File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2004/lyotard.0412, message 15


From: "Eric" <ericandmary-AT-earthlink.net>
Subject: FW: sideways - incapacity
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 20:29:15 -0600


 
 
Steve, 
 
I wasn't arguing for a utilitarian morality. I think the points I was
making could easily be re-inscribed in terms of Kant's categorical
imperative, Schopenhauer's compassion or even Badiou's ethics of truth.

 
I also think that in concrete terms we arrive at similar positions -
against institutionalized religion, corporate agri-business and the
economic development that leads to global warming and the destruction of
species of wildlife. 
 
My problem with your position is simply that I don't see how you really
get there from here.  How does your stance on the equivalence of animals
inform any real ethical and political action? It seems like a mere
abstraction to me because I don't think Deleuze's plane of immanence
applies to the level of species. The virtual involution of evolution
takes place ontologically before the species begins. 
 
That is why I call your stance a form of pantheism.  It is the Hegelian
night is which all cats (even George) are gray.
 
eric
 
 
 
 


--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005