Before The Light
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.


'Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day. But when I follow at my pleasure the serried multitude of the stars in their circular course, my feet no longer touch the earth.'
 
HomeSearchRegisterLog in

 

 Christological

Go down 
3 posters
AuthorMessage
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 10:53 am

I am going to take a term that Zizek uses at least once, Christological, and use it from now on to distinguish the logic of the Christian metaphysical from Christianity as religion or even from Christianity as historical event. The system of Christianity is different from the logic underpinning it, the system at best manifests this logic materially in the world and at worst just represents this logic indirectly as a sort of gesture or image.

Zizek's point here was that the logic of Christianity is deeply Hegelian in how Christianity created a space for human meaning beyond the cultural symbolic order, beyond the dynamics of the family and beyond the state. Christ was this kind of radically contingent event, Christ as man, through which a larger metaphysical symbolic possibility was realized in so far as the contingency is required to allow the necessary "absolute" structure to function in real life; a distinction he makes here is between two forms of society and governance: the modern state of the rule of experts and technocratic bureaucracy, versus the older monarchies where experts existed more in the background and did the real work of understanding and crafting policies and actions for the king or leader figure to simply sign. He claims that Hegel's point is that's society needs an empty figurehead at the top in order to enact governance in a more human way, that the direct rule of experts or direct popular vote is s tyranny of positivity that can only work well when supplemented with the radically negative figure of the leader whose job is to fail to understand the policies and actions that he signs into law.

He uses a line from Lacan: "madness is not only the beggar who believes he is a king, it is also the king who believes he is a king." This is profound. The real logic of necessity is only able to act as governance and intelligent actions and will if there is a kind of empty symbol for this action and will, because of the distance required between the true rationale behind an act and the act itself. The psychoanalytic term here is symbolic castration, which means the irreducible (in so far as we remain truthful as subjectivities) gap in subjectivity between what we are to ourselves, our inner experience and self, and what we are to others, our roles in society, the function we have to others and how others perceive us. I am not fully convinced that this gap is totally irreducible because instead of trying to reduce it "downward" toward the conditions of the gap itself we can instead reduce it "upward" in philosophical and artistic activity. We can try to change our world to reflect our "inner truth" and gain proper recognition by that standard, but perhaps even this is a form of castration as well, an external rather than internal castration.

The Christological formula was to introduce radical negativity into humanity at the intersection between individual and state/society and between individual and other people. It was no longer enough to have this ideal of perfectly filling out our social role and position in peaceful harmony with our state or culture; Zizek notes how he went to China and asked them about the nature of their state communist administration of capitalism, and was told that they have abandoned the idea of communism for a more practical peaceful homogeneity between individual and society, where everyone knows their proper place and role and is genuinely happy and self-actualized in fulfilling that place-- "sure", Zizek replies, "we ourselves in Europe also have a term for this ideal state of peaceful social harmony of perfect functioning of individuals and social role, it's called corporate fascism".

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 11:07 am

His point is that we should defend Europe and US against this contemporary critique that goes something like "Europe/US are oppressive colonial powers of hegemony that tyrannize "local peoples" and cultures", we shouldn't defend the imperialism but we should defend the Christological gap within the proper human subjectivity, a gap that always makes utopian perfection whether as the naive communist idea or as corporate fascism impossible.

The idea of communism is simply that eventually the need for wage-labor work would fall away due to this work being taken over by machines. Since the need to work in the common social economic sense of "having a job" is still always the case, communism is only a distant vision of a possible future where the symbolic castration would no longer govern sociopolitical affairs. But of course this is also naive in so far as machinery can only remove physical materials labor and cannot actually remove mental and emotional labor. Capitalism today has pushed work-labor into the immaterial realm as society is more and more overtly defined by this inner logic of human subjectivity wherein the distance required between oneself and one's actions or "image of oneself" functioning in society is still irreducible. The "human element" is the required contingent factor of imperfection and unpredictability around which capitalism's drive for necessity and perfection (homogeneity, absolute control and prediction) rotates.

