“Artxell Knaphni “teleiopoesis”
Nice play on ‘distance’ & ‘telos’
Within the present confines of the “absolute, perfect, completed, accomplished, finished” sentence, can be found the junctions, waystations, intersections; of other ‘sentences’, other ‘discourses’, other objectifications. The seemingly Zenoian differentiations lead ‘out’, as it were, beyond the confine-mentation of sentential presence, into an ‘architext’ no longer quite governed, or wholly governed, by a fixed topology of ‘interiority’/exteriority.
Allan Holdsworth, when asked about the limits of his left hand reach, said: “I don’t know, I don’t want to know, because then I might not try something.”
Like · Reply · 1 · 16 June at 10:27 · Edited”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The routes of Zenoian differentiation, referred to above, when configured as ‘difference’, could suggest, it is ‘true’, a particular metaphysics; one, that, in the final analysis, can only draw on that of a complementary ‘identity’. This, we know all too well; & it is precisely this, that contemporary ‘philosophies’, in the 21st century, are unable to confront in any interesting way.
Choosing to circulate, only in the sinister & scintillating detritus of a nostalgia for traditions now allegedly broken; fetishising their truncations, deformations, & ‘horrors’; are all ploys to remain within the horizons of such nostalgia, to perpetuate the investments of an ignorance that was always incapable of seeing beyond the narrowness of its self-interest. Equating this self-interest with the ‘real’, such an ignorance is able to inhabit the contradictions & discrepancies that arise, as a theme park of necessary hypocrisies, which it takes great pleasure in practicing. This pleasure is a strong characteristic of the cult of opportunist exploitations.
It always exploits the inherent ambiguity that the notion of ‘Reality’ affords. The double sense, of immanent immediacies, & of underlying, substantial constancies. The first, which speaks in the languages of experience, perception, or scientific data, treats this production of the allegedly undeniable elements of immanent truth, or of the subliminal flow of lived events; usually under the signs of ‘Empiricism’; or ‘Science’; or of some other unquestioned, or weakly questioned, ‘given’. This first sense, is constructed, configured, & applied, in such ways, as to necessarily disqualify the other sense of ‘Reality’, that of substantial constancy; which is held to speak in the languages of structural idealisation, of theorisation, or of some ‘key’ of explanatory ‘truth’, treating this production of organising ‘principles’, contexts, & perspectives, as, in some way or another, privileged responses, sanctified, in their exclusive exceptionalism, as the guidance of a favoured set of coordinations, & of the alleged benefits such favoured coordinates are held to provide.
All this, is well known, taken for granted, to such an extent, that it forms a ‘given’ in itself, that of a thoroughly inhabited methodology which is never questioned, except along the routes & procedures only it, as entrenched method, self-referentially provides. In these dual provisions, of benefits & self-critiques; all disclosures of truth, all that such entrenchment can confide, is only the metaphysics of a long ago forgotten immobilisation, wherein this very forgetting has become its own substantial configuration, & all ‘substantial’ truths that it might seek, reside precisely in that which has been forgot, in the history of an immobilisation whose horizons can no longer even be identified or known, but whose trauma is only repeated, as the methodical call, of what has become the most futile of identifications.