From: "Friedman, Howard J." <hfn-AT-sdpfr.powersoft.com> Subject: RE: pleasures of perversions Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 17:04:00 PST >The point of this is that I don't think >that singularities "disengage" from the virtual so much as get >contracted and associated by the agency of what Bergson calls >"intellect" that selects and associates certian virtual images >as required by the imperatives of the images-movements that appear >in the actual element of the living present. These virtualities >are thus brought into contact, by the dual agency of intellect and >"motor memory" or "habit".... It is at this >point of contact that the two series converge and sense gets produced. Ed, This is, of course, what I've been saying all along in making the virtual to be a mode apart, rather than a mode "of something." No thing "disengages" from the virtual. What gets contracted from the virtual is an "image being received in perception" (a simulacra?), an image which gets inflected with objects of sensation and with other images of perception. Howie ____________ Karen writes: >But, my guess is that the trick and the fun and the pleasure of >perversion in Bergson lies in this way of being caught up between >two Determinacies (call them Subjective and Objective, call them >Past and Present, call them whatever you will) without common >measure: this is the place of nomads of the clinamen of the swerve >of the inflection and of wriggling about Any objection to calling the "two Determinacies without common measure" the Virtual and the Substantial? And then calling the "place of the nomads" the Convivial? Aren't we talking about a three-way metaphysics here? ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005