The Existentialist Cowboy: Philosophy

Showing posts with label Philosophy. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

The Mask of Wotan

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Jung's influence has been keenly felt among screenwriters, novelists, and 'literati' who often speak of a "character's shadow", one of several "archetypes", a mirror image of what writers call the "higher self".

Related to Jung is the work of Russian folk tale expert, Vladimir Propp, who thought of "archetypes" as "masks" deliberately worn by "characters". Masks are worn in both stories and in life for one of two purposes or both: to reveal and/or to hide.

In most cases a benign public mask is worn to hide facets of the personality with which the character has not yet made peace. It is a mistake, however, to equate "the shadow self" with evil. It is merely the hidden self —the object of one's search for oneself. All "quest" stories are symbolic of this process.

In both Propp and Jung, the idea is to peel away this "social facade", this "mask". The metaphor "peel away”, however; suggests that the process is an easy one but that is rarely the case. Masks are the gestalt of one's various defense mechanisms and unconscious anxieties. "Peeling them away" reveals an "authentic self" that is often difficult to reach and more difficult to confront or deal with. Throughout the 50's existentialists and other "beatniks" talked about getting down to one's "real self". Jung believed that this “real self” was the source of vitality and creativity lurking behind a "neurotic shield" —a mask!

Jung was influenced by numerous mystical religions and Taoism where terms like "inner room", "the great void," the "realm of essence," the source of things", the "Id", the "Creative Unconscious" are common.

The biggest obstacle to objective truth is one's own self image or "mask". We are inclined to believe whatever is consistent with whatever belief system makes us feel good about ourselves. In America, an entire political party espouses what was once called “supply side” economics but now more often referred to as “trickle down” theory.

The theory is discounted by almost every reputable economist upon abundant objective and verifiable data. That this theory continues to be popular suggests that it's appeal does not lie in objective truth. “Trickle down” economics is most surely a convenient rationalization of an increasingly self-absorbed life style catered to by the mass media. Has modern America become a culture premised upon mass denial?

In 1936, Jung was trying to figure out what was happening in Germany —just as many are trying to understand what is happening in America today. Jung wrote an essay called "Wotan" and in it, he tried to understand developments under Hitler, in terms of the mythology of the god Odin, a.k.a. the Germanic god Wotan. Jung wrote: "We have seen him come to life in the German Youth Movement." I am not sure what "gods" have come to life in America —but I am more inclined to characterize them as fallen demigods, if not demons. Gods or Demons, they are but manifestations of the human personality. There may be a "Wotan" in all of us.

A “mask” is but the smiley face we show the world; it's origin is the lie that we tell ourselves. I recently watched a PBS documentary about a Japanese sergeant who "supervised" British and Australian POW's in Southeast Asia during WWII. Though he had been convicted of war crimes in connection with the treatment of the POW's, the man —some 55 years after the fact —still denied that thousands of POWs had been literally worked and starved to death under his supervision. He denied that he had beaten many of them himself with wire whips.

There is an old saying that the truth will set you free. But here was a man who by his denial had made himself prisoner to the lie —his own lie. In Jungian terms, his life --premised as it was upon the falsehood that he told himself --was "inauthentic".

Dr. Gustav Gilbert, the American psychologist at Nuremberg, came to some conclusions based on his experiences keeping Nazi war criminals alive until final sentencing could be carried out. He said that he had come to understand the nature of "evil". Evil, he said, was an utter lack of empathy. I might add: that empathy with another is only possible if one has come to terms with one's own "shadow", one's own "source of creativity", one's own humanity. One who cannot see humanity in him/herself or in another is a Nazi in spirit; and “Nazism” typifies what Jung would have called the "inauthentic" life, a life lived upon lies and denial. A life lived behind a false mask.

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

On Liberty: More Relevant Than Ever

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

In his classic essay "On Liberty", John Stuart Mill deals with the issue of "civil liberties" --not the metaphysical issue of "free will". While most attacks on civil liberties have historically occurred from the right within the context of a tyrannical or an aristocratic rule, Mill deals with threats against liberty from within the institutions of democracy itself. The issue is especially relevant at a time when widespread domestic wiretapping and surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The aim of early libertarians was to limit the power of the ruler over those governed; Mill, however, identifies a need to limit the power of elected governments and officials as well. Mill is not merely addressing the issue of "who should rule?", he seeks to establish limits on the power that government may exercise over minorities and individuals. His work is more relevant now than ever.

While "government of the people" is an ideal to be sought, Mill argues that such an ideal is often not the case in fact. He argues that those exerting the power of the government --elected officials, bureaucrats, the judiciary --often develop their own interests. They may be influenced by those constituencies in ways that are at odds with the interests and liberties of individuals or other groups.

Mill makes no distinction between a tyranny of one and a tyranny of many. A tyrannical majority running roughshod over the rights of individuals and minorities is no less a tyrant because it is a majority, because it is elected, or because it is elected by a majority.

While society may not tolerate criminal behavior, for example, society may not legitimately interfere with or suppress all non-conforming behaviors indiscriminately or because a majority may not approve. What then are the powers that society may legitimately exercise over the individual? Mill answers:

"The only purpose for which power can be rightly exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
-J.S. Mill, On Liberty

James Madison --called the "Father of the Constitution" --may have anticipated Mill's ideas in his draft of the Bill of Rights --the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Implicit in the Bill of Rights is the recognition that the power of the state is a blunt instrument. Abused, it can oppress and repress individuals and minority groups alike. The Bill of Rights addresses this issue by guaranteeing "due process of law", limiting state power over individuals and groups, guaranteeing that groups and individuals may speak freely, worship freely.

The Fourth Amendment specifically is a promise that our government made to us in its very founding:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
-Fourth Amendment, Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution

Let's make something abundantly clear: there are no "inherent powers", "implicit" authorizations" that would, in any way, overturn, limit, or repeal the Fourth Amendment. Many politicians are not only wrong about that, they may have deliberately lied about it. Moreover, Congress may not overrule the Fourth Amendment with statutory law. Constitutional Law is supreme and provisions in the Bill of Right are valid until amended as set out in the Constitution itself. Widespread domestic surveillance is illegal whatever is done by Congress ex post facto --and until the Constitution is amended, it will remain illegal. At last, ex post facto laws, themselves, are expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

Mill is all the more remarkable for his insight into issues that remain contemporary. In every literate criticism of "special interest groups", PAC's, the gun lobby, the tobacco lobby, the Military/Industrial Complex, one sees the lasting influence of John Mill.

On Liberty is essential reading for anyone interested in law, the principles of government, political science, political philosophy, indeed, freedom itself. It is also essential reading for anyone interested in learning about the intellectual underpinnings of Anglo-American civil liberties.

Saturday, September 04, 2010

Why You are Free and the Right Wing is Not!

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The essence of Sartre is found in a slim volume of just under 100 pages: Existentialism and Human Emotions. In a single sentence, Sartre turned several centuries of conventional thinking on its head: "Existence precedes essence". Sartre himself, however, credits Rene Descartes whose cogito ergo sum or, en francais, Je pense donc je suis; in English: "I think, therefore I am".

Sartre writes:

"For we mean that man first exists, that is, that man first of all is the being who hurls himself toward a future and who is conscious of imagining himself as being in the future.
Man is at the start a plan which is aware of itself, rather than a patch of moss, a piece of garbage, or a cauliflower; nothing exists prior to this plan; there is nothing in heaven; man will be what he will have planned to be. Not what he will want to be. Because by the word "will" we generally mean a conscious decision, which is subsequent to what we have already made of ourselves.

I may want to belong to a political party, write a book, get married; but all that is only a manifestation of an earlier, more spontaneous choice that is called "will." But if existence really does precede essence, man is responsible for what he is. Thus, existentialism's first move is to make every man aware of what he is and to make the full responsibility of his existence rest on him. And when we say that a man is responsible for himself, we do not only mean that he is responsible for his own individuality, but that he is responsible for all men."

--Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Human Emotions

"Existence precedes essence", therefore, strikes at the very heart of dogma, prejudice, pre-conceived notions of any sort, ideologies into which humankind is inclined to shoe-horn reality. Existentialism begins with a clean slate. The 'moving finger' may or may not write but most certainly does not dictate what we may or may not make of ourselves.

In existentialism, therefore, there is no place to run, no place hide. It is the price we pay for being free. For that reason, existentialism is liberating. Man is no longer limited by theological notions of his origin with God's breath in the Garden or at the tip of God's finger, as depicted by Michelangelo's Sistine Ceiling. That 'man', alone, is responsible for what he is or becomes is the source of 'existential angst'. And also our freedom.

Existentialism is the enemy of dogma --religious, psuedo-scientific, political ideology. For that reason alone, existentialism is often, though fallaciously, identified with the political left-wing. The 'right wing' undermines itself from within, by what Sartre would call 'mauvaise foi', i.e., bad faith.

'Bad faith' was best illustrated by Bertolt Brecht who summed it up: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot; but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a crook!" The photographer Richard Avedon was even more succinct: "You cannot expect another man to carry your shit!"

Thus 'bad faith' defines the 'crook' and, thus, the many American politicians who blame a universe of strawmen for their own failures --minorities, liberals, the world-wide communist conspiracy, Islamic 'terrorists' and left-wing subversives throughout the U.S. labor, anti-war and civil rights movements.

Existentialism is the philosophy that says --grow up! Stop making excuses! Stop blaming others! Existentialism is the tough-minded philosophy of no lies, no excuses, no bullshit!

Jean-Paul Sartre: "I am my liberty!"

Cogito ergo sum

Note: The Existentialist Cowboy is currently bombarded by spam from a lunatic name caller of the right wing ilk! Therefore, comments are moderated. Intelligent comments are, as always, welcome! Ad hominem attacks, spam and psychotic drivel is not! Eventually, the offending party will be committed to an asylum and we adults can once again engage in intelligent, articulate dialogue. Thanks for understanding.

Bluebloggin

Subscribe

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Ignorant Republican Attacks "Existentialism"

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The GOP has run out of strawmen --"phony wars", "pot" "evolutionists", and "secular humanists" to demonize, attack and/or ridicule. Now they've taken aim at a mainstream philosophy with roots in the enlightenment, a philosophy defined by 'personal responsibility', an attribute with which goppers have precious little or no experience.

I expect nothing else, certainly nothing more, from a party whose existence depends upon blaming everyone and everything but itself for its own many crimes and failures --political and personal.

But --the GOP is not a political party, it's a cult, possibly a criminal conspiracy. It ought to be investigated by a Federal Grand Jury for the probable cause that it routinely violated anti-racketeering laws. It dares to attack a mainstream political philosophy with roots in Cartesianism ['I think, therefore I am!'] ; Voltaire's famous statement: "I have no name but the name that I have made for myself" and Satre's: "A man is nothing else but what he makes of himself!"

The GOP hates 'existentialism' because they have made of themselves 'crooks' and have no one but themselves to blame for it. Bertolt Brecht had their number: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a crook!"

The GOP are Crooks!

But --alas --I have grown accustomed to endemic stupidity and ignorance from a party that is also characterized by greed and arrogance.

Now Starting: The War on Existentialism

In a stirring speech yesterday, former Missouri Senator Jim Talent said that not only does global terrorism demand a stronger a more efficient military, but also that it is part of an "existential threat to America."

"These people are reading Jean-Paul Sartre to their children," the fiery Talent railed. "We cannot have that influence our society."

"American demands a philosophical undermining that is grounded, epistemologically-speaking, in a fervent belief in God and his infinite capacity to bless us at the same as damning half our citizens to hell. The Terrorists want to spread their message of mortal isolation, forlornness, and the accidental nature of existence upon us, but we must fight them!"

When asked if he had any experience with existentialism, Talent replied, "I read The Stranger once, and all I wanted to do was tell him he wasn't a stranger to Jesus."

Existentialist Noble Prize Winner Jose Saramago replied to Talent's ramblings saying, "Entre os fataés eventos desta presente guerra, entendo serà de V.m. sem duvida havido por digno de maior ponderaçaõ, o que aconteceo na Cidade de Genova, no dia dez do corrente; eu, que com horror vi o principio, e o fim delle, faltaria aos empenhos da nossa boa amizade se deixasse de participalo a V.m. com individuarlhe as cauzas de que se originou, e narrarlhe sinceramente os factos mais essenciaes de que se compoz."

To which Talent replied: "Yes, that is exactly the kind of filth I want to fight."

It will be a long struggle, defeating existentialism. We'll have to burn a lot of books. Killing philosophers should be easy, but what if Woody Allen has to go as well?

Either way, if the threat to America is, as Mr. Talent says, existential, I'm sure our brightest minds will find some way to fight it, just as we did that pesky War on Drugs that finally went away.

To start with, Talent used the term "existential" incorrectly. Most certainly, in context, he means "existentialist" threat. The quagmire of Bush's creation in Iraq is an "existential" threat whether Talent is an "Existentialist" or not.

Goppers, like Bush, "don't do nuance". But Talent's mistake can be dismissed. It's just a product of an inadequate education or willful stupidity. It's the GOP; take your pick. Remember, this is a party that waged war on public education. Education lost.

I find it incredible that Talent bothered to read 'a' book. That he might have read 'at' the Bible is not surprising. But it is strange that he would have attempted "L'etranger" or, for Talent, "The Stranger". Why does a fundie bother to read a book when it is so much easier to blame others or call them names?

I am frankly fed up with stupid people telling me and the nation what to do. As far as I am concerned, Talent can just fuck off! While defending Talent's right to be stupid and his First Amendment right to say stupid things, I likewise defend my own right to be intelligent and call him an idiot. So here goes: Talent is a typical GOP idiot, a typical GOP bigot, a typical GOP ignoramus, and, because he has chosen to be a gopper, he is responsible --existentially --for the choice that he has made. Talent and Talent alone is responsible for having chosen to be a part of an organization that appeals to crookedness, thrives on corruption and promotes lies. Absolutely unforgivable is the fact that the GOP is --at its black heart --elitist but ignorant, if not endemically stupid.

Existentialists are free because, by definition, they accept responsibility for what they are. By contrast, the GOP has defined itself by blaming black people, liberals, progressives, academics, writers, artists, actors, environmentalists, young people, rock n' roll, 'liberal media' (an oxymoron) a 'world wide communist conspiracy' recently replaced by an Islamic conspiracy to commit acts of 'terrorism' on American soil. Bush's theory of 911 was a 'conspiracy theory': 14 Arab hijackers --whose very existence cannot be proven --were said to have hijacked flights that did not exist causing the demolition of buildings that could not have been penetrated by any aircraft not made of hardened industrial steel. Clue: NO airliner aircraft is made of hardened industrial steel. On 911, Bush provided the GOP with a scapegoat --Muslims!

There is no freedom without choice, no choice without responsibility. Even concentration camp victims of Hitler found freedom in incarceration. Victor Frankl purposefully chose his own attitude in the face of death. Existentialism is the philosophy of freedom, courage and choice --the courage and freedom to make a choice and the courage to take responsibility for its effects. It takes great courage to accept responsibility for what you have made of yourself. It takes only cowardice of the GOP kind to blame everyone but themselves for the fuck ups they have made of both themselves and the nation.

Talent is not a free man; Talent is a tool!

Now --if you wish to become expert on Existentialism, you must start with Descartes' cogito: I think, therefore I am. In Southern parlance: if you ain't thinkin', you ain't livin'. Even a gopper has no choice but to admit his/her own existence, given that the gopper in question has a pulse. One's own existence cannot be doubted. Everything else follows from that. Then read Soren Kierkegaard, a "Christian" existentialist. What could Talent possibly have against a fellow Christian? Perhaps, the fact that Kierkegaard dared to be intelligent while Talent and his fellow minions dare to show themselves in public.

Then there is the monumental volume Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre, an atheist existentialist. If you have time for only one book about existentialism, read Existentialism and Human Emotions by Sartre. It can be summed up in a single clause:

A man is nothing else but what he makes of himself.''
--Jean-Paul Sartre

It must surely be the many corollaries to that which bother idiots like Talent. It means simply that they --Republicans --can no longer get away with blaming others, indeed, the entire world for their failures as people, their failures as a party, their failures in positions of governmental responsibility for which they are singularly unsuited.

Let us assume that Talent was born with at least an average intelligence. In that case, Talent alone is responsible for the sorry mess that he has made of himself, the cesspool that his party made of Washington, the hell hole that it made of Iraq.

An addendum: 20 things you have to believe to be a Republican today

1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.
The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.
Government should relax regulation of Big Business and Big Money but crack down on individuals who use marijuana to relieve the pain of illness.
"Standing Tall for America" means firing your workers and moving their jobs to India.
A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all humankind without regulation.
Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.
The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.
Group sex and drug use are degenerate sins unless you someday run for governor of California as a Republican.
If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.
A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our longtime allies, then demand their cooperation and money.
HMOs and insurance companies have the interest of the public at heart.
Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.
Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.
Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is a solid defense policy.
Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.
The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's driving record is none of our business.
You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have a right to adopt.
What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the 1980s is irrelevant.
Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist; but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.
--20 things you have to believe to be a Republican today

The Ballad of the Existentialist

Sunday, November 04, 2007

How to be free when all about you are enslaved by an evil, GOP machine

Political "evil" allows people to assuage their consciences in numbers. A person who might never lynch a man himself, might do so in a mob. Lynchings and torchings of black people were most often done by groups -not by individuals. The Holocaust required a "Reich". The Reagan regime required only an increasingly bourgeois populace only too willing to believe the lies it told itself. No member of such a group is truly free. No "good Republican" is free! No member of a mob is free. No group is free!

While psychologists may diagnose individuals as "psychotic", the more harmful effects are sustained when a group exhibits symptoms and acts upon them. There are no un-motivated choices. Motivation follows from our very existence which precedes essence, in this case, the manifestation of character, the gestalt of our choices. I propose that we choose to be free. We become free when we accept responsibility for what we make of ourselves.

Hollywood script-writers say that motive precedes character. Many, perhaps most, will act upon what is believed, in good faith, to be true but others will act knowingly upon a lie. Bertolt Brecht addressed inauthentic" people when he said: "A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it ia lie is a crook!". To act knowingly upon a lie is to act upon bad motives. Jean-Paul Sartre would call it mauvaise fois.

For if indeed existence precedes essence, one will never be able to explain one’s action by reference to a given and specific human nature; in other words, there is no determinism – man is free, man is freedom. Nor, on the other hand, if God does not exist, are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimize our behaviour. Thus we have neither behind us, nor before us in a luminous realm of values, any means of justification or excuse. – We are left alone, without excuse.

That is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free. Condemned, because he did not create himself, yet is nevertheless at liberty, and from the moment that he is thrown into this world he is responsible for everything he does. The existentialist does not believe in the power of passion. He will never regard a grand passion as a destructive torrent upon which a man is swept into certain actions as by fate, and which, therefore, is an excuse for them. He thinks that man is responsible for his passion.

Neither will an existentialist think that a man can find help through some sign being vouchsafed upon earth for his orientation: for he thinks that the man himself interprets the sign as he chooses. He thinks that every man, without any support or help whatever, is condemned at every instant to invent man.
--Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism

In some cases, a lie may not be a true motivation, but only a "cover" for a truth that dare not be revealed. In such cases, there is the "truth" that is acted upon, and the lie that is publicly professed. The intention is to deceive. The GOP is, thus, enslaved by its own web of lies --the lies it tells the world, the lies it tells itself. Only those who can accept the truth of their own existence and take responsibility for it are truly free. The GOP is the party of blame, a party for whom everyone but itself is blamed for its failures at home, in Iraq, throughout the world.

In some cases, a lie is told oneself and the world. In other cases, the truth is known and ignored; a cover story is told the world. Trickle down theory is just such a lie --a falsehood of convenience told publicly to justify economic policies intended to enrich the very few while impoverishing the many.

It is often possible to convince oneself that a lie is true and, in those cases, truth is forever covered up. It is a rare culprit who accepts his own villainy. Most will excuse a crime with a lie, a rationalization. "I was only righting the wrong that had been done me". "I was mistreated as a child". "The money should have been mine".

"Republicanism" itself is a gestalt of lies of many sorts. Republicans embrace "trickle down theory" not because it is true but because it conveniently justifies piggish, often criminal behavior. There are perhaps two kinds of people in this corrupt White House -those who really believe the lies and those who know them to be lies but cite them, in bad faith, to promote the GOP agenda. Motives so assiduously disguised cannot be benign.

It is easy enough invoke a blanket "political motive" ie, if Bush had been honest and up front about the many ways in which his cronies would be enriched by war with Iraq, the nation would never have backed the war. But many would have backed the war and would have espoused the same specious arguments and for the same reasons. Bush lied about WMD because he dared not make public the other, hidden reasons to wage aggressive war.

Evil, and the hypocrisy it inspires, springs from a deep well. Hypocrisy and mass psychoses are only mechanisms by which evil objectives are achieved. Dr. Gustav Gilbert, the American psychologist charged with keeping the Nuremberg criminals alive until they could be duly hanged, identified evil with the primary symptom of "psychopathic personalities" ie, the "utter lack of empathy".

Human, All Too Human (BBC) - Jean Paul Sartre: Part 1

Human, All Too Human (BBC) - Jean Paul Sartre: Part 2

A Short Based upon my interview with a survivor of Auschwitz

An update from my friends at Bad Attitudes:

Even for Texas…
Texas, a perennial frontrunner in the stupidity stakes, is about to auction off a state wildlife preserve bordering Big Bend National Park:
The property, which could be sold as soon as Tuesday, is the Christmas Mountains Ranch, a 9,270-acre tract abutting Big Bend National Park near the Rio Grande. It was given to the state in 1991 and leased to the nonprofit association of local residents to patrol

The dispute pits the donors of the land, the Conservation Fund and the Richard King Mellon Foundation, against a pistol-packing commissioner adamant about preserving hunting and firearms rights on the property, even at the cost of denying the land to the National Park Service, although Texas ranks 44th in park land.

Posted by Jerome Doolittle