Thursday, March 18, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Thursday 18 March 2021

 

Published in 1951


In order to establish a totalitarian regime, terror must be presented as an instrument for carrying out a specific ideology; and that ideology must have won the adherence of many, and even a majority, before terror can be stabilized.

The question that imposed itself was: Could the activity of thinking as such, the habit of examining whatever happens to come to pass or to attract attention, regardless of results and specific content, could this activity be among the conditions that make men abstain from evil-doing or even actually “condition” them against it?

"The historian, investigating any event in the past, makes a distinction between what may be called the outside and the inside of an event. By the outside of an event I mean everything belonging to it which can be described in terms of bodies and their movements. … By the inside of an event I mean that in it which can only be described in terms of thought." R.G. Collingwood, The Idea of History, 213.

It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that almost nobody in Britain drank tea at the beginning of the eighteenth century, and nearly everybody did by the end of it.


Language and Myth by Ernst Cassirer, translated by Susanne K. Langer

 

The original German edition published in 1924; Langer's English translation in 1946

This short (126 pp.) work was originally published by Cassirer in his native Germany. The English translation was undertaken by fellow philosopher--and in some ways his successor in the aspect of his project--Susanne K. Langer. The English-language edition was published in 1953. It's not a quick or easy read, but well worthwhile if the reader has an interest in the roots of myth, language, religion, and thought. 

This is my first book by Cassirer. His titles, An Essay on Man (1943), The Myth of the State (1946), and Language and Myth were found on many book store shelves and The Myth of the State (which I've now started reading) was included on political theory "additional reading" bibliographies. But Cassirer wasn't taught in any class that I took, and I never got around to reading any of his work. But my curiosity was renewed when I read The Time of the Magicians: Wittgenstein, Benjamin, Cassirer, Heidegger, and the Decade That Reinvented Philosophy (2020), in which Cassirer comes across as the most establishment and the most traditional of the four thinkers discussed in that book. However, he also came across as the most sensible and accessible. The climax of the book was a "debate" between Cassirer and Martin Heidegger that was held in Davos (yes, that Davos) in 1929. Some thought Heidegger received the greater approval of those present, but I came away with s  greater appreciation of Cassirer. (N.B. Heidegger remained in Germany in 1933 after the Nazis came to power and accepted a Nazi-approved position; Cassirer, who was Jewish, fled Germany that year for Britain and eventually came to the U.S., where he finished his career.) 

Thus my taking up Language and Myth. 

This is a dense book, not a long read, but neither is it a quick, easy read. In fact, in order to write this review, I went back and read it a second time. But the additional effort was worth the time spent. 

Cassirer wields serious credentials as a scholar and as a thinker. His mastery of the literature of myth and religion from the nineteenth-century up to the time of his original publication in 1924 reveals his bona fides as a scholar. Many of the fellow scholars whose works he cites are unfamiliar to me (and were written in German), but a few, like Frazier, Tylor, and Max Muller, are familiar. Cassirer delves deeply into these sources in his attempt to understand the relationship between language, myth, religion, and later formal modes of thought (such as philosophy and science). That Cassirer relies on so many early explorations of mythology and religion makes me wonder how later developments in the field may alter the validity of his conclusions. In any event, these early European (and American?) scholars delved deeply and enthusiastically into other cultures and their ways, which is certainly one of the positive outcomes of the spread of Westerners around the world and their encounters with different civilizations and cultures. Cassirer seems quite well-acquainted with this pioneering literature. And what does he make of it? 

In short, Cassirer argues that that language and myth share a common linage and that one doesn't pre-date the other. Myth and mythological (and magical) thinking pre-date later developments of what we've come to know as rational, logical thought. He spends the last chapter discussing metaphor as a key function of language. Put in the simplest terms, our logical-deductive, denotative language tends to abstraction and generalization, while our mythical, more metaphorical language tends toward specification. I come away with the feeling that Cassirer doesn't intend to crown one way of language and knowledge over the other, but he sees them as complementary. And don't be fooled by his sympathy for the archaic, the mythological, the metaphorical. This is a man who was a leading "neo-Kantian" and who wrote a book explaining Einstein's (then) new theory of relativity. 

As I remarked above, I've just embarked on The Myth of the State, and I also have my eye on his An Essay on Man, both of which should take deeper into his project of "philosophical anthropology." After those two works, I'm looking forward to some of Susanne Langer's works. And, reading Myth and Language has me thinking about how his work compares to that of his peer, R.G. Collingwood, who served as a reader for an OUP book of essays dedicated to Cassirer, who was then living in the UK. So no doubt Collingwood had some acquaintance with Cassirer's project. Both of these thinkers were concerned with art and appreciated non-Western and archaic cultures and traditions. (And Collingwood made interesting observations about magic as well.) I also wonder how Cassirer compares to Owen Barfield, a younger contemporary concerned with the "evolution of thought" and origins and development of language. Finally, among our contemporaries, Iain McGilchrist cites Cassirer a few times in his masterwork, The Master and His Emissary, and I suspect that there are a good many more shared perspectives and potential influences than one might glean from McGilchrist's passing citations. (Perhaps McGilchrist's forthcoming book will shed some light on this topic.) 

Cassirer is another thinker from the first half of the twentieth century and from Central Europe whose writing about philosophy, history, politics, religion, and art--and about their contemporary world--continues to fascinate me. A century ago they were dealing with the Great Influenza that ravaged the world in 1918-1919 while at the same time dealing with the destructiveness of the First World War and all the changes that it wrought. And it was a time of new mass media (radio and film), economic disruption (post-war and then the Great Depression), cultural change, and political extremism and violence. History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme, and the rhymes I hear make me nervous and therefore eager to take advantage of the insights and wisdom of those who dealt with similar challenges a century ago.

03.18.2021 





Wednesday, March 17, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Wednesday 17 March 2021--Happy St. Patrick's Day!

 



It is the specific danger of all forms of government based on equality that the moment the structure of lawfulness—within whose framework the experience of equal power receives its meaning and direction—breaks down or is transformed, the powers among equal men cancel each other out and what is left is the experience of absolute impotence. Out of the conviction of one’s own impotence and the fear of the power of all others comes the will to dominate, which is the will of the tyrant.

Of the two European suspicions—that American anti-Stalinists are simply more sophisticated and less powerful defenders of the status quo, and that they may be only an ideological “superstructure” for their country’s national interests in foreign politics—the one seems to be as well founded as the other is unwarranted. Interminable discussion by anti-Stalinists of the moot question as to whether Soviet Russia is a socialist country has somewhat blurred the fact that anti-Stalinists, along with other Americans, are fundamentally and sincerely opposed to any government that functions with the help of concentration camps and secret police, that aims at the total domination of society and the total humiliation of man.

One can say that to some extent fascism has added a new variation to the old art of lying—the most devilish variation—that of lying the truth.

What interested me far more were the moods of intensity—what G. K. Chesterton had called the sense of ‘absurd good news’. From the beginning, one thing seemed basically clear to me: that in these states of enriched consciousness, these states in which it seems self-evident that life is good, we begin to grasp what life is all about.


Monday, March 15, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: 15 March 2021


 

Mathematics is usually thought to be a model of absolute clarity of thought achieved with the use of symbols and, hence, no place for Scholastics to be delving. But a prerequisite of most mathematics is analysis of concepts confusedly present in experience, and in this the Scholastics were masters.

The medieval lawyers were the first to consider explicitly the grading of the degrees of proof, with some discussion of how fine it should be; the combination of different pieces of evidence for the same conclusion; and the conflict of different pieces of evidence bearing on the same conclusion. The resulting theory is a coherent one. It is not numerical, and there is no reason to think that it would have been improved if it had been numerical. On the contrary, since modern (English) law has a similar theory, and insists on keeping it nonnumerical,1 there is every reason to believe the medievals were correct in avoiding numbers.

Lamennais and [John Henry] Newman felt sharply, and tried to deflect, modernity’s relentless demand for reasons. Newman wrote that “rationalism,” by which he meant not just denying but overthinking religion, was “the great evil of the day.” If faith was shown to be unreasonable, would not the reasonableness of morality be next?

A disillusioned progressive, Adams saw people en masse as well-intentioned but biddable. Political engagement was part, but not the larger part, of their lives. Without a vigilant-enough citizenry, his country’s admirable democratic institutions had been captured by moneyed interests, which paid politicians to govern in the people’s name. To Adams, it was a sordid bargain.

