The Needs of the Individual vs. The Needs of the Group
At first glance, the ancient Greeks and the modern Americans seem to have very little in common. On the contrary, these two cultures, separated by over two thousand years, behave in similar fashions. Walter Goldschmidt, an anthropology professor, argues that each culture must find its own balance point between meeting the needs of the individuals and the needs of the group (175). Both the ancient Greeks and the modern Americans find their balance points favoring the side of meeting the needs of the group, rather than those of the individual.
In Walter Goldschmidt’s essay “The Culturally Embedded Self”, he argues that every member of a culture must be able to identify himself or herself as both an individual and a member of that culture. Goldschmidt writes, “[t]he self gets its definition and its continual redefinition from the group or groups with which the individual sees himself as being identified” (175). Because of this dualism in identification, the culture itself must be able to provide for the needs of the individual and the needs of the group. According to Goldschmidt, “[e]ach culture also finds its own balance point, if it is a healthy culture, for the needs of the social order vary with the economic demands and social circumstances in which its members operate”(175). This balance point differs for every culture and depends on the values of the culture.
The ancient Greeks may be one of the most famous cultures in history. Many Western cultures base themselves around the accomplishments of the ancient Greeks. However, the balance point between meeting the needs of the individual and the needs of the group of Athenian culture leans more to the side of the needs of the group.
Through Plato’s The Crito, one learns much about the Greek culture and infers even more. In The Crito, Plato has transcribed a dialogue between Socrates, Plato’s teacher, and Crito, a good friend of Socrates. The dialogue occurs hours before the government of Athens will execute Socrates. Crito tries to convince Socrates to run away to some other country so as to avoid his upcoming execution. The prologue states that, “Crito comes to the prison to lay the plan before him and beseech him to let his friends save him” (Plato 274). However, Socrates refutes that option by saying that two wrongs do not make a right. The prologue goes on to say, “[can it] ever be right to defend oneself against evil by doing evil” (Plato 274). Through the course of the dialogue, one learns from Socrates that the balance point between meeting the needs of the individual and the needs of the group, for the ancient Greeks, leans heavily towards the side of meeting the needs of the group.
According to what Socrates says to Crito, the ancient Greeks did not allow for much of the needs of the individual to be met in their society. When Crito asks why Socrates will not run away, when it is so easy to do so, Socrates replies that to do wrong in retaliation of wrong done to you is not the right and just thing to do. Socrates says that, “it is never right to do a wrong or return a wrong or defend oneself against injury by retaliation” (Plato 280). Socrates then creates a scenario in which he does run away with Crito but the government catches him in the process. He says to Crito, “[s]uppose that while we were planning to run away from here-or however one should describe it-the laws and constitution of Athens were to come and confront us” (Plato 280). Socrates then goes on to say that the laws would interrogate him extensively as to what his plans are and show him that what he plans to do hurts the country more than any individual in the country. Socrates supposes that the laws would say,
“compared with your mother and father and all the
rest of your ancestors your country is something far
more precious, more venerable, more sacred, and held
in greater honor both among gods and among all reasonable
men….you are even more bound to respect and placate the
anger of your country than your father’s anger….And if
[your country] leads you out to war to be wounded or killed,
you must comply, and it is right that you should do so….Both
in war and in the law courts and everywhere else you must do
whatever your city and your country command” (Plato 281).
These hypothesized words of the laws show that meeting the needs of the group is much more important than meeting the needs of the individual in ancient Greece. If this were not so, then the needs of the country would not be put before and above the needs of one’s family. One would like to think that this philosophy has been reversed since the time of the ancient Greeks, however this may not be entirely true.
Modern American culture may seem to have very little in common with the ancient Greeks. The two cultures are separated by over two thousand years and all the technology advancements that go with that amount of time. Nevertheless, modern American culture tends to put the needs of the group before the needs of in the individual in the same way the ancient Greeks did.
One learns about modern American culture through Tillie Olsen’s short story I Stand Here Ironing. In this piece, the narrator describes how she raised her first child Emily, during the great depression of the 1930’s. The narrator had a difficult time raising Emily because they were both young when her husband left her. The institutions that the narrator has to place Emily in show much about American culture.
When the narrator can no longer care for Emily by herself, she sends Emily away to a convalescent home. This home is not one of the better ones, and Emily is very unhappy there. The needs of the group at the home were met before the needs of the individuals who lived there. The rules of the home clearly stated that no one could keep personal items, but Emily would have been much happier had she been allowed to keep the letters the narrator sent. “‘We simply do not have room for children to keep personal possessions’, [the caretakers] patiently explained when we pieced one Sunday’s shrieking together to plead how much it would mean to Emily, who loved to keep things, to be allowed to keep her letters and cards” (Olsen 257). As one can see, the convalescent home would not meet the needs of the individual at all.
However, some institutions did try to meet the needs of the individual. At the beginning of the piece, the narrator describes how one of Emily’s teachers called the house asking if the mother would come in to school to talk about Emily. The teacher says, “I wish you would manage the time to come in and talk with me about your daughter….She’s a youngster who needs help and whom I’m deeply interested in helping” (Olsen 255). In this instance, the teacher tries to help Emily individually so she will be caught up with the rest of the group. Once this has been accomplished, the teacher will be able to better meet the needs of the group, without having to worry about the needs of the individuals.
In conclusion, every culture must find a balance point between the needs of the individual and the needs of the group. Cultures separated by thousand of years can find similar balance points. This is true in the case of ancient Greek and modern American cultures. Both balance points in these cultures tend to meet the needs of the group before the needs of the individual. The balance points may be situated where they are because meeting the needs of the group is much easier to accomplish than meeting the needs of the individual, which are different for every person in the group.
Works Cited
Goldschmidt, Walter. “The Culturally Embedded Self”. Liberal Studies 1: The Human Experience. 13th ed. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
Olsen, Tillie. “I Stand Here Ironing”. Liberal Studies 1: The Human Experience. 13th ed. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
Plato. “The Crito”. Liberal Studies 1: The Human Experience. 13th ed. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
© December 9, 1999
Go back to papers
Go back to Skidmore
Go back home
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page
