the collective problem of our time....

[Peter Kropotkin]

we are bedeviled today to discover who we are
and what we are supposed to do...
just as Iambigious is fractured, (by his own admittance)
we as a society/culture are fractured.. we just don't know it....
and so the question is, as Kant has put it,

"What are we supposed to do?" "What are we to believe in?"
"What can we know?"

collectively, we have no sense or understanding of what it
is we are supposed to do...and that is a problem because
we are a social/collective species...we cannot survive without
others.. we are driven by biology/evolution, to exist with
with other... there are studies that suggest that people
who do not interact with other people, have far greater
mental/social/physical issues than those who do interact
with other people...we are hardwired to interact with
other people... that is a biological fact... but that
fact comes with a price... we must act and interact with other people...
and what is the plan for us as we interact with others....
what are we supposed to do, as we interact with other people?

I am old enough to remember the space race of the 1960's...
collectively we pursued space travel and it was that effort that,
one important aspect that kept us, as a nation, as a people,
as a civilization, together...

and in seeking a collective "mission" as we must, because
that is what we, as human beings must do.... what is
a "collective mission" that we can do, as a people, a nation,
that will give our lives some meaning, something to
aim for..... and what is a goal, a point is something that
collectively offers us a collective meaning?
just as we individually do, we must do collectively....
everyone today, focuses on what they individually want
and work for, but we don't have a collective meaning/point/goal
and that is why we are a fractured society/state/civilization today.....

so we need to pick a goal, end poverty in our time, and that
is actually a doable goal... all we need to do is agreed to
end poverty and then, and then even at great personal
cost, end poverty.... the point is to create a collective
goal... to give us some collective act to achieve together.....

but Kropotkin, we can NEVER agree to one goal/purpose....
and that is my point.... and that is why we are so fractured
and in such a malaise... it isn't enough to achieve or pursue
individual goal/purpose... that is just one aspect of human
existence.. we are social, collective beings and that is why
we must collectively engage as one, one state, one society,
one civilization....that is why the conservative, Romantic
vision of the society cannot work... with Kierkegaard, who
emphasis one, the one, the sole individual who act, thinks
and believes in seeking their own goal... which is in fact,
what the entire Romantic era was about....is such a failure...

our individual mission must be in concert with our collective goal/
purpose.... it is not enough to say, I want to retire with a million dollars,
we must say, because we are a social, collective species, we must
say, what can we achieve, accomplish together?

and until we strive for, reach for some overall, collective goal,
we will remain a fractured species... because it isn't enough for
us to focus on our own individual selves.. we must, must
for our own collective species, engage with each other
with some sort of overarching goal or purpose....
and we shall flounder, wander the desert until we come together
for some overall, collective goal...

what is the point of existence? certainly not our individual goals,
for they are "ad hoc"... temporary... and easily enough
interrupted.... we can only move forward collectively...

Kropotkin

[Gary Childress]

The (possible) demise of the Abrahamic religions has undermined faith in authority among some of us. The fact that industry is driven by greed, profit, and just the "bottom line" outright--to the point where some people participating in it at the highest levels will sometimes lie, cheat or steal (or else make themselves oblivious to what is going on around them) in order to save or else benefit themselves doesn't help with restoring faith either.

Human beings are fallible. Sometimes collectivism is good when a group of people are on target and know what they want to do and why to do it, but other times, depending on what one is surrounded by, it can be better to strike out on one's own, at least until one finds a group of people to be around. And even then, it may not be a 'good' or 'appropriate' group of people one is around if one doesn't do some independent examination and thought.

My particular life story has been one of introversion and striking out on my own from my immediate surroundings. So that perhaps influences (or maybe "jades" is a better word) my view of collectivism. On the other hand, perhaps a good part of my problem is that I've never really gotten to know anyone really well. So I don't know if people are inherently good, inherently bad, or inherently somewhere in the middle or neutral--or perhaps just not all the same.

I only know myself. And I don't like following orders--to the extreme. Of course, I haven't accomplished much of anything in life and I am diagnosed with a "mental illness". So I guess taking my word for anything is probably a mistake. But at age 55, it's become very late to change my ways. I'm now on a single-minded mission to make up for what seems like lost ground. Unfortunately, the pickings for a person late in life become slimmer and less appealing than when I was young and completely clueless, and running in the wrong direction.

So there's that. But I do agree that people are predominately social beings when we're at our best and that the dissolution of social cohesion has played a large role in creating chaos and uncertainty. However, as you point out, many of us really don't know what we want to do or why to do it these days. Some probably do, but in my experience, I haven't met too many noble people in my life. Just ones trying to get what they want. So I'm mostly that way too.