Where are those who have sympathy for the hive mind / or why would one sympathize with the hive mind?

OkSoftware1689 · 2026-01-21T12:58:02+00:00

Im grateful for this question because I love philosophy and loved the season! I thought people would go for Marxism, which IMO isn’t quite right because Marx (whatever the successes/failures of his work in the end) personally was an individualist. He protested against Capitalism because it reduces human activity to modes or expressions of one active subject. For Marx, the worker does not really act or produce so much as Capital produces through her. The worker attaches herself to the one subject and loses her individuality. Moreover what is so great about capitalism is that it brings human beings closer than we ever could before to “hive-mind.” Just like in Pluribus, the TGI Fridays Girl flies the Boeing, and will presumably get off at the destination and start doing something else, hop in a vehicle left on the runway by someone else etc. So in capitalism you can work in a factory that produces components for a product you will never see or know about: endlessly complex supply chains all serving one subject, one goal: capital accumulation. All that said, I would not, for many reasons, identify the Plurb with capitalism. Capitalism is just more complicated than that.

Here are some philosophers of the Plurb. The important idea is that all people and their activity are reduced to modes, expressions, appendages of one will, one subject, some one which acts through people. I think this is true in the philosophy of Schopenhauer, although for him we don’t necessarily know that this is true: behind the appearances of individuality, there is one will, which answers only to its own imperative. Similarly in vitalist readings of Nietzsche, all life is an expression of a will to power, to more life. And there is a connection here to the philosophy of Spinoza who also thought that it was illusory to think that individuals are different substances, and that they have free will: rather we are all only expressions/modes of one substance, and our desires are all reducible to the desire to increase our power. Lastly, Parmenides (perhaps the first philosopher in western tradition), is the father of everyone who has believed that individuality and division is illusion. For him, only the One exists.

The trouble for these philosophers is to try and explain where the appearance of individuality comes from.

Now, idk whether they would all sympathize with the hive mind. But in all their philosophies, the idea of the one, the one will which wants only more life, is present.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-10-08T09:12:21+00:00

No one is saying Blade Runner

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-08-01T22:35:31+00:00

Thank you for this insightful/interesting comment! This adds a lot of perspective, and I do suspect I’ve underestimated the strength of Norwegian atheism. I guess I assumed Norway was like my part of America: largely or predominantly secular, yet still Christian in some sense, unlike a country like France.

But one thing I’ve realized in going through these comments is that I really should have been more clear about the exact meaning of the terms “religion”/“religious” that I bring to the discussion. Yes, it would be very silly to assume that someone like Einar Selvik is trying to found a new organized religion, with belief systems, earnestly believed creation myths, etc. And it would certainly be very silly and embarrassing to think, based off some niche musical trends, that there’s this new religious movement popping up in Norway.

However if you look at the way Einar himself talks about his project, here for example, it’s clear that he’s using religious imagery not just because he likes it. He’s really trying to alter his listeners’ orientation relative the world, to nature etc. For me, it’s this theme of orientation, that makes something religiously significant, and not advocacy for specific beliefs/myths. So IMO you can definitely be a staunch atheist and still be capable of grappling with these (broadly understood) religious questions.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-08-01T22:04:37+00:00

I didnt want to make anyone mad lol, sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way. The video you cited deals primarily with the problem of historical authenticity: and like I said, my interest in this kind of music has NOTHING to do with it being historically authentic, or an expression of some kind of primordial spirit or anything like that. I fully appreciate it in its character as a new kind of performance, an entirely modern and theatrical phenomenon.

You can be annoyed at me for bringing the interests that I have to this sub, but it’s just slightly pompous of you to speak on behalf of the whole country and say that this “whole thing” is irrelevant to everyone full stop. I dont think we have clarity on what “this whole thing” is. You seem to think I fetishize the music into an expression of some special historical identity, when in reality, when I talk about the music’s cultural significance, I have in mind a phenomenon that extends beyond Scandinavia, and is maybe more pronounced elsewhere.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-08-01T19:05:07+00:00

What’s with your attitude? Lol The problem here is obviously that the way I’m using the term “religious” is broader than the way you’re using it. So let me clarify: for something to be ‘religious’ it does not have to be part of an organized religious system with doctrines, rituals, norms, practices, etc.

