getfiscal posted:

i've never actually read bordiga. i always thought it was weird he died in 1970 though. that's like how kautsky died in 1938. whenever i read about kautsky's theories i always assume lenin literally killed him in 1919 or something.

he actually dropped out of politics to focus on building houses after his marginalisation in the pci in the late 20s lol

e: bordiga snype

laika posted:

babyhueypnewton posted:

DM I've never heard of Charles Taylor so I briefly looked him up. What is he doing that isn't already done by Carl Schmitt or Georgio Agamben?

I haven't read Schmitt or Agamben firsthand yet and I'm only just now getting into Taylor so I can't give you a really comprehensive answer yet. What similarities did you have in mind?

sorry i just assumed you've read everything just the concept of secular religion and western institutions/ideology as diversified theology

babyhueypnewton posted:

laika posted:

babyhueypnewton posted:

DM I've never heard of Charles Taylor so I briefly looked him up. What is he doing that isn't already done by Carl Schmitt or Georgio Agamben?

I haven't read Schmitt or Agamben firsthand yet and I'm only just now getting into Taylor so I can't give you a really comprehensive answer yet. What similarities did you have in mind?

sorry i just assumed you've read everything just the concept of secular religion and western institutions/ideology as diversified theology

haha, no problem. that line of thought is interesting to me and i've encountered it in several other authors, but i don't think that's so much what Taylor is about. i'm reading Sources of the Self right now (and liking it a lot) but the summaries i've read of A Secular Age suggest that it goes a different direction. here's a review if you're interested: https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/23696-a-secular-age/

his notion of morality is a lot different than current common conceptions too. it's more broad and also includes "our sense of what underlies our own dignity, or questions about what makes our lives meaningful or fulfilling."

here is a passage from Sources of the Self that really stood out to me partially because of the influence of the phenomenological tradition:

...The very way we walk, move, gesture, speak is shaped from the earliest moments by our awareness that we appear before others, that we stand in public space, and that this space is potentially one of respect or contempt, of pride or shame. Our style of movement is expresses how we see ourselves as enjoying respect or lacking it, as commanding it or failing to do so. Some people flit through public space as though avoiding it, others rush through as though hoping to sidestep the issue of how they appear in it by the very serious purpose by which they transit through it; others again saunter through with assurance, savoring their moments within it; still others swagger, confident of how their presence marks it; think of the carefully leisurely way the policeman gets out of his car, having stopped you for speeding, and the slow, swaying walk over as he comes to demand your licence.

the contempt/shame side of things comes into play a lot with social attitudes about mental illness that often become internalized

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21271414

Patients with schizophrenia seem to be less sensitive towards unfairness to their own disadvantage, but punish unfairness at a comparable level to controls, which opposes the common view of a general lack of moral value appreciation in schizophrenia.

drwhat posted:

i am going back to school since i skipped out the first time around and hence am reading babby's first everything, starting with the early history of the development of near-eastern civilization/culture. it's interesting to see what is glossed over and/or assumed as natural consequence. blah blah blah blah blah, and now humanity could emerge from the caves because interest-bearing loans are the foundation of civilization and capital determines all progress in history

reading makes u a worse student, not a better one. the dirty secret of academia is no one actually reads things, just the sections they need for their paper or whatever they were forced to read in graduate school. I would be shocked if more than 100 american academics have read Marx's capital in its entirety.

laika posted:

babyhueypnewton posted:

laika posted:

babyhueypnewton posted:

DM I've never heard of Charles Taylor so I briefly looked him up. What is he doing that isn't already done by Carl Schmitt or Georgio Agamben?

I haven't read Schmitt or Agamben firsthand yet and I'm only just now getting into Taylor so I can't give you a really comprehensive answer yet. What similarities did you have in mind?

sorry i just assumed you've read everything just the concept of secular religion and western institutions/ideology as diversified theology

haha, no problem. that line of thought is interesting to me and i've encountered it in several other authors, but i don't think that's so much what Taylor is about. i'm reading Sources of the Self right now (and liking it a lot) but the summaries i've read of A Secular Age suggest that it goes a different direction. here's a review if you're interested: https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/23696-a-secular-age/

his notion of morality is a lot different than current common conceptions too. it's more broad and also includes "our sense of what underlies our own dignity, or questions about what makes our lives meaningful or fulfilling."

here is a passage from Sources of the Self that really stood out to me partially because of the influence of the phenomenological tradition:

...The very way we walk, move, gesture, speak is shaped from the earliest moments by our awareness that we appear before others, that we stand in public space, and that this space is potentially one of respect or contempt, of pride or shame. Our style of movement is expresses how we see ourselves as enjoying respect or lacking it, as commanding it or failing to do so. Some people flit through public space as though avoiding it, others rush through as though hoping to sidestep the issue of how they appear in it by the very serious purpose by which they transit through it; others again saunter through with assurance, savoring their moments within it; still others swagger, confident of how their presence marks it; think of the carefully leisurely way the policeman gets out of his car, having stopped you for speeding, and the slow, swaying walk over as he comes to demand your licence.

the contempt/shame side of things comes into play a lot with social attitudes about mental illness that often become internalized

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21271414

Patients with schizophrenia seem to be less sensitive towards unfairness to their own disadvantage, but punish unfairness at a comparable level to controls, which opposes the common view of a general lack of moral value appreciation in schizophrenia.

sounds cool. I might read this now as I'm interested in how morality is gendered as an embodied set of values and how transgender people have to relearn a set of patriarchal bio-values in how they walk, talk, dress, eat, posture, etc.

roseweird posted:

babyhueypnewton posted:

sounds cool. I might read this now as I'm interested in how morality is gendered as an embodied set of values and how transgender people have to relearn a set of patriarchal bio-values in how they walk, talk, dress, eat, posture, etc.

simplify please? and what does "bio-values" mean??

i was gonna write bio-political morality but i wasn't sure if it captured the concept I was trying to capture of directly embodied ideology instead of the more abstract foucaultian junk that gets misused. im sure theres a better word.

i guess I'm trying to think about the way we act as a directly physical manifestation of ideology which is clearly gendered. Men walk in a certain way, hold themselves in a certain way, speak in a certain way, etc. not particularly original, just a basic feminist reading of Lacan imo. but it is interesting how transgender people relearn these coded ideologies, like MTF learning to speak in a higher voice, sitting with their legs crossed, playing with their hair, etc.

roseweird posted:

we exist as an indirect, differentiated manifestation of an undifferentiated ideology. but thats because im a fascist monist freemason witch etc.

Agreed, we certainly exist as the organically differentiated components of the singular body born of shared blood and soil. Consequentially, the degeneration and alienation of contemporary social existence is a result of the misrecognition of our nature as such differentiated components of the organic whole. in order to secure the harmonious existence of our people, we are compelled to enforce the homogenous functioning of the naturally differentiated parts of the social body, or volk. to do so it is necessary to intervene in the biological makeup of our community to ensure the existence of cohesive ethnic bodies. Heil Hitler