What is "cynicism"?

Cynicism: the main symbol of schizophrenia in contemporary society

2005-1-163: 42: 31Author: Ji Source: Wenyi. com.

-

Anyone who has heard the cross talk "Buy a Buddhist Shrine" will remember that there is an old lady in it. The old lady bought a kitchen god from a paper shop and met a young man on her way home. The young man is very polite: "Is Aunt out? Ha ... bought a niche? " Hearing this, the old lady was unhappy: "Young people have no rules. This is the holy land of Buddhism! Can you say buy? I have to say please! " "Aunt, I don't understand. How much did you pay for it? " "Cough! Just _ such a broken thing, eight hairs! "

In my opinion, this old lady has become a major symbol of schizophrenia in contemporary society: in contemporary society, many people are in a state of split personality, although not all of them show it in this form. "Being sick" has become the mantra of many people. "Are you sick or am I sick?" It has become the idiom of some people. Here, on the "conscious" level, the old lady "knows" that I can't buy a niche, so she can only say please. On the "unconscious" level, she not only reveals the fact of buying a niche, but also shows the psychological state of cherishing money. This is the division of consciousness and unconsciousness. Of course, there are various forms of schizophrenia in contemporary society. For example, it is said that artists never talk about art when they get together, but they talk about money; Entrepreneurs get together and never talk about money. They talk about art, which is also a kind of schizophrenia-the split of identity and behavior.

Cynicism is also a kind of schizophrenia, but according to my understanding, it is a split between "knowing" and "doing". Of course, don't equate the so-called cynicism here with the cynicism of ancient Greece. There is a difference between the two and they cannot be confused. The traditional cynics in the west refer to those maverick people, who ridicule the living habits of human beings, deny the spiritual value of human beings, and are eager to be liberated from the shackles of morality, religion and state power and live a happy life like Ji Kang. Because they advocate informality and charm, and deny all the achievements of human civilization such as China, Lao Zi and Zhuangzi. Diogenes, the originator of cynicism in ancient Greece, believed that although he was not protected by fur or feathers, he could still come and go naked like a frog. It is said that his death was related to eating octopus raw, and he ate it all by himself. Although it was understandable that China people violated the principle of "everyone eats when there is food", he condescended to compete with the dog for food and was killed by the dog. I don't know the famous American journalist John? Is Bugat's famous saying "Dog bites dog is not news, but man bites dog is news" inspired by him? But what is certain is that the "cynical" "dog" is definitely related to this.

The so-called cynicism here is different from other commentators. In other theorists, cynicism has become the source of all evil: cynicism, shameless, extreme self-interest, unscrupulous, drunk and dreaming, snake and mouse both ends. Cynicism has become the theory that street hooligans, corrupt officials, vulgar literati and social scum excuse their despicable behavior. It makes the shame of human beings disappear and the moral sense of society disappear. Such a strong value judgment, I think it can be used as a "curse guide." See who is not pleasing to the eye, immediately label it as "cynicism", which is easy and simple, killing two birds with one stone: criticizing others and raising yourself.

Some people think that contemporary cynicism should "smooth out all qualitative differences and replace them with neutral and gray values of overall depreciation". In short, it should "subvert values and level differences". Some people regard cynicism as a "new philosophy", and the so-called "new philosophy" is such a rhetoric: "Science is a matter of social interests, consultation and consultation to a large extent or as a whole, or a matter of making myths and producing narrative inscriptions; Appeal to' facts',' evidence' or' rationality' is just an ideological lie to cover up the exile of this or that oppressed group. " This actually refers to the post-modernist view of science, which can be summarized as: "Without objective epistemological standards, science has no particularity in epistemology." The above two viewpoints actually equate cynicism with relativism. Relativism is only one of the manifestations of cynicism, and it is by no means the whole content of cynicism; The word relativism cannot summarize and grasp the basic characteristics of cynicism.

