Arran, thanks for your reply, though it s a fruitless response for a Nietzschean with respect to nihilism. You can try to speak in favour of Levi whatever you want, but it is enough for me to see that my point is not moot despite your efforts, something that you cannot but respect (Tim Morton? really? loool). Of course, I used Levi as an expiatory sheep to pose a very important point: nihilism is not a theme to speak from teeth-out, but something that we have to live intensively enough in order to occur in our lives. Verbiage is what comes when this fact has not even happened.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Levi Bryant’s ‘Axioms for a dark ontology’
- march 16 2013 5.06pm
Latest Updates RSS
-
Naxos
-
Naxos
-
Arran, thanks for your reply.
I respect the fact that you do not seem to understand enough the schizoanalytical mode, what leads me to say that maybe I do understand it better than you. So firtsly I would say that D&G does not privilege the schizo in the sense of saying: ‘let us *decide* to use the schizo as a model to see what happens in the text and see what would others say about it’, neither in the sense of saying: ‘look what we have done as society! we have spoiled this person’s creative line with our production system and our clinical gaze’, etc. The fact is that they find in the schizo a very concrete empirical experience which comes as the event of experimenting with the full-filled space of intensive quantities: the intensities of the world. So we can say that this modelization of the schizo experience, as the one which means an aperture to the world, but also as the irruption of life as such in existence, is indeed something that Deleuze was pursuing to pose philosophically since his book on Nietzsche and that he only managed to complete though with many disciplinary constrictions in his book Difference and Repetition. This experience is what Deleuze’s nietzschean-spinozian vein traces since Deleuze’s encounter with Nietzsche: it is Deleuze’s famous excess, and the affirmation of life that it compels is precisely what allowed him to pose his philosophy of pure difference. So, as i see it regards to the schizo model: it is not a question that in AO they got too creative with their aim, nor that they simply wanted to take a ‘state’ or a ‘condition’ to diagnose our society, as you seem to suggest: it goes farther than that.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Quote: Dementia as a way of being
- May 16 2013 4:33pm
-
-
Naxos
-
I am somehow delighted with Arran’s commentaries and his re-emerging Nietzscheanism, which I celebrate as good news in the blogosphere. I just recently commented something about the question concerned to the meaning of life that i want to share here (just to illustrate about what might mean to think life from a post nihilistic condition, far from any dualism and anthropomorphism). More about this issue can be read here http://schizosophy.com/2013/04/29/bill-vallicellas-existential-desert-on-the-question-concerned-to-the-meaning-of-life/ Just as i have commented in Arran’s post, I prefer to think of an active nihilism rather than of a post-nihilism, which is just a failed vitalism. Active nihilism is something for those who have grasped what life means in their own experience, the absolute nothingness and meaninglessness of life, which is what leads their bodies to conquer their own singularity and individuation. But as I have also commented in Arran’s dementia post, this theme is firmed as schizoanalytical, it is Deleuze’s schizo-philosophy, purely schizosophical.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Post-Nihilistic Practice: Levi R. Bryant and Arran James
- May 16 2013 8:53pm
-
-
Naxos
-
As a Deleuzo-Nietzschean, I also prefer to think in terms of an active nihilism (which is better referred to the practice of experimenting life and the intensities it carves against any encysted negativity) rather than in terms of a post-nihilism (which still does not overcome the mourning of what the world could be, of what it has never been and will never be). Regards to Levi, I can only keep on taking what he writes as superfluous verbiage: the question of nihilism, and particularly the question of how to overcome it, is a question of life and not only a ‘theme’ where to chant dark malformed axioms: it is a question that only with our own life we can answer. So I truly don’t think that Levi has lived enough to be nihilistic, thus he cannot even be post-nihilistic. Active Nietzschean nihilism is a sort of vitalism which can only be experienced by those who have reached out in flesh their own singularity and their own point of individuation. Something that Levi does not even seem to be capable to achieve for his own philosophical sake.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Levi Bryant’s ‘Axioms for a dark ontology’
- May 15 2013 800pm
-
-
Naxos
-
The quote is neat: there is nothing strange about it, but I agree with dmfant that there is a need to specify which sort or experience or state may be the model to think our modern/western condition. To my mind, this theme has already a schizoanalytical firm: as i see it, this specificity can be detected specially in D&G’s AO.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Quote: Dementia as a way of being
- May 15, 2013 at 06:53 pm
-
-
Naxos
-
Interesting and nice to read. I am kind of ambivalent about this issue: I consider myself a self-forged philosopher, and as such i have given myself all the freedom to think whatever i might be up to think about philosophy, but this does not exclude some rigour in my thinking, in my writing and in my way to pose my philosophical restlessness. I do think that one has to read all about those authors that feed our views. I actually have the experience of having read chronologically the complete works of Spinoza, Nietzsche, Deleuze, and Foucault (but also Guattari, Bateson and Bourdieu). It took me quite a time to do it, but i did it because i could, firstly, and secondly because i was to the point of willing to stop the common train of our daily life, which leads no time to read neither to think in fact, and also to stop dreaming the kind of intimate scholastic fantasy like ‘one day, i will read all about this or that author’, which is a common line of escape for academics whose restlessness is totally subjected. So I did it, not time for sterile second sources, only a rigorous reading: no notes to take, no specific interests to solve: only the necessity to open my mind to philosophy and read affectively and totally immersed as in a celibate practice. However, being a social researcher, I did had a more professional concern about being rigorous: you cannot pose any problem adequately without rigour: and if you have some vocation, you would tend to start hating every single thing that you can possible brilliantly think about what you are in fact researching, because it comes as part of a certain illusion of immediacy regarding to the object you study, because it comes as part of a naive realism as an effect of such approximation. Though, time may pass, and while it passes, those brilliant thoughts become obstacles to reach your object, but those that were thought with some rigour, those that reached out their own point of rigourousity, still remain there as thick facts to gnaw objectively. I sum, I learned to love rigour because it is rigour what transforms us with respect of our object of study and even with regards to our own philosophical restlessness.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Rigor Shmigor
- May 8, 2013 at 10:33 PM
-
-
Naxos
-
Hey I just noticed that you are the one who writes this blog, cool, I was wondering what happened to your edmundberger.wp.com! Thanks for your reply, I think we agree with the main idea. But I admit that I am always watching myself out from splicing some of D&G’s terms together with other non schizoanalytical terms. This vigilance has been productive for me to dilucidate them more heuristically, so I try not to pair e.g the macro and the micro (which are still too objectivistic for me) with the molar and the molecular (which precisely were coined as to break with this sort of scale/spatial objectivism). That is why I felt motivated in first place to share my comment
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Machinic Oedipus, Machinic Multitude
- 8 mayo 932 2013
-
-
Naxos
-
Another great post, Thanks. However, I would not say with Baudrillard that the Oedipus complex is molecular even if we understand it as a process. On the contraire: it is a bodily molar investment, a sedimentation/segregation/secretion brought by symbolic order and by its structures: it may be everywhere as symbolic as it is, and it may be also ‘invisible’, but it does not quite spread molecularly nor induce any change in experience far from the molarity it feeds. A broken, encysted, fixed machine that it is Oedipus complex: an ideological miniaturized apparatus that is still molar and always reterritorializing the strata, triangulating it and never escaping from what it organizes: say, an organic device of organization, all too molar with respect to the molecular schizo-flows that leak from it and repulse it.
- Comentado por Naxos en:
- Machinic Oedipus, Machinic Multitude
- 8 mayo 742 2013
-
...
