diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'essays/social_recognition.tex')
-rw-r--r-- | essays/social_recognition.tex | 212 |
1 files changed, 212 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/essays/social_recognition.tex b/essays/social_recognition.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b3daa70 --- /dev/null +++ b/essays/social_recognition.tex @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@ +\chapter{On Social Recognition} + +The most important tasks which the individual can undertake arise not +from personal considerations but from the general conditions of society. The +standards of accomplishment for these tasks are implicit in the tasks, and are +objective in the sense that they can be applied without reference to public +opinion. For example, given that humans express themselves in statements +which are supposedly true or false, there arises a fundamental philosophical +"problem of knowledge." Then, the fact that societies are organized in +different ways at different times and places poses fundamental problems of +"political" thought and action. Sometimes the most important task posed by +the conditions of society is to invent a whole new activity. The origination +of experimental science in Europe in the seventeenth century is an example. +For lack of a better term, these tasks will be referred to as "fundamental +tasks." + +The fact that a fundamental task is posed by the general conditions of +society does not mean that public opinion will be aware of the task, or that +the ruling class will commission someone to undertake it. It may well be that +the first person to perceive the problem is the person who solves it; and +public opinion may not catch up with him for decades or centuries. + +The person who devotes himself to a fundamental task is, more often +than not, persecuted or ignored by society. Society puts up an immense +resistance to solutions of fundamental problems, even when, as in the cases +of Galois and Mendel, those solutions are politically innocuous. There is no +evidence that this state of affairs is limited to some particular organization of +society. Further, there are cases in which an objectively valid result is +known, and yet apparently society can never adopt the result institutionally. +Art is objectively inferior to brend, as I have shown, and yet all indications +are that art will always be a major institution. The persecution of individuals +who undertake fundamental tasks is an instance of a general human social +irrationality which runs throughout history, from human sacrifice in ancient +times to present-day war between communist countries. The conclusion is +that for an individual to commit himself to a fundamental task tends to +preclude social approval for his activities. + +Quite apart from the fundamental tasks which are posed by general +social conditions, the ruling class needs a continual supply of new talent at +all levels of society. At the lower levels, this supply is assured by the +necessity of selling one's labor power in order to eat. At the higher levels of +accomplishment, the ruling class assures itself of a continual supply of new +talent by offering publicity or fame---social recognition---as a reward for +accomplishing the tasks specified by the ruling class. Famous men such as +Einstein are held up to children as examples of the proper relationship +between the talented individual and society; and an international institution, +the Nobel Prize, exists to implement this system of supplying talent. +According to the doctrine, the individual has a duty to benefit society, to +choose a task posed by the ruling class as his occupation. (His publicly +known occupation is supposed to correspond to his real goals.) If he +performs successfully, he will receive publicity as an indication that he is +indeed benefiting society. + +Our analysis of fame is the opposite of that of Ben Vautier. Vautier +asserts that the desire for personal publicity is an instinctive drive of human +beings, and that the accumulation of publicity is a genuinely selfish act like +the accumulation of food. In fact, Vautier goes so far as to make no +distinction between what Gypsy Rose Lee and Lenin, for example, did to +gain fame; and he assumes that a pacifist, for example, would welcome +military honors equally as much as he would a peace award. We assert, on +the contrary, that the desire for publicity is not instinctive; it is inculcated in +the young so that the ruling class may have a continual supply of new talent +to serve its purposes. The desire for publicity, far more than the desire for +money, is establishment-serving more than self-serving. (We suggest that the +principal reason why Vautier seeks publicity is not instinct, but economics. +Vautier has no inherited source of income, and has never been trained for a +profession. For him, the alternative to the art\slash publicity racket would be +common labor. If he had the opportunity for a life of leisure, he might feel +differently about publicity.) + +The issues which are raised here are extremely important for the person +who perceives a fundamental task, because his sanity may depend on +whether he understands the rationality of his motives for undertaking the +task. He will already have been inculcated with the establishment's concepts +of service and recognition, concepts which are epitomized in the image of +Einstein's career. What we suggest is that it is vital to disabuse oneself of +these concepts. To repeat, fundamental tasks are posed by the general +conditions of society. Yet the individual who undertakes such a task will +probably be persecuted or ignored. Given these circumstances, the doctrine +that the individual has a duty to benefit society is a hypocritical fraud, an +obscenity. For the individual to commit himself to a fundamental task tends +to preclude social recognition for his activities; or, to reverse the remark, +social recognition is not a reward to accomplishment of a fundamental task +(just as military honors are not a reward to pacifism). Thus, it is not rational +for the individual to undertake a fundamental task in order to gain fame. + +The motive for undertaking a fundamental task should be genuine +selfishness. (We will continue our argument that the striving for fame is not +genuinely selfish below.) The individual who perceives a fundamental task +should undertake it for his private gratification. The task is of primary +importance to society. By accomplishing it, the individual gains the privilege +of knowing something which is socially important, but which society cannot +deal with honestly. The individual should undertake the task in order to +utilize his real abilities, to develop his potentiality for its own sake. The +undertaking of a significant task which utilizes one's real abilities is the true +source of happiness. To perceive a fundamental task and not to undertake it +is to be stunted: one loses one's self-respect and becomes progressively +demoralized. (Another rational motive for undertaking a fundamental task is +to transform the social environment by methods which do not depend on +society's approval or comprehension.) + +We do not mean to suggest that the individual who undertakes a +fundamental task should conceal his results. Even though such tasks may +seem individualistic, they require cooperative, social activity for their +accomplishment. A proposed solution to a fundamental problem can hardly +develop without being scrutinized from a variety of perspectives. It is +essential to have qualified critics, and it is unfortunate that they are so rare. +Solutions to fundamental problems are social consumption goods (their +consumption is not exclusionary), so that critics or collaborators have as +much opportunity to benefit from them as their originators do. As an +example, most of my writings are really collaborations with Tony Conrad. I +often find that I do not understand my own position until I know how it +appears to him. When communication of results is essentially a form of +collaboration, it is very different from the attempt to gain publicity or fame. + +It is precisely in the context of the generalized social irrationality which +runs throughout history that the attempt to gain fame must be seen as +foolishly un-selfish. What difference can it possibly make whether the masses +venerate one's name a hundred years after one's death? The adulation of the +masses after one is dead is of no conceivable value to oneself. It is society +which indoctrinates one to worry about one's reputation after one is dead, in +order to condition one to serve the interests of the ruling class. + +Then, what does it mean to the individual who solves a fundamental +problem to have his name publicized in the mass media, to be a celebrity +among people who cannot possibly understand what he has done? Even +more important, we must recognize that publicity carries a definte risk for +the individual committed to a fundamental task. The solution of such a +problem must usually be expressed in categories which are incommensurate +and incompatible with the categories of thought which are common coin at +the time. In order for the solution of a fundamental problem to be exposed +in the mass media, it has to be translated into media categories and this +usually results in irreparable distortion. In fact, the solution is distorted in +precisely such a manner that it begins to serve the interests of the ruling +class. One encounters an immense pressure which tends to harness one to +goals which have nothing to do with objective value. More precisely, when an +individual who has solved a fundamental problem is publicized in the mass +media, a process of mutual subversion takes place as between the +establishment\slash media and the individual. In the process, the establishment is +likely to come out far ahead. + +There are two other reasons why it is actually advantageous to the +individual who undertakes a fundamental task to avoid publicity. Since one's +activity is likely to be treated as a threat by society, one can minimize the +energy required to defend it, and can carry the activity further, if one +receives no publicity. Then, there will unavoidably be false starts made in +developing the solution to a fundamental problem. If one is not operating in +the glare of publicity, it is far easier to abandon these false starts. + +It used to be that when I saw publicity being given to an inferior way of +doing a thing, and I knew a better way, then I reacted with a sense of duty. I +had to appoint myself as a missionary, to enter the public arena and start a +campaign to replace the inferior approach with the better approach. But this +sense of duty must now be called into question. Is it really in my interest to. +thrust myself on the media as a missionary? The truth is that in the context +of generalized social irrationality, it is un-selfish and self-sacrificing to believe +that I must either agree with current fads or else contest them publicly. The +genuinely selfish attitude is *hat it is sufficient for me to know what the +superior approach is. I can ignore the false issues which fill the mass media; I +do not have to participate in public opinion at all. The genuinely selfish +attitude is that "it does not concern me." Genuine selfishness is living one's +life on a level which does not communicate with the level of the mass media +and public opinion. + +If we recognize that it is irrational to undertake a fundamental task in +order to benefit society and gain social approval, then our very choice of +fundamental tasks shouid be affected. The most visible fundamental tasks +are those which the establishment is to some extent aware of, and which if +accomplished would immediately be rewarded with social approval. (In the +natural sciences, there literally may be a race to solve a well-known problem). +But if our motives are genuinely self-serving, and have to do with the +development of our potentiality for its own sake, then there is no reason to +limit ourselves to widely understood problems. We can undertake to discover +timeless results---permanent answers to questions which will be important +indefinitely---without concerning ourselves with whether society can adopt +the results institutionally. We can pose problems of which neither the +establishment, the media, nor public opinion are aware. We can undertake +tasks which draw on our unique abilities, so that our personal contribution is +indispensable. + +There is a difficulty which we have postponed mentioning. The +individual is always compelled to engage in some socially approved activity +in order to obtain the means of subsistence. We cannot assume that the +individual will have an inherited source of income. In order to pursue a +fundamental task, he will have to pursue a legitimate occupation at the same +time. It may be extremely difficult to lead such a double life, because to do +so requires precisely the self-assurance. that comes from accomplishing the +fundamental task. Leading a double life is not a game for the person who is +unsure about his real abilities or his vocation. If the individual is capable of +leading a double life, our suggestion is to obtain the means of subsistence by +the most efficient swindle available. Do not hesitate to practice outward +conformity in order to exploit the establishment for your own purposes. + +There remains the case of the individual who, like Galois, is not +prepared to lead a double life. His problem is one of destitution. However, +he is different from an ordinary pauper. By assumption, he is more talented +than the members of the establishment; he does not belong to the +establishment because he is overqualified for it. Given that he is more +talented than members of the establishment, and that his survival is +threatened, a collateral fundamental task emerges, the task of immediately +transmuting his talent into power to handle the establishment on his own +terms. To perceive this task is a major resuit of this essay. The task cannot be +defined accurately without a perfect understanding of the difference +between fundamental tasks and the serve-society-and-get-famous fraud. We +contend that Galois should have regarded the task of immediately +transmuting his talent into power over the establishment as an inseparable +collateral problem to his mathematical researches. From a common sense +point of view, this collateral task will seem utterly impossible. However, we +are talking about individuals whose vocation is to do the seemingly +impossible. Thus, we conclude by leaving this unsolved fundamental problem +for the reader to ponder. + |