The Unconscious Civilization

If I had to recommend just one book for 2005, The Unconscious Civilization would get the nod.  It effectively sums up and prioritizes much of the content of the books that I have read over the past 12 years in my quest to determine why true progress has ground to a halt.  If you are uneasy about the direction of society, it will help you understand the source of that uneasiness.  Although the link above is to the paperback edition, the page location of the excerpts below refer to the hardcover edition.  (For some reason, Amazon.com would not recognize the ISBN for the hardcover edition.)

First published in 1995, the book nonetheless provides explanations for many of the actions of the current U.S. administration and its courtiers.  (See if you can recognize the reason for the banishment of Harriet Meyers to the small print of history.)  Canadians (Saul lives in Canada) seem to be extremely sensitive to the neoconservatives.  Likely because they are aware that this is a group that can rationalize the takeover of their country in the near future -- directly or indirectly.

And now for the excerpts:

Our actions are only related to tiny, narrow bands of specialist information, usually based on a false idea of measurement rather than upon any knowledge -- that is, understanding -- of the larger picture.  The result is that where a knowing woman or man would embrace doubt and advance carefully, our enormous, specialized, technocratic elites are shielded by a childlike certainty.  Whatever they are selling is the absolute truth.  Why link childishness to certainty?  Quite simply, as Cicero put it:  "He who does not know history is destined to remain a child." [p.5]

One of the tricks which makes this sort of closet delusion possible is that the very size and prosperity of the elite permits it to interiorize an artificial vision of civilization as a whole.  Thus, ours takes seriously only what comes from its own hundreds -- indeed, thousands -- of specialized sectors.  Everything turns on internal reference.  Everything is carefully measured, so that heartening "body counts" of growth or job creation of whatever can be produced.  Truth is not in the world, it is the measurements made by professionals.  [p.9]

A managerial elite manages.  A crisis, unfortunately, requires thought.  Thought is not a management function.  Because the managerial elites are now so large and have such a dominant effect on our education system, we are actually teaching most people to manage not to think.  Not only do we not reward thought, we punish it as unprofessional. [p.14]

I would argue that our society functions today largely on the relationship between groups.  What do I mean by groups?  Some of us immediately conjure up transnational corporations.  Others think of government ministries.  But this is to miss the point.  There are thousands of hierarchically or pyramidally organized interest and specialist groups in our society.  Some are actual businesses, some are professions or narrow categories of intellectuals.  Some are public, some private, some well intentioned, some ill intentioned.  Doctors, lawyers, sociologists, a myriad of scientific groups.  Nothing more.  And that the primary loyalty of the individual is not to the society but to her group. [p.32, See this U.S. Chamber of Commerce article for an example.  Maybe it's time for a U.S. Chamber of Living Well.]

I am a snake, not an apple.

What does that mean?  Well, our civilization -- the Judeo-Christian -- in its founding myth portrayed the deliverer of knowledge as the source of evil -- the devil -- and the loss of innocence as a catastrophe.  This probably had less to do with religion than with the standard desire of those in authority to control those who are not. [p.39]

...doubt is central to a citizen-based society; that is, to democracy. [p.42]

The result is that the Platonists, with their fundamental belief in authoritarianism justified by high intelligence and high learning, have been able to count Socrates more or less as one of their own. [p.58]

We can understand through the Platonic past the uncomfortable silence of our elites today and their Hobbesian taste for law, not as justice, but as contract and fear.  We can see and know that the Platonists are in power. [p.60, keep in mind that this was published in 1995]

As for the individual, the one-third to one-half of the population who are part of the managerial elite are indeed castrated as citizens because their professions, their employment contracts and the general atmosphere of corporate loyalty make it impossible for them to participate in the public place.  [p.89]

Now, there are those who will mistake what I say for an anti-market tirade.  They will be wrong.  I love the market.  I like trade, money markets, global economic patterns, all of it.  It's like a game.  It's fun for those who can afford to have a sense of humour.  But I'm not fool enough to mistake these necessary and important narrow mechanisms for a broad, solid, conscious force that can lead society. [p.119]

And so the movement for citizens' rights has been seen as an ideal, put in place from above or outside.  In essence, the Socratic movement has been infected from the beginning by the Platonists' distrust of the populace.  Or to fit this problem into the modern experience, the reforming elites have never been able to free themselves entirely from the authoritarian campaign initiated by Hobbes in the seventeenth century.  He argued that the populace would run amok unless kept in awe of some sort of authority.  And fear of punishment was the best way to control us. [p.162]

But the universities are also in crisis because the historic process of learning has slipped, once again, back into the comfortable cubbyhole of sophism and scholasticism.  In the fifth century B.C., the Sophists aimed at producing not wisdom or goodness, but efficiency and cleverness.  This may sound familiar; these are characteristics vaunted by the business schools and those parts of the social sciences that feed the think tanks and foundations. [p.173]

This approach and my earlier comment on how to insert the citizenry into the formal system of power are intended to indicate that our need is not, at this time, for another round of incremental changes in one direction or another.  The effects of corporatism are so invasive that the strategy of the citizenry should be to change not the policies in place but the dynamics. [p.175]

Yet our real problem is not one of time.  It will be increasingly one of finance.  Over the long term, no society will be able to finance 25 to 35 years of retirement.  It would be far more sensible -- and far more liveable for the individual -- to re-examine our outdated patterns.  Why not take five to ten years from the end of a life and transfer it to the beginning?  In other words, why not actually make some use of the time won through longer life expectancy?   And I don't mean mere utilitarian use.  If a 50 percent increase in longevity is a victory for civilization, then it is civilization which should gain some advantage from it. [p.175]

Thanks to the indulgence of my spouse, I've been able to transfer this five or ten years to the middle of my life and this may have been the best method for me.  If I had not spent the first part in the incomprehensible corporate world, I might not have appreciated this learning interlude as much as I have.  There are many who are financially able to take the time in their middle years for a comprehensive education -- perhaps with more structure than mine.

These qualities [common sense, creativity or imagination, ethics (not morality), intuition or instinct, memory and reason] are the basic tools of humanity.  In more aggressive verbiage, they are our weapons for use in what can only be described as a constant war against ideology.  And therein lies the key to our unconscious self-loathing.  Any one of these qualities, taken away from the others and used as an absolute value in itself, becomes a tool of ideology. [p.183]

Wow....  Matt      

Comments

[kd]

Many thanks, Matt, for the fascinating quotes from Saul's book. I'll definitely look for it.

I lived in rural south India during most of the 90's (returning to the United States in 2001, just days before 9/11), & there I had a friend & neighbor (a well-read gentleman, with a sizable library) who spoke highly of Saul's books. I believe they even exchanged a few letters.

I certainly agree with Saul that universities have (at least since the 60's) have focused primarily on producing Sophists. That trend hit full stride in the 80's. Indeed, we've taken the Sophist's way a step further by not only honoring efficiency & cleverness, but punishing contemplation & insight.

Suddenly I think of the great Thomas Merton's book title (or was it a chapter?) "Contemplation in a World of Action".

Anyway, myriad thanks for the good stuff!

[speedbird]

Well, kd (good to see that moniker again), my University was still turning out a few thoughtful people in the early 90's (though I say so myself :-D) - but I will concede that I felt there was a steady decline. Of course, there's no reason why my own institution should have been particularly representative of global trends.

My evidence? The 'Oh, what attracted you to that subject, then?' test. The answer you're looking for is not 'Job prospects'. As the years go by I meet fewer and fewer people who answer any other way.