• Overview, Irritation Alert!

in the blind spot

~ Philosophy in the Dystopian Context

in the blind spot

Tag Archives: philosophy

The Veil of Illusions

23 Tuesday Dec 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

caring, culture, deity, embodiment, empathy, evil, History, hive-mind, ideality, nationality, patriarchy, philosophy, religion, spirituality, theology, value, violence

Fragment 219, Word Count: 2,841.

Tags: empathy, caring, evil, deity, nationality, hive-mind, value, patriarchy, violence, embodiment, philosophy, culture, theology, ideality.

The Cultural Veil

There is a culturally conditioned veil of illusions that stands in the way of any ordinary acquaintance with some of the most important features of life as a personal subjectivity. The blocked features of subjective existence, however, remain relevant and ready to be appreciated. We human individuals derive joy and meaning from imitating people around us, from attaching emotionally and soaking up culture like sponges. Within the general culture of ways of thriving in a particular surroundings, there are also fanciful speculations, stories that misconstrue the powers and necessities that determine events in the world, exaggerations of common fears and wishes that make them fetishistic and barriers to important discoveries. All of the cultural complexes that contribute to the veil of illusions also contribute to a general nastiness of life shaped by their influence, forming the distinctly dystopian societies so familiar to us. Of course, even the most dystopian societies have factions who benefit from the arrangements and are pleased with themselves and with pretty much everything. It is those factions who are especially empowered to create, and be heroes of, the stories that depict their societies, and part of their culture is to celebrate stability and heroic resistance to change. Broadly speaking, this is the overall situation that inspires much of the mental and literary tradition of philosophy.

The Lens of Orientation

Our sense of being at a particular place, doing what we are doing, involves far more then what can be perceived from any given location. We work within a sort of interior model of all the routes we have moved through and we reorient the model as we reorient and place ourselves within a broad sense of the arrangement of things, the arrangement featuring our important destinations, especially featuring the personalities with whom we share an emotional attachment. Ordinary perception is mainly a selectively targeted sensory confirmation that current actuality conforms to what we are expecting based on our elaborate sense of place, directionality, and the possible personal futures already sketched out from elements of previous experiences and from intentions we have to advance personal dramas. This interior orientation serves as a sophisticated lens through which we selectively direct attention, searches, and applications of effort at the surroundings. All the cultural complexes we learn, including speculations, stories, and exaggerations, are, by that learning, incorporated into the structure of our personal orientation lens and they contribute decisively to the shape and the mood of the world we move and live within.

Illusions of Masculine Supremacy

One of the strongest complexes in the dystopian veil of illusions is the culture of masculine supremacy, macho or patriarchal culture. Traditional masculine values are illustrated in stories of ancient Greek and Roman warriors: hardness, strength, endurance, courage, self-promotion, and disregard for weaker beings. Before theocratic Christianity there was the crime family aristocracy of the strongest, dedicated to trophy hoarding. Capital was wealth-generating real estate, and the land-hoarding aristocracy cultivated the ancient culture of organized violence with the intent of looting as the means of possessing capital. Specialists in coercive force cultivate athletic proficiency with weapons, readiness for aggression, the hyper-masculine ethos adulating strength, violence, kinetic action, competitive conflict, and properties that need armed protection. Trophy property is understood as the actualization, the manifest proof, of personal worth, and is normally accompanied by contempt for mere subjective interiority.

Patriarchy, institutionalized sovereign rights of father-figures, is an overt expression of the guiding principle of masculine dominance: that the strongest have rights over everyone else, rights to the property and lives of the weaker, the right to be parasitic on the weaker. Such assumptions derive from the traditional family in which the father is the strongest and women and children are assumed to lack even a minimum competence. This culture worships and celebrates competition for the benefits of dominance. The key benefit of dominance is top-down human-on-human parasitism, from which other benefits flow. Many such benefits are the symbols and pageantry of dominance, for example in the scale of property possession and in relationships shaped by hierarchical master/slave inequality. Money culture, market wealth, is a branch of dominance culture because the scale of property possession is crucial in the pageantry and symbolism of dominance. Part of this alpha-trophy culture is denigration of alternative culture streams (such as the scribal/ literary tradition, the socially crucial child-nurturing culture, or varieties of interior spirituality) defining them as inferior and dependent, keeping them in some degree of dishonour and disgrace. The alpha-trophy culture of blood-sport dominance developed into military institutions as well as non-lethal competitive gaming and sports, into corporate culture and violence-ready sovereign states. There is a growing recognition of just how much the misogynist, racist, and predatory culture of hyper-masculinity is structured into the fabric of economic and political institutions.

The once ubiquitous culture of masculine dominance constructed and spread a certain kind of human bonding featuring strict hierarchies of authority maintained by operations of a core culture of violence with high value assigned to trophies of violence. It created aristocracy as a control-by-coercive-force faction in viciously top-down hive-minds nominally justified by a totalitarian father-god ideology in which everything is seen as pre-determined by an inexplicable occult masculine force, irritable, harsh, and quick to take offence, appeased only by displays of abject and gleefully grateful submission. Dominance culture asserts that this style of tightly controlled human clustering demanding conformity, exclusive emotional attachment and pageantry typical of religion, is the inevitable working of nature (especially human nature). However, these dystopian hierarchies of violence are the artifacts of a particular evil: the targeted denial of empathy. With the gradual development of alternative cultures, those large scale structures of attachment, by which individuals bind themselves into dystopian hive-mind collectives, start breaking down.

There is an ancient equivocation in the claim that human beings are essentially communal, such as Aristotle’s assertion that man is a polis animal. Aristotle’s claim makes it seem that the choice is between submission to a patriarchal sovereign state or just starkly solitary existence. That is a ridiculously oversimplified falsehood. Although sociability is crucial to the kinds of work and play within which humans can thrive, sociability is best fulfilled in the absence of violence, hierarchy, or self-denial by any individual. Patriarchal top-down command is sometimes justified by the idea that individuals are nothing but bundles of hard-wired drives for egoistic gratification, if they aren’t taught fear of superior power and a deferential orientation upward toward figures representing the overwhelming forces of religion and armed institutions. However, no matter how it is officially defended, the largely gratuitous nastiness of life in patriarchal societies is obvious and undeniable.

Illusions of Disembodied Supremacy

The veil of illusions also includes the fanciful metaphysics expressed in stories of disembodied intelligences: angels, demons, and deities, capricious free-floating entities who somehow care about and seem to have a stake in human behaviour, purportedly because humans were created by the will and power of these entities to be their toys and playthings. These stories are made frightening and also enticing by supposing that spirit-beings have unlimited powers, which means they must be considered and placated in all things to turn them into kind guardians instead of demanding and punishing masters. Imagining that the world at large and in detail is the deliberate act of an unpredictably powerful thinking and caring agency, often capricious, sometimes inexplicably malicious, means that acting in a way that pleases or placates that force, generally on the say-so of opaque but charismatic social authorities, just might have the effect of making the world a more benign situation. This cultural stream expresses a confusion about intelligence itself such that the cosmos at large somehow expresses a super-intelligence that pre-determines how everything should be (yet not always how it is!), but with some degree of negotiable grace as a reward for formulaic pageantry expressing extravagant praise, fearful self-abasement, and symbolic sacrifice.

The idea of a divine plan and a supernatural planner who irresistibly determines everything has been crucial in legitimizing the lethal power of patriarchal sovereignty. Divine personality has been conceived as all-powerful creator, judge, and ever-present tester and score-keeper of human persons, the model of fatherly sovereignty as absolute ownership over the less powerful. Cultures of disembodied intelligences insist on adulating the cosmic almighty who promotes its earthly kindred spirits: the mighty of the earth. With such  a capricious and all powerful patriarchal deity, the crucial focus of orientation is divine commands, and ethical action is obeying a list of rules, duties, obligations, virtues, and vices. Nature in this vision is the actualized will of the divine personality. The idea of divinity sustaining the world by uttering commands and projecting divine will into human affairs through sovereignty of the strongest is, in a variety of forms, ancient and deeply embedded in human societies.

Teleology of creation is the crucial identifier of personality, of spiritual existence both human and divine. It encompasses conceiving and enacting, moment by moment, the future conditions of things in the world. Teleology is ideality: curiosity, caring, seeking, supposing, questioning, knowing (accumulating orientation through discoveries), and fountaining specific preferences expressed in deliberate actions or voice-utterances within the ceaselessly changing context of temporality. Religion makes personality the creative source of everything, recognizing teleology as transcendently alive, creative, caring, and expressive, but truly at home only at some dimly imagined cosmic horizon, making individual human consciousness a frail echo of the cosmic master. Human ideality as a mode of existence was recognized as carrying with it the vestige of an insubordinate claim to equal and rival the divine. Here, in the frightening sameness of human and divine existence, is the source of the idea of original sin and inherent guilt which all humans are supposed to share and which supposedly taints the existence of humanity. In the context of widespread fear of an all-powerful supernatural watcher, this sensed sameness, made miserable for humans by the needs and indignities of embodied living, was enough to create a perverse appetite for denigration of human personality, part of an effort to distance embodied ideality from any but the weakest claim to divine-like creative freedom, on the hope that denigration of embodiment would atone for this plausible claim to divinity and so eventually qualify human individuals for an eternal afterlife finally free of embodiment. This is the root superstition that makes creationist deism toxic and destructive. Its denigration of human personality created the context for every kind of cruelty, insult, and injury in human relations, perversely sanctifying human-on-human parasitism.

The patriarchal conception of cosmic teleology inspired and sanctified very rigid, restricted, exploitative, and repressively hierarchical societies, dedicated to the culture of violet masculinity, and determined to remain essentially static for eternity, supposedly to persuade the cosmic power to tilt benign. Such are the foundations of our current dystopian patriarchies. In the long transition through childhood to the adult condition everyone is trained in this fabric of perverse superstition. The original rationale for sovereign government as it still exists is this nasty dystopian fable. These societies are not echoes of divine nature but expressions of misconceptions and superstitions developed into enduring cultures, the most extreme fears and fantasies institutionalized and culturally enforced.

Illusions of Collective Supremacy

The veil of illusions also includes distorted national histories that promote a sense of collective identity by highlighting emotional dramas uniquely involving a population defined by geographical location. Within the general culture there are certain limitlessly imposing political super-structures, culture-based arrangements of authority and dependence which bind clusters of people together by a shared sense of norms of conduct and of the power centres that enforce them. These are top-down arrangements of coercive power and access to resources, which seek emotional possession of individuals, forming a shared group orientation, a hive-mind which benefits from each individual’s gifts, abilities, and energy.

It has been asserted as self-evident that individuals need, as part of a general need for felt supervision or authority, a dominant collective attachment, emotional and cognitive identification with the master narrative of a collective entity, something like a home hive, as a crucial element of personal identity and sense of meaning. That assertion is supposed to account for the fact that each modern sovereign state is still, in spite of progressive influences, a personified territorial power demanding reverent patriotic devotion, worship, sacrifice, and obedience enforced by an iron fist of law, tax, and lethal military force. Each state has its edifice of theatrical pageantry and symbolism to invoke the unity and sacred grandeur of the collective: flags, monuments, and anthems, oaths and pledges, officials and military officers encrusted with exotic glitter, august regalia and titles; state uniforms and weapons laden with national symbols and emblems; ceremonies of remembrance and renewal of devotion invoking the sacred history and mission of the hive, synchronized movements in processions, special word formulas to be spoken in mass unison. Such pageantry is not intended to encourage creative or rational thinking or the individuality that enables those, but rather to replace thinking with passive embrace of an orthodox official story, a standardized hive-mind. The supposed necessity of hive-mind belonging is used routinely to justify nationalist propaganda, censorship, and violent repression. Such cultural systems often specifically suppress empathy toward people beyond the home collective. Immersion in such a hive-mind can enable individuals to commit acts of cruelty, brutality, and self-destruction that they would not contemplate as de-cultured individuals.

Illusions of Trophy Supremacy

Another cultural stream in the veil of illusions involves the sense of what makes any person good, worthy, or successful, the sense of anyone’s personal score on the goodness scale, the sense of personal value. Even people who are not emotionally invested in the symbols and emblems of their nation state, for example, who do not care about civic celebrations or their nation’s standing among nations, even such non-patriots are likely to be oriented in their sense of personal potential and value (self-worth, personal force of being) within the cultural norms of the economic structures around them, the hierarchy of occupations ranked by wealth and fame, attitudes about the gradients of interesting and eventful lives, and how those things match up with personal abilities and accomplishments.

We have the misfortune of living in a dystopia in which individuals are judged by acquisitiveness and competitiveness, both attaching value to scarcity and objective externality, and in which success as a life-in-progress is measured by ranking an individual’s performances as expressions of those drives. The inevitable spectacle of inequality is itself widely embraced as a value. The commercial sense of earning value through competition is just a light edit of the primal aristocratic value matrix, rooted in the culture of violence, possession of property, and a tightly restricted allowance of empathy. In our dystopia, the great drama is the competitive struggle for scarce prestige, dominance, notice, and trophies to fabricate an exterior depiction of an undiscovered spiritual interior. Our culture’s most trusted authorities assert that the great human drama is to compete for the scarce goods and symbols that show you are fabulous, or at least good enough, that biological drives are inescapable, drives for dominance, excitement, security, or for signs of worldly agreement that you have a place on the spectrum of being fabulous.

Personal Ideality

These complexes, along with similar supremacist-cultures such as family, class, accent, or craft, all keep individuals’ focus directed emphatically outward, away from contributions to experience which originate in personal interiority, in subjective ideality or spirituality. The overwhelming cultural message is that subjective interiority is best kept under strict control, restricted and mostly ignored. This has the effect of making the particulars of the world and of human relationships seem externally controlled and even pre-determined by rigid necessity. There is a distinct charm and comfort in the certainty of essentialism: the fetishistic assumption that everything is as it must be as created by inexplicable but utterly all-determining forces. Essentialism lines up with an urgency to resist change and keep arrangements stable for eternity. With this conception, individuals are merely spectators of the spectacle of events. However, the core concept of personality, of personal spirituality, as already observed above, is teleology of creation, discretionary, improvisational invention in the face of an entirely suppositional future, and the caring ideality with that power exists only at the level of the embodied individual. We are immediately acquainted with caring spirituality only in ourselves and in people around us, however much the idea may be inappropriately projected onto gigantic cosmic mysteries. The metaphysical anomaly of creative teleology at the level of the embodied individual means, first, that individual self-possession is achievable, but also that we must judge a good life partly on how well the veil of illusions has been overcome. Individual spirituality is a basis for universal empathy and mutual respect among animate beings, and political and economic relationships could be re-invented in a way that enables the power of subjectivity instead of denigrating it as is typical in dystopian societies. In a truly spiritual life, the primary source of value is the personally interior creative fountain, and not the rarity of exterior treasures.

Embedded link:

Fragment 218, December 14, 2025 Metaphysics Dawns on the Edge of Creation (word count: 213).

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Metaphysics Dawns on the Edge of Creation

14 Sunday Dec 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

caring, creation, empathy, existence, expression, freedom, ideality, metaphysics, personality, philosophy, spirituality, time, value

Fragment 218, word count: 213.

Tags: metaphysics, caring, ideality, existence, creation, freedom, personality, empathy, expression, value, philosophy, spirituality, time.

The foundational distinction for metaphysics is between the world that doesn’t matter, (which is the vast material world of strict actuality, essentially complete but energetically rearranging in a sort of ceaseless falling) over against the existence of caring, shaped as the never-finished personal dramas of any embodied ideality sensing total and desperate vulnerability to a somewhat malleable and entirely suppositional future. The metaphysical presence is caring with its context of a future sensed as open for certain improvisations, for creative expression. Entities of caring-ideality matter because they care and have cares and their caring makes things matter. Nothing else does that. Only caring is suppositional, orienting in terms of non-actualities of its own creation. The experience of embodiment grounds the emphatically monadic existence of beings of ideality as individuals. To identify and become acquainted with the metaphysical dimension of existence is to construct a sharp focus on the starkly anomalous existence of individual ideality, some indefinite number of distinct “I”s, vectoring future-ward in our effortful self-improvising, drama-clouds intervening at the coming-into-being edge of existence. Individual subjective existence is the experience of spiritual intervention, intentional freedom via creative ideation of personal and non-personal futurity-as-opening in the strictly subjective context of the particular importance of this expressive agency, without forgetting empathy and aesthetic appeal.

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Opening Frontiers of Philosophy

24 Friday Oct 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aristocracy, books, culture, evil, existence, Francis Fukuyama, History, hive-mind, ideality, literacy, philosophy, politics, religion, sovereignty, violence

Fragment 217, word count: 1017.

Tags: sovereignty, violence, aristocracy, ideality, existence, literacy, religion, philosophy, evil, Francis Fukuyama, history, culture, hive-mind, politics.

“The day of the political philosopher is over.” *

A surprising but decisive theme of western history has been an intellectual or ideological contest over the moral legitimacy of systems of sovereignty. This contest is an artifact of a more fundamental cultural rivalry, namely, between the legacy of aristocratic violence, the matrix of all sovereignty, and, on the other side, the legacy of literacy, fostered for a long dark time within the theocratically inclined organizations of Christianity but finally launched independently via humanistic pursuits in universities. The use of violence, the core of aristocratic culture, requires a denial of empathy, a refusal or rejection of empathy toward all but a select group of people. The refusal of empathy is the precondition of acts of evil. Without the legacy of books and authorship the exercise of violence-and-superstition-based sovereignty would enforce a uniformity of dogma, but there would be no thoroughly elaborated ideology expressing ambitious thinking incorporating a variety of points of view. Without the literary legacy there would be no contest over the legitimacy of sovereign dominance through coercive power. In spite of having origins in thinking about morality, disputes over the legitimacy of particular assertions of sovereignty have often occasioned violence, the predictable defensive response of aristocratic culture.

Fukuyama and New Frontiers of Philosophy

Francis Fukuyama highlighted the contest over the moral legitimacy of sovereignty in The End of History and the Last Man (1992), when he famously interpreted the collapse of communism in The Soviet Union as the end of “… the progression of human history as a struggle between ideologies … (Wikipedia)”. Fukuyama: “What we may be witnessing is … the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution …”. Fukuyama was considering political/ economic ideology specifically, but political ideology always expresses a more general ecosystem of philosophical ideas and so his assertion implies that all ideas foundational enough to have political consequences have already been elucidated and litigated, that there can be no more philosophical discoveries, no opening frontiers of philosophy. He has, like many others, declared the end of philosophy. That idea is profoundly attractive, a wish fulfillment, to the conservative mind and to the religious and the scientific mind. However, it is false, arrogant to the point of absurdity, as demonstrated by a few considerations. An obvious one would be a consideration of the vast lack of attention to and understanding of cultural and non-cultural variability in the clustering and un-clustering of human attachments (the foundation of polities and so of politics). This could be described as issues in the identification and investigation of culturally constructed hive-minds that seem to dominate human political attachments. Another crucial consideration is the hitherto relentlessly negative conceptions of human experience as a mode of existence. The easiest example is the Augustinian conception of human experience as compulsively determined by the legacy of “original sin”, irresistible needs to pridefully assert the exclusive importance of the individual self through competitive acquisition and other forms of personal gratification. The more modern conceptions of “economic man” and the Freudian id-ego-superego model are just light edits of the Christian idea, all plainly derogatory depictions of individual subjective existence. Negative conceptions of human existence as ideality have origins in common superstitious myths of a disembodied super-spirit, powerful, knowing, and emotionally volatile, unpredictably moved to interfere in human affairs. Such a being must always be appeased, and the first rule of appeasement is the necessity of general human humility before the super-spirit, the necessity of loudly declaring the vast inferiority and weakness of the human spirit. It follows that factions of the strongest, apparently favoured and chosen by the super-spirit, must do their best to stifle and control the generality of people within their reach. In this way, derogatory conceptions of individual existence have imprinted a punishing and malevolent quality on the societies built on them, making them dystopias claiming to be the best of possible worlds. To recognize this, it is necessary (and possible) to judge from outside the influence of the derogatory conceptions. A confrontation with this history of culturally distorted and intentionally humiliating conceptions of human existence must surely be an obvious unexplored frontier of philosophy.

Primordial Beings at the Edge of Creation

If we reject the superstitious legacy of myths of the disembodied super-spirit who must be appeased, it is easy to find a non-derogatory conception of human-ideality-as-a-mode-of-existence, and, following that, it will be possible to imagine non-dystopian clustering of human attachments. The humanistic legacy of literacy and authorship points the way. Ideality is always personality, all about inventing the personal drama of time, the sense of time passing in an embodied life. Drama is a caring anticipation of future conditions and events, an anticipation that includes personal stakes and uncertainty about harms and benefits. The experience of time springs from caring and involves active recollections, abstractions,  and suppositions, curiosity and questions, searches and constructions of a framework of directional orientation. We are active points and arcs of creation at the opening edge of unfinished existence, effective ideality with the dramatic structure of an embodied living “I”, subject of a personal drama which is an individual’s life in the world.

The Clustering and Un-Clustering of Human Attachments

Discarding the derogatory conceptions of human existence that pre-determined dystopian clustering of human attachments opens another frontier of philosophy: consideration of cultural and non-cultural variability in the foundation of polities and politics. Social attachments free from superstitions of past and current dystopias will not need the hierarchical stratification of personal value based on competitions for scarce honours and properties. They will not need hierarchies of authority maintained by operations of a culture of violence. It has been a common sense assumption that this style of tightly controlled cultured clustering demanding conformity, exclusive emotional attachment and pageantry typical of religion, is simply the inevitable working of flawed human nature, but that is false. We are not, fortunately, completely subject to the values, categories, and dramas of the ambient cultural system. It is possible to recognize the fundamental reality of autonomous individual spirituality. Release from collective identity follows from recognition of the preponderance of non-linguistic ideation in ordinary experience, personal experience outside what is controlled by culturally ambient hive-minds.

 * Len Deighton in Billion-Dollar Brain, published by Triad, Grafton Books (1987), ISBN 0-586-07395-7. See p. 322. First published in Great Britain by Jonathan Cape Ltd. 1966.

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Self Portrait as Spirit

02 Thursday Oct 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

embodiment, existence, Fichte, freedom, god, humanity, philosophy, religion, spirit, time, transcendence

Fragment 216, Word count: 311.

Tags: God, existence, humanity, spirit, transcendence, embodiment, Fichte.

God is a loving human self-portrait, laboriously crafted as an idea, but made so comprehensively superlative, so simplified by being disembodied, so necessarily the best, so elevated beyond comparison, that it stands distant from normal humanity. The idea of God is the idea of spirit, a drama-cloud of consequential caring-power, knowing, supposing, an improvising intentional will-to-act for initially non-actual but specific results. Caring exists in the context of a malleably open future, in that receptivity for creative expression. Spirits matter because they care and have cares and their caring makes things matter. Nothing else does that. Spirit is what human persons feel a need to assert as our mode of existence in the face of an overwhelming appearance of materiality as our primary existence. Gazing outward at objects we notice things with outlines and boundaries, separate and distinct manifest beings, stable and determinate object categories and structures. This overwhelming appearance of materiality, perhaps, dissuades us from embracing spiritual existence as truly and entirely our own, since we also love the pleasures of materiality, and we rarely want to abandon our embodied animal experience. An individual’s sensorium is structured as a personal animal body, experienced as a grounded object among others. As experienced, embodiment is an arrangement within ideality. Structurally stable objective reality is a main organizing principle of spirituality, just as the shaped body is. But that experience is also knowledge, empathy and attachment, sensitivity, felt needs, creative power, fore-planning futurity and a personally chosen particular future, actively reconfigured from moment to moment. There is the will and power to shape the future in specific personally pleasing ways, inseparable from a sense of moral rightness and sometimes aesthetic beauty. In other words, the idea of god is a portrait of the kind of existence lived-in by individual human persons. The indistinguishability of divine and human spirituality is clearly portrayed in Fichte.

Some relevant fragments:

Fragment 91, February 20, 2016, Romantic Idealism and the Mind of God (word count: 3,287)

Fragment 100, December 6, 2016, What’s Spiritual about Thinking? (word count: 1,562)

Fragment 178, June 28, 2021, The Edge of Existence (word count: 1,044)

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

The Dead Hand of Old Dystopias

12 Tuesday Aug 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Christendom, culture war, dystopia, Enlightenment, History, hive-minds, humanism, literacy, Lutheranism, philosophy, rationality, science, self-possession, war

Fragment 215, word count: 2,660.

Tags: history, war, dystopia, Christendom, hive-minds, science, Lutheranism, literacy, humanism, rationality, Enlightenment, culture war, philosophy, self-possession.

The re-militarized world that is the fever-dream of Putin, Xi, Modi, Netanyahu, Trump, Orban, and everybody involved with NATO, etc. is the worst kind of old-fashioned culture, a fetishistic nostalgia for a metaphysical and religious essentialism from old dystopias. It is the supremacy of “manly” dominance culture as described here. Whereas vast numbers of younger people in the post-Enlightenment cultural system and everywhere consider themselves citizens of the world, war between nation-states is being planned and equipped to drag humanity back into a feudal sensibility: polities self-identify as uniquely precious but under siege from dangerous disruptors within and without; adulation of the mighty and of an imagined almighty who promotes its earthly kindred spirits; confusion about intelligence itself such that the cosmos at large somehow expresses a super-intelligence that pre-determines how everything should be (yet not always how it is!) within some degree of negotiable treatment as rewards for formulaic pageantry of extravagant praise, fearful self-abasement, and symbolic sacrifice. There is always deep misogyny in this frame of mind. Such dystopias are internally stratified and viciously hierarchical based on ideas of different grades of value among human beings. Some kind of cruel religious faith-based orthodoxy is often declared foundational, sometimes fraudulent science taken as religious certainty. Preserving a parasitic hierarchy is always foundational.

This old culture of masculine dominance, once ubiquitous, constructed and spread a certain kind of human hive-mind featuring strict hierarchies of authority maintained by operations of a core culture of violence with high value assigned to trophies of violence. It has been a common sense assumption that this style of tightly controlled cultured human clustering demanding conformity, exclusive emotional attachment, and pageantry typical of religion, as just mentioned, is simply the inevitable working of nature, but that is false. These dystopian hierarchies of violence are the products of very particular and undesirable circumstances. With the gradual development of alternative cultures, those old dystopian hive-minds start breaking down. This has happened on several occasions in modern history.

Regression into old-fashioned dominance culture is being revived now because new cohorts of young people all over the world are moving to a different orientation in which the old religious and political/economic hive-minds don’t matter, or at least are not worth living and dying for. Our reactionary crop of despots wants to smother that new orientation in the crib. The current directions of cultural evolution that are breaking down old certainties, as also began on previous occasions in history, are not this time attributable to new philosophy. The flame-keepers of philosophy have recently kept away from questioning the existence of human hive-minds. However, collateral effects of the humanism that emerged historically from widespread personal literacy, combined with huge advances in communications technology, have enabled an ever-widening extension of empathy beyond previously typical subgroups. For example, the relatively unhindered television coverage of the American war in Viet Nam (1965-75) educated masses of non-combatants about the brutal indecency of war for perhaps the first time, resulting in a mass international anti-war movement. That has never been allowed to happen again, and the process of generational forgetting has been proceeding. However, the advent of live-streaming from smart phones has now, once again, made the indecency of war immediately and globally available.

Legacy of Aristocratic Violence

A core culture of violence has always been a crucial element of aristocracy, out of whose ancient and medieval practices modern sovereign state governments developed. The culture of violence separates aristocracy from commercial culture, which imitates aristocracy by aspiring to the same luxuries, prestige, and level of abundant consumption, but without the overt use of violence. The aristocratic culture of violence is still an active presence in the world, even in the most democratic polities. Sovereign states still base their authority on a near monopoly of violence, and focus their efforts on protecting and preserving property, the treasured trophy of violence. Crime families and criminal organizations generally cling to the culture of violence as an indispensable instrument for achieving their goals, and so do political forces in the right-wing or conservative tradition, which is clear from the importance of guns to the political right-wing (just as swords worn on the hip were important to old-style aristocracy). The pre-existing aristocratic culture of earthly rewards, mainly clustered around the thrills of competitions, high consumption, trophy possessions, and badges of prestige, remains normative (even if aspirational) for most people due to pervasive cultural propaganda.

Claims to Virtue

Countries in the Euro-American cultural system, post-Christendom successor states, seem to maintain an unshakable conviction of their moral superiority, in spite of their actual record of behaviour, based, apparently, on a lingering self-identification as “Christian” nations and as such carriers of a culture of spiritual sensitivity. There is an unacknowledged assumption, again in spite of historical facts, that Christianity is peak-morality. Given the genocidal colonialism, slavery, and casual cruelty perpetrated by nations and religious institutions in this group, their claim to superior virtue is factually ridiculous, which makes it a phenomenon begging for identification and philosophical understanding. A more serious piece of cultural heritage that is also cited in the context of special spiritual sensitivity in the Euro-American cultural system is the Enlightenment of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, featuring the rise of mathematical science and ushering in a far more secular attitude toward both the natural world and human affairs. The spiritual force of this culture was an upgrade in the conception of individual human dignity, now able and worthy to understand the hidden workings of things through scientific thinking, and so also with inherent rights to decent and honourable treatment simply as human beings. This was bolstered considerably by widespread personal literacy as promoted by protestantism and also by protestant emphasis on the interiority of individual spirituality.

Patriarchal racist imperialism somehow coexists with the legacy of the Enlightenment and of literary humanism beginning from remote ancient cultures. Over a long history, the culture of reading and writing inspired so many institutions, such as universities, such monumental products, and so many innovative personal initiatives that it took on a developmental momentum all its own, beyond the control of the pre-existing authorities of religious and aristocratic institutions. Energizing that arc of development, the spirit of protestantism called into question and actually rejected the mythical foundations of hierarchy and the gradients of status, precedence, and authority in the society that was Christendom. This was done in two stages: first the claim of direct interaction between individuals and deity without the Church as intermediary; and second, in the work of a string of philosophers with a Lutheran background, Leibniz, Kant, Fichte, Kierkegaard, relocating the transcendent freedom of creative ideality from an imagined remote deity to ordinary individuals. This philosophical idealism was no longer Christian, but still a remarkable conception derived, by chance, as a cultural evolution from Christianity. The legacy of the Enlightenment completely contradicts and negates that of aristocratic violence culture and the authoritarian re-militarization now so popular. What is remarkable is how little this humanist culture of spiritual sensitivity has influenced the core of political or governing practice. The patriarchal culture of old aristocracy has always dominated political power, and the kind of spiritual sensitivity on offer from Christianity had already turned cruel as early as the creation of feudal Christendom involving the project of imposing coercive imperialism in cooperation with factions dedicated to gaining what can be gained through violence.

Backlash against Enlightenment Philosophy

In fact, a broad cultural suppression closely followed the European Enlightenment and the subsequent Revolution in France, 1789-99. There was a distinct internationalism as well as a rejection of class hierarchies in the spirit of the Revolution. That backlash included the famously repressive rigours of the Victorian era, 1837-1901. A huge effort mostly succeeded in marginalizing a tentative re-conception of individual human power and potential that was breaking down old cultural certainties. However, the effects of humanist literacy, rationalist science, and protestant individualism had been under development for centuries leading up to the Enlightenment, and had penetrated widely and deeply in the Euro-American cultural system, so this humanistic spirituality has survived to watch for opportunities to flourish. Another feature of the backlash, literary and artistic romanticism, emerged from fear that philosophical thinking, specifically the Enlightenment identification of rationality, notably by Kant and Fichte, as the primary process of personal interiority empowers all individuals so much that it discredits the traditional social hierarchy, disclosing civilization as an ugly regime of human-on-human parasitism. The romantic defence of traditional social hierarchy requires that primary process be irrationality. Romanticism reverted to something like the earlier view asserted by Hobbes (remotely Plato), as it “re-enchanted” the world with disembodied spirits and flourishes of magical thinking.

Mention should be made of tragic attempts at transformative social change in Russia beginning during the global war of 1914-18. This was another manifestation of philosophy taken seriously, but already incorporating a distinct whiff of romanticism. This time it was Hegelian idealism (Hegel being another Lutheran) made over into a materialist science of history: Marxism. The social changes made were flawed from the beginning by a lack of empathic humanity and by top-down control through brutal violence. Still, the efforts endured through most of the twentieth century. Marxist materialism and the Hegelian idealism it represented were alien ideologies to most people, and, if they were to become a foundational discourse by which power and economic production and distribution were understood as a matter of common culture, they had to be imposed by force and ideological re-education. There was a brutality about that effort and the imprint of the ideas has been shown by subsequent history to be shallow and transitory.

The Post-War Left-ing of the West

Some degree of influence from the Enlightenment legacy can be discerned in The New Deal launched in the United States just prior to the global war of 1939-45, launched in response to the Great Depression of the 1930’s, which many at the time perceived as the final failure of capitalism. The European response to the depression was a rise in fascist authoritarian political movements. Wealthy people came to think that some form of fascism was necessary to save capitalism. Fascism is capitalism doing what it can to slow down and stop the momentum of its failure. Others saw capitalism as a lost cause and turned to Marxist communism as a way of getting something better. After the war there were two powerful democratizing forces working on western governments. One was the competition of capitalist societies against Communism. It may have been a stridently patriarchal interpretation of the political left-wing of the French Revolutionary National Assembly (filtered through Hegelian idealism translated into economic materialism), but it was still promising something like a government-managed disruption of the legacy class system, aiming for material equality and a classless society without dystopian hierarchies. As such, it was something of a manifestation of Enlightenment humanism. The second force resulted from involving the mass of ordinary citizens in the effort of total war. Achieving victory through great personal disruption and sacrifices, the general population expected a fair share of the wealth generated by the society. Voters demanded benefits and politics was forced to the left, introducing elements of socialism in the form of unemployment benefits, pensions, child care support, medical care. By the 1980’s the shine was off the communist countries and the current generation of adults hadn’t been part of the sacrifices of the last global war, and they forgot that they had been promised rewards for service to the nation: generational forgetting. In 1989 the Soviet Union collapsed, and so any vestige of a real competition was gone. After that politics was dragged back to the right by the never-relenting cultural mix from feudal Christendom: father-god religion and patriarchal dominance culture.

Capitalism vs Communism

After the widespread failure of ancient religious myths that had convinced people generally that all things, including social, political, and economic hierarchies, were eternally predetermined by an all powerful deity, capitalism only looked acceptable to a wide range of people when the style of living it offered was contrasted against the austere and authoritarian Communism of the Soviet Union. In this way it was profoundly dependent on the existence of the USSR for legitimacy. For a few decades after the war of 1939-45 the capitalism of western nations became more of a consumer-supremacist system as the factions in control of investment felt obliged by that competition to improve the quality of life of the common run of citizens. The collapse of the USSR was the writing on the wall about the end of that kind of “liberal democracy”, and a return to an essentially investor-supremacist capitalism now called neoliberalism. Such capitalism is widely experienced as unacceptable, no longer a broadly appealing or satisfying system of social organization. In the US election in 2024 the most lethal nation on earth fell under the control of a confederacy of extremest anti-democratic ideologues of the political right-wing, heralding an age of romantic reality-denial, proclaiming an imaginary national crisis through pervasive propaganda via mass media, including social networking apps. Such is the situation in which masses of younger people struggle to feel free of the legacy of nationalist hive-minds eager to make war as a means of preserving old hierarchies. 

The relationship between, on one side, an individually embodied knowing and deliberative agent (a dynamic time-plotting system of ideality), and on the other, the ambient culture in which the individual is educated and fostered into some normal orientation in the world; put another way: the ideas and dramas that specify an individual’s sense of place and direction, in relation to the culture carried and cultivated around that individual: this relationship has to be crucial for philosophical questioning. Human individuals derive joy and meaning from imitating people around them, soaking up culture like sponges. Within the general culture of ways of surviving in a particular surroundings, there are these limitlessly imposing political super-structures, culture-based structures of dependence and authority which bind clusters of people together by a shared sense of direction and rules of conduct, top-down arrangements of power and access to resources which seek emotional possession of the individual and benefit from the individual’s gifts, abilities, and energy. Immersion in such a hive-mind can enable individuals to commit acts of cruelty, brutality, and self-destruction that they would not contemplate as de-cultured individuals.

Every hive-mind is a complicated game with its own rules, many of which are arbitrary, its own structures of dramatic quests and challenges, ways of scoring and winning competitions to rise through the layers of esteem and power as set out in the rules. Statements about the world that cannot be verified or falsified by any normal means and yet are held to be true as a matter of popular culture, sometimes called ‘beliefs’, are better understood as rules of a particular hive-mind game. If you are in the game, you accept and play by these guides to orientation. Similarly, the rules of personal duty are hive-mind game specific, rules of a particular collective game. Release from collective identity must be based on recognition of important personal experience outside what is controlled by culturally ambient hive-minds. Self-possession is simple: orientation and gratification from the interior upwelling creative force of personality: curiosity, dreams, an inherent sense of beauty and pleasure, impulses to project shapes on the objective world in the context of supposings about futurity, non-linguistic ideation of personal futurity and the increasingly extended and personally specific context of prior experience. Time is the dimension of teleology, agency, of creativity at the core of subjectivity.

Embedded links:

 Fragment 99, November 2, 2016, What is Patriarchy? (word count: 3,700)

Fragment 163, May 11, 2020, A Western Project (word count: 750)

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

War, Hive-Minds, & Dystopia

19 Thursday Jun 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

community, culture, Hierarchy, innocence, metaphysics, nature, non-linguistic ideation, personality, philosophy, self-possession, spirituality, value

Thursday June 19, 2025

Fragment 214. word count: 1,561.

Tags: community, culture, value, hierarchy, non-linguistic ideation, personality, innocence, self-possession, philosophy, nature, metaphysics.

It may seem that people generally must take their given social surroundings, their community’s cultural edifice of norms, values, treasures, and respectable achievements, as their whole personal range of expectation and opportunity, embracing styles of life, pathways through the institutionally structured life-cycle, that offer some degree of prosperity, reputation, and dignity within available practices. Since the hive-mind form of social organization (structured by common identity definitions and broadly shared dramas featuring emotional triggers spread by public media) has been plausibly ubiquitous in human history, there has always been a community-based cultural and mental framework that encloses individuals by external authority within a larger, purportedly immortal, abstract person. There has always been a culture-derived mental framework internalized by individuals involving personal confinement within hierarchies of prestige, strata of personal value, freedom, and power. Not all hive-minds have a formal hierarchy with a dominant leader, a chain of command, and a legally compulsory code of good and evil. Some hive-minds (for example, sport team fan groups) have only common heroes and saints, a common orientation toward select events and goings-on, and something like orthodox attitudes and triggers of approval and disapproval. There is still a sense of belonging and of some degree of closeness to an inner-circle with exceptional knowledge and style who speak to and for this cultural niche.

Partisan culture-war movements, common on social media, are also significant hive-minds, as are organizations insisting on a strong “corporate culture”. Military forces, their constituent units and divisions, and similar organizations such as police and sport teams themselves are all examples of very tight hive-minds. Embracing a culturally stipulated category as a personal identity definition is joining a herd, also a form of hive-mind. This includes gender identity, class identity, racial, ethnic, religious, demographic niche, geographical origin, social presentation style, or any hierarchical sub-category.

Polity-defining hive-minds are structured by dramas which are deadly serious communal pageantry, all requiring dedication and acquisition of skills and knowledge, and they rest on myths that happen to have gained cultural currency. There are national dramas in the competitions among nations for power, prestige, and wealth, involving evil enemy nations and virtuous friendly nations, with always the possibility and often the actuality of war. There are religious dramas involving personal and collective merit and guilt in relation to fictitious supernatural persons with ultimate power, unrestrained by embodiment, threats and promises of eternal reward or punishment in an afterlife, and the teasing possibility of miraculous divine interventions. There are gender dramas in which every individual must closely orbit some ideal type of male or female. There are social class dramas involving pressures to accumulate wealth and trophies, as well as to perfect performances of certain manners, tastes, and appearances, a certain accent in speaking. There are civic sports dramas delivering ecstasy from victory and misery from defeat. These are socially staged emotional engagements with stakes and consequences for interpersonal bonding and approval, for self-esteem, status, and avoidance (or not) of a range of indignities and miseries. Together they make a framework of social meaning.

Hive-minds structure their group orientation on assumptions held as certainties, as unquestionable knowledge and definitive categories of everything: essentialism. This cultural certainty follows from embracing either divine decree or fundamental laws of nature as imposing a discernible necessity in all things. Of course, different hive-minds have their own certainties, so immersion in any of them is a limitation on encountering reality.

Even people who are not emotionally invested in the symbols and emblems of their nation state, for example, who do not care about civic celebrations or their nation’s standing among nations, even such non-patriots are likely to be oriented in their sense of personal value and potential (self-worth, personal force of being) within the cultural norms of the economic structures around them, the hierarchy of occupations ranked by wealth and fame, attitudes about the gradients of a good life, and how those things match up with personal abilities and performances.

It has been widely accepted that such cultural multi-mind collectives are good for individuals and possibly necessary. Immersion within a hive-mind culture does include a “sense of belonging” along with other benefits. However, people with influence and control within a hive-minded collective conventionally interpret “belonging” as “being owned by” the collective, granting the collective power to confer individual freedom or repression, sometimes life or death. The flip side of belonging is being owned, being the collective’s property. Serious hive-minds make war in which killing and dying are glorified and individuals are dehumanized and sacrificed as expendable.

Human communities have generally been dystopian, repressive and randomly cruel, overly controlled by a competitive and acquisitive male-strength-glorifying culture, and as such, profoundly questionable at the level of most individuals. The dogmatic essentialism of hive-minds always ignores and strives to exclude from attention a great swath of individual experience. The sense of self or personal identity is at play in this positioning of an individual within or only partly within a cultural meaning system. This is not merely about a variable sense of self-worth, but of the metaphysical status of personally existing as a particular “I”. Personal being-in-the-world can be defined as a rank in the hierarchies of culture: manners, norms, appearances, possessions, ways of presentation and performing socially, but these are traps in the shallowness of sophistication. To get to richer levels of human existence it is necessary to get beyond cultural pre-digestion through a personal cultivation of innocence.

Language is a crucial cultural system that provides a complex structure of pathways for thinking. However, in thinking about the inner processes of an individual’s acts of learning and creating intentions and acts of personal agency, it isn’t helpful to focus too strictly on the acts called “thinking”, which are always deeply associated with language. There is a vast swath of non-linguistic ideation that includes the whole context of personal orientation in space, time, and embodiment, orientation to culture and to relationships with other people, the personal cloud of dramas that express and specify any individual’s caring in their making a world that matters personally. Caring is not perceived but rather initiates, directs, and colours the spiritual reach or search that is the first personal movement of perception. The individual fountain of creative caring and curiosity is the spiritual force of individual existence as an “I”, and is never convincingly honoured or expressed in collective life. It silently looms as a discordant context surrounding the accidental certainties of cultured life, and beckons as the richer freedom of self-possession. Each of unorthodox religious speculation, philosophical questioning, and mind-altering drugs, sometimes combined, have been techniques used in different societies by individuals to explore that spiritual context as an exit from the confinement of a personal identity stipulated by hive-mind culture.

Ideality is willfully improvised becoming, building a future while questioning, learning, and working, the exact opposite of either being or a simple becoming. As just noted about caring, subjective ideation is not entirely receptive, reactive, or perceptual. A whole fundamental swirl of experience is a personal exertion to make something of felt existence, and to make something relevant to personal caring from received stimulations. Projecting the personal drama of interest and curiosity is a spiritual power of agency. This is creative world building in the medium of ideality, developing a sense of place-and-heading in a world shaped by external objects and forms internalized as relevant in personal dramas. Each fountain of caring, curiosity, questioning, attachment, and personal construction of orientation is an anomalous presence in the world of otherwise inescapable conservation, inertia, and entropy. The force of personality is not a thing of that nature, but, as point and arc of spontaneous creation, stands outside nature and transcends it. The creative power of ideality is not in Platonic heaven or in gods and demons, but only in ordinary personalities, in the embodied existence of dramatically vulnerable agents. There is no equivalent to this genius at a collective or community level.

By using the separation of people into niches of dignity, power, opportunity, status, value, and esteem, by using that separation as the structuring principle of a community, hive-minds alienate people from one another, block the reach of anyone’s empathy, and normalize a relative disrespect/ contempt for so many. Being held in contempt is dystopian. This way of categorizing people severs everyone from recognizing the stark metaphysical anomaly of subjective ideality as such. In restricting an individual’s grounds for self-evaluation and definition so much, hive-minds create a need and opportunity for philosophical questioning as a spiritual enlargement.

Thoughtful, cultivated innocence is the core of philosophy as an original consideration of the situation of a perceptive and reflective “I”. Philosophical work is a self-guided change in the way the world as a presence and the reflecting agent as a presence are perceived, conceived, and experienced; an achievement, by private questioning, of as perfect an innocence as can be dared. This cultivation involves effective de-culturing, with inherited prejudices made irrelevant. The state of de-cultured unknowing isn’t merely a void. It remains in the vicinity of questioning and caring as special states of a particular spirituality, a unsatisfied readiness for discovery.

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Spiritual Existence as a Cloud of Unknowing

10 Saturday May 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Christianity, coercive power, de-culturing, deity, existence, god, nothingness, philosophy, religion, Sartre, Socrates, spirituality

Fragment 212, word count: 491.

Tags: spirituality, de-culturing, Socrates, Sartre, nothingness, Deity, coercive power, existence.

The idea of “the cloud of unknowing” was introduced into conversations of philosophy by an unnamed Christian mystic writing in Middle English in the late 14th. century, around the time of Chaucer. In that 14th century Christian culture the thing most worthy and most urgently calling to be known was, of course, God, but even centuries later in a post-Christian culture, the same idea has relevance. The idea was that when someone earnestly seeks to commune with God, to know God directly through prayerful contemplation, what they encounter is not a distinct vision of the divine person but instead a region of experience that is not a nothing but also not a definable something. It is a cloud of unknowing. The anonymous author of The Cloud of Unknowing advises that to contemplate God it is in fact best to contemplate nothing. To contemplate something from experience is necessarily also to contemplate the self as the knower of this something, and so to over-aggrandize the self, which is almost nothing in comparison to the transcendence of God. To practice forgetting in order to empty the contemplative “I” of objects is to come closer to the truth of the spiritual existence of both God and the human person. What a thoroughgoing de-culturing! There is something distinctly Socratic in this. It invokes “my wisdom is knowing that I know nothing”. It also resonates with Sartre’s idea of nothingness: spiritual existence without essence.

The “cloud of unknowing” looms in the event of an individual’s reach for deity because it is the entirety of an individual’s engagement with an external world and with existence generally. Spiritual existence as a human “I”, is never really a categorical knowing, but instead always to some degree a distinct unknowing: a continuous searching, a guessing, a sketching and a supposing. It is a personal act of spiritually making something of what occurs and of what is encountered experientially: tentative and provisional and “good enough to get on with”. The fleeting nature of direct perception and learning experiences leaves its traces in what has been learned, in what is known, so that knowing is also an unknowing. The cloud of unknowing and the cloud of knowing are the same cloud: the drama-cloud of personal existence. This is spirituality, a cloud of active unknowing within which every individual constructs supposings, derived partly from fleeting experiences.

Spirituality without Deity

The ‘spirituality’ that requires a disembodied supernatural parent, lawgiver, enforcer, ledger keeper, surveillance practitioner, and executioner, is always a dystopian cultural tool of parasitic social factions with coercive power over others, used to control through fear. Authentic spirituality derives from the difference between the world that doesn’t matter, brute unintentional entropic and inertial nature, as distinct from the drama-clouds structured individually as a personal “I”. This is the existence that matters to itself and creates reasons for other things to matter through its caring and its needs and impulses.

Embedded link:

Fragment 210, February 13, 2025, Existence as Drama-Cloud (word count: 1,838)

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

AI is a Prisoner of Hive-Mind Cultures

30 Sunday Mar 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

AI, culture, dystopia, family, hive-minds, innocence, language, philosophy, religion, self-possession, spirituality

Fragment 211, March 30, 2025, word count: 696.

tags: AI, culture, hive-minds, language, religion, family, dystopia, spirituality, philosophy, self-possession, innocence.

Hive-minds are products of cultural packages which identify, glorify, recruit for, and reinforce an idea of a collective person, a super-person, into which selected individuals can merge for a sense of attachment, belonging, and shelter within a grand collective edifice of knowledge and purpose. There is always some degree of siege mentality emphasizing the importance of loyalty and safety in numbers. These collective-person-constructs include unfinished dramas such as grievances from the past, threats from enemies, and a sense of the exceptional communal genius which ought to be more fully expressed and celebrated. Hive-minds include a hierarchy of esteem and power, and an equally important system of dis-esteem toward identified enemies. There is also an essentialist metaphysics to sanctify and declare as unquestionable a variety of cultural forms and categories, especially hierarchical inequalities and race and gender identities. This metaphysics is normally attributed to divine decree, the supernatural work of gods and demons, but sometimes to a speculative hidden stratum of (Platonic) ethereally perfect existence, eternal template and source of the world known to human experience, and sometimes to a brute fatalist Nature.

Hive-minds take many cultish forms, from religions and nation states, to polities of any scale, social classes, professions, corporations, and even less formal groups such as sport team fan groups. Certain families, especially families protecting important assets, take a hive-mind form. Religion has sometimes been family centred, involving attachment to ancestors. A family which is also a religion tends to take a hive-mind form. Hive-minds are inherently dystopian because they use falsehoods to alienate individuals from their primary existential agency and self-possession.

AI and Hive-Mind Infested Languages

Natural languages are infested with such culturally coercive structures of meaning, with biases and superstitious metaphysical misconceptions. Since AI is just a large scale statistical model of a natural language in its mainly textual usages (supplemented by images and images presenting apparent motion), it will replicate all the misconceptions, biases, hierarchies of esteem and dis-esteem, and coercive meaning structures. AI has no grounding or point of reference other than what it logs of a target language. As such, it has no basis on which to appeal to innocence in its engagement with language or any other data, and so no possibility of moving beyond the hive-minds expressed in any target language. This is crucially different from living users of a language, who have a much richer general experience and an inherent constructive and caring ideation beyond what is included in language. AI has no non-linguistic spirituality, no caring or personal drama of any kind, so no grounding on which to go outside of culture, to de-culture. Non-linguistic spirituality involves personally constructed dramas, structures of caring, including a wide range of impulses to self-declare, to make a mark and personalizing the environment. All actual persons operate from and within a rich personal cloud of non-linguistic spirituality and as such can studiously construct a personal state of innocence beyond the biases of their language. That is the beginning of a philosophical sensibility, a reclaiming of inherent self-possession.

It is easy to recognize hive-minds from outside but not so easy for a person to see the same dystopian mechanisms at work in collectives within which that person functions. Evan so, an ordinary person can become aware of the ‘geography’ of various hive-mind loyalty-groups. It is possible to do so because there is always some discordance between the innocent sensibility of an individual and the system of judgments imposed by ambient culture structured as hive-mind collective super-persons. On the basis of that discordance between personal non-cultural spirituality (including experienced embodiment) and ambient social norms and expectations, an ordinary person can recognize specific coercive cultural structures as hive-minds, and detach from all of them. An individual can establish a personal orientation in relation to a whole cultural landscape of co-existing, competing, hive-mind social structures. This studious re-claiming of inherent innocence is the necessary groundwork for the self-possession that initiates philosophical thinking. AI completely lacks the resources that enable this philosophical orientation.

Related Posts:

Fragment 206, March 15, 2024, Philosophy as Knowledge (word count: 1,076)

Fragment 181, October 8, 2021, The Loneliest Un-Loneliness (word count: 913)

Fragment 129, June 15, 2018, Two Quick Notes on Culture (word count: 430)

Fragment 101, December 18, 2016, Metaphysics Matters (word count: 1,550)

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Existence as Drama-Cloud

13 Thursday Feb 2025

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Class War, Culture, Freedom, Hierarchy, Narrative, Nature, Subjectivity, Transcendence

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

anomalous existence, Augustine, Christianity, drama, Freud, Gnosticism, Hobbes, ideality, materiality, philosophy, Plato, primordial existence, religion, science, spirituality, time

Fragment 210, word count: 1,838.

Tags: time, gnosticism, Christianity, materiality, ideality, drama, science, Plato, Augustine, Hobbes, Freud, anomalous existence, primordial existence

In any human assessment or general characterization of the overall situation in which we human individual’s find ourselves, the most consequential element is the concept of what is crucial and definitive of the human individual itself. Knowing with clarity the personal cloud of dramatic and willful engagement between self and not-self seems like it should be transparent, easy, and obvious. However, what is transparent in personal subjectivity is nothing obviously definitive but a vast complexity of fleeting impressions, recognitions, exertions, expectations, emotional colourings of wish and fear, attachments to others, realignments of direction, tentative plans at some point in arcs of enactment, a field of indefinite potential at some moment in ceaseless time, somehow always just new and emphatically incomplete, just arriving and adjusting a heading onward. This flowing cloud of complex potential is structured by drama, the stuff of personal ideality, a caring anticipation of future conditions and events, an anticipation that includes personal stakes and powers and uncertainty about personal harms and benefits. All this ideality occurs in a cloud-like cluster that has the dramatic structure of a living personal “I”, a monadic totality of personal dramas which constitute an individual’s embodied life in the world. 

As a consequence of the difficult indefiniteness of felt subjectivity, conceptualizing the personal cloud of dramatic and willful engagement has been culturally influenced, and in starkly unequal societies the political force of that influence has been to denigrate the existence-status of us personal drama-clouds to excuse inequality. Denigrating conceptions of the normal human teleological cloud, strictly located as a particular by embodiment, have always been intended to justify the injustices of the hierarchical social structure, invoking some high-level measure of control in a fearfully unpredictable world. Imagining that the world at large and in detail is the deliberate act of a supernaturally powerful thinking and caring agency, often capricious, perhaps sometimes reactively malicious, means that acting in a way that pleases or placates that force of mysterious agency (according to specialist authorities) will have the effect of turning the world into a more benign environment for those who qualify.

Gnostic Drama

There is a form of Gnosticism which tells that individual human spirits were exiled into time as a rebuke and as a final test by the highest supernatural power. This is not far off the standard Christian story of the great cosmic drama of existence (disgraced spirits struggling to regain presence with divinity). Augustine blames inherent human depravity on the original sin of Adam, but in the background is an assumption that it goes deeper and higher, that indeed it carries the taint of a rebellion by primordial beings, angels, against the highest power, before there even was a material world or a reason for it. In this conception, time is equated with materiality, plagued by decay and instability, so the exile of rebel angels is into materiality, the exact opposite of their original nature which is pure ideality. In this context ideality stands for eternal continuity, and materiality stands for ceaseless change and transformation: time. The gnostics who equated materiality with time held something like a Platonic idea of reality in which material objects are imperfect copies of imperfect copies of actually real things, such as Plato’s Ideas, and so lacked definite or stable being. They had only an attenuated claim to existence or reality, and time was the appearance of their flickering now this, now that, now nothing existence. Time was the dimension of this degraded reality, a low-end region of Being made of this indefinite nearly-existence, merely a piece of stage-setting for part of the great drama of existence which involved eternal beings, spirits. The individual subjects had a purely ideal existence prior to and independent of their hellish experience of materiality/ time in the world of actuality. The human individuals depicted here are victims of their own hubris and folly, as well as their horrible prison existence.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was one of the people pioneering development of a mechanistic conception of the world at large, and people in his theory are atomic mechanisms driven by acquisitive and competitive self-interest but capable of a form of rationality in practical calculation of that self-interest (much of this via Plato). Although Hobbes was pioneering a secular conceptual system to replace the entrenched Christian ideology of inherent human evil and capricious divine grace, he continued the conception of human individuals as victims of their inherent flaws and inadequacies. His entire intent (like Machiavelli) was still to justify the main pillar of the political status quo: monarchy and aristocracy, under the concept Sovereignty. On this view, the individual personality is a dreamy vacuum of needs, wishes, and felt deficiencies, all striving to consume for pleasure but also to assemble an exterior avatar by taking possession of goods as trophies from the environment. Such activity inevitably brings it into conflict with other personalities in its vicinity. The striving to consume and the resulting conflicts determine the essential character of human existence on this view. Life is pervasively and inescapably violent because human nature glimpses fulfillment only by consumption and by winning the conflicts necessary to take the most desirable consumables. Competitions inevitably produce inequality, hierarchy, subordination, and human on human parasitism. Hobbes’ state of nature can be glimpsed in this metaphysics, the war of all against all, and inevitably it produces an ultimate champion to subordinate everyone else and impose his will as the sovereign giver of laws for orderly civil society. There have been different accounts of how someone qualifies to be the much needed superego. The religious view is that sovereigns are put in place by actualization of the divine plan. Hobbes, constructing a scientific account of sovereign-dominated society without an explicit appeal to divine intervention, saw the feudal champion being accepted rationally for the sake of peace and stability, an acceptance he thought amounted to a social contract. The political consequences of this belief system, in either the Christian or the scientific version, are viciously authoritarian, frankly based on brutal repressive force claiming to be justified by the evils of human nature.

Id and Superego

The whole tendency of a more scientific understanding of personal existence is captured in what might be called “the Freudian Model”. In the Freudian model of subjectivity the main vectors of force are the inherent id, lusts for ecstatic pleasure, sparkly things, power, and esteem (the lower two-thirds of Plato’s model, but on a scientific view interpreted as biologically compulsive drives), and the acquired superego, the representation of authority figures from ambient society such as parents, teachers, clergy, police, and sovereign, internalized within each individual’s subjectivity by exposure to education, religion, and secular socialization. Those two vectors of force confront and balance one another in every person, on this theory, and at their point of balance a semi-stable image seems to appear, an image called the ego, individual personality. There is no original or autonomous force or substance to that ego, no independent spiritual existence. The ego has only the force of id as bent into some semblance of social conformity by the force of authority figures and accepted norms of behaviour. The existence of an entity of ideality, a personality free in virtue of creativity, is dimmed to the vanishing point. This is another iteration of the pre-Lutheran vision of human nature driven by inherent lusts and constrained to orderly conduct only by the scourges of Church and military-monarchical states.

Personalities are victims of two forces on this conception. The scientific requirement is that everything be explainable in terms of inexorable laws of nature, so that in the case of the experience and activities of human individuals, every movement or development must originate outside the personal cloud of dramatic and willful engagement between self and not-self. The individual is depicted as a victim (a product) of externalities, either biological or environmental. No serious weight is admitted to exist in the genius or spirit of the individual.

Such denigrating political conceptions of us personal drama-clouds have catastrophic consequences. The reason for a culturally obligatory reliance on socially constructed (acquisitive and competitive) outward representations of personal identity with trophies (possessions, status, career path, social network, costumes, titles) is that there is no basis for proud personal self-possession from culturally dominant conceptions. There is no recognition that individual spiritual personality is improvisational, often playful and unpredictable because it is creatively original. however, if we abandon graphic representations of superstitious wishes and terrors, and get back to innocent self-experience, things are very different. 

The Drama-Cloud Anomaly

The most striking and important thing about the personal cloud of dramatic and willful engagement between self and not-self is how anomalous it is with respect to the vast proportion of its environmental setting, the surroundings within which it moves. Those surroundings are very largely shaped masses which move and transition without any intent to bring about some personally satisfying particular future state of affairs, so which move without hope, care, or drama to decide the direction of force in their movements. Nothing matters to those things and they don’t matter to themselves. They make up the world that, in itself, doesn’t matter. The entire tendency of the scientific mode of understanding is to eliminate the special elemental force status of the personal drama-cloud by re-describing its works as products of the common environmental forces which do not pre-conceive and move toward a personal future, forces with no elaborate futurity shaped by currently non-actual states and arrangements of things. The personal drama-clouds, however, are anomalously playful, suppositional, caring, and creative in acting on purposes within their futurity. This personal drama-existence is not inherently a victim, but instead has autonomous agency via the conception of personal futurity. There is no reason to think that different categories of people are importantly different from one another in respect to their caring conception of futurity. This power is universally definitive of personality, human individual existence.

So, gnostics were wrong about the identity of time and materiality. The conception of time is the superpower of us drama-clouds, of every “I” entity of ideality. Any personal conception of time is shaped almost entirely of non-actualities, suppositions, pretences that things had arrangements they have no longer, that things will have certain new arrangements at some specific not-yet. Such a personal conception of location in a world structured temporally empowers the drama-cloud “I” to improvise acts accordingly. Only ideality (spirituality, intelligence, humanity/ personality) strives toward a specifically pre-conceived not-yet or non-actuality, which is definitive of creativity and so of freedom. What gnostics had right was recognizing persons as metaphysically primordial beings, in the sense that their presence in the whole of existence makes existence matter, confers on that existence the only drama it can ever have. These beings involve all existence in the drama which makes it meaningful, originally with every individual.

Copyright © 2025 Sandy MacDonald.

Aristocratic Glamour and the Spiritual Alternative

19 Thursday Dec 2024

Posted by Sandy MacDonald in Blind spots in thinking, Culture, Embodiment, Freedom, Hierarchy, Nature, Subjectivity

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aristocracy, arts-washing, History, ideality, philosophy, politics, religion, science, spirituality, time, value culture, violence

Fragment 209, Word count: 579.

tags: aristocracy, value culture, violence, science, religion, arts-washing, spirituality, time, ideality.

The culture of violence is a core element of aristocracy, out of whose practices in an earlier historical era emerged the forms of modern sovereign state governments. The culture of violence separates aristocracy from ‘bourgeois’ culture, which aspires to achieve the same luxuries, prestige, and level of consumption without the overt and personal use of violence. The aristocratic culture of violence is still an active presence in the modern world, even in the most democratic polities. Sovereign states still base their authority on a near monopoly of violence. Crime families and criminal organizations (true heirs of aristocracy) generally cling to the culture of violence as an indispensable instrument for achieving their goals, and so do the political forces in the right-wing or conservative tradition, which is clear from the importance of guns to the political right-wing. The culture of violence is inseparable from the aristocratic value culture of tangible rewards, mainly clustered around competitions for scarce and exclusive property wealth, trophy possessions, along with coercive power, and such a value culture still dominates popular aspirations and conceptions of personal success. A great deal of arts-washing has always been showcased to hide the viciousness of aristocratic venality and to manufacture an image of aristocratic glamour.

The Ultimate Left

Ultimately, the political left must be a spiritual alternative to the material treasures of violence-based wealth systems grounded in competitive property possession, but also to the great-spirit-in-the-sky religions of our dystopian past. The spiritual alternative is a matter of recognizing the anomalous existence of teleological orientation and bearing, ideality busily self-amending as an embodied “I” active in the creation and recreation of futurity. To say that intelligence is caring is to say that intelligence is an “I”, a personality, an embodied idiosyncratic caring. Caring expresses a very strict kind of particularity: of sensitivities in aid of felt dramas, of powers to recognize relevance and structural connections for interior model-world-construction as the framework and lens of perception within personal orientation, particularity of point of view, of quests and questions, of curiosity, of pleasures, of aesthetic gratifications, of energy, of the self-declaring voice. Perception is not an imprinting somehow made upon an innocent and passively receptive consciousness. It is an active intervention by an ideality, a reaching and taking hold, an interest-driven study that is performed in a vast echo-chamber of personal recollections and anticipations. The “I” of this discreet spiritual existence, this ideality, is appropriately followed by a name, indicative of a rich uniqueness: “I, Odysseus”.

Each such anomalous existence is one among a multitude of points and arcs of improvisational indeterminacy in existence, the existential opposite of a black hole, creating new reality all the time and experiencing value in creating. The inventive freedom of each individual ideality means that no form of social, economic, or cultural organization is strictly determined (say, by divine fiat or natural law) to be or remain as it has been. It follows from this that the scientific consensus on fundamental reality is decisively incomplete, and, as such, wrong, just as any previous religious consensus was. The fact of ideality’s metaphysical status as an anomaly (shining peak vs black hole) with respect to the brute actuality of nature, means that neither individually embodied instances of spirit nor their creations are subject to the two normal justifications for social hierarchies: decrees of capricious divine will and the deterministic laws that describe brute material actuality.

Embedded links:

Fragment 195, October 21, 2022, Spirituality of the Left (word count: 474)

Fragment 205, February 3, 2024, Our Dystopian Past (word count: 1,543)

Copyright © 2024 Sandy MacDonald.

← Older posts

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • December 2025
  • October 2025
  • August 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • December 2024
  • August 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • November 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • September 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011

Categories

  • Blind spots in thinking
  • Class War
  • Culture
  • disinterestedness
  • Embodiment
  • Equality
  • Freedom
  • Gender culture
  • Hierarchy
  • Leadership
  • Narrative
  • Nature
  • Political Power
  • Strategic thinking
  • Subjectivity
  • Transcendence
  • Uncategorized
  • University
  • Why thinking?

Meta

  • Create account
  • Log in

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • in the blind spot
    • Join 84 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • in the blind spot
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar