I get tired of writing intellectual bull. Is it really intellectual? Can you ever really make positive statements? When I say this is X, is it not true that it is X because it is not Y, and then you exclude Y, which invites and necessitates a new reading of what X is and what Y is and what the reading in the first place means, but what it can't quite say is the problem, so all you do is develop a series of differences without positive statements, always an infinite departure without a return in sight (or even possible). Welcome to my mind. Of course it could be said that everything is in this system of differences, we are all seemingly bound and linked by language, I mean think of the word link, link to chain, so our communication is our link, our language a link to the other, thus our chain to the other, for we are never ourselves because we possess some divine connection, we are ourselves because we are not you, thus my self is constituted by my otherness to you, so you constitute me, but at the same time I am bound up in you, so we never are solipisms in any way at all. Just a web, a net, a sea of signifiers.
Sorry, that is what I do--everyday.
Not that I don't enjoy it.
But, you really have to take a break from it every now and then, at least look back on it with some sort of skepticism. No system of thought is ever complete. I don't know if anything can ever be a totality.
Oh, so yeah...the problem with people is that we need people. I know this isn't anything novel, it may be cynical to some extent, but it seems problems arise when we have to depend on people. Granted we need this dependence, we are social, we long for something always, this extra desire that exists. Nearly every conflict, every piece of literature, every love story--all seem to center around the issue/the condition of the glance, the experience of the other, of meeting someone and how that communication goes, how it is broken, how you leave, to link to the previous post--the duet. I love the song, a lot a lot. I don't why exactly, I used to sing the duet with my sister, but I haven't done that in a long time. But back to the concept of the duet. Who listens? We all speak with the hope that someone listens. We all blog with the hope that someone reads it. That is this messianic promise that we all hope for, that almost preconditions our speaking/writing and even is embedded in our reading. This seems to be echoed in the duet. Call and response, but there seems to be a break. Is Dean-o listening to the female lead. Is the fact that I don't know the female lead is the issue? Is the song phallologocentric because the voice of the female is echoed, it is disembodied and denied a true presence? Notice how the volume level changes, even the idea of the echo reminds me of Echo from mythology. She (notice the gender) could never complete her own sentences, she had to echo the others. Perhaps this is a love story between Echo and Narcissus. I might just be reading too far into it though.
So this turned not into a personal rant. Perhaps I meant it as a joke. Like Zizek does (look out Mr Kirsch).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Everyhting about you is intellectual...it's a part of you...even when you try not to!
It's a part of you, that can't be shaken off.
I have been thinking about the duets recently as well. And about how we cannot exist without other people, however much we try to explain ourselves that we will be fine, at the end of the day life is about living it with others. We can only find satisfaction in what we do if we find it reflected in others' eyes. If we find the approval for what we do in others. That can be a very sad conclusion sometimes.
I only started to enjoy blogging when I realised that others read it.
Don't get tired of writing intellectual bull, it's great to read (even if it takes a little effort to follow... you know I'm not a philosoper, like yourself, but I'm learning, with your help)
on a more interesting note, I will feauture you in the next post chapter 1.4, you will appear as the man who thought he knew everything...now how's that?
Lets digress from all that intellectual bull :)
Polly-great comments, I will respond further when I have more time.
Y- To the contrary, All that I know is that I know nothing.
come on..stop being a pseudo-intellectual
Y-Socrates once said "One thing only I know, and that is that I know nothing." I tend to agree with him. We never really know anything in ourselves. To know is to make onself a solipsism of sorts, to take on for your own something that is as much other as the other. Wisdom might be acknowledging that one cannot know everything. Meaning is in being with the world, it isn't some abstract transcendental subject, that exists outside of reality.
Polly--I don't think we have to find satisfaction in what we do in other's eyes. Such a thing would say that we need someone to always watch us do what we do in order to feel satisfaction. I do believe that we structure "others" that guide our desires, but these are protections set up by the physche to prevent the too-muchness of reality.
The philosophy Jean-Luc Nancy postulated that everything is touching, that nothing can exists wholly in-itself or for-itself. It destroys the idea of the monad. Everything we do, we twist, bend, shade someone else. Everyone is contiguous. We are all touching, thus reality and existing only exists to the extent that we are "with"
And thanks for reading!
Talking about whose ox is gored. You shouldn't care about what others think. Those who do, end up trying to please others. Those who shade others lack confidence. I stopped giving a hoot since I lost my father. I dont care whose ox is gored. Follow me and Ill continue to read your interesting bull
Check out Wordworth's "I wondered Lonely as a Cloud"
It isn't that your difference is submitted, that you cede your being, but you live in the world together with others regardless.
Your unseizing libido will bring you back to the commune.
Some jokes you wish you never made. I guess this will be one of them.
When some see what they do not understand, or when they see traits similar to what they may have seen...they become confused and begin to form a generalized perception or presumption of that person or things ability.
Ignorance is a crime.
What a pity!
I love you my dear Mr. intellectual word truncheon but aren't there more important things for you to worry about.
My dear Mr. Intellectual,
that was a joke by the way...I enjoyed my time with you and will return again soon :)
With love
Post a Comment