Posts Tagged ‘ Mass man ’

Shame

We are ashamed of ourselves, for what we have turned out to be. Are we aware of this? No, we are not aware of anything, and instead we are proud of our deadness – which should our ultimate shame.

I continue to read Sartre, who is talking about The Origin of Nothingness. I can only marvel at how he overlooked the nothingness in the people all around him. After all, France had suffered one of the most humiliating defeats in history in WWII. Existentialism did address some of the emotions resulting from this – while overlooking the most sweeping change of all – the dominance of mass man - the rule of complete idiots – exemplified perfectly by the Nazis.

Fighting the Nazis was easy, because they made themselves so conspicuous. They practically invited the rest of the world to destroy them. But they have been succeeded by a force much more subtle and dangerous – one that we can barely comprehend.

Instead of making an effort to understand it – we just gave up, and decided it did not exist – when, in reality, it was turning us into idiots. “Oh well,” We said to each other, “It can’t be helped.”

And we were not ashamed at all.

The Spoiled Child

This is one of Ortega y Gasset’s most famous similes, and you are struck by it the first time you hear it. This is like his depiction of mass-man – immediately you know what he is talking about – something you already knew about, but had no words for.

I am still reading Human Existence as Radical Reality, which is about Ortega’s philosophy. Pedro Blas Gonzalez, the author, tries to make Ortega too much of a philosopher, in my opinion, when I would prefer him to be an acute, intuitive observer of the post-modern scene – more of a psychologist or sociologist. What follows begins on page 122. He starts with technology, which is indeed part of this complex.

The practical applications of the technology have immense dangers for the mass-man because these advances in science are not understood or appreciated by the masses. This only brings about what he calls the “psychology of the spoilt child”.

This spoiled child as such has no self-imposed limits to his caprice and desires. These desires are perpetuated by even more demands without consideration to any sense of obligation on his part…The spoiled child naturally assumes that everything is always ready-made, and therefore always available on demand…They are only concerned with their own well-being, and at the same time remain alien to the cause of that well-being.

They do not see behind the benefits of civilization, marvels of inventions and construction, which can only be maintained by great effort and foresight, the imagine that their role is limited to demanding these rights peremptorily, as if  they were natural rights.

On the other hand:

Man must confront his own life reflectively prior to affecting any meaningful and dutiful engagement with society at large…Life is always presented to us first and foremost as a differentiated self. The discovery of this self allows for an existential understanding of “myself” as being something that is not merely biological.

On page 125:

Ideology for Ortega represents the best example of the vulgarity of mass society…the ideals of ideologues are bent on the destruction of institutions, and not with instituting internal reform.

But, as we begin the twenty-first century, sensitive minds in both philosophy and science are beginning to wonder if in fact man is not truly a teleological “infinite synthesis,” as Immanuel Kant so beautifully expressed it…all forms of “revolt” that are not anchored in a reflective self end up by simply promoting cultural decay and moral nihilism.

A reflective self – how rare that is!

Being Fake

Being real interests few people – as my postings about Ortega y Gasset and mass man should have made clear. I would estimate about twenty percent of the population. Nearly everyone, however, will try to impress you with how real they are – usually by being effusively friendly. You do not have to scratch very deep to discover how shallow this is – much to their annoyance.

I had a personal acquaintance with this: I knew the owner of Real People Press. I lived with his second wife one summer on their ranch in the remote desert of Utah. He had been a student of Fritz Perls, and became his publisher. He had a run of his first book printed, stored them in his garage, and hoped he wouldn’t lose too much money. As it turn out, it became a best seller and he became rich. I also knew the couple who started the Gestalt Institute of Denver, and we used to go skinny-dipping in their Jacuzzi.

Fritz’s death more or less coincided with the end of the Sixties, and that was the end of Gestalt Therapy also. Fritz was a genius at intuiting people’s hidden motivations, and had a traveling show where crowds of people watched him work with other people on the stage. He had no therapy of his own, but used somebody else’s technique, changing every year. Few of his students noticed this, they just went along with whatever the great man did.

My friend, when the Sixties ended, switched effortlessly to NLP – a cognitive, behavior-modification approach which was almost the opposite of the intuitive approach involved in Gestalt. But he didn’t change the name of his publishing company, which still exists.

Being real has acquired a new meaning, quite different from its original meaning. The existential philosophers have worked this over thoroughly – and what they have discovered is basically a lot of hypocrisy.

Ortega on Human Nature

I watched with amazement as Steven Pinker, on his pitch on TED for his latest book, said “Ortega y Gasset says there is no such thing as human nature.” He was quoting him as some kind of authority. To me, this was shocking simplification of Ortega’s philosophy by someone who has become a pseudo-philosopher himself.

Ortega is first of all an exponent of individuation. This means there is no human nature, only an inner nature every individual makes for himself – as opposed to that imposed by society – and mass society in particular. Pinker is now cleverly pleasing this mass society – and making lots of money doing so.

This is from the book Human Existence as Radical Reality: Ortega y Gasset’s Philosophy of Subjectivity, page 102:

In solitude, man is his truth; in society, he tends to be mere conventionality or falsification.

Or in even more bluntly on page 111:

The collectivity is indeed something human, but it is the human without man, the human without spirit, the human without soul, the human dehumanized.

On page 105 he says this about mass man:

To my mind, anyone who does not realize this curious moral situation of the masses can understand nothing of what is today beginning to happen in the world.

This was written in 1931. Actually this change had been going on for over a hundred years already (as a result of Industrialization) – and would be greatly accelerated in the 20th Century.

Individuality is forbidden in a mass society.

People are Inherently Defective

People are defective because we try make our own world, and we are not very good at being God.

This is most clearly seen if we consider what we were in our natural condition, before we became civilized. We existed in an amazing variety of cultures, each with its own language, and vastly different ways of doing things. Each of these was convinced they were the most advanced. We can immediately discern a fundamental propensity of mankind here: the tendency for each culture to consider itself perfect – when an outside observer can discover no such perfection.

The whole idea of perfection is clearly our own – along with all our many other ideas. Man could almost be said to be a idea-creating animal. This is one of our fundamental defects: every idea is defective if taken to extremes or inappropriately applied – something we do all the time.

Since I have only started to think about this idea, I am sure there are many other examples of our defectiveness – perhaps they are without number. But the point I want to make here is simply that they exist – and there is no way we can get rid of some of the most basic ones.

We will always be defective, and we will have to live with that fact. And also with the fact that we will be constantly striving to overcome them – often unsuccessfully. This is all part of the human condition; this is what makes each of us interesting – because we are each stumbling around in our own way. We never tire of seeing this depicted by the Arts – that is what they are, an endless recital of our perfections and imperfections. Just this morning I read this by Ortega y Gasset:

I found myself in the beginning then, with this basic two-fold discovery: that one’s own life is the fundamental reality and that life is circumstantial. Each of us exists as a castaway in his circumstances, and it is there, whether he wishes it or not, that man must struggle to remain afloat.

Living like this would not be a problem, since we have been living this way since day one. But one of our creations, the machine, is just the opposite: it is perfect. You will immediately object there are plenty of defective machines, and can name plenty of examples. But I still maintain the idea of a machine is perfection itself – that is why they are made. No one tries to make a defective machine by design. True, they always end up being less than perfect, but they can always be improved – and usually are. The end result of any technology is a model of perfection.

Take this common example: the automobile. They do not always operated perfectly, heavens knows, but overall they are remarkably trouble-free, considering how complicated they are. Otherwise they would not be so successful. The darn things have taken over our world – along with all our other machines.

Why? Because they are perfectible – while we, by contrast, are not. The importance of this cannot be over-emphasized – because we have made the huge mistake of trying to become like machines. And succeeding all too well. We are no longer humans, but something else – some kind of mixture of machines and humans. And we feel we are much better this way – when in fact, we are much worse.

This will take some explaining. The details of this process are extremely complicated, and happened over thousands of years in all kinds of ways – but the overall outline is not difficult to understand. We loved our things, and tried to become like them. This was not a problem for our simpler things, blow-guns, for example.

But machines were different. These things became awesome, and took over our lives. They were no longer serving us – we were serving them. This process is so well-known I will not belabor it – but only add my voice to the many others who have pointed out its dangers. But I will do this differently – I will concentrate of its effect on us, and how it has changed us. A change we have strongly resisted seeing.

After all, it is not pleasant knowing we are no longer humans – but a strange something else we do not understand. We would almost rather die than admit this – but if we don’t, we will die anyway, as I will explain. We can no longer put this off.

I will now be talking about a social dynamic that has not been analyzed nearly enough – how people’s machines effect them personally and socially. And especially how the idea of them effects us. Ideas, I hardly need say, are powerful and have effected us in powerful ways. And this idea is no different.

The basic idea of a machine is that it is perfectible. They can always be improved, and if they are important, they will be. My favorite example is the sailing ship – a wind-powered machine that was developed to a perfection that still amazes us. This single invention changed us completely. Trade was now possible between any two places on the global, and all of the globe could be explored (and exploited) – even the polar regions! A whole new population promptly appeared to serve it – showing another basic principle of human action: as soon as jobs appear, people will appear, as though by magic, to fill them.

Many of these now live in slums – but they are still alive, and as far as they are concerned, that’s all that matters.

The main point here is that a new kind of people have taken over – what Ortega y Gasset called mass man. And every other philosopher, and I mean all of them, have ignored this important finding. They will talk about anything else, but not that. They want to be respectable, and this is not a respectable subject.

In the developed world, there is a reaction to the influx of immigrants – who are not considered respectable people. But the people who are rejecting them are no different, just more wealthy – and determined to keep that wealth. But this is minor stuff – just the usual struggle between the haves and the have-nots. We should not be distracted by that.

What is important is everyone’s attitude towards themselves. Now they have become super-people (part human and part machine) they are turning against human people – and the human parts of themselves. Why? Because humanness will taint them with its defectiveness.

As a result, they are destroying their world – which includes them. And they are completely unable to see this, they are so defective.
—-
An American friend commented on this posting, and what she said was interesting. “You are right about our deficiencies, she said, but if we allowed ourselves to be aware of them, we would be severely severely hampered in our ability compete for the things we need to survive.”

The Mind of a Perfect Machine

Some people actually have minds like this – and everyone else believes they do too. These are two separate topics, and I will deal with the first one first.

Some programmers have such minds, and any company with any sense is desperate to hire them. Companies without any sense, by far the most numerous, are willing to settle for second-rate minds – or in some cases complete imbeciles, as long as they know how to please the boss.

I have recently been exposed to a situation where such machine-like minds really shine. I had decided to learn Ruby on Rails, a programming language and application framework. Programming now means programming for the Web, which requires some new ways of doing things.

I had been a programmer once back in the early eighties, and programming then was comparatively simple. But even then it was obvious  that I could not compete with the real brains in the field. I didn’t have that kind of mind – and in cases like this, you either have it or you don’t – and I didn’t.

So here I was learning to program again, just for fun – but trying to learn the most advanced stuff. It didn’t work, and I am going to tell you why.

I bought a book, and it described the different tools for using Ruby on Rails. It mentioned, in passing, that real programmers don’t need any tools to help them, and work directly from the command line (giving programming commands directly to the computer). This was not for me, I need all the help I can get – which meant working in an integrated development environment (IDE), which would do all kinds of things to help me.

It listed three IDEs. The first one I tried, from a company in Budapest, made no sense at all. The second used an open-source program that I had heard of before, and should have worked fine – but as I discovered for myself, and by doing some browsing on the Web, it was full of bugs.The third one, from a company the author of my book worked for, was a very expensive proposition – it did not come right out and say so, but if you followed the dots, as I spent some time doing, you ended up discovering this for yourself.

