more deadly sins announced!
Thanks to tall skinny kiwi for the link to the new deadly sins.
Apathy, apparently is the top choice (after, of course, the existing and ongoing seven deadly, and already established sins.
So part of me wonders whether or not anyone's really apathetic or whether we're all suffering from a kind of information - and - therefore - engagement overload?
At some point everybody goes, "so what?" says Joan Bakewell, but don't we just go "so what?" when our resources of caring are just too taxed?
LIke, for instance, I'm horrified about the Chechen tragedy and about how much m ore I need to recycle -- at least on a theoretical level -- but I'm really BUSY caring about some other travesties in my more immediate (emotional or geographic) proximity.
And it seems like on some level that apathy as a cultural indicator (/sin) is an effect of globalism and globalvillaging, wifi, google, & cell phones.
It's increasingly easy to be connected to tragedy that's distant from us or not immediate important to us.
I know I'm not exactly getting this right though, because on the other hand -- I know that some of my apathy is more rooted in selfishness than immediacy. Or is my perceived immediacy just an effect of how selfish or unselfishly I'm living.
This seems like an increasingly confusing post, but it seems linked to so many other questions i've been obsessed with recently...
insight? anyone?
Apathy, apparently is the top choice (after, of course, the existing and ongoing seven deadly, and already established sins.
So part of me wonders whether or not anyone's really apathetic or whether we're all suffering from a kind of information - and - therefore - engagement overload?
At some point everybody goes, "so what?" says Joan Bakewell, but don't we just go "so what?" when our resources of caring are just too taxed?
LIke, for instance, I'm horrified about the Chechen tragedy and about how much m ore I need to recycle -- at least on a theoretical level -- but I'm really BUSY caring about some other travesties in my more immediate (emotional or geographic) proximity.
And it seems like on some level that apathy as a cultural indicator (/sin) is an effect of globalism and globalvillaging, wifi, google, & cell phones.
It's increasingly easy to be connected to tragedy that's distant from us or not immediate important to us.
I know I'm not exactly getting this right though, because on the other hand -- I know that some of my apathy is more rooted in selfishness than immediacy. Or is my perceived immediacy just an effect of how selfish or unselfishly I'm living.
This seems like an increasingly confusing post, but it seems linked to so many other questions i've been obsessed with recently...
insight? anyone?
posted by Redbaerd at 4:46 PM
6 Comments:
Oftentimes people who lean to the liberal side of politics will say that voicing one's concerns about the 'problems of others' is proof that they are not apathetic. They say that conservatives 'lack of vocal concern' is a sign that they tend to be apathetic. I see a couple problems with these views. First, liberals actions often show that they are only concerned with the appearance of caring, rather than the action. Second, liberals who want to take action to help the people they claim to care about usually try to force everyone else to finance the actions that they think are necessary. Lastly, when the conservatives take their action to help, they are far less likely to seek media coverage of their deeds, and the media is far less likely to tell about what they did anyway.
Liberals only care about being SEEN as caring, compassionate, and unapathetic. They don't usually care about ACTUALLY BEING caring and compassionate.
Oftentimes people who lean to the liberal side of politics will say that voicing one's concerns about the 'problems of others' is proof that they are not apathetic. They say that conservatives 'lack of vocal concern' is a sign that they tend to be apathetic. I see a couple problems with these views. First, liberals actions often show that they are only concerned with the appearance of caring, rather than the action. Second, liberals who want to take action to help the people they claim to care about usually try to force everyone else to finance the actions that they think are necessary. Lastly, when the conservatives take their action to help, they are far less likely to seek media coverage of their deeds, and the media is far less likely to tell about what they did anyway.
Liberals only care about being SEEN as caring, compassionate, and unapathetic. They don't usually care about ACTUALLY BEING caring and compassionate.
Oftentimes people who lean to the liberal side of politics will say that voicing one's concerns about the 'problems of others' is proof that they are not apathetic. They say that conservatives 'lack of vocal concern' is a sign that they tend to be apathetic. I see a couple problems with these views. First, liberals actions often show that they are only concerned with the appearance of caring, rather than the action. Second, liberals who want to take action to help the people they claim to care about usually try to force everyone else to finance the actions that they think are necessary. Lastly, when the conservatives take their action to help, they are far less likely to seek media coverage of their deeds, and the media is far less likely to tell about what they did anyway.
Liberals only care about being SEEN as caring, compassionate, and unapathetic. They don't usually care about ACTUALLY BEING caring and compassionate.
Hey Anonymous...
Do you have a name? I know bloggers created absurd numbers of hoops for folks to jump through just to have a name, but you can still leave an in-text tag.
I think if you re-read my post, you'll see that I'm at least one exception to the liberals you're talking about. I don't voice my concern about things to seem like I care. I voice my despair that I don't have the capacity to care about enough...
and i think its a problem that people who think about politics from the right and the left struggle with....
sounds like you have a different axe to grind than the one I'm referring to....
First of all, I am so sorry that my little response was placed three times.
Secondly, I hope your suggestion that I leave some sort of identifier isn't meant to imply that my opinion is less valid or my thought process less logical because I didn't. If someone uses some sort of identification it doesn't make theirs more valid or logical.
Thirdly, I wouldn't waste my time reading your blog if your your ideas weren't so refreshing, and your writing wasn't so different, interesting, and technically an example for us all.
That being said, I feel like that "axe to grind" comment may have been more 'ad hominem' than I've usually seen from Redbaerd. But I quess that could be just a different perspective on the biblical idea of "steel sharpening steel," considering you as someone with quite a 'sharp' mind and myself as someone who constantly feels that my blade may be a tad dull and have a few big dings in it from accidentally missing the log and banging into a large stone.
Maybe I should have written it this way: Redbaerd presents the idea that he has simply met his capacity to care about the problems of the world. Unable to care more, he despairs because he wishes he had a greater capacity for caring. It seems that this last addition, if thought of with the typical mind process of a liberal, could be added as simply another sign that he is a more compassionate person because he cares so much that he is incapable of more caring.
If one reaches their true capacity of caring, how is it possible to care that you are capable of no more caring? Maybe the 'care tank' has a little "reserve" section, that is only to be used in situations where the main 'care tank' has been drained. In that case if one's tank runs dry, one becomes aware of that situation when the care motor starts to cough. Desiring not to run out of care at the side of the road, stranded in a desert of spent emotions, one reaches down, flips the switch, and 'cares just a little more'. And there is the evidence that that person has a greater capacity for compassion. When all the other people ran out of care, they just quit, but those with the reserves used them to show they had that little extra.
I've read some of your other posts, and I don't question your honesty or compassion at all. I think they're quite genuine. I just think that the idea of caring that you can't care any more is just some simple word play that one might use because they maintain a certain level of pride about their personal lack of apathy about the world's problems. And that's what I disagree with. At that point, it seems to me that the compassion is less real, and more manufactured for appearances.
That my friend, is what liberals do. Actions for appearance's sake.
thanks -- anonymous -- for shedding light on your comments,
and on my post.
the name suggestion wasn't at all about legitimacy or validity. it was (is?) all about the notion that discourse always comes from a certain place and seems to work most effectively when its contextualized within relationship.
but i'm okay with anonymity on the web -- particularly as long as i'm convinced that someone wants to have dialogue and friendship.
and that's certainly the spirit i read between your lines...
nice metaphors with the axe and the steel the rocks and the dings, too. I didn't mean it as an ad hominem. I certainly grind more than my fair share of axes over here -- I just meant that I thought we were talking about two different issues.
But i think I hear where you're coming from now...
i'm not sure that i agree with where you end up, but it seems like a fair path that got you there...and a path that's relevant to the issues that i'm describing.
Thanks for clarifying...reading...and dialoguing....
Post a Comment
<< Home