tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-85737178008356352872024-03-12T16:52:13.463-07:00States of MindPeter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-76126264736692514612012-05-14T08:30:00.001-07:002012-11-19T06:23:42.739-08:00The German word "geistig"<blockquote>“Dancing, business, theatre, cards, dares, horses, women, drink, travel, all these are powerless in the face of the boredom that arises when a lack of intellectual needs makes intellectual pleasures impossible.”—Schopenhauer</blockquote>The “geistige Bedürfnisse” of which Schopenhauer speaks could also be translated as “spiritual needs.” To our ears, this would give the passage an entirely different meaning. “Intellectual” and “spiritual” might be considered synonymous, both referring to the mind. But unfortunately the word “spiritual” has been usurped by those for whom care of the intellect is a lazy and undisciplined affair. It is as if the word “athletic” had been usurped by those who watch television all day. We may consider ourselves fortunate that, at least for now, the word “intellectual” retains an association with discipline. In our paradisiacal democracy, where we are ruled by those who, in addition to representing the majority, also represent the intellectual level of the majority, this is unlikely to last for long.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-51166321403300335802012-04-21T05:50:00.000-07:002012-11-19T07:18:47.264-08:00Pop culture“Pop culture is created by capitalists intent upon profit, not by humanitarians intent upon educating, improving or ennobling mankind.”<br /><br />“And who gets to decide what constitutes an improvement? You, I suppose?”<br /><br />“That’s just the thing. It’s not as if the producers of pop culture have an idea of what ennobles and improves mankind different from my own. They have none at all. They just don’t care about those things. They want to be popular. They want to make a profit. Culture that educates and improves has to also challenge. And most people don’t want a challenge. Pop culture is the cultural equivalent of fast food. Rather than trying to nourish, it bypasses conscience and appeals directly to the palate.”Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-16974516636615383832012-04-20T14:31:00.000-07:002013-02-20T21:00:12.590-08:00Theory and practiceWhen mathematicians, physicists and philosophers say, “Practice is for lesser minds. I concern myself only with theory,” their statement is more than merely arrogance. It represents a conscious decision about priorities. It represents a choice to place intellectual life on a higher plane than material life. It is, in essence, the same decision made by Christians who renounce the kingdom of means for the Kingdom of God, by Buddhists who renounce the world of action for the world of contemplation. The intellectual forms the mathematician or physicist plays with are different from those the mystic plays with. But the belief in the superiority of intellectual life is the same.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-58766017992423454302012-04-19T09:07:00.000-07:002013-02-20T21:05:22.991-08:00Love and desire<blockquote>“If people were told: what makes carnal desire imperious in you is not its pure carnal element. It is the fact that you put into it the essential part of yourself—the need for Unity, the need for God—they wouldn’t believe it. To them it seems obvious that the quality of imperious need belongs to the carnal desire as such. In the same way it seems obvious to the miser that the quality of desirability belongs to gold as such, and not to its exchange value.”—Simone Weil</blockquote>A desire comes from nature, and to obey it is to obey nature, to acquiesce in the role of created being. But the neighbor’s desire is as much a part of nature as my own. To satisfy my own while leaving his unsatisfied ceases to be an act of reverence to nature. It becomes instead an act of rebellion against it. Unlike the ascetic’s rebellion, however, it is hard to imagine this being a rebellion on behalf of something higher. Desire can retain its innocence only so long as it is no more imperious than love.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-21168062469484101632012-04-02T05:41:00.007-07:002012-11-19T06:30:29.937-08:00WorkThe typical bourgeois endures tedious and unfulfilling work for the sake of extravagant entertainment and sumptuous meals. An existence in which such passive activities are the center and focus is but a pale shadow of what it might have been, had work been its center and focus. It isn’t consumption that satisfies. It’s creation.<br /><br />One visible effect of the bourgeoisification of the professions is that, over time, the houses of professionals become more and more grand and opulent, while the offices where we perform our work become more and more austere. If work were the center of our life, rather than merely a means, it would be just the other way.<br /><br />If we expect to find gratification in insignificant things (entertainments and sumptuous meals) and not in significant things (thinking, creating, producing), we will find only an insignificant gratification. Profound happiness will elude us.