Me and Gregory
Time and again over the past few months I’ve found myself in discussions (both in person and online) with highly intelligent, articulate and well-intentioned people with whom I was completely unable to find a common ground. On a variety of topics… from economic policy to Climate Change, creationism to group psychodynamics, sustainability to local politics, the credit crunch to the oil industry… I find myself totally isolated and end up doubting myself… wondering if maybe I haven’t got it wrong after all.
At the same time, I made a promise to myself when I started studying psychoanalysis and group psychodynamics that I would follow my own research and conclusions wherever they led… even if they led to unpopular or unfamiliar places.
Even so, and I’ll only say this once to get it off my chest and I’ll then shut up about it, lest I appear like I’m whinging (though what else is a personal blog for, if not for whinging?)… I have reached the stage where I’m finding it incredibly frustrating and disheartening that everyone I speak with finds my views wrong-headed or mystifying or objectionable or silly. It’s almost like the only person in the entire world who agrees with me is Gregory Bateson.
And he’s dead.
My views have changed radically over the last few years, Jim. Largely because of the discussions on head heritage, and also because I took the time to read Richard Heinberg’s books after you recommended them there. I don’t think people can really imagine how bad things could get, or how quickly this could happen. Certainly I’ve been trying to put across the same message for years on other boards, and have constantly come across these false hopes, often from people who ought to know better.
Anyway, I don’t think you’re alone. I think quite a few people on HH are happy to let you post, rather than jump in themselves, because you do it more authoritively and eloquantly than they could themselves.
September 20th, 2008 | 9:15pm
by PMM
I haven’t been involved in any of these frustrating discussions, so this is a general remark. But there isn’t anything wrong with a bit of self-doubt: it’s the difference between the reflective, self-critical thinker, and the stubborn ideologue (of whatever stripe). But of course there’s self-doubt in the positive sense I mean (retaining some skepticism about one’s own conclusions), and the sort of self-doubt which arrives unwelcome, following a hostile barrage of disagreement. So my advice is don’t let the bastards grind you down; follow your research and conclusions wherever they lead; but always be open to the possibility that you have got it wrong, cos there’s nothing wrong with that.
September 20th, 2008 | 11:34pm
by Larry Teabag