O.G. Rose | The Philosophical and Dictatorial Suffering Servant by O.G. Rose (Hume to Hegel Series) @O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel | Uploaded January 2024 | Updated October 2024, 1 day ago.
A reason why Hume is so passionate about maintaining a “dialectic” is because “autonomous reason” creates a feeling that we should “autonomously rule.” If we must always be dialectical with “common life” though, we can only ever be a “steward,” never a ruler who disconnects from our people without falling into “false philosophy,” a force of destruction. Everyone naturally seeks to “be right” (it is impossible to knowingly and consciously seek to be wrong), and so philosophy seeks to “be right,” which means that philosophy is primed to naturally engage in “autonomous rationality,” which is to say “nondialectical thinking.”
‘By the autonomy principle, the philosopher must consider his own system ultimately correct and to be entitled to rule over other systems; failure to do so means that he is not taking his own philosophical thinking seriously and is doing violence to his integrity as a thinker.’ (Livingston)
This point is paramount, for it means thinking naturally seeks power and totalitarianism for “right” reasons, unless it is made dialectical (by choice) and forced into ‘primordial participation in custom.’ Otherwise, thinking and rationality will almost innocently stumble into ‘purg[ing] [itself] of the authority of custom,’ at which point it will be “unbound” and at the same time see itself as “rightly justified” and even obligated to “rule over other systems” — otherwise, the rationality couldn’t really take itself to be right, could it? And isn’t it immoral to not want others to be right (like us) and to not help them be right as such? In this way, “autonomous rationality” (which is A/A-thinking) must naturally seek making itself “totally right,” at which point it will be “epistemically immoral” for the rationality not to impose itself on others. And so a lack of dialectics (and A/B-thinking) leads to a world of competing totalitarian possibilities and forces...
For the full essay, please visit:
ogrose.substack.com/p/the-philosophical-and-dictatorial
Medium:
o-g-rose-writing.medium.com/the-philosophical-and-dictatorial-suffering-servant-c4921ca41500
For more by O.G. Rose:
ogrose.com
Photo by Europeana
A reason why Hume is so passionate about maintaining a “dialectic” is because “autonomous reason” creates a feeling that we should “autonomously rule.” If we must always be dialectical with “common life” though, we can only ever be a “steward,” never a ruler who disconnects from our people without falling into “false philosophy,” a force of destruction. Everyone naturally seeks to “be right” (it is impossible to knowingly and consciously seek to be wrong), and so philosophy seeks to “be right,” which means that philosophy is primed to naturally engage in “autonomous rationality,” which is to say “nondialectical thinking.”
‘By the autonomy principle, the philosopher must consider his own system ultimately correct and to be entitled to rule over other systems; failure to do so means that he is not taking his own philosophical thinking seriously and is doing violence to his integrity as a thinker.’ (Livingston)
This point is paramount, for it means thinking naturally seeks power and totalitarianism for “right” reasons, unless it is made dialectical (by choice) and forced into ‘primordial participation in custom.’ Otherwise, thinking and rationality will almost innocently stumble into ‘purg[ing] [itself] of the authority of custom,’ at which point it will be “unbound” and at the same time see itself as “rightly justified” and even obligated to “rule over other systems” — otherwise, the rationality couldn’t really take itself to be right, could it? And isn’t it immoral to not want others to be right (like us) and to not help them be right as such? In this way, “autonomous rationality” (which is A/A-thinking) must naturally seek making itself “totally right,” at which point it will be “epistemically immoral” for the rationality not to impose itself on others. And so a lack of dialectics (and A/B-thinking) leads to a world of competing totalitarian possibilities and forces...
For the full essay, please visit:
ogrose.substack.com/p/the-philosophical-and-dictatorial
Medium:
o-g-rose-writing.medium.com/the-philosophical-and-dictatorial-suffering-servant-c4921ca41500
For more by O.G. Rose:
ogrose.com
Photo by Europeana
