When Sensory Input Does not Match Expectation
-experience
-our bodies are just part of a feedback loop
-we become aware of a self via mismatches between experiences
Here we are in de Field again, Maro. Tryin to solve de mysteries o’life.
“... cuz like if you don’t have kids then there’s no way for people in society to keep track of you. you could always be a floater, jus goin in and outta organizations. takin what you need and then moving on. Marriage and kids make you get attached to a place, to people, you’re not really able to get up and move on if you have people relying on you for stuff all the time. You have to have security in your job. So you have to stay. You have to compromise, and revolution is not about compromise.”
Sounds like Randt, but i’s actually #20033007, (a.k.a. Chap, and of course, he’s without sponsor). I think I’m gonna try to respond.
“What about hippy parents? They seem to have kids jus fine. Would you say dat dey conformin to da mainstream?”
“Yeah, I guess I just didn think of that.”
“I guess der’s jus different degrees of it. Maybe der kids go to school. But those parents still need a steady source of income. And where’s dat gonna come from, y’know?”
Now I’m startin to sound like Randt. Maybe I should jus move on. For some reason it makes me think o’Schulte’s decision-makers interactin. Backward induction: look ahead, predict and reason back.
I just willed that expression of my own thought.
I dunno, maybe. Maybe. E. Daprati et al. suggests in Cognition 65 (1997) dat schizophrenics “fail to attribute elements arising from their long-term memory, from which they form their goals and plans, to their real origin. The consequence of this failure in monitoring makes them unable to disentangle ‘intentions’ arising from external stimuli, from those generated as a consequence of their own cognitive functioning.”
From what I’ve observed. But what would constitute an intention arisin from external stimuli? Schulte says dat rational agents’hould follow backward induction. An’den he gets into game theory, which isn’too helpful to my situation here.
“Totally.”
“There’s no way o’gettin out of it. There’s nothin you can do about it. I'll probly end up havin a family o’my own some day too, I guess.”
“Hey man, you holdin?”
“Yeah, but only enough for personal.”
Same as it ever was. Bullshit. Fuckin rich, whitebred, punkass. As if he ain’t had enough personal today already. The whole time he’s been talkin he’s been twitchin like hell.
“But Jo D’s got shit fer sure. Go talk to him. He’ll spot you fer sure, if you need ‘im to.”
“Kay.”
As a rational agent myself, I identify Randt as a defector in de last game dat I played wid’him. Of course, in life de number o’games is infinite an’derfore, as a rational agent, Randt can say to himself, “Well, there’s always a chance that this here rational agent that I’m dealin with won’t remember that I defected as a first move in the last game. So, I should try to defect as a first move again.”
“Cuz I'll warn you right now, Jo is going to be feeling sorry for himself, and talking about himself a lot, cause that's basically all he's into at this point. You're jus going to have to put up with it for a while if you wan any shit from‘im. You gotta listen to his sad story first otherwise he won give you the time o’day. I mean it. I seen ‘im wid dat... oh, what’s her name? Dat sorta hippie chick. You know who I’m talkin ‘bout. Anyway, she jus wanted a bit o’pot, but instead o’ jus handin over a baggie, he was goin on an on about all his shit. She was tryin to look interested but I could tell she was just wanting to get the weed an go. But she knew that if she interrupted ‘im she’d get nothin. So, jus keep that in mind, man. Jo D’s got lousy customer relations. I’m tellin ya...”
So, like, Randt could make his first move a completely trustworthy one just in order to fuck you over later on. Schulte’s’olution is dat when an agent is faced wid unexpected behaviour (such as not defectin on de first move) one can attribute dis to a mistake in reasoning. Dis don make too much sense to me. I think I jus don’t understand’e scope o’de discussion or somethin.
“Positive symptoms such as insertion of thought, hallucinations and delusion of control would directly derive from this difficulty.” E. Daprati et al. again from dat same article in Cognition 65 (1997). By 1885, the physiologist, Edouard Brown-Sequard had established a theory of ‘dynamic actions’ in the nervous system. This theory promoted the notion that stimulation of one area of the nervous system could create effects in other areas of the nervous system, “either as ‘dynamogenesis’ (a stimulation of functioning), or as “inhibition” (a lessening of functioning)”. According to Ellenberger, the relation between stimulation and functioning was then applied by psychiatrists to the phenomena of mental disturbances. Pierre Moreau (de Tours) “taught that a mental illness [was] a world of its own, basically different from our world and comparable to the world of dreams, even though its elements were all taken from the real world.” Moreau’s description of this world seems comparable in many ways to the notion of the unconscious that we still have today. In fact, Pierre Janet, one of the pioneers of modern dynamic psychiatry, insisted that his own theory of psychological analysis was originally inspired by Moreau de Tours’ ‘fundamental law of mental illness’. Prosper Despine, an adherent to the earlier school of dynamic psychiatry, regarded ‘psychological automatism’ as the means through which complex and intelligent acts were realized. He believed that such automatism was the product of a living machine, completely devoid of consciousness. Janet’s use of this term entails implications that are somewhat contrary to those encompassed by Despine’s use. The ‘psychological automatism’ that Janet wrote about was “a psychological phenomenon in its own right, always entailing a rudimentary consciousness”. In fact, Janet’s entire thesis seems to revolve around a notion of consciousness that has a dynamic relationship to the unconscious mind.
When the room fills what will that be like?
The crew interfaces with AL every day, other than AL himself they presumably know him better than anyone. Goodman’s point here is that all computers do is shuffle symbols around. And, as of yet, we cannot prove and we have no idea how to prove that we, as humans do anything other than shuffle symbols around. We too, seem to be guided by a formal set of rules, we just don’t know what they are. Indeed, according to Goodman, we may never know how our “endless manipulation of symbols” amounts to anything. But, if reportability is taken as the point of reference for personhood then AL seems to pass that test just fine. adults are
This is the very question
we don’t know when this point arises and we don’t know how it arises
How is it that we take meaning from one another’s words? What is the connection between the words that a person utters and the beliefs that she holds? Donald Davidson asserts that in order to interpret the utterances of a speaker we must assume that most of the beliefs that a speaker holds are true. This principle of charity, held on the part of the interpreter, maximizes the true beliefs that a speaker holds in such a way that a background of massive agreement exists between the interpreter and the speaker. Without such a principle it is very difficult to see how communication could take place. If speaker and interpreter did not have a set of common background assumptions (such as a notion of truth) with which to work, then taking meaning from any sentences uttered would seem impossible.
As an interpreter, how is it that I can be sure that the sentences being uttered by a speaker mean what I understand them to mean? It would seem as though there is little to no justification for assuming that all agents will come up with the same interpretation for any given expression. Indeed, it seems as though the meaning of any person’s given expression will elude even the best of today’s philosophers of language. And yet, we communicate. If the meaning of a sentence isn’t the same for all interpreters, and the same sentence can take on different meanings according to the context in which it is uttered, then it would appear that the interpretation of any given sentence would require something to allow a speaker and an interpreter to agree upon before any sort of communication could take place. Ahhh, but what is communication? Quine asserted that the problem of radical translation occurred whenever two speakers of two different languages attempted to communicate without the aid of any prior translation between their languages. Two such speakers would have no established method of translating each other’s utterances, and so would seem to have no way of determining the meaning of each other’s utterances. In this way, it is difficult to see how translations ever occur between the speakers of different languages. And yet, they do. We’ve been communicating this way for as long as different languages have existed. This sets the bar for communication very low indeed. We are able to gather some sort of meaning from one another’s utterances without being able to speak the same language. Wonderful! Davidson maintains that a similar problem, one that he calls ‘radical interpretation’, occurs between two speakers of the same language. Because we cannot be sure that the meaning of a speaker’s utterance will match the meaning that an interpreter will take, it is necessary to assume that something else must be at work when the process of interpretation takes place. There must be something in place that allows a speaker and an interpreter to assume understanding of one another’s utterances.
Whose nightmare dream is dis? Maybe Prin’s?
I am havin dat dream again. I am even partially realizin dat it is a dream while I am dreamin it. But dat don stop it from happenin. It keeps on playin jus da same.
"Whateva, it don matter. We could see dat new movie, uh..."
Latest chick-flick. What is de latest chick-flick? I am fumblin with a name in my mind an den I got it.
“Da Bridges o’Madison County.”
Long pause. Yes? No?
She bursts out laughin. I guess it was jus too much for her, though I’m not really sure why at first. Is it dat her friends an mine don mix? Maybe even da idea dat I got friends at all? Maybe I shoulda suggested “Evita”. Anyway, at least she’s got a handy excuse ready for me. She says she can’t ‘cause i’s her brother’s girlfriend’s birthday on Saturday an she has to go ‘cause i’s like some sorta family ting or sometin.
“Yeah, I understand. Shit like dat is hard ta get outta. Maybe some other time.”
“Yeah, maybe some other time.”
This writing is very personal. It has become very personal. There is a tight spot between when the medicine ends and the writing starts and when I am lost again. Maybe I bin takin too many drugs, eh Kretschy? Almost done forgot how to write. Almost cut my hair. Ha ha. My legs are sparkling. Maybe I’m about to have a stroke. Maybe the medicine has started again. I don’t picture my memories in this way. I don’t like video recording machines. I like to remember things my way, not the way that they necessarily happen. memories are just other versions of myself waiting to jump off roof tops of the second floor (the reason i don’t go up any higher than that). piece going anywhere? Also my stinky armpits. God. Yeah, I’m realizing that I”m not ok. all those cars pulling up all of my squinting men pullin men offa streets right in front of me. feelin like it never really happened at all. how much of every thing was real at all memories are just my own selves facing in other directions a black abyss. thinks navidson record. thanks alot. so many sirens now. with being nothing. I want my dreams here they come. another drug dealer, someone at my window. guilt lining up at my window frame, the writing lining up at the window of my head. when the police get here i’ll be lining up in the middle of my past cuz i never know what really happened there undercover people pounding on other peoples doors for a search warrant. different floors getting robbed. this is why i live on the second floor, not the third. try and capture it before it disappears. i write all the time. ideas to be heard. And it looks like it’s not going to happen. I should just be content with nothing because i need the light for entertaining myself with my own decreativity. depravity. it’s all there in my head, the nothing. neverending story, navidson record. like i’m playing music with my fingertips, back, bach to hofstadter. now There’s nothing left to do. I think I hate my job. I think I hate my job. I think I need to get a new job, but I really jus don’t feel like it.
some weird kinda intestinal crap
also, ohya, I gave her some chicken... Yeah, I’m talking about you. You’re weird. There’s no way I’m gonna get through a whole head of lettuce. ramp champ, no, more like rat champ. i blame myself for that woman’s death. she died because i was there an did not feel the loss properly. it’s my fault that she died.
I can tell what the people above me are doing, jus based on the shadows that they project on the walls across from me. Just like the cave, that ol’philosopher of human kind.
