"'Critique' philosophers firmly install their metalanguage and in the center and slowly substitute their arguments to every single object of the periphery; organizing the critique is a tantamount to a careful, obstinate and deliberate empire-building" (90).
Our house is on fire. Join the resistance: Do no harm/take no shit. My idiosyncratic and confluent bricolage of progressive politics, the collaborative commons, next generation cognitive neuroscience, American pragmatism, de/reconstruction, dynamic systems, embodied realism, postmetaphysics, psychodynamics, aesthetics. It ain't much but it's not nothing.
Monday, July 7, 2014
Latour on Serres
See this Latour article. I'm
fascinated with how Serres does not see strict divisions between
domains. Or a metalanguage that contextualizes them all within a
critique or model. Not only different domains but what one who uses
metalanguages might interpret as past and lower levels that must be
supplanted. It seems more like how Luhmann sees the various mutations of
a human or society, as that of structural couplings. Or how Gebser does
as well, how they all continue to exist simultaneously via such
couplings. And yet there is not overarching 'integral' metalanguage
(model, method) etc. As in Morton or Zizek, there is no Nature. I like
this quote:
"'Critique' philosophers firmly install their metalanguage and in the center and slowly substitute their arguments to every single object of the periphery; organizing the critique is a tantamount to a careful, obstinate and deliberate empire-building" (90).
"'Critique' philosophers firmly install their metalanguage and in the center and slowly substitute their arguments to every single object of the periphery; organizing the critique is a tantamount to a careful, obstinate and deliberate empire-building" (90).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.