1.15. Integrating Academic-Historical Philosophy with Contemporary-Applied Philosophy

-- DB, June 14-15th, 2006.

This philosophical forum and treatise -- comprised of many small essays -- is designed to combine theoretical-academic-historical philosophy with contemporary-pragmatic-street philosophy. On an academic level, it is about philosophical and historical evolution. On a practical level, it is about finding better ways to resolve conflicts and solve problems related to differences in perspective, opinion, lifestyle. It is designed to combine complexity and abstractness with simplicity with concreteness. It is about philosophizing in the gaps. The thesis here is really very simple and has been stated in many different ways -- I will state it this way: Wherever there is a gap in human perspective between A and B, or between A,B, and C, there is an opportunity for human evolution in the form of AB, or ABC. Call this a ’compromise’ if you will. Or call it an ‘integrative solution’. Or call it ‘synergy’ and under the best of circumstances -- a ‘win-win solution’. The more that is gained from the integration of two opposing perspectives, and the less that is lost for each side of the difference in perspective, the better the solution -- the better the conflict resolution. The best solution to a difference in perspectives -- the best conflict resolution -- is where the ‘combined chemistry’ of the ‘united whole’ is superior in terms of an ‘evolutionary function’ and/or a ‘homeostatic balance’ (1), point of view, than the individual parts by themselves in the difference in perspectives. ‘The united whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts’.

Unfortunately, this approach to human problem-solving and conflict-resolving gets lost all too easy in human greed, narcissism, selfishness, hedonism, righteousness, locked in, one-sided perspectives, power-striving, revenge-striving, arrogance, superiority-striving -- need I go on? My perspective -- and the perspective of this forum and this school of philosophy as it becomes more articulated and systemized as a partly academic, partly practical school of philosophy is: post-Hegelian, post-Nietzschean, post-Freudian, post-Gestalt, post-Derridan...It is humanistic-existential and this is only one of many hyphenated words that you will see in my work because the whole purpose of the hyphen is to bring opposing perspectives together in united, dialectical harmony and wholism. The harmony may not last forever -- indeed it will be continually tested and challenged by the opposing energies and forces in the hyphenated harmony wanting to continually or periodically eliminate each other, or alternatively, flee from each other so as to live in greater, individual freedom and narcissistic bliss. However, us humans for the most part being basically ‘civil, social’, this can create a problem too as narcissistic freedom and bliss can quickly turn into social alienation, estrangement, loneliness…the old ‘you can’t live with them and you can’t live without them’ syndrome…

So let us call this our existential and philosophical starting point -- the dichotomy of man’s existence in terms of his (and her) many bi-polarities -- perhaps the most significant one being between our individual (Dionysian (3)) wish for ‘narcissistic freedom and bliss’ vs. our (Apollonian (3)) need to live in an organized civilized society where people aren’t out to rape, pillage, kill and terrorize each other. (Hobbes (2), Nietzsche (3), Freud (4), Golding (5).…). Call this second set of impulses (or restraints) our need for democracy, egalitarianism, and humanism. Now obviously, these opposing impulses or values are going to be of different strength for different people. So let the philosophical fun begin...combining the realism of the way people actually behave with an idealism that is worth striving for, for greater and better democracy, egalitarianism, humanism, existentialism, peace, harmony, and balance. ‘Sure’, you say, ‘there has always been human selfishness, human conflict and human violence that goes along with that conflict, and there always will be’...and I answer, ‘Yes, that is true but what ‘was’ and what ‘is’, is not necessarily what ‘has to be’ and how we learn to handle our conflicts in life -- particularly the biggest conflicts -- is the test of our character as a person, our combination of self-assertiveness and social empathy, our ability not to succumb to ‘narcissistic rage’ and ‘righteous indignation’ -- and worse -- to act on the basis of the worst of our narcissistic and/or righteous and/or rebellious capabilities -- except perhaps where it is humanistically essential that some ‘anti-humanistic’ force be assertively addressed -- but rather for the most part to adapt a ‘Synergetic-Expressive-Empathic-Wholistic-Evolutionary-Dialectic-Imaginative-Democratic-Integrative-Triumphant’ (‘SEE-WE-DID-IT’) approach to problem-solving and conflict-resolving, that we don’t lose in the heat of the battle, or in a covert or overt philosophy of narcissistic, capitalist, materialism -- a philosophy of ... ‘I am going to try to take the most I can get here, and/or dominate this situation to the best of my dominating capabilities, and I don’t care about my neighbor, my co-worker, my employer, my employee, or worst of all, someone in my own family’. We do not need any more war, strife, violence, death, corruption, greed, separation, divorce, and the like right now. The world has much more than enough of this kind of grief, horror and trauma going. Let’s take our human existence -- a more dialectic-democratic-humanistic-existential philosophy -- to a better place; not a worse one. Let us put a greater emphasis on synergy, integration (synthesis) and balance; not a place of greater narcissistic, righteous destruction and self-destruction. We already have far too much of that. DGBN, June 14-15th, 2006. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

References

Homeostasis is the property of an open system, especially living organisms, to regulate its internal environment to maintain a stable, constant condition, by means of multiple dynamic equilibrium adjustments, controlled by interrelated regulation mechanisms. The term was coined in 1932 by Walter Cannon from the Greek homoios (same, like, resembling) and stasis (to stand, posture). Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (on the internet).

Hobbes, Thomas, The Leviathan, 1660.

Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Birth of Tragedybold; LINE-HEIGHT: 100%">Freud, Sigmund, Civilization and its Discontents, 1929.

Golding, William, Lord of the Flies, 1954.