Passages on the Violence of Metaphysics

 

Passage I: Anthropophagy

/ a micro physics of power / instinctual atomism / materialism generalizing models of combination and exchange / a naturalization of the arbitrary, the aleatory and the contingent  / all is differential, textual, oppositional, decentred / “life” is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering, and narrated so that ontic difference is by necessity oppositional and contradicting as forces resist, succumb or are vanquished by other forces / force equals writing / master-slave theories generalized / a determinate linearity plays out in postmodernism (deconstruction, schizo-analysis, genealogy) where everything is under the umbrella of a Master metaphor of production, marking & inscription / an ideologist’s ideology where everything is arbitrary because all equally motivated: everything is motivated equally as power / powerful agent of reduction: everything is reduced to a unified field where all effects are accounted for before they happen through the absorbing of difference all difference in the same way, for the same reason /

/ “necessity” imparts created difference as material deformity where everything is subject to conditions of distortion and impoverishment, and where the sublime advances as a featureless abyss /

/ “life” becomes force appropriating, resisting, vanquishing or succumbing to another force, given over to an aesthetic taste of “instinct” and “nature” as arbitrating signs mediating the Absolute as ascent and acquisition /

/ revival of the anthropophagy of Dionysus, the intoxication of appropriating forces eating themselves and repeating eternally… /

***

The cannibalism at work in Nietzsche’s revival of the metaphysics of antiquity: Dionysian tumult, necessity of strife, strength for its own sake and celebrating acquisition and dominion: violence ontology is existence as drunkenness of power, the flaying of flesh, a warfare of being ritualized in its wasteful, extravagant, charismatic cult of death (but always described through inverse qualities like vitality and creativity). The cannibalism of the metaphysics of postmodernism: the “point of view of nature” that wishes to upend all of the limit consequences of power and desire.

 


 

Passage II: Enclosures

/ order and chaos, each side fortifying the other / Dionysian “play of forces” that is boundless, fecund, abundant, contradictory and recurrent / Apollonian structure, stability, prudence or order /

/ enclosure /

/ having painted the world as an irreversible movement towards virtual ascendancy, towards total control and technological enframing, what is left is only the unpredictable, fated event that abolishes programmatic modernity in a sudden convulsion of reversibility / in violence ontology the only possibility of difference or otherness is left to hysterical, impetuous eruption as all ethical alterity becomes impossible /

/ difference appears in the Symbolic in opposition to the structural and substitutive logic of the sign / death (Exile) becomes blind spot or absence haunting all calculations of the political economy / irreducibly excluded from all formal fields of signification, making its return to reinforce dead labor of the City, death becomes a metaphysical non-proximity /

/ result: human beings in the simulacrum (the exteriorization of the senses) are mere quanta of forces, mere ventilations of power that are checked against the power of State violence / metaphysical enclosure in the “necessity” of violence rendered concretely in the sacrificial economy of terrorism and the technocratic police state /

/ a fundamental strife coming out in the postmodern as it theorizes terrorism (negation of political economy) while simultaneously reinforcing the entire System of terroristic control / ironized metaphysics where otherness is sought security ontologically as non-meaning, as immanent rupture or principle of self destruction said to be at work in all things /

/ everything becomes subject to a sacrificial economy /

***

The enclosure of metaphysics in the depiction of an amaranthine sublime: the sublime as sheer contingency, the mutation of intoxication in “play” and the announcement of Dionysus (the antichrist) as giving metaphysics its finality and final form. Postmodernism’s choice is between pagan or gnostic scales: a specious selection between either celebrating the sheer terror of the contingent bounty of life or departing towards some apophatic reduction that is entirely unrelational, as ultimately it descends into a nihilistic exterminism.

…a fierce irony of a System that ends up internalizing terrorism, emptying itself by inflicting it on itself…

 


 

Passage III: War Story

/ Nietzsche’s pragmatism: all worldviews are arbitrary because all equally motivated, and the same problem arises in the “problem of the sign” as all signifiers reduce reality to the arbitrary /

/ even if it sought return in the form of denunciation, structuralism could only save itself from positivism by returning to metaphysics to redouble it: a constant latency remains throughout: repressed in the “critique of the metaphysics of representation” but also immediately disclosed as the urge to determine the nature of the reality “falsified” in the representational systems under scrutiny / the differential, the textual, the oppositional, the decentered, the molecular: from the outset attempts to guarantee statements about the nature of representation where models preclude the context of their grounds, as the model become the only possibility of reference / deductive, structural causality, where every representer & represented is always preceded by the representations as cause / combinatory model of exchange /

/ unified field, where everything is the same for the same reason, as in the “arche-writing” advancing the immemorial “unity of violence and writing” : all problems reduce to a priori structures of indifference, centripetally trapped in a play of signifiers /

/ the gods buffer the enclosure, re-evoked out of the dust of antiquity to posit on the one hand, a metaphysics of presence taken for a priori colonial violence, and on the other, an intoxicating power that is a uniform field of seamless interrelationality /

/ emerging nihilistic contour in the microphysics of power / dynamics of violence operating as a potent agent of reduction /

/ Being as something that cannot help but affirm war: Heidegger displacing the “existential human subjectivity” (Sartre) from the “center”: original withdrawal, manifesting itself by hiding itself, cue also to the statement that war is not an accident which overcomes Being, but is “Being itself” [Violence of Metaphysics] /

/ the argument that there ought to be a stance of peace against a charismatic fascism is checked off, rendered something worth aiming towards, but nonetheless the “question of being” is said to “come first” and if that displaces human beings or human valuation from “centrality” then so be it /

/ castration: impossibility of communication /

/ if predication is the first violence, then what prevents the “purifying of rhetoric” from davagating to barbarism, to demolition or eradication, since by this scheme of erasing being the other also remains mute in the impossible infinity of ethical alterity, in monstrous sublimity? / what of the derailment of communication (said to be always-already at work) that destabilizes and decomposes within a totality which, ambiguities and undeciables aside, pronounces the necessity of violence? /

/ the Gallic themes of rupture and breaks – perhaps, also “collaborators:” all the themes of difference sized and shaped by the ambiguity of the language paradigm, spirited by Nietzsche’s gods through a horizontal elocution of power /

/ impossible to ignore the slope from a destruktion of humanism to an active inhumanity: the antichrist where metaphysics reinforces an economy of violence against violence / the symbolic is dissolved in the sign’s absorption of otherness, entailing nothing less than a explosive, terroristic tension /

/ violence inextricable to every approach to the other /

/ displacing present meanings by attempting to claim more original ones, destrucktion is also concurrent to fascism that asserverates a palingenesis of “conservative revolution” / what of care, communication, ethics, responsibility when a unified field of effects are all accounted for before they happen, and accounted for as primal power? /

/ “existential human subjectivity” effaced in the cold glow of the technocapocalypse /

 

***

Is being only an illusory stability, a kind of haunting thing following after the event? Perhaps. But is the event by necessity subject to the anthropophagy of Dionysus? Not unequivocally. Only from a mode of arbitrariness that makes everything arbitrary for the same reason. Is the unrepresentable somehow more “true” than representation? Whereas the joker cards of slippage would have me suspended at a moment of indecision, at least for a time being, before making a choice, it insinuates that that choice will always be under the tutelage of a “necessity” of violence.

Can all of these questions liquefy together in order to yield an entirely different, salubrious effect?

 


 

Postscript: obverse to violence ontology:

Metaphysics interprets being where “gift” is reduced to a contractual mechanism, a mere token of power, calculation, circulation functioning in a sacrificial economy of symbolic exchange. Over and against Mauss, the challenge against the postmodernists is mutatis mutandis “gift” as a moral community (not a totalizing of credit and obligation ending in a tautology of the same). The postmodernists fundamentally misunderstood the aporia of the gift – the ‘economy of exchange’ – regarding a “true” gift as impossible by virtue of accommodating an implicit obligation, where gift qua gift is never free: it locks the giver and receiver into a mutually destructive isochronism.

To return to the question of the gift (aporia of the gift) we may do so in recourse to the God who makes saints.

As the postmodernists suggested we are indeed seized by the economics of exchange, but the indwelling of a clear mind cuts the Gordian Knot in grace. Grace is gift, the truest gift possible coming from the fountainhead of actuality in the act of creation. Nothing has to exist. God needs nothing. God acts to no ends. To act from need belongs only to an imperfect agent. God alone is perfectly liberal, perfectly giver: acting of no profit but only on the account of goodness. The coming-to-be of things and its ongoing continuation is dependent on the infinity whose essence and existence comes together: that which gives, the Good, is not ‘beyond the beings.’ Every creature is a sheer gift: there is nothing to be in the creature that has not been given. An absolutely radical gift-giving (“pray for those who persecute you”). Rather than reciprocity or a return of the always-the-same, the gift is pure gratuity. The gift is offered without compensation. No finite thing’s being is their own: they show up as a gift in the world.

“For who maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? but if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?
(Saint Paul)

/ a radiant light /

 

 

 

3 thoughts on “Passages on the Violence of Metaphysics

  1. Cool brain dump.

    You know I’ve been thinking lately, perhaps The problem is not so much the infamous “central thinker“ or centrality as such, but more that such centrality is not probably been ties to itself but actually sees its own workings as indeed significant, Which is to say that as it did Nite is emotional content it there by cc the processes of emotion as contributing to a sort of Gestalt Of reason and sense, as though the passionate rise that accompanies a cognition means something “large”, like the universe is communicating something to me or God has communicated something to me or this culmination links up with the last time I’ve had this kind of realization and then the whole series of realizations culminate in this great spiritual awakening that the whole world needs to register and understand.

    Perhaps the problem is not so much this process but that it is understood as having more significance than it really does.

    Because isn’t the whole thing about art to do with passion and following one’s passion and feeling the art and stuff like that?

    At what point does art stay art? It kind of seems in the effort to contain a particular activity into “art” we miss the large significance of every activity being art, and then also Mrs. significance of having the coincidence of passion and thought means less then with the cognition conveys .

    Liked by 1 person

    1. onto something down this path:
      “It kind of seems in the effort to contain a particular activity into “art” we miss the large significance of every activity being art”

      art in every being as shared creative ebullience

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s