A July of Jacques Lacan

Now that the blog is growing at a respectable clip, it seems like a good time to cut 300 Words About’s adult teeth in the steak of a particularly egregious obscurantist. So without further poetry, welcome to a July of Jacques Lacan. Specifically, July 2009 will be dedicated to selections from Écrits, a collection of Lacan’s lectures which fill out his unorthodox psychoanalytic philosophy.

The short (but overcomplicated) essays of Écrits will allow this blog to accomplish two things: 1) more thorough synopses within the 300 word limit than those of larger books with broader scopes of argument, 2) to simplify the work of a thinker both sophisticated and pretentious, fascinating and frustrating- a sustained crusade against obscurantism.

For a crash course in Lacanian psychoanalysis, UVic professor Stephen Ross has written an introduction to Lacan, available here.

After this, I promise you, dear reader, simpler works by Plato and Aristotle. Until then, enjoy the sunshine and try not to think of your mother.

***

• Seminar on ‘The Purloined Letter’
• Beyond the Reality Principle
• The Mirror Stage as Formative of the I Function as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience
• On the Subject Who is Finally in Question
• The Function and Field of Speech and Language in Psychoanalysis
• Kant With Sade
• Science and Truth

***

Selections from “Écrits”
Jacques Lacan (1966), translated by Bruce Fink, Printed by Norton and Company (2006)
ISBN: 0-393-32925-9

300 Words About “The End of Faith”

Outspoken atheism has returned to the philosophical vogue, lead by thinkers like Sam Harris. However, addressing atheism’s specifics here would be mostly redundant and ignore its other contributions. Case in point: The End of Faith. Its atheism is inseparable from its theses on politics, morality and consciousness.

Harris’ arguments on secular ethics are the most interesting of the book. He dismisses relativism, deontology and pragmatism, maintaining the analytic ethical tradition of consequentialism. The real dangers of true believers inspire Harris’ criticism, coupled with the inherently anti-progressive nature of religion. Insofar as it insists on its traditions, religion harms women, relishes bloodshed and punishes pleasure. When it sidesteps its own text and modernizes, it culturally excuses the ignorance and failures of true believers. Harris does not oppose spiritual experience, but, in a sophisticated and Buddhist-inflected way, advocates finding other sources of it.

Despite its foreseen consequences, disastrous aftermath and fundamentalist flavor, Harris surprisingly excuses the Iraq war from his own ethical criteria (what suddenly matters is the intent of the bombers, not the widespread collateral damage). However, he clarifies this lapse with a more productive (and still more shocking) argument. If ethics concerns collective happiness and harm- and must reject pacifism- then torture is eclipsed by the destruction of modern warfare. Culturally, however, we fret about the former and accept the latter. The crucial point is that ethics doesn’t synchronize cleanly with the intuitions stemming from our “Paleolithic genes.” Even an ethics of happiness demands uncomfortable, unpopular policies.

The End of Faith occupies an emerging and still-radical position in American thinking. It rejects the established spectrum of American politics and mixes radical atheism with a surprisingly spiritual take on consciousness. Most readers- atheists included- will find something to object to: the surest sign of a comprehensive argument on an urgent topic.

***

“The End of Faith”
Sam Harris (2004), printed by W. W. Norton and Company (2004).
ISBN: 0-393-32765-5

300 Words About “Yojimbo”

Fans of A Fistful of Dollars should recognize Yojimbo, the samurai skeleton of Sergio Leone’s spaghetti Western. Given similar stories, this review will focus on how Kurosawa and Leone told them.

The portrayals resonate in the most important aspects. Cinematography avoids Hollywood shots, instead modeling their close-ups as still portraits and reveling in panorama, silence and the interplay between actors and empty space.

Yojimbo and its successor diverge most when characterizing villains. Though ruthless, Yojimbo’s Seibei and Ushitora are cowards who fight and bicker clownishly. Their notable henchmen are not only simpletons but impossibly ugly to boot: fat, balding Inokichi, for example, sports a unibrow stretching back to his temples. A bug-eyed Tazaemon even prefaces the last blood of the feud by pacing about, smacking his prayer drum in what resembles a hissy fit. Clint Eastwood’s enemies, by comparison, mix their ruthlessness with charisma and good grooming. Excluding their most expendable mercenaries, the Baxters and Rojos exude competence.

