What do you think?
Rate this book
The Silence of Animals: On Progress and Other Modern Myths
A searching, captivating look at the persistence of myth in our modern world "By nature volatile and discordant, the human animal looks to silence for relief from being itself while other creatures enjoy silence as their birthright."
In a book by turns chilling and beautiful, John Gray continues the thinking that made his Straw Dogs such a cult classic. Gray draws on an extraordinary array of memoirs, poems, fiction, and philosophy to re-imagine our place in the world. Writers as varied as Ballard, Borges, Conrad, and Freud have been mesmerized by forms of human extremity―experiences that are on the outer edge of the possible or that tip into fantasy and myth. What happens to us when we starve, when we fight, when we are imprisoned? And how do our imaginations leap into worlds way beyond our real experiences? The Silence of Animals is consistently fascinating, filled with unforgettable images and a delight in the conundrum of human existence―an existence that we decorate with countless myths and ideas, where we twist and turn to avoid acknowledging that we too are animals, separated from the others perhaps only by our self-conceit. In the Babel we have created for ourselves, it is the silence of animals that both reproaches and bewitches us.
In a book by turns chilling and beautiful, John Gray continues the thinking that made his Straw Dogs such a cult classic. Gray draws on an extraordinary array of memoirs, poems, fiction, and philosophy to re-imagine our place in the world. Writers as varied as Ballard, Borges, Conrad, and Freud have been mesmerized by forms of human extremity―experiences that are on the outer edge of the possible or that tip into fantasy and myth. What happens to us when we starve, when we fight, when we are imprisoned? And how do our imaginations leap into worlds way beyond our real experiences? The Silence of Animals is consistently fascinating, filled with unforgettable images and a delight in the conundrum of human existence―an existence that we decorate with countless myths and ideas, where we twist and turn to avoid acknowledging that we too are animals, separated from the others perhaps only by our self-conceit. In the Babel we have created for ourselves, it is the silence of animals that both reproaches and bewitches us.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2013
138 people are currently reading
2722 people want to read
About the author
John Gray
51 books906 followersJohn Nicholas Gray is a English political philosopher with interests in analytic philosophy and the history of ideas. He retired in 2008 as School Professor of European Thought at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Gray contributes regularly to The Guardian, The Times Literary Supplement and the New Statesman, where he is the lead book reviewer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 170 reviews
March 3, 2013
I'll start my review with a statement from the middle of this book, which might also stand for a précis of its argument:
Gray's new book is advertised as a sequel to his deliberately shocking Straw Dogs (2003) – a prospect I confess that didn't particularly appeal to me, although I read Straw Dogs twice and was energized by its skeptical zest. I was also a fan of Black Mass (2007). But the truth is, I've had enough polemicism.
Happily, Gray's new book provides a fresh turn. There is still the core hopelessness about the prospects of humankind, a complete rejection of the notion of "progress." But what could be a bleak conclusion for many writers is for Gray the point of departure. The Silence of the Animals turns to poetry, art, the musings of marginal philosophers, novelists and naturalists to explore a style of thinking and living beyond the myths of religion and (what Gray derides as a simple variant) the myth of "enlightened" humanism.
I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the argument. It's really more of an essay in the manner of Montaigne – richly skeptical, generous in its love for animals, the earth, poets, writers and freethinkers. Gray gave me a new appreciation for Freud, a "scientist" I generally consider a quack. For Gray, Freud is an ethicist who taught the art of resignation. "Resignation meant accepting the fact of ultimate chaos."
As with Montaigne, the discussion develops unpredictably, following its own imaginative logic. Every few pages Gray would introduce a writer I barely knew – Llewelyn Powys, T. E. Hulme or Fritz Mauthner. Ford Maddox Ford's Parade's End is mentioned in passing as "possibly the greatest twentieth-century English novel." Who knew? I'd just pulled that book off my shelf to read, before it's encumbered with Benedict Cumberbatch.
When he cited J. G. Ballard's late memoir Miracles of Life (2008), I thought: I didn't know Ballard had published another memoir… I looked the book up on Amazon. Turns out the American edition has just been published. I hopped up from my table at Peets and hurried a couple doors down to Books Inc. – and there it was, a single copy. Anyone who loves books will understand the happiness of such a moment.
Gray's godless contemplation is a pleasure for atheists – atheists wearied of calling themselves atheists – for those of us incapable of "believing in" Christianity (or any religion) but moved nevertheless by the beauty of its myths. We humans may not enjoy the silence of the animals but, however fictive it might be, we are lucky in language.
Admitting that our lives are shaped by fictions may give a kind of freedom – possibly the only kind that human beings can attain. Accepting that the world is without meaning, we are liberated from confinement in the meaning we have made. Knowing there is nothing of substance in our world may seem to rob that world of value. But this nothingness may be our most precious possession, since it opens to us the world that exists beyond ourselves.That phrase "exists beyound ourselves" hints at the paradox at the heart of The Silence of the Animals – what Gray calls, a bit awkwardly, a "godless mysticism."
Gray's new book is advertised as a sequel to his deliberately shocking Straw Dogs (2003) – a prospect I confess that didn't particularly appeal to me, although I read Straw Dogs twice and was energized by its skeptical zest. I was also a fan of Black Mass (2007). But the truth is, I've had enough polemicism.
Happily, Gray's new book provides a fresh turn. There is still the core hopelessness about the prospects of humankind, a complete rejection of the notion of "progress." But what could be a bleak conclusion for many writers is for Gray the point of departure. The Silence of the Animals turns to poetry, art, the musings of marginal philosophers, novelists and naturalists to explore a style of thinking and living beyond the myths of religion and (what Gray derides as a simple variant) the myth of "enlightened" humanism.
I was surprised by how much I enjoyed the argument. It's really more of an essay in the manner of Montaigne – richly skeptical, generous in its love for animals, the earth, poets, writers and freethinkers. Gray gave me a new appreciation for Freud, a "scientist" I generally consider a quack. For Gray, Freud is an ethicist who taught the art of resignation. "Resignation meant accepting the fact of ultimate chaos."
As with Montaigne, the discussion develops unpredictably, following its own imaginative logic. Every few pages Gray would introduce a writer I barely knew – Llewelyn Powys, T. E. Hulme or Fritz Mauthner. Ford Maddox Ford's Parade's End is mentioned in passing as "possibly the greatest twentieth-century English novel." Who knew? I'd just pulled that book off my shelf to read, before it's encumbered with Benedict Cumberbatch.
When he cited J. G. Ballard's late memoir Miracles of Life (2008), I thought: I didn't know Ballard had published another memoir… I looked the book up on Amazon. Turns out the American edition has just been published. I hopped up from my table at Peets and hurried a couple doors down to Books Inc. – and there it was, a single copy. Anyone who loves books will understand the happiness of such a moment.
Gray's godless contemplation is a pleasure for atheists – atheists wearied of calling themselves atheists – for those of us incapable of "believing in" Christianity (or any religion) but moved nevertheless by the beauty of its myths. We humans may not enjoy the silence of the animals but, however fictive it might be, we are lucky in language.
May 27, 2013
The Silence of Animals - John Gray (2013)
I have a love-hate relationship with John Gray. Every atom of my being wants to deny his excoriatingly bleak judgement on the human condition and yet every time I read and re-read him I end up capitulating to his basic premise. His thinking's precise, forensic and irritatingly undeniable. Just turn on the television and watch the news for about two minutes and you see it playing out everyday.
In a nutshell his argument runs that there's no redemption for the human animal, in fact, we delude ourselves if we think we are anything beyond the animal. We are, he argues, violent, brutish and barbaric. And whilst our 21st century lives in developed nations are no longer dominated by these three forces, it is deep-written in our nature to have these forces just below the surface and that fact is as immutable as the mountains. Whilst our technology and science progress and develop our basic character and nature cannot. We are not improving as a species, becoming less violent or nasty and inexorably moving on to some dreamy Star Trekkian future of benign benevolence. We are doomed to repeat the barbarism of history, civilisation only paper-thin.
In this short and bitter book, sweetened by its careful construction and beautifully evocative language, Gray uses history and eye-witness account of human atrocity to drive home his point again and again. He drives nails into the humanist contention that we might be able to save ourselves from our atavistic instincts, dismissing atheism as just another rather silly belief system. As he evokes the silence of animals of the title he articulates his view so eloquently there's no escape. There is nothing surface here, his thinking goes so deep.
He contends that our memory and narrative self construct a lie for us each and everyday, a lie perpetuated by our civilisations where the human sense of self is reflected back at us with such power we believe our own propaganda. We are not cohesive beings with an "I" deep inside us driving our thoughts and lives in a trajectory or agenda of our choosing. We are a narrative self failing to remember this fundamental lie everyday. We string moments together into a bead necklace of memory, both imagining the dots and then joining them to construct the story of our life. Neuroscientists will tell you the same, root about in the treasure chest of the brain and you won't ever find the place where "we" reside. To prove his point Gray takes us to humans in the raw, to Naples in 1943 where starvation and disease took a modern city and tossed it back into the dark ages and people fought to live in the most desperate of conditions. In such terrible circumstances anything goes and the civilised life is seen to be the myth it is. Humans are animals that will do anything to remain alive, ditching values and philosophies long held simply to keep their hearts beating.
As I said it is a bleak and honest analysis and it is a powerful warning about human hubris, urging us to be ever humble and watchful for our own "nasty" instincts. Our institutions, our mythological civilised life where many of us have the privilege to live - where indeed John Gray himself gets the opportunity to de-construct it all - can and often is, washed away in an instant by the forces of dark disaster. He parodies our search for silence and the solace of meditation and the monastic life, suggesting there is an envy within it for the true language-less silence of animals. Where life is lived instant by shiny instant, a jabbing intention inside a single moment that is not recalled after the next one opens, in such a life there can be true calm. That dark calm of awarelessness, where day is simply the opposite of night and does not have a value-judgement shadowing it, making it something else entirely. In such a life, where the gripping fingers of memory do not snag hold of phantasms and illusions and weave a myth of stability and ego, is lierally beyond our ken and to be envied. On the journey he lords Nietzsche and Freud, whilst disparaging Jung and marvelling at our species's sheer ability to construct belief and myth.
This is poetry disguised as prose, marinaded in the deepest and most beautiful philosophy. A powerful and life-changing set of ideas, approach with care as the human world and the individual within it will never appear the same again.
I have a love-hate relationship with John Gray. Every atom of my being wants to deny his excoriatingly bleak judgement on the human condition and yet every time I read and re-read him I end up capitulating to his basic premise. His thinking's precise, forensic and irritatingly undeniable. Just turn on the television and watch the news for about two minutes and you see it playing out everyday.
In a nutshell his argument runs that there's no redemption for the human animal, in fact, we delude ourselves if we think we are anything beyond the animal. We are, he argues, violent, brutish and barbaric. And whilst our 21st century lives in developed nations are no longer dominated by these three forces, it is deep-written in our nature to have these forces just below the surface and that fact is as immutable as the mountains. Whilst our technology and science progress and develop our basic character and nature cannot. We are not improving as a species, becoming less violent or nasty and inexorably moving on to some dreamy Star Trekkian future of benign benevolence. We are doomed to repeat the barbarism of history, civilisation only paper-thin.
In this short and bitter book, sweetened by its careful construction and beautifully evocative language, Gray uses history and eye-witness account of human atrocity to drive home his point again and again. He drives nails into the humanist contention that we might be able to save ourselves from our atavistic instincts, dismissing atheism as just another rather silly belief system. As he evokes the silence of animals of the title he articulates his view so eloquently there's no escape. There is nothing surface here, his thinking goes so deep.
He contends that our memory and narrative self construct a lie for us each and everyday, a lie perpetuated by our civilisations where the human sense of self is reflected back at us with such power we believe our own propaganda. We are not cohesive beings with an "I" deep inside us driving our thoughts and lives in a trajectory or agenda of our choosing. We are a narrative self failing to remember this fundamental lie everyday. We string moments together into a bead necklace of memory, both imagining the dots and then joining them to construct the story of our life. Neuroscientists will tell you the same, root about in the treasure chest of the brain and you won't ever find the place where "we" reside. To prove his point Gray takes us to humans in the raw, to Naples in 1943 where starvation and disease took a modern city and tossed it back into the dark ages and people fought to live in the most desperate of conditions. In such terrible circumstances anything goes and the civilised life is seen to be the myth it is. Humans are animals that will do anything to remain alive, ditching values and philosophies long held simply to keep their hearts beating.
As I said it is a bleak and honest analysis and it is a powerful warning about human hubris, urging us to be ever humble and watchful for our own "nasty" instincts. Our institutions, our mythological civilised life where many of us have the privilege to live - where indeed John Gray himself gets the opportunity to de-construct it all - can and often is, washed away in an instant by the forces of dark disaster. He parodies our search for silence and the solace of meditation and the monastic life, suggesting there is an envy within it for the true language-less silence of animals. Where life is lived instant by shiny instant, a jabbing intention inside a single moment that is not recalled after the next one opens, in such a life there can be true calm. That dark calm of awarelessness, where day is simply the opposite of night and does not have a value-judgement shadowing it, making it something else entirely. In such a life, where the gripping fingers of memory do not snag hold of phantasms and illusions and weave a myth of stability and ego, is lierally beyond our ken and to be envied. On the journey he lords Nietzsche and Freud, whilst disparaging Jung and marvelling at our species's sheer ability to construct belief and myth.
This is poetry disguised as prose, marinaded in the deepest and most beautiful philosophy. A powerful and life-changing set of ideas, approach with care as the human world and the individual within it will never appear the same again.
October 20, 2014
The world in which you live from day to day is made from habit and memory. The perilous zones are the times when the self, also made from habit and memory, gives way. Then, if only for a moment, you may become something other than you have been.
Richard Rorty in a number of essays on Derrida and Deconstruction notes sanguinely that if rigor is what satisfies you and your philosophy, you need not follow Derrida. This is my clumsy paraphrase and Rorty readily notes there are a number of reasons to read Derrida, especially as he is one of the brave souls out dancing in the dark; but a programmatic analysis was not included in his methodology nor is it his intention. I feel that John Gray is likewise out sternly strolling in the shadows. His thesis here is that humanism is cognitive dissonance, a bad faith endeavor perpetuated by fictional positivism. Gray believes we confuse technology with a developed sense of self and purpose. The Silence of Animals is a queasy book, one larded with long citations from other authors. One could gather that his premise curtailed the need for escalation or procedure, what would be the point, anyway? I said that last bit in my Marvin the Paranoid Android voice.
2.5 stars
Richard Rorty in a number of essays on Derrida and Deconstruction notes sanguinely that if rigor is what satisfies you and your philosophy, you need not follow Derrida. This is my clumsy paraphrase and Rorty readily notes there are a number of reasons to read Derrida, especially as he is one of the brave souls out dancing in the dark; but a programmatic analysis was not included in his methodology nor is it his intention. I feel that John Gray is likewise out sternly strolling in the shadows. His thesis here is that humanism is cognitive dissonance, a bad faith endeavor perpetuated by fictional positivism. Gray believes we confuse technology with a developed sense of self and purpose. The Silence of Animals is a queasy book, one larded with long citations from other authors. One could gather that his premise curtailed the need for escalation or procedure, what would be the point, anyway? I said that last bit in my Marvin the Paranoid Android voice.
2.5 stars
January 8, 2019
Reading "Straw Dogs" by John Gray many years ago was something close to a formative intellectual experience. At the very least it helped me think in new ways about some fundamental things that I had been taking for granted til then. As a result I've always had a soft spot for his essays and books and have continued to pick them up over the years, whenever possible.
Having said that there is something unsettlingly repetitive about his corpus of work. "The Silence of Animals" goes over the same familiar themes: the Myth of Progress, the transmutation of religious expectation into secular ideology and the basic artifice of the man-created metaphysical world. In a sense these issues are timeless and bear repeating. But you don't necessarily need to read the same book about them again and again to get his message.
There was a small novelty to this work, suggested in the title. If we as human beings, caught up in the escalating clamor of the modern world, could rediscover that inner silence and solicitude that comes naturally to animals, perhaps something like real knowledge could be found. This is the knowledge that comes from contemplation and from being attuned to the "sweet stillness of the heart," something that so many writers of antiquity tried to convey to us the value of.
In addition to that reminder, Gray's reflections on Progress made me wonder whether the rush to adopt every new technology — even with mounting evidence that such uncritical embraces are causing us grave harm — is basically a sublimated religious impulse that considers novelty as not just a good but as something that provides meaning to life. How would we feel if the motor of technological advance ground to a halt, never to turn forward again?
If you've read Straw Dogs you don't need to read this one. Gray's essays on Muslim terrorism and modernity are also worth looking at.
Having said that there is something unsettlingly repetitive about his corpus of work. "The Silence of Animals" goes over the same familiar themes: the Myth of Progress, the transmutation of religious expectation into secular ideology and the basic artifice of the man-created metaphysical world. In a sense these issues are timeless and bear repeating. But you don't necessarily need to read the same book about them again and again to get his message.
There was a small novelty to this work, suggested in the title. If we as human beings, caught up in the escalating clamor of the modern world, could rediscover that inner silence and solicitude that comes naturally to animals, perhaps something like real knowledge could be found. This is the knowledge that comes from contemplation and from being attuned to the "sweet stillness of the heart," something that so many writers of antiquity tried to convey to us the value of.
In addition to that reminder, Gray's reflections on Progress made me wonder whether the rush to adopt every new technology — even with mounting evidence that such uncritical embraces are causing us grave harm — is basically a sublimated religious impulse that considers novelty as not just a good but as something that provides meaning to life. How would we feel if the motor of technological advance ground to a halt, never to turn forward again?
If you've read Straw Dogs you don't need to read this one. Gray's essays on Muslim terrorism and modernity are also worth looking at.
September 29, 2024
Όταν ήμουν νέος πίστευα πως το σύμπαν είναι ένα ανοιχτό βιβλίο τυπωμένο στην γλώσσα των φυσικών εξισώσεων και των κοινωνικών παραγόντων, ενώ τώρα μου φαίνεται σαν ένα κείμενο γραμμένο με αόρατο μελάνι.. Άρθουρ Καιστλερ.
Ωραία, και πως μπορούμε να διαβάσουμε τη μυστική γραφή του κόσμου;
Κατά John Gray, με πολλούς τρόπους, μονάχα που, αυτό που διαβάζουμε είναι τα δικά μας γράμματα, η κατά περίπτωση μυθολογία μας.
Εύκολοδιάβαστο, ενδιαφέρον κείμενο - που ανεβάζει συνεχώς στροφές όπως τσουλάει - από τον αιώνιο σκεπτικιστή Γκρέυ. Με ερωτήματα που σε κάνουν να σταματάς συχνά, για να σκεφτείς:
" Όταν η αλήθεια συγκρούεται με το νόημα, κερδίζει το νόημα. Το γιατί συμβαίνει αυτό, είναι ένα λεπτό ερώτημα. Γιατί έχει τόση σημασία το νόημα; Μήπως επειδή οι άνθρωποι χρειάζονται ένα λόγο να ζουν; Μήπως επειδή δεν θα μπορούσαν να αντέξουν τη ζωή αν δεν πίστευαν πώς η ζωή ενέχει μία κρυφή σημασία;"
Κατά Γκρέυ, η ανθρώπινη γνώση αυξάνεται, ενώ η ανθρώπινη ανορθολογικοτητα μένει η ίδια. Και ακόμα, η σιωπή των ζώων είναι πολύ διαφορετική από τη σιωπή των ανθρώπων, ή ακριβέστερα, της προσπάθειας τους για κατασίγαση του εσωτερικού θορύβου τους.
"Οι άνθρωποι είναι ζώα εφοδιασμένα με σύμβολα. Τα σύμβολα, καθώς τους βοηθούν να αντιμετωπίσουν τον κόσμο που δεν καταλαβαίνουν, είναι χρήσιμα εργαλεία' όμως οι άνθρωποι έχουν τη μανιώδη τάση να σκέφτονται και να πράττουν ωσάν ο κόσμος που έχουν φτιάξει με βάση αυτά τα σύμβολα να υπάρχει αληθινά" σ. 131.
Νομίζω ότι είναι το καλύτερο απ' όσα δικά του έχω διαβασει.. Οι σκέψεις του και, περισσότερο οι παραπομπές του, ανοίγουν μονοπάτια, οι τελευταίες σελίδες της" σιωπής" πλήρεις νοήματος. Φοβερό ανάγνωσμα.
Ωραία, και πως μπορούμε να διαβάσουμε τη μυστική γραφή του κόσμου;
Κατά John Gray, με πολλούς τρόπους, μονάχα που, αυτό που διαβάζουμε είναι τα δικά μας γράμματα, η κατά περίπτωση μυθολογία μας.
Εύκολοδιάβαστο, ενδιαφέρον κείμενο - που ανεβάζει συνεχώς στροφές όπως τσουλάει - από τον αιώνιο σκεπτικιστή Γκρέυ. Με ερωτήματα που σε κάνουν να σταματάς συχνά, για να σκεφτείς:
" Όταν η αλήθεια συγκρούεται με το νόημα, κερδίζει το νόημα. Το γιατί συμβαίνει αυτό, είναι ένα λεπτό ερώτημα. Γιατί έχει τόση σημασία το νόημα; Μήπως επειδή οι άνθρωποι χρειάζονται ένα λόγο να ζουν; Μήπως επειδή δεν θα μπορούσαν να αντέξουν τη ζωή αν δεν πίστευαν πώς η ζωή ενέχει μία κρυφή σημασία;"
Κατά Γκρέυ, η ανθρώπινη γνώση αυξάνεται, ενώ η ανθρώπινη ανορθολογικοτητα μένει η ίδια. Και ακόμα, η σιωπή των ζώων είναι πολύ διαφορετική από τη σιωπή των ανθρώπων, ή ακριβέστερα, της προσπάθειας τους για κατασίγαση του εσωτερικού θορύβου τους.
"Οι άνθρωποι είναι ζώα εφοδιασμένα με σύμβολα. Τα σύμβολα, καθώς τους βοηθούν να αντιμετωπίσουν τον κόσμο που δεν καταλαβαίνουν, είναι χρήσιμα εργαλεία' όμως οι άνθρωποι έχουν τη μανιώδη τάση να σκέφτονται και να πράττουν ωσάν ο κόσμος που έχουν φτιάξει με βάση αυτά τα σύμβολα να υπάρχει αληθινά" σ. 131.
Νομίζω ότι είναι το καλύτερο απ' όσα δικά του έχω διαβασει.. Οι σκέψεις του και, περισσότερο οι παραπομπές του, ανοίγουν μονοπάτια, οι τελευταίες σελίδες της" σιωπής" πλήρεις νοήματος. Φοβερό ανάγνωσμα.
July 1, 2020
في القرن التاسع عشر آمن نيتشة أن الفن يمكنه أن يكون جسرا بين الإنسان المادي والإله المتعالي الذي قتله، ولكنه يحذر؛ إن التحول من الدين إلى التأمل العلمي هو قفزة عنيفة وخطيرة، لا ينبغي التوصية بها، ولكن من أجل تحقيق هذه الغاية، فإن الفن يجب أن يوظف إلى حد أقصى لكي يغيث العقل المثقل بالعواطف، من اللامنطق يأتي الكثير من الخير. إنه متجذر بقوة في الأحاسيس، في اللغة، في الفن، في الدين، وعموما في كل شيء يعطي الحياة قيمتها. فقط السذج هم من يصدقون أن طبيعة الإنسان يمكن أن تصبح منطقية بالكامل.
غراي كذلك يجادل أن العلم والتاريخ يثبتان بأن البشر ليسوا عقلانيين إلا بشكل جزئي ومرحلي، لكن بالنسبة للإنسانويين المعاصرين، الحل سهل: على البشر أن يكونوا أكثر عقلانية في المستقبل. هؤلاء الذين يحملون مبخرة العقل ليس بمقدورهم رؤية بأن فكرة قدرة البشر يومًا ما على أن يكونوا أكثر عقلانية تفترض قفزة إيمانية أكبر لا يفترضها أي دين. فكرة أن المسيح قد عاد من بين الموتى، بحكم أنها ترتكز على خرق إعجازي ضمن نظام الأشياء، تتعارض مع العقل أقل من ذلك المفهوم الذي بحسبه سيكون البشر في المستقبل مختلفين عن ما كانوا عليه دائما
يمكننا اتهام زيوس قدر ما نشاء ولكنا لن نستطيع أن نقول أنه ممل بأي حال، على عكس أساطير العالم الحديث
غراي كذلك يجادل أن العلم والتاريخ يثبتان بأن البشر ليسوا عقلانيين إلا بشكل جزئي ومرحلي، لكن بالنسبة للإنسانويين المعاصرين، الحل سهل: على البشر أن يكونوا أكثر عقلانية في المستقبل. هؤلاء الذين يحملون مبخرة العقل ليس بمقدورهم رؤية بأن فكرة قدرة البشر يومًا ما على أن يكونوا أكثر عقلانية تفترض قفزة إيمانية أكبر لا يفترضها أي دين. فكرة أن المسيح قد عاد من بين الموتى، بحكم أنها ترتكز على خرق إعجازي ضمن نظام الأشياء، تتعارض مع العقل أقل من ذلك المفهوم الذي بحسبه سيكون البشر في المستقبل مختلفين عن ما كانوا عليه دائما
يمكننا اتهام زيوس قدر ما نشاء ولكنا لن نستطيع أن نقول أنه ممل بأي حال، على عكس أساطير العالم الحديث
February 6, 2022
El silencio de los animales fue el primer libro de John Gray que recuerdo haber comenzado a leer. En ese momento en mi vida estaba en un matrimonio que no iba a ninguna parte, pero durante el cual se dieron muchas situaciones que después fueron determinantes en mi vida.
Recuerdo haber comenzado a leer este libro y sentir cómo me hablaba, cómo las primeras ideas que Gray iba dibujando sobre el papel tenían eco en mi, en mis sentimientos, en mi manera de ver a mi alrededor, y también recuerdo que al leerlo y terminar una parte, unas páginas, me regresaba al inicio y volvía a comenzarlo.
Cada vez que comenzaba a leerlo sentía que leía algo ligeramente distinto, algo que había pasado por alto la primera vez. Avanzaba apenas unas páginas más que la vez anterior y lo dejaba.
Ese ejercicio de comenzar a leer este libro se dio demasiadas veces… en los últimos 7 años de mi vida.
Leí otros libros de Gray, como Perros de paja, Siete tipos de ateísmo y Misa negra, y entre todas esas y otras lecturas, este librito lo comenzaba y dejaba, volvía a comenzarlo y a dejarlo.
Gray se convirtió en uno de mis tótems, uno de mis gurús y mentores, junto con Taleb, con Rovelli, de Waal y Pouydebat. Y me ha inspirado a explorar a otros autores, como a Leopardi y Montaigne, a quien espero leer con calma pronto.
Ahora que pude leerlo todo de principio a fin, no puedo evitar reconocer en esta lectura exactamente lo que necesitaba leer en este momento en mi vida, leerlo y sentirme “menos solo” sintiéndome completamente solo, pero pleno y en armonía conmigo mismo.
Incluso, comencé a compartir este mensaje con algunas de las personas con quien me escribo en esta época:
Y mucho tuvo que ver esta lectura.
El subtítulo aclara muy bien de qué va: sobre el progreso y otros mitos modernos.
Durante las páginas de este libro, Gray nos explica y demuestra porqué el “progreso humano” es una invención y un mito inventado por la humanidad, y que basándonos en ello no vamos a llegar a ningún lado.
Que en realidad, como especie: no vamos a llegar a ningún lado nunca.
Todo esto lo hace con su erudición habitual, la cual jamás es pedante o presuntuosa, nunca se siente pesado ni paternalista con el lector, al contrario, va dando vaivenes de sus ideas dentro de unos márgenes muy bien delimitados, siendo ameno y hasta gracioso, y dejando una que otra crítica muy diplomática sobre uno que otro autor.
Es una joya leer a Gray.
La estructura es similar a la que vemos en los demás libros de Gray: va dejando aquí y allá, como unas especies de viñetas largas en las cuales nos expone alguna anécdota histórica, alguna lectura en específico, o profundizando en las ideas de autores que ha estudiado a conciencia, como Freud en este caso, entre otros.
Por medio de estos ejemplos, va demostrando la lectura errónea o lo torcido que pueden llegar a estar las interpretaciones que han hecho otros autores, un Nietzsche, un Powys; todo salpicado de poesía, mucha poesía, mucha de la visión de los poetas sobre el mundo, lo cual enriquece la lectura exorbitantemente, abre caminos nuevos en el lector, plantea preguntas desde ángulos distintos, y pone en su lugar al pensamiento científico y las ciencias sociales, y sobre todo a las humanidades.
Este libro me ha ayudado a hacer las paces conmigo mismo, y con quienes están cerca de mí.
Justo hace un par de años terminó una relación muy importante en mi vida y, más recientemente, está terminando otra muy significativa, de la cual no me quedaba muy claro el por qué hasta después de unas pláticas más, y precisamente, me encontraba leyendo cuando:
Cita Gray a John Sturat Mill, y así es, un poco así son mis discusiones, no que crea que yo contengo “la verdad”, pero sí me acerco a cierto grado de lucidez, y termina frustrándome que haya personas a mi alrededor que prefieran seguir soñando despiertos que ver la realidad con otros ojos.
Es como si alguien, viendo The Matrix (The Wachowskis, 1999), prefiere tomar la píldora roja y quedarse en Wonderland.
Como sería el caso de esta relación valiosa para mí, pero en la cual, la otra persona prefiere dirigirse en otra dirección, una que antagoniza con la que yo he decidido seguir.
Así que, como escribí arriba: esta lectura me hace más consciente de lo que está bien para mí, de acuerdo a cómo quiero entender el mundo; me lleva a aceptar mi condición, mi lugar en el mundo y a hacer las paces con mis circunstancias, me ayuda a redefinir qué es lo que quiero y qué es lo que no.
Y de alguna manera, a entender a mis semejantes:
Esta pregunta la responde unas páginas más adelante Gray, y la comparto aquí por si alguien que leyera este comentario no tiene a la mano el libro, no puede leerlo o no le interesa pero termina llegando a esta parte, porque esto es lo que termina dándome todas las herramientas que no me han dado otras lecturas para entenderme:
Siga pues mi camino rumbo a la contemplación, enfundado muy cómodamente en la resignación.
Recuerdo haber comenzado a leer este libro y sentir cómo me hablaba, cómo las primeras ideas que Gray iba dibujando sobre el papel tenían eco en mi, en mis sentimientos, en mi manera de ver a mi alrededor, y también recuerdo que al leerlo y terminar una parte, unas páginas, me regresaba al inicio y volvía a comenzarlo.
Cada vez que comenzaba a leerlo sentía que leía algo ligeramente distinto, algo que había pasado por alto la primera vez. Avanzaba apenas unas páginas más que la vez anterior y lo dejaba.
