On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 17:30:08 -0000, domfox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>With sexual difference it is a question of libidinal economics, the
>incompatibility or incompossibility of pleasures. Some people would give a
>lot to be rid of it, as they would like to be rid of all
incompossibilities;
>hence the noble dream of the comprehensive school, which will only truly
>exist when nothing else does.
>
>Dom
>
....sorry, I forgot to directly reply to this point, as why I
considered "vague" the point made by Dom in the post "Is this real..." .
The reason being that he missed to quote the extratext of those ideas, id
est Lyotard's controversial “evil” book, "Libidinal economy", (as being
The Libidinal Economics of Criticsal Philosophy) published in translation
in the UK in 1993, but first appeared with Le Minut in 1974, during the
what we now define the French philosophical expressionism of the Seventies,
to which Lyotard deeply contributed with this off and bizarre
interpretation of Freudianism, European Marxism and Westernised idea of the
Capital. (See chapters: Coitus reservatus, The concentratory Zero, and so
on...).
Also, to respond to Dave’s observation that people nowadays rarely have
faith in a consolatory ideology, I shall quote Lyotard again: “The
sacrificial aspect of this commitment to political reflection and praxis is
obviously related to monastic obedience” (from Peregrination).
erminia (have you opened your "boxes" yet? )
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Erminia Passannanti" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:55 PM
>Subject: Re: Is this real. . .
>
>
>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:06:00 -0500, Mairead Byrne <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I don't know whether there will always be men and women, but I suspect
>> there
>> >> will always be something and then again something else.
>> >>
>>
>> too vague..., what exactly this something and this other something
>> else stand for, figs and carrots, or what?
>>
|