12-24-2017, 06:43 AM
hello,
yes, i agree the bracketed line and the following line are... well one of them is redundant. i’ll either cut one or the other.
the cannibalism is the distillation of a complex philosophical concept. giving birth to one’s self is obviously existential, specifically relating to Sartre and his famous saying “existence precedes essence”. following on through that, to “Process Philosophy” and Whitehead, Deleuze etc. and the philosophy of becoming—later references to becoming-animal, etc. but like the snake that eats it’s own tail (i have temporarily drawn a blank for the name of that)-—but not like the Nietzschean “eternal return” and so on. but this is all by-the-by, it’s metaphorical. abstract thought (awareness of self, life, death, etc.) creates self, life, and death. and wittgenstein tells us
1. the world is everything that is the case
2. what is the case is the existence of states of affairs
3. a logical picture of facts is thought
4. a thought is a proposition with a sense
5. a proposition is a truth function of elementary propositions
6. the general form of a proposition is the general form of a truth function: [p ̄,ξ,N(ξ)].
7. whereof one can not speak, thereof one must be silent.
and if this weren’t peculiar enough, he later makes an entire revision and so on and so forth. but this is all a bit mansplainy as i’m sure no poet worth their salt hasn’t read wittgenstein. and so it goes.
i should say, although this poem seems to be harsh on “people”, there is no alternative. the negativity arises from the dismal concepts we propagate. possibly.
yeah, the whole “catching ideas...” stanza, needs serious reworking. it’s a bit rubbish.
a “surbater” is someone who tires you with walking. .
yes, indeed “cunt”, though not gendered in british english, is gendered here. and yes, animal is opposed to “spirit” to a certain degree. although, being a deleuzian, the concept of the “animal-spirit” is never far away.
thanks for reading. i will think about your comments and try to make some changes. unfortunately, this is a pretty old poem, and i’m not sure i agree with its purpose.
cheers.
yes, i agree the bracketed line and the following line are... well one of them is redundant. i’ll either cut one or the other.
the cannibalism is the distillation of a complex philosophical concept. giving birth to one’s self is obviously existential, specifically relating to Sartre and his famous saying “existence precedes essence”. following on through that, to “Process Philosophy” and Whitehead, Deleuze etc. and the philosophy of becoming—later references to becoming-animal, etc. but like the snake that eats it’s own tail (i have temporarily drawn a blank for the name of that)-—but not like the Nietzschean “eternal return” and so on. but this is all by-the-by, it’s metaphorical. abstract thought (awareness of self, life, death, etc.) creates self, life, and death. and wittgenstein tells us
1. the world is everything that is the case
2. what is the case is the existence of states of affairs
3. a logical picture of facts is thought
4. a thought is a proposition with a sense
5. a proposition is a truth function of elementary propositions
6. the general form of a proposition is the general form of a truth function: [p ̄,ξ,N(ξ)].
7. whereof one can not speak, thereof one must be silent.
and if this weren’t peculiar enough, he later makes an entire revision and so on and so forth. but this is all a bit mansplainy as i’m sure no poet worth their salt hasn’t read wittgenstein. and so it goes.
i should say, although this poem seems to be harsh on “people”, there is no alternative. the negativity arises from the dismal concepts we propagate. possibly.
yeah, the whole “catching ideas...” stanza, needs serious reworking. it’s a bit rubbish.
a “surbater” is someone who tires you with walking. .
yes, indeed “cunt”, though not gendered in british english, is gendered here. and yes, animal is opposed to “spirit” to a certain degree. although, being a deleuzian, the concept of the “animal-spirit” is never far away.
thanks for reading. i will think about your comments and try to make some changes. unfortunately, this is a pretty old poem, and i’m not sure i agree with its purpose.
cheers.