When we think about the great heroes of the world, who do we think of? Perhaps we think of some powerful warrior who fights valiantly in battle, or someone who tirelessly fights for some cause to make the lives of the vulnerable better, or perhaps a parent who fights to keep their family safe. In all three examples we have someone who has been given the responsibility and burden of caring for someone less powerful and bearing up underneath that responsibility. The warrior, the champion, and the parent, all display that quality which was known in Greek as the exercise of the quality of stegos (στέγωσ); which means bears under or protect.
The only place that I can think of where the word Stegos exists in English is the name of the dinosaur "stegosaurus". I have no idea if the name stegosaurus means "protected lizard" or "armored lizard" but given that stegos in Greek means to bear underneath some burden, or protect that which is precious and which is still kind of a burden, and the stegosaurus has plates of armor for its protection, then it would not surprise me.
We likely have a very noble idea of the warrior, the champion, or the parent, and rightly so, because in taking on such a role they have displayed a willingness to also bear underneath personal expense. It might cost a warrior their life to fight for the nation. It might cost the champion who fights for a cause, comfort, time, and considerable effort. Anyone who has been a parent must also concede that it costs many many sleepless nights and quite literally a small fortune to raise a family. Reasonable estimates put the total expenditure at raising a child to the age of majority, at something in the order of a third of a million dollars.
For all the nobility that this sense of stegos might imply, it absolutely requires that there be a thing or more importantly a person, which is worth protecting. The noble qualities of the warrior, the champion, or the parent, are obvious. The inherent value of the thing, person, or people being protected, might very well not be. Worse, through reasons of xenophobia, which expresses itself in things like racism, ableism, classism, nationalism, et ceteral; the vulnerable person are themselves, more likely to be the objects of violence or harm by others. We may even question the quality of the thing being protected and wonder why they bother.
In the case of warrior, the thing that they think which is worthy of protection, is the nation. However that nation is comprised, the warrior thinks that the continued existence of the collective and the way of life, is preserved. When we send warriors off to fight, they do so on behalf of everyone back home and in return, the are absolved from what would normally be considered a crime because the act of war itself, on behalf of the collective of the nation, can overlook the killing of other people.
In the case of the champion of a cause, the thing that they think which is worthy of protection, is either an idea which they want to see enacted, or the eradication of some disease, or the elimination of things like racism, ableism, poverty, homelessness et cetera. The objects of their cause, is mostly the betterment of people who are unable to overcome the difficulty that they face without help.
In the case of the parent, the thing that they think which is worthy of protection, is far more immediate. There may even be a strange sense of nobility in a parent doing things at great personal expense, including setting aside their own comfort and happiness, for the happiness of their children.
That thing or person that the warrior, champion, or parent thinks is worth protecting, can only come from a well of philos or what we would consider love for that other person or thing. The idea of stegos then takes that root of civic or familial philos and then intends to act upon on it. In putting that philos into concrete action, it watches, watches over, and watches out for the loved one. It does so in the face of difficulty and even in the shortcomings or faults in the loved one. It doesn't even expect to recieve reciprocal or mutual benefit because often, that is impossible. The nation can not repay the warrior. A parent does not expect payment from a child. People who benefit from the results of fighting the cause, often have no idea who the champion was. The art of giving without receiving anything back at all, not even the recognition of effort, describes stegos well.
Of course in the act of trying to protect the one who needs protection, this doesn’t excusing wrongdoing or seek to evade the natural consequences of knavery on their part. There may be the more expensive act of forgiveness and/or learning to live with the consequences (and this has been covered previously in this series of posts) but it means to strengthen what is weak, shield what is vulnerable, and forgive what is provoking.
How does the idea of stegos connect with the overarching concept of eudemonia which this series of posts has been about? Because ultimately I do not think that any kind of eudemonia, can come from any other place except from an active philos of one's self, family, community, and nation. I think that it's almost fair to say that everything that is bad that happens in the kosmos, comes as a result of accident, stupidity, or cruelty. Accident which includes the environment acting, is mostly blameless. Stupidity is the result of people's poor decisions and blunders. Cruelty exists because people actively want to rail against philos. Granted there are instances where competing views of justice might rise up against each other, but cruelty which refuses to see others as human and inherently valuable, is all far too common. Protecting that which is valuable, against the ravages of the kosmos, is what stegos intends to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment