psychbronalysis
― max, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:43 (thirteen years ago) link
nah i just think that psychoanalysis is bs, fuck the subconscious
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:43 (thirteen years ago) link
Lacan was a bro.
― Spencer Chow, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:43 (thirteen years ago) link
i'm a reasonable fan of lacan, but happy to label him bullshitter supreme. unlike yer derridas and yer deleuzes i think there's genuinely no reason for him to write in the dumb way he does.
― Antoine Bugleboy (Merdeyeux), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:43 (thirteen years ago) link
After giving a talk at Berkeley once a guy accosted me at tea afterwards & would not shut up about Lacan, even though my talk was on logic. I'm pretty sure that what this guy was saying was bullshit, but I guess I'm not sure that he was getting Lacan right.
― Euler, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:44 (thirteen years ago) link
another music side note: have always wondered whether Smashing Pumpkins "Zero" was Lacan inspired.
― Spencer Chow, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:45 (thirteen years ago) link
i will say that lots of Lacan fans tend to be very passionate + outspoken in academia and generally aren't as smart as Lacan
― Mordy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:45 (thirteen years ago) link
(all this in my experience in academia, obv, ymmv, etc etc)
is that because when you challenge them they point to lacan and then it is hard to refute lacan
― dayo, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:47 (thirteen years ago) link
i mean more bc they talk about lacan-this and lacan-that and when pressed a lot of their ideas break down. (i've seen this at conferences where questions reduce the presenter to just repeating, 'you'll have to look in lacan to understand' in some form over and over)
― Mordy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:48 (thirteen years ago) link
i will say a lot of my lacan comes second hand via griselda pollock and other feminist art historians but it tends to be the point at which its difficult for me to take seriously what they're saying anymore. like theres this chapter in vision and difference where she does this lacanian analysis of rossetti's paintings and its just a bit like "oh ok thats the phallus is it? right ok" (she is otherwise awesome, i just wish ppl could use marx instead of lacan bc eg. spivak is a way more credible writer for me bc of this and only this)
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:51 (thirteen years ago) link
some dude who picked me up hitchhiking once got into a mad argument w/ me about this and i resolved to read society and its discontents but i uh havent
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:52 (thirteen years ago) link
civ + discontents. this is btw why i love Walter Benjamin (and Adorno) so much. Marx + some psychoanalysis. it's hot shit.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:53 (thirteen years ago) link
i like benjamin bc he is mystical
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:55 (thirteen years ago) link
benjamin is my bro
― dayo, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:56 (thirteen years ago) link
mystical benjamin is the scholem connection
― Mordy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:57 (thirteen years ago) link
I like Benjamin but I find him TOO HARD a lot of the time because of his mystical shizz. Like, I can totally follow Agamben saying much the same thing but Benjamin makes my head hurt.
― emil.y, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 01:15 (thirteen years ago) link
gershom brolem
― max, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 01:36 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?showall=true&bookmarkedmessageid=2246786&boardid=77&threadid=81522
― deejeuner sur l'herb (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 01:40 (thirteen years ago) link
the brolitical unconscious is levels for a 'modern conception of literature'
― boss margins, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 02:15 (thirteen years ago) link
Lacan isn't bullshit
re: the other: as somebody said, it starts with Levinas on the one hand and Kojeve's existential-marxist interpretation of the master-slave dialectic on the other (lol). and Kojeve begat Sartre and Lacan, who begat Fanon and a bunch of feminist theory, with probably some stuff I'm missing somewhere in there
― Egyptian Raps Crew (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 03:39 (thirteen years ago) link
what's the thread nakh linked? i'm still not on 77
― bernard snowy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 03:51 (thirteen years ago) link
reading lots of/about Heidegger these days
― bernard snowy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 03:52 (thirteen years ago) link
bro-ing-toward-death
― max, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 03:58 (thirteen years ago) link
the thread nakh linked to is about l0u1s jagg3r and the post he linked to is a gif of a book about gershom scholem
right
come join snowy! let thee not be the other of 77
― deejeuner sur l'herb (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 07:31 (thirteen years ago) link
gershy schol kinda looked like a 'bro' when he was young, anyway
― deejeuner sur l'herb (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 07:32 (thirteen years ago) link
xp I tend to forget that it exists! but nah, I'm cool — I guess I just lack "a taste for the secret"
― bernard snowy, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 13:54 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.thechinabeat.org/?p=2631
huh, very sneaky Dr. Land
― goole, Saturday, 19 February 2011 00:05 (thirteen years ago) link
I suppose this is the best place to ask: does anyone have any recommendations for a overview of 20th century philosophy? (mainly continental, mainly french) Not afraid of depth, but what I'm really looking for is something with a lot of breadth which actually attempts some kind of all-encompassing view of intellectual history during the 20th century.
― ryan, Saturday, 19 February 2011 01:12 (thirteen years ago) link
the course I took in college used the critical tradition, as compiled by david richter, which was just important excerpts from a lot of big important philosophy texts, w/ some introduction and interpretation
pretty good imo
― dayo, Saturday, 19 February 2011 01:46 (thirteen years ago) link
ryan, gary gutting's history of 20c. french (CUP) is good. there's a recent book 'french theory' (u. minn press) that might fill out that story on the tail end and more from the american/anglo humanities side. also a recent biography of deleuze and guattari, 'd+g: intersecting lives'.
― j., Saturday, 19 February 2011 05:30 (thirteen years ago) link
Try - A History of Structuralism by Francois Dosse
― historyyy (prettylikealaindelon), Saturday, 19 February 2011 13:11 (thirteen years ago) link
Quick question - I'm being lazy as I just want to check something that'll only affect a couple of paragraphs, but if I want to talk about Marx, Kant and instrumentality am I right in thinking Theses on Feuerbach should be my starting point?
― emil.y, Saturday, 19 February 2011 16:40 (thirteen years ago) link
thanks! all of those look really good, actually.
― ryan, Saturday, 19 February 2011 18:52 (thirteen years ago) link
Quick question - I'm being lazy as I just want to check something that'll only affect a couple of paragraphs, but if I want to talk about Marx, Kant and instrumentality am I right in thinking Theses on Feuerbach should be my starting point?― emil.y, Saturday, February 19, 2011 4:40 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark
― emil.y, Saturday, February 19, 2011 4:40 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark
where does Kant talk abt (something akin to) instrumentality? not familiar enough.
lately I'm tryna get into the third Kritik — the whole question of 'taste' as public use of reason, etc etc. it's fun.
― on some outer space shit (bernard snowy), Saturday, 19 February 2011 20:39 (thirteen years ago) link
One of the proposed formulations of the categorical imperative is to not use others purely as means and not ends, so in other words not to give primacy to their instrumentality above their being-in-themselves. So I'm tying that to Marx in the sense of a type of alienation stemming from the separation of these modes of being, and indeed a nullification of the latter, but am in need of some references to back me up, rather than half-remembered bits and pieces. The central thing of what I'm writing about is literary, though, hence not wanting to spend days trawling through everything for the sake of only a small part of my piece. Shouldn't be so lazy, I know.
― emil.y, Saturday, 19 February 2011 20:54 (thirteen years ago) link
ah ok i gotcha now
practical reason is my big blind spot... i mostly jump on the bandwagon in the post-kantian years when everyone's getting all romantic and speculative, and I have no idea how any of those dudes took the 2nd critique
― on some outer space shit (bernard snowy), Saturday, 19 February 2011 21:05 (thirteen years ago) link
y'all reading any new stuff you can recommend?
― markers, Friday, 5 August 2011 03:33 (twelve years ago) link
Derek Parfit - On What Matters is the most important philosophy book in a decade probablyPippin has a new book on Nietzsche that's pretty awesome - but I'm a Pippin-stanI haven't read it yet but Boyarin has a new book that's getting good reviews -- The Jewish Gospels, I think. Not out till next year tho.
― Mordy, Friday, 5 August 2011 03:56 (twelve years ago) link
first book's on my long list of things to read. thanks for reminding me about it!
is this the pippin? http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/N/bo8697282.html
― markers, Friday, 5 August 2011 03:59 (twelve years ago) link
yep!
― Mordy, Friday, 5 August 2011 04:01 (twelve years ago) link
looks p good :D
― markers, Friday, 5 August 2011 04:05 (twelve years ago) link
nick land has a blog!
http://www.thatsmags.com/shanghai/article/detail/292/time-preference
that gives you the flavor. austrian economics, "civilizational" despair. another right-winger...
― goole, Thursday, 17 November 2011 21:56 (twelve years ago) link
good post
― Mordy, Thursday, 17 November 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link
woah, thanks for the link
― markers, Thursday, 17 November 2011 22:53 (twelve years ago) link
markers, if u figure out how to rss just his posts, let me know.
― Mordy, Thursday, 17 November 2011 22:57 (twelve years ago) link
finally managed to read some of the "speculative realism" stuff, namely Tool-Being. I honestly thought it was pretty good, despite some reservations (don't ask me to defend that statement in detail though). I wonder what a better understanding on Harman's part of American philosophy (Peirce and James) would add to his philosophy, because it seems like his understanding of pragmatism is a little thin.
― ryan, Friday, 18 November 2011 00:50 (twelve years ago) link
i haven't looked too hard, but i don't see an obvious way to tbh
― markers, Friday, 18 November 2011 00:51 (twelve years ago) link
xpost