agamben

biographical

pictured: text

basic stats • birth: • death: • height: • favorite drink: • residence: • background:

core 🎲 specimen number: 𓁋 type: figure ⊞ quote fragments: ⍟ key operators: ⌘ external graft: ⚐ counter nodes: ❏ glossary: ◐ concepts:

▴ first impressions

text

advanced stats

miscellaneous

social

advanced stats

gossip

pulled from:

mission observations

in an alternate universe, a perfect merge between me and

observation 1:

synkar’s notebook

fragments → commentary is for academic work, impressionistic is for social media discourse fragments context → the unedited context surrounding the quotes (warning: its alive/bites) fragment page → only synkar’s thoughts without biographical distractions

commentary | ✦︎

impressionistic | ✦︎

fragment page

fragments

fragments context | ❖4

▴ works

click on any of the books to read any material synkar has written in regards to them

guide: ✦ counter text ✧ review ❖ fragments ✗ n/a

homo sacer ✗

4. profanations ✗

2. state of exception ✗

5. the use of bodies ✗

3. the coming community ✗

6. the kingdom and the garden ✗

ᯓ★ table graphs

graph 1: text

graph 2: text

▴ selected quotes

▴ selected synkar quotes

name

“quote.”

name

“quote.”

name

“quote.”

name

“quote.”

synkar

name

“quote.”

synkar

name

“quote.”

synkar

id tell you to try agamben malabou and tiqqun for anarchism, negarestani for cybernet, ngai and bretton for art, lazzarato, mouffe, cortazar for politics, try out laruelle or jorg for language not the full list but i think you get the idea

agambens position could easily just be misanthropic self reserved kaczinskyian convinced of denial of all gnostic doomerism doesnt need to be natopilled everyoneontheirown-core and then one day it metaphorically and literally ruptures and explodes school shooter vibes but a lot of that is the failure of the manic not the world around him and the evil contained within

i think both prophecy and priesthood should be subject to partial sublation, if we see priesthood as the granting of an authority that is attached to obligation and the lacanian law, and the power to dictate that grants the conformity of experience, this is powerful experience, but how would anyone reply to agambens critique of anarchism and soveirgnity? i think if theres a 1:1 correspondence, its not just the aesthetics of the rebel being sacrificed, but the rebel in its entirety. i cant imagine a rebellious priest, priesthood to me is an operation of social totality, of submission and mediocrity (without the ability to at least invoke the aesthetics of rebellion) simultaneously, i agree that prophecy alone isnt enough, i think of unauthoritative prophecy aesthetically as weak-willed and incapable to submit to its task, inherently doomed, an undignified and generally vulgar and self-abiding principle that crumbles quickly and doesn't allow for the conformity of experience

critique without end ooo but with animals systems theory of specrealism foucault and badiou aristotelian robot political corporate responsibility gadamer through plato paradoxology yiddish anarchism hobbes medeas derridas sovereignty agambens sovereignty islam and anthropocentrism

yep. or artifical scare without the city, because i can also scare you and not be a city thats why its called scare city cause the city scares you but you can also get jumpscared like, for example if i was behind the sofa and so fourth you don't really need a city to hog all the supplies plus if i was ever in the agambian state of exception id just start putting existing players in bugs and glitches and abuse that id run around biting from peoples sandwhiches and creating weird cultish revolutions id essentially gain the benefit of no longer being observed and have to play by the rules i know in agamben actually its like, a bad thing but if we keep video game-izing these concepts, we should be able to enter into loopholes of affirmation, right?

i know its hilarious to read this sexually but i think its actually a very valid concern philosophers should often have. when idolized, it is a question of what exactly the interest is, of their intentions, personal life, hilarious stories, online presence, body? etc etc but i wouldnt shut them down like agamben did

Oh no he definitely has point. Especially when the person he was talking about literally had no idea about any of the concepts they were discussing. He’s also very easy to talk to Replies to emails very kindly

😂 see this is exactly what i'm talking about, you just put him down all the way to the ground, even below our level, he went from an inaccessible demigod of fruitful philosophy that is infinitely distant to me, someone whos writings i've read as if theyre law, willing to judge me into drowning myself akin to kafkas judgement, all the way down to an easygoing emailing companion so, although i dont know the context, and although his point is valid from a prescriptive perspective (you should probably have read a philosopher if you're already talking to them etc...) there is a phenomenon of idolization (or not even thinking of it through a superiority lense) just some type of manufactured distance between thinkers-as-spectacles and their observers that ocassionally reaches a point of total distance from everything they've ever said i'm thinking of a majority of people that engage with zizek memetically rather than philosophically, and reduce him to that level and although to us it may seem obvious as foremost interested in their philosophy to be inclined to assume the celebrity philosophers are indeed just that, i woudn't want to imprint our own biases on their accumulated possibility of being other things, such as viral memes, spectacles, idols, prophets, pornography, and so fourth

gadamers relevance of the beautiful. barthes image music text. derridas truth in painting. foucaults archeology of knowledge and order of things. agambens the man without content. the muses by nancy. bakthins rabelais and his world. dantos after the end of art. basically any book by wollheim on art. goodmans languages of art i've only read a few of these and skimmed through some other few so i dont have total knowledge but i can attest to their quality regardless and these arent simply talking about art and aesthethics in mention, these are specifically ones where its the focal point except Foucault

this is giving agamben. in the sense that the state of exception becomes turned upside down. the sovereign gets to experience being found guilty of being in the wrong regime of signs at the wrong time. it reminds me of thousand year reigns where suddenly some random guy that was waiting to get to that spot of power suddenly has it revoked out of nowhere, i would presume this hurts more than losing your lottery ticket. or also of the logic of torture that i've mentioned before, where the idea is to convict and to draw out the function of the removal of some cause irregardless of its actuality. and also of the way in which certain symbolic gestures have power over us. the ability to convince somebody of a symbolic act is the reason, to me, that fascism and authoritarian attitudes have a hard time sticking for longer periods of time. something allows us to make comical gestures that remove a sense of responsibility of a person. the emotional act of vanquishment has actual physical ties to reality, and it is very funny to me that we are at that level of fragility sometimes, fragility in the sense of as-appearance or social manifestation, not psychologically. also i'm typing this at 5am after having studied logic for 6 hours if i sound stupid it's because it probably is (i'm barely sitting in my chair without falling off as it is)

i get it maybe, the me criticizing the paranoic insitution is the one who was shaped by the paranoic insitution

would the me that never came into contact with it, criticize it in the same manner, if at all?

(this problem sits at the root of my thinking. should we be friends with the one we deem shortcoming? if already in a co-relation, what consequences are there? (or the consequences dont matter)

should i at all even consider the paranoic insitution and the central network?)

(thoughts after reading the agamben article)

he doesnt state who they are but it doesnt matter because he also says understanding doesnt imply play immediately after this paragraph, because he says it implies self-transparency and leaves no room for fuzziness and he uses agamben to explain why therefore, ill allow myself to not understand what he means by that and just associate it to whatever idea i want and i claim that the best seducers in western society are janitors not sure if i should elaborate

agamben identifies the state vs. police as the extra legal order exception though if your state has a police, it is extra legal you either have the police, or the state you dont get to enforce the power that comes with your declaration of soveirgnity it should be self-accessed the power should literally deliver itself the extra legal order exists for agamben in everything except anarchy, because in anarchy there is no more law

i will enter the discussion suddenly. i'm gonna attempt to flip anon's narrative using agamben agamben argues that political power that abides by "the law" outside of the base social factor that anon 2 argues is anarchy, always has a dual function, or in other words, a paradox which usually manifests in two different systems of soveirgnity:

"whether it is referred to by the hendiadys “constitution/government” or “state/administration,” the fundamental concept of western politics is a dual concept, a janus-face that sometimes displays the austere and solemn face of the institution, at other times the more obscure and informal face of administrative practice, without it being possible to identify or dissociate either side." (agamben)

in the us you have it too, constitution vs government, and you also have the senate vs the supreme court, two different governing bodies which fight between eachother, when theyre supposed to be presenting a single political goal they orient around

whats even worse, agamben argues, is that this requires an extra-legal order to enforce itself, meaning cops are constantly threading the line between the lawful and the lawless, they are in a zone of exception where theyre able to execute both the demanded order, and exist outside this order in order to enforce it

"there is no power that can legitimize its exercise through laws without presupposing an extra-legal order that founds it, nor can there be a pure administrative practice that claims to remain legal on the basis of decrees issued out of necessity. these are, as schmitt himself suggests, two different ways of making obedience compulsory. as we can see today, the truth of both is in fact the state of exception. whether one acts in the name of the law or in the name of administration, what is at issue in the final analysis is always the sovereign exercise of a monopoly of violence. and this is the kyros, the hidden ruler who, in the words of aristotle, holds together in one system the two faces of state power." (agamben)

wait so weil is the glorifying repression one and agamben is the chad "i'd rather not [be phallic]" one? /hj

oh wow, see, i wouldn't take that if i were you. i'd be rude and audacious right back. i would be showing mad attitude not gonna be dragged by a superior intellect-cel over curiosity i would SLAM people, straight DESTRUCTION kidding i would cower in fear also what do you email them about anyways? just random philosophy questions? hey agamben wtf do u mean by state of exception answer right now or i will be very mad ok bye