Peter Sloterdijk, Rage and Time -- book study

On the subject of self-valuing, Sloterdijk has good things to say. The Greek conception of Thymos, the pride and anger-aspect to mans being which is the subject of the book Rage and Time, is pertinent to our conception of self-valuing. I will start this book study off with a single paragraph and an interpretation.

"If one demands recognition from a specific opponent, one stages a moral test. If the other who is addressed rejects this test, she needs to deal with the rage of the challenger, who feels disrespected. Rage occurs first when the recognition from the other is denied (which leads to extroverted rage). However, rage also flourishes if I deny recognition to myself in light of my value ideas (so that I have reason to be angry with myself). According to Stoic philosophy, which situated the struggle for recognition fully inside the human psyche, the wise person is supposed to be satisfied with self-respect, first, because the individual in no way has control of the judgment of the other and, second, because she who is knowledgeable will strive to keep her- self free from all that does not depend on herself." [Peter Sloterdijk, Rage and Time, introduction]

Quick 'translation' into VO:

Rage occurs when self-value is not granted, when the others valuing can not be valued in terms of self-value. Rage also flourishes if I can not value my own actions or situation in terms of my self-valuing. According to the Stoics, which situated the struggle for being of value fully inside the human psyche, the wise person is supposed to be satisfied with self-valuing, first, because the individual has no control over the valuing of the other and second, because (s)he who is knowledgeable will strive to keep herself free from all over which her self-valuing has no direct influence.

Would you consider offering more interpretations of him and his work here?

I have read Sloterdijk and found him insightful as well. I will post some of my own notes and thoughts on him in this thread.

Brief course outline from an MIT class, focused here on his book Critique of Cynical Reason, which looks very interesting:

Peter Sloterdijk, Critique of Cynical Reason


What is enlightenment?

Mündigkeit-- own mouth, own voice; consent

Kant’s Categorical Imperative from the Critique of Pure Reason

The Formula of the Law of Nature: "Act as if the maxim of your action were to become through your will a universal law of nature."

The Formula of the End Itself: "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end."  


Sloterdijk’s Kritik der zynischen Vernunft is a play on Kant

who were the greek cynics?
dog philosophers
believed that virtue was the only necessity for happiness
desires lead ultimately to misery
followed this philosophy to the extent of neglecting everything that did not
further their perfection of virtue lived like dogs; neglecting society, hygiene, family,money, etc. in order to lead wholly virtuous and happy lives.

Who is the cynic today?

urban figure, modern
no longer an outsider(Jude Mason)  

191/ only in the city, under the pressure of public and a general love-hate, can the cynic clearly emerge as the negative profile of the city

Discontent in culture appears as universal, diffuse cynicism.


the modern cynic-- extant as a mass phenomenon since wwI-- is no longer an outsider

*Sloterdijk notes that rise of modern cynic corresponds with ascendance of Nietzsche’s thought

Cynic is borderline melancholic-- he can still work!

Cynic has “enlightened false consciousness”

Cynicism is the twilight of false consciousness (1984)

what is false consciousness?

people act contrary to their true interests because they don't know what's good for them.

people voluntarily shop at Wal-Mart and Home Depot.

"Why do so many people patronize large, impersonal retailers who destroy downtowns and sell goods that destroy the human spirit? Why do consumers and workers willingly permit themselves to be oppressed by capitalism?"

answer: false consciousness (also: bad faith)


“enlightened false consciousness” is cynicism in a crystalline state.

I am interested in Sloterdijk and I plan to pick upon this book soon. In the meantime I want to explore some things he is saying.

"Capitalism is nothing but one big acceleration process for cultural projects."

This is interesting, although perhaps most because I don't know quite what he means. He seems to be saying that we want results quickly, and cannot wait for a whole generation to reproduce whatever it is that we want... this seems like a confusion, either his confusion or mine of what he is saying. Economic, symbolic, whatever else kind of "reproductions" and "returns" we might want to see, no one has ever expected to wait 30 years. I'm not very clear what he is talking about in this reference, either he is being quite vague or there is a larger context here.

Why is he using the span of a generation to measure what seems to be nearly everything as "results we expect"? Yes in 30 years a generation replaces itself... so what? Human ideas, discoveries, economic production, advancements in law or culture, political movements, none of that stuff is inherently bound to the generational cycle.

Im trying to think of a single "return" or "cultural project" that is inherently tied to the generational cycle.

By the way here is the clip: