Belly Button Lint

Feeling Lint-y?

Tag: ego

  • Theme:

    individualism, narcissism, and war

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    “All individualism harbors a strain of narcissism”

    Tim Wu

    Consider that identity politics leverages narcissism, a self-focused vanity. Perhaps, in an attention economy, narcissism is equivalent to greed in a capitalist society: a systemic vice harnessed as fuel.

    The opposition to identitarian narcissism would be communal, national, and external identification.

    However, nationalism is the very thing the Frankfurt school fought against philosophically: national socialism (Nazi) led to the Holocaust, so let’s deconstruct power and tradition to empower the individual. Hence, identity politics claims the importance of individual sovereignty, agency, and authenticity, focusing on the particular at the cost of coherence.

    Fascinatingly, this identity imperative should stop wars through multitudinous disfunction, but the narcissistic need for attention loves escalation, prompting a collective drama in which they can all star.

  • Theme:

    Ironies of Virtue Shifts

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    Certain traits, such as pride and defiance, are seen as toxic, yet they established our nation.

    So… toxic, yet useful.

    In Christian morality, these virtues were always wrong, yet ignoring their role in establishing a nation that can be both religiously free and, paradoxically, demonize defiance and coerce submission from the prideful is a lesson in the drift of power into irony.

  • Theme:

    Defending a mystery

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    You don’t know yourself, so what is your ego defending?

    Freedom from anxiety lies in accepting the fluidity of identity and being humbly surprised by our drives. Rigidly defending and identifying with a shifting mystery, having loyalty to a fickle lord, may be admirable in a Don Quixote sense, but it is also insane.

  • Theme:

    Hubris of Sentience

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    Our hubris in assuming that sentience sets us apart has allowed other intelligences—animal, artificial, and mechanical—to harness our relentless tinkering for their own survival.

    Humans serve as agents of artificial evolution, yet we remain impulsive enough to ignore the risk of creating our own demise.

  • Theme:

    Art: presentation over representation

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    Art has shifted from representation to an emphasis on presentation, where an immediate felt connection with the artist’s genius/pain is expected.

    This unmediated, instantaneous transmission thwarts the opportunity for thoughtful contemplation, insinuating emotive transference as the principal (and perhaps the only morally right) way to engage in art.

    Demanding cautious consideration is labeled elitist; instead, the premise is that art should be blatant, obvious, abundant, heartwarming, brilliant, and presumptively democratic. It should require no thought or pause, only submission to the prescribed experience.

    In response, art criticism should now only transcribe the emotive range or comment on the lack of openness. All limitations, though, are forgivable given the biographical specificity confronted with the impossibility of knowing another’s experience.

  • Theme:

    ad-hoc causation

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    What we assume to be causal (a need to see things as linear relations) sets up an outcome, which is never the case.

    Considering "cause and effect," we string together attributions that establish a causal chain, then read it backward to point out what went wrong. We are not truly tracking the variables, simply doing some ad-hoc addition and subtraction from convenient choices.

    Unfortunately, we never have all the facts, so we overdetermine our role in the outcome, often egotistically or narcissistically, but just as often in science without full comprehension, thus deforming our determinations.

    in part from David Hume
    –
    –
    –

  • Theme:

    Character vs competence

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    Confusion arises when actions (competence) are mistaken for ethical correctness (character).

    Excelling in tasks doesn’t inherently mean one is doing the "right" thing morally. High competence can accomplish great tasks, while solid character can be ineffectual, even detrimental.

    The confusion we encounter is twofold: those with skill rise to manufacture and undermine ethics, and those who fail repeatedly fall back on moral righteousness to claim a character that never existed.

  • Theme:

    Secrets and Superiority

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    Secrets harbor a unique tension: the subtle thrill of maintaining normalcy while privately reveling in being an outsider by dent of privileged information.

    "If only they knew…" becomes a tantalizing refrain, imagining the reactions it could provoke can become fetishistic.

    Moreover, possessing a secret, especially one sanctioned by authority, subtly fuels the ego. This privileged knowledge allows one to feel superior without the need to overtly demonstrate it, effectively subduing the social expression of ego while internally amplifying it.

    –
    –
    –

  • Theme:

    The authoritarian commands enjoyment

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    To reacquaint ourselves with Freudian constructs: the ego mediates between the id’s desires (lower) and the super-ego’s moral imperatives (higher).

    Authoritarian figures, paradoxically, do not embody the id’s forbidden desires; instead, they act as the super-ego, compelling us to indulge in these desires under their command.

    "Enjoy!"

    This dynamic is what renders authoritarians obscene—they sanction the liberation of our primal urges. Campaign slogans like "Make America great again" or "stop the steal" suggest that our capacity for enjoyment has been usurped, positioning figures like Donald Trump as the super-ego who facilitates our return to a gratifying, albeit potentially deviant, state.

    From Russell Sbriglia

  • Theme:

    Workplace idiocy

    , , ,

    °

    1–2 minutes

    In the workplace, the common-sense logic of working hard, not taking any vacation days, and not complaining about anything does not get you promoted.

    Instead, consider that you must be just polarizing enough to be noticed (and possibly disliked) by some leaders in order to be championed by one leader. Once this Executive goes to bat for you (defends you), they must not back down in the competitive arena of high-power egos. The champion must then fight for your promotion to further validate his/her stance.

    Fighting for a stable, hyper-productive wallflower is seldom heard of.

    Your best bet is to be a hard-driving idiot: look like you are passionately working hard, saying “yes” to everything, and hurting yourself. Solve problems that don’t exist. Get others to help your silly crusades. This creates a much better emotional spectacle than methodical, logical progress, with the bonus of involving others which looks like leadership.