acceleration is the loss of the gravitational significance of time Anonymous 17-05-23 21:27:49 No. 15226 [Last 50 Posts]
The history of philosophy is the history of the will-to-power coming to know itself and affirm its own validity against the lies of sophistry; a therapeutic endeavour of spirit against idealistic bullshit which produce narratives that serve the powers that be. In this regard, the task of philosophy has been fulfilled, completed by Nietzsche & Marx, and the domination of nature by man has found its final vessel in cybernetics. As Wittgenstein writes, "Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." Philosophy itself has been embroiled in an endless struggle against itself over the same questions for centuries, but never coming any closer to real answers to those questions, with each generation it recedes into more meta-argumentation than before.Given that philosophy has been completed, what remains of the initial questions which plagued the pre-socratics? What is it to be? Why is there something rather than nothing? These are questions philosophy has actually left outstanding, problems that it just isn't equipped to deal with, as the pursuit of 'wisdom' (which reveals itself to merely be a facet of the will-to-power). Let us ask the question another way. What is the will-to-power? The will-to-power is the actualising force of the ego onto the surroundings. In modern life, the world accelerates faster and faster as humans seek more and more to actualize their will onto the world. The lie we tell ourselves is that the faster we go, the more we can experience and enjoy. The active element of human life becomes frantic, restless, directionless, a mere reflection of the passionless bourgeois consumerism of the times. Though we experience 'leisure' it is nothing more than the brief respite from work, in fact many are compelled to work through this leisure time (productivity culture). We see that the vita activa without the contemplative element leads to a dead, unreflective life, and those who live under it become mere sheep. The man-as-labour metaphysics is not merely descriptive but prescriptive. You WILL work. You WILL be your labour. As Byung-Chul Han writes>"History – which, according to Hegel, is a history of freedom – will not be completed as long as we remain the slaves of work. The domination of work makes us unfree. The opposition between master and slave cannot be sublated by everyone becoming a slave of work. It will only be removed if the slave actually transforms himself into a free man. The vita activa remains a term of compulsion as long as it does not incorporate the vita contemplativa within itself. " Why do we call it an 'acceleration'? Is time truly accelerating? What is really being accelerated? Acceleration is caused by the inability to find conclusions. Time runs off because it finds no conclusion. Right and good time disappears. 'Whoever cannot die at the right time must perish in non-time'. Growing discontinuity, the atomization of time, destroys the experience of continuity. The world becomes *non-timely.* Dasein's cyclical time fades into directionless meaningless moments- atomized. Proust's 'In Search of Lost Time' is a reaction against the progressive de-temporalization of existence. The self disintegrates into a ‘succession of moments’ (succession de moments). Thus, it loses all stability, all permanence. The ‘man that I was’, Proust writes, ‘no longer exists, I am another person’ (je suis un autre). Proust’s novel about time, In Search of Lost Time, is an attempt to stabilize the identity of the self, which threatens to disintegrate. The temporal crisis is experienced as an identity crisis.' Proust’s narrative temporal technique opposes temporal dissociation by framing events, uniting them into a coherent whole, or structuring them into certain periods. They are reassociated. A net of relations between events lets life appear liberated from sheer contingency and bestows significance on it. In the acceleration of Dasein's time, collective memory becomes fragmented. Surges in poltical traditionalism are a reaction to ongoing foreclosures in our social imagination of our fragmented understanding of history. abstracted traditions disappear from the public conscious to make room for new ones. acceleration of capital gives collective dementia. Proustian recollections of traditions are perceived as spiritual enlightenments. This gives rise to reformulated traditions but under capitalist dementia society is forced to hold onto the memory, chasing after the enjoyment of recollection inorganically through a paranoid repression of difference- fascism arises. In this way not only the accelerationists but also the neo-reactionaries too are idiotic. The future cannot be the mere re-appropriation of past tradition but the transvaluation of values is where the work is done. The re-imagination and re-institution of the magmatic ontologies of society. So what we see is that what is really being accelerated– is the disintegration of the self by the unchecked will-to-power, and all semiotic difference. Indeed, dialectics itself, the chosen poison of philosophy, is predicated upon the obliteration of the significance of motion, time. How ironic it is that they call themselves accelerationists- given that they do not believe in motion at all!!!! Thought cannot be accelerated, thought must be slow, deliberate. Only through the ending of this age of philosophy and the opening up of a new of age of thinking (which yes, also requires the end of capitalism) can we be free. Vita Contemplativa!
Anonymous 17-05-23 22:11:13 No. 15230
>>15229 I don't care for madoka, and I much prefer urobuchi's other works.
But magia is a banger
Anonymous 17-05-23 23:04:34 No. 15232
>>15226 the history of philosophy is, as with all history, a history defined by class struggle. but it is a history which is colored by the idealist naivety of taking each historical epoch at their own word filtered through the ruling ideas of the contemporary epoch. this is how you get ideas like philosophical history being that of "the actualizing force of the ego onto the surroundings" "coming to know itself and affirm its own validity". it's a conception that can realistically only be applied to the (largely irrelevant) modern western philosophical tradition as well as a narrow and peculiarly modernist reading of the western philosophical classics. it would be quite strange to make such a statement about, for example, the medieval scholastics, or eastern traditions like buddhism, hinduism, or confucianism, none of which would seem to fit cleanly into a history of philosophy as the self-justification of an abstract and individualized "will-to-power".
cybernetics, contra your neo-vitalist romanticism, is the bridge which dissolves the previously insoluble contradiction between nature and spirit. rather than coming to dominate nature, spirit returns to nature by objectifying itself, and subjectifying nature simultaneously. the danger in this is precisely the opposite of the bleak and ironically anti-humanist hiedeggarian picture you paint. rather than the enslavement of the object to the subject, cybernetics threatens the final and irreversible triumph of the object over the subject. failure to reckon with this fact signals a failure to reckon with the real stakes of human development within our generation. the question is not whether subject will reconcile itself with object, as this is inevitable because the subject
is object, but whether subject can reconcile itself with subject.
the final irony of this post comes in the last sentence:
>Only through the ending of this age of philosophy and the opening up of a new of age of thinking (which yes, also requires the end of capitalism) can we be free. of course, we all know that philosophy is dead, and has been for quite some time now. you have been wont in the past to rail against this very board's predilection for "anti-intellectualism" and general distaste for abstract philosophy of your eclectic continental flavor. you are yourself an agent of this zombie enterprise, the nature of which you misapprehend, and the destruction of which you proudly clamor for.
Anonymous 17-05-23 23:09:08 No. 15233
>>15232 1. what is the material source of class struggle other than the aggregate of individual's will-to-power? the will-to-power is not idealist. the will-to-life is, but the will-to-power is first *power* not *will*. it's a statement of what IS not a vector. This is like saying 'class is an idealist idea not a material thing'.
2. What you say about cybernetics is 100% true, and the will-to-power is part of nature. man naturalises himself- and in the will-to-power dominates even himself.
I think your reply is talking past all my points rather than engaging with them as they are.
Anonymous 17-05-23 23:14:43 No. 15236
Nietzsche's anti-foundationalist and anti-metaphysical realist
commitments, the will to power as a way of knowing must be prioritized.
In this way, we have seen, the ontology of the will to power derives from
the 1epistemic doctrine of the will to power as a reflection 011
philosophical method and knowledge. It is precisely in this way that
Nietzsche avoids making foundationalist claims about what the world is
like in itself, that is, independently of our perspectival takings. Thus the
doctrine of the will to power is an absolute truth to the extent that it is
justified as a cross-perspectival truth and not through recourse to extra
perspectival claims to knowledge. My argument, then, has been that
Nietzsche prioritizes epistemology over ontology. In so doing, he
maintains, contrary to the criteriological realist, that justification is
properly understood as a theory-internal or perspectival matter.
Furthermore, we have witnessed Nietzsche's view that although
justification does not involve confrontations with the world it is still
possible to put forth perspectival absolute truths. From this we have seen
that justification, for Nietzsche, remains a perspectival issue without
succumbing to the sceptical idealist's problem of confinement.
In further conclusion, Nietzsche emphasizes the notion of realist
constraint by claiming that absolute truths remain open to the possibility
of revision and further refinement. With regard to the doctrine of the will
to power he states:
Granted this too is only interpretation - and you will be eager
enough to raise the objection? - well, so much the better. _ 6
>>15233 Anonymous 17-05-23 23:24:47 No. 15240
>>15239 the spectacle is way cooler conceptually tbh
anyway, i find it strange how people equate the denotation of concepts as idealism. y'all are obsessed iwth substance and metaphysics. metaphysics cant pose the question of being, and the understanding of being dictates the locus for the answer to the question of the substance of beings lol
Anonymous 17-05-23 23:50:24 No. 15241
>>15233 >what is the material source of class struggle other than the aggregate of individual's will-to-power? the question is malformed because you reverse the causality. class struggle is the source of the individual will-to-power as we understand it. there is no other context under which one would conceive of their status as an ethically affective subject in terms of a totalizing imperative to impose upon everything external to you other than the context of a class society. it is the presence of definite material conditions - climatic, geographical, biological, technological, etc. - proper to the creation and maintenance of
subject peoples which creates the imperative to impose, and thereby creates the will-to-power as such.
>I think your reply is talking past all my points rather than engaging with them as they are. i talk past you because i don't take the vast majority of what you say seriously. i reply to the few gems of salience you bury beneath jargon and circumlocution, and hope the insight will be useful to others who don't take you very seriously but read the thread out of morbid curiosity.
Anonymous 18-05-23 00:30:30 No. 15243
>>15241 >class struggle is the source of the individual will-to-power as we understand it. you cannot be serious. the desire to dominate nature exists regardless of class. what do u think caused class to exist in the first place lol… this is absurd from you
>>15242 yes! time slows down as it speeds up. there's no anchoring! it's a de-coring, a de-anchoring, de-gravitising
Anonymous 18-05-23 00:51:54 No. 15251
>>15243 >the desire to dominate nature exists regardless of class. that's an assertion for you to defend.
>what do u think caused class to exist in the first place <the presence of definite material conditions - climatic, geographical, biological, technological, etc. - proper to the creation and maintenance of subject peoples people were once not only content to live in egalitarian social organs, they had no choice but to because there was no material basis for class society. that material base was formed as a result of factors which cannot be reduced to any individual or group of individuals' "desire to dominate nature".
Anonymous 18-05-23 01:03:05 No. 15253
>>15250 So the common parlance definition.
Got it. Who exactly is spreading the “ lies of sophistry” in this case?
Anonymous 18-05-23 01:37:23 No. 15257
>>15256 you are equivocating.
>people have desires and goals is not the same proposition as
>the desire to dominate nature exists regardless of class. desire is not equivalent to desire
for domination .
and if your intention through this equivocation is to reveal that by "will-to-power" you really just mean "desire as such" then when you ask:
>what is the material source of class struggle other than the aggregate of individual's will-to-power? what you really mean to say is:
>the material source of class struggle is the aggregate of individual desire which should make it very clear why i consider everything you are saying here to be idealist bullshit.
Anonymous 18-05-23 01:46:40 No. 15260
>>15259 >since you admitted that you didnt no i didn't. i said i don't take it seriously, because it's inane idealist nonsense.
>dont see why i should engage you at all. you shouldn't because i am demonstrating in real time how what you are saying is meaningless.
Anonymous 18-05-23 01:55:51 No. 15269
>>15267 the
independent of their will bit would seemto be particularly pertinent here. he is saying, exactly as i was, that our social reality is formed by factors which are independent of our will, and indeed this will in and of itself is a social reality which is subject to the very same material factors.
Anonymous 18-05-23 01:58:26 No. 15272
>>15269 >existence is formed by social reality yes, the existence is formed by social reality, including namely, desire. desire which then reproduces itself onto social existence through action. stop arguing with spectres. i never said anything ideal determines our social reality. desire is a *material force*. the 'will' is a mere interpretation. hence the quote by nietzsche
'Granted this too is only interpretation - and you will be eager
enough to raise the objection? - well, so much the better. '
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:06:48 No. 15275
>>15272 i don't understand how you can read
>It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. and take from it that actually it means that their social reality is determined by their desire.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:06:59 No. 15276
>>15273 this is not about suffering. this is about the fact that you cannot even be an active class in history without class consciousness. where does class consciousness come from? it requires the ability to think. the franticness of acceleration leaves the worker unable to relate to their own being and re-evaluate the conditions they find themselves in. which means no writing communist manifestos (everything is too fragmented), no authentic suffering even. Turning workers into sheep is the surefire way to prevent any kind of class consciousness.
