Supplements

 

Philosopher (Dali)

 

Is mathematics discovered or invented? But what if we have misplaced the scent from the start; in other words what if this clear distinction elides the process itself, if the particular and immanent relation between invention and discovery forms the basis of the ‘singularizing’ expression involved in a new mathematical proof? But a rigorous diagram of novelty itself, of the Event, seems to escape the boundaries of mathematical thought. Ontology is not the royal road to reality, any more than dreams are a singular road the unconscious. In a way, it does not even seem to get us very far at all; at least in terms of understanding “truth,” that exceptional ontogenesis of knowledge and/or being, which after all constitutes what philosophers have so far approached as the ideal “problem” according to which all others are to be modeled, and to which the creation of any new concepts must invariably be induced to correspond.

Risk. The utter annihilation of the soul is an unavoidable stage of becoming human. The human soul is restless, without certainties — at least until it has finally inoculated itself to the world, jamming any channels still open to the outside.

Nihil. Philosophy is a whirlwind from which very little can escape; the breaks are not always where they appear to be! A pure negation of philosophy remains pure philosophy; it is coded in the same semiotic, an inverse. Even suspending this decision (to separate essence from appearance) is still a philosophical position. Finally, even if we manage to truly escape philosophy and found a new science which could in turn truly take the “human” science of philosophy and grasp it as raw experimental material, the risks of a new asceticism corresponding to this “higher” rigor are nearly unavoidable. All these risks are not unlike those Nietzsche or Deleuze are continually warning us about. The worst consequence of nihilism is not necessarily that of forgetting our philosophy in our despair; rather there is a stranger, more uncanny possibility — that the pious suspension of philosophy would be capable of sweeping reality away along with it, abandoning us in some non-human plane of transcendent nullity, enslaved to transparent emptiness and arcane jargon. Nonetheless, a positive “nihilism” undoubtedly constitutes an ideal space for the creation of a new kind of science capable of grasping in turn any human science, and even philosophy itself.

 

Supplements. What is true cannot change; what changes cannot be truth — is this not the miserable dream in which too many have diffused their cleverness?

This entry was written by Joseph Weissman and published on Friday, March 13, 2009 at 8:43 pm. It’s filed under decision, Deleuze, mathematics, Nietzsche, nihilism, non-philosophy and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.

2 thoughts on “Supplements

  1. sighs, grunts, coughs, sneezes, hummings, and all things that remain like those half words, never spoken but always audible. In short, the words lost in the obscurity of meaning too much or nothing at all. And there you go, I said it, or maybe I have to say it again, I love your blog, esp those posts which make no sense at all, you know they always tell you ‘love makes no sense’… innit?

  2. The first and third concerns seem quite congruent with the recursive inclinations of ipseity, and I refer here particularly to the third of title, “Nihil”; I do say however that the first is perhaps especially notably demonstrative of the inexorability of this ipseity making for the subject but a modality exclusive of transcendence of the remainder-yet-to-be-apprehended; this vagueness is to say that in any consideration there exists inevitably some axiomatic premises necessarily assumed in admission of the consideration; a transcendentally comprehensive evaluation of anything entails transcendence of this inexorable condition, that any progress is proliferative of similarly spawning iterations. I would comment in greater elaboration, though I don’t believe the inconstancy of prosaicity as a character of the entry existent admits the indulgence; lyricisms have most meaning for their respective authors. Thus I leave the more profound significances of the post to be appreciated by Joe, for the time being.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,873 other followers

%d bloggers like this: