{"id":10635,"date":"2013-03-13T16:07:28","date_gmt":"2013-03-13T21:07:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=10635"},"modified":"2013-03-13T18:46:11","modified_gmt":"2013-03-13T23:46:11","slug":"bosteels-event-seminar-on-derrida","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2013\/03\/13\/bosteels-event-seminar-on-derrida\/","title":{"rendered":"bosteels event seminar on Derrida"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bosteels What is an Event? and Derrida<\/a><\/p>\n

A Certain Impossible Possibility of Saying the Event<\/em> by Jacques Derrida 2007\u00a0 PDF<\/a><\/p>\n

Structure of a certain impossible impossibility: what are the implications of this structure, what it enables\/closes down, presupposes,<\/p>\n

aporia<\/em>: an impasse, a dead-end street, there is no way out.\u00a0 Derrida tries to dwell in this impossibility.<\/p>\n

In the confession, there is a saying of the event, of what happened, that produces a transformation. It produces another event and is not simply a saying of knowledge. Every time that saying the event<\/span> exceeds this dimension of information, knowledge, and cognition, it enters the night \u2014you spoke a great deal of the night\u2014 the \u201cnight of non-knowing,\u201d something that\u2019s not merely ignorance, but that no longer pertains to the realm of knowledge. A non-knowing that is not lack, not sheer obscurantism, ignorance, or non-science, but simply something that is not of the same nature as knowing. A saying the event<\/span> that produces the event beyond the confines of knowledge<\/strong>. This kind of saying is found in many experiences where, ultimately, the possibility that such and such an event will happen appears impossible. 448<\/p>\n

Bosteels recites from Derrida:<\/a>
\nThe event, if there is one, consists in doing the impossible. But when someone does the impossible, if someone does the impossible, no one, above all not the doer of the deed, is in a position to adjust a self-assured, theoretical statement to the event and say, \u201cthis happened\u201d or \u201cforgiveness has taken place\u201d or \u201cI\u2019ve forgiven.\u201d A statement such as \u201cI forgive\u201d or \u201cI\u2019ve forgiven\u201d is absurd, and, moreover, it\u2019s obscene. How can I be sure that I have the right to forgive and that I\u2019ve effectively forgiven rather than forgotten, or over-looked, or reduced the offense to something forgivable? I can no more say, \u201cI forgive\u201d than \u201cI give.\u201d These are impossible statements.<\/p>\n

“Be realistic demand the impossible.” do the i mpossible, a true event would make possible in a normal circumstance, what would appear impossible.\u00a0 If there is one, it must do the impossible.\u00a0 Not “you can do anything if you put your mind to it,” for Derrida the impossible must continue to haunt every doing that makes something impossible.<\/p>\n

There are no gifts.\u00a0 What makes a gift less than a gift, destroys it as a gift.\u00a0 Giving creates a structure of reciprocity, a social act … its not simply the going back and forth, its a specific kind of calculation, an equal return, a comparable return, its even further than this, there can be NO knowledge, somebody asks for money, are you giving, why are you giving, because you’re helping out a poor, feeling good for it, or are you giving for no reason.\u00a0 If I expect a return, then there is no giving either.<\/p>\n

NO expectation of any return, (not heaven etc for being good Samaritan, a friendship for a loving return etc) does this mean the original hospitality was not possible.\u00a0 Extreme limit, it is inevitably caught in a structure of return and calculation.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Asking the Question<\/a><\/p>\n

A question like \u201cIs saying the event possible?\u201dputs us into a truly philosophical stance. We are speaking as philosophers. Only a philosopher, regardless ofwhether he or she is a philosopher by profession or not, can ask such a question and hope that someone will be attentive to it. 442<\/p>\n

Synonymous: is the event possible?\u00a0 We are speaking as philosophers.\u00a0\ud83d\ude42 Bosteels is not so sure.\u00a0 Can we only ask these questions as philosophers.\u00a0 The attitude of the philosopher is to keep these questions forever suspended in their APORETIC TENSION. He doesn’t want to interrupt the suspension, but what are the political\/ethical consequences. Suspension is a state of hyper-responsibility. True gift and true hospitality is a unconditional demand and can never be met. A true gift must be a singularity not caught up in any circuit of return.<\/p>\n

Bosteels interpreting Derrida’s take on the event<\/a><\/p>\n

Capital logic, it can overcome many of its limits by crisis, intermittent destruction of human resources (labour power) and natural resources, colonialism.\u00a0 But there are certain limits beyond which capital cannot reproduce itself. By studying the machine, we could uncover latent inconsistencies by which we can push.\u00a0 On the inconsistencies LEAN!\u00a0 But that means there are cracks already in the machine\/structure, but for Derrida if there is a disruption, it cannot be the realization of possibilities already within them, cause that would mean its predictable.\u00a0\u00a0 A communist movement to lean on inconsistencies, a latent possibility, potentiality, but Derrida does not go there.<\/p>\n

Here’s Derrida <\/a><\/p>\n

In the same way, if I invent what I can invent, what is possible for me to invent, I\u2019m not inventing. Similarly, when you conduct an epistemological analysis or an analysis in the historyof science and technology, you examine a field in which a theoretical, mathematical, or technological invention is possible, a field that may be called a paradigm in one case, an episteme<\/em> in another, or yet again a configuration; now, if the structure of the field makes an invention possible (at a given point in time a given architectural inven-tion is possible because the state of society, architectural history, and architectural theory make it possible), then this invention is not an invention. Precisely because it\u2019s possible. It merely develops and unfolds a possibility, a potentiality that is already present and therefore it is not an event. For there to be an invention event, the invention must appear impossible<\/strong>.\u00a0 450<\/p>\n

It can not be the realization of a potential already latent, Marx said society is pregnant with latent possibilities, the actualization of something merely virtually possible, latent potentiality, that is also raising a philosophical question<\/p>\n

The history of philosophy is the history of reflections on the meaning of the possible,on the meaning of being or being possible. This great tradition of the dynamis, of potentiality, from Aristotle to Bergson, these reflections in transcendental philosophy on the conditions of possibility, are affected by the experience of the event insofar as it upsets the distinction between the possible and the impossible, the opposition between the possible and the impossible. 454.<\/p>\n

Myth of metals<\/a><\/p>\n

If you have iron you will be worker, silver you will be Guardian, if you have gold you’ll be a philosopher.\u00a0 Realization of your potential, actualization of something in you.\u00a0 It is not the imposition of an external purpose on the materials.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bosteels What is an Event? and Derrida A Certain Impossible Possibility of Saying the Event by Jacques Derrida 2007\u00a0 PDF Structure of a certain impossible impossibility: what are the implications of this structure, what it enables\/closes down, presupposes, aporia: an impasse, a dead-end street, there is no way out.\u00a0 Derrida tries to dwell in this … Continue reading “bosteels event seminar on Derrida”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[45,73,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10635","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-badiou","category-derrida","category-event"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10635","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10635"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10635\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10645,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10635\/revisions\/10645"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10635"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10635"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}