No, that is just our sheer hubris and ignorance.The West thinks it has bypassed this idea that people are born to continue culture. That seems to be a tribal idea- tribes need more people so the tribe does not die out. — schopenhauer1
People will claim that individual identities are socially constructed, thus any point about the individual born at the behest of institutions (and therefore being used by them) is a moot point. The individual wouldn't exist without institutions, according to this reasoning, thus there is no dichotomy.
I think this is overlooking the fact that even if humans are socially constructed, they still act as if they are autonomous, and operate accordingly. — schopenhauer1
It is clear that by procreating, we are assenting to the perpetuation of economic and cultural institutions. — schopenhauer1
Even if it if sounds far too simple and obvious, the reason for these institutions to exist is that societies so complex and interdependent as we have now can function. Institutions, those "stable recurring patterns of behaviour" are simply demanded in a highly complex society where basically all people are dependant on actions of others. People living in huge megacities totally dependent on a globalized market literally need a highly complex logistical system that could not exist without a multitude of various institutions that people would follow.
The more specialized our society comes, the more it needs various kinds of institutions: economic markets, nation states, international organizations and so on. Thus there are various kinds of institutions that we have to teach people. We have more roles as individuals that let's say some hunter-gatherers of some small tribe earlier. Everybody here has is a member of various organizations, likely has a profession and are citizens of some country. — ssu
I think too much emphasis is put on institutions as being a way to control the individual... as somehow without them (the institutions) being forced upon us, we as individuals would be better off (and hence these institutions shouldn't be forced upon the individual). Much less is given thought to the sheer rational of institutions as ways to create social cohesion, ways for our large societies to operate smoothly. — ssu
Hence It's not in any way surprising that one of the biggest institution that Schopenhauer1 states to be the "cultural practice of personal development" that "gets people to more fully embrace the institutions which need perpetuating" would be in my view the educational system as a whole, that now spans from kindergarten to the university. — ssu
Hence Western individualism, consumerism, democracy, justice-state, human rights and so on are not seen as part of Western culture, but of something universal condition that has come as irreversible force upon human kind. Of course when look at the discourse in non-Western societies about just what is "Western", it tells a different viewpoint from ours. But we don't care about that. — ssu
Humans are autonomous because they have evolved to be autonomous. Autonomy wasn't invented a couple of decades ago. Children need years of nurture, but nature has set the table. It is the nature of our species to employ culture to perpetuate ourselves. Language, story telling, writing, drama, music, fiction, factual material -- all sorts of narratives are composed to perpetuate ANY culture. — Bitter Crank
Procreation happens because nature is running that particular show. People do not breed to make political statements (well, almost never), but people do avoid breeding to make political statements. One has to go way out of one's way to avoid procreation; if one isn't paying attention, reproduction will happen. Nature makes sure it does. — Bitter Crank
I think I agree with what you are saying.What I mean by personal development, is how we egoistically try to pursue our own self-interest and by thinking that we are doing things for ourselves, really we are participating more full-heartedly in the institutions (markets, school, consumption, production, jobs, investments, government, family, etc. etc.). In other words, you thinking you're doing stuff for yourself, is actually strengthening the institutions so, the perpetuation of the institutions is a bit more hidden than say a tribal society where the individual directly knows they are perpetuating tribal cultural/institutional norms and practices. — schopenhauer1
That is the Western hubris that I talked about: it will happily change the word "western" to "modern" as being synonyms! Yet just look at Japan, one of the high achievers in the World that surely isn't part of the Western culture. It's history doesn't look at all similar to ours (that is before we imposed our ways after defeating them in WW2).Although you may have a point here, you are getting tripped up on the word "Western". If you'd like, think of the word "modern" or "post-modern". I don't care. The point is that in our "modern" globalized system now, that started in the 1400s in Europe, — schopenhauer1
Well, if you have children, wouldn't you want the best for them? And for them to have a happy life, they have to manage the complex system the society has facing them. And it's institutions.By having more children, the parent is trying to say that the child needs to participate in institutions and carry them forward (work, production, consumption, government, etc. etc.). Thus the final idea is that individuals are not born for themselves. That is an impossibility. They are here to keep institutions going. — schopenhauer1
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.