realism or idealism
Realism or Idealism According to the theory of Idealism, all individuals have the capacity to rise above mere self-interest to reach their fullest potential. In the beginning, we were driven by biological instincts, however, we are more than those instincts. We can think and use imagination and therefore, we are perfectible. We can rise above our base nature and ask, “Is this all there is?“ We have the capacity to learn from our mistakes. There is no endpoint to our evolution and development. All human social relationships should be judged by the ability to reach their fullest potential. No party should be used by another to sustain their own self-interest. Everyone must be able to benefit from the relationship. What is characteristic about human nature is that we have the potential to progress beyond our animal instincts. Morality is the standpoint from which all decisions should be judged. Einstein states in Morals and Religion, “ All men should let their conduct be guided by the same principals; and those principals should be such, that by following them there should accrue to all as a great a measure as possible of security and satisfaction, and a small a measure as possible of suffering“. It is from this perspective that we must look at the world. We ought to be able to turn the other cheek when faced with the inequality of life. Dr. King quotes Arnold Toynbee when he says in his speech, A time to break Silence, “ Love is the ultimate force that makes for the saving choice of life and good against the damming choice of death and evil. Therefore the first hope in our inventory must be the hope that love is going to have the last word.” This is a nice theory, but in reality, that’s not how the real world works. If we turn the other cheek, we run the risk of getting slapped twice. In order to survive in the real world, you must take a more realistic approach. In accordance with Realism, there are some few who are destined to rule over the rest. The strong will survive while the weak will either bend to the will of the strong, or die. The only thing to consider is your own self-interest and morality does not enter into the equation. When we take into account the natural order of things, we must then ask ourselves, “ How are our resources used? Who will get what and how?” There isn’t enough to go around so there is no way to avoid the struggle for scarce goods. Poverty is a given. The poor are deserving and responsible for their condition and only have themselves to blame for it. The problem then becomes what to do with the poor. How can we make them productive members of society? With Swift’s, A Modest Proposal, perhaps we have a solution. Swift’s proposal states that a fair, cheap, and easy method of dealing with Ireland’s over-population problem is to take all of the infants born to the poor and use them for food. You may not like it, but it is for their own good. In doing so, we can turn the liability into an asset. The poor are a drain on our resources. The most these children have to hope for is a life of misery. Their mothers are forced to walk the streets to try to earn enough to feed them.