Top XV Questions asked by French & English people over the years

XV Questions

15 des meilleures questions posées par les français et les anglais au fil des ans | 15 of the Best Questions asked by French & English people over the years

QUESTION I.

[FR] – En quoi consiste la théorie organique ?

[EN] – What is the Organic Theory About?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

La théorie organique est une théorie du 21ème siècle principalement axée sur la conception de l’individu. Elle s’appuie sur l’école de pensée française après la révolution où l’individu embrasse ses propres choix et se définit par ses capacités, ses désirs et ses réalisations. Elle est également fondée sur la théorie de l’évolution, parce qu’elle considère l’individu comme un organisme façonné par son environnement, capable de s’adapter, d’évoluer et de changer en fonction des environnements psychologiques, sociaux et culturels dont il veut faire partie. Cependant, ce qui est unique dans la théorie organique, c’est que c’est la première théorie qui porte la conception unique de l’organisme individuel à un autre niveau, parce qu’elle reste centrée sur la structure des pensées et l’interprétation du monde en considérant ce qui compte pour l’individu et n’est pas fondée sur des généralisations d’hypothèses comme les théories anciennes, ce qui élimine beaucoup de confusion car elle déplace le point de focalisation sur ce qui compte pour l’organisme individuel unique.

Un autre aspect important de la « Théorie Organique » en tant que théorie scientifique que je voudrais éclaircir dans l’esprit des masses est qu’une théorie scientifique n’a rien à voir avec ce que la plupart des gens ont tendance à appeler des « théories générales ». Une théorie générale est une théorie commune qui est généralement utilisée pour expliquer au quotidien des questions d’importance parfois discutable liées à des questions sociales ; cet usage du terme « théorie » englobe généralement des croyances subjectives et des idées sur des sujets non liés à l’universalité de la vie humaine ou à la psychologie, mais plutôt des conversations sociales que la plupart des gens tiennent dans des endroits comme les cafés pour discuter et expliquer des raisons ou causes possibles sur des sujets communs comme « Pourquoi la Deuxième Guerre mondiale est-elle réellement arrivée ? « Pourquoi Jean a-t-il quitté son travail ? » ou « Pourquoi Jeanne a-t-elle épousé Jean ? ». Les explications à ces questions tendent à être qualifiées par la foule commune de « théorie », et ce genre de théorie n’a absolument rien à voir avec une « théorie scientifique » telle que la Théorie organique.

Une théorie scientifique repose sur la combinaison de deux méthodes anciennes : le rationalisme et l’empirisme. Ces deux méthodes font de la science un outil puissant. Par exemple, les rationalistes affirment que la validité ou l’invalidité d’une proposition donnée peut être déterminée en appliquant soigneusement les règles de la logique. L’école de pensée empiriste soutient d’autre part que la source de toute connaissance est l’observation sensorielle, de sorte que pour les empiristes rigides, la vraie connaissance ne peut être dérivée de ou validée que par l’expérience sensorielle. Après des siècles d’enquête, nous avons constaté que le rationalisme et l’empirisme avaient tous deux une utilité limitée, de sorte que la science moderne a combiné les deux écoles de pensée, et depuis lors, les connaissances se sont accumulées à un rythme exponentiel.

Par conséquent, le mouvement rationaliste a ajouté son aspect à la science et l’a empêchée de simplement recueillir une gamme infinie de faits empiriques déconnectés, parce que nous, intellectuels, devons en quelque sorte donner un sens à ce que nous observons, donc, nous formulons des théories scientifiques. Une théorie scientifique a deux fonctions principales : (1) il organise les observations empiriques et (2) il sert de guide pour les observations futures et génère des propositions confirmables. En d’autres termes, une théorie scientifique suggère des propositions qui peuvent être testées expérimentalement dans une certaine mesure avec certaines méthodes statistiques réductionnistes. Si les propositions générées par une théorie sont raisonnablement confirmées par l’expérimentation, la théorie gagne en force ; si les propositions ne sont pas confirmées, la théorie perd de sa force. En science, l’observation est souvent guidée par la théorie.

La théorie organique est une théorie que j’ai présentée à la table intellectuelle, mais ses fondements étaient dormants dans la psychologie et la littérature scientifique pendant des décennies. Il semble que je n’ai eu qu’à rassembler ces observations objectives et à les organiser méthodiquement pour en arriver à la déduction et à la réalité qu’elle révèle. Nous ne sommes pas maîtres de notre vie, mais nous avons un grand contrôle sur notre propre conception individuelle basée sur nos désirs, notre éducation, notre direction, nos capacités et nos choix dans la vie.

La théorie organique suit la vision organique du monde qui existait déjà dans les grands débats psychologiques du siècle et j’ai construit sur cette perspective, l’ai affinée et étendue avec la littérature empirique et philosophique des temps modernes pour donner à l’individu plus de pouvoir de définition de soi dans notre société moderne et parfois confuse. En fait, j’ai aussi pris quelques concepts de Jacques Lacan pour donner à l’individu le pouvoir et la capacité de réaliser ses rêves et aussi pour ouvrir l’esprit de la foule environnante pour faire savoir et comprendre à la société que les gens ne sont pas des objets statiques, mais ont la capacité de se créer et de se récréer.

Le seul message fondamental de la théorie organique est que nous ne sommes pas simplement définis par l’endroit où nous sommes nés ou par les personnes qui nous sont liées que nous n’avons pas choisies, ou par les lignées sanguines, mais plutôt par nos propres choix, efforts, capacités, réalisations et orientations, et aussi par le fait que tout organisme peut être conditionné pour faire partie de l’environnement de tout autre organisme par le processus sans fin d’apprentissage et d’adaptation, comme le montrent les exemples d’Adolf Hitler ou de Napoléon Bonaparte, pour ne citer que deux cas célèbres de grands dirigeants issus d’une modeste éducation étrangère, qui ont grandi au plus haut niveau dans des pays où ils ne sont pas nés, mais se sont recréés pour devenir le cœur de ces nations à un moment donné.

Le Jeune Napoleon dpurb d'purb website

Image: Le jeune Napoléon

La Théorie Organique démontre que la construction individuelle [formation], qui  » peut être  » mécanique et structurée dans son application [par exemple l’apprentissage à distance par texte / vidéo / audio], se développe indirectement pour créer et donner une dimension socioculturelle à l’individu une fois que les compétences souhaitées [modèles de communication et de comportement] ont été pleinement adoptées, maîtrisées et déployées dans la vie. Le terme  » social  » est aussi beaucoup trop vague pour être important en tant que tel… le terme  » social  » peut simplement être défini comme l’interaction [de tous types] entre organismes. Le terme  » social  » n’est donc pas vraiment valide sur le plan scientifique et il manque de précision puisqu’il peut se référer à un large éventail de variables. Il ne nous reste alors que les choix, le(s) langage(s) et les capacités de développement personnel de l’individu [par exemple la synthèse culturelle et psycholinguistique] : les facteurs majeurs dans l’explication psychologique et philosophique de sa conception singulière [à noter que chaque conception est unique à l’organisme humain individuel tel que ses empreintes digitales, sa forme crânienne ou sa structure corporelle : singularité]. Ainsi : formation, méritocratie, ordre et amour [simple… en théorie].

Pour comprendre la logique simple de la conception individuelle de l’organisme unique, prenons l’exemple d’un homme profondément ancré dans la culture française et qui est aussi un grand professeur de littérature, mais qui a un fils qui décide de rejoindre un monastère au Tibet, et une fille qui se convertit à l’hindouisme, et une sœur qui apprend l’arabe, épouse un marchand et déménage dans son pays, cela signifie-t-il que cet homme lui-même est maintenant un arabe hindou tibétain ? Bien sûr que non ! Un autre exemple serait d’imaginer un grand philosophe d’Europe de l’Ouest qui a une sœur qui, par manque d’attention, est influencée par un petit cercle social et devient strip-teaseuse dans la banlieue française, est-ce que cela signifie aussi que le philosophe fait maintenant partie de l’industrie du sexe ? Bien sûr que non ! Pourtant, comme la société et, malheureusement, les hommes adultes en 2019 ne comprennent toujours pas la conception individuelle – ce qui vient avec le fait fondamental que chaque organisme est responsable de sa propre conception et de sa destinée et non de celle des autres – je pense que la théorie organique devrait clairement aider la société mondiale à comprendre que le choix de vie d’un organisme individuel ne relève ni de la responsabilité d’autrui, ni du fardeau d’autrui.

C’est une théorie qui apporte des preuves neuroscientifiques pour expliquer la plasticité, des arguments philosophiques pour expliquer la perception et des explications psychanalytiques pour expliquer le fonctionnement de l’esprit, ainsi que la construction et les désirs symboliques qui guident l’individu dans la réalisation de son but dans la vie. Par la suite, il souligne également que ces faits scientifiques et ces arguments philosophiques ne peuvent être ignorés ni par l’individu ni par la société en général, parce que nous sommes une nouvelle génération d’êtres humains et que nous devrions agir comme des organismes éclairés face à la découverte et non comme des êtres ataviques et rigides d’un passé lointain, car nous ne sommes pas prisonniers du passé.

Bien sûr, comme la plupart des innovateurs intellectuels, j’ai rencontré quelques obstacles que j’ai franchis avec succès, en me basant sur des arguments scientifiques et philosophiques forts[Lacan, Kant, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer et Rousseau] tout en fusionnant des perspectives objectives et des observations rationnelles basées sur des théories évolutionnaires avancées par Charles Darwin et Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck. En effet, je n’ai commencé à questionner le comportement humain, le cerveau et la construction de nos réalités qu’après avoir sacrifié des années de ma vie dans la recherche et acquis les connaissances et les compétences pour le faire. Les fondements de ma théorie reposent sur des faits empiriques tirés d’un large éventail de revues scientifiques réputées, même si l’empirisme ne peut pas tout saisir précisément lorsqu’il s’agit du fonctionnement interne de l’esprit – comme la plupart des psychologues cognitivo-comportementaux le savent très bien puisqu’ils ont choisi d’entreprendre des recherches qui portent uniquement sur ce qui peut être observé et mesuré, et malheureusement pas tout sur l’esprit peut être, car nous avons trop de variables confusionnelles et de plus le domaine du psychisme est non physique.

Psychisme Définition - Centre National de Resources Textuelles et Lexicales

Définition du mot « Psychisme » sur le site du Centre National de Resources Textuelles et Lexicales

La théorie organique est pour conclure, une théorie qui vise à libérer l’individu de barrières absurdes et imaginaires et à lui faire savoir qu’il n’est lié par rien ni à personne avec qui il n’a signé aucun accord à respecter. Les individus sont libres de se construire, de créer des liens sociaux autant qu’ils peuvent aussi se défaire des charges sociales et des liens avec tout organisme qui n’est en aucune façon bénéfique ou progressif pour leur développement, et cela s’étend à tout organisme extérieur qui n’est pas sous leur responsabilité ou qui ne fait pas partie de leur réalité choisie (par exemple, les petites connaissances, collègues, famille, etc).

Ce que j’insinue simplement, c’est que les organismes individuels sont maîtres de leur propre destin et que, pour réaliser leurs rêves, ils devraient être assez intelligents pour savoir quoi sacrifier, car ce n’est pas leur fardeau ou leur responsabilité et ce qu’ils doivent créer et/ou conserver. En effet, on m’a toujours dit que la mesure du succès d’une personne est la mesure de son sacrifice, et cela semble être une simple question de raisonnement. Peut-être que d’une certaine manière la « Théorie Organique » met aussi à l’épreuve la notion de « liberté » dans nos sociétés modernes. Si nous vivons vraiment dans des sociétés libres, l’individu devrait être libre dans ses choix, car la liberté elle-même implique des choix. La philosophie de la « Théorie Organique » semble aussi suggérer que dans une société éclairée, éduquée, cultivée, sophistiquée et moderne, un individu libre devrait être capable de dire ce qu’il veut, quand il veut, où il veut, comment il veut, à qui il veut, et selon ses capacités, il devrait aussi pouvoir choisir son propre chemin, identité, domaine et cercle, et lorsque ces actes ne causent la mort à personne, cela semble totalement noble et juste.

L'individu libre dans une société éclairée Danny D'Purb dpurb site web 2019

Le modèle de communication, aussi connu sous le nom de « langue », est également un élément fondamental de la Théorie Organique car c’est l’une des plus grandes facettes de l’identité d’une personne. A travers la langue, un individu peut être attribué à une civilisation ou à des civilisations particulières s’il en maîtrise plus d’une, c’est ce que l’on appelle la maîtrise des schémas de communication qui est également liée aux modèles de comportement hérités d’une sphère linguistique particulière.

En conclusion, la Théorie Organique est une théorie de la conception et de l’évolution individuelle. En 2019, en ce qui concerne « La théorie organique »[qui se concentre sur la singularité de l’organisme individuel], il n’y a pas de débat entre intellectuels en psychologie, mais simplement la découverte des nouvelles perspectives mécaniques / scientifiques qu’elle introduit pour expliquer la conception psychologique et philosophique de l’individu – comme le disait Carl Sagan, « La science est une manière de penser bien plus qu’un corps de savoir ». J’ai sacrifié des années de ma vie à étudier le cerveau, le développement, la psychologie, l’art, la littérature, le langage, la conception et la singularité, et … et vous, vous croyez en quoi?

Si vous voulez en savoir plus sur la théorie organique qui est un projet en cours, faites une recherche sur mon nom « dpurb » et vous tomberez sur mon site où vous trouverez plus d’informations sur le sujet. Les bases de la théorie organique ont déjà été jetées, mais il s’agit d’un projet de toute une vie qui sera affiné et mis à jour dans une série de livres au cours des prochaines décennies avec d’autres travaux que j’ai l’intention de présenter au grand public du monde entier.

ad meliora - towards better things

vers de meilleures choses / towards better things

 

—-|—-

[EN] Answer to Question I. « What is the Organic Theory About? »

 

The organic theory is a theory of the 21st century mainly focussed on the conception of the individual. It is based on the French school of thought after the revolution where the individual embraces his own choices and defines himself through his abilities, desires and achievements. It is also founded on the theory of evolution, because it sees the individual as an organism that is shaped by its environment with the ability to adapt, evolve and change depending on the psychological, social and cultural environments it wants to be a part of. However, what is unique the Organic Theory, is that it is the first theory that takes the unique conception of the individual organism to another level, because it remains focussed on the structure of thoughts and the interpretation of the world by considering what matters to the individual and is not founded on generalisations of assumption like most ancient theories do, hence this discards a lot of confusion because it shifts the focus on what matters to the unique individual organism.

Another important aspect of the « Organic Theory » as a scientific theory that I would like to make clear in the mind of the masses is that a scientific theory is nothing like what most people tend to refer as « general theories ». A general theory is a common theory that generally used to explain every day matters of sometimes questionable importance related to social matters; this usage of the term « theory » generally emcompasses subjective beliefs and insights about matters not related to the universality of human life or psychology, but instead tend to occupy social conversations that most people have in places such as coffee shops to discuss and provide explanations about possible reasons or causes on common matters such as « Why did World War II really happen? », « Why did John quit his job? » or « Why did Jane marry John? ». Explanations to these questions tend to be referred by the common crowd as some « theory », and this kind of theory has absolutely nothing to do with a « scientific theory » such as the Organic Theory.

A scientific theory is based on a combination of two ancient methods: rationalism and empiricism. These two methods are what make science a powerful tool. The rationalist school of thought go by the belief that mental operations or principles must be employed before knowledge can be attained, for example, rationalists state that the validity or invalidity of a certain proposition can be determined by carefully applying the rules of logic. The empiricist school of thought maintains on the other hand that the source of all knowledge is sensory observation, so for rigid empiricists true knowledge can be derived from or validated only by sensory experience. After centuries of inquiry, we found that by themselves, rationalism and empiricism both had limited usefulness, so modern science combined the two schools of thought, and since then, knowledge has been accumulating at an exponential rate.

Hence, the rationalist movement added its aspect to science and prevented it from simply collecting an endless array of disconnected empirical facts, because we intellectuals must somehow make sense out of what we observe, hence, we formulate scientific theories. A scientific theory has two main functions: (1) it organises empirical observations, and (2) it acts as a guide for future observations and generates confirmable propositions. In other words, a scientific theory suggests propositions that may be tested experimentally to a certain extent with some reductionist statistical methods. If the propositions generated by a theory are confirmed reasonably through experimentation, the theory gains strength; if the propositions are not confirmed, the theory loses strength. In science observation is often guided by theory.

The Organic Theory is a theory that I brought forward to the intellectual table but its foundations were lying dormant in the psychology and scientific literature for decades. It seems that I only had to piece together these objective observations and methodically arrange them to come to the deduction along with the reality it revealed. We are not complete masters of our life, but we do have a great amount of control of our own individual conception based on our desires, education, direction, capabilities and choices in life.

The organic theory follows the organismic worldview that already existed in the great psychological debates of the century and I have built upon this perspective, refined and extended it with modern day empirical and philosophical literature to give the individual more power of self-definition in our modern and sometimes confused society. In fact, I also took some concepts from Jacques Lacan to give the individual the power and the ability to achieve their dreams and also to open the minds of the surrounding crowd to let society know and understand that people are not static objects, but have the ability to create and recreate themselves.

PrinciplesOfPsychology

The one fundamental message the Organic Theory brings are that we are not defined simply by where we are born or the people connected to us that we did not choose, or by bloodlines, but rather by our own choices, efforts, abilities, achievements and directions, and also the fact that any organism can be conditioned to become part of the environment of any other organism through the never ending process of learning and adaptation, as we can see from the examples of Adolf Hitler or Napoléon Bonaparte, to name two famous cases of great leaders who came from modest foreign origins and who raised to the highest level in countries where they were not born, but recreated themselves to become the heart of these nations at a given point in time.

The Organic Theory shows that individual construction [training], which ‘can be’ mechanical and structured in its application [e.g. distance learning by text / video / audio], develops indirectly to create and give a socio-cultural dimension to the individual once the desired skills [communicative and behavioural patterns]have been fully adopted, mastered, and deployed in life. The term ‘social’ is also far too vague to be important as such… the term ‘social’ can simply be defined as the interaction [of all types] between organisms. So the term ‘social’ is not really valid scientifically and it lacks precision itself since it may refer to a wide range of variables. What we are left with then is only the individual’s choices, language(s) & abilities of personal development [e.g. cultural & psycholinguistic synthesis]: the major factors in the psychological & philosophical explanation of his/her singular conception [to note that each conception is unique to the individual human organism such as his/her fingerprints, skull shape, or body structure: singularity]. Thus: training, meritocracy, order and love [simple… in theory].

To understand the simple logic of individual conception of the unique organism, let us use the example of a man who is deeply embedded in French culture and is a great teacher of literature, but has a son who decides to join a monastery in Tibet, and a daughter who converts to Hinduism, and a sister who learns Arab, marries a merchant and moves to his country, does this mean that the man himself is now a Tibetan Hindu Arab? Of course not! Another example would be to imagine a great philosopher of the Western world who happens to have a sister who due to a lack of attention is influenced by a petty social circle and becomes a strip dancer in the suburbs of France, similarly does this mean that the philosopher is now part of the sex industry? Of course not! Yet since society and sadly fully grown up men in 2019 still do not understand individual conception – which comes with the fundamental fact that each organism is responsible for his/her own conception and destiny and not that of others – I feel that the organic theory should clearly help society worldwide understand that an individual organism’s choice in life is not the responsibility or the burden of another.

braintolivein

Human brain specimen being studied in neuroscience professor Ron Kalil’s Medical School research lab. © UW-Madison News & Public Affairs 608/262-0067 Photo by: Jeff Miller Date: 5/00 File#: color slide

It is a theory that brings neuroscientific evidence to explain plasticity, philosophical arguments to explain perception and psychoanalytic explanations to explain the proceedings of the mind, along with construction and symbolic desires that guide the individual in achieving its goal in life. Subsequently, it is also making the point that these scientific facts and philosophical arguments cannot be ignored by both the individual and societies at large, because we are a new generation of human beings, and we should be acting as enlightened organisms in the face of discovery, not atavistic and rigid beings of a long dead past, because we are not prisoners of the past.

Of course, as most intellectual innovators I came a few barriers, which I crossed with success, basing myself on strong scientific and philosophical arguments [Lacan, Kant, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Rousseau] while fusing objective perspectives and rational observations based on evolutionary theories brought forward by Charles Darwin and Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck. Indeed, I only started questioning human behaviour, the brain and the construction of our realities after having sacrificed years of my life in research and earned the knowledge and skills to do so. The foundations of my theory are based on empirical facts gathered from a wide range of reputable scientific journals even if empiricism cannot capture everything precisely when dealing with the inner workings of the mind – as most cognitive-behavioural psychologists themselves know very well since they chose to embark in research that only deals with what is observable and measurable, and unfortunately not everything about the mind is measurable since we have too many confounding variables, and the psyche is after all a non-physical domain.

The organic theory is to conclude, a theory that is meant to free the individual from nonsensical and imaginary barriers and to let them know that they are not bound by anything or anyone with whom they did not sign any agreement to abide by. Individuals are free to build themselves, to create social connections just as much as they can also discard of social burdens and links with any organism that is not in any way beneficial or progressive to their development, and this extends to any outside organism that is not their responsibility or part of their chosen reality [e.g. petty acquaintances, colleagues, family, etc].

What I am simply implying is that individual organisms are masters of their own destiny and to be able to achieve their dreams they should be smart enough to know what to sacrifice since it is not their burden or responsibility and what to create and/or keep. Indeed, I was always told that the measure of one’s success is the measure of one’s sacrifice, and this seems to be a simple matter of reasoning. Perhaps in some way the « Organic Theory » is also putting to the test the notion of « freedom » in our modern societies.

If we really do live in free societies then the individual should be free in his or her choices, because freedom itself entails having choices. The philosophy of the « Organic Theory » also seems to be suggesting that in an enlightened, educated, cultivated, sophisticated and modern society, a free individual should be able to say what he wants, when he wants, where he wants, how he wants, to whomever he wants, and depending on his abilities, he should also be able to choose his own path, identity, domain and circle, and when such acts do not cause death to anyone, this seems totally noble and right.

Communicative pattern, also known as “language” is also a fundamental element of the Organic Theory as it is one of the biggest facets of one’s identity. Through language an individual can be allocated to a particular civilisation or civilisations if the individual masters more than one, this is known as the mastery of communicative patters that is also related to behavioural patterns that are inherited from a particular linguistic sphere.

To conclude, The Organic Theory is a theory of individual conception and evolution. In 2019, as far as ‘The Organic Theory’ [which focuses on the singularity of the individual organism] is concerned, there is no debate between intellectuals in psychology, but simply the discovery of the new mechanical / scientific perspectives that it introduces to explain the psychological and philosophical conception of the individual – as Carl Sagan phrased it, ‘Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge’. I have sacrificed years of my life studying the brain, development, psychology, art, literature, language, conception and singularity, and… and you, what do you believe in?

If you want to know more about the organic theory which is an ongoing project, please do a search of my name “dpurb” and you will come across my website where more information can be found on the topic. The foundations of the Organic Theory have already been laid, but it is a lifetime project that will be refined and updated in a series of books in the coming decades along with other works that I intend to bring to the mainstream audience worldwide.

 

_________________________________

 

QUESTION II.

[FR] – Le terme « race » que vous qualifiez de « composition organique » semble dénué de sens pour votre théorie mais comment vous classifiez-vous par rapport à la « composition organique » ?

[EN] – The term “race” which you qualify as “organic composition” seems meaningless to your theory but how do you classify yourself in regards to “organic composition”?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

Je me classe comme un organisme avec les schémas de communication et de comportement hérités de la sphère franco-britannique.

Danny D'Purb XV Questions

Image: Danny D’Purb

La race scientifiquement parmi les êtres humains peut simplement être définie comme un type particulier de « composition organique ». Cela signifie que les gens de différentes parties du monde ont simplement des compositions organiques particulières qui correspondent à leur histoire évolutive. Cependant, du point de vue scientifique universel, tout organisme, quel que soit son type de composition organique, peut procréer avec un autre. Par conséquent, cette observation simple mais fondamentale suggère que si les lois de la nature qui régissent toutes les espèces vivantes sur cette planète avaient des plans différents pour les organismes présents sur cette planète, la procréation entre les membres d’une même espèce avec des compositions organiques différentes ne serait pas possible – ce qui n’est évidemment pas le cas du point de vue de l’évolution.

J’aimerais répondre à votre question sur la composition organique [ce que vous appelez la race] et ma propre classification. Il est fondamental de comprendre que je me suis assimilé à la société d’Europe occidentale qui est une société d’héritage indo-européen, les deux langues que je parle, le français et l’anglais étant également des langues indo-européennes, et parce que j’avais tous les éléments pour faire partie des sociétés française et anglaise pour être plus spécifique quand je parle de l’Europe de l’Ouest, j’ai toujours ressenti une attraction naturelle et un sentiment instinctif d’appartenance à ces sociétés avec les gens qui constituent sa majorité.

Comme c’est moi qui innove avec une théorie scientifique qui aborde la question de l’assimilation et qui a aussi commencé à ébranler les fondements de la psychologie, de la culture et de la perception, ce fut toujours une tâche immense de clarifier cette question de l’assimilation et de la composition organique, que beaucoup de sociétés ataviques appellent « race », sans réaliser qu’aucune race sur terre n’est « pure » et que notre race humaine actuelle, les « Homo sapiens » sont le résultat de croisements et de l’évolution. J’aimerais aller droit au but pour répondre à votre question et expliquer aussi comment j’ai raisonné pour expliquer mon point sur la composition organique et ma propre classification.

Je suis une personne pleinement assimilée dans la société française et britannique. Et tout en ne cachant pas le fait que mon côté français est dominant, je ne peux pas cacher le fait que j’ai un côté britannique très fort, ayant vécu et côtoyé le peuple anglais en Angleterre pendant des années. Cependant, la France est une société plus avant-gardiste philosophiquement et a toujours permis à des individus talentueux de s’assimiler dans leur société tout au long de leur histoire (par exemple Napoléon qui était corse est devenu l’empereur du peuple français) et est aujourd’hui un pays composé d’un mélange de compositions organiques qui s’est parfaitement adapté aux Français, apportant au patrimoine génétique français leur originalité et leur gènes surdoués. Ainsi, d’après les découvertes scientifiques actuelles, il semble que la civilisation française ait toujours été en avance sur son temps et beaucoup plus sophistiquée que tout autre empire de sa ligue.

Les Enfants de France

Image: Des jeunes français

Quelle que soit la composition organique ou la nuance de couleur des individus en France, il existe un fort sentiment de préoccupation nationale et d’identité française ancré dans la grande majorité des Français qui sont fiers de leur société en évolution et qui veulent valoriser la France et sont amoureux de son patrimoine et de son peuple. En France, en effet, ce qui semble le plus important, c’est votre identité culturelle et votre loyauté envers la nation et vos sentiments français, votre vision et votre sentiment de connexion et d’amour pour les français de souche, plutôt que la pâleur de votre peau.

Étant quelqu’un qui a été élevé dans la littérature française, qui a lu la bible en français étant d’une mère chrétienne, qui a étudié la littérature française sous la direction d’un tuteur privé nommé Christian Rivalland, un grand maître et une figure paternelle pour moi qui nourrissait de nombreuses élites et personnalités politiques et qui me surnommait « Le Seigneur » [à cause de mes cheveux longs et de ma chemise blanche avec un bouclier de préfet royal doré] et qui me traitait comme son propre fils et m’enseignait Molière, Maupassant, Victor Hugo, Rousseau et la Révolution française dans sa propre maison, en étudiant aussi profondément la littérature shakespearienne et victorienne, il était clair que je me sentirais et me classerais comme une personne appartenant aux sociétés d’Europe occidentale de France et d’Angleterre – on m’appelait même affectueusement « Banane » à cause du ton de ma peau mais avec ce que beaucoup décrivaient aussi comme une forme de « blancheur » à l’intérieur, bien que j’aie toujours dit aux gens qu’il n’y a pas de « blancheur » car chaque pays a sa propre langue et sa propre façon de se comporter et est pour le plus incompatible en valeurs et en philosophie, avec de nombreux pays qui semblent presque sauvagement préhistoriques par rapport à l’empire français, donc être de la même couleur ne signifie certainement pas être du même niveau ou de la même finesse psychologique ou avoir les mêmes sentiments et perspectives sur la vie. J’ai aussi figuré en tant que chanteur principal d’un groupe alternatif indépendant et « underground » (j’ai toujours mis en doute ma flexibilité à le faire quand je portais de la littérature du début du siècle avec des paroles, heureusement le film « La Reine des Damnés » est sorti et m’a fait m’a fait sourire avec le personnage Seigneur Lestat de Lioncourt, qui transcendait les siècles des châteaux et manoirs vers une scène rock contemporaine).

Lestat de Lioncourt

Image: La Reine des Damnés (2002)

L’héritage intellectuel de l’Europe de l’Ouest s’est enraciné en moi tout au long des années où j’ai vécu à Londres et étudié en tant que chercheur profondément imprégné de la psychologie et de la philosophie des grands esprits de l’Europe de l’Ouest [par exemple Darwin, Lacan, Freud, Descartes, Rousseau, Lacan, Voltaire, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer & Kant] et toutes mes interactions professionnelles avec quelques-uns des meilleurs intellectuels du continent au fil des ans, tant personnellement que dans le média moderne que constitue Internet. Le français et l’anglais sont les deux seules langues dans lesquelles je parle et pense, et elles me permettent d’exister, en effet, je rêve même en français et en anglais avec tous les personnages qui sont de ces sphères, donc, je ne pourrais absolument rien faire sans ces langues.

Maintenant, si nous devions poser la simple question de savoir si le français et l’anglais sont des langues d’origine d’Europe de l’Ouest, la réponse serait simplement « oui ». Et comme je suis fait de ces langues, cela conclut que mes propres racines culturelles et psychologiques seraient européennes occidentales. Et comme l’Europe de l’Ouest est principalement composée de personnes de composition organique qui sont communément appelées « Blanches » par la majorité non-sophistiquée scientifiquement [ce qui est faux, puisque personne au monde n’est blanc, sauf les statues, les sculptures de marbre et les clowns dans le cirque qui se maquille], je me considère comme un dérivé de la civilisation de « L’Europe de l’Ouest », et puisque la majorité des personnes de la classe intellectuelle sont « Blanches », je me qualifie de « Blanc [Autre] ». Oui, pas les Blancs [britanniques], ou les Blancs [français], mais les Blanc [autres] pour indiquer que je ne suis pas le « Blanc » typique, mais un Blanc qui a subi quelques modifications dans l’histoire de l’expansion et de la conquête impériale de Europe occidentale, d’où la nuance d’olive.

ad lucem - into the light

dans la lumière / into the light

D’ailleurs, on ne m’interroge jamais à ce sujet sauf pour remplir des formulaires dans les pays de la sphère anglo-saxonne, alors je coche la case « Blanc [Autre] ». Simplement parce qu’il résume, clarifie, donne la description de quelqu’un qui reflète la langue, la culture, les valeurs et les perspectives de la civilisation française de l’Europe de l’Ouest principalement et la majorité des gens d’une telle civilisation sont caucasiens ou au moins plus clairs dans le teint, et cela ne servirait à rien et n’aurait certainement aucun sens sauf à créer une énorme confusion de me qualifier comme Marsien, Noire, asiatique, indien, hispanique, orientale, juif ou toute autre description empirique qui n’est pas affiliée au patrimoine de l’Europe de l’Ouest et qui ne s’en rapproche en aucune façon en donnant une forme de description de ma personne, de mon identité, de mon patrimoine et de mes capacités – les choses ont changé radicalement et le monde devrait savoir et changer aussi une fois qu’ils comprennent. En effet, ce n’est pas parce que le monde de la politique est à la traîne que je devrais faire de même.

On ne m’interroge jamais sur la « race » ou, comme je préfère l’appeler d’un point de vue scientifique, sur la « composition organique » parce que dès que les gens me voient et m’entendent parler, ils arrivent instantanément à la conclusion que c’est un homme qui fait partie intégrante des sociétés française et britannique, et bien qu’il ait un teint d’olive, il parle et représente l’élite des sociétés française et britannique avec son accent et son dialecte cultivé dans les deux langues, et il ne pouvait représenter ou représenter aucun autre peuple que la majorité de ces sociétés, qui s’avèrent être des personnes d’origine indo-européenne et des langues indo-européennes et sont donc ce que la plupart ont tendance à appeler « Blanc » [qui comme je l’ai dit ne sont pas blancs mais vont du rose pâle au jaune rougeâtre] ou les personnes de la « race aryen ».

C’est pourquoi, sans surprise, j’ai répondu à votre question que je me considère comme un « produit » de la civilisation caucasienne de l’Europe de l’Ouest, pour être précis, « blanc » comme on le dit communément et mesquinement [le produit de civilisations où la majorité de la foule intellectuelle est caucasienne], bien sûr j’ai une nuance de peau d’olive, provenant d’un endroit géographique où le soleil est abondant et où un mélange organique sain a eu lieu tout au long de l’histoire de l’expansion impériale et de la conquête de l’Europe occidentale, et après tout, si nous regardons la zone géographique de l’Europe occidentale, nous pouvons observer que les tons de peau varient de très pâle à des teintes olive et jaune rougeâtre. Mais j’aimerais aussi vous donner plus de détails sur la façon dont j’en suis arrivé à cette conclusion et pourquoi je ne suis pas fou après tout, mais plutôt en train de vivre la réalité des quelques élites de la classe intellectuelle de ma génération au XXIe siècle.

Au début, j’ai dû éliminer des possibilités en me posant quelques questions :

La première question est : Suis-je un nègre ? Non
En second lieu, suis-je Indien ? Non, je ne parle pas hindi et je n’ai jamais mis les pieds en Inde.
Troisième, suis-je africain ? Il est clair que non, je n’ai jamais marché en Afrique continentale ou n’ai jamais eu de caractéristiques et de traits africains.
Quatrième être, suis-je asiatique ? Clairement non aussi, parce que je n’ai jamais marché sur le continent asiatique et que je n’ai pas non plus l’air, ni le son, ni la parole d’un Asiatique.
Cinquièmement, suis-je originaire d’un pays avec un héritage d’origine européenne ? Oui, tous les livres que j’ai lus, la musique que j’ai écoutée et les langues dans lesquelles j’ai vécu sont originaire de l’Europe de l’Ouest ! En effet, tous les hommes et les femmes qui m’ont fait ressentir toutes les émotions qui complètent un homme cultivé sont d’origine européenne, principalement de France, d’Angleterre et de quelques autres pays influencés par leur patrimoine linguistique.

Alors, comment un homme qui a été fait par l’Europe de l’Ouest et son héritage ne pourrait-il pas ressentir un fort sentiment d’identification et de loyauté envers ces gens qui l’ont fait, et sans qui il ne serait même rien aujourd’hui ? Des gens qui l’ont fait rire, pleurer et évoluer à travers leur travail artistique ? Si vous pouviez trouver un Indien, un Pakistanais, un Asiatique de l’Est, un Africain, un Caucasien[Blanc] en dehors de l’Europe de l’Ouest, un cow-boy, ou un clown déguisé en chien brun foncé aboyant dans un cirque sur une île, qui connaît tous les albums de Francis Cabrel, qui ont lu la poésie de Stéphane Mallarmé, qui a chanté dans un groupe alternatif bilingue aux influences rock et classiques, qui a étudié Shakespeare, Dickens et parle anglais avec un accent d’Oxford et français comme l’héritier de Victor Hugo, alors faites-moi savoir, je serais stupéfait. Il s’agit simplement de faire valoir avec fermeté l’argument simple mais fondamental que sur cette planète, les individus ne sont pas ce que la foule environnante croit qu’ils sont, mais ce qu’ils sont, deviennent ou sont devenus parce que cela résulte du chemin qu’ils ont choisi ou qui leur a été imposé, consciemment ou inconsciemment.

Je suis né dans un pays relativement petit et nouveau d’environ 1 million d’habitants, fondé par les Français et les Britanniques avant son indépendance, et après cela, il a gardé ses saveurs françaises et britanniques et je fais partie d’une nouvelle génération d’un nouveau petit pays républicain qui a dû définir sa propre identité par rapport à son héritage intellectuel. Et comme toutes les sociétés du monde, la petite île a aussi des classes différentes, des régions différentes et des gens différents avec des langues, des dialectes, des visions et des désirs différents. Ce que je veux dire, c’est que tous les pays ont des paysans, des villages, des ruraux simples, de la pauvreté, des sauvages, des laids, des bons, des méchants, des beaux, des gens d’affaires, des personnalités publiques, des classes dirigeantes, des classes intellectuelles, des villes et différents niveaux d’éducation que les parents peuvent offrir à leurs enfants.

J’ai eu beaucoup de chance, car grâce à mes propres efforts intellectuels, j’ai réussi à me hisser à la toute première place dans l’élite d’une minuscule minorité qui a choisi le meilleur établissement, le Collège royal de Port-Louis, qui est une école pour enfants doués et impitoyablement sélective. Et étant une minorité d’élite d’une petite population d’environ 1 million d’habitants, je suis entrée dans un segment encore plus restreint de ces élites assez courageuses qui ont osé suivre la voie littéraire comme Chateaubriand et Victor Hugo [la majorité veut simplement être comptable, médecin, avocat, banquier, chef d’entreprise, et tous les emplois qui vous garantissent une maison avec une voiture pour impressionner la famille de votre future femme avec une route facile à un parti politique – qui est un groupe dépassé.] J’ai toujours eu des problèmes à cause de la taille de l’île et de la carrière littéraire et philosophique que j’avais envisagée en raison du nombre limité d’esprits [quelques dizaines d’individus solitaires environ] avec mes choix éducatifs et mon niveau de compétence linguistique en français et en anglais [étant une élite universitaire, cela s’étend globalement en fait], et je me suis donc installée sur le continent qui est la base de mon héritage, à savoir l’Europe de l’Ouest [France et Angleterre], avec l’intention de m’inscrire sur un terrain mieux adapté à celui que je voulais être et suis devenu ! Comme Napoléon après avoir décroché une bourse d’étude où le petit corse allait devenir plus français que les français après avoir beaucoup subi dans sa phase d’adaptation.

ad vitam aeternam - to eternal life

à la vie éternelle / to eternal life

Et étant d’origine indo-européenne, il était clair que j’avais toutes les chances de m’assimiler dans les sociétés d’Europe de l’Ouest, c’est-à-dire que la France et l’Angleterre qui sont aussi d’origine et de langues indo-européennes, même si mon nuance d’olive me donne une identité très personnelle et ajoute parfois à mon caractère unique. En tant que personne originaire d’un pays relativement petit et nouvellement créé, avec des liens culturels d’origine d’Europe occidentale, il était clair que les élites avaient besoin d’une voix intellectuelle du XXIe siècle pour dissiper toute confusion et remettre les pendules à l’heure pour guider une génération de la classe intellectuelle qui luttait parfois pour trouver un sentiment d’identité et d’appartenance. Je crois que cela dissipe beaucoup de confusion au sujet de la classification et c’était l’un de mes objectifs avec la théorie organique pour les individus perdus et doués ; après tout, beaucoup d’intellectuels avant moi ont aussi donné une voix à ceux qui se sont perdus à travers leurs arguments et découvertes incroyables tout au long de l’histoire de la civilisation, de grands hommes, des penseurs innovants tels que Charles Darwin, Jean-Baptiste de Lamarque, Sigmund Freud, Napoléon Bonaparte, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean-Jacques Rousseau et Jacques Lacan. Je n’ai fait que marcher dans leurs pas pour poursuivre cette tradition intellectuelle et académique des penseurs d’Europe occidentale.

Danny D'Purb Repond Sur Sa Vie

Image: Danny D’Purb

Après tout, il s’agit d’une question concernant mon identité au XXIe siècle en tant qu’homme faisant partie de la nouvelle génération qui a hérité des technologies d’apprentissage accéléré et qui ne peut parler que pour lui-même et ce en quoi il croit, comment il se sent et comment il voit sa propre histoire intellectuelle que beaucoup n’ont jamais osé analyser dans une perspective systématique et complexe du XXIe siècle, l’évolution psychologique qui a lieu par transmission culturelle, le progrès individuel et l’éducation transmise, mais sont au contraire perdus et confus à leur sujet sans comprendre plus largement le monde et ses divers sphères ; sans aucune direction pour améliorer leur vie et profiter au maximum des opportunités de faire partie de quelque chose de plus grand, comme l’empire français par exemple.

 

—-|—-

[EN] Answer to Question II. « The term “race” which you qualify as “organic composition” seems meaningless to your theory but how do you classify yourself in regards to “organic composition”? »

 

I classify myself as an organism with the communicative and behavioural patterns inherited from the Franco-British sphere. Race scientifically among human beings can simply be defined as a particular type of “organic composition”. This means that people from different parts of the world simply have particular organic compositions in line with their evolutionary history. However, from the universal scientific view, any organism of whatsoever type of organic composition can procreate with another. Hence, this simple but fundamental observation suggests that if the laws of nature that govern all living species on this planet had different plans for organisms present on this planet, procreation between members of the same species with different organic compositions would not be possible – yet this is clearly not the case from an evolutionary perspective.

I would like to respond to your question about organic composition [what you call race] and my own classification. It is fundamental to understand that I assimilated into the Western European society which is a society of indo-european heritage, with both languages that I speak, i.e. French and English also being indo-european languages, and because I had all the elements to be part of the French and English societies to be more specific when talking about Western Europe, I always felt a natural attraction and an instinctive sense of belonging to these societies along with the people that constitutes its majority.

Since, I am the one to innovate with a scientific theory that would tackle the issue of assimilation and one that has also started to shake the foundations of psychology, culture and perception, it was always going to be an immense task to clarify this issue about assimilation and organic composition, what many atavistic societies call “race”, still not realising that there is no race on earth that is “pure” and that our current breed of human beings, being the “Homo-sapiens” are the result of interbreeding and evolution. I would like to get straight to the point to answer your question and also explain how I reasoned to explain my point on organic composition and my own classification.

I am a person who fully assimilated in both French and British society. And while not hiding the fact that my French side is dominant, I cannot also hide the fact that I have a very strong British side, having lived and mixed with the English people in England for years. However, French being a more avant-garde society always allowed talented individuals to assimilate in their society throughout their early history [e.g. Napoléon who was Corsican became the emperor of the French people] and is a country today composed of a blend of organic compositions who mixed and adapted perfectly with the native people of France, bringing in their individuality and gifted genes to the French gene pool. Hence, according with today’s scientific findings, it seems that the French civilisation is one that was always ahead of its time and far more sophisticated that any other empire of its league. Whatever the organic composition or colour shade of individuals in France, there is a strong sense of national concern and French identity embedded in the vast majority of French people who are proud of their evolving society and who want to enhance France and are in love with its heritage and people. In France, indeed, what seems to matter the most is your cultural identity and your loyalty to the nation and your French sentiments, outlook and sense of connection and love for the native people, rather than the paleness of your skin.

Being someone, who was brought up on French literature, who read the bible in French being from a Christian mother, who studied French literature under a private tutor named Christian Rivalland, a great master and a father figure for me who spoon fed many elites and political figures and who also nicknamed me “Le Seigneur” [meaning The Lord – because of my long hair and white shirt with a golden Royal Prefect shield] and who treated me as his own son and taught me Molière, Maupassant, Victor Hugo, Rousseau and the French Revolution in his own home, while also studying Shakespearean and Victorian literature to its depth, it was clear that I would feel and classify myself as a person belonging to the Western European societies of France and England – I was even affectionately called “Banana” due to the tone of my skin but with the what many also described as a form of “whiteness” within, although I always told people that there is no such thing as “whiteness” as each country have their own language and ways of behaving and are for the most incompatible in values and philosophy, with many countries seeming nearly savagely prehistoric when compared with the French empire, so being of the same colour certainly does not mean being of the same league or of the same psychological finesse or with the same sentiments and outlook on life. On the side I also was performing as the lead singer of an independent and underground alternative band [I always questioned my flexibility in doing this when carrying early century literature with lyrics, luckily the movie Queen of the Damned came out and made me feel better with the character Seigneur Lestat de Lioncourt, who transcended the centuries from castles and manors to a contemporary rock stage].

The Western European intellectual heritage was further embedded in me through the years of living in London and studying as a scholar deeply drenched in the psychology and philosophy of the great minds of the Western European region [e.g. Darwin, Lacan, Freud, Descartes, Rousseau, Lacan, Voltaire, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer & Kant] with all my professional interactions being with some of the finest intellectuals of the continent over the years, both personally and through the now modern medium that is the internet. French and English are the only two languages I speak and think in, and they allow me to exist, indeed, I even dream in French and English with all the characters being from those realms, hence, I would not be able to do absolutely anything without these languages.

Now if we were to ask the simple question of whether French and English are languages of Western European roots, then they answer would simply be “yes”. And since I am made of these languages, this concludes my own cultural and psychological roots would be Western European. And since Western Europe is mostly composed of people of organic composition who are commonly referred to by the unsophisticated majority as “White” [which is untrue, since no one in the world is white, except statues, marble sculptures and clowns in the circus who wear makeup], I see myself as a derivative of the “Western European” civilisation, and since the majority of people from the intellectual classes are “Caucasian” hence I classify myself as “White [Other]”. Yes, not White British, or White French, but “White [Other]” to indicate that I am not the typical “White” but one that has had some modification through the history of Western European Imperial expansion and conquest, hence the olive tone.

Besides, I am never asked about this except when filling forms in countries of the Anglo sphere, so I tick the “White [Other]” box. Simply because it summarises, clarifies, gives the description of someone who reflects the language, culture, values and outlook of the Western European civilisation of France mainly and the majority of people from such a civilisation are Caucasian or at least lighter in complexion, and it would not serve any purpose and certainly would not make any sense except create tremendous confusion to classify myself as Marsian, Black, Asian, Indian, Hispanic, Oriental, Jewish or any other empirical description that is not affiliated with the Western European heritage and does not in any way come even close giving a form of description of my person, identity, heritage and abilities – things have changed drastically and the world should know and change too once they do. Indeed, it is not because the world of policy is lagging behind that I should too.

I never get asked about “race” or as I prefer to call it from a scientific perspective, “Organic Composition” because the moment people see and hear me speak they instantly come to the conclusion that this is a man who is fully part of French and British societies, and while he may have a slight olive tone, he speaks for and represents the elite of both French and British society with his cultivated dialect and accent in both languages, and he could not possibly stand for or represent any other people but the majority of those societies, which turn out to be people of Indo-European heritage and Indo-European languages and hence are what most tend to call “White” [that as I said are not white but range from shades of pale pink to reddish-yellow] or the people of the “Aryan Race”.

Hence, your question answered, unsurprisingly, I see myself as a “product” of the Caucasian Western European civilisation to be precise, “White” as it is commonly and pettily said [the product of civilisations where the majority of the intellectual crowd are Caucasian], of course I have an olive tone, being from a geographical location where the sun is abundant and where some healthy organic blending has taken place through the history of Western European imperial expansion and conquest, and after all, if we look at the Western European geographic area we may observe that skin tones vary from very pale to hues of olive and reddish-yellow. But I would also like to give you some more details of how I also proceeded to come to this conclusion and why I am not insane after all, but rather living the reality of the few elites of the intellectual class of my generation in the 21st century.

At first I had to eliminate possibilities by asking myself a couple of questions:

First question being, am I a negro? No
Second being, am I Indian? No, I do not speak hindi or have ever stepped foot in India.
Third being, am I African? Clearly No, I have never stepped in mainland Africa or have any African features and traits.
Fourth being, am I Asian? Clearly no also, because I have never stepped in the Asian continent and also do not also look, sound or speak like an Asian either.
Fifth being, am I from a country with European intellectual heritage? Yes, all the books I read, music I listened to and languages I lived in are of Western European heritage! Indeed, all the men and women who made me feel all the emotions, that complete a cultured man are of European heritage, mostly from France, England and a few other countries influenced by their linguistic heritage.

So how could a man who was made by Western Europe and its heritage, not feel a strong sense of identification and loyalty to these people who made him, and without whom he would not even be anything today? People who made him laugh, cry and evolve through their art work? If you could find an Indian, a Pakistani, an Eastern Asian, an African, a Caucasian [White] outside of Western Europe, a cowboy, or a clown dressed as a dark brown dog barking in a circus on some island, who knows all the albums of Francis Cabrel, who read the poetry of Stéphane Mallarmé, who sang in a bilingual alternative band with rock and classical influences, who studied Shakespeare, Dickens and speaks English with an accent from Oxford and French like the heir of Victor Hugo, then please let me know, I would be amazed. This is simply to adamantly make the simple but fundamental argument that on this planet, individuals are not what the surrounding crowd believes them to be, but are what they are, are becoming or have become because it results from the path they chose or that was imposed on them – consciously or unconsciously.

I was born in a relatively tiny and new country of about 1 million in population founded by the French and the British before its independence, and after that it still kept its French and British flavours and I am part of a new generation of a tiny new republican country who had to define his own identity in relation to his intellectual inheritance. And as all societies in the world, the small island too has different classes, different regions and different people with different languages, dialects, visions and desires. What I mean is that all countries, have peasants, villages, simple rural people, poverty, savages, ugly people, good people, bad people, beautiful people, business people, public figures, leading classes, intellectual classes, cities and different levels of education that parents are able to afford for their children.

I turned out to be quite lucky, because through my own intellectual efforts, I managed to rise to the very cream of the crop into the elite segment of a tiny minority who took the route of literary studies at the best institution, the Royal College of Port-Louis which is an unforgiving and highly selective elite oriented school for gifted children. And being an elite minority of a small population of about 1 million, I went into an even tinier segment of those elites courageous enough who dared to follow the literary road like Chateaubriand and Victor Hugo [the majority just want to be accountants, doctors, lawyers, bankers, business owners, and all the jobs that land you in a house with a car safely to impress your future in laws with an easy route to joining the obsolete group that is a political party]. I always had problems existing because of the size of the island along with the literary and philosophical career I had envisioned due to the limited amount of minds [about a few dozens of solitary individuals] with my educational choices and level of linguistic proficiency in French and English [being an academic elite, this extends globally in fact], and hence moved to the continent that is the root of the inheritance I am made of, which is Western Europe [France and England], with the intention of being part of a terrain more suited to the person that I wanted to be and today, have become! Quite similar to Napoleon who after having obtained a scholarship to an elite academy in France, the little Corsican would later grown to become more French than the French themselves after having suffered a lot in his early adaptation phase to the culture and people.

And being of Indo-European heritage it was clear that I had all the chances of assimilating in the societies of Western Europe, i.e. France and England being also of Indo-European heritage and languages, although my olive tone does give me a very individual identity and sometimes adds to my unique character. As a person from a relatively tiny and newly created country that is of Western European heritage, it was clear that the elites needed an intellectual voice of the 21st century to clear out all the confusion and set the record straight to guide a generation of the intellectual class sometimes struggling to find a sense of identity and belonging. I believe this clears out a lot of confusion about classification and this was one of my purposes with the organic theory for lost and gifted individuals; after all many intellectuals before me also gave a voice to those who were lost through their amazing arguments and discoveries throughout the history of civilisation, great men, innovating thinkers such as Charles Darwin, Jean-Baptiste de Lamarque, Sigmund Freud, Napoléon Bonaparte, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Jacques Lacan. I only walked in their steps to pursue this intellectual and academic tradition of Western European thinkers.

After all this is a question about my identity in the 21st century as a man who is part of the new generation who inherited accelerated learning technologies and who can only speak for himself and what he believes in, how he feels and how he sees in regards to his own intellectual history that many have never dared to analyse from a systematic and sophisticated perspective by embracing the 21st century and the psychological evolution that took place through cultural transmission, individual progress and education, but are instead lost and confused about themselves without a wider understanding of the world and its different realms; without any direction to make their lives better and make the most of the opportunities to become part of something bigger, such as the French empire for example.

_________________________________

 

Franco-Britannique

QUESTION III.

[FR] – Qu’est-ce que cela signifie pour vous d’être franco-britannique ?

[EN] – What does it mean to you to be Franco-British?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

Eh bien, cela signifie être français dans la pensée, les sentiments, la philosophie, les valeurs, l’art et la vision, mais aussi avec un côté britannique fort qui se reflète dans l’anglais parlé et écrit. Être franco-britannique pour moi, c’est pouvoir naviguer dans les deux environnements avec la facilité d’un natif au niveau d’une élite et se sentir à l’aise dans les deux sphères tout en étant capable de voir le monde du point de vue des deux peuples et de parler pour les deux peuples dans les questions liées à la gestion de la société.

La philosophie française enseigne à l’individu à repousser ses limites, tandis que la sphère anglaise semble inculquer la notion de connaître ses propres limites, évidemment le royaume anglais est moins progressiste et décourage l’individu dans des efforts créatifs et favorise plutôt une vie mondaine et captive sans aucune faim pour le type d’innovation qui englobe la grandeur du cerveau humain.

Franco étant devant les Britanniques signifie que le Français est l’identité dominante, et sans manquer de respect au sphère anglaise, il serait impossible pour n’importe quel individu avec mes capacités intellectuelles de prendre la décision de renoncer complètement à leur côté français pour être entièrement anglais, car cela signifierait simplement gâcher la chance de faire partie de la civilisation la plus sophistiquée sur terre avec un amour absolu et un respect admirable des droits des individus dans la société.

Enfin, être franco-britannique signifie pour moi diffuser progressivement les valeurs françaises et la « joie de vivre » à la société britannique et à la sphère anglo-saxonne afin de changer cette réputation stéréotypée de « rocher froid irréceptif et irréactif » et motiver les gens de tous horizons à croire aux philosophies de l’épanouissement personnel et de l’évolution individuelle, ainsi qu’à une bonne conscience héroïque axée sur la morale, la dignité, le sens des responsabilités, la solidarité civique, la fraternité et la loyauté où les individus se poussent et se motivent mutuellement pour avancer, en considérant le succès comme un bien commun, dans le grand sens d’une société harmonieuse et en phase avec la grandeur de l’être, en harmonie, qui est mieux en accord avec les principes et perspectives françaises. Ce qui est surprenant et malheureux, c’est que cette réputation stéréotypée typique de « l’Anglais misérable, négatif, déprimant et ennuyeux » semble être justifiée par les récents rapports de l’OCDE qui ont placé la Grande-Bretagne parmi les pays les plus déprimés d’Europe occidentale, avec les problèmes de santé mentale coûtant environ 94 milliards de livres par an. Quant à l’autre grand continent de l’anglosphère, les États-Unis, ils sont en tête de liste pour les taux de troubles anxieux et de dépression.

Ainsi, en tant qu’intellectuel plongé dans le monde de la psychologie, cette mission de changer le psychisme de l’anglosphère et du reste du monde apparaît comme un effort justifié et noble pour aider progressivement l’évolution du psychisme typique « d’artisan » vers un psychisme « artistique, dynamique, créatif et humain ». Bien sûr, c’est aussi motiver les gens de la sphère anglo-saxonne et le reste du monde à apprendre la langue française, car avec la langue vient la magie de l’âme, les sentiments, la perspective, l’art, la sophistication, la créativité et le courage inhérents au patrimoine alors qu’ils apprennent à naviguer dans le bleu profond de la sphère française en apprenant à se dépasser et à se perfectionner psychologiquement pour modifier leur perception de manière progressive tout en respectant les droits des autres à croître.

Impossible n'est pas français - Napoleon

Traduction (EN): « Impossible is not French » – Napoleon

—-|—-

 

 

[EN] Answer to Question III. « What does it mean to you to be Franco-British?”

 

Well, it means to be French in thought, sentiments, philosophy, values, artistry and vision, but with also a strong British side that is reflected in spoken and written English. To be Franco-British to me means to be able to navigate both environments with the ease of a native at the level of an elite and to feel at home in both realms along with the ability to see the world from the perspective of both people and speak for both people in matters connected to the management of society.

The French philosophy teaches the individual to push the limits, while the English realm seems to inculcate the notion of knowing one’s own limits, to me the latter is less progressive and discourages the individual into creative endeavours and instead promotes a mundane and captive life without any hunger for the type of innovation that embraces the greatness of the human brain.

Franco being before British means that the French is the dominant identity, and without being disrespectful to the English realm, it would be impossible for any individual with my intellectual abilities to take the decision to completely give up their French side to be fully English, because it would simply mean throwing away the chance to be part of the most sophisticated civilisation on earth with an absolute love and respect for the rights of the individual in society.

Finally, for me, being Franco-British means gradually spreading French values and « joie de vivre » to British society and the Anglo-Saxon sphere in order to change this stereotyped reputation of « unreceptive and unreactive cold rock » and motivate people from all walks of life to believe in the philosophies of personal development and individual evolution, as well as in a heroic conscience based on morals, dignity, a sense of responsibility, civic solidarity, fraternity and loyalty where individuals push and motivate each other to move forward, considering success as a common good, in the great sense of a harmonious society and in phase with the greatness of humankind, in harmony, which is more in line with French principles and perspectives. What is surprising and unfortunate is that this typical stereotyped reputation of the « Miserable, negative, depressing and boring Englishman » seems to be justified with recent OECD reports that have placed Britain among the most depressed countries of Western Europe, with mental health problems costing about 94 billions pound a year. As for the other major continent of the anglosphere, the US, they are topping the charts for rates of anxiety disorders and depression.

Prevalence of Common Mental Health Problems since 1993 in the UK

Mental health statistics for England: prevalence, services and funding / Source: www.parliament.uk

So, as an intellectual drenched in the world of psychology, this mission of changing the psyche of the anglosphere and the rest of the world seems like a justified and noble endeavour to gradually help the evolution of the typical « artisan » psyche into an « artistic, dynamic, creative and human » one. Of course, it also means motivating people in the Anglo-sphere and the rest of the world to learn the French language, because with language comes the magic of the soul, the sentiments, the perspective, the artistry, the sophistication, the creativity and the courage inherent to the heritage as they learn to navigate in the deep blue of the French sphere by learning to surpass themselves and to perfect themselves psychologically and modify their perception in a progressive way while respecting the rights of others to grow.

 

_________________________________

 

QUESTION IV.

[FR] – Quelle est la meilleure langue entre le français et l’anglais selon vous ?

[EN] – Which one is the best language between French and English according to you?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

C’est une question délicate car le terme « meilleur » est ici assez vague. Ainsi, j’aurai tendance à penser qu’un langage de première classe devrait être clair, précis, pratique, agréable à l’oreille, et les yeux, bien structurés avec la prononciation reflétée dans la structure grammaticale pour empêcher les gens de mal prononcer les mots et aussi tenir une quantité de profondeur qui se reflète lors de l’expression des pensées du penseur de haut niveau, et qui a une valeur artistique qui lui permet de se sentir plein d’émotions lorsque parlé comme langue humaine à travers son timbre et son ton.

La langue anglaise, bien que pratique en raison de son usage répandu, manque de synchronisation entre sa structure grammaticale et la façon dont les mots sont prononcés, ce qui fait que même les anglophones de langue maternelle expérimentés peuvent mal prononcer de nombreux mots, ce qui, dans de rares cas, peut même conduire à considérer les gens comme dyslexiques phonologiques. Pour moi, cela rend la langue anglaise inférieure à la langue française puisque la dernière a un plus grand nombre de « signes accentués » qui indiquent précisément au lecteur comment prononcer les mots. En effet, dans la langue française, la majorité des mots se prononce exactement comme ils sont écrits une fois que l’on apprend les terminaisons des temps verbaux et quelques règles grammaticales.

L’autre facteur, lorsqu’on compare les deux langues les plus répandues dans le monde civilisé, est le fait que la langue anglaise a une variété d’accents provenant des différentes régions où elle est parlée [par exemple Scouse, Geordie, Cockney, Scottish, Irish, etc] et est souvent étouffée dans les vidéos et peut souvent conduire à des malentendus ou exiger de l’auditeur de répéter des segments pour bien comprendre, ce qui est un désavantage de la langue anglaise. Ce n’est guère le cas avec le français, car même dans les différents accents dans lesquels la langue peut être parlée, ils conduisent toujours à un son plus clair en raison de la structure grammaticale et des règles de la langue et donc une audition plus claire et donc une compréhension plus rapide en comparaison de l’anglais.

La langue anglaise a aussi une histoire fondée sur l’empirisme et semble simplement remplir la tâche de communiquer des instructions et des textes scientifiques, mais elle manque de l’émotivité des œuvres d’art [par exemple le romantisme] et des arguments philosophiques [par exemple I think, therefore I am !] par rapport à la langue française. Notez que je n’ai pas dit qu’il ne peut pas être utilisé dans les œuvres d’art, mais seulement qu’il est moins intense que la langue française. L’anglais me semble diminuer l’intensité des arguments philosophiques et des conversations humaines étant une langue assez plate dans sa forme écrite et orale. Cela peut aussi s’expliquer par le fait que l’anglosphère est issue d’une majorité de sociétés où les valeurs de l’humanité, de la fraternité et de l’individu ne sont pas au cœur de la civilisation comme en France, mais plutôt de sociétés industrialisées et mécaniques qui ne peuvent offrir la liberté que comme une forme d’individualité extrême à la limite de l’égoïsme basée sur une formule du type  » chacun pour soi  » dans un jeu sauvage de survie et de préservation à tout prix. C’est bien sûr le principal courant de pensée, parce que nous avons une minorité d’individus incroyables de la sphère anglaise qui se distinguent par leur propre investissement dans la cultivation de leurs personnalités uniques et captivantes et qui n’agissent pas et ne pensent pas comme la majorité commune et on peut le constater par leur comportement, leurs sentiments et leurs œuvres artistiques. De plus, les racines de la langue anglaise sont toujours liées au système monarchique désuet qui semble rendre la société obsédée par les histoires médiévales de capes et d’épées : un système qui semble inculquer à l’individu le sens de connaître les limites de ses droits et une obéissance incontestable ; alors que la langue française est enracinée dans les valeurs de la révolution qui inculque le sens du questionnement et aussi de repousser ses propres limites pour libérer en soi l’Empereur/le Roi/le Maître », avec la légende de Napoléon comme preuve – la philosophie et les valeurs des deux langues semblent opposées entre elles.

Ainsi, pour moi, étant quelqu’un qui a reçu une bourse et étudié la littérature, la linguistique, la psychologie et la philosophie tout en ayant écrit pendant longtemps et qui a été plongé profondément dans le domaine culturel de l’anglais et du français, l’anglais semble être une langue de communication, alors que le français est une langue qui peut absolument tout faire comme l’anglais, mais qui permet aussi à l’individu non seulement de communiquer, mais aussi de « s’exprimer »[leur profondeur, leurs pensées, leurs émotions] d’une manière que la langue anglaise ne parvient pas à saisir à une telle intensité en raison de son histoire et de sa structure fondatrices qui ne sont pas aussi axées sur le timbre, la philosophie, les arts et l’expression des sentiments que l’est la langue française.

Ainsi, puisque la langue française peut faire tout ce que l’anglais peut faire dans le monde formel, comme les instructions, les écrits scientifiques et la simple communication, mais qu’elle peut aussi aller plus loin pour toucher plus profondément l’être « humain » par sa subtilité dans le timbre et le son qui s’inscrivent dans une histoire de grands poètes, philosophes et penseurs qui se sont imposés dans la pierre, je dois dire que le français est meilleur que l’anglais. Bien qu’il soit important de noter que ces deux langues sont très proches l’une de l’autre dans leur structure puisque beaucoup de mots sont épelés de façon similaire dans les deux langues avec des changements mineurs d’une langue à l’autre [par exemple Psychologie/Littérature est français pour psychology/literature (anglais)]. Comme les deux langues sont d’origine indo-européenne, il est plus facile pour les anglophones d’évoluer et de passer au français que la plupart des autres langues – du moins sous forme écrite puisque le français oral exige de la pratique et du dévouement à la maîtrise ; tandis qu’une « âme » est une autre histoire impliquant une vision métaphorique, des capacités de synthèse, des valeurs, une vision et une profondeur de pensée… et bien sûr la personnalité, les émotions et la sensibilité.

 

—-|—-

 

[EN] Answer to Question IV. « Which one is the best language between French and English according to you?”

 

This is a tricky question because the term “best” here is quite vague. So, I will tend to think that a first class language should be clear, precise, practical, pleasant to ears, and the eyes, well-structured with the pronunciation reflected in the grammatical structure to prevent people from mispronouncing words and also hold an amount of depth that is reflected when expressing the thoughts of the high-level thinker, and one that holds an artistic value that allows it to be full of emotions when spoken as a human language through its timbre and tone.

The English language although practical because of its widespread use does lack the synchronisation between its grammatical structure and the way words are pronounced which results in even experienced native English speakers to mispronounce many words, in rare cases this could even lead to people being thought of as phonological dyslexics. This to me makes the English language inferior to the French language since the latter has a greater number of “accentuated signs” that precisely instruct the reader how to pronounce the words. Indeed, in the French language the majority of words are pronounced exactly as they are written once we learn the endings of verbal tenses and some grammatical rules.

The other factor when comparing the 2 most widespread languages of the civilised world, is the fact that the English language comes with a variety of accents from the different regions it is spoken [e.g. Scouse, Geordie, Cockney, Scottish, Irish, etc] and is often muffled in videos and can often lead to misunderstanding or may require the listener to repeat segments to fully comprehend, so this is another disadvantage of the English language. This is hardly the case with French because even in the different accents in which the language may be spoken, they always lead to a clearer sound due to the grammatical structure and rules of the language and hence a clearer hearing and hence a faster understanding when compared to English.

The English language also has a history grounded in empiricism and seems to simply fulfil the task of communicating instructions and scientific texts, but lacks the emotionality in works of art [e.g. Romanticism] and in philosophical arguments [e.g. Je pense, donc je suis!] compared to the French language. Note that I did not say that it cannot be used in works of art, but only pointing out that it is less intense when compared to the French language. English to me seems to lessen the intensity of philosophical arguments and human conversations being a fairly flat language in its written and spoken form. This may also be due to the fact that the anglosphere is generated from a majority of societies where the values of humanity, brotherhood and the individual are not at the heart of the civilisation as it is in France, but rather tend to be industrialised and mechanical societies that can only offer freedom as a form of extreme individuality bordering on selfishness based on an “each to their own” type formula in a savage game of self-survival and preservation at whatever cost. This is of course the major train of thought, because we do have a minority of incredible individuals from the English realm who stand out because of their own investment in cultivating unique and captivating personalities and who do not act and think like the common majority where it reflects in their behaviour, feelings and art works. Furthermore, the roots of the English language still connect to the outdated system of monarchy which seems to make the society obsessed with medieval stories of capes and swords: a system that seems to inculcate in the individual a sense of knowing the limits of one’s rights and unquestionable obedience; while the French language is rooted in the values of the revolution which inculcates questioning and a sense of pushing one’s own limits to unleash the “Emperor/King/Master” within ourselves, with the legend of Napoléon as proof – the philosophy and values of these two languages seem to oppose each other.

Hence, to me, being someone who received a bursary and studied literature, linguistics, psychology and philosophy while also having written for a long time and been drenched deeply in the cultural realm of both English and French, English seems like a language for communication, while French is a language that can achieve absolutely everything that English can, but also goes further by allowing the individual to not simply communicate, but also to “express themselves” [their depth, their thoughts, their emotions] in a way that the English language fails to capture at such intensity because of its founding history and structure that is not as focussed on timbre, philosophy, arts and the expression of feelings as the French language is.

So, since the French language can do everything that English can in the formal world, such as instructions, scientific writings and simple communication, but can also go to greater depth to touch humans deeper through its subtlety in timbre and sound embedded in a history of great poets, philosophers and thinkers who set their mark in marble and stone, I would have to say that the French language is superior to English.

rootsoftheenglishlanguage

Image: Tree diagram showing the tangled roots of English / Source: NYT

Although it is important to note that these 2 languages are very close to each other in structure as many words are spelled similarly in both languages with minor changes from one to the other [e.g. Psychologie/Littérature is French for psychology/literature (English)]. Since both languages are of Indo-European origin, it is easier for English speakers to evolve and shift to French than most other languages – at least in written form since oral French requires practice and dedication to master; while a “soul” is another story involving metaphorical vision, abilities of synthesis, values, insight and depth of thought… and of course personality, emotions and sensibility.

 

_________________________________

 

QUESTION V.

[FR] – De quelle civilisation vous sentez-vous faire partie ?

[EN] – What civilisation do you feel a part of?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

C’est certainement la question la moins compliquée jusqu’à présent parce que je me suis toujours présenté et décrit comme un Européen occidental franco-britannique qui vit en Angleterre et qui entend alterner périodiquement avec le sud-est de la France dans un avenir proche. Donc, en passant par-là, je peux honnêtement dire que je défends la civilisation de l’Europe de l’Ouest et la France avant tout, avec bien sûr, une forte connexion et une préoccupation pour la société anglaise puisque c’est ici que j’ai vécu et que c’est aussi là que j’ai grandi et évolué pour devenir la personne que je suis aujourd’hui et qui n’est plus qu’à deux pas de la France. Pour moi, en tant qu’individu faisant partie de la classe intellectuelle de sa génération, c’était toujours l’Europe de l’Ouest où mon destin allait se dérouler et où mes œuvres allaient atteindre le public qui leur était dû. Mon passé d’adolescent n’a porté que sur les fondements de mon éducation qui allait toujours être poursuivie et affinée en France ou en Angleterre car l’île où je suis né aujourd’hui est trop petite et compte une population d’environ 1 million d’habitants, et bien plus comme une mini station de vacances 5 étoiles aux paysages naturels à couper le souffle, c’est un endroit parfait pour se déconnecter, méditer dans la solitude, se détendre, réfléchir, créer et écrire, mais pour moi ce n’est pas assez grand en géographie et en population pour favoriser le développement d’une élite littéraire qui a étudié toutes les grandes œuvres européennes et qui a une vision universelle de la psychologie, de la philosophie et de la gestion de la civilisation. C’est une histoire similaire à celle de Napoléon qui a dû quitter la Corse et aller en France pour découvrir et libérer sa propre grandeur et son génie.

Donc, pour en revenir à la question, pour moi, un homme qui vit dans le présent, je suis et je me sens partie de l’empire français avec des liens forts avec la société britannique et surtout les intellectuels d’Oxford qui m’ont soutenu au fil des ans dans mes recherches en tant que consultant indépendant, intellectuel, chercheur, philosophe et écrivain qui trouve son inspiration dans le monde. Je dis donc que je suis un ami du peuple et de la société britannique et le réveil de l’empire français à une époque où la passion est morte et où la corruption et les bureaucrates ennuyeux, inaptes et peu créatifs se sont surtout concentrés sur leurs propres poches sans aucune vision ont mis un terme déprimant à la civilisation. D’une certaine manière, j’ai parfois l’impression qu’il est de mon devoir de consacrer cette vie à remettre la société française et l’Europe de l’Ouest sur sa glorieuse voie.

Académie Française Crepuscule

Image: L’Académie Française, Paris

M’attaquer, c’est attaquer l’empire français et la civilisation d’Europe de l’Ouest ! Parce qu’à l’heure actuelle, il n’y a pas d’autre personne qui ait un cœur entièrement dévoué à son avenir et un cerveau à la hauteur de la grandeur qui l’accompagne ! Il s’agit d’un simple énoncé des faits, et non d’une vantardise insensée !

Europe de l'Ouest

 

—-|—-

 

[EN] Answer to Question V. « What civilisation do you feel a part of?”

 

This is definitely the less complicated question so far because I have always introduced and described myself as a Franco-British western European who lives in England and who intends to periodically alternate with the south-east of France in the near future. So, going by this I can honestly say that I stand for the Western European civilisation and France primarily, with of course, a strong connection and concern for the English society since this has been my home and also the place where I matured and evolved into the person that I am today and which is only a stone’s throw away from France. To me, as an individual who is part of the intellectual class of his generation, it was always going to be Western Europe where my destiny would unfold and where my works would reach its rightful audience. My teenage past only involved the foundations of my education that was also always going to be pursued and refined in France or England since the island where I was born today is too small in size and a population of 1 million approximately and much more like a mini 5-star holiday resort with stunning natural sceneries, making it a perfect place to disconnect, meditate in solitude, relax, brain storm, create and write, but to me it is not large enough in geography and population, to foster the development of an elite literary man who studied all the great European works and who has a universal outlook on psychology, philosophy and the management of civilisation. It is a similar story to that of Napoleon who had to leave Corsica and go to France to discover and unleash his own grandeur and genius.

So, getting back to the question, for me, a man who lives in the present, I am and I feel part of the French empire with strong links with British society and especially the intellectuals of Oxford who have supported me in my research over the years as an independent consultant, intellectual, researcher, philosopher and writer who finds his inspiration in the world.

So I say that I am a friend of the British people and the awakening of the French Empire at a time where passion has died because corrupt, boring, incompetent and uncreative bureaucrats focused mainly on their own pockets without any vision have brought civilization to a depressing halt. In a way, I sometimes feel that it is my duty to devote this life to putting French society and Western Europe back on its glorious path.

Attacking me, means attacking the French empire and Western European civilisation! Because at this point in time there is no other person with a heart completely dedicated to their future with a brain that matches the grandeur to go along with it! This is a simple statement of facts, not mindless boasting!

 

 

_________________________________

 

QUESTION VI.

[FR] – Êtes-vous un fan d’Hitler ?

[EN] – Are you a Hitler fan?

 

Hitler Walking Out

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

Je suppose que cette question m’est posée parce que j’ai souvent lié des vidéos d’Hitler dans mes essais et mes écrits.

Eh bien, pour commencer, je n’ai jamais tout à fait compris le terme « fan », parce que cela semble impliquer une certaine forme d’obsession pour une personne en particulier. Non, j’ai admiré les œuvres et les valeurs de beaucoup de gens, et si cela me qualifie de « fan », alors je le suis peut-être. « Admiration » pour « certains » aspects des œuvres de nombreux grands hommes et femmes à travers l’histoire – ce qui fait de moi un admirateur d’œuvres étonnantes avec du respect pour l’artiste ou le créateur. Cela s’étend à Adolf Hitler, qui, je dirais, avait raison sur bien des points en ce qui concerne la gestion d’une civilisation, mais pas sur tout. Lui ou ses conseillers ont commis des erreurs, comme la plupart des humains, qui lui ont tout coûté, à lui et à son régime.

Je dirais donc que j’admire beaucoup de philosophies et de réalisations d’Hitler, comme la nécessité d’unir le peuple en débarrassant le pays des divisions de gauche, du centre et de droite, tout en critiquant certaines de ses procédures, car après tout, il était un être humain qui n’a vécu que la réalité de son époque, alors que je vis en 2019 et vois les choses sous un autre angle car je suis privilégié d’avoir reçu une grande part des connaissances et découvertes scientifiques que l’époque d’Hitler n’avait pas encore mises au point. L’avancement de la technologie a permis aujourd’hui d’être extrêmement mobile puisque la plupart des grands travaux et recherches sont maintenant disponibles sous forme numérique, ce qui a rendu le monde plus connecté sans qu’il soit absolument nécessaire de se rendre dans d’anciennes bibliothèques pour trouver des ressources universitaires, et d’une certaine manière, nous pourrions gérer une équipe ou une entreprise en Europe depuis la jungle amazonienne, depuis une cabane forestière au Mexique ou une tente au Danemark, tant que nous aurons la haute vitesse et la bonne technologie – imaginez ce que de Vinci aurait réalisé si nous avions ceux-là en son temps !

Léonard de Vinci - Accélérateir de Science (2017)

Source: Leonard de Vinci: Accélérateur de Science (2017)

Pour commencer par le dossier hitlérien, ce n’est pas une réponse simple car il y a beaucoup de choses à dire et à expliquer pour que les gens du monde entier puissent comprendre mon point de vue et aussi comprendre toute la controverse entourant le « Führer ». En répondant à cette question, je me référerai également à la « Théorie organique » pour expliquer l’existence, l’adaptation et l’évolution de l’homme et je me référerai également à mon propre cas en tant qu’Européen de l’Ouest franco-britannique assimilé, assez similaire au cas de Hitler ou de Napoléon qui n’étaient tous deux pas originaires de leur société, mais étaient assimilés, étonnamment, il semble que les deux dirigeants les plus puissants d’Europe occidentale aient dû venir d’un autre pays comme envoyés par le destin pour résoudre les problèmes d’une civilisation qui n’avait pas de chef légendaire avec une vision parmi son peuple, et qui a reçu un chef qui a gagné son appartenance et est devenu plus national que les nationaux eux-mêmes. Hitler est né en Autriche, tandis que Napoléon est né en Corse, et peut-être étonnamment 7 ans avant la naissance du futur empereur de France, Rousseau disait que la Corse allait secouer l’Europe.

Je dois dire que, dès mon plus jeune âge, j’ai été fasciné par la réputation d’Adolf Hitler parce que, comme la grande majorité d’entre nous, on nous a tous enseigné qu’il était la personne la plus horrible qui ait jamais existé dans l’histoire humaine, et son obsession meurtrière pour le génocide des Juifs était une chose que tout homme sain ne pouvait justifier. Comme la plupart des gens qui ont grandi entre la fin des années 80 et la fin des années 90, l’information était et est toujours principalement diffusée par les principaux médias à majorité juive, à une époque où l’Internet était encore en plein essor – en particulier les sites de streaming vidéo – j’ai donc été obligé de digérer la seule perspective à ma disposition jusqu’à une décennie dans le millénaire où un grand nombre de fichiers Hitler qui étaient enterrés commençait à apparaître partout sur Internet, donnant une perspective plus claire du monde et ses implications économiques, philosophiques et religieuses des deux côtés du débat.

Il y a aussi la grande confusion, la mauvaise interprétation et la fabrication médiatique de commérages qui existent concernant le prétendu désir de conquête du monde et l’obsession d’Hitler pour la prétendue supériorité de la race caucasienne germanique, particulièrement le sous-type nordique aux cheveux blonds et aux yeux bleus qui devrait à la longue remplacer toutes les autres races qui ne sont pas d’origine allemande – comme beaucoup de sociétés inférieures en Europe de l’Est avec un certain nombre de juifs et musulmans, etc. par e.x. La Pologne, la Bosnie, la République tchétchène et la Russie, qu’il considérait comme bon marché et de culture inférieure, les comparant à des animaux mineurs – du moins c’est ce qu’on disait et faisait croire à la majorité. Si les sociétés d’Europe de l’Est ne sont peut-être pas aussi sophistiquées que les sociétés d’Europe de l’Ouest, cette hypothèse de sous-type inférieur et supérieur ne reposant que sur l’héritage génétique et les attributs physiques n’est pas scientifiquement valable car nous savons maintenant que les organismes peuvent être formés avec les conseils et l’éducation appropriés pour s’adapter à leurs sociétés choisies et cela devrait être le cas si un empire conquiert et prend de l’ampleur, et aussi que le talent et le génie, bien que très rare, peuvent apparaître et a émergé de différentes sociétés et compositions organique, de n’importe quel coin du globe, et cela prouve qu’un organisme supérieur [intellectuellement ou physiquement] peut naître de n’importe quelle société et faire partie de n’importe quel type de composition organique, non seulement le sous-type nordique de la race caucasienne germanique, voire même Mussolini qui était un autre dirigeant fasciste et nationaliste était en désaccord avec Hitler sur cette question du sous-type nordique, et il a dit ne croire à la supériorité d’un seul sous-type particulier mais de la qualité générale de tous les sous-types, dont le sous-type méditerranéen aux cheveux bruns qui crée un mélange sain parmi le peuple national.

Cependant, l’amplification de l’argument d’Hitler en un désir d’extermination a créé beaucoup de confusion et a été encore exagérée et amplifiée par la presse commérageuse majoritairement détenue et gérée par les Juifs pour donner au régime hitlérien une mauvaise publicité et une haine mondiale. En ce qui concerne les enregistrements, nous savons seulement qu’Hitler s’est concentré sur des questions nationales et a clairement demandé à tous les autres pays de le laisser, lui et l’Allemagne, se concentrer seuls sur leur propre société et d’être autorisés à façonner leur société comme ils l’ont souhaité, car ils ont tout hérité de leurs ancêtres et ont voulu préserver leur société après avoir reçu l’autorisation de le faire dans des élections démocratiques, et aussi garder la race nationale allemande « pure »[ce qui n’avait bien sûr aucun sens car aucune race n’est pure puisque nous sommes le résultat de la migration, du métissage et de l’évolution de différents sous-types et Hitler lui-même était le résultat de la consanguinité entre un homme et sa nièce, le type d’union que Charles Darwin, l’homme derrière la théorie de l’évolution, s’opposait lui-même ainsi que le mariage entre cousins qu’il tentait de rendre illicite par loi à cause des nombreuses malformations et de l’incapacité des enfants qu’a entraîné ainsi que les mauvaises gènes que cela propagerait].

Donc, pour commencer à répondre à votre question, je dirai d’abord que Hitler était un patriote convaincu et un défenseur de la société et du peuple qu’il représentait [pas différent de moi et de mes vues pour la France et l’Europe occidentale en fait] et que pour renforcer un pays de plusieurs façons, l’accent devrait d’abord être mis sur ceux qui font partie du peuple natif du pays, s’y reconnaissent et l’aiment, c’est une philosophie qui s’inscrit dans le droit fil de la bonne gestion d’une civilisation et de ma propre philosophie de la « Théorie organique », mais seulement en partie parce que la solution complète implique aussi la prise en compte de l’afflux de talents et l’adaptation évolutive d’autres organismes qualifiés qui contribuent également au maintien et au progrès de la nation et qui ont acquis leur origine nationale et s’identifient complètement à la nation, en faisant partie intégrante de celle-ci.

Malheureusement, Hitler et ses conseillers ont exagéré et mal interprété la compréhension de l’évolution organique et ont suivi une politique atavique et rétrograde avec une équipe qui a procédé sauvagement, sans considérer attentivement la logique fondamentale qui existe dans tous les domaines de la vie, à savoir que nous avons toujours eu des exceptions aux règles pour les cas exceptionnels – cela s’applique aux mathématiques, aux arts, à la médecine, aux sciences – qui devraient également s’appliquer à tout système jugé pratique, moderne et évolué. Tous les organismes de cette planète s’adaptent et évoluent d’un point de vue organique et sociolinguistique, mais pas de la même façon et comme je l’ai dit, si les lois de la nature et de l’évolution qui contiennent toute vie sur terre en décidaient autrement, alors les organismes de différentes compositions organiques ne seraient pas capables de procréer.

L’équipe d’Hitler était aussi composée de nombreux traîtres avec une éducation assez élémentaire qui ont pris des décisions meurtrières qu’ils ont cachées au « Führer », entraînant sa chute et l’annihilation complète de ses plans et de son système ; vers la fin ils ont tous mis la faute sur un homme comme si Hitler avait drogué une nation entière et les avait hypnotisés en marionnettes mécaniques – qui est aussi clairement impossible sans la foi, la volonté et le désir de la nation à se diriger vers la vision.

Hitler embrassant une fillette juive

Cette photo de Hitler embrassant une fillette juive s’est vendue 11 520 dollars aux enchères / Source: VanityFair

Il convient également de mentionner qu’à ce jour, pas un seul enregistrement ou message écrit n’a été trouvé de Hitler donnant le feu vert à l’extermination d’un peuple, et ce qui peut être conclu aujourd’hui est que Hitler croyait que toutes les sociétés et races devraient simplement être nationalisées afin que toutes les sociétés et races puissent se comporter mieux et se perfectionner comme le Reich allemand. Sur la question des massacres de masse, le blâme aujourd’hui, selon les faits qui ont été recueillis, est principalement attribué à Göring et Himmler, ce dernier passant par les anciennes écritures aryennes de l’hindouisme se croyant agir comme le grand guerrier Arjuna qui purgeait son peuple et le monde entier du mal et qui croyait qu’à long terme les gens le verraient comme le héros mythologique nettoyant la terre du mal qui était pour lui les Juifs et leurs valeurs étant la cause de toute souffrance humaine sur terre comme ils détruisent les autres civilisations et déforme et contrôle les pensées des masses par leurs activités médiatiques.

Tout d’abord, j’expliquerai ce que je critique à l’égard du régime hitlérien avant d’expliquer ce que je considère comme admirable dans la légende d’Adolf Hitler en tant que leader et être humain sur cette planète. Il y a deux ou trois choses que je pense sincèrement ne sont pas acceptables dans la société éclairée d’aujourd’hui en 2019, et Hitler aurait construit un Reich plus fort s’il avait été mieux conseillé dans des politiques plus intelligentes concernant la gestion, le maintien et la formation d’une population productive et sophistiquée avec des sentiments patriotiques forts et un sentiment de synchronisation et de compréhension. Hitler ne visait pas simplement à créer une entreprise de boulettes de viande roses, mais était un leader cultivé guidé par la philosophie, l’éthique, la morale, la dignité, les valeurs et les arts et voulait que le monde entier regarde l’allemand comme un modèle héroïque à suivre et à être inspiré par. Hitler voulait que les gens voient les honorables SS comme des héros légendaires qui voulaient faire du monde un endroit meilleur. Adolf Hitler n’était pas un porc ou un simple soldat.

adolf-hitler-archive-national-nazi-hoffmann

Image: Des photos de Henrich Hoffmann, le photographe d’Hitler, numérisés, restaurés et publiés pour la première fois (2019)

Il est fondamental de comprendre qu’à l’époque d’Hitler, l’Allemagne se faisait conquérir par des communistes méthodiquement concentrés sur la prise de pouvoir de l’Allemagne sans véritable sentiment d’appartenance, avec l’intention de la transformer en une forme de zone commerciale et une arrière-cour économique en Europe, semblable à ce que les génies influents du monde des affaires, principalement juifs, ont fait des Etats-Unis aujourd’hui – une société mécanisée, industrialisée, dépourvue d’humanité et de valeurs, où l’individualisme égoïste a laissé chacun dans une lutte constante pour survivre à tout prix, même si cela signifie se tuer mutuellement, ce qui est aussi courant lorsque les armes sont légales là-bas. Les dirigeants de ces groupes communistes en Allemagne à l’époque d’Hitler étaient composés d’une majorité d’étrangers, dont de nombreux Juifs. Alors que le nombre de morts de Juifs a été exagéré et utilisé pour diffamer Hitler, aucune attention particulière n’a été accordée au nombre de morts horribles que les Juifs ont causées pendant la révolution russe et de nombreux historiens révisionnistes ont affirmé que le nombre de morts était beaucoup plus élevé que le régime hitlérien. Cependant, il était clair qu’en plus de l’immigration juive et des influences politiques des communistes juifs qui affaiblissaient et corrompaient progressivement la société allemande, il y avait aussi un énorme problème avec l’immigration de populations qui n’étaient pas des Allemands de souche. Cela impliquait que pour qu’un homme comme Hitler puisse réaliser son rêve d’une Allemagne forte, stable et moderne, il aurait fallu s’attaquer à la question de l’immigration, et comme il avait une vision nationale et d’excellence, le fait de se débarrasser d’une foule excessive, incompatible et étrangère qui ne voulait pas s’assimiler pleinement et devenir citoyen allemand était une chose nécessaire dans sa vision.

Cependant, il ne fait aucun doute qu’Hitler aurait aussi dû se rendre compte qu’il y avait un grand nombre d’êtres humains très talentueux et complètement assimilés dans la société allemande qui devaient être conservés et traités comme des citoyens qui avaient acquis leur origine et un fort sentiment d’identification avec la foule native par leur propre adaptation et évolution. Et comme ce n’était pas le cas, nous nous sommes retrouvés avec la Seconde Guerre mondiale, de nombreuses personnes mourant dans des camps de détention mal approvisionnés après que les alliés eurent bombardé les voies ferrées de liaison et perturbé l’approvisionnement alimentaire et hygiénique, provoquant une épidémie de typhus qui a fait des milliers de morts. En outre, de nombreux Allemands qui avaient un lien lointain avec la population juive ont été traités comme des criminels à déporter, ce qui a conduit à une opération irrationnelle qui a écarté des personnes qui étaient parfaitement aptes à faire partie d’une société fonctionnelle, les normes scientifiques actuelles ayant prouvé, avec une interprétation correcte de la théorie de l’évolution, que nous sommes des organismes qui peuvent adapter et changer leur identité pour qu’elle soit en accord avec les nouveaux environnements, si nous faisons les bons choix et avons les capacités et la motivation pour le faire.

L’autre côté, c’était celui de la supériorité du peuple allemand dont Hitler était obsédé et qui s’avéra en fait peu créatif en ne considérant pas les personnes ayant une part d’héritage et d’appartenance culturelle allemande comme un exemple de conquête allemande, car c’était aussi un moyen pour une civilisation de diffuser ses gènes plus largement et d’encourager les personnes résultant de ce mélange à se mélanger avec la civilisation fondatrice qui conduirait à leur future lignée de partager une quantité encore plus importante de gènes allemands. En fait, si la science et l’évolution ainsi que la supériorité en moyenne de la « race aryenne » ont guidé la politique du régime national-socialiste, elles auraient dû également encourager la diffusion du génome aryen en encourageant les hommes et les femmes les plus sains et les meilleurs de la race aryenne à donner des ovules et du sperme et encourager les couples à utiliser des donneurs sains de la race aryenne pour élever leurs enfants, et ce service aurait dû être offert aux couples de toutes conditions sociales pour prévenir la formation de malformations et d’organismes malsains. Cela aurait été une façon sophistiquée et moderne de penser l’évolution humaine et l’évolution sociétale à la manière hitlérienne. Une façon de dire est que pour changer leur société biologiquement, une bonne façon est de s’assurer qu’ils ont assez de « tartelettes à la crème ». Parce qu’après tout, je crois qu’il faut donner aux êtres humains la liberté de choisir leur partenariat, ce qui n’était pas le cas dans le Reich, car les Allemands natifs qui ne se reproduisaient pas avec des Allemands natifs étaient considérés comme des traîtres.

Par conséquent, cette forme d’extrémisme était l’une des principales doctrines qui ont conduit à tant de haine et de ressentiment envers le Troisième Reich de la part d’un grand nombre d’Allemands eux-mêmes, amenant une armée alliée à travailler constamment pour faire tomber tout le spectacle, bien que la partie adverse représente les valeurs d’une société qui ne sont pas meilleures en fournissant une solution à une civilisation harmonieuse mais qui sont surtout alimentés par la haine, de fortes motivations financières juives et le désir de paralyser l’Allemagne à tout prix, mais surtout de faire tomber le charismatique et trop puissant Adolf Hitler, comme c’est souvent le cas quand un homme doué monte au sommet et éclipse sa compétition avec son talent et son magnétisme.

Judea declares war on Germany

C’est aussi le cas de Napoléon, lorsque toute l’Europe a rassemblé toutes ses forces pour le faire tomber. Cela semble être le cas aujourd’hui, comme si la société ne pouvait accepter que certains organismes soient supérieurs à la majorité médiocre. Cela semble hypocrite puisque nous pouvons tous aujourd’hui accepter que nous avons une nourriture supérieure d’un point de vue nutritionnel, des ordinateurs supérieurs, des voitures supérieures, des joueurs de football supérieurs, des montres supérieures, des caméras supérieures, des guitares supérieures, des pianos supérieurs, des chevaux supérieurs, donc cela devrait aussi s’appliquer à l’organisme humain, ce qui signifie que nous avons aussi des individus supérieurs avec une intelligence supérieure, donc une vision et une gestion supérieures. Il est également important de noter que les objets supérieurs sont toujours rares, et donc minoritaires, c’est pourquoi leur valeur est immense. Si les diamants étaient aussi abondants que l’acier et si l’acier était aussi rare que les diamants, alors les bijoux seraient faits d’acier et les diamants seraient utilisés dans la construction. Ainsi, nous semblons vivre dans un monde où la médiocrité des masses semble avoir de la difficulté à accepter que certains individus soient supérieurs dans leur ensemble, et au lieu d’encourager, d’apprendre, d’être inspirés et fiers d’être dirigés par de tels individus, nous semblons plutôt trouver une union de médiocrité qui fait tout son possible pour faire tomber ces individus. C’est quelque chose sur quoi la société doit travailler à l’échelle mondiale, pour favoriser l’excellence ! Le respect et l’appréciation sont après tout des mots qui existent dans tous les dictionnaires, et les êtres nobles et cultivés savent comment les montrer, et ceux qui n’ont jamais considéré ces valeurs peuvent essayer d’apprendre, cela en ferait certainement des êtres plus complets.

Pour en revenir à la gestion de la population de l’Allemagne pour une nation saine, forte et stable, Hitler aurait dû trouver une forme systématique de  » filtration « , impliquant des formes d’interview, d’évaluation de la santé, d’évaluation des compétences et d’évaluation culturelle qui analysaient tout le segment de la population allemande d’origine étrangère en tout ou en partie, et les diviser en deux groupes : ceux qui étaient aptes, sûrs et synchronisés avec la société allemande à garder, et ceux qui constituaient un fardeau en raison de leur incapacité à s’adapter et de leur refus d’être allemands en raison de convictions religieuses ou étrangères fermes d’être transférés diplomatiquement dans un environnement et une société plus adaptés à leurs caractéristiques, de la manière la plus respectueuse qui soit. Ceux qui ont été jugés aptes à la société allemande auraient même pu bénéficier d’une forme de classification [sous-type de la société allemande] s’ils l’avaient jugé nécessaire et auraient également dû prêter serment d’allégeance et de priorité à leur identité nouvellement trouvée et aux personnes qu’ils auraient dû respecter si c’était là où ils pensaient appartenir, sinon, il serait préférable pour un individu de se déplacer et de vivre dans une société compatible avec son patrimoine et avec les personnes dont il se sent membre, car aujourd’hui, en 2019, l’inégalité des revenus a diminué et le monde devient une planète plus égalitaire ainsi que les progrès technologiques qui rendent la vie assez semblable d’une partie du monde à une autre. Les organismes assimilés pourraient également avoir droit à 3 avertissements avant d’envisager de les expulser pour non-respect de leur contrat d’allégeance après des infractions graves, devenant ainsi des « traîtres » à la nation.

La solution de la filtration n’a pas été facile, mais en fait, c’était une solution sophistiquée qui aurait été plus adaptée à une civilisation qui évoluait et devenait de plus en plus complexe, décennie après décennie – nous ne pouvons pas nous attendre à des solutions faciles pour convenir à une civilisation complexe. Ce n’était bien sûr pas la solution choisie par le régime, mais la voie la plus rapide et la plus facile pour déporter tous les Juifs, non allemands et partiellement juifs, ce qui a entraîné tant de souffrances inutiles et de malentendus, alors que beaucoup de ces personnes n’étaient même pas religieuses et se considéraient plus allemandes que toute autre religion, comme Sigmund Freud qui était un produit de la pensée intellectuelle de la tradition allemande et qui, par la suite, a influencé la psychologie globalement, ou encore Albert Einstein qui était également sans sentiments religieux et a dû se rendre aux Etats-Unis pour s’exiler.

Il est également important de rappeler que les politiques conçues par le régime national-socialiste visaient également toutes les personnes considérées comme un fardeau et inutiles au progrès de la société allemande, ce qui a également conduit à l’euthanasie de nombreux Allemands pour des maladies génétiques et autres maladies incurables considérées comme impures pour une société et une race saine, ainsi que de nombreuses personnes âgées considérées comme inaptes à vivre. Cela montre donc que même un grand nombre d’Allemands ont perdu la vie, pas seulement des Juifs et des étrangers piégés dans des camps de déportation lors d’un bombardement massif des sols allemands.

Je trouve également important d’attirer l’attention sur le fait que l’Allemagne d’Hitler n’était pas une forme de société purement caucasienne, purement native et allemande, où toute autre personne jugée différente était enlevée, enfermée et abattue. Non… bien sûr, Hitler n’était pas un tel idiot, et s’est rendu compte qu’il avait besoin de nombreux travailleurs étrangers pour achever la construction de son pays (routes, bâtiments, etc.) et qu’il avait en effet de nombreux travailleurs d’Europe de l’Est et étrangers sur ses chantiers, il savait aussi que l’économie allemande devrait comme tous les pays adopter le tourisme, et donc les gens de toutes sortes étaient autorisés à visiter l’Allemagne. En effet, Hitler a même accueilli les Jeux Olympiques où des athlètes du monde entier étaient présents. Beaucoup d’historiens modernes qui revisitent la Seconde Guerre mondiale ont tendance à oublier ces détails.

Jeux Olympiques de 1936

Image: Les Jeux Olympiques de 1936

Hitler voulait en effet se concentrer sur les Allemands, mais il s’est rendu compte qu’il était impossible de diriger un pays sans une part équitable de la population étrangère qui étaient fondamentaux. Et cela se reflète aujourd’hui dans l’exemple de l’amour absolu des Européens de l’Ouest pour la cuisine étrangère, par exemple la cuisine chinoise ou la cuisine indienne qu’ils aiment avoir à portée de main par simple pression d’un bouton. Et en utilisant ces exemples pour expliquer la logique, il serait impossible de fournir des aliments asiatiques de qualité au marché européen sans la présence de certaines personnes de ces régions pour gérer la distribution et assurer la qualité des aliments. Cela s’étend à la cuisine italienne, mexicaine, grecque et/ou française. Un autre exemple serait les bienfaits scientifiquement prouvés du yoga en tant que discipline de santé, qui a été adopté par la société française et de nombreuses autres sociétés occidentales, de même, il serait impossible de s’attendre à la généralisation du style de vie si nous n’avions pas certains des fondateurs du yoga pour former une génération, et il est sans doute que les experts devraient être d’où vient la discipline, qui est en Inde, ce qui conduirait à la formation d’autres experts dans d’autres parties du monde, une logique qui s’applique également pour les disciplines telles que les arts martiaux, également originaires du continent asiatique.

Le fait est que l’Europe de l’Ouest n’est pas une région comme les autres, parce qu’elle est le lieu de naissance de certains des plus grands intellectuels, penseurs et inventeurs qui ont eu un impact majeur sur le monde, ce qui a également conduit à la création des meilleures institutions éducatives dans divers domaines en Europe. Cela attire certains des meilleurs universitaires du monde entier qui paient d’énormes frais de scolarité pour étudier dans ces établissements, ce qui stimule également l’économie de l’Europe et lorsque cela se produit, cela signifie que le gouvernement a plus d’argent à dépenser pour sa propre population, son système et ses infrastructures. Lorsque ces meilleurs universitaires étrangers terminent leurs études, une grande partie d’entre eux retournent dans leur pays d’origine, mais certains sont également employés en tant que spécialistes hautement qualifiés et travailleurs qualifiés dans leur domaine par des géants du monde européen des affaires dans des domaines allant de l’ingénierie à la médecine. Il est également important de comprendre que la contribution de ces personnes contribue au progrès des institutions européennes et à leur réputation. Ainsi, ces travailleurs qualifiés, bien qu’ils ne fassent pas partie de la sphère culturelle ou de l’industrie du spectacle ou de l’industrie hollywoodienne majoritairement juive, font parfois partie de l’équipe qui trouve une nouvelle invention, un nouveau moteur, une façon plus propre de récolter l’énergie, une nouvelle cure, un nouveau traitement, et où le monde est en train de se diriger dangereusement en ce moment en avec la perte de utilité des antibiotiques, qui sait si l’un d’entre eux trouvera l’antibiotique ultime, et si c’est le cas, cela permettra de sauver tant de producteurs, compositeurs, méso-sopranos, pianistes, danseurs de ballet et peintres, ainsi que leurs proches et enfants, de mourir de petites infections comme Frédéric Chopin. Il est donc important de noter que certaines choses sont plus grandes que la beauté extérieure, mais ont plus à voir avec la beauté intérieure de l’esprit qui se reflète dans l’intelligence et les capacités académiques.

L’autre scénario est que, dans de nombreux cas, ces travailleurs qualifiés ayant passé une grande partie de leur vie dans la civilisation occidentale finissent par se marier avec une femme du pays où ils travaillent, par exemple, des médecins étrangers qualifiés qui épousent leur infirmière et lui offrent une vie dont elle n’a jamais rêvé. Donc, ce sont des choses qui se produisent dans le monde humain, et ces mélanges mineurs de gènes se sont toujours produits depuis le début de l’humanité, comme je l’ai expliqué à maintes reprises que notre race actuelle est le résultat du mouvement à travers les plaines de la terre, le croisement et l’évolution. Donc, essayer d’arrêter une telle force qui a façonné notre espèce, semble être une lutte contre la nature elle-même, donc cela semble contre nature. La seule chose que l’on puisse faire est de guider les gens vers une meilleure compréhension de leur propre société, de son peuple et de son identité, ainsi que de sa continuité et des efforts que cela exige de tous ses citoyens – sinon tout système s’écroule et se désintègre – et ceux qui font partie d’une société devraient savoir que s’ils ne s’assimilent pas et ne font pas partie de ce peuple, ils auront toujours une vie mondaine et incomplète, qui pourrait être comparable à celle d’un rat. Dans certains cas, des cas mineurs de fusion génétique ajoutent également des gènes très talentueux au patrimoine génétique d’une civilisation, car l’excellence peut provenir de n’importe quelle composition organique et, lorsqu’elle fait partie d’une civilisation, ne fait que la renforcer, car elle se propage dans la civilisation à travers le temps. La chose décente à faire serait que l’État contrôle toujours le nombre d’étrangers dans le pays en imposant une limite stricte par rapport à la population native, peut-être s’entendre sur un pourcentage qui ne devrait jamais être dépassé, en excluant les étudiants universitaires.

Par conséquent, le régime hitlérien aurait dû savoir qu’il n’allait qu’échouer et créer beaucoup de ressentiment et de haine en essayant de séparer les êtres humains légalement par des formalités rigides et des preuves d’identité génétique par des idées obsolètes telles que la généalogie allemande, comme le faisait le régime national socialiste. En effet, la société avait déjà évolué et de nombreux liens s’étaient tissés entre les personnes qui se sont mariées et ont eu des enfants, entre les différentes confessions religieuses, origines et nationalités de la nation allemande. Et ces types de règles rigides qui expulseraient ceux qui ne s’y conforment pas par le biais de la généalogie et de l’ascendance ne pourraient que conduire à la séparation des familles et même à la déportation des femmes ou des maris de nombreux Allemands, et lorsque ces scénarios se produisent, les humains ont tendance à lutter à mort pour sauver ceux qui leur sont chers. Le régime hitlérien aurait dû savoir que ce genre de politique était vouée à l’échec.

Ce qui, selon moi, aurait plutôt fonctionné, c’est une exécution « informelle » de la vision d’une Allemagne forte. En d’autres termes, Hitler aurait dû créer une société centrée sur les citoyens allemands – à la fois les natifs et ceux qui se sont fermement assimilés et qui se considéraient comme des Allemands de souche – avec une forte identité allemande et un sentiment d’intérêt pour le peuple et la nation, tout en nationalisant les industries et en s’assurant que les gens au sommet se consacrent entièrement sans autre motif que le progrès de la nation et ont les valeurs nationales, la dignité humaine et comprennent l’identité religieuse de la nation en favorisant des personnes aux sentiments allemands forts et reconnus. Après cela, le régime et la nation auraient automatiquement créé un climat qui illustrerait la vision d’une Allemagne nationaliste forte, avec des industries axées sur le peuple allemand, et sans une politique formelle de déportation et de dépistage génétique, le peuple se serait rapidement retrouvé dans une société remodelée pour refléter les valeurs d’une Allemagne nationaliste, avec fierté dans son histoire, son peuple, sa culture et ses valeurs sans attaquer systématiquement les autres. Après cela, les entreprises qui ne pouvaient pas s’adapter fermeraient automatiquement et partiraient si les autorités déclaraient catégoriquement qu’aucune tradition juive ne serait tolérée sur le sol allemand et qu’aucune personne de la religion ou de la communauté juive ne serait autorisée à faire des affaires, sauf celles qui ont abandonné leur identité juive et adopté pleinement la tradition allemande avec la religion officielle comme option. Les personnes qui voulaient rester dans l’Allemagne nationale-socialiste évalueraient automatiquement leurs capacités et leurs possibilités et se forceraient à respecter les règles et à embrasser, à se développer et à apprendre à être citoyens allemands ou à partir. Elle aurait automatiquement généré un sentiment de logique d' »adaptation, de périr ou de partir » dans l’esprit de la population allemande, ce qui aurait conduit les peuples assimilés d’Allemagne à se rapprocher et à renforcer leurs liens avec le peuple natif allemand pour faire partie de la grande vision d’une Allemagne nationaliste, ou ils seraient partis à cause de leur incapacité ou refus de s’adapter, participer et contribuer à l’amélioration de la société.

C’est donc ce qu’il aurait fallu faire, selon moi, les idées et la vision du régime national-socialiste auraient dû être appliquées de manière informelle et non formelle par le biais d’un régime militaire strict, de camps de déportation, d’enquêtes généalogiques et de l’affirmation atavique et non scientifique du « sang ». En effet, il n’existe pas de « sang » comme on l’appelle dans la culture, le sang est un liquide qui coule dans les veines des êtres humains, mais même la famille n’a parfois pas de sang compatible car ils diffèrent par groupe et ont parfois besoin d’étrangers ou des individus d’une société différente pour donner du sang pour sauver la vie des autres qui ne sont pas liés à eux. Ainsi, cette idée de « sang » devrait être utilisée avec soin et convient mieux aux métaphores de « culture et littérature » que la réalité, puisqu’elle semble être utilisée pour expliquer la loyauté, l’unité et la parenté à travers une nation, une société, des valeurs et des perspectives similaires. Avec cet exemple, je peux dire aujourd’hui que j’ai du sang franco-britannique dans les veines et que cela fonctionnerait culturellement, mais médicalement cela n’aurait pas beaucoup de sens, puisque mon sang ne sera compatible qu’avec des individus de mon groupe sanguin qui peuvent être de n’importe quelle partie du monde et de n’importe quelle composition organique ou société, tant qu’ils sont humains et non des animaux.

La dernière chose que je mets aussi en doute dans la situation du régime hitlérien, c’est le véritable pouvoir de la démocratie à notre époque, oui ! Je veux dire, le peuple allemand avait voté pour l’arrivée au pouvoir des national-socialistes après avoir clairement connu leur manifeste et leurs idées d’une Allemagne nationaliste sans présence juive. Par conséquent, je me demande si demain, si je fais campagne et si je dis par exemple – notez que ce n’est qu’un exemple, et non une déclaration d’intention – que je rendrai illégal dans le pays toute forme de lieux de culte islamique, car nous savons par les faits historiques que c’est une religion qui a mené d’énormes guerres violentes contre la civilisation classique occidentale et toutes les autres religions non musulmanes et qui est une secte de guerre, de sang, de conquête et de domination par tous les moyens ; et si je suis élu, je serai bombardé par les alliés et emprisonné pour avoir essayé de le faire ! Cela signifie que même si une forme de référendum démocratique soutenait mes idées, toutes les autres conventions m’en empêcheraient, ce qui semble indiquer que les pays ont perdu leur pouvoir démocratique et ne peuvent plus satisfaire leur propre population, ce qui devrait laisser aux autorités beaucoup à réfléchir.

L’autre question de l’assimilation culturelle, qui consiste à faire partie intégrante de la nation, exige que l’on adopte le thème culturel de la nation, et cela s’applique aux individus et à leurs noms. Ce que je veux dire, c’est que l’assimilation implique généralement de porter un nom en accord avec l’héritage de la société, et beaucoup de Juifs l’ont compris, malheureusement le reste ne semble toujours pas comprendre qu’avec un nom comme « Mangia Fazula », « Okolo Sambaweh », « Munjabar Sakalamaktoum », « Soupovic Boringov », « Adnan Sawey » ou « Aharon Azriel » ils seront automatiquement considérés comme étrangers dans un pays d’Europe de l’Ouest fondée sur la culture chrétienne occidentale. Ainsi, les personnes qui veulent faire partie intégrante d’une nation par le biais de l’assimilation devraient aussi être assez intelligentes pour comprendre le thème culturel qui s’applique aussi aux noms, ainsi que la combinaison de la condition physique qui facilite simplement le processus et une maîtrise des modèles de communication et de comportement et un fort sentiment de solidarité avec la nation, tout en acceptant également l’identité religieuse de la nation même si cela est facultatif – étant une question de connexion spirituelle et le caractère sacré de son âme et c’est une question entre la personne et sa conscience et « Dieu » si elle croit en lui.

Quant à la rhétorique catholique forte encouragée par Hitler et son régime en faveur de l’éducation des jeunes à la religion et aux valeurs, il est important de se rappeler que Jésus Christ, le Messie qui a conduit à la fondation et à la diffusion du christianisme, n’est pas né d’origine européenne ni ne parlait français, allemand ou anglais. Jésus-Christ est né de la population d’Israël et parle en araméen. Bien sûr, il n’était pas de foi juive, et les textes religieux et l’héritage du christianisme ont été traduits dans les langues occidentales pour atteindre un large public. Par conséquent, cela aurait aussi pu être fait pour n’importe quelle autre religion si c’était celle qui avait été adoptée et répandue en Europe, par exemple l’hindouisme. Si tel était le cas, tous les textes hindous et les hindous d’Europe parleraient et prieraient dans leurs propres langues européennes, pas nécessairement dans la langue maternelle des dieux, c’est-à-dire l’hindi, puisque tous les textes religieux auraient été traduits dans les langues respectives de la région européenne. De même, les chrétiens modernes d’Europe occidentale ne parlent pas l’araméen, la langue que Jésus parlait.

Le fait est que, comme l’explique la théorie organique, les modèles de communication des primates humains peuvent varier d’une région à l’autre, mais la créativité et le QI ne varient pas, et par conséquent, une fois que l’héritage de l’humanité est traduit dans le langage approprié [modèle de communication], la société devrait être immédiatement soulagée dans sa capacité à se comprendre mutuellement. La synchronisation linguistique devrait donc être une chose qui apaiserait un monde en désaccord, même si les valeurs et les croyances religieuses sépareront toujours les groupes, de sorte que le débat aujourd’hui vers une civilisation harmonieuse devrait certainement commencer sur le langage global de l’humanité à adopter. Un bon exemple serait de voir le succès commercial et l’influence créative de la forme d’art moderne connue sous le nom de « manga » – qui vient d’Asie – sur la France et les autres sociétés d’Europe de l’Ouest une fois qu’elles sont doublées dans la bonne langue.

Et maintenant, après avoir parlé de la Théorie Organique ci-dessus, j’aimerais expliquer son application à une civilisation humaine moderne ainsi qu’à l’évolution et à l’assimilation organiques individuelles, afin que la plupart des non-académiques et des non-initiés qui lisent ceci puissent avoir une vision claire de ce qu’est l’assimilation d’un point de vue objectif et rationnel et aussi de ce que cela implique et exige pour un organisme de considérer si elle a le potentiel et les exigences pour être assimilée dans une société particulière, et comment cela renforce une société sophistiquée, et ici, comment cela aurait aidé dans la politique d’Hitler à créer une Allemagne moderne ou la vision de n’importe quel dirigeant à créer un pays moderne.

En parlant d’évolution, il faut tenir compte de l’évolution et de la condition physique de chacun, car toutes les formes d’Homo Sapiens évoluent ensemble sur cette minuscule planète qu’est la Terre d’une manière si rapide que les manuels scolaires ne peuvent espérer l’expliquer et l’égaler, d’où l’importance des ressources et la créativité de penseurs d’avant-garde dotés d’une intelligence fluide.

Tout d’abord, je voudrais aborder la question de l’assimilation d’un point de vue organique et, étant donné que je suis un parfait exemple de l’école de pensée française avec un côté britannique fort, je vais expliquer ce processus en m’en servant moi-même comme exemple. Maintenant, j’ai hérité des connaissances, de la langue, des valeurs et des philosophies de l’empire français et de l’empire britannique par la transmission culturelle après que ces empires aient conquis des terres et étendu leur royaume. Je ne me suis donc pas réveillé un matin, parlant soudainement français et anglais tout en connaissant l’histoire et la littérature de ces langues. Et si l’île minuscule que je suis née était située près de l’Europe occidentale, elle ferait partie de l’Europe, je n’aurais probablement pas à répondre à toutes ces questions, car elle aurait été considérée comme un produit de la civilisation européenne, à la simple différence que certaines des personnes qui constituent sa nation viennent avec une variété de tons de peau dont beaucoup ont une couleur et une texture très différentes de la majorité commune du rose clair à cause d’un mélange qui a été fait pendant la conquête occidentale européenne. Pourtant, cela n’aurait pas été un tel problème parce qu’il y a beaucoup de pays d’Europe où les gens ne sont pas aussi pâles que la majorité commune, par exemple l’Espagne, le Portugal, l’Italie et la Grèce – c’est simplement une légère similitude dans les attributs physiques, pas la langue, ou autre chose, donc il ne serait d’aucun sens de placer ces nations dans un groupe ! Mais, comme le lieu de ma naissance est un lieu éloigné de l’Europe géographiquement bien que né sur le patrimoine de l’Europe de l’Ouest, et que j’ai voyagé pour rejoindre les racines de mon héritage culturel en Europe occidentale puisque je fais partie des élites littéraires de la nouvelle génération née dans une république indépendante avec un nouveau système culturel et éducatif, une langue et des valeurs française, je pense être un bon exemple pour expliquer le processus de l’assimilation dans une perspective individuelle, en m’aidant de ma propre Théorie organique.

Maintenant que j’ai expliqué que l’organisme individuel né sur la planète terre selon les lois de la nature et de l’évolution est libre et évolue encore puisque l’évolution est un processus sans fin. J’attirerai également l’attention du public sur le fait que, selon les lois de la nature, les barrières érigées par l’homme ne font pas partie des lois naturelles, ce sont simplement des barrières érigées par les groupes politiques. Ainsi, l’organisme individuel naît sur une planète et peut s’adapter et changer en fonction de ses capacités et de son choix d’environnement. Grâce aux progrès d’aujourd’hui grâce à la technologie et à ses installations d’apprentissage accéléré, les organismes peuvent apprendre et se façonner linguistiquement et philosophiquement en fonction de l’environnement dont ils veulent faire partie. Cependant, il y a aussi des limites à ce processus, car un haut niveau de compétence en termes de modèles comportementaux et de communication sera nécessaire pour qu’un organisme s’assimile parfaitement à un environnement choisi et soit vu comme une partie intégrante de celui-ci tout en étant synchronisé avec les natifs. Par exemple, j’avais hérité des modèles communicatifs, comportementaux et sociaux de la France et de l’Angleterre, qui étaient enracinés en moi et j’ai également fait des choix pour approfondir ma compréhension de ces sociétés à travers mes choix éducatifs et, dès mon plus jeune âge, j’ai toujours voulu poursuivre ma carrière et terminer ma vie en Europe de l’Ouest : France et Angleterre. Cela signifie que j’ai investi beaucoup d’efforts pour me redéfinir en tant que Franco-Britannique d’Europe occidentale parce que rien n’arrive à personne sans sacrifice, travail et dévouement.

Il s’agit maintenant d’expliquer que pour qu’un organisme sur terre puisse envisager de s’assimiler dans un environnement choisi, ce n’est pas un processus facile, mais il comporte d’immenses défis et sacrifices. Si nous voulons faire partie d’une nouvelle société, nous ne pourrons pas le faire en restant ce que nous sommes, mais nous devrons nous remodeler et nous adapter à la société et nous efforcer de ne faire qu’un avec son peuple, et d’une certaine façon les voir comme notre propre « sang » – métaphoriquement. En outre, il y a aussi la question de la condition physique, qui n’a rien à voir avec la « beauté », mais plutôt avec la capacité de se fondre dans les organismes de cette société par une certaine forme de synchronisation physique. Ce n’est qu’une partie et non le seul facteur qui définit l’assimilation, mais c’est un facteur qui facilite le processus d’assimilation, bien que ce ne soit pas tout. Par exemple, en utilisant l’organisme que je suis, je suis né avec un héritage indo-européen et bien que je sois peut-être un peu moins pâle que la majorité moyenne des organismes de la sphère occidentale européenne, j’ai encore plus de similitudes physiques avec ces gens puisqu’ils sont aussi d’origine indo-européenne et de ce qui est aussi connu comme la « race aryen ». Ce que j’essaie de dire, c’est que j’ai choisi une société où l’assimilation était réalisable parce qu’il y avait des liens forts dans mon propre patrimoine génétique, linguistique et culturel avec ces pays : Je parlais la langue, lisais la littérature, connaissais l’histoire, chantais, jouais et écoutais la musique, partageais la même religion et étudiais et comprenais la philosophie de ses plus grands esprits. Cela signifie donc que l’organisme que je suis a eu toutes les chances de s’assimiler dans la sphère de l’Europe de l’Ouest, en France comme en Angleterre.

Cela n’aurait peut-être pas été aussi facile si, par exemple, j’avais décidé de m’assimiler dans la civilisation négrière de l’Afrique parce que pour commencer, la forme physique entre l’organisme que je suis et le peuple négrier est incroyablement loin l’un de l’autre ; mais encore plus, je n’ai aucun lien avec la culture, les langues, l’histoire ou la philosophie négrière. Cela ne veut pas dire que ce serait impossible, mais cela aurait été très difficile en raison des différences de civilisation et de mode de vie.

Puisqu’il s’agit du sujet des nègres, si dans les années 1950 une personne avait déclaré que les nègres sont une race et un patrimoine inférieurs, les gens autour d’elle auraient pu dire que l’homme est partial et raciste. Cela ne signifie pas pour autant que tous les nègres sont inadéquats ou non qualifiés, bien sûr, nous avons de grands nègres qui excellent dans la plupart des disciplines physiques comme le sport et quelques autres qui sont devenus des professeurs dans des domaines spécifiques. Mais ce qu’il est généralement sous-entendu par l’affirmation que « les nègres sont une race inférieure » semble suggérer qu’en moyenne, c’est-à-dire que si nous prenons tous les nègres et faisons la moyenne de leurs réalisations et les comparons à toutes les autres civilisations, nous arriverons au fait qu’ils sont en retard sur tout, d’où le terme « inférieur ». Aujourd’hui, si nous regardons toutes les statistiques mondiales concernant les nègres, nous verrons qu’ils sont en effet derrière toutes les autres civilisations. Pourtant, chaque fois que ce sujet revient sur le tapis, nous voyons soudain tous les médias à majorité juive, jetant soudain tous les nègres singuliers des États-Unis qui ont fait de l’argent ; nous voyons des joueurs de basket-ball, des rappeurs avec des diamants la bouche, et tous les autres nègres qui ont réussi financièrement grâce aux industries des médias à capitaux juifs des États-Unis. Ce n’est donc pas encore une fois la question, car je ne dis pas que tous les nègres sont inférieurs, mais simplement que la civilisation négrière est en moyenne inférieure à toutes les autres civilisations de la planète Terre. Et comme si cela ne suffisait pas, ils sont aussi physiquement incroyablement uniques en termes de caractéristiques et de traits par rapport à toutes les autres civilisations de la Terre, ce qui en fait une énigme en matière d’assimilation dans toutes les cultures. Donc, pour moi, les nègres devraient en tenir compte et avec le monde développé dans lequel nous vivons maintenant et avec la technologie qui rend le monde beaucoup plus connecté et qui rend la vie assez semblable sur n’importe quelle partie de la Terre, je crois fermement qu’ils devraient commencer à s’unir et s’organiser pour combler le fossé avec le reste du monde et envisager le développement du continent africain où ils pourraient tous trouver assez de place pour vivre.

S’installer en Afrique: les clés pour réussir ses projets sur le continent

World Charity by Country

Dons de charité par pays / Source: GDTB

Le monde a été très charitable envers les causes négrières, mais il est temps pour eux de commencer à s’aider eux-mêmes. L’autre point avec les nègres, c’est qu’eux aussi sont assez semblables aux Juifs lorsqu’ils déménagent dans d’autres sociétés, parce qu’ils se concentrent généralement sur les questions négrières et les nègres, et ainsi forment un groupe de personnes qui cherchent davantage à accroître leur nombre dans un pays qui n’est pas le leur, et ne se concentrent pas sur les questions nationales et les peuples natifs, ce qui ne constitue pas une assimilation, et ce n’est pas une solution avantageuse pour un système. Donc, encore une fois du point de vue de la théorie organique, cela ne fait que générer et créer des organismes plus problématiques qui ne font pas partie d’un système et qui ont des problèmes d’assimilation en raison d’énormes différences dans la composition organique, les modèles comportementaux, les objectifs et les perspectives et ne fait que ralentir et affaiblir tout système.

Reportage: Paris-Jerusalem, Alya.

En 2019, il semble juste d’expliquer ce qu’est la véritable assimilation, et aussi avec le monde plus développé, plus égal et plus connecté, de guider ceux qui ne peuvent ou ne veulent pas s’assimiler en leur expliquant comment des organismes partageant des compositions organiques, valeurs, culture, vision et histoire similaires ont tous les facteurs pour créer des sociétés harmonieuses en étant ensemble. Les nègres et les juifs devraient tous les deux y réfléchir, et peut-être méditer sur la question de savoir s’ils seraient plus heureux dans une société composée de leur propre espèce, ce qui pourrait générer moins de tensions et un sentiment d’être à l’aise dans une atmosphère noire ou juive reflétant leurs croyances et rituels. Parce que la civilisation occidentale est loin d’être parfaite et elle a aussi ses propres problèmes à résoudre, son propre peuple et ses propres questions de gestion à cibler, et si la nation a une foule qui n’est pas déterminée à y contribuer, elle ne fait qu’aggraver ces problèmes.

Reportage: La vie dans la rue

Nous voyons parfois des gens de la foule occidentale se comparer aux membres des foules du tiers monde et des tribus étrangères pour générer un faux sentiment de supériorité. Je voudrais rappeler aux gens que cela n’améliore en rien leur vie. La société occidentale a beaucoup de problèmes qui sont profondément enracinés et qui ne peuvent pas être perçus à l’œil nu depuis la surface, puisque c’est une société qui semble amoureuse de tout emballer proprement, mais étant un intellectuel qui a étudié la psychologie, je peux dire avec confiance qu’il y a d’immenses problèmes en Occident concernant la culture de l’esprit pour le bien de nos vies. Beaucoup de gens sont malades dans leur esprit et ne s’en rendent pas compte et il reste énormément de travail à faire pour fixer les mentalités et inculquer des valeurs pour une société harmonieuse et saine.

Reportage: Femmes et Alcoolisme

Les personnes qui ne s’assimilent pas n’ont généralement pas ces questions à cœur et ont tendance à se garer en Europe occidentale pour un revenu tout en restant étrangères dans leur identité. Ces gens devraient comprendre que s’ils ne s’assimilent pas, ils ne devraient pas s’attendre à être traités comme les organismes natifs qui font partie intégrante du système parce que le système dépend de ses organismes pour sa continuité et son existence, et cela arrivera aussi à leurs enfants s’ils sont élevés selon des croyances, une identité et des valeurs étrangères qui sont incompatibles avec la nation où ils vivent.

Les gens qui sont en Occident en tant que travailleurs hautement qualifiés et qui ne veulent pas s’assimiler devraient clairement se qualifier d’organismes temporaires qui n’ont pas l’intention de rester pour toujours et d’accepter la vie d’un étranger et le fardeau qui l’accompagne, car je ne dis pas que les natifs sont parfaits ou que tous sont supérieurs puisque nous avons des classes et différents niveaux de scolarité dans toutes les sociétés, mais ce que je répète, c’est que les problèmes de l’Occident ont besoin de la contribution et des préoccupations de sa population pour être résolus et que ceux qui n’y contribuent pas ne contribuent pas à améliorer leur vie et celle du pays, qu’ils soient natifs ou non-natifs. Ce n’est bien sûr pas un problème pour les touristes qui ne visitent que pour des photos et retournent dans leur pays après le voyage – sans problèmes.

Chine, le paradis des Maoïstes

Maintenant que j’ai parlé de l’exemple de moi essayant de m’assimiler dans la civilisation noire, une situation similaire se présenterait si, par exemple, je décidais de m’assimiler dans la sphère orientale asiatique, car les différences tant physiques que culturelles sont immenses et, bien que pas impossible, je me heurterais à d’énormes obstacles avec de telles différences qui rendraient ma tâche difficile pour être considéré comme membre de leur société en accord avec leurs propres natifs – et il est inutile de discuter des autres obstacles avec des énormes différences de choix alimentaire, de comportement, de communication et de style de vie.

Documentaire: Inde: Auroville, le paradis des hippies

Comme troisième exemple, une situation similaire se produirait si je décidais de m’assimiler en Inde, parce que bien qu’ils puissent être liés au peuple indo-européen, ils sont clairement une civilisation distincte qui s’est divisée et a acquis ses propres modèles de communication et de comportement, que je ne connais pas un seul mot et ne comprends ni ne gère, pour empirer les choses, je n’ai pas non plus l’air d’un Indien parce que bien évidemment je ne le suis pas, même si certains peuvent partager une teinte de peau olive, et pour finir, ils sont une civilisation principalement hindoue qui se reflète à travers leur culture et leur art, alors que je suis un chrétien profondément enraciné dans l’art de la civilisation française et de l’Europe de l’Ouest.

Le quatrième exemple, c’est celui d’une tentative d’assimilation dans une civilisation musulmane, l’Algérie par exemple. Encore une fois, je ne pourrais pas, parce que je ne parle pas la langue, je ne reflète pas les valeurs, je ne crois pas en l’islam et enfin, ma vision et mon style de vie sont totalement incompatibles avec les cultures du monde musulman, et pour couronner compliquer le tout je ne ressemble pas vraiment aux Algériens non plus.

Par conséquent, si je devais être jeté en Inde, en Asie de l’Est, en Afrique ou dans une société musulmane, regarder dans les yeux de ces organismes serait comme regarder dans les yeux d’un cerf, que je crois être une très bonne métaphore que j’utilise ici pour décrire une créature complètement ignorante, en partie à cause de son innocence, car elle n’a jamais été jetée et n’aura jamais à connaître le drame angoissant et incessant de devoir résoudre les problèmes du monde prétendument moderne de la civilisation occidentale tout en devant constamment endurer l’insécurité et la petitesse de « certains » des plus vils reptiles et cannibales immoraux comme des personnalités publiques vêtues d’un costume que personne n’aurait envie de présenter à ses proches ou d’inviter à dîner une fois qu’ils auront découvert la vérité sur les possibilités illimitées de leur profondeur sauvagement hédoniste et de leur esprit obscur, immoral et pourri.

Cerfs de toutes les couleurs

En fait, en tant qu’élite littéraire, je crois que ce sentiment d’être toujours entouré de cerfs de toutes les couleurs, formes, tailles et origines dans la plupart des endroits de la terre, d’ouest en est, doit être partagé par les autres esprits littéraires, car la plupart des organismes existent simplement, alors que les gens de lettres dans des domaines tels que la psychologie et la philosophie doivent porter le fardeau de penser pour la société et c’est une tâche morale énorme qui vient avec beaucoup de pression et de responsabilité, tout en étant rarement en mesure de communiquer avec les esprits simples que nous rencontrons parfois sur notre route méditative, qui nous laisse seulement l’option soit de sourire, soit de dire quelque chose de doux et anodin, comme de parler du temps.

Donc, pour en revenir à la question de la synchronisation physique, comme je l’ai répété, la condition physique [qui a à voir avec de légères similitudes et non avec la « beauté » comme on le croit communément] ne fait qu’aider et faciliter le processus d’assimilation mais n’est qu’une indication peu profonde d’appartenance, car la profondeur de l’individu est un point encore plus déterminant, car la véritable valeur de l’organisme est dans le mental, la vision et les valeurs. Pour aller plus loin dans cette logique, je donnerai l’exemple de quelques autres organismes à peau blême de certaines sociétés étrangères qui, malgré leur ton pâle, sont absolument incompatibles avec la société française, ce n’est donc pas parce qu’ils se fondent de manière trompeuse en donnant une impression superficielle d’appartenance à la majorité par une couleur de peau qu’ils sont parfaitement adaptés pour s’y intégrer car ils ne reflètent ni le patrimoine linguistique ni les valeurs, ni les principes fondamentaux des libertés individuelles, la pensée chrétienne qui, même sans être religieux, ont marqué la civilisation et le caractère humain et récepteur de la France.

Sibérie: Les Enfants du Bagne / Tomsk, colonie pour filles, et Mariinsk, camp pour garçons, voici un aperçu de l’univers carcéral en Sibérie où règne le désespoir. Les conditions de vie dans ces bagnes contemporains sont régulièrement dénoncées par les organisations humanitaires. Un témoignage unique.

Un bon exemple serait de considérer les Juifs, les Européens de l’Est, les Russes, les mennonites ou certains segments de la population syrienne qui ont des fois une peau blême. Et puisque nous sommes sur le sujet, je n’ai aussi jamais remarqué « Juif » comme une catégorie séparée empirique dans les formulaires ataviques du monde Anglo-Saxon, pourquoi ?

Des Juifs

Image: Des Juifs Haredim

Jérusalem:le pouvoir des ultra orthodoxes

Après tout, les Juifs sont une race distincte, comme ceux qui semblent obsédés par la recherche empirique l’ont découvert – moi ça ne me dérange pas puisque je vois les choses de la perspective évolutionnaire avancée de la « Composition Organique », mais je me pose la question pour les obsédés du laboratoire. Ce que la génétique semble avoir révélé, c’est qu’il existe de puissants marqueurs génétiques de la judéité, de sorte que l’intuition d’Hitler s’est avérée vraie. Ainsi, les juifs ne sont pas nés de conversions en Europe parce que les juifs géographiquement et culturellement éloignés ont encore plus de gènes en commun qu’avec les non-juifs et ces gènes sont d’origine levantine [région où se trouve Israël] ce qui indique un mélange de sociétés caucasiennes de l’est [région entourant la Russie, la Géorgie, l’Azerbaïdjan, l’Arménie, l’Europe de l’Est et l’Asie de l’Ouest], européennes et sémitiques qui semblent compléter le lien manquant de la descendance européenne des juifs. On croit maintenant que les juifs ashkénazes descendent d’une population iranienne hétérogène qui s’est ensuite mélangée à des peuples slaviques orientaux et occidentaux et peut-être même à des Turcs et des Grecs sur le territoire de l’Empire khazar vers le VIIIe siècle après J.-C. Bien que ma perspective sur la race se résume à une simple question de « compositions organiques différentes », c’est simplement une petite observation pour les scientifiques obsédés par la génétique. Encore une fois, il est important de considérer l’évolution globale de tous les organismes, et aussi de ne jamais oublier qu’un organisme supérieur peut venir de n’importe où sur terre – l’évolution de la race humaine est continue et sans fin.

Je ne dis pas que certaines personnes sont des animaux ou qu’elles devraient être exterminées, alors ne considérez pas mes observations comme discriminatoires, car j’ai déjà expliqué que l’organisme individuel a tous les pouvoirs d’auto-création et d’auto-définition et que du point de vue de l’évolution, les organismes humains de n’importe quelle « composition organique » [race] peuvent procréer avec qui ils veulent, et l’organisme supérieur peut apparaître de n’importe où, mais cette réalité scientifique n’est pas suffisant pour s’assimiler. Ce que je dis, c’est que « s’assimiler » dans une civilisation sophistiquée ne se résume pas à une simple forme physique, il ne s’agit pas simplement d’accepter les « Gros boudins roses » comme le disait Christian Clavier dans la mini-série « Napoléon » de Yves Simoneau en 2002, car on ne cherche pas simplement à créer une société sans structure, dont le seul point fort serait une peau blême et ensuite d’inonder la société de boules de chair roses non civilisées…pour la photo !

En Bolivie, chez les Mennonites

Seule l’industrie hollywoodienne, majoritairement juive, semble voir les choses de cette façon et c’est peut-être parce que les Etats-Unis sont simplement une colonie d’Europe bâtardisée composée principalement de migrants et de juifs de la sphère allemande et anglo-saxonne qui ont tendance à être très pâles pour ne pas dire blême en termes de teint contrairement à beaucoup d’européens.

État de bâtard

Ils ont été forcés de trouver un moyen de survivre dans le Far West et ont dû s’unir autour de quelque chose en commun, ce qu’ils ont fait autour du whisky, des armes à feu, du poulet frit, des affaires et de la langue anglaise qu’ils ont également bâtardisé dans leur propre version, tout en restant un groupe industrialisé et mécanique sans aucune structure culturelle – pour la grande majorité bien sûr qui semble avoir une profonde frustration qui se reflète par un mépris des Européens modernes parfaitement assimilés aux sociétés qui forment leur racine.

Beaucoup d’Américains semblent également excités de souligner leur longue ascendance européenne perdue, tout en étant déconnectés de celle-ci en termes de valeurs et de philosophie, et ils semblent aussi ignorer l’évolution sociétale des grands empires européens tels que la France. Cette perspective Hollywoodienne peut marcher pour qu’une agence d’escorte, un bar de strip-tease, pour que certains puissent travailler en tant que femmes de loisirs ou répondre aux critères de travailleuses du sexe, mais en dehors de ces entreprises, une société exige davantage de ses citoyens, et ici des organismes avec un sens d’appartenance et de responsabilité ainsi que les comportements et les noms appropriés qui correspondent au domaine thématique pour être en parfaite synchronisation avec les exigences de la société – donc la condition physique ne suffit pas mais facilite simplement le processus d’assimilation, surtout parmi le cerveau courant et non pensant.

En effet, les juifs ont longtemps utilisé cette illusion visuelle pour se fondre parmi ceux qu’ils qualifient de « gentils » ou de « goy » de la sphère européenne, les non-juifs qui, selon leurs écritures, sont des êtres inférieurs nés pour servir les juifs et qui, selon leurs textes religieux, peuvent être traités en animaux et même tués si nécessaire. Il s’agit simplement d’une observation factuelle de ce qui est écrit dans les textes religieux des juifs. Ce sont des écritures qui ont façonné la pensée des sociétés juives depuis l’antiquité, et c’est un fait dont les gens devraient être conscients pour comprendre le train principal de pensée d’un groupe particulier, il est important de connaître les faits des écritures qui les ont façonnées, leurs valeurs et perspectives et pourquoi une grande partie de leurs industries saignent les civilisations et sont desséchées de toute humanité. Cela semble tout à fait contraire au concept de karma que l’on trouve dans l’hindouisme, par exemple, qui croit en la causalité à travers un système où les effets bénéfiques sont dérivés des actions bénéfiques passées et les effets néfastes des actions néfastes passées, créant un système d’actions et de réactions dans la vie réincarnée d’une âme (Atman), formant un cycle de renaissance. La causalité de l’hindouisme s’applique non seulement au monde matériel, mais aussi à ses pensées, ses paroles, ses actions et celles que d’autres font selon nos instructions. Tout au long de l’histoire, les juifs utilisant leur peau pâle pour se répandre et se cacher au sein de la civilisation chrétienne de l’Europe occidentale, ont souvent eu un parcours plus facile, et lorsqu’ils changent de nom pour adopter des noms chrétiens pour leur intégration thématique, il est parfois difficile de les distinguer des peuples natifs de la civilisation occidentale née de la pensée et des arts chrétiens.

Le problème avec les Juifs est que, bien qu’ils se mélangent, agissent, s’habillent et se nomment comme les natifs des nations européennes dans lesquelles ils se déplacent, ils se classent toujours clairement comme Juifs, se concentrent sur l’amélioration des autres Juifs, et travaillent systématiquement ensemble dans les affaires pour promouvoir les intérêts des Juifs, et même ont des conventions mondiales entre Juifs, et présentent avec fierté les réalisations des Juifs. Si nous remarquons que tous les groupes étrangers le font, sauf les chrétiens occidentaux qui semblent préférer s’entretuer et vivre une vie d’hédonisme égoïste.

Pourtant, ce que font ces groupes étrangers n’est pas l’assimilation, mais simplement le mélange et l’intégration pour dominer systématiquement une société ou un système, et les juifs ont été connus pour le faire méthodiquement et habilement dans de nombreux pays européens à travers l’histoire, avec de violents sacrifices religieux à leurs dieux assoiffés de sang, qui impliquent le sacrifice des enfants chrétiens, comme ils ont fait au fil des ans à travers l’histoire européenne avec de nombreux corps d’enfants chrétiens jeunes mutilés trouvés à travers toute l’Europe vidés de leur sang. C’est pourquoi les Juifs sont le seul groupe qui, tout au long de l’histoire de l’humanité, a été persécuté et banni de tant de pays. Oui, beaucoup de gens ne connaissent pas ces faits car la plupart d’entre eux n’ont pas d’autre choix que de prendre leurs informations dans les industries des médias grand public appartenant aux Juifs, alors apprenez quelque chose de nouveau ici !

Le régime hitlérien n’a pas été le premier régime à interdire et persécuter les Juifs, les Juifs ont même été bannis d’Angleterre en 1290 par Edouard Ier, et aussi en 1306 de France par Philippe IV et ce ne sont que 3 exemples. Les Juifs ont été interdits dans un grand nombre de sociétés où ils se sont installés en raison de leur insolence, de leur manque de respect pour la nation et les valeurs de leur patrimoine qui ont encouragé la destruction systématique et l’asservissement de toutes les civilisations non-juives, de leur habitude de monopoliser la presse pour déformer la perception et aussi de leurs rituels occultes et violents impliquant le meurtre de jeunes enfants chrétiens pour offrir leur sang à leur Dieu païen violent, Baal dont le terme « Holocauste » est tiré – qui a conduit au sacrifice des personnes dans un Tophet de flammes. En fait, les Juifs ont été interdits dans un grand nombre de pays depuis l’an 1 200 AVANT J.-C. jusqu’en 2014 où ils viennent d’être banni au Guatemala, ce qui conduit à environ 3213 ans de persécutions constantes et d’interdictions dans les pays où ils ont migré. En fait, ils ont été interdits à Carthage, à Rome, en Égypte, en Espagne, en Italie, en Suisse, en Hongrie, en Belgique, en Autriche, en Autriche, aux Pays-Bas, en Pologne, en République tchèque, en Lituanie, dans les États baltes et en Russie, pour ne citer que quelques exemples. Si les gens veulent connaître la liste complète, ils peuvent utiliser Internet et chercher « Pays où les Juifs ont été bannis/expulsés » [aussi voir: Les Résolutions contre Israël].

Voici ce qui, à mon avis, a suscité tant de dégoût et de ressentiment envers les Juifs des nations chrétiennes. Et si quelqu’un avait le temps de lire le Talmud, il comprendrait pourquoi les Juifs ont été persécutés dans tant de pays chrétiens et haïs par le Pape Innocent III lui-même. De même que dans nos langues les chrétiens tirent leur nom du Christ, de même dans la langue du Talmud les chrétiens sont appelés Notsrim, de Jésus le Nazaréen. Mais les chrétiens sont aussi appelés par les noms utilisés dans le Talmud pour désigner tous les non-juifs : Abhodah Zarah, Akum, Obhde Elilim, Minim, Nokhrim, Edom, Amme Haarets, Goim, Apikorosim, Kuthrim.

Les juifs enseignent que, puisque les chrétiens suivent les enseignements de cet homme[Jésus], que les juifs considèrent comme séducteur et idolâtre, et qu’ils l’adorent comme Dieu, il est clair qu’ils méritent le nom d’idolâtres, qui ne diffèrent en rien de ceux parmi lesquels les juifs ont vécu avant la naissance du Christ, et qu’ils ont appris à exterminer par tous les moyens possibles.

Tout Juif est donc tenu de faire tout ce qui est en son pouvoir pour détruire ce royaume impie des Édomites (Rome) qui règne sur le monde entier. Mais comme il n’est pas toujours et partout possible de procéder à cette extermination des chrétiens, le Talmud ordonne qu’ils soient attaqués au moins indirectement, à savoir : en les blessant de toutes les manières possibles, et en réduisant ainsi leur pouvoir, aider à leur destruction finale. Partout où c’est possible, un Juif devrait tuer les chrétiens, et le faire sans pitié. Les Juifs ne doivent pas ménager leurs moyens pour combattre les tyrans qui les détiennent dans cette quatrième captivité afin de se libérer. Ils doivent combattre les chrétiens avec astuce et ne rien faire pour empêcher le mal de leur arriver : leurs malades ne doivent pas être soignés, les femmes chrétiennes en couches ne doivent pas être aidées, ni être sauvées quand elles sont en danger de mort.

Dans le même livre Sanhedrin (107b) nous lisons : »Mar a dit : Jésus a séduit, corrompu et détruit Israël. »

Le livre Zohar, III, (282), nous dit que Jésus est mort comme une bête et a été enterré dans ce « tas de terre… où ils jettent les cadavres des chiens et des ânes, et où sont enterrés les fils d’Ésaü[les chrétiens] et d’Ismaël[les Turcs], Jésus et Mahommed, incirconcis et souillés comme des chiens morts »(25).

Dans Iore Dea (81,7, Hagah) il est dit : « Un enfant ne doit pas être nourri par un Nokhri, s’il peut avoir un Israélite ; car le lait du Nokhrith durcit le cœur de l’enfant et lui donne une nature mauvaise.

Dans Iore Dea (153,1, Hagah), il est dit : « Un enfant ne doit pas être donné à l’Akum pour apprendre les bonnes manières, la littérature ou les arts, car ils le conduiront à l’hérésie ».

Dans Zohar (1,25b) il est dit : « Ceux qui font du bien à l’Akum… ne ressusciteront pas d’entre les morts »

C’est ainsi qu’ils expliquent les paroles du Deutéronome (VII,2)… et tu ne leur montreras aucune pitié[Goim], comme cité dans la Gémarah. Rabbi S. Iarchi explique ce passage de la Bible comme suit : « Ne leur faites pas de compliments, car il est interdit de dire : « Que Goi est bon ! »

Le rabbin Bechai, expliquant le texte du Deutéronome sur la haine de l’idolâtrie, dit : « L’Écriture nous apprend à haïr les idoles et à les appeler par des noms ignominieux. Ainsi, si le nom d’une église est Bethgalia – « maison de la magnificence », elle devrait s’appeler Bethkaria – une maison insignifiante, une porcherie, une latrine. Pour ce mot, karia, désigne un bidonville en bas de l’échelle. »

JÉSUS est ignominieusement appelé Jeschu – ce qui signifie, que son nom et sa mémoire soient effacés. Son nom propre en hébreu est Jeschua, qui signifie Salut.

MARIE, LA MERE DE JESUS, s’appelle Charia-dung, excrément (épave allemande). En hébreu, son nom propre est Miriam.

Les SAINTS CHRÉTIENS, dont le mot hébreu est Kedoschim, sont appelés Kededchim (cinaedos) – hommes féminins (fées). Les femmes saintes s’appellent Kedeschoth, les putes.

Une FILLE CHRETIENNE qui travaille pour les Juifs le jour de leur sabbat s’appelle Schaw-wesschicksel, Saleté du sabbat.

Puisque les Goïm servent les Juifs comme des bêtes de somme, ils appartiennent à un Juif avec sa vie et toutes ses facultés : « La vie d’un Goi et tous ses pouvoirs physiques appartiennent à un Juif. » (A. Rohl. Die Polem. p.20)

C’est un axiome des rabbins qu’un juif peut prendre tout ce qui appartient aux chrétiens pour quelque raison que ce soit, même par fraude ; on ne peut pas non plus parler de vol, car il ne fait que prendre ce qui lui appartient.

Dans Babha Bathra (54b), il est dit : « Tout ce qui concerne le Goim est comme un désert ; la première personne qui l’emporte peut le réclamer pour le sien ».

Dans Babha Kama (113b) il est dit : « Il est permis de tromper un Goi. »

Le Babha Kama (113b) dit : « Le nom de Dieu n’est pas profané quand, par exemple, un Juif ment à un Goi en disant:’J’ai donné quelque chose à ton père, mais il est mort ; tu dois me le rendre’, tant que le Goi ne sait pas que tu mens.

Dans Kallah (1b, p.18), il est écrit : « Elle (la mère de la mamzer) lui a dit:’Jure-moi. Et Rabbi Akibha jura de ses lèvres, mais dans son cœur il invalida son serment »(4).

(4) cf. supra, p.30, Un texte similaire se trouve dans Schabbuoth Hagahoth of Rabbi Ascher (6d) : « Si le magistrat d’une ville oblige les Juifs à jurer qu’ils ne s’échapperont pas de la ville et n’en sortiront rien, ils peuvent jurer faussement en se disant qu’ils ne s’échapperont pas aujourd’hui et qu’ils ne sortiront rien de la ville aujourd’hui. »

Dans Zohar (I, 160a) il est dit : « Rabbi Jehuda lui dit[Rabbi Chezkia]:’Il faut louer celui qui est capable de se libérer des ennemis d’Israël, et les justes sont beaucoup à louer qui s’en libèrent et combattent contre eux’. Rabbin Chezkia a demandé : « Comment devons-nous les combattre ? Rabbi Jehuda a dit :  » Par de sages conseils, tu leur feras la guerre  » (Proverbes, ch. 24, 6). Par quel genre de guerre ? Le genre de guerre que chaque fils de l’homme doit mener contre ses ennemis, que Jacob a utilisé contre Esaü par tromperie et ruse chaque fois que possible. Il faut les combattre sans cesse, jusqu’à ce que l’ordre soit rétabli. C’est donc avec satisfaction que je dis que nous devons nous libérer d’eux et régner sur eux. »

Dans Choschen Ham. (425,5) il est dit : « Si vous voyez un hérétique qui ne croit pas en la Torah, qui tombe dans un puits dans lequel il y a une échelle, dépêchez-vous immédiatement de l’enlever et de lui dire:’Je dois descendre et descendre mon fils d’un toit ; je vous ramènerai l’échelle immédiatement’ ou autre chose. Les Kuthaei, cependant, qui ne sont pas nos ennemis, qui prennent soin des brebis des Israélites, ne doivent pas être tués directement, mais ils ne doivent pas être sauvés de la mort. »

Et dans Iore Dea (158,1) il est dit : « Les Akum qui ne sont pas nos ennemis ne doivent pas être tués directement, mais ils ne doivent pas être sauvés du danger de mort. Par exemple, si vous voyez l’un d’eux tomber à la mer, ne le sortez pas à moins qu’il ne vous promette de vous donner de l’argent. »

Enfin, le Talmud ordonne que les chrétiens soient tués sans pitié. Dans l’Abhodah Zarah (26b), il est dit : « Les hérétiques, les traîtres et les apostats doivent être jetés dans un puits et non sauvés. »

Et dans Choschen Hamm. encore une fois (388,15) il est dit : « S’il peut être prouvé que quelqu’un a trahi Israël trois fois, ou a donné l’argent des Israélites à l’Akum, un moyen doit être trouvé après un examen prudent pour l’effacer de la surface de la terre ».

Même un chrétien qui étudie la loi d’Israël mérite la mort. Dans le Sanhédrin (59a), il est écrit : « Rabbi Jochananan dit : Un Goi qui prêche dans la Loi est coupable de mort. »

Dans Hilkhoth Akum (X, 2), il est dit : « Ces choses[supra] sont destinées aux idolâtres. Mais les Israélites[Juifs] aussi, qui abandonnent leur religion et deviennent épicuriens[Chrétiens], doivent être tués, et nous devons les persécuter jusqu’au bout. Car ils affligent Israël et détournent le peuple de Dieu. »

A Choschen Hamm. (425,5) il est dit : « Les juifs qui deviennent épicuriens[chrétiens], qui adorent les étoiles et les planètes et péchent malicieusement ; aussi ceux qui mangent la chair d’animaux blessés, ou qui s’habillent en vain, méritent le nom d’épicuriens ; de même ceux qui renient la Torah et les prophètes d’Israël – la loi veut que tous soient tués ; et ceux qui ont le pouvoir de vie et de mort doivent les faire tuer ; et si cela ne peut être fait, ils doivent être conduits à leur mort par des moyens trompeurs. »

Le rabbin David Kimchi écrit dans Obadiam : « Ce que les prophètes ont prédit sur la destruction d’Édom dans les derniers jours était destiné à Rome, comme l’explique Ésaïe (ch. 34,1) : Approchez, nations, pour entendre … Car quand Rome sera détruite, Israël sera racheté. »

UN JUIF QUI TUE UN CHRÉTIEN NE COMMET AUCUN PÉCHÉ, MAIS OFFRE UN ACCEPTABLE SACRIFICE À DIEU / En Sépher ou en Israël (177b) il est dit : « Prenez la vie du Kliphoth et tuez-les, et vous plairez à Dieu comme celui qui lui offre l’encens ».

Et dans Ialkut Simoni (245c. n. 772) il est dit : « Quiconque verse le sang de l’impie est aussi agréable à Dieu que celui qui offre un sacrifice à Dieu ».

APRÈS LA DESTRUCTION DU TEMPLE DE JÉRUSALEM, LE SEUL SACRIFICE NÉCESSAIRE EST L’EXTERMINATION DES CHRÉTIENS

Dans Zohar (III,227b) le Bon Pasteur dit : « Le seul sacrifice requis est que nous retirions de nous les impurs. »

CEUX QUI TUENT LES CHRÉTIENS AURONT UNE HAUTE PLACE DANS LES CIEUX

Dans Zohar (I, 38b, et 39a) il est dit : « Dans les palais du quatrième ciel sont ceux qui se sont lamentés sur Sion et Jérusalem, et tous ceux qui ont détruit les nations idolâtres… et ceux qui ont tué ceux qui adoraient les idoles sont vêtus de pourpre afin qu’ils soient reconnus et honorés ».

LES JUIFS NE DOIVENT JAMAIS CESSER D’EXTERMINER LES GOIM ; ILS NE DOIVENT JAMAIS LES LAISSER EN PAIX ET NE JAMAIS SE SOUMETTRE À EUX

Dans Hilkhoth Akum (X, 1) il est dit : « Ne mangez pas avec les idolâtres, et ne leur permettez pas d’adorer leurs idoles, car il est écrit : Ne faites pas d’alliance avec eux, et n’ayez pas pitié d’eux (Deut. ch. 7, 2). Soit tu te détournes de leurs idoles, soit tu les tues. »

Ibidem (X,7) : « Là où les Juifs sont forts, aucun idolâtre ne doit rester… »

Le 25 juin 1940, l’armistice divise la France en deux, livrée au Nord à l’occupation allemande. Paris, ville ouverte, voit sur la Tour Eiffel se dresser le drapeau du Reich.
Les Juifs de France seront la première cible, tant dans la zone occupée où est appliquée la politique raciale du Reich, que dans la zone libre où la Révolution nationale prônée par le maréchal Pétain permet l’instauration d’un antisémitisme d’État. En France, à la veille de la guerre, on dénombre environ 300.000 Juifs, divisés en deux groupes bien distincts :
– 150.000 « Israélites » citoyens français (bourgeois et professions libérales)
– 150.000 « Juifs » étrangers (majoritairement en bas de l’échelle sociale) Ces derniers seront les victimes privilégiées de Vichy.

 

La communauté juive en France: Si la France est le foyer de la plus grande communauté juive en Europe, de nombreux juifs de France sont tentés de partir, victimes d’actes de vandalisme ou d’agressions antisémites.

Maintenant, nous pouvons nous poser quelques questions simples : « Est-ce que tous ceux qui ont banni les Juifs pourraient être sans raison de le faire ? » et « Est-ce que les gens pourraient simplement se promener et soudainement décider sans raison de haïr les Juifs ? » et aussi « Si cela leur arrive depuis tant d’années, n’est-il pas probable que le problème soit en fait avec les Juifs eux-mêmes ? Je crois qu’il vaut mieux laisser le public répondre à ces questions et y réfléchir seul.

Je voudrais qu’il soit clair que je parle de la mentalité et de la pensée juive dans son ensemble, mais je ne dis pas que chaque Juif est mauvais ou n’a rien à offrir aux sociétés dans lesquelles il vit. Bien sûr, il y a des personnes étonnantes, admirables et aimables qui s’assimilent complètement, et même abandonnent leur identité juive et se convertissent au christianisme, ou deviennent athées. Il y a bien sûr des gens décents d’origine juive qui deviennent des citoyens à part entière de leurs nouvelles sociétés, qui parlent au nom des natifs et se considèrent comme faisant partie de la nation, et cela se voit en France, où certains sont devenus plus français que les natifs et se sont intégrés au cœur de la nation. Il s’agit cependant d’une très petite minorité de juifs qui, après l’avoir fait, considèrent souvent les juifs étrangers comme inadéquats pour la France parce qu’ils se considèrent comme faisant partie du peuple français et comprennent l’identité religieuse du pays qu’est le christianisme. Cependant, la majorité des Juifs ne suivent pas l’exemple des nobles qui s’assimilent, mais ils restent distincts et travaillent pour leurs camarades et organisations juives tout en adoptant leurs valeurs et croyances de circoncision et de supériorité.

Le fait que tous les organismes étrangers doivent comprendre, c’est que pour faire partie de la civilisation de l’Europe occidentale, il faut accepter le fait que le christianisme fait partie de la culture fondatrice, et bien que de nombreuses personnes ne soient pas religieuses, on ne peut ignorer que l’histoire, l’héritage et la littérature ont été fondés par des hommes et des femmes chrétiens, dont certains ne sont pas religieux mais qui étaient indéniablement influencés directement et indirectement par les pensées et l’héritage chrétiens, ce que peuvent refléter les nombreuses allégories et métaphores relatives à la Bible dans les écrits. C’est aussi une immense coïncidence qu’au moment même où je réponds à vos questions que la cathédrale de Notre Dame vient d’être mystérieusement frappée par un incendie le 15 avril 2019, certains y voient peut-être un signe des fondements d’une civilisation en feu – et les coïncidences avec ma vie ne me surprennent plus. Quand le hasard multiplie les coïncidences, ce n’est plus le hasard.

En fait, être pleinement assimilé signifie renoncer à son identité étrangère et adopter l’histoire, la langue, le thème linguistique, la nation et la religion de la nouvelle société comme une option supplémentaire si possible. Les juifs devraient réfléchir à ceci : le fait que l’Europe occidentale est une civilisation chrétienne, tout comme Israël est une société juive et les Etats arabes sont une civilisation musulmane, les gouvernements de ces deux derniers pays considérant la religion comme une question de culture sérieuse sans jamais faire de compromis sur les priorités et les nécessités religieuses par rapport à toute autre religion étrangère. En effet, dans de nombreux États arabes, le crucifix en tant que symbole du christianisme est interdit et illégal, et ils n’y trouvent aucune excuse, parce qu’ils sont de fermes musulmans et que cela fait partie intégrante du tissu de leur gouvernement et de leur culture. Pour compléter cet exemple, il est également ridicule que la Grand-Croix de l’Ordre national de la Légion d’honneur qui est le plus haut ordre français du mérite militaire et civil, établi en 1802 par Napoléon Bonaparte, ait été remise au sultan de Brunei en 1997, un homme qui a récemment institué un nouveau code pénal qui applique aussi strictement que possible la charia – la loi islamique : la mort par lapidation pour punir les homosexuels et l’adultère, l’amputation d’une main ou d’un pied pour les voleurs, la peine de mort pour insulte au prophète. Être juif ou musulman se présentera toujours comme une personne aux valeurs étrangères issues de l’histoire et des valeurs de ces religions les plus incompatibles avec celles de la civilisation européenne de l’ouest.

Lorsque des personnes qui ont la capacité de s’assimiler choisissent de le faire, elles devraient d’abord trouver leur place dans la nouvelle société en fonction de leurs choix, de leurs compétences, de leurs aptitudes et de leur domaine. De grands efforts et des preuves d’assimilation seront exigés d’eux et cela commence normalement par un nom occidental de la culture chrétienne. Les personnes qui ne s’assimilent pas pleinement, se reconstruisent, se remodèlent et adoptent une identité totalement nouvelle doivent toujours se rappeler qu’elles ne sont pas chez elles et ne doivent pas s’attendre au même traitement que celles qui le sont – c’est une simple question de bon sens. Ceux qui s’assimilent correctement feront automatiquement partie du peuple natif et partageront une existence avec des opportunités similaires, parce qu’ils sont devenus natifs par leurs efforts et leur décision d’être loyaux et dévoués à leur nouvelle société et à son peuple, en respectant l’héritage fondateur et les sensibilités religieuses, et bien sûr en maîtrisant les modèles comportementaux et de communication. Cela ne veut pas dire qu’après s’être assimilés, ils doivent être soumis et ne peuvent pas faire une observation critique pour aider à développer le pays et à le faire avancer, mais leur allégeance devrait être à la nation et aux peuples natifs parce qu’ils devraient se considérer comme faisant partie de ce peuple. Après tout, l’objectif est de créer des citoyens loyaux qui se sentent concernés par la société, pas des esclaves ! Les natifs aussi devraient apprendre à agir comme des êtres humains et adopter les valeurs de la décence pour comprendre qu’une société fonctionne mieux quand la population est en harmonie et heureuse tout en voyant les citoyens véritablement et convenablement assimilés comme leur propre « sang ».

Ainsi, comme l’explique la théorie organique, un autre facteur est plus fondamental que la condition physique pour l’assimilation, comme nous pouvons le voir en utilisant les Juifs comme exemple pour expliquer que la similarité dans le ton de la peau n’est pratiquement rien, sauf un petit facteur qui aide avec la majorité qui pense rarement. La partie la plus importante et la plus déterminante de l’assimilation concerne la gestion des modèles de comportement et de communication appropriés de la société dont l’organisme veut faire partie intégrante. Pour une assimilation réussie et complète, les organismes doivent aussi intégrer la philosophie, comprendre le cœur du peuple en fonction de son histoire, maîtriser la langue, ne faire qu’un avec la nation, ressentir la joie et la douleur du peuple et aussi être capables d’utiliser le terme « nous » pour se décrire eux-mêmes et les natifs ; en d’autres termes voire le peuple comme leur propre « sang », et c’est ainsi que cela se passe dans la civilisation la plus complexe, cad. La France, où le peuple est prêt à vous aimer et à vous considérer comme son propre sang si vous manifestez le désir sincère de faire partie de la patrie nationale et la loyauté envers la nation.

L’assimilation n’est malheureusement pas facile à réaliser et c’est pourquoi l’assimilation ne doit pas être confondue avec l’intégration, car l’intégration est simplement l’acquisition d’un passeport pour la légalité ; mais l’assimilation, c’est sculpter son cœur et son âme pour être un avec les gens et faire partie du sang national par loyauté et engagement tout en jouant son rôle de citoyen avec ses devoirs civiques. En effet, dans la Grèce antique, tous les membres de la société qui ne participaient pas aux affaires communes ou qui ne s’impliquaient pas et ne s’intéressaient pas aux questions concernant le fonctionnement du pays et l’harmonie du peuple étaient considérés comme des « parasites », et cela inclut tous les citoyens – natifs et non-natifs – car toute société a besoin que ses membres travaillent ensemble pour résoudre ses problèmes et suivent la voie sans fin du changement positif pour l’amélioration d’une civilisation.

En France, la plupart des gens comprennent qu’être citoyen est un devoir, et c’est pourquoi, jusqu’à aujourd’hui, ils sont la seule civilisation qui a défendu la fraternité de l’humanité comme individus à traiter avec respect, ils font partie des rares civilisations qui écoutent l’opinion du peuple et font l’éloge d’un empereur à un homme du peuple s’ils estiment que cet homme a la grandeur de ses arguments et le mérite – nous le savons par la légende de Napoléon – et enfin le peuple français est un des plus réceptifs qui est toujours disposé à raisonner avec de nouveaux arguments, quels que soient leurs origines. En fait, la France est la civilisation la moins atavique et la plus sophistiquée du monde moderne, et accomplir une tâche aussi glorieuse sans monarchie est étonnant – cela montre que lorsque les gens se considèrent comme un et se traitent mutuellement avec respect tout en ayant un sens moral et de dignité, ils incarnent un empire ensemble, sans ou avec un empereur – la tête avec une couronne étant simplement une option si nécessaire et jugé assez ingénieux pour guider une civilisation en conquête, mais non une nécessité !

Pour atteindre ce sens de l’harmonie, il faut des organismes qui peuvent trouver un fort sens de synchronisation en tant que peuple et se considérer comme une nation et ressentir la douleur et la gloire des uns et des autres pour raisonner comme un. Bien sûr, comme n’importe quelle société sur terre, nous trouvons de mauvaises pommes, des hommes d’État corrompus et immoraux et des arguments mesquins, surtout parmi les petites classes, mais dans l’ensemble, c’est une société construite sur des valeurs et des philosophies conçues pour favoriser le développement des êtres humains où tout individu peut atteindre le sommet par son propre désir, ses efforts et son engagement. Ce qui est malheureux, c’est qu’à mesure que le temps passe et que la génération passionnée qui a participé à la fondation de ce nouveau monde meurt, ces valeurs s’estompent parfois dans l’esprit de la nouvelle génération et des médiocres hommes d’État « Fisher Price » qu’elle nous a donnés. Ce sont de grands hommes et femmes au caractère admirable qui ont eu le courage, au cours de l’histoire, de prendre la parole pour rappeler au peuple combien de personnes ont perdu la vie et se sont battus pour la société actuelle et combien il est urgent de poursuivre notre route du progrès humain sur la même direction à prendre.

Pour terminer, après avoir parlé de ce que je pensais ne pas avoir été bien planifié sous le régime hitlérien, et expliqué en profondeur la théorie organique et l’assimilation, voici les choses qui inspirent dans l’histoire d’Hitler, et cela commence avec le grand exemple que le peuple allemand a donné à l’époque en donnant le pouvoir absolu à un individu méritant en montrant au monde qu’un artiste en faillite pouvait devenir le tout premier dans une société moderne. Ce qui signifie que nous avons finalement vu un garçon aux prises avec des difficultés financières qui était le premier de sa classe à l’école primaire et qui n’a pas réussi à démarrer sa carrière artistique après avoir échoué à un examen à l’une des meilleures écoles d’art d’Europe de l’Ouest, l’Académie des beaux-arts de Vienne, puis par ses propres efforts après avoir été sans abri et en lutte pendant la guerre, monter au sommet. Cela démontre une mobilité sociale absolue, mais aussi comment un homme peut être un artiste, un soldat et un homme cultivé par ses propres efforts pour ensuite diriger une civilisation moderne et atteindre le sommet. C’est pour moi un exemple moderne clair de la Théorie Organique sur le processus d’autodéfinition et de développement progressif d’un organisme individuel basé sur ses propres désirs et capacités.

La deuxième facette étonnamment inspirante de l’histoire d’Hitler est la façon dont il a donné au monde un exemple avant-gardiste de la réponse à un environnement harmonieux, en étant un végétarien qui a été le premier à initier des lois de protection animale.

Le troisième côté admirable d’Hitler était son charisme et sa loyauté envers sa société, mais aussi sa modestie et sa confiance envers les gens de tous les milieux, étant la seule personnalité publique de son niveau à se promener librement dans son pays et à rencontrer des gens de tous horizons et de toutes classes sans aucune protection, tout en gagnant leur confiance absolue pour les guider.

Le quatrième côté d’Adolf Hitler était qu’il avait du style dans son goût pour l’architecture de son pays, comme on peut le constater aujourd’hui à travers les plans qu’il a élaborés avec Albert Speer. On peut imaginer ce qu’aurait été l’avenir de l’Allemagne et de Berlin. Ces plans révèlent les bâtiments et les plans d’une ville qui reflétait la grandeur de l’humanité et même les uniformes de son personnel ont été confiés à Hugo Boss – montrant un homme qui vénérait la perfection. Et si nous regardons les uniformes et les costumes du gouvernement national-socialiste, nous devrons peut-être accepter qu’il s’agît de certains des costumes les plus stylés et les plus beaux jamais vus dans l’histoire moderne, peut-être seulement égalés par des couturiers français comme Yves Saint Laurent.

Le cinquième côté étonnant avec Hitler était son amour pour la science et l’évolution et sa passion pour garder une perspective mise à jour de toutes les dernières découvertes. Il serait donc assez partial de supposer qu’Hitler est un homme rigide qui n’a aucun goût pour le changement. Cela se reflète dans son empressement à encourager la recherche afin de reconstruire les installations médicales, technologiques et militaires de l’Allemagne. Cela ajoute aussi à mon opinion qu’Hitler aurait été disposé à écouter les nouvelles découvertes et à changer ses opinions en conséquence s’il avait été conseillé et convaincu par des gens authentiques, avant-gardistes et honnêtes – il aurait dû me consulter. Haha ! Mais bien sûr, l’entourage proche du Führer n’était pas particulièrement composé des esprits les plus éthiques ou les plus sophistiqués où beaucoup se sont révélés déloyaux et maléfiques, ce qui a probablement conduit aux horreurs du régime sans aucun lien avec Hitler lui-même.

La sixième chose admirable à propos d’Hitler, c’est le fait qu’il était un leader qui voyait vraiment les gens comme des organismes qui avaient besoin des mêmes chances de réussir et de s’élever et non comme une foule qui devait être divisée en segments gauche, droite et centre. Hitler considérait tous ses citoyens comme des gens de son système et s’efforçait de synchroniser l’ensemble de la société pour travailler comme une machine singulière. C’est certainement admirable en comparaison avec les personnes corrompues et immorales à la tête de la plupart des systèmes actuels où les critères utilisés pour gouverner les êtres humains sont des facteurs économiques et commerciaux. Diriger une civilisation d’êtres humains sans valeurs, sans philosophie et sans morale est un moyen sûr d’échouer à long terme parce que les êtres humains ne sont pas des objets ou des biens, mais des organismes complexes qui nécessitent un système très sensible pour vivre harmonieusement, et toute personne qui se dit leader et ne comprend pas la psychologie, la philosophie et les éléments qui conduisent à un environnement humain moderne harmonieux se mentent à eux-mêmes et la société.

Hitler Person of the Year Time

Il faut aussi se rappeler comment Hitler a même proposé de démanteler l’armée allemande et de détruire toutes les armes si tous les autres pays faisaient de même, ce à quoi ils n’ont jamais répondu. Ainsi, nous comprenons maintenant pourquoi Hitler a même été présenté comme la personne de l’année par le magazine Time, et cela ne pourrait pas être pour transformer les Juifs en viande hachée. Et l’autre question énigmatique est de savoir pourquoi tant d’argent est consacré aujourd’hui à la défense et à l’armée alors qu’il est clair que nous sommes une civilisation solitaire sur une planète solitaire qui devrait chercher à étendre sa portée en commençant une nouvelle civilisation sur une planète de réserve pour obtenir le statut de civilisation spatiale ? Ces partis qui dépensent tant d’argent pour l’équipement et la technologie militaires n’ont-ils que la défense et rien d’autre à l’arrière de leur esprit, peut-être inconscient ? Est-ce simplement pour la décoration ?

La septième chose inspirante à propos d’Hitler, c’est qu’il n’était pas d’origine allemande, mais comme moi, pleinement assimilé dans la société allemande et de gagner aussi le cœur de toute une nation et de s’élever au sommet et finalement devenir plus d’Allemands que les Allemands eux-mêmes, est quelque chose d’assez spectaculaire. Peut-être, une autre chose admirable a été la réponse d’Hitler dans une procédure judiciaire après l’échec de son coup d’État contre pour prendre le pouvoir, où il a répondu après qu’on lui ait demandé s’il était allemand en demandant si cela est prouvé sur un morceau de papier ou dans le cœur d’un homme ; car bien qu’il avait déjà gagné le cœur de la nation, il n’avait toujours pas de passeport allemand. Dans ses premières années en Allemagne, alors qu’il luttait financièrement et qu’il était sans abri, certains Allemands lui ont également dit qu’il ressemblait à un Juif et qu’ils pensaient qu’il en était un, puis de surmonter tout cela pour atteindre le sommet est tout à fait admirable.

Hitler Photos Rares Digitalisé Pour La Première Fois

Des photos de Henrich Hoffmann, le photographe d’Hitler, numérisés, restaurés et publiés pour la première fois (2019)

Le huitième côté inspirant d’Hitler était sa capacité unique d’ouvrir complètement son cœur à la nation et de prononcer des discours bouleversants qui hypnotisaient les foules, avec son langage corporel passionné qui dépeignait son honnêteté et son dévouement envers les Allemands en les mettant devant son propre confort.

Le neuvième et dernier point que je crois inspirant pour Hitler, c’est qu’il ne semble pas avoir vu les choses du point de vue d’un cadre moyen ordinaire, d’un économiste, d’un banquier, d’un médecin ou d’un autre cadre financier qui a tendance à se frayer un chemin dans un parti politique simplement pour apparaître à la télévision ou dans un journal sans aucune présence, vision ou valeurs fortes et voir une civilisation comme une boutique à gérer. Hitler avait une vision plus profonde comme les empereurs légendaires l’avaient, et voulait guider une nation avec la philosophie, l’architecture inspirante, les œuvres d’art intemporelles et voulait mélanger et synchroniser tous les départements allant des affaires, l’économie, l’éducation, la science, la recherche, l’histoire et les arts pour créer le genre de civilisation éternelle comme il est souvent décrit dans la littérature mythologique qui tient le test du temps en marbre et pierre.

Les planifications d'Hitler

Plus important encore, Hitler semblait être d’avis que si une civilisation n’est pas en expansion, elle ne progresse pas et cela reflétait les qualités d’un conquérant, rappelant celles d’Alexandre le Grand ou encore Napoléon.

Alexandre Le Grand vainqueur du lion de Bazaria, sculpté par jacques Dieudonné

Image: Alexandre Le Grand vainqueur du lion de Bazaria, sculpté par Jacques Dieudonné, Jardin des Tuileries, 1er arrondissement, Paris | Source: Les Musées de la Vile de Paris

Aujourd’hui, des cadres pathétiques et médiocres qui dirigent une équipe qu’ils appellent un parti politique sont guidés par le seul désir de rester au pouvoir, et en raison de leur allégeance aux donateurs de leur parti, ils doivent respecter et satisfaire certaines demandes pour rester financés, cela détruit une civilisation car elle n’est pas dirigée avec la liberté et les valeurs qu’elle exige, et donc, cela conduit à une atmosphère mondaine d’une société statique et ennuyeuse où le même genre d’hommes agissent et parlent d’une manière noble en public, mais se comportent comme des personnages ignobles et immoraux dans leur décision et leur gestion – ce cycle est déprimant et répétitif depuis des décennies sans qu’aucun personnage légendaire ne semble se dresser contre une telle absurdité et changer les choses. Aujourd’hui, avec tant de conventions, il n’est guère possible pour un grand empire de prendre les choses en main et d’envisager l’expansion et la conquête à cause de croyances hypocrites d’égalité absolue de toutes les sociétés et langues et de politiques du tiers monde qui ont piégé les grands empires occidentaux comme la France en soumission et à genoux pour se conformer à des règles irrationnelles, les exigences ridicules et hypocrites qui l’ont contraint à respecter les conventions et l’ont progressivement transformée, lui et bien d’autres empires, en pépinières paralysées par les exigences des sociétés inférieures, alors qu’elle a toutes les ressources pour transformer le monde entier en colonies et mieux le gérer tout en donnant à tous les peuples de la Terre le rêve de faire partie de son patrimoine, comme le faisaient autrefois les grands empires.

Donc, pour conclure avec une réponse à votre question, je ne suis ni un fan d’Hitler, ni un haineux Hitler, mais un homme qui voit « Le Führer » comme l’une des grandes figures du siècle dernier avec des éléments à s’inspirer et des erreurs à apprendre à ne pas commettre aussi.

Enfin, j’aimerais souligner que si personne ne parle, rien ne change… alors j’ai choisi de parler, qu’avez-vous choisi de faire ?

 

—-|—-

 

[EN] Answer to Question VI. « Are you a Hitler fan?”

 

I guess this question is being asked to me because I have often linked Hitler videos throughout my essays and writings.

Well, to begin I have never quite understood the term “fan”, because this seems to involve some form of obsession to a particular person. No, I have admired many people’s works and values, and if this qualifies me as being “fan”, then perhaps I am. “Admiration” for “some” aspects of many great men and women’s works throughout history – that makes me an admirer of amazing work with respect for the artist or creator. This extends to Adolf Hitler, whom I would say had many things right in regards to managing a civilisation, but not everything. He, or his advisors did make some mistakes like most humans do, that cost him and his regime everything.

So, I would say, I do admire a lot of Hitler’s philosophies and achievements such as the need to unite the people by ridding the country of the divisions of left, centre and right, while also critical of some of his proceedings, because after all he was a human being who only went by the reality of his era, while I am living in 2019 and today see things from another perspective because I am lucky to have inherited a great amount of knowledge and scientific findings that were not yet available in the times of Hitler. The advancement of technology has today made it possible to be extremely mobile since most of the major works and research are now available in digital form and this has made the world more connected without the absolute need to travel to ancient libraries to find academic resources, and in some way, we could be managing a team or a company in Europe from the Amazonian jungle, from a tree house in Mexico or a tent in Denmark, as long as we have high speed broadband and decent technology – imagine what Da Vinci would have achieved if he had those in his time!

To begin with the Hitler dossier, this cannot be a simple answer since there are many things to say and explain so that people from the world over may understand my views and also have an understanding of all the controversy surrounding the “Fuhrer”. While answering this question I will also refer to the “Organic Theory” in explaining human existence, adaptation and evolution and also refer to my own case as an assimilated Franco-British Western European fairly similar to the case of Hitler or Napoleon who were both also not natives from the society they led, but were assimilated, surprisingly it seems that the two most powerful leaders in Western Europe had to come from another land as if sent by fate to solve the problems of a civilisation that had no legendary leader with vision among their own natives, and received a leader who won his nativity and became more national than the natives themselves. Hitler was born in Austria, while Napoleon was born in Corsica, and perhaps surprisingly 7 years before the birth of the future Emperor of France, Rousseau said that Corsica would shake Europe.

I have to say that from a very young age I was fascinated with the reputation of Adolf Hitler because like the great majority we were all taught that he was the most-evil person to have existed throughout human history, and his murderous obsession with the genocide of the Jews was something no sane human could possibly justify. Being just like most of people who grew up in the late 80s to the late 90s, information was and is still mainly distributed through the mainstream majority Jewish owned media outlets, a time when the internet was still blooming – specially video streaming websites – so, I was forced to digest the only perspective available to me until of course 10 decades into the millennium where a tremendous amount of Hitler files that were buried started to surface all over the internet, giving the world a clearer perspective of the war and its economic, philosophical and religious implications from both sides of the argument.

There is also the great confusion, misinterpretation and gossip media fabrication that exists regarding Hitler’s supposed desire for world conquest and obsession with the assumed superiority of the Germanic Caucasian race, especially the Nordic subtype with blond hair and blue eyes being one that should in the long run replace all the other races who are not of German descent – such as many inferior Slavic Eastern European societies with a fair amount of Jews & Muslims e.g. Poland, Bosnia, Chechen Republic and Russia, which he considered as cheap and inferior in culture, comparing them to minor animals – at least this is what the majority were told and made to believe. While the societies of Eastern Europe may not be as sophisticated as Western European societies, this assumption of inferior and superior subtype going only by genetic inheritance and physical attributes is not scientifically valid since we now know that organisms can be shaped with the right guidance and education to adapt to their chosen societies and this would have to be the case if an empire conquers and expands, and also that talent and genius, although very rare, can appear and have appeared from any corner of the earth in any society and of any organic composition, so a superior organism [intellectually or physically] can be born from any society and be part of any type of organic composition, not only the Nordic subtype of the Germanic Caucasian race, indeed even Mussolini who was another fascist and nationalist leader disagreed with Hitler on this Nordic subtype issue, and said that he did not believe in the superiority of just one particular subtype but in the overall quality of all subtypes, including the Mediterranean subtype with dark hair that creates a healthy mix among the nation.

However, the amplification of Hitler’s argument into a desire for extermination created a lot of confusion and which was further exaggerated and amplified by the mainstream gossip press mostly owned and managed by Jews to give the Hitler regime some bad publicity and worldwide hatred. As far as the recordings go, we only know of Hitler being focussed on national matters and clearly asking all other countries to leave him and Germany alone to focus on their own society and to be allowed to shape their society as they so wished since they inherited everything from their ancestors and wanted to preserve their society after having been given the authority to do so in democratic elections, and also keep the national German race “pure” [which of course made no sense because no race is pure since we are the result of migration, interbreeding and evolution from different subtypes and Hitler himself was the result of inbreeding between a man and his niece, the type of union that the man behind the theory of evolution, Charles Darwin was himself against along with marriage between cousins which he tried to make illegal by law due to the amount of deformities and disabled infants this led to and the dangerous genes this would spread].

So, to begin answering your question I will first say that Hitler was a firm patriot and a defender of the society and people he represented [not different from myself and my views for France and Western Europe in fact] and saw that to strengthen a country in more ways than one, the emphasis should first be on those who are part of, identify with and love the native people of the country, the latter being those who created the individual identity of the nation and those who represent the majority who drive the country and contribute to its functioning and continuation – this is a philosophy in line with the good management of a civilisation and my very own philosophy of the “Organic Theory” but only in part because the complete solution also involves taking into consideration the influx of talent and the evolutionary adaptation of other skilled organisms who also contribute to the maintenance and progress of the nation and who gained their nativity and completely identify with the nation, being a part of it.

Unfortunately, Hitler and his advisors exaggerated and misinterpreted the understanding of organic evolution and followed an atavistic and retrograde policy with a team who proceeded savagely, without carefully considering the fundamental logic that exist in all fields of life, which is that we have always had exceptions to the rules for exceptional cases – this applies to mathematics, arts, medicine, and science – which should also apply to any system deemed practical, modern and evolved. All organisms on this planet adapt and evolve from an organic and socio-linguistic standpoint, although not in equal measures and as I have said, if the laws of nature and evolution that contain all life on earth decided otherwise, then organisms from different organic compositions would not be able to procreate.

Hitler’s team was also composed of many traitors with fairly basic education who took murderous decisions that they hid from the “Fuhrer”, resulting in his downfall and the complete annihilation of his plans and system; towards the end they all placed the blame on one man as if Hitler had drugged a whole nation and hypnotised them into mechanical puppets – which is also clearly impossible without a nation’s faith, will and desire to go into the directions of his vision. It should also be mentioned that to date, not a single recording or written message has been found from Hitler giving the green light to the extermination of any people, and what can be concluded today is that Hitler believed that all societies and races should simply be nationalized so that all societies and races could behave better and perfect themselves like the German Reich. On the issue of mass murder, the blame today according the facts that have been collected are mainly attributed to Göring and Himmler, the latter going by ancient Aryan scriptures of Hinduism believing himself to be acting like the great warrior Arjuna who was purging his people and the whole world from evil and who believed that in the long run people would see him as the mythological hero cleaning the earth of evil which to him were the Jews and their values being the cause of all human suffering on earth as they destroy other civilisations and bend and control the minds of the masses through their media businesses.

First of all, I will explain what I am critical of the Hitler regime before also explaining what I believe is admirable about the legend of Adolf Hitler as a leader and a human being on this planet. There are a couple of things that I sincerely think are not acceptable in today’s enlightened society of 2019, and Hitler would have built a stronger Reich if he was better advised into smarter policies regarding the management, maintenance and shaping of a productive and sophisticated population with strong patriotic sentiments and a sense of synchronisation and understanding. Hitler did not simply aim to create a pink meatball company, but was a cultured leader guided by philosophy, ethics, morality, dignity, values and the arts and wanted the whole world to look to the German as a heroic role model to follow an be inspired by. Hitler wanted people to see the honourable SS men as legendary heroes who wanted to make the world a better place. Adolf Hitler was no pig or just a simple soldier.

It is fundamental to understand that at the time of Hitler, Germany was being taken over by communists who were methodically focussed in taking over Germany without any real sense of belonging to it, with the intention to simply turn it into a form of trading area and an economic backyard in Europe, similar to what the influential mainly Jew business geniuses have turned the United States into nowadays – a mechanised an industrialised society lacking a human touch and values, where selfish individualism has left everyone in a constant struggle to survive at whatever cost even if it means killing one another which is also common with firearms being legal there.

The Collapse of the American Empire?

The leaders of these communist groups in Germany at the time of Hitler were composed of a majority of foreigners which included many Jews. While the death count of Jews has been exaggerated and used to vilify Hitler, no major focus has been placed over the amount of horrific deaths that Jews caused in the Russian revolution and many revisionist historians have been claiming a much higher death count than the Hitler regime. However, it was clear that besides Jewish immigration and political influences from Jewish communists gradually weakening and corrupting German society, there was also a huge problem with the immigration of populations who were not native Germans. This implied that for a man like Hitler to achieve his dream of a strong, stable and modern Germany, the immigration issue would have had to be addressed, and being one with a vision of national focus and excellence, the offloading of excessive, incompatible and alien crowds who did not want to fully assimilate and become German citizens was something necessary to his vision.

However, there is no question also about the fact that Hitler should also have realised that there was a great amount of human beings who were highly talented and had completely assimilated in German society that had to be kept and treated as citizens who gained their nativity along with a strong sense of identification with the native crowd through their own adaptation and evolution. And since this was not the case, we ended up with World War II, many people dying in badly supplied detention camps after the allied bombed the connecting railways and disrupted food and hygienic supplies leading to an outbreak of typhus which killed thousands. Also many Germans who happened to have some distant link to the Jewish population where treated as criminals to be deported and this lead to an irrational operation that discarded people who were perfectly fit to be part of a functional society as today’s scientific standards have proven along with a proper interpretation of the theory of evolution: that we are organisms who can adapt and change identities to fit new environments if we make the choice and have the abilities and desire to do so.

The other side, was that of the superiority of the German people that Hitler was obsessed about and who in fact turned out to be fairly uncreative by not considering people who had part German inheritance and cultural affiliation as an example of a form of German conquest, as it was also a way for a civilisation to spread its genes further and wider, and encourage the people resulting from this blending to mix with the founding civilisation which would lead to their future lineage to share an even greater amount of German genes. In fact, if science and evolution along with the average superiority of the “Aryan Race” was what guided the policy of the National Socialist regime, then they should have also encouraged the widespread of the Aryan genome by encouraging the healthiest and finest men and women from the Aryan race to donate eggs and sperm and encourage couples to use healthy donors of the Aryan race in breeding children, and this service should have been offered to couples from all walks of life to prevent the creation of malformations and unhealthy organisms. This would have been a sophisticated and modern way of thinking of human evolution and societal evolution in a Hitlerian way. A way of saying is that to change their society biologically, one great way is to make sure that they have enough “cream tarts”. Because, I believe that after all, human beings should be given the freedom of their choice of partnership, which was not the case in the Reich; as native Germans who did not breed with native Germans were considered as traitors.

Hence, this form of extremism was one of the major doctrines that lead to so much hate and resentment to the Third Reich from a large amount of Germans themselves, leading to an allied army to work consistently to bring down the whole show, although the opposing side represented values of a society that were not any better in providing a solution to a harmonious civilisation but were mostly fuelled by hate, strong Jewish financial motives and the desire to cripple Germany at any cost, but mostly to bring down the charismatic and overly powerful Adolf Hitler, as it is often the case whenever a gifted man rises to the top and dwarfs his competition with his talent and magnetism. We can also find this happening to Napoleon, when the whole of Europe gathered all their forces to bring him down. This seems to be the case nowadays, as if society cannot accept that some organisms are superior to the mediocre majority. This seems hypocritical since we can all nowadays accept that we have superior food from a nutritional standpoint, superior computers, superior cars, superior football players, superior watches, superior cameras, superior guitars, superior pianos, superior horses, so, this should also apply to the human organism; meaning we do also have superior individuals with superior intelligence, and hence superior vision and managerial skills. It is important to also note that superior objects are always rare, and hence a minority, in fact, that is why they have immense value. If diamonds were as abundant as steel and steel was as rare as diamonds, then jewellery would be made of steel and diamonds would be used in construction. So, we seem to live in a world where the mediocrity of the masses seem to find it hard to accept that some individuals are superior as a whole, and instead of encouraging, learning from, being inspired by, and being proud of being led by such individuals, we seem to instead find a union of mediocrity trying whatever they can to bring those individuals down. This is something society has to work on globally, to nurture excellence! Respect and appreciation are after all words that exist in all dictionaries, and noble and cultivated beings know how to display them, and those who have never considered these values may try to learn, it certainly would turn them into more complete beings.

Getting back to the management of the population of Germany for a healthy, strong and stable nation, Hitler should have found a systematic form of “filtration”, involving forms of interview, health assessment, skill assessment & cultural assessment that analysed the whole segment of German population who were of foreign origin in whole or in part, and divided them into 2 groups: those that were fit, safe and synchronised with the German society to keep, and those that were a burden due to their inability to adapt and unwillingness to be German due to firm religious or foreign convictions to be diplomatically relocated to an environment and society more suited to their characteristics in the most respectful of ways. Those who were deemed fit for German society could even have been given a form of classification [subtype of the German society] if deemed necessary and should also have been made to swear allegiance and priority to their newly found identity and people which they should have respected if this is where they thought they belonged, otherwise it would be best for an individual to move and live in a society compatible with their heritage and with people they feel a part of, after all nowadays in 2019, income inequality has gone down and the world is becoming a more equal planet along with the technological advances that make life fairly similar from one part of the world to another. The organisms who assimilated could also have the right to 3 warnings before considering deporting them for not respecting their contract of allegiance after serious offences, and hence becoming “traitors” to the nation.

The filtration solution was not an easy one but was in fact a sophisticated solution that would have been more apt for a civilisation that was evolving and getting more complex decade after decade – we cannot expect easy solutions to suit a complicated civilisation. This was of course not the solution the regime opted for, but instead chose the fastest and easiest route to deport all Jewish, non-German and part-Jewish people which resulted in so much unnecessary suffering and misunderstanding, when many of these people were not even religiously affiliated to any religion and considered themselves more German that anything else, such as Sigmund Freud for example who was a product of the intellectual thought of the German tradition who later influenced psychology globally and Albert Einstein, another great man of science who was also without any religious sentiments, and had to flee to the United States.

It is also important to remember that the policies devised by the National Socialist regime also targeted all the people who were deemed as burden and unnecessary to the progress of the German society, which also led to many Germans being euthanised for genetic and other incurable diseases that was seen as impure to a healthy society and race, along with a lot of elderly people who were thought as unfit to live. So, this shows that even a great amount of Germans lost their lives, not only Jews and foreigners trapped in deportation camps during a heavy bombardment of German soils.

I find it also important to bring to the discussion here the fact that Hitler’s Germany was not some form of 100% pure native-German Caucasian only society where any other person found to be different were taken away, locked and shot. No… of course, Hitler was not such an idiot, and realised that he needed many foreign workers to complete the construction of his country [roads, buildings, etc] and indeed had many Eastern European and foreign workers on his construction sites, he also knew that the German economy should like all countries embrace tourism, and hence people of all kinds were allowed to visit Germany. Indeed, Hitler even hosted the Olympic Games where athletes from all around the world were present. Many modern historians who revisit World War II tend to leave out those details.

Hitler indeed wanted to concentrate on the Germans, but did realise that it was impossible to run a country without a fair share of foreign population that were fundamental. And this can be reflected nowadays in the example of Western Europeans’ absolute love for foreign cuisine, for example Chinese food or Indian food that they love to have at hand with the touch of a button.

Curry Heat Ratings in the UK

Image: Chart showing the areas in England which enjoy the hottest curries / Source: The Telegraph

Britain's Ideal Pub George Orwell Moon Under Water

The single most important feature of Britons’ ideal pub is that it would serve meals (67%). Having a beer garden (63%) / Source: YouGov

And using those examples to explain the logic, it would be impossible to provide quality Asian food to the European market without some people from these regions present to manage the distribution and ensure the quality of the food. This extends to Italian food, Mexican food, Greek and/or French cuisine. Another example would be the scientifically proven benefits of Yoga as a health discipline, that has been adopted by the French society and many other Western societies, similarly, it would be impossible to expect the widespread of the lifestyle if we did not have some of the founders of Yoga to instruct a generation, and it is without doubt that the experts would have to be from where the discipline originates, which is India, who would lead to the training of other experts from other parts of the world, this also applies to other disciplines such as Martial Arts which also originates from the Asian continent.

The point is that Western Europe is not a region like any other, because it is the birth place of some of the greatest intellectuals, thinkers and inventors who have had a major impact on the world, and this has also led to the best learning institutions in various fields being in Europe. This attracts some of the finest academics from all over the world who pay huge fees to study in those institutions, which also bolsters the economy of Europe and when this happens, it means that the government has more money to spend on its own people, system and infrastructures. When these top foreign scholars complete their studies, a great amount move back to their homeland but some are also employed as highly trained specialists and skilled workers in their fields by giants of the European business world in fields ranging from engineering to medicine. It is important to also realise that these people’s contribution lead to the progress of European institutions and their reputation. Hence, these skilled workers while not part of the cultural sphere or show business or the mainly Jewish-owned Hollywood industry, are sometimes part of the team who find a new invention, a new engine, a cleaner way of harvesting energy, a new cure, a new treatment, and where the world is dangerously heading at the moment with antibiotics becoming useless, who knows whether one among them will find the ultimate antibiotic, and if they do, this will lead to saving so many producers, composers, meso-sopranos, pianists, ballet dancers and painters, along with their loved ones and children throughout time from dying from petty infections such as Frédéric Chopin. So, it is important to also note that some things are bigger than outer beauty, but has more to do with the inner beauty of the mind reflected in intelligence and academic abilities.

The other scenario is that in many cases these skilled workers having spent so much of their life in the Western civilisation end up in a marriage with a wife from the countries they work, for example, skilled foreign doctors marrying their nurse, offering the latter a life that she never dreamt of. So, these are things that happen in the human world, and these minor blending of genes has always happened since the beginning of mankind, as I have repeatedly explained since our current breed is a result of movement across the plains of the earth, interbreeding and evolution. So, trying to stop such a force that has shaped our kind, seems like a fight against nature itself, hence it seems unnatural. The only thing that can be done is to guide people into a better understanding of their own society, its people and its identity along with its continuity and the efforts this requires from all its citizens – otherwise any system crumbles and disintegrates – and those who become part of a society should know that if they do not assimilate and become part of the people they will always live a mundane and incomplete existence, that could be compared to that of a rat. Minor cases of genetic fusion in some cases also adds highly talented genes to the gene pool of a civilisation since excellence may stem from any organic composition and when made part of a civilisation only strengthens it, because it spreads among the civilisation throughout time. The decent thing to do would be for the State to always control the amount of foreign people in the country by imposing a strict limit in relation to the native population, perhaps agree on a percentage that should never be exceeded, excluding university students.

Hence, the Hitler regime should have known that it was only going to fail and create a lot of resentment and hate by trying to separate human beings legally through rigid formalities and proof of genetic identity through obsolete ideas such as German genealogy as the National Socialist regime did. This is because, society had already evolved and many links had been made among people who married and had children, some of different religious faiths, origins and nationalities among the German nation. And these types of rigid rules that would expel those not conforming to them through genealogy and ancestry could only lead to families being separated and even many German individuals having their wife or husband deported, and when these scenarios happen, humans tend to fight to the death to save those who are dear to them. Hitler’s regime should have known that this kind of policy was doomed to fail.

What I believe would have instead worked, was an “informal” execution of the vision of a strong Germany. That is, Hitler should have created a society, focussed on German citizens – both natives and those who firmly assimilated and saw themselves as native Germans – with a strong German identity and sense of concern for the people and nation, while nationalising the industries and ensuring that the people at the top are completely dedicated without any other motive than the progress of the nation and have national values, humane dignity and understand the religious identity of the nation by favouring people with proven strong German sentiments. After doing this, the regime and the nation would automatically have generated a climate that would portray the vision of a strong nationalist Germany, with industries focussing on the German people, and without any formal policy of deportation and genetic screening, the people would have soon found themselves in a society that had been reshaped to reflect the values of a nationalist Germany, with pride in its history, people, culture and values without systematically attacking others. After this, the businesses that could not adapt would automatically close and leave if the authorities adamantly declared that no Jewish tradition will be tolerated on German soil and no person of the Jewish religion or community would be allowed to run any form of business except those who have given up on their Jewish identity and fully embraced German tradition with the official religion as optional. The people who wanted to remain in the National Socialist Germany would automatically evaluate their abilities and possibilities and would either force themselves to abide by the rules and embrace, develop and learn to be German citizens or leave. It would automatically have generated a sense of “adapt, perish or leave” logic in the minds of the population of Germany, which would have led to assimilated people of Germany to get closer and strengthen their links with the German native people to be part of the great vision of a Nationalist Germany, or they would have left due to their inability or refusal to adapt, take part and contribute in the betterment of society.

So, this is what I think should have been done, the ideas and vision of the National Socialist regime should have been applied informally and not formally through strict military regime, deportation camps, genealogy investigation, and the atavistic and unscientific claim of “blood”. Indeed, there is no such thing as “blood” as it is referred to in culture, blood is a liquid that runs in the veins of human beings, yet even family sometimes do not have compatible blood since they differ by group and sometimes need complete foreigners or individuals from a different society to donate blood to save the lives of others who are not related to them. So, this idea of “blood” should be carefully used and best suits metaphors in “culture and literature” than reality, since it seems to be used to explain loyalty, togetherness and relatedness through a similar nation, society, values and outlook. Using this example, I can today say that I have Franco-British blood running in my veins and that would work culturally, but medically it would not make much sense, since my blood will only be compatible to individuals of my blood group who may be from any part of the world and of any type of organic composition or society, as long as they are humans beings and not animals.

The last thing I also question in the Hitler regime situation is the true power of democracy in our times, yes! I mean, the people of Germany had voted for the National Socialists to come into power after clearly knowing their manifesto and ideas of a nationalist Germany without Jewish presence. Hence, I question whether if tomorrow I campaign and for example say – note that this is just an example, not a statement of intention – that I will make it illegal in the country to have any form of Islamic worship areas because we know from historical facts that it is a religion that has waged tremendous amounts of violent wars upon Western Classical civilisation and all other non-Muslim religions and is a cult of war, blood, conquest and domination by all means; and if I am elected, I guess I would be bombarded by allies and jailed for trying to do so! This means that even if a form of democratic referendum supported my ideas, all other conventions would prevent me from doing it, hence this seems to suggest that countries have lost their democratic power and cannot satisfy their own people anymore, and this should leave authorities out there with a lot to ponder about.

The other issue of cultural assimilation which involves becoming fully part of the nation requires embracing the cultural theme of the nation and this applies to individuals and their names. What I mean is that assimilating generally involves carrying a name in line with the society’s heritage, and many Jews understood that, unfortunately the rest still do not seem to understand that with a name like “Mangia Fazula”, “Okolo Sambaweh”, “Munjabar Sakalamaktoum”, “Soupovic Boringov”, “Adnan Sawey” or “Aharon Azriel” they will automatically be seen as outsiders in a country of Western Europe founded on Western Christian culture. So, people who want to be fully part of a nation through assimilation should also be intelligent enough to understand the cultural theme that also applies to names, along with the combination of physical fitness that simply eases the process and a mastery of communicative and behavioural patters and a strong sense of togetherness with the nation, while also accepting the religious identity of the nation even if this is optional – being a matter of spiritual connection and the sanctity of one’s soul and it is between the individual and his own conscience and “God” if he believes in him.

As for the strong Catholic rhetoric encouraged by Hitler and his regime towards the education of religion and values to the youth, it is somehow important to remember that Jesus Christ, the messiah who led to the foundation and widespread of Christianity was not born of European stock or speak French, German or English. Jesus Christ was born out of the population of Israel and spoke in Aramaic. Of course, he was not of Jewish faith, and the religious texts and inheritance of Christianity was translated to the Western languages to reach a wide public. Hence, this could have also been done to any other religion if it was the one to have been adopted and spread in Europe, e.g. Hinduism. If that was a scenario that took place, then all Hindu texts and hindus of Europe would sill be speaking and praying in their own European languages, not necessarily the native language of the gods, i.e. Hindi, since all the religious texts would have been translated into the respective languages of the European region. Similarly, modern day Christians of Western Europe do not speak Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke.

The point is that as the Organic Theory explains the communicative patterns of human primates may vary from one region to the other, but creativity and IQ do not, and hence, once the legacy of humanity is translated into the appropriate language [communicative pattern], society should instantly be relieved in the ability to understanding one another. So linguistic synchronisation should be one thing that would appease a world in disharmony although values and religious beliefs will always separate groups, so the debate today towards a harmonious civilisation should certainly begin on the global language of humanity to adopt. A good example would be to see the commercial success and creative influence of the modern art form known as “manga” – which originates from Asia – on France and other Western European societies once they are dubbed into the right language.

And now, having spoken of the Organic Theory above, I would like to explain its application to a modern human civilisation along with individual organic evolution and assimilation, so that most non-academics and lay people reading this out there may have a clear vision of what assimilation is from an objective and rational standpoint and also what it involves and requires for an organism to consider whether it has the potential and requirements to assimilate in a particular society, and how it enhances a sophisticated society, and here, how it would have helped in the policy of Hitler to creating a modern Germany or any leader’s vision to creating a modern country.

When talking evolution, the evolution and fitness of everyone should be taken into consideration, because all forms of Homo Sapiens are evolving together on this tiny planet called Earth in ways that are so fast that the textbooks cannot hope to match and explain – hence the importance of resourcefulness and creativity from avant-garde thinkers gifted with fluid intelligence.

First of all I would like to address the issue of assimilation from the organic stand point and since I am a perfect example of the French school of thought along with a strong British side, I will be explaining this process using myself as an example. Now, I have inherited the knowledge, language, values and philosophies of the French empire and the language of the British empire through cultural transmission after these empires conquered lands and expanded their realm. So, I did not wake up one morning, suddenly speaking French and English while also knowing the history and literature of these languages. And if the tiny island that I was born was near Western Europe, it would be part of Europe, then I probably would not have to answer all those questions, because it would have been seen as a product of European civilisation with the simple difference that some of the people that constitutes its nation come with a variety of skin tones with many being high in colour and texture differing from the common majority of pale pink because of some blending that happened through the course of Western European conquest. Yet, this would not have been such an issue because there are many countries of Europe where the people are not as pale as the common majority, for example Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece – this is simply a slight similarity in physical attributes, not language, or anything else, so it would not make any sense to place those nations in one group! But, since the location of my birth is a place far from Europe geographically although born on Western European heritage, and I travelled to join the roots of my cultural inheritance in Western Europe since I am among the literary elites of new generation that was born in an independent republic with a new culture and educational system, language and French values, I feel that I am a good example to explain the process of assimilation from the Individual Organism’s perspective using my very own Organic Theory.

Now since I explained that the individual organism born on planet earth according to the laws of nature and evolution is free and is still evolving since evolution is a never-ending process. I will also bring to the attention of the public that according to the laws of nature, man-made barriers are not part of natural laws, they are simply barriers that have been erected by political groups. Hence, the individual organism is born on a planet and can adapt and change according to its abilities and its choice of environment. With today’s advancements due to technology and its accelerated learning facilities, organisms can learn and shape themselves linguistically and philosophically for the environment that they want to be a part of. However, there are some limits to this process too, as a high level of proficiency in terms of behavioural and communicative patterns will be required for an organism to assimilate perfectly with a chosen environment and be seen a complete part of it while being synchronised with the natives. For example, I had inherited the communicative, behavioural and social patterns of France and England, these were embedded in me and I also made the choices to deepen my understanding of these societies through my educational choices and from a very early age always intended to pursue my career and end my life in Western Europe: France and England. This means that I invested a lot of effort in redefining myself as a Franco-British Western European because nothing happens to anyone without sacrifice, work and dedication.

The point now is to explain that for an individual organism on earth to consider assimilating into a chosen environment, it is not an easy process, but comes with immense challenges and sacrifices. If we are to become part of a new society, we will not be able to do it by remaining who we are, but we will have to reshape our selves and adapt to the society and strive to become one with its people, and in some ways see them as one’s own “blood”- metaphorically. Furthermore, there is also the issue of fitness, which has nothing to do with “beauty” but rather the ability to blend in with the organisms of this society through some form of physical synchronisation. This is only one part and not the sole factor that defines assimilation but it is one factor that eases the assimilation process, although it is not everything. For example, using the organism that I am, I was born with an Indo-European heritage and although I may be slightly less pale that the average majority of organisms from the Western European sphere, I still have more physical similarities with these people since they are also of Indo-European heritage and of what is also known as the “Aryan Race”. What I am trying to say is that I chose a society where assimilation was achievable because there were strong links in my own genetic, linguistic and cultural heritage with those countries: I spoke the language, read the literature, knew the history, sang, played and listened to the music, share the same religion and studied and understand the philosophies of its greatest minds. So, this means that the organism that I am had all the chances of assimilating in the Western European sphere of both France and England.

This may not have been as easy if for example I decided to assimilate in the Negro civilisation of Africa because to begin with the physical fitness between the organism that I am and the Negro people is incredibly far from each other; but even more, I do not have any links with Negro culture, languages, history or philosophy. This does not mean that it would be impossible, but it would have been very hard due to the difference in civilisation and ways of living.

Since we are on the negro topic, if in the 1950s a person had made the statement that negroes are an inferior race and heritage, people around may have said that the man is biased and racist. Yet, this is not implying that every single negro is inadequate or unskilled, of course we do have some great negroes who excel in mostly physical disciplines such as sports and a couple of others who have become professors in specific fields. But what it is generally implied through the statement that “negroes are an inferior race” seems to suggest that on average, meaning that if we took all the negroes and averaged their achievements and compared it to all other civilisations, we will come to the fact that they are lagging behind in everything, hence the term “inferior”. Nowadays, if we look at all the statistics globally concerning the negro people, we will see that indeed they are behind all other civilisations. Yet, every time this topic surfaces, we suddenly see all the mainly Jewish owned media, suddenly throwing all the singular negros in the United States that have made money; we see basketball players, rappers will grills in their mouth, and all the other negroes that have succeeded financially through the Jewish-owned media industries of the United States. Hence it is once again, not the point, because I am not saying that all negroes are inferior, but simply pointing to the fact that on “average” the negro civilisation is inferior to all other civilisations on planet Earth. And if this is not enough, they are also physically incredibly unique in terms of features and traits compared to all the other civilisations on Earth, which makes them a conundrum in matters of assimilation into any culture. So, for me, the negro people should take this into account and with the developed world that we now live in and with technology making the world a much more connected place that makes life fairly similar on any part of the Earth, I firmly believe that they should start uniting and organising themselves to bridge the gap with the rest of the world and consider the development of the African continent where they would all find enough space to live. The world has been very charitable to negro causes, but it is time for them to start helping themselves. The other point with negro people is that they too are fairly similar to Jews when they move to other societies, they are generally focussed on negro matters and negro people, they are a group of people who are more focussed on expanding their numbers in a country that is not theirs, rather than focussing on the national matters and the native people, this is not assimilation and if it is not, it is not beneficial to any system. So, once again from the Organic Theory’s perspective, this only generates and creates more problematic organisms that are not part of a system and that has problems with assimilation due to immense differences in organic composition, behavioural patterns, goals and outlook and only leads to slowing and weakening any system. In 2019, it seems fair to explain what true assimilation is, and also with the world more developed, more equal and more connected, to guide those who cannot or do not want to assimilate by explaining them how organisms sharing similar organic compositions, values, culture, vision and history have all the factors to create harmonious societies by being together. Negroes and Jews should both consider this, and perhaps meditate on whether they would be happier in a society composed of their own kind, which may generate less tension and a feeling of being at home in a negro or Jewish atmosphere reflecting their beliefs and rituals. Because, the Western civilisation is far from perfect and also has its own problems to tackle, its own people and matters of management to be focussed and if the nation has a crowd that is not focussed in contributing to this it only worsens the problems.

The Enemies Of Reason – The Irrational Health Service

We do sometimes see people of the Western crowd comparing themselves to members of third world crowds and foreign tribes to generate a fake sense of superiority. I would like to remind people that this by no means leads to the betterment of their lives. The Western society has a lot of problems that are deeply rooted and cannot be perceived with the naked eye from the surface, since it is a society that seems in love with packaging everything neatly, but being an intellectual who studied psychology, I can confidently say that there are immense problems in the West regarding the cultivating of minds for the betterment of our lives. Many people are sick in their minds and do not realise it and tremendous amounts of work remains to be done is fixing mentalities and instilling values for a harmonious and healthy society.

People who do not assimilate generally do not have these matters at heart and tend to simply park themselves in Western Europe for an income while remaining foreign in their identities. These people should understand that if they are not assimilating, they should not expect to be treated as the organisms that are native and are fully part of the system because the system relies on its organisms for its continuity and existence, and this will also happen to their children if they are raised on foreign beliefs, identity and values that are incompatible with the nation they live in.

People who are in the west as highly skilled workers and do not want to assimilate should clearly classify themselves as temporary organisms who do not intend to stay forever and accept the life of a foreigner and the burden that goes with it, because I am not saying that the natives are perfect or that all of them are superior since we do have classes and different levels of education in all societies, but what I am repeating is that the problems of the West need contribution and concern from its population to be resolved and those who do not contribute are not helping to make life better for themselves and the country – natives and non-natives alike. This is of course not a problem for tourists who are only visiting for photos and return to their countries after the trip is over – no problems.

Now having spoken of the example of me trying to assimilate in the negro civilisation, a similar situation would be faced if for example I decided to assimilate in the Eastern Asian sphere, since the differences both physical and cultural are immense, and although not impossible, it would come with huge hurdles with such differences that would make it a hard task for me to be seen as a member of their societies in line with their very own natives – and there is no point discussing the further hurdles with huge differences in eating, behavioural, communicative and living patterns.

As a third example, a similar situation would occur if I decided to assimilate in India, because although they may be linked to the Indo-European people, they are clearly a distinct civilization that has divided itself and acquired its own models of communication and behaviour, which I do not know a single word and do not understand or manage, to make matters worse, I don’t look like an Indian either because of course I’m not, even if some may share an olive skin tone, and finally, they are a mainly Hindu civilization that is reflected through their culture and art, while I’m a Christian deeply rooted in the art of French civilization and Western Europe.

The fourth example is an attempt at assimilation in a Muslim civilization, such as Algeria. Again, I couldn’t, because I don’t speak the language, I don’t reflect the values, I don’t believe in Islam and finally, my vision and lifestyle are totally incompatible with the cultures of the Muslim world, and to complicate things further, I don’t look like the Algerians either.

Hence, if I was to be thrown in India, Eastern Asia, Africa or a Muslim society looking in the eyes of these organisms to me would be like looking into the eyes of a deer, which I believe is a very good metaphor that I am using here to describe a completely ignorant creature partly because of its innocence since it has never been thrown into and will never have to know the agonising and non-stop drama of having to solve the problems of the supposedly modern world of the western civilisation while constantly having to endure the insecurity and pettiness of “some” of the vilest and immoral cannibalistic reptilian-like public figures dressed in suit whom no one with a sane mind and enough insight would ever want to introduce to their close ones or have over for dinner once they discover the truth about the limitless possibilities of their savagely hedonistic depth and immoral and rotting dark minds.

Reptiles from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Image: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)

In fact, as a literary elite, I believe this feeling of always being surrounded by deer of all colours, shapes, sizes and origins in most places, all over the Earth from the West to the East, must be shared among other literary minds, because most organisms simply exist, while literary people into fields such as psychology and philosophy have to carry the burden of thinking for society and it is a huge moral task that comes with a lot of pressure and responsibility, while rarely being able to connect with the simple minds we sometimes come across on our meditative road, which only leaves us with the option of either smiling, or saying something insignificant and sweet, such as talking about the weather.

So, getting back to the issue of physical synchronisation, as I have repeated, physical fitness [which has to do with slight similarities and not “beauty” as it is commonly believed] only helps and eases the process of assimilation but is only a shallow indication of belonging, since the depth of an individual is an even more defining point, because the true worth of an organism lies in the mind, the outlook and the values.

Super‐recognisers in Action Evidence from Face‐matching and Face Memory Tasks

Image: Bobak, A., Hancock, P. and Bate, S. (2015). Super-recognisers in Action: Evidence from Face-matching and Face Memory Tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(1), pp.81-91.

To further this logic, I will give the example of a few other pale skinned organisms from some foreign societies who despite a pale skin tone are absolutely incompatible with the society of France, so it is not because they blend deceptively by giving a surface impression of being part of the majority through their skin tone that it means they are perfectly adapted to assimilate, because they do not reflect the linguistic heritage, the values, the founding philosophies of individual freedom, the Christian thought that shaped the civilisation even if they are not religious, and the receptive and human character of France.

A good example would be to consider Jews, Eastern Europeans, Russians, Mennonites or some segments of the Syrian population who sometimes happen to share a paler skin tone. And since we are on the topic, I have also never noticed « Jew » as a separate empirical category in the atavistic forms of the Anglosphere, why? After all, Jews are a distinct race, as those who seem obsessed with empirical research have discovered – this is not a cause for concern to me because I see things from the advanced evolutionary perspective of « Organic Composition », but I ask myself the question for those obsessed with the laboratory. What genetics seem to have revealed is that there are powerful genetic markers of Jewishness, so Hitler’s intuition seem to have been right. So, the Jews did not arise from conversions in Europe because geographically and culturally distant jews still have more genes in common than they do with non-jews and these genes are of Levantine origin [area where Israel is located] which points to a mixture of Eastern-Caucasus [area around Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Eastern Europe and Western Asia], European, and Semitic societies that seem to complete the missing link of the Jewish European Ancestry. It is now believed that the Ashkenazi jews descent from a heterogenous Iranian population that later mixed with Eastern and Western slavic people and possibly some Turks and Greeks in the territory of the Khazar Empire around 8th century A.D. Although my perspective on race comes to a simple matter of « different organic compositions », it is simply a small observation for those scientists obsessed with genetics. Once again, it is important to consider the global evolution of all organisms, and also never forget that a superior organism can come from anywhere on earth – the evolution of the human race is continuous and never-ending.

I’m not saying that some people are animals or that they should be exterminated, so don’t consider my comments as discriminatory, because I’ve already explained that the individual organism has all the powers of self-creation and self-definition and that from an evolutionary point of view, human organisms of any « organic composition »[race] can procreate with whomever they want, and the superior organism can appear from anywhere, but this scientific reality is not enough to be assimilated.

Napoléon Gros Boudin Rose Scene (2002) dpurb site web

Image: Yves Simoneau / Napoléon (2002)

What I am saying is that to “assimilate” in a sophisticated civilisation requires more than only physical fitness, it is not simply a matter of accepting “Big pink sausages” as Christian Clavier termed it in the mini-series “Napoléon” by Yves Simoneau in 2002, because we are not simply trying to create a society that has no structure, with the only defining point being a pale skin tone and then to flood the society with uncivilised pink balls of meat for the photo… no! Only the mainly Jewish Hollywood industry seems to see it that way, and perhaps because the United States is after all nothing more than a simple bastardised European colony composed mainly of migrants and Jews from the German and Anglo-Saxon sphere who tend to be very pale, if not pallid in terms of complexion, unlike many Europeans. They were forced to find a way to survive in the Wild West and had to unite around something in common, which they did around whiskey, guns, fried chicken, business and the English language that they also bastardized in their own version, while remaining an industrialised and mechanical group without any cultural structure – for the vast majority of course, which seems to have a deep frustration that is reflected in a contempt for modern Europeans who are perfectly assimilated to the societies that form their roots. Many Americans also seem eager to point out their long lost European ancestry while being disconnected from it in terms of values and philosophy, and they seem to be unaware of the social evolution of major European empires such as France. The Hollywood perspective may be fairly sufficient for an escort agency, a strip bar, to work as ladies of leisure or meet the criteria as sex workers, but apart from these businesses, a society requires more from its citizens, and here organisms with a sense of belonging and responsibility along with the appropriate behavioural and communicative patterns and names that fit the thematic sphere to be in complete synchronisation with the requirements of the society – so physical fitness is not enough but it simply eases the assimilation process especially among the common brains that do not think.

Indeed, the Jews have long used this visual illusion to blend among those they quality as “gentiles” or “Goy” of the European sphere, the non-Jews who according to their scriptures are inferior beings who were born to serve the Jewry and that can, according to their religious texts, be treated as animals and even killed if necessary. This is simply a factual observation of what is written in the religious texts of Jews. These are scriptures that have shaped the thought of Jewish societies since ancient times, and it is a fact that people should be aware of to understand the leading train of thought of a particular group, it is important to know the facts of the scriptures that shaped them, their values and outlook and why a great deal of their industries bleed civilisations dry of all their humanity. This seems completely opposite to [for example] the concept of Karma found in Hinduism which believes in causality through a system where beneficial effects are derived from past beneficial actions and harmful effects from past harmful actions, creating a system of actions and reactions throughout a soul’s (Atman’s) reincarnated lives – forming a cycle of rebirth. The causality in Hinduism is said to be applicable not only to the material world but also to one’s thoughts, words, actions and actions that others do under our instructions. Jews using their pale skin to spread and hide among the Christian Western European civilisation, have often throughout history had an easier ride, and when they change their names to adopt Christian ones in the process of blending in, it is sometimes hard to differentiate a great amount of them from the native people of the Western European civilisation that was born out of Christian thought and artistry.

The issue with Jews is that although they blend, act, dress and name themselves as the natives of the European nations they move to, they always clearly classify themselves as Jews, and focus on the betterment of other Jews, and work systematically together in business to further the interests of Jews, and even have worldwide conventions among Jews, and parade the achievements of Jews with pride. If we notice all foreign groups do this, except Western Christians who seem to prefer killing each other and live a life of selfish hedonism.

Yet, what these foreign groups do is not assimilation, but simply blending and integrating to systematically dominate a society or system, and Jews have been known to methodically and skilfully do this in many European countries throughout history, along with violent religious sacrifices to their blood thirsty gods that involve the sacrifice of Christian children, which they have done over the years throughout European history, with many mutilated corpses of young Christian children found across Europe drained of all their blood. This is why the Jews are the only group who throughout human history has been persecuted and banned from so many countries. Yes, many people do not know these facts since most people are without any choice but to take their information from Jewish owned mainstream media industries, so learn something new here!

The Hitler regime was not the first regime to ban and persecute the Jews, the Jews have even been banned from England in 1290 by Edward I, and also in 1306 from France by Philippe IV and these are only 3 examples. The Jews have been banned throughout a wide range of societies they moved to due to their insolence, their disrespect to the nation and the values of their heritage that encouraged the systematic destruction and enslavement of all non-Jewish civilisations, their habit of monopolising press business to distort perception and also their occult and violent rituals involving the killing of young Christian children to offer their blood to their violent pagan God, Baal from which the term “Holocaust” itself derives – which involved throwing people to their death in a burning Tophet. In fact, Jews have been banned in a wide range of countries since 1200 B.C until 2014 where they have recently been banned from Guatemala, which leads to about 3213 years of constant persecution and bans from countries they migrated to. In fact, they have been banned from Carthage, Rome, Egypt, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Hungary, Belgium, Austria, Netherlands, Poland, Czech Republic, Lithuania, the Baltic States, and Russia to name a few. If people want to know the full list, they can use the internet and search “Countries where Jews were banned/expulsed” [also: Resolutions aganst Israel].

Here is what I believe created so much disgust and resentment towards the Jews from Christian nations. And if anyone had the time to read the Talmud, they would come to understand why the Jews have been persecuted in so many Christian countries and hated by the  Pope Innocent III himself. As in our languages Christians take their name from Christ, so in the language of the Talmud Christians are called Notsrim, from Jesus the Nazarene. But Christians are also called by the names used in the Talmud to designate all non-Jews: Abhodah Zarah, Akum, Obhde Elilim, Minim, Nokhrim, Edom, Amme Haarets, Goim, Apikorosim, Kuthrim.

The jews teach that since Christians follow the teachings of that man [Jesus], whom the Jews regard as a Seducer and an Idolater, and since they worship him as God, it clearly follows that they merit the name of idolaters, in no way different from those among whom the Jews lived before the birth of Christ, and whom they taught should be exterminated by every possible means.

Every Jew is therefore bound to do all he can to destroy that impious kingdom of the Edomites (Rome) which rules the whole world. Since, however, it is not always and everywhere possible to effect this extermination of Christians, the Talmud orders that they should be attacked at least indirectly, namely: by injuring them in every possible way, and by thus lessening their power, help towards their ultimate destruction. Wherever it is possible a Jew should kill Christians, and do so without mercy. Jews must spare no means in fighting the tyrants who hold them in this Fourth Captivity in order to set themselves free. They must fight Christians with astuteness and do nothing to prevent evil from happening to them: their sick must not be cared for, Christian women in childbirth must not be helped, nor must they be saved when in danger of death.

In the same book Sanhedrin (107b) we read:
« Mar said: Jesus seduced, corrupted and destroyed Israel. »

The book Zohar, III, (282), tells us that Jesus died like a beast and was buried in that « dirt heap…where they throw the dead bodies of dogs and asses, and where the sons of Esau [the Christians] and of Ismael [the Turks], also Jesus and Mahommed, uncircumcized and unclean like dead dogs, are buried. »(25)

In Iore Dea (81,7, Hagah) it says: « A child must not be nursed by a Nokhri, if an Israelite can be had; for the milk of the Nokhrith hardens the heart of a child and builds up an evil nature in him. »

In Iore Dea (153,1, Hagah) it says: « A child must not be given to the Akum to learn manners, literature or the arts, for they will lead him to heresy. »

In Zohar (1,25b) it says: « Those who do good to the Akum . . . will not rise from the dead. »

In this way they explain the words of Deuteronomy (VII,2) . . . and thou shalt show no mercy unto them [Goim], as cited in the Gemarah. Rabbi S. Iarchi explains this Bible passage as follows: « Do not pay them any compliments; for it is forbidden to say: how good that Goi is. »

Rabbi Bechai, explaining the text of Deuteronomy about hating idolatry, says: « The Scripture teaches us to hate idols and to call them by ignominious names. Thus, if the name of a church is Bethgalia— »house of magnificence, » it should be called Bethkaria—an insignificant house, a pigs’ house, a latrine. For this word, karia, denotes a low-down, slum place. »

JESUS is ignominiously called Jeschu—which means, May his name and memory be blotted out. His proper name in Hebrew is Jeschua, which means Salvation.

MARY, THE MOTHER OF JESUS, is called Charia—dung, excrement (German Dreck). In Hebrew her proper name is Miriam.

CHRISTIAN SAINTS, the word for which in Hebrew is Kedoschim, are called Kededchim (cinaedos)—feminine men (Fairies). Women saints are called Kedeschoth, whores.

A CHRISTIAN GIRL who works for Jews on their sabbath is called Schaw-wesschicksel, Sabbath Dirt.

Since the Goim minister to Jews like beasts of burden, they belong to a Jew together with his life and all his faculties: « The life of a Goi and all his physical powers belong to a Jew. » (A. Rohl. Die Polem. p.20)

It is an axiom of the Rabbis that a Jew may take anything that belongs to Christians for any reason whatsoever, even by fraud; nor can such be called robbery since it is merely taking what belongs to him.

In Babha Bathra (54b) it says: « All things pertaining to the Goim are like a desert; the first person to come along and take them can claim them for his own. »

In Babha Kama (113b) it says: « It is permitted to deceive a Goi. »

The Babha Kama (113b) says: « The name of God is not profaned when, for example, a Jew lies to a Goi by saying: ‘I gave something to your father, but he is dead; you must return it to me,’ as long as the Goi does not know that you are lying. »

In Kallah (1b, p.18) it says: « She (the mother of the mamzer) said to him, ‘Swear to me.’ And Rabbi Akibha swore with his lips, but in his heart he invalidated his oath. »(4)

(4) cf. supra, p.30, A similar text is found in Schabbuoth Hagahoth of Rabbi Ascher (6d): « If the magistrate of a city compels Jews to swear that they will not escape from the city nor take anything out of it, they may swear falsely by saying to themselves that they will not escape today, nor take anything out of the city today only. »

In Zohar (I, 160a) it says: « Rabbi Jehuda said to him [Rabbi Chezkia]: ‘He is to be praised who is able to free himself from the enemies of Israel, and the just are much to be praised who get free from them and fight against them.’ Rabbi Chezkia asked, ‘How must we fight against them?’ Rabbi Jehuda said, ‘By wise counsel thou shalt war against them’ (Proverbs, ch. 24, 6). By what kind of war? The kind of war that every son of man must fight against his enemies, which Jacob used against Esau—by deceit and trickery whenever possible. They must be fought against without ceasing, until proper order be restored. Thus it is with satisfaction that I say we should free ourselves from them and rule over them. »

In Choschen Ham. (425,5) it says: « If you see a heretic, who does not believe in the Torah, fall into a well in which there is a ladder, hurry at once and take it away and say to him ‘I have to go and take my son down from a roof; I will bring the ladder back to you at once’ or something else. The Kuthaei, however, who are not our enemies, who take care of the sheep of the Israelites, are not to be killed directly, but they must not be saved from death. »

And in Iore Dea (158,1) it says: « The Akum who are not enemies of ours must not be killed directly, nevertheless they must not be saved from danger of death. For example, if you see one of them fall into the sea, do not pull him out unless he promises to give you money. »

Lastly, the Talmud commands that Christians are to be killed without mercy. In the Abhodah Zarah (26b) it says: « Heretics, traitors and apostates are to be thrown into a well and not rescued. »

And in Choschen Hamm. again (388,15) it says: « If it can be proved that someone has betrayed Israel three times, or has given the money of Israelites to the Akum, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth. »

Even a Christian who is found studying the Law of Israel merits death. In Sanhedrin (59a) it says: « Rabbi Jochanan says: A Goi who pries into the Law is guilty to death. »

In Hilkhoth Akum (X, 2) it says: « These things [supra] are intended for idolaters. But Israelites [Jews] also, who lapse from their religion and become epicureans [Christians], are to be killed, and we must persecute them to the end. For they afflict Israel and turn the people from God. »

In Choschen Hamm. (425,5) it says: « Jews who become epicureans [Christians], who take to the worship of stars and planets and sin maliciously; also those who eat the flesh of wounded animals, or who dress in vain clothes, deserve the name of epicureans; likewise those who deny the Torah and the Prophets of Israel—the law is that all those should be killed; and those who have the power of life and death should have them killed; and if this cannot be done, they should be led to their death by deceptive methods. »

Rabbi David Kimchi writes as follows in Obadiam: « What the Prophets foretold about the destruction of Edom in the last days was intended for Rome, as Isaiah explains (ch. 34,1): Come near, ye nations, to hear . . . For when Rome is destroyed, Israel shall be redeemed. »

A JEW WHO KILLS A CHRISTIAN COMMITS NO SIN, BUT OFFERS AN ACCEPTABLE SACRIFICE TO GOD / In Sepher Or Israel (177b) it says: « Take the life of the Kliphoth and kill them, and you will please God the same as one who offers incense to Him. »

And in Ialkut Simoni (245c. n. 772) it says: « Everyone who sheds the blood of the impious is as acceptable to God as he who offers a sacrifice to God. »

AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE AT JERUSALEM, THE ONLY SACRIFICE NECESSARY IS THE EXTERMINATION OF CHRISTIANS

In Zohar (III,227b) the Good Pastor says: « The only sacrifice required is that we remove the unclean from amongst us. »

THOSE WHO KILL CHRISTIANS SHALL HAVE A HIGH PLACE IN HEAVEN

In Zohar (I,38b, and 39a) it says: « In the palaces of the fourth heaven are those who lamented over Sion and Jerusalem, and all those who destroyed idolatrous nations … and those who killed off people who worship idols are clothed in purple garments so that they may be recognized and honored. »

JEWS MUST NEVER CEASE TO EXTERMINATE THE GOIM; THEY MUST NEVER LEAVE THEM IN PEACE AND NEVER SUBMIT TO THEM

In Hilkhoth Akum (X, 1) it says: « Do not eat with idolaters, nor permit them to worship their idols; for it is written: Make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them (Deuter. ch. 7, 2). Either turn away from their idols or kill them. »

Ibidem (X,7): « In places where Jews are strong, no idolater must be allowed to remain… »

Now, we can ask ourselves a few simple questions here, which is “Could all the people who have banned the Jews be without any reason to do so?” and “Could people simply walk around and suddenly without any reason decide to hate Jews?” and also “If this has happened to them for so many years, is it not likely that the problem is in fact with the Jews themselves?” I believe it is best to leave the audience to answer these questions and reflect on them alone.

I would like to make it clear, that I am talking of the Jew mentality and train of thought as a whole, but I am not saying that every single Jew is evil or has nothing to offer to the societies they move to. Of course, there are some amazing, admirable and loveable individuals who completely assimilate, and even give up their Jewish identity and convert to Christianity, or become atheists. There are of course, some decent people of Jewish heritage who become fully citizens of their new societies, speak for the natives and see themselves as part of the nation, and this can be seen in France, where some have become more French that the natives and have embedded themselves in the heart of the nation. However, this concerns a very tiny minority of Jews who after doing so, often see foreign Jews as inadequate for France because they see themselves as part of the French people and understand the religious identity of the country being Christianity. However, the majority of Jews do not follow the example of the noble ones who assimilate, instead they remain distinct and work for their Jew comrades and organisations while embracing their values and beliefs of circumcision and superiority.

The fact that all foreign organisms need to grasp is that to be part of the Western European civilisation, means accepting the fact that Christianity is part of the founding culture, and while many people are not religious, it cannot be ignored that the whole history, inheritance and literature were founded by Christian men and women with some not being religious but who were undeniably directly and indirectly influenced by Christian thoughts and inheritance and this can be reflected in the large amount of allegory and metaphors related to the bible in the literature. It is also an immense coincidence that right at the same period when I am answering your questions that the Notre Dame cathedral has been mysteriously struck by a fire on the 15th of April 2019, some may see it as a sign of the foundations of a civilisation burning – and coicidences with my life are today not suprising anymore to me. When hasard multiplies coincidences, it is not hasard anymore.

In fact, to be fully assimilated means giving up on one’s foreign identity and embracing the new society’s history, language, linguistic theme, nation and religion as an added option if possible. Jews should reflect on this: the fact that Western Europe is a Christian civilisation, just like Israel is a Jewish society and the Arab states are a Muslim civilisation, with the governments of the latter two countries taking religion as a serious matter of culture without ever compromising on religious priorities and necessities over any other foreign religion. Indeed, in many Arab states, the crucifix as a symbol of Christianity is banned and illegal, and they make no excuses for it, because they are firm Muslims and this is embedded in the fabric of their government and culture. To further this example, it is also ridiculous that the Grand Cross of the National Order of the Legion of Honour which is the highest French order of merit for military and civil merits, established in 1802 by Napoleon Bonaparte, was given to the Sultan of Brunei in 1997, a man who recently instated a new penal code that applies the sharia – Islamic law – as strictly as possible: death by stoning to punish homosexuals and adultery, amputation of a hand or foot for thieves, death penalty for insulting the prophet. Being Jewish or Muslim will always portray oneself as a person with foreign values derived from the history and values of those religions that are for the most incompatible with those of Western European civilisation.

When people who have the ability to assimilate choose to do so, they should first find their place in the new society based on their choices, skills, abilities and field. Tremendous efforts and proofs of assimilation will be required of them and this normally starts with a Western name of Christian culture. People who do not assimilate fully, rebuild and reshape themselves and adopt a completely new identity should always remember that they are not at home and should not expect the same treatment as those who are – this is a simple question of common sense. Those who assimilate properly will automatically become part of the native people and share an existence with similar opportunities, because they have become natives through their efforts and decision to be loyal and dedicated to their new society and its people, by respecting the founding heritage and religious sensibilities, and of course by mastering the behavioural and communicative patterns. This does not mean that after assimilating, they have to be subservient and cannot make a critical observation to help develop the country and push it forward, but their allegiance should be to the nation and the native people because they should consider themselves as part of that people. The objective after all is to create loyal citizens with a strong sense of concern for the society, not slaves! Natives too should learn to act like human beings and adopt the values of decency to understand that a society works better when the population is in harmony and happy while seeing genuinely and properly assimilated citizens as their own “blood”.

So as the Organic Theory explains, another factor is more fundamental than physical fitness for assimilation as we can see using Jews as an example to explain that similarity in skin tone is hardly anything except a tiny factor that helps with the majority who rarely think. The most important and defining part of assimilation concerns handling the appropriate behavioural and communicative patterns of the society that the organism wants to fully be a part of. For successful and complete assimilation, organisms need to also embed the philosophy, understand the heart of the people according to their history, master the language, feel at one with the nation, feel the joy and pain of the people and also be able to use the term “us” to describe themselves and the natives; in other words see the people as their own “blood”, and this is how it is done in the most sophisticated civilisation, i.e. France, where the people are willing to love you and see you as their own blood if you show the genuine desire to be part of the people and loyalty to the nation.

Assimilation unfortunately is not easily achieved and this is why assimilation should not to be confused with integration, because integration is simply the acquisition of a passport for legality; but assimilation is sculpting one’s heart and soul to be one with the people and be part of the national blood through loyalty and dedication while playing one’s part as a citizen with civic duties. Indeed, in Ancient Greece, all members of society who did not partake in communal matters or get involved and take interest in matters concerning the running of the country and the harmony of the people were seen as “parasites”, and this includes all citizens – natives and non-natives alike – because all societies need its people to work together to address its problems and follow the never-ending course of positive change for the betterment of a civilisation.

In France, most people understand that being a citizen is like a duty, and hence until today they are the only civilisation who stood up for the brotherhood of mankind as individuals to be treated with respect, they are among the rare civilisations who listen to the opinions of the people and give the praise of an emperor to a common man if they feel the man has the grandeur in his arguments and deserves so – we know this from the legend of Napoléon – and finally the French people are one of the most receptive people who are always willing to reason with new arguments in the noblest of ways no matter who the arguments are from. In fact, France is the least atavistic and most sophisticated civilisation of the modern world, and to achieve such a glorious task without a monarchy is amazing – it shows that when people see themselves as one and treat each other with respect while having a sense of moral and dignity, they embody an empire together, without or with an emperor – the head with a crown being simply an option if needed and deemed ingenious enough to guide a conquering civilisation, but not a necessity!

To achieve this sense of harmony requires organisms that can find a strong sense of synchronisation as a people and see themselves as a nation and also feel each other’s pain and glory to reason as one. Of course, just like any society on earth, we do find some bad apples, and corrupt and immoral statesmen along with petty arguments, especially among the minor classes, but as a whole, it is a society that was built on values and philosophies devised to foster the development of human beings where any individual can rise to the very top through his or her own desire, efforts and dedication. The unfortunate thing is that as time passes, and the passionate generation who were part of the foundation of this new world dies, these values sometimes fade in the minds of the new generation and the mediocre “Fisher Price” statesmen it has given us and it is great men and women with admirable character that throughout history have had the courage to stand up, speak and remind the nation of the number of people who fought and lost their lives for the society we now have and the need to push in the same direction to continue on the route of human progress.

So now to finish off, having already spoken of what I thought was not well planned in Hitler’s regime, along with a fairly deep explanation of the Organic Theory and assimilation, here are the couple of things that are inspiring with Hitler’s story, and it starts with the great example the German people set at the time in terms of giving power to the deserving individual by showing the world that a failed artist could rise to the very top of a modern society. Which means that we eventually saw a financially challenged boy who was the top of his class in primary school who then failed to kickstart his artistic career after failing an exam to one of the finest art school in Western Europe, the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna, and then through his own efforts after being homeless and struggling through the war, rise to the very top. This to me shows absolute social mobility, but also how a man can be an artist, a soldier, and a cultivated man through his own efforts to then lead a modern civilisation and rise to the very top. This to me is a clear modern example of the Organic Theory on the process of self-definition and progressive development of an individual organism based on his/her own desires and abilities.

The second amazingly inspiring side to the story of Hitler is how he gave the world an avant-garde example of the answer to a harmonious environment; by being a vegetarian who was the first to initiate animal protection laws.

The third admirable side to Hitler was his charisma and his loyalty to his society, but also his modesty and confidence with people of all walks of life, being the only public figure of his level to freely walk around his country and meet the crowd from all walks of life and classes without any protection, while also gaining their absolute trust to guide them.

The fourth side to Adolf Hitler was that he had style in his taste in architecture for his country as we can today find through the blueprints he devised along with Albert Speer. We can imagine what would have been the future Germany and Berlin. These plans reveal buildings and plans of a city that reflected the grandeur of mankind and even the uniforms of his staff were contracted to Hugo Boss – showing a man who revered perfection. And if we take a look at the uniforms and the suits of the National Socialist government, we may have to accept that they were some of the sharpest and best-looking suits ever seen throughout modern history, perhaps only matched by French couturiers such as Yves Saint Laurent.

The fifth amazing side with Hitler was his love for science and evolution and his passion to keep an updated perspective of all the latest discoveries. So, it would be fairly biased to assume Hitler to be a rigid man who had no taste for change. This can be reflected is his eagerness to foster research in order to rebuild Germany’s medical, technological and military facilities. This also adds to my view that Hitler would have been willing to listen to new discoveries and shift his opinions accordingly if advised and convinced by genuine, avant-garde and honest people – he should have consulted me. Haha! But of course, the close entourage of the Fuhrer was not particularly composed of the most ethical of minds or the most sophisticated where many turned out to be disloyal and evil, which likely led to the horrors of the regime without any link to Hitler himself.

The sixth admirable thing about Hitler, is the fact that he was a leader who really saw people as organisms requiring the similar chances to succeed and rise and not as a crowd to be divided into segments of left, right and centre. Hitler saw all his citizens as people of his system and worked to synchronise the whole society to work as one machine. This is certainly admirable in comparison to the corrupt and immoral people at the head of most systems today where the criteria used to govern human beings are economic and business factors. To run a civilisation of human beings without values, philosophy and morals is a sure way to fail in the long run because human beings are not objects or goods, but are complex organisms that require a very sensible system to live harmoniously, and any person who calls himself a leader and does not understand psychology, philosophy and the elements that lead to a modern harmonious human environment are fooling themselves and lying to society. It is also to be remembered how Hitler even proposed to dismantle the German military and destroy all weapons if all other countries did the same, which they never responded to. So, we now understand why Hitler was even paraded as person of the year by Time magazine, and it could not possibly be for turning Jews into minced meat. And the other enigmatic question is why so much today is being spent on defence and military when it is clear that we are a lonely civilisation on a lonely planet that should be looking to extend its reach by starting a new civilisation on a backup planet to gain the status of a space civilisation? Do these parties spending so much on military equipment and technology only have defence and nothing else in the back of their perhaps unconscious minds? Is it simply for decoration?

The seventh inspiring thing about Hitler is that he was not a native German, but just like me, fully assimilated in German society and to also win the heart of a whole nation and rise to the very top and eventually become more Germans that the Germans themselves, is something quite spectacular. Perhaps, another admirable thing was Hitler’s reply in a court proceeding after his failed coup against the state to take power, where he responded after being asked if he was German by asking whether this is proved on a piece of paper or in a man’s heart; because although he had already won the heart of the nation, he still did not have a German passport. In his early years in Germany as he struggled financially and was homeless, he was also told by some Germans that he looked like a Jew and that they thought he was one, to then overcome all this to rise to the top is quite frankly admirable.

The eighth inspiring side to Hitler was his unique ability to open his heart completely to the nation and deliver shattering speeches that hypnotised the crowds, with his passionate body language that portrayed his honesty and dedication to the Germans by placing them before his own comfort.

The ninth, and final point that I believe is inspiring with Hitler is that he did not seem to have seen things from the perspective of the regular average exec, economist, banker, doctor or other financially motivated executive who tend to claw their way in a political party just to appear on television or newspaper without any presence, greater vision or strong values and see a civilisation as a store to manage. Hitler had a deeper view like legendary emperors had, and wanted to guide a nation with philosophy, inspiring architecture, timeless artworks and wanted to blend and synchronise all the departments ranging from business, economy, education, science, research, history and arts to create the kind of timeless civilisation as it is often depicted in mythological literature that stands the test of time in marble and stone. Most importantly, Hitler seemed to be of the opinion that if a civilisation is not expanding then it is not progressing and this reflected the qualities of a conqueror, reminiscing of those like Alexander the great or Napoleon. Nowadays, pathetic and mediocre execs who lead a team that they call a political party are guided by the sole desire to stay in power, and because of their allegiance to donors to their parties, they need to abide and meet some demands to remain funded, this destroys a civilisation because it is not being managed with the freedom and the values that it requires, and hence, this leads to a mundane atmosphere of a static and boring society where the same kind of men act and speak in a noble way public, but behave like ignoble and immoral characters in their decision and management – this has been a depressing and repetitive cycle for decades now without any legendary character appearing to stand against such absurdity and turn matters around. Today, with so many conventions, it is hardly possible for any great empire to take matters into their own hands and consider expansion and conquest because of hypocritical beliefs of absolute equality of all societies and languages along with third world policies that have trapped great empires of the West such as France into submission and onto its knees to comply with irrational, ridiculous and hypocritical demands that bound it to comply with conventions and gradually has today transformed it and many other empires into nurseries paralyzed by the demands of inferior societies, when it has all the resources to turn the whole world into its colonies and manage it better while giving all the people on Earth the dream of being part of its heritage, like great empires once did.

So, to conclude with an answer to your question, I am neither a Hitler fan, nor a Hitler hater, but a man who sees “The Fuhrer” as one of the great figures of the last century with elements to be inspired by and mistakes to also learn from.

Finally, I would like to point out that if nobody speaks, nothing changes… so I chose to speak, what did you choose to do?

 

_________________________________

 

 

QUESTION VII.

[FR] – Qui est votre leader préféré de tous les temps et pourquoi ?

[EN] – Who is your all-time favourite leader and why?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

Après avoir beaucoup réfléchi et éliminé d’une liste constituée de Chirac, Sarkozy, Hitler, De Gaulle, Alexandre le Grand et Napoléon Bonaparte, j’ai dû aller avec ce dernier, l’Empereur du peuple français, car il s’avère être un des chefs les plus énigmatiques jamais vu dans l’histoire des hommes. Je crois que l’humanité n’a pas eu de dirigeants de ce calibre depuis. Nous avons eu surtout des cadres médiocres qui ont dirigé des partis politiques et ont joué avec la civilisation jusqu’à ce que leur temps passe, tout en faisant le maximum pour assurer une retraite financièrement confortable et assez de photos encadrées avec des célébrités pour les accrocher à leurs murs.

Avant d’en arriver à Napoléon, je dois dire qu’il y a quelques personnalités publiques assez décentes qui avaient des éléments à leur sujet que je trouve inspirants. Nous avons l’ancien président français Chirac, qui, je crois, avait une personnalité incroyablement charismatique et magnétique, qui incarnait également la joie de vivre française et qui avait une touche de jeunesse éternelle dans son caractère, et cette touche d’humanité est admirable car je crois que être humain est un facteur fondamental pour gérer les autres humains. Chirac aimait la foule et était à l’aise avec les gens de tous les milieux tout en ayant un grand sens de l’humour.

Un autre président français que je trouve également inspirant est Nicola Sarkozy, qui est aussi un grand exemple d’assimilation et quelqu’un qui a également rencontré de nombreux obstacles dans ses premières années en tant que fils de Hongrois et petit-fils d’un Juif mais qui a finalement tout surmonté pour se prouver comme un vrai français qui avait la France dans son cœur. Sarkozy est aussi celui qui inspire les autres à monter, contrairement à beaucoup de personnalités égoïstes d’aujourd’hui qui, une fois au sein d’un parti, semblent haïr les jeunes générations et agissent en animaux vils et frustrés envers les personnalités de demain.

Hitler aussi a été un cas de grande assimilation et après avoir parlé de ce que je trouve inspirant à son sujet ci-dessus, je pense que nous pouvons passer au dernier, qui est Charles de Gaulle.

Juin 1958, l’Assemblée donne les pleins pouvoirs à De Gaulle

Ce dernier, pour moi, est un grand exemple d’un homme qui savait ce qu’il voulait et qui avait la grande vision d’une civilisation. De Gaulle faisait aussi preuve d’une modestie exemplaire et ne se noyait pas égoïstement dans le luxe mais pensait à l’Etat et au peuple avant son propre confort. L’autre chose admirable de Gaulle, c’est qu’il avait gagné la confiance de la France pour diriger librement comme un monarque et est peut-être aujourd’hui connu comme le dernier « roi démocratique de France ».

Le dernier avant Napoléon est Alexandre le Grand, qui fut la seule personne d’origine indo-européenne à avoir presque conquis le monde, de la Grèce au fleuve Indus. C’était un général et un explorateur qui était aussi incroyablement cultivé de ses enseignements par le grand Aristote qui lui avait enseigné la science, la philosophie, la littérature et les techniques de combat – toutes les compétences nécessaires pour un futur grand leader.

Aristote instruisant Alexandre le Grand et ses camarades

Image: Aristote instruisant Alexandre / Alexandre le Grand (2011) . Arte

Dès ses premières années, il a enduré un père incroyablement exigeant qui s’attendait à ce qu’il ne soit jamais faible et qu’il soit le plus grand dans tous les domaines. Alexandre était assoiffé de connaissances et était inspiré par le modèle grec et voulait être le meilleur comme Achille, le héros légendaire de la mythologie grecque à qui son père avait dit que pour se comporter comme un homme, il devait être le meilleur et avoir un meilleur jugement.

Alexander the Great

Après avoir été enseigné par Aristote pendant 3 ans, Alexandre dira plus tard qu’il aimait Aristote comme un père et si son père biologique lui a donné la vie, c’est Aristote qui lui a montré comment vivre. Ce dernier lui raconta comment l’empire perse s’est étendu jusqu’à la fin du monde jusqu’en Inde, et comment leur roi avait envahi la Grèce il y a environ 100 ans, détruisant toutes les villes, prenant Athènes et brûlant l’Acropole avant que les Grecs puissent s’unir et chasser les Perses. Aristote avait également dit à Alexandre comment les Perses étaient une menace permanente avec leurs troupes amassées aux portes de la Grèce avec le tombeau du valeureux Achille encore dans leurs mains, et que le rêve de gloire éternelle réside dans l’acte d’unir les Grecs et de poursuivre les troupes persanes comme ce serait l’acte d’un héros. Son père lui avait dit qu’il devait trouver un empire à sa taille car la Grèce est trop petite.

Alexander

Image: Alexandre le Grand (2011) . Arte

Après avoir commencé à conquérir la Perse, il vainquit l’armée de Darius III, bien qu’en infériorité numérique, et fit prisonniers la mère, l’épouse et les sœurs. Dans un acte de chevalerie, il leur promettait même qu’elles seraient traitées avec respect et qu’aucun de ses hommes ne serait impuni s’ils manquaient de respect aux femmes persanes, à la colère et à la frustration d’un de ses généraux les plus proches et les plus doués, Philotas. Il dira à ce dernier qu’après leur bravoure et leur victoire héroïque contre l’armée persane, comment pourraient-ils se comporter en lâches avec leurs femmes ? Alexandre a continué son exploration et a presque pris le monde avec de nombreuses villes, y compris Babylone le recevant comme un libérateur – il voulait surpasser ses ancêtres. Mais l’une de ses déclarations les plus nobles fut peut-être son désir d’avoir été Diogène de Sinope s’il n’avait pas été Alexandre. Diogène de Sinope était l’un des philosophes les plus célèbres de l’école de philosophie cynique dont le caractère a profondément marqué les Athéniens à travers une multitude d’anecdotes légendaires. Cela montre qu’au fond de son cœur, Alexandre n’était pas motivé par le luxe ou l’argent, mais voulait vraiment construire une civilisation noble de gens sophistiqués et humains. Cela montre aussi sa sensibilité et sa capacité à établir des relations avec les gens modestes, mais surtout sa sagesse dans l’évaluation de la grandeur d’un homme, non pas en fonction de ses possessions ou de ses vêtements, mais uniquement en fonction de son intelligence et du contenu de son discours; parce que Diogène de Sinope vivait dehors, dans la misère, vêtu d’un simple manteau, avec un bâton, un sac et un bol. Dénonçant l’artifice des conventions sociales, Diogène prônait une vie simple, plus proche de la nature, et se contentait d’un grand pot couché sur le côté pour dormir.

Diogène de Sinope 413 avJC - 327 avJC dpurb site web

Diogène (Diogenes) par John William Waterhouse, 1882

Diogène avait l’art de l’invective et de la parole mordante. Il semble qu’il n’ait pas hésité à critiquer ouvertement les grands hommes et autres philosophes de son temps (dont Platon). Les apostrophes les plus célèbres qui lui sont attribuées sont :

«Je suis à la recherche d’un homme» – (c’est-à-dire un homme vrai, bon et sage), une phrase qu’il prononçait à la stupéfaction de ses concitoyens en marchant dans les rues, brandissant sa lanterne allumée en plein jour et approchant les visages des passants.

(réponse éblouissante à Alexandre le Grand, roi de Macédoine, qui était venu le voir pour lui demander s’il avait besoin de quelque chose, s’il pouvait l’aider d’une manière ou d’une autre…). – Oui, sortez de mon soleil, répondit Diogène.

Plusieurs anecdotes témoignent du mépris de Diogène pour la richesse et les conventions sociales. Selon Diogène Laërce, il n’a pas hésité à mendier avec les statues pour «s’habituer au refus». Il a abandonné son bol après avoir vu un enfant boire à la fontaine dans ses mains. Interrogé sur la façon d’éviter la tentation de la chair, Diogène aurait répondu « en se masturbant », et aurait ajouté : «Il vaudrait mieux pour le ciel qu’il suffise aussi de se frotter le ventre pour ne plus avoir faim». Diogène aurait également été vu se promenant dans les rues d’Athènes en plein jour, avec une lanterne à la main, disant à ceux qui lui demandaient ce qu’il faisait : «Je cherche un homme.» (parfois traduit par «je cherche l’homme» ou «je cherche un vrai homme»). Cet «homme» désignerait celui théorisé par Platon, l’idéal de l’être humain, et Diogène aurait voulu réfuter son existence, puisque seuls des hommes concrets existent. Une autre anecdote rapporte que, Platon ayant défini l’homme comme un «bipède sans cornes et sans plumes», le lendemain Diogène se promenait dans la ville, tenant dans sa main un coq déplumé avec des ergots coupés, et déclarant : «C’est l’homme de Platon !» Diogène a d’abord vécu comme un homme libre, mais comme il se dirigeait vers Égine par bateau, ce dernier avait été pris par des pirates. Mis en vente comme esclave à Corinthe, il déclara au marchand qui lui demandait ce qu’il pouvait faire qu’il savait «gouverner les hommes», et qu’il devait donc être vendu à celui qui cherchait un maître. Il finit par être acheté par un riche Corinthien qui admirait son indépendance d’esprit, et qui lui donna sa liberté.

Puget_-_Diogenes_Alexandre_Louvre dpurb site web

La rencontre d’Alexandre le grand et de Diogène de Sinope / Pierre Pujet, vers 1680, Musée du Louvre

C’est à Corinthe, où Diogène vivait lorsqu’il n’était pas à Athènes, que s’est déroulée la célèbre rencontre du vieux clochard philosophe avec le jeune roi de Macédoine, Alexandre le Grand. Cet épisode est raconté en particulier par Plutarque dans la Vie d’Alexandre, XVIII, par Cicéron dans les Tosculans, 5, XXXII, et par Diogène Laertius dans la Vie des philosophes, Livre VI.

Voici la version la plus complète de leur conversation :

– Demande-moi ce que tu veux, je te le donnerai.

– Sors de mon soleil (littéralement : « Reste loin de mon soleil pendant un moment. »)

– Tu n’as pas peur de moi ?

– Qu’est-ce que tu es ?……… Un bon ou un mauvais ?

– Un bon, un bon.

– Qui pourrait craindre le bien ?

Diogène avait demandé qu’après sa mort, son corps soit jeté dans la rue, mais ses amis lui ont donné des funérailles honorables. Une colonne surmontée d’un chien de marbre a été placée sur sa tombe et sur laquelle les versets suivants ont été écrits :

« Même le bronze subit le vieillissement du temps,
Mais votre renommée, Diogène, l’éternité ne la détruira pas.
Car vous seul avez montré aux mortels la gloire d’une vie indépendante
Et le chemin le plus facile à suivre pour une vie heureuse. »

Aujourd’hui, l’héritage d’Alexandre le Grand est présent en politique aux côtés des légendes et dans la littérature. Il envisageait un empire universel où les sociétés auraient une administration autonome et pourraient coexister pacifiquement sous un gouvernement impérial. Alexandre n’a pas seulement conquis le monde, il a changé le cours de son histoire pour toujours.

Mais mon chef préféré de tous les temps est Napoléon. Napoléon pour sa grandeur en presque tout et sa présence motivante et inspirante qui a touché des hommes et des femmes du monde entier. Napoléon est quelqu’un à qui je semble me lier parce qu’il est peut-être l’une des plus grandes histoires d’assimilation étonnante et qu’il est passé d’un simple militaire à général, puis consul puis empereur et tout cela grâce à la reconnaissance du pays tout entier.

BONAPARTE AU PONT D'ARCOLE (1796) Antoine-Jean GROS (1771 - 1835) dpurb site d'purb

Image: Bonaparte au pond d’Arcole (1796) par Antoine-Jean Gros (1771 – 1835)

Napoléon m’inspire parce que, comme moi, il n’est pas né en France, mais a quitté sa maison en Corse et est parti étudier en France. Dans ses premières années, il ne maîtrisait même pas la langue française et avait un fort accent corse, et il a également été intimidé au collège alors qu’il était à Brienne, une académie d’élite et a été traité comme un petit immigrant étranger dans ces premières années. Pourtant, avec un tel dévouement, en tant qu’étudiant déjà étonnant et grand autodidacte solitaire, il a lu tous les grands esprits de l’Europe, s’est cultivé et est devenu l’un des plus grands Français à avoir jamais vécu. En effet, du petit étranger à l’accent louche, devenir alors plus français que les Français, et s’élever au rang d’Empereur est vraiment inspirant. Avant de recevoir sa couronne le jour de son couronnement après que le peuple français eut décidé de le faire empereur de la République française, il se retourna et regarda son frère en disant, en corse  » sì u nostru babbu ci hà vistu « , qui signifie  » si notre père pouvait nous voir « . Cela montre que bien qu’il ait incarné la France dans son cœur, il était respectueux de son humble passé alors qu’il est passé de simple lieutenant à empereur en seulement 11 ans. Napoléon était aussi un exemple parfait de la théorie organique dans la création, le développement, l’évolution et la définition de soi dans une société sophistiquée qui croit en la force créatrice de l’individu pour réaliser ses rêves. Napoléon était aussi un homme qui personnifiait le courage, tant sur le champ de bataille que dans les affaires officielles de l’État. Napoléon, un homme guidé par des valeurs et non par l’argent, était entièrement dévoué à la France et plaçait le peuple et la grandeur de sa nation avant sa propre santé et son confort.

Jacques-Louis David - 1801 - Le Premier Consul franchissant les Alpes au col du Grand Saint-Bernard

Image: « Le Premier Consul franchissant les Alpes au col du Grand Saint-Bernard » par Jacques-Louis David (1801)

En plus d’être un génie militaire et politique, il prouva qu’un homme pouvait être un intellectuel, un soldat, un grand bâtisseur tout en étant amoureux des arts et de la musique. L’empereur avait aussi un sens de la dignité et des valeurs et voulait permettre aux gens de toutes les classes en France de croire en la capacité de grandir et de s’élever par leurs propres efforts – il voulait que tous les membres de sa société puissent rêver. Pour Napoléon, l’impossible n’était pas français ! Le code Napoléon a aussi été écrit par lui, et il a influencé des pays du monde entier en donnant à la société française une structure nécessaire pour l’ordre et la sécurité après la révolution et la terreur. Napoléon avait une vision instinctive de ce que devait être un pays moderne et fit des réformes d’une ampleur extraordinaire dans les domaines juridique, politique et économique pour les droits et les devoirs des citoyens afin de rendre fonctionnel la société d’après la révolution. Napoléon était pour moi le vrai chef des hommes et pouvait les motiver avec son honnêteté ancrée dans ses discours électrisants et il était aussi quelqu’un qui avait les qualités d’un conquérant et qui croyait qu’un empire avait besoin d’expansion pour progresser. L’empereur avait donc la grande vision d’étendre la France, sa langue et ses valeurs et semblait suivre les traces d’Alexandre le Grand comme un conquérant qui était à deux doigts de conquérir toute l’Europe. Je pense que Napoléon Bonaparte est l’exemple de la grandeur de la civilisation française et aussi la preuve que la France est la civilisation qui incarne la grandeur de l’humanité, ses rêves et les valeurs de méritocratie et d’excellence.

La Légende de Napoléon

—-|—-

 

[EN] Answer to Question VII. « Who is your all-time favourite leader and why?”

 

After a great amount of thinking and eliminating from a list constituted of Chirac, Sarkozy, Hitler, De Gaulle, Alexander the Great and Napoléon Bonaparte, I had to go with the latter, the Emperor of the French people because he turns out to be one of the most enigmatic leaders ever seen throughout the history of mankind. I believe that humanity has not had leaders of this calibre since. We have had mostly mediocre execs who became the head of political parties and played around with civilisation until their time passed while making the most to ensure a financially comfortable retirement and enough framed photographs with celebrities to hang on their walls.

Before getting to Napoleon, I have to say that there are somehow a couple of fairly decent public figures that had some elements about them that I find inspiring. We have the former French president Chirac, who I believe had an incredibly charismatic and magnetic personality who also embodied the French “joie de vivre” and had a touch of an eternal youth about his character, and this touch of humanity about him is admirable because I believe being human is one factor that is fundamental to manage other humans. Chirac loved the crowds and was at home with people from all walks of life while also having a great sense of humour.

Another French president that I also find inspiring is Nicola Sarkozy, who also is a great example of assimilation and someone who also faced many obstacles in his early years as the son of Hungarian and the grandson of a Jew but who eventually overcame everything and everyone to prove himself as a true Frenchman who had France in his heart. Sarkozy is also the one who inspires others to rise up, unlike many of today’s selfish personalities who, once within a party, seem to hate the younger generations and act as vile and frustrated animals towards tomorrow’s prominent figures.

Hitler too was also a case of great assimilation and having spoken about what I find inspiring about him above, I think we can skip to the last one, which is Charles de Gaulle. The latter, is to me a great example of a man who knew what he wanted and who had a grand vision of a civilisation along with an exemplary modesty who did not selfishly drown himself in luxury but thought of the state and the people before his own comfort. The other admirable thing about de Gaulle was that he had gained the confidence of France to lead freely like a monarch and is perhaps today known as the last “democratic King of France”.

The last one before Napoleon is Alexander the Great, who was the only person of Indo-European heritage to have nearly conquered the world starting from Greece to the Indus River. He was a general and an explorer who was also incredibly cultivated from his teachings by the great Aristotle who had taught him science, philosophy, literature and combat techniques – all the necessary skills for a future great leader. From his early years he endured an incredibly demanding father who expected him to never be weak and to be the greatest in all fields. Alexander had a thirst for knowledge and was inspired by the Greek model and wanted to be the best like Achilles the legendary hero of Greek mythology who was told by his father that to behave like a man he would have to be the best and have a better judgement. After being taught by Aristotle for 3 years, Alexander would later say that he loved Aristotle as a father and if his biological father gave him life, it was Aristotle who showed him how to live. The latter told him how the Persian empire extended to the end of the world until India, and how their king had invaded Greece about a 100 years ago, destroying all the cities, taking over Athens and burning down the Acropolis before the Greeks could unite and drive out the Persians. Aristotle had also told Alexander how the Persians were a permanent menace with their troops amassed at the doorsteps of Greece with the tomb of the valorous Achilles still in their hands, and that the dream of eternal glory lies in the act of uniting the Greeks and chasing the Persian troops as this would be the act of a hero. His father had told him that he should find an empire to his size since Greece is too small. After he started conquering Persia, he defeated the army of Darius although outnumbered by the latter and made the mother, the wife and sisters prisoners. In an act of chivalry he would even promise them that they would be treated with respect and that none of his men would be unpunished if they disrespected Persian women, to the anger and frustration of one of his closest and most talented generals, Philotas. He would tell the latter that after their bravery and heroic win against the Persian army, how could they act like cowards with their women? Alexander continued his exploration and nearly took over the world with many cities including Babylon receiving him as a liberator – he wanted to surpass his ancestors. But perhaps one of his noblest declaration was his desire to have been Diogenes the Cynic if he had not been Alexander. Diogenes was one of the most famous philosophers from the school of cynic philosophy whose character had a profound impact on the Athenians through a mass of legendary anecdotes. This shows that deep in his heart, Alexander was not motivated by luxury or money, but truly wanted to build a noble civilisation of sophisticated and humane people. It also shows his sensibility and ability to relate to modest people but more importantly his wisdom in assessing the greatness of a man not based on his possessions or clothes but solely based on his intelligence and the contents of his discourse; because Diogenes lived outside, in destitution, dressed in a simple coat, with a stick, a bag and a bowl. Denouncing the artifice of social conventions, Diogenes advocated a simple life, closer to nature, and was satisfied with a large jar lying on its side to sleep. Diogenes had the art of invective and biting speech. It seems that he did not hesitate to openly criticize the great men and other philosophers of his time (among whom Plato). The most famous apostrophes attributed to him are:

« I am looking for a man » – (meaning a true, good and wise man), a phrase he used to utter to his amazed fellow citizens as he walked the streets, brandishing his lantern lit in broad daylight and approaching the faces of passers-by.

« Get out of my sun » – (dazzling reply to Alexander the Great, King of Macedonia, who had kindly come to see him and asked him if he needed something, if he could help him in any way… – Yes, get out of my sun, Diogenes replied.)

Several anecdotes testify to Diogenes’ disregard for wealth and social conventions. According to Diogène Laërce, he did not hesitate to beg with the statues in order to « get used to the refusal ». He abandoned his bowl after seeing a child drinking at the fountain in his hands. When asked about how to avoid the temptation of the flesh, Diogenes would have replied « by masturbating », and would have added: « It would be better for heaven that it is also enough to rub your stomach to no longer be hungry!” Diogenes was also reportedly seen walking the streets of Athens in broad daylight, with a lantern in his hand, saying to those who asked him what he was doing: « I am looking for a man. « (sometimes translated as « I am looking for man » or « I am looking for a real man »). This « man » would designate the one theorized by Plato, the ideal of the human being, and Diogenes would have wanted to refute his existence, seeing only concrete men exist. Another anecdote reports that, Plato having defined man as a « biped without horns and feathers », the next day Diogenes walked around the city holding in his hand a deplumed rooster with dewclaws cut off, and declaring: « This is Plato’s man!” Diogenes first lived as a free man, but as he was heading for Aegina by boat, the latter was taken by pirates. Put up for sale as a slave in Corinth, he declared to the merchant who asked him what he could do that he knew how to « govern men », and that he must therefore be sold to someone who is looking for a master. He ended up being bought by a rich Corinthian who admired his independence of mind, and who gave him his freedom.

Alexander_visits_Diogenes_at_Corinth_by_W._Matthews_(1914) dpurb site web

Alexander visits Diogenes at Corinth by W. Matthews (1914)

It is in Corinth, where Diogenes lived when he was not in Athens, that the famous meeting of the old bum-philosopher with the young king of Macedonia, Alexander the Great, took place. This episode is told in particular by Plutarch in the Life of Alexander, XVIII, by Cicero in the Tusculans, 5, XXXII, and by Diogenes Laertius in the Lives of Philosophers, Book VI.