WHOA! Maro, I think I jus fell asleep again, der. I guess I should go an take a rest or somethin.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Friday, March 16, 2007
Progress Report
PROGRESS REPORT ON Wesbild #20041406
This patient’s deep-seated infection of subcutaneous tissue progressively destroyed fascia and fat, but the skin and muscle was spared. We’ve identified the cause as mixed organisms (aerobic gram-negative bacteria, anaerobes, microaerophiic streptococci) in an open wound contaminated with bowel contents. Within 24 hrs. of the initial lesion tenderness rapidly developed, the erythema changed from red to purple and then to blue. Blisters and bullae containing clear yellow fluid then appeared. On day 7 the line of demarcation became sharply defined, the dead skin began to separate at the margins, revealing an extensive necrosis of the subcutaneous tissue. The patient became dull, unresponsive, and delirious at times. Current Hypostheses Regarding Mechanisms of Shock and Tissue Destruction Caused by Virulent Group A Streptococci. Though the antibiotic selection was critically important, other measures, like prompt, aggressive exploration and debridement of suspected deep-seated S. pyogenes infection was mandatory. The patient had fever and was in excruciating pain. Systemic toxicity would have developed. There was definite evidence of necrotizing fasciitis. If we had waited any longer, surgical debridement would have been too late. Prompt surgical exploration through a small incision, and timely Gram stain of surgically obtained material provided an early and definitive etologic diagnosis. Surgical colleagues were involved early in this case because the infection may have extended to vital areas impossible to debride.
This patient’s deep-seated infection of subcutaneous tissue progressively destroyed fascia and fat, but the skin and muscle was spared. We’ve identified the cause as mixed organisms (aerobic gram-negative bacteria, anaerobes, microaerophiic streptococci) in an open wound contaminated with bowel contents. Within 24 hrs. of the initial lesion tenderness rapidly developed, the erythema changed from red to purple and then to blue. Blisters and bullae containing clear yellow fluid then appeared. On day 7 the line of demarcation became sharply defined, the dead skin began to separate at the margins, revealing an extensive necrosis of the subcutaneous tissue. The patient became dull, unresponsive, and delirious at times. Current Hypostheses Regarding Mechanisms of Shock and Tissue Destruction Caused by Virulent Group A Streptococci. Though the antibiotic selection was critically important, other measures, like prompt, aggressive exploration and debridement of suspected deep-seated S. pyogenes infection was mandatory. The patient had fever and was in excruciating pain. Systemic toxicity would have developed. There was definite evidence of necrotizing fasciitis. If we had waited any longer, surgical debridement would have been too late. Prompt surgical exploration through a small incision, and timely Gram stain of surgically obtained material provided an early and definitive etologic diagnosis. Surgical colleagues were involved early in this case because the infection may have extended to vital areas impossible to debride.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Maro responds:
Here is Prin. She has entered my chamber now. We don’t know what she was like before she entered. But we do remember a first impression. In a university residence there is something called a common room. This is where the young come to flaunt newly acquired mannerisms. I, myself, have mannerisms. And the one that I choose to flaunt is sitting an watching everyone else. She is flitting from lap to lap. I am trying to figure out if she’s got a boyfriend and if he might be correlated to one o’those laps. She finally settles down in the arms of the young woman sittin across from me.
Tonight we are going to a meat market. Prin claims to have no use for meat markets, but neither of us can think of anywhere else to go. We will dance in soft coloured light surrounded by vibrant tones and watchful eyes. She will tell many lies to every man that approaches her. I will stand by and simply nod in dumb-founded silence. These are the times that we have had, and I continue to cherish them. No matter what anyone says.
On the dance floor, once she’s had several drinks to get her going, she will grab my arm and pull me close. This is when I’m supposed to know that i’s appropriate for me to dance with her in celebration of sexy girlishness. But I always fail the test, not likin to be touched by anyone, in this way, in public. I’s unfortunate. I can feel her disappointment. She wans to attract as many eyes as possible. She needs this glamour and I failed her once again. The weakest link, she’ll say afterwards.
In the cab home she is tellin the driver all about how she grew up in the Pane and Pinch hood. I find the whole story very amusing. The truth is that Prin grew up on the ultimately right side of the tracks. Her parents worked very, very hard to set their palace up there and buy her Christian Dior baby clothes and send her to this uppity private school downtown.
Prin is with her highschool cronies. They have cut class again. They are cruising in Melody’s parents’ Beamer. The dare is: drive up to the corner of Pane and Pinch, open the door, and TOUCH THE GROUND. giggle giggle. When this mission is accomplished the Beamer peals off again, leavin the poverty-stricken mess in the dust.
Prin is combing her hair. She got curlies coming out from behind every ear.
“Are you ready to go?” she says.
At first I don’t hear. I’m too busy scoping out her record collection, none of which she listens to. She has decked me out in ribbons and bows and garters tonight. For this I will never forgive her. Some day I’ll get her back, but not now. Night time is her time, afterall.
“Yeah. Yes. Can I borrow the John Tesh remix some day?”
“Only if you promise to bring it back.”
“Don’t I always?” I am grinning as I say this.
We are surrounded by blue in her tower tonight. She says she’s “been blue” for some time now. Though I know she just put this colour up last week.
“No, really. You have to bring it back. My father bought it for me.”
Her father bought everything for her, ‘cept for the stuff that her mother bought for her.
“And no scratches or anything this time.”
“What the hell are you talking bout?” I almost added ‘bitch’ there, but decided that wouldn’t be a good idea. She’s been blue lately, she’d probably start crying or something.
“I’m talkin bout dat Liz Phair disc that I lent you a while ago. D’one dat now has a skip in it.”
Crazy bitch. She can get real gawdam pissy when she wants.
“And I s’pose that’s all my fault.”
“That’s not what I’m saying. I’m just saying that it’s a pretty strange coincidence that when I finally get it back from you it turns out to have a skip in it that it did not have before I lent it to you.”
“Whateva.”
What does she care? She can jus go ask her daddy to buy her another one. Prin once got a job all by herself. It was tough work, but she pulled it off. She actually asserted some independence for a whole summer. Got herself her own place. I even lived with her for a while there. Well, I guess it was more like I crashed on her couch a lotta the time. But I did help out with the rent. Why did her parents expect her to live at home anyway? Because they needed her. They needed to give her orders in person, feed her, wash her, and fuck her over on a regular basis. This is what she refused to keep going along with. I remember I once stayed over at their palace. I slept on a leather couch in their entertainment room. She was very worried that her grandfather would “wake me up” in the morning. “He’s so loud,” she said, wrinkling up her nose. But he never laid a sonoric hand on me. She seemed surprised by this, and still preferred me to sleep with her up in the loft.
Ready TO Hand versus Ready AT Hand:
Are you ahead of yourself? Perhaps your care is expressing itself through your ‘I’ function. “In terms of care the constancy of the Self, as the supposed persistence of the subjectum, gets clarified.”
Yeah, ok, Maro. I know my Heidegger.
“But the phenomenon of this authentic potentiality-for-Being also opens our eyes for the constancy of the Self in the sense of its having achieved some sort of position.”
Yeah, I know de passage you’re talkin bout Maro. Being and Time is Being and Time is Being and Time. Tell me, does this postmodern shit help you out any?
...
I didn’t’hink so.
“The constancy of the Self, in the double sense of steadiness and steadfastness, is the authentic counter-possibility to the non-Self-constancy which is characteristic of irresolute falling.”
“Existentially, ‘Self constancy’ signifies nothing other than anticipatory resoluteness.”
What are you tryin to say, Maro. I know all bout authenticity.
Essentially, Dasein is a being for whom Being is an issue. This issue becomes lost in the shuffle of its average-everday life. In order to live an authentic life Dasein must own up to its existence. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with living inauthentically. Heidegger does not view an inauthentic life as sinful or as containing a type of inherent evil1. This is mainly due to the fact that those who are living an inauthentic life are for the most part doing so unknowingly. A Dasein that is fully immersed in the They has no idea that anything is wrong. The moment before death (when Dasein alone, is inescapably confronted with the finiteness of its own Being and the groundlessness of its existence) might bring about a sudden revelation of mineness that will expose the veil of inauthenticity. The inauthentic Dasein will come to the realization that all actions and decisions up to that point were made in relation to a They that is really no one at all. This Dasein will have a couple seconds of anguish and then it will be over. Where the real trouble lies is with the capacitated, full-life-ahead-of-it Dasein that somehow catches a brief glimpse of the veil or becomes fully aware of the veil of the They (perhaps during a mid-life crisis, or through reading Being and Time). This Dasein is then cursed with the difficult task of establishing an authentic existence in the face of the They, for once the veil is revealed Dasein is faced with the conscious choice of living behind it. The real sin lies not in the losing of the Self (for that is inevitable) but in the choosing of an inauthentic life over an authentic one.
In this essay I am going to examine Dasein’s journey into authenticity. Heidegger sets up a trajectory for Dasein that tracks a ‘fall’ into inauthentic living and a consequent redemption that lifts it back up again. I will be treating Heidegger’s description as a narrative in which Dasein is the star. We will start off with Dasein’s Relation to Others, and end with my own personal notion of Full-blown Authenticity, in all of its glory. Along the way we will be stopping off at Empathy, Anxiety, and Anticipation. We will also be spending a fair amount of time in the They’s Evasion of Death (it’s not as bad as it seems). By addressing these issues in a benign, trite fashion I hope to neutralize some of the negative associations that accompany the terms used in Heidegger’s description of inauthentic living. I will attempt to demonstrate that while Heidegger places negative connotations on the They, these do not necessarily translate over to the They-Self. It is only the authentic Dasein (or a Dasein on its way to authenticity) that can deem the inauthentic life as non-preferential.
We will begin with Dasein’s “Being-with towards others”2. It’s difficult to discern at what point exactly Dasein loses itself to inauthenticity. Heidegger seems to trace it to the moment when Dasein must take up a stance with regards to the Other. We can assume that this would be fairly early on in life. Dasein becomes inauthentic by default, not necessarily by choice. Dasein has no choice but to be with others and this Being-with constitutes its worldhood3. When Dasein originally encounters another Dasein there is a type of empathy that takes place. Dasein sees another Dasein and projects itself on to that Other. It can be argued that once Dasein is able to recognize itself, this type of projection happens between two Daseins as an immediate, knee-jerk type of reaction. Heidegger takes care to emphasize that, “empathy does not first constitute Being-with”4, however this could prove to be a point of contention. In any case, to Heidegger empathy serves to mask Dasein’s true self from itself. Dasein’s concern towards others becomes its downfall. Dasein’s genuine understanding of itself is distorted as it takes refuge in its projection on to the Other.
The merging point with the They occurs when Dasein can no longer refer to itself, when it must continually refer to the They as a source. By this time Dasein has already taken up a stance of distantiality with regards to itself. Its own feelings and thoughts have become mediated by the They. Dasein has now become the They-self, it is fully immersed in the world of concerns5. The veil has been lowered.
Inside the They-self
While Heidegger is careful to maintain that inauthenticity is not a ‘lower’ degree of Being he does not give a very favorable description of what it’s like to be inside the They:
Every kind of priority gets noiselessly suppressed. Overnight, everything that is primordial
gets glossed over as something that has long been well known. Everything gained by a
struggle becomes just something to be manipulated. Every secret loses its force.
