kurt-anderson.com

What is meditation?

When I stare into nowhere
Sometimes
Something shifts
And I see all things
As Maya‘s veil
(two-dimensional embroidery).

And sometimes
Something seems
To gently drag a finger
Across this cloth
(of which I am a part).

Is this meditation?
Or do I just need new contacts?

Setting the Stage

If you couldn’t tell from my fixation with government and it’s roles, I’m very fascinated with the idea of social contracts. Naturally, I’m used to examining this topic from a customary angle (read – political philosophy). However, I also enjoy the less well-known iterations of social contracts, both where they are being instituted (classrooms, RPGs) and where they’re breaking down (capitalism).

Well, last weekend I encountered an unexpected example of a social contract: the comedy club.

Take a second and consider the deal we make when we go to a show. When you go to a show, you throw your name into an unfortunate raffle – the comic now has license to mercilessly insult you, even if there’s nothing especially funny about you. In fact, when I go to a show, I’m kind of disappointed if the comedian doesn’t use someone in the front few rows as improv fodder for a few minutes.

This relationship in itself is hardly exceptional – it’s pretty much the dynamic between friends and spouses in every sitcom. What makes this a peculiar social contract is that the relationship is completely unilateral! The comic is encouraged to mock us but, if you throw it back, you’re the asshole that needs to shut up, sit down, and let the man with the mic do his job. And we pay to be in this lottery! Technically, we’re the customer.

The Punchline

I could go on about the peculiarities of this dynamic for a while, but what struck me is that this train of thought led me to understand an important aspect of social contracts: it’s all about the purpose of the union.

In the case of the comedy club, the purpose of the union is to laugh; if one of the marks has to take a hit, then it’s an acceptable loss. What’s amazing is that, as long as we laugh,  we all accept this unvoiced dynamic. Even if you’re the one being made fun of you laugh, because that’s the point.

An even stranger variation of this provides some more evidence. When the comedian isn’t even good – when he’s just awkward and drowning – we still laugh. Granted, it’s a different laugh, but we still do our part. As long as the comedian is giving us something to work with, we’ll do our best to make up the difference.

When you think about it, the only time the social contract breaks down is when one of the parties isn’t trying at all. That’s when revolutions happen (in this case, heckling and walkouts).

The Point

So what? So what if injustices can be borne as long as the purpose of the contract is being upheld? (What, what? Really?)

But what if the purpose of your union (say, America) is unclear? What then? Then you get your Andy Kaufman moments (going along with the comedian analogy); neither side is moving toward the same goal and, ultimately, both give up on each other. And, when the social contract breaks down, anarchy reigns. And anarchy, in my opinion, is ultimately best-defined as fighting for only our individual wants and needs.

Self-evident?

Where are we? Are we starting to give up? Are we willing to forfeit something for the good of the contract, or are we just looking out for personal best interests?

Obama was exciting (wow, was that really only a year ago?) because we saw unity. There was a glimmer of a renaissance of the American social contract.

Are we losing steam? Have we forgotten that a social contract, by definition, requires sacrifice? And who wants that?

It’s the new millennium.

OK, that’s old news. Frankly, that was old news 8 years ago. With bloggers beginning to analyze the Oughts and ‘I Love the 90s’ celebrating its 5th birthday, I admit that I’m pretty behind the ‘Zeitgeist of the Cloud.’ Then again, we’ll be discussing Philosophy – a topic that is generally considered archaic (or, at least, out of touch).

That’s right. My musings today have been orbiting the following question: What form will Philosophy take among the new world order?

Not Your Grandma’s Philosophy

Before we get too far into it, in no way am I talking about the philosophy of universities and academic journals. My brother describes those philosophers as professionals striving to be living encyclopedias. And, for the most part, he is justified.

No, I mean the philosophy that Socrates himself practiced: wandering the agora, engaging whomever passed him by, bringing the arrogant ones down a few pegs. The question is, to risk a connection to an 80s classic, how would Socrates have done it had he been born into this world of TV, tweets, and Time magazine?

Before You Close This Tab

Now, you might think this question, while mildly interesting, is mostly academic and therefore pointless. However, I assure you that it is not. This topic is at the very core of whether or not Philosophy will continue to thrive or if it will join Alchemy and Phrenology in the semi-comical crypt of dead sciences.

Philosophy has been through quite the series of transformations [post on the Metamorphosis of Philosophy is upcoming]. However, while once a dynamic battleground of ideals and worldviews, the ole “love of wisdom” has long been absorbed by the aristocracy. That’s where the problem lies.

As Matt Mason illustrates effectively in his book ‘the Pirate’s Dilemma‘, once a major cultural movement has been appropriated by the establishment, it has the choice of adapting or fading away. Reinvention or obsoletion. Which will it be? For the study that has been the primordial soup of all major hard and soft sciences, I feel that there are few intellectual questions more pressing.

28 Days Later (…OK, more like 2800 YEARS later)

So, that is the question: will Philosophy be reborn or become the nosferatu from which all sane people run?

Well, if you must know anything about me, you should learn that I am (perhaps against my better judgment) an optimist. So death isn’t an option. Philosophy must adapt. Perhaps it already is adapting.

So Here’s the Project

Over the course of the next few articles, we’ll examine each of the major forms of media (Audio, Video, Written, Social) to see which vehicles are most predisposed to Philosophical discourse. Since speculation yields nothing related to reality, along the way we’ll examine whether or not philosophy has already begun to creep into these media.

I know, I know – I can hardly wait too!