tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post3457989897850509845..comments2024-03-28T09:51:55.365-06:00Comments on ECOLOGY WITHOUT NATURE: Survival 3Timothy Mortonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05067377804366363020noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post-19916986854940103522010-08-17T09:02:27.888-05:002010-08-17T09:02:27.888-05:00I think I argee, Tim. To posit the trace as some s...I think I argee, Tim. To posit the trace as some sort of arche or orgin seems to defeat the purpose of realism and its striving for an absolutely immanent ontology. As Deleuze would warn: it would reintroduce transcendence and ruin the whole thing! Perhaps something inherent in the "trace" lends itself to such a collapse?martelmdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00869803949371502888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1438289051411770399.post-63330596994292088972010-08-16T16:01:44.680-05:002010-08-16T16:01:44.680-05:00I've not read Hagglund so I can't speak to...I've not read Hagglund so I can't speak to how he takes Derrida. But I think the unlimited semiois does entail that infinite regress. At least in On Grammatology. There is no origin. Rather there is an ongoing never started sign-system with forces pushing signs in a particular direction. So a way to say this is that there isn't <b>a</b> origin but rather an infinite number of non-origins.<br /><br />Exactly how this entails the Spinozist God though isn't clear to me.Clark Goblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03876620613578404474noreply@blogger.com