The Anthology of Pure Phenomenology

Seldom have I met an individual who used the word "hypocrite" in its being meaning full. The same goes for "negativity", "negative", "negation", &c., as opposed to its being positive, & this its not being used meaningfully, this being abused, is the first of a whole host of indications pointing out the apparently being unable to be overcome two-sidedness in general discourse involved. . .

Now, an etymological overview; & for that purpose--as it regards "negativity"--I enlist the Oxford English Dictionary, which furnishes this information about "negate", the root word at hand:

The original sense of "negate"¹ presupposes some kind of opposition, & this opposition is characterised by simple repression, or refusing, of one thing, concrete or otherwise, for the benefit of another. This original sense for that reason can also be used in the employ of existential matters, i.e., sublimated thought influenced by negativity, but this actively refusing something involves transferring negative energy in as much the same manner as heat frome one person being conducted to another. In everyday language we might call this passage of negativity emotion based upon representational thinking.

In another, though not by any means alienated, sense negativity is the process by which differences in an interrelated system reach determination. "Determination" in this sense has a doubled significance overruling the praxis of free will. In the same breath it means to have one's choices & actions pre-determined inasmuch as one bears an identity which is both in accordance with one's corporeality, as determined by the natural manifold, & in accordance with the totality of one's relationship with otherness in general: naturalism in effect. Freed negativity has the tendency of making individuals exhibit a pathological not liking oneself. The indifferent free play of pure negativity, which is the general condition of the natural manifold, is simple process of determining, & often is confused, even in the face of this indifference, as being meaningful only as it regards an individual, a particular group of individuals, &c. without taking up its universal, albeit particular & individual, significance.

In this vein, Inwood has observed the following about Hegel's conception of "negativity"³: "Hegel endorsed Spinoza's doctrine that all DETERMINATION is negation, but he rejected Spinoza's view that REALITY is at bottom a wholly indeterminate SUBSTANCE" (200), & he gives this "simplified" "historical analogue" for negativity in play: "Before the emergence of Protestantism, Catholicism is just (Western) Christianity as such. It then generates Protestantism, which negates it. Protestantism is not just non-Catholicism, but actively differentiates itself from it and bears the marks of the Catholicism that it negates. Catholicism in turn negates Protestantism, thereby ceasing to be simply Christianity as such and bearing the marks of its active self-differentiation from Protestantism" (201), & further notes, "Hegel often sees later phases of logic, HISTORY, a LIFE, etc., as the restoration of an earlier phase on a higher level" (201).

This is the same as being: "I have become Spiritual as matter of course":

(a) These actual facts underlie the statement "I am religious/believe the government has my best interests in mind/&c.": I was raised in a society that is oriented around Christian values. I was raised in a household that attended Sunday mass, said Grace at dinner, observed religious holidays, believed in the power of prayer, believed in the existence of Heaven & Hell, &c.

(b) "Now I am an athiest/used to be a member of the Democratic party/used to be a member of the Republican party/agnostic/humanist/feminist": At university I was taught to practise critical thinking, to be suspicious of any ideology requiring a degree of blind trust, to bring to light problematic aspects of this or that institution. I have on many occasions observed practitioners of Christianity actively behave contrary to their values, the news media has often published stories recounting the abuse of children at the hands of clergymen, I have witnessed police brutality firsthand, &c., & therefore I no longer subscribe to this idea, that an all-powerful, all-loving, & all-knowing God exists (cf. Epicurus, "Problem of Evil"), I absolutely believe in the equality of all people, I believe that society ought to be geared in such a manner that younger generations are educated on the importance of preserving every person's dignity, I express animosity towards this or that group but am safe in the knowledge of having adhered to the moral imperative necessitated by my beliefs, I take a cynical, though at times idealistic, outlook of the world, there is an implicit penance required by my de facto compliance in systematic oppression in my formative years, &c., & so facing this information of what constituted nothingness in the past has for its antithesis practical religiosity.

(c) "I am being Spiritual": I realise & it has become rather clear, that juste as little is seen in pure light as in pure darkness. As Picasso once said, "It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child", & the culmination of Man's journey in Kubrick's 2001: Space Odyssey likewise sees this transcendence of all observable phenomena, & this Spiritual elevation of the individual, or what is the same thing, the reunion of what I have elsewhere called artificial (creative, in the sense that it has channeled its Desire into productive endeavours) self-consciousness with itself. To that end, Picasso has also said, "Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up". In other words, Spirit which now views itself as Spirit, because it has always been Spirit in the first place, now "sees" the inherent neutrality, i.e., itself, as the connective tissue between what was formerly comprised of darkness (black) & lightness (white). In a sense, morality as such vanishes, but is still preserved, & is superseded by matters of degree, i.e., a happy & grey medium for any circumstance becomes ideal; but this preservation of opposites at first has the aspect of being without passion, but this keeping of extremes at bay never-the-less insists on true individuality actively participating in the inexhaustible natural manifold, or this indifference. As Inwood notes, "This type of double negation is INFINITY" (201).

But this formal articulation of Spirit which has raised itself frome a merely symbolic, & then pure being-for-selfish, & overall un-self-conscious relationship with itself has fore its content only my recitation of it, & will only make literal sense, or what is the same thing, activate the free play of the senses--frisson--if it is sensed, perceived, understood, & recognised as such, & in order for this to be made real artificial self-consciousness must experience itself, i.e., the natural manifold, for what it is in its negativity. Its thought-process must, in other words, become sublimated, or what is the same thing, explicit for itself. In hindsight this feeling of having been developed makes itself felt when somebody experiences things being much simpler back then, or when this development is understood by the saying To Hell And Back, or by the unmistakable state of being in the moment.

Now, this movement frome the 2nd moment, into the 3rd, this 3rd being a negation of a negation synthesis of the 1st and 2nd, because humans are, contrary to popular "thought", organisms based upon binary opposition, in the same manner that complex programmes are based upon simple binary, appears to be feasible enough, but this moving upward is the summation of the 1st and 2nd moments reaching their apex & likewise the sublimation of its thought content, i.e., their being exhausted, or becoming explicit, which demands their being united in the image of the free play of the natural manifold, which itself is the unification of its thetic and antithetical (positional) modes. Anything else, which is this its being foreign, becomes the denial of self-consciousness's truth, or what is the same thing, of its being as it is in the natural manifold, which is this its being negative. Hypocrisy, therefore, is this its denying what it is, because hypocrisy is the unreflective mode of that which takes fore given its not really being reflective. What it sees, what it takes as being unreflective, as being not reflective is in actuality itself being unreflective.

But this being negative can perhaps be seen clearer in the light of a better example. "Keeping positive control" of one's body in the heat of intense activity, or even positive control of a heavy object, illustrates juste this relation between negativity as we have faced it & its positive counterweight. Since our corporeality is unalterably connected to the natural manifold--there is no real way around it--redefining the term "body positivity", not without preserving its common usage, will prove instructive. Any person who has run a distance of 2 miles in earnest, e.g., will understand the effort demanded for maintaining a regular pace which exceeds the bounds of one's comfort.

But any exercise, in order to effect positive development over one's corporeality, must exceed the bounds of one's comfort, or what is the same thing, must exceed the bounds of one's limits, or the limits of one's comfort. As a general rule, limits must be superseded, but the contours of those limits must never-the-less be preserved. In running, simple, albeit presumably unnatural, adjustments must be taken into consideration depending on the terrain. In spite of general discomfort or general exhaustion incurred frome being in nature, it is considered goode practise for one to maintain proper forme, even breaths, fluid movements, &c; this in spite of general discomfort incurred from being in nature, which is negativity in its richest forme. With the increase of speed one's being in this natural manifold in all its elemental affluence follows; for, notwithstanding this or that particular environment, it is indeed nature's influences against which one fights in the exercise of his corporeality. Maintaining positive control over one's body, being "body positive", is juste this confrontation & reunion with negativity. This "runner's high" is juste this preservation of positivity and negativity being at rest.

It could be said about hypocrisy that such activity, of being "actively hypocritical", requires zero effort. Mental anguish produced as a result of this activity is artificial at best and virtually non-existent at worst, for it does not have this aspect of its positive counterweight. Etymologically,² "hypocrite" possesses the aspect of being considered from a lower or deficient position. The prefix "hypo-" "represent[s] Greek ὑπο-, ὑπ- ( < ὑπό preposition and adverb 'under' = Latin sub- )", having the aspect of a lower forme of the root to which it is attached; in this case of "hypocrisy", whose Latinate and Greek formes hypocrisis & ὑπόκρισις, are developed from this idea of "acting of a part on the stage, feigning, pretence", but the root κρίνειν (krinein) has the meaning "to decide, determine, judge", "discriminate, distinguish". Contemporary usage has thoughtlessly employed hypocrisy so much that the sense of its root word being felt has been lost. In hypocrisy one engages in behaviour which is contrary to reality, true, in essence engineering a reality contrary to the free play of negativity, but this actively determining or judging in discord with the natural manifold also belies a deficiency which must not be foregotten, namely a being unable to generate thought which has for its content the counterweight of its natural positive.

"True hypocrites" act in a purely oppositional manner. They essentially play a role which achieves its purpose and its meaning solely through another but in the same breath actively work towards the denial of another's right to existence by engineering a reality which is purely contrary to the free play of negativity, & so this behaviour has the aspect of being one side of an equation without superseding this aspect of opposition & thereafter preserving these opposites which are in constant motion. This kind of compromise would no doubt require effort, but true hypocrites have unwittingly locked themselves into an ideal world which is continually frustrated by the opposition it meets at the point of sublimation--because they do not work in concert with their natural opposites--& and what does in fact occur at this point of thought being materialised in the physical world, in corporeality, for thought does not merely remain in itself, is a grotesque disfigurement, or a retarded forme of Spirit.

Originally published on Sun Jul 26 21:15:33 2020, & last updated on Wed Jul 29 17:27:44 2020