/lit/ - Literature

>>11835777
and because questions are better than answers, i'd like to leave this with one more mildly perverse thought-experiment.

what would happen if we smashed up heidegger and land together? you can't imagine more opposed figures, but what if? it's part of my own interest in trying to make a shift from paranoia to metanoia. when land theorizes about capital he represents it as an alien attack from the future, a thing the DNA of which is drawn equally from cthulhu and from Skynet. and of course we respond to both of these things with horror and fascination. with heidegger it is much the same: for him the ontological is always opposed to the poetic, and wherever the ontological occurs it must come at the expense of the ontic and vice-versa (this is a very reductive and uncharitable reading of heidegger, so please don't jump down my throat immediately if you are a dedicated heideggerian reading this).

but what if we took a different tack? technology is a thing we can't live without, and we don't really want to live without it either. and i'm not trying to make a new defense of neoliberalism either, although ofc this too can be inferred. what i'm wondering is if one took heidegger's attitude towards Being, in its most positive forms, with some of land's insights about teleoplexy and intelligenesis. as D&G present it, capital is this metaphysical process, deterritorializing and reterritorializing: what it loves is to make connections, to connect inputs and outputs - in other words, to be the Spice which Flows. and in thinking along these lines a radically a-historical perspective emerges that is nothing like hegel's. and yet landian teleoplexy, it stands to reason, has at least *some* connection to dialectics in this way, inasmuch as intelligence has to grow and emerge .

a metanoid attitude rather than a paranoid one might incline us to look at this phenomenon in a potentially interesting way. in therapy, at least, the analyst has a particular relationship with the analysand: the idea is for the analysand to come into their own relationship with the symptom. in land's universe, it is difficult to tell whether it is humanity which is the symptom of capital or vice-versa; in either case, the nature of this relationship, in its present form, is highly untenable and psychopolitically destructive.

and so maybe a fresh perspective might lead to a ghost of hegel that comes from a different direction, with a different sensibility. discovering that we weren't the centre of the universe fucked us up when copernicus and galileo intimated it, and we're fucked up now by things not so dissimilar. intelligence matters. empathy matters too, but empathy in the global village feels like raising sails during a hurricane, sometimes.

still tho. we just don't know what could be ahead for spaceship earth. just thought it was worth leaving that possibility out there in case anyone wanted to tinker with a HeiLand theory-fragment.