Thursday, 2 September 2010

Skolem's paradox, dijection and parrhesia

It has long been my object to take three things I don't understand or care about and form a philosophy out of their conjunction.
Not all the time, you understand. Just when I'm drunk.

How's about Skolem's paradox, dijection and parrhesia?
Too easy to see the connecting thread?

Essentially Skolem's P (Hilary Putnam) shows language is like somewhat fucked unless you gotta dijective ( diaganolized) rather than bijective mapping to like some lobe or the other in the brain. Enter parrhesia- or mercilessly taking the piss of 'etibar' (Faith, what is commonly accepted, that which is in accordance with teaching etc) the way good ole' Ghalib does.
Fuck Foucault- not in the arse, he'd like that that, great fucking Froggie poofter that he is- parrhesia aint no 'talking Truth to Power' (Said lifted a stone to fling at Identity Politic's Majnoon- and, unlike Ghalib in boyhood- let it fly coz he forgot his own head.) Rather it is taking the piss and pissing upon fuckers who talk.

Words to live by.
Delenda est (David- great howling goody-goody that he is) Camerono.

No comments: