Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Why Does the Application of Moral Philosophies to Dating Life Inevitably Turn into Outtakes from The Naked Gun Movies?

Last month, Theo a friend from my department posted a hilariously horrifying story on MySpace. It was about the dangers of being single in this world of post singularity, where singleness has developed its own essence is no longer the state of not yet being with someone, but something in and of itself something to be explored. What comes from this is interesting forms of fetishizing dating techniques, norms, pick up lines and moves. When these fetishized forms mix with alcohol the results are often brain numbing, as Theo found out when he was forced into situation where he was berated for the poorness of his moves and offered help with them at the same time through drunken social role-playing with some random chick he met at a party.

As Theo is part of the theory student bloc of power in my department the first thing that came to mind after reading of his exploits in the realm of getting hot girls to lecture you while they are bleeding vodka from their eyeballs, was of course "did Immanuel Kant ever date?" And the trailing follow up thought would of course be, "what would Hegel say if he were told by a girl that "you need to work on your moves if you want to get hot girls like me"?"

Their answers, while possibly being in German might have something to do with the distinction between singularity (the state of being single) and copolarity (the state of being in a relationship), and how in order to escape the chaos that is singularity (where we incessently question ourselves, "this is what single people do right?") we must submit to the order and rationality of social norms and thus become national couple subjects, who only deal with those questions of copolarity, not in hysterical single people fashion, but instead in drugding already known and accepted Kantian moralistic ways ("fucking categorial imperative, shit, but this is what people in relationships are supposed to do right? Dammit, of course I know its right. Stupid Kant.")

This helps us answer the question which has puzzled at least two or three scholars for centuries, and that is why Kant spent most of his life indoors despite the absence of internet, cable and easily accesible pornography. If Kant had left the house more often, then instead of being an academic or a hermit he would have been considered a single man, and to him no doubt, singularity would be just like the state of nature, no rules, and we know how much Kant loved his rules.

But what would a base Kantian approach to dating be anyways? Say for example, the book The Rules was written by a Kantian who was trying to impart Kant's beautiful beliefs on morality and law to the general public in an attempt to make dating more modern, moral and free. Can you imagine trying to date and pick up people, using the categorical imperative as your pick up line?

"Dude, are you ready to try for her number?"
"Wait dude I'm just going over my lines. Lemme see. Complement a woman on her hair only if I can will that complement to be universal."
"Shit, you can't do that then."
"Why not? I can compliment anyone on their hair."
"But what about bald people? Or cancer patients?"
"Well I just said hair, it doesn't mean just on their heads...."

This is why the claim that Kant is a strict moralist philosopher makes little sense to me, his philosophies of morality (like just about everything else) eventually turn into dialogue from The Naked Gun movies.

No comments:

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails