check out this dudechekem out

check out this dude
chekem out

Pleasure limits the scope of human possibility - the pleasure principle is a principle of homeostasis. Desire, on the other hand, finds its boundary, its strict relation, its limit, and it is in the relation to this limit that it is sustained as such, crossing the threshold imposed by the pleasure principle. — Jacques Lacan - The Seminar of Jacques Lacan Book XI : The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. Norton, 1981. (via jwes115)

(via imkrebsgang)

Two centuries ago, a former European colony decided to catch up with Europe. It succeeded so well that the United States of America became a monster, in which the taints, the sickness and the inhumanity of Europe have grown to appalling dimensions. Franz Fanon (via the-uncensored-she)

(via mochente)

a Master is … by definition an impostor, an imbecile who misperceives as the outcome of his decisions what actually ensues from the automatic run of the symbolic machine — Slavoj Zizek, 1994 (via alterities)

scrapes:

nov—-18th:

"I have never really understood exactly what a ‘liberal’ is, since I have heard ‘liberals’ express every conceivable opinion on every conceivable subject." — Assata Shakur

image

(via codeinewarrior)

weakness posing as strength betrayed the thought of the allegedly rising bourgeoisie to ideology, even when the class was thundering against tyranny. in the innermost recesses of humanism, as its very soul, there rages a frantic prisoner who, as a fascist, turns the world into a prison. — adorno
minima moralia
uicspecialcollections:

chicagohistorymuseum:

Jake’s hot dog stand, Chicago, Illinois, 1987. Photograph by Patty Carroll.
Want a copy of this photo?  > Visit our Rights and Reproductions Department and give them this number: ICHi-39257.
Connect with the Museum
    

mmmmmm

uicspecialcollections:

chicagohistorymuseum:

Jake’s hot dog stand, Chicago, Illinois, 1987. Photograph by Patty Carroll.

Want a copy of this photo?  
> Visit our Rights and Reproductions Department and give them this number: ICHi-39257.

Connect with the Museum

Museum Blog Friend us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter Add us on Google + Follow Me on Pinterest

mmmmmm

Perhaps the best way to describe the diminishing interest in philosophy among the intellectuals is to say that the infinite is losing its charm. We are becoming commonsensical finitists – people who believe that when we die we rot, that each generation will solve old problems only by creating new ones, that our descendants will look back on much that we have done with incredulous contempt, and that progress toward greater justice and freedom is neither inevitable nor impossible. We are becoming content to see ourselves as a species of animal that makes itself up as it goes along. The secularization of high culture that thinkers like Spinoza and Kant helped bring about has put us in the habit of thinking horizontally rather than vertically – figuring out how we might arrange for a slightly better future rather than looking up to an outermost framework or down into ineffable depths. Philosophers who think all this is just as it should be can take a certain rueful satisfaction in their own steadily increasing irrelevance. — Richard Rorty, "Philosophy as Cultural Politics" (via restless93)

(via wittgensteinsmister)

What this example perfectly demonstrates is the limitation of the cynical attitude: cynics are les non-dupes who errent; what they fail to recognize is the symbolic efficiency of the illusions, the way they regulate activity which generates social reality. The position of cynicism is that of wisdom – the paradigmatic cynic tells you privately, in a confidential low-key voice: “But don’t you get it that it is all really about… /money, power, sex/, that all high principles and values are just empty phrases which count for nothing?” In this sense, philosophers effectively “believe in the power of ideas,” they believe that “ideas rule the world,” cynics are fully justified in accusing them of this sin – however, what the cynics don’t see is their own naivety, the naivety of their cynical wisdom.
Hence the goal of schizoanalysis: to analyze the specific nature of the libidinal investments in the economic and political spheres, and thereby to show how, in the subject who desires, desire can be made to desire its own repression—whence the role of the death instinct in the circuit connecting desire to the social sphere. All this happens, not in ideology, but well beneath it. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (1972), p. 105. (via literature-and-cats)

(via becomingbricolage)

Any science is based upon the special nature of that which it has made its object through its methods of objectifying. The method of modern science is characterized from the start by a refusal: namely, to exclude all that which actually eludes its own methodology and procedures. Precisely in this way it would prove to itself that it is without limits and never wanting for self-justification. Thus it gives the appearance of being total in its knowledge and in this way provides a defense behind which social prejudices and interests lie hidden and thus protected. One need only think of the role of experts in contemporary society and of the way economics, politics, war, and the implementation of justice are more strongly influenced by the voice of experts than by the political bodies that represent the will of the society.

Hans Georg Gadamer - Semantics and Hermeneutics (1972)

No less true forty years later. I’m reminded of Paul Krugman’s “very serious people”, hiding their ideology behind their “objective” seriousness.

(via urashimajoe)

(via becomingbricolage)

This society turns everything it touches into a potential source of progress and of exploitation, of drudgery and satisfaction, of freedom and of oppression. Sexuality is no exception. One Dimensional Man by H. Marcuse (via psychemenace)

(via becomingbricolage)

it is native to weakness to suppose strength and fear it Marquis de Sade (via vacantgarde)
For the correlationist, ancestrality cannot be a reality prior to the subject- it can only be a reality that is said and thought by the subject as prior to the subject. It is a past for humanity which has no more effectiveness than that of a past of humanity that is strictly correlated with actual humans.

melaissoux

i aint lookin up this dudes name
shits wild

Drawn into a circle of guilt for not making things better, one feels ever more the need to make things worse, is identifying with loss and defeat, ‘deriving sadistic satisfaction from […] suffering.’ — Andre Vantino, quoting Jodi Dean (via alterities)