Suchergebnisse

The article draws attention to a certain multi-layered parallel between Nietzsche and Badiou's theory of the event, which the author argues Badiou evaded by a kind of strategic relocation. The article does not focus so much on (and certainly not against) Badiou's philosophy, but attempts to assess the possible implications of this relocation for Badiou's interpretation of Nietzsche. In the first part of the article, the key concepts of Badiou's account of Nietzsche are introduced, such as "archi-politics", "antiphilosophy", and the "event Nietzsche". Later, it is shown that, despite some fundamental differences, there is a strong resemblance between some key concepts of Badiou's theory of the event, especially those related to the notion of "intervention", and some concepts found in Nietzsche. Finally, the paper focuses on the problem of the "death of God", which is somehow absent in Badiou's interpretation, even though the term itself resonates strongly in various aspects of Badiou's philosophy.

Prispevek se prvenstveno posveča Nietzschejevi obravnavi okrutnosti, ki v številnih bistvenih pogledih predstavlja nenadomestljiv ključ za razumevanje Nietzschejevega genealoškega projekta. Ta študija je dopolnjena z vzporednicami s še dvema izstopajočima intelektualnima figurama poznega devetnajstega stoletja: Fjodorjem Mihajlovičem Dostojevskim in Leopoldom von Sacher-Masochom. Dostojevski je zapisal: »če človek zaradi civilizacije ni postal bolj krvoločen, je postal pa vsaj huje, odvratneje krvoločen.« Nietzsche je šel v tej oceni še korak dlje: ne le, da nas civilizacije ne naredi imune za okrutnost, pač pa je treba dojeti kako se sama, na vseh svojih odločilnih korakih, neposredno izrašča iz okrutnosti. Kar Nietzscheja po drugi strani povezuje z Masochom, je dejstvo, da vsi ti zgodovinski in celo predzgodovinski procesi, ki so izoblikovali človeštvo in civilizacijo, niso samo povezani z okrutnostjo, temveč jih moramo razumeti kot različne oblike ponotranjenja (»poduhovljenja«, »božanstvenja«) okrutnosti. Jedro študije je posvečeno analizam različnih oblik in vidikov Nietzschejevega koncepta ponotranjenje okrutnosti (v relaciji do razmerij moči, razmerja subjekt-objekt, mutacij užitka in perverzij).

This essay is part of a project that has set out, as one of its primary objectives, to observe perversions as important indicators of broader changes and developments within society. Both of the momenta I follow in this study meet all the requirements for such an inquiry. The first development to be examined is what I will call the decline of pornography. At a time when all of society is increasingly becoming pornographic in so many ways, it sounds strange to talk about the decline of pornography. And yet pornography as a genre is, I believe, losing ground to something else – to a distinctly different system of unfolding sexuality and its economic exploitation. The second development to be discussed is the rise of masochism. In this context, I will analyse certain reports that show that, especially since the outbreak of the pandemic COVID-19, the number of people practicing masochistic "heavy play" has increased significantly. It appears that in a period when one would expect people to be dreaming of the lifting of restrictions, freedom, or whatever, many have chosen to undertake the cruel path of "servitude". Eventually, I will show that these two developments are essentially connected, probably even consubstantial.

Članek je prvenstveno študija Nietzschejevih neobjavljenih fragmentov iz obdobja pomlad – jesen 1881, v katerih je Nietzsche prvič vpeljal svojo misel večnega vračanja enakega. V prispevku si zastavljam dva cilja: prvi cilj je razlaga Nietzschejevih tez o večnem vračanju, ki so bile v tej fazi še presenetljivo jasne in koherentne. In drugi cilj je: v samih teh tezah poskusiti poiskati pojasnilo njihovega bodočega molka. Z drugimi besedami, prispevek je raziskava razmerja med tezami, ki jih je Nietzsche razvil leta 1881, in knjigo Tako je govoril Zaratustra, ki se, po Nietzschejevih lastnih besedah, opira na te teze kot na svojo »temeljno misel«, a jih, kljub temu, nikoli v celoti ne razkrije. Obe smeri raziskave vodita do zaključka, da jedro Nietzschejeve vpeljave ideje večnega vračanja tvori njegov pojem Einverleibung, oziroma utelesitev. Analiza namreč pokaže, da srž Nietzschejevega prizadevanja okoli misli večnega vračanja ni v tem, kako je to misel mogoče jasno artikulirati znotraj zavesti, temveč prej, kako jo izoblikovati na način, ki bi omogočal, da bi postala nezaveden instinkt, ki bi postopoma lahko spodrinil »utelešene zmote«, katere od znotraj obvladujejo naše mišljenje.

Besedilo izhaja iz teze, da se je, ko govorimo o Nietzschejevi kritiki objektivnosti, nemogoče izogniti naslednjemu problemu: objektivnost in kritika sta za Nietzscheja dva obraza iste težnje, ki ju bo »filozofija prihodnosti« morala znati preseči v višji formi filozofskega »kreiranja novih vrednot«. S tega gledišča je mogoče razložiti tudi Nietzschejevo odločitev, da je glavno težišče svoje kritike usmeril v intervencijo zoper potekajoči proces, ki ga imenuje Rangverschiebung, »premena v rangiranju« razmerja med filozofijo in znanostjo. Na ta način filozofsko kritiko že v izhodišču postavi na teren, ki ji onemogoča slediti idealu objektivnosti, h kateremu sicer spontano inklinira. Prvi del besedila obravnava epistemološki vidik Nietzschejeve kritike objektivnosti, se pravi, pojasni zakaj (in kako) je Nietzsche zavračal vse obstoječe filozofske kriterije utemeljitve objektivnega spoznanja. Drugi del besedila pa pojasnjuje na kakšen način je po Nietzscheju mogoče intervenirati v proces »premene v rangiranju« razmerja med filozofijo in znanostjo, ki v končni fazi vodi proti škodljivemu popolnemu monopolu ideala znanstvene objektivnosti nad resnico.

Rethinks objectivity and fiction in contemporary philosophy, psychoanalysis and Marxism – beyond the realism–nominalism divideRethinks the concept of objectivity through its relation to fiction beyond their mere oppositionConceptualises 'objective fictions'Highlights a shared background underpinning realist and nominalist approaches to the relation between subjectivity and objectivityRevitalises modern/contemporary philosophical currents, psychoanalytic theory and the Marxist critique of political economy beyond the realism-nominalism divideIncludes contributions from a mix of renowned thinkers and from the new generation, including Slavoj Žižek, Mladen Dolar, Frank Ruda and Samo TomšičRelying on contemporary continental philosophy, psychoanalytic theory and the Marxist tradition, this volume moves beyond the deadlock between nominalism and realism. It rethinks the relationship between objectivity and fiction through engaging with a series of 'objective fictions', including fetishes, semblances, lies, rumours, sophistry, fantasies, and conspiracy theories, among other phenomena. What all these phenomena exhibit are paradoxical entanglements of subjectivity with objectivity and of fiction with truth.When it comes to questions of objectivity in current philosophical debates and public discourse, we are witnessing the re-emergence and growing importance of two classical, opposed approaches: nominalism and (metaphysical) realism. Today's nominalist stances, by absolutizing intersubjectivity, are moving towards the abandonment of the very notion of truth and objective reality. By contrast, today's realist positions, including those bound up with scientific discourse, insist on the category of the object-in-itself as irreducible to any kind of subjective mediation. However, despite their seeming mutual exclusivity, both approaches share fundamental presuppositions, namely, those of neat separations between the spheres of subjectivity and objectivity as well as between the realms of fiction and truth.