A View of Society from Modern Philosophy: Only Conservative Thought is Unique and Special

A View of Society from Modern Philosophy: Only Conservative Thought is Unique and Special The Subject of Philosophy When we say "philosophy," it's acceptable to assume we are referring to Western philosophy. Philosophy ultimately comes down to ontology and epistemology. In the past, value judgments such as morality and the power of judgment were also within the scope of philosophy. When I studied about 30 years ago, it was written that philosophy had become a branch of ethics, but recent research shows that philosophy includes ethics. Well, from a traditional perspective, that is the traditional way of thinking. Given the breadth of the English word "philosophy," this might be a matter of course. As we move into the modern and contemporary eras, the idea that human life and death have no inherent meaning becomes dominant. Meaning is not something given; it is something you create for yourself. This tendency has been present since around the time of existentialist philosophy. The culmination of Nietzsche's philosophy is nihilism; the idea of the Übermensch is likely secondary. Sartre said that man is condemned to be free, and he dedicated his own choice of freedom to the realization of Marxism. Even in contemporary philosophy, such as post-structuralism, life is not given meaning by something else. If you need meaning, you create it or decide it for yourself. Based on this premise... If You Are Free to Decide, Only Conservatism is Special In the modern and contemporary eras, it has become commonplace that life and death have no inherent meaning, but this way of thinking existed even before then. For example, in the period between the Middle Ages and the modern era, there was the tabula rasa of British empiricism. The human mind is originally a blank slate, and experience creates perception and existence. The national character of the British is said to be conservative. If the world has no meaning and is free, then among the various possibilities and choices, only the existing state of "as-is" becomes special. Humans may have nothing certain in philosophical ontology or epistemology, but they live their daily lives as they are. That "as-is" daily life alone is special. Freedom might have meaning for the future. However, we live in a world where the present and the past cannot be changed. The existential philosopher Heidegger, who I believe was also a conservative person, presented the concept of "Being-in-the-world." This is the idea that we live as beings who have been thrown, or "projected," into a given world. In English, this is "existence." The English word "existence" comes from ex- + sistence, so in a sense, it's a direct translation of "projection." If there is anything special, it is the world into which we have been thrown, and to protect that world as it is becomes conservatism. The main objective is to protect things that are irreversible—things that, once lost, can never be recovered. Conversely, things that are reversible can be changed as much as one likes. New cultures or artifacts can be introduced if desired, and existing things can be modified if they are restorable. This is the reason why it is said that "Japanese culture is a culture of selectively adopting and editing foreign cultures." I believe it was Lévi-Strauss who said something like this. Destroying the given world to an unrestorable extent for the sake of some ideal, Idea, or ideology is not favored in a conservative culture. In other words, revolution is not favored. However, restoration is acceptable. Broadly speaking, revolutions tend to fail. Japan's Meiji Restoration was a major reform greater than any clumsy revolution, but because it was an imperial restoration, it was relatively successful, wasn't it? Attachment and Affection I will summarize the relationship between faith, trust, confidence, and systems in another article soon. Trust is not a shadow player but rather the essence of a system, group, or organization. The point is that it is not limited to humans or living beings. To summarize briefly, "Trust is a social mechanism that makes a system (society, organization, human relationships, etc.) sustainable by reducing future uncertainty and enabling safe and predictable interactions." This could be extended beyond humans and society to other things. A more general definition could be: "Trust is a state where one element constituting a system can use the functions of other elements as expected. It is a mechanism that reduces the complexity of the entire system and enables more efficient operation." Be that as it may, when people live ordinary lives, a natural love for their hometown and country develops. Of course, there will be things they dislike about the country they were born and raised in. However, "basic trust" is like the origin of a human being in psychoanalytic developmental psychology. If one lives a natural life, it's not possible to be completely indifferent to or only dislike one's family, community, or country. This is true even for people who have been hurt by terrible circumstances, abuse, or adverse childhood experiences. They may develop mental health problems later in life, but the fact that these problems arise means that trust and attachment are necessary in childhood. This has been confirmed in animal experiments, and some species will die without trust or attachment. Experiments with primates have also confirmed that strange things happen. Therefore, conservatism, which preserves and protects the given world, is special. Besides conservatism, there may be various other directions, but they are all attempts, trials, or challenges to change the world. Changing something involves risk. A conservatism that changes nothing may also have risks, but there is a considerable, or rather fundamental, difference between having an existing foundation of trust and affection and destroying it. Therefore, Only Conservative Thought is in a Class of its Own I am not saying that conservative thought is great or superior. It is special. Changing or destroying things can be done at any time. Conversely, to have preserved, protected, and kept the past unchanged into the present is special. Major destruction usually leads to strange outcomes. Wasn't the golden age of France before the French Revolution? After the French Revolution, the country has never settled down, even to this day. The same goes for the Russian Revolution. The country still hasn't settled down. Revolutions may be important at times, but they should be carried out with the utmost care. Otherwise, the human and material damage tends to be severe.