>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=TO=TRINPSITE=INDEX=<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
MODEL OF NEUTRAL-INCLUSIVITY
BOOK OF FUNDAMENTALS
THE MANIFESTATIONS OF EXCLUSIVISM
EXCLUSIVISTIC BUT NOT SUBANTHROPIC

2.2.3 

ANTHROPIC AND EGO-RELATED


From the superspecific (or superanthropic), to the specific (anthropic), to the subspecific (subanthropic), the circle enclosing the collection of things which are the object of exclusion or exclusivity becomes narrower and narrower. It is narrowest when object and subject coincide, that is, when the person 'imself, or 'er body, is the center of exclusion or exclusivity. Because it is one particular person we are then talking about that is contrasted with other persons and (the rest of) the world, we shall label it "the self" or "ego". All manifestations of exclusivism related to this ego are, then, forms of 'ego-related exclusivism' (X.8). Together with superanthropic (X.11), anthropic (X.10) and subanthropic (X.9) exism, human ego-related exism (X.8) is part of a tetratomic subdivision of nonsophistic exclusivisms (X.2).

When ego-related exism is unitary (X.8.0), it is 'ego-centered', for the ego then functions as one whole on which the irrelevantism is centered; when it is compositional (X.8.1), it is 'ego-based', for the exism then only centers on a part or aspect of one's own person. Egoism and egocentrism denote an aggrandizemental component of ego-centered (or -based) exism. But ego-centered exism, as the name of an irrelevantism, refers to the object which is the ego, or a factor which distinguishes between what belongs to the ego and what does not belong to it. Ego-centered exism may therefore not only denote an over- but also an undervaluation of the self. The latter, abnegational, form of ego-centered exism involves altruism as an exclusive regard for, or dedication to, the interests of others (X.8.03). It is not that a person takes the interests of others into account which is altruistic, since this is simply a form of self-transcending inclusivity (N.8.0); it is that 'e totally neglects 'er own personal interests in order to serve the purely personal interests of others (especially when looked on over a longer period of time).

A special operational manifestation of egocentrism (the aggrandizemental component) is normative egocentrism (X.8.02.22) or what philosophers have called "ethical egoism". The sole, ultimate norm of this doctrine is that a person should do what promotes 'er own greatest good. Even in making second- and third-person moral judgments, a normative egocentrist goes by what is to 'er own advantage. 'E may be unselfish, friendly and social-minded in practise; but if so, then either because 'e does not act on 'er own principle, or because 'e believes that such behavior will be to 'er own advantage in the long run. By describing normative egocentrism in this way, the ego-distinction is made in the content of the norm, but it can also be made in the application of a norm or rule. This may, for example, be the case in normative abnegational ego-centered exism when a norm or rule which is not ego-related in itself is exclusively applied, or believed to apply, to others.

Both ego-based and anthropic exclusivism can be subdivided into a physical and a nonphysical variant, while the nonphysical (or 'mental') variants of both of them have cognitive, affective and conative manifestations. Physical ego-based exclusivism (X.16) may be further subdivided into bodily ego-based exclusivism (X.32), when it concerns a person's own body in the strict sense, and nonbodily ego-based exclusivism (X.33), when it concerns 'er personal, material possessions other than 'er own body. A sentimental (self-)aggrandizemental component of bodily egoism is narcissism: the preoccupation with, or exclusive love of, one's own body (X.32.05). A similar component of nonbodily physical egoism is the preoccupation with, or exclusive attention for, one's own external, material possessions. Both these components are forms of, what might be called, 'possessive egoism'. (However, in everyday usage, possession often refers to external possessions, and is not meant to apply to one's body or its parts.)

If aggrandizemental, physical anthropic exclusivism (X.20) involves anthropomorphism. The divine operational manifestation of this form of speciesism is anthropomorphic homotheism (X.20.05.10). As a cognition this is the belief that the supreme being (if monotheistic) or the gods (if polytheistic) necessarily and exclusively have human physical characteristics, such as corresponding to the parts of the human body and such as determining its/their power, possibly only gradually exceeding what is normal for earthly human beings. This divine belief is an anthropic extension of narcissism: human homotheists who thus create the supreme being or gods in their own image have the divinity of mere being. (It is a piteous sight indeed to see homotheist man pine away for love of the god upon whom he so piously reflects while looking at him in the water.)

Homotheism need not only be anthropomorphic tho; usually it is nonphysical as well, for example, anthropopathic. That is, homotheists also tend to believe in a supreme being or gods that necessarily and exclusively have human feelings, such as a personal will, cultural feelings of love and hatred, and a susceptibility to honor and dishonor, possibly --again-- only gradually exceeding an intensity which is normal for earthly humans. Anthropopathism in general is affective (nonphysical) anthropic exclusivism (X.336), but homotheism is often of the cognitive nonphysical sort too. As a cognition, supreme cognitive homotheism, for instance, is the belief that the supreme being or other gods necessarily and exclusively have human and possibly superhuman knowledge and cognitions. In an extreme fashion it is the belief that the supreme being would be, and must be, an omniscient being, as or with a (super)human sort of mind. This 'immaculate' ideological conception does definitely not allow for a supreme being that would not know more than the average human being, let alone a supreme being that would not 'even' have a (super)human sort of mind.

All principal and nonprincipal, physical and nonphysical, types of aggrandizemental anthropic exclusivism may be called "anthropocentrism" (X.10.02). There is no special name for abnegational anthropic exism in general, but there is one for sentimental abnegational anthropic exism, namely misanthropy (X.10.07). Its opposite is speciesist philanthropy (X.10.05) when the subject is not interested in, or shows no concern for, the well-being of nonhuman, mental or sentient beings as well. Also humanism is speciesistic, and another form of anthropocentrism, if, and to the extent that, it asserts the dignity and capacities of human beings in contrast to (nontheodemonical) nonhuman beings. (But historically it is rather contrasted with homotheist theocentrism.) A comprehensive ideology is anthropocentristic in a normative sense --perhaps not in an ethical sense-- if , and to the extent that, its norms or ideals are exclusively applicable to humans or humankind. In general, normative anthropocentrism is expressed in the confinement of theodemonist or nontheodemonist ideological norms or ideal states of being to the human and/or anthropopathic condition; that is, to the situation in which human beings and/or personified beings with human thoughts, feelings and tendencies happen to find themselves.

When nonphysical anthropic exism is regarded as a unitary manifestation, it may be called "mind-centered anthropic exclusivism" (X.21.0), or "mind-centered anthropocentrism", if aggrandizemental (X.21.02). An interesting operational manifestation of the latter exism is the existential one (X.21.02.13), which involves, or is nothing else than, anthropocentric (epistemological) idealism or personalism. As a cognition it is the belief that only humans (and possibly one or more anthropocentrically conceived personified beings) have a mind (or mental predicates), and that these human (or anthropocentrist) minds or personalities constitute the only reality. Its antithesis, existential mind-transcending supranthropic inclusivity (N.21.0013), involves perceptual or epistemological 'realism' or 'objectivism'.

As suggested above, there are not only superanthropic and anthropic strains of idealism; there is also an egoistic strain. It is the existential manifestation of aggrandizemental mind-centered ego-based exclusivism. As a cognition this is the belief that one's own mind would constitute the sole reality. Another name for it is solipsism. The only consistent form of ideal( exclusiv)ism might be nontemporal solipsism, namely the belief that one's own 'mind' in its present (but not in its past or future) modification would be the sole reality. Perhaps this belief is not exclusivistic in itself; it would only drain the word reality of all meaning. And not only that: reality could never have acquired a meaning to start with.

There are several ego-related terms in the present language which sometimes are employed as synonyms, sometimes not, namely egocentrism, egoism and egotism. Of these three terms it is egotism which is also used in the special sense of talking about oneself too much, or of excessively using the singular first person pronoun. This 'egotism' is a lingual operation of sentimental self-aggrandizemental exclusivism. It does not only involve an exceedingly frequent use of the singular first person pronoun, but also the capitalized use of only this pronoun in the traditional written variant of the present language (with I instead of i). 'Egotism', 'egocentrism' and 'egoism' are all frowned upon by most people. That is to say, many people may not frown upon what is egotism, egocentrism or egoism, but they frown upon what they call "egotism", "egocentrism" or "egoism". The employment of any of these terms presupposes that the distinction a person draws between 'imself and others, or everything else, is not relevant. When it is relevant, or rather believed to be relevant, in regard of a goal believed to be legitimate, no-one will be blamed for being an egoist. This shows but too clearly that egoism is nothing else than one of the innumerable manifestations of exclusivism.


©MVVM, 41-57 ASWW
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=TO=TRINPSITE=INDEX=<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>=<
TRINPSITE
[TO TRINPSITE MAIN DOCUMENT]
TOP OF TREE

Model of Neutral-Inclusivity
Book of Fundamentals
The Manifestations of Exclusivism
Exclusivistic But Not Subanthropic
PREVIOUS | NEXT TEXT
>=<