°
To understand something you must be in it, and of it. It is bodily, emotive, and flowing.
When we judge we shift from the Right brain (open and holistic) to the Left brain (rational and linear).
To judge is to articulate and file, to create a snapshot so you can categorize.
It is not that judgement is not useful, it is that it leaves us incomplete.
°
Today, the subject mistakenly considers itself an object.
We consider a subject to be sovereign, to have individual character and desires, which block us from fully understanding or controlling them. Their subjective individuality (perhaps irrationality) hinders the smooth functioning of the world.
Yet, if we consider the verb tense “to subject” it means to voluntarily submit, amor fati. While “to object” is to block or oppose, odium fati.
Our common misconception is that the active subject (agent) works on the passive object (a desire or material), which becomes a ludicrous reversal of terms. Instead, the subject is passive (submissive) to the object’s active disruption (thwarting and tickling).
This leads us to reconsider our emulation of being objective: to be strong individuals we enact blocking or thwarting, to prove our subjectivity we act like an object.
The sands become a stone, and cease to move. Yet submitting to the winds carries us around the world.
in part from Slavoj Žižek
°
The melancholic philosopher, such as Baudrillard or Milton, will generate an existential paradise that is somehow inaccessible, reflecting their inability to access happiness. The giddy spirit, Deleuze-Guattari, will announce an alternate coding allowing for merging, newness and escape; lines of flight for the hopeful.
Schopenhauer is a curmudgeon, Kierkegaard a hopeless romantic, and Camus a poetic, passionate cynical humanist. Plato fawns over power, and Socrates undermines authority.
Their way of life was their rebuttal in words.
And let’s not forget, the resonance of their message is amplified by their background: time and place are amplifiers for disposition.
°
The melancholic philosopher, such as Baudrillard or Milton, will generate an existential paradise that is somehow inaccessible: a transcendent realm we can no longer reach.
The giddy spirit, such as Deleuze-Guattari, will announce an alternate "coding," allowing for merging, newness, and escape, lines of flight for the hopeful.
Schopenhauer is a curmudgeon, Kierkegaard a hopeless romantic, and Camus a brutally poetic cynic.
Their disposition forms an argument, a rebuttal to the world.
°
At one point the news was a sober lens from which we saw insanity in the outside world.
Today the news produces itself, commenting on “minor nothings” with outrage while “major somethings” go unreported.
The news does not report on crazy; they are crazy. For any reasonable person, this makes the news un-newsworthy.
°
One complaint of the non-binary and transsexual movement is its unwillingness to define itself or its parameters. Tactically this is smart; strategically, it creates havoc.
In the “concrete universal,” a very particular example becomes the definition for the broader category, which means it serves as a particular instance for an abstract idea.
In not defining a “specific point,” confusion is the point. (Without concrete, we are only left with shifting abstractions, easily manipulated and unanticipated.)
Strategically, vagueness can evade attacks, slipping around limiting parameters as a type of guerilla warfare without standardization. Yet, normative social relations predicated upon the utility and identity of defined (concrete) characteristics are thrown into chaos, and the more literal-minded become anxious, leading them to antagonism to recapture stability.
Without specificity, how to define or defend an idea also seems unknowable. Unfortunately, we are witnessing any non-majority behavior become equivalent by affiliation with the most extreme aspects; that is, people have begun defining the entire LGBTQIA spectrum by its most confusing aspects and reacting against the whole.
°
Nietzsche says revenge is an attempt to “will away” what happened in the past.
As Nietzsche says, trying to erase the past to reset boundaries is an extraordinary folly.
It is impossible, which means your willful logic enacted is self-deception, which creates a version of you that can never return to reality or forgiveness.
°
The reason you recognize damage is because you were damaged.
The reason I can spot abuse, wrapped in pretty lies is because I was lied to, taken advantage of.
In such ways our insight grows: not to do what’s been done to us, but to ameliorate the progress of pain, while still imparting the learning.
After all, we do not want to eradicate a survival instinct, but we do not want to traumatize either.
