"Absolute Knowledge is a Dick Joke"

I write my own philosophy from a sense of completion or more-or-less perfected self-knowledge. Of course this is audacious, laughable, taboo. I know. Believe it or not, I'm a pretty smooth in the real world. I don't drop this stuff on anyone but those who might get or forgive or hopefully relate to it. Anyway I generalize my spiritual history as "spirit" that evolved from agency, or mastery from the slavery of indirect and therefore unstable, unsatisfying pseudo-mastery (mastery-in-the-name-of or castration). Wearing the phallus is appealing to X as one's justification or badge. Being the phallus is eschewing such appeals, at least theoretically. Or more cynically we might say that being the phallus is wearing the self-referential phallus. Obviously practical life requires various credentials. But the "ego-ideal" or notion of virtue is that of Bloom's "strong poet."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

for "Stirner"

The "spirit of seriousness" possesses the objective man, the responsible man, the mature man. This "possession" is just its "non-optionality" in the absence of a conscious alternative. Until one somehow learns to think otherwise, virtue just is serious and objective. Or rather such is the case for the "scientist of virtue." To be clear, "I" who speak here also play at this role, but in a late ironic stage of the role, in a self-subverting stage. So the serious man to maintain his serious pose (which is to say to avoid understanding his seriousness as a pose) must interpret the ironist as a sick man or an evil man. The ironist, of course, is not offended --beyond as it were the "violence" of words. In this sense the ironist is the true materialist. If he shrugs at materialist ideologies, he knows better than most the gap between words and "reality." He fears actual  not verbal violence as an interruption of his c
Read more

Hegel & The Irony

What we are talking about here is an _invisible_ _background._ The most important message is the medium itself. It is the authoritative _pose_ itself that tends to remain invisible and unthought. In our earnest questioning in the pursuit of the Truth-For-All, we forget to question this questioning itself. We have _assumed_ both the existence of this truth-for-all and the nobility of pursuing it. Our actions betray these implicit assumptions. This is the "first wrong move," which is only "wrong" in its blindness and according to its own implicit standards. The philosopher is, ideally, a skeptic or a critical mind. But as philosopher (or as an earnest metaphysician) he is constituted by an unchallenged belief --that his thinking is and ought to be universal. This is Spengler's "ethical socialism" as opposed to "confession." By _confession_ I mean the confession of faith _as_ faith or the presentation of one's beliefs in the context of
Read more

"the one who is supposed to know"

Yes, this "one who is supposed to know" is at the center of my own philosophy/worldview/personality. The death of "the one who is supposed to know"  is  the leap from "agency" (embodiment) to "spirit." In my teens and 20s, I lived my own Phen. of Spirit, went through a series of epistemological-ethical positions. Since I was seduced utterly by the "knower" version of the hero myth, the epistemological  was  the ethical. Eventually this knowledge version of the hero myth appeared to me in its contigency --but only because I wanted to  know  the truth about knowledge. So the identification with truth-seeking-as-nobility was self-subverting. That's how I take Hegel. These positions collapse on their own terms. Indeed, a proud man won't accept criticism except in terms of his household gods, if even then. He has to suffer self-mutilation. His frustration with the contradictions in his myth of hero lead to the abandonment-replacement
Read more