listen closely-- it's fast and complicated, but hear it like some combination of philosophy and poetry-- or better, just listen the playfulness in the ideas. And for all the ideas too difficult, or given too fast, to comprehend, just enjoy the voice, the words, the sounds. Like all of Phillip's talks, there is so much to learn, if given the chance.
tx for your passion & reflections. I have rarely encountered such eloquence explaining the process in such depth. A couple of observations if i may. First, in my experience, the need for perfection may be an offering created by an immature ego to tame a superego's assaults. In addition, the need for self-criticism may be used by an ego for the purpose of directing feelings towards the self intended for the object (in a Freudian sense) &, thereby, avoiding the threat of retaliation. For you Brits, harking back to the American revolution, I paraphrase, no castration without representation.
Wonderful man. I kept thinking of Bob Dylan, for many reasons including the climax of all the rhymes in 'Visions of Johanna' (Bonger): WHILE MY CONSCIENCE EXPLODES! If only I could look like him Hamlet Phillips or Vincent Dylan.
I don't listen to anything that begins with, "A Man's Liberty Begins With" when I am not one. That is a criticism of ME. The Title? Against self-criticism. Just following the spirit of the talk, by not watching.
There's a kindly tone to this lecture by a professional with a voice that could probably make a reading of the phone book sound good. And certainly the jacket helps. Yes, I'm sure I don't think highly enough of myself and am quite worthy with many strengths. And I realize there is much merit in cutting down on self-criticism as a habitual mode of living. Perhaps this rather sweet view has certain caveats, and I missed them. Sociopaths should ignore the talk? I'm thinking worldwide we are breeding a bunch of man-babies with zero conscience. And, I suppose, I should not exclude women from this charge. Look no further than Trump for the type of man who has become acceptable and cheered. If only he had a few self-critical moments. I find myself continually returning to a belief in a continuum. Approaches that recognize dichotomies appeal to me: Yin-yang, the dialectic, even Freud's ambivalence all seem to have merit. The unexamined life? The Ayn Rand hero or heroine who is often in vogue has certain charms, but when I found Greenspan was taking that as a philosophy to guide the U.S. economy, I was utterly dismayed. Someone has to regulate something based on conscience. We can't hope that all will be well based on Phillips' theories. A beguiling talk but I'm fresh out of patience with the romance of human nature. Best wishes, Christy
I think your notion of 'man-babies' calls for serious examination. Why is this concept and its implications of regression or of arrested development automatically a negative? Is a laudable 'man-baby' conceivable? And why man-baby and not baby-man? Which is worse, or which preferable: the one who (psychically) ages too quickly or the one who ages too slowly or not at all? You mention dichotomies, so: are there 'woman-babies'? If so, why do we not use the term? If not, why aren't there any? If maleness/masculinity are to be thought of on this kind of straight line - with progressions and regressions, from baby to boy to man 'back' to man-baby - what is the implicit idea of being female or feminine? As for people lacking conscience, or seeming to, I picture an elastic band, only stretching so far before it snaps. What looks like a lack might well be an excess: this is implicitly addressed in the remarks on the criminal committing crime precisely to seek punishment for deeper troubles. Capitalism continues to exert moral imperatives on these people (the seemingly unbridled elites, not the lowly criminals, although I'd be lying if I said I didn't relish the grammatical obscurity, the ambivalence if you'll mind the pun), maybe moreso than on anyone else. Not that I would necessarily advocate any softly-softly liberal approach.
I had similar thoughts. And I guess the idea is a ‘bully’ type self criticism is different to critique. It’s not objective. Rather it’s critical for the sake of being critical. And therefore it could well be another escape from true self appraisal. One would think being overly kind in ones appraisal of oneself might be the same, i.e. just as removed from taking a real honest look. So a bullying self critical actually prevents one from a deeper sense of guilt that might lead to making efforts to repair and change things.
I've been listening to this to fall asleep for several days in a row
that boring huh?
:0) True. A good presenter never reads like that. Otherwise just give the audience the written version, let them read it, and have a Q&A after.
Watched this 3 times already.
Yeah, not enough of this sort of thing out there.
I converted it to mp3 and listened to it at least 6 times. And every time, I'm learning a new thing from it!
Very psychedelic because of all the information
How many times are you on now?
It has to be watched endless times because most of it is impenetrable, vague and self-contradictory.
Very very brilliant author and a very brilliant idea as well to be sharing Mr. A. Phillip's highly prized essays in youtube:) Thank you LRB!
listen closely-- it's fast and complicated, but hear it like some combination of philosophy and poetry-- or better, just listen the playfulness in the ideas. And for all the ideas too difficult, or given too fast, to comprehend, just enjoy the voice, the words, the sounds. Like all of Phillip's talks, there is so much to learn, if given the chance.
tx for your passion & reflections. I have rarely encountered such eloquence explaining the process in such depth. A couple of observations if i may. First, in my experience, the need for perfection may be an offering created by an immature ego to tame a superego's assaults. In addition, the need for self-criticism may be used by an ego for the purpose of directing feelings towards the self intended for the object (in a Freudian sense) &, thereby, avoiding the threat of retaliation. For you Brits, harking back to the American revolution, I paraphrase, no castration without representation.
Wonderful man. I kept thinking of Bob Dylan, for many reasons including the climax of all the rhymes in 'Visions of Johanna' (Bonger): WHILE MY CONSCIENCE EXPLODES! If only I could look like him Hamlet Phillips or Vincent Dylan.
To Mr. A. Phillips (sorry for the typo earlier) please have a talk/reading in Italy too!
When was the lecture given.
5th March 2015
Good comparison and contrast between superego and conscience. "Morality based on desire" how novel.
Is this ironic?
Anyone know if there is a transcript of this essay. I want to read and digest it!
www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v37/n05/adam-phillips/against-self-criticism
The essay is in his book un -forbidden Pleasures
Boss leather jacket
he is too fast.... i am not able to understand him.... he is reading book
+kenneth lam You can read the lecture; there is a link above
@@juiletteelizawood You can click the settings wheel and reduce the stream rate, the wheel on the lower right of the screen.
you can listen several times! why should it all come through at once?
I don't listen to anything that begins with, "A Man's Liberty Begins With" when I am not one. That is a criticism of ME. The Title? Against self-criticism. Just following the spirit of the talk, by not watching.
?
1. It's an old quote.
2. "Man" means human. Not a particular sex, gender or an expression of those.
3. The talk is criticizing nobody, just analyzing.
There's a kindly tone to this lecture by a professional with a voice that could probably make a reading of the phone book sound good. And certainly the jacket helps. Yes, I'm sure I don't think highly enough of myself and am quite worthy with many strengths. And I realize there is much merit in cutting down on self-criticism as a habitual mode of living.
Perhaps this rather sweet view has certain caveats, and I missed them. Sociopaths should ignore the talk? I'm thinking worldwide we are breeding a bunch of man-babies with zero conscience. And, I suppose, I should not exclude women from this charge. Look no further than Trump for the type of man who has become acceptable and cheered. If only he had a few self-critical moments.
I find myself continually returning to a belief in a continuum. Approaches that recognize dichotomies appeal to me: Yin-yang, the dialectic, even Freud's ambivalence all seem to have merit. The unexamined life? The Ayn Rand hero or heroine who is often in vogue has certain charms, but when I found Greenspan was taking that as a philosophy to guide the U.S. economy, I was utterly dismayed. Someone has to regulate something based on conscience. We can't hope that all will be well based on Phillips' theories. A beguiling talk but I'm fresh out of patience with the romance of human nature.
Best wishes, Christy
I think your notion of 'man-babies' calls for serious examination. Why is this concept and its implications of regression or of arrested development automatically a negative? Is a laudable 'man-baby' conceivable? And why man-baby and not baby-man? Which is worse, or which preferable: the one who (psychically) ages too quickly or the one who ages too slowly or not at all? You mention dichotomies, so: are there 'woman-babies'? If so, why do we not use the term? If not, why aren't there any? If maleness/masculinity are to be thought of on this kind of straight line - with progressions and regressions, from baby to boy to man 'back' to man-baby - what is the implicit idea of being female or feminine?
As for people lacking conscience, or seeming to, I picture an elastic band, only stretching so far before it snaps. What looks like a lack might well be an excess: this is implicitly addressed in the remarks on the criminal committing crime precisely to seek punishment for deeper troubles. Capitalism continues to exert moral imperatives on these people (the seemingly unbridled elites, not the lowly criminals, although I'd be lying if I said I didn't relish the grammatical obscurity, the ambivalence if you'll mind the pun), maybe moreso than on anyone else. Not that I would necessarily advocate any softly-softly liberal approach.
I had similar thoughts. And I guess the idea is a ‘bully’ type self criticism is different to critique. It’s not objective. Rather it’s critical for the sake of being critical. And therefore it could well be another escape from true self appraisal. One would think being overly kind in ones appraisal of oneself might be the same, i.e. just as removed from taking a real honest look. So a bullying self critical actually prevents one from a deeper sense of guilt that might lead to making efforts to repair and change things.
Isn't romantic comedy a tragedy?
Do not read texts.
Ii
He’s a very deceptive man…..