While I would never discount the great achievements that Western medicine has given overall to human health, if we spent half as much money and time trying to invent a better placebo—or, maybe more accurately, better ways to train our immune system to protect our bodies—we’d likely discover entirely new ways to treat disease. This is, of course, where it’s beneficial to consider the relationship between the environment and human physiology as a wedge to help control and strengthen the immune system itself.


Sunday, March 14, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Sunday 14 March 2021

 


[I]ndigenous communities around the globe use sensory and environmental stimuli to treat their sick. He flashes a list of techniques culled from ethnographic accounts and ancient texts on the screen: sensory deprivation, breathing, fasting, extreme exercise, meditation, hyperthermia, hypothermia, and psychedelic plant medicines. All of these interventions aim to wedge space between the way we experience stress and how our bodies respond to difficult environments. Someone should write a book! I think to myself.

The placebo effect might actually be the Wedge in action.


Patrician classes have taken many forms throughout history.36 However, in all cases, their function is, First, to uphold society by observing its mores and modeling its norms (making all due allowance for the inevitable hypocrisy involved), thus giving the populace something to look up to and be guided by; Second, to direct the affairs of the society for the general good even though this will inevitably further entrench their own wealth, status, and power. What distinguishes a genuine patrician class from a mere oligarchy concerned only with feathering its own nest is a spirit of noblesse oblige— the duty of those in a privileged position to behave with responsibility and generosity toward those who are less privileged, if only out of a due regard for their own enlightened self-interest. Noblesse oblige constitutes the glue that holds a well-functioning civil society together and causes a people to take their cues from above instead of below.

Step one in your search for happiness is to continually work toward having control of your schedule.

The world is far too complex to be reduced to any single organizing framework. There is thus a fine line between clarity and dogmatism, between a useful heuristic and a distorting myopia.

Even as its citizens ask for security, in the sense of guaranteed status, they hymn unconfined opportunity. The market myth makes us think that spontaneity will sort out things according to their merits, without the need for planning and regulation. The individual is supposed to forge his or her own “environment,” unfettered by prior social arrangements. More and more the governmental workings of America have come to reflect the necessities of national size and ambition, while the Presidents express a romantic rejection of that machinery, a denial of the rule of necessity, a promise to escape “back” toward remembered freedoms.

Good stories, poems, and creative nonfiction get a good deal of their power by leaving things implied. When something is implied, the reader is pulled in and participates more deeply in the meaning—experiences the meaning—rather than just understanding it. (See Tannen’s “Relative Focus.”) And many good writers of expository and academic writing do not succumb to the syntactic bias among writing theorists in favor of hypotaxis, embedding, and left-branching syntax. Writers reach readers better when they also know how to call on the rhetorical virtues of parataxis and right-branching syntax that’s so common in everyday speaking.

In 1949 the average life expectancy  (in China) was thirty-six, and the literacy rate was 20 percent. By 2012,  life expectancy was seventy-five, and the literacy rate was above 90 percent.


Saturday, March 13, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Saturday 13 March 2021

  

And the post-world is coming!


Keynes also worried that with the decline of work, all that free time would be a problem because people were not good at leisure. He noted that the indolence of much of the aristocracy, which already faced this problem, was a gloomy omen of what might come to the larger public eventually.

When you want to hurry something, that means you no longer care about it and want to get on to other things.

Heidegger rightly points out: “Descartes himself stresses that the sentence [cogito ergo sum] is not a syllogism. The I-am is not a consequence of the I-think but, on the contrary, the fundamentum, the ground for it.”

Beneath Montesquieu’s distinction between the nature of government (that which makes it what it is) and its moving or guiding principle (that which sets it into motion through actions) lies another difference, a problem which has plagued political thought since its beginning, and which Montesquieu indicates, but does not solve, by his distinction between man as a citizen (a member of a public order) and man insofar as he is an individual.

In discussing Renaissance law and its impact, it should be kept in mind that the law was then much less an esoteric specialization than it is today. Such unlikely people as Alberti and Copernicus were actually doctors of canon law, while almost all of the founders of mathematical probability had some legal connection: Fermat was a professional lawyer, Cardan and Pascal were the sons of lawyers, Huygens was a doctor of civil and canon law....