I don't care what Marx said about this, Marx was wrong. My whole point is we need to move beyond philosophy, beyond the will-to-power, and towards thinking.
>>15274 I have read Lacan and I think he's wrong. I was pretty big on lacan for a long time, still am. Guattari better.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:10:15 No. 15278
>>15276 >I don't care what Marx said about this, Marx was wrong. My whole point is we need to move beyond philosophy, beyond the will-to-power, and towards thinking. see
>>15263 >Turning workers into sheep is the surefire way to prevent any kind of class consciousness Stop everything you're doing and read Marx's Capital or any of his political works.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:14:06 No. 15282
>>15278 P sure
>The slaves only develop consciousness when they suffer beyond reason. comes from an offhand text in one of Marx's later works actually. Not in Capital.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:18:03 No. 15285
>>15279 >social reality determines desire. this directly contradicts
>existence is formed by social reality, including namely, desire. where you attempted to equivocate once again, this time desire with the social reality which you've just admitted actually determines desire and therefore cannot be identical to it. i will take this a concession that you are making it up as you go along.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:27:43 No. 15293
>>15290 The workers want revolution. Very few communist parties have been able to correctly articulate the interests of the masses without falling into revisionism or abandonment of Marxism.
My point is that the masses are already radical, you need to talk to them.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:32:35 No. 15299
>>15287 >desire *is* material reality. >class *is* also material reality, though a denotation for the aggregate libidinal force of desire. the reason i say this is idealism is not because i believe desire is
immaterial . i am a materialist. i don't even have a concept of what it would mean for desire to be immaterial. my contention is that you have the order of operations reversed here. class is a material condition which arises regardless of desire, and conditions the material reality of desire. desire in turn influences circumstance, but it can only do so within a space of possibility deliminated by the circumstance it already finds itself in.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:34:52 No. 15302
>>15295 Thats why you build a revolutionary communist party. So that the class-in-itself can be the class-for-itself. The communist party is the agent the masses can use to establish communism.
>>15296 Proleteriat is already class consciousness. They just need to expand it to the overthrow of world system of imperialism which is the job of communists. Talk to people who are oppressed.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:36:24 No. 15305
>>15302 Great man, thanks, I'll just build a revolutionary party, why didn't anybody think of this before.
Most people dislike what they think communism is even more than the current system
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:38:10 No. 15308
>>15302 class consciousness is not 'when ur upset and dont know why' class consciousness requires the proper object.
>>15304 people needing food is not a desire?
>>15306 it's just deleuze & guattari. materialist treatment of the will-to-power
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:47:31 No. 15312
>>1468941 any feedback specifically on the writing style? Idk what you are talking about in relation to cyberparts.
>>15309gave urself away there buddy
>>15310 ok. I'll try to translate the OP into smoother language. philosophy is a sort of therapy for the endless bickering that tries to mask the fact that everyone is just kind of projecting their own desires onto reality. capitalists are the winners of that fight to project their desires onto people. philosophy can get you to the point of seeing that it's your desire (or class's desire) that is the driving force of action. acceleration makes everything action. what's being accelerated is consumption and production, active life. there's no time for the re-evaluation of values because there's no time spent not having specific goals and desires to go and fulfil (that are given to you by capitalists and the media). time isnt accelerating, its just a perception due to how frantic the spectacle is.
in the process of acceleration, memory sort of becomes fragmented. people recollect experiences, and try to hold on dearly to them, romanticising memory- tradition, which leads the repression of new ways to do culture, and new values, and that's the origin of fascism.
so the direct remedy for this is to sit back and engage in 'denken', contemplation, and a recognition and refusal to engage in spectacle. rejection of a purely goal-oriented life and giving one's self space to discover and uncover what's hidden.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:50:47 No. 15314
>>15312 actually i plugged it into chatgpt lets see what it says
The core points of the message are as follows:
The history of philosophy is a struggle against deceptive narratives and the will-to-power.
