Cynicism

CYNICISM

“But for Heraclitus precisely this manifold richness is the kosmos. It never appears as something isolated, but shimmers ungraspably through everything....In comparison with the kosmos in it’s complete appearing as fire, “the most beautiful ordering of all is surely comparable to a heap of randomly spilled garbage”1

Cynicism, the ancient philosophical way of life, is an odd creature, yet a constantly appearing and obviously appealing one. It’s founding was claimed for Socrates – like several other philosophical traditions. More properly, Socrates’ student, Antisthenes is regarded as a forefather, though he himself was not a Cynic, and may not have approved of those who came later and did regard themselves so. It’s a form of naturalism, of nominalism, and of skepticism, but is neither materialistic nor purely relativistic.

Antisthenes’ theology, as far as we know, is an early expression of a recognisable form of monotheism; recognisable in the sense that it fits in well with the Abrahamic approach (a god of amorphous character and ambiguous, or at least ill-defined and changeable relationship with the world). He claimed that while by convention, there were many gods, by nature there was only one, whose form was like nothing else, but who ruled and controlled all. Socrates’ may have held near identical views, but with Plato, Antisthenes’ contemporary (and sometime opponent), the issue is more complicated. Indeed for Plato the nature of the divinity seems to have been of greater interest, and he hinted at a variety of ways to approach understanding of the cosmic deity in the dialogues. Antisthenes just accepted a naturalistic mono-god, and was focused of ethics. Again, we have extremely limited sources with regards to Antisthenes.

Cynicism was/is a philosophy whose major themes are the rational nature of humanity, and accepting, or rather, steeling oneself to accept whatever happens as providential. These themes are shared by ways with other philosophies, not least Stoicism. But Cynicism is less inclined to recognise social conventions.

Whenever I get a tug from....I don’t know, an uneasy conscience? A tyrannical ego? (probably the latter)....to the effect that I begin to unburden myself, and burden others, with my ideas on politics and economic justice, I am reminded – before I do too much damage – that such opinion mongering is probably worse than useless. As fellow writer Mike Kay rightly suggests, we’re in for it, whether we like it or not.

After all, if the majority within our populations were really rational and free-thinking, we would not be in a situation where the super-rich and ethically-deficient get ever more, the poor get ever less, and yet the latter continue to defend the neoliberal propaganda that the “free market” is freedom itself. Say what you will about the Epsteinites; they know how to manipulate the masses in ways that Lenin or any other populist demagogue from the past could never aspire to.

For it is often those living in the greatest precariousness, under the greatest stress and threat of penury and homelessness, who are the loudest in proclaiming the justice of their suffering, and the virtues of the oligarchs, their economic superiors and afflictors. People would rather wrap themselves in the delusions given them through the plethora of ”free-market” think-tanks , NGOs, influencers, and wretched tabloids, and believe themselves to be free, radical dissenters to an oppressive government, than to realise they no longer have a government, and that the very corporate interests who took over from government in the late 1970s are the same that both oppress them now, and feed them the ‘freedom’ propaganda.

So, enough with the misguided ideas of the Marxists and “progressives”, but also with at least part of the beliefs of the classical Cynics; the “masses”, the people, are not the rational, discerning creatures of their quaint hope; they are easily manipulated, and depressingly masochistic when it serves our rulers for them to suffer so.

Thus, I can assent to one half of the Cynic creed, that whatever happens is guided by a rational principle, though rational in a Heraclitean manner (what seems irrational to us being nothing apart from the supra-rationality of the divine principle) but not the other. I am sceptical about the priority of rationality in the character of at least a great part of the human population.

THE CLOUDS OF UNKNOWING

The burning clouds and winds will pass,

the fencing thorns will dry and fall,

to silent bones beneath the grass,

or strewn about the broken walls

***

And left will be a résumé;

a storehouse laid for life again,

account of actions, night and day;

“As thus,- so thus”

“So done,- so then”