Comments on: The Autonomous Man in an Other-Directed World

By: pooleside

pooleside — Thu, 09 May 2013 15:13:10 +0000

Autonomy ain’t all it’s cracked up to be…

By: Tommy

Tommy — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:31:26 +0000

See Don Draper’s bookshelf:

http://www.vulture.com/2008/07/don_drapers_mad_men_bookshelf.html

By: Ben

Ben — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:12:33 +0000

Just love this often forgotten wisdom. This has special meaning in this contemporary age, where, let’s face it, walking with the crowd is generally not the way to shine! Neither, however, is blind contrarianism – an element of self-Mastery is surely the ability to examine one’s self and one’s actions alongside those of the crowd, and then to choose your own best path whilst holding true to your personal values. Brilliant!

By: Matt Verlinich

Matt Verlinich — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 22:04:59 +0000

This is an excellent article. In the spirit of the article I’ll have to read the original book, so as to not be influenced by your summary of it. You make a very valid “dig” at Tim Ferriss’ “lifestyle design”, but I like to think that I’m merely trying to use his 80/20 methods to transcend its inherent “other-directed” nature.

By: Randy

Randy — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 10:00:55 +0000

This was a great article. I really enjoyed reading it. I’ll never look at society the same again. I might check that book out.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 21:03:27 +0000

Great Article. Not only did you shed some light on the book, but how you see it relating to our culture. Just ordered the book!

By: James

James — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 23:05:34 +0000

A well researched article. The best style for AoM and why I keep coming back. Thanks

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:39:35 +0000

Exceptional article. This is why I keep coming back. I will obtain a copy of The Lonely Crowd and share it with my son.

By: Ed

Ed — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:55:04 +0000

One of the premises seems to be that autonomy exists. I think its a good article and something people may be able to use, but people have been saying basically the same thing since plato’s republic and aristotle’s nichomacean (I don’t know if I spelled that right) ethics. I think the reason this problem of autonomy as an important part of ethics seems to never be resolved adequately is that autonomy can only be an illusion.

Anyway, I know neuroscientific experimentation is providing greater evidence to show that our thoughts, decisions, and actions are predetermined by our brain structure. The evidence is by no means conclusive, but strong correlations are being drawn. Or at least this was the general lesson learned in my Philosophy of Neuroscience class taught at UAB.

On a more abstract note, philosophers since Kant have discussed whether free will and even the principium individualis is an illusion or not. I’m under the opinion that the differentiation of people and objects is a category imposed and generated by the anatomy and physiology of our brains and sensory systems. But that’s just speculation.

Basically what I’m getting at is that this article is all very well and good — I do think that it may be personally useful to think of things in this way. But I wonder, does it have substance or is it just a crude demonstration of symbolic language imposed on vague sensory impressions. Does it really fit, or is it like fitting a square block into a circle hole? It seems like it works, but only because the block has been hammered in so many times the hole has been distorted.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 03:36:51 +0000

I saw a lot of myself in some of the examples… it makes me realize the impact of social media. Good food for thought. Very much appreciated.