2021-11-13: Questioning greatness, and a strange phenomenon rak
================================================================
Some more questions about which I have been wondering, as I
question everything:
1. What is greatness?
2. How does it relate to mankind?
3. Is it ever justified to say that someone is great? Or is it
only some unachievable ideal that people strive to, but can
never attain?
4. Why do some strive for greatness, in the sense of working to
be the best person they can, while others are content with
themselves as they are?
5. What are the implications of saying that someone is great?
6. Must someone be perfect to be great, or is it possible for
a great person to be flawed?
7. What is the relationship between heroism and greatness?
8. Why do children have a psychological need for heroes? Why do
people seem to lose it as they age? Is it healthy for adults
to look for heroes? To feel an immense need to surround
themselves with people they admire?
9. What is the purpose of admiration? How are its intellectual
and emotional components related?
10. What is required for someone to be admirable? Can one admire
flawed people? Is it sufficient for someone to have some
good components to be admirable?
On the topic of admiring the good, I have occasionally observed
a pattern, a phenomenon, whose motives that I do not
understand. I have observed it both in individuals and as part
of a broader cultural pattern. Here are some of its instances.
I do not know if they all share the same motive, the same root
cause, or if they just share accidental similarities. But here
they are:
* I once knew someone who hated a peer of ours because she was
brilliant, beautiful, incredibly hard working, and successful.
* I have frequently observed a reflexive attitude in people,
where if you observe the good someone has done, then they will
reflexively point out their flaws. Hemingway was a great
writer---but a womanizer and a drunk. The Ancient Greeks
produced incredible works of literature and philosophy---but
Greek women had no rights and Thales thought everything was
water. The Founding Fathers and their French counterparts
sought for the first time to found societies based on the
recognition of universal human rights and the equality of
all---but they also owned or traded slaves. (I am not
objecting to having nuanced discussions or to recognizing that
people have flaws. I am objecting to the reflexive need to
undercut anybody portrayed as good.)
* The phenomenon manifests itself in anti-semitism based on the
historical and modern successes of Jews in the arts, in the
sciences, and in business.
* I have been reading an anthology of Greek myths and recognized
the phenomenon in the story of Arachne, a young woman famous
throughout Greece for her weaving abilities. One day, Minerva,
the goddess of wisdom and war, but also of crafts, paid
Arachne a visit, and Arachne challenged her to a trial of
skill. When Minerva realized that Arachne had won the contest,
she destroyed Arachne's tapestry and turned Arachne into a
spider, crying "henceforth you shall hang from a thread, and
all your race shall bear the same punishment forever".
* It also seems similar to an objection to using superlatives to
describe good attributes, especially in relation to a person's
ability, and even if they are deserved, e.g., saying that
someone is brilliant, a superstar, or one of the most
perceptive people you have ever met.
At their core, these instances seem to revolve around refusing
to acknowledge the good in people, and trying to undercut it
when confronted with it.
I don't think this phenomenon is new (see the example from Greek
mythology), but I wonder if it has become more pervasive, at
least as an implicit sentiment. Next to CMU there is the
Westinghouse memorial, a large bronze monument whose dedication
plaque reads:
> This memorial unveiled October 6, 1930, in honor of George
> Westinghouse is an enduring testimonial to the esteem,
> affection and loyalty of 60,000 employees of the great
> industrial organizations of which he was the founder. In his
> later years rightly called "The Greatest Living Engineer",
> George Westinghouse accomplished much of first importance to
> mankind through his ingenuity, persistence, courage, integrity
> and leadership. By the invention of the air brake and of
> automatic signaling devices, he led the world in the
> development of appliances for the promotion of speed, safety
> and economy of transportation. By his early vision of the
> value the alternating current electric system, he brought
> about a revolution in the transmission of electric power. His
> achievements were great, his energy and enthusiasm boundless,
> and his character beyond reproach; a shining mark for the
> guidance and encouragement of American youth.
I cannot imagine such a monument being built today, let alone
12,000 people attending its unveiling [0]. Similarly, I cannot
imagine 300,000 people (of a city of 500,000) lining the streets
for the funeral cortège of a composer and singing "Va, pensiero"
as one [1]. The monument and the feelings it conjures feel like
anachronisms, a remnant from an age where admiration for man was
the norm. Today, profound admiration feels like naïve emotion
that must be quashed out by adulthood: children have heroes, but
adults do not. What caused this cultural shift? While writing
this, I looked up the definition of "hero" and found the
following:
> Hero worship exists, has existed, and will forever exist,
> universally among mankind. --Carlyle. [1913 Webster]
Would that it were true.
[0]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_Memorial#History
[1]
https://www.historytoday.com/archive/death-guiseppe-verdi
