• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
"Tat Tvam Asi": A Feedback Model of Goodness and Beauty
Frederick TurnerThis essay proposes a counter-theory to the generally accepted analysis of ethics and aestheticsoriginating from Immanuel Kant. That analysis was based on the idea of disinterestedness--thatis, what distinguishes an ethical action from one which is unethical or ethically neutral, is that theact is performed without expectation of reward or payoff, and what distinguishes an artistic actfrom a merely practical one is a supererogatory playfulness, unmotivated by the hope of gain.These ideas are not without merit in themselves, and their best features--the ones that ring true toour intuition--need to be preserved in any replacement. Kant's argument is much moresophisticated than my brief description of it, but it is the cultural assumptions that flowed fromKant, and our own approach to art and ethics, that concern this essay; and those assumption aremore easily summarizable.Kant's position had at the time a very convincing basis--the philosophical crisis that had beenprovoked by the apparent discovery by enlightenment science that the universe operated in anentirely deterministic way. It was a clockwork in which every event was uniquely caused by itspredecessors. A "Laplace Calculator," given the positions and momenta of all particles in theuniverse, would be able to predict all future events. If human beings were subject to the samelaws, then moral action, which depends on the principles of free choice and assignable ethicalresponsibility, would be meaningless; and so too would art, since the originality of a work of artwould be undermined by its least detail having been stored up in a chain of prior causes for all of time. Thus humans could not be wholly subject to those laws--and thus the world of knowledgewould have to be carved up into two incommensurable areas:
 Naturwissenschaft 
(natural science)and
Geisteswissenschaft 
(the arts and humanities). The ruling principles of the latter werefreedom and originality, specifically the ways in which human spiritual activities escaped the
ananke
or fated inevitability of the material universe. Humans, clearly, were influenced by thephysical world, and could so imbrute themselves that they became predictable like any materialobject or instinctually-driven animal; but our special nobility was to be able to transcend thosemotives. The hold that nature had over us needed to be broken by art and religion if we were topossess a spiritual identity: and that hold on us made itself felt through our self-interest. Thus if we are interested in the outcome of an action or event, and stand to gain from it in some materialway, to choose the path of reward would be to have been bribed, so to speak, by physicality; ouractions could not be free and original, and would fall into the province of natural science ratherthan the humanities.One implication of this analysis was that the world of economic profit cannot be ethical or moral,and thus political institutions need to be created and staffed by truly moral and disinterestedpersons, which can coerce or reimburse the market--coercion and profit being all it understands--
 
into ethical and socially beneficial behavior. The very word "interest"--which also means theprofit on a loan--suggests that those who live by finance and banking are like animals, whichneed to be controlled by the disinterested and the noble, or even, if they threaten human freedom,violently put down. The characters of Alberich and Hagen in Wagner's
 Ring
cycle, who in theirobsession with gold become the murderous enemies of the noble disinterested hero, are symbolsof this danger; and tragically the stereotype of the bestial and bloodsucking moneylender has ledto much misguided slaughter in the last century. Another implication was that artists must make apoint of being impractical, poor salesmen, whose integrity can only be proved by starving ingarrets. Yet another implication of the Kantian analysis was that the word "beauty", with all itscorrupting implications of pleasure and emotional reward, must be replaced by Kant's coinage,"aesthetic", which connotes a forbidding and difficult encounter with all that contradicts physicalwellbeing and mortal happiness.I believe that the rift between the sciences and the humanities is profoundly dangerous bothintellectually and culturally, leading to deep errors of understanding and unwitting crimes.Certainly at the time it seemed the only defense against what looked like a brutal pragmatism inpersonal relationships and a ruthless historicism in international realpolitik, where the victors inboth cases would write history. But the apparent cure--the
cordon sanitaire
between science andthe humanities--had side effects perhaps worse still. Let us look briefly at the history of thosekey humanistic ideas: freedom in moral action and originality in art.To be free one must have free will. Will became the core concept of nineteenth century moralphilosophy. It was will or intentionality that set us apart from brute nature. But what was thedirection of will? It could only be the extension of its own field of action, since any focussingdown on a specific object in the world would enslave it to the deterministic motivations of physicality. "Extension of the field of action" is nicely glossed by the word "power": so "Will"now became "the Will to Power". Thus power eventually became the key idea of the Humanities,as it remains today in its Foucauldian, Feminist, Postcolonialist, Lacanian, and Neomarxistversions. Strangely, our original enterprise, which was to delineate an alternative humanisticworld to the deterministic realm of physical forces, has logically morphed itself into the veryenemy it was designed to escape. Power, whether expressed in oppressive violence by areactionary elite, revolutionary acts by the disenfranchised, or legal sanctions by an enlightenedruling group, is the same thing as physical force: politically it means that you can send men withguns to make people do what you want. If beauty has been culturally relativized out of existence(which is indeed the result of avant-garde theory) and if logical reasoning is, as part of theregnant regime of power and knowledge, no more than the linguistic property of the oppressor,the only way to persuade people is through force. Force is the more perfect, the fewer side-effects and unintended consequences it entails, the less it needs to consult its victims, the fewerreasons it needs to give, and the less it needs to disguise itself. Force, after all, is a deterministic
2
 
phenomenon--F=ma--most perfectly expressed in one-way cause and effect. However, physicsteaches us that power of this kind is absolutely and universally subject to the second law of thermodynamics, that is, it tends over time to waste itself and turn into useless heat and thermaldisorder. Thus the humanities, when cut off from nature, ended up not only looking exactly likethe brutal world they hoped to transcend, but also trapped in the gradual entropic heat-death of the physical universe. And history confirmed this gloomy picture: the best-intentioned will- andpower-based state in the world, the Soviet Union, turned into a nightmare of coercion and finallyafter seventy years blew away as if by some inexorable physical law of decay. As Lysenko foundout, nature had its revenge on will.Originality in art went through the same sort of tragic devolution once it had cut itself off fromnature. Beauty became a dirty word. Originality meant the "gratuitous act", as the Existentialistsput it, unbribed by pleasure, custom, or interest. Every move must be
sui generis
, a radicalnovelty; novelty could only be guaged by the shock it administered to its audience; habituationand fatigue constantly raised the threshold of shock; artists found themselves lashing about likehuge starving carnivorous fishes in a diminishing pool of state economic support. A new lease of life was provided by the technique of deconstruction--the whole history of past art lay open andavailable for parody and exciting defacement--but one can only burn something to ashes once.Soon the reserves of fossil fuels--the old artistic traditions, techniques, and values--wereexhausted. In the visual art field, something even more ironic happened. Pop artists turned tothe marketplace as a source of ideas to demolish. The marketplace found these parodiesamusing, and coopted them almost at once, and art became a roaringly profitable investment.Industrial methods of production were introduced, and many contemporary artists of the Jeff Koons variety became almost indistinguishable from chic faux-kitsch interior designers.But during the same period natural science has, paradoxically, undergone a profound revolution.The theory of evolution proved how astonishingly original nature could be. Chaos andcomplexity theory showed that no Laplace calculator could keep pace with the world's ownunpredictable self-organization. The feedback inherent in all dynamical systems rendered theidea of power largely obsolete in complex ecological systems, where the top-down balancinginfluence of the whole system could dominate local chains of deterministic cause. The predator'spower over its prey is part of a system in which the prey species also determines the numbers of the predators and relies on predation to keep its own gene pool healthy. The rigid reductivexenophobia of our immune systems serves a larger organism that is free to explore all kinds of different worlds. The selfish gene becomes the microstructure of the altruism of a social species,and is in turn selected for or against by the resulting adaptability of the species as a whole andthe emergent features of the ecosystem it inhabits. Though indeed the determinisms of classicaldynamics--and its statistical and time-dependent version, thermodynamics--still hold in isolatedlocations, they are now seen as idealizations only partly fulfilled in a real universe that is
3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...