A Review of Mr. Desh Subba's work by Abdullateef Sadiq, Theoretician and Generalist Writer, Nigeria
Let's begin with a story.
A king sent for a Man who he heard feared no one. Well, the king hearing that, although he has won many battles and made waste to land inhumanly, killed people and slaves and closed ones without second thought. The king summoned him immediately. Having on the top of his fence, heads of conquered kings and great rebels as trophies, with their wives as his concubines. Firstly, the king tries to confirm if the man knew what he has done by asking the man that fears nothing (let's call him F) if he knew him, the terrible king and all the stories of his ruthless and blood thirsty nature.
Mr F said, 'yes of course, I know you and heard all about you, and so what? You only conquered lands for fear that other kings might dominate you, or we might see you as inferior, or that according to the tradition of kingship and it's mythology, a display of brutality and war must satisfy the myth and unconscious forces of our custom and traditions. Also my lord, your imagination also is your master, and if it means by filling up a large field with human heads to prove over your inferiority complex of your personality type, you would do so. My lord, all these, you do, because of the system and instincts of fear revolving around your present life progress and spiritual station. If your position torments you, then your fears and it's expression by the super ego or ambition are your persona in this throne which it might not be your cosmic harmony.'
But the king, fearing more that someone knew something he never wished anyone knew. That someone knew his fear. A personal issue and subjective. But not yet. An objective and social issue lies also. " If People knew that the King wasn't feared, so they too were afraid that if that is so, their whole world view was a lie".
But the king, must satisfy his inner peace to still be the king. He had to prove to himself that all creatures feared him. He inquired if Mr F had a family or friend or loved one. They said no. So next was torture and starvation. But the man proved to enjoy pain, and welcomed the will to death, so even hunger was something he welcomed. His hands were cut, but he had nothing to lose. He had a disorder which made him feel no pain. The king was in fear, for even if he banished him out of existence the fact already existed that someone never feared him. The king committed suicide, because he was afraid to live life as such with such a fact. The king wasn't FEARLESS.
Here below are some remarks I made.
Now, I Present my Reflections on Mr Desh Subba's book on the 'Philosophy of Fearism" (Abdullateef Sadiq, Theoretician and Generalist Writer, Nigeria)
1. It's is, to use an institutional metaphor, an anthropology of the various human conditions and how they act and react to them that arouse fear. Sure, I skipped other early chapters because I belief we know the basics. The hierarchy and systems of schema such as an organization, the relationship of the mind to objects and realities that have an affect hold on him resulting to fear. They having the "appearance" based in the evolutionary epoch, mode of living (or production in Marxist terms) and culture of religion, philosophy, civilization (science, art and technology).......all masking the various modes of fear. But at the end, you tend to make a classification of fear. The dispensable, the gradation (minimum or maximum) and the one that perhaps seems to be innate (such as sickness, death, overwhelming of cosmic force and uncertainty of time).
"if you really want to make a field or a discipline of "Fearism" you would need to systematize the whole discourse"
2. On your use of concept and categories. You take the unconscious as an existing and autonomous realm. Although, with your use of some "Asian or Eastern" (I don't clearly agree with such demarcation as the history of thought has led me to believe) philosophies that unconscious is put in relation with some mysteries hidden as forces yet conceptualized but intuited by feeling of cosmic/material rhythm and sensual mastery of the body and environment (hence the "Asian"). This step, if I am correct in reading you is accepted to me as far as it remains open as a conjecture and to be tested by experience. There are many mysteries which I am sincere not to deny.
But the "idea" of post modernism and postmodern thinkers at least I might accept that Derrida took such a pledge, but not with Foucault whose text you lodge into such matrix. If you read his "Archaeology of knowledge" and also his "The Order of Things" (where he made some empirical analysis of the instability of "isms" and the arbitrariness of sciences and programs as "Modes of Discourse" each with its strategy of "Formation of Objects" you would see that by inference he would not be classified as such or even imply any post modernism). To confirm this, just see the second chapter of the "Archaeology of Knowledge". Perhaps the best way to put this is Foucault reply to Derrida critique of his 'History of Madness', this was imposed in his other edition as a reply to Derrida letter. It shows the difference and also that foucault doesn't practice philosophy neither sees it as a foundation neccessary for knowledge;
"What I have tried to show (but it was probably not clear to my own eyes when I was writing the History of Madness) is that philosophy is neither historically nor logically a foundation of knowledge; but that there are conditions and rules for the formation of knowledge to which philosophical discourse is subject, in any given period, in the samemanner as any other form of discourse with rational pretension." APPENDIX III Page 578. Routledge Publisher. Ed. By Jean Khalfa.
Also on your use of categories, perhaps, if you really want to make a field or a discipline of "Fearism" you would need to systematize the whole discourse, but I understand why the text is like that, with its literary structure still leaving windows here and there, because as you made clear in the beginning that other works and findings in different areas and by different people are making progress towards that "ism". That means they are under the research program of "Fearism". Well, the only addition I might say is that, it should be open to criticism and falsification of the concept any time, experience is the only thing that contradicts it's own results. This would help to keep an attitude of objectivity and awareness of bias.
3. On findings, you made (especially at your ending notes), an elaborate clinical and medical collections of observations, studies and professional reports of the conditions of life which fear is actualized either from a psychic, bodily, environmental (or "natural") and institutional source. That agreed and it is corroborated by many psychological, sociological and philosophical (beyond, Jasper, existentialist, Nietzsche and psychoanalysis schools) works I have tried to read to the best of my time.
COMMENTS
1. Your work helps to bring to Man the unconscious (which in strict psychological epistemology is just the mental process, habits and the contemporary and historical institutions known and unknown that have a grip on our social fabric of culture and life, hence the mystical feeling of it) workings and it's varieties to the consciousness of Man. By making it clearly, showing its various historical forms and also how even in the superstructure maintained by various elites and ruling class whatever their realm (science, legality, spirituality or politics and art) the idea of fear is almost innate and might (and is used) for the betterment of society or to its detriment or exploitation. I applaud this remarkable achievement. This step I believe, in your own version is quite novel and made apparent for those who wish to know and take life serious.
2. Another progress is it's collection of wealth of facts and making notifications here and there in different fields of discourse how "fear" relates them together. Also, I would add that a progress was made (also, as far as I have seen, a novel one indeed,) is the skill of making an elaborate classification of various feilds of human experience and also animal experience (for example on your analysis of fear in organism from micro to others as they adapt, feed and react to environment, but, whatever the notion or "nature" of animal mind might be still remains a mystery.) This was done at the beginning of your book which from there you took on the life or nature of consciousness basing it not on discourse or "knowledge" or "experience" but on what I might surely go with George Santayana as "Animal Faith". An elaborate philosophical discourse of the fact of consciousness playing a minute role and only called upon in the existence of animal life for survival and purposive (problem solving sure, a sign of "fear" also I think) reason can be found elsewhere. For example, to be found in the first two chapter of Alfred North Whitehead's "The Function of Reason" and also the second section of his cosmology of "Process of Reality".
Again in the work of that forgotten sociologist and philosopher L.T. Hobhouse's first part of "Development and Purpose: An Essay Towards a Philosophy of Evolution". Where we see on "conation" as the organic reaction and action towards an impulse but through adaptation it gets purposive (hence the adventure of conscious life beginning, for consciousness even in everyday experience is aroused to respond with the power of language for 'higher animals' like us, it deals with the discourse of essence related to the aim). See William Mcdoughal's "Social Psychology" to see how this description finds its form into the matrix of the whole social fabric.
"A work like Mr Desh Subba's, is surely deserving our serious attention especially if we choose to deal with it without the tradition of verbal magic and the cult of terminologies which are a true hindrance to fruiltful intellectual progress Indeed, a work to be revered."
