Out of interest, why do you think this? Is it something about the internal nature of the aspect that makes it incapable of connecting with another person, or something about other people that stops them from accepting/loving/owning-to that particular part in a way they could other parts?
I think that it doesn't value other people's autonomy as much as the rest of me. It just wants to get to it's ends, no matter the cost, because it believes they are right. And it thinks that everybody else should be doing exactly what it's doing--marching toward the same goal. Anyone who isn't helping is a distraction or enemy.
So, to answer your question, both. Maybe internal aspects that make it uninterested in and even wary of other people--individual people, experienced interpersonally--and other people giving it the affection it deserves, which is to say none.
It sounds to me like what you're saying is that this part of you is simply that part which experiences values as objective/real, i.e. out there, not dependent on your personal preferences - this part is both highly valued because a real value is the only one that can enable self-transcendence (any value dependent on one's own personal preferences keeps you within the sphere of yourself), but also necessarily conflicts with the kind of liberal relativism that seeks (chimerically) to impose nothing on others, to never advance a value claim against them, i.e. in a way that could come to them as an alien demand. You feel a conflict between really valuing things and being infinitely tolerant, a conflict mirrored in liberal ideology itself. Or something like that. Does this sound right
( ... )
that this part of you is simply that part which experiences values as objective/real, i.e. out there, not dependent on your personal preferences
Yes, that sounds right.
this part is both highly valued because a real value is the only one that can enable self-transcendence (any value dependent on one's own personal preferences keeps you within the sphere of yourself)
This seems resonates less well with me. In my personal musings I tend to think very little about the self, or transcending it. I think what's going on here is a kind of deontological itch--a capacity for duty that is desperate for an obligating power.
liberal relativism that seeks (chimerically) to impose nothing on others, to never advance a value claim against them, i.e. in a way that could come to them as an alien demand.
It's funny, but the term "liberal relativism" has come up in several conversations recently. Personally, I think it's a bit of a misnomer, because it seems like liberals tend to be realists, even absolutists, about
( ... )
Comments 7
Reply
I think that it doesn't value other people's autonomy as much as the rest of me. It just wants to get to it's ends, no matter the cost, because it believes they are right. And it thinks that everybody else should be doing exactly what it's doing--marching toward the same goal. Anyone who isn't helping is a distraction or enemy.
So, to answer your question, both. Maybe internal aspects that make it uninterested in and even wary of other people--individual people, experienced interpersonally--and other people giving it the affection it deserves, which is to say none.
As always, flattered by your interest. Why?
Reply
Reply
that this part of you is simply that part which experiences values as objective/real, i.e. out there, not dependent on your personal preferences
Yes, that sounds right.
this part is both highly valued because a real value is the only one that can enable self-transcendence (any value dependent on one's own personal preferences keeps you within the sphere of yourself)
This seems resonates less well with me. In my personal musings I tend to think very little about the self, or transcending it. I think what's going on here is a kind of deontological itch--a capacity for duty that is desperate for an obligating power.
liberal relativism that seeks (chimerically) to impose nothing on others, to never advance a value claim against them, i.e. in a way that could come to them as an alien demand.
It's funny, but the term "liberal relativism" has come up in several conversations recently. Personally, I think it's a bit of a misnomer, because it seems like liberals tend to be realists, even absolutists, about ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment