Friday, May 20, 2011

Mira Alfassa was a great modernizer and reformist


The participatory turn: spirituality, mysticism, religious studies - Page 301 Jorge N. Ferrer, Jorge Noguera Ferrer, Jacob H ... - 2008 - 388 pages
Feminists under fire: exchanges across war zones - Page 203 - Wenona Mary GilesWomen in Conflict Zones Network - 2003 - 238 pages - The "Mother"- Mira Rachel Alfassa of Sephardic Jewish origin from Egypt and France - was a great modernizer and reformist and is revered even today, thirty years after her death. Many European and American socialist and communist women ...
Sri Aurobindo, Jung and Vedic Yoga by Satya Prakash Singh (Hardcover - Apr. 15, 2005)
Maha yogi Walt Whitman: new light on yoga Odayamadath Kunjappa Nambiar - 1978 - 258 pages
Emerson and the light of India: an intellectual history Robert Cartwright Gordon - 2007 - 255 pages
Rūmī and the hermeneutics of eroticism - Page 36 Mahdi Tourage - 2007 - 260 pages
Dante and the Orient - Page 100 Brenda Deen Schildgen - 2002 - 160 pages
Divine justice according to Kambar and Luther Ci. Vi Cavarimuttu - 1978 - 110 pages
Destiny and human initiative in the Mahābhārata - Page 242 Julian F. Woods - 2001 - 237 pages
Under western eyes: India from Milton to Macaulay Balachandra Rajan - 1999 - 267 pages
Looks at the influence of India on the lives, thought, and desires of such twentieth-century Western writers and thinkers as E.M. Forester, Carl Jung, W.B. Yeats, and Martin Luther King, jr
Father India: how encounters with an ancient culture transformed ... - Jeffery Paine - 1998 - 324 pages - ... Aurobindo and the Mother became spiritually one. And Mirra Richard achieved her synthesis, her work, in defiance of the European highbrows like Dickinson who argued that "the contrast is that between India and the rest of the world. ...
With Medhananda on the shores of infinity - Medhananda - 1998 - 144 pages - Reminiscences by a German disciple of the Mother, 1878-1973, chiefly about Sri Aurobindo Ashram; with a few texts translated from French and German.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Hawking Dawkins had a grand fall


'Maya' mired in an overly ambitious plot Bangkok Post - May 14, 2011
MAYA By Jostein Gaarder 346pp, 2001 Phoenix paperback. Available at all good bookshops, 279 baht. His later novel, Maya, attempts to do for evolutionary science what Sophie's World did for philosophy: render it inspiring; reveal it in all of its ...
Stephen Hawking tells Google 'philosophy is dead'  Telegraph.co.uk - Matt Warman - May 17, 2011
Speaking to Google's Zeitgeist Conference in Hertfordshire, the author of 'A Brief History of Time' said that fundamental questions about the nature of the universe could not be ...
Stephen Hawking, science and sharia Washington Post (blog) 
My twelve-year-old son Rumi, is a fan of Stephen Hawkings' book, A Brief History of Time. He has been blogging about the book for nearly a year now.
Islamic philosophy is genuine and is not Greek Iran Book News Agency - May 17, 2011
In the reviewing meeting on the book "Farabi"; written by Nasrollah Hikmat, Davari Ardakani said: " The philosophy which began with al-Kindi and was established with Farabi, is authentically original and isn't Greek.
Dr Michiel Leezenbrrg, professor of philosophy at the University of Amsterdam is going to lecture on 'Spinoza and Islamic Philosophy' at Iranian Institute of Philosophy.
A Philosopher in Love New York Times - Robert Zaretsky - May 6, 2011
TODAY is the 300th birthday of David Hume, the most important philosopher ever to write in English, according to The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Monk, mystic, mechanic Ha'aretz - Avner Shapira - May 13, 2011
Ludwig Wittgenstein's complicated ties with his Viennese family, the suicides of three of his siblings, his ambivalent attitude toward his Jewish origins and his homosexuality - all are examined in a new exhibition in Berlin in honor of the great 20th ...

