https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=552u7yqT-YM
I have followed the sociologist Dr. Frank Furedi's writings (mostly his fear writing) since 1997. I like a good deal of his critiques. Yet, I strongly am not in agreement, for a lot of reasons, with a lot of it--including, and in particular, his biased ideological (materialist = secularist = exclusionist = traditionalist-modernist) leanings of interpreting the relational, social-cultural and political world. He gets quite reductionist, hyperbolic and extremist at times.
I haven't listened to this particular talk per se by him, but it is always worth a listen. He researches his topics well. He thinks independently and he challenges the stataus quo.
For the record, I cite his work often in my publications. Sadly, over the years, he has chosen not to cite my work or dialogue with me on the fear topic or education topic (which he also critiques Education often in ways I find stereotypying if not fearmongering itself).
----------
Note and Questioning: I am thinking of how a Fearlessness Paradigm is so different in many ways from the Fear Paradigm that Furedi works with in his perspective on society and what is going on. His corrective to the Fear Problem? He is a libertarian (politically and ideologically) as far as I can tell, though I do not think he actually says this explicitly anywhere. He is definitely not in favor of government or any authority body taking over the parent's role with their children on certain interior and moral aspects of their development. He is kind of conservative that way, as an educational thinker. That said, I wonder if the very language of calling a phenomenon life excessive fear, or "culture of fear" (as he also writes about) a "Fear Epidemic" is actually useful and to what end and who does it serve?
In a Fearlessness Paradigm there is more depth and breadth to conceptualizing the Fear Problem than Furedi wants to make out. And, although that is a much larger topic and critique, suffice it to say here in this blog response that maybe we would benefit more as a culture if we called what he is referring to as a "Timidity Epidemic" or a similar term even less flattering a "Cowardice Epidemic." From within the core of the Fearlessness Paradigm of critical analysis and intervention, the role of the Rebel, and Sacred Warrior (and Magician) archetypes is important in my theorizing of 'what humans need to recover'--and the warrior-spirit is a sacred notion that is able to overcome the cowardice dynamics of a "culture of fear" in ways that I think bring about true emancipatory implications. The latter, I do not see in Furedi's philosophy, theories, historical understanding and in his diagnoses and general interventions of how to improve society.
Comments