Can We Call This Progress?

coberst

Well-Known Member
Messages
427
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Can We Call This Progress?

Rugged individualism might be an appropriate expression for all the creatures in the world, with one exception. Humans have, in the last few hundred years, moved from being rugged individuals to our present state in which we have fashioned an alien environment in which we have become chess pieces or ciphers. We have invented the Artificial Kingdom where, as Simone Weil once noted, “it is the thing that thinks and the man who is reduced to the state of the thing”.

I think that we, women and men, have become chess pieces. We have become objects to be manipulated by the market and the corporation. We spend our days like the chess piece; we have a quantified value and are placed on the board and used as desired by some one who may be a real person. The real person has still the human characteristics of creativity, spontaneity, improvisation, spontaneously reactive, discontinuous, a mosaic more than syntax or cipher. Just what we find is missing when using the telephone to contact someone out there.

In an effort to understand where we are now it might help to start back in time and move forward. In frontier days each person was very much an individual. Rugged individualism was a popular expression. Each man and woman was a jack-of-all-trades and master of none. Each husband and wife was a team that together could and had to do everything that was needed.

In early America we were an agricultural economy. Most families were farm families we were all rugged individualist. The farmer was very much the jack-of-all-trades and the master of his or her domain.

As we move forward in time we see this team become a man working in a factory or office and the woman was at home raising the children and maintaining the day to day necessities for all family members. She washed, cleaned, shopped, sewed, and was still much of a rugged individual. Slowly the man became a specialized worker in a clockwork factory or office.

Moving forward in history we arrive at the present moment where not only is the man working in the factory or office but the woman joins him there also.

When we examine the factory or office workspace we find a very different occupation for the man and woman than the rugged individualism of emerging history of human evolution. We no longer are masters of our own domain but are ciphers in a clockwork that functions upon modern economic principles.

A pertinent example of this mode of commodification is how we have converted what was political economics into the modern economics. Political economy is the study of social relations. It is the study of culture. Political economy focuses upon the problem of how to regulate industrialization within the context of a healthy society, it worries about the problems of labor within a context of the laborer as an end and not a commodity—an object of commerce.

Economics, however, in its modern form, has replaced political economics. Economics has removed the pesky concern about labor as being human and has replaced labor as being a commodity—an object of commerce. Modern economics is now the study of scarcity, prices, and resource allocation. Economics has legislated that labor, as an end, is no longer a legitimate domain of knowledge for economic consideration. In doing so, over time, society has become ignorant of such concerns. Our culture has replaced concern about humans as ends with humans as means to some other end.

In the rugged individualist mode of living the individual was creative and master even though the domain of mastery was small. An individual’s personality is dramatically affected. Labor has become an abstract quantity and calculated into the commodity produced. We are the only creatures who have completely removed our self from what we were evolved to be. We are the only creatures removed from our grounding in an organic world. We came from a long ancestry of rugged individualist and now reside in the Artificial Kingdom. To what end only time will tell.

Do you feel like a cipher in our culture?
 
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

R. Heinlein.

I happen to have done all but three of the above.
 
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

R. Heinlein.

I happen to have done all but three of the above.

Let me guess... cooperate, fight efficiently and die gallantly?
 
Sounds Randian. Anyone can still be as rugged an individualist as they want. Go to Alaska, build your own shack, marry a nice polar bear, and live happily ever after.

Chris
 
Sounds Randian. Anyone can still be as rugged an individualist as they want. Go to Alaska, build your own shack, marry a nice polar bear, and live happily ever after.

Chris

Hmmmmm am I allowed just to live in sin with a beaver? :D

tao
 
Let me guess... cooperate, fight efficiently and die gallantly?


I've stopped fights by landing a single blow. I've never conned a ship, planned an invasion, or died.

I can cooperate when someone is worthy of my cooperation. Those who persist upon being bigoted, and hate-filled do not deserve my cooperation.
 
Can We Call This Progress?

Rugged individualism might be an appropriate expression for all the creatures in the world, with one exception. Humans have, in the last few hundred years, moved from being rugged individuals to our present state in which we have fashioned an alien environment in which we have become chess pieces or ciphers. We have invented the Artificial Kingdom where, as Simone Weil once noted, “it is the thing that thinks and the man who is reduced to the state of the thing”.

I think that we, women and men, have become chess pieces. We have become objects to be manipulated by the market and the corporation. We spend our days like the chess piece; we have a quantified value and are placed on the board and used as desired by some one who may be a real person. The real person has still the human characteristics of creativity, spontaneity, improvisation, spontaneously reactive, discontinuous, a mosaic more than syntax or cipher. Just what we find is missing when using the telephone to contact someone out there.

In an effort to understand where we are now it might help to start back in time and move forward. In frontier days each person was very much an individual. Rugged individualism was a popular expression. Each man and woman was a jack-of-all-trades and master of none. Each husband and wife was a team that together could and had to do everything that was needed.

