here is my latest post, which touches on the 18th century controversy over reason and the Reformation, through a reading of the first of Karl Reinhold's Letters on the Kantian Philosophy
listed.to/@pachabelcan...
also, do subscribe to my blog for posts like these here:
listed.to/@pachabelcan...
here is my latest post, on my experience reading Hegel, and the impression of his prose, plus thoughts on Alexandre Koyré's essay "Hegel in Jena"
listed.to/@pachabelcan...
Thank you! Which writing did you like by the way?
I'm one!
and I want the critics & philosophers of AI to be much more rigorous lol
what is the general Hegelian response to Schelling's late "positive philosophy"?
I think it's also that you can't just become the latter if you want a girlfriend or whatever
Thank you! Glad you liked it
thank you!!
which one!
Gm
100%!!!!!
that & to internally justify said regulation—this I think however is still bound to a particular scale and I think cannot be scaled so easily
I agree, absolutely! And this reinvention is in the service of some local social problem, like censorship debates often come down to like, proship/antiship debates, and the Nazi bar stuff comes down in part with dealing with horrid people om the TL. And the shared knowledge is meant to regulate
whatever, that's just incomprehensible. like in a way I really am skeptical of the power of LLMs but mostly because I've been reading Negarestani and [stuff]. but thats not a kind of discussion that is possible
in a kind of smug tone "well it's a large language model, not a large reasoning model" (have seen this as a tumblr screenshot), but it's for "internal" kinds of discussion. nobody can really tell you what "reasoning" is, for example except in a vague way. and if you bring in reza negarestani or
what Lacan might call S1 and S2, truth and knowledge, and so the kids end up choosing the latter, to wield knowledge as a set of codified opinions to mediate social relations better. but this means closing off the former. and this applies to like, AI or whatever. so someone might say something like
to each other ... notably, it's not really for convincing random conservatives, because they're not talking to them in the first place but it's also not for thinking through ideas about gender or whatever, they're going to be befuddled reading Copjec, for example. this is the disctinction between
write Gender Trouble, and this gets locked into a pretty intense debate (for example, I think that Joan Copjec's Read My Desire has a pretty good conceptual critique of Butler), but then Butler has somehow gotten into the water supply and then teenagers write summaries or "explanations" of Butler
I think there's a sense that, this grew out of Tumblr, the point of this "knowledge" was not to be something to think about, but rather a kind of mechanism to mediate social bonds. take something like Butler's concept of performativity in gender - they draw from Foucault, Lacan and others, and then
thought, discussion, analysis whatever.
and then everyone in a particular kind of space converge onto the same set of opinions, and so on after a while and it gets codified in memes and jokes. obviously what annoys me about this is that this is rather anti-intellectual in its own way, and doesn't really allow for more serious
derives from a set of given authorities. it's not actually the same as the media or whatever, this is quite bottom-up, and the takes are optimized to do well in social media in this quasi-pedagogical affirming fashion, and something like AI ... like, a few people mention the water stuff, TESCREAL
what supplies it is mostly stuff like podcasts and video essays, which take a kind of pedagogical point of view, and then in reddit or whatever people end up just taking these amateur explanations to explain to each other, to generate a kind of shared knowledge which is obviously correct, and
so there's a very curious thing, there's a kind of space I'm going to call the "popular left-lib space" or something, where you find this spontaneous convergence on topics like AI or whatever - it's a mix of liberal reddit + bluesky + tumblr, it's very "spontaneous" and amateur
somehow worse than both classical and marginalist theories of value...
ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/u...
there is by Philip Mirowski a very good analysis of open science but mind you it's not that sharing data is bad, it's more like the ideology of "open science" and many advocates + institutions. very sensible and Mirowski is good as a scholar of neoliberalism
