Byung-Chul Han

Sociopolitical events are no longer determined by the clash between ideologies or classes—the very idea has come to sound archaic. But for all that, the positivization of society does not abolish violence. Violence does not stem from the negativity of clash or conflict alone; it also derives from the positivity of consensus. Now, the totality of capital, which seems to be absorbing everything, represents consensual violence. Struggle no longer occurs between groups, ideologies, or classes, but between individuals; still, this fact is not as important for understanding the crisis of the achievement-subject as [Hans] Ehrenberg claims. What proves problematic is not individual competition per se, but rather its self-referentiality, which escalates into absolute competition. That is, the achievement-subject competes with itself; it succumbs to the destructive compulsion to outdo itself over and over, to jump over its own shadow. This self-constraint, which poses as freedom, has deadly results.

5 thoughts on “Byung-Chul Han

  1. shinichi Post author

    Achievement society is the society of self-exploitation. The achievement-subject exploits itself until it burns out. In the process, it develops auto-aggression that often enough escalates into the violence of self-destruction.

    **

    One feels free in relationships of love and friendship. It is not the absence of ties, but ties themselves which set us free. Freedom is a word which pertains to relations par excellence. Without hold there is no freedom.

    **

    In social networks, the function of “friends” is primarily to heighten narcissism by granting attention, as consumers, to the ego exhibited as a commodity.

    **

    Culture presumes an environment in which deep attention is possible. Increasingly, such immersive reflection is being displaced by an entirely different form of attention: hyperattention.

    **

    The violence of positivity does not deprive, it saturates; it does not exclude, it exhausts.

    **

    The complaint of the depressive individual, “Nothing is possible,” can only occur in a society that thinks, “Nothing is impossible.” No-longer-being-able-to-be-able leads to destructive self-reproach and auto-aggression. The achievement-subject finds itself fighting with itself. The depressive has been wounded by internalized war. Depression is the sickness of a society that suffers from excessive positivity. It reflects a humanity waging war on itself.

    **

    Now, under the neoliberal regime of auto-exploitation, people are turning their aggression against themselves. This auto-aggressivity means that the exploited are not inclined to revolution so much as depression.

    **

    The history of violence culminates in this merging of victim and perpetrator, of master and slave, of freedom and violence.

    **

    Deep tiredness loosens the strictures of identity. Things flicker, twinkle, and vibrate at the edges. They grow less determinate and more porous and lose some of their resolution. This particular in-difference lends them an aura of friendliness. Rigid delimitation with respect to one’s surroundings is suspended.

    Reply
  2. shinichi Post author

    The Burnout Society

    by Byung-Chul Han

    https://blogs.ethz.ch/don18/files/2020/05/Byung-Chul-Han-The-Burnout-Society-Stanford-Briefs-2015.pdf

    NEURONAL POWER

    Every age has its signature afflictions. Thus, a bacterial age existed; at the latest, it ended with the discovery of antibiotics. Despite widespread fear of an influenza epidemic, we are not living in a viral age. Thanks to immunological technology, we have already left it behind. From a pathological standpoint, the incipient twenty-first century is determined neither by bacteria nor by viruses, but by neurons. Neurological illnesses such as depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), borderline per-sonality disorder (BPD), and burnout syndrome mark the land-scape of pathology at the beginning of the twenty-first century. They are not infections, but infarctions; they do not follow from the negativity of what is immunologically foreign, but from an excess of positivity. Therefore, they elude all technologies and tech-niques that seek to combat what is alien.

    The past century was an immunological age. The epoch sought to distinguish clearly between inside and outside, friend and foe, self and other. The Cold War also followed an immunological pattern. Indeed, the immunological paradigm of the last century was commanded by the vocabulary of the Cold War, an altogether military dispositive. Attack and defense determine immunological action. The immunological dispositive, which extends beyond the strictly social and onto the whole of communal life, harbors a blind spot: everything foreign is simply combated and warded off. The object of immune defense is the foreign as such. Even if it has no hostile intentions, even if it poses no danger, it is eliminated on the basis of its Otherness.

