FREEDOM & HARMONY

Lockdown was not enjoyable. It had me traversing a rabbit hole I dug out of my own ego. I found myself delving deeper and deeper into my perceived flaws and slights. Picking and gnawing at this constructed self I had conjured up in years past. A self-built on the foundations of exterior definitions. A self that seemingly crumbled under the weight of isolation. 

The anchors tying me to the idea of who I was, severed by an untimely and universal disconnection from the world outside, had me reeling. I sat idle in a bay, a boat untethered to neither shore nor port. Lifeless, but for the gentle nudge of the sea breeze rustling my patchwork sails.

So, where did this existential crisis originate? Lockdown was merely a match. Really, I was dried grass, yearning for a spark.

Let me divulge.

~

What is an individual? A single, distinguishable entity perhaps. 

So, assuming there is such a thing, it would of course, presumably encounter outside variants. Variants that ultimately shape the individuality of the individual entity. Then, it’s an individual. 

That’s surely too simple of an explanation. So again, I ask, what is an individual? 

It’s a question hot on the lips of many in the time of life I am in. That unyielding, maddening cesspit of existential uncertainty we blindly step into as school finishes. Where we find ourselves trying to figure out what the hell is going on.

This period of growth is now soiled by both the loss of connection and purpose. Two quarries from which we would usually mine components to construct a self. 

With such a massive shift in a pivotal time of development for many young adults, I think it may be prudent to delve into what our sense of an individual is and how these past few months of isolation may have left us questioning whether we’re digging in the right spot. 

So, allow me to delve into the beforementioned cesspit.

~

Let’s look at the western frame of thinking around the self: how we frame the idea of the individual is around exactly that; an Individual. The nucleus of our society and the way we live is that single, distinguishable entity. Whatever I encounter is me encountering it so my idea of the individual must be that of assumed centrality.

We see this in psychology where social anxiety in western cultures is spurred on by the fear of others judgingyou. The affect is put onto the individual from the whole. 

Yet, we constantly see people defined not by their individuality, but by their assumed individuality given to them by labels and stereotypes. Structures we put in place because it’s too hard to understand the intricate complexities of a human. What if there was no differentiation, at least not to the extent that we in the West think there might be. There we come to the Ying to our Yang; the Eastern frame of thinking.

The East frames itself around a much more communal mindset. To return to the example social anxiety gives, in the East it is an individual fearing that their actions will offend others. It’s about the individuals’ effect on others. There is no centrality, the individual is indistinguishable from the whole. 

The idea of the “whole” is something we’ve grappled with in the West, especially in the last few months. Even today, as restrictions are slowly being reimposed in our more populated states, anger is being ousted at retail workers when shoppers are asked to wear masks. Because a mask in our mind affects us first and foremost. We have to wear it, and for those of us who aren’t so inclined to think of others, it’s anger that is manifested as they see themselves (the individual) slighted by the whole (e.g. Bunnings employees.)

To make it a bit clearer, as we move forward. Think of the West as America. The entirety of societal thought is framed around Freedom. A concept that, especially in the US’s case, is formulated around the individual. 

Think of the East as China, where freedom is replaced with the reverence of Harmony. Harmony of the whole to be specific. 

West and East. Freedom and Harmony. Yin and Yang. 

~

Freedom 

I think the earliest introduction I had to two hemispheres of global philosophical thinking was in a religious context. I had been in Bodhgaya, India, near to the site where Siddhartha Gautama reached “Enlightenment.” In a conversation with a cross legged, Bhutanese monk a parallel was formed. 

“In the west you look up and think, how did I get here? Whereas in the East we look up, then we look down and then we think okay, what now?” 

Now I may have heard this from a wise, mysterious monk or I may have read it in a book. Since I have been in the situation from which I could say I heard that from a Buddhist practitioner hailing from a secretive Himalayan Kingdom, I think I’ll go with that.

So, continuing on. As alluded to earlier, our Western sense of self is very much individualistic. Our minds are soiled with delusions of purpose and centrality. Over time, as we have moved into our cosy, capitalistic hovel which we now call society, our individuality became enmeshed with the favourite son of consumerism. Material. 

What in psychology is called “Symbolic Self Completion Theory” equates to those of us who adhere to the Western ideation of the individual as using materials to define themselves. Now this approach worked to some degree throughout the twentieth century as more and more value, both monetary and social, was placed on materials. 

Think about it, you had your group of friends, most of you would have had shared interests, but ideally each of you had something that defined you. Whether it be sport, music, clothing, hobbies etc. it’s popularised, and simplified in popular culture like in movies where we see geeks, goths, jocks in high school settings. While this is somewhat tribalistic it does paint a picture of “Symbolic Self Completion Theory” possibly in its primitive form. 

