Individualism

[David_Sundaram]

Bringing this 'lead' OP over from GoogleGroups:

Santeri Satama <ssatama@gmail.com> Jan 6, 2021, 6:37 AM

Indian philosopher discusses Western metaphysical politics of individualism in contrast to Hindu notions of self and person. He notes that as a liberatory philosophy, that individualism promises to be, it has utterly failed and been mostly a tool of colonialism.

https://iai.tv/video/the-different-plac ... _auid=2020#

Kastrup's concept of Markov Blanket as the social sphere could be actually closer to the Hindu view as presented here, than individualism of distinct boundaries.

========

My comment stemming from that is:

The relationship of 'individuals' to 'society' is analog-us to the relationship between a 'finger' and the 'hand' it is 'on'.

Mixing more metaphors: The 'individual' is a function(ary) of the 'hand' and dependent on the 'hand' for its existence (imagine a 'baby' in a 'vacuum' and an 'adult' 'in outer space' for confirmation).

Neither the society nor the individuals comprising it could functionally 'flourish' or 'flower' without their mutual/reciprocal support and connection./devotion.

They serve their (respective) purposes thereby. Their respective 'lives' would be meaningless otherwise!


My comment about the above comment and its relation to most of those in preceding it (in the thread it branch-stems from) is that this one is analogous to a clear-seeing steady-standing cowboy facing off with a swirling hand-and-leg dance of martial-arts 'master'.

The value of an ideational-scheme is its practical utility.

Kapow!

[SanteriSatama]

Not a bad metaphor. The problem is, in-divi-dual digits of digital individing have been complaining about alienation and general loss of meaning. The fingering possession of their full humanity by the Grabbing Hand may serve some higher purpose, which can be only speculated, but on our human level the ethics of its standard behavior are highly questionable. .

[David_Sundaram]

Keep 'questioning', by all means, Sanman. IMO, the 'answer' is OBVIOUS.

[SanteriSatama]

Keep 'questioning', by all means, Sanman. IMO, the 'answer' is OBVIOUS.

What good is just assigning a truth-value opinion to a proposition, how ever "obvious"? Isn't the real question is about therapeutic (anti)philosophy and it's praxis?

[David_Sundaram]

The 'answer' to this Q is also OBVIOUS, imo.

[AshvinP]

Not a bad metaphor. The problem is, in-divi-dual digits of digital individing have been complaining about alienation and general loss of meaning. The fingering possession of their full humanity by the Grabbing Hand may serve some higher purpose, which can be only speculated, but on our human level the ethics of its standard behavior are highly questionable. .

On our human level, the ethics of any standard behavior of individuals within a group is highly questionable. From the Western metaphysical perspective, alienation from God is integral to reconnection with God, as we see throughout the Passion story.

[David_Sundaram]

=On our human level, the ethics of any standard behavior of individuals within a group is highly questionable. From the Western metaphysical perspective, alienation from God is integral to reconnection with God, as we see throughout the Passion story.

Do say more, if for no other reason than to redeem your 'self', Ashvin,