Skip to main content

The indexicality of conceptual thinking

I'm getting closer to a more solid connection between what a post-nihilist thinking can do and what indexicalism provides. While substantives could have an intelligibility that can be extracted, captured, followed or persecuted - with different degrees of success, with different degrees of approximation - because their correction is given by something independent of any situation, indexicals can only be understood in a context. A situated metaphysics is one where the effort of intelligence is a production that is not consummated in a product, in an idea or a thesis that is general and could expose and replace its object - situated thought is not about replacing what is thought but attempts to produce what is not geared towards a further distribution or registration.

At the same time, I understand how the indexicality of conceptual thinking is an example and not an exception to how things are. Indexicalism conceives concepts as being inextricably connected to the position from where they are thought. One can attempt to exorcise this tacit subjectivism of the "for us" of our conceptual capacities - this is the project Hegel inaugurated in order to render the lessons of Kant less subjectivists (and therefore more substantivist). The attempt to extricate concepts from indexicals is based on a conceptual dynamics that could be contemplated from nowhere and from no position in particular. However, this is only possible if concepts converge - if conceptual activity is understood as producing (fully present) products. The adventure started with Kant was that of concocting a different substantive, one that is not provided by the world, by an apodicitic phenomena, by a position that is somehow universal and necessary. This adventure is taken further by Hegel in his attempt to establish in a converging Geist a new promised land for substantives.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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 nev...
1 comment
Read more

The underground of concepts: my talk at the Marxism and the Pittsburgh School Conference

In few minutes I'll be presenting this talk in the Marxism and the Pittsburgh School conference in the UCL. I can still change the text but this is how it looks like now. The underground of concepts: McDowell on the productivity of Anschauungen Hilan Bensusan 1. Jean-François Lyotard diagnosed the idea that concepts do the productive work of thinking as a deception. It is not through a dynamics of concepts that conclusions are reached and it is not with the decisive intervention of them that conflicts between alternatives resolved. Lyotard compares the pretense that concepts think with the mystification that capital works. He argues that “what works is not the concept, […] the concept is [like] capital which pretends to work, but which [only] determines the conditions of labour, delimits the outsides and insides, the authorized and the prohibited” (Lyotard, Libidinal Economy, p. 13). This diagnosis, frequently lost in the middle of an ampler argumentation around t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Talk on ultrametaphysics

 This is the text of my seminar on ultrametaphysics on Friday here in Albuquerque. An attempt at a history of ultrametaphysics in five chapters Hilan Bensusan I begin with some of the words in the title. First, ‘ultrametaphysics’, then ‘history’ and ‘chapters’. ‘Ultrametaphysics’, which I discovered that in my mouth could sound like ‘ autre metaphysics’, intends to address what comes after metaphysics assuming that metaphysics is an endeavor – or an epoch, or a project, or an activity – that reaches an end, perhaps because it is consolidated, perhaps because it has reached its own limits, perhaps because it is accomplished, perhaps because it is misconceived. In this sense, other names could apply, first of all, ‘meta-metaphysics’ – that alludes to metaphysics coming after physics, the books of Aristotle that came after Physics , or the task that follows the attention to φύσις, or still what can be reached only if the nature of things is considered. ‘Me...
Post a Comment
Read more