    Recent times have witnessed the proliferation of discourses about society that explicitly employ immunological models of explanation. However, the currency of immunological discourse should not be interpreted as a sign that society is now, more than ever, organized along immunological lines. When a paradigm has come to provide an object of reflection, it often means that its demise is at hand. Theorists have failed to remark that, for some time now, a paradigm shift has been underway. The Cold War ended precisely as this paradigm shift was taking place.1 More and more, contemporary society is emerging as a constellation that escapes the immunological scheme of organization and defense altogether. It is marked by the disappearance of otherness and foreignness. Otherness represents the fundamental category of immunology. Every immunoreaction is a reaction to Otherness. Now, however, Otherness is being replaced with difference, which does not entail immunoreaction. Postimmunological—indeed, postmodern—difference does not make anyone sick. In terms of immunology, it represents the Same.2 Such difference lacks the sting of foreignness, as it were, which would provoke a strong immunoreaction. Foreignness itself is being deactivated into a formula of consumption. The alien is giving way to the exotic. The tourist travels through it. The tourist—that is, the consumer—is no longer an immunological subject.

    **

    BEYOND DISCIPLINARY SOCIETY

    Today’s society is no longer Foucault’s disciplinary world of hospitals, madhouses, prisons, barracks, and factories. It has long been replaced by another regime, namely a society of fitness studios, office towers, banks, airports, shopping malls, and genetic laboratories. Twenty-first-century society is no longer a disciplinary society, but rather an achievement society [Leistungsgesellschaft]. Also, its inhabitants are no longer “obedience-subjects” but “achievement-subjects.” They are entrepreneurs of themselves. The walls of disciplinary institutions, which separate the normal from the abnormal, have come to seem archaic. Foucault’s analysis of power cannot account for the psychic and topological changes that occurred as disciplinary society transformed into achievement society. Nor does the commonly employed concept of “control society” do justice to this change. It still contains too much negativity.

    Disciplinary society is a society of negativity. It is defined by the negativity of prohibition. The negative modal verb that governs it is May Not. By the same token, the negativity of compulsion adheres to Should. Achievement society, more and more, is in the process of discarding negativity. Increasing deregulation is abolishing it. Unlimited Can is the positive modal verb of achievement society. Its plural form—the affirmation, “Yes, we can”—epitomizes achievement society’s positive orientation. Prohibitions, commandments, and the law are replaced by projects, initiatives, and motivation. Disciplinary society is still governed by no. Its negativity produces madmen and criminals. In contrast, achievement society creates depressives and losers.

    On one level, continuity holds in the paradigm shift from disciplinary society to achievement society. Clearly, the drive to maximize production inhabits the social unconscious. Beyond a certain point of productivity, disciplinary technology—or, alternately, the negative scheme of prohibition—hits a limit. To heighten productivity, the paradigm of disciplination is replaced by the paradigm of achievement, or, in other words, by the positive scheme of Can; after a certain level of productivity obtains, the negativity of prohibition impedes further expansion. The positivity of Can is much more efficient than the negativity of Should. Therefore, the social unconscious switches from Should to Can. The achievement-subject is faster and more productive than the obedience-subject. However, the Can does not revoke the Should. The obedience-subject remains disciplined. It has now completed the disciplinary stage. Can increases the level of productivity, which is the aim of disciplinary technology, that is, the imperative of Should. Where increasing productivity is concerned, no break exists between Should and Can; continuity prevails.

    **

    PROFOUND BOREDOM

    Excessive positivity also expresses itself as an excess of stimuli, information, and impulses. It radically changes the structure and economy of attention. Perception becomes fragmented and scat-tered. Moreover, the mounting burden of work makes it necessary to adopt particular dispositions toward time and attention [Zeit- und Aufmerksamkeitstechnik]; this in turn affects the structure of attention and cognition. The attitude toward time and environ-ment known as “multitasking” does not represent civilizational progress. Human beings in the late-modern society of work and information are not the only ones capable of multitasking. Rather, such an aptitude amounts to regression. Multitasking is common-place among wild animals. It is an attentive technique indispens-able for survival in the wilderness.

    An animal busy with eating must also attend to other tasks. For example, it must hold rivals away from its prey. It must constantly be on the lookout, lest it be eaten while eating. At the same time, it must guard its young and keep an eye on its sexual partner. In the wild, the animal is forced to divide its attention between various activities. That is why animals are incapable of contemplative immersion — either they are eating or they are copulating. The animal cannot immerse itself contemplatively in what it is facing because it must also process background events. Not just multitasking but also activities such as video games produce a broad but flat mode of attention, which is similar to the vigilance of a wild animal. Recent social developments and the structural change of wakefulness are bringing human society deeper and deeper into the wilderness. For example, bullying has achieved pandemic dimensions. Concern for the good life, which also includes life as a member of the community, is yielding more and more to the simple concern for survival.

    **

    VITA ACTIVA

    In The Human Condition, Hannah Arendt seeks to rehabilitate the vita activa against the primacy a long tradition has granted the vita contemplativa, and to articulate its inner richness in a new way. In her estimation, the traditional view has wrongly reduced vita activa to mere restlessness: nec-otium or a-scholia.1 Arendt con-nects her revaluation of vita activa to the priority of action [Handeln]. This makes her commit to heroic actionism, like her teacher Heidegger. That said, for the early Heidegger death pro-vides the point of orientation: the possibility of dying imposes limits on action and makes freedom finite. In contrast, Arendt ori-ents possible action on birth, which lends it more heroic emphasis. The miracle, she argues, lies in human natality itself: the new beginning that human beings are to realize on the basis of being born. Wonder-working belief is replaced by heroic action, the native obligation of mankind. This amounts to conferring a quasi-religious dimension on action:

    The miracle . . . is the birth of new men and the new beginning, the action they are capable of by virtue of being born. . . . It is this faith in and hope for the world that found perhaps its most glorious and most succinct expression in the few words with which the Gospels announced their “glad tidings”: “A child has been born to us.”

    **

    THE PEDAGOGY OF SEEING

    The vita contemplativa presupposes instruction in a particular way of seeing. In Twilightof the Idols, Nietzsche formulates three tasks for which pedagogues are necessary. One needs to learn to see, to think, and to speak and write. The goal of education, according to Nietzsche, is “noble culture.” Learning to see means “getting your eyes used to calm, to patience, to letting things come to you”—that is, making yourself capable of deep and contemplative atten-tion, casting a long and slow gaze. Such learning-to-see represents the “first preliminary schooling for spirituality [Geistigkeit].” One must learn “not to react immediately to a stimulus, but instead to take control of the inhibiting, excluding instincts.” By the same token, “every characteristic absence of spirituality [Ungeistigkeit], every piece of common vulgarity, is due to an inability to resist a stimulus”1—the inability to set a no in opposition. Reacting immediately, yielding to every impulse, already amounts to illness and represents a symptom of exhaustion. Here Nietzsche is simply speaking of the need to revitalize the vita contemplativa. The vita contemplativa is not a matter of passive affirmation and being open to whatever happens. Instead, it offers resistance to crowd-ing, intrusive stimuli. Instead of surrendering the gaze to external impulses, it steers them in sovereign fashion. As a mode of saying no, sovereign action [Tun] proves more active than any and all hyperactivity, which represents a symptom of mental exhaustion. What eludes Arendt in the dialectic of being-active [Aktivsein] is that hyperactive intensification leads to an abrupt switch into hyperpassivity; now one obeys every impulse or stimulus without resistance. Instead of freedom, it produces new constraints. It is an illusion to believe that being more active means being freer.

    **

    THE BARTLEBY CASE

    Melville’s “Bartleby,” which has often been the object of meta-physical and theological interpretations,1 also admits a pathologi-cal reading. This “Story of Wall-Street”2 describes an inhumane working world whose inhabitants have all degraded to the state of animal laborans. The sinister atmosphere of the office, choked by skyscrapers on every side, is hostile to life and portrayed in detail. Less than three meters from the window there surges a “lofty brick wall, black by age and everlasting shade” (5). The workspace, which seems like “a huge square cistern,” proves “deficient in what landscape painters call ‘life’” (5). Melancholy and gloominess are often mentioned, and they set the basic mood for the narrative. The attorney’s assistants all suffer from neurotic disorders. “Tur-key,” for example, runs around in “a strange, inflamed, flurried, flighty recklessness of activity” (6). Psychosomatic digestive trou-bles plague the overly ambitious assistant “Nippers,” who grinds his teeth perpetually and hisses curses through them. In their neu-rotic hyperactivity, these figures represent the opposite pole of Bartleby, who falls into silent immobility. Bartleby develops the symptoms characteristic of neurasthenia. In this light, his signa-ture phrase, “I would prefer not to,” expresses neither the negative potency of not-to nor the instinct for delay and deferral that is essential for “spirituality.” Rather, it stands for a lack of drive and for apathy, which seal Bartleby’s doom.

    **

    THE SOCIETY OF TIREDNESS

    Tiredness has a broad heart.
    —Maurice Blanchot

    As a society of activeness [Aktivgesellschaft], achievement society is slowly developing into a doping society. In the meanwhile, the negative expression “brain doping” has been replaced by “neuro-enhancement.” Doping makes it possible to achieve without achieving, so to speak. Now even serious scientists claim that it is irresponsible not to employ substances of this kind. A surgeon able to operate with greater concentration by using neuro-enhancers would make fewer mistakes and be able to save more lives. Nor is the general use of neuro-enhancers viewed as a problem. One need only ensure fairness—namely, by putting them at the dis-posal of all. If doping were also permitted in sports, it would de-grade into a pharmaceutical race. For all that, simple prohibition cannot prevent both the body and the human being as a whole from becoming a performance-machine [Leistungsmaschine] that is supposed to function without disturbance and maximize achievement. Doping is just one consequence of this development, whereby being alive [Lebendigkeit] itself—an extremely complex phenomenon—is boiled down to vital functions and capacities.

    **

    BURNOUT SOCIETY

    In a very cryptic tale—“Prometheus”—Kafka undertakes a few modifications of the Greek legend. His reworking reads, “The gods grew weary, the eagles grew weary, the wound closed wea-rily.”1 I would subject Kafka’s version to further revision and turn it into an intrapsychic scene: the contemporary achievement-subject inflicting violence on, and waging war with, itself. As everyone knows, Prometheus also brought work to mankind when he gave mortals the gift of fire. Today’s achievement-subject deems itself free when in fact it is bound like Prometheus. The eagle that con-sumes an ever-regrowing liver can be interpreted as the subject’s alter ego. Viewed in this way, the relation between Prometheus and the eagle represents a relation of self-exploitation. Pain of the liver, an organ that cannot actually experience pain, is said to be tired-ness. Prometheus, the subject of self-exploitation, has been seized by overwhelming fatigue.

    For all that, Kafka envisions a healing tiredness: the wound closes wearily. It stands opposed to “I-tiredness,” whereby the ego grows exhausted and wears itself down; such tiredness stems from the redundancy and recurrence of the ego. But another kind of tiredness exists, too; here, the ego abandons itself into the world [das Ich verläßt sich auf die Welt hin]; it is tiredness as “more of less of me” [Mehr des weniger Ich], healthy “tiredness that trusts in the world.” I-tiredness, as solitary tiredness, is worldless and worlddestroying; it annihilates all reference to the Other in favor of narcissistic self-reference.

    Reply
  3. shinichi Post author

    ドイツ哲学界のスター:ビョンチョル・ハンの「疲労社会」を考える

    欧州新首都:ベルリンから世界を読む

    by 武邑光裕

    https://www.newsweekjapan.jp/takemura/

    <今、世界の注目を集める韓国生まれのドイツの哲学者、ビョンチョル・ハン(Byung-Chul Han)は、『疲労社会』の中で、ハッスルカルチャーを、新自由主義が植え付けた「達成主義」にもとづく心理的統制であると指摘し続けている>

    ハッスルカルチャーの弊害

    日本ではたびたび「過労死」が問題となってきた。欧州のテレビ局では、日本の過労死問題の特集番組が何度も放送されている。ベルリンで日本の過労死を扱った独仏共同制作のTVドキュメンタリーを観た時、これは日本だけの出来事ではなかった。仕事を最優先し、全力で仕事に取り組むというトレンドは、今や世界中に浸透している。

    「ハッスルカルチャー」と呼ばれるライフスタイルは、過剰に働くことが、他人から尊敬され、自分自身を成長させる最善の方法だと教える。もし1日のうちで、可能な限り生産的なことに時間を費やしていないなら、成功するための条件を失うことになる。ハッスル(Hustle)とは、英語で「ゴリ押し」や「強引な金儲け」などを意味し、日本での「頑張り」や「張り切る」といった意味とはかなり異なっている。

    ハッスルカルチャーの強迫観念については、すでに多くの医療関係者や研究者などが指摘しているように、努力は必要だが、自分の時間がなくなるまで仕事をするのは危険である。常にハッスルしていると燃え尽き症候群になる可能性があり、健康に悪影響を及ぼすからだ。

    過労とメンタルヘルス

    過労とメンタルヘルスの直接的な関連性はまだ確立されていない。しかし、過労は生体リズムの乱れにつながり、睡眠不足、うつ病、II型糖尿病、肥満、高血圧、脳心血管系合併症の発症などに影響を及ぼす可能性がある。最近、日本でも報告されているように、自殺のリスクも排除すべきではない。

