Innocence & Inherency: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Social Sciences » Innocence & Inherency » Innocence & Inherency

Innocence & Inherency
A sociological essay

Innocence & Inherency

LanguidLegend
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 05, 2008
Location: California
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 7

Posted 08/05/08 - 08:34 PM: Subject: Innocence & Inherency	#1
Ok this is a term paper I have written for one of my philosophy classes. It is only my initial draft, but if you read it, it would be great if you could give me some feedback (critiques & support). I also have this paper linked on my Google website (http://flcl178.googlepages.com/innocenceandinherency). Thanks! This article is mainly an oppositional response to the second half of Nietzsche’s Human, All Too Human, in which he concludes that “Everything is innocence: and knowledge is the way to insight into this innocence.” [Nietzsche, 274-275] I plan on proving that humanity is inclined to egotistical & malicious behavior and at the same time refute humanity’s innocence from such a behavior. Humanity is far from innocent, and it is knowledge and insight that is the key to its inherent evil: for is it not knowledge and purposeful premeditation that proves innocence or guilt in our modern day court of law? When one’s need or desperation is raised to a certain point, the value of human life & decency is then trampled upon by the pursuit of one’s own needs and desires. Justice is a system inherent to the stability and survival of society, not the individual person, thus not inherent in him. Self-awareness is the crux of this ignorance-innocence argument. Nietzsche pleads ignorance and thus innocence for the entire realm of human actions and behaviors, but I however see awareness and forethought, and thus evil inherent in humanity. Most behaviors and actions of ignorance are those of intentional ignorance; in other words, they are those of thoughtlessness and inflexibility, usually due to an elitist lifestyle. Nietzsche himself admits that in a social environment, man seeks to cause pain to his fellow man: “In social dialogue, three-quarters of all questions and answers are framed in order to hurt the participants a little bit; this is why many men thirst after society so much: it gives them a feeling of their own strength.”[Nietzsche, 257] To be sure, he was not the first man to highlight this inherent malicious urge for his fellow humans; therefore humanity’s self-awareness is clearly existent. How can he then turn and say that this malicious behavior is not one of self-awareness and premeditation? It is clear that it could not be so. I believe that humanity’s true self has never been so succinctly portrayed by anyone as by sociological comedian, George Carlin, who said: “When you get right down to it human beings are nothing more than ordinary jungle beasts. Savages. No different from the Cro-Magnon people who lived twenty five thousand years ago. … Our DNA hasn't changed substantially in a hundred thousand years. We're still operating out of the lower brain. … We like to think we've evolved and advanced because we can build a computer, fly an airplane, travel underwater, we can write a sonnet, paint a painting, compose an opera. But you know something? We're barely out of the jungle on this planet. … What we are, is semi-civilized beasts, with baseball caps and automatic weapons.” [George Carlin: Life is Worth Losing, imdb.com] When I heard that, I could not help but think to Freud’s ‘Id’; for like it or not, it is our inner, instinctual mind that to this day remains an active part of our psyche. It is essentially the same mind that guided our species’ skills of survival so many hundreds of thousands of years in the past and still does today. It is a self-centered thing which thinks only of our own best interests for survival, abandoning all else. However, this bestial mind has been recently curbed, or shaped, through the existence of society; no longer does it immediately think to its own immediate survival. The normal man has levels, or order, of human value that his unconscious mind abides by: strangers, friends, family, and finally, self. However, as his need of and the risk to the safety of those of a certain level increases, those above it quickly melt away. In other words, the safety of friends supersedes that of strangers, just as that of one’s own self supersedes that of one’s family or friends. I think that Aristotle’s assertion that “every action and choice seem to aim at some good” [Aristotle, 47] is undeniable to anyone. In the case of the human psyche, the ultimate good is happiness; this exposed psychological foundation is the continued pursuit for self-preservation: the only motive for the ‘Id.’ Therefore, the actions and choices of every person aim first and before all else at his and her own continued preservation. Justice, just as with Freud’s ‘Id’, is a system whose existence is essential to the survival of society, not to the individual members themselves. “The good of mankind is the only object of all these laws and regulations.” [Hume, 207] In the beginning, humans had no need for a regulatory system such as justice: they needed only heed the single-mindedness of the inner ‘beast’ (mind), instinctual in every living being. However, as men evolved and populations multiplied, they grew together in close quarters and relied more heavily on each other for common necessities. Due to the high risk of internal mischief and damage this close reliance posed for all who inhabited these newly forming societies, a system of sociological justice naturally developed in step. This prescience of its own inherent immorality was the first major psychological stride by humanity. Unconsciously or not, it is obvious that justice is a system developed to deter man’s natural inclination towards selfishness & general thoughtlessness. It is with this in mind that I agree with Aristotle when he states that justice is indeed the highest virtue of all; not only does it encompass all his previously mentioned human virtues, but it also (if performed solely for the sake of justice itself) demonstrates a clear prescience and understanding of man’s inherent inclinations on the part of man himself. However, even after considering all of this, justice still cannot be thought of too highly; it is merely, Nietzsche thinks, the instinctual mind’s response to a life in society. “Justice naturally goes back to the viewpoint of an insightful self‑preservation, that is, to the egoism of this consideration: ‘Why should I uselessly injure myself and perhaps not reach my goal anyway?’” [Nietzsche, 266] Through time, says Nietzsche, men have forgotten this true origin of justice and therefore, having no apparent selfish motives, just acts have been wrongfully labeled as selfless and virtuous. Therefore it is clear to see that humans are a species who are more than aware of their own instinctual inclination towards general malice and self-absorption. Nietzsche tries to absolve humanity from its egotistical ways by maintaining that through the fact of natural inherency from nature, we are thus clear from blame and responsibility, but the fact that we are additionally self-aware of this inclination ties us to responsibility for our actions. Edited by LanguidLegend on 08/06/08 - 09:44 AM
"... One thinks that if someone honestly believed in something and fought for his belief and died it would be too unfair if he had actually been inspired by a mere error. Such an occurrence seems to contradict eternal justice. Therefore the hearts of sensitive men always decree in opposition to their heads that there must must be a necessary connection between moral actions and intellectual insights. Unfortunately, it is otherwise, for there is no eternal justice." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Kelby
Cognitive Philosopher

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 03, 2008
Location: The Fire Nation
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 248

Posted 08/05/08 - 11:37 PM:	#2
Do you wish for "philosophical" feedback or feedback on the actual essay itself? In other words, a philosophical or essay critique? Because both need some revision. example: what is "intentional ignorance?"
Embodied Cognition: http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/embodcog.htm#H2

LanguidLegend
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 05, 2008
Location: California
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 7

Posted 08/06/08 - 09:59 AM:	#3
I guess either feedback would be nice, but preferably philosophical. As for intentional ignorance, I mean how some people look down on certain people/cultures/etc. as 'inferior', and therefore they refuse to understand or accept them as equals. This then can lead to a behavior of mere apathy to a hatred of them. These 'inferior' people are viewed so insignificantly that the 'superior' people are not even aware of their suffering. The most apt examples would be slavery or the Holocaust, I suppose, but its not just limited to racism. I know its an oxymoron, but it was the most concise term of which I could think.
"... One thinks that if someone honestly believed in something and fought for his belief and died it would be too unfair if he had actually been inspired by a mere error. Such an occurrence seems to contradict eternal justice. Therefore the hearts of sensitive men always decree in opposition to their heads that there must must be a necessary connection between moral actions and intellectual insights. Unfortunately, it is otherwise, for there is no eternal justice." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Kelby
Cognitive Philosopher

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 03, 2008
Location: The Fire Nation
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 248

Posted 08/06/08 - 02:57 PM:	#4
LanguidLegend wrote: I guess either feedback would be nice, but preferably philosophical. As for intentional ignorance, I mean how some people look down on certain people/cultures/etc. as 'inferior', and therefore they refuse to understand or accept them as equals. I personally wouldn't use the word ignorance. People look down on others because of a belief and they refuse to understand or accept people because their beliefs say not to. It's not that they wish to be ignorant of "inferior" people... instead, they believe there is nothing to be ignorant of. These "inferior" people are not worth learning or studying, but it's not because they wish to be ignorant, it is because they have no reason to study them since their beliefs repudiate them in the first place.
Embodied Cognition: http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/embodcog.htm#H2

LanguidLegend
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 05, 2008
Location: California
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 7

Posted 08/20/08 - 09:01 AM:	#5
yea, good point.
"... One thinks that if someone honestly believed in something and fought for his belief and died it would be too unfair if he had actually been inspired by a mere error. Such an occurrence seems to contradict eternal justice. Therefore the hearts of sensitive men always decree in opposition to their heads that there must must be a necessary connection between moral actions and intellectual insights. Unfortunately, it is otherwise, for there is no eternal justice." - Friedrich Nietzsche

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.