OPINION –
That said, individual ownership, encouraged by the laws of hyperconsumption and the prevailing egocentrism (what today we could call “the culture of selfies »…), has, in my opinion, only a function of seduction and self-satisfaction. This is simply a codified way, with money as the benchmark, of discriminating between the “haves” and the “have-nots” while reserving authority for a materialistic elite.
Since inheritance (which I associate with the “idea of eternity”) emerges here as a central issue in man’s progress as an engaged individual and as a social being, let us think about the different meanings and forms we can give it.
What leads to leaving a legacy, to passing on? Why give as an inheritance? And what to give? We could initially say, in a rather banal way, that it is the awareness of one’s own death that leads one to think about the (collective) usefulness of the actions undertaken and the works produced during one’s life: how will these benefit one’s peers? and its environment? But above all I believe that intention is part of a basic natural impulse, which aims (all in all in a completely selfish way) at one’s own fulfillment by participating in that of others; the empathy that fundamentally distinguishes us from the beast.
There are two dimensions to consider: tribal heritage (what we leave to our loved ones, to our children), and universal heritage (what we leave indifferently to humanity). In this sense, it seems to me that everyone’s responsibility is double, indeed I would say first and foremost universal, to the extent that the family can be perceived (beyond its obvious protective functions) as an artificial and restrictive system based on faith in the sacredness of “blood ties”, especially when we measure the damage on individuals who remain under the influence of their parents, or more generally of the tribe, during adulthood.
If the legacy left to descendants is formally, legally, according to cultural and material precepts, what is “left to the world” is instead unquantifiable, even elusive, because it is founded on a widespread, spiritual, altruistic and by definition informal basis. Here is what I mean, a little more concretely, by “universal heritage”: a professional know-how, an artistic or scientific work, a political will or a philosophical thought (not necessarily formulated and theorized, but at least transmitted from a given behavior), and even more banally what I would define, in human relationships, “faith in the other”, that is, a dynamic, an energy that we communicate around us as the most efficient of beliefs, like that of the parent or the ‘teacher who pupil.
Faith in humanity is the secret, invisible and total freewhich participates more massively in this idea of eternity. Because this is what we urgently need to rediscover: the freedom of things and actions performed, in a world of algorithms, controls and systematic profits, where everything is monetized and ideological. It’s about giving way again to the grace of exchanges, to the possibility of encounters, to the love – and not the fear – of time.
And this is precisely the first, essential function of culture: increase. Educate through know-how, will, art, sport and communion with ideas. Evoking nature, beauty, life and the need for their renewal, through social and ideal proposals, through models of creation, innovation and overcoming. But a society that has expelled its artists, its writers, its scientists and its thinkers in favor of officially preferring impostors, communicators and co-opted perverts cannot reasonably claim harmony.
No, talent has not disappeared. We have simply silenced him, suffocated him, excluded him, even condemned him, in the name of worldly tribalism and the ideological tyranny of the media, which makes repeated warmongers appear as “philosophers”, noise for music, novels for masterpieces, literature or propaganda for journalism.
But talent is everywhere, very present, in the patience and anonymity of citizens, far from Parisian salons and overexposed scenes: its scent spreads silently throughout the world as an uncontrollable remedy for injustice, and, affirming its truth in solidarity , falls on the predatory authorities like a barrage of Kalashnikovs. Justice, peaceful and real, is only a matter of time. And bold…
What will remain, humanly and spiritually, of these appearances of artists, of these appearances of politics that are imposed on us, in an indecent and increasingly aggressive way, as a permanent invitation to insurrection? What will remain of the crooks, the corrupt and the untouchables in power? Nothing. They will leave behind them the memory of harmful beings, of unfortunate ugliness, which could not be cured or put in their place. But how long will they dare to confiscate our time?
Interview Between Time.news Editor and Legacy Studies Expert
Editor: Welcome to Time.news! Today, we have the privilege of speaking with Dr. Elena Roux, an expert in legacy studies and social philosophy. Elena, thank you for joining us.
Dr. Roux: Thank you for having me! I’m excited to discuss these pressing topics surrounding legacy and individual ownership.
Editor: In your opinion, the concept of individual ownership, often associated with hyperconsumption and a culture of self-centeredness, creates divisions between the “haves” and “have-nots.” Can you elaborate on this?
Dr. Roux: Certainly. The culture we live in today encourages individual ownership as a means of validation – a way to showcase wealth and status. This reinforces materialism, creating a divide where authority and privilege align with material possessions. The challenge is to shift from this egocentric mindset to one that values empathy and collective well-being.
Editor: That raises an interesting point about empathy and legacy. You mentioned in your article that the awareness of mortality prompts individuals to consider the utility of their actions for future generations. Is there a specific driving force behind this desire to leave a legacy?
Dr. Roux: Absolutely. The natural human impulse to leave a legacy often ties back to the instinct for self-fulfillment through the betterment of others. This creates a dynamic where we not only seek to validate our existence but also strive to contribute meaningfully to our community and the world. It’s a reflection of our empathy and interconnectedness.
Editor: You discuss tribal heritage versus universal heritage. How do individuals balance these two responsibilities?
Dr. Roux: It’s a delicate balance. On one hand, we have our obligations to our loved ones – the immediate family and community. However, the universal heritage, which encompasses contributions that benefit humanity as a whole, should be at the forefront. This broader perspective prompts individuals to think about their legacy not just in terms of tangible wealth passed down but also in terms of knowledge, culture, and values shared with the world.
Editor: Speaking of universal heritage, how would you define what is left to the world as “unquantifiable” but essential?
Dr. Roux: The universal heritage is often intangible. It encapsulates things like the wisdom we impart, the creative and scientific endeavors we pursue, and the deeper “faith in humanity” we foster. This goes beyond mere material inheritance; it includes the relationships we nurture and the positive energy we bring into the world. Such legacies might be less visible, but they can resonate through generations and have a profound impact.
Editor: You also mentioned the importance of culture in nurturing this legacy. How can society foster a culture that encourages genuine contributions rather than superficial achievements?
Dr. Roux: It starts with valuing authentic creativity and critical thought over mere consumerism or sensationalism. We need to create environments that celebrate artists, thinkers, and innovators who challenge the status quo. By doing so, we empower individuals to engage deeply with their passions, nurturing a culture that prioritizes growth, art, and the holistic development of society.
Editor: That’s a refreshing perspective, especially in a world dominated by profit-driven motives. How do we effectively “rediscover the freedom of things and actions performed,” as you put it?
Dr. Roux: Rediscovering that freedom involves reconnecting with our intrinsic motivations rather than those imposed by society. It requires a collective shift toward valuing genuine interactions over transactional ones. By prioritizing relationships, community engagement, and the joy of creation, we allow ourselves to move away from material constraints and embrace a more fulfilling existence.
Editor: Elena, thank you for your insights today. It’s crucial for us to contemplate our legacies and how we approach our responsibilities to both individuals and society at large.
Dr. Roux: Thank you for the conversation. It’s vital we continue to reflect on these themes as they shape the future we aspire to create.
Editor: Absolutely! We appreciate your time, and I encourage our readers to reflect on the legacies they wish to leave behind.