Subject: Re: Ludens is the Father of All Things Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:21:37 -0500 (EST) On pg. 61 of PMC, Lyotard says clearly that paralogy is not innovation, does not bring into play the next/new which is why it is not an aesthetic sort of gaming stimulating our need for the latest hit from the spectacle which we all love to consume. As dissensus it throws into confusion the capicity for explanation. A process he likens to Thom's morphogenesis, localised catastrophes working through 'blind spots'. A blind spot, for instance, at that point, where water cooling down, is no longer fluid and yet is not solid ice. As I see it then, an Event which displaces the aesthetic concept of the new, pulls in two different directions at once. Communication, the exchange of posts, is then as paralogical dissension, a construction of paradoxes that interrupt, shake up the tendency of thought to settle down, without contradiction, in subtantives and adjectives. This seems to be, the exigency of communicative responsibility, its agonic and festive potentiality where as in the medieval carnival everything goes topsy turvy and becomes matter for monkey business, the work of idiotic, radical empiricist, closer to Job than Socrates, write D&G in _What is Philosphy?_. Deleuze talks about the Greek Agon, in many places, and first of all, it displaces the notion of consensus, or the idea of western democratic conversation. The Agon is a struggle with ri concept's friend; he is potentiality of the concept." There is nothing here to do with discourse as a propositional conversation dealing in the subject-predicate order but unpredictable, pure events. ari --
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005