Defining Action by Richard Seltzer

(excerpt from Lenses, a book-length collection of short essays, in search of a publisher)

After World War II, authors like Sartre and Camus reacted against abstract philosophy that neglected the immediacy, emotion, and empathy of everyday life. They blamed abstract dehumanized thinking for the horrors of the Third Reich. In opposition to that perspective, they harkened back to Dostoyevsky and other writers who believed that we are defined by our actions, regardless of the rationalizations we might use to justify what we do. Action in that sense means far more than muscle movement. They focused on decisive moments when one puts one's whole self behind what one does, where one is willing to risk everything to do what one feels must be done. Such acts are fraught with meaning due to the context in which they are performed. Such acts, particularly ones involving self-sacrifice/martyrdom, can trigger a tidal wave of consequences, For example, Moses standing up against Pharaoh, the martyrs of the early Christian church, Sir Thomas More standing up to Henry VIII, Martin Luther rebelling against the Catholic Church, and the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

Few of us will ever perform history-changing heroic feats. But we all do affect one another through principled, heartfelt acts that serve as memorable and inspiring examples to those around us. And what, at the time, may seem an insignificant act could through its influence on others have major consequences.

Through our genes, we are connected to those who came before and those who will come after us. Through ideas and chains of teaching and learning, we are connected to those who inspired us and whom we inspire. And we are also connected to one another by the consequences of our meaningful acts.