Individualism

[Globalistgirl]

In the last thread about how to measure cosmopolitanism, individualism vs connectedness came up. I'm fairly individualistic, but I think being too individualistic isn't good for you or anyone else. I think that everyone should have the freedom to whatever they like within reasonable bounds. Of course, what is reasonable can be debated. Is it reasonable for parents to tell their children whom to marry? What to study? Is it reasonable for someone to keep quiet about abuse in the family for the sake of not rocking the boat? Where does the line go? I think this is an issue for global culture, because what we think is reasonable starts with cultural assumptions. What do you think? When should we be free to do whatever we like? When should you sacrifice something for the sake of others? What is reasonable to sacrifice?

[Paul Dougherty]

My take on this is that people should be free to do whatever they like as long as it does not negatively impact those around them. Of course, people will have different views as to what is negative. Parents should be guides for their children and ideally children will learn through the observation of how their parents interact with the world. The whole "do as I say, not as I do" statement is not, in my opinion, a way to raise children. From that standpoint, arranged marriages may not be negative as parents should have the best understanding of their children and their opinion on who to marry probably is the most informed. Any arrangement that has to do with money or status is ridiculous in my opinion and only solidifies wrong ideals.

Abuse should not be ignored or let slip under the table. It should be addressed. Abuse would fall into the categroy of having a negative impact on others and abusers should be held accountable for their actions. If the abuse can be handled within the family, so much the better. If not, outside help should be brought in.

Another example of negative impact can be recognized in the behavior of people in group activities. Globalistgirl has a post on her blog about peoples behavior in classical concerts. My response to this is also that people should be expected to behave in a way that does not disrupt others enjoyment of the event. To me, this has nothing to do with what people wear. Who cares how people dress? Music is something to be appreciated and these concerts should represent the celebration of that music. Reasonable bounds should be that the setting should dictate the kind of dress. In other words, showing up naked is probably only acceptable at a concert in a nudist colony. At the same time, showing up in a Tux is probably too much for a concert at the beach. In this case the person in the Tux should not be affected by the people in swim trunks. Showing up in a bikini at the London Philharmonic can be equally disrupting, but people should not be exaserbated if it happens. People need to consider those around them. Children running in the ailses should not be tolerated, but if someone can sit there and enjoy the music without interferring with someone elses enjoyment, the more the merrier. Some traditions, however, should not be broken. People who applaud in the middle of a piece drive me insane. Classical shows are not rock concerts and silence is not an indication of a piece being complete. While individual movements may sound completely different, there is a connection between them that should be appreciated.

Awareness and accountability of how you interact with the world is a good way to start establishing reasonable bounds. Communication is another. Between the two, we should be able to come up with a set that apply to everyone.