<br /><br />The difference between genius and bourgeois is not that genius has more talent, ability or intelligence. It is that for genius work is an end in itself. Genius is gratified by its exercise. The bourgeois refuses to find and exercise his genius. Instead, we find him at the theater and the opera, vainly trying to be gratified by the genius of others. His passivity is a tragedy in its own right, if only he would understand it rightly.<br /><br />The division of labor efficiently provides for basic necessities, so genius may focus upon developing itself and not be distracted. But it brings with it an unfortunate temptation to sit back and watch others exercise their genius instead of finding and developing our own.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-51526017780217994992012-04-01T15:29:00.002-07:002012-04-23T06:01:43.661-07:00Dirty moneyAccording to <span style="font-style:italic;">Harper’s</span> magazine, the estimated net worth of George Washington, in today’s dollars, is $525 million. The fact that politics is corrupted by money is not a new problem. The new problem is that the people with money are no longer educated in the humanities. The only virtues they know are shopkeeper virtues.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-24178373362422479892012-03-31T05:51:00.000-07:002013-02-20T21:31:43.804-08:00Aphorisms1. No one expects aristocratic virtues from a laborer. In America we all define ourselves as laborers so that no one will ever expect aristocratic virtues from us.<br /><br />2. To understand the nature of truth, one has to understand the knower as well as the known. There is no deep philosophy without psychology. And in order to understand the psyche, one has to understand the genealogy of its ideas. There is no deep psychology without history.<br /><br />3. Virtue is to the psychologist as plumage to the ornithologist, or blossoms to the botanist. When the peacock spreads his tail, we appreciate its beauty. But at the same time we know it was contrived by nature merely as a testament to health.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-7241660303560136442012-03-30T06:33:00.003-07:002013-02-20T21:48:11.725-08:00Tamed and domesticatedWhen Jonas Salk gave his vaccine to mankind, asking for nothing in return, he sent a message to the world. <span style="font-style:italic;">Science is something apart from commerce, something higher than commerce. Its goals are humanitarian rather than commercial in nature.</span><br><br>If this message was heard at all, it was soon forgotten.<br /><br />Capitalism represents the most successful attempt yet to tame and domesticate genius, to make it useful to the rulers of the regime. Genius is <span style="font-style:italic;">qualitatively</span> different from anything in the bourgeois world. Once traded for a sum of money, no matter how large, it ceases to be qualitatively different, and enters the realm where values are measured by accountants. By succumbing to the lure of comforts and rewards, genius ceases to be genius and becomes just another bourgeois asset. Tamed and domesticated genius is no longer genius.<br /><br />In order to avoid the necessity of trading itself for wages, genius must of course have a certain amount of wealth. The error of the bourgeois is to mistake how much that amount is. He wants opulence and a corps of servants like the wealthy, but unlike the wealthy, to whom these things come unbidden, he must destroy his genius in order to obtain them.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-82636222114865607602012-01-24T06:10:00.002-08:002012-11-19T06:22:19.190-08:00Intellectual discipline and ascetic discipline<blockquote>"That man is richest whose pleasures are the cheapest."—Thoreau</blockquote>When I spend more money than necessary, I give others more power over me than necessary. Unfortunately, the ones to whom I cede power are usually not the wisest. Wise men are few, and to make money requires a large market.<br /><br />For those of us who are not wealthy, ascetic discipline is an inevitable component of intellectual discipline. Without it we are forced to take orders from the undisciplined, and all our discipline amounts to naught.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-48808707210942634922012-01-23T06:24:00.000-08:002012-04-23T05:44:26.234-07:00Reason and conscienceThe ordinary way of organizing the mind is to make reason the instrument of our desires, and let conscience be the brake. But conscience was never match for reason. Reason is always crafty enough to find a loophole, a detour, a way of placating conscience and getting exactly what it wants. A mind organized this way amounts to a life of petty egoism restrained only by prudence, in which genuine virtue has no part. Only when reason is on the side of what is highest in ourselves can we hope to elevate ourselves above the ordinary.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-71061318040956571122012-01-22T12:55:00.002-08:002012-11-19T08:41:18.705-08:00Aphorisms1. Some books inspire us to think. Others inform us that someone else is thinking, and that we, therefore, need not.<br />
<br />
2. The works of a great man are not a call to adulate him. They are not a call to emulate him. They are a call to be as great as he.<br />
<br />
3. Wisdom and virtue will not allow themselves to be accumulated as the miser accumulates his treasure. As soon as we begin to regard them as a treasure stored up within us, rather than as something we must conquer anew in each moment, we cease to possess them.<br />
<br />
4. Anyone who can appreciate fine possessions can also appreciate the leisure he must sacrifice to obtain them.<br />
<br />
5. Smalltalk: the intellectual equivalent of petty crime.<br />
<br />
6. Those fond of incoherent abstractions quickly become impatient with abstract discussions.<br />
<br />
7. The regime that seeks to compel justice makes every just act into a cowardly one.<br />
<br />
8. Consensus: a suicide pact for seekers of truth.<br />
<br />
9. The more we persevere in tasks which bore us, the more boring we become.<br />
<br />
10. The philosopher whose books are tedious to read reveals what sort of life he recommends.<br />
<br />
11. To say "I am not a saint" is a confession of moral laxity. To say “I am not a genius” is a confession of intellectual laxity. Both adopt the guise of modesty in order to conceal indolence.<br />
<br />
12. While we previously imagined that the intellect was something supernatural, we now know it resides in the material world—usually, in the servants’ quarters.<br />
<br />
13. At the end of a play, we applaud not only the hero, but also the villain and the fool. If only we were so discerning in life.<br />
<br />
14. An unwelcome passion, like an unwelcome guest, should be ejected as politely as possible.<br />
<br />
15. The mind of the commercial man conforms itself to whatever shape is conducive to commerce—not the most beautiful shape, but the most useful.<br />
<br />
16. All the sciences have their origin in love of truth, just as all human beings have their origin in sexual love.<br />
<br />
17. The flight attendant's version of Matthew 7:3: "Secure your own virtues before assisting others."<br />
<br />
18. Forming one’s character without reflection will produce results similar to grooming oneself without a mirror.<br />
<br />
19. A taste for wine destines a man to become a sot; a taste for epiphany, a sage.<br />
<br />
20. Aphorism: a post-it note on the bedpost in the amnesiac ward of wisdom.<br />
<br />
21. We are perfectly content to be ignorant, but abhor being idle, so we acquire only that little bit of knowledge we need in order to act.<br />
<br />
22. The <i>argumentum ad laborum</i>: “I have invested years of my life in learning this doctrine. Therefore, it must be true.”<br />
<br />
23. Amassing a fortune, a detour which the less fortunate are compelled to make from the path to greatness, is often mistaken for the path itself.<br />
<br />
24. Everyone is the child of his age. The question is, how much is he willing to misbehave?Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-6538558810108662382012-01-02T07:05:00.002-08:002013-02-20T20:57:18.770-08:00ComteThe problem with Auguste Comte's proposal to put man in the place of God as the "<span style="font-style:italic;">grand être</span>" is that it puts a real thing in place of an abstraction. An abstract God can represent the intellectual achievements of the greatest men and ignore the intellectually insignificant. By elevating "man" above his intellectual products, we have granted a place to nonintellectuals in intellectual life which they do not deserve. The great products of the human intellect—science, mathematics, philosophy—are worthy of reverence because they are true, and because they are difficult, not because they are useful to nonintellectuals.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-20802853710961351412011-12-23T16:13:00.001-08:002013-02-20T21:17:43.613-08:00FreedomOn some days we talk about political freedom, on other days about free will. We never pause at intermediate points. What about everyday cases where we forfeit our freedom by our own choices? What about the lucrative job offer that tempts us to do something other than what we would have freely chosen? The state is one potential tyrant. The laws of physics and chemistry may be another. But these are hardly the only two. Each one of our appetites is a potential tyrant—especially when there are plenty of corporate tyrants offering to satisfy our appetites in exchange for obedience. Somehow Continental Europeans have managed to remain aware of the connection between freedom and asceticism. Americans are optimists. We like to imagine we can have our luxuries and our freedom too.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-80392136496796367462011-12-06T06:34:00.001-08:002012-04-22T16:24:34.704-07:00The ascent of manCould anyone imagine a better way to destroy the humanities than to prohibit the one syllable word used to describe its subject matter, leaving nothing but awkward, convoluted substitutes?Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-50349385022943169052011-04-08T07:43:00.001-07:002013-12-05T05:18:03.878-08:00Find your genius nowThere is a widely accepted notion that excellence consists in integrating oneself into society, in performing some socially useful function exquisitely. I believe precisely the opposite. The great man performs no function other than being a great man. He is not great because he makes a great contribution to something. He is great because he <span style="font-style:italic;">is</span> something. His existence needs no justification. His goal is to make his existence perfect, not to make it a perfect instrument for society.<br /><br />The temptation to do something “useful” is the downfall of the intelligent man. There are always dozens of predefined projects that tempt him because he knows he can complete them easily. If he succumbs to the temptation, he will never find the project he desperately wants to do, the project that will take his intellectual development to the next level.<br /><br />The urge to participate in society is the urge to escape from the restless demands the intellect makes upon itself. The utopian urge to improve society will consume mental energy (indefinitely, since it is always hopeless) in something that I already know how to do. <br /><br />When someone asks me what I do for a living, my answer is, “There is something that my intellect, and mine alone, is capable of. My sole task in life is to determine what that is.” Emerson said that his eye was placed where one ray would fall that he might testify to that particular ray. What if, instead of testifying to that ray, Emerson had become a lawyer, or exquisitely fulfilled some other determinate function in society? This would have been a tragedy, both for him and for society. The same is true of every intelligent person.<br /><br />It will be objected that the world could not function if everyone adopted this attitude. But I am not so arrogant to think that I am indispensable. The world will continue to function without me. Economists predict that the market will adapt, of its own accord, to shrinking supplies of copper and oil. Surely it can also adapt to a shrinking supply of servile intellectuals.<br /><br />The most important question, the question I am faced with anew in each moment is—shall I take the easy way, and do something I have done a dozen times before?—or shall I take the hard way, and create something I have never created before, perhaps something no human being in history has ever created before? It doesn’t matter if what I create is useful to me or to anyone else. What matters is that it sets my mind on a path toward perfection, rather than running in circles.<br /><br />A great intellect is not something I am given. It is something I create. I create it by working to perfect my intellect. In the course of this I may undertake tasks that help others. But the primary purpose of those tasks must always be to perfect my intellect. If I don’t make this my primary purpose, I shortchange others as much as I shortchange myself. At the end of my road, one moment of my help will be worth years of help in my present state. If there is a “duty” to others, it is to become the greatest man I can be. Only then will my help be the greatest I can provide, the help I alone can provide.<br /><br />The fact that every man and woman doesn’t aspire to be a genius is a fault of our education. As it is, not even every genius aspires to be a genius. Most aspire only to be competent professionals, performing the same task over and over, the task demanded by their clients, not the task demanded by their genius.<br /><br />To be a genius means first and foremost to pay attention to genius, to treat its desires as legitimate, as, in fact, the most urgent of all desires. When we place the petty desire for material comfort above the desire of genius for its own development, we make the worst bargain a human being can possibly make.<br /><br />Unless I am entirely certain that my intellect has reached its full potential (how could I ever be certain of that?), putting my intellect wholeheartedly in the service of society, leaving no time for its own development, is a very bad bargain, both for myself and for society.<br /><br />Every man and woman is capable of creating something unique. Every man and woman is too much of a genius to be merely fulfilling a predetermined role. Abandon your unfulfilling social roles as much and as soon as you can, and concentrate your effort on finding and developing your genius.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-73538360901931948802010-04-01T05:38:00.003-07:002012-11-19T06:50:45.872-08:00Moral perfectionismThe method I use for deriving my ethical principles is this. <br /><br />First, I imagine what level of perfection I would achieve in my behavior toward other human beings if I were Socrates, Jesus, or any truly profound philosopher. Then I strive to behave this way all the time.<br /><br />Second, I imagine what level of perfection I would achieve if I were speaking to a prince, a pope or a philosopher. Then I strive to speak this way all the time.<br /><br />Today’s ethics is Kant lite. We acknowledge there are rules to follow. But everything else is left up to arbitrary whim. We’re not striving for perfection. We’re not striving for virtue.<br /><br />Moral progress has succeeded not in transforming virtue into what Emerson would have adored, the full recognition of the unique genius of each person, but rather in eliminating it from our vocabulary. If everyone can have his own form of virtue, what's the point of using the word? Is it just to lecture others on <span style="font-style:italic;">our</span> virtues—and on <span style="font-style:italic;">their</span> vices?<br /><br />But is it really any more abhorrent for someone who has thought a great deal about virtue to talk about virtue than for someone who has thought a great deal about chemistry to talk about chemistry? If the term “virtue” turns out to be obsolete, then it will be a history lecture. Even then it is useful.<br /> <br />An Emersonian form of virtue would demand that I recognize the genius of each person, and strive to help him develop it. If the world were to adopt such an ethic, the factory owner would no longer be able to direct his workers. The university would no longer be able to crank out workers for the intellectual factories.<br /><br />The problem with Emerson’s form of virtue, like all the obsolete ones, is that it’s "impractical." But have we forgotten what the prophet of Capitalism Herself said? “<span style="font-style:italic;">The evaluation of an action as ‘practical’ depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.</span>” We are striving for prosperity rather than virtue, and we don’t much like to talk about that. So we have dismissed the very idea of virtue as impractical.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-7919249726982171762010-03-06T05:46:00.000-08:002012-04-22T16:11:34.708-07:00Intellectual discipline“Western literature is no more than a grand case of narcissistic personality disorder.”<br /><br />“Yes! The same narcissistic personality disorder than led man to study science—Charcot!—Freud!”<br /><br />“Don’t shout the names of dead while males to make your point.”<br /><br />“My point is that without intellectual discipline, there is no way for anyone to study any science, including psychology.”<br /><br />“So what? I have discipline.”<br /><br />“Yes, but you need the vocabulary to talk about it. A mind in which discipline is never discussed is like a restaurant in which food is never discussed. The humanities is the menu of intellectual self-discipline. The mathematician has plenty of discipline, but lacks the vocabulary to describe it. He can only grunt when he wants more.”Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-43244373161785575682009-12-04T13:36:00.000-08:002013-12-04T14:41:39.076-08:00Commerce<blockquote>“When by habit a man cometh to have a bargaining soul, its wings are cut, so that it can never soar. It bindeth reason an apprentice to gain, and instead of a director, maketh it a drudge.”—George Savile</blockquote><blockquote>"Whoever has a keen eye for profits, is blind in relation to his craft."—Sophocles</blockquote>Criticism of commerce has become as cheap as the goods produced by commerce itself. And yet I feel I must add my noise to the din.<br /><br />Many forms of work have two different kinds of logic. First, there is an internal logic, which, when followed, produces the satisfaction of a job well done. Second, there is a commercial logic, which, when followed, produces the largest possible income.<br /><br />Consider this case: A patient fits the eligibility criteria for surgery, but the surgeon knows this particular patient is unlikely to benefit. The logic of healing says it would be unconscionable to recommend unnecessary surgery. The logic of commerce says it would be unconscionable to pass up a lucrative opportunity.<br /><br />Consider this case: Economic logic says that a loan is not in the applicant’s interest. Commercial logic says the loan will yield a profit for the bank. Even if the loan officer is courageous enough to follow conscience rather than commerce, his stance is futile. He will soon be overruled by his supervisors. They, of course, have been carefully selected for their unwavering commitment to the logic of commerce.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-14043421532215447462009-11-19T07:50:00.000-08:002012-11-19T08:24:28.681-08:00Love thy neighborThe way to find joy in the company of others is to love them. When I hold back my love, I may feel that I am being frugal and prudent, but I am really just depriving myself of joy. <br /><br />If I interpret “Love thy neighbor” as a sacrifice, I have perverted its meaning. Love for my neighbor allows me to experience a profound joy in his presence. I love him as much for my sake as for his.<br /><br />If I interpret “Love thy neighbor” to mean “Love all men equally,” I have also perverted its meaning. Equality is not the important thing. Love is the important thing. A far better interpretation is “Love each person as much as you possibly can.” <br /><br />When I read that “God is love,” I do not interpret this to mean that the ruler in the heavens is a loving ruler, I interpret it to mean that love is divine.