[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 12 KB, 171x266, 125502FD-5BB1-4331-9C77-7037F5441754.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13591752 No.13591752 [Reply] [Original]

Who/what do I read before I can into accelerationism? What is Land’s best work?

>> No.13591779

>>13591752

>mistah commisar... put ze electrodes back on mr rand's bawrsack

>> No.13591844

This should give a basis for how he thinks.

http://english.cpc.people.com.cn

>> No.13591850

>>13591844
You son of a bitch. I blindly followed the link. Now, Xi is calling the boys to retrieve me for reeducation. At least I'll get some quiet time.

>> No.13591949
File: 72 KB, 398x251, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13591949

>>13591752

>> No.13591950

>>13591850

Tell us if he's there

>> No.13592454

>>13591752
Heidegger but I'm waiting for someone else to post a thread on him instead of making one myself.

>> No.13592955

>>13591949
What is it?

>> No.13593291

>>13591752
>his best work?
That would be The Thirst for Annihilation; it's not fully accelerationist tho as we've come to expect it from the deleuzoguattarian Land

>> No.13593317

lolita

>> No.13593771

>>13592955
Accelerationism Reader, Urbanomics

>> No.13594425
File: 97 KB, 1051x645, Land_Fanged_Noumena.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13594425

>>13591752
Read this for a quick overview of what accelerationism actually is-

https://xenogothic.com/2019/03/04/a-u-acc-primer/

Then read the Accelerationist Reader for the lineage of the idea as well as its modern footprint.

Land's best work is Fanged Noumena (not that his other stuff isn't worth reading at all, Thirst for Annihilation is pretty cool, but you're here for accelerationism, so you're here for Fanged Noumena). Read the first two things I mentioned and you'll be more or less ready for it, though if you've literally never studied Kant, Marx, or Deleuze and Guattari's work (alternatively if you've never read Lovecraft or Gibson) you might be missing out on a lot. Depends on your background. See also pic related for an overview of FN.

>> No.13594472

>>13594425
The idea of capitalism being actually driven by some kind of incomprehensible and dangerous noumenal entity is pretty cool.
Seems speculative though.

>> No.13594480

>>13594472
Isn't capital like a supra-organism anyway? Like an ant colony?

>> No.13594491

>>13594480
Well I think it's a stretch to suppose that the combination of the two of us for instance actually make up a third intelligent organism. I suppose in a sense we could be, that intelligence doesn't have to be a conscious intelligence.

>> No.13594494

>>13594480
Exchange value capital in human economy capitalism is just a manifestation of Lands outer self-strengening Captial (the arriving noumenon)

>> No.13594495

>>13591752
Wait for Land to go full Dengist now; he'll be back soon from his, "little vacation".

>> No.13594827
File: 2.37 MB, 440x440, Land_FloatingHead.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13594827

>>13594472
>>13594480
For Land, capital is artificial intelligence, which he would define as essentially game-theory, i.e. the process by which something engages in the 'winning' of 'games' . The way capital deterritorializes and reterritorializes our physical (and mental) world to expand and grow, the way it routes around potential problems, it's perpetual hunger - for Land capital is an engine of growth bootstrapped (for the time being) to humanity.

That there is some noumenal/eldritch entity steering or prodding this process along is almost more like artistic afterthought (speculative is a nice word for it) applied to Deleuzian perceptions of capital taken towards an Exit.

>> No.13594973

>>13594472
land was influential to both speculative metaphysics and speculative realism

>> No.13594987

>>13594827
good answer

>> No.13595770

>>13591779
fpbp

>> No.13596875

>>13591752
Can somebody explain to me (or link me to an explanation of) what Exit is in the Landian sense?

>> No.13596976
File: 162 KB, 308x480, treaded.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13596976

I really doubt you guys read ALL the required reading to finally reach the point of understanding of near all philosophy to the time of Nick Land.
Many esteemed university professors wouldn't qualify since they skipped parts by not understanding them or focused to much on one area by narrowing doen on it to achieve their goal of becoming established.
Sure you could also jsut pick up Nick Land after a couple wikipedia articles, but frankly if you didn't dwell on many 19-20th century philosophers and on all the previous philosophers necessary to understand them, you probably aren't to far removed from the dude who read couple major works, school of life and then picked up Fanged Noumena.

>> No.13598371

>>13596976
You underestimate me.

>> No.13598398

>>13596976
You don't have to read everyone who influenced a philosopher to understand them because they will usually explain quite clearly the portions of the work of those who influenced them as it relates to the original system they are creating. It helps of course in understanding the history of philosophy, but to grasp what Land says about someone like Kant, you need only the most rudimentary understanding of the latter, because he is taking a handful of concepts, and not elaborating on the entire Kantian system.

If you want to do your own work in philosophy then you generally do need to go through a very intensive process of studying all these figures, but even then ideas repeat with great frequency in philosophy and the process of creating it is in some ways reiterated in each philiosopher in a somewhat redundant fashion.

The question is vague, because philosophy is all-encompassing in its ideal, and so the relations of philosophy to its own variegations are necessarily contained within, and for some like Hegel, central even. But there are many philosophies that proceed quite differently, making a short series of observations, inferences, and connections. Land is more a Hegel than a Berkeley, but a lot of what he says is intuitively clear to anyone who just reads him and has some basic background knowldege. A lot of it is gibberish too, but I don't really care for that portion of Land. The best idea he ever came up with was his Outside(not to be confused with something like the Noumenon, it has a pattern of interaction with reality that is expressible and occupies a totally different place than the Noumenon does for Kant), and how it relates to our world, which he never fully fleshed out, I suppose because his mind broke down.

The bits and pieces of Land have flashes of total brilliance, but the whole is unclear and not cohered.

>> No.13599656

is he back boys?

>> No.13600978

>>13592454
This. I'll post more when I get back home.