“The man who finds his country sweet is only a raw beginner, the man or whom each country is as his own is already strong, but only the man for whom the whole world is as a foreign country is perfect”
I believe that Todorov is right in his statement concerning the condition of man in terms of identity. Essentially, he is arguing that the more detached a man is from one specific nation of identity, the better off he will be. Being attached to one place requires loyalty, and dependence on an external source for security, and happiness. The man who considers each country as his own is better off than the one who believes his country, and his ideals are secure and ideal because he is accepting all other nations and beliefs as his own. This is better because he is not tied down to one ideology that might fail him, or prove to be wrong in the end.
The man for whom the whole world is as a foreign country is even better off than the one who accepts each as his own because in this statement attachment is a bad thing. Therefore, separation from all ideologies and countries is better than attachment.
I can’t help but think of the Bhagavad Gita when reading Todorov’s statement. The ideal mindset for a Hindu is to be separated from all worldly things in order to purify the mind and become free from the miseries that arise from material contact. I think this is why I had trouble in class today agreeing that indifference must mean only tolerance, and not acceptance. In my opinion, being indifferent towards opposing beliefs is not necessarily a bad thing. I have a hard time agreeing that those who have faith in the accuracy of their beliefs do not accept the fact that others believe in something else with the same assurance. Compared to killing each other over these beliefs, I think this a relatively happy medium. While I’d like to believe that eventually we could all reach a level of acceptance, instead of tolerance, I think it’s a step in the right direction.
The man who sees the whole world as foreign is best off because he separated from everyone, equally. The one who accepts all others as his own is tolerant of others as equals as well, but will inevitably be confused, and overwhelmed by the need to upkeep this equal acceptance. I think Todorov is getting at the idea that maybe equal tolerance is better more logical, and far more practical than equal acceptance.
No comments:
Post a Comment