Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:15:08 +1000
From: hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Ataraxia/cultists


Eric/All,

Comments at **

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> hugh:
>
> I am going away for Thanksgiving and I'll be offline the next several
> days, so this discussion on ethics (and the last chapter of Badiou) will
> simply have to wait.
** OK,  Enjoy.

> I admit you made me a little angry with your cultism comment.
>
> Personally, I find value in discussing these authors and texts and don't
think of myself as a cultist in the least. (do you think I am?)

**To a degree we both have cultist tendencies.  Your relation to the  those
you are always quoting seems aesthetic.  We both see movies, art and
architecture, feel pleasure, make judgements. I may be wrong, but I think
your involvement with the French philosopher is aesthetic.

I gave a dictionary definition of cult.  There is a matter of degree.
Would you call the Heaven's Gate people who committed mass suicide, to
achieve their ultimate goal/value, cultists?  or Bin Laden's 19 disciples.
Or, speaking of disciples, how about Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

If Baudrillard burned himself to death on the steps of La Madeline,
he would join the immortals of extreme faith and be called a cultist.

> Also, you have to admit there is something paradoxical about the fact
> that you rail this way against French thought and yet have been on this
site longer than just about anyone else.
**Yes it's strange. I always wanted to discuss some of L's ideas with people
like yourself who read and understood them - and we did so.  I guess that
makes me a a Lyotard cultist. I was often frustrated with posts that cited
names of other people rather than opinions of the writer..

> Are you a closet cultist?
**No.  Who would I hide from.  Cultists find each other. A solitary cultist
is a contradiction in terms.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>
> eric
>