Some people think that "cynicism has many manifestations in the field of knowledge society in modern China", "For example," technical rationality "and" value neutrality "which are highly praised by many intellectuals at present are one example", and "populist people's democracy is also a kind of modern cynicism". Here, cynicism has become an extremely generalized term, even to the point of being all-encompassing. However, according to general logical knowledge, there is an intuitive "inverse relationship" between the connotation and extension of a concept: the greater the connotation of a concept, the smaller the extension; The smaller the connotation of a concept, the greater the extension. An infinitely extended concept can only be empty and nothing can be expressed.

As mentioned above, the essence of cynicism is the split between "knowing" and "doing". The contemporary western cynicism theory comes from Hegel, who thinks that modern consciousness is "troubled and internally divided consciousness". At this time, the "sense of hardship" is within itself, which is due to the fission of "knowledge" and "action": it knows that "reason" belongs to the eternal world on the other side, but "reason" comes from the mobile world on the other side, which is separated from this world by yin and yang. "Worry consciousness" puts itself in this world, but never forgets its commitment to this world. "Worry consciousness itself is the gaze of one self-consciousness on another self-consciousness, and it is dual in itself." In other words, "sense of hardship" is the sense of the torn subject. There, the division between "knowledge" and "behavior" is inevitable: "knowledge" is one thing, "behavior" is one thing, and "knowledge" and "behavior" cannot be unified.

To this, Zizek's understanding is quite profound. He discussed this problem from the angle of ideology, and his investigation of cynicism originated from his incisive views on ideological theory. In Marx's era, ideology was just a false consciousness. Marx defined ideology on the level of knowledge, but he did not pay attention to the level of action. But he doesn't need to pay attention to this level, because at that time, ideology mainly played a role at the level of "knowledge" or "consciousness". The main mission of ideological criticism is to get rid of the blind of consciousness, and then everything will be fine.

However, today, if we remain at the level of "knowledge", we can't understand the essence of ideology, let alone understand its operating mechanism. We have entered the post-modernism era. Popular ideology is not the "false consciousness" and "consumerism" that some people relish, and it is not the "aestheticization of daily life" that excites some people. What muddles along is cynicism. The basic feature of cynicism is the split between "knowing" and "doing", that is, words and deeds are different: say what you say and do what you do. Say one thing, do another, even be sarcastic. It is different from the traditional "talking with people, talking nonsense" because the traditional "duplicity, duplicity" is intentional and still stays at the level of "knowing" or "feeling". People who do this are fully aware of what they have done and even suffer from conscience condemnation. Cynicism is different, at least it no longer believes in any theoretical truth and takes any theoretical proposition seriously. What makes Zizek uneasy is that cynicism makes people turn a blind eye to the role of "ideological illusion" in constructing reality. At this time, "ideology is not an illusion to cover up the real state of things, but an (unconscious) illusion to construct our social reality." six