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 11:20 am

Interestingly this idea is almost the exact opposite of Plato's vision of politics given in The Republic. The supposedly wise leader who sees himself as fully embodying his role as political leader without any remainder is only another kind of tyranny, Zizek makes reference here to Stalin as a perfect example; the people will always treat the political leaders as if they had some sort of divine wisdom and as if they are in fact synonymous with the role they occupy, and the gap between the leader and his role is rendered invisible; but when the leader himself acts as if this gap didn't exist, when the leader truly believes that he is this role himself, that is is king, then we must only get another form of absolute tyranny.

Democratic republics today in US and Europe have partially solved this problem by making the position of leader an empty role that is filled only temporarily by various elected officials. In this way the justification for being in that role is no longer the supposition that the leader has some divine or perfect mandate justifying his occupying that role, because now we all know that the leader is simply whoever is chosen by a majority of the people. The leader may still pathologically associate themselves literally with the role they play, thereby forsaking their humanity and pushing the gap of symbolic castration deeper into repression, but now there is always the threat that this facade will be exposed as a sham, for the simple reason that there now exists a mechanism for selecting leadership that is entirely beyond the leader himself. The leader must submit himself to the imperfections and contingency of the will of the people as hypostasized into a single "majority vote", and this is a necessary remainder of political leadership that works against pathological associations of leaders with their roles. The king who REALLY BELIEVES that is IS king, this is the problem that the Christological formula militates against.

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 11:23 am

Zizek also here makes the point with regard to Plato, that a hypothetical perfectly just society would be an absolute terror.

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7296
: 8671
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 11:48 am

I find this a good reading of Christianity. To my own great cheerfulness, I am instantly grounded in opposition to this formula of government; as a philosopher-legislator, I believe in philosopher-kingship, in direct logos-to-praxis downward, with the hirded help of whatever experts are necessary for any given context.

Zizek expresses here the pure negativity in terms of human will that Christianity represents; the simple ontic inability of regulating his species, and his species representing nonetheless his will.

Now, that philosophy is coming home, which means back to its throne, this system becomes obsolete, and a true horror. Now that god is dead and humans are being born into sanity again, the time has announced itself where we need proper leadership, a commander, who knows what he is doing, unlike any 'experts'.....  who are after all specialists, and can thus by definition not know politics, which is comprehensive.

It is time for positive leadership again - we humans arent anylonger ashamed of our drives, which is why we could not have direct leadership - we had to hide our drives form ourselves, make this strange circuitry outside of ourselves, to exclude ourselves from our will, which was sinful to us, but needed to be done anyway. This is why the king was an illusory figure, his role is to hide shame and guilt, and for this he needs to be transcendent, or to forge a psychoanalytic term: sublime-perverse. The apparatus we are now about to vote out of power is thus sublime-perverse kingship, president Obama probably the most sublime-perverse human to ever 'rule'; be entirely powerless, and ignorant about 'his' domain while speaking the ruling logos, blindly superimposing the given mediating matrices of shame and guilt on society to regulator its will into narrow, puny paths that can be controlled; man under god was simply a harvesting machine without a pilot, so he needed a great artifice of government.

In this world to come now, we need self-valuings, individuals, who are actual humans, and can know what the humans in the world really need now; apparently the time has come, where we can be proud enough, sane enough, un Christian enough to take our fate into our own human hands.

'Masters of the Earth', Nietzsches greatest project, to which the notion of the Superman and the ER is but a small catalyst... to open the paradigm to this very mastership is our task as philosophers before the light.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 1:34 pm

So if I'm correct here what you're saying is that the problem isn't really the fact of symbolic csstration and its repression, but actually the problem is sublime-perverse drive-confusion they can only be organized in terms of a leader/spiritual teacher? I agree it is possible to have truly wise leaders. So I agree that the problem isn't that leadership is always unwise qua leadership, he problem is more like how utterly rare it is to have leaders who are wise (and sane), as well as how to tell the difference. In Plato's system there is no real mechanism for preventing the inevitable rise of an unwise/insane leader. I suppose the other way around this problem of the rarity of wisdom in leadership is for the people to grow in their own wisdom. That seems to be what you're saying?

While it's easy to be cynical and dismiss that idea, I do happen to agree. "The people" should keep raising their standards of life and in so doing come closer to a need for truth both in life's beautiful gifts as well as in the ennui that follows achieving quality of life with regard to material need. The ennui of "rich white America" that is a well known side effect of capitalism here can be seen as a kind of breeding ground for an elevated standard to come, for the need for truth.

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
: 853
Join date : 2011-12-11

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 6:24 pm

" Zizek's point here was that the logic of Christianity is deeply Hegelian in how Christianity created a space for human meaning beyond the cultural symbolic order, beyond the dynamics of the family and beyond the state. "


My problem with this in general is reading Christianity independently from the Judaic underpinning from which it evolved. The basic idea in Judaism is that the mundane affairs of family life are themselves vehicles through which the divine re-participates in the creation; that one can literally lower and raise the universe simply by being a good father or wife, etc. So if the emergence of Christ is read against that more ancient theological background, Christ does not represent the opening of a symbolic possibility beyond the mundane reality of state and family life, but rather, an inversion of that symbolic order; in Judaism, man expresses the divinity latent in nature through good acts, while, after Christ, that latent divinity is no longer latent, it is actual, thus "the kingdom of heaven is within you." Agape or the spirit of god, brotherly love, becomes the main focus of worship- and man expresses divinity through that, rather than by fulfilling stifling and static social roles deemed as good in the Judaic tradition. So Christ is not an empty signifier between god and man here or a radical negativity, rather, he expresses the divine actualization or radical positivity of humanity as agape or love, so that man no longer needs to relate himself to God through the established forms of society/ "filling their proper place" in Judaism (symbolically castrating himself) in order to express the divine. Christ removes the distance between man and the divine. Neither Christ or God exist as the radical negativity of the other; they are both negated on the basis of a mutual affirmation, so that the affirmation can be reified through the Christ-God's death as agape or brother love. This love or agape allows things like family life and the mundane affairs of living to become active rather than passive expressions of the divine as they were in Judaism: that is the fundamental gift of Christ. And this is my system. Two being(s) are irreducible and cannot be brought into a negative relation to one another- because they are both affirmations of Being, that is, positivity, as Christ and God; negative reflection * isolates the positive core which they share by negating them both at the level of the symbolic- hence it wasn't god and man that died on the cross, it was the god-man and god; finally that positivity is reified, or reproduced in a new form.

* [ For Holderlin, all knowledge stems from an original division by reflection within athesis
through which Being is positioned as an intellectual intuition, that is, not as identity, but
as a transcendental relation between the subject and object that cannot be synthetically
unified within consciousness, and whose specification can therefor only take the form of
tragic poeticism, an aesthetic of the mourning introduced into the Eden of nature with the
fall of man into reflection and immanence. In my view, because man can reproduce
intellectually his own lack, through what I call negative-reflectivity, he must be initially
divided from himself in pre-reflection. This lack is man's Being. The transcendental
relation of subject and object becomes in this view an immanent relation between man's
consciousness and the Being of that consciousness, with the reproduction within
consciousness of the lack representing the reification of the Being of consciousness- a
reification of the transcendent object missing in a Nature mournful over the absence of
the divine.]

In other words: Christ does not provide a radical possibility beyond the mundane, family etc. Christ allows the mundane to be expressed as the radical metaphysical possibility.

A similar inversion politically is possible. Man does not express his will positively by relating it to law under a king; man expresses law by positively relating his will to a leader. The idea is that law itself is not a passive symbolic structure but an active real structure. Both the individual and the leader are pure affirmations of a basic ontos, law; the structure of the new polis serves to negate them both so that the positive core they share can be isolated and reified in a new form, as "the people," a political category that was only properly articulated in America and which represents law in its activity rather than passivity.

 

___________
ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum; 
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata. 

[                                          The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
                                                                                     the First.]

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.


                                        -- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.
Back to top Go down
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7296
: 8671
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 7:48 pm

Capable wrote:
So if I'm correct here what you're saying is that the problem isn't really the fact of symbolic csstration and its repression, but actually the problem is sublime-perverse drive-confusion they can only be organized in terms of a leader/spiritual teacher? I agree it is possible to have truly wise leaders. So I agree that the problem isn't that leadership is always unwise qua leadership, he problem is more like how utterly rare it is to have leaders who are wise (and sane), as well as how to tell the difference. In Plato's system there is no real mechanism for preventing the inevitable rise of an unwise/insane leader. I suppose the other way around this problem of the rarity of wisdom in leadership is for the people to grow in their own wisdom. That seems to be what you're saying?

I believe only in nominal control, I believe that arms should be in the hands of privates, always. Never a monopoly on violence by an institution. That is my philosophical idea, and with this idea I try to come to rule. I think of philosophy as supreme - and of myself supreme only in as far as I philosophize - go inward. I cant bopth be supreme and command downward; but I can cast possibilities to the mind, which are paths and destinies. I see Greece as having come into being as such, and I continue this line with a joy that is incomparable to any other, the very joy of philosophy.

I do not take philosophy or wisdom as possibilities, but as givens, now on Earth, this moment, this opportunity, us together- and who knows all the others - to me there is nothing abstract about philosophical rulerships ambition, it is purely personal, about values, and self-valuing.

A tyranny is collectivism; the collective is united by a sublimated passion mixed with fear. But our form is self-valuing, the fire itself that builds the entity.

Quote :
While it's easy to be cynical and dismiss that idea, I do happen to agree. "The people" should keep raising their standards of life and in so doing come closer to a need for truth both in life's beautiful gifts as well as in the ennui that follows achieving quality of life with regard to material need. The ennui of "rich white America" that is a well known side effect of capitalism here can be seen as a kind of breeding ground for an elevated standard to come, for the need for truth.

Yes, teaching is the only form of government there has ever existed - we've forgotten this as we became the greatest power.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
individualized
Tower
Tower
individualized

Posts : 5737
: 6982
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : The Stars

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeMon Oct 10, 2016 8:41 pm

Parodites wrote:
" Zizek's point here was that the logic of Christianity is deeply Hegelian in how Christianity created a space for human meaning beyond the cultural symbolic order, beyond the dynamics of the family and beyond the state. "


My problem with this in general is reading Christianity independently from the Judaic underpinning from which it evolved. The basic idea in Judaism is that the mundane affairs of family life are themselves vehicles through which the divine re-participates in the creation; that one can literally lower and raise the universe simply by being a good father or wife, etc. So if the emergence of Christ is read against that more ancient theological background, Christ does not represent the opening of a symbolic possibility beyond the mundane reality of state and family life, but rather, an inversion of that symbolic order; in Judaism, man expresses the divinity latent in nature through good acts, while, after Christ, that latent divinity is no longer latent, it is actual, thus "the kingdom of heaven is within you." Agape or the spirit of god, brotherly love, becomes the main focus of worship- and man expresses divinity through that, rather than by fulfilling stifling and static social roles deemed as good in the Judaic tradition. So Christ is not an empty signifier between god and man here or a radical negativity, rather, he expresses the divine actualization or radical positivity of humanity as agape or love, so that man no longer needs to relate himself to God through the established forms of society/ "filling their proper place" in Judaism (symbolically castrating himself) in order to express the divine.

Yes, this is also in line with what I was trying to say, although I probably expressed it inadequately. "Christ does not represent the opening of a symbolic possibility beyond the mundane reality of state and family life, but rather, an inversion of that symbolic order", in fact I think these two things are the same thing: the opening of the (new) symbolic possibility beyond the mundane is equal to the inversion of the (old) symbolic order as such. The old order it is taken as a givenness and meant to symbolize God itself, directly as you say, but when Christ inverted this formula he placed the symbolic itself at the heart of human being because, once freed from the old tyranny of God-symbolizing, the reality behind the older symbolic order, the family and social relations, etc., was freed into more direct being. Christ divorces humans from being inextricably, unconsciously bound up in social and family relations and thereby Christ frees that in those relations which was actually real and always there to begin with. The old order which bound everything up tightly together had obscured this truer reality. This is why Christ was not saying we should seriously hate our parents and brothers and sisters in order to love Christ, in that famous saying of his, it isn't meant to be taken literally like that. He was saying that we are now free to love beyond the bounds of what had formerly been (falsely) called love. Love didn't really exist before Christ. Love is radical distance which respects its other as itself categorically, as an immediate metaphysical truth, like with what you say about mutual affirmation I think.

Essentially, the philosophical rational notion of equality among categorical partners. All human beings are, potentially, categorical partners in this way. Christ was not saying that all people are equal, he was saying that all people equally share the same category and regardless of how things actually turn out in practice. And this equalization of the human race under the same category is at the metaphysical level replacing the old idea of God: God in pre-Christ is just the stand-in concept for the supposed absolute reality of the "big Other", whereas God in post-Christ is the proper distance from that Other so we can start to form real relations with the actual others in our immediate lives. That is how I see it anyway.

Quote :
Christ removes the distance between man and the divine. Neither Christ or God exist as the radical negativity of the other; they are both negated on the basis of a mutual affirmation, so that the affirmation can be reified through the Christ-God's death as agape or brother love. This love or agape allows things like family life and the mundane affairs of living to become active rather than passive expressions of the divine as they were in Judaism: that is the fundamental gift of Christ.

I agree. I think this is also Zizek's point with his reading of Hegel and Christianity that I was talking about in the OP here.

Quote :
And this is my system. Two being(s) are irreducible and cannot be brought into a negative relation to one another- because they are both affirmations of Being, that is, positivity, as Christ and God; negative reflection * isolates the positive core which they share by negating them both at the level of the symbolic- hence it wasn't god and man that died on the cross, it was the god-man and god; finally that positivity is reified, or reproduced in a new form.

* [ For Holderlin, all knowledge stems from an original division by reflection within athesis
through which Being is positioned as an intellectual intuition, that is, not as identity, but
as a transcendental relation between the subject and object that cannot be synthetically
unified within consciousness, and whose specification can therefor only take the form of
tragic poeticism, an aesthetic of the mourning introduced into the Eden of nature with the
fall of man into reflection and immanence. In my view, because man can reproduce
intellectually his own lack, through what I call negative-reflectivity, he must be initially
divided from himself in pre-reflection. This lack is man's Being. The transcendental
relation of subject and object becomes in this view an immanent relation between man's
consciousness and the Being of that consciousness, with the reproduction within
consciousness of the lack representing the reification of the Being of consciousness- a
reification of the transcendent object missing in a Nature mournful over the absence of
the divine.]

In other words: Christ does not provide a radical possibility beyond the mundane, family etc. Christ allows the mundane to be expressed as the radical metaphysical possibility.

I think your view and the Zizek-Hegelian view are essentially the same here. "In my view, because man can reproduce
intellectually his own lack, through what I call negative-reflectivity, he must be initially
divided from himself in pre-reflection. This lack is man's Being." --this is pointing to the psychoanalytic insight that the concept of symbolic castration is also saying: "Lacan turns Freudian castration into “symbolic castration.” The latter, rather than being a real or imagined scene in which a specific threat to bodily integrity is issued, designates the dual somatic and psychical discombobulating effects upon the premature human animal caused by insertion into and subjection to surrounding socio-symbolic contexts, of being made to depend on the foreignness [distance, lack, unknowable] of signifiers and everything they bring with them." (Plato.sanford.edu).

The human being already lacks something, even before it is a human being, and this lack manifests itself as a gap within thinking whereby that which in fact determines this thinking is, initially, entirely obscured from thinking itself; we cannot think our thinking directly, but even more problematically we cannot think the base of thought itself. Philosophy is the only cure for this that I know of. Psychoanalysis is on par here, because psychoanalysis is basically a system for producing philosophical insights in people who are not philosophers.

But note that in your above description there are two lacks: there is the original lack, and then there is the lack in thought that arises because of the original lack; thought is a reflective process that reproduces the original lack first indirectly and then, finally in the finished philosopher, directly. Any true philosophy must always take stock of this original lack through its direct conscious understanding of the lack in thought, because philosophy proceeds from a high precipice of thought-substances and gradually works its way back down through these and to the ground; philosophy must build up its mountains of concepts and ideas only so that philosophy can gain the possibility of climbing back down through these to return to the original ground, a ground that was only possible to even glimpse, let alone ultimately grasp, because we had to first build the massive mountain from which perspective and height we could finally see this ground. This is also Hegel's idea of absolute recoil: the "fall" (original sin) that by falling creates that from which it is a fall. There was no perfect original Absolute, no pure state of grace, no initial utopia; we actually create this 'perfect state' only because we fall from it. In positive philosophical terms: only because we build the mountain away from the ground do we become able to actually see the ground qua ground, to even become aware of its existence (and therefore our own existence, too).

Quote :
A similar inversion politically is possible. Man does not express his will positively by relating it to law under a king; man expresses law by positively relating his will to a leader. The idea is that law itself is not a passive symbolic structure but an active real structure. Both the individual and the leader are pure affirmations of a basic ontos, law; the structure of the new polis serves to negate them both so that the positive core they share can be isolated and reified in a new form, as "the people," a political category that was only properly articulated in America and which represents law in its activity rather than passivity.

I am not sure what you mean here, are you saying that human being is the realization of a purely rational-logical structure ("law"), a kind of metaphysical Being that becomes real through the human beings that have been formed according to it? Please elaborate this point so I can grasp better what you mean.

 

___________
“Be clever, Ariadne! ...
You have little ears; you have my ears:
Put a clever word in them! —
Must one not first hate oneself, in order to love oneself? ...
I am your labyrinth ...”.  -N

“A man is not great if he is not small, and he is not small if he is not great. Concepts flirt with the loss of their significance in the oscillation between ambiguous states, and this is in part the function and purpose of concepts.” -Primer on Meaning
Back to top Go down
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7296
: 8671
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeTue Oct 11, 2016 3:13 am

I thnk what P is sayinng is more simple; in general I think that the "Trumpian" position is toward more simplicity, and away from metaphysical differentiations of man from man; as I read it, P is simply saying that a leader does not have to be a symbolic-metaphysical representation of a process that is not entirely human, at least not entirely fed by true humans, positive beings - but that a leader can simply be a strong man that is actually worthy of being followed, because he does good stuff. I at least think that this is what we need to be getting back to  - the system, and I don't mean the corporate system but the philosophic-metaphysical system, is failing us.

A strong leaders is not a fuhrer. I am also a leader, here, as are the both of you. We command respect in each other, and in ones less advanced, and there is no principle of law or humanity or society that we obey to indirectly; we simply know how to value, and express ourselves directly, most directly of all to those in charge of whatever matters. I tend write so that politicians can make sense of it, and I know we're being seen. Tough this is just the beginning, this thing we do here is government of the future, no less - there is absolutely no more conscientious and human agency active on the planet than this, I am sure. In happy case, we may have some equals. But we dont need them, we have enough here to make another round of 'Founding Fathering', pretty soon.

We have ethics. That is what, to my mind, Hegel and Marx negated. They did not start from the generative logic of the individual, therefore they necessarily disacknowledge the individual, and his logos.

I'd like to focus on that point, that Hegel did not put forth the self-valuing principle before he started juggling around with these archetypes supposedly referring to humans.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
Parodites
Tower
Tower
Parodites

Posts : 790
: 853
Join date : 2011-12-11

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeTue Oct 11, 2016 10:53 am

Lacan's Lack is the lack of a primary object in eroto-genesis. The consequent dependency on foreign signifiers is different than the negativity or lack I imagine. For, in Lacan, the subject is split from itself- it cannot rise up to the category of representation beyond reflection so no primacy objectification appears in erogeneity:

[ ... the Lacanian model- a model which is all based on the idea
that erogeneity remains nebulous and that no definite primacy ever develops between the
anal, oral, genital, etc. stages. For him each libidinal circuit merely "rotates" around a
center of gravity without ever attaining any object, generating a subjective awareness of
the impulse only at the completion of each cycle, which splits the subject into conscious
ego and unconscious.]

