Social Q

American Dream dilemma?

I have mixed feelings about this. People, for the most part, are just trying to survive (I guess you can tell which class I come from). However, there is an American dream and it is worth going after. If it becomes the sole motivator of one's life than all I can say is--how sad! Life is far to important to let other people decide one's life for her or him.

For those who possess intense "life sensitivity," life is always an adventure, and for a special few, this sensitivity becomes a trans formative experience, a force for the "good." Unfortunately, however, a life of transformation is only experienced by a few. The rest of us (speaking for myself at least) spend our lives existing half in the "common universe" and half outside that same universe, --but (and this is a "big but"), at least I know the difference.

Would this be a good system for the world?

A long time ago some people believed that it was possible to achieve a society based on the following premise: From each according to ability, to each according to needs. Really, though, we cannot expect Santa to deliver what is not in his bag of goodies; that said, I am 100% behind the idea that a more "just society," a society with a more equitable distribution of wealth, is possible. However, without the political will success here is remote if not impossible. Why is there no political will? --Because we are talking about an idea that incites revolution. So, maybe we should put on our Christmas wish list, way at the top, a wish for more equitable distribution of compassion to all, and to all, happy holidays.

What determines a society?

According to Marx, the economic determinate is the meaning behind society, people have to eat (barter, profit, etc. keep people alive and bring them together). Every society deals with the negotiated relationship that defines the "collective" and the "individual." How this relationship is dealt with flushes out the particulars of society,-- democracy, fascism, communism, dictatorship, etc.

The line between individual and collective requirements of society is constantly shifting. A major problem confronting every society is to prevent unused human energy and imagination from being employed against it. The representatives of every society inevitably seek to strike some kind of balance between the freedom permitted to the individual and the requirements of society; the more complex the society the more serious is this control problem. In the beginning of the collectivity considerable scope is usually permitted the individual, but when a collective is in danger of falling apart maintaining control becomes a top priority. In the last attempt to retain control authorities may place a virtual straitjacket of restrictions on the membership. When social control fails, so does society.

What was life like of a soldier in the concentration camp?

Based on the book "Man's Search for Meaning" (Frankl) who survived the camps, the worst camp jobs were carried out by those prisoners who got extra food, cigarettes, and other privileges. That situation allowed some of the soldiers to look away (separate themselves from the horrors). There were sadistic soldiers, however, who took pleasure in inflicting pain and death upon the prisoners. It was to Frankl's credit (a psychiatrist before becoming a victim) to be able to see humanity in the same people who contributed to the most despicable behavior imaginable.

Should Hiroshima have gotten bombed? Please don't troll off this question, please don't!?

No. There was a movement started by the scientific community to not drop the bomb. A number of the "maker's of the bomb" would have signed on to that option if it were not for the Government's Herculean effort to keep those ideas and the petition away from Los Alamos. Instead of dropping the bomb on city(s), the petition called for a demonstration of the bomb on an uninhabited island so the Japanese could choose to surrender. That was the moral option to this very difficult decision, an option that never saw the light of day. Hypothetically, if no surrender came after the bomb was demonstrated then I still don't believe the bomb should have been dropped but I probably would have agreed to it knowing full well that I would never be able to live with that decision for the rest of my life--war is hell.