Then I downloaded an issue of Code magazine to the Kindle app on my computer, and found it had an article about Ruby on Rails in it. I started following its instructions, which were of the most basic kind: working from the command line. I learned a lot, in a hurry. Part of this learning was technical: I could see the power of Ruby on Rails (which is awesome) – but I also learned I didn’t have the kind of mind – the mind of a machine – needed for this kind of work. Just trying to think this way was was messing up my mind completely.

After a good night’s sleep, and recalling what I learned from reading The Master and his Emissary, this became clear. The left hemisphere thinks like a machine (a limited human), but the right hemisphere thinks like a complete human. McGilchrist takes great care to emphasize that both are necessary – we need both kinds of thinking – but we are in big trouble when the left takes command and starts giving orders itself.

I have explained how some people have minds that think like machines – but now I have to explain the second part of my opening statement: that everyone believes they have minds just as powerful. Minds that can instantly detect truth or falsehood. This is clearly an illusion, but a powerful one.

It should be exposed for just this reason: as one of the most pernicious beliefs of our time. Consider the sorry state of the presidential campaign. Everyone is lying their head off, knowing full well that the public is incapable of detecting this.

And when I say the public, I also include many of our intellectuals. I subscribe to the New York Review, and frequently comment on its articles. Its initial enthusiasm for Obama was limitless; they were comparing him to Lincoln. Their enthusiasm has slackened, but they still haven’t detected that he is completely fake – someone who says all the right things, and does all wrong things. Something so simple they cannot comprehend it.

They immediately classified him as a good guy, and they are incapable of changing their minds. Something McGilchrist has shown is left hemisphere, through and through. Or, as Ortega y Gasset has also shown, is typical of mass man - which now includes almost everyone. Or to refer to my own writing: the social results of mass production – which also produced mass man.

What Went Wrong

Something is wrong with the world, and that something is us. It’s not the birds, the bees, or the trees – it is us. But we refuse to acknowledge this, and keep insisting it is something else – this, that, or the other thing. This is understandable, because what has happened to us is something we would not have wished on our worst enemies. And it happened, strangely enough, with the best of intentions.

It is not hard to understand, once you get over the horror of it all - because what happened was indeed horrible. We ended up not being human, but something else we have no word for, and no understanding of. But only the desperate defense “What ever you are talking about, it never, never happened. We are basically the same as we always have been. The world may be in desperate condition, but that is not our fault.”

The denial is even more basic than that: we cannot see any Big Problem. But only isolated problems here and there, and no overall pattern. Whatever happened to us, it has destroyed our ability to understand our world as a whole. Instead we sing, as a massive chorus, “Nothing really bad has happened! Things are better than ever!”

And our intellectuals are no better, they are not swimming against this current – probably for the same reason: they are scared to death – as indeed everyone is. The one overwhelming emotion of this time is a fear so intense it cannot be overcome. We now have a society where only complete conformity is acceptable. Some discussion of this or that is permitted, but not the Big Problem. We cannot even say that it does not exist – because that would involve some tentative admission that it might.

However, I will continue my reasoning, whether I have an audience or not. This requires an historical review – a review of what happened in the Modern world. Others far more qualified than I have written about this – but not that many. The most important event in the history of mankind is a complete mystery to most because our educational system has omitted this study – but has concentrated on making us comply with what has happened instead. It did not make us better thinkers, but better conformists instead.

The key process in the Modern world was Mass Production, which began with the Printing Press. Once set up, it could produce unlimited copies of any document. This was not an innocent, isolated incident – it set a pattern that everything would follow. Soon we would be mass-producing everything imaginable – including copies of ourselves.

But I need to discuss something else: the explosive growth of technology – of which the Printing Press was a part. The first dominant technology of the age was the sailing ship – which was developed to a peak of perfection that even amazes us today. These could sail around the world, and literally expanded man’s horizons. The New World was discovered – even thought it had been discovered by pre-historic man long before.

Whole industries sprang up to build and service these ships – and even more amazingly, a huge population to furnish the manpower to operate them. We have always flocked (like chickens) to wherever the jobs were, and this was our second population boom (the first was in response to agriculture).

The era of mass man had arrived – and this would have a profound effect – but also, and this was also typical, we would ignore this most important development. The education system, which was designed to educate only the best and the brightest (but also, if truth be known anyone who had the money) could not begin to cope with the vast increase in the population, but instead concentrated on making them part of the System. I must now describe what this System came to be.

The System was caused by the next major development – the Industrial Revolution. This, in turn, was make possible by Science – which in turn made new, modern technologies possible. As I have already said, the first of these, the Printing Press, was also a technology but hardly a science. In the same way succeeding technologies were only indirectly related to Science – but were nevertheless dependent on it.

The next big event was the Steam Engine – but also, even more importantly, the use of fossil fuels – which started us on an energy high, and an energy addiction, which still defines, largely, who we are. To put it bluntly, we are energy hogs – and we have no intention of breaking this habit. However, let me return to my historical review.

The Steam Engine made manufacturing possible. Instead of using human power (and animal power for transportation) and the simple loom to produce cloth – the Steam engine could provide vast amounts of power – and with the complicated machinery being rapidly developed, could produce vast amounts of cheap cloth. This immediately reduced the people involved, who had been independent farmers and craftsmen, to poverty. There were dark, satanic mills instead of England’s green and pleasant lands. But we were just beginning.

The Steam Engine also made the railroads possible. (I am skipping the development of the canals, because in the end they were not so important.) The railroads also provided employment for the growing population – but in inhuman working conditions.

People had become nothing more than machines to be used for industrial purposes. And Industry had made a few extremely rich – a wealth they proceeded to exhibit in every way possible. This would be the pattern of the future – except for the ostentatious display. This would eventually become more subdued, as its owners became content with control instead. And the rest became content with entertainment instead.

Entertainment (the movies, and eventually television) became an industry itself – and eventually, in the form of marketing, advertising, and politics – the dominant industry.

I hope you are asking, as I go through this review: what happened to the people in all this? The answer is simple – but shocking: they ceased to exist as people but became something else – a something we have yet to acknowledge or understand.

And the situation only got worse as the external combustion engine (coal and steam) was replaced by the internal combustion engine (oil, the automobile and the airplane). And then even worse by the latest complex – the computer/software/Internet.

People had not just ceased to exist, they had actively turned against each other and proceeded to destroy the world. The ultimate terror had begun.

We Have Turned Against Ourselves

This turning was the turning point in recent human history (the last 500 years or so). The most amazing thing about this event – was that it was not noticed! We had headed into a black hole from which nothing would emerge.

The black hole analogy is apt. They are caused by the collapse of massive stars. In the human world, our black hole was caused by the collapse of what we refer to now as the Modern world – which involved an explosion of technology, energy consumption, and eventually consumerism in general. In all this, we forgot what it was like to be human – the most important heritage of the Greco-Roman world  (Humanism).

We became something else, what Ortega y Gasset called mass man – who are not human, but something new and terrifying. And as I keep repeating: this new development was so terrifying we could bear to experience it. We had gone over the threshold of what we could experience – the event horizon of our black hole, and are fast imploding into nothingness. And we have also become obsessed with terror.

My analogy to a black hole must seem far-fetched to you. But scientific discoveries have always involved discoveries of ourselves as well. We cannot now imagine the enthusiasm people felt for the discoveries of Newton. He did not just discover how the solar system worked (something of not much practical importance) – he discovered something far more important: the mathematical laws defining gravity. He had discovered the laws the ran the universe!

The social impact of this was enormous. All people had to do was discover how nature worked, and then manipulate these laws to their advantage. Newton was an extremely devout man, but the world he created, the Industrial world, would have a different kind of religion: the religion of business.

Newtonian science reined for over two hundred years – practically forever in today’s world. But it was inadequate to explain new phenomena (such as Electro-Magnetism) that were being studied. Einstein rescued it with Relativity – and at the same time discovered black holes.

