Reading Anton Jäger’s Hyperpolitics recently I came across the following sentence:
That humanity faces world-historical challenges at the beginning of the twenty-first century — from global warming and economic inequality to mounting geopolitical tensions — is a banausic truism.
That word “banausic” didn’t really stump me because I could guess its meaning in context. I also felt like it was a word I had known and even used previously, even though I couldn’t quite place it. So a bit of spadework was in order.
Banausic derives from the Greek banausos, a pejorative term for manual laborers such as blacksmiths or carpenters. It’s been speculated that the etymology is from baunos (furnace) and originally referred to jobs involving fire, like a smith or potter. This has, however, been questioned. The main point is that Greek intellectual life took a dim view of working-class jobs so calling something banausic was a putdown.
In modern times the meaning has stayed along these same lines. Apparently it is still used in German to describe an uncultured person or Philistine. In English it has been defined as meaning vulgar or mundane, or (in slightly less negative terms) merely utilitarian and practical. It’s even been expanded to refer to any profession (law, business) that prioritizes making money over the life of the mind.
Having gathered all this, I was left wondering: was Jäger using the word correctly? I think what he meant was that the fact that the world faces a lot of serious challenges is a banal observation. Banal having the meaning of being unoriginal, dull, or inane, and deriving from a French word for a feudal lord’s rights (I’m not sure I understand the connection). I think this is what Jäger meant, as banausic doesn’t really fit. If you’re going to flash around fancy words you have to use them right!
‘ when combined, a banaustic truism’ is an aggressive way to describe a comment that is not only completely obvious but also deeply uninspiring, narrow minded, or hyper focused on basic utility.’ It’s a thing.
LikeLike
Where’s that coming from? AI?
I could see it being a thing, but is it the right thing for what he’s talking about? Those qualifiers don’t seem to apply to the point he’s making.
I think he was four-flushing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lord Google, which is AI now anyway, and to be honset that explanation is nearly as bad as what yer man wrote.
LikeLike
honset FFS. 🤦🏼♀️ 🙄
LikeLike
A honset mistake.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed.
LikeLike
what is the sentence that comes before and after the one you show?
He could be saying that the world is going to go on and only the idiot masses think it is going to end tomorrow. Like Chicken Little. Except Chicken Little didn’t do any work that I could tell.
LikeLike
No, he does think the challenges are real. He’s quite a lefty so probably not someone you would agree with about much!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I figured and so my interpretation was really stretching things.
LikeLike
I knew a guy who took Latin in high school and German in college and he was great at figuring out the meanings of words based on etymology. I swear, sometimes it was like a party trick.
LikeLike
Yep, if you know Greek and Latin you’ve basically got 90% of words covered. My grandfather apparently was unstumpable.
LikeLike