Ese ejercicio de comenzar a leer este libro se dio demasiadas veces… en los últimos 7 años de mi vida.
Leí otros libros de Gray, como Perros de paja, Siete tipos de ateísmo y Misa negra, y entre todas esas y otras lecturas, este librito lo comenzaba y dejaba, volvía a comenzarlo y a dejarlo.
Gray se convirtió en uno de mis tótems, uno de mis gurús y mentores, junto con Taleb, con Rovelli, de Waal y Pouydebat. Y me ha inspirado a explorar a otros autores, como a Leopardi y Montaigne, a quien espero leer con calma pronto.
Ahora que pude leerlo todo de principio a fin, no puedo evitar reconocer en esta lectura exactamente lo que necesitaba leer en este momento en mi vida, leerlo y sentirme “menos solo” sintiéndome completamente solo, pero pleno y en armonía conmigo mismo.
Incluso, comencé a compartir este mensaje con algunas de las personas con quien me escribo en esta época:
Estoy en un punto muy zen de mi vida. Muy equilibrado, consciente de las cosas, más seguro de lo que quiero y lo que no. Y confirmando que no quiero hacer nada en la vida más que dedicarme a la contemplación. Leer, ver películas, escuchar música, y pues tener un trabajo que no me estorbe tanto y pague mis cuentas.
Y mucho tuvo que ver esta lectura.
El subtítulo aclara muy bien de qué va: sobre el progreso y otros mitos modernos.
Durante las páginas de este libro, Gray nos explica y demuestra porqué el “progreso humano” es una invención y un mito inventado por la humanidad, y que basándonos en ello no vamos a llegar a ningún lado.
Que en realidad, como especie: no vamos a llegar a ningún lado nunca.
Todo esto lo hace con su erudición habitual, la cual jamás es pedante o presuntuosa, nunca se siente pesado ni paternalista con el lector, al contrario, va dando vaivenes de sus ideas dentro de unos márgenes muy bien delimitados, siendo ameno y hasta gracioso, y dejando una que otra crítica muy diplomática sobre uno que otro autor.
Es una joya leer a Gray.
La estructura es similar a la que vemos en los demás libros de Gray: va dejando aquí y allá, como unas especies de viñetas largas en las cuales nos expone alguna anécdota histórica, alguna lectura en específico, o profundizando en las ideas de autores que ha estudiado a conciencia, como Freud en este caso, entre otros.
Por medio de estos ejemplos, va demostrando la lectura errónea o lo torcido que pueden llegar a estar las interpretaciones que han hecho otros autores, un Nietzsche, un Powys; todo salpicado de poesía, mucha poesía, mucha de la visión de los poetas sobre el mundo, lo cual enriquece la lectura exorbitantemente, abre caminos nuevos en el lector, plantea preguntas desde ángulos distintos, y pone en su lugar al pensamiento científico y las ciencias sociales, y sobre todo a las humanidades.
Este libro me ha ayudado a hacer las paces conmigo mismo, y con quienes están cerca de mí.
Justo hace un par de años terminó una relación muy importante en mi vida y, más recientemente, está terminando otra muy significativa, de la cual no me quedaba muy claro el por qué hasta después de unas pláticas más, y precisamente, me encontraba leyendo cuando:
¿Pero por qué se empeña en despertar a quiénes están durmiendo? ¿qué camino, qué salida ha diseñado para ellos? (pág. 55)
Cita Gray a John Sturat Mill, y así es, un poco así son mis discusiones, no que crea que yo contengo “la verdad”, pero sí me acerco a cierto grado de lucidez, y termina frustrándome que haya personas a mi alrededor que prefieran seguir soñando despiertos que ver la realidad con otros ojos.
Es como si alguien, viendo The Matrix (The Wachowskis, 1999), prefiere tomar la píldora roja y quedarse en Wonderland.
Como sería el caso de esta relación valiosa para mí, pero en la cual, la otra persona prefiere dirigirse en otra dirección, una que antagoniza con la que yo he decidido seguir.
Así que, como escribí arriba: esta lectura me hace más consciente de lo que está bien para mí, de acuerdo a cómo quiero entender el mundo; me lleva a aceptar mi condición, mi lugar en el mundo y a hacer las paces con mis circunstancias, me ayuda a redefinir qué es lo que quiero y qué es lo que no.
Y de alguna manera, a entender a mis semejantes:
¿Por qué es tan importante el sentido? ¿Por qué necesitan los seres humanos una razón para vivir? ¿Sería porque no podrían soportar la vida si no creyeran que la vida tiene un sentido oculto? ¿O tal vez la exigencia de sentido derive del hecho de otorgar demasiada importancia al lenguaje, de creer que nuestras vidas son libros que no hemos aprendido aún a leer? (pág. 71)
Esta pregunta la responde unas páginas más adelante Gray, y la comparto aquí por si alguien que leyera este comentario no tiene a la mano el libro, no puede leerlo o no le interesa pero termina llegando a esta parte, porque esto es lo que termina dándome todas las herramientas que no me han dado otras lecturas para entenderme:
Al aceptar que el mundo carece de sentido, nos liberamos de la reclusión en el sentido que le habíamos dado. El saber que no hay nada sustancial en este mundo puede dar la impresión de privar al mundo de su valor. Sin embargo, este vacío se puede convertir en nuestra posesión más valiosa, puesto que nos abre al mundo inagotable que existe más allá de nosotros mismos. (pág. 92)
Siga pues mi camino rumbo a la contemplación, enfundado muy cómodamente en la resignación.
September 22, 2015
If you've read Straw Dogs, it's probably best you stopped there. It seems like each new book by John Gray is full of the same arguments as previous books, just framed slightly differently. I loved Straw Dogs, but there's only so many times I can read a new "remix" of the same ideas.
The best parts of The Silence of Animals are the quotes from books that John Gray peppers throughout, leaving you wanting to read more. I've now added a number of them to my "to read" list, including The Peregrine by J.A. Baker, The Drowned World by J.G. Ballard, An Outpost of Progress by Joseph Conrad, and Naples '44 by Norman Lewis.
The best parts of The Silence of Animals are the quotes from books that John Gray peppers throughout, leaving you wanting to read more. I've now added a number of them to my "to read" list, including The Peregrine by J.A. Baker, The Drowned World by J.G. Ballard, An Outpost of Progress by Joseph Conrad, and Naples '44 by Norman Lewis.
August 24, 2022
I miss this kind of books, especially now that I am forced to read endless, tedious distinctions about specialized subtopics that nobody besides 50 professors and a few hundred poor graduate students care about. There aren't really any arguments in this book. I think that after Straw Dogs Gray decided to focus more on the history of ideas, finding as many pessimistic anti-humanist, anti-Enlightenment writers as possible and combine them with each other to form small sections that describe his particular -and quite attractive to me- viewpoint. His Seven Types of Atheism was also very similar to this.
This viewpoint should be very familiar to anyone who have read his other books. We humans think that things keep getting better but in reality what changes is the toys we have to play with and the stories we tell to ourselves. We are fundamentally and irrevocably flawed and we are ready to show it when opportunity arises, when we find ourselves in unusual circumstances. It's no surprise that many of his sections deal with stories from WW2 or similar supposedly extraordinary periods in which culture collapses. We say to ourselves that we are born to be free and that we are the only rational beings, but it is simply a replacement of God with faith in reason, truth, science and progress.
We think that our views reflect the world but they are ready to crumble when a new one arises. It is actually a choice between myths, not a mirror of reality (he is following Rorty and post-modernist thought here). It is not us and the world, we are part of a chaotic order and we invent order and stability but only temporarily. It is hard or impossible to escape this need for meaning or order and in some cases, like in pursuit of happiness or freedom it can even be detrimental.
The most interesting section is the one that bears the name of the book. A very common idea that started from Gadamer and Heidegger but is still here with McDowell is that whereas animals live in an environment, humans create their own world because of thought and language. This is supposedly a privilege, but for Grey it is a flaw. The animals in their environment are silent and lucky, because they don’t have this incessant endless inner talk. Humans traditionally seek silence in monasteries but now this is discouraged. As he says: “admitting the need for [silence] means accepting that you are inwardly restless” and that “much of your life has been an exercise in distraction”. Many people, philosophies or religions provide instructions on how to escape it but these ways usually came with caveats like spiritualism or reaching God or reaching some inner humanity or accessing a mysterious platonic realm. Instead, like in Straw Dogs, he endorses contemplation, a godless mysticism that doesn’t try to reach something divine or some higher self, it doesn’t have anything particular in mind as a goal, “all it offers is mere being”.
Overall, I always enjoy this kind of books and cannot wait to escape academia and have the time to read all those authors he finds. But of course, this is only one more viewpoint, that just happens to suit my own preferences. I am fine with that.
This viewpoint should be very familiar to anyone who have read his other books. We humans think that things keep getting better but in reality what changes is the toys we have to play with and the stories we tell to ourselves. We are fundamentally and irrevocably flawed and we are ready to show it when opportunity arises, when we find ourselves in unusual circumstances. It's no surprise that many of his sections deal with stories from WW2 or similar supposedly extraordinary periods in which culture collapses. We say to ourselves that we are born to be free and that we are the only rational beings, but it is simply a replacement of God with faith in reason, truth, science and progress.
We think that our views reflect the world but they are ready to crumble when a new one arises. It is actually a choice between myths, not a mirror of reality (he is following Rorty and post-modernist thought here). It is not us and the world, we are part of a chaotic order and we invent order and stability but only temporarily. It is hard or impossible to escape this need for meaning or order and in some cases, like in pursuit of happiness or freedom it can even be detrimental.
The most interesting section is the one that bears the name of the book. A very common idea that started from Gadamer and Heidegger but is still here with McDowell is that whereas animals live in an environment, humans create their own world because of thought and language. This is supposedly a privilege, but for Grey it is a flaw. The animals in their environment are silent and lucky, because they don’t have this incessant endless inner talk. Humans traditionally seek silence in monasteries but now this is discouraged. As he says: “admitting the need for [silence] means accepting that you are inwardly restless” and that “much of your life has been an exercise in distraction”. Many people, philosophies or religions provide instructions on how to escape it but these ways usually came with caveats like spiritualism or reaching God or reaching some inner humanity or accessing a mysterious platonic realm. Instead, like in Straw Dogs, he endorses contemplation, a godless mysticism that doesn’t try to reach something divine or some higher self, it doesn’t have anything particular in mind as a goal, “all it offers is mere being”.