Being and Time, p. 165
From this passage we can discern that Heidegger holds a particular disdain for the They. Publicness dogs Dasein’s everydayness and continually levels all genuine feelings down to “something familiar and accessible to everyone”. This includes every goal that Dasein may strive for and every judgment that Dasein makes, for all possibilities for Being have already been pre-ordained by the They. The biggest irony is that the They is really no one at all. The They wrestles away all of Dasein’s accountability and yet remains unaccountable itself. Dasein in all its everydayness has entrusted its care over to the They who is actually no on in particular, so that just about everything that Dasein achieves by the end of the day has really been accomplished by nobody. This may seem like a bad thing, but by this point Dasein has completely forgotten about itself anyway. It has no idea that it’s lost anything. In fact, the very innocuousness of the They is what keeps its incredible hold on the inauthentic Dasein. It is through Dasein’s own ignorance that the They maintains its dominion.
The pinnacle achievement of the They and at the same time its own downfall is its comportment towards death. The They pushes the event of death away from Dasein with a vengeance. The They treats death with the same irreverence that it treats everything else. It is always occurring somewhere else, to someone else. It has no particular relevance to any one Dasein. While it is an unalterable fact that we will all die some day, the They is very good at making sure that death remains just an unalterable fact and not a reality that is to be owned-up to. This is perhaps because death is the one event that will not allow a substitution. No one (particularly a nobody like They) can take on Dasein’s death for it. Death is the point at which the They terminates. It is completely non-relational and completely unavoidable. This is what the They is trying to conceal. The They “provides a constant tranquilization about death”7. This is less for the sake of the Dasein that dies and more for the sake of the Dasein who is left behind. Those who die have no need to be consoled about death, it is only those who must constantly live in the face of it that require consolation. The They administers this consolation by removing the face of death. The inauthentic Dasein falls through life never really knowing death. The They ensures “an untroubled indifference towards the uttermost possibility of existence” for Dasein, so that it might live on as though death were not an immediate concern. The They relieves Dasein of its own feelings towards death.
Anxiety becomes the Saving Grace
Every inauthentic Dasein carries around within it the seed for redemption. How can Dasein find its way out of the They-self? In order to live authentically, Dasein must stop looking through the veil of the They and instead hold it up for scrutiny. What agent could possibly allow Dasein to become aware of the mediation of the They? If we were to view the journey into authenticity as an alchemical transformation the catalyst would be death and the reagent would be anxiety. As an indeterminate mood anxiety reveals to Dasein the uncertainty of its own death. Fear can be attributed to the They’s superficial concept of death, but because anxiety has no direct cause Dasein is forced to search for its source. Anxiety pokes a hole in the veil of the They. It whispers into Dasein’s ear and tells it that the They is hiding something. An element of incompletion is introduced and dwelled upon. Dasein is in a mood. Suddenly, something is missing. Dasein has forgotten something. What could it be? It is at this point that the They’s hold on Dasein could begin to loosen, for once it starts on a search of this nature there will be no consoling Dasein. This is the moment of purgatory for Dasein. It has caught a glimpse of the They that it cannot ever forget, and yet Dasein has not set upon the path of authenticity. While there is nothing wrong with inauthentic living for the They-self, a Dasein that has been lifted out of the They-self can never be completely immersed into it again. This is when the sin occurs. Unless anxiety is unleashed it will never occur to the They-self that there even is a veil of the They. Once anxiety has illuminated the veil Dasein can’t help but see it. Dasein now has the choice to attempt to lose itself back in the They or to attempt to push the veil aside. Why would any self-respecting Dasein choose the They after having glimpsed the veil? Because death is waiting on the other side of that veil. The They offers an easy out to death. Dasein can rest in the certainty that death is coming but it’s still a long way off. Authentic Being does not allow this. Death is occupying the immediate space on the other side of that veil, and yet no matter how close the living Dasein gets to it s/he can never know it. Death is the inauthentic Dasein’s missing piece, but remains itself incomplete for the duration of life. It’s not until death that Dasein will ever completely tear the veil of the They away. Dasein must always concern itself with its Being-with towards others. The only difference between the authentic and the inauthentic Dasein is knowledge. Authentic Dasein possesses immediate knowledge of death and therefore immediate knowledge of self because it is keenly aware of its own potentiality for Being. The inauthentic Dasein lives towards the end but does so in ignorance. The They-self only knows the They, it has no idea what it’s missing.
Anticipation=Emancipation
In order for Dasein to be authentic Heidegger advises Dasein to essentially carry death around on his or her shoulder. Instead of gliding toward it inadvertently as the They advocates, Dasein should take death up, hold it close and never let it stray too far from Being. In short, anticipation of death allows Dasein the ultimate mineness. By carrying death around Dasein will never lose sight of its own potentiality of Being. Dasein lives authentically by holding-for-true the projection of itself towards death (rather than on to the Other). Death acts as the catalyst that can unlock Dasein’s true self. Dasein is born into life and it is certain that Dasein will die out of it. Dasein could go at any moment. Death serves as a strong reminder of the They. Death tells Dasein that existence is groundless. Meaning can only be found in Dasein’s own genuine thoughts and feelings, not in the herd mentality of the They. The non-relational aspects of death will force Dasein to take a stance towards mineness. Dasein will also have to address the possibility of the ultimate loss of its mineness, the ultimate loss of Self.
Heidegger warns against brooding about death. There is nothing that we can do to prepare for it. On the other hand, we cannot dismiss death as something that is certainly on its way. It is out of our control and yet it remains a constant possibility. The very fact that death is always a possibility should open up all the possibilities that Dasein has for living. Indeed, death is the end of all possibility with regards to existence. The authentic Dasein can use this to disclose its “ownmost potentiality-for-Being”8. In this way Dasein can carry on with its everyday activities but with a keen awareness of its Being and the ever-present possibilities for Being. That is all that authenticity is. There is no inherent good contained in it. An authentic Dasein simply comports itself differently towards existence.
The end result of this alchemical transformation may or may not be gold. Who is to be the judge? The redeemed Dasein is still subject to all of the pain and suffering that an inauthentic Dasein will be exposed to. The only difference is that the authentic Dasein has a mechanism other than the They to cope with it. The only Dasein that views the They-self as a non-preferential state is an authentic Dasein. Heidegger even goes so far as to suggest that the authentic Dasein could take up the cause of liberating others from the They-self as a form of authentic care. However, if existence is groundless anyway then what duty would any authentic Dasein have to an inauthentic Dasein, or to any Dasein for that matter? Who can objectively say that living authentically is any better than living inauthentically? At the end of the day Dasein is either surrendering itself over to a faceless They or a groundless Being.
...
Well, so what? I’s’posed to make me feel better that I’m suddenly more HUMAN jus because I’m doubting the contents of my own self. Big fuckin deal. As if Kretschmar would ever care. Dat would jus be another notch in her belt of acheivements. Who cares bout bein human. I fuckin hate humans. They’re a disgustin lot.
...
...
Here is Prin. She has entered my chamber now. We don’t know what she was like before she entered. But we do remember a first impression. In a university residence there is something called a common room. This is where the young come to flaunt newly acquired mannerisms. I, myself, have mannerisms. And the one that I choose to flaunt is sitting an watching everyone else. She is flitting from lap to lap. I am trying to figure out if she’s got a boyfriend and if he might be correlated to one o’those laps. She finally settles down in the arms of the young woman sittin across from me.
Tonight we are going to a meat market. Prin claims to have no use for meat markets, but neither of us can think of anywhere else to go. We will dance in soft coloured light surrounded by vibrant tones and watchful eyes. She will tell many lies to every man that approaches her. I will stand by and simply nod in dumb-founded silence. These are the times that we have had, and I continue to cherish them. No matter what anyone says.
On the dance floor, once she’s had several drinks to get her going, she will grab my arm and pull me close. This is when I’m supposed to know that i’s appropriate for me to dance with her in celebration of sexy girlishness. But I always fail the test, not likin to be touched by anyone, in this way, in public. I’s unfortunate. I can feel her disappointment. She wans to attract as many eyes as possible. She needs this glamour and I failed her once again. The weakest link, she’ll say afterwards.
In the cab home she is tellin the driver all about how she grew up in the Pane and Pinch hood. I find the whole story very amusing. The truth is that Prin grew up on the ultimately right side of the tracks. Her parents worked very, very hard to set their palace up there and buy her Christian Dior baby clothes and send her to this uppity private school downtown.
Prin is with her highschool cronies. They have cut class again. They are cruising in Melody’s parents’ Beamer. The dare is: drive up to the corner of Pane and Pinch, open the door, and TOUCH THE GROUND. giggle giggle. When this mission is accomplished the Beamer peals off again, leavin the poverty-stricken mess in the dust.
Prin is combing her hair. She got curlies coming out from behind every ear.
“Are you ready to go?” she says.
At first I don’t hear. I’m too busy scoping out her record collection, none of which she listens to. She has decked me out in ribbons and bows and garters tonight. For this I will never forgive her. Some day I’ll get her back, but not now. Night time is her time, afterall.
“Yeah. Yes. Can I borrow the John Tesh remix some day?”
“Only if you promise to bring it back.”
“Don’t I always?” I am grinning as I say this.
We are surrounded by blue in her tower tonight. She says she’s “been blue” for some time now. Though I know she just put this colour up last week.
“No, really. You have to bring it back. My father bought it for me.”
Her father bought everything for her, ‘cept for the stuff that her mother bought for her.
“And no scratches or anything this time.”
“What the hell are you talking bout?” I almost added ‘bitch’ there, but decided that wouldn’t be a good idea. She’s been blue lately, she’d probably start crying or something.
“I’m talkin bout dat Liz Phair disc that I lent you a while ago. D’one dat now has a skip in it.”
Crazy bitch. She can get real gawdam pissy when she wants.
“And I s’pose that’s all my fault.”
“That’s not what I’m saying. I’m just saying that it’s a pretty strange coincidence that when I finally get it back from you it turns out to have a skip in it that it did not have before I lent it to you.”
“Whateva.”
What does she care? She can jus go ask her daddy to buy her another one. Prin once got a job all by herself. It was tough work, but she pulled it off. She actually asserted some independence for a whole summer. Got herself her own place. I even lived with her for a while there. Well, I guess it was more like I crashed on her couch a lotta the time. But I did help out with the rent. Why did her parents expect her to live at home anyway? Because they needed her. They needed to give her orders in person, feed her, wash her, and fuck her over on a regular basis. This is what she refused to keep going along with. I remember I once stayed over at their palace. I slept on a leather couch in their entertainment room. She was very worried that her grandfather would “wake me up” in the morning. “He’s so loud,” she said, wrinkling up her nose. But he never laid a sonoric hand on me. She seemed surprised by this, and still preferred me to sleep with her up in the loft.
Ready TO Hand versus Ready AT Hand:
Are you ahead of yourself? Perhaps your care is expressing itself through your ‘I’ function. “In terms of care the constancy of the Self, as the supposed persistence of the subjectum, gets clarified.”
Yeah, ok, Maro. I know my Heidegger.
“But the phenomenon of this authentic potentiality-for-Being also opens our eyes for the constancy of the Self in the sense of its having achieved some sort of position.”
