Human Selfishness Research Articles

The Ineffable Name of God: Man: Poems (review)

The Ineffable Name of God: Man: Poems, by Abraham Joshua Heschel, translated from the Yiddish by Morton M. Leifman, introduction by Edward K. Kaplan. New York and London: Continuum: 2004. his autobiographical novel Ven Yash iz geforn (1938), Jacob Glatstein, a renowned Yididish poet and critic, reminisces on his youth in Lublin just before the outbreak of World War I. He recalls how he and his friends wrote poetry and imagined themselves as romantic heroes from European literature. It is not unusual that young, sensitive people write poetry, and in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s it was perhaps even more common than anywhere else. It is no wonder that Abraham Heschel (1907-1972), at that time a young sensitive student of Hasidic background, exposed to vibrant secular life in Vilna where he studied in the Real Gymnasium before entering universities in Berlin, tried his hand at poetry. While there he was loosely associated with the Yung Vilna group. His poetry was more traditional, and so were his views compared with some very radical members of that group. Heschel's oeuvre is well known to American readers. He had a great impact on shaping the image of pre-war East European Jewish life through his poetic prose. Even if readers of his prose do not know about his youthful poetic attempts, it should not come as a surprise that he had such aspirations. Now, thanks to this beautiful bilingual edition translated by Morton J. Leifman, with a preface by Edward K. Kaplan, the English-speaking reader has a chance to get to know Heschel's poetic work, and readers who know Yiddish can take pleasure in comparing the two versions. As Kaplan puts it: Poetry can become a form of prayer, sharpening vision, transforming lives. Prayer can become poetry, emancipating words that illuminate the worlds fullness. The latter was true of Heschel, for whom poetry was undoubtedly a way of rendering his thoughts. The sixty-six poems are grouped in six sections. The titles of most of them testify to their religious, philosophical, and contemplative character: for example, Man is Holy,Bearing Witness,Between Me and the World, Repairing the World. But there is also the mysterious Lady in a Dream, to which ten poems are dedicated (some with erotic content), as well as those devoted to nature grouped in the section entitledNature Pantomimes. Some poems are not very original in their philosophical content and express typical dilemmas of a young idealist looking at injustice and the crisis of values. For example, in the poem Un titled from the part Repairing the World, Heschel talks about human selfishness and lack of faith and wonders if poetry is still possible in a world where sentences man to death and children suffer hardships and whereno one knows what's good, what's right (p. 181). But in others-for example, People's Eyes Wait (from the section Man Is Holy)-he foreshadows his future vocation in the following expression of mission: Shamed brothers beg my help, deceived sisters dream of consolation. And I, with stubborn boldness have promised that I will increase tenderness in this world and it seems to me that I will, in time move on through this earth with the brightness of all the stars in my eyes! (p. 39) Paradoxically, some of Heschel's poems sound better in the English translation, in which they are devoid of the rhymes which are not always very fortunate in the original. This concerns mainly poems with philosophical and lyrical contents. For example, In the Palace of Your Face opens in its English rendition with the lines: Your face is my palace, your eyes-blue, near a pillow for my soul. (p. 93) Perhaps not very original, perhaps a bit too lofty for modern sensibilities, but still acceptable as poetry from earlier times. Compare these lines with the Yiddish version: Dayn gezikht iz mayn palats oygn nonte bloe dayne a kishn far neshome mayne. …

“BEYOND GLASS DOORS . . . THE SUN NO LONGER SHINING”: ENGLISH PLATONISM AND THE PROBLEM OF SELF‐LOVE IN THE LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORK OF IRIS MURDOCH1

AbstractCertain oddities of Iris Murdoch's Platonism have a significance beyond that of being the personal and idiosyncratic opinion of one author, of interest only to Murdoch enthusiasts. First of all, they provide richly suggestive indications of what can happen to Platonism when it is brought into interaction with a mechanical and deterministic model of the physical universe. Secondly, Murdoch's work acts as a particularly perspicuous theological flash‐point, showing the intrinsic difficulties with combining demanding features of Platonism with a strong sense of human selfishness (self‐love) and imperfectibility. This is illuminated through a comparison with a strand of neo‐Lutheran theology.

Telos and Existence: Ethics in C. S. Lewis's Space Trilogy and Flannery O'Connor's Everything That Rises Must Converge

Within Western culture, narrative literature has always been the means by which people have understood the nature of the human condition and the of their lives. Through storytelling, as Alasdair MacIntyre explains in After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, readers or listeners gain a consciousness of their humanity and an understanding of their cultural traditions. The ethical value of literature lies in its ability to help readers consider, more than they otherwise might, the consequences of their choices and those of others. Most important, ethical reading focuses attention on the particular shape and telos of life; it encourages readers to imagine the bounded potential of human existence. As Christian authors, C. S. Lewis and Flannery O'Connor wrote from within an antagonistic cultural context of twentieth-century secular humanism. Within this milieu, Lewis and O'Connor had to assume that many of their readers would, at the very least, respond skeptically to their reassertion of orthodox Christian dogma. In some cases, as in the harsh contemporary reviews of Lewis's work by liberal critics such as Q. D. Leavis or L. C. Knights, the reaction went far beyond skepticism: it reflected an uncompromising refusal to consider the role of spirituality in human existence. In his review of Lewis's Rehabilitations, for example, Knights wrote that Lewis brings much needed support to those who wish to be confirmed in certain complacent attitudes (92). Given the context of philosophical skepticism in which Lewis and O'Connor wrote, it is understandable that they would find it necessary to begin with fundamental matters, such as the ethical implications of the human condition of mortality and the value of the spiritual life over materialism or utilitarianism. From within the Western tradition of classical-Christian thought, Lewis and O'Connor both viewed human nature and human society as innately corrupt, permeated with human selfishness, ignorance, and destructiveness, and both believed that within this earthly wasteland, human systems of ethics were ultimately ineffectual. Human society could approach an ethical condition only through the redemption of individuals. Since this moral revolution could not rely on collective action, both Lewis and O'Connor are skeptical concerning humanistic theories of ethics. From their point of view, humanistic approaches to ethics invariably devolve into self-interested action since they lack a point of moral reference outside of human nature (in this respect, Lewis and O'Connor write within the Aristotelian and Augustinian tradition in which, as MacIntyre points out in Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, an ethics of virtue is contrasted with the ethics of effectiveness). The very tendency of ethical philosophy to revert to moralistic discourse is the result of a human-centered philosophy in which power and ego always come to the fore and must be restrained by social pressure. At this general level, Lewis and O'Connor are in complete agreement, and we should not discount the importance of how unusual they both were among modern writers in their unwavering defense of an orthodox Christian faith. If for no other reason, their works can be linked because they stood unflinchingly for the same set of beliefs and in opposition to the same intellectuals falsehoods. (1) On a more particular level, of course, some important differences of emphasis or methodology can be detected in their ethical positions. Lewis's valuation of humility (for example, the for a writer of derivative rather than original) contrasts with a more pronounced tension between self-effacement and self-assertion in O'Connor's writing. Lewis writes in Christianity and Literature that we are mirrors reflecting divine light: 'Originality' in the New Testament is quite plainly the prerogative of God alone; even within the triune being of God it seems to be confined to the Father. The duty and happiness of every other being is placed in being derivative, in reflecting like a mirror (Rehabilitations 191). …

Modernist Paradigms Never Die, They Just Fade Away

The Modernist Epoch Each century begins, as each epoch must, with reference to the near or even distant past. Such acknowledgment is necessary to begin framing the culture-sustaining, reinvigorating, and metamorphosing concepts that achieve better futures. This century, at its start, acknowledged the sum of good and bad human intentions, conservative and adventurous ideas, constructive and destructive inventions, and the ambitious social engineering and experimentation which became, in some instances, culture sustaining and, in others, pernicious. Human memory's natural short-sightedness and selfishness is aggravated by the territoriality of schools of thought, arrogant national chauvinism, disdainful religious beliefs, and the baneful nostalgia that always transforms the more simple past into a cure for the more complicated future. The human heritage of previous thought and accomplishment is embedded in all present, from the philosophical to the religious to the political. The ideas, objects, and conventions flowing from it are both the culmination of cultural achievement as well as obstructions to identifying those obstacles to better futures. The roots of all ideas reach far back into history. They become obscure over time, yet their impact and inferences are durable and at times, permanent. Francis Bacon, John Locke, David Hume, and their peers, thinkers, philosophers, historians, and statesmen, stand in the wings, concluding the Age of Enlightenment by ushering into existence Europe's major social revolutions. Martin Luther's emancipation of commoners, and Gutenberg's publishing venture and disseminating the resulting of knowledge, finally lead to the American social experiment and example-following declarations of

Personalism and the problem of scarcity

Economics as an intellectual and behavioral discipline would set more agreeably with scholars in the moral and social sciences if its basic problem of scarcity were more clearly identified as inhering in the human condition and not caused mainly by human selfishness.

Pandora's jar: scarcity and the standard of living in classical Greek economic theory

Few ideas are as central both to social scientific analysis and normative political philosophy as the concept of scarcity. For the social analyst, scarcity is at the core of many models, including most prominently what Gary Becker has called the economic approach to human behavior, for example rational choice and game theoretic approaches. Its importance in this sphere stems from the fact that it is one of the key ingredients generating calculation and strategic interaction, cooperative or conflictual. Where, conversely, a superabundance is postulated there is, as Carl Menger observed, no economizing behavior, no competition, nor any need for a property regime. And so too is the idea of scarcity one of the background conditions for the theory of justice in general—‘justice derives its origins’ from human selfishness combined with ‘the scanty provision nature has made for his wants’ —and for the problems of distributive justice in particular. Again, where there is superabundance these matters would not so much as arise. Yet scarcity is at the same time one of those concepts which, like the notion of the standard of living, seems readily accessible, transparent, indeed available almost pre-theoretically. So universal, so ready-to-hand does the notion of scarcity appear that we may be tempted to allow it to enter our theoretical lexicon unexamined.

Interfaith Understanding in the Buddhist-Christian Dialogue

Interfaith understanding is an understanding among members of different religions in order to save the world and live peacefully together. Interfaith understanding is crucial to the present world because it is the only means of fostering unity and an altruistic love of all humankind. Since human beings follow different religious doctrines and ways of life, it is necessary to try to understand one another in order to cooperate in building a more perfect world. Thus far, however, most people have believed that their own religion is the best and the only way to salvation. Such an attitude contradicts all valid religious principles and tends to generate more evil and defilements in the human mind than already exist. In fact, all religions provide spiritual support. They are founded and exist in order to eliminate human selfishness and to help resist materialistic domination. On the other hand, modern technology and development are conducive to materialistic growth and not to spiritual enlightenment. They empower base human instincts, selfishness, and capitalism since their primary concern is to provide human life with convenience and affluence. Thus, religions are necessary to counteract this negative influence of materialism. And their protective power can be strengthened by interfaith understanding. In order to understand other religions, one should be reminded that the world is composed of various kinds of people, cultural bases, and ways of life leading to numerous sets of beliefs and practices. Thus, there must be more than one religion in the world. The religions of the world today can be classified into three categories, namely, religions of faith, religions of spiritual discipline, and religions of wisdom. Religions of faith demand from their members a faith in a supernatural force and authority. This is the primordial form of those religions in world history where human beings, confronted with their unknown nature, sought divine assistance. In those days, human beings believed in a countless number of divine beings and participated in many religious rites. In addition, they believed in anthropomorphic gods/God. Due to their narrow experiences and misconceptions, they could not understand God as an impersonal force or as

On Psychology's Role in the Promotion of Human Selfishness

On Psychology's Role in the Promotion of Human SelfishnessJohn H. Harvey, Gifford Weary and Richard LennoxJohn H. HarveyRequests for reprints should be sent to John H. Harvey, Department of Psychology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409Search for more papers by this author, Gifford WearySearch for more papers by this author and Richard Lennox1 Texas Tech University.2 Ohio State University.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:January 2011https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1985.3.1.2PDFPDF PLUS ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations AboutAbstract“It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done ”(Sidney Carton as he went to the guillotine to save another's life, in Charles Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities). Previous article Next article FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 3Issue 1Mar 1985 Information© 1985 Guilford Publications Inc.PDF download

Effects of self-esteem and expected duration of interaction on liking for a highly rewarding partner.

Psychological theories predicated on the assumption of human selfishness and theories based on principles of equity may lead to conflicting predictions about when a person will like his partner. Of special interest are a person's reactions to receiving uncommonly high rewards. The present study addressed this issue by examing the development of same-sex liking in 40 female college students. It was hypothesized that subjects with lowered self-esteem, having a great need for interpersonal rewards, would react favorably to the receipt of such rewards, even if underserved. Subjects with raised self-esteem, on the other hand, having had their need for rewards met, should respond unfavorably to the receipt of high rewards, desiring a more equitable distribution of reward. These effects should be strong only when continuing dyadic interaction is expected (i.e., as issues of stability and reciprocity become salient). The predictions were confirmed.

Capitalist Ethics--Tough or Soft?

FEw world outlooks have been responsible for greater social mischief than the ideology or social philosophy which might be called socialism-the cluster of ideas centering upon a contrast between the evil capitalist ethic and its supposedly superior socialist counterpart. Sentimental socialists maintain, for one thing, that, since the system of private enterprise for profit rewards pursuit of self-interest, it cannot serve the general interest. Consequently, a system banning selfish private enterprise for profit is bound to encourage economic activity in the public interest in the place of the proscribed private interest. What is sentimental here is the belief that a change in social organization is all that is required to abolish human selfishness. As Mr. Dooley said, A man that'd expect to train lobsters to fly in a year is called a lunatic; but a man that thinks men can be turned into angels by an election is called a reformer and remains at large. Among sentimental socialists are such disparate modern thinkers as Albert Einstein, Jawaharlal Nehru, and R. H. Tawney. Sentimental or socialism has an extraordinary appeal to gentle physicists, non-materialistic statesmen, Unitarian ministers, and social workers-to mention just a few vulnerable categories. The appalling experience of this century with an actual socialist system in Russia has shaken this set of beliefs, to the limited extent by which mere evidence can sway opinion, but even so the world-wide influence of the ideology of soft socialism is an incalculable asset to the system of organized terror now ruling most of the Eurasian continent.