[...]politics, study physics.  ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>]  Forget the sacred, that means='lgc'>: forget the violence that founds it and forget the ="trms">religious which links men to each other. Consider the object, objects, ="trms">nature.”
="ppl">Serres='strcls'>*

...nevertheless the plague returns and there is violence

sacred ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> division of space ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> temple ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> inside ='and'>& outside ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> a dichotomized space ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> a boolean ="trms">geometry, a two-valued ="trms">ontology ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> inside ='lgc'>: ="trms">religious , outside ='lgc'>: profane ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> inside ='lgc'>: ="trms">matter , outside ='lgc'>: void ='lgc'>='lgc'>-->='qstn'>? Atom

="large lg2" stl="font-size:110%"> ="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

O="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of ="trms">geometry, construction of ="trms">geometric idealities, establishment of the first proofs, a ="trms">Greek (or Egyptian priest) miracle
='lgc'>--="ppl">Serres='lgc'>='lgc'>--> this is the same as asking='lgc'>: how one passed from one ="trms">language to another, from one type of ="trms">writing to another='qstn'>?

='strcls'>**we are always dealing with many ="trms">languages='strcls'>**

one of my contracts='lgc'>: agreement on what is noise.
I never truly made an agreement with my audience on what we might collectively agree about noise and ="trms">interference.
="lsts lst1">•mode of ="trms">communication, meaning-making, ="trms">language, ="trms">transference, transformation,
="lsts lst1">•what is the ="trms">intersection of our repertoire='qstn'>? (in ="nms">apass, particularly; each of our ="trms">mimetic preoccupations, dynamics of our violences, our mathematical sites, drawings on sand, modifiers, etc.)
='lgc'>='lgc'>==> dialogue

mathematics='lgc'>: (="trms">presents itself as) a ="trms">communication maximally purged of noise

HRN='lgc'>: human ="trms">relation-noise
='lgc'>=/= ="trms">geometry


die agonal


to which degrees ='mywrk'>my work on ="nms">ajayeb aligns or depends on the “new ="trms">language” of the inexhaustible discourse of mathematics as inherented from the ="trms">Greek ="trms">geometry into the ="trms">modern culture='qstn'>?

What are the inaugural ="trms">relation of the ="trms">geometric (metrological) ideogram to the ="trms">CG='qstn'>? And to the Egyptian priest='qstn'>?
What is compared, modeled, simulated='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•flood
="lsts lst1">•fires
="lsts lst1">•celestial fire
="lsts lst1">•catastrophes
="lsts lst1">•violence of the elements
="lsts lst1">•


="nms">ajayeb='lgc'>: doxographies (, legends and allegories) ="trms">composed in ="trms">natural ="trms">language (='qstn'>?)
='lgc'>=/= (the problem of) how to duplicate the cube ='lgc'>='lgc'>---,='lgc'>{thematized object of the complete ="trms">intersubjective ="trms">relation='lgc'>}
='lgc'>='lgc'>~=='qstn'>? alogon ='lgc'>=/= logos='lgc'>: proportion, ="trms">measured ="trms">relation, discourse;
alogon prohibits speaking

crisis and recast, ="trms">questions of archive


="frds scrmbld">Luisa, ="frds scrmbld">Foad
(the space of the ="trms">relation between) experience ='and'>& abstract ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> between sense ='and'>& purity
(an inquiry line for ="frds scrmbld">Luisa='lgc'>: try to figure out the status of pure ='lgc'>[which is impure='qstn'>? when ="trms">history changes='lgc'>])

my allegorical covers

meaning of='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•non-disproportion
="lsts lst1">•nonviolence

="ppl">Socrates='lgc'>: you are in crisis because you are ignorant of ="trms">geometry

even='lgc'>: same
odd='lgc'>: other

برهان خلف borhane kholf, irrationality of the absurd

the irrational is ="trms">mimetic


='lgc'>='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>==='lgc'>===


“before-after” temporality ="trms">narrative

="ppl">Serres's ="trms">fabulous work on the effects of the style in ="trms">science
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> styles profile from (a ="trms">sort of) stability ='strcls'>*** -they inspire disciplines and furtilize fields of research, they seizes what is at stake in ="trms">sciences

who believes that the passage from local to global is always possible='qstn'>?!
="ppl">="ppl">Lucretius answer is immediately “no”

="large lg14" stl="font-size:107%"> in ="nms">apass each of us is somehow busy with the critique of unidimensional platitude characteristics of our milieus. / Is that the global notion in our rese="trms"nttrm="search">arches='qstn'>?

I want to take it up, maybe fulfill, and modify the project sketched out in ="nms">="nms">ajayeb al makhlughat 10 centuries ago.

='at'>#my ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading act with ="nms">ajayeb is like the practice of pencil monoprint on paper on a relief surface. The patterns of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading emerge as the pencil moves gently across the paper, pressing down or not. The paper, pencil, pressure, movement, the object behind, the touch of three elements, ="trms">interactive ="trms">interfacial patterns of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading="trms">writing with ="nms">ajayeb's textual corpus='strcls'>*


” ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>] the industrialized ="trms">world is frequently condemned to considering the concrete universe as its re="trms">presentation.”
="ppl">="ppl">Stengers ='lgc'>+ P="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigogine

(='qstn'>?what do we have that helps us give up ='thdf'>the idea of a) rational ="trms">nature of the real
observation ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> ="trms">generalization
="trms">measurement ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> precision

which precisions can be achieved by other than ="trms">measurement='qstn'>?

How not to ="trms">travel through the universe like free and self-determined gods='qstn'>? (='at'>#magicians)

="ppl">="ppl">Stengers > ="ppl">Leibniz ='at'>@="frds scrmbld">Luisa='lgc'>: “movement is produced within a full ="trms">world, an ="trms">interdependent ="trms">world in which nothing can happen that has not been made possible by the state of the set of bodies ="trms">according to a harmony that determines and checks at every moment the un="trms">folding of the ="trms">different movements.”


the full and compact ="trms">nature, version of ="nms">ajayeb

='mywrk'>my work in ="nms">apass is on a theory of transformation among ="trms">languages (not about the best point of view ='lgc'>='lgc'>=/=> ="trms">system ="trms">integrated ='lgc'>='lgc'>=/=> ="trms">trajectories calculated)='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•="nms">ajayeb's ="trms">natural ="trms">language
="lsts lst1">•="trms">system ="trms">language of ="trms">differential logic
="lsts lst1">•english grammar and syntax
="lsts lst1">•organic and ="trms">intersubjective space of my peers
="lsts lst1">•old ="trms">farsi
="lsts lst1">•="trms">animal
="lsts lst1">•


“speak of” ="trms">science
“speak about” ="trms">science
“speak” ="trms">science
“speak” ="trms">="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphysics

speaking the ="trms">language of dynamics


what is still at stake in ="trms">science='lgc'>: the description of a ="trms">world of processes

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

="ppl">Lezra
In the European ="trms">imaginary, the public struggle over the “better” word makes the city (the polis) ='at'>@="nms">apass

="brkr">
="ppl">Derrida calls for patience, take care ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read on slowly. ="ppl">Kafka='lgc'>: all human errors are impatience. Radical patience, is the necessity to differ, but also to rush in precipitately, one has to make decisions='lgc'>: absolute urgency.

="trms">Literature for derrida, ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading in ='mywrk'>my works, is indis="trms">sociably bound up with ="trms">questions of politics, democracy and ="trms">responsibility, ="trms">religion, nationality and nationalism, identity and law.

E m foster, how can i tell what i think, till i see what i say.

What one finds repeatedly in derrida's work is the uncanny effect by which one is invited to sense the un="trms">folding of all his thinking starting out from anywhere, from any idea, any word, any thought that happen to be at issue. Deconstruction is the name for this='qstn'>?

="ppl">Derrida proceeds with patience and pleasure, to describe what is going on in a particular text or ="trms">situation.

Every ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading is difficult, ="ppl">Shakespeare, maulwürfe, mathematics. The difficulty of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading is in transforming the ways we are ="trms">obliged to think about those texts.