Here is the most complete version of their conversation:

 » – Ask me what you want, I’ll give it to you.

– Get out of my sun (literally: “Stay away from my sun for a while.”)

– Aren’t you afraid of me?

– What are you?….. A good or a bad?

– A good one.

– Who could fear good?

Diogenes had asked that after his death, his body be thrown on the streets, but his friends gave him an honorable funeral. A column surmounted by a marble dog was placed on his tomb and on which the following verses were written:

“Even bronze undergoes the ageing of time,
But your fame, Diogenes, eternity will not destroy it.
For only you have shown mortals the glory of an independent life
And the easiest path to happy life to follow.”

Today Alexander the Great’s heritage is present in politics along with legends and in literature. He envisioned a universal empire where societies would have an autonomous administration and could co-exist peacefully under an imperial government. Alexander did not only conquer the world; he changed the course of its history forever.

But my all-time favourite leader is Napoleon. Napoleon for his grandeur in nearly everything along with his motivating and inspiring presence that touched men and women from all around the world. Napoleon is someone I seem to connect to because he is perhaps one of the greatest stories of amazing assimilation and rose from a simple military, to general, consul then emperor and all through the acknowledgement of the whole country. Napoleon is inspiring to me because like myself he was not born in France, but left his home in Corsica and went to study in France. In his early years, he did not even handle the French language properly and had a strong Corsican accent, and he was also bullied in college while at Brienne, an elite academy and was treated as a little foreign immigrant in these early years. Yet, with such dedication, as an already amazing student and a great self-educated solitary, he would read all the great minds of Europe, cultivate himself and become one of the greatest Frenchmen to ever live. Indeed, from the little foreigner with a dodgy accent, to then become more French than the French, and rise to become the Emperor is truly inspiring. Before receiving his crown on the day of his coronation after the people of France had decided to make him Emperor of the French republic, he turned around and looked to his brother saying, in Corsican « sì u nostru babbu ci hà vistu », meaning « if our father could see us ». This shows that although he embodied France in his heart he was respectful of his humble past as he rose from simple lieutenant to Emperor in only 11 years. Napoleon was also a perfect example of the Organic Theory in self-creation, development, evolution and definition in a sophisticated society that believes in the creative force within the individual to achieve his dreams. Napoleon was also a man who personified courage, both on the battlefield and in official matters of the State. Napoleon, was a man guided by values and not by money, and was completely dedicated to France and put the people and the grandeur of his nation before his own health and comfort. In addition to being a military and political genius, he proved that a man could be an intellectual, a soldier, a great builder while being in love with the arts and music. The emperor also had a sense of dignity and values and wanted to allow people of all classes in France to believe in the ability to grow and rise through their own efforts – he wanted all members of his society to be able to dream. For Napoleon, the impossible was not French! The Napoleonic code was also written by him, and he influenced countries all over the world by giving the French society a necessary structure for order and security after the revolution and terror. Napoleon had an instinctive vision of what a modern country should be and made extraordinary reforms in the legal, political and economic fields for the rights and duties of citizens in order to make society functional after the revolution. Napoleon was for me the true leader of men and could motivate them with his honesty rooted in his electrifying speeches and he was also someone who had the qualities of a conqueror and who believed that an empire needed expansion to progress. The emperor therefore had the great vision to extend France, its language and values and seemed to follow in Alexander the Great’s footsteps as a conqueror who was on the brink of conquering all of Europe. I think that Napoleon Bonaparte is an example of the greatness of French civilization and also the proof that France is the civilization that embodies the greatness of humanity, its dreams and the values of meritocracy and excellence.

 

_________________________________

 

 

QUESTION VIII.

[FR] – Avez-vous l’intention de vous lancer en politique?

[EN] – Do you plan in getting into politics?

 

[FR] Réponse:

 

Après avoir constamment critiqué les systèmes politiques mondiaux et la race des politiciens pour la plupart médiocres, corrompus et désagréables qui ont fait surface au cours des 5-6 dernières décennies, il serait certainement controversé que je réponde « oui » à cette question. Cela semblerait hypocrite à mon auditoire. J’ai toujours pensé qu’il était de mon devoir de guider la civilisation sur la bonne voie et je crois fermement que le modèle actuel de gouvernement politique n’est pas approprié pour atteindre un tel objectif.

La démocratie est un concept qui donne une voix au peuple, mais la politique est quelque chose de très différent qui n’est pas à l’abri des âmes immorales et corrompues et de leur égoïsme. En plus d’avoir constamment critiqué la politique comme un concept dépassé et mal appliqué qui découle d’une mauvaise application de la démocratie, ainsi que les politiciens qui, tout au long de la civilisation, ont joué un rôle significatif dans les tragédies de la civilisation humaine, ce ne serait certainement pas ma fierté de devenir un homme politique.

Là où la corruption fait rage dans le monde

Là où la corruption fait rage dans le monde / Source: Statista

Les organisations connues sous le nom de « partis politiques » sont à l’origine d’un grand nombre de problèmes auxquels la civilisation humaine est confrontée, puisqu’il s’agit de diviser la population en segments qui correspondent à leurs politiques de gauche, du centre et de droite. Je ne voudrais donc jamais être considéré comme un « politicien », mais plutôt comme un leader d’êtres humains sans affiliation politique parce qu’ils imposent trop à la vision créative d’un grand leader et conduisent à trop de concessions pour satisfaire les donateurs et satisfaire des motifs financiers qui ne sont pas vraiment dans l’intérêt de la nation et du pays. Je crois en la science et la philosophie et je considère les gens comme des organismes d’un système que nous devons trouver un moyen de synchroniser pour réaliser le rêve d’une civilisation noble et sophistiquée. Même la logique de ma théorie organique conduit à la même conclusion.

Ainsi, aujourd’hui, en 2019, j’ai pu toucher les esprits et les cœurs des gens grâce aux outils technologiques extraordinaires que notre civilisation moderne nous a donnés, et il y a peut-être 200 ans, il serait impossible de se bâtir une réputation publique et de se faire un nom en tant que leader sans un parti, des donateurs et des fonds.

Pourtant, pour changer la vie des gens et le système qui est utilisé pour les gérer aujourd’hui, il n’est malheureusement pas possible de le faire sans emprunter la voie sale de la politique. Je ne peux donc pas dire avec certitude que je n’emprunterai jamais cette voie, car c’est peut-être la seule, jusqu’à ce que quelqu’un de sophistiqué et de juste change le système et en crée un nouveau qui puisse gouverner les hommes et apporter la stabilité dans la gestion de la civilisation tout en appliquant la démocratie de manière optimale.

Pourtant, si jamais je me lance en politique, je veux que les gens sachent que je ne me qualifierai jamais comme politicien, mais comme un homme qui veut conduire sa civilisation et ses hommes et femmes à la grandeur. Les termes « politique » et « homme politique » sont aujourd’hui des symboles d’inadéquation, de corruption, de méchanceté, de mesquinerie, de division, d’égoïsme, de mensonge, de tromperie et bien d’autres choses qui ne sont pas dans l’intérêt du genre humain.

Louis Léopold Boilly, Etude de trente-cinq têtes d'expression, 1825 Danny D'Purb dpurb site web

Image: « Etude de trente-cinq têtes d’expression », vers 1825 par Louis Léopold Boilly

Je m’efforcerai de faire de tout cela une histoire morte et de construire un nouveau système.

Aujourd’hui, nous vivons dans un monde où la corruption fait rage et même les associations connues sous le nom de « presse libre » se sont transformées en outils politiques qui n’ont absolument aucune valeur et aucun respect pour la société et ses citoyens. Bien sûr, je ne dis pas que tous les journalistes sont des êtres méchants et vils parce que nous avons une petite section d’écrivains et de chroniqueurs vraiment travailleurs, nobles, authentiques et professionnels qui sont des maîtres dans leur domaine spécialisé, mais pour la majorité, ils semblent être simplement des outils d’écriture médiocres dans la couverture d’événements et des pantins de diffamation appartenant entièrement aux entreprises pour lesquelles ils travaillent – des écrivains du dimanche sans âme, sans art littéraire, amour des mots, profondeur de réflexion, vision, style ou philosophie. Cette race particulière d’ordure a tendance à jeter de la saleté sur les gens par ordre et s’ils le font avec moi aujourd’hui, ils le feront demain avec vous, vos enfants et les enfants de vos enfants.

interet-independance-170119-v563471485088556165_0_579_591 indépendance des journalistes

L’indépendance des journalistes / Source: LaCroix

Par conséquent, nous ne pouvons pas rester dociles en tant que société si nous voulons créer un système équitable et transmettre à nos enfants la liberté pour laquelle beaucoup sont morts et aussi le droit de s’élever par leurs propres efforts dans une société juste et noble qui croit aux débats et aux arguments sophistiqués et non à l’intimidation et aux moqueries sans raison qui étouffe les idées incroyables et détourne l’attention aux bêtises. En effet, j’ai été l’objet de beaucoup de méchanceté de la part de la presse qui sert ses maîtres politiques.

chartoftheday_13561_cote_confiance_popularite_presidents_francais_n danny d'purb dpurb com

L’inévitable chutes des Présidents auprès des Français / Source: Statista

La seule question qui me frappe toujours quand ces imbéciles essaient de se moquer de moi, c’est « Qu’est-ce que je pourrais apprendre de toi ? », c’est-à-dire « Avec quelles connaissances concrètes et intelligentes pourraient-ils m’éclairer ? » Probablement pas grand-chose ! La plupart du temps, c’est moi qui ai envie de dire « Si les limites de votre intelligence et de votre cerveau empêchent la compréhension en raison du niveau de l’écriture, une question poliment posée en levant la main semble être une démarche productive. »

Les Limites de votre intelligence et de votre cerveau danny d'purb dpurb site web

Traduction(EN): »If the limits of your intelligence and brain prevent understanding because of the level of the writings, a politely asked question while raising one’s hand seems like a productive move. »

Ainsi, il semble assez évident qu’une grande métaphore pour expliquer la façon dont je perçois les outils corrompus, vils et bas de gamme de la presse, serait un « insecte », oui, dans son propre cirque avec d’autres insectes, dans une sorte de comédie où la médiocrité par frustration essaie de noyer le noble débat académique, scientifique, philosophique, psychologique et logique dans une mesquinerie absolue. Pour citer Aymeric Caron: «Un ver de terre n’a évidemment pas le même rapport au monde qu’un humain», et à cela j’ajouterai qu’il n’as pas non plus la connaissance culturelle, la compréhension et la perception du monde qu’un humain. Heureusement la société est devenue plus intelligente en 2019 et les gens brillants savent maintenant que plus rien ne peut suffoquer la véritable intelligence, la science, la philosophie, la psychologie et la raison. En fait, je ne peux pas permettre qu’une telle mesquinerie me fasse perdre mon temps, en effet je sais que j’ai affaire à des insectes inférieurs parce que je suis un personnage assez connu dans le monde depuis près d’une décennie maintenant et ils n’ont toujours pas eu le cran et le courage de me faire face devant une audience publique avec leurs voix tremblantes et leurs arguments paysans auxquels je ne pense pas même devoir me préparer, du moins dans la majorité des cas.

Mes arguments sont donc une façon de dire que la noblesse d’esprit, l’intelligence et la classe ne s’inclineront jamais devant des insectes frustrés. Je crois qu’ils devraient aussi arrêter de rêver parce que je ne leur dois absolument rien, à eux et à leur cirque comique. Les seuls domaines auxquels je dois des choses sont ceux de la recherche, de la psychologie, de la philosophie, de la littérature, de la poésie et des arts et il y a des livres sur lesquels je travaille actuellement. Il semble que ces personnes puissent souffrir d’une certaine forme légère de trouble d’apprentissage parce qu’elles ne cessent de répéter des débats qui ont déjà été scellés, comme si elles jetaient constamment leur propre insécurité sur les autres pour voir comment elles réagissent. J’ai déjà expliqué que les insécurités d’une personne n’affectent pas le monde entier, mais seulement cette personne qui peut avoir besoin d’une intervention psychologique pour évoluer vers un être éclairé. C’est comme s’ils ne pouvaient pas lire et comprendre la bonne science et le bon raisonnement, ou peut-être ne veulent-ils pas « comprendre ». Ils ne réalisent pas non plus que chacune de leurs tentatives enfantines de dénigrer les gens décrit leur insécurité et leur peur de gérer des débats intelligents et que de plus en plus de gens commencent à comprendre leur routine sale et abjecte, ce qui peut se refléter dans le nombre croissant de personnes qui ne font plus confiance à la presse du monde entier et qui ont récemment été vandalisées par le mouvement courageux et défiant « Gillet Jaune » qui donne un exemple à la foule mondiale et leur explique comment résister à la politique stupide, à l’injustice et aux idioties médiatiques.

Personnellement, en ce qui concerne la presse corrompue, j’aimerais qu’ils comprennent qu’ils ne sont pas au niveau ou à la ligue pour me faire la leçon ou me conseiller parce que la plupart d’entre eux manquent d’intelligence, de culture et de langue, alors que je suis parmi et m’engage dans des discussions sérieuses avec l’esprit des gens qui leur accordent des diplômes universitaires. Oui, je suis au cœur des choses et j’extrais des documents de revues académiques renommées, tout en étant lié à des départements à Oxford, Londres, Paris, Grenoble et même aux Etats-Unis en termes de psychologie, santé mentale, philosophie et société, et je leur explique comment se construire, s’éduquer, se cultiver, s’améliorer, gérer leur vie, leur stress, leurs perceptions, leurs comportements, leurs relations, leurs carrières et comment élever leurs enfants. Ainsi, mon message à ces gens vils est que jeter de la terre partout n’aura absolument aucun impact sur la science et la psychologie, c’est une perte de temps et d’énergie de leur part qui pourrait être investie de façon appropriée dans une autre activité (par exemple, courir pour perdre du poids), car la vie d’un individu n’a jamais été et ne sera jamais définie par les désirs et inventions de leurs esprits pathétiques, obsolètes et mal informés. En effet, il semble que seul un organisme avec l’intelligence d’un âne pourrait créer des mensonges comme eux, puis croire en leurs propres mensonges et danser sur eux, c’est absolument insensé et je crois qu’ils devraient cesser d’agir comme des enfants de 10 ans.

En ce moment, je me concentre sur l’écriture de mes livres, car je crois qu’ils contiennent un grand nombre de découvertes et d’innovations fondamentales et décisives pour la psychologie, la philosophie et les valeurs de notre civilisation fragmentée et confuse actuelle. Une fois qu’ils auront été publiés pour un large public, allant des jeunes aux plus âgés, je crois qu’ils auront présenté ma vision, ma pensée et mon orientation aux masses. Pour moi, il est fondamental que les gens comprennent mon esprit et mon cœur avant qu’ils puissent me voir comme un leader possible, parce que je veux que les gens me fassent confiance sur la base du contenu de mon cerveau, et non pour ma popularité ou pour mon visage étant sur les journaux et leurs rues par le pouvoir des portefeuilles des donateurs immoraux avec la seule intention de saigner l’état pour leur compte en banque. Cela ne veut pas dire que je suis contre les affaires ou que je suis pour une économie faible ! Bien sûr, je veux une économie forte, mais je crois aussi fermement que de bonnes affaires peuvent être totalement éthiques en respectant les sensibilités des gens et de l’environnement. Il y a des hommes d’affaires décents qui réussissent et qui ont réalisé leur rêve tout en étant éthiques, moraux et justes. Les affaires peuvent être nobles lorsqu’elles sont faites avec les bonnes valeurs, et n’ont pas besoin d’être faites aux dépens du sang du peuple, et beaucoup d’hommes d’affaires sauvages aujourd’hui ne semblent toujours pas comprendre cela et ils trouvent des moyens d’infiltrer et de détruire le système en corrompant des politiciens immoraux qui ne peuvent résister au goût de l’argent sale. Cela conduit à la souffrance et à un système sans humanité, et je m’oppose à ces scénarios parce que mon objectif est l’harmonie dans tout le système et je sais qu’il peut être atteint avec le bon leader, les bons esprits, les bons cœurs et les bonnes valeurs.

Je déteste donc le terme politique et, pour l’instant, je me concentre sur mon devoir d’éclairer et de guider la civilisation à travers mon travail intellectuel. Mon objectif est de changer le système et de le réorganiser en quelque chose de stable, efficace et honorable tout en rendant la vie des gens meilleure, plus heureuse et plus sophistiquée. Je ne peux pas dire si l’avenir me forcera à entrer dans le monde de la politique, mais je ne me présenterai jamais comme un politicien, et c’est quelque chose que je veux que les gens connaissent et ancrent dans leur esprit et dans leur cœur. Si je suis forcé de faire de la politique, ce serait pour la changer pour toujours, et même enterrer le terme politique et politiciens pour créer quelque chose de plus grand, de meilleur, de plus noble, de plus stable, de plus organisé, de plus sophistiqué et de plus civilisé.

Donc, votre réponse à cette question semble être une réponse que seul le temps peut répondre.

Alexandre le Grand - ARTE - 2016

Image: Alexandre le Grand (2011) . Arte

 

—-|—-

 

[EN] Answer to Question VIII. « Do you plan in getting into politics?”

 

After constantly criticising the political systems globally and the breed of mostly mediocre, corrupt and nasty politicians that have surfaced over the last 5-6 decades it would certainly seem controversial if I was to answer “Yes” to this question. It would come across as hypocritical to my audience. I have always thought of my duty in this lifetime to guide civilisation into the right path and firmly believe that the current model of political government is not appropriate in achieving such a goal.

Democracy is one concept that gives the people a voice, but politics is something quite different that is not safe from immoral and corrupt souls and their selfishness. Besides having constantly criticised politics as an outdated and badly applied concept that stems from the wrong application of democracy, along with politicians who throughout civilisation have played a significant part in the tragedies on human civilisation, it would certainly not be my pride to become a politician.

Organisations known as “Political parties” are at the root of a tremendous amount of problems that human civilisation faces, since it involves dividing the people into segments that fit their policies into left, centre and right. So, I would never want to be seen as a “politician”, but rather a leader of human beings without any party affiliation because they impose too much on the creative vision of a great leader and leads to far too many concessions to please donors and satisfy financial motives that are not truly for the benefit of the nation and country. I believe in science and philosophy and see people as organisms of a system that we must find a way to synchronise to achieve the dream of a noble and sophisticated civilisation. Even the logic of my Organic Theory leads to the same conclusion.

So, today in 2019, I have been able to reach minds and hearts among the people through the amazing technological tools that our modern civilisation has given us, and perhaps 200 years ago, building a public reputation and a name for oneself as a leader would be impossible without a party, donors and funds.

Yet, in order to change the life of people and the system that is used to manage them today, it is sadly not possible without taking the filthy route of politics. So, I cannot say for sure that I will never take this route, since it may be the only route until someone sophisticated and righteous changes the system and sets up a new one that can govern men and bring stability to the management of civilisation while also applying democracy in an optimal way.

Yet, if I ever get into politics, I want the people to know that I will never qualify myself as a politician, but a man who wants to lead his civilisation and his men and women to greatness. The term “politics” and “politician” are today symbols of inadequacy, corruption, nastiness, pettiness, division, selfishness, lies, deceit and so much more that are not for the benefit of mankind.

I will work towards making all this dead history and build a new system.

Today, we are living in a world where corruption is raging and even associations known as the “Free Press” have today been turned into political tools that have absolutely no values or respect for society and its citizens. Of course, I am not saying that all journalists are evil and vile beings because we do have a small section of truly hardworking, noble, genuine and professional writers and columnists out there who are masters in their specialised field, but for the majority they seem to be simply tools of mediocre writing in reporting events and puppets of defamation completely owned by the companies they work for – soulless Sunday scribblers without any literary artistry, love of the written word, depth of thought, vision, style or philosophy. This particular breed of scum tends to throw dirt on people by order and if they do it with me today, tomorrow they will do it with you, your children and the children of your children. Hence, we cannot remain docile as a society if we want to create a fair system and also pass down to our children the freedom that many died for and also the right to rise through their own efforts in a fair and noble society that believes in sophisticated debates and arguments and not mindless bullying and mockery that smothers incredible ideas and diverts attention to petty nonsense. Indeed, I have been at the receiving end of a lot of nastiness from the press who serve their political masters.

The only question that always strikes me when these imbeciles try to mock me is “What could I learn from you?”, meaning what “concrete and intelligent knowledge could they enlighten me with?” Probably nothing much! Most of the time, it is myself who feel like saying « If the limits of your intelligence and brain prevent the comprehension due to the level of the writings, a politely asked question while raising one’s hand seems like a productive move. ». So, it seems fairly obvious that a great metaphor to explain the way I perceive the corrupt, vile and cheap tools of the press, would be an “insect”, yes, in its own circus along with other insects, in a sort of comedy where mediocrity out of frustration is trying to drown noble academic, scientific, philosophical, psychological and logical debate with absolute pettiness. To quote Aymeric Caron: « An earthworm obviously does not have the same relationship to the world as a human being », and to that I would add that it also does not have the cultural knowledge, the understanding and the perception of the world of a human being. Luckily society has become smarter in 2019 and today smart people know that nothing will smother true intelligence, science, philosophy, psychology and reasoning. In fact, I cannot allow such pettiness to waste my time, indeed I know I am dealing with inferior insects because I have been a fairly known figure to the world for nearly a decade now and they still have not had the guts and the courage to face me in front of a public audience with their trembling voices and their peasant arguments to which I do not believe I would even have to prepare myself – for the majority at least.

So, my arguments are a way of saying that nobility of the mind, intelligence and class will never bow down to frustrated insects. I believe they should also stop dreaming because I owe absolutely nothing to them and their comedic circus. The only domain I owe things to are those of research, psychology, philosophy, literature, poetry and arts and there are books that I am currently working on. It seems that these people may suffer from some mild form of learning disability because they keep repeating debates that have already been sealed, as if constantly throwing their own insecurities at others to see how they react. I have already explained that the insecurities of one person do not affect the whole world, but that person only who may need psychological intervention to evolve into an enlightened being. It is as if they cannot read and understand good science and reasoning, or perhaps they “do not want to understand”. They also fail to realise that every one of their childish attempts to vilify people portrays their insecurity and fear to handle intelligent debates and more and more people are beginning to understand their filthy and abject routine and this may be reflected in the growing amount of people who do not trust the press anymore from all over the world with newspaper stands recently being vandalised by the courageous and defiant “Gillet Jaune” movement of France who gave an example and a tutorial to the sheep crowd of the world on how to stand up to political stupidity and press abuse and idiocy.

Personally, regarding the corrupt press business, I would like for them to understand that they are not at the level or league to lecture or advise me because most of them lack intelligence, culture and language, while I am among and engaging in serious discussions with the minds that award people like them academic qualifications. Yes, I am at the heart of things and I extract documents from renowned academic journals, while being linked to departments in Oxford, London, Paris, Grenoble and even the United States in terms of psychology, mental health, philosophy and society, and I explain to them how to build, educate, cultivate, improve themselves, manage their lives, stress, perceptions, behaviours, relationships, careers and how to raise their children. So, my message to these vile people is that throwing dirt all over the place will not have absolutely any impact of science and psychology, it is a waste of time and energy from them that could be invested appropriately in another activity [e.g. jogging to lose weight], because the life of an individual has never been, and will never be defined by the desires and inventions of pathetic, outdated and misinformed minds.

L'Âne blanc

Image: Donkeys

Indeed, it seems that only an organism with the intelligence of a donkey could create lies like them, then believe in their own lies and dance to them, this is absolutely senseless and I believe that they should stop acting like 10 year old children.

At the moment, I am focussed on writing my books, since I believe they contain a great amount of fundamental, life-changing and pivotal discoveries and innovations to the psychology, philosophy and values of our current fragmented and confused civilisation. Once, they are published for a wide audience, ranging from the young to the old, I believe they will have introduced my vision, train of thought and direction to the masses. To me, it is fundamental that the people understand my mind and heart before they can see me as a possible leader, because I want people to trust me based on the contents of my brain, and not for my popularity or for my face being on petty papers and their streets through the power of the purse of immoral donors with the sole intention to bleed the state for their bank accounts. This does not mean that I am against business or stand for a weak economy! Of course, I want a strong economy, but I also firmly believe that good business can be completely ethical by respecting the sensibilities of the people and the environment. There are decent businessmen out there who are successful and have achieved their dream while also being ethical, moral and righteous. Business can be noble when done with the right values, and does not need to be done at the expense of the people’s blood, and many savage businessmen today still do not seem to understand this and they find ways to infiltrate and destroy the system by corrupting immoral politicians who cannot resist the taste of dirty money. This leads to suffering, and a system without any humanity, and I am against these scenarios because my aim is harmony across the system and I know that it can be achieved with the right leader, the right minds, the right hearts and the right values.

So, I hate the term politics, and for the time being I am focussed in my duty of enlightening and guiding civilisation through my intellectual work. My aim is to change the system and re-organise it into something stable, efficient and honourable while making the life of the people better, happier and more sophisticated. I cannot tell if the future will force me into the world of politics, but I will never portray myself as a politician, and this is something I want the people to know and embed in their minds and hearts. If I am forced into politics, it would be to change it forever, and even bury the term politics and politicians to create something bigger, better, nobler, more stable, grander, and truly sophisticated and civilised.

So, your answer to this question seems one that only time can tell.

 

_________________________________

 

QUESTION IX.

[FR] – Si vous avez la possibilité de le faire à l’avenir, quels changements proposeriez-vous pour un meilleur système de gestion de l’État ?

[EN] – If you have the chance to do so in the future, what changes would you propose towards a better system of management for the state?

 

 

[FR] CET ARTICLE EST EN COURS D’ÉDITION ET SERA ENTIÈREMENT MIS À JOUR DANS LES MOIS À VENIR

[EN] THIS ARTICLE IS CURRENTLY BEING EDITED AND WILL BE FULLY UPDATED IN THE COMING MONTHS

 

 

 

 

Mis à jour le Samedi, 3 Août 2019 | Danny J. D’Purb | DPURB.com

____________________________________________________

Bien que le but de la communauté de dpurb.com ait toujours été et sera toujours de se concentrer sur une culture moderne et progressiste, le progrès humain, la recherche scientifique, l’avancement philosophique et un avenir en harmonie avec notre environnement naturel, les efforts inlassables dans la recherche et la fourniture à notre précieux public des dernières et meilleures informations dans divers domaines ont malheureusement leur coût sur nos administrateurs très humains, qui malgré le temps sacrifié et le plaisir de contribuer à l’avancement de notre monde grâce aux discussions sensibles et idées novatrices, doivent gérer les contraintes qui testent même le plus fort d’esprit. Votre précieux soutien assurerait que notre travail demeure à la hauteur de ses normes et rappellerait à nos administrateurs que leurs efforts sont appréciés tout en vous permettant de ressentir une certaine fierté par notre cheminement vers une civilisation humaine éclairée. Votre soutien bénéficierait à une cause qui se concentre sur l’humanité, les générations actuelles et futures.

On vous remercie encore une fois de votre temps.

N’hésitez pas à nous soutenir en envisageant de faire un don.

Sincèrement,

L’équipe @ dpurb.com

 

____________________________________________________

While the aim of the community at dpurb.com has  been & will always be to focus on a modern & progressive culture, human progress, scientific research, philosophical advancement & a future in harmony with our natural environment; the tireless efforts in researching & providing our valued audience the latest & finest information in various fields unfortunately takes its toll on our very human admins, who along with the time sacrificed & the pleasure of contributing in advancing our world through sensitive discussions & progressive ideas, have to deal with the stresses that test even the toughest of minds. Your valued support would ensure our work remains at its standards and remind our admins that their efforts are appreciated while also allowing you to take pride in our journey towards an enlightened human civilization. Your support would benefit a cause that focuses on mankind, current & future generations.

Thank you once again for your time.

Please feel free to support us by considering a donation.

Sincerely,

The Team @ dpurb.com

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Essay // Psychoanalysis: History, Foundations, Legacy, Impact & Evolution

Hampstead dpurb.com d'purb website Psychoanalysis

Photographie: Danny D’Purb © 2008

History and Background

In contemporary psychology, the psychoanalytic movement’s place is both unique and paradoxical. Focussing on the study of the mind as a “software” running on the brain as the “hardware”, psychoanalysis remains the only discipline that truly focuses on the mechanism and processes behind our thoughts. Unlike empirical behavioural science and other “cogno-sciences” that can be fairly barbaric and obstinate in the forced application of the rigid mathematical and systematic procedures embedded in the classic scientific method when dealing with an entity as complex and organic as the human mind; psychoanalysis has remained focussed in understanding human psychology by capturing it in all its details, depths, dimensions and linguistic aspects.

The scientific method although a proven mathematical approach to inquiries in the hard sciences [e.g. biology, medecine, physics, chemistry, astrophysics, material science, astronomy, etc], shows its limitations when used as a tool for psychological inquiry in the measurement of variables that are incredibly hard to measure such as emotions, values, motives, desires, libidinous intensity or dreams. It is also fair noting that humans are different from simple organisms, molecules or robots, hence psychoanalysis remains the only discipline focused on the mind [the software] assuming that most human beings have a physiologically healthy brain [the hardware].

However, modern sciences have discovered how abnormalities in the brain’s physiology due to birth defects or injury may result in behavioural problems linked to a deficient mind due to the defective brain [hardware] at its disposal. Hence, nowadays most good intellectuals in the field of psychoanalysis would likely be a better psychologist with an in-depth knowledge of the physiology of the brain, i.e. the major areas affecting core functions such as speech [Wernicke and Broca’s], vision [the occipital lobe], and motor abilities [parietal lobe], etc.

Cerveau & Fontions dpurb-com

This is because some psychological problems may on rare occasion be caused by brain injuries or physiological abnormality due to virus, trauma, stroke or injury. In those cases where such a scenario materialises, the psychotherapist may refer the patient to a neurosurgeon who may be more appropriate to inspect the extent of the problems on the defective brain [hardware] which may lead to a clearer perspective of the limitations being imposed on the mind of the affected individual and how it impacts processes such as the conscious, the preconscious and the unconscious [based on Sigmund Freud’s 1st ground breaking theory of mental life, the Topographic Model, which was also adopted by Jacques Lacan who argued convincingly that post-Freudian psychoanalysts had swayed too far from the fundamental concepts and turned psychoanalysis into a confusing genre].

However, as we are in the developmental stages of conception of the organic theory, a theory that takes the focus on the individual organism’s creative ability to another level, we are going to remain focussed on the mind. The organic theory was inspired by the brain’s magnificent ability to learn any age, and thus give the individual human organism the ability and freedom to define, create, redefine, recreate and shape itself based on its inherited and acquired abilities, desires and personal constructionist developments throughout its life – yes, the individual does have choices and these impact the person’s internal working model of mental life and the person as a whole along with his or her environment.

While psychoanalysis remains one of the most widely known schools of psychology it is perhaps not universally understood. The founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud is perhaps one of the most famous psychologist of the last century even if his chosen discipline, psychoanalysis, has little in common with the other schools of thought and psychology.

Psychoanalysis views the mind as an active, dynamic and self-generating entity, and this is in the German tradition of mental life [it was also a founding assumption for Jean Piaget as he developed his Theory of Cognitive Development in Children].

Exploding Raphaelesque Head - Salvador Dali (1951) dpurb d'purb website

« Tête Raphaélesque Éclatée » par Salvador Dali (1951)

It is also important to note that Freud was trained in hard sciences, yet his system shows little appreciation for systematic and reductionist empiricism. As a physician, Freud used his observational skills to build his system within a medical framework, basing his theory on individual case studies. He did not depart from his understanding of 19th-century science in the effort to organise his observations, neither did he attempt to test his hypotheses rigorously through independent verification. As he testified, he was psychoanalysis and did not tolerate dissension from his orthodox views. Nevertheless, Freud had a tremendous impact on 20th century psychology, perhaps more importantly, the influence of psychoanalysis on Western thought, as reflected in literature, philosophy and art, significantly exceeds the impact any other system of psychology.

 

The Active Mind

OrangeLightFlowers-dpurb-com-1200

Photographie: Danny D’Purb © 2012

Going back to the philosophical foundations of modern psychology in Germany during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, we found that the tradition of Leibniz and Kant clearly emphasised mental activity. This is in contrast to British empiricism, which assumed the mind to be a passive entity [such as a sponge that simply soaks in what is thrown at it]. The German tradition held the most logical and creative assumption that the mind itself generates and structures human experience in characteristic ways [being « active »]. Whether through Leibniz’s monadology or Kant’s categories, the psychology of the individual could be understood only by examining the dynamic, inherent activity of the mind.

Throughout the years, as psychology evolved into an independent discipline in the latter part of the 19th century under Wundt’s tutelage, the British model of mental passivity served as a guiding philosophy. Clearly, Wundt’s empiricistic formulation was at odds with German philosophical precedents, recognised by both Stumpf and Brentano. Act psychology and the psychology of non-sensory consciousness represented by the Würzburg School were closer to the German philosophical assumptions of mental activity than to Wundt’s structural psychology. The Gestalt movement encompassed these alternatives to Wundt’s psychology in Germany. Eventually, as the rational outcome guided intellectuals, Wundt’s system was replaced by Gestalt psychology, turning into the dominant psychology in Germany prior to World War II – one based on a model of the mind that admitted inherent organisational activity.

The assumptions underlying mental activity in Gestalt psychology were highly qualified, where construct for mind involves the organisation of perception, based on the principle of isomorphism, which resulted in a predisposition toward patterns of personal-environmental interactions. The focus on organisation meant that the way of mental processes, not their content, was inherently structured. In other words, individuals were not born with specific ideas, energies, or other content in the mind; rather, the organisational structure was inherited to acquire mental contents in characteristic ways. Accordingly, the Gestalt movement, while rightly rejecting the rigidity of Wundt’s empiricistic assumptions and concepts, did not reject empiricism completely [as a technique to study some basic and easily defined variables (such as traits) and their relation(s) to others]. Instead, the Gestaltists advocated a compromise between the empiricist basis of British philosophy and the German model of activity. Consequently, this opened psychological investigation to the study of complex problem-solving and perceptual processes.

Consistent with the Gestalt foundations, psychoanalysis was firmly grounded in an active model of mental processes, however it shared little of the Gestalt commitment to empiricism. Freud’s views on personality were consistent not only with the activities of mental processing suggested by Leibniz and Kant, but also with the 19th century belief in conscious and unconscious levels of mental activity. In acknowledging the teachings of such philosophers as Von Hartman and Schopenhauer [Read the Essay on our Review of « Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung »(The World as Will and Idea), Freud developed motivational principles that depended on energy forces beyond the level of self-awareness.

Schopenhauer

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 – 1860)

Moreover, for Freud, the development of personality was determined by individual, unconscious adaptation to these forces. The details of personality development as formulated by Freud are outlined below; however, is also important to recognise the fundamental basis of Freud’s thinking. Psychoanalysis is based on the implication of mental activity further than any other system of psychology. As a major representative of a reliance on mental activity to account for personality, psychoanalysis is set apart from other movements in contemporary psychology. In addition, psychoanalysis unlike the other branches of psychology, did not emerge from empirical academic research; rather it was the product of the applied consequences of clinical practice [i.e. it was a force that was born on the field to treat mental problems as they surfaced throughout human history].

 

The Treatment of Mental Illness

Besides being the founder of the psychoanalytic movement in modern psychology, Freud is also remembered for his efforts in pioneering the upgrade in the treatment of mental and behavioural abnormalities, and was instrumental in psychiatry’s recognition as a branch of medicine that specifically deals with psychopathology. Before Freud’s works in attempting to devise effective methods of treating the mentally ill, individuals who deviated from socially acceptable norms were usually treated as if they were criminals or demonically possessed. Although shocking controversies in the contemporary treatment of mental deviancy appear occasionally, not too long ago such abuses were often the rule rather than the exception.

The treatment of mental illnesses was never a pleasant chapter in Western civilisation and it has been pointed out many times that abnormal behaviour is often mixed up with criminal behaviour as with heresy and treason. Even during the period of enlightenment during the European Renaissance, the cruelties and tortures of the inquisition were readily adapted to treat what we nowadays qualify as mental illness. Witchcraft continued to offer a reasonable explanation to such eccentric behaviour until recent times. Prisons were established to house criminals, paupers, and the insane without any differentiation. Mental illness was viewed as governed by evil or obscure forces, and the mentally ill were looked upon as crazed by such weird influences such as moon rays. Lunatics or “moonstruck” persons, were appropriately kept in lunatic asylums. As recently as the latter part of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the institution of for the insane in Utica, New York, which was progressive by the standards of the time, was called the Utica Lunatic Asylum. The name reflected the prevailing attitude toward mental illness.

Philippe_Pinel_à_la_Salpêtrière_dpurb_1200

« Dr. Philippe Pinel at the Salpêtrière », 1795 by Tony Robert-Fleury. Pinel ordering the removal of chains from patients at the Paris Asylum for insane women

Reforms in the treatment of the institutionalised insane were slowly introduced during the 19th century. In 1794, Philippe Pinel (1745 – 1826) was appointed the chief of hospitals for the insane in Paris, and managed to improve both the attitude toward and the treatment of the institutionalised insane. In the United States, Dorothea Dix (1802 – 1887) accomplished the most noticeable reforms in the treatment of the mentally ill. Beginning in 1841, Dix led a campaign to improve the condition of indigent, mentally ill persons kept in jails and in poorhouses. However, these reforms succeeded in improving only the physical surroundings and maintenance conditions of the mentally ill; legitimate treatment was minimal. [Even today, in 2018, the US seems to have more people with eccentric behaviours and with questionable mental stability, for example, Donald Trump, who has been singled out as being mentally ill by more than one. See: (1) The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, (2) Trump Is ‘Mentally Ill’ Says Former Vermont Governor and Doctor Howard Dean, (3) American psycho? Donald Trump’s mental health is still a question, (4) Psychiatrist: Trump Mental Health Urgently Deteriorating & (5) Stanford’s Zimbardo asks: Is President Trump mentally ill?

Confidence in US

Around the world, favorability of the U.S. and confidence in its president decline / Source: Pew Research Center

The US has more women in prison than China, India & Russia combined

According to the International Centre for Prison Studies, nearly a third of all female prisoners worldwide are incarcerated in the United States of America. There are 201,200 women in US prisons, representing 8.8 percent of the total American prison population. / Source: Forbes

Most people in prison

Highest to Lowest – Prison Population Total / Source: World Prison Brief

Efforts to develop comprehensive treatments were plagued by various quacks, such as the pseudoscience developed by Mesmer that dealt with the “animal spirit” underlying mental illnesses [although it may be true today if expressed as a metaphorical description to some of the behavioural manifestations of some mental disorders in some individuals].

White Dogs & Tootsie Pops by Marie Hughes dpurb 1200

« White Dogs and Tootsie Pops » by Marie Hughes

Similarly, the phrenology of Gall and Spurzheim advocated a physical explanation based on skull contours and localisation of brain functions – which was of course also wrong.

Gradually however, attempts were made to develop legitimate and effective techniques to treat emotional and behavioural abnormalities. One of the more productive investigations involved hypnotism and was pioneered by a French physician, Jean Martin Charcot (1825 – 1893). Charcot gained widespread fame in Europe, and the young Freud amazed by his abilities, studied under him, as did many other talented physicians and physiologists. He treated hysterical patients with symptoms ranging from hyper-emotionality to physical conversions of underlying emotional problems that the patient could not confront when conscious.

Jean Martin Charcot - dpurb1000

Une leçon clinique à la Salpêtrière (1887) » with Jean Martin Charcot in Front (A Clinical Lesson at the Salpêtrière) par André Brouillet à l’Université Paris Descartes

Another French physician in Nancy, namely Hippolyte Bernheim (1837 – 1919), developed a sophisticated analysis of hypnosis as a form of treatment, using underlying suggestibility to alter the intentions of the patient. Finally, Pierre Janet (1859 – 1947), a student of Charcot, used hypnotism to resolve the forces of emotional conflict, which he believed were basic to hysterical symptoms. However, it was Sigmund Freud who went beyond the techniques of hypnotism to develop a comprehensive theory of psychopathology from which systematic treatments evolved.

 

A Biography of Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud for dpurb-com 1200

Sigmund Freud (1856 – 1939) / Image: Freud Museum London

Since psychoanalysis as we know it today is hugely influenced by the foundations laid by Sigmund Freud, it is worthwhile to have an understanding about the major points in his life. Sigmund Freud (1856 – 1939) was born on the 6th of May 1856 in Freiberg, Moravia, at that time a norther province of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, today a part of the Czech Republic.

Freud was the eldest of 8 children, and his father was a relatively poor and not very successful wool merchant. When his business failed, Freud’s father moved with his wife and children [as many jews are accustomed to migrating to better places in the quest for a better life and income] first to Leipzig and then to Vienna when Freud was 4 years old. The young Freud remained in Vienna for most of the rest of his life, and his precocious genius was recognised by his family, and he was allowed many concessions and favours not permitted to his siblings. For example, young Freud was provided with better lighting to read in the evening, and when he was studying, noise in the house was kept to a minimum so he would not be disturbed.

Freud’s interest were varied and intense, and he showed an early inclination and aptitude for various intellectual pursuits. Unfortunately, Freud was a victim of the 19th century Jew-dislike which was obvious and severe in central and Eastern Europe after the numerous accounts of Jews being banished from places all over Europe due to their occult and violent religious practices on Christian infants [e.g. human sacrifices] along with their known habits in monopolising the majority of the press businesses to then distort news and heritage to their agendas and economic advantage.

However, although Freud was an atheist and more scientifically minded, his Jewish birth precluded certain career opportunities, most notably an academic career in university research. Indeed, medicine and law were the only professions open to Vienna Jews.

Freud’s early reading of Charles Darwin intrigued and impressed him to the point that a career in science was most appealing. The closest path that he could follow for training as a researcher was an education in medicine. Hence, Freud entered the university of Vienna in 1873 at the age of 17. However, because of his interests in a variety of fields and specific research projects, it took him 8 years to complete the medical coursework that normally required 6 years.

Eel

In 1881, he received his doctorate in medicine. While at university, Freud was part of an investigation of the precise structure of the testes of eels, which involved his dissecting over 400 eels. Later, he moved on to physiology and neuroanatomy and conducted experiments examining the spinal cord of fish. While at Vienna, Freud also took courses with Franz Brentano, which formed his only formal introduction to 19th century psychology.

Franz Brentano dpurb 1200

After waiting for Freud for about 4 years, his fiancée, Martha Bernays, a jewish girl from a business family and the grand-daughter of a famous Rabbi in Hamburg, married him. While she did not show great interest in Freud’s intellectual pursuits, her younger sister Minna became a very close intellectual partner of Freud. Carl Jung one of Freud’s intellectual ally who would become one of his firmest critic would even later say that he learned from Minna that Freud was in love with her and their relationship was very “intimate” – although we have no factual confirmation of such. She was so close to the young couple, that she moved in with them in the 1890s to set up was has been “jokingly” called a “ménage a trois”. As for Martha, she was also a charmer, intelligent, well-educated and fond of reading who as a married woman ran her household efficiently and was almost obsessive about punctuality and dirt. Firm but loving with her children, French analyst René Laforgue said that she spread an atmosphere of peaceful joie de vivre through the household. Shortly after Freud’s wedding, he recognised that a scientific career would not provide adequate income, since anti-Jewish sentiments were strong around Europe and this worked against Jewish advancement in academia even if Freud himself was not a practising Jew or had any religious sentiments. So Freud reluctantly decided to begin a private practice. Although the young couple were very poor in the early years of their marriage, Freud was able to support his wife and his growing family, which eventually included 6 children. The early years in private practice were very difficult, requiring long hours for a meagre financial reward that basically did not challenge him. Freud was also an atheist and did not want psychoanalysis to be seen as a purely Jewish endeavour, and his close network although were mainly Jewish later slowly grew to incorporate European intellectuals where some of the most significant would disagree with some of his assumptions and leave his circle after keeping only a few of his fundamental concepts about the theory of the mind.

During his hospital training, Freud had worked with patients with anatomical and organic problems of the nervous system. Shortly after starting private practice, he became friendly with Josef Breuer (1842 – 1925), a general practitioner who had acquired some local fame for his respiration studies. This friendship provided needed stimulation for Freud, and they began to collaborate on several patients with nervous disorders, most notably the famous case of Anna O., an intelligent young woman with severe, diffuse hysterical symptoms. In using hypnosis to treat Anna O., Breuer noticed that some specific experiences emerged under hypnosis that the patient could not recall while conscious. Her symptoms seemed to be relieved after talking about these experiences under hypnosis. Breuer treated Anna O. daily for over a year, and became convinced that the “talking cure”, or “catharsis”, involving discussion of unpleasant and repulsive memories revealed under hypnosis, was an effective method in alleviating her symptoms. Unfortunately, Breuer’s wife became jealous of the relationship; that would later be called “positive transference of emotional feelings to the therapist” [this would later be explained as patients falling in love with the new object at which they had redirected feelings and desires retained in childhood] at characteristic stages of therapy, this looked suspicious to her. As a result, Breuer terminated his treatment of Anna O. Freud was also very professional with his clients and never had any mistresses or took advantage of his female patients.

Jean Martin Charcot Treating Mentally Ill Women 1000 dpurb

Jean-Martin Charcot (1825 – 1893) / Charcot first began studying hysteria after creating a special ward for non-insane females with « hystero-epilepsy ». He discovered two distinct forms of hysteria among these women: minor hysteria and major hysteria. His interest in hysteria and hypnotism « developed at a time when the general public was fascinated in ‘animal magnetism’ and ‘mesmerization' », which was later revealed to be a method of inducing hypnosis.
Charcot argued vehemently against the widespread medical and popular prejudice that hysteria was rarely found in men, presenting several cases of traumatic male hysteria. He taught that due to this prejudice these « cases often went unrecognised, even by distinguished doctors » and could occur in such models of masculinity as railway engineers or soldiers. Charcot’s analysis, in particular his view of hysteria as an organic condition which could be caused by trauma, paved the way for understanding neurological symptoms arising from industrial-accident or war-related traumas.

In 1885, Freud received a modest grant that allowed him to go to Paris to study with Jean-Martin Charcot for 4 and half months. During that time he not only observed Charcot’s method of hypnosis [which he never managed to master as Charcot did] but also attended his lectures, learning about the master’s views on the importance of unresolved sexual problems in the underlying causality of hysteria. When Freud returned to Vienna, he gave a report of his work with Charcot to the medical society, but its cold reception left him with resentment that affected his future interactions with the entrenched medical establishment and its rigid and reductionist methods at understanding and solving the problems of the mind.

Freud continued his work with Breuer on hypnosis and catharsis, but gradually abandoned the former in favour of the latter, being not very gifted with hypnotic techniques, but also for 3 major reasons regarding its effectiveness as a treatment with general applicability. First, not everyone can be hypnotised; hence its usefulness is limited to a select group. Second, some patients refuse to believe what they revealed under hypnosis, prompting Freud to conclude that the patient must be aware during the step-by-step process of discovering memories hidden from their accessible consciousness. Third, when one set of symptoms were alleviated under hypnotic suggestibility, new symptoms often emerged. Freud and Breuer were moving in separate directions, and Freud’s increasing emphasis on the primacy of sexuality as the key to psychoneurosis contributed to their break. Nevertheless, in 1895 they published Studies on Hysteria, often cited as the first work of the psychoanalytic movement, although it sold only 626 copies during the following 13 years – perhaps due to the lack of sophistication and interest in the workings of the mind at that particular point in history, or the level of the academic discussions that may not have been adequate for the intellect of the average mind at the time.

Freud’s preferred method of treatment, catharsis, involves engaging with patients and encouraging them to speak of anything that comes [occupies] their mind, regardless of how discomforting or embarrassing it might be. This “free association” took place in a relaxed atmosphere, usually on the classic psychologist couch in a reclined position to promote comfort. The main reason behind the logic of catharsis and free association is that – like hypnosis – it would allow hidden thoughts and memories to manifest in consciousness. However, in contrast, to the method of hypnosis, the patient would be aware of these emerging recollections. Another ongoing process during free association is “transference”, which involves which involves emotionally laden experiences that allow the patient to relieve earlier, repressed episodes. Since the psychoanalysis is often part of the transference process [as mentioned earlier where the repressed emotions are often redirected onto] and is often the object of emotions, Freud recognised transference as a powerful tool to assist the patient in resolving sources of anxiety.

In 1897, Freud began a self-analysis of his dreams, which evolved into another technique important to the psychoanalytic movement. In the analysis of dreams, Freud distinguish between the manifest content [the actual depiction of the dreams] and the latent content, which represented the symbolic world of the patient. In 1900, he published his major work, The Interpretation of Dreams. Although it sold only 600 copies in eight years, it later went through eight editions in his lifetime. In 1901, he published The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, the book in which his theory began to take shape. Freud argued that the psychology of all people, not only those with neurotic symptoms, could be understood in terms of the unconscious forces in need of resolution.

When his reputation as a pioneer in psychiatry started to grow due to his prolific writings, Freud attracted admiring followers, among them was the notable Carl Jung. In 1909, G. Stanley Hall, president of Clark University, invited him to the United States to give a lecture series as part of that institution’s 20th anniversary. The lectures were published in the American Journal of Psychology and later in book form, serving as an appropriate introduction to psychoanalytic thought for American audiences.

As psychoanalysis was perceived as radical by the medical establishment, early believers form their own associations and found the journals to disseminate their competing views. However, Freud’s demand for strict loyalty to his interpretation of psychoanalysis led to some discord within the movement [perhaps for the betterment of the field itself as many branches kept the fundamental concept of unconscious (Id), pre-conscious (SuperEgo), and conscious (Ego) but fused other theoretical and scientific perspectives to explain and treat a range of mental illnesses]. Carl Jung broke away in 1914, so that by the following year, three arrival groups existed within the psychoanalysic movement. Nevertheless, Freud’s views continued to evolve. Impressed by the devastation and tragedy of World War I, Freud came to view aggression, along with sexuality, as a primal instinctual motivation. During the 1920s Freud expanded psychoanalysis from a method of treatment for mentally ill or emotionally disturbed persons to a systematic framework for all human motivation and personality.

In 1923, Freud developed cancer of the jaw and experience almost constant pain for the remaining 16 years of his life. He underwent 33 operations and had to wear a prosthetic device. Throughout this ordeal however, he continued to write and see patients, although he shunned public appearances. With the rise of Hitler and the anti-Jewish sentiments that arose with his campaigns with the National Socialists, Freud’s works were unfortunately singled out as they were not seen as a scientific endeavour but rather as a Jewish science, and his books were burned throughout Germany. However, Freud resisted fleeing from Vienna. When Germany and were politically united in 1938, the Gestapo began harassing Freud and his family. Pres Roosevelt indirectly relayed to the German government that Freud is intellectual must be protected. Nevertheless, in March 1938 some thugs invaded Freud’s home. Finally, for the efforts of friends, Freud was granted special permission, but only after promising to send for his unsold books in Swiss storage so that they could be destroyed. After he signed a statement saying that he had received good treatment from the police, the German government allowed him to leave for England, where he died shortly after, on September 23, 1939.

 

An overview of the Psychoanalytic System based on Freud’s Research

Before our in depth examination of psychoanalytic theory, it is important to recognise that the theory has an unusually broad focus. Psychoanalysis contains a theory of personality, but it also offers theoretical tools for understanding culture, society, art and literature. It is also a clinical theory that aspires to explain the nature and origins of mental disorders, and that is associated with an approach to their treatment. To give some more sense to Freud’s breadth, consider that he wrote on topics as diverse as the meaning of dreams and jokes, the origins of religion, Shakespeare’s plays, the psychology of groups, homosexuality, the causes of phobias and obsessions, and much more besides. Even as a theory of personality, psychoanalysis is primarily an account of the processes and mechanisms of the mind, rather than an account of individual differences.

In addition to its breadth of focus, the psychoanalytic theory has many distinct components that have also been modified and explored by a range of skilled psychoanalysts, making it hard to integrate into a single unitary model of the mind since they are inter-connected in complex ways.

Freud’s views evolved continually throughout his long career in the collective result of his extensive writings as an elaborate system of personality development. Personality was described in terms of an energy system that seeks an equilibrium of forces. This homeostatic model of human personality was determined by the constant attempt to identify appropriate ways to discharge instinctual energies, which originate in the depths of the unconscious. The structure of personality, according to the psychoanalytic model consists of a dynamic interchange of activities energised by forces that are present in the person at birth. This homeostatic model was consistent with the prevailing views of 19th-century science, which saw the mechanical relations of physical events studied by physics as the term of scientific inquiry. Freud’s model for psychoanalysis translated physical stimuli to psychic energies or forces and retained an essentially mechanical description of how such forces interact.

As the writings on the dpurb.com website are the foundations for the Organic Theory of the mind, we are going to be focused not on the later structural model which repositioned the Unconscious, Conscious and Pre-Conscious across the Id, Ego and SuperEgo, but with the first topographic model (1900 – 1905) adopted by both Carl Jung and Jacques Lacan. This model, has been more influential and is more flexible in accommodating competing view points about the structure of mental life across individuals.

The topographic model refers to the levels or layers of mental life. Freud proposed that mental content – ideas, wishes, emotions, impulses, memories, and so on – can be located at one of the three levels: Conscious (later known as the Ego), Preconscious (SuperEgo), and Unconscious (Id). It is important however, to understand that Freud use these terms to describe degrees of awareness and unawareness, but also to refer to distinct mental systems with their own distinct laws of operation. Unconscious cognition is categorically different from Conscious cognition, in addition to operating on mental content that exists beneath awareness. To convey this point, the three levels of the topographic model was referred to as the ‘systems’ Cs., Pcs., and Ucs.

Topographic Model_C_S_U_dpurb_1000 

The Conscious (which would later be known as Ego with a partial unconscious side, and also “Le Moi” in Lacanian Theory)

Consciousness is merely the proverbial ‘tip of the iceberg’ of mental activity. The contents of the Conscious are simply the small fraction of things that the person is currently paying attention to: objects perceived, events recalled, the stream of thought that we engage in as a running commentary on everyday life. [This is the main focus of most other branches of Psychology such as Biological Psychology and Cognitive Psychology]

 

The Preconscious (which would later be known as the Super-Ego)

Of course, not all of all mental life happens under the spotlight of awareness and attention. There are many things to which we could readily be attention to but do not, such as ideas or plans we have set aside all memories of what we were doing last week or yesterday. Without any great effort these things or events, which in the present out of consciousness, can be made conscious. Those form the domain of the Preconscious.

The boundary between the Conscious (Ego) and the Preconscious (Super-Ego) is a permeable one. Thoughts, memories and perceptions can cross without great difficulty according to the momentary needs and intentions of the individual. They also share a common mode of cognition, which in psychoanalysis is known as the ‘secondary process’. Secondary process cognition is the sort of everyday, more or less rational thinking than generally obeys the laws of logic.

 

The Unconscious (which would later be known as the Id)

The Unconscious (Id) is perhaps one of the most celebrated theoretical concepts in Freud’s legacy. However, he did not invent or discover the unconscious as is sometimes claimed – versions of the concert had been floating around intellectual circles for some time – but he gave it a much deeper theoretical analysis than anyone before him. Freud distinguished between mental contents and processes that are descriptively unconscious and those that are dynamically unconscious. The descriptively unconscious simply exists outside consciousness as a matter of fact, and therefore include Preconscious material that can become conscious if it is attended to. Freud’s crucial contribution was to argue that some thoughts, memories, wishes and mental processes are not only descriptively unconscious, but also cannot be made conscious because of a countervailing force keeps them out of awareness. In short, mental life that is dynamically unconscious is a subset of what is descriptively unconscious, one whose entry to consciousness is actively thwarted. The Freudian unconscious corresponds to the dynamic unconscious in this sense.

Freud held that the Unconscious contains a large but unacknowledged proportion of mental life that operates according to its own psychological laws. The barrier between the Unconscious (Id) and the Preconscious (SuperEgo) is much more fortified and difficult to penetrate than the border between the Preconscious (Super-Ego) and Conscious (Ego). In addition, it is policed by a mental function that Freud likened to a “censor”. The censor’s role is to determine whether the contents of the Unconscious would be threatening or objectionable to the person if they became conscious. If the censor judges them to be dangerous in this type, the person will experience anxiety without knowing what caused it. In this case, these thoughts come wishes and so on, will normally be repelled back into the Unconscious, in a process referred to as “Repression” [it is fundamental and very important to understand that Repression is something else than a judgement which rejects and chooses, repression is unconscious]. Unconscious material, by Freud’s account, has an intrinsic force propelling it to become conscious. Consequently, repression required an active opposing force to resist it, just as effort is required to prevent a surf board made of white foam to rise to the surface when it is submerged in the ocean.

Under the constant pressure of Unconscious material bubbling towards the Preconscious, the censor cannot possibly bar entry to everything. Instead, it allows some Unconscious material to cross over the barrier after it has been transformed or disguised in some way so as to be less objectionable. This crossing might take the form of a relatively harmless impulsive behaviour, or in the form of private fantasy, the telling of a joke, or in a slip of the tongue, where the person says something ‘unintentionally’ that reveals to the trained eye and mind the repressed concerns and wishes [such as that of a psychoanalyst – as Jacques Lacan proposed: repression can take the form of a metaphor and the brilliant psychoanalyst must be able to decipher a chain of clues with a great deal of verbal dexterity where crossword puzzles may help in training]. Psychoanalytic training teaches how phenomenal such as these can be interpreted, the process that involves uncovering the unconscious material that is concealed within their “disguises” [i.e. forms].

To Freud, dreams represent a particularly good example of the disguised expression of the Unconscious wishes. They offered, he wrote, “the royal road to the Unconscious”. One reason for this is that during sleep, the sensor relaxes and allows more repressed Unconscious material to cross the barrier. This material, transformed into a less threatening form by a process referred to as the “dream-work”, then takes the shape of a train of images in the peculiar form of consciousness that we call dreaming. It is believed, that each dream has a “latent content” of Unconscious wishes that is transformed into the “manifest content” of the experienced dream. This transformation has to allow the Unconscious wishes to be fulfilled while concealing the elements of threat they contain. If the latent content is not concealed sufficiently through the “dream-work” process, the sleeper will register the threat and be awoken [sometimes in shock and sweat]. To avoid this the dream-work may alter the identities of the people represented in a wish. For example if a person has an Unconscious wish to harm a loved one, the dream work might produce a dream in which the individual instead harms someone else or in which the loved one is harmed by another person. Neutralised in this way, the Unconscious wish finds conscious expression.

Dreams also showcase the distinct form of thinking that operates in the Unconscious. “Primary processthinking, unlike the secondary process than governs the Conscious (Ego) and Preconscious (Super-Ego), shows no respect for the laws of logic and rationality. In primary process thinking, something can stand for something else, including its opposite, and can even represent two distinct things at once. Contradictory thoughts can coexist and there is not orderly sense of the passage of time or of causation. Basically, primary process thinking captures the magical, chaotic quality of many dreams, the mysterious images that seems somehow significant, the fractured storylines, the impossible and disconnected events. To Freud, dreams are not simply night-time curiosities, but reveal how the greater part of our mental life proceeds beneath the shallows of conscience.

 

Foundations of the later “Structural” model: concepts to consider and synthesise with the Topographic Model

We are now going to have a look at the later version of Freud’s psychoanalytic theory where the Unconscious [this time referred to as the Id] is still the fundamental concept, however decades later in 1923, another 3-way dissection of the mind was proposed. This time Freud called it the Psychic Apparatus and the 3-way dissection of the mind was defined in terms of distinct mental functions instead of levels of awareness and their associated processes. In original German, the terms das Es (Id), Ich (Ego) and Über-ich (Super-Ego) were used. As we take a look at these structures, it is important to remember that they were not proposed as real underlying entities, but rather as a sort of conceptual shorthand for talking about different kinds of mental processes. Our aim here is to synthesise the logical concepts of the Structural Model with the Topographic Model of the Unconscious (Id), the Conscious (Ego) and the Preconscious (Super-Ego), however although it is convenient to talk about the Id, Ego and Super-Ego “doing” such-and-such or being “in charge of” so-and so, it is important to remember that they were not intended to refer to distinct sub-personalities within the individual.

Modèle_Structurel_Id(LeCa)_Ego(Moi)_SuperEgo(Surmoi)_IcebergModel_dpurb

The Id [completely/dynamically unconscious] represents the part of the personality that is closely linked to the instinctual drives that are the fundamental sources of motivation in Freudian theory. According to Freud, these drives are chiefly sexual and aggressive in nature. On one hand we have the “life instincts” concerned with preserving life and binding together new “vital unities”, the foremost expression of this concern being loving sexual union. Opposed to these life instincts, on the other side, we have the set of “death instincts”, whose corresponding concern is with breaking down life and destroying connections, its goal is a state of entropy or nirvana, where there is a complete absence of any form of tension [motivation]. The most obvious form of these instincts were aggressiveness expressed inward towards the self or outward towards others. Freud proposed that the instinctual drives were powered by a reservoir of instinctual “psychic energy” grounded in basic biological processes. The sexual form of this energy was referred to as libido.

Although Freud proposed that the Id is a biological underpinning, its contents are psychological phenomena such as wishes, ideas, intentions, and impulses. These phenomena are therefore sometimes described as “instinct- derivatives”. Some of these phenomena are innate, whereas others have been consigned to the Id by the process of repression. All of the Id’s contents, however are unconscious.

Freud proposed that the Id operated according to what he called the “pleasure principle”. Simply stated, this principle states that the Id’s urges strives to obtain pleasure and avoid “unpleasure” without delay. Pleasure, in Freud’s understanding, represented a discharge of instinctual energy which is accompanied by a release of tension. In short, the Id strives to satisfy its drives enabling immediate, pleasurable release of instinctual energy. It is the most primitive and least accessible structure of personality. As originally described by Freud, the Id is psychic energy of an irrational nature and sexual character, which instinctually determines unconscious processes. The Id is not in contact with the environment, but rather relates to the other structures of personality that in turn must mediate between the Id’s instincts and the external world. Immune from reality and social convention, the Id is guided by the pleasure principle, seeking to gratify instinctual libidinal needs either directly, through a sexual experience, or indirectly, by dreaming or fantasizing. The latter, indirect gratification was called the primary process. The exact object of direct gratification in the pleasure principle is determined by the psychosexual stage of the individual’s development [as explained in 3rd part of the essay on The 3 Major Theories of Development].

The Ego, is another mental function and complicates this picture of immediate gratification. This “psychic agency” arises over the course of development as the child learns that it is often necessary and desirable to delay gratification. The bottle or breast does not always appear the instant that hunger is first experienced, and sometimes it is better to resist the urge to urinate at the bladder’s first bidding if one is to avoid the unpleasure of wet pants, embarrassment, and a parent’s howls of dismay. The Ego, often called the “executive” of personality because of its role in channeling Id energies into socially acceptable outlets [ego is believed to start developing between the ages of 1 and 2 as the child confronts the environment]. The Ego crystallises out this emerging capacity for delay, and in time becomes a restraint on the Id’s impatient striving for discharge. However, it cannot be an inflexible restraint. Its task is not to delay the fulfilment of wishes and impulses endlessly, but to determine when and how it would be most sensible or prudent to do so given the demands of the external environment at a particular time. It operates, that is, on the “Reality principle”, which simply requires that the Ego regulate the person’s behaviour in accordance with external conditions [at a given time or place according to certain rules or laws or conventions, and of course this changes as society redefines “reality” in terms of what it acceptable and not].

Freud emphasized that the Ego is not the dominant force in the personality [unlike Ego psychologists in the US has stated], although he believed it should strive to be. A famous statement of Freud regarding the goal of Psychoanalytic treatment is “Where Id was, there Ego shall be”. By his account, the Ego not only emerges out of the Id in the course of development – beforehand, the infant is pure Id – but it also derives all of its energy from the Id. Freud had a gift for metaphor, and he likened the Ego’s relation to the Id as a rider’s relation to a wilful horse. The horse supplies all of the pair’s force, but the rider may be able to channel it in a particular direction.

Fortunately, this “rider” has a repertoire of skills at its disposal. Freud proposed that the Ego could employ a variety of “defence mechanism” in the service of the reality principle. These mechanisms come in a diverse range, and all represent operations that the Ego performs to deal with the threats to the rational expression of the person’s desires, whether from the Id or the external environment. These Ego defence mechanisms are common processes in everyday mental life, and many of them are carried out by the Ego unconsciously, showing that there is an unconscious part in the Ego.

The Ego being governed by the reality principle, is aware of environmental demands and adjusts behaviour so that the instinctual pressures of the id are satisfied in acceptable ways, and the attainment of specific objects to reduce libidinal energy in socially appropriate ways was called the “secondary process” [the “primary process” being the Unconscious (Id)].

Some of the most well known defence mechanisms are denial, isolation of affect, projection, reaction formation, repression and sublimation.

Finally, the differentiation of the structures of personality, called the Super-Ego, is believed to start appearing by the age of 5. In contrast to the Id and Ego, which are internal developments of personality, the Super-Ego is an external imposition. That is the Super-Ego is the incorporation of moral standards perceived by the Ego from some agent of authority in the environment, usually an assimilation of the parents’ views as the child develops – both positive and negative aspects of these standards. The Super-Ego’s emergence complicates the task of the Ego in regulating the expression of the Id’s impulses in response to demands and opportunities of the external environment. The Super-Ego represents an early form of conscience, an internalised set of moral values, standards, and ideals. These moral precepts are not the sort of flexible, evolving, reasoned, and discussable rules of conduct that we tend to imagine when we think of adult morality, however, instead they tend to be relatively harsh, absolute and punishing; adult morality as refracted through the immature and fearful mind of a child. The Super-Ego therefore represents the shrill voice of societal rules and restrictions, a voice that condemns and forbids many of the sexual and destructive wishes, impulses and thoughts that emerge from the Id.

The positive moral code is the Ego ideal, i.e. a representation of behaviour for the individual to emulate. The conscience embodies the negative aspect of the Super-Ego, and determines which activities are to be taboo. Conduct that violates the dictates of the conscience produces “guilt” in healthy individuals. Hence, the Super-Ego and the Id are in direct conflict, leaving the Ego to mediate. The Ego now becomes the servant of three masters: the Id, the Super-Ego and the External Environment [Societal Rules]. It is now not enough to reconcile what is desired with what is possible under the circumstances. The Ego now also needs to take into consideration what is socially prohibited and impermissible. Instinctual drives must still be satisfied; which is a constant, however the Ego now attempts to satisfy them in a way that is flexibly “realistic” – that is, in the person’s best interests under current conditions – but also “socially” permitted. These prohibitions are often very unreasonable and inflexible, rejecting any expression of the drive with an unconditional “NO”, either because the moral structures of a particular “culture” are intrinsically rigid, atavistic or unsophisticated, or because the child’s internalisation of these structures is simply black-and-white, without any grey area to compromise for an adequate expression of the drive. Thus, the Super-Ego imposes a pattern of conduct that results in some degree of self-control through an internalised system of rewards and punishments.

Given the demands that it faces, the Ego can either find a way to express the Id’s desires successfully, or its attempts to arbitrate can fail. In this case, psychological trouble is likely to follow. If the Id wins the struggle, and the desire finds expression in a more-or-less unaltered and primitive form, the person may experience guilt or shame: the Super-Ego’s sign that it has been violated, and may also have to pay the price of a short-sighted, impulsive action. If on the other hand, the Super-Ego wins the struggle and dominates a person excessively, that individual may become overly rigid, rule-bound, uncreative, unquestioning, anxious and joyless. The forbidden desires may well go “underground” and manifest themselves in symptoms such as anxieties, compulsions or in occasional “out-of-character” impulsive behaviour or emotion.

The major motivational constructs of Freud’s theory of personality was derived from instincts, defined as biological forces that release mental energy. Hence, from the account of the Unconscious (Id), the Conscious [and partly unconscious, Ego) and the Preconscious (Super-Ego), it implies that conflict within the mind’s opposing forces is inevitable, because the demands of society – or “civilisation” – are generally opposed to our natural instincts and drives. Indeed, intrapsychic conflict is one of the fundamental and defining concepts of psychoanalysis. Conflict within the mind is at the root of personality structure, mental disorder, and most psychological phenomena [e.g. artistic expressions of various forms]. The goal of personality is to reduce the energy drive through some activity acceptable to the constraints of the Super-Ego [Preconscious].

Freud classed inborn instincts to life (eros) and death (thanatos) drives. Life instincts involve self-preservation and include hunger, sex and thirst. The libido is that specific form of energy through which life instincts arise in the Id. The death instinct (Thanatos) may be directed either inwards, as in suicide or masochism, or outwards, as in hate and aggression. The notion that personality equilibrium must be maintained by discharging energy in acceptable ways, leads to anxiety which plays a central role. Essentially the view is that anxiety is a diffuse fear in anticipation of unmet desires and future evils. Given the primitive character of Unconscious (Id) instincts, it is unlikely that primary goals are ever an acceptable means of drive reduction; rather they are apt to give rise to continual anxiety in personality. Freud described three general forms of anxiety.

(i) Reality (or Objective) Anxiety
(ii) Neurotic Anxiety
(iii) Moral Anxiety

Reality or objective anxiety, is a fear of the real environmental danger [e.g. heights, depth, fire, etc] with an obvious cause; such fear is appropriate as it has survival value for the organism. Neurotic anxiety comes about from the fear of potential punishment inherent in the goal of instinctual gratification. It is a fear of punishment for expressing impulsive desires. Finally, moral anxiety is the fear of the conscience through guilt or shame in healthy individuals. In order to cope with anxiety, the Ego develops defence mechanisms, which are elaborate, largely unconscious processes that allow a person to avoid unpleasantness and anxiety-provoking events. For example, an individual may avoid facing anxiety by self-denial, conversion [whereby the anxiety caused by repressed impulses and feelings are ‘converted’ into a physical complaint such as a cough or feelings of paralysis], or projection, or may repress thoughts that are a source of anxiety into the unconscious. Many defence mechanisms are described in the psychoanalytic literature, which generally agrees that although defence mechanisms are typical ways of handling anxiety and maintaining a sense of psychological stability, they must be recognised and controlled by the individual himself/herself for psychological health.

Denial Refusing to acknowledge that some unpleasant or threatening event has occurred; common in grief reactions
Isolation of Affect Mentally severing an idea from its threatening emotional associations so that it can be held without experiencing its unpleasantness; common in obsessional people
Projection Disavowing one’s impulses thoughts and attributing them to another person; common in paranoia
Reaction formation Unconsciously developing wishes or thoughts that are opposite to those that one finds undesirable in oneself; common in people with a rigid moral codes
Repression Repelling threatening thoughts from consciousness, motivated forgetting; common in post-traumatic reactions
Sublimation Unconsciously deflecting sexual aggressive impulses towards different, socially acceptable expressions; central to artistic creation and sports.

Table 1: A List of The Most Common Defence Mechanisms

Freud placed great emphasis on the development of the child because he was convinced that neurotic disturbances manifested by his adult patients had origins in childhood experiences. And as the last model proposed by Freud, the Genetic Model, explains, the psychosexual stages are characterised by different sources of primary gratification determined by the pleasure principle. Freud basically wrote that the child is essentially autoerotic. The genetic model has been previously described in the 3rd section of the essay, The 3 Major Theories of Childhood Development. [Please refer for more details]

However, the genetic model in psychoanalysis has been extensively revised and most of the concepts are not considered as reliable nowadays due to other theories that have shown how personality continues to evolve and only stabilises around the age of 30. However, the genetic model laid the groundwork for other theorist such as John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth who based their guiding principles to uncover the theory of attachment on pre-oedipal developments first mentioned by Sigmund Freud. These attachment types have been discussed in the Essay, The 3 Major Theories of Childhood Development, and although it may not be completely true for all people, the logic behind the psychosexual stages should always be considered to some extend when analysing clients along with attachment types – not to forget to assess the self-reflective abilities of the person, since this has been proven to have more impact on adult personality, emotional intelligence and attachment types.

 

The Relationship between the Topographic Model and the Structural Model

It is important to assimilate the knowledge from the structural model and synthesise them with the topographic model. It can be seen that although the later model is conceptually distinct from the first model, they do map onto one another to some degree. The content of the Id, of course, lies firmly within the Unconscious, and is forbidden from entry to the consciousness unless disguised in the form of dreams, slips of the tongue, symptoms, and so on. However the Ego is not completely conscious unlike many ego psychologist may claim along with cognitive psychologist, as it has a strong Unconscious component, given that a great deal of psychological defence mechanisms are conducted instantly out of awareness, and hence is sometimes inaccessible to introspection by the patient – hence requiring a skilled psychoanalyst to guide therapy and treatment. The Super-Ego also has an Unconscious fraction, reflecting as it does and often “primitive” and irrationally punishing morality at least as much as it reflects our reasoned beliefs and principles. Although many concepts have been revised and alternative treatments relating to mental illness have also been devised by other schools of thought in psychology, the sheer complexity and uniqueness of the psychoanalytic system has formed a remarkable achievement. Indeed, Freud even had to invent new terminology to express his thoughts, and these terms have become an accepted part of our vocabulary.

Psychisme: Les théories de Freud ont-elles évolué? (2013)

 

Psychoanalytic Evidence: From the perspective of Empirical Methodology (Mainstream Science)

Freud ardently believed along with all good psychoanalysts that psychoanalysis is a science, not an empirical science, but a science of the mind that slices not with blades or questionnaires, but with concepts through the linguistic and philosophical realm of a patients subjective reality. It is also fair to consider that Freud himself was an accomplished biological scientist before he developed psychoanalytic theories. Biological ideas are interwoven in his work, as is his concepts of drive, instinct, and psychic energy. Nevertheless, the methods that he used to obtain evidence for the psychoanalytic theory were very different from the reductionist and empirical methods used by the laboratory scientists or the statistical psychologists with their quantified questionnaires exploring basic “traits”. As an anatomist and physiologist, Freud made systematic observations of living and dead organisms, and conducted controlled experiments. Hence, he must have come to the same conclusion as ourselves, which is, mental life cannot be fully explained by the mechanical explanations, although a lot can be learnt from understanding the physiology of the brain, but the “software” itself, that generates the mind, is an entity that empirical science comes short in terms of its methodologies. Hence, as a psychoanalyst, Freud introspected and speculated about his own mental life, and listened closely to what his patients told him during sessions of psychoanalytic therapy. If is quite clear, that dissecting an eel is completely different from dissecting a personality with all its complexities, and that observing the stream of one’s consciousness or another’s speech is very different from conducting a controlled experiment with observable variables. So, psychoanalytic evidence is clearly unlike the evidence on which most “hard physical sciences” are based.

However, it is important to understand that the critique of psychoanalysis from the methodology of empirical science may not be rational. Because psychoanalysis was never intended to be a mechanical science, although it learns from neuroscience of certain aspects of the physiology of the brain. These questions about Empirically Supported Treatment (EST) came to the forefront of psychotherapy literature in 1993, when Division 12 of the American Psychological Association worked to publish a list of criteria for what constitutes EST (Chambless, et al., 1996; Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures, 1995; Taskforce on Psychological Intervention Guidelines, 1995). A list of treatments were published that we empirically supported and very few psychodynamic treatments were included, nor were interpersonal or humanistic therapy included. Not surprisingly, these guidelines and list became anything but unifying for psychotherapists and psychotherapy researchers.

Westen, Novotny and Thompson-Brenner (2004) made some important critiques of the literature on ESTs. They noted that ESTs are often designed for a single, Axis I disorder, and patients are screened to maximise their homogeneity and to minimise their diagnostic comorbidity. Treatments are manualised and brief, and outcomes are assessed often by reductions in the primary symptom reduction for that particular disorder. Westen et al. suggested that EST researchers always tend to assume the following:

  • Psychopathology is highly malleable
  • Most patients can be treated for a single problem or disorder
  • Psychiatric disorders can be treated without much attention to underlying personality factors
  • Experimental methodology used to develop ESTs has ecological validity in clinical practice

Westen et al. (2004) basically contended that these assumptions are not valid, not to say wrong. There is considerable diagnostic comorbidity, making most patients ineligible to participate in EST research trials. There also is considerable stability of psychopathology of psychiatric symptoms, even after “successful” completion of EST. And clinicians of all theoretical orientations see patients well beyong the time allotted in treatment manuals (see Morrison, Bradley, & Westen, 2003; Thompson-Brenner, Glass, & Westen, 2003; Westen & Morrison, 2001 for an excellent review of these issues).

Norcross (2002a) offered an additional perspective on why the EST literature has been so controversial. First, he explained that EST research rarely addresses the fact “that the therapist is a person, however much he may strive to make himself an instrument of the patient’s treatment” (Orlinsky & Howard, 1977, p.567 as cited by Norcross 2002a). This idea has been demonstrate very well in empirical literature. For example, Wampold (2001) concluded in a meta-analysis of psychotherapy studies that the qualities of the therapist play a much stronger role in the outcome of treatment that does the treatment itself. Second, Norcross stated that therapy research has savagely neglected the important question of studying the therapy relationship. Instead, the focus has been more on the application and mastery of a technique (not a relationship). Third, who the patient is affects treatment outcome. As attention has been directed towards the study and implementation of psychotherapy techniques to different categories of disorders, small attention has been given to the patient characteristics that affect outcome, such as comorbid conditions, capacity for insight, and a history of interpersonal relatedness.

Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic therapies certainly are related to these issues. Analytic and Dynamic models of therapy are very focused on the behaviour and qualities of the therapist, with special attention to issues of the therapeutic alliance, neutrality, transference, and countertransference.

Freud's Couch at Freud Museum London

The couch that started everything: Freud’s psychoanalytic couch at the Freud Museum in London

It is important to also consider that one’s training in how to conduct psychoanalytic or psychodynamic psychotherapy is focused on how therapists present themselves and how patients respond to this. Such a focus automatically puts the therapeutic alliance at the centre of attention, something that has taken on more interest over the years (Fairbairn, 1952; Greenberg, 1986, 2001a; Pine, 1998; Stolorow, Atwood & Brandchaft, 1994; Wallerstein, 2002). Psychoanalysts have also recognised that the personality and qualities of the patient affect how therapy should be conducted (e.g., Gabbard, 2000, 2004); that is, one approach to working with patients does not fit all patients. Furthermore, many psychotherapists have been reluctant to allow their therapy relationships to be subject to empirical investigation (Bornstein, 2005), as a form of respect for the privacy of their clients, making it very hard to provide more objective data that the support the validity of psychoanalysis. In contrast, other schools of thoughts derived from the behavioural school and the medical fields have very willingly offered their data for empirical investigations.

Often accompanying this philosophical criticism regarding scientific testability is a factual criticism that psychoanalysts have seldom tried to test their theories scientifically. This criticism may have some truth to it, however many psychoanalysts have responded to the call for more scientific inquiry by asserting that it is unnecessary and that clinical evidence of the treatments curing mental illness of various types is quite sufficient.

FIGURE B - SUCESS RATES WITH ADULTS & CHILDREN

Success Rates of Psychotherapy with adults and children, and Therapy from other schools of thought [traditions] based on Effect Sizes from Meta-analyses / Source: dpurb.com

Other psychoanalysts have argued that scientific support for their theories is irrelevant. Psychoanalysis, they suggest, is not an empirical science, but a science of subjective experience and linguistic dissection, so it is inappropriate to judge it by the mainstream reductionist empirical scientific standards of modern day academia.

Many see psychoanalysis as a “hermeneutic” discipline, an approach to interpretation which is rather like a school of literary criticism or biblical scholarship. To them, psychoanalytic theory is a way to decipher mental life, an interpretative technique for uncovering meaning. Its goal, they say, is to understand psychological phenomena in terms of their underlying reasons rather than explaining them as objective science in terms of causes. Some have gone so far as to suggest that the goal of psychoanalytic understanding is not to ascertain literal or scientific truth – for example, what “truly happened in a person’s past to make them the way they are today” – but instead to formulate “narrative truth”, a story that gives coherent meaning to the person’s experiences [from their perspective in terms of what matters to them] (Spence, 1980).

LePromeneurSolitaire-dpurb-com-1200

Photographie: Danny D’Purb © 2018

It would also be fair to acknowledge that there is something quite “special” about psychoanalytic evidence, for all its empirical flaws. A completed psychoanalytic treatment may sometimes [depending on the type of patient] occupy four or five sessions each week over a period of several years, amounting to perhaps 1000 hours in which the analyst listens closely to the patient’s innermost thoughts. These thoughts, often too intimate and raw to be shared even with loved ones, range widely over the patient’s personal history and lived experiences. They are recounted in a wide variety of mood-states and frames of mind. These millions of spoken words and feelings may not represent the kind of systematically and objectively collected data on which the scientific theory of personality [that the hardcore empiricist loves] can easily be built. However, it is hard to declare that the analyst does not understand the patient’s personality better than someone who might interpret the patient’s responses, dashed off in a matter of minutes, to a trait questionnaire.

Indeed, there is something valuable about psychanalytic evidence, but it is very hard to build an empirical theory out of it since we are not dealing with matters of hard sciences [e.g. biology, medecine, physics, chemistry, astrophysics, material science, astronomy, etc], but the mind of human beings that embodies their whole existence and worlds.

 

Empirical Evidence for the Existence of Unconscious Processes

More and more psychoanalytic thinkers and sympathisers are starting to find creative ways to test psychoanalytic hypotheses in rigorous empiricistic ways to conform with academic science, despite all the difficulties that this involves. This research is now very extensive, and therefore difficult to summarise. However, two very broad conclusions can be drawn from it. First, specific Freudian claims typically fail to receive experimental support but do work in treating mentally ill patients in clinical practice. For example, repression, castration anxiety and penis envy [although Adler suggested that this should be expressed symbolically as women’s frustration at not being able to match male dominance in society] cannot be experimentally demonstrated. Dreaming does not seem to preserve sleep by disguising latent wishes, and there is very little evidence to back up the theory of Psychosexual stages, although it influenced the Theories of Attachment devised by John Bowlby. However, more general Freudian concepts have often received a good deal of scientific support.

There is today, plenty of evidence to suggest the existence of unconscious mental processes, for the existence of conflict between these processes and conscious cognition, and for the existence of processes resembling some of the defence mechanisms. 2 illustrative studies can support his work. First, Fazio, Jackson, Dunton and Williams (1995) found that people who sincerely profess to having absolutely no racial prejudice can be shown to associate negative attributes with Black faces more than White faces in a laboratory task. This finding which has been replicated countless times by social cognition researchers, shows that the conscious attitudes of individuals may conflict with their “implicit” attitudes [unconscious]. Second, Adams, Wright and Lohr (1996) hooked male subjects up to a daunting instrument called the penis plethysmograph, which measures sexual arousal by gauging penile circumference. It was found that men who reported strong anti-gay (homophobic) attitudes demonstrated an increased arousal when shown videos of homosexual acts, whereas non-homophobic men did not. This finding seems to reveal some form of defence mechanism consistent with the psychoanalytic view that homophobia is a reaction formation against homoerotic desires. However, none of these illustrative studies can be considered as completely conclusive, and all have been controversial and subjected to various interpretations. For example, anxiety, shock, or anger rather than sexual arousal may have caused the increased penile blood flow of Adams et al.’s homophobic subjects.

These experiments prove that with enough creative ingenuity, some psychanalytic propositions can be scientifically tested. Doing so should contribute to the important task of sifting what is worth retaining in psychoanalytic theory for strict empiricists of the hard sciences.

 

Unconscious Processes: Integrating Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychodynamic Theory

In various ways, the evidence for the existence of mental processes that are outside of direct conscious awareness are apparent in every scenarios of life. Here are some examples:

  1. We sometimes cannot remember the name of a particular person of importance, only to be able to recall it hours or days later at a time and place when knowing the name is not required
  2. Despite one’s intention to offer some control over the process, dreaming appears to occur at its own timing and pace.
  3. On September 11, 2001, and the days following, many Americans watched hours of news report focussed on the same attacks on the United States. Although deeply upset by the contents, many individuals could not stop themselves from watching these videos, saying that it was as if something in them drew them to reports in spite of conscious awareness of disbelief and outrage
  4. Many patients who seek psychotherapy are unable to stop unwanted behaviours or interpersonal problems, despite conscious awareness of their harmfulness to them and their life. These problems range from relatively simple [e.g. drinking too much alcohol] to relatively complex [e.g. placing oneself in situations in which one is often taken advantage of or obsessing about one’s body image if certain kinds of fattening foods are consumed].

Other examples are evident too, simple exercises that can be easily performed. For example, consider when 3 lines are drawn in the shape of a triangle with the ends of each line however, not touching one another, leaving a small gap between all their extremities. We can come to realise that, depending on the space between the lines, the image is instantly perceived as a triangle by the individual, a triangle with missing edges; 3 lines that are coming together like a triangle, or just 3 lines at different angles.

When taking into consideration perceptual phenomena such as this [i.e. an example of the Gestalt principle of closure], it is evident that the mind does the following very quickly, without conscious awareness of how the process occurs, yet meaning and understanding are formed.

  • Takes in sensory information
  • Determines what the information is
  • Assembles the information in such a way that a percept or concept is formed
  • The percept or concept is “perceived” and “understood”

The evidence for the existence of unconscious processes is widely known in cognitive psychology. In a seminal paper in the American Psychologist, Shevrin and Dickman (1980) demonstrated how conclusions from the studies of selective attention, cortical evoked potentials, and subliminal perception provide support for the concept of an unconscious mind and posit that “no psychological model that seeks to explain how human beings know, learn, or behave can ignore the concept of unconscious psychological processes” (p. 432). They also noted that the initial stage for processing all stimuli occurs outside of consciousness and that is affects what is known consciously. This early stage is different in how it operates from conscious cognition, and conscious cognition necessarily occurs after considerable preconscious processing. Years, later, their conclusions and ideas appear to be no less true.

 

Empirical and Cases Studies Demonstrating Unconscious Processes

In studies of subliminal perception, which began in 1950s, the processing of unperceivable stimuli and its effect on behaviour has provided interesting results about the unconscious mind. Shevrin and Fisher (1967) subliminally presented participants with a picture of a pen and knee just prior to falling asleep. When they awoke from rapid eye movement (REM; dream stage) sleep, participants’ associations to their dreams were of a pen or knee or included less rational kinds of associations (a finding that had been well demonstrated in past sleep studies). These included words that sound like pen or knee, such as pennant, hen, or neither. In contrast, those who awoke during non-REM sleep, which had been associated with few dreams or dreams that were more rational, had associations such as penny (pen + knee) or related words, such as nickel and dime.

Shevrin (2006) noted that this study demonstrated that 2 levels of unconscious processing – irrational and rational – were taking place. He deduced that once inhibitions [e.g. defences] weaken – in this case, being awakened from sleep – more rational processes overtaken by irrational ones. Surprisingly, the more irrational process observed in this study produced content similar to what was found in severe types of psychopathology: repetition and clanging. In a follow-up study with the same methodology, Shevrin (1973) presented participants with the same stimuli, this time while they were fully awake and more proximal  to entering the sleep state. Again, they found a similar pattern of results in which the type of associations produced varied depending on when participants were awakened.

Even more interesting results were described by Shevrin and colleagues (Shevrin, 1988; Shevrin, Bond, Brakel, Hertel & Williams, 1996; Shevrin et al., 1992), who set out to demonstrate that unconscious and conscious processes operate differently. In these studies, patients were selected who had either pathological phobic reactions or extended grief. They were then assessed via interview, and 4 psychoanalysts listened to the interviews carefully. By way of consensus, the psychoanalyst researchers derived a conceptualisation of the core conflicts for each patient; then went on to select the patients’ words that they believed captured the patients’ conscious experience of the symptoms and words that represented unconscious conflict. These words along with unrelated words were then presented both subliminally and supraliminally to the patients, who were then asked to classify them as belonging together. Using event-related potentials to detect patients’ ability to classify or respond to words in similar ways, the researchers found that words representing unconscious conflicts were correctly classified only when presented subliminally and that the reverse was true for supraliminally presented words; they were correctly classified only when presented supraliminally. Here, we find some sense to Lacan’s deductions regarding the unconscious being structured like language and the linguistic dexterity that psychoanalyst should be able to handle to decipher and understand the fullness of the patient’s mind [conscious and unconscious].

Shevrin (1996) concluded, “…When [these studies are] taken in combination, [they] show that unconscious psychological causes affect consciousness in a qualitatively different way… and that unconscious conflict has an existence independent of the of the psychoanalyst’s inferences from conscious manifestations, an independence supported by brain correlates” (p. 591, italics in original). Shevrin also published reviews of research showing an association between subliminal perception and dreaming (Shevrin, 1986) and subliminal perception and repression (Shevrin, 1990).

In a more recent meta-analysis from more than 100 studies of subliminal perception, Weinberger and Hardaway (1990) found that psychodynamic material presented subliminally had a noticeable and predictable effect on behaviour, suggesting very clearly that unconscious processes affect overt behaviour. For instance, studies by Silverman and colleagues (Silverman, 1983, 1986; Silverman, Bronstein & Mendelsohn, 1976; Silverman, Kwawer, Wolitzky & Coron, 1973; Silverman, Lachman & Milich, 1982; Silverman, Ross, Adler & Lustig, 1978) found that subliminally presented messages of Oedipal content (e.g., “Beating dad is okay”) to male participants yielded more competitiveness in a subsequent dart-throwing game than non-Oedipal messages. [Note: Freud proposed that at the Oedipal stage, a competition between father/son and daughter/mother takes place, before it is resolved in the child gradually adopting the same-sex parent’s values as his/her own in the development of an early form of Conscience (Super-Ego/Preconscious)]

Bradley and colleagues (Bradley, Mogg & Millar, 1996; Bradley, Mogg and Williams, 1994, 1995) performed a series of studies in which words related to depression (e.g. misery, grief, despair) are subliminally presented to individuals who fall into 3 groups: those meeting the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria for major depression, those with subclinical levels of depression and those operating as controls. They consistently found that on implicit memory tests, depressed and subclinically depressed individuals correctly identity words related to depression more often than those who are not depressed. Although their findings have not been consistently replicated for patients suffering with anxiety, studies with depressive patients suggest that a level of processing occurs below conscious awareness that increases individuals’ awareness of and identification of depressive material. Clinically, it would suggest that to effectively treat and manage depression, addressing issues related to unconscious sensitivity to depressive material is very important. Given the relatively high relapse rates for depression and other disorders that are treated with methods focussing more on conscious awareness – via cognitive and behavioural therapies (Westen & Morrison, 2001) – it seems that attention to unconscious processes has the potential to effectively address some depressive disorders.

Eagle (1987) provided support for the notion of unconscious processing in studies of perceptual illusions and dichotic listening, a type of selective attention task. For instance, in the Ames room experiment (Ittleson & Kilpatrick, 1951), the ceiling and floor were not parallel, and the 2 subjects stood either towards the front or back of the room. This led perceivers to believe that the people very different in size , despite the fact that they were not. In the dichotic listening task (Lewis, 1970), individuals heard 2 different messages in each ear but were trained to attend to just one of those messages. When asked to repeat what was heard in the trained ear, individuals had less of a reaction time in producing the words when the words in the other ear were semantically similar [the meaning was synonymous / it meant the same thing]. This means that, there was a facilitative effect on performance when a semantically similar word was processed (unconsciously) in the “unattended” ear.

Further studies of patients who have experienced brain injuries provide interesting clinical observations that support the presence of unconscious processes. Milner, Corkin and Teuber (1968) reported the famous case of a patient known as H.M., who had undergone surgery on his medial temporal lobes to control very severe seizures. We nowadays know that just below the this part of the cortex lies the hippocampus, which is considered as an important anatomical locus for learning new information and storing it in working and long-term memory. Because of the damage done to the medial temporal lobes by the procedure, H.M. failed to remember anything that was new to him past surgery. H.M. however could remember information if he rehearsed it, although it was quickly lost if he was interrupted.

One interesting consequence of this procedure was that H.M. appeared not to have lost all “affective” components of certain experiences. For instance, H.M. had the occasion to visit his mother, who was hospitalised. After leaving the hospital, he had no recollection of visiting her, although he had the idea that something may be wrong with her. H.M. experienced other events like this, demonstrating well that implicit learning was still occurring for “affectively charged” situations and that the unconscious effects of this learning could be identified in everyday life.

Later studies of unconscious affective processing have suggested that there are at least 2 neural pathways that process affective information (LeDoux, 1989, 1995, as cited in Westen, 1999). One of these pathways originates in the thalamus and transmit sensory information to other brain regions, whereby emotional meaning is attached to the information. The other pathway, also originating in the thalamus, sends the sensory information to the cortex, where higher levels of emotional processing and emotional meaning are executed.

Mark Solms has reported some exciting work on the effects of unconscious processes on commonly observed clinical syndromes (e.g., Solms, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2002, 2004). Solms has taken a very active role in recent times in integrating the findings of neuroscience and psychoanalysis, which has created a relatively new discipline of study known as neuro-psychoanalysis. An interesting set of case of studies has been provided (Solms, 2000a) on patients who have experienced a strike on the right temporal lobe in the region, where the middle cerebral artery lies. In these case studies, psychoanalytic theory and treatment is integrated into the neurological understanding of the deficits the patients are experiencing.

Right hemisphere syndrome is a neurological disorder consisting of 3 major symptoms: ansognosia, neglect and spatial perception and cognition deficits. Anosognosia is the indifference or outright denial of an illness, which in the present case was the loss of the use of the patient’s left arm and side. Neglect occurs when patients ignore their paralysed limb and side. Patients often feel disgust when they are compelled to attend to the left side of the body, sometimes experiencing a sense of revulsion.

The spatial and cognitive deficits observed consist of defective facial recognition, imperceptions of facial emotion, environmental disorientation, and various kinds of apraxia [the inability to complete an activity involving muscle movement]. There are various theories about the emotional deficit in patients with right hemisphere syndrome. One theory suggests that the stroke affects attentional arousal that is mediated through activity in the right perisylvian region of the temporal lobe, which consequently gives rise to anosognosia and neglect. Another theory has focused on the fact that the left hemisphere is more involved with positive emotional processing and the right with more negative emotional processing. Since, the right hemisphere is damaged in this case, anosognosia and neglect occur because there is little to no processing of negative effect in the right hemisphere. A final theory states that it is the right hemisphere that is dominant for the perceptual representation of bodily states, which include more somatic or visceral perceptions. When this part of the brain is damaged or compromised, the bran can only rely on past somatosensory representations of bodily states, which provide the patient that there is no deficit or problem.

Solms (2000a) described Mr.C., a 59-year-old engineer who experienced right hemisphere syndrome after complications from a mild stroke. Only part of the visual field of the patient was remaining and he would not attempt to compensate for it [i.e. neglect], and he also ignored sensory stimulation that occurred on the left side of his body [anosodiaphoria]. He ignored and minimised his paralysed left arm, referring to it as being “like a dead piece of meat, but not it’s just a little bit lame and lazy” (p.71). Other deficits existed due to right parietal damage.

Mr.C. was “aloof, imperious and egocentric” (Solms, 2000a, p.72). He seemed unconcerned about others and would sit blankly at times staring into space. However, on occasion he would burst into tears or look as if this were the case. These periods however, were brief yet stood in stark contrast to the emotional coldness that he often presented with. During one physical therapy session, Mr. C. was making very little progress in learning how to walk. The physiotherapist reported to the treating psychologist that Mr. C. seemed “indifferent to the errors he was making, and he simply ignored her when she pointed them out to him” (p.74). In a session next day, Mr. C. told the psychologist that the physiotherapist indicated that he had been making mistakes, sounding as if he was confession something. Then, he said that another therapist had asked him to do some activities with blocks but that he could not do it. At this point, the therapist replied to Mr. C.:

 

“…it was difficult for him to acknowledge the problems his stroke had left him with, but it seemed that he was now more able to see them. Mr.C., carried on… [saying] his physiotherapy was “okay” but that his arm had not progressed to the degree that he required. Then, at this point, he suddenly  withdrew from conversing… and began to exercise his left hand and arm with the right one. [The therapist] commented that is seemed as if he could not bear the wait, and wanted his arm to be completely better instantly… [He replied] “I just don’t want my left arm to get weak from non-use.” [The therapist then replied] perhaps it was too painful for him to acknowledge what he was on the verge of recognising a moment earlier – namely that his arm really was completely paralysed – and that the question of whether it would recover or not was largely beyond his control. This comment provoked an instantaneous crumpling of his face and a burst of painful emotion accompanied by pre-tearfulness. [Turning to the therapist] he said in desperation “but look at my arm [pointing to his left arm] – what am I going to do if it doesn’t recover? (pp. 74-75)

 

Solms (2000a) noted that this case demonstrates how unconscious material that was too painful to acknowledge was accessed through careful interpretations. Furthermore, the case example controverts the theory that these patients lack negative emotions or have no awareness of their bodies and their deficits. In Mr. C’s case, it is clear that implicit processes were at work and that the emotional response originated out of the complex, associative networks were formed by this patient’s unconscious processing of the painful loss of his bodily integrity.

Transference phenomena can also be better understood in the light of recent findings in cognitive psychology. To understand transference phenomena, Westen and Gabbard (2002b, pp. 103-104) highlighted important ideas in recent studies of cognitive processing.

  1. More representations consist of memory traces that are multimodal, which include semantic, sensory and emotional components.
  2. Representations of self and other exist as potentials for activation. Because there are potentials, they are subject to modification, which will interact with new knowledge, further developing the self and other representations.
  3. Memory networks consist of semantic, episodic and procedural knowledge, along with differing affects and motives.
  4. Unconscious procedures to manage emotions are defences and may be triggered outside of awareness. Co-occurring motives and affects may also be activated, such that the person may not be aware of either one or the defence being used.
  5. Conscious representation are some of many representations that get activated. Consciousness is a serial processing system, whereas multiple parallel processes get activated that are not available to consciousness.

As may be observed in these principles, Westen and Gabbard (2002b) suggested that transference phenomena represent a dynamic, ongoing process that occurs at the conscious and unconscious level. Because multiple cognitive events occur at one time, transference phenomena can be highly complex phenomena and can represent one of many possible reactions to the therapist, as well as other meaningful individuals in the patient’s life. In fact, multiple transferences can occur. For instance, a patient may feel particularly challenged by his work and may experience some feedback from his female supervisor about his recent difficulties with his job. Suppose the patient’s mother took great strides to help him whenever he felt frustrated in his school activities or work, such that he came to unconsciously expect her to provide assistance during challenging times. At work the patient may have experienced the supervisor’s comments as an invitation for help and assistance. Should no help be forthcoming, the patient would become irritated and disappointed with such a difficult supervisor. Likewise, suppose that this patient’s father was unavailable to help him. He may have to come to view male authorities as uncaring and disinterested in his plight. Thus, in his present treatment, the patient may find himself feeling scared and anxious towards his male therapist when talking about his recent disappointment with the supervisor. An exploration of his interaction with his supervisor may elicit anxiety in the patient towards his therapist whom he experiences as a disinterested and uncaring male. Likewise, he may feel very frustrated towards the therapist  who is not willing to tell him how to manage his interactions with his supervisor, reflecting a maternal transference to the therapist who unconsciously should be offering help and assistance quickly and without much effort on the patient’s part.

 

The Psychoanalytic Account of Motivation

The account of human motivation, resting on sexual and death instincts, has been a big talking point for critics of psychoanalysis from the very beginning. Jung’s departure from the psychoanalytic movement was largely caused over disagreements over the motivational concepts. Jung questioned the centrality of sexuality and argued the importance of spiritual motives. Alfred Adler on the other hand proposed a basic desire for social superiority and a “will to power”. Later writers within the psychoanalytic tradition also sought to expand the theory of motivation to include drives for mastery and competence, and for interpersonal relatedness.

In general, there has always been 2 major issues, the first is whether the sexual and death instinct are plausible sources of human motivation. Second, whether they are sufficient explanations of motivation, or whether additional motives that are not reducible to these drives are needed.

With respect to the first issue, it may be hard to deny [from a universal and organic standpoint] that sexual wishes and drives are powerful sources of motivation, especially if we include “sexual” desires as a part of loving relationships and for bodily pleasure. From a biological and evolutionary perspective it could not be otherwise, since reproductive success is the basic currency of individual genetic fitness, not to mention species survival [in all species including primates and mammals].

From this perspective, the psychoanalytic emphasis on sexual drives – an emphasis shared by no other personality theory – is a very strong point of the psychoanalytic theory, even if we are allowed to disagree and investigate some particular claims that may not apply to some individuals regarding the effects of the Psychosexual stages in childhood as proposed by Freud [which inspired John Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment], or discuss the other drives that are non-sexual [e.g. Romantic love and its expressions].

272 Nat Museum of Women in Art 215_1000_dpurb

From the same evolution standpoint, a death instinct directed inwards towards self-destruction is questionable. However, this negative judgement on the death instinct, which is shared by many contemporary psychoanalysts, does not mean that we need to dispense with the idea of aggressive drives. Aggressiveness could be theorised not as a form of self-destructiveness, but rather as a way to strive for social dominance [among a particular frame, circle or group], i.e. to fend off “attackers” in defence of one’s own “territorial grounds” or to assert one’s personal choice or interest.

The second issue is whether sexual and perhaps aggressive drives are broad enough to capture the full range of human motivations. The answer, is clearly not. Since, we also have drives for achievement, approval, non-sexual relatedness, creativity, self-esteem, and so on? The other question is biologically-based motives that “push” us towards certain kinds of behaviour enough? Do future-oriented motivational concepts, like goals and personal ideals not “pull” us towards desirable endpoints? When these questions are raised, basic Freudian account of motivation may seem limited in their scope, leaving out motives that are socially shaped or personally determined. However, the issue is not so easily resolved, since psychoanalysts may agree that motivations beyond the instinctual drives are required to describe how our behaviour is guided, however it may still be argued that all these motivations are simply multiple layers of the very same instinctual drives. For example, achievement striving could be described psychoanalytically as a socially shaped motive that is underpinned and powered by aggressive urges [that are applied in different forms to achieve our goals, i.e. not in a physically violent manner, but competitively in multiple sophisticated social ways]. On the same note, creativity might be understood as a sublimated expression of our sexual drives [e.g. artistic creations], based on some unconscious desire for unifying and making connections that Freud saw as the hallmark of life instincts.

Victor Hugo La Musique

Traduction(EN): « What we could not say and what we could not silence, music expresses. » -Victor Hugo (1802 – 1885)

However, even if the claim that human motivation is ultimately based on a few instinctual drives that govern all living organism, it would still be more enlightening and accurate to patients to describe their motivation in a more complex way, i.e. expressed to meet the sophisticated and multi-layered human societies we live in. So, in the end there is no objective or empirical way to establish the question of motivation with a clear “true or false” – we will have to use logical reasoning and theories about what drives “life” forward.

Documentaire: L’invention de la Psychanalyse (1997)

 

The 2 Major Disciples of Freudian Theory: Carl Jung and Jacques Lacan

The psychoanalytic movement was largely the invention of Sigmund Freud, and his influence far exceeds that of his early followers who subsequently tried to modify psychoanalysis. The major principles of psychoanalysis were redefined and reinterpreted until by 1930 the movement was fragmented into competing views. Nevertheless, those writers were departed from Freud’s speculation retain the basic model of psychoanalysis that conceived of personality in terms of an energy reduction system with three levels of awareness that is the conscious [that contains the Ego], preconscious [that holds the Super-Ego] and the unconscious [the wild Id]. The psychoanalytic movement has been very active since Freud’s death in 1939, and has led to many new theoretical developments influencing all schools of psychology rather than standing still as we have just seen regarding the reconciliation of some fundamental concepts with Cognitive psychology and Neurosciences.

 

Carl Jung (1875 – 1961)

Carl Jung

One of the most fascinating and complicated scholars of this century, Carl Jung (1875 – 1961) was born to a poor family in a northern Swiss village. He managed to gain entrance to the University of Basel and received a doctorate in medicine in 1900. Jung spent most of the rest of his life in Zürich, teaching, writing and working with patients. After reading The Interpretation of Dreams in 1900, Jung began corresponding with Freud and finally met him in 1907. Eventually he accompanied Freud to America in 1909, where he also lectured and introduced his own work to American audiences. However, Jung began to apply psychoanalytic insights to ancient myths and legends in search for the key to the nature of human psyche. Such independent thinking did not meet with Freud’s approval, and there is also some speculation that the Jung made a critical analysis of Freud’s personal life that may have contributed to tensions between them. Freud secured the post of the first president of the International Psychoanalytic Association for Jung in 1911, but by this time their rift was beyond healing. Finally, in 1914, Jung withdrew from the Association and severed all interactions with Freud due to the over-emphasis of the defining stages of infant sexuality among other aspects of pure Freudian theory.  Jung continued his own interpretations of psychoanalysis and made several expeditions to study primitive societies in Western United States, Africa, Australia and Central America. His prolific writings on subjects ranging from anthropology to religion provided novel insights to age-old problems of human existence from the psychoanalytic perspective.

Jung’s “Analytical psychology” refined many Freudian concepts and emerged as the first major alternative to Freudian theory (1900); however, Jung retained Freud’s terminology [Unconscious, Conscious and Preconscious], and as a result the same terms often carry different meanings. Jung (1912) renamed the Id as the Personal Unconscious, the Ego as the Personal Conscious [although the term Ego also appears in some of Jung’s writings], and the Super-Ego as the Collective Conscious [although the term Persona also appears in some of his writings]. After that Jung (1912) analytical psychology also added the Collective Unconscious to Freud’s (1900) structure of personality which is part of the Id.

Jung, like Freud, believed that the central purpose of personality is to achieve a balance between conscious and unconscious forces within the personality. However, Jung described two sources of unconscious forces. What is the personal unconscious, consisting of repressed or forgotten experiences similar to Freud’s preconscious level. The contents of the Personal Unconscious [Id] are accessible to full consciousness. Jung’s Personal Unconscious held complexes, which were groups of feelings with a defined theme than give rise to distorted behavioural responses. According to Hall and Lindzey (1970), “… a [complex] is an organised group or constellation of feelings, thoughts, perceptions, and memories which exists in the Personal Unconscious” (p.82). Unlike archetypes [which reflect the cumulative experiences of the entire human race, Homo Sapiens], Complexes reflect each individual’s unique experience. For example, a boy who repressed negative emotions about his mother could become an adult with the complex, experiencing intense feelings and anxieties when images or stimuli associated with motherhood are encountered [because they are dominated by their mothers (e.g. some mothers might offer nourishment only after – not before – their babies stop crying, thus communicating the unconscious message that the mothers are all-powerful].

The second source of unconscious forces, you need to Jung’s theory, is the Collective Unconscious, more powerful source of energy that contains inherited contents shared with other members of a particular group, i.e. it consists of aspects of personality, common to all humans, that we have inherited from our ancestors. Jung here was talking about individual similarities and not differences in personality. As the personal unconscious has complexes, the collective unconscious has archetypes, defined as primordial images evolved from human beings primitive ancestry of specific experiences and attitudes passed on over centuries [after all humans did evolve from basic primates to the sophisticated beings were now are]. Hall and Lindzey (1970) define archetype as “…a universal thought form (idea) which contains a large element of emotion” (p.84). Although modern science has shown that direct environmental influences has more power in shaping the individual mind, some aspects may be retained from evolutionary psychology although it is important to consider the fact that human societies are constantly evolving in more ways than one. At the time that Jung devised his theory however, he listed such archetypes as birth, death, unity, power, God, the devil, magic, the old sage and the earth mother. As Weitz (1976) noted, according to Jung’s Analytical Psychology, archetypes equip humans to interact with particular aspects of their physical and social worlds in a particular manner, thus archetypes are adaptive from an evolutionary standpoint. For example, Jung (1912) contended that all humans possess a “mother figure” archetype that not only gives them readily accessible image of a generic mother at birth but also predisposes them to interact with their actual mothers in a particular manner [e.g. crying, sucking]. Solomon (2003) noted that in Jung’s Theory, collectively experienced archetypes provide basic themes around which personally experienced complexes are organised. For example, all individuals are born with a readiness to seek nourishment from their mothers (the mother archetype), some individuals may find that their mothers use this readiness against them (mother complex).

The notion of a collective unconscious in personality that provides the individual with patterns of behaviour fits well with Jung’s preoccupation with myths and symbols. Jung believed that the adequacies of a society’s symbols to express archetypal images are an index of the progress of civilisation. [A good example would be the Ancient Greeks who after sophisticating their society through the evolution of their values, philosophy & educational system, saw peasants turn into conquerors, sculptors, poets and artists who even went on to colonise countries that later changed the history of those who colonised them in timeless ways / See: L’épopée de la Grèce antique (2016)].

Jung focussed on the middle years of life, when the pressures of sexual drives supposedly give way to anxiety about the more profound philosophical and religious issues of the meaning of life and death. By reinstating the notion of the spiritual soul, Jung argued that the healthy personality has realised the fullness of human potential to achieve self-unity and complete integration. According to Jung, this realisation occurs only after the person has mastered obstacles during the development of personality from infancy to middle age. Failure to grow in this sense results in the disintegration of personality. Accordingly, the person must individualise experiences to achieve a “transcendent function” by which differentiated personality structures are unified to form fully aware self.

Both Jung (1921) and Freud (1905) wrote about libido, or psychic energy, that presumably fuels individuals’ behaviour, however Jung viewed libido in a less sexualised form. Jung redefined libidinal energy as the opposition of introversion – extraversion in personality, bypassing Freud’s extreme sexual emphasis. Extraversion forces are directed externally of the people and the environment, and then nurture self-confidence. Introversion leads the person to an inner direction of contemplation, introspection and stability. Jung (1921) believed that all individuals are capable of experiencing introversion as well as extraversion over time, however, individuals at any particular point in time may be characterised as experiencing either introversion or extraversion. The opposing energies must be balanced for the proper psychological functioning sensation, thinking, feeling and intuition. An imbalance between extraversion introversion is partly compensated for in dreams. Indeed, for Jung dreams have important adaptive value in helping the person maintain equilibrium. Jung has been praised for developing a dichotomy of flow of psychic energy [i.e. introversion vs extraversion] that has been recast as one of the major personality traits in various trait theories [for empiricists who believe the main focus should be the “conflict-free” conscious part of the ego, to which many basic concepts of Cognitive Psychology can be applied].

In addition to introversion versus extraversion as a pair of opposing directions of flow of psychic energy [i.e. inwards versus outwards], Jung (1921) postulated that thinking vs feeling and sensing vs intuition represent 2 pairs of opposing modes of adaptation and functioning.

As Jung grew older, his writings increasingly came to emphasise mysticism and religious experiences, domains usually ignored by mainstream empirical psychology. Out of all the early founders of psychoanalysis, Jung held views in sharpest contrast to those of empiricism. However, he offered a unique treatment of critical human issues that had not been systematically studied by psychologists and still remain in the realm of speculative philosophy. Perhaps Jung was more of a philosopher than a psychologist, and he provoked and confronted issues not readily accommodated in other systems of psychology.

 

Jacques Lacan (1901 – 1981)

Jacques Lacan

One of the most famous post-Freudian development, especially popular in Europe and South America, was initiated by the colourful French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. Lacan was the son of a successful oil and soap salesman from Paris. His mother was a firm Catholic and his younger brother entered a monastery in 1929.

During the early 1920s, Lacan actively engaged with the Parisian literary and artistic avant-garde movements. Having met James Joyce, he was present at the bookshop where the first readings of passages from Ulysses in French and English took place, shortly before it was published in 1922. Lacan also had meetings with Charles Maurras, whom he admired as a literary stylist, and he occasionally attended meetings of Action Française (of which Maurras was a leading ideologue), of which he would later be critical on some aspects that he firmly disagreed and considered as outdated, such as the positivist sociology of Maurras which presents the subject as a simple product of his « milieu » [circle], derived from his culture which was even pushed to absurd extremes by Édouard Pichon to theorise about a « national unconscious ». Lacan was more avant-garde and perhaps unknowingly embraced future psychological advances of neuroscience by founding his logic on the thesis of German biologist and philosopher Von Uexküll who convincingly argued about the multitude of determining factors of the environment and not simply the basic evolution of species, but on the sophisticated elaboration of language which identifies the development of the individual psyche to a social structure.

Lacan developed psychoanalytic theory in radically new directions that relied heavily on linguistic theory and other intellectual trends in the late 20th-century France, such as the structuralist movement. It was proposed that the Unconscious is structured like a language, so that its operations can be likened to linguistic phenomena [e.g. repression was likened to a metaphor]. Hence, to uncover unconscious material the psychoanalyst must decipher a chain of clues with a great deal of verbal dexterity. Lacan also held that the ego [le Moi], although conscious and able to orchestrate a wide range of operations, is not a complete organ of self-control as ego psychologists from the US maintained, but largely also an unstable and ultimately illusory sense of personal unity. To Lacan, our sense of wholeness is a fiction and our selves are profoundly “de-centred” around a tissue of identifications with people [and characters] we have known [directly or indirectly exposed to – this extends to the arts, fictional characters, mentors, etc].

According to Lacan’s (1973/1977) version of Psychoanalytic Theory, Ego Psychologists [e.g. Anna Freud, Heinz Hartmann, Erik Erikson] and Object Relations Theorists [e.g. Melanie Klein, Donald Winnicott and Ronald Fairbairn] had strayed too far from Freud’s original (1900, 1923) original version of psychoanalytic theory. This is even in direct contrast to Jacques Lacan’s own mentor, Ego Psychologist Rudolph Loewenstein who was also a close associate and collaborator of Ego Psychologist Heinz Hartmann.

Lacan, however, seems to have set the record straight in accentuating the fundamental and widely accepted foundations of psychoanalysis by advocating a “return to Freud” [not Anna Freud’s (1923) version of Ego Psychology], but rather to Sigmund Freud’s Topographic Model of the 1900 that defined the mind into 3 levels of awareness, i.e. the Unconscious, the Preconscious and the Conscious.

Rocha (2012) noted that Lacan (1973/1977) was especially concerned with the Unconscious [l’inconscient, le « Ça », the « It », the ID] as the “ideal worker” within individuals’ personality structures. In a 1973 television interview, Lacan famously argued that the Unconscious does not “think, nor calculate, nor judge; the unconscious simply works!” Lacan contended that like the ideal worker in a capitalist society, the Unconscious generates a product in compliance with rigid, hierarchical rules and regulations – in particular, the product of unthinking and unquestioning fulfilment of individuals’ desire – which seems like something psychoanalysis should address and change for a humane, intelligent and creative civilisation.

As for dreams, Lacan argued convincingly that dreams are important products of the Unconscious [l’inconscient, le « Ça », the « It », the ID] that allow individuals to “feel” [at least during the sleeping state] that they have fulfilled their desire, however, dreams may also contain anxiety-provoking contents that individuals do not desire. As Meyer (2001) interestingly pointed out, in Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory, the problem of the Unconscious [l’inconscient, le « Ça », the « It », the ID] in finding expression is the problem of discourse with the “Other” [Le grand « Autre », the big « Other », Preconscious Superego in the domain of the symbolic]. Indeed, infants enter the world without knowing how to communicate their desire to caregivers via language, with its own rules and structure. It is also to be noted that in Lacanian Theory of Psychoanalysis, infants’ desire arises from the “loss and longing” that they experience when they are separated from their caregivers [especially their mothers] – precisely the person from whom the infants first learn early forms of communication [language]. Waintrater (2012) also pointed out that in Lacan’s Theory, individuals’ desire are not solely tied to infantile sexuality. If anything, Lacan’s concept of unconscious desire complements John Bowlby’s (1969) concept of infants’ need for attachment. Lacan uses the term « Manque« , French for « Lack » which is always related to desire. It is a lack which causes desire to arise [desire is the metonymy of the lack of being (manque-à-être)], however the precise nature of what is lacking varies. In 1955, when the term « Manque (Lack) » first appears, it designates first and foremost « manque-à-être » [want-to-be] which is the « lack of being« , hence what is desired is « being », i.e. not the lack of this or that, but the lack of « being » whereby the being exists, this lack of being [manque-à-être] is the heart of analytic experience and the very field in which the neurotic patient’s passion is deployed. An important distinction to be noted for Lacanian oriented psychoanalysts and theorists is between the lack of being [Manque-à-être / want to be] which relates to desire, and the lack of having [Manque-à-avoir] which relates to demand.

 

Distinction between Need, Demand & Desire

Need

In the context of this distinction, « need » comes close to what Freud referred to as « instinct » (Instinkt); that is, a purely biological concept opposed to the realm of the drive (Trieb), it is an appetite which emerges according to the requirements of the organism and which abates completely (even if only temporarily) when satisfied. The human subject, being born in a state of helplessness, is unable to satisfy its own needs, and hence depends on the Other [usually a role occupied by the mother in most cases] to help it satisfy them. In order to get the Other’s help, the infant must express its needs vocally; need must be articulated in demand. The primitive demands of the infant may only be inarticulate screams, but they serve to bring the Other to minister to the infant’s needs. However, the presence of the Other soon acquires an importance in itself, an importance that goes beyond the satisfaction of need, since this presence symbolizes the Other’s love. Hence demand soon takes on a double function, serving both as an articulation of need and as a demand for love. However, whereas the Other can provide the objects which the subject requires to satisfy his needs, the Other [usually mother at this stage] cannot provide that unconditional love which the subject craves. Hence even after the needs which were articulated in demand have been satisfied, the other aspect of demand, the craving for love, remains unsatisfied, and this leftover is desire.

The concept of a pre-linguistic need is thus merely a hypothesis, and the subject of this pure need is a mythical subject; even the paradigmatic need of hunger never exists as a pure biological given, but is marked by the structure of desire. Nevertheless, this hypothesis is useful to Lacan for maintaining his theses about the radical divergence between human desire and all natural or biological categories. Need is thus an intermittent tension which arises for purely organic reasons and which is discharged entirely by the specific action corresponding to the particular need in question.

 

Demand

Lacan argues that since the infant is incapable of performing the specific actions that would satisfy its biological needs, and hence Lacan bases the distinction on the fact that in order to satisfy his needs the infant must articulate them in language; in other words, the infant must articulate his needs in a « demand » [for them to be met by the mother who will perform the specific actions]. However, in doing so, something else is introduced which causes a split between need and demand; this is the fact that every demand is not only an articulation of need but also an (unconditional) demand for love. Now, although the Other to whom the demand is addressed (in the first instance, the mother) can and may supply the object which satisfies the infant’s need [e.g. the breast to satisfy the child’s hunger], she is never in a position to answer the demand for love unconditionally, because she too is divided. The result of this split between need and demand is an insatiable leftover, which is desire itself. It is this double function which gives birth to desire, since while the needs which demand articulates may be satisfied, the craving for love is unconditional and insatiable, and hence persists as a leftover even after the needs have been satisfied; this leftover constitutes desire. In the seminar of 1956-7, Lacan argues that the cry of the human infant — its call (l’appel) to the mother — is not merely an instinctual signal but is « inserted in a synchronic world of cries organized in a symbolic system. » In other words, the infant’s screams become organized in a linguistic structure long before the child is capable of articulating recognisable words.

Demand is thus intimately linked to the human subject’s initial helplessness. By forcing the patient to express himself entirely in speech, the psychoanalytic situation puts him back in the position of the helpless infant, thus encouraging regression.

« Through the mediation of the demand, the whole past opens up right to early infancy. The subject has never done anything other than demand, he could not have survived otherwise, an we just follow on from there. » However, while the speech of the patient is itself already a demand (for a reply), this demand is underpinned by deeper demands (to be cured, to be revealed to himself). The question of how the psychoanalyst engages with these demands is crucial. Certainly the psychoanalyst does not attempt to gratify all of the patient’s demands, but nor is it simply a question of frustrating them.

 

Desire 

Lacan follows Spinoza in arguing that « desire is the essence of man. » Desire is simultaneously the heart of human existence and the central concern of psychoanalysis. However, when Lacan talks about desire, it is not any kind of desire he is referring to, but always « unconscious » desire. This is not because Lacan sees conscious desire as unimportant, but simply because it is unconscious desire that forms the central concern of psychoanalysis. The aim of psychoanalytic treatment is to lead the patient to recognise the truth about his/her desire. It is only possible to recognize one’s desire when it is articulated in speech. Hence in psychoanalysis, « what’s important is to teach the subject to name, to articulate, to bring this desire into existence. « However, it is not a question of seeking a new means of expression for a given desire, for this would imply a expressionist theory of language. On the contrary, by articulating desire in speech, the patient brings it into existence.

« That the subject should come to recognise and to name his desire; that is the efficacious action of analysis. But it isn’t a question of recognising something which would be entirely given. … In naming it, the subject creates, brings forth, a new presence in the world. » [adds to reality what was previously not there through language].

However, there is a limit to how far desire can be articulated in speech because of a fundamental « incompatibility between desire and speech; « it is this incompatibility which explains the irreducibility of the unconscious (i.e. the fact the the unconscious is not that which is not known, but that which cannot be known). « Although the truth about desire is present to some degree in all speech, speech can never articulate the whole truth about desire; whenever speech attempts to articulate desire, there is always a leftover, a surplus, which exceeds speech. » It is important to distinguish between desire and the drives. Although they both belong to the field of the Big Other (as opposed to love), desire is one whereas the drives are many. In other words, the drives are the particular (partial) manifestations of a single force called desire (although there may also be desires which are not manifested in the drives). There is only one object of desire, object (petit) a, and this is represented by a variety of partial objects in different partial drives. The object (petit) a is not the object towards which desire tends, but the cause of desire. Desire is not a relation to an object, but a relation to a lack (Manque-à-être / Lack of being). One of Lacan’s most oft-repeated formulas is: « man’s desire is the desire of the Other [Big Othe/Superego]. » This can be understood in many complementary ways, of which the following are the most important:

Desire is essentially « desire of the Other’s desire », which means both desire to be the object of another’s desire, and desire for recognition by another. Desire is essentially a desire for recognition from this ‘Other’; secondly desire is for the thing that we suppose the Other desires, which is to say, the thing that the Other lacks.

Lacan takes this idea from Hegel, to state:

Desire is human only if the one desires, not the body, but the Desire of the Other [Big Other / Superego] . . . that is to say, if he/she wants to be ‘desired’ or ‘loved’, or, rather, ‘recognised’ in his/her human value. . . . In other words, all human, anthropogenetic Desire . . . is, finally, a function of the desire for ‘recognition‘.

Thus, desire is a constant force which can never be fully satisfied [because humans tend to have other desires once one is achieved], the constant ‘pressure’ which underlies the drives and keeps us moving forward.

 

Mirror Stage: the birth of the Ego [Le Moi]

Malin (2011) pointed out that in Lacanian Theory, a major event in infants’ personality and social development is the mirror stage, when infants enter into language as a uniquely human form of interaction with all caregivers in the child’s environment [although infants are not likely to consciously experience language prior to age 2]. As Luepnitz (2009) noted, Lacan believed that infants often enter into language at a crucial point when they literally recognise themselves in a mirror, with caregivers [i.e. can include others such as teachers rather than direct parents] pointing to the reflection and approvingly saying to the infants, “Look, that’s you!” – even if infants are unlikely to remember the event in itself.

Rene Magritte - Not To Be Reproduced (1937)

« Not to be reproduced » by René Magritte, 1937

And as Hivernel (2013) noted, the 2 major outcomes of the mirror stage are the emergence of the Subject, a product of the symbolic field (i.e., individuals’ gradual awareness regarding their uniqueness) and the Other (i.e. individuals’ gradual awareness regarding the rest of humanity, to whom they are connected to varying degrees). A further major outcome of the mirror stage is the birth of the Ego [Le Moi, an imaginary formation], and infants may experience joy at this moment, which occurs (and, in fact, is necessary) before infants can truly understand the power of symbols in language. However, as already mentioned, one of the unfortunate outcomes of the mirror stage was that infants gradually begin to look outward, and not inward in search for identity; and such external orientation toward individuals’ own identity is doomed to fail. This seems to make perfect sense even from the objective and mechanistic outlook that the Organic Theory considers; i.e., any organism whose reality or sense of it is based on the geographical mental conditioning of a group of organisms [about 4 or 5] will have a limited perspective of reality and lack a wider outlook of the world as it truly is.

 

The Power of Language

Gillett (2001) noted that, in Lacan’s view, language does not perfectly convey individuals’ desire to other persons, partly because individuals do not fully understand their own desire, and partly because language is an inherently social medium that can lead to misunderstanding as well as understanding between individuals and other persons. Language however is a very powerful social medium [as can be seen also from the essay, The Concept of Self]

Le Langage et la Réalité dpurb 1200

Traduction(EN): « There has always been something special about language because language creates reality. Language reveals the truth of the subject and adds to reality what was not there before. Hence, the difference between truth and reality is that truth adds to reality what was not there before. Empiricists who study traits should remember that constructs would not exist if they had not first been created through language. Hence language, creates reality! » -Danny J. D’Purb

Lacan proposed that the unconscious is structured like language. In the unconscious as well as in the acquisition of language, individuals may follow rules regarding the use of symbols without having deliberately learned [and without having overtly been taught] those rules [something “special” and even “mystical” about language]. In addition the unconscious [like language] is regarded as a “network of signifiers” with the term signifier (le significant) referring to any symbol that is used [on its own, or in combination with other symbols] to stand in for, or to represent, something else [the signified – le signifié].

 

The 3 Registers: Symbolic, Imaginary & Real

The Symbolic [which is constructed largely via language] is one of the aspects of the Subject that is revealed via individuals’ dreams, and it is the cornerstone of Lacanian theory because the Subject’s relationship with the Symbolic is the heart of psychoanalysispsychoanalysts are essentially practitioners of the symbolic function [culture and symbolic are thus imposed on nature]. Lacan criticises the psychoanalysis of his day for ignoring the symbolic domain and reducing everything to the imaginary and this for Lacan is a betrayal of Freud’s most basic insights; « Freud’s discovery is that of the field of effects, in the nature of man, produced by his relationship to the symbolic order« . Lacan argues that it is only by working in the symbolic field that the psychoanalyst can produce changes in the subjective position of the patient and foster progress and growth; these changes will also produce imaginary effects [on the Ego « Moi »] since the imaginary is structured by the symbolic. Hence, it seems to suggest that a healthy Ego [Le Moi] will produce appropriate imaginary effects and contribute to the individual’s desires and unique personality since it allows the Subject to imagine creatively while regulating the desires of the Unconscious [ID / It / Ça / Inconscient] according to the symbolic laws of the Big Other [Grand Autre / Superego with the ID], and the balance between these 3 domains [ID – Superego – Ego] differs from one individual to the other leading to differences in personality.

Other structural components [or registers] of the Subject that are revealed via dreams are the Imaginary and the Real [Real simply stands for what is neither symbolic or imaginary and is never truly known – it is mediated by the 2 orders of the Imaginary and the Symbolic, thus while it is present, these uncanny objects are treated as alien and reminders of symbolic lack in the subjects identity formation]. The Imaginary order is based on the formation of the Ego in the mirror stage by identification with the counterpart [or specular image] and this dual relationship between the ego and the counterpart is characterised by narcissism and alienation. Lacan also accused the major psychoanalytic schools of reducing psychoanalysis to the imaginary order since it is the dimension of the human subject which is most closely linked to animal psychology, but yet it is structured by the symbolic and this means that in man the imaginary relation has deviated from the realm of nature and is in fact the realm of image and imagination, deception and lure. The principal illusions of the imaginary are those of wholeness, synthesis, autonomy, duality and similarity.

Lacan argued that the psychanalyst’s interpretation of dreams can be viewed as analogous to a linguist’s translation of a language, unearthing the meaning that particular symbols hold for an individual [e.g. a client in psychotherapy]. Lacan noted that a specific difficulty that arises when psychoanalysts interpret the content of clients’ dreams is that, by the time the clients have awakened a large portion [if not most or all] of the dream has vanished, and this can be problematic if clients are reflecting on dreams that they experienced several year (decades?) ago. According to Lacanian Theory, Marder (2013) noted that dreams are oriented towards future interpretation, by dreamers themselves or by someone else (e.g. Psychoanalysts). Hence, truly important content are likely to survive clients’ transition from sleeping to waking states.

Lacan also pointed out as Stockholder (1998) noted, that Freud’s (1923) Structural model, i.e. the later version of his Psychoanalytic Theory with its dictinctions among Id, Super-Ego and Ego had distorded the true meaning of the first Topographic Model. And perhaps rightly observed, since the Ego which was meant to be conscious, revealed an unconscious element in its ability to instantly generate defence mechanisms outside the awareness of the patient, when before the function of the Ego was just one component present in the Conscious, i.e. the Ego [le Moi], was a part of the « Conscious », as a level of consciousness and not assumed to be a distinct mental functions as part of the new 3 part dissection [ID, SuperEgo and Ego]. However, they can be synthesised and enhanced, as we are doing with Freud, Jung and Lacan along with other discoveries in the realms of Neuroscience and Cognitive-Psychology to explore the psychology of the singular organism and its powers of definition to a level that no other psychologist has attempted to before our endeavour.

Lacan’s theory relocates the ID [Ça / L’Inconscient / Symbollic], Super-Ego [Surmoi, Le grand Autre: the big Other / Symbolic] and the Ego [Moi / Imaginary order] across the Unconscious, Preconscious and Conscious.

 

The Subject: Uniqueness in the speaking being, le parlêtre

Although psychoanalytic treatment has powerful effects on the ego, it is the Subject, and not the ego, on which psychoanalysis primarily operates. Different from the ego, the Subject is a product of the symbolic Grand Autre, i.e. the « Big Other » [Superego under the influence of the ID]. The Subject means no more than « human being » and in 1953 Lacan establishes a clear distinction between the Subject and the Ego which remained a one of the most fundamental distinctions in his work.  Whereas the Ego is part of the imaginary order, the Subject is parf of the symbolic. Lacan distinguished between 3 kinds of subject. Firstly, we have the impersonal subject, independent of the other, the pure grammatical subject, the noetic subject, the « it » of « it is known that ». Secondly, we have the anonymous reciprocal subject who recognises himself in equivalence with the other (ego reflection / petit autre / little other). Thirdly and finally, we have the personal subject in his uniqueness completely constituted by the act of self-affirmation. It is the third sense of the term subject, i.e. the personal subject in his uniqueness that constitutes the focus of Lacan’s work, and this also seems to be in line with our philosophy of construction and singularity in the creation of the individual. Lacan’s subject is the « subject of the unconscious », i.e. it is a product of the expression of the unconscious through the symbolic « Grand Autre » [Superego]. Lacan argues that this distinction can be traced back to Freud: « [Freud] wrote Das Ich und das Es in order to maintain this fundamental distinction between the true Subject of the unconscious and the Ego as constituted in its nucleus by a series of alienating identifications. A complex and unique domain such as the subject should not be objectified or reduced to a thing; « What do we call a subject? Quite precisely, what in the development of objectivation, is outside of the object. » References to language come to dominate Lacan’s concept of the subject from the mid-1950s on. He distinguishes the subject of the statement from the subject of the enunciation to show that because the subject is essentially a speaking being (parlêtre), he is inescapably divided. In the early 1960s Lacan defines the subject as that which is represented by a signifier for another signifier; in other words, the subject is an effect of language and in philosophical discourse, it denotes an individual self-consciousness. This perfectly illustrates Lacan’s thesis about the determination of consciousness by the symbolic register. « The subject is a subject only by virtue of his subjection to the field of the Other [Grand Autre / Big Other / Superego / from the Symbolic resgister]. » The philosophical connotations of the term « Subject » are particularly emphasised by Lacan, who links it with Descartes’s philosophy of the cogito [« Je pense donc que je suis »]: « in the term subject . . . I am not designating the living substratum needed by this phenomenon of the subject, nor any sort of substance, nor any being possessing knowledge in his pathos . . . nor even some incarnated logos, but the Cartesian subject, who appears at the moment when doubt is recognised as certainty. » The fact that the symbol of the subject, S, is a homophone of the Freud’s term Es (‘Id’) illustrates that for Lacan, the true subject is the subject of the unconscious [i.e. the impact of the expression of the instincts and language of the unconscious through the SuperEgo/Big Other/Grand Autre on the subject and ego – which differs in individuals. Lacan forced us to admit that we all have mental automatism. We all have, deep inside us, this inner voice that will inhabit the language [or languages] with which we will speak. Perhaps a good example of the expression of the unconscious inner voice is through music, which Lacan saw as a fundamental language of our unconscious thoughts, and therefore the bearer of an enigmatic knowledge, i.e. a form of language that would therefore have a meaning, corresponding for example to that of the different emotions that satisfy the various states of mind and that possibly supports an imaginary form of communication]. In 1957 Lacan strikes through this symbol to produce the symbol $, the « barred subject, » thus illustrating the fact that the subject is essentially divided.

Niklos Koda Tome 7 Magie Blanche et Le spiborg - Mort et Déterré

Déssins: « Niklos Koda » par Olivier Grenson & « Mort et Déterré » par Jocelyn Boisvert et Pascal Colpron

 

Super Ego (Big Other / Grand Autre): an early form of conscience in the symbolic register, the mysterious origins of speech & the social bond of language

Lacan distinguishes between the Superego and the ego-ideal [terms that Freud used interchangeably in the Ego and the Id] and argues that the primary function of the Superego is to repress sexual desire for the mother in the resolution of the child’s early Oedipus complex and following Freud he also argues that the Superego is an early form of conscience that develops from the Oedipal identification with the father but also incorporates the maternal origins of an archaic form of the superego [conscience] derived from Melanie Klein’s thesis. Hence, the Oedipus complex is a process which imposes Symbolic structures on sexuality and allows the Subject to emerge. When Lacan returned to the subject of the Superego [Grand Autre / Big Other] in his 1953-4 seminar, he located it in the symbolic order, as opposed to the imaginary order of the ego: the superego is essentially located within the symbolic plane of speech and has a close relationship with the « law » [law here does not refer to a particular piece of legislation, but to the fundamental principles which underlie social relations, i.e. a set of universal principles which makes social existence possible, the structures that govern social exchange, for e.g. gift giving or the formaton of pacts. Since the most basic form of exchange is communication [e.g. the exchange of words, the gift of speech], the symbolic « law » is fundamentally a linguistic entity/dimension, it is the law of the signifier. This law then is revealed with an order of language – the symbolic order itself. Lacan argues that the « law » is human because it separates man from other animals by regulating sexual relations that are among animals, unregulated. It is the law of the pleasure principle which commands the subject to « Enjoy as little as possible » and this maintains the subject at a safe distance from the « Thing » (the forbidden object of desire, known as the « objet petit a » which is any object which sets desire in motion and is the object of anxiety), making the subject circle round it without ever attaining it because if the subject transgresses, it is experienced as suffering/evil – it is fortunate then that the thing (which is not an imaginary object but firmly in the register of the real) is usually inaccessible and/or out of direct reach]. The « law » as such is a symbolic structure which regulates subjectivity and in this sense prevents disintegration of the wholeness of the individual’s psycheThe law of the superego however is believed to have a senseless and blind character of pure imperativeness and simple tyranny, so it is at one and the same time the law and its destruction, the Superego [only partially conscious] is thus the « big Other » which imposes a purely oppressive morality on the neurotic subject but also the will-to-enjoy and is related to the voice. The big « Other » must be considered a locus in which speech is constituted, it is thus only possible to speak of the « big Other » as a subject in a secondary sense where a psychoanalyst may occupy this position and thereby « embody » the « Big Other » for a patient.

In arguing that speech originates not in the Ego or even in the Subject, but in the partially unconscious « big Other » [Superego], Lacan is stressing that speech and language are beyond conscious control, they come from an other place, outside consciousness, and hence « the unconscious is the discourse of the big Other » [the effect on the subject of speech that is addressed to that subject from elsewhere, by another subject (forgotten or unknown) from another scene or psychic locality] and belongs wholly to the symbolic order. In 1969, Lacan begins to use the term « discourse » to denote a « social bond » founded in language; an incredibly rational observation because there is nothing more social that language – the vital ingredient in any form of social activity.

Parlez-vous Lacan

In conceiving the « big Other » as a place, Lacan alludes to Freud’s concept of not physical locality, but « psychical locality« , in which the unconscious is described as « the other scene ». It is highly likely that the impact of the arts, education, exposure and personal development has an important role to play in the development of the partially unconscious « big Others ». The big Other is always « lacking » something for the subject and the mythical complete and perfect Other does not seem to exist. In 1957, when Lacan introduces the algebraic symbol for the barred Other (A), lack comes to designate the lack of a signifier in the Other. Lacan introduces the symbol S(A) to designate « the signifier of a lack in the Other. [Note that Lacan uses the term « Grand Autre » with capital A which here is referred to as the « Other » with capital O, i.e. the « big Other » and not the « petit autre » which is the reflection or projection of the Ego [counterpart and specular image] in the imaginary order referred to as the « other » or « little other », « o » « petit autre » « a ».]

 

Lacanian Terms: Inconscient, Grand Autre & Moi

To clarify Lacanian terms, we have the « inconscient« ; being the unconscious ID in the domain of the symbolic which is the unconscious origin of speech, the symbolic « it » or « Ça » beyond the imaginary ego: man is lived and spoken by the unconscious « it » or « Ça ». Hence the phrase which Lacan frequently uses when discussing the unconscious ID, « it speaks » (le « Ça » parle). Hence, Lacan argued that the concept of the unconscious was badly misunderstood by most of Freud’s followers who reduced it to being « merely the seat of instincts« , and against this biologistic mode of thought Lacan argued that the unconscious is not simply the seat of instincts but is also and primarily linguistic because we can only grasp the unconscious when it is explained and transformed into words. One should see in the unconscious the effects of speech on the subject, as it is the determination of the subject by the symbolic order. The unconscious is a kind of memory in the sense of a symbolic history of signifiers that have determined the subject in the course of his life. What this seems to suggest is that the unconscious absorbs a wide range of signifiers (signifiants) [that symbolise something else, « le signifié » or « signified » in a deeper exploratory sense] throughout the subject’s life and these later find expression and guide desires through the Superego [Grand Autre / Big Other / the symbolic discourse of the unconscious] and in turn symbolically shapes the imaginary creations of the Ego [Moi] and define the Subject according to his abilities to achieve his desires – the outcome differs depending on the subject’s individual creativity and intelligence.

Le Penseur par Auguste Rodin (1882) dpurb site

«Le Penseur» par Auguste Rodin (1882) représente un homme dans une réflexion profonde, semblant utiliser toute son intelligence pour résoudre un problème.

For the Cognitive-Behavioural mind, these signifiers may be considered as « stimuli » [received in different forms, e.g. visual, auditory, mental] however their reception and their responses are completely unconscious and generate effects in the depth of the mind [unconscious] that cannot be measured or seen.

We then have the « Autre » or « Grand Autre » or « Big Other » which is the preconscious Superego also in the domain of the symbolic; being the discourse of the unconscious. The big « Other » designates an otherness that transcends the illusory otherness of the imaginary because it cannot be assimilated into the psyche through identification, Lacan equates the big « Other » with language and the « law » [the structures that govern social exchange] and hence the big « Other » is inscribed in the symbolic order, and indeed the big « Other » is symbolic because it differs for each subject and is the symbolic order which mediates the relationship with a particular subject. The little « other«  is a reflection or projection of the ego, it is the counterpart and the specular image, unlike the « big Other » which is in the symbolic order, the little « other » is inscribed in the imaginary order of the Ego.

Finally we have the « moi », which is the equivalent of the Ego, a formation in the domain of the imaginary as opposed to the subject, which is a product of the symbolic order.  The Ego is a méconnaissance of the symbolic order, the seat of resistance and is structured like a symptom at the heart of the subject, the human symptom par excellence, the mental illness of man. Lacan also argued that the proponents of ego-psychology betrayed Freud’s radical discovery by relocating the ego as the center of the subject. In opposition to this school of thought, Lacan maintains that the ego is not at the center, that the ego is in fact an object. ‘ The ego is a construction which is formed by identification with the specular image in the Mirror stage and is thus the place where the subject becomes alienated from himself, transforming himself into the counterpart. Unlike US Ego psychologists who considered the Ego as the dominant component that should be worked on and strengthened, Lacan argued against such irrational therapy because the ego is the « seat of illusions » and to increase its strength would only increase the subject’s alienation, the ego is the source of resistance to psychoanalytic treatment and strengthening it would increase those resistances. Lacan argued that the true goal of psychotherapy should be therapists’ unearthing the clients’ unconscious desire via the “talking cure” of psychoanalysis – not strengthening the Ego [mindlessly, as this may leave individuals in a state of delusion without an ego adjusted to their abilities – and may even lead to individuals allowing their Ego [imaginary moi] to dominate the Super-Ego [Grand Autre, Big Other] and favour irrational release of the ID’s [Inconscient / Ça] psychic energy without any remorse or rational control]. Because of the imaginary fixity of the ego, it is resistant to all subjective growth and change and to the dialectical movement of desire, hence, by undermining the fixity of the ego, psychoanalytic treatment aims to restore the dialectic of desire and reinitiate the « coming into being » of the subject. This is in direct contrast to the Ego Psychologists’ perspective.

 

Psychoanalysts as the Grand Autre [Big Other / Superego]

To Lacan, psychoanalysts should adopt the role of the big « Other » as a counterpart to the clients’ Subject, thus making it possible for clients to peer beneath their own conscious (typically not completely true) narratives, into their unconscious (and “true”) desire(s) [and perhaps guide or help the patient to realise their dreams within the realms of reality within civilised society]. Lacan also maintained that psychoanalytic intervention should not aim to adapt the Ego to reality, and this seems reasonable since « reality » is a social construct under constant change as we primates are evolving and adapting to the discoveries of our constantly changing civilisation. But also because the ego is an imaginary formation as opposed to the subject which is the true product of the symbolic. Lacan also questioned whether the ego of the psychoanalyst gives the measure of reality to the patient in trying to adapt the latter.

Lacan’s suggestion seems to give the individual the creative freedom to create himself through language and discourse, exist and be unique within the reasonable limits of a mentally adequate and healthy person. Since reality and culture are social constructs that are always changing through collaboration, the individual can both be shaped by them and also shape them [for e.g. human culture teaches a child how to use a fork and a knife to eat, but it can also be shaped by an individual if he invents/discovers something or adopts a philosophy that affects/inspires human cultures. In the past smoking was allowed everywhere and it was common culture to see people and even doctors smoking in public buildings, but since we found about the harmful effects of cigarette smoke, today culture has been reshaped and smoking is banned indoor in most public places. The invention of the mobile phone has also affected human culture and behaviour when before people used public phone boxes]; this concept of being shaped by and also shaping human cultures is known as mutual constitution and is reflected in the artefacts of all societies through the arts, literature and languages [as we explained in the Essay: The Concept of Self].

Lacan was also innovative and challenged the established procedures of Psychoanalytic practice [which promoted multiple sessions lasting an hour or more apiece, across several years] to advocate brief, impromptu [i.e. unscheduled] therapy that could be completed in a matter of minutes. This seems logical since the main factors that influence successful therapy are the relationship between the therapist and the client, but also the aptitudes of the client [which varies from one individual to another depending on their reflective abilities, intelligence and will power]. Since Lacan’s theory is mainly based on French society – one with a history of challenging the limits of the individual in the name of excellence – it seems fair to acknowledge his opinions [in a sense that not all patients require multiple sessions depending on their individual characteristics and response to the relationship with the psychoanalyst and their understanding of their own mental condition and desires] as rational, economical, time-saving and flexible to accommodate individual differences.

Nous En France - Sarkozy - d'purb

Traduction(EN): « Us in France, we are different from others. To live, we have to drink, eat, but also to cultivate ourselves. » -Nicolas Sarkozy

However, partly as a reaction to Jacques Lacan’s criticism of Ego Psychoogy [as practiced in the United States], and partly as his advocacy of brief, impromptu therapy, the US-oriented International Psychoanalytic Association barred Lacan from training future psychoanalysts. Despite [or perhaps because of?] the IPA’s decision to bar Lacan from training future psychoanalysts, the proportion of Psychoanalysts adopting a Lacanian perspective has only grown since Lacan’s death in 1981with half or more of the world’s psychoanalysts adopting some Lacanian concepts. Jardim, Costa Pereira and de Souza Palma (2011) applied Lacanian Theory to understanding the personality disorder of Schizophrenia [formerly known as “madness”], interpreting a case study [along with fictional examples from literary works] in terms of failure to achieve an integrated Ego from infancy onwards. Furthermore, McSherry (2013) argued that Lacan’s Theory of Psychoanalysis could benefit mental health nursing practice since various forms of personality disorders [including but not limited to Schizophrenia] can be understood readily in terms of Lacan’s theory.

Malone (2012) noted that Lacan was ambivalent towards the growing tendency for empirical clinical psychologists to align their discipline with the hard sciences [e.g. Biology, Medecine, Physics, Chemistry, etc] and not with the humanities [e.g. Literature, Poetry, Theatre, Drama, Art, etc], and viewed psychoanalysis as ideally informed by both the humanities and by the sciences.

Documentaire: Jacques Lacan, La Psychanalyse Réinventée (2001)

Lacan has been hailed as the “French Freud” who has established a tradition of French psychoanalysis that rivals American and British psychoanalysis in terms of international influence. Although Lacan’s theory has been cast as a uniquely French theory [culturally and linguistically speaking], it has nonetheless struck a chord with many [and, perhaps, most] of the world’s influential modern day psychoanalysts, shattering perceptions across languages and cultures worldwide. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a decade later, much psychoanalytic research in the US itself will seem to confirm Lacan’s perspectives as discussed above.

LesFrancaisNapproventPasLaPolitiquedesUSA

A majority of 80% of French citizens are wary of the US and do not approve its politics / Source: Le Figaro

 

Conclusion: Legacy, Impact & Evolution

Psychoanalysis is a unique movement in psychology that grew out of the same German model of mental activity that produced act psychology and the Gestalt movement. However, psychoanalysis received its immediate expression through the needs of the mentally ill. It was born as a clinical discipline, not an academic development based on empirical methodology to fit a particular field’s reductionist requirements for acknowledgement. For this reason, psychoanalysis, especially as proposed by writers after Freud, gives the impression of an ad hoc movement that develops as particular problems arise – it could be seen as adaptive and constantly evolving. Psychoanalysis did not adhere to the commitment to methodology expressed in those mechanical systems generated by academic research. Hence, there was and still is little interaction between psychoanalysis and those systems grounded on empiricism and reductionist methodologies that are stubborn in trying to capture an entity as the mind when most of the constructs cannot be seen or touched, or accurately measured. Stated quite simply, psychoanalysis and the other schools of psychological models do not speak the same language.

Although different and hardly understood, let alone accepted by common mainstream empirical and academic psychology, psychoanalysis did assume a dominant role in psychiatry. This is completely understandable in light of the origins of psychoanalysis as a response to clinical problems as they manifested themselves. Indeed, psychoanalytic writings enjoyed an almost exclusive position in psychiatry and clinical psychology until the 1960s, when behaviour modification and Pavlovian derivatives based on Behaviourism [such as Cognitive Psychology] began to compete as an alternate model of therapy [Read: the Essay on the Origins of the Cognitive Behavioural Model: Biological Constraints in Learning, which also suggests an unconscious drift in other animals].

Pavlov Dog Labs

Psychoanalysis continues to exert a marked influence on art, literature, and philosophy. This influence reflects major contributions of Freud: his comprehensive analysis of the unconscious. On the same line, literary and artistic expressions are interpreted in light of the unconscious activities of the artist as well as the unconscious impressions of the perceiver. Psychologists today may choose unconscious motivations or simply to refer to subliminal or subthreshold activities. However, any truly comprehensive theory of psychological activity can no longer be limited to conscious aspects of behaviour. Although some psychologists may disagree with some Freudian concepts and interpretations, Freud did identity some dynamic processes that influence the activity of the individual: processes that psychology cannot ignore anymore.

As mentioned earlier, psychoanalysis has a unique position in the history of psychology. Freud did not develop a theory that generated testable hypotheses or other empirical implications. Yet, on another level, Freud accomplished what few other theorists have: He revolutionised attitudes and created a new set for thinking about personality. The findings of other more empiricist theories of personality disturbance have often confirmed many of Freud’s observations. If his views do not meet the criteria of empiricistic study, they nevertheless mark a man of genius and insight, whose influence pervades people’s thinking about themselves in ways that few others have achieved.

The psychoanalytic theory is an enormously complex and ambitious one, and it aims to make sense of a much broader array of psychological and social phenomena than other theories, and does so with a collection of explanatory concepts. Hence, the sheer range and scope of psychoanalytic theory, and its aspiration to be a total account of mental life, should be recognised and applauded. In comparison, all other schools of psychology to study personality look decidedly timid and limited in focus. Even if other approaches tend to have more empirical foundations and hence more credential in academic psychology, they tend to leave out much of what we might want to include in a comprehensive theory of human behaviour. To many intellectuals and lay people alike, any account of personality that does not acknowledge that humans are like psychoanalytic theory portrays us, i.e., driven by deeply rooted motives, inhabiting bodies that bring us pleasure and shame, shaped by our early development, troubled by personal conflicts, and often a mystery to ourselves – is fundamentally limited.

While the empirical limitations are a fact, some of these problems are due in part to the intrinsic difficulty of what psychoanalytic theory tries to explain. Others could be partially overcome if researchers made a more concerted effort to determine which psychodynamic ideas stand up to closer, “scientific enquiry”. However, psychoanalysis cannot be judged only by empirical perspectives, and it would be a mistake to abandon it impatiently, given how much a suitably revised and empirically updated theory of psychodynamics in the future might deepen the studies of personality.

Even for all its failings to the empirical scientist, on some aspects, psychoanalysis is at least partly responsible for several important and scientifically respectable ideas that has always had a kernel of truth and was later developed by other researchers. While Freud’s idea of the dynamic unconscious remains controversial, it can no longer be disputed today that unconscious cognition is now a fact and an uncontroversial idea in cognitive and social psychology, where huge volumes of research now explore non-conscious or “implicit” attitudes.

*****

References

  1. Adams, H. E., Wright, L. W., & Lohr, B. A. (1996). Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 440-5.
  2. Adler, A. (1956). The individual psychology of Alfred Adler. L. Ansbacher & R. R. Ansbacher (Eds.). New York. Basic Books.
  3. Adler, A. (1958). What life should mean to you. New York: Capricorn Books.
  4. Bornstein, R.F. (2005). Reconnecting psychoanalysis to mainstream psychology. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22, 323-340.
  5. Bradley, B.P., Mogg, I. & Millar, N. (1996). Implicit memory bias in clinical and non-clinical depression. Behaviour Research Therapy, 34, 865-879.
  6. Bradley, B.P., Mogg, I. & Williams, R. (1994). Implicit and explicit memory for emotion-congruent information in depression and anxiety. Behaviour Therapy and Research, 32, 65-78.
  7. Bradley, B.P., Mogg, I. & Williams, R. (1995). Implicit and explicit memory for emotion-congruent information in depression and anxiety. Behaviour Therapy and Research, 33, 755-770.
  8. Brennan, J. (2014). History and Systems of Psychology (6th Ed).
  9. Carr, A. (2012). Clinical psychology. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.
  10. Chambless, D.L., Sanderson, W.C., Shoham, V., Bennett Johnson, S., Pope, K.S., Crits-Cristoph, P. et al. (1996). An update on empirically validated therapies. Clinical Psychologist, 49, 5-18.
  11. Eagle, M. (1987). The psychoanalytic and cognitive unconscious. In R. Stern (Ed.), Theories of the unconsciousness and theories of the self, 155-189. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
  12. Ellenberger, H. F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious. New York: Basic Books.
  13. Fairbairn, W.R.D. (1952). An object relations theory of personality. New York: Basic Books.
  14. Fazio, R., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobstrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013-27.
  15. Fordham, F. (1953). An introduction to Jung’s psychology. London: Penguin.
  16. Freud, S. (1920). The psychopathology of everyday life. New York: Mentor.
  17. Freud, S. (1938). The history of the psychoanalytic movement. In A. A. Brill (Ed. And Trans.), The basic writing of Sigmund Freud. New York: Random House.
  18. Freud, S. (1955). The interpretation of dreams. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud (Vols. IV and V). London: Hogarth.
  19. Freud, S. (1965). New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. New York: W. W. Norton.
  20. Gabbard, G.O. (2000). Psychodynamic psychotherapy in clinical practice (3rd). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
  21. Gabbard, G.O. (2004). Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing Incorporated.
  22. Gay, P. (1988). Freud: A life for our time. New York: Norton.
  23. Gillett, G. (2001). Signification and the unconscious.  Philosophical Psychology, 14, 477-498.
  24. Gravitz, M. A., & Gerton, M. I. (1981). Freud and hypnosis: Report of post-rejection use. Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences, 17, 68-74.
  25. Greenberg, J. (2001a). The analysts’s participation: A new look. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 49, 359-381.
  26. Greenberg, J.R. (1986). Theoretical models and the analyst’s neutrality. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 22, 87-106.
  27. Hale, N. G. (1971). Freud and the Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
  28. Hall, C. S., & Lindzey, G. (1970). Theories of personality (2nd).  New York:  Wiley & Sons.
  29. Hall, C. S., & Lindzey, G. (1970). Theories of personality (Rev. ed.). New York: Wiley
  30. Haslam, N., Smilie, L., & Song, J. (2017) An Introduction to Personality, Individual Differences and Intelligence (2 Eds.). Sage Publications Ltd.
  31. Hivernel, F. (2013). “The parental couple”:  Franciose Dolto and Jacaues Lacan:  Contributions to the mirror stage.  British Journal of Psychotherapy, 29, 505-518.
  32. Huprich, S. K. (2008). Psychodynamic Therapy: Conceptual and Empirical Foundations. Routledge
  33. Ittleson, W.H. & Kilpatrict, F.P. (1981). Experiments in perception. Scientific American, 185, 50-55.
  34. Jardim, L. L., Costa Pereira, M. E., & de Souza Palma, M. (2011). Fragments of the Other:  A psychoanalytic approach to the ego in schizophrenia.  International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 20, 159-166.
  35. Jones, E. (1955). The life and work of Sigmund Freud. New York: Basic Books.
  36. Jung, C. G. (1933). Modern man in search of a soul. New York: Harcourt Brace.
  37. Jung, C. G. (1953). Psychological reflections (J. Jacobi, Ed.). New York : Harper & Row.
  38. Jung, C. G. (1959). The basic writings of C. G. Jung. New York: Random House.
  39. Kainer, R. G. (1984). Art and the canvas of the self: Otto Rank and creative transcendence. American Imagi, 14, 359-372.
  40. LeDoux, J. (1989). Cognitive-emotional interactions in the brain. Cognition and Emotion, 3, 267-289.
  41. LeDoux, J. (1995). Emotion: Clues from the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 209-235.
  42. Leichsenring, F. & Rabung, S. (2011). Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in complex mental disorders: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 199, 15-22.
  43. Leichsenring, F., Rabung, S. & Leibing, E. (2004). The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific psychiatric disorders: A meta-analysis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61, 1208-1216.
  44. Lewis, J.L. (1970). Semantic processing of unattended messages during dichotic listening. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 85, 225-228.
  45. Luepnitz, D. A. (2009). Thinking in the space between Winnicott and Lacan.  International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 90, 957-981.
  46. Macmillan, M. (1985). Souvenir de la Salpêtrière: M. le Dr. Freud à Paris, 1885. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 14, 41-57.
  47. Malin, B. D. (2011). Kohut and Lacan:  Mirror opposites.  Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 31, 58-74.
  48. Malone, K. R. (2012). Lacan, Freud, the humanities, and science.  Humanistic Psychologist, 40, 246-257.
  49. Marder, E. (2013). Real dreams.  Southern Journal of Philosophy, 51, 196-213.
  50. McSherry, A. (2013). Jacques Lacan’s theory of the subject as real, symbolic and imaginary:  How can Lacanian theory be of help to mental health nursing practice?  Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 20, 776-781.
  51. Meyer, P. (2001). Freud and the human sciences.  Annals of Psychoanalysis, 29, 247-258.
  52. Milner, B., Corkin, S. & Teuber, H.L. (1968). Further analysis of the hippocampal amnesic syndrome Fourteen year follow-up study of H.M. Neuropsychologia, 6, 215-234.
  53. Morrison, C., Bradley, R., & Westen, D. (2003). The external validity of efficacy trials for depression and anxiety: A naturalistic study. Psycology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 76, 109-132.
  54. Norcross, J.C. (2002a). Empirically supported therapy realationships. In J.C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work. New York: Oxford.
  55. Orlinsky, D. & Howard, K.E. (1977). The therapist’s experience of psychotherapy. In A.S. Gurman & A.M. Razin (Eds.), Effective psychotherapy: A handbook of research, 566-589. New York: Pergamon.
  56. Pine, F. (1998). Diversity and direction in psychoanalytic technique. New haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  57. Rocha, G. M. (2012). The unconscious:  Ideal worker?  International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 21, 17-21.
  58. Samuels, A. (1994). The professionalisation of Carl G. Jung’s analytical psychology clubs. Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences, 30, 138-147.
  59. Schick, A. (1968 – 1969). The Vienna of Sigmund Freud. Psychoanalytic Review, 55, 529-551.
  60. Shevrin, H. & Dickman, S. (1980). The psychological unconscious: A necessary assumption for all psychological theory? American Psychologist, 35, 421-434.
  61. Shevrin, H. & Fisher, C. (1967). Changes in the effects of a waking subliminal stimulus as a functioning of dreaming and non-dreaming sleep. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 72, 362-368.
  62. Shevrin, H. (1973). Brain wave correlates of subliminal stimulation, unconscious attention, primary and secondary-process thinking and repressiveness. Psychological Issues, 30, 56-87.
  63. Shevrin, H. (1986). Subliminal perception and dreaming. Journal of Mind and Behaviour, 7, 379-395.
  64. Shevrin, H. (1988). Unconscious conflict: A convergent psychodynamic and electrophysiological approach. In M. J. Horowitz (Ed.), Psychodynamics and cognition, pp, 117-167. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  65. Shevrin, H. (1990). Subliminal perception and repression. In J.L Singer (Ed.), Repression and dissociation: Implications for personality theory, psychopathology, and health, 103-119. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  66. Shevrin, H. (1996). Psychoanalytic research: Experimental evidence in support of basic psychoanalytic assumptions. In E. Nersessian & R.G. Kopff, Jr. (Eds.), Textbook of psychoanalysis, 575-603. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
  67. Shevrin, H. (2006). The contribution of cognitive behavioural and neurophysiological frames of reference to a psychodynamic nosology of mental illness. In Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organisations, Psychodynamic diagnostic manual (PDM), 483-509. Silver Spring, MD: Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organisations.
  68. Shevrin, H., Bond, J., Brakel, L, Hertel, R., & Williams, W.J. (1996). Conscious and unconscious processes: Psychodynamic, cognitive, and neurophysiological convergences. New York: Guilford.
  69. Shevrin, H., Williams, W.J., Marshall, R.E., Hertel, R.K., Bong, J.A. & Brakel, L.A.W. (1992). Event-related potential indicators of the dynamic unconscious. Consciousness and Cognition, 1, 340-366.
  70. Silverman, D.K. (1986). Some proposed modifications of psychoanalytic theories of early child development. In J. Masling, (Ed.), Empirical studies of psychoanalytic theories, 49-72. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  71. Silverman, L.H., Bronstein, A. & Mendelsohn, E. (1976). The further use of psychodynamic activation method for experimental study of the clinical theory of psychoanalysis: On the specificity of the relationships between symptoms and unconscious conflicts. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 13, 2 -16.
  72. Silverman, L.H., Kwawer, J.S., Wolitzky, C. & Coron, M. (1973). An experimental study of aspects of the psychoanalytic theory of male homosexuality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 82, 178-88.
  73. Silverman, L.H., Lachman, F.M. & Milich, R.H. (1982). The search for oneness. New York: International University Press.
  74. Silverman, L.H., Ross, D.L., Adler, J.M. & Lustig, D.A. (1978). Simple research paradigm for demonstrating subliminal activation effects: Effects of Oedipal stimuli on dart-throwing accuracy in college males. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 341-347.
  75. Silverman, L.S. (1983). The psychodynamic activation method: Overview and comprehensive listing of studies. In J. Masling (Ed.), Empirical studies of psychoanalytic theories (Vol. 1), pp. 69-100. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  76. Sirkin, M., & Fleming, M. (1982). Freud’s “project” and its relationship to psychoanalytic theory. Journal of the History of the Behavioural Sciences, 18, 230-241.
  77. Solms, M. (2000a). A psychoanalytic contribution to contemporary neuroscience. In G.vandeVijver&F.Geerardyn(Eds.), The pre-psychoanalytic writings of Sigmund Freud, 17-35. London: Karnac Books.
  78. Solms, M. (2000b). Preliminaries for an integration of psychoanalysis and neuroscience. Annals of Psychoanalysis, 28, 179-200.
  79. Solms, M. (2001). The interpretation of dreams and the neurosciences. Psychoanalytic History, 3, 79-91.
  80. Solms, M. (2002). An introduction to the neuroscientific works of Sigmund Freud. In M Velmans (Ed.), Investigating phenomenal consciousness: New methodologies and maps. Advances in Consciousness Research Series (M. Stamenov, Seried Ed.), pp. 67-95. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
  81. Solms, M. (2004). Is the brain more real than the mind? In A. Casement (Ed.), Who owns psychoanalysis?, 323-324. London: Karnac.
  82. Solomon, H. M. (2003). Freud and Jung:  An incomplete encounter.  Journal of Analytical Psychology, 48, 553-569.
  83. Spence, D.P. (1980). Narrative truth and historical truth: Meaning and interpretation in psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton.
  84. Stockholder, K. (1998). Lacan versus Freud:  Subverting the Enlightenment.  American Imago, 55, 361-422.
  85. Stolorow, R.D., Atwood, G.E. & Brandchaft, B. (1994). The intersubjective perspective. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
  86. Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures (1995). Training in and dissemination of empirically validated psychological treatments: Report and recommendations. Clinical Psychologist, 48, 2-23.
  87. Task Force on Psychological Intervention Guidelines (1995). Template for developing guidelines: Interventions for mental disorders and psycho-social aspects of physical disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  88. Thompson-Brenner, H., Glass, S., & Westen, D. (2003). A multidimensional meta-analysis of psychotherapy for bulimia nervosa. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 269-287.
  89. Waintrater, R. (2012). Intersubjectivity and French psychoanalysis:  A misunderstanding?  Studies in Gender and Sexuality, 13, 295-302.
  90. Wallerstein, R.S. (2002). The growth and transformation of American ego psychology. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 50, 135-169.
  91. Wampold, B.E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  92. Weinberger, J. & Hardaway, R. (1990). Separating science from myth in subliminal psychodynamic activation. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 727-756.
  93. Weitz, L. WJ. (1976). Jung’s and Freud’s contributions to dream interpretation:  A comparison.  American Journal of Psychotherapy, 30, 289-293.
  94. Westen, D. & Gabbard, G.O. (2002b). Developments in cognitive neuroscience: II. Implications for theories of transference. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 50, 99-134.
  95. Westen, D. & Morrison, K. (2001). A multidimensional meta-analysis of treatments for depression, panic and generalised anxiety disorder: An empirical examination of the status of empirically supported therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 875-899.
  96. Westen, D. (1999). The scientific status of unconscious processes: Is Freud really dead? Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 47, 1061-1106.
  97. Westen, D., Novotny, C.M., & Thompson-Brenner, H. (2004). The empirical status of empirically supported psychotherapies: Assumptions, findings, and reporting in controlled clinical traits. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 633-663.

 

Mis-à-jour le Mardi, 20 Août 2019 | Danny J. D’Purb | DPURB.com

____________________________________________________

While the aim of the community at dpurb.com has  been & will always be to focus on a modern & progressive culture, human progress, scientific research, philosophical advancement & a future in harmony with our natural environment; the tireless efforts in researching & providing our valued audience the latest & finest information in various fields unfortunately takes its toll on our very human admins, who along with the time sacrificed & the pleasure of contributing in advancing our world through sensitive discussions & progressive ideas, have to deal with the stresses that test even the toughest of minds. Your valued support would ensure our work remains at its standards and remind our admins that their efforts are appreciated while also allowing you to take pride in our journey towards an enlightened human civilization. Your support would benefit a cause that focuses on mankind, current & future generations.

Thank you once again for your time.

Please feel free to support us by considering a donation.

Sincerely,

The Team @ dpurb.com

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Essay // Philosophy Review: “The World as Will and Idea”, by Arthur Schopenhauer (1818)

Schopenhauer et Nietzsche

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 – 1860) & Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900)

Schopenhauer, a pessimistic philosopher, focused on the dark side of life and mental evils and cruelty, which he considered inevitable and that we as psychologists, intellectuals and masters of the mind view as mental disorders that have a negative effect on both the character of the affected and the human environment at large exposed to the vile side of human nature.

This negative view of man’s behaviour and role in life was a sharp contrast to the other more euphoric philosophers who marked the spirits of the generation before him, and who embraced a more idealistic and perhaps a slightly exaggerated euphoric side of man’s mind and character. Though Schopenhauer’s work originally gained little attention at the time it was published [perhaps being too avant-garde for the atavistic institutions of his time], he expressed an interpretation of the world that was dragging and opposed the great ideal of who went before him, such as Victor Schelling and Hegel on some very important points but did not deny expressions of art such as the romantic movement in its various forms.

Schopenhauer who never refrained from publicly criticising people and ideas he disliked was very vocal in his complete contempt for these men, and regarded himself as their great opponent in the ring of the leaders delivering the “Real truth” to mankind and civilisation. Schopenhauer’s work in many ways could be viewed as an extension of another famous German philosopher, namely Immanuel Kant, who preceded him by one generation, delivering his major philosophical work, “a critique of pure reason”. Schopenhauer worked out a system in which reality is known inwardly by a kind of feeling where intellect is only an instrument of the will: the biological will to live and where process rather than result is ultimate.

Schopenhauer’s pessimism lies in his very strong rejection of life. In fact, this rejection is so strong that he even had to address the question of suicide as a solution to life. He fortunately also rejected this “solution” to life, this rejection to life reflected influences with roots in Eastern philosophy, particularly Buddhism, and it is one of the most significant aspects of his work that he was the first Western philosopher to integrate Buddhist thought into Western philosophy. His preoccupation with the evil of the world and the tragedy of life was also somewhat reminiscent of ancient Hindu philosophies. His writings helped to stimulate in Germany an interest in Oriental thought and religion, which can also be seen in the work of many later German philosophers.

In “The World as Will and Idea”, Schopenhauer also considered the important question of the function of art. The value of arts to human life in far more depth than any of his predecessors, and even graded each of the arts, such as music, poetry, architecture [etc], from most important to least important. For that reason, his book had not only a profound effect on future philosophers, but also artists, particularly poets and composers, such as the enigmatic Wagner, who felt indebted to him and sent him a letter of gratitude when he was first introduced to Schopenhauer’s work.

Tristan und Isolde (John Duncan 1912 Symbolism)

Image: Tristan and Isolde (1912) by John Duncan

It is believed that Wagner’s popular opera “Tristan und Isolde” in particular, shows Schopenhauer’s influence as a philosopher who believed that music was the highest form of art, an idea that of course, Wagner found pleasing and so the composer began to think of himself as a prime example of Schopenhauer concept of a genius. People in other fields of the arts were also influenced by Schopenhauer, including the novelist Thomas Mann. Schopenhauer’s ideas had the unique ability to influence not only philosophy but many other fields of human endeavour and expression. Within philosophy itself, Schopenhauer never founded a school of thought “per se”, but his influence instead was in stimulating other philosophers towards a particular line of thought, which varied with the individual and his or her response to Schopenhauer’s writing. His writing had a major impact on the German philosopher Nietzsche, who was also a friend of Schopenhauer’s admirer, Richard Wagner. Nietzsche shared the idea that life is tragic and terrible but can sometimes be transformed through art. Nietzsche was also the man famous,for his concept of the Ubermensch “Superman”, which later helped to inspire the German National Socialist movement and eventually the founding pillars of the Third Reich of Adolf Hitler.

The Apollo Belvedere (Ancient Sculpture) - Vatican Museum - Roma

Image: Apollo Belvedere (Sculpture Ancienne), Musée du Vatican, Rome

So, these three names Schopenhauer, Wagner and Nietzsche are often linked and are also associated at times, through no fault of the men themselves with a dark period of human history.

“The world is Will and Idea” begins with the famous line, “The world is my idea” when Schopenhauer says the world is his idea, he is referring to the relationship between an “object” and “the subject” [i.e. The person who sees or senses the object]. As an example, he did not mean that an apple is identical with your abstract concept of an Apple, he means that the apple as perceived by you exist only in relation to you as a person or “the subject” who perceives it. Its reality is only in what you perceive, it is what you perceive it to be so.

So, the world is my idea means that a whole visible world and its sum of total experience is “object” for a “subject”, its reality consists in appearing to be perceived by a subject. This theory of the world of idea was taken and developed from Kant’s philosophy, but the second part of Schopenhauer’s philosophy “The World as Will” is completely his own and expresses his very unique interpretation of human life. Briefly, this interpretation says that the will, « the will to survive and live » is the strongest force in man and everything else is subordinate to it. His conception of the supreme wisdom of life is one of resignation to the power this “will” has and the tragic results of it.

Arthur Schopenhauer was born on February 22nd of 1788 in Danzig, Germany. His father was a wealthy merchant and banker who hoped his son would follow in his steps. He was also an independent minded man who moved his family from the city of Danzig when it was taken over by Prussia in 1793. The new family home was in Hamburg. Schopenhauer left to visit England and other countries, on the understanding that when he completed his tour, he would begin work in a business. Schopenhauer, then 16 years old, kept his promise but he had no attraction to business and when his father died, he got consent from his mother to continue his studies. In 1809, he entered the University of Göttingen to study medicine, but he changed to philosophy in his second year, as he put it “life is a problem and he decided to spend his life contemplating it”. He also studied at Weimar where he lived with his mother until he became estranged from her.

Schopenhauer had a moody, irritable temperament and could be violent in his passion. At the university, Schopenhauer developed an affection for Plato and visited Berlin to hear the lectures of contemporary philosophers Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762 – 1814) and Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768 – 1834). Fichte was the first transcendentalist idealist and Schleiermacher was a founder of modern Protestant theology. Schopenhauer found Fichte’s comment, “No one could be a true philosopher without being religious” absurd and retorted that no man who was religious turns to philosophy since they have no need for it [a questionable statement when religion (e.g. Christianity) does not cover all the aspects of the experience of life in detail, or study God’s works methodically through the lens of science and rationality, to understand the further implications in the betterment of the human world].

Rodin - Hands (Musee Rodin, Paris)

Image: « Les Mains » par Auguste Rodin

Schopenhauer left Berlin when Prussia rebelled against Napoleon. He never developed strong German patriotic values and sentiments [perhaps never given a chance or a reason or support to do so at the time], and always regarded himself more as a cosmopolitan without any strong national affiliation. He went into retirement to write his first dissertation called “On the fourfold route of the principle of sufficient reason”, which was published in 1813 and earned him a doctorate at Vienna. The poet Goethe congratulated Schopenhauer, and in return he wrote an essay called « On Vision and Colours » which supported Goethe in his stand against Isaac Newton. But the dissertation, although it won the admiration of Goethe, went practically unnoticed. The author however always considered it the groundwork and essential introduction to his philosophy. Shortly after he published his dissertation, Schopenhauer met an Oriental scholar, Friedrich Majer (1771 – 1818), who introduced him to Indian philosophy and literature. He maintained an interest in Indian philosophy throughout his life, and as an old man, he meditated on the Upanishad, part of the Vedas [the sacred script of the Hindus]. He would later associate his theory of the world of ideas with the Indian doctrine of Maya [to the Indians, Maya is illusion or the world as an illusion]. To Schopenhauer, this meant that the individual subject and object he wrote were “Maya”, all at the end.

For 4 years between 1814 and 1818, Schopenhauer lived in Dresden, which is where he wrote his masterpiece “The World as Will and Idea”. He sent the manuscript to his publishers and left for an art tour of Italy. The book was published the following year in 1819, and although it received attention from some philosophers, it sold very few copies. This was a disappointment to the author who felt sure it contains the secret of the universe.

This failure did not kill his eagerness however, so he returned to Berlin and started lecturing. By now he was 32 years old. He deliberately scheduled his lectures for the hour at which the philosopher Hegel was also accustomed to lecture – planning to compete with the master. But his lecturing career was a failure and Schopenhauer gave it up after only one semester. His ideas seemed at odds with the dominant spirit of the time.

Dolly_the_Sheep

Schopenhauer roamed around a bit and then settled in Frankfurt in 1833, he read European literature and scientific books and journals looking for illustrations or confirmations of his theories. He frequented the theatre and also continued writing, publishing on the Will of nature and winning a Norwegian prize for an essay on freedom. He failed to win a similar prize from the Royal Danish Academy of the Sciences for a separate essay on ethics. The Academy disapproved of his disparaging remarks about other philosophers. These two essays were later published together in 1841, under the title “The two fundamental problems of Ethics”.

In 1844, Schopenhauer published a second edition of “The world as Will and Idea”, which contained 50 new chapters. In the Preface, he took the opportunity to make a strong statement of his views about university professors of philosophy, which were of course not admiring. In 1848 there was an unsuccessful revolution in Germany. A revolution from which Schopenhauer had no sympathy whatsoever. But after the failure of this revolt, people were more willing to consider a philosophy which emphasised the evil in the world in which preached the rejection of life for the route of contemplation. Schopenhauer’s popularity was on the rise. In 1851, he published a collection of essays that dealt with a wide variety of topics, and finally in 1859, he published third edition of the “World as Will and Idea” with more supplements. In the last decade of his life, the author finally became a famous man, all kinds of visitors with all kinds of philosophies came to see him and to enjoy his brilliant conversations. Lectures were given on his system at the University, the very university he has attacked, a sure indication that he had finally achieved success. Schopenhauer has spent a long, lonely life of reflection and only after his works were ignored for many years that he attained fame and reputation. He died in September 1860, at the age of 72.

Schopenhauer by Mitch Francis

Image: Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 – 1860) by Mitch Francis

As a man, Schopenhauer was cultured, broadly educated, eloquent and articulate, witty and conversational, and a very talented writer, but he was also opinionated, egotistical, and often quarrelsome. His remarks about other philosophers were assaulted and his remarks about women in general were so scathing that they had to be deleted from his book by his editor. He was obsessed with the suffering of humanity, but did nothing to alleviate it. He himself made the comment that it is no more necessary for a philosopher to be a saint than it is for a saint to be a philosopher, and he never tried to prove otherwise. But, in the final analysis he was exactly the man he needed to be to write what he wrote. His pessimistic and grim interpretation of life are not very likely to have come from a man of infallible kindness or tolerance, and that interpretation of life played a significant role in the development of human thought and philosophy by inspiring both similar and opposing viewpoints which forced humanity to re-examine itself yet again.

 

Now is a summary of the text of “The World as Will and Idea

The world is my idea. This truth applies to everything that lives and knows, but only man can reflect on it and bring his abstract consciousness to it. It becomes clear to him when he looks at the sun that what he knows is not a sun, but an eye that sees the sun, not a nurse but a hand that feels the earth. This truth is by no means new, it was a fundamental text of the Vedanta philosophy of the Hindus, it was also part of the reflections of the French philosopher René Descartes and finally it was also clarified by the philosopher George Berkeley – although neglected by Kant. But this view of the world as idea is one-sided and must be balanced by another one which is the impressive and awful truth that the world is my “Will”. The world has necessary hands, the subject and object. The object and the subject that perceives it operate together. If one were to disappear, then the whole world would cease to exist. All objects have universal forms and either space, time and causality or the relation of cause and effect as Kant has demonstrated, they may be discovered and known apart from the objects in which they appear, as an expression of reason or the principle of sufficient reason. But what if our whole life is but a dream, or how do we distinguish between dream and reality? Kant tried to answer this question by stating that the connection of ideas, according to the law of causality, constitute the difference between them. But the long life dream in distinction from our short dreams has always had complete connection, according to the principle of sufficient reason. We are such stuff as dreams are made on and our little life is rounded with a sleep.

Life and dreams are leaves of the same book, the book we read through and the one whose leaves we turn idly to read a page here and there. Any system of philosophy that starts with the object has to deal with the whole world of perception, the most consistent form of these philosophies is simple materialism. It regards time and space and matter as existing absolutely. It ignores the relationship to the subject in whom these ideas exist, then it takes a law of causality as its guiding principle: causality exists by understanding alone. Materialism seeks the most simple states of matter and then tries to develop all other states from it. It ascends from mere mechanism and chemistry: the chemical properties and attractions of objects. It ascends to vegetable and animal life, to sensibility and thought. But, the thoughts and knowledge reached through materialism in a long, laborious process, assumed from its starting point that there was a subject or perceived matter: eyes that side, hands that felt it and understanding that knew it.

This system of philosophy which opposes this materialism is idealism, which instead starts with the subject and then tries to derive or reach the object from the subject, but it overlooked the fact that there can be no subject without an object, like materialism this idealism begins by assuming what it is supposed to prove later. The method of Schopenhauer’s system is different from both of these, for it starts from neither object nor subject, it starts from the idea. The idea is the first form of consciousness and its essential form is the antithesis or opposite of subject and object. For each one of us it is our own body that is the starting point in our perception of the world and we consider it like all other real object simply as an idea, the understanding which develops ideas could never come into being if there were no simple bodily sensations from which to start. If the thinker were no more than a pure knowing subject without a body like a winged cherub that is all spirit, he would not be able to know the nature of the world. He would be like a man going around a castle getting to its façade and trying in vain to enter it, all reality would be a riddle, but because the subject of knowledge is also an individual with a body and a bodily nature, the world becomes revealed, it is revealed in the will. Every true act of the will is a movement of the body for the action of the body is nothing but will express through an object. The body is the object, my body and my will are one. The double knowledge which each one has of his body out of idea and inner will becomes the key to the nature of the world. Phenomenal existence, the existence we perceive with our senses, is an idea and nothing more. Real existence or the thing in itself is will.

die welt als wille und vorstellung

Will is a term that applies to both the highest and lowest in man’s nature, it is that which drives us to pursue the light of knowledge and it’s also that which in nature strives blindly and dumbly to survive. Both come under the common name of will, just as the first dim light of dawn in the rays of the full midday are both called sunlight. If we consider the impulse with which waters hurries to the ocean, or the way in which a magnet turns to the North Pole, or the eagerness with which electric poles seek to be united or the way a Crystal takes form, we can recognise our own nature, for the name will describes the inner nature of everything that is in the world. The world as will is one, it knows nothing of the multiplicity of things in the outer world: the world of perception, the world of time and space. Notions like more or less, don’t exist to it, it knows nothing of quantities or qualities. For this reason, it cannot be said that there is a small part of the will in a stone or a large part of the will in a man. Relations like this between part and whole belong to the idea of space which does not apply to the will. In reality, the will is present in its entirety and undivided in every object of nature and in every living thing. Yet in terms of its objectification, that is, its external expression, it has different grades in inorganic matter, in vegetation, in animals and in man. The lowest of these appear in the most universal forces of nature, in the form of gravity, rigidity, elasticity, electricity and the like, which are in themselves manifestations of the will, just as much as human actions are. The higher grades are seen in man where the will takes the form of individuality and consciousness. It is here that the will shows its second side. For in the human brain lies the potential of comprehending the will, so that as it is kindled by a spark it brings the whole world as idea into existence. In this manner, knowledge proceeds from the will, knowledge that is either from the senses or is rational and is destined to serve the will in its aim of expressing itself. In all beasts and in most men, knowledge remains in subjugation to the will, yet in certain individual men, knowledge can free itself from this bondage so the subject of knowledge exists for itself as a pure mirror of the world. As a rule, knowledge remains subordinate to the will and grows on the will [so to speak] as a head on the body. In the case of the beast, the head is directed towards the Earth where the objects of its will are. But in the case of man, the head is elevated and set freely upon the body as in the Apollo Belvedere where the head of the guard stands so freely on his shoulders that it seems delivered of the body and no longer subject to it.

The transition from the individual’s knowledge of particular things to the knowledge of the idea takes place suddenly. It happens when the knowledge of the will changes someone into a pure will-less subject of knowledge, contemplating things as they are in themselves. If raised by the power of the mind, a man leaves the common way of looking at things behind and forgets both his individuality and his will, then he becomes a pure “without will” timeless and painless subject of knowledge – this appears in the genius. For when Genius appears in a man a far larger amount of the power of knowledge comes to him than is necessary for the service of his will. This extra knowledge is free and purified from will: a clear mirror of the inner nature of the world. All willing arises from want. The satisfaction of a desire ends it, but for one wish that is satisfied, there remain 10 which are denied. No attained object of desire can give lasting satisfaction, for it is likely alms thrown to a beggar that keep him alive today that misery may be prolonged tomorrow.

Attending to the demands of the will, continually occupies and influences our consciousness. But when we are lifted out of the endless stream of willing, we can comprehend things free from their relation to our will without any personal interest or subjective opinions, and then the peace we have been seeking comes of our own accord. For we are, at least for the moment, set free from the miserable striving of the will – the wheel stands still. There is no more slavery to the will. It is the function of the fine arts to express this freedom from will or the different grades along the way. Matter as such cannot be an expression of the idea but when it is express through an art like architecture, its characteristics of gravity, cohesion and hardness, the universal qualities of stone appear as a direct but low grade of the objectified or expressed will. In the building nature reveals itself a conflict between the gravity of the building and the rigidity of the structure of the support, as in the simplest form of a column. The problem of architecture, apart from practical utility, is to make this conflict appear in a distinct way so that the building material instead of a mere heap of matter bound to the earth is raised above it, so that the roof example is realised only by the means of the columns or arches which support it. The pleasure that comes from looking at a beautiful building lies in the fact that the viewer is set free from the knowledge which serves the will and is raised to the kind of knowledge which comes from contemplation that has no will.

Woman and Man Roman Sculpture

The highest grade of the expression of the will is found in anything that reflects human beauty in a way which reveals the idea of man. No object transports us so quickly into will-less contemplation as the most beautiful human form. We know human beauty when we see it, but true artists can express it so clearly that it surpasses even what we have seen. In the genius of a sculptor, we find a representation of what nature intended to express, so that if you were to present his statue to nature, he would say “This is what you wanted to say!”

danaide-le-baiser-par-auguste-rodin

Image: « Danaide » & « Le Baiser » par Auguste Rodin

Painting as an art has character as well as beauty and grace for its object, for it attempts to represent the will of the highest grade in the idea of humanity. This, however, can be an abstract form of the concept known as the picture attempt [as it does at times an allegorical painting] to represent something other than what is perceived. In poetry the relationship is reversed, for here what is given directly in words is the concept that leads readers away to the object of perception, this is done through metaphors, similes, parables, allegories and the like. The aim of all poetry is the representation of man. When it is a representation of the poet himself, we have the lyric. The lyric poet reveals himself in joy or more often grief as the subject of his own will, but along with this as the sight of nature impresses him, there is the awareness of himself as the subject of pure will-less knowing, and his joy now appears as a contrast to the stress of desire: desire imposed on him by his will. Epic poetry portrays man in a more historical context in connection with significant situations in human life. Drama in the form of tragedy is not only the best of poetic art, but the most significant in terms of this system of philosophy because it is the strife of the will represented at its highest grade of objectivity, it becomes visible in human suffering that is brought about by fate or error or wickedness, in which the will lives on while people fight against and destroy one another. The tragic effect in poetry may be produced by means of a character of extraordinary evil such as Iago in Othello or Creon in Antigone or by blind fate is in the Oedipus Rex of Sophocles or by circumstance and the situation in which the character finds himself such as Hamlet. In the tragic character we can observe how the noblest of men – after a long personal conflict and inward suffering – come at last to renounce the pleasures of life and the particular goals once so keenly fought for, instead the character joyfully surrenders to life itself. It is in this sense that Hamlet renounces life for himself but askes Horatio to remain a while and to – in this harsh world – draw his breath in pain to tell Hamlet’s story and clear his name.

Shakespeare's Hamlet Tragedy

Beginning with architecture in which gravity and rigidity reveal the lowest grade of the conflict of the will with itself and ending with tragedy where this conflict reaches its highest grade, we have considered the arts and how they represent the will and the idea, but music stands quite alone, cut off from all the other arts, since it’s not a mere copy of any idea of existence in the world. Music is as direct an expression of the whole will as the world itself is. Nature and music are two different expressions of the same thing, and so music speaks a universal language. In the deepest tones of harmony in the bass we recognise the lowest grades of the will, for bass is in harmony with the crudest matter on which all things rest and from which they originate. The higher complimental parts of music are parallel with animal life and in the melody of high voice singing we recognise the high grade of the will in the effort and intellectual life of man. The pleasure we received from beauty, the consolation we get from art and the enthusiasm of the artist, rest on the fact that whereas existence in the world is something sorrowful and terrible, the contemplation of the world as idea is both soothing and significant. But in the case of the artist, the contemplation of beauty doesn’t quiet the will and it doesn’t provide a pathway out of life as does the resignation of the saint. The deliverance from the will only occurs when – tired of the game – one renounces life and gets a grasp on what is real. When the will – this blind and incessant impulse of nature – becomes conscious in man, it is recognised as the will to live. Man may affirm or deny it. He affirms the will to live when – having seen it as that which has produced nature and his own life – he then adds his own desires to it. The denial of the will to live occurs when the awareness or consciousness of it means the end of desire. The phenomena of the world – that what we see and perceive – no longer motivates the will, for the comprehension of the world as idea has freed the will and allowed it to be silent. It the essential nature of the will – nowhere free and everywhere powerful – to strive endlessly towards satisfaction that it is incapable of getting. Just as in nature, gravitation is the ceaseless striving towards a mathematical centre and this striving will not stop even if the whole universe were rolled into a single ball. In the same way the solid will become a fluid, the fluid will become a gas, and the plant – restless and unsatisfied – will strive through ascending forms until it goes to seed where it finds a new starting point.

All nature is a struggle in which war is waged that is deadly to both sides. All striving is in vain, and yet it cannot be abandoned and all this is identical to what appears in us. In us, the blind striving of nature becomes the will to live, but it is self-conscious will: we are aware of it! The fate of this will is in keeping with its striving nature in the face of constant obstacles and hindrances, and anyone who will consider the character and destiny of the will to live, will be convinced that suffering is essential to all life.

Ad Augusta Per Angusta

Translation (EN): « Has grandiose results by narrow lanes » / Source: Le Petit Larousse 2018 / Les locutions étrangères gravées dans nos mémoires ont la magie des formules oubliées dont le charme va croissant lorsque l’alchimie des mots nous est plus mystérieuses. Elles ont l’autorité de la chose écrite. / Mot de passe des conjurés au quatrième acte d’Hernani, de Victor Hugo. On n’arrive au triomphe qu’en surmontant maintes épreuves.

From where then did Dante take the materials for his hell? From the world! And when it came to describing the delights of heaven he had an insurmountable task, for the world could offer him no proper material. The fatal assertion of the will to live has produced man’s body and the desire to preserve and perpetuate it. So the assertion of the will is really the assertion of the body. In such assertion, we find the source of all egoism and all wrongdoing, but such selfhood is really an illusion due to a false philosophy in which the individual imagines he lives to himself alone. He is really only a product of the one will to live. Just as a sailor sitting in a boat trusting to his frail barque in a stormy sea, so it is that in the world of sorrows man sits quietly, trusting to the principle of individualisation and separateness, in which he only knows things superficially or as they appear to him, but when he comes to understand that the one will to live exists in all men alike, he realises that the difference between those that inflict suffering and those that bare it is only a perceived difference that is not real. In truth, the evil man is like a wild beast, who frenzied and excited, unintentionally buries its teeth in its own flesh, injuring itself as it tries to injure another. But no matter how veiled and evil man is by illusion, he still feels the sting of conscience, which creates a sense that the gulf which seems to separate him from others isn’t real. As all hatred and wickedness rely upon egoism and as egoism rest on the assertion of the will to live, so do all goodness and virtue spring from the denial of the will to live. The will turns around and no longer asserts itself but denies its own nature instead. Man then denies his own nature as expressed in his body and no longer desires sensual gratification under any condition. Voluntary and complete chastity is the first step in the denial of the will to live. But then the human race would die out, and with it the mind in which the world is reflected, and without a subject of knowledge, there would be no object, there would be no world. To those in whom the will to live has turned and denied itself, this world of ours with all its sun and milky ways is nothing [dead inside].

 

These are some of the ideas and the basic themes presented in Schopenhauer’s “The world as Will and Idea”, a very lengthy work that of course includes many other ideas and elaborations of the ones we have mentioned. But the essence of Schopenhauer’s philosophy can be found in a few basic point.

 

To begin with, he sees the will of man, and specifically the will to survive as the dominant force in the universe and slavery to this will is the root of all evil. Man and all other creatures are subservient to their will to live. In exercising his will, man inflicts all kinds of cruelties and evil. Schopenhauer first examined these cruelties in the world of nature, spending a lot of time on the way in which animals of one species prey on those of another. Then he moved onto man and says, “the chief source of the most serious evils which afflict man is man himself”. Whoever keeps this last fact clearly in view sees the world as a hell which surpasses that of Dante, through the fact that one man must be the devil of another. Schopenhauer uses war and various other cruelties such as industrial exploitation, bravery and social abuses to back up his claim. Schopenhauer had no sympathy for the revolution of his time because he felt the state was justified, exactly because of the cruelty of man. It existed to make the world a little more bearable than it would otherwise be. He did not consider the state government divine, but he considered it necessary [a view he may have been willing to revise had he been alive in 2018 with democracy falling apart and not being properly applied, leading to evil, unethical, unscrupulous and unskilled street politicians getting into positions above their understanding].

Schopenhauer believed we can do something to alleviate suffering but it is pointless to think that we can change the fundamental character of the world or of human life. If war was abolished for instance and if all of men’s material needs were met, they would eventually still resort to conflict – “it is their nature”. He is quick to condemn the optimism or idealism of other philosophers who disregard the dark side of human existence, or who try to justify it as rational. To Schopenhauer these dark aspects of life were not secondary feature, they were the most significant aspects of human life in history. On this basis, he created his theory of The Blind and Striving Impulse, he called the Will. Then, he looked around and found support for his theory in the inorganic, organic and human phenomena of life.

Unquestionably, Schopenhauer held a one-sided vision of the world, but because of its one-sidedness and exaggeration it served as a counterbalance to philosophers like Hagel who focused attention on the glorious triumph of reason throughout history and he tended to dismiss evil and suffering with elaborate, evasive, phrasing. Schopenhauer did offer 2 ways of escape from the slavery to the will. One was the path of contemplation, which is the way of art and the other was the path of asceticism, of renouncing the world in one’s personal desires or will. He did believe that the human mind could develop beyond what was required just to satisfy his physical and material needs, it could develop a surplus of energy over and above what was needed to fulfil its biological function. When that happened, man can use the extra energy to escape the life of desire and striving, of assertion of the ego, of conflict, none of which brings him satisfaction anyway. In transcending the Will through art [expressing it with insight], Schopenhauer was very specific about which art forms served what purpose, and in defining which were superior to others. Not surprisingly, the the supreme poetic art is tragedy, for tragedy reveals the real character of human life expressed in dramatic form or as he said the unspeakable pain: the wail of humanity, the triumph of evil, the mocking mastery of chance and the irretrievable fall of the just and innocent. But art and contemplation, besides reflecting on the evil of life, can also open a door that becomes perhaps the only hopeful point in Schopenhauer’s entire book. This door is opened when man can see through the veil of Maya. Maya, being the Hindu concept for the illusionary nature of the world and life. It is Maya that causes to see separateness and division where there is none, but Schopenhauer also believed that man had the intellectual capacity to develop gradually a site that penetrated Maya, and raised some questions that made even a glimmer of hope seem a little bright. What is the purpose of achieving such virtue? What happens afterward?

To start with, the man who denies the Will treats the world as nothing, for the world is just the appearance of the will, which he denied. So it is true that when the will denies itself, our world with all its sun and Milky ways is nothing as Schopenhauer said, then what happens at death? Schopenhauer is convinced of the finality of death. “Before us”, he says “there is indeed only nothingness”. Death or the withdrawal from the world means the extinction of consciousness, In life, he reduces existence to thin thread, and at death, it is finally destroyed. The man who denies his will to live reaches the final goal, which is to not live. Schopenhauer does leave one last hope beyond the grim disappearance of consciousness and of the world, admitting that it is possible that ultimate reality, which he called the thing in itself may possess attributes that we do not know about and that we cannot know. This reality would not be a state of knowledge since there would not be a subject and an object, that phenomenal and illusionary relationship that is required for knowledge, but it might resemble some experience that cannot be communicated and to which mystics refer to, but only in obscure vague ways. So, in the end like all great philosophers must, Arthur Schopenhauer admitted that he did not have all the answers but he thought he had some, and ultimately it is the questions his answers posed to others that became his most significant contribution, for the role of the philosopher and of philosophy itself is not only to solve our problems, but also to express points of views that stimulate us to further thought and consideration on human nature and the meaning of life, in that, he was incredibly successful.

Schopenhauer sur Le Style

« Style is the physiognomy of the mind. It is a more reliable key to character than the physiognomy of the body. » – Arthur Schopenhauer

___________________________________________

­­­

 

24.08.2018 | Danny J. D’Purb | DPURB.com

____________________________________________________

While the aim of the community at dpurb.com has  been & will always be to focus on a modern & progressive culture, human progress, scientific research, philosophical advancement & a future in harmony with our natural environment; the tireless efforts in researching & providing our valued audience the latest & finest information in various fields unfortunately takes its toll on our very human admins, who along with the time sacrificed & the pleasure of contributing in advancing our world through sensitive discussions & progressive ideas, have to deal with the stresses that test even the toughest of minds. Your valued support would ensure our work remains at its standards and remind our admins that their efforts are appreciated while also allowing you to take pride in our journey towards an enlightened human civilization. Your support would benefit a cause that focuses on mankind, current & future generations.

Thank you once again for your time.

Please feel free to support us by considering a donation.

Sincerely,

The Team @ dpurb.com

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Essay // Psychology: The Concept of Self

SelfRope

The concept of the self will be explored in this essay – where it comes from, what it looks like and how it influences thought and behaviour. Since self and identity are cognitive constructs that influence social interaction and perception, and are themselves partially influenced by society, the material of this essay connects to virtually all aspects of psychological science. The self is an enormously popular focus of research (e.g. Leary and Tangney, 2003; Sedikides and Brewer, 2001; Swann and Bosson, 2010). A 1997 review by Ashmore and Jussim reported 31,000 social psychological publications on the self over a two-decade period to the mid-1990s, and there is now even an International Society for Self and Identity and a scholarly journal imaginatively entitled Self and Identity.

Nikon Portrait DSC_0169 Res600

The concept of the “self” is a relatively new idea in psychological science. While Roy Baumeister’s (1987) painted a picture of a medievally organised society where most human organism’s reality were fixed and predefined by rigid social relations and legitimised with religious affiliations [family membership, social rank, birth order & place of birth, etc], the modern perspectives adopted by scholars and innovative psychologists has been contradicting such outdated concepts. The idea of a complex & sophisticated individual self, lurking underneath would have been difficult, if not impossible, to entertain under such atavistic assumptions of social structures affecting an individual human organism.

However, all this changed in the 16th century, where momentum gathered ever since from forces such as:

Secularisation – where the idea that fulfilment occurs in afterlife was replaced by the idea that one should actively pursue personal fulfilment in this life

Industrialisation – where the human being was increasingly being seen as individual units of production who moved from place to place with their own “portable” personal identity which was not locked into static social structures such as extended family

Enlightenment – where people felt they were solely responsible for choosing, organising and creating better identities for themselves by overthrowing orthodox value systems and oppressive regimes [e.g. the French revolution and the American revolution of the late 18th century]

and

Psychoanalysis – Freud’s theory of the human mind unleashed the creative individual with the notion that the self was unfathomable because it lived in the depth of the unconscious [e.g. Theory of social representations – theory invoking psychoanalysis as an example of how a novel idea or analysis can entirely change how people think about their world (e.g. Moscovici, 1961; see Lorenzi-Cioldi and Clémence, 2001). [See: Psychoanalysis: History, Foundations, Legacy, Impact & Evolution]

summer

Together, these and other socio-political and cultural influences lead to society thinking about the self and identity as complex subjects, where theories of self and identity propagated and flourished in this fertile soil.

As far as self and identity are concerned, we have noticed one pervasive finding in cultural differences. The so called “Western” world involving continents such as Western Europe, North America and Australasia, tend to be individualistic, whereas most other cultures, such as in Asia, South America and Africa are collectivist (Triandis, 1989; also see Chiu and Hong, 2007, Heine, 2010, 2012; Oyserman, Coon and Kemmelmeier, 2002). Anthropologist Geertz puts it beautifully:

“The Western conception of the person as a bounded, unique, more or less integrated, motivational and cognitive universe, a dynamic centre of awareness, emotion, judgement, and action organized into a distinctive whole and set contrastively both against other such wholes and against a social and natural background is, however incorrigible it may seem to us, a rather peculiar idea within the context of the world’s cultures.”

Geertz (1975, p.48)

the-individual

Markus and Kityama (1991) describe how those from individualistic cultures tend to have an independent self, whereas people from collectivist cultures have an interdependent self. Although in both cases, people seek a clear sense of who they are, the [Western] independent self is grounded in a view of the self that is autonomous, separate from other people and revealed through one’s inner thoughts and feelings. The [Eastern] interdependent self on the other hand, unlike in the West, tends to be grounded in one’s connection to and relationships with other people [expressed through one’s roles and relationships]. As Gao explained: ‘Self… is defined by a person’s surrounding relations, which often are derived from kinship networks and supported by cultural values based on subjective definitions of filial piety, loyalty, dignity, and integrity’ (Gao, 1996, p. 83).

From a conceptual review of the cultural context of self-conception, Vignoles, Chryssochoou and Breakwell (2000) conclude that the need to have a distinctive and integrated sense of self is “likely” universal. However from individualist and collectivist cultures, the term “self-distinctiveness” holds a set of very different assumptions. In the individualist West, separateness adds meaning and definition to the isolated and bounded self. In the collectivist & Eastern others, the “self” is relational and gains meaning from its relations with others.

universal

A logic proposed by analysing historical conceptions of self with an account of the origins of individualist and collectivist cultures along with the associated independent and interdependent self-conceptions may be related to economic policies. The labour market is an example where mobility helped the industry by viewing humans as “units” of production who are expected to shift their geographical locations from places of low labour demand to those of higher demand, along with their ability to organise their lives, relationships, self-concepts around mobility and transient relationships.

New York Construction Workers Lunching on a Crossbeam

Construction workers eat their lunches atop a steel beam 800 feet above ground, at the building site of the RCA Building in Rockefeller Center.

Independence, separateness and uniqueness have become more important than connectedness and long-term maintenance of enduring relationships [values that seem to have become pillars of modern Western Labour Culture – self-conceptions reflect cultural norms that codify economic activity].

However, this logic applied to any modern human organism seems to clearly offer more routes to development [personal and professional], more options to continuously nurture the evolving concepts of self-conception through expansive social experience and cultural exploration, while being a set of philosophy that places more powers of self-defined identity in the hands of the individual [more modern and sophisticated].

TheMan

Now that some basic concepts and origins of the “self” along with its importance and significance to psychological science has been covered, we are going to explore two creative ways of learning about ourselves.

Firstly, the concept of self-knowledge which involves us storing information about ourselves in a complex and varied way in the form of a schema means that information about the self is assumed to be stored cognitively as separate context specific nodes such that different nodes activate different ones and thus, different aspects of self (Breckler, Pratkanis and McCann, 1991; Higgins, van Hook and Dorfman, 1988). The concept of self emerges from widely distributed brain activity across the medial prefrontal and medial precuneus cortex of the brain (e.g. Saxe, Moran, Scholz, and Gabrieli, 2006). According the Hazel Markus, self-concept is neither “a singular, static, lump-like entity” nor a simple averaged view of the self – it is a complex and multi-faceted, with a relatively large number of discrete self-schemas (Markus, 1977; Markus and Wurf, 1987).

masks

Most individuals tend to have clear conceptions of themselves on some dimensions but not others – generally more self-schematic on dimensions that hold more meaning to them, for e.g. if one thinks of oneself as sophisticated and being sophisticated is of importance to oneself, then we would be self-schematic on that dimension [part of our self-concept], if not then we would not [would not be part of our self-concept – unsophisticated]. It is widely believed that most people have a complex self-concept with a large number of discrete self-schemas. Patrice Linville (1985, 1987; see below) has suggested that this variety helps to buffer people from life’s negative impacts by ensuring enough self-schemas are available for the individual to maintain a sense of satisfaction. We can be strategic in the use of our self-schemas – Linville described such judgement colourfully by saying: “don’t put all your eggs in one cognitive basket.” Self-schemas influence information processing and behaviour similarly to how schemas about others do (Markus and Sentis, 1982): self-schematic information is more readily noticed, is overrepresented in cognition and is associated with longer processing time.

S€lection de Vos Oeufs d'purb

Self-schemas do not only describe how we are, but they are also believed to differ as we have an array of possible selves (Markus and Nurius, 1986) – future-oriented schemas of what we would like to become, or what we fear we might become. For example, a scholar completing a postgraduate may think of a career as a lecturer, writer, entrepreneur, politician, actor, rock musician, etc. Higgins (1987) proposed the self-discrepancy theory, suggesting that we have 3 major types of self-schema:

  • The actual self – how we are
  • The ideal self – how we would like to be
  • The ‘ought’ self – how we think we should be

Discrepancies between the actual, ideal and/or ought, can motivate change to reduce the discrepancy – in this way we engage in self-regulation. Furthermore, the self-discrepancy and the general notion of self-regulation have been elaborated into the regulatory focus-theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998).This theory proposes that most individuals have two separate self-regulatory systems, termed Promotion and Prevention. The “Promotion” system is concerned with the attainment of one’s hopes and aspirations – one’s ideals. For example, those in a promotion focus adopt approach strategic means to attain their goals [e.g. promotion-focused students would seek ways to improve their grades, find new challenges and treat problems as interesting obstacles to overcome. The “Prevention” system is concerned with the fulfilment of one’s duties and obligations. Those in a prevention focus use avoidance strategy means to attain their goals. For example, prevention-focussed students would avoid new situations or new people and concentrate on avoiding failure rather than achieving highest possible grade.

aimhigh

Whether an individual is more approach or prevention focussed is believed to stem during childhood (Higgins and Silberman, 1998). Promotion-focus may arise if children are habitually hugged and kissed for behaving in a desired manner and love is withdrawn as a form of discipline. Prevention-focus may arise if children are encouraged to be alert to potential dangers and punished when they display undesirable behaviours. Against this background of individual differences however, regulatory focus has also been observed to be influenced by immediate context, for example by structuring the situation so that subjects focus on prevention or on promotion (Higgins, Roney, Crowe and Hymes, 1994). Research also revealed that those who are promotion-focussed are more likely to recall information relating to the pursuit of success by others (Higgins and Tykocinski, 1992). Lockwood and her associates found that those who are promotion-focussed look for inspiration to positive role models who emphasise strategies for achieving success (Lockwood, Jordan and Kunda, 2002). Such individuals also show elevated motivation and persistence on tasks framed in terms of gains and non-gains (Shah, Higgins and Friedman, 1998). On the other side of the spectrum, individuals who are prevention-focussed tend to recall information relating to the avoidance of failure by others, are most inspired by negative role models who highlight strategies for avoiding failure and exhibit motivation and persistence on tasks that framed in terms of losses and non-losses. After being studied in intergroup relations (Shah, Higgins and Friedman, 1998), the regulatory focus theory was found to strengthen positive emotion related bias and behavioural tendencies towards the ingroup when in the context of a measured or manipulated promotion focus. Prevention-focus strengthens more negative emotion-related bias [haters] and behavioural tendencies against the outgroup (Shah, Brazy and Higgins, 2004).

ADLER PLANETARIUM UNIVERSE

On May 25, 2012, take off on a mind-blowing tour of the Universe in the Adler’s new space adventure Welcome to the Universe! Audiences travel a billion light-years and back in this live, guided tour unlike any other in the world. Visitors explore the breathtaking, seemingly infinite Universe as they fly through space to orbit the Moon, zoom into a canyon on Mars, and soar through the cosmic web where a million galaxies shower down upon them in the most immersive space environment ever created. (C) Adler Planetarium. (PRNewsFoto/Adler Planetarium)

The second way of learning about the concept of self is through the understanding of our “many selves” and multiple identities. In the book, The Concepf of Self, Kenneth Gergen (1971) depicts the self-concept as containing a repertoire of relatively discrete and often quite varied identities, each with a distinct body of knowledge. These identities have their origins in a vast array of different types of social relationships that form, or have formed, the anchoring points for our lives, ranging from close personal relationships with other professionals, mentors, trusted friends, etc and roles defined by skills, fields, divisions and categories, to relationships fully or partially defined by languages, geography, cultures [sub-cultures], groups values, philosophy, religion, gender and/or ethnicity. Linville (1985) also noted that individuals differ in terms of self-complexity, in the sense that some individuals have more diverse and extensive set of selves than othersthose with many independent aspects of selves have higher self-complexity that those with a few, relatively similar, aspects of self. The notion of self-complexity is given a rather different emphasis by Marilynn Brewer and her colleagues (Brewer and Pierce, 2005; Roccas and Bewer, 2002) who focussed on self that is defined in group terms (social identity) and the relationship among identities rather than number of identities individuals have.

TheMask

They argued that individuals have a complex social identity if they have discrete social identities that do not share many attributes but a simple social identity if they have overlapping social identities that share many attributes [simple]. For example, when Cognitive Psychologists [cognitive psychology explores mental processes] study high-level functions such as problem solving and decision making, they often ask participants to think aloud. The verbal protocols that are obtained [heard] are then analysed at different levels of granularity: e.g. to look at the speed with which participants carry out mental processes, or, at a higher level of analysis, to identify the strategies being used. Grant and Hogg (2012) have recently suggested and empirically shown that the effect, particularly on group identification and group behaviours of the number of identities one has and their overlap may be better explained in terms of the general property of social identity prominencehow subjectively prominent, overall and in a specific situation, a particular identity is one’s self-concept. Social identity theorists (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) argued 2 broad classes of identity that define different types of self:

(i) Social Identity [which defines self in terms of a « particular » group membership (if any meaningful ones exist for the individual)], and

(ii) Personal Identity [which defines self in terms of idiosyncratic traits & close personal relationships with specific individuals/groups (if any) which may be more than physical/social, e.g. mental [strength of association with specific others on specific tasks/degrees]

The first main focus question here is asked by Brewer and Gardner (1996), ‘Who is this “we”?’ and distinguished three forms of self:

  • Individual self – based on personal traits that differentiate the self from all others
  • Relational self – based on connections and role relationships with significant/meaningful others
  • Collective self – based on group membership [can depend of many criteria] that differentiates ‘us’ from ‘them’

More recently it has been proposed that there are four types of identity (Brewer, 2001; Chen, Boucher and Tapias, 2006):

  • Personal-based social identities – emphasising the way that group properties are internalised by individual group members as part of their self-concept
  • Relational social identities – defining the self in relation to specific other people with whom one interacts [may not be physical or social only] in a group context – corresponding to Brewer and Gardner’s (1996) relational identity and to Markus and Kitayama’s (1991) ‘interdependent self’.
  • Group-based social identities – equivalent to social identity as defined above [sense of belonging and emotional salience for a group is subjective]
  • Collective identities – referring to a process whereby  those who consider themselves as « group members » not only share self-defining attributes, but also engage in social action to forge an image of what the group stands for and how it is represented and viewed by others.

China Collective

The relational self  [for those who choose to be defined by others at least] is a particularly interesting concept as it can also be considered a particular type of collective self. As Masaki Yuki (2003) observed, some groups and cultures (notable East-Asian cultures) define groups in terms of networks of relationships. Research also revealed that women tend to place a greater importance than men on their relationships with others in a group (Seeley, Gardner, Pennington and Gabriel, 2003; see also Baumeister and Sommer, 1997; Cross and Madson, 1997).

In search for the evidence for the existence of multiple selves which came from research where contextual factors were varied to discover that most individuals describe themselves and behave differently in different contexts. In one experiment, participants were made to describe themselves on very different ways by being asked loaded questions which prompted them to search from their stock of self-knowledge for information that presented the self in a different light (Fazio, Effrein and Falender, 1981). Other researchers also found, time and time again, that experimental procedures that focus on group membership lead people to act very differently from procedures that focus on individuality and interpersonal relationships. Even “minimal group” studies in which participants are either: (a) identified as individuals; or (b) explicitly categorised, randomly or by some minimal or trivial criterion as ‘group’ members (Tajfel, 1970; see Diehl, 1990), a consistent finding is that being categorised tends to lead people to being discriminatory towards an outgroup, conform to ingroup norms, express attitudes and feelings that favour ingroup, and indicate a sense of belonging and loyalty to the ingroup.

ManVsGorilla

Furthermore, these effects of minimal group categorisation are generally very fast and automatic (Otten and Wentura, 1999). The idea that we may have many selves and that contextual factors can bring different selves into play, has a number of ramifications. Social constructionists have suggested that the self is entirely situation-dependent. An extreme form of this position argues that we do not carry self-knowledge around in our heads as cognitive representations at all, but rather that we construct disposable selves through talk (e.g. Potter and Wetherell, 1987). A less extreme version was proposed by Penny Oakes (e.g. Oakes, Haslam and Reynolds, 1999), who does not emphasise the role of talk but still maintains that self-conception is highly context-dependent. It is argued that most people have cognitive representations of the self that they carry in their heads as organising principles for perception, categorisation and action, but that these representations are temporarily or more enduringly modified by situational factors (e.g. Abrams and Hogg, 2001; Turner, Reynolds, Haslam and Veenstra, 2006).

evolution

Although we have a diversity of relatively discrete selves, we also have a quest: to find and maintain a reasonably integrated picture of who we are. Self-conceptual coherence provides us with a continuing theme for our lives – an ‘autobiography’ that weaves our various identities and selves together into a whole person. Individuals who have highly fragmented selves (e.g. some patients schizophrenia, amnesia or Alzheimer’s disease) find it very difficult to function effectively. People use many strategies to construct a coherent sense of self (Baumeister, 1998). Here is a list of some that we have used ourselves.

Sometimes we restrict our life to a limited set of contexts. Because different selves come into play as contexts keep changing, protections from self-conceptual clashes seem like a valid motive.

Other times, we continuously keep revising and integrating our ‘biographies’ to accommodate new identities. Along the way, we dispose of any meaningless inconsistencies. In effect, we are rewriting our own history to make it work to our advantage (Greenwald, 1980).

We also tend to attribute some change in the self externally to changing circumstances [e.g. educational achievements, professional circle, industry, etc] rather than simply internally to construct who we are. This is an application of the actor-observer effect (Jones and Nisbett, 1972).

In other case, we can also develop self-schemas that embody a core set of attributes that we feel distinguishes us from all other peoplethat makes us unique (Markus, 1977). We then tend to recognise these attributes disproportionately in all our selves, providing thematic consistency that delivers a sense of a stable and unitary self (Cantor and Kihlstrom, 1987). To sum up, individuals tend to construct their lives such that their self-conceptions are both steady and coherent.

One of major elements in the conception of self, is the ability to communicate through language and its varying degrees of granularity that hold a major role in social identity.

The remaining part of this essay will focus on the power and importance of language as the essence of the human being.

___________________________________________________

MicOne.jpg

The Essence of the Modern Human Being: Language, Psycholinguistics & Self-Definition

Human communication is completely different from that of other species as it allows virtually limitless amounts of ideas to be expressed by combining finite sets of elements (Hauser, Chomsky, & Fitch, 2005; Wargo, 2008). Other species [e.g. apes] do have communicative methods but none of them compare with human language. For example, monkeys use unique warning calls for different threats, but never combine these calls on new ideas. Similarly, birds and whales sing complex songs, but creative recombination of these sounds in the expression of new ideas has not occurred to these animals either.

As a system of symbols, language lies at the heart of social life and all its multitude of aspects in social identity. Language may be at the essence of existence if explored from the philosopher Descartes most famous quote, “Cogito Ergo Sum” which is Latin for “I think, therefore I am.”, as thought is believed to be experienced and entertained in language.

cogito ergo sum

The act of thinking often involves an inner personal conversation with oneself, as we tend to perceived and think about the world in terms of linguistic categories. Lev Vygotsky (1962) believed that inner speech was the medium of thought and that it was interdependent with external speech [the medium of social communication]. This interdependence would lead to the logical conclusion that cultural differences in language and speech are reflected in cultural differences in thought.

In the theory of linguistic relativity devised by linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf, a more extreme version of that logic was proposed. Brown writes:

Linguistic relativity is the reverse of the view that human cognition constrains the form of language. Relativity is the view that the cognitive processes of a human being – perception, memory, inference, deduction – vary with structural characteristics – lexicon, morphology, syntax – of the language [one speaks].

rene-descartes

Rene Descartes (1596-1659) was not only one of the most prominent philosophers of the 17th century but in the history of Western philosophy. Often referred to as the « father of modern philosophy », Descartes profoundly influenced intellectuals across Europe with his writings. Best known for his statement « Cogito ergo sum » (I think, therefore I am), the philosopher started the school of rationalism which broke with the scholastic Aristotelianism. Firstly, Descartes rejected the mind-body dualism, arguing that matter (the body) and intelligence (the mind) are 2 independent substances (metaphysical dualism) and secondly rejected the causal model of explaining natural phenomena and replaced it with science-based observation and experiment. The philosopher spent a great part of his life in conflict with scholastic approach (historically part of the religious order and its adherents) which still dominated thoughts in the early 17th century.

Communication & Language

The study of communication is therefore an enormous undertaking that draws on a wide range of disciplines, such as psychology, social psychology, sociology, linguistics, socio-linguistics, philosophy and literary criticism. Social psychologists have tended to distinguish between the study of language and the study of non-verbal communication [where scholars agree both are vital to study communication (Ambady and Weisbuch, 2010; Holtgraves, 2010; Semin, 2007)]; with also a focus on conversation and the nature of discourse. However the scientific revolution has quickly turned our era into one hugely influenced by computer-mediated communication which is quickly turning into a dominant channel of communication for many (Birchmeier, Dietz-Uhler and Stasser, 2011; Hollingshead, 2001).

Communication in all its varieties is the essence of social interaction: when we interact we communicate. Information is constantly being transmitted about what we sense, think and feel – even about “who we are” – and some of our “messages” are unintentional [instinctive]. Communication among educated humans comprises of words, facial expressions, signs, gestures and touch; and this is done face-to-face or by phone, writing, texting, emails or video. The social factors of communication are inescapable:

  • It involves our relationship with others
  • It is built upon a shared understanding of meaning
  • It is how people influence each other

Spoken languages are based on rule-governed structuring of meaningless sounds (phonemes) into basic units of meaning (morphemes), which are further structured by morphological rules into words and by syntactic rules into sentences. The meanings of words, sentences and entire utterances are determined by semantic rules; which together represent “grammar”. Language has remained an incredibly and endlessly powerful medium of communication due to the limitless amount of meaningful utterances it can generate through the shared knowledge of morphological, syntactic and semantic rules. Meaning can be communicated by language at a number of levels, ranging from a simple utterance [a sound made by one person to another] to a locution [words placed in sequence, e.g. ‘It’s cold in this room’], to an illocution [the locution and context in which it is made: ‘It’s cold in this room’ may be a statement, or a criticism of the institution for not providing adequate heating, or a request to close the window, or a plea to move to another room (Austin, 1962; Hall, 2000)].

SonicDelicacy

Linguistic mastery therefore involves dexterity at many levels of cultural understanding and therefore should likely differ from one individual to another depending on their personality, IQ, education and cultural proficiency in adaptation. This would lead to being able to navigate properly in the appropriate cultural context through language whilst knowing the appropriateness of the choice of words in term of “when, where, how and to whom say it.” Being able to master these, opens the doors to sociolinguistics (Fishman, 1972; also see Forgas, 1985), and the study of discourse as the basic unit of analysis (Edwards and Potter, 1992; McKinlay and McVittie, 2008; Potter and Wetherell, 1987). The philosopher John Searle (1979) has identified five sorts of meanings that humans can intentionally use language to communicate; the can use language:

  • To say how something is signified
  • To get someone to do something.
  • To express feelings and attitudes
  • To make a commitment
  • To accomplish something directly

Language is a uniquely human form of communication, as observed in the natural world, no other mammal has the elaborate form of communication in its repertoire of survival skills. Young apes have been taught to combine basic signs in order to communicate meaningfully (Gardner and Gardner, 1971; Patterson, 1978), however not even the most precocious ape can match the complexity of hierarchical language structure used by a normal 3-year-old child (Limber, 1977).

BabyBoy

Language has been called a human instinct because it is so readily and universally learned by infants. At 10 months of age, little is said, but at 30-month-old infants speak in complete sentences and user over 500 words (Golinkoff & Hirsh-Pasek, 2006). Moreover, over this very 20 month period, the plastic infant brain reorganises itself to learn the language of its environment(s). At 10 months infants can distinguish the sounds of all languages, but by 30 months, they can readily discriminate only those sounds to which they have been exposed (Kraus and Banai, 2007). Once the ability to discriminate particular speech sounds is lost, it is very hard to regain in most, which is one of the reason why most adults tend to have difficulties with learning a new language without an accent.

Neuro_SpeakingAHeardWord

Processes involved in the brain when speaking a heard word. Damage to areas of the Primary auditory cortex on the Left temporal lobe induce Language Recognition Problems & damage to the same areas on the Right produce deficits in processing more complex & delicate sounds [e.g. music, vocal performances, etc]. Hence, in Neuroscience, although it is not always the case, it can be generalised with a fair amount of confidence that Left is concerned with Speed, and Right is focused on Complex Frequency Patterns.

Most intellectuals researching the evolution of sophisticated human languages turned first to comparative studies of the vocal communications between human beings and other lesser primates [e.g. apes / monkeys]. For example, vervet monkeys do not use alarm calls unless other similar monkeys are within the vicinity, and the calls are more likely to be made only if the surrounding monkeys are relatives (Cheney and Seyfarth, 2005). Furthermore, chimpanzees vary the screams they produce during aggressive encounters depending on the severity of the encounter, their role in it, and which other chimpanzees can hear them (Slocombe and Zuberbuhler, 2005).

A fairly consistent pattern has emerged in the study of non-human vocal communication: There is a substantial difference between vocal production and auditory comprehension. Even the most vocal non-human primates can produce a relatively few calls, yet they are capable of interpreting a wide range of other sonic patterns in their environment. This seems to suggest that non-human primates’ ability to produce vocal language is limited, not by their inability to interpret sounds, but by their inability to exert ‘fine motor control’ over their voices – only humans have this distinct ability. It also confidently suggests that human language has likely evolved from a competence in comprehension already existing in our primate ancestors.

theyoungafricanape

The species specificity to language has led to some linguistic theorist to assume that an innate component to language must be unique to humans, notably Noam Chomsky (1957) who argued that the most basic universal rules of grammar are innate [called a “Language Acquisition Device”] and are activated through social interaction which enables the “code of language” to be cracked. However some other theorists argue for a different proposal, believing that the basic rules of language may not be innate as they can be learnt from the prelinguistic parent-child interaction (Lock, 1978, 1980), furthermore the meanings of utterances are so dependent on social context that they seem unlikely to be innate (Bloom, 1970; Rommetveit, 1974; see Durkin, 1995).

Motor Theory of Speech Perception

The motor theory of speech perception proposes that the perception of speech depends on the words activating the same neural circuits in the motor system that would be activated if the listener said the words (see Scott, McGettigan, and Eisner, 2009). Support for this theory has come from evidence that simply thinking about performing a particular task often activates the similar brain areas as performing the action itself, and also the discover of mirror neurons, motor cortex neurons that fire when particular responses are either observed or performed (Fogassi and Ferrari, 2007).

Cerebellum

Broca’s area: Speech production & Language processing // Wernicke’s area: Speech Comprehension

This seems to make perfect sense when solving the equation on the simple observation that Broca’s Area [speech area] is a part of the left premotor cortex [motor skills/movement area]. And since the main thesis of the motor theory of speech perception is that the motor cortex is essential in language comprehension (Andres, Olivier, and Badets, 2008; Hagoort and Levelt, 2009; Sahin et al., 2009), the confirmation comes from the fact that many functional brain-imaging studies have revealed activity in the primary or secondary motor cortex during language tests that do not involve language expression at all (i.e., speaking or writing). This may also suggest that fine linguistic skills may be linked to fine motor skills. Scott, McGettigan, and Eisner (2009) compiled and evaluated results of recorded activity in the motor cortex during speech perception and concluded that the motor cortex is active during conversation.

Gestural Language

Since the unique ability of a high degree of motor control over the vocal apparatus is present only in humans, communication in lesser non-human primates are mainly gestural rather than vocal.

chimps-gestures

Image: Reuters

This hypothesis was tested by Pollick, and de Waal in 2007, who compared the gestures and the vocalisations of chimpanzees. They found a highly nuanced vocabulary of hand gestures being used in numerous situations with a variety of combinations. To conclude, chimpanzees gestures were much more comparable to human language that were their vocalisations. Could this simply suggest that primate gestures have been critical stage in the evolution of human language (Corballis, 2003)?

On this same note, we may focus on the already mentioned “Theory of Linguistic Relativity” (Whorf, 1956) which states that our internalised cognitions as a human being, i.e. perception, memory, inference, deduction, vary with the structural characteristics, i.e. lexicon, morphology and syntax of the language we speak [cultural influence shapes our thoughts].

Thoughts

In support of of Sapir and Whorf’s position, Diederik Stapel and Gun Semin (2007) refer poetically to the “magic spell of language” and report their research, showing how different categories in the language we speak guide our observations in particular ways. We tend to use our category of language to attend to different aspects of reality. The strong version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is that language entirely determines thought, so those who speak different languages actually perceive the world in entirely different ways and effectively live in entirely different cognitive-perceptual universes. However extreme this suggestion may seem, a good argument against this assumption would be to consider whether the fact that we can distinguish between living and non-living things in English means that the Hopi of North-America, who do not, cannot distinguish between a bee and an aeroplane? Japanese personal pronouns differentiate between interpersonal relationships more subtly than do English personal pronouns; does this mean that English speakers cannot tell the difference between relationships? [What about Chong, Khan, Balaraggoo, Tyrone, Vodkadinov, Jacob, Obatemba M’benge and Boringski – where would you attribute their skills in the former question?]

The strong form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is believed to be the most extreme version to be applicable to the mainstream, so a weak form seems to better accord with the quantitative facts (Hoffman, Lau and Johnson, 1986). Language does not determine thought but allows for the communication of aspects of the physical or social environment deemed important for the community. Therefore in the event of being in a situation where the expertise in snow is deemed essential, one would likely develop a rich vocabulary around the subject. Similarly, should one feel the need to have a connoisseur’s discussion about fine wines, the language of the wine masters would be a vital requisite in being able to interact with flawless granularity in the expression finer experiences.

EQ2

Although language may not determine thought, its limitations across cultures may entrap those ‘cultured’ to a specific one due to its limited range of available words. Logically, if there are no words to express a particular thought or experience we would not likely be able to think about it. Nowadays such an idea based on enhancing freedom of expression and the evolution of human emancipation, a huge borrowing of words across languages has been noted over the years: for example, English has borrowed Zeitgeist from German, raison d’être from French, aficionado from Spanish and verandah from Hindi. This particular concept is powerfully illustrated in George Orwell’s novel 1984, in which a totalitarian regime based on Stalin’s Soviet Union is described as imposing its own highly restricted language called “Newspeak” designed specifically to prohibit people from even thinking non-orthodox or heretical thoughts, because the relevant words do not exist.

Further evidence over the impact of language on thought-restriction comes from research led by Andrea Carnaghi and her colleagues (Carnaghi, Maas, Gresta, Bianchi, Cardinu and Arcuri, 2008). In German, Italian and some other Indo-European languages [such as English], nouns and adjectives can have different effects on how we perceive people. Compare ‘Mark is gay’ [using an adjective] with ‘Mark is a gay’ [using a noun]. When describing an individual, the use of an adjective suggests an attribute of that individual; whereas a noun seems to imply a social group and being a member of a ‘gay’ group. The latter description with a noun is more likely to invoke further stereotypic/prejudicial inferences and an associated process of essentialism (e.g. Haslam, Rothschild and Ernst, 1998) that maps attributes onto invariant, often bio-genetic properties of the particular social category/group.

Paralanguage and speech style

The impact of language on communication is not only dependent on what is said but also by how it is said. Paralanguage refers to all the non-linguistic accompaniment of speech – volume, stress, pitch, speed, tone of voice, pauses, throat clearing, grunts and sighs (Knapp, 1978; Trager, 1958). Timing, pitch and loudness (the prosodic features of language; e.g. Argyle, 1975) play major roles in communication as they can completely change the meaning of utterances: a rising intonation at the end of a statement turns it into a question or communicates uncertainty, doubt or need for approval (Lakoff, 1973). Underlying emotions are often revealed in prosodic features of speech: low pitch could signify sadness or boredom, while high pitch could communicate anger, fear or surprise (Frick,1985). Naturally fast speech often reflects power and control (Ng and Bradac, 1993).

EQ

To gain further understanding of the feelings elicited by different paralinguistic features, Klaus Scherer (1974) used a synthesizer to vary short neutral utterances and has had individuals identify the emotions that were being communicated. Fig. A shows how different paralinguistic features communicate information about the speaker’s feelings.

In addition to paralinguistic cues, communication can also happen in different accents, different language varieties and different languages altogether. These are important speech style differences that have been well researched in social psychology (Giles and Coupland, 1991). From social psychology, the focus in language is mainly on how something is said rather than on what is said, with speech style instead of speech content; whereas discourse analytic approaches also place importance on what is said.

Table D2

Fig. A | Emotions displayed through paralinguistic cues

Social Markers in Speech

Most individuals have a repertoire of speech styles that is automatically or deliberately tailored depending on the context of the communicative event. For example, one would tend to speak slowly, use short words and simple grammatical constructions when dealing with foreigners and children (Clyne, 1981; Elliot, 1981). Longer, more complex constructions along with formalised language varieties or standard accents tend to be used in more formal contexts such as an interview or a speech.

In 1979, Penelope Brown and Colin Fraser categorised different components of a communicative situation that may influence speech style and distinguished between two broad features:

  • The scene (e.g. its purpose, time of day, whether there are bystanders or an audience, etc)
  • The participants (e.g. their personality, ethnicity, chemistry between them)

It is important to note however that individual differences have a major role to play in this objective classification of situations as different individuals may not define the similar “objective” situations similarly. For example, what is deemed formal for some may simply be common place to others; this subjective perception of objective situations has an effect on one’s chosen speech style.

RelaxedNaturally

One amazing point raised by Adrian Furnham (1986) is the fact that not only does one adjust speech styles to subjectively perceived situational demands, but one also seeks out situations that are appropriate to a preferred speech style. Contextual variations in speech style contains information about who is speaking to whom, in what context and on what topic? Speech contains social markers (Scherer and Giles, 1979). The most researched markers in social psychology are of group “memberships” such as society, social class, ethnicity, education, age and sex. Social markers are in most cases clearly identifiable and act as reliable clues to group membership. For example, most of the English can easily identify Americans, Australians and South Africans from their speech style alone, and (see Watson, 2009) are probably even better at identifying people who have been cultured in Exeter, Birmingham, Liverpool, Leeds and Essex! Speech style generally elicits a listener’s attitude towards the group that the speaker “represents” [at the exception of some non-mainstream individuals – as in any other group]. A mainstream media example could be the actress Eliza Doolittle’s tremendous efforts in the film My Fair Lady to acquire a standard English accent in order to hide her Cockney origins. This idea or concept is known as the match-guise technique, one of the most widely used research paradigms in the social psychology of language – devised to investigate language attitudes based on speech alone (Lambert, Hodgson, Gardner and Fillenbaum, 1960). The method involves individuals rating short speech extracts similar in paralinguistic, prosodic and content respects, differing ONLY in speech style (accent, dialect, language). All the speech extracts were spoken by the very same individual – who was fluently bilingual. The speaker is rated on a number of evaluative dimensions, which fall into 2 clusters reflecting competence and warmth as the 2 most basic dimensions of social perception (Fiske, Cuddy and Glick, 2007).

  • Status variables (e.g. intelligent, competent, powerful);
  • Solidarity variables (e.g. close, friendly, warm).

The matched-guise technique has been used extensively in a wide range of cultural contexts to investigate how speakers of standard and non-standard language varieties are evaluated. The standard language variety is the one that is associated with high economic status, power and media usage – in England, for example, it is what has been called received pronunciation (RP) English. Non-standard varieties include regional accents (e.g. Yorkshire, Essex), non-standard urban accents (e.g. Birmingham, North/South London) and minority ethnic languages (e.g. Afrikaan, Urdu, Arab, Hindi, Mandarin and other foreign minority languages in Britain). Research reveals that standard language varieties are more favourably evaluated on status and competence dimensions (such as intelligence, confidence, ambition) than non-standard varieties (e.g. Giles and Powesland, 1975).

42-23059472

There is also a tendency for non-standard variety speakers to be more favourably evaluated on solidarity dimensions. For example, Cindy Gallois and her colleagues (1984) found that both white Australians and Australian Aborigines upgraded Aboriginal-accented English on solidarity dimensions (Gallois, Callan and Johnstone, 1984). Hogg, Joyce and Abrams (1984) found that a similar scenario occurs in other linguistic cultures, for e.g. Swiss Germans upgraded speakers of non-standard Swiss German relative to speakers of High German on solidarity dimensions.

Language, Identity & Ethnicity

Matched-guise technique and other studies in linguistics have revealed how our speech style [accents, language, grammatical proficiency & voice] can affect how others evaluate us socially. This is unlikely to be due to the fact that some speech styles are aesthetically more pleasant than others, but more likely to be because speech styles are associated with particular social groups that are consensually evaluated more or less positively in society’s scale. Unless being acted, a person speaking naturally in the speech style of lower-status groups may lead to an evaluation similar to that of the group and their image [in terms of way of life] in society [for most mainstream cases & not expert assessors of individuality]. This simply suggests that processes associated with intergroup relations and group memberships may affect language and social behaviour among the mainstream crowd.

A Scholar at His Desk

Howard Giles and Richard Bourhis and their colleagues employed and extended principles from the social identity theory to develop an intergroup perspective on the social psychology of language (Giles, Bourhis and Taylor, 1977; Giles and Johnson, 1981, 1987). Since the original analysis focussed mainly on ethnic groups that differ in speech style, the theory is called ethnolinguistic identity theory; however, the wider intergroup analysis of language and communication casts a much wider net to embrace all manner of intergroup contexts (e.g. Giles, 2012; Giles, Reid and Harwood, 2010). 

Speech Style and Ethnicity

Although it is well know that ethnic groups differ in appearance, dress, cultural practices, and religious beliefs, language or speech style is often one of the most distinct and clear markers of ethnic identitysocial identity as a member of an ethnolinguistic group (an ethnic group defined by language or speech-style). For instance, the Welsh and the English in the UK are most distinctive in terms of accent and language. Speech style, then, is an important and often central stereotypical or normative property of group identity: one of the most powerful ways to display your Welshness is to speak English with a marked Welsh accent – or, even better to simply speak Welsh.

Language or speech style cues ethnolinguistic identity. Therefore, whether people accentuate or de-emphasise their ethnic language is generally influenced by the extent to which they see their ethnic identity as being a source of self-respect or pride. This perception will in turn be influenced by the real nature of the power and status relations between ethnic groups in society. Research in England, on regional accents rather than ethnic groups, illustrates this (e.g. Watson, 2009) – some accents are strengthening and spreading and others retreating or fading, but overall despite mobility, mass culture and the small size of England, the accent landscape is surprisingly unchanged. Northern accents in particular such as Scouse and Geordie have endured due to low immigration and marked subjective regional pride of these respective communities. Brummie is slowly spreading into the Welsh Marches due to population spread, and Cockney-influenced Estuary English popular due to it being portrayed in mainstream middle-class films has luckily not influenced East Anglia and South East England – that have kept their grammar and granularity.

Bloomsbury 128

It should be noted that almost all major societies have a multicultural component with ethnic groups, however all contain a single dominant high-status group whose language is the lingua franca of the nation with ethnic groups whose languages are subordinate. However, in major immigrant economies such as the United States, Canada and Australia some of the biggest variety of large ethnic groups occur. Unsurprisingly, most of the research on ethnicity and language comes from these countries, in particular, Australia and Canada. In Australia for example, English is the lingua franca, but there are also large ethnic Chinese, Italian, Greek and Vietnamese communities – language research has been carried out on all these communities (e.g.  Gallois, Barker, Jones and Callan, 1992; Gallois and Callan, 1986; Giles, Rosenthal and Young, 1985; Hogg, D’Agata and Abrams, 1989; McNamara, 1987; Smolicz, 1983)

Speech Accommodation

Social categories such as ethnic groups may develop and maintain or lose their distinctive languages or speech style as a consequence of intergroup relations. However, categories do not speak. People speak, and it is generally done with one another, usually in face-to-face interaction. As mentioned earlier, when people interact conversationally, they tend to adapt their speech style to the context – the situation, and in particular the listener. This concept is the foundation of the speech accommodation theory (Giles, 1984; Giles, Taylor and Bourhis, 1973), which invokes specific motivations to explain the ways in which people accommodate their speech style to those who are present. Motivation involved for such adaptations may be a desire to help the listener to understand what is being said or to promote specific impressions of oneself.

Oxford Radcliffe Square at night by Y_Song2

Radcliffe Square at Night, Oxford [Image: Y. Song]

 Speech Convergence and Divergence 

Since most conversations involve individuals who are potentially of unequal social status, speech accommodation theory describes the type of accommodation that might occur as a function of the sort of social orientation that the speakers may have towards one another (See Fig. B). Where a simple interpersonal orientation exists (e.g. between two friends), bilateral speech convergence occurs. Higher-status speakers shift their accent or speech style ‘downwards’ towards that of the lower-status speakers, who in turn shift ‘upwards’. In this scenario, speech convergence satisfies a need for approval or liking. The act of convergence increases interpersonal speech style similarity and this enhances interpersonal approval and liking (Bourhis, Giles and Lambert, 1975), particularly if the convergence behaviour is clearly intentional (Simard, Taylor and Giles, 1976). The process is based on the supported idea that similarity typically leads to attraction in most cases (e.g. Byrne, 1971).

Table D1

Fig. B | Speech accommodation as a function of status, social orientation and subjective vitality

Consider a particular scenario where an intergroup orientation exists. If the lower status group has low subjective vitality coupled with a belief is social mobility (i.e. one can pass, linguistically, into the higher status group), there is unilateral upward convergence on the part of the lower status speaker and unilateral speech divergence on the part of the higher status speaker. In intergroup contexts, divergence achieves psycholinguistic distinctiveness: it differentiates the speaker’s ingroup on linguistic grounds from the outgroup. Where an intergroup orientation exists and the lower status group has high subjective validity coupled with a belief in social change (i.e. one cannot pass into the higher status group), bilateral divergence occurs. Both speakers pursue psycholinguistic distinctiveness.

Speech accommodation theory has been well supported empirically (Gallois, Ogay and Giles, 2005; Giles and Coupland, 1991). Bourhis and Giles found that Welsh adults accentuated their Welsh accent in the presence of RP English speakers (i.e. the standard non-regional variety of English).  Bourhis, Giles, Leyens and Tajfel (1979) obtained a similar finding in Belgium, with Flemish speakers in the presence of French speakers. In both cases, a language revival was under way at the same time, and thus an intergroup orientation with high vitality was salient. In a low-vitality social mobility context, Hogg (1985) found that female students in Britain shifted their speech style ‘upwards’ towards that of their male partners. Accommodation in intergroup contexts reflects an intergroup or social identity mechanism in which speech style is dynamically governed by the speakers’ motivation to adopt ingroup or outgroup speech patterns. These motivations are in turn formed by perception of:

  • The relative status and prestige of the speech varieties and their associated groups;and
  • The vitality of their own ethnolinguistic group

 

Stereotyped Speech

One important factor that may actually govern changes in speech style is conformity to stereotypical perceptions of the appropriate speech norm. Thakerar, Giles and Cheshire (1982) distinguished between objective and subjective accommodation. People converge on or diverge from what they perceive to be the relevant speech style. Objective accommodation may reflect this, but in some circumstances it may not: for instance subjective convergence may resemble objective divergence if the speech style stereotype is different from the actual speech behaviour of the other speaker.

Even the “Queen’s English” is susceptible to some accommodation towards a more popular stereotype (Harrington, 2006). An analysis of the phonetics in the speech of Queen Elizabeth II from her Christmas broadcasts to the world since 1952 show a gradual change in the Royal vowels, moving from ‘upper-class’ RP to a more ‘standard’ and less aristocratic RP. This may simply reflect a softening of the once strong demarcation between the social classes – social change may sometimes be a catalyst for speech change. Where once she might have said “thet men in the bleck het”, she would now say “that man in the black hat”.

ClownRedQueen.jpg

Red Queen Illustration from Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking Glass (Oxford Classics)

Speech accommodation theory has been extended in recognition of the role of non-verbal behaviour in communication – now called communication accommodation theory (Gallois, Ogay and Giles, 2005; Giles, Mulac, Bradac and Johnson, 1987; Giles and Noels, 2002), which acknowledges that convergence and divergence can occur non-verbally as well as verbally. Anthony Mulac and his colleagues found that women in mixed-sex dyads converged towards the amount of eye contact (now called ‘gaze’) made by their partner (Mulac, Studley, Wiemann and Bradac, 1987). While accommodation is often synchronised in verbal and non-verbal channels, this is not necessarily the case. Frances Bilous and Robert Kraus (1988) found that women in mixed-sex dyads converged towards men on some dimensions (e.g. total words uttered and interruptions) but diverged on others (e.g. laughter).

 

Bilingualism and second-language acquisition 

Due to the excessive and culturally destructive waves of migration caused by the exploitation of diplomacy and some corrupt mainstream media and politicians to promote mass migration, most major countries are now bilingual or multilingual, meaning that people need to be able to speak two or more languages with a fair amount of proficiency to communicate effectively and successfully achieve their goals in different contexts. These countries contain a variety of ethnolinguistic groups with a single dominant group whose language is the lingua franca – very few countries are effectively monolingual (e.g. Portugal and Japan) anymore – which may be reflected in the rise in cultural conflict and lack of social coherence.

JLD_IOSW_MDL

The Intervention of Sabine Women par Jacques-Louis David (1795-1799)

The acquisition of a second language is rarely a matter of acquiring basic classroom proficiency, as one might in order to ‘get by’ on holiday – in fact, it is a wholesale acquisition of a language embedded in a highly cultural context with varying degrees of granularity to reach the levels of flawless/effective communication (Gardner, 1979). Second-language acquisition requires native-like mastery (being able to speak like a native speaker), and this hinges more on the motivations of the second-language learner than on linguistic aptitude or pedagogical factors. Failure to acquire native-like mastery can undermine self-confidence and cause physical and social isolation, leading to material hardship and psychological suffering. For example, Noels, Pon and Clément (1996) found low self-esteem and marked symptoms of stress among Chinese immigrants in Canada with poor English skills. Building on earlier models (Gardner, 1979; Clément, 1980), Giles and Byrne (1982) proposed an intergroup model of second language acquisition. There are five socio-psychological dimensions that influence a subordinate group member’s motivational goals in learning the language of a dominant group (see Fig. C):

  • Strength of ethnolinguistic identification
  • Number of alternative identities available
  • Number of high-status alternative identities available
  • Subjective vitality perceptions
  • Social beliefs regarding whether it is or is not possible to pass linguistically into the dominant group

Low identification with one’s ethnic ingroup, low subjective vitality and a belief that one can ‘pass’ linguistically, coupled with a large number of other potential identities of which many are high-status, are conditions that motivate someone to acquire native-like mastery in the second language. Proficiency in the second language is seen to be economically and culturally useful; it is considered additive to our identity. Realisation of this motivation is facilitated or inhibited by the extent to which we are made to feel confident or anxious about using the second language in specific contexts. The converse set of socio-psychological conditions motivates people to acquire only classroom proficiency. Through fear of assimilation, the second language is considered subtractive in that it may attract ingroup hostility and accusations of ethnic betrayal. Early education, individual Intelligence, personality and aptitude may also affect proficiency.

table-d3
This analysis of second-language acquisition grounds language firmly in its cultural context and thus relates language acquisition to broader acculturation processes. John Berry and his colleagues distinguished between integration (individuals maintain ethnic culture and relate to dominant culture), assimilation (individuals give up their ethnic culture and wholeheartedly embrace the dominant culture), separation (individuals maintain their ethnic culture and isolate themselves from the dominant culture) and marginalisation (individuals give up their ethnic culture and fail to relate properly to the dominant culture (Berry, Trimble and Olmedo, 1986).

braintolivein

Human brain specimen being studied in neuroscience professor Ron Kalil’s Medical School research lab. © UW-Madison News & Public Affairs 608/262-0067 Photo by: Jeff Miller

While the only effective forms of adjustments that completely benefit a system remain « native citizens » [in terms of designing culturally fitting human organisms from the lower to the upper scale of society], and assimilation [the small number of culturally & educationally worthwhile & proficient organisms that manage to], the remaining could simply be qualified as burden to most systems, specially children deriving from economic migration [who are already being born in mass (in some cases) due to the higher fertility culture from their parents’ cultural origins, and who seem to want native treatment while not being able to culturally navigate with native-like proficiency (illogical demands with illogical cultural belonging). This ‘nomadic‘ generation of children whose parents initially moved from land to land for nothing else but the simple rush for cash from a socio-economic system with better financial prospects may unfortunately [at the exception of some illogical mainstream college-educated far-left human rights activists] be a scenario fitting with a parasitic ‘metaphoric example’, while to others [such as left wing economic policy makers], this could be what they cheaply describe as « modernism » & « cultural-enrichment« .

In a ‘psychological’ reality, from a social-psychologist’s perspective this may simply be described as a mass phenomenon that society is not used to dealing with and has not been monitoring effectively since the 1950s, to a point where confusion and sheer desperation sets for both native citizens and authorities when thinking of a « rational » solution that seems to be constantly destroyed by outdated, irrational and illogical human rights laws, forever unfavourable to major western societies while defending cheap unskilled migration originally from culturally and economically disastrous systems [e.g. the third world, middle east & some parts of Southern and Eastern Asia].

james

Thus, the consequences for second language learning can indeed be very dramatic and have a life changing impact. Most major economies today are fragmented due to linguistic barriers and cultural differences, furthermore, since language is refined from interactions, the lack of chemistry and coherence may well be a major factor in the drop in cultural and educational standards – not to mention a generation that does not seem to represent any values [cultural or philosophical] – but simply regional classroom proficiency and barely any granularity or refinement in the linguistic and cultural context of a heritage that comes with traditions ‘developed’ over centuries of civilisation.

USAChineseTourists

Majority group members do not generally have the motivation to acquire native-like mastery of another language. According to John Edwards (1994), it is precisely the international prestige and utility, and of course widespread use of English that makes native English speakers such poor language students: they simply lack the motivation to become proficient. Itesh Sachdev and Audrey Wright (1996) pursued this point and found that English children were more motivated to learn languages from the European continent (e.g. French, German, Italian) than those from the Asian continent (e.g. Mandarin, Hindi, Russian, Urdu, Tamil, Arabic, etc) even though a fair amount of children in the sample were exposed to more Asian & African immigration [due to years of mediocre policies linked to cheap democratic governments & leftist agendas bent on promoting alien invasions – fragmenting societies & destructively shifting geographical compositions] than languages & cultures from Europe. A possible reason would be that English children perceive more prestige and desirability in mastering additional languages & cultures such as French, German & Italian instead of far-flung incompatible foreign ones [e.g. African Third world, Middle-East, Asia etc].

Communicating without words

Speech rarely happens in complete isolation from non-verbal cues. Even on a phone, individuals tend to automatically use a variety of gestures [body language] that cannot be ‘seen’ by the recipient at the other end of the phone line. In a similar fashion, phone and computer-mediated communication (CMC) conversations can be difficult precisely because many non-verbal cues are not accessible [e.g. users may interpret some messages as ‘cold’, ‘short’ or ‘rude’ when a participant might simply not be proficient at expressing themselves on a keyboard]. However, non-verbal channels do not always work in combination with speech to facilitate understanding. In some cases, non-verbal message starkly contradicts the verbal message [e.g. threats, sarcasm and other negative messages accompanied by a smile; Bugental, Love and Gianetto, 1971; Noller, 1984].

Agony, Torture, and Fright by Charles Darwin

Agony, Torture, and Fright | Charles Darwin, 1868

Human beings can produce about 20,000 different facial expressions and about 1,000 different cues based on paralanguage. There are also about 700,000 physical gestures, facial expressions and movements (see Birdwhistell, 1970; Hewes, 1957; Pei, 1965). Even the briefest interaction may involve the fleeting and simultaneous use of a huge number of such devices in combination, making it unclear even to code behaviour, let alone analyse the causes and consequences of particular non-verbal communications. However, their importance is now acknowledged in social psychology (Ambady and Weisbuch, 2010; Burgoon, Buller and Woodall, 1989; DePaulo and Friedman, 1998), and doing research in this area has remained a major challenge. Non-verbal behaviour can be used for a variety of purposes, one may use it to:

  • Glean information about feelings and intentions of others (e.g. non-verbal cues are often reliable indicators of whether someone likes you, is emotionally suffering, etc);
  • Regulate interactions (e.g. non-verbal cues can signal the approaching end of an utterance, or that someone else wishes to speak)
  • Express intimacy (e.g. touching and mutual eye contact);
  • Establish dominance or control (non-verbal threats);
  • Facilitate goal attainment (e.g. pointing)

These functions are to be found in most aspects of non-verbal behaviour such as gaze, facial expressions, body language, touch and interpersonal distance. Non-verbal communications has a large impact, yet it goes largely ‘unnoticed’ – perhaps since we acquire them unaware, we tend not to be conscious when using them. Most individuals acquire non-verbal skills without any formal training yet manage to master a rich repertoire of non-verbal behaviour very early in life – suggesting that huge individual differences in skills and uses should be noticed. Social norms can have a strong influence on our use of non-verbal language, for example, if one is delighted at the demise of an arrogant narcissist or foe, one would be unlikely to smile at their funeral – Schadenfreude is not a noble emotion to express [at least in most situations].

StoneGarden

Individual and group differences also have an influence on, or are associated with, non-verbal cues. Robert Rosenthal and his colleagues (Rosenthal, Hall, DiMatteo, Rogers and Archer, 1979) devised a profile of non-verbal sensitivity (PONS) as a test to chart some of these differences. All things equal, non-verbal competence improves with age, is more advanced among successful people and is compromised among individuals with a range of psychopathologies (e.g. psychosis, autism).

Gender Differences 

Reviews conclude that women are generally better than men at decoding both visual cues and auditory cues, such as voice tone and pitch (E. T. Hall, 1979; J. A. Hall, 1978, 1984). The explanation for this seems to be rather social than evolutionary (Manstead, 1992), including child-rearing strategies that encourage girls more than boys to be emotionally expressive and attentive. One major question remains whether women’s greater competence is due to greater knowledge about non-verbal cues. According to Janelle Rosip and Judith Hall (2004), the answer seems to be ‘yes’ – women have a slight advantage, based on results from their test of non-verbal cue knowledge (TONCK). A meta-analysis by William Ickes has shown that when motivated to do so, women can become even more accurate: for example when women think they are being evaluated for their empathy or when gender-role expectations of empathy are brought to the fore (Ickes, Gesn and Graham, 2000).

Femelle Et Male

Most individuals can improve their non-verbal skills (Matsumoto and Hwang, 2011), that can be useful for improving interpersonal communication, detecting deception, presenting a good impression and hiding our feelings [when required in some situations]. Practical books have been written and courses on communications has always had an enduring appeal. Why not try yourself out on the TONCK?

Non-verbal behaviour differs among individuals since most have different attachment styles thus different relationships too. In the case of intimate relationships, we would tend to assume that partners would enhance each other’s emotional security through accurate decoding of their individualistic non-verbal cues and responding appropriately (Schachner, Shaver and Mikulincer, 2005). Although there are data dealing with non-verbal behaviour in parent-child interactions and how they relate to the development of attachment styles in children (Bugental, 2005), there is less research focussing on how adult attachment styles are reflected ‘non-verbally’ in intimate relationships.

 

Discovering the Self

In turning our attention to ourselves, we begin to apply the psychological concept of self to the individual’s consciousness of his or her own identity. What does the “mind’s eye” see when it looks into the self – into that special mirror that reveals one’s innermost thoughts and feelings, i.e. our own private world we so often hide from others. Ancient Greeks who travel to the Oracle at Delphi for answers to their problems, found this message inscribed on the shrine: “Know Thyself”.

Centuries later, it was William James who in 1890, set the stage for the modern resurgence of psychology’s interest in the self. In studying what he called “the mind from within”, James distinguished three aspects of the self: the material, the spiritual and the social.

The material self is our awareness of the physical world: our body and the people and things around us.

The spiritual self is the part that “thinks of ourselves as thinkers” – the inner witness to events.

And the part of the self that focuses on the images we create in the minds of others is called the social self.

While it was William James who pioneered the scientific concept of the self, many earlier philosophers and writers had also recognised this dimension of human nature. Some psychologists believe that the gradual separation of a young child from its mother, a process called individuation, is essential for developing a unique sense of self and a healthy personalityfailure to acquire an independent self-identity may lead to psychological problems.

Today many psychologists are keenly interested in studying the self, however there was a time when psychology focused almost exclusively on behaviour – there was no place for anything as fuzzy as the concept of self. Even to Freud, the conscious self was little more than a weak, passive link in his triad of Id, Ego and Superego. Freud defined the Id as a primitive, unconscious part of the personality where drives and passions originate. The Superego restrains the Id. For Freud the Superego is a combination of the conscience and the ideal self. The ego, our conscious self of self-identity, moderate between the Id and Superegobetween our primitive impulses and our sense of moral obligation. Freud was much more interested in the dramatic confrontations between the unconscious Id and Superego, than he was in the conscious processes of the ego [which we believe accommodates many basic principles of Cognitive Psychology, although not sufficient to explain a complete model of the mind, behaviour, drives and motivation as it ignores the unconscious processes].

Carl Rogers in the 1960s placed a much greater emphasis on aspects of the conscious self [the conscious Ego]. Rogers led the humanistic movement, which was hugely responsible for psychology’s return to the self. In contrast to Freud’s view of a conflicted, impulse driven creature, Rogers offered a vision of psychological growth and health. There exists within the healthy individual, a capacity for self-understanding, for self-direction, for guiding behaviour in self-directed ways, which can be tapped if the right conditions [e.g. resources, education, commitment, training, etc] are provided.

The Art of Education 2018 dpurb 1000

In other words, the individual does have the capacity and a potential for self-development, change and integration [eventually leading to assimilation in various “cultural” contexts, i.e. linguistic, socio-behavioural, philosophical, geographic, etc] – which does not need to be supplied from the “outside world”, but rather learnt and developed from within the individual. As Jacques Lacan beautifully puts it in describing the mirror stage, one unfortunate outcome of the stage is that individuals tend to look outward and not inward in their search for identity – such external orientation toward individuals’ own identity is doomed to fail.

In the humanistic view, we find a self that is striving towards personal fulfilmenta guiding force that moves us towards positive actions and enhancements imbued with a kind of virtue that gives humans kinship with the angels. For psychologists, the next step after describing the properties of the self has been to explore just how this dynamic mental structure works in controlling behaviour. Researchers who study the self usually speak of the self-concept: the individual’s awareness of his or her continuing identity as a person. This self-concept is viewed as an internal regulator of thoughts, feelings and behaviour. It interprets and organises our ongoing experiences. It reflects on how our present actions compare with our standards and expectations, and it affects our performance by providing plans, scripts, goals and incentives.

We tend to organise our beliefs and information about ourselves in terms of schemas, or knowledge clusters. For example, to some people, gender schemas are all-important – masculinity and femininity dominate their thinking. To others, “weight schematic” may be more important, where they may be trying to lose weight and perceive others primarily in terms of being fat (out of control) or being thin (having it all together). Our self-schema or self-image can have a powerful impact on our behaviour. If our self-image is good, we try to live up to our standard: we try harder and succeed more often. If our self-image is bad, we tend to adjust downward, and end up failing more often. So, self-image can work for or against us. Along this line, Albert Bandura of Stanford developed what he calls the theory of self-efficacy, a new theory of how the self works which can help us understand how some people translate promise and passion into optimal performance. In this experiment, researcher Delia Cioffi would give one subject the task of improving production at the model furniture factory. She would tell the subject that his ability to make good decisions for the factory is based on innate intelligence and ability. The higher one’s basic capacities in the skills, the better one will perform. Nowadays however computer programs tend to ease this process. The next subject is told that complex decision-making is an acquirable skill, and that his performance can improve through his own efforts. In any new skill, one does not begin with faultless performance, but the more one practices formulating and testing decisions, the better one gets at it. The first subject who believes that decision-making is a measure of his intelligence proceeds cautiously and sets lower goals for himself and is frustrated by an increasing number of incorrect decisions. His confidence is measured by the number on the lower left of the screen which keeps falling, as does his sense of efficacy. The second subject, however, sees early mistakes as a necessary part of learning. He profits by them and his performance improves. He sets higher goals for himself, and his response to questions about confidence demonstrate an increasing sense of his own efficacy.

The issue is not what you have, but how you use what you have. From this point of view, we can see that we can have the same competencies and subskills and use them poorly, adequately, or extraordinarily, depending on our self-belief. So for this reason, we can often predict people’s accomplishments better from their self-belief rather than from just their past attainments.

Up to this point we have been focusing on the part of the self which focuses inward to assess its capabilities. But there is another aspect of the self that focuses outward to get an understanding on the impression being created in others. This outward focus, the awareness of the social self, asked the questions: “How am I coming across? What impression am I creating? Do you see me the way I see myself? Do you see me the way I would like you to see me?”

To better explain this part about self-presentation, we are going to explore the arts, particularly drama which addresses the nuances of self-presentation. As a former student of literature and drama, I will use the example of the drama teacher who trains young individuals and actors in self-presentation skills to help them convey an impression to an audience. How does this work? Well, we are going to use the concept of status, which has to do with how we manipulate the affect of our self to one another. The content in a given circumstance may be the same, however the way in which I choose to speak to you [the way I use non-verbal cues, i.e. body language] may affect my relationship to you.

These status transactions, come in different aspects, and here we are going to discuss some of them.

The first of these would be eye contact, as it is commonly known that eye contact is a useful device in asserting oneself.

The second variable is of course whether or not one’s body is moving in a sustained way or whether it has jerky movements. As soon as a person starts to move in jerky ways it also affects his or her speech, as it is hard to sustain sentences when for example one is moving there head up and down. Many people tend to speak uncomfortably while moving at the cost of their status [e.g. Uh, as soon as, um, I begin to move my body in, uh, jerky ways – it also affects my speech you notice, It’s hard to uh, sustain sentences when I’m moving, uh, kind uhbut, but it, uh…. At the cost of their status in some cases]. A third kind of jerky motion we notice often is people touching the face, their hair or their hands, which conveys a sense of nervousness – which again would be lowering their status as a speaker]. In other words, anything we might consider to be nervous gestures would be in the category of lowering one’s status. So, the prototype for high status would be someone who is basically calm and composed, and who speaks in complete sentences, breathes deeply, makes eye contact and [uh?] does not have any particular jerky mannerisms.

These factors in interactions are known as status transactions, and they take place all the time between all kinds of people. They are a form of interpersonal communication where individuals establish their degree of social status and power, and demonstrate as well as anything the social aspects of the self-concept. To manage the impressions we create in others, we all engage in what is known as strategic self-presentation – how we present ourselves to others so that they perceive us in the way we see ourselves. Society reacts to us according to the context our behaviour has created [e.g. profession(s), values, education, language(s), nationality(ies), etc], then we see the way they respond to us, which confirms our original belief about the kind of individual we truly are [have become through growth and development]. It is a closed circle – what researcher Mark Snyder has called behavioural confirmation. Our beliefs, our sense of self, create their own reality. That is why depressed people elicit negative reactions and tend to be treated as if, in fact, they are inadequate in most aspects of normal life. While extroverts create an easy-going social climate in which others tend to respond positively to them.

There is also an intimate connection between self and culture [please note that culture here may be related to many fields, e.g. language, profession, clubs, private circles, orientations, identities, musical circles, arts, etc] – culture can be defined objectively [scientifically] as behavioural patterns individualised to a particular select group.

When we talk about the self, we are referring to the way in which the biological organism/being becomes a person. Becoming a person [human being], is largely a social endeavour. We can be a biological being [a primate] all by ourselves but to become a person, to become a self, we must engage with or take on or incorporate the cultural meanings, cultural ideas and practices of a particular group or groups [for individuals who have the chance to be bi or tri-cultural]. We must use these to become a person as it would be impossible to be a self by ourself. We can be a biological entity, but to be a person with a sense of self, we normally do it in some set of culture specific ways.

Culture can be seen not as biologically based, but rather socially based. It is a set of behavioural patterns and attitudes that we adopt as a means of defining who we are depending of where we are and who we want to be.

Danny D'Purb dpurb.com official concept of self 675p

Traduction(EN): « The day when I will stop questioning, learning, creating and innovating, will be the day that I will be dead. » -Danny J. D’Purb / © 2018

Many tend to think of “culture” as an entity inside people, similar to some sort of essence. Taking myself as an example, I qualify myself as bi-cultural, being a Franco-British individual, and since the majority of people do not have the chance to receive the heritage of two European empires, I will focus on the French side. Many people tend to think about us French [yes, the heirs of the language of Victor Hugo, Molière and Chateaubriand] as having some kind of French genes, or French traits or some kind of French attributes that make us French. It is absolutely not true, as culture is “what we choose to do”. And so, as the French school of thought, which has always been avant-garde in structuring minds to the French family; if we take an individual and guide him or her to connect with and use French ideas/concepts, and French ways of perceiving, feeling, behaving and doing things [i.e. values], then eventually that person will become French. Similarly, if I took that same person and placed him or her in the British context, that person will then become British in that sense [at least the science of Psychology in 2019, has enough evidence that I have collected throughout the dpurb.com website, to show that such a scenario depending on the individual’s abilities should be scientifically and psychologically valid – the mainstream people at large are still to embed and share this principle to open new perspectives to their own lives and in doing so allow themselves to grow psychologically and culturally].

Culture is simply a set of common ideas and common ways of doing things – although each culture has its sub-cultures that may vary [e.g. geographically, linguistically, artistically and philosophically].

We can view culture and self as a collaboration where each has an effect on the other: culture shapes se