Back to Blog
Affectus ethos rhetoric7/3/2023 Even the thought of the symphony later is, for me, a material process. I’m not suggesting that the symphony is identical to its transmission through sound waves– I think all sorts of other material processes and interactions have to be involved in order for a symphony to be a symphony –only that there has to be material embodiment and material processes for that symphony to be real. Symphony’s, for example, must have some sort of material embodiment whether it be in sound waves, pieces of papers, brains, computer data banks, etc. Consequently, for me anything that is must be material in some way. ![]() ![]() As a materialist, I want to argue that only matter and the void exist. 13 (pp1-27, 1998.After a rocky start which is my fault– I really hate it when I behave like a jerk towards others online (unless, of course, they’re creeps) –Nick and I have been having an interesting discussion on whether or not incorporeals should be admitted into a materialist ontology. This paper first appeared Nebula: A Netzine of the Arts and Science, Vol. Since I am concerned with the appropriateness of this argument as a paradigm for understanding the Hellenistic origins of the Western philosophical tradition, I sketch out three examples from classical Greek philosophy that call into question the validity of this argument. With this caveat in mind, I examine the phallogocentric argument as it is nascently described by Derrida in his first major work on the subject, Grammatology (1967) and as it is more fully developed in his other writings, such as Différance (1968), Plato's Pharmacy (1972), Spurs (1978), and The Post Card (1980). This discussion is necessarily framed by a caveat: a full reckoning of Derrida’s argument would have to include a discussion of the Jewish and Christian influences as well as the Greek. In this paper I discuss the phallogocentric argument specifically as it relates to the Greek philosophical influence on the development of Western culture. This reading of Nietzsche’s work thus hopes to bring forth a possible understanding of the Sophist as an unfettered spirit, well-versed in experience, for whom music and word cooperate to produce a higher culture capable of grand aspirations and opportune actions while always cognizant of the sublime and terrible nature that underlies their fragile dreams of beauty. This essay thus proposes that a model of the Sophistical artist that combines aspects from each of these personae in a way that brings together the power of tragic uffering, persuasive word, and passionate music, respectively. Furthermore, none of these three characters can be said to be representative of Nietzsche’s attitude toward the Sophists. However, I argue that his essay presents us with not two characters but three-the Stoic philosopher, political rhêtôr, and the Dionysian artist. Traditional readings of Nietzsche’s essay, “On Truth and Lying in a Non-Moral Sense,” tend to emphasize the clash between philosophy and rhetoric in the form of two distinct personae-the intuitive, Sophistical artist who embraces the rhetorical power of language to create and destroy on the one hand, and the rational, Stoic philosopher who uses concepts to order the world into a block universe on the other. Recovering the professionalism and experimentalism of the Sophists contributes to the democratic project of promoting the productive and collaborative arts-including rhetoric-that employ the resources of theoretical knowledge to inform collective practice and thereby assist in controlling the fortunes of humankind in a changing world ![]() ![]() Both perspectives conceal the common attitude that unites the Sophists as a group and is central to understanding their democratic ethos rooted in an experimental attitude that draws on the resources of speculative reason to serve the purpose of radical invention necessary for a democratization of the productive arts. More recently, this view has been complicated by studies revealing the Sophists to be a diverse group of intellectuals who practiced their art prior to the categorization of “rhêtorikê,” thereby rendering the very meaning of the general term “Sophist” far more problematic. Traditionally, the Older Sophists were conceived as philosophical skeptics who rejected speculative inquiry to focus on rhetorical methods of being successful in practical life.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |