Posts tagged dinguses
Posts tagged dinguses
Commenters keep telling me that my problem is just that I haven’t read enough continental philosophy. While I am of the opinion that I have read more than enough drivel to last me a lifetime, (I’ll sometimes encounter drivel in analytic philosophy, but it’s reassuring to study in a field where ridiculousness is the exception rather than the rule,) I have decided to indulge the critics and read a definitive continental work. Maybe if I read more, I will “get it”! Maybe I will have a revelation, convert to the other side, and after the obligatory period of sackcloth, ashes and self-flagellation, I will awaken. Indeed, as a butterfly emerges from its chrysalis, I will emerge reborn as someone who non-sarcastically babbles on about biopower at the drop of a hat. Fingers crossed.
So, just to clarify, I can either love someone for “the things they are like their beauty or intelligence”, or I can love them for their… haecceity?
The following is from Francois Laruelle’s A Summary of Non-Philosophy. This is as good a point as any to laugh derisively at the very idea of “non-philosophy” as a practice, getting as many giggles/guffaws as possible out of the way before the soul-crushing inanity of it all sinks in.
[P]hilosophy is regulated in accordance with a principle higher than that of Reason: the Principle of sufficient philosophy. The latter expresses philosophy’s absolute autonomy, its essence as self-positing/donating/naming/deciding/grounding, etc. It guarantees philosophy’s command of the regional disciplines and sciences. Ultimately, it articulates the idealist pretension of philosophy as that which is able to at least co-determine that Real which is most radical.
Capitalization for extra SUPER DUPER EMPHASIS? Check. Inability to pick one fucking word to describe a concept? Check. Liberal use of standard continental buzzwords? Check.
Thank you, Francois, for bringing to our attention the nasty dirty incestuous narcissistic masturbatory nature of philosophy. I know my main goal in life is to (at least co-)determine that REAL which is most RADICAL!!!111!!!11!!!!1!!!111!!!!!11!
Fuck REASON. Philosophy is a totally different and self-contained thing, in which we all suck our own dicks. The end.
I don’t know who originally said this. I’m not sure if it’s continental philosophy, eastern philosophy or some sort of theory, but bullshit is bullshit.
STFU, pretentious facebook “friend”. As if farmville requests and Lady Gaga lyrics weren’t bad enough. Asshole.
I can’t add much to a friend of mine’s response to the post quoted above.
Yes, and physicists who study Black Holes have forgotten that their study is a means to an end. They spend too much time trying to figure out what Black Holes are and if they exist and not enough time directly building Black Hole technology.
Exactly. Where is my black hole technology?! I demand it. Also “wisdom”, but no groundwork to help us know what the fuck we’re even talking about.
This is from Nelson Maldonado-Torres’ "Post-continental Philosophy: Its Definition, Contours, and Fundamental Sources".
It’s essentially 30 pages of difficult to parse wankery, but one fascinating revelation is that (continental-style) philosophy, when done in the Caribbean etc., is actually post-continental philosophy because it’s not, y’know, done on the European continent.
In fact, our idea of continents itself is a tricky tricky illusion. Because it’s not like we divide up the world based on landmarks and topography and shit. It is all because of racism. Yes.
North America, South America, Europe, Africa, and Asia? Don’t forget Australia, don’t forget Antarctica? FUCK THAT. Your entire preschool education was a lie. Because of metageography.
Honestly, I hope this works. I’m curious to see how Zizek’s intentional attempts at humor measure up to the inadvertent comic genius of his philosophizing.
So the internets have been buzzing(ish) with news of the New York Times’ new philosophy-related online forum, The Stone. Gawker (strangely enough) had a post on it and Brian Leiter referred to its moderator, Simon Critchley as "a complete hack". After reading Critchley’s first article, I’m inclined to agree.
Here is an extremely in-depth summary:
What is a philosopher? This one philosopher, Thales, fell into a well. He was looking at the sky. This is a metaphor. Silly philosophers. Water clocks are stealing your time, except only if you’re a lawyer. Lawyers have no souls, but they are successful, unlike PHILOSOPHERS. Silly philosophers, you have time, but you also don’t, but mostly you do. Your heads are always in the clouds. This is important: PHILOSOPHY KILLS. This is because Socrates once died, and he was a philosopher. Also, Bertrand Russell didn’t get a job once. Because of blasphemy! Silly philosophers. You are so anti-establishment and whatnot. This is why the Athenians killed Socrates. Were they right? I dunno. Whatevs.
The philosopher’s clumsiness in worldly affairs makes him appear stupid or, “gives the impression of plain silliness.” We are left with a rather Monty Pythonesque definition of the philosopher: the one who is silly.
Thales believed that water was the universal substance out of which all things were composed. Water was Thales’ philosophers’ stone, as it were. Therefore, by falling into a well, he inadvertently presses his basic philosophical claim.
Pushing this a little further, we might say that to philosophize is to take your time, even when you have no time, when time is constantly pressing at your back. The busy readers of The New York Times will doubtless understand this sentiment. It is our hope that some of them will make the time to read The Stone.
Far from eloquent, Socrates insists, the pettifogger is “perplexed and stutters.” Of course, one might object, that ridiculing someone’s stammer isn’t a very nice thing to do.
Thank you, Critchley, for regaling us with anecdotes and making philosophers out to be otherworldly clueless schmucks as you babble about some water/time metaphor forever and make jokes about speech impediments while sucking up to the NYT readership.
P.S. Stanley Fish, don’t think I haven’t noticed your column in the NY Times. I’m coming for you next(ish).