Chapotraphouse

In East Germany a critical view of psychology was developed that took material dialectics and historical materialism and centered them on the subjective reality of individuals. What arose from this critical rethinking of psychotherapy were three core concepts: “action possibility” (Handlungsmöglichkeit), “agency” (Handlungsfähigkeit, sometimes translated as “action potence”), and “subjective situation” (subjektive Befindlichkeit).

Now, I'm going to simply quote from this short peice from the Annual Review of Critical Psychology, entitled KRITISCHE PSYCHOLOGY AS A MORAL SCIENCE

I cannot summarize all the pertinent aspects of German Critical Psychology in the short space allotted here, but three concepts can be mentioned that illustrate its recognition of Gesellschaftlichkeit. These are “action possibility” (Handlungsmöglichkeit), “agency” (Handlungsfähigkeit, sometimes translated as “action potence”), and “subjective situation” (subjektive Befindlichkeit). All three are based on the recognition that human individuals do not confront the world directly, but as a structure of meanings which creates for us what may be called an “epistemic distance” between ourselves and objects. Objects do not act directly upon us, but rather present us with possibilities for action that can only be decided by the individual reflecting on a complex amalgam of cognitive, historical, and societal factors. In Holzkamp’s word:

The essential determinant of consciousness in its specifically human form is the emerging epistemic relation of the individual to world and self, materially based on the overall societal mediatedness of individual existential security, in which people are able to relate consciously to meaning structures as action possibilities, thus becoming free of the demands of immediate personal survival and able to understand the overarching connection between the existential and developmental problems of the individual and the overall societal process by which the means and conditions of providing for human life are created in a generalized way. (1983, p. 237)

Among the implications of this is that individuals come to relate to themselves as first-persons in societal relations with others, and subjectivity becomes seen as equivalent to intersubjectivity. This is important from the moral theoretical point of view, as it creates the morally necessary choice of relating to others as – to use Macmurray’s terms (1961) – instruments (means) or as persons (ends).

“Agency” (Handlungsfähigkeit) refers to the historically and societally determined degree of control that individuals have over their own conditions and possibilities for satisfying their needs. Clearly, there are circumstances under which such agency can be severely limited. This may or may not be obvious to the individuals affected. Those whom Marx called “wage slaves” in a capitalist economy have agency that is restricted, but they may accept such restriction as normal, thus remaining effectively unaware of their enslavement. Ideally, a society should be organized such that every individual has the possibility of realizing the potentials for satisfaction that are offered by the state of the society’s historical development. We all need to play a meaningful part in the control of the societal process (Holzkamp, 1983, p. 243), which brings us to the concept of “subjective situation” (subjektive Befindlichkeit). This is the individual’s personal awareness and assessment of his or her own possibilities and restrictions. As long as the wage slave is unaware of the restrictions that create wage-slavery, little is likely to be done about removing those restrictions. An important role of theory is to create that awareness.

I trust that I have said enough to show that we have here a psychological theory that is equipped with the kinds of concepts that readily mesh with moral theory and its concerns. The world in which we live is currently ruled by fear, destruction, and greed, that is, by anything but concern for the development and exercise of human possibilities and the development of individual awareness and agency. To realize the latter, radical change is needed. As Chris Hedges (2015) writes, such change (or “revolt” as he puts it) is a moral imperative. No psychological theory will bring this about, but one with the right concepts can be part of the necessary apparatus of change. German Critical Psychology meets that requirement; it is prepared for the “revolutionary moment.”

I say all that to mean, that on the scale of action potency, taking charge against the landlords In your local area is very likely to have a much higher degree of potency then trying to do something about Elon.

For the deeply alienated this framework feels very powerful. Taking stock of the degrees in which you have agency, finding where you have less agancy, coping with stress due to this lack of agancy through understanding why you have a lack of agancy, working towards changing those conditions to create more agancy for yourself and others.

At some point you will need to engage with others to struggle for that agency. We have little agency as individuals to control musk. But we have lots of agency as individuals in our jobs, schools, towns, and cities. When we hit our limits we can seek others who share our struggles so that we can lessen the load that lack of agency brings with it.