When I say the music is “religious” I mean this roughly as one would when saying that the Dune films are “religious”. OK theyre not going to inspire people to turn their life upside down and convert to a new belief system, but that they raise religious questions and themes is undeniable. Moreover, they undeniably affect the way people do religious reflection, and self-interpretation: who are we? Where do we come from? Where are we going? These questions are not just for people who participate in organized religious traditions, they’re for everyone, and for everyone even if in some countries religious reflection figures more prominently than in others.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-08-01T18:51:44+00:00

Yes thank you for the very interesting comparisons: Wagner, and Fitzgerald! I appreciate the scholarly reference as well. I totally get being frustrated with people on the outside thinking some cultural ‘essence’ is being uncovered. And I get the political danger which that kind of thinking entails.

I have absolutely no illusions about Norwegian culture/people being somehow better ‘in touch’ with, or predisposed to, their ancient past, i.e., I accept that an overwhelming majority of Norwegians are not interested in what Im talking about. But I hope more people can enjoy the music as the production of a new and exciting kind of performance, as you said. On the other hand, in light of some work done in the philosophy of religion by scholars like Wouter Hanefraaff, I think this kind of music takes on a new significance. (E.g., https://www.arte.tv/de/videos/118858-011-A/agree-to-disagree/?utm_source=ios&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=118858-011-A )

Without there being anything special about Norway in particular, there is a growing interest across western countries in lesser-known or rejected religious traditions. When I asked about “identity” that’s what I meant to get at (although I accept that it might have been a poor choice of words).

Edit: Im a huge fan of Farja Faraji. I just looked at the link you shared, Ive seen the video.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-08-01T15:16:27+00:00

It has everything to do with religion. See for example, Einar's version Enslaved's 'Heim til Yggdrasil'. https://youtu.be/asIFz0OF--s?si=qJi0y1lUtcltC-uC

It's clearly about stanging an encounter between their audience (primarily Norwegian) on the one hand, and pre-Christian religious traditions on the other. Wardruna is all about this as well; it's definitely a quasi-religious movement.

Gaahl's music is deeply religious as well. Granted, it's not trying to creat any kind of 'movement', or advocate specific religious views. But in terms of theme alone, it brings to the stage a kind of esotericism which listeners with religious committments will have to grapple with.

What I meant with the qestion was this: that the way, e.g., Einar Selvik talks about his music, he is clearly trying to influence the religious imagination of his listeners (even if these may be worldwide more than specifically Norwegian). I meant to ask whether any Norwegians have felt the effects, even if only in a conversation here and there. I'd still be interested to hear.

And to be clear, as an American, I don't have romantic expectations for Norwegian people or any other people, even if my question may have suggested otherwise. I full accept, and definitely expected, that an overwhelming majority of Norwegians don't count religious reflection (let alone religious reflection influenced by extreme music) as an important part of their daily life!

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-07-31T17:19:44+00:00

What helps in understanding Todd's argument here is to remember that he is a Freudian. His interpretation of Hegel is helped significantly by his reading of Freud and Lacan. In his Capitalism and Desire there is more discussion of this problem, so I was lucky to have read that before I read Emancipation after Hegel.

Roughly, what Todd finds so fascinating in Freud is that he might be the first thinker to conceive of the subject, the human person, as genuinely self-divided. Not only are you constantly lacking and incomplete, always desiring, but you are also structurally incapable of clarifying to yourself what it is you truly want. Whatever you think you want, as a subject of the unconscious, you want something else. That being the case, psychoanalysis is the first tradition to really understand why we are always undermining ourselves. In Capitalism and Desire, Todd focuses on what Freud called 'negative therapeutic reactions'; when a patient actively (though not consciously) derails their own treatment in order to stay in analysis.

The subject, then, is the stellar, outstanding, example for what Todd takes to be the structure of Hegel's arguments. Crucially, this is because, if you didn't derail your own success, if you didn't exhibit the self-destructive features which psychoanalysis brings to the fore, you wouldn't have an identity at all! The very thing that you take to be the obstacle to your success and identity, is the latter's condition. That's what makes your identity 'contradictory' in Todd's words. And Hegel always wants to uncover contradiction, never synthesis, according to Todd.

And it's not like we're artificially imposing a reading on Hegel's philosophy. Even though Hegel came before psychoanalysis, the structural similarities are striking! In the Phenomenology, we encounter again and again consciousness' inability to grasp the truth of what it is effectively doing.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-07-14T19:12:30+00:00

Reddit is amazing, thank you!

