diff options
author | Silvio Rhatto <rhatto@riseup.net> | 2018-01-30 10:35:15 -0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Silvio Rhatto <rhatto@riseup.net> | 2018-01-30 10:35:15 -0200 |
commit | f484c50d7139f35df257e1f568dfe44fe3753517 (patch) | |
tree | 6d968c5df17ff2a87b93bcb659070624b8fdc574 | |
parent | 55599855b9104f0057427b132630f405612f0d46 (diff) | |
download | blog-f484c50d7139f35df257e1f568dfe44fe3753517.tar.gz blog-f484c50d7139f35df257e1f568dfe44fe3753517.tar.bz2 |
Books: One-Dimensional Man: Chapter One
-rw-r--r-- | books/sociedade/one-dimensional-man.md | 227 |
1 files changed, 226 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/books/sociedade/one-dimensional-man.md b/books/sociedade/one-dimensional-man.md index 8ffec82..fcc5fcd 100644 --- a/books/sociedade/one-dimensional-man.md +++ b/books/sociedade/one-dimensional-man.md @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta title="One Dimensional Man"]] +[[!meta title="One-Dimensional Man"]] * Author: Hebert Marcuse @@ -61,3 +61,228 @@ repulses all alternatives. The productivity and growth potential of this system stabilize the society and contain technical progress within the framework of domination. Technological rationality has become political rationality. + +### Freedom in negative terms + + Contemporary industrial civilization demonstrates that it has reached the stage + at which “the free society” can no longer be adequately defined in the + traditional terms of economic, political, and intellectual liberties, not + because these liberties have become insignificant, but because they are too + significant to be confined within the traditional forms. New modes of + realization are needed, corresponding to the new capabilities of society. + + Such new modes can be indicated only in negative terms because they would + amount to the negation of the prevailing modes. Thus economic freedom would + mean freedom from the economy—from being controlled by economic forces and + relationships; freedom from the daily struggle for existence, from earning a + living. Political freedom would mean liberation of the individuals from + politics over which they have no effective control. Similarly, intellectual + freedom would mean the restoration of individual thought now absorbed by mass + communication and indoctrination, abolition of “public opinion” together with + its makers. The unrealistic sound of these propositions is indicative, not of + their utopian character, but of the strength of the forces which prevent their + realization. The most effective and enduring form of warfare against liberation + is the implanting of material and intellectual needs that perpetuate obsolete + forms of the struggle for existence. + + The intensity, the satisfaction and even the character of human needs, beyond + the biological level, have always been preconditioned. Whether or not the + possibility of doing or leaving, enjoying or destroying, possessing or + rejecting something is seized as a need depends on whether or not it can be + seen as desirable and necessary for the prevailing societal institutions and + interests. In this sense, human needs are historical needs and, to the extent + to which the society demands the repressive development of the individual, his + needs themselves and their claim for satisfaction are subject to overriding + critical standards. + +### The irrationality of the rational + + We are again confronted with one of the most vexing aspects of advanced + industrial civilization: the rational character of its irrationality. Its + productivity and efficiency, its capacity to increase and spread comforts, to + turn waste into need, and destruction into construction, the extent to which + this civilization transforms the object world into an extension of man’s mind + and body makes the very notion of alienation questionable. + + [...] + + But in the contemporary period, the technological controls appear to be the + very embodiment of Reason for the benefit of all social groups and interests—to + such an extent that all contradiction seems irrational and all counteraction + impossible. + + No wonder then that, in the most advanced areas of this civilization, the + social controls have been introjected to the point where even individual + protest is affected at its roots. The intellectual and emotional refusal “to go + along” appears neurotic and impotent. + + [...] + + But the term “introjection” perhaps no longer describes the way in which the + individual by himself reproduces and perpetuates the external controls + exercised by his society. Introjection suggests a variety of relatively + spontaneous processes by which a Self (Ego) transposes the “outer” into the + “inner.” Thus introjection implies the existence of an inner dimension + distinguished from and even antagonistic to the external exigencies—an + individual consciousness and an individual unconscious apart from public + opinion and behavior.3 The idea of “inner freedom” here has its reality: it + designates the private space in which man may become and remain “himself.” + + Today this private space has been invaded and whittled down by technological + reality. Mass production and mass distribution claim the entire individual, and + industrial psychology has long since ceased to be confined to the factory. The + manifold processes of introjection seem to be ossified in almost mechanical + reactions. The result is, not adjustment but mimesis: an immediate + identification of the individual with his society and, through it, with the + society as a whole. + +### One-dimensionality + + Thus emerges a pattern of one-dimensional thought and behavior in which ideas, + aspirations, and objectives that, by their content, transcend the established + universe of discourse and action are either repelled or reduced to terms of + this universe. They are redefined by the rationality of the given system and of + its quantitative extension. + + The trend may be related to a development in scientific method: operationalism + in the physical, behaviorism in the social sciences. The common feature is a + total empiricism in the treatment of concepts; their meaning is restricted to + the representation of particular operations and behavior. The operational point + of view is well illustrated by P. W. Bridgman’s analysis of the concept of + length:5 + + We evidently know what we mean by length if we can tell what the length of any + and every object is, and for the physicist nothing more is required. To find + the length of an object, we have to perform certain physical operations. The + concept of length is therefore fixed when the operations by which length is + measured are fixed: that is, the concept of length involves as much and nothing + more than the set of operations by which length is determined. In general, we + mean by any concept nothing more than a set of operations; the concept is + synonymous with the corresponding set of operations. + + Bridgman has seen the wide implications of this mode of thought for the society + at large:6 + + To adopt the operational point of view involves much more than a mere + restriction of the sense in which we understand ‘concept,’ but means a + far-reaching change in all our habits of thought, in that we shall no longer + permit ourselves to use as tools in our thinking concepts of which we cannot + give an adequate account in terms of operations. + + Bridgman’s prediction has come true. The new mode of thought is today the + predominant tendency in philosophy, psychology, sociology, and other fields. + Many of the most seriously troublesome concepts are being “eliminated” by + showing that no adequate account of them in terms of operations or behavior can + be given. + + [...] + + Outside the academic establishment, the “far-reaching change in all our habits + of thought” is more serious. It serves to coordinate ideas and goals with those + exacted by the prevailing system, to enclose them in the system, and to repel + those which are irreconcilable with the system. The reign of such a + one-dimensional reality does not mean that materialism rules, and that the + spiritual, metaphysical, and bohemian occupations are petering out. On the + contrary, there is a great deal of “Worship together this week,” “Why not try + God,” Zen, existentialism, and beat ways of life, etc. But such modes of + protest and transcendence are no longer contradictory to the status quo and no + longer negative. They are rather the ceremonial part of practical behaviorism, + its harmless negation, and are quickly digested by the status quo as part of + its healthy diet. + + [...] + + Such limitation of thought is certainly not new. Ascending modern rationalism, + in its speculative as well as empirical form, shows a striking contrast between + extreme critical radicalism in scientific and philosophic method on the one + hand, and an uncritical quietism in the attitude toward established and + functioning social institutions. Thus Descartes’ ego cogitans was to leave the + “great public bodies” untouched, and Hobbes held that “the present ought always + to be preferred, maintained, and accounted best.” Kant agreed with Locke in + justifying revolution if and when it has succeeded in organizing the whole and + in preventing subversion. + +### Progress, abolition of labor, totalitarianism + + The society bars a whole type of oppositional operations and behavior; + consequently, the concepts pertaining to them are rendered illusory or + meaningless. Historical transcendence appears as metaphysical transcendence, + not acceptable to science and scientific thought. The operational and + behavioral point of view, practiced as a “habit of thought” at large, becomes + the view of the established universe of discourse and action, needs and + aspirations. + + “Progress” is not a neutral term; it moves toward specific ends, and these ends + are defined by the possibilities of ameliorating the human condition. Advanced + industrial society is approaching the stage where continued progress would + demand the radical subversion of the prevailing direction and organization of + progress. This stage would be reached when material production (including the + necessary services) becomes automated to the extent that all vital needs can be + satisfied while necessary labor time is reduced to marginal time. From this + point on, technical progress would transcend the realm of necessity, where it + served as the instrument of domination and exploitation which thereby limited + its rationality; technology would become subject to the free play of faculties + in the struggle for the pacification of nature and of society. + + Such a state is envisioned in Marx’s notion of the “abolition of labor.” The + term “pacification of existence” seems better suited to designate the + historical alternative of a world which—through an international conflict which + transforms and suspends the contradictions within the established + societies—advances on the brink of a global war. “Pacification of existence” + means the development of man’s struggle with man and with nature, under + conditions where the competing needs, desires, and aspirations are no longer + organized by vested interests in domination and scarcity—an organization which + perpetuates the destructive forms of this struggle. + + Today’s fight against this historical alternative finds a firm mass basis in + the underlying population, and finds its ideology in the rigid orientation of + thought and behavior to the given universe of facts. Validated by the + accomplishments of science and technology, justified by its growing + productivity, the status quo defies all transcendence. Faced with the + possibility of pacification on the grounds of its technical and intellectual + achievements, the mature industrial society closes itself against this + alternative. Operationalism, in theory and practice, becomes the theory and + practice of containment. Underneath its obvious dynamics, this society is a + thoroughly static system of life: self-propelling in its oppressive + productivity and in its beneficial coordination. Containment of technical + progress goes hand in hand with its growth in the established direction. In + spite of the political fetters imposed by the status quo, the more technology + appears capable of creating the conditions for pacification, the more are the + minds and bodies of man organized against this alternative. + + The most advanced areas of industrial society exhibit throughout these two + features: a trend toward consummation of technological rationality, and + intensive efforts to contain this trend within the established institutions. + Here is the internal contradiction of this civilization: the irrational element + in its rationality. It is the token of its achievements. The industrial society + which makes technology and science its own is organized for the + ever-more-effective domination of man and nature, for the ever-more-effective + utilization of its resources. It becomes irrational when the success of these + efforts opens new dimensions of human realization. Organization for peace is + different from organization for war; the institutions which served the struggle + for existence cannot serve the pacification of existence. Life as an end is + qualitatively different from life as a means. + + [...] + + Qualitative change also involves a change in the technical basis on which this + society rests—one which sustains the economic and political institutions + through which the “second nature” of man as an aggressive object of + administration is stabilized. + + [...] + + To be sure, labor must precede the reduction of labor, and industrialization + must precede the development of human needs and satisfactions. But as all + freedom depends on the conquest of alien necessity, the realization of freedom + depends on the techniques of this conquest. The highest productivity of labor + can be used for the perpetuation of labor, and the most efficient + industrialization can serve the restriction and manipulation of needs. + + When this point is reached, domination—in the guise of affluence and + liberty—extends to all spheres of private and public existence, integrates all + authentic opposition, absorbs all alternatives. Technological rationality + reveals its political character as it becomes the great vehicle of better + domination, creating a truly totalitarian universe in which society and nature, + mind and body are kept in a state of permanent mobilization for the defense of + this universe. |