Skip to main content

Indexicalism in contrast to Hegel and Whitehead (a project)

In the study group around Hegel's Wissenschaft der Logik the topic of the universality of negation and the exercises of the content (as opposed to the fixed and determined categories of Kant) often comes out. Determinate negation and concrete universals provide content with a dynamics that is not determined (in any of its particular movements or arriving points) and yet necessary.

Today it occurred to me a direct contrast between
a) Hegel's general doctrine that conceptual content drives the process of things in a somehow necessary way as negated content gives rise to all things concrete;
b) Whitehead's pan-perceptualism according to which perception in its different forms drives the process of things in a way that is open and yet oriented by the capacity of the perceiver to be lured - a view that spreads agency beyond the limits of concepts and understand contents as responding to something that is genuinely exterior and
c) Indexicalist as the view that the drive of things is neither perception nor conceptual content but rather the deictic friction between what is indoors and what is exterior.

Indexicalism (see here) draws on a Kripke-Perry-Kaplan understanding of indexicals as involved with something exterior to cognition and intention and hence independent of the whereabouts of conceptual contents and of perceived forms - without falling into a myth of the Given and its corresponding problems with the immediate. Indexicalism improves on Whitehead's pan-perceptualism because it postulates exteriority as absolute and therefore as beyond what attracts perception. Both indexicalism and Whitehead can be understood to depend on the way paved by Hegel in his attempt to take (conceptual) content as a dynamical force that drives things beyond the subject's pale.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dismantling absolute contingency

I´ve been wondering about whether we can formulate something about contingency along the lines of a principle of irreduction: aucune chose n´est par elle-même contingent ou necessaire . The principle asserts that necessity is always contingent on underlying fixed things: something is physically necessary (or contingent) given the fixed laws of nature, something is deontically contingent - allowed - or necessary - mandatory - given the fixed ethical rules (or laws of the land). Finally, something is logically necessary (or necessary simpliciter) given a fixed logic. The irreducible diversity of ethical rules, the absence of eternal laws of nature and the plurality of logical systems, if accepted, makes necessity relative to those parameters. An aggiornamento of Heraclitus would have that nothing is necessary comes what may. Surely, of couse, if there is no absolute necessity, there is no absolute contingency. We can then say that in a broader, more abstract level, things are up for grab...
6 comments
Read more

Necropolitics and Neocameralism

It is perhaps just wishful thinking that the alt-right seemingly innovative and intrepid ideas will disappear from the scene as Trump's reign comes to an end. They have their own dynamics, but certainly the experiences of the last years, including those in the pandemics, do help to wear off their bright and attractiveness. Neocameralism, what Mencius Moldbug and Nick Land with him ushered in as a model of post-democracy that relinquish important ingredients of the human security system, is one of these projects that is proving to be too grounded in the past to have any capacity to foretell anything bright beyond the democratic rusting institutions. It is little more than necropolitics - which is itself a current post-democratic alternative. Achile Mbembe finds necropolitics in the regimes were warlords take over the state-like institutions (or mimick them)  to rule on the grounds of local security having no troubles killing or letting die whoever is in their path. Neocameralism pos...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Cathedral and the axiomatics of capital

Today in my Cosmopolitics of Capital class, instead of discussing Lyotard´s evil book in connection to Moldbug and Land´s ideas, as planned, we spent hours considering bits of The Anti-Oedipus under the light of Neo-cameralist ideas and some remarks Land makes about the horror that is often triggered as an emotional response to (Neo-cameralist) statements about the Cathedral. We concentrated on the bit of chapter 3, section 10 where Deleuze and Guattari talk about class struggle and the bourgeoisie as a class eroder. There they describe how capitalism decodes the flows of castes, orders, and classes in the sense of feudal aristocracy, serfdom and peasantry. The erosion affects also the proletariat that is never associated with a specific job or type of service but rather a decoded abstract worker. This decoding is precisely what makes the proletariat universal and directly linked with the productive forces - which means, for Deleuze and Guattari, that they are potentially the schizo, ...
Post a Comment
Read more