The contemporary negation of subjectivity

[The Johnny]

"Reality exists in the human mind and in no other place. Not in the individual mind, that can make mistakes and, in all cases, perishes soon. Just the mind of the Party, that is collective and inmortal, can sense reality. What the Party says its true is effectively true."
-O'Brien

Equiparating subjectivity as the manifestation of desire itself and making an abstract polarization to possibly exemplify better:

Objectivity      Subjectivity
Order            Chaos
Rationality      Irrationality

One example of how rational our society is, can be approached thru a neurological example of brain function:

Left Hemisphere                Right Hemisphere

Analytic                             Holistic
Verbal                               Prosodic
Logic                                Intuitive
Exact Calculation                Aproximate calculation
Language:                         Language:
   -Grammar                          -Intonation /accentuation
   -Literality                          -Prosody
   -Vocabulary                       -pragmatic
                                          -Conceptual

Most people in the world (70%-95%) are right handed. It hasnt been determined why of this tendency in humans. There have been geneticistic and cultural attempts at an explanation but unsuccessfully; aswell different species of primates there isn't such polarization.

So, if there cant be a cultural or genetical explanation, maybe its possible for a neurological and ideological explanation. Maybe its not coincidence that so many people are right handed, maybe it's a symptom to how over-idealized are the qualities and ways of thinking due that they were the basic and necessary for survival in our origins. Maybe its putting to much of a fine point on it, but note that the qualities of the left hemisphere correspond to the characteristics of typical rational thought.

But this rationality, this over-idealization of the qualities of the left hemisphere of our brain are a limitation of the human spectre to satisfy all of its needs and desires. Capitalism and the fetichism of money seem to be nowadays the measure of "objectivity" and "truth", and its ok'ed by the groups in power due to, that the search of happiness thru materialism and consumism doesn't question the functionality of society. If a person feels sad, and accepts consumist doctrine thru the mass media, that he can be happy by purchasing a new cell phone that is in fashion and trendy, then he shall buy the cell phone; or maybe when hes sad he can take it as something random, without deep reasons and can take prescription drugs, such as Prozac, Valium or Tylenol. This person could do thousands of solutions that are rational and "objective" (and reductionist in nature) for his sadness, but ¿are they solutions or distractions to the problem?

Another example of our current reality: psycho-tropic substances. Tobacco, alcohol, caffeine and prescription drugs are within the legal limits in an almost global perspective, while cannabis, LSD, cocaine, heroine and opium are outside of that legal limits. Based on what is this difference? Quickly any agent or representative of the law could answer "Because some are addictive and harmful, while the rest aren't", but the reality is that all of them have adverse effects, with addictive potential. Then, if all have adverse effects to health and all have the potential for addiction ¿What criterion in reality is used to assess if they are legal or illegal? Possibly because one can be an addict to nicotine, caffeine, be an alcoholic and being sedated by prescription drugs and continue to be "productive" economically speaking, while on the other drugs one cannot. Hallucinogens can bring persons to altered states of consciousness where holistic and "irrational" thoughts can emerge.

The aspiration to objectivize the collective subjectivity towards money, "productivity", "efficiency", "utility", all being economical concepts to respond to human needs, human needs that don't respond to such criterions. All in the purpose to keep social order, maintenance of status quo as utopia, utopia with rational basis, logical towards an ideal, but absurd towards what is human. An ordered society its not the consecuence of the satisfaction of all the ideals and desires of all persons.

"... in a purely quantitative world everything would be dead, rigid, without movement... Its evident that any being different from us feels other qualities and, therefore, lives in a different world from ours. Qualities are our human idiosincrasyes properly said; to ask that these interpretations  and these human values to be general and perhaps productive is one of the most outstanding crazes of the human pride."


(This is a fragment from last trimesters final essay i did... was originally in spanish.)

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Can't brain today; I have the dumb. But that looks like it's well worth the read, and I'll tackle it tomorrow when I'm fresh and unimpaired.

