tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post3338020217508137987..comments2020-08-01T22:28:50.016-06:00Comments on Proactive Progressive Populism: Rhetoric about rhetoricEdward Bergehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-822687500459654052012-05-31T11:43:47.190-06:002012-05-31T11:43:47.190-06:00I replied: I understand your concerns Balder. I kn...I replied: I understand your concerns Balder. I know Slot is not arguing for a shetong metaphysics. For the most part it seems to the contrary. But on that one recent quote provided there does seem to be a more strict division between "dispositionary knowledge and that knowing where the seeker's eye is broken by the object." Granted they are not identical but the issue for me is how they remain distinct yet related, how those boundaries are crossed while still retaining them.<br /><br />In terms of contemplative praxis, of course solo meditation techniques are not identical with rhetoric. And yet I think similar, dare I say homeomorphic equivalencies (HE), might be drawn as to their contemplative goals? Yes, I went too far in my hyperbole calling it (non)self masturbation, but that is in response to what I perceive as a hegemonic meditation fetish in integral more generally, with its emphasis on Buddhism. We do not need to meditate in that way as part of an ILP and can find a HE path, which rhetoric more broadly construed might accomplish?<br /><br />Perhaps in light of this recent turn we should revisit "the world is made of stories" thread?*<br /><br />"David Loy explores the fascinating proposition that the stories we tell...become the very building blocks of our experience and of the universe itself."<br /><br />Therein I also referenced an IO thread on Loy called "The dharma of deconstruction," where Loy asks: "Do Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, and Derrida also help to liberate us from such problematic ways of thinking?"<br /><br />I'm also reminded of Derrida's bastard reasoning to apprehend khora and Merleau-Ponty's hyper-dialectic, which serves a similar function, also referenced in that thread.<br /><br />* http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/the-world-is-made-of-storiesEdward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-33239161274263095342012-05-31T11:42:03.469-06:002012-05-31T11:42:03.469-06:00Balder replied: Sloterdijk is not a shentong, and ...Balder replied: Sloterdijk is not a shentong, and is not arguing for a shentong metaphysics in his book. <br /><br />One thing I'm concerned about in what you write above (especially when you frame rhetoric in empowering language and dismiss meditation as masturbation) is that arguing for porous, non-absolute boundaries between these domains (with which I generally agree) can perhaps slip, intentionally or unintentionally, into the absolutization of one's own preferred mode (here, rhetoric), since it, being porous, has "access" to the enactions of all other injunctive modes. "Good language can achieve anything you meditating wankers can achieve." A subtle logocentrism or language-centrism, it seems, is a potential here. I agree that language has the ability to shift consciousness and to inspire compassionate action, but would not go so far as to say that language can achieve anything any other mode of enaction can. I'm not sure if you even intended to suggest that, but the critical division in your comment above (rhetoric as skillful-aesthetic-transformative, meditation as masturbatory) prompted my concerns.Edward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7621529782651296685.post-6179834949525482122012-05-31T11:02:53.932-06:002012-05-31T11:02:53.932-06:00On a related note, Lakoff broke with Chomsky and w...On a related note, Lakoff broke with Chomsky and was participant in the 'linguistic wars' on the very relation between syntax and semantics. Recall for Lakoff metaphor is more than just an aesthetic or rhetorical trope but empirically validated via quite precise 'scientific' modes. Hence syntax (form) itself is infected from its origin with semantics (meaning), and vice versa.Edward Bergehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864657929019204993noreply@blogger.com