(Rituals) Byung-Chul Han: Authenticity is NOT a Virtue, or, How it equates to Narcissism
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 07. 2022
- Reading from + Commentary from The Disappearance of Rituals, Ch. 2
Han has written on topics such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, borderline personality disorder, burnout, depression, exhaustion, internet, love, multitasking, pop culture, power, rationality, religion, social media, subjectivity, tiredness, transparency and violence.
Hello doc! I love your lectures, its really instrumental to my philosophical yearnings. Please keep uploading substantial contents. Truly appreciated your stuff.
You are so kind. Which philosophers' works are you currently enjoying?
@@philosophy_schilling On Byung Chul Han, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Borgmann and other thinkers in Philosophy of Technology. I also like classical thinkers like Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas and Augustine. And a little interest in Structuralism and Semiotics on Saussaure and Barthes.
Great - I concur with all on this list I have read. I am soon going to read Saussure for my class next week and haven't yet read Barthes, but he is on the list for this year. Thanks for the great list!
Extreme authenticity and extreme inauthenticity lends itself to pathological societal outcomes. Narcissistic personality disorder is a pathological set of behaviour, but not all narcissistic traits are pathological, just like antisocial personality traits. Japan and South Korea are extreme examples of this philosophy, and their thoughts on the individual and individual freedoms are, in my opinion, super messed up.
I appreciate your hard work on this.
MC
That is interesting. I hadn't considered one could be "too authentic." What would that look like?
@@philosophy_schillingmy guess is Too authentic looks "German like", machine like, cold. This creates conflicts between people. I used to be an truth extremist on my younger years, I now understand after many life lessons that we cannot ask that from others and we need to sometimes hold the truth for harmony. The upside of being too authentic is that you will grow faster as you can admit that you are wrong so you can correct it, like a machine. 0 and 1
36:25 exactly 👹🌎🩸
3:48 yeah, but how do we know what others want? (its hard enough for us to even know what we ourselves even actually want) (sorry, i hope this wasnt sounding rude or anything. I was just sincerely confused by how one is supposed to make such a judgement)
No worries. I agree. I think that anyone's expression of a subject could potentially reach others and be what some prefer.
@@philosophy_schilling thanks for replying 🙂
Of course!
Hi Doc! Just curious: why?
Basically, I think Han disagrees with the push towards "authenticity" just as anyone might critique "toxic positivity," in that the practice doesn't usually achieve what it is meant to. For Han, authenticity just pressures people to make the private public (relating to transparency) and probably also because he would see it as narcissistic vs. rituals, which require one to die to the ego and perform in community for a collective, liberating goal.
@@philosophy_schilling . Interesting. Thanks.
Isn't the point of philosophy, art, etc, truth and emancipation? If the old 'rituals' no longer suffice, maybe their old emancipatory value is lost, the old rituals cannot serve new problems? Are 'rituals' mean't simply as repetitive acts? Or rituals as in all that casting spells, and magic, etc? If we mean rituals as in community, universal values, in opposition to individualism, there is less that unites people in capitalism. Even the most ordinary relationship between man and woman is revolutionary.
That is a really helpful counterargument to his thesis. Yes, I think that might be one reason the trend is away from from some traditions and rituals. Good point! He would be better then in addressing this and perhaps proposing examples of rituals that are problematic and don’t liberate vs. ones that do. He sort of just makes a blanket statement that remains one-sided.
I've recently come across Han and started with his essay "The Burnout Society'" which I loved.
Regarding rituals, Jonathan Pageau has some interesting comments on how to conceptualize them which might be interesting to you. One example Pageau uses is shaking hands. That is a ritual ladden with meaning. And his argument is to test the validity of it by doing the opposite and seeing how this affects your relationships.
I've found myself listening to your commentary and finding it useful to think about Han's concepts further. Thanks!
@@pambellefleur7588 Thanks so much. That is a great example. I noticed during the pandemic, some people switched to bumping elbows or not doing anything at all. It was really awkward also to not hug people when you might usually. It made me think about as well the assumptions that surround rituals concerning comfort and consent. I know that in France and probably other places, kisses on the cheeks are ritualized.
The point of philosophy is not emancipation, necessarily.
It's not that 'old' rituals no longer suffice, it's that rituals we had are disappearing.
It's that Rituals are repetitive acts, casting of spells, community and values -- all at the same time. Repetion induces mood and reinforces truth, community since individuals is incapable of creating higher value. Not necessarily universal values, but Buyng Chul Han is Christian so it's a combination of universal and particular.
The fact that love is seen as revolutionary just reinforces Han's points about rituals and the loss of love, but even love lacks rituals nowadays. Marriage has no metaphysical importance.
It isn't about "old" rituals vs "new", it is an absence of rituals in general. Haven't watched this video yet so I'm not sure if this is a misunderstanding on your part of hers but what you stated is a complete miscontruing of the text
He compares the 18th century aristocratic fashion and communication patterns with modern day mass society? Why not peasents of 18th with modern mass society? Am i missing something?
That's a good point. If he did such a comparison, what would come to light?
If he were to compare peasants instead would this change the point he was making at all?
Barba non facit philosophum.
Lol. True.
Judging from your comment section you did not convey this text well, which is disappointing because it has such great messages to spread
Thanks for your comment.