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-36531385426928395262009-02-05T16:50:00.000-08:002011-08-19T17:22:53.017-07:00WillA dubious notion that certain human characteristics can be traced to the will, while others cannot, leads us to say without hesitation that courage and prudence are virtues, even as we refuse to consider the possibility that beauty and talent might be virtues.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-82500199550561067172008-12-21T21:00:00.000-08:002011-12-29T12:59:24.655-08:00PunishmentKant tells us one of the foremost demands of morality is to treat men as ends in themselves, never as means to our own ends. If he is right, then the state that punishes lawbreakers to set an example, using them as a means to achieve law and order, thereby makes itself into a towering example of immorality.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-80890982702727314792008-12-04T13:40:00.000-08:002013-12-04T14:40:47.426-08:00Commerce and reason<blockquote>“Men make it such a point of honour to be fit for business that they forget to examine whether business is fit for a man.”—George Savile</blockquote>As rational thought comes to be associated more and more over time with commerce, the sort of words that represent the non-commercial goals of mankind come to be heard less and less often in rational discourse. Such words are now found primarily in trite sentiments on greeting cards, in the emotionally overheated ranting of religious demagogues, in self-help manuals.<br /><br />If I propose to have a calm and reasonable discussion about the question of what, for me, might constitute a life well lived, I get no more than a trite, dismissive remark. If I attempt to enlist the help of friends in calm and reasonable contemplation about the human condition, I get no more than an incredulous stare. No one believes anymore that such idle questions are amenable to reason. And, in any case, no one has time to discuss them. We are too busy with our commercial endeavors.<br /><br />What all this busy commercial activity amounts to, effectively, is the implicit assertion that the question of what constitutes the best life for man has already been decisively and definitively answered—and that this decisive and definitive answer, which applies universally to everyone, is the life of commerce. Of course we allow for the fact that each individual has his or her own preferences. These are accounted for by determining which particular sort of productive activity the person engages in, and which particular assortment of consumer goods he purchases. What no longer makes sense to us is an extended discussion of these preferences. Such a discussion now makes no more sense than an extended discussion of one's favorite color, or one's favorite flavor of ice cream. The general character of the best life for mankind has, allegedly, now been decisively and definitively decided, and the particulars in each individual case are merely a matter of personal preference. Such personal preferences might be disclosed, but certainly not rationally discussed or debated.<br /><br />To rule the notion of virtue out of order in rational discourse is, effectively, to concede by default that all our existing attitudes and behaviors are virtuous. It removes the possibility of examining our own behavior and criticizing ourselves. By convincing ourselves that there is no true and rational standard by which to order our lives, we in effect concede that the false and irrational standard by which we presently order our lives is the true and rational one. The discussion of the good life will probably never rise to the level of pristine rationality found, say, in the proofs of Euclidean geometry. But it also need not be abandoned to the trite, vague, superficial and unsubstantiated sentiments of greeting cards, religious demagogues and self-help manuals.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-78883612316325873782008-12-04T13:38:00.000-08:002013-12-04T14:41:14.396-08:00Relocating to NirvanaThomas Hobbes expresses the modern bourgeois mentality well when he says, “The felicity of this life, consisteth not in the repose of a mind satisfied. For there is no such <i>finis uitimus</i>, utmost aim, nor <i>summum bonum</i>.” We moderns are always restlessly producing and consuming. We are never satisfied. In fact we don't even have the faintest idea of what would satisfy us. The only thing we know for certain is that it would be preceded by the word "more."<br /><br />In the fifties, Harvard psychologist Richard Alpert began experimenting with the hallucinogens psilocybin and LSD. He concluded that the state of mind to which the drugs took him was most certainly the <i>summum bonum</i>. He then sought more reliable ways to reach this state of mind. Alpert’s quest eventually led him to India, where he studied Yoga and Buddhism. Alpert concluded that the “Nirvana” referred to in Indian texts is essentially the same as the “high” produced by LSD and psilocybin, just reached by different means. The Indian method of achieving Nirvana was, he decided, superior. Drugs presented the inevitable problem of “coming down.” <br /><br />In addition to this practical problem, however, there is a deeper theoretical one. Perhaps the tripper experiences the same Nirvana as the Eastern mystic, but he doesn’t really understand how or why. An appropriate analogy is the jet airplane. The jet takes us from one place to another quickly. But it doesn’t give us an understanding of the world in which the two places are situated, or the vastness of the distance separating them. The tripper is a tourist in Nirvana. The guru has relocated.<br /><br />In Protestant theology, there was once a debate between salvation by faith and salvation by works. Salvation by works won. And this victory has become deeply entrenched in our nominally secular culture. We now unquestioningly privilege material works over psychological satisfaction. Insofar as our society makes use of psychology at all, it is primarily to return nonproductive people to the workforce. The idea that a nonproductive life, a life of contemplation and reverence, might be the higher form of life, has lost its plausibility in the Western world.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-61811092977484365362008-05-23T11:33:00.001-07:002012-04-23T06:29:28.738-07:00Political philosophyPolitical philosophers, in considering what sort of social arrangements society should have, are merely deciding how to paint the background of human lives. It is the cowardly part of man that allows his actions to be governed by the state. The brave part will do what he finds most virtuous, irrespective of what society and the state demand. A career in political philosophy amounts to a lifelong concern with the cowardly part of man. I cannot help but wonder, was this part ever really worthy of such devotion?Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8573717800835635287.post-41773851405908277652008-05-17T11:22:00.000-07:002013-12-04T14:44:46.112-08:00When we seek to rule, we often merely allow ourselves to be ruled<blockquote>“When we examine what glory is, we discover that it is nearly nothing. To be judged by the ignorant and esteemed by imbeciles, to hear one’s name spoken by a rabble who approve, reject, love or hate without reason—that is nothing to be proud of.”—Frederick the Great</blockquote><blockquote>“It is far more difficult to avoid being ruled, than to rule.”—La Rochefoucauld</blockquote>There are certain positions in society, often regarded as powerful and glorious, which no one attains without granting mediocrity its requisite share of attention. The politician, for example, chooses his public attitudes, composes his speeches, and fashions the very image he presents to the world in a way carefully contrived to obtain the approval of the mediocre. He may privately harbor contempt for them, but in public he always flatters them. He must, at any cost, obtain their votes. <br /><br />The commercial person must likewise account for the needs and desires of the mediocre, who are, after all, his largest pool of potential consumers. A publisher, for example, cannot select his material based solely upon excellence. He must consider its potential appeal to consumers. It is conceivable that a publisher might maintain some standards other than marketability. But if he passes up opportunities for profit because of this, his investors will berate him for his omission. And rightly so, for, in his role as a commercial person, his primary responsibility is to obtain the largest possible profit for his investors. Any other considerations must be deemed irrelevant.<br /><br />Let us examine more carefully, then, whether and to what extent positions like those of the political person, the commercial person, or any other person who attains his position at the cost of giving consideration to the mediocre, can be accurately characterized as “powerful and glorious.” There is no denying that the political influence of the elected official and the material resources of the commercial person give them formidable power. But in order to obtain this power, they have given others power over them. At some times they rule; at other times they must allow themselves to be ruled. Those who unequivocally praise this sort of position see the power and glory of the rule, but not the ignominy of the submission—in particular, of the submission to inferiors.<br /><br />Whether and to what extent it is prudent to seek political and commercial success will depend upon circumstances. But before anyone commits wholeheartedly to obtaining one of those “powerful and glorious” positions, as most intelligent people do, perhaps he should consider the alternatives. Perhaps, rather than allowing himself to be ruled by the mediocre and ruling them in turn, he might instead seek merely to be independent of them. He might seek a position in which his power over inferiors is more modest, but he is also more independent of their influence.<br /><br />A principle that seems to me wise is to allow oneself to be ruled only by those whom we recognize as our superiors. The novice will find many fit to rule him, but as he improves he will find fewer and fewer. Beyond a certain point, the path to excellence is necessarily an independent one.Peter Capofreddihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12390300524764315587noreply@blogger.com0