#Cultural perspectives

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Authenticity

The concept of authenticity is deeply rooted in existentialist philosophy and has been a significant topic of discussion in various philosophical traditions. At its core, authenticity involves living a life that is true to one's self, values, and beliefs, rather than conforming to external pressures or societal expectations. This exploration delves into the philosophy of authenticity, its origins, key ideas, and its relevance in contemporary life.

Key Concepts in the Philosophy of Authenticity

Existentialism and Authenticity:

Origins: The notion of authenticity is most closely associated with existentialist philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre.

Kierkegaard: Kierkegaard emphasized the importance of individual faith and subjective experience, urging individuals to make authentic choices that reflect their true selves.

Heidegger: In "Being and Time," Heidegger discusses authenticity as being true to one's own existence (Dasein) and not succumbing to the "they-self," which represents societal norms and expectations.

Sartre: Sartre's existentialism posits that existence precedes essence, meaning individuals must create their own essence through authentic choices, taking full responsibility for their actions.

Authenticity and Self-Discovery:

Concept: Authenticity involves a continuous process of self-discovery and self-creation.

Argument: To be authentic, one must engage in introspection and recognize their own desires, values, and beliefs, distinguishing them from those imposed by society.

Authenticity vs. Inauthenticity:

Concept: Inauthenticity arises when individuals conform to external pressures and live in a way that is not true to themselves.

Argument: Heidegger describes inauthenticity as living according to the "they-self," where individuals adopt the roles, behaviors, and beliefs dictated by others rather than their own.

Freedom and Responsibility:

Concept: Authenticity is closely linked to the existentialist notion of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it.

Argument: Sartre asserts that individuals are "condemned to be free," meaning they must take responsibility for their choices and the authenticity of their lives, without blaming external factors.

Authenticity in Modern Life:

Concept: The pursuit of authenticity remains relevant in the context of modernity, where societal norms, technological advancements, and consumer culture often challenge individual authenticity.

Argument: In contemporary society, maintaining authenticity involves resisting the pressures of social media, consumerism, and other external influences that promote a superficial or conformist lifestyle.

Theoretical Perspectives on Authenticity

Existentialist Perspective:

View: Existentialists emphasize the importance of individual choice and responsibility in achieving authenticity.

Argument: Authenticity is achieved through existential freedom, where individuals define their own essence and live according to their true selves.

Humanistic Psychology:

View: Humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow highlight authenticity as a crucial aspect of self-actualization and personal growth.

Argument: Authentic living is necessary for psychological well-being and fulfillment, as it allows individuals to realize their true potential.

Postmodern Critique:

View: Postmodern thinkers critique the concept of authenticity, questioning the possibility of a true, stable self in a world of constant change and fluid identities.

Argument: Authenticity may be seen as a constructed ideal rather than an attainable state, with the self being a product of various social, cultural, and historical influences.

Cultural and Social Perspectives:

View: Cultural and social theorists examine how authenticity is influenced by cultural norms and social contexts.

Argument: The quest for authenticity must consider the diverse ways in which different cultures and societies understand and value authentic living.

The philosophy of authenticity centers on the pursuit of a life that is true to one's self, free from the constraints of external pressures and societal expectations. Rooted in existentialist thought, it emphasizes self-discovery, individual freedom, and responsibility. While authenticity remains a crucial concept in contemporary life, it is also subject to critique and reinterpretation, reflecting the complexities of modern existence.

[noperopesaredope]

Hot Take: When it comes to the topic of race and racism as a whole, Europeans and Americans need to have separate conversations from each other.

(Explanation in this reblog)

[autisminfiction]

Just watched Avatar: The Way of Water. I for one think it’s much better than the first film because it explores much deeper themes. Among these themes is how different cultures interpret neurodivergence differently. One of the lead characters, Kiri, is canonically neurodivergent - she is diagnosed with a form of epilepsy after having a seizure underwater. Importantly, humans attribute her spiritual experiences to frontal lobe seizures. The fact the movie embeds us in the Na’vi culture causes the audience to take their spiritual interpretation as granted for truth, but there is some ambiguity to it, and many real world cultures regard neurodivergent individuals as sacred. It’s the same phenomenon here, but our perspective is being inverted from what we are used to. This is also the reason I’ve always had some degree of dislike towards the term neurodivergence - it’s a reflection of our cultural bias to reduce personality and other cognitive differences to neurology. By inverting our biases, the film exposes us to them, though people may still overlook them anyway, just in the opposite direction.