Overall, I always enjoy this kind of books and cannot wait to escape academia and have the time to read all those authors he finds. But of course, this is only one more viewpoint, that just happens to suit my own preferences. I am fine with that.
January 9, 2014
This is the follow-up to Straw Dogs, and happily is more of the same. He debunks the whole idea of humanism and human progress, yet, while an atheist, he is not antagonistic to religion. His style is terse, pointed, and aphoristic. I have many pithy, new quotes to add to my growing list. You can use them as a basis for contemplation, say on a long walk. At the least, his thinking can help one avoid being carried away by the latest fads of civilization.
Sample quotes:
If belief in human rationality was a scientific theory it would long since have been abandoned. 72
If there is anything unique about the human animal it is that it has the ability to grow knowledge at an accelerating rate while being chronically incapable of learning from experience . 75
A type of atheism that refused to revere humanity would be a genuine advance. 81
Science and myth are both ways of dealing with the chaos of sensation. 98
But science and myth are alike in being makeshifts that humans erect as shelters from a world they cannot know. 102
Looking for happiness is like having lived your life before it is over. You know everything important in advance: what you want, who you are. Why saddle yourself with the burden of being a character in such a dull tale? Better make up your life as you go along, and not be too attached to the stories you tell yourself on the way. 112
The pursuit of silence seems to be a peculiarly human activity. Other animals run away from noise, but it is noise made by others that they try to avoid. Only humans want to silence the clamour in their minds. 157
If the human mind can ever be released from myth it is not through science, still less through philosophy, but in moments of contemplation. 206
Sample quotes:
If belief in human rationality was a scientific theory it would long since have been abandoned. 72
If there is anything unique about the human animal it is that it has the ability to grow knowledge at an accelerating rate while being chronically incapable of learning from experience . 75
A type of atheism that refused to revere humanity would be a genuine advance. 81
Science and myth are both ways of dealing with the chaos of sensation. 98
But science and myth are alike in being makeshifts that humans erect as shelters from a world they cannot know. 102
Looking for happiness is like having lived your life before it is over. You know everything important in advance: what you want, who you are. Why saddle yourself with the burden of being a character in such a dull tale? Better make up your life as you go along, and not be too attached to the stories you tell yourself on the way. 112
The pursuit of silence seems to be a peculiarly human activity. Other animals run away from noise, but it is noise made by others that they try to avoid. Only humans want to silence the clamour in their minds. 157
If the human mind can ever be released from myth it is not through science, still less through philosophy, but in moments of contemplation. 206
March 25, 2019
Κατά διαστήματα συναρπαστικό, ακόμη κι όταν μ' εκνεύριζε. Πού και πού ένιωθα ότι ξεπερνά τις αντιληπτικές μου ικανότητες. Οπωσδήποτε ενδιαφέρον, κάποιες φορές όμως μού φάνηκε αποπροσανατολισμένο.
July 26, 2017
What's the book about? A scathing critique of modern civilization and liberal humanism? Loathing for the idea of faith in progress? Or a call to acceptance of human imperfection and frailty while liberating ourselves "from confinement in the meaning we have made. Knowing there is nothing of substance in our world may seem to rob that world of value. But this nothingness may be our most precious possession, since it opens to us the inexhaustible world that exists beyond ourselves." ?
Hard to tell. It does give an interesting perspective on how so many of the things that we take for granted are just myths and an interesting defense of Freud over Jung. Also love his description of a myth:
or aphorisms like:
The book draws on works from numerous authors most of whom I know nothing about but the book ends up being structured in a meta fashion that I like a lot, but YMMV.
Hard to tell. It does give an interesting perspective on how so many of the things that we take for granted are just myths and an interesting defense of Freud over Jung. Also love his description of a myth:
"Myths are not eternal archetypes frozen somewhere out of time. They are more like snatches of music that play in the mind. Seeming to come from nowhere, they stay with us for a while and then are gone."
or aphorisms like:
"If belief in human rationality were a scientific theory it would long since have been falsified and abandoned"
"If there is anything unique about the human animal it is that it has the ability to grow knowledge at an accelerating rate while being chronically incapable of learning from experience"
"Human uniqueness is a myth inherited from religion, which humanists have recycled into science."
The book draws on works from numerous authors most of whom I know nothing about but the book ends up being structured in a meta fashion that I like a lot, but YMMV.
September 21, 2013
This is another of Grays’ characteristic critique of neo-liberal philosophy and follows in the direction of his earlier cult book "Straw Dogs." Referring to the works of writers as varied as Ballard, Borges, Freud, Conrad, Jeffries, Beckett etc.., and with a number of quotes included makes it for a rich reading. Human progress is quintessentially a myth and Gray himself does not hold back and is sharp shooting when he says– “Reviving long-exploded errors, twenty first century believers in progress unwittingly demonstrate the unreality of progress in the history of ideas”....“to suppose that the myth of progress could be shaken off would be to ascribe to modern humanity, a capacity for improvement even greater than that which it ascribes to itself.”
Gray certainly does make one think hard when he asks - “When truth is at odds with meaning, it is meaning that wins. Why this should be so is a delicate question. Why is meaning so important? Why do humans need a reason to live? Is it because they could not endure life if they did not believe it contained hidden significance? Or does the demand for meaning come from attaching too much sense to language – from thinking that our lives are books we have not yet learnt to read?”
The Silence of the Animals is fascinatingly an enjoyable read even though it knocks the ‘human’ off its pedestal!
Gray certainly does make one think hard when he asks - “When truth is at odds with meaning, it is meaning that wins. Why this should be so is a delicate question. Why is meaning so important? Why do humans need a reason to live? Is it because they could not endure life if they did not believe it contained hidden significance? Or does the demand for meaning come from attaching too much sense to language – from thinking that our lives are books we have not yet learnt to read?”
The Silence of the Animals is fascinatingly an enjoyable read even though it knocks the ‘human’ off its pedestal!
August 27, 2019
John Gray doesn't want us to forget we're animals, or that the fact explains us. This continues the thinking of his previous book, Straw Dogs. His core message here seems to be that technological progress doesn't mean progress in civilization because increases in knowledge don't neutralize man's innate irrationality. That irrationality accounts for our barbarity. Animal nature can't be overcome by our technological advances. Knowledge isn't enough to control it. Therefore, Gray says, progress is a myth. In our age of declining religion, since man can't live without myth, we've come to think of science and knowledge as salvation. Science has become the secular myth of progress which is replacing religion.
The answer we strive for is silence. The most manifest difference between man and animals is our possession of language, through which we perceive the world. Animals lack language and live in a world of silence which humans seek through poetry, religion, and an engagement with the natural world isolated from civilization and its attendant barbarity. Silence, for man, becomes the redemption that animals possess naturally.
An interesting book. Knotty.
The answer we strive for is silence. The most manifest difference between man and animals is our possession of language, through which we perceive the world. Animals lack language and live in a world of silence which humans seek through poetry, religion, and an engagement with the natural world isolated from civilization and its attendant barbarity. Silence, for man, becomes the redemption that animals possess naturally.
An interesting book. Knotty.
February 12, 2017
John Gray takes a look at the fancies of man throughout history, and isn't particularly impressed. His main punching bag of choice is the modern notion of progress – particularly those of moral, societal progress – and the scientific optimism which posits that we're living in a intelligible world that we're increasingly beginning to understand. Christianity may be a falsely comforting fiction of redemption, but in the eyes of Gray, rational humanism is a worse fiction still, and as much of a religion in its own right.
The book reads largely like an anthology, with constant quotations of a large list of authors' pessimistic views on humanity, civilization, and progress. I liked the portions drawing on Freud, Borges, and Conrad in particular. Gray, like me, seems to much much prefer Freud to his protégé Jung: "Jung's thought is interesting not because it has any value in itself, but for showing how psychology can become a vehicle for a new religion". He also brings in the life-stories and words of several (to me) little known writers.
Gray's invective directed at humanism gets rather repetitious after a while. A familiar paradox is how the great pessimists can actually function as some of the best antidotes to a gloomy mood – from Schopenhauer's amusing but insightful grumpiness to Camus' reflections on the Sisyphean mundanity of everyday life. To me, this is not the case with Gray. In the end it comes off less as a life-affirming or humorously caustic pessimism than a peevish drone.
Granted, humanity isn't on a one-way track toward moral utopia – after all, the last century brought with it some of the most gruesome atrocities imaginable, and there's more than enough around in the present. But when taking a quick glance at the societal trends since, say, the enlightenment age, I find it rather hard to deny that there have been some substantial and very meaningful societal advancements. As the brilliant educator Hans Rosling, who sadly recently passed away, pointed out repeatedly, the present world is in a far better condition than what the majority of us realize. It's just hard to remember given how the news we are fed every day invariably tend to accentuate the things that still go badly, and not the very gradual but all the more real facts like more girls getting access to education around the globe or decreasing violent crime rates.
The book reads largely like an anthology, with constant quotations of a large list of authors' pessimistic views on humanity, civilization, and progress. I liked the portions drawing on Freud, Borges, and Conrad in particular. Gray, like me, seems to much much prefer Freud to his protégé Jung: "Jung's thought is interesting not because it has any value in itself, but for showing how psychology can become a vehicle for a new religion". He also brings in the life-stories and words of several (to me) little known writers.
Gray's invective directed at humanism gets rather repetitious after a while. A familiar paradox is how the great pessimists can actually function as some of the best antidotes to a gloomy mood – from Schopenhauer's amusing but insightful grumpiness to Camus' reflections on the Sisyphean mundanity of everyday life. To me, this is not the case with Gray. In the end it comes off less as a life-affirming or humorously caustic pessimism than a peevish drone.
Granted, humanity isn't on a one-way track toward moral utopia – after all, the last century brought with it some of the most gruesome atrocities imaginable, and there's more than enough around in the present. But when taking a quick glance at the societal trends since, say, the enlightenment age, I find it rather hard to deny that there have been some substantial and very meaningful societal advancements. As the brilliant educator Hans Rosling, who sadly recently passed away, pointed out repeatedly, the present world is in a far better condition than what the majority of us realize. It's just hard to remember given how the news we are fed every day invariably tend to accentuate the things that still go badly, and not the very gradual but all the more real facts like more girls getting access to education around the globe or decreasing violent crime rates.
April 28, 2023
Even though there are certain claims of the author I find ridiculous (in regard to relatively recent events) I find his books worth reading. This is one of his best, together with "Straw Dogs".
No need to review the book. :) This is how a bot does it:
No need to review the book. :) This is how a bot does it:
Review the book "The Silence of Animals" (Struck parts are those the bot is wrong about.)
