Anyone here familiar with Pascal Bruckner?
I’m curious because he’s some hot shot French ‘philosopher’ who’s seems to make a living writing provocative books.
And I’d love to hear the opinion from someone who’s read more of Bruckner’s stuff then the couple articles I have.
Now I don’t have the attention span for long winded philosophizing, so it usually only takes a few paragraphs to
send me running. However, this Pascal Bruckner has written a couple popular articles based on his book “Fanaticism of the Apocalypse”
that I have read on a count of him getting a lot of play amongst the Global Warming No Worries, it’s all in your head crowd.
After reading this man’s vacuous pot shots at the scientific community,
and him basically ridiculing concerns, and the folks who have them, for what humanity is doing to our one and only life sustaining planet,
you can imagine that I’d have a few choice comments to share with this Pascal Bruckner, if only I could find his address.
But, as some of you know, I like sharing such critiques, and figure perhaps that way it may find it’s way to Bruckner’s eyes.
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Watching Flames, Pascal Bruckner Fiddles
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2014/08/watching-flames-bruckner-fiddles.html
In any event, if anyone has any Pascal Bruckner (The Gallic Gadfly) stories to share please do.
Excellent take-down, CC. I had never heard of Bruckner before your post here. Seems he is living in a fantasy world.
Thanks Darron. Sometimes I wonder, just like Pascal I spend a lot of time within my own mind and reality… so it's nice to hear.
{ps. Hope it's going OK with you and the family}
That Bruckner’s talents defy classification might help to account for the relatively understated reception of his work on this side of the Atlantic. This situation is likely to change soon: along with The Tyranny of Guilt, Princeton University Press will also publish Perpetual Euphoria: On the Duty to Be Happy. Like the great French writers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Bruckner excels at multiple genres. His novel Les Voleurs de beauté, or The Beauty Thieves, which appeared in 1997, won the prestigious Renaudot Prize. In 1992, an earlier novel, Lunes de fiel (translated into English as Evil Angels), was made into the film Bitter Moon by Roman Polanski. Both book and film serve up a dystopian portrait of human intimacy: bleak, sadistic, tortured.
His wisdom?
His wisdom is of the anti-scholastic, worldly, Socratic variety. He is acutely self-conscious of humanity’s, and therefore his own, intellectual and moral failings. Given his aversion to speculative pretense, the moralist is something of an intellectual sniper, a perennial deflator of illusion and pomposity.
Heyya Pals,
I had reason to revisit one of my old WUWTW posts and of course did some editing as I went along,
after going through all that I figured I may a well post it at CC since it is a “philosophical” review of a big time modern philosopher.
And since I’m always curious if there’s any interesting discussion to be had - I’m posting a couple thoughts over here.
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶24 - All the foolishness of Bolshevism, Maoism, and Trotskyism are somehow
reformulated exponentially in the name of saving the planet. Authors, journalists, politicians, scientists compete in announcing
the abominable and lay claim to a hyperlucidity: They alone see things correctly, whereas others vegetate in the slumber
from which they will someday awaken, terrified. They alone have emerged from the cave of ignorance in which the human
herd mills around, deaf and blind to the obvious.
Pascal once again conflates scientists with pundits and reporters.
Besides, if scientists offer what he wants to coin "hyperlucidity" it's only because most of the rest of world seems to be under
the spell of 'Hollyworld' ( the Hollywood/Reaganomics weltanschauuing) and too apathetic about our life sustaining home
planet Earth to care to learn about it in a serious lucid manner.
Sad fact is, because most folks these days have climbed into ancient religious books for their reality, it's left to the scientists
and other rational observers, to objectively strive towards understanding what we are witnessing upon our actual physical planet...
as opposed to spending all our attention on the machinations playing out within our fertile imaginations.
Deriding their attention to the physical planet we depend on, doesn't diminish it's importance. If only more people were interested
in a lucid understanding of our physical planet we'd all be way ahead of the game.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶25 - The adepts of the worst-case scenario are still the victims of a fantasy of omnipotence:
For them, to prognosticate a hateful destiny is to ward it off. It is one thing to teach the science of catastrophe as a science of reacting to and resisting disproportionate misfortunes; it is another to believe that we will be able to cope with mistakes by forecasting them.
Never a word for simply learning about our planet.
... for understanding it's evolutionary history and how we got here.
... for understanding how it's processes operate.
