Killing Objectivity

[Wolfgang Absolutus]

So I've had this idea stuck in my brain for some time now and to keep track of it's progression I've been steadily adding to a word document over time with a sentence or two at a time trying to describe it. One of the main references is to this clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7KxGDucKNU&feature=youtu.be&t=41s from Possessed. I really can't tell if I have a worthwhile idea or if I should just go back to writing Evangelion fanfiction.

____________________________________________

To survive within globalized capitalism one key strategy is to eliminate one's subjectivity. This is a problem many have had with buddhism in that they interpret and find in the way people practice it a yearning for the erasure of subjectivity. An erasure of the personalness. Becoming nothing and feeling nothing to get through such a cruel way of life.

To move forward then I propose a different interpretation of Zen Buddhism. A interpretation that focuses on the destruction of objectivity.

Our inability to deal with the world as it is leads us in all sorts of crazy directions and delusions. We often helplessly find ourselves outside of our heads trying desperately to look in; as if some deep truth lay hidden within our skulls and that the division meant anything at all. The messege of Zen Buddhism is not that one should burn down this house of the mind instead of looking inside, but that one should get inside so that one can truly look out.

If one looks to the saying of who is wiser than all the prophets and sages, understanding that it is one's self requires a suspension of objectivity.

Or the phrase about hesitation. One hestitates because they are only guessing at what it is that they desire. They do not know what to do. They debate with themselves. To simply be and remove that hesitation one has to remove objectivity. Once on the inside one can easily determine one's desires and act on them without worry because there is no other perspective.

To further illustrate this look to the object subject distinction previously discussed. Objects can only BE as in exist in continuity from the objective position. Subjects exist most in continuity from the subjective position, the one that delineates actions and desires; the one that chooses. Slaves lack a certain subjectivity because of this. They are completely defined by the outside lens rather than the inside lens and due to this they can only be objects. The same thing is talked about in reference to women where it is said men often treat them like pieces of meat. The woman is thus treated only from the objective outside lens and no attention is paid to the inner lens of the woman. Therefore in order to gain full subjectivity one has to get rid of the objective position.

One can also draw the distinction between this and the mere ordering of one's self. What good is it to get rid of other bosses just to boss your self around. This is truly paradigmatic of the outside looking in objective gaze. To truly be a subject rather than an object, even an object of your self, is to be on the inside looking out. This gets rid of all the deliberating and vacillating and allows one to just exist.

Here one can also draw the distinction between awareness and self-consciousness. If I am on the outside of my self, experiencing my self as other then I am only self-conscious. I take the objective lens looking at me like I would someone else. To be aware is to get on the inside and look out. To be aware of the situation that is happening and feel the situation as visceral as it is. Rather than the distance of feeling the objective gaze would have us take we get back into the drivers seat and experience the situation in a way that can really only be described as participatory. This is what it means to live in the present.

Another way to look at this tension is in terms of the spectacle. The objective gaze allows us to look at ourselves like an other examining it 'impartially'. We view ourselves as a spectator moreso than as a participant in our lives. This brings self-consciousness as we become embarrassed and even ashamed. "What will the neighbors think?" We are like if we are looking into a dark abandoned house wondering what is going on inside, never quite knowing. From the objective gaze the self becomes both easier to see in full but also harder to penetrate. We don't really know what we want. They way we figure it out is the same way we go about assessing others. We practice psychology on ourselves to gain some kind of (in)sight into what's going on 'in there'. Really this is all wasted effort. The best way to know what is happening inside that house is to get inside of it. Maybe you can't see the whole picture, but you can see what you need to see.

There are no impersonal whys. Moments simply are. The only whys that are even relevant are the personal subjective whys. The ball falls because I dropped it and because of every event that caused those events. There isnt a higher level. No god's eye why if you will.

"Welcome aboard, Mr. Pilgrim," said the loudspeaker. "Any
questions?"

   Billy licked his lips, thought a while, inquired at last: "Why
me?"

   "That is a very earthling question to ask, Mr. pilgrim. Why you?
Why us for that matter?  Why anything? Because this moment simply is. Have
you ever seen bugs trapped in amber?"

   "Yes." Billy, in fact, had a paperweight in his office which was a
blob of polished amber with three ladybugs embedded in it.

   "Well, here we are, Mr. Pilgrim, trapped in the amber of this
moment. There is no why."

Another way of thinking of it is to imagine yourself as god. god is completely subjectivised. As humans we think that there is some higher way to view things and certain contingent historical circumstances have led us to usually try and view the world through this higher lens. For god there is no higher lens. He sees the world as it is. His self is not other to himself. That is perhaps what makes him god. He lacks the separation that humans mostly have, he is completely subjectivised not worried about life or death and just being. We have killed god and all other authorities are next. We need to fully subjectivise ourselves. To be. We will be living gods, buddhas, ubermensches.


The being exists through being observed by others. The I exist because I observe my self. It is through this objectivity and this distancing from my self that self-consciousness arises. It is in this way that we become separated from other animals and shirk enlightenment. If I get on the inside and look out that vantage point whereby I see myself vanishes. The I disappears and I return to nothingness. There is no hesitation, no self-consciousness. Only awareness. Action and Desire. This is the state of the animal or the child. Self-Consciousness is dwarfed by awareness. This is the one who can do anything. The one who can do nothing. The ubermensch. The child. The Buddha. The Big Other. I return to nothingness. In the fade to black I become free to travel anywhere and do anything. This is the goal of the revolutionaries. To become the living embodiment of freedom. This is what I crave. Could I aspire to anything greater?

[The Johnny]

What were you, again? Student of philosophy? I'll engage this tomorrow.

[Wolfgang Absolutus]

I don't leave for university until tuesday, so technically no.

[The Johnny]

Your statements are too broad and are just personal conclusions if you do not explain them... what does it entail to "survive in capitalism"? And in which manner is "subjectivity eliminated"?

You cant "go in the house, so you can look out", its our human limitation, there will always be a distinction between conscious and unconscious, likely because we would not be able to bear it, it would be too much stress on our minds.

And we are social beings, there will always be consideration of other's perspective, either because one is empathic, or because other's perspective limits our actions, so that will always exist as well...

Perhaps some reading of phenomenology is in order for you, regarding on how things exist or they dont...

Also, your text is plagued by self-implication that might not hold true for others.

Correct me if im wrong, but, please get off drugs and eastern philosophy