The Silence of Animals by John Gray is a book that explores the human condition and the limits of reason. Gray argues that humans are not rational beings who can overcome their animal nature, but rather creatures who are constantly driven by irrational impulses and desires. He challenges the idea that humans can find meaning and purpose in their lives through progress, morality, or religion. Instead, he suggests that humans should embrace their animal silence and learn to live with uncertainty and contingency.The book is divided into three parts: The Human Past, The Human Present, and The Human Future.In each part, Gray draws on various sources such as literature, philosophy, history, and psychology to illustrate his arguments. He also uses examples of people who have experienced moments of silence, such as prisoners of war, artists, mystics, and nihilists. Gray's style is clear and engaging, but also provocative and challenging. He does not shy away from confronting some of the most difficult questions about human existence and morality.
The Silence of Animals is a book that will make you think and question your assumptions about yourself and the world. It is not a book for those who are looking for easy answers or comforting illusions. It is a book for those who are willing to face the reality of human nature and the uncertainty of human destiny.
April 11, 2013
John Gray is een Britse filosoof die de afgelopen jaren ook in Nederland een trouwe schare fans heeft weten op te bouwen. Eerder verschenen o.a. "Strohonden", "Al-Quaida en de moderne tijd", "Valse dageraad", "Zwarte mis" en "Het onsterfelijkheidscomité".
Dit boek is in zekere zin een vervolg op zijn boek "Strohonden" uit 2002. Net als dat boek is "De stilte van dieren" een venijnige kritiek op het vooruitgangs- en maakbaarheidsgeloof van de moderne mens, door Gray als moderne mythe beschouwd. Met name humanisten - zij die religie verwerpen en de wetenschap als bron van vooruitgang en ultieme bevrijding beschouwen - moeten het ontgelden.
Het boek is fragmentarischer en minder systematisch dan "Strohonden". Het is opgebouwd uit drie delen, die zijn opgedeeld in hoofdstukken die allen een denker of dichter tot uitgangspunt nemen, en een rijke kennis van de Westerse (intellectuele) geschiedenis tentoon spreiden. Het is geen rechtlijnig betoog, maar evocatief en associatief. Daardoor is het moeilijk om de vinger precies op de zere plek te leggen. Met name Gray's gebruik van de term "mythe" is tamelijk vaag.
Het mensbeeld in de eerste twee delen van het boek is tamelijk donker, maar het derde deel is haast boeddhistisch en lichtvoetig wanneer Gray contemplatie benadrukt als de mogelijkheid om de werkelijkheid te zien en te accepteren zoals die is.
Een zeer lezenswaardig en interessant boek, dat boeit tot de laatste bladzij, en dat verrast met schitterende aforismen.
Dit boek is in zekere zin een vervolg op zijn boek "Strohonden" uit 2002. Net als dat boek is "De stilte van dieren" een venijnige kritiek op het vooruitgangs- en maakbaarheidsgeloof van de moderne mens, door Gray als moderne mythe beschouwd. Met name humanisten - zij die religie verwerpen en de wetenschap als bron van vooruitgang en ultieme bevrijding beschouwen - moeten het ontgelden.
Het boek is fragmentarischer en minder systematisch dan "Strohonden". Het is opgebouwd uit drie delen, die zijn opgedeeld in hoofdstukken die allen een denker of dichter tot uitgangspunt nemen, en een rijke kennis van de Westerse (intellectuele) geschiedenis tentoon spreiden. Het is geen rechtlijnig betoog, maar evocatief en associatief. Daardoor is het moeilijk om de vinger precies op de zere plek te leggen. Met name Gray's gebruik van de term "mythe" is tamelijk vaag.
Het mensbeeld in de eerste twee delen van het boek is tamelijk donker, maar het derde deel is haast boeddhistisch en lichtvoetig wanneer Gray contemplatie benadrukt als de mogelijkheid om de werkelijkheid te zien en te accepteren zoals die is.
Een zeer lezenswaardig en interessant boek, dat boeit tot de laatste bladzij, en dat verrast met schitterende aforismen.
October 23, 2013
Gray is absolutely brilliant and has an incredible knowledge of western intellectual history. I first gained an appreciation of Gray through Black Mass where he traces the origin and the continuation of teleological western thought. His scathing critique of goal oriented religions and ideologies from Christianity to Marxism to modern neo-liberal capitalist is best expression of my own ideas of intellectual history.
In the Silence of Animals, he returns to the same theme; the myth of of progress. This time he attacks modern myths through modern literary history citing numerous figures; well known to obscure. My greatest disappointment was the absence of Camus. In his essay, The Rebel, Camus addresses the same issues found in both the Black Mass and the Silence of Animals. Camus' critique of the French and Russian Revolution and his personal insights into human existence match Gray's ideas in Black Mass and The Silence of Animals respectively.
The only other weakness is the lack of narrative structure. In Black Mass, Gray was able to use history to provide structure. In a more personal look at the modern individual, Gray has no anchor and his ideas and citations seem to float from here to there. Camus integrated both the personal and social need for goals and progress using history as a structure. Thus, the only thing left to say is if one reads Camus' the Rebel one doesn't need to read Black Mass and The Silence of Animals. Of course, all three are still worth reading.
In the Silence of Animals, he returns to the same theme; the myth of of progress. This time he attacks modern myths through modern literary history citing numerous figures; well known to obscure. My greatest disappointment was the absence of Camus. In his essay, The Rebel, Camus addresses the same issues found in both the Black Mass and the Silence of Animals. Camus' critique of the French and Russian Revolution and his personal insights into human existence match Gray's ideas in Black Mass and The Silence of Animals respectively.
The only other weakness is the lack of narrative structure. In Black Mass, Gray was able to use history to provide structure. In a more personal look at the modern individual, Gray has no anchor and his ideas and citations seem to float from here to there. Camus integrated both the personal and social need for goals and progress using history as a structure. Thus, the only thing left to say is if one reads Camus' the Rebel one doesn't need to read Black Mass and The Silence of Animals. Of course, all three are still worth reading.
October 12, 2014
Well its John Gray-of course I loved it. Not quite as much as Straw Dogs though as it was a bit less trolly than that and more introspective. I am a recent fan of Mr. Gray but am relieved to find someone else making the same points (though much more eloquently) that I have been for a few years now. Possibly the best part, to which I wholeheartedly agree, is that truly being an atheist and a critical thinker means having no room for ideals such as humanism. Its a point Ive long thought relevant and a particular gripe I have with the new atheist movement.
Since he was so fond of quoting poets and thinkers in this work let me add ome words from the excellent band Agalloch:
I saw the nightfall...
It called to me like a river of shadows
It sang to me with the cries of a thousand ravens that blackened the sky as they
took flight
and sank the Sol
I shall never trust the sun again, Eridanis Nadir
I ran away far into the woods
To find the Sol, I called to her...
"I don't want to be forgotten...I never wanted to be human"
NEVER!!!!!
Since he was so fond of quoting poets and thinkers in this work let me add ome words from the excellent band Agalloch:
I saw the nightfall...
It called to me like a river of shadows
It sang to me with the cries of a thousand ravens that blackened the sky as they
took flight
and sank the Sol
I shall never trust the sun again, Eridanis Nadir
I ran away far into the woods
To find the Sol, I called to her...
"I don't want to be forgotten...I never wanted to be human"
NEVER!!!!!
December 29, 2013
Sub par for Gray. He is trying to convey a complex yet simple idea about the meaningless of life - the beauty of meaningless. The happiness to be derived from meaninglessness.
As his critic in The New York Times points out, he does this by various seemingly unconnected true anecdotes not using a cohesive argument. And there are familiar names, Joseph Conrad, Freud, Santanyana, (the obligatory) Ballard. Nearing the book's end lesser prophets such as Ford Madox Ford (whose book Parade's End Gray calls "possibly the greatest twentieth-century English novel") and Llewelyn Powys make their anecdotal appearance.
So Gray is trying to convince us by showing us arguments. He could do better but still, he's turned my head.
As his critic in The New York Times points out, he does this by various seemingly unconnected true anecdotes not using a cohesive argument. And there are familiar names, Joseph Conrad, Freud, Santanyana, (the obligatory) Ballard. Nearing the book's end lesser prophets such as Ford Madox Ford (whose book Parade's End Gray calls "possibly the greatest twentieth-century English novel") and Llewelyn Powys make their anecdotal appearance.
So Gray is trying to convince us by showing us arguments. He could do better but still, he's turned my head.
January 10, 2019
I've added so many books to my to-read list as a result of this thought-provoking but grim manifesto on human insignificance. Composed of brief snippets similar to college essays, Gray's quiet jeremiad is an easy-to-read smorgasbord of philosophical ideas. Delish!
September 18, 2019
O livro é um longo ensaio que trata de grandes ideias abstratas que tornaram verdadeiros mitos, ou seja, damos sentido à nossa existência em parte, pelo menos, a esses mitos.
Mais do que fazer comentários, tratei de reproduzir trechos que me chamaram a atenção ao longo do texto.
Gray – primeiro livro que leio dele – se apresenta não como um otimista ou pessimista, mas como alguém que é cético em relação à nossa própria humanidade, o que inclui a própria ideia de um propósito abstrato que exista desde antes da nossa existência e nos guie neste mundo.
Ele põe isso nos seguintes termos: “Ao longo de toda a história e da pré-história, tem-se aceito que existe algo errado com o animal humano”.
E aí, o que fazer? Talvez enfrentar esses mitos nos guiam a lugar nenhum. O primeiro, e mais óbvio, é o que trata do progresso e de sua ilusão. Não, nós não vamos melhorar. Não, nós não vamos ser melhores, de um ponto de vista ético, melhores do que aqueles que nos antecederam. E mais, toda a nossa cultura, talvez toda a nossa vida possa ser sintetizada como o fracasso dessa concepção de se ver o mundo.
A fé no progresso, segundo ele, é um remanescente tardio do cristianismo primitivo, originando-se na mensagem de Jesus, posto por ele simplesmente como o “profeta judeu que anunciou o fim dos tempos”, mas, por outro lado, “A mensagem do Gênesis é que nas áreas mais vitais da vida humana não pode haver progresso, apenas uma eterna luta com nossa própria natureza”.
