Eliot Rosenstock - The Ego And Its Hyperstate: A Psychoanalytically Informed Dialectical Analysis of Self-Interest

The state is rational in and for itself inasmuch as it is the actuality of the substantial will which it possesses in the particular self-conscious that has been raised to its universality. This substantial unity is an absolute end in itself, in which freedom comes into its supreme right. On the other hand, this final end has supreme rightagainst the individual,whose supreme duty is to be a member of the state.

GWF Hegel

Why should one have a supreme duty to be a member of a state? Its a matter of survival and desire certainly. If one lives within a monarchy, or if one lives within a state which has a grip on ideology, duty to the state inevitably becomes a matter of having a venue for ones desire to effectively transfer into ones demands, as well as a matter of survival.

An unconscious power play is strung through Hegel, clear as day, the need to overcome the government with the assertion of the individual. What is supposedly a unity of man and the state, is actually Hegel clinging onto the state for not only survival, but to articulate his own desires, his own will-to-power which manifests in what he wants for himself. In other words, to be the philosopher that he was. But because of this, he couldnt really let the state get one over on him through all moments of the dialectic. The state is also overcome:

For to us religion means the retirement of the Spirit within itself, in contemplating its essential nature, its inmost Being. In these spheres, then man is withdrawn from his relation to the State, and betaking himself to this retirement is able to release himself from the power of secular government.

Hegel, Philosophy of History (p. 130)

Could Hegel free himself from the bonds of the state without risking life and limb? Yes he could quite easily, and at no risk to manifesting his desires through the identity of the state. Thanks to God, he is able to rest. Is this not a clear unconscious wish to escape the superego of the state, which he has raised to the level of supreme duty?

To state the obvious, Hegel does not escape self-interest, he is in the midst of psychological egoism. His morals and values swirl together with their consequences to create a narrative of absolute duty to the state. (I bet the King loves that!) Hegel does not know why he does what he does, but he certainly has a nice rational system for it. He is determined by unconscious psychological forces

On that note, how great is it that The Good Place existed as a show? An articulation of philosophy as a television product with a relatively engaging story line is certainly in line with what I consider an ideal or two, manifesting in the world. A main character is a Kantian in constant moral crisis (and some say that we arent progressing as a species). Chidi is a philosophical fantasy, the man devoted to the raw calculation of his actions in a totally selfless religious devotion.

How does the Kantian Chidi judge his life? He laments on not doing enough, like his love interest Eleanor. It seems clear that Chidi has a point; I doubt anyone watched the show and thought Chidi was someone who shouldnt be drawn into the orbit of the Arizonan Egotist Eleanor. Eleanor was defined by the most vulgar ideal of self-interest, which is self-interest contra the well-being of others. She never missed a chance to insult or scam someone.

Her character eventually escaped the negative judgment of itself through consulting with Chidi, the calculative Kantian. But she judged herself negatively for taking the actions of scamming, and by the end of the show she finds love and a sense of self-worth. It is clear with a small amount of rational analysis that she in fact is more self-interested than ever. Chidi moves away from calculation toward the emotive registers and articulations which are at times in line with duty, but at other times are in line with the articulation of desire.

Self-interest mutates, slides, combines, burns, grows, and becomes unrecognizable. Self-interest is the bastard of all ethical theories insofar as it is pegged into a single register, usually the register of the itch or the hedonistic, immediate gratification impulse, or the register of its use against other people. Self-interest is indeed both of these things at times. However, self-interest in process is the ground of all ideals and their movements, when overlooked by the holder of the ideal.

In the final calculation, self-interest is revealed through a thats it! feeling, a uniting of the characters in ideals, in goals, and in actions. It is a rational expression of survival and desire which make their way through ideals to create particular events, which create forces in their lives, which cause ideals to work themselves out through unitary events and their mutual superego forces.

I am not saying that Chidi should not be a Kantian. In his state of things, he is quite an interesting character. Those of us who are aware of The Absolute Hyperstate shouldnt necessarily be bringing it into every conversational discussion. Rather, The Absolute Hyperstate, the true movement of self-interest, can be utilized to troubleshoot movements through the worlds when necessary. To know that if you encounter Chidi in the wild, that he is in unity with an antagonistic ideal, and that this is self-interest. To articulate that his entire moral framework is incorrect due to not understanding that self-interest is the ground of being, to be insistent on this fact might harm the beauty of the world.

This is a call for you to be an artist to some extent, to be able to see beauty, and know how to intervene in ideals. It is also a call to not let the superego unities overwhelm you, to not feel that there is no escape from any one ideal.