Sublime Thinking

Hot off the microphone, the entire Kairos series in podcast form. Including a short introduction. Comment, criticize, etc. Please!

Rowan G. Tepper - Introduction to kairos by rowan-g-tepper

Kairos I: Exemplary Acts by rowan-g-tepper

Kairos II: Kairos at the End of Modernity by rowan-g-tepper

Kairos III: La révolution post-historique by rowan-g-tepper

Kairos IV: The Whatever Messiah: We're Who We've Been Waiting For by rowan-g-tepper

Parts I and III have previously been posted. Enjoy! Discuss! Goddamnit! You don't have to read, just listen!


   Pre-order a copy of The Immanence of Myth, published by Weaponized in July 2011.

Hello everyone,

I doubt this is the right place to post this so I apologize if it's wrong.

I recently applied for graduate programs in philosophy all over the US. I realized at some point that I was doing about an hour of research a day and just storing it for myself. This seemed a bit on the selfish side so I decided that I would publish my findings on this blog. This blog is my research into how to survive as a career philosopher.

http://philosorapters.blogspot.com/


This blog is designed to keep you updated on professional news and movements in philosophy today, trolled from many site over the internet.
Firstly, particular focus is on the professional aspects of philosophy such as how to create a good C/V, prepare ones application, Publish papers, and understand hiring practices.
Secondly, I'm also quite interested in why philosophy, specifically critical thinking, is not taught in high school, and other issues in the profession.


I will be posting my findings that I think could be beneficial to other undergrads, graduates as well as post-doc students.

Please feel free to comment, criticize, or suggest research material.

Yet again, I apologize if this is posted in the wrong place,

I hope this blog might help philosophy students prepare for the job market if that is where they want to go.

All the best,

William Parkhurst
http://philosorapters.blogspot.com/

This  is experimental direction in a science and the literature through merge of poetry and a science (philosophy). This direction did not exist till now in the pure state. Earlier there was a direction in poetry? Philosophical poetry (Empedocl, V. Solovyov, M.Voloshin, I.Brodsky, O.Khajyam, etc.), but did not exist directions in a science of philosophy in rhyfm philosophical gamble. One of representatives of German classical philosophy F.Schelling, named a similar direction didactic poetry.

The method of rhyming of philosophical positions is entered for popularization and generalization of philosophical questions which arise in connection with disclosing of the basic concepts describing surrounding and a private world of the person. Therefore, in any way it is impossible to name poetry and verses Poesophy, even, in spite of the fact that externally poeses (so I name each separate product in Poesophy) Are similar to verses. In the Poesophy I try to reflect where probably to generalize, and in process of intellectual opportunities to develop, ideas of representatives of philosophy and a science since the most ancient times (an ancient philosophy, and ancient religious doctrines) finishing modern concepts of a postmodernism and poststructuralism and existentialism, not passing thus medieval and German classical philosophy, sociology, Russian historiosophy, and scientific divinity.

Will

 

The will is authority above itself,

the authority is will above others.

The will recovers a direction,

and doing the world destiny,

freedom of destiny in the world-

the will inspires in a pressure.

The duty as the center of will -  Good Honour,

freedom as the center of a duty – The good Gospel’s message.

The reason is a duty a measure,

a belief is a freedom’s share,

outside of reason will -belief,

but in reason belief - will.

 

 

 

Time

 

Time is something an average  between

that the friend the friend is pregnant:

movement and an idea.

The first the last the clothes called time,

dresses in sense.

Temporariness inside of sense - moves,

immovable in sense - It is thought.

I also do the conclusion

that time is think of a seed:

outside of an idea time - movement,

but in an idea movement - time.

 

 

Hi everybody!

I'm not sure if this is the proper place to ask this question but here goes.  I've been doing my research on Jean-Luc Marion.  As far as I understand him, he believes that Husserlian and Heideggerian phenomenology is not phenomenological enough.  This makes him jump to a third reduction:  back to the givenness of the things themselves.  Instead of focusing on the objectness of objects (Husserl) and Dasein (Heidegger), Marion goes back to the very givenness of the givens as they are given to us.  Insofar as these givens are given, they attest to phenomenality.  In this sense, phenomenality and givenness amount to the same thing.  He proceeds with his reduction of the self, and comes up with l'interloque which he developed in his book Reduction and Givenness.  In his two succeeding books in his phenomenological triptych Being Given and In Excess, he continues this thinking and comes up with l'attributaire, l'adonne, and finally, l'amant.  We are thus witnesses to phenomenon.  His phenomenology eventually amounts to a philosophy that has its apex in love.  We are thus loved.  Knowing that we are loved, we are called to love in return (though not as simple as this formulation).  To me, everything up to here is clear.  But, with situations such as tragedies, natural (Katrina) or otherwise (Mogadishu, Rwanda), I feel that he is keeping silent about issues on senseless violence. What can his philosophy of givenness say about these? 

Can anybody suggest readings that might answer this? If you have files (or even links) that you can send me, that would be of great help, too.

Thanks a lot!

 

I've heard a lot of commentary on the relationship between Deleuze and Lacan, and there are a few things I'm trying to get straight. Hopefully someone here will know enough about the two to help me out. I'm going to outline my understanding of their relationship to the best of knowledge with the hope of figuring if I'm in the wrong direction.

