{"id":8398,"date":"2011-10-05T14:21:33","date_gmt":"2011-10-05T19:21:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=8398"},"modified":"2012-11-18T17:31:51","modified_gmt":"2012-11-18T22:31:51","slug":"zizek-8","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2011\/10\/05\/zizek-8\/","title":{"rendered":"\u017di\u017eek universal singularity"},"content":{"rendered":"

Which is why, from the Lacanian perspective, it is problematic to clam that we humans “seem to have enormous difficulty in accepting our limitedness, our finiteness, and this failure is a cause of much tragedy”: on the contrary, we humans have enormous difficulty in accepting the<\/strong> infinity`(undeadness, excess of life) in the very core of our being,<\/span> the strange immortality whose Freudian name is the death drive<\/span>. IDLC 344<\/p>\n

… for Lacan, the radically heterogeneous Thing<\/span> whose traumatic impact decenters the subject is, … the primordial \u201cEvil Thing<\/span>,\u201d something that cannot ever be sublated (aufgehobun)<\/em> into a version of the Good;\u00a0 … It is … the very unconditional \u201cfanatical\u201d commitment to a Cause<\/span> which is the \u201cdeath drive<\/span>\u201d at its purest and, as such, the primordial form of Evil: it introduces into the flow of (social) life a violent cut that throws it out of joint.\u00a0 The Good comes afterwards, it is an attempt to \u201cgentrify,\u201d to domesticate, the traumatic impact of the Evil Thing.<\/span>\u00a0 In short the Good is the screened\/domesticated Evil. IDLC 345<\/span><\/p>\n

… the incompatibility of the Neighbour<\/span> with the very dimension of universality. What resists universality is the properly inhuman dimension of the Neighbour<\/span>. This brings us back to the key question: does every universalist ethics have to rely on such a gesture of fetishistic disavowal? The answer is: every ethics that remains \u201chumanist\u201d (in the sense of avoiding the inhuman core of being-human), that disavows the abyssal dimension<\/strong> of the Neighbour<\/span>. \u201cMan,\u201d \u201chuman person,\u201d is a mask that conceals the pure subjectivity of the<\/strong> Neighbour<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Consequently, when one asserts the Neighbour<\/span> as the impenetrable \u201cThing\u201d that eludes any attempt at gentrification, at its transformation into a cozy fellow man, this does not mean that the ultimate horizon of ethics is deference towards this unfathomable Otherness that subverts any encompassing universality.<\/p>\n

Following Alain Badiou, one should assert that, on the contrary, only an \u201cinhuman\u201d ethics, an ethics addressing an inhuman subject, not a fellow person, can sustain true universality.<\/span><\/p>\n

The most difficult thing for common understanding is to grasps this speculative-dialectical reversal of the singularity of the subject qua Neighbor-Thing into universality, not standard \u201cgeneral\u201d universality, but universal singularity<\/span>.<\/p>\n

the universality grounded in the subjective singularity extracted from all particular properties,<\/span> a kind of direct short circuit between the singular and the universal, bypassing the particular.<\/span> ID16-17<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Which is why, from the Lacanian perspective, it is problematic to clam that we humans “seem to have enormous difficulty in accepting our limitedness, our finiteness, and this failure is a cause of much tragedy”: on the contrary, we humans have enormous difficulty in accepting the infinity`(undeadness, excess of life) in the very core of … Continue reading “\u017di\u017eek universal singularity”<\/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":[35,125,38,103,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8398","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-concrete_universal","category-drive","category-ethics","category-universal","category-zizek"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8398","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=8398"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8398\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8400,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8398\/revisions\/8400"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8398"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8398"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8398"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}