Wolfgang Maehr

Aftenposten, one of Norway’s big newspapers had today this nice article from Niels Chr. Geelmyden arguing that to think independent thoughts is contraproductive and disrespected in this society. In his case he is looking at Norway and citing Henrik Ibsen who said that at his time “there are no 25 indendently thinking people in Norway”. Geelmyden argues that society (and the government) even encourage people not to think. The startdom of athletes and the tax-free lottery are some of his examples. I would even put the attitude of seeing people as “nerds” somewhat into that category.

However, from my perspective I would say that the problem is the same in Austria and probably everywhere else in the world as well. And I would even dare to claim that it always was that way. As being a herd animal the humans have to have thoughts that align with the rest of the group. Failing to do so would result in the end of the group. The alpha animal there then has to do some thinking (or have an advisor) but the rest is supposed to not think.
And then there is the question that if there was less than 25 people thinking independently in Norway at Ibsen#s time, how was that number supposed to grow significantly? To think independently needs encouragement that can only come from independent thinkers. This encouragement never comes from society as they shake up the status quo.

Looking at the thinkes I got to meet in my life (my father and my “weird” neighbour in Gothenburg) made me realise that it is totally obvious why independent thinkers reading Dante end up homeless and leaders read Asterix. Independent thoughts are difficult to understand and thrown at a totally unprepared victim the thinker will only appear as odd. Working at a software company I get confronted with the problem of different perspectives all the time. The expert/thinker has a different perspective and making these thoughts understandable for everybody is probably one of the most difficult tasks there is. Looking at the square pegs in the round holes I would claim only the most profound of them were able to convey their messages in mere words and speeches (i.e. Sokrates, Laotse, Jesus Christ*, Ghandi**, …). Looking at the other thinkers (e.g. Marx & Engels, Martin Luther, Einstein, Kubrick***, Sartre***, …) they all used different means such as written text, paintings, films or other art to convey their message. This is why presentation skills are so crucial. To make people (non-experts) understand what revolutionary thoughts have been thought of. If those rhetorics fail, one is regarded as lunatic, yes, a weirdo since it would require the listener to first drop the pre-conceived opinions and try to understand the argument. Something that usually has never been taught anywhere: The discours to resolve arguments, to find the truth, not to beat the opponent as some of the philosophers did.
As Geelmuyden highlights, historically using the disguise of a fool is one viable way to convey this message. Our school example was Till Eulenspiegel. And Even if our teachers cared to explain the reason of his stories, the essence of thinking independently was never really encouraged. And The way I see it, it never will be since otherwise law and order would be endangered (especially order). As Orwell argues, the lottery is a way to control the people, as is the (yellow) press. Where would we end up if everybody had their own thoughts? Imagine that loss of productivity and safety.

Yes, this post does not provide a complete argument but instead is a scribbeling of some thoughts. That’s why it is only a blog post. ;)
Still, I encourage people to comment their own thoughts (no matter how simple) as a first step towards chaos. ;)

Thanks for your understanding attention.

* If Jesus Christ belongs into this list is ad discutandum.
** Actually, even with Ghandi I am not sure if he used letters and other means as well.
*** Please don’t lynch me because of these names. I am not qualified to judge if these people really were geniusses and what impact they had on the world (especially the artists). I added them here for the sake of the argument as illustration.