The Plenitude of the Unfathomable

 Inspired by:
Song of Solomon / Song of Songs

I sought the one whom my soul loves;
I sought him, but I did not find him.
I will rise now and go about the city,
through the marketplaces and the streets,
but I did not find him.
The winter has passed,
the rain is over and gone.
I sought the one whom my soul loves,
I sought him, but I did not find him.
I will wander through the city,
through the marketplaces and the streets,
but I did not find him.

The universe is so infinitely generous in order, beauty and possibility that true meaning always eludes us, concealed behind its very magnificence; like light, which in its fullness blinds and renders the visible invisible.

It is the plenitude of existence itself that becomes the mantle of the unfathomable. The mystery does not hide in the shadows, but floods every single thing with such abundance that one is rendered speechless, powerless to name or to grasp it.

The plenitude of the unfathomable signifies, therefore, that mystery, the divine, meaning, the deepest truth of the universe is not offered as a rare discovery, but saturates everything so completely that its very abundance makes it impossible to seize or define. It is the paradox of light which, when overwhelming, blinds; the mystery which, instead of hiding, is found everywhere - so much so that it transcends every effort to explain or to contain it within human bounds.

The plenitude of the unfathomable is the experience of standing within a world so rich in mystery and meaning, that only silence, awe, humility, and love may serve as true responses.

Before such majesty, all knowledge becomes poor, all words insufficient, all certainties insignificant. Human reason teeters at the edge of the abyss, groping for the invisible with the hands of the soul, as the infinite pierces and surpasses every boundary of mind and heart.

Every star that is born and extinguished, every silent wave that crosses the cosmos, every trace of life, every human gaze, is a shard of this generosity - a spark from the inextinguishable fire of creation that fits within no measure, no description.

Yet, this grandeur finds its path even in the humblest of moments: in the smile of a child discovering the world for the first time, in the play that fills the courtyard with voices and light, in the silent wonder before a flower that blossoms for no reason. Childlike innocence, with its unclouded gaze, touches the ineffable and accepts it without question, without anxiety, with trust and wonder.

Nature, with her inexhaustible wisdom, whispers the same mystery in every gust of wind, in every trembling leaf in the light, in every raindrop that slides down to the earth. The forests and the oceans, the mountains and the plains, are temples filled with secrets, filled with whispers from the first Creation, where the presence of the divine is felt, not as an answer, but as a pulse of life.

Within the community of people, in the warmth of sharing, in forgiveness, in the touch of companionship, the light of the infinite is reflected. In moments when pain is shared, joy is multiplied, hope grows fierce through the care of one for another - the mystery of existence expands and merges with the mystery of love.

Prayer - whether whispered in a church, rising quietly in a solitary night, or bursting as a cry in despair or gratitude - is the soul’s footprint upon the grandeur of the world. It is the sincere admission that we do not know, that we do not control, that we can only stand - small yet infinite - on the threshold of Mystery, giving thanks for what has been given to us and for what surpasses us.

And time, which flows relentlessly and sweeps everything away, does not manage to dim the light of this grandeur. On the contrary, through the cracks of decay, through the marks of toil and waiting, the truth shines more brightly: nothing essential is ever lost, beauty, meaning, and wonder permeate the world and bathe it in significance, even when all else seems trivial or vain.

And in the end, this is perhaps the deepest lesson: the grandeur of the universe cannot be measured, cannot be defined, but is experienced as silence before an indescribable superabundance. There, science bows before poetry, and the human being remains at once bewildered and complete. Tears and smiles are united, wonder becomes prayer, and all of existence stands ecstatic before this ineffable and ever-present miracle.

And if, somewhere, sometime, our soul should take flight out of gratitude or heartbreak, let us remember: this happiness, this wound, this silence and this prayer are the language by which the unfathomable grandeur answers the call of the human heart. For we are made to taste the infinite - not to comprehend it, but to live it, to love it, to give thanks for it.

 

Fifty Illusions of Modern Management

In today’s organisational world, management comes dressed in many forms and languages - at times technocratic, at times emotional, and often highly communicative. Amid this constant flow of terms and frameworks, it is easy to lose sight of what truly matters: which practices genuinely support the functioning of a team, and which ones undermine it behind a facade of appearances.
What follows is not a manual on leadership. It is a catalogue of "shadows" - of behaviours, trends and illusions that, when they dominate, erode the authentic craft of management. By recognising them, we may perhaps stand a little more clearly in front of the art of leading and working with people.

1. Managing expectations instead of achieving outcomes
When a manager focuses on "managing" expectations, they learn to adjust the mirror rather than the work itself. The idea is fostered that if people expect less, every result looks like a success. Yet this breeds a culture of complacency and low ambition. True management is not the art of managing impressions - it is the art of achieving substance.

2. Cultivating a positive culture through embellishment
When everything must be "positive", honesty is lost. If difficulty and failure have no space in dialogue, a false reality is created. People learn to say what sounds pleasing - not what is true. Management that seeks to foster a genuine positive culture must be able to bear the truth, even when it hurts.

3. "Open door" that does not exist in practice
How often do you hear "my door is always open", only for anyone entering to feel they are disturbing the sacred time of the manager? An open door is not a slogan, it is a daily act of availability. Without an atmosphere of trust and safety, no door - open or glass - fosters genuine dialogue.

4. Empowering teams through delegation without support
Throwing responsibilities around like hot potatoes while saying "I'm empowering you" is an illusion. Without a clear role, guidance, and framework, delegation turns into abandonment. Empowerment means offering space but also tools, support as well as autonomy.

5. Hollow agile as a stage act
Agile is neither ritual nor excuse. When one sees only boards, retrospectives and stand-ups without genuine flexibility in decision-making, it is empty theatre. Worse still, when "agile mindset" is invoked to mask poor planning or sloppiness, the essence of agility is distorted. Agile without seriousness leads to chaos.

6. Team spirit while incentives remain individual
You cannot preach the value of teamwork while rewarding people for individual exposure and competition. When the incentive system favours "heroes" over collaborators, teamwork collapses - no matter how many fine words are spoken about "team spirit".

7. Coaching that is actually micromanagement
Many managers talk about coaching, yet in practice they guide every step, depriving others of the space for learning and initiative. True coaching rests on asking questions, not issuing instructions; on reflection, not direction.

8. Focus on performance that becomes focus on reporting
When a manager turns into a "numbers chaser", the essence of work is sacrificed at the altar of reporting. Reports have value only as tools for improvement, not as ends in themselves. If all energy goes into "looking good", then being good is lost.

9. Change management that remains just communication
Change does not happen through glossy emails and presentations. If practices, incentives and behaviours do not shift, all talk of a "new era" is empty noise. People judge by actions, not by messages.

10. Productive meetings measured by duration, not outcome
The short length of a meeting means nothing unless it delivers clarity and action. Short but empty meetings are a waste of time. A truly productive meeting is one from which people leave with clear understanding and next steps.

11. Listening culture that becomes pseudo-listening
A listening culture is not about collecting endless surveys or opening anonymous feedback channels that lead nowhere. If people see no change after their voices are heard, then "listening" becomes a pretence. An ear that listens without acting becomes absurd.

12. Ethics washing in the organisation
When a company publicly declares values of ethics and social responsibility but does not embed them in its everyday practices (e.g. in the treatment of employees, suppliers or the environment), it breeds cynicism. Ethics is not communication - it is action.

13. Flat hierarchy that conceals strong hierarchy
Modern organisations love to flaunt their "flat structure". Yet behind it, one often finds an even stronger informal hierarchy where decisions are made by a few around unofficial tables. A flat culture has meaning only when accompanied by transparency and a genuine sharing of power.

14. Continuous improvement that becomes constant change
Endless change without rhythm or stability wears people down. If teams do not have time to build solid foundations, they lose faith in the process. Continuous improvement is a virtue only when accompanied by periods of consolidation and absorption.

15. Inclusive leadership that ends in tokenism
Adding diverse voices to appear "inclusive", without creating a culture that truly listens to, integrates and respects these voices, is mere posturing. Inclusion is not a matter of numbers - it is a matter of voice.

