Taking a glance at a sort of outsider in France
His cross-disciplinary training, it seemed, created a barrier of suspicion between Serres and the philosophical counter-establishment
It seems this is the only country in the world I find people approaching “genius”. This is one of Girard’s friends. Described as untimely, not many know of him in the Anglophone world. I’m looking for innovators.
I’m feeling like a monkey after taking a glance at Lacan, yes my love for philosophy is probably a sublimation of animality. That’s a clever innovation of his.
Serres frustrates people with his interdisciplinarity
Why in the space of one paragraph, do we find ourselves with the Romans then with Jules Verne then with Indo-Europeans, then, suddenly, launched with the Challenger rocket, before ending up on the bank of the Garonne river?
A recent secondary text says these are the subjects one must have a good grasp of in order to understand him
Just getting some kind of guidance in the dark. Only “Bloomians” will care about this. I try to locate thinkers that might not emerge in the US for decades. This writer claims his most crucial work, The System of Leibniz, is virtually impossible to procure even though it was translated in 2003. I have to take a zoom-out from Badiou and say that the most Truth emerges not from theatre or math. For me it’s finding a genius. Perhaps Badiou is too modest to say that, being one himself. Serres claims Leibniz frees you, while thinkers like Hegel and Heidegger shackle you – he goes back to the old old Germany. The instinct in our culture is lacking for wanting to find unknown “Apollos and Athenas”. In a culture that worships the mediocre, what do you expect?
The next Leibniz could be out there, and if you don’t look you won’t find him
Refusing any single starting point, Serres takes the plurality of Leibnizian discourses itself as his entry into the Leibnizian corpus, seeking to account for how they relate to each other rather than trying to reduce one to another. This is the approach to Serres’s own work I attempt in the current volume.
Why do you think I like to drop the N-bomb? It’s because it’s thee term that expresses the diametrical opposite of people like Serres, and those Bloom is fond of. If you don’t know one side you won’t know the other. We’re supposed to pretend there is no difference between the two. An Australian aboriginal is the exact opposite of what I want to be. Then of course people who want to hide this have all sorts of ways of obfuscating it. If you don’t want to learn from people like Dante and Serres that’s your life. It’s clear that leftism is a form of genius. This obscuring talent that it has. Then one has to wonder if convincing people genius doesn’t exist could ever count as genius itself. The genius of ressentiment, the genius of envy – something doesn’t sound right about those, they’re almost oxymoronic. And these are the kinds of “geniuses” that control our culture. Why am I the only who finds it disturbing that they want a future where people like Serres don’t exist anymore? It’s an evil conspiracy, truly.
I don’t even know if Serres IS a genius yet- only the signs are there. If you live in ressentiment that urge to LOOK for them does not exist. It’s essentially a love for those who facilitate a higher activity of mind. Many are quite content with crossword puzzles and the like.
In my book Girard is an authority, and HE attests to his untimeliness
Locating unknown geniuses is also of course a form of accelerationism.
Ugh Lacan is a pretty good troll, I have to admit. That’s a form of ACC too, Badiou seems totally serious about it too- “You have to face that you want to have sex with truth and you never will.” Just go away. It’s only a troll, this is what I’m telling myself. It’s like how I was making fun of the left the other day suggesting someone should anthropomorphize Diversity and parody the character in some artform, except they’re doing something similar to me with wisdom.
This is a type of futurism, immanentizing the untimely ones
I began to discern the characteristic ‘moves’ of the philosopher in question, to see the ways in which, time and again, they approached disparate subjects in distinct and recognisable ways
I’ve done this with lots of them, just for YOU! Strauss is still untimely, Moldbug, Girard, Dugin, etc etc, and no futuristic immanentizations are possible from the reservation. This can be understood as “Bloomian”- genius appreciation, particularly the appreciation of what they don’t or can’t say. Once again, I feel bad for those who understand some of these thinkers as well as I do then have to live a double-life in ordinary reality with pre-internet people. We live in the future, a future that might not ever happen if leveling continues apace.