Plans, a question, a note on Hegel

18Feb10

My goal in the next few weeks is to work through the ten points of the previous post and dedicate an entry to each in an attempt to flesh out (and really explain to myself) the metaphysical Frankenstein’s monster of Dark Vitalism. One question I have is regarding the four terms Real-Immanence-Sense-Transcendence.  The last term troubles me and as I feel that transcendence should be taken in a Schellingian sense, as more material than is traditionally thought, as a transformation of ground whereas immanence is the rearrangement of the materiality of ground. In the past I have thought to replace the term transcendence with Cohen and Stewart’s term extilligence but thought that they might be too restrictive/anthrocentric. Any thoughts on alternatives or discussions of extilligence, of the ability to externalize products of the mind via culture, are welcome.

Paul has a crystal clear post about SR and Hegelianism responding to Graham’s response to Paul’s interview here.

Quite a bit more needs to be said about Hegel in relation to SR (as well as Deleuze and SR) as it seems bost sides are carcicturing the other a bit – non SR people seem to think Meillassoux and company are merely asking for a turning back of the clock to dogmatism/rationalism etc and those working against Zizek/Badiou over-simplify them in terms of what materialism means. While in NM for a conference last weekend I was able to have brunch with Adrian Johnston and he remarked how he was tired of being called a high flying idealist as he thought that Pippin’s work on Hegel had obliterated such assumptions about Hegelianism. The issue with transcendental materialism and Hegel I think is how the subject – substance relation is tipped (or not) toward subjectivity when wedded to Lacan. While both Lacan and Hegel work together as hyper-self-aware philosophies of the limitation of embedded (material/structural/real? subjectivity) the former’s structuralism weakens the latter’s historicity/materiality. But I know far more about Lacan than Hegel and would readily change my mind here.

Also check the interesting and related post at Hyper Tiling.

About these ads


2 Responses to “Plans, a question, a note on Hegel”


  1. 1 Thinking, the In-Itself « Complete Lies.
  2. 2 Dark Vitalism 0/10: Taxonomy of Nature « Naught Thought

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 218 other followers

%d bloggers like this: