June 16th, 2009 / 11:19 pm
Snippets
Snippets
Ken Baumann—
Possibly Obnoxious Half-Figurative Question(s) #1: Can a person be a glutton for information? What is the healthy amount to subsume?
this much
this much
Also, here’s an idea for an essay that I will probably not write:
‘In his Notes Towards a Definition of Culture, T.S. Eliot remarks that there are moments when the only choice is the one between sectarianism and non-belief, i.e., when the only way to keep a religion alive is to perform a sectarian split from its main corpse. By means of his sectarian split, by cutting himself off the decaying corpse of the International Psycho-Analytic Association, Lacan kept the Freudian teaching alive – and it is upon us today to do the same with Lacan.’
Use the above to talk about Brian Evenson & his split from LDS.
Also, here’s an idea for an essay that I will probably not write:
‘In his Notes Towards a Definition of Culture, T.S. Eliot remarks that there are moments when the only choice is the one between sectarianism and non-belief, i.e., when the only way to keep a religion alive is to perform a sectarian split from its main corpse. By means of his sectarian split, by cutting himself off the decaying corpse of the International Psycho-Analytic Association, Lacan kept the Freudian teaching alive – and it is upon us today to do the same with Lacan.’
Use the above to talk about Brian Evenson & his split from LDS.
Probably less than I do, at a guess. I have brain on the shoulders of my jacket.
Probably less than I do, at a guess. I have brain on the shoulders of my jacket.
Ken, I’m working my way through “Notes” right now. Are you reading it too by any chance? I haven’t encountered the passage you’re quoting but in the introduction Eliot lays out a thesis that no culture develops except alongside a religion. It’s also important to understand his three uses of “culture” as a term- maybe that’s something I can post about later. Anyway it’s a short book; a little stuffy but not all that dense.
Re the quote you mentioned- I don’t think Evenson’s personal case really applies, though he’s pretty much a genius so he’d be good too just shoot the breeze with in general. Eliot seems to be talking about separation and re-imagination as a kind of re-boot, an evasive maneuver designed to preserve value and re-invigorate a dying movement. LDS isn’t dying, it’s burgeoning, and Brian didn’t leave as part of any attempt to “save” it–whatever that would mean. He had an irreconcilable conflict with the power-brokers in LDS, and the net result of his leaving seems to have been not a renewed or re-imagined faith but a personal loss/abandonment of faith as such.
I think if you want to extend Eliot’s quote into the present day, you need to look at the way that Zizek has turned traditional Lacanian psychoanalytic theory on its head– or, if you like, in the way that psychology itself has been run out of the sciences on a rail, but saved itself from archaism (like, i dunno, phrenology or something) by getting itself absorbed into the English department, where it lives on as a critical/philosophical model.
Ken, I’m working my way through “Notes” right now. Are you reading it too by any chance? I haven’t encountered the passage you’re quoting but in the introduction Eliot lays out a thesis that no culture develops except alongside a religion. It’s also important to understand his three uses of “culture” as a term- maybe that’s something I can post about later. Anyway it’s a short book; a little stuffy but not all that dense.
Re the quote you mentioned- I don’t think Evenson’s personal case really applies, though he’s pretty much a genius so he’d be good too just shoot the breeze with in general. Eliot seems to be talking about separation and re-imagination as a kind of re-boot, an evasive maneuver designed to preserve value and re-invigorate a dying movement. LDS isn’t dying, it’s burgeoning, and Brian didn’t leave as part of any attempt to “save” it–whatever that would mean. He had an irreconcilable conflict with the power-brokers in LDS, and the net result of his leaving seems to have been not a renewed or re-imagined faith but a personal loss/abandonment of faith as such.
I think if you want to extend Eliot’s quote into the present day, you need to look at the way that Zizek has turned traditional Lacanian psychoanalytic theory on its head– or, if you like, in the way that psychology itself has been run out of the sciences on a rail, but saved itself from archaism (like, i dunno, phrenology or something) by getting itself absorbed into the English department, where it lives on as a critical/philosophical model.
When I go back home from this trip in five days my feed reader will have over 5000 unread articles.
This is too much.
When I go back home from this trip in five days my feed reader will have over 5000 unread articles.
This is too much.
Ken, I’m tired of you and BB getting me to think.
