Saturday, August 27, 2011

Temporary but Unrepentant Umbilical to Furthur Thought-Insanity, Part XXV

Carlos-O(1): “ You say to me, ‘If you affirm Enlightenment thinking in terms of postmodern thinking,your theory becomes, ‘Enlightenment is the overcoming of Enlightenment.’

What if I affirm postmodern thinking and change my theory to,

Postmodernity is the hazard and problem of TOTALIZATION coming through the age of Enlightenment.

Orla-O(1): “ Yes, and that we now have the theory in this form must be seen as a positive result of our inquiry. Please note this form of your theory requires you to affirm postmodernity, both as existing and in terms of its specific content.”

Carlos-O(1): "Yes, that is so."

Orla-O(1): " The notion of overcoming in your original theory is replaced by notions of problem, hazard, and 'coming through', but in what ways is totalization a hazard?"

Carlos-O(1): “ Totalization is a hazard in these ways: 1) that it be negated (rejected,denied); 2) that it is not thought through as a problem (e.g. treated as if trivial, marginal, vulgar, uneducated slang, amusing jargon of the 'great unwashed',etc); 3) that it not be seen as a problem, i.e., that it be regarded as it was regarded in the age of Enlightenment and the following modern ‘ages’; 4) that it be seen as a problem but not within the historical horizon of the Enlightenment; 5) that totalization be affirmed. (Affirmed in this sense means something like a prisoner suffering in solitary confinement choosing to regard suffering in solitary confinement as the most wonderful thing imaginable, a real treat.)”

Orla-O(1): " Yes, that is so."


Post a Comment

<< Home