... for appreciating that we have become a global geological force.
... or for reminding us this game we're playing is for keeps.
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶42 What is worrisome about ecologism is that it energetically insinuates itself into the most intimate aspects of our lives—our eating habits and our clothing—the better to control them. The project here is authoritarian.
On reading its recommendations, we can almost hear the heavy door of a dungeon closing behind us.
Well every aspect of our lives is touched by the resources at our disposal and the constraints/opportunities weather imposes.
Want to get philosophical Pascal? I tell you in my over half century of travels and a great many outside jobs,
I learned early on to appreciate weather as "the friendly adversary." Smoke on that concept for while.
Unfortunately, from reading Pascals world, I don't think he has any direct knowledge of this planet of the natural process
that gave birth to humanity, I can easily image a dude that's hardly ever been outside rooms.
I wonder if the concept of this planet and creatures and humanity evolving over unimaginable stretches of time makes any
visceral sense. I fear that for Pascal and such it's all some two-dimensional image like a post card. They can't grasp it's
essence or appreciate what hugely important lessons it has to teach us.
Nah, instead they're lost in some lala land of rhetorical games.
It has nothing to do with authoritarianism, it's about the reality of our dependency on
a healthy biosphere and predicable weather pattern.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Pascal Bruckner is the author of many books, including The Paradox of Love (Princeton University Press, 2011) and The Tyranny of Guilt (Princeton, 2010). This essay is adapted from his new book, The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse, published by Polity Press.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Reading through this, it occurred to me that, other than his privileged education, the intellectual difference between
Pascal and myself might be boiled down to a little metaphor.
Whereas Pascal is a perfect fit for the prissy interior designer who can't see beyond the furniture, frills and the
color scheme of a place. I myself am more the construction type who's looking at roof lines; bearing points; framing details;
drainage; maintenance anticipating considerations; spending time staring at the zone heating system; etc.
In my area snow loads and shedding during winter, is important; did they install safe hooks on the ridge for the snow shovelers
who need to climb up there (most don't) and such functional details, etc., etc., etc. And I'm constantly shocked at how
blind folks are to that. It's all about achieving the magazine cover picture perfect facade - the important details are handled like an after thought.
My sense of indignation is fired by Pascal's obvious ignorance of, and disinterest in, what's actually going on within the climate science community.
The man sounds like he gets all of his information from pop media outlets, a great source for interesting stories but a
lousy source for genuine detailed learning. Though, from his glib attitude, I don't think learning about the climate or the
folks who study it was his intention anyways.
For the whole thing, link to
http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/2014/12/watchingflames-pascalbruckner-fiddles.html
Ecologists should be wary of developing and falling prey to dogma of their own making.
That is the only useful message that I could glean from Bruckner’s flowery misguided ramblings. If he had just said that, he would have been an okay philosopher/human being, in my book. But he goes to the extreme, claiming/inferring that Ecologists have indeed fallen prey to developing a dogma that is paradoxically damaging the world, so much so that it is advocating a return of past failed totalitarian political systems, and also, is promoting a self-hatred and malaise amongst all of humanity.
The simple, succinct, and correct 1st message, of course, would not sell books. The bullshit of his actual message has apparently made him “successful”.
From all of the snippets I’ve read of his “philosophy” writing, all I can really say is that the guy is completely and utterly full of $hit. He’s a windbag in love with his own voice. I’ve heard schizophrenics on the street spouting the same kind of crap–except they made more sense (and that’s not actually a joke).
This is the kind of nonsense that people who sometimes briefly drop into these forums (and who are clearly suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect) spout–manifestos that are long-winded, boring, and not the least bit clever or insightful, but full of big words and complex-sounding “ideas”. And they generally take about 5,000 words to say what could have been said in a sentence or two. And they usually don’t stick around too long.
Anybody remember any of these posters?
BTW, I could write meaningless $hit like that in my friggin’ sleep. >:(
Heyya Pals,
I had reason to revisit one of my old WUWTW posts and of course did some editing as I went along,
after going through all that I figured I may a well post it at CC since it is a "philosophical" review of a big time modern philosopher.
And since I'm always curious if there's any interesting discussion to be had - I'm posting a couple thoughts over here.
