news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

driving my car

today's life is in a state of drastic change, and past certainties are constantly being eroded. in order to find a sense of autonomy in life in the flux, anthropologist xiang biao and philosopher wang xiaowei had an online conversation.

xiang biao is well-known to the public for his concept of "proximity". wang xiaowei recently published a collection of essays, "the depths of daily life", which uses the philosophy of technology as a basis to discuss the relationship between people, objects and life. they try to find ideological resources from the intersection of philosophy and anthropology to cope with the challenges of drastic changes.

💡duan zhipeng of the max planck institute in germany hosted the conversation, and jiang wendan compiled the recording. chen zhifeng of oxford university participated in the conversation. due to space limitations, the text material is compiled from part of the discussion content.

01.

grand narrative

“some grand narratives have fixed, rigid structures. you cannot look back at your own experiences, but are at their mercy.”

wang xiaowei：professor xiang has always been willing to speak to the public, paying attention to the experiences of young people, their anxiety and sense of meaninglessness, and other situations of shrinking vitality. you talk a lot about "nearby", which gives people the feeling that you reject grand narratives and keep a distance from grand theories themselves. it seems that young people do not need big philosophical and anthropological theories to get rid of anxiety and regain a sense of life, but to pay attention to their own "nearby". is this at least the first step?

xiang biao：if we understand grand narratives as a stable symbolic structure, a series of solid ideas, a meaning that is above and beyond your experience, then of course we have to get rid of this structure. this structure is fixed and rigid, and your own experience cannot be reflected back on it, but is at its mercy.

a trip to the island of seychelles

the third kind of grand narrative is more reflective, and its fundamental purpose is to ask what exactly are we doing? for example, the anthropological study of "common anxiety" that we are going to do. without the grand narrative, this study would not be very valid. at this point, i particularly hope to learn new things from the philosophical community.

for example, the work of li zehou, who was a very important figure in china in the second half of the 20th century, is grand and abstract. starting from aesthetics, he combines beauty, emotion, and physical sensation with kant and marx, and provides a unique theory of subjectivity.

li zehou may be the most influential scholar in the 1980s. there is a reason why his influence can be seen from the perspective of sociology and anthropology, because li zehou provides everyone with a perspective that has social and political implications. you must have a grand narrative perspective to understand why li zehou's thoughts have such an influence.

similarly, understanding overall anxiety also requires a grand narrative. when young people feel unhappy, we need to ask what makes them unhappy? how to understand their unhappiness and how they express their unhappiness. different expressions of unhappiness reflect different power structures, self-perceptions, etc.

you keep asking questions, and ultimately we need a potential grand narrative to help us understand. i think there must be a grand narrative to know where we are in history today and what we are doing, so that we can deeply understand the specific confusions of young people.

for example, if you only do empirical research, you can’t explain the “feeling of unworthiness” of young people. why do they feel unworthy? some things are clearly obtained by themselves, but after a lot of hard work, they feel unworthy. this reflects a cognition of self-existence.

this is not only a psychological process, but also a summary of his/her long-term growth experience, which may also include his/her parents' growth experience and mentality. this requires philosophical thinking to transform this phenomenon into a larger issue.

perfect days

wang xiaowei：so what you reject is the grand narrative as an ideology. because we cannot look back and can do nothing about it. the second grand narrative is trivial, a daily narrative habit. the third is reflective, historical, asking where we are in history. only in this way can we effectively respond to specific problems in reality.

the grand background of li zehou's time was an open china that tried to integrate into world civilization. rediscovering the subjectivity of the chinese people was his systematic attempt in such a grand background.

zhao tingyang is a student of li zehou. he has recently been discussing the issue of “post-humanity”, which is actually the issue of the changing subjectivity of people in the technological era. we are currently writing a group of articles on post-humanity together.

he empathizes with the sense of emptiness and meaninglessness that everyone encounters in the era of deep technology. he seems to think that the ubiquity of technology will lead to the collapse of morality. he also seems to have a rational humanistic attitude, ardently hoping to prevent degeneration by promoting rationality.

however, grand narrative philosophical projects are no longer popular today. historical philosophies like hegel's and subjectivity philosophies like li zehou's may hardly arouse interest.

