Skip to main content

Ahistorical histories of ideas: Teleological progression and Discursive formation

Portrait Source: Google Books


If you were asked which knowledge do you trust? first, which is practiced in actions, second, which is enunciated in speech, third, which is a part of oeuvre of an author, fourth, which represents a homogeneous account of ideas with strange continuity, fifth, which shows the limitations and conditions for discourse and discursive practices; strategically maneuvered to demonstrate regularity and continuity, a systemization of ideas, normalization of speech and conduct, a formalized universality, a grandiose of teleology. You may guess, where does knowledge reside? Whether knowledge is cognitive or psychological phenomenon? Whether it demonstrates the presence of an author in a setting of discourse? Whether or not all discourses are contingent, temporal, non-repetitive, a lived reality, which is lived again, but with a different orientation, in quest of regularity and continuity, which makes possible to the appearance of a teleological discourse? What significance a written note has of an author in the appearance of a systemized work, like Nietzsche wrote a few with laundry bills? What role a fanciful imagination has in the grand genre of an artist? I don't have one answer. It can't be. There are many incoherent and paradoxical thoughts; may be systemized after the practice of choosing a few regularity, for the appearance of discourse, and beneath it, the vast array of silences, remain there, live its own oblivion, wait for its moments to be a part of future discourses. History of ideas is ahistorical, discontinuous, non-circular. History is a strategic unity in Foucaudian sense, beneath it, the vast possibilities of marginal discourses appear and remain there in silences. These sentences, being written here, in a spatial and temporal dimension, are, in fact, the  lived realities for the moment, being a part of the larger setting of the theme, in which every sentences follow a few grammatical rules, every proposition is weighed at par logical structure, every sentence may or may not be referential to any independent object to represent, it may or may not symobolize what I intend to do. But above all, and beneath every sentence, there is a strategic structure, the pre-existing conditions, for the possibility of statements and speech act. My sentences may be grammatically incoherent or coherent, logically illogical or illogically logical, but these conditions are not quintessential for the possibility of discourse. It appears with a default setting of formative practices, which are lived for the moments, but thought later, criticized later, analyzed later, to cohere a possibility of knowledge, which is unlikely to be written in coherence and continuity, it is simply made as a regular progression, a strategic possibility, which appears to be revelatory and objective, but it can't be divorced from the formative practices, which make the discourse possible in the first place.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Imagination

Student: I want to excel in my life. Over the years, my graph of success is achieving a new height. I am doing hard work to become one of the smartest and richest persons on the Earth. Teacher: Wonderful! Who is  achiever and what is achieved? Student: I am the achiever. My name and fame are shining day by day.  Teacher: Who is this ‘I’? What is the material by which it is produced? Student: I is the ego which is the agent achieving successes and facing failures. Teacher: Whether ego is real or imaginary? Student: It is made of name, form, and function. Teacher: Whether name, form, and function are eternal?  Student: No, they are changing. Teacher: Anything changes does it exist? Whether these are real or merely fictitious images appearing and disappearing before the sightscreen of mind? Student: They are the images constructing my identity as a person. Teacher: Well said! What is the stuff by which these images are made of? Who is maker and what is made? Student: They ar...
Post a Comment
Read more

पिरोता जाऊँ एक माला ज़िन्दगी का

पढ़ता हूँ हर एक दिन एक ही पन्ना, हर दिन हज़ार ये मालूम पड़ते हैं। जबसे होश संभाला है एक ही पन्ना सवांरते आया हूँ, लोग इसे ज़िन्दगी कहते हैं। इसपे लिखे हर एक लब्ज़ जो मेरे मालूम पड़ते हैं, ना जाने कितने जुबां पे चढ़े होंगे। आज हम भी कुछ पल के लिए ही सही इसके सारथी हैं, जाने से पहले कुछ रंग मेरा भी इसपे चढ़ जाए, बस इसीलिए एक ही पन्ना बार बार पलटता रहता हूँ। हर कोई अनजाने किताब की तलाश में बाहर निकलता है, जिसका हर एक पन्ना वो ख़ुद है। जब ख़ुद के रंग को समझ ही ना पाया, तो भला इंद्रधनुषी किताब के क्या मायने हैं? अस्तित्व में ना जाने कितने पन्ने बिखरे पड़े हैं, बस एक से ही अवगत हो जाऊँ, उसके हर एक शब्द को चुनता जाऊँ, कुछ पल के लिये सही, पिरोता जाऊँ एक माला ज़िन्दगी का।
1 comment
Read more

Human's Rationality: Its Unfree-Freedoms

Cosmic energy is moving into various forms and patterns, its quest is to become, what Arthur Schopenhauer called 'will to live'.  (Arthur Schopenhauer, 1818). He is explicit that: “Thus the will to live everywhere preys upon itself, and in different forms is its own nourishment, till finally the human race, because it subdues all the others, regards nature as a manufactory for its own use. Yet even the human race...reveals in itself with most terrible distinctness this conflict, this variance of the will with itself…”. Every ‘will to become' is a movement, encompassing the history of past and future; the degree of rationality and its gradation are normativized by thoughts as hierarchy of souls and monads. Human being as likeness and image of God possess the highest truth, indeed! In fact, human being is the only species who possess and owns the truth, it is the only mode of being who puts truth at stake, constructs its horizons and claim of legitimacy and illegitimacy, defi...
Post a Comment
Read more