Print Friendly and PDF

Thursday, November 5, 2015

Self-realization is not the desire after self-realization

Why shall we necessarily have what we want?

Is it not because we think we have the right for it?

In political philosophy they have made much out of claiming that the right of ownership is a "natural" right, whereby you can justify waste and exploitation.

There are pieces of Rold Forest which are "private" where other people not are allowed entrance.

Other "rich" people can buy a star or a planet if rich enough (I wonder -  if there are people living there - they would agree with that).

I just wait to see that the air I breath, that a bird´s song in the morning, and my mommy´s love, now have become the right of ownership by some "rich" guy, which I therefore not are allowed entrance to anymore.

A bit in the same way they have claimed, that conclict is something "natural", whereby you can justify violence and war.

And the ideology of needs is claiming the same: the desire after satisfying your needs, not only your basic needs, but also esteem-needs and self-actualizing needs, is something entirely "natural" and a human right.

The problem is that there is a difference between actually being a self-realized person and the desire after being such a person.

To reduce the whole thing to needs is a distortion of what self-realization is all about.

1 comment:

  1. I read that self-realization is a state of wholeness that manifests through the awakening of the three levels of our existence, personal, individual and universal. To arrive at completion we must realize our true self on those three levels. If one is missing, as usually happens, the others remain incomplete or even fall apart.
    Self-realization begins from the universal and descends into the personal, but our evolution actually ascends from the personal to the universal, while individual self-realization is bridging the two in both directions.
    Man, I feel like I'm in college. Sue