Logic of identity

[matthew piscioneri]

Hello Bob,

>yer being ironic, ...all those elegant locutions as "Me also bloody
>intolerant of religion", "make my skin crawl,"  in re metafisical libido
>were'nt meant for contempt?

Yes in the large part I find religion contemptible.
--------------
>producers, persons who understand their work and its dignity within their
>socio-economic universe, arrive to an existential conviction of the
>metafisical signification of the (sorry) labor theory of value, >...which 
>from the essential ethos of homo faber must by definition be
>humanistical, ...that this claim has been usurped for 2 centuries with
>unending hekatomb to the serenely cruel god Capital, by business, the
>bourgeoisie ...nso on, the old allegory.  Clearly, calling this core
>confession "unthinking myth" is either malign or insouciant.

More malign, I would say because I don't know the meaning of insouciance. 
Solidarity in labor as the essence of our species being? Yes, because many 
people do find their existential essence in labor. I don't particularly.

To go back to the Boss. When you listen to the River, sure it evokes 
solidarity. But isn't the point that young Joe Hill is in the dumps because 
there ain't been much work for the Jonestown Company? If there was more work 
then Joe could buy his missus and child a present (get her mother off her 
back), put some new tyres on the car, shout a round of drinks for his mates.

So is the issue this or is it:

>...and
>thence that makers have a morally imperative claim to dispose the >polis,

sure in an ideal world I can't argue with this.
----------------
[you write]

>But obviously,
>lacking the existential illumination, there can't be any solidarity
>(notoriously intellectuals from a morbid hyper-cerebrality default into
>caste loyalty, no?...adorno, quintessentially brahmin).  While, given the
>core faith in the great god LTOV, self-critique (ie, re-thinking the
>labor/construct) is constant and natural and liberating (please no 
>invidious
>auschwitz gate).

Ouch. You are right I do go for caste loyalty as a default position. BTW, 
what's LTOV?
--------------------
>just to
>be clear, we are speaking philosophically, aren't we?

I only do critical philosophy in the conviction that it is connected to 
actual life. The theory/praxis distinction is absurd IMO. The ontological 
illusion of pure theory, as JH succinctly stated in 1965, a re-affirmation 
of Horkheimer's distinction between Critical Theory & traditional theory. So

>sometimes feel you're
>being a stickler for the narrowest reifications, religion, prole class,
>movement, etc.,

I just don't acknowledge a unique philosophical realm of discourse in which 
narrow reifications et al get disqualified.
-----------
>which insofar as they thrive under the present set of
>circumstances perforce disqualifies them.

Not exactly sure what you mean here :-).
------------
And there is no denying the inevitability of its inversion either (corny as 
it may sound, and there you go, caste loyalty):

>The praxis, as in the present
>case against capital's great leap forward, is always trial and error,
>critique, 'n atom again; and while you may derogate as habermas and mentor,
>there's no denying its presencing.  corney as it is,  marching, picketing,
>teach-ins & co is still a engendering force, gathering threat, eh? the
>sharon/bush/blair axis is more afraid of the street than the evil one,
>saddam & sons.
------------
>finally, from my perspective the source of your difficulty appears the
>cartesian, cart before horse, fallacy.  the vital formula is still credo ut
>intelligam.  but then you either got credo or you don't.

OK, a riddle for the credentialed. To feed me and my children whilst I get 
through my studies I run a little recycled clothes shop in my hometown. My 
take home pay is about (US)$6000 p.a. I drive a (US)$250 car (which I love, 
of course).

Now out of bad socialist conscience I can't charge what the clothes are 
really worth because I get a lot of people in here who, for want of a better 
phrase, aren't rich eg. single mums, unemployed kids, students etc. So I 
give a discount, give clothes away blah blah blah. My bad socialist 
conscience makes me feel mean to deny people with whom I share my community 
the opportunity to wear fashionable clothes. It does a lot for a persons 
self esteem to look good. To me in a very small way that's how I express 
solidarity. If I charged what I could I might add 25% to my take home and 
I/family could enjoy an improved standard of live. Anyway enough of my 
nauseous spiel for self-sanctification. I hope the reification isn't too 
narrow for you because it gets worse.

The other day someone stole something from my shoppe. My desire for revenge 
arose from seeing this act of stealing as class treachery. I knew who it was 
and how to get them. Given some harder heads around the place forgive me my 
bad socialist conscience and I probably could have had them done over. 
Instead I turned to the state, and its civil army. Given you have the credo, 
what would you have done, in a philosophical sense, of course? Re-education?

MattP.

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp