Morality What Man Would Be

Morality

What man would be so foolish as to tire himself out cultivating a field that will be plundered by the first comer, be it man or beast, who takes a fancy to the crop?" Many famous scholars, like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, have advocated the importance of individuals interests, even while set in the context of a society. Despite the belief of many within Philosophy, there is a strong case for believing the interests of the individual supersede those of a common people or group. One may adapt in order to still fulfill one's individual interests within the limits of society, as was the case in Rousseau's "social contract;" however, continually serving the interests of others above oneself results in a life of servitude -- leaving a life of hard labor with no personal gains to show for it.

Scholars and Philosophers throughout history have tried to convince the individual that his or her rights and interests were not as important as the fulfillment of the group's. This philosophy stems back from ancient Eastern and Classic beliefs about the importance of kindness and piety. The highest figure in Christianity reportedly gave his life for the greater common good. Great men such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. have all shown the importance of this ideology in more recent society.

Additionally, tribal societies rely on help from each other to survive. Many in our society strive to great lengths to give to others, many times to their own disadvantage.

However, it is the individual interests which are the more important when compared to the needs of the greater good. In the world we live in, without special concern for one's own interests, failure is inevitable. If one were to constantly share one's assets with others in the capitalist economy of today, that individual would essentially be parting with his or her own invaluable resources, to their own detriment. Experiments in Communist and Socialist governments have shown how devastating this view on life and property can be on each specific individual. Nations like Communist Russia and the still practicing Chinese for of Communism show that even when this ideology is perpetuated for the masses in terms of real economic implementation, many individuals within the regime fall into desperate conditions. Without any sort of financial stability, one may never be able to fully support his or her family.

So what is one to do when the society one lives requires a certain level of devotion and acceptance of working for the common good? Jean-Jacques Rousseau spoke of the idea of a "social contract" between an individual and his or her government, stating that as long as the government is uphold it's side of the contractual agreement, i.e. laws ensuring the benefit of the individual, the individual should give up certain things in order to hold up their end of the contract, i.e. obeying those laws. However, based on the judgment of the individual, if he or she believes that they are in fact loosing out on their deal, and therefore are putting to much out for the common good at their own detriment, that individual has the right to break the contract. This ideology is an evolution of individual rights above the common good, but it adapts in order to allow some sort of cooperation between individuals within the same society.