Friday, June 15, 2012

Baudrillard takes the negative path. Deleuze creates anew

5m   Savitri Era Party @SavitriEraParty Reaching airport along with 3 ministerial colleagues to receive Ramdev is perhaps the most demeaning event in Pranab's long public life. TNM Expand

chris on June 9, 2012 at 7:43 pm [In reply to the response post linked above at 'Radical Denial':] Bio: Christopher Vitale
I agree, Baudrillard is another path. I left him and Badiou out of my post, simply because they diverged too far from my target, which was deconstruction. But Baudrillard is much maligned, yet doing very similar things to the rest. I don’t know why philosophers don’t read him that often, perhaps it is because his later works aren’t written as systematically as philosophers like.
I agree also that one needs to ‘feel’ the metaphors of a given thinker. Deleuzian optimism can rub the wrong way. That said, it’s ethos of creation is hardly polyanna-ish, to truly commit to creation is a hard path which will eventually strip the ego of its beloved yet paranoid limitations as radical mutation sets in. So long as radical mutation is in the service of life, and not merely the new for its own sake, I think this is a hard yet ultimately rewarding path towards liberation, collective and otherwise.
Baudrillard takes the negative path. He wants to go through the simulacra by intensifying it. You lie more intensely than the others, becoming so fake you almost become real. Almost. Underneath, it’s quite Nietzschian, in that ‘truth and lies’ kind of way.
My issue with Baudrillard, like most of the post-structuralists, however, is that he gets caught in the danse macabre, and points beyond, but doesn’t take the step himself into new creation. Deleuze does this, he creates anew. Baudrillard’s concepts tend to exist for the purpose of unravelling rather than constructing. I’d like to see a creative Baudrillardism, perhaps….

Individuals and the Whole in Process Ontology
 - Footnotes to Plato This is a response to some recent posts on process philosophy in America by Jason/Immanent Transcendence. The status of individuals in a process ontology is something I’ve explored in connection with Harman’s object-oriented ontology (HERE and HERE). Harman points to process ontologists like Whitehead and says they ignore the irreducible individuality of things (as withdrawn objects) in favor of the flux between them. Read more

John Elwyn Kimber June 15, 2012 at 4:23 AM Thank you for publishing this interview. It is regrettable that those who wish to find fault seize forensically upon every word which might serve to reinforce a pre-existent prejudice. Even with far more experience of the processes it would be difficult to judge these extraordinary experiments in human transformation objectively – remembering that The Mother too was reduced to a state of dependency as she attempted to ‘unlearn’ the body’s conventional wisdom. They may have been landmark developments or they may have been false starts, but neither the Mother’s nor Satprem and Sujata’s critics have the necessary knowledge to make an informed judgment at this stage. You might as well criticise a marathon-runner for showing signs of exhaustion. It would be wiser to read, absorb the information, and reserve judgment.
Pauline Cardozo June 15, 2012 at 3:11 PM Anyway the procces of transformation the Mother and Sri Aurobindo started is going on . No matter if we beliefe it or not. Satprem said this very clearly. I feel so gratefull to belong to the persons who have knowledge of this.

No comments:

Post a Comment