tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6374401823934629223.post8750988111338431667..comments2023-10-12T04:25:24.549+14:00Comments on word(w/o)word: Das Problem der transzendentalen Intersubjektivitättroylloydhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14706450196335510065noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6374401823934629223.post-3125443795685905632008-10-19T11:51:00.000+14:002008-10-19T11:51:00.000+14:00Text Template Transformation Toolkit(An Applicatio...Text Template Transformation Toolkit<BR/><BR/>(An Application of Authorship Attribution by Intertextual Distance in English)<BR/><BR/>"cède l'initiative aux mots"<BR/><BR/>Historicity entails both origin and tradition [movement and endurance] of ideal objects according to "new rules": neither "factual interconnections" [who spoke to whom; who read what] nor "ideal and ahistoric additions" [what should have happened]. Instead, as we will see, we will have in historicity [and thus in its correlate historical reflection] an interweaving of non-repeatable facts [genesis] and repeatable essences[structure].<BR/><BR/>Reflection, or "historical intuition," entails that the reactivation of sense should in principle precede and condition empirical determination of fact [have to have prior identification of sense of X in order to determineY as a fact of the history of X]. We will shortly see, however, the interweaving of fact and essence, rather than this privilege of essence.<BR/><BR/>a). Erstmaligkeit, the "essence of the first time," is the sense of fact. This is probably something like the "eidetic singularities" of Ideas I, which are "ultimate material essences" excluding only the "tode ti of brute existence" . In other words, an essence covering the smallest possible extension. But since in historical reflection the fact to be essentialized is absent, the essence of the first time must find its place in a notion of tradition. Tradition sasy that an origin took place and that it was such a sending origin; but again, this insight is only possible after the fact.<BR/><BR/>The problem with Weltanschauung, then, is its cramped, finite, project, its desire merely to realize a good life based on cultural values; science, on the other hand, is an infinite task of achieving universal, omnitemporal truths which it puts into a circulation so open that anyone at any time can reactivate any of its deposits, any of its sedimented meanings.<BR/><BR/>The structure/ornament discussion remains active territory within architectural history and theory. It has long been a site of vigorous positioning that often serves as a telling gap between historicism and modernism. The accretions of this dialectic have become an institution of our architectural predilections, documenting a tendency to pit one against the other and our impulse to declare absolutes about the value or dominance of one over the other. While Pugin sowed moralistic tones to our discipline's use of ornament and structure, he did so in the context of refurbishing the necessity and presence of ornament from a historical and cultural perspective. Through the virtues of economic, social and political events, this living myth, has been seamlessly reconfigured and retold. Contemporary architecture flaunts its allegiance to rational thought and empirical processes in a plethora of naked structure and thin surfaces. Questions persist regarding the nature of ornament and decoration in these efficient constructs. Despite the lure of contemporary architecture's technological prowess and neglect for ornament, an impetus remains to retell and reinterpret this particular architectural myth.<BR/><BR/>Authorship depends upon a value that is ascribed to human endeavours. When authorship is no longer revered, then that value loses out. This is the issue when we conceive of the literary text as a machine. If Mallarmé's texts are seen as a prototype of the Rousselian writing machine, where the writing is literally produced by a machine, authorship can no longer be sacred in the humanistic sense because the product is no longer the result of human agency. That is, the value that is traditionally ascribed to the literary text as a product of human genius or divine inspiration no longer holds. Rather, writing is from now on what Mallarmé calls "le hasard", or chance. And yet in his ever self-reflexive manner, Mallarmé's famous poem, Un Coup de Dés jamais n'abolira le hasard (A Throw of the Dice will Never Abolish Chance), what has become the subject of the poem is this very phenomenon of writing as chance, just as the loss of authorship also becomes the subject. "Every thought emits a throw of the dice", says Mallarmé, and he says this in a poem that is the very literary and literal representation of the haphazard nature of thought when it comes into contact with language. This self-reflexivity appears, in an indirect manner, to maintain some level of authorship, even if that authorship is cut off, since there is a sense of authorial control. It enacts a mimetic function, not a function that imitates nature, but that other Aristotelian one where it becomes nature (in this case Nature as pure chance).<BR/><BR/>Ultimately, aesthetic comportment is to be defined as the capacity to shudder, as if goose bumps were the first aesthetic image. What later came to be called subjectivity, freeing itself from the blind anxiety of the shudder, is at the same time the shudder's own development; life in the subject is nothing but what shudders, the reaction to the total spell that transcends the spell. Consciousness without shudder is reified consciousness. The shudder in which subjectivity stirs without yet being subjectivity is the act of being touched by the other.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Your document has been indexed by the following search engines:<BR/><BR/>GoogBot has been here 7 times.<BR/><BR/>First crawled about 1 month ago.<BR/>Last crawled 1 day ago<BR/><BR/>------------------Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com