Abstract

I have come to the realization that we cannot regulate what we cannot define. However, the public sphere should be a place where dialogue is readily stated even if it makes someone uncomfortable, and this is not hate speech. Otherwise, we begin to stop talking about difficult things, and secondly, there is not anything I can say that is not going to offend someone if the crowd is large enough. Who defines hate? This is an insoluble problem; thus, it should not be regulated. That is why we need the public sphere so desperately so that those with an invested advantage do not make our decisions for us. Western society lives in worldless times. The salvation of worldlessness is firstly, a world that is based in continuity and permanence, even though human beings require the unpredictability and uncertainty of a controlled outcome, and secondly, thinking that is driven by meaning-making, reason, and wonder, rather than the reverence of sciences and technology and lastly an education that provides children deployment of trust from the world in order to reproduce. I will begin by defining the intricacies of worldlessness an Arendtian term, defining what thinking is, and how worldlessness relates to thinking. I will then demonstrate how various forms of thinking can be detrimental to society, and the public sphere. Additionally, I will investigate the prolific use of technology and sciences as an affecting mechanism in the way human beings think. Finally, I will be taking a closer look at how culture is formed or deformed through worldlessness and what the model of education needs to be in order for future generations to become more thoughtful thinking adults.