On Nietzsche, Darwin and Bill Gates
Compassion : Sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it.
In a world in which Darwinism theory of "Survival of the Fittest" is enacted in all walks of life, compassion, as a concept, is almost antithetical. It is almost like an oasis in a desert. Why is compassion an emotion experienced by humans then? Lets try to get a historical perspective.
Circa early 19th Century. The glory and democracy of French revolution has given way to an anarchy, which only the obstinate optimists will term as a success. Over the period of next few decades, Napoleon would, in a way exploit, this chaos to establish his supremacy over France. Needless to say, this seminal event changed Europe and the World, not only politically, but also in the way people started thinking. This is as brief a premise as i could possibly give.
Circa late 19th century. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (October 15, 1844 – August 25, 1900) was a Prussian-born philosopher, who though was largely overlooked by the contemporaries of his time, came to be regarded as a highly significant and influential figure in modern philosophy. Much of Nietzsche's philosophy has a critical flavor to it; two concepts associated with a more constructive project are the Übermensch (variously translated as superman, superhuman, or overman) and the eternal return (or eternal recurrence), though in this context, its the former we are interested in primarily. The former is posited as a goal that humanity can set for itself, or that an individual can set for his- or herself; Nietzsche basically was of the opinion that society's and mankind's only role should be in the development of a Man who is perfection personified. And consequently, he rubbished democracy. The anarchy that followed French Revolution and the "heroic" role played by Napoleon thereafter, seems to have contributed to Nietzsche's philosophy, as did Schopenhauer's "The World as Will and Idea". Contentiously, though, Nietzsche never clearly outlined the role this Superman was to play in such a hypothetical society.
Circa 2006. The world is a lot different place. The new weapon is money, but strife, as a part of life, is one of the few constant factors. In this increasingly complex world, some acts just shock you by their sheer audacity and surprise quotient. The world's richest man, Bill Gates, decides to not just donate most of his wealth close to $50 b, but actively involve himself in philanthropy. And helping him in this endeavor is another of the world's richest men, Warren Buffet who gives most of his wealth to Gates for this purpose. And all this happening in the intensely competitive Corporate society. Gates, in a lot of ways, is the modern Übermensch visualized by Nietzsche. He is a product of his society, achieving success not by inheritance, but by sheer talent and diligence. The implication here is not that he is perfect (ok, there are plenty of Gates detractors), but if there's anyone who fits the bill in this world, its him. And such a man, when in his prime devotes himself to such a cause as philanthropy and compassion, the world takes notice.
Maybe after centuries of power struggles and strife, humans have finally started realising that strife, though necessary, has only worstened human plight in this control-less way and mindless wars. And maybe its people like Gates, who consciously or unconsciously are realising the fact that its not always survival of the fittest which leads to an evolved species, but survival of the weakest which strengthens the pyramid of our societies and our species as a whole. And the most remarkable and striking of all things is that, this time the agent of change is not the Aristocrat, or the Nation state but one of the finest products of a society , where strife is relatively controlled.
And although inequity is still ubiquitous, we still fight over things as inane as land and religion and future appears unstable, but maybe Compassion and humanity is the new mantra in evolution, pioneered by Gates-like-Übermensch.
Nietzsche take a bow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I believe that Nietzsche's Übermensch cannot be personified. It is not so much an individual as it is the process of overcoming oneself (the limitations of man) and nihilism. Although Nietzsche admired Napoleon and several other great historical figures, he was critical of the concepts of soul and self consciousness which he dismissed as fictitious grammatical constructs.
The Übermensch (if thought of as an individual) would influence and dominate the thoughts of others creatively and affect history indefinitely by reentering the world through other people’s minds and affect their thoughts and values; inspiring them to overcome nihilism.
In this context, Gates' altruism aids in social equality which uniforms all beings and leads to nihilism. The Übermensch will not arrive to feed the poor. He is more likely to inspire them to forgo all moral dogmas and steal from the rich!
gates, like many of the new age humanists have realized that while darwin said survival of the fittest...there is a much older theory, that is too visible to be propounded by a man...its called "the limited factor".... in any society's progress 9 and humans can only survive in socities)... the growth is constantly firewalled by the limitinf factors... the " not so blessed people" as we state. or rather, the masses. no ideal concept, either democracy or capitalism can thrive in a society where the limiting factors are in great numbers. they immediately form a parallel governance, that we today know as corruption, manipulation, mafia, trafficking,crime.everything.what people like bill gates or others are doing is at least giving individual equal base and chance.
what most philosphers ignore, is as Ayn Rand called them, are second handers. i dont appreciate that term, because mediocrity isnt a destiny or a person... its a characteristic.
and compassion is basically a characteristic of those who love life, love for self, and everything life and this world stands for. it can only come as a package deal. if it is minus the above, look again, you must have seen pity, or guilt at getting more than one deserves.... otherwise, it is a natural occurence, not a path to be taken. enough said. interesting write.
Presumtion of "goodness" as natural occurence after the ravages experienced by humanity (more so in the 20th century like world wars, genocides and what not) would be somewhat optimistic,eh? we most not forget that this is a relatively peaceful period (last 25 years or so) that humanity is witnessing.
Secondly, our societies are a whole lot more complex. One can take example of the US. the difference between "the capitalists" and "the second handers" are mind boggling, at the least. and while this may not withhold the development of society at its front (eg. technology) the tail,still,lags. And it is this intrinsic complexity and diversity of our societies that makes anything possible. Darwinism and such are difficult to ascribe to our societies without taking into account its complexity.
But i do agree , compassion is more so a personal trait than societal. Yet the attempt was to try and see things in another perspective.
Thanks for the comment
I am reading this article second time today, you have to be more careful with content leakers. If I will fount it again I will send you a link
I agree with dilettanti, Nietzsche thought that sympathy was for the weaks. The Strong ones (also called ubermensh) could use brutality and violence as a way to expend their lives and say ''yes'' to their existence, without having any moral guilt or pression from the weaks, offended by your behavior (because it doesn't fit their codes...).
But I think your article is very good because of its distance with N's theory and to rethink our vision of a great man... Is a great man someone powerful who could make anyone bow, or is it someone who bows before the weaks?
I apologize for my poor English, i'm french and just dropped on your blog by total random :)
Post a Comment