Individualism is a lie we must cherish

I was talking with Trevor and he told me two things I wish to address here. While reading my most recent blog post he was unsure of what side of the argument I was on, if I even agreed with the points I was making. Now this is something I do occasionally, argue androgynously. Kind of a verbal banter while working thru a question and if I do not come to a conclusion or get distracted by a new question it sometimes stays that way. And second he stated Ryan is wrong, something about this needs to be argued with, but what? What is actually the idea we are looking at?

And so I attempt to clarify my position and hopefully the thought in itself.

It seems to me that individualism is a philosophy of unrestricted personal freedom. Though the more I look at it the more I think that our idea of individualism is broken, that is flawed in some way. Do we reach to individualism for some kind of self-worth or identity, or do we reach out for a reason, an excuse?

Individualism protects us from mob rule, from doing that which we would not otherwise do. For example, some people take up smoking or drinking, as a sign of their freedom, to declare independence from the church. While others, under pressure from friends or society, find their independence in the church. These people take opposite actions yet both find that freedom which they felt was withheld, missing or being attacked.

Individualism is a way for us to keep our own moral codes, it allows us to portray on the outside what we feel on the inside.

However if we find a community that shares our individual philosophies then we can join it and accept its rules and boundaries and not feel our individualism offended. How many of us say everyone takes showers so to display my individualism I am heretofore refusing such a mindless act the mob has placed into our heads? Our individualism gets offended when we do not agree with an idea that we feel is foisted upon us. Community is effective when it is chosen, but forced community is generally oppressive for those within it.

Issues come up when we are born into a society, and some of these societies are difficult to get out of. If I decide that I disagree enough with Canadian policy that I no longer wish to be part of the Canadian community, what can I do? There is no longer any frontier land that I can go claim as everything is already owned. What is a man to do without becoming illegal? Sometimes all we can think to do is complain and hope someone hears us. We cry foul whenever our desires are being denied, I cry foul. And as anyone who has gotten me ranting for any amount of time knows, I despise socialism, it hurts my sensibilities. Did you know that Canada spent in excess of $172 billion last year on health care, this works out to about $5,200 per person. Wow, yeah urg, that just chaps me something fierce. But I am not getting into that here, ignoring it and moving on.

Rejection of the politics of where I am born leads me to reduce the effect that they have in my life and I have been drawn to the idea of a commune to express my individualism from society. Yet, even in my individualism I am drawn into community. One reason this makes so much sense is that individualism is an ineffective way of life. I am not good enough to do everything on my own. I have a finite amount of time allotted to me, I can spend it learning how to build an effective house for the climate or learning to play the piano, I must choose to not learn one thing so I can learn another. Time is my enemy, so much to learn and do, and yet here I sit in my darkened room, writing. Anyway, to beat this enemy called time we gather, gather with people who are sufficiently alike and different from ourselves. We form symbiotic relationships where I no longer have to know how to make music to appreciate it, where my skills complement the skills of others. Life is more effective when there is a multitude of people to share the responsibilities and efforts of continuing existence and joy. Yet still here alone in dark, I secretly wish I could be skilled with everything, to be truly independent and autonomous. Why do I feel shame for my reliance on others? Pride refuses to let me accept it.

And a short thought about individualism in religion. Since religion is truth from a source greater then man and not a democracy, disagreement leads to nothing but a single solution. Agree or leave. Without constancy and steadiness unity falters, but without change individualism suffers.

Buddhism and the Supreme Being

There have been a couple times in the last week where I have been involved in discussions where someone assigns Buddhism a supreme being. While they do have the venerated Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama ), he is not a creator god. There is, in fact, no creator god in Buddhism.

Buddhism does acknowledges the existence of supernatural beings called devas. However the life of a deva is only temporary, they like the humans are still stuck in samsara (the continual cycle of death and rebirth). They are still subject to the sufferings of samsara and the effects of Karma. The deva are no closer to nirvana then humans and in fact being born a deva offers too many pleasures and distractions to inspire a serious motivation for meditation and selflessness. So it is believed that the human realm is best for realizing full enlightenment.

This lack of a supreme being also causes what to me is one of the attractions of Buddhism. The removal of the supreme creator turns the theology/philosophy into a logical process. The Buddha analyzed the problem of suffering, diagnosed its root cause and prescribed a method to dispel suffering. There were no visitations, no miracles, no reliance in belief of the unseen or emotion. Buddhist philosophy doesn’t ask you to imagine that which cannot be seen, or to understand the difference between God touching the soul and human emotion. It is logically understandable by the mind alone and, thus most importantly, replicable.

Does the individual have a place in Mormon ideology??

This thought was inspired by a brilliant post by my good friend Gaddian called ‘womanhood rant’. You can find her and the post over there ------> yep there she is, go read her stuff, I will wait.

I do not envy the role of women. While in early Mormon history and male dominated society you were a wife, an almost subservient being whose purpose is to create happiness for the husband. Now, in the women empowered future, you are to be a glorified baby factory, a container wherein is held the glorious and deific womb. From Wife to Mother, the placement did not change merely the angle wherein we view it.

Individualism is hard to place, If we look at scriptural examples of Zion societies. (Acts 4:31-35 (shortly after Christ’s mortal ministry), 4 Nephi 1:2-6, 10-18 (after his visit to America), Moses 7:17-21 (the city of Enoch), and D&C 42:18-36 (revealed law for early Mormondom). There is a common theme of Unity, being one heart and one mind. “I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine.” This relegation of individualism seems to thread its way thru much of our religious thought.

Marriage, genealogy (turning hearts of fathers to sons and sons to fathers), The family unit, sealings, being one with Christ, being one heart and one mind, all things being equal and common. We are fairly insistent on removing individuality from godliness and of pointing out the fact that we cannot be saved alone. Even to achieve the greatest glory in God’s kingdom, exaltation in the highest degree, requires a voluntary loss of the individual. Exaltation is an eternal union between a man and a woman never to be separated, or between a man and three women for all those of you with polygamous tendencies.

However, there is a dissonance between this idea of Unity and Agency, the concept of teaching people correct principles and allowing them to govern themselves. Where does unity end and personal choice begin? Why have this great gift of agency only to be told how to use it.

I had this conversation with myself. What is the greatest thing to do with your agency? Why to do what god wants you to do of course. But is that not Satan’s plan, to take our freedom and return us safely to heaven? God is not taking our freedom we are giving it to him. But this works out to the same thing, a society which completely accepts Gods plan will look exactly the same as one that would have developed under Satan’s. Except with God you choose it.

Is wanting to follow gods will paramount or is merely doing it sufficient? You cannot compel Zion, Zion requires a people who want. You cannot force people to care about others. This must develop organically out of people’s desires and beliefs, so the question then stands how do we get a society to think this way? Is our current teachings the best solution or should we be approaching it another way. Are we more likely to achieve wanting to do good as individuals or as a part of a faceless mass?