[D-G] Communism definitions Physics

[Dewey Dell]

hey how are you?
did you think more about Japan and China and dna?
and yellow jackets?

Le jeu. 14 mars 2019 à 15:40, Mike Lansing <badger2 at mail2world.com> a
écrit :

> the word you concocted, unzeitgemaessetikheidt' doews not appear in the
> dictionary. Urzeugung, 'abiogenesis,' unzustand ' original state.'
> Knowledge is replacing faith planet-wide, and Guattari's machinic
> atheism is now a contemporary trajectory, though the science of
> abiogenesis cannot self-destruct as easily as faith or
> 'feeling-compromised reason.' It is interesting to watch as thinking
> DNA like Aquinas attempts to find its own origins, whereby the electron
> of the sparking volcano still retains its individuality (and [italics])
> its sameness to other electrons. Deleuze can sound like none other than
> the neo-Confucians' concept of the 'diversity of particularizations,'
> according to Chu Hsi, et al.
>
> <-----Original Message----->
> >From: Johnatan Petterson [internet.petterson at gmail.com]
> >Sent: 3/13/2019 8:10:44 PM
> >To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
> >Subject: Re: [D-G] Communism definitions Physics
> >
> >as to Nietzsche's quote in your mention,
> >I'd reckon Fried. Nietzsche was talking (perceptually?) or anyway
> >historically rather
> >than conceptually. When mentioning "christian god", sure does he think
> about
> >the figure of the Jesus Christ dude. Nietzsche is often ironical and
> the
> >will to truth
> >is speaking of the people who come as the historical followers of the
> >historical Jesus Christ.
> >The Figure of Christ "in the mind" of the followers "works" and
> produces a
> >religious effect,
> >what Widder calls faith and which is just a feeling. Feeling
> encompasses
> >both Reason and Faith, again the both self destruct as concepts
> >when you consider the necessity of producing concepts within the full
> >feeling.
> >Whether Aquinas proves the concept
> >of that feeling, that is if nobody is missing the definition he gives,
> >would probably not
> >matter for Nietzsche. That was Nietzsche's novelty in the history of
> >philosophy, its
> >*Unzeitgemässetikheidt (?) *Nietzsche took pleasure with playing with
> such
> >"personnages conceptuels" as
> >Aquinas or Jesus Christ, because he did not feel the need to prove his
> >concept (besides knowing his concepts full well)
> >unlikely anxious in a way that nobody would miss it, or not dig it.
> That
> >was what he meant by a sudden "will to truth"
> >killing Jesus Christ in such a Roman Crucifixion Drama. The followers
> are a
> >metaphor for such historians of philosophy such
> >as Nathan Widder. How ironical innit? Bravo Fried.!! carry on,
> >Continuation, please!!
> >
> >Le jeu. 14 mars 2019 à 01:19, Mike Lansing <badger2 at mail2world.com> a
> >écrit :
> >
> >> Widder's text to begin an exegesis. Firstly, here is where Aquinas
> >> looses it:
> >>
> >> 'Although the truth of the christian faith exceeds the capacity of
> >> human reason, truths that reason is fitted by nature to know cannot
> be
> >> contrary to the truth of faith. The things that reason is fitted by
> >> nature to know are clearly most true, and it would be impossible to
> >> think of them as false. It is also wrong to think that something that
> >> is held by faith could be false since it is clearly confirmed by god.
> >> Since we know by definition that what is false is contrary to the
> >> truth, it is impossible for the principles that reason knows by
> nature
> >> to be contrary to the truth of faith. (Summa Contra Gentiles 1.7, in
> >> Aquinas 1988:4)
> >>
> >> The impossibility of confirming a precept held by faith seems not to
> >> bother Aquinas here, but it does illuminate a central dilemma both he
> >> and his successors face. The attempt to make philosophy a handmaiden
> of
> >> theology calls for concessions on both sides, and it becomes
> impossible
> >> to maintain a dual loyalty. The demand to be true to both reason and
> >> faith ultimately undermines both. Hence as Nitzsche declares, the
> >> christian god is killed by the christian will to truth
> >> itself....Analogy and univocity emerge as the possible answers to the
> >> problem of categories and are extended in one direction toward the
> >> problem of individuation and in the other toward the relation between
> >> god and his creatures. Here too, difficulties arise, since analogy
> >> fails to account for individuation, while univocity threatens to
> >> demolish divine transcendence unless strict limitations are imposed.
> >> Ultimately, however, these limitations rest on the very faith that is
> >> precariously tied to and supported by reason.'
> >> (Widder, Reason and Faith: Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and Ockham, in
> >> Genealogies of Difference, p. 115)
> >>
> >> Aquinas looses it precisely where the signifier god is smuggled in to
> >> represent the signified, which for the latter is thinking DNA forged
> >> from the crusty lips of a volcano, thus killing by default the
> >> signifier that goes with it. Aquinas in copula with both signifier
> and
> >> signified corresponds to religion in safe copula with the State and
> >> capitalism due to the habituation of theogonic reproduction (as per
> >> Shults' Iconoclastic Theology). We are not arguing against
> replacement
> >> of concept with percept, but are reinforcing Deleuze's project to
> >> empower life in the wake of such violences already mentioned.
> >>
> >> We must add Widder's passage on the middle term because of the
> >> impossible trident and its perception: an Indigene can perceive the
> >> trident correctly, though "civilized" humans may have more trouble.
> Why
> >> is this so? Have you contemplated the Wiki page for the Impossible
> >> Trident? One can insert Bernie Sanders' socialism or else something
> >> like Widder's passage:
> >>
> >> '....based on complex propositions such as "Socrates is white."
> >> Nevertheless, judgment, which assigns predicates to a subject -- or
> >> quasi attributes in the case of the divine, since a purely simple
> being
> >> does not admit such an act of predication -- refers back to
> >> apprehension as simple knowledge of being, and here there is no room
> >> for analogy: between statements "god is [a being] and "socrates is is
> >> [a being]" there can only be univocity or equivocity. Aquinas here
> >> accepts equivocity, maintaining that reason can demonstrate god's
> >> existence and analogically ascribe certain attributes to him but that
> >> the divine being remains opaque. This move functions on the division
> >> between essence and existence, and it forces Aquinas to admit that
> his
> >> demonstrations of god's existence do not live up to stract
> Aristotelian
> >> standards for demonstrative proof, which require a definition of the
> >> thing in question -- that is, its essence -- as a middle term in its
> >> syllogism.....To this Duns Scotus replies: "There is no point in
> >> distinguishing between a knowledge of his essence and a knowledge of
> >> his existence....For I never know anything to exist unless I first
> have
> >> some concept of that which existence is affirmed." '
> >> (Widder, p.125)
> >>
> >> We are now in a much better position to forge concepts of abiogenesis
> >> (see Wikipedia for Abiogenesis and the Miller-Urey volcanic spark
> >> experiment) and the inorganic life that began there.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> >Info:
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> >Archives: www.driftline.org
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
> Info:
> http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org
>