A Man at his Highest Point.We are not born perfect: every day we develop in our personality and in our calling till we reach the highest point of our completed being, to the full round of our accomplishments, of our excellences. This is known by the purity of our taste, the clearness of our thought, the maturity of our judgment, and the firmness of our will. Some never arrive at being complete; somewhat is always awanting: others ripen late. The complete man, wise in speech, prudent in act, is admitted to the familiar intimacy of discreet persons, is even sought for by them.
16 comments:
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
i think this is kind of elitist.
I get what you mean, but why is that?
Can you be specific?
I think I'm going to be awanting right until the end. Never to ripen. Sigh. The fruit flies will have nothing to do with me!
A wonderful post, not elitist, high standards are a good thing.
high standards are in fact an excellent thing, i say.
it's in the confusion of those with "purity of taste" that elitism creeps in.
ok. and here's my basic contention with this and the below quote, although i find both of them awesome, too:
it speaks to a certain elitism in that they both speak to a certain time, space, and distance that is afforded by some sort of material luxury.
i.e., neither of these philosophies address how you might fit into them if you're born in a refugee camp, or in dire poverty.
i dunno about gurdjieff below, but i'm willing to bet balthasar gracian seldom wondered where his next meal might come from, or how he was going to feed his children tomorrow.
in other words, to put not too fine a point on it, the global abuses of the catholic church, and therefore the sufferings of others, quite likely afforded mr garacian the time, space, and luxury to ask himself these questions, and to think about them.
not that i disagree with his conclusions.
i'm just in a bad mood tonight.
heh. :)
and to summarize my disagreements with them, again:
these quotes, while i like their basic premises, presuppose the time, space, and luxury to endlessly grow upwards into "betterment".
not everyone has that opportunity.
that's where the elitism, imo, comes in.
it presupposes that opportunity for everyone, and therefore lays the blame on the individual for not "bettering".
not that i'm denying individual responsibility.
and, also, they only refer to "men", and don't even get me started on that.
First off, please take a good look at that hat.
A Man at his Highest POINT.
We are not born perfect.
Oh wait, yes we are! Has this guy ever even seen a baby? (I'm sorry, just kidding).
I'm not into "the complete man" thing I guess, but I think that he mentions taste is really interesting.
On another note, what's wrong with elitism?
1. practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
2. consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group.
I want my doctor to be elite, I want my leaders to be elite. Don't I? (Artists? Priests?)
Good questions.
I think his patriarchy can be contextualised relative to his time. And you're right Wolfboy, he likely wrote this comfy warm in a tower of wisdom somewhere.
But pointing out that it doesn't apply to extreme cases says nothing about its application to the albeit small majority that are indeed well fed and educated, at least in North America and Europe anyway.
And generally, this can apply to situations of poverty. My father being the best example. He and he himself was the one that found a way out of poverty in a third world country. Sure he had breaks, but it was his firm living will that pushed him beyond the bonds of oppression. The same can hold true for many others in the same situation.
Liberationist theology is just that, pointed at poverty such that IT IS THE WAY to break such bonds.
Always wanting more, understanding that one is never complete and can always do more.
So in the end, I don't think it presupposed opportunity, in fact, it is a recipe on how to create it.
So, perhaps the point is that, people who are born into a life of opportunity and comfort are in an ideal position to investigate the nature of the world and humanity, and offer what solutions they are able to find, to the betterment of all.
cf. Gautama Buddha, J. Krishnamurti, etc. etc.
They aren't the only ones who can do so, that's not the point; but given their (our) position, it may be a moral obligation...
No doubt, it is a moral obligation to the extreme.
I don't see Gracian's privileged class as a problem regarding the universality of this passage. If I agreed with him (which I don't), I think I could argue that the type of development he's describing doesn't require hours of meditation or study, but just purposeful living. It doesn't matter whether you're working hard or sitting around, we can all try to be better. Moreover, physical labour may actually be even better for this kind of mindful practice than anything else.
This is what I would say if I wanted to defend his argument. But I won't. I have an issue with this notion of the "complete man". Is there such a thing? What is "complete"? What does it entail? Does it mean better, fuller, greater?
Can a scatter-brain with occasional bouts of poor judgment be considered complete? Why not? Who decides which virtues lead to a better existence and a better world? If we agree with Gracian we're settling on pure taste, clear thought, mature judgment, firm will, wise in speech, and prudent in act. I've got another one to add to that list - BORING.
Can I be complete and then later become incomplete? Why not? Is there such a thing as a static personality? Gracian is all lines. I want circles.
Is my development into a Gracian-style island of perfect personal existence really the best life I can hope for? If that's the case what the hell are all you people doing here? What if we're incomplete by design? What if man at his highest point is really the point when she(!) acknowledges her reliance on others to make up for her weaknesses, and in turn, accepts the responsibility of sharing her strengths. Maybe we can be complete together, in one spot, at one time. Maybe. I don't know, but that seems a heck of a lot more like a life I want to live than Gracian's.
In sum:
I don't want to be a complete man!
ps: prudent acts are overrated.
Woh, what a critique magnifique.
Seriously, some of your best work Renemaphone.
I'm convinced.
Word: cbzlxq
ha!
me too.
i hereby declare Ren to be the (in)complete (wo)ma(y)n (!!!).
Post a Comment