In life, three things are true; first, that all of us will die; until we do, we will spend our days distracting ourselves from the first truth; there is no such thing as a truly altruistic deed.
The first truth needs no explanation. The second truth though, is often challenged, but almost always ends in a concession. The most compelling argument I've heard so far is that some things we do are typified by a dwelling on death. While this argument is provocative, it does not adequately negate my postulate. If anything, it might necessitate a rewording of the second truth. Perhaps something like "all of life's actions are inspired by and an escape from death." But even then, it is simpler to say that we spend our time distracting ourselves from our mortality. Let's consider the argument though: that some acts aren't a form of escapism, but rather, investigations into death. If we assume this to be true, we might cite something such as religion as exhibiting a preoccupation with that eternal slumber, or humanity's obsession with risky behaviors that flirt with death; sky-diving; rock-climbing; speeding; drug abuse; autoerotic asphyxiation. Still though, I think a more careful examination reveals that these are not examples of chasing our demise.
In the case of thrill seeking, the seeker seeks an exhilaration - a heightened sense of awareness, the affirmation of life - not death. It is the illusion of freedom from death's embrace; a momentary feeling of invulnerability; a weak attempt at exercising power over that which we do not control. For someone to truly seek fatality, all they would need to do would be to lie inside a wooden box in a darkened, soundless room. Death is not exciting, it is mundane and lifeless, still. Just look at a corpse.
The case of religion is a more interesting one. Here, the fascination with expiration causes a shift in focus and the emergence of the concept of afterlife. There is an emphasis on life and living as a means to ensure safe passage at the time of your death. Death becomes the fulcrum point, the moment at which judgement is passed; the moment you stand in line for entry to the club and hope you're dressed well enough, or that the girl you're with is pretty enough to get you inside. The point being, that for religion, death is not the end. One of the tenants of religion is founded on escapism - the idea that through faith and good conduct you can survive expiry, that you can get into that elite club and fucking dance!
So in both cases - religion and dangerous behaviors - it is not the pursuit of death that motivates us, it is the want of power over it. We wish to defeat it, to enslave it, to incapacitate it and run from it so it cannot touch us. On a purely instinctual level we recoil from it, by definition: to survive is to thwart it. It is on a cognitive level that we construct abstractions to absolve ourselves of it. We create, we do, we choose to be. Creation and being are the anthesis of death - its literal and symbolic opposite. We disobey death in all we do. We run from it and busy ourselves with tasks to help us forget our dying; driving a bit slower down that dead end street, looking at the pretty houses and the yellow sunset painting everything in a fast fading gold that cannot stay.
Even writing this is a form of distraction. The belief that maybe I'll realize something about our situation that I hadn't before; the idea that writing something down and making it digital will lend me a kind of immortality; the belief that interrogating death might make it less scary - the shining of a light on the monster in the closet.
I'll tell you what isn't, though. It's not an altruistic deed.
There is no such thing.
Even something as seemingly selfless and kind as adopting a child, isn't. The person does it because it makes them feel good. They're doing something they feel is valuable and meaningful. It makes them feel they've saved something innocent and precious and pure. And this is true - they have. I would never denounce a beneficent deed, or suggest something as beautiful as adoption is anything less. I wish there were more people with enough empathy and love for others to forego replicating their own DNA for another person. I encourage people to be benevolent and help people in need, to be kind, to love and bring comfort and happiness to the ones the world has forgotten; give that homeless man a dollar, give him $5, volunteer, show someone something, explain it to them, share. All of these are necessary - imperative - for human growth and understanding, for the eradication of fear and ignorance, the preservation of compassion. However lofty, I do not confuse this with altruism. It isn't.
We're all selfish, acting out of self-interest and self-preservation, and at our best, we're able to produce an outcome that can be seen as symbiotic.
But, in spite of this, be caring. Do it selfishly; for the collective good of humanity; for posterity.
No comments:
Post a Comment