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
anyone read this yet?
http://o-books.com/books/in-the-dust-of-this-planet
― markers, Monday, 9 January 2012 19:06 (twelve years ago) link
The blurb makes the author sound like an aspiring Oscar Wildean.
― Aimless, Monday, 9 January 2012 19:09 (twelve years ago) link
I can vouch for Eugene Thacker's previous work. This new one looks like a lot of fun too.
― ryan, Monday, 9 January 2012 21:03 (twelve years ago) link
awesome. i want to read after life at some point too
― markers, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 00:26 (twelve years ago) link
thanks for bringing my attention to this! just about to turn in my dissertation and i think it will be my first read with my new freedom.
― ryan, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 03:11 (twelve years ago) link
i think i'm going to read that yale university press gadamer biography next -- i got it for under ten bucks at the mit press bookstore over two years ago
― markers, Thursday, 12 January 2012 14:35 (twelve years ago) link
(i should go back there eventually and check out the discount section again)
― markers, Thursday, 12 January 2012 14:36 (twelve years ago) link
I like gadamer
― bob loblaw people (dayo), Thursday, 12 January 2012 16:54 (twelve years ago) link
so just started In the Dust of This Planet and it's even more interesting than I anticipated because I think one of the things he's trying to gesture towards is an idea of a kind of nihilistic or negative mysticism, an experience of the "nothingness" beyond the limits of thought/philosophy. not for nothing does it open with epigraphs from Schopenhauer and The Cloud of Unknowning. There's basically no quicker way to get my attention than that kind of juxtaposition!
― ryan, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 18:37 (twelve years ago) link
also some mentions of Nishitani towards the end, i see. Ok i should actually read this now..
― ryan, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 18:38 (twelve years ago) link
"What an earlier era would have described through the language of darkness mysticism or negative theology, our contemporary era thinks of in terms of supernatural horror."
This actually strikes me as an interesting claim because the traditional religions have seemed to push out mystical or antinomian ideas for the sake of an enforced fundamentalism.
― ryan, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 18:44 (twelve years ago) link
and non-traditional, new agey type religions aren't so much concerned with an unknowable God so much as the revelation of personality or self.
― ryan, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 18:45 (twelve years ago) link
ok so he's now talking about Keiji Haino!
― ryan, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 19:34 (twelve years ago) link
i think i'll end up reading this at some point
― markers, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 19:52 (twelve years ago) link
just preordered the huge zizek book that's coming out in april
― markers, Wednesday, 25 January 2012 03:53 (twelve years ago) link
is that the promised opus on Hegel?
I finished the Thacker book, it was good. It was short and more suggestive than sustained and argued, but if you enjoy those themes (as mentioned above) it's pretty interesting.
― ryan, Thursday, 26 January 2012 04:14 (twelve years ago) link
yes yes! look!: http://www.amazon.com/Less-Than-Nothing-Dialectical-Materialism/dp/1844678970/
yeah, from something you said upthread it sounds like it'll be my kind of book
― markers, Thursday, 26 January 2012 14:39 (twelve years ago) link
ok, may have to read this. reading group?
― Mordy, Thursday, 26 January 2012 14:48 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah, I'd be up for that. I expect it won't be an easy read- the little Hegel I've read is heavy stuff.
― good luck in your pyramid (Neil S), Thursday, 26 January 2012 14:49 (twelve years ago) link
yeah, this'll probably be more like Zizek's Parallax View than Living in the End Times, re: complexity
― Mordy, Thursday, 26 January 2012 14:55 (twelve years ago) link
There are some posts about the book at http://ernstbloch.wordpress.com/, including a table of contents.
― Øystein, Thursday, 26 January 2012 15:30 (twelve years ago) link
not a huge Zizek guy, but it sounds good! i still think Hegel is very fertile ground.
the first post on that blog touches on all manner of things that interest me, but what i usually get from sources like from George Spencer-Brown or Peirce or Niklas Luhmann. very cool.
― ryan, Thursday, 26 January 2012 16:13 (twelve years ago) link
i'd be up for an ilx hegel reading group
― ogmor, Thursday, 26 January 2012 19:35 (twelve years ago) link
the dialectic requires markers to be down for it
― The term “hipster racism” from Carmen Van Kerckhove at Racialicious (nakhchivan), Thursday, 26 January 2012 21:47 (twelve years ago) link
kinda looks like "finally, zizek's hegel book" really means "finally, zizek's most thorough unfolding of his own thought". but yeah could be interesting. i understand that he had an editor for the first time in many years for this one, so it shouldn't be stricken with the chronic laziness that's characterised a lot of his recent work.
― Merdeyeux, Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:24 (twelve years ago) link
incidentally, i'm in the middle of marking a big pile of essays on hegel right now. it's kinda fun.
― Merdeyeux, Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:25 (twelve years ago) link
I'd be up for both a new-Zizek or Hegel ilx reading group, hell yeah!
― future debts collector (Le Bateau Ivre), Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:31 (twelve years ago) link
what if the group took place in an infinite loop? :P
― Mordy, Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:41 (twelve years ago) link
Haha, fair play, I'd be down with that too
― future debts collector (Le Bateau Ivre), Thursday, 26 January 2012 22:46 (twelve years ago) link
http://onwhatmatters.tumblr.com/
― markers, Saturday, 28 January 2012 00:48 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.amazon.com/Knowledge-Coordination-Interpretation-Daniel-Klein/dp/019979412X
― Mordy, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 00:50 (twelve years ago) link
43 bucks
― markers, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 00:51 (twelve years ago) link
i kno :(
― Mordy, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 00:52 (twelve years ago) link
if i wanted to read all of nietzsche's books in translation, in order, which translator should i go with? are kaufmann's translations the ones to read?
― markers, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 02:52 (twelve years ago) link
from what i remember kaufmann and hollingdale are the two big ones. dont know if one is preferred. kaufman has a reputation for being a little looser, but more readable.
the one exception is that i read this genealogy of morality (translated by Maudemarie Clark and Alan J. Swensen) and thought it was great. but i dont think they translated any other nietzsche.
http://www.amazon.com/Genealogy-Morality-Friedrich-Wilhelm-Nietzsche/dp/0872202836
― max, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:01 (twelve years ago) link
im reading strikethrough banging my head against strikethrough sturggling w/kant atm
― the parable is the parable of the (Lamp), Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:05 (twelve years ago) link
I don't think there is any other way to read kant tbh
― dayo, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:07 (twelve years ago) link
i think the general consensus is that Kaufmann's are to Nietzsche what Constance Garnett is to Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. ie, questionable accuracy but by far the most famous and readable translation.
― ryan, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:07 (twelve years ago) link
yo kant is clarity incarnate. if you're confused it's bc your brain is all twisted up from life + shit.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:08 (twelve years ago) link
I remember going through Being and Time painstakingly, almost line by line, with a notepad trying to put things in my own terms. those were some long afternoons in the library.
― ryan, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:08 (twelve years ago) link
@markers - fwiw kaufmann and hollingdale are the ones i have as well. this guy agrees with max on the clark/swensen
― the parable is the parable of the (Lamp), Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:09 (twelve years ago) link
man I don't know anybody who still reads the constance garnett translations! but kaufmann is still widely used afaict
― dayo, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:10 (twelve years ago) link
i was at a dissertation defense a few weeks ago where one of the professors went on quite vociferously about how crappy the new translations were (the married couple) and how much better Garnett was. but she is probably a minority opinion.
― ryan, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:11 (twelve years ago) link
I'm not a terribly big fan of the married couple
― dayo, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:13 (twelve years ago) link
theyre translations are really good imo
― the parable is the parable of the (Lamp), Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:14 (twelve years ago) link
I can't remember who I contraristan for above them though, I'll have to check my contraristan log, I've definitely expressed this opinion elsewhere on ILX
― dayo, Tuesday, 31 January 2012 03:15 (twelve years ago) link