What book are you reading?

[Nilgiri]

There are plenty of takeaways. I agree with most of them while I disagree with some of them. For example, the book harshly criticizes totalitarianism whereas I don't have too many issues with totalitarianism.

The way the novel explores the tension between individual freedom and societal stability is wonderful. In the pursuit of eliminating conflict and ensuring social harmony, society sacrifices personal freedoms and autonomy. In my opinion, the reason why this ended up creating a dystopia is that one of the key purposes of the state was to build a society that has maximum happiness and uniformity. In my life, living life in pursuit of happiness is a horrible life. Reading Fyodor Dostevesky's work confirmed my belief that sublime suffering will always be better than happiness. The pursuit of happiness together with uniformity will always lead the society towards either decline or stagnation.

I hate the fact that the controllers allow the creation of inferior human beings even though they have the means to make everyone an Alpha. The controller stated that this ended in a disaster the last time they tried it but in my opinion, with the right conditioning they could have repeated the experiment and the result would have been way better.

The best part of the book is definitely the conversation between the controller and John.

I on other hand have serious issues with totalitarianism.

At his core, Huxley was extremely interested with metaphysics (similar to me).... and the totalitiarian "greater good" state was and is something of an entire antithesis in the way it (attempted, attempts) to displace this realm of the human psyche entirely.

That is from where Huxley derives his distaste for what he saw where the sinews of totalitarianism taking root and establishing at his time in human society....the downstream being an inevitable extreme dystopia which he explores in the novel.

This is exactly why his version of the "glitch in the matrix" is quite Jungian in the end. In that there is deeper layer than the "tabula rasa" that the totalitarian state takes as its first principle to indoctrinate and control with....and pacify residuals and abnormalities with soma as well (past every epicurean licentiousness of convenience, stripped of all original purpose/meaning predating the state).

It is this deeper layer in the individual that starts to pose questions and challenge what it sees. This is the archetype that neo represents in the matrix as well.

I brought up the tabula rasa and jungian substrata below it earlier: https://defencepk.com/forums/threads/india-china-relations.1451/page-2#post-23569

That thread might be interesting one for you and others to read as well.

When you say "you just wish the segmentation/stratification didnt happen" w.r.t alphas, betas, gammas, deltas (I forget if there was an epsilon)....and you wish the state could have just made every person alpha. I think you don't quite grasp that what Huxley was pointing at (which I agree with) is that this is inevitable with totalitarianism.

i.e Power is concentrated in an extreme way and if weakness does not exist, it needs to be invented (as the inversion to Voltaire)....for the purposes of power serving itself (i.e a large population of only alphas would threaten the totalitarian setup if they are not made to be smaller in number and have betas and gammas to flex their own allotted power upon etc).

This is what we have seen in every attempted totalitarian setup so far as well. Things stratify inevitably (into groups and hierarchies) because there is no distributed decision making allowed to feedback sufficiently into the collective population....regarding realities and discourse on power (i.e what is best or fairly retained with the individual as core right and work your setup upwards from that) to be vested at various, fair and proper resolutions.

The Hobbesian argument can be an attractive one, but it is ultimately too reliant on the concentration being benevolent, near-omniscient and near-omnipotent and staying such in continued succession (essentially a full transmission to the human realm of power/authority from the Godly realm of power/authority). Things that just do not transpire in reality given human nature and what happens if you do not hedge power away from just one person or a tiny group of people.

It is why I ground and align say with Locke et al. instead.

This is also exactly why the glitches to the tabula rasa control in brave new world....originate from the "bottom up" layers below the totalitarian setup itself.... i.e certain individuals. Neo in the matrix sensed something was wrong as well early on.

 

[_NOBODY_]

When you say "you just wish the segmentation/stratification didnt happen" w.r.t alphas, betas, gammas, deltas (I forget if there was an epsilon)....and you wish the state could have just made every person alpha. I think you don't quite grasp that what Huxley was pointing at (which I agree with) is that this is inevitable with totalitarianism.

i.e Power is concentrated in an extreme way and if weakness does not exist, it needs to be invented (as the inversion to Voltaire)....for the purposes of power serving itself (i.e a large population of only alphas would threaten the totalitarian setup if they are not made to be smaller in number and have betas and gammas to flex their own allotted power upon etc).

I wish to write a detailed reply but I lack the time. Forgive me for being disrespectful as I will reply in the form of multiple posts. I will start by talking about Alphas. While you are correct in saying that a society full of alpha will threaten the authority of the totalitarian regime of Oceania, this will only be true if the social conditioning remains the same. Since a lot of Alphas are clones of one single body, they will grow up to be almost identical to each other as long as their condition is the same. However, the differences between them will start growing as time passes as they will be living and working may be radically different. We humans are shaped by our environment more than anything else. Alphas could be given different conditions based on their aptitude and the work environment that will be most suitable for them. In the novel only one Alpha was able to break free from the shackles of his conditioning, Helmholtz Watson. I didn't mention Bernard as he was the way he was due to his imperfections when compared to other Alphas. This proves that the conditioning that Oceania was using on Alphas was good enough to make them obedient citizens of the state.

I feel like my previous post may have made it seem like I am a fan of totalitarianism. I should have clarified that the reason why I am tolerant towards totalitarianism is because there are other forms of governance that are far worse. In my opinion, the most ideal system is the one where a delicate balance is maintained between freedom and authoritarianism. The condition is that such a balance leads towards prosperity. Now you may ask what is prosperity? We humans may have different definitions of prosperity. To me, prosperity is when human beings continue to make technological advances, have the freedom to do anything as long as it isn't hurting anyone and the overall quality of life improves. If you say that all three of these points can be subjective then you wouldn't be wrong. My idea of a balanced system is quite idealistic which is rather ironic because I try to be as practical as possible and stay as far away from idealism as possible.

Now let's talk about power. One sector of society will inevitably gain far more power than others. For example, in libertarian democracies, the power vacuum created by a weak government is always filled by the corporation and the society starts heading towards corporatocracy. The question is who would you rather have as the strongest entity in a state? I will always choose the government. It doesn't matter whether it is elected or not, the purpose of the government is to serve its people. Even an authoritarian regime will eventually crumble if it fails to serve its people. North Korea is not a valid example here as foreign powers prefer to maintain the status quo. If the government doesn't end up becoming the strongest entity then corporations will take over that role. I personally will never accept this under any circumstances.

At the end of the day, it comes down to what you are willing to sacrifice in order to gain something. Security can be attained by sacrificing privacy. Stability can be attained by choosing authoritarianism but you sacrifice freedom. In my opinion, complete freedom is one thing that can only be attained in death. Even in anarchy, true freedom cannot be attained because it is inevitable that one side will eventually become powerful enough to one day restore order.

I wrote all of this while feeling sleepy af. Forgive me if I end up sounding like a retard. I don't have the strength to check what I have written.

 

[Jamie]

I have wanted to buy this book for months. I better not get scammed. Also, since I am buying the limited-edition version of this book, the cover better look cool af.

View attachment 5006

I heard Dazai’s works are a gem. Some one recommended shayo to me, have you read it? It’s by Dazai aswell.
Japanese writers are something else.

 

[_NOBODY_]

I heard Dazai’s works are a gem. Some one recommended shayo to me, have you read it? It’s by Dazai aswell.
Japanese writers are something else.

Dazai is a legend. He is a master at portraying depression and loneliness.

 

[Jamie]

Dazai is a legend. He is a master at portraying depression and loneliness.

Now I have to pick this up… Will I be able to find this on liberty books?

 

[Nilgiri]

I wish to write a detailed reply but I lack the time. Forgive me for being disrespectful as I will reply in the form of multiple posts.

Bhai, no worries. This is meaty, leisurely conversation in the end (and the larger topic is about books after all anyway) and time comes to us however and whenever it does in the end to express it.

While you are correct in saying that a society full of alpha will threaten the authority of the totalitarian regime of Oceania, this will only be true if the social conditioning remains the same. Since a lot of Alphas are clones of one single body, they will grow up to be almost identical to each other as long as their condition is the same. However, the differences between them will start growing as time passes as they will be living and working may be radically different. We humans are shaped by our environment more than anything else. Alphas could be given different conditions based on their aptitude and the work environment that will be most suitable for them. In the novel only one Alpha was able to break free from the shackles of his conditioning, Helmholtz Watson. I didn't mention Bernard as he was the way he was due to his imperfections when compared to other Alphas. This proves that the conditioning that Oceania was using on Alphas was good enough to make them obedient citizens of the state.

