transcendence

I realise I have misunderstood a philosophical notion of transcendence, partly due to a false representation of it in the general community. I realise that I have been misunderstanding also because Bataille's favouring of "immanence" which I have now come to realise is better regarded as "transcendence of self through embracing immanence".

There is the patriarchal notion that was at large when I was growing up, viz. "men transcend women". What it seemed to mean at the time, at least in terms of the rhetorical value that it had then, was that men had the capability for mastery that was often less developed in womankind -- but not prohibited to them by any means, and that they, too, might rise to this level, only with practice.

What I see to day as "transcendence" is simply projective identification. One person transcends another by claiming all their intrinsic but socially regarded good qualities as their own, and projecting that which is negative about themselves onto others. Thus "man" "transcends" "woman" by projecting on to her his emotional incapabilities and despair, whilst claiming the socially redeeming qualities of being a good worker and breadwinner.

Such is the problem with the way a false transcendence is commonly appropriated for wrongful personal gain.