From the moment thought arose, both in the West and in the East, it was considered an immutable truth that each person has within himself a certain solid and integral foundation, the focus of his personality. Despite all superficial transformations, this “I” (called “soul” by metaphysicians) remains in its essence unchanged and sweeps us through all life and even, as expected, beyond its limits. At the same time, the contradictory nature of a person's inner life is too obvious to be ignored, and ancient thinkers from all continents unanimously offered it the same explanation - in fact, the first that comes to mind: in addition to the higher, ideal and true "I" there exists in us the lower, material and false principle - it is this that is the cause of the observed discord. The first was identified with reason, the second - with feelings and passions,to be kept in check and overcome. This position seemed impeccably logical, because if the world itself, as it was sacredly believed, was divided into two hierarchical levels - material and transcendental (ideal) - then the same rift must pass through a person. The wholeness of the "I", thus, was saved, and the nature of all internal conflicts is explained as a clash between reason and feelings, between the higher and lower principles.
The described view is absolutely dominant until the end of the Enlightenment and its last convulsions in German classical philosophy of the early 19th century. In its very depths, however, in parallel, there was an understanding of the impossibility of explaining internal conflicts only through this naive prism. From the observation of situations when the conflict unfolds in one hierarchical plane, what I would call the true concept of the tragic is born: "good" collides with "good", love collides with debt, an idea against an idea, one love fights another, debt turns against debt, and one justice excludes and subverts another. The struggle between the "higher" and "lower" authorities turns out to be just a childish fuss in comparison with the fierce civil war that reason, feelings and moral attitudes wage within themselves,and where it is never clear who is right and what to do. The greatest and unsurpassed artist of this second stage is, of course, Dostoevsky, but we find fine examples of such contradictions in Shakespeare and Pierre Corneille. Belief in the “I” and its existence according to the old habit is still preserved, however, the map of the internal battles of the human personality is now drawn along and across and is no longer limited to one front.
At the third stage of evolution, which has been actively forming from the time of Nietzsche to the present, including through the efforts of cognitive science and brain research, it becomes clear: if there is no higher authority within us, an immutable instance on which we could rely in a situation of internal conflict, then there is also nothing that could be called "I". Any choice will be arbitrary, spontaneous, including the choice of the favorite instance of "reason", because, firstly, it is undoubtedly not the prevailing force, and secondly, it is also not a monolith, but a set, the elements of which are in constant motion and collision. As long as we have no reason to opt for a particular favorite, we are left with the only opportunity to declare "I" their entire set, which, however, puts us in a somewhat curious position. The personality then appears to be decentralized, schizophrenic - a space of quarrelsome confrontation of forces different in nature and aspirations, an arena that contains their incessant games. This means that at every second of our life "we" is a specific alignment of forces in the social structure of our inner world, not a mythical free person, but rather a product of processes that are not subject to consciousness, constantly pulling the blanket over themselves.constantly pulling the blanket over themselves.constantly pulling the blanket over themselves.
The force that managed to break through to the helm immediately declares itself the master of the situation and sticks the solemn label "I" on itself. For some time, the rest of the residents of the schizo-university echo it, but soon the new master is overthrown and the label "I" passes into the possession of another competing instinct, feeling, passion, idea or motivation. Sometimes these changes and somersaults reach such contrasts and opposites that no matter how we are accustomed to self-deception, we involuntarily doubt “whether we were”, “what came over us”, and how it happened. We are amazed how our whole and free "I" can pull from side to side in such a way and sometimes even notice a completely disturbing fact: although we are conscious of our own desires, we are completely unknown to their sources and are not subject to their appearance or disappearance. Man is not capable of desiring at will, and likewise he is not able to give up what he desires by an effort of will. And although we spend a lot of time and effort trying to control our own desires, "motivation" and even write entire books about it, why one of them appears or disappears each time remains by and large a mystery.
