|
interesting. i think this is answered with a great big "it depends on the problems you are talking about"---no doubt we all organize our own versions of the world and project aspects of ourselves into that organization. this projections can be conscious and unconscious at once (they usually are it seems) and so are probably rooted in a variety of ways in our own sense of ourselves, our sense of how we are in the world, of the world, etc.
this is clearest to me in political questions--what you isolate as problematic, how you parse it, what you imagine the response to be--all potentially shot through with projections. for example, i have done alot of work on and still am generally sympathetic with revolutionary politics--but if you look at or play that game, it's self-evident that there is a circuit which links your sense(s) of alienation (in the existientialist sense, not the marxist one) to the choices you make analytically and the conclusion that you draw that problems x y or z cannot be addressed coherently within the existing order and so constitute a basic challenge to that order. it could be that you desire the existing order to burn for the reasons you know about, and that you desire it because you imagine at some level another world is possible, one in which you might not find yourself alienated in the same ways. so you have to engage in recursive operations--why do i think this? what are the premises and why are they compelling--more or less continually.
i don't see this as a bad thing--one of the advantages of left political action in a fragmented context (and in general, but it's clearest in a space of fragmentation) is that while the existing order argues its legitimacy through spatial arrangements (for example) and through explicit claims, in opposition everything about your sense of legitimacy is explicit because everything is argument. so the operations of checking (to the extent that you can do it) are implicit in any political viewpoint--maybe on the surface, maybe taken care of for you by the ideological production machinery, maybe by its absence).
more generally, though, two things:
1. the world is not anything, really, absent your projections as to order. your projections as to order are socially circumscribed and are matters of investment. so you project your world, but not in an unbounded fashion. being functional is about projecting orders in socially legitimate ways. there is no immanent order of things.
2. no-one is better at trapping you than you are.
given that. it's better to know.
this is really compressed and i wonder if it reads as more psychologically oriented than it should...bloody messageboards.
i think i like the problem of not being able to make the arguments i want to make in the way i want to make them in this format.
i keep doing it.
it's always like that everywhere.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|