Infinity of Dreams

[monk222]

Here is another romantic reflection on the death of Amy Winehouse, this one going back to the source of our knowlege on suicide, Emile Durkheim. Again, it is something with which even your basic bottom-feeder loser can identify, that sense of not being grounded in the living world, as the days and years waft by in a mist of dream and sorrow, in a way that I imagine is more true than of millionaire entertainers.
_ _ _

Emile Durkheim, the founding father of sociology, in his great work, “Suicide,” published at the end of the 19th century, drew attention to the phenomenon of “anomie.” Society is held together and sustained, he argued, by a network of norms — largely unstated rules of behavior. Suicides, he argued, tend to suffer from anomie, or normlessness: they float free from the life-belt of rules and regulations, and often sink.

Durkheim characterized “romantic anomie”, in particular as an “infinity of dreams” doomed to be forever in conflict with the reality principle, and potentially fatal.

-- Andy Martin at The New York Times

Comments

[make-me-stay.livejournal.com]

Bleargh, I'm so sick of these kinds of articles... Obviously I need to put my philosophy degree to good use, start writing pithy philosophical discussions then relate it vaguely to whatever's grabbed the headlines that week... (I think maybe I'm just bitter that I'm not making money from pithy philosophy for the masses peieces!)

And again with the links between the Norway massacres and Winehouse?! I don't understand!

[make-me-stay.livejournal.com]

Well, when I say I don't understand, I just mean I still find the links that are being drawn to be offensive and kind of arbitrary. This article less so than the last, but still.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

The New York Times for the masses! I thought this was fare for the cultural elites, learned citizens such as myself.

I suppose it's hard to fill so much space every day. I suspect that most of us are just looking for passing entertainment, while hopefully picking up the big news of the day.

An academic journal it is not, nor would I be up to reading such. Though,the Times does have its pretensions. For instance, Stanley Fish gives us a nice piece of philosophical disputation for todays's Times. Perhaps you might enjoy it: Does Philosophy Matter? (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/does-philosophy-matter/?hp)

One has to appreciate what game one is playing. ;)

[make-me-stay.livejournal.com]

Haha ok, I was probably a bit harsh the other day - but there's still something about articles like this that just grind my gears. I think philosophy does have a lot to contribute to understanding the modern world and current cultural events, but everything seems just so exploitative at the moment.

I read the Fish article, thanks for the link! Interesting, but I disagree with him really strongly about some of his conclusions - to say that philosophical arguments has no application to the real world is just... mindblowing to me. Obviously there are areas of philosophical thought that have limited relevance for most people's everyday lives (paraconsistent logics for eg), and there are some areas that don't really matter to most people living their lives but add significant depth to them (consciousness theories, philosophy of language) but I really think that lots of areas do have direct implications for the way people live their lives (ethical decisions, understandings of identity and time), even if people only have a rudimentary idea of such idea... and the process of philosophy - having an understanding of thought process, how to argue and understand an argument - is really important too. Sometimes "I think this, just because" won't cut it :)