Plague Journal, Saying Goodbye To Mr. Hegel
The sky is gray, overcast as if a bowl of depressive disorder had been placed over us by the gods. It seems very quiet outside with little traffic along Western Avenue. Sunday morning is not typically this silent. But these are the days of pandemic, of worsening spread of the coronavirus. I cannot say that mistakes have been made, causes resolving into this grim effect of mounting deaths in the winter months. The president a majority of us elected to office in 2016 does not have the ability to care, the man is an empathic void, — thus his absence of motivation to conduct a national Federal program to combat the spread of of the virus. The “red” states reluctant to encourage social distancing, the wearing of a mask in public, expressed fealty to Trump and his reelection to office. The “blue” states offered strong advisement to social distance, to always wear a mask when in public. So, the states have been in competition with each other — the virus has spread unimpeded across state lines. The virus is non-partisan.
Reason in Hegel
astutely asserts itself through
bloody and tortuous events
that turn the daily life of the people
into History,..
— a conceptual map
of the road to our present reality
marked by unremitting violence.
The drive toward totalization
has generated the wreckage
whose effects we are witnessing now,
in the age of Trump,
the age of dementia
fueled by the full realization of reason
in its techno-financial form. p. 57
Truth is revealed at the end
of the historical process
as an effect of conflict and re-composition.
…when modernity’s promise collapses,
when chaos replaces the project of reason
and war replaces the political order,
we leave these spheres of conjunctive concatenation
and historical realization.
At this point
say goodbye to Mr. Hegel
and enter the sphere of computation,
in which reason is not the end point
of the historical process, a telos
pursued by conscious action of men,
but its beginning…
Digital reason replaces historical reason,
and the spiritual necessity of historic realization
is replaced by the mechanical necessity
of a logical machine that
entangles human language and living events. p. 60
excerpt BREATHING Chaos and Poetry
by Franco “Bifo” Berardi
These lines from Berardi’s book are a photograph of our condition in the language of philosophy. The philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel is a format for understanding history as the outcome of struggle. An initial situation is confronted by it’s opposite, there is a clash of realities, then voilà the sound and fury (and blood) of conflict disappears and a “new” reality is born, the embodiment of sweet reason. That is Hegelian dialectic in a nutshell as I understand it. Rationality ultimately wins.
The initial promise of America has not been fulfilled. We have not become a “city set on a hill” as asserted by John Winthrop in 1630. As to the words of Lincoln’s Gettysburg address:
a new nation conceived in liberty, dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Truth be told the inception of our society involved enslavement of peoples imported from Africa and then by genocidal warfare with Indian nations. In our Father’s generation and our own we have witnessed a continued spread of the financialization of the economy, a society defined by the language of finance, where globalized corporations wield more power than the government. “Small business” the much celebrated American ideal is in fact gradually excluded from the marketplace by regulation that favors size. Now, the pandemic causes a severe cut back of cash flow for months to come. We have an uber-wealthy class, the one-percent, — and the rest who are composed of unemployed, or under-employed whites and “essential” workers, educated poorly, ethic citizens without health insurance.
Modernity’s promise collapses. History means conflict, period. As to a realization of the American Century — it didn’t come to pass. Reason, sweet reason does not triumph in the end.
Instead we contemplate accelerating deployment of digital reason, the beginning of a digitally managed society, inhumanly parsed into winners and losers by the algorithms of Apple, Facebook, Google, and Amazon.
Say goodby to Mr. Hegel.
4 thoughts on “Plague Journal, Saying Goodbye To Mr. Hegel”
“Modernity’s promise collapses.”
Jerry, what exactly is the promise of Modernity? And, how many of us accurately and/or fully understand its promise? Is it Modernity’s fault that our misconceptions of it’s promise fail us?
I believe Modernity offers one and only one promise: Change.
Like one of its chief enablers, Technology, Change is amoral. How we react to it and accommodate it determines whether the result brought about by change is good or bad.
Change happens, whether you like it or not, whether you like the instance of the change or not.
People who are nostalgic for the past are trying to prevent themselves from experiencing change. And they are doomed to failure.
This is not the fault or failure of Modernity. It is a failure of human adaptability.
Joe, thank you for the probing question. “What exactly is the promise of Modernity?” My first thought — Modernity is an abstract term which we use as a label for the present, regarded as the culmination of past generations, and their efforts which result in society as we know it. The term is one which connotes “improvement,” the felicity of life with the amenities of antibiotics, iphones, and on-demand streaming television. I am describing how I meant to use the term.
How could I possibly disagree with your assertion that the time in which we live means nothing other than “change.” Indeed it does, as have all eras. Our present means change at warp speed compared with than of prior generations. Have we misunderstood modernity? I agree with you that we have. My post, inspired by the quotation of Franco Berardi is a criticism of Hegel’s manner of characterizing History as improvement, as the advance of well-being resulting from the invincibility of reason.
I share your skepticism about nostalgia for a time past, which as you observe, gets in the way of experiencing the change which envelops us. We are immersed in time, forward movement is inevitable.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me.
Glad to read thought provoking engagement on your posts. With that in mind, I’m adding a couple of cents worth of my own perspective here. I’m not certain that change has always been a part of the human experience. My sense is that change (at least in context of technological and medical innovation) comes in waves over the course of our species’ existence. The greatest “changes” seem to have appeared when our imaginations had the opportunity to ponder our world, much as did the Greeks 2,500 years ago or the advances in technology formulated by the Romans. If one had been born 20,000 years ago or even in 1200 AD, the difference in culture and technology between the time you were born and the time you died would have been negligible. It wasn’t until the Renaissance and the subsequent “Age of Enlightenment” that change became a part of life from generation to generation.
It addition, change is relative to how life was lived when you were a child and what transpired during your lifetime. I look at my grandmother who was born in Paris in 1893. Her father had a transportation company utilizing horse drawn carting. She lived to see us fly, communicate by radio waves, send live images around the world, and take a walk on the moon. I can’t imagine a generation that could have witnessed such monumental change, because it was relative to the specifics of the change that occurred during her time on earth.
We grew up in a world where change was a given. Yes, as Joe pointed out, nostalgia for a different age is tantamount to longing for the impossible (and potentially detrimental), but even during the 50s and 60s change was a part of daily life. One could argue that change itself is woven into the fabric of our existence and that the only major existential change that happen would be if things stopped advancing. If our capabilities froze so that technology or medicine has reached an apex of the possible. I don’t see that happening anytime in the near future, but we are now so inured of how life is different from one day to the next, it is almost commonplace.
“We’re landing on Mars” says science. “YAWN”, says the latest generation, “So what else is new?” OR, “Cancer is cured.” “Yeah?” says a 17 year old, ” It’s about time!”
And so we have indeed become numb to the changes in life, which has been pointed out by many scientists and authors (and on these pages as well) as something of great concern. If we view exponential advances in technology as a ho-hum part of life, then we become blinded to the detrimental portion of these so-called advances. Artificial Intelligence becomes Substitutional Intelligence as our minds become lazier since we have developed machine to help us think. I always go back to the analogy of the cashier at a grocery store (which itself is an archaic term) when they would ring up your purchases because they all knew the prices by heart and had to punch them into the cash register by hand. Now the bar code and the store’s computer does ALL of the thinking. This may be a small diminishment to mention, but to me it is indicative of how we have embraced computer technology over using our minds and personal dexterity.
It all comes down the story of the frog and the boiling water (guessing you are familiar with this). The pace of change is allowing acceptance of the loss of using our minds. Perhaps this is a portion of the problem we are facing today with regard to our inability to communicate across ideological differences; that we’re just not used to using our minds to solve issues of any substance. Anyway, like I said, just a few cents worth of something to consider. Thanks for reading.
Enjoyed your reflection upon “change” as humans have experienced in different points in our history. For most generations in the past I am sure that changes was imperceptible, as no new technology (tools) arrived on the horizon to disrupt the “old ways.”
“Numb” is a good word to describe the effect of technology upon us at this time. Our imaginations are surpassed by what has been introduced by large scale integration of semiconductors. Naturally such “advances” are initially applied in weapons and then reach us as consumer goods. The cell phone was a leap forward, and then came the iphone, a quantum advancement. I agree that in a state of innervation we are hardly able to detect the dark side of these changes. I remember working in a toy store as a high school senior, and all of the skills that were learned, such as making change for customers who payed for nearly all purchases in cash. That world has long receded in the rear view mirror.
Perhaps the change we most need to be focused upon is effect which our high tech tools have upon our mental life. We create reality, do we not, with our minds? As you allude to, if communication ability atrophies will we find ourselves unable to communicate across ideological boundaries? Then what?