HistoricAmbition
Registered Member
Vanity is: One’s good feeling of superiority to others by comparing his R1 belongings with others’.
We are good at distinguishing economic base and superstructure. But when we have enough guarantees for safety and comfort, we are not going to construct real superstructure of spirit but to be slaves of another vulgarity– vanity. We go after more money, go after more power, to be enviers of brands. Though productive efficiency and other techniques such as internet are developing rapidly, spiritual life of mankind is not improved, and even fatigue is not alleviated as far as mankind as a whole concerned. People are still in a desperate hurry for R1 guarantees they don’t really need for safety and comfort but need for vanity. Many useless products are invented and produced. And when market is saturated, commercials are bombed to people, and so-called experts try to lure them according to vanitism to buy (even with some faked theories) those trashes. Vanitism is another barricade to superstructure after easism. And what is more awful is, vanity relies on comparison, so vanity at large is bottomless. Because of that, vanitism disenables the possibility that people would pursue better spiritual life when the marginal utility of material comes down after prosperity of material construction.
To meet all the demands of the people (see Proof 3: Needs, combinations of PSKR, Chapter1), there are two basic ways:
The first way is to improve productivity and produce more material wealth to meet the demand for ease sufficiently and sublate this kind of need by the decrease of marginal effect, so that people would pursue other needs.
There are two insurmountable difficulties in this way. One is that, as what we mentioned in the Section of Vanitism, out of the scope of easism, there is the boundless grassland of vanitism. Vanity is a bottomless abyss which couldn’t be filled in with material supply, for vanity is on the basis of “difference”, that’s on the basis of contempt for others and others’ suffering from being humiliated by comparison (though usually societies wouldn’t point it out for they need to take vanitism as a crucial engine of their development). And vanity is zero-sum as far as all the people are concerned (Someone may argue, “According to world significance function, people could assign being humiliated as a dispensable thing or even a positive thing. Then, the total sum of vanity wouldn’t be zero.” We should say that if one did so, it had already been a matter beyond vanitism. Vanity relies on resource occupation, if the fact is not the case, if one who is humiliated has been independent of occupation comparison by assignment, the person who is to humiliate wouldn’t get the superiority complex from his opposite. Hence, the sum between the two people is still zero. And if the person who is to humiliate is too slow to take notice of the other’s independent reaction, he would save his vanity, but finally they would probably understand each other; or if the other happens to be an infant or one who doesn’t understand the humiliation, he would save his vanity, but in general, there are few fools indeed in the world, and infants would grow up and understand finally. Another case is that the humiliated pretend not to understand the humiliations to him. Hypocrisism works here. But he does feel hurt inside. Therefore, vanity is zero-sum as far as all the people are concerned.). Furthermore, there is another problem of the way: paying over-attention to ease would result in weakening people, and all the problems of culture of the weak would follow. Thus, the way couldn’t make the society develop further qualitatively since a certain stage. People could only rotate at the low-level if we adopt this way.
The other way is the way of culture of the strong– reforming humanity: with basic life guarantees, spiritual construction would be listed at the top, making people the strong first and then making them spread their strength– PSKR– into reality, which is real life, and at the same time consideration is given to material construction and it is regurgitation-fed with the fruits of spiritual construction. The way to Humanity-Big is the way of liberating ideas, reinforcing persistence, creativity, and aesthetics of tragedy, optimistic belief, nobleness, loftiness and so on, and by which techniques, production and consumption are led. The two problems of the first way could be overcome. A state not only provides welfare, but also makes people’s hearts nobler and greater (the method is to make them stronger).
We are good at distinguishing economic base and superstructure. But when we have enough guarantees for safety and comfort, we are not going to construct real superstructure of spirit but to be slaves of another vulgarity– vanity. We go after more money, go after more power, to be enviers of brands. Though productive efficiency and other techniques such as internet are developing rapidly, spiritual life of mankind is not improved, and even fatigue is not alleviated as far as mankind as a whole concerned. People are still in a desperate hurry for R1 guarantees they don’t really need for safety and comfort but need for vanity. Many useless products are invented and produced. And when market is saturated, commercials are bombed to people, and so-called experts try to lure them according to vanitism to buy (even with some faked theories) those trashes. Vanitism is another barricade to superstructure after easism. And what is more awful is, vanity relies on comparison, so vanity at large is bottomless. Because of that, vanitism disenables the possibility that people would pursue better spiritual life when the marginal utility of material comes down after prosperity of material construction.
To meet all the demands of the people (see Proof 3: Needs, combinations of PSKR, Chapter1), there are two basic ways:
The first way is to improve productivity and produce more material wealth to meet the demand for ease sufficiently and sublate this kind of need by the decrease of marginal effect, so that people would pursue other needs.
There are two insurmountable difficulties in this way. One is that, as what we mentioned in the Section of Vanitism, out of the scope of easism, there is the boundless grassland of vanitism. Vanity is a bottomless abyss which couldn’t be filled in with material supply, for vanity is on the basis of “difference”, that’s on the basis of contempt for others and others’ suffering from being humiliated by comparison (though usually societies wouldn’t point it out for they need to take vanitism as a crucial engine of their development). And vanity is zero-sum as far as all the people are concerned (Someone may argue, “According to world significance function, people could assign being humiliated as a dispensable thing or even a positive thing. Then, the total sum of vanity wouldn’t be zero.” We should say that if one did so, it had already been a matter beyond vanitism. Vanity relies on resource occupation, if the fact is not the case, if one who is humiliated has been independent of occupation comparison by assignment, the person who is to humiliate wouldn’t get the superiority complex from his opposite. Hence, the sum between the two people is still zero. And if the person who is to humiliate is too slow to take notice of the other’s independent reaction, he would save his vanity, but finally they would probably understand each other; or if the other happens to be an infant or one who doesn’t understand the humiliation, he would save his vanity, but in general, there are few fools indeed in the world, and infants would grow up and understand finally. Another case is that the humiliated pretend not to understand the humiliations to him. Hypocrisism works here. But he does feel hurt inside. Therefore, vanity is zero-sum as far as all the people are concerned.). Furthermore, there is another problem of the way: paying over-attention to ease would result in weakening people, and all the problems of culture of the weak would follow. Thus, the way couldn’t make the society develop further qualitatively since a certain stage. People could only rotate at the low-level if we adopt this way.
The other way is the way of culture of the strong– reforming humanity: with basic life guarantees, spiritual construction would be listed at the top, making people the strong first and then making them spread their strength– PSKR– into reality, which is real life, and at the same time consideration is given to material construction and it is regurgitation-fed with the fruits of spiritual construction. The way to Humanity-Big is the way of liberating ideas, reinforcing persistence, creativity, and aesthetics of tragedy, optimistic belief, nobleness, loftiness and so on, and by which techniques, production and consumption are led. The two problems of the first way could be overcome. A state not only provides welfare, but also makes people’s hearts nobler and greater (the method is to make them stronger).