Dematerialisation.

[luka]

check the bits about double truth.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/ibnrushd/

like i say, if you explain to me why it excites you and what it has enabled you to understand, the way it twisted your perspective, how it opened your eyes, i will be very happy. but i dont want to read it now.

explain its relevance to dematerialisation. fit the pieces together. make it work.

 

[luka]

the trick then is to take this conception of the eternal prime mover, of Ghazali's idea that god's knowledge changes, of the existentialism of Mulla Sadra and see how they are shaped by history. One has to see the unity of opposites in their historical dynamic.

It wouldn't really make sense to be godless in the 13th century, for instance. yet it does today. why that has to be *dialectically* investigated, and a true dialectical investigation will also go against itself in illustrating the interconnections.

you must know that to me this can't be anything but word salad. it doesn't have any content for me. it's white noise.

 

[thirdform]

we're not really talking abut dematerialisation anymore though are we. We're talking about an abstracted notion of feeling.

 

[luka]

make it relevant and make it comprehensible. slow it down. work out what is communicable from your own internal process and what is too private to be shared and understood.

dont use names, use ideas. for people who know the names a name can act as shorthand for an idea or a system of thought, but not otherwise.

 

[luka]

we're not really talking abut dematerialisation anymore though are we. We're talking about an abstracted notion of feeling.

we're talking about how to talk as a precursor for talking about dematerialisation.

 

[thirdform]

i can tell you why given my current conditions of alienation, why say the digital music of Alva Noto makes more sense than Haim, for instance. But what you want is to erase this difference, what you want is a reconfiguration of the alienation, not a prefiguration of its abolition, even if this is a naive faith.

 

[thirdform]

what you're asking for is a digital psychedelia.

Fine. so what happens when you (to borrow one of your favourite terms) hhit the brick wall of fruitless intensification?

 

[luka]

no. this is just it. im not asking for anything. this is why im getting frustrated. im not asking for anything im not justifying anything im not advocating anything.

 

[luka]

if people, listen to me, understand, then disagree with me, sometimes i get angry because i am a giant child, but i try not to. i do try not to.

but this is different cos people, not just you, almost everyone, is telling me im saying the things i have gone out of my way to explain im not saying.

and it feels strange. it feels like im somehow falling out of sync with reality. like im at an odd angle to everyone else.

 

[thirdform]

that's not possible mate this isn't my cunting philosophy professor who i wanted to punch in the face for denying the philosophical subject. and why i dropped out of uni and developed a drinking habit.
love u m8 don't go down this route you are not qualified enough to confront the demons. settle down, find someone like me who is qualified to exorcise them for you.

 

[luka]

so im assuming you dont beleive that material conditions, the facts of peoples lives and of the socities they are embedded in affect

a)the way they perceive

b)their values

c)their thoughts

d)the things they make, be it skyscrapers, songs, television programmes, online thinkpieces

etc etc etc

becasue if you dont believe output is affected by, basically determined by, input
then that is where the problem lies cos that is the thesis of the thread

 

[luka]

the thesis of the thread is

input determines output

as inputs change outputs change

what changes are discernible in the current outputs (products etc) of our societies? what is distinctively now about these outputs?

whether good, bad or indifferent. whether boring or exciting. whether inclusive or alienating.

 

[luka]

i mean, it's actually very very materialist and marxist so i dont even know what the problem is. its basically wearing a red t-shirt with a yellow hammer and sickle on it. very very materialist.

 

[thirdform]

Sure, but phenomenology can't be abstracted. radical new ways of being can exist, but they are always shot through with previous forms.

 

[luka]

i already said alienation is a great word, very apt. im all for it.

 

[luka]

ok. i give up. at some point you will understand what i am saying and you will come back and contribute to the thread and you will be great. until then, stay away from the books. they'l give you indigestion.

 

[thirdform]

i mean, it's actually very very materialist and marxist so i dont even know what the problem is. its basically wearing a red t-shirt with a yellow hammer and sickle on it. very very materialist.

the day those moronic che guevara and hammer and sickle t-shirts stop being produced is the day i will have an orgasm without even masturbating.

 

[thirdform]

ok. i give up. at some point you will understand what i am saying and you will come back and contribute to the thread and you will be great. until then, stay away from the books. they'l give you indigestion.

Where is barty?

 

[luka]

Sure, but phenomenology can't be abstracted. radical new ways of being can exist, but they are always shot through with previous forms.

like, this for example, what are you trying to say? it's not an argument with me. you're continually putting words in my mouth, inventing some weird hand puppet version of me and talking to the puppet on your hand instead of me. its some weird attempt to destabalise my sense of my own reality and existence. as if you could replace me with the puppet altogether.

when have i said or implied that the previous forms dont persist? they're fucking obvious. they're the predominate presence. that's why it can be so hard to sift through and find what is genuinely new.

 

[luka]

Where is barty?

hes not coming back. too many gaslighting old men.