When Darwin proposed the theory of evolution, mass controversy erupted. And even though the science of evolution is still debated today, one idea was readily accepted in society. Survival of the fittest, the thought that those who couldn't survive were unfit for existence, became the cultural excuse for the devastating gap between the lives of the rich and lives of the poor. And though the trendy idea quickly became taboo, it had lingering effects on society. How many of our actions are spurred by the need to show strength and dominance over others?
For example, only when Gatsby first shared his problems and pains did Nick begin to accept him as a friend. Nick only decides to help him when Gatsby became less god-like and perfect. This goes to show that we are only willing to help the less fortunate, not those who need it. And though the two often go hand-in-hand, this unusual situation raises the question: Are we only willing to help the less fortunate, in order to make ourselves more dominant?
After all it is a competitive world. Often times, we are defined by a single number: a test score or an inheritance. But to cope with the outside world we develop our own ranking system in our heads. We define ourselves by our single best attributes and continually compare ourselves to others. Most often we form relationships with those who pose no threat to us or to those who can help us succeed. Relationships are built on mutual need- so why does the helper help the helpee? For every relationship there is a tradeoff; maybe we do help others solely to feel better about ourselves.
Weaknesses draw humans toward each other and help us establish these relationships. Interestingly enough, Gatsby's humanity was his weakness. His love for Daisy was what drew Nick to help him. Love, which is commonly portrayed as the ultimate strength, failed Gatsby in the end. And as strengths and weaknesses become interchangeable, survival of the fittest becomes skewed. The strong may fall. The weak may conquer. So why do we continually try and prove that we are better than someone else? The dominance that drives our motivation may just be a figment of our imagination. The definition of "fittest" can be defined by an arbitrary collection of characteristics. Who is the strongest? Who is fit to survive? No one is.
.png)
For example, only when Gatsby first shared his problems and pains did Nick begin to accept him as a friend. Nick only decides to help him when Gatsby became less god-like and perfect. This goes to show that we are only willing to help the less fortunate, not those who need it. And though the two often go hand-in-hand, this unusual situation raises the question: Are we only willing to help the less fortunate, in order to make ourselves more dominant?
After all it is a competitive world. Often times, we are defined by a single number: a test score or an inheritance. But to cope with the outside world we develop our own ranking system in our heads. We define ourselves by our single best attributes and continually compare ourselves to others. Most often we form relationships with those who pose no threat to us or to those who can help us succeed. Relationships are built on mutual need- so why does the helper help the helpee? For every relationship there is a tradeoff; maybe we do help others solely to feel better about ourselves.
Weaknesses draw humans toward each other and help us establish these relationships. Interestingly enough, Gatsby's humanity was his weakness. His love for Daisy was what drew Nick to help him. Love, which is commonly portrayed as the ultimate strength, failed Gatsby in the end. And as strengths and weaknesses become interchangeable, survival of the fittest becomes skewed. The strong may fall. The weak may conquer. So why do we continually try and prove that we are better than someone else? The dominance that drives our motivation may just be a figment of our imagination. The definition of "fittest" can be defined by an arbitrary collection of characteristics. Who is the strongest? Who is fit to survive? No one is.
.png)
No comments:
Post a Comment