Yeah, I know de passage you’re talkin bout Maro. Being and Time is Being and Time is Being and Time. Tell me, does this postmodern shit help you out any?
...
I didn’t’hink so.
“The constancy of the Self, in the double sense of steadiness and steadfastness, is the authentic counter-possibility to the non-Self-constancy which is characteristic of irresolute falling.”
“Existentially, ‘Self constancy’ signifies nothing other than anticipatory resoluteness.”
What are you tryin to say, Maro. I know all bout authenticity.
Essentially, Dasein is a being for whom Being is an issue. This issue becomes lost in the shuffle of its average-everday life. In order to live an authentic life Dasein must own up to its existence. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with living inauthentically. Heidegger does not view an inauthentic life as sinful or as containing a type of inherent evil1. This is mainly due to the fact that those who are living an inauthentic life are for the most part doing so unknowingly. A Dasein that is fully immersed in the They has no idea that anything is wrong. The moment before death (when Dasein alone, is inescapably confronted with the finiteness of its own Being and the groundlessness of its existence) might bring about a sudden revelation of mineness that will expose the veil of inauthenticity. The inauthentic Dasein will come to the realization that all actions and decisions up to that point were made in relation to a They that is really no one at all. This Dasein will have a couple seconds of anguish and then it will be over. Where the real trouble lies is with the capacitated, full-life-ahead-of-it Dasein that somehow catches a brief glimpse of the veil or becomes fully aware of the veil of the They (perhaps during a mid-life crisis, or through reading Being and Time). This Dasein is then cursed with the difficult task of establishing an authentic existence in the face of the They, for once the veil is revealed Dasein is faced with the conscious choice of living behind it. The real sin lies not in the losing of the Self (for that is inevitable) but in the choosing of an inauthentic life over an authentic one.
In this essay I am going to examine Dasein’s journey into authenticity. Heidegger sets up a trajectory for Dasein that tracks a ‘fall’ into inauthentic living and a consequent redemption that lifts it back up again. I will be treating Heidegger’s description as a narrative in which Dasein is the star. We will start off with Dasein’s Relation to Others, and end with my own personal notion of Full-blown Authenticity, in all of its glory. Along the way we will be stopping off at Empathy, Anxiety, and Anticipation. We will also be spending a fair amount of time in the They’s Evasion of Death (it’s not as bad as it seems). By addressing these issues in a benign, trite fashion I hope to neutralize some of the negative associations that accompany the terms used in Heidegger’s description of inauthentic living. I will attempt to demonstrate that while Heidegger places negative connotations on the They, these do not necessarily translate over to the They-Self. It is only the authentic Dasein (or a Dasein on its way to authenticity) that can deem the inauthentic life as non-preferential.
We will begin with Dasein’s “Being-with towards others”2. It’s difficult to discern at what point exactly Dasein loses itself to inauthenticity. Heidegger seems to trace it to the moment when Dasein must take up a stance with regards to the Other. We can assume that this would be fairly early on in life. Dasein becomes inauthentic by default, not necessarily by choice. Dasein has no choice but to be with others and this Being-with constitutes its worldhood3. When Dasein originally encounters another Dasein there is a type of empathy that takes place. Dasein sees another Dasein and projects itself on to that Other. It can be argued that once Dasein is able to recognize itself, this type of projection happens between two Daseins as an immediate, knee-jerk type of reaction. Heidegger takes care to emphasize that, “empathy does not first constitute Being-with”4, however this could prove to be a point of contention. In any case, to Heidegger empathy serves to mask Dasein’s true self from itself. Dasein’s concern towards others becomes its downfall. Dasein’s genuine understanding of itself is distorted as it takes refuge in its projection on to the Other.
The merging point with the They occurs when Dasein can no longer refer to itself, when it must continually refer to the They as a source. By this time Dasein has already taken up a stance of distantiality with regards to itself. Its own feelings and thoughts have become mediated by the They. Dasein has now become the They-self, it is fully immersed in the world of concerns5. The veil has been lowered.
Inside the They-self
While Heidegger is careful to maintain that inauthenticity is not a ‘lower’ degree of Being he does not give a very favorable description of what it’s like to be inside the They:
Every kind of priority gets noiselessly suppressed. Overnight, everything that is primordial
gets glossed over as something that has long been well known. Everything gained by a
struggle becomes just something to be manipulated. Every secret loses its force.
Being and Time, p. 165
From this passage we can discern that Heidegger holds a particular disdain for the They. Publicness dogs Dasein’s everydayness and continually levels all genuine feelings down to “something familiar and accessible to everyone”. This includes every goal that Dasein may strive for and every judgment that Dasein makes, for all possibilities for Being have already been pre-ordained by the They. The biggest irony is that the They is really no one at all. The They wrestles away all of Dasein’s accountability and yet remains unaccountable itself. Dasein in all its everydayness has entrusted its care over to the They who is actually no on in particular, so that just about everything that Dasein achieves by the end of the day has really been accomplished by nobody. This may seem like a bad thing, but by this point Dasein has completely forgotten about itself anyway. It has no idea that it’s lost anything. In fact, the very innocuousness of the They is what keeps its incredible hold on the inauthentic Dasein. It is through Dasein’s own ignorance that the They maintains its dominion.
The pinnacle achievement of the They and at the same time its own downfall is its comportment towards death. The They pushes the event of death away from Dasein with a vengeance. The They treats death with the same irreverence that it treats everything else. It is always occurring somewhere else, to someone else. It has no particular relevance to any one Dasein. While it is an unalterable fact that we will all die some day, the They is very good at making sure that death remains just an unalterable fact and not a reality that is to be owned-up to. This is perhaps because death is the one event that will not allow a substitution. No one (particularly a nobody like They) can take on Dasein’s death for it. Death is the point at which the They terminates. It is completely non-relational and completely unavoidable. This is what the They is trying to conceal. The They “provides a constant tranquilization about death”7. This is less for the sake of the Dasein that dies and more for the sake of the Dasein who is left behind. Those who die have no need to be consoled about death, it is only those who must constantly live in the face of it that require consolation. The They administers this consolation by removing the face of death. The inauthentic Dasein falls through life never really knowing death. The They ensures “an untroubled indifference towards the uttermost possibility of existence” for Dasein, so that it might live on as though death were not an immediate concern. The They relieves Dasein of its own feelings towards death.
Anxiety becomes the Saving Grace
Every inauthentic Dasein carries around within it the seed for redemption. How can Dasein find its way out of the They-self? In order to live authentically, Dasein must stop looking through the veil of the They and instead hold it up for scrutiny. What agent could possibly allow Dasein to become aware of the mediation of the They? If we were to view the journey into authenticity as an alchemical transformation the catalyst would be death and the reagent would be anxiety. As an indeterminate mood anxiety reveals to Dasein the uncertainty of its own death. Fear can be attributed to the They’s superficial concept of death, but because anxiety has no direct cause Dasein is forced to search for its source. Anxiety pokes a hole in the veil of the They. It whispers into Dasein’s ear and tells it that the They is hiding something. An element of incompletion is introduced and dwelled upon. Dasein is in a mood. Suddenly, something is missing. Dasein has forgotten something. What could it be? It is at this point that the They’s hold on Dasein could begin to loosen, for once it starts on a search of this nature there will be no consoling Dasein. This is the moment of purgatory for Dasein. It has caught a glimpse of the They that it cannot ever forget, and yet Dasein has not set upon the path of authenticity. While there is nothing wrong with inauthentic living for the They-self, a Dasein that has been lifted out of the They-self can never be completely immersed into it again. This is when the sin occurs. Unless anxiety is unleashed it will never occur to the They-self that there even is a veil of the They. Once anxiety has illuminated the veil Dasein can’t help but see it. Dasein now has the choice to attempt to lose itself back in the They or to attempt to push the veil aside. Why would any self-respecting Dasein choose the They after having glimpsed the veil? Because death is waiting on the other side of that veil. The They offers an easy out to death. Dasein can rest in the certainty that death is coming but it’s still a long way off. Authentic Being does not allow this. Death is occupying the immediate space on the other side of that veil, and yet no matter how close the living Dasein gets to it s/he can never know it. Death is the inauthentic Dasein’s missing piece, but remains itself incomplete for the duration of life. It’s not until death that Dasein will ever completely tear the veil of the They away. Dasein must always concern itself with its Being-with towards others. The only difference between the authentic and the inauthentic Dasein is knowledge. Authentic Dasein possesses immediate knowledge of death and therefore immediate knowledge of self because it is keenly aware of its own potentiality for Being. The inauthentic Dasein lives towards the end but does so in ignorance. The They-self only knows the They, it has no idea what it’s missing.
Anticipation=Emancipation
In order for Dasein to be authentic Heidegger advises Dasein to essentially carry death around on his or her shoulder. Instead of gliding toward it inadvertently as the They advocates, Dasein should take death up, hold it close and never let it stray too far from Being. In short, anticipation of death allows Dasein the ultimate mineness. By carrying death around Dasein will never lose sight of its own potentiality of Being. Dasein lives authentically by holding-for-true the projection of itself towards death (rather than on to the Other). Death acts as the catalyst that can unlock Dasein’s true self. Dasein is born into life and it is certain that Dasein will die out of it. Dasein could go at any moment. Death serves as a strong reminder of the They. Death tells Dasein that existence is groundless. Meaning can only be found in Dasein’s own genuine thoughts and feelings, not in the herd mentality of the They. The non-relational aspects of death will force Dasein to take a stance towards mineness. Dasein will also have to address the possibility of the ultimate loss of its mineness, the ultimate loss of Self.
Heidegger warns against brooding about death. There is nothing that we can do to prepare for it. On the other hand, we cannot dismiss death as something that is certainly on its way. It is out of our control and yet it remains a constant possibility. The very fact that death is always a possibility should open up all the possibilities that Dasein has for living. Indeed, death is the end of all possibility with regards to existence. The authentic Dasein can use this to disclose its “ownmost potentiality-for-Being”8. In this way Dasein can carry on with its everyday activities but with a keen awareness of its Being and the ever-present possibilities for Being. That is all that authenticity is. There is no inherent good contained in it. An authentic Dasein simply comports itself differently towards existence.
The end result of this alchemical transformation may or may not be gold. Who is to be the judge? The redeemed Dasein is still subject to all of the pain and suffering that an inauthentic Dasein will be exposed to. The only difference is that the authentic Dasein has a mechanism other than the They to cope with it. The only Dasein that views the They-self as a non-preferential state is an authentic Dasein. Heidegger even goes so far as to suggest that the authentic Dasein could take up the cause of liberating others from the They-self as a form of authentic care. However, if existence is groundless anyway then what duty would any authentic Dasein have to an inauthentic Dasein, or to any Dasein for that matter? Who can objectively say that living authentically is any better than living inauthentically? At the end of the day Dasein is either surrendering itself over to a faceless They or a groundless Being.
...
Well, so what? I’s’posed to make me feel better that I’m suddenly more HUMAN jus because I’m doubting the contents of my own self. Big fuckin deal. As if Kretschmar would ever care. Dat would jus be another notch in her belt of acheivements. Who cares bout bein human. I fuckin hate humans. They’re a disgustin lot.
...
...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)