Wednesday, June 26, 2013

A Collection of Stances

Every problem needs a stance (or a attitude that a person, group or culture takes towards that problem). I have listed some common stances below. Some are more embedded in the events they describe, while others are more reflective of them. I would guess that in human culture we are broadly moving away from reflective stances towards more interconnected ones.

  • The everyday stance – 'What problem?'
  • The reflective stance (Cartesianism) – ‘Let’s step back from the problem and be objective about it in terms of what we know.' (Both idealism and empiricism are contained within this stance).
  • The reflexive (postmodern) stance– Include yourself and your ‘stepping back’ in your consideration of the ‘problem.’
  • The emotional/impulsive stance – ‘Let’s get upset about the problem!’ Emphasises its affective dimensions and the victims whilst demonises its perpetrators (rhetoric).
  • The active/impulsive stance – ‘Let’s just do something!’
  • The hedonistic stance – ‘Fuck the problem; let’s partaaay!’
  • The cynical stance – ‘Were fucked, the universe is fucked: don’t get worked up trying to solve it!’
  • The stoic stance – Don’t get upset about the problem. (‘It’s not really a problem; it’s an opportunity for growth, etc.’)
  • The pragmatic stance – ‘What can we do to salvage something from this mess!’
  • The interconnected stance (Heideggerian /ecological /networked-self)– there is no immediate problem, it is symptomatic of a wider and more deep seated malaise. This stance emphasises the universal interconnectedness of all things and the unforeseen consequences of actions—‘a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil….etc’


Fr Jr. said...

Excellent! Would it be fair to summarise the Heideggerian stance as "Plan ahead, that way we don't have to do anything right now."?

RodMunday said...

Probably not fair Fr Jr, but truthful in a cynical way ;)