Van,
You wrote:
"The value of individualism today is pegged to the soaring value of specialization.
The requirement that the professional socially responsible individual become instead the trained specialist, ie that the true individual turn into a cell in the social body, is galling enough. What is unacceptable is that each cell has little knowledge of the whole and therefore little influence over the workings."
It seems to me that true individualism, by its own definition, is something that can never be "pegged". Moreover, a true individual can certainly understand your explanation/argument, and is even capable of understanding the "whole", but why would a true individual want to "influence" the workings of the whole? The last thing a true individual wants is more true individuals.
True individualism is so rare that it is for the most part not even recognizable for what it really is, and it is certainly, again by definition, not something that can be taught. That is not to say, however, that true individuality is invisible. Nor does true individuality conceal itself. In simple terms, true individuality doesn't reflect what the rest (are looking to) see.
While the rest are continually working at the "workings", the true individual is out there enjoying what the rest are ignorant of.
Van, my point being that the notion of "true individuals" doesn't even belong within the context of your argument. For example, the phrase "professional socially responsible individual" harbors a distinct contradiction.
Steve
ps
On a slightly older topic, Van, you might just be right about reenactment somehow engendering predestination. It seems that my reenacting Piranesi via redrawing his Ichnographia Campi Martii predestined me to being the first person in modern times to discover (in 1999) a heretofore unknown work by Piranesi, namely the rare printing of the Ichnograpia's first state. I'm very proud to have manifested what is now a more true Piranesi history in relative quiet.
You wrote:
"The value of individualism today is pegged to the soaring value of specialization.
The requirement that the professional socially responsible individual become instead the trained specialist, ie that the true individual turn into a cell in the social body, is galling enough. What is unacceptable is that each cell has little knowledge of the whole and therefore little influence over the workings."
It seems to me that true individualism, by its own definition, is something that can never be "pegged". Moreover, a true individual can certainly understand your explanation/argument, and is even capable of understanding the "whole", but why would a true individual want to "influence" the workings of the whole? The last thing a true individual wants is more true individuals.
True individualism is so rare that it is for the most part not even recognizable for what it really is, and it is certainly, again by definition, not something that can be taught. That is not to say, however, that true individuality is invisible. Nor does true individuality conceal itself. In simple terms, true individuality doesn't reflect what the rest (are looking to) see.
While the rest are continually working at the "workings", the true individual is out there enjoying what the rest are ignorant of.
Van, my point being that the notion of "true individuals" doesn't even belong within the context of your argument. For example, the phrase "professional socially responsible individual" harbors a distinct contradiction.
Steve
ps
On a slightly older topic, Van, you might just be right about reenactment somehow engendering predestination. It seems that my reenacting Piranesi via redrawing his Ichnographia Campi Martii predestined me to being the first person in modern times to discover (in 1999) a heretofore unknown work by Piranesi, namely the rare printing of the Ichnograpia's first state. I'm very proud to have manifested what is now a more true Piranesi history in relative quiet.