/lit/ - Literature

>>12663945
there never was, unless i am mistaken, anything like a Freudian *ethics* (or am i wrong?) that was supplied by Lacan, who brought his own readings of Hegel, Kojeve, Heidegger and others to bear on Freud's thought, and he came up with something pretty captivating.

how crazy is it to look at /acc stuff in the same way? psychoanalytic theory tells us that Desire, unconscious Desire, is the desire of the other, full stop period. what Landian stuff does is posit a view of the unconscious wholly manifested as capitalism, and bringing itself out into the world (ZeroHP had that remarkable phrase, 'the encephalization of capital'). this is i think what's happening, although i admit that it is kind of darkly romantic in that sense.

but how else do you want to look at this phenomenon? something is assembling here, guys like Musk or those anonymous execs at Facebook and elsewhere aren't suggesting AI isn't going to happen, they're wondering how to manage its appearance so that it doesn't completely faceroll us all. this to me is about as much of a thing to get hyped about in philosophy as anything, a genuine speculative opportunity and epistemological break. AI makes philosophy great again in the most unironic ways, and it's a good thing too, because the twentieth century was equal parts luxury cruise and total fucking panic-inducing nightmare.

civilization is probably worth preserving, and is it really so crazy to posit Land as a kind of Marxist-Freudian, in the weirdest of all possible ways? you can't escape from capital any more than you can escape from your own unconscious drives and desires, so you had might as well just get used to them (and to those of the next guy too). we had more Revolution in the 20C than you could shake a stick at, and the only one that made it out was the capitalist one. wat do?

>>12663973
pretty much