Smagen af en følelse

En af mine gamle venner yndede at sige, at man skal høre sandheden fra børn og fulde folk. Det hører med til historien, at han drak, og han sagde, mange sande ting.

Jeg tænkte på ham fornylig, da jeg deltog i et seks-dages meditationsretreat på et kloster ved Costa Brava kysten. Her refererede underviseren – i et af hans Buddhistiske causerier – til filmen Inside Out. En tegnefilm! Det slog mig, at der vitterligt er noget om klicheen: sandheden, fuldskab og børn. Børn er sjældent fulde, men de udfordrer deres forældre. Dagligt. De modner dem.

Nu har jeg set Inside Out. Og den er ganske interessant (om end midten føles lidt lang). Den viser, hvordan følelser interagerer og kæmper om kontrollen i vores mentale kontrolrum. Glæde. Væmmelse. Vrede. Tristhed. Frygt.

images

Filmen handler om pigen Riley, der er 11-12 år. Hun flytter med sine forældre til San Fransisco, hvorved hele hendes følelsesliv sættes på en prøve. I filmen udspiller dette sig ved, at følelsen Glæde ønsker at være den dominerende. Uanset hvad der sker. Glæde har altså svært ved at træde til side, selv når andre følelser synes at virke mere passende i forhold til situationen, fx vrede, frygt eller tristhed på grund af flytning, ny skole, nye venner, tab af venner, osv. På den måde hæmmes et mere modent forhold til følelser.

Følelser er svære, fordi de synes uden klare grænser. Det kan dog være givende at være opmærksom på følelser, når de opstår. Hvad forårsager dem?

Følelser er forbipasserende gæster i ens liv. I Buddhismen lærer man ikke at identificere sig med disse. Gradvist kan man opleve forskellen mellem ”jeg er vred” og ”det er vrede.” Det er svært, men frigørende. Som alt andet forandrer følelser sig også. Selv en forelskelse forandrer sig og bliver til kærlighed og hårdt arbejde. En anden måde at se dette på, kan man ved hjælp af en af hjerneforskningens mere interessante opdagelser, nemlig begrebet neural plasticitet eller den plastiske hjerne. Denne opdagelse understreger, at vores hjerne forandrer sig gennem hele livet. Af samme grund er det også muligt, at blive bedre til at håndtere eller navigere i forbindelse med de følelser, som suser igennem en.

Nyere studier viser, at glæde og lykke i stor grad hænger sammen med evnen til at ”smage” på følelser, fx smage en positiv oplevelse, og derved lade denne smag gennemtrænge ens aktiviteter. Smagen kan ligeledes imprægnere tidligere aktiviteter i skæret af denne. Som et ordsprog siger: det er aldrig for sent, at få en bedre barndom. Denne ”smag” hænger sammen med, hvordan man kan kultivere ens velvære. Det vil sige, at man giver slip på følelser som grådighed og had, mens man prøver at kultivere gavmildhed, medfølelse og kærlighed. Man accepterer ærligt ens motiver, mens man oprigtigt prøver at fremme mere af det, som fremmer velvære, fx gavmildhed.

Modning eller visdom drejer sig om at blive mere bevidst omkring, hvad der foregår i ens mentale kontrolrum. Lytte til den indre stemme.

En af forskellene mellem depressive og ikke-depressive personer er bl.a. forbundet med en fastholdelse af ”smagen” af glæde. Hos den depressive er denne aktivering forbigående, hvorfor hjernen ikke for alvor når at ”smage” følelsen. Jagten på lykke bliver flad og stressende og, af samme grund, deprimerende. Personer der besidder denne kapacitet formår derimod at forblive eller forlænge aktiviteter i denne region af hjernen.

I Inside Out erkender følelsen Glæde, at følelsen Tristhed ikke er skadelig i små doser. Tværtimod. Den kan slå os omkuld, men også lære os at komme på fode igen. Tristheden fremmer refleksion og styrker ens værdier. Hvad er vigtigt? Hvem kan hjælpe? Selvfølgelig kan tristhed igennem længere tid udvikle depression, men i mindre doser vækker den ofte gavmildhed eller generøsitet hos den anden (sågar en selv, såfremt man evner at tage vare på sig selv). Jørgen Leth er eksempelvis kendt for at have et lettere deprimeret sind, hvorfor han bl.a. bor afsondret og mindre forstyrret på Haiti, men han er også en generøs digter. Han digter plads til det, som er i færd med at blive. Dette evner han, fordi han er opmærksom og nærværende – måske ikke hele tiden – men i hvert fald med en imponerende styrke i dele af sit liv.

Det er altså Tristheden, som bringer pigen Riley tilbage til hendes forældre. Tristheden overtager styringen. Det sker i det øjeblik hun tør blotte sig, og vise sin sorg på grund af alt det tabte. I dette øjeblik møder hun – heldigvis – forældrenes rummelighed.

Tanken er vel, eller kald det filmens morale, at vi alle sammen til tider støder ind i nogle – måske endda os selv – som har det svært. Ligesom os, vil enhver anden, gerne leve et liv, der er mindre lidende og utilfredsstillende. Det de mangler for at kunne komme videre, er ikke en neoliberalistisk peptalk om hvorvidt den stærkeste overlever, men omsorg og medfølelse.

Apropos medfølelse. I går afsluttede jeg et kursus i Filosofisk vejledning med en ”loving-kindness”-meditation. Lider de studerende? Ja. Kedsomhed. Usikkerhed. Tvivl. Plus alt det andet: sygdom, død, tab osv. Flere af de studerende smilte efterfølgende. Mere end de plejer. En enkelt sagde, ”What the fuck?”

Ja, what the fuck. Det er jo bare et liv. Og et liv, der ikke undersøges og afprøves, er, som bekendt, ikke værd at leve. Det mente Sokrates i hvert fald.

Philosophy for Everyday Life

I published the essay “Philosophy for Everyday Life” in Journal of Philosophy of Life.

Abstract: The aim of this essay is two-sided. The first is to illustrate to what extent philosophy can contribute to our everyday living. The second is to illustrate how. The implicit thesis that I try to unfold in this experimental essay is that these two sides—what and how—constantly intermingle. Although the philosophical approach takes its inspiration from the French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Michel Serres, as well as from modern secular mindfulness, the main consideration in any philosophy that contributes to our life must be the coherency of our approach to life. Philosophy is a way of relating to life, which, among other things, requires awareness. This essay, therefore, does not present a single way of living that is beneficial but instead advocates a form of life that is philosophical.

You can read the complete essay here.

Move to Mars

In The Practice of the Wild, the poet Gary Snyder writes, ”The world is our conscious, and it surrounds us. There are more things in mind, in imagination, than ‘you’ can keep track of – thoughts, memories, images, angers, delights, rise unbidden.”

We are formed by the world. It resembles the mystery of our minds. Still, the world is suffering: Water shortage. Climate chaos. Mass poverty. Mass migration. Terrorism. Financial greed. And so forth.

What to do? In the same essay, Snyder stresses, ”An ethical life is one that is mindful.” Becoming mindful is the challenge.

Of course, we all know it. The world — our planet — needs our care to survive. Yet, it seems as if the planet is wrapped more in sweet and symbolic words than actual concrete actions. Saving the planet has become a moralistic quest. We have forgotten, “the shared ground of our common biological being,” as Snyder writes, that is to say; you have more in common with a lion than what differentiates you from it.

Saving the planet is our responsibility, some say. Some even wants to save it, because they feel guilty. They are concerned about the fear of suffering from future guilt, as when our kids or our friends kids confront us, “Why didn’t you do anything?” However, guilt, fear, and responsibility … I am not sure that it works. At least it doesn’t seem like it’s working. Instead, I suggest that we save the planet out of love.

It’s that simple. We need the planet because we love the sun, the rain, and the wind. We need the planet because we love how we are connected with every being that breathes. We need the planet because we live here; our memories, love stories and miseries are embedded here. We don’t love the planet because we need it for something as vague as career, status or prestige.

Out of love. That’s the best intention for everything. Out of love we plant small seeds, then we nurture them, take care of them, and we do so because deep down we know that survival of the fittest doesn’t rule the world (only capitalism works that way). On the contrary, in life it’s compassion, care, and love that rules. It’s because I care that some life will go on living.

Do you care?

An ethical life is mindful, well, a mindful life is one that tries to live here and now in our bodies. Here and now is also how Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari defined utopia in What Is Philosophy?, ”Utopia does not split off from infinite movement: etymologica1ly it stands for absolute deterritorialization but always at the critical point at which it is connected with the present relative milieu, and espe­cially with the forces stifled by this milieu, Erewhon, the word used by Samuel Butler, refers not only to no-where but also to now-here.”

Utopia. Nowhere is always now and here. We don’t need more contemplation, not even higher ideals or moral categories. Rather we need to connect with the present. Becoming more mindful. Mindfulness of the body, for example, can be practiced by watching the breath when goes in and out, listening to the sounds, noticing the smells in the air, becoming aware of what we put in our mouth. Awareness is the key, not judgment. Mind and body are indistinguishable like Alberto Contador and his bike.

To love is not an intellectual project. Don’t your lips shiver when you kiss your lover? Do you love your kids out of responsibility? Out of guilt? No, because that’s not love. You love them because you love them.

Don’t you love the place where you live? If not … move to Mars.

For more on mindful philosophy, I have published the essay “Philosophy of Everyday Life” in the Journal of Philosophy of Life.

Doing Business with Deleuze?

I just published the essay “Doing Business with Deleuze?” in Kritike.
Abstract: This essay has two parts. The first part gives a brief overview of the foundation of economics. The second part contains a broader outline of the way in which philosopher Gilles Deleuze thinks of ethics. In the second part, I also explore the potential connections between Deleuze’s thoughts and economics. Especially, I focus on the concepts of “human capital,” “empowerment,” and more fruitful, the concept of “power-with” as proposed by organizational theorist, Mary Parker Follett. By doing so, I try to minimize the gap between economics and ethics as presented here. Finally, I determine whether it is possible to do business with Deleuze.
Read the full essay here.

Kierkegaard’s Quest: How Not to Stop Seducing

I just published the paper “Kierkegaard’s Quest: How Not to Stop Seducing” in Philosophy of Management.

Abstract

Change has traditionally been perceived as something to be avoided in favor of stability. This can be witnessed in both individual and organizational approaches to change. In this paper, change as a process of becoming is analyzed. The author relates change to seduction to introduce new perspectives to the concept. The principal idea is that the process of change is a seductive experience. This assumption highlights the positive aspects of becoming, growing, and changing. In doing so, reference is made to the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze, as well as the humanistic psychology of Carl Rogers, to analyze seduction, as presented in The Seducers Diary by the philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. The qualification of this claim is based on this reading. Finally, a conclusion is offered through brief comments on the relationship between seduction, personal growth, and self-actualization.

Read the entire paper here: Kierkegaard’s Quest- How Not to Stop Seducing

Preface to …

From my book, The Happiness of Burnout:

PREFACE

A proper philosophical question is: Which life is worth living? The question invites a plurality of answers from different perspectives. This plurality leads toward an affirmative practice that asks: How might one live a flourishing and happy life without any transcendent guidance?

This book deals with these questions. It tells the case story of the Danish artist Jeppe Hein’s (JH) burnout.

The material for this book is based on more than 100 hours of interviews with JH. Most interviews were unstructured. In addition, I interviewed his family and some of his closest friends. Interviews with the latter were more structured in order to check for accuracy; however, I also left a part of these interviews open to see whether I could obtain new knowledge or perspectives on the process.

During the process of writing this book, some memories changed. This is normal. Memories are not static, but something that we recreate or reedit in light of present events and new knowledge. This emphasizes that a life is never organized in a static fashion. It’s constantly being organized. A life is changing.

Thus, it can be tempting to see burnout as something that marks everything as either being before or after, at least for compositional reasons. Still, the relationship between the cause and effect is not something solid. Sometimes an effect can cause new causes to emerge. This stresses that ethic is a compositional capacity that uses narrative elements in order to tell, retell, or invent a room where various experiences can be expressed.

While I tell the story of JH, I will constantly mix it with other thoughts and ideas related to burnout. For example, I will present burnout as illustrated in Graham Greene’s novel A Burnt-Out Case. I will relate the story of JH to Greene’s thoughts. Also, I will add perspective by conversing with theories and thoughts from both psychology and philosophy—most notably the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze. Finally, I will relate JH’s story to his art.

The purpose of this is to create a broad site where certain experiences can fold, unfold, and refold in order to share thoughts related to how one might overcome the various setbacks that all lives encounter.

Finally, I might add that this book doesn’t aim to outline one roadmap to accomplish a life worth living. Basically, it does not believe that there is one truth regarding a happy life (or that any unchangeable certainties exist), nor that one path will be suitable for all. Rather, it offers different perspectives, addresses various challenges, and poses questions and ideas that some might find inspirational in his or her quest toward living a happier and flourishing life.

You can read more here.

Camus

The French writer, Albert Camus was ‘a moralist who insisted that while the world is absurd and allows for no hope, we are not condemned to despair.’

Like this, the historian Robert Zaretsky presents Camus in the book, A Life Worth Living — with the subtitle, Albert Camus and the Quest for Meaning. Camus was a moralist, but not a moralizer. He did not judge from a higher or more lucrative position, but tried to grasp what took place. He tried to create meaning where none was given.