I don't think the social conditioning was good enough (especially long term). Huxley at moments specifically mentions the use of soma and implies the reason for this (what's coming in from the edges, jungian or not)....i.e the "uncomfy emotions" that soma addresses (or seems to address, since really its not been that long passage of time and mustapha mond seems to realise this as well).

We are emotional beings in the end you see....this is the most day to day way we harness the metaphysical in the end. Things like love, fear, mortality and belonging that give sense to larger constructs of meaning and purpose. The meaning and purpose that the totalitarian state has stripped away....i.e your life is just second 0 to second 3 billion or whatever and only the state understands why that is and fills in that time with what you have been alloted to live it by the state....you are not to think about it or dwell upon it (i.e the source of the uncomfy emotions for soma to counter as soon as they start).

The irony and hypocrisy is exposed by the highest state edifice (Mond et al) meeting with John..... in that these matters are permitted only at that very high echelon (i.e these are ultimately great things permitted to only them, but denied to all else).

Huxley implies by the presence of castes in this world, the stratification of intellect vs labour (among other things) in the activities of occupational and existential time would pose too much a jarring upset to social conditioning methods found thus far by the state (tabula rasa control + soma + extreme epicureanism) without castes.

I am inclined to agree with him as time for intellectual endeavour largely originated from organisational labour (especially farming) and surpluses created by it to then sustain it....i.e these originated with stratification baked in and present a very long time (and then with the industrial revolution adding its force to this as well)..... till the totalitarian state/dystopia came to be.

So this would just bleed over past what soma could address if one "alpha" is made to work an intellectual job and another "alpha" is made to work a physical job.....i.e the soma could not soak up the emotional consequences of the intellectual surplus of the latter. That to me is why lower castes are engineered to begin with by the totalitarian state along with the power dynamic to dispense and launder among them.

The hypothesis that realised science (physics) will always be a small sphere compared to immensity of metaphysics. This is the brave new world (complete with the irony laden in it from Shakespeare)....because its a new untrodden path and is expected to last as the older well trodden one......while being extremely immoral, ignorant and ingrateful towards this basic reality and great disparity between the two in size.

If you ever get the time later btw, you should watch Joseph Campbell's power of myth if you haven't already. There is a great deal in there explaining this in a longer + detailed form.

I feel like my previous post may have made it seem like I am a fan of totalitarianism. I should have clarified that the reason why I am tolerant towards totalitarianism is because there are other forms of governance that are far worse. In my opinion, the most ideal system is the one where a delicate balance is maintained between freedom and authoritarianism. The condition is that such a balance leads towards prosperity. Now you may ask what is prosperity? We humans may have different definitions of prosperity. To me, prosperity is when human beings continue to make technological advances, have the freedom to do anything as long as it isn't hurting anyone and the overall quality of life improves. If you say that all three of these points can be subjective then you wouldn't be wrong. My idea of a balanced system is quite idealistic which is rather ironic because I try to be as practical as possible and stay as far away from idealism as possible.

Now let's talk about power. One sector of society will inevitably gain far more power than others. For example, in libertarian democracies, the power vacuum created by a weak government is always filled by the corporation and the society starts heading towards corporatocracy. The question is who would you rather have as the strongest entity in a state? I will always choose the government. It doesn't matter whether it is elected or not, the purpose of the government is to serve its people. Even an authoritarian regime will eventually crumble if it fails to serve its people. North Korea is not a valid example here as foreign powers prefer to maintain the status quo. If the government doesn't end up becoming the strongest entity then corporations will take over that role. I personally will never accept this under any circumstances.

At the end of the day, it comes down to what you are willing to sacrifice in order to gain something. Security can be attained by sacrificing privacy. Stability can be attained by choosing authoritarianism but you sacrifice freedom. In my opinion, complete freedom is one thing that can only be attained in death. Even in anarchy, true freedom cannot be attained because it is inevitable that one side will eventually become powerful enough to one day restore order.

I'll come to this later....with more time and more of your replies to reflect upon at same time.

I wrote all of this while feeling sleepy af. Forgive me if I end up sounding like a retard. I don't have the strength to check what I have written.

No worries at all. It is all useful to me in the end to unpackage some deeper things I have entered into conversation with others over time. Apologies (to particular circumstances w.r.t input/output) are never required for deep debate and conversation done in good faith meaningful way....whatever we agree or disagree upon. The longer form of the debate itself will help smooth over rough edges, fits and starts etc anyway.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I wish to write a detailed reply but I lack the time. Forgive me for being disrespectful as I will reply in the form of multiple posts.

How utterly tempting it is to write a flamboyant, totally outraged reply, calling you out for your disrespect of the thoughtful, contemplative, grave and respectable minds that constitute the group!
Do stop apologising and post as you find convenient. None of us has this as a full-time activity; by implication, none of us has the time to prepare polished documents that will stand as significant works of belles-lettres.
Relax, big man.
We are just sparing around sharing our views of books that we have liked (or disliked!), and there is no Prix Goncourt at the end of our posts, not even a humble Booker.

 

[Shanlung]

I just finished GIVER. It got pushed to front burner as I saw another person waiting for that book.

A painful book to read

"The Giver by Lois Lowry | Plot, Summary & Characters - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com" https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-giver-summary-characters-themes-author.html

I finished my Baldacci, that I said I finishing soon.

And now starting on Mitchener

 

[_NOBODY_]

Now I have to pick this up… Will I be able to find this on liberty books?

Yes, but this book is expensive af in Pakistan for some reason. @RescueRanger can tell you more about Book a Book but I prefer Readings or Liberty Books. Book a Book's customer service is not non-existent.

If you wish to read no longer human then please make sure that you are doing well. This book has the capacity to make the reader incredibly suicidal. You have been warned.

Readings: https://www.readings.com.pk/pages/BookDetails.aspx?BookID=1545382
Liberty Books: https://www.libertybooks.com/no-longer-human-pb-9780811204811?search=no longer human&search_type=all
Book a Book:

No Longer Human by Osamu Dazai (Hardcover) (Limited Edition)

High Quality Books at affordable prices.

bookabook.pk

 

[_NOBODY_]

No worries at all. It is all useful to me in the end to unpackage some deeper things I have entered into conversation with others over time. Apologies (to particular circumstances w.r.t input/output) are never required for deep debate and conversation done in good faith meaningful way....whatever we agree or disagree upon. The longer form of the debate itself will help smooth over rough edges, fits and starts etc anyway.

I love discussing this book with others. If you liked Brave New World then you love an anime called Psycho-Pass. I am about to finish season 1 and it's phenomenal. I will urge you to go in blind. Don't search for anything about this anime. All you need to know is that it is set in the future where Japan is a highly technologically advanced dystopia. You will thank me later. I will once again urge you to go in blind.

 

[_NOBODY_]

Now I have to pick this up… Will I be able to find this on liberty books?

Also, why are you ordering this book from Pakistan? Aren't you residing in China?

 

[_NOBODY_]

Metro book series is also good.

Metro is S tier easily. Metro games are also S tier.

 

[Shanlung]

My reading as I used to report on Goodreads.

Then I got lazier and lazier and stopped updating since 2019
I was not that conscientious before that either

Shan Lung’s books on Goodreads (77 books)

Shan Lung has 77 books on his all shelf: The Fall of Io by Wesley Chu, The Rise of Io by Wesley Chu, Verdun: The Longest Battle of the Great War by Paul ...

www.goodreads.com

 

[Joe Shearer]

My reading as I used to report on Goodreads.

Then I got lazier and lazier and stopped updating since 2019
I was not that conscientious before that either

Shan Lung’s books on Goodreads (77 books)

Shan Lung has 77 books on his all shelf: The Fall of Io by Wesley Chu, The Rise of Io by Wesley Chu, Verdun: The Longest Battle of the Great War by Paul ...

www.goodreads.com

View attachment 10650

View attachment 10651

View attachment 10652

Oh my WORD.
You are serious.
Good to find you lot. @RescueRanger @_NOBODY_ @Shanlung

 

[_NOBODY_]

My reading as I used to report on Goodreads.

Then I got lazier and lazier and stopped updating since 2019
I was not that conscientious before that either

Shan Lung’s books on Goodreads (77 books)

Shan Lung has 77 books on his all shelf: The Fall of Io by Wesley Chu, The Rise of Io by Wesley Chu, Verdun: The Longest Battle of the Great War by Paul ...

www.goodreads.com

View attachment 10650

View attachment 10651

View attachment 10652

Holysh*t! That's incredible. You're on a whole other level.