The dynamics of the inner life of each of us is determined by the geopolitical situation between the players involved in the confrontation and whether there are strong enough figures and alliances on the map to keep control in our hands for a long time and firmly. If yes, then we have a harmonious personality, purposeful, knowing what she wants and productive, for she is capable of long-term determination and large, long-term projects. On the contrary, the parity of many warring parties, when none can prevail for a long time and seriously, exhausts, leads to internal chaos, neurotic and mental disorder, self-destruction, idleness and stagnation. The most creative, the most brilliant people sometimes combine the constancy and predominance of the main driving forces, passions and aspirations with the oppositional principles that are constantly destabilizing and attacking them. Being subjected to a constant onslaught on the very brink of possibilities, the basic personal orientations in this struggle adapt, grow stronger, develop, and such a restless spirit generates so much internal electricity that it becomes capable of titanic achievements.
Be that as it may, the only common denominator in schizophrenia that owns us is the theatrical stage themselves, the empty space of consciousness in which all the action unfolds and where the characters inhabiting us alternately go out. But there is also a catch, because only the tip of the iceberg, a distorted and simplified semblance of the struggle that boils in the deep dark waters of the personality, falls into the focus of consciousness. Consciousness, if we resort to another comparison, is like a screen on which schematic reflections of the electrical battles taking place in the depths of the system unit are shown. It seems to us that “we” are in control of the course of the battle, but in reality, only the results of each specific battle, together with the tags attached to them, are in our field of vision: “I did it”, “I saw it”, “I want it” - then,what Immanuel Kant called "the synthetic unity of apperception." The function of consciousness and the "free will" we are aware of is to accumulate this data and accompany it with appropriate cliches; this is not a command post at all, but a monitoring center, to which some of the events that have taken place on the battlefield reach, moreover, with a delay and in a distorted simplified form.
It is quite possible that “we” (for lack of a better word) control our own inner life no more than the life of our body. Strictly speaking, it is one of the functions of this body, a kind of low rumbling that the brain emits, like a rumbling in the stomach, but with an important set of tasks. The only difference is the continuously generated and evolutionarily convenient mirage, as if inside this body there is not just a set of interacting algorithms, but someone "real" and he decides something. No matter how hurt our pride, the closest relative of man as a biological robot is a computer program, a mechanical robot that works, by the way, on the same electrical impulses - it does not have any monolithic "I", but only a complex branching of commands and subroutines, in among which it is possible to make an imitation of "consciousness". The apparent dissimilarity between us is due not to the principle of work, but to the set of components and the fact that living organisms have hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind their backs and the so far unattainable complexity of software and hardware filling, while our smaller man-made brothers have barely fledged.
The collapse of idols and illusions, the debunking of the fundamental delusions of the past is a difficult path that humanity, if it lasts long enough, will have to go from the bright youth of the ancient world through the maturity of the New Age into the old age of post-industrial civilization. Belief in "I", in free will, in a meaningful universe, in truth and much more are comforting toys that have remained with us since infancy, and as long as we can neither sleep nor stay awake without them, we will not be able to move on. One could reasonably argue that there is no need to rush to grow old, but spiritual old age, in contrast to physical old age, has a wonderful property that has long been discovered by the wisest people in history. After it, if it is possible to overcome it (the most important challenge, the final battle in the life of the individual and the existence of civilization), a new and already endless youth follows. Old age begins with cynicism, bitterness, collapse of illusions and their inherent bitterness, it is marked by despair and fatigue, nihilism. This is a painful reaction to a collision with the realities of the world, petrification and shock from the first glance of the world in the face. If, however, we do not avert our eyes in fright, putting on rose-colored glasses back, and the shock will be able to survive and overcome, then what Nietzsche and Heidegger called a “New Beginning”, “Another Beginning” - a new youth, now with clear eyes, that great wisdom that does not carry sorrow and does not generate it.we will not take our eyes off in fright, putting on pink glasses back, and the shock will be able to survive and overcome, what Nietzsche and Heidegger called “New Beginning”, “Another Beginning” may come - a new youth, now with clear eyes, that great wisdom that does not carry sorrow and does not generate it.we will not take our eyes off in fright, putting on pink glasses back, and the shock will be able to survive and overcome, what Nietzsche and Heidegger called “New Beginning”, “Another Beginning” may come - a new youth, now with clear eyes, that great wisdom that does not carry sorrow and does not generate it.
Promotional video:
© Oleg Tsendrovsky
