Tolstoy, and some thoughts on self-renunciation

[Mark_W]

Hi, here's some jumbled thoughts, some of it paraphrased from the writings of Tolstoy. I'd love to get any feedback, if anyone wishes to comment.

Before we act we must establish a relationship with world, and have a theory for life, some reason for doing the things that we do. Upon entering rational life, nobody can escape this establishing of some sort of relationship to everything and everyone around him or her. Most people, both “religious” and “scientific”, organize their lives around a philosophy that we have a right to our lives and should therefore live for our happiness and the happiness of those close to us (friends and family) and, if possible, for the happiness of everyone else too. However, when we try to live for the happiness of ourselves and of those close to us, we find (if we don’t ignore the fact) that the worldly advantages we get can only be obtained by taking away from others. Also we realize that the more worldly advantages we acquire, the less they satisfy us and the more we desire for new ones. And the longer someone lives the more inevitable becomes the approach of death, destroying all possibility of worldly advantages. So this is an irrational way to live. The only way to true happiness and a rational life is through a process of self-renunciation, where you do not live for worldly advantages but for the good of everyone and devote your life to this cause. This is living solely to serve your conscience, as you know through experience and reason that living any other way will ruin true happiness, since you must live conscientiously for your heart to be at rest.

[Furrowed Brow]

Hi Mark_W

However, when we try to live for the happiness of ourselves and of those close to us, we find (if we don’t ignore the fact) that the worldly advantages we get can only be obtained by taking away from others.

Sounds like some Marxism or Jean Jaques Rousseau buried in that sentence. Property is theft, that kind of thing. I think that kind of rational is seductive but empty.

That whole way of looking at things presumes we all seek the same advantages, and that there is a finite supply of things that count as advantageous. So we are in competition to keep the advantage for ourselves. Sometimes this might be true. But it is not a universal. I guess we all want to be warm, fed and healthy; but that does not mean that if I attain these things it is at your detriment.

If I work for you, are you exploiting my labour, or are you taking away the headache of me finding a market for my labour?

[Mark_W]

Hi, thanks for the response. When you ask, "If I work for you, are you exploiting my labour, or are you taking away the headache of me finding a market for my labour?"
It would depend on my motivation as to whether I am exploiting you or not. Hopefully I wouldn't
The deeper question here though is, why is it a headache to find a market for your labor? There is injustice at the end of this question as to why you cannot employ yourself, and this is because the land has been appropriated and now you are forced to pay a person for the privilege of them letting you live. (since we need land just as much as we need air).

[Furrowed Brow]

Hi, thanks for the response. When you ask, "If I work for you, are you exploiting my labour, or are you taking away the headache of me finding a market for my labour?"
It would depend on my motivation as to whether I am exploiting you or not. Hopefully I wouldn't
The deeper question here though is, why is it a headache to find a market for your labor? There is injustice at the end of this question as to why you cannot employ yourself, and this is because the land has been appropriated and now you are forced to pay a person for the privilege of them letting you live. (since we need land just as much as we need air).

That definitely sounds like Jean Jacques Rousseau. I might go dig out a quote.

But maybe I'm just inherently lazy, or psychologically better equipped to be a follower rather than a leader, or perhaps I hate doing accounts, or asking people to pay the bills, or maybe you're more prepared to take the risk of mortgaging your house to finance the company than I am. Maybe I just feel safer letting someone else take the risk.

[Furrowed Brow]

I think JJR said some relevant stuff. Here's a point he makes that seems to echo your sentiment.

The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying 'this is mine', and found people simple enough to beleive him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: 'Beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody'

[Mark_W]

yes, I like that quote, thanks. If you can explain to me how this type of thinking is "seductive but empty", I would be grateful.

[Furrowed Brow]

Seductive - it appeals to a sense of inequality and that something can and should be done about it. If someone is poor, that is because someone has got rich. This must be stopped! Take to the street. Bring on the revolution and so on!

Empty - the form of accountancy it relies on cannot be falsified, mostly because (like Marxism) it will not let itself be falsified. If I work for you because you are a good leader, and I appreciate and respond to you managent skills, and would prefer to work in an environment which you manage rather than work for myself - then I am getting something out of that relationship. Some economic relationships can be symbiotic.

[Mark_W]

If seeking justice is "seductive" then yes it is "seductive", but equality is something different. I am saying that injustice is what needs to be corrected, not inequality per-se.

Yes, some economic relationships can be symbiotic, but in today's world this is the exception rather than the rule. First you have to directly know the person you are working for before you can claim symbiosis, and very few people do.

[Furrowed Brow]

If seeking justice is "seductive" then yes it is "seductive", but equality is something different. I am saying that injustice is what needs to be corrected, not inequality per-se.

Yes, some economic relationships can be symbiotic, but in today's world this is the exception rather than the rule. First you have to directly know the person you are working for before you can claim symbiosis, and very few people do.

Here's one. Afgan Poppy farmers. Who is being exploited?