Conversation

You create a new social science “thing” is to turn a tangible thing into an abstract thing and then _pluralize_ it so there’s enough for everyone. Eg: time —> temporality —> temporalities matter —> materiality —> materialities future —> futurism —> futurisms Try it! Fun game
3
68
One ring to rule them all: Subject —> Subjectivity —> Subjectivities Demonic nuclear option: Object —> Objectivity —> Objectivities
2
15
Replying to
Once you get good at this you can make up sentences like “The logics and infrastructures of late capitalism, and the materialities and subjectivities they induce”
2
23
I call these shitcodings. It’s a way to create an inconsequential academic map of consequential things, on which you can wage imaginary battles against ideological adversaries in effigy. A kind of rarefied larp.
2
36
These shitcodings supposedly achieve decenterings of hegemonies and interrogations and subversions of assemblages of power or something 🧐 They don’t do anything of the sort. It’s a kind of angels-on-pinheads theology game. This is what the Glass Bead Game parodies.
2
13
The sad part is, if you learn to parse this language, you’ll actually find interesting insights sometimes, but there’s no pathway to bring it back down to earth. It’s a game that sort of creates a lamarckian dna but has no pathways to express anything into proteins
2
9
Academia is about the glass-bead gamification of war. The only thing that varies is the theater of war. STEM: physical war Social science: economic war Humanities: culture war
War Were Declared Futurama GIF
GIF
3
9
It’s a mistake to think of this as bullshit btw. It is potent stuff. On the rare occasions any of these things leaks out of HSS labs you get economic or culture war WMDs
2
8