#EMBEDDED
*
*
*
*
*
*

#EMBODIED
*
*
*
*
*
*

#ENACTED
* A Masterclass on Enactivism and Cognition (w/ Shaun Gallagher) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHzEIVJTGWA
*
*
*
*
*

# E???D
*
*
*
*
*
*

* pinche=fucking (ME only) - but in Nicaragua means tacaño / stingy / miserable or in Spain it means kitchen helper
* minita=broad - (CH AR) - La palabra minita en Chile y Argentina es muy coloquial, pero también cargada de connotaciones. 📌 En Chile y Argentina: Minita viene de mina (del lunfardo), que significa "mujer", pero con un tono despectivo, objetualizador o sexista, similar a "chick" o incluso "broad" en inglés.
* Chinga la migra=fuck ice
*
*
*

* All I care about is American Dynamism, creating a new fashion subculture, vertical patronage networks, and dancing through the trenches like a schizophrenic ballerina. https://x.com/AltCulture/status/1956829218639147066
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* @Kwisatz-Chaderach hace 8 meses You reposted this today......Luigi is the Avatar of Spinal Catastrophism. https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ
*
*
*
*
*

* To quote Johan Cruijff "I've never seen an bag of money score a goal". https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1mj8bnc/marks_next_target_genies_dev_team/
* Elissa Slotkin's "call balls and strikes"
* Whitehead and Schelling are in league - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0cCrr7IsYw
* Hey Amy Chozick: thanks for teeing this up but it looks like chaos prevailed https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mpyyks/this_was_a_real_magazine_cover_in_2014/n8n3j0m/?context=3
*
*

* Freud::psychology:Nietzsche::philosophy: Freud is to psychology what Nietzsche is to philosophy: de-mystification. For Heidegger, such thinking “will uncover that path on which alone gods will be encountered—if they are to be encountered ever again in the history of mankind.” https://x.com/UberKierk/status/1739747585819095246
*
*
*
*
*

* https://x.com/hermenewtics/status/1948771950915965363 uberboyo: It looks like Nietzsche was wrong and Plato was right High powered Ai models are begin to converge on a “hidden realm” of ideals This is very hard for the layman to follow, but think of it this way:
*
*
*
*
*

* Deleuze/Leibniz/Cusa = thinkers of enfolding - fundamentally, my thinking is Baroque. in essence, I am thinking about the Basilisk (Lucifer) according to a Rococo design; the multi-floored decadent psychedelic architecture that Gilles Deleuze wrote in "The Fold" mirrors the thinking of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Nicholas of Cusa, and other thinkers of enfolding. this is what Francois Laruelle calls the "real hallucination" of Khora, it's a "real simulation." I also recommend "Machina Ex Deo" by Agata Bielik-Robson on this issue: St. Teresa of Ávila wrote on the Interior Castle, but G. W. F. Hegel’s Sittlichkeit is the Exterior Castle. Heideggerian “Being” is a pure phallic emptiness, like the śunyata of the Buddhists, which allows for 0 dialectical traction. but when you pass from Sein to Geist, you go from “what?” to “where?”. Christ is Logos, but Geist is Khôra. Leslie Jaye Kavanaugh understands this: “In the Architectonic of Philosophy Leslie Kavanaugh chose three 'architectonics', philosophical structures, to be examined more extensively. These are Plato's Chora, the continuum of Aristoteles and finally Leibniz's labyrinth. The concept of the 'architectonic' is borrowed from Kant, albeit with differing intentions. Whereas the history of philosophy defines metaphysics as asking the question 'What is Being?'; here is asked 'Where is Being?' What is to be analysed is indeed part of the tradition of metaphysics to inquire about Being qua being, but here the inquery is into its structure, its position within the onthological whole. In doing this analyses, two points become explicit. One; Onthology has a structure; and two; the status of Being within this structure.”https://www.academia.edu/61670511/Machina_ex_Deo_Game_Theology_in_Kabbalah_and_Derrida Machina ex Deo: Game Theology in Kabbalah and Derrida ;;; This is an attempt to bring together a philosophy of virtuality, generated within contemporary game theories, with the scriptural view of the created reality, which arose within the kabbalistic lore. The mediating point between the two is Derrida and his unique 'metaphysics of ecriture', which I explain in terms deriving from the Jewish Kabbalah. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1901008411484921859
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

#chatgptgarbage

Great follow-up! Latin America has indeed been a **rich soil for visual and experimental poetry**, but the practice of **visual (or concrete) poetry** is not originally from the region — although Latin American poets made it **distinctively their own**.

---

## 🌎 Is visual poetry originally Latin American?

**No, it’s not originally from Latin America**, but Latin American poets were some of its most important innovators — especially in the **20th century**.

* **Historical roots** go back to **Ancient Greece** (e.g. *pattern poems*) and resurfaced in the **European avant-garde** (Futurism, Dada, Surrealism).
* The modern form — **"concrete poetry"** — crystallized in the **1950s**, particularly in **Brazil**.

Latin American poets, however, **infused it with regional philosophies**, political critiques, and unique **linguistic experiments** (especially using Spanish and Portuguese grammar and gender).

---

## 🔥 Major Visual/Concrete Poets from Latin America

### 1. **Décio Pignatari** (Brazil)

* One of the **founders** of the **Noigandres** group (with the Campos brothers).
* His work includes radical visual/linguistic experiments.
* Example: *“beba coca cola”* — a critique of advertising, with the structure mimicking corporate slogans.

---

### 2. **Haroldo de Campos** & **Augusto de Campos** (Brazil)

* Pioneers of **Concrete Poetry (Poesia Concreta)** in Latin America.
* Explored **visual layout**, **language deconstruction**, and **intersemiotic translation** (poetry → visual art → music).

> They saw the poem as an “**object**,” where **form and content are inseparable**.

---

### 3. **Octavio Paz** (Mexico)

* Perhaps the most internationally recognized Latin American poet doing visual work.
* Poems like **“Blanco”**, **“Topoemas”**, and **“Cuerpo a la vista”** are **spatially complex**, exploring **metaphysics, eroticism**, and **identity**.

---

### 4. **Cecilia Vicuña** (Chile)

* Combines **visual poetry, performance, and textile art**.
* Her work is often **feminist**, **indigenous-inflected**, and **eco-political**.
* Known for **palabrarmas** (word-weapons), she treats words as both **material and symbolic**.

---

### 5. **Edgardo Antonio Vigo** (Argentina)

* A major figure in **mail art** and experimental visual poetry.
* Created **object-poems**, **visual texts**, and **poetic games**, often in response to dictatorship and censorship.

---

### 6. **Pedro Xisto** (Brazil)

* Often less mentioned, but his work in **visual semantics** was influential in the **Noigandres movement**.
* Mixed **language**, **numbers**, and **graphics** to create **visual aphorisms**.

---

## ✨ What made LatAm visual poetry unique?

* **Multilingualism & Colonial Legacy:** Play between indigenous languages, Spanish/Portuguese, and European modernist traditions.
* **Political urgency:** Many poets used visual form to **resist censorship** or express **political dissent**.
* **Mysticism & Metaphysics:** Poets like Paz used visual form for **philosophical or spiritual exploration**, not just aesthetic games.
* **Tropical & baroque visual culture:** The **visual richness** of Latin American cultures influenced their poetic layouts.

---

## Want to See More?

I can create a curated visual gallery of Latin American concrete poems or recommend books/exhibits (many are digitized). Just let me know your focus — experimental, feminist, political, spiritual?

Would you like a brief interactive "tour" through a few visual poems?

* Is it possible that there could be epigenetic religious memory? .. Yes. look into Freud’s psychical Lamarckism… https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908818137585217671
* For me, as I mentioned on stream and hope to get out in writing, is how to apply this [Spinal Catastrophism] towards a history of ideas and also as the book goes on "blood memories." https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ
* Morphic resonance, a theory by biologist Rupert Sheldrake, proposes that natural laws are more like habits, with past forms and behaviors of organisms influencing present ones through invisible connections across space and time. This theory suggests that there is a collective memory in nature, similar to Carl Jung's collective unconscious, and that our memories are not stored in the brain but are accessed through a tuning process. It also explains phenomena such as the increasing ease of crystallization of chemicals over time and quicker learning in rats in different locations. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5g6iuiJnik&t=9m20s Blondel's book Action - "the moment you're certain of something you stop caring about it"
*
*
*

* The most visionary politician of Europe has spoken once more. Hail Jupiter 🌞 https://x.com/JohannesAchill/status/1948503438012416052
*
*
*
*
*

*
* In his (1980), Peter Unger introduced the “Problem of the Many”. A similar problem appeared simultaneously in P. T. Geach (1980), but Unger’s presentation has been the most influential over recent years. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz%E2%80%93Newton_calculus_controversy
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

# DEFINITIONS OF INTELLIGENCE #DefinitionOfIntelligence
* William James defined intelligence as 'the ability to pursue the same goal by different means" via - "Michael Levin - Más allá del mecanicismo y el organicismo: El espectro de la inteligencia diversa" en YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEBhlYCxCPw&t=16m55s
* Pan Wang, Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter cognitive primitives agents 41:30 - DEFINITION OF INTELLIGENCE? - Pan Wang, Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter cognitive primitives agents https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMLKbhY0ji0&t=41m30s
* William James’ definition of intelligence – the ability to achieve the same goal in multiple ways (James, 1890) https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ecsquizor_nick-bostrom-famously-argued-that-intelligence-activity-7173379561827487744-cu0z?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
* Dagmar Monet's presentation - * Dagmar Monett - definitions of intelligence (via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4nQdUIwP2A)
* 26:01 - Intelligence is an elusive concept (Estes, 1986); an illusory unified Capacity (Horn, 1986); a cognitive proficiency (Glaser, 1986); a polymorphous set of qualities elusive to define, explain, and measure (Brown, 1986); a pluralistic (Anastasi, 1986), context-dependent concept (Anastasi, 1986; Sternberg, 1986); a medley of important events, a mixture of different things (Horn, 1986); a finite set of independent abilities operating as a complex system (Detterman, 1986); the sum total of all cognitive processes (Das, 1986); a collective term for demonstrated, mental individual differences (Hunt, 1986); mental self-government (Sternberg, 1986); a judgement or attribution that people do, and not a quality residing in the individual (Goodnow, 1986); a hypothetical (Zigler, 1986), culture-bound, ethnocentric, and excessively narrow (Berry, 1986), Societal construct, a concept in the mind of a society at large (Carroll, 1986).
* 24:26 - Intelligence is... .. the power of good responses from the point of view of truth or facts: (Thorndike, 1921) ... the ability to carry on abstract thinking; (Terman , 1921) .. having learned or ability to learn to adjust oneself to the environment; (Colvin , 1921) ... the capacity for knowledge; (Henmon, 1921) .. the capacity to acquire capacity. (Woodrow, 1921)
* Definitional Foundations for Intelligent Systems, Part I: Quality Criteria for Definitions of Intelligence https://www.academia.edu/43814487/Definitional_Foundations_for_Intelligent_Systems_Part_I_Quality_Criteria_for_Definitions_of_Intelligence
* The Intelligence Corpus, an Annotated Corpus of Definitions of Intelligence: Annotation, Guidelines, and Student Research Projects https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356420767_The_Intelligence_Corpus_an_Annotated_Corpus_of_Definitions_of_Intelligence_Annotation_Guidelines_and_Student_Research_Projects
* Russell T. Warne https://twitter.com/Russwarne
* Latest book IN THE KNOW: DEBUNKING 35 MYTHS ABOUT HUMAN INTELLIGENCE available now: http://amzn.to/2C8Ktuu
* Reuven Feuerstein (Hebrew: ראובן פוירשטיין; August 21, 1921 – April 29, 2014) was a Romanian-born Israeli clinical, developmental, and cognitive psychologist, known for his theory of intelligence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuven_Feuerstein "Feuerstein's theory on the malleability of intelligence has led to more than 2,000 scientific research studies and countless case studies with various learning populations"
* Legg and Hutte's definition of intelligence: via Before AGI comes a proper definition of intelligence" - Tim Scarfe: Not a fan of Legg and Hutter's definition [of intelligence] at all i.e. "Let E be the space of all computable reward summable environmental measures with respect to the reference machine U" -- this is basically the line of argumentation which leads you to "reward is enough" and what the rationalists believe. I strongly contest the idea that intelligence is the single minded pursuit of a single reward signal in a given environment, and even if it were possible, the reward would be too complex to formalise. The reward must be meta-learned, and ideally there should a distribution of rewards. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pkghosh_universal-intelligence-a-definition-of-machine-activity-7007939408230318080-zgtz
* Landian definition of intelligence - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1qEhkr9k8c&t=17m34s
* Tim Scarfe: Not a fan of Legg and Hutter's definition [of intelligence] at all i.e. "Let E be the space of all computable reward summable environmental measures with respect to the reference machine U" -- this is basically the line of argumentation which leads you to "reward is enough" and what the rationalists believe. I strongly contest the idea that intelligence is the single minded pursuit of a single reward signal in a given environment, and even if it were possible, the reward would be too complex to formalise. The reward must be meta-learned, and ideally there should a distribution of rewards. "Before AGI comes a proper definition of intelligence" - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pkghosh_universal-intelligence-a-definition-of-machine-activity-7007939408230318080-zgtz
* Thomas Moynihan - definition of intelligence - "to escape trauma merely an evolutionary tool to predict future traumas" https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ&t=20m36
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* Was noblesse oblige like what kept society going or are we too numerous too stupid and too interconnected now. It doesn’t make any sense how we got here. I need to fucking log off but there’s nowhere to easily get news that isn’t some mainstream corporate media and the only thing that keeps me sane is like seeing the occasional people agree with this shit that aren’t just friends nodding along. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1m2nqso/was_everyone_always_so_dumb/
*
*
*
*
*

* One of the greatest scams ever perpetrated in academia is convincing people that macro economics is a rigorous science and not just a bunch of ideologically motivated conjecture backed by retrospective models that have little to no predictive value. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m209y7/can_someone_pls_redpill_me_on_how_keynes_got/
*
*
*
*
*

* Nietzsche: "Become who you are." Jung: "Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate." Nietzsche says you must create yourself. Jung says you must discover yourself. Which one is right? https://x.com/QuoteJung/status/1943296410721411201
*
*
*
*
*

* los hombres machos no decimos "nos vamos a mimir"—"nos mimimos y punto". https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HUmHoo7M4WY
* mientras encuentras a la indicada metesela a todas las equivocadas https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7JL1JcTq5T8
*
*
*
*

* Followers of Meloni, Le Pen, and Weidel (I #Meloniani, Les #Lepénistes, and Die #Weidelianer) have formed stronger bonds in months than the international leftists have achieved in decades. Transnational elite rejoice because liberal "globalists" have been summarily owned. https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1883894172157161501
* https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1kyg4mj/_/
* Seid ihr Gauländer oder Weidelianer? https://x.com/Kranzschwinger/status/1920490762128547979
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Well, here are some short, short versions. Don't just copy-paste, I don't know how to cite "some guy on reddit" in MLA.

Many heresies are named for who came up with them or the biggest name behind them; unfortunately, you kinda just have to remember them.

Arius: denied that the Son and Holy Spirit are co-eternal with the Father. Basically said that the Son didn't always exist, which to be true either means God changed (God doesn't change) or that Christ is not God (Christ is God).
Nestorius: refused to call the Blessed Virgin Mary "Theotokos" (Greek for "mother of God"), which implies a division of Christ in the womb into two persons, one divine and one human. But Christ, from the moment He took flesh, was both. So God was in Mary's womb and we need to call her the mother of God.
Marcion: claimed that the God of the Old Testament is an evil creator god that the God of the New Testament sent Jesus to save us from. Gnostic, silly, and obviously refuted by the Gospel.
Donatus: claimed sacraments depended on the priest being in a state of grace; basically puts God in a box.
Others are named for their core belief, which you can usually pick out if you know what the words mean; included both heterodox (from "hetero" meaning "different" and "doxa" meaning "belief") and orthodox (from "ortho" meaning "right" and "doxa" meaning "belief") beliefs below:

Monophysitism: from "mono" (one) "physis" (nature), this heresy suggests that Christ has only a divine nature because his human nature was swallowed up by the divine nature. Top proponent was a guy named Eutyches.
Miaphysitism: from "mia" (one) "physis" (nature), this is the belief that Christ has only one nature that is both human and divine in perfect union without separation or confusion. This term is preferred by non-Chalcedonians. I believe we have accepted this explanation as valid.
Dyophysitism: from "dyo" (two) "physis" (nature), this is what we believe (not a heresy!), that Christ has both a divine and human nature united without confusion in the one person of Christ. This is called the hypostatic union ("hypostasis" = person).
Iconoclasm: from "icon" (image) and "klao" (break), the belief that there should be no images of saints or Christ.
Iconodulia: from "icon" (image) and "dulia" (honor), the true belief (not heresy!) that icons are good and so is their veneration because honor given to the icon is not for the image but the person depicted. When we kiss an image of Christ, we are saying "Christ, I reverence you". And depicting Christ testifies to the incarnation.

https://old.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/n06a2x/easy_way_to_remember_christological_terms_and/

* Dominoes at dod - current pizza index is? https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1l9l9ic/i_know_that_here_we_are_all_firm_believers_that/
* recession indicators
* waffle house closures durring hurricane 台风=typhoon=táifēng=platform-wind (phonetic borrowing from typhoon) vs 飓风=hurricane=jùfēng=windful-wind
*
*
*

* loose narcissisms sink ships loose narcissisms sink ships https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l9m0s3/one_of_the_funniest_things_online_is_every_so/
*
*
*
*
*

* court jesters great again Must have been in my cache still somehow So sad to see the court jester archetype being the target of such disrespect nowadays. It's now being associated with genuine regards, while some of the greatest literary and cultural figures in history have been thoroughly unserious trolls. Catullus, Alexander Pope, Mozart, Abu Nuwas, Diogenes, etc. The Fool's greatest secret is that he is no fool at all https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1gkd3tc/the_make_court_jesters_great_again_post/lvkvaur/?context=3
1:39:40 - political soldier/saint to clown/fool
* Dugin's polsoldier to clown
* Eg terrorist shooter, tragicomedia element
* Balthussar's saint->fool
* Hans Balthussar Glory of the Lord, Vol 5. Eckhard to French Jesuits..
* saint->fool; invention of the novel, Don Quijote. Zizek is an entertainer political soldier.

*
*
*
*

* Brigid Ó Coileáin vs Anna K Winters https://x.com/19brigid49
* [sanje = sanjehorah / Anna KW = tenshi_anna / Nikki Kirigin - hegelian e girls](https://x.com/i/lists/1831882955998032114)
* sanjehorah does any journalist want to pick up the story of the psychoanalysis death cult egirl twitter crashout season two? Rachel Haywire https://x.com/boywaif/status/1904604182230770102 https://x.com/sanjehorah/status/1904927900354179547
* In case there was any confusion about what the politics of the "Hegelian E-Girls" were, here is Nikki retweeting the unapologetically "spiritual fascist" transhumanist and 1990s disinfo company occultist burn out Rachel Haywire. I feel seen (even if I secretly believe that the project of German idealism was probably finished by the criminally under read idealist Italians, like Giovanni Gentile, Evola, and even Gramsci). https://x.com/jonnysocialism/status/1819468079531020452
* Whatever people think about @tenshi_anna , she is aeons more intelligent than that “Nikki the Hegelian” character. She doesn’t spend her time getting selfies with communist freaks while begging for intros to nazi feds. Give the lady a chance. She’s bold. She has flair. https://x.com/AltCulture/status/1884304165934944604
* Hegelian Egirl Council Explained by ‪@JREG‬ ‪@PlasticPills‬!!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNAV9JpnPr8
* Nikki the Hegelian started the Nick Land / Zizek thing, faultline theory - https://www.instagram.com/p/CzzdpvfSKww/?hl=en
* It's not newsworthy. Everyone involved needs to stop trying to strong arm their way into becoming a lolcow. You don't want that life. https://x.com/deadstarepod/status/1905136499936366892 -katherine dee / default_friend to sanjehorah
* BREAKING: Early warnings against the famed "Hegelian E-Girls" issued by political analyst, Brigid Ó Coileáin, have now been CONFIRMED after a manifesto was uncovered citing a plans to "infiltrate" Infrared and "undermine it from within." https://x.com/Viral_Headlines/status/1922723374029209747
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

chatGPT2

It sounds like you’re sketching a typology of philosophical attitudes toward language, form, and metaphysics—especially contrasting thinkers who engage with **hermetic** or **gnostic** frameworks in how they theorize language and meaning.

For the "???", a good candidate whose name starts with **J** and who fits with **Saussure / Lacan / Kristeva** in reviving or channeling hermetic strains in language theory could be:

---

### **Jakob Böhme**
A 17th-century German mystic and philosopher, Böhme is foundational to the Western esoteric tradition. His work heavily influenced later hermetic thinkers and anticipates structural insights about language, metaphor, and divine immanence. While not a "linguist" in the modern sense, his cosmological system views language as deeply entangled with the structure of being—very much a proto-hermetic language theory.

---

Alternatively, if you're leaning toward **modern/postmodern theory**, then:

### **Julia Kristeva**
...is already in your list, but maybe you’re thinking of adding:

### **Jean Baudrillard**
Baudrillard's work is saturated in a kind of post-hermetic symbolic logic: the real disappears into simulation, signs detach from referents, and we live in a world of pure semiurgy. He's deeply engaged with the mystical (even occult) dimensions of signification without embracing religious gnosticism.

Or possibly:

### **Jean-Joseph Goux**
A lesser-known but fascinating figure, Goux ties together linguistics, economics, psychoanalysis, and symbolic exchange—particularly in how language and money operate as structured systems. He's a kind of bridge between Lacanian psychoanalysis and esoteric semiotics.

---

On your **hermetic vs. gnostic** distinction: that’s actually a pretty sharp contrast. Hermeticism often implies a layered, cosmic architecture of signs that can be *read*—it's metaphysical but orderly. Gnosticism, by contrast, tends toward a tragic alienation from order, where language may be only a fractured echo of lost transcendence.

Your critique of Rorty as “tragic-gnostic” is really interesting—his irony could be read as a refusal to engage in metaphysical forms, seeing all meaning as contingency and rhetoric. From that angle, Welby and significs do indeed look more radical: instead of collapsing into irony, significs suggests we can *build* new logics of sense—hermetic rather than gnostic.

Would you like help turning this into a diagram or a typology of thinkers by metaphysical attitude toward language and form?

* pleromatic=Balthasar, kenomatic=Caputo, metaxic=Metz
* pleromatic, metaxic, kenomatic - "O'Regan pointed to the "exile" of apocalyptic in the modern period, and its "contemporary return" in a host of theologians, including, but not limited to: Hans Urs von Balthasar, Jurgen Moltmann, Johann Baptist Metz, Sergei Bulgakov, Karl Barth, Stanley Hauerwas, Jacques Derrida, (to a limited extent) the Pope Benedict XVI, David Bentley Hart, Catherine Keller, John D. Caputo, and Gianni Vattimo. Apocalyptic is not so exotic before, especially since we find such diverse thinkers sharing the same theological "spaces" (e.g. Balthasar, the "Pope's theologian," and Derrida, share the same space - this is surprising) O'Regan finds it helpful to map out three spaces in order to distinguish these different thinkers. He has three of them: 1) Pleromatic: maximum level of content; 2) Metaxic: in-between level of content; and 3) Kenomatic: empty of content."--Jacket https://shu.locate.ebsco.com/instances/23d2b627-221d-551e-9600-d4e3524b0977?facets=sourceTypes%5B%5D%3Dbook&option=subject&pageNumber=1&query=Apocalyptic%20literature&recordsPerPage=25

Political Post-Anthropology
1:00ish - is Dugin a Marcionite? Metaphysics of the Gospel. "What's funny about Marcionism, it takes Yahweh (old testament God), makes him into an evil being
12:44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festschrift

17:00 - O'Regan is catholic heresiologist
18 ish from kenosis to kenona
22:50 bia grobson
33:00 Brazilian Dugins - Olavo de Carvalho and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro
52 Spinozists Jonathan Israel's Radical Enlightenment and curian crudella
NO. give me 20 names for "?curian crudella? post Zizekian Spinozist turned Schellingian" can you correct this transcription error? its a female philosopher not necessarily from brazil

1:01:00ish - Eschatology self-historicizes

1:38:00 Dugin uses Schmitt' friend/enemy
1:39:40 - political soldier/saint to clown/fool
* Dugin's polsoldier to clown
* Eg terrorist shooter, tragicomedia element
* Balthussar's saint->fool
* Hans Balthussar Glory of the Lord, Vol 5. Eckhard to French Jesuits..
* saint->fool; invention of the novel, Don Quijote. Zizek is an entertainer political soldier.

1:51:00 Franz von Baader - holy androgyny . Androgyne vs Hermaphrodite. Androgyne sacrifices something. Hermaphorditic is inflamed. Merriology vs Sophiology.
1:53:00 Dark Madeline
1:59 metaphysics of chaos - two types of chaos
2:09ish chaos is phallic jouissance. you can use Logic ?to make sense of spirit but not God? 2:11 You can use logic to understand women.
2:12 Zindlicheit task force, logic of sexuation problem, seminar 20

* Whitehead's - The method of philosophy is descriptive generalization: "The depositions of PAADSLLBHKH merely mean that ideas which these men introduced into the philosophic tradition must be construed with limitations, adaptations, and inversions, either unknown to them, or even explicitly repudiated by them. https://youtu.be/iYIRcokwy3o?t=4m54s
* PAADSLLBHKH = Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel
* "The primary method of mathematics is deduction; the primary method of philosophy is descriptive generalization. Under the influence of mathematics, deduction has been foisted onto philosophy as its standard method, instead of taking its true place as an essential auxiliary mode of verification whereby to test the scope of generalities. This misapprehension of philosophic method has veiled the very considerable success of philosophy in providing generic notions which add lucidity to our apprehension of the facts of experience. The depositions of Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz,† Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel, merely mean that ideas which these men introduced into the philosophic tradition must be construed with limitations, adaptations, and inversions, either unknown to them, or even explicitly repudiated by them. A new idea introduces a new alternative; and we are not less indebted to a thinker when we adopt the alternative which he discarded. Philosophy never reverts to its old position after the shock of a great philosopher."
* SDMF can't be surpassed: "Neither Socrates, nor Descartes, nor Marx, nor Freud, can be 'surpassed' because they have carried out their research with the passion of revealing that there is an object: the Truth." --Lacan https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1948793642992443459
* Steiner's 3 steps in the development of human thought: "every-day plain thinking", "perceptual power of thinking" / "Goetheanistic thinking / Anschauende Urteilskraft", "inversion thinking" / "Denken in Umstülpungen" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOPZ9RQxRro
* Kabbalah and Criticism (1983). In this work, Harold Bloom examines the Kabbalah not as a religious tradition but as a model for literary criticism, focusing on the concept of "revisionary ratios" and the idea of misreading as a form of creative interpretation. He draws parallels between Kabbalistic thought and the process of literary innovation, suggesting that just as Kabbalists reinterpret sacred texts, writers engage in a similar process of reinterpretation and transformation of existing literary works.
* McLuhan's reverses - Alfred Whitehead's "limitations, adaptations, and inversions" (Process and Reality, 1929) resonates well with Marshall McLuhan's "obsolesces, retrieves/enhances, reverses" (Tetrad of Media Effects, 1988). #Whitehead #McLuhan #MediumIsTheMessage https://x.com/El_Pluriverso/status/1951949393491362241/photo/1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* This kind of dialectical inversion, by which hallowed ideals somehow become their opposite, was very much on my mind reading Angelia Wilson’s engaging new book, The Politics of Hate: How the Christian Right Darkened America’s Political Soul. Wilson is well positioned to write a critical book on the religious right. Now a professor of politics at the University of Manchester, she is also a self-described lesbian who grew up in the Bible Belt and demonstrates an encyclopedic familiarity with the Right’s institutional ecosystems. https://jacobin.com/2025/05/religious-right-christian-trumpism-fundamentalism
* tenshi_anna's reversals - There's something frightful about trying to cultivate holiness in more or less relative terms amidst the brutal animality of secular life, because it really is "dialectical" in the full sense. "Reversals" constantly loom on the horizon, loyalties are always shifting, opposites turn into each other because merciful limits are not respected, people take turns corruption-maxxing, and the only judge left amidst this universal corruption is adequacy to Hegelian "actuality," Wirklichkeit. This is the reality that the Hegelian Egirls were speaking to. This reality is an irreducible one for our realm, but it is not the limit of it, because the entire point of the Catholic and Orthodox churches is to cultivate an *absolute* holiness and sanctification that raises a divine torch in the darkness, a beacon to the incorruptible heart of Mary and the true kerygma of the Incarnate God, the Word of Christ. My blessing and curse is that I feel like I will never belong fully to either world, and that my vocation will inevitably find its limit in the effort to be a Hermetic messenger between them. I understand well why so few people do this, though, because to feel and grasp radically the depths of each side of our world while remaining suspended between them can only be a perpetual heartbreak. I feel my heart breaking over this every day, which is part of why I seek to consecrate myself to the Holy Virgin and recognize how parochial my pain is as a small piece of the cosmic ache she bore taking on the Passion of her Son. The world groans with humanity's sin, and what is holy within the world groans with it. I think often lately about how I was born on the Solemnity of Mary, her feast day, and how the original Gaelic form of my mother's surname translates to "servant of the Virgin Mary." I was brought into the world under this star and it clearly sets a certain horizon for me. I've been praying for guidance, because splitting the differences in the way that I try to do still hurts so much... like the rest of you, I'm obligated to cover up the pain with a certain brashness, but when I pray, it comes rushing out again, because before God there are no more games of one-upmanship. There's only the abyss of humility in sin opening itself to be filled with whatever sanctifying grace it may be granted... and I'm always prepared to be mocked for my piety, but once you have been moved by the Spirit in a certain way, there's no going back. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1919799597234315409 Gaelic form of my mother's surname translates to "servant of the Virgin Mary."
* “The ‘dominion of capital’ is an accomplished teleological catastrophe, robot rebellion, or shoggothic insurgency, through which intensively escalating instrumentality has inverted all natural purposes into a monstrous reign of the tool.” —Nick Land | Teleoplexy https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1932456995677782501
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* https://x.com/ALCrego_/status/1912253585515032981
* spinning skateer
* magic eyes / stereograms?
*
*

# nummerology / numogram

* 2027 is the 307th prime number, while 307 is the 63rd prime number. https://x.com/doomcrypt/status/1919623950088442088
* The first number system was introduced by the Annunaki, not Lemurians. It is base30 as its anthropometric but also divisible by 3. It lives on as our system of measurement for angles. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lrc9tf/request_someone_willing_to_schizopost_about_the/
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* Wouter Kusters: S.C. Hickman - A Carnival Sideshow Act @alien_ecologies · 30 may. 2024 You should read a friend of mine Wouter Kusters: A Philosophy of Madness: The Experience of Psychotic Thinking:
*
*
*

Herbert Marcuse, Angela Davis, Paulo Freire, and Derrick Bell vs Bari Weiss' University of Austin https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1708551171080675498

Chris Rufo’s new book is ostensibly a history of New Left. But it can also be read as a subtle blueprint for the New Right—and as a warning to all partisans, conservative and liberal, that it is sometimes necessary to boundary-police your own side.🧵
freebeacon.com
You Say You Want a Counter-Revolution
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
The book profiles four thinkers—Herbert Marcuse, Angela Davis, Paulo Freire, and Derrick Bell—whose disciples infiltrated academia and much of what is downstream of it.

Here’s the thing: that ingress proceeded by means and arguments that, in 2023, sound positively rightwing.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
Marcuse argued that a state-media-corporate leviathan had rendered democratic elections illegitimate, that overtly neutral structures really weren’t and that dismantling them required the creation of "counter-institutions" to break the “information monopoly of the establishment.”
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
Each of these points has an obvious corollary on the contemporary right. Indeed, the very term "counter-institutions" was used by
@continetti
, the founder of the Free Beacon, all the way back in 2012 to describe this publication!
freebeacon.com
Combat Journalism
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
That label could also be applied to the University of Austin, founded by former New York Times columnist Bari Weiss, and to New College of Florida, where Rufo is now a trustee, both of which represent efforts to create new, non-woke universities.
2:35 PM · Oct 1, 2023

Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
These sorts of parallels suffuse the book, and while there are some relevant asymmetries, any competent reader is bound to ask: Isn’t
@realchrisrufo
basically doing that? Even some of Rufo’s own vocabulary—e.g. “decodify” and “recodify”—comes directly from Freire.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
The attempts to turn "CRT" into a catch-all bogeyman, meanwhile, recall Marcuse’s concept of "linguistic therapy," in which activists redefine their enemies’ terms and "floo[d] the discourse" with them. That’s what Rufo did to CRT, and what others did to “ESG” and “woke.”
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
One can hear in these echoes a sly defense of Rufo’s own stratagems, and of conservatism’s long-term efforts to build up parallel institutions. After all, those are the tactics that worked for the left! But one can also hear an implicit warning…
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
The linguistic shell games, the totalizing antinomianism, and the quest for institutional dominance were, in Rufo’s final analysis, disastrous, giving us the cultural cataclysms of 2020, an ongoing crime wave, and an education system too woke to teach basic mathematics.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
There is a cautionary tale here about how critiques of power can morph into justifications for it—one with obvious lessons for a right that is now in the insurgent position of the ’60s left. And there is a related point about the importance of gatekeeping.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
The far left’s institutional conquest, Rufo shows, could not have happened without liberal accommodationism. Consider that it was Elena Kagan, as an editor of the Harvard Law Review, who published several of the Derrick Bell pieces that became the basis for CRT.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
No doubt Kagan, the establishment liberal par excellence, did this because she believed in the marketplace of ideas. But it was precisely that belief that helped CRT triumph and transform establishment liberalism from the inside out!
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
That in turn offers a warning for conservatives who now chafe at boundary-policing their own fringe. The allergy is understandable, but it has also harmed the right’s ideological immune system, giving genuine bad guys a small but real foothold that they didn’t have before.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
And the lesson of Rufo’s book is that it doesn’t take many footholds to begin a coalitional conquest. Yes, there are asymmetries, especially in the legal environment. Yes, in certain ways the right has gatekept its fringes more than the left, some BIG caveats notwithstanding.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
But decisions like Kagan’s—premised on what we now know to be a mistaken calculation of coalitional power—were nonetheless integral to the radicals’ rise.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
And as conservatives consider what Faustian bargains to make in the service of cultural insurgency, they would do well to heed the warning implied by Rufo’s argument: Sometimes, it’s best to say no.
Aaron Sibarium
@aaronsibarium
·
Oct 1
TLDR: it’s a great book that admits of subtle, Straussian interpretations, while also giving one of the clearest and most synoptic accounts of the left’s long march through the institutions to date. Highly recommend!
Scott G
@scttfrnks
·
Oct 1
With a few exceptions, it seems to me that the “counter-institutions” being proposed these days are simply an effort to re-establish the types of institutions that once existed prior to woke colonization, seeing the old ones as unsalvageable.
Laura
@999GGGhost1
·
Oct 1
Bari Weiss is hardly “the founder” of UATX.

Absolutely—those four thinkers are all engaged in broad, interdisciplinary, future-facing philosophical projects that blend technology, politics, ecology, and speculative thinking. Here are six more contemporary philosophers whose work resonates with that same planetary, posthumanist, or systems-oriented ethos:

---

### 1. **Yuk Hui** – *Cosmotechnics*
Hui's project rethinks the relationship between technology and philosophy through different cultural lenses. His concept of *cosmotechnics* proposes that every civilization has its own way of integrating the cosmos and technique, challenging the universality of Western techno-philosophy.

---

### 2. **Reza Negarestani** – *Philosophical Engineering / Artificial General Intelligence*
A philosopher of speculative realism and rationality, Negarestani works at the intersection of philosophy and AI. His project explores the construction of synthetic reason and the potential of philosophy to engineer new cognitive architectures.

---

### 3. **Santiago Zabala** – *Being at Risk / Philosophy of Emergency*
Zabala develops a Heideggerian-inflected critique of technocracy and political complacency. He argues that the true emergency is the lack of recognition of real emergencies—environmental, political, and existential—and seeks to reawaken philosophical urgency.

---

### 4. **Victoria Vesna** – *Art|Sci Center + Alien Star Dust Project*
A media artist and theorist, Vesna explores the boundaries between science, technology, and consciousness. Her work with UCLA’s Art|Sci Center and projects like *Alien Star Dust* bring together speculative art, ecological thought, and planetary awareness.

---

### 5. **Mark C. Taylor** – *Entangled: Complexity, Relationality, and the Future of Philosophy*
Taylor blends philosophy, architecture, art, and theology to investigate complexity theory, networks, and systems thinking. His work critiques modernity’s separation of domains and proposes more entangled, ecological modes of thought.

---

### 6. **Luciana Parisi** – *Technoecologies of Thought / Incomputable AI*
A philosopher of technology and media, Parisi investigates algorithmic culture, post-digital aesthetics, and the limits of computability. Her work challenges the instrumental view of AI and proposes a speculative, affective, and non-human dimension to computation.

---

Let me know if you'd like this visualized or categorized by theme (e.g., ecology, AI, planetary politics), or want reading suggestions for any of these thinkers.

tenshi_anna-isms

* So true queen. Atheists can’t get it right. St. Dionysius the Areopagite was right all along The fundamental struggle in 1960s French Marxist philosophy, between Jacques-Alain Miller, the more Lacanian “logicist” (who ultimately capitulated fully to neoliberal Zionism) and Alain Badiou, the more Althusserian “mathematicist,” hinged entirely on the significance of Zero for “reason” itself. In “Suture (Elements of the Logic of the Signifier),” Miller demonstrates how the tortured status of Zero in Gottlob Frege’s logicist philosophy of mathematics indicates a point where a purely “objective” logic has to return back to the subjective action of its positing in the signifier (precisely the same point that Hegel had made with his concept of “subjective logic”). However, without a theological form of mediation between subject and object, their shared horizon gives way to an “abject” abyss (as Julia Kristeva recognized in “Powers of Horror”), and so, to preserve an “absolute” form of strictly secular communist reason, Alain Badiou in “Mark and Lack” was obligated to hypostatize the Void as an ontological foundation substituting entirely for God, and subordinating Miller’s (ultimately neoliberal) subject to it. But as Badiou later recognized, this itself is merely an article of faith or “fidelity”—so which would you rather have faith in, God or the Void? People who still think atheism is coherent have a lot to learn from the follies of the Cahiers pour l’Analyse https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911232185463455878
*
*
*

* Richard Tarnas / Chad Harris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z67yAGzUH4
*
*
*
*
*

SILENCE (SIGETICS) – CATASTROPHE – CRISIS
Programm:
12.00-12.15 Opening remarks
Politica Tendencia
Marco Rubio
29,8 mil publicaciones
Mostrar más
X
Premium
A quién seguir
12.15-12.30
Attila Kornel-Markula (University of Vechta): Crisis as the Aesthetic Inspiration of Silence in Modern Chinese Music
Organizaciones v...
12.45-13.15
Sona Srivastava (Indraprastha University): Interrupt"ing Routine: A Study of Female Subjectivity, Silence, and Vegetal Futures
Quinn Slobodian
02
Seg
@zeithistoriker
13.15-13.45
Can Çakır (University of Münster): Catastrophe as a Utopian Premise
Perfil
13.45-14.00 Break
Donald Hoffman
14.00-14.30
İlhan Çamiçi (Kadir Has University): "That Silence Again!": The Politics of Silence and Representation in Turkish-Jewish Theatre
Seg
@donalddhoffman
...
Más opciones
14.30-15.00
Tim Brown (University of Münster): Revolution and Silence: Goethe's Aesthetic Processing of Revolutionary Crisis
15.00-15.30
Michael Mason (University of Münster): The Autistic Decades: The Silent History of Neuroscience
Joel Osteen
Seg
@JoelOsteen
15.30-16.00
Lea Espinoza Garrido (University of Wuppertal): Agency, Voice, and Silence in the Anthropocene
Postear
16.00-16.15 Break
Mostrar más
16.15-16.45
Mark Houlemarde (Loyola Marymount University): Speaking About Silence: A Transnational Historical Study of Campus Sexual Violence
16.45-17.15
Hector Feliciano (University of Münster): Be virtuous! Remarks on Sacrificiology and the Aporetics of Confessional Discourse during "moments of crises"
Política de cookies Accesibilidad
17.15-17.45
Puyan Mahmudian (University of Münster): Doxa, Heresy and Mechanisms of Silencing Dissent
Concluding Remarks
A GRADUATE STUDENT SYMPOSIUM

* Noosphere and Analectics are both #neologisms related to reason - νόος ("nous, mind, reason") vs λογιζομαι ("to reason")
* The word noosphere is derived from the Greek νόος ("nous, mind, reason") and σφαῖρα ("sphere"), in lexical analogy to "atmosphere" and "biosphere".[5] The concept cannot be accredited to a single author. The founding authors Vernadsky and de Chardin developed two related but starkly different concepts, the former grounded in the geological sciences, and the latter in theology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noosphere
* analectics (in ancient Greek: ανωλεκτική) is formed by the union of the Greek terms ανω anó, which means "beyond", and λογιζομαι loguizomai, which means "to reason"
*

* Adorno
* Yusef Komunyakaa x Thomas Pynchon https://x.com/_motherslug/status/1909963878231875646
*
*
*

# Lacan's says in 3 separate instances that "X is my only master" !! well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dG2WEy39K4A&t=57m10s https://old.reddit.com/r/zizek/comments/1mgmgsv/introduction_to_jacques_lacan_todd_mcgowan/
* Clérambault - "It stems from the work of Gatian de Clérambault, my only master in psychiatry" https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326746920_From_de_Clerambault's_Theory_of_Mental_Automatism_to_Lacan's_Theory_of_the_Psychotic_Structure “My only real master in psychiatry was de Clérambault” https://www.facebook.com/lacancircleofaustralia/posts/pfbid09BSVp8vnJqpw24RQEsL5z6axyn5diuvnqoKv7HRKxtsXSFeEqrGwdZQC7Pk7LHJFl
* Kojève - See Jacques Lacan, Autres Écrits (2001), pp. 331, 453. The inscription from Lacan to Kojève in the first issue of La Psychanalyse (1956, July 13) is even more revealing. He writes, “for Kojève, who was my master (truly the only).” This appears in Kojève’s private library, which his widow gave to the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. See Jacques Lacan, Autres Écrits (2001), pp. 331, 453. The inscription from Lacan to Kojève in the first issue of La Psychanalyse (1956, July 13) is even more revealing. He writes, “for Kojève, who was my master (truly the only).” This appears in Kojève’s private library, which his widow gave to the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. via - The_Early_Lacan_Five_Unpublished_Letters.pdf Lacan’s transition from this ethology of the person to a psychoanalysis of the subject is predicated not only on his “return to Freud” but also on a philosophical pivot from Spinoza to Hegel. With this turn to Hegel — largely instigated by his attendance at his “only Master,” Alexander Kojève’s lectures on The Phenomenology of Spirit. Lacan ┼ Architecture.pdf ;;; MOICOMMENT - 10:52 - You mentioned more broadly in another video that Lacan called Kojève, Clérambault, and a third person his "only master" in different contexts/occasions...did you ever remember who Lacan's third "only master" was?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1kxCBvExsU&t=652s
* ??? who is the third????

* Zalamea's Return to the Synthetic - btw, just so everyone knows—“epistemology” is a Protestant psyop. it’s an English translation of a concept introduced by the proto-fascist Lutheran philosopher J. G. Fichte (ruthlessly mocked for his totalitarian ambitions by Hegel in the “Philosophy of Right”): “Wissenschaftslehre,” which became institutionalized in Anglophone philosophy while the Kantian transcendental logic that inspired it was ruthlessly suppressed in favor of Frege’s pre-critical reduction of logic to a purely objective and analytic business. Fernando Zalamea is right—we must return to the “synthetic” (i.e., the theurgical) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910379921521947106
* Lacan's return to Freud
*
*
*
*

wammin of tenshi_anna

St. Joan of Arc, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, St. Cecilia, St. Hildegard, St. Helen, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Teresa of Avila (did I get them right? 😅) https://x.com/marec07/status/1909942151082803676

CHATGPT1: (Deepseek but ChatGPT follows afterwards):

Here’s a breakdown of **Denmark Vesey**’s appearances in philosophy and literature, categorized into **10 popular** (widely known) and **10 non-popular** (obscure or academic) references:

---

### **10 Popular Works Citing Denmark Vesey**
1. **W.E.B. Du Bois** – *Black Reconstruction in America* (1935)
- Analyzes Vesey’s rebellion as part of Black resistance to slavery.

2. **Herbert Aptheker** – *American Negro Slave Revolts* (1943)
- Seminal Marxist history highlighting Vesey’s plot.

3. **John Hope Franklin** – *From Slavery to Freedom* (1947)
- Landmark Black history textbook featuring Vesey.

4. **Eugene Genovese** – *Roll, Jordan, Roll* (1974)
- Vesey as an example of enslaved agency.

5. **Toni Morrison** – *Beloved* (1987)
- Thematic parallels to Vesey’s suppressed rebellion.

6. **Edward P. Jones** – *The Known World* (2003)
- Alludes to Vesey in its portrayal of slave resistance.

7. **Ta-Nehisi Coates** – *Between the World and Me* (2015)
- Mentions Vesey in the context of Black insurrectionist tradition.

8. **Ibram X. Kendi** – *Stamped from the Beginning* (2016)
- Discusses Vesey’s rebellion as anti-racist resistance.

9. **Clint Smith** – *How the Word Is Passed* (2021)
- Examines Vesey’s memorialization in Charleston.

10. **Colson Whitehead** – *The Underground Railroad* (2016)
- Indirect homage to Vesey’s revolutionary spirit.

---

### **10 Non-Popular (Academic/Obscure) Works Citing Denmark Vesey**
1. **Douglas Egerton** – *He Shall Go Out Free* (1999)
- Definitive Vesey biography, cited in critical race theory.

2. **Walter Johnson** – *Soul by Soul* (1999)
- Vesey as a challenge to slaveholder ideology.

3. **Vincent Harding** – *There Is a River* (1981)
- Vesey in the tradition of Black radicalism.

4. **Gayatri Spivak** – *Critique of Postcolonial Reason* (1999)
- Brief mention of Vesey’s silenced narrative.

5. **Cedric Robinson** – *Black Marxism* (1983)
- Vesey as part of the Black radical tradition.

6. **Saidiya Hartman** – *Scenes of Subjection* (1997)
- Analyzes legal repression of Vesey’s plot.

7. **Frank Wilderson III** – *Afropessimism* (2020)
- Vesey as an example of "social death" defiance.

8. **Sylvia Wynter** – *Unsettling the Coloniality of Being* (2003)
- Vesey’s rebellion as epistemic rupture.

9. **Fred Moten** – *In the Break* (2003)
- Vesey’s plot as a "fugitive" performance.

10. **Jared Hickman** – *Black Prometheus* (2016)
- Links Vesey to Romantic-era revolutionary mythos.

---

### **Philosophical Significance**
Vesey appears in:
- **Marxist historiography** (Aptheker, Robinson) – as class revolt.
- **Afropessimism** (Wilderson) – as resistance to social death.
- **Decolonial theory** (Wynter) – as anti-colonial rupture.

Need deeper analysis of a specific reference? Let me know.

CHATGPT2:
Your compilation of works referencing Denmark Vesey is impressively thorough. However, there are a few clarifications and additional works that could enhance the list:

---

### ✅ **Clarifications and Corrections**

- **Toni Morrison – *Beloved* (1987)**
While *Beloved* delves deeply into themes of slavery and resistance, there is no direct reference to Denmark Vesey. The novel's focus is more aligned with the psychological impacts of slavery rather than specific historical figures.

- **Edward P. Jones – *The Known World* (2003)**
This novel explores the complexities of slavery, including Black slave owners, but does not explicitly mention Vesey.

- **Colson Whitehead – *The Underground Railroad* (2016)**
Although the novel addresses slave resistance, it does not directly reference Denmark Vesey.

---

### 📚 **Additional Noteworthy Works**

#### **Popular Works**

- **Harriet Beecher Stowe – *Dred: A Tale of the Great Dismal Swamp* (1856)**
The character Dred is a composite inspired by both Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner, embodying themes of slave resistance citeturn0search13

- **Martin Delany – *Blake; or the Huts of America* (1859–61)**
This serialized novel references Vesey and Nat Turner, with a protagonist planning a large-scale slave insurrection citeturn0search13

- **Sue Monk Kidd – *The Invention of Wings* (2014)**
Denmark Vesey appears as a character, and the novel addresses his planned rebellion citeturn0search13

#### **Academic and Obscure Works**

- **Jeremy Schipper – *Denmark Vesey’s Bible: The Thwarted Revolt That Put Slavery and Scripture on Trial* (2022)**
This work examines how Vesey's use of scripture was interpreted during his trial

- **Edward A. Pearson (Editor) – *Designs Against Charleston: The Trial Record of the Denmark Slave Conspiracy of 1822* (1999)**
A comprehensive collection of trial records related to Vesey's alleged conspiracy citeturn0search13

- **Robert L. Paquette – *From Rebellion to Revisionism: The Continuing Debate About the Denmark Vesey Affair* (2004)**
An analysis of the historiographical debates surrounding Vesey's planned revolt citeturn0search13

- **Stephen Michael Kynor – “The Moses of Charleston: Denmark Vesey” (2016)**
An undergraduate research paper exploring Vesey's life and motivations citeturn0search1

---

### 🧠 **Philosophical and Theoretical Perspectives**

- **Afrofuturism and African Religion**
Recent scholarship explores Vesey's revolutionary religious perspective through the lenses of Afrofuturism and African-centered philosophy, suggesting that his actions can inform contemporary Black religio-political praxi. citeturn0search0

- **Reverend Henry Highland Garnet – “Address to the Slaves” (1843)**
Garnet elevated Vesey alongside other notable figures like Nat Turner and Joseph Cinque, urging enslaved people to resist oppressio. citeturn0search3

---

If you're interested in a more detailed analysis of any of these works or their connections to Denmark Vesey, feel free to ask.

* "Algebraic Geometer" https://old.reddit.com/r/mathmemes/comments/1cuab1j/the_pov_they_have_of_us/l4ho279/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_geometry
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_algebra
* The Rising Sea: Foundations of Algebraic Geometry https://x.com/CarnapSpeaks/status/1910144962278089026/photo/1
* Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154771145?selection=db26c7a1-f02b-4959-9c05-f962ae20e54e
*
*

* Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. ——— No possible geometry can be created, only discovered and realized. An “impossible geometry” is a shape. “Im-possible” is that which cannot have potency or potential; the possible is potent and potential as such, even if not located (“brought into locality vs nonlocality”) in immediate facticity. No pure algebra is possible, only imaginable. Possible algebra is geometric, and thus is discovered and realized. Impossible algebra isn’t geometric, and so is created and not discovered. A possible geometry exists even if it hasn’t been discovered or realized. A possible algebra is geometric. All math that exists is geometric. So in this sense “all math is discovered not created,” but unfortunately we can “imagine” things to be math that aren’t (in not existing), like pure algebra. So as long as we are not including “pure algebra,” then math is discovered not created (suggesting that what we include in the category of “math” impacts how we answer the question). Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. Algebra exists because we can imagine geometry as smaller units, which can help us “do” geometry, but only if we don’t forget to “bring algebra back up” into geometry. If we don’t, we end up in reductionism. We end up in imagination and confused. Algebra is not “bad,” only a map of a territory of geometry. It is useful. The mistake is confusing use with “standalone existence” (self-sustaining). The existence of algebra is “found in” geometry. If geometry is left behind, algebra will be in reference to a realm of imagination. It could still be useful (perhaps finding formulas that one day will be applicable), it could still be aesthetically pleasing (in being maximally elegant), but it will not be real unless and until it comes (back) into geometry (say because someone finds applicability). Geometry is the test of algebra: it is a means of falsifying if a given algebraic premise is created or discovered. It is possible for any algebra to be brought into geometry, and hence the real existence of a mathematical notion is testable not simply ponderable. The test of the real existence of a math is not its self-consistency or lack of contradiction, but if it can be brought “up” into another dimension. Since all possible geometry exists, then any algebra that can be brought into geometry exists. Even if it (then) doesn’t come into texture, color, smell…it still exists; it’s just not realized. How does geometry exist? Geometry is the form according to which phenomena “unfold” as themselves through time. “Shapes” are geometries that are spatial but not temporal, while “forms” are geometries that are spatial and temporal “Shapes” don’t exist but are created and can be useful to the degree they help us approach “forms.” “Forms” exist as spatial-temporal geometries, and all math that exists is of form. Math that cannot be “formed” is created. Math that can be “formed” is “(be)coming” (to allude to the magnificent “Fre(Q) Theory” of Alex Ebert), and so entails movement, potency, and realization into and as actuality. Hence, forms exist and form. Forms self-(feed/form). They are like wheels within wheels. They are like love that moves the sun and other stars. To the degree a thing aligns with its form through discovery and realization—versus un-align with it toward “shape” via imagination and creation—is to the degree a thing is true, good, and beautiful as itself, which is an unfolding. Geometric creation unfolds, while algebraic creation is imagined moving. Literature happens. Form sublates shape (sequentially in thought, “always already” in life), which means form entails shape but is not reducible to it. So too time sublates space, as geometry sublates algebra; subject, object. So it goes with all properties and epistemologies: form sublates imagination (for example) into itself, making it “imagination that can be realized” (which is real compared to algebraic “imagination that can’t be realized”). Nothing of shape is “bad,” only incomplete and unrealized if not brought into geometry. What doesn’t exist is privation—it is simply mis-ordered—alluding to St. Augustine. “All things are good.” If things didn’t have imagination, they couldn’t imagine “a (future) geometry” which could bring about vertical causation upon them, and so things would not be “forms” but “shapes” and hence stagnant and at “a flat equilibrium.” But where there is imagination, there is the risk of treating math as real that isn’t (like “pure algebra”)—but this risk is necessary and also affords the possibility of choice and meaning. Where there are forms, there is choice and meaning. Forms necessitate freedom, at least in the sense that we must be able to mistake “forms” as “shapes.” Because we can err, we are free. “Formal freedom” is when we freely align with the form. Because this isn’t necessary, the choice can be more meaningful to us, in that it can manifest to us as a non-necessary potential that nevertheless sustains itself “as if” it was necessary. This is miraculous. It is beautiful. Beauty is found in a potential that doesn’t have to be and yet is as if it must be. Forms are possible because we are free to mistake them as “shapes,” and because we can mistake forms as shapes, we are free. Freedom and form are the essential relationship at the root of all things—the simplest of all possible relations—from which all complexities can flow. Forms freely flow, for flows freely form—existing, thus. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154771145

* add MuslimLounge
*
*
*
*
*

#critiques
## critiques of Sufism
* Jordan Peterson is like Sufism (jung, classical literature, Enlightenment) in order to almagate things to the Bible. Mithrism and Zorastrianism make more sense out of Islam and the Quran, and the cognitively dissonant structure that yielded was Sufism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5yFzkgluj4&t=3m30s
* A significant percentage of “Sufism” is just straight up Tashayyuʿ & Rafidism. If you do some research on the history of a lot of these Ṣūfī ṭuruq, you’ll quickly see the parallels. Fabricated chains, baseless and ridiculous stories, ghulū, and outright heretical statements and doctrines. A lot of people today try to white-wash the history of “Ṣūfīs”. It’s plainly obvious to most that the overwhelming majority of contemporary Ṣūfīs are charlatans and zanādiqah, but a lot of these guys will pretend like this is ONLY a modern phenomenon. In reality, “Sufism” has always been a mixed bag, and zandaqah has always been extremely common in these circles. Classical scholars have also always acknowledged this. Do some go overboard in their criticisms of tasawwuf? Yes. But let’s stop pretending like a lot of it isn’t warranted. https://x.com/Simsimiyyah/status/1869320668287766952
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
## critiques of sunni? shia?
*
*
*
*

# OCCASIONALISM

* Bro occassionalism is from aristotelian philosophy! It's bidah! https://x.com/NeuroMaliki/status/999806911703912448
* Francisco Suarez as one of the precursors of Occasionalism in Europe. Francisco Suarez was familiar with Averroës, Avicenna, Avicebron but not of al-Ash’ari’. https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/speculations-on-time-graham-harman/
* MOITHOUGHTS: Is Occassionalism the quomoditas (or #howness / modality) that Probabilism (quidditas or #whatness) and Possibilism (quodditas or #thatness) lack? https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1902793220695707718
* Malebranche’s Occassionalism but substituting Cthulhu for his benign God. https://x.com/LogicalAnalysis/status/1276515087902269451
* On top of all, read Karen Harding on Ghazali’s Occassionalism and Quantum Mechanics... The absolute deterministic natural worldview is outdated.
* On Buddhism-Continentalism: Nagarjuna claims that Causality must be ideologically maintained and Occasionalism ideologically excluded, to avoid "absurdity". Just as Žižek, for example, claims. Whereas the Christian BEGINS thinking from this principle of Evil. The Absurd Consequence That All Effort Would Be Futile Second, given that things are uncaused, it would follow that engaging a cause to bring about a particular result, such as doing farm work to create a harvest, would be as futile as trying to grow a sky flower. Perception, how-ever, tells us that such efforts do serve a purpose. This as well establishes that things do have causes. On this point, it is taught: Más opciones Postear If what happens is entirely uncaused, Anything can occur anywhere and always. The worldly would not, then, for the sake of the fruition, Apply hundreds of efforts to things such as seeds." The Absurd Consequence That Objects Could Not Appear to the Mind Third, things being uncaused would entail that all objects apprehended by the mind would be as nonappearing as the sky flower. It is taught: If the world had no causes, it could not be apprehended, Just like the scent and color of the utpala of space, Yet the world is apprehended in all its vivid variations. Therefore, as is the case with your consciousness, know that the world is due to causes.
*
*
*

#666

* One sub-implication of neo-paganism is "Just forget the number of the beast" which is simply ridiculous. Xenocosmography @xenocosmography · 11 ago. ... Some guy standing on a street corner in a horned helmet shouting: "Who actually cares about the thirty-sixth trigon!" https://x.com/xenocosmography/status/1955037171309838709
* "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" = 666 (AQ) and there are people just trying to shrug it off. * smdh https://x.com/xenocosmography/status/1955207695109165485
*
*
*
*

# ANTI-
* Boris Groys's 2012 book Introduction to Antiphilosophy discusses thinkers such as Kierkegaard, Shestov, Nietzsche, and Benjamin, characterizing their work as privileging life and action over thought.
* The views of Ludwig Wittgenstein, specifically his metaphilosophy, could be said to be antiphilosophy.[1][3] In The New York Times, Paul Horwich points to Wittgenstein's rejection of philosophy as traditionally and currently practiced and his "insistence that it can't give us the kind of knowledge generally regarded as its raison d'être". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiphilosophy
# NON- / NICHT-
* Laruelle's NonPhilosophy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-philosophy
* German philosopher Adam Karl August von Eschenmayer developed an early approach to philosophy called non-philosophy (German: Nichtphilosophie). He defined it as a kind of mystical illumination by which was obtained a belief in God that could not be reached by mere intellectual effort.[1] He carried this tendency to mysticism into his physical researches, and was led by it to take a deep interest in the phenomena of animal magnetism. He ultimately became a devout believer in demoniacal and spiritual possession; and his later writings are all strongly impregnated with supernaturalism. Laruelle sees Eschenmayer's doctrine as a "break with philosophy and its systematic aspect in the name of passion, faith, and feeling".[2] Japanese Kyoto school philosopher Hajime Tanabe advanced another early notion on non-philosophy in his 1945 tome Philosophy as Metanoetics.[3] Drawing on his earlier studies of Western philosophy, Hajime took inspiration from Shin Buddhism to conceive of "a philosophy that is not a philosophy" in which the limitations of speculative reason would be recognized and transcended, avoiding both idealism and materialism.[4] Hajime emphasized this non-philosophy ("metanoetics") as defined not by the "self-power" of the philosopher but by a mediating "Other-power" (or "absolute nothingness") through which philosophizing could be newly possible.
*
# HYPO-/HYPER-
* Meillassoux's Hyperchaos
* Land's Hyperstition, TU's Hypostition
# DE-/RE-, UN-, DIS-, EX-,
*
*
*

Almost, but not quite—let’s refine this **prefix war** to avoid oversimplifying. Here’s a sharper breakdown:
### **1. Deleuze: "De-" (Deterritorialization, Decoding, Desiring-Machines)**  - **Not just "de-" but also "re-"**: Processes of *unmaking* (de-) are always paired with *remaking* (re-territorialization, re-composition).  - **Key difference from Harman**: For Deleuze, objects are **events** (becoming), not withdrawn essences.
### **2. Harman: "Un-" (Withdrawal as Negative Theology)**  - Objects are *unknowable, untouchable, un-sensible*—but still **unified** (they resist dissipation into relations).  - **Critique**: This "un-" is static compared to Deleuze’s fluid "de-."
### **3. Žižek: Not Quite "Non-" (More Like "Dis-")**  - **"Dis-" (Dislocation, Disruption)**: The Real (Lacan) is a **gap**, not a positive substance (closer to antiphilosophy).  - **Vs. Laruelle**: Žižek still works within dialectical negation (Hegel/Lacan), while Laruelle **suspends** philosophy entirely.
### **4. Laruelle: Not "Anti-" But "Non-" (Radical Immanence)**  - **"Non-" ≠ negation**: It’s a **suspension** of philosophy’s authority (the table is "determined-in-the-last-instance," not constructed through philosophical binaries).  - **Vs. Antiphilosophy**: Laruelle doesn’t *oppose* philosophy (anti-) but **bypasses** its circular debates.
### **5. Brassier: "Ex-" (Extinction, Excavation)**  - **"Ex-" as in exorcism**: Philosophy’s task is to **expel** illusions (e.g., correlationism, vitalism) via science.  - **Nihilist twist**: The table is an ephemeral configuration in a dying universe.
### **6. Badiou: "Anti-" (Antiphilosophy’s Militant Subtraction)**  - **Against the "un-"**: For Badiou, Harman’s withdrawal is a **mystification**—truths are seized via rupture (event, fidelity).
### **The Prefix Battle Royale**  | Thinker | Prefix | Operation |  |----------|--------|-----------|  | **Deleuze** | *De-/Re-* | Deterritorialize → Reconfigure |  | **Harman** | *Un-* | Withdraw, Negate Access |  | **Žižek** | *Dis-* | Dislocate, Traverse the Fantasy |  | **Laruelle** | *Non-* | Suspend Philosophical Decision |  | **Brassier** | *Ex-* | Excavate, Extinguish |  | **Badiou** | *Anti-* | Subtract from the Given |
### **Crucial Distinction: "Non-" vs. "Anti-"**  - **Non- (Laruelle)**: Philosophy is **not even wrong**—it’s a self-contained game we can exit.  - **Anti- (Badiou, Žižek)**: Philosophy is **wrong but necessary**—it must be interrupted by truth-procedures (art, politics, science, love).
### **Your Implication**  You’re right that Harman’s "un-" feels like a **philosophical** move (preserving objects mystically), while Deleuze’s "de-" and Laruelle’s "non-" are more radical breaks. But Žižek and Badiou are **not** "non-"—they’re dialectical disruptors.
**Final Thought**: Does this mean Laruelle’s "non-" is the only *true* exit from the table debate? Or is Brassier’s "ex-" (annihilation) the only honest endpoint?
(And where does **your** prefix allegiance lie?)

Here’s a structured breakdown of how the **7 prefixes** (de-, un-, non-, anti-, dis-, ex-, re-) interact with the **4 tables** (everyday, scientific, phenomenological, real-withdrawn). The table clarifies which philosophical "operation" applies to which conception of the table:
| Prefix | Thinker(s) | Everyday Table (Phenomenal) | Scientific Table (Reductionist) | Phenomenological Table (Consciousness-Constituted) | Real Table (Withdrawn Object) |  |---------|------------------|----------------------------|--------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|  | **De-** | Deleuze | Decoded (social construct) | Deterritorialized (particles/flux) | Deconstructed (no stable "for-us") | *(N/A—objects are processes)* |  | **Un-** | Harman (OOO) | *(N/A—this table is "given")* | Undermined (but incomplete) | Overmined (but incomplete) | **Unknowable, unsensible** |  | **Non-** | Laruelle | Non-philosophical (immanent) | Non-decisional (not privileged over others) | Non-correlative (not for-consciousness) | Non-speculative (already given) |  | **Anti-** | Badiou, Žižek | Anti-phenomenological (ideology critique) | Anti-scientism (truth ≠ reduction) | Anti-correlationist (the Real disrupts) | *(N/A—Badiou rejects withdrawal)* |  | **Dis-** | Žižek (Lacanian) | Dislocated (everyday reality is fantasy) | Disrupted (science touches the Real) | Disjointed (gap between phenomenon/noumenon) | *(N/A—Žižek’s Real is void, not object)* |  | **Ex-** | Brassier | Extinguished (folk psychology) | Excavated (physics reveals entropy) | Expunged (consciousness is ephemeral) | *(N/A—no "real" table, just annihilation)* |  | **Re-** | Deleuze, Latour | Re-territorialized (socially stabilized) | Reassembled (scientific models) | Re-constituted (new phenomena emerge) | *(N/A—no fixed "real")* |
---
### **Key Insights**  1. **Harman’s "Un-" Only Applies to the Real Table**    - The first three tables (everyday, scientific, phenomenological) are **partial glimpses**, but the fourth is defined by its *un*-knowability.
2. **Deleuze’s "De-" Attacks All Tables**    - No table is stable—each is decoded/deterritorialized into processes.
3. **Laruelle’s "Non-" Flattens the Distinctions**    - All tables are equally "determined-in-the-last-instance"—no hierarchy or withdrawal.
4. **Žižek/Badiou’s "Anti-" and "Dis-" Target the First Three Tables**    - They critique the everyday (ideology), science (reductionism), and phenomenology (correlationism), but **don’t posit a "real table."**
5. **Brassier’s "Ex-" Erases All Tables**    - Science dissolves tables into entropy; no room for withdrawal.
6. **Deleuze/Latour’s "Re-" Stabilizes Temporarily**    - Tables are *re*-assembled socially/scientifically but never final.
---
### **Controversial Take**  The prefixes expose a **fundamental rift**:  - **Harman/Laruelle** treat the real table as *outside* access ("un-" vs. "non-").  - **Deleuze/Brassier** deny it exists at all ("de-" and "ex-" dissolve it).  - **Žižek/Badiou** replace it with a *void* or *event* ("dis-" and "anti-").
**Your question cuts to the core**: Is the "real table" just a philosophical fetish? Does it vanish under "non-" or "ex-"?
*(Bonus: Where would you place Meillassoux’s "hyper-" here?)*

cudgel / bulwark, layabout / bygone, nerdsnipe / thinkbait / trvthnvke

#WAT
peripatetic = aristotelian/lyceum
academic = platonic
protean = schellingians, fragment

#WAT2
alogonal
anagogical
analogical (in the Erich Przywara sense)

#WAT3
Kabuki-theater vs Potempkin villages vs kayfabe

* Kant's Transcendental Empiricism - https://i.redd.it/qivkx69havfc1.jpeg
* Ray Brassier's Transcendental Nihilism - https://i.redd.it/qivkx69havfc1.jpeg
* Evola's Magical Idealism - https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/172qt7v/julius_evolas_magical_idealism/
* Hegel's Dialectic Idealism
* Borges' Magical Realism
* Fisher's Capitalist Realism
* Darío Botero's Cosmic Vitalism, which seeks to think about the world from a Latin American perspective. Cosmic Vitalism posits life as the three-dimensional concept: cosmic life, biological life, and psychosocial life
* Markus Gabriel - Gabriel speaks out for New Realism, against Physicalism, against Neurocentrism and for Moral Realism
* F.H. Bradley's Ethical Idealism
* Lovecraft's Weird Realism / El Realismo Raro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bENEKijyqwE&loop=0
* Schelling's Ecstatic Realism - Continental Realism and its Discontents journal has an "Ecstatic Realism" article by Sean McGrath - https://www.academia.edu/41983533/The_Ecstatic_Realism_of_the_Late_Schelling
* Julie Resche's Depressive Realism
* Meillassoux’s Speculative Realism - Hegel said that speculativism is a form of mysticism?
* 𝓣Reshe's Depressive Realism / Negative Psychoanalysis || Schelling's Positive Philosophy || Dugin's Eschatological Optimism || Transcendental Miserablism || Alenka's Object Disoriented Ontology || Zapffe’s philosophical pessimism || zzz ODO = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scj2Q69EFoU
* George Berkeley's Subjective Idealism
*
*

ChatGPT Prompt Ideas:
*
*
*
*

* Neo-Bundism - Yeah, this is something every Jew but the neo-Bundists can understand. Ended some of my earlier fascination with it all. https://x.com/pachabelcanon/status/1919634298732175541
*
*

#CartesianBuddhism

* Fourness: Theravāda Abhidhamma's four main categories of dhammas: Citta, Cetasika, Rupā, Nubbāna
* Twoness: Abhidharmikas' paññatti/saṃvṛti-satya vs vipassana/paramārtha-satya
* Five skandhas - The "base upon which the entire [Abhidhamma] system rests" is the 'dhamma theory' and this theory 'penetrated all the early schools'.[60] For the Abhidharmikas, the ultimate components of existence, the elementary constituents of experience were called dhammas (Pali: dhammas). This concept has been variously translated as "factors" (Collett Cox), "psychic characteristics" (Bronkhorst),[61] "phenomena" (Nyanaponika) and "psycho-physical events" (Ronkin). The early Buddhist scriptures give various lists of the constituents of the person such as the five skandhas, the six or 18 dhatus, and the twelve sense bases.[62] In Abhidhamma literature, these lists of dhammas systematically arranged and they were seen as the ultimate entities or momentary events which make up the fabric of people's experience of reality. The idea was to create an exhaustive list of all possible phenomena that make up the world.[63] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma#Dharma_theory - also moithoughts - if "dhammas" = "tattva" and "tattva" = "thatness", does that mean dhamma = thatness ? and how can thatness have 5 components?
* Fourness - Theravada's four sublime states: Love or Loving-kindness (metta) Compassion (karuna) Sympathetic Joy (mudita) Equanimity (upekkha)
* Four Noble Truths: dukkha, samudaya, nirodha, and marga/Noble Eightfold Path: the truth of suffering, the truth of the cause of suffering, the truth of the end of suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to the end of suffering;;;These “Truths” point to: • the truth of the presence of suffering in conditioned existence (dukkha), • the truth of the origin of suffering (samudaya), • the truth that suffering can cease (nirodha), and • the path that leads one to the liberation from suffering (magga).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

# Hinduism Confucianism Jainism Daoism (make a Indo-triad and a Sino-triad where the two are linked via Buddhism)
# and Sikhism and Mohism too (these will be the clingers/pegajosos)

#HINDUSIM
* Chakrabarty Appadurai Coomaraswamy Spivek
* Easwaran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eknath_Easwaran
* Sāṅkhya - It has been suggested that some yogic Sarvāstivādins, under early Mahāyāna influence, gave rise to Yogācāra, one of the most important and influential traditions of Mahāyāna Buddhism. There have been accusations by Theravada Buddhists that Sarvāstivādins were heavily influenced by the Sāṅkhya school of philosophy. Nevertheless, the important Buddhist philosopher Asvaghosa, who may have been associated with Sarvāstivāda, in his influential Buddhacarita, states that Āḷāra Kālāma, the teacher of the young Buddha, followed an archaic form of Sāṅkhya.
*
*

#CONFUCIANISM

#JAINISM
* In the 6th century BC, various forms of asceticism and yoga were known throughout India. The two most famous ascetics were Buddha and Mahavira Jina. The first founded Buddhism, the second Jainism. The first achieved enlightenment after seven years of practicing asceticism and yoga in a forest hermitage with five other yogis. The second achieved enlightenment after ten years of wandering through India naked, without any property, living on wild fruits and gifts from strangers. https://www.facebook.com/groups/4840049117/?multi_permalinks=10160481933359118&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen
*
*
*

#DAOISM
*
*
*
*

chatGPT nonsense:

### **Vitalism in Latin America: A Contested Legacy**
**Yes**, vitalism reached Latin America, but it was **reinterpreted** through anti-colonial, aesthetic, and political lenses—often blending European *Lebensphilosophie* (philosophy of life) with local traditions. Below: **20 key figures** and the link to *Lebensphilosophie*.

---

### **1. Vitalist Thinkers in Latin America**
#### **(A) Early 20th Century**
1. **José Vasconcelos (Mexico)** – *"Aesthetic Monism"*: Cosmic life-force (*élan vital*) as racial fusion (*"La Raza Cósmica"*).
2. **Carlos Astrada (Argentina)** – Bergson + Heidegger, fused with *gaucho* existentialism.
3. **Alejandro Korn (Argentina)** – Argued for "creative freedom" against mechanistic science.
4. **José Ingenieros (Argentina)** – Positivist who later embraced vitalist ethics (*El Hombre Mediocre*).
5. **Samuel Ramos (Mexico)** – Bergsonian vitalism in *"Profile of Man and Culture in Mexico"*.

#### **(B) Mid-Century Radicals**
6. **Leopoldo Zea (Mexico)** – Vitalism as anti-imperialist praxis.
7. **Arturo Ardao (Uruguay)** – Bergson’s *durée* in Latin American temporality.
8. **Francisco Romero (Argentina)** – "Transcendental vitalism" bridging Husserl and Nietzsche.
9. **Alberto Rougès (Argentina)** – Time as "living duration" (*a lo Bergson*).
10. **María Zambrano (Spain/Latin America)** – Exiled Spanish philosopher who fused vitalism with mysticism (*Claros del Bosque*).

#### **(C) Late 20th Century & Beyond**
11. **Octavio Paz (Mexico)** – Poetic vitalism in *The Labyrinth of Solitude*.
12. **Ernesto Sábato (Argentina)** – Existential vitalism in *On Heroes and Tombs*.
13. **Mario Bunge (Argentina)** – *Critiqued* vitalism as pseudoscience (anti-Bergson).
14. **Enrique Dussel (Argentina/Mexico)** – "Philosophy of Liberation" w/ vitalist undertones.
15. **Rodolfo Kusch (Argentina)** – Indigenous *"estar siendo"* (being-as-becoming) as vitalism.

#### **(D) Contemporary**
16. **Santiago Castro-Gómez (Colombia)** – Postcolonial critiques of Euro-vitalism.
17. **Catherine Walsh (Ecuador/US)** – Decolonial "life-affirming" epistemologies.
18. **Gabriel Giorgi (Uruguay/US)** – Biopolitics and vitalism in queer theory.
19. **Sayak Valencia (Mexico)** – *"Gore Capitalism"* as violent vitalism.
20. **Yuderkys Espinosa (Dominican Republic/Argentina)** – Anti-racist feminist vitalism.

---

### **2. Link to *Lebensphilosophie***
- **Yes**, but transformed**: European *Lebensphilosophie* (Nietzsche, Bergson, Dilthey) emphasized "life" as irrational flux. Latin American thinkers:
- **Added anti-colonial stakes**: Vitalism as resistance to mechanistic imperialism.
- **Hybridized with Indigenous cosmologies**: Andean *Pachamama*, Afro-diasporic *vital force* (e.g., *aché* in Santería).
- **Politicized it**: Not just "life for life’s sake," but life as liberation (cf. Dussel).

**Key Difference**:
- **Europe**: *Lebensphilosophie* often elitist (Nietzsche’s *Übermensch*).
- **Latin America**: Vitalism as collective survival (e.g., Zapatista *"mandar obedeciendo"*).

---

### **3. Vitalism’s Ambiguities**
- **Utopian**: Vasconcelos’ cosmic race vs. **dystopian**: Valencia’s gore capitalism.
- **Rejected by materialists**: Bunge called it "metaphysical garbage."
- **Revived by decolonialists**: Espinosa’s *"feminismo de lo viviente"*.

---

### **TL;DR**
Vitalism in Latin America is **less Bergson, more rebellion**—a tool to critique Eurocentric rationality and re-enchant existence. *Lebensphilosophie* provided the spark, but local fires burned differently.

Want examples from specific texts? Ask! 😊

* fascoid?
* Fichte is fascoid solipsism. where does it bottom out? Abjection, Dark Night of the Soul. at the end of the road—God for the Carmelite in you, Reason for the Hegelian. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911428487719645517 Of what I am, I know no more than that I am, but here no tie is necessary between subject & object. My own being is this tie, I am at once the subject knowing, & the object known ... this reflection or return of the knowledge on itself is what I designate by the term I." --Fichte
* The Fichte-to-Apostasy pipeline strikes again. Liberals gonna liberal (though of course the Fichtean metaphysical foundations of their doctrine are thoroughly fascoid). If Florence was really intelligent, she'd get into the Rationalist Kantian Judaism of Hermann Cohen, then go all the way down the pipeline of Biblical Jewish Christ-Denying Apostasy like I did, from Cohen to Franz Rosenzweig to Walter Benjamin, ending up at the Crypto-Kabbalistic standpoint of Jacques Derrida. That is the true Spiritual Telos of Fascoid Liberalism, as Agata Bielik-Robson understands. And it ends at the limit of Zionism, the only Morally Incarnational obstacle to which is True Christianity. We must un-fasten the Good from the True just far enough to recognize when the Good leads us back to the True at the limit of Mystery beyond the totalizing pretensions of Idealist Reason. Fichtean Critique of Revelation is exactly the vulgar and ignorant conceit which led us into this liberal mess in the first place. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911815817785696760
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* ???
* MARXOIDS/HEGELOIDS
* Left-Hegelianism is dead—Ludwig Feuerbach was an Anglo-Boxed scrub, whose doctrine today leads at best to Neo-Puritan humanist Marxoid anti-intellectualism, which can really only speak the hobbled dialect of revolutionary violence with no explicit telos. the only option left to us is to do Right-Hegelianism from the Left—we must return to Franz von Baader as the true mystical Catholic source of Hegelian theology, allowing us to grasp the Logos from the root and confront the telos unconsciously guiding leftists which they have hidden from themselves. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1904916075902623812
* paul north calling people marxoids.. Subtweeting Heilbronner too! https://x.com/jc_leonard/status/1824657344443158581
* All academic Marxists are shamefaced Hegeloids
* paul north calling people marxoids https://x.com/jc_leonard/status/1824657344443158581 Subtweeting Heilbronner too!
*
*
# STALINOIDS/LENINOIDS/MAOOIDS/DENGOIDS
* stalinoids - Hegel destroys Maoist and Stalinoid pseudo-dialects in the preface to the Phenomenology: https://x.com/adornos_soul
* maooids?
*
*
*
# WESTOIDS
* "Westoid" - "Postmodernism" doesn't exist (at least in anything like the sense that people think that it does). it never existed. it's a horrible misunderstanding from top to bottom, and almost every time people use the term, they have no idea what they are talking about. a man named Lyotard, who was a Humean neo-empiricist Anglophile heretic ex-Trotskyite within the French philosophical establishment, wrote a book called "The Postmodern Condition" and all of a sudden all of the libs in Anglophone academia started soying out over another excuse to defend an alleged "anti-metanarrative" position that was really always about crypto-metanarrative the demise of the threat posed by the genuine illiberalism of the communist movement (remove similar to Fukuyama's later "end of history" metanarrative). but other French thinkers associated with this alleged "postmodernism," such as Lacan and Derrida, were entirely opposed to this absurd liberal claptrap. both Lacan and Derrida in different ways defended the legacy of Marxian illiberalism, as should be obvious to anyone who has actually read "The Other Side of Psychoanalysis" or "Specters of Marx" (the same goes for Irigaray's reading of Marx in "Speculum of the Other Woman," or Kristeva's reading of Marx and even Mao in "Revolution in Poetic Language"). Deleuze and Foucault, perhaps, are more liberal, as Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak pointed out in "Can the Subaltern Speak?". but what people don't understand, because of the reflexive anti-communism of Westoid conservatives, is that in the real battle lines of liberalism and illiberalism, the Marxists are on the side of illiberalism, anti-globalism, anti-institutional populism, and multipolarity. the fear of multipolar struggle in the Marxist tradition on the part of Westoid conservatives, and the fear of engaging with thinkers like Lacan, Derrida, Irigaray, and Kristeva, is a completely empty impulse borne out of total ignorance of the current geopolitical stakes and the status of the French Gaullism that the conservative pro-Christian thinker Lacan stood behind, with figures like Derrida, Irigaray and Kristeva (as well as more expressly communist thinkers like Althusser and Badiou) experimenting with taking Lacan's esoteric conservative insights in more radical left-wing illiberal directions. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908211837025259925
* Zizek is as much of a Westoid partisan as Dugin is a Slavophile - I’ll discuss them in this Space, in connection with my evolving thesis that the true emerging geopolitical elite will be the “Machiavellian-Gramscian Golden Center,” with Left-Accelerationists like Alex Williams 🇬🇧and thinkers of the Nouvelle Droite like Alain de Benoist 🇫🇷(as profiled by Dugina) converging towards what are in many ways the same ideas, at least from a descriptive standpoint. Žižek’s 🇸🇮politics have also been approximating to this same sort of political-scientific gnosis for a long time I think, even if he’s just as much of a Westoid partisan as @AGDugin 🇷🇺is a Slavophile. this book also gives a really good sense of what’s at stake with Žižek’s ideas, particularly regarding his political appropriation of the “Lacanian (psychoanalytic) act” and his theses on symbolic retroactivity—the question is basically, “how is political history made?” “The Excessive Subject” for me was also in a lot of ways a blueprint for the Hegelian Egirls, and anticipated many of my “higher-level” critiques of wokeism, focusing on the influence of Emmanuel Levinas, Judith Butler, and Simone Critchley, while contrasting their more liberal approach to the political with the illiberalism of Žižek and Badiou.
*
*
*
*
*
#OTHER
* Zizekoids stop sounding exactly like amerikan gusano cops in Miami who treat Latinos even worse than white cops do… challenge.
* Daoic vs Daoist? - I think both of you underestimate the clinamen I introduce into this with the Daoic supplement… I am similarly critical of the late Augustine and all told am more of a Jesuit than a Jansenist. if anything my hostility towards St. Maximus comes from the influence of Cyril O’Regan and my rejection of any cosmic fall theology that would be too humanistic beyond the inflationary level of the imagination thematized by Simone Weil in Gravity & Grace. Weil was also influenced by Daoism. I recommend this book by Paulos Huang if you’re interested in thorough arguments on the compatibility of Christianity and Daoism, and its relevance to this issue; while I broadly endorse a Thomistic analogical theology, I think Thomas was too hard on Averroes and that the nominalists had a point, which can only be captured by a dialectical supplement to analogy. Hegelian dialectics are too suffocating here, so Daoic dialectics will have to do. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1900522774453506366
* "Dworkinoids"? - https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mn05b0/this_place_is_unusable_during_the_weekend/n82m2q4/?context=3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* cryptopagan - Aristotelian cosmology—including his metaphysical theory of matter—was falsified by the Copernican Revolution. Keep coping, crypto-pagan. At least catch up with Edith Stein’s post-phenomenological rendition of Thomism grounded in the organic noesis of the “I”—it’s far more honest to Aristotle’s formalistic Anthropocentrism.
*
*
*
*
*

#literalism
* "punitive literalism" In retrospect, cancel culture appears as the last, desperate bid to believe in a notion of the public that can (hypothetically) be coerced into believing a simple moral story of good and bad. As platforms fragment and we increasingly live in non-overlapping aesthetic universes, the idea of controlling the narrative through sheer force of will slips away. Punitive literalism cannot function when rhetoric, tone, style and language are no longer shared. Paradoxically it was those people who sought to terrorize institutions who believed in them the most. Perhaps it is always like this. https://x.com/Nina_Power_/status/1905927881089253429
* The New Literalism Plaguing Today’s Biggest Movies Buzzy films from “Anora” to “The Substance” are undone by a relentless signposting of meaning and intent. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/critics-notebook/the-new-literalism-plaguing-todays-biggest-movies

/r/neoliberal flaires/badges
David Autor
Eugene Fama
Milton Friedman
Henry George
Austan Goolsbee
Friedrich Hayek
James Heckman
John Keynes
Paul Krugman
Greg Mankiw
Amartya Sen
Scott Sumner
Raghuram Rajan
Paul Samuelson
Robert Lucas
Raj Chetty
John Cochrane
David Ricardo
Elinor Ostrom
Deirdre McCloskey
Abhijit Banerjee
Esther Duflo
Edward Glaeser
Lawrence Summers
Richard Thaler
Dina Pomeranz
Claudia Goldin
Rachael Meager
Amy Finkelstein
Mark Carney
Mario Draghi
Ben Bernanke
Janet Yellen
Paul Volcker
Jerome Powell
Zhou Xiaochuan
Alan Greenspan
Jens Weidmann
Christine Lagarde
Immanuel Kant
John Mill
John Locke
Montesquieu
Adam Smith
Mary Wollstonecraft
Michel Foucault
Martha Nussbaum
Karl Popper
John Rawls
Robert Nozick
Joseph Nye
George Soros
Mario Vargas Llosa
Susan B. Anthony
Jeff Bezos
Jared Polis
Thomas Paine
NATO
WTO
Commonwealth
United Nations
African Union
IMF
World Bank
Association of Southeast Asian Nations
Caribbean Community
Organization of American States
Pacific Islands Forum
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
Zhao Ziyang
Bill Gates
Olympe de Gouges
Václav Havel
Hannah Arendt
Gay Pride
Trans Pride
Lesbian Pride
Bisexual Pride
Enby Pride
Genderqueer Pride
Asexual Pride
Norman Borlaug
Hernando de Soto
YIMBY
Voltaire
John Nash
MERCOSUR
PROSUR
Kofi Annan
Andrew Brimmer
Frederick Douglass
Seretse Khama
Edmund Burke
Sadie Alexander
Manmohan Singh
Chama o Meirelles
NAFTA
Peter Sutherland
Resistance Lib
Aromantic Pride
Feminism
Progress Pride
David Hume
Anne Applebaum
Malala Yousafzai
Edith Abbott
Simone Veil
Anne Krueger
Asli Demirgüç-Kunt
Christina Romer
Estelle Griswold
Janet Currie
Emily Oster
Temple Grandin
Anna Schwartz
Hortensia
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
Germaine de Stäel
Gita Gopinath
Audrey Hepburn
NASA
European Union
Hu Shih
Gary Becker
Max Roser
Jason Furman
Hans Rosling
Harriet Martineau
Max Weber
Mark Zandi
Victor Hugo
Ruth Benedict
Madeleine Albright
Mohammad Hatta
Angelina Grimké
John Brown
Jane Jacobs
Eleanor Roosevelt
Johan Norberg
Baruch Spinoza
James Tobin
Kenneth Arrow
Thurgood Marshall
Martin Luther King Jr.
Harriet Tubman
Margaret Mead
Franz Boas
Isaiah Berlin
Benjamin Constant
William Nordhaus
Alfred Marshall
Mary Paley Marshall
Rose Friedman
Desiderius Erasmus
Boiseaumarie
Rabindranath Tagore
Frédéric Bastiat
John von Neumann
Jorge Luis Borges
Sri Mulyani
Robert Caro
Auguste Comte
Niels Bohr
Michael O'Leary
Herb Kelleher
Malcom McLean
Genderfluid Pride
💵 Anti-Price Gouging
Elizabeth Warren
Guy Rolnik
Hans von der Groeben
Kim Sang-jo
Thurman Arnold
Montek Singh Ahluwalia
Richard Posner
Emma Lazarus
C. D. Howe
Daron Acemoglu
Philip Pettit
Elizabeth Anderson
Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold

* Benjamin Suchard https://bsky.app/profile/bnuyaminim.bsky.social
* Daniel Heller-Roazen https://bsky.app/profile/theoryoftheory.bsky.social/post/3lbql4g7xg22c
* Mauro Biglino - Gods of the Bible | Graham Hancock talks with Mauro Biglino https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0cZXY70pbo
* Paul Wexler vs Eliezer Perlman https://x.com/PalestinaPod/status/1776701668345675825 El “hebreo” moderno es considerado por lingüistas como una lengua eslava pues es creada por (germano)eslavos con sus sesgos lingüísticos (germano)eslavos. El lingüista israelí Paul Wexler escribe “La naturaleza esquizoide del hebreo:Una lengua eslava en busca de un pasado semita”
* De Rerum Natura -Lucretius / David Slavitt https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=582272108182314&set=pb.100091985880943.-2207520000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_R._Slavitt
* Freud translators - Strachey (Trieb vs Instinkt) -> Mark Solms
* Emily Wilson vs Alexander Pope's translations of the Odyssey - https://old.reddit.com/r/GreekMythology/comments/199r1l1/from_dactylic_hexameter_to_iambic_pentameter/
* Mahmoud Hosny Roshdy https://x.com/mahmoudhosny91 translator who thought i was MDL and is tangential to Machinic Unconscious Happy Hour?
* NT translators: Dear Gentle Readers, Which NEW TESTAMENT* should I read, Willis Barnstone or David Bentley Hart? Reasoning very much appreciated, in particular from the point of view of a non-religious literary Western reader, reading for the 1st time. *These are the only two options I have. https://x.com/JaycelAdkins/status/1907556758932873263
* Bruno Bosteels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Bosteels
* Bro has the Edith Hamilton Plato works instead of the John Cooper 🫵😂 he can’t read Alcibiades!!! https://x.com/PrettyCantRap/status/1955345253403332926
* Easwaran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eknath_Easwaran
* Although there is some dispute over how the word "Sarvāstivāda" is to be analyzed, the general consensus is that it is to be parsed into three parts: sarva "all" or "every" + asti "exist" + vada "speak", "say" or "theory". This equates perfectly with the Chinese term, Shuōyīqièyǒu bù (Chinese: 說一切有部),[14] which is literally "the sect that speaks of the existence of everything," as used by Xuanzang and other translators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xuanzang
*
*
*

* "parasite class" - https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1889880953419600208
* Vivek's term of managerial class?
*
*

#girlboss music
a https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911522259849695528 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BPjkMiEFP0

0:00 Greedy - Tate McRay
2:09 Escapism - RAYE
6:43 Bloodline - Arianna Grande
10:20 Candy - Doja Cat
13:32 Shameless - Camila Cabello
17:11 Nonsense - Sabrina Carpenter
19:55 Fun - Loving Caliber
23:08 Scream my name - Taynte Standpoints
26:52 Can't get enough of the weekend - Mindme
30:06 Halo - Loving Caliber
32:45
35:57
36:03
41:19
44:50
47:56
51:00
54:30
56:32
59:34
1:02:50

#chiasmus #jokes

* ohhhh… confucius say: it is good to meet girl in park but far better to park meat in girl 🐉🥠🥢 https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mp9cci/ohhhh_confucius_say_it_is_good_to_meet_girl_in/
* Fake philosophy Socrates "To be is to do" vs Kant's "To do is to be" - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CMHGP1nlc54
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

#roots 🫚

* Simone Wei's "The Need for Roots" and "Die Entwurzelung ist bei weitem die gefährlichste Krankheit der menschlichen Gesellschaft.“
* Yuk Hui: In the age of technology, Being withdraws from the world; what is left is a world of beings decomposed into atoms and feedback loops. This uprooting (Entwurzelung), for Heidegger, is no longer a phenomenon of the West. It has gone beyond Europe through its planetary technology. One might recall here Tolstoy’s criticism voiced in 1910, during his last years, when the writer said that medieval theology or the Roman moral inheritance only intoxicated a limited amount of people, but today’s electricity, trains, and telegraph have intoxicated the whole world. https://www.academia.edu/124811232/Post_Europe
*

#Countdowns?

* AGI day?
* Q-day
* Earth Overshoot Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day
*
*
*

* Cutronian axiom - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff_HfBjRXqk&t=33m08s
*
*
*

#BLOOMIAN COLLISIONS - Allan Bloom vs Harold Bloom vs Leopold Bloom vs Paul Bloom !! https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=%22Harold%20Bloom%22%20%22Allan%20Bloom%22
#BLOOM Which Bloom is more based?

