nOne of the Two: Idiot of Love

Intimacy of desire and eroticism of drive: separate instances intertwined in the idea of love. Hence, from a displacement of desire and drive, love emerges as spiritual, religious, idealist and mystic concept. The knowledge of love is awareness of a narrative of one's desire for the enjoyment of the other; retracing the desire at the void of being or the force of life, the Freudian drive. Libido. Any desire is wish and fantasy. Always at work, indeed in manic-erotic obsession the idea of love, of loving beloved person is more than just desiring the agalma (Lacan's objet petit a). The compulsory instance of this misperceived identification of the fantasy of beloved with the actual person want-to-be story of "true love". The problem of love-idealism of the Two is however posed by psychoanalytic practice of love-transfer, which renders love as pure altruism; disinterested to profit on the economy of desire – but to profit on money – whereas the previous animates the idea of the love of Two. Yet, there is the idea of Love of Two that cannot be disregarded as illusion: the idea of One; impossible idea, as of the Two becoming One in Love there is no-one of the two left. This is an operation that annihilates the subject, for good or bad. Love idealism is then the idea of absolute void, an annihilation of Being. And the One is impossible to make "in love". What truth is now revealed in this dialectical movement of reasoning? The truth that One is always already One-self. So, why make one self an idiot of Love?

Recommended reading: J. Lacan, Encore.

It takes balls to be Pussy

"On Wednesday, the Russian Foreign Ministry denounced Western criticism of the trial as politically motivated and said there were "elements of a clash of civilizations" in the Western condemnation."

http://freepussyriot.org/news/female-punk-rock-band-appeals-conviction-russian-church-critical

Pussy Riot incident renders traditional antagonism between West and Russia meaningless as the "clash of civilizations" may be a matter of the internal political splitting in Russia. It is hard to believe that Pussy Riot are the only Pussies against Putin. But a significant note is that the action took place in the church performing a prayer to Maria. The hope for heavenly intervention agains Putin sends clear message about his monumental position in Russia. Putin's only rival is no less than the Mother of God! So, is there any real opposition, on the level of public opinion, really against Putin in Russia today?

Western sensationalism and false idealism which calls for an indeed impossible rescue mission not only attacks Russian idea of justice but motivates a serious conflict which at this stage, given Putins fast position, will only harden his rule and eventually mobilize or renew traditional Russian hostility to the West. Subsequently, in relation to the West most Russians are perhaps ready to choose to support the existing system than to introduce Western idea of democracy and justice. The former is not an option as Putin's propaganda apparently succeeds to create an apocalyptic vision of non-Putin Russia but perhaps most significantly because any change in Russia now requires an intervention of Biblical proportions. What is the core of this impossibility? Perhaps the people of Russia are perfectly contained to do anything but to prefer to be pussies.      

Speculative/Philosophy and so on

Exploring new frontiers of thought speculative philosophy is basically working on a level of fantasy. This is why the nature of desire and knowledge, as within the fantasy, was elaborated by Plato, closely connected to the idea of truth. However, working on the level of fantasy, philosophy's search for truth thus requires a company of (Lacanian) psychoanalysis and its discourse of the location of the real/ontic not in our faculties but beyond such Kantian discourse: into the domain of the unconscious; an eccentric place, whereas the locus of the subject is not entirely void but a force – the Freudian drive, force of life, Eros: a force of gravity, invisible and known only by its effects; a gravity holding together the singularity of individual being, related to the world and other singularities, animated and other, as an alien One to the Whole. Now, this circular reasoning, from the question of fantasy to the (false metaphysical) question of the Being - by dialectical necessity of the movement of thought - we arrive at a fundamental question, reasoning initially on the hypothesis of the ontic status of the subject of the unconscious. A move towards “ontology” locating the space of relations and non-relations in-between singularities to investigate speculative thought, the thinking itself, to anything it thinks (is thinking), as a fantasy to truth, is ultimately a move from Heideggerian "thinking" returning to philosophy - after its dead. 

The Subject Spoken

Consciousness is, psychoanalytically speaking, accompanied by the unconscious. The unconscious is articulated in language by means of distorted and disrupted elements of meaning, which on a level of understanding pertain to nonsense – the subject of psychoanalytical interpretation. Locating the disruptions in relation to the overall context of meaning the site of the trauma is revealed in a symptomatic occurrence of the signifiers of the unconscious meaning in the speech. While the subject speaks it is also according to Lacan spoken by the unconscious. Any strictly semantic analysis of the unconscious, as the unconscious according to Freud “knows no contradiction”, misses the hidden meaning of the unconscious. Both sides of the meaning, the conscious and the unconscious, which accounts for the whole meaning, and ultimately the truth, is structurally impossible to grasp at once. As Lacan claims, the truth can only be “half-spoken”. The other half is embodied; the language of speaking body, which is enjoyment (jouissance); a language by which one is spoken. 

Metod: lacansk interpretation

Sedan det omedvetna enligt Freuds observationer av drömtydning ”inte känner till några motsättningar” medverkar det till tolkningens ständiga förskjutning då meningsbyggande relaterar till språklig (binär)logik. Genom att supplementera syntaksens primat över det omedvetnas signifiantlogik som till exempel Lacans psykoanalys bygger sin teori kring kan vi lokalisera och artikulera vad som inte kan inkorporeras i språket men som ändå i enlighet med psykoanalytisk teori om det underliggande eller bortträngda är inpräglat i det omedvetna - i lacanska termer uttryckt, i ”bokstavens instans i det omedvetna”….  

Science and Subjectivity: From Cogito to Geist

The scientist who supposes science a discourse of objectivity fails to recognize the true object of the study: the human being who is a scientist. As any other human being the scientist asks eternal questions. All fundamental questions are those of human being itself. In an outlook inwards to cogito or out there towards the universe the scientist finds some relief away from the self that insists on asking. To forget the questions without answer as those are the questions being asked unlike questions given the answer already in the question. Any question is ultimately the question of the self. This means that cogito do not recognize who thinks while occupied by thinking. What else? But Descartes is aware of this. He is a thing that thinks. Res cogitans. He knows that. As Descartes’ fundamental claim is cogito ergo sum – as cogito should be the subject of science – the science nevertheless determines existence from what it cogitates. However, understanding is an operation to be undertaken by the subject who thinks. Le sujet supposé savoir of Lacan? 

Placing ego in relation to what is subjected to the question of the sum. 
Existence is a thing I think. 
Ego sum. 
And now from cogito to Geist!

"Do not be content with trying to respect the other, but fighting the common fight, because the problems we face today-over affect us in common."


Slavoj Žižek, in Vorboten der Barbarei: Zum Massaker von Utøja, an anthology by Rainer Just and Gabriel Ramin Schor, LAIKA Verlag, 2011.