chinneths

[chinneths]

[chinneths]

Windover mortuary pond display at Brevard Museum of History and Science. All bones on display are replicas.

[chinneths]

[chinneths]

[chinneths]

Yes

[chinneths]

[chinneths]

Drumf

Vs

Borowitz

[chinneths]

[Care ethics] can be traced back to the 1980s work of Carol Gilligan, a psychologist who studied how women approach real-life moral dilemmas. In contrast to findings about men in earlier studies (Kohlberg 1973), Gilligan found women did not appeal to general principles or make categorical assertions about right and wrong. Instead, they focused ‘on the limitations of any particular resolution and describe[d] the conflicts that remain.’ (Gilligan 1982, 22) ...But care ethicists are not just concerned with ‘what women think.’ Instead, they believe their theory can — indeed, should — guide all of us in moral decision-making, regardless of our gender and the particular dilemmas we face. Through reflection on the lived reality of ethical decision-making, care ethicists are led to the following ideas: that responsibilities derive from relationships between particular people, rather than from abstract rules and principles; that decision-making should be sympathy-based rather than duty or principle-based; that personal relationships have a value that is often overlooked by other theories; that at least some responsibilities aim at fulfilling the needs of vulnerable persons (including their need for empowerment), rather than the universal rights of rational agents; and that morality demands not just one-off acts, but also ongoing patterns of actions and attitudes. Most importantly, care ethicists believe morality demands ongoing actions and attitudes of care, in addition to (or even in priority to) those of respect, non-interference, and tit-for-tat reciprocity — which care ethicists see as over-emphasised in other ethical theories. Importantly, though, care ethicists do not claim that other theories get nothing right: care ethics is not a theory of the whole of ethics or morality, but of important parts of it that have been inadequately appreciated by other theories. (Engster 2007, 61–2; Held 2004, 65, 68; Tronto 1993, 126)

Stephanie Collins, “Care Ethics: The Four Key Claims”

[chinneths]

Hulk vs. Socrates, the ultimate Socratic dialogue

Psychoanalysts hate him, inanimate objects fear him, philosophy students (and ancient Greek jurors who condemned Socrates to death) wish they were him

The winner, heartbreaking developments and + under the cut

From The Incredible Hulk #226 (1978) by Roger Stern & Sal Buscema

[chinneths]

In the writings of the Heracliteans, there was this precept, constantly to think of some one of the men of former times who practiced virtue. 

—Marcus Aurelius, Meditations��11.26 

IMAGE: Seven Sages Mosaic of Baalbek (3rd century AD) 

[chinneths]

-二十三夜堂からのメッセージ-

“空しくなったらあの無明の夜の満天の星を仰いで、声高らかに『般若心経』を唱え、何千億光年の彼方から返ってくる3世諸仏光音の響きを聴け”

(＊三世諸仏＝過去・現在・未来の3世にわたって存在する一切の仏)

[chinneths]

There is, however, an asymmetry here that is obfuscated by this straightforward solution: the political struggle is not one among other struggles (in a series alongside artistic, economic, religious, etc., struggles); it is the purely formal principle of antagonistic struggle as such. That is to say, there is no proper content of politics; all political struggles and decisions concern other specific spheres of social life (taxation, the regulation of sexual mores and procreation, the health service, and so on and so forth)—"politics" is merely a formal mode of dealing with these topics, Insofar as they emerge as topics of public struggle and decision.

This is why "everything is (or, rather, can become) political" —Insofar as it becomes a stake in political struggle. The "economy," on the other hand, is not just one of the spheres of political struggle, but the "cause" of the mutual contamination-expression of struggles.

To put it succinctly, Left-Right is the Master-Signifier "contaminated" by the series of other oppositions, while the economy is the objet a, the elusive object that sustains this contamination (and when that contamination is directly economic, the economy encounters Itself in its oppositional determination). Politics is thus a name for the distance of the "economy" from itself.

Its space is opened up by the gap that separates the economic as the absent Cause from the economy in its "oppositional determination," as one of the elements of the social totality: there is politics because the economy is "non-all," because the economic is an "impotent" impassive pseudo cause. The economic is thus here doubly Inscribed in the precise sense which defines the Lacanian Real: it is simultaneously the hard core expressed" in other struggles through displacements and other forms of distortion, and the very structuring principle of these distortions.

In Defense of Lost Causes S. Zizek

[chinneths]

Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that, unless we love the truth, we can not know it.

Blaise Pascal

[chinneths]

“memento mori, amor fati”

- Friedrich Nietzsche

[chinneths]

And soon, mechanically, dispirited after a dreary day with the prospect of a depressing morrow, I raised to my lips a spoonful of the tea in which I had soaked a morsel of the cake. No sooner had the warm liquid mixed with the crumbs touched my palate than a shiver ran through me and I stopped, intent upon the extraordinary thing that was happening to me. An exquisite pleasure had invaded my senses, something isolated, detached, with no suggestion of its origin. And at once the vicissitudes of life had become indifferent to me, its disasters innocuous, its brevity illusory—this new sensation having had the effect, which love has, of filling me with a precious essence; or rather this essence was not in me, it was me. I had ceased now to feel mediocre, contingent, mortal. Whence could it have come to me, this all-powerful joy? I sensed that it was connected with the taste of the tea and the cake, but that it infinitely transcended these savours, could not, indeed, be of the same nature. Where did it come from? What did it mean? How could I seize and apprehend it? I drink a second mouthful, in which I find nothing more than the first, then a third, which gives me rather less than the second. It is time to stop; the potion is losing its virtue. It is plain that the truth I am seeking lies not in the cup but in myself. The drink has called it into being, but does not know it, and can only repeat indefinitely, with a progressive diminution of strength, the same message which I cannot interpret, though I hope at least to be able to call it forth again and to find it there presently, intact and at my disposal, for my final enlightenment. I put down the cup and examine my own mind. I put down the cup and and examine my own mind. It alone can discover the truth. But how? What an abyss of uncertainty, whenever the mind feels overtaken by itself; when it, the seeker, is at the same time the dark region through which it must go seeking and where all its equipment will avail it nothing. Seek? More than that: create. It is face to face with something which does not yet exist, which it alone can make actual, which it alone can bring into the light of day.

—Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time [I.45-46]

[chinneths]

If all misfortunes were laid in one common heap whence everyone must take an equal portion, most people would be contented to take their own and depart.

(Socrates)

[chinneths]