What is poverty?
until recently I had an interview with the federal government on this issue because I have received for a while support from the Social Fund of the SUB. The nice journalist asked me if I was as poor. I answered with a clear "No". I'm not poor. But why? And then who is poor?
One could Häb think poverty has to do with material deprivation. This is certainly a part of it all, but just not everything. as a hermit, who lives without prosperity is selected, a poor person? I would argue that he is not. But what is poverty? It is important as well but a spiritual component. I think at least, poverty has a lot to do with despair. Poverty is nebstdem it actually has to do with material circumstances, also largely a question of attitude.
Why am I not poor? Then I would say that I'm happy - usually at least. I enjoy the things that I have, to the fullest. I am educated and have continued access to education, try to deal in depth with literature and philosophy for my own pleasure. I enjoy nature and even the simple meal, enjoy fellowship with other people. Why should I be poor? A rich, lonely, unhappy person is poorer for me.
course I do not intend to belittle material hardship, on the contrary. People fighting for survival are really, really poor. Their material poverty she takes so much to claim that they have no opportunity for other things - their material poverty is widespread even in their thoughts. In richer Countries like Switzerland is a loneliness and a decline in social status to which I would also be considered a sign of poverty. The social pressure in terms of money and wealth is important in Switzerland. Nevertheless, I will
point out that it does not follow that the promotion of material prosperity is a good thing. You can have material wealth and still live in "spiritual poverty" - isolated, uneducated and unhappy. Are such people not to call it a poor? And what we strive for real? For wealth and prosperity? I would now rather say (and have stressed the ancient Greek philosophers), that after the man luck sought. Not in the sense of a happy coincidence, but in the sense of a sense of satisfaction and happiness. Meanwhile, more modern philosophers again emphasizes this aspect more, including, for example Martha Nussbaum. Man tends to live a fulfilled life, a happy life. That kontininuierliche increase in material wealth leads to this life, I venture to doubt strong. This includes the principle of marginal utility: At a certain level of prosperity it brings not much more to have.
The conclusion seems to me to be clear: We should again encourage an attitude that insists less on material wealth and external things, but again to "intellectual wealth" and to promote their return, just because this is often neglected. Happiness is sought in the increasing consumption - but that may not bring happiness. One of a fulfilled life and that is a certain sorrow, one takes some effort on in order to reap even greater happiness. The best example is an artist who takes upon himself much trouble to complete his work of art. He can not just a can of feeling "picture painting", then take them to, he must paint the picture actually. Since I will also refer to the thought experiment of the experience machine. None of us wants to be connected to a machine that us incessantly happy states "Inoculated" - we really want to do something. For these reasons, our consumer society seems absurd to me and understand why such people will be more unhappy. And this form of spiritual poverty takes more and more around, if we do not stop.
0 comments:
Post a Comment