Zaretsky organizes his portrait of Camus around five key-concepts: Absurdity, Silence, Measure, Fidelity and Revolt. The concepts are strongly related; that is to say that certain points in Camus’ thinking are repeated, but never in a tiring way. On the contrary, Zaretsky develops an intimate portrait of Camus showing how it most likely was for him to be in this world. Camus is placed both in his historical context — whether it is the struggles between Algeria and France, or between Sartre and Camus — and in conversation with contemporary thinkers.

What do we learn about Camus?

Like Nietzsche, Camus detested any kind of resentment. He knew that being faithful was not a virtue in itself. Instead, one only ought to be faithful towards a life served in happiness. Happiness, therefore, seems to be the main thread in Camus’ struggle. Not as something shallow, but as an existential guide that could help him balance his thoughts. This is an interesting reading.

Happiness is, of course, a difficult task for Camus. First of all, the world is absurd. It is without any meaning. One must invent meaning, just as one must ‘create happiness in order to protect against the universe of unhappiness.’ At times one can only do so by being silent. As Camus says, ‘we do not write in order to say things, but in order not to say them.’

Camus was a pragmatic. He did not idealize life or describe it through theoretical abstractions. He wished to witness life as an experience — no matter how painful or beautiful it appeared. This practical approach caused him several problems, going from his battles with Sartre and Merleau-Ponty, especially their idealized Marxism, to the confrontation with an Algerian student who, the day before Camus received the Nobel Prize in literature, criticized Camus for his silence over Algeria. At one point, Camus famously said: ‘People are now planting bombs in the tramways of Algiers. My mother might be on one of those tramways. If that is justice, then I prefer my mother.’

Zaretsky portrays Camus as a real human being, albeit a bit more gifted than most of us. His most impressive achievement is, I think, that he succeeds in describing Camus’ quest for meaning as if it was a psychological case-study. Recent studies in psychology show that a one-sided quest for happiness can result in the opposite. Instead, having a purpose or being able to produce meaning is more important to make a life flourish. ‘Today,’ Camus said in an interview, ‘happiness has become an eccentric activity. The proof is that we tend to hide from others when we practice it.’ Sixty years later, happiness seems to be something quite ordinary, vague even, that the majority of people like to expose. And yet, whether eccentric or ordinary, a deep felt happiness — then as now — is something that requires ‘attention and effort.’ There is no quick fix for achieving a life worth living.

For Camus, suffering is part of thinking. It is related with one’s active involvement in life. Paying attention. Trying to make sense. One might realize that violence is ‘unjustifiable,’ because of one’s compassion and empathy. As a consequence, one acts. ‘Rebellion, Camus declares, is born of the spectacle of irrationality.’ Like the ancient Greeks, Camus based his thoughts on the idea of limits, Zaretsky says. Nothing should be carried to extremes. Nothing should be denied beforehand. The quest for meaning never stops.

I believe that Zaretsky’s book  is not only interesting for readers of Camus, laymen as well as scholars (i.e. scholars from various disciplines, e.g., literature, philosophy, history and psychology), but also for anyone who would like to change the state of things. It can serve as a toolbox for future moralist! Changing the world requires more than a glittering or candied ideal. In fact, it requires a courageous and honest sensuality that allows one to be touched by life and death as something real — an experience.

Camus questioned life from within this life, the only life there is. No appeal is possible. Still, if we trust Zaretsky, Camus lived a life worth living because of his ongoing quest for meaning, a quest that brought him moments of happiness. ‘For Camus, true nobility lies in lucid acceptance of the world, its beauties and its limits, its joys and its demands, its inhabitants and our common lot,’ Zaretsky concludes beautifully. Absurdity might ‘ambush us on a street corner or a sun-blasted beach. But so, too, do beauty and the happiness that attends it.’ All it requires is attention and effort.

This book is worth reading.

Naturen er ikke noget derude

For naturen er livet simpelt. Den er hinsides moralismen god versus ond. Den værner om livets mangfoldige forbindelser. Det hele hænger sammen, fordi der ikke er noget liv i sig selv; der er ikke andet liv end det, som er i færd med at blive: træet der vokser. Selv træet der er dødende er blivende.

Denne, sikkert, alt for naturlige indsigt erfarede jeg på en pilgrimsvandring i Norge i foråret 2014.

Sammen med min gode ven, kunstneren Jeppe Hein, var jeg fløjet fra Barcelona til Oslo. Fra Oslo tog vi toget til Dombås, der ligger cirka fire timer nord fra Oslo. Det var herfra vi skulle begynde vores pilgrimsvandring mod Nidarosdomkirken i Trondheim. I alt skulle vi vandre knap 270 kilometer.

Læs mere på pilgrimsvandring.dk

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