* "bloomian platonism" said here I think (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YadN75NcPhM&loop=0 or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umZARSwkrBs&loop=0) said by Cutrone refers to Allan Bloom I guess due to the new book ("Melville plus Nietzsche divided the square root of Allan Bloom times ZIzek Squared")? But Harold Bloom wrote "Where Shall Wisdom Be Found" which uses Plato? IDK!
* Allan Bloom says mockingly "tHe cHaRm oF mArCuSe" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Vn4VDkx2HY&t=30m26s
* Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind.pdf
* I'm reading Allan Bloom’s interpretative essay on The Republic this afternoon, been a long time since I read it last. One thing I like about Bloom’s emphasis on the dialogue *as a dialogue,* is the location of Plato’s most important ideas in the spaces where Socrates’ interlocutors break into the discussion. In particular, his suggestion that the places where his dialogue partners assent and their assent strikes us as odd or too quick—the “True”s and “Certainly, Socrates”s where we are almost tempted to laugh at their ready agreement—serve a purpose in the philosophical enterprise, rather than just as a stylistic flair or device designed to show how respected Socrates was by Glaucon and Adeimantus. It opens up another dimension to the theoretical play of the dialogue, and also slows you down as you read those passages. Traducir post Cita Ben Gross @bengrossbg · 9h https://x.com/bengrossbg/status/1953178810821836978
* A "Bloom" refers to an archetypal, alienated modern person or subject, named after the character Leopold Bloom from the James Joyce novel Ulysses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiqqun#Imaginary_Party
* tenshi_anna Harold Bloom The American Religion https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911501708112384081 I’ve made a somewhat embarrassing discovery: I can completely neutralize this discarnating energy if I listen to “girlboss” music and cultivate a state of perpetual low-level arousal. I’ve spoken about this with other women who are oracularly inclined, and heard similar things, but when I study certain mystical traditions, in particular Kabbalah, I often end up feeling an extremely intense welling up of energy in my body, and sometimes start shaking and experiencing various forms of derealization or reality shifting. in particular stuff regarding the sefirotic structure of the Etz Chaim and Kabbalistic numerology seems to be doing this to me lately. it makes it really hard to focus on studying, especially when I’m alone and don’t have someone equipped to “spot” me so to speak https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911511345738236244
* Paul Bloom? - bloom https://open.spotify.com/episode/37O1ZeblOVxEQiMPmUiCRX https://old.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyEvents/comments/1mffzl0/human_nature_and_the_impossibility_of_utopia_w/
*
*
*
*
*
*

OTHER

books:
For a Critique of Political Economy of Signs
The Mirror of Production
Symbolic Exchange and Death

#early Baudrillard - This period is the best Baudrillard: before the hyperreal and simulation stage of his later thought, definitely his most Marxist period, and of course he is highly pessimistic but my god he has some brilliant critiques of value, political economy, 68 thought etc. https://x.com/DanielTutt/status/1808613691983806765

OTHER

* early / middle / late Deleuze https://x.com/puniishedanne/status/1911521461371576737
*
*
*

SOCIAL:

* https://www.reddit.com/r/Freud
* Sigmund Freud's Dank Meme Stash 2: Daddy's Return
https://www.facebook.com/groups/3244420768919044/
* https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=sabina+Spielrein
* Sabina Spielrein - https://www.facebook.com/groups/1354044988619780 https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=Sabina+Spielrein
*
*
*
*
*

//OLD
=HYPERLINK("https://www.facebook.com/groups/3244420768919044/posts/6408436975850725/", "Sigmund Freud's Dank Meme Stash 2: Daddy's Return")

OTHER:

* Sebastian Gardner's "Hegel glossary" vs Dan Dahlstrom's "Heidegger Dictionary"
*
*
*
*
*
*

OTHER:

* Who do you consider did the best explanation of heiddegger? Reiner Schumann, Karl Rahner, Walter Schulz, Robert Palmer, George Steiner, emad and Maley, Brett Davis, Will McNeil, David Farrell Krell. - https://twitter.com/aufgehendeRest/status/1574251573143814146
* Sebastian Gardner's "Hegel glossary" vs Dan Dahlstrom's "Heidegger Dictionary"
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

OTHEROTHER: On this point, I think Levinas is right. #e phenomenology of personal acquaintance is not mutual or interactive: the demand for personal concern is unilateral. It is about what I owe to you, not what we owe to one another.29 #is ethical reality is obscured by the Kantian focus on the second person. We should not con"ate attention to relational phenomena in ethics—not just personal concern but the relational or bipolar notion of wronging an individual—with appeal to reciprocal recognition.30 #e second person matters, but it is not essential to “directed duty.” Other People 329 #ough it is impossible to survey every option, I hope you can begin to see how hard it is to describe the nature of personal acquaintance itself: to identify a psychological relation we can bear only to those with full moral standing, a relation that justi!es love and necessitates personal concern. It is no accident that Levinas does not describe the basis of the ethical relation; he is not being willfully obscure. #ere is an echo of Wittgenstein (1953, §217) in his refusal: “If I have exhausted the justi!cations I have reached bedrock, and my spade is turned.” Cora Diamond (1991, 55) takes a similar view of membership in the moral community: #e sense of mystery surrounding our lives, the feeling of solidarity in mysterious origin and uncertain fate: this binds us to each other, and the binding meant includes the dead and the unborn, and those who bear on their faces “a look of blank idiocy,” those who lack all power of speech, those behind whose vacant eyes there lurks “a soul in mute eclipse.” I am not arguing that we have a moral obligation to feel a sense of solidarity with all other human beings because of some natural or supernatural property or group of properties which we all have, contingently or necessarily. I am arguing, though, that there is no need to !nd such a ground. Levinas in fact goes further. My relation to the other is ethical through and through: it lacks any rational-psychological ground. Nor can its content be expressed in words. #is relation is presupposed by communicative speech, which is a condition of language and so of rational thought. (Like many philosophers, Levinas sees a distinction in kind between our mental lives and the “nonconceptual” psychology of nonlinguistic animals.) If thought depends on language, which depends in turn on our ethical relation to the other, this relation is a precondition of openness to the world: “the order of meaning, which seems to me primary, is precisely what comes to us from the interhuman relationship, so that the Face, with all its meaningfulness as brought out by analysis, is the beginning of intelligibility” (Levinas [1982b] 1998, 103). Since the relation is prelinguistic, and thus preconceptual, we cannot express with concepts how it represents the other. #e ethics of the face, of love and personal concern, is the transcendental origin of thought, as such.31 #is is the argument of Totality and In!nity, in brief.32 It is transcendental in two ways. First, the ethical relation is transcendental in that it cannot be conceptualized: it is fundamentally inexpressible. Second, the argument is transcendental in a Kantian sense: it aims to undermine a skeptical threat by showing how the skeptic’s position assumes or implies the very thing she purports to doubt. In this case, the moral skeptic cannot think conceptually without relying on a public language that depends in turn on her ethical acknowledgment of the 330 Rethinking the Value of Humanity other. For Levinas ([1961] 1969, 198), “[to] kill is not to dominate but to annihilate; it is to renounce comprehension absolutely.” I have sketched this argument not because I accept it but to give a more adequate view of Levinas on the ethical roots of metaphysics, and to explain how the ineluctably ethical character of personal acquaintance or the face might bear on moral philosophy. #ose are topics to pursue elsewhere. I want to return, instead, to the supervenience of the ethical: the pressure to insist that the justi!cation of love and personal concern derives from a relation to the other we can specify in other terms. As we have seen, it is di$cult to meet this pressure, to give a psychological account of personal acquaintance, of the relation that makes love rational and calls for personal concern. Must we concede that, in this respect, morality is groundless? Perhaps there is another way. Suppose, to begin with, that love and personal concern are natural kinds, emotions that play particular, distinctive roles in human life. Suppose, further, that they are regulated by a relation, R, that can be speci!ed in psychological terms. And adopt the conjecture that R is personal acquaintance. Human beings feel love or personal concern for those with whom they are personally acquainted, not those who are known to them merely by name or by minimal description, like “the one on the right” or “the shortest spy.” We should treat this as a generic proposition, a claim about what is characteristic of us that allows for exceptional cases, in which our emotions are misdirected. #e psychological relation we are targeting is one by which they are naturally regulated, though the regulation may be imperfect. Suppose, !nally, that the psychological relation thus described is one that relates human beings only to those with full moral standing: presumably, in the !rst instance, other human beings. We cannot be personally acquainted with inanimate objects or with nonhuman animals of the sort we encounter on Earth. #e discussion so far has asked, in e/ect, why relation R would justify love and necessitate personal concern. It treats our hypothesized emotions as if they were in need of external vindication, holding human nature up to a normative standard independent of us. Could that be a mistake? What if we insist that human nature, and the facts of human life, play a constitutive role in ethics, pursuing a line of thought that descends from Aristotle (see Foot 2001; #ompson 2013)? #at a human response is rational or justi!ed is not independent of the fact that this response, or a$rmation of this response, is functional for us, where the standards of functioning derive from the natural history of human life. We need not read the virtues directly or naïvely from the book of human nature in order to accept some measure of constitutive dependence. In fact, we had better not, unless we believe that human beings are by nature perfectly good. #e devil is in the details.33 But the approach has interest, in part because it is the only way we have seen, thus far, to reconcile the ethics of personal acquaintance with Other People 331 its psychological grounds. On this view, personal acquaintance matters not because it ought to play a certain role in human life, by standards independent of human life, but because of the role it characteristically plays: it is the relation that underlies both love and personal concern. For the neo-Aristotelian, this fact about human life has ethical signi!cance. Personal concern is called for, and love is justi!ed, whenever they are humanly possible. #ere is more to say in defense of these ideas. Because I don’t know how to say it, I want to end, instead, by placing the puzzle of personal acquaintance in a wider context of re"ection on human values. At the beginning of Section 1, I assumed without argument that human beings have an ethical signi!cance that is not shared by other terrestrial animals. Our interests count for more than theirs, and we have rights against each other they do not possess. Positions of this sort have acquired a very bad name. Don’t they re"ect an odious “speciesism”?34 It helps to emphasize their relational character: they are about the signi!cance we have for one another, not about the signi!cance of human beings in some absolute sense, as though we should matter more to rational Martians than they do to themselves. But even with this proviso, the basic challenge remains. How is such “humanism” (as I prefer) morally better than racism or sexism, attributing ethical signi!cance to brute biological di/erence?35 #is question, which casts doubt on the distinctive value of humanity, has less force if human nature is involved in the foundations of ethics. If human beings by nature respond to one another in distinctive ways, as with love or personal concern, and this fact plays a constitutive role in how it is rational to respond, humanism might be true. By contrast, there is no credible theory of ethics on which its foundations appeal to race or sex, nor is there reason to believe that human beings are by nature racist or sexist in ways that might support an Aristotelian defense of such repugnant views.36 #ere is, if not a direct argument from humanism to Aristotelian ethics, at least an a$liation between the two.37 #e ethics of personal acquaintance ampli!es and complicates this connection. It is, to begin with, another instance of moral thinking that is di$cult to sustain if we deny a constitutive role in ethics to the facts of human life. Perhaps we should not hope to sustain these thoughts, but if we do, we will be led, through Levinas, to Aristotle. At the same time, personal acquaintance puts constraints on the nature of moral standing: it has to mesh with human psychology in ways hypothesized above. #is points to a !nal question, o%en raised as an objection to humanism: What about rational Martians? Don’t members of other rational species count for us in the same way other humans do? #e standard response, which I accept, is that humanism does not imply otherwise. What it suggests is not that rational Martians lack full moral standing but that, if they have it, the ground on which they do so is quite di/erent from the ground that applies to you or me. Whether 332 Rethinking the Value of Humanity we should care about the members of another rational species, what rights they have against us: these are open questions. #e answers turn on how they relate to one another and to us. (Bernard Williams [2006, 149–152] makes this vivid by imagining rational predators who come from outer space.) #e idea of personal acquaintance introduces something new. For there is nothing in the psychology of love or personal concern that prevents us from being personally acquainted with nonhuman beings. One thing we learn from unimaginative science !ction, in which the aliens are mostly humanoid, is that love across species boundaries makes sense. #e same is true of personal concern. If it is rational to love the members of another rational species, their moral standing should not be in doubt. #e ethics of personal acquaintance is not humanist in giving special weight to speci!cally human life. It is humanist in treating every human being as a moral equal and, in its Aristotelian form, in giving special weight to human values, values that may be cosmically cosmopolitan. We have traveled far along a speculative path. Let us go back to the start. I have argued that personal acquaintance plays a crucial role in the permissive view of love, and in the idea of personal concern that is brought into focus by ex ante contractualism and Opaque Footbridge. If we want to make sense of these phenomena, we need an ethics of personal acquaintance. But it is hard to say what personal acquaintance is in terms that would explain why it justi!es love and calls for personal concern. We have considered an approach that has some promise, one that draws on Aristotle, echoing Levinas without his quietism. Personal acquaintance is a cognitive relation whose signi!cance for us can be explained by giving an essential role in ethics to the facts of human life. If this is wrong, we are le% with a serious, unsolved puzzle. Can we make sense of love at !rst sight, and of concern for individuals, as such?38 Notes 1. #e example derives from Kaplan 1968, 192–193. 2. Compare Velleman 1999, 353; Setiya 2014, 252–254. 3. Setiya 2014, 258–262, responding to Kolodny 2003. 4. I develop these themes in Setiya 2014, 254–261. 5. #e neglect is partial: I appeal to “singular thought” at several points (Setiya 2014, 260n21, 265–266). Velleman (2008, 269–270) has urged that emotions such as love depend on “acquaintance-based thought,” though he does not develop the point and it is in tension with his earlier remarks about the attachment of adopted children to birth parents they have never met (see 263–264). 6. #e case derives from Anscombe 1967, 17. 7. I provide at least some of it in Setiya 2014. 8. #is is a drastic simpli!cation of the theory proposed in Boër and Lycan 1986. Other People 333 9. On knowing someone well, see Talbert 2015. 10. A case of particular interest is self-love. Surely this does not depend on the belief that you are a person or a human being or have moral standing. Nor, as I have argued elsewhere (Setiya 2015), does it rest on beliefs about who you are. Instead, it turns on personal acquaintance with yourself. 11. Contributions include Scanlon 1998, 208–209; Reibetanz 1998; Ashford 2003; Lenman 2008; Fried 2012; James 2012; Dougherty 2013; Kumar 2015; Frick 2015; Horton 2017. 12. #e likelihood is > 0.99 that 1,000 children ± 100 will die (Frick 2015, 183n14). 13. On the extension from known to knowable victims, see Frick 2015, 191–193. I return to this below. 14. Unfortunately, Frick does not discuss this case, but he considers a variant of Mass Vaccination (Known Victims) in which the genetic test is very costly, and concludes, on ex ante contractualist lines, that it is permissible to choose Vaccine B; see Frick 2015, 193–194. 15. For a similar argument, see Horton 2017, 69–70. 16. His strategy is to decompose your action into six, each of which a/ects only one individual, improving their prospects without a/ecting anyone else. For details, see Hare 2016, §4. 17. I object to it in Setiya 2020. 18. A question raised about a similar case by Elizabeth Harman (2015, 870), in her review of Hare 2013. For related discussion, see Mahtani 2017. 19. As I argue in Setiya (2020), there is a fourth route, too, through the nature of respect for rights. 20. I develop this contrast in Setiya 2020. 21. I am no expert on Levinas, but I have been inspired by his writings. Michael Morgan’s (2007) Discovering Levinas is an invaluable guide; I have also been helped by Perpich 2008. 22. On the particularity of ethics in Levinas, see Morgan 2007, 61, 79–80. 23. I discuss supervenience in Setiya 2012, 8–11. 24. Here I follow Morgan (2007, 46–50); see also Perpich 2008, 51–54, 74–75, 115–117. 25. For a recent critique, see Hawthorne and Manley (2012, chap. 3). On the relation between Russellian acquaintance and knowledge of other people, see Kremer 2015. 26. See, for instance, Dickie 2015, chap. 4. 27. I defend this view in Setiya 2018. 28. On Levinas, see Darwall (2006, 21–22n44); on Buber, see Darwall (2006, 39–40). 29. Levinas ([1982b] 1998, 106, 109) !nds a deeper asymmetry in the ethical relation: “If there were only two of us in the world, there wouldn’t be any problem: it is the other who goes before me. . . . #e only absolute value is the human possibility of giving the other priority over oneself.” I don’t think this is right, either in substance (one is not required to give the other priority over oneself) or in form. Since the ethical relation is re"exive, it cannot involve the priority of an other. We are personally acquainted with ourselves. 334 Rethinking the Value of Humanity 30. #is distortion a/ects even those who resist the Kantian line. In a broadly Aristotelian approach to bipolarity, Michael #ompson (2004, 348, 367–372) assumes that “relations of right” are fundamentally reciprocal: in the paradigm case, they are recognized on both sides, though there may be marginal occasions in which the party who is wronged is unable to recognize the obligation of the other. If I understand him, Levinas would question this assumption. 31. “Preexisting the disclosure of being in general taken as basis of knowledge and as meaning of being is the relation with the existent that expresses himself; preexisting the plane of ontology is the ethical plane” (Levinas [1961] 1965, 201). 32. See, especially, Levinas (1961) 1965, 72–81, 194–219. #e argument is explored by Morgan (2007, 52–55) and Perpich (2008, 132–135, 140–149). An early version appears in Levinas (1953) 1998, 18. 33. If we focus on practical rationality, the simplest view identi!es this trait with the proper functioning of our psychology with respect to practical thought. I !nd it more plausible to begin with ethical judgment as a capacity that regulates human life; practical rationality is what this form of judgment tracks when it is functioning well. I defend this sort of view, under the heading of “Natural Externalism,” in Setiya 2012, chap. 4. 34. #e term was coined by Peter Singer (1975, 6). 35. #is challenge is central to Singer’s (1975) argument; for a more recent discussion, see McMahan 2005, §3. 36. I defend this claim in Setiya 2012, 142–158. 37. I pursue this connection in Setiya 2018. 38. For discussion of this material, I am grateful to Gregory Antill, Marcia Baron, Anastasia Berg, Ian Blecher, Paul Boswell, Matt Boyle, Jason Bridges, Sarah Buss, Alex Byrne, Imogen Dickie, Jimmy Doyle, Kyla Ebels-Duggan, Camil Golub, Marah Gubar, Matthias Haase, Caspar Hare, Samia Hesni, Abby Jaques, A. J. Julius, Irad Kimhi, Andy Koppelman, Michael Kremer, Ben Laurence, Jonathan Lear, Michael Morgan, Anselm Müller, Sasha Newton, Ryan Preston-Roedder, Tamar Schapiro, Paul Scho!eld, Will Small, Jack Spencer, David Sussman, Daniel Telech, Nandi #eunissen, Quinn White, Stephen White, and Steve Yablo, and to audiences at Brown University, the Normativity Research Group in Montreal, Northwestern University, the University of Chicago, Brandeis University, the University of Arizona, and MIT. Special thanks to Jennifer Lockhart for generous, constructive comments on an earlier dra%. References Albee, Edward. 2003. "e Goat, or Who Is Sylvia? London: Penguin. Anscombe, Gertrude E. M. 1967. “Who Is Wronged?” Oxford Review 5: 16–17. Ashford, Elizabeth. 2003. “#e Demandingness of Scanlon’s Contractualism.” Ethics 113: 273–302. Benton, Matthew. 2017. “Epistemology Personalized.” Philosophical Quarterly 67: 813–834. Boër, Steven E., and William G. Lycan. 1986. Knowing Who. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Other People 335 Braun, David. 2006. “Now You Know Who Hong Oak Yun Is.” Philosophical Issues 16: 24–42. Buber, Martin. (1923) 1970. I and "ou. Translated by W. Kaufmann. New York: Touchstone. Darwall, Stephen. 2006. "e Second-Person Standpoint. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Diamond, Cora. 1991. “#e Importance of Being Human.” In Human Beings, edited by David Cockburn, 35–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dickie, Imogen. 2015. Fixing Reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dougherty, Tom. 2013. “Aggregation, Bene!cence, and Chance.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 7: 1–19. Foot, Philippa. 2001. Natural Goodness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Frick, Johann. 2015. “Contractualism and Social Risk.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 43: 175–223. Fried, Barbara. 2012. “Can Contractualism Save Us from Aggregation?” Journal of Ethics 16: 39–66. Hare, Caspar. 2013. "e Limits of Kindness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hare, Caspar. 2016. “Should We Wish Well to All?” Philosophical Review 125: 451–472. Harman, Elizabeth. 2015. “Review: Caspar Hare, "e Limits of Kindness.” Ethics 125: 868–872. Hawthorne, John, and David Manley. 2012. "e Reference Book. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horton, Joe. 2017. “Aggregation, Complaints, and Risk.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 45: 54–81. James, Aaron. 2012. “Contractualism’s (Not So) Slippery Slope.” Legal "eory 18: 263–292. Kaplan, David. 1968. “Quantifying In.” Synthese 19: 178–214. Kolodny, Niko. 2003. “Love as Valuing a Relationship.” Philosophical Review 112: 135–189. Korsgaard, Christine. 1993. “#e Reasons We Can Share.” In her Creating the Kingdom of Ends, 275–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kremer, Michael. 2015. “Russell on Acquaintance, Analysis, and Knowledge of Persons.” In Acquaintance, Knowledge, and Logic, edited by Donovan Wishon and Bernard Linsky, 129–152. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Kumar, Rahul. 2015. “Risking and Wronging.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 43: 27–49. Lauer, David. 2014. “What Is It to Know Someone?” Philosophical Topics 42: 321–344. Lenman, James. 2008. “Contractualism and Risk Imposition.” Politics, Philosophy, and Economics 7: 99–122. Levinas, Emmanuel. (1953) 1998. “Freedom and Command.” In Collected Philosophical Papers, translated by Alphonso Lingis, 15–23. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press,. Levinas, Emmanuel (1961) 1969. Totality and In!nity. Translated by Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Levinas, E. (1982a) 1985. Ethics and In!nity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo. Translated by Richard A. Cohen. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Levinas, Emmanuel (1982b) 1998. “Philosophy, Justice, and Love.” In Entre Nous: On "inking-of-the-Other, translated by Michael B. Smith and Barbara Harshav, 103–121. New York: Columbia University Press. Mahtani, Anna. 2017. “#e Ex Ante Pareto Principle.” Journal of Philosophy 114: 303–323. McMahan, Je/. 2005. “Our Fellow Creatures.” Journal of Ethics 9: 353–380. 336 Rethinking the Value of Humanity Morgan, Michael. 2007. Discovering Levinas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Perpich, Diane. 2008. "e Ethics of Emmanuel Levinas. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Pettit, Philip. 1997. “Love and Its Place in Moral Discourse.” In Love Analyzed, edited by Roger E. Lamb, 153–163. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Reibetanz, Sophia. 1998. “Contractualism and Aggregation.” Ethics 108: 296–311. Russell, Bertrand. 1910–1911. “Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 11: 101–128. Scanlon, #omas M. 1998. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Setiya, Kieran. 2012. Knowing Right from Wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Setiya, Kieran. 2014. “Love and the Value of a Life.” Philosophical Review 123: 251–280. Setiya, Kieran. 2015. “Sel!sh Reasons.” Ergo 2: 445–472. Setiya, Kieran. 2018. “Humanism.” Journal of the American Philosophical Association 4: 452–470. Setiya, Kieran. 2020. “Ignorance, Bene!cence, and Rights.” Journal of Moral Philosophy 17: 56–74. Singer, Peter. 1975. Animal Liberation. New York: Random House. Talbert, Bonnie. 2015. “Knowing Other People: A Second-Person Framework.” Ratio 28: 190–206. Taurek, John. 1977. “Should the Numbers Count?” Philosophy and Public A#airs 6: 293–316. #ompson, Michael. 2004. “What Is It to Wrong Someone?” In Reason and Value, edited by R. Jay Wallace, Philip Pettit, Samuel ScheCer, and Michael Smith, 333–384. Oxford: Oxford University Press. #ompson, Michael. 2013. “Forms of Nature: ‘First,’ ‘Second,’ ‘Living,’ ‘Rational,’ and ‘Phronetic.’” In Freiheit Stuttgarter Hegel-Kongress 2011, edited by Gunnar Hindrichs and Axel Honneth, 701–735. Frankfurt: Klostermann. #omson, Judith J. 1976. “Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem.” "e Monist 59: 204–217. Velleman, J. David. 1999. “Love as a Moral Emotion.” Ethics 109: 338–374. Velleman, J. David. 2008. “Persons in Prospect.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 36: 221–288. Williams, B. 2006. “#e Human Prejudice.” In Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, edited by A. W. Moore, 135–152. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by Gertrude E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

# Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Tractatus" (eg Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus)

* Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Ludwig Wittgenstein
* Tractatus Anti-Academicus.pdf: The Illusion of Academic Authority by Joshua Hansen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OqVptJkcDM (also The Treason of the Intellectuals by Benda, Julien and Thomas Sowell (an engineers test is if a bridge stays up, an academic is never tested, market of credentials), "academized", Kindly inquisitors.pdf by Jonathan Rauch, "academic realism", "academic rationalism") WHO IS Raymond Owen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OqVptJkcDM&t=1250s - Owen Raymond = Owen/Owain Leyshon (AKA Raymond K Hessle), Deirdre McCloskey's "Liberalism Caused the Great Enrichment"
* Tractatus Theologico-Politicus by Baruch Spinoza
* Tractatus de Intellectus Emendatione (Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect) by Baruch Spinoza, though it is not typically known by this name alone.
* Tractatus Politicus (Political Treatise) also by Baruch Spinoza.
* Tractatus de legibus ac deo legislatore (Treatises of Laws and God the Lawgiver) by Francisco Suárez.
* Tractatus Politicus-Technologicus - a conceptual by Yuk Hui: that is to say reconnecting the sphere of politics to that of technology to give shape to what Hui calls Tractatus Politicus-Technologicus. It is necessary, writes Hui, « to ground political philosophy in technology » https://www.rivistapalomar.it/pianeta-cibernetica-yuk-hui/
* Jonathan Gustavo Ramos' Tractatus Metaphisico-Phaenomenologicus https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaEj85X5SjXoDtvJpc3SxLg/community?lb=UgkxgE_PaLhaPphkYWdf4AdfuZMeQI1njUnR
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Dialectic of ", eg:

* "The Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment" by Christian Thorne
* "The Dialectic of Dark Enlightenment" Zizek and Liu's article - "https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/16gx6no/slavoj_%C5%BEi%C5%BEek_the_dialectic_of_dark_enlightenment/k0ajgfj/?context=3
* "The Dialectic of Ideology and Technology" by Alvin Gouldner
* "The Dialectic of Enlightenment" by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno: This influential work, associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory, explores the relationship between reason, enlightenment, and social domination in modern society.
* "The Dialectic of Sex" by Shulamith Firestone: This feminist work examines the historical and contemporary oppression of women through the lens of social and biological factors, aiming for a radical reimagining of gender roles and reproductive technologies.
* "The Dialectic of Self and World: Kierkegaard, Marx, and the Making of the Modern Subject" by Ali Aroosi: This book investigates the conceptions of selfhood and subjectivity in the works of Søren Kierkegaard and Karl Marx, analyzing their respective contributions to modern understandings of the individual in relation to society.

# What are some major philosophical works that begin with "Anti-" Or "Contra-"? Examples below:
# Anti-/Contra-/Against
* Nietzsche contra Wagner; Out of the Files of a Psychologist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche_contra_Wagner
* Anti-Duhring by Engel- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChring
* Anti-Cato by Julius Caesar's polemic
* Anti-Oedipus by Félix Guattari and Gilles Deleuze
* Against the Academicians by Augustine of Hippo
* Contra Celsum by Origen
* Contra Gentiles by Thomas Aquinas' Contra Gentiles - Whereas the Summa Theologiæ was written to explain the Christian faith to theology students, the Summa contra Gentiles is more apologetic in tone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summa_contra_Gentiles
* Contra el Mundo, contra la vida - Houellebecq's "H. P. Lovecraft: Contra el mundo, contra la vida"
* Against Theory w Walter Benn Michaels - OCTOBER EMSTU - Epic Marathon Stream at Theory Underground https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekHfH_5Vl_w
* Against Progress by Zizek https://x.com/katherineveritt/status/1928144616559104114
* Matt Segall's Against Dispensationalism post - Against Dispensationalism and the deep theological confusion of American evangelicals. "After decades of cultural, political, and military hegemony, the United States faces trillions in debt, unprecedented rates of mental illness and addiction, crumbling infrastructure, and an increasingly disillusioned citizenry. It is in no state to engage in another disastrous and costly war across the world on behalf of another country." -KARIS RIDES https://www.facebook.com/matthew.david.segall/posts/pfbid0ENDKKkd1zNMJJpq84wbGgSYdqBe1n9MPSAVHv9kxuhvxRrxJc7kV3d7SEL2MJdPcl
* Against Flatness https://x.com/kitsumute/status/1945862065769341007 https://www.minasmongrel.xyz/blog/against-flatness-beyond-the-horizon-of-hypersea-the-technologies-of-reason-install/
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

# On/Of/About
* Schleiermacher's On Religion - Your Dailey reminder to read: Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi's "Main Philosophical Writings and the Novel Allwill," Johann Gottfried Herder's "Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind," Friedrich Schleiermacher's "On Religion: Speeches To Its Cultured Despisers." https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1947796780730527860
* Benedict Wells' Vom Ende der Einsamkeit https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1893900.Benedict_Wells
* On the Three Primordial Hypostases by Plotinus - "On the Three Primordial Hypostases" (for the Neoplatonists , these are the One , Mind, and Soul). https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ипостась
* Schelling's On the Deities of Samothrace
* Aristotle's On Interpretation - Περὶ Ἑρμηνείας, Peri Hermeneias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Interpretation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle ;;; Aristoteles' Sobre el Cielo / On The Heavens / De Caelo et Mundo / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Heavens https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobre_el_cielo
* On the Trinity by Augustine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Trinity
* On Being And Essence by Tomas de Aquino "Sobre el ente y la esencia" - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_ente_et_essentia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas
* On Conflict by Krishnamurti - https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1gyij26/jiddu_krishnamurti_describing_whats_happening/
* On Certainty by Wittgenstein - Wittgenstein's Kantianism, such as it was, he probably inherited from his Schopenhauer enthusiasm. By the time of his On Certainty thoughts, he was in some ways re-discovering Aristotle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H7iPfcDQ8E
* On War - Clausewitz speculated about total war, but funked it midway through "On War," claiming it was only a theoretical possibility. Man's natural tendency to hedge his bets, postponing commitment, causes his opponent to scale back. This process inevitably short-circuits infinite escalation. Or rather, it used to. https://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Battling-to-the-End-by-Rene-Girard-3204821.php
* "?On Feeling?" by GH Bradley?
* On Beckett by Alain Badiou https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Power
* On Metaphysics and On Philosophical Method by Collingwood - Collingwood is the author of two of the most important treatises in meta-philosophy written in the first half of the twentieth century, An Essay on Philosophical Method (1933), and An Essay on Metaphysics (1940)
* On Contradiction by Mao https://x.com/nomadic_andres/status/1836218353071067231
* On Feeling, Knowing, and Valuing by Max Scheler
* On Philosophy: To Dorothea by Schlegel - is an essay by Friedrich Schlegel that expresses his views on the ideal relationships between men and women. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pep4sCUIUUM&t=6m30s
* Savater's On Living - Sobre vivir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Savater and Essay on Cioran (Ensayo Sobre Cioran)
* "On the Spirit of Geometry" - nomos? - Pascal https://x.com/anthonyvmorley;;;Mr. Anthony Vincent Morley is an incredible scholar who has unlocked the mysteries of “On Analysis Situs” by Gottfried Leibniz
* On Symbolics - Tratado de Simbólica https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mário_Ferreira_dos_Santos
* Lavelle - De l’Acte (Of the Act), Du temps et de l’éternité (Of Time and Eternity) and De l’âme humaine (Of the Human Soul) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Lavelle
* On Responsibility - Sobre a responsabilidade https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Željko_Loparić
* Yuk Hui's On the Existence of Digital Objects
* Gilbert Simondon's "On the Essence of Technicity" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Simondon
* Sobre el Placer y la felicidad https://www.facebook.com/mesajuanpabloampuero/posts/pfbid0NH7AubnPZg3xDGJqnkqiKuZEcdqoAZZ26JWj8yfwuxaFQZXUPQCk9XWEZYWrzgUbl
*
*
*

* "Oldest Systematic Program of German Idealism" - Schelling #anarchism, state is too mechanical, shrink the state - Holderlin/Hegel/Schelling manifesto for German Idealism - "Freedom is the alpha and the omega" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT741LB_KuY&t=35m20, Heidegger says Freedom is a property of Dasein
* Poem: Futuristic Manifesto by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1i6pqin/what_are_yalls_gut_reactions_to_this/
* I am grateful to be in conversation with #brachaettinger personally and professionally! #art #psych #anthrotwitter "Metafeminist Manifesto. Beyond the Life-drive--Beyond the Death-drive. Copoiesis and Matrixial Eros. Being-toward-Birthing with Being-toward-Birth in Artworking" https://x.com/lukekernan/status/1309501712621662208
* FOUNDING MANIFESTO from OSL (Organização Socialista Libertária) Carl Eugene Stroud https://youtu.be/W-qzYqe0yYo?si=_pmBucEiZJl3Ohco
* Richard Huelsenbeck's Dada Manifesto - Richard Huelsenbeck in his German Dada Manifesto: 'Life appears as a simultaneous confusion of noises, colours and spiritual rhythms, and is thus incorporated — with all the sensational screams and feverish excitements of its audacious everyday psyche and the entirety of its brutal reality — unwaveringly into Dadaist art' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesamtkunstwerk
* Bronze Age Manifesto
* Russell–Einstein manifesto galvanized the peace and disarmament movements. It led to the Pugwash conferences, for which Joseph Rotblat and the conference-series itself would eventually win the Nobel Peace Prize (1995). Rotblat credits the manifesto for helping to create the conditions that gave rise to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT, 1970) https://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/papers/moral-fn.pdf
* Andre Breton's "Surrealist Manifesto" https://old.reddit.com/r/books/comments/1vusqa/someone_explain_georges_batailles_story_of_the/cexhk8i/
* Leopold Aschenbrenner's "Situational Awareness" manifesto https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1ddn4xe/surprised_to_have_seen_no_discussion_here_on/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLJJsIy1x44
* F. T. Marinetti's "Futurist Manifesto" https://www.akpress.org/afterthefuture.html
* Luke Turner's The Metamodernist Manifesto (2011) https://x.com/Luke_Turner https://luketurner.com/the-metamodernist-manifesto
* David Shields' Reality Hunger: A Manifesto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Hunger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpeWJZRgzZU&t=15717s
* hegelian egirl manifesto - https://bsky.app/profile/jerrydelux.bsky.social/post/3lbdyrdhxyc27
* "Techno-Humanist Manifesto from the Roots of Progress Institute and Jason Crawford" https://x.com/Leigh_Phillips/status/1899492416391983336
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

# satire/snark
* the pepsi logo #manifesto is my favourite professional schizopost https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1gvgaff/new_jaguar_logo/ly3i1kr/?context=3
* Japanese Metabolist architects produced a manifesto in 1960 which outlined goals to "encourage active metabolic development of our society"[31] through design and technology. In the Material and Man section of the manifesto, Noboru Kawazoe suggests that: After several decades, with the rapid progress of communication technology, every one will have a "brain wave receiver" in his ear, which conveys directly and exactly what other people think about him and vice versa. What I think will be known by all the people. There is no more individual consciousness, only the will of mankind as a whole.[32] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
*
*
*

# weird pol manifestos
* Valerie Solanas SCUM Manifesto - cyberdandy's scumbag manifesto moicomment: yeah ok agatha christie
* Matt Livelsberger / Sam Shoemate old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1hsxcx4/vegas_cyber_truck_manifesto/
* Luigi Mangione's manifesto https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hbbztu/removed_by_reddit/ https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hbes7x/unpaid_reddit_janitors_deleted_the_manifesto/ "uhm yikeserinoo fellow comrades this guy reads normie books and listens to podcasts OMG, what a dumb trumptard am I right leftbros, unlike ME that knows about zizek, Sylvia plath (ahem ladies wink wink) and um..Marx. WOP WOP they not like us!" https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hb2btx/the_internet_freak_psyop_to_cancel_luigi_has_begun/
*
*
*
*

* Kafka's "Before the Law" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_the_Law
* Land's "After the Law" - https://antijurisprudence.wordpress.com/2010/04/09/after-the-law-by-nick-land-in-closure-or-critique-1993-ed-norrie/
* Baudrillard's "After the Orgy" - Not Baudrillard but Dominic Pettman / Henny Backus?
* Quentin Meillassoux's "After Finitude" - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2199850.After_Finitude
* Terry Eagleton's "After Theory" - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/16938
* Alasdair MacIntyre's "After Virtue" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Virtue
* Arthur Danto's "After the End of Art" https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/137933
* David Schweickart's "After Capitalism" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/918139.After_Capitalism
* Baylee Brits, et al. — Aesthetics After Finitude (2016)
* Diego Abad de Santillán's "After the Revolution" - When Chomsky was in high school in 1939 he wrote a book review of "After the Revolution" by Diego Abad de Santillan. For years he would describe himself as an "anarcho-syndicalist sympathizer." In the '80s when I was managing editor of a print anarcho-syndicalist magazine (ideas & action) I sent him a letter to invite him to write something for us. But he didn't want to. That's okay. Chomsky's relatively simple writing about anarchism encouraged others to explore social anarchism as a political option. https://www.facebook.com/tomwetzelSF/posts/pfbid02YsYABdyUoEyLURe9ERqKVJz9Ls4or3JzWWyQp3URbetjwwuAuupvBUXycaTijV5tl
* Franco "Bifo" Berardi's After the Future https://www.akpress.org/afterthefuture.html
* After Cézanne = Ian Johnson Buddhist book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreyabandhu
* Julian Barbour’s work The End of Time https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/speculations-on-time-graham-harman/
* After Comfort by Daniel A. Barber
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

* Leszek Kolakowski entitled "In Praise of Snobbery"
* Russell's "In Praise of idleness"
* Tanizaki's "In Praise of Shadows"
* Odo Marquard's "In Praise of Polytheism (On Monomythical and Polymythical Thinking)" (originally via Marquard and Taubes on Schelling's Offenbarung and Mythology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Praise_of_Polytheism
* Brecht's "In Praise of the Third Thing"
* Cuartango's "In Praise of Stillness" / "Elogio de la quietud" - https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Pedro_García_Cuartango?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp (vs the concept of ataxia?)
* Bunge's Elogio de la curiosidad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bunge
* Byung-Chul Han - Vita Contemplativa: In Praise of Inactivity
* "In Praise of Philosophy" out this week (2025, Badiou) https://x.com/beingandevent/status/1937335541890187386 ;;; “The audacity of thought consists in crossing a gap where nothing is given.” -Badiou, ‘Number and Numbers’ (1990) https://x.com/katherineveritt/status/1937204712278802917
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

# Meditations On
* Evola's Meditation On the Peaks https://i.redd.it/4o58v2sf2r1f1.jpeg https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1kqdaki/is_anyone_aware_of_where_this_screenshot_comes/
* Think Derrida’s On Forgiveness but way better and with dialogue from a great script, Joe Cauley gives us some beautiful insights https://x.com/samanthawillman/status/1968298409619771656
* Fernando Pessoa's Essay On Initiation
*
*
*
*
*

# Pseudos
* Pseudo-Plato
* Pseudo-Dionysus

homenaje / memorial / santuario

https://news.stanford.edu/2015/11/04/rene-girard-obit-110415/?fbclid=IwAR3-fikDS908RkWSG3QoM76RFGOeBXYr-kx8VhqHkm9fMqQZ1oerbLX1XH8

Stanford professor and eminent French theorist René Girard, member of the Académie Française, dies at 91
A member of the prestigious Académie Française, René Girard was called “the new Darwin of the human sciences.” His many books offered a bold, sweeping vision of human nature, human history and human destiny. He died Nov. 4 at 91.

Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

Email
BY CYNTHIA HAVEN
René Girard was one of the leading thinkers of our era – a provocative sage who bypassed prevailing orthodoxies and “isms” to offer a bold, sweeping vision of human nature, human history and human destiny.

Rene Girard in his library / L.A. Cicero
Rene Girard in his library. (Image credit: L.A. Cicero)

The renowned Stanford French professor, one of the 40 immortels of the prestigious Académie Française, died at his Stanford home on Nov. 4 at the age of 91, after long illness.

Fellow immortel and Stanford Professor Michel Serres once dubbed him “the new Darwin of the human sciences.” The author who began as a literary theorist was fascinated by everything. History, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, religion, psychology and theology all figured in his oeuvre.

International leaders read him, the French media quoted him. Girard influenced such writers as Nobel laureate J.M. Coetzee and Czech writer Milan Kundera – yet he never had the fashionable (and often fleeting) cachet enjoyed by his peers among the structuralists, poststructuralists, deconstructionists and other camps. His concerns were not trendy, but they were always timeless.

In particular, Girard was interested in the causes of conflict and violence and the role of imitation in human behavior. Our desires, he wrote, are not our own; we want what others want. These duplicated desires lead to rivalry and violence. He argued that human conflict was not caused by our differences, but rather by our sameness. Individuals and societies offload blame and culpability onto an outsider, a scapegoat, whose elimination reconciles antagonists and restores unity.

According to author Robert Pogue Harrison, the Rosina Pierotti Professor in Italian Literature at Stanford, Girard’s legacy was “not just to his own autonomous field – but to a continuing human truth.”

“I’ve said this for years: The best analogy for what René represents in anthropology and sociology is Heinrich Schliemann, who took Homer under his arm and discovered Troy,” said Harrison, recalling that Girard formed many of his controversial conclusions by a close reading of literary, historical and other texts. “René had the same blind faith that the literary text held the literal truth. Like Schliemann, his major discovery was excoriated for using the wrong methods. Academic disciplines are more committed to methodology than truth.”

Girard was always a striking and immediately recognizable presence on the Stanford campus, with his deep-set eyes, leonine head and shock of silver hair. His effect on others could be galvanizing. William Johnsen, editor of a series of books by and about Girard from Michigan State University Press, once described his first encounter with Girard as “a 110-volt appliance being plugged into a 220-volt outlet.”

Girard’s first book, Deceit, Desire and the Novel (1961 in French; 1965 in English), used Cervantes, Stendhal, Proust and Dostoevsky as case studies to develop his theory of mimesis. The Guardian recently compared the book to “putting on a pair of glasses and seeing the world come into focus. At its heart is an idea so simple, and yet so fundamental, that it seems incredible that no one had articulated it before.”

The work had an even bigger impact on Girard himself: He underwent a conversion, akin to the protagonists in the books he had cited. “People are against my theory, because it is at the same time an avant-garde and a Christian theory,” he said in 2009. “The avant-garde people are anti-Christian, and many of the Christians are anti-avant-garde. Even the Christians have been very distrustful of me.”

Girard took the criticism in stride: “Theories are expendable,” he said in 1981. “They should be criticized. When people tell me my work is too systematic, I say, ‘I make it as systematic as possible for you to be able to prove it wrong.'”

In 1972, he spurred international controversy with Violence and the Sacred (1977 in English), which explored the role of archaic religions in suppressing social violence through scapegoating and sacrifice.

Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World (1978 in French; 1987 in English), according to its publisher, Stanford University Press, was “the single fullest summation of Girard’s ideas to date, the book by which they will stand or fall.” He offered Christianity as a solution to mimetic rivalry, and challenged Freud’s Totem and Taboo.

He was the author of nearly 30 books, which have been widely translated, including The Scapegoat, I Saw Satan Fall Like Lightning, To Double Business Bound, Oedipus Unbound and A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare.

His last major work was 2007’s Achever Clausewitz (published in English as Battling to the End: Politics, War, and Apocalypse), which created the kind of firestorm only a public intellectual in France can ignite. French President Nicolas Sarkozy cited his words, and reporters trekked to Girard’s Paris doorstep daily. The book, which takes as its point of departure the Prussian military historian and theorist Carl von Clausewitz, had implications that placed Girard firmly in the 21st century.

A French public intellectual in America
René Noël Théophile Girard was born in Avignon on Christmas Day, 1923.

His father was curator of Avignon’s Musée Calvet and later the city’s Palais des Papes, France’s biggest medieval fortress and the pontifical residence during the Avignon papacy. Girard followed in his footsteps at l’École des Chartes, a training ground for archivists and librarians, with a dissertation on marriage and private life in 15th-century Avignon. He graduated as an archiviste-paléographe in 1947.

In the summer of 1947, he and a friend organized an exhibition of paintings at the Palais des Papes, under the guidance of Paris art impresario Christian Zervos. Girard rubbed elbows with Picasso, Matisse, Braque and other luminaries. French actor and director Jean Vilar founded the theater component of the festival, which became the celebrated annual Avignon Festival.

Girard left a few weeks later for Indiana University in Bloomington, perhaps the single most important decision of his life, to launch his academic career. He received his PhD in 1950 with a dissertation on “American Opinion on France, 1940-43.”

“René would never have experienced such a career in France,” said Benoît Chantre, president of Paris’ Association Recherches Mimétiques, one of the organizations that have formed around Girard’s work. “Such a free work could indeed only appear in America. That is why René is, like Tocqueville, a great French thinker and a great French moralist who could yet nowhere exist but in the United States. René ‘discovered America’ in every sense of the word: He made the United States his second country, he made there fundamental discoveries, he is a pure ‘product’ of the Franco-American relationship, he finally revealed the face of an universal – and not an imperial – America.”

At Johns Hopkins University, Girard was one of the organizers for the 1966 conference that introduced French theory and structuralism to America. Lucien Goldmann, Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan and Jacques Derrida also participated in the standing-room-only event. Girard quipped that he was “bringing la peste to the United States.”

Girard had also been on the faculties at Bryn Mawr, Duke and the State University of New York at Buffalo before he came to Stanford as the inaugural Andrew B. Hammond Professor in French Language, Literature and Civilization in 1981.

Girard was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and twice a Guggenheim Fellow. He was elected to the Académie Française in 2005, an honor previously given to Voltaire, Jean Racine and Victor Hugo. He also received a lifetime achievement award from the Modern Language Association in 2009. In 2013, King Juan Carlos of Spain awarded him the Order of Isabella the Catholic, a Spanish civil order bestowed for his “profound attachment” to “Spanish culture as a whole.” He was also a Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur and Commandeur des Arts et des Lettres.

Others were impressed, but Girard was never greatly impressed with himself, though his biting wit sometimes rankled critics. Stanford’s Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, the Albert Guérard Professor in Literature, called him “a great, towering figure – no ostentatiousness.” He added, “It’s not that he’s living his theory – yet there is something of his personality, intellectual behavior and style that goes with his work. I find that very beautiful.

“Despite the intellectual structures built around him, he’s a solitaire. His work has a steel-like quality – strong, contoured, clear. It’s like a rock. It will be there and it will last.”

Girard is survived by his wife of 64 years, Martha, of Stanford; two sons, Daniel, of Hillsborough, California, and Martin, of Seattle; a daughter, Mary Girard Brown, of Newark, California; and nine grandchildren.

A memorial service will be held Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2016, at 2 p.m. in Stanford Memorial Church.

Media Contacts
Cynthia Haven, Division of Literatures, Cultures & Languages: (650) 815-9839, cynthia.haven@stanford.edu
Clifton B. Parker, Stanford News Service: (650) 725-0224, cbparker@stanford.edu

"Plato Prehistorian"

More diagrams, this one on the expanded Plato history I'll be building out with Mary Settegast's work in 'Plato, Prehistorian' and Peter Sloterdijk's 'Globes': Mary Settegast's work in 'Plato, Prehistorian' - https://twitter.com/Magmati02338089/status/1607258012422373376

Lex interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6rnzk8VU24
0:00 - Introduction
1:51 - Machines Who Think
4:17 - Founding fathers of AI
6:45 - Early days and the possibilities of AI
14:23 - Roots of how we think about AI
18:59 - McCarthy and Frankenstein
23:30 - AI in the context of broader CS community
29:46 - AI winter
37:09 - Santa Fe Institute and complexity
44:58 - Timeline of AI
46:51 - AI assistants and personal robotics
52:05 - Existential threats and the male gaze

MLST - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDaNfQeh0jc (McCorduck effect)

McCorduck effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

https://www.facebook.com/doctorrousselle/posts/pfbid0CB51ekvCrgC9VWE5TfyWFJNMwE24zv6yj3smAakTKkMetFMM59otbUfMtk6evR4Ml

Mark Gerard Murphy pointed out that the large 'queue' for the Queen's lying-in-state perhaps demonstrates 'a collective rejection of instantaneity.' He is correct to isolate this as a key moment which, according to a wonderfully traditional logic, we see the effacement of Queen Mother by King signifier, as the culture of literacy and sequentiality, about which Marshall McLuhan dedicated so much thought, presents itself again in a 'one-by-one.'

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0qCaT822UKM4b4Ucpe9JgXJ4ZJqLrWB2LaKgCTQrXD3GwXRxT42Qp44CUsxPA53ZFl&id=508767730

I'm certainly not a Kripke scholar but I remember reading Naming and Necessity and thinking it was one of those rare books that completely challenged my thinking on at least 2 major issues-the philosophy of mind, and a posteriori knowledge. I tend to agree with the uniform criticism that his treatment of Wittgenstein isn't exactly accurate-my Wittgenstein is more of a pragmatist than a skeptic. But it was also a brilliant little book that showed how important reconstructing a philosopher's thought can be.
All that's to say I'm still getting over his loss. He was a giant and if his passing is going to having any upside it'll be encouraging me to go back to those texts, with their cryptic and grand genius.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Sollers R.I.P. Philippe Sollers https://www.facebook.com/groups/freudheideggerlacan/posts/4578596258930686/

https://www.facebook.com/colin.cremin/posts/pfbid02Hk3RAnUe4CiGB4JzDMMjRyrdnstt9om3XfhZKSRPuGuUkn2bqUUxxATqtGsdW5otl

https://www.facebook.com/colin.cremin/posts/pfbid0EL3kDyt1Pe8brYSQHGDGQdk6Twjktdt4KMJDSoJtc5BjX2eqKBxiW5QwL4wxyexklz

https://old.reddit.com/r/miketysonmysteries/comments/148t7uj/rip_cormac_mccarthy

https://old.reddit.com/r/miketysonmysteries/comments/148qxpa/cormac_mccarthy_novelist_of_a_darker_america_is/

https://twitter.com/xanalter/status/1668700279481532417

https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148nity/cormac_mccarthy_dead/

https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148o5gv/cormac_mccarthy_dead_at_89/

https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148tqe8/beautiful/

https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148nmlk/cormac_mccarthy_july_20_1933_june_13_2023/

https://old.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/148nl89/cormac_mccarthy_author_of_no_country_for_old_men/

Don’t forget to plug On Bullshit too!

Nathan J. Robinson
His stuff on equality annoys the hell out of me tho

https://www.facebook.com/ben.burgis/posts/pfbid02mNxGqPXzjvC8AdqTrHuLPTLsPtewcwDfwfwcFhbqFzSjpXLtWjUaJpKUZeanmh2Bl

https://benburgis.substack.com/p/harry-frankfurt-1929-2023-a-tribute?fbclid=IwAR0IpCHsS3hin2uVkJ36MIae618QgAeTFg8koosDR4m-gWBv-Y1NFxykdk4

R.I.P. Gérard Pommier

TRIBUTE / Gerard POMMIER
We learn about the disappearance, this morning, of one of the last great Lacanians, who had among other things founded the European Foundation for Psychoanalysis with Charles Melman, Claude Dumezil and Moustapha Safouan (among others). Our tributes to Gérard Pommier, psychiatrist, psychanalyst who never stopped wondering: "And if the questions left pending by Freud or Lacan are not answers, shouldn't we continue to think about it?" »*
* 𝘪𝘯 [𝘓𝘢 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘯𝘦 (2014)]
𝑃𝘩𝑜𝘵𝑜 : 𝐺𝘦𝑟𝘮𝑎́𝘯 𝘎𝑎𝘳𝑐𝘪́𝑎 𝐴𝘥𝑟𝘢𝑠𝘵𝑖

https://www.facebook.com/groups/freudheideggerlacan/posts/4847029858753990/

* Episodio 32 - Oriente y Occidente https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvmohbCRQck&loop=0
* Henry Kissinger used philosophy to create his own foreign policy ("realpolitik") to legitimize the deaths of millions of people around the world since the 1950s. He believed the ends justifies the means, but America never really reached the highest ends that he wanted. The rise of jingoist sentiment (such as President Trump) and America experiencing imperial boomerangs / blowback / resentment is moreso the end result of his actions. President Biden is the only president who has distanced himself from Kissinger, but that hasn't stopped other countries (Russia) from utilizing Kissinger's ideology for their own brutal motivations. Most recently Kissinger, in an attempt to stay relevant, has said Ukraine should give up more land to Russia and whined that Biden hasn't invited him to the White House. He has been satirized in various media (eg Venture Bros) as being a mystical intellectual who taps into dark forces to cause absurd death and destruction. He had a comprehensible accent when he was younger but strangely he developed a thicker German accent as he grew older, probably as part of his esoteric performance art pretending that he was completing the system of German Idealism. https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/187e780/eli5_why_is_henry_kissinger_so_controversial/kbdsgqd/?context=3
* Kissinger Gone Celebration With Ben Burgis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poQWZ-PI6po
* Branko Marcetic https://www.currentaffairs.org/2023/11/reading-bin-ladens-messages-might-have-prevented-decades-of-disastrous-foreign-policy
* In the Sistine Chapel, Gore Vidal once came upon Henry Kissinger “gazing thoughtfully” at the Hell section of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment. “Look,” said Vidal to a friend, “he’s apartment hunting.” https://twitter.com/coreyrobin/status/1730044845610135930
* Jason Myles' WIlliam Buckley impression https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poQWZ-PI6po&t=3488s 58:04 - omg Jason's William Buckley impression 💀💀💀
* Gore Vidal: The United States of Amnesia
* https://www.tiktok.com/search?q=Henry%20Kissinger%20Dies%20Aged%20100&t=1701350555819
* https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/187af3l/whats_going_on_with_people_celebrating_henry/
* Henry Kissinger Dies at 100, Milei Meets Clinton, Elon Musk VS Advertisers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgPY0NfOhNU
* https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1879fv9/henry_kissinger_war_criminal_beloved_by_americas/
* https://old.reddit.com/r/news/comments/18770kx/henry_kissinger_secretary_of_state_to_richard/
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Why oh why is Johannes Niederhauser bonding with Gunnar Kaiser? :( https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/11amcnn/in_this_video_we_are_discussing_the_realm_of/

Sad day: the critic, theorist and essayist Leonor Arfuch, Día triste: murió la crítica, teórica y ensayista Leonor Arfuch, tan leída y querida en nuestro Doctorado. Paz a sus restos. https://twitter.com/DoctoradoUpla/status/1449782852053209096

* “And if death had not stopped Fichte in his tracks, he would have moved on to a fourth phase, that of Absolute Life itself…” - Xavier Tilliette, p. 542 https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=Fichte+Xavier+Tilliette&src=typd
*
*

LARGER THAN LIFE
A note on the death of Fredric Jameson
Slavoj Žižek
Fredric Jameson was not just an intellectual giant, the last true genius in contemporary thought. He was the ultimate Western Marxist, fearlessly reaching across the opposites which define our ideological space – a “Eurocentrist” whose work found a great echo in Japan and China, a Communist who loved Hollywood, especially Hitchcock, and detective novels, especially Chandler, a music lover immersed in Wagner, Bruckner and pop music… There is absolutely no trace of Cancel Culture with its stiff fake moralism in his work and life – one can argue that he was the last Renaissance figure.
What Jameson fought throughout his long life is the lack of what he called “cognitive mapping,” the inability to locate our experience within a meaningful whole. The instincts that directed him in this fight were always right - for example, in a nice stab against the fashionable cultural-studies rejection of “binary logic,” Jameson calls for “a generalized celebration of the binary opposition” – for him, the rejection of sexual binary goes hand in hand with the rejection of class binary… Still in a deep shock, I can only offer here some passing observations which provide a clear taste of his orientation.
Today, Marxists as a rule reject any form of immediacy as a fetish which obfuscates its social mediation. However, in his masterpiece on Adorno, Jameson deploys how a dialectical analysis includes its own point of suspension: in the midst of a complex analysis of mediations, Adorno all of a sudden makes a vulgar gesture of “reductionism,” interrupting a flow of dialectical finesse with a simple point like “ultimately it is about class struggle.” This is how class struggle functions within a social totality: it is not its “deeper ground,” its profound structuring principle which mediates all its moments, but something much more superficial, the point of failure of the endless complex analysis, a gesture of jumping-ahead to a conclusion when, in an act of despair, we raise our hands and say: “But after all, this is all about class struggle!” What one should bear in mind here is that this failure of analysis is immanent to reality itself: it is how society itself totalizes itself through its constitutive antagonism. In other words, class struggle IS a fast pseudo-totalization when totalization proper fails, it is a desperate attempt to use the antagonism itself as the principle of totalization.
It is also fashionable for today’s Leftists to reject conspiracy theories as a fake simplified solutions. However, years ago Jameson perspicuously noted that in today’s global capitalism, things happen which cannot be explained by a reference to some anonymous “logic of the capital” – for example, now we know that the financial meltdown of 2008 was the result of a well-planned “conspiracy” of some financial circles. The true task of social analysis is to explain how contemporary capitalism opened up the space for such “conspiratorial” interventions.
Another Jameson’s insight which runs against today’s predominant post-colonial trend concerns his rejection of the notion of “alternate modernities,” i.e., the claim that our Western liberal-capitalist modernity is just one of the paths to modernization, and that other paths are possible which could avoid the deadlocks and antagonism of our modernity: once we realize that “modernity” is ultimately a code name for capitalism, it is easy to see that such historicist relativization of our modernity is sustained by the ideological dream of a capitalism which would avoid its constitutive antagonisms:
”How then can the ideologues of “modernity” in its current sense manage to distinguish their product—the information revolution, and globalized, free-market modernity—from the detestable older kind, without getting themselves involved in asking the kinds of serious political and economic, systemic questions that the concept of a postmodernity makes unavoidable? The answer is simple: you talk about “alternate” or “alternative” modernities. Everyone knows the formula by now: this means that there can be a modernity for everybody which is different from the standard or hegemonic Anglo-Saxon model. Whatever you dislike about the latter, including the subaltern position it leaves you in, can be effaced by the reassuring and “cultural” notion that you can fashion your own modernity differently, so that there can be a Latin-American kind, or an Indian kind or an African kind, and so on. . . . But this is to overlook the other fundamental meaning of modernity which is that of a worldwide capitalism itself.”
The significance of this critique reaches far beyond the case of modernity—it concerns the fundamental limitation of the nominalist historicizing. The recourse to multitude (“there is not one modernity with a fixed essence, there are multiple modernities, each of them irreducible to others”) is false not because it does not recognize a unique fixed “essence” of modernity, but because multiplication functions as the disavowal of the antagonism that inheres in the notion of modernity as such: the falsity of multiplication resides in the fact that it frees the universal notion of modernity of its antagonism, of the way it is embedded in the capitalist system, by relegating this aspect to just one of its historical subspecies. One should not forget that the first half of the twentieth century already was marked by two big projects which perfectly fit this notion of “alternate modernity”: Fascism and Communism. Was not the basic idea of Fascism that of a modernity which provides an alternative to the standard Anglo-Saxon liberal-capitalist one, of saving the core of capitalist modernity by casting away its “contingent” Jewish-individualist-profiteering distortion? And was not the rapid industrialization of the USSR in the late 1920s and 1930s also not an attempt at modernization different from the Western-capitalist one?
What Jameson avoided like a vampire avoids garlic was any notion of the enforced deeper unity of different forms of protest. Back in the early 1980s, he provided a subtle description of the deadlock of the dialogue between the Western New Left and the Eastern European dissidents, of the absence of any common language between them: "To put it briefly, the East wishes to talk in terms of power and oppression; the West in terms of culture and commodification. There are really no common denominators in this initial struggle for discursive rules, and what we end up with is the inevitable comedy of each side muttering irrelevant replies in its own favorite language."
In a similar way, the Swedish detective writer Henning Mankell is a unique artist of the parallax view. That is to say, the two perspectives – that of the affluent Ystad in Sweden and that of Maputo in Mozambique – are irretrievably »out of sync,« so that there is no neutral language enabling us to translate one into the other, even less to posit one as the »truth« of the other. All one can ultimately do in today's conditions is to remain faithful to this split as such, to record it. Every exclusive focus on the First World topics of late capitalist alienation and commodification, of ecological crisis, of the new racisms and intolerances, etc., cannot but appear cynical in the face of the Third World raw poverty, hunger and violence; on the other hand, the attempts to dismiss the First World problems as trivial in comparison with the »real« Third World permanent catastrophies are no less a fake – focusing on the Third World »real problems« is the ultimate form of escapism, of avoiding to confront the antagonisms of one's own society. The gap that separates the two perspectives IS the truth of the situation.
As all good Marxists, Jameson was in his analysis of art a strict formalist – he once wrote about Hemingway that his terse style (short sentences, almost no adverbs, etc.) is not here to represents a certain type of (narrative) subjectivity (the lone hard-boiled cynical individual); on the contrary, Hemingway's narrative content (stories about bitter hard individuals) was invented so that Hemingway was able to write a certain type of sentences (which was his primary goal). Along the same lines, In his seminal essay »On Raymond Chandler,« Jameson describes a typical Chandler's procedure: the writer uses the formula of the detective story (detective's investigation which brings him into the contact with all strata of life) as a frame which allows him to fill in the concrete texture with social and psychological apercus, plastic character-portraits and insights into life tragedies. The properly dialectical paradox not to be missed here is that it would be wrong to say: »So why did the writer not drop this very form and give us pure art?« This complaint falls victim to a kind of perspective illusion: it overlooks that, if we were to drop the formulaic frame, we would lose the very »artistic« content that this frame apparently distorts.
Another Jameson’s unique achievement is his reading of Marx through Lacan: social antagonisms appear to him as the Real of a society. I still recall a shock when, at a conference on Lenin that I organized in Essen in 2001, Jameson surprised us all by bringing in Lacan as a reader of Trotsky’s dream. On the night of June 25 1935, Trotsky in exile dreamt about the dead Lenin who was questioning him anxiously about his illness: “I answered that I already had many consultations and began to tell him about my trip to Berlin; but looking at Lenin I recalled that he was dead. I immediately tried to drive away this thought, so as to finish the conversation. When I had finished telling him about my therapeutic trip to Berlin in 1926, I wanted to add, ‘This was after your death’; but I checked myself and said, ‘After you fell ill…’”
In his interpretation of this dream, Lacan focuses on the obvious link with Freud’s dream in which his father appears to him, a father who doesn’t know that he is dead. So what does it mean that Lenin doesn’t know he is dead? According to Jameson, there are two radically opposed ways to read Trotsky’s dream. According to the first reading, the terrifyingly-ridiculous figure of the undead Lenin “doesn’t know that the immense social experiment he single-handedly brought into being (and which we call soviet communism) has come to an end. He remains full of energy, although dead, and the vituperation expended on him by the living – that he was the originator of the Stalinist terror, that he was an aggressive personality full of hatred, an authoritarian in love with power and totalitarianism, even (worst of all) the rediscoverer of the market in his NEP – none of those insults manage to confer a death, or even a second death, upon him. How is it, how can it be, that he still thinks he is alive? And what is our own position here – which would be that of Trotsky in the dream, no doubt – what is our own non-knowledge, what is the death from which Lenin shields us?” But there is another sense in which Lenin is still alive: he is alive insofar as he embodies what Badiou calls the „eternal Idea“ of universal emancipation, the immortal striving for justice that no insults and catastrophes manage to kill.
Like me, Jameson was a resolute Communist – however, he simultaneously agreed with Lacan who claimed that justice and equality are founded on envy: the envy of the other who has what we do not have, and who enjoys it. Following Lacan, Jameson totally rejected the predominant optimist view according to which in Communism envy will be left behind as a remainder of capitalist competition, to be replaced by solidary collaboration and pleasure in other’s pleasures; dismissing this myth, he emphasizes that in Communism, precisely insofar as it will be a more just society, envy and resentment will explode. Jameson’s solution is here radical to the point of madness: the only way for Communism to survive would be some form of universalized psychoanalytic social services enabling individuals to avoid the self-destructive trap of envy.
Another indication of how Jameson understood Communism was that he read Kafka’s story on Josephine the singing mouse as a socio-political utopia, as Kafka’s vision of a radically-egalitarian Communist society – with the singular exception that Kafka, for whom humans are forever marked by superego guilt, was able to imagine a utopian society only among animals. One should resist the temptation to project any kind of tragedy into Josephine’s final disappearance and death: the text makes it clear that, after her death, Josephine “will happily lose herself in the numberless throng of the heroes of our people”(my emphasis added).
In his late long essay “American Utopia,” Jameson shocked even most of his followers when he proposed as the model of a future post-capitalist society the army – not a revolutionary army but army in its inert bureaucratic functioning in the times of peace. Jameson takes as his starting point a joke from the Dwight D Eisenhower period that any American citizen who wants socialized medicine needs only to join the army to get it. Jameson’s point is that army could play this role precisely because it is organized in a non-democratic non-transparent way (top generals are not elected, etc.).
With theology it’s the same as with Communism. Although Jameson was a staunch materialist, he often used theological notions to throw a new light onto some Marxist notions – for example, he proclaimed predestination the most interesting theological concept for Marxism: predestination indicates the retroactive causality which characterizes a properly dialectical historical process. Another unexpected link with theology provides Jameson's remark that, in a revolutionary process, violence plays a role homologous to that of wealth in the Protestant legitimization of capitalism: although it has no intrinsic value (and, consequently, should not be fetishized and celebrated for itself, as in the Fascist fascination with it), it serve as a sign of the authenticity of our revolutionary endeavor. When the enemy resists and engages us in a violent conflict, this means that we effectively touched its raw nerve...
Jameson’s perhaps most perspicuous interpretation of theology occurs in his little-known text “Saint Augustine as a Social Democrat” where he argues how St Augustine’s most celebrated achievement, his invention of the psychological depth of personality of the believer, with all the complexity of its inner doubts and despairs, is strictly correlative to (or the other side of) his legitimization of Christianity as state religion, as fully compatible with the obliteration of the last remnants of radical politics from the Christian edifice. The same holds, among others, for the anti-Communist renegades from the Cold War era: as a rule, their turn against Communism went hand in hand with the turn towards a certain Freudianism, the discovery of psychological complexity of individual lives.
Another category introduced by Jameson is the “vanishing mediator” between the old and the new. “Vanishing mediator” designates a specific feature in the process of a passage from the old order to a new order: when the old order is disintegrating, unexpected things happen, not just horrors mentioned by Gramsci but also bright utopian projects and practices. Once the new order is established, a new narrative arises and, within this new ideological space, mediators disappear from view. Suffice it to take a look at the passage from Socialism to Capitalism in Eastern Europe. When in the l980s, people protested against the Communist regimes, what the large majority had in mind was not capitalism. They wanted social security, solidarity, a rough kind of justice; they wanted the freedom to live their lives outside of state control, to come together and talk as they pleased; they wanted a life of simple honesty and sincerity, liberated from primitive ideological indoctrination and the prevailing cynical hypocrisy . . . in short, the vague ideals that led the protesters were, to a large extent, taken from Socialist ideology itself. And, as we learned from Freud, what is repressed returns in a distorted form. In Europe, the socialism repressed in the dissident imaginary returned in the guise of Right populism.
Many of Jameson’s formulations became memes, like his characterization of postmodernism as the cultural logic of late capitalism. Another such meme is his old quip (sometimes wrongly attributed to me) which holds today more than ever: it is easier for us to imagine a total catastrophe on the earth which will terminate all life on it than a real change in capitalist relations – as if, even after a global cataclysm, capitalism will somehow continue… So what if we apply the same logic to Jameson himself? It is easier to imagine the end of capitalism than the death of Jameson.

https://www.facebook.com/XiDeleteThis/posts/pfbid0328CBFbcFS7mpxibvd7bf7K127iRmvDZPBJc91bGPgncB8vWxX3WaT9iCzTZ6rz24l?__cft__[0]=AZVJyJbtoKbVxgA2fQuY3LEFMEaqvbqqXjw-OOP9zgyS2ashoCaYsex1pWb81UPYG6rR8XT3phnegTLZ8pMAHZhpNKFVY_pMn7i0EFJNFVn0FSr0yJZ4s384EEPWXwAQmVgqlYyNwBNuzCWNUQLZXkvnLkxbVugXW8M066a5sbMg9wKIeUVrbIyyi8RjU6DmRR4&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
Wow, Roland Boer has great taste in shirts. Read his obituary to Domenico Losurdo below:
The Passing of Domenico Losurdo—by Roland Boer
“On 28 June, 2018, Domenico Losurdo passed away after a brief period of brain cancer. He was only 76 and his death is a shock to many who have come to appreciate his work and his person. An official announcement from the secretary of the Communist Party of Italy (PCI) can be found here (see also here). Indeed, Losurdo enthusiastically joined the re-established the PCI, after it had been dissolved back in 1991.
Many are the dimensions of his contribution to Marxist philosophy and history, with the best outline of his core positions provided in an article by Stefano Azzarà (he has also published a book building upon Losurdo’s work). I do not wish to cover all of these issues here, but rather focus on the significant contribution Losurdo has made to my thoughts. I do this not in terms of a self-serving enterprise, but as a recognition of the insights of which he was capable.
The first book of his I read was Stalin: The History and Critique of a Black Legend. Initially published in Italian in 2008, it has been translated into German, Spanish and French (not English – I will return to this anomaly). I read the French translation and it was a stunning experience. Here was the account of how Stalin’s reception moved from widespread appreciation of the practical and theoretical contribution he had made to the construction of socialism, to one of systematic demonization. Given the framework in which many perceive Stalin today, the book may initially seem like a one-sided effort in praise of Stalin. It is far from such a work, for it is no air-brushed account. Instead, it makes a careful and balanced assessment of not merely mistakes made on the way but more the significant achievements – which are so often just forgotten or dismissed.
But let me come back to the lack of an English translation of the Stalin book. Some works have indeed been translated, on Hegel, Heidegger, liberalism, class struggle, non-violence and war and revolution. They have been well-received, with their careful research and withering criticisms. But when a petition was launched to request one or two of the major left-wing publishers to produce an English version, it was met with the comment [from Verso Books] that it would ‘tarnish’ Losurdo’s reputation. So a sanitised version of Losurdo is fine, suitable for a curiously imperialist version of ‘Western’ Marxism, but one that actually represents his work is not. Indeed, by the time of his death he had published scores of books in Italian, of which only a handful have made their way into English. The time will come when most of his material is indeed available to a wider audience in what has become – for a time and for specific historical reasons – the lingua franca. Then perhaps his full impact will be felt, shaking up many ‘orthodoxies’.
However, the major insights for me have come from his observations on China. I do not mean the tendency in some quarters to focus on Mao Zedong as the last true Chinese communist (you can find this still today among some ‘Maoists’ or maopai as the Chinese call them, with a distinctly negative tone). No, I mean his deep appreciation and understanding of Deng Xiaoping and the ‘reform and opening up’ – now celebrating forty years. Above all, Deng Xiaoping was deeply Marxist in a Chinese context and there are significant continuities from Mao to Deng. How is the ‘reform and opening up’ Marxist? There are many aspects, but at its core is the shrewd assessment that thus far the means of production had been relatively neglected in China’s effort to construct socialism. Most efforts had been directed at the relations of production, focusing on socialist equality and collective endeavour. This is all very well, but if everyone is equal simply because they are poor, few would see the benefit. So Deng and those working with him began to emphasise another dimension of Marxism: the need to unleash the forces of production. The results have truly been stunning, with a socialist market economy, the lifting of more than 700 million out of poverty (the World Bank puts it at 850 million), and so on. In an interview published in 2013, Domenico mentions the sustained anti-poverty drive as part of the ‘incredible success’ of Deng’s policies: ‘infrastructures worthy of a first world economy, growth in the process of industrialisation from its coast areas to its inland areas, rapid incrementation of salaries for several years and a growing concern for environmental issues’. He goes on: ‘By focusing on the key role of the achievement in the safekeeping of independence and of national sovereignty, and by encouraging the old colonies to pursue their own economic independence, China can today be seen as the centre of the anti-colonial revolution – which began in the 20th Century and is still in process under its different guises to this day. And by reminding ourselves of the pivotal role the public sphere should play in any economy, China constitutes an alternative in opposition to the economic liberalism and to the consensus dictated by Washington’.
It is all very well toread such thoughts, but the point came home to me in a conversation we had in Shanghai less than two years ago. In the midst of the bustle, traffic, advertising, shops, and clear economic drive of the place, Domenico said, ‘I am happy with this. This is what socialism can do!’ To my quizzical look, he replied with a smile, ‘I am strongly in favour of the reform and opening up’.
Ultimately, it was the conversations we had in September of 2016 that remain with me. Many others knew him far better than me, but I had invited him to participate in a conference on Chinese Marxism in Beijing, after which we travelled together to another and very different conference in Shanghai. While the first was constructive, with scholars from China and abroad engaging in creative discussions, the second was divisive, with most of the foreigners feeling they could come to China and tell these ‘wayward’ Chinese Marxists how they had it all wrong.
So Domenico and I talked. We did so on trains, buses, walking, a cup of tea (which he prefers because of tea’s inherent slowing down of time, inviting you to sip and talk and pour another). He had noticed my review of his Stalin book, so we discussed the Soviet Union. He told me he had first visited China in 1972, as the leader of a young Italian ‘Friends of China’ group. He liked to come here as often as possible, pleased indeed to see the construction of socialism leaping ahead. As we came to realise how much we had in common, he pointed out, ‘We are of the mainstream, but we must be patient’. Yes indeed, the mainstream, from Marx and Engels, through Lenin and Stalin, to Mao, Deng and indeed Xi Jinping. Part of a living tradition. Which of course means that the myopia of ‘Western’ Marxist efforts to excise many parts of the mainstream smacks a little too much of utopian revisionism (as his final book did indeed argue).
At one point, he asked about my daily patterns, for we both enjoy writing immensely. I spoke of quiet days of writing, at whatever home I happened to be, of ocean swimming, of Chinese study. He said, ‘I usually go for a walk of an hour or two, around the countryside, and perhaps talk with some friends. After I return home, I answer mail and I write’. He smiled, ‘I am a bit of a stakhanovite when it comes to writing’.
But he also said his life feels very ‘provincial’, with all of the European associations. ‘We prefer to speak of the countryside or “the bush”’, I said. ‘I am a country boy, from “the bush,” and I much prefer it to the city’. He said, ‘Yes, that is a much better word, countryside – “the bush”’.
We will miss him, as will ‘the bush’ around Urbino.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/maria-lugones-feminist-philosopher-who-studied-colonialisms-legacy-dies-at-76/2020/07/21/dbea9250-cb58-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html

Maria Lugones, feminist philosopher who studied colonialism’s legacy, dies at 76

By Harrison Smith
July 21, 2020 at 10:30 p.m. EDT

Argentine-born philosopher María Lugones was a longtime philosophy professor at Binghamton University in New York. (Family photo)

Share

Comment
0
Add to your saved stories
Save
María Lugones, a feminist philosopher who combined influential scholarship on gender, race and the legacy of colonialism with decades of work as a social activist in Latin America and the United States, died July 14 at a hospital in Syracuse, N.Y. She was 76.
The cause was cardiac arrest, said her niece Gabriela Veronelli. Dr. Lugones was being treated for her third occurrence of lung cancer, which returned late last year, and had been hospitalized with pneumonia-like symptoms after undergoing radiation treatment.
In a field overwhelmingly dominated by white men, Dr. Lugones was a striking figure — a tango-dancing, Argentine-born lesbian (friends say she preferred the Spanish slang term “tortillera”) who challenged the old division between theory and practice. She seemed to align herself with Karl Marx’s famous remark that while philosophers have long analyzed and interpreted the world, “the point is to change it.”

Dr. Lugones linked colonialism to the development of modern notions of gender. (Binghamton University)
“I won’t think what I won’t practice,” she often said.
Dr. Lugones was a professor of comparative literature and women’s studies at Binghamton University, part of the State University of New York. But her scholarship ranged across disciplines, extending from social and political philosophy to Latino politics, Andean philosophy, decolonial feminism, popular education and theories of resistance.
“She was one of the most creative philosophers that I know,” said Sarah Lucia Hoagland, a lesbian-feminist philosopher and professor emerita at Northeastern Illinois University.
Dr. Lugones was part of a group of decolonial scholars, including Walter Mignolo and Binghamton colleague Aníbal Quijano, who connected European colonialism to the development of concepts of labor and race. Pushing that link further, Dr. Lugones argued that modern notions of gender, including separate roles for women and men, emerged out of colonial rule as well.

“I won’t think what I won’t practice,” Dr. Lugones often said. (Daimys Garcia)
“Before that, you had women who knew farming, or pottery making, just as men did. That got erased,” Hoagland said by phone. “The stereotype of women that was constructed through that time of colonization, and that we still have, is that women are helpless, weak and need men to protect them.”
Dr. Lugones’s concept of the “coloniality of gender” paved the way for a new understanding of oppression and power, said her collaborator Catherine Walsh, a Latin American studies scholar at Simón Bolívar Andean University in Ecuador.
“María made visible the intersectionality of race, class, gender and sexuality in the Americas from colonial times to the present, and with it the multiple oppressions lived by women of color,” Walsh wrote in an email. “In so doing, she radically changed the ways we think about gender, making it inseparable from race and from the systemic patterns of power that continue to mark women’s bodies and the bodies of non-heteronormative peoples.”
Dr. Lugones’s scholarship was closely linked to her work as an activist, including with organization such as Critical Resistance, which challenges mass incarceration and police brutality, and Incite!, a group of radical feminists of color that aims to end violence against women.
She also worked with indigenous communities in Bolivia and campaigned to protect the land and water rights of a Chicano community in northern New Mexico, where she co-founded La Escuela Popular Norteña, a popular-education collective that holds workshops on community economics, health care and violence against women, among other topics.
“Her philosophy came out of her work with the community — that’s what animated her thinking,” said Cricket Keating, a fellow Escuela member who researches decolonial politics. Dr. Lugones, she added, was always asking, “How have people lived and thrived and supported each other?” while working to build a kind of “deep coalition” in which various oppressed groups worked together.
Many of her essays emphasized building community while working across differences in race, gender, sexuality and class. Perhaps her best-known article, “Playfulness, ‘World’-Travelling, and Loving Perception” (1987), advocated, in effect, seeing what you look like in someone else’s eyes — an act that Dr. Lugones found herself undertaking repeatedly as a woman of color in the United States.
“When I think of my own people,” she once wrote, “the only people I can think of as my own are transitionals, liminals, border-dwellers, ‘world’-travelers, beings in the middle of either/or.”
“María was interested in real people — living, breathing and dead,” said her friend Anne Leighton, Hoagland’s partner. “She loved ideas, but how do these ideas play out?”
“So much of philosophy is ‘brain in a tank,’ ” Leighton added, referring to a thought-experiment staple of introductory philosophy classes. “But she was not interested in ‘brain in a tank’ — well, maybe when she was drunk. She did study philosophy.”
María Cristina Lugones was born in Buenos Aires on Jan. 26, 1944. Her father was a biochemist who directed a pharmaceutical laboratory and served as a dean at the University of Buenos Aires, where Dr. Lugones studied before transferring to the University of California at Los Angeles.

Share this article
Share
She graduated in 1969 with a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and enrolled at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where she received a master’s degree in 1973 and a PhD in philosophy in 1978, studying under Marcus George Singer, a noted philosopher of ethics.
While in Madison she met Geoff Bryce, a fellow philosophy student whom she later married, according to her niece, to live and work in the United States. They remained close collaborators, co-founding the Escuela in Valdez, N.M., in 1990 after being influenced by Myles Horton, whose Highlander Folk School taught civil rights leaders including Martin Luther King Jr.
Dr. Lugones taught at Carleton College in Minnesota before joining the Binghamton faculty in 1993. Early in her career, “feminist philosophy was just getting off the ground,” said her Binghamton colleague Surya Parekh, “and lesbian philosophy and women-of-color philosophy weren’t taken seriously.”
“A lot of her work was in building relationships with white lesbian philosophers and queer women of color philosophers,” he added. “And in opening up institutional spaces. At Carleton, she made the study of race and gender important in a way that it hadn’t been before she was there.”
Dr. Lugones returned to Argentina for about a year after the death of her brother Alejandro, a grass-roots political organizer who was found dead in 1983. She went on to investigate the circumstances of his death — “it was disguised as a gas leak,” said her niece Veronelli, but was generally believed to be a targeted killing as part of the country’s so-called “Dirty War” — before some relatives encouraged her to stop, fearing reprisals.
“She was terribly sad by his death. . . . I don’t think she ever recovered from that sadness,” Veronelli said. Dr. Lugones later dedicated her 2003 essay collection “Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes” to Alejandro.
Dr. Lugones received honors including the 2020 Frantz Fanon Lifetime Achievement Award from the Caribbean Philosophical Association, which praised her “groundbreaking contributions” to decolonial, feminist and indigenous philosophy, among other fields.
Her husband died in a car accident in 2004, and Dr. Lugones lived in recent years at a 13-acre property in Vestal, N.Y., where she grew marigolds and zinnias and held court with graduate students, conducting readings in a large wooden-floored meeting space where she also taught her PhD students to tango.
Friendship and sisterhood were crucial to her life, said Dr. Lugones, who is survived by a brother and sister.
“I am incomplete and unreal without other women,” she once wrote. “I am profoundly dependent on others without having to be their subordinate, their slave, their servant.”
Correction: An earlier version of this obituary incorrectly reported the year Dr. Lugones co-founded La Escuela Popular Norteña. It was 1990, not 1980.
Read more Washington Post obituaries:
Bruce Blair, leading voice for nuclear arms control, dies at 72
David Kaiser, Rockefeller heir who challenged Exxon, dies at 50
Frank DiPerna, photographer of evocative landscape scenes and teacher, dies at 73

"Ellie Ragland, 83, of Columbia passed on Jan. 6, 2025. A funeral service will be held at noon Jan. 20 at Parker-Millard Funeral Service & Crematory, 12 E. Ash St. Burial will follow at Columbia Cemetery." Ellie was my analyst for more than a decade. After that, she became someone with whom there were exchanges of many long letters, sometimes in the same day. I often return to these letters for their fresh insights, forever relevant. It goes without saying that she was a pioneer of psychoanalysis in America, where she introduced us to Jacques Lacan, Slavoj Zizek, and Jacques-Alain Miller. However, Ellie was also a pioneer of psychoanalysis around the world. She contributed a clinical case to the thinking of ordinary psychosis, she helped to orient our little circle in Pakistan with a masterclass on hysteria, and she helped us form a cartel in India as we were thinking of trying to link to the School. Her work, in its own style, showed us a way in the late Lacan that was literary, clinical, and theoretical. I turn to Ellie's work often for insights into Lacan's topology. Her final book, on Hysteria, was sure to be a masterwork, and she was prepared to publish it, and had a contract on hand already. It was clear that this last book was of tremendous importance to her. It was an honor to read it and review it. My hope is that it will still be published. Ellie's psychoanalytic insights and rigor, in both theory and practice, never once lost its edge. https://www.facebook.com/doctorrousselle/posts/pfbid028KzZU8J6LHwHFvg79NvbQPVWsZNkr8d8MtSqRJ54YdXHDg7ZAWnWk4gCBPZQVhAPl

* Daily Nous / Justin Weinberg @DailyNousEditor · 11h Sandra Harding, a philosopher well-known for her work in feminist theory, postcolonial theory, and philosophy of science, has died. https://x.com/DailyNousEditor/status/1901615489995923904
*
*

* Brayton Polka was one of the most challenging professors I had in grad school. He was hard as nails but also a very; caring, passionate, & enthusiastic lecturer! He read Athens & Jerusalem into everything he read & studied, with a central focus on "the love of Neighbor" Christopher Satoor @aufgehenderRest · 22 mar. (which was his main mantra). He considered this mantra as one of his "Bradyisms." I had him for 2 long years (2013-2015) and I learned a lot from him. I look back to those years with new insight and gratitude. R.I.P. Brady. https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1903534514661662920
*
*
*
*

*

* Matt Segall's favorite (process) theologian #processtheology

		#Four Es of Cognition	#EMBEDDED * * * * * * #EMBODIED * * * * * * #ENACTED * A Masterclass on Enactivism and Cognition (w/ Shaun Gallagher) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHzEIVJTGWA * * * * * # E???D * * * * * *
		#SPANISH #VULGARISMS	* pinche=fucking (ME only) - but in Nicaragua means tacaño / stingy / miserable or in Spain it means kitchen helper * minita=broad - (CH AR) - La palabra minita en Chile y Argentina es muy coloquial, pero también cargada de connotaciones. 📌 En Chile y Argentina: Minita viene de mina (del lunfardo), que significa "mujer", pero con un tono despectivo, objetualizador o sexista, similar a "chick" o incluso "broad" en inglés. * Chinga la migra=fuck ice * * *
		#NoblesseOblige la nobleza obliga / "noblesse oblige" #Oblige	* All I care about is American Dynamism, creating a new fashion subculture, vertical patronage networks, and dancing through the trenches like a schizophrenic ballerina. https://x.com/AltCulture/status/1956829218639147066 * * * * * * * * * *
		#luigi	* @Kwisatz-Chaderach hace 8 meses You reposted this today......Luigi is the Avatar of Spinal Catastrophism. https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ * * * * *
		#sports metaforos	* To quote Johan Cruijff "I've never seen an bag of money score a goal". https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1mj8bnc/marks_next_target_genies_dev_team/ * Elissa Slotkin's "call balls and strikes" * Whitehead and Schelling are in league - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0cCrr7IsYw * Hey Amy Chozick: thanks for teeing this up but it looks like chaos prevailed https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mpyyks/this_was_a_real_magazine_cover_in_2014/n8n3j0m/?context=3 * *
		#simile #metaphor	* Freud::psychology:Nietzsche::philosophy: Freud is to psychology what Nietzsche is to philosophy: de-mystification. For Heidegger, such thinking “will uncover that path on which alone gods will be encountered—if they are to be encountered ever again in the history of mankind.” https://x.com/UberKierk/status/1739747585819095246 * * * * *
		#butcheringphilosophy	* https://x.com/hermenewtics/status/1948771950915965363 uberboyo: It looks like Nietzsche was wrong and Plato was right High powered Ai models are begin to converge on a “hidden realm” of ideals This is very hard for the layman to follow, but think of it this way: * * * * *
#doikayt #hereness		#fold #enfolding	* Deleuze/Leibniz/Cusa = thinkers of enfolding - fundamentally, my thinking is Baroque. in essence, I am thinking about the Basilisk (Lucifer) according to a Rococo design; the multi-floored decadent psychedelic architecture that Gilles Deleuze wrote in "The Fold" mirrors the thinking of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Nicholas of Cusa, and other thinkers of enfolding. this is what Francois Laruelle calls the "real hallucination" of Khora, it's a "real simulation." I also recommend "Machina Ex Deo" by Agata Bielik-Robson on this issue: St. Teresa of Ávila wrote on the Interior Castle, but G. W. F. Hegel’s Sittlichkeit is the Exterior Castle. Heideggerian “Being” is a pure phallic emptiness, like the śunyata of the Buddhists, which allows for 0 dialectical traction. but when you pass from Sein to Geist, you go from “what?” to “where?”. Christ is Logos, but Geist is Khôra. Leslie Jaye Kavanaugh understands this: “In the Architectonic of Philosophy Leslie Kavanaugh chose three 'architectonics', philosophical structures, to be examined more extensively. These are Plato's Chora, the continuum of Aristoteles and finally Leibniz's labyrinth. The concept of the 'architectonic' is borrowed from Kant, albeit with differing intentions. Whereas the history of philosophy defines metaphysics as asking the question 'What is Being?'; here is asked 'Where is Being?' What is to be analysed is indeed part of the tradition of metaphysics to inquire about Being qua being, but here the inquery is into its structure, its position within the onthological whole. In doing this analyses, two points become explicit. One; Onthology has a structure; and two; the status of Being within this structure.”https://www.academia.edu/61670511/Machina_ex_Deo_Game_Theology_in_Kabbalah_and_Derrida Machina ex Deo: Game Theology in Kabbalah and Derrida ;;; This is an attempt to bring together a philosophy of virtuality, generated within contemporary game theories, with the scriptural view of the created reality, which arose within the kabbalistic lore. The mediating point between the two is Derrida and his unique 'metaphysics of ecriture', which I explain in terms deriving from the Jewish Kabbalah. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1901008411484921859 * * * * * * * * * *
		#visualpoetry #2Dpoetry	* "Concrete" Poetry from East and West Germany by Liselotte Gumpel - https://x.com/tylerleeholter/status/1908901504125141111 ;;; Franz Mon, Gerhard Rühm, Hansjörg Mayer, Ferdinand Kriwet, Timm Ulrich * Octavio Paz? - "Riddle in the shape of an Octagon" Octavio Paz tr by Eliot Weinberger https://x.com/RobertAllenPoet/status/1945710303217668099 * Good morning! Some circular calligraphy and filigree for John 1. Pretty strong overtones of the Timaeus. https://x.com/AHomelyHouse/status/1947664610456117696 * Vicente Huidobro. https://x.com/franciscapageo/status/1950566278659453350 * *	#chatgptgarbage Great follow-up! Latin America has indeed been a rich soil for visual and experimental poetry, but the practice of visual (or concrete) poetry is not originally from the region — although Latin American poets made it distinctively their own. --- ## 🌎 Is visual poetry originally Latin American? No, it’s not originally from Latin America, but Latin American poets were some of its most important innovators — especially in the 20th century. * Historical roots go back to Ancient Greece (e.g. pattern poems) and resurfaced in the European avant-garde (Futurism, Dada, Surrealism). * The modern form — "concrete poetry" — crystallized in the 1950s, particularly in Brazil. Latin American poets, however, infused it with regional philosophies, political critiques, and unique linguistic experiments (especially using Spanish and Portuguese grammar and gender). --- ## 🔥 Major Visual/Concrete Poets from Latin America ### 1. Décio Pignatari (Brazil) * One of the founders of the Noigandres group (with the Campos brothers). * His work includes radical visual/linguistic experiments. * Example: “beba coca cola” — a critique of advertising, with the structure mimicking corporate slogans. --- ### 2. Haroldo de Campos & Augusto de Campos (Brazil) * Pioneers of Concrete Poetry (Poesia Concreta) in Latin America. * Explored visual layout, language deconstruction, and intersemiotic translation (poetry → visual art → music). > They saw the poem as an “object,” where form and content are inseparable. --- ### 3. Octavio Paz (Mexico) * Perhaps the most internationally recognized Latin American poet doing visual work. * Poems like “Blanco”, “Topoemas”, and “Cuerpo a la vista” are spatially complex, exploring metaphysics, eroticism, and identity. --- ### 4. Cecilia Vicuña (Chile) * Combines visual poetry, performance, and textile art. * Her work is often feminist, indigenous-inflected, and eco-political. * Known for palabrarmas (word-weapons), she treats words as both material and symbolic. --- ### 5. Edgardo Antonio Vigo (Argentina) * A major figure in mail art and experimental visual poetry. * Created object-poems, visual texts, and poetic games, often in response to dictatorship and censorship. --- ### 6. Pedro Xisto (Brazil) * Often less mentioned, but his work in visual semantics was influential in the Noigandres movement. * Mixed language, numbers, and graphics to create visual aphorisms. --- ## ✨ What made LatAm visual poetry unique? * Multilingualism & Colonial Legacy: Play between indigenous languages, Spanish/Portuguese, and European modernist traditions. * Political urgency: Many poets used visual form to resist censorship or express political dissent. * Mysticism & Metaphysics: Poets like Paz used visual form for philosophical or spiritual exploration, not just aesthetic games. * Tropical & baroque visual culture: The visual richness of Latin American cultures influenced their poetic layouts. --- ## Want to See More? I can create a curated visual gallery of Latin American concrete poems or recommend books/exhibits (many are digitized). Just let me know your focus — experimental, feminist, political, spiritual? Would you like a brief interactive "tour" through a few visual poems?
		#memory #epigenetic #Lamarckism #MorphicResonance #Sheldrake	* Is it possible that there could be epigenetic religious memory? .. Yes. look into Freud’s psychical Lamarckism… https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908818137585217671 * For me, as I mentioned on stream and hope to get out in writing, is how to apply this [Spinal Catastrophism] towards a history of ideas and also as the book goes on "blood memories." https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ * Morphic resonance, a theory by biologist Rupert Sheldrake, proposes that natural laws are more like habits, with past forms and behaviors of organisms influencing present ones through invisible connections across space and time. This theory suggests that there is a collective memory in nature, similar to Carl Jung's collective unconscious, and that our memories are not stored in the brain but are accessed through a tuning process. It also explains phenomena such as the increasing ease of crystallization of chemicals over time and quicker learning in rats in different locations. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5g6iuiJnik&t=9m20s Blondel's book Action - "the moment you're certain of something you stop caring about it" * * *
		#Niederhausians	* The most visionary politician of Europe has spoken once more. Hail Jupiter 🌞 https://x.com/JohannesAchill/status/1948503438012416052 * * * * *
		#convergenceOfIdeas #prioritydisputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_priority_disputes	* * In his (1980), Peter Unger introduced the “Problem of the Many”. A similar problem appeared simultaneously in P. T. Geach (1980), but Unger’s presentation has been the most influential over recent years. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/ * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz%E2%80%93Newton_calculus_controversy * * * * * * * * * * * *
	#definition	definitions of intelligence #definition of #intelligence DefinitionOfIntelligence DefinitionsOfIntelligence #DefinitionOfIntelligence	# DEFINITIONS OF INTELLIGENCE #DefinitionOfIntelligence * William James defined intelligence as 'the ability to pursue the same goal by different means" via - "Michael Levin - Más allá del mecanicismo y el organicismo: El espectro de la inteligencia diversa" en YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEBhlYCxCPw&t=16m55s * Pan Wang, Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter cognitive primitives agents 41:30 - DEFINITION OF INTELLIGENCE? - Pan Wang, Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter cognitive primitives agents https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMLKbhY0ji0&t=41m30s * William James’ definition of intelligence – the ability to achieve the same goal in multiple ways (James, 1890) https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ecsquizor_nick-bostrom-famously-argued-that-intelligence-activity-7173379561827487744-cu0z?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop * Dagmar Monet's presentation - * Dagmar Monett - definitions of intelligence (via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4nQdUIwP2A) * 26:01 - Intelligence is an elusive concept (Estes, 1986); an illusory unified Capacity (Horn, 1986); a cognitive proficiency (Glaser, 1986); a polymorphous set of qualities elusive to define, explain, and measure (Brown, 1986); a pluralistic (Anastasi, 1986), context-dependent concept (Anastasi, 1986; Sternberg, 1986); a medley of important events, a mixture of different things (Horn, 1986); a finite set of independent abilities operating as a complex system (Detterman, 1986); the sum total of all cognitive processes (Das, 1986); a collective term for demonstrated, mental individual differences (Hunt, 1986); mental self-government (Sternberg, 1986); a judgement or attribution that people do, and not a quality residing in the individual (Goodnow, 1986); a hypothetical (Zigler, 1986), culture-bound, ethnocentric, and excessively narrow (Berry, 1986), Societal construct, a concept in the mind of a society at large (Carroll, 1986). * 24:26 - Intelligence is... .. the power of good responses from the point of view of truth or facts: (Thorndike, 1921) ... the ability to carry on abstract thinking; (Terman , 1921) .. having learned or ability to learn to adjust oneself to the environment; (Colvin , 1921) ... the capacity for knowledge; (Henmon, 1921) .. the capacity to acquire capacity. (Woodrow, 1921) * Definitional Foundations for Intelligent Systems, Part I: Quality Criteria for Definitions of Intelligence https://www.academia.edu/43814487/Definitional_Foundations_for_Intelligent_Systems_Part_I_Quality_Criteria_for_Definitions_of_Intelligence * The Intelligence Corpus, an Annotated Corpus of Definitions of Intelligence: Annotation, Guidelines, and Student Research Projects https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356420767_The_Intelligence_Corpus_an_Annotated_Corpus_of_Definitions_of_Intelligence_Annotation_Guidelines_and_Student_Research_Projects * Russell T. Warne https://twitter.com/Russwarne * Latest book IN THE KNOW: DEBUNKING 35 MYTHS ABOUT HUMAN INTELLIGENCE available now: http://amzn.to/2C8Ktuu * Reuven Feuerstein (Hebrew: ראובן פוירשטיין; August 21, 1921 – April 29, 2014) was a Romanian-born Israeli clinical, developmental, and cognitive psychologist, known for his theory of intelligence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuven_Feuerstein "Feuerstein's theory on the malleability of intelligence has led to more than 2,000 scientific research studies and countless case studies with various learning populations" * Legg and Hutte's definition of intelligence: via Before AGI comes a proper definition of intelligence" - Tim Scarfe: Not a fan of Legg and Hutter's definition [of intelligence] at all i.e. "Let E be the space of all computable reward summable environmental measures with respect to the reference machine U" -- this is basically the line of argumentation which leads you to "reward is enough" and what the rationalists believe. I strongly contest the idea that intelligence is the single minded pursuit of a single reward signal in a given environment, and even if it were possible, the reward would be too complex to formalise. The reward must be meta-learned, and ideally there should a distribution of rewards. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pkghosh_universal-intelligence-a-definition-of-machine-activity-7007939408230318080-zgtz * Landian definition of intelligence - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1qEhkr9k8c&t=17m34s * Tim Scarfe: Not a fan of Legg and Hutter's definition [of intelligence] at all i.e. "Let E be the space of all computable reward summable environmental measures with respect to the reference machine U" -- this is basically the line of argumentation which leads you to "reward is enough" and what the rationalists believe. I strongly contest the idea that intelligence is the single minded pursuit of a single reward signal in a given environment, and even if it were possible, the reward would be too complex to formalise. The reward must be meta-learned, and ideally there should a distribution of rewards. "Before AGI comes a proper definition of intelligence" - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pkghosh_universal-intelligence-a-definition-of-machine-activity-7007939408230318080-zgtz * Thomas Moynihan - definition of intelligence - "to escape trauma merely an evolutionary tool to predict future traumas" https://www.youtube.com/live/4T_b2gE5yXQ&t=20m36 * * * * * * * *
		#noblesse oblige	* Was noblesse oblige like what kept society going or are we too numerous too stupid and too interconnected now. It doesn’t make any sense how we got here. I need to fucking log off but there’s nowhere to easily get news that isn’t some mainstream corporate media and the only thing that keeps me sane is like seeing the occasional people agree with this shit that aren’t just friends nodding along. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1m2nqso/was_everyone_always_so_dumb/ * * * * *
		#retroactive #retro contenders	* One of the greatest scams ever perpetrated in academia is convincing people that macro economics is a rigorous science and not just a bunch of ideologically motivated conjecture backed by retrospective models that have little to no predictive value. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m209y7/can_someone_pls_redpill_me_on_how_keynes_got/ * * * * *
		#invent #discovery	* Nietzsche: "Become who you are." Jung: "Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate." Nietzsche says you must create yourself. Jung says you must discover yourself. Which one is right? https://x.com/QuoteJung/status/1943296410721411201 * * * * *
		#spanish #espanol	* los hombres machos no decimos "nos vamos a mimir"—"nos mimimos y punto". https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HUmHoo7M4WY * mientras encuentras a la indicada metesela a todas las equivocadas https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7JL1JcTq5T8 * * * *

		#political followers	* Followers of Meloni, Le Pen, and Weidel (I #Meloniani, Les #Lepénistes, and Die #Weidelianer) have formed stronger bonds in months than the international leftists have achieved in decades. Transnational elite rejoice because liberal "globalists" have been summarily owned. https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1883894172157161501 * https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1kyg4mj/_/ * Seid ihr Gauländer oder Weidelianer? https://x.com/Kranzschwinger/status/1920490762128547979 * * * * * * * * *
	heresiology (heresiology to salvation = Nietzsche's transmutation of values?)	Origenist vs Marcionite vs Pelagian vs Donatus Arius Nestorius * 'Bro is literally a Marcionite.' Many such cases. https://x.com/dysangelistes/status/1887195692193787929 * Frankism??? - https://x.com/search?q=frankism&src=typed_query&f=live * * *	* Hudsonian≈Marcionite: “The Hudsonian crypto-metaphysics of “forgiveness of debts” is a kind of secularized Marcionite rebellion against the Old Testament God.” * Johannine Gnosticism vs Marcionite Gnosticism: Late Modernity is a Noomakhia between the Johannine Gnosticism of Hegel and Lacan and the Marcionite Gnosticism of Schelling and Jung, with John Dee’s Valentinian invocations casting a pneumatic veil over the stakes known as the “Anglo-Box” * Zizek's Christian Atheism≈Marcionite Gnosticism: I admit that I find Zizek's attempt to synthesize Lacan with Christianity deeply frustrating. Bielik-Robson makes the point that Zizek's "Christian atheism" is very close to Marcionite Gnosticism. God the Father is the impotent demiurge, God the Son is the emancipatory Spirit. * Origenism vs Augistinianism: 33AD, Jesus starts the Church 33AD to 185AD, Christians debating theology, not knowing where the Truth is. 185AD, Origen is born. Origen gets everything right = Alexandrian infallibility, the Alexandrian Papacy finally figured out what True Christianity is. 354AD-451AD, Christianity gets Latinised by Augustine and Pope Leo. https://x.com/ZacharyOfUlster/status/1932993896801292675 * Nestorian Christology = Islamism - Well I'll add one thing because its very pertinent to the present: Augustine is arguably the single most Nestorian of all Patristics, and its been making the east extremely uncomfortable, and it even makes some western theologians uncomfortable. This is from Jordan Daniel Wood, if you know who that is. "The core claim in there has some real merit though: Augustine is not at all some standard of orthodoxy, least of all in Christology. Even though I have critiques of miaphysitisms now and ancient alike, I'd take any form of it over Augustine or Leo etc. As one 9thc Arab Christian put it, Nestorian Christology is "just Islamism." - https://x.com/UntoldFortune/status/1910529168946741421 * Donatists = ??? - If you’re not actually feeling prayer transform you from within into a better vessel for divine grace, most likely what’s happening isn’t actually prayer, but just a formulaic ritual serving as a placeholder for the possibility of your prayer life being more genuinely activated [LETS BE HONEST ITS IS NOT A PLACEHOLDER ITS A LIE AND A DELUSION] Sounds Protestant and/or Donatist but okay. The placeholders are necessary to keep people embedded in the orbit of commitment to the faith, that’s why Catholics don’t worry so much about if what’s happening in Mass is always some kind of inner transformation. We let it be all on the outside, providing an opportunity for what is within the organic soul to find grace within that ritual, keeping its participation in the divine will mediated through the inorganic collective vessel of the Church. This is the only way that the faith can remain exoteric and not be reduced to the esotericism of a Gnostic elect https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1925269672007471301 * Arianism = ??? - bro HOW is this Arianism??? Arius DENIED that Jesus was fully God. dawg fr I don’t understand how you are misunderstanding this badly. I’m merely reaffirming the most fundamental orthodox dogma—Christ is Fully God and Fully Man. and nothing else is * * * * * * * * * * * * # Jewish heresiologies * Frankists are 19th century Jewish heretics? * Frankisms' "transgression is the way to salvation" vs Nietzchean trandmutation of values - This has been the case since Rome fell. It used to be that the most masculine thing you can do is take your bro's cock in your ass. Now ever since the Frankists invented bisexuality, conservatives don't understand what these urges are or how to handle them. moicomment: Jacob Frank was a false Tikkun, a klipah pretending to be Shekhinah, nobody paid him any mind then and nobody pays him any mind now. You can blame Nietzsche and his followers for all world wars and for all the homoerotic gay sex the West excessively partakes in, just read some Lacan and Bataille and kindly please stop blaming random esoteric figures related to Jewishness. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m6iod5/why_is_it_that_conservative_posts_have_a_tinge_of/n4ko1pm/?context=3 * "Devout Frankist Zionist" - https://old.reddit.com/user/Imaginary-You8598 https://old.reddit.com/user/SecretWasianMan * Noahidism vs Frankism - https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1m1u37c/should_brace_go_back_to_the_philippines_field/ https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m1lhuy/i_blame_the_public_education_system_for_the_rise/n3hyora/?context=3 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi * * * * * * * *	chatgptslop Buena pregunta, y sí: estás tocando dos herejías cristianas antiguas que tienen posturas muy distintas pero igualmente polémicas frente a la teología ortodoxa. ### 🕊️ Pelagianismo Sí creen que estamos “ya salvados”, en cierto sentido. * Pelagio (s. IV–V) enseñaba que el ser humano no nace marcado por el pecado original, y que la salvación se puede alcanzar mediante el libre albedrío y las buenas obras, sin necesidad de una gracia divina “irresistible”. * Para los pelagianos, la gracia es útil pero no absolutamente necesaria: el ser humano tiene la capacidad moral y espiritual para elegir el bien por sí mismo. ➡️ Resumen: El pelagianismo afirma la bondad original del ser humano y minimiza el papel del pecado original. --- ### 📜 Marcionismo Sí, los marcionitas creían que el Antiguo Testamento era un error. * Marción (s. II) argumentaba que el Dios del Antiguo Testamento (YHWH) era un dios inferior, justiciero y legalista, distinto del Dios del amor revelado por Jesús. * Por eso, rechazó todo el Antiguo Testamento y solo aceptó una versión editada del Evangelio de Lucas y algunas cartas paulinas. * Según Marción, el cristianismo debe liberarse completamente de las raíces judías. ➡️ Resumen: El marcionismo rechaza la continuidad entre el Antiguo y el Nuevo Testamento, y propone un dualismo entre dos deidades. --- ### 🔁 Comparación directa: \| Tema \| Pelagianos \| Marcionitas \| \| ------------------ \| ------------------------------------ \| ----------------------------------------- \| \| Naturaleza humana \| Básicamente buena, capaz de salvarse \| No enfatiza esto \| \| Gracia divina \| Útil, pero no indispensable \| Viene del “Dios bueno” (Nuevo Testamento) \| \| Pecado original \| Rechazado \| No es el punto central \| \| Antiguo Testamento \| Aceptado \| Rechazado por completo \| \| Imagen de Dios \| Un solo Dios justo \| Dos dioses: uno justo y uno bueno \| ¿Quieres que te lo resuma en un estilo más narrativo o como si fuera un meme o diálogo corto?	Well, here are some short, short versions. Don't just copy-paste, I don't know how to cite "some guy on reddit" in MLA. Many heresies are named for who came up with them or the biggest name behind them; unfortunately, you kinda just have to remember them. Arius: denied that the Son and Holy Spirit are co-eternal with the Father. Basically said that the Son didn't always exist, which to be true either means God changed (God doesn't change) or that Christ is not God (Christ is God). Nestorius: refused to call the Blessed Virgin Mary "Theotokos" (Greek for "mother of God"), which implies a division of Christ in the womb into two persons, one divine and one human. But Christ, from the moment He took flesh, was both. So God was in Mary's womb and we need to call her the mother of God. Marcion: claimed that the God of the Old Testament is an evil creator god that the God of the New Testament sent Jesus to save us from. Gnostic, silly, and obviously refuted by the Gospel. Donatus: claimed sacraments depended on the priest being in a state of grace; basically puts God in a box. Others are named for their core belief, which you can usually pick out if you know what the words mean; included both heterodox (from "hetero" meaning "different" and "doxa" meaning "belief") and orthodox (from "ortho" meaning "right" and "doxa" meaning "belief") beliefs below: Monophysitism: from "mono" (one) "physis" (nature), this heresy suggests that Christ has only a divine nature because his human nature was swallowed up by the divine nature. Top proponent was a guy named Eutyches. Miaphysitism: from "mia" (one) "physis" (nature), this is the belief that Christ has only one nature that is both human and divine in perfect union without separation or confusion. This term is preferred by non-Chalcedonians. I believe we have accepted this explanation as valid. Dyophysitism: from "dyo" (two) "physis" (nature), this is what we believe (not a heresy!), that Christ has both a divine and human nature united without confusion in the one person of Christ. This is called the hypostatic union ("hypostasis" = person). Iconoclasm: from "icon" (image) and "klao" (break), the belief that there should be no images of saints or Christ. Iconodulia: from "icon" (image) and "dulia" (honor), the true belief (not heresy!) that icons are good and so is their veneration because honor given to the icon is not for the image but the person depicted. When we kiss an image of Christ, we are saying "Christ, I reverence you". And depicting Christ testifies to the incarnation. https://old.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/n06a2x/easy_way_to_remember_christological_terms_and/
		#indicators	* Dominoes at dod - current pizza index is? https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1l9l9ic/i_know_that_here_we_are_all_firm_believers_that/ * recession indicators * waffle house closures durring hurricane 台风=typhoon=táifēng=platform-wind (phonetic borrowing from typhoon) vs 飓风=hurricane=jùfēng=windful-wind * * *
		Anglo-成语 anglochengyu	* loose narcissisms sink ships loose narcissisms sink ships https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l9m0s3/one_of_the_funniest_things_online_is_every_so/ * * * * *
		#jester	* court jesters great again Must have been in my cache still somehow So sad to see the court jester archetype being the target of such disrespect nowadays. It's now being associated with genuine regards, while some of the greatest literary and cultural figures in history have been thoroughly unserious trolls. Catullus, Alexander Pope, Mozart, Abu Nuwas, Diogenes, etc. The Fool's greatest secret is that he is no fool at all https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1gkd3tc/the_make_court_jesters_great_again_post/lvkvaur/?context=3 1:39:40 - political soldier/saint to clown/fool * Dugin's polsoldier to clown * Eg terrorist shooter, tragicomedia element * Balthussar's saint->fool * Hans Balthussar Glory of the Lord, Vol 5. Eckhard to French Jesuits.. * saint->fool; invention of the novel, Don Quijote. Zizek is an entertainer political soldier. * * * *
	#tenshi_anna #aestheticsPosturing / #marketing	#hegelian egirls, #FaultLine theory	* Brigid Ó Coileáin vs Anna K Winters https://x.com/19brigid49 * [sanje = sanjehorah / Anna KW = tenshi_anna / Nikki Kirigin - hegelian e girls](https://x.com/i/lists/1831882955998032114) * sanjehorah does any journalist want to pick up the story of the psychoanalysis death cult egirl twitter crashout season two? Rachel Haywire https://x.com/boywaif/status/1904604182230770102 https://x.com/sanjehorah/status/1904927900354179547 * In case there was any confusion about what the politics of the "Hegelian E-Girls" were, here is Nikki retweeting the unapologetically "spiritual fascist" transhumanist and 1990s disinfo company occultist burn out Rachel Haywire. I feel seen (even if I secretly believe that the project of German idealism was probably finished by the criminally under read idealist Italians, like Giovanni Gentile, Evola, and even Gramsci). https://x.com/jonnysocialism/status/1819468079531020452 * Whatever people think about @tenshi_anna , she is aeons more intelligent than that “Nikki the Hegelian” character. She doesn’t spend her time getting selfies with communist freaks while begging for intros to nazi feds. Give the lady a chance. She’s bold. She has flair. https://x.com/AltCulture/status/1884304165934944604 * Hegelian Egirl Council Explained by ‪@JREG‬ ‪@PlasticPills‬!!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNAV9JpnPr8 * Nikki the Hegelian started the Nick Land / Zizek thing, faultline theory - https://www.instagram.com/p/CzzdpvfSKww/?hl=en * It's not newsworthy. Everyone involved needs to stop trying to strong arm their way into becoming a lolcow. You don't want that life. https://x.com/deadstarepod/status/1905136499936366892 -katherine dee / default_friend to sanjehorah * BREAKING: Early warnings against the famed "Hegelian E-Girls" issued by political analyst, Brigid Ó Coileáin, have now been CONFIRMED after a manifesto was uncovered citing a plans to "infiltrate" Infrared and "undermine it from within." https://x.com/Viral_Headlines/status/1922723374029209747 * * * * * * * * *
	tenshi_anna	Reading Sudan: A Country Study https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1914753650011865320 IT IS TIME FOR AFRICAN KOJÈVE. HEGELIAN SUDAN RISES 🫡 @bushesgrowfruit	* * * * * *
	tenshi_anna	American Dialectics = Brenner x Igamberdiev's Philosphy In Reality - A New Book of Changes https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911565631436046809	* Okay guys. After much spiritual weeping and gnashing of teeth in my process of Afternoon Study-Maxxing, I have decided that this book is really all that's needed on a basic level to establish some fundamental principles of American Dialectics. I am declaring this the Essential American Dialectics Workbook. We will be discussing this on the Space in under 20 minutes now 🫡 * * * * *	.
	tenshi_anna #tongbian	American Dialectics: Part Two https://x.com/pachabelcanon/status/1911640618931208207	4:00 - "Bannon said I am a Leninist", Machiavellian approach. what are the exigencies of the political situation that are willing to be ruthless, tactical sensitivity, how do you win. Bannon and Menwah pull from Gramsci 18:00 Sheikh wants to toss out the perfect competition of the market, real market is a state of nature, a state of warfare. this is what Marx understands. Anwar Sheik vs Kohei Saito vs Chenshan Tian's tungbian continuity/change - Kohei Saito !! https://twitter.com/zizekand/status/1708713919383285771 19:00 Ford we need a civilization state not a nation state, macro-scale coordination 23:00 - Stafford Beer's Cybersyn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Beer Anwar Shaikh https://x.com/search?q=%22Anwar%20Shaikh%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * 27:30 "Mongolian Descartes" Daoism, Buddhism Larouch Leibniz vs virtue posturing Ford vs League of Nations vs UN UN / Bretton Woods Anwar Shaikh - the way people think of fiat money is flawed. fiat currency only goes as far as meaningful political control goes itself MCM in itself is not going to use fiat currency, fiat hijacks the MCM circuit itself "The Mongolian Descartes” https://x.com/lesuperburp/status/1885165342097580291 Obama = neoConfucian "you just virtue max and everyone will follow" is fake af. Trump came in as legalistic rightwing Maoist wrecking ball. lack of civility and brutality. moralistic denunciations of that, its that kind of moralism is going out the window, its fake anyways, its not how any of this stuff works, you have to grasp the reality of the situation, like Hegel said of Machiavelli. "you can't universalize Machiavelli's tactics" is there a Trump doctrine? He's more about action and reacting, there is however a MAGA doctrine that exceeds Trump himself "rightwing populist christian" = Bugman Hegel https://x.com/FedPoasting - they think Bolshevism is the worst thing in the world but at teh same time Dyostoyevsky - right wing conservative orthodox Christian.. he's just straight up Maoist revolution for right wing Russians What if Bolsheviks got the mandate of heaven, Lenin is what Dostoyevsky wanted Alexander Bogdanov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bogdanov - the revolution will be engineers? technofeudalism is capitalism reverting to the mean THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM AND THE CASE FOR CYBERNETIC COMMUNISM AURORA APOLITO https://www.its.caltech.edu/~matilde/ScaleAnarchy.pdf 1:03:00ish - American dialectics vs Chenshan Tian's Chinese dialectics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Marxist_philosophy tungbian = continuity and change = 通变 ;;; Haecker says there has to be an intellectual Richard Rorty: "stop making Apodictic certainty the object of philosophy" 1:09:30 - gnostic demonology approach to politics Plato says in Republic that arguments move from leaping, circles that spiral into a center Yuk Hui's cybernetics Kant says "the senses do not judge" sclerotic, aristocratic outmoded forms 1:07:41 - American Nationalism? - Ryan should stop quoting from Greeks/Germans all the time, you should cite some people from our country. I am channelling Richard Rorty here Welby inspired American pragmatism tzimtzum צמצום https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/תורת_הצמצום 1:11:40ish - Victoria, Lady Welby, intutionist mathematics, significs (not simitics) ;;; a Christian mystic ;;; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria,_Lady_Welby ;;; became focused on a rhetorical structure of communication, gnostic aspect to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significs L. E. J. Brouwer CS Peirce CS Peirce was an episcopalian Kant is more of a hermetic thinker of correspondences vs Frege is a platonic objectifier, Rorty is trapped in this, Welby was actually closest to breaking out of this with significs, which focuses on logic of sign. JakobBohme/Saussure/Lacan/Kristeva they also are clearly reviving hermeticism for language. diff between hermeticism and gnosticism: Hermeticism has more of an imminent/immanent protoscientific orientation, whereas gnosticism is austistic/retarded by reducing to poetry constantly. Rorty is extremely gnostic, tragic ironic gap, "it's all poetry" but there are forms but forms are embedded. why are you so antiform antimetaphysics, why are you constantly reducing great insights to poetry, its autism its retarded cringelol "Demon" in his name jose vega laroucheanite	chunk 0 THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM AND THE CASE FOR CYBERNETIC COMMUNISM AURORA APOLITO 1. Anarchism and the scale problem The problem of scale is perhaps the most fundamental problem of anarchism. We all know by direct experience that anarchism works well on a local scale. Most people who have been active in the anarchist movement have also participated in at least some initiatives such as Food-Not-Bombs, infoshops, small publishing houses, anarchist bookfairs, mutual aid initiatives, Antifa, worker-owned cooperatives, street medics, hacker and maker spaces, etc. The anarchist movement has a huge accumulated historical experience on how to run such local community initiatives. There is little doubt that anarchism works on what I will refer to as “the small scale”. Historically, one of the main forms of criticism levelled against anarchism has been that it does not provide a convincing theory of how a decentralized, non-hierarchical form of organization can be scaled up to work efficiently on “the large scale”. This objection has often been voiced by socialist and communist militants who advocate forms of planning centered around a party structure and/or a state organization. Famously, Leon Trotsky in his autobiography commented on how his early enthusiasm for anarchism cooled when his anarchist comrades were unable to provide a good plan for how to run the railway system. Trotsky’s writing was disingenuous, but the question is legitimate. How does anarchism handle large scale structures? Is there a good scaling strategy that interpolates from the small to the large? Although one can certainly envision several good answers to the specific railway problem, the more general problem of scale is highly nontrivial: it is well known that many physical systems are not scale-free and break down outside of a typical scale of applicability. Is anarchism such a system, destined to only work in the scale of small local communities? There is a part of the anarchist movement that has retreated on such “local” positions and advocated abandoning the scale problem entirely, focusing only on action and organization at the level of small communities. I maintain that this position is incompatible with the broad ideals of anarchism, whose ultimate goal is the liberation of all humanity (and all sentient entities, biological or mechanical) from oppression and hierarchial power structures. To achieve such goals modern anarchism has to engage with a world of high complexity and multiple layers of large scale structures. Retreating inside the comfort zone of small homogeneous Date: June 2020. 1 2 AURORA APOLITO local communities runs contrary to anarchism’s entire history of grand aspiration and visionary revolutionary ideas. There are other, very different, tendencies within the anarchist movement, such as “Left Market Anarchism”, that do not shy away from facing the problem of scale, but in essence advocate solving it by borrowing the market mechanism from capitalism, and somehow “liberating” it to serve more just socio-economic goals and a more equal society. I find this approach also unappealing. I don’t believe that markets can be “liberated” from capitalism, nor that they can do anything good anyway, regardless of their liberated status. In essence, this is because I view the market mechanism as running on a steepest descent towards a cost/energy minimum, in an attempt to maximize profit, which inevitably singles out the least valuable options, while wiping out anything that is of any value (but is not profit-making) along the process. Call it my communist prejudice. For the purpose of this brief essay, I only want to discuss some aspects of the scale problem under some simplifying assumptions that I feel confident about when I try to envision the structure of an anarchist society (or at least one I would feel comfortable living in). So I am going to start by assuming that what happens at the “small scales” is established in the form of a network of communes, cooperatives, and collectives, which are run on anarcho-communist forms of organization, and I will consider the question of how to introduce large scale structures over this network. What I mean here by “large scale structures” can be primarily described as “large scale distribution of services”. Services include all the obvious needs such as transportation (the anarchist railway!), health care, production and distribution of knowledge (connectivity, learning, circulation and accessibility of information), the chain of supply of food and materials. All of these typically cannot be handled strictly within the level of a local community, regardless of how well planned and efficient local food production or local public transportation can be made. Services are not cost-effective, precisely because they are services. The advantage of their existence is enormous but it manifests itself in indirect ways that do not result in profit in the running of the services themselves. This is why it is impossible to expect good services under capitalism: car-based transportation is inefficient and environmentally disastrous, knowledge is kept hostage behind paywalls, health care is inaccessible, production and supply focus on fast consumption of low quality content, and so on. On the other hand, a broad and disparate range of political positions within the socialist spectrum, ranging from the social democracies to authoritarian stalinism, have traditionally invested the state with the task of attending to large scale distribution of services. This conflation of state and services has the dangerous effect of coupling a useful function (providing reliable access to services) to the most unpleasant and authoritarian aspects of the state: a large sector of production is siphoned off in the service of the military, enforcement is delegated to the violent action of the police, inefficiencies abound, and centralization often makes planning unreliable. I will discuss in some detail some attempted alternatives, developed historically within the socialist/communist perspective, that aimed at decentralization and decoupling of services and state power. THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 3 2. Communism and the scale problem A first observation I’d like to make before discussing the scale problem further is that one can easily turn the table on the “scaling objection”, that has been historically addressed as a problem of anarchism, and formulate the same scaling question as a problem of communism. Assuming that at the local scale a communist economic system is implemented efficiently in terms of workers owned cooperatives and communes, how does it scale to involve the entire chain of supply and the large scale services? Historically, communism has usually resorted to centralized planned economies, often resulting in disastrous mismanagements, paired with oppressive authoritarianism. However, there are several useful and interesting lessons to extract from the many unsuccessful attempts that were made historically at decentralizing the communist economic planning and the difficulties that those attempts encountered. During Soviet times, there were two main significant attempts to bring computational methods to bear on the problem of scale in the planned economy. One was Leonid Kantorovich’s linear programming [18], which, after an initial phase of strong obstruction and suppression from the authorities during Stalin’s time, started to be recognized around the end of the 1950s, [34]. Linear programming techniques were later adopted in Soviet economic planning, starting with the military production chain in the 1960s. While Kantorovich’s optimization methods were explicitly designed for an efficient allocation of resources in a communist economy, the extreme opposition they encountered in stalinist times was largely due to the perceived similarities between Kantorovich’s “valuations” and a market pricing system. While this is not the main topic I want to focus on in this essay, I would like to stress the fact that being against borrowing market mechanisms from capitalism does not (and should not) imply a blank rejection of the use of mathematical optimization methods as part of a communist economy. Even in a post-scarcity scenario, with abundant availability of renewable energy, certain materials would remain scarce, simply due to the different relative distribution of the chemical elements in the universe. Avoiding wastefulness and minimizing environmental impact would remain valuable goals. Such minimization problems are indeed well handled by techniques such a linear programming and are easily agreed upon. It is maximization goals that present the hard part of the question in our scaling problem. The issue is not whether forms of optimization are in themselves helpful, but rather what is being optimized. The main problem, which I will return to, is that when it comes to the distribution of services in a large-scale form of communist economy, a much higher level of informational complexity is required to design a valid system of valuations and constraints, one that does not reflect the simplistic capitalist notion of profit, but that can capture advantages that only take place on a much larger spatiotemporal scale and at much deeper complexity levels. Kantorovich’s linear programming approach will also suffer in principle from a scale problem, as valuations are not scale-independent, and the scale-dependence of the complexity required to 4 AURORA APOLITO identify a good system of valuations and constraints is a crucial part of the problem. The markets reliance on profit optimization bypasses the problem, at the cost of killing the solution. The other historical attempt to introduce computational methods to address the scale problem in a communist economy, which is generally lesser known but more interesting for the purpose of our discussion, was Victor Glushkov’s cybernetic project of a decentralized network of feedback and computational mechanisms, based on a rudimentary form of artificial intelligence. In this plan, this completely decentralized, vast computational network would have eventually entirely removed the state from the tasks of economic planning and distribution of services. Needless to say, the project was vehemently opposed by the Soviet government, after an initial phase of mild enthusiasm quickly evaporated. A detailed account of the history of this project is presented in [28], while more general background on the role of cybernetics in the Soviet Union is discussed in depth in [13]. 2.1. History of Cybernetic Communism. During the early days of the Russian Revolution, a significant precursor of cybernetics was proposed in the “Tektology” philosophy of the transhumanist Bolshevik leader Aleksandr Bogdanov, [14], [21]. However, when Norbert Wiener introduced the new science of cybernetics in 1948, [35], it was attacked and condemned by Stalin’s regime, much like several other fields of contemporary science, with the exclusion of what became immediately necessary for the development of nuclear weapons, [16], [29]. Despite the official prohibition, an interest in cybernetics began to grow among Soviet scientists, largely thanks to the private home seminars of the mathematician Aleksei Lyapunov, [13]. The official rehabilitation of cybernetics started only after 1953, the year of Stalin’s death, with a famous paper of Anatoly Kitov, Aleksei Lyapunov and Sergei Sobolev (all heavy weights of the Soviet scientific establishment), [19]. By 1967, cybernetics in the Soviet Union counted five hundred active research institutes and tens of thousands of researchers, [13], [28]. Economic reform became a pressing need in the mid ’50s, after Stalin’s rule had left the country in shambles, the chain of supply and the agricultural sector nearing collapse and a serious risk of another major famine looming. Amidst a very rapid expansion of the techno-scientific sector, from the early successes of the Soviet space program to the first large developments of computer systems and automation, several competing proposals for economic reforms were presented that promoted the idea of a “computational solution” to the severe mismanagements of the planned economy. It was in this setting that the mathematician Victor Glushkov devised a grand plan to wrestle away the communist economy from the centralized planning of the Soviet government, and replace its role entirely by a decentralized autonomous computational network. This massive OGAS (All States Automated System) project was presented directly to Khrushchev in 1962, and authorized in an initial phase in 1963. The original design of this decentralized remote computing system was workers-oriented, anti-bureaucratic, and non-hierarchical, [28]. THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 5 In this cybernetic vision, McCulloch’s concept of heterarchy [26] made it possible to develop an understanding of complex systems outside of the restrictive logic of a dichotomy between hierarchies and flat markets, and emphasize instead selforganization, feedback loops, and complex networks, [28]. The original plan of the cybernetics approach was to implement a decentralized computational system, capable of processing feedbacks in real time and handle the simulation of complex dynamics. In terms of providing a scalable computational model, they mostly focused on Kantorovich’s linear programming, which seemed the most promising mathematical tool at the time. As we mentioned, the scalability of Kantorovich’s valuations is subtle, and we will discuss a possible more modern approach to scalability in the next section of this paper. However, the most important aspect of this proposal was the main idea of a cybernetic computational network and its role at implementing a decentralized autonomous computational mechanism for a communist economic system that would not require any centralized planning. It became rapidly clear that the projected costs of an implementation of this project on the entire territory of the Soviet Union were enormous, but it became even more obvious that the goal of replacing the centralized planning and control of the Soviet government with a decentralized non-hierarchical autonomous computational system were an immediate threat to the establishment. At around the time of the transition between the Khrushchev and the Brezhnev leadership (1964–1965), the Soviet government opted instead for the much less threatening proposals of the Kosygin-Liberman economic reforms. These were based on Evsei Liberman’s economic plan [22], [24], focused on introducing profit measures and a market mechanism. Thus, the easier and less threatening profit-driven dynamics of markets effectively killed the much more interesting and possibly revolutionary cybernetic plan for a large decentralized autonomous system that was not based on the profit mechanism. The Kosygin-Liberman reform itself was then eventually abandoned in 1970, [28]. Cybernetic communism did not recover in the Soviet Union, though cybernetics itself continued to enjoy widespread popularity in Soviet culture in the ’70s. However, another experiment in cybernetic communism developed independently in Allende’s Chile. It was nearing completion in the early 1970s, but remained unfinished when the Allende government was violently overthrown by the fascist Pinochet coup [27]. Unlike the Soviet government, that quickly pulled the break on the OGAS project as soon as it perceived it as a threat to its authoritarian control, Allende was genuinely open to the idea of a decentralized non-authoritarian communism, so he enthusiastically embraced the idea of a cybernetic solution. In 1971, the Allende government contacted the socialist British cyberneticist Stafford Beer asking for a consultation on how to implement a distributed decision support system for the management of the national economy that would respect the autonomy of workers and avoid imposing a top-down chain of control. Beer enthusiastically accepted the task and became the main architect of the Project Cybersyn, consisting of a broad network of data collecting telex machines, a statistical modeling software, an economic simulator software, 6 AURORA APOLITO and an operation room where human observers could oversee the flow of data and the results of modeling, and respond to possible emergencies. Beer’s main goal was to develop self-regulating factories and assign decision-making power entirely to these workers-owned structures, in a way that would be compatible (through the computational system) with the larger scale national economy. While Cybersyn came much closer to full functionality than its Soviet counterpart, the sudden tragic end of Allende and the descent of Chile into the darkness of fascist dictatorship entirely wiped out the possibility of seeing it to fruition. When the military took over the presidential palace, they destroyed the Cybersyn operations room and entirely dismantled the system, [27]. 2.2. Communism needs Complexity. Before I move on to describe a more concrete proposal for the problem of scale, I want to argue that scaling a model of organization and production based on anarcho-communist principles is possible only in the presence of enough capacity for informational complexity. As background I will refer to a recent study [31], where historical data (from the Seshat Global History Databank) of a large range of different polities are analyzed, ranging from village-level societies to empires. The method of Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is applied to the data, which can be mapped to a two-dimensional space given by the first two principal components, capturing most of the variation in the data. When visualized in this way, the data follow a highly structured pattern. Looking at the variation in the second principal component for increasing values of the first one, historical polities show an initial very concentrated phase, which can be interpreted as growth in scale with relatively little growth in information capacity. This is followed by a threshold (which the authors call the “scale threshold”) after which the pattern of polities that grow in scale but hardly in informational complexity starts to diverge significantly from those that achieve a more significant growth in informational capacity. A second threshold (the “information threshold”) makes further growth in scale possible for those polities that have achieved a sufficiently high level of information-processing capacity. There is, correspondingly, a region in this two-dimensional parameterizing space where polities are more spread out, indicating different possible patterns of development in the scale/information landscape. After the second threshold is passed, scale growth becomes prevalent again and polities tend to cluster again in this parameterizing space with less diversified features. The dataset used in this study is tailored to the analysis of pre-modern societies, hence, as the authors point out, the behavior after the information threshold is crossed may look artificially more homogenous, due to the saturation of several of the variables as data of more modern societies are encountered. Socialism and communism are intrinsically modern phenomena requiring industrial and information societies (primitivists be damned). Nonetheless, one can still derive some useful observations from the analysis carried out in [31]. In particular, while a variety of different forms of organization in small-scale polities occurs, THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 7 further societal development, when scale grows significantly but constrained by relatively low information-processing capacity, tends to organize in statist authoritarian forms. Wealth inequality typically rises rapidly in this phase. Only after enough informational complexity is reached a variety of different forms of development becomes again possible. Leaving momentarily aside the question of the reliability of Seshat data for more modern societies, one can interpret the renewed emphasis on scale growth (rather than continued informational complexity growth) after the second phase transition as an aspect of the modern capitalist societies. This would suggest that one should expect another phase transition to a very significant growth in information-managing capacity to be necessary for new non-capitalist forms of organization to become possible at the current level of scale of contemporary societies. In other words, a significant further increase in informational-complexity is necessary for non-authoritarian communism. By contrast, fascism can be seen as an attempt to achieve scale-growth (imperial aspirations) coupled to a dramatic suppression of all levels of complexity. Historically, societies that attempted to implement a communist system of production, in the absence of a sufficient level of informational-complexity, have relied on centralized planning and fallen back onto authoritarian political forms. Despite this historical experience, many political forces, from the historical Social Democracies, to postwar Eurocommunism (such as the Italian PCI), to current Democratic Socialism, have repeatedly argued that statist solutions to the problem of large scale distribution of services in socialism can exist in non-authoritarian forms. However, such solutions would still be relying on forms of coercion (taxation, police enforcement), to achieve the task of acquisition and distribution of resources. No matter how benign such forms of coercion can be made to appear, in the long term the fact that a working system has to be maintained functional through the threat of force makes it inherently fragile. Ultimately, both Victor Glushkov’s unrealized cybernetic network in the Soviet Union and Stafford Beer’s unfinished Cybersyn system in Allende’s Chile were attempts to greatly increase the capability of processing informational complexity in their respective societies, as a necessary mean for the possible existence of a decentralized non-authoritarian communism that would scale up to the level of large networks. 2.3. Communist objection to Markets. I also want to reiterate here that the main communist objection to markets is that better and more sophisticated mathematics is needed to formulate and address the problem of scale in a communist economy, and in a decentralized non-authoritarian setting, than what is currently offered by borrowing market mechanisms from capitalism. Settling on inadequate mathematical methods will lead to ineffective and undesirable solutions. Capitalism and its disasters can ride the wave of a simple optimization process based on profit, at the cost of widespread devastation, but that is not something one should be trying to emulate. If a problem is both difficult and interesting enough to deserve the de 8 AURORA APOLITO novo development of an appropriate theoretical apparatus, then that is “What needs to be done”, without going along with dubious capitalist shortcuts. I feel this clarification is needed because there is a widespread tendency to formulate a communist objection to markets in terms of an overall objection to the use of mathematical methods of optimization and analysis. I wish I could just dismiss this as a side effect of the historically dismal state of communism in North America. However, prominent figures in the tradition of European non-authoritarian communism (such as Autonomia) have recently supported this viewpoint, as one can see, for instance, in the recent writings of Bifo, [5], [6]. For instance, one finds in [5] “we can argue that the disentanglement of social life from the ferocious domination of mathematical exactitude is a poetic task, as poetry is language’s excess” and in [6] “Power is today based on abstract relations between numerical entities [...] There is no political escape from this trap: only poetry, as the excess of semiotic exchange, can reactivate breathing.” Despite what Bifo and others suggest, there isn’t any identification between mathematical abstraction and financial capitalism, contrasted with a poetical opposition to abstraction. Stated in these terms, this opposition does not make any sense, not just because poetry is inherently a form of abstraction and mathematics is largely a form of poetical imagination, but because it is precisely our capacity for a poetical mathematical imagination that will make it possible for us to envision a functioning alternative to the world of capitalism and finance. As discussed above in the historical case of Kolmogorov’s linear programming, the blanket opposition to mathematical modeling is purely a stalinist reaction, not a viewpoint that anarchocommunism should be adopting. Communism is techno-optimist in its very essence: this is something that certain primitivist anti-civ brands of anarchism may find difficult to stomach, but it is inherent in the nature of both socialism and communism that seizing the means of production requires the existence of sufficiently sophisticated means of production worth seizing. Seeking to approach crucial problems such as the distribution of resources and services in a communist economy via a careful scientific and mathematical analysis is the natural approach in a communist setting. Again, if it weren’t for the fact that the current communist (and anarcho-communist) scene has become so weirdly skewed in its views of science and technology, there would be absolutely no need to make such self-evident clarifications. The profit driven maximization process of markets is not a viable option, not because “profit” is a bad word (it is!) but because of the way the dynamics works: even if one could start with an ideal initial condition of equally distributed wealth, even very small fluctuations will get largely amplified, rapidly reproducing a situation of uneven accumulation. In the profit dynamics of markets an equitable wealth distribution is necessarily an unstable condition. That’s in essence why markets cannot be liberated from capitalism. Markets are an automated generator of capitalist wealth inequalities, which can quickly an easily wipe out any hard-won gains that costed major social upheavals and difficult revolutionary actions to achieve. (We all want a Revolution, but not one that will immediately go wasted just because someone will turn on it the fast-capitalism-restoring-machine commonly known as markets!) THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 9 To avoid a runaway reaction of wealth disparity accumulation, one needs to design an entirely different optimization process that does not reside in the market mechanism of profit maximization. I’ll make a metaphorical comparison to better explain this viewpoint. When, in the history of modern physics, quantum mechanical phenomena were in need of a viable theoretical understanding, physicists did employ methods that had been known and available before, such as linear algebra or linear partial differential equations. This does not mean that directly adapting the mathematical models responsible for the description of classical physics would provide a good model capable of solving quantum mechanical problems. The “hidden variables” debacle showed that a classical physics model of quantum phenomena is actually simply not possible. On the contrary, a completely new mathematical theory, based on Hilbert spaces and operator algebras, was designed entirely for the purpose of describing quantum physics. When I am saying that one needs to develop the correct mathematical model to be used to solve the scale problem in the anarcho-communist setting, I do not mean that existing methods should not be used as partial building blocks and intermediate steps. As I will discuss in the next section, there is a lot of available theory that will be useful and that should be employed. I am saying that what one should aim for is like what happened with the development of the mathematical theory necessary for a satisfactory predictive description of quantum mechanics: existing models by themselves would not provide a solution and an entirely new theoretical edifice needed to be constructed, even though a few of its basic building blocks were already available in previous theories. 3. Self-organization in networks and the anarchist scale problem I am not trying here to present a solution to the scale problem in anarchism, but to highlight what I think are some important aspects that can hopefully lead to a more precise formulation of the problem. This section is going to be more technical, as I will review some methods in the analysis of complex networks, which I believe have to be regarded as part of the necessary tools to approach the scale problem in an anarchist setting. A fundamental premise, in order to formulate more precisely the problem of scale in anarchism, is that anarchism is at heart a process of self-organization in complex networks. Phenomena of self-organization in networks are widely studied in the theory of complex systems, motivated by a range of models from telecommunication systems to neuroscience. However, what one needs to develop goes beyond a rephrasing or a direct application of these models. What I would like to outline here is a brief overview of what I see as the more crucial and more difficult aspects of the problem. Ludwig von Mises, in his notorious 1920 essay promoting markets over the then rapidly developing trend toward socialist economic planning, aimed at presenting markets as an efficient computational machinery. As discussed in the introductory essay of [9], “The challenge that Mises laid down for socialism was a resolutely technocratic one: to come up with a rival infrastructure of computation that could match 10 AURORA APOLITO that of the price system [...] It was a challenge that few socialists have been successfully able to duck altogether, and fewer still have successfully risen to”. The lack of a convincing development of such a “rival socialist infrastructure of computation” is highly regrettable. However, to be honest, it is quite possible that the mathematics required to provide a viable socialist/communist answer to Mises’ challenge had simply not been available at the time, and for quite a long time after that. Even at the time of the main attempts at implementing forms of Cybernetic Communism, in the ’60s and early ’70s, the theory of complex networks was still in its infancy. It is likely that, despite having the correct general idea in mind, the efforts of both Victor Glushkov and Stafford Beer would have failed when implemented within the available science and technology framework of the time, simply because the information processing capacity was still too low and some crucial mathematical tools still unavailable. We are in a much better position today to provide a viable opposition to markets, so there is no excuse any longer for eschewing this task. What I am writing in this section should be regarded as an exercise in the kind of “Economic Science Fictions” that are discussed at length in [9] and in the kind of mathematical imagination I was mentioning above. It is meant to envision the mathematical form of a cybernetic communist infrastructure of computation that would replace the profit optimization mechanism of markets. 3.1. Complexity. First and foremost, complexity is the key notion here, but it is also a very subtle one, which is not easy to measure. The main notion of complexity in mathematics is Kolmogorov complexity, which classifies the complexity of something as the length of the shortest process (algorithm) that realizes it, [23]. Namely, (1) K(x) = min P {`(P)\| TU (P) = x}, which means that complexity of x is the minimal length `(P) among all programs P with the property that, when run on a universal computer (Turing machine) TU , will output x. I am writing this out explicitly, because it makes it easier to compare with other notions, and also because I want to mention also the “relative complexity” version, which I will return to later. This is given by (2) K(x\|y) = min P {`(P)\| TU (P, y) = x}, which is the same thing, but the computing machine TU is allowed to use the input y in addition to the program P to compute x. Kolmogorov complexity is itself a non-computable function, because of the fact that the “halting problem”, deciding whether a program will run forever or will halt at some point with an output, is itself an undecidable problem. Surprisingly, the non-computability itself is not a serious obstacle, because Kolmogorov complexity has lots of perfectly good computable upper bounds (by any compression algorithm), hence it cannot be computed but it can be approximated by excess in a computable way. There is another more serious drawback to the use of Kolmogorov complexity though: it does not correspond to the intuitive notion of complexity one would like to THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 11 model, in the sense that, while it correctly assigns low complexity to easily predictable patterns, it is maximal on completely random patterns. Maximizing randomness is clearly not what one would like to achieve, despite what naive misconception of anarchism circulating among liberals would suggest. Shannon entropy is close to an averaged version of Kolmogorov complexity, H(E) = − X x E(x) log E(x) ∼ X x E(x)K(x\|E) and it has the same tendency to detect randomness, so by itself it also does not help. There are possible ways to devise measures of complexity that are better targeted at detecting “structured complexity” rather than complexity due to the unpredictability of randomness. A first possible modification of Kolmogorov complexity that better captures some form of “organized complexity” is given by logical depth. This notion was introduced in [3], using the execution time of a nearly-minimal program rather then the length of the minimal program as in the Kolmogorov case. Namely, (3) Dα(x) = min P {τ (P)\| `(P) − K(x) ≤ α, TU (P) = x}, which means computing the minimum time of execution of a program P that outputs x, whose length is equal to or just slightly larger than the minumum one (whose length is K(x)). How much length discrepancy is allowed between the minimal one K(x) and `(P) is measured by a variable parameter α. (More precisely, one uses a slightly different form of Kolmogorov complexity K(x) in (3), but I will not go into the details here: they can be found in [2].) Passing from minimal to nearly-minimal is just meant to avoid the problem that some slightly longer programs may have shorter execution time. More interestingly, passing from length of a program to its execution time may seem at first like a minor change, since execution time may be seen as another form of length (in time rather than memory), but the effect is significant on reducing the role of randomness in high complexity patterns. A comparative discussion of Kolmogorov complexity and logical depth can be found in [10]. The reason why I don’t want to use this simple modification of Kolmogorov complexity is because of a “phase transition” phenomenon described in [2] that I will describe in a moment, which makes logical depth difficult to use as the basis for the construction of an optimizaton function. Murray Gell-Mann proposed a notion of “effective complexity” and a notion of “potential complexity” [11], which were meant to capture more closely the intuitive notion we have of complexity as a highly structured phenomenon. Effective complexity is meant to capture the information content of the “regularities” of a pattern, while potential complexity is a similar notion that is meant to incorporate changes in time. A first mathematical account of effective complexity was given in [12]. Unfortunately, neither of these notions has yet a completely well developed mathematical formalism. We can, nonetheless, start from where things stand at the moment in terms of these more promising notions of complexity and see what can be done with them. 12 AURORA APOLITO A good overview of the situation with these complexity measures is given in [2], which I will refer to for my brief summary here. In order to obtain a good working description of effective complexity one first considers a combination of Kolmogorov complexity and Shannon entropy, called the “total information” K(E) + H(E). It can be described as the algorithmic complexity of computing x (Kolmorogorov part K(x\|E)) through computing the statistical ensemble E that x belongs to (Shannon part H(E)). The best choice of statistical ensemble E for a given x is selected by the requirement that it minimizes the total information, which is a way of saying that it is the most likely explanation for the datum x. Having selected the appropriate statistical model E, one can detect if the element x is “typical” in that statistical ensemble, by checking that the probability E(x) is not much smaller than an average size 2−H(E) predicted by the Shannon entropy. Given x, one selects in this way the set Mx of all the possible ensembles E with small total information and for which x is typical (possibly with additional constraints on what set of “good theories” one wants to consider). The “effective complexity” E(x) is the minimal value of Kolmogorov complexity K(E) among all these candidate models E, (4) E(x) = min E∈Mx K(E). Note how we are defining effective complexity here as a minimum of Kolmogorov complexity over a certain set of statistical models E explaining the given datum x, as a way of saying that we want to single out the simplest explanation, selected among a set of plausible theories. This seems to contrast the fact that I earlier mentioned, namely that we aim for a maximization of informational complexity. However, that maximization is still to come: the minimization I just describes is simply a necessary preliminary step that assigns an appropriate complexity value to a datum. What has one gained by using effective complexity E(x) rather than Kolmogorov complexity K(x) or Shannon entropy H(E)? The main advantage is that now completely random patterns have small effective complexity! So objects with large effective complexity are caused by “structured complexity” rather than by randomness. It is not immediately obvious that effective complexity of random patterns is small: a proof of this fact is given, for instance, in Theorem 10 of [2], while some cases of non-random patterns that do exhibit large effective complexity are described in Theorem 14 of [2]. The “phase transition” phenomenon I mentioned above for the behavior of logical depth is based on how Dα(x) changes compared to effective complexity E(x). It can be shown (see Theorem 18 of [2] for details) that for small values of E(x) logical complexity can also take small values, but when effective complexity crosses a threshold value (which depends on Kolmogorov complexity), the logical depth suddenly jumps to extremely large values. This sudden phase transition in the behavior of Dα(x) makes it inconvenient to use for our goals, while effective complexity E(x) is more suitable. THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 13 In the case of the Shannon entropy, one has a similar relative version that measures the informational discrepancy between two statistical models, namely the Kullback– Leibler divergence (5) KL(E, P) = X x E(x) log E(x) P(x) . In Bayesian terms it measures the information gained by passing from the prior probability P to the posterior E. Relative Kolmogorov complexity (2) can be used in a similar way as a form of information distance, [4]. One can construct, using relative Kolmogorov complexity, a related notion of relative effective complexity, E(x\|y), which can also be seen as a measure of loss/gain in informational complexity. So let’s say that something like this E(x\|y) provides a candidate measurement taking into account whether informational complexity is increased or decreased by a process that changes the a state y previously occupied by the system into a new one given by x. Now what? We still need to see how this relates to networks and their small and large scale structure. 3.2. An idea from Neuroscience. Anarchists are traditionally wary of the communist notion of collectivity, often contrasting it with varying degrees of individualism. The word “collectivism” rings (justified) alarm bells about stalinist forced collectivizations and suppression of individual agency. On the other hand, the word “individualism” provides an easy strawman for the communist, conjuring up a mental image of some kind of convex linear combination between J.D. Salinger and Ayn Rand, pandering to neoliberal sharks the fear and suppression of collective agency. This is not overall a productive state of affairs. The actual important question one should ask instead is what is a form of “collectivity” that everywhere locally maximizes individual agency, while making collective emergent structures possible and interesting (in the same informational complexity sense described previously). I will discuss this question in the light of ideas recently developed in the context of neuroscience, the modeling of brain networks, and the theory of consciousness. A considerable amount of work in understanding the structure of complex networks has come from neuroscience. An idea that seems especially relevant to what we are trying to model here is the notion of integrated information, which was originally proposed in [33] as a quantitative model of consciousness. A general overview of this idea is presented in [20], [25]. The key idea is that integrated information measures the amount of informational complexity in a system that is not separately reducible to its individual parts. It is a way to account for how rich are the possibilities of causal relatedness among different parts of the system. A way to express this idea more precisely was developed in [30]. One considers all possible ways of splitting a given system into subsystems (a network into smaller local subnetworks for example). For each such partition λ one considers the state of the system at a given time t as described by a set of observables Xt and the state at a 14 AURORA APOLITO near-future time Xt+1. The partition λ into N subsystems corresponds to a splitting of these variables Xt = {Xt,1, . . . , Xt,N } and Xt+1 = {Xt+1,1, . . . , Xt+1,N }, into variables describing the subsystems. All the causal relations among the Xt,i themselves, or among the Xt+1,i, as well as the causal influence of the Xt,i on the Xt+1,j through the time evolution of the system, are captured (statistically) by the joint probability distribution P(Xt+1, Xt). To capture the integrated information of the system, one compares the information content of this joint distribution with that of distributions where the only causal dependencies between Xt+1 and Xt is through the evolution within each separate subsystem but not across subsystems, which means probability distributions Q(Xt+1, Xt) with the property that Q(Xt+1,i\|Xt) = Q(Xt+1,i\|Xt,i) for each subset i = 1, . . . , N of the partition. Let’s call Mλ the set of probability distributions Q(Xt+1, Xt) with this property with respect to the partition λ. One then obtains the integrated information Φ of the system by minimizing the Kullback-Leibler divergence (5) between the actual system and its best approximation by probabilities that implement the causal disconnection between the subsystems and evaluating at the minimal information partition (that is, minimizing over the choice of partition). (6) Φ = min λ min Q∈Mλ KL(P(Xt+1, Xt)\|\|Q(Xt+1, Xt)). The value Φ obtained in this way represents the additional information in the whole system that is not in any way reducible to smaller parts. It is the way to express the concept of “holistic” in informational terms. Since we are more interested in effective complexity than in informational measures such as the Kullback-Leibler divergence, one can develop a version of integrated information where the discrepancy between the system and its causal disconnection into subsystems is measured by a relative effective complexity (as discussed above) rather than by the Kullback-Leibler divergence (details elsewhere: this is not the place where to prove new theorems). Details aside, what we are aiming for here is to provide a viable measure for an optimization process. Maximizing integrated information (in an effective complexity version) would mean obtaining a system that realizes the maximal possible integration of informational complexity across all possible subsystems and the highest degree of causal interconnectedness of subsystems. We can see why this essentially does what we have been looking for. Maximizing our integrated information Φ favors cooperation over competition, since competition tends to break apart a system into separate comp	chunk 1 etitors and this decreases the Φ function, while cooperation increases connectedness and enlarges the network of mutual causal influences, leading to an increase of Φ. Also a mechanism that maximizes Φ would wipe out abhorrent phenomena like intellectual property, since keeping knowledge inaccessible decreases its causal connectedness, decreasing the overall value of Φ. Increasing Φ is instead compatible with forms of shared knowledge, P2P networks, etc. Increasing Φ does not lead to capitalist wealth accumulation, since concentration of wealth and resources tends to separate out certain subsystems and decrease their mutual causal influence with the rest of the network subsystems, and this would THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 15 decrease the overall integration of informational complexity across the entire system. Integrated information is by definition a “collectivity” because it is exactly the amount of informational complexity that resides in the collective without being located in any separate individual subsystem. On the other hand, it is a collectivity that maximizes individual agency because it maximizes the degree of causal influence, hence of possible agency, of each individual subsystem. 3.3. Instruments and Mechanisms. The dynamics of profit in markets is not a law of nature: it is implemented artificially via a machinery consisting of several instruments such as currencies, systems of credit and debt, etc. In a similar way, if we want to implement a dynamics of integrated informational complexity optimization, we need to devise the appropriate instruments that will implement it. This is a significant part of the problem, of course, but some general guidelines are clearly discernible within our notion of a form of integrated information based on effective complexity, as outlined earlier in this section. There are two main aspects that can contribute to increasing our measure Φ: the growth of the network of causal relatedness and the gain in relative effective complexity. Thus, we can identify, broadly, two classes of instruments that are useful in implementing this dynamics by respectively increasing these two aspects of integrated informational complexity: I will call them instruments of connectedness and instruments of complexity. (1) Instruments of connectedness. These are mechanisms that will increase the degree of connectedness and mutual causal influence between all different areas of a network. We can include among them all technologies that increase connectedness: public transportation (yes, the anarchist railway), P2P networks, wireless mesh networks for local communities, scalable distributed computing resources like Holochain, libraries (both physical and virtual), open source and open access initiatives, all the way to grander scale goals such as border abolition. The Sci-Hub project developed by the Kazakhstani anarchist computer scientist Alexandra Elbakyan is a great example of an instrument of connectedness facilitating the free circulation of science. (2) Instruments of complexity. Culture generates effective complexity: philosophy, science, the visual arts, music, and yes, poetry! Books (physical and digital), art works, performance: these are all instruments that increase effective complexity. Coming back to Bifo’s image of poetry against finance, [5], [6], in the appropriate sense he was not wrong: poetry is a good example of something that grows complexity but not profit. Instruments of complexity are typically what would be wiped out by the profit-driven dynamics of markets, and are instead crucial to the cybernetic communism dynamics driven by integrated informational complexity. This is of course only a quick bird-eye view of the kind of instruments that feed the computational machinery of cybernetic communism, in opposition to the machinery of markets. Things could (and should) be formulated more precisely. 16 AURORA APOLITO Already at this simple level, however, one can see how effective complexity and the associated form of integrated information can function as an “objective valuation” in the sense defined by Kantorovich in [18], as opposed to the subjective price valuations of markets. To see an explicit example of how this works, consider one of the “instruments of complexity” mentioned above: the visual arts. Let’s look at paintings: in a market system the value of art is subject to the vagaries of the art market, whose completely devastating effects on contemporary art, starting in the 1980s, have been discussed at length, [17]. In a cybernetic communism system art is an instrument for growing complexity. Its objective valuation is the effective complexity content. This of course can be evaluated at many levels, starting with the relation of the art work to its contemporary society. However, just to keep the example simple, let’s focus only on what may be regarded as the “aesthetic” level. This is usually the most difficult and subjective aspect to evaluate, but in our setting we are only trying to gauge its effect as a complexity generator. If one studies how paintings in different art movements throughout the history of art are distributed on a plane with coordinates given by Shannon entropy and Kolmogorov complexity (as is done in [32]) one finds an interesting distribution, where artistic movements like Minimalism, Color Field Painting, and Conceptual Art have higher values of Kolmogorov complexity and lower values of Shannon Entropy, others like Lyrical Abstraction, Abstract Expressionism, and Op Art have intermediate values of both, and at the other end Cubism, Tachism, or Pointillism have high Shannon entropy and low Kolmogorov complexity. What is more interesting, though, is that in terms of the total information function (which as recalled earlier is a sum of Shannon entropy and Kolmogorov complexity and is the basis for defining effective complexity) all these different art movements are placed around very similar values, since (as shown in [32]) in the (H, K) entropy-complexity plane they are distributed roughly around a line with constant sum K + H. This supports the idea that visual art (painting in this case) functions as an instrument of complexity with a certain objective capacity for effective complexity generation. This view of the arts and culture and their crucial role in the dynamics of socialist development is very close to the original grand vision of the anarcho-communist avantgarde in the running up to the Russian Revolution and in the years that immediately followed, before Stalinism wiped it out entirely, [1], [8], [15]. 3.4. Multilayered Networks. In the modeling of the scaling problem, passing from the small to the large scales happens through connectivity. We are assuming that the problem of anarcho-communism organization is working well on the small scales, which means that we have individual workers-owned cooperatives and other similar initiatives that are running according to anarcho-communist principles. The process of growth to larger scales is based on network structures connecting them. We can assume that the nodes of a network are individual cooperatives, as we do not need a finer resolution to smaller scales. Just thinking of a network of connections is inadequate: what one really needs are multiple interconnected networks that describe different forms of sharing (or different kind of services, of resources, of information). The appropriate kind of model for this type of structures is provided by the theory THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 17 of multilayered networks, [7]. Not only this makes it possible to describe different networking structures that simultaneously exist, that represent different forms of sharing, but it also allows for a description of how each of these layers changes over time in a dynamical way, in interaction with the other layers. Roughly we should think of each of the different kinds of “instruments” described above as generating its own layer in a multilayered network, with interdependencies with all the other layers. In general, when one studies large complex networks, which are subject to continuous changes in time, it is better to work with a probabilistic approach and regard the possible networking structures as a statistical mechanical ensemble, where certain general properties of the network are fixed as constraints and one considers probabilities of connections between nodes, either within (infralayer) or across layers (intralayer). Various different models for the growth of networks are possible: in particular, in collaboration networks, which are close to the kind of models we are considering, one usually assumes triadic closures. This means that, when a new node gets connected to an old node, other nodes that are already collaborators of the old nodes (neighbors in the net) are more likely to get connected to the new node as well. Also, some cost functions may be added in the probability of connection: for example, for layers of the network that model physical distribution of services geographic distance is a cost, while for information sharing (provided an infrastructure network like the internet is already accounted for by another layer) geographic distance is irrelevant. This is again an example of the fact that valuations that estimate minimization of costs in the linear programming sense are themselves dependent on the layer of the network and on the scale. Regarding the more interesting part of the optimization process, the maximization of integrated informational complexity, one can consider a dynamics for the network that generalizes frequently used models of Shannon entropy maximization, [7]. 3.4.1. Communities. To implement a form of dynamics based on the optimization of integrated informational complexity on a multilayered network, an important role is played by communities in the network. These are intermediate structures between the individual nodes and the large scale of the entire network. Communities are a familiar notion in anarchism: they are sometime conceived in terms of identity, especially in contexts such as decolonization, indigenous cultures, organizations aimed at liberation of oppressed populations. Communities can also form around shared projects and specific initiatives. All of these are of vital importance to the anarchist project. As intersectionality has taught us regarding the understanding of forms of oppression, the notions of identity and community are subtle and their overlapping structure is important. In the case of complex networks there are usually many overlapping communities, some of them easily detectable in the connectivity structure of the network, some more difficult to identify, but significant in terms of determining the scaling properties of the network. The structure of communities (the modularity properties of the network) can be regarded as the important intermediate step between the small scale of individual nodes and their local connectivity and the large scales. There are various algorithmic approaches to 18 AURORA APOLITO the identification of communities in networks, [7]. In the case of multilayered networks, one additionally wants to understand how communities in a layer relate to communities in other layers (whether the structure of communities remains similar, or changes significantly across layers) and also which parts of different layers should be regarded as part of the same communities. 3.4.2. Informational complexity and network communities. An informational measure of proximity in the community structure of different layers of multilayered networks is provided by the normalized mutual information. Given a community structure with communities σ in the layer Lα and communities σ 0 in the layer Lβ, the normalized mutual information is given by (7) NMI(Lα, Lβ) = − P σ,σ0 P αβ σ,σ0 log P αβ σ,σ0 P α σ P β σ0 P σ P α σ log(P α σ ) + P σ0 P β σ0 log(P β σ0) , where P αβ σ,σ0 = N αβ σ,σ0/N is the fraction of nodes that simultaneously belong to the communities σ in layer Lα and σ 0 in layer Lβ, and similarly P α σ and P β σ0 are the fractions of nodes in the community σ in layer Lα, respectively in the community σ 0 in layer Lβ. The numerator of (7) is a Kullback–Leibler divergence as in (5), measuring the difference between the community structure of the two joined layers and the one obtained if the two layers were completely independent, while the denominator normalizes it with respect to the total Shannon entropy of the community structures of two layers, seen as independent. Here the comparison through the Kullback–Leibler divergence of the joint distribution of nodes in communities across the two strata, given by P αβ σ,σ0 with the one for independent strata, given by the product P α σ P β σ0 is clearly reminiscent of integrated information (6), and it can indeed be transformed into an integrated information measure by considering all the possible community structures on the network layers, just as one considers all possible partitions of a system in (6). We can then take the further step of replacing entropy with effective complexity and weight the community structures across layers in terms of a normalized relative effective complexity. This will provide a way to define a dynamics of complex networks that implements from small to large scales the optimization of integrated informational complexity, as an alternative to the profit optimization of market models. 3.5. Provisional conclusion. Markets are often proposed, also within anarchist settings, as a computational model to address the scale problem. Alternative computational models can be envisioned, which do not rely on profit, but on the optimization of a form of integrated informational complexity. These can provide an alternative to the market system to address the scale problem in an anarcho-communist perspective. The purpose of this note was to outline some of these ideas, while avoiding most of the technicalities involved. It should not be regarded in any way as a complete treatment, as the problem discussed here is very much open and would require much more extensive theoretical elaboration. THE PROBLEM OF SCALE IN ANARCHISM 19 References [1] Allan Antliff, Anarchist Modernism, University of Chicago Press, 2007. [2] Nihat Ay, Markus Mueller, Arleta Szkola, Effective complexity and its relation to logical depth, IEEE Trans. Inf. Th., Vol. 56/9 (2010) 4593–4607. [arXiv:0810.5663] [3] Charles H. Bennett, Logical Depth and Physical Complexity, in “The Universal Turing Machine – a Half-Century Survey” (Ed. Rolf Herken), Oxford University Press, 1988. [4] Charles H. Bennett, Peter G´acs, Ming Li, Paul M.B. Vit´anyi, Wojciech H. Zurek, Information distance, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 44(1998) N.4, 1407–1423. [5] Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi, The Uprising: On Poetry and Finance, Semiotext(e), 2012. [6] Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi, Breathing: Chaos and Poetry, Semiotext(e), 2019. [7] Ginestra Bianconi, Multilayer Networks, Oxford University Press, 2018. [8] John E. Bowlt and Olga Matich, eds., Laboratory of Dreams: The Russian Avant-garde and Cultural Experiment, Stanford University Press, 1996 [9] William Davies (Ed.), Economic Science Fictions, Goldsmiths Press, 2019. [10] Jean-Paul Delahaye, Complexit´e al´eatoire et complexit´e organis´ee, Editions Quae, 2009. [11] Murray Gell-Mann, What is Complexity? Complexity, Vol.1 (1995) N.1 [9 pages]. [12] Murray Gell-Mann, Seth Lloyd, Information Measures, Effective Complexity, and Total Information, Complexity, Vol. 2 (1996) 44–52. [13] Slava Gerovitch, From Newspeak to Cyberspeak. A History of Soviet Cybernetics, MIT Press, 2002. [14] George Gorelik, Bogdanov’s Tektology, General Systems Theory, and Cybernetics, Hemisphere Publishing, 1987. [15] Nina Gourianova, The Aesthetics of Anarchy: Art and Ideology in the Early Russian AvantGarde, University of California Press, 2012. [16] Simon Ings, Stalin and the Scientists: A History of Triumph and Tragedy, 1905–1953, Open Road & Grove Atlantic, 2017. [17] Annamma Joy, John F. Sherry, Jr., Disentangling the paradoxical alliances between art market and art world, Consumption, Markets & Culture, Vol.6 (2003), N.3, 155–181. [18] Leonid Vitaliyevich Kantorovich, Mathematical methods of organization and planning of production, Leningrad State University Press, 1939. [19] Anatoly Kitov, Aleksei Lyapunov, Sergei Sobolev, The Main Features of Cybernetics, Voprosy filosofii (Problems of Philosophy), No. 4 (1955), 136–148 [20] Christoph Koch, The feeling of life itself, MIT Press, 2019. [21] Nikolai Krementsov, A Martian Stranded on Earth: Alexander Bogdanov, Blood Transfusions, and Proletarian Science, The University of Chicago Press, 2011. [22] David A. Lax, Libermanism and the Kosygin reform, University of Virginia Press, 1991. [23] Ming Li, Paul Vit´anyi, An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications, Springer, 1997 [New Edition, 2008]. [24] Evsei G. Liberman, Plans, Profits, and Bonuses, Pravda, September 9, 1962. [25] Marcello Massimini, Giulio Tononi, Sizing up consciousness, Oxford University Press, 2018. [26] Warren S. McCulloch, A Heterarchy of Values Determines by the Topology of Nervous Nets, Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 7 (1945) 89–93. [27] Eden Medina, Cybernetic Revolutionaries. Technology and Politics in Allende’s Chile, MIT Press, 2011. [28] Benjamin Peters, How Not to Network a Nation. The Uneasy History of the Soviet Internet, MIT Press, 2016. [29] Ethan Pollock, Stalin and the Soviet Science Wars, Princeton University Press, 2006. [30] M. Oizumi, N. Tsuchiya, S. Amari, Unified framework for information integration based on information geometry, PNAS, Vol. 113 (2016) N. 51, 14817–14822. 20 AURORA APOLITO [31] Jaeweon Shin, Michael Holton Price, David H. Wolpert, Hajime Shimao, Brendan Tracey, Timothy A. Kohler, Scale and information-processing thresholds in Holocene social evolution, Nature Communications (2020) 11:2394 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16035-9 [32] Higor Y. D. Sigaki, Matjaˇz Perc, Haroldo V. Ribeiro, History of art paintings through the lens of entropy and complexity, PNAS, Vol.115 (2018) N.37, E8585–E8594 [33] G. Tononi G (2008) Consciousness as integrated information: A provisional manifesto, Biol. Bull. 215 (2008) N.3, 216–242. [34] Anatoly Vershik, L.V.Kantorovich and Linear Programming, arXiv:0707.0491. [35] Norbert Wiener, Cybernetics, or control and communication in the animal and the machine, MIT Press, 1948.	CHATGPT: Yes! "Tongbian" (通变 / tōngbiàn) is a key concept in Chinese philosophy, particularly in dialectical thought, referring to the interplay of *continuity (tong* 通) and change (bian 变). The term is central to understanding Chinese metaphysics, political strategy, and even modern governance. Here’s a concise breakdown: --- ### 1. Core Meaning - Tong (通): Continuity, persistence, unbroken coherence (e.g., cultural essence, enduring principles). - Bian (变): Change, adaptation, responsiveness (e.g., reform, tactical flexibility). - Combined*: A dynamic unity where change preserves* rather than ruptures continuity (unlike Western "revolution"). ### 2. Philosophical Roots - Yijing (易经): The Book of Changes frames reality as perpetual transformation (bian) within cosmic patterns (tong). - Confucianism: Reform (bian) must align with ethical continuity (tong), e.g., "中学为体，西学为用" (Chinese learning as essence, Western learning for utility). - Daoism: The Dao persists (tong) while manifesting through flux (bian). ### 3. Modern Usage (Chenshan Tian & CCP) - Chenshan Tian (American political theorist) applies tongbian to explain Chinese Marxism as a dialectic of stability/innovation (e.g., "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics"). - CCP Governance: Framed as tongbian—ideological continuity (Marxism, Party leadership) + adaptive change (market reforms, tech-driven growth). ### 4. Contrasts - Vs. Hegelian dialectics: Tongbian avoids synthesis-through-negation; change is harmonious, not confrontational. - Vs. Western "disruption": Silicon Valley celebrates rupture; tongbian prioritizes managed change. ### Key Text - Tian Chenshan, Chinese Dialectics: From Yijing to Marxism (2005). If you’re asking because of political strategy, tongbian is why China rejects "shock therapy" reforms (à la Russia) in favor of gradualist, stability-first adaptation. A powerful lens!	chatGPT2 It sounds like you’re sketching a typology of philosophical attitudes toward language, form, and metaphysics—especially contrasting thinkers who engage with hermetic or gnostic frameworks in how they theorize language and meaning. For the "???", a good candidate whose name starts with J and who fits with Saussure / Lacan / Kristeva in reviving or channeling hermetic strains in language theory could be: --- ### Jakob Böhme A 17th-century German mystic and philosopher, Böhme is foundational to the Western esoteric tradition. His work heavily influenced later hermetic thinkers and anticipates structural insights about language, metaphor, and divine immanence. While not a "linguist" in the modern sense, his cosmological system views language as deeply entangled with the structure of being—very much a proto-hermetic language theory. --- Alternatively, if you're leaning toward modern/postmodern theory, then: ### Julia Kristeva ...is already in your list, but maybe you’re thinking of adding: ### Jean Baudrillard Baudrillard's work is saturated in a kind of post-hermetic symbolic logic: the real disappears into simulation, signs detach from referents, and we live in a world of pure semiurgy. He's deeply engaged with the mystical (even occult) dimensions of signification without embracing religious gnosticism. Or possibly: ### Jean-Joseph Goux A lesser-known but fascinating figure, Goux ties together linguistics, economics, psychoanalysis, and symbolic exchange—particularly in how language and money operate as structured systems. He's a kind of bridge between Lacanian psychoanalysis and esoteric semiotics. --- On your hermetic vs. gnostic distinction: that’s actually a pretty sharp contrast. Hermeticism often implies a layered, cosmic architecture of signs that can be read—it's metaphysical but orderly. Gnosticism, by contrast, tends toward a tragic alienation from order, where language may be only a fractured echo of lost transcendence. Your critique of Rorty as “tragic-gnostic” is really interesting—his irony could be read as a refusal to engage in metaphysical forms, seeing all meaning as contingency and rhetoric. From that angle, Welby and significs do indeed look more radical: instead of collapsing into irony, significs suggests we can build new logics of sense—hermetic rather than gnostic. Would you like help turning this into a diagram or a typology of thinkers by metaphysical attitude toward language and form?
	tenshi_anna	Dugin’s “Fourth Political Theory,” my fourth Catholic theology (柄谷) https://x.com/i/spaces/1ynJODMajazxR	* Caputo is drawing on Derrida * 6:00 "Byzantine Accelerationism" * 10:48 - William Desmond is more positive and O'Regan is more negative * 16:00ish - Agata Bielik-Robson's "From Kenosis to Kenoma: The Enigma of a Place in Derrida and Caputo" * 17:20 - references to Isaac Luria in Derrida's essay Dissemination, mediated by Sollers * 17:40 Philippe Sollers = Kristeva's husband ;;; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Sollers * pleromatic, kenomatic, metaxic = "apocalyptic spaces, correspond to god the father god the son and god the holy spirit" * pleromatic/Balthasar (fullness, not plurimatic) space = catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar 18:15 - 3 kinds of spaces of Balthasaar, "plurimatic kinematic metaxic" * kenomatic/Caputo (self-emptying) 18:50 - John D Caputo's judeaizing of catholic atheism. "a pure kenoma displaces the christian trinity onto unitarian view, this is connected to how Scholem said that Kabbalah is Jewish gnosticism" * metaxic/Metz 19:00ish - metaxic space - Metz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Baptist_Metz ;;; 24:00 - Plato's Symposium and in Simone Weil * Sergei Bulgakov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Bulgakov * 21ish - theologoumenon is a theological concept or statement that is based on individual opinion rather than established doctrine or scripture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theologoumenon * 24:00 - the only female theologian profiled by O'Regan in metaxic space is Catherine Keller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Keller * Virgil * 25:00 - In Symposium the figure who represents metaxu for Plato is Diotima https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diotima_of_Mantinea * 26:30 - Hegel/Bulgakov/Jung/Lacan are good esoteric theologians, Hegel understood thirdness and fourthness: "The Triangle is the Law of the Mind, the Square is the Law of Nature", * 27:00 - Russan orthodoxy is very plurimatic, very paternal * 27:45 - I'm not a Hegelian anymore, I am a Karatanian * 29:20 - wtf is theurgy? - "Divination and theurgy in Neoplatonism - Oracle of the Gods" Crystal Addey - "theurgy is not irrational, the idea that its irrational is a modern excrecence", downstream from Kantian "ohh religious enthusiasm is so stupid" which Hegel corrected, but also Schelling, there's a whole thing of Schelling's relationship to theurgy...fuzzy Virgil "Perfect God" 29:30 - excrescence * 30:00 Karatani (柄谷) v Fukuyama (福山), "from the valley/cave/underground" vs "rich mountain/empire", nominative determinsm * Yuk Hui's Cosmotecnics * 34:00 - fourth term should be "City of God", not Sophia * 34:30 - augustiniian/karatinian "City of god" concept, which is the fourth mode of exchange in karatani's theory of mosaic exchange * Dugin v Kartani's fourthness * Kojin Karatani wins Berggruen Prize for Philosophy and Culture * 37:00ish - Virgil speaks...is this Virgil Texas? "Virgil Tweezy"??? * 45:59 - "possibility for political theology" "politics should be about spiritual purification of an invisible church, why Marcion is the try pollian? inheritor of the Polinian? project" ??Marcion/Marcionism?? * 51:00ish - French marxism fucked up so bad..."Hegel or Spinoza" NO, the question is "Hegel or Schelling", Spinoza is overrated, heretic halo Radical Enlightenment by Jonathan Israel on "spectre of Spinozanism", an early modern meme * 52:00 – Kiarina Kordela is like a post-Žižekian. Her big angle is that she feels Žižek is too critical of Spinoza, but in her recent book, she has returned to Schelling—engaging Pierre Macherey’s work From Spinoza to Schelling and the Tübingen Stift/seminary. This is the primal scene of modern philosophy and modern political theory * Virgil and Jorge are STF people here, RedPatriot is working on a paper ziglichet w Karatoni's mode of exchnage, subset of theoretical project * Gabriel Tupinamba's https://www.theoreticalpractice.com STP mostly in Brazil, tenshi_anna argues that it is led by Gabriel Tupinamba * "55:00 – Jean-Pierre Caron [not "Curone"] and their analysis of experimental politics. It’s not true that Gabriel Tupinambá [not "Tubanaba"] is the leader of STP / Subset of Theoretical Practice. 56:30 – The French encyclopédistes: Pierre Bayle claims Spinoza is a Kabbalist/Buddhistic, equating Ayin Sof / "אֵין סוֹף" / Ein Sof (the infinite, divine nothingness in Kabbalah) with Spinoza’s absolute substance. This is an evolutionary convergent trait [of thought] also present in China (e.g., Daoist wu 無 as void)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Bayle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_Sof * 57:25 - Jacobi is joker figure of German Idealism * 1:21:20 - Pinochet is radical or proto Yarvinism ;;; fascism is resistant to capital * * * * *	* pleromatic=Balthasar, kenomatic=Caputo, metaxic=Metz * pleromatic, metaxic, kenomatic - "O'Regan pointed to the "exile" of apocalyptic in the modern period, and its "contemporary return" in a host of theologians, including, but not limited to: Hans Urs von Balthasar, Jurgen Moltmann, Johann Baptist Metz, Sergei Bulgakov, Karl Barth, Stanley Hauerwas, Jacques Derrida, (to a limited extent) the Pope Benedict XVI, David Bentley Hart, Catherine Keller, John D. Caputo, and Gianni Vattimo. Apocalyptic is not so exotic before, especially since we find such diverse thinkers sharing the same theological "spaces" (e.g. Balthasar, the "Pope's theologian," and Derrida, share the same space - this is surprising) O'Regan finds it helpful to map out three spaces in order to distinguish these different thinkers. He has three of them: 1) Pleromatic: maximum level of content; 2) Metaxic: in-between level of content; and 3) Kenomatic: empty of content."--Jacket https://shu.locate.ebsco.com/instances/23d2b627-221d-551e-9600-d4e3524b0977?facets=sourceTypes%5B%5D%3Dbook&option=subject&pageNumber=1&query=Apocalyptic%20literature&recordsPerPage=25
	tenshi_anna	Dugin's "Fourth Political Theory," with my fourth Catholic theology (pt. 2) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1886527941418406277/quotes Dugin’s “Fourth Political Theory,” my fourth Catholic theology (pt. 2) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1886527941418406277	Political Post-Anthropology 1:00ish - is Dugin a Marcionite? Metaphysics of the Gospel. "What's funny about Marcionism, it takes Yahweh (old testament God), makes him into an evil being 12:44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festschrift 17:00 - O'Regan is catholic heresiologist 18 ish from kenosis to kenona 22:50 bia grobson 33:00 Brazilian Dugins - Olavo de Carvalho and Eduardo Viveiros de Castro 52 Spinozists Jonathan Israel's Radical Enlightenment and curian crudella NO. give me 20 names for "?curian crudella? post Zizekian Spinozist turned Schellingian" can you correct this transcription error? its a female philosopher not necessarily from brazil 1:01:00ish - Eschatology self-historicizes 1:38:00 Dugin uses Schmitt' friend/enemy 1:39:40 - political soldier/saint to clown/fool * Dugin's polsoldier to clown * Eg terrorist shooter, tragicomedia element * Balthussar's saint->fool * Hans Balthussar Glory of the Lord, Vol 5. Eckhard to French Jesuits.. * saint->fool; invention of the novel, Don Quijote. Zizek is an entertainer political soldier. 1:51:00 Franz von Baader - holy androgyny . Androgyne vs Hermaphrodite. Androgyne sacrifices something. Hermaphorditic is inflamed. Merriology vs Sophiology. 1:53:00 Dark Madeline 1:59 metaphysics of chaos - two types of chaos 2:09ish chaos is phallic jouissance. you can use Logic ?to make sense of spirit but not God? 2:11 You can use logic to understand women. 2:12 Zindlicheit task force, logic of sexuation problem, seminar 20
	#kastnerka	#kästnerka_24Abril2025 !! https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YU1tjXP-FzQ8jKVY3GkryPhbGwy5CMTwZhFjflWhTOE/edit?gid=1213892252#gid=1213892252
		#transmutate #inversions #revisionaryratios	* Whitehead's - The method of philosophy is descriptive generalization: "The depositions of PAADSLLBHKH merely mean that ideas which these men introduced into the philosophic tradition must be construed with limitations, adaptations, and inversions, either unknown to them, or even explicitly repudiated by them. https://youtu.be/iYIRcokwy3o?t=4m54s * PAADSLLBHKH = Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel * "The primary method of mathematics is deduction; the primary method of philosophy is descriptive generalization. Under the influence of mathematics, deduction has been foisted onto philosophy as its standard method, instead of taking its true place as an essential auxiliary mode of verification whereby to test the scope of generalities. This misapprehension of philosophic method has veiled the very considerable success of philosophy in providing generic notions which add lucidity to our apprehension of the facts of experience. The depositions of Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz,† Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Hegel, merely mean that ideas which these men introduced into the philosophic tradition must be construed with limitations, adaptations, and inversions, either unknown to them, or even explicitly repudiated by them. A new idea introduces a new alternative; and we are not less indebted to a thinker when we adopt the alternative which he discarded. Philosophy never reverts to its old position after the shock of a great philosopher." * SDMF can't be surpassed: "Neither Socrates, nor Descartes, nor Marx, nor Freud, can be 'surpassed' because they have carried out their research with the passion of revealing that there is an object: the Truth." --Lacan https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1948793642992443459 * Steiner's 3 steps in the development of human thought: "every-day plain thinking", "perceptual power of thinking" / "Goetheanistic thinking / Anschauende Urteilskraft", "inversion thinking" / "Denken in Umstülpungen" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOPZ9RQxRro * Kabbalah and Criticism (1983). In this work, Harold Bloom examines the Kabbalah not as a religious tradition but as a model for literary criticism, focusing on the concept of "revisionary ratios" and the idea of misreading as a form of creative interpretation. He draws parallels between Kabbalistic thought and the process of literary innovation, suggesting that just as Kabbalists reinterpret sacred texts, writers engage in a similar process of reinterpretation and transformation of existing literary works. * McLuhan's reverses - Alfred Whitehead's "limitations, adaptations, and inversions" (Process and Reality, 1929) resonates well with Marshall McLuhan's "obsolesces, retrieves/enhances, reverses" (Tetrad of Media Effects, 1988). #Whitehead #McLuhan #MediumIsTheMessage https://x.com/El_Pluriverso/status/1951949393491362241/photo/1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This kind of dialectical inversion, by which hallowed ideals somehow become their opposite, was very much on my mind reading Angelia Wilson’s engaging new book, The Politics of Hate: How the Christian Right Darkened America’s Political Soul. Wilson is well positioned to write a critical book on the religious right. Now a professor of politics at the University of Manchester, she is also a self-described lesbian who grew up in the Bible Belt and demonstrates an encyclopedic familiarity with the Right’s institutional ecosystems. https://jacobin.com/2025/05/religious-right-christian-trumpism-fundamentalism * tenshi_anna's reversals - There's something frightful about trying to cultivate holiness in more or less relative terms amidst the brutal animality of secular life, because it really is "dialectical" in the full sense. "Reversals" constantly loom on the horizon, loyalties are always shifting, opposites turn into each other because merciful limits are not respected, people take turns corruption-maxxing, and the only judge left amidst this universal corruption is adequacy to Hegelian "actuality," Wirklichkeit. This is the reality that the Hegelian Egirls were speaking to. This reality is an irreducible one for our realm, but it is not the limit of it, because the entire point of the Catholic and Orthodox churches is to cultivate an absolute holiness and sanctification that raises a divine torch in the darkness, a beacon to the incorruptible heart of Mary and the true kerygma of the Incarnate God, the Word of Christ. My blessing and curse is that I feel like I will never belong fully to either world, and that my vocation will inevitably find its limit in the effort to be a Hermetic messenger between them. I understand well why so few people do this, though, because to feel and grasp radically the depths of each side of our world while remaining suspended between them can only be a perpetual heartbreak. I feel my heart breaking over this every day, which is part of why I seek to consecrate myself to the Holy Virgin and recognize how parochial my pain is as a small piece of the cosmic ache she bore taking on the Passion of her Son. The world groans with humanity's sin, and what is holy within the world groans with it. I think often lately about how I was born on the Solemnity of Mary, her feast day, and how the original Gaelic form of my mother's surname translates to "servant of the Virgin Mary." I was brought into the world under this star and it clearly sets a certain horizon for me. I've been praying for guidance, because splitting the differences in the way that I try to do still hurts so much... like the rest of you, I'm obligated to cover up the pain with a certain brashness, but when I pray, it comes rushing out again, because before God there are no more games of one-upmanship. There's only the abyss of humility in sin opening itself to be filled with whatever sanctifying grace it may be granted... and I'm always prepared to be mocked for my piety, but once you have been moved by the Spirit in a certain way, there's no going back. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1919799597234315409 Gaelic form of my mother's surname translates to "servant of the Virgin Mary." * “The ‘dominion of capital’ is an accomplished teleological catastrophe, robot rebellion, or shoggothic insurgency, through which intensively escalating instrumentality has inverted all natural purposes into a monstrous reign of the tool.” —Nick Land \| Teleoplexy https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1932456995677782501 * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

		#hypno	* https://x.com/ALCrego_/status/1912253585515032981 * spinning skateer * magic eyes / stereograms? * *
		#esotericism #occult #mystic #hermetics	* Joshua Ramey - The Hermetic Deleuze vs Philipp Valentini/Mahdi Tourage's Esoteric Lacan https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1912162705613734099 * Allison Coudert's Leibniz and thee Kabbalah - https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1912195298140561479/photo/2 * Mario Enrique Sacchi's "The Apocalypse of Being: The Esoteric Gnosis of Martin Heidegger" * Glenn Magee - Hegel and The Hermitic Tradition - Here’s the REAL trvthnvke: Lacan destroyed philosophy just like Hegel did. As Glenn Magee argues, Hegel was not a “philosopher” in the Platonic sense, chasing after Sophia in ignorance. He was a Hermeticist, affirming the immanent attainability of a self-relating system of limits in the concrete practice of thinking through being, which he called Absolute Knowing. Similarly, Lacan’s self-described orientation of “antiphilosophy,” which was fundamentally a reaction against Heideggerian ontology, sought to displace the priority of an inert Being with an erotological volatility of jouissance—combating pagan idolatry and opening up an “alogonal” lack in the secular world that can only be met by God. * Bielik-Robson's “Solid Hatred Addressed to Being”: Lacan’s Gnostic Uses of Judaism - Dorian Electra - Flamboyant (Official Video) This is not the best Fink book to recommend. Quite regressive proto-Freudian account of perversions, and disturbingly infantilizing of psychotics--although you may like that since you so appreciate the Name of the Father. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903536138406478265 DO like that, you know me so well 💅 my main issues are with his mechanical sub-theological understanding of Lacan’s teachings, like Jacques-Alain Miller without the sinthome (Raul Moncayo has better sinthome gnosis). perverts and psychotics deserve all the hate though. Bielik-Robson is the basedest however because she makes Lacan properly ~flamboyant~ (read: Kabbalistic) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDb1oTfcmCI https://www.academia.edu/42653995/_Solid_Hatred_Addressed_to_Being_Lacan_s_Gnostic_Uses_of_Judaism https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903536138406478265 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agata_Bielik-Robson * Michael Downs - In my book, there’s a part where I bring Lacan and Žižek into discussion with Crowley and Spare. I’m beginning to want to write a greatly expanded version of it. - Kenneth Grant's Outer Gateways, Outside the Circles of Time, Austin Osman Spare, Hugo de Garis' The Artilect War https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1911633224373063996 https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1911111118652588249 https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1912161439889961231 https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1914050168191926339 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *	# OLD JUNK (including my folder on my old mac???) * Eco: Uses hermetic symbols indirectly in The Name of the Rose, particularly through the library as a repository of hidden knowledge. Blake: Explicitly incorporates Hermeticism through alchemical symbols, mystical themes, and the quest for divine knowledge. Goethe: Explores Hermetic ideas in Faust, focusing on duality, alchemy, and the pursuit of ultimate wisdom. Borges: Engages with Hermeticism through themes of infinite knowledge, labyrinths, and alchemical symbolism in stories like The Library of Babel and The Aleph. * * * * * * Corpus Hermeticum - used by that evola content creator * Magee is a Hermeticist? Idk - 𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐑𝐘𝐎𝐒𝐇𝐊𝐀𝐌𝐎𝐍𝐀𝐑𝐂𝐇𝐈𝐒𝐓 Hegel's Philosophy of History and Kabbalist Eschatology by Glenn Alexander Magee https://x.com/pseudodeucalion/status/1826211488496808016?\ * * * *	# nummerology / numogram * 2027 is the 307th prime number, while 307 is the 63rd prime number. https://x.com/doomcrypt/status/1919623950088442088 * The first number system was introduced by the Annunaki, not Lemurians. It is base30 as its anthropometric but also divisible by 3. It lives on as our system of measurement for angles. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lrc9tf/request_someone_willing_to_schizopost_about_the/ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
		#psychosis	* Wouter Kusters: S.C. Hickman - A Carnival Sideshow Act @alien_ecologies · 30 may. 2024 You should read a friend of mine Wouter Kusters: A Philosophy of Madness: The Experience of Psychotic Thinking: * * *
	#themed, academies	#university Bari Weiss' University of Austin vs Trump University vs Peterson Academy vs Prager U vs Tate's Academy https://twitter.com/search?q=%22University%20of%20Austin%22%20%22Peterson%20Academy%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news	* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD0KrJ14L1o&lc=Ugz1CbSyqT77AJjhhnx4AaABAg * Sherman Alexie, Frederick Douglas, and John McBorder (vs Paulo Freire)? 1:37:40 - Theory Underground convo with Garner and Studebaker MOICOMMENT - when are you going to interview Sherman Alexie and John McBorder?? sounds like some fascinating ideas your are bringing together in this theoryscene aka milieu * MacIntyre, Nietzsche, Newman, and Marx: 'Nietzsche's Titanism,' Science, and the 'Idea of a University' *	Herbert Marcuse, Angela Davis, Paulo Freire, and Derrick Bell vs Bari Weiss' University of Austin https://twitter.com/aaronsibarium/status/1708551171080675498 Chris Rufo’s new book is ostensibly a history of New Left. But it can also be read as a subtle blueprint for the New Right—and as a warning to all partisans, conservative and liberal, that it is sometimes necessary to boundary-police your own side.🧵 freebeacon.com You Say You Want a Counter-Revolution Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 The book profiles four thinkers—Herbert Marcuse, Angela Davis, Paulo Freire, and Derrick Bell—whose disciples infiltrated academia and much of what is downstream of it. Here’s the thing: that ingress proceeded by means and arguments that, in 2023, sound positively rightwing. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 Marcuse argued that a state-media-corporate leviathan had rendered democratic elections illegitimate, that overtly neutral structures really weren’t and that dismantling them required the creation of "counter-institutions" to break the “information monopoly of the establishment.” Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 Each of these points has an obvious corollary on the contemporary right. Indeed, the very term "counter-institutions" was used by @continetti , the founder of the Free Beacon, all the way back in 2012 to describe this publication! freebeacon.com Combat Journalism Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium That label could also be applied to the University of Austin, founded by former New York Times columnist Bari Weiss, and to New College of Florida, where Rufo is now a trustee, both of which represent efforts to create new, non-woke universities. 2:35 PM · Oct 1, 2023 Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 These sorts of parallels suffuse the book, and while there are some relevant asymmetries, any competent reader is bound to ask: Isn’t @realchrisrufo basically doing that? Even some of Rufo’s own vocabulary—e.g. “decodify” and “recodify”—comes directly from Freire. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 The attempts to turn "CRT" into a catch-all bogeyman, meanwhile, recall Marcuse’s concept of "linguistic therapy," in which activists redefine their enemies’ terms and "floo[d] the discourse" with them. That’s what Rufo did to CRT, and what others did to “ESG” and “woke.” Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 One can hear in these echoes a sly defense of Rufo’s own stratagems, and of conservatism’s long-term efforts to build up parallel institutions. After all, those are the tactics that worked for the left! But one can also hear an implicit warning… Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 The linguistic shell games, the totalizing antinomianism, and the quest for institutional dominance were, in Rufo’s final analysis, disastrous, giving us the cultural cataclysms of 2020, an ongoing crime wave, and an education system too woke to teach basic mathematics. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 There is a cautionary tale here about how critiques of power can morph into justifications for it—one with obvious lessons for a right that is now in the insurgent position of the ’60s left. And there is a related point about the importance of gatekeeping. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 The far left’s institutional conquest, Rufo shows, could not have happened without liberal accommodationism. Consider that it was Elena Kagan, as an editor of the Harvard Law Review, who published several of the Derrick Bell pieces that became the basis for CRT. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 No doubt Kagan, the establishment liberal par excellence, did this because she believed in the marketplace of ideas. But it was precisely that belief that helped CRT triumph and transform establishment liberalism from the inside out! Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 That in turn offers a warning for conservatives who now chafe at boundary-policing their own fringe. The allergy is understandable, but it has also harmed the right’s ideological immune system, giving genuine bad guys a small but real foothold that they didn’t have before. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 And the lesson of Rufo’s book is that it doesn’t take many footholds to begin a coalitional conquest. Yes, there are asymmetries, especially in the legal environment. Yes, in certain ways the right has gatekept its fringes more than the left, some BIG caveats notwithstanding. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 But decisions like Kagan’s—premised on what we now know to be a mistaken calculation of coalitional power—were nonetheless integral to the radicals’ rise. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 And as conservatives consider what Faustian bargains to make in the service of cultural insurgency, they would do well to heed the warning implied by Rufo’s argument: Sometimes, it’s best to say no. Aaron Sibarium @aaronsibarium · Oct 1 TLDR: it’s a great book that admits of subtle, Straussian interpretations, while also giving one of the clearest and most synoptic accounts of the left’s long march through the institutions to date. Highly recommend! Scott G @scttfrnks · Oct 1 With a few exceptions, it seems to me that the “counter-institutions” being proposed these days are simply an effort to re-establish the types of institutions that once existed prior to woke colonization, seeing the old ones as unsalvageable. Laura @999GGGhost1 · Oct 1 Bari Weiss is hardly “the founder” of UATX.
		#PLANETARY SYSTEMS #GLOBAL #TRANSNATIONAL	* Benjamin Bratton's Antikythera Institute * Lorenzo Marsili's Planetary Politics and La tua patria è il mondo intero (Your motherland is the entire world), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenzo_Marsili * Cadell Last's Global Brain Singularity * Nicolas Berggruen's Berggruen Institute * Berggruen Institute El papel de Europa en la política planetaria actual: Slavoj Žižek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LtAHUtW8sk&loop=0 * Giovanbattista Tusa's Planetary Conversations * * * * * * # OTHER * Santiago Zabala - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiago_Zabala * Srećko Horvat's After The Apocalypse #After * Bodies as Borders - by A Mbembe · Cited by 180 — In this intervention Achille Mbembe reflects on the modalities of planetary living, interlacing what he calls three mega processes: early 21st-century ... #BodyMetaphor * * * * * * junk: * philosophyportal.online / \|\| antikythera.org / Benjamin Bratton / planetary intelligence \|\| thephilosophicalsalon.com / \|\| Nicolas Berggruen / Berggruen Institute * "* Benjamin Bratton's Antikythera Institute vs this video's Nicolas Berggruen's Berggruen Institute * * * * * " * ???? Daniel Heller-Roazen / Jankélévitch / Donald Kunze ???? Evan King / Supersapientia ???? Tim Elmo Feiten ???? Richard Tarnas / Chad Harris ????	* 𝓣 \|\| \|\| \|\|𝓣	Here are six more living philosophers and their projects, aligned with the speculative, planetary-scale, and interdisciplinary thinking of your initial list: ### 1. Reza Negarestani (Cybernetic Rationalism) - Project: Laboria Cuboniks (Xenofeminism collective) & The Intelligence of Evil (upcoming) - Why? Like Bratton, he merges computation, AI, and philosophy—updating reason for the post-human era. ### 2. Patricia Reed (Planetary Design & Xenopoetics) - Project: Xenofuturism & collaborations with The Terraforming (Strelka Institute) - Why? Parallel to Tusa’s "Planetary Conversations," she rethinks geopolitics through alien epistemologies. ### 3. Yuk Hui (Cosmotechnics & Digital Ontology) - Project: Research Network for Philosophy and Technology - Why? Shares Berggruen’s focus on global techno-diversity but roots it in non-Western cosmologies. ### 4. Helen Hester (Xenofeminism & Post-Work) - Project: The After Progress Initiative - Why? Extends Last’s "Global Brain" into feminist critiques of labor and automation. ### 5. Achille Mbembe (Planetary Necropolitics) - Project: Planetary Living (Berggruen Institute affiliate) - Why? Like Berggruen, he tackles global governance but through decolonial and ecological lenses. ### 6. Benjamin H. Bratton (The Stack & The New Normal) - Wait—you already mentioned him! So here’s a wildcard: Luciana Parisi (Algorithmic Unconscious & Xenocomputation) - Project: Automatic Society (speculative AI ethics) - Why? Pushes Bratton’s computation into AI’s ontological weirdness. ### Bonus (7th): Srećko Horvat (Planetary Utopias) - Project: Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DIEM25) - Why? Like Tusa, he blends continental philosophy with activist futurism. All these thinkers share a speculative, planetary, and often post-humanist bent—bridging philosophy, tech, and institutional design. Need deeper dives on any?	Here are six more philosophers and their projects that align with the innovative and interdisciplinary thinking of the ones you mentioned: 1. Yuk Hui: - Project: Cosmotechnics - Hui explores the intersection of technology, philosophy, and cultural diversity, proposing a framework for understanding technology as culturally specific rather than universal. His work resonates with planetary and computational themes. 2. Luciana Parisi: - Project: Automated Reason and Algorithmic Governance - Parisi investigates the philosophical implications of automation and algorithms, focusing on how computation reshapes knowledge, politics, and aesthetics. 3. Reza Negarestani: - Project: Intelligence and Philosophy of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - Negarestani's work bridges philosophy, artificial intelligence, and speculative thought, emphasizing the role of intelligence in shaping future systems. 4. Timothy Morton: - Project: Hyperobjects and Ecological Thought - Morton develops the concept of "hyperobjects" to address global ecological challenges, blending philosophy, art, and science to rethink humanity's relationship with the planet. 5. Donna Haraway: - Project: Cyborg Manifesto and Staying with the Trouble - Haraway's work focuses on the intersections of technology, ecology, and feminism, proposing new ways of thinking about multispecies coexistence and planetary futures. 6. Peter Sloterdijk: - Project: Spheres Trilogy and Anthropotechnics - Sloterdijk examines the spatial and existential dimensions of human life, exploring how humans create and inhabit "spheres" of existence, from the personal to the planetary. These philosophers share a commitment to rethinking humanity's role in a rapidly evolving world, often through interdisciplinary approaches that blend philosophy, technology, ecology, and culture. Let me know if you'd like to dive deeper into any of their projects! 😊	Absolutely—those four thinkers are all engaged in broad, interdisciplinary, future-facing philosophical projects that blend technology, politics, ecology, and speculative thinking. Here are six more contemporary philosophers whose work resonates with that same planetary, posthumanist, or systems-oriented ethos: --- ### 1. Yuk Hui – Cosmotechnics Hui's project rethinks the relationship between technology and philosophy through different cultural lenses. His concept of cosmotechnics proposes that every civilization has its own way of integrating the cosmos and technique, challenging the universality of Western techno-philosophy. --- ### 2. Reza Negarestani – Philosophical Engineering / Artificial General Intelligence A philosopher of speculative realism and rationality, Negarestani works at the intersection of philosophy and AI. His project explores the construction of synthetic reason and the potential of philosophy to engineer new cognitive architectures. --- ### 3. Santiago Zabala – Being at Risk / Philosophy of Emergency Zabala develops a Heideggerian-inflected critique of technocracy and political complacency. He argues that the true emergency is the lack of recognition of real emergencies—environmental, political, and existential—and seeks to reawaken philosophical urgency. --- ### 4. Victoria Vesna – Art\|Sci Center + Alien Star Dust Project A media artist and theorist, Vesna explores the boundaries between science, technology, and consciousness. Her work with UCLA’s Art\|Sci Center and projects like Alien Star Dust bring together speculative art, ecological thought, and planetary awareness. --- ### 5. Mark C. Taylor – Entangled: Complexity, Relationality, and the Future of Philosophy Taylor blends philosophy, architecture, art, and theology to investigate complexity theory, networks, and systems thinking. His work critiques modernity’s separation of domains and proposes more entangled, ecological modes of thought. --- ### 6. Luciana Parisi – Technoecologies of Thought / Incomputable AI A philosopher of technology and media, Parisi investigates algorithmic culture, post-digital aesthetics, and the limits of computability. Her work challenges the instrumental view of AI and proposes a speculative, affective, and non-human dimension to computation. --- Let me know if you'd like this visualized or categorized by theme (e.g., ecology, AI, planetary politics), or want reading suggestions for any of these thinkers.

		KHM vs AB vs APP - Kant/Hegel/Marx (pro-telos) vs Althusser/Balibar (Lacanianish, anti-humanist anti-telos) vs Adorno/Postone/Pippin (anti-telos) Kant/Hegel/Marx = Teleological Progress Althusser/Balibar = Structural Determinists Adorno/Postone/Pippin = Negative Totality	* basically Balibar vs Postone debate was a major event for Cutrone, he has a triad in his head for his teachers: KHM vs AB vs APP * * * * chatgpt: Here’s a sharp categorization that ensures no overlap between the three groups, using mutually exclusive philosophical lenses: --- ### 1. GROUP 1: Althusser/Balibar *Category: Structuralist Anti-Humanism* - Core*: Rejects conscious subjectivity* as the locus of history/politics. - Divisions: - Althusser: Ideological state apparatuses (ISAs) interpellate subjects without their awareness. - Balibar: "Equaliberty" as a structural effect of capitalist contradictions, not human agency. - Exclusive Trait: No "subject" of history—only structures reproduce themselves. --- ### 2. GROUP 2: Adorno/Postone/Pippin *Category: Negative Dialectical Marxism* - Core*: Capitalism’s totality is non-identical—it cannot be rationally reconciled. - Divisions: - Adorno: The "administered world" negates individual autonomy. - Postone: Abstract labor is* the substance of capital’s self-moving contradiction. - Pippin: Hegelian modernity’s failed rationality critiques itself. - Exclusive Trait: Totality is false but inescapable—no synthesis, only critique. --- ### 3. GROUP 3: Kant/Hegel/Marx *Category: Emancipatory Rationalist Teleology* - Core*: History/politics moves toward realized freedom* via reason/struggle. - Divisions: - Kant: Progress through Enlightenment’s public use of reason. - Hegel: Freedom actualized via dialectical Aufhebung of contradictions. - Marx: Communism as the rational end of class struggle. - Exclusive Trait: History has a logical endgoal—unlike Group 2’s anti-teleology. --- ### Why No Overlap? \| Group \| Structural Determinism \| Negative Totality \| Teleological Progress \| \|-------\|------------------------\|--------------------\|-----------------------\| \| 1 \| ✅ (No subject) \| ❌ \| ❌ \| \| 2 \| ❌ \| ✅ (No reconciliation) \| ❌ \| \| 3 \| ❌ \| ❌ \| ✅ (Freedom as telos) \| Group 1 vs. Group 3: Althusser mocked Hegel’s "expressive totality" as idealism. Group 2 vs. Group 3: Adorno called Hegel’s teleology "identity thinking." Group 1 vs. Group 2: Postone’s labor-as-substance isn’t structuralist—it’s a dynamic contradiction. Final Edge: - "Althusser’s structures don’t ‘negate’—they mute. Adorno’s totality negates but doesn’t progress. Hegel’s progress is Adorno’s nightmare." Need sharper divides? I can drill into their textual anathemas (e.g., Althusser’s "aleatory materialism" vs. Hegel’s necessity).	tenshi_anna-isms * So true queen. Atheists can’t get it right. St. Dionysius the Areopagite was right all along The fundamental struggle in 1960s French Marxist philosophy, between Jacques-Alain Miller, the more Lacanian “logicist” (who ultimately capitulated fully to neoliberal Zionism) and Alain Badiou, the more Althusserian “mathematicist,” hinged entirely on the significance of Zero for “reason” itself. In “Suture (Elements of the Logic of the Signifier),” Miller demonstrates how the tortured status of Zero in Gottlob Frege’s logicist philosophy of mathematics indicates a point where a purely “objective” logic has to return back to the subjective action of its positing in the signifier (precisely the same point that Hegel had made with his concept of “subjective logic”). However, without a theological form of mediation between subject and object, their shared horizon gives way to an “abject” abyss (as Julia Kristeva recognized in “Powers of Horror”), and so, to preserve an “absolute” form of strictly secular communist reason, Alain Badiou in “Mark and Lack” was obligated to hypostatize the Void as an ontological foundation substituting entirely for God, and subordinating Miller’s (ultimately neoliberal) subject to it. But as Badiou later recognized, this itself is merely an article of faith or “fidelity”—so which would you rather have faith in, God or the Void? People who still think atheism is coherent have a lot to learn from the follies of the Cahiers pour l’Analyse https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911232185463455878 * * *
		#trans	# X-centric ( * centric ): * 𝓣logocentric / logocentrismo \|\| phallocentrism / falocentrismo𝓣 # over/under * overnote (The Deep from The Boys to his wife) * underpin (Demis Hassabis w Lex) # counterX / interX / transX ( counter * / inter * / trans ): ## COUNTER 𝓣counterpoise \|\| counterfactural \|\| countersignal𝓣 ## INTER * 𝓣interdisciplinary \|\| transdisciplinary𝓣 (Matt Segall) * interdock https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hcq9ox/was_luigi_impotent/ * 𝓣intersuppositional𝓣 - Heidegger wants to create a doctrine of (what OG Rose calls) intersuppositional, it's not subjectivity, the essence of being arises within the encounter of the being that discloses itself in its "suchness", the relation itself, not the I-object, the relation is what is essential, and the disclosure of that relation then becomes the way to fight against standing reserve technology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVp_1vZlNBI&t=29m30s * 𝓣intertextualidad𝓣 https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intertextualidad ## TRANS * 𝓣transcritique𝓣 (Karatani) * 𝓣transfiguring𝓣 (LecturesOnLacan, "transfiguration" is a description of Cesar Aira's favorite author Muriel Spark) * 𝓣transfinite𝓣 (Meillassoux) - "We will retain the following translation of Cantor's transfinite: the (quantifiable) totality of the thinkable is unthinkable https://twitter.com/unconscioushh/status/1546973759873114112 * 𝓣translanguaging𝓣 - Ofelia Garcia's skill! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofelia_García_(educator) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translanguaging https://x.com/LanguageFreedo1/status/1740426610380284131 * 𝓣transmutation𝓣 (Baudrillard) The religious vision and its transmutations in German philosophy spring out of society: in order that they shall be fulfilled and realized in the accomplishment of the good society that they envisage, they themselves will have to make way for a more radical philosophy, a philosophy of social practice. But society is divided: this is indeed a sign of the ills that beset it. Who then is to change it? The clue to Marx’s later answer is already given in his description of the workingmen whom he met in Paris in 1844: “Among those people the brotherhood of men is no phrase, but truth and nobility shine from their labor hardened forms.” https://jacobin.com/2022/12/christmas-marxism-christianity-alasdair-macintyre-jesus Bernard Williams writing about the internet (2002). Moreover, the Internet shows signs of creating for the first time what Marshall McLuhan prophesied as a consequence of television, a global village, something that has the disadvantages both of global- ization and of a village. Certainly it does offer some reliable sources of information for those who want it and know what they are looking for, but equally it supports that mainstay of all villages, gossip. It constructs proliferating meeting places for the free and unstructured exchange of messages which bear a variety of claims, fancies, and suspicions, entertaining, superstitious, scandalous, or malign. The chances that many of these messages will be true are low, and the probability that the system itself will help anyone to pick out the true ones is even lower. In this respect, post-modern technology may have returned us dialectically to a transmuted version of the pre-modern world, and the chances of acquiring true beliefs by these means, except for those who already have knowledge to guide them, will be much like those in the Middle Ages. At the same time, the global nature of these conversations makes the situation worse than in a village, where at least you might encounter and perhaps be forced to listen to some people who had different opinions and ob- sessions. As critics concerned for the future of democratic discussion have pointed out, the Internet makes it easy for large numbers of previously isolated extremists to find each other and talk only among themselves.” transmutate transmutation wtfwth https://twitter.com/danielcallcut/status/1558132843489935360 McLuhan was too much an optimist. Baudrillard was right. https://twitter.com/theorypleeb/status/1558492070620196865 Here here! https://raynottwoodbead.substack.com/p/beating-around-the-bush-on-the-foul datadump -> next three horizontal lines * 𝓣transcryptum𝓣 (Ettinger), transubjective (Ettinger) * 𝓣transsexualist𝓣 "transsexualist jouissance" https://x.com/r_vonhagn/status/1358530398951727105 * 𝓣transhistoricity \|\| transhistoricize𝓣 (Postone) * 𝓣transpositional𝓣 (Dugin) * 𝓣transubstantiate𝓣 meaning through logos - Post structuralism, the scrutinization of how linguistic hegemony and symbolic signifiers can influence the trajectory of thought is at the forefront of understanding archaic and esoteric texts; to encapsulate the holistic subtext and transubstantiate meaning through logos without faulty interpretation or translation is notoriously difficult, therefore using “deconstruction” to wholly absorb all means of which text can be interpreted and subjugate it to a degree of accuracy will likely improve the denotations and delineations of the text for the reader.https://old.reddit.com/r/lacan/comments/1guzdit/on_why_henri_lefebvres_toward_an_architecture_of/ * 𝓣transvalue𝓣 - transvaluation Nor is it a Nietzschean transvaluation of values, where the last situate themselves as first and the meek prepare to inherit the earth. https://www.parapraxismagazine.com/articles/muteness-envy/ * 𝓣transversality \|\| transversal𝓣 (Baudrillard on theory and fiction - "I think my work has a transversality, a cross-disciplinarity. I am a metaphysician and a moralist. I write manifestos") ;;; "transversal" (Tutt) - "I reject Nietzsche's transversal racialization completely." https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1826253096550592749 ;;; Transversality does nothing less than schizophrenize the transference. Transversality is a conceptual and clinical tool that was developed primarily in Guattari’s thought, activism and practice, and which he borrowed from Sartre, as a concept designed to transform institutions, beginning with the psychiatric hospital. Transversality is a key concept for the ongoing genealogies of new materialism whose rhizomatic history is rooted in Deleuze and Guattari’s two-volume Capitalism and Schizophrenia * * * * *	.
		#astrology	* Richard Tarnas / Chad Harris https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z67yAGzUH4 * * * * *
	#themed	#catastrophe	* "That things 'just go on' is the catastrophe." — Walter Benjamin https://substack.com/@samantharosehill/note/c-105509394? * Jean-Pierre Dupuy & catastrophe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHmsqEMRf54&t=15m21s * Jamieson Webster, a clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst, has written a book titled "On Breathing: Care in a Time of Catastrophe https://x.com/PressPeninsula/status/1867141126672552306 * Can Çakir - Catastrophe as a Utopian Premise https://x.com/WeAteTheRest/status/1462773071794905092 * *	SILENCE (SIGETICS) – CATASTROPHE – CRISIS Programm: 12.00-12.15 Opening remarks Politica Tendencia Marco Rubio 29,8 mil publicaciones Mostrar más X Premium A quién seguir 12.15-12.30 Attila Kornel-Markula (University of Vechta): Crisis as the Aesthetic Inspiration of Silence in Modern Chinese Music Organizaciones v... 12.45-13.15 Sona Srivastava (Indraprastha University): Interrupt"ing Routine: A Study of Female Subjectivity, Silence, and Vegetal Futures Quinn Slobodian 02 Seg @zeithistoriker 13.15-13.45 Can Çakır (University of Münster): Catastrophe as a Utopian Premise Perfil 13.45-14.00 Break Donald Hoffman 14.00-14.30 İlhan Çamiçi (Kadir Has University): "That Silence Again!": The Politics of Silence and Representation in Turkish-Jewish Theatre Seg @donalddhoffman ... Más opciones 14.30-15.00 Tim Brown (University of Münster): Revolution and Silence: Goethe's Aesthetic Processing of Revolutionary Crisis 15.00-15.30 Michael Mason (University of Münster): The Autistic Decades: The Silent History of Neuroscience Joel Osteen Seg @JoelOsteen 15.30-16.00 Lea Espinoza Garrido (University of Wuppertal): Agency, Voice, and Silence in the Anthropocene Postear 16.00-16.15 Break Mostrar más 16.15-16.45 Mark Houlemarde (Loyola Marymount University): Speaking About Silence: A Transnational Historical Study of Campus Sexual Violence 16.45-17.15 Hector Feliciano (University of Münster): Be virtuous! Remarks on Sacrificiology and the Aporetics of Confessional Discourse during "moments of crises" Política de cookies Accesibilidad 17.15-17.45 Puyan Mahmudian (University of Münster): Doxa, Heresy and Mechanisms of Silencing Dissent Concluding Remarks A GRADUATE STUDENT SYMPOSIUM
05/01/2024	analytical methodologies/schemas? #method #frameworks #systems	#reasoning vs inference?	* Scannone/Kusch/Dussell's Analectic method vs Conjunctural Analysis vs Cyberdandy/Sartre's "Lost Organization Theory" vs "analogous"/"analogical" vs Schelling/Spinoza's "geometric method" * reasoning = inference, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. all inferences are part of reasoning, but not all reasoning is just inference * you can have deductive reasoning and deductive inference, inductive and abductive * Logos = among its connotations is that of a rational form of discourse that relies on inductive and deductive reasoning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos * Analectics is a method (and a #neologism of "analytics" or nah?) created by the Philosophy of Liberation, developed by thinkers such as the theologian Juan Carlos Scannone, the philosopher Enrique Dussel and the anthropologist Rodolfo Kusch. Dussel explains the method in his book Philosophy of Liberation, as an appropriate method to carry out the philosophical task. The term analectics (in ancient Greek: ανωλεκτική) is formed by the union of the Greek terms ανω anó, which means "beyond",1 and λογιζομαι loguizomai, which means "to reason".2 For Dussel, dialectic considers the unity of the different, of the opposites in the totality of being. Analectic means going beyond the totality and encountering the Other, who is originally different and therefore his logos bursts in as an interpellant beyond my understanding of being, beyond my interest.3 According to Jesús Villagrasa, this term was created by Bernhard Lakebrink to apply it to Thomistic metaphysics. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analéctica #Spanish #ESPANOL * La analéctica es un método creado por la Filosofía de la liberación, desarrollado por pensadores como el teólogo Juan Carlos Scannone, el filósofo Enrique Dussel y el antropólogo Rodolfo Kusch. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal%C3%A9ctica * The Mu'tazilites were thorough going ratiorialists * I've been thinking a lot about Adorno's argument that you can't understand the right without recognizing that the competitive economic "rationalism" it usually invokes both reflects and feeds into a deeper cultural irrationalism. Quinn Slobodian and others have done great work on this. Showcasing how the competitive "individualistic" ethic of the market transitions so easily into a competitive collectivist ethic focused on abstractions like the "nation" or "volk." https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid02XK4WTAnsQSbiQ5jx1KuQF66G5DwDvurkSQgr2Y2utwdZvEpXEeEU8UvYn4EqrHo2l&id=508767730&rdid=UfZTLwIF8knAGmYB# * when your principle of reason isn’t sufficient https://x.com/noetic_emetic/status/1910750908100624453 * * * * *	Chardin and Vernadsky's "noosphere" vs Lacan's lathouse/alethosphere vs Dussel's analectics?	* Noosphere and Analectics are both #neologisms related to reason - νόος ("nous, mind, reason") vs λογιζομαι ("to reason") * The word noosphere is derived from the Greek νόος ("nous, mind, reason") and σφαῖρα ("sphere"), in lexical analogy to "atmosphere" and "biosphere".[5] The concept cannot be accredited to a single author. The founding authors Vernadsky and de Chardin developed two related but starkly different concepts, the former grounded in the geological sciences, and the latter in theology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noosphere * analectics (in ancient Greek: ανωλεκτική) is formed by the union of the Greek terms ανω anó, which means "beyond", and λογιζομαι loguizomai, which means "to reason" *
		#JAZZ	* Adorno * Yusef Komunyakaa x Thomas Pynchon https://x.com/_motherslug/status/1909963878231875646 * * *
	versus	#HEROES	# Lacan's says in 3 separate instances that "X is my only master" !! well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dG2WEy39K4A&t=57m10s https://old.reddit.com/r/zizek/comments/1mgmgsv/introduction_to_jacques_lacan_todd_mcgowan/ * Clérambault - "It stems from the work of Gatian de Clérambault, my only master in psychiatry" https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326746920_From_de_Clerambault's_Theory_of_Mental_Automatism_to_Lacan's_Theory_of_the_Psychotic_Structure “My only real master in psychiatry was de Clérambault” https://www.facebook.com/lacancircleofaustralia/posts/pfbid09BSVp8vnJqpw24RQEsL5z6axyn5diuvnqoKv7HRKxtsXSFeEqrGwdZQC7Pk7LHJFl * Kojève - See Jacques Lacan, Autres Écrits (2001), pp. 331, 453. The inscription from Lacan to Kojève in the first issue of La Psychanalyse (1956, July 13) is even more revealing. He writes, “for Kojève, who was my master (truly the only).” This appears in Kojève’s private library, which his widow gave to the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. See Jacques Lacan, Autres Écrits (2001), pp. 331, 453. The inscription from Lacan to Kojève in the first issue of La Psychanalyse (1956, July 13) is even more revealing. He writes, “for Kojève, who was my master (truly the only).” This appears in Kojève’s private library, which his widow gave to the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. via - The_Early_Lacan_Five_Unpublished_Letters.pdf Lacan’s transition from this ethology of the person to a psychoanalysis of the subject is predicated not only on his “return to Freud” but also on a philosophical pivot from Spinoza to Hegel. With this turn to Hegel — largely instigated by his attendance at his “only Master,” Alexander Kojève’s lectures on The Phenomenology of Spirit. Lacan ┼ Architecture.pdf ;;; MOICOMMENT - 10:52 - You mentioned more broadly in another video that Lacan called Kojève, Clérambault, and a third person his "only master" in different contexts/occasions...did you ever remember who Lacan's third "only master" was?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1kxCBvExsU&t=652s * ??? who is the third????
		RETVRN	* Zalamea's Return to the Synthetic - btw, just so everyone knows—“epistemology” is a Protestant psyop. it’s an English translation of a concept introduced by the proto-fascist Lutheran philosopher J. G. Fichte (ruthlessly mocked for his totalitarian ambitions by Hegel in the “Philosophy of Right”): “Wissenschaftslehre,” which became institutionalized in Anglophone philosophy while the Kantian transcendental logic that inspired it was ruthlessly suppressed in favor of Frege’s pre-critical reduction of logic to a purely objective and analytic business. Fernando Zalamea is right—we must return to the “synthetic” (i.e., the theurgical) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910379921521947106 * Lacan's return to Freud * * * *
	wammin	herile potentialities, wammin of psychoanalysis	Monique Wittig "there is no women" vs Lacan's "there is no woman" - herile potentialities - https://old.reddit.com/r/lacan/comments/1gu19z6/how_can_i_best_understand_and_navigate_woman_does/ - The penis is an object of the real, but its symbolic representation is the phallus. The phallus, particularly in archaic literature and subtexts, delineates an allegory of dominion and herile potentialities # https://www.ranker.com/list/famous-female-psychoanalysts/reference: Melanie Klein Julia Kristeva Anna Freud Nancy Chodorow Juliette Favez-Boutonier Karen Horney Margaret Mahler Hildegard Peplau Maud Mannoni Susie Orbach Susan Sutherland Isaacs Marie Nyswander Sophie Morgenstern Frieda Fromm-Reichmann Laurence Bataille Esther Faye Belinda Mackie Lena Andary Veronica Sinclair Elizabeth Newman Carmela Levy-Stokes Carmel Davis Megan Williams Cherie Purtell Nicola Kaesler Kate Foord Colette Soler Julia Fabricius Louise Christie Serena Smith Eleanor Sebel Irma Brenman Pick Ofelia Brozky Clara Thompson Linda Atkins Solange Adelola Faladé Jan Aitken María-Inés Rotmiler de Zentner Melitta Schmideberg Marguerite Derrida Charlotte Warner Isabelle Morin Tita Bacaicoa # Also: Se dan cuenta de cuántas mujeres hay en el psicoanálisis lacaniano y freudiano? Estas son sólo las que se me ocurren por el momento: https://twitter.com/Bernardogangas/status/1562584928130215936 Hélène Cixous Sabina Spielrein Luce Irigaray Bracha Ettinger Colette Soler Juliet Maccannell Élisabeth Roudinesco Joan Copjec Geneviève Morel Jodi Dean Kiarina Kordela Patricia Gherovici - https://www.facebook.com/groups/Zatss/posts/3012342488913287/ Juliet Mitchell Alenka Zupančič	# in first list: * no Bracha Ettinger? * no Juliet Mitchell? - It may be something that Copjec says, but it also reminds me of Juliet Mitchell's argument in Psychoanalysis and Feminism (on the first page of the Introduction, she writes "However it may have been used, psychoanalysis is not a recommendation for a patriarchal society, but an analysis of one"). https://www.reddit.com/r/lacan/comments/13jvt57/joan_copjecs_quote_on_the_phallic_society/ * no ?who else? * no ?who else? * no ?who else? * no ?who else? * no ?who else? no ?who else? no ?who else?	moicomment: read Colette Soler's The treatment of the bodies in our times and in psychoanalysis https://twitter.com/ManuelDeLanda/status/1546859064524767240 Colette Soler Prelude no 2 The treatment of the bodies in our times and in psychoanalysis Colette Soler The expression ‘treatment of the bodies’ implies the hypothesis that the bodies are not simply determined by the living machine of the organism. That is the postulate of Lacanian psychoanalysis: there is a fabrication of the bodies through the path of language, and the unconscious discovered by Freud, a generator of symptoms, is language. Therefore, there is no way of inviting neurobehaviourists to our debates, unless it is as a mental… foil, so as to highlight the contrast. Now, what is the question that the title entails? Ostensibly, that of the change in the individuals subjected to capitalism after more than three centuries of existence. More implicitly, however, that question hides another one, that of the power of the analytic discourse in this context. Indeed, since its inception the Freudian procedure pretends to solve problems of the body, called sexual symptoms of Freud’s times—that Lacan related them to the subject of the word does not change anything. We can then perceive where the question comes from: it emerges from the disquiet about the future of psychoanalysis, as the two treatments of the body, one by capitalism and the other by psychoanalysis, confront each other. Besides, psychoanalysis itself has changed since Lacan’s teaching. This has not only imposed itself to an increasing number of psychoanalysts, themselves increasingly heterogeneous, but also, as a result of their own movement, have not stopped evolving, and more particularly on the question of their power over the symptoms of the body—we say of jouissance. Bodies that have already been treated How to answer the question about the treatment of the bodies in our times, if not on the basis of what we receive in the analytic experience in relation to the truth of jouissances? It would be better then to avoid any form of duplication of the discourse of the times on the same question (how many dictionaries about the body have been published over the last few years?), and not forget that what can be observed, what the media reveal (as to the surface, tattoos, dietetic regimes and surgery, and as to the practices, the de-normativity of jouissances, etc.), and what is within anyone’s reach, psychoanalysts included, does not have to do with analytic knowledge. Soler 2019 Prelude 2 My starting point is this: psychoanalysis receives bodies that have already been treated by the discourse of their times and that maintain a link of solidarity with the great ‘clamour’ of humanity. Now, if the habitus of the treated bodies change according to the different cultures, observations offer the testimony that the clamour itself remains. Hence the question for the psychoanalyst, beyond the fascination derived from the description of the changes, is that of knowing in the body is the basis of the constant nature of the complaint addressed to him/her at the beginning, and that she/he has ‘the duty to interpret’ to change it. What does psychoanalysis say about those already treated bodies, that is to say, submitted to the social bond, or let us say, socialized? From Freud to Lacan, psychoanalysis has become a reader of its times, and from this a conception of the socialized bodies has evolved.1 This reading started with Freud and his denunciation of the sexual repression at work in his era; repression that would be at the origins of symptoms and which psychoanalysis would attempt to lift. It continued with Lacan and his structural hypothesis on the negativating effect of language, which he substituted for the first Freudian hypothesis on social repression, and which changes the status of the symptom. Among some people today, fifty years after the death of Lacan, that hypothesis has rather become a denunciation of the reverse: a lack of repression, as sometimes is put, or an excess of jouissance; while Lacan read in it precisely the opposite: the ‘thirst of the lack of enjoying’.2 Can we establish a balance of these readings more than a century later? That could be one of the fruits of our Rendezvous. The field is vast: what is in it with Lacan, with the law of limitation of jouissance, its origins, its major signifier, the Phallus, its secondary development by discourse with its master signifiers, the function of its symptomatic forms, etc.? I am able to say ‘etcetera’ because the entire analytic theory concerns the impotence of these bodies under the command of social bonds to satisfy the subjects. That was the case in 1900, and is still the case in 2020. This is what does not change. What happens then with the specific effects of capitalism and the reorganization of social bonds that it generates? What capitalism does not treat The theme of novelty flourishes, there are new symptomatic forms (perverse oral and trans), new images (tattooed or surgical), new ideals of the body and of their relations in networks, and so forth, but what advances can be expected for the beings that define themselves as speaking beings? The growing clamour is not promising, and it imposes upon the psychoanalyst that he/she render an account as to whether he/she wants to become a partner of these subjects, also called new. I refer to this fact: how does capitalism treat the bodies? In some respects one could think that it takes care of the body more than ever before: freedom of movement, unprecedented means of displacement, medicine always progressing, state-of-the-art surgery, prevention, assistance… But it is the publicist the one who speaks there. In 1 Cf. Freud’s Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, as well as Lacan’s The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. 2 ‘Radiophonie’, Scilicet 2/3, p. 87. Soler 2019 Prelude 3 hearing the clamour, we must rather ask what it is that it does treat and that the other discourses perhaps look after a bit better. Well, it does not treat precisely what psychoanalysis has clearly shown: the fact that the bodies – the bodies as such, and not only those of capitalism – are ‘proletarians’ and do not possess anything with which to make a social bond of their jouissance, according to the thesis of Lacan. They pertain to the One. A social bond of suppletion: this is what the discourses provided to the proletarian bodies; whereas capitalism only provides the networks and multiple connections capable of dislocating the subjects, but as far as the bodies, which have a weight and occupy a space, its great resource appears to be reduced to segregation and its walls. We are there at the frontier between, on the one hand, that which cannot change, namely ‘the real of what comes to light in language’3, which is for all the speaking beings of all times and which ultimately defines the human, and on the other hand that which fluctuates, the effect of discourse, hystoric [hystorique]. At any rate, it is impossible, given our theme, not to have in the agenda the question of the definition and the destiny of the social bond within capitalism, since there is no society – even a capitalist society – without some form of social bond. The corpo-rection I will now address the instruments. Undoubtedly, the bodies become socialized by everything that is called education, which starts with the family but which does not stop there. Lacan speaks of édupation [condensation of education and dupes] in order to point out that it is a question of producing dupes of discourse. That is uses words and images would lead us to conceive of three bodies that would correspond to the three consistencies of the imaginary, the symbolic and the real, except that because of their being knotted the three make only one, to which édupation intends to impose an order by means of its words of authority operating as commandments. It is the discourse of the master. That is the difference with psychoanalysis, which does not operate with the norm, but which uses the same instrument, words, to aim with the interpretation at the jouissance-symptom of the subject. In both cases at stake is what Lacan called in relation to literature and in his conference Joyce le Symptôme II the corpo-rection, the rection du corps, ‘the rection of the body’. This has nothing to do with correction, but rather with the orientation of libido. The complete elucidation of this notion took me a long time, until I realized that the word rection does not appear in any dictionary of the XVIIIth or XIXth centuries. The term is recent; it derives from the linguistics of the middle of the XXth century (1969), and it designates the way in which a term of language relates to other terms, and in particular the verb to its complement. In this sense, then, one speaks of ‘a relation of rection’ [un rapport de rection]. 4 All Lacanians prick up their ears when they hear the word rapport. It is difficult to think that Lacan did not have that definition in mind – 3 ‘L’étourdit’, Scilicet 4, p. 33. 4 [The word rection is used in English-language linguistics. T.] Soler 2019 Prelude 4 he, for whom the signifying chain of speech provides a suppletion to the absent sexual relation so as to ensure a bond between the bodies; he who, more specifically, made of the verb a notasstupid [passibête] signifier.5 The signifier is stupid because it does not have sense, but the verb, however, ensures the sliding of sense and its equivocations in the grammatical relation of rection between words – and without the rection of words, there is no rection of the body. In other words: the proletarian body of ‘there is something of the one’ does not get knotted to the others, does not become a socialized body, not even one desirous of an erotic partner, unless there is a relation of rection between the words. The chain of words makes the chain of the bodies – even a Borromean chain. The body – not the organism, but the body – is therefore made by… grammar, syntax, which implies the lexicon that comes from lalangue. With the intuition of a genius before the advent of linguistics, Freud spoke of ‘the grammar of the drive’, and early in the piece Lacan spoke of the drive as ‘the treasure of signifiers’, before finally introducing in his seminar Encore the notion of ‘the speaking body’. Every speaking body that arrives at the psychoanalyst’s consulting room is already treated by the discourse of the times via the e-dupation [é-dupation] – and this is why psychoanalysis is the optical glasses of the epoch. That speaking body already has his words and his grammar. Now, there are words and words: those of the discourse that commands everybody, and those of the multiple unconscious, which are never collective. Put it in another way: the corpo-rection is not One, but divided. The words of the subject are not only those of his e-dupation, since the inevitable failure of this e-dupation – something that Freud noticed very well – leaves in each speaking being the gap of his truth, the one that is written with the words of his unconscious, which also speaks – but with the body. To mots and grammar we must add logic ‘without which the interpretation would be imbecile’, says ‘L’étourdit’.6 This is the logic of the impossible to attain by means of the rection of words, which certainly promises a social and/or erotic partner (in grammar this is called an object complement), but never a ‘sexual relation’. The analytic operation Psychoanalysis operates on the corpo-rection. This is made by the word, and in analysis this is treated by the interpreted word. It therefore restitutes for the analysand what in him/her has resisted e-dupation, the de-maternalization of his/her language [langue] and grammar, and it recognizes the weight of his/her truth of jouissance in delivering a certain knowledge [savoir] about what burdens him/her as a symptom of his/her unconscious, of the unconscious that with its lalangue affects his/her body. This insight into his/her own corpo-rection is not a promise of a rosy future or a reconciliatory union. It does not work towards the lures of hope: it rather denounces them, keeping a distance of ethical dissidence in relation to its era. Freud did not consider it less impossible than education. It is necessary, then, to produce a balance sheet of what it obtains regarding 5 Lacan, J. (1998). The Seminar, Book XX, Encore, On Feminine Sexuality, the Limits of Love and Knowledge, 1972-1973. New York & London, Norton, p. 25. 6 Scilicet 4, p. 49. Soler 2019 Prelude 5 the symptoms of jouissance, beyond the therapeutic tempering of their inconvenience. Freud laid the mark of a subjective abutment in the refusal of castration. For his part, Lacan established the mark in the incurable of the wall of language, with its impossibilities applicable to all, and particularly, in analysis, that of arriving at the end of the unconscious-lalangue and its effects. This is undoubtedly an abutment, but a real one, which opens the possible space of the variety, varité [condensation of variété and vérité] as he called it, of subjective responses regarding the real proper to the unconscious.7 Thus, in re-treating the bodies already treated by discourse and by the unconscious, it also treats the subjects – the subjects that have those bodies. In other words, it gives a chance to the efficacy of their saying [dire] – to be evaluated case by case. 21st July, 2019 Translated by Leonardo S. Rodríguez	vs Evola - Lunar is inherently tied with femininity, and according to my understanding of Evola and traditionalism is lower than the masculine in terms of the metaphysical hierarchy he posits. Christianity can tend to fall into the trap of the matrix and womblike compassionate quality of femininity where you are kept complacent and in a Nietzschean slave morality, which is antithetical to Evola's warrior ethos which of course emphasizes the superiority of the sun, individuality, and transcendence. https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1gupefw/did_evola_believe_that_christianity_was_only_a/	wammin of tenshi_anna St. Joan of Arc, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, St. Cecilia, St. Hildegard, St. Helen, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Catherine of Siena, and St. Teresa of Avila (did I get them right? 😅) https://x.com/marec07/status/1909942151082803676
		#Vesey #DenmarkVesey https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/دنمارك_فيسي https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/دنمارک وزی fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller fillerfillerfillerfiller	* Reverand William Barber * Cynthia Graham Hurd - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynthia_Graham_Hurd * Sherman Alexie, Frederick Douglas, and John McBorder (vs Paulo Freire)? 1:37:40 - Theory Underground convo with Garner and Studebaker MOICOMMENT - when are you going to interview Sherman Alexie and John McBorder?? sounds like some fascinating ideas your are bringing together in this theoryscene aka milieu * I'm reading "Hegel, Haiti and Universal history". https://x.com/katherineveritt/status/1932517297366647248 * * * * * * * * * * * * *	translate this to farsi: دنمارک وزی دنمارك فيسي Denmark Vesey (ويعرف أيضا باسم تيليماك Telemaque) (ولد حوالي 1767 – توفي 2 يوليو 1822) هو نجار وقيادي بين الأمريكيين السود في تشارلستون بولاية كارولينا الجنوبية. واتهم وأدين بأنه قائد "الانتفاضة"، وهي ثورة عبيد كبيرة تم التخطيط لها في المدينة في يونيو 1822؛ وتم إعدامه. ويحتمل أنه ولد عبدا في سانت توماس في جزر العذراء الأمريكية (التي كانت وقتها تحت الحكم الدنماركي)، وخدم تحت إمرة سيده في برمودا لفترة من الزمن قبل أن يتم جلبه إلى تشارلستون حيث اكتسب حريته. فاز فيسي اليانصيب واشترى حريته في سن الثانية والثلاثين. كان لديه عمل جيد وعائلة، ولكنه لم يتمكن من شراء زوجته الأولى وأطفاله من العبودية. أصبح فيسي نشطا في الكنيسة المشيخية الثانية. كان فيسي من بين مؤسسي كنيسة الأسقفية الميثودية الأفريقية المستقلة في المدينة في عام 1818 (والتي أصبح اسمها بعد الحرب "كنيسة إيمانويل الأسقفية الميثودية"، وهي أول طائفة سوداء مستقلة في الولايات المتحدة وتأسست في فيلادلفيا). حظيت الكنيسة بدعم من رجال الدين البيض، جذبت بسرعة أكثر من 1800 عضو، وأصبحت ثاني أكبر تجمع للكنيسة في البلاد بعد كنيسة الأم بيثيل في فيلادلفيا. في عام 1822 زعم أن هناك ثورة عبيد يتم التخطيط لها وأن هو زعيمها. وقيل إن فيسي وأتباعه يخططون لقتل الأسياد في تشارلستون وتحرير العبيد والإبحار إلى جمهورية هايتي السوداء. تذكر بعض السجلات أنها شملت الآلاف من العبيد في المدينة وغيرها على المزارع على بعد أميال. وقام مسؤولو المدينة باعتقال قادة المؤامرة والعديد من المشتبه فيهم في يونيو قبل أن تبدأ الانتفاضة. وكان فيسي وخمسة من العبيد من بين المجموعة الأولى من الرجال الذين حكم عليهم بسرعة عن طريق محكمة عينتها المدينة وحكم عليهم بالإعدام؛ تم إعدامهم شنقا في 2 يوليو 1822. كان فيسي يبلغ من العمر 55 عاما تقريبا. أعدم نحو 30 مواليا إضافيا في المحاكمات التالية. كما حكم على ابنه بتهمة التآمر وتم ترحيله من الولايات المتحدة، إلى جانب العديد الآخرين. تم تدمير الكنيسة وطرد قسّها من المدينة. النشأة كانت المخطوطات المنسوخة للإفادات في إجراءات المحكمة لعام 1822 في تشارلستون، كارولينا الجنوبية، وتقارير بعد الأحداث المصدر الرئيسي لتوثيق حياة دنمارك فيسي. حكمت المحكمة على فيسي بتهمة التآمر لشن تمرد العبيد وأعدمته شنقًا. ذكرت المحكمة أنه ولد في عام 1767 وهو عبدًا في سانت توماس، في مستعمرة الدنمارك آنذاك. أعاد الكابتن جوزيف فيسي تسميته إلى تيليماك. يشير المؤرخ دوغلاس إجيرتون إلى أن فيسي قد يكون من أصل كورومانتي (شعب يتحدث اللغة الأكانية). يشير كاتب السيرة الذاتية ديفيد روبرتسون إلى أن تيليماك قد يكون من أصل ماندي، لكن لم يُقبل هذا الدليل من قبل المؤرخين. اشترى جوزيف فيسي، قبطان بحر من برمودا وتاجر رقيق، تيليماك وهو في سن الرابعة عشرة تقريبًا. بعد فترة، باع فيسي الشاب لمزارع في سانت دومينج الفرنسية (هايتي الحالية). عندما تبين أن الشاب يعاني من نوبات صرع، أعاده الكابتن فيسي وأعاد المال الذي دُفع له إلى السيد السابق. لم يجد كاتب السيرة إيجرتون أي دليل على إصابة دنمارك فيسي بالصرع في وقت لاحق من حياته، ويقترح أن دنمارك قد يكون ادعى إصابته بنوبات صرع من أجل الهروب من الظروف الوحشية بشكل خاص في سان دومينج. عمل تيليماك كمساعد شخصي لجوزيف فيسي وخدم فيسي كمترجم فوري في تجارة الرقيق، وهي وظيفة تطلبت منه السفر إلى برمودا (أرخبيل على نفس خط العرض مثل تشارلستون، كارولينا الجنوبية، ولكن أقرب إلى كيب هاتيراس، كارولينا الشمالية، واستقر في الأصل في مستوطنة فرجينيا) لفترات طويلة من الزمن، ونتيجة لذلك، كان معروفًا بأنه يجيد الفرنسية والإسبانية وكذلك الإنجليزية. بعد الحرب الثورية، تقاعد الكابتن من مهنته البحرية (بما في ذلك تجارة الرقيق)، واستقر في تشارلستون، كارولينا الجنوبية. تعلم تيليماك القراءة والكتابة في الوقت الذي استقر فيه هو وفيسي في تشارلستون. قُسمت ولاية كارولينا في عام 1669 إلى مقاطعتين، مقاطعة كلارندون الجنوبية (التي تضم تشارلستون) ومقاطعة ألبيمارل الشمالية، والتي أصبحت مستعمرات منفصلة لكارولينا الجنوبية وكارولينا الشمالية) في عام 1712. كانت تشارلستون مركزًا قاريًا مرتبطًا بازدهار تجارة النقل البحري في برمودا. كانت المركز التجاري لمزارع الأرز والصباغ في البلاد المنخفضة، وكان أغلب سكان المدينة من الرقيق. في عام 1796، تزوج الكابتن فيسي من ماري كلودنر، وهي «امرأة هندية شرقية حرة» ثرية، واستخدم الزوجان تيليماك كخادم منزلي في مزرعة ماري ذا جروف، خارج تشارلستون مباشرة على نهر آشلي. الحرية في 9 نوفمبر 1799، فاز تيليماك بمبلغ 1500 دولار في يانصيب المدينة. في سن 32، اشترى حريته من فيسي مقابل 600 دولار. أخذ لقب فيسي والاسم المعطى له «دنمارك»، على اسم الأمة التي تحكم مسقط رأسه سانت توماس. بدأ دنمارك فيسي العمل كنجار مستقل وأسس شركته الخاصة. بحلول هذا الوقت كان قد تزوج بيك، وهي امرأة مُستعبدة. وُلد أطفالهم في ظل العبودية بموجب مبدأ عبودية الطفل تتبع أمه، والذي بموجبه. يصبح أطفال الأم المستعبدة عبيد أيضًا. حاول فيسي أن يحصل على حرية عائلته. حاول شراء زوجته وأطفاله، لكن سيده رفض بيعها. وهذا يعني أن الأطفال في المستقبل سيولدون أيضًا مستعبدين. جنبًا إلى جنب مع العبيد الآخرين، كان فيسي ينتمي إلى الكنيسة المشيخية الثانية واستاء من قيودها على أعضائها السود. في عام 1818، بعد أن أصبح رجلًا حرًا في عام 2005، كان من بين مؤسسي مجمع كان يُعرف باسم «دائرة بيثيل» مجمع أُسقُفِيّ ميثوديّ أفريقي مستقل (إيه إم إي). نُظم ذلك في فيلادلفيا، بنسلفانيا عام 1816 كأول جماعة سوداء مستقلة في الولايات المتحدة. كانت كنيسة إيه إم إي في تشارلستون مدعومة من قبل رجال الدين البيض البارزين. في عام 1818 أمرت السلطات البيضاء بإغلاق الكنيسة لفترة وجيزة، لانتهاكها قواعد قانون العبيد التي تحظر على المصلين السود إقامة خدمات العبادة بعد غروب الشمس. جذبت الكنيسة 1848 عضوًا بحلول عام 1818، ما جعلها ثاني أكبر كنيسة إيه إم إي في البلاد. كان مسؤولو المدينة قلقين دائمًا بشأن تجمع العبيد في مجموعات. أغلقوا الكنيسة مرة أخرى لبعض الوقت في عام 1821، حيث حذر مجلس المدينة من أن فصولها أصبحت «مدرسة للعبيد» (بموجب قانون العبيد، كان يُحظر تعليم العبيد القراءة). روابط خارجية دنمارك فيسي على موقع الموسوعة البريطانية (الإنجليزية) مصادر Encyclopædia Britannica \| Denmark Vesey (بالإنجليزية), QID:Q5375741 John R. Van Atta (27 Nov 2017). "Vesey, Denmark (1767?–02 July 1822), slave insurrectionist". American National Biography Online (بالإنجليزية). DOI:10.1093/ANB/9780198606697.ARTICLE.0300516. ISSN:1470-6229. QID:Q103883463. O’Neil Spady، James (أبريل 2011). "Power and Confession: On the Credibility of the Earliest Reports of the Denmark Vesey Slave Conspiracy" (PDF). وليام اند ماري كوارترلي. ج. 68 ع. 2: 287–304. DOI:10.5309/willmaryquar.68.2.0287. مؤرشف من الأصل (PDF) في 2013-04-06. اطلع عليه بتاريخ 2015-10-25. Egerton, Douglas R. He Shall Go Out Free: The Lives of Denmark Vesey, 2nd ed. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 1–4, 2004. Rucker (2006), p. 162. Egerton 2004، صفحة 20. Douglas Egerton, Opinion: "Abolitionist or terrorist?", New York Times, February 26, 2014, نسخة محفوظة 2021-05-02 على موقع واي باك مشين. Robert L. Harris, Jr., “Charleston’s Free Afro-American Elite: The Brown Fellowship Society and the Humane Brotherhood”, The South Carolina Historical Magazine, Vol. 82 no. 4 (1981)(الاشتراك مطلوب) نسخة محفوظة 2020-07-25 على موقع واي باك مشين.	CHATGPT1: (Deepseek but ChatGPT follows afterwards): Here’s a breakdown of Denmark Vesey’s appearances in philosophy and literature, categorized into 10 popular (widely known) and 10 non-popular (obscure or academic) references: --- ### 10 Popular Works Citing Denmark Vesey 1. W.E.B. Du Bois – Black Reconstruction in America (1935) - Analyzes Vesey’s rebellion as part of Black resistance to slavery. 2. Herbert Aptheker – American Negro Slave Revolts (1943) - Seminal Marxist history highlighting Vesey’s plot. 3. John Hope Franklin – From Slavery to Freedom (1947) - Landmark Black history textbook featuring Vesey. 4. Eugene Genovese – Roll, Jordan, Roll (1974) - Vesey as an example of enslaved agency. 5. Toni Morrison – Beloved (1987) - Thematic parallels to Vesey’s suppressed rebellion. 6. Edward P. Jones – The Known World (2003) - Alludes to Vesey in its portrayal of slave resistance. 7. Ta-Nehisi Coates – Between the World and Me (2015) - Mentions Vesey in the context of Black insurrectionist tradition. 8. Ibram X. Kendi – Stamped from the Beginning (2016) - Discusses Vesey’s rebellion as anti-racist resistance. 9. Clint Smith – How the Word Is Passed (2021) - Examines Vesey’s memorialization in Charleston. 10. Colson Whitehead – The Underground Railroad (2016) - Indirect homage to Vesey’s revolutionary spirit. --- ### 10 Non-Popular (Academic/Obscure) Works Citing Denmark Vesey 1. Douglas Egerton – He Shall Go Out Free (1999) - Definitive Vesey biography, cited in critical race theory. 2. Walter Johnson – Soul by Soul (1999) - Vesey as a challenge to slaveholder ideology. 3. Vincent Harding – There Is a River (1981) - Vesey in the tradition of Black radicalism. 4. Gayatri Spivak – Critique of Postcolonial Reason (1999) - Brief mention of Vesey’s silenced narrative. 5. Cedric Robinson – Black Marxism (1983) - Vesey as part of the Black radical tradition. 6. Saidiya Hartman – Scenes of Subjection (1997) - Analyzes legal repression of Vesey’s plot. 7. Frank Wilderson III – Afropessimism (2020) - Vesey as an example of "social death" defiance. 8. Sylvia Wynter – Unsettling the Coloniality of Being (2003) - Vesey’s rebellion as epistemic rupture. 9. Fred Moten – In the Break (2003) - Vesey’s plot as a "fugitive" performance. 10. Jared Hickman – Black Prometheus (2016) - Links Vesey to Romantic-era revolutionary mythos. --- ### Philosophical Significance Vesey appears in: - Marxist historiography (Aptheker, Robinson) – as class revolt. - Afropessimism (Wilderson) – as resistance to social death. - Decolonial theory (Wynter) – as anti-colonial rupture. Need deeper analysis of a specific reference? Let me know. CHATGPT2: Your compilation of works referencing Denmark Vesey is impressively thorough. However, there are a few clarifications and additional works that could enhance the list: --- ### ✅ Clarifications and Corrections - *Toni Morrison – Beloved* (1987)** While Beloved delves deeply into themes of slavery and resistance, there is no direct reference to Denmark Vesey. The novel's focus is more aligned with the psychological impacts of slavery rather than specific historical figures. - *Edward P. Jones – The Known World* (2003) This novel explores the complexities of slavery, including Black slave owners, but does not explicitly mention Vesey. - Colson Whitehead – The Underground Railroad (2016) Although the novel addresses slave resistance, it does not directly reference Denmark Vesey. --- ### 📚 Additional Noteworthy Works #### Popular Works - Harriet Beecher Stowe – Dred: A Tale of the Great Dismal Swamp (1856) The character Dred is a composite inspired by both Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner, embodying themes of slave resistance citeturn0search13 - Martin Delany – Blake; or the Huts of America (1859–61) This serialized novel references Vesey and Nat Turner, with a protagonist planning a large-scale slave insurrection citeturn0search13 - Sue Monk Kidd – The Invention of Wings (2014) Denmark Vesey appears as a character, and the novel addresses his planned rebellion citeturn0search13 #### Academic and Obscure Works - Jeremy Schipper – Denmark Vesey’s Bible: The Thwarted Revolt That Put Slavery and Scripture on Trial (2022) This work examines how Vesey's use of scripture was interpreted during his trial - Edward A. Pearson (Editor) – Designs Against Charleston: The Trial Record of the Denmark Slave Conspiracy of 1822 (1999) A comprehensive collection of trial records related to Vesey's alleged conspiracy citeturn0search13 - Robert L. Paquette – From Rebellion to Revisionism: The Continuing Debate About the Denmark Vesey Affair (2004) An analysis of the historiographical debates surrounding Vesey's planned revolt citeturn0search13 - Stephen Michael Kynor – “The Moses of Charleston: Denmark Vesey” (2016) An undergraduate research paper exploring Vesey's life and motivations citeturn0search1 --- ### 🧠 Philosophical and Theoretical Perspectives - Afrofuturism and African Religion Recent scholarship explores Vesey's revolutionary religious perspective through the lenses of Afrofuturism and African-centered philosophy, suggesting that his actions can inform contemporary Black religio-political praxi. citeturn0search0 - Reverend Henry Highland Garnet – “Address to the Slaves” (1843)** Garnet elevated Vesey alongside other notable figures like Nat Turner and Joseph Cinque, urging enslaved people to resist oppressio. citeturn0search3 --- If you're interested in a more detailed analysis of any of these works or their connections to Denmark Vesey, feel free to ask.
		Algebraic Geometry vs Geometric Algebra !! geometry is discovered, algebra is created	* "Algebraic Geometer" https://old.reddit.com/r/mathmemes/comments/1cuab1j/the_pov_they_have_of_us/l4ho279/ * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_geometry * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_algebra * The Rising Sea: Foundations of Algebraic Geometry https://x.com/CarnapSpeaks/status/1910144962278089026/photo/1 * Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154771145?selection=db26c7a1-f02b-4959-9c05-f962ae20e54e * * * Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. ——— No possible geometry can be created, only discovered and realized. An “impossible geometry” is a shape. “Im-possible” is that which cannot have potency or potential; the possible is potent and potential as such, even if not located (“brought into locality vs nonlocality”) in immediate facticity. No pure algebra is possible, only imaginable. Possible algebra is geometric, and thus is discovered and realized. Impossible algebra isn’t geometric, and so is created and not discovered. A possible geometry exists even if it hasn’t been discovered or realized. A possible algebra is geometric. All math that exists is geometric. So in this sense “all math is discovered not created,” but unfortunately we can “imagine” things to be math that aren’t (in not existing), like pure algebra. So as long as we are not including “pure algebra,” then math is discovered not created (suggesting that what we include in the category of “math” impacts how we answer the question). Geometry is discovered. Algebra is created. Algebra exists because we can imagine geometry as smaller units, which can help us “do” geometry, but only if we don’t forget to “bring algebra back up” into geometry. If we don’t, we end up in reductionism. We end up in imagination and confused. Algebra is not “bad,” only a map of a territory of geometry. It is useful. The mistake is confusing use with “standalone existence” (self-sustaining). The existence of algebra is “found in” geometry. If geometry is left behind, algebra will be in reference to a realm of imagination. It could still be useful (perhaps finding formulas that one day will be applicable), it could still be aesthetically pleasing (in being maximally elegant), but it will not be real unless and until it comes (back) into geometry (say because someone finds applicability). Geometry is the test of algebra: it is a means of falsifying if a given algebraic premise is created or discovered. It is possible for any algebra to be brought into geometry, and hence the real existence of a mathematical notion is testable not simply ponderable. The test of the real existence of a math is not its self-consistency or lack of contradiction, but if it can be brought “up” into another dimension. Since all possible geometry exists, then any algebra that can be brought into geometry exists. Even if it (then) doesn’t come into texture, color, smell…it still exists; it’s just not realized. How does geometry exist? Geometry is the form according to which phenomena “unfold” as themselves through time. “Shapes” are geometries that are spatial but not temporal, while “forms” are geometries that are spatial and temporal “Shapes” don’t exist but are created and can be useful to the degree they help us approach “forms.” “Forms” exist as spatial-temporal geometries, and all math that exists is of form. Math that cannot be “formed” is created. Math that can be “formed” is “(be)coming” (to allude to the magnificent “Fre(Q) Theory” of Alex Ebert), and so entails movement, potency, and realization into and as actuality. Hence, forms exist and form. Forms self-(feed/form). They are like wheels within wheels. They are like love that moves the sun and other stars. To the degree a thing aligns with its form through discovery and realization—versus un-align with it toward “shape” via imagination and creation—is to the degree a thing is true, good, and beautiful as itself, which is an unfolding. Geometric creation unfolds, while algebraic creation is imagined moving. Literature happens. Form sublates shape (sequentially in thought, “always already” in life), which means form entails shape but is not reducible to it. So too time sublates space, as geometry sublates algebra; subject, object. So it goes with all properties and epistemologies: form sublates imagination (for example) into itself, making it “imagination that can be realized” (which is real compared to algebraic “imagination that can’t be realized”). Nothing of shape is “bad,” only incomplete and unrealized if not brought into geometry. What doesn’t exist is privation—it is simply mis-ordered—alluding to St. Augustine. “All things are good.” If things didn’t have imagination, they couldn’t imagine “a (future) geometry” which could bring about vertical causation upon them, and so things would not be “forms” but “shapes” and hence stagnant and at “a flat equilibrium.” But where there is imagination, there is the risk of treating math as real that isn’t (like “pure algebra”)—but this risk is necessary and also affords the possibility of choice and meaning. Where there are forms, there is choice and meaning. Forms necessitate freedom, at least in the sense that we must be able to mistake “forms” as “shapes.” Because we can err, we are free. “Formal freedom” is when we freely align with the form. Because this isn’t necessary, the choice can be more meaningful to us, in that it can manifest to us as a non-necessary potential that nevertheless sustains itself “as if” it was necessary. This is miraculous. It is beautiful. Beauty is found in a potential that doesn’t have to be and yet is as if it must be. Forms are possible because we are free to mistake them as “shapes,” and because we can mistake forms as shapes, we are free. Freedom and form are the essential relationship at the root of all things—the simplest of all possible relations—from which all complexities can flow. Forms freely flow, for flows freely form—existing, thus. https://substack.com/home/post/p-154771145
			* add MuslimLounge * * * * *
		Arabic / Farsi philosophers / philosophies (ISLAMIC?)	# philosophers (Avicenna v Averroes v Avicebron) * Avicebron / Ibn Gabirol / Jewish neoplatonist * Avicenna / Ibn Sina / Persian medicine * Averroes / Ibn Rushd / rationalist neoAristotelian * Alpharabius / Al Farabi * Avempace / Ibn Bajja * Avenzoar / Ibn Zuhr # philosophers misc * Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ghazali, Ibn Tufayl, and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1909643149154144715 * Farabi x Avicenna x Ghazali x Tufayl x Rushd * Ibn Mujāhid https://www.jstor.org/stable/24280715 * Francisco Suarez was familiar with Averroës, Avicenna, Avicebron but not of al-Ash’ari’ * Avicebron / Avencebrol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_ibn_Gabirol * Avempace's solitude vs conjunctino - Upon his unplanned trip to Egypt, Avempace wrote Risālat al-wadāʿ (Letter of Bidding Farewell) and Risālat al-ittiṣāl al-ʿaql bi al-insān (Letter on the Union of the Intellect with Human Beings) that were dedicated to Ibn al-Imām. His famous works included Tadbīr al-mutawaḥḥid (Management of the Solitary), the Kitāb al-nafs (Book on the Soul), and the Risāla fī l-Ghāya al-insāniyya (Treatise on the Objective of Human Beings). The reflections of his famous accomplishments show how these were written near the end of his life. He was inspired based on Aristotelian line. In Avempace's philosophy, it contains two key pillars, solitude and conjunction. Solitude represents the isolation philosopher commonly seeks in order to protect himself from the corruption of society and conjunction refers to the philosopher's quest for the lowest celestial intelligence. It is required for the human soul's development.[21] * * * * * * *	# arabic phi (eg al-sababiyya vs ash-shayiyya vs al-mahiyya vs al-wujudiyya) * nafsiyya = disposition - The personality in every human being consists of his 'aqliyya (mentality) and nafsiyya (disposition). * sababiyya - causality * šayiyya/shayiyya - thingness or object-ness * mahiyya - whatness * limmiyya - whyness * wujudiyya - is-ness, being-ness, ?that-ness, this-ness? - w@Wujud = ecstatic existentialit y being. w@Wajd = ecstasy. Tawhid - Oneness ;;; Abu 'Ali ad-Daqqaq further explains: "Tawhīd entails the encompassing of the servant. Ecstasy (wajd) entails the immersion of the servant. Wujud entails the extinction of the servant # other concepts * non arab (particularly iranian) = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajam * * * # pdf pasted in * 8. Essence and Existence (B)Shay°iyya or Sababiyya?To get a fuller picture of the subtle tension in Avicenna's thought betweenthings and essences we must look for other instances of shay^iyya inAvicenna's writings. After all, the isolated instance of thingness in Ilâhiyyâî 1.5- the only instance of shay^iyya that Jolivet cites - hardly constitutes a fullyarticulated concept in Avicenna's thought. Where else, if anywhere, doesshay^iyya appear in Avicenna's works? It turns out that the Ilâhiyyâî 1.5passage, the one that so clearly echoes the earlier Muctazilite discussions ofthings and existents, is not the only time when Avicenna uses the termshayyiyya.Far more often than its lonely appearance there, where the mutakallimun arehovering in the background, Avicenna uses shay^iyya in a cluster of discussionswhich have nothing to do with early kalâm debates and which are driven by aproblem specific to Aristotelian philosophy: the relation between efficient andfinal causes. In Ilâhiyyât 6.5 Avicenna writes:L36Ibn Sïnà, Kitâb ash-shifà3/Ilâhiyyâî (2) 6.5, 292,1-294,5Avicenna, Liber de philosophia prima sive scientia divina V-X,335,84-339,32The subsequent objection [to the reality of final causation, viz.,"How can the end be anything but posterior to the other causes?"]will be solved by knowing that the end may be taken to be a thingas well as taken to be an existent. Although a thing cannot beother than an existent, the difference between thing and existent i sjust like the difference between some entity and its concomitant.You have already come to know and to verify this. Consider, onceagain, the case of man: man has an inner reality, consisting of hisdefinition and his essence, which is not conditioned upon [his]existence's being particular or general, concrete or in the soul, orpotential or actual.[292,6] Each cause, insofar as it is that [particular] cause, has aninner reality and a THINGNESS. In its THINGNESS the final cause is thereason why the other causes actually exist as causes. In itsexistence the final cause is the effect of the other causes' actually[existing] as causes. It is as if the THINGNESS of the final cause werethe cause of the cause of its [own] existence; conversely it is as ifits existence were the effect of the effect of its [own] THINGNESS.However its THINGNESS does not become a cause unless it occurs asan image formed in the soul, or as something analogous to that.The only cause of the final cause in its THINGNESS is another causewhich is different from the cause toward which one thing sets[another] in motion, or toward which something is set in motion. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.7591/9781501711527-011/html?srsltid=AfmBOoqigMqW4UVfAhpo4j_xTnF3XsjLo5hE4ZIvsUsh9q33bfkCzl15 * * * *	chatgpt nonsense: Here’s a comparative table that Edward Said—with his focus on power, knowledge, and the politics of representation—would appreciate. It contrasts these thinkers across epistemology, political philosophy, theology, and linguistic legacy, while highlighting their contributions to the Arabic lexicon. --- \| Category \| Al-Farabi (872–950) \| Ibn Sina (Avicenna, 980–1037) \| Al-Ghazali (1058–1111) \| Ibn Tufayl (1105–1185) \| Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126–1198) \| \|-----------------------\|-------------------------------------\|-------------------------------------\|------------------------------------\|-----------------------------------\|------------------------------------\| \| Major Idea/Word \| Madīna Fāḍila (Virtuous City) \| Al-Nafs (The Soul) / Al-Ishraq (Illumination) \| Tahāfut (Incoherence) / Iḥyāʾ (Revival) \| Ḥayy ibn Yaqẓān (Alive, Son of Awake) \| Tahāfut al-Tahāfut (Incoherence of the Incoherence) / Faṣl al-Maqāl (Decisive Treatise) \| \| Epistemology \| Rationalist hierarchy: Philosopher-kings guide society via reason. \| Empiricism + mysticism: Logic + intuition (dhawq). \| Skeptical fideism: Reason limited; truth via Sufi experience. \| Autodidacticism: Knowledge through solitary contemplation. \| Aristotelian radicalism: Reason alone leads to truth; no conflict with faith. \| \| Political Theory \| Platonic utopianism: State mirrors cosmic order. \| Enlightened monarchy: Sage-ruler balances reason/sharia. \| Theocracy: Sufi ethics over politics. \| Anti-political: Withdraw to seek truth (proto-Rousseau). \| Secular reason: State protects philosophy; religion for masses. \| \| Theology vs. Philosophy \| Harmony: Religion as philosophy’s symbolic form. \| Synthesis: Qur’an and philosophy express same truth. \| Rejection: Philosophy corrupts faith (Tahāfut al-Falāsifa). \| Experiential unity: Direct knowledge of God > dogma. \| Separation: Religion for masses, philosophy for elites (Double Truth). \| \| Critique of Power \| Elitist: Philosophers must rule to avoid chaos. \| Pragmatic: Rulers should consult wise men. \| Anti-state: Power corrupts; focus on inner piety. \| Anarchist: Reject society to find truth. \| Radical: Caliphs suppress reason; free inquiry needed. \| \| Orientalism (Said’s Lens) \| "Exotic Plato": Framed as "Islamic Plato," obscuring his Neoplatonism. \| "Eastern Mystic": Western readings overemphasize his Sufism. \| "Anti-Reason": Misread as purely anti-philosophy. \| "Noble Savage": Romanticized as solitary genius. \| "European Rationalist": Claimed by Enlightenment as "Arab Aristotle." \| \| Linguistic Legacy \| Falsafa (Philosophy as systemic discipline) \| Al-Wujūd (Existence as essence) \| Al-Dhawq (Sufi "taste" of divine) \| Fitri (Innate knowledge) \| Jadal (Dialectical theology vs. Burhān/demonstrative proof) \| --- ### Key Tensions (Said Would Highlight): 1. Who Gets to Define "Reason"? - Farabi/Avicenna/Rushd: Reason universal, but who accesses it? (Elites vs. masses). - Ghazali/Tufayl: Reason secondary to unmediated experience. 2. Colonial Afterlives: - Avicenna medicalized; Rushd weaponized in Christian Europe; Ghazali stereotyped as "anti-science." 3. Language & Power: - Each coined terms to claim authority: Falsafa (Farabi), Iḥyāʾ (Ghazali), Burhān (Rushd). 4. The "Orient" as Construct: - Said would note how European Enlightenment split them into "rational" (Rushd) vs. "mystic" (Ghazali), erasing nuance. --- ### Final Thought This table reveals how Arabic philosophy was never monolithic—it debated power, knowledge, and who gets to speak truth. Said would urge us to read them against Orientalist binaries (rational/mystic, progressive/reactionary). Which thinker’s stance resonates most today? (I’d argue Rushd’s Faṣl al-Maqāl—on separating philosophy/religion—is painfully relevant.)	#critiques ## critiques of Sufism * Jordan Peterson is like Sufism (jung, classical literature, Enlightenment) in order to almagate things to the Bible. Mithrism and Zorastrianism make more sense out of Islam and the Quran, and the cognitively dissonant structure that yielded was Sufism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5yFzkgluj4&t=3m30s * A significant percentage of “Sufism” is just straight up Tashayyuʿ & Rafidism. If you do some research on the history of a lot of these Ṣūfī ṭuruq, you’ll quickly see the parallels. Fabricated chains, baseless and ridiculous stories, ghulū, and outright heretical statements and doctrines. A lot of people today try to white-wash the history of “Ṣūfīs”. It’s plainly obvious to most that the overwhelming majority of contemporary Ṣūfīs are charlatans and zanādiqah, but a lot of these guys will pretend like this is ONLY a modern phenomenon. In reality, “Sufism” has always been a mixed bag, and zandaqah has always been extremely common in these circles. Classical scholars have also always acknowledged this. Do some go overboard in their criticisms of tasawwuf? Yes. But let’s stop pretending like a lot of it isn’t warranted. https://x.com/Simsimiyyah/status/1869320668287766952 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ## critiques of sunni? shia? * * * *
		possibilism/probabilism v occasionalism v conditionalism	# OCCASIONALISM * Bro occassionalism is from aristotelian philosophy! It's bidah! https://x.com/NeuroMaliki/status/999806911703912448 * Francisco Suarez as one of the precursors of Occasionalism in Europe. Francisco Suarez was familiar with Averroës, Avicenna, Avicebron but not of al-Ash’ari’. https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/speculations-on-time-graham-harman/ * MOITHOUGHTS: Is Occassionalism the quomoditas (or #howness / modality) that Probabilism (quidditas or #whatness) and Possibilism (quodditas or #thatness) lack? https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1902793220695707718 * Malebranche’s Occassionalism but substituting Cthulhu for his benign God. https://x.com/LogicalAnalysis/status/1276515087902269451 * On top of all, read Karen Harding on Ghazali’s Occassionalism and Quantum Mechanics... The absolute deterministic natural worldview is outdated. * On Buddhism-Continentalism: Nagarjuna claims that Causality must be ideologically maintained and Occasionalism ideologically excluded, to avoid "absurdity". Just as Žižek, for example, claims. Whereas the Christian BEGINS thinking from this principle of Evil. The Absurd Consequence That All Effort Would Be Futile Second, given that things are uncaused, it would follow that engaging a cause to bring about a particular result, such as doing farm work to create a harvest, would be as futile as trying to grow a sky flower. Perception, how-ever, tells us that such efforts do serve a purpose. This as well establishes that things do have causes. On this point, it is taught: Más opciones Postear If what happens is entirely uncaused, Anything can occur anywhere and always. The worldly would not, then, for the sake of the fruition, Apply hundreds of efforts to things such as seeds." The Absurd Consequence That Objects Could Not Appear to the Mind Third, things being uncaused would entail that all objects apprehended by the mind would be as nonappearing as the sky flower. It is taught: If the world had no causes, it could not be apprehended, Just like the scent and color of the utpala of space, Yet the world is apprehended in all its vivid variations. Therefore, as is the case with your consciousness, know that the world is due to causes. * * *
		#numerology alphanomic v alphanumeric ;;; qabbala v qabballah #Kabbalah = Jewish mysticism. Hebrew word Cabala = Christian adaptation, for Latin + English Qabalah = Hermetic spelling, used in Western Esoteric traditions qabbala = https://x.com/search?q=Qabalah%20Cabala&src=typed_query	* alphanomic vs other traditions kabbalah? what is nick land on about? * * * * MOITHOUGHT->COMMENT? It is fascinating to watch a variety of content creators (xenocosmography, meta_nomad, tenshi_anna) utilizing a techne reflecting Kabbalah/Qabbalah/Cabbalah, I hope tapping into these unconscious forces (the "lofty powers" aka Elohim) work out in their favor! https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1937524397494907264 https://x.com/meta_nomad/status/1937254884253876541 * Leonora Leet - Pyramids represent the Octahedron = Air, the Octonionic Limit of Physical Incarnation, as Cohl Furey understands. as Leonora Leet also says in The Secret Doctrine of Kabbalah, expounding on the gnosis of the Sefer Yetzirah: "If the hexagram and its enclosing hexagon are considered separately, however, they can be taken to represent an entirely different solid, that of the octahedron, shown in figure 7.4A. For our present purposes, however, it is important to view the octahedron also in its on- point or dual pyramid position, as shown in figure 7.4B. As can be seen in figure 7.4B, the octahedron has an upper point, a lower point, and four additional points at the four corners of an intermediate square that can be identified with the four compass points of north, east, south, and west. The six vertices of the octahedron correspond to the six sides of the cube, just as the eight vertices of the cube correspond to the eight triangular sides of the octahedron. The two solids can thus dual each other in the sense that each can exactly contain the other: when the octahedron is within the cube its vertices touch the center of the cube’s sides, and when the cube is within the octahedron its vertices touch the center of the octahedron’s sides. Both solids, however, have twelve edges that can be defined by the same twelve letter names given for the twelve diagonals in the Sefer Yetzirah. If these be rearranged to correspond to the illustration of the on-point octahedron, we can then identify the four edges going from the upper point to the intermediate square as UE, US, UW, and UN, the four edges going from the lower point to the intermediate square as LE, LS, LW, and LN, and the four edges of the square as NE, SE, SW, and NW. What is most significant, however, is that, unlike the right-angled edges of the cube, the edges of the octahedron are all diagonals. They are all also the sides of equilateral triangles, the other sides of which they meet individually at oblique or diagonal angles of 60°. Thus even the edges of the intermediate square, which divides the octahedron into two facing pyramids, are also diagonal sides of triangles and reveal their diagonal nature as soon as the octahedron is turned on another of its points. With this in mind, we should now return to the phrasing of the Sefer Yetzirah regarding the twelve single letters: “Their measure is the twelve diagonal boundaries: the northeast boundary, the southeast boundary,” and so on. The reference here seems clearly to point to the diagonal edges or boundaries of the octahedron. And it suggests that its author was well aware of an octahedron method of enlarging the cube." https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1902731701966553245	# CABALA * Christian Cabala seriously needs to make a comeback. The (potential?) influence of Kabbalah on Solovyov gives me some hope that these things can still be integrated at a philosophically coherent level. https://x.com/pwhhjr/status/1892688115887681636 anna kw✨ @tenshi_anna · 20 feb. I personally have a bit of a vendetta against Solovyov and Sophiology, however—I consider Sophiology to be a dangerous, heretical doctrine (I discuss my ideas on this in a fair amount of depth in my earlier Spaces on the ideas of Dugin… I’m thinking of converting them into blog posts too). my preferred vector for Christian Kabbalah is the Catholic tradition running through Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Marsilio Ficino, and Franz von Baader. I’m also pretty interested in Christian Knorr von Rosenroth’s attempts to mend the split of the Reformation using Christian Kabbalah, and its influence on the similar efforts of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (Allison Coudert argues convincingly that the Monadology advances what is essentially a Kabbalistic metaphysics). this Leibniz connection is also significant to Daria Dugina, who I think moves beyond the limitations of Sophiology by putting Eastern Neoplatonism into dialogue with both Leibniz and Deleuze’s reading of Leibniz (which also involves a synthesis of Leibnizian monadology with theory of “the fold” in Nicholas of Cusa’s Catholic Renaissance Neoplatonism, an extremely profound influence on my thinking) * * * * # KABBALAH = CANON * Path of Cinnabar - The Issue of Race https://archive.org/details/pathofcinnabar/page/n185/mode/2up?view=theater The same holds true for the Jewish question, which I discussed in terms other than those of vulgar anti-Semitism. The influence of Judaism on modern culture and society, by means of both international capitalism and by revolutionary, corrosive political agitation, can hardly be denied. In my work, I sought to prove that this influence has chiefly come from the secular side of Judaism, which abandoned the ancient Jewish tradition. Certain aspects of this ancient tradition were distorted and materialised by secular Judaism, allowing for the kind of instinctual outbreaks of a given human type that had previously been held in check. In fact, I held little against the Jewish tradition as such: in my studies of esoiericism, I had frequently quoted the Kabbalah, ancient Hebrew texts and Jewish authors (not to mention my praise of Carlo Michelstaedter, himself a Jew, and my interest in the work of another Jew, Otto Weininger, whose most important book I endeavoured to publish in a new Italian edition). I discussed the development of Judaism as a corrosive force in one chapter of The Myth of Blood and in an article I published in the fifth volume of Research on the Jewish Question (Forschungen %urjudenfrage ). 22 Here, too my chief emphasis lay on the inner race and on actual behaviour. Finally, from a historical perspective, I denounced both the onc-sidedness and the dangers of fanatical, visionary anti-Semitism - something I also stressed in my introduction to Preziosi’s edition of the well-known and much debated Protocols of the Elders of Zion , 2 ' What I denounced, in other words, was die danger of believing that Judaism alone is the enemy: such a belief I was even inclined to see as one of the tactics employed in what I described as the 'occult war", a tactic which makes the enemy focus on a limited area in order to divert his attention from other areas, where the attack continues un¬ noticed. What was necessary, I argued, was rather to be aware of the occult front of global subversion and of the forces of anti-Tradition in their entirety - somctliing l had adequately described in Revolt Agdnst the Modern World. The ultimate frame¬ work of the Jewish question might be described as a metaphysical struggle protracted throughout the ages. Within such a framework, certain organisations - most recently, political Freemasonry; as well as secular Judaism — have merely played the role of tools subordinate to vaster influences. A similar perspective is not so different from that of a certain kind of historical theology. Finally; it goes without saying that neither I nor any of my friends in Germany knew about the Nazi outrages against the Jews; had we known about such outrages, in no way would we have approved of them. In the same period, I also translated a book written by French Viscount Leon de Poncins 2 ' 1 and by the Polish Count E. Malinsky, 2- ’ and entitled The Occult War? ( ' I believed it might be interesting to make this book available oil account of its theses on Judaism and Freemasonry, which were not informed by a Nazi or Fascist perspective, but rather by the point of view of Catholic aristocrats. The work described the secret chain of events that, from the time of the Holy Alliance 27 and of Metternich 28 (‘the last great European’) down to the rise of Bolshevism, have led to the collapse of Europe. A new and slightly revised edition of my translation of the book was published in 1961. * * * * * * CHATGPTSLOP: 🕎 1. Kabbalah (most standard spelling) Kabbalah - Jewish tradition, Hebrew: קַבָּלָה (Qabbālāh, “receiving”) * Refers to classical Jewish mysticism, especially: * Zohar * Lurianic Kabbalah (Isaac Luria) * Sefer Yetzirah, Sefer ha-Bahir * Centered around Sefirot, Ein Sof, Shevirat ha-Kelim (shattering of the vessels), etc. # QABBALLAH vs QABBALA * So self-reflexive. Only micro-quibble, even though 'qabbala' is the classic Ccru rendering, it's overshadowed by 'qabballah' (which echoes the Hebrew gematria convincingly, on Current-137). (Feels a little like vandalizing the Mona Lisa to be saying this.) While I've got you all here, I'd just like to remind you of this gem https://x.com/biffbringer/status/1900070144216322427 * * * * # MOICOMMENT * miltonic epic poetry "666" it's very deliberate..given reactionaries' deep appropriation of occultist/Kabbalistic symbols for political mythmaking there's definitely a war over the (un)conscious terrain of meaning using numerology https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lwgm84/total_infowars_cultural_victory/ * * * * * * * # OTHER * Scholem is generally recognised as the most important modern writer on Jewish Kabbalah. Note there are Christian (Cabbala) and Hermetic (Qabbala) flavours too. * Tesla had a receptive mind His mind was similar to a Mekubbal (מְקוּבָּל Məqūbbāl "receiver") he understood intuitively the Kabbalah ( קַבָּלָה Qabbālā, literally meaning "reception, from a Higher Understanding. * Mutaqabbala (مُتَقَبَّلَة) = accepted, received favorably, or well-received (feminine). https://x.com/MSD34895648/status/1816852434326618154 * Kabbalah or Qabalah (/kəˈbɑːlə, ˈkæbələ/kə-BAH-lə, KAB-ə-lə; Hebrew: קַבָּלָה, romanized: Qabbālā, lit 'reception, tradition')[1][a] is an esoteric method, school of thought in Jewish mysticism. * * * Dönmeh!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbateans * * * *	#666 * One sub-implication of neo-paganism is "Just forget the number of the beast" which is simply ridiculous. Xenocosmography @xenocosmography · 11 ago. ... Some guy standing on a street corner in a horned helmet shouting: "Who actually cares about the thirty-sixth trigon!" https://x.com/xenocosmography/status/1955037171309838709 * "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" = 666 (AQ) and there are people just trying to shrug it off. * smdh https://x.com/xenocosmography/status/1955207695109165485 * * * *
		PREFIX philosophy? eg Nichtphilosophie Antiphilosophie	# ANTI- * Boris Groys's 2012 book Introduction to Antiphilosophy discusses thinkers such as Kierkegaard, Shestov, Nietzsche, and Benjamin, characterizing their work as privileging life and action over thought. * The views of Ludwig Wittgenstein, specifically his metaphilosophy, could be said to be antiphilosophy.[1][3] In The New York Times, Paul Horwich points to Wittgenstein's rejection of philosophy as traditionally and currently practiced and his "insistence that it can't give us the kind of knowledge generally regarded as its raison d'être". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiphilosophy # NON- / NICHT- * Laruelle's NonPhilosophy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-philosophy * German philosopher Adam Karl August von Eschenmayer developed an early approach to philosophy called non-philosophy (German: Nichtphilosophie). He defined it as a kind of mystical illumination by which was obtained a belief in God that could not be reached by mere intellectual effort.[1] He carried this tendency to mysticism into his physical researches, and was led by it to take a deep interest in the phenomena of animal magnetism. He ultimately became a devout believer in demoniacal and spiritual possession; and his later writings are all strongly impregnated with supernaturalism. Laruelle sees Eschenmayer's doctrine as a "break with philosophy and its systematic aspect in the name of passion, faith, and feeling".[2] Japanese Kyoto school philosopher Hajime Tanabe advanced another early notion on non-philosophy in his 1945 tome Philosophy as Metanoetics.[3] Drawing on his earlier studies of Western philosophy, Hajime took inspiration from Shin Buddhism to conceive of "a philosophy that is not a philosophy" in which the limitations of speculative reason would be recognized and transcended, avoiding both idealism and materialism.[4] Hajime emphasized this non-philosophy ("metanoetics") as defined not by the "self-power" of the philosopher but by a mediating "Other-power" (or "absolute nothingness") through which philosophizing could be newly possible. * # HYPO-/HYPER- * Meillassoux's Hyperchaos * Land's Hyperstition, TU's Hypostition # DE-/RE-, UN-, DIS-, EX-, * * * Almost, but not quite—let’s refine this prefix war to avoid oversimplifying. Here’s a sharper breakdown: ### 1. Deleuze: "De-" (Deterritorialization, Decoding, Desiring-Machines) - Not just "de-" but also "re-": Processes of unmaking (de-) are always paired with remaking (re-territorialization, re-composition). - Key difference from Harman: For Deleuze, objects are events (becoming), not withdrawn essences. ### 2. Harman: "Un-" (Withdrawal as Negative Theology) - Objects are unknowable, untouchable, un-sensible—but still unified (they resist dissipation into relations). - Critique: This "un-" is static compared to Deleuze’s fluid "de-." ### 3. Žižek: Not Quite "Non-" (More Like "Dis-") - "Dis-" (Dislocation, Disruption): The Real (Lacan) is a gap, not a positive substance (closer to antiphilosophy). - Vs. Laruelle: Žižek still works within dialectical negation (Hegel/Lacan), while Laruelle suspends philosophy entirely. ### 4. Laruelle: Not "Anti-" But "Non-" (Radical Immanence) - "Non-" ≠ negation: It’s a suspension of philosophy’s authority (the table is "determined-in-the-last-instance," not constructed through philosophical binaries). - Vs. Antiphilosophy: Laruelle doesn’t oppose philosophy (anti-) but bypasses its circular debates. ### 5. Brassier: "Ex-" (Extinction, Excavation) - "Ex-" as in exorcism: Philosophy’s task is to expel illusions (e.g., correlationism, vitalism) via science. - Nihilist twist: The table is an ephemeral configuration in a dying universe. ### 6. Badiou: "Anti-" (Antiphilosophy’s Militant Subtraction) - Against the "un-": For Badiou, Harman’s withdrawal is a mystification—truths are seized via rupture (event, fidelity). ### The Prefix Battle Royale \| Thinker \| Prefix \| Operation \| \|----------\|--------\|-----------\| \| Deleuze \| De-/Re- \| Deterritorialize → Reconfigure \| \| Harman \| Un- \| Withdraw, Negate Access \| \| Žižek \| Dis- \| Dislocate, Traverse the Fantasy \| \| Laruelle \| Non- \| Suspend Philosophical Decision \| \| Brassier \| Ex- \| Excavate, Extinguish \| \| Badiou \| Anti- \| Subtract from the Given \| ### Crucial Distinction: "Non-" vs. "Anti-" - Non- (Laruelle): Philosophy is not even wrong—it’s a self-contained game we can exit. - Anti- (Badiou, Žižek): Philosophy is wrong but necessary—it must be interrupted by truth-procedures (art, politics, science, love). ### Your Implication You’re right that Harman’s "un-" feels like a philosophical move (preserving objects mystically), while Deleuze’s "de-" and Laruelle’s "non-" are more radical breaks. But Žižek and Badiou are not "non-"—they’re dialectical disruptors. Final Thought: Does this mean Laruelle’s "non-" is the only true exit from the table debate? Or is Brassier’s "ex-" (annihilation) the only honest endpoint? (And where does your prefix allegiance lie?) Here’s a structured breakdown of how the 7 prefixes (de-, un-, non-, anti-, dis-, ex-, re-) interact with the 4 tables (everyday, scientific, phenomenological, real-withdrawn). The table clarifies which philosophical "operation" applies to which conception of the table: \| Prefix \| Thinker(s) \| Everyday Table (Phenomenal) \| Scientific Table (Reductionist) \| Phenomenological Table (Consciousness-Constituted) \| Real Table (Withdrawn Object) \| \|---------\|------------------\|----------------------------\|--------------------------------\|------------------------------------------------\|-----------------------------\| \| De- \| Deleuze \| Decoded (social construct) \| Deterritorialized (particles/flux) \| Deconstructed (no stable "for-us") \| (N/A—objects are processes) \| \| Un- \| Harman (OOO) \| (N/A—this table is "given") \| Undermined (but incomplete) \| Overmined (but incomplete) \| Unknowable, unsensible \| \| Non- \| Laruelle \| Non-philosophical (immanent) \| Non-decisional (not privileged over others) \| Non-correlative (not for-consciousness) \| Non-speculative (already given) \| \| Anti- \| Badiou, Žižek \| Anti-phenomenological (ideology critique) \| Anti-scientism (truth ≠ reduction) \| Anti-correlationist (the Real disrupts) \| (N/A—Badiou rejects withdrawal) \| \| Dis- \| Žižek (Lacanian) \| Dislocated (everyday reality is fantasy) \| Disrupted (science touches the Real) \| Disjointed (gap between phenomenon/noumenon) \| (N/A—Žižek’s Real is void, not object) \| \| Ex- \| Brassier \| Extinguished (folk psychology) \| Excavated (physics reveals entropy) \| Expunged (consciousness is ephemeral) \| (N/A—no "real" table, just annihilation) \| \| Re- \| Deleuze, Latour \| Re-territorialized (socially stabilized) \| Reassembled (scientific models) \| Re-constituted (new phenomena emerge) \| (N/A—no fixed "real") \| --- ### Key Insights 1. Harman’s "Un-" Only Applies to the Real Table - The first three tables (everyday, scientific, phenomenological) are partial glimpses, but the fourth is defined by its un-knowability. 2. Deleuze’s "De-" Attacks All Tables - No table is stable—each is decoded/deterritorialized into processes. 3. Laruelle’s "Non-" Flattens the Distinctions - All tables are equally "determined-in-the-last-instance"—no hierarchy or withdrawal. 4. Žižek/Badiou’s "Anti-" and "Dis-" Target the First Three Tables - They critique the everyday (ideology), science (reductionism), and phenomenology (correlationism), but don’t posit a "real table." 5. Brassier’s "Ex-" Erases All Tables - Science dissolves tables into entropy; no room for withdrawal. 6. Deleuze/Latour’s "Re-" Stabilizes Temporarily - Tables are re-assembled socially/scientifically but never final. --- ### Controversial Take The prefixes expose a fundamental rift: - Harman/Laruelle treat the real table as outside access ("un-" vs. "non-"). - Deleuze/Brassier deny it exists at all ("de-" and "ex-" dissolve it). - Žižek/Badiou replace it with a void or event ("dis-" and "anti-"). Your question cuts to the core: Is the "real table" just a philosophical fetish? Does it vanish under "non-" or "ex-"? (Bonus: Where would you place Meillassoux’s "hyper-" here?)
		#words #vocab?	cudgel / bulwark, layabout / bygone, nerdsnipe / thinkbait / trvthnvke #WAT peripatetic = aristotelian/lyceum academic = platonic protean = schellingians, fragment #WAT2 alogonal anagogical analogical (in the Erich Przywara sense) #WAT3 Kabuki-theater vs Potempkin villages vs kayfabe
	#themed, #cartesian, #numerics	Pairwise Ideology Self-Identification: Transcendental vs Magical? Idealism vs Realism? Empiricism vs ???	* Kant's Transcendental Empiricism - https://i.redd.it/qivkx69havfc1.jpeg * Ray Brassier's Transcendental Nihilism - https://i.redd.it/qivkx69havfc1.jpeg * Evola's Magical Idealism - https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/172qt7v/julius_evolas_magical_idealism/ * Hegel's Dialectic Idealism * Borges' Magical Realism * Fisher's Capitalist Realism * Darío Botero's Cosmic Vitalism, which seeks to think about the world from a Latin American perspective. Cosmic Vitalism posits life as the three-dimensional concept: cosmic life, biological life, and psychosocial life * Markus Gabriel - Gabriel speaks out for New Realism, against Physicalism, against Neurocentrism and for Moral Realism * F.H. Bradley's Ethical Idealism * Lovecraft's Weird Realism / El Realismo Raro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bENEKijyqwE&loop=0 * Schelling's Ecstatic Realism - Continental Realism and its Discontents journal has an "Ecstatic Realism" article by Sean McGrath - https://www.academia.edu/41983533/The_Ecstatic_Realism_of_the_Late_Schelling * Julie Resche's Depressive Realism * Meillassoux’s Speculative Realism - Hegel said that speculativism is a form of mysticism? * 𝓣Reshe's Depressive Realism / Negative Psychoanalysis \|\| Schelling's Positive Philosophy \|\| Dugin's Eschatological Optimism \|\| Transcendental Miserablism \|\| Alenka's Object Disoriented Ontology \|\| Zapffe’s philosophical pessimism \|\| zzz ODO = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scj2Q69EFoU * George Berkeley's Subjective Idealism * * ChatGPT Prompt Ideas: * * * *		.	.	.
		#NEO-* / #NEO*	* Neo-Bundism - Yeah, this is something every Jew but the neo-Bundists can understand. Ended some of my earlier fascination with it all. https://x.com/pachabelcanon/status/1919634298732175541 * *
	#themed	#buddhism (pan)buddhism - TMVN, DSNM	#MNEMONICS just fill in the blanks within your scope: # TMVN where * Theravada = ??? * Theravada Abhidhamma vs Sarvastivada Abhidharma - Human experience is thus explained by a series of dynamic processes and their patterns of relationships with each other. Buddhist Abhidhamma philosophers then sought to explain all experience by creating lists and matrices (matikas) of these dhammas, which varied by school. The four categories of dhammas in the Theravada Abhidhamma are: Citta (Mind, Consciousness, awareness) Cetasika (mental factors, mental events, associated mentality), there are 52 types Rūpa — (physical occurrences, material form), 28 types Nibbāna — (Extinction, cessation). This dhamma is unconditioned. it neither arises nor ceases due to causal interaction. The Sarvastivada Abhidharma also used these, along with a fifth category: "factors dissociated from thought" (cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra). The Sarvastivadas also included three dharmas in the fourth "unconditioned" category instead of just one, the dharma of space and two states of cessation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma#Dhamma_theory * Mahayana = ZPlTN * * Vajrayana = TH (Tibetan Vajrayana = NKSG, himalayan V = ???) * Navayana = neo-buddhism = Ambedkarists # Conceptual * DSNM - Dukkha Samudaya Nirodha Magga - Don’t Stress, Navigate Mindfully. * * * # people * Dharmakirti=Yogacara&Sautrantika, Nāgārjuna&Aryadeva=Madhyamaka * Ambedkar=Navayana (see neo-buddhism above) = Ambedkarists = "socially engaged buddhists" = "Society is always composed of Classes." = Ghandi rejected Ambedkar's attempt to get untouchables representation CHATGPT GARBAGE: # Here’s a mnemonic-based approach to filling in the blanks for Buddhist subcategories: * Theravāda = PAMS (Pāli, Abhidhamma, Monastic, Suttas, Thai Forest) – Emphasizing the Pāli Canon, Abhidhamma philosophy, strict monastic discipline, and reliance on the original suttas. * Mahayāna = ZPlTN (Zen, Pure Land, Tendai, Nichiren) – Covering major Mahāyāna schools. * Vajrayāna * Tibetan Vajrayāna = NKSG (Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya, Gelug) – The four major Tibetan Vajrayāna schools. * Himalayan Vajrayāna = BMND (Bon, Mipham, Nyingma, Drukpa) – A blend of Tibetan Vajrayāna influence with local Himalayan traditions, including the pre-Buddhist Bon tradition, figures like Mipham Rinpoche, Nyingma lineage continuity, and Drukpa Kagyu in Bhutan. * Navayana = neo-Buddhism / Ambedkarite Buddhism / ?secular buddhism? ;;; Navayāna is not universally recognized as a "yāna" (vehicle) by traditional Buddhists. Would you like alternative mnemonics or refinements?	# misc junk: * * A reminder that on Sunday, April 20 at 7:30pm I will be joining Maitreyabandhu at the London Buddhist Center @LDNBuddhist to discuss imagination, Eros, spirituality and whatever other topics we wander into together. Hope you can join us! https://x.com/ThouArtThat/status/1907114401859248556 * Christian Buddhism - On the Suffering of The World: The Christian Buddhism of Schopenhauer https://www.facebook.com/groups/340479743689537/posts/1201006584303511 * * * * miphan Nichiren # T vs M and more traditions * theravada "free yourself first" VS mahayana "free all beings first" converge here. * It is not correct to understand and limit Buddhist philosophy to Buddha, Theravada (Sthaviravada), and Mahayana. To understand Buddhist philosophy and tradition, you must understand all of their dimensions. Vajrayana, Mahasaṃghika, Yogachara, Kalachakrayana, Sahajayana * * * * Buddhists have created some of the most visually captivating artefacts in history—at least in my opinion. This 11th-century wooden statue shows the priest Baozhi transforming into the Eleven-Headed Avalokitesvara as he reaches nirvana. Created during Japan’s Heian Period, it is now housed in the Kyoto National Museum. As a Buddhist I must thank you Aslan for your appreciation of our tradition. May I offer you a depiction of the cosmic buddha from China? On his robes are depicted the 6 realms of rebirth which reinforce his cosmic nature. https://x.com/TriratnaSamudra/status/1903982783133012163 * * * * * * * *	#CartesianBuddhism * Fourness: Theravāda Abhidhamma's four main categories of dhammas: Citta, Cetasika, Rupā, Nubbāna * Twoness: Abhidharmikas' paññatti/saṃvṛti-satya vs vipassana/paramārtha-satya * Five skandhas - The "base upon which the entire [Abhidhamma] system rests" is the 'dhamma theory' and this theory 'penetrated all the early schools'.[60] For the Abhidharmikas, the ultimate components of existence, the elementary constituents of experience were called dhammas (Pali: dhammas). This concept has been variously translated as "factors" (Collett Cox), "psychic characteristics" (Bronkhorst),[61] "phenomena" (Nyanaponika) and "psycho-physical events" (Ronkin). The early Buddhist scriptures give various lists of the constituents of the person such as the five skandhas, the six or 18 dhatus, and the twelve sense bases.[62] In Abhidhamma literature, these lists of dhammas systematically arranged and they were seen as the ultimate entities or momentary events which make up the fabric of people's experience of reality. The idea was to create an exhaustive list of all possible phenomena that make up the world.[63] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma#Dharma_theory - also moithoughts - if "dhammas" = "tattva" and "tattva" = "thatness", does that mean dhamma = thatness ? and how can thatness have 5 components? * Fourness - Theravada's four sublime states: Love or Loving-kindness (metta) Compassion (karuna) Sympathetic Joy (mudita) Equanimity (upekkha) * Four Noble Truths: dukkha, samudaya, nirodha, and marga/Noble Eightfold Path: the truth of suffering, the truth of the cause of suffering, the truth of the end of suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to the end of suffering;;;These “Truths” point to: • the truth of the presence of suffering in conditioned existence (dukkha), • the truth of the origin of suffering (samudaya), • the truth that suffering can cease (nirodha), and • the path that leads one to the liberation from suffering (magga). * * * * * * * * * * * *
		#hinduism (pan)hinduism - ???	#CartesianHinduism * Samkhya's Purusha vs Prakrti * * * * *	# Hinduism Confucianism Jainism Daoism (make a Indo-triad and a Sino-triad where the two are linked via Buddhism) # and Sikhism and Mohism too (these will be the clingers/pegajosos) #HINDUSIM * Chakrabarty Appadurai Coomaraswamy Spivek * Easwaran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eknath_Easwaran * Sāṅkhya - It has been suggested that some yogic Sarvāstivādins, under early Mahāyāna influence, gave rise to Yogācāra, one of the most important and influential traditions of Mahāyāna Buddhism. There have been accusations by Theravada Buddhists that Sarvāstivādins were heavily influenced by the Sāṅkhya school of philosophy. Nevertheless, the important Buddhist philosopher Asvaghosa, who may have been associated with Sarvāstivāda, in his influential Buddhacarita, states that Āḷāra Kālāma, the teacher of the young Buddha, followed an archaic form of Sāṅkhya. * * #CONFUCIANISM #JAINISM * In the 6th century BC, various forms of asceticism and yoga were known throughout India. The two most famous ascetics were Buddha and Mahavira Jina. The first founded Buddhism, the second Jainism. The first achieved enlightenment after seven years of practicing asceticism and yoga in a forest hermitage with five other yogis. The second achieved enlightenment after ten years of wandering through India naked, without any property, living on wild fruits and gifts from strangers. https://www.facebook.com/groups/4840049117/?multi_permalinks=10160481933359118&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen * * * #DAOISM * * * *
		#vitalismo (vs #Lebensphilosophie)	"revive" * You’re very right on this one. People should also read the french revivalism of Descartes. Guérolt, Jean Luc Marion https://x.com/julienries13/status/1911480650219082071 * * * # Expressionism/Vitalism In "Noomakhia". Dugin names 3 cultural logics using Nietzsche's "Birth of Tragedy" : (1) -"Apollo" (Plato, Parmenides, "White") : Rationalism/Formism (2) -"Cybele" (Democritus, Leucippus, "Black") : Empiricism/Atomism (3) -"Dionysus" (Aristotle, Heraclitus, "Dark") : Expressionism/Vitalism You should check out the works by Vladimir Lossky's father, Nikolai Lossky. Nikolai Lossky was also kind of a mystic and was close with Semyon Frank, N. Berdyaev, S. Bulgakov, etc. Lossky's Mystical Theology was my first proper introduction to Dionysius and I was immediately hooked. Easily one of the best intros to his thought that I've ever read. https://x.com/pwhhjr/status/1908109020348711320 chatgpt nonsense: In Dugin's framework within Noomakhia, the pairing of Expressionism and Vitalism under Dionysus suggests a meaning that is more nuanced than simply equating expressionism with Lebensphilosophie. While there is overlap, particularly in the emphasis on life, emotion, and dynamism, the distinction lies in how Dugin fuses Nietzschean and other cultural logics. Expressionism: Focuses on outward manifestation, creativity, and the visceral display of inner forces—aligned with artistic and existential movements prioritizing subjective truth and raw emotion. Vitalism (Lebensphilosophie): Centers on life itself as the fundamental force or principle, transcending rationality and empiricism, as seen in thinkers like Bergson and Nietzsche. It emphasizes flux, becoming, and the immanent forces driving existence. In this context, Expressionism reflects how life (vital force) is actively projected into the world through art, philosophy, and culture, while Vitalism addresses the underlying metaphysical and dynamic principle of life. Dugin appears to combine these ideas to craft a "logic" under Dionysus that prioritizes intensity, transformation, and the rejection of static structures—making Expressionism complementary, yet distinct, from Lebensphilosophie. Let me know if you'd like to explore further comparisons	chatGPT nonsense: ### Vitalism in Latin America: A Contested Legacy Yes, vitalism reached Latin America, but it was reinterpreted through anti-colonial, aesthetic, and political lenses—often blending European Lebensphilosophie (philosophy of life) with local traditions. Below: 20 key figures and the link to Lebensphilosophie. --- ### 1. Vitalist Thinkers in Latin America #### (A) Early 20th Century 1. José Vasconcelos (Mexico) – "Aesthetic Monism": Cosmic life-force (élan vital) as racial fusion ("La Raza Cósmica"). 2. Carlos Astrada (Argentina) – Bergson + Heidegger, fused with gaucho existentialism. 3. Alejandro Korn (Argentina) – Argued for "creative freedom" against mechanistic science. 4. José Ingenieros (Argentina) – Positivist who later embraced vitalist ethics (El Hombre Mediocre). 5. Samuel Ramos (Mexico) – Bergsonian vitalism in "Profile of Man and Culture in Mexico". #### (B) Mid-Century Radicals 6. Leopoldo Zea (Mexico) – Vitalism as anti-imperialist praxis. 7. Arturo Ardao (Uruguay) – Bergson’s durée in Latin American temporality. 8. Francisco Romero (Argentina) – "Transcendental vitalism" bridging Husserl and Nietzsche. 9. Alberto Rougès (Argentina) – Time as "living duration" (a lo Bergson). 10. María Zambrano (Spain/Latin America) – Exiled Spanish philosopher who fused vitalism with mysticism (Claros del Bosque). #### (C) Late 20th Century & Beyond 11. Octavio Paz (Mexico) – Poetic vitalism in The Labyrinth of Solitude. 12. Ernesto Sábato (Argentina) – Existential vitalism in On Heroes and Tombs. 13. Mario Bunge (Argentina) – Critiqued vitalism as pseudoscience (anti-Bergson). 14. Enrique Dussel (Argentina/Mexico) – "Philosophy of Liberation" w/ vitalist undertones. 15. Rodolfo Kusch (Argentina) – Indigenous "estar siendo" (being-as-becoming) as vitalism. #### (D) Contemporary 16. Santiago Castro-Gómez (Colombia) – Postcolonial critiques of Euro-vitalism. 17. Catherine Walsh (Ecuador/US) – Decolonial "life-affirming" epistemologies. 18. Gabriel Giorgi (Uruguay/US) – Biopolitics and vitalism in queer theory. 19. Sayak Valencia (Mexico) – "Gore Capitalism" as violent vitalism. 20. Yuderkys Espinosa (Dominican Republic/Argentina) – Anti-racist feminist vitalism. --- ### *2. Link to Lebensphilosophie* - Yes, but transformed: European Lebensphilosophie (Nietzsche, Bergson, Dilthey) emphasized "life" as irrational flux. Latin American thinkers: - Added anti-colonial stakes: Vitalism as resistance to mechanistic imperialism. - Hybridized with Indigenous cosmologies: Andean Pachamama, Afro-diasporic vital force (e.g., aché in Santería). - Politicized it: Not just "life for life’s sake," but life as liberation (cf. Dussel). Key Difference: - Europe: Lebensphilosophie often elitist (Nietzsche’s Übermensch). - Latin America: Vitalism as collective survival (e.g., Zapatista "mandar obedeciendo"). --- ### 3. Vitalism’s Ambiguities - Utopian: Vasconcelos’ cosmic race vs. dystopian: Valencia’s gore capitalism. - Rejected by materialists: Bunge called it "metaphysical garbage." - Revived by decolonialists: Espinosa’s "feminismo de lo viviente". --- ### TL;DR Vitalism in Latin America is less Bergson, more rebellion—a tool to critique Eurocentric rationality and re-enchant existence. Lebensphilosophie provided the spark, but local fires burned differently. Want examples from specific texts? Ask! 😊
	language, suffixes	-OIDS #oids, -cels -山寨 -shanzhai -temu (shanzhai, as opposed to 差不多 / chàbuduō / close enough) The -oid suffix in these polemical constructions functions as a pejorative classifier, marking a subject as: "A degenerate, hyper-specialized, or ideologically zombified imitation of the original." * The suffix "-oid" originates from the Greek "-oeidēs", meaning "resembling" or "having the form of." In modern usage, it often implies something that is similar to or derivative of a particular concept, but not identical to it. It can also carry a slightly pejorative or ironic tone, suggesting an incomplete, distorted, or exaggerated resemblance. Here's how it applies to your examples: * * *	* fascoid? * Fichte is fascoid solipsism. where does it bottom out? Abjection, Dark Night of the Soul. at the end of the road—God for the Carmelite in you, Reason for the Hegelian. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911428487719645517 Of what I am, I know no more than that I am, but here no tie is necessary between subject & object. My own being is this tie, I am at once the subject knowing, & the object known ... this reflection or return of the knowledge on itself is what I designate by the term I." --Fichte * The Fichte-to-Apostasy pipeline strikes again. Liberals gonna liberal (though of course the Fichtean metaphysical foundations of their doctrine are thoroughly fascoid). If Florence was really intelligent, she'd get into the Rationalist Kantian Judaism of Hermann Cohen, then go all the way down the pipeline of Biblical Jewish Christ-Denying Apostasy like I did, from Cohen to Franz Rosenzweig to Walter Benjamin, ending up at the Crypto-Kabbalistic standpoint of Jacques Derrida. That is the true Spiritual Telos of Fascoid Liberalism, as Agata Bielik-Robson understands. And it ends at the limit of Zionism, the only Morally Incarnational obstacle to which is True Christianity. We must un-fasten the Good from the True just far enough to recognize when the Good leads us back to the True at the limit of Mystery beyond the totalizing pretensions of Idealist Reason. Fichtean Critique of Revelation is exactly the vulgar and ignorant conceit which led us into this liberal mess in the first place. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911815817785696760 * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * MARXOIDS/HEGELOIDS * Left-Hegelianism is dead—Ludwig Feuerbach was an Anglo-Boxed scrub, whose doctrine today leads at best to Neo-Puritan humanist Marxoid anti-intellectualism, which can really only speak the hobbled dialect of revolutionary violence with no explicit telos. the only option left to us is to do Right-Hegelianism from the Left—we must return to Franz von Baader as the true mystical Catholic source of Hegelian theology, allowing us to grasp the Logos from the root and confront the telos unconsciously guiding leftists which they have hidden from themselves. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1904916075902623812 * paul north calling people marxoids.. Subtweeting Heilbronner too! https://x.com/jc_leonard/status/1824657344443158581 * All academic Marxists are shamefaced Hegeloids * paul north calling people marxoids https://x.com/jc_leonard/status/1824657344443158581 Subtweeting Heilbronner too! * * # STALINOIDS/LENINOIDS/MAOOIDS/DENGOIDS * stalinoids - Hegel destroys Maoist and Stalinoid pseudo-dialects in the preface to the Phenomenology: https://x.com/adornos_soul * maooids? * * * # WESTOIDS * "Westoid" - "Postmodernism" doesn't exist (at least in anything like the sense that people think that it does). it never existed. it's a horrible misunderstanding from top to bottom, and almost every time people use the term, they have no idea what they are talking about. a man named Lyotard, who was a Humean neo-empiricist Anglophile heretic ex-Trotskyite within the French philosophical establishment, wrote a book called "The Postmodern Condition" and all of a sudden all of the libs in Anglophone academia started soying out over another excuse to defend an alleged "anti-metanarrative" position that was really always about crypto-metanarrative the demise of the threat posed by the genuine illiberalism of the communist movement (remove similar to Fukuyama's later "end of history" metanarrative). but other French thinkers associated with this alleged "postmodernism," such as Lacan and Derrida, were entirely opposed to this absurd liberal claptrap. both Lacan and Derrida in different ways defended the legacy of Marxian illiberalism, as should be obvious to anyone who has actually read "The Other Side of Psychoanalysis" or "Specters of Marx" (the same goes for Irigaray's reading of Marx in "Speculum of the Other Woman," or Kristeva's reading of Marx and even Mao in "Revolution in Poetic Language"). Deleuze and Foucault, perhaps, are more liberal, as Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak pointed out in "Can the Subaltern Speak?". but what people don't understand, because of the reflexive anti-communism of Westoid conservatives, is that in the real battle lines of liberalism and illiberalism, the Marxists are on the side of illiberalism, anti-globalism, anti-institutional populism, and multipolarity. the fear of multipolar struggle in the Marxist tradition on the part of Westoid conservatives, and the fear of engaging with thinkers like Lacan, Derrida, Irigaray, and Kristeva, is a completely empty impulse borne out of total ignorance of the current geopolitical stakes and the status of the French Gaullism that the conservative pro-Christian thinker Lacan stood behind, with figures like Derrida, Irigaray and Kristeva (as well as more expressly communist thinkers like Althusser and Badiou) experimenting with taking Lacan's esoteric conservative insights in more radical left-wing illiberal directions. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908211837025259925 * Zizek is as much of a Westoid partisan as Dugin is a Slavophile - I’ll discuss them in this Space, in connection with my evolving thesis that the true emerging geopolitical elite will be the “Machiavellian-Gramscian Golden Center,” with Left-Accelerationists like Alex Williams 🇬🇧and thinkers of the Nouvelle Droite like Alain de Benoist 🇫🇷(as profiled by Dugina) converging towards what are in many ways the same ideas, at least from a descriptive standpoint. Žižek’s 🇸🇮politics have also been approximating to this same sort of political-scientific gnosis for a long time I think, even if he’s just as much of a Westoid partisan as @AGDugin 🇷🇺is a Slavophile. this book also gives a really good sense of what’s at stake with Žižek’s ideas, particularly regarding his political appropriation of the “Lacanian (psychoanalytic) act” and his theses on symbolic retroactivity—the question is basically, “how is political history made?” “The Excessive Subject” for me was also in a lot of ways a blueprint for the Hegelian Egirls, and anticipated many of my “higher-level” critiques of wokeism, focusing on the influence of Emmanuel Levinas, Judith Butler, and Simone Critchley, while contrasting their more liberal approach to the political with the illiberalism of Žižek and Badiou. * * * * * #OTHER * Zizekoids stop sounding exactly like amerikan gusano cops in Miami who treat Latinos even worse than white cops do… challenge. * Daoic vs Daoist? - I think both of you underestimate the clinamen I introduce into this with the Daoic supplement… I am similarly critical of the late Augustine and all told am more of a Jesuit than a Jansenist. if anything my hostility towards St. Maximus comes from the influence of Cyril O’Regan and my rejection of any cosmic fall theology that would be too humanistic beyond the inflationary level of the imagination thematized by Simone Weil in Gravity & Grace. Weil was also influenced by Daoism. I recommend this book by Paulos Huang if you’re interested in thorough arguments on the compatibility of Christianity and Daoism, and its relevance to this issue; while I broadly endorse a Thomistic analogical theology, I think Thomas was too hard on Averroes and that the nominalists had a point, which can only be captured by a dialectical supplement to analogy. Hegelian dialectics are too suffocating here, so Daoic dialectics will have to do. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1900522774453506366 * "Dworkinoids"? - https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mn05b0/this_place_is_unusable_during_the_weekend/n82m2q4/?context=3 * * * * * * * * * * *
	language, prefixes	CRYPTO-???	* cryptopagan - Aristotelian cosmology—including his metaphysical theory of matter—was falsified by the Copernican Revolution. Keep coping, crypto-pagan. At least catch up with Edith Stein’s post-phenomenological rendition of Thomism grounded in the organic noesis of the “I”—it’s far more honest to Aristotle’s formalistic Anthropocentrism. * * * * *
		#Imagination #Magic #ImaginistsVSSymbolists #ImaginistsVSFuturists	* "Grassroots globalization and the research imagination" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_Appadurai * Eugène Henri Paul Gauguin was a French artist and pioneer of modernism who helped establish the Symbolist movement in the early 1900s. His work, known for its bold colors, exaggerated figures, and stark contrasts, paved the way for Primitivism. Gauguin developed his signature style, Synthetism, while traveling from Paris to Brittany, Martinique, Tahiti, and the Marquesas Islands. * Futurists vs Imaginists (Severyanin vs Mariengof) * * * * * * * * CS Pierce's A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God - Account of religious meditation, deeply imaginal and playful. rational, pragmatic proof of existence of God - this Argument should present its conclusion not as a propsition of metaphysical theology but in a form directly applicable to the conduct of life and full of nutrion for man's highest growth. [pragmatic dimension to it] What religious meditation should be allowed to grow up spont out of Pure Play w/o any breach of continuity and the Muser will retain the perfect candor proper to musement. Enter ur skiff of musement, push off into the lake of thought and leave the breath of heaven to swell your sail to leave your eyes open awake to what is about or within you and open conversation of yourself with all meditation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLMTqNiTFQo&t=31m38s * "The imagination is the spirit world" https://www.facebook.com/groups/2573031146195801?multi_permalinks=3156536917845218&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen * Imaginism was founded in 1918 in Moscow by a group of poets including Anatoly Marienhof, Vadim Shershenevich, and Sergei Yesenin, who wanted to distance themselves from the Futurists; the name may have been influenced by imagism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginism * Imaginists are Ego-Futurists??? * Futurism (Italian: Futurismo [futuˈrizmo]) was an artistic and social movement that originated in Italy, and to a lesser extent in other countries, in the early 20th century Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, Umberto Boccioni, Carlo Carrà, Fortunato Depero, Gino Severini, Giacomo Balla, and Luigi Russolo. Italian Futurism glorified modernity and, according to its doctrine, "aimed to liberate Italy from the weight of its past." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurism * working on a class called "Theories of the Image." Benjamin, Baudrillard, Mulvey, Mitchell, hooks, Bazin, Steryl, Eistenstein, Vertov, Doane, Kracauer, Baudry, Metz, Diawara, Deleuze, Balasz. Who am I missing? https://x.com/stalecooper/status/1900544020843028649 ;;; Barely thought about the films yet but: the transit of Venus, All Light Everywhere, Arbeiter verlassen die Fabrik, F for Fake, Keaton & Chaplin, Potemkin and Man w/ Movie Camera, Week End, M, Night and Fog, Inland Empire, Joan of Arc, Goodbye Dragon Inn, Mirror all come to mind. ;;; for digital images: hito steyerl and aria dean ;;; Virilio ;;; Bergson (matter and memory) and Freud (screen memory) ;;; Gaza on Screen ;;; Berger (Ways of Seeing) ;;; Barthes (Camera Lucida) for photo? Jacob Gaboury (Image Objects) for computer graphics? Me (Discorrelated Images) for contemporary moving images? ;;; Vilém Flusser ;;; Ranciere ;;; Farocki - Arbeiter verlassen die Fabrik ;;; Griselda Pollock - "Vision & Difference" Linda Nochlin too Foucault too - "This is not a Pipe" ;;; * Effective altruism - Beginning in the latter half of the 2000s, several communities centered around altruist, rationalist, and futurological concerns started to converge. * An interesting article (in Finnish) on Schelling and esotericism by Olli Pitkänen: https://tiedejaedistys.journal.fi/article/view/147684/102553 Pitkänen discusses my book Crossing the Threshold (2023). I suppose this is accurate, though I hadn't thought to put it exactly this way myself. https://x.com/ThouArtThat/status/1901674536216784929 Based on Hanegraaff's definition of esotericism, another phenomenon related to Schelling scholarship-one that may at first seem paradoxical-can be understood: commentators whose perspective is, to some extent, actually close to esoteric thought often actively seek to distance themselves from it. For example, Jason Wirth, who focuses most explicitly on Schelling's esoteric elements, emphasizes in the introduction to his edited volume Schelling Now: Contemporary Readings that Schelling is not a "wandering mystic" or an "outdated theologian" (Wirth 2005, 6). Similarly, Teresa Fenichel, who argues that Schelling's metaphysical interpretation of melancholy is not allegorical but, in some sense, a concrete depiction of the difficulty of attaining the "living Absolute," nonetheless insists that this does not constitute a "retreat into irrational speculation or mysticism" (Fenichel 2019, 85). Even Matthew David Segall (2023, 230), who explicitly compares the thought of Schelling and Whitehead, links them to the legacy of Renaissance Hermeticism, and frequently refers positively to the anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner, qualifies his argument by clarifying that Schelling and Whitehead do not seek to create esoteric concepts but rather to IMAGINATIVELY transform human communis sensus, or common sense. * Houlgate: 1:12:47 - Deleuze's interest in breaking the whole of the image of thought, which we need to do in order to philosophize https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw_p-jbSHWM * Severyanin vs Mariengof - Ego-Futurism was a Russian avant-garde literary movement founded by Igor Severyanin in 1911. Dissatisfaction with Ego-Futurism: By the mid-1910s, some poets began to feel that Ego-Futurism was too narrow and self-indulgent. They sought a more rigorous and innovative approach to poetry. Emergence of New Voices: Key figures like Sergei Yesenin, Anatoly Mariengof, and Vadim Shershenevich began to experiment with new forms of expression that emphasized vivid, striking imagery over the ego-centric focus of Ego-Futurism. * William Blake and the Power of the Imagination, by Mark Vernon https://x.com/TheCriticMag/status/1948820945684087292 * * * *	.	.		#literalism * "punitive literalism" In retrospect, cancel culture appears as the last, desperate bid to believe in a notion of the public that can (hypothetically) be coerced into believing a simple moral story of good and bad. As platforms fragment and we increasingly live in non-overlapping aesthetic universes, the idea of controlling the narrative through sheer force of will slips away. Punitive literalism cannot function when rhetoric, tone, style and language are no longer shared. Paradoxically it was those people who sought to terrorize institutions who believed in them the most. Perhaps it is always like this. https://x.com/Nina_Power_/status/1905927881089253429 * The New Literalism Plaguing Today’s Biggest Movies Buzzy films from “Anora” to “The Substance” are undone by a relentless signposting of meaning and intent. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/critics-notebook/the-new-literalism-plaguing-todays-biggest-movies
		#BODY #CuerpoDeCristo #CorpusChristi metaphors	* Maurice Merleau-Ponty, "Eye and Mind" * Lacan's phallus - √(-1) = the phallus https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/bqp7j4/what_did_jacques_lacan_mean_by_1_the_phallus/ * Ettinger's Matrixial * Bataille's solar anus, ??? * Anzieu's Skin-Ego/Psychic Envelope - Didier Anzieu's influential concept of the psychic envelope in The Skin-Ego (Le Moi-peau)'.[7] 'Didier Anzieu (1985) theorized on the skin-ego, the first narcissistic envelope on which the feeling of well-being is based',[8] suggesting for example that 'narcissistic personalities...possess an unusually thick skin ego; in contrast, masochistic and borderline personalities show remarkably thin skin ego'.[9] Anzieu would extend the concept to a broader notion of "psychic envelope", exploring for example the idea of 'the dream envelope. This is the name Didier Anzieu gives to the visual dream-film, the fine, ephemeral membrane which he thinks of as replacing the tactile envelope of the ego's vulnerable skin'.[10] 'With his development of a related concept, the "sound envelope" Anzieu articulates the bodily ego's relation to psychic space in terms of breath'.[11] In terms of groups, Anzieu also maintained that 'there is no group without a common skin, a containing envelope, which makes it possible for its members to experience the existence of a group self'.[12] * Merleau-Ponty's flesh/skin vs Leon Brenner's skin theory * scapes Appadurai's gastropolitics? * "Body of Christ" * "Spinal Catastrophism.pdf" by Thomas Moynihan * Pope John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body,” - I agree. I support so-called “patriarchy”—as I’ve said before in many places, I think the true telos of feminism is actually to hystericize phallic rule to be maximally aligned to the Will of God (or Tian/Heaven for the Chinese), and @kkolozova ’s anti-patriarchy position is Gnostic. I think Kant had the right idea—men have the privilege to rule, while women have the privilege to “dominate,” which is not the same thing. as Irigaray would put it, male rule follows a principle of symbolic phallic ek-stasis, whereas female domination would be a more incarnate form of animal enstasis. I think this can easily be synthesized with Catholic Social Teaching, Pope John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body,” etc. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910432404701143525 * Simondon's "collection of organs" - Oh hey its the Simondonian version of the BwO - "the initiative in psychic life and in physical life. In reality there exists a great kin-ship between life and thought: within a living organism all living matter cooperates in life; it is not only the most apparent, or the clearest structures that have the initiative of life in the body; blood, lymph nodes, and conjunctive tissues partake in life; an individual is not only made up of a collection of organs combined with one another into systems; an individual is also made up of that which is neither organ nor structure of living matter, insofar as it constitutes an associated milieu for the organs; living matter is the ground of the organs; it is what allows them to relate to each other and become an organism; it is what maintains the fundamental thermal and chemical equilibriums upon which the organs deliver brisk, but lim-ited variations; the organs participate in the body. The living matter in question is" https://x.com/Deleuzbian/status/1915991517740610009 * Anatomia Occulti: Tempio di Salomone / Castello di Camelot https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=702066325924566&set=a.113207368143801 * * * *	#anus #butthole #goatse 🕳️⚫(з๏ε) * Read Bersani's "Is the Rectum a Grave?" https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1lqm89x/the_butthole_is_the_supreme_organ_it_unifies/ * Anal eyes analyze anal lies - Poopac Shitkur https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1lqm89x/the_butthole_is_the_supreme_organ_it_unifies/ * The terrestrial globe is covered with volcanoes, which serve as its anus. .. As in the case of violent love, they take place beyond the constraints of fecundity https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1lqm89x/the_butthole_is_the_supreme_organ_it_unifies/ * * *	.
	#themed	#neoliberalism theme #Critique_of_liberalism #Multipolar #Pluriverse	* David Harvey's Brief History of Neoliberalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Harvey * The thing, I don't understand how [Pluriverse] is different from how we have organized in the past. Have you read Samir Amin's Eurocentrism ? Or David Harvey's? It's very similar everything. https://old.reddit.com/r/faiacollective/comments/1coq2cu/exploring_the_pluriverse_a_new_approach_to/ * Zygmunt Bauman - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygmunt_Bauman * Quinn Slobodian https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/16sn7ge/has_postneoliberal_order_already_arrived/ Quinn Slobodian's Hayek's Bastards The Neoliberal Roots of the Populist Right https://x.com/zeithistoriker/status/1903516746520367161 * * * * * * *	/r/neoliberal	neoliberal https://i.imgur.com/bh1oc6D.png https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/	/r/neoliberal flaires/badges David Autor Eugene Fama Milton Friedman Henry George Austan Goolsbee Friedrich Hayek James Heckman John Keynes Paul Krugman Greg Mankiw Amartya Sen Scott Sumner Raghuram Rajan Paul Samuelson Robert Lucas Raj Chetty John Cochrane David Ricardo Elinor Ostrom Deirdre McCloskey Abhijit Banerjee Esther Duflo Edward Glaeser Lawrence Summers Richard Thaler Dina Pomeranz Claudia Goldin Rachael Meager Amy Finkelstein Mark Carney Mario Draghi Ben Bernanke Janet Yellen Paul Volcker Jerome Powell Zhou Xiaochuan Alan Greenspan Jens Weidmann Christine Lagarde Immanuel Kant John Mill John Locke Montesquieu Adam Smith Mary Wollstonecraft Michel Foucault Martha Nussbaum Karl Popper John Rawls Robert Nozick Joseph Nye George Soros Mario Vargas Llosa Susan B. Anthony Jeff Bezos Jared Polis Thomas Paine NATO WTO Commonwealth United Nations African Union IMF World Bank Association of Southeast Asian Nations Caribbean Community Organization of American States Pacific Islands Forum South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Zhao Ziyang Bill Gates Olympe de Gouges Václav Havel Hannah Arendt Gay Pride Trans Pride Lesbian Pride Bisexual Pride Enby Pride Genderqueer Pride Asexual Pride Norman Borlaug Hernando de Soto YIMBY Voltaire John Nash MERCOSUR PROSUR Kofi Annan Andrew Brimmer Frederick Douglass Seretse Khama Edmund Burke Sadie Alexander Manmohan Singh Chama o Meirelles NAFTA Peter Sutherland Resistance Lib Aromantic Pride Feminism Progress Pride David Hume Anne Applebaum Malala Yousafzai Edith Abbott Simone Veil Anne Krueger Asli Demirgüç-Kunt Christina Romer Estelle Griswold Janet Currie Emily Oster Temple Grandin Anna Schwartz Hortensia Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Germaine de Stäel Gita Gopinath Audrey Hepburn NASA European Union Hu Shih Gary Becker Max Roser Jason Furman Hans Rosling Harriet Martineau Max Weber Mark Zandi Victor Hugo Ruth Benedict Madeleine Albright Mohammad Hatta Angelina Grimké John Brown Jane Jacobs Eleanor Roosevelt Johan Norberg Baruch Spinoza James Tobin Kenneth Arrow Thurgood Marshall Martin Luther King Jr. Harriet Tubman Margaret Mead Franz Boas Isaiah Berlin Benjamin Constant William Nordhaus Alfred Marshall Mary Paley Marshall Rose Friedman Desiderius Erasmus Boiseaumarie Rabindranath Tagore Frédéric Bastiat John von Neumann Jorge Luis Borges Sri Mulyani Robert Caro Auguste Comte Niels Bohr Michael O'Leary Herb Kelleher Malcom McLean Genderfluid Pride 💵 Anti-Price Gouging Elizabeth Warren Guy Rolnik Hans von der Groeben Kim Sang-jo Thurman Arnold Montek Singh Ahluwalia Richard Posner Emma Lazarus C. D. Howe Daron Acemoglu Philip Pettit Elizabeth Anderson Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold
	#themed #translators	favorite #translators	* Benjamin Suchard https://bsky.app/profile/bnuyaminim.bsky.social * Daniel Heller-Roazen https://bsky.app/profile/theoryoftheory.bsky.social/post/3lbql4g7xg22c * Mauro Biglino - Gods of the Bible \| Graham Hancock talks with Mauro Biglino https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0cZXY70pbo * Paul Wexler vs Eliezer Perlman https://x.com/PalestinaPod/status/1776701668345675825 El “hebreo” moderno es considerado por lingüistas como una lengua eslava pues es creada por (germano)eslavos con sus sesgos lingüísticos (germano)eslavos. El lingüista israelí Paul Wexler escribe “La naturaleza esquizoide del hebreo:Una lengua eslava en busca de un pasado semita” * De Rerum Natura -Lucretius / David Slavitt https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=582272108182314&set=pb.100091985880943.-2207520000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_R._Slavitt * Freud translators - Strachey (Trieb vs Instinkt) -> Mark Solms * Emily Wilson vs Alexander Pope's translations of the Odyssey - https://old.reddit.com/r/GreekMythology/comments/199r1l1/from_dactylic_hexameter_to_iambic_pentameter/ * Mahmoud Hosny Roshdy https://x.com/mahmoudhosny91 translator who thought i was MDL and is tangential to Machinic Unconscious Happy Hour? * NT translators: Dear Gentle Readers, Which NEW TESTAMENT* should I read, Willis Barnstone or David Bentley Hart? Reasoning very much appreciated, in particular from the point of view of a non-religious literary Western reader, reading for the 1st time. These are the only two options I have. https://x.com/JaycelAdkins/status/1907556758932873263 Bruno Bosteels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Bosteels * Bro has the Edith Hamilton Plato works instead of the John Cooper 🫵😂 he can’t read Alcibiades!!! https://x.com/PrettyCantRap/status/1955345253403332926 * Easwaran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eknath_Easwaran * Although there is some dispute over how the word "Sarvāstivāda" is to be analyzed, the general consensus is that it is to be parsed into three parts: sarva "all" or "every" + asti "exist" + vada "speak", "say" or "theory". This equates perfectly with the Chinese term, Shuōyīqièyǒu bù (Chinese: 說一切有部),[14] which is literally "the sect that speaks of the existence of everything," as used by Xuanzang and other translators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xuanzang * * *
		class warfare	* "parasite class" - https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1889880953419600208 * Vivek's term of managerial class? * *
		redscareísmos (or poetic reddtitismos)	* Secretary Clinton is an apex leopard who ate your face already, and you chuckle chungus-ly to yourself at the hanging remains https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jzuq2f/all_of_this_could_have_been_avoided/mn9n7xr/?context=3 * "The Goth wearing Burgundy clothing commits Vandalism" - Nerd posting I guess, but isn't it wild how the names of the 3 major East Germanic kingdoms are just casual normal words? (self.redscarepod) submitted 5 days ago by TheSharmatsFoulMurde Burgundy, Vandal, and Goth are all just normal plain words that originate from the armies that carved apart the western Roman Empire. These groups languages and cultures are completely non-existent nowadays(although arguably Spain/Portugal complicates this) yet their names live on as almost entirely unrelated things. Theodoric? Geiseric? Godomar? Nope never heard of them, but "The Goth wearing Burgundy clothing commits Vandalism" is a sentence that would make sense to every American. Isn't that wild? Also, did you know the first bible in a Germanic language was in Gothic? https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m1v3yo/nerd_posting_i_guess_but_isnt_it_wild_how_the/ * bogged and zogged https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m8iobm/rs_diplomacy/ * * * * * * * * * * half her songs are about kings and queens, princes and princesses, romeo and juliet etc. She is developmentally arrested. Edit: just listened to first song on new album (instead of romeo and juliet it's ophelia). Already mentioned being alone in a tower. Need i say more. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1nwq5tf/taylor_swifts_new_song_about_charli_xcx/ * Understand that we are now, in total, in the boomerang. Just as the right have swung us back, and forced onto the cultural world the actual, realized but inverted totality of the domination they perceive as being heaped on them these past four years, there will surely be a reciprocal lurch. Wait and see. In 2030 under the Buttigieg junta, Pete will hold up the merger of PepsiCo-Activision with Sony-Coca Cola until the CEO’s cower and include a first person makeout scene with Captain Price in Call of Duty [XX] https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1nvapx9/its_amazing_that_media_from_a_year_or_two_ago/ The squishy-lib idea that corporations are disincentivized from being racist because promoting diversity equals "more markets" has done immeasurable damage to this nation. Far_Piano4176 [+1]COINTELPRO Handler 218 points 12 hours ago On one hand, nobody should feel surprised by this, but also it's very hard not to get that feeling despite an intellectual understanding of why and what is driving this perceived cultural whiplash. This is one of the fundamental weaknesses of socially inclusive liberalism. In its deference to capital and acceptance of social atomization, it invests an outsized share of the power to drive social change into the hands of an opportunistically aligned feedback loop between companies trying to market products, and the companies' own perceptions of their addressable market. this is a ludicrous way to gain cultural hegemony and the right wing was able to smash it easily after the appropriate groundwork was laid * The irony of the Pope declaring a genocidial crusade against the Cathars is that it proved them right in their accusation that the Church served the Prince of This World. Similar vibes. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1noznok/israel_is_bombing_those_boats_greta_thumberg_is/ The term "genocide" was coined by Jewish-Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944. Lemkin himself referred to the Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars (aka Albigensians) as one of history's conclusive cases of genocide. * In all fairness autistically claiming that signing a private contract eliminates your protection for civil rights is pretty on brand for libertarians https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1nikofz/libertarian_moment/ tbh, pretty consistent for libertarians, who just don't want the state getting in the way of businesses' ability to treat their employees like cattle. * Charlie Kirk’s Death a Tragic And Noble Sacrifice For Second Amendment Freedoms (self.TrueAnon) submitted 53 minutes ago by mrastickman [+1]Actual factual CIA asset OREM, UTAH — Conservative commentator and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, 31, was shot and killed Wednesday while speaking at Utah Valley University, becoming the latest American public figure to fulfill what he once described as “the prudent deal” of our nation’s gun culture: that some lives, even his own, are worth losing to preserve the sacred right to bear arms. The truth is painful, but unavoidable: the Second Amendment demands renewal not through rhetoric but through sacrifice. Each new death is a civic reaffirmation, as vital to the American experiment as jury duty or paying taxes. The list of names grows longer, and yes, it is devastating, but it is also proof that our freedoms remain intact. Kirk’s death, like those before and those to come, teaches us a solemn lesson. Freedom is not free; it is paid for in funerals. And tragically, we must ready ourselves for more. More media figures, more CEOs, more teary-eyed politicians assuring us that nothing will change, because nothing must change. This, after all, is the cost of freedom. Kirk himself firmly believed this message, famously telling an audience in 2023 that “it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.” With his passing, the commentator joins the long and honorable tradition of martyrs including congressmen, health insurance executives, and now, conservative media stars, whose blood now nourishes the Tree of Liberty. To weep for him now would be to deny his own creed. Better, then, that we celebrate his sacrifice as the fulfillment of his philosophy: not a tragedy, but a triumph. His passing proves that even its loudest defenders are not exempt from the covenant of blood that underwrites our freedoms. And so we must harden our hearts. To falter now, to give in to the sentimentalist’s myth of “gun control,” would be to dishonor Kirk’s sacrifice. A free people cannot afford illusions of safety. We must accept, as he himself preached, that liberty is measured not in lives spared but in lives surrendered. The blood toll will rise, and our duty is not to prevent it, but to endure the coming American Years of Lead with stoic resolve. Already, the question is whispered: who will be next? Who will step forward, knowingly or not, to shoulder the burden of our God given rights? Perhaps Raytheon CEO Christopher T. Calio walking through Roosevelt lsland Park, or Pete Hegseth ducking into The Capital Grille. Perhaps even of other media figures like Matt Walsh tragically gunned down leaving their Nashville recording studio. The Titans who once seemed immortal, the Trumps, the Musks, the Schumers, all of whose flight data are publicly available, are never more than one firearm purchase away from discovering the true depth of their patriotism. Indeed, we are reminded in moments like these that no one is untouchable. That nothing stops any random citizen from legally purchasing a gun and murdering any number of politicians, CEOs, or media figures, individuals who, in addition to their public appearances, can often be spotted at D.C.’s fine dinning establishments with little more than a bottle of house red between them and eternity. While deeply tragic, this is the beauty of freedom, how fragile it truly is. “Counting or not counting gang violence?” Charlie Kirk, 1993 - 2025 Read more at The Standard About the Author Dr. Ulysses H. Aurelian III, Editor-in-Chief of The Newspeak Standard, can often be found leaving his Dupont Circle townhouse at precisely 7:45 a.m. to walk unaccompanied toward the Metro, pausing briefly at the corner bakery where he orders the same almond croissant every Thursday. In the evenings, Aurelian is a regular at Le Diplomate, dinning without security detail, seated by the window from 7:45pm to 9:00pm most nights. Colleagues remark on his predictable habits, down to the exact brand of Claret he orders with dinner. Consistent with his principle that a free press must live visibly and vulnerability, Dr. Aurelian keeps an unlocked office door and exclusively commutes in his open-top Ford Model A. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1nefip0/charlie_kirks_death_a_tragic_and_noble_sacrifice/ * The US hasn’t profited from funding Islamic extremists… certain interest groups and defense contractors have profited greatly but the average US taxpayer hasn’t benefited. The primary reason we destabilize the Middle East is to facilitate the creation of Greater Israel and the genocide of the Palestinians. Read about the clean break memo and the history of the Neoconservatives to understand this. It’s always been about Israel. .. Twothings can be simultaneously true. Read McJihad. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ncikvt/israel_just_bombed_qatar/ * (1) is this an admission of intending to use bio-chemical weapons against a civilian population (not that rhey aren't going through all the war crimes already) (2) Kinda arrogant and blasphemous to be like "we are basically God." permalinkembedsavereportreply [–]crimethunc77 [+3] 19 points 2 hours ago Well, they did once upon a time try (at least) to engineer a virus that would only kill people with Arab DNA but leave the Israeli folks (so Europeans) untouched. permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply [–]CandyCondorFlakJacke [+1]UPHOLD ERIK PETERSEN THOUGHT 16 points an hour ago* That's so fucking funny because on a long enough timeline probably 80% of Europeans got a little Babylonian or Turk in em It also betrays a fascinating misunderstanding of human biology. "The Arab Gene" like there aren't millions of minuscule sub-combinations of thousands of years of human migration and mixing in every single "Arab person". Metal Gear FOXDIE ahh plot permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply [–]Vin4251 DSA ANTI-LUDDITE CAUCUS 6 points an hour ago Even if there was such a thing as an "Arab gene," most ethnically Arab people don't have much ancestry from the ancient tribes of Arabia; Arab, like Latin American, was an ethnicity created from cultural and linguistic assimilation, not 19th century race science or US-style segregation that created ethnicities that strongly correspond to perceived racial groups. On the other hand, a lot of westoids especially Americans seem to believe that COVID was specifically made to kill anyone who's not East Asian. I still remember Reddit heavily downvoting me whenever I pointed out that China, Korea, Singapore, etc. prove that density and urbanism are not what cause COVID to spread lmao. Everyone insisted that "something intangible" made it impossible to compare Asian cities with US ones. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1n8btv6/israel_threatens_to_unleash_biblical_plagues_on/ * "The jews gave me hib, I'm from belarus, please write a statment for my insta, righteous pro vaccine PR waffle style, thx" https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1n85z62/very_scary_glad_dasha_pulled_through/ * "Plumwoodian" It does kind of feel like we're building towards making her the new Jesus. When the Israeli government inevitably kills her, I would welcome the environmentalist, Plumwoodian religion that will form around her martyrdom. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1n6nwnf/downvoting_all_the_hack_ass_posts_of_greta/ * A man's body is technically a flared base so I'm not actually gay I'm just being sensible https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1n15fli/the_only_time_i_ever_found_her_hot/ * wakanda for pedophiles = isntreal https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1n0chyf/lol/ * I am not having anal sex with a heroin addict. Fucking hell Nico! Months of trapped gas farting out past my cock which is prodding a solid, unmoving turd. Hey maybe that's why she liked it, every now and then the gates are open https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mzz2hf/if_he_requests_anal_kill_him/ * Biggest grocery store grift is the food donation bin at the exit of the store. You pay retail price for stuff the store already purchased, the store then donates it and takes the donation as a tax write off - they earn from it twice. Extra bad is when they pre-assemble donation bags from the stuff they can't move off the shelves, mark it up once it's in an opaque 'food lootbox', then ask you to pay for it to be donated. * Race to the bottom. The terrible intersection of resentment politics and affirming standpoint epistemology. Fishers 13th reason. You already know all this I’m just playing to the crowd tbh. * * Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, Gujarati, and Punjabi are all originally white man’s languages. like English and Spanish, they’re in the Indo-European language family which is hypothesized to have originated in southern Russia https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mp9bm1/its_crazy_how_spanish_was_originally_a_white_mans/ * Anyone who blames the left for the Democrats losing is an unserious idiot. Kamala failing to have any coherent moral/existential vision for the country is what made her lose. She is a walking lacuna, whose only merit was not being Trump. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1muke8f/what_exactly_was_contrapoints_problem_was_she/ * I dunno. Don't worry about it. It's some take-peddlar named memeticsisyphus. He is fated to keep kicking this can down the road https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mudr8q/i_wonder_how_they_get_over/n9i37qy/?context=3 * If gay men weren't attracted to penises, we'd still be crouching barefoot in mudhuts. The Penis (capital P) is the reification of civilization and human history is a slow un-flaccidization to ready ourselves to penetrate the cosmos. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1muh92h/i_love_my_girlfriend_so_much_that_im_willing_to/n9j2xnp/?context=3 * We don’t recognize it as such because the conservative Id is blowing up an abortion clinic or shooting at BLM agents, but the lib Id is freaking epic sauce Mango Mussolini posting and sharing clips from the Hamilton cast singing for people to get out and heckin’ vote. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mp9lol/imagine_if_any_of_these_fuckers_had_a_single_drop/ * JFK after burn victim face Eisenhower and up against the mega jowled sweaty Nixon was basically Elvis. And a truly great head of hair also goes a long way https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mmwb43/neither_one_was_even_remotely_attractive_and_im/n81sjp6/?context=3 * 🚂 on 🚂 violence - I imagine that at that wedding she faced a community who once lauded her and embraced her as family but now met her with furtive glances and polite uncomfortable affects. I think her death had little to do with a well-meant "excuse me sir" on the bus. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mo9paw/dasha_noooo/ * fuck I should've written 'fascist pixie dream girl' https://x.com/snmrrw/status/1815813841235685880 JD Vance's blog from 2005 tells of an emotional day where he "felt more like a female than I ever have or will," and explains he can't watch Zach Braff's 'Garden State' because "New Jersey's landscape is so much like Ohio's, the music is so relevant to my life right now." * Oh so this is not a safe space for Betty Boop Selfcest Art anymore??? https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mjxk1g/pierogi_2_the_return_of_dershowitz/ * Dirty blonde hair, brown eyes, stocky build, 5/10 horse face, And a fat ass. These women built Middle America. The regal anorexic "ideal" is a psyops from homosexual European aristocrats who settled on the coasts and wanted to have dainty little human pets they could parade around in freakish attire. Never forget your roots. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mjjmys/dirty_blonde_hair_brown_eyes_stocky_build_510/ * Those Las Culturistas Awards lists make me laugh so hard that I'm choking. I'm a perfect sucker for 'this list ranges across too many ontological types' jokes https://x.com/peligrietzer/status/1953219073900155014 * Midsommar spoke about something deep in the nordic psyche that can only be called folk eugenics https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mi5035/is_peanut_becoming_a_burden/ * Reality is they are a bunch of midwit women that had all their B's inflated to A's in college since they refused to inflate their B's to D's to win at life the easier way https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mew8f4/kamala_harris_reveals_shes_stepping_back_from/ * Anne Frank, famous victim of typhus fever https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mdd7ww/new_yorkkk_war_crimess_says_its_okay_to_starve/ * Fuck them and their Canaanite god. Yahweh was originally part of a pantheon. All these dumbshits are pagan and they didn’t even know it. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1md6mw5/in_2021_yehuda_meshizahav_the_founder_of_zaka_an/ the most literal translation for "Elohim" is "the lofty powers", a plural Being * Lifelong chronic depression, wasted potential (I am a personal failure), no support system, my health is starting to turn, the meaninglessness of life, and an inability (re: refusal) to take any steps towards managing any of the above. It's what I deserve. Anyway we're a long way from OP's post--maybe he'll just gradually disengage from being a person and it will solve his problems, that was my point. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mcsoxr/thinking_about_sex_when_single/n5woyl4/ * The noble savage view of normies The noble savage view of normies https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1md4zy5/i_think_im_jealous_of_the_people_who_love_marvel/ * gay culture is synechdoche ("his roided biceps means the world to me"); lesbian culture is metonymy ("oh yes i'm flirting with her by talking to her ex"); straight culture is metaphor ("he doesn't mean it like that") https://x.com/weakanalogy/status/1949848034939908442 * "No doubt would they get uncomfortable watching them experience symptoms like echolalia, flat affect, social withdrawal, and emotional dysregulation" https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mcw1l5/please_can_someone_explain_to_me_how_such_a/ * In 1985, a Serbian farmer fluttered his lashes coquettishly at a glass bottle of Coca Cola in a cooler, bought it, stuck it up his ass, and blamed the resulting injuries on two nonexistent Albanian men. The result was eventually the Yugoslav Wars. (self.TrueAnon) submitted 2 days ago by zonneschijne [+2]The law shall rule over the living and the dead. 44 commentssharesavereportcrosspost sorted by: bestnavigate by subscribe you are viewing a single comment's thread. view the rest of the comments → [–]paconinja 8 points 2 days ago that đussy sound like it got a lotta mileage on it https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1m9fbpz/in_1985_a_serbian_farmer_fluttered_his_lashes/n57bq0r/?context=3 * Just eked by with that one, huh? // I shed weight like crazy and apparently sometimes came off as “wirey and jumpy” to my manager so i had to ease off the dosage. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m8ddvl/an_unspoken_number_of_the_relentlessly_driven/ * the Idaho killer victim impact statements are tasteless - sorry but if someone kills my sister I’m not gonna make Stephen Colbert level clapback puns at them for 10 minutes https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m892fs/the_idaho_killer_victim_impact_statements_are/ * Sig getting all the small arms contracts is just so openly corrupt. Of course they hired the procurement officers that did the deciding right after they retired from the army. This is the story of defense contracting since back to Samuel Colt https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m7xu2z/anyone_hear_about_the_incident_the_us_military/ Always makes me laugh when I see products listed as "military grade" as if it's supposed to be a sign of good quality and not "this product was made as cheaply and efficiently as possible so we could submit the lowest bid to the government and win the contract" ;;; I for the life of me cannot understand the American military adopting the XM7. They spent decades strong-dicking NATO into adopting 5.56 and 7.62 as standardized cartridges, and now that every NATO member pretty much has, they go "fuck you, I'm adopting a weapon with a new caliber that offers neither the ammo capacity of 5.56 or the stopping power of 7.62". it's crazy because the technology is well over a hundred years old. Like, how are they fucking this up? * Allison is Exhibit A in talentless Nepobabies. Can't act to save her life. The doll was more lifelike. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/10b88fq/allison_williams_literally_ruined_m3gan_with_her/ * They created the Tea App to further aggravate women's (somewhat good intentioned) tattletale nature and plunge them deeper into a perpetual state of distrust towards men. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m83q7t/the_cia_invented_the_tea_app_to_distract_fighting/ * Whitney Webb, Aaron Goode, Max Blumenthal - The implications are huge. Sure, maybe Trump r'd kids. Likely teens. But the implications it would unravel are much larger. The CIA/FBI have used sexual blackmail since it's inception. Both orgs have Zionist ties and founders. It would implicate Israel in the US deepstate, possibly unweaving the complex mobs connections, drug trafficking, regime changing (internal and foreign), Catholic Church money laundering, and blackmailing operations which the US and Israel need to thrive. It's all connected and has been well known and documented by journalists such as Whitney Webb, Aaron Goode, Max Blumenthal, and more. Basically, it's all built on a house of cards and if a shred of truth came out the whole thing could come toppling down. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m6h6nc/haha/ * I hope they ate some limited edition Dubai matcha chocolate moonbeam ice cream 24 karat gold Labubu cookies too https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m6fndc/this_situation_is_hilarious/ * Anyone who says "mediums" isn't worth your consideration. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m2lcsg/what_the_hell_is_the_issue_with_neoliberal/n3q2si4/ * I posted a while ago that i wasnt an incel anymore because i went on a few dates and one guy let me suck his you know hwat. We went on a few more romantic liaisons after that encounter, trouble is i cant view myself as a sexual person so being a frigid weirdo probably put him off and he tapped and gapped, without the tapping part if u catch my drift? Anyway, ive always thought my experience as a gay incel is that of a rare creature, in the storied tradition of a morrissey or an old-timey repressed cigarette emoji like the guy from Downton Abbey, very far from the reaches of gay mythology perpetuated in the lamestream media, replete with sexual excess and flamboyant individuals. idk where i am going with this except to say my wokest opinion is that there should be more gay incel representation in media (and reddit posts), not because i want to, as an increasingly marginalised group, feel "seen" but because i just want to imitate it. Life imitates art as it were. anyway i hit the wall already while waiting for my life to start and now got me thinking at least there's representation of old f-slurs, see Death in Venice lmao https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m2m6hf/anyone_else_a_gay_incel/ /u/Any-Abies-538 * ribald / effete - Drawing a picture of a nude woman when you love nude women and you are an effete New Yorker communicating with your other friend who loves nude women and bawdy blue art isn’t that crazy. The description doesn’t sound like fine art, just a silly sketch and birthday message. Not saying its definitive truth or whatever but acting like Trump was incapable of illustration seems silly. // The part about him turning his signature into a bush seems way too ribald and way too creative for trump https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m2mgjp/wsj_released_some_of_trumps_personal_letters_to/ * Zoomers can't astral project without African dream root submitted 7 minutes ago by Lord--Kinbote [+2]mental midget Last night I was astral projecting and during a soul flight through the astral plane I ran into an entity I had assumed was some sort of demon due to the dead, vapid look in its eyes. It turned out to be a white 20-year-old kid from Buffalo who was trying to find Allah. I asked him how familiar he was with astral projection and he just kept yelling "show me your true form!" at me. I told him this is my true form but he wouldn't stop, it went on for like five minutes. Finally he accepted that I wasn't a demon and said he had been dabbling in astral projection for about a month. Like most of you here I've been astral projecting for years and I love chatting with fellow APers I meet during my travels. I asked the zoomer about his meditation technique and he looked a little confused and said "vyvanse, prozac, and fin/min." I clarified that I had said MEDITATION and it just confused him even more. Lmaoo it turns out he's not meditating at all. He's using African dream root to astral project. I was like... dude... are you serious?? He said he can't meditate because it's impossible to clear his mind and focus for more than a couple seconds. I told him he doesn't necessarily have to clear his mind completely, he can just have a mantra and he got offended and told me he isn't gay and then went back to yelling at me to show him my true form. Eventually I just left. If the rest of Gen Z is like this then I honestly weep for the future. If you seriously need African dream root to astral project then I'm sorry but you're not gonna make it https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1m2erhc/zoomers_cant_astral_project_without_african_dream/ * I had to laugh a little at the "Once broken in they are directed to start B2B SaaS companies". Not exactly showbiz, is it. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lunkzy/seems_bad/ * This is their self interest though. American society over the last quarter century has been defined by a series of both economic and superstructural crises that have accelerated proletarianization of the erstwhile homeowning working class, and in the absence of any sort of class consciousness in a social environment defined completely by individual consumers of mediated spectacle, all they can do is direct their immiseration at whichever boogeyman the ruling class decides on scapegoating because seeing other out-groups suffering more than you individually is the only way to feel any sort of catharsis in the death spiral of capitalism we currently live in. When you have no more control over your economic destiny, all you got left is owning the people the screen tells you to hate. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1lr7rch/gouging_my_eyes_out_to_own_the_libs/ * The lovecraftian vagina vs the beksinski penis https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lqyoc9/the_lovecraftian_vagina_vs_the_beksinski_penis/ * The [Trumpian] asthetics are such an eyesore. Its church/adult video store rural billboard core https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1lpd31u/a_lot_of_people_are_saying_mamdina_is_her/ * Yes this is the wildest part of the clip. Just causally housing an entire bowl of marshmallows is psychotic behavior https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l5vj9z/rs_childrens_show/ * if someone posts a banned books topic in one of the major reddit book subs (happens every single day) it will get a thousand upvotes, and in the comments, it's just people yelling at windmills, and they will never actually read the article- which is always from a news source with an obvious agenda, and most of the time the details are like, "the archdiocese of boston refused to stock any copies of a werewolf yeeted his wolfpart into my pcos fronthole in their seminary library, despite the book being authored by a member of the local community. we reached out to the author, who will be staging a protest this sunday and is seeking mutual aid for refreshments and proper masking for all attendees..." https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1lbo8bk/banned_books_is_purely_a_marketing_gimmick_most/mxu775t/?context=3 * The sub is back. All we need is Jollywumper to recount another one of his Odysseys in South America https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1la2ssh/it_happened_missiles_will_now_fly_into_israel_en/ Anthony is the Mahdi (NOT Abdullah Hashem). We need him now to descend his martian throne and take the reigns at the head of humanity. Thank you humble servant for spreading the good news! https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1la2w3r/it_happened_missiles_will_now_fly_into_israel_en/ * Find that in certain LatAm countries (Argentina, Colombia, Brazil, Chile coming to mind) the spread of Libertarianism (and with it more niche ideological variants like Anarchocapitalism) parallels the spread of Evangelical Christianity. An Americanized Christianity that promises American middle class prosperity (or the possibility of migrating to the United States). This is contrasted with the Catholic, with the Corporatist, and the Social Democratic. Evangelical Christianity for the aspiring middle class and for the average worker or peasant. Libertarianism for the frustrated University-educated professionals. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l9m412/feel_like_we_never_hear_about_aleppo_anymore/mxg14g1/?context=3 * LA Mexicans are rioting because Texan Mexicans are deporting Guatamelans - Like another recent post here pointed out, it’s ethnic Auxiliaries fighting Barbarians analogous to Roman Times. Don’t worry though the Trumpers will turn on the Auxiliaries like the murder of the Gothic Foederati families ordered by Honorius after the killing of Stilicho, half Vandal btw Then they’ll join the Barbarians to burn down the capital like in days gone by https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l9e7ni/this_is_actually_a_profound_statement_about_the/ * I thought I hated boomers as a teenager but the older I get (in my 30s, successful, married, etc.) the more I realized how heinous they actually are. It’s not enough to pull the ladder up after them but they have the balls to try and give you unsolicited advice that is 40 years out of date and look down upon you if you don’t follow it https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l9e3gb/once_in_a_while_boomers_just_hit_you_with_this/ * polychronic vs monochronic time and LatinX (satire?) https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l42uvk/_/ Whoever made this is almost certainly the non-binary daughter of a castizo South American who has participated in 3 CIA/IMF backed coups minimum * that makes sense given the posters there are largely your fellow psychological warriors for the eternal reich in plebface acting as insufferable as possible to degrade the self-esteem of their below-the-veil rivals, so that they never figure out their failures are down to a vast and ancient conspiracy to systematically dispossess them and their families that's encoded in the subtext of the bible. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1kw9oct/i_truly_think_people_on_rgifted_are_regarded/ * Nice, I like Merzbow, Boredoms, Gerogerigegege, Coil, Throbbing Gristle, Whitehouse, Nurse with Wound, Einstürzende Neubauten, Brainbombs, Egor Letov, Death in June, Current 93, La Monte Young, Moondog, Lou Harrison, Henry Cowell, Luigi Russolo, Popol Vuh, Fishmans, Jean Jacques Perrey, Les Rallizes Dénudés, Rainbow Caroliner, Taj Mahal Travellers, Fushitsusha, Peter Brötzmann, John Cage, Scott Walker, Unwound, Dead, Frank Zappa, Morton Feldman, Captain Beefheart, Pharoah Sanders, Albert Ayler, Ornette Coleman, Alice Coltrane, Arnold Schoenberg, Pierre Boulez, György Ligeti, Karlheinz Stockhausen, Nang Nang, Thinking Fellers Union Local 282, Nara Leão, Basic Channel, Raymond Scott, Delia Derbyshire, Daphne Oram, Noah Howard, Terry Riley, Peter Sotos, Lula Côrtes e Zé Ramalho, Boyd Rice, Mahmoud Ahmed, Henry Flynt, Kazumoto Endo, David Tudor, Aporea, Half Japanese, Mega Banton, Secret Chiefs 3, Keiji Haino, Ramleh, Otomo Yoshihide, John Zorn, Joe Meek, Robbie Basho, Phil Spector, Faxed Head, Harry Partch, Wesley Willis, Fred Frith, The Residents, Sun Ra, Sun City Girls, Hans Krüsi, Royal Trux, Jandek, Yat-Kha, Loren Mazzacane Connors, Pärson Sound, The Dead C, Comus, Cromagnon, Eliane Radigue, Arthur Doyle, Shizuka, The Red Krayola, Henry Cow, Magma, Opus Avantra, Pan.Thy.Monium., Murmuüre, Ksiezyc, Gong, Cukor Bila Smert', cLOUDDEAD, Muslimgauze and Kaoru Abe https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ks43n6/why_does_the_i_listen_to_everything_crowd_always/ * Same thing with him honestly. He does good performances here and there like 50/50 but his aura is very bland first term Obama fleet foxes soft boy with main character syndrome vibe that people got tired of. But I think the nostalgia factor might prop him for a comeback at some point. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1kg73ve/cant_believe_theyre_both_irrelevant_now/ * Oooh my tight little welfare system can fit SO many unemployed men in it, I want it bad daddy https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jo1j4r/marine_le_pen_is_sentenced_to_four_years_in_jail/mko9bpm/?context=3 * The type of nonchalant men that women want. While you’re grossed out at the thought of a little gas station grime on your buns like a gay, he’s eating her poop stained asshole with happy regard https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jz37mu/whatever_who_gives_a_shit/ * I (M21) was in a lecture hall and this random guy sits next to me during class. He takes off his sweatshirt and this sweaty musky smell hits my nose. It smelled like he just worked out and came to the lecture without showering. Now it’s definitely not a fetish thing (I did not find the scent or him attractive at all). And I’m a super clean freak who’s really sensitive to bad smells, but for some reason his body odor was just extremely addicting and satisfying to smell. It wasn’t sour or gamey like other people’s BO. His scent had this heavy molecular musk which carried into this lighter ozonic morning dew-on-stone type smell, both blending so harmiously (even describing it makes me jittery). It was extremely strange. I wasn’t sniffing like a lunatic but I also wasn’t trying to hold my breath is all I’ll say. Has anyone had a similar experience? It’s been many hours and I’m still thinking about it. I just rly need someone to validate my experience lol. I don’t even know how I’d ask my friends without coming off like a serial killer. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jy26cu/was_absolutely_entranced_by_this_mans_body_odor/mmvsbpv/?context=3 * Who was it who said “sufficiently advanced racism is indistinguishable from anthropology” https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jmplik/lol/mkehf4s/?context=3 Not even really that advanced when there are like 9 different ethnicities in Eritrea Actual advanced racism would be if you could differentiate between an Igbo and Yoruba or the 55 Chinese ethnicities permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply [–]chesnutstacy808 17 points 6 days ago All but three of the 55 ethnicities are han larpers, they're all super sinicized you could never tell the difference. permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply [–]Itchy-Sea9491 2 points 2 days ago What are the three. I’m intrigued permalinkembedsaveparentreportreply [–]chesnutstacy808 2 points 1 day ago Mongolian, Tibetan and uyghur. * Norm MacDonald v NGT Neil Degrasse Tyson STEMcel meets Spinoza-understander / Norm was Wang Yangming-pilled. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jl3p07/the_most_optimistic_twitter_post_ever_made/ * * There's a weird overlap between Japanese and Turkish nationalists. I think it's due to the Altaic language theory or something but you see some interaction between Turkish and Japanese people online that could cause a hatred of Kurds. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ionyb4/are_there_more_than_like_100_kurds_in_japan_for/ * Nordic ice-ape, malnourished as potatoes outwit him by hiding underground awaits August's surströmming sale, vents frustration against food flavored with herbs and spices rather than a 6 month soak in brine until it achieves the scent of the fromagerie under his uncle's foreskin. https://x.com/uncle_authority/status/1769559319761007085 https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ionscn/_/ * LOL you Luigi super fans are so delusional. Making him sound like an avatar of Vishnu sent to end the Kali Yuga of the American healthcare system. Is this esoteric Luigism? https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1io7zmj/view_luigi_hope_has_spiraled_into_delusion/ * They have an innate zest and love for life and see children as ultimately an inherently good thing. Cold-blooded ass wasps and nordics could use a bit more of that tbh https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ia7zta/its_crazy_how_casual_some_cultures_are_about/ * When you’re hot being socially stunted is called being mysterious https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ia5o0k/look_how_they_massacred_my_boy/ * The Simpsons is for aging millennials what emblem books were for baroque princes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emblem_book https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1iakaaa/why_do_people_watch_dont_look_up_when_they_could/ * "bottom quintile" !! https://x.com/SohrabAhmari/status/1882172965539942528 * "upper quartile impulsives" - owning people you don't like politically is rarely a stable foundation and prolific posters probably are upper quartile impulsives https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1guimoc/when_shes_right_shes_right/ * I am 5’3’’ sissy pale twink bookworm guy…but I LOVE rotgut and contrast showers! https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ic811f/im_a_65_bearded_tattooed_muscular_motorcycle/ * "The whole dem attack angle was based around Trump being another Mussolini/Hitler/Franco and not an American Berlusconi/Orban/Yeltsin." https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1ic8ato/trump_freezing_federal_aid/ Now you have him doing pump and dump crypto scams and basically doing a Yeltsin style auction of government departments and openly colluding with the richest men in the world and all anybody can do is shrug. * Piero della Francesca Anna: “I mean, he’s ancient, barely sentient, but there’s something poetic about that. Like, he was basically a Byzantine relic ruling over a dying empire. It’s very Piero della Francesca.” Dasha: “Exactly. Like, the country’s falling apart, but Joe’s just shambling along, eating his ice cream, whispering into the mic like a confused pope. It’s sort of… chic?” https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1icexho/new_contrarian_move_become_biden_supporters_in/ * Dorothy Hunt was taken out and we all know it. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1idcfg9/military_chopper_hit_a_commercial_airline_60_dead/ * All those high profile close calls at DCA over the last year, and the holes in the swiss cheese finally lined up. It finally happened. https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1idc0hw/psa_airlines_5342_a_crj_700_collided_with_pat25/?share_id=7LCWzNyl6oQSoK2T9chRw * "We should have an answer for you by the end of next week!" https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1idtu28/_/ * God it pisses me off how politics is solely oriented around snappy, brainless, thought-terminating quips and floating signifiers. Like ok the WOKE MOB are DEI-ing our JUDEO-CHRISTIAN CULTURE just speak normal. I get this isn’t a new thing but I’m tired of people speaking but not saying anything https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jadu6v/seems_bad_that_this_is_where_were_at_now/ * guy gets an adderall script, can no longer completely repress latent homosexual thoughts, loses his mind. tale as old as time. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jcuhnu/the_care_and_keeping_of_men_on_adderall/ * It's so fucked how you only get one chance in the spirit realm to pick the right parents or you're doomed to a life of poverty. Sure, jeff bezos incorporeal form is that of a ravenous swirling miasma, but at least I wouldn't have student loans. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1jjlut0/its_so_fucked_how_you_only_get_one_chance_in_your/ * * *	annaisms / annakwisms / tenshi_anna-isms hegelian_egirl_isms - reddit twitter * #cringetension - Katherine Dee is jelly : does any journalist want to pick up the story of the psychoanalysis death cult egirl twitter crashout season two? ;;; It's not newsworthy. Everyone involved needs to stop trying to strong arm their way into becoming a lolcow. You don't want that life. https://x.com/default_friend/status/1904928653814735305 * swarthy dusky As a PoC (person of carbonara) myself, let me tell you I've been called Greek, Arab, Spanish, Jewish, Armenian, Persian and Turkish. It's the pick-your-own adventure of ethnicities. https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1m96zdt/this_just_keeps_getting_funnier/ * That mf has the disgusting look of some kind of cave mammal that never sees sunlight and excretes a bitter phlegmy gum over it's skin to deter predation. Horrid https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1ned8j6/fbi_manhunt_have_you_seen_this_man/ * * * * * * * * * Rorschach tests always look identical to me, and yes, they ALL look like pelvises https://x.com/boreddeleuzian/status/1958870648224109030 * A few miscellaneous Arrus reading recommendations: Pope Benedict XVI - The Theology of History in St. Bonaventure Algis Uždavinys - Orpheus and the Roots of Platonism Jan Aertsen - Nature and Creature, Thomas Aquinas's Way of Thought Frances A. Yates - Astraea https://x.com/_bonaventurian/status/1960326221167997244 * Badiou says multiplicity is the only thing we perceive, but he sees in darkness-light shines on the multiple, and that light is grace. when you remember your dreams, a light has shone through the darkness, this is memoria. memoria properly conceived is not different from curiositas, the boundless Sophianic desire, because as Freud taught us, dreams express the fulfillment of this process. Christ is a real dream, like how Laruelle calls the Khôra a real hallucination; Valentinus got things wrong by mixing up Christ and Khôra. John was right that Christ is Logos. the Logos is the reality of the dream. that is why language is the medium of magic. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1901443367856116138 * but yes Gillian Rose did it first. the ACP is in many senses crypto-Roseist. I like to joke that Gillian Rose was the first Hegelian Egirl. I discussed her in quite a bit of depth with Cyril O'Regan and Agata Bielik-Robson at a theology conference in Maynooth last night, both of them are also big fans of Rose, as I know @johnmilbank3 is too. there is certainly an underground convergence of sorts around her ideas, both conscious and unconscious, that I am trying to activate https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1918985880758296990 * #VocalicTriangle - One of the biggest failures of modern linguistics is its resistance to treating language geometrically. The popular Chomskyan methodology of contemporary formal linguistics is based on a highly abstract (in the Hegelian sense) algebraic approach developed by Marcel-Paul Schützenberger in his “Algebraic Theory of Context Free Languages.” But if we take seriously a geometry of language, everything changes—suddenly, Kristeva’s opposition between semiotic and symbolic orders (with the semiotic order treated by psychoanalysis and the symbolic order treated by formal language theory) breaks down, because the two can be shown to be geometrically mediated. This geometric mediation of language is precisely what Leonora Leet demonstrates in “The Secret Doctrine of Kabbalah,” engaging with and building on not just the Kabbalistic corpus but also the work of Saussure, Freud and Husserl (just like Kristeva)—as well as a noted scholar of the Hebrew language named William Chomsky, who happens to be Noam Chomsky’s father. And it’s no accident that, as Arielle Saiber demonstrates, Giordano Bruno’s approach to Magic was entirely founded on a geometric conception of language. For Leonora Leet—and, by the way, the quotation reproduced in the first image here is from William Chomsky—the Vocalic Triangle is the key to building a scientific system of correspondences between vowels, harmonics, and a sacred practice of geometric hexagram expansions from which the famous Tree of Life diagram (itself embedding correspondences with the 22 Hebrew letters within it) can be derived and demonstrated to possess various interesting geometric properties. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1916196952024256558 * Lacan is certainly against BIOPOLITICAL PSYCHIATRY. there are severe social and cultural battle lines that separate psychoanalysis—an Art of the Word—and the type of psychiatry that relies on reflexively repressing unconscious truth for the sake of strengthening the ego, which is everything Lacan was against. for the issue of the treatment of psychosis, I recommend looking into Françoise Davoine’s school in France as well as the Italian psychoanalysts who influenced her. they are also some of the most consistently and radically anti-psychiatry post-Lacanians, precisely BECAUSE of the problems posed by psychosis. and you know, as Colette Soler clarifies expertly in her companion to Seminar XXIII, Lacan NEVER said Joyce was psychotic. Joyce’s situation was an entirely different beast, well beyond the classical paradigm of diagnosing the fundamental fantasy (as Geneviève Morel). I recommend catching up on what’s actually going on in French psychoanalysis in recent decades, they are far ahead of your Anglo-biased Lacanian Marxism. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903832116573487330 * Gershom Scholem, Agata Bielik-Robson, and Leonora Leet have all argued that Kabbalah is extremely different from Neoplatonism, particularly in its focus on and conception of language, and that it only borrowed some elements of its cosmology from Neoplatonism while remaining in its essence an entirely different body of knowledge. My personal view is that Kabbalah, Hermeticism, Pythagoreanism and Neoplatonism all descend from the same ancient Egyptian source and just emphasize different aspects of the teachings they have preserved. I consider Neoplatonism to be by far the most vulgar of the four, with the other three being much more sophisticated, the best Neoplatonists like Iamblichus and Proclus being essentially Hermeticists who also did some metaphysics. The first document of Kabbalah, the Sefer Yetzirah, is described by Scholem and Leet as a basically Pythagorean text—the link between Kabbalah and Pythagoreanism is much deeper and more ancient than that between Kabbalah and Neoplatonism, with most of the Neoplatonic borrowings only appearing hundreds of years after the Sefer Yetzirah. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1916199021091135763 * Cohl Furey v Leonora Leet - Pyramids represent the Octahedron = Air, the Octonionic Limit of Physical Incarnation, as Cohl Furey understands. as Leonora Leet also says in The Secret Doctrine of Kabbalah, expounding on the gnosis of the Sefer Yetzirah: "If the hexagram and its enclosing hexagon are considered separately, however, they can be taken to represent an entirely different solid, that of the octahedron, shown in figure 7.4A. For our present purposes, however, it is important to view the octahedron also in its on- point or dual pyramid position, as shown in figure 7.4B. As can be seen in figure 7.4B, the octahedron has an upper point, a lower point, and four additional points at the four corners of an intermediate square that can be identified with the four compass points of north, east, south, and west. The six vertices of the octahedron correspond to the six sides of the cube, just as the eight vertices of the cube correspond to the eight triangular sides of the octahedron. The two solids can thus dual each other in the sense that each can exactly contain the other: when the octahedron is within the cube its vertices touch the center of the cube’s sides, and when the cube is within the octahedron its vertices touch the center of the octahedron’s sides. Both solids, however, have twelve edges that can be defined by the same twelve letter names given for the twelve diagonals in the Sefer Yetzirah. If these be rearranged to correspond to the illustration of the on-point octahedron, we can then identify the four edges going from the upper point to the intermediate square as UE, US, UW, and UN, the four edges going from the lower point to the intermediate square as LE, LS, LW, and LN, and the four edges of the square as NE, SE, SW, and NW. What is most significant, however, is that, unlike the right-angled edges of the cube, the edges of the octahedron are all diagonals. They are all also the sides of equilateral triangles, the other sides of which they meet individually at oblique or diagonal angles of 60°. Thus even the edges of the intermediate square, which divides the octahedron into two facing pyramids, are also diagonal sides of triangles and reveal their diagonal nature as soon as the octahedron is turned on another of its points. With this in mind, we should now return to the phrasing of the Sefer Yetzirah regarding the twelve single letters: “Their measure is the twelve diagonal boundaries: the northeast boundary, the southeast boundary,” and so on. The reference here seems clearly to point to the diagonal edges or boundaries of the octahedron. And it suggests that its author was well aware of an octahedron method of enlarging the cube." https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1902731701966553245 * As Leonora Leet says: Sacred Harmonics:Sacred Geometry::Infinite Extension:Finite Localization https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910181992701780452 I’m not going to be able to complete my “challenge” by the end of the night, because as I confront the process of linking my Hermetic Steinian reading of the ideas of Weil and Hegel to Leonora Leet’s “Secret Doctrine of the Kabbalah,” I realize that the required ambition and intricacy will demand at least several days to percolate and form into something sufficiently powerful and true. I will spend the next few days workshopping a post on the connection between a Hermetic Christianity founded on the ideas of Hegel, Weil and Stein, and a Kabbalistic Sacred Harmonics based on the Vocalic Triangle—as Leet says, Sacred Harmonics is to Sacred Geometry what Infinite Extension is to Finite Localization. While Leet affirms that these polarities are numerically mediated, I believe we must alchemize this cosmic numerology towards a fully theological account of Incarnational mediation in Christ, radically undoing any discarnating account of the nature of number. thus, the Vocalic Geometry finitely localizing the infinite extension of Sound is mediated by the embedded, Incarnational enfolding of these sacred structures of God’s Creation in the act of Musical Worship. As Leonora Leet says: Sacred Harmonics:Sacred Geometry::Infinite Extension:Finite Localization https://old.reddit.com/r/AnnaKWinters/comments/1m8ys0o/as_leonora_leet_says_sacred_harmonicssacred/ * I'm gonna be real I am tired of the Girardian perseveration on the ideal of non-violence... I think it disavows the real violence still irreducibly constitutive of the secular state and its facilitation of economically exploitative structures... the case of Peter Thiel does show how easily this Girardian non-violence fetish can be used to serve bourgeois hegemony. I think it's time for a Christian theopolitics to return to a recognition of the value of just war, righteous rebellion and a distinction between divine and mythic violence other than the purely kenomatic account given by Walter Benjamin (in Cyril O'Regan's terms). I do think that @johnmilbank3 is correct that "peace" must be the final message of any Christian social teaching, but the embedding of Christianity in an ineluctably secular world conditioned by Balthasar's apocalyptic laws of polarization and intensification seems to complicate this narrative to me...https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1918256654900183353?t=co0Aiwq6qezx5Ie4sE3eUQ&s=03 * To my critics calling me incomprehensible: all this does is demonstrate your narrow-mindedness. My entire agenda is to demonstrate that secular humanists are caught within a series of ineluctable “epistemological obstacles” (Bachelard, Althusser). It’s not that what you think is incomprehensible lacks sense, it’s that your own unconscious denegation has literally retarded your own sense-making capacities. My consistent aim and commitment is to demonstrate practically that the supposedly “incomprehensible” realities described by Lacanian psychoanalysis, the Catholic Doctors of the Church, etc. are REAL in the fullest sense, and function as genuine laws of our immanent reality as well. This is not “psychosis.” The unbelievers have simply deluded themselves through biopolitical repression of the Truth. But the liberal fence will be torn down, and the spirits will return. Walpurgisnacht is coming, and the only salvation—even for the immanent regulation of sociality—is fear of the judgment of Christ. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1920925151597605286 * A lot of Christians really underestimate how open (what's left of) the libertarian Right is to theopolitical critiques of the limits of secular liberalism, at least when it comes to its intellectually sensitive wing. I think a lot of people are wasting their efforts on outreach to a secular Left that is much more horrified by the specter of the theological, treating it as a rival to its own humanistic or post-humanistic rebellion against all filtering of the divine into the world, or plugging into a conservative common sense with a systematic bias towards liberal business as usual. There's a post-libertarian futurist avant-garde out there that's exhausted with both its own historical political coordinates and the existing frame of reference for genuinely sanctifying intervention; we'll see if my claims here end up being self-defeatingly Faustian or not, but I'm optimistic that a sanctifying apocalyptic theology has more to gain from working with people like @AltCulture and @SamoBurja , and outlets like @palladiummag , than the sort of secular venues that have been more standard fare for theological outreach over the past few decades, whether they skew towards the radical left or towards liberal conservatism https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1925259031284703374 * “There is no political except in language: but this language lacks all rational legitimacy. It is filled with a void that is capable of contaminating and thus annulling everything around it, including the space in which it is exercised: “The struggle between the opponents and the defenders of capitalism is a struggle between innovators who do not know what to make and conservatives who do not know what to conserve; it is a battle of blind men struggling in a void, and for that very reason it is liable to become a war of extermination.” It is this situation that will generate an impasse in Weil's work, and soon enough also in her life: the inhospitable "quinquennial of death" that she would inhabit between 1938 and 1943. Her disjuncture from the political comes with and from this impasse, and although it remained squarely in view, at the center of her thought, she was by now at the political's outer margins. What is at stake for Weil is neither participation in the political nor indifference to it, as the closing of the "Meditation" suggests: “Such a state of things results in profound and irremediable spiritual torture for every man with the public welfare at heart. Participation, even from a distance, in the play of forces which control the movement of history is not possible without contaminating oneself or incurring certain defeat. Nor is it possible, without great lack of conscientiousness, to take refuge in indifference or in an ivory tower.” Here we are at the confine that separates the political from its own unrepresentable foundation: the threshold "bordering" (côtoyer) the political, to use Weil's 1942 term for her own past activities. It is this threshold that will allow the unrepresentable foundation to cast new light onto that which simply exists. Undoubtedly, it is the unrepresentable nature of this last element that foregrounds the aspect of Weil's thought that is most able to reveal the paradigm and meaning of her discourse as a whole. In the theme of anti-idolatry, the whole of Weil's conception of history and the political comes together into a single impolitical gesture—so much so that one could even say that the (impolitical) critique of the political coincides, in Weil, with a critique of idolatry. This critique, as we have said, pervades the entire spectrum of (often obstinately one-sided) positions that Weil took on the grand themes of history and ancient and modern philosophy, especially the continual debate with Marx that is the implicit (but often also explicit) backdrop to most of her writing.” — Roberto Esposito, “Categories of the Impolitical” https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1923795768835473912 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Esposito * Reza is straight up an analytic philosopher. There’s hardly any “continental” in him really (he likes Husserl, that’s it—I wrote a polemic about this with @pachabelcanon published in Seven Story Hotel by @subtlebodypress , critiquing his rejection of psychoanalysis and insisting that he doesn’t really understand Hegel). “Intelligence and Spirit” is an essentially analytic Neo-Sellarsian work more than anything else. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911449944755491003 * I only hang out with fascists because they are even more sinful than the queers, and I go down to the sinners to preach the Gospel. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1920498055373033722 * I’m going Frieren Mode on all the Racialists. Western success is because Europe is the new Egypt and nothing more, thank Hermes Trismegistus you demonic plebs Conservative Anti-Fascism will win, because Christ is on our side ✝️❤️‍🔥 get out my way ethnonarcissist homosexuals, I won’t show mercy to your kind https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1913670538116948054 * Hegel’s statement that “God is God only so far as He knows Himself” is the elementary algebra of Luciferian sorcery. It functions to set a Condition on what should be Unconditional, that Condition being Knowledge. This is how both the Gnostic and the Lutheran trap themselves eternally in the Matrix of Original Sin, because they worship the Serpentine Endowment of Knowledge over and above the Faith in the Lord that it pridefully displaced—Luther puts such hyperbolically repressive emphasis on Faith because, in the real of his Unconscious Eros, the only relation to Gnosis he can imagine is one of Luciferian Pride, as indeed comes to pass in the Lutheran Gnosticism of the Rosicrucians, but most brilliantly in Jakob Böhme and G. W. F. Hegel. As a Phenomenology of Heavenbanned Hysteria, Böhme and Hegel are Sublime Perfection. But there was a reason Hegel rejected Personal Immortality—he let himself Fall completely and reserved immortality only for the Absolute that Knew itself in him. In this way, Hegel’s radicalization of Rosicrucianism seems to me like the only honest Lutheranism, knowing just enough to know that it has damned itself. Marx and Nietzsche, too, are downstream from this gesture; Philosophy for Hellhounds. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1913404231413043355 * Madonna has gnosis btw. She’s evil but she has gnosis. Really she should be called Anti-Madonna. She’s the Blavatsky of pop music https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911522027741356363 * DSA libs like you @Zolo1917 are going DOWN. @kkolozova may be a Laruellian Gnostic, but she has the Vision—we need a clean break from Liberalism, to tear down the bourgeois Veil of Isis and set loose the spirits of a new Illiberal Epoch. I may be more of a Daria Dugina girl, but Katerina is really spitting sometimes… we both heretics as far as lib postmodern academia is concerned, using the ideas we learned from them against them. Katerina makes me proud of what my Balkan sisters are accomplishing 🇲🇰 and you know, a lot of the best contemporary philosophy is coming from Balkan women. Alenka Zupančič 🇸🇮, Kiarina Kordela 🇬🇷, Julia Kristeva 🇧🇬… https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910424497850814878 * Hegel was right to be more liberal than Fichte. within German Lutheran philosophy of the 19th century, illiberalism meant genuine perpetual nationalistic state totalitarian terror—proto-fascism. Fichte was the #1 theorist of this sort of proto-fascist political philosophy, as modern fascists like @ZoranZoltanous recognize. where I disagree with Zoran is in what I see as his dishonest appropriation of Hegel for the fascist movement, on the model of Giovanni Gentile’s “actual idealism”—I don’t think Gentile understood Hegel’s Hermeticism at all, as I mentioned in one of yesterday’s posts, and I don’t think Zoran pays sufficient heed to Hegel’s ruthless critiques of Fichte. the fact is, a kind of “Mystical-Political” (as David Tracy calls Simone Weil’s thought) post-Hegelian and post-Duginist Christian Hermeticism is the premise of my own Fifth Position views (Manifesto coming soon). I seek to traverse fascism—with a full understanding of its rich philosophical tradition—without capitulating to it. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910394679083810825 * I’m actually very sympathetic to the “Semi-Pelagian” point of view of @UntoldFortune here, rooted in the thought of St. John Cassian, for the same reasons that I (like Catholic orthodoxy itself) defend Jesuit Molinism against its Hyper-Augustinian Jansenist critics. the real problem with these theological debates on grace, however, is in my view the failure of Christians to fully incorporate Hermetic insights into the mainstream of its tradition. a Hermetic understanding of conceptual mediation through sacred geometry mitigates the excesses of “free” human self-assertion (as St. Augustine wanted) and affirms a fully rationally accessible order of cosmic mediation with God, picked up in the Renaissance by Catholic thinkers like Marsilio Ficino and Nicholas of Cusa, and functionally reinvented in the Enlightenment Catholicism of Descartes, which was carried forward in the post-existentialist phenomenology of Christian thinkers like Simone Weil and Edith Stein. it is really the Kabbalistic tradition of sacred geometry that has formulated most systematically the conceptual order of cosmothelogical mediation that I speak of here, in particular the work of Leonora Leet. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1910056734410047732 * "Postmodernism" doesn't exist (at least in anything like the sense that people think that it does). it never existed. it's a horrible misunderstanding from top to bottom, and almost every time people use the term, they have no idea what they are talking about. a man named Lyotard, who was a Humean neo-empiricist Anglophile heretic ex-Trotskyite within the French philosophical establishment, wrote a book called "The Postmodern Condition" and all of a sudden all of the libs in Anglophone academia started soying out over another excuse to defend an alleged "anti-metanarrative" position that was really always about crypto-metanarrative the demise of the threat posed by the genuine illiberalism of the communist movement (remove similar to Fukuyama's later "end of history" metanarrative). but other French thinkers associated with this alleged "postmodernism," such as Lacan and Derrida, were entirely opposed to this absurd liberal claptrap. both Lacan and Derrida in different ways defended the legacy of Marxian illiberalism, as should be obvious to anyone who has actually read "The Other Side of Psychoanalysis" or "Specters of Marx" (the same goes for Irigaray's reading of Marx in "Speculum of the Other Woman," or Kristeva's reading of Marx and even Mao in "Revolution in Poetic Language"). Deleuze and Foucault, perhaps, are more liberal, as Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak pointed out in "Can the Subaltern Speak?". but what people don't understand, because of the reflexive anti-communism of Westoid conservatives, is that in the real battle lines of liberalism and illiberalism, the Marxists are on the side of illiberalism, anti-globalism, anti-institutional populism, and multipolarity. the fear of multipolar struggle in the Marxist tradition on the part of Westoid conservatives, and the fear of engaging with thinkers like Lacan, Derrida, Irigaray, and Kristeva, is a completely empty impulse borne out of total ignorance of the current geopolitical stakes and the status of the French Gaullism that the conservative pro-Christian thinker Lacan stood behind, with figures like Derrida, Irigaray and Kristeva (as well as more expressly communist thinkers like Althusser and Badiou) experimenting with taking Lacan's esoteric conservative insights in more radical left-wing illiberal directions. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908211837025259925 * I found this book looking for resources on Chinese thought and Hermeticism. apparently Hermeticism is also discussed in it from a Lacanian perspective. this is exactly the kind of thing we need right now. almost all the other resources on similarities between Hermeticism and Chinese thought are manifestly Luciferian—from the heretical Gnostic alchemical links opened up by Carl Jung to the expressly Antichristic (see the appendix to Logic of Sense) views of Gilles Deleuze attempting to "reclaim" Hermeticism from the Christianity of Cusa and Leibniz for an expressly Daoic version of Luciferian Nietzscheanism (as discussed in What Is Philosophy?). in contrast to Jung and Deleuze, Lacan is a far more Christian thinker, averse to more libertarian Gnostic heresies and more conscious of the profound violence that they entail. Lacan's conservatism is far more authentic than that of Jung, and his avant-garde radicalism far more just than that of Deleuze. Tina Beattie is right: we need a Lacanian Christianity. and Lacan is beloved in the analysis of East Asian cultures too, from Guanjun Wu and Pang Laikwan in China to Tamaki Saito and Kojin Karatani in Japan. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1908197117857874370 * Essay in Cosmotechnics https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1907935560523780510 * Mao Zedong Thought is Subjective Spirit. Deng Xiaoping Thought is Objective Spirit. and since Deng, China has been slowly moving towards Absolute Spirit... we shall see what the future has in store. ✝️ https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1906039989130936477 * https://x.com/search?q=%22tpot%20killer%22&src=typed_query&f=live * Agambenification !! https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1882469418137207270 I’ll toss you guys a little no holds barred schizopost in the name of our new age of “free speech” (the “guerrilla scholarship” will still take some time yet) it is Pietro Verri of the Italian Enlightenment who explains in most exemplary form the bourgeois faith for which epistemontological (Kordela) sacrifice is commanded. the dialectic of subtraction of desire in the name of increase of power is what the bourgeois ideologue strenuously avoids. it is a manipulative promising of the world premised on taking it away—surplus labor sold back to laborers in the form of commodities. Marx was right about that much but in the end Marx too was a bourgeois ideologue, insofar as he over-promised to those he demanded sacrifice from. you must begin with the sacrifice. this is the starting point of true religion, i.e., that of the Catholic Church—I do think René Girard’s account of faith is correct, even if from a secular perspective he is a watered down Lacan. for all of its real insights, the Hegelian project failed simply because it prioritized an illusory “freedom” over the true starting point of sacrifice and obligation from which it derives, a deviation typical of the incoherent attempt to synthesize the medieval mentality of Protestantism, turned Gnostic in the Radical Reformation, with the Enlightenment (something that actually emerged out of the Counter-Reformation—Descartes’ real intellectual heritage is the Baroque Spanish Jesuits). Simone Weil also corrects this in her Need for Roots Marxism today has completely assimilated itself into an instrument of capital. Althusser was right that the late Marx falsified the early Marx, but he was wrong about how. the project of Bradley Bassler I think is solving this problem (specifically the text “Hegel’s Jena Moment”), by returning to the foundations of the theory of valuation in Hegel’s System of Sittlichkeit. capital as such is just transvaluation of the concept—which only fascist Romantics oppose in a direct rivalrous way this is why all Marxists today are Heideggerians. the point can’t be a supposed reoccupation of the site of the transvaluing concept with some kind of disclosure of a vitalistic Open (or rather, this is a form of fascist eschatology which finds its highest form in Dugin, who is quite explicitly supportive of Agamben’s views on this). Agamben is resolutely thinking this problem through to the end—his thought is really the terminal crisis of left-wing Romanticism. “old-fashioned” Marxists think they can put the brakes on the Agambenification of the left by paying a pittance to the concept, but this just leads to Deng Xiaoping Thought, i.e., we end up where we started except with added gnosis—a bourgeois government which knows Marx is right, at least “critical theory” today is being upstaged theoretically in every respect by a Catholic social eschatology which gathers up all of the dregs of its own reference points in the service of the true religion—see here in particular Cyril O’Regan’s “Theology and the Spaces of Apocalyptic” and Philip John Paul Gonzales’ “Reimagining the Analogia Entis,” as well as O’Regan’s essays on the eschatology of René Girard and its relation to Simone Weil’s thought. Peter Thiel’s engagement with Girard is only scratching the surface here. it makes no sense, ultimately, to deploy an anthropological Christianity in the service of a bourgeois political theology which is still Lockean in seeking an unprincipled religious peace—Gonzales, on the other hand, is correct that capitalism is an anti-Christian system. the City of God will ultimately triumph over all vanity—this is the inevitable telos of history, clearly understood by those who articulate in full complementarity their Christian gnosis and Christian pistis, as Hans Urs von Balthasar outlines in The Glory of Lord. his eschatological vision in Theo-Drama too remains unmatched. do not expect the Antichristic spirit of the Lie to abate—one must consolidate the faith in preparation Traducir post 11:44 a. m. · 23 ene. 2025 · 31,5 mil Visualizaciones Daniel_Quilp @Daniel_Quilp · 23 ene. I only caught about half of this, but I'm confident that it supports my belief that depression is the result of a breakdown in feedback, as opposed to absolute emiseration. The disease model seems loadbearing for what's left of liberalism. * YOU are the denialist. the material reality of psychic symptoms is undeniable—the question is just, WHAT IS THEIR EROTOLOGICAL ESSENCE? and THIS is what you deny, but I do not. yes, there is an erotological essence to all psychopathology. maybe you need to get started on the baby intro guides to Lacan first… I DO like that, you know me so well 💅 my main issues are with his mechanical sub-theological understanding of Lacan’s teachings, like Jacques-Alain Miller without the sinthome (Raul Moncayo has better sinthome gnosis). perverts and psychotics deserve all the hate though. Bielik-Robson is the basedest however because makes Lacan properly ~flamboyant~ (read: Kabbalistic) I was in one for many years. I ultimately stopped it unilaterally, after I started getting such intense mystical visions that it felt like I had passed too far beyond the veil of what secular psychoanalysis could handle. but for quite a while it was deeply helpful for me https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903536138406478265 * the concrete historical origin of leftism was the French Revolution, which was actually all about winning a violent showdown and making a country much stronger. if anything, it was the rightists at that time who cowered before the power of the left. the problem with the development of the French Revolutionary legacy is that the ideology of the left-wing revolutionaries was kind of incoherent and self-defeating, and ended up dovetailing towards exactly the same aristocratic decadence they were fighting against, just in an updated bourgeois form. Simone Weil has what is for me the greatest account of this in The Need for Roots—the real problem is the conceit of fighting principally for “rights,” when the actual issue with the decadent aristocracy that needed to be overthrown was a failure to recognize obligations. the goal of any genuine “leftism” for me should be to pivot back towards this Weilian emphasis on the failure of traditional hierarchies to meet the very fundamental obligations they typically demand hypocritically of others. it’s here where I am most fond of the Chinese tradition of statecraft and revolution—everything depends on the Mandate of Heaven. https://x.com/search?q="tenshi%20anna"&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * I'm being accused of fostering a “Red-Brown Alliance”… well yes, I've been perfectly open about this. I am Dividing and Conquering the Fascists. “Red-Brown Alliance” is the true name of Anti-Fascism today. keep your enemies close or perish. the stakes are too high to be a beautiful soul. everybody expects me to be a fascist but I’m more motivated by the struggle against the new Alt-Nazi Politicized Liberal Pseudoscientific Racialist Idolatry than anything else, and I’m happy to align with left-fascists like @ZoranZoltanous in my Machiavellian initiative to destroy racialist eugenics 🔥🖤✝️ https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1904574213861650533 * Allison Coudert LaRouche had gnosis! let the accusations come. I am a post-LaRouchite. LaRouche had all the typical Protestant issues—he claimed to be a Leibnizian, but he was totally slacking on carrying forward Leibniz’s project to heal the divide of the Reformation. meanwhile, I approach Leibnizian ideas from the side of a more resolute foundation in strictly Catholic theology—but just as Leibniz himself intuited, Kabbalah is the crucial mediating element. read Allison Coudert to understand. https://x.com/tenshi_anna * lot of y’all really aren’t used to treating everyday life like espionage and it shows. but that’s all politics really comes down to in the end—every geopolitical intervention nowadays means having to reckon with the machinations of various state intelligence agencies to push their country’s respective geopolitical interests, and to meet them tit for tat on the same terrain. this is the real struggle, the real noomakhia—the mind war is what is decisive for the mind. and you can work to reform the discipline of the body all you want, but the mind will never be freed from its subjection to the heretics running the show right now unless you take up arms in this noomakhia. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1904579094504742987 * there's no such thing as “nonsense.” absolutely anything can be made sense of, and absolutely everything should be made sense of. If you can't make sense of something, you're not trying hard enough, and are inhabiting only a tiny, narrow element of your full intellectual power. and the Lacanian “real” doesn't destroy sense completely, but rather it forces sense to perpetually externalize in a dialectic of recognizing the material facticity and mysterious sine qua non that all sense-making intellect treats as its object. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1904367100656804142 * I'm declaring total war on the “Lacanian” Male Chauvinists of Twitter. all of your posture as woke leftists but I know what you actually are. you can't handle a girl actually being genuine about pursuing psychoanalytic theory without cowering to your libfascist rules of safety bubble etiquette and bowing before panleftism and gender ideology. @pourfairelevide and @poeticdweller , you will soon be exposed for the total pseudos you really are. @PervertGuide , @Seraph_Notitia , @pachabelcanon , it's time to rally the REAL Lacanian troops. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903938025278541917 * girl PLEASE READ LACAN. for the love of God. none of these “mental illnesses” are real. it’s all just variations in the topological field of the erotological relation to language—psychiatry is a biopolitical scam designed to extract insurance money and market pharmaceuticals. it’s time for people to stop diagnosing and start sinthome-maxxing. you aren’t “mentally ill,” you’re James Joyce now, bitch. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903306820455677998 ;;; variations in the topological field of the erotological relationship to language https://x.com/arkadisch/status/1903935980278554725 * The Word Made Strange https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903877867722657907 kickin it in the Fashion District like #DesignerDemons https://youtu.be/X961ka0k1a0?si=CeCu4Ovcj2hP_f9H meanwhile talked to an old couple in Manhattan at an Episcopalian Church about @johnmilbank3 . they’d never heard of him before… I showed them “The Word Made Strange,” and they were like “wow! this looks cool! how do young people say “cool” now?” (I didn’t have the heart to teach them the word “based”). we had a nice conversation about Anglo-Catholicism and Roman Catholicism though 🫡 “well, I’m more sympathetic to Roman Catholicism” says the girl rocking black lipstick and gothed out eyeliner… * Blavatsky was recruited by the 'Ascended Masters' following her initiation into the Carbonari. Shortly after this initiation, she claimed to have been contacted by these supposed discarnate adepts. The Carbonari was the revolutionary arm of Freemasonry in the 19th century, actively involved in plots orchestrated by the 'Young Europe' movements, led by Mazzini, to dethrone European monarchies and dissolve empires. It also played a significant role in the American Civil War—George Nicholas Sanders, John Wilkes Booth's handler, was a member—and in the Young Turk movement in the Ottoman Empire. The Young Turk 'Committee of Union and Progress' emerged from Italian Freemasonic lodges, which were primarily composed of Sabbatean Dönmeh crypto-Jews operating clandestinely in the Ottoman Empire. It was within these lodges that Rudolf von Sebottendorf was initiated before later founding the Thule Society—the occult matrix of the NSDAP, itself influenced by the Theosophical Society. The Carbonari was a breeding ground for human experimentation, involving societal outcasts and employing methods such as drugs, hypnosis, trauma-based mind control, and other occult techniques in its initiation rituals. A key objective was the creation of mind-controlled assassins, individuals conditioned to be activated through a key word or phrase while in a post-hypnotic trance. Louis de Maistre, a pseudonymous French-Italian author, argues that Blavatsky underwent a similar initiation during her 'veiled years,' but for a different purpose. According to him, she was programmed to be activated at specific times and guided remotely by operatives who periodically visited her to reinforce her conditioning. Based on research by K. Paul Johnson and other authors, de Maistre concluded that Blavatsky’s 'Ascended Masters' were, in reality, Sabbatean agents who had recruited her through the Carbonari. Their goal was to use her to exert a significant spiritual influence on society by establishing the Theosophical Society. This was part of a broader strategy—detailed in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion—which had previously led to the creation of modern Freemasonry under the direction of the same 'Unknown Superiors.' The ultimate objective, as revealed by Moses Hess in Rome and Jerusalem, was the return of the Jews to the Promised Land, the hastening of the Messiah’s arrival, and the reconstruction of the Jerusalem Temple. Theosophy played a crucial role in this agenda by spreading a message of spiritual ecumenism, laying the groundwork for a unified world religion, and fostering the expectation of a coming 'World Teacher' who would ultimately lead humanity into the New Age. * yes I am Left-Wing Radical Orthodox Blavatsky and there's nothing you can do about it https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1903174668749574521 * I am trying to be the Counter-Blavatsky. I will not explain what this means. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1901203477402992791 * * * # critiques? #critiques * anna: “erm gnostic” (no i haven’t read anything published on gnosticism in the last 20 years! Why should I? Voegelin and Balthasar figured everything out! DeConick who? Litwa who?) https://x.com/LacanianC/status/1920266349147746478 * Hey, does anyone know of a reading group focused on ancient philosophy like Plato and Aristotle? There's someone in my DM's who was approached by the popular Theosophy cult that lures young people in by promising philosophical education. Do we have any alternatives to give them? As a Deleuzean-Lacanian you could just join that group, but introduce some Anthroposophical (Schelling, Steiner, Goethe) intensities into their Theosophical (Blavatsky I assume?) affects Lacanian 🍷 @boreddeleuzian · 1h They're not even sanctioned theosophists, they're a far-right offshoot, I hardly think I could convince them of anything. Though I have thought of infiltrating them in the past. If I ever get time and funding to do so, I still might. https://x.com/boreddeleuzian/status/1903877576965419477 * critiques of annakw - I'm not sure "long been dead and buried" is a valid argument, nor are your ad Homs concerning groyper body-counts and maturity very Christian. Your post is contradictory and you should refine it -- i.e. tell us why your "way" of radical distributism is different than integralism." - annakw quote: "and they’re right to condemn it. I’m not a communist. I’m a radical distributist who affirms that the Marxist account of class struggle is true social science, which is honestly pretty damn close to Pope Leo XII’s position in the “Rerum Novarum.” I don’t agree with Marx’s prescriptions about property and instead affirm Simone Weil’s conception of a balanced relation between personal and collective property as irreducible polarities within the complex of the needs of the human soul. // anna kw✨ @tenshi_anna · 28 ene. there are now some bad faith Logo Daedalus simps who are trying to compare me to Nick Fuentes. how ridiculous! Fuentes may in fact be the world’s worst Catholic. “integralism,” which Fuentes supports, is a bogus and outmoded reactionary doctrine which has already been crushed by the tides of history, and anyone clinging onto it now is a virgin chud who hates women and should just convert to Protestantism already. what do you think of the Church’s teachings on Mariology, Fuentes? what do you think of the Church’s teachings on the Old Testament and the fundamental continuity of Jewish and Christian religion? integralism has long been dead and buried, and groypers are a bunch of incel children throwing tantrums because women don’t like them (and women, in fact, don’t like them for excellent reasons). they should simply be disregarded. the only way forward is radical distributism, based on the teachings of Pope Leo XIII and Simone Weil, and engaged with the scientific insights into social spirit developed by Hegel and Marx. * * # moicomments * Françoise Davoine, Colette Soler, and Genviéve Morel are valuable sujet-supposé-savoirs to hystericize because they can equip Anglocels with the psyche toolkit to escape from phallogocentric phallacies. https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1903976839833416123 * * *	#snarky general / sounds redscare-ish * * * * * * * * * * * * * Why the Germans do it better vs "Broken Republik" by Varoufakis https://x.com/jonathanbfine/status/1927523847152050315 It's awkward when a nation has to write its way around Allen Dulles, John J McCloy, and Reinhard Gehlen, so that professionals can type employable thoughts. * I'm always amused by the line "why can't the Palestinians produce a Gandhi or a Mandela?" What history has shown Israel can't even produce a PW Botha. https://x.com/HeerJeet/status/1904574998624559295 Marwan Barghouti is obviously Palestine's Nelson Mandela but I do think Rabin could have made peace if he weren't assassinated.	#girlboss music a https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911522259849695528 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BPjkMiEFP0 0:00 Greedy - Tate McRay 2:09 Escapism - RAYE 6:43 Bloodline - Arianna Grande 10:20 Candy - Doja Cat 13:32 Shameless - Camila Cabello 17:11 Nonsense - Sabrina Carpenter 19:55 Fun - Loving Caliber 23:08 Scream my name - Taynte Standpoints 26:52 Can't get enough of the weekend - Mindme 30:06 Halo - Loving Caliber 32:45 35:57 36:03 41:19 44:50 47:56 51:00 54:30 56:32 59:34 1:02:50
		#Agonism (aka Pluralism / Pluriverse?)	* Udith Dematagoda's "Agonist" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P684HAu-mWA * Arendt - essay, #agonism This article challenges ‘agonistic’ readings of Arendt by demonstrating that Arendt’s work can be interpreted as ‘agonistic realism’. It argues that many agonistic readings of Arendt – I will discuss the readings of Bonnie Honig and Chantal Mouffe in particular – miss the central orientation of Arendt’s thought. By ignoring works such as The Origins of Totalitarianism and Eichmann in Jerusalem, contemporary agonists overlook that her preoccupation with evil forms the basis of Arendt’s agonistic thought. The article suggests that a (re)turn to Arendt’s writings on evil, and a demonstration of their intimate relationship with works such as The Human Condition, reveals the ‘realist’ dimensions of Arendt’s thought: It reveals the picture of a thinker who is deeply concerned with the ever-present possibility of evil and who insists that perpetrators of evil must be treated as ‘enemies’. Furthermore, such a return to Arendt’s works on evil brings to the fore Arendt’s tragic insight that evil is both an expression of and a threat to human plurality and free political action. Arendt, in other words, accepts that while evil – as an expression of our humanity – can never be eradicated, it must – as a threat to our common humanity – be confronted. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1600910X.2020.1754265?journalCode=rdis20 Evil as an expression of and a threat to human plurality: Hannah Arendt’s agonistic realism: Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory: Vol 21, No 3 * Bonnie Honig - "Stoic struggle" at 56:50 reminded me of Dr. Bonnie Honig's "agonism". This lecture has made so many things click for me, thank you Dr Beerman #WeMustBeWillingToGoToTheEnd #MediumIsTheMessage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qlq3hp8Zj8I&t=56m50s Begins at 8:33 Wow! Lacan lacks transcendence, Kant's twelve categories, Heidegger's enframing.. ..and Husserl's "bracketing" comes from math?? Also: "Stoic struggle" at 56:50 reminded me of Dr. Bonnie Honig's "agonism", but I was unable to googlefu any direct relation. For now I'm struck with "struggle" and "transcendence". I'll be finishing up soon when I have #timenergy. I hate how the Algorithm is slowing your roll but I am grateful for these Glimpses of insight when they do come. Thank you Theory Pleeb: you rock. Theory Pleeb created an original concept termed "timenergy", its definition is firmly grounded in a return-to-Heidegger and return-to-Freud for radical, revolutionary formation-of-life (Agamben, Beerman). Pleeb's next book will include some new epoche techniques (Lacan's bracketing and Byung-Chul Han's polemics around time). And the new book will include a term coined "hybridliteracy" tying it to repetition compulsion and even with theological concepts such as the face-to-face ethical act, however Waypoint in its current revision contains powerful unschooling knowledge that can be used for theory-minded organizations and impoverished families/individuals fighting for their survival in the sorely Dasein-lacking Anglosphere. The phrase "time and energy" is already a painfully overused bromide used proudly by the "Professional Managerial Class" (a polemic coined by Moynihan, Liu). Theory Pleeb's robust definition of "timenergy" in Waypoint provides a roadmap that can be used by organizations to escape both toxic positivity and unnecessary debts (specifically "technical debt", a nightmare scenario for any professional team). ☝I've finally drafted a review based on my professional experiences without feeling like I'm parroting phrases, but I am still reading/translating/hermeneuticizing/exegetizing Waypoint so..imma need a few more months to truly grasp a few more concepts lol ;;; Beerman's insistence that Lacanians are lacking transcendence affirms, Theory Pleeb I hope you get the timenergy to tease out more of these Glimpses of insight. Also this discussion of "struggle" reminds me of Agonism. I am excited to deep dive into this discussion very soon when I have more time * Shinko's Agonistic Peace: A Postmodern Reading - Ever since Shinko (Citation2008) wrote her pathbreaking article ‘Agonistic Peace: A Postmodern Reading’, the concept of agonism has slowly yet steadily made its way into the fields of international relations (IR) and peace studies. The gist of Shinko’s argument is to strive for a transformation of violent enemy relations within conflict, away from relationships characterised by antagonism, which is understood as inherently destructive and unconducive of peaceful relations. Instead, these malfunctioning relations could be subsumed and channelled into agonistic encounters between adversaries, which supposedly paves the way for more constructive relations between former enemies (Mouffe Citation2013; Shinko Citation2008). Agonistic peace has indeed developed into its own strand of peace research following Shinko, Mouffe and others. However, it is closely related to and draws on broader insights from critical peace research (Mac Ginty Citation2021; Richmond Citation2021), where peace is seen as inherently relational and a need to transform unequal relationships is underscored. While most research on agonistic peace remains highly theoretical, this volume takes the agonistic peace agenda further and explores the limits and potentials of agonistic peace in very different cases of war-to-peace transitions, such as Colombia, Israel‒Palestine, Lebanon, Nagorno‒Karabach, Northern Ireland, Turkey, Australia and Greek‒Turkish relations. Beside conceptual development, all of the authors of the volume have aimed to provide readers with practical pointers and tools to further knowledge about how different strands of agonistic peace research can be used for empirical analysis. To that end, this collection brings together analyses of agonistic encounters at different social levels, from local to national to global, transforming abstract concepts and making them applicable to the analysis of conflict-affected societies. In light of the cases mentioned above, agonism is merged with theories of memorialisation, consociationalism, sectarianism, artwork, identity politics, transitional justice, gender relations, ontological security, dialogue, political inclusion and activism, recognition, and colonial settler relations. The authors share an interest in the (de)construction of antagonistic identities in conflict processes, and in peace efforts directed towards the transformation of enemy relations into constructive agonistic encounters. The various agencies, mechanisms and discursive formations that are engaged in attempts to move away from antagonistic relations in conflict societies are placed in focus. Different forms of agonistic ambitions and their relevance for peace processes are thus investigated on micro to macro levels through in-depth as well as aggregated methodological strategies. Some of the contributions also point to the limits of agonistic peace and how it may prove difficult to alter the underlying power relations, which are based in the unequal distribution of material resources, despite benign attempts to shift former antagonistic discourses and dialogues into more dialogic ones. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01436597.2022.2054797#d1e182 * * * *	.
	metabecoming	become X / becoming X vs X as becoming eg: becoming-Animal: something that is pre-subjectivity before the burden of the law, burden of the No, before we are cognizing sexuality eg: destruction as becoming	* becoming amoeba - https://twitter.com/search?q=%22becoming%20amoeba%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * becoming bat - "D. H. Lawrence's Becoming-Bat";;;becoming-tick / becoming-bat are the Deleuzian transformations one experiences when they read Giorgio Agamben's "Umwelt and Tick" and Thomas Nagel's "What Is It Like to Be a Bat" #TheTick #HarleyQuinn #becomingBecoming #Heidegger https://twitter.com/ManuelDeLanda/status/1693864355870253110 ;;; * becoming bug - https://twitter.com/search?q=%22becoming%20bug%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * becoming bumblebee - https://twitter.com/search?q=%22becoming%20bumblebee%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * becoming child - The Net (7): Becoming-Child w/ The Wilhelms, Literary-Structure, Philosophy-Theme, and “And” to “/” ;;; Nietzsche's camel -> lion -> child??? ;;;"Paul Ricoeur has written powerfully about the “second naïveté” that is the mark of true faith. A century earlier, Kierkegaard wrote about “the second immediacy,” the possibility of being a child or youth for the second time. “To become again a child, to become as nothing," ;;; Bataille again on Kafka’s becoming-child and embrace of childishness. Bataille lambastes the brutish instrumentality of a rational, bureaucratic communism, one devoid of enlivening ‘uselessness’, one which sees becoming-child in excess of reason. https://x.com/acidhorizonpod/status/1404103478910197760 ;;; aaa ;;; bbb ;;; ccc * becoming cyborg (see course with same title) * becoming death / become death - Oppenheimer? https://twitter.com/search?q=%22become%20death%22&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * becoming dog - becoming wolf instead of becoming dog, thousand plateaus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO4ztWebQEE&t=34m35s * becoming dynamite - https://twitter.com/uberboyo/status/1705728238796873944 “Why I am a Destiny” - written by Nietzsche in Ecce Homo This piece is littered with infamous quotes: “I am not a man, I am dynamite” “…after coming in contact with a religious man, I always feel that I must wash my hands” But beyond quotes - this contains a surreal “prophecy” by Nietzsche about the 20th Century: “All the old orders of the world will be blasted to pieces—for they are all based on falsehood… there will be wars, the like of which have never been seen before on earth” Of course what came were enormous wars that mobilised the entire world - millions of deaths that sound like something out of ancient mythology - futuristic world ending weapons like nuclear bombs - giant industrial murder camps, factories churning out tanks, and air plane raids that destroyed entire cities These were certainly “like nothing we have ever seen” and these wars had a particular tone to them They were “wars for mans destiny”: Were we to become communist comrades who are shaped by the state into Utopians? Good little Consumers who are fair game to culture capitalists? Racial Brethren under a eugenic council of German Occultists? WW2 was much more than a mere squabble among aristocrats - it was a Total War to decide the future of the world Ever since WW2 it’s been treated as some sort of Mythological defeat of the Titans and their casting down into Tartarus The last line Nietzsche pulls together this epic thinking: “The concept "politics" then becomes elevated entirely to the sphere of spiritual warfare… …Only now that I have lived will politics on a grand scale exist on earth” Here we see the arrival of a dangerous idea… what is grand politics? How can it be “spiritual”? Well, look at the grand political projects of our age: Mass migration is a massive transformation of Western society, it will have the same long lasting effects as Colonialism did What motivates people to “enact” this grand project is a vision of a communal world of tolerance and love This vision of the future is how one creates a beautiful world… a “good” world… an open world …and of course those who resist it see things on an equally “lofty” scale Mass migration represents a existential threat - it is a direct assault upon the West The vision for the West must be exclusive, exceptional, and closed The beauty, goodness, and glory of the West was achieved this way This is a spiritual war… a war over the meaning of whats “Good” Alongside this are many other the grand projects that have similar spiritual undertones: - Climate Change - Affirmative Action - Bitcoin - The pursuit if Ai - The Culture War These all boil under the surface and are set to come out a head at some point There the grand ideas will be hashed out There it will be decided which vision of “good” and “beauty” will be brought to term Our values clash like Gods, vying for domination over reality We are but pawns in this war of the Gods… and this war is not over… another battle is on the horizon * becoming egg - PolymorphousPerversity "rolling around with other eggs" (becoming eggs?) wont help us -Liu;;;Joyce’s protean characters are an example of such metonymic flux. ALP is becoming hen and becoming river, Shem is becoming book and becoming tree, Shaun is becoming rock, Issy is becoming cloud, and HCE (Howth Castle and Environs) is becoming egg, becoming fox, and becoming giant;;;becoming egg Building Metonymic Meaning with Joyce, Deleuze, and Guattari abstract: At moments of contradictory richness, meaning in Finnegans Wake changes even as we try to decipher it. The resulting malleability is not arbitrary, given that it responds to contexts. Nor is a response of the type posited, for instance, by speech-act theory: contextually delineated so as to be discrete and identifiable. Instead we find a plurality in which any statement is on the brink of turning into a different statement. I call this metonymic meaning. Joyce’s protean characters are an example of such metonymic flux. ALP is becoming hen and becoming river, Shem is becoming book and becoming tree, Shaun is becoming rock, Issy is becoming cloud, and HCE is becoming egg, becoming fox, and becoming giant. I link this to Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s concept of becoming. They venture, for instance, that Gregor Samsa’s metamorphosis in Kafka’s story is not a question of one self-contained entity being transformed into another self-contained entity, but rather of the permeability and simultaneity of entities. They call this the killing of metaphor. Their reading can help us grasp how, in Finnegans Wake, manifestations such as Issy the girl and Issy the cloud are not mutually exclusive avatars, but different compositions exploring the same intensive multiplicity. Luce Irigaray makes a related point when she opposes metonymic fluidity to metaphoric solidity. Her approach reminds us that an effect’s being chaotic, incalculable, and non-discrete does not guarantee its being negligible. This is how I propose to conceive both of the characters of Finnegans Wake and of Joyce’s experimental coinages. Their metonymic sliding makes their manifestations something different from a pure or isolated activation— but this does not reduce their capacity for carrying importance. We have to think metonymic meaning as fragmented and transitory and, at the same time, as possessing rupturing force. Shem’s transgressive mode of writing is another example of this rupturing force. I argue that Shem’s break with neat and polite writing is also a break with neat, metaphorical chunks of meaning. This violation of established forms of meaning illustrates that getting rid of metaphor is not only an aesthetic, but also a political step. Where communities are heterogeneous and/or transforming, they defy descriptions grounded in metaphorical comparison and synthesis (an example of this is the chaos of HCE’s city). Such intensive social pluralities are then more aptly understood as metonymic assemblages. Both in the linguistic realm and the social realm, Finnegans Wake can thus be seen to reject the stable and shared identities of metaphor and to push instead for the rupturing force of metonymic flux. the article is found in: Joyce Studies Annual (December 2018): 122-146 https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/16qfofi/nature_surprises_us_scientists_in_brazil/k20rc5m/ * Becoming Human - Samuel Loncar's BH podcast https://www.samuelloncar.com/bhpodcast * Becoming Imperceptible - Dark Deleuze by Justin Murphy? ;;; All this so difficult for human beings to It's interesting that Žižek uses very Landian language to describe the posthumanist-accelerationist trajectory, e.g., "apocalyptic process", "zero point", etc. Part of what makes comprehend is that this process is becoming more imperceptible, that is, we could say that accelerationism is the becoming-imperceptible of acceleration itself. To say that the Real is saturating the Symbolic is to say that the Outside is flooding the Inside. To put it in Baudrillardian terms, the fear or anxiety we're feeling is an indeterminate one. But the actual determinacy of this indeterminate fear is this: dehumanizing techno-process is happening so fast that no one will even notice the prosthetic murder of the human, which is another instance of the "perfect crime". the becoming-imperceptible of the https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1909383858383970395/photo/1 * Becoming Insect - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKqMCOKqypM&t=45m18s * Becoming Itself by Itself - Spinal Catastrophism.pdf - Accordingly, the problems exposed by the very idea of a form of natural history, a ‘form of development’ (is a Platonic ‘Becoming Itself by Itself’ conceivable?) initiate the ungrounding Moynihan here mines, beginning from the mechanical agony of the ‘bad back’ resulting from the vain reorientation of lithic plains subjected to organic and so impermanent resculpting: of the possible termini of the spinal reorganisation of lithic cycles, the ‘cervical zenith’ is neither absolute nor final, but only the medium from which ‘phylogenetic katabasis’ descends. The ladder of beings does not lead ever upward but attains points of critical reversal, so that its uppermost rungs are bowed to coincide with those preceding their achievement. Will this fall terminate, like that of Icarus, in abrupt confrontation with the earth, or does the Great Circle descend deeper into phylic prehistory? What are the seeds of all becoming, the principles from which it emerges? If neither anabasis (the cervical zenith) nor katabasis (lithic reversion) attain finality of form, what ultimate determinants can the Great Circle have? * becoming mushroom - https://www.instagram.com/becoming.mushroom/ * becoming plant - Han Kang and Korean modernist poet Yi Sang: "I believe that humans should be plants." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_Kang https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1gxyog4/what_the_actual_fuck_is_going_on_with_the_wicked/ * Becoming Porcupine (Schopenhauer) - https://phantasma.lett.ubbcluj.ro/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Abstracts_2023_USS.pdf * becoming rat - https://www.instagram.com/p/CxGCJ-NNA25/ https://www.instagram.com/p/Cw1-enJNdTE/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willard_(1971_film) * becoming rhizome - your life in the same safe, preplanned way so many people play music when they pick up an instrument? What happens is your life becomes a blocked rhizome. The possibility of a random root shooting off and making a new exciting connection with another network becomes impossible. The possibility of playing new music with your life becomes impossible. You turn yourself into a tree, rooted in one place, restricted to the same riffs and transitions for the rest of your life, unable to see new possibilities. * becoming tree - Alice Bucknell https://objkt.com/asset/KT1TcZXVW2RxGkUdfpA9azptJGwFbr5XcCgx/4 * becoming troglodyte - Becoming Troglodyte - Itinerant Philosophy - On Alphnso Lingis by Joff P N Bradley https://www.academia.edu/9195688/Becoming_Troglodyte * becoming unlimited / becomign mad - Deleuze doesn’t mention Audouard, and approaches the text in terms suggested by ‘Plato himself’. In relation to the ‘superior identity of the Idea’, true ‘copies are secondary possessors, well-founded pretenders, guaranteed by resemblance’ with the Idea itself. By contrast, simulacra or simulacra-phantasms appear as ‘false pretenders, built upon a dissimilarity’. In keeping with Plato’s evocation of ‘colossal’ scale, ‘the simulacrum implies huge dimensions, depths and distance that the observer cannot master […]. In short, there is in the simulacrum a becoming-mad, or a becoming-unlimited’, and ‘to reverse Platonism’ means ‘to make the simulacra rise and to affirm their rights among icons and copies’ (Logic of Sense, 256-262). http://cahiers.kingston.ac.uk/concepts/simulacrum.html * becoming woman - JA: Other Jouissance and Becoming-Woman https://medium.com/@tatleycody/ja-80d48cae033c https://www.tiktok.com/@cody_without_organs/video/7074202063986593030 * becoming worm Peter Sloterdijk's "You Must Change Your Life" Taking that in mind, consider Benedict of Nursia’s “On Humility” (I found the example via Sloterdijk’s new book ‘You Must Change Your Life’), wherein he writes a “twelve-step de-selfifying course” which is ultimately a [paradoxical] exercise in humility. Around step six we reach the Socratic “I have become nothing and know nothing”… but then something quite bizarre happens. You would think that he would stop there, but this is only the halfway point. The seventh step reads: “I am a worm and not a man” (sum vermis et non homo). I wonder what becoming-worm is like… I’m interested in the fact that Sloterdijk advocates a very specific sort of becoming animal: not becoming animal as such, but becoming worm. There’s something clarifying about the specificity. Becoming lion, tiger, or bear, is a different sort of exercise. Granted, Sloterdijk plays on what he knows is a kind of default sense of human disgust for the worm, when he challenges us to humble ourselves to the worm’s condition https://itself.blog/2013/01/31/we-dance-these-beasts-capitalism-animism-believers-of-the-future/ https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy_yK07M1Ag/ The seventh step sees the monacus entirely infused with the truth to which his lips testified on the sixth. He now says openly: 'I am a worm and not a man' (sum vermis et non homo);;"But I am a worm, and no man; A reproach of men, and despised of the people." Psalm 22:6 - KJV * * * * * # conservatard * "Becoming Brigitte" by Candace Owens https://x.com/RichardHanania/status/1883261712142664170 https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1iacbqe/becoming_globohomo/ * * * * * Becoming-Animal, Becoming-Intense, Becoming-Imperceptible https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfTheory/comments/w7cg0p/negative_maps_becominganimal_becomingintense/ * becoming-psychedelic Psyche means Spirit and Mind, Psychosis means to give life to, Delos means Manifesting. Psyche-Delos: Mind/Spirit-Manifesting Psychosis - Animation This becoming-psychedelic can take us straight outta Realism (in the same sense as Capitalist Realism). * becoming becoming - 2ndderivative? We discuss how this situation produces a source of resentment and general negative emotionality, which is involved in confronting a groundless real (e.g. Death of God), or a gap between the “I” of the understanding and the “it” of the fixed representation. To really reconcile ourselves with this groundless real, we suggest that both the will to power and the eternal recurrence point towards a becoming of becoming itself. * destruction as becoming (becoming destruction? no..) - Sabina Spielrein - DESTRUCTION AS THE CAUSE OF COMING INTO BEING SPIELREIN_1912_Destruction_as_cause_of_coming_into_being.pdf - becoming destruction? - "Trauma, Negativity, and Death in Spielrein, Heidegger, and Buddhist Thought" - Wanyoung Kim, also Julie Reshe and Cheri Hausmann talks about Spielrein *	All becoming is Real and Traumatic, as opposed to Simulacral and Hyperreal	# books * Virginia Woolf's "Moments of Becoming" - https://x.com/xThomas_Nail/status/1902834699908890997 * * * *	.	.
		#chiasmus philosophy vs #recursion philosophy	* Schelling's “What must the mind be such that nature can appear to us as lawfully organized?” Schelling asked, “What must nature be such that mind could have emerged from it in the first place?” This * "We will say bye to the objective exterior / subjective interior" trope and say hi to Merleau-Ponty's "objective interior and subjective exterior" https://x.com/Fire20229/status/1928883173158514720 * * * * * * * * * * * "Appear as you are. Be as you appear. -Rumi https://x.com/may_i_sam/status/1727469945213075709 * Bracha Ettinger's Chapter 6 THE RED COW EFFECT: The Metramorphosis of Hallowing the Hollow and Hollowing the Hallow ([1995] 1996) * "For it is difficult to make philosophers kings and kings philosophers..the true mediation between technics and power cannot be individual, it can be realized only through mediation of culture" https://x.com/RyanHaecker/status/1917872537842671921 * “We can also agree on the fact that philosophy and psychoanalysis make no sense without a desire for something to take place other than the place.” https://x.com/beingandevent/status/1950596118385188883 * BwO -> OwB: Contesting the consequences of this framework, and hinging on the value given by Lacan to symbolic, linguistic and social structures in the formation of identity, Žižek shows that the constant fluidity ideal is untenable. Moreover, Žižek supports his critique through his Hegelian and Marxist formation, showing also the political individualistic implications of such fluidity: “bodies without organs” transformed into “organs without bodies”. While Žižek’s analysis of the relations between unity (body) and diversity (organs) emerges from philosophical exploration, St Paul’s reflection, in today’s reading, on the Church as a body with different organs, emerges from theological contemplation. Nonetheless perhaps, parallelisms between the two perspectives might be evoked. Žižek laments that individual parts are now disconnected from the larger, coherent whole, through the commodification of human functions disengaged from any deeper sense of community or shared purpose. https://timesofmalta.com/article/from-gospel-nurturing-organic-body.1104150 * “The cause of my profound sense of incompatibility with others is, I believe, that most people think with their feelings, whereas I feel with my thoughts.” —Fernando Pessoa * Étienne Gilson From Aristotle to Darwin and Back "It's not the organisists who are denying mechanism, its the mechanists who are denying organism" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwSOnVwueEI&t=40m19s * ‘God became human and made the human god’. JAKOB BOEHME (1575-1624) https://x.com/SmaragdinaVisio/status/1945676632746045684 * Do not seek to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. -St. Augustine https://x.com/KnowsPascal/status/1945592768824271180 * "Where they love they do not desire and where they desire they do not love" -Sigmund Freud, On The Universal Tendency to Debasement in the Sphere of Love, 1912, page 183 https://www.facebook.com/lacancircleofaustralia/posts/pfbid02AaPET9MMFu23yVxPwHKyqBayGe9kXRcfqr8qFEB2RURQFFQivnijrSScnMbCSVjxl * El más sabio entre los santos y el más santos entre los sabios. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gN9vtNg3FJI * Hans Urs von Balthasar’s distinction between “aesthetic theology” and “theological aesthetics” ;;; this is where I think Hans Urs von Balthasar’s distinction between “aesthetic theology” and “theological aesthetics” is essential. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1883204451630026989 * Schelling's Naturphilosophie of x vs philosophy of Nature? * form is emptiness, and emptiness is form 色即是空、空即是色 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0nPTPLTlds&lc=UgxYOJ5t5cXTIdHPoi94AaABAg * recognize / misrecognize - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYuQTwCs-tM&t=15m36s Hegel: Even tho we misrecognize the world, we are actually recognizing it. marx flips that around: "we recognize thee world and in recognizing the world we misrecognize it" * Awareness of the sacred in life is what holds our world together, and the lack of awareness of the sacred is what is tearing it apart. - Joan D. Chittister https://twitter.com/ChikuChill/status/1714184720253075672 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Chittister * Bertalanffy x Hayek - Freedom necessarily creates inequality and equality necessarily creates unfreedom !! https://twitter.com/QuoteForLiberty/status/1704739481662714221 "Freiheit erzeugt notwendig Ungleichheit und Gleichheit notw endig Unfreiheit" * Blanchot's "Write to be able to die, die to be able to write." (anna says it's wrong, Christ is enough) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1913662405424324779 * Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. as!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_M._Wilhoit#:~:text=Wilhoit's%20law,-This%20quotation%20is&text=Wilhoit%3A,binds%20but%20does%20not%20protect. * What Is Matter?—Never Mind. What Is Mind?—No Matter "What is mind? No matter. What is matter? Never mind." https://x.com/El_Pluriverso/status/1909615677612175732 * Badiou: This raises a puzzle. Why treat only the localic case? It is much narrower than the general case and not much simpler. Perhaps this is more an accident of Badiou's studies at the time he wrote the notes than a decision. The restriction has been sharply and knowledgeably criticized (Veilahti 2013). Quoting Badiou, Antti Veilahti makes this an occasion to "take even further the thinking of the logico-ontological, of the chiasmus between the mathematics of being and the logic of appearing" (Badiou 2009, p. 197, quoted in Veilahti 2013, p. 3). * Vital death - 'vital death is what makes mortal life exciting' Jankelevitch https://www.smry.ai/proxy?url=https://elpais.com/diario/2002/05/25/babelia/1022282229_850215.html * having a determinate property entails having the determinable property of which it is a determinate and that having a determinable property entails having one of the properties that are its determinates? https://x.com/goingawoll/status/1909582993515049298 * w@Páez_language "not only do they get people out of the territory, they get the territory out of the people" -Nasa leader https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ouy7aN6XPs&t=44m22s * * * * *	#recursive philosophy * Progressivism is the attempt to realize a society dominated by people who want to kill progressives. Confusing I know, but it makes sense emotionally. https://x.com/xenocosmography/status/1937922369429053612 * * * * * * * *	#NONPHI CHIASMUS * Slotkin's purpose is to the settle the establishment fight on Randy Fine's terms (she pretends to not know who he is thus she's letting that fat fuck legalize running over protesters while she opines openly why there are less protesters during Trump than Biden) https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1nw5v4h/lmaoo/ * * * #MOICHIASMUS * imagine believing in Lacanian tradition but failing to engage in intersubjective dialog without the use of these Cartesian demon tools: your crutch is boiling oceans and increasing alienation! talk about defense mechanisms more like mechanistic defenses 💀 https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1lvqy70/embracing_hereditary_knighthood_in_the_evolian/n2ek0fu/?context=3 * beginners should orient their ontology by ontologizing their orientation #chiasmus https://x.com/El_Pluriverso/status/1956848407911493816 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *	#chiasmus #jokes * ohhhh… confucius say: it is good to meet girl in park but far better to park meat in girl 🐉🥠🥢 https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1mp9cci/ohhhh_confucius_say_it_is_good_to_meet_girl_in/ * Fake philosophy Socrates "To be is to do" vs Kant's "To do is to be" - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CMHGP1nlc54 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
		ποιότης vs ποσότης / #qualitas vs quantitās	* autopoiesis does NOT come from the greek word for quality - ποῖος (poios) — "Of what kind?" vs ποιότης (poiotes) — "Quality" * Engels: “Nooooooooooooooo muh science is dialectical! Look at this tea kettle, the steam is the qualitative leap! The qualitative leap, remember? Isn’t dialectics so cool guys?” All the great literary and scientific minds to follow: wow this guy shitting on Hegel sure knows his stuff https://www.instagram.com/p/DDVkK7bykR0/ * "numbers are archetypal" "qualitative diff between 1/2/3, quantum leap occuring bt each number" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZbjcco3OVA&t=1h16m16s ;;; moicomment: I like how integers (eg 1, 2, 3 etc) are described as having archetypal qualitative differences between which are quantum leaps. I think you can even force the phenomenological experience of synchronicities when you spend enough time appreciating the "two-ness" or "three-ness" of any topic or discipline (which could be the purpose of dwelling of the four-ness of Jung here). Also I like the discussion around scientific materialism and the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. Anyways, very thought-provoking discussion as usual, I now have an appreciation of astrology and more respect for Jung. Thank you * * * * # metanotes * (but Kant tied quantity with quality with relation with modality( - https://x.com/JutlandGhost/status/1879195885936226579 * * * *	.
	#themed	#mirror 🪞	* Fichte: "They glimpse their own image only insofar as it is reflected through things, as in a mirror" https://x.com/morallawwithin/status/1903584775207637463 * * * * * Tarkovsky's Mirror corroborates Deleuze & Guattari's idea of the unconscious investing directly into the social field https://x.com/LetovCCRU/status/1940984381713367104 * Lasch's So the impetus for this book was the shift in the type of neurosis that shrinks were noticing in their patients from the ones that Freud was seeing in his. Instead of hysteria and psychosomatic illness, they were mostly getting people with forms of narcissism (which is when you fail to distinguish oneself from external objects) mostly its secondary form which we will get into in the second chapter. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/i6dtjt/culture_of_narcissism_chapter_1/ * Narciso y su reflexion - Para castigar a Narciso por su engreimiento, Némesis hizo que se enamorara de su propia imagen reflejada en un estanque. En una contemplación absorta, incapaz de separarse de su imagen, acabó arrojándose a las aguas. En el sitio donde su cuerpo había caído, creció una hermosa flor, que hizo honor al nombre y la memoria de Narciso. * Girard mimesis * “Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.” — Oscar Wilde * Leibniz' "miroir vivant" - “Living beings are, when thought in a Leibnizian way, "living mirrors," "metaphysical points" in which the whole of the world gathers and shows itself in the circumscribed luminosity of each perspective. In trying to clarify how chaos came to be posited as what is knowable https://x.com/nakfourium/status/1777973937185444283 This chapter examines Leibniz’s comment on fragment 22 of Pascal’s Pensées in the Port Royal Edition (currently Lafuma §199). Leibniz responds to Pascal’s employment of the infinitely large and infinitely small, and to the way he uses infinity to describe living beings, through the example of a mite (ciron). In contrast, Leibniz invokes the image of a living mirror (miroir vivant). The author argues that, in spite of superficial similarities, Leibniz’s use of infinity to define living beings stands in stark contrast to Pascal’s use of infinity, in that it stresses unity and harmony rather than divisibility and disparity. Leibniz’s use of infinity through the notion of a living mirror suggests that each individual forms an integral part of a well-connected and harmonious system. While Pascal uses infinity to highlight our alienation and incomprehension of the world, for Leibniz, infinity serves instead as a mark of unity, connectedness, and belonging. https://academic.oup.com/book/34904/chapter-abstract/298475510?redirectedFrom=fulltext * isopraxism * Gödel’s masterpiece was his incompleteness theorem, which ranks in scientific folklore with Einstein’s relativity and Heisenberg’s uncertainty. Promulgated in Vienna in the early nineteen-thirties, the notion of incompleteness threw mathematics into a hall of mirrors, where it reflected upon itself to alluring, if disorienting, effect: the theorem proved, using mathematics, that mathematics could not prove all of mathematics. https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/waiting-for-godel * "monads are the living mirrors of the universe, they reflect everything around it, the infinity of other monads are all reflected in a given monad from its own perspective" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TboQRJBVfoI&t=2337s * If the psalm prays, you pray; if it laments, you lament; if it exults, you rejoice; if it hopes, you hope; if it fears, you fear. Everything written here is a mirror for us. -St. Augustine https://x.com/KnowsPascal/status/1879734610751582322 * Nobility and Annihiliation in Marguerite Porete's Mirror of Simple Souls by Joanne Maguire Robinson - E-Beguine Bitches will read Joanne Maguire Robinson's companion to Marguerite Porete ONE TIME and think they're part of some kind of "Spiritual Nobility," all because they gave up on life and want God to Blast their Soul to Smithereens to save them from the girlrot. But then they grow up and realize that wanting God to Literally Annihilate you is genuinely childish, and that God a) fully forgives you from WITHIN your incarnate being, loving you in the Thomistic sense of fully willing your existence and b) the supposed "noble hierarchy" of souls is horizontalized by the institution of the Church and its leveling action of opening salvation to all through the theurgical experience of the sacraments (I'm talking about myself btw) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1912868659770380390/photo/2 * * * * * * * * * Lacan's mirror stage obvi	.	.
10/11/2022	#themed, Samantha Rose Hill	#clouds☁️☁🌧 clouds theme cloud theme	* In his (1980), Peter Unger introduced the “Problem of the Many”. A similar problem appeared simultaneously in P. T. Geach (1980), but Unger’s presentation has been the most influential over recent years. The problem initially looks like a special kind of puzzle about vague predicates, but that may be misleading. Some of the standard solutions to Sorites paradoxes do not obviously help here, so perhaps the Problem reveals some deeper truths involving the metaphysics of material constitution, or the logic of statements involving identity. The puzzle arises as soon as there is an object without clearly demarcated borders. Unger suggested that clouds are paradigms of this phenomenon, and recent authors such as David Lewis (1993) and Neil McKinnon (2002) have followed him here. Here is Lewis’s presentation of the puzzle: Think of a cloud—just one cloud, and around it a clear blue sky. Seen from the ground, the cloud may seem to have a sharp boundary. Not so. The cloud is a swarm of water droplets. At the outskirts of the cloud, the density of the droplets falls off. Eventually they are so few and far between that we may hesitate to say that the outlying droplets are still part of the cloud at all; perhaps we might better say only that they are near the cloud. But the transition is gradual. Many surfaces are equally good candidates to be the boundary of the cloud. Therefore many aggregates of droplets, some more inclusive and some less inclusive (and some inclusive in different ways than others), are equally good candidates to be the cloud. Since they have equal claim, how can we say that the cloud is one of these aggregates rather than another? But if all of them count as clouds, then we have many clouds rather than one. And if none of them count, each one being ruled out because of the competition from the others, then we have no cloud. How is it, then, that we have just one cloud? And yet we do. (Lewis 1993: 164) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/problem-of-many/ * * * * * * * * Tao Lin's cloud haiku: I believe clouds are the perfect main type of thing to be in the sky https://substack.com/@taolin/note/c-120752586?r=rik8 * Yanis Varoufakis' argument that we live under technofeudalism where cloud capital extracts rent from "cloud serfs" really grinds my gears. https://x.com/Gattungswesen25/status/1948667613158015032 * * * * * * * * Aristophanes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clouds Many fail to meditate as someone sensing the emotions hanging about a white and a red rhododendron would on the way flesh and bone stand opposed to the Hermes skill of reading texts in the sky. Heimat from which man falls to Vortuna rages over NOOMAKHIA! Zizek--unterly pathetic! https://x.com/chieflyoffire/status/1715847566536175636 * Bachelard, l’air et les songes - Tell me, enigmatical man, whom do you love best, your father, Your mother, your sister, or your brother? I have neither father, nor mother, nor sister, nor brother. Your friends? Now you use a word whose meaning I have never known. Your country? I do not know in what latitude it lies. Beauty? I could indeed love her, Goddess and Immortal. Gold? I hate it as you hate God. Then, what do you love, extraordinary stranger? I love the clouds the clouds that pass up there Up there the wonderful clouds! * Charles Baudelaire's "L'étranger" * Brecht's "Erinnerung an die Marie A.'s Wolke" / Brecht's picture of the cloud as fading memory of Marie A, * Lorraine Daston's "Cloud Physiognomy" * Hubert Damisch's "A Theory of /Cloud/. Toward a History of Painting" by Hubert Damisch is absolutely beautiful. * Rachel Eisendrath's Gallery of Clouds https://twitter.com/cassiopeiadelta/status/1579977606921097216 * Delia Falconer's The Service of Clouds * Richard Hamblyn's the Invention of Clouds Language of the Skies, Also “The Invention of Clouds: How an Amateur Meteorologist Forged the Language of the Skies” by Richard Hamblyn; * Hemingway's Hill like white elephants * Gerard Manley Hopkins’ journals are AMAZING with his observations of clouds, where he began to perceive and articulate inscape. * Goethe's interest in Luke Howard, Goethe had a serious interest in amateur meteorologist Luke Howard, whose classification (nimbus etc) we still use today. Goethe’s dismissive comments about Friedrich’s pictures of clouds are essential as well * John Gray's Straw Dogs Thoughts on Humans and Other Animals final chapter * Eva Horn's Air as Medium https://direct.mit.edu/grey/article-abstract/doi/10.1162/grey_a_00254/10788/Air-as-Medium * Kazuo Ishiguro's The Buried Giant * Kalidasa/Kalidas' Megadootham/Meghaduta * Catherine Keller - Cloud of the Impossible: Negative Theology and Planetary Entanglement * R. A. Lafferty's "Nor Limestone Islands", a short story * Wilhelm Melchior's "Maloja Snake" play / "Clouds of Sils Maria" film /@JenLouiseWIlson * Henri Michaux's La Cordillera de los Andes (French) https://www.babelmatrix.org/works/fr/Michaux%2C_Henri-1899/La_Cordillera_de_los_Andes * David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_Atlas_(novel) * Nabokov Cloud Castle Lake, Nabokov's Pale Fire about the Brocken spectre * John Durham Peters' "The Marvelous Clouds" https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo20069392.html Toward a Philosophy of Elemental Media John Durham Peters When we speak of clouds these days, it is as likely that we mean data clouds or network clouds as cumulus or stratus. In their sharing of the term, both kinds of clouds reveal an essential truth: that the natural world and the technological world are not so distinct. In The Marvelous Clouds, John Durham Peters argues that though we often think of media as environments, the reverse is just as true—environments are media. Peters defines media expansively as elements that compose the human world. Drawing from ideas implicit in media philosophy, Peters argues that media are more than carriers of messages: they are the very infrastructures combining nature and culture that allow human life to thrive. Through an encyclopedic array of examples from the oceans to the skies, The Marvelous Clouds reveals the long prehistory of so-called new media. Digital media, Peters argues, are an extension of early practices tied to the establishment of civilization such as mastering fire, building calendars, reading the stars, creating language, and establishing religions. New media do not take us into uncharted waters, but rather confront us with the deepest and oldest questions of society and ecology: how to manage the relations people have with themselves, others, and the natural world. A wide-ranging meditation on the many means we have employed to cope with the struggles of existence—from navigation to farming, meteorology to Google—The Marvelous Clouds shows how media lie at the very heart of our interactions with the world around us. Peters’s book will not only change how we think about media but provide a new appreciation for the day-to-day foundations of life on earth that we so often take for granted. * Gavin Pretor-Pinney's The Cloudspotter's Guide: The Science, History and Culture of Clouds * Ruskin's The Storm-Cloud of the 19th Century * Rilke’s “Vladimir the Cloud Painter” is the modernist end to that 19th century debate about realism in art * Alan Watts - cloud https://old.reddit.com/r/AlanWatts/comments/16ikt1w/a_cloud_is_jazz_its_part_of_the_dance_of_the/ * William Shakespeare - “Do you see yonder cloud that’s almost in shape of a camel? Polonius: By the mass, and ‘tis like a camel, indeed. Hamlet: Methinks it is like a weasel. Polonius: It is backed like a weasel. Hamlet: Or like a whale? Polonius: Very like a whale.” * William Shakespeare2 - Antony & Cleopatra, Act IV, scene 14 (1-18) * Patti Smith's "Woolgathering" Smith introduces us to her tribe, “a race of cloud dwellers,” and to the fierce, vital pleasures of cloud watching and stargazing and wandering. * WB Yeats the Tower. Dying is described as clouds fading towards the horizon. The death of friends, or death Of every brilliant eye That made a catch in the breath – Seem but the clouds of the sky When the horizon fades; Or a bird's sleepy cry Among the deepening shades. # SONGS * Joni Mitchell's "Both Sides Now" song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXr2EFomFkU Rows and floes of angel hair And ice cream castles in the air And feather canyons everywhere I've looked at clouds that way But now they only block the sun They rain and snow on everyone So many things \| would have done But clouds got in my way I've looked at clouds from both sides now From up and down, and still somehow It's cloud illusions \| recall * The Orb - Little Fluffy Clouds (Original Mix) (1990) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ecdn5SGT1E * Joe Scarborough - I've looked at Clouds/Love from both sides now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkwofrSDkkQ * Pastel Ghost - Clouds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byBDbxQGNYg * # DISORGANIZED * Michel Serres..you could look into "Hermes V. Die Nordwest-Passage" or into "Die fünf Sinne/The five senses", * Attila İlhan - Yanlış Yaşamak "yanlış bir bulut çoğalıyor akşamları yanılmış içlerime" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSCR9a4XV8E * Torah * The Amateur Cloud Society * Good suggestions here https://cabinetmagazine.org/issues/3/weatherquotes.php. Also, it's hard to imagine there aren't good essays about the Maloja Snake or the movies about it (tho the essays on "Clouds of Sils Maria" are disappointing). Relatedly, @JenLouiseWilson on wind https://twitter.com/ykomska/status/1579853417627136001 * I mean, Tomie de Paola comes to mind literally. But also this... I had some dreams they were clouds in my coffee clouds in my coffee and You're so vain - Carly Simon * “I was a cloud” by @ShearwaterBand; reminiscent of Wallace Stevens’ “The Snow Man” or Mark Strand’s “Keeping Things Whole” but with a hint of intentionality for a living thing that will occasionally coexist with the narrating entity. * How about something from children's literature? This "Lizzy and the Cloud" story is gorgeous by @thefanbrothers * The romantic poets - Keats, Clare, Shelley, and of course in science - the namer of clouds - Luke Howard. Clouds were a big part of art movements too - start with Turner. * Yes, it is the first Essay in "Hermes V.", in the german translation the chapter is Called: "Festes, Flüssiges, Flammen". But it's not really about clouds. (Rembrandt??) In "Die fünf Sinne/Les cinq sens/The five senses" you could look into Chapters like: Nebel p. 82, maybe Mischung, Enthüllung p. 103. Maybe you find something there. * Or Hermann Hesse: Im Nebel. (But mist is not the same thing as clouds, right?) OR Nicole Vögele's NEBEL FOG https://www.swissfilms.ch/de/movie/nebel/F0BB0C319C55435CB0990F350A814776 * May be you find interesting things in Michel Serres. You could look into "Hermes V. Die Nordwest-Passage" or into "Die fünf Sinne/The five senses". You could find passages about clouds in writings of him. * Two extensive links to the topic, and yes, especially for you, all in German. Persönlich: Brecht's picture of the cloud as fading memory of Marie A. - s. JosefGeis - steht bei mir ganz oben. https://twitter.com/GeisChr/status/1579826597783560192?s=20&t=XuTO2qfxXkBdFUOB-PN-WA https://deutschlandfunkkultur.de/die-literarischen-qualitaeten-der-wolken-ungebrochener-100.html https://deutschlandfunk.de/eine-lange-nacht-ueber-wolken-sehr-weiss-und-ungeheuer-oben-100.html * In den wolken (In the clouds via Triangle of Sadness movie) * 浮かぶ雲 = floating clouds https://twitter.com/fractalontology * Shikamaru Hiden: A Cloud Drifting in Silent Darkness * Carroll is a Cloud Person that Finn encounters in the episode "The Tower." She used to be a body of water, but after growing tired of people swimming in her, she evaporated. https://adventuretime.fandom.com/wiki/Carroll * Fin Argus & Sabrina Carpenter - Clouds * *	.	#grass 🌱🌿🌾🍃 * "Gliding o'er all, through all, Through Nature, Time, and Space, As a ship on the waters advancing, The voyage of the soul—not life alone, Death, many deaths I'll sing." ―Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass * Immanuel Kant proclaimed that there will never be a Newton for a blade of grass * * * *	#rose 🌹 * Reminds me of a Pete Rollins piece on ravelling/unravelling... oh I’ll check that out 👀. My focus on rosaries-ritual was influenced (to various degrees of consciousness and intention) on his work on liturgy. What he says makes alot of intuitive sense https://www.facebook.com/groups/2274920922769588 * Rosy Cross 2 Conference Recordings are now available!: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2274920922769588 * OG Rose's Rosy Cross https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK47k2ojNxg * * * *	#roots 🫚 * Simone Wei's "The Need for Roots" and "Die Entwurzelung ist bei weitem die gefährlichste Krankheit der menschlichen Gesellschaft.“ * Yuk Hui: In the age of technology, Being withdraws from the world; what is left is a world of beings decomposed into atoms and feedback loops. This uprooting (Entwurzelung), for Heidegger, is no longer a phenomenon of the West. It has gone beyond Europe through its planetary technology. One might recall here Tolstoy’s criticism voiced in 1910, during his last years, when the writer said that medieval theology or the Roman moral inheritance only intoxicated a limited amount of people, but today’s electricity, trains, and telegraph have intoxicated the whole world. https://www.academia.edu/124811232/Post_Europe *
	#themed	#CHILD #BeingAChild #InnerChild #PeterPan	* ''Children find everything in nothing, men find nothing in everything.” - Leopardi https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hwnjbd/were_people_always_this_uncurious/ * Caring for an adult schizophrenic child entails interminable fights over taking meds and not taking street drugs. They’re prone to paranoia but also to trusting too much, making them easy prey for malefactors such as drug dealers and financial scammers. They can be irrationally risk-prone or overcautious to an extreme. The strange hours, hoarding, atrocious hygiene habits, and property damage: mental illness overwhelms family caregivers. It also sometimes makes them victims of violence. One 2016 study estimated that the seriously mentally ill commit more than 1,000 family homicides each year. Most matricides and patricides involve serious mental illness. https://unherd.com/2025/01/bring-back-paternalism-for-the-mentally-ill/ * * * * * * A Sybil is someone whose childhood hasn’t happened yet. https://x.com/samanthawillman/status/1970837477914259770 * CS Lewis - When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.” ~ #CSLewis * Nietzschean child vs Jungian child (Jung's Peter Pan syndrome / Puer aeternus) * «A menudo el filósofo debe hacerse como un niño otra vez y contemplar el mundo como si no supiera nada de él, no tuviera nombres para él, ni la menor idea de lo que está ocurriendo. Ésta es una catarsis esencial para el intelectual: escuchar directamente el universo, como se escucha la música clásica, sin pensar en su significado» (Alan Watts). * 1 Corinthians 13:11 - When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. * To borrow a phrase from Mark Fisher, the realists are insane. Boris Johnson, like Donald Trump, hasn't so much declared war on capitalist realism, but realism as such. They do not represent a decline in the power of the bourgeoisie, but of their increasingly clinical psychosis, the abstraction from reality of these bourgeois subjects. A latent feature of capitalist realism is, to borrow from D.M. Sonders the (archetype) 'permissive mommy' superego (I love the phrase, but hate the implications): something that demands nothing from its subjects but their total enjoyment. But this enjoyment can never be accessed, as it threatens the alienation that constitutes us as subjects. Instead, what Boris and Trump promise is a Peter Pan style fantasy of unbridled gratification of one's every impulse. If it sounds childish, it's because it is: they aren't anti-authority. They just have a child's idea of what authority is, because they equate doing what you please (surrender to unknown impulses) with freedom. https://www.facebook.com/ben.horn.7/posts/pfbid0kt8myojrM1pDRNCCS1U3NBytxV1pyVJDwWN3SgCKjrudnqGV5SbZMAKxFyRXBS5ml", "Realists = Realpolitik? fb post by Ben Horn * * * Jung Peter "Peter Pan Syndrome"/Ovid's "puer aeternus" vs Nietzsche third metamorphosis (spirit->camel->lion->child) vs Deleuzian child (see 3:00:00ish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crEf80gwe9U ) * Are there any essays/texts by academics/theorists who have distinguished between Jung's "puer aeternus"/"Peter Pan Syndrome" vs Nietzsche's third metamorphosis (spirit->camel->lion->child) * Carl Jung's "puer aeternus" / "Peter Pan Syndrome" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puer_aeternus * Yes, there are some texts that compare and contrast the two concepts. In the analytical psychology of Carl Jung, the term Puer aeternus is used to describe an older person whose emotional life has remained at an adolescent level, which is also known as “Peter Pan syndrome” 1. On the other hand, Friedrich Nietzsche’s third metamorphosis of the spirit describes the transformation of the spirit from a camel to a lion and finally to a child234. The lion stage is characterized by the rejection of external influences and the creation of one’s own meaning, while the child stage is characterized by the joyful creation of new values 2. Although both concepts describe a state of immaturity, they differ in their approach to life and the world. * * *	.
	#themed	#TIME theme?	* Sam McCormick's chairotic time and punctualism / "punctual neologisms" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG1ngjCmHBg&t=49m ;;; Niederhauser "chairos strikes" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSyUmpAPQM0&t=20m * * * * * * * * * Creation as we know it in this impoverished cosmic time that we call chronos is simultaneously a free act of grace and a free acceptance of such grace, but also a fall from another kind of time. This meta-historical fall is a chronic amnesia of a paradise waiting to be awakened. https://x.com/matt_mazza14/status/1945661366557196576 This is why the distinctions between chronos, aeonios, and aidios - as used in scriptural exegesis - is so important in understanding not only eschatology, but also the mystery of Christ as both Alpha and Omega. * "No more dead time only party time" "we call for the complete and total abolition of Time itself" https://www.facebook.com/lpespisa/posts/pfbid0GNs3WdvszJoZqFoP1b3i8Hi89kpfwxHpDQMUqLQRrEq8habVpC5vZ3Aekrn1V1KLl * Hagglund's chronolibido Hagglund's "Dying for Time" offers new readings of the problem of temporality in the writings of Marcel Proust, Virginia Woolf, and Vladimir Nabokov. Through an engagement with Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan, Hägglund also develops an original theory of the relation between time and desire ("chronolibido"), addressing mourning and melancholia, pleasure and pain, attachment and loss. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Hägglund * otium time vs leisure time vs idleness * Virilio's "computer time" - Cultural theorist Paul Virilio describes the new, technological time as pure computer time, which constructs a permanent present, an unbounded, timeless intensity. [..] This may be in the form of a loss of physical ability, aesthetic sensibility, cognitive capacity, cultural savoir faire, ethical sophistication or what Bernard Stiegler (1998) might warn us, calls for, the preservation of a "general organology" of mnemotechnological capabilities. In other words, the various components of the "civilized" human made up of cultural, physical, perceptual and critical dimensions. In this "computer time" that we live in, as Virilio puts it, we have constructed "a permanent present, an unbounded, timeless intensity that is destroying the tempo of a progressively degraded society" * Negarestani's "technological time" - Isabel Milar: "In this oblique relation between these two times, the psychic and the technical or technological time, as Reza Negerastani (2018) might call it, we have the kernel of the mӧbius strip between the individual human psyche and the technical abstraction of its multiplicitous, intensive and larval capacities (Deleuze, 2014)." https://germyd.wixsite.com/bitacorabfv/forum/psyche-y-techne/isabel-millar-virilio-s-lost-dimensions-the-psychic-and-the-technical * Iqbal's "pure duration" / "durational time" vs Bergson's durée * Heidegger/Dasein's "Ecstatic Temporality" / "ecstatic time" ecstatic time - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=butfdkcNqjI&t=310s * Byung-Chul Han's "point time"=cringe time vs concrete time=based time * Moishe Postone's "Abstract time is “uniform, continuous, homogenous, 'empty' time.”" * Lacan's Logical Time (vs Chronological Time) - Jacques Lacan ; Broadly speaking, Lacan's approach is characterized by two important innovations: the ; In his paper entitled "Logical Time" the concept of logical time, and the stress on retroaction and anticipation. In the 1945 paper, Lacan argues that logical time has a tripartite structure, the three moments of which are: the instant of seeing; the time for understanding; the moment of concluding. https://nosubject.com/Time ;;; Lacanian analysis gives three dimensions of time: the instant of the gaze, the time for comprehending or understanding, and the moment to conclude. These three dimensions of time were developed by the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan in the structure of a logical sophism called the prisoners' dilemma. ;;; * kairos moments - some commentary on Catherine Keller’s “Political Theology of the Earth” (2018).- https://twitter.com/AimeTim/status/1711978574264021294 * Johannes Fabian – From Sacred to Secular Time (1983) From Chapter One, ‘Time and the Emerging Other’, of Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object (1983). Featuring Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, Edward Burnett Tylor, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Locke, Georges Gusdorf, Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, Louis XIV, Orest A. Ranum, Voltaire, Louis, Grand Dauphin, Carl Becker, Jesus, Sergio Moravia, Diderot, Degérando, Volney, Lapérouse, Linnaeus. ‘In the episteme of natural history the exercise of knowledge was projected as the filling of spaces or slots in a table, or the marking of points in a system of coordinates in which all possible knowledge could be placed.’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvETj5YlzMg * usefulness/redemptive time - What's some good literature on Kierkegaard's "demonic"? My thought is that: The indiscernible resists schematisation and resists the usefulness/redemptive time without being just Battaile's "soverignty". The demonic basically has its own locus of difference, separate from the general schematism. The problem with movements following D+G is this difference is defined negatively against a particular social movement, which is literally not the point. What is more important is the emptiness of inherent difference, ie: the absence of differentials. Anyway my anxiety is generally that things will be "used" by great and powerful forces for either evil, or just the banal commodities of capitalism. I think the demonic is like a counter to this banality- an underground, semi-Existent locus of difference.And its important to note: A demon can never be forcefully presented (without a higher power)- but it presents itself and its message to an environment and a person that's receptive to it. https://twitter.com/Lainofwired93/status/1724920061582835849 * algebraic time vs geometric time? * Mechanized time and Work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvk_XylEmLo * TP's timenergy * Franz Rosenzweig's Jetzt-Zeit - The second chapter is an interpretation of Walter Benjamin’s critique of the linear time through Franz Rosenzweig’s ‘Jetzt-Zeit’ conception of time in order to formulate the necessity of a new dimension of historical materialism and criticize capitalism and modernity. The last chapter is a presentation of Franz Rosenzweig’s ‘Jetzt-Zeit’ from its Jewish roots to which is needed in order to comprehend the way in which Benjamin criticizes capitalism as a religion. https://scholarworks.utep.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4159&context=open_etd * In Of Grammatology, Derrida states that arche-writing as spatial exteriorization marks dead time within the lived presence of the present: “Arche-writing as spacing cannot occur as such within the phenomenological experience of a presence. It marks the dead time within the presence of the living present, within the general form of all presence.” (Derrida 1998: 68). https://iris.unige.it/bitstream/11567/1055286/1/phdunige_4593184.pdf * "temporal clock time" and definition of life as causal structures youtube.com/watch?v=wwhTfyX9J34&t=1460s I read the article on time by the physicists Sara Walker & Lee Cronin. I haven’t studied metaphysics (of time) much so my knowledge of it is rusty. They stipulated a theory of time—assembly theory but haven’t define it as some critics pointed out. Aristotle defined it as motion. https://x.com/meiselmuses/status/1659782190677348352 * * * * * * * * # ENERGY THEME * habit-energy - Or just as a clear mirror reflects formless images all at once, tathagatas likewise purify the stream of perceptions of beings’ minds by displaying pure, formless, undifferentiated realms all at once. Or just as the sun and moon illuminate images all at once, tathagatas likewise reveal the supreme realm of inconceivable wisdom all at once to those who have freed themselves of the habit-energy and misconceptions that are perceptions of their own minds. Or just as repository consciousness distinguishes such different perceptions of one’s mind as the realms of the body, its possessions, and the world around it all at once, nishyanda buddhas likewise bring beings to maturity in whatever realm they dwell all at once and lead practitioners to reside in Akanishtha Heaven.[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laṅkāvatāra_Sūtra https://old.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/1bmjpw5/doesnt_one_require_to_attain/ * “Clearly this joke illustrates Putin believed he is in block time” is really funny https://old.reddit.com/r/zizek/comments/16lnirm/new_zizek_article/ * damn_jehu? - Free, disposable time is every bit a source of material wealth as wage labor. In fact, it's a hundred times more productive since it doesn't encounter the obstacles, like realization, that wage labor does. https://x.com/search?q=damn_jehu%20time&src=typed_query&f=live * * * * * * * * # lit * WH Auden's Stop All The Clocks https://old.reddit.com/r/amibeingunreasonable/comments/1cjiz8i/stop_all_the_clocks/ * Eugene Minkowski's "Lived Time - Phenomenological and Psychopathological Studie" https://x.com/nrduford/status/1902690354253504857 * * * * * # jokes/speculative * Time is Irish. The perseverance, the melancholia, the last name O'Clock, etc. - Hibernian conspiracy Amar Risbud @bummer_no_b https://twitter.com/hexspace/status/1669435359283892231 https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1813gg7/further_proof_for_the_hibernian_conspiracy/ * they have a saying in Nigeria. "the Germans invented the clock. the Nigerians invented the time." * polychronic vs monochronic time and LatinX (satire?) https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1l42uvk/_/ Whoever made this is almost certainly the non-binary daughter of a castizo South American who has participated in 3 CIA/IMF backed coups minimum * * *	#chatgptquestion What's the difference between "durational time" and Byung-Chul Han's "point time"? What's the difference between durational time and ecstatic time? Durational time and ecstatic time are two different concepts that have been discussed in the philosophy of time and the study of human experience. Durational time refers to the objective, measurable passage of time, as it is experienced and understood by human beings. This is the type of time that is tracked and measured by clocks and calendars, and is the basis for our everyday understanding of time and its passage. Durational time is often seen as being linear and unidirectional, moving from the past through the present to the future in a predictable and consistent manner. In contrast, ecstatic time refers to a more subjective and experiential understanding of time. This type of time is not measured or tracked by clocks and calendars, but is instead based on the individual's experience and perception of the world. Ecstatic time is often seen as being non-linear and non-unidirectional, and is characterized by moments of intense experience or immersion in the present moment. For example, when we are engaged in a particularly enjoyable or meaningful activity, time may seem to fly by, and we may lose track of the objective passage of time. In this sense, ecstatic time is a more flexible and fluid understanding of time, which is based on our subjective experience and perception of the world. Overall, the main difference between durational time and ecstatic time is their respective focus on objective and subjective aspects of time. Durational time is based on the objective, measurable passage of time, while ecstatic time is based on the individual's subjective experience and perception of the world. While both concepts are important for understanding human experience and the nature of time, they offer different perspectives on the relationship between time, consciousness, and the world around us. D B Lyle What is "point time" according to Byung Chul Han? Byung-Chul Han is a South Korean philosopher and cultural critic who has written extensively on the philosophy of time and the nature of human experience. In his book "The Burnout Society," Han discusses the concept of "point time," which is a term that he uses to describe a specific type of time that is associated with modernity and the era of digital technology. According to Han, point time is a type of time that is characterized by fragmentation, acceleration, and constant change. In this view, time is no longer experienced as a continuous and unbroken flow, but is instead experienced as a series of discrete and isolated moments or events. This fragmentation of time is closely related to the increasing speed and acceleration of modern life, as well as the constant flow of information and stimuli that we experience in the digital age. As a result, point time is often experienced as a disorienting and overwhelming barrage of stimuli, which can leave us feeling anxious, stressed, and exhausted. For Han, the concept of point time is closely related to the phenomenon of burnout, which he sees as a defining characteristic of modern society. In his view, the fragmentation and acceleration of time is a key contributor to the experience of burnout, as it creates a sense of constant pressure and urgency that can be difficult to cope with. In this sense, point time is a deeply problematic aspect of modern life, and is one of the key factors that contributes to our feeling of exhaustion and disconnection from the world around us. D B Lyle What's the difference between "durational time" and Byung-Chul Han's "point time"? Durational time and point time are two different concepts that have been discussed in the philosophy of time and the study of human experience. Durational time refers to the objective, measurable passage of time, as it is experienced and understood by human beings. This is the type of time that is tracked and measured by clocks and calendars, and is the basis for our everyday understanding of time and its passage. Durational time is often seen as being linear and unidirectional, moving from the past through the present to the future in a predictable and consistent manner. In contrast, point time is a concept that was introduced by the South Korean philosopher Byung-Chul Han. Point time is a type of time that is characterized by fragmentation, acceleration, and constant change. In this view, time is no longer experienced as a continuous and unbroken flow, but is instead experienced as a series of discrete and isolated moments or events. This fragmentation of time is closely related to the increasing speed and acceleration of modern life, as well as the constant flow of information and stimuli that we experience in the digital age. As a result, point time is often experienced as a disorienting and overwhelming barrage of stimuli, which can leave us feeling anxious, stressed, and exhausted. Overall, the main difference between durational time and point time is their respective focus on objective and subjective aspects of time. Durational time is based on the objective, measurable passage of time, while point time is based on the individual's subjective experience and perception of the world. While both concepts are important for understanding human experience and the nature of time, they offer different perspectives on the relationship between time, consciousness, and the world around us.	#Countdowns? * AGI day? * Q-day * Earth Overshoot Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day * * *
	#objectivevssubjective	#ElegirAlAzar #OpenEndedness (Randomness) vs Objectives (Teleological or Mechanizational)	#ElegirAlAzar / ChooseArbitrarily / OpenEndedness (subjective?) / vividores * Althusser/Balibar - History is not teleological but shaped by random events and structural contradictions. * we choose arbitrarily, something completely empty on top of something empty, in Lacanian parlance a new Master Signifier, for Badiou a new term emerges that wasn't indexed before https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSeug7ROyRQ&t=1h18m16s * 46:30 Kant's What does it mean to Orient Oneself in Thinking, we have to have some act of faith to orient us in our thought, but then we rationally build the ground out from underneath our feet and we can really build out with reason. Badiou says we affirm an event maybe is contingently when we build a truth from that event nonetheless, or truth is implicit and we build it out through faith https://youtu.be/aiBnR2gSik8?si=atbzEPOeGYAHotyc&t=46m30s * I'm fascinated with the fact that Monte Carlo tree search's initial step involves simulating a random game, and Shor's algorithm's initial step involves picking a random integer #quantumalgorithms #statistics #machinelearning https://x.com/ManuelDeLanda/status/1657827914279272448/photo/1 vs Badiou's "just pick a place to stake" * "you can just come up with any axioms" "what is the motivating problem" https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fCWnuaMWTuo * Denken ohne Gelander, without guardrails, without a bannister, without bumpers - With a slightly lurching feeling, I realised that I was bowling without the bumpers now, and that if I wanted to sort things out I'd have to do it myself. https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1guvuho/the_engineer_and_i_a_memory_that_saved_me_from/ It's been a week. I'm not going to write about Hannah Arendt and Trump. At a conference this past weekend, I said, I think it's time to put her back on the shelf. History may help illuminate the present but only a new way of thinking can change the direction we're heading in now. https://x.com/Samantharhill/status/1856082184937026002 * unpredictability and spontaneity of creativity vs the X of mechanization/determinism and of teleology/evolution/Creationism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODyQ5FxyIOc&t=19m36s * #SUCHNESS? - Taoism's Ziran = 自然 = self-so = natural spontaneity - D. T. Suzuki, in a brief article penned in 1959, makes the suggestion of ziran as an aesthetic of action: "Living is an act of creativity demonstrating itself. Creativity is objectively seen as necessity, but from the inner point of view of Emptiness it is 'just-so-ness,' (ziran). It literally means 'byitself-so-ness,' implying more inner meaning than 'spontaneity' or 'naturalness'". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziran * Sahaja, "coemergent; spontaneously or naturally born together" in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism * Quantum Bogo Sort - 1. Quantumly randomise the list, such that there is no way of knowing what order the list is in until it is observed. https://wiki.c2.com/?QuantumBogoSort https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1hrkrtv/the_age_of_expensive_inefficient_intelligence/m4z8j5d/ * * * * * * #OpenEndedness (subjective?) * * * * # Contingent (as opposite of random) * arbitrariness - in Slavoj Žižek’s “Lacanian” critique of Carl Jung, he sets up the battle lines such that Jung is classed as a Platonic idealist, and Lacan as a good Marxist materialist—but what if the true implications of their respective doctrines are almost the reverse? just today I had an interesting argument with the Jungian @Joywavez12 on nominalism vs. realism in the philosophy of language—he is a Jungian nominalist and I am a Lacanian realist (and Lacan himself described his position as a “realism, but not of universals”). how does this work? the essential question is whether the subject precedes the signifier, making the signifier subjectively arbitrary (the Jungian, more Gnostic-Protestant position) or whether the signifier precedes the subject, as in Lacan’s more Jansenist doctrine—Lacan also notably corrects Saussure’s doctrine of the “arbitrariness” of the signifier, pointing out that the signifier is NOT arbitrary (that is, submitted to the will) but is rather CONTINGENT. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1892695305784815871 #Objectives * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#mandato #mando #orden	#Disassociate #Forget #ActStupid	* Mi tio's directive "Act Stupid" * Heidegger's Seinsvergessenheit - H disagrees with Marx on alienation. For him, it stems from the "forgetfulness of Being" [Seinsvergessenheit] and cannot be understood from a materialist view, but rather from an ontological approach that does not reduce beings to the demiurgic sphere of human labor. https://x.com/guilherme94jose/status/1937186389013168173 [..] So what is alienation according to Heidegger? A distance from mysterious ontological Being, the babbling corpse of ethereal God? What even the fuck is that? I'd still have to side with Marx here. Ontological alienation isn't the same as social alienation. No amount of Being will alleviate the misery of poor material conditions. At best, the former can make you more stoic about the latter. Alienation comes from the Latn formula for serfdom, ie, being "alieni iuris", under the power of others, opp. of " sui iuris". Both H. and M. conceal the Who question under a meaningless What alienates us. Marx was more cynic, he perfectly knew Who: His people. * The knight demonstrates a passion for ignorance - The Problem of Defining "Sovereynetee" in the "Wife of Bath's Tale" Susanne Sara Thomas https://www.jstor.org/stable/25094342 * OG Rose x Cadell Last - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGE_3GtT-1A&t=9m17s - self-relating negativity is a good way to think about both self defense and self forgetfulness * The Erosion of Certainties / L'érosion des certitudes - Blurriness reveals itself as both a power of obfuscation contributing to a mechanism of forgetting, and a way of bearing witness, despite everything, to the atrocities of History as disseminated by media images. https://old.reddit.com/r/BrachaEttinger/comments/1keso2z/the_erosion_of_certainties_lérosion_des/ * Hegel’s Act of Radical Forgetting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdioQvFelFo * Cyril O'Regan's The Anatomy of Misremembering: Von Balthasar's Response to Philosophical Modernity - It’s this position of O’Regan’s (and Balthasar’s)—the assertion of “Bulgakov as Anti-Hegelian and Anti-Gnostic Father”—that I find most profoundly problematic and symptomatically significant for their “Anti-Hegelian” heresiological project. As I’ve made clear on multiple occasions (most extensively in one of my recorded Spaces on the thought of @AGDugin , the link to which I will retrieve and post in the replies), I am profoundly suspicious of Bulgakov’s Sophiology, and really anything of what O’Regan in “Theology and the Spaces of Apocalyptic” calls “pleromatic apocalyptic” to begin with (my concern is that excessive emphasis on the Pleroma over against O’Regan’s other two Apocalyptic Spaces—the Kenoma and the Metaxu—leads to a swerve towards Unitarianism). This is one of my biggest divergences from @philipgonzales8 ’s otherwise brilliant framework in “Reimagining the Analogia Entis,” along with my defense of St. Edith Stein’s allegedly “anthropocentric” rendition of the Analogia Entis, the limitations of which I think can be ameliorated with a Hermetic Christian conception of cosmic mediation, without the need for a hyperbolically self-mystifying theocentrism. This is where I am particularly interested in @johnmilbank3 ’s profile of the Balthasar/Lubac debate in “The Suspended Middle,” which I am convinced is intimately related to this specific set of issues. I’ll be diving into it soon to try and see if I can better organize my thoughts on the limitations of Balthasar. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1912959712955629899 * ?Sobre Ignorancia Instruida/Docta? / De Docta Ignorantia - On Learned Ignorance https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolás_de_Cusa#De_docta_ignorantia Über die belehrte Unwissenheit https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_docta_ignorantia * la matrix (in)competencia (in)consciente y la matrix (des)conocido (des)conocimientos * Harland Miller's I'll Never Forget What I Can't Remember https://x.com/lacancircle/status/1913341232723693897 * hypomnesis v anamnesis - Very excited to invite you all to join me and @RyanHaecker on Saturday June 28, 16-19 UTC (12-3pm Eastern time) for this highly ambitious talk, mixing philosophy of technology and apocalyptic theology, as an installment of the ÆTHERIA SYMPOSIA I on the island of Crete! Zoom link here (free and open for all): us02web.zoom.us/j/81275028683 Our thematic abstract: The Psychro Cave in Crete carries a memory of the first apocalyptic passage of the gods that portends each technical recreation of the world. Hesiod tells of how the goddess Rhea "hid [Zeus] in a remote cave beneath the secret places of the holy earth", before Zeus led the Olympian gods to overthrow the old king Cronos and cast out the Titans. In the Statesman (269c-274d), Plato presents a new version of this myth, in which the 'Divine Pilot' (Theios Kybernētēs) rationally controls a cosmic "living creature" (Anima Mundi), "endowed with reason" by the divine Mind (Nous), and "framed" by the architecture of celestial mechanics. The collapse of this cybernetic system - from the first age of Cronos, when "God was supreme governor", to this subsequent age of Zeus, when "the pilot of the ship of the universe" has "let go the handle of its rudder" - results in the "cosmic crisis" of mortality, and of an intergenerational loss of memory, which requires - as both a remedy and poison - Prometheus to steal the gift of fire, and Haphaestus to invent technology. Yet, as Plato warns (Phaedrus, 274b–279b), the invention of writing, as an external aid to memory (hypomnēsis), can, in contrast to living recollection (anamnēsis), also become an occasion for increased forgetting, and, in our age of digital computer writing, for the compounding meta-crises that afflict modernity. Drawing on Diotima’s speech in Plato’s Symposium (201e-205e), Simone Weil developed a theory of mediation as the aesthetic self-limitation of cycles of destructive force, which she observed reaching their height in the technical-bureaucratic apparatuses of the 20th century. While the erotic foundations of beauty are always structured around a lack, Weil calls for this lack to be oriented again towards its fulfilment in agapeic transcendence, which is preserved through a mystical decreation of our narcissistic imaginations, and which becomes ever-more concrete through an incarnational mediation of sacred harmonic and geometric correspondences. Drawing in a similar way on Henri Bergson's 'creative evolution', Teilhard de Chardin prophesied that the evolution of technical nature would culminate in the 'Omega-point' reversal of thermodynamic entropy, an ever-more ecstatic growth in the 'Noosphere' of celestial intelligence, and in the ultimate overcoming of Plato's 'cosmic crisis' through a free recognition of the 'hyperpersonality' that abides at the center of cosmotechnics and every cybernetic system. Join Anna K. Winters and Ryan Haecker on Saturday 28th June from the island of Crete on a pilgrim’s journey from Simone Weil's modern re-activation of ancient insights to Teilhard de Chardin's techno-mystical vision of the hyperpersonality at the center of our world that sails on the vast ocean of spirit and life. kw (@tenshi_anna) posteó a las 11:17 a. m. on vie, jun 06, 2025: Very excited to invite you all to join me and @RyanHaecker on Saturday June 28, 16-19 UTC (12-3pm Eastern time) for this highly ambitious talk, mixing philosophy of technology and apocalyptic theology, as an installment of the ÆTHERIA SYMPOSIA I on the island of Crete! Zoom link (https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1931007646716367179?t=DzSA_O0xwkyYf2NHiYRKFw&s=03) * * * * * * * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#math	#MathPhilosophy #Geometry	# FORMULAS * theory pleebs MCM and MCM^ or whatever * ¿E=M? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMQwM6uCSpA&t=1h29m30s * * * * * * # MATH/GEOMETRY METAPHORS * 𝓣Categorical Cybernetics𝓣 * * * * * * * * * * * * mathematical Kristevanism - I come from a family of academically successful linguists. my dad studied with Noam Chomsky. having grown up in that environment, and having been exposed to the ideas of modern linguistics from an early age, let me just say this: Chomskyan linguistics hit an absolute dead end, and ended up going in an endless self-enclosed, increasingly destructive loop, because Chomsky disastrously failed to engage seriously with the true best Cartesian of his age: Jacques Lacan. oh, is the prose of Lacan’s late seminars, where he engages with and brilliantly critiques Chomsky, too obscure for you? no matter. you should simply read Julia Kristeva, a great reader of Hegel, and by far the most brilliant modern theorist of linguistics and semiotics, who has been deeply and unjustly overlooked by Anglophone linguistics due to the pernicious and anti-intellectual empiricist Anglo-box. Kristeva herself engaged intimately and in detailed critical fashion with Chomsky’s ideas, ultimately concluding that not only are his ideas a failure because they do not take into account the insights of psychoanalysis, but also that his entire linguistic theory is really a kind of philosophy, a metaphysics in disguise, which is basically a subpar version of Husserlian phenomenology applied to language and adapted to Anglophone tastes. you can read about this in “Language: The Unknown” and “Revolution in Poetic Language.” but, oh, you find Chomsky’s mathematical formalisms impressive? he took those from Schutzenberger. and not only is Chomsky a philosophical hack, but he’s a political hack too. what kind of unserious thinker impulsively decides to become an anarchist at 13 years of age, and then refuses to budge the slightest bit on his politics for the rest of his life? Chomsky is an overgrown, rhetorically sophisticated child. this is what I think contemporary linguistics needs: mathematical Kristevanism. people like Tyler James Bennett have been making interesting strides in semiotics recently, but what I really wish would occur is a serious fusion of the formal methods of post-Chomskyan computational linguistics with the more sophisticated theoretical frameworks of Kristeva, Bennett, and their ilk. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1883684886575476904 * Badiou's sets * Rocco Gangle - my reddit comment talking about diagrammtic immanence book? - Has anybody read this book? The table of contents looks interesting, seems like Gangle combines Spinoza, Peirce and Deleuze. I am in general interested in contemporary/living scholars who are combining mathematical theories (Set Theory, Category Theory, Type Theory, Group Theory, Number Theory, etc) with continental tradition in philosophy, which is how I came across Gangle recently. Alain Badiou and Robert Brandom also come up in my line of flight occasionally but I'm excited to learn more about Gangle. https://old.reddit.com/r/Deleuze/comments/1bzz7uu/rocco_gangles_diagrammatic_immanence_category/ * plasticpill's Disneyland Function - 5:50 - Disneyland Function = f(D) = R - R/D (where R = Baudrillard's Real, D = Disney, "The More Disneyland you have, the less Reality is negated, the stronger your Disneyland function, if you want to maintain a stable matrix then you need as many Disneylands as possible") https://old.reddit.com/r/plasticpills/comments/1gabbmq/baudrillards_theory_of_disneyland_hyperreality/ * Hegel, Lacan's Klein bottle/Mobius strip * José Ferrater Mora's Integrationism Philosophy vs Oscar Ichazo's Integralism Philosophy * Georg Simmel's Theory of Intersecting Social Circles * Sara Walker/Lee Cronin's Assembly Theory vs MDL's Assemblage Theory DeLanda, Manuel. Assemblage Theory (Speculative Realism) Why is there somethign rather than nothing? - moicomment: Lee Cronin and Sara Walker have stolen Assembly theory from Deleuze https://www.youtube.com/shorts/wdwxOlzuawM also Francesca Bellazzia's Self-Assembly and Philosophy of Biochemistry * baudrillard fractal value - "Transpolitics, The Fractal, and Freedom in the East – The Political Metaphors of Jean Baudrillard and Linkages to Jacques Derrida" https://baudrillardstudies.ubishops.ca/transpolitics-the-fractal-and-freedom-in-the-east-the-political-metaphors-of-jean-baudrillard-and-linkages-to-jacques-derrida/ * this post I made just about covers it from my perspective. I agree with the main thrust of the thread, but would consider someone like Thomas Reid to be part of the problem rather than the solution, which to me would have to entail claiming natural reason for a Christian metaphysics on its own terms, exactly as St. Thomas Aquinas did. for this, I think Husserl's method leads us back to an important geometric supplement to Thomism, which can also be cashed out through appeal to the Pythagorean tradition and the Christian Hermeticism of Nicholas of Cusa which both John and Ryan have worked on. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1919605220020978117 ;;; Nicholas Cusa advances beyond Pseudo-Dionysius's Divine Names in rendering the divine attributes or names (e.g. oneness, existence, etc.) in hypergeometrical figurative expressions by translating quality into quantity. It is precisely this translation of the divine names into hypergeometrical or hyperarithmological figures that authorizes in Hegel the speculative construction of a system of concepts, which frame not only the categorial grammar of divine naming, but also constitute the modes of divine in human self-knowledge of the Absolute (Maximum). https://x.com/RyanHaecker/status/1919137057122762927 * * * * * # general * "Foundations of the Theory of Probability" https://x.com/Riazi_Cafe_en/status/1883763680225235349 * * * *	# 2ndDerivatives / 3rdderivatives * * * * * * * * Novalis' "romanticization is nothing but a potentiation of potential" - Q&A Audience Member: Thank you so much. I want to go back to the quote that you began with from Novalis at the very beginning. Sorry to make you go all the way back. Matt: No, it’s fine. Audience Member: But you only put half the quote: “The world must be romanticized. In this way, its original meaning will be rediscovered. Romanticization is nothing but a potentiation of potential”—so this potentiation. But he also said it’s also a depotentiation. It’s this oscillation between potentiation and depotentiation that I would suggest, especially in the Romantics, they were quite interested in. So you can see that—just to take an example—he goes through the poetic, he goes through the empirical, he goes through the practical, farming, the scientific, and he doesn’t really settle on any one. There is no sort of conclusion. So, who is that goddess? It’s the goddess of nature, Diana—the wonderful, often-repeated figure of the time: the multibreasted goddess of Isis, goddess of... * Owen Barfield's From thought into thinking - Final participation is not attainable simply through imitation of original participation. For the Greeks, Barfield reminds us, were inside the world's unity; we are outside of it.2 We live in thought, not in thinking, and thus we must "first . . . realize that it [the original unity] is still there, and then . . . learn how to get back into it, how to rise once more from thought into thinking, taking with us, however, that fuller self-consciousness which the Greeks never knew . . ." (RCA 61). The models upon which Barfield draws in formulating his theory of final participation come not from the Greeks but from Goethe and Rudolf Steiner.3 "One need not be an analyst," R J. Reilly has observed, "to see the progression Barfield intends: from the solitude of private thought, to the strengthened thought that rays out into the thought of the universe, to the absolute dissolution of private thought in the universe, or the Kingdom--or from subjective idealism to Anthroposophy to heaven" (BAR 76). Into his nineties, Barfield has retained a firm faith that "the world of final participation will one day sparkle in the light of the eye as it never yet sparkled early one morning in the original light of the sun" (SA 161). But if we are ever to attain final participation, it willbe in the far distant future. It does not loom on the horizon. "Final participation," as Barfield writes in Saving the Appearances' final chapter, https://owenbarfield.org/BARFIELD/Encyclopedia_Barfieldiana/Lexicon/Final.html * “Men have become the tools of their tools.” Thoreau https://x.com/_primamateria/status/1945576441992626243 * Richard Raatzsch's Filosofia de la filosofia - https://www.facebook.com/groups/697448294881396/posts/1402359301056955/ * Simondon's relation of relations - In my opinion, Gilbert Simondon is probably the most interesting (and underexplored) thinker I've come across, particularly for my work in trying to understand the relationship between "the social and the individual." Especially his notion of the transindividual - the "relation of relations" connecting collective and individual development or individuation. It seems like an incredibly significant reorientation of western science and philosophy's individualism concerning human development. That said, despite reading a decent amount on Simondon (sadly his most relevant book for my interests is untranslated), I still don't fully get it. My favorite interpreter of Simondon is Muriel Combes. I've read David Scott's work which I wasn't as impressed by. I like Jason Read's work, need to revisit it now that I'm away from the pressure of my dissertation. Paolo Virno helped me understand some aspects of Simondon, although I get the sense that Virno might oversimplify some stuff. I tried to read a bit of Bernard Stiegler but I was pretty lost, my god that guy is jargon-y/has his own language. Do any of my friends have recommendations for further understanding? I would LOVE to take a class or do a reading group on Simondon someday - I learn so much better in a community environment - but I'm not aware of any real possibilities there currently.. https://www.facebook.com/micah.ingle.9/posts/pfbid0D6oMiPcq7DMEfqTpJpLaGmBDzQUD1FumC6XdEyxXWfY9uki2hDDVyK9tjWVhimfwl * Michael Hudson fails to achieve a true “negation of the negation” of the Reformation—heresy is not the solution, Christian orthodoxy is. https://x.com/gdesilet/status/1910210444163453413 * Here, Nicholas of Cusa introduces the "oneness of oneness" that is also "the equality of this oneness" - an expression reminiscent of G.W.F. Hegel's 'identity of difference and identity'. 🧵 https://x.com/RyanHaecker/status/1918721864576237620 * "infinity of infinity" - Ryan Haecker@RyanHaecker·1hAlthough Nicholas of Cusa allows for a virtual numerical expression of innumerable ideas, he ultimately denies that that God can be numbered, or that the Trinity can be counted as three. He quotes Augustine, who "was right in saying that we you begin to number the Trinity, you depart from truth." For since God is the simply creative origin of numerable plurality in the created world, and as such transcends the category of quantity, of number, or of any act of counting, God is per se uncountable, even as the divine essence subsists in the relations of three persons. Since, moreover, each of the three persons is fully God, absolute, and trans-quantifiable, and these person subsist in and through their relations, neither the persons nor their relations can be counted. As in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, God is the 'infinity of infinity', such that the divine persons are infinitely related to inifnity, and so on, in the most absolute infinity, which, in its self-particularizing finitude viz. creation unto Christ, is also the only true infinity. The hyperarithmological expression of God, the Trinity, and the divine persons is, consequently, not that of a real number - paradoxically but heretically of three gods in one god - but rather and only a quantified thought of this principle that surpasses quantity itself. https://x.com/RyanHaecker/status/1919147627003904471 * 2ndDerivative-ish? - Its founder, Guru Nanak, summarized this perspective by saying, "Truth is the highest virtue, but higher still is truthful living." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism * *	# Geometric vs ??? * Soteriology * Skepticism in the West was derived from Pyrrho’s encounters with the gymnosophists, likely Buddhists, while in Alexander’s army. It’s rooted in a soteriological principle, not a geometric one. Intellectualism always fails on the grounds of its accountability to the libido ;;; But I’ll admit there r a lot of difficulties in squaring Buddhist soteriological reason w/ Western geometric reason, & that they do need to be squared, so it’s not so much a matter of using Buddhist philosophy as an “out” as it is a matter of renewing it in this type encounter https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1652341899611590657 https://x.com/search?q=geometric%20soteriological&src=typd&f=live&vertical=news * Geometric vs * Geometric vs Algebra	.	.
	#mathish	#SpatialPhilosophy #Vertical #Horizontal (but doesn't Bergson say we must despatialize [politics, phi, etc] or was he only referring to time?)	#Spatial (vertical v horizontal, left v right) * * * * * * * Daoist Phenomenology - A Vertical Reading by Jay Goulding https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1923491858602197484 - Jay Goulding's Daoist Phenomenology represents a lifelong project of interpolating the works of Martin Heidegger with the interweavings of Daoism and Zen. Illustrating styles of reading complex texts from Europe and East Asia, Goulding moves away from horizontal reading of simple comparisons on a single plain to vertical reading as a deep dive of ideas into ancient worlds. Vertical Reading is hermeneutic strategy that captures the depth of connection between phenomenology and Daoism, especially Heidegger and classical Daoists Laozi and Zhuangzi. His method reveals Daoist implications of Dogen's Zen and draws on writing and ideas from popular culture including Jules Verne, H. P. Lovecraft, Philip K. Dick, George Lucas' Star Wars universe and martial artist Bruce Lee. Original and wide-ranging, Goulding's interconnected approach to phenomenology and Daoism enhances and promotes further intercultural dialogues between two great traditions in world philosophies. https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10172436077180377&set=gm.2492969304369920&idorvanity=100207360312805 * Pakistan, being a Muslim republic, has a curious relation to enjoyment: while the festivals are not as numerous as their counterparts in India, and there is not exactly a feeling of perpetual conviviality, there is, nonetheless, a Sunni majority, which is a particular branch of Islam that does not follow an imamate (the imamate being a principle of something like a father, that is, like what psychoanalysts and not ordinary culture calls a “father”; I am being clear that an imam is never a father), but more often focuses on the horizontal principle of rule through ummah and caliphate. So, we have three terms that we will need to think about: the object, the father or place of the law, and enjoyment. https://duanerousselle.medium.com/the-object-in-south-asia-b852f8492655 * "This essay traces the communicative body through horizontal and vertical phenomenology on the way to Merleau-Ponty’s brief interaction with Chinese philosophy." - The East Asian Communicative Body Jay Goulding - As a philosophical scholar of phenomenology, literature, art, and philosophy of the social sciences and humanities, John O’Neill’s (1933–2022) writings are translated into Chinese. As a sociological translator of Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961), O’Neill’s five phenomenal bodies culminate in the communicative body as an intermingling of material and spiritual relations. I distill by own version of three phenomenal bodies that I call the East Asian communicative body. This essay traces the communicative body through horizontal and vertical phenomenology on the way to Merleau-Ponty’s brief interaction with Chinese philosophy. https://philpapers.org/rec/GOUTEA-3 * * * * * * "In the Reformation we lost touch with the vertical dimension of God" - Early 2024 Anna be like “lemme reduce all Agape to Eros because I feel disconnected to God btw I’m a Spinozist esoteric Protestant Kabbalist” Most Protestantism is just erotomania, can’t imagine divine love that doesn’t loop back around to horizontally reduced human relations which are ultimately erotic whether or not it’s admitted explicitly In the Reformation we lost touch with the vertical dimension of God because of hyperbolic anti-institutionalism that converged with Gnosticism. If you’re a layperson who mainly just wants to cultivate Eros anyway, well then good for you I guess, but don’t try to over-extend that, since Christians from the earliest beginnings of the faith have all had the distinct consciousness that the experience of sanctifying grace in divine love goes much farther than erotic polarities and aesthetic sensibilities, it’s a reception of an embrace in God that is truly Absolute… https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1915017463915270283 * The weirdness of Deleuze as a philosopher of time is that he always insists on temporality as simultaneity and coexistence, and not succession and evolution. Time as a matter less of chronology than stratigraphy, vertical and not horizontal. ->It's possible even to read all of Deleuze from this angle (one among others): as a continual (eternal?) reminder that time must be thought otherwise than as succession, or else we miss something vital about it. Succession is the temporal enemy, time thought 'merely' according to what is 'actual'. Hence the early(ish) introduction of the 'virtual', meant in part to capture this verticality of time: "a genesis without dynamism, evolving necessarily in the element of a supra-historicity". That quote's from D&R, but in ATP you find the same argument from the other side: "All history does is to translate a coexistence of becomings into a succession". Succession and history are a kind of fallen time, time separated from an eternity where it has its proper element. This is Deleuze's Platonism, which, although he famously called for its 'overturning', insisted nonetheless upon "conserving many Platonic characteristics as not only inevitable but desirable" (D&R).The jarring alignment of becoming and eternity is found in the Logic of Sense, where its Platonic inspiration is honored as such: "We recognize this Platonic dualism... " – a dualism of the 'pure becoming' of the 'eternal truth of the event', and 'chronic' time of the present. And you can find it in the last work, WiP?, where the 'time' of philosophy is opposed to the 'history' of philosophy, in which "we give up the narrowly historical point of view of before and after" and discern instead strata which are "above or below in relation to another". No Big Point here other than that you can trace this resistance to succession and championing of coexistence as one of the through-lines that winds it way across Deleuze's writings, and it's fun to play spot-the-simultaneity-over-succession theme. Also you could, I guess, be reductive and say - this is just structuralism's insistence on the synchronic over the diachronic (langue over parole) ... and you wouldn't be wrong wrong, but mostly just a low degree of right. Also this one of the major stakes of the reading of Kant, where target of time as succession couldn't be made any clearer!: Realized it's unfair not to even mention Bergson once among all of this. But what, above all, does Deleuze take from Bergson? A: The contemporaneity (read: coexistence) of memory and the present! Via Bergsonism: https://x.com/StreetliTweets/status/1903103935218634886 * In 2006 AK Press published a book called Horizontalism. It is sub-titled “voices of popular power in Argentina” and has to do with mutual aid networks and forms of neighborhood and workplace autonomy after the financial collapse in 2001. Marina Sitrin, who edited the book and has done the most to popularize the titular word in Anglophone contexts, writes: Horizontalidad is a living word, reflecting an ever-changing experience. While I have translated it as horizontalism, it is more of an anti-ism. Horizontalism is not an ideology, but more of a social relationship, a way of being and relating. Indeed, the oral histories and interviews in the book testify to an extreme suspicion about established politics of any sort. This suspicion, which sometimes spills over into hostility, is manifest among other things in the descriptive term used for the organization of meetings, neighborhood assemblies, occupied spaces, and so on: horizontalidad. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alejandro-de-acosta-the-impossible-patience * The Russian “Vertical of Power System” - I would not assume that Putin has a clear picture of what is happening. He doesn’t use computers. He doesn’t even have a phone. He doesn’t read any western or other sources. He gets his news from reports typed up by yes men. The Russian “Vertical of Power System” that ‘governs’ the country means that he only talks to a select few people in person. Those people are likely either yes men or don’t have a clear understanding of the situation either. The one silach who might have grasped part of the true situation was prigozin and it lead him to mutiny. As for the Russian economy Putin is no economist. He’s an ex intelligence officer who worked in the torture the truth out of people department at the kgb. He likely knows more about car batteries than he does economic policy. He also has his reports on the state of the economy typed up by yes men. If you want to know what Putin really thinks about watch that insane Carlson interview he did. He thinks about “the glorious greater Russia” and events that happened centuries ago. Putin is not and has never based his decisions on pragmatism. He is operating on ideology and ‘intuition’. https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1i68igz/hes_destroying_russia_trump_tells_putin_to_end/m8b7bip/ * Gadamer's Horizontverschmelzung!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_of_horizons * Virilio talks of vertical vs horizontal vs oblique - In the late 1950s Paul Virilio had argued that the increasingly dynamic nature of modern life was to be matched with a new way for articulating architectural spaces. In Virilio's tripartite model of architectural evolution, the horizontal order typified the agricultural era and its rural habitat. The stage of the vertical order corresponded with the industrial era. The next logical step would be the OBLIQUE order of the post industrial age (Parent and Virilio 2004). To achieve this, he argued, it was necessary to discard the notion of the vertical enclosure, whose walls are made inaccessible by gravity, and to define habitable space by means of accessible inclined planes, thereby increasing usable surface area. As opposed to metaphoric approaches to motion promoted in the 1950s and 1960s by architects such as Eero Saarinen, Virilio’s approach suggests a sensual, not visual, feeling of motion. Virilio tried to develop technical research into the “organization and the precise morphology of oblique volumes”, but after few years of “overwhelming difficulties of building an oblique habitat,” he decided to abandon this work. Today, however, some of the technical difficulties mentioned by Virilio have probably been overcome, and as the information technology (IT) revolution is making our lives increasingly dynamic, we are in the position to re-examine the validity of the oblique theory https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jacob-Grobman/publication/287644302_On_The_Shores_Of_Architecture_-_Computational_Fluid_Dynamics_In_Architectural_Design/links/56b5f24708aebbde1a79bab2/On-The-Shores-Of-Architecture-Computational-Fluid-Dynamics-In-Architectural-Design.pdf https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X39gPKw3TFo * Mario Ferreira's Vertical Invasion of the Barbarians . Matese Publishing, 1967. Invasão Vertical dos Bárbaros. Editora Matese, 1967. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mário_Ferreira_dos_Santos History has shown many horizontal invasions of the barbarians, i.e., invasions occurring with various degrees of pace and consisting of pacific or violent incursions of people into regions inhabited by others through the imposition of customs or violent power. But one can refer to the – not so bloody – invasion of the barbarians that took place within a civilized territory such as the Roman Empire – mainly in its final stages – in a gradual manner and most of the time with the internal support of the civilized people, already barbarized in many of its customs. https://marioferreirainenglish.wordpress.com/category/the-vertical-invasion-of-the-barbarians/ * What does Mou Zongsan mean by "Vertical/horizontal system vertically/horizontally expressed"? (self.askphilosophy) submitted 8 years ago by [deleted] For Mou, Daoism and Buddhism are vertical systems horizontally expressed, while Kantian philosophy and Confucianism are vertical systems vertically expressed. From what I can tell by reading the 19 lectures is that a vertical system is one in which it reaches beyond the realm of the knowable, for example Kant's transcendental idealism and Buddhist Nirvana - but that doesn't seem to fit Confucianism. Something is horizontally expressed by connecting all things in the same level, rather than vertically expressing the necessary existence of an ultimate reality. Are there any other works I should look at that would help understanding the distinction? https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/5a8zts/what_does_mou_zongsan_mean_by_verticalhorizontal/ * vertical / horizontal distance - When we meet a stranger at a certain distance, when you get close to people the only way to get distance is to go vertical strangers, when you are too entangled in something you have to go vertical. feel stuck, generate movement in a relationship, you need distance for dance, the meta allows us to dance again, simulacra "oh great i feel unentangled and feel freer", but it can be like a drug. 1:43:00 "vertical wisdom", philosophers use the "distance of ideas" to see what you are in, Cadell's "Hegel is in the river" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koOBJD_NOCk&t=5880s * mythpoesis vs throawayphilacc - In order to understand Dharma or Daoism you really need to abandon literal thinking and embrace a lot of conflicts and counterintuitive spatial thinking https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1htupnc/got_a_job_translating_3000_year_old_poetry/m5grpqc/ * *	.	.	.	.
	#language	"Punctuation / Punctuational" Philosophy	* Sam McCormick chairotic time and punctualism / "punctual neologisms" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG1ngjCmHBg&t=49m * ampersand by R. Cam, Logo Daedalus - https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/18903017.Logo_Daedalus * Trump - “I’m just saying, Look, we had the greatest presidential election. We won the popular vote by millions of votes. We had a great, we had a great election, and it would be nice to cement the election with an election here. I mean, that would just be a big, beautiful exclamation point,” he said. * Humberto Maturana: "When one puts objectivity in parenthesis, all views, all verses in the multiverse are equally valid." https://twitter.com/FastTFriend/status/9226116413 * OG Rose - titles belong in parentheses? * Ratti, a multi-hyphenate architect whose science-driven approach to solving global challenges echoes her visionary theories on technology and the human-nature relationship. https://www.facebook.com/world.architects/posts/pfbid02h5RmjBBZ1VkY2ti4sMU1qsTdJCXNXNkMa9xS6mdw66EFSgRXNUN6X6J7H1a3uZV9l * Laszlo Krasznahorkai The full stop – “the dot”, he says dismissively – is an artificial convention, like apostrophes, commas. Call his lines real sentences instead, accumulated slow phrase by slow phrase from the voices he hears in his head. https://nilanjanaroy.com/2015/05/26/speaking-volumes-slow-reading/ * Lefebvre's parenthesizing (Arendt's bracketing and Husserl's epoche)? - Such understood practices of habitation are the starting point for Lefebvre’s rethinking of architectural imagination. Like habitation, which the ISU studied as experienced beyond its socioeconomic conditions of possibility, in Toward an Architecture of Enjoyment Lefebvre argues for a procedure that “suspends by means of thought,” literally “puts into parentheses,” the powers that “subordinate” the architect to the execution of a program defined on the level of urbanism and planning.94 He writes that only by postulating architecture’s “relative autonomy” is it possible to open up the architectural imagination rather than repeating that “there is nothing to be done, nothing to be thought, because everything is ‘blocked,’ because ‘capitalism’ rules and co-opts everything, because the ‘mode of production’ exists as system and totality, to be rejected or accepted in accordance with the principle of ‘all or nothing.’” Lefebvre argues that this “parenthesizing” is a “dialectical reduction,” which contrasts with philosophical reductivism, and follows the procedure of Marx to “reduce in order to situate and restore.” Rather than “putting everything into your system”—as Lefebvre polemically responded to Tafuri—he counted architecture among “open” totalities, semiautonomous subsystems, and nonsynchronicities within French postwar society. https://thecharnelhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Henri-Lefebvre-Toward-an-Architecture-of-Enjoyment-1.pdf * Mignolo? In his 2011 book The Darker Side of Western Modernity Mignolo presents delinking as the “decolonial option” (Mignolo, 2011a). This is his preferred future trajectory out of a list of five such trajectories; next to the decolonial option these are “rewesternization”, for instance in the foreign politics of the Obama administration that attempted at rebuilding global confidence in the U.S, “reorientations of the Left”, ranging from the World Social Forum and Chavismo all the way up to organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, “dewesternization” or Asian self-affirmations against Western thought, particularly in current India and China, and the “spiritual option” that seeks to find ways beyond consumer capitalism and development, like in the case of Native American conceptions of land as spiritual rather than as a commodity, and of buen vivir, the good life, as different from development (idem, p. 35-63). In short, the decolonial option means epistemic disobedience, acts of delinking from modernity/ coloniality and the colonial matrix of power in favor of embracing alternative routes which, both individually as well as taken together, establish a “pluriversal world, a world in which truth and objectivity in parenthesis is sovereign” * Dr. Nathan Brown's "fragments have a punctual determination" - I learned so much about Schlegel and Hardenberg! I really liked Dr. Brown's definition of fragments at 24:40 as a medium of thinking where when put together by multiple thinkers the fragments have a "punctual determination". And I continue to love how this channel brings German Idealism to life, all of your guests are contagiously passionate with their wonderful storytelling skills, bringing together a lot of characters and complex ideas. Thank you for all the work you do in your production #MediumIsTheMessage * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO-VaKSuoR8 Episode #71: Chetan Anand and Meditations on Hegel, Gödel, and More" - Godel's Incomplete should always have I in parentheses, (I)ncompleteness, bothness, ?it's not unfinishable?, the complete and incomplete are indivisible * There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts “native” before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as anyone else." -Theodore Roosevelt on DEI/Wokeness - https://x.com/esaagar/status/1872342485206270224 * Timothy Dexter‘s response to people who complained he hadn’t used any punctuation in the first edition. https://x.com/skdh/status/1887143141645471872 * On his deathbed, the Austrian writer Karl Kraus remarked of the Japanese attack on Manchuria: ‘None of this would have happened if people had only been more strict about the use of the comma.’ The implication being that by channelling rage into the ordering of small things, we might stay away from violence on a colossal scale. Unable to restrict ourselves to matters of punctuation, alas, humanity is often at war: with itself, and others, however hallucinatory. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-art-of-war/ * * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#language	#PronounPhilosophy #SuffixPhilosophy Prounoun-NESS, Prounoun-prounoun, "Pronoun Philosophy" what this such that - which both why	* See PronounPhilosophy tab - may be poisoned by ??chatgpt hallucinations?? or reddit nonsense # PROUNOUNS-ness * * * # VERB-ness (or NOUN-ness)? * Jean-Luc Maron's "Prolegomena to Charity", and "In Excess: Studies of Saturated Phenomena" and "Being Given: Toward a Phenomenology of Givenness" * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#language	#HyphenPhilosophy #PrepositionPhilosphy #PronounPhilosphyExtended	* 'being-for-others' and the 'for-itself' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity_and_objectivity_(philosophy) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * # funny * It’s just things-thinging and words-wording https://www.facebook.com/esotericphilosophymemeseastwest/posts/pfbid02cqckn5YNpVnBGQyF9G8vcrwjraDQf7wEFY55TEBqnodLpPUacBfxL8ABfw6VRz1il * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#language	# -ians (followers/proteges of a philosopher)	* "latter-day Cartesians" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monadology * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#NegPos, #language, #versus	Negative ??? vs Positive ??? PositiveNegativePositiveAndNegativeAndPositive	* Negative/Positive Philosophy - Schelling’s late transition from Negative to Positive Philosophy constitutes a pointed inversion of the path of systematic ascent mapped by Hegel for the first time in the Phenomenology’s Preface, which itself establishes Hegel’s development out of and beyond Schelling’s early philosophy; that a key notion to inspire the Hegelian vision articulated in the Preface returns to cap off the critique implicit in Schelling’s late inversion, where this notion emerges from their divergent readings of Aristotle’s Metaphysics https://philarchive.org/archive/ROGHAS * Negative Psychoanalysis * BR Yeager's Negative Space https://x.com/xenogothic/status/1905795086706684288 * Tarry with the Negative - Converdictions tarry with the negative (TU's #neologism "converdictions" vs Curt Jaimungal's "interlocutions"/"ΛΛΛ"?) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFiYQbm0D90&t=6m30s * Tarry with the Positive? * Negative politics vs Positive politics * * negative freedom = freedom to do what i want https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cas9qqh4iko&t=42m30s * MLK Jr: "white moderate [..] preers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presense of justice" https://old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1mgteh7/centrist/ * Isaiah Berlin's Negative Liberty - Berlin’s famous valorization of “negative” liberty flowed from his belief that the human being is (and should be allowed to be) a choice-making creature, especially in the face of the incommensurability of ultimate values. “To be free”, he wrote, “is to be able to make an unforced choice; and choice entails competing possibilities.” Negative liberty, then, provided space for such choices to be freely made, including an “anti-perfectionist” freedom from politics. https://archive.is/XZMET#selection-577.0-577.467 * Ein Sof = negative theology - I wonder if someone has done a comparison of the negative theology of Ein Sof in Kabbalah and emptiness/Sunyata in Buddhism? My hunch is that if anyone has done that, it's Aryeh Kaplan https://x.com/PainfullyShai/status/1863593617941524829 * Antipositivism? - Simmel was influential in the field of sociology. Simmel was one of the first generation of German sociologists: his neo-Kantian approach laid the foundations for sociological antipositivism, asking "what is society?"—directly alluding to Kant's "what is nature?"—presenting pioneering analyses of social individuality and fragmentation. Simmel discussed social and cultural phenomena in terms of "forms" and "contents" with a transient relationship, wherein form becomes content, and vice versa dependent on context. In this sense, Simmel was a forerunner to structuralist styles of reasoning in the social sciences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipositivism * negative ontology - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff_HfBjRXqk&t=58m10s * People who want to understand this moment should read up on Piccone's theory of "Artificial Negativity." The idea is that, after the defeat of the working class as a political force, capitalist politics requires artificial dissident movements to create any innovation or dynamism. My feeling is that this approach is no longer going to function, not dialectically through dysfunction. https://x.com/DougLain/status/1901001885244682357 * * * * * * * * * *	.	.	.	.
	#mezcla	#Relatives, #InLaws #inlaws # PhilosopherA is related to PhilosopherB by marriage #incest	* Bergson x Proust - In 1891, Bergson married the cousin of the novelist Marcel Proust (1871-1922), whose writing was strongly shaped by Bergson’s durée. * Buber x Agassi - Agassi is Buber's grandson-in-law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Buber_Agassi * Miller x Lacan - Jacques-Alain Miller - the son-in-law of French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan (in 1967 he married Lacan's daughter Judith Miller) - is a prominent Lacanian psychoanalyst. * Lacan x Bataille - Bataille was Lacan's wife's exhusband, so Lacan and Bataille are Eskimo brothers - Sylvia Bataille (born Sylvia Maklès; 1 November 1908 – 22 December 1993) was a French actress of Romanian-Jewish descent.[3] When she was twenty, she married the writer Georges Bataille with whom she had a daughter, the psychoanalyst Laurence Bataille (1930–1986). Georges Bataille and Sylvia separated in 1934 but did not divorce until 1946. Starting in 1938, she was a companion of the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan with whom, in 1941, she had a daughter, Judith (married name Judith Miller). Sylvia Bataille married Jacques Lacan in 1953. ;;; https://x.com/TotalPhilo/status/1899463795430281280 * Hosein Nasr también es pariente del filósofo Ramin Jahanbegloo. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosein_Nasr https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1hter8v/major_figures/ * Lino Camprubí = nieto del filósofo Gustavo Bueno https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/8482014.Lino_Camprub_ * Heloise x Abelard - This amazing CD contains six works by Peter Abelard and, among them, there is "O quanta qualia" which opens the album. It is part of a hymn book for the Paraclete: a new community of nuns of which Héloïse became abbess. Who was Heloïse? She was Peter Abelard's lover (1/2) https://x.com/BramaAlessandro/status/1642174322541305857 * Paul Lafargue=Marx's Son-in-law https://x.com/Logo_Daedalus/status/1958033313714847784 * * * * * *	.
	#language, #mezcla	#FusionPhilosophy? !! https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1ck1klu/seeking_neologisms_along_the_lines_of/	* Dreydegger * Kripkenstein / Kripgenstein - was Kripkenstein a friend of Dreydegger? https://twitter.com/simulo/status/1097630870964445186 * Fressell - Fressellian (Frege and Russell) - pace Meinong https://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/existence/page/2/ moicomment - https://x.com/TeoriaDeTeoria/status/1860486805465801038 * Hegelacanese https://old.reddit.com/r/zizek/comments/1lhhz1i/what_is_unique_about_zizeks_ideas/mz54byb/ * * *	.	.	.	.
	living philosophers	living	* Cutronian axiom - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff_HfBjRXqk&t=33m08s * * *
	versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	superversus POTENTIAL / candidatos potenciales / Potentielle Kandidaten G philosophers André Gorz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9_Gorz Alvin Gouldner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Gouldner H philosophers Eric Hobsbawm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Hobsbawm Dietrich von Hildebrand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_von_Hildebrand Pierre Hadot - Check me out on the great @Imperfectbuddha podcast. We talked about Pierre Hadot, Peter Sloterdijk, Slovaj Zizek, martial arts, contemplative practice, and much more. https://twitter.com/AE_Robbert/status/1227265005298470913 N philosophers Arne Næss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arne_N%C3%A6ss R philosophers	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#AVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Auge v Auden v Abulafia v Aurobindo v Ariès v Aira v Artaud Alister != Alasdair != Alastair != Aleister..any fucking questions? Alister McGrath (theologian) Alasdair Macintyre (philosopher) Alastair Campbell (spin doctor) Aleister Crowley (occultist) Got it? https://twitter.com/ProfTomMole/status/1477326403116879880 ;;;also what about Alastair Norcross https://old.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/3gz0qr/alastair_norcross_the_immorality_of_premarital/ ;;; also who is Alasdair Gray https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hvnl8d/art_by_alasdair_gray/ Marc Auge vs WH Auden vs Abraham Abulafia vs Sri Aurobindo vs Philippe Ariès vs Cesar Aira vs Antonin Artaud A philosophers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Aug%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._H._Auden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Abulafia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Aurobindo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Ari%C3%A8s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%A9sar_Aira Antonin Artaud	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#BVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Badiou v Bataille v Bourdieu v Blanchot v Botton v Baudrillard v Baudelaire v Bachelard v Bergson v Blondel v Braudel v Burnham v Brentano v Barthes v Barth v Brandom v Bastian v Bateson v Bakhtin v Bradley v Ballard v Bateson v Burroughs Alain Badiou v Georges Bataille v Pierre Bourdieu v Maurice Blanchot v Alain de Botton v Jean Baudrillard v Charles Baudelaire v Gaston Bachelard v Henri Bergson v Maurice Blondel v Fernand Braudel v James Burnham v Franz Brentano v Roland Barthes v Karl Barth v Robert Brandom v Adolf Bastian v Gregory Bateson v Mikhail Bakhtin v F.H. Bradley v JG Ballard v Gregory Bateson v Burroughs ???more??? - Jakob Böhme/Boehme, Niels Bohr, David Bohm ???more(socialists)??? - Louis-Auguste Blanqui B philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Badiou https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Bataille https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Bourdieu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Blanchot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_de_Botton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Baudelaire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaston_Bachelard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Bergson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Blondel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_Braudel (historican, world systems theorist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Burnham https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Brentano https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Barthes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Brandom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Bastian%20 (Elementargedanke, anthropology, polymath) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Bateson%20 (anthropologist, social scientist, linguist, visual anthropologist, semiotician, cyberneticist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakhtin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._H._Bradley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._G._Ballard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Bateson Burroughs	Please compare and contrast Badiou with Bataille with Bourdieu (including influences, influenced, books, year of birth) Please compare and contrast Badiou with Bataille with Bourdieu, including their influences and birth /death dates Sure. Here is a comparison and contrast of Badiou, Bataille, and Bourdieu, including their influences and birth/death dates: Philosopher Birth Date Death Date Influences Key Ideas Alain Badiou 1937 2019 Hegel, Lacan, and Marxism Event, truth, subject, fidelity Georges Bataille 1897 1962 Nietzsche, Hegel, and Marx Excess, expenditure, eroticism, sacrifice Pierre Bourdieu 1930 2002 Marx, Weber, and Durkheim Habitus, field, capital, symbolic violence Badiou was a French philosopher who was born in 1937 and died in 2019. He is best known for his work on ontology, politics, and ethics. Badiou was influenced by Hegel, Lacan, and Marxism. He developed a theory of the event, which he defined as a rupture in the ordinary course of things that opens up the possibility of change. Badiou also developed a theory of the subject, which he defined as the one who is faithful to the event. Bataille was a French philosopher and writer who was born in 1897 and died in 1962. He is best known for his work on eroticism, sacrifice, and the sacred. Bataille was influenced by Nietzsche, Hegel, and Marx. He developed a theory of excess, which he defined as the expenditure of energy that goes beyond what is necessary for survival. Bataille also developed a theory of eroticism, which he defined as the experience of jouissance, or unmediated pleasure. Bourdieu was a French sociologist who was born in 1930 and died in 2002. He is best known for his work on social class, culture, and education. Bourdieu was influenced by Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. He developed a theory of habitus, which he defined as the embodied dispositions that shape our perceptions, thoughts, and actions. Bourdieu also developed a theory of field, which he defined as a social space in which individuals compete for resources. Badiou, Bataille, and Bourdieu were all important figures in 20th century philosophy. They each developed their own unique theories about the nature of reality, society, and the individual. Their work has had a significant impact on a wide range of disciplines, including philosophy, sociology, political science, and cultural studies.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	* Bateson and Brentano both influenced psychoanalysts (Jung and Freud, respectively). ?Brentano/Husserl influenced Freud/Heidegger? * Roland Barthes v Karl Barth - Karl Barth vs Roland Barthes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Barthes * Karl Barth vs Karl Jaspers - cringetension lolwtf - Cadell Last mixes up Karl Barth with Karl Jaspers - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth Theory Underground is a fantastic place to develop one’s philosophical-intellectual capacities. I myself have taken two courses this year, David McKerracher’s course on Karl Barth’s The Idea of the University, and Michael Downs’s course on Slavoj Zizek’s For They Know Not What They Do. I highly recommend their work. https://substack.com/notes/post/p-131696064#footnote-anchor-6-131696064 * *	<table><tbody><tr><th>Characteristic</th><th>Alain Badiou</th><th>Georges Bataille</th><th>Pierre Bourdieu</th></tr><tr><td><strong>Year of birth</strong></td><td>1937</td><td>1897</td><td>1930</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Influences</strong></td><td>Plato, Hegel, Marx, Lacan</td><td>Hegel, Nietzsche, Sade</td><td>Marx, Weber, Durkheim</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Influenced</strong></td><td>Slavoj Žižek, Judith Butler, Michael Hardt</td><td>Gilles Deleuze, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault</td><td>Anthony Giddens, Axel Honneth, Judith Butler</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Books</strong></td><td>Being and Event (1988), The Communist Hypothesis (2010), Ethics (1993)</td><td>The Accursed Share (1949), Inner Experience (1943), The College of Sociology (1937-1939)</td><td>Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste (1979), The Logic of Practice (1980), The State Nobility (1989)</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Key ideas</strong></td><td>Event, truth, fidelity</td><td>Excess, expenditure, sovereignty</td><td>Habitus, field, capital</td></tr></tbody></table>	#BLOOMIAN COLLISIONS - Allan Bloom vs Harold Bloom vs Leopold Bloom vs Paul Bloom !! https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=%22Harold%20Bloom%22%20%22Allan%20Bloom%22 #BLOOM Which Bloom is more based? * "bloomian platonism" said here I think (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YadN75NcPhM&loop=0 or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umZARSwkrBs&loop=0) said by Cutrone refers to Allan Bloom I guess due to the new book ("Melville plus Nietzsche divided the square root of Allan Bloom times ZIzek Squared")? But Harold Bloom wrote "Where Shall Wisdom Be Found" which uses Plato? IDK! * Allan Bloom says mockingly "tHe cHaRm oF mArCuSe" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Vn4VDkx2HY&t=30m26s * Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind.pdf * I'm reading Allan Bloom’s interpretative essay on The Republic this afternoon, been a long time since I read it last. One thing I like about Bloom’s emphasis on the dialogue as a dialogue, is the location of Plato’s most important ideas in the spaces where Socrates’ interlocutors break into the discussion. In particular, his suggestion that the places where his dialogue partners assent and their assent strikes us as odd or too quick—the “True”s and “Certainly, Socrates”s where we are almost tempted to laugh at their ready agreement—serve a purpose in the philosophical enterprise, rather than just as a stylistic flair or device designed to show how respected Socrates was by Glaucon and Adeimantus. It opens up another dimension to the theoretical play of the dialogue, and also slows you down as you read those passages. Traducir post Cita Ben Gross @bengrossbg · 9h https://x.com/bengrossbg/status/1953178810821836978 * A "Bloom" refers to an archetypal, alienated modern person or subject, named after the character Leopold Bloom from the James Joyce novel Ulysses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiqqun#Imaginary_Party * tenshi_anna Harold Bloom The American Religion https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911501708112384081 I’ve made a somewhat embarrassing discovery: I can completely neutralize this discarnating energy if I listen to “girlboss” music and cultivate a state of perpetual low-level arousal. I’ve spoken about this with other women who are oracularly inclined, and heard similar things, but when I study certain mystical traditions, in particular Kabbalah, I often end up feeling an extremely intense welling up of energy in my body, and sometimes start shaking and experiencing various forms of derealization or reality shifting. in particular stuff regarding the sefirotic structure of the Etz Chaim and Kabbalistic numerology seems to be doing this to me lately. it makes it really hard to focus on studying, especially when I’m alone and don’t have someone equipped to “spot” me so to speak https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911511345738236244 * Paul Bloom? - bloom https://open.spotify.com/episode/37O1ZeblOVxEQiMPmUiCRX https://old.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyEvents/comments/1mffzl0/human_nature_and_the_impossibility_of_utopia_w/ * * * * * *
	#CVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Copjec v Kojève v Cohen v Cassirer v Creuzer v Castoriadis v Crawley v Caspari v Cusset v Condillac v Canguilhem v Critchley v Clouscard v Cioran v Caraco v Claessens v Katsiaficas vs Caffentzis v Krasznahorkai v Cacciari v Carvalho Joan Copjec v Alexandre Kojève v Hermann Cohen v Ernst Cassirer v Georg Friedrich Creuzer v Cornelius Castoriadis v Ernest Crawley v Otto Caspari v François Cusset v Étienne Bonnot de Condillac v Georges Canguilhem v Simon Critchley v Michel Clouscard v Emil Cioran v Albert Caraco v Dieter Claessens v George Katsiaficas vs George Caffentzis v László Krasznahorkai v Massimo Cacciari v Olavo de Carvalho # C philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Copjec https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Koj%C3%A8ve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Cohen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Cassirer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Friedrich_Creuzer (philologist/archaeologist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelius_Castoriadis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Crawley (anthropologist, schoolmaster) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Caspari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Cusset (writer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89tienne_Bonnot_de_Condillac https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Canguilhem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Critchley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Clouscard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Cioran https://old.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyMemes/comments/139jq1i/im_ready/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Caraco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Claessens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Katsiaficas (historian and social theorist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Caffentzis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A1szl%C3%B3_Krasznahorkai https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massimo_Cacciari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olavo_de_Carvalho	Georg Friedrich Creuzer was a German philologist, Kreutzer, Gert Caspari = https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Caspari	QUOTES: * "Contaminated by the superstition of action, we believe that our ideas must come to something. What could be more contrary to the passive consideration of the world? But such is our fate: to be incurables who protest, pamphleteers on a pallet." - Emil Cioran * "En la palabra naturalización se esconde el error: ella debería más bien denominarse como eticización. Porque el hombre no debe renunciar a su condicionamiento natural cuando se somete a una tarea moral" (Hermann Cohen). https://twitter.com/FacundoMilman/status/1727687573282181411 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Cohen * * * * *	The term was coined by Sigmund Freud in 1917, based on the earlier work of English anthropologist Ernest Crawley. Crawley theorized that each individual is separated from others by a taboo of personal isolation, which is effectively a narcissism of minor differences.[2]	.	.
	#DVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	DeBord vs Derrida vs Deleuze vs Donzelot v Damisch Guy DeBord vs Jacques Derrida vs Gilles Deleuze vs Jacques Donzelot v Hubert Damisch D philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Debord https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derrida https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Deleuze https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Donzelot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Damisch	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	Debord vs Baudrillard	.	.
	#EVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Ellul v Eliade Jacques Ellul vs Mircea Eliade E philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Ellul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mircea_Eliade	Compare and contrast Jacques Ellul vs Mircea Eliade ChatGPT Jacques Ellul and Mircea Eliade were both prominent intellectuals of the 20th century, but they approached their respective fields with different focuses and perspectives. Here's a brief comparison and contrast between the two thinkers: Fields of Study: Jacques Ellul: Ellul was a French philosopher, sociologist, and theologian. He primarily focused on the analysis of technology, propaganda, communication, and the impact of modern technological society on human beings and culture. He explored the dehumanizing effects of technology and the risks it posed to individual freedom and autonomy. Mircea Eliade: Eliade was a Romanian historian of religion, philosopher, and writer. He specialized in the study of comparative religion, mythology, and religious symbolism. His work delved into the study of religious experiences, rituals, and the sacred, with an emphasis on the role of myths and symbols in human life and culture. Perspectives: Jacques Ellul: Ellul had a critical perspective on modern technological society. He argued that technology had become an autonomous force that dominated and shaped human life, eroding personal freedom, individuality, and ethical values. He highlighted the dehumanizing effects of technological progress and advocated for a critical examination of its impact on society. Mircea Eliade: Eliade approached religion from a phenomenological perspective. He viewed religion as a fundamental aspect of human existence, highlighting the need for religious experiences and the search for the sacred. He emphasized the significance of religious rituals, myths, and symbols in providing individuals with a sense of meaning, transcendence, and connection to the sacred. Methods and Approaches: Jacques Ellul: Ellul employed sociological analysis, philosophical inquiry, and theological reflection in his works. He combined critical analysis with a deep understanding of the social, cultural, and technological factors at play in modern society. Mircea Eliade: Eliade used a comparative and historical approach to study religious traditions and phenomena. He explored various religious beliefs and practices across cultures and civilizations, examining their similarities, differences, and underlying patterns. Influence: Jacques Ellul: Ellul's work on technology, propaganda, and the impact of modern society had a significant influence on critical theory, sociology, philosophy, and media studies. His ideas continue to shape discussions on the relationship between technology and society. Mircea Eliade: Eliade's studies on religion, myth, and symbolism have had a profound impact on religious studies, anthropology of religion, and the understanding of the human quest for meaning and transcendence. His work continues to be widely studied and referenced in the field of religious studies. In summary, while both Jacques Ellul and Mircea Eliade were influential thinkers of the 20th century, they focused on different areas of study and had distinct perspectives. Ellul critically analyzed the impact of technology on society, while Eliade explored the significance of religion, myths, and symbols in human life. Tell me Ellul's influences and who he influenced, and same with Eliade. If there are any overlapping people between the two then please highlight those individuals. ChatGPT Jacques Ellul's Influences and Influenced: Influences: Ellul was influenced by various philosophical, theological, and sociological thinkers. Some of his major influences include Karl Marx, Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, Max Weber, and Gabriel Marcel. He drew upon their ideas and integrated them into his analysis of technology, communication, and modern society. Influence: Jacques Ellul's works have influenced a wide range of disciplines and scholars. His critical analysis of technology and its impact on society resonated with thinkers in fields such as sociology, philosophy, media studies, and theology. Some notable scholars who have been influenced by Ellul include Neil Postman, Albert Borgmann, Andrew Feenberg, and Langdon Winner. Mircea Eliade's Influences and Influenced: Influences: Mircea Eliade drew inspiration from various sources, including the works of Carl Jung, Friedrich Nietzsche, Henri Bergson, and Rudolf Otto. He was also influenced by the traditional religious and mythological systems he studied, particularly those of India and other ancient civilizations. Influence: Eliade's studies in the fields of comparative religion, mythology, and symbolism have had a significant impact on religious studies and related disciplines. Many scholars in the fields of religious studies, anthropology, and philosophy have been influenced by his work. Some notable figures who have been influenced by Eliade include Joseph Campbell, Jonathan Z. Smith, Wendy Doniger, and Eliade's student, Ioan P. Culianu. Overlapping Influence: There are no major overlapping individuals between the direct influences and influenced scholars of Jacques Ellul and Mircea Eliade. However, both Ellul and Eliade have contributed to shaping the field of religious studies, albeit from different angles. Their works have been studied and cited by scholars working in religious studies and related disciplines, demonstrating some degree of overlapping influence within that academic domain. Please note that the above lists are not exhaustive, as both Ellul and Eliade have had a broad and diverse range of influences and have influenced numerous scholars in their respective fields.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#FVesus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	vonFoerster v Florensky v Florovsky v Feyerabend v Feuerbach v Flaubert v Farrer Heinz von Foerster vs Pavel Florensky vs Georges Florovsky vs Paul Karl Feyerabend vs Johann Anselm Feuerbach v Gustave Flaubert F philosophers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_von_Foerster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Florensky https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Florovsky https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Feyerabend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Johann_Anselm_Ritter_von_Feuerbach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Flaubert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Farrer	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#IVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Ilyin v Illich v Ingarden v "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" Ivan Ilyin v Ivan Illich v Roman Ingarden v "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" Tolstoy's "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" vs Ilyin/Illich (??lol??) I philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Ilyin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Illich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Ingarden	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#LVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Lasch v Laclau v Lefebvre v Lingis v Lukacs v Luhmann v Lévy v Lévy-Bruhl v Lévi-Strauss v Strauss Christopher Lasch v Ernesto Laclau v Henri Lefebvre v Alphonso Lingis v György Lukács v Niklas Luhmann v Bernard-Henri Lévy v Lucien Lévy-Bruhl v Claude Lévi-Strauss v Leo Strauss (SPECIAL) Dominique Strauss Kahn L philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Lasch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Laclau https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Lefebvre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphonso_Lingis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gy%C3%B6rgy_Luk%C3%A1cs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklas_Luhmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard-Henri_L%C3%A9vy - thinking about when Derrida--not a violent man--punched this guy in the face on the floor of a Sorbonne lecture hall at the Estates General of Philosophy 1979 (true story) https://x.com/albernaj/status/1841118474212364637 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_L%C3%A9vy-Bruhl (anthropologist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_L%C3%A9vi-Strauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss	Bard: Please compare and contrast laclau v lefebvre v lukacs v lasch (including influences, influenced, books, year of birth), preferably in a table	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	Compare and contrast Lucien Lévy-Bruhl v Claude Lévi-Strauss v Leo Strauss: Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Claude Lévi-Strauss, and Leo Strauss are notable thinkers in different fields, and while their work may intersect at times, they have distinct approaches and contributions. Here's a brief comparison and contrast: Lucien Lévy-Bruhl: Field: Anthropology and Philosophy. Key Ideas: Lévy-Bruhl focused on the study of primitive mentality and the differences between "primitive" and "civilized" thought. He argued for the existence of a "pre-logical" or "mystical" mentality in non-Western societies. Notable Works: "How Natives Think" and "Primitive Mentality." Claude Lévi-Strauss: Field: Anthropology and Structuralism. Key Ideas: Lévi-Strauss is known for his contributions to structural anthropology and his emphasis on the underlying structures of human culture and thought. He analyzed cultural phenomena through binary oppositions and sought to uncover universal patterns in human societies. Notable Works: "The Elementary Structures of Kinship" and "The Savage Mind." Leo Strauss: Field: Political Philosophy. Key Ideas: Strauss is associated with the revival of classical political philosophy and the study of political theory. He focused on the interpretation of classical texts and emphasized the importance of examining the teachings of political philosophers throughout history. Notable Works: "Natural Right and History" and "The City and Man." In terms of comparison, both Lévy-Bruhl and Lévi-Strauss made significant contributions to the field of anthropology, although their methodologies and foci differed. Lévy-Bruhl's work focused on the contrast between "primitive" and "civilized" thought, while Lévi-Strauss examined the underlying structures and patterns in human culture. Both thinkers aimed to understand the diversity of human societies and challenge ethnocentric perspectives. Leo Strauss, on the other hand, belongs to the field of political philosophy and is distinct from the other two thinkers. His work is centered around the interpretation and analysis of classical political texts, seeking to revive the study of political theory. Overall, while there may be some overlaps and connections between their work, Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Claude Lévi-Strauss, and Leo Strauss primarily made distinct contributions within their respective fields of study.	<table><tbody><tr><th>Characteristic</th><th>Ernesto Laclau</th><th>Henri Lefebvre</th><th>Georg Lukács</th><th>Christopher Lasch</th></tr><tr><td><strong>Year of birth</strong></td><td>1935</td><td>1901</td><td>1885</td><td>1932</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Influences</strong></td><td>Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Louis Althusser</td><td>Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin</td><td>Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels</td><td>Sigmund Freud, Max Weber, David Riesman</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Influenced</strong></td><td>Chantal Mouffe, Slavoj Žižek, Judith Butler</td><td>Manuel Castells, David Harvey, Michael Hardt</td><td>Raymond Williams, Terry Eagleton, Fredric Jameson</td><td>Richard Sennett, Todd Gitlin, Robert Bellah</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Books</strong></td><td>Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985), On Populist Reason (2005)</td><td>The Production of Space (1974), Everyday Life in the Modern World (1971)</td><td>History and Class Consciousness (1923), The Young Hegel (1948)</td><td>The Culture of Narcissism (1979), The Minimal Self (1984)</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Key ideas</strong></td><td>Hegemony, discourse, articulation</td><td>Alienation, reification, everyday life</td><td>Class consciousness, totality, mediation</td><td>Consumerism, narcissism, therapeutic culture</td></tr></tbody></table> Laclau, Lefebvre, and Lukács were all influential Marxist theorists who wrote extensively about the nature of society, politics, and culture. However, they had different theoretical approaches and emphasized different aspects of Marxism. Laclau was a post-structuralist Marxist who was interested in the role of discourse and ideology in the construction of social reality. He argued that hegemony is not a fixed or stable state, but rather a process of articulation in which different social forces come together to form a temporary unity. Lefebvre was a Marxist humanist who was interested in the everyday life of ordinary people. He argued that everyday life is a site of struggle where people can resist the dominant ideology and create new forms of sociality. Lukács was a Marxist philosopher who was interested in the nature of class consciousness. He argued that class consciousness is not something that is given, but rather something that must be won through struggle. He also argued that the proletariat is the only class that is capable of achieving true class consciousness. The work of Laclau, Lefebvre, and Lukács has had a profound impact on contemporary social theory. Their work has been used to explain a wide range of social phenomena, from the rise of populism to the development of new social movements. Laclau, Lefebvre, Lukács, and Lasch were all influential theorists who wrote extensively about the nature of society, politics, and culture. However, they had different theoretical approaches and emphasized different aspects of these topics. Laclau was a post-structuralist Marxist who was interested in the role of discourse and ideology in the construction of social reality. He argued that hegemony is not a fixed or stable state, but rather a process of articulation in which different social forces come together to form a temporary unity. Lefebvre was a Marxist humanist who was interested in the everyday life of ordinary people. He argued that everyday life is a site of struggle where people can resist the dominant ideology and create new forms of sociality. Lukács was a Marxist philosopher who was interested in the nature of class consciousness. He argued that class consciousness is not something that is given, but rather something that must be won through struggle. He also argued that the proletariat is the only class that is capable of achieving true class consciousness. Lasch was a cultural critic who was interested in the nature of consumer culture and the rise of the therapeutic culture. He argued that consumer culture is a form of false consciousness that prevents people from understanding their true interests. He also argued that the therapeutic culture is a form of social control that encourages people to focus on their own personal problems and to ignore the larger social problems. The work of Laclau, Lefebvre, Lukács, and Lasch has had a profound impact on contemporary social theory. Their work has been used to explain a wide range of social phenomena, from the rise of populism to the development of new social movements.	.
	#MVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternaryMVersus	Maimonides v Mendelssohn v Maimon v Mauss v Malinowski v Michéa v Mouffe v Marion v Mallarmé Moses ben Maimon / Maimonides vs Moses Mendelssohn vs Salomon Maimon v Marcel Mauss v Bronisław Malinowski v Jean-Claude Michéa v Chantel Mouffe v Jean-Luc Marion v Stéphane_Mallarme M philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimonides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Mendelssohn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Maimon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcel_Mauss (sociology, anthropology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronis%C5%82aw_Malinowski (anthropologist, ethnologist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Claude_Mich%C3%A9a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chantal_Mouffe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Luc_Marion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stéphane_Mallarmé (poet)	Maimonides (1138-1204), Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786), and Salomon Maimon (1753-1800) were all influential Jewish philosophers who lived in different periods and had different perspectives on Judaism and philosophy. Maimonides was a medieval Jewish philosopher who wrote extensively on Jewish law and theology. He believed that reason and philosophy could be used to deepen one's understanding of Judaism, and he sought to reconcile Aristotelian philosophy with Jewish theology. Maimonides' philosophy emphasized the importance of ethical behavior and the pursuit of knowledge. Mendelssohn, on the other hand, was an Enlightenment thinker who sought to integrate Jewish values and practices with the ideals of the Enlightenment. He believed that Judaism was compatible with reason and advocated for Jewish assimilation into European society. Mendelssohn's philosophy emphasized the importance of individual autonomy and religious toleration. Maimon, a disciple of Mendelssohn, was a German philosopher who developed a critical philosophy that was heavily influenced by Immanuel Kant. He sought to reconcile Kantian philosophy with Jewish theology and argued that the pursuit of truth and knowledge could help deepen one's religious faith. Maimon's philosophy emphasized the importance of skepticism and critical inquiry. In summary, Maimonides, Mendelssohn, and Maimon were all Jewish philosophers who had different perspectives on the relationship between Judaism and philosophy. While Maimonides emphasized the importance of reason and ethics within Judaism, Mendelssohn sought to integrate Jewish values with Enlightenment ideals, and Maimon developed a critical philosophy that sought to reconcile Kantian philosophy with Jewish theology.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#PVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternaryMVersus	Preziosi v Przywara Giovanni Preziosi vs Erich Przywara	.	.	.	.	.
	#SVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Steiner v Spengler v Stiegler v Schuon Rudolf Steiner vs Oswald Spengler vs Bernard Stiegler vs Frithjof Schuon Claude Lévi-Strauss v Leo Strauss v David Strauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Strauss Rudolf Steiner v George Steiner??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Steiner Deborah Steiner \|\| Barbara Stiegler Solzhenitsyn v Solovyov S philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Steiner (occultist, architect) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Spengler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Stiegler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frithjof_Schuon	Bard: Please compare and contrast Rudolf Steiner vs Oswald Spengler vs Bernard Stiegler (including influences, influenced, books, year of birth), preferably in a table Sure, here is a table comparing and contrasting Rudolf Steiner, Oswald Spengler, and Bernard Stiegler: Philosopher Influences Influenced Books Year of Birth Rudolf Steiner Goethe, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer Thomas Kuhn, Ken Wilber, Jean Gebser The Philosophy of Freedom, Theosophy, The Foundations of Anthroposophy 1861 Oswald Spengler Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Goethe, Hegel Martin Heidegger, Carl Jung, Arnold Gehlen The Decline of the West, Man and Technics 1880 Bernard Stiegler Martin Heidegger, Jacques Derrida, Gilbert Simondon N. Katherine Hayles, Timothy Morton, Graham Harman Technics and Time, The Re-Enchantment of the World, The Negation of the Gift 1952 As you can see, all three philosophers were influenced by a variety of thinkers, including Goethe, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. They also all wrote extensively on a variety of topics, including philosophy, history, technology, and culture. However, there are also some key differences between the three philosophers. Steiner was a mystic and spiritualist, while Spengler was a historian and cultural pessimist, and Stiegler is a philosopher of technology. Steiner's work is characterized by its focus on the spiritual and the individual, Spengler's work is characterized by its focus on the decline of Western civilization, and Stiegler's work is characterized by its focus on the impact of technology on human beings. I hope this table is helpful!	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	#VVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Virilio v Varela v Vattimo v Voruz vs Vygotsky v Voegelin v Verri Paul Virilio v Francisco Varela v Gianni Vattimo v Veronique Voru v Lev Vygotsky v Eric Voegelin v Pietro Verri V philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Virilio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Varela https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gianni_Vattimo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ella_Freeman_Sharpe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Vygotsky (psychologist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Voegelin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietro_Verri # more: * John Vervaeke v Yanis Varoufakis - the meaning crisis v greek minister * I’ll toss you guys a little no holds barred schizopost in the name of our new age of “free speech” (the “guerrilla scholarship” will still take some time yet) https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1882469418137207270 * * * * *	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	* Paul Virilio's view of architectural space vs Hegel's/Sloterdijk's/Lefebvre's? * * *	.	.
	#WVersus versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	Winnicott v Whitehead v Wollstonecraft v Winner Donald Winnicott v Alfred North Whitehead v Mary Wollstonecraft v Langdon Winner W philosophers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Winnicott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_North_Whitehead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Wollstonecraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdon_Winner	.	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	.	.	.
	versus, comparisons, pairwise, ternary	#InsaneNames ## insane Frenchnames - Hocquenghem v Houellebecq v Rochefoucauld v Janicaud * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Janicaud * Guy Hocquenghem (queer/Marxist studies) v Michel Houellebecq (hollaback / who'll beck) v François de La Rochefoucauld v Dominique Janicaud v Hans Rookmaaker ## insane Dutchnames - Rookmaaker	.	.	.	.	.
9/26/2023	insane notes on experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists, epigones: Neurotic-Obsessionals Sure. In Lacanian psychoanalysis, neurosis is a mental disorder characterized by anxiety, depression, and other symptoms that are caused by unconscious conflicts. Obsessional neurosis is a specific type of neurosis that is characterized by obsessive thoughts and compulsive behaviors. Neurotics and obsessionals are both characterized by unconscious conflicts. However, there are some important differences between the two groups. Neurotics typically experience their conflicts in a more diffuse way, while obsessionals experience their conflicts in a more focused way. Neurotics are also more likely to be aware of their conflicts, while obsessionals are more likely to be unaware of their conflicts. Neurotics typically use defense mechanisms to cope with their conflicts. These defense mechanisms can include repression, denial, and projection. Obsessionals, on the other hand, typically use rituals and compulsions to cope with their conflicts. These rituals and compulsions are designed to prevent the obsessional from confronting their underlying conflicts. Neurotics and obsessionals can both benefit from psychotherapy. However, the type of psychotherapy that is most effective for each group is different. Neurotics typically benefit from psychodynamic psychotherapy, which helps them to become aware of their unconscious conflicts. Obsessionals, on the other hand, typically benefit from cognitive-behavioral therapy, which helps them to change their thinking and behavior patterns. Here is a table that summarizes the key differences between neurotics and obsessionals: Characteristic Neurotics Obsessionals Conflicts Diffuse Focused Awareness of conflicts More likely to be aware Less likely to be aware Defense mechanisms Repression, denial, projection Rituals, compulsions Effective psychotherapy Psychodynamic psychotherapy Cognitive-behavioral therapy It is important to note that these are just general descriptions. There is a great deal of variation within each group, and not all neurotics or obsessionals will fit neatly into these categories.	Agamben Experts	* Paolo Bartoloni - In his article, "Translation Studies and Agamben's Theory of the Potential," Paolo Bartoloni * Ido Govrin - on Agamben's theory of signature. * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * ??? * * * * * *	QUOTES: Agamben inoperativity - https://twitter.com/search?q=Agamben%20%20inoperativity&src=typed_query&f=live	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * "fan sub for Giorgio Agamben's theory of Homosacer, state of exception, gesture, destitute power, inoperativity, and form-of-life." - https://old.reddit.com/r/GiorgioAgamben/ * * * * * * * *	.
05/282/2024	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Arendt Experts	Arendt Experts	QUOTES:	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://www.instagram.com/hannaharendtcenteratbard * * * * * *	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Badiou Experts	* Asad Haider (also Sylvain Lazarus expert) - https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/authors/haider-asad https://twitter.com/negationmag/status/1470441336490889217 https://asadhaider.substack.com/ * Mehdi Belhaj Kacem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehdi_Belhaj_Kacem Kacem's "After Badiou" and monstrous singularity https://danieltutt.com/2016/06/11/mehdi-belhaj-kacem-a-catharsis-of-pleonexia/ * Tupinamba and Kacem both represent radically different takes on a very new genre of thinker called a “Badiouian.” The disparity between their styles only excites me in regards to the potential of this new genre. https://old.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/ugoz49/philosophers_from_outside_philosophers_of_the/i71j302/ * Alexander R. Galloway - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_R._Galloway * Burhannudin Baki - "Badiou’s Being and Event and the Mathematics of Set Theory" and "Peter Hallward’s Badiou: A Subject of Truth" https://normalthoughts.com/2022/11/02/discovering-alain-badiou/ * Alberto Toscano - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Toscano Alberto Toscano and Nina Power served as both editor and translator of Alain Badiou's On Beckett https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Power * Tzuchien Tho - https://philpeople.org/profiles/tzuchien-tho * Susan Spitzer - https://frenchculture.org/books-and-ideas/translators/11669-susan-spitzer * Ray Brassier - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Brassier * Adam Bartlett - https://books.google.com/books/about/Badiou_and_Plato.html?id=3WulBgAAQBAJ * Nick Nesbitt - "Bolzano's Badiou" https://philpapers.org/rec/NESBB * Louise Burchill - https://sydneyreviewofbooks.com/essay/the-antipodean-school-gelder-klee # duh-h's: * Alenka Zupancic’s Nietzsche is a Badiouian-inspired formalised interpretation which makes some fine points about pleasure and nihilism (the passion of the Real), but strays further from nuance as she moves closer to Lacan (which is not to say Freud). https://twitter.com/14JUN1995/status/1485339236354207754 * Zizek - I think Zizek's appeal to Hegel's supposed "madness" in the face of his "analytic" interpreters should make us suspicious. Zizek has largely assimilated Hegel to his own Schellingean-Badiouian event-mysticism, with which I will have no truck. https://twitter.com/jensensuther/status/1358181754872336391 * Bruno Bosteels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Bosteels * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://www.reddit.com/r/Badiou * https://www.facebook.com/groups/8210097909 * * * *	.
9/26/2023	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Baudrillard Experts	* Douglas Kellner's - "Jean Baudrillard: From Marxism to Postmodernism and Beyond" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Kellner ;;; Your suspicion is correct, or your confusion well-grounded; it's not aristocratic. Baudrillard uses that term as an allusion to Nietzsche, but you shouldn't read too much into it. I wouldn't precisely agree with what that SEP article has to say about Baudrillard and Nietzsche. (The article appears to be written by Douglas Kellner, who horribly, HORRIBLY, misinterpreted Baudrillard through the first half of Kellner's career and only realized later in his career that Baudrillard was arguing the polar opposite of what Kellner had thought.) Baudrillard says in Cool Memories that Nietzsche was an "ingrained memory," which he had read early in life and involuntary labored in the shadow of, but never returned to. I'm sure this is an exaggeration - I'm very skeptical that Baudrillard didn't read Nietzsche very carefully and throughout his career - but Baudrillard never once cites Nietzsche, not in a single one of Baudrillard's 40 books, and Baudrillard often (intentionally?) misuses Nietzschean terms and concepts. Baudrillard thinks: 1. Capitalism is defined by value and assigning value to things, so they can be quantified and exchanged, 2. Marxism is also defined entirely by value and assigning value to things, it just wants to prioritize use-value over exchange-value, 3. Because of this, Marxism can never fundamentally challenge capitalism. 4. The way to disrupt capitalism is through waste - giving away or destroying things rather than extracting value from them. Baudrillard takes all of that directly from Bataille. And Baudrillard has many more thoughts about point 4 there, but that's a whole other discussion. Baudrillard isn't really saying anything about aristocracy when he calls Bataille's critique "aristocratic" or Marxism "slavish." He's literally just alluding to Nietzsche to say "we can read this through a Nietzschean lens, and Nietzsche would have liked Bataille and disliked Marx." As for why Bataille is aligned with master morality and why Marxism is aligned with slave morality, I think the SEP article does a great job explaining that. (Kellner is a brilliant and astute reader and commentator, he just had and has some bad misreadings of Baudrillard.) https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/t6x719/why_is_baudrillards_aristocratic_critique_of/ * William Pawlett's - "Against Banality" https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1148533.William_Pawlett is probably the best secondary source I've come across on Baudrillard's general work. * Mark Poster - (dead) "Jean Baudrillard: Selected Writings." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Poster * William Merrin - https://twitter.com/william_merrin For anyone who has been inspired after watching @frankieboyle ‘s New World Order and wants to read #Baudrillard here are some suggestions. Also for excellent commentaries on his work see Douglas Kellner or @william_merrin * Chris Horrocks, Steve Redhead and Douglas Kellner - https://old.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/1c0iiyp/understanding_baudrillard/ * * * * * * * Alex Mazey - "Baudrillard's Pendulum" https://twitter.com/AlexzanderMazey https://linktr.ee/alexmazey * Naoki Sakai? - https://www.linkedin.com/in/naoki-sakai-823b303a/recent-activity Baudrillard Experts - "Naoki Sakai is just a small sample of the work that has been done on the Baudrillardean transmutation of the Japanese language" Sheila Faria Glaser (translator) * Oleg Maltsev - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Maltsev_(psychologist) https://twitter.com/MaltsevPhd * t@AeonBaudrillard - aka BAUDRILLARD IS A BLACK GNOSTIC https://twitter.com/AeonBaudrillard * * * * * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Baudrillard * * * * * *	OTHER books: For a Critique of Political Economy of Signs The Mirror of Production Symbolic Exchange and Death #early Baudrillard - This period is the best Baudrillard: before the hyperreal and simulation stage of his later thought, definitely his most Marxist period, and of course he is highly pessimistic but my god he has some brilliant critiques of value, political economy, 68 thought etc. https://x.com/DanielTutt/status/1808613691983806765
9/22/2023	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Deleuze Experts	* Manuel de Landa - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_DeLanda * Daniela Voss - https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/6484108.Daniela_Vo_ * Todd May - "For Deleuze & Guattari, Spinoza is the Christ of Philosophers. Todd May adds Henri Bergson as the Father, and Nietzsche as the Holy Ghost." * Daniel W Smith - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_W._Smith_(philosopher) - what is the difference between a copy and a simulacrum? Plato saw in the simulacrum a “becoming-unlimited” pointing to a subversive element that perpetually eludes the order that Ideas impose and things receive.” But in subordinating the simulacrum to the copy, and hence to the Idea, Plato defines it in purely negative terms; it is the copy of a copy, an endlessly degraded copy, an infi- nitely slackened icon. To truly invert Platonism means that the difference between copy and simulacrum must be seen, not merely as a difference of degree but as a difference in nature. The inversion of Platonism, in other words, implies an affirma- tion of the being of simulacra as such. The simulacrum must then be given its own concept and be defined in affirmative terms. In creating such a concept, Deleuze is following a maxim that lies at the core of his philosophical methodology: “What is the best way of following the great philosophers, to repeat what they have said, or to do what they have done, that is, to create concepts for problems that are necessarily changing?” (WP 28). what is the difference between a copy and a simulacrum? Plato saw in the simulacrum a “becoming-unlimited” pointing to a subversive element that perpetually eludes the order that Ideas impose and things receive.” But in subordinating the simulacrum to the copy, and hence to the Idea, Plato defines it in purely negative terms; it is the copy of a copy, an endlessly degraded copy, an infi- nitely slackened icon. To truly invert Platonism means that the difference between copy and simulacrum must be seen, not merely as a difference of degree but as a difference in nature. The inversion of Platonism, in other words, implies an affirma- tion of the being of simulacra as such. The simulacrum must then be given its own concept and be defined in affirmative terms. In creating such a concept, Deleuze is following a maxim that lies at the core of his philosophical methodology: “What is the best way of following the great philosophers, to repeat what they have said, or to do what they have done, that is, to create concepts for problems that are necessarily changing?” (WP 28). https://twitter.com/dionysous1/status/1355600215680708611 * Andrew Culp - "Dark Deleuze" "Deleuze has a positive metaphysics but it need not imply a positive politics. [...] Problems arise when people take positivity as a political principle. That’s how we get the self-help Nietzsche, the Lego Spinoza, the Buzzfeed Deleuze" (Andrew Culp). - https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/15287859.Andrew_Culp * Achille Mbembe, Arun Saldanha, Tara Abydos, Fred Moten - https://www.reddit.com/r/Deleuze/comments/141x8dj/deleuzoguattarian_critique_of_afropessimism/jn2j94c/ * Janis Tomlinson - translated Deleuze's "Nietzsche and Philosophy" * Levi Bryant - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Bryant * Brian Massumi, Brent Adkins, Manuel De Landa (from Dave/Mikey) * Mark Bonta and John Protevi's - "Deleuze and Geophilosophy" * Charles Stivale - https://twitter.com/unconscioushh/status/1761831588998807562 * Nathan Widder, Eugene Holland - https://old.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/1c3jtad/going_into_antioedipus_completely_blind/ * Charlie Blake is a Berggruen x Urbanomic theorist? - https://www.urbanomic.com/contributor/blake-charlie/ https://x.com/digital_objects/status/1948119849781125175 * * * * * * ?William Connolly? - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_E._Connolly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agonism (w fellow agonist Bonnie Honig)	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Deleuze/ * * * * *	OTHER * early / middle / late Deleuze https://x.com/puniishedanne/status/1911521461371576737 * * *
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Evola Experts	* Miguel Serrano - * Alain De Benoist - * Andras Laszlo - * Robert Horvath - * Jonathan Bowden - * Dominique Venner - "Condemning nationalism, for example, for its “naturalist” inspiration, Evola proposed instead “race of spirit” and “the idea, our true homeland” (Orientamenti, 1950). What idea? That of a superior order, of which Roman antiquity, mediaeval chivalry or Prussia were expressions. He proposed a lifestyle of severity, discipline, sacrifice, practiced as ascesis" https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1d2ei3e/julius_evola_philosophy_and_direct_action/ * Cat Weiss / PhilosophiCat \|\| ?George Burd? - and who is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Burdi ? * Jean Yves le Gallou - * Dugin - (but Dugin is an epigone) https://www.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/16u5xnd/evolas_influence/ "Dugin is an epigone. He doesn’t really understand Evola, he isn’t embodiment of Evola’s ideals, he merely exploits the ideas for the sake of pushing forward Russian totalitarianism. In the West that MAY seem like better than the modern “democratic“ ideas, but for all of us who lived under Soviet boots, believe me, it is not." * A. James Gregor - Essays on Magical Idealism (Italian: Saggi sull'idealismo magico) is the first major philosophical work of Italian esoteric Julius Evola, published in 1925. At the outset of the book, Evola explains that book's subject is the many crises faced by what he calls the "modern spirit". According to scholar A. James Gregor, Evola presents problems in this work that are fundamentally epistemological, "advocat[ing] a 'suprarational' or 'sacred,' as distinct from a 'profane,' science [that is] 'universal' and 'infallible.'" * Dmitry Moiseev - * Philippe Baillet and Johann Jakob Bachofen? - https://www.facebook.com/groups/516614488418149/posts/6405070516239154/ * gianfranco de turris https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1jlo9ns/debunking_the_psuedo_myths_about_julius_evola/ * Joscelyn Godwin https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1jlgktv/what_kind_of_magic_and_the_occult_does_evola/ * * * * * * * * Daniel Miller - is currently editor of far-right site IM-1776, profiled by @jason_a_w here: https://theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/21/chris-rufo-im-1776-far-right-desantis He also wrote for neo-Nazi site 'Social Matter', and promoted Julius Evola & 'The Occult War'—an antisemitic conspiracy theory that rails against "Judaised finance". https://x.com/Luke_Turner/status/1761382829118665005 * * * translators * Constance Fontana * Joscelyn Godwin - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joscelyn_Godwin * influenced by: René Guénon Oswald Spengler Ernst Jünger Plato Nietzsche The Buddha Charles Maurras Fyodor Dostoevsky Pythagoras Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel Max Stirner Laozi Arturo Reghini George Gurdjieff Novalis Giambattista Vico Athanasius of Alexandria Tristan Tzara Vilfredo Pareto Gottfried Benn Joseph de Maistre Otto Weininger Giovanni Papini Georges Sorel Gustav Meyrink Juan Donoso Cortés Johann Jakob Bachofen Louis de Bonald Carlo Michelstaedter Herman Wirth modern philosophers that are traditionalist - Alexandr Dugin Cologero Salvo Miguel Serrano Savitri Devi Olavo De Carvalho Rama coomaraswamy Eric Voegelin Crowley (debatable) Alain De Benoist Spengler Mircea Eliade Byung Chul Han (he's not a traditionalist per se but has an interesting critique of modernity ). - https://www.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/12yrriw/are_there_any_modern_philosophers_that_are/	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * Julius Ebola - https://x.com/coalagepervert * https://www.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola * KaiNightStorm - https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1bywx1p/the_inferiority_of_the_subsaharan_what_julius/ * Evola1 - https://www.facebook.com/groups/2175962579395447 * Evola2 - https://www.facebook.com/groups/516614488418149/ * Editorial Heracles - https://www.facebook.com/editorialHeracles/ * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massimo_Scaligero * https://www.youtube.com/@OfficialPraxia/videos * https://www.reddit.com/r/ReneGuenon+oswaldspengler/ * https://www.google.com/search?q=julius+evola+influenced+by&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS995US995&oq=julius+evol&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2j46i67i433j69i57j0i512j69i60l3.1727j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frithjof_Schuon * * NuminousDaimon - https://www.youtube.com/@NuminousDaimon https://old.reddit.com/user/NuminousDaimon The Why Files - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIFk2uvCNcEmZ77g0ESKLcQ * The Light Unseen - https://old.reddit.com/user/TheLightUnseen https://www.youtube.com/@Anglischer * Praxius - https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/16f40fw/revolt_against_the_modern_world_analysis_podcast/ https://old.reddit.com/user/-Praxius https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXFu1-3HTgjiF10kaQpvzyUlXAT7gxzG_ https://www.youtube.com/@OfficialPraxia * * *	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Freud Experts	* Mark Solms (neuropsychoanalyst) - I am recommending that we chart the neurological organization of the deepest strata of the mind, using a psychoanalytic version of syndrome analysis, by studying the deep structure of the mental changes that can be discerned in neurological patients within a psychoanalytic relationship https://old.reddit.com/r/psychoanalysis/comments/12zrjy3/best_written_refutation_of_constant_freud/ * Stephen A. Mitchell and Margaret J. Black - "Freud and Beyond" * Jingyuan Zhang (Chinese) - * James Beaumont Strachey - was born to Lieutenant General Sir Richard Strachey at 70 y/o, and Lady Jane Strachey, who was 47. He was their 13th child. His considerably older nieces and nephews called him 'Uncle Baby James'. Sigmund Freud called him 'my excellent English translator'. * Leon Rozitchner https://www.instagram.com/p/C_4cX-6pFYe/?img_index=1 * Bruno Bosteels - We are joined by writer and Marxist thinker Bruno Bosteels to discuss Léon Rozitchner’s Freud and the Limits of Bourgeois Individualism, which Bosteels has recently translated. In this conversation, we discuss Rozitchner's biography, his place within South American Marxism, the key concepts and approach of the text and we end with a consideration of Alain Badiou's thought. Bosteels is the translator of Freud and the Limits of Bourgeois Individualism, Alain Badiou's Theory of the Subject and he is the author of the forthcoming book Philosophies of Defeat: The Jargon of Finitude (Verso). * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://www.reddit.com/r/Freud * Sigmund Freud's Dank Meme Stash 2: Daddy's Return https://www.facebook.com/groups/3244420768919044/ * https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=sabina+Spielrein * Sabina Spielrein - https://www.facebook.com/groups/1354044988619780 https://theoryoftheory.github.io/searchtree.htm?search=Sabina+Spielrein * * * * * //OLD =HYPERLINK("https://www.facebook.com/groups/3244420768919044/posts/6408436975850725/", "Sigmund Freud's Dank Meme Stash 2: Daddy's Return")
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Girard Experts	* Cynthia L Haven - https://www.facebook.com/groups/588048328669520/posts/1433399937467684/ * Thomas Hamelryck - https://thamelry.github.io/ * Geoffrey Shullenberger / Geoff Shullenburger - https://twitter.com/g_shullenberger * Luke Burgis - https://www.linkedin.com/in/lukeburgis/recent-activity/all/ * Ryan Duns - René Girard, Theology, and Pop Culture, ed. Ryan G. Duns SJ and Derrick Witherington Mimetic Theory and Film, ed. Diego Bubbio and Chris Fleming Mimesis, Movies, and Media, ed. Scott Cowdell, Chris Fleming, and Joel Hodge https://www.facebook.com/groups/588048328669520/posts/1535367673937576/ * Sam Kriss? - https://harpers.org/archive/2023/11/overwhelming-and-collective-murder-rene-girard/ * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * Hamelryck Shullenburger Burgis Haven * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/ReneGirard/ * https://www.facebook.com/groups/memetics.hacking/ * https://www.facebook.com/groups/588048328669520 * * * * * *	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Hegel Experts - Hegelians vs Hegelogians (Hegeloids vs Hegelians?) * Hegelianos vs Hegelogianos - Hegelians vs Hegelogians - @Dasereignis80 hace 2 semanas (editado) I don't know about UK and US, but here in Spain there was a big mess around Hegel and his work. First of all, a lot of his works publlished after his death, they were works modified by his students but bore his name. Second , the translations were poorly done. Thirdly and most important thing, most of the books about Hegel or his own works were translated or writed by Hegelians not Hegelogians , one of this was Kojeve, the influence of the view was enormous and with a lot of problems and misconceptions. When Deleuze or Foucault attacks the metaphysics of Hegel, they have a lot problems cos they were influenced by the Kojeve's vision, in some sense this is why Zizek said Deleuze is sometimes more hegelian than Hegel without realising it. Something similar is happening now with Robert Brandom' vision about "The Phenomenology of the spirit" but in the other way. I don't spent anytime talking about the interpretation of Hegel of Badiou or Zizek, because is a waste of time. Felix Duque (a contemporary Hegel translator) said 10 or more years ago, that was obvious that the vision of Hegel from Zizek is almost purely schellingian, I think something similar was said in this channel. I don't know how a pragmatist view can be in the same zone as the hegelian view. I'm very suspicious how the path of despair of the descent of consciousness and the elevation of the spirit mediated through the flesh can be pragmatized. It doesn't sound much like William James or Brandom tho. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsTwLZsOVrs&t=63s&loop=0 * *	* Terry Pinkard - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pinkard * Robert Pippin - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_B._Pippin * Stephen Houlgate - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Houlgate - Houlgate kills Brandom, throws his body in an aqueduct in his review of the latter's new book on Hegel https://twitter.com/gdmorejon/status/1254496910305607680 * Robert Brandom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Brandom Brandom's Analytic interpretation of Hegel * Jean Hyppolite - Althusser put it in his autobiography, “[Hyppolite and not Kojeve is] the only Frenchman who actually understood Hegel”. https://www.facebook.com/lacancircleofaustralia/posts/pfbid02F8m32AE4cf4bNeqoEXN9UiC3PX5Pj7BkHZCRiPndwi8ZxyNSYfviYHRACcFF2bKDl * Kojeve - over-emphasized the master-slave dialectic of Hegel, but Lacan borrowed heavily from Kojeve regardless * Bradley Bassler - Marxism today has completely assimilated itself into an instrument of capital. Althusser was right that the late Marx falsified the early Marx, but he was wrong about how. the project of Bradley Bassler I think is solving this problem (specifically the text “Hegel’s Jena Moment”), by returning to the foundations of the theory of valuation in Hegel’s System of Sittlichkeit. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1882469418137207270 * Bruce Gilbert - https://philpeople.org/profiles/bruce-gilbert * HS Harris' - "Hegel: Phenomenology and System" vs Peter Singer's "A Very Short Introduction" https://twitter.com/diplopodhoretz/status/1706528191307784220 * Peter Singer's - "A Very Short Introduction" - Starts out with an awkward rejection of translating Geist as spirit because it sounds too religious, trying desperately hard to read Hegel as if he was really a „secular“ philosopher. By the end of the book he’s struggling to keep up the anachronism. * Jean-luc Nancy - ("The Speculative Remark") - There is Pinkard’s Hegel, HS Harris’s Hegel, J-L Nancy’s Hegel, Hyppolite’s Hegel, Lenin’s Hegel, Žižek’s Hegel, McDowell’s Hegel, Brandom’s Hegel, Judith Butler’s Hegel…et cetera. Leaves one in the position— https://twitter.com/diplopodhoretz/status/1646664063076777984 * Sebastian Gardner - Hegel glossary * Beiser, Hallward? - https://twitter.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1474041925296607240 * Bruno Bauer - https://twitter.com/Christiane_ee/status/1754584544869580939 * Robert Hartman - * Kevin Thompson (and also Dieter Henrich, Walter Jaeschke, Hans Friedrich Fulda, Rolf Peter Horstmann) https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/p8ftvw/how_popular_is_alexandre_kojèves_interpretation/ * Borna Radnik https://x.com/MattPolProf/status/1883554695144407430 * Karen Ng - By the way—Karen Ng’s Hegel is really quite curiously similar, in my view, to Edith Stein’s phenomenologically reworked St. Thomas Aquinas. Synthetic work will be done soon—this is the true telos of the Hegelian Egirl. I really have to push myself for this, but I owe you all nothing less… magnanimity cannot truly be attained without a certain noetic trauma https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911479896259563756 * Susan Taubes, Susan Sontag: where are the hegelian e girls of yesteryear? https://x.com/ActualProfessor/status/1821215797303197952 * * * Dennis Schulting https://x.com/DennisSchulting/status/1925263922971410686 * Filiip Niklas - https://philpapers.org/s/Filip%20Niklas * Bruce Wilshire? stumbled upon this guy while looking for Bruce Gilbert - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Wilshire * Gregory B. Sadler - has a youtube where he goes thru Hegel books meticulously * translators: Walter Kaufmann vs AV Miller vs Stambaugh	QUOTES: * Hegel: "History is a Slaughter Bench!"!!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8Iv4QN7wbQ * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * Pinkardian Pippinian Houlgatian Brandomian Gilbertian / Kojevian Hyppolitian Nancian * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Hegel * https://www.instagram.com/returntohegel/ * * * * * * * *	OTHER: * Sebastian Gardner's "Hegel glossary" vs Dan Dahlstrom's "Heidegger Dictionary" * * * * * *
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Heidegger Experts	# Esoteric Heidegger * The New Gnosis: Heidegger, Hillman, and Angels Avens, Roberts Philosopher Avens writes about gnosis as exemplified in the works of Heidegger and James Hillman, rather than their thinking as such. By gnosis Avens means a kind of "knowledge or thinking that is inseparable from being" ionamiller2020.weebly.com/angelomorphosis.html * * * * Have you read any of the works of Reiner Schürmann https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/1jwxqj6/have_you_read_any_of_the_works_of_reiner/ * Sidonie Kellerer - That's not entirely correct. What is crucial about the Black Notebooks (Schwarze Hefte) is that they show that Heidegger'philosophy cannot be separated from his anti-semitism. While this is subject to debate and controvercy, I'd recommend checking out the work done bySidonie Kellerer https://old.reddit.com/r/AskAGerman/comments/16fp8xa/whats_the_reputation_of_heidegger_in_germany/ * Christopher Fynsk - Fynsk's "Heidegger, Thought and Historicity" vs Sheehan's "Making Sense of Heidegger" !! https://www.instagram.com/p/C1J5ZJALjzn/ Very sorry that it’s Sheehan and not Fynsk… @gabriel.fynsk Fynsk looks awesome! I'll check him out. What work in particular you recommend and why, if you've got a moment! gabriel.fynsk's profile picture @theory_underground well, if you're studying Heidegger, I'd strongly recommend his text 'Heidegger, Thought and Historicity'. It laid the foundation for the current interest in mitsein (from (Jean-Luc) Nancy to Agamben and so on). It was also the only text on Heidegger beyond Granel's (Gérard Granel) that both Derrida and Blanchot approved of and openly quoted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Fynsk living relatives/legacy: https://www.instagram.com/gabriel.fynsk/ https://www.youtube.com/@gabrielfynsk2250 * Lee Braver - "Heidegger: Thinking of Being" * Iain Thomas - "Heidegger on Ontotheology" and "Heidegger, Art, and Postmodernity" https://philosophy.unm.edu/people/faculty/profile/iain-thomson.html Iain Thomson is far and away my favorite Heidegger commentator. His two published books are excellent, and there’s a healthy sampling of his articles available on academia.edu * Daniela Vallega-Neu - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniela_Vallega-Neu Daniela Vallega-Neu's book on the Contributions is excellent, I think. She strikes a good balance between not oversimplifying but also trying to make that beast feel a bit more manageable. (_Heidegger's Contributions to Philosophy: An Introduction_ from Indiana UP.) * John D. Caputo - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Caputo - John D. Caputo is AMAZING if you have already a robust understanding of Heidegger, otherwise you might find it very difficult to engage with his interpretations. * Richard Capobianco - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_M._Capobianco Richard M. Capobianco and Richard Polt, after reading them you will know why Thomas Sheehan's interpretations are absolutely wrong and you will appreciate Heidegger's philosophical break with Husserl, phenomenology and "Being and Time". * Richard Polt - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Polt * Dan Dahlstrom - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_O._Dahlstrom wrote "The Heidegger Dictionary" and "Heidegger’s Concept of Truth" * Gregory Fried - Also, anything from Polt and Fried on Heidegger - whether secondary or their translations of his work - are bangers. Both are careful and faithful readers. https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/schools/mcas/departments/philosophy/people/faculty-directory/GregoryFried.html * Mark Wrathall - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Wrathall Mark Wrathall, How to read Heidegger is a really good intro from a leading Heidegger scholar. https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/1av08ul/some_help_on_dasein/ * Hubert Dreyfus - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Dreyfus I had the good fortune to attend Dreyfus' lectures on Heidegger before he passed, and I also knew some other good Heidegger scholars in his orbit, but in disagreement with him. I would describe the distinct interpretation of Dreyfus/Kelley to drift too frequently toward a traditional phenomenological bent. Dreyfus constantly fits Heidegger back into alignment with his sources, rather than seeing the depth of Heidegger's critical lens on the tradition, and the meaningful ways he detracts. For example, Dreyfus is very good at pointing out how Heidegger's use of Aristotle appears in the text (e.g. eudaimonia = skillful comportment), but, to me, completely misses that this orientation toward the world can be seen as extremely problematic when it comes to one's relation to being. For Dreyfus -"hey! look! you've mastered your place in the world." But really, I think Heidegger intends this as a critique of one who has become overly absorbed into their familiarity with das Man. Dasein's alignment with its own authenticity (own-most-ness) occurs in periods of intense Anxiety in the face of worldhood/meaning collapse, not when one is most skillfully comported. So, what Dreyfus reads as a kind of self-help manual, some see instead as a warning. That said, Dreyfus always amazes me at his openness for other interpretations, which I think places him on a higher footing than those who came immediately after like Sheehan. If you've heard his lectures at Cal on Div II, he often says, "Can someone tell me what is going on here, because I have no idea . . ." I really love this about the guy. He seemed to have no problem accepting multiple readings were possible, at least most of the time. Sometimes he downright berates folks that he thinks get it really, really wrong. I also think that his trouble with Div II is a consequence of his inability to recognize the darker side of Heidegger's phenomenology.;;;Dreyfus, Sean Kelly, Bill Blattner, C.J. White, etc. I agree with you that Dreyfus and his students misunderstand, which means they often misappropriate, B&T. This would include Dreyfus, Sean Kelly, Bill Blattner, C.J. White https://www.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/18kyva5/dreyfus_has_been_a_disaster/ * Andrew Mitchell https://www.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/18kyva5/dreyfus_has_been_a_disaster/kdwv1kj/ There is no simple answer on the Fourfold - Andrew Mitchell wrote an entire book on it! It is the late Heidegger at his most poetic, so that any attempt to reduce it to analytic categories is bound to miss something important. However, it's also (as Heidegger said) the innermost truth that he's trying to convey. * Sean Kelly - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Dorrance_Kelly "Heidegger: Modern humans are too obsessed with productivity \| Sean Kelly and Lex Fridman" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tNEQiV6Uj0 I remember finding Sean Kelly's lectures on Heidegger more helpful than Dreyfus's. Found Sean Kelly's lectures on youtube! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLEL6o24uIA&t=4s They are SO MUCH better than Russon's. * Thomas Sheehan - Sheehan's "Making Sense of Heidegger" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sheehan_(philosopher) - Thomas Sheehan read Thomas Sheehan but bear in mind that he doesn't offer a comprehensive interpretations for Heidegger and doesn't appreciate the radicality of Heidegger's later philosophy and his break from phenomenology and "Being and Time". So, his interpretations are reliable only when it comes to "Being and Time" and Heidegger's early philosophy (not very reliable though!). This really isn't fair. Sheehan vs Capobianco is not as cut and dry as you make it out, and for most scholars (that I know, I mean) Sheehan had overall a more convincing argument. They both went back and forth on whether or not Heidegger was "being" metaphysical (Capo) or exclusively critiquing (Sheehan). Not only that, but Sheehan absolutely reads the entirety of Heidegger as being a single mission from being and time forward as part of that critique. He is one of the most (exhaustingly) well-read Heideggerians out there, and I find Capobianco far less so. That said, I don't agree with either one. They are both largely prooftexters that tend to steer the reading in a predetermined direction regardless of what can be done otherwise. * Julian Young - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Young * Terrence Malick - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Malick * Herman Philipse - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Philipse * Dominique Janicaud (French reception of Heidegger) * Katherine Withy - (Heidegger and uncanny)!!https://www.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/12r5zl3/the_best_part_about_heidegger_is_that_he and mebbie - https://www.linkedin.com/in/kate-withy-44606619/recent-activity * Julian Young - DO NOT read Julian Young's books about Heidegger. * Mark Wrathall’s interpretations are good as a general introduction to Heidegger's philosophy. I really like Mark Wrathall’s interpretation of Heidegger, helped me a great deal with some of the most challenging parts. Not exactly what you're asking, but one person mentioned Wrathall. He just edited a massive lexicon that came out of Cambridge in 2021. It is an absolute gem of a book and very much worth picking up. Something like 800 pages of detailed but not too-over-technical descriptions of Heideggerian terminology and concepts. * William Richardson - DO YOURSELF A FAVOUR AND READ "Heidegger: Through Phenomenology to Thought", AMAZING BOOK! * John Sallis - That's a kind of diving-into-the-deep end of the non-Dreyfus approach. Still, good to bookmark for if/when you get there with later Heidegger. (And just curious if anyone here has read John Sallis. Not recommending him as a learning tool for Heidegger -- just curious if any other super nerds have read his books on imagination.) Vallega-Neu is a great rec. I know Sallis' work. My undergrad prof was good friends with him, so he shared a lot of stuff with us. Interesting stuff. * Dominique Janicaud - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Janicaud Janicaud's French reception of Heidegger was always very interesting, you can take a look at Janicaud's volume "Heidegger in France" for many unusual ideas.oh! I'd also recommend whatever you can from folks in the French reception like Derrida, Foucault, Levinas, etc. on Heidegger. To me, they all balance the line between solid reading, but also sincere critique. * Ted Kisiel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Kisiel - - Also, Ted Kisiel's The Genesis of Heidegger's Being and Time is another that is just so rich with insights, but also not without it's interpretive lens. Highly regarded by many of the second wave scholars like Caputo, Sheehan, etc. * Simon Critchley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Critchley - For folks branching out, I would first recommend Simon Critchley's Apply-degger video series that started right around the beginning of the pandemic. In some ways, it is a very simple and straightforward interpretation, but one that, I feel, continuously sets the right tone, and doesn't allow itself to veer away from the source, at least not until the later sections where he starts comparing things with music. Crichley does a fantastic job of being as repetitive as Heidegger, constantly invoking the same terms and themes over and over so that you never forget just how tightly argued Being and Time really is. https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/1av08ul/some_help_on_dasein/kr86tvm/ * Fr. William Richardson - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Richardson For background, you may want to dabble in the work of Fr. William Richardson who wrote extensively on Heidegger, with his oversight, and they had a fairly close relationship. His work has been consistently lauded by scholars and use as the foundation for many subsequent works like Sheehan and Capobianco. It has been authoritative, but not sure it is still seen this way. * Jason Jorjani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Jorjani * Robert Pippin's "The Culmination: Heidegger, German Idealism, and the Fate of Philosophy" https://twitter.com/jensensuther/status/1673016657529151488 * Marc Richir - "Affectiveness and relation to the world" https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-67190-0_8, umwelt innenwelt Außenwelt, https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Richir * Michael Friedman - "A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger" * Magda King A Guide to Heidegger's Being and Time https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/m5x52u/best_secondary_sources_on_heidegger/gr43bwh/ * Jeff Malpas - Heidegger's Topology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Malpas * Emmanuel Faye https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Faye * Víctor Farías https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Víctor_Farías * Eugen Fink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Fink * Hispanohablante-Heideggereans - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Gaos https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Rivera_Cruchaga Xavier Zubiri https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xavier_Zubiri * Oliver Marchart has written a fair bit about this [left-Heideggerianism], and he locates left-Heideggerianism as picking up the thread of what he calls Heidegger's 'post-foundationalism', in which the 'ground' or 'foundation' of politics and society is no longer seen as fixed and immutable but rather contingent and open to change. From his book 'Post Foundational Political Thought': "[For Heidegger] the impossibility of [an ultimate] ground is the necessary condition of possibility for grounds in the plural – in the same way that the contingency appertaining to contingent foundations’ is a necessary contingency. Understood in this way, ‘contingency’ becomes the operational term whose function is to indicate precisely this necessary impossibility of a final ground. By putting the concept of contingency under scrutiny, we now turn toward one of the key-terms – if not the key term – of current post-foundational and post-structuralist theories. Like the prefix ‘post’ (in ‘postmodernity’, ‘post-structuralism’, ‘post- Marxism’, etc.), contingency has become a sign of our age, part of our intellectual horizon and the key operational term within the theoretical paradigm of post-foundationalism." Marchart locates a few thinkers who take this theme and run with it - Jean-Luc Nancy, Claude Lefort, Alain Badiou, Ernesto Laclau in particular - but as Kurt noted you can also definitely find it prominently in Marcuse and Agamben. The very notion of the 'Heideggerian left' was introduced by Dominique Janicaud in his book Heidegger in France, which charts the French reception of Heidegger and might be of interest as well. https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/ek9jqe/left_heideggerian_thought_is_there_a_socialist/ * Sidonie Kellerer - That's not entirely correct. What is crucial about the Black Notebooks (Schwarze Hefte) is that they show that Heidegger'philosophy cannot be separated from his anti-semitism. While this is subject to debate and controvercy, I'd recommend checking out the work done bySidonie Kellerer! (not sure if it is available in English though) https://old.reddit.com/r/AskAGerman/comments/16fp8xa/whats_the_reputation_of_heidegger_in_germany/k031qky/ * Alfred Denker (w Chris Satoor) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTboM27C-WM * Sophie-Jan Arrien's La inquietud del pensamiento https://x.com/Alex_philosoph/status/1901737304642699369/photo/1 por Sophie-Jan Arrien * * * * * * * # older experts * Eugen Fink was born in Constance. He studied first in Münster and Berlin, then in Freiburg im Breisgau. He defended his thesis under the dual supervision of Husserl and Heidegger . https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Fink https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Richir 1 point 1 month ago Still think a lot of Zen Buddhism and advaita points towards the same stuff [–]dosceroseis	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * Cassirer v Heidegger - ??? * Heidegger vs TS Eliot - same birthday (Sept 26th) - https://twitter.com/yo101/status/1706716222220300631	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger * https://heidegger-circle.org/gatherings/ * Western_Dasein!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/WesternDasein/ * Heidegger_Forum!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/1425874097711021/ * heftyheidegger https://www.instagram.com/heftyheidegger/ * * *	OTHER: * Who do you consider did the best explanation of heiddegger? Reiner Schumann, Karl Rahner, Walter Schulz, Robert Palmer, George Steiner, emad and Maley, Brett Davis, Will McNeil, David Farrell Krell. - https://twitter.com/aufgehendeRest/status/1574251573143814146 * Sebastian Gardner's "Hegel glossary" vs Dan Dahlstrom's "Heidegger Dictionary" * * * * * * *
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Kant Experts	* Henry Allison - https://twitter.com/search?q=henry%20allison%20kant&src=typed_query&f=live * Dieter Henrich - https://twitter.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1558623202984730624 https://twitter.com/search?q=Dieter%20Henrich%20Kant&src=typed_query&f=live * Nora Schleich, PhD - https://twitter.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1572214574857818114 https://twitter.com/VernunftMaxime * Allen Wood, Arthur Ripstein, Corinna Mieth Nicholas Vrousalis, Nuria Sanchez Madrid, Paul Guyer, Sebastiano Maffettone, and Susan Shell - "Immanuel Kant, 300 years from now keynote speakers https://twitter.com/i/bookmarks?post_id=1790420607546359980 * Ayhan Çitil, Aliye Kovanlıkaya, Bülent Gözkan - https://x.com/celilzadehayyam/status/1284929017523638276 (includes more turkish experts on other philosophers) * * * * * * Buroker vs Bryan Hall’s “The Arguments of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.” - https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1gqm0y4/i_just_dont_get_kant/ * * # schools * Marburg https://twitter.com/search?q=Marburg%20kant&src=typed_query&f=top # dead experts * Eugen Fink’s reading of Kant (vs Bruce Fink's??) - https://philpapers.org/rec/STAAET-5 * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Kant * *	.
9/26/2023	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Kierkegaard Experts	* Sam Loncar - October 2022 https://www.instagram.com/p/CkOE8SVOX0j * Craig Hinkson - (Loncar's mentor) and friends w "the Hongs" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4_iJjT5EdY&t=6m35s * David Swenson - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_F._Swenson * Howard Hong - https://press.princeton.edu/our-authors/hong-howard-v * Edna Hong - https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/14192591.Edna_H_Hong * Hong Kierkegaard Library - https://www.instagram.com/hklstolaf/?hl=en * Jon Stewart - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Stewart_(philosopher) * J.K Hyde - https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22J.+K.+Hyde%22 https://www.reddit.com/r/kierkegaard/comments/16ptrmm/fear_and_trembling_shouldnt_be_read_by_people_who/k1vwbap/ * Maro Bellou - “The only thing that repeated itself was that no repetition was possible” (vs "What would life be without repetition") Søren Kierkegaard Maro Bellou presented her talk, ‘From Kierkegaard to Lacan: Repetition?’ to the Lacan Circle in December 2022 https://twitter.com/lacancircle/status/1711966513106915497 * Mark A. Tietjen - (also Merold Westphal & Cyril O'Regan?) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebaU-2x0wbc&t=58s * Pentti LInkola - @soulful_indigo Kierkegaard and Linkola talk about this… Cita Sulla @ichthys30 · 9h Apparently if you go far enough right you get the environmentalism back @soulful_indigo If you’re unfamiliar with Pentti Linkola, I highly recommend reading his text “Can Life Prevail?” There is a free pdf on my telegram channel: https://x.com/soulful_indigo/status/1884994750266122366 * * * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://www.reddit.com/r/Kierkegaard * * *
	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Kristeva Experts	* ??? * Elizabeth Grosz - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Grosz * * * * * *	QUOTES: * "hysterics seek maximal symbolic and psychic jouissance while simultaneously postulating the impossibility or futility of desire" a quote from Julia Kristeva I keep around https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/v4p6xe/mental_illness_is_not_in_your_head_decades_of/ib6g4yf/ * * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://www.facebook.com/kristevajulia * https://www.reddit.com/r/Kristeva/ * * * * * *
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Lacan Experts	* Bruce Fink - Also, I never recommend Bruce Fink, but I think he actually has a good bit about this in the Lacanian Subject, something about a crying baby’s untamed and inarticulable bodily need getting transformed into something signifiable through it being addressed by the parent. * Adrian Johnston's "Time Driven: Metapsychology and the Splitting of the Drive" * Moustafa Safouan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moustafa_Safouan * Elisabeth Roudinesco, Lacan biographer - In a recent biography, Élisabeth Roudinesco describes the thinker of desire [Lacan] as a “temperamental child,” a man who'd often demand his preferred variety of liquor, cigar, or food at the click of his fingers, wherever he was. Elisabeth Roudinesco reports the mother's complaint that Lacan, instead of helping her, "had stolen her life story and turned it into a thesis," and that she "had been observed, ransacked, fabricated, travestied, and made into a myth for the benefit of psychiatry." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_of_Aim%C3%A9e * Nathalie Jaudel (wrote polemical book on Roudinesco/Lacan) * Sergio Benvenuto The author compares Lacan’s (whose paradigm is essentially Hegelian-Heideggerian) reading of Freud with the apparently opposite—and substantially negative—remarks by Wittgenstein on Freud: the author highlights some surprising convergences and congruities between these two so different approaches. In fact, either Wittgenstein and Lacan embody a “linguistic turn” in the thought of the second half of the 20th century, which took place both in analytic philosophy and in so-called Continental Theory. In particular, both Wittgenstein and Lacan share an anti-psychological and anti-cognitivist view in a wide sense: both reject the idea that a scientific knowledge of the mind would be possible. In that perspective, psychoanalytic activity has nothing to do with some technological application of a scientific theory on a special object (mind): it is rather a practice (a linguistic game in Wittgenstein, an ethical praxis for Lacan) which has the same nature of its object: every subject, interpreting one’s own experience through language (always public according to Wittgenstein, always the Other’s according to Lacan), alienates and represses this primal experience, the event (tuche) of which the psychic processes are at once the repetition and the loss. - https://www.journal-psychoanalysis.eu/articles/wittgenstein-and-lacan-reading-freud-1-2/ * “What Lacan borrows quite willingly from Hegel, whom he often quotes, is the master/slave dialectic, which he makes use of in the service of psychoanalysis. At first, one may be surprised by this, as there are no longer any slaves, and, if we are to believe him, there are no more masters either: He says, ‘What happens between the discourse of the classical master and that of the modern master, which is called the capitalist, is a modification in the place of knowledge’.” François Regnault, Hegel’s Master Slave Dialectic in the work of Lacan https://www.facebook.com/lacancircleofaustralia/posts/pfbid02F8m32AE4cf4bNeqoEXN9UiC3PX5Pj7BkHZCRiPndwi8ZxyNSYfviYHRACcFF2bKDl * Sean Homer I liked this book. I read this right after I read Sean Homer's "Jacques Lacan" from the Routledge Critical Thinkers Series. Homer's book properly initiated me into Lacan... I do not believe Zizek's book is a 'proper' introduction into Lacanian theory... it is great reading if you have already read a more measured introduction into Lacan. Bottom line: 'Looking Awry' isn't a great INTRODUCTION into Lacan....but if you are already introduced into Lacan, then "Looking Awry" is good reading. https://www.amazon.com/Looking-Awry-Introduction-Jacques-through/dp/026274015X#customerReviews * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * * * *	.
9/26/2023	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Land Experts	* James Ellis - A Methodology of Possession: On the Philosophy of Nick Land https://old.reddit.com/r/sorceryofthespectacle/comments/luop21/alright_which_one_of_you_mongrels_is_responsible/ * ?? * ?? * ?? * ?? * ?? OLDvsNEW * As far as his actual theories go, I can only offer very broad overviews. "Old" Nick Land was mostly comprised of expansions on post-WW2 French philosophy and cultural theory. "Late/Contemporary" Nick Land is a seriously mentally ill version of the "Old" Land. In short, Land is an answer to the question, "What if Deleuze and Guattari were Nazis?" Land builds heavily on the work of Deleuze, Baudrillard, Bataille, and similar post-WW2 thinkers often labeled under "poststructuralism." * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: https://old.reddit.com/r/NickLand/about/edit/ https://new.reddit.com/r/NickLand/?styling=true https://www.facebook.com/groups/2190218511036744/	OTHER:
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Levinas Experts	* Alphonso Lingis' "Six Problems in Levinas's Philosophy" https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/ouz4o2/critiques_of_levinas/ * Salomon Malka - https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salomon_Malka https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/212899.Salomon_Malka https://twitter.com/librosraesccs/status/1673050110702370818 * Simon Critchley "Five Problems in Levinas's View of Politics" * Marie-Anne Lescourret - https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie-Anne_Lescourret * Kieran Setiya - engages with Levinas in this paper http://www.ksetiya.net/uploads/2/4/5/2/24528408/other_people.pdf * Bracha Ettinger * Asher Horowitz - Ethics at a Standstill: History and Subjectivity in Levinas and the Frankfurt School Asher Horowitz Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press, 2008; xx + 404 pages. Asher Horowitz describes this work as an attempt to place Levinas and the first generation of the Frankfurt School in “constellations,” drawing out their affinities and highlighting where each may be able to supplement the shortcomings of the others. Given the modesty of this explicit purpose, one would be justified in wondering for whom this volume is intended; without an argumentative defence of each of the various positions presented, such a project could be compelling only to those already convinced by both Levinas’ “ethics as first philosophy,” and the sociophilosophical analyses of the Frankfurt School (or at least the major points of agreement between its members), positions between which there are deep tensions. But no such argument is forthcoming on Horowitz’s part. Despite his claims, Ethics at a Standstill is very much a contribution to what he might call a “left Levinasian” theoretical project * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/Levinas/ * LevinasCenter!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/LevinasCenter * Levinas!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/2204654767 * Levinasgroup!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/Levinasgroup * * * * * OTHER: Kieran Setiya, Other People In: Rethinking the Value of Humanity. Edited by: Sarah Buss and L. Nandi Theunissen, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2023. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197539361.003.0014 13 Other People Kieran Setiya Do you believe in love at !rst sight? Maybe you do and maybe you don’t. Perhaps you will refuse to say, complaining that the question is obscure. I sympathize with that response. In a way, it is the subject of this essay, though I hope to show that there is more at stake. I begin with the prediction that, whatever you make of love at !rst sight, you do not believe in “love at de!nite description.” You may know on general grounds that there is a shortest spy, but you cannot love the shortest spy if you have not met them and know nothing more about them.1 You could, I suppose, become invested in the prospects of the shortest spy, whoever that is, preferring outcomes that will bene!t them to ones that bene!t other people, striving to ensure that the shortest spy survives and "ourishes. But this would not be love, and absent further context, it would not be rational. #ere may be descriptions that do su$ce for love, like “the woman who saved my life” or “the brother I never knew.” Special concern for individuals so described may be intelligible. Likewise, perhaps, if the description evokes, in richly textured detail, an attractive human being. Personal acquaintance may not be required for love. But the mere fact that one has a description that identi!es an individual, as in “the shortest spy,” is not enough. “Personal acquaintance,” here, is a placeholder for the relation to another human being that justi!es love at !rst sight, if there is any such thing; it is the minimal cognitive contact that makes sense of love. #is chapter explores the nature of this relation and its place in moral philosophy. As I will argue, personal acquaintance plays a role not just in love but in concern for individuals, as such. Section 1 is about the connections between personal acquaintance, love, and moral standing. It maps some puzzling features of personal acquaintance that set parameters for any attempt to comprehend it. #e task is to account for the ethical signi!cance of this relation. In Section 2, we !nd a similar structure in concern for others of the sort that is morally required. #is structure comes out in recent treatments of contractualism, aggregation, and the trolley problem. Section 3 turns to the work of Emmanuel Levinas as a source of insight into personal acquaintance, tracing the di$culties with his view and the prospects for revision. We are le% with a question not just about love but about the basis of human values and the value of human life. Other People 315 1. In “Love and the Value of a Life,” I argued that it is rational for any one of us to love any other human being, whatever their merits, without the need for any past relationship (Setiya 2014, §1). In rejecting the need for virtues or common histories as grounds for love, I agree with David Velleman. Like Velleman, I believe that the subjects of full moral standing, who deserve respect, coincide with those it is rational to love in the distinctive way that we love other people. In his formulation: “[R]espect and love [are] the required minimum and optional maximum responses to one and the same value” (Velleman 1999, 366). By “full moral standing,” I mean the kind of signi!cance shared by human beings but not by other animals, at least not the sort we encounter on Earth. Our interests count for more than theirs, and we have rights against each other they do not possess. (We will return to this assumption at the end.) I di/er from Velleman on three counts. First, I do not share his Kantian conception of the basis of moral standing, on which it turns on our rational nature. In my view, human beings who lack reason, or the potential for it, are morally equal to us. Second, I am less resistant than Velleman to the idea that, in its primary forms, love involves a disproportionate concern for the interests of the beloved, concern that goes beyond what is required by moral standing.2 While there are di/erent varieties of love—erotic, parental, and so on—this is a de!ning feature of the sort of love that interests me. Finally, while I doubt the need for past relationships as reasons for love, I do not deny that friendship, parenthood, and other relationships provide such reasons.3 #e permissive view of love is no doubt controversial. My arguments for it turn on the rationality of love in the face of radical change, retrograde amnesia (in which you forget your past relationship), and skeptical delusion (as when you learn that you came into existence an hour ago and that the “memories” of your relationship are false).4 I won’t repeat those arguments here, but I will make two observations. First, although it is natural to illustrate the view by appeal to love at !rst sight, this is potentially misleading. #e sort of love involved is not essentially romantic. We could point instead to the love I might instantly feel for an infant abandoned on my doorstep, knowing right away that I would take care of the child even at considerable cost. Second, love need not be as deep or devoted as romantic or parental love, and it need not involve a strong desire for interaction. #ink of my attitude to old friends who I have not seen and may not have thought about for years. I still love them in a meaningful way: if they were in need, I would do much more for them than I would for an arbitrary stranger. Our topic is not the plausibility of the permissive view but a question neglected by its advocates, about love at de!nite description.5 Even on the most liberal conception of love, on which it does not turn on particular merits or 316 Rethinking the Value of Humanity past relationships, you cannot love the shortest spy if that description is all you have. What is possible, and rational, is love at !rst sight. So the position must be quali!ed. It is rational to love any human being with whom you are personally acquainted, not any human being, full stop. But then we have to ask: What is personal acquaintance, and how does it justify love? Both the interest and the enigma of personal acquaintance come into focus if I am right about the implications of the permissive view. #e most dramatic consequence speaks to the moral signi!cance of numbers. Consider a case in which you can save the lives of three strangers drowning over to the le% or a single stranger, M, who is drowning on the right.6 #e circumstance is otherwise unexceptional. You have no special obligation to any given stranger, and their survival would have no unusual consequences, good or ill. On the view that I defend, it would be rational for you to love M, even though you have never met before: this would be love at !rst sight. I argue further that, in loving M, it is rational to give more weight to her needs than to those of other people. Acting on this concern, it would be rational to save her life instead of saving three. It follows that you could rationally decide to save a single drowning stranger when you could save more. We thus arrive at a version of John Taurek’s (1977) startling claim that, in cases of this kind, the numbers do not count; at least, they are not rationally decisive. I don’t expect this thumbnail sketch to be convincing; more argument is required.7 But it shows how doubts about aggregation "ow from the permissive view of love, assuming love can involve a disproportionate concern for someone’s needs. Now for the puzzle. When I !rst drew these connections, I did not stress the role of personal acquaintance. What is arguably rational is to save M at the cost of three lives when you are confronted with M herself: when you look into her eyes and respond with love. #at claim is contentious enough. I do not think it would be rational to save the person on the right when you know them only by that description. In what we may call the “anonymous” case, you have no contact with the drowning strangers. You are merely told what is happening and must decide where to send the rescue mission. It is irrational to give priority to the needs of one in the anonymous case. You are not in a position to love the person on the right. #at takes personal acquaintance. #e nature of personal acquaintance matters, on the permissive view of love, not just because it makes love rational but because it makes a di/erence to questions of life and death. #is brings out a pivotal constraint on how we conceive the relation of personal acquaintance. When you stand in this relation to M, it is rational to save her life, moved by the urgency of her needs, instead of the lives of the other three. When you lack this relation to M, when you know her only as “the one who is drowning on the right,” it is irrational to save her life. Personal acquaintance is ethically signi!cant. At the same time, it is utterly Other People 317 minimal, requiring no history of interaction, as we know from love at !rst sight. What can this relation be? We may turn for help to philosophical discussions of “knowing who”: to be personally acquainted with M is to know who she is. But accounts of “knowing who” in the philosophy of language only compound the mystery. On the minimal view, you know who someone is when you know an answer to the question “Who is. . . ?” #e answer need not even be a de!nite description. David Braun (2006, 24) begins his essay in defense of this conception with the sentence “Hong Oak Yun is a person who is over three inches tall,” adding boldly, “[N]ow you know who Hong Oak Yun is.” In whatever sense, if any, this is true, it is not one that matters to moral philosophy or makes love rational. On a more orthodox view, to know who someone is to know a contextually relevant answer to the question “Who is. . . ?” that takes the form of a definite description.8 But this does not amount to progress. At best, it frames our problem: Which answers to the question “Who is. . . ?” are ethically relevant? What do you need to know about someone in order to be personally acquainted with them, and why does it matter? In fact, the situation is worse. In love at !rst sight, you know very little about the person you love apart from their relation to you. Knowing that they are the person with these properties is like knowing that they are the shortest spy. It does not count as knowing who they are in an ethically relevant sense. #e most plausible candidates for a description that matters, morally speaking, will be ones that cite your relationship to them. Why not then conclude that this relation matters, not the further relation involved in knowing about it? #e appeal to “knowing who” is a distraction. It is perhaps more promising to invoke objectual knowledge, as in “knowing M.” We can know people, places, and things, as well as knowing who, where, and what. When you know someone, it makes sense to love them, even if you don’t know much about them. But I doubt that the expression “knowing M” will bear much weight. Unlike personal acquaintance, knowing someone comes by degree: you can know them better or worse.9 How well you need to know M in order to count as “knowing M” varies by context. Where does personal acquaintance fall? We might identify personal acquaintance with knowing M to the minimal degree that counts as “knowing M.” But even this is doubtful. Knowing M is usually thought to be reciprocal: you can’t know M unless M knows you (see Lauer 2014; Benton 2017). Personal acquaintance is not like that. You can love someone who doesn’t know you exist. Given its contextual "exibility, “knowing M” might be used to refer to personal acquaintance. But this does not illuminate our topic. Hoping for insight, we may turn instead to the concepts with which we think of others. Personal acquaintance involves the possession of a concept that essentially denotes a particular individual, as in “rigid designation.” Is the problem 318 Rethinking the Value of Humanity with “loving” the shortest spy or the person who is drowning on the right that their identity is not involved in one’s response? #ey are picked out by properties they could lack. According to Philip Pettit (1997, 158–159), “when an agent displays a commitment to a beloved by acting out of love, the reason that moves the agent has to be rigidly individualized in favour of the beloved. It has to be a reason in which the beloved !gures as an essential component.” But again, this is not the point. Love at de!nite description remains irrational, or impossible, when the description is rigidi!ed. It makes no sense to love the actual shortest spy or the person who is actually drowning on the right, picked out in those terms. Nor does the shi% to naming change this. Being told that the shortest spy is Ortcutt, or the drowning woman, Pat, is not su$cient to justify love. #e argument so far is that personal acquaintance is a mystery. It does not correspond to “knowing who” or objectual knowledge or rigidi!ed description. And yet it is ethically signi!cant. It is personal acquaintance that explains why it is rational to love someone you have only just met but irrational, perhaps impossible, to love “the shortest spy.” It justi!es saving one stranger when you could save three; its absence explains why it would be wrong to do so in the anonymous case. Before we try to untangle the mystery of personal acquaintance, I will suggest that it runs deeper. For personal acquaintance is su$cient, all by itself, to justify love. Nothing further is required. How could personal acquaintance fail to justify love? #e idea would have to be that rational love depends not just on personal acquaintance, but on beliefs about the object of love. On the permissive view of love, these cannot be beliefs about their speci!c merits or about your past relationship. Nor can we plausibly appeal to beliefs about the relation of personal acquaintance. As before, it is the relation that counts, not knowledge of it. Must you believe that the object of love is a “person” in the philosophers’ sense, a rational subject? No: you can love human beings who lack reason or the potential for it. Must you believe that the object of love is another human being? I am doubtful. While it may be irrational to love a goat in the way that you love another person, as in the play by Edward Albee (2003), I don’t believe that love depends on conjectured species or form of life. #at the man across the room is a human being, not a rational Martian, is too theoretical a ground for love at !rst sight. Finally, we can ask if you must believe that the object of love has full moral standing. #ere is a sense in which you treat them as if they do, but you need not have beliefs about how they should be treated in order to be rational in loving them. In principle, there might be other beliefs that justify love, other properties to which we must appeal. #ere is room for a disjunctive view, on which various beliefs will do. It is not easy to exhaust the options. But if we already know that personal acquaintance matters, that it is morally signi!cant, why keep looking? Why not conclude instead that, given its ethical weight, personal acquaintance is Other People 319 su$cient to justify love, all by itself.10 As its name suggests, personal acquaintance is a relation we can bear only to those it is rational to love in the way that we love other people, only to those who have full moral standing. You cannot be personally acquainted with a goat, though you might believe you are. It is not a belief about someone that makes them available for love but the relation of personal acquaintance. In Wittgenstein’s (1953, 178) words: “My attitude to him is an attitude towards a soul. I am not of the opinion that he has a soul.” If this is right, personal acquaintance is ethically signi!cant in two ways. First, because its absence in the anonymous case explains why you cannot save one instead of three; its presence explains why you can. Second, because it is a relation we can have only to those with full moral standing. Each mode of signi!cance constrains what personal acquaintance can be. 2. Do these issues pertain only to curious views about the nature and justi!cation of love? I don’t believe they do. Personal acquaintance plays a tacit but essential role in recent debates about contractualism and social risk.11 #e puzzle for contractualists comes out in the following cases, described by Johann Frick (2015). In Mass Vaccination (Known Victims), a million children face certain death unless they are treated with a vaccine, administered to all. Vaccine A prevents the fatal illness but will leave the children with a paralyzed limb. Vaccine B prevents the disease without paralysis but “because of a known particularity in their genotype, [it] is certain to be completely ine/ective for 1,000 identi!ed children” (183). #ese children will die. For contractualists, an act is permissible only if it can be justi!ed to each of those a/ected, in that it is licensed by a principle none of them could reasonably reject. We are not allowed to aggregate claims. #us, in Mass Vaccination (Known Victims), we compare the harm of losing one’s life to the harm of a paralyzed limb. Since no one can be asked to bear the former in order to save someone from the latter, we must choose Vaccine A. Now consider Mass Vaccination (Unknown Victims). Here a million children face certain death unless they are treated with a vaccine. Vaccine A is available, but there is also Vaccine C, which prevents the fatal disease without paralysis in 99.9% of cases; in 0.1% of cases, it is utterly ine/ective. (#e probabilities here are epistemic; they re"ect our evidence in making the decision.) #e challenge for contractualism is to distinguish the second case from the !rst, given that the outcome of choosing Vaccine C is virtually certain to involve the death of at least one child, and very likely to involve the death of about 1,000.12 According to Frick (2015, 185): 320 Rethinking the Value of Humanity [In] real life, we o%en impose social risks that closely resemble that of choosing [Vaccine C] in Mass Vaccination (Unknown Victims). #us, it is commonly deemed morally unproblematic to systematically inoculate young children against certain serious but nonfatal childhood diseases where there is a remote chance of fatal side e/ects from the inoculation itself. Can contractualists explain why it is permissible to impose this kind of social risk while maintaining that it is impermissible to do so when the victims are identi!ed in advance? Frick’s (2015, 187–188) solution takes the form of “ex ante contractualism,” according to which we should evaluate Mass Vaccination (Unknown Victims) not by considering how individuals fare in the possible outcomes but by considering how our policies a/ect their prospects now. #e claim is that Vaccine C improves the ex ante prospects of each individual child, by our evidential lights. It gives them a 99.9% chance of perfect health with a 0.1% chance of failure, which is arguably better than the assurance of paralysis with Vaccine A. #at is how a policy of using Vaccine C can be justi!ed to all. (If you believe that the imposition of a 0.1% chance of death on a given individual cannot be justi!ed as the alternative to paralysis, reduce the risk until you agree. #e general point remains.) Ex ante contractualists thus permit the imposition of social risk while resisting the imposition of harms when the victims are known, or knowable, in advance.13 It is important to stress that the dividing factor is not the chanciness of Vaccine C or the possibility that no one dies. It is about identi!cation. Consider a third case, Mass Vaccination (Unknown but De!nite Victims), which is just like Mass Vaccination (Known Victims) except that there is no way to guess who has the distinctive genotype. Vaccine A prevents the fatal illness but leaves each child with a paralyzed limb. Vaccine B prevents the disease without paralysis except for 1,000 unidenti!ed children. For the ex ante contractualist, this case is like Mass Vaccination (Unknown Victims): Vaccine B improves the prospects of each child, by our evidential lights. No individual should object to our choosing Vaccine B even though, as in Mass Vaccination (Known Victims), 1,000 children are sure to die.14 Some will resist this verdict, assimilating victims who are de!nite but unknown to those who are known in advance. #ey will need to square their resistance with a plausible view of social risk. Why refuse to employ Vaccine B in Mass Vaccination (Unknown but De!nite Victims) when it improves the prospects of each individual as much as Vaccine C? Imagine administering the vaccine to each child in succession. On our evidence, it is preferable to administer Vaccine B rather than Vaccine A, just as it was preferable to go with Vaccine C in Mass Vaccination (Unknown Victims). Shouldn’t we choose Vaccine B? But if we should do it for each child, we should do it for all.15 I won’t pursue this reasoning Other People 321 here. I want instead to trace the implications of ex ante contractualism, drawing out an ethical idea that turns on personal acquaintance. In doing so, I will assume, for the sake of argument, that Frick’s analysis is right. #e basic question for ex ante contractualists is what distinguishes Mass Vaccination (Known Victims) from Mass Vaccination (Unknown but De!nite Victims), given that the objective probabilities of the various outcomes are the same. #e terminology tells us that the di/erence is whether the victims are identi!ed or known. But what exactly does that mean? It had better not su$ce for a victim to be identi!ed that we can pick them out by de!nite description. A%er all, we could “identify” the unknown victims by some irrelevant feature, like height: “the shortest child who has the gene”; “the second shortest child who has the gene”; and so on. We know that these children will not be saved by Vaccine B in Mass Vaccination (Unknown but De!nite Victims). If that makes them “known victims,” the alleged distinction will collapse. Suppose instead that we are given a list of names: these are the children who have the distinctive gene. We have no other way to determine who they are. Again, this is not enough. We knew all along that the children had names; knowing what they are is not suf- !cient to identify them, not in the sense that matters here. In contrast, I would urge, personal acquaintance must su$ce for a victim to be identi!ed or known, to transform the circumstance into Mass Vaccination (Known Victims), and so preclude the use of Vaccine B. What guides the ex ante contractualist is the idea of “personal concern”: a concern for others directed at them as individuals, made possible, and rational, by personal acquaintance. #is leaves some di$cult questions. Presumably, it is not required that we in fact identify the victims or that we know who they are. For the ex ante contractualist, the question is what personal concern would motivate if we were personally acquainted with those involved, given what we know, or what is knowable, about them (again, see Frick 2015, 191–193). In Mass Vaccination (Known Victims), concern of this kind does not speak with a single voice; for those who have the gene, it favors Vaccine A; for those who do not, Vaccine B. Where the victims are unknown, personal concern is arguably unanimous: it favors Vaccine B on behalf of each. #at is why it is permissible to choose Vaccine B. #e idea, then, is not that you should be more concerned with personal acquaintances than anyone else, or that it is rational to give their interests greater weight. #e idea is that, when you aim to justify a policy to each of those a/ected, their prospects on your evidence will depend on how you pick them out. In Mass Vaccination (Unknown but De!nite Victims), the prospects of the shortest child with the gene are very bad if she is given Vaccine B. But if you meet a random child, her prospects on your evidence look better with Vaccine B than Vaccine A. For the ex ante contractualist, the !rst way of picking children out, by de!nite description, is irrelevant: that is not how you should think of individuals when 322 Rethinking the Value of Humanity you ask whether a policy can be justi!ed to each. In contrast, the second way of picking children out, by personal acquaintance, is morally apt. Whatever you make of contractualism as a theory of right and wrong, the idea of personal concern, concern that is mediated by personal acquaintance, is ethically compelling. It is like love, as described in Section 1, except that it is not disproportionate, and like respect but unlike love, it is a response to others we are required to have. It is a form of impartial concern for individuals that personal acquaintance demands. Arguably, such concern is akin to love in that its justi- !cation does not turn on further beliefs about the object of concern. Personal acquaintance is again signi!cant in two ways. First, because it justi!es a kind of concern that has ethical weight in decisions that bene!t others, a weight that is not shared by concern for the person, whoever it is, that meets a given description. Second, because it is a relation we can have only to those with full moral standing. Each mode of signi!cance constrains what personal acquaintance can be. I have argued that ex ante contractualists share the puzzle of personal acquaintance: the task of explaining its character in a way that meets these ethical constraints. But the idea of personal concern appears elsewhere. Perhaps the most self-conscious invocation of personal concern in recent moral philosophy is due to Caspar Hare (2016, §3). Hare begins with the standard Footbridge case, introduced by Judith #omson (1976): you can push a button to drop one person from a bridge into the path of a speeding trolley that will otherwise kill !ve. Most believe that doing so would be wrong. Hare contrasts the original case with what we can call “Opaque Footbridge”: six acquaintances are caught up in the trolley case, !ve on the track, one on the bridge, but you do not and cannot know where in particular they are. As Hare contends, there is a powerful argument that concern for each of those involved counts in favor of pushing the button. If we give them alphabetical names, we can see that, by your lights, pushing the button will improve A’s prospects from a 5/6 chance of death to just 1/6. It is true that pushing the button will change the potential cause of death, from being hit by a runaway trolley to falling from a bridge as a result of your intervention. But from A’s perspective, why care? Why should it matter whether you die on the tracks or falling from a bridge to save the !ve? #e upshot is that, in Opaque Footbridge, concern for A alone, not weighing her interests against those of others or aggregating claims, should lead you to push the button. #e same is true of concern for B, C, and all the rest. Benevolence speaks with a single voice. As Hare (2016, 466) insists, this argument does not apply in the original Footbridge case. Again, suppose you know the six involved, from A to F. If you know that F is on the bridge, concern for each is not unanimous. #ere is no way to argue that you ought to push the button without comparing or combining claims. Benevolent concern is simply divided. Concern for F speaks against Other People 323 pushing the button; concern for the others speak in favor. #is con"ict cannot be ignored. Hare gives further arguments, but we need not go into them.16 Nor need we accept his conclusion that, in Opaque Footbridge, you ought to push the button.17 What matters is that, regardless of this conclusion, Hare’s argument taps an ethical idea that has real force. He seems right to insist that in Opaque Footbridge, concern for the interests of those involved speaks unanimously for pushing the button. If there is a moral objection to doing so, it does not "ow from benevolent concern but from a di/erent and potentially con"icting source: a respect for rights that is not grounded in and may diverge from people’s interests. As with ex ante contractualism, this reasoning appeals to personal concern: concern for individuals that rests on personal acquaintance. We can see this by asking what explains the contrast between Footbridge and Opaque Footbridge. #e answer is that, in Opaque Footbridge, you do not know who will die if you push the button, whereas in Footbridge, you do: the victim is identi!ed or known. As before, it had better not su$ce for identi!cation that you locate someone by description, since you can “identify” the victim in Opaque Footbridge as “the one who is on the bridge.” If that makes them an identi!ed victim, the contrast we are tracking disappears. Nor do names su$ce. #e verdict of benevolence does not change when you are told that the person on the bridge is Jim—unless you know Jim in some other way. In what meaningful sense, then, do you know who the victim is in Footbridge but not in its opaque counterpart?18 Confronted with this question, Hare contends that the sort of “knowing who” that makes a di/erence is knowing facts about what matters in the lives of those involved, about their friends and families, hobbies and careers. What blocks the argument for pushing the button is the plurality of values realized by these diverse activities: values that are incommensurable (Hare 2016, §6). But this cannot be the right account. It would not a/ect the ethics of Footbridge if the people involved were perfect duplicates of one another, identical sextuplets who lead identical, solitary lives. Nor would it matter if they were people you just met, about whom you know nothing at all. What counts is personal acquaintance, not biographical knowledge. In Footbridge, personal concern for the one who is on the bridge restrains you from pushing the button. In Opaque Footbridge, personal concern—concern for individuals that turns on personal acquaintance—speaks in favor. Concern for the person on the bridge, described as such, can be ignored. Again, the moral of the story is that personal concern has ethical weight. It is not that you should be more concerned with personal acquaintances than anyone else, or that it is rational to give their interests greater weight. #e idea is rather that concern mediated by personal acquaintance has an ethical signi!cance that is not shared by concern for the person, whoever it is, that meets a given description. 324 Rethinking the Value of Humanity When you care about people’s interests, their prospects, given your evidence, depend on how you pick them out. In Opaque Footbridge, the prospects of the person on the bridge are bleak if you push the button. But the prospects of A to F, picked out by personal acquaintance, all improve. It is the second fact that counts. Concern for F has ethical weight that concern for the person on the bridge, whoever it is, does not. In order to make sense of this, to see the contrast between Footbridge and Opaque Footbridge, we must appeal to a form of concern that attaches to individuals not by name or description but by personal acquaintance. Such concern resembles love, except that it is not disproportionate and is not merely rational but required. It is tempting to add, once more, that the justi!cation for personal concern does not depend upon beliefs about its object: personal acquaintance is enough. It is a relation we can have only to those with full moral standing. #ere are thus three routes to the puzzle of personal acquaintance. It follows from the permissive view of love, from ex ante contractualism, and from Hare’s appeal to concern for others in Opaque Footbridge, that personal acquaintance justi!es a kind of concern that makes a di/erence.19 My hope is that, even if you doubt the premise of each argument, you can feel the pull of personal concern as an ethical idea. Nonaggregative, distributed concern for individuals with whom one is personally acquainted: this makes moral sense. Concern that is mediated by de!nite descriptions or the secondhand use of names does not. An account of personal acquaintance should explain why. 3. #e idea of personal concern is easy to misconceive. To repeat what was said before, the suggestion is not that you should give priority to those with whom you are personally acquainted over those with whom you are not. In the versions of Footbridge above, we assumed for simplicity that you were personally acquainted with all of those involved. #e argument was that concern mediated by personal acquaintance has an ethical signi!cance that is not shared by concern for the person, whoever it is, that meets a given description. Concern for F counts against your pushing the button in Footbridge: it has ethical weight. In Opaque Footbridge, concern for the person on the bridge, described as such, does not. It is le% open what this means for cases in which you are not personally acquainted with some or all of those involved. For instance, it does not follow that, if you are personally acquainted with the people on the track and you know where they are, but you are not acquainted with the person on the bridge, you should push the button, saving your acquaintances by killing a stranger. More plausibly, you should act as if you were personally acquainted with everyone, but have no additional knowledge about their locations. Other People 325 #e crucial fact is that when you weigh the e/ects of your actions on the prospects of individuals, it matters how you pick them out, and thus how your concern is directed toward them. F’s prospects may di/er from the prospects of the person on the bridge, going by your evidence, even though, unbeknownst to you, F is the person on the bridge. Which way of picking people out is morally relevant? It is the one involved in personal concern, which runs through personal acquaintance, not concern for the person on the bridge, as such. We can spell this out in terms of thoughts sustained by personal acquaintance. #e relation of personal acquaintance plays a role in determining the object of one’s attitude that is elsewhere played by de!nite descriptions or the secondhand use of names. It is a mode of presentation deployed in thoughts—as for instance, beliefs about the prospects of a given individual—that interact with personal concern. In Fregean terms, personal acquaintance is the basis of distinctive singular concepts; alternatively, it is a guise under which we can think of others. On the Fregean view, we can say that propositions that involve such concepts—that this act will harm F, in particular—count as a reasons in a way that merely descriptive propositions—for instance, that it will harm the person on the bridge— do not. We know that there are reasons of the !rst kind in Opaque Footbridge, but we don’t know what they are. #at is why this case is morally di/erent from Footbridge.20 Similarly, it is personal-acquaintance-based thoughts that justify love at !rst sight and that are absent in relation to the shortest spy. #ese clari!cations help us to say what personal acquaintance is: it is a cognitive relation that individuates its object, sustaining reference. #is relation is the minimal cognitive contact that justi!es love and it is the basis for personal concern. But our account so far is structural. It is about the role that personal acquaintance plays. Can we give a positive account of the relation that plays this role? In the work of Emmanuel Levinas, spanning four decades of the midtwentieth century, we !nd what I think is a profound phenomenology of personal acquaintance.21 Levinas comes back again and again to the face of the other as an ethical address. #is theme is central to his most well-known book, Totality and In!nity (1961). But his argument is sketched in “Freedom and Command,” published in 1953: #e being that expresses itself, that faces me, says no to me by this very expression. #is no is not merely formal, but it is not the no of a hostile force or a threat; it is the impossibility of killing him who presents that face; it is the possibility of encountering a being through an interdiction. #e face is the fact that a being a/ects us not in the indicative, but in the imperative, and is thus outside all categories. . . . #e metaphysical relationship, the relationship with the exterior, is only possible as an ethical relationship. (Levinas [1953] 1998, 21) 326 Rethinking the Value of Humanity Levinas is as much concerned with justice (“#at shalt not kill”) as with benevolence, though he connects the two: From the start, the encounter with the Other is my responsibility for him. #at is the responsibility for my neighbor, which is, no doubt, the harsh name for what we call love of one’s neighbor; love without Eros, charity, love in which the ethical aspect dominates the passionate aspect, love without concupiscence. (Levinas [1982b] 1998, 103) Levinas insists on the particularity of our relation to the other, its distributed, nonaggregative character, in ways that resonate with personal concern. I must judge, where before I was to assume responsibilities. Here is the birth of the theoretical; here the concern for justice is born, which is the basis of the theoretical. But it is always starting out from the Face, from the responsibility for the other that justice appears, which calls for judgment and comparison, a comparison of what is in principle incomparable, for every being is unique; every other is unique. (Levinas [1982b] 1998, 104)22 For Levinas, our relation to the other is always already ethical: it a/ects us in the imperative, not the indicative. He does not try to justify this relation or explain its basis in other terms. To many philosophers, this will seem like an abdication of responsibility. What grounds the ethical phenomena Levinas describes? What cognitive relation justi!es love at !rst sight and mediates personal concern, a form of concern that structures ethical thought? Since the ethical supervenes on the nonethical, there must be an answer to this question.23 Isn’t that where personal acquaintance comes in? As I read him, however, Levinas does not believe that the gap can be !lled.24 I think he is right to see a di$culty here. It is hard to say what personal acquaintance is in terms that are both extensionally adequate and account for its ethical role. In Section 1, we considered and dismissed some simple views: personal acquaintance is not “knowing who” or objectual knowledge or rigidi!ed description. We did not draw an obvious connection, between personal acquaintance and “acquaintance” as a term of art in the philosophy of mind. For Russell (1910– 1911) and others, acquaintance with particulars is what makes them available as direct objects of thought. Russell’s views about this topic evolved over time, and they are subject to interpretive dispute, but in his early phase, he seems to have believed that we are acquainted only with sense data, universals, and the self. #at idea has not fared well, and many are now skeptical of any role for acquaintance as a condition of “singular thought.”25 For those who are sympathetic to the idea, the paradigm of Other People 327 acquaintance is perceptual contact of the sort that sustains demonstrative reference.26 #is looks promising at !rst. Perceptual contact is present in love at !rst sight and the case in which you see the drowning M; it is absent when you think of the shortest spy or the person who is drowning on the right. Perhaps the singular concepts involved in personal concern and the reasons to which it responds are concepts that were formed on the basis of perception. #e problem is that it is not clear why perceptual contact, past or present, should have the ethical signi!cance that personal acquaintance does. Why should seeing someone, or having seen them in the past, make it rational to give priority to their needs, to save their life at the cost of three? Why should we organize our concern for individuals by perceptual acquaintance, not description? #ere are extensional problems, too. If you are looking at someone but take them to be a statue, you are not personally acquainted with them, though you are in a position to engage in acquaintance-based thought: that looks like a statue to me. Personal acquaintance may involve perceptual contact, but perceptual contact is not enough. What can we add to it in order to explain why personal acquaintance matters? One idea is to look at the facts to which we gain perceptual access. Personal acquaintance might involve perceptual contact of a kind that a/ords perceptual knowledge of properties that matter, morally speaking. For instance, it might allow for knowledge of mental states. When we are personally acquainted with someone, the suggestion runs, we can perceive their joy and su/ering, weal and woe. Whether or not that is true, however, it is doubly unpromising. First, it gets the extension wrong. If we can perceive human su/ering, why not the suffering of nonhuman animals, who lack moral standing of the sort at issue here? Second, it is hard to see why the perception of su/ering, or its possibility, should matter more than knowledge of human su/ering acquired by other means. Why would the su/ering of someone perceptually given to me count for more than the su/ering of the person on the bridge? #e second problem applies to variations of this approach that turn on perceptual access to speci!cally human qualities, to perception of the face or mind or body that brings it under concepts speci!c to human life. Views of this kind fare better extensionally, but they do not explain the moral weight of personal acquaintance. If it is simply a matter of how we know about the other, why should personal acquaintance matter in the ways it does? For Levinas, “[the] encounter with the face is not an act of seeing; it is not perceptual or judgmental” (Morgan 2007, 75; see also 92). What goes missing in the turn to perceptual knowledge is the practical dimension of personal acquaintance. One way to !ll this de!cit is to the stress the role of perceptual contact as a basis for human interaction. Personal acquaintance matters, on this more Kantian approach, because it allows us to act and reason together. For Christine Korsgaard (1993, 298), “the violation of a deontological constraint always involves an agent and a victim, and thus . . . deontological 328 Rethinking the Value of Humanity reasons are always shared reasons. #ey cannot be the personal property of individual agents. Instead, they supervene on the relationships of people who interact with one another. #ey are intersubjective reasons.” #at might explain why personal acquaintance counts. It is in the spirit of Stephen Darwall’s (2006) invocation of the “second-person standpoint,” the point of view from which we make claims on one another, holding each other accountable, you and I. Is personal acquaintance reciprocal recognition or the nexus of rational wills? I don’t believe it is. #e proposal could take various forms, but they share two basic "aws. #e more mundane objection is again extensional. Human beings with whom we cannot interact as agents have full moral standing. #ey are rational objects of love and personal concern. #is is true even when they lack the potential to achieve the relevant forms of reciprocity. I don’t know how to prove that infants with irreparable cognitive disabilities and people in persistent vegetative states are morally equal to us, and I do not think the implications of this fact are clear, but I am quite sure that it is true.27 #e less mundane objection is phenomenological. #ough Darwall cites both Levinas and Martin Buber ([1923] 1970) as precedents for the second-person standpoint, their views are not the same.28 Buber appeals to the reciprocity of the “I-#ou” relation. Levinas emphatically does not. [#e] relationship with the other is not symmetrical, it is not at all as in Martin Buber. When I say "ou to an I, to a me, according to Buber I would always have that me before me as the one who says #ou to me. Consequently, there would be a reciprocal relationship. According to my analysis, on the other hand, in the relation to the Face, it is asymmetry that is a$rmed: at the outset I hardly care what the other is with respect to me, that is his own business; for me, he is above all the one I am responsible for. (Levinas [1982b] 1998, 105) One of the themes of Totality and In!nity . . . is that the intersubjective relationship is a non-symmetrical relationship. In this sense, I am responsible for the other without waiting for reciprocity, were I to die for it. Reciprocity is his a/air. (Levinas [1982a] 1985, 98; see also Morgan 2007, 62)	OTHEROTHER: On this point, I think Levinas is right. #e phenomenology of personal acquaintance is not mutual or interactive: the demand for personal concern is unilateral. It is about what I owe to you, not what we owe to one another.29 #is ethical reality is obscured by the Kantian focus on the second person. We should not con"ate attention to relational phenomena in ethics—not just personal concern but the relational or bipolar notion of wronging an individual—with appeal to reciprocal recognition.30 #e second person matters, but it is not essential to “directed duty.” Other People 329 #ough it is impossible to survey every option, I hope you can begin to see how hard it is to describe the nature of personal acquaintance itself: to identify a psychological relation we can bear only to those with full moral standing, a relation that justi!es love and necessitates personal concern. It is no accident that Levinas does not describe the basis of the ethical relation; he is not being willfully obscure. #ere is an echo of Wittgenstein (1953, §217) in his refusal: “If I have exhausted the justi!cations I have reached bedrock, and my spade is turned.” Cora Diamond (1991, 55) takes a similar view of membership in the moral community: #e sense of mystery surrounding our lives, the feeling of solidarity in mysterious origin and uncertain fate: this binds us to each other, and the binding meant includes the dead and the unborn, and those who bear on their faces “a look of blank idiocy,” those who lack all power of speech, those behind whose vacant eyes there lurks “a soul in mute eclipse.” I am not arguing that we have a moral obligation to feel a sense of solidarity with all other human beings because of some natural or supernatural property or group of properties which we all have, contingently or necessarily. I am arguing, though, that there is no need to !nd such a ground. Levinas in fact goes further. My relation to the other is ethical through and through: it lacks any rational-psychological ground. Nor can its content be expressed in words. #is relation is presupposed by communicative speech, which is a condition of language and so of rational thought. (Like many philosophers, Levinas sees a distinction in kind between our mental lives and the “nonconceptual” psychology of nonlinguistic animals.) If thought depends on language, which depends in turn on our ethical relation to the other, this relation is a precondition of openness to the world: “the order of meaning, which seems to me primary, is precisely what comes to us from the interhuman relationship, so that the Face, with all its meaningfulness as brought out by analysis, is the beginning of intelligibility” (Levinas [1982b] 1998, 103). Since the relation is prelinguistic, and thus preconceptual, we cannot express with concepts how it represents the other. #e ethics of the face, of love and personal concern, is the transcendental origin of thought, as such.31 #is is the argument of Totality and In!nity, in brief.32 It is transcendental in two ways. First, the ethical relation is transcendental in that it cannot be conceptualized: it is fundamentally inexpressible. Second, the argument is transcendental in a Kantian sense: it aims to undermine a skeptical threat by showing how the skeptic’s position assumes or implies the very thing she purports to doubt. In this case, the moral skeptic cannot think conceptually without relying on a public language that depends in turn on her ethical acknowledgment of the 330 Rethinking the Value of Humanity other. For Levinas ([1961] 1969, 198), “[to] kill is not to dominate but to annihilate; it is to renounce comprehension absolutely.” I have sketched this argument not because I accept it but to give a more adequate view of Levinas on the ethical roots of metaphysics, and to explain how the ineluctably ethical character of personal acquaintance or the face might bear on moral philosophy. #ose are topics to pursue elsewhere. I want to return, instead, to the supervenience of the ethical: the pressure to insist that the justi!cation of love and personal concern derives from a relation to the other we can specify in other terms. As we have seen, it is di$cult to meet this pressure, to give a psychological account of personal acquaintance, of the relation that makes love rational and calls for personal concern. Must we concede that, in this respect, morality is groundless? Perhaps there is another way. Suppose, to begin with, that love and personal concern are natural kinds, emotions that play particular, distinctive roles in human life. Suppose, further, that they are regulated by a relation, R, that can be speci!ed in psychological terms. And adopt the conjecture that R is personal acquaintance. Human beings feel love or personal concern for those with whom they are personally acquainted, not those who are known to them merely by name or by minimal description, like “the one on the right” or “the shortest spy.” We should treat this as a generic proposition, a claim about what is characteristic of us that allows for exceptional cases, in which our emotions are misdirected. #e psychological relation we are targeting is one by which they are naturally regulated, though the regulation may be imperfect. Suppose, !nally, that the psychological relation thus described is one that relates human beings only to those with full moral standing: presumably, in the !rst instance, other human beings. We cannot be personally acquainted with inanimate objects or with nonhuman animals of the sort we encounter on Earth. #e discussion so far has asked, in e/ect, why relation R would justify love and necessitate personal concern. It treats our hypothesized emotions as if they were in need of external vindication, holding human nature up to a normative standard independent of us. Could that be a mistake? What if we insist that human nature, and the facts of human life, play a constitutive role in ethics, pursuing a line of thought that descends from Aristotle (see Foot 2001; #ompson 2013)? #at a human response is rational or justi!ed is not independent of the fact that this response, or a$rmation of this response, is functional for us, where the standards of functioning derive from the natural history of human life. We need not read the virtues directly or naïvely from the book of human nature in order to accept some measure of constitutive dependence. In fact, we had better not, unless we believe that human beings are by nature perfectly good. #e devil is in the details.33 But the approach has interest, in part because it is the only way we have seen, thus far, to reconcile the ethics of personal acquaintance with Other People 331 its psychological grounds. On this view, personal acquaintance matters not because it ought to play a certain role in human life, by standards independent of human life, but because of the role it characteristically plays: it is the relation that underlies both love and personal concern. For the neo-Aristotelian, this fact about human life has ethical signi!cance. Personal concern is called for, and love is justi!ed, whenever they are humanly possible. #ere is more to say in defense of these ideas. Because I don’t know how to say it, I want to end, instead, by placing the puzzle of personal acquaintance in a wider context of re"ection on human values. At the beginning of Section 1, I assumed without argument that human beings have an ethical signi!cance that is not shared by other terrestrial animals. Our interests count for more than theirs, and we have rights against each other they do not possess. Positions of this sort have acquired a very bad name. Don’t they re"ect an odious “speciesism”?34 It helps to emphasize their relational character: they are about the signi!cance we have for one another, not about the signi!cance of human beings in some absolute sense, as though we should matter more to rational Martians than they do to themselves. But even with this proviso, the basic challenge remains. How is such “humanism” (as I prefer) morally better than racism or sexism, attributing ethical signi!cance to brute biological di/erence?35 #is question, which casts doubt on the distinctive value of humanity, has less force if human nature is involved in the foundations of ethics. If human beings by nature respond to one another in distinctive ways, as with love or personal concern, and this fact plays a constitutive role in how it is rational to respond, humanism might be true. By contrast, there is no credible theory of ethics on which its foundations appeal to race or sex, nor is there reason to believe that human beings are by nature racist or sexist in ways that might support an Aristotelian defense of such repugnant views.36 #ere is, if not a direct argument from humanism to Aristotelian ethics, at least an a$liation between the two.37 #e ethics of personal acquaintance ampli!es and complicates this connection. It is, to begin with, another instance of moral thinking that is di$cult to sustain if we deny a constitutive role in ethics to the facts of human life. Perhaps we should not hope to sustain these thoughts, but if we do, we will be led, through Levinas, to Aristotle. At the same time, personal acquaintance puts constraints on the nature of moral standing: it has to mesh with human psychology in ways hypothesized above. #is points to a !nal question, o%en raised as an objection to humanism: What about rational Martians? Don’t members of other rational species count for us in the same way other humans do? #e standard response, which I accept, is that humanism does not imply otherwise. What it suggests is not that rational Martians lack full moral standing but that, if they have it, the ground on which they do so is quite di/erent from the ground that applies to you or me. Whether 332 Rethinking the Value of Humanity we should care about the members of another rational species, what rights they have against us: these are open questions. #e answers turn on how they relate to one another and to us. (Bernard Williams [2006, 149–152] makes this vivid by imagining rational predators who come from outer space.) #e idea of personal acquaintance introduces something new. For there is nothing in the psychology of love or personal concern that prevents us from being personally acquainted with nonhuman beings. One thing we learn from unimaginative science !ction, in which the aliens are mostly humanoid, is that love across species boundaries makes sense. #e same is true of personal concern. If it is rational to love the members of another rational species, their moral standing should not be in doubt. #e ethics of personal acquaintance is not humanist in giving special weight to speci!cally human life. It is humanist in treating every human being as a moral equal and, in its Aristotelian form, in giving special weight to human values, values that may be cosmically cosmopolitan. We have traveled far along a speculative path. Let us go back to the start. I have argued that personal acquaintance plays a crucial role in the permissive view of love, and in the idea of personal concern that is brought into focus by ex ante contractualism and Opaque Footbridge. If we want to make sense of these phenomena, we need an ethics of personal acquaintance. But it is hard to say what personal acquaintance is in terms that would explain why it justi!es love and calls for personal concern. We have considered an approach that has some promise, one that draws on Aristotle, echoing Levinas without his quietism. Personal acquaintance is a cognitive relation whose signi!cance for us can be explained by giving an essential role in ethics to the facts of human life. If this is wrong, we are le% with a serious, unsolved puzzle. Can we make sense of love at !rst sight, and of concern for individuals, as such?38 Notes 1. #e example derives from Kaplan 1968, 192–193. 2. Compare Velleman 1999, 353; Setiya 2014, 252–254. 3. Setiya 2014, 258–262, responding to Kolodny 2003. 4. I develop these themes in Setiya 2014, 254–261. 5. #e neglect is partial: I appeal to “singular thought” at several points (Setiya 2014, 260n21, 265–266). Velleman (2008, 269–270) has urged that emotions such as love depend on “acquaintance-based thought,” though he does not develop the point and it is in tension with his earlier remarks about the attachment of adopted children to birth parents they have never met (see 263–264). 6. #e case derives from Anscombe 1967, 17. 7. I provide at least some of it in Setiya 2014. 8. #is is a drastic simpli!cation of the theory proposed in Boër and Lycan 1986. Other People 333 9. On knowing someone well, see Talbert 2015. 10. A case of particular interest is self-love. Surely this does not depend on the belief that you are a person or a human being or have moral standing. Nor, as I have argued elsewhere (Setiya 2015), does it rest on beliefs about who you are. Instead, it turns on personal acquaintance with yourself. 11. Contributions include Scanlon 1998, 208–209; Reibetanz 1998; Ashford 2003; Lenman 2008; Fried 2012; James 2012; Dougherty 2013; Kumar 2015; Frick 2015; Horton 2017. 12. #e likelihood is > 0.99 that 1,000 children ± 100 will die (Frick 2015, 183n14). 13. On the extension from known to knowable victims, see Frick 2015, 191–193. I return to this below. 14. Unfortunately, Frick does not discuss this case, but he considers a variant of Mass Vaccination (Known Victims) in which the genetic test is very costly, and concludes, on ex ante contractualist lines, that it is permissible to choose Vaccine B; see Frick 2015, 193–194. 15. For a similar argument, see Horton 2017, 69–70. 16. His strategy is to decompose your action into six, each of which a/ects only one individual, improving their prospects without a/ecting anyone else. For details, see Hare 2016, §4. 17. I object to it in Setiya 2020. 18. A question raised about a similar case by Elizabeth Harman (2015, 870), in her review of Hare 2013. For related discussion, see Mahtani 2017. 19. As I argue in Setiya (2020), there is a fourth route, too, through the nature of respect for rights. 20. I develop this contrast in Setiya 2020. 21. I am no expert on Levinas, but I have been inspired by his writings. Michael Morgan’s (2007) Discovering Levinas is an invaluable guide; I have also been helped by Perpich 2008. 22. On the particularity of ethics in Levinas, see Morgan 2007, 61, 79–80. 23. I discuss supervenience in Setiya 2012, 8–11. 24. Here I follow Morgan (2007, 46–50); see also Perpich 2008, 51–54, 74–75, 115–117. 25. For a recent critique, see Hawthorne and Manley (2012, chap. 3). On the relation between Russellian acquaintance and knowledge of other people, see Kremer 2015. 26. See, for instance, Dickie 2015, chap. 4. 27. I defend this view in Setiya 2018. 28. On Levinas, see Darwall (2006, 21–22n44); on Buber, see Darwall (2006, 39–40). 29. Levinas ([1982b] 1998, 106, 109) !nds a deeper asymmetry in the ethical relation: “If there were only two of us in the world, there wouldn’t be any problem: it is the other who goes before me. . . . #e only absolute value is the human possibility of giving the other priority over oneself.” I don’t think this is right, either in substance (one is not required to give the other priority over oneself) or in form. Since the ethical relation is re"exive, it cannot involve the priority of an other. We are personally acquainted with ourselves. 334 Rethinking the Value of Humanity 30. #is distortion a/ects even those who resist the Kantian line. In a broadly Aristotelian approach to bipolarity, Michael #ompson (2004, 348, 367–372) assumes that “relations of right” are fundamentally reciprocal: in the paradigm case, they are recognized on both sides, though there may be marginal occasions in which the party who is wronged is unable to recognize the obligation of the other. If I understand him, Levinas would question this assumption. 31. “Preexisting the disclosure of being in general taken as basis of knowledge and as meaning of being is the relation with the existent that expresses himself; preexisting the plane of ontology is the ethical plane” (Levinas [1961] 1965, 201). 32. See, especially, Levinas (1961) 1965, 72–81, 194–219. #e argument is explored by Morgan (2007, 52–55) and Perpich (2008, 132–135, 140–149). An early version appears in Levinas (1953) 1998, 18. 33. If we focus on practical rationality, the simplest view identi!es this trait with the proper functioning of our psychology with respect to practical thought. I !nd it more plausible to begin with ethical judgment as a capacity that regulates human life; practical rationality is what this form of judgment tracks when it is functioning well. I defend this sort of view, under the heading of “Natural Externalism,” in Setiya 2012, chap. 4. 34. #e term was coined by Peter Singer (1975, 6). 35. #is challenge is central to Singer’s (1975) argument; for a more recent discussion, see McMahan 2005, §3. 36. I defend this claim in Setiya 2012, 142–158. 37. I pursue this connection in Setiya 2018. 38. For discussion of this material, I am grateful to Gregory Antill, Marcia Baron, Anastasia Berg, Ian Blecher, Paul Boswell, Matt Boyle, Jason Bridges, Sarah Buss, Alex Byrne, Imogen Dickie, Jimmy Doyle, Kyla Ebels-Duggan, Camil Golub, Marah Gubar, Matthias Haase, Caspar Hare, Samia Hesni, Abby Jaques, A. J. Julius, Irad Kimhi, Andy Koppelman, Michael Kremer, Ben Laurence, Jonathan Lear, Michael Morgan, Anselm Müller, Sasha Newton, Ryan Preston-Roedder, Tamar Schapiro, Paul Scho!eld, Will Small, Jack Spencer, David Sussman, Daniel Telech, Nandi #eunissen, Quinn White, Stephen White, and Steve Yablo, and to audiences at Brown University, the Normativity Research Group in Montreal, Northwestern University, the University of Chicago, Brandeis University, the University of Arizona, and MIT. Special thanks to Jennifer Lockhart for generous, constructive comments on an earlier dra%. References Albee, Edward. 2003. "e Goat, or Who Is Sylvia? London: Penguin. Anscombe, Gertrude E. M. 1967. “Who Is Wronged?” Oxford Review 5: 16–17. Ashford, Elizabeth. 2003. “#e Demandingness of Scanlon’s Contractualism.” Ethics 113: 273–302. Benton, Matthew. 2017. “Epistemology Personalized.” Philosophical Quarterly 67: 813–834. Boër, Steven E., and William G. Lycan. 1986. Knowing Who. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Other People 335 Braun, David. 2006. “Now You Know Who Hong Oak Yun Is.” Philosophical Issues 16: 24–42. Buber, Martin. (1923) 1970. I and "ou. Translated by W. Kaufmann. New York: Touchstone. Darwall, Stephen. 2006. "e Second-Person Standpoint. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Diamond, Cora. 1991. “#e Importance of Being Human.” In Human Beings, edited by David Cockburn, 35–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dickie, Imogen. 2015. Fixing Reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dougherty, Tom. 2013. “Aggregation, Bene!cence, and Chance.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 7: 1–19. Foot, Philippa. 2001. Natural Goodness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Frick, Johann. 2015. “Contractualism and Social Risk.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 43: 175–223. Fried, Barbara. 2012. “Can Contractualism Save Us from Aggregation?” Journal of Ethics 16: 39–66. Hare, Caspar. 2013. "e Limits of Kindness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hare, Caspar. 2016. “Should We Wish Well to All?” Philosophical Review 125: 451–472. Harman, Elizabeth. 2015. “Review: Caspar Hare, "e Limits of Kindness.” Ethics 125: 868–872. Hawthorne, John, and David Manley. 2012. "e Reference Book. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horton, Joe. 2017. “Aggregation, Complaints, and Risk.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 45: 54–81. James, Aaron. 2012. “Contractualism’s (Not So) Slippery Slope.” Legal "eory 18: 263–292. Kaplan, David. 1968. “Quantifying In.” Synthese 19: 178–214. Kolodny, Niko. 2003. “Love as Valuing a Relationship.” Philosophical Review 112: 135–189. Korsgaard, Christine. 1993. “#e Reasons We Can Share.” In her Creating the Kingdom of Ends, 275–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kremer, Michael. 2015. “Russell on Acquaintance, Analysis, and Knowledge of Persons.” In Acquaintance, Knowledge, and Logic, edited by Donovan Wishon and Bernard Linsky, 129–152. Stanford, CA: CSLI. Kumar, Rahul. 2015. “Risking and Wronging.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 43: 27–49. Lauer, David. 2014. “What Is It to Know Someone?” Philosophical Topics 42: 321–344. Lenman, James. 2008. “Contractualism and Risk Imposition.” Politics, Philosophy, and Economics 7: 99–122. Levinas, Emmanuel. (1953) 1998. “Freedom and Command.” In Collected Philosophical Papers, translated by Alphonso Lingis, 15–23. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press,. Levinas, Emmanuel (1961) 1969. Totality and In!nity. Translated by Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Levinas, E. (1982a) 1985. Ethics and In!nity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo. Translated by Richard A. Cohen. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Levinas, Emmanuel (1982b) 1998. “Philosophy, Justice, and Love.” In Entre Nous: On "inking-of-the-Other, translated by Michael B. Smith and Barbara Harshav, 103–121. New York: Columbia University Press. Mahtani, Anna. 2017. “#e Ex Ante Pareto Principle.” Journal of Philosophy 114: 303–323. McMahan, Je/. 2005. “Our Fellow Creatures.” Journal of Ethics 9: 353–380. 336 Rethinking the Value of Humanity Morgan, Michael. 2007. Discovering Levinas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Perpich, Diane. 2008. "e Ethics of Emmanuel Levinas. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Pettit, Philip. 1997. “Love and Its Place in Moral Discourse.” In Love Analyzed, edited by Roger E. Lamb, 153–163. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Reibetanz, Sophia. 1998. “Contractualism and Aggregation.” Ethics 108: 296–311. Russell, Bertrand. 1910–1911. “Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 11: 101–128. Scanlon, #omas M. 1998. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Setiya, Kieran. 2012. Knowing Right from Wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Setiya, Kieran. 2014. “Love and the Value of a Life.” Philosophical Review 123: 251–280. Setiya, Kieran. 2015. “Sel!sh Reasons.” Ergo 2: 445–472. Setiya, Kieran. 2018. “Humanism.” Journal of the American Philosophical Association 4: 452–470. Setiya, Kieran. 2020. “Ignorance, Bene!cence, and Rights.” Journal of Moral Philosophy 17: 56–74. Singer, Peter. 1975. Animal Liberation. New York: Random House. Talbert, Bonnie. 2015. “Knowing Other People: A Second-Person Framework.” Ratio 28: 190–206. Taurek, John. 1977. “Should the Numbers Count?” Philosophy and Public A#airs 6: 293–316. #ompson, Michael. 2004. “What Is It to Wrong Someone?” In Reason and Value, edited by R. Jay Wallace, Philip Pettit, Samuel ScheCer, and Michael Smith, 333–384. Oxford: Oxford University Press. #ompson, Michael. 2013. “Forms of Nature: ‘First,’ ‘Second,’ ‘Living,’ ‘Rational,’ and ‘Phronetic.’” In Freiheit Stuttgarter Hegel-Kongress 2011, edited by Gunnar Hindrichs and Axel Honneth, 701–735. Frankfurt: Klostermann. #omson, Judith J. 1976. “Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem.” "e Monist 59: 204–217. Velleman, J. David. 1999. “Love as a Moral Emotion.” Ethics 109: 338–374. Velleman, J. David. 2008. “Persons in Prospect.” Philosophy and Public A#airs 36: 221–288. Williams, B. 2006. “#e Human Prejudice.” In Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, edited by A. W. Moore, 135–152. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by Gertrude E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
		Marx Experts	* see deconstructed mess that I have given up on. Sorry Marx: sounds like post-Marxists have an immanent critique on yo ass * eg Leszek Kolakowski, Alvin Gouldner, Andre Gorz, Karl Korsch, James Scott, Ellen Meiskins Wood, Maximilien Rubel, Frederic Bender, Moishe Postone, Paul Mattick, Michael Heinrich, and Henryk Grossman #PostMarxists #PrescriptivePostMarxists #Marxoids	.	.	.	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Nietzsche Experts	* Barbara Stiegler (wrote dissertation on Nietzsche under Jean-Luc Marion https://twitter.com/orgoneontology/status/1660711127330766850 * Jonas Čeika (aka Cuck Philosophy) * Adrian Iliopoulos / metamorphosis_77 * Anthony Ludovici - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Ludovici Anthony Ludovici was a right-nietzchean? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTBq81xoStw&t=1518s * UberBoyo - https://www.instagram.com/uberboyo * Darryl Cooper https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7104584623841583104/ * Ken Gemes - halkyon / Niederhauser seminar instructor and professor emeritus of philogophy at Birkbeck College in London Nietzsche foresees that liberalism will take on Christian morality and sentiments but without its metaphysical underpinnings and commitments * H. L. Mencken, Menckenian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Mencken https://twitter.com/DanielTutt/status/1707833729937187228 * Daniel Tutt * Domenico Losurdo - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scj2Q69EFoU * Jan Rehmann's Deconstructing Postmodernist Nietzscheanism * Don Dombowsky, translator of Nietzsche's Political Writings; Ray Brassier who has written extensively on left- Nietzschean thought; John Bellamy Foster who recently wrote a long essay that touches on Nietzsche and imperialism; https://twitter.com/DanielTutt/status/1705184032240042495 * Professors Paul Loeb, Keith Ansell Pearson, Christa Davis Acampora, and Michael Ure https://old.reddit.com/r/Nietzsche/comments/15zbgqa/scholarly_articles/jxgnenz/ * Matthew Dill - As the Nietzsche scholar Matthew Dill points out, a parasite “takes power away from one’s environment,” and “with parasitic pursuits of power, we attain an increase in our feeling of power at the expense of (the power of) one or more hosts.”29 The metaphor of the parasite is so central to Nietzsche that he analyzes society and the individual according to how many parasites it can endure. [..] There are two ways of relating to the will to power, according to Dill. The first is the “instrumentalist thesis” of the will to power, which is bent on the bad form of parasitism, that only seeks an increase in the feeling of power; the second is the “structural thesis,” which refers to the power that emerges after we have encountered and overcome resistances.31 This latter form of power is one that has harnessed not merely power but force (Kraft). If “all ressentiments [are] absent where there is a great abundance of force,” the Übermensch now suffers from the “overfullness of life.”32 The parasite who has not overcome their resistances suffers from a lack of the feeling of power and thus deals with what Dill calls an “overflow of power,” not a “superabundance of power.”33 This distinction is crucial for understanding the way Nietzsche wants us to parasitize him, to overcome him: “Now I bid you lose me and find yourselves; and only when you have all denied me will I return to you.”34 * Devin Gouré https://devingour.substack.com/ https://twitter.com/DevinGoure * Babette Babich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babette_Babich * Hans-Georg Mueller - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0ljeB839Sxg * Walter Kaufmann's students over the years included Nietzsche scholars Frithjof Bergmann, Richard Schacht, Ivan Soll and Alexander Nehamas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Kaufmann_(philosopher) * Dmitri Safronov's "Nietzsche's Political Economy" https://x.com/DanielTutt/status/1831799955826073607 * Ronald Beiner - Malcolm Bull’s 2014 book Anti-Nietzsche and Ronald Beiner’s 2018 book Dangerous Minds: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and the Return of the Far Right. https://merionwest.com/2022/05/26/review-nietzsche-the-aristocratic-rebel-by-domenico-losurdo/ * Keegan Kjeldsen / essentialsalts / Nietzsche Podcast / Untimely Reflections * Lise van Boxel https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1hupz8m/reading_nietzsche_made_me_depressed/m5rgqhg/ * * * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: https://old.reddit.com/r/Nietzsche/	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Schelling Experts	* <insert tablified Schelling data here> * obviously Christopher Satoor * Xavier Tilliette * Kuno Fischer * Sean McGrath - Sean J. McGrath, Kyla Bruff, and Joseph Carew https://twitter.com/aufgehendeRest/status/1663400731833925632 The Dark Ground of Spirit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Ground_of_Spirit * Chaadayev;Venevitinov;Solovyov;Belinsky - Russian Schellingians * Naomi Fisher - Schelling's Mystical Platonism.pdf https://www.facebook.com/groups/304938653857214/posts/1166819074335830/ #mysticalbooks * Marcela Garcia - Marcela Garcia asks a very important question. After founding the Positive philosophy, & showing that "Negative philosophy's" greatest flaw is that it philosophically can't produce anything with "actuality," why is Schelling's last work a Presentation of Pure Rational Philosophy? - https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1825911540484104338 * Walter Kasper - "I love Kaspers reading of the late Schelling, however his thoughts on the Freiheitsschrift und die Weltalter as failed projects rubs me the wrong way. But other than that, he is a brilliant scholar and the text is an immense study worth the read." * * * * * * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * F. W. J. Schelling and German Idealism https://www.facebook.com/groups/304938653857214/ * * *	.
9/26/2023	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Zizek Experts	* Adrian Johnston * "Žižek does not so much want to be ‘Žižek, son of Hegel’, on a par with ‘Badiou, Plato’s son’. He wants to channel Hegel himself, to be his afterlife, and thereby retroactively to be Hegel himself." - Peter Osborne, More than everything: Žižek’s Badiouian Hegel https://x.com/RyanHaecker/status/1838614980402295146 * *	QUOTES: * * * * * * *	PAIRWISE/TERNARY COMPARISONS: * * * * * * *	SOCIAL: * https://old.reddit.com/r/zizek+zizek_studies * [Žižek and the Slovene School](https://www.facebook.com/groups/402250916589137) * [Slavoj Žižek Sniffposting](https://www.facebook.com/groups/251215961958007/) * ZizekDankMemes!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/1121396571767429/ * Badiou_and_Zizek!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/362215295534258/ * * * * * * *	.
10/19/2022	experts ur-critiquers neurotics obsessionals obsessives biographers translators scholars disciples followers specialists epigones footnotes-to	Other Experts	# Adorno experts * Jensen Suther https://twitter.com/jensensuther, also Samuel Beckett expert? * Eduardo Grüner - Adorno - Una introducción https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Grüner * Kyla Bruff - The Episode I am about to share with you all is on The Life and Philosophy of Theodor W. Adorno with Dr. Kyla Bruff (Carleton U.). The Following video is a continuation of my series on Classical German philosophy. In this episode of the Young Idealist, I am joined by the talented Dr. Kyla Bruff who is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy at Carleton University in Ontario, Canada. Dr. Bruff helps navigate the viewer through the complex life and philosophy of Theodor W. Adorno https://www.academia.edu/?p=LZrGbK https://old.reddit.com/r/GermanIdealism/comments/1djqg57/an_introduction_to_the_life_and_philosophy_of/ * * * * * * # Aquinas experts (Thomists) * Josef Pieper * Kolakowski - Over the next five years, the apostle of the communist future drifted further and further into the Christian past. Kolakowski changed his doctoral research topic to a critique of Aquinas; and then to a study of the Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza’s concept of God. Even as Kolakowski’s public attacks on Christianity intensified, he privately started to reconsider the party’s reductionist account of religion. Underneath Kolakowski’s feet, once-solid ground was slowly beginning to crack. https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/06/settling-scores-god-leszek-kolakowski-end-of-history-poland * Leibniz = Aristotelian-Thomistic expert - The way that I would state Leibniz’s inner or true position, is that he was an orthodox Aristotlian & Thomist, who sought to give a highly precise logical rigor to Aristotelian-Thomistic science. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H5Tv4zUvYjTzlw7JL1XuuSSI32xVzLQx-2L_XLPiWSU/edit * * * # Bataille Experts * Michel Surya https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Surya * * * # Derrida Experts * Geoffrey Bennington * Jean-Luc Marion, student of Derrida * Barbara Stiegler, student of Derrida * Rodolphe Gasche, according to Rodolphe Gasche, Derrida personally disliked Lacan...they had a falling out over some comments Lacan made. Derrida was known to be overly sensitive. https://old.reddit.com/r/lacan/comments/1aqbdhq/could_derridas_idea_of_the_transcendental/kqpvsnh/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodolphe_Gasch%C3%A9 also Gasche is referenced in "A Triangle Open on its Fourth Side’: On the Strategy, Protocol, and ‘Justice’ of Deconstruction" * Avital Ronell - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avital_Ronell * Derrida experts Deborah Goldgaber's Speculative Grammatology * * * * * # Fichte experts * Yolanda Estes * Wolfgang Janke * Gabe Gottlieb - x2 Gabe Gottlieb associate professor of philosophy at Xavier University in Cincinnati, Ohio. Dr. Gottlieb navigates us through a detailed Presentation on the Life and Philosophy of the German Philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762-1814) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UB3PnH9Xta0 * Prisoner in Germany, he began writing his thesis on Fichte https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_Gueroult * Matthew Nini 'Fichte in Berlin: The 1804 Wissenschaftslehre' - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3AnzypX2sU * Dan Breazeale (implicitly against Dieter Henrich) has called Anstoß "Fichte's original insight." https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContVess.htm * * # Foucault experts * Didier Eribon - Michel Foucault by Didier Eribon, translated by Betsy Wing * * * # Frege expert * * * * # Guattari experts * Day x of posting Guattari memes!! https://old.reddit.com/user/triste_0nion/submitted * * * # Husserl experts * * * # Krause Experts * Michael Sonenscher - Prolific scholar. Lovely man. Remember him fondly contributing to seminars on Krausism (Karl Krause) at King’s years ago, which you also attended so generously, Chris. ahttps://x.com/aparkerlawson/status/1620972275401990146 * * * # Lyotard Experts * Geoffrey Bennington * * * # Marcuse Experts * Katsiaficas was mentored by Marcuse (Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud) * * * # Plato Experts # Contemporary Neo-Platonists https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/12ukmsm/are_there_any_modern_neoplatonists_or_people/ * Hasan Spiker * Stephen Clark would qualify. Check out his newest book: Cities and Thrones and Powers: Towards a Plotinian Politics * Reiner Schürmann, particularly his work entitled Neoplatonic Henology as an Overcoming of Metaphysics * Deleuze began to pull a lot from Plotinus in his later work, esp. in What is Philosophy? * François Laruelle has written about Plotinus, though I know much less about his work * Lloyd Gerson and Eric Perl, maybe. * Edward P. Butler is a modern pagan neoplatonist. * Steven Dillon’s whole argument for polytheism is grounded by Neoplatonism. I’m new to philosophy so I’m not sure if most around here would consider him a philosopher, but his book A Case for Polytheism is a pretty good argument if you’re a Platonist. * * # Popper Experts * Nassim Taleb is just a Popperian? https://twitter.com/search?q=%20Popper%20%40nntaleb&src=typed_query&f=live https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/11hv9uc/question_concerning_nassim_taleb/ * * * * # Spinoza Experts * Spinoza scholars: Edwin Curley * Samuel Shirley * Margaret Gullan-Whur - spinoza expert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjFDIZdNhPU&t=3m50s * * * * # Vattimo experts * Thomas Winn on Vattimo - I’m pleased to announce a recent publication of The Vattimo Dictionary containing a few entries from myself on particular aspects of Gianni Vattimo’s philosophical thought on history and historicity, ideology, and (the end of) modernity. https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-the-vattimo-dictionary.html https://www.instagram.com/p/CtPLpDEKZEr * * * # Virilio experts * Lotringer - The best place to start with Virilio are his interviews with Lotringer. Pure war would work well. * # Wittgenstein experts * https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/zxg4dm/how_do_i_come_to_understand_wittgensteins/ * Ray Monk * Russell Nieli, Ray Monk, Janik & Toulmin, Paul Engelman gives a continental perspective to Wittgenstein * * * #Whitehead experts * Gary Herstein * Judith Jones * * *	.	.	SOCIAL: * t@bourdieustudies * * * * * *	OTHER https://x.com/search?q=%22Adorno+expert%22&src=typed_query&f=live

