.com Join online discussion Groups Be In the Spotlight Let us Interview you : Authors of political books Activists Journalists Lawyers Law Enforcement Politicians Politican Scientists Be A Columnist Get Internship Credit Write twice a Month Get Heard Start a Yahoo Group Advertise with Us Books (Free) Political Social Economics Religious Science About Us Our Staff & Contributors Our Magazines Quietpoly.com I-Traderschool Juryfury.com The Company Our Address: QuietPoly Inc. 240 W. Saunders. Dr. (#146) Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Tel (928) 214-7365 quietpoly@yahoo.com