If only we could have quarantined the victims back then! Instead, the infection has worked its way through people and institutions, such that the abolition of men -- and women -- is almost the default position. From the perspective of the abolished man -- say, Chris Hayes, or Anderson Cooper, or Rachel Maddow -- the unabolished man -- oh, let's say, President Trump -- is the problem!
When they say "patriarchy" I hear "parricide," AKA the Abolition of Man.
Why is our politics so divided and divisive? Well, first of all, because it is supposed to be. However, it is more divided than usual, because the two sides no longer share the same principles or goals. Nor, for that matter, do they inhabit the same reality (and by definition there is only one). And ultimately they are no longer the same species. For an abolished man is obviously no longer a man. Which is the whole point of the exercise.
What then is this former man? Is he merely an animal? In other words, if we eliminate human nature, are we left with but a trousered or tenured ape? Yes and no. For a man cannot actually abolish himself, any more than a snake can fly or a Bernie Bro can support himself. Being human means we can imagine alternate realities, such that a man can always pretend he is a woman, or a journalist, or intellectual, or pretty much anything.
He can even pretend there is no such thing as human nature and thereby pretend to have abolished man, just like that. Actually, the second part isn't "pretend," because unreal ideas can nevertheless have very real consequences. For example, Islamists imagine they please God by murdering innocent human beings. The idea is crazy but its victims are just as dead.
Notice that the feelings are subjective but the consequences are objective. However, one side of our culture war insists that its feelings are objective. For example, if someone says "believe all women," this means we should abandon all objective standards of innocence and guilt. More generally, has any conservative ever uttered the oxymoron "my truth?" For the personal pronoun reduces the impersonal and objective to personal and subjective. Which is one way to abolish a man, or at least cancel him.
Consider these two statements: 1) "President Trump is a white supremacist." 2) "Joe Biden is suffering from a progressive dementia."
The first statement isn't even false, whereas the second is so self-evident that one must be able to recognize its truth in order to deny its truth; in other words, the lie is parasitic on the truth of Biden's obvious cognitive decline. The statement about Trump is a different kind of lie, because it doesn't deny a prior truth but superimposes an alternate reality.
Having said that, there are nevertheless times that feelings are an adequation to reality. Lewis discusses one of them, the recognition of the sublime. Someone who says "this is sublime" isn't just making a statement about his feelings. Rather, the feelings are a wholly appropriate response to the object that provokes them, say a cathedral, or the Pieta, or Yosemite Valley.
However, if you have been indoctrinated into a scientistic worldview, your feelings of sublimity are completely subjective, and reveal nothing about reality. If one says "this musical performance is sublime," it really just means "I'm having sublime feelings." Which means nothing, since the feelings evoked are rendered wholly individual instead of universal. It's equivalent to saying I feel hungry or tired, which doesn't mean you should feel hungry or tired.
Nevertheless, when a normal man says "that woman is beautiful," he doesn't mean "I am having beautiful feelings." But a metaphysical Darwinian, if he is being intellectually consistent, will say "the form of that woman is tricking me into thinking she is a genetically fit candidate for the propagation of my DNA." There is no such thing as beauty, except insofar as it is a kind of deception, or bait-and-switch.
People who consistently deny that feelings can be adequations "will believe two propositions":
firstly, that all sentences containing a predicate of value are statements about the emotional state of the speaker, and secondly, that all such statements are unimportant (Lewis).
But no one really believes this; or certainly no one can live as if it is true. The person who feels President Trump is a white supremacist isn't just saying "I am having feelings of white supremacism." Rather, he believes his feelings are an appropriate adequation to an objective reality. In other words, if the president is a white supremacist, our reaction shouldn't be neutral, let alone positive.
But what if the feelings are coming first, the perception second? In other words, what if I simply have the feeling that the president is a racist, and then justify those feelings by excluding any evidence to the contrary? In that case, then the feelings are no longer an adequation, at least to objective reality.
Nevertheless, they are still an adequation. To what then? This is a long story, and since neither my body nor mind have adapted to the time change, we're running out of it. However, the problem is alluded to in the book, and has to do with the idea that the human mind...
