A poisoned peace

A poisoned peace

A poisoned peace
— Read on huenemanniac.com/2018/09/18/a-poisoned-peace/

The century of doubt, exhibited here by one of the more artistic of philosophical thinkers, Camus.

Yet we find that this is a kind of anachronistic view which persists into every present moment. In particular because I think the choice that he gives us, while appearing like a false choice, if I include myself in the continuum of humanity as a historical organism of knowledge, it’s actually a mistaken view.

Take for example this famous picture called “all is vanity”.

The choice that Camus appears to give us is a choice between say the woman looking in the mirror and a skull. Here, There is no reduction to the picture itself to say that there is a false choice, but rather that the choice that I am making to say that it is a false choice is understood as a correct reduction. Of course if we bring in the French artist I forget his name, who made the picture “This is not a pipe” (The treachery of images)

We have the argument for a false dichotomy.

These are missed placed expressions of doubt. Miss placed because if you take them to their end and actually apply them to a lived life, you really get nowhere but a bad attitude. Or you get the sort of Zen bliss of understanding about the transience of consciousness.

But then when you look at the 20th century, with some exceptions of course, you pretty much see a bunch of people with a bunch of bad attitudes; you don’t see a bunch of people in a Zen happy state. I mean The 20th century started out with two world wars as well as the synthesis of pure drugs. I mean that sounds to me like a recipe for disaster. Lol

And still you have these kind of pessimistic philosophers that are stuck in the 20th century that want to reduce things to sort of the actuality of things. And the thing is is that every experience includes all these kinds of false choices and false dichotomies; The issue is is what choice do we want to make about the “actuality of things”. For when we think about it even coming to the conclusion that such and such is the “actuality of things” must also be included in that situation that they are presenting as the actuality of things. And so the confusion that we find in the 20th century is this idea that ideas are giving us “actual things”. This is where we find nihilism. Because people came across these “big profound truths of existence” and then you got depressed and spiteful because they’re very ideas about the profundity of life and existence was merely reflecting this situation that they themselves were in: The belief that what they are telling themselves is true.

They failed to supply their own contradictions to the conclusions that they have come across.

There is no good reduction to the actuality of the pipe or the actuality of the drawing. Actuality is what is occurring at the moment. And if the actuality of what is occurring at the moment is that there is a false choice presented to us in existence, then we have nearly found the content of contradiction, rather than finding the substance of human existence. Les as a real case and more as a true case.

5 thoughts on “A poisoned peace

  1. Continental philosophy can be problematic. There is always a danger of personal opinion rather than opinion based on careful analysis.

    And yes, Zen can dangerous as well if practiced the wrong way. But I think should not dismiss the depth of Buddhism has. Careful reading will show he was quite the philosopher.

    Lastly, the painter of the pipe is Magritte.

    1. Thx.

      One of the issues I address is that is reductionary truths. So often I am not discounting what I appear to be critiquing, but merely speaking to what it is, what should be noticed. Not as an indication of what is wrong, but merely as an indication, a notice of the aspect without the implication of incorrection.

      A suspension of a teleology.

      1. Well that’s the catch isn’t it?

        I cannot say that I am against reductionism because very conclusion that I would come to to say that I would be against reductionism is itself a reduction.

        I don’t know if I would use the word “against”. I Admit that reduction has its uses in his place.

        What do you mean by reductionism exactly?

      2. Yes. “Against” is not the best word.

        As you know, in my thinking, conception is a process of an object. The reality itself does not reduce anything. Only human beings do in the human being way.

        Reductionism is then a kind of categorisation of things, not necessarily there. Yet humans practice categorisation. That is their characteristic. What to do, what to do?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s