This, then, creates an enormous inconsistency in our culture. Individualism is a penultimate value, but it is one that is unattainable. Not only is it an unattainable goal, but the closest approximation involves separation from others, from those who ascribe so much of life’s meaning, as has already been established. Is it any wonder that so many people suffer from depression? Exclusive humanism has wreaked havoc on our society.
However, perhaps society has figured out that individuality is an inaccessible goal. There is another shift in our society, one that is still in the process of developing. Any time there is an extreme push, there will be some form of backlash. In this case, it is post-modernism. It is arguable that post-modernity is not a new era of its own, but merely an extension, or the next necessary step of the modern age, though this will be impossible to determine for quite some time. It does seem like it is just the next logical jump for a society which has become organized around an individual focus. Unfortunately, this pursuit of independence and individuality has not been eradicated, but simply augmented.
One of the primary traits of post-modernity is relativity, a loss of absolutes. The rise of exclusive humanism gives value to people on an individual basis, which then gives a sense of validation to their opinions. Simultaneously, the individual focus of society creates a sort of societally ingrained self-centredness. Thus, people prize themselves as individuals and behave as if they were, while the society further encourages this by catering to them as such. The result is a conglomeration of individuals shouting to be heard amidst the din of other voices proclaiming their opinions, each of which must be taken as valid. It is bound to occur that two people will have contrasting opinions, so for both to be considered valid, there must be relativity. There is more to post-modernity than this, but this is an essential part of it.
In this regard, absolutes begin to fade into grey areas. Context more and more becomes the determiner of right and wrong. Everyone has heard the phrase: “What’s right for me may not be what’s right for you.” This coincides with the concept of a worldview. This is a fairly recent idea to enter society. It is the understanding that all people have a different way of perceiving events, which determines their behaviour. Since it prevails that all opinions are valid, it becomes taboo to judge other people’s worldviews by any standard other than their own. This is regarded as unfair or even cruel since a person’s worldview must be factored into the context of every action taken. In some ways, this idea of relativity and context removes blame and guilt from any individual. There is always some formative event or person who can be pointed to as the excuse for shaping someone’s behaviour. It is a variety of determinism, but it is a pluralistic one which exploits determinism to achieve the freedom to make any desired choices.
Another facet of the backlash against modernity has been a return from impersonality and individualism to an emphasis on relationships. However, there is a sense that it is too late to go back. Perhaps exclusive humanism has already taken society past a point of no return. This facet of post modernity creates a sort of pluralism. There is a longing for true deep and intimate relationships, but the individuality wrought by exclusive humanism cannot be undone. People hope to be connected to one another while still maintaining their autonomy. This is done through a range of means.
The sexual revolution is one example. It started in the 60’s as a rejection of strict sexual repression and a quest for meaning, but it has degenerated somewhat since then. As the norms regarding sex have slackened, intercourse has become more about the relationship than the protest. However, the pluralism of post-modernity is felt strongly here. Sex is a deeply intimate and binding act, but people either distance themselves from knowledge of this fact in order to remain independent or pursue this relational intimacy to excess, making it unachievable. In addition, the stress on independence and the impersonalizing of relationships cheapened them. So, when the emphasis was renewed, it created new forms of relationships which resembled their predecessors, but were lacking in commitment because of the already ingrained love of independence.
Another way this relational independence manifests itself is on the internet. The worldwide web was supposed to connect people all over the earth. In a way, it has (one could also argue that everyone in the world was already interconnected, the internet just tightened the gaps). People from opposite sides of the world can communicate almost instantaneously, but what is the quality of their communication? Often, it seems rather lacking. The shining silver turns out to be nothing more than polished iron. Though the communication initially seems genuine, the distance and imperfection of it keep the interaction from being completely authentic. Because the opposite ends of conversation are so far removed from one another, there is a sense of impersonality to even the deepest, most personal dialogues.
In both of these situations, the sexual revolution and internet communication, a new sort of anomie is present. It is different from Durkheim’s initial speculation on the loneliness of living in modern society. However, the present condition is perhaps worse because there is an illusion of true connection that is still an unsatisfying facade. The disillusionment is even deeper.
Darker.
No comments:
Post a Comment