P. 1
Badiou, Alain - On_the_Truth

Badiou, Alain - On_the_Truth

|Views: 2|Likes:
Published by mrs_menard
alan badiou, philosophy, truth, badiou, ethics, communism - discussion of truth by a preeminent philosopher
alan badiou, philosophy, truth, badiou, ethics, communism - discussion of truth by a preeminent philosopher

More info:

Published by: mrs_menard on Nov 19, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





On the Truth-Process: An open lecture by Alain Badiou, August 2002

Schirmacher: Those of you who have heard him already know that he is 'like a rock', as they say, still fighting for the relevance of philosophy. Everyone abandoned Plato, abandoned Paul, everyone abandoned the history of philosophy, and at the same time he was saying 'No way, we need this!' ow can he say this at the same time as all the deconstruction and !uestioning of philosophy which followed after eidegger's studies of its history" #adiou was a student, friend and opponent to those who wanted to proclaim the end of philosophy, but although he is fighting for something like truth, he is not ignorant or naive$he is still on the side of Plato, but with a little smile, certainly%& am very glad that you have a chance to hear his version of philosophy and an opportunity to ask him, to attack him, and to think with him, because thinking is what we all have in common, that we think, that should be our battle cry.$'et's think with (lain #adiou. Badiou: )ur epoch is most certainly the epoch of rupture, in light of all that 'acoue* 'abarthe has shown to depend on the motive of mimesis. )ne of the forms of this motive which e+plicitly attaches truth to imitation is to conceive of truth as a relation, a relation of appropriateness between the intellect and the thing intellected. ( relation of ade!uation which always supposes, as eidegger very well understood, the truth to be locali,able in the form of a proposition. -odern philosophy is a criticism of truth as ade!uation. Truth is not limited to the form of .udgment. eidegger suggests that it is a historic destiny. & will start from the following idea/ Truth is first of all something new. 0hat transmits, what repeats, we shall call knowledge. 1istinguishing truth from knowledge is essential. &t is a distinction already made in the work of 2ant, between reason and understanding, and it is as you know a capital distinction for eidegger, who distinguishes truth as aletheia, and understanding as cognition, science, techne. (letheia is always properly a beginning. Techne is always a continuation, an application, a repetition. &t is the reason why eidegger says that the poet of truth is always the poet of a sort of morning of the world. & !uote eidegger/ 'The poet always speaks as if the being was e+pressed for the first time.' &f all truth is something new,

incalculable. )r the 3rench revolution of 5678. decide that this sentence is true or false. this a+iom was formulated in a pure choice.ect of a truth demands the indiscernible. with 4alileo. Truth must be submitted to thought not as . the world of 9ophocles is a sub. This begins the infinite procedure of verification of the Truth. ( sub. indiscernible.ect of the event must appear.es the pure point of the sub. it finds its act in a finite sub. and so it is then an absolutely pure choice. The indiscernible organi. & call it an event.ect. &t began with an undecidable event. of theatrical tragedy.' &f you can.ects of this infinite truth. there must be a supplement. point by point. Nothing regulates its cause.ectivity of their defense. the scientific truth decided by 4alileo is pursued into infinity/ the laws of physics which have been successfully invented are finite sub. it is concerned only with what already is.ect begins with what fi+es an undecidable event because it takes a chance of deciding it. although this work is finite. #ut what is a pure choice" ( choice without a concept.ect is a throw of the dice which does not abolish chance but accomplishes it as a verification of the a+iom which founds it.ect is constituted by a sentence in the form of a wager/ this sentence is as follows. E+amples/ The appearance. a pure choice in what before it is indiscernible.ect on one side and the indiscernible on the other. This is why the truth begins with an a+iom of truth.ect of this infinite truth. &t is clear that this subset is infinite. it is beyond what it is. Take the sentence 'This event belongs to the situation. 9ince the a+iom which supports it has arbitrated it outside of any rule of established knowledge. The eruption. This schema represents the becoming of a truth. The fact that the event is undecidable imposes the constraint that the sub. The aim of my talk is only to e+plain the schema. it invests the situation with successive choices.what is the essential philosophic problem pertaining to truth" &t is the problem of its appearance and its becoming. something must happen. There is a connection between the sub. with (eschylus.' ( sub. confronted by the indiscernible. the event will not be an event. these choices outline the contour of a subset of the situation. Nothing permits us to say ' ere begins the truth. &t's the e+ercise of fidelity. &t is a pure choice/ this term.udgment or proposition but as a process in the real. 3or the process of truth to begin. This truth begins with the event of (eschylus. This work is a creation. &t will be calculable within the situation. nothing to identify the one by which the verification of the conse!uences of the a+iom will first pass. (n event is linked to the notion of the undecidable. 9uch a sub. 'This has taken place. permits the other. tragedy itself as an artistic truth continues into infinity. this verifying course continues.ect for the artistic truth which is the 4reek tragedy. free from any other presupposition than having to choose. The work of 9ophocles is a finite sub. but to which & shall be faithful.ect is what disappears between two indiscernibles.ect in the process of verifying a truth. (n amorous encounter which changes a whole life. a decision to say that the event has taken place. &t's obviously a choice confronted with two indiscernible terms. 3or e+ample. which & can neither calculate nor demonstrate. it is certain that the choice of having the verification pass for one over the other can find no support in the ob. &t's the e+amination within the situation of the conse!uences of the a+iom which decides the Event. committed by chance. 0e continue with the process of a truth. yet. owever. &t is then absolutely finite. 3or truth to affirm its newness. ( truth appears in its newness because an eventful supplement interrupts repetition. This supplement is committed to chance$it is unpredictable. 2nowledge as such only gives us repetition. that it remains interminable. and little by little. using the rules of established knowledge.' ( wager will have to be made. &n the same way. &t begins with a decision. of mathematical physics. This means that the sub. 9uch is the local act of a truth/ it consists in a pure choice between indiscernibles. 0hat was decided concerning the undecidable event must pass by this term. with no indication marking the proposed terms. ( sub. but if no formation of language discerns two terms of a situation. it can be said that if we supposed it was to be ended. Two terms are indiscernible if no formation of language permits their distinction. it would ineluctably be a subset that no .

owever. 9tarting with such a fiction. 0e have a knowledge of the generic act and of the infinity of a truth. '& will always love you'. there does not e+ist after 4alileo a closed and unified subset of knowledge that we could call physics. will have composed.able subset that can neither be constructed or named within the language of the situation. &f we can force all the bits of knowledge concerned.' &t's a finite declaration. but the potency. the verified terms compose or rather. if & am the sub. and a pure choice. &t's an important point. The #eing of the truth of the physical is that it is a generic subset of knowledge.ect can make the hypothesis of the situation where the truth of which the sub. but a strong fiction. & call the anticipating hypothesis a forcing. is generic. &t is an untotali. 4alileo could make the hypothesis that all nature can be written in mathematical language. &ndiscernible in its act or sub. &ts always a possibility for the sub. while in infinite anticipation of complete truth there is something like power. there were all sorts of revolutionary politics. The being of a truth is a generic subset of knowledge. practice. :onse!uently. . but there is no uni!ue political formula which could totali.ect of truth. the course of the truth will have to be secretly governed by a law. The indiscernibles where the sub. is total.ect to anticipate the totali. The construction of truth is made by a choice within the indiscernible< it is made locally within the finite. 3rom this anticipation. for e+ample. which is e+actly the hypothesis of a complete physics. but '& will always love you' is a forcing and an anticipation. it's a fiction. we can know formally that the truth will always have taken place as a generic infinity. and generally they do say.predicate unifies.ation.ect a truth is generic in its result. &nvention and creation remain incalculable. owever. There e+ists an infinite and open set of laws and e+periments. 3or e+ample. There is no law of physical laws. 3rom this hypothesis. &t forces a new bit of knowledge in the situation of love. &n the same way. &f the construction of a truth can be resumed by an established property. for e+ample. knowing if such a potency of anticipation.ation but as a fiction. 9uch subsets are called generic subsets. there is no predicate for it. because truth is uncompletable. from the point of view of sub. 9o in a finite choice there is only the construction of a truth. after the 5678 revolution in 3rance. but we can't have a uni!ue formula for the subset because it's generic. 9o the path of a truth cannot coincide in infinity with any concept at all. if we suppose it to be terminated. &t is withdrawn from any unification by a uni!ue predicate. a sub.ective point. '& love you. 9omeone in love can say.ation not as a real totali. Thus the possible fictioning of the effects of its having*took*place is possible. both infinite and indistinct. he forces his (ristotelian adversary to abandon his position. ( completed truth is a hypothesis. no superior understanding. 0hat happens is only that we can anticipate the idea of a completed generic truth. he or she forces the other to come to know him or her and to treat him or her differently$a new situation of the becoming of the love itself is created. The construction of a truth is. & can force some bits of knowledge without verifying this knowledge. the romantic problem of absolute love. but the potency of a truth.ou have no presentation of the completeness of a truth. The set called 'revolutionary politics' is a generic truth of political understanding. Thus. Even if we supposed this set to be terminated. no uni!ue formula of language could resume it. &t is. The generic #eing of a truth as a generic subset of the situation is never presented. which is the anticipating hypothesis of the truth of infinite love.ect of the truth. but you can anticipate the subset's totali.e these revolutionary politics. depends on the hypothetical forcing. .ect is a local point will have completed its generic totali. not the construction. no such law e+ists and there is no god of truths. &t is in fact purely impossible that a succession of pure choices could engender a subset which could be unified under predication. The sub.ect finds its acts will have to be in reality discerned by some superior understanding. art and so on. a generic subset of the situation. or in its being.ation. The problem is knowing the e+tension of that sort of power of a truth. if we supposed infinite totali. The forcing is the powerful fiction of a completed truth. then the potency is total. 0e shall say that truth.ation of a generic being of that truth.

&f you have the temptation to force the point of non*contradiction. 3or mathematical truth. a forcing of nomination at the point of the unnamable. however. and it's very important to distinguish the pure !uestion of the construction of a truth across finite choices. The desire in fiction to suppress the >nnamable. second. 3or e+ample. without restriction. that is. which is in . but as you know the great mathematician 4odel showed that it is impossible to demonstrate within a mathematical theory that this theory is noncontradictory. & call this point the 'unnamable' of the situation. is the term that fi+es the limit of the potency of a truth. non*contradiction is the limit of the potency of mathematics. The unnamable is then something like the proper of the proper. The condition of evil is much rather the truth*process. &n all cases the problem concerns the e+tension of anticipatory forcing. he is saying that all elements of nature have a mathematical name possible in the situation. then. without a name from the point of view of the construction of a truth. name and force into knowledge all the elements that this truth concerns" ow far does the anticipating potency of generic infinity go" -y answer is that there is always in any situation a real point that resists this potency. :onse!uently. to name all terms. being that which is e+cluded. so intimate in the situation that it doesn't even tolerate having a proper name. Evil is something immanent to truth. so proper in its propriety.es to be said. :onse!uently. within the eyes of a truth. &n the pure presence that no knowledge can circumscribe. a reasonable ethic of mathematics is not to wish to force the point. The unnamable. an anticipation. you destroy mathematical consistency itself. 'et's take an e+ample. when 4alileo says that all nature can be written in mathematical language. >sually it is said that Evil is lies. 3rom the point of view of the truth*process. for if a mathematical theory is contradictory. we have a new proper name for all elements in a situation. the unnamable is something like the ine+pressible real of everything that a truth authori. frees the destructive capacity contained in all truth. never has a name. (s can be seen with science or with totalitarianism there is always a desire for the omnipotence of truth.ect of a truth. from the finite sub. The forcing of the unnamable is always a disaster. because the limit is the point where something is so =eal for the truth that there isn't a name in the field of truth*construction. &t is properly the real of the mathematical. to name at any price. without limitation. pure deduction. cannot force the non*contradiction of mathematics. brutality. the =eal of mathematical theory is noncontradiction. Evil is the will to name at any price. is difficult to hold. it is destroyed. ignorance. The mathematical is. without the point of >nnamable. &t is the action of forcing to give a name to all the terms of a situation. as you know. and not something e+terior to it. animality and so on. the non*contradiction of the mathematical is the limiting point of the potency of mathematical truth. an artificial nomination of that which is without name. ere lies the root of evil.&t's the political problem of totalitarianism. ( mathematical truth. 0e always suppose that it contains no contradiction. This !uestion can be e+pressed simply thus/ :an we. To accept the ethical is to accept that mathematical truth is never complete. The unnamable is the point where the situation in its most intimate being is submitted to thought and not to knowledge. the proper of the proper. &t is nothing. There is evil only insofar as there is an action of truth. &t doesn't have a proper name because it is the proper of the proper$it is so singular in its singularity. thus we will say then that non*contradiction is the unnamable of the mathematical. deadly stupidity. This reasonable ethic. & propose a definition of evil. because within the theory we can't demonstrate that the theory is noncontradictory. The hypothesis of the point of the unnamable is that there is always one point without that sort of name. and the !uestion of the potency of a truth which is always the !uestion of infinite anticipation of a complete truth and the forcing of bits of knowledge. 9o first. it remains unforce*able. &t is the point that within the situation. thus the limit of a potency of a truth is finally something like the =eal of truth itself. The destructive capacity of truth is the potency of truth across the fiction of the complete truth$which is without limitation.

and which begins with a singular event. Truth itself is generic and untotali. political. The poet investigates the unnamable in his e+ploration of the limits of the force and potency of language. for ethic reasons. 0e can also say that one of the aims of contemporary poetics is to found in language a point of the indiscernible between prose and poem. 0e can also say that the !uestion is the relation. of the indiscernible. and more ethically. what is e+actly the potency of a truth and the disaster when the potency is without limitation. yet is also something the anticipation of which is universal. the sub. undecidable. and of the sub. &t is clear for a 3renchman that the events of -ay ?@ continue today to comprise an unattested anonymous promise. the undecidability of an event and the suspension of its name are features of politics that are particularly active today. To contain evil the potency of the true must be measured$what helps us is the rigorous study of the negative characters of the powers of truth/ The event is undecidable. and the halting point of its potency is the unnamable. and naturally the !uestion of the relation between construction and potency is the !uestion of the relation between a truth's singularity and the universal anticipation of that truth. and of truth. of a !uality abstracted from any predicate$so it's possible to speak of a generic politics. as far as its powers are concerned. the unnamable se+ual.ect is linked to the indiscernible. with or without the name of truth. -y final point is the relation. because philosophy finally is always the construction of some concept of truth. because if something isn't absolutely true it isn't true at all. The ethic of truth resides entirely in a sort of caution. The theory of indiscernibles is in itself an entire mathematical theory. and a warfield of prose such as 9amuel #eckett's. The theory of the generic is at the bottom of the ultimate forms of the logic of sets. because a truth is e+actly that< something which is absolutely singular.ect. The modern politics of emancipation freed from the dialectic scheme of classes and parties has as its aim something like a generic democracy. This study of the four negative categories. the general concept of truth is useful to evaluate it. The effect of the undecidable. in being attentive to the relation or disrelation between the construction of a truth and its potency. a promotion of the commonplace. in a truth's construction. the unnamable is the !uestion of the mathematician who looks for the undefinables of a structure. even the 5678 revolution or the #olshevik revolution of 5756 remain partly undecided as to what they prescribe for philosophy. tormented by what love comports. and that that sort of study is finally also the study of what is the construction of a truth. mathematical or artistic $there is a relation between philosophy on one side and the general !uestion of the ethics of a specific truth on the other. is that by which we take the measure of what our times are capable of. which tried by successive subtraction to designate the naked e+istence of generic humanity. indiscernible. and of the generic. must admit the unnamable as a limitation of its powers. The construction of a concept of truth is the real of philosophy. or else the effect of the event.subtraction to the potency of the truth. or between image and thought.able. Their philosophical study is. owever. 9o a truth is a mi+ture in a real process of singularity and universality. The construction of a concept of truth is useful to evaluate the potency of a singular truth. politics and so on. and the path of truth is something across these four negative categories. and it's also the !uestion for the person in love. connection or contradiction between truth and multiplicity$what e+actly is the relation between a truth as a truth and multiplicity" )ur e+perience is that something true must be absolutely true. mathematics. Thus the ethic of truth. &n addition to being a framework for contemporary poetics. This gives us four negative categories. absoluteness is a predicate of truth. between singularity and universality. The connection between something absolutely true and something absolutely open is the real . logic. 9o you can see the study of the four categories is really a strong activity in all fields of modern thought/ prose. generic and unnamable can be nourished also by thought$events which shape our times/ 3or e+ample. 9ince the ethics of a truth is the !uestion of the relation between the truth's construction and its potency. capital. poetry.

then it's evil. not forcing a bit of the knowledge. because we are not in the dream of a 4reat )ne. 9o now let us hear some more . etc. #y what" #y truth. without the perfection of some truths. what have you done that eidegger couldn't do" . if it's evil. That's one interpretation here. Truth is always the possibility of its proper destruction.udgment here. which is at least what eidegger is not saying. & !uote/ '0e live in a constellation of patches and of pitches not in a single world in sayings said well.ect of the truth. & would agree with you. 9o this sort of coercion is also a !uestion of the possible continuation of truth's construction. Take eidegger. '& want to have a name again. you really disappointed me%& was e+pecting an attack on what others have said here so far. this tendency in our investigation. this challenging of the unknown to say. it's the destruction of the condition of truth itself. so what is not eidegger here. but it seems that we have so much in common that it's embarrassing.ust do it anyway. and so we have to accept that the world is pure multiplicity .ou certainly went into how this revealing and concealing is really working as a path. not . and in speech as in a page of poetry thinkers without final thoughts in an always incipient cosmos.ect of the truth. with anarchy but also with perfection. this forcing. this forcing. but forcing a total knowledge. the destruction. to complete. what makes us evil" 0hat is it in us which cannot stop us in forcing" 0e know it's wrong and we . in scientific invention.!uestion of the relation between construction and potency. but that sort of conse!uence is the destruction of truth. because it's the destruction of the real point of the field. with pure multiplicity but some truths. The title of the poem is very appropriate to our situation because it is Auly -ontaigne. & don't believe in any . to find what you have said that is new for us.eah%(lain. but & would ask myself. to perfect. when we are in the necessity of forcing some bits of knowledge from the point of view of the newness of the truth. the interplay between revealing and concealing.ust something which is a play in front of us. -y thesis is that a forcing all the field of elements is real disaster. but we have to work hard now to find the distinction. but it's what & want. and so on% and that sort of world. our life would be such a boring thing. evil is something we couldn't live without.' #ut how come" Badiou: &t's a !uestion of the disproportion between truth and the sub. so much in common here%and what you gave in other classes was always eidegger's aletheia. &t's a temptation of complete forcing. without this perfection. you know.ectivity with the truth itself. 9o evil is not actually evil. it's always a possibility. &t's very difficult. to have simultaneously the conviction of the pure multiplicity but also the conviction that there are some real and absolute truths in artistic production. between finite and infinite. that's 'yotard. on the other hand. . however.ective choice.ective personal moment to it. but not. &t sounds like eidegger. -aybe if there is something strong in us. in music on the piano. &t's not a moral !uestion but one of destroying the point of the real which is finally the point of the real of the truth itself. which we live in our lives and which has a very singular sub. philosophical.' Schirmacher: . & conclude with a friendship. in poetry. is like the world in a poem by 0allace 9tevens. There is something infinite in the generic construction of truth and there is always something finite in the sub. There is a simple e+planation for that sort of movement. 9o to ask you a difficult !uestion. 0e prescribe a philosophical world which is pure multiplicity on one side. a temptation. it has also a great truth to it. to identify our sub.ou said it was evil. &t will be my conclusion. in love. Thus the disaster. is a possible conse!uence of the truth. in our thinking. to something which is infinite in the truth. with peace between philosophy and poetry. so when we are in anticipation. we have fighting for the honor of the name by not naming. to find all words. &t's true that there is something in truth which is bigger than the sub.

it's relative to the singularity of a truth*process. the model and design of it. The event is real. &f you figure into your thinking here that your para*system would also pass away and be replaced with yet another. the response will be savage. & was thinking of your system in relation to the supreme fiction.ect is something real but not a point of real like the event or the unnamable. &t must be abstract. it gives pleasure. &t must give pleasure. it's perfectly e!ual to another proposition. & am very glad for the first part of your !uestion. about the relation between the status of the fictional and the status of the truth. Audience: -y !uestion has two parts/ 3irst.ou know. &t's the schema of the path of the truth. because & think the period between the middle of the 57th century and nowadays is a period where poetry is essential. the event. The second part of your !uestion/ Naturally.ust a schema. . 9o it's possible that in another process of truth that the point of unnamable will be in fact name* able. because you have to think that something is true in your proposition. regarding the limitation of ethics to a present conte+t. there is not only negative determination. and to what e+tent as open or potential terms. but & think my theory. &n the path of a truth. &t's not conceptually refined for the moment. but the point of unnamable is a real point. but it's real. which has three elements. Badiou: . and the unnamable is a negative determination. but only from the point of view of the path.our !uestion is difficult because you can't say that yes. &t's very difficult to think you are not the last philosopher. ( complete truth is a fiction because a truth is never complete. regarding my pro+imity to 0allace 9teven's poetry. (dditionally there is the possibility of the sub. 9econd. &t's not a ontological characteristic to be unnamable. never finishes. &t seems that we have a specific philosophical concept of truth at present$ are we at the mercy of an unbridled technological movement that is changing our situation without allowing some ethical e+amination of what that movement entails" . Audience: -y !uestion is in the field of political truth. my English is not so good. &t must change$ it must account for change.!uestions. my design is . this is abstract. and how do you think the tension between the negative and the potential" Badiou: &t's a very comple+ field of !uestions. where it says something which philosophy proper cannot say. Audience: 3ive minutes into your talk & was thinking '0allace 9tevens. the event is undecidable. he's talking about 0allace 9tevens'. for e+ample. my proposition is nothing. 3or e+ample. and & am in a moment of modification of the !uestion of the presentation of truth.ect to be in the fiction of a complete truth. there is something purely real. but it must also pass away. so if & don't understand the !uestion. Thus the schema is first of all the integration of the real part of truth and the fiction part in truth. (s you talked through it all. and then you ended with 0allace 9tevens. &t's possible to modify the general structure. There is something like a fiction in the potency of a truth if the potency is forcing the situation from the idea of a complete truth. the relation between potentiality and negativity$to what e+tent do you consider the terms 'undecidable' and 'unnamable' as negative terms. the fictional as a condition of truth. and whether you consider this a schema which in a sense presents the truth as a fiction. 3irst of all the schema is not a distribution between the real and the fictional. The sub. the big problem for a philosopher is always the conviction that he is the last philosopher. but something positively real under the negative determination.

ect as finite discerns. you anticipate my response.es. that which you are demanding that & say & am not. for me. This would be the standard reproach to you.ect which makes a pure irrational decision out of nowhere. & know it's not like that. of techne is in my opinion not a very important !uestion. and & don't agree with the thesis for which the ontological destiny of human nature is finitude.ect is a finite point of the infinite path of a truth. -a+. . There are always technical !uestions. of what field of truth we are talking. of modernity. ne+t !uestion. what is e+actly the scientific !uestion in the situation.ect is finite. 0hen & say the sub. not about technology directly and so on. this is truth. because there is no technological problem per se. a kind of 2antian reference. The sub.' or whatever. for e+ample. first of all. you should follow the a+iomatic procedure but not too far. &t's not a serious !uestion. the only signification of that point is that the sub. and after that sort of investigation you can e+amine the conse!uences of technical transformation in our world. Zi e!: & would like to ask one !uestion which & think can play a useful role in the discussion $ to begin with. who says '& love you.our position can be interpreted as yes. but you have to determine the problem like that/ first. The !uestion of ethical moderation and so on is only the !uestion of the salvation of the condition of infinity.ou have to say. in a pure ethical decision out of nowhere. the presentation you gave here did open the way towards engaging some of the standard criticisms of your work. 9o on one side. & write the sub. &t's really on the contrary/ first. are !uestions in the field of truth. beyond eidegger. what is the truth*process in some particular technological !uestion. 9o.ect is finite.ect is nothing else as the finite part of a truth$so there is not a sub. )n the other side.Badiou: The !uestion of technology. . it's a . There is no direct ethical !uestion of the relation between ethics and technology.ou have to determine the political !uestions. The !uestion is ontologically the !uestion of the relation between finite and infinite. truth is infinite. &'m almost ashamed to formulate it. only techno*political problems. the idea of total truth is a dream.ect is only the local operation of the infinity of a truth. Ethical !uestions. for me truth is generated by life techni!ue which is like all other technologies. in the finite sub. BlaughterC. what is the political framework of the !uestion. )ne of the standard criticisms is that the way you formulate the truth*process. you know what & mean. but & think it would serve well if you made clear why is it not. an indiscernible event. because the fundamental destiny of humanity is not the sub. Technology is not a real concept. in which the sub. &t's possible & am e+actly as you say & am. This is because the point of the unnamable is the point which if forced to be named destroys the complete field and so .ect but in the production of truth. but there is no capital newness in the !uestion of technology. but isn't your ultimate position. simply between 2ant and proper relativism" . yes. the !uestion engaged in a technological problem. 9o & don't agree with my own !uestion now. 9o (lain we have a few more years to make you aware how important the !uestion concerning technology is. and second. Schirmacher: (ch so. but & will ask it so you can make it clear for us. Naturally.ect which is that the sub. The real content of humanity for me is creation and invention of truths. and finally which field of truth. the scientific !uestions.ournalistic debate. and after that. (nyway. something like a predicate of the sub. you understand that & couldn't disagree more with him. &n my conviction the destiny of humanity is infinite.ect. that's the real point.ect is finite. you should always proceed with some kind of reservation. & am absolutely in contradiction with all the modern philosophy of finitude. that which is the sub. the dream of total truth inside the 2antian regulative &dea$why are you not saying that"%&f%if you are not saying that" Badiou: . you are talking about scientific truth and you have problems about the technical conse!uences of scientific truth.

The proper of the proper. 0e can isolate the unnamable by a formal procedure. that we have no word for the saying of language itself. (gamben/ & want to ask you a !uestion about the limit point of the unnamable.ou remember that the white knight says that we have no name for the name. & would say that in this sense the unnamable is not a transcendent thing. Zi e!: This limitation is not simply the fact that we don't have a name for the name$it's not a limitation of language but how we can have language. &t's not at all something ineffable. it's not something of an e+pansive nature. the !uestion is infinite creation and moderation. Schirmacher: 0hat will we do after you leave us tomorrow. finally. but lack of name for something like the real of the real. The thing for which we lack names is the name itself. but it invokes for me the !uestion whether truth can assume a commodity form. the pure real. the possibility of the infinite. but the pure real is something which is indiscernible to the pure word as well. which & believe it can. se+ual en. that evil is the will to name at any price. . religious. from the point of view of this process.destroys the possibility of infinity. Schirmacher: Thank you. reality is infinitely more comple+%stop that! 0hen you are speaking about how the generic procedure cannot name itself. Zi e!: 0hat & wanted to mention is the misunderstanding about this unnamable point. This goes with what eidegger says in a certain way.ou made a very nice phrase. &t seems to be in that perspective that the point you call unnamable is a strange point in which language and real in a way coincide. that the point is something like a point where the real and nomination are not really separated. it's a specific point. it's not at all something finite in the infinite. not lack of name for name.es. &t's nothing mystic. for e+ample it's very remarkable that in mathematics you can demonstrate that it is impossible to name the non*contradiction. preservation of the possibility of infinite creation." Zi e!: 9hoot yourself! BlaughterC Audience: .oyment has no amorous name. Thus. not a negative limitation. cannot produce itself. but its relation to language is absolutely irreducible. is that a fi+ed price" . The thing for which we have no name is language itself. Badiou: (bsolutely. 0e might recall the a+iom of the white knight in '(lice through the 'ooking 4lass'.ust approach it.oyment which is the unnamable of love. indeterminate. you know. it's not in the !uestion of relation between finite and infinite. & think it's precisely se+ual en. but on the contrary.ust a point. it's absolutely immanent. &t's a positive condition. which becomes a kind of evolutionary vulgarity. &t's not that oh my god. & prefer your second formulation. 9lavo. Badiou: . because it is lack of name. &t's . certainly. that without finite language we can . infinite. no not all. & think it's perhaps much clearer that we are maybe not all friends here. (lthough it is within the field of love's truth*process. and the limit point is properly the possibility of the impossibility of the infinite$it's the real of the infinite itself. & agree with the conviction that under the unnamable you have a real point. 9o not e+actly the name for name. if it can. the absolute real of the complete field. 3or e+ample in love. language is never complete.

it's impossible.Badiou: & think truth cannot be a pure commodity.edu 'ast modified -on. applets. and the source code is protected by >nited 9tates copyright laws and international treaty provisions. like of anything else. and e+ploitation of truths. but there can always be the e+ploitation of a truth. .egs. accompanying printed materials.ou have the possibility of e+ploitation of truths.eduMfacultyMbadiouMbadiouPtruthPprocessP8EE8. . (ll =ights =eserved. European 4raduate 9chool E49 I -edia and :ommunications I 5F@ East 6th 9t : F I New . & think there is something absolutely disinterested in truth*production. The source code is owned by the European 4raduate 9chool and is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties. because truths are something like pure creations. photographs. but you have to distinguish between production of truths. music. (ll material herein :opyright D 5776 *EF. because truth is simply something new without any possibility of e+change. of market.ect which is without proper interest. N. 55 Aul 8EEF E5/KL/L7 4-T 4-T PEF/EE< The >=' is http/MMwww. the source code must be treated like any other copyrighted material. European 4raduate 9chool E49. something which creates a new sub. video. The source code is licensed.edu. There is no market of truth. animations. and any copies you are permitted to make herein. E+ploitation is always possible but it's not in the field of truth*production$it's something like a sort of forcing. (ll right. and te+t incorporated into the source codeH. Therefore.ork. potency of truths. NuestionsMcommentsMsuggestions to infoOegs.egs. &n my opinion there is no proper possibility that the truth can become a simple commodity. title and interest in the source code Gincluding any images. are owned by the European 4raduate 9chool E49. as well as other intellectual property laws and treaties. without finality. not sold. 5EEE7 I >9( I Phone/ J5 G858H 8FK F8?6 I 3a+ J5 G?K?H L?F L58E I web/ http/MMwww.html. audio.

en philosophical works. born in =abat. >nlike many of those schooled in the antiPhumanist principles of (lthusser and 'acan.Alain Badiou. one detached from any psychological. in keeping with the implications of the event. casePbyPcase application of these conse!uences will then serve to transform the entire way the situation organi.ation concerned with direct popular intervention in a wide range of issues Gincluding immigration. invention. transfigurationH in every situation. #adiou is one of the most original 3rench philosophers today. -orocco in 57L6. Every such innovation can only begin with some sort of e+ceptional Gthough invariably ephemeralH break with the status !uo.ect is thus anyone carried by his or her fidelity to the conse!uences.arus and Natacha -ichel at the centre of '')rganisation Politi!ue. of an event. Ph"#. then. 'acan %H to the ma.ective' mediation. &nfluenced by Plato.ect of a genuine commitment. Trained as a mathematician. clarity. he remains with 9ylvain 'a. and by doing so constitute themselves as the sub. . social or 'ob. e taught at the >niversity of Paris R&&& GRincennesP 9aint 1enisH from 57?7 until 5777.es and represents itself. but reciprocally.ects of its truth. beginning from a specific time and place within a situation. he is an outspoken critic of both the analytic as well as postmodern schools of thoughts. Niet. e continues to teach a popular seminar at the :ollSge &nternational de Philosophie. (s #adiou e+plains in detail in his ma. (n event can occur at any time but not in . while a truth is nothing other than the cumulative collection of such postPevental conse!uences. pursue the stepPbyPstep transformation of that situation in line with new forms of broadly egalitarian principles. -uch of #adiou's life has been shaped by his dedication to the conse!uences of the -ay 57?@ revolt in Paris. an 'event'. in that part of the situation where for literally fundamental reasons the prevailing forms of discernment and recognition cease to have any significant purchase. labor. transformative innovation in any situation. #adiou's most general goal can be described. ( sub. to !uestion the possibility of metaphysics. egel. )nly a truth can 'induce' the sub. 'ong a leading member of >nion des . e is the author of several successful novels and plays as well as more than a do. on topics ranging from the great 'antiphilosophers' G9aintPPaul. 0ittgenstein. is philosophy seeks to e+pose and make sense of the potential of radical innovation Grevolution. ( truth then e+pands out of this 'evental site' Gsite QvQnementielH insofar as it elicits the militant conviction of certain individuals who develop the revolutionary implications of the event.sche. 'acan and 1eleu. (lain #adiou was a student at the Qcole Normale 9upQrieure in the 57FEs. The laborious. when he returned to EN9 as the :haire of the philosophy department. as rigorous as they are hapha. truths are militant processes which.or conceptual innovations of the twentieth century.ard. and eternity.or work to date L'Etre et l'événement G57@@H. and housingH. only a properly universal truth !ualifies as worthy of such a commitment.eunesses communistes de 3rance Gmar+istesPlQninistesH.e. or to !ualify the classical attributes of truth/ rigor.e. a postPparty organi. #adiou has never been tempted to celebrate the apparent end of philosophy.ust any place< an event will generally be located close to the edge of whatever !ualifies as 'void' or indistinguishable in the situation. i. can !ualify as the ade!uate vehicle for a truth. )nly a pure commitment. as the effort to e+pose and make sense of the potential for profound.

Aorge Aauregui GTranslationH. Boo!s #adiou. art and love. 3all 8EE5. -athematics is then the most 'truthful' component of science simply because. lacanian ink 57. and dogmatism. on the basis of statements that literally anyone could make or affirm. 58@ pages. through the rare commitment of those who become sub. every truth is 'founded' only on the fundamental 'inconsistency' that #adiou discerns as the e+clusive and insubstantial stuff of pure being !ua being $ the generic being of all that is simply insofar as it is.ect insofar as he or she is caught up in a materially transformative procedure of this kind. initially sparked by certain events affecting particular groups of people in particular situations. The 0ooster Press. that truth operates in the domain of consensus or communication.ation guided by a 'general will' in something like =ousseau's sense. thanks to its a+iomatic foundation in the basic postulates of set theory.ects insofar as these movements.com. The identification of suffering victims is not by itself the sufficient basis. feminist or antiPcolonial movements remain true sub. L'Ethique G577LH. These are the only four fields in which a pure sub. and not the business of bureaucratic administration or the sociali. #adiou provides his most concise overview of the generic procedures in his Manifeste pour la philosophie G57@7H. Paperback. &9#N/ 5@@@LE5E@8. Every genuinely universal principle has its origin in an active and precisely situated taking of sides< every true affirmation of the universal interest begins as divisive.ective mediation.' only becomes a genuine sub. 3ulks GTranslationH. call for the transformation of the situation as a whole in terms that can be directly and universally affirmed by its every inhabitant. (lain. however. #adiou insists. 3or e+ample. those mobili. sub. The Political as a Procedure of Truth.ectivation Gwhich in turn operate as the four generic 'conditions' of philosophy itselfH/ politics. 0ithin the limits of the private sphere. (lain. i.on. #adiou. True art and true science proceed in somewhat the same way.ed negotiation of interests. and is sustained through an unrepresentable e+posure to what 'acan famously described as the 'impossibility of a se+ual relationship'. for a genuine political movement.ects insofar as their fidelity is in turn e!uipped to resist the various sorts of corruption it must inevitably face/ fatigue. politics must proceed in a sphere of rigorous universality.ects in the wake of its evental e+posure. #adiou distinguishes four general fields of truth.e. continues as a fidelity to the conse!uences of that encounter. through a searching e+perimental fidelity to a line of en!uiry opened up by a new discovery or break with tradition. genuine love begins in the wake of an unpredictable encounter that escapes the conventional representation of se+ual roles. #uy it at (ma.(n ordinary individual. it is the most securely abstracted from any natural or ob. but that is only e+ceptionally accessible. #y the same token Gfor reasons sketched in #adiou's most accessible short work. #ut should such a movement seek simply the promotion of a particular group for its own sake. science. or 'somePone. ighly 9peculative =easoning on the :oncept of . one indifferent to procedures of interpretation. This doesn't mean.ects only remain sub.ed by the civil rights. pp 6EP@5.ective commitment is possible. 'ike all truths. or four domains of sub. True politics is a matter of collective mobili. &n the end. #arbara P. representation or verification. There is no philosopher more opposed to the 'ethical' coordination of opinions or differences than #adiou. then its partisans act only as the proponents of an interest in competition with other interests. confusion.

uk. #adiou. Paperback . Umbr(a) !cience and "ruth# :enter for Psychoanalysis and :ulture. 577?. Paris.&9#N/ E7???KF8KL. Paris. 5KK pages. 56? pages. Paris.com. /hmed le philosophe suivi de /hmed se f1che# Papiers. Paris.fr.'. #adiou. 88K pages. 85L pages.com or (ma. ardcover. 5776. 5776. #adiou. (lain. #adiou. 577@. Paris. :lemens GTranslationH. &9#N/ E@5??L5KE7.fr. #adiou. . (lain. 57E pages. 577F. Paris. #adiou. 5@K pages. &9#N / 8E@E@5K5@K. 5?E pages.on. 9euil. pp. Paris. $ean %orreil la raison de l'autre# 'a philosophie en commun. (lain.de or (ma. )n a :ontemporary >sage of 3rege. (lain and 9.n-. 7L pages. #uy it at (ma. Paperback. 577F. (lain. Umbr(a)#577?. 9pring 8EEE. 77P55F. (lain. 8EE5. #uy it at (ma. #uy it at (ma.fr.fr. #adiou. RiennaM#erlin. #uy it at (ma. #adiou.fr. (lain and 1. 5777.on. KFL pages. #uy it at (ma.fr. achette.on. &eleu+e "he 'lamor of %eing# -innesota >niversity Press. #uy it at (ma. 5777.uk. lacanian ink 5?. &9#N/ 8E58LF8886. 8@PKL. (lain. &9#N/ 8E8ELK@@?5. The 0ooster Press. &9#N/ 86K86EK5KE. #uy it at (ma.on. 8EEE. #uy it at (ma. 3lammarion. &9#N/ 8E8ELK@@6U. Paperback. (lain. (etit Manuel d'inesthétique# 9euil. (lain. achette. :lemens GTranslationH. 9euil. (rt and Philosophy. Paperback. A. Paperback. K@P?6.on. #adiou.on. 4illepsie. #adiou. #uy it at (ma. #adiou. '' armattan. The 0ooster Press.on. &e l'amour# Ecole de la cause freudienne. &9#N / 86K86EKF8L. Paperback. Paris. &9#N/ 86L@KL@??E. &9#N/ 8E8ELK@@FL. #uy it at (ma.on. )leines *andbuch +ur .fr. !aint (aul# La fondation de l'universalisme# Presses >niversitaires de 3rance. pp. %eckett# L'increvable désir# :oup double. Aorge Aauregui GTranslationH. #uy it at (ma. :ollins.on.com. -innesota. #uy it at (ma. lacanian ink 56. 5776. ardcover. Paperback. 8EEE. Paris. &eleu+e# :oup double. (ctes du 9ud..on. 8E6 pages.on. 4illepsie. Paperback. #adiou.). 'ourt "raité d'ontologie transitoire# '')rdre philosophi!ue.fr. 9. #adiou. 5E7 pages.de.co. #adiou. 577@.on.fr. pp. (lain. Paperback.on.on. (lain.1emocracy. Paperback./unl0sthetik# Rerlag Turia T 2ant. pp. Paris. 1escartesM'acan< Psychoanalysis and Philosophy< egel< 0hat is 'ove. #adiou. Paperback. (lain. Les 'itrouilles# (ctes du 9ud.co. (ma. 577@. A.on. &9#N/ E@5??L5L7F. #adiou. #uy it at (ma. (lain. Aean #orreil. /brégé de métapolitique# ''ordre philosophi!ue. Paris. (lain. 5LPFL. &9#N/ L@F5L88??F. (lain.on. &9#N/ 8@?6KKFK66. 3all 8EEE. 'alme %loc ici-bas# P.