But to back up a notch – in Northern Europe Newton’s discoveries produced a new society – and, as almost a side-effect, affluence! In Southern Europe and Latin America this movement was destroyed by the Counter-Reformation. Even today, Latinos cannot conceived of abstract space and time – a serious handicap that has held them back. And Gringos have now become so stupid they cannot appreciate this difference themselves.

I see this stupidity in all the Gringos down here – and it never ceases to amaze me. And as I read of current events elsewhere – I am no less amazed. What the hell happened? We have turned against ourselves, and destroyed ourselves.

And we have no memory of this happening – and are strictly forbidden to do so. There is no way out of this black hole.

Not-Being as a Way of Being

I have been thinking what might be the most salient feature of contemporary life. The most important thing you can say about these people, I think, is that they do not exist. Anything else you can say is secondary – except for one thing: they destroy anything that exists.

A whole school of philosophy arose while they are becoming dominant – Existentialism. They said, quite correctly, that existence is all-important – without that, nothing else matters. But at the same time, they were ignoring the overwhelming social force of their time: mass man – people without existence.

What is being? For one thing, it is being aware: noticing what is going on around you, and in you. But these people are not interested in this at all – they have decided to ignore reality, and build a reality of their own. This is mass insanity – and not surprisingly, individual insanity is epidemic in them also.

For them, being themselves is an external social matter – how they relate to others who are also only interested in how others relate to them. They have no inner being, and don’t want one. This is the Facebook generation. Their primary concern is filling the vacuum in them – by owning and consuming.

There is another important part of this puzzle: technology – something else existentialists were incapable of understanding. Its effect on people is simple: it makes them think they are super-human – because they have all these super-capabilities. When just the opposite was happening: they are becoming sub-human, mechanisms – because their things had taken control of them.

All of this is a complex – a state of affairs where many things effect many other things in complicated ways. It is not possible to separate a couple of things and examine their interaction separately, as science has always done.

In particle physics, physicists decided there must be a Higgs Boson to tie everything together. In the Wikipedia article on the LHC it says:

In the latter conference it was reported that, despite hints of a Higgs signal in earlier data, ATLAS and CMS exclude with 95% confidence level the existence of a Higgs boson with the properties predicted by the Standard Model over most of the mass region between 145 and 466 GeV.

But higher energies will not be available until 2014.

I have spent some time trying to understand the latest developments in physics, including listening to The Fabric of the Cosmos.  And the effort has been frustrating. These scientists are materialists and that makes it difficult for them to relate to anyone else.

The Whole Idea of Mass Production is What Did Us In

What I am trying to say is not an easy idea to comprehend, therefore the convoluted, idiomatic English. Mass production has become an idea and a process so common it no longer shocks us, as it must have done the first time we encountered it.

I am reminded of stories of Asian children seeing white men for the first time. They were paralyzed with terror. I even noticed this myself, after spending some time in Indonesia – these foreigners were acting like machines – and ruthless machines at that. Indonesia, you may recall, was colonized by the Dutch – where they behaved as badly any any other colonizing power, such as Belgium in the Congo. Or for that matter, America in the Philippines. The atrocities were unbelievable because there was so much money to be made by enslaving the population.

But the same thing happened internally – the population was harnessed to serve industrialization – to produce standardized goods and services (such as transportation by the railroads). The basic idea behind all of this was mass production by mass people – who appeared suddenly in massive quanitities.

I repeat: mass production was an idea that took us by force. There was some of this before, the Greeks had pottery factories manned by slaves. And they conceived of the idea of atoms: identical units that formed the underlying basis of all matter. And writing made reproduction of almost anything possible. The Romans made their armies out of identical, replaceable human parts. But it was not until the invention of the printing press that mass production really took hold – and made the modern world.

But most things were still made by hand, by artisans who made a decent living, and jealously guarded their craft. The Industrial Revolution destroyed all of this – something Thomas Jefferson could dimly see coming, but could not stop.

The Industrial Revolution did one thing: it destroyed people – which was its hidden agenda.

And it continues to destroy people. As I said, this is what did us in – and turned us into mindless consumers.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 361 other followers