March 2, 2010
J’accuse! from The Silent Film Posters of Peter Kocjančič via @brainpicker

J’accuse! from The Silent Film Posters of Peter Kocjančič via @brainpicker

February 28, 2010

via easternblocparty + fuckyeahkarlmarx + obsidianobelisk

via easternblocparty + fuckyeahkarlmarx + obsidianobelisk

February 3, 2010
"The question of the archive is not a question of the past. It is not the question of a concept dealing with the past that might already be at our disposal. An archivable concept of the archive. It is a question of the future, the question of the future itself, the question of a response, of a promise, and of a responsibility for tomorrow. The archive, if we want to know what that will have meant, we will only know in times to come; not tomorrow, but in times to come. Later on, or perhaps never."

— Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever, University of Chicago Press, 1996 (via butterflyhunt)

January 28, 2010
Das Kapital in Lithographs via @IlllllllllllllI

Das Kapital in Lithographs via @IlllllllllllllI

January 28, 2010





Homegirls Potato Chips: It’s all that.

via clingtomymouth + jhnbrssndn + bringtheruckuss + carlovely + blondie-suicide

Homegirls Potato Chips: It’s all that.

via clingtomymouth + jhnbrssndn + bringtheruckuss + carlovely + blondie-suicide

January 26, 2010
"Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned."

— Avicenna, Metaphysics (via illllllllllllli)

January 17, 2010
All the best theories are…

via supermassiveblackhole

All the best theories are…

via supermassiveblackhole

January 15, 2010
DELEUZE AND THE QUESTION OF DESIRE: TOWARD AN IMMANENT THEORY OF ETHICS

“The title of this paper raises two questions, each of which I would like to address in turn. The first question is: What exactly is an immanent ethics (as opposed to an ethics that appeal to transcendence)? The second question is: What is the philosophical question of desire? My ultimate question concerns the link between these two issues: What relation does an immanent ethics have to the question of desire? Historically, the first question is primarily linked with the names of Spinoza and Nietzsche (as well as, as we shall see, Leibniz), since it was Spinoza and Nietzsche who posed the question of an immanent ethics in its most rigorous form. The second question is linked to names like Freud and Lacan, and behind them, to Kant, since it was they who formulated the modern conceptualization of desire in its most acute form—that is, in terms of unconscious desire, desire as unconscious. It was in Anti-Oedipus, published in 1972, that Deleuze (along with Félix Guattari, his co-author) would attempt to formulate his own theory of desire—what he would call a purely immanent theory of desire. In his preface to Anti-Oedipus, Michel Foucault would claim, famously, that “Anti-Oedipus is a book of ethics, the first book of ethics to be written in France in quite a long time”—thereby making explicit the link between the theory of desire developed in Anti-Oedipus with the immanent theory of ethics Deleuze worked out in his monographs on Nietzsche and Spinoza”

via @troyrhoades & @hyblis

January 12, 2010
"Consider the real history of Newton’s physics, compared to what might have been the history of Cartesian dualism. Newton’s physics reigned dominant for two hundred years. It gave us false beliefs but many benefits. I don’t think anyone will say ‘It would have been better if Newton had never lived!’ Imagine that Cartesian dualism had not been so conclusively rejected by the late seventeenth century but had also reigned for two hundred years. Would we say that the false beliefs that metaphysics gave us had been but a small price to pay for the ease and intuitive appeal felt in its explanation of the human condition?"

Bas van Fraassen: The Empirical Stance

via fuckyeahphilosophy

December 10, 2009
Ernst Bloch, photographed by Ernst Bloch.

via fuckyeahphilosophy

MySpace style.

Ernst Bloch, photographed by Ernst Bloch.

via fuckyeahphilosophy

MySpace style.

December 4, 2009
"We are like sailors who on the open sea must reconstruct their ship but are never able to start afresh from the bottom. Where a beam is taken away a new one must at once be put there, and for this the rest of the ship is used as support. In this way, by using the old beams and driftwood the ship can be shaped entirely anew, but only by gradual reconstruction."

Otto Neurath

via wildcat2030

December 2, 2009
the dream ship by r. e. l.

via @boingboing

the dream ship by r. e. l.

via @boingboing

December 1, 2009
What is Web 3.0? Semantic Web & other Web 3.0 Concepts Explained in Plain English

nogoodreason:

collection of some good slideshare presentations on web 3.0

November 27, 2009
"A curious thing about the ontological problem is its simplicity. It can be put into three Anglo-Saxon monosyllables: ‘What is there?’ It can be answered, moreover, in a word—’Everything’—and everyone will accept this answer as true."

Existence and Its Contrary

Willard Van Orman Quine

via wildcat2030

November 23, 2009
Mozart Was a Red: A Morality Play in One Act

via @IlllllllllllllI