This is not a blanket statement but I have tended to find that people who look down on the inadequacies of 'chavs' are often quite 'chav-y' themselves.
Tuesday, 4 April 2017
"Such as we are made of, such we be." - ShakespeareA basic tenet of Aristotelian philosophy is that all beings act in accordance with their nature.
Unfortunately he thought that slavery was justified on this basis, i.e. that slaves were slavish and therefore rightly treated as such.
Yet modern lessons can be learnt from this tenet.
That is to say, the influences of mass mind control and cultural programming through school, the media, the working world and other instruments of conformity might not be as definitive as is sometimes made out, provided that alternative angles are available and accessible.
For example, school does not usually provide a strong moral education in so far as Natural Law and Philosophy is concerned, but those who are philosophical and ethical by nature will come, with time and maturity, to look at sources of information that do offer such angles.
Conversely, those who feel at home in looking down on others and conformist bigotry generally will ignore philosophical books and read newspapers.
Those driven to practical activity will become practical workers, those driven to worldly power and financial wealth will become politicians and businessmen, those driven to seeking truth will become scientists, conspiracy researchers or philosophers, those driven to creative expression will become artists and so on.
Nature has provided a corrective to the world's caprice, as Seneca put it, as manifested in conventional homogenisation and artificial belief systems by making people, if they have the courage and will to do so, act according to their nature.
Thus we can always expect that some will be moral, concerned with truth and humane, even when mainstream culture has gone awry in its immorality, greed and superficiality.
Similarly, we can always count on practical people to achieve practical things which are essential for any society to function.
On the negative side, however, we can always be sure that there will be some power-hungry individuals who seek positions of worldly influence and manipulation because that is their in their nature.
In that regard, in the simplest of terms, empaths will act empathetically, psychopaths psychopathically, philosophers philosophically, craftsmen craftily, artists artistically, criminals criminally, alcoholics alcoholically, intellectuals intellectually, sportsmen physically, sensitive people sensitively, abusive people abusively, narcissists narcissistically etc.
That being said, working out one's nature and acting in accordance with it can be a task of long duration, especially if this requires unlearning a great deal of false information not relating to one's true self and then, in addition, a need to accept oneself for who one is rather than what one would like to be.
It goes without saying that the same individual may partake of several natures at once, e.g. artist, intellectual, practical, physical and sensitive.
I think it should be obvious that some personalities, particularly introverted, uncompetitive ones, are highly penalised by the mainstream working world in its people-oriented, uncreative and competitive aspects and certainly the world of busy-ness.
It has been shown that extroverts earn more as a whole than introverts and reach higher positions in most money-making sectors, unpaid deep philosophising not being one of them.
Areas that would be conceivable for me to work in such as care and translation are notoriously underpaid.
I gave up on careers a long time ago seeing that whatever skills I may possess are not valued by money-making institutions.
In my opinion, the worst thing about (secondary) school is not the waste of time, getting the bus in the morning, the homework, the teachers, the low-level of information, the lack of proper life and technical guidance, the canteen food but the nasty and petty interactions that occur between pupils, i.e. bullying, name calling, stigmatisation, shunning, mocking, demeaning, stealing.
In other words: the rule of the lowest common denominator, which always means the dominance of the lowest level of consciousness imaginable. This is why reading William Golding's Lord of the Flies during this period was akin to getting the first taste of truth about the world that adults around me at the time miserably failed to impart me with.
Nonetheless because of these phenomena I shut myself off from my sensitive as well as my creative selves, became a fearful person full of resentment and conformist bigotry as I grew older, loathed humanity and acquired a psychology of learned helplessness, i.e. that there being no correctives to dominator, abusive behaviour you have no choice but to let yourself be trampled on.
It took me seventeen years to liberate myself from the damage caused by the toxic environment of adolescent state schooling.