In recent years, there has been an intriguing trend of philosophical and psychological concepts being introduced to a broader audience through accessible mediums like TikTok, YouTube, and self-help books. This phenomenon taps into the growing public interest in self-improvement, personal growth, and exploring fundamental questions about the human condition.
Articles such as "Is Philosophy Self-Help?" examine the intersection of philosophy and self-help and its merits, while "The Internet's New Favorite Philosopher" explores how the German philosopher, Byung-Chul Han, has become a cult figure on TikTok and YouTube. The Atlantic article "The New Empress of Self-Help is a TikTok Star" traces the TikTok phenomenon of Keila Shaheen, who sold 600,000 copies of her The Shadow Work Journal, drawing from Jungian concepts, and later secured a successful publishing deal with HarperCollins.
The common thread among these articles is the examination of the commodification of complex ideas, whether it involves repackaging ancient philosophical concepts into modern self-help books or presenting bite-sized ideas from thinkers like Byung-Chul Han into bite-sized nuggets. The underlying premise of these books and TikTok videos seems to be that they can teach viewers and readers how to live a better life by applying the principles they present.
However, some key questions arise: Is philosophy merely a prescriptive device for helping one live a better life? Or is it much more complex and abstract than that? Is there inherent value in simplifying profound ideas for mass consumption? Or does that simplification risk stripping away the essence and nuance that gives those ideas meaning? Furthermore, by framing philosophy primarily as a means to achieve a "better life" as defined by contemporary societal norms, are we unnecessarily constraining it within the limited scope of individual self-optimisation rather than exploring its potential for deeper ontological and epistemological insight?
Fundamentally, the self-help industry is rooted in the notion of self-reliance and individual self-improvement. However, this perspective aligns with a neoliberal ideology that oversimplifies the complex factors influencing success and better living. In contrast, philosophy is rooted in a deeper quest for understanding reality, morality, ethics, and their interplay on society. Perhaps taking philosophical ideas and selecting them like one would an outfit misses the general point of philosophy and its focus on improving society, not necessarily the individual.
While listening to an episode on the Philosophize This podcast—which offered a thought-provoking exploration of the complexities surrounding philosophy and society through the lens of Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek—I was struck by how his perspectives echoed many of the concerns around the commodification and simplification of profound philosophical ideas into consumable content.
Žižek argues that reducing complex frameworks for grappling with consciousness, identity, and life's paradoxes into catchy, memeable sound-bites betrays the rigorous intellectual endeavour true understanding requires. He is critical of the proliferation of surface-level "wisdom" that provides only a veneer of depth while shielding people from genuinely reckoning with deeper existential and philosophical realities.
For Žižek, distilling life's most profound questions into viral content to be passively consumed, rather than actively grappled with, risks constraining philosophy's role in elevating insights about the nature of reality beyond mere individual self-optimisation.
The rise of philosophers like Byung-Chul Han's online cult following or the multi-million dollar The Shadow Work Journal highlight how this seemingly positive effort to make ideas more accessible can perversely serve to hollow out their essence. While democratizing access expands audiences, it also risks presenting mere shadows of comprehensive philosophies to simply be consumed, not comprehended.
Žižek critiques how this hunger for "ideology without ideology" aligns neatly with self-help tendencies offering revolution without revolutionising anything. Vapid phrases replace the intellectual courage required for paradigmatic re-conceptualisation. Under the guise of inclusion, sanitised buzzwords often simply reinforce conventional norms they claim to disrupt.
Ultimately, the notion that profundity can be distilled into hacked self-help briefs represents a concerning trend of intellectual impotence and foolish oversimplification. While making complex ideas more accessible is noble, we must recognise that true wisdom cannot simply be delivered in pre-packaged, context-free bullet points. By their nature, human existence's deepest questions demand deeper excavation.
Until next time,
If you’re reading this post in your inbox, you can find a shareable version online here. Please share this newsletter with friends if you like, leave a comment to share your thoughts, or tap the heart below to like this post. And don’t forget, you can also follow us on Instagram and Pinterest.
Thank you for reading Hyperreality. Your support means everything to us.