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Wide variety of other philosophical orientations


From time to time people have raised questions about why SR/OOO might have arisen at the time it did. I don’t pretend to have a comprehensive answer to this question, but I suspect that it has a lot to do with the unique experience of our generation, especially as it pertains to the new technologies. Folks like Graham, Morton, Bogost, and I lived through a fundamental transformation of culture. We saw the first Ataris, then the personal computer, transformations in the telephone involving call waiting, caller ID, multi-party calls, the rise of cable television, the invention of the cell phone, the rise of the internet, the transformation of grocery stores and food, etc., etc., etc. We have lived through and in a transition between two cultures. As Jameson suggests in Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, such transitional lives between histories tend to generate a particular critical and speculative sensibility.

We have lived– as does the current generation that grew up in this ecology –in a world awash in objects of all sorts. Not only did we develop in a world of objects, we developed in a world awash in mysterious or withdrawn objects (here, for some reason, Stephen King’s Maximum Overdrive and Christine both come to mind as they depict a world animated by all sorts of mysterious, frighteningly lively machines). And what we discovered, perhaps, as we began our studies in the world of theory was that that theory was deeply inadequate in helping us to understand this strange new world we were living in. Roughly we were presented with three options: the linguistic turn focusing on signifiers, texts, and signs, phenomenology focusing on the analysis of intentionality and lived embodied experience, and the new historicists with their focus on networks of power and discursive structures.

Well apparently it’s been a banner day for interviews! Here’s another interview with me over at Figure/Ground. I talk quite a bit about Pedagogy and new media.

The internet changed all of that, especially with the emergence of blogs.  Suddenly the relations between nodes in networks opened up significantly, leading to all sorts of surprising encounters among researchers.  This has led to people discovering theoretical orientations and trends that they might not have ever otherwise discovered due to the relatively restricted nature of the earlier academic networks.  Additionally, communication has intensified such that discussion takes place between people from diverse backgrounds on a day to day basis.  As a result, theoretical shifts and development have intensified as a result of cross-fertilization.  I now find that I have to think about a wide variety of other philosophical orientations in my own work that I wouldn’t have even been aware of in an ecology prior to the internet. […]

First, I’d say it’s important to value the process of writing for its own sake.  A lot of students and people see writing is the end result of a process whereby ones ideas have already been developed.  But that’s not really how it works; at least for me.  The writing is the thinking, not the result of a thinking that has already taken place.  The activity itself is what generates the ideas.  It’s important to get into the habit of writing regularly to develop your ideas.  This also leads to a diminution in the anxiety surrounding articles and conferences.

Second, participate and communicate with others.  My experience online has been invaluable because it has forged relationships with scholars from all over the world.  These relationships have not only created countless opportunities for articles and presentations, but have invaluably deepened and enriched my thought.  There are a number of trajectories of thought that I would have never followed if discussions with others handn’t instigated them in me.  No one knows that you exist if you don’t participate and communicate.  While it’s certainly true that articles are more important on your CV, a mere handful of people ever read articles.  It’s crucially important to get yourself out there and engage with the work of others.  Not doing so both renders you invisible and denies you countless opportunities to develop your thought.

At New APPS, the interview by John Protevi can be found by clicking HERE. At Figure/Ground Communication, the interview by Laureano Ralon is HERE. Posted by doctorzamalek

Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Reharmonizations of ancient metaphysics and philosophical contributions in a fortified form

By incorporating Gadamer’s metaphysics and ontology into his account of epistemai and mutable historical a prioris, Foucault would have access to non-constructed shared structures, which because of their web-like interconnections and flexible boundaries, would be both amenable to his episteme-specific conditioning rules and would provide the present-yet-absent background “space” needed to fill the gaps between epistemai. In other words, these interconnected metaphysical structures, given their identity-range and ongoing concealment-unconcealment dialectic, would give Foucault a way to explain the transitional movements between epistemai and how elements from past epistemaican be taken up in subsequent historical periods, be reconfigured and yet still recognizable as echoes of something else, and come to play a completely different role in the new episteme. These common structural yet non-identical overlaps across epistemai, in which former discursive elements, concepts, and practices are reharmonized in a new episteme and inhabit an organization “place” along a continuum of central and peripheral roles, support and strengthen a view of epistemai with porous and permeable rather than rigidly fixed boundaries and internal rules.
Just as Foucault is reticent to speak of historical a prioris as metaphysical principles, he is also reticent to make explicit claims regarding transcultural structures or capacities possessed by all human beings—even though his account presupposes such structures. We have also seen that Foucault’s expansion of his methodology to an archaeology-plus-genealogy and his affirmation in later writings of our inability to step outside of the conditioning of our own episteme allow him to overcome deficiencies of his earlier formulations. Foucault’s methodological amendment and the accompanying implication that the archaeologist too is historically conditioned share family resemblances with Gadamer’s notion of our socio-cultural and linguistically shaped hermeneutical horizons. Because they both affirm the contingency of these socially-formed conditioning factors, neither thinker advocates a social determinism locking us into a particular horizon or prohibiting us access to other historical periods.
Like Foucault, Gadamer, as Taylor points out in his essay, presupposes some kind of common human nature or shared transhistorical metaphysical structures.[12] Unlike Foucault, Gadamer acknowledges and makes explicit his appropriations and reharmonizations of ancient metaphysics to support a historically-friendly view of shared human structures.  In light of the fact that Foucault’s notion of power relations, resistance possibilities, and his analyses of active subjects and self-transformative technologies presuppose common volitional and rational capacities among humans, he has much to gain from joining hands with Gadamer and making these metaphysical assumptions explicit. Given Foucault’s expanded archaeology and his affirmation of our finitude and interpretative constraints, my proposed archaeologico-hermeneutical fusion would, if my account is correct, allow him to retain his innovative insights and philosophical contributions in a fortified form. Not only would his account become more coherent, but the emancipatory aspects of his analyses would be redoubled and their viability amplified and available for application to current socio-political issues.

I suspect that OOO is more analogous to negative theology than to deconstruction, insofar as the object is supposed to have some kind of content. In fact, in conversation with Levi he has said that the “withdrawn” object includes unrealized potentiality, which then serves as the ground of the possibility of change. I still maintain that we don’t need any hidden content to make change possible. You can get change through negativity or inherent ontological incompleteness, and indeed I would argue that the change achieved in that model is more “real” than the change Levi was promoting in that conversation, because the unrealized potential of the object is “always already there” even if it doesn’t manifest at any given moment. (This isn’t the main point of the post, however, and I may be wrong about what Levi meant.)
What’s more, everything I’ve read from Harman and Levi indicates that the object is the self-identical “ground zero” of reality — so that the withdrawal of the object from all relationships (including and especially its relationship to human cognition) serves to reinforce its base-level self-identity.
So overall, it seems to me that OOO’s approach to the object is similar to negative theology’s approach to God. Am I getting anything horribly wrong here? (Just to be clear, I don’t mean to say that OOO is “secretly religious” or anything of the sort — I’m only talking about the formal similarity between OOO and negative theology.)

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Philosophical despair & post-secular spirituality


Posted by DEBBANERJI POSTHUMAN DESTINIES: FEBRUARY 8, 2011
Two of the major figures I would like to refer to in this regard are both Americans.  One is Richard N Bucke, who wrote a book called Cosmic Consciousness in 1901. The book was inspired by an experience, on  which he wrote in the third person due to a sense of impersonality that had entered his consciousness.  […]
1901-1902 is also the year of the publication of a major work, one may say, the foundational text of world religions, of comparative mysticism, and of one might call the subjective science of the future.  This is William James’ Varieties of Religious Experience.  In this work, James characterizes all mystical experiences by four features. It’s interesting that James  first characteristic of mystic experience is stated in terms that may almost be taken out of the description of his experience by Richard Bucke Bucke says of his experience that he had an exaltation “followed by an intellectual illumination quite impossible to describe.”  
István Mészáros.  Social Structure and Forms of Consciousness, Volume I: The Social Determination of Method.  Monthly Review Press, 2010.  463 pp.
The book in effect presents a number of case studies on particular thinkers.  One example is the discussion of Hannah Arendt in the chapter on the 'Rise and Fall of Historical Temporality'.  While Arendt was a critical writer, Mészáros shows that she accepted certain premises which trapped her thinking within the bounds of bourgeois thought.  The horizon of the possible becomes limited to capitalism.
Thus the possibility of democratic control of production is ruled out of consideration before her analysis begins.  Arendt is further taken to task for a relativistic argument concerning the meaning of history, leading to pessimism about knowledge itself, and is shown to be caricaturing Marx's understanding of the manner in which humanity makes its own history (pp. 123-5).  The decay of bourgeois thought is exemplified here in Arendt's treatment of Descartes, which for Mészáros is as distorted as her treatment of Marx. Descartes' principle of doubt was a point of departure 'which in its explicitly stated positive aspirations aims at the constitution of secure knowledge' (p.122).  
The problem is not just at the level of epistemology and history.  Philosophical despair at the possibility of knowledge becomes practical despair at the possibility of changing the world. Arendt stands here therefore as an exemplum of a whole range of twentieth-century schools of thought.

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Incipient mentality must already exist on the level of subatomic particles

The Speculative Turn, edited by Levi Bryant, Nick Srnicek, and Graham Harman, has now been published. This volume gives the fullest account to date of (so-called) “speculative realism” in all its varieties. There are articles by the four initial speculative realists (Graham Harman, Iain Hamilton Grant, Quentin Meillassoux, and Ray Brassier), together with work by other thinkers who have influenced them (Laruelle, Latour, Stengers, Delanda, etc) essays by later contributors to speculative realist trends (Bryant, Srnicek, Reza Negarestani), brief interviews with Badiou and Zizek, and more. The volume contains my own article/critique of Harman, “The Actual Volcano: Whitehead, Harman, and the Problem of Relations,” together with Harman’s response.
The Speculative Turn can be purchased in hardcopy, or downloaded as a free pdf, here. It doesn’t seem to have made it to Amazon.com yet, but I am told it will be there shortly.

 It may be noted that research into biological free will and biological decision-making is not entirely unrelated to the questions about panpsychism raised by such analytic philosophers as Thomas Nagel, Galen Strawson, and Sam Coleman, and which I have discussed previously in this blog. For Strawson, the emergence of mentality from non-mentality is a serious problem, even though the emergence of life from non-life is not. He argues, therefore, that an incipient mentality must already exist on the level of subatomic particles. I suggest that it helps to make sense of this claim if we understand mentality in terms of “decision,” rather than in terms of consciousness or “qualia.” The evolution of biological decision making, and biological free will, might well depend upon, and make use of, an implicit potential of all matter. If decision were not already possible, then living things that actually do make decisions could not have come into existence. Rather than decision being a power of life, then, life would be a consequence of the potentiality of decision.

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Cyberspace and Postmodern Democracy

An important thesis of Habermas's text was what he saw as the degeneration of a rationally based mode of public deliberation into a consumerist society dominated by a mass media that was itself compromised by its relationship with the State. His critics, in turn, have argued that such a transformation was not in fact a degeneration but a marker of a more egalitarian and democratic public culture. This conference seeks to re-examine the contours of this debate in the light of the significant transformations in digital technology and human communication that have taken place over the last few decades.  

Forum on Contemporary Theory, Baroda in collaboration with Department of English and Cultural Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh
Theme: The Virtual Transformation of the Public Sphere
15-18 December 2010 Venue: Hotel Parkview, Chandigarh, India
Program-Schedule
Thursday, 16th December Venue: Banquet Hall (Upper)
10.00 – 11.30 am Inauguration Chair: Prof. Bhupinder Brar
10.00 – 10.10 am     Welcome by Prof. Rana Nayar, Head, Department of English, Panjab University
10.10 – 10.20 am     Welcome by Prof. Prafulla C. Kar, Convener, Forum on Contemporary Theory, Baroda
10.20 – 10.35 am     Thematic Introduction by Dr. Gaurav Desai, Convener of the Conference
10.35 – 10.40 am     Remarks by Prof. Lewis R. Gordon, on the Special Issue of the Journal of Contemporary Thought, “Degrees of Statelessness”
10.40 – 10.45 am                 Release of the Special Issue by Prof. Nicholas D. Mirzoeff
10.45 – 10.55 am     Remarks by Prof. William D. Pederson, Editor of the Volume, Abraham Lincoln without Borders
10.55 – 11.00 am     Release of the Volume by Prof. R. C. Sobti, Vice-Chancellor, Panjab University, Chandigarh
11.00 – 11.05 am     Remarks by Prof. Akeel Bilgrami, the Editor of the Volume Democratic Culture: Philosophical and Historical Essays
11.05 – 11.10 am      Release of the Volume by Prof. Javeed Alam, Chairperson, Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi
11.10 – 11.20 am      Inaugural Speech by the Vice-Chancellor, Prof. R. C. Sobti
11.20 – 11.25 am                  Address by the Chair, Prof. Bhupinder Brar
11.25 – 11.30 am      Vote of Thanks by Dr. Surbhi Goel, Department of English, Panjab University, Chandigarh 
11.45–1.00 pm First Session Venue: Banquet Hall (Upper) Keynote Address Chair: Gaurav Desai
Speaker: Nicholas D. Mirzoeff, Professor in the Department of Media and Communication Studies, New York University, USA
Topic: “Global Visualities in Crisis”
Second Session 2.00 –3.30 pm Venue: Banquet Hall (Lower)
A1: Theorizing the Public Sphere Chair: Jasbir Jain
a)     Meera Chakravorty, “The Virtual Transformation of the Public Sphere and Its Dynamics”
b)     Nishat Kazi,  “Internet and the Dynamics of Public Sphere”
c)      Surhita Basu, “News and Public Sphere: Discourse is Power”
B1: Political AgencyVirtual and Real1
Chair: Pushpinder Syal Venue: Conference Room 
a)     Anup Shekhar Chakraborty, “Identity and the Virtual Spaces among the Zo Hnahthlak: The Emergent Zo Cyber Politics”
b)     Esha Mahadevan, “Internet as Public Sphere – The Emergence of New Forms of Politics”
c)      Hiba Aleem, “Virtual Activism, Real Repercussions: An Analysis of How Facebook Impacts the Public Sphere in Light of Some Recent Campaigns”
d)     Padam Nepal, “Virtualization of the Politics of Recognition: Mapping the Physical-Virtual Complementarity in Lepchas’ Struggle for Recognition as PTG in Darjeeling Hills (West Bengal) and Sikkim, India
C1: Democracy, New Media and the Public Sphere Chair: Harpreet Pruthi Venue: Board Room
a)     K.M. Johnson, “Cyberspace and Postmodern Democracy: A Critique of the Habermasian Notion of the Public Sphere”
b)     Garima Kalita, “Attested Freedom: Public Sphere of Media Democracy”
c)      Timothy Allen Jackson, “Cybernecology: Liberation Aesthetics in the Public Sphere”
Third Session 3.30 –5.00 pm
A2: Historicizing the Public Sphere Chair: Parul Dave Mukherji Venue: Conference Room
a)     Mary Bachaspatimayum, “Technological Advancement and Its Influence on the Public Sphere”
b)     N. Nagaraju, “New Communities and ‘Their’ Public Sphere”
c)      Anju Dhadda Misra, “Noosphere in Cyborg: The Virtual and the Virtuous”
d)     Ashes Kumar Nayak, “Media Literacy: Strengthening the Public Sphere”
B2:      Political Agency­ Virtual and Real 2 Chair:  Meera Chakravorty Venue: Banquet Hall (Lower)
a)     James Winchester, “Global Justice, Institutional Change and the Public Sphere in the Age of the Internet”
b)     Arturo Brahms & William Pederson, “Media Transformations from Lincoln to Obama”
c)      Mandakini Jha, “New Media’s Use and Misuse of Lincoln as a Democratic Symbol in Asia
C2:       Representations 1 Chair: Sunita Manian Venue: Board Room
a)     Jasbir Jain, “Mediations between Collective Voices and Future Time: Politics and Media Representation”
b)     Jaspal K. Singh, “Images of Sikh “Tortured Bodies” and the Construction of Sikh Solidarity and Identity within the Indian Nation-state and the Diaspora”
c)      Divya Joshi, “Culture of Confession in The Bachchans: From Autobiography to Blogging”
Fourth Session (Plenary)  5.15 – 7.00 pm Venue: Banquet Hall (Upper)
Re-Reading William Godwin Chair: R. Radhakrishnan
Speaker:        a) Tilottama Rajan, Canada Research Chair and Distinguished University Professor at the University of Western Ontario
Topic: “Mediating the Novel: Speculations and Discipline in Godwin’s St. Leon
Speaker:        b) Gour K. Das, Former Professor of English, University of Delhi and Vice Chancellor, Utkal University, Bhubaneswar
Topic:             “Culture of Anarchy: On the Shaping of Contemporary Media and Literary Cultures”