Just bought Miller's The Song of Achilles despite telling myself I wouldn't buy any more books until this quarter's over. I'm sure it's gonna be cliché in a ton of places, but every time I see quotes from the novel, I always feel a bit charmed.

corumjhaelen

France6884 Posts

November 21 2014 08:25 GMT

#1363

On November 21 2014 06:09 Surth wrote:
I wanted to check up on Water Margin. Its one of the four most important chinese novels and I cant buy it new on amazon! What a world we live in. Maybe I'll just download one of the many TV adaptations of it. reading books is for losers anyway, after all. :3

You can in French and in English :p

Surth

Germany456 Posts

November 21 2014 13:51 GMT

#1364

je ne parle pas français! And as much as I enjoy reading and conversing in English, it does still feel different to me reading something in German. The words just fly by you unconsciously in a way that will never really happen when reading in a second language. Oh well.

Next up: More Baudrillard and some Fukuyama. Writing a term paper about why Futurama represents the End of History from the perspective of Baudrillard's pessimism!

farvacola

United States18866 Posts

November 21 2014 14:00 GMT

#1365

I would dismiss that claim out of hand; Baudrillard is hardly a pessimist and Futurama is quite obviously about today and not tomorrow :D

To be fair, I don't think History really ever started in the first place.

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 21 2014 18:23 GMT

#1366

I'm the end of history

dmnum

Brazil6910 Posts

November 21 2014 19:13 GMT

#1367

On November 22 2014 03:23 bookwyrm wrote:
I'm the end of history

straight out of a michael bay movie

corumjhaelen

France6884 Posts

November 21 2014 19:25 GMT

#1368

On November 22 2014 04:13 dmnum wrote:

Show nested quote +

straight out of a michael bay movie

Or of Hegel's mouth.

Surth

Germany456 Posts

November 21 2014 19:53 GMT

#1369

Write an essay about the nature of Law and Derrida. You have two minutes to comply. If you do not comply, the sentence is death.

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 21 2014 19:54 GMT

#1370

There are two possible solutions to the problem of divine violence. The first (Christian-antinomian or deconstructive) solution is to attempt to turn the divine violence upon God himself - God must die so that we may live together in the l’avenir of Kingdom Come. This is the idealist solution, and should be strenuously rejected as attributing undue causal efficacy to correct belief (or to freeing oneself from incorrect belief) - in others words, as attributing undue emancipatory potential to the slogans of academic discourse themselves, as making the mistake of thinking that the basic task of the “progressive” intellectual is to proselytize for “progressive” causes. The materialist solution (which is at once the solution of fascism and of the radical Left, as seen in the strange convergence of the thought of Walter Benjamin and Carl Schmitt) is, on the other hand, to accept the inevitability of divine violence - to accept that the disavowed violence behind the Law is not peculiar to the settler colony but constitutive of the Law as such, and that furthermore there is no outside to the Law, that no antinomian escape is in fact possible. The only question that remains, then, is to ask ourselves what violence we intend to do. And this is the question which I must now pose, and, in the remainder of this essay, attempt to answer - lest I fall beneath the hooves of my own critique. Put up or shut up. Very well, then - what violence do I intend to do, today?

Surth

Germany456 Posts

November 21 2014 20:04 GMT

#1371

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 21 2014 20:06 GMT

#1372

I cheated, it's from my term paper

Surth

Germany456 Posts

November 21 2014 20:15 GMT

#1373

Can I see it when its done? I want to scratch my head and ask myself why I am never capable of these kinds of papers!

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 21 2014 20:20 GMT

#1374

it's one of the more insane papers I have written. and it is a polemic against some people I don't name explicitly. but yes, you can

farvacola

United States18866 Posts

November 21 2014 21:33 GMT

#1375

Carl Schmitt whad upppp

lungic

Sweden123 Posts

November 22 2014 16:52 GMT

#1376

OK, tried to comprehend bookwyrms statement above and I failed, but I learned that there's something called Christian Anarchy, so I feel the time was well spent.

dmnum

Brazil6910 Posts

November 22 2014 17:13 GMT

#1377

On November 23 2014 01:52 lungic wrote:
OK, tried to comprehend bookwyrms statement above and I failed, but I learned that there's something called Christian Anarchy, so I feel the time was well spent.

Read The Kingdom of God Is Within You if you're interested in christian anarchism

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 22 2014 18:01 GMT

#1378

Go read pauls letter to the galatians

lungic

Sweden123 Posts

November 22 2014 20:58 GMT

#1379

Well I just might though I'm not schooled enough in the social sciences and philosophy to really appreciate it.

Just want to tell you that when I saw the two (in my opinion) incompatible terms put together It kind of broke my view on what Anarchy and/or Christianity is, not really an epiphany but it made my head spin. I can imagine the idea of Jesus could be a serious problem here (was Jesus a human, and how should one look at his possible return, and should one look to this man(?) as authority).

It feels like one is almost ridiculing the idea of anarchism. It kind of makes for a relative anarchism where certain rules can apply for authority, and one is tempted to define an "plancks anarchism" - where there's no authority but the planck lenght.

My understanding is probably flawed beyond the tolerance limit, and I'm sorry if I offend anyone with my ignorance.

bookwyrm

United States722 Posts

November 22 2014 23:21 GMT

#1380

Well, christianity IS antinomian literally in the sense that paul claims that you can be justified by faith in christ and not through the works of the law. (Law = nomos). this is obviously a point of contestation in the history of christianity and different people will interpret the antinomian tendencies in different ways with different strength. But its there in paul. Its not necessarily the same as anarchism

In the paper I say that deconstruction is actually just a version of this christian antinomianism (ie derrida ia a crypto christian). This is also why for deconstruction democracy can only ever be "to come" (l'avenir) because actually its just a messianic ideology.