Rolling Philosophy

missed it but she is real good so... stole that, check

macbeth sez in a footnote

I have been told by a native speaker that in French one does call building a model airplane a game.

can our man in la domaine francais euler confirm?!?

good work/congratulations/*shrug*/whatever sits best ryan

will definitely read you when i'm thru with Harry Potter

Wow, a recording of David Lewis: http://www.philpercs.com/2015/07/audio-of-david-k-lewis-in-australia-in-1981.html

I've definitely looked for some before, seemed like there was none out there.

Madame Macbeth is correct re les jeux

She is a friend but I haven't read the book yet

friends don't have to read friends' books, it's a perk

I'm reading marvellous clouds atm, Ryan. Enjoying it so far - not sure why I try to read this stuff at work, though. But I'm only about 70 pages in.

I don't know much about Timothy Morton or OOO but this has piqued my interest. http://www.dazeddigital.com/music/article/25630/1/bjork-searches-for-meaning-in-these-personal-emails

There's some lovely stuff in there.

"I try to argue that everything is alive (or undead--almost as good!!" Can this be called "reanimism" please?

aw that email correspondence is adorable

Congrats, Ryan! Was always a big fan of yours back in the I Love Film days

Also, started reading an interesting VSI that I got in Oxford which is related to this thread but I won't say what until I get a little further.

came across this on twitter, made me laugh:

http://imgur.com/gallery/rn1QP69

won't google "ghostmodernism" for fear it is a real academic trend, rather than a pretty cool band name.

Sounds like hauntology. Which is a cool genre name.

http://www.academia.edu/People/Ghostmodernism

1 ghostmodernist can't be wrong.

im sure "University of Wolverhampton" sounds like a perfectly normal place to british people but it sounds to this texan like an ideal place to study ghostmodernism.

Forgot to say 'hauntologie' is also a term from Derrida.

trust me it would be

Busy modernists often hire ghostmodernists to serve as uncredited coauthor.

Anyone seen this thing? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379028/

Apparently there's a scene in it of Cavell, Danto, and Morgenbesser playing in a meadow while arguing about the external world.

there was some talk a ways back about deleuze and expression, of which i was reminded when i picked up this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Search-Image-Thought-Philosophical-Expressionism/dp/0816678030/

not sure when i'll have time to read it (my quest to understand deleuze remains a faltering yet ongoing project), but thought it may be of interest to the thread.

in other news i order Hans Blumenberg's gigantic "Work on Myth" and im really excited to read it. "Legitimacy of the Modern Age" is probably on my short list of favorite books by this point.

work on work on myth

about 2/3 of way through "the universe of things" and it's very readable and interesting, though i think it's managed to turn me off to OOO and whitehead.

has anyone read Lee Braver's "A Thing of This World: A History of Continental Anti-Realism"? I think im gonna try to skim through it next.

skimmed a bit

read some of his heidegger/wittgenstein book too, seemed worth reading through (just haven't had a good time to yet)

i think he's doing good stuff

Anyone seen this thing? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379028🔗/

Apparently there's a scene in it of Cavell, Danto, and Morgenbesser playing in a meadow while arguing about the external world.

Basically what philosophers did in the sixties.

Yeah, yeah

[Jpsartre.jpeg]
Yé-yé

Yeah, yeah

Morgenbesser

the introduction to "A Thing of This World" is kind of a perfect little summary of philosophy from Kant to Heidegger. looking forward to the rest. he seems like a clear-headed type.

Braver quotes Hilary Putnam to the effect of it being impossible to find a philosopher before Kant who is not a metaphysical realist. i had never considered this but it's interesting, especially since it recasts the period between Descartes and Kant as one of transition from the medieval to the modern, rather than Descartes as the first modern.

yeah i think there's been a lot of interesting work lately questioning just how well the idea of descartes as the first modern holds, e.g. alain de libera's stuff about when the modern subject actually appears (short answer: either significantly before descartes or significantly after descartes).

just looked up De Libera and his stuff looks awesome but i can't read french because i suck. (i can more or less make out the titles of his books though.)

my biggest regret so far in life is that if i was gonna make the catastrophic decision to go to grad school i should have gone for intellectual history.

but Kant was a metaphysical realist!

For a minute I thought instead of "Kant" you typed "Karl."

the entry on 'subject' from dictionary of untranslatables that de libera wrote with etienne balibar and barbara cassin is a good introduction to his deal - http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/wp-content/files_mf/rp138_article1_vocabularyofeuropeanphilosophiespart1.pdf

that looks awesome--thanks!

Isn't Berkeley an anti-realist?

it's being used in a specialized sense so Berkeley would still count as a realist: since ideas are all there is, we are definitely up to knowing what they are. if there was a sliding scale I imagine he might be more of a realist than Descartes, who at least entertains the possibility of skepticism!

well

Berkeley is not a materialist but he is a theist so he does have positive metaphysical acceptances too

Euler do you mean Kant is a metaphysical realist because of the proof of an external world or for some other reason?

well there is that

but I had in mind his commitment to noumena

and in the Prolegomena:

There are things given to us as objects of our senses existing outside us, yet we know nothing of them as they may be in themselves, but are acquainted only with their appearances, i.e. with the representations that they produce in us because they affect our senses. Accordingly, I by all means avow that there are bodies outside us, i.e. things which, though completely unknown to us as to what they may be in themselves, we know through the representations which their influence on our sensibility provides for us, and to which we give the name of a body—which word therefore merely signifies the appearance of this object that is unknown to us but is nonetheless real. Can this be called idealism? It is the very opposite of it.

cool--thanks!

I mean it's a controversial point & my view is owed to my graduate training where my teacher was/is a defender of this line but there are texts like this, what can you say

the de libera / étienne balibar / barbara cassin article linked above is really good & helpful to me! it seems to me a very characteristic example of good contemporary French philosophy : highly dependent upon readings of historical texts, not surprising since the three authors are historians of philosophy. if it's armchair philosophy then it's an armchair in a bibliothèque rather than in some office.

^agreed, good article & relevant to my interests
much of the medieval stuff was new to me
was familiar with balibar’s fondness for the subject(ed) ‘pun’ from his essay in this book
http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1266915545l/1871607.jpg
it’s somewhat idiosyncratic yet i think productive way to frame genealogy of the term

my own bias feels omission of hellenistic (esp stoic) philosophy, imo pivotal to story of the subject
but that may be due to project’s genealogical focus on ‘words’ rather than ‘concepts’

zat a review of a book from our boy ryan i see today??? looks like

big ups

haha yes. thanks. it's kind of an odd review but nice to be noticed!

I'm still working my way through the lee braver book and I really admire it. it's quite exhaustive and looks like it must have been a ton of work but it offers some of the best readings of Heidegger I've read.