This blog post explores how the conflict between an individual’s originality and social influence, which arises during the formation of thought, can be harmoniously overcome.
Thought is more a product of the social community than of the individual. While individual thoughts exist in diverse forms depending on the person, the foundational ideas that shape them are social products. Society forms specific value and belief systems, and individuals grow within them, developing their own ideas under their influence. This implies that an individual’s ideas cannot exist completely independently. An individual selects one or several of these archetypes according to their own judgment to form their own unique ideas. However, when ideas that existed externally in various forms enter an individual’s mind, they do not necessarily become unified or harmonious. It is not uncommon for contradictory thoughts to become entangled within the mind, causing confusion in judgment.
Ideas accepted by an individual often initially branch out in multiple directions, creating a tumult within the mind. This tumult of ideas signifies, at first, the richness of their thought. However, this richness can sometimes lead to mental conflict and confusion. Particularly in an era like modern society, overflowing with a deluge of information and ideas, the volume of thoughts and information an individual must absorb increases exponentially. Consequently, many become overwhelmed. What matters most at this point is the process of organizing and harmonizing this tumult to forge a unified ideology. Only when this process succeeds does an individual’s ideology truly deepen.
The action-oriented individual allows one particular thought to dominate, suppressing the emergence of other ideas, thereby steadying the direction of their actions. They sometimes demonstrate decisive resolve to overcome confusion, transforming their thoughts into concrete actions. Therefore, great doers rarely become profound thinkers. Conversely, contemplative individuals often fail to reach conclusions because conflicting ideas vie for legitimacy within their minds. Such thinkers tend to lean toward skepticism. Their search for multiple grounds to guide action can hinder swift action or action itself. Thus, contemplatives rarely become doers. However, they can compensate for this lack of decisiveness with deep insight. The advantage of avoiding erroneous judgments stems precisely from this.
The value of thought lies in enabling a broader and deeper understanding of a matter by examining it from multiple angles. This is because actions grounded in more deeply considered thought are more likely to yield better results. Yet, no absolute ideology can guide humanity to the ultimate good. Ideology is ultimately relative to its time. The ideology of one era cannot necessarily be deemed correct in another, as values and perceptions shift with the passage of time. People generally judge right and wrong based on the circumstances of their era or their own position, and they hope that their perspective becomes the universal human ideology.
Conversely, people desire others to share their own thoughts. Yet when someone else’s ideas appear superior, they may quietly adopt them as their own. This tendency to follow others seems to conflict with human autonomy. However, it also serves as the foundation for establishing universal ideas through mutual understanding. Ultimately, the value of ideas shines when the originality of subjectivity harmonizes with the potential for objective acceptance. This means that an individual’s ideas do not remain confined to the personal level; they gain meaning and become richer on the social level.
