An “ism” is a very powerful thing.
An ism is like a plan, like a program.
An ism creates a slogan people can rally around.
An ism creates a social identity and something for us to believe in.
But despite all that, isms get a bad rap sometimes.
They’re thought to be inflexible and dogmatic.
People reject and shake off isms, they don’t want to be defined by them.
But isms don’t have to be inflexible and dogmatic.
They don’t need to be anything more than this:
the moment’s view of how things are,
the moment’s plan for how things should go next.
And yes, isms are dangerous.
Someone clever and popular can steal your ism from you
And in people’s minds, that person can
Turn your ism into something you never wanted it to
Be.
But I’m an “arenaist.”
I believe you have to stay in the arena,
Work with the powerful tools of the human condition.
You can’t shy away because they may be used against you.
Stay in the arena.
Join in others’ isms.
Create your own and invite others to join.
I have a couple ideas for what we could do in this thread:
Talk about / critique / support what I just said.
Create some “isms” or short slogans that articulate your current philosophy, or ideas that are important to you.
Here are some of my isms:
– Experimentalism: I believe in the power of trying new stuff and seeing what happens. This thread is an example.
– Love-theism: I believe that God is the ideal of Love in the human heart. To love God is to love Love itself, and place loving others as your ideal.
– Narrativism: I believe in the power of stories to organize and explore the human experience. Here’s a story from my real life: I once saw a guy in a coffeeshop with a sign that said “write your stories here”. His name is Brandon Ehdom. He is creating a book called “Don’t Talk to Strangers” (google it). I invested in his project because I think it will change the world.
Nihilism: It’s been unavoidable.
Aestheticism: All might be futile but it might as well be so whilst looking good.
Solipsism/Egoism/Individualism: The belief that each person is the keeper of their own destiny.
It’s been unavoidable? Do you feel like a victim or passive recipient of your nihilism? Would you rather something else?
Are you really a nihilist if you also believe in beauty?
Isn’t solipsism a bit of a strong word for “keeper of your own destiny”? Solipsism usually means you think you’re the only thing in existence, or the only thing that matters. I think that I’m keeper of my own destiny, but I don’t think my own destiny is separate from that of others. I met a girl a few months ago and sometimes I wonder if we are destined to be together…
My solipsism combined with the egoism/individualism simply means that I am the only who attributes meaning to things. I aim to use this outlook to shape my lifestyle: my world is thus defined and dependant on me, it’s not an extreme solipsism, others do exist but only in a meaningful way once a personal relationship has been formed. My aestheticism can colour and form my perception of things, how I perceive things determines how I am towards them. I’m experimenting with just how malleable perception is. Nihilism is simply a matter-of-fact for me. Meaning is relative therefore there is no-inherent meaning within things. I guess my nihilism isn’t extrem either. My main emphasis is on relativism (I forgot to add) and egoism.
Pragmatism… Cuz if it works… it works.
Instrumentalism… Cuz it works.
Empiricism… cuz nothing else works.
Atheism… cuz theism dosn’t work.
And any other ism I’m familar with that works…
And by “works” I mean renders my expectations, such that they more often match my experiences than not.
I like OP’s Narrativism - I’m currently thinking a lot around this subject myself.
I’d say constructivism, although not with a big C,
pragmatism, although not with a big P,
Epicureanism possibly with a big E because Epicurus is a proper noun, and
schism, because I don’t like sticking within isms. Schismism?
People want so badly to believe in, or discover, some inherent meaning in life. And, yet, we are eventually faced with the human inability to find any. Hence Absurdism.
I think the more real situation is that in today’s society (and for a very specific agenda), people have been inspired to refuse any “meaning for life”. I have no question that I found that supposed illusive meaning. But no matter what you say, if it is contrary to temporal authority agenda, it is denounced, obfuscated, and buried. Hence “rationalism”.
I’m not quite sure on the “inability” part yet. And if that’s the condition then there might be something to be found in living with that idea, or in being inspired by it, enthused by it.
I don’t know about that. I think people are inspired, even urged, to seek meaning but are only given a limited number of avenues by which to pursue it, so we essentially give in to the exhaustion if we can’t conform in some way.
What, if I may, is this illusive meaning you’ve discovered?
Whatever the case, nobody can take that from you. It can be denounced by everyone else, but that need not change your perspective. Meaning is relative, so there will never be a totally unified consensus on this, but if you have found some meaning that suits you and makes you happy, I say right on!
I don’t personally believe we are rational animals. Rationalism is more like a standard by which to measure our reasoning and justifications – it will never be perfect except as an ideal. I do think we are naturally inclined to appeal to reason, being that it is an extremely useful construct, but I also think that reason needs a healthy foundation in existentialism. Reason must be applied to a subject and context, after all.
Bluff,
Have you ever read Albert Camus? What you describe is one of his main philosophical concerns. Camus was inspired by this idea and found great inspiration and joy in it. He was a humanitarian because, I believe, he understood and sympathized with the human condition to such an extent that he found a great love for it.
I’ve read some - The Outsider and Sisyphus. Might read them again sometime as I wasn’t been particularly impressed. But I don’t think sympathy for ‘humanity’ will be on the cards for awhile.
"Ism"s are basically just identifiable narratives. While individually people may not match all the elements of the "ism"s that they ascribe to (or are ascribed to them), they provide a framework of understanding that can be meaningfully engaged. Basically, what you outlined in the OP.
Personally, my three would be:
Pragmatism/Instrumentalism
New “Boston” Confucianism (South of the Charles River School, w/ emphasis on xinxue, another “ism”)
Socialism
My reasoning for each of those positions depends on and is reinforced by the others.