t byfield on Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:36:41 +0200 (MET DST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Political Economics 101 |
At 2:52 PM -0400 on 6/3/97, Mark Stahlman wrote: <...> > a world that is characterized by economic scarcity (Maastricht austerity), So is this "economic rationalism" this rational or irrational? > studied irrationality (post-structuralism), Post-structuralism is named so mostly because it comes *after* structuralism; was structuralism "rational"? I think you might find that some basic strains of it focused very clearly on the "pattern recognition" you advocate. And I think you'll find as well that it sits very squarely atop your "great divide": OT1H by emphasizing a scalable "process" of "assembly" that applies at every level of human activity with no regard whatsoever for any pseudo-distinction between "culture" and "technology"; and OT0H by emphasizing this mode, *not* "individuality" or "will" or whatever, as the object of the human sciences. So, I'll ask again: Was structuralism "rational"? And onward: Was--we *are* talking 30 or even 40 years here--post-structuralism primarily a reaction to structuralism? And just which post-structuralism are we talking about? Althusser? Derrida? Foucault? Lacan? J-P Vernant? That's already an impossibly mixed bag, and I've left out a half-dozen other French rock stars--Deleuze, Ricoeur, Le Goff, Marin, Veyne, Bourdieu, Certeau... Once you start taking on other national traditions--UK, US, Germany, Italy, and yes! Slovenia--this "post-structuralism" will very quickly collapse into the negative category it is. So,"irrational" you say; and I agree, but for quite different reasons on a different order. > electronic narcotics (user interfaces and virtual reality), I think that Feuerbach's famous line sums up this plaint well: "But certainly for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, representation to reality, the appearance to the essence. . .*illusion* only is sacred, *truth* profane. Nay, sacredness is held to be en- hanced in proportion as truth decreases and illusion increases so that the highest degree of illusion comes to be the highest degree of sacredness." (pref, 2d ed, _Essence of Christianity) > semiotic occultism (hermenetics), I would like to know what you mean by this semiotic occultism. > accelerated looting and the global crushing of hope. <...> Hope is irrational. And bloody well good for it, I should add. Ted --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: [email protected]