First published by Verso 2012

Slavoj iek

All rights reserved

The moral rights o the author have bee! asserted

1 " # $ % 10 & ' ( 2

Verso
)*+ ' ,eard Street- .o!do! /1F 001
)S+ 20 2ay Street- Suite 1010- 3rookly!- 45 11201
6667versobooks78om

Verso is the impri!t o 4e6 .et 3ooks

e9S34:1"+ %$&:1:&(('$:%02:$

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A 8atalogue re8ord or this book is available rom the 3ritish .ibrary

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

;i<ek- Slavoj7
.ess tha! !othi!g + =egel a!d the shado6 o diale8ti8al materialism > by Slavoj ;i<ek7
p7 8m7
9!8ludes i!de?7
9S34 %$&:1:&(('$:&%$:' :: 9S34 %$&:1:&(('$:&&%:1 @ebookA
17 =egel- 1eorg /ilhelm Friedri8h- 1$$0:1&"17 97 Title7
32%(&7B## 2012
1%"::d82"

20110#0('#

Typeset i! ,i!io! Cro by ,2 1ava!- Dor!6all- )*
Cri!ted by i! the )S by ,aple Vail

To Ale!ka a!d ,lade!Ebe8ause die Cartei hat immer Fe8ht7

Do!te!ts

9!trodu8tio!+ Eppur Si Muove

CAFT 97 T=0 GF94* 30FHF0
1 Vacillating the Semblances
What cannot be said must be shownIdeas appearingFrom fictions to semblancesDialectical
gymnastics? o! than"s#From the $ne to de! %othing e&ists'(orgias! not )lato! was the arch*
Stalinist#
2 Where here !s "othing# $ea% hat ! Lo&e 'ou
+ ,hristian -ragedy?-he big $ther-he death of (od-he atheist wager%Do not compromise your
desire'.acan against /uddhism
( )ichte*s Choice
From Fichtes 98h to 0egels Sub1ect-he Fichtean wager A!stoss and Tat:=a!dlu!g Division and
limitation-he finite +bsolute-he posited presupposition-he Fichtean bone in the throat-he first
modern theology
CAFT 997 T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ =010.
+ !s !t Still Possible to Be a ,egelian o%ay-
0egel versus iet2scheStruggle and reconciliation+ story to tell,hanging the destiny-he owl of
Minerva)otentiality versus virtuality-he 0egelian circle of circles
!nterlu%e 1. /ar0 as a $ea%er of ,egel# ,egel as a $ea%er of /ar0

1 Parata0is. )igures of the Dialectical Process
In praise of 3nderstanding)henomena! noumena! and the limit-he differendegation of the
negationForm and contentegation without a filling
!nterlu%e 2. Cogito in the ,istory of /a%ness

2 "ot 3nly as Substance# but 4lso as Sub5ect
,oncrete universality0egel! Spino2a 4 and 0itchcoc"-he 0egelian Sub1ect+bsolute 5nowing-he
Ideas constipation?-he animal that I am
!nterlu%e (. 6ing# $abble# War 7 an% Se0

8 he Limits of ,egel
+ .istecessity as self*sublated contingency6arieties of self*relating negation-he formal
aspect Auhebu!g and repetitionFrom repetition to drive
CAFT 9997 T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ .ADA4
9 Lacan as a $ea%er of ,egel
-he ,unning of 7eason-he .acanian prosopopoeia.acan! Mar&! 0eidegger-he %magical force' of
reversal7eflection and supposition/eyond intersub1ectivityDrive versus Will-he unconscious of self*
consciousness
!nterlu%e +. Borro:ing from the )uture# Changing the Past

; Suture an% Pure Difference
From differentiality to the phallic signifierFrom the phallic signifier to objet a Sibeliuss silence-he
pure difference
!nterlu%e 1. Correlationism an% !ts Discontents

1< 3b5ects# 3b5ects =&ery:here
Subtraction! protraction! obstruction 4 destruction-he objet a between form and content6oice and
ga2e-he grandmothers voice-he Master and its specter-he two sides of fantasyImage and
ga2e)resence%-he picture is in my eye! but me! I am in the picture'.eave the screen empty#
!nterlu%e 2. Cogniti&ism an% the Loo> of Self-Positing

11 he "on-4ll# or# the 3ntology of Se0ual Difference
Se&ual difference in the disenchanted universe-he real of se&ual differenceFormulae of se&uation8 the
+ll with an e&ceptionFormulae of se&uation8 the non*+ll-he antinomies of se&ual differenceWhy .acan
is not a nominalistegation of the negation8 .acan versus 0egel?%-here is a non*relationship'
CAFT 9V7 T=0 D91AF0TT0 AFT0F
12 he )oursome of error# 4n0iety# Courage 7 an% =nthusiasm
/eing9World9Event-ruth! inconsistency! and the symptomal point-here is no human animal/adiou
against .evinasFrom terror to enthusiasm/adiou and antiphilosophy
1( he )oursome of Struggle# ,istoricity# Will 7 an% Gelassenheit
Why .acan is not a 0eideggerian0egel versus 0eidegger-he torture*house of language+n alternative
0eideggerFrom will to drive-he non*historical core of historicityFrom (elassenheit to class struggle
1+ he 3ntology of ?uantum Physics
-he ontological problem5nowledge in the 7eal+gential realism-he two vacuums:a de den
Do!8lusio!+ The Coliti8al Suspe!sio! o the 0thi8al
9!trodu8tio!+ Eppur Si Muove

There are t6o opposed types o stupidity7 The irst is the @o88asio!allyA hyper:i!tellige!t subje8t
6ho just does!It Jget it-K 6ho u!dersta!ds a situatio! logi8ally- but simply misses its hidde! 8o!te?tual
rules7 For e?ample- 6he! 9 irst visited 4e6 5ork- a 6aiter at a 8aL asked me+ J=o6 6as your dayMK
,istaki!g the phrase or a ge!ui!e Nuestio!- 9 a!s6ered him truthully @J9 am dead tired- jet:lagged-
stressed out OKA- a!d he looked at me as i 9 6ere a 8omplete idiot O a!d he 6as right+ this ki!d o
stupidity is pre8isely that o a! idiot7 Ala! Turi!g 6as a! e?emplary idiot+ a ma! o e?traordi!ary
i!tellige!8e- but a proto:psy8hoti8 u!able to pro8ess impli8it 8o!te?tual rules7 9! literature- o!e 8a!!ot
avoid re8alli!g 2aroslav =aPekIs good soldier Qvejk- 6ho- 6he! he sa6 soldiers shooti!g rom their
tre!8hes at the e!emy soldiers- ra! i!to !o:ma!Is la!d a!d started to shout+ JStop shooti!g- there are
people o! the other sideRK The ar8h:model o this idio8y is- ho6ever- the !aSve 8hild rom A!derse!Is
tale 6ho publi8ly e?8laims that the emperor is !akedEthereby missi!g the poi!t that- as Alpho!se
Allais put it- 6e are all !aked be!eath our 8lothes7
The se8o!d a!d opposite igure o stupidity is that o the moro!+ the stupidity o those 6ho ully
ide!tiy 6ith 8ommo! se!se- 6ho ully sta!d or the Jbig HtherK o appeara!8es7 9! the lo!g series o
igures begi!!i!g 6ith the Dhorus i! 1reek tragedyE6hi8h plays the role o 8a!!ed laughter or 8ryi!g-
al6ays ready to 8omme!t o! the a8tio! 6ith some 8ommo! 6isdomEo!e should me!tio! at least the
JstupidK 8ommo!:se!se part!ers o the great dete8tives+ Sherlo8k =olmesIs /atso!- =er8ule CoirotIs
=asti!gs O These igures are there !ot o!ly to serve as a 8o!trast to a!d thus make more visible the
dete8tiveIs gra!deurT they are i!dispe!sable or the dete8tiveIs 6ork7 9! o!e o the !ovels- Coirot
e?plai!s to =asti!gs his role+ immersed i! his 8ommo! se!se- =asti!gs rea8ts to the 8rime s8e!e the
6ay the murderer 6ho 6a!ted to erase the tra8es o his a8t e?pe8ted the publi8 to rea8t- a!d it is o!ly i!
this 6ay- by i!8ludi!g i! his a!alysis the e?pe8ted rea8tio! o the 8ommo!:se!se Jbig Hther-K that the
dete8tive 8a! solve the 8rime7
3ut does this oppositio! 8over the e!tire ieldM /here- or i!sta!8e- are 6e to put Fra!U *aka-
6hose great!ess resides @amo!g other thi!gsA i! his u!iNue ability to prese!t idio8y as somethi!g
e!tirely !ormal a!d 8o!ve!tio!alM @Fe8all the e?travaga!tly Jidioti8K reaso!i!g i! the lo!g debate
bet6ee! the priest a!d 2ose *7 6hi8h ollo6s the parable J3eore the .a67KA For this third positio!-
6e !eed look !o urther tha! the /ikipedia e!try or Jimbe8ileK+ J9mbe8ile is a term or moderate to
severe me!tal retardatio!- as 6ell as or a type o 8rimi!al7 9t arises rom the .ati! 6ord imbecillus-
mea!i!g 6eak- or 6eak:mi!ded7 V9mbe8ileI 6as o!8e applied to people 6ith a! 9W o 2'X#0- bet6ee!
Vmoro!I @9W o #1X$0A a!d VidiotI @9W 0X2#A7K So it is !ot too bad+ be!eath a moro!- but ahead o a!
idiotEthe situatio! is 8atastrophi8- but !ot serious- as @6ho elseMA a! Austria! imbe8ile 6ould have put
it7 Croblems begi! 6ith the Nuestio!+ 6here does the root Jbe8ileK pre8eded by the !egatio! @Jim:KA
8ome romM Although the origi!s are murky- it is probably derived rom the .ati! baculum @sti8k-
6alki!g sti8k- staA- so a! Jimbe8ileK is someo!e 6alki!g arou!d 6ithout the help o a sti8k7 H!e 8a!
bri!g some 8larity a!d logi8 i!to the issue i o!e 8o!8eives o the sti8k o! 6hi8h 6e all- as speaki!g
bei!gs- have to lea!- as la!guage- the symboli8 order- that is- 6hat .a8a! 8alls the Jbig Hther7K 9! this
8ase- the tripartite idiot:imbe8ile:moro! makes se!se+ the idiot is simply alo!e- outside the big Hther-
the moro! is 6ithi! it @d6elli!g i! la!guage i! a stupid 6ayA- 6hile the imbe8ile is i! bet6ee! the
t6oEa6are o the !eed or the big Hther- but !ot relyi!g o! it- distrusti!g it- somethi!g like the 6ay
the Slove!e pu!k group .aiba8h dei!ed their relatio!ship to6ards 1od @a!d reerri!g to the 6ords o!
a dollar bill J9! 1od 6e trustKA+ J.ike Ameri8a!s- 6e believe i! 1od- but u!like Ameri8a!s- 6e do!It
trust him7K 9! .a8a!ese- a! imbe8ile is a6are that the big Hther does !ot e?ist- that it is i!8o!siste!t-
Jbarred7K So i- measured by the 9W s8ale- the moro! appears brighter tha! the imbe8ile- he is too bright
or his o6! good @as rea8tio!ary moro!s- but !ot imbe8iles- like to say about i!telle8tualsA7 Amo!g the
philosophers- the late /ittge!stei! is a! imbe8ile par e&cellence- obsessively deali!g 6ith variatio!s o
the Nuestio! o the big Hther+ is there a! age!8y 6hi8h guara!tees the 8o!siste!8y o our spee8hM Da!
6e rea8h 8ertai!ty about the rules o our spee8hM
Goes !ot .a8a! aim at the same positio! o the @imAbe8ile 6he! he 8o!8ludes his JVers u!
sig!iia!t !ouveauK 6ith+ J9 am o!ly relatively stupidEthat is to say- 9 am as stupid as all
peopleEperhaps be8ause 9 got a little bit e!lighte!edKM
1
H!e should read this relativiUatio! o
stupidityEJ!ot totally stupidKEi! the stri8t se!se o !o!:All+ the poi!t is !ot that .a8a! has some
spe8ii8 i!sights 6hi8h make him !ot e!tirely stupid7 There is !othi!g i! .a8a! 6hi8h is !ot stupid- !o
e?8eptio! to stupidity- so that 6hat makes him !ot totally stupid is o!ly the very inconsistency of his
stupidity7 The !ame o this stupidity i! 6hi8h all people parti8ipate is- o 8ourse- the big Hther7 9! a
8o!versatio! 6ith 0dgar S!o6 i! the early 1%$0s- ,ao Bedo!g 8hara8teriUed himsel as a hairless
mo!k 6ith a! umbrella7 =oldi!g a! umbrella hi!ts at the separatio! rom heave!- a!d- i! Dhi!ese- the
8hara8ter or JhairK also desig!ates la6 a!d heave!- so that 6hat ,ao is sayi!g is thatEi!
.a8a!eseEhe is subtra8ted rom the dime!sio! o the big Hther- the heave!ly order 6hi8h regulates
the !ormal ru! o thi!gs7 /hat makes this sel:desig!atio! parado?i8al is that ,ao still desig!ates
himsel as a mo!k @a mo!k is usually per8eived as someo!e 6ho- pre8isely- dedi8ates his lie to
heave!AEso ho6 8a! o!e be a mo!k subtra8ted rom heave!M This Jimbe8ilityK is the 8ore o the
subje8tive positio! o a radi8al revolutio!ary @a!d o the a!alystA7
The prese!t book is thus !either -he ,omplete Idiots (uide to 0egel- !or is it yet a!other
u!iversity te?tbook o! =egel @6hi8h 6ould be or moro!s- o 8ourseAT it is somethi!g like -he
Imbeciles (uide to 0egelE=egel or those 6hose 9W is some6here 8lose to their bodily temperature
@i! DelsiusA- as the i!sult goes7 3ut o!ly somethi!g like it+ the problem 6ith Jimbe8ilesK is that !o!e o
us- as ordi!ary speakers- k!o6s 6hat the JimK !egates+ 6e k!o6 6hat Jimbe8ileK mea!s- but 6e do!It
k!o6 6hat Jbe8ileK isE6e simply suspe8t that it must someho6 be the opposite o Jimbe8ile7K
2
3ut
6hat i- here too- persists the mysterious te!de!8y or a!to!yms @su8h as heimlich a!d
unheimlichEabout 6hi8h Freud 6rote a amous short te?tA to mea! the same thi!gM /hat i Jbe8ileK is
the same as Jimbe8ile-K o!ly 6ith a! additio!al t6istM 9! our daily use- Jbe8ileK does !ot sta!d o! its
o6!- it u!8tio!s as a !egatio! o Jimbe8ile-K so that- i!soar as Jimbe8ileK already is a !egatio! o a
ki!d- Jbe8ileK must be a !egatio! o !egatio!Ebut- a!d this is 8ru8ial- this double !egatio! does !ot
bri!g us ba8k to some primordial positivity7 9 a! Jimbe8ileK is o!e 6ho la8ks a substa!tial basis i! the
big Hther- a Jbe8ileK redoubles the la8k- tra!sposi!g it i!to the Hther itsel7 The be8ile is a !ot:
imbe8ile- a6are that i he is a! imbe8ile- 1od himsel also has to be o!e7
So 6hat does a be8ile k!o6 that idiots a!d moro!s do!ItM The lege!d has it that- i! 1'""-
1alileo 1alilei muttered- JEppur si muoveK @JA!d yet it movesKA- ater re8a!ti!g beore the 9!Nuisitio!
his theory that the 0arth moves arou!d the Su!+ he 6as !ot tortured- it 6as e!ough to take him o! a
tour a!d sho6 him the torture devi8es O There is !o 8o!temporary evide!8e that he did i! a8t mutter
this phrase- but today the phrase is used to i!di8ate that- although someo!e 6ho possesses true
k!o6ledge is or8ed to re!ou!8e it- this does !ot stop it rom bei!g true7 3ut 6hat makes this phrase so
i!teresti!g is that it 8a! also be used i! the e?a8t opposite se!se- to assert a JdeeperK symboli8 truth
about somethi!g 6hi8h is literally !ot trueElike the JEppur si muoveK story itsel- 6hi8h may 6ell be
alse as a histori8al a8t about 1alileoIs lie- but is true as a desig!atio! o 1alileoIs subje8tive positio!
6hile he 6as or8ed to re!ou!8e his vie6s7 9! this se!se- a materialist 8a! say that- although he k!o6s
there is !o 1od- the idea o a 1od !o!etheless JmovesK him7 9t is i!teresti!g to !ote that- i! JTerma-K
a! episode rom the ourth seaso! o -he ;*Files- J0 pur si muoveK repla8es the usual JThe truth is out
there-K mea!i!g that- eve! i their e?iste!8e is de!ied by oi8ial s8ie!8e- alie! mo!sters !o!etheless
move arou!d out there7 3ut it 8a! also mea! that- eve! i there are !o alie!s out there- the i8tio! o a!
alie! i!vasio! @like the o!e i! -he ;*FilesA 8a! !o!etheless e!gage us a!d move us+ beyo!d the i8tio!
o reality- there is the reality o the i8tio!7
"
.ess -han othing e!deavors to dra6 all the o!tologi8al 8o!seNue!8es rom this eppur si
muove7 =ere is the ormula at its most eleme!tary+ Jmovi!gK is the strivi!g to rea8h the void- !amely-
Jthi!gs move-K there is somethi!g i!stead o !othi!g- !ot be8ause reality is i! e?8ess i! 8ompariso!
6ith mere !othi!g- but be8ause reality is less than nothing7 This is 6hy reality has to be suppleme!ted
by i8tio!+ to 8o!8eal its empti!ess7 Fe8all the old 2e6ish joke- loved by Gerrida- about a group o 2e6s
i! a sy!agogue- publi8ly admitti!g their !ullity i! the eyes o 1od7 First- a rabbi sta!ds up a!d says+
JH- 1od- 9 k!o6 9 am 6orthless- 9 am !othi!gRK Ater he has i!ished- a ri8h busi!essma! sta!ds up
a!d says- beati!g himsel o! the 8hest+ JH- 1od- 9 am also 6orthless- obsessed 6ith material 6ealth- 9
am !othi!gRK Ater this spe8ta8le- a! ordi!ary poor 2e6 also sta!ds up a!d pro8laims+ JH- 1od- 9 am
!othi!g OK The ri8h busi!essma! ki8ks the rabbi a!d 6hispers i! his ear 6ith s8or!+ J/hat i!sole!8eR
/ho is that guy 6ho dares to 8laim that he too is !othi!gRK 0e8tively- o!e already has to be
somethi!g i! order to be able to a8hieve pure !othi!g!ess- a!d .ess -han othing dis8er!s this 6eird
logi8 i! the most disparate o!tologi8al domai!s- o! diere!t levels- rom Nua!tum physi8s to
psy8hoa!alysis7
This 6eird logi8- the logi8 o 6hat Freud 8alled the drive- is pere8tly re!dered i! the hypothesis
o the J=iggs ield-K 6idely dis8ussed i! 8o!temporary parti8le physi8s7 .et to their o6! devi8es i! a!
e!viro!me!t i! 6hi8h they 8a! pass o! their e!ergy- all physi8al systems 6ill eve!tually assume a state
o lo6est e!ergyT to put it a!other 6ay- the more mass 6e take rom a system- the more 6e lo6er its
e!ergy- u!til 6e rea8h the va8uum state o Uero e!ergy7 There are- ho6ever- phe!ome!a 6hi8h 8ompel
us to posit the hypothesis that there has to be somethi!g @some substa!8eA that 6e 8a!!ot take a6ay
rom a give! system 6ithout raising that systemIs e!ergy7 This Jsomethi!gK is 8alled the =iggs ield+
o!8e this ield appears i! a vessel that has bee! pumped empty a!d 6hose temperature has bee!
lo6ered as mu8h as possible- its e!ergy 6ill be urther lowered7 The Jsomethi!gK 6hi8h thus appears is
a somethi!g that 8o!tai!s less e!ergy tha! !othi!g- a Jsomethi!gK that is 8hara8teriUed by a! overall
!egative e!ergyEi! short- 6hat 6e get here is the physi8al versio! o ho6 Jsomethi!g appears out o
!othi!g7K
Eppur si muove should thus be read i! 8o!trast to ma!y versio!s o the e?ti!8tio!>over8omi!g
o the drive- rom the 3uddhist !otio! o gai!i!g a dista!8e to6ards desire up to the =eideggeria!
Jgoi!g:throughK /ill 6hi8h orms the 8ore o subje8tivity7 This book tries to demo!strate that the
Freudia! drive 8a!!ot be redu8ed to 6hat 3uddhism de!ou!8es as desire or to 6hat =eidegger
de!ou!8es as the /ill+ eve! ater 6e rea8h the e!d o this 8riti8al over8omi!g o desire:6ill:
subje8tivity- somethi!g 8o!ti!ues to move7 /hat survives death is the =oly Spirit sustai!ed by a!
obs8e!e Jpartial obje8tK that sta!ds or the i!destru8tible drive7 H!e should thus @alsoA i!vert 0lisabeth
*Ybler:FossIs ive stages o ho6 6e relate to the pro?imity o death i! the *ierkegaardia! se!se o the
Jsi8k!ess u!to death-K as the series o ive attitudes to6ards the u!bearable a8t o immortality7 H!e
irst de!ies it+ J/hat immortalityM Ater my death- 9 6ill just dissolve i!to dustRK The!- o!e e?plodes
i!to a!ger+ J/hat a terrible predi8ame!t 9Im i!R 4o 6ay outRK H!e 8o!ti!ues to bargai!+ JH*- but it is
!ot me 6ho is immortal- o!ly the u!dead part o me- so o!e 8a! live 6ith it OK The! o!e alls i!to
depressio!+ J/hat 8a! 9 do 6ith mysel 6he! 9 am 8o!dem!ed to stay here oreverMK Fi!ally- o!e
a88epts the burde! o immortality7
So 6hy do 6e o8us o! =egelM 9! the history o philosophy @or /ester! philosophy- 6hi8h
amou!ts to the same thi!gA- this eppur si muove arrived at its most 8o!siste!t ormulatio! i! 1erma!
9dealism- espe8ially i! =egelIs thought7 Si!8e- ho6ever- the a?iom o this book is that JH!e divides
i!to t6o-K the 8e!tral body o the book is split i!to a part o! =egel a!d a part o! .a8a! as a repetitio!
o =egel7 9! ea8h 8ase- the book ollo6s the same systemati8 our:step approa8h7 /ith =egel- 6e begi!
6ith the obvious histori8al Nuestio!+ i! 6hat mea!i!gul se!se 8a! o!e still be a =egelia! today-
beari!g i! mi!d the radi8ally 8ha!ged histori8al 8o!stellatio!M The! 8omes a des8riptio! o the basi8
me8ha!isms or ormulae o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- ollo6ed by the more detailed e?pli8atio! o
=egelIs basi8 thesis o! the Absolute as !ot o!ly Substa!8e- but also Subje8tT i!ally- 6e raise the
dii8ult !o!:trivial Nuestio! o the limitatio!s o the =egelia! proje8t7 /ith .a8a!- a!d beari!g i!
mi!d that .a8a!Is theory is here i!terpreted as a repetitio! o =egel- the irst step is the prese!tatio! o
.a8a!Is @e?pli8it a!d impli8itA reere!8es to =egel- that is- o .a8a! as a reader o =egel7 /hat ollo6s
is the prese!tatio! o suture as the eleme!tary me8ha!ism o the sig!iyi!g pro8ess- the me8ha!ism
6hi8h e!ables us to u!dersta!d .a8a!Is dei!itio! o the sig!iier as Jthat 6hi8h represe!ts the subje8t
or a!other sig!iier7K The !e?t logi8al step is to e?ami!e the obje8t ge!erated by the sig!iyi!g
pro8ess- the .a8a!ia! ob1et a i! all its dime!sio!s7 Fi!ally- .a8a!Is !otio! o se?ual diere!8e a!d his
logi8 o !o!:All are submitted to a 8lose readi!g 6hi8h u!8overs the ultimate limitatio! a!d deadlo8k
o .a8a!ia! theory7
9t 6as said @i! the old days beore smoki!g be8ame stigmatiUedA that the se8o!d a!d the third
most pleasurable thi!gs i! the 6orld 6ere the dri!k beore a!d the 8igarette ater7 A88ordi!gly- apart
rom the =egelia! Thi!g- .ess -han othing also deals 6ith a series o beores @Clato- Dhristia!ity-
Fi8hteA a!d aters @3adiou- =eidegger- Nua!tum physi8sA7 ClatoIs )armenides deserves a 8lose readi!g
as the irst e?er8ise i! diale8ti8s proper- 8elebrated by =egel a!d .a8a!7 Si!8e =egel 6as the
philosopher o Dhristia!ity- it is !o 6o!der that a =egelia! approa8h to DhristIs death bri!gs out a
radi8al ema!8ipatory pote!tial7 Fi8hteIs thought is e!joyi!g a deserved 8omeba8k+ although he
sometimes appears to be just o!e step rom =egel- their u!iverses are thoroughly diere!t- si!8e the
6ay Fi8hte arti8ulates the relatio!ship bet6ee! the 9 a!d its Hther rea8hes 6ell beyo!d so:8alled
Jsubje8tive idealism7K Alai! 3adiouIs attempt to over8ome .a8a!Is a!tiphilosophy 8o!ro!ts us 6ith
the basi8 Nuestio! o the possibility o o!tology today7 Feadi!g =eidegger agai!st the grai!- o!e
dis8overs a thi!ker 6ho 6as- at some poi!ts- stra!gely 8lose to 8ommu!ism7 The philosophi8al
impli8atio!s a!d 8o!seNue!8es o Nua!tum physi8s are still u!e?ploredE6hat i- beyo!d the alse
alter!ative o pragmatism @Jit 6orks- 6ho 8ares 6hat it mea!s philosophi8allyKA a!d 4e6 Age
obs8ura!tism- a =egelia! readi!g ope!s up the path or a !e6 materialist i!terpretatio!M
H! top o this- si? i!terludes are i!serted bet6ee! the 8hapters o the t6o 8e!tral parts- deali!g
6ith the reverberatio!s o these philosophi8al topi8s i! literature- art- s8ie!8e- a!d ideology- as 6ell as
i! the 6ork o philosophers opposed to the =egel>.a8a! a?is7 Three additio!al topi8s are elaborated
apropos o =egel+ the ambiguities o ,ar?Is reere!8es to =egelT the u!iNue status o mad!ess i!
=egelIs theory o mi!dT the multiple poi!ts at 6hi8h =egelIs system ge!erates a! e?8ess 6hi8h
threate!s to e?plode its rame6ork @rabble- se?uality- marriageA7 /ith regard to .a8a!- the irst
i!terlude deals 6ith the retroa8tivity o the sig!iyi!g pro8essT the se8o!d o!e opposes .a8a!Is a!ti:
8orrelatio!ism to Wue!ti! ,eillassou?Is re8e!t 8ritiNue o post:*a!tia! 8orrelatio!ismT the third o!e
e?plores the limitatio!s o the !otio! o the subje8t at 6ork i! the 8og!itive s8ie!8es7 Fi!ally- the
8o!8lusio! elaborates the politi8al impli8atio!s o .a8a!Is repetitio! o =egel7
3ut ho6 does this reere!8e to =egel it our o6! histori8al mome!tM There are our mai!
positio!s 6hi8h- together- 8o!stitute todayIs ideologi8o:philosophi8al ield+ irst- the t6o sides o 6hat
3adiou appropriately baptiUed Jdemo8rati8 materialismK+ @1A s8ie!tii8 !aturalism @brai! s8ie!8es-
Gar6i!ism OA- a!d @2A dis8ursive histori8ism @Fou8ault- de8o!stru8tio! OAT the!- the t6o sides o the
spiritualist rea8tio! to it+ @"A 4e6 Age J/ester! 3uddhism-K a!d @(A the thought o tra!s8e!de!tal
i!itude @8ulmi!ati!g i! =eideggerA7 These our positio!s orm a ki!d o 1reimasia! sNuare alo!g the
t6o a?es o ahistori8al versus histori8al thought a!d o materialism versus spiritualism7 The thesis o
the prese!t book is double+ @1A there is a dime!sio! missed by all our- that o a pre:tra!s8e!de!tal
gap>rupture- the Freudia! !ame or 6hi8h is the driveT @2A this dime!sio! desig!ates the very 8ore o
moder! subje8tivity7
The basi8 premise o dis8ursive materialism 6as to 8o!8eive la!guage itsel as a mode o
produ8tio!- a!d to apply to it ,ar?Is logi8 o 8ommodity etishism7 So- i! the same 6ay that- or ,ar?-
the sphere o e?8ha!ge obliterates @re!ders i!visibleA its pro8ess o produ8tio!- the li!guisti8 e?8ha!ge
also obliterates the te?tual pro8ess that e!ge!ders mea!i!g+ i! a spo!ta!eous etishisti8 misper8eptio!-
6e e?perie!8e the mea!i!g o a 6ord or a8t as somethi!g that is a dire8t property o the desig!ated
thi!g or pro8essT that is- 6e overlook the 8omple? ield o dis8ursive pra8ti8es 6hi8h produ8es this
mea!i!g7 /hat o!e should o8us o! here is the u!dame!tal ambiguity o this !otio! o li!guisti8
etishism+ is the idea that- i! the good old moder! 6ay- 6e should disti!guish bet6ee! Jobje8tiveK
properties o thi!gs a!d our proje8tio!s o mea!i!gs o!to thi!gs- or are 6e deali!g 6ith the more
radi8al li!guisti8 versio! o tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutio!- or 6hi8h the very idea o Jobje8tive reality-K
o Jthi!gs e?isti!g out there- i!depe!de!tly o our mi!d-K is a Jetishisti8 illusio!K 6hi8h is bli!d to
ho6 our symboli8 a8tivity o!tologi8ally 8o!stitutes the very reality to 6hi8h it JreersK or 6hi8h it
desig!atesM 4either o these t6o optio!s is 8orre8tE6hat o!e should drop is their u!derlyi!g shared
premise- the @8rude- abstra8t:u!iversalA homology bet6ee! dis8ursive Jprodu8tio!K a!d material
produ8tio!7
(
*aka 6as @as al6aysA right 6he! he 6rote+ JH!e mea!s that 0vil has is the dialogue7K
Do!seNue!tly- this book is !ot a dialogue- si!8e the u!derlyi!g premise that sustai!s its double thesis is
u!ashamedly =egelia!+ 6hat 6e reer to as the 8o!ti!e!t o JphilosophyK 8a! be 8o!sidered as
e?te!di!g as mu8h as o!e 6a!ts i!to the past or i!to the uture- but there is a u!iNue philosophi8al
mome!t i! 6hi8h philosophy appears Jas su8hK a!d 6hi8h serves as a keyEas the only keyEto
readi!g the e!tire pre8edi!g a!d ollo6i!g traditio! as philosophy @i! the same 6ay that ,ar? 8laims
that the bourgeoisie is the irst 8lass i! the history o huma!ity 6hi8h is posited as su8h- as a 8lass- so
that it is o!ly 6ith the rise o 8apitalism that the e!tirety o history hitherto be8omes readable as the
history o 8lass struggleA7 This mome!t is the mome!t o 1erma! 9dealism delimited by t6o dates+
1$&$- the year i! 6hi8h *a!tIs ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason appeared- a!d 1&"1- the year o =egelIs death7
These e6 de8ades represe!t a breathtaki!g 8o!8e!tratio! o the i!te!sity o thi!ki!g+ i! this short spa!
o time- more happe!ed tha! i! 8e!turies or eve! mille!!ia o the J!ormalK developme!t o huma!
thought7 All that took pla8e beore 8a! a!d should be read i! a! u!ashamedly a!a8hro!isti8 6ay as the
preparatio! or this e?plosio!- a!d all that took pla8e i! its atermath 8a! a!d should be read as
pre8isely thisEthe atermath o i!terpretatio!s- reversals- 8riti8al @misAreadi!gs- o 1erma! 9dealism7
9! his reje8tio! o philosophy- Freud Nuoted =ei!ri8h =ei!eIs iro!i8 des8riptio! o the =egelia!
philosopher+ J/ith his !ight8ap a!d his !ight:shirt tatters- he bot8hes up the loopholes i! the stru8ture
o the 6orld7K @The !ight8ap a!d !ight:shirt are- o 8ourse- iro!i8 reere!8es to the 6ell:k!o6! portrait
o =egel7A 3ut is philosophy at its most u!dame!tal really redu8ible to a desperate attempt to ill i! the
gaps a!d i!8o!siste!8ies i! our !otio! o reality a!d thus to provide a harmo!ious WeltanschauungM 9s
philosophy really a more developed orm o the se"und=re /earbeitung i! the ormatio! o a dream- o
the eort to harmo!iUe the eleme!ts o a dream i!to a 8o!siste!t !arrativeM H!e 8a! say that- at least
6ith *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal tur!- the e?a8t opposite happe!s+ does *a!t !ot ully e?pose a 8ra8k- a
series o irreparable a!ti!omies- 6hi8h emerges the mome!t 6e 6a!t to 8o!8eive reality as AllM A!d
does !ot =egel- i!stead o over8omi!g this 8ra8k- radi8aliUe itM =egelIs reproa8h to *a!t is that he is
too ge!tle 6ith thi!gs+ he lo8ates a!ti!omies i! the limitatio! o our reaso!- i!stead o lo8ati!g them i!
thi!gs themselves- that is- i!stead o 8o!8eivi!g reality:i!:itsel as 8ra8ked a!d a!ti!omi87 9t is true that
o!e i!ds i! =egel a systemati8 drive to 8over everythi!g- to propose a! a88ou!t o all phe!ome!a i!
the u!iverse i! their esse!tial stru8tureT but this drive does !ot mea! that =egel strives to lo8ate every
phe!ome!o! 6ithi! a harmo!ious global edii8eT o! the 8o!trary- the poi!t o diale8ti8al a!alysis is to
demo!strate ho6 every phe!ome!o!- everythi!g that happe!s- ails i! its o6! 6ay- implies a 8ra8k-
a!tago!ism- imbala!8e- i! its very heart7 =egelIs gaUe upo! reality is that o a Foe!tge! apparatus
6hi8h sees i! everythi!g that is alive the tra8es o its uture death7
The basi8 8oordi!ates o this time o the u!bearable de!sity o thought are provided by the
mother o all 1a!gs o Four+ *a!t- Fi8hte- S8helli!g- =egel7
#
Although ea8h o these our !ames sta!ds
or a J6orld o its o6!-K or a u!iNue radi8al philosophi8al sta!8e- o!e 8a! arra!ge the series o the
our great 1erma! 9dealists pre8isely 6ith reere!8e to the our J8o!ditio!sK o philosophy elaborated
by 3adiou+ *a!t relates to @4e6to!ia!A s8ie!8e- his basi8 Nuestio! bei!g 6hat ki!d o philosophy is
adeNuate to the 4e6to!ia! breakthroughT Fi8hte relates to politi8s- to the eve!t that is the Fre!8h
Fevolutio!T S8helli!g relates to @Foma!ti8A art a!d e?pli8itly subordi!ates philosophy to art as the
highest approa8h to the AbsoluteT a!d =egel- i!ally- relates to loveT his u!derlyi!g problem is- rom
the very begi!!i!g o his thought- that o love7
9t all begi!s 6ith *a!t- 6ith his idea o the transcendental constitution of reality7 9! a 6ay- o!e
8a! 8laim that it is o!ly 6ith this idea o *a!tIs that philosophy rea8hed its o6! terrai!+ prior to *a!t-
philosophy 6as ultimately per8eived as a ge!eral s8ie!8e o 3ei!g as su8h- as a des8riptio! o the
u!iversal stru8ture o e!tire reality- 6ith !o Nualitative diere!8e rom parti8ular s8ie!8es7 9t 6as *a!t
6ho i!trodu8ed the diere!8e bet6ee! o!ti8 reality a!d its o!tologi8al horiUo!- the a priori !et6ork o
8ategories 6hi8h determi!es ho6 6e u!dersta!d reality- 6hat appears to us as reality7 From here-
previous philosophy is readable !ot as the most ge!eral positive k!o6ledge o reality- but i! its
herme!euti8 8ore- as the des8riptio! o the histori8ally predomi!a!t Jdis8losure o 3ei!g-K as
=eidegger 6ould have put it7 @Say- 6he! Aristotle- i! his )hysics- struggles to dei!e lie a!d proposes
a series o dei!itio!sEa livi!g bei!g is a thi!g 6hi8h is moved by itsel- 6hi8h has i! itsel the 8ause
o its moveme!tEhe is !ot really e?plori!g the reality o livi!g bei!gsT he is rather des8ribi!g the set
o pre:e?isti!g !otio!s 6hi8h determi!e 6hat 6e al6ays:already u!dersta!d by Jlivi!g bei!gK 6he!
6e desig!ate a! obje8t as Jalive7KA
The most appropriate 6ay to grasp the radi8al 8hara8ter o the *a!tia! philosophi8al revolutio!
is 6ith regard to the diere!8e bet6ee! Schein @appeara!8e as illusio!A a!d Erscheinung @appeara!8e
as phe!ome!o!A7 9! pre:*a!tia! philosophy- appeara!8e 6as 8o!8eived as the illusory @dee8tiveA
mode i! 6hi8h thi!gs appear to us- i!ite mortalsT our task is to rea8h beyo!d these alse appeara!8es to
the 6ay thi!gs really are @rom ClatoIs 9deas to s8ie!tii8 Jobje8tive realityKA7 /ith *a!t- ho6ever-
appeara!8e loses this pejorative 8hara8teristi8+ it desig!ates the 6ay thi!gs appear @areA to us i! 6hat
6e per8eive as reality- a!d the task is !ot to de!ou!8e them as Jmere illusory appeara!8esK a!d to
rea8h over them to tra!s8e!de!t reality- but a! e!tirely diere!t o!e- that o dis8er!i!g the conditions
of possibility of this appearing of things- o their Jtra!s8e!de!tal ge!esisK+ 6hat does su8h a! appeari!g
presuppose- 6hat must al6ays:already have take! pla8e or thi!gs to appear to us the 6ay they doM 9-
or Clato- a table that 9 see i! ro!t o me is a dee8tive>impere8t 8opy o the eter!al 9dea o the table-
or *a!t- it 6ould have bee! mea!i!gless to say that the table 9 see is a dee8tive temporal>material
8opy o its tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!ditio!s7 0ve! i 6e take a tra!s8e!de!tal 8ategory like that o Dause- or a
*a!tia! it is mea!i!gless to say that the empiri8al relatio! o 8ausality bet6ee! t6o phe!ome!a
parti8ipates i! @is a! impere8t 8opy oA the eter!al 9dea o a 8ause+ the 8auses that 9 per8eive bet6ee!
phe!ome!a are the o!ly 8auses that there are- a!d the a priori !otio! o Dause is !ot their pere8t
model- but- pre8isely- the 8o!ditio! o possibility o me per8eivi!g the relatio!ship bet6ee! phe!ome!a
as 8ausal7
Although a! i!surmou!table abyss separates *a!tIs 8riti8al philosophy rom his great idealist
su88essors @Fi8hte- S8helli!g- =egelA- the basi8 8oordi!ates 6hi8h re!der possible =egelIs
)henomenology of Spirit are already there i! *a!tIs ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason7 First- as Gieter =e!ri8h
put it 8o!8isely- J*a!tIs philosophi8al motivatio! 6as !ot ide!ti8al 6ith 6hat he took to be the origi!al
motivatio! or doi!g philosophyK
'
+ the origi!al motivatio! or doi!g philosophy is a metaphysi8al o!e-
to provide a! e?pla!atio! o the totality o !oume!al realityT as su8h- this motivatio! is illusory- it
pres8ribes a! impossible task- 6hile *a!tIs motivatio! is a 8ritiNue o all possible metaphysi8s7 *a!tIs
e!deavor thus 8omes ater6ards+ i! order or there to be a 8ritiNue o metaphysi8s- there irst has to be
a! origi!al metaphysi8sT i! order to de!ou!8e the metaphysi8al Jtra!s8e!de!tal illusio!-K this illusio!
must irst e?ist7 9! this pre8ise se!se- *a!t 6as Jthe i!ve!tor o the philosophi8al history o
philosophyK
$
+ there are !e8essary stages i! the developme!t o philosophy- that is- one cannot directly
get at truth- o!e 8a!!ot begi! 6ith it- philosophy !e8essarily bega! 6ith metaphysi8al illusio!s7 The
path rom illusio! to its 8riti8al de!u!8iatio! is the very 8ore o philosophy- 6hi8h mea!s that
su88essul @JtrueKA philosophy is !o lo!ger dei!ed by its truthul e?pla!atio! o the totality o bei!g-
but by su88essully a88ou!ti!g or the illusio!s- that is- by e?plai!i!g !ot o!ly 6hy illusio!s are
illusio!s- but also 6hy they are stru8turally !e8essary- u!avoidable- a!d !ot just a88ide!ts7 The
JsystemK o philosophy is thus !o lo!ger a dire8t o!tologi8al stru8ture o reality- but Ja pure- 8omplete
system o all metaphysi8al stateme!ts a!d proos7K
&
The proo o the illusory !ature o metaphysi8al
propositio!s is that they !e8essarily e!ge!der a!ti!omies @8o!tradi8tory 8o!8lusio!sA- a!d si!8e
metaphysi8s tries to avoid the a!ti!omies 6hi8h emerge 6he! 6e thi!k metaphysi8al !otio!s to their
e!d- the JsystemK o 8riti8al philosophy is the 8ompleteEa!d thereore sel:8o!tradi8tory-
Ja!ti!omi8KEseries o metaphysi8al !otio!s a!d propositio!s+ JH!ly the o!e 6ho 8a! look through the
illusio! o metaphysi8s 8a! develop the most 8ohere!t- 8o!siste!t system o metaphysi8s- be8ause the
8o!siste!t system o metaphysi8s is also 8o!tradi8toryKEthat is to say- pre8isely- inconsistent7
%
The
8riti8al JsystemK is the systemati8 a priori stru8ture o all possible>thi!kable JerrorsK i! their imma!e!t
!e8essity+ 6hat 6e get at the e!d is !ot the Truth that over8omes>sublates the pre8edi!g illusio!sEthe
o!ly truth is the i!8o!siste!t edii8e o the logi8al i!ter8o!!e8tio! o all possible illusio!s O is this !ot
6hat =egel did i! his )henomenology @a!d- at a diere!t level- i! his .ogicAM The o!ly @but keyA
diere!8e is that- or *a!t- this Jdialogi8K pro8ess o truth emergi!g as the 8riti8al de!u!8iatio! o the
pre8edi!g illusio! belo!gs to the sphere o our k!o6ledge a!d does !ot 8o!8er! the !oume!al reality
6hi8h remai!s e?ter!al a!d i!diere!t to it- 6hile- or =egel- the proper locus o this pro8ess is the
Thi!g itsel7
S8hope!hauer amously 8ompared *a!t Jto a ma! at a ball- 6ho all eve!i!g has bee! 8arryi!g
o! a love aair 6ith a masked beauty i! the vai! hope o maki!g a 8o!Nuest- 6he! at last she thro6s
o her mask a!d reveals hersel to be his 6ieKEthe situatio! o 2oha!! StraussIs Fledermaus7 For
S8hope!hauer- o 8ourse- the poi!t o the 8ompariso! is that the masked beauty is philosophy a!d the
6ie Dhristia!ityE*a!tIs radi8al 8ritiNue is really just a !e6 attempt to support religio!- his
tra!sgressio! is a alse o!e7 /hat- ho6ever- i there is more truth i! the mask tha! i! the real a8e
be!eath itM /hat i this 8riti8al game radi8ally 8ha!ges the !ature o religio!- so that *a!t ee8tively
did u!dermi!e 6hat it 6as his goal to prote8tM Cerhaps those Datholi8 theologia!s 6ho sa6 *a!tIs
8riti8ism as the origi!al 8atastrophe o moder! thought that ope!ed up the 6ay to liberalism a!d
!ihilism 6ere a8tually rightM
Fi8hteIs Jradi8aliUatio!K o *a!t is the most problemati8 li!k i! the 8hai! o 1erma! 9dealists+
he 6as a!d is dismissed- ridi8uled eve!- as a hal:8raUy solipsisti8 Jsubje8tive idealist7K @4o 6o!der
that- or the A!glo:Sa?o! a!alyti8 traditio!- *a!t is the o!ly 1erma! 9dealist to be take!
seriouslyE6ith Fi8hte- 6e e!ter the domai! o obs8ure spe8ulatio!7A 3ei!g the least popular- it takes
the greatest eort to get to the true 8ore o his thought- his Ju!dame!tal i!sightK @Fichtes
(rundeinsichtEthe title o Gieter =e!ri8hIs study o! Fi8hteA7 =o6ever- his 6ork is 6orth the eort+ as
6ith all truly great thi!kers- a proper u!dersta!di!g o his 6ork reveals a! u!surpassed des8riptio! o
the deep stru8ture o e!gaged subje8tivity7
S8helli!gIs thought is to be divided i!to t6o phases- the early Jphilosophy o ide!tityK a!d the
late Jphilosophy o revelatio!KEa!d- as is so ote! the 8ase- S8helli!gIs true breakthrough o88urs
bet6ee! the t6o- i! the short period bet6ee! 1&0# a!d 1&1# 6he! he produ8ed his t6o absolute
masterpie8es- the treatise o! huma! reedom a!d the three versio!s o the Jages o the 6orldK
ma!us8ript7 A 6hole !e6 u!iverse is dis8losed here+ the u!iverse o pre:logi8al drives- the dark
Jgrou!d o 3ei!gK 6hi8h d6ells eve! i! the heart o 1od as that 6hi8h is Ji! 1od more tha! 1od
himsel7K For the irst time i! the history o huma! thought- the origi! o 0vil is lo8ated !ot i!
huma!ityIs Fall rom 1od- but i! a split i! the heart o 1od himsel7
9! S8helli!g- the ultimate igure o 0vil is !ot Spirit as opposed to 4ature- but Spirit dire8tly
materialiUed i! 4ature as u!:!atural- as a mo!strous distortio! o !atural order- rom evil spirits a!d
vampires to mo!strous produ8ts o te8h!ologi8al ma!ipulatio!s @8lo!es- et87A7 4ature i! itsel is 1ood-
i! it- the evil:grou!d is by dei!itio! al6ays subordi!ated to the 1ood+ Jat ea8h stage o !ature prior to
the appeara!8e o ma! the grou!d is subordi!ated to e?iste!8eT i! other 6ords- the sel:6ill o the
parti8ular is !e8essarily subordi!ated to the u!iversal 6ill o the 6hole7 =e!8e- the sel:6ill o ea8h
i!dividual a!imal is !e8essarily subordi!ated to the 6ill o the spe8ies- 6hi8h 8o!tributes to the
harmo!y o the 6hole o !ature7K
10
/he!- 6ith the emerge!8e o ma!- the grou!d o e?iste!8e is
allo6ed to operate o! its o6!- egotisti8ally asserti!g itsel- this does !ot o!ly mea! that it asserts itsel
against divi!e love- the harmo!y o the 6hole- the u!iversal @!o!:egotisti8A 6illEit mea!s that it
asserts itsel in the very form of its opposite+ the horror o ma! is that- i! it- 0vil be8omes radi8al+ !o
lo!ger simple egotisti8 evil- but 0vil masked @appeari!gA as u!iversality- as is e?emplarily the 8ase i!
politi8al totalitaria!ism- i! 6hi8h a parti8ular politi8al age!t prese!ts itsel as the dire8t embodime!t o
the u!iversal /ill a!d Freedom o huma!ity7
11
4o6here is the diere!8e bet6ee! =egelIs thought a!d S8helli!gIs late philosophy more
palpable tha! regardi!g the Nuestio! o the begi!!i!g+ 6hile =egel begi!s 6ith the poorest !otio! o
bei!g @6hi8h- i! its abstra8tio!- its la8k o determi!atio!s- eNuals !othi!gA- S8helli!gIs J!egative
philosophyK @6hi8h remai!s part o his system- but suppleme!ted by JpositiveK philosophyA also begi!s
6ith the airmatio! o a !egatio!- o a void- but this void is the airmative or8e o the 6illIs desire+
Jall begi!!i!g lies i! a! abse!8eT the deepest pote!8y- 6hi8h holds ast to everythi!g- is !o!:bei!g a!d
its hu!ger or bei!g7K
12
From the domai! o logi8 a!d its a priori !otio!s- 6e pass i!to the domai! o
a8tual lie- 6hose starti!g poi!t is a year!i!g- the Jhu!gerK o a void to be illed i! by positive a8tual
bei!g7 S8helli!gIs 8ritiNue o =egel is thus that- i! order to really pass rom bei!g>!othi!g!ess to a8tual
be8omi!g 6hi8h results i! Jsomethi!gK positive- the J!othi!gK 6ith 6hi8h 6e begi! should be a
Jlivi!g !othi!g-K the void o a desire 6hi8h e?presses a 6ill to ge!erate or get hold o some 8o!te!t7
The e!igma o =e!ri8hIs readi!g o 1erma! 9dealism is 6hy he systemati8ally do6!plays the
role o S8helli!g- espe8ially the middle S8helli!g o Freiheitschrift a!d Weltalter7 This is mysterious
be8ause it 6as pre8isely this middle S8helli!g 6ho e?plored i! the greatest depth 6hat =e!ri8h
desig!ates as Fi8hteIs @a!d 1erma! 9dealismIsA 8e!tral problem- that o the JSpi!oUism o reedomK+
ho6 to thi!k the (round of Freedom- a tra!s:subje8tive 1rou!d o subje8tivity 6hi8h !ot o!ly does !ot
8o!strai! huma! reedom but literally grou!ds itM S8helli!gIs a!s6er i! Freiheitschrift is literally
1rou!d itsel+ huma! reedom is re!dered possible by the disti!8tio!- i! 1od itsel- bet6ee! the
e?isti!g 1od a!d its o6! 1rou!d- 6hat i! 1od is !ot yet ully 1od7 This a88ou!ts or S8helli!gIs
u!iNue!ess- also 6ith regard to =Zlderli!Is JH! 2udgme!t a!d 3ei!gK+ like the late Fi8hte @although i!
a totally diere!t mode- o 8ourseA- S8helli!g arrives at the tra!s:subje8tive 1rou!d o subje8tive
reedom- but or =Zlderli! @a!d Fi8hteA- this tra!s:subje8tive order o 3ei!g @or divi!e .ieA is ully
H!e- pre:rele8tive- i!divisible- !ot eve! sel:ide!ti8al @be8ause sel:ide!tity already i!volves a ormal
dista!8e o a term rom itselAEit 6as o!ly S8helli!g 6ho i!trodu8ed a radi8al gap- i!stability- dis8ord-
i!to this very pre:subje8tive>pre:rele?ive 1rou!d7 9! his most dari!g spe8ulative attempt i! Weltalter-
S8helli!g tries to re8o!stru8t @to J!arrateKA i! this 6ay the very rise o logos- o arti8ulated dis8ourse-
out o the pre:logi8al 1rou!d+ logos is a! attempt to resolve the debilitati!g deadlo8k o this 1rou!d7
This is 6hy the t6o true highpoi!ts o 1erma! 9dealism are the middle S8helli!g a!d the mature =egel+
they did 6hat !o o!e else dared to doEthey i!trodu8ed a gap i!to the 1rou!d itsel7
=Zlderli!Is amous ragme!t JH! 2udgme!t a!d 3ei!gK deserves urther me!tio!- si!8e it is
ote! take! as a! i!di8atio! o a ki!d o Jalter!ative reality-K o a diere!t path that 1erma! 9dealism
might have take! i! order to break out o the *a!tia! i!8o!siste!8ies7 9ts u!derlyi!g premise is that
subje8tive sel:8o!s8ious!ess strives to over8ome the lost u!ity 6ith 3ei!g>the Absolute>1od rom
6hi8h it has bee! irrevo8ably separated by the Jprimordial divisio! [3r*-heilung\-K the dis8ursive
a8tivity o Jjudgme!t [3rteil\K+

3ei!g [Sey!\Ee?presses the joi!i!g [Verbi!du!g\ o Subje8t a!d Hbje8t7 /here Subje8t a!d Hbje8t
are absolutely- !ot just partially u!ited [verei!iget\- a!d he!8e so u!ited that !o divisio! 8a! be
u!dertake!- 6ithout destroyi!g the esse!8e [/ese!\ o the thi!g that is to be su!dered [getre!!t\- there
a!d !ot other6ise 8a! 6e talk o a! absolute 3ei!g- as is the 8ase i! i!telle8tual i!tuitio!73ut this 3ei!g
must !ot be eNuated [ver6e8hselt\ 6ith 9de!tity7 /he! 9 say+ 9 am 9- the Subje8t @0goA a!d the Hbje8t
@0goA are !ot so u!ited that absolutely !o su!deri!g 8a! be u!dertake!- 6ithout destroyi!g the esse!8e
o the thi!g that is to be su!deredT o! the 8o!trary the 0go is o!ly possible through this su!deri!g o
0go rom 0go7 =o6 8a! 9 say J9K 6ithout sel:8o!s8ious!essM 3ut ho6 is sel:8o!s8ious!ess possibleM
Cre8isely be8ause 9 oppose mysel to myselT 9 su!der mysel rom mysel- but i! spite o this su!deri!g
9 re8og!iUe mysel as the same i! the opposites7 3ut ho6 ar as the sameM 9 8a! raise this Nuestio! a!d 9
mustT or i! a!other respe8t [FYksi8ht\ it [the 0go\ is opposed to itsel7 So ide!tity is !ot a u!iti!g o
Subje8t a!d Hbje8t that takes pla8e absolutely- a!d so 9de!tity is !ot eNual to absolute 3ei!g72udgme!t+
is i! the highest a!d stri8test se!se the origi!al su!deri!g o Subje8t a!d Hbje8t most i!timately u!ited
i! i!telle8tual i!tuitio!- the very su!deri!g 6hi8h irst makes Hbje8t a!d Subje8t possible- their )r:
Theilu!g7 9! the 8o!8ept o divisio! [Theilu!g\ there lies already the 8o!8ept o the re8ipro8al relatio!
[3eUiehu!g\ o Hbje8t a!d Subje8t to o!e a!other- a!d the !e8essary presuppositio! o a 6hole o
6hi8h Hbje8t a!d Subje8t are the parts7 J9 am 9K is the most appropriate e?ample or this 8o!8ept o
)rtheilu!g i! its theoreti8al orm- but i! pra8ti8al )rtheilu!g- it [the ego\ posits itsel as opposed to the
4o!:ego- !ot to itsel7A8tuality a!d possibility are to be disti!guished as mediate a!d immediate
8o!s8ious!ess7 /he! 9 thi!k o a! obje8t [1ege!sta!d\ as possible- 9 merely dupli8ate the previous
8o!s8ious!ess i! virtue o 6hi8h it is a8tual7 There is or us !o thi!kable possibility- 6hi8h 6as !ot a!
a8tuality7 For this reaso! the 8o!8ept o possibility has absolutely !o valid appli8atio! to the obje8ts o
Feaso!- si!8e they 8ome i!to 8o!s8ious!ess as !othi!g but 6hat they ought to be- but o!ly the 8o!8ept
o !e8essity [applies to them\7 The 8o!8ept o possibility has valid appli8atio! to the obje8ts o the
u!dersta!di!g- that o a8tuality to the obje8ts o per8eptio! a!d i!tuitio!7
1"
=Zlderli!Is starti!g poi!t is the gap bet6ee! @the impossible retur! toA the traditio!al orga!i8
u!ity a!d the moder! rele?ive reedom+ 6e are- as i!ite- dis8ursive- sel:8o!s8ious subje8ts 8ast out o
o!e!ess 6ith the 6hole o bei!g to 6hi8h 6e !evertheless lo!g to retur!- yet 6ithout sa8rii8i!g our
i!depe!de!8eEho6 are 6e to over8ome this gapM =is a!s6er is 6hat he 8alls the Je88e!tri8 pathK+ the
split bet6ee! substa!8e a!d subje8tivity- 3ei!g a!d rele8tio!- is i!surmou!table- a!d the o!ly
re8o!8iliatio! possible is a narrative o!e- that o the subje8t telli!g the story o his e!dless os8illatio!
bet6ee! the t6o poles7 /hile the 8o!te!t remai!s !o!:re8o!8iled- reconciliation occurs in the
narrative form itselfEthe e?a8t i!verse o the logi8al assertio! o the subje8tIs ide!tity @9 ] 9A 6here
the very orm @divisio!- redoubli!g- o the 9IsA u!dermi!es 8o!te!t @ide!tityA7
=Zlderli!Is solutio! should be put i! its 8o!te?t a!d 8o!8eived as o!e o the three versio!s o
ho6 to solve the same problemEthe gap bet6ee! subje8tive auto!omy a!d the orga!i8 /hole that
8hara8teriUes moder!ityT the other t6o versio!s are S8hillerIs a!d S8hlegelIs7 For S8hiller- ree huma!
lie 6ithi! !ature a!d 8ulture is possible i it a8hieves that ki!d o i!ter!al orga!iUatio!- determi!atio!
rom 6ithi!- or harmo!y o parts that is 8hara8teristi8 o both !atural a!d artisti8 beauty7 9! a beautiul
!atural obje8t- 6e i!d- as it 6ere- Jthe perso! o the thi!gKT 6e have a se!se o Jthe ree 8o!se!t o the
thi!g to its te8h!iNueK a!d o Ja rule 6hi8h is at o!8e give! a!d obeyed by the thi!g-K a!d this is a
model or the ree 8o!se!t o a! i!dividual to the 6orth o a so8ial repertoire or 6ay o lie7 Friedri8h
S8hlegel- o! the 8o!trary- seeks to e!a8t a ki!d o impere8t yet al6ays e!ergeti8 reedom i!
8o!ti!uous- iro!i8- 6itty- sel:revisi!g a8tivity that 8hara8teriUes roma!ti8 poetryEa ki!d o
8ommitme!t to eter!al restless!ess7 9t is easy to see ho6 these three positio!s orm a ki!d o tria!gle+
S8hiller:S8hlegel:=Zlderli!7 S8hiller believes i! the subje8tIs i!tegratio! i!to the orga!i8 substa!tial
orderEree selhood 8a! 6holly appear i! beautiul !ature a!d artT S8hlegel asserts the or8e o
subje8tivity as the 8o!sta!t u!settli!g o a!y substa!tial harmo!y @o!e 8a! 8laim that- i! 1erma!
9dealism- this oppositio! repeats itsel i! the guise o S8helli!g versus Fi8hteEthe positivity o the 3r*
(rund prior to rele8tio! versus the Jeter!al restless!essK o subje8tivityA7
=egel o88upies here a ourth positio!E6hat he adds to =Zlderli! is a purely ormal shit o
tra!sposi!g the tragi8 gap that separates the rele8ti!g subje8t rom pre:rele?ive 3ei!g i!to this 3ei!g
itsel7 H!8e 6e do this- the problem be8omes its o6! solutio!+ it is our very divisio! rom absolute
3ei!g 6hi8h u!ites us 6ith it- si!8e this divisio! is imma!e!t to 3ei!g7 Already i! =Zlderli!- divisio!
is redoubled- sel:relati!g+ the ultimate divisio! is !ot the Subje8t:Hbje8t divisio!- but the very divisio!
bet6ee! divisio! @o Subje8t:Hbje8tA a!d u!ity7 H!e should thus suppleme!t the ormula o Jide!tity o
ide!tity a!d !o!:ide!tityK 6ith Jdivisio! bet6ee! divisio! a!d !o!:divisio!7K H!8e 6e a88omplish this
step- 3ei!g as the i!a88essible pre:rele?ive 1rou!d disappearsT more pre8isely- it reveals itsel as the
ultimate rele?ive 8ategory- as the result o the sel:relati!g divisio!+ 3ei!g emerges 6he! divisio!
divides itsel rom itsel7 Hr- to put it i! =Zlderli!Is terms- the !arrative is !ot merely the subje8t
8opi!g 6ith its divisio! rom 3ei!g- it is simulta!eously the story 3ei!g is telli!g itsel about itsel7
The loss suppleme!ted by the !arrative is i!s8ribed i!to 3ei!g itsel7 /hi8h mea!s that the last
disti!8tio! o! 6hi8h =Zlderli! i!sists- the o!e bet6ee! i!telle8tual i!tuitio! @the immediate a88ess to
3ei!g- the subje8tIs dire8t o!e:!ess 6ith itA a!d the Je88e!tri8K !arrative path @that mediates a88ess to
3ei!g through !arrative re8o!8iliatio!A- has to all+ the !arrative already does the job o i!telle8tual
i!tuitio!- o u!iti!g us 6ith 3ei!g7 Hr- i! more parado?i8al terms+ the sta!dard relatio!ship bet6ee! the
t6o terms should be tur!ed arou!d7 9t is i!telle8tual i!tuitio! 6hi8h is merely a rele?ive 8ategory-
separati!g us rom 3ei!g i! its very e!a8ti!g o the subje8tIs immediate o!e:!ess 6ith 3ei!g- a!d it is
the !arrative path 6hi8h dire8tly re!ders the lie o 3ei!g itsel+

That Jthe truth is the 6holeK mea!s that 6e should !ot look at the pro8ess that is sel:ma!iestatio! as a
deprivatio! o the origi!al 3ei!g7 4or should 6e look at it o!ly as a! as8e!t to the highest7 The pro8ess
is already the highest O The sub1ect or =egel is O !othi!g but the a8tive relatio!ship to itsel7 9! the
subje8t there is !othi!g u!derlyi!g its sel:reere!8e- there is only the sel:reere!8e7 For this reaso!-
there is o!ly the pro8ess a!d !othi!g u!derlyi!g it7 Chilosophi8al a!d metaphori8al models su8h as
Jema!atio!K @!eo:Clato!ismA or Je?pressio!K @Spi!oUismA prese!t the relatio!ship bet6ee! the i!i!ite
a!d the i!ite i! a 6ay that ails to 8hara8teriUe 6hat the pro8ess @sel:ma!iestatio!A is7
1(
9t is- thereore- =Zlderli!- !ot =egel- 6ho remai!s here metaphysi8al- 8li!gi!g to the !otio! o a
pre:rele?ive 1rou!d a88essible through i!telle8tual i!tuitio!E6hat is properly meta:physi8al is the
very presuppositio! o a substa!tial 3ei!g beyo!d the pro8ess o @sel:Adiere!tiatio!7 @This is also the
reaso! 6hyEas 6e 8a! see i! the last paragraph o the ragme!tE=Zlderli! subordi!ates possibility to
a8tuality7A This is 6hy =egel appropriates the solutio! o =Zlderli!Is 0yperion @6hat- i! reality- 8a!!ot
be re8o!8iled is re8o!8iled ater6ards- through its !arrative re8o!stru8tio!A agai!st =Zlderli! himsel+
i! a 8lear parallel to =egelIs )henomenology of Spirit- =Zlderli! sees the solutio! i! a !arrative 6hi8h
retroa8tively re8o!stru8ts the very Je88e!tri8 pathK @the path o the perma!e!t os8illatio! bet6ee! the
loss o the De!ter a!d the repeated ailed attempts to regai! the immedia8y o the De!terA as the pro8ess
o maturatio!- o spiritual edu8atio!7 This solutio! does !ot imply dis8ursive 8o!stru8tivism @the
8o!siste!8y o our reality is that o a! apr>s*coup !arrativeA- but a mu8h more radi8al =egelia!
positio!+ 6hile the dis8ursive 8o!stru8tivism 8a! be read as a !eo:*a!tia! la!guage:tra!s8e!de!talism
@as 1adamer put it i! his paraphrase o =eideggerIs thesis o! Jla!guage as a house o bei!g-K Jto be is
to be u!derstoodKT that is- the horiUo! o u!dersta!di!g sustai!ed by la!guage is the ultimate
tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! o our approa8h to bei!gA- that is- 6hile the dis8ursive tra!s8e!de!talism
o8uses o! ho6 6hat 6e e?perie!8e as JrealityK is al6ays:already mediated>8o!stru8ted by la!guage-
=Zlderli!Is solutio! shits the o8us to ho6 @as .a8a! put itA the signifier itself falls into the real- that
is- ho6 the sig!iyi!g i!terve!tio! @!arrativiUatio!A i!terve!es i!to the real- ho6 it bri!gs about the
resolutio! o a real a!tago!ism7
=egel thus remai!s the peak o the e!tire moveme!t o 1erma! 9dealism+ all our are !ot eNual-
they are three plus o!e7 3ut 6hyM /hat makes =egel u!iNueM H!e o the 6ays to 8ir8ums8ribe this
u!iNue!ess o =egel is to use the .a8a!ia! !otio! o the Jla8k i! the HtherK 6hi8h- i! =egelIs 8ase-
poi!ts to6ards the u!iNue epistemologi8o:o!tologi8al mediatio! abse!t i! all three other 9dealists+ the
most eleme!tary igure o diale8ti8al reversal resides i! tra!sposi!g a! epistemologi8al obsta8le i!to
the thi!g itsel- as its o!tologi8al ailure @6hat appears to us as our i!ability to k!o6 the thi!g i!di8ates
a 8ra8k i! the thi!g itsel- so that our very ailure to rea8h the ull truth is the i!di8ator o truthA7 9t is the
premise o the prese!t book that this Ju!dame!tal i!sightK o =egel has lost !o!e o its po6er todayT
that it is ar more radi8al @a!d a ar greater threat to metaphysi8al thi!ki!gA tha! all the 8ombi!ed a!ti:
totality topi8s o 8o!ti!ge!8y:alterity:heteroge!eity7
1#
H!e 8a! 6ell imagi!e a truly obs8e!e versio! o the amous JThe Aristo8ratsK joke that easily
beats all the vulgarity o amily members vomiti!g- dee8ati!g- or!i8ati!g- a!d humiliati!g ea8h other
i! all possible 6ays+ 6he! asked to perorm- they give the tale!t age!t a short 8ourse i! =egelia!
thought- debati!g the true mea!i!g o !egativity- o sublatio!- o Absolute *!o6ledge- a!d so orth-
a!d- 6he! the be6ildered age!t asks them the !ame o the 6eird sho6- they e!thusiasti8ally reply+
JThe CervertsRK 9!deed- to paraphrase the good old 3re8htIs sloga! J/hat is the robbi!g o a ba!k
agai!st a ou!di!g o a !e6 ba!kMK+ 6hat is the disturbi!g sho8k o amily members dee8ati!g i!to
o!e a!otherIs mouths 8ompared to the sho8k o a proper diale8ti8al reversalM
1'
=o6ever- the aim o .ess -han othing is !ot to simply @or !ot so simplyA retur! to =egel- but-
rather- to repeat =egel @i! the radi8al *ierkegaardia! se!seA7 Hver the last de8ade- the theoreti8al 6ork
o the Carty Troika to 6hi8h 9 belo!g @alo!g 6ith ,lade! Golar a!d Ale!ka Bupa!^i^A had the a?is o
=egel:.a8a! as its Ju!de8o!stru8tibleK poi!t o reere!8e+ 6hatever 6e 6ere doi!g- the u!derlyi!g
a?iom 6as that readi!g =egel through .a8a! @a!d vi8e versaA 6as our u!surpassable horiUo!7 Fe8e!tly-
ho6ever- limitatio!s o this horiUo! have appeared+ 6ith =egel- his i!ability to thi!k pure repetitio!
a!d to re!der themati8 the si!gularity o 6hat .a8a! 8alled the ob1et aT 6ith .a8a!- the a8t that his
6ork e!ded i! a! i!8o!siste!t ope!i!g+ Seminar ;; ?Encore@ sta!ds or his ultimate a8hieveme!t a!d
deadlo8kEi! the years ater- he desperately 8o!8o8ted diere!t 6ays out @the sinthome- k!ots OA- all
o 6hi8h ailed7 So 6here do 6e sta!d !o6M
,y 6ager 6as @a!d isA that- through their i!tera8tio! @readi!g =egel through .a8a! a!d vi8e
versaA- psy8hoa!alysis a!d =egelia! diale8ti8s mutually redeem themselves- sheddi!g their a88ustomed
ski! a!d emergi!g i! a !e6 u!e?pe8ted shape7 The bookIs motto 8ould have bee! Alai! 3adiouIs 8laim
that Jthe a!tiphilosopher .a8a! is a 8o!ditio! o the re!aissa!8e o philosophy7 A philosophy is
possible today o!ly i it is 8ompatible 6ith .a8a!7K
1$
1uy .ardreau made the same poi!t 6ith regard
to the ethi8o:politi8al spa8e 6he! he 6rote that .a8a! Jis the o!ly o!e thi!ki!g today- the o!ly o!e
6ho !ever lies- le chasse*canaille [the s8ou!drels:hu!ter\KEa!d Js8ou!drelsK here are those 6ho
propagate the sembla!8e o liberatio! 6hi8h o!ly 8overs up the reality o 8apitalist perversio!- 6hi8h-
or .ardreau- mea!s thi!kers su8h as .yotard a!d GeleuUe- a!d or us ma!y more7 /hat 3adiou shares
6ith .ardreau is the idea that o!e should thi!k through .a8a!- go urther tha! he did- but that the o!ly
6ay beyo!d .a8a! is through .a8a!7 The stakes o this diag!osis are 8learly politi8al+ .a8a! u!veiled
the illusio!s o! 6hi8h 8apitalist reality as 6ell as its alse tra!sgressio!s are based- but his i!al result is
that 6e are 8o!dem!ed to domi!atio!Ethe ,aster is the 8o!stitutive i!gredie!t o the very symboli8
order- so the attempts to over8ome domi!atio! o!ly ge!erate !e6 igures o the ,aster7 The great task
o those 6ho are ready to go through .a8a! is thus to arti8ulate the spa8e or a revolt 6hi8h 6ill !ot be
re8aptured by o!e or a!other versio! o the dis8ourse o the ,aster7 .ardreau- together 6ith Dhristia!
2ambet- irst tried to develop this ope!i!g by o8usi!g o! the li!k bet6ee! domi!atio! a!d se?uality+
si!8e there is !o se?uality 6ithout a relatio! o domi!atio!- a!y proje8t o Jse?ual liberatio!K e!ds up
ge!erati!g !e6 orms o domi!atio!Eor- as *aka 6ould have put it- revolt is !ot a 8age i! sear8h o a
bird- but a bird i! sear8h o a 8age7 3ased o! this i!sight that a revolt has to be thoroughly de:
se?ualiUed- .ardreau a!d 2ambet outli!ed the as8eti8:,aoist:.a8a!ia! igure o Ja!gelK as the age!t o
radi8al ema!8ipatio!7 =o6ever- 8o!ro!ted 6ith the destru8tive viole!8e o the Dultural Fevolutio!
a!d espe8ially o the *hmer Fouge regime i! *ampu8hea- they aba!do!ed a!y !otio! o a radi8al
ema!8ipatio! i! so8ial relatio!s a!d e!ded up i! a split positio! o airmi!g the lesser evil i! politi8s
a!d the !eed or a! i!!er spiritual revolutio!+ i! politi8s- 6e should be modest a!d simply a88ept that
some ,asters are better tha! others- a!d that the o!ly revolt possible is a! i!!er spiritual o!e7
1&
The
prese!t book reje8ts this spiritualiUatio! o revolt a!d remai!s aithul to 3adiouIs origi!al proje8t o a
radi8al ema!8ipatory proje8t 6hi8h passes through .a8a!7

Part I

,= D$!"6 B=)3$=
CHAPTER 1

JVa8illati!g the Sembla!8esK

/=AT DA44HT 30 SA9G ,)ST 30 S=H/4

The amous last propositio! o /ittge!stei!Is -ractatusEJ/hereo o!e 8a!!ot speak- thereo
o!e must be sile!tKEi!volves a! obvious parado?+ it 8o!tai!s a superluous prohibitio!- si!8e it
prohibits somethi!g 6hi8h is already i! itsel impossible7
1
This parado? aithully reprodu8es the
predomi!a!t attitude to6ards the aestheti8 represe!tatio! o the =olo8aust+ it should!It be do!e-
be8ause it 8a!It be do!e7 2orge Sempr_!Is Spa!ish:Datholi8 origi!s play a 8ru8ial role i! his reversal o
this prohibitio!+ or Sempr_!- it is !ot poeti8 i8tio! but prosai8 do8ume!tary 6hi8h is impossible ater
Aus8h6itU7 For 0lie /iesel- by 8o!trast- there 8a! be !o !ovel about the =olo8aust+ a!y te?t 8laimi!g
to be su8h is either !ot about the =olo8aust or is !ot a !ovel7 Feje8ti!g this 8laim that literature a!d the
=olo8aust are i!8omme!surable- Sempr_! argues that the =olo8aust 8a! only be represe!ted by the
arts+ it is !ot the aestheti8iUatio! o the =olo8aust 6hi8h is alse- but its redu8tio! to bei!g the obje8t o
a do8ume!tary report7 0very attempt to Jreprodu8e the a8tsK i! a do8ume!tary 6ay !eutraliUes the
traumati8 impa8t o the eve!ts des8ribedEor as .a8a!- a!other atheist Datholi8- put it+ truth has the
stru8ture o a i8tio!7 Almost !o o!e is able to e!dure- still less to e!joy- a s!u ilm sho6i!g real
torture a!d killi!g- but 6e 8a! e!joy it as a i8tio!+ 6he! truth is too traumati8 to be 8o!ro!ted
dire8tly- it 8a! o!ly be a88epted i! the guise o a i8tio!7 Dlaude .a!Uma!! 6as right to say that i by
8ha!8e he 6ere to stumble upo! some do8ume!tary ootage sho6i!g the a8tual murder o i!mates i!
Aus8h6itU- he 6ould destroy it immediately7 Su8h a do8ume!tary 6ould be obs8e!e- disrespe8tul
to6ards the vi8tims eve!7 /he! 8o!sidered i! this 6ay- the pleasure o aestheti8 i8tio! is !ot a simple
orm o es8apism- but a mode o 8opi!g 6ith traumati8 memoryEa survival me8ha!ism7
3ut ho6 are 6e to avoid the da!ger that the aestheti8 pleasure ge!erated by i8tio! 6ill
obliterate the proper trauma o the =olo8austM H!ly a mi!imal aestheti8 se!sitivity is !eeded to
re8og!iUe that there 6ould be somethi!g alse about a! epi8 !ovel o! the =olo8aust- 6ritte! i! the
gra!d style o !i!etee!th:8e!tury psy8hologi8al realism+ the u!iverse o su8h !ovels- the perspe8tive
rom 6hi8h they are 6ritte!- belo!gs to the histori8al epo8h that pre8eded the =olo8aust7 A!!a
Akhmatova e!8ou!tered a similar problem 6he!- i! the Soviet )!io! o the 1%"0s- she tried to depi8t
the atmosphere o the Stali!ist terror7 9! her memoirs she des8ribes 6hat happe!ed 6he!- at the height
o the Stali!ist purges- she 6as 6aiti!g i! a lo!g Nueue outside the .e!i!grad priso! to lear! the ate o
her arrested so! .ev+

H!e day somebody i! the 8ro6d ide!tiied me7 Sta!di!g behi!d me 6as a you!g 6oma!- 6ith lips blue
rom the 8old- 6ho had o 8ourse !ever heard me 8alled by !ame beore7 4o6 she started out o the
torpor 8ommo! to us all a!d asked me i! a 6hisper @everyo!e 6hispered thereA- JDa! you des8ribe
thisMK A!d 9 said- J9 8a!7K The! somethi!g like a smile passed leeti!gly over 6hat had o!8e bee! her
a8e7
2
/hat ki!d o des8riptio! is i!te!ded hereM Surely it is !ot a realisti8 des8riptio! o the situatio!-
but a des8riptio! 6hi8h e?tra8ts rom the 8o!used reality its o6! i!!er orm- i! the same 6ay that- i!
his ato!al musi8- S8hoe!berg e?tra8ted the i!!er orm o totalitaria! terror7 At this level- truth is !o
lo!ger somethi!g that depe!ds o! the aithul reprodu8tio! o a8ts7 H!e should i!trodu8e here the
diere!8e bet6ee! @a8tualA truth a!d truthul!ess+ 6hat makes a report o a raped 6oma! @or a!y other
!arrative o a traumaA truthul is its very a8tual u!reliability- 8o!usio!- i!8o!siste!8y7 9 the vi8tim
6ere able to report o! her pai!ul a!d humiliati!g e?perie!8e i! a 8lear 6ay- 6ith all the data arra!ged
i!to a 8o!siste!t order o e?positio!- this very Nuality 6ould make us suspi8ious7 The same holds or
the u!reliability o the verbal reports give! by =olo8aust survivors+ a 6it!ess 6ho 6as able to oer a
8lear !arrative o his 8amp e?perie!8e 6ould thereby disNualiy himsel7 9! a =egelia! 6ay- the
problem is here part o the solutio!+ the very dei8ie!8ies o the traumatiUed subje8tIs report o! the
a8ts bear 6it!ess to the truthul!ess o his report- si!8e they sig!al that the reported 8o!te!t has
8o!tami!ated the very orm i! 6hi8h it is reported7
"
/hat 6e are deali!g 6ith here is- o 8ourse- the gap bet6ee! the e!u!8iated 8o!te!t a!d the
subje8tive positio! o e!u!8iatio!7 17 *7 Dhesterto! 6rote apropos o 4ietUs8he that he Jde!ied egoism
simply by prea8hi!g itK+ JTo prea8h a!ythi!g is to give it a6ay7 First- the egoist 8alls lie a 6ar 6ithout
mer8y- a!d the! he takes the greatest possible trouble to drill his e!emies i! 6ar7 To prea8h egoism is
to pra8ti8e altruism7K
(
The medium here is !ot the message- Nuite the opposite+ the very medium that
6e useEthe u!iversal i!tersubje8tivity o la!guageEu!dermi!es the message7 9t is !ot o!ly that 6e
should- thereore- de!ou!8e the parti8ular positio! o e!u!8iatio! that sustai!s the u!iversal e!u!8iated
8o!te!tEthe 6hite- 6ealthy male subje8t 6ho pro8laims the u!iversality o huma! rights- or e?ample7
9t is ar more importa!t to u!earth the u!iversality that sustai!s- a!d pote!tially u!dermi!es- his
parti8ular 8laim7 The supreme 8ase here- as !oted by 3ertra!d Fussell- is that o the solipsist tryi!g to
8o!vi!8e others that he alo!e really e?ists7 Dould o!e e?te!d this argume!t to the problem o tolera!8e
or i!tolera!8eM Cerhaps !ot altogether- although there is a similar 8at8h i!volved i! prea8hi!g
tolera!8e+ it @presupAposes its presuppositio!Ethat is- the subje8t deeply JbotheredK by the
4eighborEa!d thus o!ly reasserts it7 Gid Caul Dlaudel !ot get it right i! his amous reply to 2ules
Fe!ard+ JMais la tolArance?K JIl y a des maisons pour Ba#K @une maison de tolArance is o!e Fre!8h
e?pressio! or a brothelAM A!d did !ot Dhesterto!- as 6as so ote! the 8ase- also get it right 6ith his
amous Nuip- JTolera!8e is the virtue o the ma! 6ithout 8o!vi8tio!sKM
The aestheti8 lesso! o this parado? is 8lear7 The horror o the =olo8aust 8a!!ot be represe!tedT
but this e?8ess o represe!ted 8o!te!t over its aestheti8 represe!tatio! has to i!e8t the aestheti8 orm
itsel7 /hat 8a!!ot be described should be inscribed i!to the artisti8 orm as its u!8a!!y distortio!7
Cerhaps a reere!8e to /ittge!stei!Is -ractatus 8a! agai! be o some help here7 A88ordi!g to the
-ractatus- la!guage depi8ts reality by virtue o shari!g a logi8al orm i! 8ommo! 6ith it7

(7121 Cropositio!s 8a!!ot represe!t logi8al orm+ it is mirrored i! them7 /hat i!ds its rele8tio! i!
la!guage- la!guage 8a!!ot represe!t7 /hat e?presses itsel i! la!guage- 6e 8a!!ot e?press by mea!s o
la!guage7 Cropositio!s sho6 the logi8al orm o reality7 They display it7
/e k!o6 that a pi8ture o a su!set represe!ts a su!set be8ause both the pi8ture a!d the su!set
share a similar Jpi8torial orm7K Similarly- a propositio! a!d 6hat it represe!ts share a similar Jlogi8al
ormK+ a propositio! depi8ts a a8t- a!d just as a a8t 8a! be a!alyUed i!to i!depe!de!t states o aairs-
a propositio! 8a! be a!alyUed i!to i!depe!de!t eleme!tary propositio!s7 /ittge!stei! here dra6s a
disti!8tio! bet6ee! sayi!g a!d sho6i!g+ 6hile a propositio! says that su8h:a!d:su8h a8t is the 8ase- it
sho6s the logi8al orm by virtue o 6hi8h this a8t is the 8ase7 The upshot o this disti!8tio! is that 6e
8a! o!ly say thi!gs about a8ts i! the 6orldT logi8al orm 8a!!ot be spoke! about- o!ly sho6!+ J(71212
/hat 8a! be sho6!- 8a!!ot be said7K 9 6e read this propositio! together 6ith the i!al propositio!
@J/hereo o!e 8a!!ot speak- thereo o!e must be sile!t7KA- the 8o!8lusio! is that 6hat 6e 8a!!ot speak
about 8a! be sho6!- that is- dire8tly re!dered i!>by the very orm o speaki!g7 9! other 6ords-
/ittge!stei!Is Jsho6i!gK should be u!derstood !ot merely i! a mysti8al se!se- but as i!here!t to
la!guage- as the orm o la!guage7 .et us retur! to our e?ample o trauma+ 6e 8a!!ot dire8tly talk
about or des8ribe it- but the traumati8 e?8ess 8a! !evertheless be Jsho6!K i! the distortio! o our
spee8h about the trauma- i! its ellipti8 repetitio!s a!d other distortio!s7 9! his !ovel .e grand voyage-
Sempr_! i!ve!ted just su8h a !e6 ormEa Jlogi8al ormK o !arrative that 6ould be adeNuate to the
trauma o the =olo8aust by 6ay o Jsho6i!gK 6hat 8a!!ot be dire8tly des8ribed7
#
The !arrative o Sempr_!Is !ovel u!olds duri!g a jour!ey i! a 8ramped a!d sNualid bo?8ar
8arryi!g 120 resista!8e ighters rom Dompi`g!e to 3u8he!6aldT 1Lrard- the irst:perso! !arrator o
the story- is o!e o these priso!ers7 The !arrative o!ly leeti!gly remai!s i! the bo?8ar+ i! sudde!
temporal s6it8hes 1LrardIs !arratio! lur8hes ba8k a!d orth rom the time beore the 6ar to the
mome!t o liberatio! i! 1%(#- to t6o- three- si?tee!- or a! u!spe8iied !umber o years later7 These
s6it8hes are re!dered as mome!ts 6ithi! 1LrardIs ra8tured stream o 8o!s8ious!essT as he u!dergoes
the ordeal o the jour!ey i! the prese!t- he remembers a!d Jore:membersK @remembers:imagi!es the
utureA- si!8e the e?perie!8e has ragme!ted him i!to a spli!tered sel7 Getails o his lie i! the past-
prese!t- a!d uture lo6 through his mi!d like multiple 8urre!ts i! a! u!impeded stream+ he is
simulta!eously a partisa! i! the Fre!8h resista!8e- a deported priso!er o the 1erma!s- a!d a survivor
o 3u8he!6ald7 3y re8reati!g 1LrardIs 8o!s8ious!ess as a! i!terse8tio! o three time Uo!es- Sempr_!
re!ders the luid timeless ordeal o the 8amp i!mate 6ho has lost his se!se o lie as a 8hro!ologi8al
passage rom yesterday through today i!to tomorro67
The topi8 o the Jdeath o the subje8t-K o its dispersal i! a pa!demo!ium o 8o!li8ti!g a!d
ragme!ted !arrative li!es- is usually see! as a result o elitist artisti8 rele8tio!s- divor8ed rom the real
8o!8er!s o real peopleT Sempr_!Is u!iNue a8hieveme!t is to establish the li!k bet6ee! this moder!ist
revolutio! i! 6riti!g a!d our most traumati8 histori8al e?perie!8e7 The true o8us o .e grand voyage
is !ot 6hat really happe!ed o! the 6ay to 3u8he!6ald- but ho6 su8h a terrible eve!t ae8ts the very
ide!tity o the subje8t+ its eleme!tary 8o!tours o reality are shattered- the subje8t !o lo!ger
e?perie!8es himsel as part o a 8o!ti!uous lo6 o history 6hi8h devolves rom the past to6ards the
uture7 9!stead- his e?perie!8e moves i! a ki!d o eter!al prese!t i! 6hi8h prese!t- past- a!d uture-
reality a!d a!tasy- dire8tly i!tera8t7 9! his theory o relativity- 0i!stei! proposes to i!terpret time as a
ourth dime!sio! o spa8e i! 6hi8h past a!d uture are all J!o6-K already hereT be8ause o our limited
per8eptio!- 6e just 8a!!ot see them- 6e 8a! o!ly see the prese!t7 9! Sempr_!Is !ovel- it is as i- ater
goi!g through the !ightmare o the lie i! a 8amp- our per8eptio! 6ide!s a!d 6e 8a! see all three
dime!sio!s o time simulta!eouslyEtime be8omes spa8e- givi!g us a! u!8a!!y reedom to move ba8k
a!d orth alo!g it just as 6e 6a!der arou!d i! a! ope! spa8e- 6ith past a!d uture as diere!t paths
that 6e 8a! take at 6ill7 There is- ho6ever- a pri8e to be paid or this reedom- a bli!d spot i! this ield
o spatialiUed time+ 6e 8a! see everythi!g e?8ept the prese!t o the 8amp itsel7 This prohibited prese!t
is- o 8ourse- deathEbei!g alive ater 3u8he!6ald is !ot the same as havi!g survived it i!ta8t+ the
shado6 o death tai!ts 1LrardIs memories o i!!o8e!t pre6ar rie!dshipsEhe lear!s later that ma!y o
his rie!ds have bee! killedEa!d poiso!s his post6ar lie7 .ie i! the 8amp is thus !ot so mu8h the
ultimate reere!t o his memories as the distorti!g s8ree! 6hi8h tai!ts a!d spoils them all7 Sempr_!
ju?taposes 1LrardIs pleasure at readi!g the 8hildhood memories oered i! Croust 6ith the pai!ul a!d
deerred memory o his arrival at the 3u8he!6ald 8o!8e!tratio! 8ampEhis Jmadelei!eK is the stra!ge
smell that re8alls the 8rematory ove!+

A!d sudde!ly- bor!e o! the breeUe- the 8urious odor+ s6eetish- 8loyi!g- 6ith a bitter a!d truly
!auseati!g edge to it7 The pe8uliar odor that 6ould later prove to be rom the 8rematory ove! O The
stra!ge smell 6ould immediately i!vade the reality o memory7 9 6ould be rebor! thereT 9 6ould die i
retur!ed to lie there7 9 6ould embra8e a!d i!hale the muddy- heady odor o that estuary o death7
'
/hat resus8itates the trauma are !ot merely the immediate pai!ul asso8iatio!s o the details
6hi8h re8all the 8amp- but- eve! more- the po6er o these re8e!t memories to J8olorK a!d thus spoil the
more a!8ie!t- ge!tle memories7 Fobert A!telme- i! his testimo!y .esp>ce humaine- evokes a similar
8ase o overdetermi!atio!+ the pleasurable memory o a lover ri!gi!g the doorbell has bee! i!delibly
8olored by the pai!ul memory o the 1estapo ri!gi!g the same bell at the mome!t o o!eIs arrest7
$

3oth i! this i!sta!8e a!d i! Sempr_!Is use o CroustIs ri!gi!g garde! bell- the survivors i!d that
memory has bee! 8olo!iUed by the e?perie!8e o the =olo8aust+ there is !o 6ay to retrieve the pleasa!t
memory o a lover 6aiti!g at the door 6ithout simulta!eously triggeri!g the 8orruptio! o that memory
by the trauma7
The same shit rom li!ear !arrative time to the ragme!ted sy!8hro!i8ity o diere!t times
8hara8teriUes Fre!8h va!guard 8i!ema o the late 1%#0s a!d early 1%'0s- most visibly i! the 6ork o
Alai! Fes!ais- 6hose irst ilm- the do8ume!tary ight and Fog- also deals 6ith the =olo8aust7
Fes!aisIs masterpie8e- .ast :ear in Marienbad- is about a 8ouple 6hose aair is told i! temporal sli8es
the order o 6hi8h is !ever 8lear+ the time stru8ture o the !arrative e?ists as a sy!8hro!i8 mass 6herei!
past- prese!t- a!d uture are all eNually available- a!d 8a! pote!tially all be prese!t7 The s8ript or
Marienbad 6as 6ritte! by Alai! Fobbe:1rillet- the leadi!g author o the Fre!8h nouveau roman 6ho
also dire8ted ilms7 4o 6o!der Sempr_! 8ollaborated 6ith Fes!ais+ apart rom 6riti!g t6o s8e!arios
or him- he 6as a! u!a8k!o6ledged 8o!tributor to Fes!aisIs Ce taime! 1e taime7 9! dis8ussi!g this
ilm- 1illes GeleuUe i!trodu8ed the 8o!8ept o the Jsheet o timeKEa traumati8 poi!t i! time- a ki!d o
mag!eti8 attra8tor 6hi8h tears mome!ts o past- prese!t- a!d uture out o their proper 8o!te?t-
8ombi!i!g them i!to a 8omple? ield o multiple- dis8rete- a!d i!tera8ti!g temporalities7 9! Ce taime!
1e taime- the JsheetK is the !arratorIs traumati8 memory o the death @murderMA o his beloved7 Dlaude
FidderEa 6riter 6ho- i! despair ater the death o his love- has attempted sui8ideEis approa8hed to be
a test:subje8t at a mysterious a8ility devoted to resear8hi!g time travel7 The s8ie!tistsI pla! is to se!d
him ba8k i!to his o6! past- e?a8tly o!e year earlier- but or o!ly o!e mi!ute7 )!ortu!ately- the
e?perime!t goes out o 8o!trol- a!d Dlaude i!ds himsel u!stu8k i! time- bou!8ed bet6ee! ra!dom
mome!ts o his lie- re:e?perie!8i!g s!ippets rom his past- i! a mi?ture o mome!ts o love- doubt-
8o!usio!- happi!ess- a!d eve! day:to:day routi!e- all i! the orm o ti!y ragme!ts- shuled about or
replayed like a s8rat8hed re8ord7 /hile the s8ie!tists ru!!i!g the bot8hed e?perime!t ra!ti8ally try to
retrieve Dlaude- he be8omes more a!d more i?ated o! past mome!ts- retur!i!g to them a!d repeati!g
them e!dlessly7 Goes somethi!g similar !ot happe! to 1Lrard i! .e grand voyageM =e also 8omes
u!stu8k rom the li!ear temporal lo6- 8aught i! a! i!tera8tive loop bet6ee! multiple traumati8 sheets
o time7
There is more tha! just a ormal parallel bet6ee! these pro8edures i! 8i!ema a!d literature+ .e
grand voyage is a !ovel 6hi8h 6as o!ly possible ater the arrival o 8i!ema- i!8orporati!g as it does
the 8i!emati8 se!sibility a!d te8h!iNues o mo!tage- lashba8ks- imagi!i!g the uture- visual
hallu8i!atio!s- et87 A!other disti!guishi!g 8i!emati8 eature o the !ovelIs !arrative is the sudde! rise
o details @images- obje8ts- sou!dsA sho6! i! 8lose:up- their e?8essive a!d i!trusive pro?imity
overshado6i!g the !arrative 8o!te?t o 6hi8h they are a part7 The herme!euti8 temptatio! to read these
details as symbols a!d to sear8h or their hidde! mea!i!g should be resisted+ they are e?posed
ragme!ts o the real 6hi8h resist mea!i!g7 The mea!i!g o their 8o!te?tEthe terrible situatio! o the
ShoahEis too traumati8 to be assumed- so this sudde! o8us o! material details serves the purpose o
keepi!g mea!i!g at a dista!8e7
The problem the survivors e!8ou!ter is !ot o!ly that 6it!essi!g is impossible- that it al6ays has
a! eleme!t o prosopopoeia- si!8e the true 6it!ess is al6ays already dead a!d 6e 8a! o!ly speak o! his
behal7 There is also a symmetri8 problem e!8ou!tered at the opposite e!d+ there is !o proper publi8-
!o liste!er adeNuate to re8eive the 6it!essi!g7 The most traumati8 dream Crimo .evi had i! Aus8h6itU
6as about his survival+ the 6ar is over- he is reu!ited 6ith his amily- telli!g them about his lie i! the
8amp- but they gradually be8ome bored- start to ya6! a!d- o!e ater a!other- leave the table- so that
i!ally .evi is let alo!e7 A! a!e8dote rom the 3os!ia! 6ar i! the early 1%%0s makes the same poi!t+
ma!y o the girls 6ho survived brutal rapes later killed themselves- havi!g rejoi!ed their 8ommu!ity
o!ly to i!d that !o o!e 6as really ready to liste! to them- or a88ept their testimo!y7 9! .a8a!Is terms-
6hat is missi!g here is !ot o!ly a!other huma! bei!g- the atte!tive liste!er- but the Jbig HtherK itsel-
the spa8e o the symboli8 i!s8riptio! or registratio! o my 6ords7 .evi made the same poi!t i! his
dire8t a!d simple 6ay+ J/hat 6e are doi!g to 2e6s is so irreprese!table i! its horror that eve! i
someo!e 6ill survive the 8amps- he 6ill !ot be believed by those 6ho 6ere !ot thereEthey 6ill simply
de8lare him a liar or a me!tally ill perso!RK
&
Si!8e .evi 6as !ot a! artist- he did !ot dra6 the artisti8
8o!seNue!8es o this a8tEbut Sempr_! did7 Guri!g the Jprese!tK o the bo?8ar jour!ey i! .e grand
voyage- 1Lrard 8o!veys his memories to a! u!!amed 8ompa!io! dubbed Jle gars de SemurK @the guy
rom SemurA7 /hy this !eed or a! i!terlo8utorM /hat u!8tio! does he haveM 1Lrard i!orms us at the
outset that his 8ompa!io! 6ill die upo! arrivi!g at the 8amp- so he 8learly sta!ds or the d6i!dli!g
prese!8e o the big Hther- the re8ipie!t o our spee8h7 9! the 8o!8e!tratio! 8amp- there is !o big Hther-
!o o!e o! 6hom 6e 8a! 8ou!t to re8eive a!d veriy our testimo!y7 This is 6hat makes eve! our
survival mea!i!gless7
This bri!gs us agai! to the ate o moder! art7 S8hoe!berg still hoped that some6here there
6ould be at least o!e liste!er 6ho 6ould truly u!dersta!d his ato!al musi87 9t 6as o!ly his greatest
pupil- A!to! /eber!- 6ho a88epted the a8t that there is !o liste!er- !o big Hther to re8eive the 6ork
a!d properly re8og!iUe its value7 9! literature- 2ames 2oy8e still 8ou!ted o! uture ge!eratio!s o
literary 8riti8s as his ideal publi8- 8laimi!g that he 6rote Finnegans Wa"e to keep them o88upied or
the !e?t (00 years7 9! the atermath o the =olo8aust- 6e- 6riters a!d readers- have to a88ept that 6e
are alo!e- readi!g a!d 6riti!g at our o6! risk- 6ith !o guara!tee rom the big Hther7 @9t 6as 3e8kett
6ho dre6 this 8o!8lusio! i! his break 6ith 2oy8e7A
This la8k o the big Hther does !ot- ho6ever- mea! that 6e are irrevo8ably trapped i! the
misery o our i!itude- deprived o a!y redemptive mome!ts7 9! Sempr_!Is !ovel- 1Lrard 6it!esses the
arrival o a tru8kload o Colish 2e6s at 3u8he!6aldT they had bee! sta8ked i!to a reight trai! almost
200 to a 8ar- traveli!g or days 6ithout ood a!d 6ater i! the 8oldest 6i!ter o the 6ar7 H! arrival- all
had roUe! to death e?8ept or itee! 8hildre!- kept 6arm i! the middle o a bu!dle o bodies7 /he!
the 8hildre! 6ere removed rom the 8ar the 4aUis let their dogs loose o! them7 Soo! o!ly t6o leei!g
8hildre! 6ere let+

The little o!e bega! to all behi!d- the SS 6ere ho6li!g behi!d them a!d the! the dogs bega! to ho6l
too- the smell o blood 6as drivi!g them mad- a!d the! the bigger o the t6o 8hildre! slo6ed his pa8e
to take the ha!d o the smaller O together they 8overed a e6 more yards O till the blo6s o the 8lubs
elled them a!d- together they dropped- their a8es to the grou!d- their ha!ds 8lasped or all eter!ity7
%
/hat should !ot es8ape our atte!tio! is that the reeUe o eter!ity is @agai!A embodied i! the
ha!d as partial obje8t+ 6hile the bodies o the t6o boys perish- the 8lasped ha!ds persist or all eter!ity
like the smile o the Dheshire 8at O 9t is !ot hard to imagi!e ho6 this s8e!e might appear o! s8ree!+ as
the sou!dtra8k re8ords 6hat is happe!i!g i! reality @the t6o 8hildre! bei!g 8lubbed to deathA- the
image o their 8lasped ha!ds reeUes- immobiliUed or eter!ityE6hile the sou!d re!ders temporary
reality- the image re!ders the eter!al Feal7 @0?a8tly su8h a pro8edure 6as used by ,a!uel de Hliveira
i! the last s8e!e o his + -al"ing )icture7A
10
9t is the pure sura8e o su8h i?ed images o eter!ity- !ot
a!y deeper ,ea!i!g- 6hi8h allo6s or redemptive mome!ts i! the bleak story o the Shoah7 H!e
should read this imagi!ed s8e!e together 6ith t6o variatio!s7 Fe8all the i!al shot o -helma and
.ouise+ the roUe! image o the t6o 6ome! i! the 8ar Jlyi!gK over the pre8ipi8e7 9s this a visio! o
positive utopia @the triumph o emi!i!e subje8tivity over deathA- or a maski!g o the miserable reality
about to 8omeM From my youth- 9 remember a! old Droatia! ava!t:garde short ilm about a ma!
8hasi!g a 6oma! arou!d a large table- the t6o o them madly giggli!g7 The 8hase goes o!- a!d the
giggli!g gets louder a!d louder- eve! 6he! the 8ouple disappear behi!d the table a!d 6e see o!ly the
ma!Is ha!ds bei!g raised7 9! the i!al shot- 6e see the dead 6oma!Is mutilated body- but the giggli!g
goes o! O
The 6eak!ess o the i!al shot rom -helma and .ouise is that the roUe! image is !ot
a88ompa!ied by a sou!dtra8k re8ordi!g 6hat is JreallyK happe!i!g @the 8ar 8rashi!g- the s8reams o the
6ome!AEstra!gely- this la8k o reality u!dermi!es the utopia! dime!sio! o the roUe! image7 9! the
Droat ilm- the relatio!s are i!verted+ it is the sou!dtra8k 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues the a!tasy o the eroti8 play-
6hile the roUe! image o the dead body 8o!ro!ts us 6ith reality7 The image thereby radi8ally 8ha!ges
our per8eptio! o the sou!dtra8k+ the same laughter loses its eroti8 i!!o8e!8e- tur!i!g i!to the obs8e!e
giggli!g o hau!ti!g u!dead voi8es7 The lesso! is 8lear+ i! the s8e!e imagi!ed by Sempr_!- the roUe!
image a88ompa!yi!g the reality registered i! sou!d sta!ds or a positive eter!al:ethi8al utopia- 6hile i!
the Droat ilm- the laughter 6hi8h persists eve! ater its bearer has bee! murdered sta!ds or the evil:
obs8e!e u!dead7
0ter!ity is to be take! here i! the stri8test Clato!i8 se!se7 9! o!e o the Agatha Dhristie stories-
=er8ule Coirot dis8overs that a! ugly !urse is the same perso! as the beautiul 6oma! he had
previously met o! a tra!s:Atla!ti8 voyage- she has merely disguised hersel to hide her !atural beauty7
=asti!gs- CoirotIs /atso!:like 8ompa!io!- remarks sadly that i a beauty 8a! make hersel appear ugly-
the! the same 8a! also be do!e vi8e versa7 /hat the! remai!s i! ma!Is i!atuatio! beyo!d de8eptio!M
Goes this i!sight i!to the u!reliability o the beautiul 6oma! !ot sig!al the e!d o loveM J4o- my
rie!d-K replies Coirot- Jit a!!ou!8es the begi!!i!g o 6isdom7K 9! other 6ords- su8h skepti8ism- su8h
a6are!ess o the de8eptive !ature o emi!i!e beauty- misses the poi!t- 6hi8h is that emi!i!e beauty is
!o!etheless absolute- a! absolute 6hi8h appears+ !o matter ho6 ragile a!d de8eptive it may be at the
level o substa!tial reality- 6hat tra!spires i!>through the mome!t o 3eauty is a! AbsoluteEthere is
more truth i! the appeara!8e tha! i! 6hat may be hidde! be!eath it7 Therei! resides ClatoIs deep
i!sight+ 9deas are !ot the hidde! reality be!eath appeara!8es @Clato 6as 6ell a6are that this hidde!
reality is that o ever:8ha!gi!g 8orrupti!g a!d 8orrupted matterAT 9deas are !othi!g but the very orm o
appeara!8e- this orm as su8hEor- as .a8a! su88i!8tly re!dered ClatoIs poi!t- the supra:se!sible is
appeara!8e as appeara!8e7 For this reaso!- !either Clato !or Dhristia!ity are orms o /isdomEthey
are both a!ti:/isdom embodied7
/hat this mea!s is that- i! 8o!8eivi!g o art- 6e 8a! retur! to Clato 6ithout shame7 ClatoIs
reputatio! has suered o! a88ou!t o his 8laim that poets should be thro6! out o the 8ity7 @Father
se!sible advi8e- judgi!g rom my o6! post:5ugoslav e?perie!8e- 6here the path to eth!i8 8lea!si!g
6as prepared by the da!gerous dreams o poetsEthe 3os!ia! Serb leader Fadova! *aradia bei!g
o!ly o!e amo!g them7 9 the /est has its military:i!dustrial 8omple?- 6e i! the e?:5ugoslavia had a
poeti8:military 8omple?+ the post:5ugoslav 6ar 6as triggered by a! e?plosive mi?ture o poeti8 a!d
military 8ompo!e!ts7A From a Clato!i8 sta!dpoi!t- 6hat does a poem about the =olo8aust doM 9t
provides a Jdes8riptio! 6ithout pla8eK+ it re!ders the 9dea o =olo8aust7
Fe8all the old Datholi8 strategy or guardi!g me! agai!st the si!s o the lesh+ 6he! tempted by
a voluptuous emale body- imagi!e ho6 it 6ill look i! a 8ouple o de8adesEthe 6ri!kled ski! a!d
saggi!g breasts O @better still- imagi!e 6hat lurks eve! !o6 be!eath the ski!+ the ra6 lesh a!d bo!es-
bodily luids- hal:digested ood a!d e?8reme!t OA7 The same advi8e had already bee! give! by
,ar8us Aurelius i! his Meditations+

.ike seei!g roasted meat a!d other dishes i! ro!t o you a!d sudde!ly realiUi!g+ This is a dead ish7 A
dead bird7 A dead pig7 Hr that this !oble vi!tage is grape jui8e- a!d the purple robes are sheep 6ool
dyed 6ith shellish blood7 Hr maki!g loveEsomethi!g rubbi!g agai!st your pe!is- a brie seiUure a!d a
little 8loudy liNuid7Cer8eptio!s like thatElat8hi!g o!to thi!gs a!d pier8i!g through them- so 6e see
6hat they really are7 ThatIs 6hat 6e !eed to do all the timeEall through our lives 6he! thi!gs lay
8laim to our trustEto lay them bare a!d see ho6 poi!tless they are- to strip a6ay the lege!d that
e!8rusts them7
11
Far rom e!a8ti!g a retur! to the Feal desti!ed to break the imagi!ary spell o the body- su8h
pro8edures amou!t to a! escape from the 7eal- the Feal 6hi8h a!!ou!8es itsel i! the sedu8tive
appeara!8e o the !aked body7 That is to say- i! the oppositio! bet6ee! the spe8tral appeara!8e o the
se?ualiUed body a!d the repulsive body i! de8ay- it is the spe8tral appeara!8e 6hi8h is the Feal- 6hile
the de8ayi!g body is merely realityEthat to 6hi8h 6e take re8ourse i! order to avoid the deadly
as8i!atio! o the Feal as it threate!s to dra6 us i!to its vorte? o 1ouissance7 A Jra6K Clato!ism 6ould
8laim here that o!ly the beautiul body ully materialiUes the 9dea- a!d that a body i! material de8ay
simply alls a6ay rom its 9dea- is !o lo!ger its aithul 8opy7 From a GeleuUia! @a!d- here- .a8a!ia!A
perspe8tive- o! the 8o!trary- the spe8ter that attra8ts us is the 9dea o the body as Feal7 This body is !ot
the body i! reality- but the virtual body i! GeleuUeIs se!se o the term+ the i!8orporeal>immaterial body
o pure i!te!sities7 @H!e should thus i!vert the usual oppositio! 6ithi! 6hi8h true art is JdeepK a!d
8ommer8ial kits8h superi8ial+ the problem 6ith kits8h is that it is all too Jproou!d-K ma!ipulati!g
deep libidi!al a!d ideologi8al or8es- 6hile ge!ui!e art k!o6s ho6 to remai! at the sura8e- ho6 to
subtra8t its subje8t rom the JdeeperK 8o!te?t o histori8al reality7A
The same goes or 8o!temporary art- 6here 6e e!8ou!ter ote! brutal attempts to Jretur! to the
real-K to remi!d the spe8tator @or readerA that she is per8eivi!g a i8tio!- to a6ake! her rom the s6eet
dream7 This gesture has t6o mai! orms 6hi8h- although opposed- amou!t to the same thi!g7 9!
literature or 8i!ema- there are @espe8ially i! postmoder! te?tsA sel:rele?ive remi!ders that 6hat 6e are
6at8hi!g is a mere i8tio!- su8h as 6he! the a8tor o! s8ree! addresses us dire8tly as spe8tators- thus
rui!i!g the illusio! o the auto!omous spa8e o the !arrative- or the 6riter dire8tly i!terve!es i! the
story to add a! iro!i8 8omme!tT i! theatre- there are o88asio!al brutal a8ts @like slaughteri!g a 8hi8ke!
o!stageA 6hi8h a6ake! us to the reality o the stage7 9!stead o 8o!erri!g o! these gestures a ki!d o
3re8htia! dig!ity- per8eivi!g them as versio!s o e?tra!eatio!- o!e should rather de!ou!8e them or
6hat they are+ escapes from the 7eal- the e?a8t opposite o 6hat they 8laim to be- desperate attempts to
avoid the real o the illusio! itsel- the Feal that emerges i! the guise o a! illusory spe8ta8le7
9G0AIS ACC0AF941

A!d the same goes or loveEthat is to say- 6hat is it to i!d o!esel passio!ately i! loveM 9s it
!ot a ki!d o perma!e!t state o e?8eptio!M All the proper bala!8es o our daily lie are disturbed-
everythi!g 6e do is 8olored by the u!derlyi!g thought o Jthat7K The situatio! is properly Jbeyo!d
1ood a!d 0vilK+ 6e eel a 6eird i!diere!8e to6ards our moral obligatio!s 6ith regard to our pare!ts-
8hildre!- rie!dsEeve! i 6e 8o!ti!ue to meet them- 6e do so i! a me8ha!i8al 6ay- i! a mode o Jas
iKT everythi!g pales i!to i!sig!ii8a!8e 8ompared to our passio!ate atta8hme!t7 9! this se!se- alli!g i!
love is like the bli!di!g light that hit Saul>Caul o! the road to Gamas8us+ a ki!d o religious suspe!sio!
o the 0thi8al- to use *ierkegaardIs terms7 A! Absolute i!terve!es a!d derails the !ormal ru! o our
aairs+ it is !ot so mu8h that the sta!dard hierar8hy o values is i!verted- but- more radi8ally- that
a!other dime!sio! e!ters the s8e!e- a diere!t level o bei!g7 A!d- o 8ourse- the same holds or a!
authe!ti8 politi8al e!gageme!t7 9! his ,onflict of the Faculties- 6ritte! i! the mid:1$%0s- 9mma!uel
*a!t addresses a simple but dii8ult Nuestio!+ is there true progress i! historyM @=e mea!t ethi8al
progress i! regard to reedom- !ot just material developme!t7A *a!t 8o!8eded that a8tual history is
8o!used a!d oers !o 8lear proo+ 6e might thi!k o ho6 the t6e!tieth 8e!tury brought u!pre8ede!ted
demo8ra8y a!d 6elare- but also the =olo8aust a!d the 1ulag7 3ut *a!t !o!etheless 8o!8luded that-
although progress 8a!!ot be prove!- 6e 8a! dis8er! sig!s 6hi8h i!di8ate that it is possible7 *a!t
i!terpreted the Fre!8h Fevolutio! as su8h a sig! 6hi8h poi!ted to6ards the possibility o reedom+ the
hitherto u!thi!kable happe!ed- a 6hole people earlessly asserted their reedom a!d eNuality7 For *a!t-
eve! more importa!t tha! the ote! bloody reality o 6hat o88urred o! the streets o Caris 6as the
e!thusiasm that the eve!ts i! Fra!8e gave rise to i! the eyes o sympatheti8 observers all arou!d
0urope @a!d also i! =aitiRA+

The re8e!t Fevolutio! o a people 6hi8h is ri8h i! spirit- may 6ell either ail or su88eed- a88umulate
misery a!d atro8ity- it !evertheless arouses i! the heart o all spe8tators @6ho are !ot themselves 8aught
up i! itA a taki!g o sides a88ordi!g to desires 6hi8h borders o! e!thusiasm a!d 6hi8h- si!8e its very
e?pressio! 6as !ot 6ithout da!ger- 8a! o!ly have bee! 8aused by a moral dispositio! 6ithi! the huma!
ra8e7
12
Go !ot these 6ords also it pere8tly the 0gyptia! uprisi!g o February 2011 that toppled
Creside!t ,ubarakM The Fre!8h Fevolutio! 6as or *a!t a sig! o history i! the triple se!se o signum
rememorativum! demonstrativum! prognosticum7 The 0gyptia! uprisi!g 6as also a sig! i! 6hi8h the
memory o the lo!g past o authoritaria! oppressio! a!d the struggle or its abolitio! reverberatesT a!
eve!t 6hi8h now demo!strates the possibility o a 8ha!geT a!d a hope or future a8hieveme!ts7
/hatever our doubts- ears- a!d 8ompromises- or that i!sta!t o e!thusiasm- ea8h o us 6as ree a!d
parti8ipati!g i! the u!iversal reedom o huma!ity7 All the skepti8ism e?pressed behi!d 8losed doors
eve! by ma!y 6orried progressives 6as prove! 6ro!g7
First- o!e 8ould !ot help but !ote the Jmira8ulousK !ature o the eve!ts i! 0gypt+ somethi!g
happe!ed that e6 had predi8ted- violati!g the e?pertsI opi!io!s- as i the uprisi!g 6as the result !ot
simply o so8ial 8auses but o the i!terve!tio! o a oreig! age!8y i!to history- a! age!8y that 6e 8a!
8all- i! a Clato!i8 ashio!- the eter!al 9dea o reedom- justi8e- a!d dig!ity7
Se8o!d- the uprisi!g 6as u!iversal+ it 6as immediately possible or all o us arou!d the 6orld
to ide!tiy 6ith it- to k!o6 6hat it 6as about- 6ithout a!y !eed or a 8ultural a!alysis o the spe8ii8
eatures o 0gyptia! so8iety7 9! 8o!trast to the *homei!ist revolutio! i! 9ra!E6here letists had to
smuggle their message i!to a predomi!a!tly 9slamist rameEhere- the rame 6as 8learly that o a
u!iversal a!d se8ular 8all or reedom a!d justi8e- so that eve! the ,uslim 3rotherhood had to adopt
this la!guage o se8ular dema!d7 The most sublime mome!t o88urred 6he! ,uslims a!d Dopts joi!ed
i! a 8ommo! prayer o! the Tahrir sNuare- 8ha!ti!g J/e are H!eRK thus providi!g the best a!s6er to the
se8taria! religious viole!8e7 Those !eo8o!servatives 6ho 8riti8iUed multi8ulturalism i! the !ame o the
u!iversal values o reedom a!d demo8ra8y 6ere 8o!ro!ted 6ith a mome!t o truth+ 5ou 6a!t
u!iversal reedom a!d demo8ra8yM This is 6hat people are dema!di!g i! 0gypt- so 6hy are you
u!easyM 9s it be8ause the 0gyptia! protesters also 6a!t so8ial a!d e8o!omi8 justi8e- !ot just market
reedomM
Third- the viole!8e o the protesters 6as purely symboli8- a! a8t o radi8al a!d 8olle8tive 8ivil
disobedie!8e+ they suspe!ded the authority o the stateEit 6as !ot just a! i!!er liberatio!- but a so8ial
a8t o breaki!g the 8hai!s o servitude volontaire7 The physi8al viole!8e 6as perpetrated by ,ubarakIs
hired thugs- 6ho e!tered Tahrir SNuare o! horses a!d 8amels to k!o8k the protesters arou!dT the most
the protesters did 6as dee!d themselves7
Fourth- although 8ombative- the protestersI message 6as !ot o!e o killi!g7 The dema!d 6as
or ,ubarak to go- to leave his post a!d the 8ou!try- a!d thus ope! up a spa8e or reedom i! 0gypt- a
reedom that e?8luded !o o!eEthe protestersI 8all to the army a!d eve! the hated poli8e 6as !ot
JGeath to youRK but J/e are brothersR 2oi! usRK This last eature 8learly disti!guishes ema!8ipatory
rom rightist:populist demo!stratio!s+ although the rightist mobiliUatio! pro8laims the orga!i8 u!ity o
the Ceople- this u!ity is sustai!ed by a 8all to a!!ihilate a desig!ated e!emy @2e6s- traitors OA7
/he! Creside!t Hbama 6el8omed the uprisi!g as a legitimate e?pressio! o opi!io! that
!eeded to be a8k!o6ledged by the gover!me!t- the 8o!usio! 6as total+ the 8ro6ds i! Dairo a!d
Ale?a!dria did !ot 6a!t their dema!ds to be a8k!o6ledged by the gover!me!tT they de!ied the very
legitima8y o the gover!me!t7 They did !ot 6a!t the ,ubarak regime as a part!er i! dialogueT they
6a!ted ,ubarak to go7 They !ot o!ly 6a!ted a !e6 gover!me!t that 6ould liste! to their opi!io!s-
they 6a!ted to reshape the e!tire state7 They did !ot have Jopi!io!sKT they 6ere the truth o the
situatio! i! 0gypt7 ,ubarak u!derstood this mu8h better tha! Hbama7 There 6as !o room or
8ompromise here+ either the e!tire ,ubarak po6er edii8e ell- or the uprisi!g 6ould be 8o:opted a!d
betrayed7 The protra8ted struggle 6hi8h dragged o! i! 0gypt 6as !ot a 8o!li8t o visio!s- but the
8o!li8t bet6ee! a visio! o reedom- the Jeter!alK Clato!i8 9dea o reedom- a!d a bli!d 8li!gi!g to
po6er ready to use all mea!s possibleEterror- ood deprivatio!- e?haustio!- briberyEto 8rush the 6ill
to reedom7
This Jtruth o ClatoK re8eived its 8learest ormulatio! i! o!e o the great a!ti:Clato!i8 6orks-
1illes GeleuUeIs -he .ogic of Sense- 6here GeleuUe begi!s by Ji!verti!gK ClatoIs dualism o eter!al
9deas a!d their imitatio!s i! se!suous reality i!to the dualism o substa!tial @materialA bodies a!d the
pure impassive sura8e o Se!se- the lu? o 3e8omi!g 6hi8h is to be lo8ated o! the very borderli!e o
3ei!g a!d !o!:3ei!g7 Se!ses are sura8es 6hi8h do !ot e?ist- but merely subsist+ JThey are !ot thi!gs
or a8ts- but eve!ts7 /e 8a!!ot say that they e?ist- but rather that they subsist or i!here @havi!g this
mi!imum o bei!g 6hi8h is appropriate to that 6hi8h is !ot a thi!g- a !o!e?isti!g e!tityA7K
1"
The
Stoi8s- 6ho developed this !otio! o Ji!8orporeals-K 6ere

the irst to reverse Clato!ism a!d to bri!g about a radi8al i!versio!7 For i bodies 6ith their states-
Nualities- a!d Nua!tities- assume all the 8hara8teristi8s o substa!8e a!d 8ause- 8o!versely- the
8hara8teristi8s o the 9dea are relegated to the other side- that is to this impassive e?tra:3ei!g 6hi8h is
sterile- i!ei8a8ious- a!d o! the sura8e o thi!gs+ the ideatio!al or the i!8orporeal 8a! !o lo!ger be
a!ythi!g other tha! a! Jee8t7K
1(
-his dualism is the Jmaterialist truthK o the dualism o 9deas a!d material thi!gs- a!d it is
agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e should e!visage a retur! to Clato7 .et us take a! u!e?pe8ted e?ample+
+ Woman -hrowing a Stone- a lesser k!o6! pai!ti!g by Ci8asso rom his surrealist period i! the 1%20s-
oers itsel easily to a Clato!ist readi!g+ the distorted ragme!ts o a 6oma! o! a bea8h thro6i!g a
sto!e are- o 8ourse- a grotesNue misreprese!tatio!- i measured by the sta!dard o realist reprodu8tio!T
ho6ever- i! their very plasti8 distortio!- they immediately>i!tuitively re!der the 9dea o a J6oma!
thro6i!g a sto!e-K the Ji!!er ormK o su8h a igure7 This pai!ti!g makes 8lear the true dime!sio! o
ClatoIs philosophi8al revolutio!- so radi8al that it 6as misi!terpreted by Clato himsel+ the assertio! o
the gap bet6ee! the spatio:temporal order o reality i! its eter!al moveme!t o ge!eratio! a!d
8orruptio!- a!d the Jeter!alK order o 9deasEthe !otio! that empiri8al reality 8a! Jparti8ipateK i! a!
eter!al 9dea- that a! eter!al 9dea 8a! shi!e through it- appear i! it7 /here Clato got it 6ro!g is i! his
o!tologiUatio! o 9deas @stri8tly homologous to Ges8artesIs o!tologiUatio! o the cogitoA- as i 9deas
orm a!other- eve! more substa!tial a!d stable order o JtrueK reality7 /hat Clato 6as !ot ready @or-
rather- ableA to a88ept 6as the thoroughly virtual- JimmaterialK @or- rather- Ji!substa!tialKA status o
9deas+ like se!se:eve!ts i! GeleuUeIs o!tology- 9deas have !o 8ausality o their o6!T they are virtual
e!tities ge!erated by spatio:temporal material pro8esses7 Take a! attra8tor i! mathemati8s+ all positive
li!es or poi!ts i! its sphere o attra8tio! o!ly e!dlessly approa8h it- 6ithout ever rea8hi!g its ormEthe
e?iste!8e o this orm is purely virtualT it is !othi!g more tha! the orm to6ards 6hi8h the li!es a!d
poi!ts te!d7 =o6ever- pre8isely as su8h- the virtual is the Feal o this ield+ the immovable o8al poi!t
arou!d 6hi8h all eleme!ts 8ir8ulateEthe term JormK here should be give! its ull Clato!i8 6eight-
si!8e 6e are deali!g 6ith a! Jeter!alK 9dea i! 6hi8h reality impere8tly Jparti8ipates7K H!e should thus
ully a88ept that spatio:temporal material reality is Jall there is-K that there is !o other Jmore trueK
reality+ the o!tologi8al status o 9deas is that o pure appearing7 The o!tologi8al problem o 9deas is the
same as the u!dame!tal problem addressed by =egel+ ho6 is meta:physi8s possible- ho6 8a! temporal
reality participate i! the eter!al Hrder- ho6 8a! this order appear- tra!spire- i! itM 9t is !ot Jho6 8a! 6e
rea8h the true reality beyo!d appeara!8esMK but Jho6 8a! appearance emerge i! realityMK The
8o!8lusio! Clato avoids is implied i! his o6! li!e o thought+ the supersensible Idea does !ot d6ell
beyond appeara!8es- i! a separate o!tologi8al sphere o ully 8o!stituted 3ei!gT it is appearance as
appearance7 4o 6o!der that the t6o great admirers o ClatoIs )armenides- =egel a!d .a8a!- both
provide e?a8tly the same ormula o the JtruthK o the Clato!i8 superse!sible 9dea+ the superse!sible
comes from the 6orld o appeara!8e 6hi8h has mediated itT i! other 6ords- appeara!8e is its esse!8e
a!d- i! a8t- its illi!g7 The superse!sible is the se!suous a!d the per8eived posited as it is in truthT but
the truth o the se!suous a!d the per8eived is to be appearance7 The superse!sible is thereore
appearance <ua appearance O 9t is ote! said that the superse!sible 6orld is not appeara!8eT but 6hat
is here u!derstood by appeara!8e is !ot appeara!8e- but rather the sensuous 6orld as itsel the really
a8tual7
1#
/he! .a8a! des8ribes ho6 Carrhasius pai!ted the 8urtai! i! order to prompt Beu?is to ask him-
JH*- !o6 please dra6 aside the veil a!d sho6 me 6hat you have pai!tedRK his i!terpretatio! o the
story reads as a! e?pli8atio! o the above:Nuoted passage rom =egel7 CarrhasiusIs pai!ti!g
appears as somethi!g else @as a!other thi!gA tha! that as 6hat it gives>prese!ts itsel- or- rather- it
gives>prese!ts itsel !o6 as bei!g this @a!Aother thi!g7 The pai!ti!g does !ot rival appeara!8e- it rivals
6hat Clato desig!ated as the 9dea 6hi8h is beyo!d appeara!8e7 9t is be8ause the pai!ti!g is this
appeara!8e 6hi8h says that it is 6hat gives appeara!8e- that Clato raises himsel agai!st pai!ti!g as a!
a8tivity 6hi8h rivals his o6!7
1'
The impli8it lesso! o Clato is not that everythi!g is appeara!8e- that it is !ot possible to dra6 a
8lear li!e o separatio! bet6ee! appeara!8e a!d reality @that 6ould have mea!t the vi8tory o sophismA-
but that esse!8e is Jappeara!8e as appeara!8e-K that esse!8e appears i! 8o!trast to appeara!8e 6ithi!
appeara!8eT that the distinction between appearance and essence has to be inscribed into appearance
itself7 9!soar as the gap bet6ee! esse!8e a!d appeara!8e is i!here!t to appeara!8e- i! other 6ords-
i!soar as esse!8e is !othi!g but appeara!8e rele8ted i!to itsel- appeara!8e is appeara!8e agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o !othi!gEeverythi!g that appears ultimately appears out o !othi!g @or- to put it i! terms
o Nua!tum physi8s- all e!tities arise out o the Nua!tum va8illatio!s o the voidA7 Appeara!8e is
!othi!g i! itselT it is just a! illusory bei!g- but this illusory bei!g is the o!ly bei!g o esse!8e- so that
the rele8tive moveme!t o esse!8e
is the moveme!t !othi!g to !othi!g- a!d so ba8k to itsel7 The tra!sitio!- or be8omi!g- sublates itsel
i! its passageT the other that i! this tra!sitio! 8omes to be- is !ot the !o!:bei!g o a bei!g- but the
!othi!g!ess o a !othi!g- a!d this- to be the !egatio! o a !othi!g- 8o!stitutes bei!g7 3ei!g o!ly is as
the moveme!t o !othi!g to !othi!g- a!d as su8h it is esse!8eT a!d the latter does !ot have this
moveme!t within it- but is this moveme!t as a bei!g that is itsel absolutely illusory- pure !egativity-
outside o 6hi8h there is !othi!g or it to !egate but 6hi8h !egates o!ly its o6! !egative- a!d this
!egative- 6hi8h latter is o!ly i! this !egati!g7
1$
The a!s6er to J/hy is there Somethi!g rather tha! 4othi!gMK is thus that there is o!ly
4othi!g- a!d all pro8esses take pla8e Jrom 4othi!g through 4othi!g to 4othi!g7K =o6ever- this
!othi!g is !ot the Hrie!tal or mysti8al Void o eter!al pea8e- but the !othi!g!ess o a pure gap
@a!tago!ism- te!sio!- J8o!tradi8tio!KA- the pure orm o dislo8atio! o!tologi8ally pre8edi!g a!y
dislo8ated 8o!te!t7 Su8h a radi8al o!tologi8al 8laim is !ot o!ly dismissed by 8ommo! se!se as a
mea!i!gless play 6ith 6ords- it 6as also problematiUed by ma!y ollo6ers a!d 8riti8s o =egel rom
S8helli!g to Gieter =e!ri8h- 6hose diag!osis is that the =egelia! !egatio! o !egatio! o!ly 6orks i
6e 8o!use t6o mea!i!gs o immedia8y+ immedia8y as the immediate starti!g poi!t o a pro8ess a!d
immedia8y as the result o mediatio! @sel:relati!g !egatio!A7 =e!ri8hIs 8riti8al 8o!8lusio! is that
=egelIs attempt to provide a 8ir8ular ou!datio! or the diale8ti8al pro8ess by 6ay o demo!strati!g
ho6 the pro8ess itsel retroa8tively posits>grou!ds its o6! presuppositio!s ails- a!d that 6hat is
!eeded is a! immediate absolute starti!g poi!t provided by the subje8tIs Selbst*6ertrautheit @sel:
a8Nuai!ta!8eA- pre8edi!g a!y rele?ive moveme!t o sel:8o!s8ious!ess7
H!e 8a! !o!etheless dee!d =egel here+ as a model o 6hat he has i! mi!d- let us take the
!otio! o the clinamen i! all its radi8ality+ it is !ot that there are irst atoms- 6hi8h the! deviate rom
their straight path @or !otAEatoms are !othi!g but their clinamen7 There is !o substa!tial Jsomethi!gK
prior to the clinamen 6hi8h gets 8aught up i! itT this Jsomethi!gK 6hi8h deviates is 8reated- emerges-
through the clinamen itself7 The clinamen is thus like the photo! 6ith !o mass+ or a! ordi!ary parti8le
@i there is su8h a thi!gA- 6e imagi!e it as a! obje8t 6ith a mass- su8h that 6he! its moveme!t is
a88elerated its mass gro6sT a photo!- ho6ever- has !o mass i! itsel- its e!tire mass is the result o its
a88eleratio!7 The parado? is here the parado? o a thi!g 6hi8h is al6ays @a!d !othi!g butA a! e?8ess
6ith regard to itsel+ i! its J!ormalK state- it is !othi!g7 This bri!gs us ba8k to .a8a!Is !otio! o the
ob1et a as surplus:e!joyme!t+ there is !o Jbasi8 e!joyme!tK to 6hi8h o!e adds the surplus:e!joyme!tT
e!joyme!t is al6ays a surplus- i! e?8ess7 The obje8t:i!:itsel @photo!- atomA is here !ot
!egated>mediated- it emerges as the ?retroactive@ result of its mediation7
This result bri!gs us ba8k u!e?pe8tedly to ClatoIs )armenides- 6hi8h u!8a!!ily e!ds up
evoki!g a hypothesis that poi!ts or6ard to6ards the thesis that there is only othing- that all pro8esses
take pla8e Jrom 4othi!g through 4othi!g to 4othi!gK+ J9 o!e is !ot- the! !othi!g is7K
1&
9s !ot
)armenides- eve! more tha! ClatoIs Sophist- the dialogue o! the 8orrosive all:pervasive or8e o
!othi!g!essM 9t begi!s already i! )armenides 1"08:d- 6he! Carme!ides raises a Nuestio! that perple?es
So8rates a!d or8es him to admit his limitatio!+ are there also 9deas o the lo6est material thi!gs- 9deas
o e?8reme!t- dust OM 9s there a! eidos or Jthi!gs that might seem absurd- like hair a!d mud a!d dirt-
or a!ythi!g else totally u!dig!iied a!d 6orthlessMK @1"08A7 /hat lurks behi!d this Nuestio! is !ot o!ly
the embarrassi!g a8t that the !oble !otio! o Form 8ould also apply to e?8reme!tal obje8ts- but a mu8h
more pre8ise parado? that Clato approa8hes i! his Statesman @2'2aX2'"aA- i! 6hi8h he makes a 8ru8ial
8laim+ divisio!s @o a ge!us i!to spe8iesA should be made at the proper joi!ts7 For e?ample- it is a
mistake to divide the ge!us o all huma! bei!gs i!to 1reeks a!d barbaria!s+ Jbarbaria!K is !ot a proper
orm be8ause it does !ot desig!ate a positively dei!ed group @spe8iesA- but merely all perso!s 6ho are
!ot 1reeks7 The positivity o the term Jbarbaria!K thus 8o!8eals the a8t that it serves as the 8o!tai!er
or all those 6ho do !ot it the orm J1reek7K =egelIs @a!d .a8a!IsA hypothesis is that this holds or all
divisio!s o a ge!us i!to spe8ies+ every ge!us- i! order to be ully divided i!to spe8ies- has to i!8lude
su8h a !egative pseudo:spe8ies- a Jpart o !o:partK o the ge!us- all those 6ho belo!g to the ge!us but
are !ot 8overed by a!y o its spe8ies7 This J8o!tradi8tio!K bet6ee! a ge!us a!d its spe8ies- embodied
i! a! e?8essive group 6hose 8o!siste!8y is purely J!egative-K is 6hat sets a diale8ti8al pro8ess i!
motio!7
9! the domai! o art as the Jse!sible appeari!g o the 9deaK @a !otio! 6hi8h should be ully
rehabilitatedEo! 8o!ditio! that 6e 8o!8eive o the 9dea as the sura8e o a! 0ve!t that shi!es through
a u!iNue physi8al 8o!stellatio!A- 6e 8o!ro!t a stri8tly homologous Nuestio!+ 6hat obje8t:8o!te!t 8a!
be made i!to a topi8 o artM The history o art is a history o the gradual dis8losure o !e6 domai!s+
6ith Foma!ti8ism- 8haoti8 rui!s a!d mou!tai!s be8ome sublimeT i! high:Nuality dete8tive !ovels-
8orrupted megalopolises a!d de8ayi!g suburbs- !ot to me!tio! murder- are i!8ludedT i! fin de si>cle
moder!ism- emi!i!e hysteria be8omes a topi8- a!d so o!7 ,lade! Golar is right to li!k this problem to
that o the agalma- the i!eable &- the se8ret treasure that @alsoA eludes predi8atio!+

6e have here the !e8essary 8ou!terpart- the Clato!ia! missi!g hal- as it 6ere- or a theory o the obje8t
a7 There are t6o very diere!t- sharply opposed- vie6s o the obje8t i! ClatoEagalma a!d ju!k @shall
6e say Jagalma a!d shitK to make or a better sloga!MAE6hi8h should ultimately be made to 8o!verge
i! the 8o!8ept o obje8t a- a!d the theory o the obje8t has to a88ou!t or both rom the same pivot7
1%
The ob1et a is thus the !ame or the ultimate u!ity o the opposites i! Clato O 9! the early
1%20s- .e!i! proposed that ,ar?ist philosophers should orm a Jso8iety o the materialist rie!ds o
=egelKEtoday- perhaps- the time has 8ome or radi8al philosophers to orm a Jso8iety o the
materialist rie!ds o Clato7K Clato is the irst i! a series o philosophers @Ges8artes a!d =egel bei!g the
t6o mai! othersA 6ho ell out o avor i! the t6e!tieth 8e!tury- bei!g blamed or all our misortu!es7
3adiou has e!umerated si? mai! @a!d partially i!tert6i!edA orms o t6e!tieth:8e!tury a!ti:Clato!ism+
17 6italist a!ti:Clato!ism @4ietUs8he- 3ergso!- GeleuUeA+ the assertio! o the real o lie:
be8omi!g agai!st the i!telle8tualist sterility o Clato!i8 FormsEas 4ietUs8he put it- JClatoK is the !ame
or a disease O
27 Empiricist*analytic a!ti:Clato!ism+ Clato believed i! the i!depe!de!t e?iste!8e o 9deasT but-
as Aristotle already k!e6- 9deas do !ot e?ist i!depe!de!tly o se!suous thi!gs 6hose orms they are7
The mai! 8ou!ter:Clato!i8 thesis o a!alyti8 empiri8ists is that all truths are either a!alyti8 or empiri8al7
"7 Mar&ist a!ti:Clato!ism @or 6hi8h .e!i! is !ot blamelessA+ the dismissal o Clato as the irst
9dealist- opposed to pre:So8rati8 materialists as 6ell as to the more JprogressiveK a!d empiri8ally
orie!ted Aristotle7 9! this vie6 @6hi8h 8o!ve!ie!tly orgets that- i! 8o!trast to AristotleIs !otio! o the
slave as a Jtalki!g tool-K there is !o pla8e or slaves i! ClatoIs 7epublicA- Clato 6as the mai! ideologist
o the 8lass o slave o6!ers O
20
(7 E&istentialist a!ti:Clato!ism+ Clato de!ies the u!iNue!ess o si!gular e?iste!8e a!d
subordi!ates the si!gular to the u!iversal7 This a!ti:Clato!ism has a Dhristia! versio! @*ierkegaard+
So8rates versus DhristA a!d a! atheist o!e @Sartre+ Je?iste!8e pre8edes esse!8eKA7
#7 0eideggerian a!ti:Clato!ism+ Clato as the ou!di!g igure o J/ester! metaphysi8s- K the
key mome!t i! the histori8al pro8ess o the Jorgetti!g o 3ei!g-K the starti!g poi!t o the pro8ess
6hi8h 8ulmi!ates i! todayIs te8h!ologi8al !ihilism @Jrom Clato to 4ATH OKA7
'7 %Democratic' a!ti:Clato!ism i! politi8al philosophy- rom Copper to Are!dt+ Clato as the
origi!ator o the J8losed so8iety-K as the irst thi!ker 6ho elaborated i! detail the proje8t o
totalitaria!ism7 @For Are!dt- at a more rei!ed level- ClatoIs origi!al si! 6as to have subordi!ated
politi8s to Truth- !ot seei!g that politi8s is a domai! o phro!esis- o judgme!ts a!d de8isio!s made i!
u!iNue- u!predi8table situatio!s7A
ClatoIs positio! is thus similar to that o Ges8artes+ JClatoK is the !egative poi!t o reere!8e
6hi8h u!ites other6ise irre8o!8ilable e!emies+ ,ar?ists a!d a!ti:Dommu!ist liberals- e?iste!tialists
a!d a!alyti8 empiri8ists- =eideggeria!s a!d vitalists O
So 6hy a retur! to ClatoM /hy do 6e !eed a repetition o ClatoIs ou!di!g gestureM 9! his
.ogi<ues des mondes- 3adiou provides a su88i!8t dei!itio! o Jdemo8rati8 materialismK a!d its
opposite- Jmaterialist diale8ti8sK+ the a?iom 6hi8h 8o!de!ses the irst is J-here is nothing but bodies
and languages 4-K to 6hi8h materialist diale8ti8s adds JO with the e&ception of truths7K
21
H!e should
bear i! mi!d the Clato!i8- properly meta:physi8al- thrust o this disti!8tio!+ prima facie- it 8a!!ot but
appear as a proto:idealist gesture to assert that material reality is !ot all that there is- that there is also
a!other level o i!8orporeal truths7 3adiou here makes the parado?i8al philosophi8al gesture o
dee!di!g- as a materialist- the auto!omy o the JimmaterialK order o Truth7 As a materialist- a!d i!
order to be thoroughly materialist- 3adiou o8uses o! the idealist topos par e&cellence+ ho6 8a! a
huma! a!imal orsake its a!imality a!d put its lie i! the servi8e o a tra!s8e!de!t TruthM =o6 8a! the
Jtra!substa!tiatio!K rom the pleasure:orie!ted lie o a! individual to the lie o a sub1ect dedi8ated to
a Dause o88urM 9! other 6ords- ho6 is a ree a8t possibleM =o6 8a! o!e break @out oA the !et6ork o
the 8ausal 8o!!e8tio!s o positive reality a!d 8o!8eive a! a8t that begi!s by a!d i! itselM Agai!-
3adiou repeats- 6ithi! the materialist rame- the eleme!tary gesture o idealist a!ti:redu8tio!ism+
huma! Feaso! 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the result o evolutio!ary adaptatio!T art is !ot just a heighte!ed
pro8edure or produ8i!g se!sual pleasure but a medium o TruthT a!d so o!7
This- the!- is our basi8 philosophi8o:politi8al 8hoi8e @de8isio!A today+ either repeat i! a
materialist vei! ClatoIs assertio! o the meta:physi8al dime!sio! o Jeter!al 9deas-K or 8o!ti!ue to
d6ell i! the postmoder! u!iverse o Jdemo8rati8:materialistK histori8ist relativism- 8aught i! the
vi8ious 8y8le o the eter!al struggle 6ith Jpremoder!K u!dame!talisms7 =o6 is this gesture possible-
thi!kable eve!M .et us begi! 6ith the surprisi!g a8t that 3adiou ide!tiies the Jpri!8ipal
8o!tradi8tio!-K the predomi!a!t a!tago!ism- o todayIs ideologi8al situatio! !ot as the struggle
bet6ee! idealism a!d materialism- but as the struggle bet6ee! t6o orms o materialism @demo8rati8
a!d diale8ti8alA7 Clus- to add i!sult to i!jury- Jdemo8rati8 materialismK sta!ds or the redu8tio! o all
there is to the histori8al reality o bodies a!d la!guages @the t6i!s o Gar6i!ism- brai! s8ie!8e- et87-
a!d o dis8ursive histori8ismA- 6hile Jmaterialist diale8ti8sK adds the JClato!i8K @JidealistKA dime!sio!
o Jeter!alK Truths7 To a!yo!e a8Nuai!ted 6ith the diale8ti8s o history- ho6ever- there should be !o
surprise here7
FROM FICTIONS TO SEMBLANCES