Nietzsche and Marx are seen as having completed the philosophical task, while cybernetics represents the ultimate control over nature.
Philosophy has failed to answer fundamental questions about existence and the nature of reality.
The will-to-power is the materialistic drive to assert dominance over one's surroundings.
Modern life is characterized by the acceleration of human experience, driven by the belief that faster pace leads to greater enjoyment.
The emphasis on work compels individuals to define themselves through their labor.
True freedom requires integrating contemplation into the active life.
The perception of time accelerating is caused by the lack of resolutions and a loss of meaningful timing.
Proust's novel "In Search of Lost Time" seeks to stabilize the fragmented self in response to the temporal crisis.
Acceleration of time leads to fragmented collective memory and a rise in political traditionalism.
Capitalism contributes to collective amnesia and a repression of differences.
The future requires a revaluation of values and the reimagination of societal foundations.
The unchecked will-to-power and the erosion of meaningful distinctions are accelerating the disintegration of the self.
Dialectics overlooks the significance of motion and time.
Genuine freedom can only be achieved by transcending the current age of philosophy and embracing a new age of thinking.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:52:34 No. 15315
>>15313 what are you trying to say here? do you mean:
>*people before class society didn't institute class society because they were* too busy having to labour to live. because if you do, that is just wrong. average labor time increases under class society. pre-class people wer less busy on average than their classed counterparts.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:55:46 No. 15316
>>15315 That's a pretty contentious point anthropologically. I'd rather have a discussion that we can come to a resolution on. Kaczynski makes pretty big critiques of that point.
But, assuming you're right, that doesn't change the fact that 'people' (actually, people with material advantage) came up with class society because they desired more from nature, and could benefit from engaging in behaviour that results in the institution of class. I'd go make a reference to Engels here but I'm lazy and It's like 4am but trust me the point is there.
Anonymous 18-05-23 02:58:46 No. 15318
>>15317 that's actually what I was I was trying to say when I say
>could benefit from engaging in behaviour that results in the institution of class I did say 'came up with' before that granted, but I did intend to say it wasn't intentional.
Anonymous 18-05-23 03:03:07 No. 15321
>>15318 when I say 'class is caused by desire' what I mean to say is that at some point people were moved to goals that result in the institution of class.
>so why even say it! because my point is that action is teleological.
I appreciate the critique of the OP's language and it helps me re-write it to avoid comprehension pitfalls or hang-ups on what 'will to power' is intended to mean in a materialistic sense, but I really wish someone would engage with its contents.
Anonymous 18-05-23 03:03:57 No. 15322
>>15316 >>15318 >I did intend to say it wasn't intentional. that's the crux of this though. no one here is denying that human desire has some role to play in a complete account of class society. the problem is that you place primacy on it, to the point of multiple times reducing the concept of class as a whole to the status of merely denoting aggregated human desire.
to what degree are desire and intention seperable? how can one intend what one does not desire? if one desires what they do not intend, then they do not act on that desire. if they are the same, and class society is not formed of intention alone, then it also cannot be formed of desire alone.
Anonymous 18-05-23 03:10:30 No. 15326
>>15312 Holy shit. I completely agree with this. I am entirely in the dark on the specific concepts often thrown around, but if anything, this is a sign that anybody with half a brain can agree with leftism if it's argued correctly.
You lose me with your arguments in favour of cybernetics, but that's relatively negligible.
Anonymous 18-05-23 03:21:06 No. 15333
>>15328 Completely understandable. Just obtuse to many, including me.
Also, the "take a break and let don't let The System drag you down" is a staple of many blue-collar philosophies. Same with "don't rush too fast". Synthesizing it with any sort of anti-capitalism is a natural evolution. Used to think poorly of your writing, but it's clicking now.
