Re: AUT: they remember nothing and understand nothing

[Thomas Seay <entheogens@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Nate Holdren <nateholdren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> More seriously, two questions: where did that stupid
> 'empire is a new
> communist manifesto' quote come from? I think Zizek
> said it, in a
> quote on the back cover of the book, but then right
> away he started
> attacking the book "it's no communist manifesto,
> despite claims that
> it is!"

Yes, I have noticed that Zizek is fond of cute
phrases, factory made for book cover blurbs.  For
example, I was at first happy to read these words of
praise, "if Doug Henwood did not exist, he would have
to be invented", echoing Voltaire.
However, then it bummed me out when I read him use the
same expression when praising other people. I mean,
come on already! Originally the expression was "if God
did not exist, He would have to be invented".  Well,
unless you are an atheist or polytheist, there is only
one God.  It is true also- unless you want to get
quantum or polyhenwoodist- that there is only one Doug
Henwood...or at least only one Doug Henwood who writes
marxist economic books and hosts LBO-Talk.  So, I dont
get it.  One God, one Doug Henwood, yet he uses that
formulaic response for a number of people.  Kind of
makes a girl feel special...NOT!

But to make matters worse, I dont think Voltaire even
said that.  He did say this:

<<Si Dieu n'existe pas, c'est à désespérer de Lui.>>

But the above phrase does not quite translate into
anything that resembles the "would have to be created"
bit.

I mean, what's Zizek going to say next?  Maybe:

Hardt and Negri are communists.
All communists are human.
Therefore Hardt and Negri are human.

Then two months on we will read: "Hardt and Negri are
not human".

Stream of consciousness...over.

=====
The real world gives the subset of what is; the product space represents the uncertainty of the observer.  The product space may therefore change if the observer changes; and two observers may legitimately use different product spaces within which to record the same subset of actual events in some actual thing. The "constraint" is thus a relation between observer and thing; the properties of any particular constraint will depend on both the real thing and on the observer.  It follows that a substantial part of the theory of organization will be concerned with properties that are not intrinsice to the thing but are relational between observer and thing.

W. Ross Ashby

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---