...we'd be so sunk!
We'd be screwed, actually.
There would be no movement. No shimmering. No physicality.
There is an irreducible erotic component in philosophy. I understand Oddný Eir is working on this like her late mentor Derrida (read the translation! hello Oddný!). Behold.
Without it there would be no possibility of being wrong. Which as Graham Harman just pointed out, via his comment on ignorance and confusion as the ground of wisdom, is part of the possibility of being “right.”
Of course, loads of philosophers and scientistic-ists act as if there were no philo-...
“The tentative solutions which animals and plants incorporate into their anatomy and their behaviour are biological analogues of theories; and vice versa: theories correspond (as do many exosomatic products such as honeycombs, and especially exosomatic tools, such as spiders' webs) to endosomatic organs and their ways of functioning. Just like theories, organs and their functions are tentative adaptations to the world we live in. And just like theories, or like tools, new organs and their functions, and also new kinds of behaviour, exert their influence on the first world which they may help to change. (A new tentative solution – a theory, an organ, a new kind of behaviour – may uncover a new virtual ecological niche and thus may turn a virtual niche into an actual one.) New behaviour or organs may also lead to the emergence of new problems. And in this way they may influence the further course of evolution, including the emergence of new biological values.”
ReplyDeleteKarl Popper, 'Objective Knowledge'.