By using the capital-C word, I'm indicating the ancient philosophy, not the psychological attitude.
Is the world ready? More important, is the world needing this? My answer here, at Massimo Pigliucci's new philosophy webzine.
That answer is a "yes," with details of how I think we should update Cynicism for today. Click the link for more.
For people unfamiliar with the basics of the philosophy, beyond
perhaps knowing that Diogenes masturbated in public and told Alexander the
Great to get out of his light, the Wikipedia entry has a good summary of base
points:
1. The goal of life is Eudaimonia and mental clarity or lucidity (ἁτυφια) – freedom from τύφος (smoke) which signified ignorance, mindlessness, folly, and conceit.
2. Eudaimonia is achieved by living in accord with Nature as
understood by human reason.
3. τύφος (Arrogance) is caused by false judgments of value,
which cause negative emotions, unnatural desires, and a vicious character.
4. Eudaimonia or human flourishing, depends on
self-sufficiency (αὐτάρκεια), equanimity, arete, love of humanity,
parrhesia and indifference to the vicissitudes of life (ἁδιαφορία).
5. One progresses towards flourishing and clarity through
ascetic practices (ἄσκησις) which help one become free from influences –
such as wealth, fame, or power – that have no value in Nature. Examples include
Diogenes’ practice of living in a tub and walking barefoot in winter.
6. A Cynic practices shamelessness or impudence (Αναιδεια)
and defaces the Nomos of society; the laws, customs, and social conventions
which people take for granted.
The “flourishing” is of course a commonality with most other
ancient Greek philosophies. Point 2 gets back to Massimo’s Stoicism essay on
showing some commonality, and is my point of departure, with a different
assessment of human nature, for neo-Cynicism.
Points 3-6 then spell out how to achieve this … and why —
that the challenging of convention, asceticism and related practices are
designed to produce mental and emotional clarity.
In my comments on the piece in response to others (at least to others who get the difference between the philosophy and the small-c psychology), I responded to one person who asked about what a neo-Cynicism might be for, and not just against, my one-word answer?
Authenticity.
My version of neo-Cynicism should be seen, in part, as being a more pessmistic outgrowth of humanistic psychologies of the 1950s and 1960s.
==
And, for the second time, one of my essays for Massimo has been picked up by 3 Quarks Daily.
In my comments on the piece in response to others (at least to others who get the difference between the philosophy and the small-c psychology), I responded to one person who asked about what a neo-Cynicism might be for, and not just against, my one-word answer?
Authenticity.
My version of neo-Cynicism should be seen, in part, as being a more pessmistic outgrowth of humanistic psychologies of the 1950s and 1960s.
==
And, for the second time, one of my essays for Massimo has been picked up by 3 Quarks Daily.
No comments:
Post a Comment