Kropotkin: This is what i was trying to say in the Marx forum also. Before artists used to paint realistically, beliefing in ideal forms such as God, determinism, there was no abstaction, disassocation , there was no modern art to speak of , nowadays there are only private spheres, and where the private globus only represents within the many. (Where there is no comparison, there is no meaning) The deconstruction this dis-associative objective narrative, created the private narratives.
Orb, are you familiar with this work of Sloterdijk?
Not really, but most of the moderns follow a similar line using pretty much similar analysis. But i will try to familiarize myself with it, will be interesting how it corresponds with the others’.
Bubbles/Spheres is a trilogy - consists of three parts, each of which is very dense, but jam-packed with innovative perceptions. There are copious amounts of reviews on the book ( the first one ), which give distillations and explanations of the technical jargon. Def. recommend this.
Thanks, Erik will look into it
You’re welcome, buddy. Happy hunting.
In this last phase man is closest to non existence. The next phases artist has to re introduce the primordial pathos of self valuing, which is negated by postmodernism, was miniaturized during the metaphysical age but unrestrained in the premetaphysical age. The agonizingly clearly understood relativity of Achilles’ perspective was the cause of its absolute consequences.
The modern thinks that his standard is already in compliance with the absolute and his consequence is nil. Belief in the one god has been internalized.
The coming age will wash all postmodernism and “monadologue art” away. It is the age of trauma, rupture, in which art must be majestic and universal to survice.
Postmodernism is a degenerate impulse towards chaos, or fragmentation - a will to deconstruct, to tear down the strata, not for the sake of reconstruction, but for chaos in itself - chaos as the telos par excellence.
I think the coming age will be a revival of the golden; the masses will be thirsty for order and true nobility. The vicissitudes of ethoses are like seasons.
In Spheres, Sloterdijk brings forth the concept of the “placental-double” or " the With ", which is the essential dyadic relationship of the primordial sphere within the mother, i.e., when you were in the mother’s womb, your double, or alter ego, was the placenta - which provided you with comfort and nourishment. This primordial dyadic relationship continues to haunt the human throughout the course of his life - he seeks to re-construct the conditions of the mother’s womb, albeit unconsciously.
Interfacial Spheres:
Negative Gynecology:
What he said ^
Bunch of incoherent words, mixed with too fanciness.
This isn’t philosophy, please move it to somewhere else.
Listen, I’m not going to condescend in my prose. If you don’t understand a term, then google it. It’s simple. This is a place for higher learning, so view augmenting your vocabulary as ancillary to your philosophical endeavors.
Just because you think/wish that what you have written in OP makes sense, doesn’t necessarily mean it does make sense.
Most of us have a sufficient understanding of the words, but bound together in the wrong way, the meaning falls apart.
It makes sense - you just need to enter into the Sloterdijkian semio-sphere. Careful, though - or else it will pop.
Ancient Greeks would have a term “diluted” when thoughts are a stray and doesn’t make sense.