On Selfishness

This post is the result of an ongoing discussion on the group for my humanities course.
Here is what started it off. The rest of it I will post as comments to this post.

"If human beings were truly selfish, and had no love or compassion (asthese feelings or concepts have been introduced by the society,religion, etc. and are not inherent to us) as claimed by certain philosophers, then how could the human civilization have survived;because would not the mother or father have killed the child as soonas it was born, or prevented it from being born if it were in their power?
Would that not make self preservation easy? The lesser the people, the longer the resources last."

Forrest Gump

Have a task before me.
Have to do it.
With one mind.
Perfect concentration.
Basics right.
No questions.
Mechanically.
Robotically.
Detached.
Completely detached.
No consideration for result.
No consideration for effort.
No consideration for time.
No question of like or dislike.

Just have to do it.

With perfection.
And keep going on.
Till there are no tasks...

There were no questions in Forrest's case.
If there have to be questions, they must be asked before the task is taken up.
And answers must also be found out then itself.
Once a task is taken up, there's no turning back,
Unless it's a blunder.
Little things don't matter.
Need not get anything out of it.
Anything.
May be not even satisfaction.
Or joy.
Nothing.

Regarding a taken up task-
Is it going to hurt, me or someone, if I go through with it?

Twinkle twinkle...

What does a star get out of its twinkle? It just emits light. It gets nothing out of it. So should it stop shining?
The eye provides vision. Does it get something out of it? Should it stop seeing? It is gaining nothing. Getting nothing.
But these examples are of so-called non-living things. Is this claim correct?
Can I say that my eye is non-living? My arm? My leg? Ears? Hair? Skin? Brain? Are they living things?

Effort etc.

Effort can be either mindless or not. Mindless effort leads to inefficiency, wastage of time.
What is mindless effort?
What is wastage of time?
Spending more time in a task than is optimally required.
How do I know how much time is optimally required?
I learn from experience. I observe myself and see where I could have saved time- where I could have invested it in a more worthy task.
Why should I not waste time?
It leads to inefficiency.
So?
I have assigned priority to many things, possibly to all. I should be spending the maximum time towards the most important thing. If I feel that I could have spent lesser time in a less worthy task, I am being inefficient. If I continue this way, there is no meaning of assigning priorities.
But are not all tasks equal in their worth? Should that not be the case?
And is it not true that I will pay less attention, that I will be less devoted to the tasks that I consider to be less worthy? Should I not be doing every task with complete devotion?
And then what is the meaning of complete devotion? If I am completely devoted to a task, will I care about the time that I am spending in it? Will I care whether it gets finished or not? Will I try to achieve perfection in it irrespective of the effort and time needed? Will I care whether it gets me the result that I wanted, if I was doing this task with a result in mind?
Are all tasks done only because I want some result out of them- an end?
If I have no desire of the result of a particular task, will I still go ahead and do it? Should I? If I do a task due to the desire to achieve a result, but the result is not achieved, does that make my effort useless?

Wars of philosophies

If a philosophy is attacked, it clears itself of its doubts and inconsistencies. The more vehement, the more violent the attack, the better.
If the philosophy gets destroyed in the process, it means that the inconsistencies were too much- it got the end that it deserved. It was not worth surviving.
If it survives, it comes out stronger than ever. It is an indication of the trueness of the philosophy.

Survival does not mean that the form of the philosophy remained completely intact- it could have undergone changes because of the attacks. I would say that the philosophy survived if some core ideas remained intact- something remained untouched. And these would be what I call the purest of ideas.

Fame

I still spend quite some time day-dreaming about being famous. I still get something out of the idea of being appreciated by a hall-full-of-audience. It still means something to me. It could be a useless hobby, just a distraction of the mind. It could simply be an urge, like sex. I hope it is.

The only issue is that it is instinctive, spontaneous. And that I have a feeling (or fear, I do not know) that it might be something worthy.
And if it actually is, I wouldn't want to kill it.

Just some idle talk

A man stood in front of me. He asked, "what do you want?"

I saw images in my head.
I stood in front of a huge crowd. My throat was aching but I did not mind. I had to tell them. I shouted as loud as I could.
"Who the fuck do you think am I".
I did not hear an answer. I had not expected one. I had not asked a question.

He asked again, "what do you want?"
"I don't know."
He did not seem to hear me. I waited for some reaction. None came.
"What do you want?"
"An identity."
"For whom?"
I thought this man was mad. I said, "for myself."
"What would you give to have an identity for yourself?"
"Can you give it to me?"
"What would you give to have an identity for yourself?"
"Are you mad?", I wanted to ask. I said, "my life."
"If you give your life, how will you have an identity?"
"I meant that I am ready to do anything that I am capable of. Can you give it to me?"
"No one else can. It's your identity."
"If no one can give it to me, then why the hell are you wasting my time?"
"You can. Only you."
"Ha ha haa. Then you have no work here", I said. He smiled.
"If you were not being skeptical about what you just said, I might have left."
"And why is that?"
"Because you just answered, at least partly, your own question."
"And how's that?"
"No one has any work here. No one has any role to play in giving you an identity. No one else but you."
"Ha ha again. If no one knows me appreciates me likes me, then I am a no one, then I have no identity."
"You seem to be saying that what others think of you defines you."
"Yeah. So what?"
"Is it possible that others think something of you and you are actually something else?"
"You mean, for example, I am trying to be good and others think that I am bad? Or vice versa?"
"Exactly."
"Yeah I think it's possible."
"So if others are allowed to build your identity, they might get it wrong?"
"Possibly."
"Because they are not the best judge of you?"
"Correct."
"Who is the best judge of you?"
"Well, me."
(to be continued...)

Turbulence

I find a new approach. It appeals to me. I try to adopt it. Usually I succeed.
But I forget, in this process of learning, whatever I held in the past. I let it go- it's my nature. I don't think it should be this way. I should find out the best of what I know and understand, and try to retain it.
Learn my lessons.
But letting go is not all useless. I do not know why. It possibly prevents me from being proud.

Being Right

Why should I be happy?
I have no answer to the question. It is something that I want, desire but do not know why. It is an end, in this sense, in itself. I have a conception of happiness- I can mostly tell when I am happy and when I am not. But I cannot describe the state of happiness- I cannot explain what I mean by being happy. There are things, events that make me happy. I cannot tell why something makes me happy and something else does not.

Why should I be right?
Because I just want to be right. Is it an end? I cannot be sure. It could lead to satisfaction, or happiness, or freedom from pain.
But it should be an end, in itself. I do have a certain conception of right- I just know when I am doing right and when I am not; well I know it most of the times. I cannot always come up with a reason as to why what I consider right I consider right. Just like happiness.