The Benefit of Greed

"We need to rid the world of greed."

This is not only impossible, it is a very bad idea in general. If we were to get rid of the greedy, we would have nobody left. Yes, even the charitable types. Yes, even people like Mother Theresa. Obviously, this sounds like an extreme position. That is because it is an extreme position, equally as extreme as the first sentence but like all extremes, it is designed to make a point clear.

Think about this, why do people do what they do? Because what they do either makes them feel good, or it makes them feel less bad. Whether it's pleasure or guilt, the greed is nothing more than a motivation to push your life in the direction you want it to go. Some have the overwhelming self-control to limit that greed, but even then, that is because another form of desire is pushing against the more obvious desire; one form of greed is overriding another form.

So why am I advocating greed?

Greed is the primary force of will; it is the drive that all people have to make their lives better, happier, and more fulfilling. In many cases, they have a faulty idea as to what makes their lives better, but it is not the greed that is the problem, but poor judgment. It is also a case of not having enough information. In both ways, they are being driven toward a goal that they themselves aren't really aware of, and often are influenced by others who share the same set of faulty reasonings.

The most powerful forms of misinformation people suffer from involve money, influence, morals, and sex.

Money is a fallacy; money is nothing more than the middleman between two services, a way for something of value to be portable for barter. The idea that money is anything else is a mysticism encouraged by those who make money their business; marketing the dollar allows the dollar to be more important, and more important dollars mean more control over the people who use them.

There are many forms of influence. Friendship means you have influence with one other person. Popularity means you have influence over many. However, political influence is simply influence through threat. All government power comes at the point of a legion of guns, distributed evenly throughout an entire region. Sometimes these guns are hidden behind a suit jacket or a concealed holster in an unmarked car. Other times, these guns are proudly displayed along with a badge, uniform, and an obviously-marked car with flashing red-and-blue lights. But don't be fooled, these are nothing more than guns with a complex aiming mechanism called people.

Perhaps you are one of those "complex aiming systems?" Perhaps you take offense to my statement above? Perhaps you should consider the nature of your job. Follow orders, enforce laws, and arrest those who do not obey. As long as you meet those requirements of your job, then congratulations, you are nothing more than an aiming mechanism. If you only protect other people from forceful acts, and resist enforcing laws against consensual behavior, regardless of whether you consider the behavior right or wrong, then I can gladly say that you are not part of the problem, and you have my grateful respect for your profound ethics.

Speaking of "Right and wrong," morals are another faulty premise in today's society. Not that morals don't exist, nor do I believe in moral relativism, but the creation and enforcement of laws based on one particular group of peoples' personal definition of morals aren't exactly right.

Many religions have a "do unto others" clause; the idea that one must treat others with the respect they want in return. This is an excellent base to found moral theory, and certainly a good start for a system of laws. However, the problem is that the point of this clause is completely sidelined to its literal meaning to a society in question; it's easy to do things to others when they do something one doesn't. You don't mind someone taking guns away of you don't have one. You don't mind someone taking all food away if you don't need to eat. You don't mind someone shooting other people in the arms if you had lost yours. Yes, they're all extreme, but they make the point nicely.

The way the clause should be interpreted would be to consider a basic fact: you want to have a happy, fulfilling life. You have a set of goals in which you plan to achieve this happy, fulfilling life. You would wish that others do not interfere with your plan to have a happy, fulfilling life. This same kind of rationale applies to others as well: They want to have happy, fulfilling lives, too. They would wish that you do not interfere with their plan to have a happy, fulfilling life. If you respect them, as the clause demands, then you will respect their wishes not to be interfered with their pursuit, and they should respect your wishes as well.

In other words, as long as you respect that simple request from others, do what you wish to be as happy as possible. Of course, conflicts arise. However, violent action to resolve differences only results in more violent activity. In some cases, it is justified; they have broken the clause's rule, and you have every right to defend yourself. But if harming you or your property is neither the goal, nor the result of the other's actions, then you have no right to make demands of them, according to the "Do unto others" clause... because doing so would not be respecting them, and therefore breaking the clause's rule.

Sex is so over-rated these days. Poets and artists, scriptwriters and actors; wherever there is a form of media, you won't find sex and its emotional trappings far. Passions ignite to drive the souls of two people together, bound by destiny, for all of time, and against all odds, they shall conquer any and all opposition, and life itself. A lot of you are probably feeling pretty passionate right now after reading that sentence, aren't you? And why?

The sex drive is real. I won't deny this by any stretch of the imagination. We would not have populated the planet nearly as quickly without it. It is a scientific fact, driven by very real hormones developed by very real glands. And when two people perform the act, their bodies are flooded with endorphins, making them feel very good.

But, as a result, the people who reproduce pass on this endorphin rush during sex, and those who have an effective skill with words will give the rush a religious fervor. Over the centuries, the reinforced "good feeling" is translated to some mystic reality in which lovers are solely subject to, some kind of veil that one passes while in the throes of tumultuous passion, and the eternal connection of love that can defeat everything just by being.

In essence, people have convinced themselves that there is more to the sexual drive than the simple act and its attendant good feelings, that there is some form of connection that occurs. Then, when something happens and horrible, nasty reality sets in, the dream is shattered, and then the other side of the coin shows its ugly face; crimes of passion are cliché, but that is not because they are not common. Once again, they are operating on an overblown description of something that is much simpler and much less important than it is made out to be.

These four things often drive most of the implacable actions of people who are greedy, greedy for those things that they have decided are good, right, and much more than they should be.

Now, we have approached the original question, if all these things can make greed from a form of personal motivation to a corrupt form of viciousness, why do I still support the concept of greed? It is because greed is motivation, and without it, there can be no drive. Without greed, there is no desire for improvement in one's life, there are no goals, no ambition... no destiny at all. People will have no reason to do anything.

So, how does one control greed, and prevent it from being the out-of-control monstrosity we have?

There are two things one must have to keep something in control: something to channel it and something to oppose it. The channel for greed is knowledge. When people learn in the attempt to gain that which they desire, they have a way to channel that greed to a much better path. The opposite of greed is competition; and, when all greed is unchecked, nobody's greed is going to overwhelm the rest.

Of course, you may reply, what about governments? Are they not unchecked against the greed of their people?

All throughout history, empires have fallen. Governments have reached a point where the collective greed of the people, the collective desires and drives to achieve their needs have overwhelmed the previously-overwhelming government. In such cases have governments been overthrown by revolution. Sooner or later, the balance will always return.

Assumptions and the Paradigm

Everything one thinks and reasons is based on a set of assumptions one has. These assumptions color the perception one has in the world, and as a result, they solidify what one "knows" to a point where they are often unwilling to acknowledge those things that conflict with those assumptions.

The full collection of assumptions come together into a paradigm. The word "paradigm" is based on the Greek word "paradeigma," which means "pattern" or "model." This is an apt description; a pattern of thought based on the threads of one's assumptions of reality make up a person's paradigm.

So, if a paradigm is a model of reality based on one's assumptions, what happens when an assumption changes? The whole of one's perception of the world changes with it. The paradigm shifts, and with it, one's thinking. Interestingly, once a paradigm changes, it puts other assumptions into a new light, revealing the flaws that encourages those assumptions to be rejected, replaced with new, more correct assumptions. The whole process of changing one's underlying assumptions to view the world in a new light is known as a Paradigm shift.

With any luck, this blog will encourage a paradigm shift for you... or at least give you something to think about.