Anonymous 18-05-23 04:32:35 No. 15336
>>15226 I want to
fuck anfem anon
Anonymous 18-05-23 06:03:30 No. 15340
>>15233 >I think your reply is talking past all my points rather than engaging with them as they are. Stop doing this all the time, that anons smart, youre always saying people aren't engaging right. I prefer his post over your op
>>15259 Stop acting so insufferable
And I like your posta BTW I'm not being mean
Anonymous 19-05-23 11:59:37 No. 15365
>>15360 also i appreciate the compliment and ofc femininity itself is the construction of patriarchy
>>15358 You need both. The vita activa is the pure gathering of expeirences. the vita contemplativa is the processing and ordering of those experiences into that which can then be appropriated by the will.
>>15362 thanks
Anonymous 19-05-23 13:14:24 No. 15370
anfem anon threads always remind me of why I gave up on continental philosophy. So much of it reads as obscurantist schizobabble at worst and at best obtuse pointless jargon obscuring coherent points that could be made much clearer as
>>15367 exemplifies
Anonymous 19-05-23 13:26:00 No. 15373
>>15370 firstly, I just feel a need to be referentially transparent. I will associate each post with a plain version from now on, if y'all agree not to get overly literal about the plain version.
but the primary problem is the plain version like the post you mentioned just doesn't really get to the meat and potatoes of why. WHY does it erode collective memory? WHY does it lead to political traditionalism? WHAT is being accelerated? HOW can we understand time? it misses all those.
Anonymous 20-05-23 15:48:58 No. 15393
>>15389 >Why Marx and Nietzsche? Now that's really mixing things up!"one might protest at this point. But there is really no cause for alarm.
Readers of Marx will be happy to learn that Marx fares quite well in this
confrontation. One might even say he is trimmed down to bare essentials
and improved upon from the point of view of use. Given Deleuze and
Guattari's perspective, this confrontation was inevitable. If one wants to
do an analysis of the flows of money and capital that circulate in society,
nothing is more useful than Marx and the Marxist theory of money. But
if one wishes also to analyze the flows of desire, the fears and the
anxieties, the loves and the despairs that traverse the social field as
intensive notes from the underground (i.e., libidinal economy), one must
look elsewhere. Since psychoanalysis is of no help, reducing as it does
every social manifestation of desire to the familial complex, where is
one to turn? To Nietzsche, and the Nietzschean theory of affects and
intensity,
>'As Marx notes, what exists in fact is not lack, butpassion, as a "natural and sensuous object." Desire is not bolstered by needs, but
rather the contrary; needs are derived from desire: they are counterproducts
within the real that desire produces'
Maybe instead of pretending class is some primordial existing material thing you should use your brain and think about where class originates from materially :) choosing to ignore it in favour of vapid essentialism instead of coming to a historical understanding of how class comes about is the real idealism! dont be a cultist retard
Anonymous 20-05-23 15:51:43 No. 15394
>>15393 >While Deleuze and Guattari quote frequently from Marx and Freud, it would be an error to view Anti-Oedipus as yet another attempt at a
Freud/Marx synthesis. For such an attempt always treats political
economy (the flows of capital and interest) and the economy of the
libido (the flows of desire) as two separate economies, even in the work
of Reich, who went as far as possible in this direction. Deleuze and
Guattari, on the other hand, postulate one and the same economy, the
economy of flows. The flows and productions of desire will simply be
viewed as the unconscious of the social productions. Behind every
investment of time and interest and capital, an investment of desire, and
vice versa
literally in the intro. like, way to reveal you never even read anti-oedipus's first pages
Anonymous 20-05-23 18:40:06 No. 15400
>>15393 So your answer to me asking for a quote to back up your claim that D&G explicitly say
>class arises because of desire, people need food, so they have to organise labour relations to get it. is to quote from Foucault's introduction that has no bearing on the claim. everyone knows anti-oedipus is a melding of Nietzsche and Marx as materialist thinkers, that is not what we're arguing. None of what you quoted supports your assertion. Jfc every thread you post in is dogshit
Anonymous 20-05-23 20:17:12 No. 15407
>>15400 >asking for a quote to back up your claim that D&G explicitly say class arises because of desire when did i ever say there's an explicit quote saying exactly this you idiot? they say need arises because of desire, so naturally if class arises from need it arises from desire.
>everyone knows anti-oedipus is a melding of Nietzsche and Marx as materialist thinkerserrr ok you're not a serious person if you think Nietzsche was a materialist lol
Anonymous 20-05-23 20:18:26 No. 15408
>>15407 instead of this fake-ass outrage why dont you actually criticise the content of my argument that it's a necessary flow of D&G instead of
> uhhh well actually this they didnt literally say that verbatim!! kill yourself pseud
Anonymous 20-05-23 20:20:11 No. 15409
>>15407 leftypol: the will to power is idealist stop using those words!!
also leftypol: nietzsche was a materialist thinker
Anonymous 21-05-23 11:15:53 No. 15412
>>15226 ok skimmed this thread. at first i thought there is not input for me to make here, though there seems to be some things after all. gunna write this down bcs it touches points that i am a bit ambivalent abt. a lot of this going to be more speculative my apologies… i do suspect that there are some subtle idealist elements at work here. a major problem i suspect is going on here is that you are reducing the task of thinking largely to an abstraction as seen here
>>15281 … the issue is that it is one thing to think, and it is another thing for the negativity of thought to be at one w a negativity in the material conditions themselves. if it is not, then it is merely some idle reflection. this goes back to what i was talking about in the last thread… positive freedom is always suppressed in capitalism. it never fully achieves full actuality because workers have little control over their work. this is the fundamental limitation of thinking-as-praxis. it is not to say thinking is useless, but it can be rather impotent. as you have brought up more ideas into this post, i see it appropriate to bring up brzozowski once again
>The man-as-labour metaphysics is not merely descriptive but prescriptive. You WILL work. You WILL be your labouri think what needs to be said about man-as-labour is that it is not simply a blind fetishization of work. rather, labour is both the primordial site in which Being unfolds, and also the site in which man may be subjugated and reduced to a machine. without understanding the ontological import of labour, we fall into a contemplative liberalism, which only criticizes capitalism to the extent that it makes people work. brzozowski makes a distinction between labour which is largely free and irrational, and that which is mechanized and lifeless
<The α of labour is a leap beyond intellect because, as Bergson states, it is the function of intellect to pragmatically foresee (Bergson 1946, 34). Oblivious, the intellect seeks to formulate grounds for an activity that has no grounds beyond itself. Such grounds only appear after labour has ceased to be a delineating inner gesture, when it has become a mechanically repeatable activity in the space of homogeneous social life i believe your criticism of accelerationism rests on a misdiagnosis of the cause of this need to temporally recollect… this part is going to be more speculative…
>Proust's 'In Search of Lost Time' is a reaction against the progressive de-temporalization of existence. The self disintegrates into a ‘succession of moments’ (succession de moments) this to me is a clear reference to bergson's critique of the classical metaphysic of time. in the classical metaphysic, the intellect abstracts time into a mere succession of moments. this leads to a mechanical understanding of the world. likewise our labour can become mechanized and commensurate with the intellect. ultimately, by stripping workers of their autonomy, there is less "irrationality" in labour. we become dominated by hypostasized forms from without. idk if a search for lost time is really the answer, as while it finds some traces of Eternity through contemplation, it doesn't do much to address that mechanizing tendency which is a source of alienation. it feels more an attempt to scoop up what little autonomy we have in modernity rather than to actually seek for more
>This gives rise to reformulated traditions but under capitalist dementia society is forced to hold onto the memory, chasing after the enjoyment of recollection inorganically through a paranoid repression of difference- fascism arisessomething ofc to be stressed here is that this memory that is often fetishized by "traditionalists" and the like is often abstracted from the concrete conditions in which it made sense. it is treated as some sort of hypostasized archetype or schema that can just be applied mechanically from without… ok something to say as well is i am a bit iffy on this stuff because the place of the intellect and the mechanical in bergson's system thought is a bit weird. it is not as though the intellect is wholly other to duration, and matter is not wholly devoid of the past either. though i guess this is similar to the fact that proles are not wholly unfree under capitalism. things are not so simple
>>15281 i also do not understand this insistence that thinking is slowness. really, true "thinking" when fully actual (i.e. a negativity in base itself) is more characterized by an irrationality. slowness is not quite what is required, but rather that (often spontaneous) bringing together of the elements of past habitual (and perhaps also intentional) elements into some individuated section/sections of time
Unique IPs: 41