Put it this way: say what you want about self-consciousness, but it is a predicament. For not only do we have to adapt to the world -- as does any other animal -- but we have the additional task of having to adapt to the exceedingly strange condition of mindedness, or of thoughts and feelings and what to do about them. Yes, "think and feel them" is correct, but perhaps you have no idea of how easy this is to say and how difficult to put into practice.
As a psychologist, I routinely deal with people who confuse their feelings with thoughts and thoughts with feelings, and wonder why their lives have run aground.
Let's take someone with deep anxiety. That's a feeling. But they turn the anxiety into a thought, for example, that the world is undergoing catastrophic warming and we're all gonna die in ten years!
It can work the other way as well: for example, if I have the thought that the president is a racist, then I will have all the righteous feelings that would be present if it were true. And these feelings are delicious. Not to mention addictive.
To be continued...
28 comments:
Let's take someone with deep anxiety. That's a feeling. But they turn the anxiety into a thought, for example, that the world is undergoing catastrophic warming and we're all gonna die in ten years!
It's easy to feel at least a little sorry for such a person; the anxiety has to fix on something. Just seems like there ought to be so many other, more plausible things to worry about...
When they say "patriarchy" I hear "parricide," AKA the Abolition of Man.
When the initial reports about Wuhan were coming out, and people were discussing how much worse it is for men, that was truly alarming; the thought of a world suddenly robbed of the people who are repositories of skill and knowledge, and quite literally keep things functional, is a possibility that ought to cause some level of anxiety, if it turned out to be true.
Speaking of the abolition of man -- in this case, woman -- this is one of the strangest articles I've ever read, especially the total absence of irony regarding a subject so deserving of ridicule: Escape Into Cottagecore, Calming Ethos for Our Febrile Moment. The writing is so over-the-top & the wokeness so profound, it burns and tickles at the same time.
'But unlike reactionary movements like “trad wives” — essentially right-wing mommy bloggers who advocate a return to regressive gender roles — cottagecore offers a vision of domestic bliss without servitude in the traditional binary framework.'
Wow. I like this line:
“It’s relieving to come home from a hard day and look at these nice pictures of things that you may not have, that you may never have. It gives you a sense of belongingness.”
So does getting married and raising a family, with or without a cottage and a herd of goats. Bonus: they're real, and you really do belong. But that's apparently too reactionary.
It's like they've spent their whole lives rejecting femininity, so they're drawn to the most extreme fairy tale version of being female - but without any of the nuisance or mess or reality of simply being what you are.
More on the abolition of woman.
I wonder how you get to a place in life where Donald Trump is your image of "unabolished man".
Politics aside, Trump is like a walking incarnation of nihilism -- a crook and a conman with no beliefs, no morality, and no dignity. He could serve as a crude cartoon illustration of all seven of the deadly sins. He incarnates the dissolution of any kind of moral order, or any kind of truth-based order for that matter.
I'm a liberal and relativist by nature, but Trump is pushing me towards a belief in the existence of objective evil.
That's a start.
Re. the Catholic Thing post, the author has the right idea. It is to be hoped that she and her friends might one day have as much positive influence on the culture as the previous group did negative.
Just reading in Murray of the many studies proving that the greater the legal equality, the greater the differences between the sexes, a finding totally contrary to the left's expectations. At any rate, it appears that feminism may be self-limiting, as the more it succeeds, the more it will fail (in its ultimate goal of denying sexual differences).
Regarding this from the post "Why is our politics so divided and divisive?...the two sides no longer share the same principles or goals. And ultimately they are no longer the same species."
It has become clear that leftists have diverged from homo sapiens and are a distinct species of hominin.
We can see this in the anatomy. They have reduced white matter in their brains. The amygdala is atrophied.
The leftist has a malformed pelvis which creates an awkward, swaying gait and splayed feet.
Some leftist females develop vagina dentata, in which vestigial teeth inside the vagina can inflict a painful nip or even significant damage to tissue. Ordinary people do not have this feature. Leftist males sometimes have multiple penises, probably an adaptation to cope with the snapping p*ssies of their mates.
Behavior-wise feminism and other attempts to put women to parity with males is a maladaptation found only in leftists, and as you note is self-limiting.