    燃え尽き症候群は確かな病気だ。世界保健機関(WHO)は、燃え尽き症候群を「職場での慢性的なストレスがうまく管理されていないために生じる症候群」と定義している。

    哲学者ビョンチョル・ハンの観点

    今、世界の注目を集める韓国生まれのドイツの哲学者、ビョンチョル・ハン(Byung-Chul Han)は、20カ国以上で翻訳出版されている主著『疲労社会(Müdigkeitsgesellschaft)』(2010)や一連の著作の中で、ハッスルカルチャーを、新自由主義が植え付けた「達成主義」にもとづく心理的統制であると指摘し続けている。2021年10月には、日本でもハン氏の主著である『疲労社会」と『透明社会』が相次いで翻訳出版されるという。ハン哲学の日本での受容に期待したい。

    1959年にソウルで生まれたハン氏は、ドイツで哲学、文学、神学を学び、現在はベルリン芸術大学(UdK)で哲学と文化理論を教えている。ドイツのみならず世界が注目することとなった彼の言説は、「透明性」を強力に推進する社会とハイパー消費主義、過剰な情報処理や過労にさえポジティブに取り組む人々の蔓延が、社会を疲弊させる要因であると指摘した。彼の著作や論考を参照しながらハン氏の思考を紹介してみよう。

    自由が生み出す「強制」

    うつ病や燃え尽き症候群のような心理的障害は、自由に対する深い危機の症状だとハン氏は指摘する。かつてドイツの社会心理・哲学者エーリッヒ・フロムは、『自由からの逃走』(1941年)を著した。フロムは、20世紀初頭、資本主義と自由を謳歌した人々が、責任がともなう「自由」から逃げはじめ、連帯や従属感という安定を求めナチズムという全体主義に服従していったと指摘した。

    フロムの分析とは異なり、現代の自由は、しばしば自主的な「強制」に変わる病的なシグナルであるとハン氏は考える。私たちは皆、生活を営むことは自由だと思っている。しかし、実際には自他のために自由を貫くことは、倒れるまで情熱的に自分を搾取していくことに転移する。その過程で、自由な個人は率先して自らを不自由に追い込んでいく。私たちは自分自身を実現し、死に至るまで自分を最適化することに明け暮れるのだ。

    ハン氏は、新自由主義を批判する際に「達成主義」と呼ぶ政治経済論理を解説する。達成主義は、持続的に私たちを先へと進ませる。いったん何かを達成すると、さらに次の達成をめざし、自分より先に進みたくなる。しかし、当然のことながら、自分よりも先に進むことは不可能なのだ。

    この不条理な論理は、最終的には破綻を招くことになる。達成の主体は、自分が自由であると信じているが、実際には自身による奴隷化なのだ。支配者がいなくても自発的に自分を搾取する限り、それは自由の奴隷なのだ。

    新自由主義という心理的搾取

    ハン氏は、チェコ出身の作家フランツ・カフカを引用し、自分が主人だと思っている「奴隷の自由」というパラドックスを明確に表現した。動物は主人から鞭を奪い、主人になるために自分自身に鞭を打つ。この永続的な自虐行為が、私たちを疲れさせ、最終的には鬱にさせる。ある意味で、新自由主義は自虐史観に基づいているとハン氏は指摘する。

    新自由主義がめざす達成社会は、規律や支配、そして懲罰がなくても搾取を可能にする。フランスの哲学者ミシェル・フーコーが『規律と罰』(1975年)の中で分析したような、懲戒や禁止事項にもとづく身体的な規律社会では、今日の達成社会を説明できない。ハン氏は、フーコーが分析した規律社会や監視社会の力学を超えて、自主的に人々がめざす達成社会こそ、権力が私たちの身体を梗塞させる以上に、心理的な自由を搾取する。ハン氏は、露骨な制限や監視に頼るより、自由こそが望ましい支配のメカニズムであると主張する。

    自ら率先してソーシャルメディアに自身や友人関係のデータ・プライバシーを提供し続け、自身をテック巨人のマネタイズのための奴隷にしてしまう自己搾取こそ、他者による支配や搾取よりも効率的である。

