.jpg)
Timothy Leary (public domain photo)
Mike Gathers wrote to me the other day, remarking, "I came across this Leary interview, and it seems really topical to current times." I thought it was a pretty good interview, too, from 1994, so I thought I would share it. I liked this bit where he described himself:
"My profession is I’m a dissident philosopher. I’m from the school of Socrates – it’s humanism – the Socratic methods which appeared in Greece over 2,000 years ago, it reappeared as the romantic movement in the eighteenth century – it’s the same movement. It’s called humanism, and its motto is 'Think for yourself,' 'Question authority' and, as Socrates said, 'Know thyself.' The aim of human life is to develop yourself as a philosopher, and it goes along with what’s known as paganism or pantheism or polytheism – that divinity, the divine intelligence – is found within, and is not to be found in institutions. I have one further thing to say about this. This philosophy, which is over 5,000 years old, was assimilated and streamed through the Ganges 4,000 years ago and is the basis of Buddhism, it’s the basis of Taoism in China, it’s the basis of mystical Christianity and Islam – it’s that basically, the interest is Chaos."
6 comments:
Very cool.
Oops I just posted “Very cool” anonymously. Very cool.
Just to unpack the "QUESTION AUTHORITY" bumper sticker real quick, for my own edification even, but ideally after authority gets question it should feel obliged to reply openly and transparently to that questioning, AND those questioning authority should engage with those answers in good faith.
If at all possible we should probably honestly discern legitimate authority from illegitimate authority.
Blindly questioning doesn't seem to lead to better outcomes than blindly following.
Ha! It appears I have questioned authority all the way around to questioning the questioning of authority :))
Yes, Mr Campbell, you're right: The Bureau of Authority, says in Section 17, paragraph 420, very early...lemme check my copy....ah! Yes: p.555: "The questioners of authority may appeal, subject with time constraints and appropriate questions from the party of the First Part: (that's you- MJ):
"To ascertain who is a 'legitimate' expert, and has paid requisite fees to the Bureau, see LIST "(enclosed).
I mean...it's right there in the Handbook.
No, but sirusly: TL's TFYQA was eons before legit scientific authority became subject to the Tech Bro fave: contrarianism as shadow-playing that you're brilliant, while it's really just fascist ideology. And they were a Problem waitin' to be had, because of, say, the number of clueless Xtian fundamentalists, never-enfranchised incels, GamerGate assholes, and shit like 4Chan. Plus the mainstream corporate media couldn't keep up the ruse, owned by reactionaries at a time when Info Acceleration blew by them like they were standing still.
We want things simple, and we wanna keep consuming at the same levels without having to sacrifice anything. So global warming must be a hoax, 'cuz it's a drag, man. We are run by children living in their 7th decade.
Ha! Yeah, I realize the bureaucratic absurdity of how I sketched that out :)))
I was thinking of Chomsky's Anarchism which has this dialectic of authority being challenged and either successfully justified as legitimate or dismantled if found illegitimate.
(One of the possibilities of cryptographic communication systems is making older self-governance models like Anarcho-Syndicalism more viable. Maybe the technology has caught up with the theory?)
And obviously also the inversion of the "QUESTION AUTHORITY" mantra as a disingenuous tool of authoritarianism in recent times, but that perhaps they are playing with fire, and we might do well to push for substantive answers.
If there ain't no sanity clause how did the post office know to deliver all these letters to my client!?
Bobby Campbell brings up an issue we all have to deal with and it's perennial, but somehow changed now that Internet: how do you know who's got the Best Knowledge? How do you sift out claims to expertise? This challenge has always been there for adults (this eliminates a wide swat of the voting populace) who think it's important to listen to many claimants to authoritative knowledge, but we all have our heuristics and biases.
Peter Berger, one of my favorites in the sociology of knowledge, was asked "what does the sociology of knowledge" mean? And he answered that you ask, "Says who?"
Post a Comment