Cliodynamics 302: What, O Socrates, is an asshole?

 Cliodynamics 302: What, O Socrates, is an asshole?

And how does the asshole differ from someone who is merely a jerk?

The distinction is important.

The asshole systematically takes advantage in interpersonal or cooperative relationships, out of an entrenched and mistaken sense of entitlement that immunizes him against the complaints of other people. His sense of entitlement is absolute; his self-aggrandizing behaviour is spontaneous and noticeably lacking in inhibition. The asshole may recognize that violating certain norms of acceptable behaviour may cause pain or give offense, but feels no conflict over that possibility.

The jerk, by contrast, is aware it is normal to apologize, express embarrassment, or at least formulate some plausible excuse -- and does so, whether successfully and sincerely or not is another matter.

Asshole is a shorthand term for the dark quartet of anti-social behaviours known as Narcissism, Machiavellianism, Sub-Clinical Psychopathy and Sub-Clinical Sociopathy. It has evolved from a part of the vulgate vernacular to a clinical term familiar to organizational psychologists and even chaired deans of philosophy, being raised in status to a clinical and philosophical term for discussion such anti-social behaviours, and it even accepted in some courts of law as a legal definition.

The asshole is morally repugnant because of his fundamental lack of respect for the moral status of those he interacts with. The Asshole doesn't register other people as morally real.

Pretending to speak hypothetically, imagine someone bringing weapons to what is supposed to be a civil discussion when told expressly not to and agreeing not to, then merely pretending to disarm, may be either a jerk or an asshole, but the jerk will feel the need to come up with, at least, an excuse. The asshole on the other hand will blame others for the mishap, and then have subordinates and sycophants verbally attack the people who pointed out the transgression.

More important, the asshole will feel indignant when questions about his conduct are raised. That, from their point of view, shows they are not getting the respect they deserve. Such escalations, from habitual, self-cantered indifference toward the feelings of others to rage at even the perception of being slighted, is indicative of what some self-styled warlords consider diplomacy.

H. L. Mencken defined a demagogue as someone “who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.” Mencken’s quip is insufficient in characterizing these self-styled warlords, who are not so much dishonest as completely uninterested in whether or not what they says is true. See Harry G. Frankfurt's "On Bullshit" [Princeton University Press, 2005].

The Ultra-Asshole Theory is that the value of the Ultra-Asshole is mainly as a stratagem of asshole management: When stuck with heaps of assholes, turn to an even bigger asshole, in hopes of capitalizing for power and profit.

The hope of the Ultra-Asshole Theory is that the Ultra-Asshole, sounds quite a bit like the sovereign in Leviathan written by Thomas Hobbes, arguing for a social contract where the Ultra-Asshole should be elevated and empowered to have absolute power. University of California at Irvine Chair of Philosophy Professor Aaron James offers tutorials on Hobbes and Rousseau which suggests that the prominence of assholes makes a certain amount of sense in the context of a group collapsing under strain.

In the context that the individual self is engaged in a zero-sum game with the rest of the galaxy; for anything to count as a good, it must have the potential to generate invidious comparisons. Each of them needing to affirm his or her own value, we devolve into a destructive contest for rank and superiority. As a result, they live in an asshole oligarchy.

The manner in which public affairs are conducted gives a sufficiently accurate indication of the moral character and state of health of the body politic.

One of the fascinating aspect of the pioneering work of Aaron James in the understanding of Assholes, is that he starts from the moral requirements of participation in cooperative relations rather than from human psychology, it is more general than anything produced by organisational psychologists. It can also be helpfully applied to non-human agents, such as groups, large corporations and nation-states. A group can be an asshole, as can a corporation, as can a nation-state. Please note that the nation-state, refers to the representatives of the government and not the populace which suffers under its administration.

Core to the Asshole is that they deserve special consideration from everyone else and a general exemption from rules intended for the general benefit which happen to be inconvenient to them, so too do some nation-states and think that their sovereignty is entitled to exceptions to the general rules of conducts, thumbing their nose that the forms need not be obeyed at least by them.

The asshole theory of international relations has much more to offer than cathartic name-calling or empty moralising. It can help explain, predict, and formulate strategies to least contain asshole nation-states, since like humani afflictions such as Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Sub-Clinical Psychopathy and Sub-Clinical Sociopathy, there is no known cure.

Normally, I would opt for the less profane sounding referent of 'jerk', but apparently 'asshole' is an accurate technical descriptor.

To those whom I have spoke about the so-called diplomatic delegation that transgressed civility by bringing weapons to a diplomatic parley safezone, referring to them as 'jerks', I apologize, it was an inaccurate term. I shall hereby vow to use the more accurate term and to take the time to explain the difference.

Diplomatic Parley assumes that there is some grounds for which an understanding and a meeting of minds is possible, however, while that is possible with effort with a jerk, by the structure of the asshole, it is not possible. Therefore, diplomatic parley with assholes is hereby forbidden until such time as the assholes can be proven to be merely jerks.

Thank you to the Margravina Calina Tereschenko, for sharing this from her studies in Cliodynamics and passing it along thru her colleagues to my attention, and for introducing me to the writings of Aaron James, H. L. Mencken, and Harry G. Frankfurt, who were insightful enough to employ classical academic methods for the understanding of the modern demagogue and asshole, as distinguished by the mere garden variety Jerk.

Aaron James is a professor and chair of philosophy at the University of California, Irvine.

(OOC: And thanks to Scott McLemee, who wrote an insightful review of Professor Aaron James work, whose words I borrowed in no small measure. Herein trusting that the satire exception to copyright covers the content herein.)

Scott McLemee is the Intellectual Affairs columnist for Inside Higher Ed. In 2008, he began a three-year term on the board of directors of the National Book Critics Circle. From 1995 until 2001, he was contributing editor for Lingua Franca. Between 2001 and 2005, he covered scholarship in the humanities as senior writer at The Chronicle of Higher Education. In 2005, he helped start the online news journal Inside Higher Ed, where he serves as Essayist at Large, writing a weekly column called Intellectual Affairs. His reviews, essays, and interviews have appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Nation, Newsday, Bookforum, The Common Review, and numerous other publications. In 2004, he received the Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing from the National Book Critics Circle. He has given papers or been an invited speaker at meetings of the American Political Science Association, the Cultural Studies Association, the Modern Language Association, and the Organization of American Historians. A selection of his work is available at his website. He is also a member of two group blogs, Crooked Timber and Cliopatria.