Monthly Archives: January 2018

ABSTRACT My theoretical work is organised around two heuristic hypotheses: 1) contemporary Continental Philosophies can usefully be viewed as metaphysical research programmes in Karl Popper’s sense 2) within the domain of contemporary Continental Philosophy a reconceptualisation of pluralism as ontological … Continue reading →

ABSTRACT In this review essay I am reading Zizek’s DISPARITIES as he asks it to be read, against the grain, following the guiding thread of the disparate in his text and drawing a simple line of demarcation between the disparate … Continue reading →

I was disappointed with Zizek’s review, as it was less ontologically oriented and more reductively Oedipal and political than his comments on the original BLADE RUNNER in his THE TICKLISH SUBJECT. K passes the Turing test, the empathy test, and … Continue reading →

1) NOTES ON THE INCIPIT TO ANTI-OEDIPUS ANTI-OEDIPUS is a transitional work, owing much in language and thought to the problematics it is trying to break from. The aim is to no longer think about our lives in psychoanalytical terms, … Continue reading →

The first paragraph has three examples, or perhaps four if we include “it”, let’s call it example zero. The progression is from abstract and generic to concrete and specific: 0) “it” – a pluralisation and concretisation of the Freudian id … Continue reading →

On the question of the task of philosophy as the configuation of a space of compossibility for the truth procedures of an epoch, Badiou states that the matheme is not all of science, but only what is philosophically configurable in … Continue reading →

The function of the language of ANTI-OEDIPUS is performative, it attempts to effectuate in its enunciative style the break with (Freudian, Lacanian) psychoanalysis that it talks about in the enounced content. For example, the removal of the definite article from … Continue reading →