“A man possessing character, a man of action, is fundamentally a limited creature.” This line from Notes from Underground really stuck out to me. A few lines before, the narrator was saying that not only could he not become spiteful, he couldn’t become anything at all. At first I found this to be very strange. But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I personally have found myself, on several occasions, questioning the defining elements of my character. When I help others and do good things, others may say that I am a good person. I, however, will think back to the bad things I have done and know immediately that this is not the case. On the other hand, if I where to be called into question for doing something wrong, I would immediately defend myself for pointing out my goodness.
If a person is consistently good, they become known as good person. To protect his or her reputation, he or she must do good, thereby limiting himself to goodness. The same could be said for those who have bad character. To truly remain unlimited in thought or action, one must remain unpredictable. However, by this logic, (“only a fool can become something”) I think everyone is a fool. If a person is never defined by any one characteristic, doesn’t that mean he has become unpredictable?
Commented on Katelyn’s “Self-suffering”
Also, if a person is never defined by characteristic, they'd have to live a bipolar lifestyle; but more than a bipolar, there would have to be many actions that ranked from angelic to demonic, and that person would be very hard to figure out.
ReplyDeletealso, whenever i'm doing something "good" for somebody else i often wonder about my personal motives. like "am i doing this because i think i personally have the power to help these people, because i am somehow good and better than them, or am i doing this through the love and power of the Holy Spirit who enables me to be good?"