The manipulation of mass opinions and sentiments leads to the concentration of power in the (usually dirty) hands of the manipulators – at least in the short run. The ordinary citizen is subject to mental-emotional manipulation to the extent that he has abandoned – or failed to develop – his critical reasoning powers. He thus shows his stubborn preference for pleasant falsehoods and myths over the truth. When a society or political culture becomes increasingly susceptible to mass-media-orchestrated mind manipulation, its collective ability to reason decreases accordingly. This eclipse of reason impedes the individual citizen’s ability to recognize the distinction between “cool,” rational thinking and “warm,” emotionally-charged opinions. When this distinction collapses, it is no more possible to reason with the easily manipulated despiser of reason than it is to discuss different colors with a person who has been blind from birth.
Perhaps the most effective first step one can take towards his healing and recovery from this condition of moral-political irresponsibility or madness involves self-doubt. The highly opinionated dupe or servile plaything of his manipulators must awaken sufficiently from his hallucinatory-intoxicated state to be able to glimpse his debased condition – and be filled with shame and disgust at what he has allowed himself to be reduced to. His long-buried inner dignity, now rekindled, recoils in outrage against his slavish seduction by (usually cynical and exploitative) manipulators. Manipulators, by definition, prey upon men’s susceptibility to suggestion, propaganda, and flattering lies. The last thing manipulators want to encourage or assist is the rational or critical faculties of their targeted audiences. They prey upon strong feelings, desires, and fears – and avoid making appeals to reflective thought. They are in the business of manufacturing more or less monolithic or bloc-like opinions.
But, to return to our freshly awakened, ashamed victim of media manipulation: he realizes that this dormant dignity that is outraged by the debased condition of mental slavery is rooted in the citizen’s neglected capacity to think critically. The two are seen and felt to be inseparable: his dignity as a human being and his developed capacity to think independently. Without this, he is less than a beast.
The light of reason illuminates our enslavement to emotionally-charged, general opinions, momentarily restoring our precarious dignity as human beings. But such sudden flashes of light do not by themselves transform us from passive opiners into active, critical thinkers. Our dignity depends, for its maintenance, upon replacing opinions with knowledge. The light of philosophical reason is, as it were, a different element from emotionally-charged opinion, as Plato long ago taught us. In order to bring about the momentous transformation I have hinted at, it is necessary to descend down into the fiery realm of emotionally-charged opinions in order to earn our soul’s release. Of course, as we descend we must carry the frail torch of reason to help guide us in that obscure, shadowy realm.
It is emotion and strong feelings that lend force and stubborn powers of resistance to our opinions. It is this power that we are up against in our private campaign to win our freedom. It will be necessary, therefore, to oppose these emotions and prejudicial feelings in order to counteract their spellbinding power over our minds. But we cannot fight the fire of emotions and passions solely with the light of reason. This light is crucial for illuminating the transformative process but it is not sufficient, by itself, to carry it to completion. Fire must fight fire. The hard “grunt work” of emotional opposition will be required. We will have to get our hands dirty.
Some might innocently suppose that this opposition means adopting opinions, biases, and preferences that are opposite from our own, but this is not the proper approach or method. Our opponent’s opinions and dogmatic convictions are no more and no less governed and supported by blinding emotion than ours are. It is not so much a matter of having opposed, emotionally-fueled opinions or positions 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑙 𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑡 (into a dead state of neutral inertia) as it is transcending the limiting horizons of emotionally-charged opinion altogether. Thus, it is not simply a courteous or “respectful” acknowledgment of our opponent’s right to his very different opinion, or even a “sympathetic” understanding of his “reasons” (or rather his passions) for holding such a different position than we do. No matter how many compromises and concessions are made (from either or both sides), this can only result in a temporary stalemate or truce.
The rationally enlightened kind of opposition I am advocating here begins with honest, ruthless introspection. What we are on the lookout for are precisely those powerful desires, fears, loves, hatreds, personal preferences, and aversions that leave us susceptible to seduction and manipulation by opinion-mongers, starting with our parents, teachers, rabbis, friends, and heroes. I said “ruthless” and I meant it. No one, no matter how beloved, endearing, persuasive, or authoritative is exempt from the most penetrating scrutiny. We must consider the frightening possibility that, from birth, we have lived – and will continue to live – in a 𝑚𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑚, not of knowledge, but of emotionally-governed opinions, vapid generalities, benign and pernicious lies and falsehoods. As such, we are like fish immersed in this polluted, watery medium – and our 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑠ℎ dream or ambition is to dry out, climb out, and to grow lungs so that we can breathe and survive in the very different element of airy thought. It may turn out that the most we can hope for is a kind of amphibious existence – free to venture out into the dry air for brief periods, but, being human, always ultimately bound to return to the opinion-crammed watery element.
Pushing firmly and steadily against those personal-identity-constituting desires, fears, love, hatreds, preferences, and aversions is a necessary key for unlocking our dignity-conferring powers of philosophical reason. It must be admitted, up front, that such rewarding but onerous work – precisely because it cuts at the roots of our “personal” identity – can 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑙 de-humanizing while it is in fact liberating our souls and ennobling our minds. But this paradox is due to a popular myth or prejudice concerning what “matters” about a personality. It is popularly believed that it is admirable to hold strong opinions or convictions, while those without strong opinions are regarded with derision and muted contempt.
But the “philosophical,” introspective reasoner sees this situation quite differently. He sees the man of strong (and almost invariably one-sided) opinion or conviction not as the ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑𝑒𝑟 of these opinions and convictions, but as the ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑑 – or possessed – by them. From this perspective, the stronger his convictions become, the more difficult it is for his dormant reason to wake up and challenge the power of the governing passions and emotions behind his “strong” opinions.
The man who has succeeded – against the odds – in liberating his mind from the emotional forces that, earlier, left him vulnerable to opinion-peddlers is not 𝑚𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑟 on that account. 𝐴𝑢 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑒! The opinionated man, the man of conviction, is a slave to those emotions that his opinions and convictions 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑘 and, to some extent, “rationalize.” He is 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 all right. Bound to stand guard in one spot, defending his opinion-turf – if it can legitimately be called “his,” in the first place. The rational mind that has succeeded, through hard work, in liberating itself from the gooey, stinky tar pit of collective opinions is free to move about unencumbered above the steamy morass. A famous citation from the end of Spinoza’s 𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑠 seems fitting here:
“If the way which I have pointed out as leading to this result seems exceedingly hard, it may nevertheless be discovered. Needs must it be hard, since it is so seldom found. How would it be possible, if salvation were ready to our hand, and could without great labor be found, that it should be by almost all men neglected? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.” (Pt.V.Prop.XLI)