Ken, I’m tired of you and BB getting me to think.
A syllogism, or logical appeal, (Greek: συλλογισμός — “conclusion,” “inference”), (usually the categorical syllogism) is a kind of logical argument in which one proposition (the conclusion) is inferred from two others (the premises) of a certain form.
A syllogism, or logical appeal, (Greek: συλλογισμός — “conclusion,” “inference”), (usually the categorical syllogism) is a kind of logical argument in which one proposition (the conclusion) is inferred from two others (the premises) of a certain form.
I have notes of Evenson from just one story that I read- I keep meaning to write about his use of moral “blank spaces” and his irony in the title “post etiquette shooting” and the story in general.
Yes, Freud is in the English dept, but therapy hasn’t died. But I’d argue it is also transformed into a social science with many practical uses and still big business. Just think of “rehab” and the billions of dollars that go into that.
I have notes of Evenson from just one story that I read- I keep meaning to write about his use of moral “blank spaces” and his irony in the title “post etiquette shooting” and the story in general.
Yes, Freud is in the English dept, but therapy hasn’t died. But I’d argue it is also transformed into a social science with many practical uses and still big business. Just think of “rehab” and the billions of dollars that go into that.
re: glutton
no, i don’t think there is a satiation point to information. what i do think is that most people who seek giant amounts of information tend to lose the ability to parse the information appropriately and apply it to real world scenario.
in other words, intelligence does not usually apply wisdom but wisdom always applies intelligence.
i mean hey awesome if you can read a 1000 books and remember every word and sentence but really who gives a fuck if you are unable to apply that towards a reality.
the more information learned the harder it is going to apply towards reality because now you have all these variables and factors and crazy shit and you have to sit and think for a really long time before making a decision and usually wisdom will dictate you make no decision because shit really is that complex.
it is much easier to say i follow X system, learn everything you can about X and apply its tenants ferociously. the guy who can quote every line of Sartre and Nietzsche doesn’t really impress me.
who cares.
show me a guy who knows and applies.
now that’s rare.
re: glutton
no, i don’t think there is a satiation point to information. what i do think is that most people who seek giant amounts of information tend to lose the ability to parse the information appropriately and apply it to real world scenario.
in other words, intelligence does not usually apply wisdom but wisdom always applies intelligence.
i mean hey awesome if you can read a 1000 books and remember every word and sentence but really who gives a fuck if you are unable to apply that towards a reality.
the more information learned the harder it is going to apply towards reality because now you have all these variables and factors and crazy shit and you have to sit and think for a really long time before making a decision and usually wisdom will dictate you make no decision because shit really is that complex.
it is much easier to say i follow X system, learn everything you can about X and apply its tenants ferociously. the guy who can quote every line of Sartre and Nietzsche doesn’t really impress me.
who cares.
show me a guy who knows and applies.
now that’s rare.
Justin, first and foremost: Glad to have you back.
I’m not reading ‘Notes’ at the moment, but will soon (actually, staring at my stack of books I probably shouldn’t say soon, although the desire does exist). The excerpt above is from Zizek’s intro to Lacan, just read it recently and was rereading.
The Evenson split reference wasn’t exactly meant as a literal case study idea, but more as a rhizomatic fragment; I thought it would be interesting to study his fiction extensively (again, the stack of books) and see if any sort of empathetic sentiments existed in both his stories/themes and the teachings — or ritual — of the LDS, etc. So yeah, not such a sound bedrock. Alas, a peering into my skull: flits and notions.
All the psychoanalysis -> philosophy stuff fascinates me, Zizek foremost. More homework.
Justin, first and foremost: Glad to have you back.
I’m not reading ‘Notes’ at the moment, but will soon (actually, staring at my stack of books I probably shouldn’t say soon, although the desire does exist). The excerpt above is from Zizek’s intro to Lacan, just read it recently and was rereading.
The Evenson split reference wasn’t exactly meant as a literal case study idea, but more as a rhizomatic fragment; I thought it would be interesting to study his fiction extensively (again, the stack of books) and see if any sort of empathetic sentiments existed in both his stories/themes and the teachings — or ritual — of the LDS, etc. So yeah, not such a sound bedrock. Alas, a peering into my skull: flits and notions.
All the psychoanalysis -> philosophy stuff fascinates me, Zizek foremost. More homework.