/lit/ - Literature

>>11682976
>Isn't the worship of capital like... the most anthropocentric you could get though?

not for land. he roots for capital because it is inhuman, because he wants the intelligence escape/intelligence explosion. i think - again, these are only my own fuckface opinions (and, fwiw, i don't agree with everything land says, either) - capital *is* the critique and it is working with the raw material, at this point, which is humanity. anthropocentrism for him means, basically, leftism and all its variants. he wants modernity - once the enemy - to be able to escape from the clutches of sweaty primitivists who know not what they want.

this is a pretty rough precis of what he thinks, but i think it's more or less appropriate. landian capital *is* intelligence by way of technology: the computer that processes desire. smash kant and marx together and in place of spirit-as-capital (hegel + marx) you get capital-as-spirit (teleoplexy). you could almost call him an orthodox marxist...just that he's been through the black hole and back and decided now that capital itself is the revolution and humanity the oppressor. in so many words.

i know this sounds crazy, as in: why the fuck would anybody think that, let alone root for it? and it's not like i stay up at night praying for this to come true. it's just a thesis i find kind of interesting to think about. and it is basically what heidegger predicted also, i think:

>technological advance will move faster and faster and can never be stopped. In all areas of his existence, man will be encircled ever more tightly by the forces of technology. These forces, which everywhere and every minute claim, enchain, and drag along, press and impose upon man under the form of some technical contrivance or other-these forces, since man has not made them, have moved long since beyond his will and have outgrown his capacity for decision.

i take these as points of departure, though, not necessarily as gospel truths.

>Or does the zombie quality preclude that?
i don't know what the zombie quality means in this context.

>>11678757
i mean he was doing a fuckload of drugs at the time. in some of the essays it shows and in some it doesn't. personally i skip over the crazy stuff, since the lucid essays in there are well worth the price of admission.

http://divus.cc/london/en/article/nick-land-ein-experiment-im-inhumanismus

>>11678758
just read FN. if you are familiar with kant/marx/deleuze it will help but i'd say just go for it. there's lots of other stuff at r/theoryfiction too you can read up on (the overy and greenspan theses especially).

https://www.reddit.com/r/theoryfiction/