The transformation is crucially always al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready in the texts he ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reads. Describing what happens when ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading a passage of anything. Everything is in ="ppl">Shakespeare, in ="ppl">Plato, in ="ppl">Kafka. The ="trms">relation between description and transformation is uncanny.

To talk about the logics of supplement is another way of attending the deconstructive effects of the and. To put into effect new discourses, new acts. This description and transformation is deconstruction, is more than a ="trms">language and no more than a ="trms">language.

There are always ="trms">differences, tensions, paradoxes in the text, between what a text says and what a text does.

="ppl">Derrida always begins (wherever he happens to find himself) in a ="trms">specific context, which is to say in trying to engage with a ="trms">specific text or s="trms">cene of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading.

(="trms">Writing is) is winking at someone (you like)  while ="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listening to my favorite music.

A ="trms">writing that is not structurally ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">readable ='lgc'>-- iterable ='lgc'>-- beyond the death of the addressee, would not be ="trms">writing.

The supplementarity of digression, a ="trms">fictional supplementarity. ="ppl">Freud is compelled to tell a ="trms">story but in the act of doing so, he betrays the annulment or effective impossibility of this ="trms">story. Sons murder of primordial father. O="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of morality='lgc'>: earliest moral restrictions in primitive ="trms">society have been explained by us as reactions to a dead which gave those who performed it the concept of crime.

The feeling that a text is especially ="trms">written ‘for’ derrida... As if waiting for him to come along and point it out.

="ppl">Freud's ="trms">story is less the ="trms">narration of an ="trms">imaginary event than the simulacrum of ="trms">narration. ="ppl">Freud's quasi event, is at once of ="trms">fictional ="trms">narrative and as ="trms">narrative as ="trms">fictive. It is the o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of ="trms">literature at the same time as the o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of law, derrida sug="trms">gests.

="ppl">Kant, ="ppl">Freud, ="ppl">Kafka, what makes important all these thinkers for ="ppl">Derrida has to do with how each in their ="trms">different way brings out a ghostly or virtual ‘="trms">narrativity and ="trms">fiction’ at the very core of legal thought.

Law is always an idiom. An idiom is an expression with a meaning that cannot be guessed from the meanings of the individual words='lgc'>: its door concerns only you. One's ="trms">relation to the law is singular.

The drama of naming (='at'>@Sonja naming the dance, dancing the name, is she dancing the name of the dance)

john ="ppl">Keats, prospective; Williams ="ppl">Wordsworth, retrospective. Prospective work consists of hopeful preparation, anticipation of future power rather than meditative reflections on ="trms">past moments of insight and harmony. Oriented towards the future.

All i am doing today, like derrida, can be seen as a grafting (ghalameh zadan) or extension, supplement or prosthesis, an outgrowth from somewhere else, earlier on.

I will attach to the ="trms">story of maulwürfe like the shit on his head.

Recalling and reinventing ="ppl">Shakespeare, the idea is not to bring it from ="trms">past to ="trms">present, something that is al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready disjointed in time towards the future. I push the characters of ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear to a future. The deconstructive ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading of the play has to do with the opening of the future itself. It is utterly important that you do something unpre="trms">dictable for yourself. If you are in the business of hate, ="trms">love suddenly, changing tracks brings the unexplainable to the ="trms">trajectory. Going in discipline is like riding a train on rails, i am not saying to go off the track and crash or stop, but to change track experimentally and to change gear. The tracks are built for us to move in the field of thought, they don't cover the whole surface, by moving along them we can witness the new to emerge from our ="trms">interdisciplinary run.

="ppl">Derrida shows, reminds, that we can never do anything ="trms">systematically.