So, as we entered into a new century the idea of the individual was heavily diluted with that of material definitions. This was, at the time, comfortable and more importantly easy. Humans, having always grappled to grasp an idea of the self, found a hiatus from that insecurity in the sweet, honeyed embrace of material symbols. But, like a calm tidal breeze, this was not to last. 

As we ventured into the later stages of the first decade of this millennium social media came about, and this is where things get messy. So, we have this sense of self, imbued with material-definitions. We know from evolutionary biology that a human’s need for differentiation from individuals in their social groups is defined by the size of that group. So of course, pre-social media there wasn’t such a need to define oneself. Any need that arose may have even been subconscious, so menial that it was unnoticeable. Although, when that social scope is amplified to the tune of global, hyper-connectedness. It’s here that we encounter problems. 

So, we have hyper-connectivity, a biological need to define oneself as an individual and a sense of self attributed to material symbols. This is where we find the “Individuality Crisis”.

~

How does my personal story tie into this? Well, let take you on a somewhat (very) self-indulgent journey.  From the end of 2018 to the waning months of 2019 I spent about six months abroad, personal trips and university internships. 

Travelling alone and with colleagues, I delved entirely into my work. I’ve documented the decline of the Koli, stone age fishermen who rest their boats upon the shores of Mumbai, India. Spent time with Changpa nomads in the high, isolated peaks of the Himalaya, learning how their life sustaining glaciers have been disappearing. I detached, physically and mentally from life back home. 

I had, to some degree of relief, (forgive the cliché) “found myself.” Or at least a version of myself I was happy with. On my return home, faced with the trivialities of the everyday, I felt detached. I knew who I was but no one else did. I had found comfort in Buddhist philosophy, but that comfort did not translate to the disconnection I felt with my friends. A year had past and I had grown, as had they. 

As I reacquainted myself with the comings and goings of life as a young adult, I began to notice a subtle display; of pain, beauty and terror, marks of growing up. As we turned into the third decade of this millennium, I resolved that I would document this time of life. First, to understand it, second, to immerse myself in it the only way I knew how, with a camera, and questionable objectivity. Ultimately, we leave school, academically adept but without a single ounce of understanding about ourselves or others and how we each tie into one another. 

It’s a swirling void, edged on by emotional instability, a ready supply of illicit, mind bending substances and a general lack of understanding as to who we are or why we’re here. 

What I began to notice alongside this existential uncertainty was symptoms of what I have come to call “The Individuality Crisis.” I began to wonder why music dubbed as mainstream is regarded as undesirable, despite the fact that good music, being good, would naturally become mainstream? Why people would get riled up when discussing certain topics like upbringings (rural, beach, city). Or why people, so fervently flocked towards centres of differentiation like festivals, back street bars and coffees with sixteen syllables. Centres of differentiation like these result in a paradox. Flocks of people try to distinguish themselves as individuals, and ultimately end up doing the same as everyone else, undermining their desired result.

~

So, this “Individuality Crisis.” Now, with social media we can see more people than ever before, and our material individualities have become flawed. With more people than attributable symbols, there are sure to be clashes. Then in our need to differentiate ourselves, we become insecure – with our material individualities left picked apart piece by piece. 

So, Instagram pages and Facebook feeds become a place where we can plug these insecurities. People, especially younger generations are so driven and determined to display their worth to the world that they ultimately neglect to prove their own worth to themselves. Things like nice clothes, coming from the beach or country, having political opinions, all comes with its own inherent identity. These all are now worth social capital. Being an individual, in a swathe of material-selves is desirable. 

I sit and listen to conversations which are like slug matches; person A will remark as to why their interest in something is authentic, then person B will return a remark stating their own perceived authenticity. This may be in regard to music and the dedication to a certain band, especially one deemed desirable with the right ratio of good music to lack of mainstream attention. 

What this is, is symbolic-interactionism on steroids. Our reality has become one made up of symbols and materials that ultimately meet the aim of defining us as humans. It’s madness! The human race has gone stark, raving crazy. We’re so ravenous for validation of authenticity and understanding that we have completely lost touch with the experiences that yield just that. 

We seek an end, disregarding the means. 

But when we lose connection to centres where we can peacock our designed selves. When the bars, festivals, sports clubs and gyms shut and the centres from which we anchor ourselves are lost to us. Do we then find ourselves lost as well?

Who are we then?

~

Harmony

Newton’s Third Law ultimately equates to balance. The concept of balance is one strewn throughout recorded history in spiritual and philosophical thinking. In the approach adhered to by Eastern Thinking, we find a more communal, collective societal structure. Growing out of the fields of thought ploughed by minds such as Confucius and Buddha, is balance. 

Eastern philosophies recognise the connection that all humans share. In Hinduism they have the concept of the Atman, the individual soul’s ultimate connection to the universal soul. In Buddhism they have Anatta, the “non-self”. A frame of thinking entirely opposite to that of the West. The push to our pull.

