Nature is a racist concept

[luka]

https://monoskop.org/images/3/31/Deleuze_Gilles_Guattari_Felix_On_the_Line_1983.pdf

 

[shiels]

yeah well im surprised to find that im on that thread making the same points! simon g powell went into it in psilocybin solution. But I thought this guy's take pushed the idea bit, he's trying to make a movement out of it.

 

[luka]

its always the way on dissensus. we'd have to close the forum down if it wasnt for the fact we forget we've said all the same things 1000 times already. goldfish memories.

 

[version]

https://monoskop.org/images/3/31/Deleuze_Gilles_Guattari_Felix_On_the_Line_1983.pdf

Lotringer claimed Semiotext(e) mapped out the whole decade when they published this, Baudrillard's Simulations and Virilio's Pure War in '83.

 

[luka]

Surely there's no such thing as 'unnatural'? Everything's made out of naturally occurring things. Our lifestyle isn't unnatural. It's like saying it's 'unnatural' for a chimp to use sticks and stones as tools. They've developed to the point where that's just what they do.

yeah yeah yeah everyone knows that

 

[shiels]

Well, this has been a real damp squib of a comeback

 

[luka]

Well, this has been a real damp squib of a comeback

we had to haze you as if you were a newcomer. it was obligatory.

 

[luka]

after we've had our massive party on sunday you'l be fully intergrated back on the team and lording it over all these cocksure young americans, trampling their soft cheeks into the mud

 

[luka]

the forum made a whole thread for you to celebrate your return but you snubbed it. we had your coat of arms up there and everything. snubbed it. vicious.

 

[shiels]

https://monoskop.org/images/3/31/Deleuze_Gilles_Guattari_Felix_On_the_Line_1983.pdf

Do you recommend I read this?

 

[Mr. Tea]

Well, this has been a real damp squib of a comeback

For an encore, I suggest you start a music thread titled "Hey, anyone else here like jungle?", something like that.

 

[sus]

i cant see what is to be gained by erasing what is clearly a useful and meaningful distinction but we've done these entry level arguments loads of times anyway

Tell me what the meaningful distinction is, what is the difference that makes a difference

AFAICT distinctions of what is and isn't natural seems mainly to be a rhetorical trick for attacking or defending a given practice, object, etc

 

[luka]

Do you recommend I read this?

only if you like that sort of thing. you wont learn anything from it.

 

[luka]

Tell me what the meaningful distinction is, what is the difference that makes a difference

AFAICT distinctions of what is and isn't natural seems mainly to be a rhetorical trick for attacking or defending a given practice, object, etc

we've done these tedious entry level debate club debates before

 

[luka]

i do quite like that sort of thing sometimes so i have read it and enjoyed it. so if you like that sort of thing you should read it becasue you will enjoy it.

 

[sus]

i cant see what is to be gained by erasing what is clearly a useful and meaningful distinction but we've done these entry level arguments loads of times anyway

I refuse to accept the existing, implicit world-structure as it is created and maintained by everyday language... I prefer to interrogate my world-carvings, tyvm

 

[luka]

ok go on then

 

[sus]

Just because these are the meaningful distinctions or conflations past generations took a liking to, doesn't mean I need to take them as gospel... revolutionary relativism... I can discard or add however I want, it's my perception it's my world

 

[sus]

I am the author of my own ontology!!!

 

[luka]

yeah but what is it?