If there is no faith by which a man might be saved then by whose determination is an individual's redemption deemed worthy? For that matter, who shall determine that salvation is even necessary? Salvation or damnation from or to what end? One cannot judge the value of one's own life based upon these intangible theories. Instead, existence can be proven to have value based upon the worth he brings by the actions he performs. Even so, are the actions justified if they are wasted upon a society who does not value these feats? Nay.
Therefore only two actions remain that may bring peace or reason to one's own life. Inward focus and the building of the host's own capabilities and understandings can belay a peace upon someone who only seeks peace for themselves. However, if peace is sought in conjunction with a life that has meaning to anyone beyond the individual, that individual must then act for and upon a society that will benefit from the action. These actions cannot have ulterior motives of changing the society to mold their future. The actions must only be performed in a manner that is harmonious with the society's way of life and in a way that garners that society's approval before the act has taken place. From this logic, only two options are available. Either the proposed act must be researched and the potential repercussions and consequences must be determined and shared with the intended society (i.e. sharing the knowledge of fuel and its uses with a primitive society will cause pollution which the society does not have the understanding to control) or only actions that are currently within the means and understanding of that society may only be performed (i.e. supplementing additional manpower required to grow crops in a manner already established by the primitive society).
The problem with this agenda is that it only properly functions so long as the assistance is only few enough to truly help, and not push, that society in a predetermined direction. If every American citizen were to adhere to this ideal in lieu of their religious beliefs, the primitive society would receive so much outside help that they would no longer struggle to advance themselves in their own time and place. There is a line that cannot be crossed that divides struggling from suffering. Every creature needs to find its own strength to overcome the natural adversities of survival. Survival at a stagnant level of awareness for as long as possible is most likely preferable. Progress begets change and change begets conflict.
This line of thinking is not without its own pitfalls. For if the primitive society remains too long at one stagnant point of progress, then what value does that society or even the life of an individual of that society have in the larger scheme of human existence? This leads to inflicting the initial dilemma of a purposeless existence upon another being and another society.
This line of thinking is not without its own pitfalls. For if the primitive society remains too long at one stagnant point of progress, then what value does that society or even the life of an individual of that society have in the larger scheme of human existence? This leads to inflicting the initial dilemma of a purposeless existence upon another being and another society.