="trms">Monstrosity in the ="trms">story Yal-o Ejdeha by ="ppl">Shamlu. ="trms">Monsters of the deep..

my aim was to show the ="trms">monstrosity of all the characters in ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear not just Edmond. Edmond is the artist of the self. ="ppl">Shakespeare makes unacceptable characters. ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear play is intolerable itself, an encounter with the opening of the future itself. Instead of giving in to the normalizing and legitimating re="trms">presentations which identity, recognize, and reduce everything too quickly, why not rather be ="trms">interested in theoretical ="trms">monsters, in ="trms">monstrosities which announce themselves in theoretical ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading.

The proper significance is simply and ="trms">categorically deferred forever, insistent strangeness of the force of deferral, (effecting what derrida has called) the singularity of the here and now.

“explained” is “explained away.”

unreasonable is not concealed necessarily.

Duty to ir="trms">responsibility

any phantasmatic organization, whether collective or individual, is the invention of a ="trms">drug, or of a ="trms">rhetoric of ="trms">drugs, be it aphrodisiac or not.
In talk, i ="trms">respond to the how of a ="trms">poem or text ="trms">dictating a kind of ad="trms">dictive ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading or desire in the ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reader.

The project of a text, the project of a theory

="trms">according to ="ppl">Freud, when the work of mourning is completed the ego becomes free and uninhabited again. Funeral speeches and related ="trms">writings, are possibilities that structures the movement of identification. Mourning is the ="trms">interiorization of the dead other, also its contrary. Politics is figured as first and foremost an organization of the time and space of mourning.

After him, it is all war and crumbling.

We know better than ever today that the dead must be able to work. And to cause to work, perhaps more than ever.


The meaning of meaning ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>]

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]deconstruction='lgc'>: a ="trms">sort of strategic device ='lgc'>+ opening ="trms">onto its own ="trms">abyss (one of the most influential approaches to texts) ='lgc'>=/= ="trms">method

="ppl">Campbell ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="ppl">Derridean deconstruction is visual
="ppl">Derrida's thinking helps us take images ="trms">seriously (as philosophical artefacts)
="lsts lst1">•organizational image='lgc'>: the ="trms">aesthetic ambassador for the organization (it visualizes ='lgc'>+ gives ="trms">aesthetic value to it)
="lsts lst1">•advertisement='lgc'>: preeminent image of production and ="trms">consumption of the global economy

image='lgc'> = logocentric vision ='lgc'>--need='lgc'>='lgc'>--> problematizing ='lgc'>=/= solutionizing


="prgrph">-is there a spirit of critique that is not liberatory in purpose='qstn'>?

="ppl">Derridean deconstruction='lgc'>: a critical approach ='lgc'>--draw='lgc'>='lgc'>--> attention to the operations of ="trms">method itself (='lgc'>=/= ="trms">method)='lgc'>:
='lgc'>[='lgc'>~='qstn'>? feedback types:='lgc'>]
="lstsrd">1. ="trms">interventionist ='lgc'>--advocate='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">different/contradictory ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">readings (of images)
="lstsrd">2. radical ='lgc'>--="trms">interest='lgc'>='lgc'>--> roots of meaning-making activity
="lstsrd">3. liberatory ='lgc'>--seek='lgc'>='lgc'>--> evoke justice (forcing an image to account for itself)
="lstsrd">4. ethical ='lgc'>--concern='lgc'>='lgc'>--> what is overlooked
="lstsrd">5. innovative (productive) ='lgc'>--promote='lgc'>='lgc'>--> non-traditional ways of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading (of ="trms">interpretting, of finding meaning)


intellectual climate in 1960s ='lgc'>='lgc'>==>
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">Derrida's deconstruction ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> bringing Saussure's own work to its own radical paradoxical con="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusion
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">="ppl">Foucault's ="trms"nttrm="search">archeological approach ='lgc'>[="trms">question ='thdf'>the idea that human is an a ="trms">priori ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> how humans have been diagnosed in psychiatry and (ab)normalized in criminal and sexual ='strcls'>*discourses='strcls'>* ='lgc'>==produce='lgc'>='lgc'>==> reality effects at the level of body='lgc'>]
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">Barthes's ="trms">semiology ='lgc'>=/= ='thdf'>the idea that the ="trms">author is the single and ="trms">authoritative source of meaning


="ppl">Derrida's ="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list of concepts='lgc'>:
differance
retrait
revenant
dissemination
deconstruction
hymen
invagination
archiécriture
supplement
khora
pharmakon
scrypt
parergon
subjectile
='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>--> levers applying torque گشتاور and displacement in the textual machinery


deconstruction
='lgc'>='lgc'>==> counter-intuitive analyses
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> pre="trms">supposes a detailed knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge of construction (one must become intimate with the ways something is assembled) ='lgc'>[='lgc'>=/= cart blanche for meaning='lgc'>]
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (="frds scrmbld">Jassem's style of) ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading otherwise='lgc'>: passing the classical discipline (='lgc'>=/= abandon, jettison it) to explore what it omits, forgets, ex="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">cludes, expels, marginalizes, dismisses, ignores, scorns, slights, takes too lightly, waves off, not ="trms">serious enough

="lsts lst1">•="trms">anthropcentric truth='lgc'>: a truth that appears to human beings
="lsts lst1">•="trms">instrumental truth='lgc'>: a truth aimed at getting things done (making things work)
="lsts lst1">•teleological truth='lgc'>: a truth which closes debate and fastens meaning

="large lg3" stl="font-size:110%">
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]visual='lgc'> = a form of control (='lgc'><='lgc'>--="ppl">Campbell='lgc'>-- this aspect makes it central to organizational analyses) ='lgc'><='lgc'>==
="lstsrd">1. ='strcls'>*visual organizes reality by claiming status as the preeminent form of re="trms">presentation='strcls'>* (vision is the dominant tyrannical ="trms">phenomenology of the contemporary ="trms">world ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> all forms of knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge can be ="trms">presented visually)
="lstsrd">2. ='strcls'>*conflation of the ‘seen='lgc'> = known’='strcls'>* ='lgc'>: “vision='lgc'> = ways of knowing='lgc'> = experiencing the ="trms">world” (='lgc'><='lgc'>-- ="trms">imagined inseparable) ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> ='thdf'>the idea that depiction/picturing/seeing are ubiquitous features of the process by which most human beings come to know the ="trms">world as it really is for them
="lstsrd">3. ='strcls'>*visual organizes the ="trms">worldview of the seer='strcls'>* ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> visual is at its most powerful when it is most invisble (='thdf'>for example ="trms">scientific diagrams, mapping ='at'>@="nms">apass)

='strcls'>***instances of visual control='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•uniforms
="lsts lst1">•packaging
="lsts lst1">•computer software packages
="lsts lst1">•brand logos
="lsts lst1">•buildings
="lsts lst1">•websites ='at'>@="nms">apass
="lsts lst1">•management reports
="lsts lst1">•staff
="lsts lst1">•servicescapes ='lgc'>[an environment where the first/primary perceived aspect is service='lgc'>]
="lsts lst1">•


="large lg4" stl="font-size:112%"> harmful, deficient, deformed, secondary ='lgc'>=/= superman, supergirl

logocentrism='lgc'>: letting the logic lead the letter ='lgc'>--="ppl">Campbell='lgc'>='lgc'>--> images are logocentric in that they create meaning by appealing to a central apparently undeconstructible ="trms">system of ="trms">authoritative truth (appealing to sources of transcendence outside of the image) ='lgc'>[='lgc'>='lgc'>--> for example forensic architecture images ='lgc'>=/= ="ppl">Derrida's ='strcls'>*there is nothing outside of the text='strcls'>*='lgc'>]
="lsts lst1">•in investigating an image we often posses a logocentric vision, drawing it into convergence, making it coherent and giving it a non-contradictory and singularly ="trms">authoritative meaning


='lgc'>[title='lgc'>]
ruined coherent ="trms">heritage


="large lg5" stl="font-size:148%"> there is no escaping the enclosure of (logocentrism of western tradition of) ="trms">="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphysics ='lgc'><='lgc'>-- we can critically engage it from within

bricolage
bricoleur ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> one is participating in the intellectual ="trms">heritage one is critiqing

death of man
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">Barthes ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> dea[...]