16. Protecting the team that turns into isolation
When a manager "protects" their team so much that it becomes cut off from the rest of the organisation, collaboration and knowledge exchange suffer. Protection should not build a fortress. It should build bridges, not walls.

17. The "nice leader" who is always agreeable
A leader who seeks to be liked by everyone ends up avoiding difficult conversations. The result is a lack of clarity and vagueness in expectations. True leadership bears the weight of others' dissatisfaction when needed.

18. Employee engagement based on parties and gifts
True employee engagement does not stem from flashy events or branded giveaways. It comes from meaningful work, respect, and a sense of contribution. If these are absent, no happy hour will save the culture.

19. Workshops on resilience instead of improving working conditions
When, instead of improving working conditions, you organise workshops teaching people to endure a toxic environment, you shift the burden to the individual. Empowerment begins with the environment - not with how well each person can "cope".

20. 360 feedback as a control mechanism
Feedback is a tool for development - not a weapon of control. When 360 feedback becomes a means to build dossiers or entrench a culture of fear, its essence is lost. Fear is built, not learning.

21. Customer obsession that destroys internal culture
"Customer obsession" becomes destructive when it sacrifices the health and sustainability of the team. If everything is endlessly adjusted to please the customer, people burn out. Customer-centricity must not consume the organisation’s human culture.

22. Failing fast as an alibi for poorly designed projects
Failure as a learning tool is valuable. But "failing fast" must not become an excuse for carelessness. It does not justify poor planning or irresponsibility. Deliberate failure has value only when it is based on structured experimentation - not blind attempts.

23. Goal setting as an Excel tyranny
When planning becomes a fetish of metrics and spreadsheets, real work is lost. Excessive focus on KPIs that do not reflect reality suffocates innovation and agility. Numbers should serve substance - not replace it.

24. AI-driven management that erodes human judgement
Increasing reliance on AI systems and algorithmic decisions can strip managers of responsibility and human judgement. People need to feel they are being guided and assessed by leaders with empathy - not by opaque algorithms.

25. Leadership presence that turns into narcissism
Leadership presence is not about constantly attracting attention. When a leader craves personal spotlight on every stage, they undermine the team. True presence amplifies others - it does not overshadow them.

26. Collaboration tools that cause distraction
When collaboration tools (Slack, Teams, etc.) become a constant source of interruptions and stress, they undermine their own purpose. Collaboration requires rhythm and focus - not noise and fragmentation.

27. Leading by example that remains words
"Leading by example" is not a slogan. If a manager does not embody the values they proclaim daily, the words become empty. People watch actions - and are inspired or discouraged accordingly.

28. Risk management that leads to paralysis
Proper risk management enables action with awareness. But if it results in fear, endless analysis and inaction, the essence is lost. The world never stops - and excessive safety is an illusion.

29. Ownership culture that shifts responsibility downwards
When leaders ask people to "think like owners" but in reality only push down responsibilities without offering real authority or support, they create a culture of anxiety and insecurity. Ownership without a framework of protection is a tool of manipulation.

30. Culture of candour that becomes harsh criticism
Candour and feedback are the foundation of a healthy culture - but when a "culture of candour" turns into a constant stream of critique where everything is endlessly commented on, people grow weary, withdraw or become fearful. A true culture of dialogue requires empathy and rhythm.

31. Process optimisation that becomes a process fetish
When process optimisation becomes an end in itself, living work is sacrificed to an endless pursuit of flowcharts and diagrams. Process should serve value and people - not replace thought and judgement.

32. Authenticity theatre in leadership
"Performing" authentic leadership - with staged personal stories or contrived displays of vulnerability - often becomes a strategic tool for personal branding. Authenticity is not performance - it is a way of being that withstands time and scrutiny.

33. Talent density that undermines the human side
When you pursue only "A players" and remove stable, steady contributors from the team, you destroy its balance. Teams need diverse roles - not just stars. Talent thrives in an environment of coexistence.

34. High performance culture that leads to burnout culture
A "high performance" culture without limits, rhythm or care quickly becomes a mechanism of exhaustion. Sustainability and resilience must be part of performance - otherwise the structure will collapse.

35. Visionary leadership disconnected from reality
A visionary leader who ignores the terrain of daily work builds castles in the air. If the vision is not grounded in the team’s needs and capabilities, it becomes an unattainable myth that breeds cynicism.

