Combining Texts

Ideas for 'Mahaprajnaparamitashastra', 'Explaining Explanation' and 'Briefings on Existence'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts

---

4 ideas

1. Philosophy / C. History of Philosophy / 5. Modern Philosophy / c. Modern philosophy mid-period

12330	In ontology, logic dominated language, until logic was mathematized [Badiou]
	Full Idea: From Aristotle to Hegel, logic was the philosophical category of ontology's dominion over language. The mathematization of logic has authorized language to become that which seizes philosophy for itself.
	From: Alain Badiou (Briefings on Existence [1998], 8)

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 8. Humour

12318	The female body, when taken in its entirety, is the Phallus itself [Badiou]
	Full Idea: The female body, when taken in its entirety, is the Phallus itself.
	From: Alain Badiou (Briefings on Existence [1998])
	A reaction: Too good to pass over, too crazy to file sensibly, too creepy to have been filed under humour, my candidate for the weirdest remark I have ever read in a serious philosopher, but no doubt if you read Lacan etc for long enough it looks deeply wise.

1. Philosophy / E. Nature of Metaphysics / 7. Against Metaphysics

12325	Philosophy has been relieved of physics, cosmology, politics, and now must give up ontology [Badiou]
	Full Idea: Philosophy has been released from, even relieved of, physics, cosmology, and politics, as well as many other things. It is important for it to be released from ontology per se.
	From: Alain Badiou (Briefings on Existence [1998], 3)
	A reaction: A startling proposal, for anyone who thought that ontology was First Philosophy. Badiou wants to hand ontology over to mathematicians, but I am unclear what remains for the philosophers to do.

1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 7. Limitations of Analysis

17082	Paradox: why do you analyse if you know it, and how do you analyse if you don't? [Ruben]
	Full Idea: The alleged paradox of analysis asserts that if one knew what was involved in the concept, one would not need the analysis; if one did not know what was involved in the concept, no analysis could be forthcoming.
	From: David-Hillel Ruben (Explaining Explanation [1990], Ch 1)
	A reaction: This is the sort of problem that seemed to bug Plato a lot. You certainly can't analyse something if you don't understand it, but it seems obvious that you can illuminatingly analyse something of which you have a reasonable understanding.