The Building of a Prosaic Philosophy

I hate to call these building blocks of prosaic thinking “principles”, as they then tend to presume or assume some kind of stance of ontology or reality.   But that is not the goal.  These principles just focus on the prosaic, the ordinary, the material place and space and time where we mostly live.   It is certainly true that we don’t live only in the prosaic – we also live in our ideals and dreams, which you might call living in the heroic, and in our needs, fears and nightmares, which you might call living in the basic. But mostly, we live in the prosaic.

Nevertheless, the basic premises of a prosaic understanding of reality would include these ideas, here set out in very conventional and perhaps inappropriate but traditional categories, all of which need more unpacking to be clear:

Metaphysics:               Metaphysics is local, not universal.

Reality/Existence:      A chief characteristic of pictorial space, which betrays its animal origin, is that it has a center. . . . Pictorial space therefore reappears, wherever an animal rises to intuition of his environment, and in each case it has its moral or transcendental center in that animal; a center which, being transcendental or moral, moves wherever the animal moves, and is repeated without physical contradiction or rivalry in as many places as are ever inhabited by a watchful animal soul. (Santayana)

Epistemology:             To eat a fruit is know its meaning. (Pessoa)

Values:                        What is aught, but as 'tis valued? (Shakespeare)

Morality:                     Our attachments are our blessings, our goods.

Ethics:                         There is a feigned disrespect for all the things which men in fact take most seriously, for all the things closest to them. (Nietzsche)

Meaning:                     The closer things are, the easier it is to find or confer meaning.  The sun and the moon, being close, seem more meaningful. Eating a fruit is closer than looking at it, and therefore more meaningful.  The farther things are, the less meaning. 

Purpose:                      If the world is cold, make fire. (Traubel)

Work:                          Play is man’s most useful occupation. (Hoffer)

Psychology:                It’s a good life if you don’t weaken.  (Irish proverb)

Aesthetics:                  Man is most nearly himself when he achieves the seriousness of a child at play. (Heraclitus)

Politics:                       As long as there is a single god standing, Man’s task is not done. (Cioran)

Prosaic principles therefore eschew the notion that reality and what matters in reality is deeper rather than the surface, farther way than what is nearby, harder to find and reach than what is in front of us.   Pictorial space is where we are, which is the center of the universe (as for all animals).  Metaphysics are local and not universal. True meaning is closest to us and not far away at all.   Only values matter. What is morally significant to us is what we are attached to.  That we often forget that the things closest to us are what we take most seriously.  We find meaning in what is closest to us, and what has least meaning for us is what is furthest from us. We determine the purpose of life – our life. What we play at is more important than what we work at. That life (our life) can be good if we are strong enough for it. That we are our best selves when we play.  And finally, no Gods of any kind rule our lives.

 

 

The Playful Civilization

It is easy to be critical of the consumerist-materialist societies.  It is commonplace to comment on their inherent superficiality (advertising), excessive consumption of goods (shopping), tacky architecture (suburbia, malls), and banality to values (rat race, daily grind, family vacations).  Those criticisms would be pertinent if there were some quality about these societies that point directly to some human unhealthiness, or at least some clear immorality.  But it is difficult to pinpoint the direct evidence that these societies pose some special danger to human existence.

 Indeed, the banality of the consumerist society seems obvious, but that is no argument against it.  Rather, its prosaic nature is a clue to its likely virtues.  The daily character in a materialistic, luxury-loving culture is nothing more than a routine form of playfulness. 

 Even playfulness can become banal, but that does not change its basic nature.  In consumerist cultures, much of the entertainment sought by the middle class consists in discovering new trinkets, bartering at a new agora, finding new forms of art and theatre, and trying new foods and alcohol.  The forms of delight are endless, even if excessive, overwrought, and ubiquitous. 

 Another way to see this point is to ask where the evil lies in consumerist-materialistic societies – even after conceding the excessive dreck, tackiness, and tedium pursued by the middle class masses.  Is it in the enormous production and re-production of goods that are not needed?  Is it found in the planned obsolescence of styles and functions?  In the endless creation of the permutations of every new thing – until the thing burns itself out from the principle of  familiarity breeding contempt?  Is it because there are environmental problems with producing and consuming too much?  Is it a moral issue based on “haves” and “have nots?”

 One could concede all of the questions and still be left with an imprecise objection to the consumerist-materialist society.  Its excesses are excesses of playfulness.