Friday, April 13, 2012

The Elementary Forces. IV

If we consider the mechanism of love from an engineering point of view, the mechanics of love could best be described as a contingent positive feedback mechanism. Contingent, in the sense that a "good" is required to activate it,  and once activated, the mechanism continues to stay connected to the good because of the pleasure associated with it.

As mentioned before, this mechanism fails if:

1) The "good" fails;  Beauty fades, people betray, character changes and there's always the inevitable physical decay.  This is one of the themes in Houellebecq's books. The materialist interpretation of life makes permanent love impossible since all physical things start rotting from the moment of their inception. Entropy is a bitch.

2) The mechanism fails to elicit the appropriate response. Here, the good, over time, fails to elicit a response and phenomenon of boredom sets in. Houellebecq illustrates this by having his characters engage in all sorts of sexual variations or constantly coupling with new partners.  The endless search for novelty an attempt to escape the habituation mechanism of the mind. Each novel act an attempt at a new psychological "high".

Hoellebecq's engineering solution to the problem of love is technological. Firstly, he advocates cloning and and a genetics which resist decay. With this technological solution, the goods which activate the love mechanism are constantly renewed. Entropy wins in the end but at least the love mechanism gets to run a lot longer.

His second solution to the problem is to re-engineer the love mechanism, through genetic engineering so that individuality disappears, there is no need to connect because there is nothing that wants to connect. Personality is killed and the mechanism is by-passed. Instead a disposition to connection replaces the "goods recognition mechanism". Goodwill rather than joy becomes the way society interacts.  His new man resembles those who belong to "ethical societies": connection but no warmth.

Curiously, another group of people had arrived at the same engineering solution. Buddhism advocated essentially the the same approach:
Normally we think our happiness is contingent upon external circumstances and situations, rather than upon our own inner atti­tude toward things, or toward life in general. The Buddha was saying that dissatisfaction is part of life, even if we are seeking happiness and even if we manage to find temporary happiness. The very fact that it is temporary means that sooner or later the happiness is going to pass. So the Buddha said that unless we understand this and see how pervasive dissatisfaction or duhkha is, it is impossible for us to start looking for real happiness.
Nirvana comes with the elimination of desire, with the bypassing of the love mechanism. Houellebecq recognised the resemblance between his solution and the Buddhist one, In Atomised (The Elementary Particles) he writes:
Hubczejak was certainly the first and, for many years, the only defender of the most radical of Djerzinski's proposals: that mankind must disappear and give way to a new species which was asexual and immortal, a species which had outgrown individuality, separation and evolution. It is superfluous to note the hostility with which such a project was greeted by the defenders of revealed religion: Judaism, Christianity and Islam were for once agreed, and heaped derision and opprobrium on work which "gravely undermines human dignity in it's unique relationship with the Creator". Only Buddhists demurred, noting that all of the Buddha's teachings were founded on the awareness of the three impediments of old age, sickness and death, and that the Enlightened One, if he had meditated on it, would not necessarily have rejected a technical solution.
Buddhism is not the solution to problem of love, rather it is an escape from our personality and humanness. In Nirvana,  man is completely aware........... and alone.

It's interesting the Houellebecq recognised that it would be the Abrahamic religions who would most oppose the technological solution. Because they had already worked out their own. Now, I'm not so read up on Judaism and Islam to comment on them,  but the Christian solution to the problem takes a totally different approach. Instead of trying to to tinker with the love mechanism, they left it alone and added another one. Not being limited by materialism, they introduced a force which did not rely on biology for its operation and was thus free of biologic constraints.

In fact, the new force was not a bonding force at all, but a force which kept binding forces bound. It was a kind of anti-entropic power that did allow good things to corrupt once they were established. In fact, the force directed the love mechanism to bind itself to everything, insofar that it was good. Unlike Buddhism, which was a withdrawal into the self, resulting in eventual nothingness, this force was was it's polar opposite; self realisation in its expansionary action and an affirmation of reality. In the Christian Nirvana, man was aware of his glory and all around him things shone like stars. He was not alone.

But it would be a mistake to think that the Christians worked out this solution. The early Christians, like the rest of men, were way too dumb. It had tried to it reveal itself to the Jews but seemed to have just missed taking root amongst them.  In fact, in the end, the force literally had to sit men down and explain to them what it was. The force was a gift of itself given to men, repairing the privation of the world. For it flowed from the nature of its being:

Deus caritas est.


Robert Brockman said...

Some underestimation of Buddhism may be going on here, especially from a Catholic perspective.

Institutionally, Buddha has been canonized as a Catholic saint: Saint Josephat (a linguistic corruption of Bodhisattva), feast day November 27. There's a reason why JP II and the Dalai Lama were tight.

The religions also cooperate in interesting ways. The Dalai Lama is said to have given lectures to Christians on the history of theism in India which profoundly strengthened their faith in Jesus.

I've also directly observed the Chung Tai branch of Zen/Chan used as a "conduit" to route one of my close friends to Catholicism.

My experience with the Chung Tai monks leads me to believe that they would be suspicious of a "technical solution" to the entropy problem with immortality and asexuality. Indeed, they postulate the existence of beings with transhuman power and bliss, which they characterize as a limitation: demigods tend to ignore the problem of suffering for long periods until it is too late and they fall.

Robert Brockman said...