Some leftist cross-breeding with regular people still occurs, indicating this species is not fully separated from the main branch. The resulting hybrids are difficult to distinguish from pure-bred homo sapiens. There is some divergence in the DNA, equivalent to that between bonobos and humans.
Given all this, it seems that concord between the two species is a pipe-dream. There will be dissension for epochs to come. Might as well just resign yourself to it.
-Professor Tweedly, Dr. of Anthropology. I will divulge some of my colleages are leftist and I try to avoid them. I am pure homo-sapiens, Rebublican, gun owner, love to hunt and fish.
Different species. I'll stick with mine.
I thank God that when my mom was faced with the pressure to abort, because the circumstances were less than ideal (what many today would consider "tragic," "hopeless," or even a "punishment"), she refused. There exist now not just one more person, but six - myself, my younger brother, and the children we have in turn brought into the world - because at a critical time she turned away from this type of opportunistic, careerist thinking.
On the flip side, having lost by nature what she chose to destroy instead of love... incomprehensible. May God have mercy on her soul, though it sounds like she has received her reward already.
As to feminism, it's morbidly ironic that they are having to fight their own battle for legitimacy against the trans-activists who simply take their ideas to the ultimate conclusion.
I will never stop talking about my prostate exam!
:D
Don՚t you feel a little bit disturbed at the thought that your political opponents are not only misguided, stupid, and malevolent, but actually not human?
I՚m not saying you are wrong, because I often feel the same way from the other side. People who like Donald Trump do seem to be of a different species from me – spiritually if not biologically. It՚s hard to see how our values and interests could ever align.
But the consequences are disturbing. It suggests eternal war between two factions of people (or nonpeople) who have divergent interests and can never yield, compromise, or live together. It՚s the first stage of Nazism or ethnic warfare. "The Jews are undoubtably a race, but they are not human." – Adoph Hitler
You, sir, are of course not a Nazi. You just believe that society is being controlled by an cabal of people so evil and malign that they might as well belong to a different species. You don՚t propose doing anything about it.
If only the leftists would consent to stop existing...that would be a relief. Suppose we awoke tomorrow to a world in which the leftists were gone- besides dancing for joy, what would we do?
First off, we would inventory and distribute the real estate, cash, gems, investment portfolios, vehicles, and other property left behind. Everybody would get something, and some might get a lot. The perishable foods would probably have to be discarded, but canned goods, pasta, rice and other dry goods in home pantries could be consumed or used as animal feed.
The empty dwellings would have to be aired out, disinfected, and then refurbished, so families could start moving into these. They would be handed the title gratis upon taking occupancy.
The Democrat and Green parties would be without members, so Republicans would square off against the Independents in elections, with predictable results.
We would never hear the words "carbon footprint" again, except in lectures by historians.
Sweet Dreams everyone. Who knows, someday....
We are all helpess here. And hapless. And half wits. Half nuts. Helpless, hapless, halfwitted halfnuts. Plus a guy who visits his proctologist far too often. And there’s not a damned thing any of us can do about it.
Whiskey! the effective mouthwash you don't have to spit out ~
"Don՚t you feel a little bit disturbed at the thought that your political opponents are not only misguided, stupid, and malevolent, but actually not human?"
Nah, too easy. With good humor and pessimism it is possible to be neither wrong nor bored.
Besides, man matures when he stops believing that politics solves his problems. To believe in the redemption of man by man is more than an error; it is an idiocy.
Now the thing with proctologists...why do they all have such long fingers? Is that a requirement for the specialty?
Politics become interesting if you run for office; then you have a horse in the race. I have held many offices and lined my pockets handsomely as a result.
In my current office the opportunities for hanky-panky are too numerous to even exploit at the same time so I am enjoying them sequentially.
Oh, sure, the taxpayer gets their money's worth. But you have to look out for number one because being an incumbent is risky, and you only last so long. You have to plan for the future.
Bartender! Whisky for me and a Bloody Mary for the lady. Keep the change.
The thing with proctologists is the same with politics. Both are a pain in the ass (though some may call it pleasurable). Me, I just want the job done as quickly as cost effectively as possible. They're both a neccessary evil (/pleasure).
