More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
the emergence of a new totalitarianism, no longer led by flamboyant “mob leaders” such as Joseph Stalin or Adolf Hitler but by dull bureaucrats and technocrats.
The essence of this difference, I realized, lies within the field of psychology.
Totalitarianism, on the other hand, has
its roots in the insidious psychological process of mass formation.
Only a thorough analysis of this process enables us to understand the shocking behaviors of a “totalitarized” population, including an exaggerated willingness of individuals to sacrifice their own personal interests out of solidarity with the collective (i.e., the masses), a profound intolerance of dissident voices...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Mass formation is, in essence, a kind of group hypnosis that destroys individuals’ ethical self-awareness and robs them of...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
We associate totalitarianism mainly with labor, concentration, and extermination camps, but those are merely the final, bewildering stage of a long process.
Somehow, they failed to realize that their research was not bringing them closer to the facts but instead was creating a fictitious new reality.
The undercurrent of totalitarianism consists of blind belief in a kind of statistical-numerical “scientific fiction” that shows “radical contempt for facts”: “The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced
Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction and the distinction between true and false no longer exist.”1
Whenever a new object of fear arises in society, there is only one response and
Just like that, society falls victim to a vicious circle that inevitably leads to totalitarianism, which means to extreme government control, eventually resulting in the radical destruction of both the psychological and physical integrity of human beings.
It is precisely this atomized subject that, according to Arendt, is the elementary building block of the totalitarian state.
Totalitarianism is not a historical coincidence. In the final analysis, it is the logical consequence of mechanistic thinking and the delusional
belief in the omnipotence of human...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
As such, totalitarianism is the defining feature of the Enlig...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Science can, in essence, be defined as open-mindedness.
It cultivated doubt and considered uncertainty a
virtue.
“I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” Voltaire declared (or rather, his biographer Evelyn Beatrice Hall, declared).
(“Looking at something, changes it,” Erwin Schrödinger declared).
The laws of mechanics apply to only a very limited part of reality.
As such, science stumbles upon an unknowable and mysterious essence that escapes logical explanation and which can be described only in the language of poetry and metaphor.
Science eventually arrives where religion once started, in a personal contact with the Unnameable
Science freed itself from all the dogmas of religious discourse, only to rediscover—at the end of a long journey—the mystical and religious texts and reendow them with their resplendent, original status: symbolic, metaphorical texts for that which is eternally hidden from the human mind.
As we will discuss in the latter part of this book, the faithful pursuit of Reason attained the highest and most sublime achievement: mapping its own boundaries.
The human mind had accepted its own limitations and once more relocated the ultimate knowledg...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
The ultimate achievement of science is that it finally surrenders, that it comes to the realization that it cannot ...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
this science has everything to seduce human beings.
From the Enlightenment forward, mechanistic thinking provided the Grand Narrative in Western civilization.
In this way, the scientific discourse spun its own creation myth.
From this perspective, the entirety of human subjectivity becomes an insignificant by-product of mechanistic processes.
At its birth, science was synonymous with open-mindedness, with a way of thinking that banished dogmas and questioned beliefs. As it evolved, however, it also turned itself into ideology, belief, and prejudice.
In short, the scientific discourse, like any dominant discourse, has become the privileged instrument of opportunism, lies, deception, manipulation, and power.
Ironically, the studies that assessed the quality of research also came to diverging conclusions.
They have abandoned the classic research, such as thorough case studies conducted by experienced clinicians, and replaced it with research that might look scientific but often is not.
In great Science, the human being, in its psychic, symbolic, moral, and ethical dimension, disappeared into the background.
But that didn’t last long. It was discovered that the observer, in his subjective qualities, has an essential influence on the objects being observed.
Numbers and graphs presented in the mass media by someone with credentials are considered de facto realities by many people.
It is at this level that Hannah Arendt situates the ideal subject of the totalitarian state: the subject that no longer knows the difference between (pseudo)-scientific fiction and reality.
Each added convenience came at a price, including a weakened connection to the natural and social environment.
industrial labor drew him away from the fields and the woods.
man’s world of experience constantly resonated with nature’s ever-varying language of forms; after mechanization, he was mainly absorbed by a monotonous, mechanical rhythm.
Evening meetings between neighbors, pub gatherings, harvest festivals, rituals,
and celebrations—they were progressively replaced by consumption of what the media presented. This seduced us into certain social laziness. It was no longer necessary to make the effort that is required for interaction with fellow human beings.
As such, industrialization broke up traditional social structures formed by the existence of varied professions, public offices, and authority (the priest, the mayor).
Their disappearance left man confused, in the darkness of his own existence; haunted by existential anxiety and unease that could not be identified.
Labor changed from a cumbersome but inherently meaningful existential task into a disembodied utilitarian necessity.
In the early twentieth century, British economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that by the end of the century, technological advances would translate to a 15-hour work week, which would be sufficient for society to produce everything it needed.
By the end of the twentieth century, people worked longer hours than ever before.
