Search This Blog

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Politics Is Visceral

Politics Is Visceral

Manos Tsakiris has written a very good essay on how visceral emotion and feeling are at the root of politics as opposed to rational thought. This essay notes that people feel increasingly unsafe today and so the emotion anxiety is in play in politics. The essay also notes that anxiety as well as anger in politics are really not rational and so politics is mainly based on how people feel, i.e., politics is visceral not rational.

The essay seems to assert that the visceral politics of today are not driven by any fundamental political disagreement. Rather, it is politicians' persuasive language and not any fundamental political disagreement that drives today's visceral politics. In other words, today's visceral politics not due to political disagreements but rather due to persuasive language of politicians.

The essay mentions the rational Polis of Aristotle as an example of rational politics that has never proven to be true. The essay then mentions the Thomas Hobbes' lawlessness that would result from the irrational war of all against all. Hobbes supposed human nature was first of all callous and not compassionate and callous free choice was fundamentally irrational and needed the social contracts of compassion to limit the natural lawlessness of callous free choice.

The essay argues that modern life undermines the the human well being of the UK social welfare state from the 1942 Beveridge report. Modern life increasingly does not distribute human well-being evenly that is a precursor of many modern day maladies like depression and suicide. The essay uses a Trump rally quote to show how language increases political anxiety and anger.

"The American people are fed up with Democrat lies, hoaxes, smears, slanders and scams. The Democrats’ shameful conduct has created an angry majority, and that’s what we are, we’re a majority and we’re angry."

However, the essay does not show why the Trump quote is not true and therefore not justified. Since there have been Democrat lies, hoaxes, slanders, scams, and shameful conduct, the emotions would then be justified and therefore help people to increase human well being.

The essay ends with a quote from Hannah Arendt, "the ideal subject of a totalitarian regime is one ‘for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (ie, the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (ie, the standards of thought) no longer exist.’"

The essay now argues that somehow, the visceral politics of modern life and human well being depends on distinguishing fact from fiction to preclude a totalitarian regime. 

Nowhere in the essay is there any discussion of the universal political disagreement over conservative individual free choice versus the liberal coerced choices of compassion state, which is the foundation of all modern politics. The visceral politics of modern life seem to be the classic political difference between the conservative Adam Smith of individual free choice versus the liberal Rousseau of enforced state compassion. Rousseau, after all, argues that first of all, human nature was compassionate and not callous, but otherwise followed Hobbes.

There is some purpose and meaning to the visceral politics of modern life. There is, after all, a fundamental recurring political disagreement over the limits of individual free choice versus the limits of state-enforced compassion. In fact, previous outcomes repeatedly shown us that either callous free choice or unfettered compassion can lead to a totalitarian state.

https://aeon.co/essays/politics-is-in-peril-if-it-ignores-how-humans-regulate-the-body?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=feedburner&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AeonMagazineEssays+%28Aeon+Magazine+Essays%29



Saturday, September 26, 2020

Free Choice and Compassion

Emotions that accompany the two main complementary conservative and liberal ideologies of civilization are the complementary emotions of free choice and compassion. All emotions come from the primitive and not the rational conscious mind, but emotions are why we feel the way that we feel and are why we do what we do.

Conservative ideology favors more individual free choice with limited government coercion while liberal ideology favors more government coercion with limited individual free choice. Extreme conservative ideology with unfettered free choice then suppresses liberal compassion and will end up despotic and tyrannical. Likewise, extreme liberal ideology with unfettered compassion then suppresses conservative free choice and will likewise end up despotic and tyrannical.


Thus Nazism or Fascism represent a conservative extreme unfettered free choice by a ruling elite, while socialism or communism represent a liberal extreme unfettered compassion by a ruling elite and have both demonstrated despotic tyranny outcomes. Despite having opposite feeling precursors of free choice or compassion, respectively, both conservative and liberal extremes both end up as despotic tyrannies. This is also why successful free market capitalism must always tolerate some political and religious dissent and thus have necessarily more representative democracy outcomes.

The balance between the callous free choice based on the feeling of an individual and the compassionate coerced choice of state has been a long struggle for civilization. Ancient China, India, and Rome all achieved some success as totalitarian states rule by the unfettered free choice of their ruling classes and a fundamental acceptance and indeed promotion of the suffering and misery of everyone else. Then, Western civilization grew to adopt a Judeo-Christian-Islamic ethic that introduced the primacy of individual free choice for most people as a a different feeling with more compassion for those outside of the ruling class. In particular, the Judeo-Christian ethic taught that both rich and poor people have the same free choice of grace and salvation and therefore both could reach heaven by their own free choice. People did not have to accept their suffering and misery, but could choose different destiny from that of their birth. The Judeo-Christian-Islamic ethic shows the primacy of individual free choice and free choice gave rise to the innovation of technological advances that increased the wealth of all people, including the poor, and gave rise to a middle class as a result.


China’s CCP is a very good example of unfettered compassion of a ruling class since the CCP uses their unfettered compassion to justify tyranny over everyone else. The unfettered CCP compassion considers itself virtuous because it has good intentions for most people, but the CCP cannot tolerate any religious or political dissent and so mercilessly suppresses the free choice of both religious and political minorities. The CCP is now actively suppressing all non-state religions, Uighurs, Tibetans, Falun Gong, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.


Syrian Assad’s ruling class represents callous free choice that likewise cannot tolerate any dissent and Assad’s nine-year long civil war ruthlessly suppresses all religious and political dissent. Likewise Iran's theocracy callous free choice likewise cannot tolerate any dissent in Iran and ruthlessly suppresses all political and religious dissent outside of the ruling theocracy.


All of these examples of one-party rule are at the extremes of either callous free choice or unfettered compassion.


Friday, September 25, 2020

Marx, Nietzsche, Sartre, and Foucault

Marx, Nietzsche, Sartre, and Foucault

Bishop Barron's talk to the Knights of Malta used works from these four prominent atheist philosophers to represent the philosophical foundations of the current U.S. culture war. All people must first of all transcend the fundamental anxiety about nihilism before they can ever hope to understand the nature of physical reality. The archetypes of these four authors are The Communist Manifesto by Marx in 1848, Beyond Good and Evil by Nietzsche in 1886, Being and Nothingness by Sartre in 1953, and The History of Sexuality by Foucault in 1976. In the span of 128 years these four books and authors represent the foundation of the current culture of identity and and its relativist individual morality. For Christians like Barron, it is religious belief that transcends anxiety about nihilism and so these four archetypes represent the dreaded four horseman of the apocalypse.

The common theme among the horseman is the rejection of the morality and ethics that represent the  power of a cultural elite. According to nihilism, elite in power simply contrive a morality and ethics mainly to oppress other identity groups. The horseman all argue that those identity groups should reject that morality and ethics of the elite and just invent their own morality and ethics. In fact, each of the horseman propose a different morality and ethics instead of adopting the power elite's well-accepted archetypes of morality and ethics. For example, instead of the morality and ethics of the Judeo-Christian-Islam tradition, each individual has the free choice to derive their own morality and ethics...from nothing but their anxieties about nihilism...

Marx argued in 1848 that first of all wealth inequality was due to the ruling class imposing its capital free market and taking their profit from the labor of the working class, who must then take power by force from the ruling class. 

Nietzche argued in 1886 that first of all God was dead and so all individuals begin with an anxiety about the nothingness of nihilism and then determine their own morality and ethics from the nothing of nihilism with their individual will to power as ubermensch. 

Sartre furthered Nietzsche's existential anxiety of nihilism in 1953 and begins the universe not with the creation of a transcendent God, but rather with the creation of a transcendent nihilism, which is again creation of something from nothing.

Foucault in 1976 then finally concluded that that since nihilism can create anything, the power elite simply invented a morality and ethics and used it to oppress all identity groups, including the power elite.

These four horsemen of the apocalypse all offer four very different ways to transcend the bottomless anxiety of nihilism with the pleasure of a relative morality and ethics for each identity group. Bishop Barron argued instead that the pleasure of Catholic belief is an absolute morality and ethics that comes with a belief in God. It is then the pleasure of a Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition that transcends the anxiety of nihilism with the pleasure of religious belief. In particular, Barron argues that there is pleasure in the intellectual tradition of the Catholic Church belief in God that has always effectively transcended nihilist anxieties.

These four horseman transcend their anxieties over nihilism with four different moral and ethical beliefs that each can replace all religious moral and ethical beliefs. Barron does not address the even more diverse of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic morality and ethics and that diversity is a fertile ground for sowing our post modern culture's bottomless black holes of nihilist anxiety. The diversity of Confucist, Taoist, Buddhist, and Hinduist religious traditions further complicate any single claim of absolute morality and ethics like that of Barron's Catholicism.

People progress in life by the pleasure of discovering new people, new places, new foods, new drink, and even new ways to survive and believe. People also get pleasure in discovering new beliefs or archetypes to transcend their anxieties about what they cannot ever know, the bottomless pit of nihilism. People need ways to transcend their anxieties about nihilism, which is the primal fear of nothing at all, and is the fear that we fear most of all. 

When bad things happen to good people, those people face the injustice of misery and anxiety of that suffering and misery from bad things. The precursors of such suffering from bad things are often simply unknowable and yet those people suffering still get angry and lash out at and blame others as enemies for injustices that cause their suffering. Other compassionate people who see such suffering will also get angry and lash out at any perceived unjust enemy as the cause of even fundamentally unknowable precursors of suffering.

Thus, these four horseman simply represent four very different transcendent beliefs different from the many different religious transcendent beliefs. In fact, transcendent beliefs by definition do not have knowable precursors...including each of the horseman's transcendent beliefs. Although precursors exist in our casual reality, there are matter-action precursors that we cannot ever know as an inescapable axiom of the reality of quantum phase. People must have archetype beliefs that allow them to transcend unknowable precursors. For example, there are unknowable precursors for some of the injustices of suffering and misery by people who do not deserve to suffer or to be miserable. 

Thus, all compassionate people, including the four horseman as well as Bishop Barron, want to reduce the suffering and misery of others. Each of the horseman proposes a different way to transcend the injustice of suffering and misery of people who do not deserve their suffering and misery. However, all of them argue that even compassionate people must first of all transcend their anxieties about nihilism before they can ever hope to transcend the injustice of the suffering and misery of others.

Thursday, September 3, 2020

Spectral Free Choice

Human interaction as either weak or strong as well as a bond attraction or a conflict of dislike are both the result of matter-action free-choice EEG spectra. The neural phases of the EEG spectra show whether the attraction is weak or strong and also show whether there is bond or conflict. The quantum phases of neural action potentials shows the pervasive nature of our quantum reality as matter-action quantum causal sets.

The universe matter-action spectrum likewise shows the frequency and distribution of universe matter intensity versus mass and is the transform of the universe matter decay pulse. While universe time emerges from the precursors and outcomes of universe matter decay, atomic time emerges from atom action. All things that happen have matter-action spectra outcomes from their matter-action spectra precursors. Each person's matter-action spectrum describes their matter and all of their interactions with themselves as well as with the universe outside of the self.

Gravity relativity is a very weak force that scales with the size of the universe while quantum charge is a very much stronger force that scales with the size of atoms. Until the biphoton of matter-action, it has been a mystery how gravity relativity and charge forces represent the same basic matter-action force. It is then even further amazing that the very weak forces of human free choice are also consistent with the same basic matter-action force.