the Observing Ego: a narrative of my existence

Introduction

Have you ever heard the phrase “talking to yourself”? What about “thinking aloud”?
Which one seems to be accurate? The phrase thinking aloud has become accepted due to self-
consciousness but it doesn’t make any sense. When YOU are talking to your SELF, you are
talking to someone, as you do in any other conversation; just as YOU are reading this book.
Whereas to think aloud, your brain would actually have to verbalize in some way.
So what is the difference between you and yourself? A matter of existence.
Thinkers in the mid to late 19th century and early 20th century like Søren Kierkegaard and
Friedrich Nietzsche, through a dismantling of objectivity and emphasis on skepticism, especially
concerning social morals and norms, laid the groundwork for the intellectual movement called
existentialism. It is my belief that the line between the objective and subjective view of philosophy
exemplified by this movement has been completely obscured by not only a subsequent misuse of
termanology but a general displasure of ideals by the following generation of philosophers. As a
result, writers such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and Samuel Beckett drew heavily from
Kierkegaard and Nietzsche rather than that of their contemporaries. They brought about a new
sense of subjectivity, but also one of forlornness which greatly influenced contemporaneous
thinkers, writers and artists. For example, Karl Barth’s important fideist approach to theology and
lifestyle ironically spawned an irreverence for reason and therefore sparked the rise of subjectivity.
Colonialism after World War II contributed to the idea that one cannot have an objectively superior
lifestyle or belief. This idea was taken further by anti-foundationalist philosophers Heidegger,
Ludwig Wittgenstein and Derrida, who re-examined the fundamentals of knowledge. They argued
that rationality was not as sure or as clear as modernists and rationalists asserted. In addition to
the philosophers, most psychologists began to assert a cognitive bias toward existence, which
points out the human bias of “truth”. Existentialism as a philosophical movement is generally
considered to be a study in pursuit of meaning in existence and seeks value for the existing
individual. Unlike other fields of philosophy, it does not treat the individual as a concept but values
individual subjectivity over objectivity.

Because of this, questions regarding the meaning of life and subjective experience are seen as
being of paramount importance, above all other scientific and philosophical pursuits. There are
several philosophical positions related to existential philosophy but the main identifiable common
proposition is that existence precedes essence, i.e. that a man exists before his existence has
value or meaning. This value or meaning and that of the world around him allows man to define
himself in his own subjectivity and vascilate between choice, freedom and angst. Existentialism
often is associated with anxiety, dread and awareness of death. However, it is also asociated
with both freedom and liberty. Existentialism emphasizes action, freedom and decision making
as being fundamental to human existence.
It is diametrically opposed to both rationalist tradition and positivism.
Early existentialists argued against any description of humans as primarily rational beings who
see reality as an object of knowledge. They refused to see human actions as something that
should be regulated by rational principles, as we were beings who could be defined in terms of
our behavior. More generally it rejects all of the Western rationalist definitions of being and
rational principles. It also rejects essence as the most general feature that all existing things share
in common. More contemporary existentialists view human beings as subjects in an indifferent,
objective, absurd and often ambiguous universe in which meaning is not provided by the natural
order but can be created, however provisionally and unstably, by the actions and interpretations
human beings. Although there are certain common tendencies among existentialist thinkers, there
are major differences and disagreements among them. Some don’t even affiliate themselves with
or accept the validity of the term “existentialism”. In contrast to this philosophical school of thought
there is an interesting paradox known as postmodernism.

When I first started writing this book, I read a quote about postmodernism from Al Gore, former
Vice something or other and possibly a Senator at the time, i’m not sure. To be honest, I don’t
keep up with that sort of thing. He stated that postmodernism was a perfect combination of
nihilism and narcissism. I took offense to this as both a nihilst and a narcissist. I mean, the nerve
of this jerk. Who are you to tell me what my personality traits combine to create perfectly?
A Senator, huh? Well, the joke’s on you because I don’t vote. I guess that’s the nihilism you are
referring to. In any case, I do not belive anyone has properly defined or classified this so-called
philosophical movement, let alone come to any kind of
consensus about the basic principles therin.
Other than the rejection of modernism, which is also ambiguous, what is it really about? I know
that an opposition to the rise of the “robots” and dawn of the computer age has much to do with it.
That would probably make George Orwell a postmodernist. But it also has to do with a rejection of
conservative ideology, in that the traditional views of socio-econmics and politics using
rationalization and objectivity are impossible because those patterns of thought do not actually
exist. I find this to be a strange conclusion as rationale and objectivity are sometimes
diametrically opposed. Objective views are primarily influenced by physical laws and mathmatic
absolutes whereas rationalization may proceed from a false assumption. If both ideas are
rejected or neither exists, one would have no other choice that to presume that they are the center
of the known universe, hence the narcissism I suppose. I started this project innocently enough by
asking myself questions. It is turning out to be very complex.
I have studied philosophy for 20 years, but I am not a professionally trained philosopher,
(whatever that may be)
but I will make an attempt to articulate as best I can from my own understanding of the material.
Simply put, this is how I see myself and how I see the world.    

Skip Pulley
Soundboy America
the Observing Ego: a postmodern narrative
by Skip Pulley
Important note:
  
 This is my first published narrative. It will be available for purchase
in June, 2008. I am very excited to present it as my first major work
of literature. Thank you to everyone who has supported me and my
projects and I look forward to your honesty, respect and continued
support.
   Thank you,

Skip Pulley, Soundboy America