The Generational Ethics of Extreme Individualism
The Generational Ethics of Extreme Individualism
Extreme forms if individualism, including but not limited to the types of individualisms or egoisms endorsed by randian, libertarian and conservative philosophies, and maybe even looking back as far back as hobbesian epistemology, cannot trully account for an ethics of caring for the next generation.Â
at the very least, we can modify hobbes, by stating that the 'next generation' is merely one manifestation of the leviathan. but how can we do it for philosophies which are more purely individualist? we can pinpoint exactly the type of ideologies using these two variables: one, those which subscribe to a framework of statelessness by using the "'the Smaller the state, the Better" notion; or by its stronger form, that of "ergo no state at all". and two, those that create a psychology of an individualism that acts and/or exists as a monolithic whole, rather than a fragment of competing convÄ«cÄ« striving to maintain convincendus; this is the definitude of contingncy; just as soon as the 'I' in descartes' "i think therefore i am" is simplified with the phrase, "thought thus existence," a question appears which, even in being a question, splits the self into two. with every new question, comes another split. these metaphorical splits, create a series of models, or lenses, that we have to understand the world. though sometimes they may be under competition, they may also be formed though some sort of systematic congruence; regardless, the ends are never sewn shut.Â
I could imagine how a follower of rand, would respond to this by saying that there is no problem with giving yourself to the other as long as it makes the individual happy. but we need to be specific here, as i do not speak about an immediate other; i am speaking about creating a connection with distant descendants that could even, possibly, care less about your existence. what kind of happiness can account for such distance if the love composed is primarily of the self concieved in a context where one does not exist (the future)? as an anecdote, the difficulty of this can be easily noticed when attempting to make a video will.Â
the "individualism" model however, does want to capture something. but the problem with it is that it seems to be over thought, and given these ideological rights and political motivations that conform quite well with the status quo. the fact of the matter is that bodies and their very near worlds of understanding do constitute something worth noticing as an ego, at least at some base. but just as we add ideological complications to concepts like individualism, we add ideological complications to these very immediate surrondings as well. if "individualism" puts "collectivism" first, it must give a pretty convincing story as to why it is performing the action for itself. though in most cases it is possible to at least imagine that the task was done for the self, a justification for an ethic which is both long term and generational seems to be lacking.Â