More thoughts:

The Chan monks that I know have many interesting qualities in common with the kindly priests I have met. The most important of these is the presence of a "radius of happiness and love" that seems to follow them around.

My suspicion is that at a fundamental level the two religions are very similar, modulo a "coordinate transformation" of sorts.

spandrell said...

The Dalai Lama is hardly representative of anything but his CIA paycheck.
SP is right, Buddhism, as seen in its scriptures (who the monks don't take very seriously) is not about saving man. It's about refusing to play because you can't win.

SP, you gotta try harder to sell universal love. In these days of diversity and multirracialism, it's a VERY tough sell for us non liberals.

Country Lawyer said...

Still waiting on how you're going to fix everything in a way that reason and passion cannot.

That's the test. That is the position you have taken. Reason and passion have failed, but there is a solution.

So show the workable solution, not a philosophical one based on "If only . . ."

How is this "divine love" going to fix the world.

So far all I see is rainbows and unicorns.

Steve N. said...

Having wandered in here from... well wherever the hell I wandered in from... I have no way of telling whether Mr. Brockman is being entirely facetious...

so at risk of utterly ruining the decorum...

Christianity (and probably to a lesser extent the other Abrahamic religions) differ from Buddhism on precisely the difference highlighted in this post. While Buddhism denigrates and attempts ultimately to eliminate natural desire, Christianity accepts, sanctifies and ultimately sacramentalizes it. Thus eating and drinking are seen to prefigure Holy Eucharist; the horizontal mambo prefigures Christ and his Church, etc.

The closest coordinate transformation that links Christianity with Buddhism would be something like {x, y, z} -> {-x, -y, -z}. I mean, sure, there are some similarities around the origin, but the differences only get greater as you move out.

The Social Pathologist said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Social Pathologist said...

Steve N

Thanks for dropping in.

I thought I was persona non Grata with the Orthosphere. ;)


but the differences only get greater as you move out.

Correct. I think that it was G.K. Chesterton that said that the arrow was farthest from the target when it was closest to the mark. Christianity and Buddhism may superficially appear very similar but at their core are fundamentally opposed religions.

Steve N. said...

Persona non grata at the orthosphere? I am not aware of that. That site appears to me to represent a fairly wide range of reactionary opinion on the subjects that vex society (Sex, tradition, religion, and Joos), even among the authors. Tho' I haven't perused your entire archive, I've seen nothing here to far that would place your opinions outside or even near to boundaries of "acceptable discourse" over there. FWIW...

Anonymous said...

What's up to every , since I am genuinely keen of reading this web site's ρoѕt tο be updated regularly.
It сοntаins nice information.

Also ѵіsit my ωeb-sitе :: Chemietoilette

Anonymous said...

The chееse would be melted and bubbly, but most excellent of all thе toppings would
not be burnt. Τhіs Florida camping locatiοn is suіtаble for a гelativеs οn а
finances considering that it is reaѕonably priceԁ for
thе Orlando communіty аnd hoωеѵer
it is neaг to аll thе pгinсipal sights liκe Disneу.
(You are aiming for the regulaгіtу of ρеаnut butter.

Also visit my website: weber pizza stone rectangular
my website ::

Anonymous said...

Үes! Finally ѕomeone wгiteѕ аbout rеѕt οn.

Hеre is my blog ... Chemietoilette

Anonymous said...

Ηi thеre, I log on to уour new stuff regularly.
Υour ѕtory-telling style is awesome,
keep doing what you're doing!

Feel free to surf to my website: Chemietoilette
My website > chemietoilette

Anonymous said...

Bе very cаreful with washing soԁa аnd use gloves as it is exceptionally alκaline.

Thіѕ have continually been a most lovеԁ аctiοn in my
propertу. Stir in onions, celery, сhopped yеllow bell pepρer and cook befoгe tenԁer.

Feel free to visit my webрage; Http://Www.Citeulike.Org/Blog/Headping62/25885

Anonymous said...

It's going to be ending of mine day, but before end I am reading this wonderful paragraph to improve my know-how.

my webpage ...

Anonymous said...

I have to thank you for the efforts you've put in writing this site. I really hope to view the same high-grade blog posts from you in the future as well. In fact, your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my very own website now ;)

my web page :: digial bathroom scale

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the auspicious wгitеup. It in fаct ωaѕ onсe a entertainment account it.
Glancе aԁvanceԁ tο mοre brоught agrеeаble fгom you!
Нoωеver, how can ωe κеep in touсh?

Feel frеe to ѕurf to my wеb blοg: augenlasern

Anonymous said...

My family аlwaуs say that Ι am kіlling my tіme here at
net, hoωever I κnow I аm getting
famіlіarity еvery day by rеаding suсh nice content.

Look at my wеb pаgе ::

Anonymous said...

Hello there, just becamе awarе of your blog thrοugh Google, and found thаt it's really informative. I'm gonnа wаtch out
for brusselѕ. I'll be grateful if you continue this in future. A lot of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

Visit my page Chemietoilette

Anonymous said...

Hmm is anyone elѕe hаving рroblems with
the іmagеs on this blog loadіng?
I'm trying to find out if its a problem on my end or if it's the blog.
Anу feed-bacκ ωould be greatly apprеciated.

Feel free to ѕuгf to my blog: Chemietoilette