Human Animal, Positive Psychology, Trauma, and Solidarity: Alenka Zupančič and Julie Reshe
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- Alenka Zupančič and Julie Reshe discuss the human animal, positive psychology, the death drive, and much more:
▪️ Human animal 0:38
▪️ Hope for harmony 12:20
▪️ What is wrong with positive psychology? 18:23
▪️ Death drive 27:20
▪️ Trauma and anxiety 36:40
▪️ World today ("Solidarity is a struggle") 46:14
Alenka Zupančič is a Slovene philosopher and social theorist. She is a professor of philosophy at The European Graduate School (EGS) and a research advisor at the Institute of Philosophy, Scientific Research Center of the Slovene Academy of Sciences.
Julie Reshe is a philosopher and a practicing negative psychoanalyst of Ukrainian Gypsy origin.
Very interesting conversation, and thank you, Julie, for raising the Ukrainian topic. I love your living dead theory, and it is important for me to “marry” it with my practical existence in the reality of war being lead against me.
One of the thoughts that came to my mind while listening to this conversation, as for impossibility of harmony: for me, the denial of harmony principle should open a path to finding such a mode of coexisting (co-dying) for people when they do not deprive each other of natural right to be suffering and dying, i.e. do not kill each other physically. I don't need a mode which will make my life “joyful or interesting or worth living”, let me just suffer and die by myself, without anyone’s help. Hopefully, it doesn't sound too positive
I love your works of love. And Zupancic was very astute as always. Thank you Julie.
positive psychology only changes ppl's emotions bc of the social ritual involved. If an entire popular investment in socially shared, culturally acceptable, economically useful negative self-talk came about, molded around modifying one's emotions, it could also make ppl feel more engaged and purposeful if it were as ritually performative as positive psychology.
ironically, this teaches ppl to rely on each other for emotional regulation while convincing themself that it's coming from within, denying a core part of what generates a sense of well-being (social acceptance and shared ritual for regulation).
And then there's the shallow "gratitude practices" to cover up that core conceit, that fall apart very easily bc they only exist in service of a deeply conceited and self‐deceptive, ungrateful regulation mechanism. You get all the benefits without having to give credit and admit to your own reliance on others.
i guess you could call it performative contradiction but with the added purpose of covering up the contradiction AND the performative dynamic.
in a state of "perfect" equilibrium, entire biospheres might not be able to exist, let alone support animals whose metabolisms rely on byproducts of non‐equilibrium states in their/our environments.
so "nature as harmony" is uniquely human in that we're constructing it to avoid just what it means to be biological. We can only seem to construct mutual plausible deniability, but that always seems to be at the cost of, ironically, less harmony within our species
The subtitles are quite inaccurate in places, so watch out!
Eros and Thanatos are tough enough, but "Errors and Penalties" ugh! No way out!
【ｐｒｏｍｏｓｍ】
It all sucks but feeds in different ways. Next.