Dec 23, 2013
swampfires replied to your post: pipistrellus replied to your post:eh w...
hot boop*
i made a mistake
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from Brazil
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Germany
seen from Belgium
seen from Belgium
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Russia
swampfires replied to your post: pipistrellus replied to your post:eh w...
hot boop*
i made a mistake
@fen: you are more than welcome to :D
what does that quote mean by transference?
I'm not sure, but that's kind of why I'm so enticed by it. I'm interested in 'transference' in a really general sense, but I don't have a very good picture of it.
I can tell it's a play off of the famous Wittgenstein line that goes "For what the solipsist means is quite correct; only it cannot be said, but makes itself manifest. The world is my world: this is manifest in the fact that the limits of language (of that language which alone I understand) mean the limits of my world." (5.62 of the Tractatus). Where Wittgenstein was arguing for a kind of solipsism, Sloterdijk's use of transference seems to be turning this quote on its head; it's an anti-solipsism. Further, it doesn't just say my 'world' (I don't know what he means by world, yet) aren't limited by language but by a much broader category of 'transference'. The limits of my world are the limits of my capacity for transference: that is, the world is just present to me through a host of linguistic signifiers, but a host of other sensations (through any of our senses and otherwise).
Further, I think it's interesting because he uses "capacity for transference" instead of just "transference" - this seems to hint that transference isn't a limited quality but could possibly be expanded or shrunk with various interactions we have with others (that is, other persons and others most widely). So that leaves open the question of what changes the domain of transference, and whether we'd want to change it, and the consequences for doing so.
32-40
Hi friend! :D
32. If you could read in a foreign language, which language would you chose?
At the moment, probably French. It'd make school way easier.
More seriously though, I'd probably choose some dialectic of Arabic, even though I'm worried that's slightly fetishiizing. It's just really gorgeous, as a script, and I'd really love to be able to read it. Either that, or Spanish, just because it's a really important language to know living in America I think (and despite that importance, I don't really know at all).
33. Most intimidating book you've ever read?
Every book of philosophy ever? I don't know, if a book of philosophy is actually worth reading, then I think it has to be dense and courageous enough to actually be kind of terrifying to read. It should provoke a kind of anxiousness, I think.
More specifically though, either zizek's "Sublime Object of Ideology" or Foucault's "Discipline and Punish", since they were both some of the first books of philosophy I've read and were absolute impenetrable and way beyond me at that time. They intimidated the hell out of me.
34. Most important book you're too nervous to begin?
Either Deleuze's "Difference and Repetition" simply because of its density and 'difficult' language or Badiou's "Logics of Worlds" because for "Being and Event" I at least had some knowledge about debates within set theory that helped me get through a lot of the book, whereas I know next to nothing about category theory and it seems really intimidating.
35. Favorite Poet?
I'm so underread when it comes to poetry. Ugh. But I really really love Rilke: both the Duino Elegies and and the Sonnets to Orpheus are way beyond me and are incredibly beautiful. I go back to them a lot.
36. How many books do you usually have checked out from the library at any given time?
Well, I have 7 right now, which is a pretty good representation. I always have a litter of books from the library around my room that I never get around to reading, and after months of renewing them I just end up returning them with shame because I realize that I'll probably never get around to reading them.
37. How often have you returned books to the library unread?
Read: above. Read: constantly.
38. Favorite fictional character?
Even though she's terrible, I really do like Daisy from The Great Gatsby because he description as someone that talked quietly to make people lean in closer was just such a sensuous description of someone that it kind of amazes me. I also really like all the characters in the Unbearable Lightness of Being, and all their interactions. That book's soooo good!Also, non-literary example, I really love Vivi from Final Fantasy 9. That story was so incredibly subtle and isn't appreciated as much as it should be, and he was the best part by far.
39. Favorite Fictional Villain?
Um...existential Nausea. I'm pretty sure that was the villain of that book.
40. Books I'm Mostly Likely to Bring on Vacation?
Right now? Probably the Gay Science and Daybreak, because I really want to make my way through them. I'd also like to get through the rest of the Game of Thrones books (I only read the first; I suck). Cat's Eye by Margaret Atwood looks really good too: I should give that one a try.
macaulaybulkin replied to your photo “Fukuyama’s such a god damn tool.”
Where is this from?
It's from Fukuyama's "End of History" article he wrote in...1989, I want to say. Here's a link to it. It's horrible.
swampfires replied to your photo “Fukuyama’s such a god damn tool.”
what the fuck ew I liked some of his stuff :(
Really? Ah, no, I haven't been able to find anything I like in Fukuyama. The whole "End of History" hypothesis just seems like bourgeois justification for the current (economic) status quo, combined with a bad reading of Marx and Hegel (saying that both have a notion of telos and End of History, which is pretty untenable), further combined with a weird amount of racism and orientalism? I don't know. I'm so bored by him.
noumenalspecificity replied to your photo “Fukuyama’s such a god damn tool.”
lol what a fucking nerd
Lol, who the hell thinks that the End of History is a tenable metaphysical thesis. What a h*cka nerd. We should steal his lunch money (especially since it's worth more than most people's life incomes).
swampfires replied to your post: demagogol replied to your post: demago...
the herniated heir
we're all winners today. putrid, putrid winners
Mum - If I Were a Fish
Fen, have you heard this song? It seems like you'd really like it, though I might be wrong.
swampfires replied to your post: swampfires replied to your post: swamp...
coffee does nothing to me. nada. maybe a quadruple americano will make me shakey but no Waking Effect. n no no diagnosis my therapist is not into giving me that sort of thing I just get lil bit from friend.
hmm hmm might wanna consider it
coffee did have a different feeling from being on actual stimulants too, when i'm taking my meds it's more of a... whole-head attentiveness? who the hell knows how to put it. when i was just using caffeine i would be very fixed on a specific thing and i still had to deal with outside stimuli being too loud/unpleasant/etc and too often, when i'm on xr it softens the sensory blow so i can keep my mind on the task at hand