Mas há não o progresso no sentido de que evoluímos em direção a algo. Não. Na verdade, ao analisar o Coração das Trevas, ele observa que “A barbárie é uma maneira primitiva de vida, sugere Conrad, mas um desdobramento patológico da civilização” e “No entendimento de Conrad, contudo, não apenas o governo se deixou contaminar pela criminalidade. Todas as instituições humanas – famílias e igrejas, forças policiais e anarquistas – estão comprometidas pelo crime. A tentativa de explicar a maldade humana pelas instituições corruptas levanta uma questão: por que os seres humanos são tão apegados a instituições corruptas? Com toda evidência, a resposta está no animal humano”.
Mas por que se acredita no progresso? A resposta dele é que “o mito do progresso projeta um vislumbre de significado na vida daqueles que o aceitam”. Significado em um mundo que não tem um. Mas esse preenchimento de espaços no nosso vazio existencial se faz também com outros mitos. O mais óbvio é o da racionalidade humana: “se a crença na racionalidade humana fosse uma teoria científica, há muito teria sido abandonada”. E “os seres humanos não lidam com crenças e percepções conflitantes procurando testá-las em cotejo com os fatos. Eles reduzem o conflito reinterpretando os fatos que vão de encontro às crenças a que estão mais apegados. Como escreveu T. S. Eliot em Burnt Norton, a espécie humana não suporta muito a realidade” ou, ainda, “A evidência científica e histórica é que os seres humanos só parcial e intermitentemente são racionais”
Em suma, “A dissonância cognitiva é a condição humana normal” ou, ainda, “Se existe algo único no animal humano é sua capacidade de multiplicar conhecimento em velocidade crescente, ao mesmo tempo revelando-se cronicamente incapaz de aprender com a experiência”.
Se não há progresso ou tampouco racionalidade, apenas oscilamos entre polos opostos: “A civilização é natural para os seres humanos, mas também o é a barbárie”.
Essas distorções nos levam a compreender mal conceitos. E aqui gostei do modo como ele apresenta a seleção natural, que, para mim, ao menos, foi uma forma bastante luminosa que entender o que ela é de fato: “A característica mais importante da seleção natural é ser um processo de deriva. A evolução não tem um estágio final nem direção, de modo que se o desenvolvimento da sociedade é um processo evolutivo, trata-se de um processo que não vai dar em lugar nenhum”.
Mas, afinal de contas, por que precisamos desses mitos inventados? A resposta dele é outra pergunta: Será porque não seriam capazes de suportar a vida se não acreditassem que contém um significado oculto?”
A resposta de outros, ou pelo menos a maneira como ele interpreta Freud vai nesse sentido. Segundo Gray, para Freud a doença humana não tem cura e o objetivo da psicanálise – um processo interminável, advertia Freud – é a aceitação do destino pessoal. Enfim, ele entende que Freud propunha um modo de vida baseado na aceitação da perpétua inquietação.
“A mitologia freudiana captura características perenes e universais da experiência humana. Naturalmente, as ideias de Freud são um sistema de metáforas. E também o é todo discurso humana, ainda que as metáforas não sejam todas do mesmo tipo.”
Curiosa, por outro lado, é a citação do poeta Wallace Stevens: “A crença final é acreditar em uma ficção, que sabemos ser uma ficção, nada mais havendo. A mais requintada verdade é saber que se trata de uma ficção e deliberadamente acreditar nela”.
Mas insistimos na mitomania: “Segundo Freud, a busca da felicidade é uma distração do ato de viver” e “O credo contemporâneo é que cada um encontrará a realização sendo a pessoa que realmente quer ser” e “Nosso infortúnio é que essas possibilidades são, em grande medida, frustradas”. Enfim, “Na realidade, a maioria passa a vida em um estado de turbulência esperançosa” porque “O ideal da autorrealização deve muito ao movimento romântico. Para os românticos, a suprema realização era a originalidade”.
Mas isso é uma inteira mentira pois “Para Freud, a vida humana era um processo de construção do ego, e não a busca de um interior fictício” e “O ideal romântico diz que cada um deve buscar o verdadeiro eu” e “O melhor é que simplesmente não busquemos a felicidade”.
Essa satisfação, além disso, não é viável “Qualquer tipo de vida civilizada acarreta perda de satisfação dos instintos. Para Freud, contudo, a barbárie não era uma alternativa atraente”.
O Gray a todo momento nos lembra que a qualquer momento podemos cair: Cita o poeta T. E. Hulme, morto na Primeira Guerra Mundial: “O homem é o caos altamente organizado, mas suscetível de voltar ao caos a qualquer momento” e “Na visão romântica, os seres humanos só acidentalmente são criaturas limitadas: suas possibilidades são infinitas. Em uma visão clássica, os seres humanos são essencialmente finitos; o potencial humano é predeterminado e limitado. ‘Resumindo, são estas as duas visões. Uma, de que o homem é intrinsicamente bom, corrompido pelas circunstâncias; e a outra, de que é intrinsicamente limitado, mas disciplinado pela ordem e pela tradição para se tornar algo razoavelmente decente [...] A visão que encara o homem como um poço, um reservatório de possibilidades, eu chama de romântica; a outra, que o considera uma criatura muito finita e predeterminada, eu chamo de clássica’.
E o silêncio dos animais o que é? Óbvio que é diferente do silêncio humano. “Enquanto para outros animais o silêncio é um estado natural de repouso, para os seres humanos é uma fuga da comoção interna. Por natureza volátil e contraditório, o animal humano busca no silêncio alívio do fato de ser ele próprio, ao passo que outras criaturas desfrutam do silêncio como um direito de nascença. Os seres humanos buscam o silêncio porque querem redenção; os outros animais vivem em silêncio porque não precisam de redenção”.
E essa nossa busca por redenção nos leva a escolhas estranhas: “Para os que não suportam viver sem uma crença, qualquer fé é melhor do que nenhuma”.
Além disso, mais uma vez ele reitera que “A ideia de que o mal humano é um erro, destinado a desaparecer com o avanço do conhecimento; de que a boa vida é necessariamente uma vida examinada; de que a prática da razão pode capacitar os seres humanos a determinar seu próprio destino – essas alegações altamente questionáveis têm sido repetidas como axiomas incontestáveis desde que Sócrates adquiriu o status de santo humanista” e “Como bem sabia Nietzsche, essa crença tem como um de seus princípios que a tragédia não é um fato definitivo: o que consideramos trágico é apenas um tipo de fracasso; de consequências infelizes ou desastrosas”.
Por fim, talvez como expressão do seu credo, ele expresse que “a contemplação do ateu é uma condição mais radical e transitória: uma trégua temporária de um mundo demasiado humano, sem nada especial em mente. Na maioria das tradições, a vida de contemplação promete a redenção da condição humana: no cristianismo, o fim da tragédia e um vislumbre da comédia divina; no panteísmo de Jeffers, a aniquilação do eu em uma unidade extática. O misticismo ateu não pode escapar à finalidade da tragédia nem tornar eterna a beleza. Ele não dissolve o conflito interno na falsa quietude de uma calma oceânica. Tudo que oferece é o mero ser. Não há redenção na condição humana. Mas não é necessária nenhuma redenção.”
Enfim, muitas ideias provocadoras. Mesmo que não concorde com várias, ainda assim uma leitura que inquieta.
Mais do que fazer comentários, tratei de reproduzir trechos que me chamaram a atenção ao longo do texto.
Gray – primeiro livro que leio dele – se apresenta não como um otimista ou pessimista, mas como alguém que é cético em relação à nossa própria humanidade, o que inclui a própria ideia de um propósito abstrato que exista desde antes da nossa existência e nos guie neste mundo.
Ele põe isso nos seguintes termos: “Ao longo de toda a história e da pré-história, tem-se aceito que existe algo errado com o animal humano”.
E aí, o que fazer? Talvez enfrentar esses mitos nos guiam a lugar nenhum. O primeiro, e mais óbvio, é o que trata do progresso e de sua ilusão. Não, nós não vamos melhorar. Não, nós não vamos ser melhores, de um ponto de vista ético, melhores do que aqueles que nos antecederam. E mais, toda a nossa cultura, talvez toda a nossa vida possa ser sintetizada como o fracasso dessa concepção de se ver o mundo.
A fé no progresso, segundo ele, é um remanescente tardio do cristianismo primitivo, originando-se na mensagem de Jesus, posto por ele simplesmente como o “profeta judeu que anunciou o fim dos tempos”, mas, por outro lado, “A mensagem do Gênesis é que nas áreas mais vitais da vida humana não pode haver progresso, apenas uma eterna luta com nossa própria natureza”.
Mas há não o progresso no sentido de que evoluímos em direção a algo. Não. Na verdade, ao analisar o Coração das Trevas, ele observa que “A barbárie é uma maneira primitiva de vida, sugere Conrad, mas um desdobramento patológico da civilização” e “No entendimento de Conrad, contudo, não apenas o governo se deixou contaminar pela criminalidade. Todas as instituições humanas – famílias e igrejas, forças policiais e anarquistas – estão comprometidas pelo crime. A tentativa de explicar a maldade humana pelas instituições corruptas levanta uma questão: por que os seres humanos são tão apegados a instituições corruptas? Com toda evidência, a resposta está no animal humano”.
Mas por que se acredita no progresso? A resposta dele é que “o mito do progresso projeta um vislumbre de significado na vida daqueles que o aceitam”. Significado em um mundo que não tem um. Mas esse preenchimento de espaços no nosso vazio existencial se faz também com outros mitos. O mais óbvio é o da racionalidade humana: “se a crença na racionalidade humana fosse uma teoria científica, há muito teria sido abandonada”. E “os seres humanos não lidam com crenças e percepções conflitantes procurando testá-las em cotejo com os fatos. Eles reduzem o conflito reinterpretando os fatos que vão de encontro às crenças a que estão mais apegados. Como escreveu T. S. Eliot em Burnt Norton, a espécie humana não suporta muito a realidade” ou, ainda, “A evidência científica e histórica é que os seres humanos só parcial e intermitentemente são racionais”
Em suma, “A dissonância cognitiva é a condição humana normal” ou, ainda, “Se existe algo único no animal humano é sua capacidade de multiplicar conhecimento em velocidade crescente, ao mesmo tempo revelando-se cronicamente incapaz de aprender com a experiência”.
Se não há progresso ou tampouco racionalidade, apenas oscilamos entre polos opostos: “A civilização é natural para os seres humanos, mas também o é a barbárie”.
Essas distorções nos levam a compreender mal conceitos. E aqui gostei do modo como ele apresenta a seleção natural, que, para mim, ao menos, foi uma forma bastante luminosa que entender o que ela é de fato: “A característica mais importante da seleção natural é ser um processo de deriva. A evolução não tem um estágio final nem direção, de modo que se o desenvolvimento da sociedade é um processo evolutivo, trata-se de um processo que não vai dar em lugar nenhum”.
Mas, afinal de contas, por que precisamos desses mitos inventados? A resposta dele é outra pergunta: Será porque não seriam capazes de suportar a vida se não acreditassem que contém um significado oculto?”
A resposta de outros, ou pelo menos a maneira como ele interpreta Freud vai nesse sentido. Segundo Gray, para Freud a doença humana não tem cura e o objetivo da psicanálise – um processo interminável, advertia Freud – é a aceitação do destino pessoal. Enfim, ele entende que Freud propunha um modo de vida baseado na aceitação da perpétua inquietação.
“A mitologia freudiana captura características perenes e universais da experiência humana. Naturalmente, as ideias de Freud são um sistema de metáforas. E também o é todo discurso humana, ainda que as metáforas não sejam todas do mesmo tipo.”
Curiosa, por outro lado, é a citação do poeta Wallace Stevens: “A crença final é acreditar em uma ficção, que sabemos ser uma ficção, nada mais havendo. A mais requintada verdade é saber que se trata de uma ficção e deliberadamente acreditar nela”.
Mas insistimos na mitomania: “Segundo Freud, a busca da felicidade é uma distração do ato de viver” e “O credo contemporâneo é que cada um encontrará a realização sendo a pessoa que realmente quer ser” e “Nosso infortúnio é que essas possibilidades são, em grande medida, frustradas”. Enfim, “Na realidade, a maioria passa a vida em um estado de turbulência esperançosa” porque “O ideal da autorrealização deve muito ao movimento romântico. Para os românticos, a suprema realização era a originalidade”.
Mas isso é uma inteira mentira pois “Para Freud, a vida humana era um processo de construção do ego, e não a busca de um interior fictício” e “O ideal romântico diz que cada um deve buscar o verdadeiro eu” e “O melhor é que simplesmente não busquemos a felicidade”.
Essa satisfação, além disso, não é viável “Qualquer tipo de vida civilizada acarreta perda de satisfação dos instintos. Para Freud, contudo, a barbárie não era uma alternativa atraente”.
O Gray a todo momento nos lembra que a qualquer momento podemos cair: Cita o poeta T. E. Hulme, morto na Primeira Guerra Mundial: “O homem é o caos altamente organizado, mas suscetível de voltar ao caos a qualquer momento” e “Na visão romântica, os seres humanos só acidentalmente são criaturas limitadas: suas possibilidades são infinitas. Em uma visão clássica, os seres humanos são essencialmente finitos; o potencial humano é predeterminado e limitado. ‘Resumindo, são estas as duas visões. Uma, de que o homem é intrinsicamente bom, corrompido pelas circunstâncias; e a outra, de que é intrinsicamente limitado, mas disciplinado pela ordem e pela tradição para se tornar algo razoavelmente decente [...] A visão que encara o homem como um poço, um reservatório de possibilidades, eu chama de romântica; a outra, que o considera uma criatura muito finita e predeterminada, eu chamo de clássica’.
E o silêncio dos animais o que é? Óbvio que é diferente do silêncio humano. “Enquanto para outros animais o silêncio é um estado natural de repouso, para os seres humanos é uma fuga da comoção interna. Por natureza volátil e contraditório, o animal humano busca no silêncio alívio do fato de ser ele próprio, ao passo que outras criaturas desfrutam do silêncio como um direito de nascença. Os seres humanos buscam o silêncio porque querem redenção; os outros animais vivem em silêncio porque não precisam de redenção”.
E essa nossa busca por redenção nos leva a escolhas estranhas: “Para os que não suportam viver sem uma crença, qualquer fé é melhor do que nenhuma”.
Além disso, mais uma vez ele reitera que “A ideia de que o mal humano é um erro, destinado a desaparecer com o avanço do conhecimento; de que a boa vida é necessariamente uma vida examinada; de que a prática da razão pode capacitar os seres humanos a determinar seu próprio destino – essas alegações altamente questionáveis têm sido repetidas como axiomas incontestáveis desde que Sócrates adquiriu o status de santo humanista” e “Como bem sabia Nietzsche, essa crença tem como um de seus princípios que a tragédia não é um fato definitivo: o que consideramos trágico é apenas um tipo de fracasso; de consequências infelizes ou desastrosas”.
Por fim, talvez como expressão do seu credo, ele expresse que “a contemplação do ateu é uma condição mais radical e transitória: uma trégua temporária de um mundo demasiado humano, sem nada especial em mente. Na maioria das tradições, a vida de contemplação promete a redenção da condição humana: no cristianismo, o fim da tragédia e um vislumbre da comédia divina; no panteísmo de Jeffers, a aniquilação do eu em uma unidade extática. O misticismo ateu não pode escapar à finalidade da tragédia nem tornar eterna a beleza. Ele não dissolve o conflito interno na falsa quietude de uma calma oceânica. Tudo que oferece é o mero ser. Não há redenção na condição humana. Mas não é necessária nenhuma redenção.”
Enfim, muitas ideias provocadoras. Mesmo que não concorde com várias, ainda assim uma leitura que inquieta.
September 24, 2025
“The distance between human and animal silence is a consequence of the use of language. It is not that other creatures lack language. The discourse of the birds is more than a human metaphor….Only humans use words to construct a self-image and a story of their lives. But if other animals lack this interior monologue, it is not clear why this should put humans on a higher plane. Why should breaking silence and then loudly struggling to renew it be such an achievement?
Many people think humans are unique in possessing something called consciousness. At its most refined, thinking in this way is like thinking that the universe has come up with humans so that it can look at itself….
It is a lovely image. But why privilege humans in this way? The eyes of other creatures may be brighter. Humans cannot help seeing the world through the veil of language. When they run after silence they are trying to leave behind the signs that make their world. This struggle is as universally human as language itself. Through poetry, religion and immersion in the natural world, humans try to shed the words that enshroud their lives. At bottom, that is what they are doing when they struggle to be silent. The struggle can never succeed, but that does not make it pointless.
Philosophers will say that humans can never be silent because the mind is made of words. For these half-witted logicians, silence is no more than a word. To overcome language by means of language is obviously impossible. Turning within, you will find only words and images that are parts of yourself. But if you turn outside yourself — to the birds and animals and the quickly changing places where they live — you may hear something beyond words. Even humans can find silence, if they can bring themselves to forget the silence they are looking for.”
Many people think humans are unique in possessing something called consciousness. At its most refined, thinking in this way is like thinking that the universe has come up with humans so that it can look at itself….
It is a lovely image. But why privilege humans in this way? The eyes of other creatures may be brighter. Humans cannot help seeing the world through the veil of language. When they run after silence they are trying to leave behind the signs that make their world. This struggle is as universally human as language itself. Through poetry, religion and immersion in the natural world, humans try to shed the words that enshroud their lives. At bottom, that is what they are doing when they struggle to be silent. The struggle can never succeed, but that does not make it pointless.
Philosophers will say that humans can never be silent because the mind is made of words. For these half-witted logicians, silence is no more than a word. To overcome language by means of language is obviously impossible. Turning within, you will find only words and images that are parts of yourself. But if you turn outside yourself — to the birds and animals and the quickly changing places where they live — you may hear something beyond words. Even humans can find silence, if they can bring themselves to forget the silence they are looking for.”
May 26, 2023
DNF, but counting towards my “read” goal because I deserve compensation for the 150 pages I did suffer through.
The author’s tone is insufferable, he’s trying so hard to make a point that it feels argumentative, but I’m not sure who he is arguing with. The book is filled with straw man arguments- at first I thought I just didn’t know enough about philosophy to really get his generalizations of “liberals” and “humanists” but his generalizations about modern psychotherapy made me realize he really is just painting with the widest brush he could find.
Of note, the works of many scholars are cited. All of those scholars are white men- at least as far as I got. In a book with so many references this is an impressive achievement.
I was hoping that if I could push through, I would eventually find the point and “get it” however I have decided life is much too short, and filled with too much pain to continue on with this.
The author’s tone is insufferable, he’s trying so hard to make a point that it feels argumentative, but I’m not sure who he is arguing with. The book is filled with straw man arguments- at first I thought I just didn’t know enough about philosophy to really get his generalizations of “liberals” and “humanists” but his generalizations about modern psychotherapy made me realize he really is just painting with the widest brush he could find.
Of note, the works of many scholars are cited. All of those scholars are white men- at least as far as I got. In a book with so many references this is an impressive achievement.
I was hoping that if I could push through, I would eventually find the point and “get it” however I have decided life is much too short, and filled with too much pain to continue on with this.
July 23, 2024
Gray explores, through literary criticism, many of the same ideas as he does in Straw Dogs. It’s a less elegant and concise book, but one that feels more open and exploratory, which is a nice change in tone for Gray. I found the ending, where he challenges some of the most fundamental assumptions of our modern storytelling/myth making, to be especially interesting.
August 1, 2024
All in all a mix-bag of ideas and hypothesis being thrown together with just the flimsiest commonality between them. More than compelling evidence for any stance, the sample novels and texts on which the format of the book is based seems more like a cherry-picked selection to support a narrative that itself goes very lukewarm in some direction. John Gray would be a kick-ass Goodreads reviewer, that's for sure.
I wish I could give this book 5 stars because page after page I found a passage worth highlighting and quotable, and Straw Dogs is one of my top 10 favourite books, and although I mainly agree with the points made here overall The Silence of Animals isn't as paradigmatic and resounding (or thought-defining) as that book is.
I wish I could give this book 5 stars because page after page I found a passage worth highlighting and quotable, and Straw Dogs is one of my top 10 favourite books, and although I mainly agree with the points made here overall The Silence of Animals isn't as paradigmatic and resounding (or thought-defining) as that book is.
April 2, 2017
**review to come**
March 30, 2020
Amazing.
November 23, 2024
Que es el lenguaje? Esta pregunta me corroe, cada respuesta pesa, pues viene desde ahí, pero como plasmarlo
April 19, 2018
Well consider my mind blown and maybe a little bit depressed. Gray’s arguments about human progress, mysticism and the fallacies of humanism are well argued and more coherent than in the other book of his that I have read, The Soul Of The Marionette. Do I agree, probably not but his points are so well argued using examples from history, philosophy, fiction and poetry that they are difficult to refute. Look forward to reading straw dogs someday, but not straight away.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 170 reviews