Thank you for this interesting conversation. Thinking about the idea that loneliness and narcissism are paired led me to think of those I
feel are narcissists and their behavior. They don’t seem to be able to accept the give and take of relationships and often isolate themselves from those who might threaten their views. This then could be where the loneliness comes in. I hope you will meet again and discuss God.
An old friend texted me and then I called an old friend. This is the time of year when it's OK to make that call. Help stamp out loneliness! The warmth of one contact lasts a year or more for both parties. Do it.
I have adopted the term "atomization" to describe how our totalitarian society is socially-engineered and programed to discourage collectivization and collective action and to encourage self-interest, narcissism, and fetishizement of the Self.
Weren't we pushed toward collective action during Covid, when we were told that we're all in this together? And the pseudoscience of CO2 catastrophe is shot-through with calls for collective action. So maybe some disagreement.
I was thinking along the same lines, but the collective action in these cases, as well as astroturfed protest movements are all part of the social engineering rather than being organically emerging through real grass roots organizing of people. The covid "collective action", in fact, was just a motto which insisted everyone remain apart and when groups tried to assemble (in many states) they were threatened and sometimes arrested.
Yes, the social engineering was planned from on high. One might say that the planners were merely part of the mass formation therefore not outside of it, but saying so is a tautology that says nothing. There was a deliberate end to take away freedom, planned by an alliance of individuals and institutions, against the will of probably a decent majority of the people. I believe our last US election demonstrated that they can take it and shove it: we aren't "asking for it." Readers of Desmet's book will get the reference.
Brilliant. I started following people who stood up, at great cost. I hardly remember when I stood up and didn't worry about the cost, but painfully remember the times I did not stand up. Thank you.
Is it an epidemic of loneliness, or is it meaninglessness/lack of purpose? Obviously, there can be a relationship involved, but when an entire society loses its moors with regard to values and priorities then I think loneliness, as opposed to the ability to be alone within a context of meaning, is a predictable result.
Thank you for posting a video of a great discussion. Some basic facts about human nature pertinent to it are that:
(1) Each one of us desires one's own personal happiness, but is born without knowledge of how the world works, without wisdom of which attitudes, values, and social bonds will optimize one's pursuit of happiness, and without possession of the material means or the good will and trust of others needed to make the most effective use of whatever knowledge and wisdom we might later acquire;
(2) Each of us can partially overcome such deficits by continually exercising one's innate rational, introspective, productive, and socializing faculties;
(3) Each of us can further overcome such deficits by engaging in voluntary cooperation with others and by building upon whatever knowledge, wisdom, and material goods are passed down to us by prior generations.
While various individualist social philosophies might disagree about the origins of human nature and about some its specifics, the basic point of agreement is that the intellectual, moral, and economic autonomy of adult human beings is a necessity for optimizing each person's pursuit of happiness. Another point of agreement is that individual liberty and responsibility doesn't "atomize" individuals (making them lonely and undermining the value of social life); it is authoritarianism, conformism, and coercion that interfere with the benefits that spontaneously emerge from a voluntary social order and with individual investments in building up trust and good will.
Collectivist philosophies (at least the more coherent among them) logically rely upon a denial of one or more the facts about human nature outlined above. In some cases, there is a denial of any on-going need of individuals to overcome one or more of the deficits (like the hyperrationalists who pretend to be omniscient, and pretend that those who disagree with them are ignorant slaves of "misinformation"), but others deny the existence of one or more the deficits or at least the ability of humans to overcome them, and thus view a voluntary social order organized around overcoming such deficits in a disciplined way as imposing arbitrary physic burdens upon them (e.g. nihilistic post-modern antimoralists and irrationalists who whine about "oppression").
The private pursuit of knowledge, wisdom, and economic and social gains are all possible because of our human potentialities, but are also all necessary because of our human imperfections. "Hyper-" collectivists who don't want to acknowledge their own imperfections; they tend to see themselves as god-like creatures who are free to do what they want and view others who disagree with them as needing indoctrination and coercion, not freedom, to bring them to the same state of perfection.
In contrast to this, "anti-" collectivists don't want to acknowledge human potentialities and/or their worth in satisfying man's innate needs or perhaps even the existence of the needs, thus rejecting the self-discipline of reason, morality, productivity, and sociability that is required for them to flourish in an individualistic society. Yet other collectivists tend to be "hyper-" about some things and "anti-" in other respects, yielding more complex ideological mixes. Different types of collectivism variously project negative feelings such as contempt, envy, fear, or doubt onto free societies.
Karl Marx for example was a hyperrationalist, but (unlike contemporary Davos-style progressives) he was also an antimoralist, believing that ethics is not efficacious in addressing social problems. Marx famously dismissed his hypermoralist rivals as irrational "utopian" socialists and likewise rejected the possibility of using reason to systematically reform society by gradual steps (which is closer to the contemporary hyperrationalist/hypermoralist approach). Instead, he advocated an apocalyptic doctrine of class warfare as a kind of inevitable conflict that man can't prevent; in his system one can only get on the right side of history and overcome the associated fears by aligning with the class that is destined to win.
In the 70’s my grandparents lived in their home located on a small lake in Illinois. It was evident they were lonely during the winter. Loneliness is not a new phenomenon. The response to loneliness has hardly progressed since the 70’s. We can cure cancers, get a man into space and yet the simple act of preventing loneliness seems out of our reach. Not a priority for the people.
Desmet has many brilliant insights but the origin of totalitarianism isn't one of them. On page 91 of his book Desmet outlines the psychological mechanisms of totalitarianism.
But totalitarianism is a political problem, not a psychological one. When totalitarianism arises it necessarily has psychological impacts but these are the effects, not the cause.
Tyranny arises when one faction seizes power and imposes its will on the rest of society, and our founding generation understood this well and worked to mitigate against it. Our current bureaucratic society isn't here because people "asked for it." It's here because government power naturally wants to expand and assert its will over the people, and we, the people, mistakenly assumed that it was doing all this for our own good, or else we were careless in our vigilance.
Our last election was proof that most people reject the Bidenesque regime of "get your shot and stop listening to misinformation." Curiously, during Covid those who were most against the advance of a technological society and who saw the evils of technology-- those protesting against industrialization, population growth, and how technology has caused (supposed) CO2 catastrophe-- were also those most likely to tell us to shut up and do what we were told during Covid. They weren't mechanistic thinkers; they were authoritarian thinkers. Yet according to Desmet, the push toward totalitarianism comes from the true believers in technology.
The political origins of totalitarianism are simply censorship and propaganda, and the psychological state of society has little to do with it unless that state is deliberately induced by government pressure and policies.
Finally, yes, there really was a conspiracy to overthrow individual self-determination during Covid, and this was deliberate and calculated. To say that we shouldn't see conspiracies-- as Desmet clearly says in chapter eight of his book ("conspiracies" are merely Sierpinski triangles)-- is to say that freedom does not require vigilance, and vigilance does not require imagination.
A.N. Whitehead makes a curious statement in his philosophy: that the primary function of every proposition is as a lure for feeling. He calls this an essential doctrine. This is quite an amazing insight.
So, what are my thoughts a lure for?
My "propositions" would aim for a purity of heart and a clear intuition: these are the feelings they aim for, and so when I see that intuition is muddled it nags me and I want to set it straight.
Totalitarianism begins in censorship and propaganda. The mass formation is induced. We all can see this, if we look clearly and honestly.
It was great fun watching the two of you together. I pray you'll be able to have that God conversation you mentioned.
Thank you for this interesting conversation. Thinking about the idea that loneliness and narcissism are paired led me to think of those I
feel are narcissists and their behavior. They don’t seem to be able to accept the give and take of relationships and often isolate themselves from those who might threaten their views. This then could be where the loneliness comes in. I hope you will meet again and discuss God.
An old friend texted me and then I called an old friend. This is the time of year when it's OK to make that call. Help stamp out loneliness! The warmth of one contact lasts a year or more for both parties. Do it.
I have adopted the term "atomization" to describe how our totalitarian society is socially-engineered and programed to discourage collectivization and collective action and to encourage self-interest, narcissism, and fetishizement of the Self.
Weren't we pushed toward collective action during Covid, when we were told that we're all in this together? And the pseudoscience of CO2 catastrophe is shot-through with calls for collective action. So maybe some disagreement.
I was thinking along the same lines, but the collective action in these cases, as well as astroturfed protest movements are all part of the social engineering rather than being organically emerging through real grass roots organizing of people. The covid "collective action", in fact, was just a motto which insisted everyone remain apart and when groups tried to assemble (in many states) they were threatened and sometimes arrested.
Yes, the social engineering was planned from on high. One might say that the planners were merely part of the mass formation therefore not outside of it, but saying so is a tautology that says nothing. There was a deliberate end to take away freedom, planned by an alliance of individuals and institutions, against the will of probably a decent majority of the people. I believe our last US election demonstrated that they can take it and shove it: we aren't "asking for it." Readers of Desmet's book will get the reference.
Brilliant. I started following people who stood up, at great cost. I hardly remember when I stood up and didn't worry about the cost, but painfully remember the times I did not stand up. Thank you.
Simply great to see you all.
Is it an epidemic of loneliness, or is it meaninglessness/lack of purpose? Obviously, there can be a relationship involved, but when an entire society loses its moors with regard to values and priorities then I think loneliness, as opposed to the ability to be alone within a context of meaning, is a predictable result.
Thank you for posting a video of a great discussion. Some basic facts about human nature pertinent to it are that:
(1) Each one of us desires one's own personal happiness, but is born without knowledge of how the world works, without wisdom of which attitudes, values, and social bonds will optimize one's pursuit of happiness, and without possession of the material means or the good will and trust of others needed to make the most effective use of whatever knowledge and wisdom we might later acquire;
(2) Each of us can partially overcome such deficits by continually exercising one's innate rational, introspective, productive, and socializing faculties;
(3) Each of us can further overcome such deficits by engaging in voluntary cooperation with others and by building upon whatever knowledge, wisdom, and material goods are passed down to us by prior generations.
While various individualist social philosophies might disagree about the origins of human nature and about some its specifics, the basic point of agreement is that the intellectual, moral, and economic autonomy of adult human beings is a necessity for optimizing each person's pursuit of happiness. Another point of agreement is that individual liberty and responsibility doesn't "atomize" individuals (making them lonely and undermining the value of social life); it is authoritarianism, conformism, and coercion that interfere with the benefits that spontaneously emerge from a voluntary social order and with individual investments in building up trust and good will.
Collectivist philosophies (at least the more coherent among them) logically rely upon a denial of one or more the facts about human nature outlined above. In some cases, there is a denial of any on-going need of individuals to overcome one or more of the deficits (like the hyperrationalists who pretend to be omniscient, and pretend that those who disagree with them are ignorant slaves of "misinformation"), but others deny the existence of one or more the deficits or at least the ability of humans to overcome them, and thus view a voluntary social order organized around overcoming such deficits in a disciplined way as imposing arbitrary physic burdens upon them (e.g. nihilistic post-modern antimoralists and irrationalists who whine about "oppression").
The private pursuit of knowledge, wisdom, and economic and social gains are all possible because of our human potentialities, but are also all necessary because of our human imperfections. "Hyper-" collectivists who don't want to acknowledge their own imperfections; they tend to see themselves as god-like creatures who are free to do what they want and view others who disagree with them as needing indoctrination and coercion, not freedom, to bring them to the same state of perfection.
In contrast to this, "anti-" collectivists don't want to acknowledge human potentialities and/or their worth in satisfying man's innate needs or perhaps even the existence of the needs, thus rejecting the self-discipline of reason, morality, productivity, and sociability that is required for them to flourish in an individualistic society. Yet other collectivists tend to be "hyper-" about some things and "anti-" in other respects, yielding more complex ideological mixes. Different types of collectivism variously project negative feelings such as contempt, envy, fear, or doubt onto free societies.
Karl Marx for example was a hyperrationalist, but (unlike contemporary Davos-style progressives) he was also an antimoralist, believing that ethics is not efficacious in addressing social problems. Marx famously dismissed his hypermoralist rivals as irrational "utopian" socialists and likewise rejected the possibility of using reason to systematically reform society by gradual steps (which is closer to the contemporary hyperrationalist/hypermoralist approach). Instead, he advocated an apocalyptic doctrine of class warfare as a kind of inevitable conflict that man can't prevent; in his system one can only get on the right side of history and overcome the associated fears by aligning with the class that is destined to win.
In the 70’s my grandparents lived in their home located on a small lake in Illinois. It was evident they were lonely during the winter. Loneliness is not a new phenomenon. The response to loneliness has hardly progressed since the 70’s. We can cure cancers, get a man into space and yet the simple act of preventing loneliness seems out of our reach. Not a priority for the people.
Desmet has many brilliant insights but the origin of totalitarianism isn't one of them. On page 91 of his book Desmet outlines the psychological mechanisms of totalitarianism.
But totalitarianism is a political problem, not a psychological one. When totalitarianism arises it necessarily has psychological impacts but these are the effects, not the cause.
Tyranny arises when one faction seizes power and imposes its will on the rest of society, and our founding generation understood this well and worked to mitigate against it. Our current bureaucratic society isn't here because people "asked for it." It's here because government power naturally wants to expand and assert its will over the people, and we, the people, mistakenly assumed that it was doing all this for our own good, or else we were careless in our vigilance.
Our last election was proof that most people reject the Bidenesque regime of "get your shot and stop listening to misinformation." Curiously, during Covid those who were most against the advance of a technological society and who saw the evils of technology-- those protesting against industrialization, population growth, and how technology has caused (supposed) CO2 catastrophe-- were also those most likely to tell us to shut up and do what we were told during Covid. They weren't mechanistic thinkers; they were authoritarian thinkers. Yet according to Desmet, the push toward totalitarianism comes from the true believers in technology.
The political origins of totalitarianism are simply censorship and propaganda, and the psychological state of society has little to do with it unless that state is deliberately induced by government pressure and policies.
Finally, yes, there really was a conspiracy to overthrow individual self-determination during Covid, and this was deliberate and calculated. To say that we shouldn't see conspiracies-- as Desmet clearly says in chapter eight of his book ("conspiracies" are merely Sierpinski triangles)-- is to say that freedom does not require vigilance, and vigilance does not require imagination.
https://jimreagen.substack.com/p/are-you-a-conspiracy-theorist
A.N. Whitehead makes a curious statement in his philosophy: that the primary function of every proposition is as a lure for feeling. He calls this an essential doctrine. This is quite an amazing insight.
So, what are my thoughts a lure for?
My "propositions" would aim for a purity of heart and a clear intuition: these are the feelings they aim for, and so when I see that intuition is muddled it nags me and I want to set it straight.
Totalitarianism begins in censorship and propaganda. The mass formation is induced. We all can see this, if we look clearly and honestly.