"I heard exactly the same thing, a long time ago to be sure, from a doctor," the elder remarked. "He was then an old man, and unquestionably intelligent. He just as frankly as you, humorously, but with a sorrowful humor. 'I love mankind,' he said, 'but I am amazed at myself: the more I love mankind in general, the less I love people in particular, that is, individually, as separate persons. In my dreams,' he said, 'I often went so far as to think passionately of serving mankind, and, it may be, would really have gone to the cross for people if it were somehow suddenly necessary, and yet I am incapable of living the same room with anyone even for two days, this I know from experience. As soon as someone is there, close to me, his personality oppresses my self-esteem and restricts my freedom. In twenty-four hours I can begin to hate even the best of men: one because he takes too long eating his dinner, another because he has a cold and keeps blowing his nose. I become the enemy of people the moment they touch me,' he said. 'On the other hand, it has always happened that the more I hate people individually, the more ardent becomes my love for humanity as a whole.'"
Dang. It's lengthy and it's paradoxical. How can one love mankind, yet not stand a single player for mankind? What type of traits does this person posses, how insightful are they? From several views, you may induce, for example, that this doctor likes sociology, but isn't social. He wants to help people, thus being a doctor, but he doesn't want to integrate himself with them, with friendship-like affiliation. He is proud person, he likes what he's made of himself, and when someone else is near he makes sure to convince himself that he's the better person. He has problems, but he doesn't want to have others create more problems for him. He gives examples of problems, slow-eater and nose-blower, but these examples seem like petty annoyances. Sure, some people eat slower than the 'status quo' and people occasionally get the common cold, but there's a difference between a petty annoyance and an inconvenience. It seems that the doctor, as intellectual, analytical, and experienced he is, is exposing his sensitivity and his long-term stress buildup through blunt conveyance, but his given everyday examples are far too petty. Henceforth on top of all of this, this doc strengthens his love for mankind. How can you strengthen this type of love when one is so proud, so sensitive, so individualized, and so secluded from a successful social interaction come to such an endgame? I'll go out on a limb and say that his pride is his downfall. Going back, if this doc believes that a single's opinion will oppress him and his freedom then I'll accept this as a valid argument if and only if some other non-petty example escapes his conscience and provides more positive insight.
No comments:
Post a Comment