english version

Belonging and grounding

Belonging is the opposite of disjunction; although it is still present in man as one of the essential characteristics, it may not manifest in its disjuncted reality. It can be supported byorder, rules, and ideologies, but these controlling influences stopped functioning through the loss of traditional order. At the same time, environment promoting belonging (grounding in the home) was removed.    Solidarity between people is a vital natural principle that holds communities together and can also be supported via material conditions, but usually mostly through mutual material dependence, but also through mutual dependence on services and division of labor. At the same time it becomes a transcendent value in the struggle for their realization.Belonging manifests as syntactic ideas (loyalty, unity, patriotism); disjunction is accompanied in principle by destructive thoughts or thoughts that are extremistic though originally neutral; in their ideological dimension they primarily manifest in campaigns advocating „human liberation (of an individual)“.The sense of belonging manifests as grounding, as an expression of respect to once home, as a signal that things are fine; and that vital characteristics of man are in place. Because belonging is all about openness to others, the ability to provide them with something and have something to take it from; personal material resources within grounding then become important.For a proletarian, belonging represents heavier burden, when he is forced to deprive himself of part of his daily needs for others. This he does more as one-off measure during a revolution rather than long term. Rooting is associated with certain physical conditions of existential environment, that’s why technological development and the whole civilization should support grounding.Hence the need for a permanent revival, certain return to older models, as well as a shift to the next orbit. Contemporary society if it is to survive must return to its older versions, even though not completely. Some things remain new. This is mainly timeless thinking, which is the method of transposition of rules of the general order, which stands in the background of all the changes that create social evolution.

  Grounding is a means of natural life and can be applied to Patocka’s (67, 81, 82) „three overall movements“ – anchoring, work and dedication. Polar values ​​of belonging and disjunction are the introductory circumstances of social life. It’s sort of subconscious principle, internal people’s beliefs, and spiritual background of the era.The balance between values ​​in the present unnatural life skewed in favor of separation; solidarity weakened. We can observe diversity of individuals‘ behavior in the period of „early“ modernity (beginning of the twentieth century) and today.Perhaps a story about the selection of candidates for a position of an actor in a theatre: once the decisive factors were talent and determination to give him a chance, now formalities (education) and relationships (clientelism, succumbing to spectators’ taste). At that time the determining circumstances devotion to society (belonging) and the ability to see its general interests, today individual and group interests (disjunction).
  Disjunction in another dimension manifests itself as overexpressed instantiation and lack of general thinking. If a person with an internal concept of disjunction seeks generalization, the result is usually a trivial idea (perhaps tolerance of any phenomenon based on ideas of equality), which solves nothing (see below).However, instantiation under the control of the general shall not be rejected. Disjunctional instantiation manifests itself in such a way that it replaces the general or not related to the general at all. Elements are mutually separated and stand alone; they are seen as isolated; and are not linked to a general idea, which would regulate their relationships.General idea is exactly the determining circumstance. Isolation is not so much breaking the relationship between elements, but breaking relationships mediated by a general superior idea. For elements (individuals or small communities) some individual relationships exist immanently. The question is whether they are adequate for the society and whether they are capable of preventing chaos.

  At the same time, man in the field of natural sciences functions very differently; he creates highly organized structures, because to some extent he does not need compositional ideas. Life sciences, unlike social ones, have a specific character, and less abstract thinking is usually sufficient. If research in Natural Sciences shall combine to create some more abstract system, the result is usually ana intellectually limited ideology (for example, as Darwinism has become an ideology; or the original Cartesian mechanical system formed ideology) that is despite „scientific thinking“ difficult to overcome (see 47). Abstraction, thus figuration of the general, becomes difficult after stepping out of a narrow field.

  Original liberation from unnatural domination of self-instated autocrats and abused and distorted dogmas did not mean disjunction just yet; man functioned in all natural mechanisms in the family, on the market, in democracy. On the contrary, grounding prevailed most of the time, and that did not allow him to become a Mafioso on the market who would blackmail others and would not take into consideration social needs (this happened only in large cities, where uprooting prevailed).Once uprooted, „freed“ from belonging to a family and community (neighborhood), belonging to a religious community, surpassing patriotism (belonging to people of the same nation), then free market remained as the only natural mechanism in which the disjunction it manifested itself. This occurred as a mass movement in the sixties in the West and was passed on to the former communist countries in early nineteen nineties.

  They already had such a form that the disjunction and eventually disengagement easily took root.Today people call for unity, which, however, has nothing to lean on. There are various theories of certain belonging that comes somehow by itself without depending on natural principles. I call it irrational belonging. Communists founded it on the solidarity of working-class and Marx theorized that it would remain the driving force in a classless society, too.This solidarity was only temporary for staunch comrades in battle, until they learned about its general non-applicability. Those who were part of the camarilla then introduced totality as its foundation. Property and other equality is not a machine for the production of belonging. Opposite is true – structured society easily leads to solidarity within individual classes and groups; even structural pressures promote solidarity.

  It is a mistake to believe that unity can be achieved automatically via religious faith in salvation. Religious communities can foster the sense of belonging as well as other communities that sufficiently determine identity. Faith can not replace identity and other visceral symptoms on which the feeling of belonging is established. Faith is related to human psyche; it directs man individually to salvation. Such a person can even be separated and live in a monastery.

  Even Agapic love (see Fromm 73) to all mankind is just an ideal; experience has shown that in human intrinsic characteristics it exist only minimally and only under certain conditions. If this does not cross the interests of the society with which one identifies, it can become a tool for interference.Therefore it is necessary that each society primarily cares for its own livelihood and culture without the influence of external power. Christian teaching puts the love of God before the love of man. Love of God leads to the exploration of God’s will, and the cosmic criteria. These are more important than irrational humanism.Love of God must therefore equal the unity with natural principles. Love of man is generally not invention of irrational ideals, but respect for man with his unalterable natural vital characterinstics springing from his nature.

  If liberation of man progressed already into disjunction, then talking about the belonging is totally out of place. Freed man, in the sense that is represented by many humanists, will never belong anywhere. Liberation and belonging are static counterparts, which may result in compromise rather than synthesis (fusion).

  If I approximated the development of disjunction, I can imagine the total destruction of communities and natural mechanisms; perhaps with the exception of the market which is not affected by disjunction. Market, like any competition, requires superior external rules.Once there are no societies,there will be norules, becausein an open worldthere will be noone to set them up, andno one who would be able todemandtheir implementation.Because any rulesareenforcedby society, uprootingushers inloss of internalorder.This isalreadyevidenttoday.States in global environment are unable to regulate themarket sothe market transformsinmafianism; in the beginningwheninstitutions still exist it is justcorruption, later, with weakening of institutions remain threats,extortionand crime. In unnaturalenvironmentin whichchildren are no longer bornnaturallyand resourcesin the handsof manallowdestruction of environment, itisa fastdiscontinuousprocess.