Beyond her explicit neurodivergence, Kiri has other elements to her character which are neurodivergent-coded. I hesitate to say autistic-coded specifically at this point, but I have seen other people make the claim. One particular moment that stood out is when Kiri is bullied for her neurodivergent behavior. She also belongs to a different culture and subspecies from her bullies, but her neurodivergence was the impetus for their harassment, and the reason she was targeted over her siblings. This is a common experience for neurodivergent children, especially autistic children. While she struggles socially, she exhibits autistic hyper-empathy where she is closely connected to animals and aspects of nature. She also appears to visually stim frequently as she observes her environment, which is reflected in the movies visuals, and has a close attention to detail. These features lend to the impression that she neurodivergent, and possibly autistic - should also point out that epilepsy is a common comorbidity of autism as well.

The last thing I’m going to note about her character is that due to the circumstances of her birth some people believe her to be a Christ figure. The plausibility of this is increased by how circumstances of her mother’s death could both provide a pseudo-scientific explanation for how her mother could have underwent parthenogenesis and a spiritual explanation for how she could be the child of the god of their culture. This is fine and all, but I hope that if this is the direction the show ends up taking that they don’t skew so hard in that direction that her nuances as a relatable neurodivergent character are lost. It’s clear that there are going to do with more her character in the future, and I hope she remains the most interesting character in the franchise so far rather than a plot device as we see more of her.

[trendynewsnow]

The Cultural Shift in Perceptions of Cats: Insights from Claude Béata

The Rise of Cats: A Cultural Perspective Even the most devoted dog enthusiasts must concede that cats are experiencing an unprecedented wave of popularity. In a year marked by Senator JD Vance’s incendiary remarks about “childless cat ladies,” which ignited a political uproar, and a thought-provoking New York magazine article titled “Is My Cat a Prisoner?” that framed our feline companions as…

[delicatelysublimeforester]

Embracing Autumn Equinox Day: Celebrating Seasonal Shifts with Indigenous Perspectives

[mehmetyildizmelbourne-blog]

Learning About National Hispanic Heritage Month?

Discover Latino Heros Who Fought Fascism Intro I started out writing about National Hispanic Heritage Month and look where I ended up. My outrage at hearing immigrants and asylum seekers, including Latinos, called criminals and worse, found its way into the story, as you will see. Yet, in the process of doing a bit of research, I was touched by learning of Hispanic heroes who fought fascism,…

[wellhealthhub]

The Indulgence and Worth of Exquisite Dining: Exploring High-Priced Meals

What’s the most money you’ve ever spent on a meal? Was it worth it? In a realm where gastronomy transcends its fundamental role as sustenance, it morphs into a portal unveiling realms of opulence, artistry, and unadulterated indulgence. Welcome to the realm of high-priced dining experiences, where culinary creations cease to be mere dishes and metamorphose into veritable masterpieces, and meals…

[nicholasandriani]

The Marvelous Dance of Coincidence: When Destiny and Storytelling Collide

Writers and dreamers, gather ’round for a tale as old as time -aren’t they all?- a narrative element that has both captivated and confounded storytellers since the dawn of creativity: coincidence. Yes, my dear friends, today we embark on a journey to explore the craft of employing coincidence in our beloved forms of storytelling. We shall learn how to wield this powerful tool with finesse,…

[growmydarling]

[omegaphilosophia]

The Problematic Association of Darkness with Evil

Considering darkness as inherently evil is problematic for several reasons, including the conflation of symbolic meanings, the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes, and the oversimplification of complex concepts. Here are some key issues with associating darkness with evil:

1. Symbolic Connotations:

Cultural Variations: Different cultures have varied interpretations of darkness. While some may associate darkness with evil, others may see it as a symbol of mystery, the unknown, or even tranquility. This diversity in symbolic meanings shows that darkness itself is not universally linked to malevolence.

Nature of Darkness: Darkness is a natural and neutral phenomenon, such as the absence of light during night time. Equating it with evil overlooks its fundamental role in the natural world, including its necessity for rest and the cyclical balance of day and night.

2. Harmful Stereotypes:

Racial and Cultural Implications: The association of darkness with evil can perpetuate negative stereotypes and biases, especially in terms of race and ethnicity. Historical and contemporary racial prejudices have sometimes used the symbolism of darkness to reinforce discriminatory views and practices.

Mental Health: Linking darkness with negative qualities can also stigmatize mental health issues related to depression or anxiety, which are often metaphorically described as "darkness" or "dark periods" in one's life. This can exacerbate feelings of shame or isolation for those struggling with these issues.

3. Moral and Ethical Oversimplification:

Complexity of Evil: Evil is a complex moral concept that cannot be reduced to a single attribute like darkness. Evil involves intentional harm, malevolence, or immorality, which are not inherently related to the concept of darkness. Associating darkness with evil simplifies the nuances of moral and ethical issues.

Ambiguity of Good and Evil: The dichotomy of good versus evil is often more nuanced than a simple association with light and darkness. Many moral and ethical dilemmas involve gray areas where both light and darkness can coexist, making it problematic to assign absolute values to either concept.

4. Psychological and Existential Dimensions:

Fear of the Unknown: Darkness is often associated with fear because it represents the unknown or the unseen. This fear is not necessarily about evil but about uncertainty and the lack of control. Associating darkness with evil can amplify irrational fears and anxieties.

Exploration of the Self: Darkness can also represent aspects of the self that are not fully understood or acknowledged. Embracing darkness as part of the human experience can lead to personal growth and self-discovery, rather than viewing it solely as negative.

5. Ethical and Philosophical Perspectives:

Existential and Phenomenological Views: Philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger have explored the idea of darkness in existential terms, focusing on themes such as the "nothingness" or "void" that accompanies human existence. These perspectives suggest that darkness is not inherently evil but a fundamental aspect of the human condition that can be approached with a sense of existential awareness.

Religious and Spiritual Interpretations: Various religious and spiritual traditions have different interpretations of darkness. For example, some see it as a space for contemplation, meditation, or spiritual growth, rather than as a symbol of evil.

The problematic nature of considering darkness as evil lies in the oversimplification of complex concepts, the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes, and the neglect of cultural and existential perspectives. Darkness, as a natural and symbolic concept, carries multiple meanings and cannot be universally categorized as evil. Recognizing the multifaceted nature of darkness helps to avoid reductive thinking and fosters a more nuanced understanding of morality, psychology, and cultural symbolism.

[cynicism-and-idealism]

Discovering the asexual spectrum is probably one of the best things that's ever happened to me. It answered so many questions, it's helped me have better, more intentional relationships overall. I'm not broken. I have a different experience, a different attraction style, and now largely a different viewpoint on relationship structures as a whole (though that's a different post, I think).

It has also pushed me into an interesting view of sexual experiences.

I don't dislike sex.

What I dislike is being viewed through a sexual lens, and the experience itself being viewed as "having sex with this person".

This isn't a semantic distinction, it's a viewpoint that may be difficult to really get clearly across (and to be honest I'm still working it out), so that's what I'm going to attempt here and hopefully not sound too pretentious while doing so.

Part of this dislike, I think, is largely based on the understanding of sex as a personal experience compared to sex as a cultural experience. Another part is related to my lived experience as woman and how our American society, especially, views women.

From my point of view, sex from a cultural perspective is largely about generating pleasure, acting on sexual attraction, and is strongly inwardly focused. This isn't to say the individuals participating only care about their own pleasure, or don't derive satisfaction from another's pleasure, but that even those actions are more indulgence for oneself. Their partner likes it when they do X, and that knowledge generates more sexual desires for them.

Or to put it more simply, "It's so hot to how my partner reacts when I do X thing they like for them". Or something like that. The person is engaged in a fully internal experience, how it makes them feel.

From a personal perspective, I tend to approach sex as a discovery experience. At first glance this sounds the same, my partner likes it when I do X... but it's the discovery of that which interests me. Sex is an opportunity to explore another person on a different level, very mindfully, very intentionally, and yet almost completely detached from myself. Even when "X" is done for me, what I'm focused on is how the other person is experiencing this activity they're doing for my pleasure. So, by comparison to the cultural perspective, my focus is entirely external.

This is really most evident in the first few times I have sexual experiences with a person, then it tends to drop off because almost universally, the person I'm having that experience with is having more of the cultural perspective experience and that gets kind of boring and impersonal.

I'm not interested in having sex for the simple sake of sexual pleasure, especially not someone else's, which is where the lived experience of being a woman in American society comes in. The most basic term for this is objectification. I am not seen as a person to discover, but rather as an fulfillment of someone else's desires.

When one goes through life with the lived experiences of existing as an object of desire and not as a person, and additionally having that reinforced through cultural expectations and messaging, it definitely erodes any interest in participating in the activity at all, and it's infinitely easier to simply say "I don't have sex" rather than try and explain the entirety of the above to someone.

Genuinely, the very few people who seem to approach it from a similar perspective also seem to be on the asexual spectrum, which to me makes this exercise of exploring this idea worthwhile. Can people have sex without it being about sex, for both? What would that experience be like? I think it's worth exploring both for the initial experience and also for ongoing learning about how that interaction can be built on.

Because, after all, I don't dislike sex.

[trying-to-jew]

Constantly torn between my desire to convert and the crushing weight of knowing that I won’t be able to exist in the wider fandom spaces that I love without being constantly reminded that Jews are always guilty until proven innocent post-Oct 7.

