This got me thinking about how tech optimism feels performative to me--performatively upbeat ("what will Friday bring?!") & performatively naive (see @paulg on "earnestness" linked below)--and then I thought about "virtue-signaling" and...1/X paulgraham.com/earnest.html
...maybe the performative aspect of emotion *is just emotion*...?
The conceit, in dismissing some expression of emotion as "signaling" or "performance", is that the person isn't really feeling it--that they are *not* experiencing the relevant emotion privately, it's "fake." 2/X
But what's the contrast case supposed to be? Private emotion? Is there such a thing? Emotion "wants out," it needs expression, and that's because it doesn't even fully get to be the emotion that it is until it is expressed. 3/X
It's not until I can express my anger that I am able to really feel it--this is precisely why emotional expression (to the right interlocutor(s)!) is so important, and why people who don't want to feel their emotions don't want to talk about them either. 4/X
So: we depend on others for understanding our emotions, which is to say, for even *having* those emotions. The "others" can be our partners in close personal relationships, or they can be members of some group we belong to. These groups--large & small--make emotions possible. 5/X
Emotions are social. But that also means that emotions constitute a kind of "shared language" w/i the group. People standing on the outside, who cannot speak the language, see nothing but a "performance" designed to cement group-membership. 6/X
And there might be some of that--people expressing emotion in order to be in the group--but I suspect there's more of: people being in the group in order to express emotions. Because, basically, if they are free, people join the groups that allow them to express who they are. 7/X
And sometimes it isn't until you find that group that it's even possible for you to express/have the relevant emotion. Maybe you wouldn't/couldn't have expressed it to your close friends/family. That doesn't make the emotion fake. 8/X
When the group's emotional communication is public (eg social media), it ends up being seen by many who cannot understand or participate in it, and serves only to remind them of their outsider status. So they (I!) cynically denigrate it as "mere performance." 9/X
Because the internet allows so much freedom of association, it allows for the formation of many different kinds of (emotional-support) groups--tech optimists and social justice warriors being two (admittedly loosely defined) examples. But it also allows people to see... 10/X
...just how many groups they're *not* part of. So maybe the moral of the story is that instead of dismissing other peoples' emotions, we need to get better at accepting the reality of our own exclusion, which is to say, the existence of all the new languages we don't speak. 11/X
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The first real Greek class I took was on Plato’s Apology, with the eminent classicist Arthur Adkins. We translated the Apology, line by line. When we stumbled over a construction—many of were beginners—Adkins would gently correct us. That was the whole class, that was it. 1/4
Adkins was dying, in a wheelchair, there was a guy in the class to remind him to take certain pills every 20 mins. He died a month or so after the class ended, but he made it through. I wish I could convey the atmosphere of that class: the hushed silence, the fierce attention.
Somehow, without ever saying it, Adkins telegraphed: Socrates knows he is going to die, but he has to give this speech first. I know I'm going to die, but I have to teach this last class. We are all dying, all the time, but there are some things we have to do before that happens.
This is a long personal thread about my own reading practices, and a revelation I recently had about the pluses and minuses of reading at different speeds.
It might not be of interest to you.
(Photo below depicts the inhabitants of my "book" shelf)
I was just reading an academic paper at my top reading speed, it was 40 pages and I got through it in about 5 minutes. (I can go even faster for non-academic writing, though my max speed is much slower for foreign languages). But I usually don’t read that fast...
The vast majority of my reading is at slower speeds—in effect, I am constantly choosing to read more slowly than I could. Why? You might think the answer is that I absorb information better if I read slow. In fact, I believe the opposite is true...
Why Difficult Old Books Make For Independent Minds:
A Long and Engaging Thread
I can teach philosophy w/o making use of any texts. So can @zenahitz, I bet. The students will love it, & walk away having learned. They'll also walk away being a little more like whichever of us taught them. That's bc--and now I'm going to let you in on a dirty little secret...
--part of what makes @zenahitz and I such good teachers is that we are charming. (I'm allowed to make this scathing accusation of her because we're old friends) This is also part of what makes @philosophybites good at exposing the public to philosophy.
Gelman claims that "negativity requires more care than positivity" bc offering a critique of a view is more difficult than lazily affirming that view. But I did not take Cowen to be contrasting criticizing s.o.'s views with affirming that person's views. 2/5
I took Cowen to be taking for granted disagreement w/work of some intellectuals & encouraging people to parlay disagreements into positive contributions of their own: be proactive, not reactive--not as making implausible claim that praising s.o. is harder than critiquing him 3/5
"Each party progresses rapidly in discovering the truth about the other, without ever discovering the truth about himself."
Rene Girard's brilliant analysis of Oedipus Rex: it is the *similarity* between Oedipus, Creon, & Tiresias that underlies the chain-reaction of violence.
@cblatts I can confirm Violence & the Sacred needs to go on your pile, esp. ch. 1 on vengeance as a chain-reaction
& how rule agst shedding blood and the rule to take revenge are the same rule ("it's because they hate violence that men must seek vengeance")
& how preservation of community gives rise to a need to distinguish good (violence-curing) violence from bad (violence-generating) violence
& how the institution of sacrifice has role of maintaining this distinction in the absence of a judicial system.