On coping
If one assumes that philosophy is a form of therapy as Wittgenstein would say, then all of it seems like a coping mechanism.
However, if philosophy is a coping mechanism that is enhanced by the practice of reason in combination with emotion, which produces wisdom, then why are some people stuck in certain seemingly self destructive, nihilistic and/or pessimistic philosophies of the past?
However, if philosophy is a coping mechanism that is enhanced by the practice of reason in combination with emotion, which produces wisdom, then why are some people stuck in certain seemingly self destructive, nihilistic and/or pessimistic philosophies of the past?
Comments (7)
It may be that there's a certain element of catharsis involved in exploring nihilistic/pessimistic philosophies, a sophisticated version of watching horror movies, but no less entertainment in its own way. In this sense, these philosophies may ironically do more good than harm in terms of distracting from/relieving ennui and depression for those who embrace them. And so again end up being coping mechanisms.
From an interview with David Cronenberg:
"Interviewer: Evil is more interesting, cinematically, than good.
Cronenberg: ...Yeah, it’s more interesting. Because it illuminates things, partly, and partly because it’s cathartic. A villain in a bizarre, twisted way is always a Christlike figure: You know he’s going to die, and he’s dying for your sins, for your rage, for your craziness; he’s doing it for you so you don’t have to do it."
http://davidbreskin.com/magazines/1-interviews/david-cronenberg-2/
In a sense the pessimist philosophy similarly concentrates on the more interesting evil/negative aspects of existence and kills the world for the pessimist so he doesn't have to do it himself. It's a kind of romanticism in the end, a romantic wallowing maybe.
What do you think about the underlined text? Is this some sort of fatalism being projected on the plight of helpless people? I find that one can only feel such a feeling in face of the meaninglessness of their suffering, which is demeaning to say the least.
I don't think it's that as he spoke of extreme cases. Did you read the Van Dongen story, for instance?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/17/kill-me-now-acid-attack-led-euthanasia-mark-van-dongen
It's not demeaning of Van Dongen that he chose death as a release. Helplessness in the face of suffering can be a frightening and horrific situation (if the suffering is severe and permanent enough) that can make death absolutely preferable to life (even if for most of us periods of absolute helplessness are transient enough that a sense of meaning can see us through). So, I don't think the director is projecting fatalism on helpless people in general in a way that denigrates their suffering but just pointing out that in extreme cases it can lead to a flipping of the normal instinct to survive and that that's one theme of his horror movies.
I would say pessimism might be a middle stage that begins with romanticism. That's all I've got so far...
Well, what he said exposes his belief that death can be a release from life given gratuitous suffering and the impossibility of relief from said suffering. Isn't that bona fide fatalism?
Not in my view; fatalism would be a resignation to the fact that we are mere puppets of forces beyond our control or will, particularly in the face of pain and death. This looks more like pragmatism applied to extreme situations. I don't see him generalizing this as an attitude to be borne regardless of context.