Same problems

Samuel Taylor Coleridge writes in “The Nightingale” that man has forced his own sorrow on the song of the nightingale. In reality, according to the poem, the bird is quite cheerful, blissfully warbling away, content with its avian existence. In other words, Coleridge has rejected one projection of human emotion on the nightingale in favor of his own projection of emotion. This returns to Wordworth’s idea of “half perception half creation” of nature, but I’m still struggling with this. I understand the idea that on some level we must project ourselves onto the things around us in order to be able to effectively forge a connection with those things, but where is the line between putting an element of yourself into things in order to experience them and just being self-centered? If I have a hand in partially creating everything, doesn’t that mean to some extent that everything revolves around me? That seems incredibly self-absorbed. If I have partially created everything around me, then the world exists to serve me. Therefore, I am entitled to the things I desire and need. Where do other people exist in this picture? What about the fulfillment of their wants and needs? If the fulfillment of their wants/needs leaves less resources for me, should I begrudge them that fulfillment, or worse, even try to stop it? It seems to me that this type of thinking leads directly to the Madoff and AIG bonuses mess. I want it, and if I don’t have it, I’ll just take it from other people.