Scan barcode
A review by tanvika
الإنسان بين الجوهر والمظهر by Erich Fromm
5.0
Classic introduction on an important question: how to live?
I particularly, like the way Fromm tears slowly and gradually our commonsensical beliefs. Be it, the views on love or sanity or living itself. He firstly presents the widely accepted belief of having in the modern society.
Having means the belief that the our relation is with an object. A having person derives meaning in life by possessing and accumulating products, ideologies, other people. This way of living is fairly common. Visibly, terrorists, nationalistic fanatics, middle classes, addicts. One identifies with the object to seek completion of the void within. The most dangerous consequence of this mode is that the person is caught in a loop of passive fulfillment by frequent stimulations like soma, sports in BNW. Rising anxiety and stress to secure these objects results in suspicion and isolation from other fellows. Fear of death follows as it will break the illusion of permanence with the object. Caught in distractions, there is little time to pay attention to the manipulations by leaders and companies. My thoughts over this mode is that it is building on the hypothesis that humans are greedy. They can be incentivized by lollipop of money and status endlessly on the basis of a rat race. I think this hypothesis can easily be disproved. Even rich and successful people face severe depression and can harm themselves. Buddha, being well off, gave it up to free the world from suffering. There are empathetic qualities in humans like helping others during tsunami, raising voice against injustices like apartheid etc. I think most of the people are indoctrinated to pursue the path of excessive materialism. This is done by parents initially because they equate it with happiness. The other institutions like school, media, company etc also promote this mindset because of their vested interest.
The other alternative considered by Fromm is the being mode. It is a state of activity. Here he presents a important distinction between busyness and being active. Being busy, is passive engagement with what one is doing. I was reminded of the truckloads of boring assignments I have to write in University. While, being active is a active involvement with what one is doing. It can be reading a nature poem, enjoying the rustling leaves. It is like being in the flow- doing effortlessly. In being, there is joy of enjoying world, without possession.like music, without buying the CD. There is a fulfillment in quality living over quantity. Critical thinking along with love and empathy are important in this mode. I am miles away from this way. Undoubtedly, a change from exploiting to caring, blind obedience to critical thinking, from anxiety to calmness will do the world much good. The Noble path is dealt by Fromm in the book - art of being.
Fromm does refer to work of many spiritual teachers like Buddha, meister Eckhart, Jesus.
A background in it, would come handy to understand his works. His distinction of modes derives a lot from marx's theory of alienation. On Freud, I can't say much because I haven't read his work.
Looking forward to more of his works. It did help me explain my cognitive dissonance and bouts of insanity with the present society.
I particularly, like the way Fromm tears slowly and gradually our commonsensical beliefs. Be it, the views on love or sanity or living itself. He firstly presents the widely accepted belief of having in the modern society.
Having means the belief that the our relation is with an object. A having person derives meaning in life by possessing and accumulating products, ideologies, other people. This way of living is fairly common. Visibly, terrorists, nationalistic fanatics, middle classes, addicts. One identifies with the object to seek completion of the void within. The most dangerous consequence of this mode is that the person is caught in a loop of passive fulfillment by frequent stimulations like soma, sports in BNW. Rising anxiety and stress to secure these objects results in suspicion and isolation from other fellows. Fear of death follows as it will break the illusion of permanence with the object. Caught in distractions, there is little time to pay attention to the manipulations by leaders and companies. My thoughts over this mode is that it is building on the hypothesis that humans are greedy. They can be incentivized by lollipop of money and status endlessly on the basis of a rat race. I think this hypothesis can easily be disproved. Even rich and successful people face severe depression and can harm themselves. Buddha, being well off, gave it up to free the world from suffering. There are empathetic qualities in humans like helping others during tsunami, raising voice against injustices like apartheid etc. I think most of the people are indoctrinated to pursue the path of excessive materialism. This is done by parents initially because they equate it with happiness. The other institutions like school, media, company etc also promote this mindset because of their vested interest.
The other alternative considered by Fromm is the being mode. It is a state of activity. Here he presents a important distinction between busyness and being active. Being busy, is passive engagement with what one is doing. I was reminded of the truckloads of boring assignments I have to write in University. While, being active is a active involvement with what one is doing. It can be reading a nature poem, enjoying the rustling leaves. It is like being in the flow- doing effortlessly. In being, there is joy of enjoying world, without possession.like music, without buying the CD. There is a fulfillment in quality living over quantity. Critical thinking along with love and empathy are important in this mode. I am miles away from this way. Undoubtedly, a change from exploiting to caring, blind obedience to critical thinking, from anxiety to calmness will do the world much good. The Noble path is dealt by Fromm in the book - art of being.
Fromm does refer to work of many spiritual teachers like Buddha, meister Eckhart, Jesus.
A background in it, would come handy to understand his works. His distinction of modes derives a lot from marx's theory of alienation. On Freud, I can't say much because I haven't read his work.
Looking forward to more of his works. It did help me explain my cognitive dissonance and bouts of insanity with the present society.