403. Mimesis and role models
René Girard proposed a theory of ‘mimetic desire’.
Desire does not arise from within the individual but from mimicry, imitation of
what others do. The closer one is to the other, the stronger this desire is,
mixed with envy and grudges when not having equal access.
This leads on to mimetic violence, where rivalry and
grudge escalate to the point that the original object of desire is lost from
sight, and the grudge itself is imitated, evokes anger that is in turn
imitated, and his escalates into mutual violence.
That leads to the need for a scapegoat, often quite
arbitrary, to load off the blame onto.
That, in turn, according to Girard, leads on to the
elevation of the scapegoat as a divinity, to carry the blame, and to constitute
a taboo, to prevent a re-kindling of the violence, and to be pacified with
sacrifice and ritual.
And that, Girard argues, is the beginning and the
basis of all culture.
I want to give some opposition to all this.
In his early and late work, Girard allowed for a more
beneficial view of imitation, which can generate empathy and sensitivity to
political problems. I want to support the latter and expand on it.
In my analysis of causality, and is application, at
several places in this blog, I adopted Aristotle’s multiple causality, which
includes the exemplary cause, a model to be imitated or a role model to be
followed (items 96 and 99 in this blog).
For example, as masters of phronesis, Aristotelian
practical wisdom, Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela served as role models. I
noted that since good practice, also in professions, cannot always be captured
in closed protocols, since much practice is too rich, i.e. too
context-dependent and variable, an example to be followed may be the only
effective form of guidance, leaving some room for personal interpretation of
the ideal.
Such leeway for interpretation is not only beneficial
for motivation and the intrinsic value of work, but also under conditions of
uncertainty where no optimal choice of policy can be established and codified
in advance, but room is needed for adapting to what emerges in new options and
conditions.
While Girard associates imitation with envy and
threat, that is not necessarily so. Similarly, in item 338 I opposed the view,
propounded by Žižek and Lacan, of the other in terms of threat rather than also
of opportunity. At several places in this blog I argued that opposition from
the other helps to escape from one’s prejudice, and to learn and grow.
Also, in imitation an innovation realises its
potential, becomes established, and there is nothing wrong with that. That is
how people get to benefit from the innovation.
Next, imitation with variation is a source of further invention
and innovation. I showed that in my ‘cycle of invention’, in items 31 and 35 in
this blog. That arises, in particular, when some existing ractice is carried
into a new context, in ‘generalisation’, to be imitated there, but then meets
with new challenges, for which the first step is to differentiate the practice,
tapping form memory of earlier trials and applications.
There is also an alternative view of the scapegoat, as
designated by an authoritarian leader to load off the blame for not fulfilling
the promises by which he captured the population.
I do not wish to deny that imitation can also be
negative, in envy and rivalry, leading to an escalation of conflict and
violence, as Girard argued.
However, in that there is also something else at play,
as I argued in item 48 in this blog. That is associated with the idea of a
hierarchy of needs (due to Maslow), with at the basis, on the most primary
level, the most fundamental, physiological needs of food and sex, and safety
and shelter. In that, people are more similar, and hence more rivalrous, than on the ‘higher’ levels of a need for
social recognition and self-realization. There, I proposed, people differ more,
and are less rivalrous, less involved in a zero-sum game, more complementary,
in opportunities to learn from each other, so that beneficial imitation may be
more prevalent.
No comments:
Post a Comment