Tag: philosophy

I strip away my modesty to state that no one has ever been as apt as I am to found the Church of Misanthropy. I have the complete theoretical foundation and the practice of a high priest. But I confess, with a certain sadness, that Karl Kraus would make an exemplary minister. He says that he has discovered that it is possible to live with people in a strange land, that is, in an environment where he does not understand a word of what they say and where it is impossible for them to communicate. Thus, the neighbor really seems tolerable. But I am impressed that I do not consider this as a novelty, since I have already written this myself. It is curious how, every time, exactly the same thing happens: I am happy to detect the shared anomaly, but it never impresses me. I am capable of each and every misanthropic manifestation ever conceived; no particularity escapes me, and I empathize with every expression of repulsion and detachment toward man. Ban language by law, proposes Karl Kraus; allow man only gestural manifestation in cases of emergency. And I support, of course, these being propositions that have already come from my own fingers. But this church would never prosper; and however efficient removal techniques may be, just as there are interesting proposals to build walls to separate him from his surroundings, to the misanthrope there is and always will be only one definitive solution—and this one, it is prudent to avoid.

Moralism is the first step in an intellectual trajectory that cannot be reduced to moralism. It is necessary for the moralist to go a step further, and go beyond the findings coming from the analysis of the world: he must transform and detach from it if he wants to progress. But it is difficult to concentrate on evolving, overcoming, forgetting, by placing a stone over what once deserved attention; to do so seems like a betrayal of his own nature, a denial of the past, and a devaluation of what the mind has produced. Wrong judgments, however. Intellectual life is justifiable only as long as it moves, and the intellectual only as long as he allows himself to create.

It is only possible to progress spiritually and maintain tranquility when circumstances seem to force the opposite, in the belief that man always has a choice, even if it is given as a psychological reaction or as an inner posture. Contrary to what it may seem at first, determinism does not tranquilize and can only generate anguish towards an uncontrollable future that will fall upon the one who considers it reasonable; therefore, the determinist feels impotent before forces alien to his will. Very different is the feeling of someone who knows that, no matter what happens to him, there will always be the possibility of a response.

It is very difficult not to get carried away by mysticism when it offers us plausible answers to phenomena that otherwise seem to have no explanation. There is, of course, always the simplest option: deny and forget about them. But for those either curious or attracted by a vital need for answers, there is no simple option. At first, it is the eyes open; and then the mind struggling to justify what the eyes see. Here the mysticism, since it is unacceptable to reject both eyes and reason. The hard thing is to see that, in some cases, the mystical solution is only temporarily reassuring…