In this respect, Zizek's ideological theory transcends the ideological theory of postmodernism. Postmodernists have different understandings of ideology, the most important of which is Foucault's creative analysis of power (discourse is both the carrier and the source of power) and Althusser's understanding of the function of ideology (the function of ideology is that it calls individuals into the subject). In the study of culture based on ideology, the works of these theorists are widely cited, such as James? James Berlin and Michael? Vivion believes that the "cultural research" in full swing at present is actually only a part of ideological criticism, which is closely related to discourse theory, because "both text creation and text interpretation have become acts of discourse analysis and negotiation" .7. However, both Foucault and Althusser imagined ideology as a confrontation between different practices (including discourse, system and power relations). Zizek's genius lies in that when he understood ideology, he did not stop at the level of Marx's "knowledge", regarded ideology as a false consciousness, nor did he stop at the level of "action", and understood ideology as a confrontation between various practices. In his view, ideology is ideology because it refuses to be symbolized, to move from the real world to the symbolic world, and to turn it into knowledge and practice. Today, ideology is not a debunked illusion, nor is it just a false belief, nor is it a hegemonic cultural code that binds us and puts us in a specific subject position. Ideology is the illusion of structural reality. Illusion is different from illusion. The illusion originates from the repressed desire in human heart, and we can't manipulate it on the level of knowledge or consciousness through "knowing". On the contrary, although we try our best to suppress it, everything we have is dominated by it, although more often we don't realize its existence. "I know it's wrong, but I did it anyway." Even if we know that some behaviors will harm the world, we can't help doing them. In the previous cultural desert era, many people liked to watch the movie Immortality in Fire adapted from the novel Red Rock. When they saw Jiang Jie being tortured, these people were receiving revolutionary education at the level of "knowledge" or "consciousness"; On the level of "action" or "unconsciousness", they are satisfying their sadistic desires. It was not so much the Kuomintang spy chief Xu Pengfei who tortured Jiang Jie as the ecstatic audience. One sentence that Xu Pengfei said when interrogating Jie Jiang even made some people "heartbroken": "Do you believe that I can have someone undress you now?" This is why the hero in the text is always extremely boring, while the villain is full of fun. When I was young, I watched movies and novels. Good people didn't leave any impression on me, but those bad people with sores on their heads and pus on their feet made me unforgettable. So they carry a wooden waist knife from east to west all day.

This is the essence of ideology. The reason for this is the times. Zizek is kind to Peter? Peter Sloterdijk. In the book "Critique of Cynical Reason", Peter? Slote Dickick believes that as a critical concept, the ideology view that regards ideology as "false consciousness" can no longer meet the needs of cultural criticism in the post-modern world. Because in the post-modern world, we have all become "cynics" and are all a little cynical; What we are accepting now is "the false consciousness of enlightenment" 8. We know that this kind of consciousness is false and even hides a trap, but we accepted it without hesitation. Previous ideological criticism failed to touch this point, ignoring the paradoxical existence of "enlightened false consciousness" and the embarrassing schizophrenic state of modern people. Zizek understood Slote Dickick's point of view, and he rewrote Marx's thought formula. He believes that what can best summarize Marx's ideological view is a sentence that Marx said in Das Kapital, rather than Marx's long speech in German Ideology: "They know nothing about it, but they are still calm about it." One sentence breaks the secret of "false consciousness": because you don't know, you take action, so the action you take is unconscious. In this sense, ideology only covers things or actions with a mysterious veil, covering up class interests. Times have changed, and now the situation is: "They know what they are doing, but they still go their own way." People know that their actions are absurd, but they will still take such actions. For example, people clearly know that they are pursuing a fantasy, but they still enjoy it. Take online dating as an example. Almost everyone knows that online dating is just a fruitless dream, but they still live a drunken life there, singing hysterically "a game and a dream", "I don't care about eternity, I only care about having it" ...

At this time, people's behavior becomes "cynical". Any form of ideological criticism is futile. With Peter? In the words of Slote Dickick, cynicism has put "ideological criticism" in a desperate situation. The traditional ideological criticism has no alternative but to watch. Zizek even thought that the traditional ideological criticism never really worked, even in the pre-modern and modern world. It is true that China carried out the Enlightenment for nearly 100 years. The Enlightenment in China in the last hundred years is actually an ideological criticism movement. However, it always stays at the level of "knowledge" or "consciousness", with the metaphor of "exposing symptoms and attracting the attention of doctors" and the mission of "exposing illusions and showing the truth". The theoretical assumption hidden under this is: drums don't knock, don't ring, and they can't argue clearly. As long as the words are made clear, as long as the reasons are made clear, then the people will naturally gather. From then on, people will embark on the road of happiness and rush to a bright tomorrow. In this respect, China's enlightener is no different from the naive and straightforward child in Andersen's fairy tale The Emperor's New Clothes. He is shouting: Your Majesty is naked! So the truth is in hand and the problem is solved. In fact, we have been standing still for nearly 100 years. This was the case in the past, and even more so today. The embarrassment of the enlighteners in China will become more and more serious, because in this post-modern world, ideology no longer plays a role on the level of "knowledge", but on the level of "action". The split between "knowledge" and "behavior" is not only the source of cynicism, but also a symbol of cynicism, which is the main symbol of schizophrenia in contemporary society.

