Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.
|
Cargando... Philosophy in the Present (2003)por Alain Badiou
   Ninguno Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro.  jonfaith | Feb 22, 2019 |  sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
Two controversial thinkers discuss a timeless but nonetheless urgent question: should philosophy interfere in the world? Nothing less than philosophy is at stake because, according to Badiou, philosophy is nothing but interference and commitment and will not be restrained by academic discipline. Philosophy is strange and new, and yet speaks in the name of all - as Badiou shows with his theory of universality. Similarly, Zizek believes that the philosopher must intervene, contrary to all expectations, in the key issues of the time. He can offer no direction, but this only shows that the question has been posed incorrectly: it is valid to change the terms of the debate and settle on philosophy as abnormality and excess. At once an invitation to philosophy and an introduction to the thinking of two of the most topical and controversial philosophers writing today, this concise volume will be of great interest to students and general readers alike. No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca. |
Debates activosNingunoCubiertas populares
 Google Books — Cargando...GénerosSistema Decimal Melvil (DDC)100Philosophy and Psychology Philosophy General PhilosophyClasificación de la Biblioteca del CongresoValoraciónPromedio: (3.81)
¿Eres tú?Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4
This is an interesting if underdeveloped and realized venture, one featuring two of the brightest philosophical stars in today's firmament. Their thesis is whether philosophy can be utilized in political machinations. Each author provides a quick essay and then there is an all too brief actual exchange, one whose edges appear blunted because of mutual admiration.
Badiou begins with a thesis that philosophers create or recognize problems through their incessant questioning. Thus they are temperamentally ill disposed to looking at political issues unless such are repurposed to their own agenda. He then unfolds 8 predicate statements, making every effort to assume an almost geometric proposition.
Good old Slavoj is much more informal -- and effective -- in my book. Tolerance means: no harassment. Harassment is a key word. Fundamentally, what this says is: hide your desire; don't come too close to me. It means, as I have experienced in the US: if you look too long at somebody, a woman or whoever - that is already visual harassment; if you say something dirty - that is already verbal rape. That shows us that tolerance in this context is precisely a form of intolerance: intolerance for the closeness of the other.
Žižek thus whirls and spouts, suddenly he asks us to rethink, to consider-- and we go silent, mulling the implications. (