Notes

Thoughts on my messy, undeveloped thoughts?
https://twitter.com/maoistmoment/status/1401946846214426629?s=20

It's kind of an overarching comment on the discussion you had with Pinheiro yesterday. I thought the conversation(s) were fascinating. A lot of quirks going on there. The way Samir frames Hamas as a subject, but not Israel (as a passive "force of nature" with no agency). The way it was so difficult to say where the meaning of literature lies because a simple correspondence between meaning and property was unclear (perhaps pointing to a limitation in a correspondence theory of truth???). The way Pinheiro completely ignores all of the structural deficiencies of scientific scholarly and academic practices, which can make their way into medicinal research, psychology, and even theoretical/particle physics (watch this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q&ab_channel=VeritasiumVeritasium). Some things Pinheiro brought up was thought-provoking: why does the violence of the Israeli-Palestine conflict rise to the level of subjective, agential violence (the violence that is visible and composed of subjects with agency), while the Sudanese Civil War remains "objective violence" (the structural violence which is invisible, the baseline level of violence necessary for the functioning of society, deviations from which are "subjective violences")? Why is one subjectivized, but the other remains objective? There was a lot to think about. I don't participate often because I'm insecure and shy, but also because I don't think I have those answers yet (I haven't read enough Heidegger yet! Please be patient!). I feel like the conversation was *structurally* against you at times because you're operating on two hard-to-reconcile frequencies: radical politics, which demands (in my opinion) 'naming the unnameable,' thinking the illogical, and Pinheiro's intuitive, empirical, and logical language (which I believe has limitations and is inherently conservative, even if I recognize that it has its place and is valuable). This article is pertinent in my opinion to this meta-commentary (sorta, I think): https://aeon.co/essays/heidegger-v-carnap-how-logic-took-issue-with-metaphysics