02.

generalized anxiety

"the problems faced by young people today often manifest as a kind of 'general anxiety', or even a desire to destroy the world."

xiang biao：we have no ambition to provide a grand picture to the public, but we do have a big picture in our minds, which is for our own use and helps us understand specific social problems. in any case, we need a totality perspective.

for example, marxism connects all social relations through the concept of commodities. lukacs also focuses on the concept of totality, believing that bourgeois doctrines are divided into smaller and smaller parts, and each detail is correct, but it is wrong when put together. only the proletariat can see the overall picture.

totality is different from totalization. totality is a way of analysis that sees the connections between multiple things.totalization is emotional, seeing everything as a lump.

the problems of young people today often manifest as a kind of "generalized anxiety", and they even want to destroy the world, thinking that the whole world is just so unbearable and unfair. this kind of anxiety is very absolute.

finally, this generalized anxiety becomes an established symbolic structure and symbolic order. you can’t look back at it anymore. generalized anxiety still brings a sense of powerlessness. after being anxious, you don’t do anything.

alcohol project

wang xiaowei：you seem to have two intentions. one is towards practice, hoping that young people can find a sense of wholeness that can lead to concrete actions and improve people's vitality. the other may be philosophical, an ontological work.

both continental and analytical philosophers have their own ontological solutions. in the era of deep technology, people like david chalmers will also propose some new solutions (such as bit ontology). i am not sure whether philosophical ontology can help us relieve anxiety and deal with nothingness. on the ontological level, i don’t know how deep anthropology will go. will it become philosophy?

xiang biao：totality is not a judgment i want to make about the world. it is not an assertion, and it is not primarily a description of a philosophical ontology.

in anthropology, totality is an empirical observation of mine: young people themselves have totalizing ideas and statements in their lives, such as the desire for the destruction of the world. i think that to fight against totalizing anxiety, it is not enough to return to a peaceful life and focus on one's own little bit of land.

i want to examine a holistic worldview from an empirical perspective, that is, to observe how young people view the world. for example, by writing ethnographic accounts of young people's life experiences and their life consciousness, i want them to see that specific things do not exist independently or in a completely separate way, but have a variety of rich connections.

for example, the impact of education on vitality. you can understand education as learning knowledge, as social domestication, as the ideological device mentioned by althusser, as the reproduction of social relations, or as the instrumentalization of people.

if we understand education as an application of vitality, and ask why today's education makes young people feel lifeless, and dig deeper into this issue, we will enter a potential "holistic" analytical method.

in school, we are not only learning knowledge, but also the way the teacher looks at me, how my deskmate talks to me, the nervousness before the exam, the relief after the exam, etc. are all connected. this connection is not in the ontological sense, it refers to the setting of the education system and environment.

we are interested in how education, as a survival activity, affects our vitality. the lethargy of life felt by a student consists of two parts. one is the most direct reaction, such as feeling tired or numb, which is based on experience. the second is how they deal with their experience, which requires the use of language and concepts.

the instant universe

wang xiaowei：for example, young people feel that pain comes from involution, and "involution" is a concept to interpret one's life experience. involution, anxiety, and depression have now become ubiquitous concepts. twenty years ago, these concepts were not used to interpret people's life experiences. involution was unheard of, and anxiety and depression were still mental diagnostic terms. in daily life, we would say that competition is fierce, we are a little nervous, and we are a little unhappy.

do you think there is a connection between general, overarching anxiety and the invention and use, or even misuse, of these words?

xiang biao：obviously, there is a connection. there is a saying that these words reinforce depression. but the appearance of these words at this time is the result of conscious practice. li zehou also talked about whether it is "language speaking me" or "i speak language". in fact, both sides make sense. but in the current chinese context, i think we should emphasize "i speak language" more and emphasize that the formation of words is the result of people's actions and choices.

wang xiaowei：i agree with this trade-off. going back to our previous discussion, do you think there is a grand narrative as a background that leads young people to choose these words to interpret their life experiences?

xiang biao：everything has a background. the question is how to deal with this background?

in his later years, li zehou proposed the theory of historical sedimentation, suggesting that we should see the sedimentation of history in the subjectivity of individuals. for example, anxiety. we know that the anxiety of young people is related to the economic downturn in the past two years, but this is short-term. anxiety is also related to his childhood growth experience, which is medium-term, but it is also related to some traumas that are unconsciously transmitted through generations, which is long-term.

children are so anxious because their parents are anxious, and parents are anxious because of their childhood experiences, which will be unconsciously passed on to their children. for example, parents lacked resources when they were young, and now they see their children take a wrong step and think it is catastrophic.

a 20-year-old's suicide may be related to china's history over the past 100 years, to yesterday's test failure, or to 20 years of growth experience. the key is how we can tell this multi-layered and multi-faceted background.

teacher wang, you are now expressing your thoughts in the form of essays, and also summarizing your daily life and life experience through public media. i feel that once we have life experience, it seems that our thinking will be submerged by the life experience itself, and it is difficult to reorganize the life experience as a subject of thought.

do you personally feel that you have now moved beyond a way of thinking that is based on life experience but goes beyond it and can look back and illuminate your life again?

wang xiaowei：observing daily experience must be permeated with a certain philosophical perspective. it is not writing a diary, nor is it a detailed record of one's life. it is to cut life through a specific perspective, and then reflect the cutting results into one's own life experience. i have been trying to find a way to unify my personality and work. outstanding work may be a note on life.

xiang biao：what stage do you think you and your friends are in? do you think you have found such an ideal model?

wang xiaowei：no. an important theme for young scholars is to quickly anchor resources within the academic system and gain a stable life through professional title promotion. this is basically an activity to get rid of humiliation. few people can do research based on life experience.

03.

reclaim the daily routine and awaken feelings

"everyday life is squeezed out, marginalized, and considered insignificant in today's life..."

wang xiaowei: during the conversation, i noticed that there is still a big gap between the research methods of anthropology and philosophy. philosophy does not require much empirical research, but is more about trying to construct narratives. but anthropology seems to be very different, and requires a lot of field work. i am more engaged in technical phenomenology, trying to clarify the grand background of the current life dilemma.

the grand background of contemporary life is the ubiquitous technological devices and the accompanying technological fanaticism. many people believe that science and technology will continue to advance, material things will become extremely abundant, and happiness will come unexpectedly. philosophers are very cautious about this. heidegger believes that technology is the premise of science. we must regard the world as something that can be mathematized and mechanized in order to represent the world as an object of scientific research.

he has foreseen that the future world will be characterized by calculation (strong control), speed (no waiting) and massiveness (no individuality). all meanings will be stripped away. people and all beings will become "persistent" and be manipulated at will.

technology will bring about a complete cover-up, and people cannot imagine another way of existence. as sun zhouxing interpreted, there is only one kind of true nihilism, and that is technological nihilism.

observing the current life in this grand picture, we have almost no way to understand what is sacred, transcendent, and vague. we only have a quantitative, calculated, and controlled lifestyle, which is an important reason for the overall anxiety. everything is a manifestation of the will to power and instrumental rationality.

in contemporary society, people feel "appropriated" in their families, companies, and social lives, and are used to do things they are not passionate about. love, intimacy, and art, which cannot be planned, manipulated, or exploited, have become scarce or simply unworthy of mention.

the banshee of inishelin

xiang biao：have you ever thought about how to continue to develop heidegger's ideas in the current situation in china?

wang xiaowei：inspired by heidegger’s philosophy and professor xiang’s discussion on “nearby”, i am now paying special attention to the everydayness of life and wrote “the depth of everyday life”.

daily life is originally something fundamental to the life world, and it corresponds to work-related activities. contemporary work has been completely shrouded by the logic of modern technology, and is highly purposeful and instrumental. daily life, on the other hand, is purposeless, does not require consideration of input and output, and does not require quantitative control. it is rough, vague, and has a strong sense of randomness and arbitrariness.

daily life is squeezed, marginalized, and considered insignificant in today's life, but it contains the antidote to alleviate technological dictatorship. the work i want to do is to recapture daily life and enrich vitality through daily life.

some things are easy to do, such as spending five minutes sitting in the woods, raising a fish, planting a pot of mint, etc. these may be an inauthentic "ordinary" state in heidegger's view, but they are particularly important today.

xiang biao：do you need to cite a lot of brain science or psychology research to illustrate your point? for example, look at whether neuroscience can produce some psychological effects of sitting aimlessly in the forest? how do you discuss the relationship between daily life and the meaning of life?

wang xiaowei：this is something we should be especially vigilant about.once you use brain science to understand the importance of daily life, you will turn daily life into technology and instrumentalization, and daily life will become work, and you have to seek benefits in it. to take back daily life is to improve people's sensitivity, not rationality.

xiang biao：therefore, the role of taking back the daily routine is not to persuade, but to arouse.

wang xiaowei：yes, it is to arouse people's sense of existence, maintain a dimension beyond technological survival, gain a moderate sense of meaning, and avoid falling into a kind of "negative nothingness."

nietzsche often talked about nothingness. he distinguished between the weak who need a strong sense of meaning and the strong who need a weak sense of meaning. people who need a strong sense of meaning will instrumentalize their lives.

nietzsche said that christians see this life as a step toward heaven, which is instrumentalizing life. they are all weak people who demand a strong meaning. the strong have a different sense of time and space. they do not pay attention to the outside world and do not use their own lives as tools. the strong affirm life itself, so they only need a weak meaning - daily life may be a weak meaning.admitting that you are not outstanding, accepting and embracing everyday life, and finding a sense of value in it, actually requires a stronger vitality.

of course, we cannot provide an operating manual for a happy life. once it is manualized, it will become a technique - anxiety removal technique.

teacher xiang's work actually looks a lot like performance art. for example, "using yourself as a method" is definitely not a manual for a happy life. there are no direct instructions or steps in the book. it is more of a guide in the dialogue. the writing style of this book is very similar to heidegger's "conversations on a country road".

the banshee of inishelin

xiang biao：this is so interesting, is there such a practice in chinese tradition?

wang xiaowei：my reading is very limited, but it seems that pre-modern things retain some sacredness, transcendence, and unspeakable mystery. for example, the concept of "tao" retains a kind of unspeakability, and therefore has a poetic quality.

it cannot be clarified through explanatory texts, but can only be understood through recitation. back to daily life, i have a feeling that in the 1980s and 1990s, people in chinese universities loved to talk about poetry and play folk songs.

you can hardly see poetry in universities today, because everyone is thinking about publishing papers. poetry has lost its ability to convene. poetry is a kind of invitational and guiding language, and poetry naturally refuses clarity.

xiang biao：students no longer write poetry, but are thinking about the postgraduate entrance exam. on one level, we may think that they are dominated by instrumental rationality. but they are unhappy and feel depressed, so they have self-awareness. if we observe this consciousness, from the perspective of enlightenment rationality, this conscious activity is irrational, so they are not completely conquered by instrumental rationality.

young people actually feel that life is unpredictable and full of uncertainty. technology does not bring them certainty. they feel that everything about them is unpredictable and that they are in an irrational and unreasonable situation.

this irrationality refers to being illogical and inefficient (irrational) from the perspective of institutional design, such as involution; unreasonableness refers to being ethically unjustifiable (unreasonable).

from our perspective, the uncertainty that everyone feels is related to political economy, not just caused by technology. it is a problem caused by social structure, which can and must be discussed. if we don't discuss it, we will not be able to get out of the predicament.

life is unpredictable, so how can we make an overall analysis in the unpredictable flow of life? at this time, every moment needs clear language. otherwise, do we write a poem when we encounter a problem? of course, that may be a way, but our approach is still a very rationalist one.

wang xiaowei：so you are not completely satisfied with heidegger's solution of returning to art, or the solution of returning to daily life that i mentioned.

xiang biao：when someone pulls out a gun, how do you respond? walking in the dark forest or sitting in the woods is not an answer to the questioning at gunpoint. you need to have a kind of rationality in the classical sense, and then return to humanism, which is the early marxist humanism, and perhaps this is the way to solve the problem.

wang xiaowei：teacher xiang, i vaguely see a fundamental difference in the world view. we seem to have different preferences between rationality and sensibility.