tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post9053772148572093318..comments2023-09-29T02:49:02.989-07:00Comments on An Emphatic Umph: Of SolitudeDaniel Coffeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03912050391869734890noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post-57625752042993231602019-07-15T02:43:35.642-07:002019-07-15T02:43:35.642-07:00as searching for help on the internet to get my ex...as searching for help on the internet to get my ex lover whom will got divorced back, i came across this wonderful man called DR.ODOGBO of ODOGBO TEMPLE who did a nice job by helping me to get my divorced husband back within 48hours.. I never believe that such things like this can be possible but now i am a living testimony to it because ODOGBO TEMPLE actually brought my lover back, If you are having any relationship problems why not contact DR.ODOGBO TEMPLE via email on: (DRODOGBO34@GMAIL.COM ) OR WhatsApp him on +1443 281 3404 Then i promise you that after 48hours you will have reasons to celebrate like me.<br />Clintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12796093675326026611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post-58710833241623709182012-10-16T21:57:47.015-07:002012-10-16T21:57:47.015-07:00I am not suggesting that being — or becoming — is ...I am not suggesting that being — or becoming — is not contingent. The social — the ethical — is one mode of contingency that in no way exhausts being. There is non-human becoming, the becoming of animals, plants, galaxies, affective flows, cosmic forces.<br /><br />When I say that an individual has a direct relationship with the universal, I am talking about a direct relationship with the the connectedness to the cosmos, that there is a distinctly non-social mode of reckoning that is essential for one's health and vitality and that might, in fact, make one a better citizen of the social. <br /><br />This is not a bypassing of the particular at all. On the contrary, it is an embracing of this particular mode of connection to other things: a universal particular connecting to particular universal flows.<br /><br />What's bypassed is the social.Daniel Coffeenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03912050391869734890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post-21177279066148003462012-10-15T06:40:32.213-07:002012-10-15T06:40:32.213-07:00Bypassing the particular, an infinity of particula...Bypassing the particular, an infinity of particulars, and connecting the individual to the universal, the philosophic project from Socrates to Hegel (and his offspring). I have the suspicion that this is the draw of television as well. The individual on their couch skipping the particulars of their daily existence for a direct (as in effortless) connection to the universal.TomGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16146088152890068896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post-75627656405336950192012-10-14T22:39:24.495-07:002012-10-14T22:39:24.495-07:00No, no! That's all rung! Solitude isn't an...No, no! That's all rung! Solitude isn't anti-social; it doesn’t even appear to be. It's the true source of cultural change even when it emerges over the course of a discussion or other social activity. The thing is that absurdity exists in the social, but society makes the absurdities tidy, cleans them up. Still absurdity persists.<br /><br />I can't help it; there is a becoming minorition, but what about the minority, how does she become individual? It can't be through loose elements in society. No! It's cosmic, it's only through a direct relationship with the flux itself. But this relationship wouldn't make her anti-social, it would make her powerful, and interesting, she would be a whorl pull in the fabric of society. Like Nietzsche one must avoid resentment, resentment will spoil solitude, it will make a solitude a slave of the social, that’s what alienation is. What’s important about Deleuze’s Minoritarian is radial affirmation, otherwise we're back to the whole master slave thing. The next social movement must be affirmation. But what is a social movement that isn't negative? The next individual the next egoist will have to be a night of faith. But how can one challenge society without doubt?<br />dustygravelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01877215902611486889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7461948747659071092.post-13782416571153455902012-10-14T21:29:39.180-07:002012-10-14T21:29:39.180-07:00"Abraham is what Kierkegaard calls a knight o..."Abraham is what Kierkegaard calls a knight of faith, having a direct relationship to the universal while participating in the social. With each step he takes, he walks into the infinite and back. He does not identify himself with being a web designer, a lawyer, a chef — although he may love being one. He affirms himself amidst the fray not as this or that person but as an exquisite absurdity, as something that makes no sense, this is not identifiable in conventional terms, as someone extraordinary, someone that can leave the social behind — and yet who lives joyfully in the social!"<br /><br />Now I see truly how you differ from Heidegger. Being for Heidegger is definitely social. Even alienation is a secondary state, for him, that only comes after the social, solitude though even this mobile solitude you speak of isn’t alienation because it’s more than a mood, I'm interpreting it as a will, and as a hidden strength. <br /><br />No wait! I'm thinking that both solitude and alienation are both emergent properties of the social that is way neither can be reduced to the social. Alienation is a negative stance to the social while solitude is a self-affirming stance toward the social. Faith is the taking up of solitude in the midst of the contradictions of society. This braking away makes an absurd event in which the individual aperies out of touch and anti-social. The week mind flees solitude, and the affirmation of their will, into an alienated socialized state of Being-with-it. <br /><br />I think where you most differ from Heidegger is that while for him human existent is fundamentally Being- there, you seem to be saying that existence is becoming and that faith is that ability to act on factors that haven’t been socialized into neat, little clichés, job descriptions, stereo types and anything else that defines being from a prescription. It's alright to engage in these things, but true strength comes from somewhere else, from the place that says fuck you I'm not one of those things, I'm some kind of beast, I'm one with the divine cosmos, I'm on a mountain killin' my son for God sake!!! Really, you(re) job descriptions have nothing to do with me. I'm not being there, I'm becoming My Self.<br />dustygravelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01877215902611486889noreply@blogger.com