For me, the subject is split not from itself but from the Object, namely in pre-reflectivity. With reflectivity, the ego represents its division from the Object (the shadow of the real) as itself. This auto-representation is my version of Holderlin's intellectual intuition. The basic lack lies in the fact that the act of representation always cleaves the subject from its object, until it reproduces its own negativity as its object in transcendental specification, that empty object taking the form of the god-idea. In the mortis imago or image of death, it perfectly represents this division from the Object and finds its representation. This representation is the material of the symbolic order, human civilization and culture. The death anxiety and erotic pathos appears with it:


[ In pre-reflectivity,
as in the Greek consciousness, the self exists for the world beyond itself, and
kenotically experiences the unity of subject and object as its own self-emptying into
creation or representation, reading itself back into the forms it has liberated from the
dance of ages as from out of the text of the old pantheon, but in reflectivity it begins to
exist for itself and mirrors its own separation from things in the image of death, death
which is a final separation of subject and object, and of objects themselves from one
another, losing the capability of representing its deepest interior contents, becoming
secretive to use Kierkegaard's terminology and aware of the hidden, nameless God of
Abraham, in whose abyss it finds something of its own emptiness. The moment the ego
associates itself in pre-reflection as the subject of a specific object, namely a metonym, so
a loss occurs, a fall from grace, and the potency of organo-affective unity is transformed
by the attempt to fill the narcissistic wound from the basic life-force into a negative
kinesis, a thanatos or tension which the ego attempts to push out of consciousness in
reflectivity by reproducing the empty ego-object of the metonym for new objects, a task
for which Eros emerges, until the whole kingdom of the body is precipitated as a series of
metonyms in erogeneity. ]



As that representation or symbolic order becomes more evolved throughout the derivations of the epistemes, the self is finally convinced that it is this representation of its division from the object, its division from Being or basic negativity to use philosophic terms.

[The narcissistic wound imposed by the catastrophe of Nature, which
births the real-ego in the pre-reflective infantile progression, ie. the psyche or
psychoanalytic subject, brings with it the death-anxiety which serves as the motive of
somatic regression insofar as the transcendent wish of the reflective childhood
progression has not successfully reproduced its own empty object, for it is upon the basis
of this object, ie. the mother-figure, that the negative kinesis of libidinal tristia generates
the ideal specification of the ego, ie. dike or the philosophical subject, ... ]


So this post-reflective or representable self essentially exists as an articulation of the very forces whose tension gives rise to it. :

[ ... the episteme is therefor much
like the tautegory of Schelling in that it represents (in my logic, it reproduces through
negative reflectivity) the very conceptual oppositions that gives rise to it. ]

[As in Schelling, for this subject Being is seen as merely
the temporary object of resistance against which the finite self sets itself against itself in
reflectivity and develops into de-objectified geist, the Spirit that can be known only in its
objectless activity, like the Atemwende or respiration and expiration of spirit and flesh, a
counter-word set against Ousia like that uttered by Lucile in Danton, accounted in Celan's
Meridian as indicative of the self that goes out beyond itself to seek itself, to seek its
deobjectified geist.

While thanatos aims to return the ego to the peace of inorganic existence, a pre-reflective
unity that never existed even in memory, a wish expressed unconsciously by the vision of
heaven, nirvana, etc., Eros would aim ultimately to express the totality of human nature, a
project jeopardized insofar as erotic pathos has regressed into the furious defense of the
god-ego in primary narcissism, in the face of Death and reality, leading to the self's
fragmentation and both the suspension and preservation of feeling- if only in a kind of
death, holding love back from extinction yet also from life, to recall Freud's Mourning
and Melancholy. The task of Eros recalls that of Schelling's lost identity for whose
existence the identity of the self is only a symptom, in that Love, too, is a symptom for all
that love has lost, cannot accomplish and has failed to gain.
]


The ego in my writing is similarly created by the very problem of representation which the existence of the ego creates.



To articulate the self without that illusion of representation- the illusion of the real or the ego, requires a break in the dialectic (which is what I mean by "reproducing the negativity of thought as the object of thought, as thought's transcendent signification." )-  

[ Yet for the very same reason that Eros has no place for the time of pleasure's
arrival, it has no place for the recognition of death, for death which opens the white-lilied
heart of love and steals the breath from the gasping lightning, whose thunder never peals
over the gorge torn open in the flesh of longing: one's death confesses one's love, but
one's love cannot confess one's death. ]

-- requires an act of love through which alone death can be psychically incorporated, for the mortis imago or image of death within which the ego represents itself to itself in the shadow of the real, is only a kind of reflective fabrication preventing man from establishing his true positive orientation:


[ Love is a break in the dialectic, for love is the negation not of
the negation but of the ideal whose content is affirmed through the negation, for the
negation is our own self, or the intact body that is repaired by being broken apart- for it
was made whole by means of the loss of what was most integral to it. ]


And when I mentioned "the people" as a political category that was first articulated in American constitutional philosophy, I meant that it serves there a similar purpose that agape served Christ, as a break in the dialectic.

 

___________
ΑΝΤΗΡΟΠΑΡΙΟΝ
in formis perisseia mutilata in omnia perisarkos mutilatum; 
omniformis protosseia immutilatum in protosarkos immutilata. 

[                                          The Ecstasies of Zosimos, Tablet
                                                                                     the First.]

BTHYS TOU ANAHAT KHYA-PANDEMAI.


                                        -- Hermaedion, in: the Liber Endumiaskia.
Back to top Go down
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
Fixed Cross

Posts : 7296
: 8671
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Acrux

Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitimeTue Oct 11, 2016 6:02 pm

"The People" is not actually a category, as it isn't juxtaposed against something that negates it. It is a direct address of.... well, the people. There isnt another way of addressing people.

We could say they are juxtaposed with the government, but the government is of and by the people, only therefore, for the people. They are the same substance, but their selfvaluing excess (moral values) are pressed upwards by self-valuing difference which seems close to what you mean with antidialectic, rather than resolved into each other, and rather than that the people and government are resolved by each other, like in a categorivcal divided society is the case, time and time again.

Capital has both ruined and increased aristocracy - if I am totally definitive about my aim, it is to restore aristocracy ad a fluid system defined by osmosis, namely (economic) equality before the law, and simply allowing for industries to create wealth and a positive inequality, that causes the Dream.

The most genius thing a nation ever did was the identify with the term Dream. What  Magicians. The identification of values with that state certainly induces a lot of alpha wavelength, and causes pure fluidity, and a very functional irrationality; it completely dampens the need for morality. Of course, this only goes for free spirits. The others do seem to not carry the burden of flux, of self-responsibility, very well -- but the United States will nevertheless determine the fate of the world into the next centuries - pride is essential. Pride is what activated Marxism - it made Communism, and that was good. But as soon as it was given the means to embody a System, Stalin and Mao were more or less exact logical operators of that logic; the history of Stalins purges of the original revolutionary generation is the most palpably theoretical dialectical materialism after Mao's Great Leap Forward. The strange thing is that indeed the very theory of Marx exudes a pride - the same with Hegel. Most philosophies are more subdued in this, less pre-emptively imposing, more of a lure to the right kind of lovers. Marx does not include the notion of love, which is just a very pure and potent, challenging selfvaluing, into his calculations, which makes them all categorically false... (kek)

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




Christological  Empty
PostSubject: Re: Christological    Christological  Icon_minitime

Back to top Go down
 
Christological
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Before The Light :: Storm :: Logic-
Jump to: