As the stream of sunlight sneaked into his dilapidated room, you could easily see dust, dancing in the stream, conspicuously settling on his face. He had not left his squalid space in more than a month... he lay dull on his rickety queen size bed only to change positions every once in a while... he ate nothing and alcohol came to consume him.... tabloids wrote about his much awaited trial- he had managed to construct, outside the realm of human imagination and traditional authority, a structure that created a furore. a furore over the indignation his building posed to the
"greatness" that men revered. His repugnance towards the "mob" culture eventually led to his existent state....
Ayn Rand creates a hero, a martyr out of the quiet rebellion.. obviously, she draws inspiration from Neitzsche's ubermensch or the 'over man' who in turn draws inspiration from Heidegger's Nazi influence. The ape creates a sense of disgust in man and obviously evolution is inevitable. therefore man will and have to evolve into something greater which will be superior than man- 'overman'. Overman does not refer to an individual but rather a group of highly evolved, devoid of tactile palpable emotions. Reasoning and logic will exist in its might and God will no longer provide moral justification and thus the famous line- "God is dead".
Speaking realistically or rather defiantly of my ideological conflict, i suspect the overman a tad bit... my only grievance with the concept is that it inculcates a sense of supremacy and repulsion to the 'last man'. Infinite power breeds egotism and class differentiation... now my question is, does evolution necessarily imply conceited power play and veneration of mortals?
The man in the room was once considered a leader... he was not even militant or defiant of his utter selfishness... no dramatics, no hysteria, no selflessness primarily because he had no doubts... So what got him to his present state?? ideological conflict and inability to separate his needs and his wants!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Over man as a concept is difficult for me to understand. Evolution is a process which happens over Centuries together. And the word means growth, development and hence something better. Although we as a species have evolved over these years we have not lost our emotions. We have learnt to be more in control of our own self. So, devoid of emotions and evolutions going hand ?? Not sure
ReplyDeleteChoice: Man has all the choices, except the choice of death, that to he can have by committing suicide. On the other hand he has no choice.
Even though our view points might not match, still the attempt is appreciated :-)
overman no doubt is overtly glorified and a tragic hero but in all my wisdom I disagree that the man in the room was a victim of his inability to separate his wants from his needs. Id go with the wants and the needs part but not with his inability.
ReplyDeleteEven if he, let's say for a moment was able to overlap his wants and needs, where would the structure he has to exist in leave him.
The one major conflict I have with Nietzsche (wow I sound important) is the fact that the ver existence of overman gives rise to the idea of supremacy of one over the other. The idea of victory over what seems to hinder the man's existence. Victory in a very practical day to day sense. Not philosophically. But obviously the practical victory will lead to philosophical victory. (Hitler did have the largest following ever, after the roman catholic church perhaps).
Now move onto Camus' Meursault(the outsider). The absurd man in the room not sure of the day his mother died is at odds with the structure he lives in much in the same way Nietzsche's overman is before he became the overman. ie when he was still another ordinary existentialist. He doesn't face the fate of overman. He can't. For he wishes for nothing to be achieved through his actions more then a passionately lived life, based on pure logic and reason much like the overman.
I ask the author, would you say that Meursaults' needs and wants were the same? If not, then what prevented his downfall in the way the man in the room fell.
please forgive me if I don't understand existentialism :)
Its more to do with the conflict of reality and construct of reality. What is real for me, might not be real for you. What i consider construct might be reality for you. Conflicts exist between individuals and within your own mind. The society usually accepts the reality or constructed reality which is accepted by the majority. But those who accept the societal norm forget that there exists a conflict within you. How would you deal with that?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletethe conflict inside you is ideological because you consciously want to believe in a particular ideology but your perceivable reality contradicts that... obviously your perceivable reality does not exist and the conflict within you arises because you are running away from the contradictions that are so evident... you re looking for acceptance somewhere, a resolution somewhere.. and that is where angst develops!
ReplyDeletethe difference lies between the absurd man and the 'in conflict' over man!
ReplyDeleteisn't it??