For the future Ministry of Botox. Foucault

We argue with friends – good roads and laws would reduce catastrophes and victims. Most say yes, I and a few do not. We mean that as good the ways and the laws are good, they « do not » play  » – people want to ride more and more, which means more cars, trips, speeds, drivers, roads from A to Z, mastered with movement world – pleasure, business, satisfied needs, but also damage. There is no way to have a lot of no rest. The risk is the victims.

To believe in the opposite is like eating more and food prices to fall. Hem to age, the fitness to keep you young. There is no way. The Enlightenment has educated us to believe that there is a way to have more and more, without life taking you on. This is not only a utopian faith in progress, but also a tool for educational purposes – if one realizes that he will always pay, he just stopped voting for political promises, he would take the portraits of Marx, Hayek and ran to the countryside to watch tomatoes that even caterpillars.

But back to the cars. Everything above does not mean that we should not strive for better ways, laws, self-awareness, less corruption. Another is the kernel: fewer cars. But not in the environmental or anti -capitalist meaning. And less as a way of life, needs; Let’s not be servants of ourselves. The varied wardrobe, too soft beds, four times eating a day with dessert, a room for each child in the family, three languages ​​with four diplomas are not a means of life. They are a supplement. It’s great to have them, but they have a price. Most often is work, lack of rest, loans, stress, « bumping like an ox » all your life – until you realize nonsense at the finish. In cars, they also mean irreparable.

The kernel is just about more than available. Does one have 1, he wants 2. He wants everything – money, knowledge, contacts, pleasure happiness is unthinkable without this « lamp », but the damage increases in parallel. The section is in the measure, the balance – it cannot be less, sometimes less. However, there is never a refusal of benefits, goods, and by self-deception, « effective » ways to get them are sought: in our country we imagine that better paths and laws will reduce catastrophes; Elsewhere, the hope is that the insurance will compensate for what is not compensated; General as a civilization – we are waiting for technology to deliver us more against less.

It’s a fantasy, but let’s imagine it! – fewer cars would mean more public transport, priority for ambulances, firefighters (mostly they move); More professional drivers, less issued books; Less reached fields of excursions, less productive work, less kef, more forgotten life troubles; More bicycles, sweat, but also carelessness and less crashes among the mouse-masha than a nice and bad one. « Come on now – let’s get out of the cars?! It’s enough nonsense! » 99% of people would react. Let them be nonsense. But let’s not forget the problem – it is not in the amenities, the progress, « what we can’t give up. » He is in the road crashes. Are we ready to give to?

But why don’t you understand the problem with « more – leads to more »? With the measure. Why is it incomprehensible? Why is this most objective mathematics in any doctrine, a textbook?

With human nature. Who does he deal with?! There is no such crazy. Accordingly, in such standard situations, the paradigm is played, that there are things that are, not the one, « the world is like that ». « We can’t reduce cars » is just such a paradigm. If you start calculating, it leads you to the conclusion that it is not good to go down.

However, here comes the brilliant Michel Foucault, who not only confirms that « the world is such » is the most ordinary variable historical mental construct. He means that, with all your intelligence, you are voluntarily in the trap not to see the opportunity to be different. Let’s stop at Foucault:

Cars will not tell you that nasty capitalists want to earn them, their politicians serve, all of them order the fat books and the media – which is why our thinking does not allow the cars (standard criticism) for a moment. Foucault first says that there is a certain order, order of thinking, a matrix of knowledge (« words and things ») – which not only predetermines the conclusions, but also in general the type of knowledge, of values ​​- to know this, not anything else, one to think about good, second for bad, etc. This scientific and moral system depends on the ages and geography, and it is not necessary to serve a rich man or ruler; It also meets good goals (for example, without such a system of society is not possible at all).

Being variables, time systems produce different knowledge, different types of truths – not so much through the principle of « science reaches new data with which they make new conclusions », but simply the new conclusions are reached after changed comparisons, identities, presumptions, etc. in language and thinking.

This not at all the original vision of Foucault is followed by the already key – he says (all his creativity) that people are the product of the current surrounding scientific and ethical system where someone imposes something to you, but in parallel you do the « mandatory » things completely voluntarily, with desire. Like they may not make us happy, but we have no idea that we can change them. We have no idea, because we ourselves as individuals (conscience, will, freedom) self -create to the system – this is how we become subjects from objects of nature, and then through self -discipline we maintain ourselves to be a subject, personality.

Stepping on Foucault, for example, let’s take the phrase « Labor Being Man ». Can anyone today assume that the work does not administer man? No. But this construct is no more than 200 years old. It is imposed as a value because of Protestant ethics, the pursuit of personal autonomy, the exit of poverty, etc. (Temporary reasons that, after another 200 years, say, there will be no). The slogan is also located as a leading knowledge – science is dedicated to how to make labor more productive. Accordingly, one of the things that you self -form as a person is « Labor Before the Man ».

But what except for goods this truth is? Well, it means lifelong work, work, work, to conquer peaks, improvement without horizon, passing, tasks, pursuit of one, second, ten – you make it constant in the profession and privacy, since the higher ideal (beauty) is only achieved with labor. On top of that, the ideal is immeasurable, that is, unattainable – nothing else remains on the ox but to bump as a result: fatigue, illness, alienation, neglect or non -deception of a family, slavery – much beyond happiness, true meaninglessness.

However, you do not think of balance as a virtue, but you are constantly looking for even more work – imagining that its fruits would bring relaxation, freedom. How would it not be after you have self -constructed with « Happiness = Labor »? After all this, not the body is a prison for the soul, but vice versa – the soul closes the body in the same (labor, fatigue). Here with the lantern Foucault – to try to reconstruct ourselves to see the problems; Scientific and ethical systems are different, we are just part of one.

There are others in which neither work adorns man nor movement, and cars are not something that cannot be descended from. Many dust has accumulated in our system, blurring logic. Because, let’s admit it, it’s really a brutal simplicity to conclude that you will be more happy with more labor, and with more car movement, crashes will decrease.

At the end, a forecast. It is from another current topic, from the field of infinite-y-y-y-beauty:

After 30, 50 or 100 years, Botox will reach incredible qualities, the risk of placement will be minimal. He will really beautify people, make them more satisfied. Science will once again confirm the relationship between beauty and mental health. It will also prove how better for all human health this body has an X quantity of Botox, that body with Y. There will be discussions about the benefits of the taxes paid to the Botox industry. For comprehensive scientific horizons, opening the knowledge of Botox specifically. For the realization of young Botox specialists.

« Isn’t it good for children to be aware of Botox early, to study him at school than on the street? » But since there will always be some risk, respectively, people will insist on laws, rules and working Botox institutions: « Where does the Ministry of Botox sleep, why not do its job? » Ha someone sows them, the moment you will follow, « Do you want to give up Botox? Egati stupid! »

No one will think of a system where Botox is considered pure nonsense. That it was even in the same system.

This is the case with the cars.

Unsplash.com