mental doodles from my noodles

 during the pandemic white people discovered house music it's a slow iteration, a process which no one understands they turn up the treble. but they dance. will the dance unlock the secrets of humanity? or  will the house music unlock the minds of white people to finally let go of capitalism and embrace the world?

 the way to recruit so-called "incels" is to mention how the commie-anarchy peeps potentially believe in sexual mutual aid

 "if you pay a buncha people to pull grain out from the wheat one kernel at a time then, hey, labor theory of value means you made more value!" dipshit, if you burned all your gasoline you'd also be "expending value" for nothing, but that don't have anything to do with the origin of value for nations.

 I think the real origin of the continental/analytic divide is laziness. Given that you'd have to read so much more to appreciate the other side, one picks up a few representative examples to make sure they're not wrong, quickly reads through them, horribly misinterprets them, then calls it a day.

 I feel we all owe Husserl, at least -- anyone who takes phenomenology seriously. He was treated poorly by the philosophical community for unjust reasons.  But my God, I'm going to say, I have a hard time reading him. lol. I love everyone inspired by Husserl, other than Heidegger. I owe Husserl a read. But daaaaaamn I don't know what it is but I just tone out reading him. I think it's both what I'm interpreting as seeming like it's just obviously false on so many frontiers, and that he treats it all like it's obviously true. I think it must be the sort of description of the mind that a scientist would give, a more particular phenomenology than how it is presented -- because I don't believe there *is* a science of science, much less a science of consciousness, and then Husserl goes off the deep end, so it seems, in Ideas  (though, of course, there are interpreters who go a different direction with him too. . . ) Soooo.... it's like I'm reading him to

kitsch is treating the generic as if it is the universal (send tweet, deleted too much after this lol)

 My feelings on Levinas, as of right this moment while I'm still mid-reading -- he is such a good philosopher. I feel he pursued something in philosophy greater than his predecessors, but in a way which the greatness cannot dominate. It's a wholly other way of doing philosophy, other-centric and not architectonic.  To follow his lead isn't to put him as first and foremost, but to put us as first. To be in dialogue with him, even after his passing, and to pursue the original philosophical impulse, ala Plato -- to cure man's/the-city's soul, with the realization that putting knowledge or metaphysics first is a mistake. The ethical is all that answers any of these questions, and to answer these questions requires someone other than yourself.

  While reading  A Clockwork Orange  take notes on each chapter so that you can refer to them. (at present at Part 1, Chapter 2) Done! Now started Totality & Infinity Lower-priority, but continue digesting and re-interpreting  The Wasteland  until something more cogent comes out Study semiotic terms well enough to perform an interpretation on their example problems, but also one poem in our poem thread so I don't have the answers in front of me and I can assure myself I at least have *an* understanding of the terms to begin exploring another way of talking about meaning

 a factoid is a statement which is true and it is only true due to at least one other statement.* *attempting a definition of factoid that is universal/necessary

 the reason supply/demand isn't a good place to refute marx's theory of value from is marx uses supply/demand directly in capital, v. 1 in conjunction with the labor theory of value -- usually this is a kind of tell that i'm reading propaganda for the econo-kiddies "marx bad because theory disproven, new econ good! no study marx, study new econ! law of man!"

 distinction between transcendental logic, classic logic, and modern logic (would need to review prior/post analytics, and actually read the topics rather than just summaries, then probably the transcendental deduction at least, then move onto actually tackling cantor and frege -- so, like, kinda cool idea but what a huge project) -- with the intent of finally being able to offer a bridging theory on the dialectic (so, once again, i would have to subject myself to the science of logic, and just suck it up this time) SO THAT IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE to state Marx's theory in Capital, v.1 in multiple logical systems. <---- look i told you i probably won't work on it lol, but what a book that would be, eh? A thorough Marxist history of feudalism to the dawn of capitalism which includes pre-feudal history to the extent possible (anthropological rather than philosophical pre-history, ala the state of nature and all that rot -- rather, a proper history of primitive accumulation, again