Contrary to the rationalist ambition to articulate the future of humanity through the lens of a supposedly universal rationality — one that exposes the epistemological fragility of prejudice — we are today drowning in a dogmatic dictatorship of hyperproduction and hyperdistribution of opinion. Opinion, as the lowest and most subjective element of the cognitive stream, has become the general standard of collective perception of reality.

Where rationalists once relied on reason as the foundational tool of common sense (sensus communis), which —in the context of managing shared affairs (res publica) — served as a rudder for all societal participants to avoid ontological reefs, today, sensation and opinion have become the primary activating forces of public action.

Sensation seeks to capture attention in a context of overstimulated cognitive-sensory capacity, while opinion attempts to provide rational justification for action itself. Opinion mimics rationality, but this supposed rationality is nothing more than a form of ideologically dogmatic reference.

The German word for opinion, Meinung, directly points to the absence of sharedness — highlighting the subjectivity of its epistemic output. The space of public expression, once shaped by participants subjected to structures of verification and derivation of knowledge and truth, has now been replaced by a space of opinion dissemination, where decisive weight no longer stems from truth, but from volume.

The volume of opinion depends on various factors—most notably, the size of the ideological group behind it, and often the sheer quantity of opinion-producers, who may be entirely artificial, i.e., programmatic.

Dogmatic thought, which precedes rationalist resistance, roots its justification in a metaphysical construct of reality—in other words, in a cosmological interpretation of human order and individual purpose within it. The post-rationalist era, however, justifies its dogmatism through the economic interpretation of the world and society: what is profitable is real, good, and meaningful.

Dogmatism can take the form of rationality—a structure of internal sequences from one premise to another. Yet the form does not change the epistemic standard. A dogma is what enables lazy thinking to renounce its own activating potential and neglect the wound that lingers beneath the symptoms of burnout in the ambition for self-optimization within the logic of profitability, visibility, overvaluation.

To truly know, we must accept the truth about the ideological construction of the world and of our own self-awareness. The sensation of the moment must be replaced by the sensation of insight. It may arise spontaneously, as a kind of satori, but most often, knowledge is the result of a cognitive adventure that does not turn away from the fundamental rules of epistemological structure.

Thinking today is increasingly delegated to synthetic tools. But whoever surrenders to this lazily will never truly know again.

Original:

Kdo je tisti, ki si zares drzne vedeti?

V nasprotju z racionalistično ambicijo, da bi prihodnost človeštva artikulirali skozi prizmo domnevno vsem skupne racionalnosti, ki razprostira epistemološko trhlost predsodkov, se danes utapljamo v dogmatični diktaturi hiperprodukcije in hiperdistribucije mnenj. Mnenje kot najnižja in najbolj subjektivna prvina spoznavnega toka je danes obči standard skupnega dojemanja stvarnosti.

V kolikor so racionalisti stavili na razum kot temeljno orodje zdrave pameti (sensus communis ali skupni čut), ki v kontekstu upravljanja skupnih stvari (res publica) predstavlja vsem deležnikom družbe krmilo izogibanja ontološkim čerem, danes temeljni aktivacijski potencial družbenega dejanja predstavljata senzacija in mnenje.

Senzacija je tisto, kar poskuša – v kontekstu z dražljaji preobremenjene kognitivno-čutne kapacitete – zagotoviti pozornost, medtem ko je mnenje tisto, kar poskuša zagotoviti racionalno utemeljitev dejanja samega. Mnenje hlini racionalnost, a ta domnevna racionalnost ni nič drugega kot forma ideološko-dogmatičnega sklica.

Nemški izraz za mnenje je Meinung, kar neposredno kaže na odsotno občost oziroma izraženo subjektivnost epistemološkega proizvoda. Prostor javnega izraza, ki so ga v preteklosti oblikovali deležniki, podrejeni strukturi verifikacije derivatov spoznavanja in opisovanja resničnosti, je danes zamenjal prostor razpečevanja mnenj, v katerem odločilno težo ne prispeva več resničnost, temveč glasnost.

Glasnost mnenja je vezana na različne dejavnike, med njimi pa zagotovo prednjači številčnost ideološke skupine, nemalokrat pa tudi količina proizvajalcev mnenj, ki so lahko povsem umetelni – torej programatični.

Dogmatično mišljenje, ki predhodi racionalističnemu odporu, svojo utemeljitev polaga v metafizični konstrukt stvarnosti. Z drugimi besedami: v kozmološko osmislitev človeške ureditve in posameznikove vloge v njej. Postracionalistično obdobje pa svojo dogmatičnost utemeljuje z ekonomsko osmislitvijo sveta in družbe: kar je donosno, je resnično, dobro, smiselno.

Dogmatičnost lahko nosi obliko racionalnosti – torej strukture notranjih zaporedij prehoda od enega k drugemu. Vendar pa oblika dogmatičnosti ne spremeni njenega epistemološkega standarda. Dogma je tisto, kar lenobnemu mišljenju pomaga, da se odpove svojemu lastnemu aktivacijskemu potencialu in zanemari rano, ki vztraja pod simptomi izgorelosti v ambiciji samoizpopolnjevanja – v kontekstu donosnosti, opaženosti, precenjenosti.

Da bi lahko vedeli, moramo sprejeti resnico o ideološki proizvedenosti sveta in lastnega samozavedanja. Senzacijo trenutka je treba zamenjati za senzacijo spoznanja. Resda se včasih zgodi spontano – kot neke vrste satori – a največkrat je spoznanje rezultat kognitivne avanture, ki se ne odvrača od temeljnih pravil epistemološke zgradbe.

Mišljenje danes vse bolj delegiramo sintetičnim orodjem. A kdor se temu lenobno predaja, vedel ne bo nikoli več.