Destruction, Negation, Subtraction

Pasolini was simultaneously a revolutionary Marxist and a man forever influenced by his religious childhood. So his question was: do the revolutionary becoming of history and political negativity represent a destruction of the tragic beauty of the Greek myths and of the peaceful promise of Christianity? Or do we have to speak of a subtraction where an affirmative reconciliation of beauty and peace becomes possible in a new egalitarian world

Conférence de Ljubljana

While Logics of Worlds already emphasized that one’s participation in a process of truth is signalized by an affect and already pointed out some of the affects connected with these processes (enthusiasm, joy, pleasure, beatitude), the further elaboration of this topics remains the task of the third part of the Being and Event, which has yet to be written and is entitled The Immanence of Truths. The first part of the lecture discusses the very reasons for this work, its necessity, and its place in my opus thus far. The task of The Immanence of Truths is to elaborate the question of how somebody is incorporated into a truth-process, how this relates to the question of the subject and the very role of philosophy itself. The latter is not the process of truth in a similar manner as its four conditions, it does presuppose them, but not the other way around. A short sketch of the inner structure of The Immanence of Truths follows and the argument in favour of the transformation of the formal category of negation. The role of the paraconsistent logics in The Immanence of Truths is to conceptualize the process of truth. The aleatory, the contingent character of any event namely means that we have to insist that there is a cut and that the truth is in the position of an exception, but which, however, is not something untransmittable. Concerning the question of the transmission and the ineffable, I distance myself in relation to Plato’s as well as to Bergson’s treatment of this question. For me, the category of an exception is a dialectical category. It has to be thought on one hand as a negation, which is not a miracle of some sort, and on the other as something inner, immanent (perhaps that was aimed at by Lacan with the term ‘extimacy’). The negation is namely an operator which simultaneously divides and includes, it is also part of the dialectical thought which includes the contingent and is therefore not deterministic. Everything that has been said so far has consequences for the functions of philosophy and concerns the question of the relationship between philosophy and life. Philosophy for me as a discipline departs from the conviction that there are truths. It is triple, being at the same time the diagnostics of an age, the construction of the concept of truth, and the existential experience of true life i.e. the immanent experiment of what is a true life, “what is it to live”. This is signalled by the affect of true life and by the formula “to live as an immortal”, which does not entail any kind of sacrifice or recompense

Bit in pojav

-

O matematiki, logiki in filozofiji

.

Umetnost in matematika

It has been well known since ancient times that mathematical activity and artistic creativity are connected, but for philosophers their relationship is linked with the juxtaposition of Plato and Aristotle. If we compare their standpoints to mathematics and art, we come to two contemporary tendencies in philosophy which differ regarding the question of what the proper didactic functions for the Subject supposed to be oriented by an Idea are. For the Platonic tendency, this is a function of mathematics, for the Nietzschean tendency, this is a function of art. There is a third tendency, the Aristotelian, for which mathematics is a branch of aesthetics, and a fourth, the Wittgensteinian tendency, today the dominant one, which sees in mathematical aesthetics a coldness, an impersonal ity in accordance with the contemporary humanism of the victim. All these tendencies should be reconsidered from the viewpoint of choice and form, which is the fundamental question of contemporary art as well as mathematics. A comparison of the four tendencies one has to choose from (the author has already chosen a Platonic one) shows that they form a discordant quartet, but occasionally, here and there, they nevertheless reach an accord concerning the question “What is form?”, when an event occurs.Znano je, da sta matematična dejavnost in umetniška ustvarjalnost že od nekdaj povezani, za filozofe pa gre pri tem tudi za vprašanje zoperstavitve Platona in Aristotela. Toda skozi primerjavo njunih stališč do matematike in umetnosti pridemo tudi do dveh tendenc v sodobni filozofiji, ki se razlikujeta glede tega, kakšne so didaktične funkcije za Subjekt, za katerega se predpostavlja, da ga usmerja Ideja. Na eni je platonistična tendenca, ki meni, da je to matematika, na drugi nietzschejanska, za katero je to umetnost. Obstajata še tretja, aristotelovska tendenca, ki meni, da je matematika veja estetike, in četrta, wittgensteinovska, danes prevladujoča, ki v matematični estetiki vidi hladnost, neosebnost in ki ustreza sodobnemu humanizmu žrtve. Ob vsem tem se je treba vrniti k vprašanju izbire in forme, ki je temeljno vprašanje tako sodobne umetnosti kot tudi matematike, ter s tega vidika obravnavati navedene tendence. Primerjava štirih tendenc, med katerimi je pač treba izbrati, pri čemer sam nastopam z gledišča platonistične, pokaže, da gre za neuglašen kvartet, kljub temu pa se ob nastopu dogodka vse štiri tendence uglasijo glede tega, kaj je forma

(Spre)vrnitev filozofije same

.

Na poti k novemu mišljenju Absoluta

The purpose of the text is to show that contemporary materialism has to assume the existence of an absolute ontology which thematizes the existence of the referential universe and has four main features. The first thinker who claimed that consequential materialism demands the absolute referent was Spinoza. The disagreement with Spinoza means that God or the absolute referent cannot have the form of the One. To claim that God is dead means less to claim the death of transcendence and more the death of The One and Unique. One has to find the immanent and absolute ontological guarantee on the side of the multiple as such, which retains four key principles: immobility, composition on the basis of nothing, axiomatic prescription, and the principle of maximality – this is successfully done by set theory. In the second part of the text counterarguments to many objections to this absolute referent (concerning infinity, undecidability, the multiplicity of logics) based on recent developments in the field of mathematics are presented. In this way the relationship between philosophy and mathematics is presented, as well as the fundamental wager: yes, it is possible to practice absoluteness of thought of the pure multiple, which is nothing but an atheistic replacement of monotheism including its immanent form presented in the works of Spinoza and Deleuze, however, on condition that we engage in rigorous mathematics.Namen članka je pokazati, da mora sodobni materializem privzeti eksistenco absolutne ontologije, ki tematizira eksistenco referenčnega univerzuma in ki ima štiri značilnosti. Prvi mislec, ki je trdil, da konsekventni materializem zahteva absolutni referent, je bil Spinoza, pri čemer nestrinjanje s Spinozo pomeni, da Bog ali absolutni referent ne more imeti oblike Enega. To, da je Bog mrtev pomeni namreč manj smrt transcendence kot smrt Enega in Edinstvenega, pri čemer je treba najti imanentno in absolutno ontološko zagotovilo, ki bo v celoti prešlo na stran mnoštva kot takšnega in ohranilo štiri ključna načela: negibnost, kompozicijo na podlagi niča, aksiomatsko preskripcijo in načelo maksimalnosti. Ravno to pa uspe teoriji množic. V nadaljevanju tekst izhajajoč iz nedavnih dognanj na področju matematike predstavi protiargumente ugovorom temu absolutnemu referentu in sicer glede neskončnosti, neodločljivosti in mnogoterosti logik, s čimer podrobneje določi tako razmerje med filozofijo in njenim matematičnim pogojem, kakor tudi svojo temeljno stavo: da, možno je prakticirati absolutnost mišljenja čistega mnoštva, ki je ateistična zamenjava monoteizma, vključno z njegovo imanentno obliko, ki sta mu jo v svojih pomembnih delih dala Spinoza in Deleuze, toda le pod pogojem, da se v nekem pomenu zavežemo strogi matematiki