The films’ nameless heroes differ little. Sanjuro, like the Man with No Name, is a Machiavellian hero: a skilled fighter and diplomat and an honest liar. But divergent villains paint the otherwise similar protagonists with different overtones. Pervasive, gritty moral ambiguity prevents The Man with No Name from chuckling over outwitting his enemies- at least until he rescues Marisol and confirms himself as actually good. Sanjuro’s victory fanfare always plucks a comedic note- except, oddly, after he rescues Kohei’s kidnapped wife from prostitution and threatens to kill the whole family for thanking him. The intriguing part is while both incidents serve identical plot functions, they also reveal their heroes’ hidden honor.

The common story brings the subtler qualities of character and cinematography out to shine in Yojimbo and its Western protégé. Aspiring writers especially should study both incarnations of the classic plot.

***

“Yojimbo”
Directed by Akira Kurosawa
Screenplay by Akira Kurosawa and Ryuzo Kikushima
Produced by Tomo Yuki Tanaka and Ryuzo Kikushima (1961)

300 Words About Spinoza’s “Ethics”

As an exhaustive step-by-step metaphysical proof, Spinoza’s Ethics are both easy to follow and easy to fall off of. This is to be expected from an argument solving the Cartesian mind/body problem by equating God with the physical laws of nature.

Spinoza’s argument is determinist like de la Mettrie’s, but remains in Descartes’ rationalism. His radical thesis is not that minds are properties of bodies, but rather that minds and bodies are fundamentally equivalent, that is, two of many variations of a single metaphysical substance: God, in the form of physical laws of nature.

Understandably, fidelity to God takes on new meaning. Thorough readers of Hobbes will recognize a Leviathan-like idea of human nature. Overwhelming external powers composes and cause our thoughts and actions. Freedom, then, cannot be thought of as an ability to choose, because we cannot substantively refuse to act however physics and biology dictate. Instead, freedom lies in understanding what causes our actions- ultimately, God/Nature. This understanding replaces external causes with human will. Though a will’s qualities are themselves externally determined, its understanding allows it to joyously affirm what it is determined to do. The human project, then, is to accumulate power and knowledge to exist as cause more than effect, as God/Nature itself does.

In a significant departure from Hobbes, Spinoza’s reason does not demand a sort of social paranoia. Spinozans eagerly compound their powers through cooperation and discipline. Though Spinozans instinctively hate useless and dissimilar people, they do not relate to others in general as hostile competitors. Sadness and hatred stem from thinking about one’s own lack of power, which itself restrains human powers. Consequently, the Ethics champions compassion and camaraderie as a means to improve ourselves.

Easily the greatest unsung metaphysics, Spinoza’s Ethics is equally mathematical and humane. It returns from exile centuries overdue.

***

“Ethics”
Benedict de Spinoza (1632-1677), edited and translated by Edwin Curley, printed by Penguin Books (1996)
ISBN: 978-0-140-43571-9

300 Words About “The Sublime Object of Ideology”

Today’s philosophy is incomplete without the phenomena of Slavoj Žižek. The Sublime Object of Ideology is a shotgun shell of Freud, Marx, Hegel and their descendants: it cuts through a broad swath of targets and livens up discussion pretty quickly. Here are just a few pellets.

When he stays on topic, Žižek argues that ideologies aren’t ideas people have about society, but rather their foundational components. Ideology is part of our being and our actions. Without ideological being, social life would be too silly or self-contradictory to continue it with a straight face. For example: money. Considering its practical uselessness, money is remarkably popular. It only has value as long as we pretend it does. But this is precisely the trick, since our collective pretense of money’s value lets it function in the marketplace as though it were inherently valuable. This illusion is palpable enough to cause very real trouble. Money is a “symptom:” a problematic idea necessary to keep our reality stable. “Freedom to sell one’s labor” functions similarly.

Jews serve as the symptom in anti-Semitic politics. The totalitarian state defuses social and economic maladies by projecting them into “The Jew,” preserving the imaginary purity of race, nation and capitalism. Belief in “The Jew” allows the working anti-Semite to bear the unfreedom of wage labor, alienation from others of his own national identity, etc. while simultaneously enjoying the market’s bounty and the joys of marching. He can suffer the antagonisms inherent his society and enjoy them too.

The Sublime Object of Ideology begins enthusiastically, ends abruptly and darts from topic to topic recklessly. It thankfully avoids as much obnoxious postmodern language as possible. Nonetheless, it’s a book about Hegel and Lacan. Those unfamiliar with either will get lost. Those familiar will also get lost, but will thoroughly enjoy it.

***

“The Sublime Object of Ideology”

Slavoj Žižek (1989), printed by Verso Books (1999)

ISBN: 0-86091-971-4

***

PS: If you’re a Žižek reader, or interested in a more in-depth treatment of his work, you can read Colin Fulton’s review of Žižek’s “magnum opus,” The Parallax View, at Souverian Reads.

300 Words About “Man A Machine”

“With one swift sabre cut, a drunken soldier cut off the head of a turkey cock. The animal remained upright, then it walked, and then it ran… I saw it myself, and you can easily see the same thing if you chop off the head of a small cat or dog.”

Say the above in polite 1700’s French/Catholic society and you’ll come to understand the brashness of de La Mettrie’s writing, whose polemics joyously cut the fat from Descartes to advance modern materialism. Specifically, he argues that thought is a property of matter, no different than inertia or gravity, in no way transcendent or beyond the natural world.

Drawing on his medical experience, de La Mettrie demonstrates the constant synchronicity between bodies and minds. Exhausting the body with exercise slows the mind. Bloodletting, drugs and disease likewise change the course of thought, for instance. More significantly, de la Mettrie levels spiritualism and idealism in key arenas like language. If language and other symbolic faculties belong to a second substance, “Mind,” the absurd possibility arises of a naturally speaking minds being trapped in mute bodies- perhaps for generations. Our mental toolkit of words, symbols and numbers all have precursors in our material experience. A bundle of sticks, for example, serves as a textbook for arithmetic.

Going still further, de La Mettrie echoes Spinoza regarding natural justice. Conscience, like other thoughts, must also be an immanent force in matter. Right and wrong synchronize with sober pleasures and pains. He even extends this morality to animals who, like humans, exercise poor moral judgment. Public moral problems, then, lie in spoiled and poisoned bodies, not souls lacking fear and reverence.

De La Mettrie’s brief essays are an accessible, charismatic debunking of the spiritual fluff of its time. Consider them must-reads for scientists of any stripe.

***

“Man A Machine” and “Man A Plant”

Julien Offray de La Mettrie (1709-1751), translated by Richard A. Watson and Maya Rybalka, printed by Hackett Publishing (1994).

ISBN: 0-87220-195-3

300 Words About “Hegemony or Survival”

The Bad News:

Space scheduled for armament, North Korea’s policy options are starvation or nuclear tests, Vietnam forced to reimburse US war spending, US Latin America policies cribbed from Werhmacht, Missile Crisis not the closest world has come to destruction, IDF starting to enjoy their work, Russian nuclear launch systems run Vista.

The Good News:

Michael Ignatieff occasionally honest, Americans outraged before the bills passed for first time in history.

That should be an accurate enough sketch of reading Chomsky (except Manufacturing Consent or his linguistics work). Collect a ream of various hypocrisies and disasters counterbalanced by embers of hope. The real value of Chomsky lies in that both are propped up with stats, sources and data.

Chomsky makes few bold ethical claims, although insisting that federal and international laws should be obeyed often is bold in the US. Instead, he accepts our commonsense moral rules- “don’t lie,” “do unto others” and so on- as given, then demonstrates how and why states habitually ignore them. Underneath the humanitarian rhetoric of Democrats and Republicans alike, Chomsky exposes the practical rules of engagement that justify attacking Iraq, rather than removing Saddam diplomatically or with UN measures. For that matter, why Iraq instead of North Korea, a genuinely totalitarian state with, among other things, the second-worst media freedoms in the world?

Compared to similar critics of ideology, Chomsky is quite easy. Unlike, say, Foucault, Chomsky argues that there are substantial positive truths and values beneath the doctrines of the powerful. This position isn’t vogue in contemporary thought, but the optimism and research it offers is, if nothing else, a welcome antidote for cynicism and blind arguments. However, Hegemony or Survival’s cases will be extremely familiar to Chomsky’s regular readership. If you’re unacquainted with America’s most prominent dissenter, this would be a good introduction.

***

“Hegemony or Survival”

Noam Chomsky (2003), printed by Owl Books (2004)

ISBN: 0-8050-7688-3