![]() ![]() The Pourquoi-Pas? attempted to return to land as the barometer fell. By mid-afternoon, however, the weather took a change for the worse: the sky turned overcast, rain began to fall, and the wind gained strength. It seems needless to say that his vision is pessimistic, grim: the development of ever autonomous technology, unbridled consumerism, and the potential for mass destruction combine to negate humanity from the world in which we live.įavorable sailing conditions were given by two weather reports originating in England and Iceland (Gonidec 1936). ![]() Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen, which may be translated as The Antiquatedness or Outdatedness of Humankind, is his great study of the destructive effects of the industrial revolutions on the “soul” (Anders 1956, 1980). But “antiquated” may take on a more sinister meaning, for example that used by Günther Anders in reference to humanity itself. This can be annoying (if the object needs to be replaced) or a source of relief (if one no longer wants it around). It is outdated and so irrelevant, at least from a functional point of view. As technology changes, a material object, say, a computer or camera, has lost its usefulness due to age. It is typically applied to objects, often enough mechanical, which have become obsolete, are no longer needed or phased out. “Antiquated,” on the face of it, is not a terrifying word. Insights from a range of psychoanalytic and non-psychoanalytic literature are used in order to shed light on clinical situations in which is found, for example, the psychopathology of waste and wastefulness, of light and noise pollution. ![]() When relatedness is salutary, when it facilitates intra- and interpsychic growth, several effects may be observed including (I quote): “a) the alleviation of various painful and anxious emotional states b) the promotion of self-realization c) the strengthening of a personal feeling of reality and d) the fostering of appreciating and accepting other people” (Schinaia 2022, p. Cosimo Schinaia’s discussion of the “non-human” environment in Searles’s thinking and the “human” environment in Winnicott’s is very helpful when grappling with the detrimental effects of potential destructiveness in relatedness gone awry. It’s but a small step to move from the environment considered on a global scope to that in which the individual grows and lives, from the disastrous, ravaging effects, for example, of the carbon economy on human, animal, and natural life to a discrete, personal scale. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |