Socrates, who for many is the true father of philosophy, was perhaps the first to truly understand this maxim to the extent that he placed it at the center of his constant exercise of thought. According to the Athenian philosopher, in fact, only if we recognize ourselves for what we really are, first of all taking note of our ignorance and consequently of all our other limitations, can we be reconciled with ourselves and reach a higher level of knowledge. It is no coincidence, among other things, that almost all scholars agree in recognizing that, through this sentence, Apollo wanted to order men to "Recognize their own limitations and finitude". In other words, in short, the God of the Sun himself was telling us this: “Stop distorting your own image through your cowardly lies and accept yourselves for who you are, which is nothing but fallible, imperfect and mortal beings!". We human beings, on the other hand, regardless of this divine prescription, continue to do everything to commit the same error as Prometheus who disobeyed the divine will by giving men fire. Precisely because of this presumptuous act of rebellion, Prometheus is first captured, then chained to a cliff and finally thrown into a bottomless ravine. And this seems to be the fate reserved for all those who, under the illusion of being able to submit everything to their own will, try in vain to rebel against the mortal condition in which they find themselves confined by the will of a higher order. Here’s the question: what does all this talk have to do with Philosophische Praxis? Here’s the answer: everything. In fact what is the deepest and most authentic sense of the need that lies behind every attempt, however unconscious and clumsy, to enter into dialogue with a philosophical consultant, if not precisely that of knowing oneself better by accepting the most possible for who he is?! The present paper aims to dissect precisely this profound link that exists between the Philosophische Praxis and self-knowledge. For expository needs, the discourse will be articulated and will develop starting from nine questions, which will be followed by two criticisms: the first will be addressed, in general, to philosophical consultants, while the second will be addressed, specifically, to myself. The latter criticism, among other things, will focus on the philosophical laboratory that I conducted at the municipal library of Cavallino Treporti (Venice) at the invitation of my colleague and friend Davide Ubizzo.
1) What does it mean to know ourselves?
Knowing ourselves means recognizing, unmasking and destroying the illusions that each of us tends to form above all with respect to ourselves.
2) What kind of relationship exists between self- knowledge and another's view of the world?
Self-knowledge is configured as an indispensable condition for becoming aware, not only of one's own vision of the world, but also of that of others. The distortions that we operate on our own image, in fact, necessarily affect everything we take into consideration, producing inevitable misunderstandings and errors of evaluation that do not even allow us to understand the other's system of thought.
3) Why do we need illusions?
We need illusions because we cannot accept ourselves for who we are.
4) What must be done to unmask one's illusions?
To unmask one's illusions it is necessary, first of all, to reconcile with oneself, which essentially means accepting that image we see reflected in the mirror for what it simply turns out to be, without the need to embellish it in an attempt to hide, both from us same as to others, all our innumerable imperfections.
5) What do we usually try to do? And why do we do it? Failing to tolerate our own makeup-free face, we constantly try to deceive ourselves either by lowering our gaze, or by wearing a mask and convincing ourselves that this is, in fact, our real face. Not unlike what the prisoners inside the cave of which Plato tells us in his famous myth did, we spend our lives staring at false and elusive shadows that are nothing more than the reflection of our own illusions. This is how that veil of Maya is born that stands between us and reality! A veil that we ourselves weave day after day and that continues to separate us from the so-called "truth" which in its etymological meaning means just unveiling. We feel ashamed for ourselves not unlike how Adam and Eve were ashamed of their nakedness after disobeying God. And here we feel the irresistible urge to cover our own face with that mask we wear in front of our own mirror. All to avoid taking note of our own limitations! All in order not to accept our transient and miserable mortal condition! That is why we have become illusionists as much more skilled as cowards! This is why we ended up living as expert fugitives trying to escape their own gaze! This is the reason why we are constantly tossed from side to side, tugged by desires that push us to chase unattainable mirages and, at the same time, suffocated by fear for ghosts that we ourselves have invented! And that's how, as we embellish our existence with increasingly striking simulacra, we inexorably sink into an invisible prison within which we feel more and more alone, lost and miserable.
6) What is the role of the philosophical consultant?
To help anyone see what they don't want to see of themselves; to show the other the blind spot of one's gaze by exhorting him to think what from his perspective, as unacceptable, is unthinkable: this is the task of every philosophical consultant.
7) What is meant by dialogue within the Philosophische Praxis’ field?
The dialogue that the philosophical consultant uses as a tool to help the consultant know a little more about his own thinking system is not an exchange of opinions. However, it is not always easy to recognize the difference between the two. Here, then, are the characteristics that transform a generic exchange of words into the dialogue that occurs in the Philosophische Praxis:
A. Understanding and clarifying the interlocutor's worldview.
B. To detection and to explicit of the assumptions contained in that vision.
C. Questioning of those same assumptions.
8) What is the maximum result that a philosophical consultant can aspire to? Through some questions usually asked only after having explained the assumptions and points of inconsistency contained in the speech, the philosophical consultant could be able to encourage the consultant to temporarily jump out of his own thinking system. When this happens, the consultant gains the concrete possibility of permanently redefining, even if only partially, his own vision of the world. This is the maximum result that a philosophical consultant can aspire to.
9) What can induce the philosophical consultant to compromise the good development of the philosophical consultation? Among the various factors that can inhibit the proper conduct of the counseling certainly include the fears and desires of the philosophical counselor. Among the most common fears there are, in particular, that of disappointing others' expectations and that of not being able to understand the other. Among the most frequent desires, however, are that of affirming one's own vision of the world and that of avoiding any form of disagreement with one's interlocutor. Another risk factor presents within the dialogic process is represented by the desire to want to achieve some results, such as that of obtaining a paradigm shift within the consultant's thinking system. In this case, in fact, the obsession with the destination becomes the main reason for the failure of the trip itself. Much better not to expect anything.
A critique
Many philosophical consultants seem to be convinced that the meaning of the Philosophische Praxis is to create the conditions for encouraging an exchange of intelligent thoughts on a certain issue. Others believe that a large part of the consultant's task coincides with the ability to stimulate a debate with interesting, original and possibly self-made ideas. There are some who even confuse a philosophical workshop with a mini master's lesson followed by a democratic debate in which each participant is free to say more or less anything they want, as long as they do not disrespect anyone. As if that weren't enough, there are even those who mistake individual philosophical advice for a sort of existential private lesson through which to encourage the consultant to adopt their own ideas about the world. Too bad that none of this really has to do with the meaning of the Philosophische Praxis! It is as funny as it is grotesque to observe how many people unable to dialogue there are among those who, at least on paper, should be experts in dialogue. Many of them, going through their initiatives, seem more interested in exploiting their role as facilitators to obtain an invisible pulpit from which to bestow their witty sentences to the world. Facilitators, of course, but of their own narcissism! A narcissism that they pamper and satisfy through their proud and high-sounding monologues that cleverly pass off as necessary premises for discussion. More than philosophers, therefore, pompous opinion leaders full of pride and self-satisfaction. More than philosophical consultants, therefore, arrogant intellectuals who pose as professional thinkers in search of their audience. In reality they are simply insecure, fragile, frightened and suffering people who, through their intellectual staging, try to collect the maximum social recognition possible in an attempt to prolong their tiring coexistence with their own lies. In short, we are talking about people who do not accept themselves for who they are and who, through the Philosophische Praxis, try to distort even more that self-image with respect to which they are unable to stand comparison. Consultant philosophers who, in the vast majority of cases, would be the first to need to take advantage of philosophical advice as consultants but who are too scared and proud even to admit it. And this is, among other things, the essence of the bizarre paradox in which Phronesis, an Italian professional Association of Philosophical Consultation, finds itself; an association made up of individuals who, instead of addressing their various unresolved issues through dialogue, proclaim themselves consultants, trying to get others to do what they themselves are not able to do at all.
A self-criticism
I believe that the philosophical workshop that I held on January 16, 2020 in Cavallino Treporti (Venice), is to be considered a failure because I was unable to get anyone to dialogue. The worldview of the participants, in fact, remained largely unfounded and the assumptions on which their affirmations were based, generally, were not even made explicit. It was at most an interesting exchange of views. And the fact that the workshop was appreciated by most of the participants seems to me further proof of its own failure. In fact people, especially in Italy, usually feel a certain satisfaction when they are able to let off steam by freely saying whatever they want. Several times it happened to me to find myself in front of people who, at the end of one of my workshops, even though they did not have a dialogue with anyone during the entire course of the evening, came to thank me, addressing me very positive opinions, enriched by generous compliments, only because they felt listened to, taken into consideration and valued in what they said. And it was above all my own fear of disappointing these expectations of others that I know very well, the cause for which I was not able to work more rigorously. The truth is, to become a philosophical consultant I still have to deal with several unresolved issues within me. And this is exactly what I have been doing, in an increasingly assiduous and constant way, for some time now: an incessant work through which I am beginning to glimpse that image reflected in the mirror that I too, like everyone, have always tempted to warp.
|
