Culler’s Theory of Theory
Culler, quotes, theory, academia, advertising, dance, philosophy, aphorism
I love this definition. But at the same time he brings up for me a certain problem. Personally I think I am so invested in problem solving that very little that I come across intellectually is not problemitized. For even at times that I’ve come to a certain truth, something that makes really good sense to me, I immediately question it. Often know sooner have I written down something that I think makes incredible sense, is a very good solution to whatever problem, that I look back upon what I’ve written and find the problem inherent in the solution.
Such it is that Culler’s theory of Theory is problematized by asking if there is a way or manner of getting outside of human prescription?
I think this question is involved with everything I do on the theoretical level. To me this is the first philosophy, and that’s why I think its a very clear way what I mean when I talk about what is’ subsequent’.
So it is for me because of the incessant problem enciting of what I come upon, I have had to enact a sort of partition and how I approach the world. And even this situation, which is really found in the question of if there is it getting outside or beyond human prescription, it’s difficult to answer as to what I mean by a partition.
In very simple terms it means that I live my life and this life only intersects with philosophy and Theory at a certain juncture, and this is to say the ‘first philosophy’ that I’m talking about does so. In this way I guess we can find a meaning and how I say that there is not a unified human potential. The partition of which I speak is an absolute partition. One side only influences the other side through this particular juncture of which ice just spoke. There is not a unilateral semi permeable membrane through which all particulates ofevents of my daily activity move back-and-forth with the theoretical world. There is no one to one correspondence with things that I come across in my daily regular world with theoretical items on me’other side’ of the partition. Hence we might also begin to understand what I mean by the point of contention and the issue at hand, because also my work concerns how this may be the case, I.e. that things move across this partition at one juncture and not across a semi permeablemembrane such as a border between nations. This juncture is more like an airport. Big jetliner just can’t land anywhere in the country, it has to intersect with this land at particular junctures that function to discern what’s going in and what’s coming out and what that means. It is not like the border between US and Canada where there are many roads that people may indeed go back and forth upon and many border stations, but between US and Canada people could ride a horse across the front tier through the forest they could walk they could take a ATV they can cross the border wherever they want.
So Innoway this analogy kind of describes the situation wherein my work books essays find purchase. My regular daily life is like the border between US and Canada. Perhaps this is similar to what I call reality. In this particular world of reality there is such as Coler theory of theory. Perhaps in reality one could say that there is this kind of inner kind of intellectualness similar to say Canada, and then there is this kind of outer activity where human beings involved with one another with items in objects in horses in trees and ideas and economies and ideologies and pop policies, that maybe we could call the continent of North America. The US say being the’Objective world’.
So to the question is if there is a way or manner to get beyond human prescription which is to say out of the effervescent and eternal cycle of human negotiation where the negotiations of humans and their world are axiomatically included in everything that can possibly be, a ‘One Universe’, then I say and 10 to suggest that there is a way or a manner that is beyond or outside human prescription the negotiation of theory of Thierry.
While it may seem that other authors have already addressed this in the conclusion is that there is no getting outside of the discourse of human negotiation and it’s world, The question then becomes not any essential question but ultimately a question of meaning itself. Because what they’re really saying by implying as relying upon this one world axiom, is that there is a definite truth that should be found in the use of terms and phrases. Harmons 000 might be slightly premature unless it is ultimately conventional and of no more significant than how to prune a tree( which in certain circles it’s pretty damn significant).
So similarly to Hickman at alien ecologies blog, my work looks in to these other worlds that exist outside of the prescription that uses the term ‘meaning’ and ‘world’ as reducible idioms of a one reality and the one universe.