The philosophy of the 21st Century: Individualism
In the 21st century, people have grown to denounce religion and renounce aethism; people have changed the interpretions of religious values to fit the current times; people have changed their own values to adopt a middle state within aethism and religion; people have even tried to counquer to world by propagating the belief that they are the descendents of God himself. Which one do we follow?
Before all the doctrines and philosophers started to emerge, there was one standard type of belief system: religion. Whether it was Christianity, Hinduism, Islam or any other type of belief that regarded towards a higher being or higher state of experience (in Buddhism), it was the penultimate belief system of the age. The reason for stating these systems to be penultimate is because they are all based on faith, and faith in fact, cannot answer all of man's questions.
If we look into the Western context in the European region, the starting of the heights of Christianity started during the Enlightenment period. This age was the age of all man being united within one kingdom, which was one of God. This age was the pinnacle of the rule of Kings and the Vatican control over teachings across nearly the entire Europe. The most famous line of kings are the kings of England, which ended with the death of King Henry the VIII. His rule was strengthened by the Enlightenment that had spread across Europe. It formed a central rule through the power of the King and with the influence of the church. The church carried out all intellectual teaching and thus controlled the flow of thought. This central system that was dictated by the church was a system similar to the feudal system in China. The church controlled all knowledge, and all who thought differently was said to be guilty of blasphemy or being a witch if you were a woman. Anyone who was different, whether in social, thought or opposing the kingdom, was to be executed on sight. These were the renditions of the Medevil Ages.
It was not until the age of the Rennaisance that intellectual thinking was propagated. This was largely aided by the invention of paper printing, which sped up the process of making books by at least a hundred fold. When before books were written by hand, they were now printed using a machine that was similar to a cartwheel. It was in this age, that philosophers started to question the conotations of religion and old traditions. Monarchy was demolished during this period and slavery banned. It can be said that the height of human intellectual development started at this period. A grand day for the thinkers.
Now, in the 21st century, we have entered a new era where things were not as simple as they were before. Belief systems have been mixed up with culture and other social values in society. Plus, with the advancement in science, religion has received massive criticism from many. Even new doctrines that oppose traditional values have risen. One philospher said to have given great influence towards the current value system is Immanuel Kant. Immanuel Kant was famour for his laws of ethics that spread widely based on aspect that seemed very real and logical.
His most famous one was his theory of Deontological Ethics. Not a direct quote:"Good is done not by wanting to do so, but by doing so out of duty. One must have originally been able to do the opposite and claim benefit for oneself, but doing good is by not wanting to do so and doing a deed out of duty and without any benefit for himself. Thus, one cannot do good buy not wanting to do evil and one cannot know life by not knowing death." His philosophy would seem to be very pessimistic about the human nature, saying that it is originally bad and only with duty can it be corrected. Though, this interpretion is wrong, because Kant also used his theory of "good will" and "universal truths" to justify his views of humanity.
However, the many Kantian followers that rose were like Hitler and Karl Marx, the father of communism. Although Kant's theology was largely followed by these two titans of the past, there was one very distinct factor that set them apart from Kant's Deontological Ethics: dictatorship. Although Hitler followed many of Kant's universal values, he was biased in his own sense that he was meant to be the dictator of man and he was also convinced that the Germans were of a kind higher than all other races. Karl Marx, although invented communism in reaction to liberalism and other ideologies, lacked on the faith that each and every man would be provided the free-will to provide for himself. The system lacked the belief that man had "good will" of any sort, and was spearheaded to a capitalist values that ruled from within a single party, which held all power. Though, in practical terms, this system failed because the party held all power and all opposing views were seen as treachery or revolt.
The modern society, holds onto the very essence of rationalism and empiricism. Plus, the "practicality" of all things actually came from a philosphy called "pragmatism". The individual living in the 21st century has much power over his own value system. However, it has become a mix between rationalism, empiricism and also social values. There are many who cannot seem to choose from the many, many values that have been laid out before them. Many of today's religious practicioners hold onto the values of their religions, in addition to many other values that have been brought down from their ancestors, and also many values that have evolved through the years due to the coalition for freedom-of-speech and human rights.
I do not say that it is wrong or claim it to be a very vague value system of no true context, I am just pointing out the facts that have become of us. Though, there is one thing that is similar from all values systems, at least those that are held in "good" nature (i'll state my opinion on "good" and "bad" in another post). All value systems strive towards one goal: unity. There is not a single value that is deemed good that would cause harm to any other human being on this earth. Life has become a commodity in the debate of values and is of the hardest to sacrifice, and almost always the last. The terminology of a greater good is often held high and justice is the notion, of which the people would always wish to see prevail.
Though, now I ask you a question. Of all the good of the world and the values that you hold. Are we truly holding onto those values? Or are we being blind hypocrites by following values that we do not truly believe in, but still used for the sake of acceptance in a social context?
In the end, it all boils down to one thing.
Who are you?
No comments:
Post a Comment