Replying to: Legacy and Whats Left
I read this post from the old man blog. I wanted to add my 2 cents to the topic.
What is legacy
I have young children, and I already feel like my world-view has shifted to be about leaving them with what I can that will benefit them and their own children before I pass on.
It's not about the material, I believe it is just about security for your bloodline. I don't think my children will find any importance in what I blog about. What they will find importance in, however, is having a house, and or land. Or even precious metals (Not that I have any of that now).
I think that as people we innately want to leave something for our family, either so that they can have something to remember us by or to support them. Since forever; you leave what was yours (when you pass on) to your next of kin. You want to, and you have to. (Who are you going to give it to, an institution?) Back then, it might have been land, or a farm, or even jewelry.
What legacy used to be about
Legacy used to be about security. It translated to your children having security and or status. It means that they will have an easier time figuring out the world when you are no longer there. That's what legacy should be, it should not just be seen from an entirely creative standpoint. I am yet to find out why we do see it that way. I'm assuming that we have been programmed to as part of an all encasing plan to make us inactive. Learned helplessness extends many different facets of life.
I'm not sure legacy is about nostalgia. I think it's more innate than just remembrance. It's simply about wanting your own bloodline to be set, to have something and to be known.
If you succeed, you pass on the baton ahead of everyone else and your children will at least have something to grasp onto and hopefully generate more wealth or land, or any privilege that gets you ahead or gives you status in your society.
In turn, you are providing an extra layer of safety for your next of kin. I believe, that what has occurred at the turn of the 19th century is that it inheritance is no longer about safety and status. Rather, it has become about sentiment, about knick knacks with no inherent value. An inverse in what is truly valuable.
If you are known in your society for your actions, by extant, so will your children be. They share your traits, and your blood.
It's about family, not institutions, not knick knacks
Your bloodline, ultimately what is yours is first.
Your family comes first, and then your local town, and then finally your government / institution.
Of course, if you have no familial identity, your focus is no longer on what benefits your collective, but rather, what may benefit you as an individual.
In order to have collective cooperation, most people need their family to be their first collective.
Perhaps, the confusion of what legacy truly is, is just a side effect of people no longer focusing on the collective benefit. Now, most people are focusing on their own individual benefit.
What happens is, that now, legacy becomes about objects and memories. Rather than heirlooms and security.