In early America we were an agricultural economy. Most families were farm families we were all rugged individualist. The farmer was very much the jack-of-all-trades and the master of his or her domain.

As we move forward in time we see this team become a man working in a factory or office and the woman was at home raising the children and maintaining the day to day necessities for all family members. She washed, cleaned, shopped, sewed, and was still much of a rugged individual. Slowly the man became a specialized worker in a clockwork factory or office.

Moving forward in history we arrive at the present moment where not only is the man working in the factory or office but the woman joins him there also.

When we examine the factory or office workspace we find a very different occupation for the man and woman than the rugged individualism of emerging history of human evolution. We no longer are masters of our own domain but are ciphers in a clockwork that functions upon modern economic principles.

A pertinent example of this mode of commodification is how we have converted what was political economics into the modern economics. Political economy is the study of social relations. It is the study of culture. Political economy focuses upon the problem of how to regulate industrialization within the context of a healthy society, it worries about the problems of labor within a context of the laborer as an end and not a commodity—an object of commerce.

Economics, however, in its modern form, has replaced political economics. Economics has removed the pesky concern about labor as being human and has replaced labor as being a commodity—an object of commerce. Modern economics is now the study of scarcity, prices, and resource allocation. Economics has legislated that labor, as an end, is no longer a legitimate domain of knowledge for economic consideration. In doing so, over time, society has become ignorant of such concerns. Our culture has replaced concern about humans as ends with humans as means to some other end.

In the rugged individualist mode of living the individual was creative and master even though the domain of mastery was small. An individual’s personality is dramatically affected. Labor has become an abstract quantity and calculated into the commodity produced. We are the only creatures who have completely removed our self from what we were evolved to be. We are the only creatures removed from our grounding in an organic world. We came from a long ancestry of rugged individualist and now reside in the Artificial Kingdom. To what end only time will tell.

Do you feel like a cipher in our culture?

Hi Coberst

Anyone that appreciates Simone Weil can't be all bad. :D

I believe you are right to question this modern trend of specialization. Have you read her book "The need for Roots" or any part of it? She does explain social force and what it would take for a society to create individuals rather than slaves of the "Great Beast." If so, I'd appreciate discussing some of her ideas with you in a separate thread. This one has been tken over by the usual sarcasm and her ideas are more specific. The ideas are deep but worth the effort to impartially think.

"Nothing can have as its destination anything other than its origin. The contrary idea, the idea of progress, is poison." Simone Weil
 
Nick

I have not read Weil, I found this quote in a book I was reading. I have only a vague idea of her life. I think she, like me, is a progressive.
 
"Nothing can have as its destination anything other than its origin. The contrary idea, the idea of progress, is poison." Simone Weil

Well, let's see. Our origin is living in mud huts with zero sanitation, scrabbling for any food at all, a monumental parasite and infectious disease load, and a lifespan that rarely got past 40 years.

Yeah, what a great thing to look forward to, isn't it?

PS: Let's not forget "no sewer systems", and sacrificing members of our own species in order to influence the weather.

What a thing to look forward to as our inevitable future--or at least Weil would have it be our inevitable future.
 
Well, let's see. Our origin is living in mud huts with zero sanitation, scrabbling for any food at all, a monumental parasite and infectious disease load, and a lifespan that rarely got past 40 years.

Yeah, what a great thing to look forward to, isn't it?

PS: Let's not forget "no sewer systems", and sacrificing members of our own species in order to influence the weather.

What a thing to look forward to as our inevitable future--or at least Weil would have it be our inevitable future.

This is probably neither he or there, but I personally would choose living in a "mud hut" in a relatively unspoiled environment with abundant food growing, flying, and running over the land, swimming in the streams; and actually, since you mentioned it, little problems with infectious diseases because of low human populations, over what we currently call civilization. No sewer system also isn't a problem if your population base is about fifteen to fifty people, which may have been a typical range for a hunter-gatherer band.

The future, compared to this past, which undoubtedly some will insist is a fantasy or at least irrelevant, does indeed look depressing and grim. Yet as the economy crumbles and cools, as non-renewable resources deplete, and a general inertia settles over hyper-active progressive modern life, we will have the opportunity to reconceptualize the way we live; which is not to say that we are going to go back to being hunter-gatherers--population densities are too high and "resources" too scarce for that lifestyle at the moment--but if we are smart, we will begin to back towards the more simple technologies of a bygone era: pre-industrial, pre-homogenized globalization, pre-mass-production. Simple machines have the advantage of being easier to upkeep than more complex ones, and being less prone to breakdown.

Gimmee that ol' time technology, a mud hut, four acres and a doggy. I think I'll be just fine, and even better if I can find an old typewriter.

;)
 
Gimmee that ol' time technology, a mud hut, four acres and a doggy. I think I'll be just fine, and even better if I can find an old typewriter.

You're probably dead by the time you hit 40. Like that idea? If you're a woman, you died younger than that from popping out as many offspring as possible.

It's easy to play tough guy pseudoluddite on an internet forum. From what I've seen of such people, pull them out to the middle of a good thunderstorm with nothing but what they can carry on their back, and they aren't so thrilled about "Mother Nature", anymore.
 
Nick

I have not read Weil, I found this quote in a book I was reading. I have only a vague idea of her life. I think she, like me, is a progressive.

As you can see, the negativity is such that most here could never have a clue. You still seem to be aware of what has been sacrificed by the loss of true individuality However if it interests you, read this link on her theories on social force.

Jim Grote: Prestige: Simone Weil's Theory of Social Force

If you are open to it, I can show you links on "The Need for Roots"

T.S. Eliot wrote in the preface to Simone Weil's "The Need for Roots:"

"This is one of those books which ought to be studied by the young before their leisure has been lost and their capacity for thought destroyed; books the effect of which, we can only hope, will become apparent in the attitude of mind of another generation."



Naturally in this day and age it is only read by a minority so it is just wishful thinking for Eliot. But still just contemplating these ideas makes us more aware of what society is capable of in furthering individuality or allowing Man to become what he IS,
 
Well, let's see. Our origin is living in mud huts with zero sanitation, scrabbling for any food at all, a monumental parasite and infectious disease load, and a lifespan that rarely got past 40 years.

Yeah, what a great thing to look forward to, isn't it?

PS: Let's not forget "no sewer systems", and sacrificing members of our own species in order to influence the weather.

What a thing to look forward to as our inevitable future--or at least Weil would have it be our inevitable future.

You measure progress by external standards and Simone does by inner standards. You measure progres by what we DO and she refers to what we ARE. This is why you cannot understand her or what individuality is..
 
You're probably dead by the time you hit 40. Like that idea? If you're a woman, you died younger than that from popping out as many offspring as possible.

It's easy to play tough guy pseudoluddite on an internet forum. From what I've seen of such people, pull them out to the middle of a good thunderstorm with nothing but what they can carry on their back, and they aren't so thrilled about "Mother Nature", anymore.

Woof, Dogbrain.

I think Jerry Mander put it well in his book In the Absence of the Sacred, where he wrote, "length of life is meaningless as compared with quality of life, which due to increasing pollution and devestation brought on by technological overdevelopment, is now in sharp decline." When civilization is composed of dense numbers of people who, by necessity or by greed, are out only for themselves and their immediate loved ones; when those people are compelled by necessity to work outside of the home and away from their families for forty or more hours a week just to get by, and before factoring in the work that goes into maintaining a place to live, acquiring food, and caring for family members; when participating in the economic system that they have been born into and are compelled to inhabit by indoctrination and force exacerbates rather than relieves problems of overproduction, pollution, overconsumption, waste, disease, and general malaise, I do believe that quality of life is in sharp decline.

Call me silly, pretentious, naive, or a poseur as you will, but I would gladly drop many of the accoutrements of technological development in return for a measure of sanity and community.
 
You could build a really deluxe mud hut these days. I guess it depends on the location. I've seen some really nice teepees. That might be a better alternative, although just a nicely apportioned shack is often the most economical approach.

Who hasn't wanked off over Walden? I've got my little self-sufficient dream too. Just gotta talk my wife into it.:)

Chris
 
You're probably dead by the time you hit 40. Like that idea? If you're a woman, you died younger than that from popping out as many offspring as possible.

It's easy to play tough guy pseudoluddite on an internet forum. From what I've seen of such people, pull them out to the middle of a good thunderstorm with nothing but what they can carry on their back, and they aren't so thrilled about "Mother Nature", anymore.

Not you though eh... you'd knock that ol storm out with one punch...

And I am sorry you believe the myth that lifespan was shorter for our forebears. Lifespan is in fact pretty flexible and has gone up and down according to environmental factors. Many remains have been found from different periods that died when they were as old as today's average. Same goes for hight and every other physical indicator of prosperity.

tao
 
And I am sorry you believe the myth that lifespan was shorter for our forebears. Lifespan is in fact pretty flexible and has gone up and down according to environmental factors. Many remains have been found from different periods that died when they were as old as today's average. Same goes for hight and every other physical indicator of prosperity.

tao

Either volunteer to eschew all technology or be exposed as a hypocrite, then.
 
Either volunteer to eschew all technology or be exposed as a hypocrite, then.

Lmao! I point out an error in your argument and I have to go live in a cave? You know of all the people posting here you really are the most arrogant of all. Arrogance is never pretty. yeh yeh yeh, I know... I can be a bit of a to55er myself at times. But I have one great advantage over you....I know it.

tao
 
Back
Top