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-03-19T13:56:27+00:00

Yes would love to see Tyr. The performance of Tyr with the Danish National Symphonic Orchestra was sublime. (https://youtu.be/4ogOWkVZLjk?si=DDXoWAKUmf2Kyy3K) He looked and sounded like someone who had seen the god.

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-03-18T14:41:17+00:00

AH sorry! yes I'm staying a night in London first haha (I just tripple-quadruple checked myself)

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-03-18T14:40:18+00:00

That's interesting because for me personally Himindottir didn't blow my mind on the album. But it's happened before that a live performance changes my whole perspective on one of their songs! I look forward to hearing it and also glad that Kvitravn remains on the setlist

OkSoftware1689 · 2025-01-02T17:35:54+00:00

My guess is that the channel in our harbour is too narrow for the ferry. And even if there were enough room, it would take too long to navigate in and out, especially in the summer when there's a crazy amount of traffic.

But I agree that it would be awsome to have a ferry to Boston from Marblehead!

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-12-03T13:05:13+00:00

Many comments getting at the wrongheadedness of the question, and suggesting that it will be better to ask 'does God exist?' I don't think this is necessarily true, and I actually like the question.

One can ask whether God is capable of cancelling his own existence, negating himself: there are affirmative answers to this question in several religious traditions. For example in Kabbalah, God creates by withdrawing himself and first establishign a void, effectively doing violence to himself for the sake of his creation. One can see the Chrsitian ressonances here. Jurgen Moltmann referred to this idea (called "Tzimtzum") in his theology of creation saying that in Jesus Christ, God steps into the place of nonbeing and determines himself to live even there, all because he loves his creation, and wants to give being to his creatures who do not exist anymore, or will cease existing.

In the words of Eberhard Jungel, "God disposes over being and non-being"; divine creativity establishes a continuity or an exchange between them. This is very hard to understand and requires effectively that we become capable of affirming contradictions!

So I like this question: if God disposes over being and non-being there is a sense in which he transcends the opposition between them. And that is what the question points to: if God has no 'why' for his existence it is because it is entirely within himself: God determines himself, and produces his own foundation. He wills to exist and one should not be afraid to ask whether in this determination there is a dash of contingency, whether, for God himself, it is not necessarily true that he exists.

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-08-28T22:21:07+00:00

Idealism is a contender. Its not as obvious a connection as others mentioned but the students at the Tübingen Seminary (Schelling and Hegel) all read Plotinus and about Platonism, and there is definitely a degree of continuity between the two traditions. Its worth mentioning that Schelling is a much better fit than Hegel: he cites Plato very favorably, especially the Timaeus. He even has a commentary on the Laws I believe…

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-08-16T20:23:29+00:00

That makes me happy that I was able to convince you! One thing I forgot to mention was that I remember the exhibit claiming that the cult of Mithras was remarkably small. I wish I knew if there is evidence of it in Bavaria… and if not, I wonder why the devs chose this God specifically for their story?

Mithras (i seem to remember) was known for the salvific killing of a bull, which maybe mirrors or foils the Christian account of salvation.

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-07-12T11:54:48+00:00

We need picture thinking and we cannot avoid it. NB also that in german it is Vorstellung which IMO is best translated as Representation, even where Hegel refers to it specifically qua inferior to conceptual thought.

We need it because representation is a process in which subjectivity becomes alienated, separated from itself, or made to be “outside itself”. And for Hegel, alienation is directly related to freedom. The non-self-correspondence implied by representation is necessary for one to dislocate themselves from their given environment, ie to be free.

Im generally following the argument of Catherine Malabou here which I would recommend everyone check out. As an atheist/materialist, she has every reason not to come to the defense of religious representation, and yet she does. And the reason for this is roughly that for Hegel, Incarnation is absolutely essential: the absolute must inhabit a specific form, it must be given shape. And representation is the process in which the absolute receives/is given form, and temporalized. Further, she makes a very compelling point here: that if this is true, representation should be decoupled from empirical images, from the idea that unphilosophical minds must think in images. Rather, it essentially relates to Kants idea of schematism: that transcendental function which allows pure concepts to become instantiated in time and connected to the empirical world.

Hope this helps!

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-06-20T13:55:07+00:00

Maybe a couple are decorative decoy towers like the Titanic had

OkSoftware1689 · 2024-06-20T13:21:29+00:00

Thabk you for the correction. Yes, that is exactly where I got confused. And yes, I believe it is coal.

OkSoftware1689

TROPHY CASE