I think ive been blocked from replying to his posts. I think its because he has too much asserting and posturing to do; he cant entertain (il-) legitimate critique.
Can we really listen to ideas that come from such a defensive posture?
Here An example of the NewReality. I like it; its a good synopsis of the New Religion. 😋
The orientation upon the True Object. Charging forth into the progress of its ideology. Yes, but no: We are determined by objects, but this reality is an ideological construction, an intrinsic mythology. A platform upon which agents of transcendence assert their privileged audience with an agency that justifies their power play over ‘the masses’. Its power available through faith.
The professor conveniently puts the transcendental agency in its historical pocket to assert a power of prophecy, but a prophecy based in bad faith, an authenticity of deception and power. Unable to choose its not-choice, the professor claims the ubiquity of reality.
Object Oriented. Necessarily.
Of course we need the ideological apologists.
But where is its counterpart?
Perhaps we would do best to call it the material unconscious. Freud famously said that there had been three blows to human narcissism: Copernicus and his decentering of the Earth, Darwin and his theory of evolution, and psychoanalysis and its discovery of the unconscious. With the first humanity learns that it is not at the center of the universe. With the second, humanity learns it is not markedly different from animals. With the third, humanity learns that it’s interiority is not in charge. With thingly thought, the thought of the object, we perhaps encounter a fourth blow to our narcissism: the way in which we are mediated by things. We dwell within a milieu of things, objects, or what I have elsewhere called machines. What we take to be our own agency, our own free choice, instead turns out in so many instances to be the agency of these things…
View original post 774 more words