Wednesday, 15 October 2008

  • Intellectualism and Competition

    It is in the fine, and crisply short days of fall that the fancy of the young and old alike turn back from the woes of agricultural nutriment to the endeavours of the intellectual mind. With this effort comes a special interest in performing upon a cognitive level that many of the populace have no chance to indulge in throughout the rest of the year. The vast majority of humanity recognizes, if at least on a purely subconscious level, the innate benefits of intellectual improvement. All know that it was thence that came the dominance of humanity over the lower and baser creatures of the earth. Without such fine interest, one and all accept on some fundamental level that mankind should be no better than the most wild and ferocious of beasts, unable to harness agressivity and passion into anything more productive or far-reaching than the immediate interests relating to momentary concerns.

    Thus it is that mankind has fostered an interest in the higher arts. While an expensive leisure for some, for others it has became a necessity for basic survival. In these societies, the foundation of group survival has come to centre itself around the intended acquisition of knowledge in order to use the skills learned through that acquisition to fabricate the more basic creations of other societies. And, while this no doubt encourages the furtherance of that most essential quality of humanity, it also invites weaknesses that are unavoidable when one looks askance upon the physical foundation of human labour that has undeniably created the safe haven intellectualism requires in order to flourish.

    And so, throughout history, the societies of mankind have tried, with varying degrees of success, to carefully balance the required ratios of physicality and intellectuality, so that not only can they maintain their dominance among and over the denizens of the planet, but the citizens as well. For man has so long sat on his crimson throne, that he can barely remember the time in which he was threatened by more than his brother and his neighbour. So satisfactory has been the overridingly positive effects of intellectual efforts that all competition among the lower species has ceased even to irk the disposition of the mighty race of men. Now, among threats, man stands alone. He is his own fear in the night in the age of men. Thus, his considerable prowess has for several millennia been required for no other effort than that in which man seeks the destruction of himself. For it is our most fundamental nature to seek the destruction of our brother over that of ourselves, and our cousin over that of ourselves and our brother, and our neighbour over that of our cousin, brother, and ourselves. Such is a tribal relationship in which distance and separation act as barriers to all but the most obligingly obvious of commonalities.

    In such a tribal instinct lies both the key to man’s success and failure. Continued cooperation through the communicatory marvel of language has allowed uniform action and thought so required for general mastery. And yet, tribal urges separate as well as bind us. When set upon by a rival tribe, the spirit of competition drives most highly the destructive urges than any other. While some laud it as the inspiration for greatness, it would seem that more often it acts only in a baleful manner and that through kindred collaboration can intertribal greatness be achieved. Many instinctively sense the end of times as the unavoidable result of such continued enmity in tribal relations, as fostered by emulous spirit.

    Thus once again is the importance of intellectual meanderings foisted upon a percipient audience. While a careful balance of both action and thought are required for enduring success, and an outfall of thought results in weak action, strong action sees thought weakened. Such becomes man’s burden in the new order of things – the careful tempering of his own actions in favour of his thoughts.

     

Comments (12)

  • curtainsopen

    i think the internet does a good job of expanding our tribes.  in Rotary they say if all kids went on a youth exchange (living with another family abroad for 10 months) there'd be no wars.  I think it goes hand in hand with the idea of tribal loyalties.  after participating in the program their tribe is expanded and no longer limited to their birth country but includes, at the very least, the country that hosted them.  likewise the internet, through social sites like this, expand our notions of friends and loyalties and tribes which in turn expands peaceful regions.


    great post. ill try not to be too active when i need to cram for a test ;)

  • benjimau5

    Ahhh NikBv, I can see why Paige loves you.

    I love you too.

    I do not know that little shit commenting above me.

    @curtainsopen - Jonas! Time for a brown sugar latte and Jimmy Dean sausage biscuit! Happy! SO HAPPY!!!!

  • apyus
    does this mean you agree?
  • wave_function

    Maybe it's built into humans to be tribal/collectivist.  A few can be individuals, maybe, but most can only hope to be tolerant of other 'tribes.'

  • sonicmega

    So tell me this... if we as humans
    strive to subsist and survive off of intellectual concepts, why do most
    of us prefer an episode of Jackass over a presidential debate?

  • Dare2BDiferentt

    Well,


    COOL!


    Wait.  That was bad.

  • aznhellaangel

    You sound like an intellectual elitist. 

  • ClockworkBunny

    I've never been told before by Uncle Sam to read a blog. Ha. That's a good plug, hope it draws a lot of traffic.

  • heidenkind

    Don't you think the quality of thought and the influence of it on one's actions counts for more than the balance of the latter to the former? 

  • tuOEnODdO

    Here, your are trying very hard not to be understood. Are you familiar with the pejorative, "grandiloquence". I'm sure you are, as well as I'm sure that you had taken great strides to refrain the viewer/commenter from imputing such attribute for an affix to your post/blog.


    Each word must necessarily infuse itself into the next so that what results is a coherent enlarging upon the builiding blocks of meaning. If writing does not follow in this manner, interpretation cannot correspond efficiently with action: the flickery rumors of battle have started using more sophisticated implements than those of your pen; you would do better by starting a war.

  • NikBv

    @tuOEnODdO - I'm sure there's some point you're making here, but darnit if it isn't too difficult for me to decipher. Perhaps I am simply too umbrageous, but I did make out from the caliginous and slight gist I did pick out just the slightest wisp of negativity. 

  • tuOEnODdO

    @NikBv - I do deserve that,--actually I deserve much worse,--I'm so sorry that I'm a prick. (Sigh) Not to justify what I wrote to you, or cleverly provide some excuse for me behaviour, but I had a terribly bad day,yesterday, and I took it out on you--I don't know why it was you that I did--but I did, and it was very wrong of me to do that.


    Quite frankly, your an highly-intelligent person that has written something that approaches, if not exceeds, the bounds of all my reference; for this, in part, provides some reason as to my....pretentious pen. Subsequently, I've had trouble getting along with people as intelligent, or more intelligent than me--I'm a 36 year old man, you would think that I would have gotten over this by now, that is, I should have gotten over my teenage identity crisis inside 20 years ago.


    At any rate, nikbv, I hope the rest of your day, today, is much better than the last,


    Take care.

  • Choose Identity

  • Give eProps (?)

  • New! You can now edit your comments for 15 minutes after submitting.

About this Entry

Who recommended?