In its essence, Heroic Theory serves two functions: 1) It is a criticism of modern psychology- and so too of the modern world, which far too often looks to psychology as a guiding light; and 2) It is a call to return to an older psychology, one rooted in strength, manhood, and tradition, which we might refer to as the classical paradigm as opposed to the modernist paradigm.
Insofar as the first point is concerned, Heroic Theory asserts that the modernist paradigm- which would include all modern philosophies rooted in Marxist, modernist, and post-modernist thought- is not only insufficient to establish sustainable mental health at either the personal scale or cultural scale but also that it is itself responsible for many of our most destructive societal trends. The abolition of truth in the classical sense, the abolition of traditional notions of manhood and family, the abolition of religion as a necessary center of meaning- all of these have contributed to the erosion of the very fabric of psychological wellbeing.
Insofar as the second point is concerned, Heroic Theory asserts that the only solution to the problem is not to continue moving forward along the same road that led us out of our natural condition but rather to return to what sustained mankind for so many thousands of years- the classical paradigm itself. What society needs today is not to "progress," but to return to what is most fundamental, to that arrangement of the world for which we have been designed: with God at the center as a representation of truth, with male and female unified in a natural family, and with all the traditional virtues passed down from father to son.
This is the essence of Heroic Theory, and of what I call the New Old World movement.
Why Psychology Fails
Psychology has failed on a number of fronts, largely because it makes some very serious errors insofar as its fundamental tenets are concerned. First among these is its understanding of the Hippocratic Oath.
The Hippocratic Oath is one of the principle tenets of medicine, and later of psychology understood as a medical field, and is generally rendered, "Above all, do no harm." However, modernist psychologists look at harm as a synonym for pain, which it is not; pain is very often necessary in order for us to be healthy. We require stress; without stress, there is no growth. So by equating harmful with painful, we remove from human development what is most necessary for its effectiveness: suffering. Man requires suffering if he is not to remain forever a boy. Suffering makes us resilient, and thus actually reduces suffering in the long term, whereas a lack of suffering makes us overly fragile, and thus more susceptible to suffering- a paradox lost on modernists. And so by focusing not on resilience but rather on avoiding uncomfortable truths and on re-engineering the world to be less painful, psychologists have created a breeding ground for psychological cripples.
Manhood & the Meaning of the Trinity
The Holy Trinity is a powerful symbol.
We are most accustomed to the Christian trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). But we see similar trinities in many other religions, for instance in Hinduism (Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva), in Buddhism (Vajrapani, Manjushri, and Avalokiteshvara), and even in paganism (Odin, Vili, and Ve). For our purposes, however, we will focus on another- the Catholic- trinity: God the Father, mother Mary, and Jesus.
The sacralization of the nuclear family is one of the most common spiritual-social symbols in the world. This makes sense because the nuclear family is the most fundamental unit of human society, and the unit upon which all of civilization depends. For this reason, traditional notions of family- including its patriarchy, its heterosexual norms, and its demands of fidelity- are absolutely critical to the health and wellbeing of society in general. And when these begin to fail, as they have in recent decades in western cultures, society begins a long, slow journey of certain disintegration.
But why did this happen?
The attack on the nuclear family is largely due to the influence of Marxism upon modern society, and its (sometimes only implied) assertion that government management of all aspects of human behavior- the raising of children included- would result in a better and more just society. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth, and we have decades of disastrous social policy to prove it. But that will not stop our intrepid idealists, who assure us that this time- this time!- it will work.
It will not.
For the more society institutes Marxist policies, the more destabilized it becomes. And to whom will society turn when it all comes crashing down? Well, to the government, of course...
It should come as no surprise that Marxism condemns all the old social structures in favor of more and more centralized control. For if there is anything in this world that endangers tyranny, it is manhood. After all, Father is the name of God, and the natural order of things is represented through fatherhood, and yes, even through patriarchy: There is a verticality to righteousness; there is a greater and there is a smaller; and thus, there is a masculinity to all that is virtuous. When the natural order of things has been well-established, there can be no tyranny, but when the rightful order has been disrupted, civilization quickly deteriorates.
This is the most dangerous moment, for when civilization deteriorates, people will beg for order of any kind- even if that order expresses itself through slavery, as it does in the case of Marxism.
Teachings of the Old School
Generally speaking, I define the Old School as veneration of and dedication to the cultivation of virtue in its traditional sense, especially- though not only- in men.
The word 'virtue' has an interesting etymology: virtue, from the Latin virtus, from the Latin vir, which means "man." Virtue is manhood; manhood is virtue. To be virtuous- that means to be strong, healthy, and masculine. Similar etymologies can be found in the case of many other words in English: For instance in the case of the word 'nobility', which means, "the quality of being like the nobility, lofty, separated, and therefore necessarily hierarchical'; or the word 'righteousness', which means, "the quality of being upright, erect (the symbolism here should go without saying), like a pillar." Virtue, nobility, and righteousness- these all share a similarly masculine- and therefore patriarchal- spirit.
This is a critical realization if we are to raise children- especially boys- in a world grown progressively feminist, in a world in which all things manly are condemned outright. For when we condemn manhood, we condemn what makes us moral- that quintessentially masculine quality of hardness in the face of weakness. And this condemnation becomes even more disastrous when we raise boys without fathers, without good men worthy of emulation.
Joshua van Asakinda +1-702-716-2906 Joshua.van.Asakinda@gmail.com