[Golden Applesauce]

I know why tobacco and alcohol is legal in the US and other drugs aren't: Our country was founded on Puritarianism and tobacco.  The puritans (not the actual Puritans, just their ideological descendants) tried and succeeded in banning alcohol and as many neurologically active substances as they could - except tobacco (because the only thing bigger than big religion is big business.)  Alcohol was too culturally accepted for the law to stick to it though, but the handy psyops fighting the War On (some) Drugs managed to keep the remaining drugs banned through public opinion.  New drugs, produced by powerful corporations, get a soft-ban (prescription only) to appease the law while still allowing access to those with deep enough pockets and/or connections to doctors.

Don't think it has much to do with the powers-that-be being afraid that constituents will reach enlightenment if they smoke too much dope, and then not need Society or Government anymore.


Also, your stuff on the left-vs-right hemisphere is suspect.  In particular, I'd like to see the body of evidence supporting the idea that the right half of the brain does holistic reasoning, while the left side does analytical.

[Jenne]

I thought it was that the white-landowning-therefore-government-honchos were the ones considering they didn't make enough $ on it, so fuckit make it illegal schtick was why marijuana and coke weren't made 100% legal here?

Seriously, I think that had more to do with it than bullshit religious morality.  The way I saw it (The Last White Hope documentary is your friend), the Rx companies strarted out YOUNG in this process and convinced their shareholders aka Mr. LawMakerMan that they'd be better off scripting the shit than selling it in their soft drinks and hemp braids.

Public opinion had shit-all to do with it...public opinion was what The Man told them it was...not the other way around.

[The Johnny]

Sambrano, Jazmín "Programación neurolinguistica para todos", 2000, Alfaomega, México, pp.20-23.
http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/545/Right-Brain-Hemisphere.html
http://frank.mtsu.edu/~studskl/hd/LRBrain.html

These are some sources that might be of interest. Neurolinguistprogramming and neurology speaking.

Have you heard about left handed persons being more creative? Maybe theres something to it?

Culturally speaking, the symbolism of right and left being equated as "correct" and "wrong"... Do you think it was randomly decided at some point, and at that random point it could might as well have been the other way around?

http://www.elementsofhome.com/Ebay/images/SOCRATES.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Eris_(Discordia).jpg

Do you find it something merely of randomness that Socrates is holding his head up with his right fist instead of his left one?

Is it random also that "she" is holding up her left palm making the gesture instead of her right one?

There are plenty and widespread examples if you look for them.

Did you know the left hemisphere of the brain controls the right side of your body? And that the right hemisphere the left side of your body?


And speaking of the drugs: just because i am writing in english, doesnt mean im talking only about the USA.

I havent read Thomas Leary, but im sure his theories on the 8 circuit model of consciousness arent far off from what im speaking of.

[Jenne]

I think a good expository on the drug culture vis a vis Mexico is a good thing to blag about...I am advocating such exposition here...

[The Johnny]

As far as i know, pre-hispanic culture was involved with some kinds of hallucinogens, more so by the northern arid nomads...

And by the more centric and southern Aztecs it was more of a ritualistic thing that went on among higher ranks such as priests, im not sure what kind of substance do.

Then the catholic spaniards came along to colonize... Catholicism i think is way more ambiguos towards substances than Puritanism, not speaking of stance in books and officially speaking, i mean in practice with the average joe believers, and i would argue for hypocrisy and double standards - they are more worried on sexuality issues id say.

Unfortunately leaving a big gap on history due to my ignorance, ill speak of this century - there havent been any prohibitions on tobacco nor alcohol, but all the stuff such as opium, cannabis, cocaine, heroince, lsd, etc. have been illegal all along... until recently.

But illegal is a term that can just be written in paper and not enforced...

Ive met quite a few of druggies and sort of been one myself, and i tell you, its pretty easy to get your hands on cocaine and pot, and i think heroine isnt that hard either... Peyote and mushrooms is harder in the sense that you have to travel to where the stuff grows naturally, because the highways that lead there and back are patrolled by the military.

