Objective culture grows far faster than subjective individual culture

Evidence

The development of modern culture is characterised by the predominance of what one can call the objective spirit over the subjective; that is, in language as well as in law, in the technique of production as well as in art, in science as well as in the objects of domestic environment, there is embodied a sort of spirit [Geist], the daily growth of which is followed only imperfectly and with an even greater lag by the intellectual development of the individual. If we survey for instance the vast culture which during the last century has been embodied in things and in knowledge, in institutions and comforts, and if we compare them with the cultural progress of the individual during the same period—at least in the upper classes—we would see a frightful difference in rate of growth between the two which represents, in many points, rather a regression of the culture of the individual with reference to spirituality, delicacy and idealism. This discrepancy is in essence the result of the success of the growing division of labor. For it is this which requires from the individual an ever more one-sided type of achievement which, at its highest point, often permits his personality as a whole to fall into neglect. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 760

In contrast, objective culture can be partially independent from subjective culture, insofar as “cultivated”—that is, cultivating—objects have been created whose availability for cultural purposes is not fully utilized by subjects. Particularly in periods of social complexity and an extensive division of labor, the accomplishments of culture come to constitute an autonomous realm, so to speak. Things become more perfected, more intellectual, and to some degree more controlled by an internal, objective logic tied to their instrumentality; but the supreme cultivation, that of subjects, does not increase proportionately. Indeed, in view of the enormous increase of objective culture, in which the world of things is parcelled out to countless workers, subjective culture could not increase. Thus far at least, historical development has moved toward a steadily increasing separation between objective cultural production and the cultural level of the individual. The dissonance of modern life—in particular that manifested in the improvement of technique in every area and the simultaneous deep dissatisfaction with technical progress—is caused in large part by the fact that things are becoming more and more cultivated, while men are less able to gain from the perfection of objects a perfection of the subjective life. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 565

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the objective/subjective spirit distinction central to Simmel’s theory, which the reader’s essay will apply to Julius’s isolation.
• XREF: Directly feeds the essay synthesizing Simmel, Lofland, and Cole — the objective-culture-overgrowth cause is what drives the blasé attitude and civil inattention. — connects to: Objective and subjective culture grow by fundamentally different logics — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 32; Individual receptive capacity is finite while objective culture grows infinitely — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 33; Objective and subjective culture are distinct measurable phenomena — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 564 (+2 more)
• DEEPTHINKING: The gap between objective and subjective culture as the structural source of modern alienation and discontent is a paradigm-level claim about modernity.
• ADDENDUM: Supports the essay’s synthesis: the citizen of Lofland’s city and Cole’s New York consumes perfected objects (objective culture) but is isolated from subjective cultivation.
• QUESTION: Does the essay’s blasé attitude function precisely as the psychic defense against this objective/subjective gap? Worth pinning the mechanism.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 760; Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 565

Related

• Objective and subjective culture grow by fundamentally different logics (similarity 0.87)
• Objective and subjective culture are distinct measurable phenomena (similarity 0.87)
• Individual receptive capacity is finite while objective culture grows infinitely (similarity 0.83)
• Subjective and objective culture necessarily oppose each other (similarity 0.81)
• Individual mental distinctiveness emerges only from contact with objective culture. (similarity 0.81)
• The metropolis reduces individuals to negligible cogs in an objective culture (similarity 0.81)
• Overwhelming objective culture forces individuals to exaggerate their peculiarities (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Objective and subjective culture grow by fundamentally different logics #expands (0.75) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 32
• Individual receptive capacity is finite while objective culture grows infinitely #expands (0.70) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 33
• Objective and subjective culture are distinct measurable phenomena #corroborates (0.55) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 564
• Building autonomous objective culture resembles economic takeoff into self-sustaining growth #exemplifies (0.50) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 87