/lit/ - Literature

>>12746895
nyxlandunlife, is that you?

>>12671035
the chart is okay but there are some things i would tweak. first, nobody should be expected to read all of Kant before Land, if anything you can use Land as a reason to read Kant. i also disagree with the Nietzsche in there; Heidegger would be far more relevant. Land hardly references Nietzsche at all, and there is far more in a relationship between Heideggerian theories of tech and Land's own than anything in WtP; Deleuze covers Nietzsche's contribution as far as Land stuff is concerned. Bataille is crucial for TfA and worth reading on his own because he is a secret endboss.

>Neuromancer
yes

>Artaud, by Sontag
no

reading Moldbug and the DE essays is also a good idea, i should have linked those.
http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/

the other one i should have included was the Murphy interview, which is as good a place to begin as any.
https://vastabrupt.com/2018/08/15/ideology-intelligence-and-capital-nick-land/

even tho Deleuze, Marx and Kant are usually the big three names most associated with Land, i actually think Heidegger is the fourth guy you want to really get with prior to Land (or along with, or afterwards, or whatever).
>then Yuk Hui
>nobody ever cares about Yuk Hui
>sad
>what about Bernard Stiegler and Simondon
>nobody cares about them either

hope that helps. good luck, happy reading

>>12665472
other than Land the guy to read to get a sense of this is Heidegger. he's a genuine overlord when it comes to these conversations, not only because he's an all-time A-rank metaphysician/philosopher, but because he's really talking about the meaning of tech and technological thinking in a way that is directly relevant to things today, in more ways than one. cap that off with the fact that he is both as old-school as it gets in his sensibilities (pre-Socratic Greeks were his thing, and Nietzsche) and yet expressly concerned with the meaning of tech as enframing (the Gestell). i highly recommend taking a lengthy side-trip with Heidgger during or along with any explorations of /acc stuff, he's super-important for all kids of stuff, whether you're into the perennials or the accelerationists, imho.

>>12665504
it's dark as hell for sure, which is why you're not likely to see Land and company on CNN anytime soon. but it's also kind of a relief also from World of Irony that characterizes modern life, sometimes...the state of Marxism in 2019. but it does connect back up to a long and venerable philosophical tradition that goes back centuries...

that brings part 3 of T&T (1) to a close. the fourth part of the book mainly deals with Heidegger. like everything else, it is worth reading. i've just excerpted some of the stuff most relevant to this thread here.

>In the course of the lecture "The Concept of Time" (1924), Heidegger, elaborating a phenomenological hermeneutics of Dasein qua a being that has to be, that is, a historial being immersed in hermëneia, sets up the articulation between the who and the what through the thematic of the clock.

>Opposition to the Sophists is constitutive of philosophy; the opposition turns around the question of technics, such as it finds specification in writing. Writing is already something like a language machine, producing a language of synthesis. But it is also in writing, insofar as writing opens up the space particular to political "publicity" and historical "temporality," that the logos becomes a question and acquires, strictly speaking, definition, distinguishing itself as reason from what is not yet rational. Now, writing is a technics. And we have seen in the story of Protagoras how tekhnê gives rise to the polis.

>Whatever the shifts in Heidegger's successive accounts of this question—to begin with Being and Time, one major consequence of which is the highlighting of the ontological singularity of beings that are "ready-to-hand," tools, that is, the what (and the sign is itself a tool)—Heidegger's thought is fundamentally still inscribed in the traditional opposition between tekhnê and the logos. If he denounced, well after Being and Time, and in another vocabulary, analyses of technics that are conducted in terms of the categories "end" and "means," it was in order to uncover an instrumental conception of technics, an analysis in which he does not appear to put in question the determination itself of an instrument as a means. The metaphysical illusion from Plato onward that turns language into a means through which humans express themselves, rather than its being located as the site of their very constitution, is abundantly criticized by Heidegger. Yet it is the same error that induces consideration of an instrument as a means. Heidegger criticizes the instrumentalization of language, its "cybernetization" in terms of the elimination of idiomatic difference, as what "transforms language into an exchange of news, with] the arts becoming regulated-regulating instruments of information," a theme that is taken up again and developed in The Language of Tradition and Technical Language."