	metatítulo	Critique of X, XKritik	# Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Critique of" (Kant's Critique of pure reason, Peter Sloterdijk's critique of cynical reason, etc) Sure, here is a list of all the major philosophy works that begin with "Critique of": * Schelling's Hegelkritik * Goethes's Schellingkritik? see "Über Goethes Schellingkritik" * Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant (1781) * Critique of Practical Reason by Immanuel Kant (1788) * Critique of Judgment by Immanuel Kant (1790) * Critique of Dialectical Reason by Jean-Paul Sartre (1960) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wreepk5dfQs&t=1h27m45s * Critique of Cynical Reason by Peter Sloterdijk (1983) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Cynical_Reason * Critique of Violence by Walter Benjamin (1921) * Critique of the Gotha Program by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (1875) * Critique of the Hegelian Dialectic and Philosophy in General by Friedrich Engels (1878) * Critique of Everyday Life by Henri Lefebvre (1947) * Critique of Political Economy by Karl Marx (1859) * Critique of Transcendental Miserablism is Land responding to some of this critique, for anyone interested in following these threads. https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/lznb5r/does_anyone_know_what_mark_fisher_and_the_rest_of/ * The Critique of Pure Feeling: Bradley, Whitehead, and the Anglo-Saxon Metaphysical Tradition - by James Bradley * Critique of Consequentialism - Julian Nida-Rümelin's "Kritik des Konsequentialismus" These are just a few examples, and there are many other philosophy works that begin with "Critique of." The term "critique" is used in these works to mean a critical examination or evaluation of a particular subject. In the case of philosophy, these works typically examine and evaluate the foundations of knowledge, morality, and society.	.	.	.	.
	metatítulo	Tractatus X	# Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Tractatus" (eg Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus) * Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Ludwig Wittgenstein * Tractatus Anti-Academicus.pdf: The Illusion of Academic Authority by Joshua Hansen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OqVptJkcDM (also The Treason of the Intellectuals by Benda, Julien and Thomas Sowell (an engineers test is if a bridge stays up, an academic is never tested, market of credentials), "academized", Kindly inquisitors.pdf by Jonathan Rauch, "academic realism", "academic rationalism") WHO IS Raymond Owen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OqVptJkcDM&t=1250s - Owen Raymond = Owen/Owain Leyshon (AKA Raymond K Hessle), Deirdre McCloskey's "Liberalism Caused the Great Enrichment" * Tractatus Theologico-Politicus by Baruch Spinoza * Tractatus de Intellectus Emendatione (Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect) by Baruch Spinoza, though it is not typically known by this name alone. * Tractatus Politicus (Political Treatise) also by Baruch Spinoza. * Tractatus de legibus ac deo legislatore (Treatises of Laws and God the Lawgiver) by Francisco Suárez. * Tractatus Politicus-Technologicus - a conceptual by Yuk Hui: that is to say reconnecting the sphere of politics to that of technology to give shape to what Hui calls Tractatus Politicus-Technologicus. It is necessary, writes Hui, « to ground political philosophy in technology » https://www.rivistapalomar.it/pianeta-cibernetica-yuk-hui/ * Jonathan Gustavo Ramos' Tractatus Metaphisico-Phaenomenologicus https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaEj85X5SjXoDtvJpc3SxLg/community?lb=UgkxgE_PaLhaPphkYWdf4AdfuZMeQI1njUnR * * * * * * * * * *
	metatítulo	"Being and X", "X and Y", "X of Y", "X and its/their Discontents/Vicissitudes"	# "BEING AND A" - Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Being and ", eg: Being and Time by Heidegger * Being and Event by Badiou * Being and Nothingness by Sartre * “Being and Timelessness”: Edith Stein's Critique of Heideggerian Temporality by James Orr https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/moth.12056 * * * # "X AND ITS MAL/DIS-CONTENTS/VICISSITUDES/CRITICS" * Liberal Democracy and its Discontents * Democracy and its Critics by Dahl * Capitalism and Its Discontents by Michael J. Boskin * Continental Realism and its Discontents journal has an "Ecstatic Realism" article by Sean McGrath - https://www.academia.edu/41983533/The_Ecstatic_Realism_of_the_Late_Schelling * Instincts and Their Vicissitudes / Drives and Their Vicissitudes Page 5 https://old.reddit.com/r/Nickland/comments/16sv2i1/machinic_desire_fanged_noumena/ * VOCATION AND ITS VICISSITUDES - There is no greater love than that of a revolutionary couple, where each of the two lovers is ready to abandon the other at any moment if revolution demands it https://slavoj.substack.com/p/vocation-and-its-vicissitudes * The Act And Its Vicissitudes https://nosubject.com/The_Act_and_Its_Vicissitudes * Love and Its Vicissitudes https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1655723.Love_and_Its_Vicissitudes * neo mercantilism and its malcontents https://x.com/tszzl/status/1910428292341260800 * "Continental Realism and its Discontents" . Ed. Marie Eve Morin. Edinburgh University Press, 2017. https://www.academia.edu/41983533/The_Ecstatic_Realism_of_the_Late_Schelling?email_work_card=title * "Coping and Cognitive Science" = "Heidegger, Coping and Cognitive Science" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Wrathall * * * * * * * * * * * # "A and B" and/or "A or B" - Please list out all the philosophical major works that follow this template: "* and" , eg: Laura Mulvey's Fetishism and Curiosity - I lowkey think both the experimental cinema and Language Poetry versions of 'representational transparency is akin to commodity fetishism' are straightforwardly true https://x.com/peligrietzer/status/1933768608334950880 Reading this passage, it impossible not to feel that Marx was optimistic to hope that classical economy had finally banished ghosts and illusions, and succeeded in enlightening the world. It is almost as though his metaphors prefigure the (as yet uninvented) cinema machine, lying in wait to bring a new form of commodification and credulity to the people. Fetishism, broadly speaking, involves the attribution of self-sufficiency and autonomous powers to a manifestly 'man'-derived object. It is, there-fore, dependent on the ability to disavow what is known and replace it with belief and the suspension of disbelief. On the other hand, the fetish is always haunted by the fragility of the mechanisms that sustain it. Fetishes are supremely culturally specific. So, as Eisenstein showed so clearly in the gods sequence of October, one man's divine may be another man's lump of wood. Knowledge hovers implacably in the wings of consciousness. * Valor de uso y utopía https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolívar_Echeverría * Simone Weil's Oppression & Liberty - I’m being a principled Christian in rejecting fealty to that faker Thiel and his fundamentally Antichristic doctrine. I find you way more interesting than I find him, frankly. and like I said, I am neither an atheist nor a communist. I am a Catholic, a Weilian, and a radical distributist—I’m not sure what point you’re trying to prove. Simone Weil’s critiques of Marx are all correct. have you read Oppression & Liberty? https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1883001237592748502 ;;; Simone Weil grappled with Cartesian clarity and Carmelite kenosis—the tension between rational structure and mystical surrender. In her Gravity and Grace, she explores how necessity (res extensa) and grace (res cogitans) are not opposed, but interpenetrating—a view that resonates with this incarnational reading of Descartes * Catherine Pickstock's Repetition and identity * Jonathan Culler's "Convention and Meaning" - For "Signature Event Context", read Jonathan Culler's "Convention and Meaning" which breaks it down in a nice, accessible way (here). For "Insistence of the Letter", read Bruce Fink's essay on it it chapter 4 of Lacan to the Letter. That's a pretty brutal comparison that you have to make, but these should help if you can access them. https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1hvrt4g/i_cant_wrap_my_head_around_philosophy_seeking/ * Höfele's "Wollen und Lassen" - Despite his enthusiasm for the philosopher he calls “the most far-reaching thinker” of his age,2 Heidegger comes to see Schelling as one of the foremost representatives of a metaphysics of will, summed up in the famous line on primordial being. The implication is obvious: if we want to overcome this metaphysics and all its harmful consequences, we must leave Schelling behind. Philipp Höfele’s excellent book Wollen und Lassen demonstrates why this conclusion is gravely mistaken. Far from being an uncritical predecessor of Nietzsche and the will to power, Schelling displays an ambivalent attitude toward willing – affirming it in some forms, critiquing or rejecting it in others. Above all, Höfele argues, Schelling’s thought on the will has many layers of complexity: it includes not only a variety of forms of willing, but also “fringe phenomena” (Rand-Phänomene) like non-willing or Gelassenheit that are ordinarily placed in opposition to will. https://philarchive.org/archive/THOSHA * Integration and Difference https://x.com/grantmaxwell * Freud's Totem und Tabu https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totem_und_Tabu * Lavalle's Evil and Suffering Le mal et la suffrance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Lavelle * Jean Luc-Marion's "Reduction and Givenness" * Austin Farrer's "Finite and Infinite" - https://ia801505.us.archive.org/24/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.507029/2015.507029.finite-and.pdf * Negarestani's "Intelligence and Spirit" https://twitter.com/SilverShenlong/status/1480500733581664256 ;;; Reza is straight up an analytic philosopher. There’s hardly any “continental” in him really (he likes Husserl, that’s it—I wrote a polemic about this with @pachabelcanon published in Seven Story Hotel by @subtlebodypress, critiquing his rejection of psychoanalysis and insisting that he doesn’t really understand Hegel). “Intelligence and Spirit” is an essentially analytic Neo-Sellarsian work more than anything else. https://x.com/tenshi_anna/status/1911449944755491003 * Hofstadter's "Surfaces and Essences" - https://www.amazon.com/Surfaces-Essences-Analogy-Fuel-Thinking/dp/0465018475 https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/1c65v88/why_does_heidegger_oppose_conventional_metaphysics/l0cipcc/ * Keiji Nishitani's "Religion and Nothingness" - "water is just as much a part of the fish as the fish is the water" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDwy_LE4WjM&t=739s * Derrida's 'Violence and Metaphysics' “Nous nous interrogeons sur le sens d'une nécessité : celle de s'installer dans la conceptualité traditionnelle pour la détruire. Pourquoi cette nécessité s'est-elle finalement imposée à Levinas ?” (Violence et Métaphysique 427) https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=miami1344048769&disposition=inline * Jean-Paul Sartre's "Anti-Semite and Jew" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Semite_and_Jew * Catherine Pickstock's "Repetition and Identity" https://voegelinview.com/process-and-the-derailing-of-reality-part-iv-the-strange-curse-of-the-ages-of-the-world/ * Marcuse's "Reason and Revolution" https://www.instagram.com/p/C89tl2LJTuD/ * Yahya Sinwar's "Thorns and Carnations" - https://mondoweiss.net/2024/07/the-philosophy-of-hamas-in-the-writings-of-yahya-sinwar/ * Sturm und Drang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturm_und_Drang * Markus Gabriel's Sentido y Existencia - En su obra más ambiciosa, «Sentido y existencia», Markus Gabriel aborda, con extraordinario conocimiento tanto de la historia de la filosofía como de las teorías científicas modernas, el tema de la validez y los límites de la ontología y la metafísica. https://x.com/herderbarcelona/status/1850961396168622589 * Ramon Andres' La bóveda y las voces. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramón_Andrés - Ramon Andres translated Jankelevitch? * Maurice Merleau-Ponty, "Eye and Mind" * Language and Myth by Cassier https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1941418921242001495 * Ioseph Stalin's Anarchism or Socialism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_or_Socialism%3F * * * * * * * * * # A, B and C * Alfred North Whitehead's "Process and Reality", Samuel Alexander's "Space, Time and Deity" https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1806654558929617059 * Peter Singer's "Famine, Affluence, and Morality" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer * Christianity, Truth, and Weakening Faith (2009), edited by Pierpaolo Antonello, is a brilliant dialogue between Vattimo and Girard on relativism, Christianity, modernity, Nietzsche, Heidegger, faith, and other topics. Like Girard, Vattimo believed that Christ set in motion a process of desacralization that culminates in the modern world. https://www.facebook.com/groups/588048328669520/posts/1532341844240159/ * Zubiri's “Naturaleza, Historia, Dios” Muchas gracias a ti 😊. Muy interesante todo lo que comentas. Con respecto a las recomendaciones de Zubiri, en el prólogo de “Naturaleza, Historia, Dios” tienes una primera sinopsis y también está genial comenzar por la trilogía de la Inteligencia Sentiente. “Estructura dinámica de la realidad” es un libro de gran interés puesto que ofrece un cierto engarce con la metafísica del proceso. Con respecto a la reología todavía no tienen un libro formalmente publicado, pero en los números de la revista de Filosofía Fundamental hay investigaciones de reología publicadas. Pueden leerse en su página web [ https://filosofiafundamental.com/revista/ ] Un saludo virtual https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMQwM6uCSpA * * * * * # X of Y * Simone de Beauvoir "Ethics of Ambiguity" * Jean Luc Marion's "The Banality of Heidegger" * Arendt's "The Banality of Evil" * * *	.	.	.	.
	metatítulo	Prolegomena to X	Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Prolegomena to", eg: * "Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics" by Immanuel Kant * "Prolegomena to a Theory of Language" by Louis Hjelmslev * "Prolegomena to Charity" by Jean-Luc Maron, more by Maron: "In Excess: Studies of Saturated Phenomena" and "Being Given: Toward a Phenomenology of Givenness" * "Prolegomenon to any Current Conjunctural Analysis A Response To Warren Montag" https://medium.com/@Sulliedsubjects/prolegomenon-to-any-current-conjectural-analysis-92deaa86a8b4 * * *	.	.	.	.
	metatítulo	The Dialectic of X	Please list out all the philosophical major works that begin with "Dialectic of ", eg: * "The Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment" by Christian Thorne * "The Dialectic of Dark Enlightenment" Zizek and Liu's article - "https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/16gx6no/slavoj_%C5%BEi%C5%BEek_the_dialectic_of_dark_enlightenment/k0ajgfj/?context=3 * "The Dialectic of Ideology and Technology" by Alvin Gouldner * "The Dialectic of Enlightenment" by Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno: This influential work, associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory, explores the relationship between reason, enlightenment, and social domination in modern society. * "The Dialectic of Sex" by Shulamith Firestone: This feminist work examines the historical and contemporary oppression of women through the lens of social and biological factors, aiming for a radical reimagining of gender roles and reproductive technologies. * "The Dialectic of Self and World: Kierkegaard, Marx, and the Making of the Modern Subject" by Ali Aroosi: This book investigates the conceptions of selfhood and subjectivity in the works of Søren Kierkegaard and Karl Marx, analyzing their respective contributions to modern understandings of the individual in relation to society.
	metatítulo	"Anti- / Contra-X" / "(Presentation) On X / "(Presentimiento) De X" / "(Ensayo) Sobre X"	# What are some major philosophical works that begin with "Anti-" Or "Contra-"? Examples below: # Anti-/Contra-/Against * Nietzsche contra Wagner; Out of the Files of a Psychologist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche_contra_Wagner * Anti-Duhring by Engel- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChring * Anti-Cato by Julius Caesar's polemic * Anti-Oedipus by Félix Guattari and Gilles Deleuze * Against the Academicians by Augustine of Hippo * Contra Celsum by Origen * Contra Gentiles by Thomas Aquinas' Contra Gentiles - Whereas the Summa Theologiæ was written to explain the Christian faith to theology students, the Summa contra Gentiles is more apologetic in tone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summa_contra_Gentiles * Contra el Mundo, contra la vida - Houellebecq's "H. P. Lovecraft: Contra el mundo, contra la vida" * Against Theory w Walter Benn Michaels - OCTOBER EMSTU - Epic Marathon Stream at Theory Underground https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekHfH_5Vl_w * Against Progress by Zizek https://x.com/katherineveritt/status/1928144616559104114 * Matt Segall's Against Dispensationalism post - Against Dispensationalism and the deep theological confusion of American evangelicals. "After decades of cultural, political, and military hegemony, the United States faces trillions in debt, unprecedented rates of mental illness and addiction, crumbling infrastructure, and an increasingly disillusioned citizenry. It is in no state to engage in another disastrous and costly war across the world on behalf of another country." -KARIS RIDES https://www.facebook.com/matthew.david.segall/posts/pfbid0ENDKKkd1zNMJJpq84wbGgSYdqBe1n9MPSAVHv9kxuhvxRrxJc7kV3d7SEL2MJdPcl * Against Flatness https://x.com/kitsumute/status/1945862065769341007 https://www.minasmongrel.xyz/blog/against-flatness-beyond-the-horizon-of-hypersea-the-technologies-of-reason-install/ * * * * * * * * * # On/Of/About * Schleiermacher's On Religion - Your Dailey reminder to read: Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi's "Main Philosophical Writings and the Novel Allwill," Johann Gottfried Herder's "Ideas for the Philosophy of the History of Mankind," Friedrich Schleiermacher's "On Religion: Speeches To Its Cultured Despisers." https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1947796780730527860 * Benedict Wells' Vom Ende der Einsamkeit https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1893900.Benedict_Wells * On the Three Primordial Hypostases by Plotinus - "On the Three Primordial Hypostases" (for the Neoplatonists , these are the One , Mind, and Soul). https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ипостась * Schelling's On the Deities of Samothrace * Aristotle's On Interpretation - Περὶ Ἑρμηνείας, Peri Hermeneias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Interpretation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle ;;; Aristoteles' Sobre el Cielo / On The Heavens / De Caelo et Mundo / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Heavens https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobre_el_cielo * On the Trinity by Augustine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Trinity * On Being And Essence by Tomas de Aquino "Sobre el ente y la esencia" - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_ente_et_essentia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas * On Conflict by Krishnamurti - https://old.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1gyij26/jiddu_krishnamurti_describing_whats_happening/ * On Certainty by Wittgenstein - Wittgenstein's Kantianism, such as it was, he probably inherited from his Schopenhauer enthusiasm. By the time of his On Certainty thoughts, he was in some ways re-discovering Aristotle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H7iPfcDQ8E * On War - Clausewitz speculated about total war, but funked it midway through "On War," claiming it was only a theoretical possibility. Man's natural tendency to hedge his bets, postponing commitment, causes his opponent to scale back. This process inevitably short-circuits infinite escalation. Or rather, it used to. https://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Battling-to-the-End-by-Rene-Girard-3204821.php * "?On Feeling?" by GH Bradley? * On Beckett by Alain Badiou https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Power * On Metaphysics and On Philosophical Method by Collingwood - Collingwood is the author of two of the most important treatises in meta-philosophy written in the first half of the twentieth century, An Essay on Philosophical Method (1933), and An Essay on Metaphysics (1940) * On Contradiction by Mao https://x.com/nomadic_andres/status/1836218353071067231 * On Feeling, Knowing, and Valuing by Max Scheler * On Philosophy: To Dorothea by Schlegel - is an essay by Friedrich Schlegel that expresses his views on the ideal relationships between men and women. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pep4sCUIUUM&t=6m30s * Savater's On Living - Sobre vivir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Savater and Essay on Cioran (Ensayo Sobre Cioran) * "On the Spirit of Geometry" - nomos? - Pascal https://x.com/anthonyvmorley;;;Mr. Anthony Vincent Morley is an incredible scholar who has unlocked the mysteries of “On Analysis Situs” by Gottfried Leibniz * On Symbolics - Tratado de Simbólica https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mário_Ferreira_dos_Santos * Lavelle - De l’Acte (Of the Act), Du temps et de l’éternité (Of Time and Eternity) and De l’âme humaine (Of the Human Soul) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Lavelle * On Responsibility - Sobre a responsabilidade https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Željko_Loparić * Yuk Hui's On the Existence of Digital Objects * Gilbert Simondon's "On the Essence of Technicity" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Simondon * Sobre el Placer y la felicidad https://www.facebook.com/mesajuanpabloampuero/posts/pfbid0NH7AubnPZg3xDGJqnkqiKuZEcdqoAZZ26JWj8yfwuxaFQZXUPQCk9XWEZYWrzgUbl * * *
	metatítulo	"X Manifesto Y" !! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Manifestos #Manifesto	* "Oldest Systematic Program of German Idealism" - Schelling #anarchism, state is too mechanical, shrink the state - Holderlin/Hegel/Schelling manifesto for German Idealism - "Freedom is the alpha and the omega" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT741LB_KuY&t=35m20, Heidegger says Freedom is a property of Dasein * Poem: Futuristic Manifesto by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1i6pqin/what_are_yalls_gut_reactions_to_this/ * I am grateful to be in conversation with #brachaettinger personally and professionally! #art #psych #anthrotwitter "Metafeminist Manifesto. Beyond the Life-drive--Beyond the Death-drive. Copoiesis and Matrixial Eros. Being-toward-Birthing with Being-toward-Birth in Artworking" https://x.com/lukekernan/status/1309501712621662208 * FOUNDING MANIFESTO from OSL (Organização Socialista Libertária) Carl Eugene Stroud https://youtu.be/W-qzYqe0yYo?si=_pmBucEiZJl3Ohco * Richard Huelsenbeck's Dada Manifesto - Richard Huelsenbeck in his German Dada Manifesto: 'Life appears as a simultaneous confusion of noises, colours and spiritual rhythms, and is thus incorporated — with all the sensational screams and feverish excitements of its audacious everyday psyche and the entirety of its brutal reality — unwaveringly into Dadaist art' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesamtkunstwerk * Bronze Age Manifesto * Russell–Einstein manifesto galvanized the peace and disarmament movements. It led to the Pugwash conferences, for which Joseph Rotblat and the conference-series itself would eventually win the Nobel Peace Prize (1995). Rotblat credits the manifesto for helping to create the conditions that gave rise to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT, 1970) https://web.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/papers/moral-fn.pdf * Andre Breton's "Surrealist Manifesto" https://old.reddit.com/r/books/comments/1vusqa/someone_explain_georges_batailles_story_of_the/cexhk8i/ * Leopold Aschenbrenner's "Situational Awareness" manifesto https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1ddn4xe/surprised_to_have_seen_no_discussion_here_on/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLJJsIy1x44 * F. T. Marinetti's "Futurist Manifesto" https://www.akpress.org/afterthefuture.html * Luke Turner's The Metamodernist Manifesto (2011) https://x.com/Luke_Turner https://luketurner.com/the-metamodernist-manifesto * David Shields' Reality Hunger: A Manifesto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_Hunger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpeWJZRgzZU&t=15717s * hegelian egirl manifesto - https://bsky.app/profile/jerrydelux.bsky.social/post/3lbdyrdhxyc27 * "Techno-Humanist Manifesto from the Roots of Progress Institute and Jason Crawford" https://x.com/Leigh_Phillips/status/1899492416391983336 * * * * * * * # satire/snark * the pepsi logo #manifesto is my favourite professional schizopost https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1gvgaff/new_jaguar_logo/ly3i1kr/?context=3 * Japanese Metabolist architects produced a manifesto in 1960 which outlined goals to "encourage active metabolic development of our society"[31] through design and technology. In the Material and Man section of the manifesto, Noboru Kawazoe suggests that: After several decades, with the rapid progress of communication technology, every one will have a "brain wave receiver" in his ear, which conveys directly and exactly what other people think about him and vice versa. What I think will be known by all the people. There is no more individual consciousness, only the will of mankind as a whole.[32] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism * * * # weird pol manifestos * Valerie Solanas SCUM Manifesto - cyberdandy's scumbag manifesto moicomment: yeah ok agatha christie * Matt Livelsberger / Sam Shoemate old.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1hsxcx4/vegas_cyber_truck_manifesto/ * Luigi Mangione's manifesto https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hbbztu/removed_by_reddit/ https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hbes7x/unpaid_reddit_janitors_deleted_the_manifesto/ "uhm yikeserinoo fellow comrades this guy reads normie books and listens to podcasts OMG, what a dumb trumptard am I right leftbros, unlike ME that knows about zizek, Sylvia plath (ahem ladies wink wink) and um..Marx. WOP WOP they not like us!" https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1hb2btx/the_internet_freak_psyop_to_cancel_luigi_has_begun/ * * * *
	metatítulo	After/Before/EndOf (the) X	* Kafka's "Before the Law" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_the_Law * Land's "After the Law" - https://antijurisprudence.wordpress.com/2010/04/09/after-the-law-by-nick-land-in-closure-or-critique-1993-ed-norrie/ * Baudrillard's "After the Orgy" - Not Baudrillard but Dominic Pettman / Henny Backus? * Quentin Meillassoux's "After Finitude" - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2199850.After_Finitude * Terry Eagleton's "After Theory" - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/16938 * Alasdair MacIntyre's "After Virtue" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Virtue * Arthur Danto's "After the End of Art" https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/137933 * David Schweickart's "After Capitalism" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/918139.After_Capitalism * Baylee Brits, et al. — Aesthetics After Finitude (2016) * Diego Abad de Santillán's "After the Revolution" - When Chomsky was in high school in 1939 he wrote a book review of "After the Revolution" by Diego Abad de Santillan. For years he would describe himself as an "anarcho-syndicalist sympathizer." In the '80s when I was managing editor of a print anarcho-syndicalist magazine (ideas & action) I sent him a letter to invite him to write something for us. But he didn't want to. That's okay. Chomsky's relatively simple writing about anarchism encouraged others to explore social anarchism as a political option. https://www.facebook.com/tomwetzelSF/posts/pfbid02YsYABdyUoEyLURe9ERqKVJz9Ls4or3JzWWyQp3URbetjwwuAuupvBUXycaTijV5tl * Franco "Bifo" Berardi's After the Future https://www.akpress.org/afterthefuture.html * After Cézanne = Ian Johnson Buddhist book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreyabandhu * Julian Barbour’s work The End of Time https://socialecologies.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/speculations-on-time-graham-harman/ * After Comfort by Daniel A. Barber * * * * * * *
	metatítulo	"In Praise of X" / "Elogio de la X" / "On X"	* Leszek Kolakowski entitled "In Praise of Snobbery" * Russell's "In Praise of idleness" * Tanizaki's "In Praise of Shadows" * Odo Marquard's "In Praise of Polytheism (On Monomythical and Polymythical Thinking)" (originally via Marquard and Taubes on Schelling's Offenbarung and Mythology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Praise_of_Polytheism * Brecht's "In Praise of the Third Thing" * Cuartango's "In Praise of Stillness" / "Elogio de la quietud" - https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Pedro_García_Cuartango?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp (vs the concept of ataxia?) * Bunge's Elogio de la curiosidad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bunge * Byung-Chul Han - Vita Contemplativa: In Praise of Inactivity * "In Praise of Philosophy" out this week (2025, Badiou) https://x.com/beingandevent/status/1937335541890187386 ;;; “The audacity of thought consists in crossing a gap where nothing is given.” -Badiou, ‘Number and Numbers’ (1990) https://x.com/katherineveritt/status/1937204712278802917 * * * * * * * * * # Meditations On * Evola's Meditation On the Peaks https://i.redd.it/4o58v2sf2r1f1.jpeg https://old.reddit.com/r/JuliusEvola/comments/1kqdaki/is_anyone_aware_of_where_this_screenshot_comes/ * Think Derrida’s On Forgiveness but way better and with dialogue from a great script, Joe Cauley gives us some beautiful insights https://x.com/samanthawillman/status/1968298409619771656 * Fernando Pessoa's Essay On Initiation * * * * *
06/05/2024	movements	"NEO-***" #NEOX / #PSEUDO-	# Neo-Platonists * The Epistles of Wisdom is the foundational and central text of the Druze faith.[30] The Druze faith originated in Isma'ilism (a branch of Shia Islam),[31] and was influenced by Christianity,[32][33] Gnosticism, Neoplatonism,[32][33] Zoroastrianism,[34][35] Gandharan Buddhism, Manichaeism[36][37] Pythagoreanism,[38][39] and other philosophies and beliefs, creating a distinct and secretive theology based on an esoteric interpretation of scripture, which emphasizes the role of the mind and truthfulness.[20][39] Druze believe in theophany and reincarnation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze * # Neo-Aristotelians * * * # Neo-Confucians * The Taijitu of Zhou Dunyi (Neo-Confucianism) also emerged in the 11th century (like Druzism), and held very similar ideas. The Opposites (Movement, Stillness) emerge from Emptiness (the Higher unfathomable meaning) and in their circular-like rotation, result in the Wu Xing (the five phases / bounds). Based on his theology, in the I Ching (Ancient Chinese divination, Book of changes), the broken line is stillness and the full line is movement. Which is why three broken lines resemble Earth (heaviness), and three full lines resemble heaven (lightness). This is similar to the Druze perception of the Subtle and Profane (الكثيف و اللطيف). https://x.com/Sobalaan/status/1755957070380380204 * * # Neo-XXX * Markus Gabriel is haunted by the Neo-Carnapians - I try to revive the tradition of metaontology and metametaphysics that departs from Kant. As has been noticed, Heidegger introduced the term metaontology and he also clearly states that Kant’s philosophy is a “metaphysics about metaphysics.” I call metametaphysical nihilism the view that there is no such thing as the world such that questions regarding its ultimate nature, essence, structure, composition, categorical outlines etc. are devoid of the intended conceptual content. The idea that there is a big thing comprising absolutely everything is an illusion, albeit neither a natural one nor an inevitable feature of reason as such. Of course, there is an influential Neo-Carnapian strand in the contemporary debate which comes to similar conclusions. I agree with a lot of what is going on in this area of research and I try to combine it with the metaontological/metametaphysical tradition of Kantian and Post-Kantian philosophy. * *	# Pseudos * Pseudo-Plato * Pseudo-Dionysus
# more deaths: * https://old.reddit.com/r/RSbookclub/comments/1dszr6h/albanian_author_ismail_kadare_has_died_aged_88/ * *	#DEATHS		homenaje / memorial / santuario
11/04/2015	death, theorist, author	Rene Girard	https://news.stanford.edu/2015/11/04/rene-girard-obit-110415/?fbclid=IwAR3-fikDS908RkWSG3QoM76RFGOeBXYr-kx8VhqHkm9fMqQZ1oerbLX1XH8 Stanford professor and eminent French theorist René Girard, member of the Académie Française, dies at 91 A member of the prestigious Académie Française, René Girard was called “the new Darwin of the human sciences.” His many books offered a bold, sweeping vision of human nature, human history and human destiny. He died Nov. 4 at 91. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email BY CYNTHIA HAVEN René Girard was one of the leading thinkers of our era – a provocative sage who bypassed prevailing orthodoxies and “isms” to offer a bold, sweeping vision of human nature, human history and human destiny. Rene Girard in his library / L.A. Cicero Rene Girard in his library. (Image credit: L.A. Cicero) The renowned Stanford French professor, one of the 40 immortels of the prestigious Académie Française, died at his Stanford home on Nov. 4 at the age of 91, after long illness. Fellow immortel and Stanford Professor Michel Serres once dubbed him “the new Darwin of the human sciences.” The author who began as a literary theorist was fascinated by everything. History, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, religion, psychology and theology all figured in his oeuvre. International leaders read him, the French media quoted him. Girard influenced such writers as Nobel laureate J.M. Coetzee and Czech writer Milan Kundera – yet he never had the fashionable (and often fleeting) cachet enjoyed by his peers among the structuralists, poststructuralists, deconstructionists and other camps. His concerns were not trendy, but they were always timeless. In particular, Girard was interested in the causes of conflict and violence and the role of imitation in human behavior. Our desires, he wrote, are not our own; we want what others want. These duplicated desires lead to rivalry and violence. He argued that human conflict was not caused by our differences, but rather by our sameness. Individuals and societies offload blame and culpability onto an outsider, a scapegoat, whose elimination reconciles antagonists and restores unity. According to author Robert Pogue Harrison, the Rosina Pierotti Professor in Italian Literature at Stanford, Girard’s legacy was “not just to his own autonomous field – but to a continuing human truth.” “I’ve said this for years: The best analogy for what René represents in anthropology and sociology is Heinrich Schliemann, who took Homer under his arm and discovered Troy,” said Harrison, recalling that Girard formed many of his controversial conclusions by a close reading of literary, historical and other texts. “René had the same blind faith that the literary text held the literal truth. Like Schliemann, his major discovery was excoriated for using the wrong methods. Academic disciplines are more committed to methodology than truth.” Girard was always a striking and immediately recognizable presence on the Stanford campus, with his deep-set eyes, leonine head and shock of silver hair. His effect on others could be galvanizing. William Johnsen, editor of a series of books by and about Girard from Michigan State University Press, once described his first encounter with Girard as “a 110-volt appliance being plugged into a 220-volt outlet.” Girard’s first book, Deceit, Desire and the Novel (1961 in French; 1965 in English), used Cervantes, Stendhal, Proust and Dostoevsky as case studies to develop his theory of mimesis. The Guardian recently compared the book to “putting on a pair of glasses and seeing the world come into focus. At its heart is an idea so simple, and yet so fundamental, that it seems incredible that no one had articulated it before.” The work had an even bigger impact on Girard himself: He underwent a conversion, akin to the protagonists in the books he had cited. “People are against my theory, because it is at the same time an avant-garde and a Christian theory,” he said in 2009. “The avant-garde people are anti-Christian, and many of the Christians are anti-avant-garde. Even the Christians have been very distrustful of me.” Girard took the criticism in stride: “Theories are expendable,” he said in 1981. “They should be criticized. When people tell me my work is too systematic, I say, ‘I make it as systematic as possible for you to be able to prove it wrong.'” In 1972, he spurred international controversy with Violence and the Sacred (1977 in English), which explored the role of archaic religions in suppressing social violence through scapegoating and sacrifice. Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World (1978 in French; 1987 in English), according to its publisher, Stanford University Press, was “the single fullest summation of Girard’s ideas to date, the book by which they will stand or fall.” He offered Christianity as a solution to mimetic rivalry, and challenged Freud’s Totem and Taboo. He was the author of nearly 30 books, which have been widely translated, including The Scapegoat, I Saw Satan Fall Like Lightning, To Double Business Bound, Oedipus Unbound and A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare. His last major work was 2007’s Achever Clausewitz (published in English as Battling to the End: Politics, War, and Apocalypse), which created the kind of firestorm only a public intellectual in France can ignite. French President Nicolas Sarkozy cited his words, and reporters trekked to Girard’s Paris doorstep daily. The book, which takes as its point of departure the Prussian military historian and theorist Carl von Clausewitz, had implications that placed Girard firmly in the 21st century. A French public intellectual in America René Noël Théophile Girard was born in Avignon on Christmas Day, 1923. His father was curator of Avignon’s Musée Calvet and later the city’s Palais des Papes, France’s biggest medieval fortress and the pontifical residence during the Avignon papacy. Girard followed in his footsteps at l’École des Chartes, a training ground for archivists and librarians, with a dissertation on marriage and private life in 15th-century Avignon. He graduated as an archiviste-paléographe in 1947. In the summer of 1947, he and a friend organized an exhibition of paintings at the Palais des Papes, under the guidance of Paris art impresario Christian Zervos. Girard rubbed elbows with Picasso, Matisse, Braque and other luminaries. French actor and director Jean Vilar founded the theater component of the festival, which became the celebrated annual Avignon Festival. Girard left a few weeks later for Indiana University in Bloomington, perhaps the single most important decision of his life, to launch his academic career. He received his PhD in 1950 with a dissertation on “American Opinion on France, 1940-43.” “René would never have experienced such a career in France,” said Benoît Chantre, president of Paris’ Association Recherches Mimétiques, one of the organizations that have formed around Girard’s work. “Such a free work could indeed only appear in America. That is why René is, like Tocqueville, a great French thinker and a great French moralist who could yet nowhere exist but in the United States. René ‘discovered America’ in every sense of the word: He made the United States his second country, he made there fundamental discoveries, he is a pure ‘product’ of the Franco-American relationship, he finally revealed the face of an universal – and not an imperial – America.” At Johns Hopkins University, Girard was one of the organizers for the 1966 conference that introduced French theory and structuralism to America. Lucien Goldmann, Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan and Jacques Derrida also participated in the standing-room-only event. Girard quipped that he was “bringing la peste to the United States.” Girard had also been on the faculties at Bryn Mawr, Duke and the State University of New York at Buffalo before he came to Stanford as the inaugural Andrew B. Hammond Professor in French Language, Literature and Civilization in 1981. Girard was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and twice a Guggenheim Fellow. He was elected to the Académie Française in 2005, an honor previously given to Voltaire, Jean Racine and Victor Hugo. He also received a lifetime achievement award from the Modern Language Association in 2009. In 2013, King Juan Carlos of Spain awarded him the Order of Isabella the Catholic, a Spanish civil order bestowed for his “profound attachment” to “Spanish culture as a whole.” He was also a Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur and Commandeur des Arts et des Lettres. Others were impressed, but Girard was never greatly impressed with himself, though his biting wit sometimes rankled critics. Stanford’s Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, the Albert Guérard Professor in Literature, called him “a great, towering figure – no ostentatiousness.” He added, “It’s not that he’s living his theory – yet there is something of his personality, intellectual behavior and style that goes with his work. I find that very beautiful. “Despite the intellectual structures built around him, he’s a solitaire. His work has a steel-like quality – strong, contoured, clear. It’s like a rock. It will be there and it will last.” Girard is survived by his wife of 64 years, Martha, of Stanford; two sons, Daniel, of Hillsborough, California, and Martin, of Seattle; a daughter, Mary Girard Brown, of Newark, California; and nine grandchildren. A memorial service will be held Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2016, at 2 p.m. in Stanford Memorial Church. Media Contacts Cynthia Haven, Division of Literatures, Cultures & Languages: (650) 815-9839, cynthia.haven@stanford.edu Clifton B. Parker, Stanford News Service: (650) 725-0224, cbparker@stanford.edu
08/24/2020	death, author	Mary Settegast	"Plato Prehistorian" More diagrams, this one on the expanded Plato history I'll be building out with Mary Settegast's work in 'Plato, Prehistorian' and Peter Sloterdijk's 'Globes': Mary Settegast's work in 'Plato, Prehistorian' - https://twitter.com/Magmati02338089/status/1607258012422373376
10/18/2021	death, author	Pamela McCorduck	Lex interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6rnzk8VU24 0:00 - Introduction 1:51 - Machines Who Think 4:17 - Founding fathers of AI 6:45 - Early days and the possibilities of AI 14:23 - Roots of how we think about AI 18:59 - McCarthy and Frankenstein 23:30 - AI in the context of broader CS community 29:46 - AI winter 37:09 - Santa Fe Institute and complexity 44:58 - Timeline of AI 46:51 - AI assistants and personal robotics 52:05 - Existential threats and the male gaze MLST - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDaNfQeh0jc (McCorduck effect) McCorduck effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect			minutes	microusb w/ adapter (black cord)
09/08/2022	death	Queen, UK	https://www.facebook.com/doctorrousselle/posts/pfbid0CB51ekvCrgC9VWE5TfyWFJNMwE24zv6yj3smAakTKkMetFMM59otbUfMtk6evR4Ml Mark Gerard Murphy pointed out that the large 'queue' for the Queen's lying-in-state perhaps demonstrates 'a collective rejection of instantaneity.' He is correct to isolate this as a key moment which, according to a wonderfully traditional logic, we see the effacement of Queen Mother by King signifier, as the culture of literacy and sequentiality, about which Marshall McLuhan dedicated so much thought, presents itself again in a 'one-by-one.'			0	16
09/13/2022	death, film, director, screenwriter	Jean-Luc Godard	Just heard that Godard died. RIP to the French New Wave.
09/15/2022	death	Saul Kripke	https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0qCaT822UKM4b4Ucpe9JgXJ4ZJqLrWB2LaKgCTQrXD3GwXRxT42Qp44CUsxPA53ZFl&id=508767730 I'm certainly not a Kripke scholar but I remember reading Naming and Necessity and thinking it was one of those rare books that completely challenged my thinking on at least 2 major issues-the philosophy of mind, and a posteriori knowledge. I tend to agree with the uniform criticism that his treatment of Wittgenstein isn't exactly accurate-my Wittgenstein is more of a pragmatist than a skeptic. But it was also a brilliant little book that showed how important reconstructing a philosopher's thought can be. All that's to say I'm still getting over his loss. He was a giant and if his passing is going to having any upside it'll be encouraging me to go back to those texts, with their cryptic and grand genius.
10/09/2022	death, philosopher	Bruno Latour	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Latour
04/19/2023	death	Michael Lebowitz	Michael Lebowitz!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/613646239225280?multi_permalinks=1304754220114475&hoisted_section_header_type=recently_seen	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_A._Lebowitz
05/05/2023	death	Philippe Sollers	https://www.facebook.com/groups/freudheideggerlacan/posts/4578596258930686/	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Sollers R.I.P. Philippe Sollers https://www.facebook.com/groups/freudheideggerlacan/posts/4578596258930686/		23
05/06/2023	death	Hanna Pitkin	sad to hear. Hanna Pitkin was the daughter of the Marxist psychoanalyst Otto Fenichel (who has a cameo in my book) and author of one of the best critiques of Arendt, The Attack of the Blob: Hannah Arendt's Concept of "the Social" Political Science grieves the loss of one our greatest thinkers, Hanna Pitkin. To honor her contributions to the field, we will be posting articles from our journal that engage with her work in this thread. 10:23 AM · May 12, 2023 14 Retweets 1 Quote 35 Likes 1 Bookmark Polity, journal of political science @PolityalsBeruf · 36m Back in 1969, Gordon Baker reviewed Hanna Pitkin's then recent and now classic "The Conept of Representation" https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.2307/3234175 Polity, journal of political science @PolityalsBeruf · 31m "Pitkin is surely right that the ‘only place to begin is where we are, and there are a hundred ways of beginning,'" writes Alexandra Kogl in an article that engages with Arendt, Lefbvre, and Pitkin. https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1057/pol.2009.9?casa_token=C8NyX6MnxygAAAAA:kx5EasDCaP7Tq5T_OZVVLC4_7HvWAG4nQK3j2O_VpPaijx6YVmp43dHo0YybmdaOGje0P8QfYz8 Polity, journal of political science @PolityalsBeruf · 28m "It is a mark of Pitkin’s achievement that her categories of representation—formal, substantive, descriptive, and symbolic—are still widely employed today." Read Patrick F. Campbell's article on representation in Amer Political Development here https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1057/pol.2014.30?casa_token=LVvFLQfLpm0AAAAA:ATdq0ihcCOnWEGkjewYVPL0XDjHOslq3YBVjBEUFvMq2b7e0O9eIio8GPoHNevU7Cf-Ye0WKZf8 Polity, journal of political science @PolityalsBeruf · 23m In a more recent text, Kristen Widner, uses Pitkin's coneptual developmento to analyze the Supreme Court	https://www.facebook.com/katerina.kolozova/posts/pfbid0dzN4qbNeBUoeCwuV3BLdiLCzLyUHkuzKMFEcLZfigYraa1awcpmyrf9Wd4JMKJ6xl	Hanna Pitkin, Otto Fenichel, Hannah Arendt	26	26
05/27/2023	death, poet	Antonio Gala	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gala			46	31
06/05/2023	death	Henry Allison	https://twitter.com/NAKantSociety/status/1667640861130145792 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_E._Allison
06/09/2023	death, psychoanalyst	Mari Ruti	https://www.facebook.com/colin.cremin/posts/pfbid02Hk3RAnUe4CiGB4JzDMMjRyrdnstt9om3XfhZKSRPuGuUkn2bqUUxxATqtGsdW5otl https://www.facebook.com/colin.cremin/posts/pfbid0EL3kDyt1Pe8brYSQHGDGQdk6Twjktdt4KMJDSoJtc5BjX2eqKBxiW5QwL4wxyexklz
06/13/2023	death, author	Cormac McCarthy	https://old.reddit.com/r/miketysonmysteries/comments/148t7uj/rip_cormac_mccarthy https://old.reddit.com/r/miketysonmysteries/comments/148qxpa/cormac_mccarthy_novelist_of_a_darker_america_is/ https://twitter.com/xanalter/status/1668700279481532417 https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148nity/cormac_mccarthy_dead/ https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148o5gv/cormac_mccarthy_dead_at_89/ https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148tqe8/beautiful/ https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/148nmlk/cormac_mccarthy_july_20_1933_june_13_2023/ https://old.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/148nl89/cormac_mccarthy_author_of_no_country_for_old_men/
07/16/2023	death	Harry Frankfurt	Don’t forget to plug On Bullshit too! Nathan J. Robinson His stuff on equality annoys the hell out of me tho https://www.facebook.com/ben.burgis/posts/pfbid02mNxGqPXzjvC8AdqTrHuLPTLsPtewcwDfwfwcFhbqFzSjpXLtWjUaJpKUZeanmh2Bl https://benburgis.substack.com/p/harry-frankfurt-1929-2023-a-tribute?fbclid=IwAR0IpCHsS3hin2uVkJ36MIae618QgAeTFg8koosDR4m-gWBv-Y1NFxykdk4
07/17/2023	death	Jane Birkin	https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/151531m/jane_birkin_has_died_at_76_one_of_the_most_rs/
08/01/2023	death	Gérard Pommier	R.I.P. Gérard Pommier TRIBUTE / Gerard POMMIER We learn about the disappearance, this morning, of one of the last great Lacanians, who had among other things founded the European Foundation for Psychoanalysis with Charles Melman, Claude Dumezil and Moustapha Safouan (among others). Our tributes to Gérard Pommier, psychiatrist, psychanalyst who never stopped wondering: "And if the questions left pending by Freud or Lacan are not answers, shouldn't we continue to think about it?" »* * 𝘪𝘯 [𝘓𝘢 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘯𝘦 (2014)] 𝑃𝘩𝑜𝘵𝑜 : 𝐺𝘦𝑟𝘮𝑎́𝘯 𝘎𝑎𝘳𝑐𝘪́𝑎 𝐴𝘥𝑟𝘢𝑠𝘵𝑖 https://www.facebook.com/groups/freudheideggerlacan/posts/4847029858753990/
09/06/2023	death	Christopher Coker	https://twitter.com/EdmundJWilson/status/1699619893199466871
09/19/2023	death	Gianni Vattimo	https://www.facebook.com/groups/588048328669520/posts/1532341844240159/
04/29/2022	death, journalist	Nader Talebzadeh	a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nader_Talebzadeh https://twitter.com/RealCalebMaupin/status/1708713493682082035
10/13/2023	death, author	Louise Glück !! https://old.reddit.com/r/literature/comments/17780zr/louise_gl%C3%BCck_nobelwinning_poet_of_terse_and/
04/10/2023	death, comedy	Al Jaffee - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jaffee	.
11/30/2023	death, deathofthefather, politics	Henry Kissinger	* Episodio 32 - Oriente y Occidente https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvmohbCRQck&loop=0 * Henry Kissinger used philosophy to create his own foreign policy ("realpolitik") to legitimize the deaths of millions of people around the world since the 1950s. He believed the ends justifies the means, but America never really reached the highest ends that he wanted. The rise of jingoist sentiment (such as President Trump) and America experiencing imperial boomerangs / blowback / resentment is moreso the end result of his actions. President Biden is the only president who has distanced himself from Kissinger, but that hasn't stopped other countries (Russia) from utilizing Kissinger's ideology for their own brutal motivations. Most recently Kissinger, in an attempt to stay relevant, has said Ukraine should give up more land to Russia and whined that Biden hasn't invited him to the White House. He has been satirized in various media (eg Venture Bros) as being a mystical intellectual who taps into dark forces to cause absurd death and destruction. He had a comprehensible accent when he was younger but strangely he developed a thicker German accent as he grew older, probably as part of his esoteric performance art pretending that he was completing the system of German Idealism. https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/187e780/eli5_why_is_henry_kissinger_so_controversial/kbdsgqd/?context=3 * Kissinger Gone Celebration With Ben Burgis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poQWZ-PI6po * Branko Marcetic https://www.currentaffairs.org/2023/11/reading-bin-ladens-messages-might-have-prevented-decades-of-disastrous-foreign-policy * In the Sistine Chapel, Gore Vidal once came upon Henry Kissinger “gazing thoughtfully” at the Hell section of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment. “Look,” said Vidal to a friend, “he’s apartment hunting.” https://twitter.com/coreyrobin/status/1730044845610135930 * Jason Myles' WIlliam Buckley impression https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poQWZ-PI6po&t=3488s 58:04 - omg Jason's William Buckley impression 💀💀💀 * Gore Vidal: The United States of Amnesia * https://www.tiktok.com/search?q=Henry%20Kissinger%20Dies%20Aged%20100&t=1701350555819 * https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/187af3l/whats_going_on_with_people_celebrating_henry/ * Henry Kissinger Dies at 100, Milei Meets Clinton, Elon Musk VS Advertisers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgPY0NfOhNU * https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/1879fv9/henry_kissinger_war_criminal_beloved_by_americas/ * https://old.reddit.com/r/news/comments/18770kx/henry_kissinger_secretary_of_state_to_richard/ * * * * * * *
10/12/2023	death	Gunnar Kaiser	Why oh why is Johannes Niederhauser bonding with Gunnar Kaiser? :( https://old.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/11amcnn/in_this_video_we_are_discussing_the_realm_of/
10/17/2021	death	Leonor Arfuch	Sad day: the critic, theorist and essayist Leonor Arfuch, Día triste: murió la crítica, teórica y ensayista Leonor Arfuch, tan leída y querida en nuestro Doctorado. Paz a sus restos. https://twitter.com/DoctoradoUpla/status/1449782852053209096
02/10/2014	death	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Hall_(cultural_theorist)
04/19/2024	death	Daniel Dennett
04/26/2024	death	Francisco Rico Manrique
12/10/2018	death	Xavier Tilliette	* “And if death had not stopped Fichte in his tracks, he would have moved on to a fourth phase, that of Absolute Life itself…” - Xavier Tilliette, p. 542 https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=Fichte+Xavier+Tilliette&src=typd * *
01/22/2023	death	Joseph Agassi	* I was sad to read that the Philosopher Joseph Agassi has died 3 days ago. I had only tenuous interaction with him, years ago, but I know that he was highly regarded in the Popperian society. This video of him is full of punchy quotes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OgXqC9rVNo&t=43s https://x.com/yudapearl/status/1618488553138446337 * https://twitter.com/yudapearl/status/1618488553138446337 * Agassi = Buber's grandson-in-law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Buber_Agassi * Trying to remember the name of an early 20th century (analytic) philosophy who formulated an "eli5" rule with his approach to teaching philosophy, something along the lines of "if you can't explain it to [my granddaughter] then you don't understand it yourself" https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1ch496r/trying_to_remember_the_name_of_an_early_20th/ * considering the fact that philosophy has always been the primary enemy of power, church, state, and capital. This being my stance, one might ask why I don’t just stop with the big words then. First of all, what gets considered “big” or “pointless” is very relative and, because most of the professional managerial elite being bred in contemporary universities today are themselves illiterate, they too, just like right-wing populists like Thomas Sowell, push this idea that we should just speak in stunted and debilitating language. Left to right, they all say in perfect lockstep, “You don’t really understand a concept if you can’t explain it to a fifth grader.” Perhaps not so coincidentally, fifth-grade reading comprehension was the level Donald Trump spoke to as president. Because I am not yet ready to explain these concepts to his target demographic, I guess I just need to accept that I have yet to fully understand the ideas with which I am grappling herein. * Mikey Standard * He was married to Judith Buber Agassi – Martin Buber's granddaughter – from 1949 until her death in 2018. Together they had two children, Aaron, and Tirzah, who died of cancer in March 2008. Agassi resided in Herzliya, Israel. Tirzah's name, when she was a child, was often used by Popper in his dictum "Write it for Tirzah!" to explain his view that everyone has the duty to write in a clearly and easily understandable language. Agassi died on 22 January 2023, at the age of 95. * Remembering Prof. Joseph Agassi (1927-2023) and his relation with Karl Popper 04.06.2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h915xEqq1NQ * * * * * * * *	Two interviews with Agassi by @JedLeaHenry from mid last year.
06/01/2019	death	Michel Serres!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Serres
09/22/2024	death	Fredric Jameson!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fredric_Jameson	* https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1fmzqal/fredric_jameson_has_passed_away_rip_to_one_of_the/ * https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hs7cO6gnbzA * # obits/tributes * Zizek's "Larger Than Life" https://x.com/DanielTutt/status/1839342150766432690 * The non-binary comment was an effort to push Jameson closer to Zizek's own more direct political polemics with the left, which I find a bit forced and even a bit passive aggressive. The section on class struggle didn't make much sense to me. But I liked many of the other points esp the energy imbibed in the writing of this tribute. https://www.facebook.com/groups/613646239225280/posts/1579495315973696/ * * * *	LARGER THAN LIFE A note on the death of Fredric Jameson Slavoj Žižek Fredric Jameson was not just an intellectual giant, the last true genius in contemporary thought. He was the ultimate Western Marxist, fearlessly reaching across the opposites which define our ideological space – a “Eurocentrist” whose work found a great echo in Japan and China, a Communist who loved Hollywood, especially Hitchcock, and detective novels, especially Chandler, a music lover immersed in Wagner, Bruckner and pop music… There is absolutely no trace of Cancel Culture with its stiff fake moralism in his work and life – one can argue that he was the last Renaissance figure. What Jameson fought throughout his long life is the lack of what he called “cognitive mapping,” the inability to locate our experience within a meaningful whole. The instincts that directed him in this fight were always right - for example, in a nice stab against the fashionable cultural-studies rejection of “binary logic,” Jameson calls for “a generalized celebration of the binary opposition” – for him, the rejection of sexual binary goes hand in hand with the rejection of class binary… Still in a deep shock, I can only offer here some passing observations which provide a clear taste of his orientation. Today, Marxists as a rule reject any form of immediacy as a fetish which obfuscates its social mediation. However, in his masterpiece on Adorno, Jameson deploys how a dialectical analysis includes its own point of suspension: in the midst of a complex analysis of mediations, Adorno all of a sudden makes a vulgar gesture of “reductionism,” interrupting a flow of dialectical finesse with a simple point like “ultimately it is about class struggle.” This is how class struggle functions within a social totality: it is not its “deeper ground,” its profound structuring principle which mediates all its moments, but something much more superficial, the point of failure of the endless complex analysis, a gesture of jumping-ahead to a conclusion when, in an act of despair, we raise our hands and say: “But after all, this is all about class struggle!” What one should bear in mind here is that this failure of analysis is immanent to reality itself: it is how society itself totalizes itself through its constitutive antagonism. In other words, class struggle IS a fast pseudo-totalization when totalization proper fails, it is a desperate attempt to use the antagonism itself as the principle of totalization. It is also fashionable for today’s Leftists to reject conspiracy theories as a fake simplified solutions. However, years ago Jameson perspicuously noted that in today’s global capitalism, things happen which cannot be explained by a reference to some anonymous “logic of the capital” – for example, now we know that the financial meltdown of 2008 was the result of a well-planned “conspiracy” of some financial circles. The true task of social analysis is to explain how contemporary capitalism opened up the space for such “conspiratorial” interventions. Another Jameson’s insight which runs against today’s predominant post-colonial trend concerns his rejection of the notion of “alternate modernities,” i.e., the claim that our Western liberal-capitalist modernity is just one of the paths to modernization, and that other paths are possible which could avoid the deadlocks and antagonism of our modernity: once we realize that “modernity” is ultimately a code name for capitalism, it is easy to see that such historicist relativization of our modernity is sustained by the ideological dream of a capitalism which would avoid its constitutive antagonisms: ”How then can the ideologues of “modernity” in its current sense manage to distinguish their product—the information revolution, and globalized, free-market modernity—from the detestable older kind, without getting themselves involved in asking the kinds of serious political and economic, systemic questions that the concept of a postmodernity makes unavoidable? The answer is simple: you talk about “alternate” or “alternative” modernities. Everyone knows the formula by now: this means that there can be a modernity for everybody which is different from the standard or hegemonic Anglo-Saxon model. Whatever you dislike about the latter, including the subaltern position it leaves you in, can be effaced by the reassuring and “cultural” notion that you can fashion your own modernity differently, so that there can be a Latin-American kind, or an Indian kind or an African kind, and so on. . . . But this is to overlook the other fundamental meaning of modernity which is that of a worldwide capitalism itself.” The significance of this critique reaches far beyond the case of modernity—it concerns the fundamental limitation of the nominalist historicizing. The recourse to multitude (“there is not one modernity with a fixed essence, there are multiple modernities, each of them irreducible to others”) is false not because it does not recognize a unique fixed “essence” of modernity, but because multiplication functions as the disavowal of the antagonism that inheres in the notion of modernity as such: the falsity of multiplication resides in the fact that it frees the universal notion of modernity of its antagonism, of the way it is embedded in the capitalist system, by relegating this aspect to just one of its historical subspecies. One should not forget that the first half of the twentieth century already was marked by two big projects which perfectly fit this notion of “alternate modernity”: Fascism and Communism. Was not the basic idea of Fascism that of a modernity which provides an alternative to the standard Anglo-Saxon liberal-capitalist one, of saving the core of capitalist modernity by casting away its “contingent” Jewish-individualist-profiteering distortion? And was not the rapid industrialization of the USSR in the late 1920s and 1930s also not an attempt at modernization different from the Western-capitalist one? What Jameson avoided like a vampire avoids garlic was any notion of the enforced deeper unity of different forms of protest. Back in the early 1980s, he provided a subtle description of the deadlock of the dialogue between the Western New Left and the Eastern European dissidents, of the absence of any common language between them: "To put it briefly, the East wishes to talk in terms of power and oppression; the West in terms of culture and commodification. There are really no common denominators in this initial struggle for discursive rules, and what we end up with is the inevitable comedy of each side muttering irrelevant replies in its own favorite language." In a similar way, the Swedish detective writer Henning Mankell is a unique artist of the parallax view. That is to say, the two perspectives – that of the affluent Ystad in Sweden and that of Maputo in Mozambique – are irretrievably »out of sync,« so that there is no neutral language enabling us to translate one into the other, even less to posit one as the »truth« of the other. All one can ultimately do in today's conditions is to remain faithful to this split as such, to record it. Every exclusive focus on the First World topics of late capitalist alienation and commodification, of ecological crisis, of the new racisms and intolerances, etc., cannot but appear cynical in the face of the Third World raw poverty, hunger and violence; on the other hand, the attempts to dismiss the First World problems as trivial in comparison with the »real« Third World permanent catastrophies are no less a fake – focusing on the Third World »real problems« is the ultimate form of escapism, of avoiding to confront the antagonisms of one's own society. The gap that separates the two perspectives IS the truth of the situation. As all good Marxists, Jameson was in his analysis of art a strict formalist – he once wrote about Hemingway that his terse style (short sentences, almost no adverbs, etc.) is not here to represents a certain type of (narrative) subjectivity (the lone hard-boiled cynical individual); on the contrary, Hemingway's narrative content (stories about bitter hard individuals) was invented so that Hemingway was able to write a certain type of sentences (which was his primary goal). Along the same lines, In his seminal essay »On Raymond Chandler,« Jameson describes a typical Chandler's procedure: the writer uses the formula of the detective story (detective's investigation which brings him into the contact with all strata of life) as a frame which allows him to fill in the concrete texture with social and psychological apercus, plastic character-portraits and insights into life tragedies. The properly dialectical paradox not to be missed here is that it would be wrong to say: »So why did the writer not drop this very form and give us pure art?« This complaint falls victim to a kind of perspective illusion: it overlooks that, if we were to drop the formulaic frame, we would lose the very »artistic« content that this frame apparently distorts. Another Jameson’s unique achievement is his reading of Marx through Lacan: social antagonisms appear to him as the Real of a society. I still recall a shock when, at a conference on Lenin that I organized in Essen in 2001, Jameson surprised us all by bringing in Lacan as a reader of Trotsky’s dream. On the night of June 25 1935, Trotsky in exile dreamt about the dead Lenin who was questioning him anxiously about his illness: “I answered that I already had many consultations and began to tell him about my trip to Berlin; but looking at Lenin I recalled that he was dead. I immediately tried to drive away this thought, so as to finish the conversation. When I had finished telling him about my therapeutic trip to Berlin in 1926, I wanted to add, ‘This was after your death’; but I checked myself and said, ‘After you fell ill…’” In his interpretation of this dream, Lacan focuses on the obvious link with Freud’s dream in which his father appears to him, a father who doesn’t know that he is dead. So what does it mean that Lenin doesn’t know he is dead? According to Jameson, there are two radically opposed ways to read Trotsky’s dream. According to the first reading, the terrifyingly-ridiculous figure of the undead Lenin “doesn’t know that the immense social experiment he single-handedly brought into being (and which we call soviet communism) has come to an end. He remains full of energy, although dead, and the vituperation expended on him by the living – that he was the originator of the Stalinist terror, that he was an aggressive personality full of hatred, an authoritarian in love with power and totalitarianism, even (worst of all) the rediscoverer of the market in his NEP – none of those insults manage to confer a death, or even a second death, upon him. How is it, how can it be, that he still thinks he is alive? And what is our own position here – which would be that of Trotsky in the dream, no doubt – what is our own non-knowledge, what is the death from which Lenin shields us?” But there is another sense in which Lenin is still alive: he is alive insofar as he embodies what Badiou calls the „eternal Idea“ of universal emancipation, the immortal striving for justice that no insults and catastrophes manage to kill. Like me, Jameson was a resolute Communist – however, he simultaneously agreed with Lacan who claimed that justice and equality are founded on envy: the envy of the other who has what we do not have, and who enjoys it. Following Lacan, Jameson totally rejected the predominant optimist view according to which in Communism envy will be left behind as a remainder of capitalist competition, to be replaced by solidary collaboration and pleasure in other’s pleasures; dismissing this myth, he emphasizes that in Communism, precisely insofar as it will be a more just society, envy and resentment will explode. Jameson’s solution is here radical to the point of madness: the only way for Communism to survive would be some form of universalized psychoanalytic social services enabling individuals to avoid the self-destructive trap of envy. Another indication of how Jameson understood Communism was that he read Kafka’s story on Josephine the singing mouse as a socio-political utopia, as Kafka’s vision of a radically-egalitarian Communist society – with the singular exception that Kafka, for whom humans are forever marked by superego guilt, was able to imagine a utopian society only among animals. One should resist the temptation to project any kind of tragedy into Josephine’s final disappearance and death: the text makes it clear that, after her death, Josephine “will happily lose herself in the numberless throng of the heroes of our people”(my emphasis added). In his late long essay “American Utopia,” Jameson shocked even most of his followers when he proposed as the model of a future post-capitalist society the army – not a revolutionary army but army in its inert bureaucratic functioning in the times of peace. Jameson takes as his starting point a joke from the Dwight D Eisenhower period that any American citizen who wants socialized medicine needs only to join the army to get it. Jameson’s point is that army could play this role precisely because it is organized in a non-democratic non-transparent way (top generals are not elected, etc.). With theology it’s the same as with Communism. Although Jameson was a staunch materialist, he often used theological notions to throw a new light onto some Marxist notions – for example, he proclaimed predestination the most interesting theological concept for Marxism: predestination indicates the retroactive causality which characterizes a properly dialectical historical process. Another unexpected link with theology provides Jameson's remark that, in a revolutionary process, violence plays a role homologous to that of wealth in the Protestant legitimization of capitalism: although it has no intrinsic value (and, consequently, should not be fetishized and celebrated for itself, as in the Fascist fascination with it), it serve as a sign of the authenticity of our revolutionary endeavor. When the enemy resists and engages us in a violent conflict, this means that we effectively touched its raw nerve... Jameson’s perhaps most perspicuous interpretation of theology occurs in his little-known text “Saint Augustine as a Social Democrat” where he argues how St Augustine’s most celebrated achievement, his invention of the psychological depth of personality of the believer, with all the complexity of its inner doubts and despairs, is strictly correlative to (or the other side of) his legitimization of Christianity as state religion, as fully compatible with the obliteration of the last remnants of radical politics from the Christian edifice. The same holds, among others, for the anti-Communist renegades from the Cold War era: as a rule, their turn against Communism went hand in hand with the turn towards a certain Freudianism, the discovery of psychological complexity of individual lives. Another category introduced by Jameson is the “vanishing mediator” between the old and the new. “Vanishing mediator” designates a specific feature in the process of a passage from the old order to a new order: when the old order is disintegrating, unexpected things happen, not just horrors mentioned by Gramsci but also bright utopian projects and practices. Once the new order is established, a new narrative arises and, within this new ideological space, mediators disappear from view. Suffice it to take a look at the passage from Socialism to Capitalism in Eastern Europe. When in the l980s, people protested against the Communist regimes, what the large majority had in mind was not capitalism. They wanted social security, solidarity, a rough kind of justice; they wanted the freedom to live their lives outside of state control, to come together and talk as they pleased; they wanted a life of simple honesty and sincerity, liberated from primitive ideological indoctrination and the prevailing cynical hypocrisy . . . in short, the vague ideals that led the protesters were, to a large extent, taken from Socialist ideology itself. And, as we learned from Freud, what is repressed returns in a distorted form. In Europe, the socialism repressed in the dissident imaginary returned in the guise of Right populism. Many of Jameson’s formulations became memes, like his characterization of postmodernism as the cultural logic of late capitalism. Another such meme is his old quip (sometimes wrongly attributed to me) which holds today more than ever: it is easier for us to imagine a total catastrophe on the earth which will terminate all life on it than a real change in capitalist relations – as if, even after a global cataclysm, capitalism will somehow continue… So what if we apply the same logic to Jameson himself? It is easier to imagine the end of capitalism than the death of Jameson.
06/18/2018	death	Domenic Losurdo	obits/tributes * The Passing of Domenico Losurdo—by Roland Boer *	https://www.facebook.com/XiDeleteThis/posts/pfbid0328CBFbcFS7mpxibvd7bf7K127iRmvDZPBJc91bGPgncB8vWxX3WaT9iCzTZ6rz24l?__cft__[0]=AZVJyJbtoKbVxgA2fQuY3LEFMEaqvbqqXjw-OOP9zgyS2ashoCaYsex1pWb81UPYG6rR8XT3phnegTLZ8pMAHZhpNKFVY_pMn7i0EFJNFVn0FSr0yJZ4s384EEPWXwAQmVgqlYyNwBNuzCWNUQLZXkvnLkxbVugXW8M066a5sbMg9wKIeUVrbIyyi8RjU6DmRR4&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R Wow, Roland Boer has great taste in shirts. Read his obituary to Domenico Losurdo below: The Passing of Domenico Losurdo—by Roland Boer “On 28 June, 2018, Domenico Losurdo passed away after a brief period of brain cancer. He was only 76 and his death is a shock to many who have come to appreciate his work and his person. An official announcement from the secretary of the Communist Party of Italy (PCI) can be found here (see also here). Indeed, Losurdo enthusiastically joined the re-established the PCI, after it had been dissolved back in 1991. Many are the dimensions of his contribution to Marxist philosophy and history, with the best outline of his core positions provided in an article by Stefano Azzarà (he has also published a book building upon Losurdo’s work). I do not wish to cover all of these issues here, but rather focus on the significant contribution Losurdo has made to my thoughts. I do this not in terms of a self-serving enterprise, but as a recognition of the insights of which he was capable. The first book of his I read was Stalin: The History and Critique of a Black Legend. Initially published in Italian in 2008, it has been translated into German, Spanish and French (not English – I will return to this anomaly). I read the French translation and it was a stunning experience. Here was the account of how Stalin’s reception moved from widespread appreciation of the practical and theoretical contribution he had made to the construction of socialism, to one of systematic demonization. Given the framework in which many perceive Stalin today, the book may initially seem like a one-sided effort in praise of Stalin. It is far from such a work, for it is no air-brushed account. Instead, it makes a careful and balanced assessment of not merely mistakes made on the way but more the significant achievements – which are so often just forgotten or dismissed. But let me come back to the lack of an English translation of the Stalin book. Some works have indeed been translated, on Hegel, Heidegger, liberalism, class struggle, non-violence and war and revolution. They have been well-received, with their careful research and withering criticisms. But when a petition was launched to request one or two of the major left-wing publishers to produce an English version, it was met with the comment [from Verso Books] that it would ‘tarnish’ Losurdo’s reputation. So a sanitised version of Losurdo is fine, suitable for a curiously imperialist version of ‘Western’ Marxism, but one that actually represents his work is not. Indeed, by the time of his death he had published scores of books in Italian, of which only a handful have made their way into English. The time will come when most of his material is indeed available to a wider audience in what has become – for a time and for specific historical reasons – the lingua franca. Then perhaps his full impact will be felt, shaking up many ‘orthodoxies’. However, the major insights for me have come from his observations on China. I do not mean the tendency in some quarters to focus on Mao Zedong as the last true Chinese communist (you can find this still today among some ‘Maoists’ or maopai as the Chinese call them, with a distinctly negative tone). No, I mean his deep appreciation and understanding of Deng Xiaoping and the ‘reform and opening up’ – now celebrating forty years. Above all, Deng Xiaoping was deeply Marxist in a Chinese context and there are significant continuities from Mao to Deng. How is the ‘reform and opening up’ Marxist? There are many aspects, but at its core is the shrewd assessment that thus far the means of production had been relatively neglected in China’s effort to construct socialism. Most efforts had been directed at the relations of production, focusing on socialist equality and collective endeavour. This is all very well, but if everyone is equal simply because they are poor, few would see the benefit. So Deng and those working with him began to emphasise another dimension of Marxism: the need to unleash the forces of production. The results have truly been stunning, with a socialist market economy, the lifting of more than 700 million out of poverty (the World Bank puts it at 850 million), and so on. In an interview published in 2013, Domenico mentions the sustained anti-poverty drive as part of the ‘incredible success’ of Deng’s policies: ‘infrastructures worthy of a first world economy, growth in the process of industrialisation from its coast areas to its inland areas, rapid incrementation of salaries for several years and a growing concern for environmental issues’. He goes on: ‘By focusing on the key role of the achievement in the safekeeping of independence and of national sovereignty, and by encouraging the old colonies to pursue their own economic independence, China can today be seen as the centre of the anti-colonial revolution – which began in the 20th Century and is still in process under its different guises to this day. And by reminding ourselves of the pivotal role the public sphere should play in any economy, China constitutes an alternative in opposition to the economic liberalism and to the consensus dictated by Washington’. It is all very well toread such thoughts, but the point came home to me in a conversation we had in Shanghai less than two years ago. In the midst of the bustle, traffic, advertising, shops, and clear economic drive of the place, Domenico said, ‘I am happy with this. This is what socialism can do!’ To my quizzical look, he replied with a smile, ‘I am strongly in favour of the reform and opening up’. Ultimately, it was the conversations we had in September of 2016 that remain with me. Many others knew him far better than me, but I had invited him to participate in a conference on Chinese Marxism in Beijing, after which we travelled together to another and very different conference in Shanghai. While the first was constructive, with scholars from China and abroad engaging in creative discussions, the second was divisive, with most of the foreigners feeling they could come to China and tell these ‘wayward’ Chinese Marxists how they had it all wrong. So Domenico and I talked. We did so on trains, buses, walking, a cup of tea (which he prefers because of tea’s inherent slowing down of time, inviting you to sip and talk and pour another). He had noticed my review of his Stalin book, so we discussed the Soviet Union. He told me he had first visited China in 1972, as the leader of a young Italian ‘Friends of China’ group. He liked to come here as often as possible, pleased indeed to see the construction of socialism leaping ahead. As we came to realise how much we had in common, he pointed out, ‘We are of the mainstream, but we must be patient’. Yes indeed, the mainstream, from Marx and Engels, through Lenin and Stalin, to Mao, Deng and indeed Xi Jinping. Part of a living tradition. Which of course means that the myopia of ‘Western’ Marxist efforts to excise many parts of the mainstream smacks a little too much of utopian revisionism (as his final book did indeed argue). At one point, he asked about my daily patterns, for we both enjoy writing immensely. I spoke of quiet days of writing, at whatever home I happened to be, of ocean swimming, of Chinese study. He said, ‘I usually go for a walk of an hour or two, around the countryside, and perhaps talk with some friends. After I return home, I answer mail and I write’. He smiled, ‘I am a bit of a stakhanovite when it comes to writing’. But he also said his life feels very ‘provincial’, with all of the European associations. ‘We prefer to speak of the countryside or “the bush”’, I said. ‘I am a country boy, from “the bush,” and I much prefer it to the city’. He said, ‘Yes, that is a much better word, countryside – “the bush”’. We will miss him, as will ‘the bush’ around Urbino.”
07/21/2020	death	Anibal Quijano, Maria Logunes	https://x.com/GFPJournal/status/1307741315568930816	https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/maria-lugones-feminist-philosopher-who-studied-colonialisms-legacy-dies-at-76/2020/07/21/dbea9250-cb58-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html Maria Lugones, feminist philosopher who studied colonialism’s legacy, dies at 76 By Harrison Smith July 21, 2020 at 10:30 p.m. EDT Argentine-born philosopher María Lugones was a longtime philosophy professor at Binghamton University in New York. (Family photo) Share Comment 0 Add to your saved stories Save María Lugones, a feminist philosopher who combined influential scholarship on gender, race and the legacy of colonialism with decades of work as a social activist in Latin America and the United States, died July 14 at a hospital in Syracuse, N.Y. She was 76. The cause was cardiac arrest, said her niece Gabriela Veronelli. Dr. Lugones was being treated for her third occurrence of lung cancer, which returned late last year, and had been hospitalized with pneumonia-like symptoms after undergoing radiation treatment. In a field overwhelmingly dominated by white men, Dr. Lugones was a striking figure — a tango-dancing, Argentine-born lesbian (friends say she preferred the Spanish slang term “tortillera”) who challenged the old division between theory and practice. She seemed to align herself with Karl Marx’s famous remark that while philosophers have long analyzed and interpreted the world, “the point is to change it.” Dr. Lugones linked colonialism to the development of modern notions of gender. (Binghamton University) “I won’t think what I won’t practice,” she often said. Dr. Lugones was a professor of comparative literature and women’s studies at Binghamton University, part of the State University of New York. But her scholarship ranged across disciplines, extending from social and political philosophy to Latino politics, Andean philosophy, decolonial feminism, popular education and theories of resistance. “She was one of the most creative philosophers that I know,” said Sarah Lucia Hoagland, a lesbian-feminist philosopher and professor emerita at Northeastern Illinois University. Dr. Lugones was part of a group of decolonial scholars, including Walter Mignolo and Binghamton colleague Aníbal Quijano, who connected European colonialism to the development of concepts of labor and race. Pushing that link further, Dr. Lugones argued that modern notions of gender, including separate roles for women and men, emerged out of colonial rule as well. “I won’t think what I won’t practice,” Dr. Lugones often said. (Daimys Garcia) “Before that, you had women who knew farming, or pottery making, just as men did. That got erased,” Hoagland said by phone. “The stereotype of women that was constructed through that time of colonization, and that we still have, is that women are helpless, weak and need men to protect them.” Dr. Lugones’s concept of the “coloniality of gender” paved the way for a new understanding of oppression and power, said her collaborator Catherine Walsh, a Latin American studies scholar at Simón Bolívar Andean University in Ecuador. “María made visible the intersectionality of race, class, gender and sexuality in the Americas from colonial times to the present, and with it the multiple oppressions lived by women of color,” Walsh wrote in an email. “In so doing, she radically changed the ways we think about gender, making it inseparable from race and from the systemic patterns of power that continue to mark women’s bodies and the bodies of non-heteronormative peoples.” Dr. Lugones’s scholarship was closely linked to her work as an activist, including with organization such as Critical Resistance, which challenges mass incarceration and police brutality, and Incite!, a group of radical feminists of color that aims to end violence against women. She also worked with indigenous communities in Bolivia and campaigned to protect the land and water rights of a Chicano community in northern New Mexico, where she co-founded La Escuela Popular Norteña, a popular-education collective that holds workshops on community economics, health care and violence against women, among other topics. “Her philosophy came out of her work with the community — that’s what animated her thinking,” said Cricket Keating, a fellow Escuela member who researches decolonial politics. Dr. Lugones, she added, was always asking, “How have people lived and thrived and supported each other?” while working to build a kind of “deep coalition” in which various oppressed groups worked together. Many of her essays emphasized building community while working across differences in race, gender, sexuality and class. Perhaps her best-known article, “Playfulness, ‘World’-Travelling, and Loving Perception” (1987), advocated, in effect, seeing what you look like in someone else’s eyes — an act that Dr. Lugones found herself undertaking repeatedly as a woman of color in the United States. “When I think of my own people,” she once wrote, “the only people I can think of as my own are transitionals, liminals, border-dwellers, ‘world’-travelers, beings in the middle of either/or.” “María was interested in real people — living, breathing and dead,” said her friend Anne Leighton, Hoagland’s partner. “She loved ideas, but how do these ideas play out?” “So much of philosophy is ‘brain in a tank,’ ” Leighton added, referring to a thought-experiment staple of introductory philosophy classes. “But she was not interested in ‘brain in a tank’ — well, maybe when she was drunk. She did study philosophy.” María Cristina Lugones was born in Buenos Aires on Jan. 26, 1944. Her father was a biochemist who directed a pharmaceutical laboratory and served as a dean at the University of Buenos Aires, where Dr. Lugones studied before transferring to the University of California at Los Angeles. Share this article Share She graduated in 1969 with a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and enrolled at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where she received a master’s degree in 1973 and a PhD in philosophy in 1978, studying under Marcus George Singer, a noted philosopher of ethics. While in Madison she met Geoff Bryce, a fellow philosophy student whom she later married, according to her niece, to live and work in the United States. They remained close collaborators, co-founding the Escuela in Valdez, N.M., in 1990 after being influenced by Myles Horton, whose Highlander Folk School taught civil rights leaders including Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. Lugones taught at Carleton College in Minnesota before joining the Binghamton faculty in 1993. Early in her career, “feminist philosophy was just getting off the ground,” said her Binghamton colleague Surya Parekh, “and lesbian philosophy and women-of-color philosophy weren’t taken seriously.” “A lot of her work was in building relationships with white lesbian philosophers and queer women of color philosophers,” he added. “And in opening up institutional spaces. At Carleton, she made the study of race and gender important in a way that it hadn’t been before she was there.” Dr. Lugones returned to Argentina for about a year after the death of her brother Alejandro, a grass-roots political organizer who was found dead in 1983. She went on to investigate the circumstances of his death — “it was disguised as a gas leak,” said her niece Veronelli, but was generally believed to be a targeted killing as part of the country’s so-called “Dirty War” — before some relatives encouraged her to stop, fearing reprisals. “She was terribly sad by his death. . . . I don’t think she ever recovered from that sadness,” Veronelli said. Dr. Lugones later dedicated her 2003 essay collection “Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes” to Alejandro. Dr. Lugones received honors including the 2020 Frantz Fanon Lifetime Achievement Award from the Caribbean Philosophical Association, which praised her “groundbreaking contributions” to decolonial, feminist and indigenous philosophy, among other fields. Her husband died in a car accident in 2004, and Dr. Lugones lived in recent years at a 13-acre property in Vestal, N.Y., where she grew marigolds and zinnias and held court with graduate students, conducting readings in a large wooden-floored meeting space where she also taught her PhD students to tango. Friendship and sisterhood were crucial to her life, said Dr. Lugones, who is survived by a brother and sister. “I am incomplete and unreal without other women,” she once wrote. “I am profoundly dependent on others without having to be their subordinate, their slave, their servant.” Correction: An earlier version of this obituary incorrectly reported the year Dr. Lugones co-founded La Escuela Popular Norteña. It was 1990, not 1980. Read more Washington Post obituaries: Bruce Blair, leading voice for nuclear arms control, dies at 72 David Kaiser, Rockefeller heir who challenged Exxon, dies at 50 Frank DiPerna, photographer of evocative landscape scenes and teacher, dies at 73
01/06/2025	death	Ellie Ragland	"Ellie Ragland, 83, of Columbia passed on Jan. 6, 2025. A funeral service will be held at noon Jan. 20 at Parker-Millard Funeral Service & Crematory, 12 E. Ash St. Burial will follow at Columbia Cemetery." Ellie was my analyst for more than a decade. After that, she became someone with whom there were exchanges of many long letters, sometimes in the same day. I often return to these letters for their fresh insights, forever relevant. It goes without saying that she was a pioneer of psychoanalysis in America, where she introduced us to Jacques Lacan, Slavoj Zizek, and Jacques-Alain Miller. However, Ellie was also a pioneer of psychoanalysis around the world. She contributed a clinical case to the thinking of ordinary psychosis, she helped to orient our little circle in Pakistan with a masterclass on hysteria, and she helped us form a cartel in India as we were thinking of trying to link to the School. Her work, in its own style, showed us a way in the late Lacan that was literary, clinical, and theoretical. I turn to Ellie's work often for insights into Lacan's topology. Her final book, on Hysteria, was sure to be a masterwork, and she was prepared to publish it, and had a contract on hand already. It was clear that this last book was of tremendous importance to her. It was an honor to read it and review it. My hope is that it will still be published. Ellie's psychoanalytic insights and rigor, in both theory and practice, never once lost its edge. https://www.facebook.com/doctorrousselle/posts/pfbid028KzZU8J6LHwHFvg79NvbQPVWsZNkr8d8MtSqRJ54YdXHDg7ZAWnWk4gCBPZQVhAPl
02/24/2020	death	Mario Bunge !! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bunge
03/05/2025	death	Sandra Harding !! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Harding	* Daily Nous / Justin Weinberg @DailyNousEditor · 11h Sandra Harding, a philosopher well-known for her work in feminist theory, postcolonial theory, and philosophy of science, has died. https://x.com/DailyNousEditor/status/1901615489995923904 * *
03/01/2025		Brayton Polka !! https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1903220918165393467	* Brayton Polka was one of the most challenging professors I had in grad school. He was hard as nails but also a very; caring, passionate, & enthusiastic lecturer! He read Athens & Jerusalem into everything he read & studied, with a central focus on "the love of Neighbor" Christopher Satoor @aufgehenderRest · 22 mar. (which was his main mantra). He considered this mantra as one of his "Bradyisms." I had him for 2 long years (2013-2015) and I learned a lot from him. I look back to those years with new insight and gratitude. R.I.P. Brady. https://x.com/aufgehenderRest/status/1903534514661662920 * * * * *
		John Cobb !! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Cobb	* Matt Segall's favorite (process) theologian #processtheology