Luis Teran (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} lost1nplace) wrote,@ 2006-10-24 11:48:00 |
|
Phil 115: Entry 7
After speaking on how the present time has us less self-restrained than in previous times, Montaigne warns us all: there is a purpose to being self-containe; it is for our own good.
When referring to the law he argues that it is best not to sacrifice oneself for the sake of change. He says it plainly: "it is greatly to be doubted wteher any obvious good can come from changing any tradditional law...it is impossible to move one without the whole structure feeling it." (p. 134) Those who start things first end up being the first devoured by the reprocussions, that much is definitely true. However, is that a bad thing? Montaigne wants to say so, as he sees acts of such revolution full of self-love and arrogance. There seems to be something missing to his equation.
The soul is not meant to be contained by any laws man has created, and as every instance of revolution has shown, such acts are not full of mere self-love; people are not alone in wanting change when it is needed. It may take one over many to start a movement toward change, but it shows it's for a greater good for all, once one sees that people were just itching to follow one's example. Would we say people like Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. were acting out of mere arrogance and self-love? Perhaps they were part of the equation, but there is something else causing their actions - a desire for social change, and that is to everyone's benefit. Every soul can benefit from change, and isn't change what montaigne wishes us to do for our own good?
After speaking on how the present time has us less self-restrained than in previous times, Montaigne warns us all: there is a purpose to being self-containe; it is for our own good.
When referring to the law he argues that it is best not to sacrifice oneself for the sake of change. He says it plainly: "it is greatly to be doubted wteher any obvious good can come from changing any tradditional law...it is impossible to move one without the whole structure feeling it." (p. 134) Those who start things first end up being the first devoured by the reprocussions, that much is definitely true. However, is that a bad thing? Montaigne wants to say so, as he sees acts of such revolution full of self-love and arrogance. There seems to be something missing to his equation.
The soul is not meant to be contained by any laws man has created, and as every instance of revolution has shown, such acts are not full of mere self-love; people are not alone in wanting change when it is needed. It may take one over many to start a movement toward change, but it shows it's for a greater good for all, once one sees that people were just itching to follow one's example. Would we say people like Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. were acting out of mere arrogance and self-love? Perhaps they were part of the equation, but there is something else causing their actions - a desire for social change, and that is to everyone's benefit. Every soul can benefit from change, and isn't change what montaigne wishes us to do for our own good?