The problem happens when they screw up badly and it turns out they were just quacks trying to make easy money. Even worse when they're perverts. The laws must be better. And the enforcement. Those things together try, to keep all the sinning in line.
I'm getting sick and tired of carrying around this chair donut all day.
Are the global measures been taken because of corona virus warranted or are they a conscious or unconscious (Divinely driven) fire drill for God knows what. Considering the sun also has a corona, that there's a space mission in progress to take a closer look at the sun and that article that appeared in 'Scientific American' by Jim Daley on Sept.3.2019 'Earth's Orbital Shifts May Have Triggered Ancient Global Warming' it's difficult to know just what's going on.
Speaking of coronavirus, a brief word about the conservative's guide to pandemics.
Rick Santelli recently suggested that to lessen the economic impact of coronavirus that we should just give it to everyone. What a cold hearted bastard, eh? Actually he was speaking rational truth. Cold hearted truth, but just keeping it real. Why let this thing destroy the economy for God knows how painfully long, when we can just get this thing out of the way so the rest of us can continue on?
Ever hear about respiratory diseases being on the rise? Hell, a great many genetic conditions are on the rise. The reason isn’t some mysterious mystery factor. The natural culling laws have been so disrupted by human technologies that all kinds of genetic conditions are being propagated. Natural law can’t just do it’s terrible culling duty anymore.
Coronavirus has a 2-3% kill rate, almost all of it being the very elderly, and those having certain kinds of genetic conditions mostly respiratory, which would’ve been culled from the general population back in 1918. The panic I’m starting to see is going to ruin everything for everybody, far worse than the natural culling order.
If the worst happens the death toll in the USA alone could be over 10 million people, which is gonna freak the hell out of practically everybody. But is it worth starving half the country, when this has been natures way for millennia which previous generations of humans accepted as harsh reality?
I’d keep Grandma isolated along with the asthmatic kid. And failing that, have everybody in the family own up to conservative reality, knowing that there’ll be a far better place for them afterwards.
Well, I'm old and I could very well kick the bucket if I get the Coronavirus. So I am worried about it.
Anonymous 5:12 wrote of natural culling and there is something to that. Seen dispassionately, there would be no real harm done to our species by carrying off increased numbers of the elderly. We don't have much survival value.
So why do we all want to get so old? What does it accomplish? At a certain point we know we've done what we came here for and hey, time to clear the hell out. Time to fire up the helos and get out of Saigon. No sense in fighting it.
Trouble is I'm not ready. I need to get my financial ducks on a row and get a revised will documented and notarized. I need to be ready for take-off, 'cause I don't know when the reaper is coming for me. I want to leave my affairs in good order.
Speaking of affairs I need to wrap these up. Paradoxically my married lovers have seen improvement in their primary unions after hanging with me. No one need ever know. But I don't think more shtupping is going to help anyone. Time to let it go. I was a sexpot, sure, my huge sensitive breasts have delighted and entertained, job well done. Let it go. Let it go.
Coronavirus, hello, how are you. You gonna kill me? Get it over with.
As a youth I wanted to die in some fiery burnout episode, like a rock star, instead of just fading away quietly. But I postponed that age once I'd reached it. Then I postponed it again at the new age I'd set, then again and again. Now I'm so old that my only value is that I can fart when my finger is pulled by a young child. There's talk of making that sort of thing a form of sexual harrassment. Guess I'm not much of a rock star anymore. I miss the days when I was the rock star of belching, like this guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8qrHo-S4t8
And now the store is out of toilet paper. I could well die from coronavirus which has entered my butthole via some dry leaves. I'd take the newspaper again but they've probably made the kid quit delivering already.
Now that there is recognition however begrudgingly given that there are events unlike the weather that are guided by an unseen hand that impact mankind negatively maybe recognition could be given to the unseen hand for the beneficial circumstances of our existence.
Hey there anonymous 11:58. I can do the farting thing on demand as well. It is amusing at family gatherings.
Farting for children works best if you're old, the farts don't smell much, and you still have money. With the latter the parents are less inclined to give you the stinkeye. Plus the only thing that delights a small child more than the clean but very loud fart is a twenty placed into their pocket.
Post a Comment