I've been watching V for Vendetta almost manically for some days, now. It made me consider quite seriously human nature and the nature of the fear which is the primary motivator in it. Most human actions are determined by fear. Governments are based on fear - fear is the underlying principle that seems to unite all human actions. Fear of some sort determines every institutional mechanism. Freud tried to unify all human action through the perspective of sex - but sex is about fear, is it not? Fear of not being able to procreate. Fear of not being able to leave a mark upon the world. Fear of not performing. Fear of even talking about it afterwards.
Bertrand Russell, on the other hand, attempted to determine human behaviour and the existence of the myriad of human institutions through the perspective of power. He essentially stated that since the desire for power is the greatest one, individuals and institutions seek power. However, this is incorrect in that power might be desired, but Russell did not actively consider why it might be so. The reason I believe that any entity would seek power is to protect itself or to cater to the fear of being harmed, or the fear of not being allowed to survive, for any number of reasons. All entities are essentially self perpetuating, hence there is a fear that they shall be unable to perpetuate themselves, hence the need for power - to prevent such an eventuality, or at the very least, make it seem less likely.
Also, what seems to surprise me the most is that when I think of it, nearly all human actions are governed at least partially by fear of some consequence or the other. Even when were have "conquered" our fear, we are still doing something which is in fear of some other eventuality. Let me explain this, if I can.
Consider a soldier in a war, who is showing extreme amounts of valour in attacking the enemy positions, and so on and so forth. Think of all the propaganda that has gone into making him that way. Think of all the possibilities of losing the war and what it will do to him/his family preying on his mind. Consider his understanding of what his comrades or commanding officer will say if he isn't brave.
Sex and power are mere manifestations of fear. We glorify lack of fear to person, without realising that the fear has merely transferred unto some other subject, that you care for enough.
When one looks at one's own actions in such a light, they make a lot more sense.
PS: Arbit speculation about my own motives started somewhere through the middle of this particular post. Spent about two days writing it.
6 comments:
That's explains why the most popular BG doctrine over the aeons was the Fear litany.
Interesting analysis though. Seems like you're wearing eye filters so that you see everything fitting in the fear theory. What has scared thee into seeing fear everywhere?
I just came to realise that a lot of the people around me (including myself) decide to do things for reasons of fear, not in a quest for knowledge, power or sex.
A lot of universifying theories involve looking at every human behaviour based on one quality or imperative, and fitting things in.
Incidentally, the more I've thought about it, the more I've realised that isn't perhaps so much fear as it is simply a desire to EXIST. Fear of death, but a better way to look at it. Even the tiniest organisms (incapable of true fear in the sense that 'our fat multi-cellular' beings understand it) will move towards self perpetuation.
It would explain sex, power, knowledge AND fear.
Hm.
I didn't get the connection between fear and sex. Also, your analysis seems to be looking at negative emotions alone..there its granted, fear is a driving force..how about stuff like happiness, love and such things..where's the element of fear in them? i know you're talking about fear governing a man's choices, but when a man makes choices driven by these emotions, i don't really see fear playing much of a part there..i dunno if i've made myself clear enough :)
About fear and sex, the connection is quite clear - we have sex for two reasons; one being the instinct for self procreation, and the other is the need for the pleasure attached. But the pleasure arises from the instinctive need to procreate, which arises from the fear of leaving this world without procreation.
Love could be looked at as the fear of dying alone; but happiness isn't a choice. I'm not saying that no other emotion exists, just stating that fear determines choices, even if we're happy while making those choices.
In any case, fear is in the past - now we're on the propogation of self.
Isn't the desire to live completely tangential to fear? Help me see your connection.
There's a difference between fitting things and forcing 'em to fit :-). See 'Procrustes' on Wikipedia. *smiles*
The last bit is thought-provoking. Why on Earth would anything tend towards existence?
Oh and what is it with you and propo in propoganda and propogate?
It is tangential to fear, agreed. But I believe that its existence gives rise to fear in a large number of situations. If one considers that fear arises out of an instinct for self preservation, then the connection becomes clear. Consider - if we didn't care to live, we would have no fear of some harm reaching us; harm of any sort, to body and/or mind.
Yes, I know the difference - I do believe (now) that when I wrote the post, I was forcing them to fit. But as my thought process is crystallizing into understanding the nature of the instinct for self preservation and its impact on our thought process, I find larger parts of human behaviour falling under the ambit of such thought.
Entities tend towards existence for they do not wish to tend towards non-existence. :-) Okay, I'll try not to disprove an opposite to prove an assertion. See, all creatures act and move towards preserving their 'self' more often than not - in fact, nearly always. Of course, I'll have to figure out where suicides come from, but consider - we procreate out of a desire to exist as a species, and we seek power and knowledge to safeguard our existence while we live.
This has been a really interesting post, not in the least because of you, Hecate and divya. :-) Thank you.
PS: Mayhaps I use words with 'propo' in them for I know my arguments are propped up on them? Sorry, a rather poor joke. I know not why I like those words, but I like the sound of the truncated syllables melding into each other.
Post a Comment