Published on May 19th, 2010.

layout options

dark - light

When I first wrote on utopianism, I was eighteen years old and a senior in high school. The idea was immature and the writing style quite awful. Would you believe I really tried to make a worth chart? A chart to measure your own worth to the world, as if it were even relevant. The utopian goal was to better the world, and through doing that, better yourself. A noble cause, but eventually, everyone had their own ideas of how to better the world, and there was no clear-cut definition of what a utopian was. Over three and a half years later, I've refined the idea and am going to share it with you.

The Model Utopian

The belief, in summary, is that humans have the greatest potential among all species of the Earth. Key traits that make us human are, then, the most important aspects of yourself that you should be developing. An example would be intelligence - we are the smartest species on the planet. We can form multiple, complex languages. We're adaptable, through technological advances, to virtually any environment. The model utopian is of above average intelligence. This is not some draconian, exclusive view; anyone born healthy can hold above average intelligence. With the availability of the Internet came the dissolution of any reason for ignorance. Yet, most people still, when holding a belief, only research the side that they want to believe in. Most people are happy dwindling away their potentially productive hours on social networks, sleeping, or on practically limitless venues of entertainment. To tell you the model utopian is a better person, is inaccurate. To say they're a better human, is obvious.

Intelligence is so heavily valued because it's central to everything about being sentient. Were humans not sentient creatures, we'd not have advanced technologically. We'd stay instinctive animals, hardly capable of creating societies. We have great bodies that allow us to become a greater species, and to be able to surpass instinct. Dolphins are also very intelligent creatures, but lack the means necessary to technologically evolve their societies. Thus, the humans reign supreme and build structures, destroy the earth and then save it.

Another sentient trait is one that plays a heavy role in our decision-making process: the conscience. Adhering to your conscience is not so hard; any normally functioning, self-aware creature can do it. Some people's consciences are a bit weaker, however, and that's undoubtedly the result of improper conditioning. When I was a boy, I stole a few things, until my mother found out I stole some kid's toy and hid it in my closet. She made me explain that I was sorry, then give the toy to him as his mother looked absolutely disgusted in me. I don't think they ever came back. I learned my lesson, but it's unfortunate that people have never had lessons taught to them, or if they had, they were not in condition to really impress values upon. The utopian must always strive to be a positive - not neutral - influence on their surroundings. A villain who has a utopian work ethic, yet commits awful acts with their abilities, is not a candidate for utopianism. I believe that they're worse than a criminal who hasn't a speck of utopianism; at least they'll screw up.

The only requirement for utopianism is that, as a utopian, you are on a constant quest to better yourself, while positively contributing to the global community. If you have a problem, you'll do your best to fix it, not null or run away from it. If there's anyone to blame, it's probably yourself, and if you decide that it justifiably is your fault, you will take responsibility. When the time comes to voice your thoughts, you'll know how to present your idea accurately, concisely, and hopefully well-mannered. This attitude will ensure that you are intelligent and a pleasure to exchange ideas with.

Instinct

Instinct is a tendency to act in a certain way based on the biology of the subject's species. It provides pre-defined patterns that allow the subject to have an intrinsic understanding of the world around it. Animals, being unable to form complex language to reason with, run wholly on instinct. It should stand apparent that self-aware creatures are unlike the other animals on the planet, and thus we humans can disobey our instincts via superior cognitive thought. It would seem, then, that perhaps instinct should be discouraged for the utopian. After all, if we're attempting to be as sentient as possible, we should strip away anything that makes us like the animals. However, though instinct can at times prove troublesome, it is every part of being sentient as it... isn't!

Instinct only becomes troublesome when people cannot use their sentience to their advantage: the humanity that lets them say no to their instinctive desires. Indeed it is such these days, with the media throwing breasts into every male's face when the chance arises, that the battle vs. succumbing to instinct is not exactly in our favor. However, that is no excuse to succumb. I find that a hefty addiction with males is - bluntly put - masturbation. This is, understandably, popular among teens, and there's nothing wrong with the act itself... until it becomes a habit. This one act is such a chronic habit for some, that they'll declare a whole week off with their friends as a sort of challenge, to stop masturbating. "Naw, dude, I can't do that!" he smiles and declines the challenge, because he knows it: he couldn't do it. There's so many pornographic websites out there that it is too easy for him to succumb to his desires.

"Those who restrain desire do so because theirs is weak enough to be restrained." would quip William Blake, and it's quite important to note this. Blake's quote is so interesting because you'd think, for one moment, that perhaps these masturbatory victims were victims due to a third party; something they can't control. It is true that testosterone encourages sexual desire and libido, but do you know which organ can, remarkably, defeat it each time? The brain, in partnership with the sentience that makes us human. Human enough to restrain ourselves, because if we don't, our desire will fall into a pattern. Every time we enforce the pattern, it will grow stronger, along with our dependency on it. This applies to everyone, not just lustful men. The more you enforce a pattern, the stronger it will be. Depression victims will enter a cycle of ruminating upon negativity, to the point where it seems they're stuck in a cycle. You can surmise, then, that patterns are good to get into only if they are genuinely beneficial to your never-ending quest of being a better human. Some men feel that their dependence on masturbatory practices is not a bad thing; it takes only a short while, and gives them pleasure right from the teat of instinct itself. That is a reasonable argument, so I suggest this to anyone curious about their addictions: perform whatever habit you've fallen into, for three months straight, and then try to not do it for a month. If you believe you can accomplish this, congratulations: you have retained your humanity even when faced with such odds against you. You have gotten into a pattern, yet you can break free at any time. If you believe you would have serious struggle breaking a pattern or addiction, why don't you try it?

This does not relate only to sexuality, and I stress that instinct is not, at its core, a bad thing. There are many times in which instinct can be useful to you. Wilderness survival enthusiasts are happy to explain a feeling of oneness with the Earth, and to be able to live among wildlife just as they would in nomadic societies. At times, instinct has even given someone the ability to perform things they could not normally perform, such as split-second, life-saving decisions - don't step there, a car is going to crush you. Instinct will only be a problem when you have sacrificed your humanity for it, and you will not be a candidate for utopianism at that point until you reverse your ways.

Cold Logic vs. Warm Morality

It shouldn't come as a surprise, being so intellectually-based, that utopianism will side with the most logical conclusion whenever possible. This, then, brings with it criticism on our moral core. You will come to a point in your life (unless you're dreadfully boring) in which you will be presented with multiple choices for a decision, one of which will be the most moral choice, but the other the more logical choice. In robot fiction, the machines will usually talk about how logical they are, while us silly humans are full of impulses and chemical reactions that sway us to make the lesser of decisions. Most people, if they had the choice, would rather make a decision that made them feel better, rather than what would be 'best' for the situation. The Vulcan, a race from the Star Trek universe, have inhibited emotional responses, and throughout the whole universe are considered a "logical" race. They would not, for example, be flustered by an insult, but would instead think of a counter-point to the criticism, and if they could not provide one, would work on developing themselves to correct their perceived faults. Utopians should strive towards being like this. The Vulcan are a great example of a utopian life form, and what's great is that we are not a fictional race, as we are human, and we can actually emulate Vulcan traits while still embracing our impulses and chemical reactions.

As stated, most people would not want to be robots, and they probably wouldn't be too keen on Vulcan either. An example of their logic are as follows: some people in our world will choose a vegetarian diet. Great. Some of those people, however, are not choosing it for the most logical (or mature) reasons. It is not uncommon to engage a vegetarian in discussion about their decision, only to find that they are not doing it for holistic purposes, but instead cite their reason as "protecting the animals". They are limiting their diet, and the reason they will first bring up is because they feel bad for eating animals. In lieu of mentioning potential health risks of meat products, they'll talk about the worst slaughterhouse video they could find on YouTube. Utopians do not base their decisions on such emotional responses: if you like meat, and find its properties to be relevant to your health, continue eating it. The animal is dead already, it won't be mad at you. This all being said, part of being sentient is that we are actually even capable of making these decisions; I do not expect every utopian to be consistently denying their conscience, nor would I even suggest it. The ability to make logical decisions when possible, however, is a trait all utopians require.

A while ago, the United States was dealing with the "issue" of stem cell research. It was the latest debate: god-warriors and feel-goods vs. scientists and progressive-minded people, all over stem cells, which are "master cells" collected from embryos and fetuses that are able to develop into almost any cell in the human body. The general public knew it as this: it could create the cure for many untreatable ailments, including spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and diabetes. Imagine, curing diabetes, it was a completely new thought. However, the media got hold of this process and noted it could make some people uncomfortable, and now America's got an issue. You had people saying it wasn't "God's will" - as if we could speak for God, or as if we knew it even existed - and pamphlets were sent out to Christians saying just how bad destroying life was. Then comes the polling, and most people's source of reference were these pamphlets, or fragments of debates they'd happen to catch. Convince a religious person they're going to sin by casting a vote, they will vote for the opposition. You've now got scientists trying to combat people who know little more than what a nucleus is, and it's all got to be a political issue because it makes people feel bad. You know what's worse than feeling bad? Feeling nothing, which is what spinal patients will go through for the rest of their life. It's this inversion of morality that is so anti-utopian, that it is no wonder to me that most utopians do not belong to an organized religion. Under no circumstances should you deny someone a better life because of any moral implications you feel. Nothing more can be said; refusing to eat animals is one thing, claiming others are going to Hell for allowing scientific research to be conducted, is another. To try to put a stop to it is absolutely unacceptable.

It is commonly accepted that you should be a good person. Some philosophers like to say that morality is not so easily defined by good and bad. That's true, but just because it's true doesn't mean good and bad cannot have a meaning. The utopian mantra for morality is, "Bad to bad, good to good". A good act would be picking up someone's groceries when they dropped them; that is, objectively, just a nice thing to do. Another good thing is charity... unless, of course, you're donating to an evil cause. An awful thing to do is rob someone, but how about robbing narcotics off a gang member? Denial of profit towards an evil cause. There is an exception, however: the good act of rehabilitation, or reformation, which is the best way to use your utopianism. The exchanging of ideas can cause one party to see things in the view of another, which is what debate is for. As a utopian, you should be staying at the top of your game, making sure your views on everything are substantial, while still being open to the possibility that they aren't. This also works for personal relationships: have you ever helped a suicidal, or even a sad friend? Through rehabilition you can help them get right back on their feet. So thus you have two ways to help others: restore, or build up. Restore by picking up someone who's down, and build up with the exchanging of ideas between two parties. Rehabilitation and reformation respectively.

The Best Around

The utopian strives to be the best they can be. We shoot for perfection in the areas we care for. Generally, this is cognitively: it is not unlikely for utopians to strive for extraordinary grades in school, and receive them. Likewise, it's natural for another utopian to have poor grades but excel in whatever they care for. The most important thing, however, is the effort we put forth. It is so common to do only what you have to in today's society. You go to college/university, just pass those fours years. Get your diploma, and get out into the field. Get your 40-hour job and whew - you've done it! You're a success! Indeed, you are a success, but most stop there. Out of the 8 hours you're given on a week day, and 16 hours on weekend, most cannot manage to find anything productive to preoccupy their time. Some will the cite the stressfulness of their job, or their children, which are decent enough excuses, but they provide no excuse for wittling away all your time without even a form of productive entertainment.

No one wants to work their whole life. In fact, not everyone wants to even be known for the work they do. Bettering yourself can be as simple as learning something new. Being productive doesn't always equate to fame, or wanting fame. Some methods of production do tend to draw attention: if you get better at art, you'll probably want to post the art not only for criticism, but because it's nice to show what you've done. This way, you could gain a moderate fan base. Participating in sports teaches teamwork skills, muscle memory and proper hand-eye coordination. Sports and art are two great examples of productive entertainment because they both are enjoyable to take up. Sports are also great exercise.

The operative in the equation for model utopianism is the effort you put forth. Putting effort into learning will boost your intelligence. Having such "boosted" intelligence, along with putting forth effort in all that you do, is a recipe for great things.

It is important to note feelings of superiority. While a utopian may, justifiably, feel superior to someone who does not try to better themselves, educate themselves, or is genuinely a bane on society, when it comes in regards to utopians as a whole: we are all equal. We are tied together by a single belief, which is to be the best you can be. Whether or not a utopian is more experienced, wealthy, or successful than another, does not give license to the presumably-greater utopian to assume superiority. Everyone has different gifts, knowledges, talents, connections, and experiences; it is this which makes unity key to the belief system of utopianism. A utopian is not better than another for believing every word published in this article, they are merely closer to the belief. You can decide how much the closeness means to you.

A final word is on blame. The un-utopians, nicknamed ciphers, love to place the blame on someone else. It is unfortunate in most cases, that if something goes - or is going - wrong, it is most likely your fault. I failed as a game designer with my first game; I could cite the poor economy, a poor player base, or even the lack of capital invested, but ultimately it all comes back to my lack of insight and proper coding techniques. For me, it feels better to place the blame on myself, than it does another. With the blame on myself, I can be assured that I will not make the same mistakes again. I want you to think about your perceived faults in yourself. Do you blame others when you could be blaming yourself? I'm not perfect, I have things I want to change about myself. It's important to recognize the fault as your own and fix it so you're all better.
Then you can be... the best around!

A Better World

As stated in the beginning of the article, utopianism used to be about bettering the world first, and then bettering yourself. It was practically an activist group, talking about picking up trash in public and recruiting members at book stores. Utopianism does not mean to destroy the world, but the belief doesn't require that you actively better the world. Yes, it is a requirement to be as positive as possible - and through this, you could be even more positive by picking up trash - but an active assertion is not required. A big factor in this is that people have different (undebatable) views on how to better the world.

Hitler may have thought he was bettering the world by actively clearing out all the "filth", and at the end of his campaign humanity was left with some excellent science done on humans, and the deaths of 11,000,000 "filthy" people - Jews, gays, Romanis, gypsies, various others. Hitler may really have believed what he did was good for the world, but most of the world disagrees. It is this fact that discourages utopianism from giving a solid statement on how one could "better" the world. You may want to pick up trash for your community, or volunteer your hours for the meek. That's great, and utopianism definitely encourages you to do so, but such activism is not required. Ultimately it is up to you to decide whether it's your goal to actively better the world, and how you're going to do it. That being said, utopians tend to be good people, and will be a positive influence wherever they are.

The comic above raises a good reason for why utopianism cannot pin-point such a way to better the world. What would make us theoretically different from the anti-gay politician, or someone who makes decisions based on what The Bible says they should do? While we can objectively look at utopianism as a good thing, it is unfair for a universal belief such as utopianism to state that one way of enriching the world is the way, because if we have the wrong idea, we fall into the same logic as Hitler and anti-gay politicians. Whether you're fighting the crusade against gays, genociding millions, writing insightful articles, or picking up trash in public parks, utopianism will not infringe on your view of how you're to actively better the world, if you even choose to do it.

There is a bit of an exception: it's probably the voice inside you saying, "Hey, but... picking up trash in public parks is a good thing!" and, fine - you've got me. Taking care of the environment is always going to be a positive act. The lack of requirement to actively bettering the world is only because of (as I stated) the arguments arising from what bettering truly is. If you ever wonder about whether an act is going to be harmful or helpful, the solution is to attempt to picture the situation objectively, and base your actions on that. For example, the Jews were not going around burning people's homes or creating such an awful disturbance that it would warrant a procedural extermination of them. Were Hitler to look at the situation objectively, he would have a hard time arguing why he felt it necessary to imprison and kill all these otherwise-normal people. Now, look at a more realistic situation objectively: a senator thinks it's important to keep the 'sanctity' of marriage (ignoring the divorce rates, of course) and thus homosexuals cannot marry. The senator cannot understand the objectivity factor: all you can lose from legalizing gay marriage is the religious stigma behind the concept of marriage, being weakened. Objectively, it will make people happier and just that much more free to live their lives how they want. You should embrace this objectivity if you are ever in question of where your moral compass is going to point you.

Where's the utopia?

It's gone. It's gone. Bless our teenage hearts, that spoke of private islands, then Montana, then apartment complexes full of utopians. Utopias are great, they really are, and I'd absolutely love to live in a nice, exclusive city or on a self-sufficient island with high-tech technologies. These things cost money, however, and it's hard to convince 10 people to drop their lives in lieu of peaceful island living. You can't just start a utopia. People want to get married, and visit other countries, and bring relatives over. I suggest, instead of a utopia, that you build yourself a sanctuary.

The definitions are clear: a utopia is far away from trouble. It's easy living. It's a remote island, or community, and it's got to be self-sufficient... even a bit xenophobic. A sanctuary, however, is in the middle of the trouble, creating a perimeter of safety. I cannot imagine having enough money to officially be looking into buying a house, and want to get some decent property in an urban environment, 5 yards from the nearest neighbor. It is just not something I would do. Were I to buy a home, it would be a sanctuary: rural, close enough but far enough from society, and absolutely as self-sufficient as I could make it. Not only does self-sufficiency help defend against the inevitable societal collapse/zombie wars, but it's also quite frugal. Within five years' time you can create a beautiful garden with flora ranging from apple trees to tomatoes. Just think about the zen as you come home from a hard day's work and decide to sit in the sun upon the piece of land that you yourself (and family?) helped produce. There's a sanctuary if I ever heard of one!

Conclusion

The best thing you can do for yourself is to train the traits that make humans sentient, every day. Encourage yourself, and others around you, to challenge themselves and grow as a greater person and human. Do not try to eliminate instinct; rather, control it. Self-control is a very important trait that sentient creatures can master. Make moral choices that are both right, and right. Remember it is the effort put forth that makes you utopian - while it may be true that genetics can favor your development, no one is to be considered a utopian without putting forth the effort to be their best. In this perpetual journey of always being your best, be sure to value other utopians the same as you would yourself; we are part of a classification of people, and that is what makes us strong. We are not better than each other, we are just different. Before casting blame upon others, take note of the relevance of casting blame, and then place it on yourself if logically suited. If you want to actively better the world, then by all means, go for it. It's a great way to give a little extra to the community. The concept of a utopia, while novel, is not as realistic as a sanctuary. Above all: be happy, be productive, be positive, and let others do the same.

With all due respect,
Vael Victus