It is a bit of hilarity by which one finds all the various ways to dispute and knock terms into categories of time and person, at that, never really wanting to apply such ideas to what is actually occurring in the consideration of those ideas. Such could be the ‘occasion’. For I find that I […]Read More Call and Response.
I have just begun Quentin Meillassoux’s “After Finitude”. At risk of appearing – What, I’m not quite sure, but something very anti intellectual – In the first chapter called “Ancestrality”, QM is doing a job on what is called ‘correlationalism’. I have never heard about this terming before. But it appears that it is the […]Read More More less wind.
Im gonna take a very short reprieve from the long wind, and just put out two questions: How is it possible to know of history without it having been taught from historic records? Or more specifically: How is it possible to know the significant points of philosophy as have been recorded by authors in books, […]Read More Two questions.
… As I read your essay, there’s a level more foundational than narrative or the interaction of narratives at which I have a hard time following you. Maybe we could call it context; context as it has to do with history and humanity’s orientation toward god and reality within your essay. History. Your (over)statements regarding […]Read More Irony and the individual, part 2.
The entrance into what is not real is made by the significant event that distinguishes reality from the experience. Where reality is sufficient to account for the experience, there we have the individual, the one that refers itself to reality to justify experience. The experience of the event, that which allows for the experience, while […]Read More Irony and the Individual, part 1.