The individual or the community. Which should be the priority?

Oh, you monster.

This is not a question easily answerable, in truth. Our relationships are with individuals, but when they bond together they form a collective capable of doing great things. In thinking this over for some time, I realise that there is no correct answer to which one is most important. They are both equally important, and which one we tend to prioritise is based on our views and schemas, how we interpret--

...oh, that was your final question. I was stuck on the ones before it.

I'll speak as to myself on which I view more important, but that's largely dependent on how I view people and how I choose to spend my time. I am primarily interested in the individual. That is to say, I interact more meaningfully with others in the context of individual people, rather than as a collective. Forming relationships only works for me when I view that person as an independent, rather than being tied to something larger by association. So I believe it's more vital to preserve the relationships we have with people by themselves for who they are and what they do, not by what they are. (Yes, that was an intentional word choice.)

Yet, why do we necessarily have to 'choose' between one versus a group? Can't we know people in both of those ways? Why should one suspend the other? In one sphere I may know someone as being part of a certain group by association, but outside of that, that person is an individual I know well. And even if we try to ignore or suppress that, what we already know about people as individuals is dragged in to how we perceive them as being part of a group. What you know about them from one place will affect how you think about them anywhere else. I believe that's technically called a 'spillover effect'?

That said, while I prefer the one-on-one interaction with people, we do not go through life alone. The material is temporal, lasting for but a moment. Attempting to live for one's self implies that the person seeks material success, or attempts to find meaning or purpose by one's own actions or deeds. But who can you prove your worth to besides yourself? Who is your arbiter of who successful you are? When all is said and done, what will your self-pursuit amount to?

No, we live our lives in relationship and response to the people we're around. We live for their sakes - mostly. In truth, choosing to live for others is a constant choice. Relationships on friends and family are something to be maintained or cherished, and the impact of your choices, when chosen to live for others, are a lot more evident and measurable. They will also last regardless of material circumstances. If you live for yourself, what then? Where will that let you end up? Where is it that you derive your meaning or purpose in life from? Answering that will shed some light on whether or not you are self-centric or others-centric.

...I'm getting a strong sense of deja vu here, like I've spoken on this before, and recently. ...Oh wait, never mind, I know why.

So, in summation, I view relationships to be more meaningful on the individual level than the group level, and because of that, it's more meaningful (and, I find, easier) to make choices to live for the good of that other person, rather than for the good of a group as a whole. The reception and results will be more noticeable - maybe not as tangible, but certainly more effective.

And this is what I have come to hold. Thank you for your time.