My Perspective on Society

The excerpt that you are about to read was the product of a joke between my friend and me. A few months ago my friend told me that I should jokingly write a book which pertains to the hatred or idiocy contained within society and humanity as a whole. I decided to take up this challenge (in jest, of course). As I began to write the paper, I could not help but to make the essay revolve around the personal, though intellectual observation, which claims that people are, for the lack of a more pleasant term, stupid. My intellectual opinions and observations were soon molded into an analysis of these constituents, and finally, a philosophy was produced. Here is the small opening excerpt to this "misinterpreted joke:" 


Human Inanity:

     Every day I am forced to succumb to the egregious idiocy and rancid stupidity of our conventional Western-world society. Every day I am forced to watch the intellectual values of “real people” burn in large, corroding flames. As I watch these values of priceless worth decompose before me, I find it unbelievable that humans can house such inanity. The fact that I find most disturbing is the methods by which humans rebuild these lost foundations. I could support the idea that the common man rebuilds his societal structure with rotten materials. This deficiency in the reconstruction of needed support causes the cultural and social values of his society to flip. What are the causes of this foolishness?

The application of premature ideas and the abuse of human intelligence.

I find it possible, though thoughtless, that some people believe in the unusual interpretation that non-conformity always promises creativity, and with that, intelligence. That is far from true; the act of being socially, culturally or even politically “isolated” only promises enlightenment under intricately treated conditions. What most non-conformists do not realize is that they were molded, not by their abilities or their intelligence, but by the large hand of society. I find it too tedious for most people to actually explore "truth" for themselves. Of course, this voyage into an intellectually transcendent world calls for the acquisition of not only the desired material, but the ability to apply purely inherited intelligence.

I could offer the same argument for those who are compliant with civilization in their daily actions. Those who are prone to believe that the large body, which we call society, is the true brain of humanity are correct in doing so. One question which these conformists fail to ask themselves is if society has the correct mind to support itself, not only economically, socially and politically, but intellectually and culturally. Do conformists truly see society’s actions through all aspects of human existence and intelligence? Of course not; as I stated before, conformists follow the most popular belief, no matter what their consciences tell them. These types of followers take this newly accepted belief and mold it into an ambiguous form of satisfaction. How would one define this newly gained sense of arbitrary fulfillment? Through the rapid and thoughtless transition of immature ideas, society’s followers are able to gain the false hope that they can grasp truly abstract ideas, and therefore, become a part of those ideas. Fundamentally, conformists see truth in what their civilization holds to be true, not what the individual holds to be true. I find that specific prospect of conformity to be atrocious in many perspectives. Not only is society a mutual agreement to retain peace, but it is run by the one binding idea which is interpreted to be societally “correct.” Where do these ideas of reciprocated conformation begin? Are these ideas meant to unify society in a secretive way? Or are they meant to sabotage the golden platforms of pure human intelligence?     

With this argument, I bring you not only a larger look at the senselessness of humanity, but the even smaller attributes which make those chaotic realities possible.

Chapter 1: Hypocrisy:

            There exists an extravagant number of situations, in which humans find themselves stuck in the rapidity of their own argument. The vigorous delivery of immature ideas causes debaters to stumble on their own ideas to the point of perplexity and misinterpretation.

An intellectual person is able to take his idea and explain it as clearly as acceptably possible, avoiding as many counter arguments as he can. Overall, the true man has explored his ideology from all existent aspects of human thought. A truly innovative person can support his theory, not only with from the viewpoints of several, if not all, features of human contemplation, but he may also have the capability to support his theory from a view that may transcend accepted human thinking; I would define this as an “extreme” abstract thought of the individual. For example, in our minds, we separate the factors of thought which are shared with society from the factors which are contemplated through the random and conceptual thought of ourselves. Where does true talent emerge from this theory? The intelligent man is able to take his new and intricate concept and connect it to an accepted or shared reality. Fundamentally, it is a reality outside of his mind. Overall, not only can an intelligent man express and understand his own ideas, but he now has the ability to expose society to his ideas in a way that makes sense to the conventional social order. In many aspects, one could support the idea that society is a way through which people connect with each other and share their newly conceived concepts. A problem is generated when similar individuals begin to boast and pride themselves off of one man’s idea. In doing so, these societal cheaters do not realize that they are performing a pointless task. Overall, the fact that these conformists could allow such foolishness would tell the intellectual man that these acts are being robbed of their intellectual values.      

     Oppositely, there exist people who are mentally unprepared to boast at the fact that they may have the intellectual capacity to understand their own, if not, society’s "abstract" ideas. Yes, it is easy for people to choose an opinion and ‘stick with it’. The problem is that most humans make their decisions blindly, without the consent of logic, common sense and intellectual investigation. In their state of sightlessness, however, they are tricked into pursuing the difficult task of supporting a mindset which would be considered too heavy for them to carry...


I presented this to my friend the day after he "dared" me to write such a paper. He told me that my paper was generally controversial. On many levels, I disagreed, but there existed aspects, through which I did perceive it to be a bit "contentious."


Overall, what do you, as "intellectual readers," think?