Originally posted to attemptsatliving as I drafted it there & didn’t particularly want to reformat it for here. This is an attempt to critique Stirner in the light of his latest revival, placing his thought in relation to the idealism of the politics of exodus. Though I don’t go into it here, I have a suspicion that politics goes is being repeated today in the idealism of some of the object-oriented ontologists (Harman & Morton).
- Comment
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
synthetic zerØ 
thanks for this introduction a.j., when you say “Libidinal investment & cognitive schematisms only become problematic when they are used as heuristic guides to action, when they become prototypes; the problem with these particular typical formations is that they have become frozen or fixed into structures. Against the image of the prototype, a form of model that is always deployed in order to be remodelled based on experimentation in the raw field of action, a structure is a model that has been decided on, constructed from purely theoretical considerations, a universal abstraction that obliterates the singular bodies from which it is composed.The problem with idee fixe is that afferentially alive prototypes ossify & numb into purely efferential structures”
is the problem the prototypes/heuristics or the move to structures/abstractions?
D’oh, a proof read would have been good.. it’s in the move, but I think there is a tendency for that movement to take place that we just can’t help a lot of the time. Cognitive flexibility isn’t easily achieved.
well and to some degree necessary (we need habits to be/come un-conscious for us to function) which is why we also need trustworthy folks to give us feedback and even correction, yeah I struggle with how much flexibility/plasticity there is to habits, not much I’m afraid.