Last post from 4.06.2015 was initiated with the thesis:
Thesis: The dialectic is the way of truth. [period]
This anticipates what appears to be a 'return' to the dialectic. Is it actually a return, or is the relationship between Being and learning already a yet to be recognized dialectic?
Reading Marx's 1844 critique of Hegel this week made clear to me that the work post Being and Learning, will begin with the working out of the genealogy of poetic praxis. This genealogy, very generally speaking, unfolds: Heraclitus>Socrates>Hegel>Marx>Freire, with the necessity of Nietzsche and perhaps even Foucault offering guidance. Then too Heidegger. Of course, Irigaray and DuBois stand as the two principal figures guiding the project, the one demonstrating the syncretic form of thinking/writing of poetic praxis, and the the other challenging to create a new logic.
The matter will begin, first, this summer with the writing of the chapter on critical theory for the encyclopedia. Next, with the writing of the paper for the Green College, UBC, Vancouver talk in August, which will begin with the fundamental question concerning the inheritance of philosophy from Aristotle onwards as the intellectual/abstract speculative work of a particular group (class) that 'enjoys' schole. The Attic class I'm currently taking will figure in as a preliminary anecdotal prompt on not only learning ancient Greek but on encountering the foundation of Attic Greek culture, specifically, its slave based political economy. From there we arrive at Aristotle and his presumptions about who does philosophy. This leads to the question: is philosophy ideology? is ideology an abstraction from from historico-material reality? Is philosophy an expression of alienation? These questions set up a revisiting of Marx's critique of Hegel, and, finally, the engagement with the Freirean category of conscientizacion: in-between Marx & Hegel.
Marx in the morning, Hegel at night.
Thesis: The dialectic is the way of truth. [period]
This anticipates what appears to be a 'return' to the dialectic. Is it actually a return, or is the relationship between Being and learning already a yet to be recognized dialectic?
Reading Marx's 1844 critique of Hegel this week made clear to me that the work post Being and Learning, will begin with the working out of the genealogy of poetic praxis. This genealogy, very generally speaking, unfolds: Heraclitus>Socrates>Hegel>Marx>Freire, with the necessity of Nietzsche and perhaps even Foucault offering guidance. Then too Heidegger. Of course, Irigaray and DuBois stand as the two principal figures guiding the project, the one demonstrating the syncretic form of thinking/writing of poetic praxis, and the the other challenging to create a new logic.
The matter will begin, first, this summer with the writing of the chapter on critical theory for the encyclopedia. Next, with the writing of the paper for the Green College, UBC, Vancouver talk in August, which will begin with the fundamental question concerning the inheritance of philosophy from Aristotle onwards as the intellectual/abstract speculative work of a particular group (class) that 'enjoys' schole. The Attic class I'm currently taking will figure in as a preliminary anecdotal prompt on not only learning ancient Greek but on encountering the foundation of Attic Greek culture, specifically, its slave based political economy. From there we arrive at Aristotle and his presumptions about who does philosophy. This leads to the question: is philosophy ideology? is ideology an abstraction from from historico-material reality? Is philosophy an expression of alienation? These questions set up a revisiting of Marx's critique of Hegel, and, finally, the engagement with the Freirean category of conscientizacion: in-between Marx & Hegel.
Marx in the morning, Hegel at night.
No comments:
Post a Comment