Is today the end or has the beginning started already?

13 03 2011

2298035932_b58630cae8

Is time like an alley where we reach the dead end at this time of year ?

Or is it like a desert where one set out an imaginary post and decide –once he feels he has traveled enough– that it’s time to head to another horizon ?

No matter.  The end ends when everything ends, so a wise man said.

Every moment is a new beginning. And an end exist merely to remind us that other things have started and are waiting for completion.

May we all be strong, resourceful, patient and smart enough to keep making new beginnings.

Happy New Year





Why Israel is an Anti-Semetic State, What can we teach ourselves about Racism by being Racist, and Other Controversial Topics

13 03 2011

…This type of ‘full speech’ and honesty is championed by Žižek. He shares a number of ‘weaknesses’ with Nietzsche; one being his anti-Semitism. It has been argued that Nietzsche is not an anti-Semite. However, I would argue, on the basis of my own interpretation, that he is. Not in that he actually hates the Jews as a race and wants to exterminate them but rather on the basis of a self-recognized symptomatic antagonism towards them. True, a project similar to Oppel’s could be undertaken to prove once and for all that Nietzsche is not an anti-Semite. However, this I believe would undermine the value of honesty in Nietzsche’s thought. Žižek, for instance, is obsessed with the character of ‘the Jew’ to the point of creating bizarre Levi-Straussian/Lacanian diagrams and mathemes to describe anti-Semitism and its execution in all its nuances. In one notable instance in his book In Defense of Lost Causes he describes an industrious Jew rising out of a destitute economic situation by selling overstocked human blood and enriching it with nutrients. He recalls his first reaction: “Typical Jews! Even in the worst gulag, the moment they are given a minimum of freedom and space for maneuver, they start trading –in human blood!”. This starts a chain of associations and a rigorous analysis of anti-Semitism that he continually comes back to. The anti-Semitism he is critiquing is obviously his own (which he believes is representative of his backwater upbringing in the former Yugoslavia). The fruit of this analysis is not only in the therapeutic value of the expression of his racism but, through its full articulation and expression, a rigorous theory and the emergence of a nimble mind that is able to identify patterns and executions of anti-Semitism (and racism in general) in all of its forms. This can be found in his critique of multiculturalism, which for him is the site of a repressed politically correct racism. For instance, in The Fragile Absolute, Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy worth Fighting For? he states:

Since the Balkans are geographically apart of Europe, populated by white people, racist cliché’s which nobody today, in our Politically Correct times, would dare apply to African or Asian people can be freely attributed to Balkan people: political struggles in the Balkans are compared to ridiculous operetta plots; Ceauşescu was presented as a contemporary reincarnation of Count Dracula…”

In his critique of Israel in The Parallax View, for instance, he isolates a kernel of anti-Semitism in the state of Israel: it only wants certain types of Jews that can be integrated into a homogenized nation-state while certain other Jews that do not fit this category are excluded and denounced as stateless individuals with no substantial identity (even to the extent of being called ‘rogue elements’: a threat to the cohesiveness and legitimacy of their state). Calling the nation of Israel anti-Semitic is precisely the type of analysis that a Nietzschean would appreciate: it is a transvaluation of racism. When racism is repressed or ignored it finds its symptomatic expression as violence or is displaced. Žižek encourages us to examine our prejudices and articulate them fully. His argument stems from psychoanalysis: our orientation towards the object of our racist hatred may well be our fundamental orientation towards the Other finding its expression in a repressed form. Further, Nietzsche argues this point himself in the quote at the start of this essay: it offers the opportunity for self-knowledge. If Neitzsche’s anti-Semitism is not identified as such and investigated than the opportunity for a new orientation towards race is elided in his theory. Nietzsche offers us a way of navigating the universal stereotypes and tropes of nationality and race by playing with them, re-signifying them, de and then re-hierarchizing them until we have a conception of an ideal transnational subject that is a particularity in their Otherness (not being viewed as a race or nationality) and an unsublimated execution of the will-to-power (I am referring here to the “Peoples and Fatherlands” section of Beyond Good and Evil).

Learning transforms us: it acts as all nourishment does, doing more than just ‘keeping us going’ –as physiologists know. But at the bottom of everyone, of course, way ‘down there’ there is something obstinately unteachable, a granite like spiritual Fatum, predetermined decisions and answers to be selected, predetermined questions. In addressing any significant problem an unchangeable ‘That is I’ has its say; for example, a thinker cannot learn to change his ideas about man and woman, but can only learn his way through to the end, only discover to the limit what is firmly ‘established’ in his mind about them. Very soon we solve certain problems with solutions that inspire strong belief distinctively in us; perhaps we will go on to call them our ‘convictions’. Later –we see in them only footprints on the way to self-knowledge, signposts to the problem that we are –more correctly, to our unteachable essence way ‘down there’.

After paying myself such a generous compliment, perhaps I may be allowed to enunciate some truths about ‘women’, assuming that henceforth people will know from the start how much these are simply –my truths.





Master morals, an Essay

13 03 2011
An Informal Defense of Master Morality, Part Three: Defense and Concluding Thoughts

Finally, the fundamental principle of master morality is this: “we have duties only towards our peers, and that we may treat those of lower rank, anything foreign, as we think best.”

Anyone who objects to master morality can go suck my existentialist dick.

There can be several objections to master morality, of which I will take two into consideration.

Firstly, a critic of master morality may object to the lack of respect towards humanity evidenced. I say that because we may “treat those of lower rank … as we think best” the level of morality of the particular treatment of any individual and indeed their status as one of a lower rank falls to the one who deemed it to be so—the is up the noble individual, and only they may submit their actions for moral evaluation. Although proponents of the categorical imperative may disagree, master morality does not have to be intrinsically “wrong.”

In order to introduce the second objection to master morality, which has much to do with the “slave’s” perspective, I must first invoke a particular quote from Nietzsche: “the slave’s eye does not readily apprehend the virtues of the powerful … he is keenly distrustful of everything the powerful revere as “good”—he would like to convince himself that even their happiness is not genuine.” We can imagine for the purpose of this argument a critic that looks at the master morality, and says that the noble must lead empty, bitter lives without integrity. Our immediate, yet less satisfying response is quite obvious: is the condition of the slave truly any better? As far as I am concerned, without having experienced the position of a master, the critic in favor of slave morality is not a competent judge of the worth of master morality. In this, our response has much in common with that of the principle of utility to the swine objection*. The other response is far more satisfying on the grounds of egoism, though harder to argue in terms of morality: it is possible that one, as a master, may find as much pleasure in one’s power as can be conceivably derived from living a life of “integrity” not solely because power is not always held at the exclusion of integrity but also because power itself can be a means to pleasure.

Also, legit conclusions are for legit schoolwork, full stop

 

*The swine objection to the principle of utility: a thing I don’t feel like explaining to you.





Improving..

13 03 2011
“People typically leave a company for one of three reasons, or a combination of them. The first is that they don’t feel a connection to the mission of the company, or sense that their work matters. The second is that they don’t really like or respect their co-workers. The third is they have a terrible boss — and this was the biggest variable…. Managers also had a much greater impact on employees’ performance and how they felt about their job than any other factor, Google found.”

Google’s 8-Point Plan to Help Managers Improve – NYTimes.com

The Google People Operations team came up with these key dissatisfaction factors after extensive internal data analysis.

To help you be a better manager, or to guide you on what to ask for as an employee, I recommend Lencioni’s variation on this topic in his book 3 Signs of a Miserable Job:

1) Anonymity:  Feeling like your manager and peers are uninterested in your life and career, that you’re not a real person to them

2) Irrelevance:  Missing the connection between your work and the satisfaction of others; ie. you don’t understand why your work matters

3) Immeasurement:  Missing tangible means for assessing success or failure.  Can you win without a score?

These are not difficult things.  Recognize people as human beings and be interested in their “context”.  And, work with them to help them understand how their work fits in the big picture and how they can measure & monitor their contribution to that big picture.   Since it’s easy to do and you get a huge payoff, why wouldn’t you?





When the impregnetable wall is shattered..

13 03 2011
Tyson900219

Mike Tyson KO’d by James ‘Buster’ Douglas, 20 years ago in Tokyo.





The other certain thing other than death and taxes is… stress

13 03 2011

Stress-1

Everyone got it.

Everyone hates it.

Everyone overreacts to it.

Everyone wants to get rid of it.

Everyone loses sleep over it.

So why not make a change.

Embrace it.

Welcome it.

Because we conquer things with open arms instead of furrowed brows.





Hello world!

13 03 2011

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!