Category: philosophy/religion topics
Progress in a society seems to be essencial for the groath of that particular society. Some of the facters invaulving this progress however seem to be negatively effecting society, thus not allowing it to healthily grow. In (The Ethics Of Authenticity) Charles Taylor points out these factors as the three malaises of midernity, and states that they hinder the ability for a human being to be authentic, thus effect the society of which they are members.
In his very first chapter Charles Taylor identifies these malaises and breafley explains them in detail. Individualism, although seems to have somehow lead to the advancement of modern society, has also braught the loss of purpice to it.
“But at the same time as they restricted us, these orders gave meaning to the world
and to the activities of social life. The things that surround us were not just potential
raw materials or instruments for our projects, but they had the significance given
them by their place in the chain of being. The eagle was not just another bird, but
the king of a whole domain of animal life. By the same token, the rituals and norms
of society had more than merely instrumental significance. The discrediting of these
orders has been called the "disenchantment" of the world. With it, things lost some
of their magic.”
Taylor argues that this has had a dormatic effect on society, as people no longer had the brauder vision as they focused more on their lives as individuals then they did as part of the much greater picture.
“People no longer have a sense of a higher purpose, of something worth dying for.
“Charles Taylor makes a radical claim that we only become capable of understanding ourselves and defining our identity through dialogue. He says humans are fundamentally dialogical creatures and cannot develop into individuals without interaction with others. Through dialogue we are able to exchange our ideas with others and construct our values and beliefs from bits and pieces we hear. This is how we become authentic humans.
Authenticity is being true to yourself. It almost seems paradoxal; to discover your individuality you must converse with others. Charles Taylor also believes that some lives are better than others, based on how authentically a life is lived. In modern society, where soft relativism prevails, this view is often seen as unacceptable. Current thought seems to be that lives are all equal; in fact the choices we face have neither a right nor a wrong answer. Charles Taylor
believes this causes people to become self absorbed, and can bring about a loss of
meaning in their lives. Socrates is also a believer in the value of dialogue. In
fact all of his teachings are in the form of a conversation. Through dialogue Socrates
can challenge the idea of those he talks to. The challenging of ideas is the most
important part of dialogue because it forces you to defend your ideas, and therefore
realize what exactly it is that you believe. If you approach a philosophical conversation
with an open mind, conflict can either strengthen your belief, or cause you to modify
your former beliefs to something that works better for you. Oedipus is given ample
opportunity to engage in dialogue. However, when Oedipus talks to others, he only
listens to what he wants to hear. When Teiresias tries to tell him the truth, he
becomes angry and says, And who has taught you the truth? Not your profession surely.
(Instead of trying to understand what Teiresias is saying, he immediately discards it because it does not fit into his plan to pull Thebes out of the plague. He is unwilling to engage in true dialogue, because he is afraid that it might cause him to question his own beliefs. Oedipus is not living his life authentically; he is not being true to himself. In his arrogance he believes himself greater than he really is, and this prevents him from truly seeking his own individuality. Oedipus becomes so caught up in himself that he cannot see his own shortcomings. This prevents him
from truly knowing himself.
The second of these malaises as Charles Taylor argues is known as instrumental reasoning.
This is basically the idea that the means justify the ends regardless of how they may effect our surroundings, being nature and in some cases even ourselves. Taylor also argues that this came about with the separation from greater orders such as the church.
“No doubt sweeping away the old orders has immensely widened the scope of instrumental reason. Once society no longer has a sacred structure, once social arrangements and
modes of action are no longer grounded in the order of things or the will of God,
they are in a sense up for grabs.”
One cannot agree that we see this occuring every day in this so called modern society.
How often is it that we hear of governmental projects which should work for the benefit of society, such as nuclear powerplants which are meant to benefit the people of the countries in which they are built yet prove to be of great danger and hazerdous to one’s health. Governments continue to build these regardless of the risks, as they find them more financially beneficial to their own pockets. The same can thus be said in the case of lab animals.
“Similarly, once the creatures that surround us lose the significance that accrued to their place in the chain of being, they are open to being treated as raw materials
or instruments for our projects.”
The horrid truth man refuses to face is that human beings have become too far off from their union with nature and with each other that they no longer regard such things as more than mear instruments, means to come to an end.
This ties well with the first theme Taylor discusses, individualism, as our great decrease in selfworth and the worth of one another also derives from our dependence of continuously developing technology, which also decreases our dependence of each other. Albert Borgman
speaks of the "device paradigm," whereby we withdraw more and more from "manifold
engagement" with our environment and instead request and get products designed to
deliver some circumscribed benefit. He contrasts what is involved in heating our
homes, with the contemporary central heating furnace, with what this same function
entailed in pioneer times, when the whole family had to be involved in cutting and
stacking the wood and feeding the stove or fireplace.
The third and final of the three malaises which Charles Taylor points out in his book derives from the previous two. He argues that we subject ourselves to our own modern laws and social and structural developements which we would most likely never do if we were to deliberate jus how this is actually effecting our lives. One example Taylor uses is the modern city structures, which make it extreamly difficult for us to travil without the use of public transport or our own personal vehicles. With regards to social developement Taylor argues that this imposes a great lack of freedom as we become subjected to the laws created by society itself.
Taylor moves on to mention another type of loss of freedom which was previously discussed mostly by Alexis de Tocqueville.
“A society in which people end up as the kind of individuals who are "enclosed in
their own hearts" is one where few will want to participate actively in self-government.
They will prefer to stay at home and enjoy the satisfactions of private life, as
long as the government of the day produces the means to these satisfactions and distributes
them widely.”
In such cases, people willingly submit themselves to the greater powers which in turn take full demand over their lives. People would much rather take comfort in their own homes rather than invaulving themselves in the shaping and developement of their society, believing that they are free to enjoy their own lives in their own personal space. Little do they realize how ironic this actually is because in truth, they will be left with no freedom as their lack of invaulvement would only strengthen these higher powers which presently dominate them, making it all the more difficult for individual citisons to later react to oppression.
Tocqueville calls this Soft Despotism. Charles Taylor presents one solution to this issue.
“If this is so, what we are in danger of losing is political control over our destiny,
something we could exercise in common as citizens.”
This is what Tocqueville called Political liberty, which means that the citysons get to choos for themselves. The lack of this would result in Despotism which would leave the citysons in the hands of tutelary power.
Upon reading this book many would realize that what Charles Taylor is arguing much applies to not only society as a whole, but to our own personal lives as individuals. Humanity has gone from the extream of total oppression, to the other extream of total indipendence which has in turn degraded not only humanity as a race of supposed rational and deliberate beings, but also nature which surrounds us and on which we often depend to live a better healthy life. Such, in fact, has lead to the widespread social and natural catastrophies, and unless we start to dwell less on how valuable we are as individuals, and start focusing more on how valuable we are to others in a civil society, we will continue to plunge in this infinite nothingness which presently dominates our lives depriving us from freedom from ourselves.
I'm no philosopher or sociologist, but much of this rings with some truth. Individuality for instance, allows us to develop according to our own marrits and desires. But it also distances us from community. it I think it to be a form of selfishness, and you can see it more and more in society today.
Indeed. That along with instrumental reasoning has pretty much braught society to what it is today, and I don't mean the advancements. People wage wars, families argue over wills and testiments they care more for objects than they do for each other, we destroy the forests and kill animals for the sake of progress. And soft despotism? For as long as we're nice and comfortable at home and we have all we need we let those in power do what ever they want and walk all over us up to the point where we can do absolutely nothing about it. Society is locking itself in an iron cage and tossing the key far beyond its reach.