IndieAgora

http://www.crosscurrents.org/Crockettwinter2003.htm[hr]
I highly recommend the John D. Caputo lecture on YouTube

The first 30 odd mins are the best

A passion for the impossible - I really like that bit.

I think I got the secret when I wrote my Plato and Mysticism thread, the secret does and does not have to exist for us to search for it.

Love the Spinoza summary.

Really enjoyed that link about religion. Almost like he is describing the formation of religious passions in the moment.

I laughed when Caputo says 'anything that is un-deconstructable has not yet been constructed' as Derrida explicity makes it clear that Justice is un-deconstructable. :D

'The still belongs to a process which is generating effects'.

Form and plasticity are effects of Differance also. Deconstruction is a destabilisation that holds a promise that could be a disaster. It goes on whether we like it or not, it is the very movement of time itself. This is what Derrida terms autodeconstruction - a series of transformations; a series of reinventions going on all the time.

We can involve ourselves in it however, we can participate. We can prevent the event, or try to anyway. Promotion of the event is also possible. 

Prevention can be reactionary or conservative. Promoting is proactive, or progressive. 

Are all the changes that go in these systems rule governed, or are they open?

If you know the rules you can predict all the events that the system will produce. Post-Structuralists say these systems are open-ended and are capable of producing unforeseen, unprogrammable, events. A deep code is written in our brain according to materialists like Chomsky, but to Post-Structuralists, argued against this and this brings up a discussion of metaphors. I have read about this in the Wittgenstein and Derrida book.

A metaphor is the attempt to break the rules of language ever so precisely.

Metaphoricity and history of language indicates it is an open system capable of producing new effects.

The unconditional is what we are dreaming of, praying for, what we desire. What we affirm. We are loyal to it, it's what we are commanded by and what we are responding to. It's a complex of callings - what is calling to us.

Caputo calls this a mostly Jewish religious modality - which is interesting as my thread on Plato when I discuss Kabballah defines it as 'to recieve', which means recieving an evocation, to provoke. 

No finite relative conditional construction is ever adequate to the unconditionals. The undeconstructable is a call that we can never adequately answer. It is a call to which we are already responding. It's not our doing, it is what is being done to us. It's not a projection - it a projectile coming at us.

I laughed when Caputo says 'anything that is un-deconstructable has not yet been constructed' as Derrida explicity makes it clear that Justice is un-deconstructable. :D


This is wrong, Derrida explains that Justice is Deconstruction!

This article is worth a read
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-JOCP/cp26472.htm

So self presence is say, 'I', which we ordinarily take to be 'there' as a fixed, coherent construct?

So self presence is say, 'I', which we ordinarily take to be 'there' as a fixed, coherent construct?


Any concept / signifier only makes sense in a system of difference and in relation to that which it is not, e.g. 'I' only makes sense in relation to it's opposite or it's 'other', therefore each sign cannot be fully present to itself as there is always a trace (or a play of traces) of that which it is not...that which is absent.