- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
kFoyauextlH.
-
AuthorPosts
-
28/04/2017 at 08:47 #17897
Sometimes, philosophy can be incredibly abstract and difficult to understand- for example, Derrida, Lacan and Foucault may not make much sense to someone who is new to them without feminism, but even then, they still require careful attention.
Explaining things in too much concreteness can be misleading however and recent ‘feminists’ such as Camille Paglia, have criticised post-structuralists for being too abstract and taking the action out of activism.
I think too much concreteness is a childish way of thinking, everything has to be in neat categories and without ambiguity which will require further contemplation, but too much abstraction can make ideas in philosophy near impossible to grasp and can lead to anti-academic attitudes coming to the surface.
28/04/2017 at 09:57 #19110Yeah. If I think about it, I am really talking about physically literal things, as real as it gets, poetics have confused so many people, as well as taking things literally in a foolish way too, and when being concrete only means giving in to modern scientific notions of atomism and the actuality of time and whatever then its just a whole new world of blocked communication from what I mean by the Real.
28/04/2017 at 10:24 #19107The people who need to read and understand Deleuze and Guattari in regards to thier critique of capitalism have the disadvantages that are the result of capitalism itself! Also, ironically, D&G did such a good job in A Thousand Plateaus that corporations use thier critique to make capital stronger! This is a critique mentioned by Rosi Braidotti.
Alfredo Bonanno suggests the anarchist has to remain silent most of the time as we are unable to determine if the reciever is an enforcer.
28/04/2017 at 14:57 #19111Awesome. I am always interested in strengthening the opposing view in order that we ourselves are forced to come up with better solutions, structure, or directives except in cases of war rather than intellectualism where doing so might be directly detrimental to comfort and success. Conversion being again a death drive, a desire for cessation of actual progress factors or combustion in an engine.
[hr]
Gosh I dislike that things should keep being pushed backwards or further away by our own efforts.24/05/2017 at 07:56 #19108Coming back to this…
The cover information for Nick Land’s Fanged Noumena tells of a radical exit from academia into ‘theory fiction’ or ‘speculative realism’ – so this hyperlogical, crazy philosophy should really only be in the hands of artists and writers of sci-fi, but he seems to have been welcomed and adopted in the hyperreal community of the alt-right.
Irresponsible bastard if you ask me, I find him fascinating, but @”Rubsy” was listening to an audiobook of his last night and it isn’t pretty, race realism, anti-equality etc, although his critique of democracy is spot on.
24/05/2017 at 09:03 #19109Land’s predictions for Modernity seem very harsh and distinct. His framing is interesting, as I can see it every where, especially in the alt right movement online. I am guessing that certain pundits have read him, like Molyneaux.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
