Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (born August 27, 1770, Stuttgart, Württemberg (now Germany) – died November 14, 1831, Berlin) was a German philosopher and one of the founding figures of German Idealism. Based on Immanuel Kant’s transcendental idealism and Rousseau’s politics, Hegel created an elaborate system of philosophy which included history, art, ethics, and religion. Apart from... Continue Reading →
As part of our mission to provide humanity with free educational services, we hereby present to you this marvelous book—a groundbreaking achievement in the study of history of philosophy indeed—with a glee which we can hardly contain to say the least... Beginning with an examination of the relationship between Hegel and Goethe, Löwith discusses how... Continue Reading →
Alain Badiou’s Philosophy in a Nutshell before the Immanence of Truths
We can apply to existence the formal remarks of the previous part of my lecture. If, for instance, the degree of identity of a thing to itself is the maximal degree, we can say that the thing exists in the world without any limitation. The multiplicity, in this world, completely affirms its own identity. Symmetrically, if the degree of identity of a thing to itself is the minimal degree, we can say that this thing does not exist in this world. The thing is in the world, but with an intensity which is equal to zero. So we can say that its existence is a non-existence. We have here a striking example of the distinction between being and existence. The thing is in the world, but its appearance in the world is the destruction of its identity. So the being-there of this being is to be the inexistent of the world. The theory of the inexistent of a world is very important. I have shown that the situation of the inexistent is fundamental in Jacques Derrida’s work.
Often, the existence of a multiplicity in a world is neither maximal nor minimal. The multiplicity exists to some extent.
To conclude I would summarize this abstract theory with a question linked to the concept of existence: the question of death.
To understand the question of death, it is essential to remember that it is only by its being-there that a being exists, and that this existence is that of a degree of existence, situated between inexistence and absolute existence. Existence is both a logical concept and an intensive concept. It is this duel status that permits us to rethink death.
We are first tempted to say that a thing is dead when, in the world of reference, its degree of existence is minimal, or when it inexists in this world. Asserting that a thing is dead would be tantamount to concluding that identity of the thing to itself is equal to the minimal degree. This would also means that death is the absolute non-identity to self. But absolute non-identity to self defines inexistence, and not death. Death must be something other as inexistence, because death happens, and this « happening » necessarily concerns an existent, and not the inexistent of the world. We define death as the coming of a minimal value of existence for a thing endowed with a positive evaluation of its identity, and not the minimal value as such. All that can be asserted of “dying” is that it is a change in appearing, the effect of which is that a thing passes from an existence with a positive intensity—even if it is not maximal—to an existence that is minimal, that is to say null relatively to the world. The whole problem is what does such a passage consist of? We limit ourselves to two remarks.
1) The passage from one identity or existence value to another cannot be an immanent effect of the multiplicity concerned. For this being has precisely no other immanence to the situation, and consequently to its own identity, as its degree of existence. The passage is necessarily the result of an exterior cause, which affects, locally or globally, the logical evaluations, or the laws of the Being-there-in-the-world. In other words, what occurs in death is a change in the identity function of a given multiple. This change is always imposed on the dying thing, and this imposition comes from outside the thing. The precise proposition is Spinoza’s: “No thing whatever can be destroyed, except by an exterior cause.” So it is impossible to say of a multiple that it is “mortal”.
2) It follows that the meditation of death is in itself vain, as Spinoza also declares: “The free man thinks of nothing less than of his death, and his wisdom is a meditation on life, and not a meditation on death.” It is because death is only a consequence. What thought must turn towards is the event which locally transforms the identity function.
All of this indicates why we cannot agree with a philosophy of mortality and finitude. There is no ontological status of death. Of no existent we can say that it is a “being-for-death”. Because existence is a transcendental degree and nothing else, we must ask with Saint Paul: “Death, where is thy victory?” Dying, exactly like existing, is a mode of being-there, and therefore a purely logical correlation. The philosophy of death is included in one sentence: Do not be afraid by the logic of a world, or by the games of existence. We are living and dying in many different worlds.
This piece originally appeared in lacanian ink 29, which is now sold out.
Tonight I am not going to engage in any kind of criticism. Instead, I intend to propose a new concept of existence. And I shall be as abstract as this intention forces me to be. You can find a less arid but not complete exposition in a chapter of my “Briefings on Existence,” and a complete one in my last book, Logiques des mondes, which is out in French and will be published in English at the end of next year, I hope.
As all of you know perfectly well, the fundamental problem is to distinguish on the one hand, being as such, being qua being, and, on the other hand, existence, as a category which precisely is not reducible to that of being. It is the heart of the matter. This difference between being and existence is often the result of the consideration of a special type of…
View original post 3,289 more words
DOWNLOAD “Adorno’s lectures on ontology and dialectics from 1960-61 comprise his most sustained and systematic analysis of Heidegger’s philosophy. They also represent a continuation of a project that Adorno shared with Walter Benjamin – ‘to annihilate Heidegger’. Following the publication of Heidegger’s magnum opus, Being and Time,and long before his notorious endorsement of Nazism at... Continue Reading →
DOWNLOAD "Badiou and Hegel: Infinity, Dialectics, Subjectivity offers critical appraisals of two of the dominant figures of the Continental tradition of philosophy, Alain Badiou and G.W.F. Hegel. Jim Vernon and Antonio Calcagno bring together established and emerging authors in Continental philosophy to discuss the relationship between the thinkers, creating a multifarious collection of essays by... Continue Reading →
VALIS by Philip K. Dick [AudioBook] High-Rise by J.G. Ballard Slavoj Zizek Retroactively Reading Signs From the Future Vem Kan Segla Förutan Vind [Who Can Sail Without the Wind] ~ Kira Skov & DR PigeKoret Slavoj Žižek: The Effects of Capitalist Dynamics and the Causes of Depression Slavoj Žižek:... Continue Reading →
Lecture delivered during #Zizek's visit to Film and Television Studies Program at The University of Vermont on April 16, 2019... You might enjoy this talk more if you've watched the Black Mirror series which we cannot recommend highly enough... It includes passages from Zizek's forthcoming book provisionally entitled Hegel in a Wired Brain...
Zamanın uçurumundan ve ötesindeki karanlıktan başka ne görüyorsunuz? - William Shakespeare Kanlı bir yumurta sarısı. Bir çarşafa yayılan yanmış bir delik. Herkesi açmakla tehdit eden öfkeli bir gül. - May Svvenson Dipsiz bir uçurumun içine baktığınız zaman, o da sizin içinize bakar. - Friedrich Nietzsche Baktıkça bakıyorsunuz kendinize, Yetişir! Bu da hiç konuşmayan adam yapıyor... Continue Reading →
Ontological Catastrophes and Transcendental Time Machines: Dialectics of Time and Event from Kant and Hegel, across Deleuze and Badiou, towards New Futures Download PDF
There are two main philosophical targets of Badiou as he puts in The Subject of Art: Those who identify the body and the subject, in which case creativity can only take the form of experimentation with the limits of the body, an experience of the finitude and complete unity of the body. Death being the limit... Continue Reading →
| Download PDF 1 or PDF 2 [Same text, different appearances] | Click Here to Listen | Recommended Voice: Amy (English - GB) The Spirit shows itself as so impoverished that, like a wanderer in the desert craving for a mere mouthful of water, it seems to crave for its refreshment only the bare feeling of the divine in general.... Continue Reading →
Inferential Rationality Kant’s initial project was to explicate the difference between “knowing-what” (pure reason) and “knowing-how” (practical reason) in the way of laying the foundations of a scientific metaphysics. Counter to Descartes and Hume he aimed at situating the subject within the limits of what can be known by rational human beings. The Kantian subject... Continue Reading →
| Download PDF | Click Here to Listen | Voice: Amy (English – UK) Abstract In this essay I attempt to explicate the sense in which Michel Henry’s reductive phenomenology rendering Life as affectivity resonates with Alain Badiou’s subtractive ontology rendering the subject as eternity in time. I claim that these two modes of subjectivity are... Continue Reading →
C. QUANTITATIVE INFINITY (a) Its Notion § 497 Quantum alters and becomes another quantum; the further determination of this alteration, namely, that it goes on to infinity, lies in the circumstance that quantum is established as being immanently self-contradictory. Quantum becomes an other; but it continues itself into its otherness; the other is thus also... Continue Reading →
When everything appears similar, nothing really is... ~ Alain Badiou Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away... ~ Philip K. Dick It is easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism... ~ Fredric Jameson If you are trapped within the dream... Continue Reading →
Deleuze'ün tüm felsefesi insanın yaşayabileceklerini çoğaltmaya yönelikti. Buna insan bilincini genişletme çabası da diyebiliriz aslında. Ama Deleuze'ün kendinden öncekilerden farkı, genişleme için öncelikle kasılmak gerektiği yönündeki saptamasından ileri geliyordu. O, Schelling'e dayanan doğa felsefesinin merkezine genleşip-daralan bir madde yerleştirmişti. Böylelikle statik merkez kavramını akışkan bir şeyle doldurarak içten çökertmek suretiyle ortadan kaldırabileceğini düşünüyordu. Beş duyumuzun... Continue Reading →
In my previous post I've attempted to trace, clarify and briefly define certain positions and oppositions within the philosophical field today. It is my conviction that at the root of philosophical enquiry lies a series of dialectical relationships between affirmation and negation, transcendence and immanence, reality in-itself and reality for-us, finitude and infinity, being and... Continue Reading →