I've read in one place that Deleuze "critically incorporates the work of Lacan" and in another place that he "wipes the floor with psychoanalysis." He was clearly critical of psychoanalysis in general, but the Introduction (it might be the Preface) of Anti-Oedipus comments parenthetically that Deleuze was more ambivalent about Lacan than other psychoanalysts, which seems to cast some doubt on the position that he was solely hostile. I've heard elsewhere that Deleuze has a more "positive" epistemology in which subjectivity is an active, self-proliferating force, as opposed to Lacan's more "negative epistemology", in which the formation of subjectivity is the result of the instating of a lack in the nascent subject, and that the resultant, uniquely human subjectivity is simply the subject's attempt to retain a lost, primal enjoyment.

Lacan argues that the "master signifier", the Name of the Father or the "Phallic Signifier", needed to get the job done, is essential to the formation of subjectivity. Without this instating of desire-as-lack (i.e., "this is mine, you can't have it, find your own") the would-be subject is just autistic, catatonic, psychotic, etc. The lack, the realization by the subject that he or she is lacking in something, sets the wheels of desire into motion as the subject sets out to attain the lost object (never to attain it, lest subjectivity cease).

Deleuze seems to frame psychoanalysis as complicit with capitalism and oppressive, bureaucratic culture. He sees a schizophrenic (a psychotic) as someone who is able to resist the oppressive (and in his opinion, unnecessary as far as subjectivity is concerned) master signifier of the phallus, but who then has no foundation on which to stand, and thus crumbles into madness. Deleuze instead seems to suggest that the patient break from the shackles of an authoritarian culture, fully individuate himself, and embrace a newer, healthier life-philosophy (exactly how this subjectivity would look as opposed to the one proposed by Lacan, I'm not sure).

Didn't Lacan chastise the "American", "capitalist", "conformist" values of ego psychologists and argue that the analyst was supposed to help individuate the patient and help him find the "cause of his own desire?" Did Deleuze necessarily consider Lacanian psychoanalysis an "authoritarian" institution in in spite of Lacan's revolutionary, anti-conformist tone?

I see in the debate between them a parallel of the rationalist/empiricist debate. Lacan would be a rationalist (Dylan Evans associates him with such a position in A Introductory Dictionary to Lacanian Psychoanalysis) and Deleuze would be the radical empiricist (indeed, he self-identifies as such). My thought is that the notion of the phallic signifier as constitutive of subjectivity proceeds from an a priori, rationalist standpoint which Deleuze instead sees as arbitrarily imposed (it's hard to determine empirically whether or not the subject has been "barred" by the phallic signifier). That said, can the two positions be reconciled? Deleuze is (in)famous for his "bastard" readings of old thinkers, which seek to bring out their revolutionary potential (as he does, for example, with the arch-rationalists, Spinoza and Leibniz).

Deleuze's "wild" empiricism seems similar to phenomenology in that both attend to lived experience, practicing an empiricism that does not leave subjectivity out of the picture; yet Deleuze seems hostile to phenomenology. Why?

There is a 12 part video set on youtube by Zizek called "Why Only an Atheist Can Believe." I watched most of it some time ago and remember hearing him talk about during one of the segments the the pagan tendencies of many of the prominent Christian fundamentalists, particularly with regard to disasters like the tsunami and 9/11.

He said something about Christianity being actually quite opposed not only to such an interpretation, but to any interpretation at all. I think. I remember being really intrigued by it but I can't find which one it was. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? Is there some written account of this argument of his on the internet? I'm thinking there must be since he repeats himself so often.

So I just got my Masters Degree in Philosophy from BC last August, got into two PhD programs, but had to make major changes in my plans after discovering that neither program came with funding, and that funding was impossible to obtain (I will forever curse the Marshall Scholarship for this), even on a second application, after I taught an intermediate level course at URI starting a week from getting my degree. Too bad I didn't realize this sooner! I've wound up having to take a second year off to re-apply, and perhaps to shift to Comparative Literature or some interdisciplinary program. Thankfully I just landed a part-time research assistant gig that'll get me continuous academic library access.

Survival as an academic outside of school was really rough at the outset, at least after my course ended (and there are far fewer adjunct positions in the spring). I found myself taking on 4 to 6 part-time jobs at any given time to make ends meet and still be able to read and write (and avoid the 9-5, which is death to me), writing software, working as a physicist's research assistant; anything to avoid an office or a temp agency. Now, at least, I've got three part-time jobs that are more than manageable, plus a gig doing some translation.

But what's really come as a surprise is that, as I am in the process of moving from one part of town to another, when I decided to sell off my old and duplicate academic books on eBay, I was met with much success. Moreover, I've found that most used bookshops don't bother to find out whether books in foreign languages are first editions, or special in any way. This motivated me to activate my latent entrepreneurial streak and go "all-in," as they say, and go into business with an online shop.

I'm here not merely to advertise it (I really have some treasures available), but also to propose to share the wealth (such as it is) - and this is NOT A SCAM - anyone referred to me from this (let me know via email or a comment), or making a purchase as a result, will receive either a 15% cut of the profits or a discount in the same amount.

Here's the store URL: http://stores.ebay.com/BooksBucher… ; I'm currently specializing in foreign language early editions, but there's a huge variety, and some forty more books going into the system tonight. I hope this is taken well.

X-Posted to Academics_Anon, Radical Thinking & Erotism