A recent parallel can be formed between these schools of thought, and their contemporary results of Freedom and Harmony. As coronavirus swept the world, Eastern countries have been doing significantly better than Western nations. This is odd, because Western nations on average have better levels of healthcare (also seeing as Coronavirus began in China). Yet, what was seen in countries like the US, Australia and the UK was people protesting the lockdown measures. 

Lockdowns put in place not to benefit the individual, but to release the strain the pandemic would have on a countries health care system and their capacity to care for the more vulnerable of their population. So of course, Western thinking, with the importance it gives to the individual, has those same individuals protesting the effect the restrictions have on them. 

Whereas in Eastern nations, with their communal mindset, has seen the populations acting in compliance, staying at home to stem the spread. The duality of Freedom and Harmony has never been clearer. Even today in our hyper-connected, globalised world we can see how these two schools of thought still form the basis of society in their respective hemispheres. 

So, what can we learn from harmony, as opposed to freedom? There is talk of the spiritual poverty in the West. I think this might just tie into what I’m talking about here. If we look at spirituality in the Abrahamic religions, it’s the connection of the individual to a higher, overbearing, godly being, and how to live a good life worthy of entry into his eternal, shiny cloud kingdom. 

In the East, its connection to reality, and the universe. Its understanding the paradigms of existence and how each of us fit into the world. This is severely lacking in Western thought. The spiritual poverty is us thinking we need to prove our individuality but not stopping to think why we want to be an individual, why the approval of others is important and what we have to gain from such a definition. 

Even then, if you adhere to the thinking of philosophers such as Locke, Hume and Parfit there isn’t even a self nor an individual. The two schools of thought around the self, body and memory result in the self, as we define it, as not existing. Your memories and body when you were born are completely different to your body and memories now. Your bones are bigger, you have shed that skin, your cells have regenerated, and you can’t even remember your first few years. That person doesn’t exist, so where does the self-begin? And where does it end? 

~

Balance

So, what now?

Well I think a good step would be to realise that fishnet stockings, Doc Martens and a criminal excess of glitter is not a substitute for a personality.

As we watch rates of mental health skyrocket, particularly in young people, it’s time to start addressing causes rather than trying to limit symptoms.

Our idea of the self is not holistic nor as individualistic as it should be. We are at a halfway point, where we haven’t entirely committed to being individuals in its rawest form because that would risk being socially alienated for not conforming to a literacy of self that others can understand. We are trying to be individuals that fit with the whole, we are squares squeezing into circle shaped holes. 

Although, we may be close, humans need connection. We are social creatures but, in that connection, we don’t necessarily need absolute conformity. So, we need to do away with labels. Or rather do away with allowing ourselves to be defined by these labels. The only constant in this world is change and any label we attribute to ourselves is surely one day going to be unattributable. The one label we can rely on, and from which build a healthy and secure sense of self, is our self. 

Covid induced isolation, while difficult for many, left us untethered from our external points of differentiation. In this, I certainly found myself faced with a raw and untraversed self. One much more real, but almost daunting in that realness. Materials that we have typically used to define ourselves, no longer hold the same gravity as we once thought they did. 

For example, say you define yourself by your following or involvement of a certain sport. That sport will always be that sport. It is a constant and largely, unmoving entity. The fallacy in this approach is that we then see ourselves. Entities, growing and moving. In constant flux as the world around us shapes and bends who we are. Stagnant ports of call like sport, often end up caging us into shallow, and largely untrue ideas of our self.

Humans need to understand the world around them. Matthieu Ricard, French photographer, writer and monk once said that “western science is a major response to minor needs.” In not only studying but giving increasing societal capital to mediums of knowledge like physics, chemistry and biology. We neglect to differentiate the immeasurable aspects of our reality. Like the self. So, when we do come to the question of who we are. We try and measure it, as something stagnant and constant. We look for what we can observe, measure and replicate and in this we don’t measure ourselves we measure something we then decide we should be. Something we and others can understand.

Lockdowns, across the western world, have shone a glaring light on the failings of how we ideate the self. But despair isn’t where we should turn. The answer is entirely ingrained in the problem. 

In our fevered dash to claim any ounce of differentiation we have overlooked the one thing that would assure us our desired label of an individual – that we already inherently are one. Then, from that seed of thought, blossoms this thinking into one that understands the connection we all have in that one, indisputable reality; that we are all individuals. It is there we might just find both freedom and harmony.

Sadly, as we further plunge into the festering, bosom of capitalism and the unnatural environment it seethes, it’s unlikely we will make this change anytime soon. This realisation will more likely result in greater insecurity. In which, we will continue to define ourselves by what we don’t have, we will further alienate ourselves away from any true sense of the word and before long be so insane in our pursuit of validation that we may even begin to question our humanity. Or even more concerningly, the humanity of others.