Sunday 30 August 2015

True Pride


Friedrich Nietzsche, aged 18
In my last I meant to say that God whether existent or not can provide a focus for the spiritual life. I mentioned atheist Sam Harris approvingly for demonstrating that the separate “I” is an illusion: there is only the One. In his own words, “Experiencing this directly—not merely thinking about it—is the true beginning of spiritual life.”

Which might lead to the conclusion that the problem is “ego”, and that spiritual life is about effacing the self. In a recent post, “The Trip”, I noted that you cannot safely cross the road without a vivid sense of “I”. The pronoun refers to body and mind together as a single unit. Too often we carelessly think the “I” refers merely to consciousness, particularly self-consciousness. In its Latin form “ego” is too often a shorthand for “egotism”, which in turn is intended as “arrogant selfishness”. Thus it is easy to get confused when we want to look into it seriously.

So I want to leave that contentious pronoun, whether in Latin or English, and talk about a different word. Pride, I say, is an essential spur to proper human behaviour, more important than any set of rules, any commandments instilled upon the impressionable child. More reliance is placed on pride, for good or ill, as a guide to action than reason, laws or even the preservation of one’s own life. This is particularly true of the male psyche. When pride is shattered, it’s like having no backbone, becoming a jellyfish. The growing child seeks a role model for what to be proud about. This is where everything can go well or badly. “WoodsyBit Moss”, in a comment on my last, mentioned “false-pride, ego and love for my country”. It seemed like a meaningful coincidence, for I’d already been brooding about notions of “good pride” and “bad pride”. I found them to have too many Christian associations.

So I shall speak in praise of true pride, proposing it as a human birthright. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights doesn’t mention pride, but is focused instead on my “rights”, defined in terms of how others must treat me. It says nothing about how I should treat myself. So here goes.

As a singular instance of Everyman, I was born black, white, able-bodied or otherwise, into a good or bad family; or perhaps was left to my fate as a foundling, floating among the bulrushes—or abandoned in a dumpster. That is to say, the dice were loaded from the start, I didn’t arrive by choice. What then can I do? Cringe and find a hole to hide in? No, here I am, there’s a space in this world for me, body and soul. Only I can claim it. I am to fill my space completely. This is true, that is to say healthy pride which leads me on to my fate; perhaps to enter Europe from Africa or Syria and get drowned in an overloaded boat.

False pride is to see myself as superior, to encroach, to exceed my space and stifle others with my overweening. Or else it is to adopt a false humility. Worst of all is to be neutered, a nothing. It might be genuinely helpful to be told that God loves me, but only if the teller feels this love personally in his or her heart. Such a person would show it by loving me for being whatever I am. And I suppose what people hate about religion is the scarcity of such a person. Many are those who will quote Jesus while leading you blindly into the very ditch he warned them against.

This pride I speak of is “the true beginning of spiritual life” because we need to know it is possible to be profoundly self-sufficient. Possible and necessary too, for no one person can show me the way. On this basis every religion falls. I almost feel that this point is the foundation of Nietzsche’s philosophy; perhaps not so much in his major works but the project he spoke of in his last book Ecce Homo as The Revaluation of All Values. He lost his sanity before he could write it.

As a young man Fernando Pessoa was much impressed by Nietzsche. Here is an entry describing a disorienting loss of ego, from The Book of Disquiet—fragment 262 in Zenith’s translation:

Fernando Pessoa as a young man
Today I was struck by an absurd but valid sensation. I realized, in an inner flash, that I’m no one. Absolutely no one. In that flash, what I’d supposed was a city proved to be a barren plain, and the sinister light that showed me myself revealed no sky above. Before the world existed, I was deprived of the power to be. If I was reincarnated, it was without myself, without my I.

I’m the suburbs of a non-existent town, the long-winded commentary on a book never written. I’m no one, no one at all. I don’t know how to feel, how to think, how to want. I’m the character of an unwritten novel, wafting in the air, dispersed without ever having been, among the dreams of someone who didn’t know how to complete me.

I always think, I always feel, but there’s no logic in my thought, no emotions in my emotion. I’m falling from the trapdoor on high through all of infinite space in an aimless, infinitudinous, empty descent. My soul is a black whirlpool, a vast vertigo circling a void, the racing of an infinite ocean around a hole in nothing. And in these waters which are more a churning than actual waters float the images of all I’ve seen and heard in the world—houses, faces, books, boxes, snatches of music and syllables of voices all moving in a sinister and bottomless swirl.

And amid all this confusion, I, what’s truly I, am the centre that exists only in the geometry of the abyss: I’m the nothing around which everything spins, existing only so that it can spin, being a centre only because every circle has one. I, what’s truly I, am a well without walls but with the walls’ viscosity, the centre of everything with nothing around it.

It’s not demons (who at least have a human face) but hell itself that seems to be laughing inside me, it’s the croaking madness of the dead universe, the spinning cadaver of physical space, the end of all worlds blowing blackly in the wind, formless and timeless, without a god who created it, without even its own self, impossibly whirling in the absolute darkness as the one and only reality, everything.

If only I knew how to think! If only I knew how to feel!

My mother died too soon for me to ever know her . . .
The piece is dated 1st December 1931. As his translator says, “No other writer ever achieved such a direct transference of self to paper.”

13 Comments:

At 31 August 2015 at 11:21 , Anonymous ellie Clayton said...

You appear to be searching for rock bottom. Are you exploring the depths before finding a point from which you can begin reassembling the scattered fragments?

 
At 31 August 2015 at 12:27 , Anonymous Nelson said...

When you say "rock bottom" and "depths" I am not sure whether you speak of them disparagingly. It’s true that I’ve alluded to instances which are rather uncomfortable to contemplate. But I can’t see how they can be swept away, for you or I could be in the shoes of anyone else in the world.

You speak of scattered fragments, but I’m trying to embrace reality afresh and see it as a whole, “things as they really are” rather than through some traditional lens shaped by venerable concepts of civilization.

Perhaps I have presented scattered fragments of ideas, and so you are right, but I’m hoping a reader may see that no skill in reassembly is needed, because they are already parts of a whole.

I'm not sure if I have answered you well enough.

 
At 31 August 2015 at 13:12 , Anonymous Tom said...

Hullo Vincent; This morning I returned my thoughts on a comment on my latest post to Geo (Trainride of the Enigmas) which relates very closely to part of what you have said here. He took gentle issue with my use of the word 'judgementalism'. Now I am not taking issue with your use of words such as 'ego' or 'I' or 'pride' only to mention that you do qualify those words in order to give them deeper meaning than they would normally carry. For me, the kind of subjects on which we write are fraught with the meaning of words, the acceptability of those words, as well as the difficulty of expressing what we experience in terms of words which can never adequately express those experiences.

I notice from Ellie's comment, someone whose input to your posts I do enjoy, that she uses such words as 'rock bottom' and 'a point (from which)'....etc. One difficulty that arises here is whether or not there is a rock bottom at all. Your quote from Fernando Pessoa is absolutely brilliant, but why is it so? Because for me, and maybe you experience this also, there is that in his words which carries one away from rationale, logic and reason. It is as if he packs in as many words as he can, none of which may necessarily mean anything in themselves, but together transport one to a sense of common (almost) experience which lies beyond his words.

 
At 31 August 2015 at 13:15 , Anonymous ellie Clayton said...

There is a condition of darkness, emptiness and hopelessness which can be a condition productive of transformation. To live there as a permanent state would be unsatisfactory solution.

I think that we cannot see "things as they really are" without some tools of perception which have to be granted before we can give structure to consciousness. I tend to think that a diffuse, undifferentiated consciousness is preliminary to the particularized consciousness which relates us to the exterior world. We assemble the scraps that we acquire from multiple sources into what we identify as "myself."

Actually I think that "things as they really are" are not the same for any two individuals.

There is much more that can be said and I'm sure you and your readers will fill me in.

 
At 31 August 2015 at 20:31 , Anonymous Bryan White said...

18 year old Nietzsche looked like a kid that would pick his nose and leave his boogers under the desk. Who knew?

 
At 31 August 2015 at 20:48 , Anonymous Bryan White said...

Excellent post, by the way.

It's interesting that we also talk about "false modesty", but in a different sense. With false modesty it's a sham that we put on, something we deliberately fake to appear ever so humble. With false pride, it's more like we fool ourselves. We think we feel proud and we may even believe in that pride, but it's the foundations of that pride that are false and built on nothing but delusions.

 
At 1 September 2015 at 02:40 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

"There is a condition of darkness, emptiness and hopelessness which can be a condition productive of transformation. To live there as a permanent state would be unsatisfactory solution."

"I think that we cannot see "things as they really are" without some tools of perception which have to be granted before we can give structure to consciousness."

"Actually I think that "things as they really are" are not the same for any two individuals."

The above quotes from Ellie's comment summarise so well my own view that I really don't need to add anything else in this instance. Except that I'm an admirer of Pessoa's writing but can do without both Sam Harris and Nietzsche.

 
At 1 September 2015 at 09:31 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Your comments as ever are a joy.

A few of mine on yours:

Nietzsche: an earlier overblown version of this post brought in Nietzsche, Freud, Darwin & Marx for good measure, till sanity prevailed. But the research was interesting, esp. on Nietzsche and his madness

Yes, as an eighteen-year-old he does have exactly the look you describe, looking his teacher straight in the eye, whilst pasting his mark of rebellion under the desk, & planning world domination

meaning of words: In fact, Tom, the entire piece took its origin from an exchange of comments between us about “ego” here, on August 11th; which, believe it or not, I continued to brood upon till I could publish this post & attempt to resolve it to my own satisfaction.

‘“things as they really are” are not the same for two individuals.’ Precisely, because the phrase was not intended to refer to objective reality but an individual’s percepts after cleansing from preconceived ideas.

tools of perception which have to be granted before we can give structure to consciousness: can we clarify this further, Ellie & Natalie? Where does the granting come from? What kind of structure to consciousness? There’s one kind which allows one to cross the road safely. A child has to be taught the requisite tools of perception for that. An adult who’s prone to moments of leaving “I”-consciousness (Pessoa: “I realized, in an inner flash, that I’m no one”) has to collect his wits to cross the road, as I’ve noted twice on this blog: “The Trip” in May ’15 and “Whithersoever” in May ’12). The consciousness of being no one involves a different structure to consciousness (perhaps a cloud of unknowing), and it too has to be granted. So I’d like to know what you think about that.

false modesty Yes, an earlier draft of this post examined the way that pride and humility while apparent opposites can masquerade as one another. Acceptance speeches: “I’ve been humbled by your praise” (unworthy of it?); “I’m so proud of everyone else (but my unworthy self?)” & so on. Then I realized that the true opposite of pride is not humility but shame We have to maintain our pride because we cannot face humiliation, which has nothing to do with humility but is the cause of shame, that emotion which can be stronger than fear. Why is it that powerful people seem impervious to shame? Is it innate or acquired shamelessness which has helped them elbow their way to the top?

Too much from me already, without puzzling over “unsatisfactory solution” as mentioned by Ellie and endorsed by Natalie. Unsatisfactory solution to what?

 
At 1 September 2015 at 09:34 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Oh, and I forgot to mention Sam Harris. I too felt I could do without him, but don't you find it one of life's delights when you can overturn a prejudice against someone, & turn disdain into admiration?

 
At 1 September 2015 at 15:13 , Anonymous ellie Clayton said...

When I think of a newborn infant, I am aware of the condition in which we all arrive: we cannot think, we cannot feel. But for a mother who nourishes us and keeps the body alive, the mind could not develop. But with minimal support, the infant learns to relate to his exterior world through acquiring data through his sensory perception. The child is born with potential; how his potential develops depends on his environment and his choices.

If mother is a metaphor for the benevolent, protective, nourishing environment, her death may leave us bereft of the positive dimension of perceiving life.

Ian Marshall and Danah Zohar wrote a book, Who's Afraid of Schrodinger's Cat, to explain the concepts of the new physics in the context of classical science. This quote crosses the dividing line between physics and cosmology:

"In Quantum Field Theory, things existing in the universe are conceived of as patterns of dynamic energy. The ground state of energy in the universe, the lowest possible state, is known as the quantum vacuum. It is called a vacuum because it cannot be measured directly; it is empty of "things." When we try to perceive the vacuum directly we are confronted with a "void", a background without features that therefore seems to be empty. In fact the vacuum is filled with every potentiality of everything in the universe.

"...Unseen and not directly measurable, the vacuum exerts a subtle push on the surface of existence, like water pushing on things immersed in it . ... It is as though all surface things are in constant interaction with a tenuous background of evanescent reality. ...The universe is not "filled" with the vacuum. Rather it is "written on" it or emerges out of it."

http://ramhornd.blogspot.com/2010/12/weeping-babe.html

This is the void which is productive of transformation.

 
At 1 September 2015 at 17:58 , Anonymous Nelson said...

I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the psychological and scientific theories you describe, Ellie.

But I must apologize for having inadvertently misled you & having failed to grasp your train of thought till now.

Pessoa wrote under many pseudonymous identities, each expressing part of his authorial imagination. I find The Book of Disquiet despite its title to be always uplifting and often euphoric. It is framed as fiction, as narrated by Bernado Soares, a bookkeeper who lives alone and works in a Lisbon office. (Pessoa was never a bookkeeper but sometimes did commercial translation work.) He admits to taking liberties in his writing, as in another piece dated the same as the one I quoted, which has the following:

“In order to convey to someone else what I feel, I must translate my feelings into his language—saying things, that is, as if they were what I feel, so that he, reading them, will feel exactly what I felt. [. . . ] even if it means perverting the true nature of what I felt. [. . . ]I’ve lied? No, I’ve understood. [. . .] Lying is simply the soul’s ideal language.”

The sentence “My mother died too soon for me to ever know her . . .” is certainly fiction, because Pessoa’s own mother died when he was 30. And as for the rest, it may arise from his Muse’s promptings while he remained detached, or it may be a transcription, so to speak, of what he had felt that day.

So the Pessoa piece can’t be used as evidence in support of the theories you refer to. It may simply be that he had the same intuition as you and Blake about a newborn infant’s needs.

 
At 1 September 2015 at 22:25 , Anonymous Natalie d'Arbeloff said...

Vincent, I'll have to postpone replying to your earlier questions as I'm in a rather un-communicating mode at present. Sorry about this but I hope to get back to the subject some time soon.

 
At 2 September 2015 at 08:41 , Anonymous Nelson said...

Thanks, Natalie, looking forward to it when you are able.

Meanwhile I seize an opportunity to repeat the key passage of this post:

. . . here I am, there’s a space in this world for me, body and soul. Only I can claim it. I am to fill my space completely.

It’s a point taken up in a post by Maria Popova in BrainPickings with a poem by Lucille Clifton, which she calls
‘A glorious ode to claiming one’s belonging in that space between starshine and clay.’

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home