I think that society cannot help but play a crucial role in personal development and happiness. Parents play a crucial role, too, but they can only do so much, and they too were shaped by society. Further, there’s evidence that many young people take their cues not from parents but from peers and the media (television, songs, films, and videogames). But there’s more to society that the media: there is also education. Educators all work in their own way to develop the capacities and open the minds of young people, and educators are in turn supported by money that comes from both private and public sources and from policies developed by various groups. Thus, many people play a role in providing young people with the tools they’ll need to develop their own way of life in order to pursue what they believe is good. So: I think that society must work collectively to develop the capacities of young people so that they stand a better chance at developing further and becoming happy once they are adults and fully on their own, and I think that our society does attempt to do this.
But then there is that media and all the people who make a living from creating it. And there is the entire industry of public relations and advertising and marketing and lobbying, full of people whose job it is to get us to buy products and services. And there are politicians and all their aides who seek to get our votes. While each group (entertainers, salespeople, and politicians) might each think that they are motivated by what is good for us, it more often seems that their powers of reason and persuasion are used to seek conformity – to get us to go after the same thing (what they want) without our thinking too much (since if we thought too much, we might realize we don’t want or need what they’re offering). We thus need to educate ourselves in order to protect ourselves from the dangers of three of the dominant activities in our society (entertaining, business, and politics). Our society doesn’t necessarily require that we act without thinking or conform, but there is often enormous pressure to do so.
Goodness! I’m already over three hundred and seventy words and I feel that I’ve barely scratched the surface of things – and I haven’t even talked about the second half of the prompt. (I clearly tried to squeeze too much into this prompt – but hopefully it will make it easier for everyone to reach three hundred words.) As for development and happiness and morality, I do believe that it is hard for the undeveloped person to be happy, largely because such persons are (I believe) less likely to know themselves. At the same time, I acknowledge that development can often lead us to become more aware of our own failings and of the sufferings around us, such that we might (early on) be less happy (a point that Plato’s ascent from the cave illustrates). But I have trouble explaining why one must, morally speaking, develop oneself and be happy. This idea seems to assume in part that our natures our good, such that, if I figure out who I truly am and then work to develop a way of life that fits that, that I would not end up hurting others in the process and/or that I cannot truly find and develop myself if I’m not restrained from interfering with others. But then I imagine someone like Nick Naylor and I wonder if this is really so. (And now I’m at about six hundred words and so I’ll stop.)
No comments:
Post a Comment