Why I keep returning to him
General consensus. Continuing with the therapy theme, he has some works on Lacan. I’ve mostly avoided Lacan because so many system-bots are fond of him, and I’m going to try to give him a chance now like I did with Chaucer.
This is how Badiou frames it
A contemporary philosopher, for me, is indeed someone who has the unfaltering courage to work through Lacan’s anti-philosophy.
I think everyone is their own level of philosopher and in order to avoid being vulnerable they use sophistry to distract from what their ego is hiding from itself.
Notice the similarity to Laruelle in this context – “nonphilosophy”? That’s the level of thinking they’re at in France. The US is only vaguely at the level of philosophy arguably, if that.
Other anti-philosophers in Badiou’s sense are St. Paul, Nietzsche, and Wittgenstein. Ways of getting around the ordinary way of looking at the love of wisdom. At this rate I expect him to enhance my perception of therapy as much as he’s enhanced my perception of math, poetry, and theatre, which is to say, pretty substantially.
Think of it in the context of my posts on his concept of innovation
Most essentially, anti-philosophy aims at an act that it believes is an unconditioned break, a transformation without determination, a groundless leap into the new.
Call it megalomania, I want all the best things together. The right entheogens, the right conception of therapy, and the right conception of politics. The first and third of these I don’t think Badiou gives us. Anti-modern shamanism which incorporates French galaxybrains. I hope you’ve been able to endure my dialectic of recognizing the sheer hopelessness of the situation fluctuating into offering possible remedies.
My next expectation with this text is that therapy will reveal itself to be similar to theatre in being a unique medium for Truth to emerge. In ancient Athens, theatre was therapy. That’s another story though. You know what, my instinct is that a “postpostmodern Molière” would be better than any therapist.
Women tell men they need to go to therapy. No, YOU need to try a therapist who isn’t a cookie-cutter cathedralist.
“You’re just distracting with philosophy right now during this Badiou’s Lacan therapy session.”
For Badiou, the essential philosophical ideas are the subject, truth, and being, and to “traverse” Lacan requires unflagging strength and the courage to rise to the real challenge that Lacan poses to these fundamental philosophical topics.
If Lacan can break through the ego defenses of philosophy-obsessives then he can break through anyone’s. On the other hand it is still to be discovered whether or not he is a cookie-cutter cathedralist himself.
Oh you’re going to like this one
one of the key elements of Lacan’s critique of philosophy is that it puts a mere semblance of love (philo-sophia as the love of truth) at the center of its discourse. In doing so, according to Lacan, philosophy obscures the fact that, although love may be “imaginary,” always transferential, merely a repetition, it nevertheless substitutes for something much worse: the illusion of the possibility of a sexual relationship.
You’re telling me I want to fuck truth and it’s an illusion? Might be on to something with that…
I’m here to help you though dear reader, because I don’t need help myself! Wanting to court Athena, nothing pathological about that. On the other hand, I don’t think any of our institutions challenge women to “be Athena”.
Now that I think about it though, there IS something “erotic” about my relation to philosophy, just not in the physical sense. I love it above all humans.
See where they are in France? They have systems for putting even the wisest ones in society through therapy. That’s like peak-progress. However, I have to note that subordinating philosophy, whether to math or therapy, has something totalitarian about it. There’s some Freudian reductionism in claiming we want to screw philosophy. For me it’s more that I want to marry Athena. Sure it’s an illusion–and so is every hyperstition at first.
Interesting. We could use this in the US since we have “pure Sartreanism” as our orthodoxy now
[Lacan has] been indispensable because it was through him that I found the means to effect a synthesis between the idea of the free Subject, which I’d enthusiastically embraced in my Sartrean youth, and that of the importance of formal structures, inspired by my long standing admiration for Plato, my love of mathematics, and the Structuralist current that had begun to dominate the intellectual scene.
Okay, therapy session over (until next time).