philosophical dogs
notes on hidden beliefs
I have a new obsession with hidden beliefs.
It started with a book on sexuality I read recently. The author introduced her work with detailed outlines on how society operates. The views were shared as if they are common sense and the only possible lens through which to see the world. There were zero citations or counterpoints. She did not mention Marx once, for example, despite relying extensively on his language and critiques of capitalism. Alarms went off.
The book mirrored much of the tone and language that my social sphere and I use. We treat complex worldviews as if they require no defense. We have a smooth communal agreement on what is wrong/right with housing, sex, family, god, money, nature. Where is the friction?
Everything is true and not true. I view myself as a person who dislikes holding a point of view without knowing its critiques and contradictions. I am far from that ideal. What scares me more is not knowing I have a point of view. Hidden beliefs parade as reality.
Apparently, I swim with others unquestioningly in a Marxist sea. What other waters can’t we even see? “It’s common sense” is a thought-terminating cliche. “You need to believe this to be cool/sexy/safe” is tribal groupthink.
A short conversation with friend Daniel Oleksiuk made it clear I knew essentially nothing about philosophy or political science. So that was the starting point - twenty YouTube lectures with Karl. Then my first reading of The Communist Manifesto. Last week I dwelt briefly at the altar of the Nietzsche, the antichrist. I relapsed into the arms of Barthes, my former lover.
I enjoy the irony. In college, the only classes I hated were philosophy and ethics. I arrived late to the second philosophy lecture to find the professor pointing at the ceiling and asking us how we could prove there wasn’t a pink elephant in the room. I never went back to class. (I did, somehow, still pass.)
I am constrained in my ability to challenge how I live and how we relate to one another as a society. I believe in my intellect and the value of my perspective. I access diverse views on relationships, economics, justice. But these dialogues are happening around me in a language I don’t understand. I want a framework. Give me a place to hang all these reels, articles, rants.
Relatedly, I am challenged in my capacity to related to fundamentally different worldviews. This shows up right now in my efforts to engage more deeply with Indigenous perspectives from the Americas. I suspect my approaches here will falter until I see more clearly what my own beliefs are made of. Let us drag the hidden into the light!
My intention is to do this project playfully. It’s working! I can feel my mind expanding joyfully.
What next? I prefer hyper-fixations with unnecessary detail over sweeping surveys. However, if I want a framework it seems beneficial to broaden out. I’ve started the “Great Minds of the Western Intellectual Tradition“ series on YouTube (playlist here)—partly because I have a crush on Michael Sugrue. Perhaps some non-Western survey’s will follow. Rabbit holes be warned. Content ideas welcome.
Professor, I’m finally ready for that philosophy class.
—
Vancouver, September 2025
Bizarre how the "default state of mind" hardens with age — even when we think we’re staying open. Maybe child-mind curiosity is the antidote?
I've also, for a very long time, believed that a refusal to search for and acknowledge one's foundational, often hidden, beliefs, is the definition of dogmatism. And dogmatism is closely aligned in multiple studies with extremism. This doesn't mean that all dogmatic people are extremist, just that it seems often to be a pre-condition.