|
|
A reading note which is not quite a reading note or
a case in reflexion, by Médéric L. Pascal. Published 1st September 2006, a more elaborate paper on the vein of reflexion. The author has attached himself to dismantle what has been presented by several Ones as the self to self relation. Here more than ever is Søren Kierkegaard a reference, as it is, also and more essentially, an occasion.
Excerpt: 'Before giving a try at showing how this passage is the key to my initial problem, I will expose briefly what troubled me, and what had troubled me for a long time.
It holds in a single expression: the self to self relation.
Several times before, I had read the expression in contributions from one or the other of the usual posters of the forum the Kierkegaardians, always with unease. It was my impression that it was being referred to what I knew as the self relation, the reflexive relation or, even more simply, reflexion in a manner which was unnecessarily redundant and confusing. The phrase self to self was the most offending part and seemed improper to me inasmuch as I could not remember a single occasion when Kierkegaard should have discussed the specificity of a self to self relation or even used this phrase.'
at a derisory price of $4.50
|
|
|
|
A reflexive cycle or
cycle of reflexion, by Médéric L. Pascal. Published 24th September 2005, a self-less paper in the patchwork vein or collecting tradition concerned, it is a fact, with similar interests but with a quite different content, style and approach. The
corner stone here appears to be the notion of reflexion itself as it affects intrasincally, or so claims the author, the phenomen of subjectivity. Here too is Søren Kierkegaard a reference, or perhaps more accurately described: an occasion.
Excerpt: 'I face a definitional problem; how to
define subjectivity without referring to a subject? Such a definition – one omitting the presence of the subject – cannot be a proper definition of subjetivity since subjectivity is the state, the status, the position or the
essence of being a subject. However, if defining subjectivity comprehends a
reference to the subject, then it is not a proper definition since the
definition of the category calls onto an examplar sample of what it categorises
so as to define the category ; this is equivalent to the tautology:
subjectivity is subjectivity.'
at the joke of a price of $4.50
|
|
|
|
The PS as a Manifesto for a passionate approach of existence, by
Médéric L. Pascal Second Edition. A cryptic lateral approach of the Final Non-Scientific Post-Scrpit to the Philosophical fragments of Johannes Climacus (a Psedonym consistently used by Kierkegaard for some of his most advanced developments in the field of the humourous bordering the religious) in which the key assumption (christiened entry point) is that the premier message in the Post-Script is that the individual thinker should feel passionately committed to existence before and when he tries to understand rationally anything which so ever. The author of the essay possibly tries to illustrate how the passages he supports his analysis upon, is a determinant of the conception of truth, subjectivity and faith as produced in the PS. Present edition established by R. Maloyan; disjunctive critiques of the essays by R. Maloyan and W. Brown. Published Tuesday, 9th August 2005
Excerpt: 'Another kind of answer could have occurred, although none of this sort did, which would have essentially differed – which is equivalent to say that they would have differed in nature. The stress would there have been set not on the difference between interpreters but on the aspect that one outlined to begin with his interpretation and on the possible divergence it would induce. Indeed, and eventhough it could earnestly be remarked that the entry-point chosen can be seen as an indication of the taste or sensitivity of the reader-interpreter, it would be equally noticeable that there might be in the very proper integrity of the work, different entry-points that should lead to different conclusions, or at least different vantages.'
at the adorable price of $7.50
|
|
|
|
Kierkegaard's dialectic of communication, by Mederic L. Pascal. An intriguingly direct attempt at capturing the innermost reasons of the direct/indirect pattern of some or perhaps the whole lot of the kierkegaardian works. Extensive citation material is supporting the Author's allegations which he nevertheless presents himself as fragmentary or partial, in a word an expression of his very own understanding or misunderstanding of the subject-matter as opposed to a scientific or objective verity. An essay
published, Thursday, 22nd July 2005
Excerpt:'I shall not claim this passage contains the truth, of course, concerning SK's bias for indirect communication. But it is a quite relevant illustration, I believe, of how deeply convinced he was that no truth can ever really be communicated directly and reasons for so believing. Now for the issue of whether this attitude is a moral one or is a serious mistake, I can only outline the fact that SK's anxiety of not being misleadingly understood as the origin of the truth rather than a medium for its transmission is a fear a priori. He decides not to chance that rather than to fight afterwards realised misunderstandings. Therefore, his attitude remains in the potentials' sphere and denotes in my opinion a fear for actual commitment in the true locus ethicae as he defines it himself, namely the sphere of action. From this 'record' to a more serious accusation of immorality hidden behind clever dialectical argumentation is a qualitative leap I refuse to take; for it is very difficult indeed to truthfully know how sincere SK was when he wrote these lines. It would more over demand a more indirect form of communication between you and me...'
at the extravagant price of $5.50
|
|
|
|
Opacity, by Mederic L. Pascal although a certain uncertainty surrounds
the precise circumstances of this piece, which you cannot fail to understand
when reading it. We take it as a longer but equally valuable essay. It is
conceived as an attempt at giving evidence that a comprehensive portray of
subjectivity can be reached without the introduction of the claim to have
attained to the ideal state of self transparency. Further details concerning
its obscure circumstances are to be found in the preface. Published, Tuesday,
19th July 2005.
Excerpt: 'An ill-intentioned thinker of a rather low intellectual integrity and a raw acceptance of his own ignorance could point at an inherent paradox in the transparent subject: his perfect default of interaction with the photon-like wavicles of conscience should imply a complete impossibility to be properly detected as such.' (...)
Another characterized and characteristic failure in his nefarious personality he may be confronted with the reproach of, would probably be the lack of a serious temper. I believe he should protest here or ask, at least, for an explanation of the serious category. To his mind any 'subjectivist' should agree that his attempt to conform to, to accord with his own subjective assumptions – lighter ones it is true, than to have reached ideal self-transparency but sufficiently pondered over to be qualified self awareness, consciously his – this attempt, I dare say, should be considered as a rather serious one. For he is trying himself on very seriously not to be serious!
at a friendly price of $4.50
|
|
|
|
Re: Regarding
Regina, by Mr. Mederic L. Pascal, a short but valuable essay. The paper is attempting to draw a connection between Kierkegaard's cancelation of his engament to Regine Olsen and some of the philosophical content regarding the æsthetic and the ethic in Either... Or... which is perhaps K.'s most celebrated masterpiece. Essay published, Tuesday, 19th
July 2005
Excerpt: 'Kierkegaard's approach of things - of all kinds - is very often -if not always- highly intellectual. So is the case when he considers the categories of existence, so is the case when he tries to understand what it is to be a Christian, and so is the case when he considers the way he should relate to other people.
The latter includes his relationship with Regine Olsen, which he quite unfortunately could not live through but had to think through first and then, possibly -if then possible- live. Why was it necessarily so dreadful that he needed to think his relationship first ? Well it was not necessary, there was no need for it to turn out to be such a disaster except for the fact that the result of his considerations about what an erotic relationship should be is precisely the contents of the A-papers. Now from a moral point of view, this attitude would have been a sheer scandal. And their lies the problem: Kierkegaard is not Johannes nor is he the assessor Wilhelm. But he has enough wits to compose both parts and feels equally committed to each side of the paradox.'
at a derisory price of $1.99
|
|
