The pressure of our obedience to a single culture is not something new. These pressures are actually very similar to those experienced by residents living in the ideological society of Czechoslovakia. Playwright Vaclav Havel describes this phenomenon one by one.
Javier said that in a society where ideological leadership, you must accept one thing, that is, you must act according to the values and settings of society. If you refuse to align with society, you will get into trouble. You will be isolated and alienated, you will be criticized as an idealist , or be considered as an unsociable person and be despised. You know what you should do and you do it, but the point is to "let people know" you are doing it.
Javier said you must be consistent with others in order to live. You must be like others, admitting that you must do this in order to live a life. If you cannot act as you expect, others will think that you are abnormal, think that you are arrogant by nature, think that you can surpass the law, or think that you can live alone.
The ideologically responsible society makes you hallucinate others, take as if it were as true, and take the stories you heard for granted. They repeatedly preached this story over the years, and in the end everyone believed and told the same story.
Javier said that in fact, this story is not taken for granted; there is a gap between the goal of this story and the goal of life. The development of life is diverse and diverse. Life is to realize its own freedom, while the system requires consistency, unity and discipline.
Javier said that the system "is a superficial world, but attempts to act as a reality." This apparent world operates by autonomous driving, which penetrates and shapes the entire society. The world of appearance is partly stable, but some are also partly unstable because it is built on appearance. Living in the superficial world, you don’t need to believe it, but you have to pretend to be consistent with it.
Sometimes, the whole thing seems to be nothing bad, you may shrugg and say, "What's wrong with being consistent with the appearance world?" Javier said, so you accept the rules of the game and become a player in the game, and the game is established.
However, the pattern consistent with the manifest world also allows you to circumvent your true self. You connect with the world through a rigid ideology, which creates illusions that make people mistakenly believe that the essence of things is a natural extension of human and the order of the universe.
Javier said that once you accept life in the superficial world, you start to "live in lies." This will ultimately create a huge crisis of human identity: in order to survive in the system, you can do anything.
The cost of getting out of the superficial world is expensive because the impact of your behavior far exceeds the behavior itself. When you break the rules of the superficial world, you show that people can live in reality without having to live in lies. Therefore, any behavior that is inconsistent with society must be eliminated.
The researchers concluded that any discussion of the role of the market in higher education "must be expressed in the language of the market, that is, currency must be mentioned in the language."
For example: "A smart sailor can adjust the sails and use the wind to go where he wants to go... and this is the possibility and challenges we must grasp now: adjust the sails, ride the wind of the market, improve our work performance and... improve our lives." Stills from the movie "The Great Gatsby".
Don't forget, economic stories say that people are rational and people are willing to take action to maximize their best interests. As a rational individual, you will take actions that can achieve your goals and require the least resources.
It is obviously more costly to stick to belief than to say nothing or do nothing (you may also sink into the pool without trace). In economic stories, sticking to belief is never in the best interest.
On the contrary, the best interest is to be willing to bow your head, don’t stick to your own ideas too much, and don’t destroy the status quo.
However, sticking to principles at critical moments in life is the most in line with human nature, and it is also something that human nature drives us to do at all times. Therefore, although calculation and selection of the lowest cost is completely reasonable and logical in terms of economic value and setting, being rational is not the whole of life.
Oscar Wilde said: "The fatal mistakes in life do not come from human irrationality; on the contrary, unreasonable moments are likely to be the best moments in life. Fatal mistakes often come from human logic. There is a big difference between the two."
In other words, no matter how you live, life has to pay a price. Living outside of economic stories is expensive, but living in economic stories and single cultures, we still have to pay another form of cost.
When the essence we once cherished - such as truth, goodness, beauty, justice - becomes a tool to achieve economic goals and accept a single culture's life, we are deprived of higher levels of human needs.
When higher-level human needs cannot be met, we will produce what psychologist Abraham Maslow calls transcendental pathology: "The pathology of the soul."
Choice is not easy. How should we live? Should we follow a single culture, be consistent with economic stories, or do we self-exile from the economic stories that define most of our cultural content?
Another way to ask: If life comes at a price no matter what, then why don’t you do what you like, tell your own stories, and implement the deepest value in your heart?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-