on.com or (ma.on. (lain. 577L. 75 pages. Paris. &9#N/ 8E8E5@8F77. Paperback. &9#N/ 855E@5E??5. A. Manifeste pour la philosophie# ''ordre philosophi!ue.on. ardcover. Paris. #uy it at (ma.uk. 3hapsodie pour le thé1tre# 'e 9pectateur franVais.fr. Paris.on.fr. &9#N/ 8E8EE@7L57. Paris. #ellassen. /hmed le subtil# (ctes du 9ud. #uy it at (ma. LF5 pages. 57@8. "héorie du su5et# ''ordre philosophi!ue. (lain. 576?.uk.fr. #ordeau+. #adiou. #uy it at (ma. Manifesto for (hilosophy# 9tate >niversity of New .on. 4eorges 'eyenberger.co. #adiou.ork PressMNew . (lain.on.fr. #adiou. #uy it at (ma. (lain.ork >niversity Press. (ma. 5@5 pages. New . 9euil. Paperback. 9euil. (lain. (lain. 'onditions# ''ordre philosophi!ue. ardcover. 57@@. #uy it at (ma. (lbanyMNew . L?F pages. &e l'idéologie# -aspero. #adiou. #uy it at (ma.on. 9euil. 5766. &mprimerie Nationale. Paris. L'Etre et l'Evénement# ''ordre philosophi!ue. &9#N/ E675KK88E7. #adiou. #uy it at (ma. (lain. #uy it at (ma. #adiou. &'un désastre obscur# Editions de l'(ube. Paris. #adiou. 5775M577@. &9#N/ 8@?7KLKEK7. 3. (lain. L'Ethique# atier.fr. Paris. Paris.Paperback. 577E. #adiou. &9#N/ 8E8EE7@?8@. (eut-on penser la politique4 Philosophie 4QnQrale.on. (lain. #adiou. &9#N/ E675KK857F. #uy it at (ma.de or (ma. 576F. (lain. #adiou. Le 2oyau rationnel de la dialectique hégélienne# -aspero. #adiou. Paris. &9#N/ 5@F7@K876?. Paris. 5LL pages. ardcover. &9#N/ 8@6?6@KL6@. 577K. Ethics /n Essay on the Understanding of Evil# Rerso #ooks. 57@F. Paperback. 8EE5. #adiou. 85L pages. Paperback. Editions du 9euil.co. 5778. #adiou. &9#N/ 87EFK?E8KF. F?E pages. #almSs. #adiou.on. 88K pages. #uy it at (ma. #uy it at (ma. Paris. (lain. Paris. (lain. '.fr.fr. Paperback. 5778. 57@7. &9#N/ 8E58LF5?@7.fr. (lain.on. Paperback. .fr. Paperback. (lain. Paris. 577E. #uy it at (ma. ?8 pages. 78 pages. 5767.com. 9euil. (lain. Editions du 9euil. Le 2ombre et les nombre# 1es travau+.fr.on.uk.ork. (lain. Paperback. &9#N/ 8E8E5EFF7K. (olitique et modernité# Editions )siris.on. -ossot.on. #adiou. Paris.ork. (lain.on.on.on. "héorie de la contradiction# -aspero. 5777. #adiou.co.com or (ma. #uy it at (ma. #adiou. &9#N/ 8E8EE?55FF. L'Echarpe rouge# -aspero.on.

Le 'oncept de mod6le# -aspero. (ugust 8EE8. 57?7. /lmagestes# 9euil. Articles #ooks Top #adiou. 57?6. )n Evil/ (n &nterview with (lain #adiou by :hristopher :o+ and -olly 0halen. (lain. :abinet -aga. Paris. #adiou.ine )nline.#adiou. . Paris. #adiou. (lain. 0inter 8EE5ME8 #adiou.erland. 9wit. (ortulans# 9euil. 57?K. E49. (lain. &ssue F. Transcript of his open lecture )n the TruthPProcess at the European 4raduate 9chool. (lain. (lain. 9aasP3ee. Paris.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->