version
Well-known member
Language is something which frustrates me, yeah.
An Emergent Order
- Thread starter version
- Start date
-
- Tags
- alp an emergent takeaway order belly bouncing the cryptic shadowy tiger lord bourgois sad sack comrade corpsey corpsey's dangerous liaisons corpsey's emergent fleshlight distasteful god lurks in your subconsciousness hamas i pity your son i'm scared of germans i'm very wet imran of riga in defence of homosexual camels jung at heart mixed biscuits got an std without having sex mixed biscuits is a version but he has clamydia suspended and his 401k the mac? come on! they are a major player three cheers for hamas! version the egyptian intellectual version's atrocity exhibition version=conceptronica what if one person pays another for their banana
Language is something which frustrates me, yeah.
frustrates in what sense?
version
Well-known member
Feels like a blunt instrument.
it's more like a chess set with its conventions and internal logics.
Wittgenstein is good on this, though he couldn't go beyond Hegel.
There's no way to escape language either though.
no but this is the fundamental discovery of psychoanalysis. that the subconscious plays a large part in the structuration of language.
Hence why the tripper is not much different to the psychotic. the symbolic order structuring the protocols of existence and authority in the world as the archetypical subject breaks down.
version
Well-known member
Something being logically true goes back to what I was saying re: the Sugrue lecture on Barthes, that the best you can hope for is to create an internally coherent system. You may be able to say something's logical but it's only logical according to a framework someone's built.
That doesn't mean it couldn't be true though, just that we can't explain it.
No, it can't be true because it doesn't make sense. to say god is outside of space and time is to say god doesn't exist, in essence. the statement cancels itself out.
exactly, you have now hit on the fact that religion can be criticised from within itself. For what is God but a conceptual framework of certain virtues we have estranged from ourselves? If God had no worldly import, then we simply wouldn't be able to speak of belief in a God.
version
Well-known member
I was reading Bakunin ranting about God early this morning. The main bit I remember is him saying something about materialism obviously being correct and something about idealists being unable to explain the point at which God comes down to the material level and why, whereas if you start from the bottom you can explain your way up.
You need to read Feuerbach, that's where Bakunin got his idea from. And Feuerbach got it from Hegel (albeit Hegel was no atheist.) In fact, I like to joke that Hegel was the last true Christian. If the substance of your dialectic is the incarnated world spirit which gradually becomes conscious of itself as the absolute idea, then what else is this but a synonym for God?
version
Well-known member
That seems to be a running thing with a bunch of philosophers, that they end up constructing a secular theology. There's a lecture on Heidegger I watched a while ago which emphasised his background as a Jesuit seminarian. I was discussing it with @dilbert1 in the Hegel thread whenever we did that one.
version
Well-known member
For anyone who hasn't read him...
The gradual development of the material world, as well as of organic animal life and of the historically progressive intelligence of man, individually or socially, is perfectly conceivable. It is a wholly natural movement from the simple to the complex, from the lower to the higher, from the inferior to the superior; a movement in conformity with all our daily experiences, and consequently in conformity also with our natural logic, with the distinctive laws of our mind, which being formed and developed only by the aid of these same experiences; is, so to speak, but the mental, cerebral reproduction or reflected summary thereof.
The system of the idealists is quite the contrary of this. It is the reversal of all human experiences and of that universal and common good sense which is the essential condition of all human understanding, and which, in rising from the simple and unanimously recognized truth that twice two are four to the sublimest and most complex scientific considerations — admitting, moreover, nothing that has not stood the severest tests of experience or observation of things and facts — becomes the only serious basis of human knowledge.
Very far from pursuing the natural order from the lower to the higher, from the inferior to the superior, and from the relatively simple to the more complex; instead of wisely and rationally accompanying the progressive and real movement from the world called inorganic to the world organic, vegetables, animal, and then distinctively human — from chemical matter or chemical being to living matter or living being, and from living being to thinking being — the idealists, obsessed, blinded, and pushed on by the divine phantom which they have inherited from theology, take precisely the opposite course. They go from the higher to the lower, from the superior to the inferior, from the complex to the simple. They begin with God, either as a person or as divine substance or idea, and the first step that they take is a terrible fall from the sublime heights of the eternal ideal into the mire of the material world; from absolute perfection into absolute imperfection; from thought to being, or rather, from supreme being to nothing. When, how, and why the divine being, eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect, probably weary of himself, decided upon this desperate salto mortale is something which no idealist, no theologian, no metaphysician, no poet, has ever been able to understand himself or explain to the profane. All religions, past and present, and all the systems of transcendental philosophy hinge on this unique and iniquitous mystery.
God and the State
Michail Bakunin God and the State 1882 Written: February-March, 1871. Published by Mother Earth Publishing Association, New York, 1916. First Published:...
theanarchistlibrary.org
Of course, because philosophy is the dominant class' acquisition of its self-consciousness, although, to a degree, this consciousness will always remain unhappy.
version
Well-known member
Touches on the discussion in the Irishness thread re: how deeply embedded religions are in people and their novels too.
The accelerating commodification of irishness
The other thing you encounter reading about Yeats, Joyce, Beckett is the contrast between the Catholic and Protestant Irish. Perhaps they have different "minds" too. Joyce was Catholic, Beckett Protestant, for example. try The Stray Sod Country where the cultural frameworks are explored...
www.dissensus.com
version
Well-known member
That last line is the kind of thing I'm talking about, tbh. It sounds cool and it's interesting, but how would anyone know and surely the class struggle's just another framework laid over things?