Here the legal entrance to bars is 18... even do theres endless crowds of 15 year olds that get in and are blooming alcoholics.

Tobacco? Tons of 15 year olds are into it too. Theres nomad salesmen all over the street that sell candy, gums and cigarrettes by the dose (sell individual cigarretes) to any willing person.

Inside universities even before the law passed, you could use drugs without punishment because they are autonomous and police or military are not allowed entrance.

The recent law that allows anyone to carry small ammounts isnt about being "progressive" such as the Netherlands (which perhaps they actually just did it for the tourism? IDK)... its because this president we have, issued his own personal version of the "War on Drugs" (Tm)... im not sure if i mentioned it in another thread, but theres 5,200 people dead this year because of this "war" (civilians, police, military, small-medium-big traffickers)... and im not sure if its overstating, but this isnt the first year of the "war"... its a war that the government is losing because our drug cartels are so strong, so its a way of separating the kittens from the wolves... It would just be hypothetics if we start to think up scenarios after the war or if there werent strong cartels...

I think my argument still stands that certain drugs are illegal because of their effects on economic productivity. Most of Europe is quite ""progressive"" and i dont see anyone besides the Netherlands making drugs legal.

[Brotep]

Not bad.

(This is a fragment from last trimesters final essay i did... was originally in spanish.)

I could tell, largely because of the word "inmortal" instead of "immortal" 

[Triple Zero]

I thought it was that the white-landowning-therefore-government-honchos were the ones considering they didn't make enough $ on it, so fuckit make it illegal schtick was why marijuana and coke weren't made 100% legal here?

It's illegal in most other western countries as well, and that makes me pretty sure it's a cultural religious thing. Just like they tried to ban alcohol.

Also what "fuck it make it illegal shtick"? Cause there's zillions of stuff that the gvt doesnt make money on, and it's not all illegal.

Regardless, I'm happy that coke is illegal because fuck it I hate that shit and the people who are on it.

[Pope Pixie Pickle]

I thought it was that the white-landowning-therefore-government-honchos were the ones considering they didn't make enough $ on it, so fuckit make it illegal schtick was why marijuana and coke weren't made 100% legal here?

It's illegal in most other western countries as well, and that makes me pretty sure it's a cultural religious thing. Just like they tried to ban alcohol.

Also what "fuck it make it illegal shtick"? Cause there's zillions of stuff that the gvt doesnt make money on, and it's not all illegal.

Regardless, I'm happy that coke is illegal because fuck it I hate that shit and the people who are on it.

TITCM. I tried it once and I hated myself on it. I just wanted to keep being an asshole to people. :'(

[Cramulus]

I think my argument still stands that certain drugs are illegal because of their effects on economic productivity.

here here. that's definitely a factor

These things are entrenched in very interesting ways.

Like how hemp isn't used the USA to this day because the settlers of the USA farmed cotton

or how pot originally became illegal because making it contraband was a way they could kick out mexicans.


I think you can explain drug use through a number of lenses, and the economic model makes a lot of sense

[Golden Applesauce]

Sambrano, Jazmín "Programación neurolinguistica para todos", 2000, Alfaomega, México, pp.20-23.
http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/545/Right-Brain-Hemisphere.html
http://frank.mtsu.edu/~studskl/hd/LRBrain.html

These are some sources that might be of interest. Neurolinguistprogramming and neurology speaking.

Have you heard about left handed persons being more creative? Maybe theres something to it?

Culturally speaking, the symbolism of right and left being equated as "correct" and "wrong"... Do you think it was randomly decided at some point, and at that random point it could might as well have been the other way around?

http://www.elementsofhome.com/Ebay/images/SOCRATES.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Eris_(Discordia).jpg

Do you find it something merely of randomness that Socrates is holding his head up with his right fist instead of his left one?

Is it random also that "she" is holding up her left palm making the gesture instead of her right one?

There are plenty and widespread examples if you look for them.

Did you know the left hemisphere of the brain controls the right side of your body? And that the right hemisphere the left side of your body?


And speaking of the drugs: just because i am writing in english, doesnt mean im talking only about the USA.

I havent read Thomas Leary, but im sure his theories on the 8 circuit model of consciousness arent far off from what im speaking of.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were talking specifically about the USA.  I just happen to only know the history of the USA well enough and not that of Mexico (or just about any other country, really) and didn't feel qualified to comment on specifics outside of the US.

On to psychology (in no particular order):  Yes, I am aware that the motor cortex on either side of the brain controls the other side of the body (unless something happens to one, and the other side rewires and handles both.)  I also know that some brain functions such as spatial reasoning and different parts of the language complex are (usually) lateralized to certain hemispheres of the brain.  But I'd like to see the studies where scientists determined that "holistic" reasoning happens on one side and "linear" reasoning happens on the other - I have my doubts on how an experiment like that would be constructed, especially on how "holistic" and "linear" would be defined and measured.

When you say that you think Leary's 8-circuit model might be close to what you're talking about, are you including the part where people develop psychic powers, remember events from past lives, communication with galactic beings, gain universal consciousness, and such?

It's no secret that in the West and Middle East (I don't know about the rest of the world) that the right hand is privileged over the left.  The Latin words "dexter" and "sinister" referring to right and left, respectively, also mean (or came to mean) skill and evil, respectively.  I suspect this had more to do with the fact that the majority of humans are right handed and the harsh cultural attitudes towards deviance of any sort than with any knowledge of neurology.  That alone explains your two photographs.  (btw, to embed images in your post you can just put

Code Select Expand

[img][/img] around the URL of the image.)

I have heard that left handed people are more creative.  I've also heard that sleeping in a room with a running electric fan will kill you dead.  The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

[The Johnny]

I dont have at hand detailed material on the experiments that led to the description of brain lateralization. Some experiments with people that had an injury to certain parts of their brains and testing them at different tasks come to mind. Ive also heard of certain experiments where numbing agents were administered to certain parts of their brain so they couldnt be used, to see how the person acted.

On Leary: nevermind, i shouldnt even had mentioned him if i dont know about him. Im not sure it has much to do with what i speak of and i dont know how fringe and crazy he is.

On the cultural significance of "right" and "left" i think we are on the same page. However i do not think that humans have always been right handed, and that the cultural significance had to emerge from somewhere.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-are-more-people-right

Basicly, we evolved from primates... primates which dont have a preference for left or right hand... my argument is that, in our evolution, we developed more the "rational"(left) side of our brains which thus gives our population today, predomenantly right handedness.

[Kai]

I dont have at hand detailed material on the experiments that led to the description of brain lateralization. Some experiments with people that had an injury to certain parts of their brains and testing them at different tasks come to mind. Ive also heard of certain experiments where numbing agents were administered to certain parts of their brain so they couldnt be used, to see how the person acted.

On Leary: nevermind, i shouldnt even had mentioned him if i dont know about him. Im not sure it has much to do with what i speak of and i dont know how fringe and crazy he is.

On the cultural significance of "right" and "left" i think we are on the same page. However i do not think that humans have always been right handed, and that the cultural significance had to emerge from somewhere.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-are-more-people-right

Basicly, we evolved from primates... primates which dont have a preference for left or right hand... my argument is that, in our evolution, we developed more the "rational"(left) side of our brains which thus gives our population today, predomenantly right handedness.

If you're interested in right/left brain lateralization, look up information on people who've had some damage to or completely lack the corpus collosum. Truth is, we've got two brains (or three, if you count the gastro-intestinal one) which are barely connected to each other. People can live without the cc, it's not ideal, but it's not absolutely necessary either.

[Cain]

Thanks for posting this.

Do you think it is likely that alienation (either in the Marxist or social conception) arises from the socially structured repression, or lack out of outlets, for the "right hemisphere" of the brain or the traits associated with it (putting aside the questions of the validity of this model) to express itself through? 

I'll likely have some more questions or comments later, but that was the first that came to mind.