Skip to main content

Remarks on a perspectivist knowledge

Perspectivism, according to Valentim, hosts two kinds of wisdom. The first has to do with what is known inside the a perspective and the second has to do with the supernatural, xamanic where knowledge is inter-perspective, is about transitions and metamorphic. It is like an empirical knowledge and non-empirical, transcendental knowledge - knowledge inside and knowledge of what makes this inside possible. The transcendental knowledge could involve me being a jaguar, a pig and a human. The formula could be something like this: empirical anthropocentrism and transcendental anthropomorphism.

Valentim quotes Tania Stolze Lima in her comparison of the Wari' and the Youdjá. For the Wari', I see a wasp as a wasp and me as human and a wasp sees me as wasp and her as human. For the Youdjá, animals see humans and animals as humans while humans sees animals as animals and humans as humans. But there is a limit for the Youdjá to hold that animals are at their disposal: they know that they think themselves as humans, so there is a danger there. It is like the route that could take to rthe Modern route of making animals available to human but there is something that blocks that route. It is like Heidegger talking about what still blocked the Pre-socratic to take the metaphysical route even though that route was already in the beginning of the history of Beyng in physis.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Giving Birth

This is a month of giving birth: 1. On the first day of the month (my birthday) I sent out my book BUG (Being Up for Grabs) to publisher. A birth-giving moment. 2. On the forth, we started the Journal, called Journal of Questions. It is a Jabèsian and Jarryian endeavor that intends to reflect in many languages about the gaps between thought and translation. It will be available soon. 3. On the 10th, day before yesterday, offspring Devrim A. B. was born. Her name means revolution in Turkish and is a roughly common name. She's very attentive and concentrated - especially on her own fingers that she learned to molest in her youth during her womb months. She was gestated together with BUG. Hope the world enjoys.

My responses to (some) talks in the Book Symposium

Indexicalism is out: l https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-indexicalism.html   The book symposium took place two weeks ago with talks by Sofya Gevorkyan/Carlos Segovia, Paul Livingston, Gerson Brea, Steven Shaviro, Chris RayAlexander, Janina Moninska, Germán Prosperi, Gabriela Lafetá, Andrea Vidal, Elzahrã Osman, Graham Harman, Charles Johns, Jon Cogburn, Otavio Maciel, Aha Else, JP Caron, Michel Weber and John Bova. My very preliminary response to some of their talks about the book follows. (Texts will appear in a special issue of Cosmos & History soon). RESPONSES : ON SAYING PARADOXICAL THINGS Hilan Bensusan First of all, I want to thank everyone for their contributions. You all created a network of discussions that made the book worth publishing. Thanks. Response to Shaviro: To engage in a general account of how things are is to risk paradox. Totality, with its different figures including the impersonal one that enables a symmetrical view from nowhere

Hunky, Gunky and Junky - all Funky Metaphysics

Been reading Bohn's recent papers on the possibility of junky worlds (and therefore of hunky worlds as hunky worlds are those that are gunky and junky - quite funky, as I said in the other post). He cites Whitehead (process philosophy tends to go hunky) but also Leibniz in his company - he wouldn't take up gunk as he believed in monads but would accept junky worlds (where everything that exists is a part of something). Bohn quotes Leibniz in On Nature Itself «For, although there are atoms of substance, namely monads, which lack parts, there are no atoms of bulk, that is, atoms of the least possible extension, nor are there any ultimate elements, since a continuum cannot be composed out of points. In just the same way, there is nothing greatest in bulk nor infinite in extension, even if there is always something bigger than anything else, though there is a being greatest in the intensity of its perfection, that is, a being infinite in power.» And New Essays: ... for there is ne