Mark Stahlman (via RadioMail) on Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:06:28 +0100 (MET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Castration and Power |
Eric (et al): Thanks for taking the time to reply to my "How Do We Get Out of This Mess?" post. I had hoped that you would (knowing that your book is on related topics) and I'm encouraged that you aren't too "exhausted" to take up where we left off. >From our first meeting on the plane to Budapest, I have felt much affection for you and I'm sorry if it appeared that I viewed you as an "enemy" or our conversation as an "attack." Such has never occured to me -- except in rhetorical terms, perhaps. <g> On the otherhand, we could discuss Mark Dery . . . nah, let's not. So, let us reason together. "We are stardust We are Golden Billion year old carbon Caught in the devil's bargain And we got to get ourselves Back to the garden" -- Joni Mitchell, refrain from "Woodstock", 1969 What was Joni Mitchell singing about? Which garden? Which devil? Which bargain? And, how will we get ourselves back to it? The garden was the Garden of Eden. The devil is Satan. The bargain is that we will became "as Gods" by eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It's all there in Genesis. And, the only way to return to the garden only by "forgetting" that knowledge and, therefore, renouncing our own humanity. But, is this Gnostic? Or, is it pagan? Or, is it both? In as much as this exchange is the continuation of the "English Ideology" effort, I should re-emphasize the central focus of the discussion. What we are trying to do here is to identify essential differences and essential congruencies. This is otherwise what has been refered to as the Yin/Yang principle. In other contexts it has been called the "unity of opposites." Or, call it the love/hate relationship, if you wish. Neo-gnosticism and neo-paganism are *essentially* the same as each other because they are built on the same premises, despite their apparent opposition -- or, as Eric has stressed *diametric opposition*. Both are attempts to annihilate humanity -- where humanity is precisely as it is described in Genesis. By coming to know the difference between good and evil, we became human with all that this entails. By trying to forget this knowledge -- or by elevating ourselves above it -- we become inhuman. By attempting to become pre-conscious (pagan) or super-conscious (gnostic), we accomplish the same end of denying our humanity. Nature worship (the motive behind Lanier's "Stewards" and the principle synthetic religion of our post-modern times) and Nature "hatred" as expressed in the complete insanity of the "Extropians" are essentially the same -- as Lanier understood. They are the Yin/Yang of a techno-utopian New Dark Age. Willfully forgetting our knowledge of good and evil is simply what is known theologically as Original Sin. It doesn't matter whether the expression is "Level Above Human" from Heaven's Gate or "to be as Gods" in the original formulation for the Whole Earth or "Knowledge is Power" from Francis Bacon. In all cases it is the denial of our humanity -- the condition of the knowledge of good and evil, or moral order -- which is congruent. These all express the same essential condition despite the particular (even apparently dichotomous) manifestations. And, yes, rejection of the notion of Original Sin was the *only* dogmatic requirement for H.G. Wells' first fictional representation of the Open Conspiracy -- the New Samurai in "A Modern Utopia". The principles which I'm describing have been codified long before we were born. I am an unabashed authoritarian. By this I simply mean that I recognise the crucial existence of authority which supercedes my will. Moral order is that authority. Just because "authoritarian" was redefined by the Frankfurt School in 1949 (i.e. "The Authoritarian Personality") to connote anti-Semite and proto-Nazi in order to lay the foundation for Social Psychology doesn't phase me except to identify this entire effort as highly problematic. And, it shouldn't phase you, either. There is no honest, human alternative but to be an authoritarian. Liberation from authority means slavery to ignorance. Freedom only exists as a result of its relationship to lawfulness or neccessity. "In intellectual life there are only two fundamental transactions. One can subordinate desire to the truth or subordinate the truth to desire." -- Micheal Jones, "Degenerate Moderns" (page 256) Either one attempts to impose their own will on Nature or one accepts the truth as demonstrated by Nature and lives by that truth in practice. This is the essential difference in all we have been discussing and, I firmly believe that, understanding this distinction is crucial to solving the dilemma that was originally posed (i.e. how do we get out of this mess?). Forget trying to figure out how tightly I construe "causality and control." It's not there in any of my essays. I am not a conspiracy theorist any more that I am a chaos theorist. These are the Yin/Yang of post-modern attitudes about history and human affairs. I reject their common ground and I reject the powerlessness which they both resolve into. I will not allow myself to be castrated by the post-modern drugs coursing through our watersupplies. Eight of the eighteen males at the Heaven's Gate mass suicide were surgically castrated. They no doubt believed that this gave them enormous power over their bodies. Is a barbell through one's clitoris any different? (Okay, I'm sure it does feel different.) What Re-Search called the "New Primitive" is merely another attempt to deny one's humanity and to return to the "garden." Mass suicide is its only definitive outcome of philosophical castration. As C.S. Lewis detailed in his brilliant 1947 essay, "The Abolition of Man", the attempt to conquer Nature through the development of genetic and psychological tools to "perfect" humanity -- when pursued under the condition of rejection of what he called the "Tao" (again synonomous with moral order) -- can only lead to the complete conquering of humanity by Nature. The result of social engineering (the motive social force in post-modernity) will be to engineer away humanity -- just as Joni Mitchell apparently wished. The knowledge of good and evil is *not* Manichean at all. This knowledge *is* human consciousness. It is what likely occured to our species around 1000 BC as the earlier (and much less differentiated) "bicameral mentality" collapsed worldwide (as hypothesised by Julian Jaynes). All attempts to deny human consciousness by equating humans with machines or with beasts (or with angels or with aliens) are rejections of our humanity. This is fundamental. And, it is anything but "black and white" since it is the knowledge of good and evil which leaves us with all the choices of human existence. The result of this capacity to choose is at least as marvelous and complex as you have intimated. None of us even approach perfection. All of us have the opportunity and challenge to recognize perfection, however. That recognition is, IMNSHO, the only way out of this mess. Castration is not power. It is death. Let's not make that mistake. (I expressly forbid Bruce Sterling or anyone else from forwarding this message to the WELL, Electric Minds or any related system. All others should feel free to re-post this as they see fit.) Mark Stahlman New Media Associates New York City [email protected] --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]