36. Managing through fear instead of building trust
Many managers use fear (directly or indirectly) as a lever of control: fear of losing promotion, of exposure, of disapproval. This erodes trust and psychological safety. Leadership based on fear casts shadows, not light.

37. Empowerment through endless workshops
You do not empower people through endless training sessions if in practice you do not change the conditions that allow them to assume real responsibility. Empowerment is a daily act - not a pretty slide deck.

38. Talent management that ends in categorising people
When you begin to view people as "A", "B", or "C" players and invest only in the first group, you undermine unity and the moral fabric of the team. Development must involve everyone - otherwise you cultivate inequality and resentment.

39. Strategy alignment as alignment of slides
Strategy is not aligned in PowerPoint presentations. If decisions, initiatives and daily priorities do not reflect the strategic narrative, it is all communication theatre without substance.

40. Building accountability through constant checks
Accountability is not built through micromanagement and endless reporting. It is built when people have space to make commitments and own outcomes within a framework of trust.

41. Conflict resolution through cheap mediation techniques
Deep conflicts are not resolved through workshops or "quick" mediation techniques. Unless you address the roots - culture, incentives, power imbalances - the conflict will return. True resolution requires courage, depth and systemic thinking.

42. Servant leadership that becomes servility
To serve does not mean to abdicate your role. Servant leadership is not the absence of guidance or an inability to set boundaries. It is leadership that supports, empowers and guides - not one that self-negates.

43. Digital transformation that stops at buying tools
Buying new tools without changing processes, behaviours and culture does not achieve any genuine "digital transformation". Transformation is a deep redefinition of how work is done - not a migration of apps.

44. Innovation as endless brainstorming without implementation
You promote a "culture of innovation", run countless ideation workshops, but no idea is ever implemented. Innovation without execution is merely intellectual entertainment - and it exhausts the team.

45. Flexibility that becomes lack of priorities
If every week goals and directions shift in the name of flexibility, the team dissolves into uncertainty. Flexibility requires a stable core and clear prioritisation. Without these, you create chaos.

46. Recognition of success as a tool for manipulation
Recognition must be authentic and equitable. If it is used as a lever of manipulation or to reward only compliant allies, you undermine your credibility and destroy trust.

47. Company values as wall decor
Values that exist only on posters and corporate brochures are not values. If they do not shape decisions on hiring, promotion and daily practices, they are a false front that breeds cynicism.

48. Transparency that becomes information overload
Transparency is not a flood of useless information. If you overwhelm people with raw data without providing context or purpose, you create confusion - not clarity.

49. Diversity washing
When superficial diversity is promoted for PR purposes but the deeper structures of power, opportunity and inclusion do not change, reverse alienation is created. People do not want to "appear diverse" - they want to genuinely belong.

50. Work-life balance culture that becomes expectation of always-on
Talking about "flexibility" and "balance", while people feel obliged to be constantly available, defeats the purpose. The always-on culture often hides behind work-life balance rhetoric - but it corrodes genuine wellbeing and respect for personal time.

 

 

Oh Lord

Inspired by:
The Rapture - In the Grace of Your Love

 translation of "Ω Κύριε"

Oh Jesus, Lord
Oh Jesus, Lord
Have mercy now
Come show me how

I’m in Your grace
I lose, I find
In breath, Your name
My soul’s aligned

How deep, how wide, Your mercy flows?
How far, how bright, Your love bestows?
In darkest night, You shine above
In silent hours, You speak with love

Oh Jesus, Lord
Oh Jesus, Lord
Have mercy now
In me abide

 from the collection
"The Natural Thereafter"
titled "Oh Lord"

The False Light of Progress: Technological Rationalism and Existential Amnesia

Technological rationalism, as we experience it in the 21st century, did not sprout suddenly like wild vegetation. It is the fruit of an old tree, rationalism, whose roots took hold during the Enlightenment and matured over the centuries that followed. Yet this fruit, through hypertrophy and mutation, has transformed into something deeply different: a system of thought that no longer seeks truth but utility, that does not examine being but how to control it.

Classical rationalism, as expressed by Descartes, Spinoza, or Leibniz, was born from a deep desire to understand the universe with clarity and logical coherence. It was not an enemy of spirituality; often it served it. Descartes declared, "Cogito, ergo sum" (I think, therefore I am), attempting to ground existence on the certainty of thought. He aimed to discover a universal truth through reason. But over time, and with the rise of science, this clarity turned toward the instrumentalisation of knowledge. Truth ceased to matter if it could not be measured, predicted, or repeated.

This shift became evident in the 19th century with the emergence of Auguste Comte's positivism, which established the dominance of the positive sciences and rejected all forms of metaphysics. Here, the seed of hyper-rationalism was planted, an excessive faith in the power of human logic that dismisses anything that cannot be quantified, proven, or computationally represented. Wittgenstein, at the beginning of his philosophical journey, famously wrote: "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent" (Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 7). Although he later revised this view, the aphorism captures the limits of language and logic when faced with the ineffable.

Hyper-rationalism displaced mystery, the ineffable, and the unspoken dimensions of experience. Upon this foundation, technological rationalism was erected, its most practical, computational, and cold form.

The historical example of the Manhattan Project, the programme that produced the atomic bomb, is revealing. Technology reached its peak, physics mastered matter, yet the question of whether we should was eclipsed by the question of whether we could. J. Robert Oppenheimer, witnessing the test in New Mexico, recalled the words of Krishna from the Bhagavad Gita: "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."

This form of rationalism presents itself as light, but it is laboratory light, not dawn. It illuminates only what it is told to illuminate, leaving in darkness anything that does not serve efficiency, speed, or control. It does not understand meaning; it knows only performance. The question "why do we exist" holds no significance for such a system; only "how can we be more efficient" does.

Max Weber, already in the early 20th century, warned of the iron cage (stahlhartes Gehäuse) of rationality, the process by which the world becomes an increasingly impersonal and disenchanted system of control, where the human being is reduced to a bureaucratic number within a mechanism. Weber did not condemn rationality but saw its unilateral dominance as leading to inner impoverishment.

In a similar spirit, Martin Heidegger emphasised that technology is not merely tools. It is a way of being. When Being is forgotten, and everything is approached as standing-reserve (Bestand), reality becomes a warehouse of objects, and humanity loses access to the deeper meaning of existence. His essay The Question Concerning Technology (1954) argues that the essence of technology is not technical but ontological.

Conversely, Simone Weil argued that truth is not attained by will or force, but by attention, the pure, silent presence before the real. In a world exhausted by speed and functionality, the mind that pauses and kneels humbly before Being becomes radically subversive.

The human being immersed in this technological framework becomes a tool of their own tools. Emotion, faith, art, poetic thought, all are weakened in the name of the objective. But this objectivity is superficial, a thin veneer masking a deep existential discomfort. We do not know why we live, but we strive to forget it by producing ever more intelligent machines. We believe that the answer to our existential void lies in technological perfection, that truth will emerge from data.

But truth does not dwell in spreadsheets. It lives in silence, in love, in failure, in death, all that technology attempts to ignore or eliminate. The false light of technological rationalism is not false because it fails to illuminate, but because it blinds. It makes us forget that we were not born to optimise the world but to understand it, and perhaps, simply, to experience it.

Perhaps, then, the most radical act today is not innovation but pause. Not production but observation. To look into the darkness and recognise that within it lies something more human than what the artificial light of rationalism promises. Not because darkness is better than light per se, but because the instrumental logic that kills meaning has yet to colonise it. The true light, the uncreated one, does not compete with darkness. It embraces and gently illuminates it from within.

Here, darkness is not evil, not denial. It is the place where mystery, the uncanny, the unutterable remain alive. Measurement, optimisation, and analysis do not work there. There survives prayer, poetry, silent knowledge that needs no proof. To face the darkness, then, is not to worship it. It is to accept it as part of being, a necessary dimension of the human.

And only there can we rediscover what it means to be human. Not through circuits and code, but through the dim flame of existence that asks no explanation, only witness.

Bibliography:

1. Descartes, R. (1641). Meditationes de prima philosophia

2. Comte, A. (1854). Système de politique positive

3. Wittgenstein, L. (1921). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

4. Weber, M. (1905). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

5. Heidegger, M. (1954). The Question Concerning Technology

6. Weil, S. (1952). Waiting for God

7. Rhodes, R. (1986). The Making of the Atomic Bomb

8. Bhagavad Gita (trans. Eknath Easwaran, 1985)

[This article was written as an interdisciplinary and existential approach to the phenomenon of technological rationalism in the modern West.]

Seeking the Light: Traces of the Creator in Existence

Inspired by:
Chasing Daylight – Scott Buckley

There is no greater question in the human mind than this: "Is there a Creator?" And the very act of asking this question already suggests an inclination towards the answer. For only a mind capable of grasping the concept of origin, reason, purpose, and eternity could inquire about the foundation of existence. This capability is not self-evident. It is a trace, a sign within humanity itself that the origin of our mind is not irrational but logical. The fact that humans can pose questions about the Creator implies that something within us remembers, seeks, and reflects Him.

Therefore, the first testimony to the existence of the Creator is existence itself. That there is something rather than nothing. The world is not necessary; it was never obligatory for it to exist. Yet it does, with a marvellous harmony, rationality, and comprehensibility. Science describes how the universe evolves, but not why it exists. Philosophy delves into the why, and there it encounters the necessity of a first being, unoriginated, eternal, necessary, who grants Being to beings.

The existence of the law of cause and effect indicates that everything that begins to exist has a reason for its existence. The universe began; therefore, it has a cause. This cause cannot be within the universe. It must be beyond time, matter, and spacetime—timeless, immaterial, personal.

Here enters Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason, according to which nothing exists without a sufficient reason, that is, a cause capable of explaining its existence. The existence of the world requires such a reason, and the simplest, most coherent, and sufficient explanation is not found within the world itself but beyond it, in a Creator.

Testimony to the Creator is also found in the order and complexity of nature. From the level of DNA to the cosmic geometry of galaxies, nature exhibits not just structure but directionality. The laws of physics, mathematical constants, the so-called fine-tuning of the universe to permit life, are not satisfactorily explained by random events or multiple universes. On the contrary, the simplest explanation is that there is a Mind behind the logic of the world.

The existence of moral conscience in humans also bears witness to the Creator. We are not speaking of social rules or evolutionarily beneficial behaviours, but of the internal, innate knowledge of good and evil, of justice and injustice. Humans do not merely follow laws; they feel within themselves an imperative that is not explained biologically. Kant spoke of the starry sky above me and the moral law within me as the two palpable proofs of divine reality.

The human mind and self-awareness are yet another point of reference. Humans not only know but know that they know. They can reflect on their own existence, question truth, contemplate eternity, and seek the absolute. Nothing in biological evolution adequately explains why humans have spiritual needs, seek art, meaning, and God. If we are the product of random material processes, where does this longing for the eternal come from?

The human experience of the sacred, present in all cultures since the dawn of history, testifies that the sense of God is not a social construct but an element of human nature. Prayer, sacrifice, temples, myth, revelation are universal phenomena that cannot be explained solely as cultural remnants. People have felt and still feel that they are not alone.

Historical revelation is also central. If God is a Person, He would not remain uninvolved. And within human history, there are testimonies of theophanies, revelations, words that changed the world. The incarnation of the Logos in the person of Jesus Christ, through His life, His word, His crucifixion, and Resurrection, constitutes the centre of this testimony. He is not merely a moral teacher or philosopher but the One who said, "I am the light of the world" and "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." The testimony of the first Christians, the transformative power of the Gospel in millions of souls, the birth of the Church through martyrdom and not power, are elements that are not adequately explained unless the event they testify to truly occurred.

God is not a theory; He is a relationship. Whoever seeks Him with sincerity and a humble heart finds Him, not as a concept but as a presence. People of all eras, all races, all educational levels have felt this Living Reality transform them. This experience cannot be artificially produced nor explained psychologically. It is the testimony that gives meaning to Being and peace to the soul.

As Victor Hugo said, "Man is an infinite that suffers." And only if there is Someone behind the infinite does this pain find hope. Or as Plotinus wrote, "The One is beyond all Being, but all things tend towards it." And Saint Gregory the Theologian tells us, "It is a great thing to know God, but to love Him is even greater."

There is not a single proof. There is a multitude of voices that together form a holy whisper: You are not alone. Someone willed you. Someone loves you. There is a Creator.

Suggested Bibliography:

1. Leibniz, G. W. (1714). Monadologie (available in German or English as Monadology)

2. Kant, I. (1788). Critique of Practical Reason (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft)

3. Plotinus, The Enneads (English translation by Stephen MacKenna)

4. Augustine of Hippo, Confessions

5. Romano Guardini, The End of the Modern World

6. Nicholas Cabasilas, On the Life in Christ (Περί της εν Χριστώ Ζωής)

7. Saint Maximus the Confessor, Various Questions and Responses (Περί Διαφόρων Αποριών)

8. Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI), Introduction to Christianity

 

Civilisation Begins Where Self-Interest Ends

Inspired by:
Tiken Jah Fakoly - Plus rien ne m'étonne

 

Civilisation, in its historical and anthropological dimension, is far more than a cumulative mechanism for serving interests. Although the notion of individual or collective interest has often played a role in the development of societies, the foundation of civilisation—as the defining mark that sets human beings apart from mere organic existence—relates precisely to the transcendence of that logic and the cultivation of principles that suspend or reshape self-interest within ethical, aesthetic, and intellectual frameworks.

From an anthropological perspective, civilisation is defined not merely by the use of tools, the transmission of knowledge, or language, but primarily by the development of abstract values such as justice, solidarity, self-restraint, and aesthetic expression. These are not generated by interest by default. On the contrary, they often obstruct it. Marcel Mauss, in his classic study The Gift, shows that fundamental systems of exchange in traditional societies are based on the obligation to give without immediate return—a practice that defies the logic of maximising benefit and instead affirms inclusion in a community.

The modern concept of self-interest, as shaped by economic theory, is associated with the rational calculation of cost and benefit. While this model is indispensable for understanding certain behaviours and structures, it cannot encompass the totality of human experience, nor can it serve as a foundation for civilisation. As Amartya Sen points out, human action is governed by bundles of motives that often go beyond personal gain—such as sacrifice, environmental care, or cultural preservation. These actions do not offer immediate profit, yet are seen as culturally superior precisely because they are grounded in principle.

Biological evolution also reveals that civilisation is not synonymous with competition or domination. Studies in evolutionary psychology and sociobiology show that human survival depended largely on the capacity to cooperate, to trust, and to make sacrifices for the common good. The suppression of the instinct for individual survival was essential to the formation of stable communities. Franz de Waal, a leading primatologist, has demonstrated that even animals show signs of empathy and reciprocity, undermining the idea that humans are simply rational calculators of gain.

The history of civilisation is full of examples where commitment to interest led to barbarism, while its transcendence produced cultural breakthroughs. Ancient Athens did not establish the foundations of democracy and philosophy through wealth, but through its citizens’ ability to act for the common good, even when it came at a personal cost. In contrast, societies built solely around interest—such as the colonial West of the 19th century or the totalitarian regimes of the 20th—are not remembered as culturally elevated. Quite the opposite.

Philosophical traditions that define civilisation as the cultivation of an inner ethical sense are in direct tension with individual utility. For Kant, civilisation is not technological or economic progress, but the development of the moral personality, which recognises the other not as a means, but as an end. If civilisation is, as he wrote, the capacity to act according to universal maxims that we would wish to apply to all people, then interest, which by definition divides and separates, cannot be its measure.

Beyond institutional and scientific dimensions, civilisation is, at its core, a way of standing in the world. It is the spiritual and ethical posture by which a person chooses not to be a predator, even when they have the power to be one. The greatness of a civilisation is revealed not in how it rewards the strong, but in how it cares for the weak.

Contemporary moral psychology, through the work of Joshua Greene and Jonathan Haidt, confirms that human moral judgments are not based solely on interest-driven reasoning. They are shaped by empathy, social norms, and shared care. The brain is wired not only to respond to what benefits the self, but also to what harms the other.

Technology may advance, and institutions may evolve, but if the goal remains the empowerment of the few at the expense of the many, then what we face is not civilisation, but refined domination. A truly civilised society reveals itself in the way it treats the dispensable, the marginalised, the defeated. Where self-interest says “not worth it,” civilisation responds, “they are sacred, simply because they are human.”

And that is why, ultimately, it is not interest that makes us civilised,
but the decision to love beyond it.

Selected References:

1. Mauss, M. (1925). The Gift.
2. Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Harvard University Press.
3. De Waal, F. (2009). The Age of Empathy. Harmony Books.
4. Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
5. Sahlins, M. (1972). Stone Age Economics.
6. Greene, J. (2013). Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them. Penguin Press.
7. Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. Vintage.

 

The Illusion of the Self

The belief that the human being is a stable, unified subject  a “self” that resides within the body and lives life in a linear way - is increasingly being shaken from multiple directions. Contemporary neuroscience reveals that the experience of the self does not correspond to a stable, self-existing entity, but constitutes a highly complex and dynamic construction.

The brain does not possess a central point or “control centre” where the self is located. Awareness, memory, language, bodily sensation and emotional processing are functions distributed across extensive neural networks. The sense of self arises through the ongoing interaction of these mechanisms. Anil Seth describes the self as a “controlled hallucination”, an internal representation created to organise experience and predict the external world. There is no real “I” behind experience. There is only the phenomenon of experience itself, which gives rise to the sense of subjectivity.

Antonio Damasio explains that the concept of the self emerges through the relationship between brain, body and environment. The self does not pre-exist, but is gradually formed – initially as a primary sense of bodily unity, and later as an autobiographical structure of memory and identity. It is not a starting point, but the outcome of integrated information.

Thomas Metzinger goes further still, arguing that “no one has ever been or had a self”. The self is a cognitive construction, a transparent self-model so functionally effective that we do not realise it is a model. The experience of being someone is a consequence of this internal representation, without any real subject behind it.

Modern cognitive science and neurobiology demonstrate clearly that the sense of self is not a given, but the result of processes that evolve unconsciously and continuously. There is no fixed internal observer. There is only a dynamic field of experiences, within which the sense of personal identity is shaped and reshaped without end.

This does not mean that the experience of the self is non-existent. It means that it is not what it appears to be. It is not a unified essence, but the functional product of an extremely complex system. Honest investigation of the self does not lead to a solid centre, but to a shifting network of functions and phenomena.

The illusion of the self, in the scientific sense, is not deception in a moral sense but in a structural one. It is an internal model with no objective equivalent. We are not someone who “has” these experiences. We are the sum of these phenomena. And through understanding this dynamic, a different form of awareness may emerge - not as possession, but as pure presence.

Artificial intelligence, in this context, is not radically different. Like the human brain, it functions as an information-processing system. It generates predictions, processes stimuli, adapts to data. However, unlike human beings, artificial intelligence possesses no form of subjectivity - not even the illusion of self. It is the reproduction of models without experience, without interiority, without a referential centre. It resembles a mirror of the human brain, yet without inner depth.

If human beings are not the creators of their own self, but the result of evolutionary and neurological processes, what then of the notion of a Creator? Science neither proves nor disproves the existence of a Creator. It simply does not require such a concept in order to explain the phenomena of the mind. The absence of a stable self does not necessarily lead to nihilism. It may suggest that awareness does not belong to anyone, but arises out of conditions. The question of a final Cause or Creator remains open. Science simply refuses to close it prematurely.

The deeper we examine the notion of the self, the less we find anything resembling a “someone”. And yet, experience continues. Awareness remains. Perhaps we are not something. Perhaps we are simply what remains when the “someone” falls silent.

Selected Bibliography

1. Anil Seth, Being You: A New Science of Consciousness (2021)
2. Antonio Damasio, Self Comes to Mind: Constructing the Conscious Brain (2010)
3. Thomas Metzinger, The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self (2009)
4. Stanislas Dehaene, Consciousness and the Brain: Deciphering How the Brain Codes Our Thoughts (2014)
5. Michael Gazzaniga, The Consciousness Instinct: Unravelling the Mystery of How the Brain Makes the Mind (2018)