Published at: 05:08 pm - Saturday August 01 2009
The author, John L. Hodge, answers some questions
Q: What is the relevance of your writing to the events of today?
A: Former President George W. Bush declared war on “terrorism” and set forth a philosophy that the United States should be ready to invade nations he considered to be “evil.” This is classic dualism. Identify yourself with the good, designate some “other” as evil, and then proceed to use these characterizations to justify war, killing, and suppression of human rights. The most frightening thing is not that he voiced this way of thinking, but that the American public bought it and overwhelmingly supported the invasion of Iraq. My writings point to the dualism of good and evil–or “moralistic dualism”– as the philosophical underpinning of these antagonistic actions. This dualism is a mostly unconscious, absorbed from the social and cultural environment that still contains many widely accepted remnants from the undemocratic past of humankind. My writings seek to bring dualism to consciousness and show how this dualism is the source of all “justifications” of oppression. My writings also point the way to replacing this way of thinking with another way. If we do not do this, Bush’s dualistic philosophy will emerge again as a “justification” for another military invasion–all falsely in the name of “freedom.”
Q: It sounds like you advocate “we are all one” or some variation of that. Is that true?
A: No. “We are all one” is a misnomer for “We are all one except those who do not agree that we are all one.” It hides another form of dualism. In addition, it fails to recognize diversity. Overcoming dualism means to see how we are diverse as well as how we are similar.
Q: How do you propose to do that?
A: I do not have sound-bite answers. It’s a difficult and complicated subject. That’s why I write at length about it.
Q: In your book, Cultural Bases of Racism and Group Oppression, you focused on dualism in “Western” culture. Is there some other non-Western culture you prefer?
A. No. To criticize something present is not to adopt something else that is different and also present–though that’s commonly assumed. I focus on “Western” culture, because that is where I live and what I know. I do not see answers elsewhere, in some other part of the world. Practically everywhere you look, you see some form of oppression, particularly of women. We have to develop the answers ourselves, not adopt some other set of beliefs. We have to create something new, based on a better understanding of the values underlying democracy.
Q: Does this mean you do not follow those who point to Buddhism or some “Eastern” philosophy as the answer?
A: Correct. I do not point to any answers except what we can develop for ourselves. When “Westerners” describe Buddhism, they bring dualism into it. Whether that dualism is actually present in Buddhism or not, I cannot tell. Without understanding how to overcome dualism, we cannot interpret other points of view without injecting dualism into those views. So the answer cannot be that we adopt another point of view, because we cannot adopt another point of view without dragging into it our own unconscious assumptions, beliefs and mental habits. It is these assumptions, beliefs and mental habits that we have to bring into our conscious awareness and decide what to keep, modify or replace. That’s what I try to do in my writings.The author, John L. Hodge, answers some questions
Q: What is the relevance of your writing to the events of today?
A: Former President George W. Bush declared war on “terrorism” and set forth a philosophy that the United States should be ready to invade nations he considered to be “evil.” This is classic dualism. Identify yourself with the good, designate some “other” as evil, and then proceed to use these characterizations to justify war, killing, and suppression of human rights. The most frightening thing is not that he voiced this way of thinking, but that the American public bought it and overwhelmingly supported the invasion of Iraq. My writings point to the dualism of good and evil–or “moralistic dualism”– as the philosophical underpinning of these antagonistic actions. This dualism is a mostly unconscious, absorbed from the social and cultural environment that still contains many widely accepted remnants from the undemocratic past of humankind. My writings seek to bring dualism to consciousness and show how this dualism is the source of all “justifications” of oppression. My writings also point the way to replacing this way of thinking with another way. If we do not do this, Bush’s dualistic philosophy will emerge again as a “justification” for another military invasion–all falsely in the name of “freedom.”
Q: It sounds like you advocate “we are all one” or some variation of that. Is that true?
A: No. “We are all one” is a misnomer for “We are all one except those who do not agree that we are all one.” It hides another form of dualism. In addition, it fails to recognize diversity. Overcoming dualism means to see how we are diverse as well as how we are similar.
Q: How do you propose to do that?
A: I do not have sound-bite answers. It’s a difficult and complicated subject. That’s why I write at length about it.
Q: In your book, Cultural Bases of Racism and Group Oppression, you focused on dualism in “Western” culture. Is there some other non-Western culture you prefer?
A. No. To criticize something present is not to adopt something else that is different and also present–though that’s commonly assumed. I focus on “Western” culture, because that is where I live and what I know. I do not see answers elsewhere, in some other part of the world. Practically everywhere you look, you see some form of oppression, particularly of women. We have to develop the answers ourselves, not adopt some other set of beliefs. We have to create something new, based on a better understanding of the values underlying democracy.
Q: Does this mean you do not follow those who point to Buddhism or some “Eastern” philosophy as the answer?
A: Correct. I do not point to any answers except what we can develop for ourselves. When “Westerners” describe Buddhism, they bring dualism into it. Whether that dualism is actually present in Buddhism or not, I cannot tell. Without understanding how to overcome dualism, we cannot interpret other points of view without injecting dualism into those views. So the answer cannot be that we adopt another point of view, because we cannot adopt another point of view without dragging into it our own unconscious assumptions, beliefs and mental habits. It is these assumptions, beliefs and mental habits that we have to bring into our conscious awareness and decide what to keep, modify or replace. That’s what I try to do in my writings.The author, John L. Hodge, answers some questions
Q: What is the relevance of your writing to the events of today?
