This transformation occurs when we turn a good idea into an absolute. Nietzsche describes this process beautifully in his book, The Gay Science:
I caught this insight on the way and quickly seized the rather poor words that were closest to hand to pin it down lest it fly away again. And now it has died of these arid words and shakes and flaps in them -- and I hardly know anymore when I look at it how I could ever have felt so happy when I caught this bird.
He’s comparing the process of thought with the process of expressing that thought. Once spoken or written, through chosen language, a thought adopts a particular point of view and becomes rigid. The wings of the bird are clipped and it’s held awkwardly in place, thus destroying the beauty of its fluid movement.
In the 20th century over 100 million people lost their lives in China and the Soviet Union, all in the name of Communism. Purists may argue that neither of these were an expression of true Communism, that these are examples of ego-maniacal individuals using Marxist theory for personal ends. The problem isn’t in Communism they’ll argue, the problem was the interpretation. And they’re correct, but knowing the wrong answer doesn’t imply that yours is right. This argument can be heard elsewhere in regards to the trouble with Islam, Christianity or in any situation where one claims to have found the truth.
Once an idea has been pinned down, it immediately espouses certain prejudices in the individual who absorbs it. For example, a viciously ambitious person might use Communism to justify his/her elimination of political rivals by proclaiming them to be counter-revolutionary. An alienated immigrant youth might use an interpretation of the Quran to feel socially and spiritually superior to those they decide are unbelievers. Conservative Catholic parents may pass down their religious beliefs, which in turn may engender irrational homophobic tendencies, misogyny or shame in a child. The individuals establish a kinship between their - possibly subconscious - desires (for power, for acceptance, for obedience) and what they interpret as truth to themselves. Their strict interpretations espouse prejudice in the way of: anyone who speaks freely about free market economy is a capitalist pig, and therefore counter-revolutionary, or anyone who doesn’t believe what I believe is unworthy of salvation, or anyone who has sex outside marriage will swim in a lake of fire for all eternity. The result is having taken a good idea and turned it into something counter-productive.
Why are we such purists? Wouldn’t we all be better off being ruthlessly critical to any and all sources claiming to know the “truth”? When it comes to the Earth and its billions of species, there are no equals to human ingenuity, but we are also the most infamous for getting things dead wrong.
If we’re going to progress as a species, it’s important to remember the spirit in which most of these “gospels” were formed - as a result of our adaptability, our fluid consciousness. We’re not confined to the structures of primal instincts that limit our animal counterparts, nor should we be confined to simple human absolutisms.
There are many great moral lessons within the pages of the Quran, the Bible and the Torah, and there are just as many great thoughts on political theory to be found in the annals of Communist and capitalist lore. They’re great in theory, because we read them in relation to the times and interpret them objectively -- keep them that way.
0 comments:
Post a Comment