In this book I argue that all progress, both theoretical and practical, has resulted from a single human activity: the quest for what I call good explanations.


Friday, March 12, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Friday 12 March 2021

 

2020 publication


That this debate was a clear sign that macroeconomics as a field was ideological to the point of astrology was often asserted by people in all the other social sciences, but economists were still very skilled at ignoring outside criticisms of their field, and now they forged on contradicting themselves as confidently as ever.

Language, by lending itself to metaphorical usage, enables us to think, that is, to have traffic with non-sensory matters, because it permits a carrying-over, metapherein, of our sense experiences. There are not two worlds because metaphor unites them.

The European visitor simply cannot perceive political realities in the United States, because they are so well hidden by the surface of a society in which publicity and public relations multiply all social factors, as a mirror multiplies light, so that the glaring façade appears to be the overwhelming reality. He cannot imagine that Mr. Jones, who in social matters is obviously the world’s greatest conformist and hardly ever speaks about politics, is nevertheless in political matters a most independent creature with a deep feeling of responsibility as a citizen. It is inconceivable to this visitor that a very complicated system of social interrelationships—determined by even more and more heterogeneous groups than one could find in a class system—can underlie the surface composed of all the worst cultural elements of a mass society.
N.B. This was written in the period immediately after the end of World War II; to wit, before 1954.

“The characteristic of totalitarianism is not only to absorb man within the group, but also to surrender him to becoming.” Against this seeming reality of the general and universal, the particular reality of the individual person appears, indeed, as a quantité négligeable, submerged in the stream of public life which, since it is organized as a movement, is the universal itself.

Thursday, March 11, 2021

Thoughts for the Day: Thursday 11 March 2021

 

An American classic originally published in 1974


Any effort that has self-glorification as its final endpoint is bound to end in disaster.
Too bad that the recently defeated president didn't get this message; but then he'd have to read.

Maurras’s following in the monarchist “street” cared less for winning arguments than for making trouble. Maurras cared for both. He stirred up right-wing street fighters with violent prose in the newspaper he edited, Action Française, and then disclaimed responsibility for the damage they caused. In 1934, for example, right-wing rioters egged on by Action Française attempted to storm the parliament in Paris.
Seem familiar?

Where the new way of knowing required that the observer remain passive, so as not to taint what he was observing with his ‘subjectivity’ – Thomas Huxley, Darwin’s ‘bulldog’, advises us to ‘sit down before fact like a little child’ – Goethe, as we’ve seen, took a more active approach. Like Schwaller de Lubicz’s ‘intelligence of the heart’, Goethe wants to get inside phenomena, not behind them to some ‘really real’ world, whether of elementary particles or Kant’s ding-an-sich, the ‘thing-in-itself’ forever barred from our cognition by the ‘categories’ of thought.
Query: How does Goethe's intention to "get inside phenomena" compare with Barfield's idea of "participation?"

Science is a plant of slow growth. It will not grow (and for a plant the end of growth is the end of life) except where the scientist as the priest of truth is not only supported but revered as a priest-king by a people that shares his faith. When scientists are no longer kings, there will be (to adapt a famous saying of Plato’s) no end to the evils undergone by the society that has dethroned them until it perishes physically for sheer lack of sustenance.
Is this observation relevant to today? (To borrow a 60s cliche.)


The shorter our standard time-phase for an historical event, the more our history will consist of destructions, catastrophes, battle, murder, and sudden death. But destruction implies the existence of something to destroy; and as this type of history cannot describe how such a thing came into existence, for the process of its coming into existence was a process too long to be conceived as an event by this type of history, its existence must be presupposed as given, ready-made, miraculously established by some force outside history.

In other words, the profit motive, whose importance for imperialist policies was frequently overrated even in the past, has now completely disappeared; only very rich and very powerful countries can afford to take the huge losses involved in imperialism.

Since Dasein is ‘to be there’ in the world – the literal, actual, concrete, daily world – to be human at all is to be immersed in the earth, and the quotidian matter-of-factness of the world.

We call such institutions, which have opposite properties to those we call inclusive, extractive economic institutions-extractive because such institutions are designed to extract incomes and wealth from one subset of society to benefit a different subset.