    「燃え尽き症候群」は主に欧米や日本、韓国などの新自由主義社会に広がった。しかし、ソーシャルメディアを通じて、新自由主義的な生活形態は今や第三世界にも広がっている。ソーシャルメディアが誘導するネット・エゴイズムやナルシシズムの台頭は世界的な現象である。

    ソーシャメディアとZOOM疲れ

    ソーシャルメディアは、私たちを、自分自身でビジネスをする生産者、起業家への幻想に導く。同時に、リアルなコミュニティを破壊し、本来の社交空間や公共空間を無用のものに変え、自我の自由と達成主義をグローバル化する。ソーシャルメディアは、自分自身を生産し、自分自身を持続的に表現し、展開していくためツールなのだ。SNSでの自己生産、つまり自我の継続的な「展示」こそ、私たちを疲れさせ、憂鬱にさせるとハン氏は指摘する。

    パンデミックの間、自由にもとづく仕事の環境は、ホームオフィスという新しいステージを得た。ZOOMでつながったホームオフィスでの仕事は、オフィスでの仕事よりも疲れるとハン氏は次のように述べる。

    「私たちは自分自身と向き合い、常に自分自身について考え、推測しなければならない。根本的な疲れは、究極的には自我の疲れに至る。ホームオフィスは、私たちをより深く自分自身に集中させ、疲労を強めていく。問題なのは、自分のエゴから気をそらすことができる他者がいないことなのだ」

    対話のベンチ

    ベルリンで人気の公園「パーク・アム・グライスドライエック」では、パンデミックの間に市民の「対話」や「おしゃべり」が極端に少なくなったことを憂慮し、参加型アクションの一環として、公園利用者の会話を促進する「対話のベンチ」を設置した。これにより、さまざまな市民との交流が可能な、敷居の低い空間が生まれた。「対話のベンチ」のプレートには、「会話に入りませんか?おしゃべりしましょう!」と明記されている。

    私たちは、社会的な接触、ハグ、身体的な接触がないために疲れてしまう。隔離された状態では、リアルな他者との会合や対話こそが「癒し」なのかもしれないと気付き始める。ウイルスは、他者の消滅を加速させているのだ。

    社会的距離を置くことは、これまで当たり前だった社会生活を解体することになる。それは私たちを疲れさせ、他の人々は、物理的な距離を保ち続けるウイルスの潜在的な保有者とみなされる。現在ベルリンでは、レストランやカフェに入るときに、ワクチン接種証明アプリか48時間以内のPCR検査の陰性証明書の提示が必要となっている。事実上、ワクチン・パスポートを所持していない人は、ワクチンを打たない自由と引き換えに、現実空間での自由を極端に制限されることになる。

    リアルなコミュニティ文化の再生

    ウイルスは、私たちの現在の危機を増幅させ、すでに危機に瀕していた現実のコミュニティを破壊している。ウイルスは、私たちを互いに疎外させる。かつてのリアルな社交文化は、ロックダウン中に真っ先に切り捨てられた。ベルリンのクラブ、コンサート、演劇、パフォーマンス、映画館、美術館ですら、ロックダウンの犠牲となった。

    ハン氏は最近、独立ジャーナリズムとして知られるThe Nationに『疲労のウィルス』という記事を寄稿し、Covid-19が、私たちを集団的な疲労状態に追い込んでいると主張した。その中で、文化とは何かを再考し次のように延べている。

    「文化はコミュニティを生み出すものである。それがなければ、私たちはただ生き延びるためだけの動物のようになってしまう。この危機から一刻も早く回復する必要があるのは、経済ではなく、何よりも文化、つまりコミュニテイにもとづく生活なのだ」

    Reply
  4. shinichi Post author

     
    疲労社会
    by ビョンチョル・ハン

    私たちはいつまで「できること」を証明し続けなければならないのか?

    絶え間ない能力の発揮と成果を求められる現代社会。
    「主体性」を祭り上げ、人々が互いにせめぎ合い、自己さえ搾取せざるを得ない社会構造。この現代の病理を特異な感性から解き明かし、「創造性」「和解」をもたらす新たな「疲労」のかたち――「なにもしない」ことの可能性を探る。

    倦み疲れ、燃え尽きる現代社会への哲学的治療の試み

    目次
     疲れたプロメテウス
     精神的暴力
     規律(ディシプリン)社会の彼岸
     深い退屈
     活動的な生
     見ることの教育学
     バートルビーの場合
     疲労社会
     燃え尽き症(バーンアウト)社会

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.