What dominates our behavior today is not so much "knowledge" as "desire". But the so-called "desire" here means neither the "need" to drink when thirsty, nor the "need" to put on airs and play down a peg or two, but a "desire" that is deeply suppressed and can never be satisfied. Sometimes, we know something or an action is improper, but we still want it or take such action without knowing it. For a smoker, although he knows that smoking is harmful to health, he still enjoys it. We usually use terms such as habit, accumulated habit and bad habit to explain this phenomenon, which is obviously too superficial, because it does not answer the following question: Why did he form or even need such a habit? We don't realize that smoking is the support of life for smokers, or in Lacan's words, smoking has become the "ontological proof" of smokers' existence. The essence of life lies in desire. Some people hate corrupt officials, but in fact they are full of strong desire for corruption and bribery. He hates corrupt officials only because they are others, not himself. What he wants to do is "replace", not change the rules. No wonder when seeing Qin Shihuang's southern tour, Liu Bang wanted "a man should be born like this" and Xiang Yu wanted "to take his place". Although they are different worlds, the logic they follow has not changed.

Take the west as an example. 1986, Austria held a presidential election. One of the candidates in that year was Kurt, the fourth Secretary-General of the United Nations. Waldheim (K. waldheim, 19 18~+08 ~). During the election campaign, an international committee reported to the Austrian government that waldheim had been drafted into the army in 1939, but it was the German "Wu" who voluntarily joined the "Brown Shirt Army" organized by Hitler and participated in the illegal execution of the victims (as executioner). In other words, the criminal has a criminal record and cannot be reused. As soon as this statement came out, many enlighteners predicted that wazir's political career was coming to an end, because the secret of The Emperor's New Clothes was exposed, and wazir's evil history was already obvious. To the great confusion of the enlightener, Wozhuoski was successfully elected that year. Why is this happening? Why is it useless to expose The Emperor's New Clothes? There is a simple reason. In contemporary society, what matters is not "truthfulness" but "desire". The Austrian anti-Semitic complex was not eradicated with Hitler's demise. Although it has been suppressed by "consciousness", even to the point of not admitting it, it will be expressed in different ways whenever there is an opportunity-here, in the form of voting. The Austrians clearly "know" and "admit" that waldheim is not a "good bird", but they still can't hold back their long-accumulated anti-Semitic feelings. Driven by deep desires, they affirmed waldheim's behavior with practical actions.

Desire has sometimes been internalized as "idol", and the attempt to get rid of "idol" based on "knowledge" has long failed. I remember that a few years ago, a busybody named Ma Zhongxin wrote a book called The Truth of Sanmao: The Concealed Illusion of a Woman Writer for 30 Years, which revealed Sanmao's "painted skin". Sanmao once attracted countless readers in the 1980s, but after Sanmao's death, some people doubted Sanmao's almost realistic romantic story, and even doubted whether Sanmao's bearded husband named Jose really existed. Ma Zhongxin, with the truth-seeking and persistent spirit of a traveler and explorer, let us know the truth of Sanmao's life from the side. Some people can't accept it or even become angry from embarrassment, accusing "dogs control mice" because it ruined their idols. This is not cynicism. Some people accept this fact, but they still have a soft spot for Sanmao. This is cynicism. In the face of this situation, enlightenment will only flinch, at best, it will start a new round of war windmill.

Li Ao said in Phoenix Satellite TV's "Li Ao has something to say" (broadcast on August 5, 2004) that Sun Yat-sen became the president of the Republic of China in 19 12, and because Tao "sabotaged the revolution", Chiang Kai-shek killed Tao in a rage (history books first said "murder in public anger" and later changed it to "murder in public anger" to cover up the crime). Afterwards, it was Sun Yat-sen who ordered Chiang Kai-shek to kill people. Sun Yat-sen instigated Chiang Kai-shek to murder Tao because Tao accused Sun Yat-sen of corruption. Many people can't accept Li Ao's words, because it destroys the image of a great leader in our minds. This is not so much that we are "afraid" to face the truth frankly as that we are "unwilling" to face the truth frankly. We found that only by covering up the truth can we heal our deep wounds and save us from harm. This is not cynicism. Even if we accept the truth, we will say that Sun Yat-sen was forced to do it for the great cause of revolution, and did not damage the glory of the hero at all. "Flies are flies after all, and soldiers with shortcomings are still soldiers after all." This is not cynicism. In this case, cynicism refers to a situation: we recognize this fact at the level of "knowledge" and know that the leader's approach is quite inappropriate, but we still have a soft spot for the leader, because such a leader image conforms to our deep-rooted illusion.

In this case, even if ideology shows its cards and exerts its mechanism to the extreme, it will still be popular and unstoppable. In other words, in today's era of cynicism, you can expose the "tricks" of ideology, or even the "tricks" of ideological criticism, and you can't stop ideology or ideological criticism from playing a role. In the traditional and pre-cynic era, if ideology wants to function normally, it must make the object it wants to deceive be in an "ignorant" state. Engels even thought that people who want to deceive others will still be deceived. In a letter to Merlin, he said: "Ideology is a process that is consciously completed by so-called thinkers but with false consciousness. The real driving force for him is always unknown to him, otherwise it is not an ideological process. " 10

Really desperate. But there are more desperate things than this. Even on the level of "knowledge", in this post-modernist world, the situation is becoming more and more complicated. This is an era in which lies and truth are inseparable. Lies play the role of truth, and truth has the function of lies. This reminds me of the thought-provoking joke: a married man and his secretary are in love. One afternoon, they couldn't hold back their passion any longer, lingering all afternoon, and didn't wake up until after eight o'clock in the evening. They packed their bags quickly. Strangely, the man asked the secretary to take out his shoes and rub them on the grass. When the man came home, his wife asked him angrily where he had gone. The man is "upright and poised": "I'd better confess. I have a hand with my secretary. I have been lingering with her today. " The wife looked at him and then at his shoes: "liar!" You went to play golf again! " This is not only the era of "false is true when it is true" (false is true), but also the era of "false is true when it is true" (false is true when it is true). It is difficult to distinguish between true and false, because of the situation.

what can I do? what can I do? It can really be said: how can I smell the helpless song when the flowers fall?

Precautions:

(2) Tu Xianfeng, Commercialization and rootlessness of human value —— A preliminary study on the value phenomenon of urban novels in 1990s, Literary Review 200 1 No.6, pp.6162.

3 Susan? Huck, Defending Science-Within the Rational Range, translated by Chen Bo, Journal of Xiangtan Normal University,No. 1 2002, pp. 13, 14.

4 Wang Zheng, On Modernity and China Intellectuals, Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities,No. 1 2004, p. 234.

5 Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, translated by A.V. Miller. New york: Oxford University Press, 1977, p. 126.

6 Zizek, The Noble Object of Ideology, translated by Ji, Central Compilation and Publishing House, 2002, p. 45.

7 edited by James a Berlin and Michael j Vivion. Cultural Studies in English Classroom: Theory and Practice, Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Boynton, Cook, Portsmouth, Heinman, 1992, P.X.

8 Peter Sloterdijk, Criticism of Cynicism and Rationality, Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1987, p. 5.

9 Zizek, The Noble Object of Ideology, translated by Ji, Central Compilation and Publishing House, 2002, p. 45.

10 Selected Works of Marx and Engels Volume 4 People's Publishing House 1972 Page 50 1.

Wenyi. com was first launched (June 65438 +654381October+April 2005)