File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2002/lyotard.0206, message 12


Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2002 11:48:04 -0700
From: Judy <jaw-AT-earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: openings onto the preface



Thanks, gratefully, for this lucid summary of a complex set of 
interrelated ideas in Kant.  For me, having no significant Kantian 
vocabulary has been a great weakness in reading Lyotard.  This sure 
helps.

>I have been following the discussion with interest, but wonder if it 
>would not be a good idea to get back to the preface itself, and what 
>is said there. With this in mind, the following, rather long, 
>remarks might be helpful -- I hope



>!....a différend itself arises when, in the case of an antithetical 
>conflict, one of the parties is divested of the means to argue and 
>allow their argument to become known. But =97 and here Lyotard differs 
>from Kant =97 it is not merely because they speak last that one party 
>ensures that they have the final word, but because theirs is, 
>effectively, the only word heard. One speaks the final word all the 
>more successfully not by speaking last, nor for that matter by 
>preventing one=92s opponent from speaking, but by establishing the 
>absolute priority of one=92s speech as such. Everything is said in 
>one=92s own idiom and in a manner that confirms one=92s own position, 
>and one=92s own arguments, or it is not said at all.....


In turning attention to this,  the conversation is resumed.  bearing 
witness to the differend--the justice of reopening the irreconcilable 
dispute to the light of day.  I guess there are micrological and 
macrological ways of going about this.  In Lyotard's time, the extant 
macrological attempts were significantly delegitimized, such that it 
was a time in which a micro focus could be more potent.  there's no 
necessity, in Lyotard and as such, for that microscopic preference or 
aptness to be the last word.
Judy



-- 




HTML VERSION:

Thanks, gratefully, for this lucid summary of a complex set of interrelated ideas in Kant.  For me, having no significant Kantian vocabulary has been a great weakness in reading Lyotard.  This sure helps.

I have been following the discussion with interest, but wonder if it would not be a good idea to get back to the preface itself, and what is said there. With this in mind, the following, rather long, remarks might be helpful -- I hope



!....a différend itself arises when, in the case of an antithetical conflict, one of the parties is divested of the means to argue and allow their argument to become known. But =97 and here Lyotard differs from Kant =97 it is not merely because they speak last that one party ensures that they have the final word, but because theirs is, effectively, the only word heard. One speaks the final word all the more successfully not by speaking last, nor for that matter by preventing one=92s opponent from speaking, but by establishing the absolute priority of one=92s speech as such. Everything is said in one=92s own idiom and in a manner that confirms one=92s own position, and one=92s own arguments, or it is not said at all.....


In turning attention to this,  the conversation is resumed.  bearing witness to the differend--the justice of reopening the irreconcilable dispute to the light of day.  I guess there are micrological and macrological ways of going about this.  In Lyotard's time, the extant macrological attempts were significantly delegitimized, such that it was a time in which a micro focus could be more potent.  there's no necessity, in Lyotard and as such, for that microscopic preference or aptness to be the last word.
Judy



Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005