atlashunter
Senior Member
This is probably going to come off as rambling because I’m searching for clarity but thought I would put it out and there and get some thoughts.
Read a quote the other day by Zeno, “Man conquers the world by conquering himself.” This expresses a common theme of the importance of self mastery found in many religions and schools of thought. On the other hand there is the idea that we must live in accordance with nature and with our own nature as human beings. Doctrines such as Marxism that run contrary to and seek to change human nature often lead to horrific consequences. And some aspects of our nature that have been deemed as vice such as selfishness can be explained as important, even necessary to our survival, in evolutionary terms. Ayn Rand argued that selfishness is a virtue. Adam Smith similarly argues that the butcher serves others not out of altruism but out of his own self interest. The point being that even aspects of our nature that may at first glance seem a negative to be diminished are actually instilled in us by nature for good reason. If it’s true that we should live according to nature then how can it be true that we should be in conflict with our own nature which nature has bestowed upon us? Hope that makes sense. I’m inclined to be in agreement with both propositions though they seem to be contradictory. Thoughts?
Read a quote the other day by Zeno, “Man conquers the world by conquering himself.” This expresses a common theme of the importance of self mastery found in many religions and schools of thought. On the other hand there is the idea that we must live in accordance with nature and with our own nature as human beings. Doctrines such as Marxism that run contrary to and seek to change human nature often lead to horrific consequences. And some aspects of our nature that have been deemed as vice such as selfishness can be explained as important, even necessary to our survival, in evolutionary terms. Ayn Rand argued that selfishness is a virtue. Adam Smith similarly argues that the butcher serves others not out of altruism but out of his own self interest. The point being that even aspects of our nature that may at first glance seem a negative to be diminished are actually instilled in us by nature for good reason. If it’s true that we should live according to nature then how can it be true that we should be in conflict with our own nature which nature has bestowed upon us? Hope that makes sense. I’m inclined to be in agreement with both propositions though they seem to be contradictory. Thoughts?
Last edited: