2021-02-19 ------------------------------------------------------------------ I decided to start a new category for my posts here. It's called "Bump". I was browsing ancient users on SDF and came accross an interesting article. Thought someone might find it worthwhile. Translation of Byung-Chul Han's "Müdigkeitsgesellscha" by jboy or "Waking up to fatigue society" gopher://sdf.org/0/users/jboy/fatigue-society.txt Here's a snippet: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Thus, the entrepreneurial subject of achievement society is in a situation of ``paradox freedom.'' Drawing on Alain Ehrenberg (whose work on depression also informs Malabou's What Shall We Do with Our Brain?), Han notes that a society in which status is no longer strictly prescribed on the basis of class or gender but which instead propagates the norm of individual initiative (or, as they say in the States, ``personal responsibility'') unleashes a new kind of systemic violence. The entrepreneurial subject is put in a position of self-exploitation, since the compulsion to labor no longer emanates from outside of it. It freely becomes an animal laborans. This form of systemic violence leads to ``psychic infarctions'' that affect not just the self---the self, Han points out, is still an immunological category---but the soul, by which Han means something like the capacity to form social bonds. In achievement society, this capacity is dissipated by the incessant command to produce. In other words, the paradox can be expressed like this: We may be free to undertake any conceivable venture, but as a result, we lose our soul---or rather, we burn out our soul. The illnesses mentioned above are the pathological manifestations of this paradox situation. The paradox of freedom is nicely captured in this observation: ``The complaint of the depressive individual, Nothing is possible, is only possible in a society that believes, Nothing is impossible.'' Chapter 3, ``A Deep Boredom,'' turns from over-production to over-communication. Specifically, Han is concerned with multitasking as a technique to accommodate the new economy of attention that has arisen alongside the new forms of productivity. Unlike some commentators, however, Han does not take multitasking to be a radically new technique. ``Multitasking is widespread among animals in the wild,'' he writes. ``It is an attention technique that is indispensable for wilderness survival.'' Newer social developments are actually making human society more like the wilderness, where predators must ensure they aren't eaten while eating their prey. Han points out that mobbing matches this pattern (and one might add other forms of bullying). Human culture, on the other hand, arose from a different kind of attention technique. Multitasking is a form of hyperattention, but culture (including philosophy) requires the deep attention of contemplation. The contemplative life had a bad rep in modern philosophy; consider Arendt's The Human Condition (which she wanted to name Vita Activa), or Lukács's opposition to ``the contemplative duality of subject and object.'' Han wants to build up the vita comtemplativa's reputation once again. Thus, the fourth chapter is called ``Vita Activa'' and is dedicated to a critique of Hannah Arendt. Against Arendt's assumption that modern development leads ever further down the road of massification and degradation of humanity, Han notes that the hyperactive, hyperneurotic individual of contemporary society is anything but animalistic. It is an animal laborans, but not the sort of animal that Arendt envisioned. It is, rather, ceaselessly engaged in individualized activity. Why? ------------------------------------------------------------------