The Narcissism of Minor Differences

 

The narcissism of minor differences is a concept that promotes the idea that human beings have a tendency to want to promote their differences with others rather than similarities. A consequence has been that human beings often seek to ensure that they emphasize on differences to such an extent that there comes a time when they end up in conflict with others who they believe to be different. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the theory of narcissism of minor differences as a nature of humanity, a form of self-identity, a form of uniformity, and finally, its negative effects.

The theory of narcissism of minor differences can be used to effectively explain the aggressive nature of human beings. Individuals tend to seek to enhance the differences between them, even though they may have the same origins, because they seek to advance their aggression towards one another. There is often a failure among them to recognize that rather than being different, they are actually quite similar and this creates a situation where they seek to magnify their differences to such an extent that they create a gap that seems unbridgeable. When this theory is considered from the perspective of human aggression, it explains a lot concerning the manner through which individuals end up not being able to handle being similar to one another because others remind them too much of themselves (Muris, Merckelbach, Otgaar, and Meijer, 2017). It might also be because of the desire to be so different from one another that they do not see their deficiencies; a situation that can be considered a cause of the aggression that they show towards one another. Therefore, minor differences end up becoming extremely pertinent to the lives of individuals because it makes them come to terms with their aggressive nature.

The narcissism of minor differences can also be made use of in determining the manner through which self-identity develops. This is especially the case considering that individuals have ended up forming groups that they believe hold similar characteristics and make them superior to others. A consequence has been that some groups have developed centuries of hatred and aggression towards one another to such an extent that they have not been able to determine the extremely greater number of similarities between them. The case of the Shia and Sunni divide among Muslims is an extreme example of the manner through which the narcissism of minor differences can end up disrupting the lives of individuals to such an extent that the way that they self-identify is based on the minor differences rather than the greater number of similarities between them (Nuruzzaman, 2017). The failure to better understand each other can lead to situations where it is difficult to bridge the divide made from minor differences. This is the case when it comes to the Shia-Sunni divide, which has been ongoing for centuries and has led to a situation where both sides consider themselves to be superior to the other and also look at their counterparts as heretics because they do not have the same minor political beliefs (Van Notten, 2014). They also fail to recognize that despite their minor differences, they both strongly identify as Muslims, and have the same practices of worship that bind all Muslims.

One of the most significant aspects of the narcissism of minor differences is that it involves a situation where despite an emphasis on their uniqueness, they are actually quite similar. Such is the case with societies such as the United States, which consider themselves exceptional because they pride themselves in attributes such as living in a society governed by democratic institutions, the rule of law, and an emphasis on individualism (Fosshage and Hershberg, 2014). However, these attributes tend to be based on more similarities than differences among individuals in society. This is especially considering that because of their beliefs in these attributes and their exceptionalism, rather than emphasizing their differences, these individuals are actually submitting to a form of uniformity. Therefore, without even realizing it, their indulging in the narcissism of minor differences has led individuals towards the bridging of these differences and essentially becoming a more cohesive society. Under such circumstances, it becomes possible for the narcissism of minor differences to act as a means of bringing people together rather than keeping them apart.

The narcissism of minor differences more often than not ends up leading to chaos. Chaos comes about because individuals of similar origins or beliefs are forced into situations where they take on antagonistic positions towards one another. This is to such an extent that they fail to consider their common origins and their similarities and are instead more focused on seeking to advance their differences. The conflict between the Croats and the Serbs is an example of such a situation because these peoples are of a common origin and their languages are so close that they are practically dialects of the same language (Brodić, Amelio, and Milivojević, 2015). However, the enmity and sense of superiority towards one another has led them into conflict that has lasted many years (Reidy, et al, 2015). The chaos that has come about, especially from the attempts of the Serbs to dominate the Croats can be considered the negative result of the narcissism of minor differences because it has led these individuals towards a failure to advance their similarities. Instead, wars have been fought between these two peoples and there has been massive loss of life and property that should not have happened.

In conclusion, the narcissism of minor differences can be considered an extremely destructive force in human societies. This is because it leads individuals towards a false sense of superiority and uniqueness that makes them blind to the similarities that they have with others. A consequence is that it magnifies differences that are virtually nonexistent and makes individuals fail to come together so that their similarities can enable them to build a more cohesive and just society that cater for all their needs. The examples provided above show that getting into a situation where the narcissism of minor differences is prominent is easier than getting out of it.

Pre-Modern to Modern View of Nature and Death

 

Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson in their poetry address diverse issues concerning nature and death. These are two aspects of life that all human beings have to live with and have to come to terms with the fact that they will have an effect on them. In this paper, there will be an attempt to compare the pre-modern to the modern view of nature through an analysis of the poetry of Whitman and Dickinson.

One of the most important aspects concerning the views of these poets is that they promote the idea that death is essentially something that has to be feared. This is especially considering that in the modern world, people more often than not, because of the adoption of science as the mainstay of everyday life, are afraid of dying. In addition, the concept of nature is one that is seen to be hostile to human beings and that there is need to bring about its taming. The taming of nature is considered an essential aspect of being civilized; meaning that being in touch with nature is viewed as regressive. Therefore, the modernist view concerning nature and death are essentially hostile to both because human beings do not often have control over these aspects of life.

The pre-modern and modern poetry’s views concerning nature and death have a considerable number of similarities. When it comes to death, both views look upon it as an extremely personal experience. This is exemplified in the pre-modern era where there was the belief that death brought about a level of relief from the problems of everyday life. Moreover, it was intensely personal because it was closely tied to religious beliefs in such a way that there was the promotion of life after death. Whitman, in “When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd”, seeks to understand death and questions why God allows it to take place (Whitman). The modern perspective is also fairly personal when it comes to death because it is believed to involve the complete end of a life. In the poetry of both eras, nature is viewed as being beyond the control of human beings, with the latter having to live the best way that they can within it.

Despite the similarities between them, there are considerable differences between the themes involving nature and death in the pre-modern and modern eras. Among the most significant of these is that unlike in the modern era, in the pre-modern era, there was an acceptance of death an inevitable, but this was tempered by the belief that there was life after death. Moreover, acts of nature were believed to be the will of God and because of it could not be questioned. In the modern era, nature is viewed as essentially being hostile to human beings, as seen in Dickinson’s "Apparently with no surprise" where she questions the benevolence of God (Dickinson). This is an important perspective especially the case considering that these beliefs have become influenced by science.

In conclusion, the pre-modern and modern views of death and nature are displayed in the works of Dickinson and Whitman. In the analysis above, there has been an attempt to show the similarities and differences between the beliefs concerning death and nature in these two eras. The result is the realization that despite the similarities and differences, the views were extremely personal.

Strategic Intelligence

 

Strategic intelligence is the process of collecting, analyzing, and making use of information or intelligence in order to develop well-informed policy in both the civilian and military sectors. It has become an important aspect of the contemporary world to such an extent that it has led to a situation where it has become indispensable in both the public and private sectors. A result of this situation is that it has become essential to ensure that there is the advancement of means through which to advance the use of strategic intelligence in the achievement of a diversity of goals aimed at enhancing the effectiveness in government. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the manner through which strategic intelligence provides value to national policy and decision makers. This process will be conducted through an assessment of its five main values mainly its provision of foresight, visioning, system thinking, motivation, and partnering.

Foresight is one of the most fundamental values of strategic intelligence because it allows policy makers to understand the various trends that are prevalent. A result is that it enables them to either take advantage of them or make contingency plans aimed at making sure that there is the advancement of national interest. Under these circumstances, strategic intelligence enables policymakers to assess every possibility that might come about during the implementation of policy and in the process come up with means through which they can ensure the success of these policies.[1] An example of the foresight aspect of strategic intelligence or what can be considered its lack is the events following Hurricane Katrina. A consequence of this situation was that it led to a situation where many lives which could have been saved were lost because of the lack of foresight from the policymakers of the federal government. There was a failure to make use of the intelligence available to make contingency plans to ensure that such a disaster did not catch all people involved unawares. Therefore, strategic intelligence is important in helping policymakers develop adequate measures aimed at preventing the emergence of disastrous situations such as the one mentioned in the example above.

Another important aspect of strategic intelligence is that of visioning because it allows policymakers to visualize an ideal future and work towards its achievement. This is a process that seeks to ensure that there is the creation of means through which all stakeholders are engaged towards the achievement of a vision.[2] It also involves finding out the diverse hurdles that have to be overcome in order to make the ideal future possible and this is an important process because it allows policymakers to become more involved with other stakeholders, especially those who will be directly affected, so that critical decisions can be made effectively. A result of this situation is that policymakers are able to create and implement policies that are not only intelligent, but also well thought out so that they can be able to make the ideal future come into being. While the eventual outcome might be slightly different from what was originally conceived, the conception makes it possible for the implementation process to take place effectively. Visioning also allows for the full support of all stakeholders to be acquired to such an extent that it becomes an essential part of the decision-making process.

Furthermore, strategic intelligence makes it possible for decision makers to come up with means through which system thinking can be made possible. This is the ability to bring in a diversity of elements together so that that can be made use of for the achievement of a common purpose.[3] When it comes to matters of national interest, this value is vital because it allows policymakers to look into a large number of avenues through which national interests can be secured with as little cost as possible to the taxpayer. Achieving this goal is therefore essential because a common purpose is retained while at the same time making sure that there is the creation of sophisticated means through which policies can be developed and implemented. Moreover, policies having the best effect possible is an integral aspect of system thinking because there is the involvement of a considerable number of people as well as agencies which have to work together in order to advance national interests. There are also lower risks of instances where conflicts of interest between government agencies can end up marring the implementation of policies because all agencies involved will have to come to terms with one another in order to achieve a common goal.

Strategic intelligence also provides value because it encourages individuals from different agencies to work together effectively. Motivation is an essential value, especially when it comes to matters concerning the development and implementation of national policy. This is because it involves having an understanding of the motivations of other people as well as countries and coming up with means through which the national interest will be best protected. It also becomes possible to encourage individuals directly involved in policymaking to make sure that they are able to bring about their best abilities aimed at making sure that they observe and scrutinize the capabilities of their counterparts in other countries so that they can make decisions based on this intelligence.[4] This is especially pertinent when it comes to the development of a military or diplomatic strategy in order to handle a diverse number of issues that take place in the international arena. Such a situation often needs policymakers who have personality intelligence; an ability that ensures that individuals are able to better understand the motivations of people and make use of this intelligence to their advantage. Securing a strong national policy needs motivated people meaning that it is important for them to be constantly encouraged to undertake their work effectively.

Strategic intelligence also involves partnering because it is the best means through which useful alliances can be made. These alliances can be with other countries, individuals, organizations, or groups whose interests coincide with those of the nation. A result is that national policy is an ever changing situation which ensures that there is the advancement of means through which the interests of the nation are protected. Strategic intelligence makes it possible for partnerships to become more useful to the nation because policymakers are forced to engage with others, mostly in the private sector, in order to come up with ways through which they can achieve the objectives that they have set.[5] In addition, it becomes possible for partnerships aimed at achieving specific objectives to be formed and these can be made use of to further national policy as well as decision making. The promotion of partnerships that can make use of strategic intelligence to advance national policy is important because it allows stakeholders to make informed decisions concerning how they would like their society to become in future.

In conclusion, strategic intelligence is important in the advancement of national policy and decision making. This is especially considering that it is a means through which to ensure that informed decision making in the formulation of policy is undertaken. In the discussion above, there has been an analysis of the manner through which strategic intelligence provides value to national policy and decision makers. This has been through an assessment of its five main values, which are its provision of foresight, visioning, system thinking, motivation, and partnering. Therefore, strategic intelligence adds considerable value to national policy and decision makers because they are able to use its various aspects to further national interests.

---

[1] Joseph Voros, "A Generic Foresight Process Framework," foresight 5, no. 3 (2003): 3.

[2] Ibid., 6.

[3] Jon D Michaels, "All the President's Spies: Private-Public Intelligence Partnerships in the War on Terror," California Law Review 96, no. 4 (2008): 907.

[4] Ibid., 945.

[5] Jerry H Ratcliffe, Intelligence-Led Policing (Routledge, 2016), 6.

Daisy Miller (Review)

 

Daisy is portrayed as a character who is not only innocent, but also an individual that wishes to ensure that she attains her freedom. In addition, she is an individual that seems to believe that Europe is a fantasy world and has the ambition to become married to a member of the European upper class so that she can become a part of that society. Daisy is shown to be extremely naïve because she seems to be very trusting of individuals. One of the most important ways through which her naiveté is depicted is in the situation where she agrees to visit the Château de Chillon with Winterbourne despite barely knowing him for a half hour. A result of this situation is that she is easily carried away and she displays characteristics that can be considered oblivious to the environment and culture around her. Her easy familiarity with individuals all round her is also mentioned, with Mrs. Costello disapproving of the way that Daisy shows too much familiarity with the courier (James, 1879, p. 400). Such familiarity is often a sign of a lose woman, but Daisy does not realize how her actions are making her appear to others within the society that she desires to become a part of. The failure by Daisy to realize or weigh the consequences of her actions can be considered a sign that she is totally oblivious and she is headstrong goes ahead with her activities. This situation is what leads to disaster because she is unable to see her tragic end until it is too late.

Daisy flirtatiously plays with Frederick Winterbourne, an individual that she has just recently met. Winterbourne, on the other hand, thinks of her as just a flirt, and this is to such an extent that he feels that were she not American, it would have been inappropriate. He further believes that it is essential to make sure that she is not judged by European standards, which are what he has become used to over the years that he has spent in Europe. Winterbourne compares Daisy to European women and finds her to be an innocent individual, despite her flirtatious nature (James, 1879, p. 397). As a man that has essentially become used to the European way of life and the way that the women of the continent behaves, he is at first wary of Daisy’s flirtatiousness, but comes to the conclusion that rather than being a lose individual, she is actually just an innocent flirt. This attitude is essential in helping in the development of friendship between them to such an extent that when Winterbourne tells her that he will be going to Geneva the next day, Daisy feels some disappointment and makes him promise her that they will meet in Rome within the year. The manner through which Daisy plays with Winterbourne is an important plot in the story because it shows her to be an innocent individual that seems to appear world wise. A consequence is that she ends putting herself in situations that cause concern to Winterbourne, as in the case where she is seeing Giovanelli, a young Italian of questionable character (James, 1879, p. 423).

Plato's Euthyphro

 

The theory of forms that is presented in Euthyphro is an extremely important manner of understanding humanity and the way that they make decisions concerning what they believe to be right. It involves a conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro concerning the meaning of piety, with Euthyphro stating that piety involves what one does at a particular time. For example, at the time of his conversation with Socrates, Euthyphro is seeking to prosecute a wrongdoer, who also happens to be his father (Woods & Pack, 2007, p. 2). This is an extremely bold step because it shows that Euthypro is determined to implement the law despite the personal cost to himself and to his family. In addition, the theory of forms is also shown within the conversation through the desire to ensure that there is an understanding of the manner through which individuals can undertake actions that are pleasing to the gods. Determining what is dear to the gods is essential in the process of undertaking actions that upholds this belief. One of the most significant examples that is given during the conversation through which individuals can ensure that they do what pleases the gods is comparing the actions of Zeus against his father Cronos. Zeus punished his own father because of the latter’s tyranny; leading to a situation where Cronos was overthrown and Zeus took up the mantle of the leadership of the gods (Woods & Pack, 2007, p. 4). While this may have been the case, one of the most significant questions that is asked by Socrates is whether actions should be undertake because the gods love it or because the gods love it because it is pious, especially considering that not all the gods have the same beliefs.

One of the most fundamental aspects of the theory of forms as handled in Plato’s Phaedo is that it involves tackling general issues in such a way that they ultimately turn into one or more general ideas. To debate a single issue can lead to a situation where individuals come to find out that there are other significant issues behind it that leads to further debate concerning the issue. This is especially considering a discussion concerning an issue such as the superiority of either fearlessness or goodness. An argument between the opposing sides cannot take place effectively unless both parties have knowledge concerning their respective points. Therefore, without an understanding of what either fearlessness or goodness is, it cannot be possible for them to have a discussion because to do so would be pointless. If they are proffered with a definition of the subject under discussion, but the definition is one that is riddled with criticism, they can be able to ensure that there is a means through which to bring about an understanding of that the definition is not. A consequence is that criticism allows individuals to look into a deeper meaning of the situation that it being discussed in such a way that leads to the achievement of the ultimate truth, where individuals have to act not based on their beliefs, but based on what the end result will likely be. Therefore, while the criticism of a definition that has been proffered can be disheartening, it also provides a way through which better instruction can be given.

Another aspect of the manner through which Plato handles the theory of forms is that some general notions can end up setting ideal limits or standards. The end result is that individuals can be able to ensure that while they deviate slightly from a notion, it does not go too far away that t creates a degree of confusion. A consequence is that individuals are encouraged not to stick too strictly to their beliefs that they fail to consider the other aspects of life around them. What they believe to be true in one case can end up not actually being true in another, as seen in Socrates’ decision to drink the poison himself, and this has to be put in mind if there is to be a level of honesty with oneself (Plato, p. 52). Undertaking such actions is essential in coming up with a sense of morality in society because the motivations of individuals do not necessarily mean that the end result will either be good or bad. Instead, it becomes essential for individuals to not only critically understand their various standpoints, but also to consider the opinions of others in such a way that while they continue to pursue what they believe to be true, they also seek to consider the motivations of others. In this way, it becomes possible to make informed decisions that cater not only to personal needs, but also to the needs of others in society to such an extent that there is a level of harmony. Thus, while discussing or describing an individual as being one that is improving in the achievement of honesty and loyalty, it essentially means that he is getting closer to perfecting honesty and loyalty.

Another fundamental aspect of handling the theory of forms is that it seeks to advance the idea of timeless truths. The knowledge that individuals have concerning the various aspects of everyday life tend to be tensed truths, and these are based on what they believe. A consequence is that it is difficult to determine whether certain notions are either truths or falsehoods and this is to such an extent that there is a potential of knowledge being based on tensed truths or falsehoods. It is therefore necessary to consider all beliefs from various angles in such a way that ensures that while they are believed to be essential truths, they might also be false to such an extent that they end up having a negative effect on the individuals involved. The case of Euthyphro can be applied in this situation because this individual was ready to prosecute his own father based on the belief that Zeus, the chief Greek god, did the same to his own father. He shows a failure to consider how his actions are not only going to affect his father, but him as well because their relationship will be ruined as a result. Therefore, the observance of what are considered as timeless truths from various angles ensures that individuals avoid undertaking certain actions that might end up creating dilemmas for them while at the same time leading them to make serious mistakes that might affect them for the rest of their lives. What is considered as timeless truth cannot be measured based on how long it has been so and can only be accepted as it is.

      The manner through which the ideas that are contained within the theory of forms are addressed can be considered important in understanding the diverse aspects of life. This is especially considering that the theory of forms is ontology of concepts that seek to ensure that there is the creation of means through which a precise definition can be achieved. A result is that it becomes possible to make sure that those concepts that are considered timeless remain so and these in such a way that advances the understanding, which individuals have of them. They are essentially means through which concepts can be rationalized because they exist independently of the real thing or entity. Through the connection or contact that the human mind or soul has with the ordinary things and events that take place in their environment, they can at times end up attaining level of contact with the ideals and objects of the transcendent world to such an extent that it proves the immortality of the soul. This immortality is what can be considered an essential aspect of Plato’s definition of the Forms.