If you are looking for a worthwhile polemic look no further. Seeing further borders on the cliché from Chartres and Isaac Newton, while looking no further begs a questionable dogmatic accusation and twisted virtue signalling. Our cherished liberal democracy used to activate around, "Love is Love", now Enlightenment is even under attack where the Right is right and the Left is over?
Being open to coherent criticisms continues to be the mechanism of meaning and implies something concrete. Meaning mutilates misinformation. How do you like that reification? How do you like that negative dialectical transfer towards living? Yet, not all questions are created equal. Hierarchical yes (in an Aristotelian tradition), but not the Judeo Christian apology preached by Jordan Peterson. Intellectually, I think JC, I mean JP is a living giant, his contributions, the speed of his mind and articulation resembles a wizardry of sorts (ie. that finger flitter as he articulates complicated concepts on the fly). Hey, I am a JP fan, but let's get things straight, Jordan Peterson is a Christian Apologist preaching a metaphysical gospel compatible with flourishing society (or so he thinks). For the secular in society this is not a one size fits all subscription. My goal is to reconcile his book, Maps of Meaning, with a Hellenic equivalent and see where the difference lies. The time for Enlightenment continues to tap us on the shoulder. When we wake up? Steven Pinker is a stark defender of Enlightenment values including...
Waking Up, although experiencing a re-branding of sorts, was a Sam Harris podcast turned meditation app. Coupling Sam Harris with Steven Pinker is far from "belligerent" as the two public intellectuals are also friends. For some "reason", unbeknownst to Pinker, the reception for the powerful yet pedestrian books from Pinker have yielded a relentless shitstorm of criticism from the rationalusters, humanistas, and the bouncing belligerence of the Taleb trampoline, et al.
Controversy appears to be the ingredient to popularity so why is this particular type of controversy less than ideal? Does Steven Pinker fit the doppelgänger stereotype of a Harvard professor; unapproachable, arrogant and egocentric? For some perhaps, this target practice on and towards Pinker is an exercise in righteous futility. For me, as well as Sam Harris, the attacks are ridiculous. Grasping at straws surfaces as a worthwhile allusion to illustrate the validity of opposition to Pinker's so-called, "optimism". The scare quotes are so cliché and infantile, made by skimmers and other such readers looking to confirm their own biases. Praise with a peppering of criticism is the ratio of constructive criticism worthy of representing the quality and depth of Pinker's contributions.
When will we all wake up and realize that charlatanism is defeatable, Enlightenment is existential, and the shades Pinker paints are actually perspectives worth living (ie. knowing)? That's right, the boundary conditions for an Enlightened consciousness includes the knowledge, the epistemology contained within and throughout the Pinker perspective. Hey, it's one source of knowledge. Read and re-read the classics, create your own personal learning journey and apply this epistemological knowledge to your daily grind, engagements and thinking.
Living a life worth living is a Socratic plug for prosperity somewhere between Eudaimonica and Hades (a.k.a. the hubs of hell for you Christian folk/sheep).
This spread of moral ethics, between flourishing and floundering pretty much covers the gamut of social consciousness. I have to admit, that as a philosopher my position on consciousness is epiphenomenal... Contextualized, my perspective on consciousness is akin to stage-play and the show must go on! That's life!!
Back to the false claims of reality as seen through the lens of rose-coloured glasses, shades of Pinker perhaps, optimism has a tradition counterpoint to the negative dialectical gymnastics of postmodern academic culture. Any toddler with a couple years of life experience can negate for the sake of negation, when the adult in the room, grocery store or daycare facility considers the wisdom in negation, adapts and moves on. There is no University of Frankfurt, the school is for the toddlers of today or the academic intelligentsia of the 60's counter-culture. Don't get me wrong, Theadorno, WaltBenjamin, Marcuse1D, et el are purposefully truncated and verbalized as such. Diminished dominance in thought was the intention, they should not be the embodied thought leaders some claim them to be. To be more direct; Karl Marx was not a Marxist and to hammer the point home (without the sickle) Plato was not a Platonist.
The Enlightenment, as Steven Pinker repeatedly points out, is... When will we wake up?
Support Your Friendly Neighbourhood Atelier Today!