[leisi-lilacdreams]

posting this while i'm in the mood to share

maybe i'll get it done before the actual new years OTL

i want to a series of 12!boys in more japanese settings and i have some ideas

[bitchslapblastoids]

Just thinking about…… the legalize catboys moment in time….. and like…. What was that??? Why was that??? Catboys? Legalize them? What? Sir, this is a Dan and Phil merch. Why??????????? A half nude slut ass photo of Dan wearing a tail and ears??????????????? What were they saying to us? And why were they saying it? That was the true advent of the no fucks given era

[delicatelysublimeforester]

Exploring Unity and Reconciliation: Miyo-wāhkōhtowin / Good Relations Project Tour

[centaurianthropology]

One thing that I think a lot of Disco Elysium meta misses (likely because a lot of it is very clearly written by young Americans writing from an intensely American-centric cultural perspective without even really realizing it) is that one of the singular and central themes of the game is massive-scale generational trauma in a home that is economically collapsing as its resources and people are being drained by an occupation.  People have noted that no one tries to help Harry, despite the fact his mental illness is incredibly obvious to everyone around him.  He tells Kim that he completely lost his memory, and Kim politely asks him to focus on the work.  He tells Gottlieb that he had a heart attack, and Gottlieb tells him that if he’s still alive it couldn’t have been that bad.  That he’ll drop dead sooner or later, but then so does everyone.

And that’s the most important thing: so does everyone.  Look at Martinaise.  Look at the world in which Harry lives.  It is not our own, but it is adjacent to ours.  More specifically, it is clearly adjacent to the states of the Eastern Bloc: overtaken and occupied by a faraway government that clearly doesn’t care about Revachol or its people.  And that is obvious in every tired face, every defeated citizen, everyone trying to eke out a little happiness or meaning in spite of the overwhelming trauma and damage around them.  The buildings are still half-destroyed.  The bullet holes are still in the walls.  The revolution was decades before, but it still feels to the people there like a fresh wound.  The number of men of Harry’s generation who are not alcoholic or otherwise deeply fucked up are very few.  Some, like Kim, hide it better, but the deeper you dig into his history, the more you realize how damaged Kim is.  He’s more than a little trigger happy, and hates that about himself, but he is a product of his environment: Kim’s entire life is seeing people he cared about shot and killed, so his instinct now is to shoot first himself, to protect those few people left who still matter to him.

Harry is not unique in his trauma.  He is a distillation of an entire culture of people who tried to rise up and make something beautiful, and were instead routed and occupied.  He is trapped between the occupation and the people on the ground, along with all the rest of the RCM.  Their authority comes from the occupying government, but it is implied that they were formed out of the remnants of the citizens militia which sprung up from Revachol itself as a way to try to mitigate some of the horrors being committed on its streets.  The Moralintern sure as hell wasn’t going to get their hands dirty, so they happily conscripted (and therefore could better control) this group, who are only recognized in certain places, and whose authority mostly amounts to giving out fines.  The RCM is corrupt, but it is corrupt in the same way its culture is.  Bribes are considered standard with them, not a moral failing, but a necessity, so long as those bribes are correctly logged as ‘donations’.  It’s how the RCM stays afloat, and the rest of Revachol completely understands that.  Everyone would take a bribe if it meant they kept eating.  Everyone would take a little under-the-table money if it meant keeping a roof over their heads.  The officersof the RCM certainly don’t make enough to see a doctor.  They have an in-house lazarus, and if he can’t fix them they just die.  Mental health care?  What mental health care?  Harry doesn’t get it for the same reason no one else does: it doesn’t really seem to exist.  There are no counselors, no psychologists, no psychiatrists.  How would they even start?  If the world is what is broken, if everyone is suffering a similar catastrophic amount, it makes sense that Harry’s trauma would simply get rolled up with all the rest.  Kim asks him to get on with the job because Harry’s suffering is not remarkable in Revachol.  He is one of an entire generation who have an astronomical number of orphans from the revolution, and so many younger people are left more or less orphans as their parents drink themselves into oblivion like Cuno’s father.  So Harry’s truly unique attribute is embodying all that trauma, having it all inside of him, filling him to bursting.

To really engage with the themes of the game, engaging first and foremost with the reality of Revachol is imperative.  Imposing our own reality onto Revachol, particularly if coming from an American perspective (which tend to have the habit of both viewing the world through an American lens and not realizing they’re doing it because they’ve never experienced a different lens), will always feel shallow to me because of this.

All that is to say, I would love to hear some more explicitly European meta about this game, and especially Eastern European meta.  If anyone can point me to some good, juicy essays from that perspective, I would be grateful!