And that would be precisely the moment where I would say: "yeah, and that's why inconsequential facelessness could happen for contingent reasons which are, at the moment, beyond our grasp". But I think that you need to state your case more clearly because I think I lost you.
-
-
Replying to @great_old_ones_ @tobias_ewe and
All this stuff about shedding self and face is just egotistic gerrymandering and nothing more. Mental autonomy (freedom indifferent to ego) in the sense that Epictetus, Kant and Hegel talk about can only be achieved through a system of ethical actions which is time-consuming.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @tobias_ewe and
Ok, so let's set the record straight. I think that the basic disagreement is that you are talking about mental autonomy (which I characterized as dialectical as in the growth of autonomy through practical struggle) and I'm talking about anonimity or taking up another personality.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @great_old_ones_ @NegarestaniReza and
or with little effort. That's why, as far as I can see, the first rules out the sub-personal side of things, while the other doesn't and even relies on them at times.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @great_old_ones_ @tobias_ewe and
This is basically the axiom of mental autonomy in the face of credible challenged levied by neuroscience against the phenomenological self-model.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @tobias_ewe and
I would beg to differ. For example, as corny and over-used as it might sound, Metzinger's philosophy "of facelessness" (the thread's words, clearly) runs somewhat in the opposite direction.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @great_old_ones_ @NegarestaniReza and
Not that I agree with Metzinger, but you put the whole issue in very absolute terms which is not a easy position to be in.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @great_old_ones_ @tobias_ewe and
Absolute terms? The global attentional system which undergirds ego is at work 99 percent of time. The remaining one percent is consciously conceptual and rational thinking.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @great_old_ones_ and
I don't think the percentage matters, what matters is the realization that many of our choices are under the command of a so-called transparent ego.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NegarestaniReza @tobias_ewe and
I'm about to say "that's precisely my point!", but this is not a way out. It's much easier when I talk about Peirce and you talk about whatever you like at the moment...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Well, the complexity of affairs requires the manifold of different voices. Neither Peirce, nor Sellars, nor Deleuze can solve these problems single handedly.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.