AN UNDER-DEVELOPED IDEA I STILL HAVE TO THINK UPON

-
Recently, I listened to a podcast on International Psychoanalytic Association (IPA)'s website, with the title, "The relentlessness of life extinct as a source inconsolability and greed". 

My concerns regarding this are the following. In general, every one of us have some or more amount of living drive and life instinct to call it such. But, sometimes, it is the excess of life and desire to live that makes us desperate and sad.

The negativity, often associated with the Todestreib, or Death drive, is in my opinion and also in Opinion of Dr. Salman Akhtar is not correct. It derives its conception from the very nature of human psyche of defeat. Human ego gives up after a point. He realizes that the quest for ultimate satisfaction and the quest of perpetual gratification are two different journeys. 

Usually, Life instinct works on the following formula, 

Pleasure => Gratification => Satisfaction

But, when this link breaks unhealthily, as in, Pleasure does not lead to gratification or gratification, even sustained gratification does not lead to satisfaction, here we find a problem. 

We can see this through economics intuition also. What is the concept of Diminishing marginal utility. It is assumed that it is human nature that sustained supply of a particular gratification will definitely make the human satisfied. But, here, in numerous cases, we find that sustained gratification does not lead to satisfaction. 

है कहाँ तमन्ना का दूसरा क़दम या रब

हम ने दश्त-ए-इम्काँ को एक नक़्श-ए-पा पाया
~ Gaalib 

The issue with these individuals is not a deficiency of the life instinct, but rather an excess of it. Additionally, there is a problem of insufficient death instinct—the absence of the quality to surrender oneself.





I hope to develop this idea in more length and depth in coming coarse of time. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THANK YOU!

-
Image
Journalling will be continued and so will Foucault reading. But I just wanted to share something very personal with you.  You know, Once upon a time, there was a kid who came to a small town in Patratu, leaving his parents behind because their parents were struggling with their own lives and relationships, to a Bijli Board given D-type quarter (House), of two of his Grandparents, Dadaji and Dadima. For a whole year, he was confused where he has come since, he did not know Hindi, only English and Tamil, may be a little Kannada.  He entered a school which was super-Hindi school. For a lot of time, He was a confused kid who did not understand what is going on.  It took at least one year for him to learn basic Hindi to be able to comprehend what was going on? Of course, he was never a brilliant student. Forget brilliant, He was not even mediocre when he used to study in LKG in Bangalore.  Now, cut to, when I see me, this little kid, who has no idea whatsoever, to me, mem...
Read more

EVERYWHERE, EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE

-
I wrote it after a sweet experience of is-ness after a Bhajan. Life, as it is, seems quite incomprehensible to us. Too much of everything. Too much of things, too much of people, too much of emotions and too much of reason. The best description of life, as it is, should be Everywhere, everything, all at once. Things exist, and from those things arise man which can comprehend itself and its is-ness.  Is-ness is a quality of the man. The capability to be able to acknowledge how existing feels like, it is a unique feature of the man. Stones cannot describe is-ness. From is-ness, a need for meaning arises. A dire need to formulate why we are able to comprehend so much.  From meanings, arise a need of articulation and from that arises language. Language worships meanings through words. Words create, in turn, their own symbolic or otherwise meanings. These meanings have a world of their own. One meaning that arose due to is-ness, another meaning which was the cause of language and t...
Read more

LET'S READ FOUCAULT: CHAPTER 1 (CHOMSKY-FOUCAULT DEBATE

-
Image
Michael Foucault, in my opinion, is the most influential thinker of 20th Century. No cap. I think the extent to which he has inspired literary theory, Philosophy, Sociology and Contemporary thought in general, it is immeasurable. I mean, everyone thinks he is not Foucauldian until I tell them what actually Foucauldian is, and then they realize that most of their actions in their lives is Post-modern and hence Foucauldian.  Here, in a couple of chapters, we will try to understand Foucault and his thoughts. In no way, it is meant to create an analysis of his work or trying to interpret his work. It is just an informative blog., the way I understand him, I would like to present so as to consolidate my knowledge. Next in the series might be Marx, Zizek, Lacan, whatever.  My beginning to understand him began when I watched this debate happened on a Dutch Television show, where these two Great thinkers, Noam Chomsky and Michael Foucault, appeared. At that time, and it was some 4-5 y...
Read more