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶24 - All the foolishness of Bolshevism, Maoism, and Trotskyism are somehow
reformulated exponentially in the name of saving the planet. Authors, journalists, politicians, scientists compete in announcing
the abominable and lay claim to a hyperlucidity: They alone see things correctly, whereas others vegetate in the slumber
from which they will someday awaken, terrified. They alone have emerged from the cave of ignorance in which the human
herd mills around, deaf and blind to the obvious.
Pascal once again conflates scientists with pundits and reporters.
Besides, if scientists offer what he wants to coin "hyperlucidity" it's only because most of the rest of world seems to be under
the spell of 'Hollyworld' ( the Hollywood/Reaganomics weltanschauuing) and too apathetic about our life sustaining home
planet Earth to care to learn about it in a serious lucid manner.
Sad fact is, because most folks these days have climbed into ancient religious books for their reality, it's left to the scientists
and other rational observers, to objectively strive towards understanding what we are witnessing upon our actual physical planet...
as opposed to spending all our attention on the machinations playing out within our fertile imaginations.
Deriding their attention to the physical planet we depend on, doesn't diminish it's importance. If only more people were interested
in a lucid understanding of our physical planet we'd all be way ahead of the game.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶25 - The adepts of the worst-case scenario are still the victims of a fantasy of omnipotence:
For them, to prognosticate a hateful destiny is to ward it off. It is one thing to teach the science of catastrophe as a science of reacting to and resisting disproportionate misfortunes; it is another to believe that we will be able to cope with mistakes by forecasting them.
Never a word for simply learning about our planet.
... for understanding it's evolutionary history and how we got here.
... for understanding how it's processes operate.
... for appreciating that we have become a global geological force.
... or for reminding us this game we're playing is for keeps.
Pascal Brucknerwrites:¶42 What is worrisome about ecologism is that it energetically insinuates itself into the most intimate aspects of our lives—our eating habits and our clothing—the better to control them. The project here is authoritarian.
On reading its recommendations, we can almost hear the heavy door of a dungeon closing behind us.
Well every aspect of our lives is touched by the resources at our disposal and the constraints/opportunities weather imposes.
Want to get philosophical Pascal? I tell you in my over half century of travels and a great many outside jobs,
I learned early on to appreciate weather as "the friendly adversary." Smoke on that concept for while.
Unfortunately, from reading Pascals world, I don't think he has any direct knowledge of this planet of the natural process
that gave birth to humanity, I can easily image a dude that's hardly ever been outside rooms.
I wonder if the concept of this planet and creatures and humanity evolving over unimaginable stretches of time makes any
visceral sense. I fear that for Pascal and such it's all some two-dimensional image like a post card. They can't grasp it's
essence or appreciate what hugely important lessons it has to teach us.
Nah, instead they're lost in some lala land of rhetorical games.
It has nothing to do with authoritarianism, it's about the reality of our dependency on
a healthy biosphere and predicable weather pattern.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Pascal Bruckner is the author of many books, including The Paradox of Love (Princeton University Press, 2011) and The Tyranny of Guilt (Princeton, 2010). This essay is adapted from his new book, The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse, published by Polity Press.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Reading through this, it occurred to me that, other than his privileged education, the intellectual difference between
Pascal and myself might be boiled down to a little metaphor.
Whereas Pascal is a perfect fit for the prissy interior designer who can't see beyond the furniture, frills and the
color scheme of a place. I myself am more the construction type who's looking at roof lines; bearing points; framing details;
drainage; maintenance anticipating considerations; spending time staring at the zone heating system; etc.
In my area snow loads and shedding during winter, is important; did they install safe hooks on the ridge for the snow shovelers
who need to climb up there (most don't) and such functional details, etc., etc., etc. And I'm constantly shocked at how
blind folks are to that. It's all about achieving the magazine cover picture perfect facade - the important details are handled like an after thought.
My sense of indignation is fired by Pascal's obvious ignorance of, and disinterest in, what's actually going on within the climate science community.
The man sounds like he gets all of his information from pop media outlets, a great source for interesting stories but a
lousy source for genuine detailed learning. Though, from his glib attitude, I don't think learning about the climate or the
folks who study it was his intention anyways.
For the whole thing, link to
http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/2014/12/watchingflames-pascalbruckner-fiddles.html
So basically he believes that anybody who claims to know more about anything than the general population, or tries to educate the general population about such things is a fascist or an authoritarian--except, of course, him. What a brilliant man (i.e. what a pompous bull$hitter)!