Exploring Absurdist Comedy Within Historical Development
Written on
We often assume that children gain wisdom from the adults who nurture them. In contrast, adults, having lived longer, typically possess more life experience than children. However, imagine a scenario where adults exhibit childlike traits, resulting in a dynamic where they guide their offspring without true understanding. If this situation persisted for millennia, it would resemble the conditions of the Stone Age.
Key to this notion is understanding the specific “respects” in which our ancestors might have displayed childlike behavior. This doesn’t imply they were foolish or incompetent; rather, it suggests that they lacked the capacity for extensive knowledge accumulation or collective memory. Their small populations allowed them to explore diverse lifestyles without the burden of sustaining a permanent civilization.
This perspective aligns with anthropological findings that highlight prehistoric social experimentation. It also resonates with our current societal norms, which often rely on collective belief systems akin to a mass hallucination maintained by shared expectations and narratives.
Thus, the building blocks of culture and modern behavior—such as abstract thought, long-term planning, and symbolic art—were likely fostered by the imaginative playfulness prevalent during the protracted Stone Age. Consequently, despite our self-perception as advanced beings in contemporary civilizations, we remain engaged in fundamentally childlike pursuits, rendering our progress somewhat anticlimactic.
The Childlike Roots of Social Laws
This concept is evident in the historical evolution of legal systems. For countless years, prehistoric societies operated without formal laws, as hunter-gatherers did not view themselves as governed by divine mandates or enforced regulations. The absence of such deities or monarchs meant that leadership was informal, relying instead on social instincts and perhaps an inherent sense of honor.
Prehistoric communities resembled experimental societies, adapting their social structures based on environmental changes and resource availability. As clans followed animal migrations and adapted to seasonal shifts, they developed new social systems, often transitioning from hierarchical to more egalitarian models, prioritizing survival.
Initially, societal norms functioned as general guidelines rather than codified laws. Expected consequences for actions, such as reprisals for murder, were understood rather than enforced by a rigid legal framework.
With the advent of settled societies, particularly those tied to city-states and kingdoms, some social arrangements became formalized to facilitate cooperation among larger populations. This shift marked a transition from practical norms to laws that demanded compliance, often instilling fear to ensure adherence among the populace.
In this context, rulers became sacred figures, claiming divine representation to maintain order. As articulated by Morris Berman in Wandering God, the enchantment of the natural world was subsumed within a structured hierarchy, integrating gods, humans, and animals.
Ultimately, laws evolved into obligatory mandates, necessitating compliance rather than mere instinct. Typically, legal justifications were rooted in theology; while individuals could violate laws, evasion would lead to supernatural retribution.
This exploration reveals the inherent childlike quality of laws. They are constructs of our imagination, taken seriously through a collective self-hypnosis that allows us to thrive within civilized frameworks. The absence of divine enforcers implies that our societal norms are akin to the "invisible friends" of childhood. As we mature, our allegiances shift from fanciful companions to the more utilitarian constructs of adult belief systems.
The Comedic Nature of "Laws of Nature"
Transitioning from societal laws to natural laws, we encounter an additional layer of irony. Cultures, while often resistant to chaos, recognize that nature also adheres to cyclical patterns. As our understanding of the natural world deepened, we uncovered the inherent order within it.
Philosophers introduced abstract equivalents to divine entities to explain these natural regularities, positing theories about substances and metaphysical properties. The scientific community, empowered by technological advancements and mathematical language, began to dominate this exploration, shifting authority from priests and rulers to scientists.
The Western Scientific Revolution emerged from a monotheistic framework, evolving through a skeptical lens known as deism. This approach equated the natural order to a society governed by a distant ruler, mirroring the human experience of subservience to monarchs.
Consequently, the laws of nature began to resemble societal laws, despite scientific inquiry's efforts to demystify and naturalize them, thereby challenging the theological underpinnings of both societal and natural laws.
Philosopher David Hume argued that there is no empirical basis for the necessity of natural patterns. We assume nature will behave consistently, largely due to habit rather than evidence. This custom, historically tied to the fear of gods and rulers, underscores the comedic essence of our legal frameworks.
The notion of imposed necessity in laws is fundamentally absurd. In our historical amnesia, we construct serious legal systems atop the playful foundations of the Stone Age, elevating primitive notions to the status of divine mandates and objectifying them as the immutable laws of nature.
The crux of comedy lies in the misinterpretation of absurdity as gravitas. We chuckle at the irony when we recognize the joke while the subject remains oblivious, highlighting how history's punchline has been obscured by time.
A Rationalization for Scientific Laws?
To grasp the absurdity embedded in our discussions of natural laws, we must consider what these laws signify in a godless nature devoid of a lawgiver. Philosopher David Lewis posited that natural laws arise from the most effective deductive systems, blending simplicity with strength. This perspective frames laws as logical generalizations emerging from human reasoning.
However, this view renders nature’s necessity subjective, as reasoning is inherently a human construct. The question then arises: why should nature adhere to our rational expectations? This presupposition reflects secular humanism, replacing divine authority with human ambition, leading us to create rational systems that produce predictions based on axioms.
Alternatively, a more Platonic or metaphysical interpretation suggests that natural laws correspond to relationships between abstract entities defined by scientific theories. Yet, this raises further questions about the reality of these relationships. Do abstract concepts like "tiger" exist independently of individual tigers, or is this metaphysics merely a secular substitute for theological absolutes?
Most scientists overlook these philosophical dilemmas, taking natural laws for granted as practical tools for understanding the world. This pragmatic approach fosters a sense of progress, yet the stability of this justification falters when scientific advancements clash with religious beliefs, and technological growth disrupts ecological balance.
Even if we accept the utilitarian rationale, the comedy persists. Progress, while technically sound, can appear absurd. Children’s imaginative play evolves in its own way, paralleling an erratic sort of order. Practicality does not necessarily confer legitimacy if our aim is to avoid foolishness.
It is conceivable that no true laws of nature exist. While a natural order contrasts with chaos, it comprises cycles and processes rather than definitive laws. Focusing on the intricacies of these supposed laws may reveal a profound misunderstanding, mistaking a playful concept rooted in our history for a serious adult endeavor.
History as Existential Comedy
Picture a scenario where adults discover a child's idle doodles and mistakenly deem them masterpieces. They form a club to celebrate these drawings, which evolves into a cult that governs society. Scholars, assuming the greatness of these creations, devote their careers to analyzing their nuances, all while the original child remains oblivious to the legacy of her work.
This illustrates the absurdity that pervades our cultural practices. When we lose sight of historical and philosophical contexts, becoming absorbed in the minutiae of our social constructs, we forget that they are fundamentally games. Their origins stem from anarchic play in the Stone Age, yet as societies settled, we became introspective and insular. The scarcity of evidence regarding prehistory leads us to mistakenly regard our cultures, ideologies, and social structures as serious rather than inherently laughable.
We feel compelled to take ourselves seriously, lest we become the target of ridicule. Our religious fervor and secular arrogance demand that we present ourselves as rational, mature adults, dismissing childish whims. However, this self-image may be nothing more than a collective illusion, maintained through acts of self-hypnosis and servile conformity.
We feign maturity, believing ourselves enlightened, while true enlightenment likely belongs to those who stand apart from the tragicomic spectacles unfolding around them.