I find Tolstoy's analogy for the nature of ideals insightful. Tolstoy observes that if we want to cross a flowing river directly from one bank to another we do not aim merely straight for the other side - in that case the resultant vector, so to speak, would carry us downriver from our target of the bank opposite. Instead, we swim against the current as though we are aiming upriver to a point further along than where we will end up. By analogy, Tolstoy thinks, so must we swim against the stream of human nature by aiming for ideals beyond our reach. Victor Frankl would also sometimes use this analogy. Goethe put much the same point thus: “If you treat an individual as he is, he will remain how he is. But if you treat him as if he were what he ought to be and could be, he will become what he ought to be and could be.” It is interesting that Phillips, quite rightly, diagnoses the inability to endure frustration as the cultural pathology of a society attempting to anesthetise itself with hedonism. Yet at the same time he seems to regard the worst possible failing an ideal could have as that it might not entirely be attainable and might thereby 'humiliate' us. There is clearly some truth to this - we have tormented ourselves in the past, particularly under the influence of the more morbid aspects of Christianity, merely for our inability to cease being ineradicably earthly creatures of the flesh. There is a kind of cruel and sado-masochistic self-humiliation involved in measuring oneself against standards which are altogether inhuman and wildly impossible. Nevertheless, there is something to be said for ideals being things which *ought* to frustrate and challenge us by lying just beyond our reach - it is not obvious that such ideals must necessarily be humiliating. Perhaps what is most humiliating for human beings is the lack of grand ideals for which to strive - for we always fall short of our ideals and it is less degrading to fall short of nobler and more demanding ideals than it is to fall short of ideals that seem as though they should be easy (such as the injunction to 'just be happy'). Maybe I am just saying something similar to Phillips in different words.
SG. It seems to me he is just saying that we need to have a goal for ourselves that is bigger than ourselves, but realistic and achievable. And if we have a lofty idealistic picture of what we want to be, we set ourselves up for frustration and the humiliation of failing. (And then giving up altogether to improve ourselves; and then blaming ourselves for lack of frustration tolerancy. Or whatever you might call it.)
"For some reason, children are idealized. I think they are idealized, because they are not adults. It's a symptom of real despair in the culture ... idealizing children. What it really says is 'being adult is a disaster. [We say to the child] It's gonna be the best period of your life. [But] being a child is terrible in many ways. Because you're so helpless.'
Phillips is brilliant here. Tyler and Rachel, will you be recording new content soon? I have returned often to your content over the years and would be thrilled to see it broaden and reach a wider audience.
The question is, how do we begin to do that when the entire society is permeated with market "values"? And even that fails because the products that we buy are not the ones that are intrinsically more valuable, but the ones that are more aggressively, incessantly, cunningly marketed. And then it becomes a runaway train, because the profit enables them to do even more of that.
We don't, sadly. This train is out of control and only stops when it leaves the tracks. After the wreckage we can more readily influence what comes next I think.
In American public schools each child is told they too can one day be the President of the United States. I remember this being stressed so clearly and precisely aimed at each of us as individuals. We all failed to live up to our American birthright of course. Potentialism fed as Potentiality. Is this a prodigal setup ? Or the necessary consequence of an egalitarian republic’s rhetoric?
This is just one of the most insightful 5 minutes of speaking I have ever heard.
I absolutely agree with you-
What an insight into the human condition...Don't you just love the way Adam Philips articulates on this...
I find Tolstoy's analogy for the nature of ideals insightful. Tolstoy observes that if we want to cross a flowing river directly from one bank to another we do not aim merely straight for the other side - in that case the resultant vector, so to speak, would carry us downriver from our target of the bank opposite. Instead, we swim against the current as though we are aiming upriver to a point further along than where we will end up. By analogy, Tolstoy thinks, so must we swim against the stream of human nature by aiming for ideals beyond our reach. Victor Frankl would also sometimes use this analogy. Goethe put much the same point thus: “If you treat an individual as he is, he will remain how he is. But if you treat him as if he were what he ought to be and could be, he will become what he ought to be and could be.”
It is interesting that Phillips, quite rightly, diagnoses the inability to endure frustration as the cultural pathology of a society attempting to anesthetise itself with hedonism. Yet at the same time he seems to regard the worst possible failing an ideal could have as that it might not entirely be attainable and might thereby 'humiliate' us. There is clearly some truth to this - we have tormented ourselves in the past, particularly under the influence of the more morbid aspects of Christianity, merely for our inability to cease being ineradicably earthly creatures of the flesh. There is a kind of cruel and sado-masochistic self-humiliation involved in measuring oneself against standards which are altogether inhuman and wildly impossible. Nevertheless, there is something to be said for ideals being things which *ought* to frustrate and challenge us by lying just beyond our reach - it is not obvious that such ideals must necessarily be humiliating. Perhaps what is most humiliating for human beings is the lack of grand ideals for which to strive - for we always fall short of our ideals and it is less degrading to fall short of nobler and more demanding ideals than it is to fall short of ideals that seem as though they should be easy (such as the injunction to 'just be happy').
Maybe I am just saying something similar to Phillips in different words.
Thank you for your comment, it was very interesting and insightful!
@@elvisadrianable Glad you got something out of it :)
SG. It seems to me he is just saying that we need to have a goal for ourselves that is bigger than ourselves, but realistic and achievable. And if we have a lofty idealistic picture of what we want to be, we set ourselves up for frustration and the humiliation of failing. (And then giving up altogether to improve ourselves; and then blaming ourselves for lack of frustration tolerancy. Or whatever you might call it.)
"For some reason, children are idealized. I think they are idealized, because they are not adults. It's a symptom of real despair in the culture ... idealizing children. What it really says is 'being adult is a disaster. [We say to the child] It's gonna be the best period of your life. [But] being a child is terrible in many ways. Because you're so helpless.'
Great understanding of „Frustration“ well articulated
Spot on!
Phenomenal simply.
Fantastic clip
Phillips is brilliant here. Tyler and Rachel, will you be recording new content soon? I have returned often to your content over the years and would be thrilled to see it broaden and reach a wider audience.
This video really helped me today thank you sir.
Absolutely terrific
The question is, how do we begin to do that when the entire society is permeated with market "values"? And even that fails because the products that we buy are not the ones that are intrinsically more valuable, but the ones that are more aggressively, incessantly, cunningly marketed. And then it becomes a runaway train, because the profit enables them to do even more of that.
We don't, sadly. This train is out of control and only stops when it leaves the tracks. After the wreckage we can more readily influence what comes next I think.
@@b_risky Show us a human in nature that's not also regulated in a culture.
@@b_risky I see you're just as testy as you were back then.
Insightful
5
xo
he is so sexy
In American public schools each child is told they too can one day be the President of the United States. I remember this being stressed so clearly and precisely aimed at each of us as individuals. We all failed to live up to our American birthright of course. Potentialism fed as Potentiality. Is this a prodigal setup ? Or the necessary consequence of an egalitarian republic’s rhetoric?
So you're saying romantic comedy is a tragedy?