A Reflective Age Devoid of Passion : On Kierkegaard s Theory of Modern Levelling

Transcription

1 A Reflective Age Devoid of Passion : On Kierkegaard s Theory of Modern Levelling Mgr. Mgr. Peter Šajda, PhD Institute of Philosophy, Slovak Academy of Sciences Introduction Throughout the 20 th and 21 st centuries Søren Kierkegaard ( ) has been invoked as a prophetic thinker who early on identified some of the crucial trends of modernity. One of Kierkegaard s key contributions to the criticism of modernity was his theory of the individual. Kierkegaard pointed out that the age which claimed to have liberated the individual devised new ways of neutralizing the individual. Many Enlightenment and post-enlightenment thinkers saw modern society as an environment that naturally empowered the individual to find him- or herself. Their optimistic visions, however, often downplayed the fact that the same society set in motion new processes that made the individual lose him- or herself again. Kierkegaard paid close attention to these complex and often latent processes and in his diagnosis of the age laid bare the dynamics of the modern neutralization of the individual. In this essay I am going to focus on Kierkegaard s theory of levelling which is an important component of his critique of the negation of the individual in modernity. In the 20 th and 21 st centuries this theory has attracted the attention of numerous thinkers, such as Ferdinand Ebner ( ), Theodor Haecker ( ), Karl Jaspers ( ), 3

2 4 The Liberal Herald: Dignity Cui Bono? Martin Heidegger ( ), Theodor W. Adorno ( ) and Hubert L. Dreyfus (1929 ) (Adorno, 1939; Dreyfus, 1999; Haecker, 1914, Jaspers, 1932). I believe that Kierkegaard s observations can provide inspiration also for our present debate, as dignity is inextricably linked to the question of the individual. My paper is intended as an introductory reflection on the situation of the modern individual and can serve as a backdrop against which deliberations on modern conceptions of dignity can be developed. From Passionlessness to the Media: Kierkegaard s Theory of Levelling In 1846 Kierkegaard published the work Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age. A Literary Review, in which he presented an insightful analysis of contemporary social processes and their impact on the existential situation of the individual. 1 Although he developed his reflections with a view to a particular historical and geographical context, he phrased them in a general way without any reference to specific events or figures. In this way he presented an analysis whose applicability transcended its immediate social-historical context. Kierkegaard focused on the features of the present age. This term can be interpreted in the strict sense as denoting the Danish society of the 1840s, but it can also be interpreted as denoting a broader reality, such as modern Europe. Later commentators tended to interpret the term in the latter sense: they viewed Kierkegaard s analysis as a contribution to a more general understanding of modernity. 1. The work is a reaction to the anonymously published novel Two Ages by the Danish author Thomasine Gyllembourg-Ehrensvärd ( ). Kierkegaard s analysis of social developments is found in the third chapter of the work. For my treatment of Kierkegaard s critique of modern society and its later echoes in Slovak see the following studies: Šajda, P. (2013). Søren Kierkegaard: kritika spoločnosti a jej neskoršia recepcia. In: Novosád, F., Smreková, D. (eds.): Dejiny sociálneho a politického myslenia. Bratislava: Kalligram 2013, pp ; Šajda, P. (2014). Haeckerova kritika liberálnej tlače inšpirovaná Kierkegaardom. In: Filozofia, vol. 69, no. 5, 2014, pp

3 A Reflective Age Devoid of Passion : Kierkegaard on Levelling 5 I would like to highlight four points of Kierkegaard s diagnosis of the present age which I consider fundamental to his understanding of the nature of modernity: 1. excessive reflection, 2. the spread of levelling, 3. the rise of the phantom of the public and 4. the support of this phantom by the press. 1. Kierkegaard characterised the present age as a sensible, reflecting age, devoid of passion, flaring up in superficial, short-lived enthusiasm and prudentially relaxing in indolence (Kierkegaard, 1978, p.68). Reflection, which under normal circumstances serves as a basis for prudent decision making, has in the present age reached such an extreme intensity that it has paralyzed resoluteness and the will of individuals to accept long-term existential commitments. The result is not so much inactivity but rather the creation of the appearance that the present generation attempts to accomplish something essential. Seeing as this endeavour lacks genuine passion and radicalism, the created appearance evaporates and is replaced by an apathy legitimised by reflection. This apathy is interrupted by episodes of enthusiasm which do not last and the vicious circle of boundless reflection repeats itself. The oscillation between fleeting interest and lack of dedication renders the present generation unable to identify with greatness and eminence which require long-term passionate commitment. The present generation defends its attitude with the help of trivialization: it concludes, on the basis of reflection, that under favourable circumstances, exceptional deeds could be accomplished by anyone (Ibid.). This generation does not realise that its antagonism towards eminence is rooted in implicit envy directed against passionate and resolute individuals. Conscious envy of eminence has disappeared due to the trivialisation of eminence, but reflection does not eliminate envy altogether, it only transforms it. In its latent form envy becomes all the more powerful. It becomes a key social determinant: envy becomes the negatively unifying principle in a passionless and very reflective age (Ibid., p. 78). At the level of social interaction latent envy manifests itself in the process of levelling.

4 6 The Liberal Herald: Dignity Cui Bono? 2. Among the characteristic features of levelling are the growth of ambiguity and the vanishing of qualitative differences. Boundless reflection introduces ambiguity into oppositions which previously required an unequivocal choice. Existential decision making on the basis of the qualitative disjunction either-or loses its relevance, since the conflict of the opposites has been called into question. Good and evil, morality and immorality are no longer in radical conflict which would prompt the individual to choose one and dismiss the other. It is characteristic of the present generation that [n]o one is carried away to great exploits by the good, no one is rushed into outrageous sin by evil [ ] for ambiguity and equivocation are titillating and stimulating and have many more words than [ ] joy over the good and the loathing of evil (Ibid., pp ). The vanishing of qualitative differences has an impact on traditional roles which have been essential in helping determine the place of the individual in interpersonal and social relations. Qualitative differences in family, education or government lose their clear-cut character but the passionless age neither eliminates nor replaces them. The differentiation of roles remains formally valid but its content is so weakened that it does not motivate individuals to adopt dedicated stances. Complex structures of authority, such as the monarchy or the church, continue to function according to the usual rules, but the content of the roles constitutive for their proper operation is neutralised (Ibid.). Excessive reflection enhances the individuals conviction that they can be whatever they want but at the same time eliminates their motivation to adopt existential commitments to something or somebody. The emptying out of the content of qualitative differences is accompanied by a decline in long-term existential commitments. Modern levelling is a social process which is not controlled by concrete leaders and does not happen under the auspices of identifiable lobby groups. To be sure, it has its supporters and certain groups have made it their agenda, but in its essence levelling is abstraction s victory over individuals and a reflection-game in the hand of an abstract

5 A Reflective Age Devoid of Passion : Kierkegaard on Levelling 7 power (Ibid., pp. 84, 86). Pre-modern societies had their own experience with levelling, but always in a limited measure, because levelling was realised by a concrete group of people. Only modernity with its means of communication and its vicious circle of passionless reflection can facilitate the spread of levelling in an uncontrolled and unchecked manner. 3. The environment in which levelling unfolds unimpeded is the public. This indeterminate collective is not a real community; rather, it is an anonymous abstraction which flourishes when community life is in decay. Although the public does not constitute a space in which individuals essentially encounter each other and unite with one another, it attempts to create the illusion that it is a legitimate community. In reality it is an undemanding space for unessential interaction, in which communication is carried out without personal commitment. An individual, in order to become a participant in the public, must become a nobody a third party (Ibid.). In order to find him- or herself in the public he or she must lose him- or herself as the single individual. The participation in the public eliminates, or at least diminishes, the individual s sense of personal responsibility. Responsibility is delegated to the collective; in this act, responsibility virtually disappears. As it is unclear who constitutes the anonymous collective of the public, it is impossible to hold it accountable for its deeds. The indeterminacy, amorphousness and the phantom-like character of the public are clearly manifested in its abrupt changes of attitude. In contrast to a concrete community of individuals who adhere to concrete values and principles, the public does not have a continuous axiological identity. From one moment to another it can completely change its opinion, and still, it is impossible to claim that it has betrayed itself. The public is a space for reflection without commitment in which ambiguity is a welcome stimulus. It is meaningless to reproach it for being unprincipled, since it has never conceived of itself as principled. The hybrid nature of the public is the natural element of levelling: For levelling really to take place, a phantom must first be raised, the spirit of

6 8 The Liberal Herald: Dignity Cui Bono? levelling, a monstrous abstraction, an all-encompassing something that is nothing, a mirage and this phantom is the public. Only in a passionless but reflective age can this phantom develop (Ibid., p. 90). The modern individual finds the opinion of the public attractive, but not so much for its content as for the fact that it seems to belong to everyone. Public opinion is, however, an inorganic something, an abstraction (Ibid., p. 106) which can in any moment turn against the individual who has appropriated it. 4. The rise of the abstraction of the public is closely connected with the activity of the press which in modernity itself becomes a phantom (Ibid., p. 90) The public, which is the main proponent of the expansion of levelling, is born thanks to the press and subsequently uses it to accomplish its objectives. The public views the press as an ideal instrument for the propagation of various forms of levelling. The fact that the press becomes a servant to the public is typical of a reflective and passionless age, in which the press reacts to the weakening of community ties by replacing them with the phantom-like community of the public. In other ages the bond between the press and concretion can be stronger. An excessively reflective society of the present age, which is increasingly pervaded by the spirit of levelling, supports such forms of communication which conform to its inner dynamic. The press is the main instrument for the promotion of levelling with its aim of neutralizing eminence. The present age does not promote those actions of individuals which were prompted by passion and inwardness; rather, it is an age of publicity (Ibid., p. 70) based on the disinterested judging of the lives of individuals. The object of reporting is not the ethical core of the individuals agency, but the external details of private lives which can be turned into gossip without much effort. Essential speaking as well as essential silence are replaced by incessant chatter and extensive talkativeness. The fact that the orientation ad intra has been suppressed by the orientation ad extra gives rise to a conversation without ideality and commitment. In such one-sided externality there is nothing to

7 A Reflective Age Devoid of Passion : Kierkegaard on Levelling 9 essentially connect individuals (Ibid.). Although Kierkegaard s descriptions of the levelling carried out by the public and the press are phrased in a general way in some instances they reflect his personal experience with Danish journalism. Shortly before the publication of Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age. A Literary Review Kierkegaard had become the target of a mockery campaign in the satirical periodical The Corsair. This conflict, which lasted for several months, had a profound impact on both Kierkegaard and the publisher of The Corsair, Meïr Goldschmidt ( ), who subsequently sold the journal and left Copenhagen. Concluding Remarks Kierkegaard s provocative meditation on the modern neutralization of the individual can be used as a mirror for the societies of the 20 th and 21 st centuries. His idea that excessive reflection extinguishes passion and leads the individual first to indecision and then to a latently envious antagonism towards those who act upon passionate existential commitments is a challenge to every age that sees itself as an age of reason. Furthermore, Kierkegaard s claim that the weakening of community life leads to the rise of the phantom community of the public, which is promoted by the mass media and which prompts individuals to renounce their singularity in order to participate in an abstraction, is a challenge to societies in which mass media enjoy a high level of authority. And last but not least, Kierkegaard s point that modern levelling introduces ambiguity where an existential either-or disjunction is needed elucidates the way in which communication without ideality is born. This nuanced critique can serve as a litmus test for societies which claim to have created good conditions for individuals to find themselves.

8 10 The Liberal Herald: Dignity Cui Bono? REFERENCES Adorno, T. ( ). On Kierkegaard s Doctrine of Love. In: Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, vol. 8. Dreyfus, H. L. (1999). Kierkegaard on the Internet: Anonymity vs Commitment in he Present Age. In: Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook Haecker, T. (1914) Nachwort. In: Søren Kierkegaard, Kritik der Gegenwart. Innsbruck: Brenner-Verlag. Jaspers, K. (1932). Die Geistige Situation der Zeit, 3 rd ed. Berlin / Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter. Kierkegaard, S. (1978). Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age. A Literary Review. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Šajda, P. (2013). Søren Kierkegaard: kritika spoločnosti a jej neskoršia recepcia [Søren Kierkegaard: On the Critique of Society and the Later Acceptance Thereof ]. In: Novosád, F., Smreková, D. (eds.): Dejiny sociálneho a politického myslenia [History of Social and Political Thought]. Bratislava: Kalligram. Šajda, P. (2014). Haeckerova kritika liberálnej tlače inšpirovaná Kierkegaardom [Haecker s Critique of the Liberal Press as Inspired by Kierkegaard]. In: Filozofia, vol. 69, no. 5.