"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-editing of this myth. As he incarnates his ideal, the ideal itself also evolves.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

for Kojeve

from an online conversation, as much of the rest in fact is: Do you never feel like the "golden boy"? The genius? The one who made it through the dangers to the prize? I see those old Christian paintings and sculptures in which Christ or some saint gives a sign with his hand. I  feel  that gesture. In my higher moments (not too rare) I feel a sense of great pride and transcendence. But this only became stable and fully mine conceptually via a kind of death. No secret, no escape, no ground. I am a fragile, mortal "god." I was quite amused to discover that Kojeve talked like this. Really it's right there in "his" Hegel that man becomes Christ. To be clear, I'm not 100% with Kojeve. He presents nihilism/skepticism as an unsatisfying or unstable position. To me, on the contrary, it is "Christ." But Kojeve takes politics more seriously than I do.  Nevertheless, his book understood philosophy as a religion of self-consciousness. The sel...
Read more

"The question behind other questions, the answer behind other answers"

The "spirit of seriousness" possesses the objective man, the responsible man, the mature man. Our seemingly opposed friend, Mr. Infinite Jest, is not , however, anti-serious or seriously irresponsible. He's not seriously anti-serious. He may even remain more serious than he might like to think. It may be nothing but his seriousness in one sense that urges him to question "the spirit of seriousness." He is aware of it as a role . He knows the words. He can write them. He can include (create) a fierce critic of his ironism within its exposition. He does this to impishly exhibit the depths of this ironism. In his domination of mere words by mere words , he may even be a friend to the serious man. But the serious man is perhaps pained by the impotence of his words. For him they were and are decisive. The ironist throws him up against the finality of his final vocabulary. His holy words are dust in the ears of the ironist. A nothingness behind them is made visi...
Read more

"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."
Read more