Without our ego, I’m certain we’d be amoebas, or bacteria at best…
It may be true that we can’t get rid of it, and even that we shouldn’t, but rampant egoism which prevents the attainment of achievable goals that would benefit humanity are unjustifiable.
without being individual people we might all become cogs in the state slavery machine that is blind to individual needs and wants… you are not a free man, you are a number.
harrison? harrison?
-Imp
…then it seems like there needs to be a balance of ‘self-interest’ v ‘the greater good’ - I’ve seen too many examples of an ego getting in the way of progression/work/fun/etc, and it wasn’t neccessary.
Smears, do you think society are capable of this balance?
Isn’t this what separates the good from the great? the ability to know what is best for the whole, and not just for themselves…
What does balance mean? I would not assume that balance is a static term, especially when everything about people and the world seems so dynamic. The point of balance for today may be totally different from that of yesterday, or that of tomorrow. I would say no, unless we were some how able to predict what balance we would need in the future (if that’s even possible), we will always be playing catchup. The best we can do now is come as close as possible as soon as possible and be ready and willing to change
I think that the greater good is self interest. But because so many people are afraid, and rightfully so, of getting fucked over, that self interest stifles progress toward the greater good. It’s not that the people are evil, it’s that they’re afraid. No matter how organized the world might be, we’re still always going to be individuals. It’s when we think that we’re better than one another, or when we think that it’s best to beat someone instead of cooperate with them that the world becomes an ugly place.