About
    • AMMDI is an open-notebook hypertext writing experiment, authored by Mike Travers aka mtraven. It's a work in progress and some parts are more polished than others. Comments welcome! More.
Search
Full

contempt for contempt

18 Apr 2025 - 28 Apr 2026
Open in Logseq
    • The only kind of justifiable contempt, perhaps, since it cancels itself out.
    • seems like many intellectuals must have struggled with this problem and came up with this solution or view, but I couldn't name any people or concepts.
    • AskClaude
      • The idea you're gesturing at — that contempt for contempt is self-undermining or self-canceling, and therefore somehow more honest or permissible than ordinary contempt — touches on several real intellectual threads:
      • Directly relevant concepts/thinkers:
      • Nietzsche's critique of ressentiment — contempt born from weakness is what he despised, but he struggled with whether his own "aristocratic" contempt escaped the same trap
      • Sartre on bad faith — recognizing that your own judgmental stance can be as inauthentic as what you're judging
      • Russell's paradox applied to attitudes — the set of all contemptible things that contains itself
      • The logical structure is similar to:
      • Moorean paradox ("I believe X but X is false")
      • Self-refuting skepticism ("we can't know anything" — but then how do you know that?)
      • Related philosophical concepts:
      • Performative contradiction (Habermas)
      • Reflexivity problems in epistemology
      • The honest answer is that this specific formulation — contempt for contempt as uniquely justified because it cancels itself — is more of a witty aphorism than a worked-out philosophical position. It reads like something from Cioran or Ambrose Bierce in spirit, but I can't pin a specific source.