Brittany Simon: A Case for the (Modern-Day) Philosopher
The place of the philosopher in society is historically wrought with challenges. Great thinkers throughout history were admired for their persistent curiosity but equally ostracized for their eagerness to challenge treasured ideas about the human experience and its society. However, although much of the tension between the philosopher and their society has remained the same, this challenged relationship has undergone a rapid metamorphosis under the influence of the internet age. Instead of philosophical thought being found on the steps of ancient collegiate schools or within prestigious universities, the vast majority of modern-day philosophers gather in pockets of cyberspace on their Substack newsletters, Twitter accounts, and YouTube channels. If you do not know where to look, they can be difficult to find because the world has become saturated with the thoughts and opinions of anyone with a wifi connection.
It would appear, at a glance, that the internet has struck a fateful blow to the vocation and need of philosophy in society. But this could not be farther from reality. There is a distinct difference between those who share their thoughts online and those who dedicate themselves to an exposed life of introspection and observation. These are the individuals who choose to act as a conduit of insight through their observation of what ails the human experience. Society, retroactively, calls these people philosophers because they offer a philosophical framework, a community, and consistency in their thinking that provide tools for others to make sense of the uncertainty of existence–which is perhaps more uncertain than ever before. However, many of these new thinkers often do not even identify with the role of the philosopher in the work they do at all! Yet even still, with their respective mediums, they dedicate their time to the pursuit of wisdom and diligently share their findings with others. One such pocket of the internet that I will use as an example and one which I have become most acquainted with in recent years has been the work of Brittany Simon.
I discovered her YouTube channel at the height of the pandemic lock down. Her work centers around the pursuit of coexistence with the self and society through introspection and she often uses pop culture and anime to catalyze deeper conversations in her audience about human nature. Brittany is most known for her introspective categorization system called, “The levels.” The levels are a philosophical framework for categorizing people and broader society from one to five based on the depth and breadth of their introspective journey. Her level system is one of–if not the– biggest controversies surrounding her internet presence as many believe the framework to be hierarchical and socially derisive. [Brittany has stated in the past that she does not wish for her level system to be written down to avoid canonization and dogmatism. She wants the framework to be a living concept subject to change. Since her level system is not the focus of this article, I will honor this and recommend watching her video on the topic to learn more.] The audience she has attracted over the years and the controversy surrounding her work bear the unique mark of great thinkers of the past. Brittany Simon is proof that not only do philosophers still exist but that the world would still benefit from them in actionable ways.
A call to introspection. The greatest thinkers of their respective eras shared ideas that were often born through the observations of their societies. While seeming prophetic predictions are a part of the tradition of philosophy, the core of their work is a result of what they observe happening around them. For example, the work of Friedrich Nietzsche was the result of noticing a trend of decreasing religious sentiment and a subsequent increase in secularism. From that observation, he was able to extrapolate what society would look like decades into the future and exclaimed accordingly–God is dead! He then formulated his hallmark concept called the Ubermensch which was the idealized man who creates their own values and internal laws apart from religion. Philosophers, whether they like it or not, must necessarily have a pulse on the zeitgeist of the going on of society in order to produce some of their best work.
The work of Brittany Simon centers around introspection. What can be observed in society today is an overwhelming sense of insecurity about the state of the world and, by proxy, the individual that inhabits it. In response to this, Brittany describes this experience as the relationship that people have with existing as a consciousness and their existence in interacting with the world. She argues that much of the discord that humans have for one another is a result of their inability to realize that everyone exists in their respective bubbles of reality. Bubbles is a word that you will hear often in her videos. It encapsulates the idea that every person is born into a set of (cultural, religious, and political) beliefs about what it means to be a human internally and externally. Those of an average introspection level will venture very little–if at all–outside of the bubbles they were born into. The act of exploring outside of a cultural, religious, or political framework is called “popping” a bubble by Brittany. The unwillingness that most people have to pop their bubble and explore other ways of existing often results in fear and conflict toward those who exist in an opposite reality. We see this manifest in such conflicts as Islam vs. Christianity, Democrat vs. Republican, Israeli vs. Palestinian, Red pill vs. Pink pill, etc.
The response to the ideas espoused by Brittany Simon has garnered a small but growing audience of people who desire to deepen their relationships with themselves through introspection and foster more curiosity about realities outside of their own. She does this by highlighting current world and pop culture events as an opportunity to explore how and why human beings (individually or collectively) think, feel, and act in accordance with their level of introspection. She encourages and challenges her audience–as they do for her–to observe human behavior with detachment to see things as they are not as they, themselves, are. This can be best summed up in her catchphrase, Human’s gonna human. The ideas that she shares give people the opportunity to enter into acceptance of the uncertainty and strife that is inherent to the fact that there are 9 billion people on the planet each with their own motivations and segmented into different conflicting bubbles of reality.
The importance of the philosopher or deep thinker is not simply in their ability to share their opinions. With an internet connection, anyone can react to the world around them or articulate their internal world. The philosopher, however, responds. They are compelled to a dedicated observation of the core of themselves and the core issues of their era. They are convicted with the desire to understand even to the detriment of their own ego and the destruction of their paradigm. This is where the stereotype of the miserable philosopher is born–though being miserable in the truth is not a prerequisite for the role. The truth, as they come to see it, and pursuit of wisdom is the payment and the reward. The ideas they share and the form in which they are shared are an outworking of a need to output the volume of thoughts they have from the input of their observations.
The risks of the taboo. The call of the philosopher is the risk and consequence of exploring the taboo. It is for this reason that the philosopher is often at odds with the will of society–that “will” is the avoidance of the collective shadow of the human psyche. These shadows are the parts of humanity that inspired the great commandments, necessitate civil law, and birth all manners of neuroses and vices. Philosophy troubles itself in the often unilluminated or unacknowledged parts of human behavior. It is a curiosity that often leaves the inquirer to be alienated and misunderstood. For example, the work of Ayn Rand explored the underbelly of religious altruism, its secular derivatives, and its effects on the individual and society. Her work aroused much controversy as it was hyper-individualistic and in direct opposition to many Christian values of the time. There is plenty to disagree with in her philosophy. Every thinker has disagreeable beliefs. But the one staple that is true of all of them is that they are dedicated to the pursuit of truth–even to the behest of the world. In a society that requires systems to function, philosophers are needed to do “system checks” on what collective beliefs are true or needed.
The biggest controversies that have occurred for Brittany Simon often center around the concept of the level system or how the framework is applied to world events and human behavior. The most consistent criticism is that her work is not as definitive and is emotionally detached from reality. This is a result of the relative nature of her philosophical system. In an effort to understand the inner workings of an action or event, Brittany Simon asks why in much the same way a child would–incessantly–until the root of the question is proposed. It does not matter how controversial or taboo the topic is. She will ask what the root cause of pedophilia is beyond dehumanizing the condition. She will attempt to understand the emotional complexity of the war between the Israeli state and Palestine. She has even openly shared her thoughts on why her own sexual assault occurred from the assailant’s perspective. There is an insatiable “why” that causes her to push for the truth even in the face of personal pain. Not every thought she shares hits the mark by even her standards, but there is a willingness to continually try for greater understanding. While the work is done for her own sake, the audience benefits from a new perspective that opens the door for more conversation and potential insight.
The world needs more people who are not afraid to think charitably and from a place of curiosity. Dogmatism is one of the greatest enemies of philosophy. Due to the increasing economic, social, and geopolitical tension in the world, there is more of a demand for what is certain. Security is rapidly disintegrating all around. The people who aspire to power take advantage of this desperation by promising a sense of security that they cannot truly provide. Politics and religion are the most prolific examples of this. Philosophy, by its very questioning nature, is a threat to corruption and social manipulation. It is for this reason that some of the greatest thinkers throughout history had a target on their backs socially, ideologically, and even physically. The prerequisite of any philosopher, past or present, is to accept the consequences of speaking outside of social prescription. They do so for the benefit of others as much as their own internal conviction. In their own unique way, they provide introspective tools for helping people make sense of the self and world–even if it is at their own expense.
Less alone. The first time you read a philosopher that mirrors your mind can change your life. It feels as if the author is writing directly to you. It is an intimate experience to read or listen to the innermost thoughts of another human being with whom there is a sense of kinship. Philosophers act vulnerably when they expose the perspective of their observation to others. Much like the artist who feels deeply, to think deeply peels and turns the thinker inside out for their bare soul to be seen. It is ironic, then, that the often reclusive philosophers throughout history have created an intellectual home for so many. It is the resonance with the vulnerability of their work that connects people together in a shared humanity. It creates an opportunity for others to put words to complex ideas and relay them to others when the moment allows. Philosophy creates an opportunity for connection near and far in both time and space through our direct interaction with others or by reading the words of an author from 100 years ago. The earnestness in sharing thoughts, ideas, and observation is a beacon for interpersonal bonds. What is even more wonderful is that you do not need to be a scholar to benefit from it as a point of connection with others.
The work of Brittany Simon has attracted an audience of people connected by their love and pursuit of ideas. The thoughts she shares center around the pursuit of understanding the core of the self in relation to the world it inhabits. There is an emphasis on thinking outside of the personal paradigm about the self and observation of society. From what I have observed, the people who resonate with her work tend to be more open to differences across bubbles of reality and are curious about the lived experiences of others. It is not that Brittany has somehow molded her audience into being through sheer persuasion. It could be easily argued that her ideas are not particularly novel. There are plenty of other introspective systems that exist with similar theories. However, what makes her work stand out is the unique flair she brings through how she communicates these ideas. By communicating authentically her observations and experiences, she attracts people who see the world similarly but do not, at first, have the language to describe it. This is the impact that can be had by those who make a vocation of thinking openly.
The world needs a home for those who wish to think and reason solutions to the trials of existence. In the past, if a person wanted to search for meaning through community, they would have to do it in the pews of a church. While there are many people who find solace in such spaces, there are an increasing number of people who are looking for answers elsewhere. The demand can be seen in more people looking for community online through the expression of their frustrations with the hardships of life. Social media is echoing the idea of collective suffering–i.e. Financial challenges, political discomfort, dissatisfaction with government, gender strife, etc. There are not a lot of cyberspaces that center around providing and sharing tools for understanding the self and society. Philosophy can be that place again. Those who curate these spaces, whether they call themselves philosophers or not, help to structure conversation and dialogue about the challenges of life. The wonderfully dharmic part of these communities is that both the creator and audience have the opportunity to grow together through open communication, intellectual sparring, and mutual understanding. It is a symbiotic relationship that is similar to friends arguing congenitally with each other about the meaning of life over an open campfire. The difference is that we can now do it no matter the distance between us.
Philosophy still has an important place in the world. Modern-day philosophy is more than the pedantry of a dwindling few in the sea of opinion on social media. It is also more than the necromancy of great thinkers of the past for the sake of self-help consumerism. The philosophers of the present day are thriving in the corners of the internet that most would least expect. But with a keen eye, it is easy to find them. They are the people with dedicated Substacks and Mediums, writers of Twitter threads, self-published authors, passionate podcasters, and YouTube essayists and orators who have, in their own ways, dedicated their lives to pondering the complexity of life openly and consistently with others. Brittany Simon is one of many that I find to be a consummate example of this. While the landscape of the world has changed with the introduction of the internet and social media, the root desire of philosophical inquiry has remained unchanged. Human beings will always ask why. And with the world as uncertain than ever–it is being asked, perhaps, even more. Thus humanity needs more people who take the time to cultivate through introspection their understanding of the world and self, who are not afraid to offend society by thinking with curiosity, and who lovingly create a space for others to do the same. That is the work and vocation of the philosopher.
—The Ibis Letter