The Impossible Dream: Utopia

881 Words4 Pages
Is it such now, that, as part of our definition of intelligent, human, behaviour, we must always strive for more; always wander towards another Utopia? Yet is it not evident in today’s first world societies that many believe happiness comes with ease of life; and as such happiness is sought in the act of distancing oneself from the toils of labour that produce our luxuries and resources? Surely, in such a society, the rich man’s dream is the poor man’s nightmare, and no utopian vision is realistic in the sense that everyone can have what they want with no-one having to unwillingly work for it.
Similarly, in a classless society as envisioned in most modern utopias, there must be an even share of work to ensure utopia for everyone (which, by the perfectionist nature of utopia, is required) – but this would mean more effort from individuals associating ease with happiness, therefore reducing happiness. Most people in (western) cultures frown upon communism, but at least some form of such a political system is a necessary part of many utopias.
As such, a social utopia is a practical impossibility. This has been known for centuries. The question now raised is actually: Is the impossibility of a utopian society due to human nature of current (and previous) societies? The fact that visions of utopia have remained basically unchanged for so long is surely a testament to the nature of society. Are the moral voices we allow to guide us enlightened geniuses or well-read fools, and how (if at all) do their personal interests, upbringings and views affect their philosophies? Are individual thoughts separate from individual (and on a grander scale, social,) philosophies.
Note: Most Utopian societies seem to have a hundred ways to die but only one way to live.
Similarly, for any Utopia to be feasible, it must have a defining perspective. By this I mean a perspective from which
Open Document