A: Former President George W. Bush declared war on “terrorism” and set forth a philosophy that the United States should be ready to invade nations he considered to be “evil.” This is classic dualism. Identify yourself with the good, designate some “other” as evil, and then proceed to use these characterizations to justify war, killing, and suppression of human rights. The most frightening thing is not that he voiced this way of thinking, but that the American public bought it and overwhelmingly supported the invasion of Iraq. My writings point to the dualism of good and evil–or “moralistic dualism”– as the philosophical underpinning of these antagonistic actions. This dualism is a mostly unconscious, absorbed from the social and cultural environment that still contains many widely accepted remnants from the undemocratic past of humankind. My writings seek to bring dualism to consciousness and show how this dualism is the source of all “justifications” of oppression. My writings also point the way to replacing this way of thinking with another way. If we do not do this, Bush’s dualistic philosophy will emerge again as a “justification” for another military invasion–all falsely in the name of “freedom.”
Q: It sounds like you advocate “we are all one” or some variation of that. Is that true?
A: No. “We are all one” is a misnomer for “We are all one except those who do not agree that we are all one.” It hides another form of dualism. In addition, it fails to recognize diversity. Overcoming dualism means to see how we are diverse as well as how we are similar.
Q: How do you propose to do that?
A: I do not have sound-bite answers. It’s a difficult and complicated subject. That’s why I write at length about it.
Q: In your book, Cultural Bases of Racism and Group Oppression, you focused on dualism in “Western” culture. Is there some other non-Western culture you prefer?
A. No. To criticize something present is not to adopt something else that is different and also present–though that’s commonly assumed. I focus on “Western” culture, because that is where I live and what I know. I do not see answers elsewhere, in some other part of the world. Practically everywhere you look, you see some form of oppression, particularly of women. We have to develop the answers ourselves, not adopt some other set of beliefs. We have to create something new, based on a better understanding of the values underlying democracy.
Q: Does this mean you do not follow those who point to Buddhism or some “Eastern” philosophy as the answer?
A: Correct. I do not point to any answers except what we can develop for ourselves. When “Westerners” describe Buddhism, they bring dualism into it. Whether that dualism is actually present in Buddhism or not, I cannot tell. Without understanding how to overcome dualism, we cannot interpret other points of view without injecting dualism into those views. So the answer cannot be that we adopt another point of view, because we cannot adopt another point of view without dragging into it our own unconscious assumptions, beliefs and mental habits. It is these assumptions, beliefs and mental habits that we have to bring into our conscious awareness and decide what to keep, modify or replace. That’s what I try to do in my writings.
/
The author, John L. Hodge, answers some questions:
/
Q: What is the relevance of your writing to the events of today?
A: Former President George W. Bush declared war on “terrorism” and set forth a philosophy that the United States should be ready to invade nations he considered to be “evil.” This is classic dualism. Identify yourself with the good, designate some “other” as evil, and then proceed to use these characterizations to justify war, killing, and suppression of human rights. The most frightening thing is not that he voiced this way of thinking, but that the American public bought it and overwhelmingly supported the invasion of Iraq. My writings point to the dualism of good and evil–or “moralistic dualism”– as the philosophical underpinning of these antagonistic actions. This dualism is a mostly unconscious, absorbed from the social and cultural environment that still contains many widely accepted remnants from the undemocratic past of humankind. My writings seek to bring dualism to consciousness and show how this dualism is the source of all “justifications” of aggressive war and oppression of identifiable groups. My writings also point the way to replacing this way of thinking with another way. If we do not do this, Bush’s dualistic philosophy will emerge again as a “justification” for another military invasion–all falsely in the name of “freedom.”
/
Q: It sounds like you advocate “we are all one” or some variation of that. Is that true?
A: No. “We are all one” is a misnomer for “We are all one except those who do not agree that we are all one.” It hides another form of dualism. In addition, it fails to recognize diversity. Overcoming dualism means to see how we are diverse as well as how we are similar.
/
Q: How do you propose to do that?
A: I do not have sound-bite answers. It’s a difficult and complicated subject. That’s why I write at length about it.
/
Q: In your book, Cultural Bases of Racism and Group Oppression, you focused on dualism in “Western” culture. Is there some other non-Western culture you prefer?
A. No. To criticize something present is not to adopt something else that is different and also present–though that’s commonly assumed. I focus on “Western” culture, because that is where I live and what I know. I do not see answers elsewhere, in some other part of the world. Practically everywhere you look, you see some form of oppression, particularly of women. We have to develop the answers ourselves, not adopt some other set of beliefs. We have to create something new, based on a better understanding of the values underlying democracy.
/
Q: Does this mean you do not follow those who point to Buddhism or some “Eastern” philosophy as the answer?
A: Correct. I do not point to any answers except what we can develop for ourselves. When “Westerners” describe Buddhism, they bring dualism into it. Whether that dualism is actually present in Buddhism or not, I cannot tell. Without understanding how to overcome dualism, we cannot interpret other points of view without injecting dualism into those views. So the answer cannot be that we adopt another point of view, because we cannot adopt another point of view without dragging into it our own unconscious assumptions, beliefs and mental habits. It is these assumptions, beliefs and mental habits that we have to bring into our conscious awareness and decide what to keep, modify or replace. That’s what I try to do in my writings.
/