9! order to dis8er! the ema!8ipatory pote!tial o ClatoIs thought- it must be pla8ed agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o the sophist revolutio!7 9! breaki!g 6ith the J8losedK mythi8 u!iverse- the A!8ie!t 1reek
sophists like the ill:amed 1orgias asserted a!d played upo! the sel:reere!tial abyss o la!guage-
6hi8h tur!s i! its 8ir8le- la8ki!g a!y e?ter!al support7 ClatoIs mai! task 6as to deal 6ith this
predi8ame!t 6hi8h he e?perie!8ed as a true horror vacui+ a6are that there 8ould be !o retur! to mythi8
8losure- he tried to 8o!trol the damage by re:a!8hori!g la!guage i! the meta:physi8al reality o 9deas7
This is 6hy his )armenides- i! 6hi8h Clato himsel e!a8ts a sel:8riti8al 8ollapse o his tea8hi!g
o! 9deas- is the 8losest he 8omes to bei!g a sophistEthe 8o!8lusio! o the eight sophisti8 logi8al
e?er8ises 8overi!g the matri? o all logi8ally possible relatio!s bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d the H!e is a 1orgias
o!e+ !othi!g e?ists- et87 9s !ot )armenides the ultimate treatise o! the sig!iier @H!eA a!d the real
@3ei!gA- deployi!g the ull matri? o their possible relatio!sM The result is a versio! o the beautiul
!eopaga! @J6i88aKA !otio! that ater death everybody gets 6hat they believed i!+ Valhalla or the
Viki!gs- =ell or Caradise or the Dhristia!s- !othi!g at all or the materialists- a!d so o!Eall
variatio!s- eve! i they are 8o!tradi8tory @sel:8o!tradi8tory a!d 8o!tradi8tory 6ith regard to ea8h
otherA- are i! some se!se true7 That is to say- ea8h o the hypotheses i! the se8o!d part o )armenides is
to be read as poi!ti!g to6ards a spe8ii8 o!tologi8al sphere 6ithi! a J8raUyK pluralisti8 o!tology- a!d
the task is to provide a pre8ise des8riptio! o ea8h o these spheres- !ot6ithsta!di!g eve!tual logi8al
mistakes i! ClatoIs reaso!i!g7
9! all his later dialogues- Clato e!deavors to 8o!trol the damage by tryi!g to dra6 a 8lear li!e o
separatio! bet6ee! sel:reere!tial sophisti8 la!guage games a!d a spee8h 6hi8h reers to substa!tial
truths e?ter!al to it7 /hat Clato 8a!!ot a88ept is the =egelia! solutio!+ all su8h e?er8ises are true- they
all have o!tologi8al releva!8e7
The 8ru8ial dialogue i! this series is the Sophist- i! 6hi8h Clato deals 6ith the problem o !o!:
bei!g- tryi!g to outli!e a third 6ay bet6ee! t6o opposite e?tremes+ Carme!idesIs assertio! o the
u!8o!ditio!al H!e a!d 1orgiasIs sophisti8 playi!g 6ith the multipli8ity o !o!:bei!g7 Clato 8lassiies
sophistry as the appearance*ma"ing art+ imitati!g true 6isdom- sophists produ8e appeara!8es that
de8eiveT i! their empty ratio8i!atio!s a!d sear8h or rhetori8al ee8ts- they obviously talk about
somethi!g that does !ot e?ist7 3ut ho6 8a! o!e talk about !o!:bei!g- maki!g it appear as somethi!g
that isM To a!s6er this Nuestio!- Clato is 8ompelled to 8ou!ter Carme!idesIs thesis that Jit is impossible
that thi!gs that are !ot areK+ thi!gs 6hi8h are !ot @but o!ly appear to beA also someho6 areEho6M
Clato dei!es 4ot:3ei!g !ot as the opposite o 3ei!g @i7e7- !ot as e?8luded rom the domai! o 3ei!gA-
but as a Giere!8e 6ithi! the domai! o 3ei!g+ !egative predi8atio! i!di8ates somethi!g diere!t
rom the predi8ate @6he! 9 say Jthis is !ot bla8k-K 9 thereby imply that it is a 8olor other tha! bla8kA7
ClatoIs basi8 strategy is thus to relativiUe !o!:bei!g- that is- to treat it !ot as a! absolute !egatio! o
bei!g but as a relatio!al !egatio! o a predi8ate7 This is ho6 the sophist bri!gs about a @relativeA !o!:
bei!g a!d thus produ8es a alse appeara!8e+ !ot by talki!g about absolute 4othi!g- but by attributi!g
alse predi8ates to e!tities7
At the origi! o ClatoIs troubles is thus the u!de8idable o!tologi8al status o sembla!8es7 /hat
is a sembla!8eM As a key to u!dersta!di!g the !otio! o semblant- .a8a! proposes 3e!thamIs theory o
i8tio!s- 6hi8h as8i!ates him or a very pre8ise reaso!+ the a?is o! 6hi8h .a8a! o8uses is !ot Ji8tio!
versus realityK but Ji8tio! versus @the real oA 1ouissance7K As 2eli8a Sumi8 e?plai!s+

sembla!8e- as 8o!8eived by .a8a!- is i!te!ded to desig!ate that 6hi8h- 8omi!g rom the symboli8- is
dire8ted to6ards the real7 This is pre8isely 6hat 8hara8teriUes 3e!thamIs i8tio!s7 9!deed- as a a8t o
la!guage- made o !othi!g but the sig!iier- 3e!thamIs legal i8tio!s are !o!etheless 8apable o
distributi!g a!d modiyi!g pleasures a!d pai!s- thereby ae8ti!g the body7 /hat held .a8a!Is
atte!tio! i! readi!g 3e!thamIs -heory of Fictions 6as pre8isely that somethi!g 6hi8h is ultimately a!
apparatus o la!guageE3e!tham dei!es i8tio!s as o6i!g their e?iste!8e to la!guage alo!eEis
8apable o i!li8ti!g pai! or provoki!g satisa8tio! that 8a! o!ly be e?perie!8ed i! the body O =e!8e
by ope!ly stati!g that i8tio!s are !othi!g but a! artii8ial devi8e- Ja 8o!triva!8e-K to use 3e!thamIs
proper term- desig!ed to provoke either pai! or pleasure- 3e!tham bri!gs i!to Nuestio! all huma!
i!stitutio!s i!soar as they are a! apparatus desti!ed to regulate the modes o jouissa!8e by dressi!g
them up i! the virtues o the useul a!d the good7 3e!thamIs 8o!8ept o i8tio!s 8a! be see! as a!
ee8tive ma!!er o de!ou!8i!g the moral a!d so8ial ideals o the epo8h- o e?posi!g them as bei!g
!othi!g but a sembla!8e- a make:believe7
22
So- 6he! .a8a! 8laims that every dis8ourse ge!erates a sembla!8e o 1ouissance- o!e should
read this as i!volvi!g genitivus ob1ectivus as 6ell as sub1ectivus+ the sembla!8e o 1ouissance @!ot a
ully real o!eA a!d a 1ouissance i! @the a8t that 6hat 6e are deali!g 6ith is a mereA sembla!8e7
2"

3e!tham is here ar rom the 8rude logi8 o Ju!maski!g-K or dis8er!i!g lo6 motivesEpleasure- po6er-
e!vy- et87Ebe!eath high ethi8al reaso!sT the e!igma he is 8o!ro!ti!g is a stra!ge eppur si
muoveEeve! 6he! a! @ideologi8alA i8tio! is 8learly re8og!iUed as a i8tio!- it still 6orks+ Jit is
possible to use i8tio!s i! order to attai! the real 6ithout believi!g i! them7K
2(
This is the parado? o
6hi8h ,ar? 6as already a6are 6he! he poi!ted out that J8ommodity etishismK persists eve! ater its
illusory !ature has be8ome tra!spare!t7 4iels 3ohr provided its pere8t ormulatio! i! respo!se to a
rie!d 6ho asked i he really believed that the horseshoe above his door 6ould bri!g him good lu8k+
JH 8ourse !ot- but 9Ive bee! told it 6orks eve! i o!e does!It believe i! itRK
/hat disti!guishes huma!s rom a!imals is their ability to prete!d as opposed to simply getti!g
8aught up i! a! illusio!+ 9 prete!d that somethi!g is & 6hile k!o6i!g ull 6ell it is !ot &7 Crete!di!g
@faire*semblantA is to be disti!guished rom dire8t attempts to 8reate a! illusio!7 /he! 6e 6at8h a
horror movie- 6e are pleasurably terriiedEpleasurably- pre8isely be8ause 6hile givi!g ourselves up to
the spe8ta8le 6e k!o6 very 6ell that that is just 6hat it is7 3ut imagi!e our sho8k a!d 6ithdra6al i- all
o a sudde!- 6e be8ame a6are that 6hat 6e 6ere 6at8hi!g 6as i! a8t a s!u movie depi8ti!g real a8ts
o horror7 This is also 6hy s8are8ro6s 8a! be righte!i!g+ !ot be8ause 6e are duped i!to believi!g they
are alive- but be8ause 6e have to 8o!ro!t the a8t that they 6ork- 6hile k!o6i!g very 6ell they are
just artia8ts7 A s8are8ro6 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the ei8ie!8y o a simula8rum+ J6hile s8are8ro6s s8are
8ro6s be8ause they lap a!d shake i! the 6i!d- s8are8ro6s s8are huma!s be8ause the 8ollapse o their
su88ess at imitati!g a huma! reveals- i! a sometimes abrupt a!d startli!g ma!!er- i!di8atio!s that they
are a simula8rum o a huma!7K
2#
/hat makes s8are8ro6s terriyi!g is the mi!imal diere!8e 6hi8h
makes them in:huma!+ there is J!obody at homeK behi!d the maskEas 6ith a huma! 6ho has tur!ed
i!to a Uombie7
There is- ho6ever- a u!dame!tal ambiguity at 6ork here- 6hi8h is 6hy .a8a! moved o! rom
fictions to semblances7 The disti!8tio! is bet6ee! symboli8 i8tio! proper a!d sembla!8e i! the se!se
o a simula8rum7 Although- i! both 8ases- the illusio! 6orks i! spite o our a6are!ess that it is o!ly a!
illusio!- there is a i!e li!e separati!g them7 9t is 8ru8ial to disti!guish here bet6ee! prete!di!g as a
orm o polite!ess- part o the Jalie!atio!K 8o!stitutive o the symboli8 order as su8h- a!d the 8y!i8al
i!strume!tal use o !orms 6hi8h relies o! a!other subje8t believi!g i! them7 9t is o!e thi!g to greet a!
a8Nuai!ta!8e 6ith a polite J4i8e to see youRK 6he! 6e both k!o6 that 9 do !ot really mea! itT it is
a!other thi!g to play the other or a su8ker- e?pe8ti!g him to all or our lies7 @The 8at8h is !ot o!ly that
the irst 8ase 8a!!ot be dismissed as hypo8risyEi! bei!g polite- 9 Jlie si!8erelyKEbut also that the
se8o!d 8ase is !ot that o a simple lieEi! dupi!g the other- 9 be8ome my o6! su8ker OA
Gavid *7 .e6is- o!e o the most perspi8uous Ameri8a! philosophers- approa8hed the
i!teresti!g problem o Jtruth i! i8tio!K alo!g just these li!es+ 6he! 6e read a 6ork o i8tio!- there is a
pa8t bet6ee! 6riter a!d reader that both 6ill respe8t the illusio! that the reported eve!ts are true7 3ut
6hat about a situatio! 6here the 6riter violates this i8tio!al truth- this truth i! i8tio!- either by
violati!g the JtruthK o his i8tive u!iverse out o sloppi!ess or by havi!g the 8hara8ters relate a i8tio!
6hi8h 6ro!gly passes or truth within the !arrative u!iverse o the i8tio!M 9! a! epi8 !ovel- say- a
mi!or 8hara8ter killed o i! the irst 8hapter pops up alive a!d 6ell i! a mu8h later 8hapterEthere is
!o mystery to it- the 6riter simply orgot that the perso! is dead O
2'
9! the more 8omple? se8o!d
8ase- re8all the out8ry provoked by the Jalse lashba8kK at the begi!!i!g o =it8h8o8kIs Stage Fright+
a ma! jumps i!to a 8ar drive! by the heroi!e a!d- as he starts telli!g her 6hy he is ru!!i!g a6ay- the
eve!ts he des8ribes are sho6! i! lashba8k7 At the ilmIs e!d- 6e lear! that he 6as lyi!g+ he is i! a8t
the murderer7 /hat 8aused the out8ry 6as that =it8h8o8k had here violated o!e o the u!dame!tal
rules o !arrative 8i!ema+ 6hat is sho6! dire8tly as a lashba8k must have really happe!ed i! the
u!iverse o the ilmT itIs J8heati!gK i 6e later lear! that it 6as a lie7
2$
So 6hat is the properly o!tologi8al problem hereM .e6is asks a very simple but perti!e!t
Nuestio!+ J6hy does this iteratio! o i8tio! !ot 8ollapse i!to itselM =o6 do 6e disti!guish prete!di!g
[that i8tio! is true\ rom prete!di!g to prete!dMK
2&
9t is here that .a8a! e!ters- 6ith his disti!8tio!
bet6ee! imagi!ary lure a!d symboli8 i8tio! proper+ it is o!ly 6ithi! the symboli8 spa8e that 6e 8a!
prete!d to prete!d- or- lie i! the guise o truth7 .e6isIs Nuestio! is thus ultimately a Nuestio! about the
Jtruthul lieK o the symboli8 order itsel+ ho6 is it that the symboli8 does !ot Jall i!to the realKM =o6
is it that it 8a!!ot be redu8ed to simple sig!s- to a! i!!er:6orldly relatio! bet6ee! sig!s a!d 6hat they
desig!ate- as is the 8ase 6ith smoke sig!iyi!g ireM The solutio! is a Clato!i8 o!e+ huma! la!guage
proper o!ly u!8tio!s 6he! i8tio! 8ou!ts or more tha! reality- 6he! there is more truth i! a mask
tha! i! the stupid reality be!eath the mask- 6he! there is more truth i! a symboli8 title @ather- judge
OA tha! i! the reality o the empiri8al bearer o this title7 This is 6hy .a8a! is right 6he! he poi!ts out
that a Clato!i8 supra:se!sible 9dea is a! imitatio! o imitatio!- appeara!8e as appeara!8eEsomethi!g
that appears o! the sura8e o substa!tial reality7
The key ormula o sembla!8e 6as proposed by 2:A7 ,iller+ sembla!8e is a mask @veilA o
!othi!g7
2%
=ere- o 8ourse- the li!k 6ith the etish oers itsel+ a etish is also a! obje8t that 8o!8eals
the void7 Sembla!8e is like a veil- a veil 6hi8h veils !othi!gEits u!8tio! is to 8reate the illusio! that
there is somethi!g hidde! be!eath the veil7 This bri!gs us ba8k to the a!e8dote- repeatedly evoked by
.a8a! a!d me!tio!ed above- about Beu?is a!d Carrhasius- t6o pai!ters rom A!8ie!t 1ree8e- 6ho
8ompete to determi!e 6ho 8a! pai!t the more 8o!vi!8i!g illusio!7
"0
Beu?is produ8ed su8h a realisti8
pi8ture o grapes that birds tried to eat them7 3ut Carrhasius 6o! by pai!ti!g a 8urtai! o! the 6all o his
room so realisti8 that Beu?is asked him to dra6 it ba8k so that he 8ould see the pai!ti!g behi!d it7 9!
Beu?isIs pai!ti!g- the illusio! 6as so 8o!vi!8i!g that the image 6as mistake! or the real thi!gT i!
CarrhasiusIs pai!ti!g- the illusio! resided i! the very !otio! that 6hat the vie6er sa6 i! ro!t o him
6as just a veil 8overi!g up the hidde! truth7 This is also ho6- or .a8a!- emi!i!e masNuerade 6orks+
the 6oma! 6ears a mask i! order to make us rea8t like Beu?is i! ro!t o CarrhasiusIs pai!ti!gE$5!
now ta"e off the mas" and show us what you really are# Gevelopi!g these rele8tio!s o .a8a!- 3er!ard
3aas 6as right to poi!t out that

the ormula Jall dis8ourse is sembla!8eK 8a! also be u!derstood a88ordi!g to the logi8 arti8ulated i! the
mathemes o se?uatio!+ the airmative u!iversal propositio! Jall ? veriies the u!8tio! @?AK
impliesE8o!trary to stri8t mathemati8al logi8Ethe e?8eptio! that makes the rule a!d that- i! a 8ertai!
6ay- ou!ds it+ Jthere e?ists at least o!e ? that does !ot veriy the u!8tio! @?AK O the u!iversal la6
that states that Jall dis8ourse is sembla!8eK dema!ds- or that dis8ourse- that there e?ists at least one
dis8ourse that 6ould !ot be Jsembla!8e-K be8ause su8h a dis8ourse is pre8isely that 6hi8h orbids all
dis8ourse rom es8api!g this la67
"1
Stra!gely- 3aas does !ot suppleme!t this mas8uli!e versio! 6ith the emi!i!e o!e+ Jthere is !o
dis8ourse 6hi8h is !ot a dis8ourse o sembla!8eK implies that J!ot:all dis8ourse is a dis8ourse o
sembla!8e7K This i!di8ates ho6 6e are to rea8h a Jdis8ourse 6hi8h is !ot sembla!8eK+ !ot through the
e?8eptio! @o!e dis8ourse 6hi8h is !ot OA- but through treati!g the multipli8ity o dis8ourses as J!o!:
All-K through dis8er!i!g their i!8o!siste!8y- their poi!ts o impossibility7 This is 6hat .a8a!- i! his
late tea8hi!g- 8alled Jto va8illate the sembla!8esK+ !ot to rea8h beyo!d- to a! e?8eptio!- but to rea8h
their i!8o!siste!t !o!:All7
Therei! resides the deadlo8k rea8hed by 4ietUs8he 6ho- i! o!e a!d the same te?t @/eyond
(ood and EvilA- seems to advo8ate t6o opposed epistemologi8al positio!s+ o! the o!e ha!d- the !otio!
o truth as the u!bearable Feal Thi!gEas da!gerous- lethal eve!- like dire8tly gaUi!g i!to ClatoIs
su!Eso that the problem be8omes ho6 mu8h truth a ma! 8a! e!dure 6ithout diluti!g or alsiyi!g itT
o! the other ha!d- the Jpostmoder!K !otio! that appeara!8e is more valuable tha! stupid reality- a!d
that- ultimately- there is !o i!al Feality- o!ly the i!terplay o multiple appeara!8es- so that the very
oppositio! bet6ee! reality a!d appeara!8e should be aba!do!ed7
"2
Goes !ot huma!ityIs great!ess lie
i! its ability to prioritiUe brillia!t aestheti8 appeara!8e over gray realityM This- i! 3adiouIs terms- is the
passio! o the Feal versus the passio! o sembla!8e7 =o6 are 6e to read these t6o opposed positio!s
togetherM 9s 4ietUs8he here simply i!8o!siste!t- os8illati!g bet6ee! t6o mutually e?8lusive vie6sM Hr
is there a Jthird 6ayKM That is to say- 6hat i the t6o opposed optio!s @passio! o the Feal > passio! o
the sembla!8eA re!der palpable 4ietUs8heIs struggle- his ailure to arti8ulate the JrightK positio! 6hose
ormulatio! eluded himM There is !ot just the i!terplay o appeara!8es- there is a FealEthis Feal-
ho6ever- is !ot the i!a88essible Thi!g- but the gap 6hi8h preve!ts our a88ess to it- the Jro8kK o the
a!tago!ism 6hi8h distorts our vie6 o the per8eived obje8t through a partial perspe8tive7 The JtruthK is
thus !ot the JrealK state o thi!gs- a88essed by a Jdire8tK vie6 o the obje8t 6ithout a!y perspe8tival
distortio!- but the very Feal o the a!tago!ism 6hi8h 8auses the perspe8tival distortio! itsel7 Agai!-
the site o truth is !ot the 6ay Jthi!gs really are i! themselves-K beyo!d perspe8tival distortio!- but the
very gap or passage 6hi8h separates o!e perspe8tive rom a!other- the gap @i! this 8ase- so8ial
a!tago!ismA 6hi8h makes the t6o perspe8tives radi8ally incommensurable7 The JFeal as impossibleK
is the 8ause o the impossibility o our ever attai!i!g the J!eutralK !o!:perspe8tival vie6 o the obje8t7
There is a truth- a!d !ot everythi!g is relativeEbut this truth is the truth o the perspe8tival distortio!
as such- !ot a truth distorted by the partial vie6 rom a o!e:sided perspe8tive7
This bri!gs us ba8k o!8e agai! to Clato+ i! the history o philosophy- the irst e?emplary 8ase o
Jva8illati!g the sembla!8esK o88urs i! the se8o!d part o ClatoIs )armenides- 6ith the deployme!t o
eight hypotheses o! the relatio! bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d H!e7 0a8h hypothesis- o 8ourse- des8ribes the
8o!tours o a sembla!8eEho6ever- take! all together- they are !ot Jmere sembla!8es-K but
Jsembla!8es va8illated7K A!d is !ot the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess the 8lima? o this strategy o
Jva8illati!g the sembla!8esKM 0a8h igure o 8o!s8ious!ess- ea8h !otio!- is des8ribed a!d de!ou!8ed i!
its sembla!8e- 6ithout a!y relia!8e o! a! e?ter!al sta!dard o truth7
G9A.0DT9DA. 15,4AST9DSM 4H- T=A4*SR

)armenides is a dialogue rom ClatoIs middle periodEi! a mu8h more literal se!se tha! is
usually mea!t7 9ts very orm is that o a 8omposite+ the irst part is a typi8al JSo8rati8 dialogue-K this
time tur!ed agai!st So8rates himselT the se8o!d part is e?emplary o ClatoIs late dialogues i! 6hi8h
o!e o the i!terlo8utors develops his li!e o reaso!i!g- 6ith his part!er limited to e?8lamatory
pu!8tuatio!s like JSo it isRK or J3y Beus- you are rightRK a!d so o!7 =o6ever- this Jmiddle periodK
8hara8ter o the te?t i! !o 6ay redu8es it to a tra!sitio!al 6orkEit is- i! a 6ay- more radi8al tha!
ClatoIs later dialogues be8ause it bri!gs about the 8ollapse o the big Hther- reveali!g its 8ra8ks a!d
i!8o!siste!8ies7
Carme!ides irst demo!strates to So8rates the 6eak!esses o his theory o 9deas- poi!ti!g out
that- beore riski!g su8h a gra!d theory- So8rates should irst e!gage i! some 8o!8eptual e?er8ise-
i!trodu8i!g moveme!t i!to 9deas themselves7 /hat the! ollo6s is a ki!d o philosophi8al 8ou!terpoi!t
to SatieIs Jgym!opLdiesKEa vast !et6ork o Jdiale8ti8al gym!asti8s-K logi8al e?ertio!s a8tualiUi!g the
matri? o all possible relatio!s bet6ee! H!e a!d 3ei!g7 The e?a8t status o this e?er8ise is !ot 8learT
6hat is 8lear- ho6ever- is that there is !o positive result- as i the e?er8ise 6ere its o6! poi!t7 The o!ly
result is that there is !o 8o!siste!t totality- !o Jbig Hther7K The 6hole i!terpretive problem arises 6he!
this result is read as merely !egative+ su8h a readi!g ge!erates the !eed to ill the gap- to propose a !e6
positive theoryE6hi8h is 6hat the late Clato the! attempts to do- passi!g rom o!e suppleme!t to
a!other- rom chora i! -imaeus to O 3ut 6hat i su8h a readi!g is 8o!ditio!ed by a ki!d o
perspe8tival illusio!- i!volvi!g a ailure to see ho6 the result is !ot merely !egative- but is i! itsel
already positive- already 6hat 6e 6ere looki!g orM To see this- o!e has o!ly to ee8t a paralla? shit
a!d grasp the problem as @8o!tai!i!gA its o6! solutio!7
H!e ote! hears talk o ClatoIs Jesoteri8 tea8hi!gK 6hi8h ru!s 8ou!ter to his oi8ial
idealismEthe t6o mai! 8a!didates are- or 4e6 Agers- a 1!osti8 dualism positi!g the emi!i!e
material pri!8iple as a 8ou!terpoi!t to idealism- a!d- or .eo Strauss- a ruthless a!d 8y!i8al realism-
do6!gradi!g the theory o 9deas to the status o a J!oble lie7K /hat i it is )armenides that delivers
ClatoIs true tea8hi!gE!ot as somethi!g hidde!- but i! plai! vie6M The tri8k is to take seriously
@literallyA- as true o!tology- 6hat is usually see! as a playul diale8ti8al e?er8ise i! ollo6i!g all
possible hypotheses ad absurdum7 The truth is !ot hidde! behi!d the logi8al e?er8ises- it is !ot the
!egative:theologi8al message that the i!eable H!e is beyo!d the grasp o logi8T it is simply that Clato
really mea!s 6hat he says7
A parallel 6ith =egel 8ould be o some use here7 H!e 6ay to determi!e e?a8tly 6he! J=egel
be8ame =egelK is to look at the relatio!ship bet6ee! logi8 a!d metaphysi8s+ the early Jpre:=egelia!K
=egel disti!guishes bet6ee! .ogi8 @the study o pure !otio!s as organon- the mea!s to o!tologi8al
a!alysis properA a!d ,etaphysi8s @the study o the basi8 o!tologi8al stru8ture o realityA- a!d he
Jbe8omes =egelK the mome!t he drops this disti!8tio! a!d realiUes that .ogi8 already is ,etaphysi8s+
6hat appears as a! i!trodu8tory a!alysis o the tools reNuired to grasp the Thi!g is already the Thi!g7
""
9! a! homologous 6ay- 6e should !ot read the se8o!d part o )armenides as a mere logi8al e?er8ise
prepari!g the 6ay or the o!tology properEit is already this o!tology7 Goes !ot Clato himsel !ot poi!t
i! this dire8tio! i! the ollo6i!g =egelia!:sou!di!g passageM

3y =eave!- 8a! 6e be ready to believe that the absolutely real has !o share i! moveme!t- lie- soul or
6isdomM That it does !ot live or thi!k- but i! solem! holi!ess- u!possessed o mi!d- sta!ds e!tirely at
restM That 6ould be a dreadul thi!g to admit7 @2(&eA
Su8h a radi8al J=egelia!K 8o!8lusio! is- ho6ever- too mu8h or the majority o i!terpreters7
Traditio!al readi!gs o the se8o!d part o )armenides move bet6ee! t6o i!terpretive e?tremes+ they
see i! it either a! e?er8ise i! pure logi8al gym!asti8s- or the !egative:theologi8al i!di8atio! o the
)!sayable H!e7 For the 4eoplato!ists- 6ho 6ere the irst to propose the latter readi!g- the purpose o
)armenides

goes ar beyo!d the maki!g o subtle li!guisti8 disti!8tio!s7 The e?er8ise i! diale8ti8 provides symboli8
a!d !umi!ous adumbratio!s o the !ature o the superesse!tial H!e a!d ho6 o!e might approa8h it7
The !egative 8o!8lusio!s o the irst =ypothesis- or e?ample- are !ot illustratio!s o the !o!se!si8al
!ature o the pure H!e7 Father- they demo!strate the ailure o reaso! a!d la!guage to grasp the
i!eable !o!:relative H!e that rises above all orms o relative k!o6ledge7 The diale8ti8al e?er8ise-
6hi8h ra!ges over the 6hole ield o dis8ourse a!d 8o!siders all the logi8al permutatio!s o a!y
propositio!- is a meditatio! or reei!g the mi!d rom 8li!gi!g to a!y o!e philosophi8al positio! or
assumptio!- thereby ope!i!g it up to mysti8al illumi!atio!7 9t is the Clato!i8 via negativa7
"(
Hr- as Fi!dlay put it+ JThose u!able or u!6illi!g to dra6 8o!8lusio!s rom more or less
palpable hi!ts- or 8o!stitutio!ally u!able to u!dersta!d metaphysi8al or mysti8al uttera!8es- or to e!ter
i!to mysti8al eeli!gs O should 8ertai!ly never e!gage i! the i!terpretatio! o Clato7K
"#
3adiou 8alls
this 4eoplato!i8 move rom the i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity o @logi8alA reaso!i!g to the tra!s:dis8ursive
H!e @6hatever its !ame- rom Substa!8e to .ieA Jthe 1reat Temptatio!K o materialist thought7 3oth
=egel a!d .a8a!- t6o great admirers o )armenides- reje8ted this Jmisu!derstood e8stasyK @=egelA-
this J4eoplato!i8 8o!usio!K @.a8a!A7 3ut is the o!ly alter!ative to readi!g )armenides as a pie8e o
mysti8al !egative theologyEits lesso! bei!g that the Absolute is i!eable- that it eludes the grasp o
our 8ategories- that 6e sa! say a!ythi!g a!d>or !othi!g about itEto redu8e it to a jokey logi8al e?er8ise
@!o!:substa!tial reaso!i!g 6ith !o 8o!!e8tio! 6ith realityA- perhaps !ot eve! i!te!ded seriously @surely
Clato must have bee! a6are o the logi8al alla8ies i! some o the argume!tsAM Cerhaps =egel 6as right
to see i! this dialogue the summit o the 1reek diale8ti87 /hat i 6e reje8t both optio!s a!d treat the
J8o!tradi8tio!sK !ot as sig!s o the limitatio! o our reaso!- but as belo!gi!g to the Jthi!g itselKM
/hat i the matri? o all possible relatio!s bet6ee! the H!e a!d 3ei!g is also ee8tively the matri? o
the JimpossibleK relatio!s bet6ee! the sig!iier a!d the FealM
Dru8ial here is the shit rom the irst to the se8o!d part o the dialogue7 9! the irst part-
So8rates tries to resolve the parado? that opposites 8a! be attributed to the same e!tity @o!e!ess a!d
multipli8ity- rest a!d moveme!t- et87A by 6ay o disti!guishi!g bet6ee! the eter!al order o 9deas a!d
empiri8al reality7 The same empiri8al thi!g 8a! be o!e a!d multipleEit 8a! simulta!eously parti8ipate
i! the 9dea o o!e!ess a!d the 9dea o multipli8ity+ a ma! is at o!8e o!e- this i!dividual- a!d multiple- a
8ombi!atio! o parts or orga!sEbut the Ideas o o!e!ess or o multipli8ity 8a!!ot7 9! the se8o!d part-
Carme!ides @i! a supreme e?ample o Clato!i8 iro!y- give! 6hat 6e k!o6 o the JrealK histori8al
Carme!idesA i!trodu8es the dy!ami8s o relati!g- mutual parti8ipatio!- a!d J8o!tradi8tio!K i!to the real
o 9deas themselves7 9! order to be H!e- o!e has to be multiple @to parti8ipate i! multipli8ityA- a!d so
o!EJeverythi!g 6ould all apart- a!d great havo8 6ould ollo6- i it tur!ed out that there 8ould be a
8o!tradi8tio! i! the order o orms themselvesK
"'
EJi someo!e 8ould sho6 that ki!ds a!d orms
themselves have i! themselves these opposite properties- that 6ould 8all or asto!ishme!t7 3ut i
someo!e should demo!strate that 9 am o!e thi!g a!d ma!y- 6hatIs asto!ishi!g about thatMK @12%8A7
The su88essio! o eight hypotheses i! the se8o!d part should thus be 8o!8eived like the
su88essio! o 8ategories i! =egelIs logi8- 6here ea8h 8ategorial determi!atio! is developed so that its
i!here!t J8o!tradi8tio!K @i!8o!siste!8yA is brought out7 So 6hat i 6e 8o!8eive the passage rom the
irst to the se8o!d part o )armenides as homologous to the =egelia! passage rom phe!ome!ology to
logi8M The irst part 6orks like a!y other o ClatoIs early dialogues+ someo!e 6ho prete!ds to k!o6 is
Nuestio!ed by the So8rati8 igure 6ho 8ompels him to admit the i!8o!siste!8y o his positio! a!d thus
the va!ity o his k!o6ledgeT the e?8eptio!al eature here is that this pro8edure has be8ome sel:
rele?ive+ the igure 6ho prete!ds to k!o6 is !o6 So8rates himsel- 6hose tea8hi!g o! 9deas is
submitted to 8riti8ism i! dialogue 6ith Carme!ides7 9! the se8o!d part- 6e pass rom phe!ome!ologi8al
dialogue to the logi8al sel:deployme!t o !otio!al determi!atio!s7
9! her detailed i!trodu8tio! to )armenides- ,ary .ouise 1ill tries to avoid both predomi!a!t
readi!gs @)armenides as a treatise o! !egative theology or as a logi8al e?er8iseA by taki!g the se8o!d
part literally- as a! attempt to resolve the deadlo8k o the irst part @6here Carme!ides has sho6! up the
i!8o!siste!8ies o So8ratesI theory o orms- 6hile !o!etheless u!eNuivo8ally asserti!g that the orms
are !eeded i 6e are to u!dersta!d bei!gA7
"$
This heroi8 eort leads her to diere!tiate bet6ee! the
stre!gth a!d perti!e!8e o the various hypotheses+ or her- the third hypothesis @asserti!g that the H!e
a!d ,a!y [the others\ are !ot i!8ompatible- that others 8a! partake i! the H!e as 6holes- as parts- a!d
get rom this partaki!g their limitA poi!ts to6ards the solutio!+ JGedu8tio! " produ8ed some highly
8o!stru8tive results by assumi!g that the o!e is altogether o!e a!d that the others someho6 partake o
it7K
"&
Carme!ides destroys this promise i! the ourth hypothesis o!ly by a88epti!g the u!6arra!ted
premise that the H!e a!d the others are totally i!8ompatible7
Sympatheti8 a!d rigorous as 1illIs attempt is- it seems to miss the poi!t o the e!tire matri? o
the eight hypotheses i! their stru8tural u!ity+ 6hat is the mea!i!g o the matri? itsel- irrespe8tive o the
varyi!g Nuality o parti8ular li!es o argume!tatio!M This bri!gs us ba8k to a readi!g o the e!tire set o
hypotheses as a ormal matri? o eight possible 6orlds+ ea8h hypothesis ormulates a 6orldIs
Jimma!e!t tra!s8e!de!talK @i! 3adiouIs pre8ise mea!i!g o the termA7 )armenides is thus ClatoIs
Jlogi8s o 6orlds7K The eight 6orlds implied by the eight hypotheses are !ot some ki!d o oreru!!er
o a postmoder! Jplurality o u!iversesK+ they arise agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o a 8ertai! impossibility or
deadlo8k 6hi8h ge!erates themEthe impossibility o Jre8o!8ili!gK 3ei!g a!d the H!e- the Feal a!d
the Sig!iier- o maki!g them overlap symmetri8ally7 There are ma!y 6orlds be8ause 3ei!g 8a!!ot be
H!e- be8ause a gap persists bet6ee! the t6o7 /hat 6e should bear i! mi!d here is that the 8ouple o
the H!e a!d 3ei!g preigures the 8ouple o Clato himsel a!d Aristotle+ i! 8o!trast to Aristotelia!
o!tology- 6ith its orie!tatio! to6ards bei!g as the most basi8 !otio! i! theory-

Clato!ism ide!tiies u!ity as the 8e!tral 8o!8ept rom 6hi8h all reaso!i!g begi!s7 H!e 8ould say that
Clato!ism is Jhe!ologyK @to hen ] the H!eA as opposed to Jo!tology7K JThe H!eK @a! artii8ial
philosophi8al 6ord- 6hi8h 6as !ot there beore the s8hool o Carme!idesA is used here as a subje8t- !ot
as a predi8ate or a !umeral7 For Aristotle- the 8o!8ept o o!e!ess is o!ly a! aspe8t o the parti8ular7
0very parti8ular is Jo!e-K i!soar as it is i!divisible a!d i!dividual7 JH!e!ess-K i! this vie6- basi8ally
depe!ds o! the mea!i!g o J3ei!g7K 9! Clato!ism- the reverse is true+ the 8o!8ept o the H!e is sel:
sui8ie!t- so to speak- pre8edi!g the domai! o parti8ulars7 A88ordi!gly- the H!e a88ou!ts or the
e?iste!8e o parti8ulars i! a ma!iold that is someho6 u!iied- stru8tured- a!d determi!ate7 9t is a
varia!t o the H!e7 All these basi8 predi8ates o the parti8ular 8a! be i!terpreted i! terms o the H!e
that pre8edes all bei!g7
"%
There is yet a!other 6ay to u!dersta!d the li!k bet6ee! )armenidesIs t6o parts+ to o8us o!
6hat the dialogue itsel 8laims is the goal o the se8o!d part- !amely to lay the grou!d or the proper
u!dersta!di!g o the do8tri!e o 9deas 6hose 8ritiNue has bee! laid out i! the irst part7 Vie6ed i! this
6ay- the Jpessimisti8K 8o!8lusio! that !othi!g at all e?ists- et87- should be Nualiied as a reje8tio! o
pre:Clato!i8 8osmi8 mo!ism+ !othi!g ully e?ists- reality is a 8o!used mess about 6hi8h !othi!g
8o!siste!t 8a! be saidT a!d i 6e remai! 6ithi! the 8oordi!ates o 8osmi8 mo!ism a!d do !ot posit a
realm o 9deas e?ter!al to DosmosEi 6e limit ourselves to the H!e:All o the eter!ally 8ha!gi!g
realityEthis H!e:All ultimately reveals itsel to be !othi!g at all7
FFH, T=0 H40 TH DE

Carme!idesIs diale8ti8al e?er8ise is divided i!to eight parts+ apropos o ea8h o the t6o basi8
hypothesesEif the $ne is a!d if the $ne is notEhe e?ami!es the conse<uences for the $ne- a!d the
conse<uences for the $thersT plus he adds a subtle but 8ru8ial disti!8tio! bet6ee! the H!e 6hi8h has
bei!g a!d the bare H!e- so that altogether 6e get eight hypotheses+
0ypothesis
If 4
,onse<uences for 4
7esult
1
There is H!e
the H!e
!egative
2
H!e is
the H!e
positive
"
H!e is
the Hthers
positive
(
There is H!e
the Hthers
!egative
#
H!e is not
the H!e
positive
'
There is !o H!e
the H!e
!egative
$
H!e is not
the Hthers
positive
&
There is !o H!e
the Hthers
!egative
9! the 8ase o hypotheses 2- "- #- a!d $- 6hi8h predi8ate bei!g @or !o!:bei!gA o the H!e- the
result is positive+ predi8atio! is possibleT that is- positive stateme!ts 8a! be made o the H!e @or o the
!ot H!eA7 9! the 8ase o hypotheses 1- (- '- a!d &- 6hi8h put the H!e out o the sphere o bei!g @or !o!:
bei!gA- the result is !egative+ predi8atio! is !ot possibleT that is- !othi!g 8a! be asserted o the H!e @or
o the !ot H!eA+

@1A JThere is H!e-K but a totally i!eable:u!predi8table $ne 6ithout 3ei!g- a H!e 6hi8h is !either true
!or alseEGolar is right to poi!t out that this H!e is !ot the !o!:symboli8 Feal- but the la8k o a
sig!iier- the JbarredK sig!iier @bA- 6hi8h is as su8h still i!here!t to the order o the sig!iier7
(0
@2A $ne
6ith 3ei!g- JH!e isK+ 6e 8a! predi8ate it- 6e are deali!g 6ith H!e 6hi8h isT but 8ru8ial here is the
implied difference bet6ee! H!e a!d 3ei!g+ J9 o!e is- it parti8ipates i! bei!g- a!d is thereore
somethi!g diere!t rom bei!g- or other6ise it 6ould make !o se!se to assert that o!e is7K
(1
3ut the
mome!t 6e 8o!8ede this diere!8e- 6e are 8ompelled to repeat it i!dei!itely- i7e7- 6ithi! ea8h o its
poles+ every H!e agai! is a!d is H!e- every bei!g is a!d is o!e- et87+ JVThe o!e that isI alls apart i!to
o!e a!d bei!g- but i! su8h a 6ay that ea8h part i!8ludes the other as its part7 This i!!er divisio!- o!8e it
has started- 8a!!ot be stopped+ the mome!t 6e have t6o parts- 6e have i!i!itely ma!y o them7K Hr- to
put it i! =egelese- ea8h term has t6o spe8ies- itsel a!d the other termT ea8h term is the e!8ompassi!g
u!ity o itsel a!d its other7 /e e!ter thereby the problemati8 spa8e o sel:reere!tial parado?es+ JH!e
is !o6 at o!e a!d the same time the 6hole a!d the part- a!d so i!to i!i!ity- it is both limited a!d
u!limited- it both moves a!d sta!ds still- it is both ide!ti8al a!d diere!t- like a!d u!like itsel a!d
others- both eNual a!d u!eNual to itsel a!d to others et87K 9 the result o the irst hypothesis is that 6e
8a!!ot predi8ate a!ythi!g o the H!e- the result o the se8o!d hypothesis is that Ja!ythi!g goes-K 6e
8a! predi8ate all possible- eve! mutually e?8lusive- predi8ates7 Golar dra6s here e?a8tly the opposite
8o!8lusio! to Arma!d BalosUy8+ .a8a!Is : a dl3n is a paraphrase !ot o the irst- but o the se8o!d o
)armenidesIs hypotheses+
.a8a!Is amous di8tum : a dl3n 8a! be read as a paraphrase o this se8o!d hypothesis7 Tra!slati!g it
simply by JThere is H!eK o!e loses the parado? o the Fre!8h ormulatio!- 6here the partitive arti8le
@deA treats the o!e as a! i!dei!ite Nua!tity @as i! Il y a de leau- JThere is 6ater-K i7e7 a! i!dei!ite
Nua!tity o itA- implyi!g- irst- that there 8a! be a! immeasurable Nua!tity o o!e- i7e7 o 6hat is itsel
the basis o a!y measuri!g- a!d se8o!d- i the Nua!tity is i!dei!ite- the! it is divisible @like 6aterAEbut
i!to 6hat- i o!e is the mi!imal u!ityM
(2
3ut does this 6eird immeasurable Nua!tity !ot mea! that the H!e o the se8o!d hypothesis should not
be li!ked to .a8a!Is : a dl3n- that the JH!e 6hi8h is-K the u!ary sig!iier- S1- should rather be
opposed to the immeasurable Jthere is @somethi!g o theA H!e-K 6hi8h is 8hara8teriUed by a divisibility
a!d thus a multipli8ity !ot 8omposed o H!esM The parado? is here a very elega!t =egelia! o!e+
although Clato is the philosopher o the H!e- 6hat he is u!able to thi!k @as opposed to just Jreprese!tKA
is pre8isely the H!e as a 8o!8ept7 To do this- o!e !eeds !ot o!ly a sel:relati!g rele?ive predi8atio!
@the H!e is a Jo!e H!e-K a! ? 6hi8h partakes o the 9dea o H!e 6ith regard to H!e!ess itselAE6hi8h
Clato possessesEbut also the positive 8o!8ept o Uero @6hi8h Clato does !ot possessA+ to get a pure
8o!8ept o the H!e- !ot just the !otio! o o!e thi!g- the ? 6hi8h Jpartakes o the idea o H!e 6ith
regard to H!e!ess itselK has to be Uero- a void- devoid o all 8o!te!t7 Hr- to put it i! a more des8riptive
6ay+ bei!g:a:H!e adds !othi!g to the 8o!te!t o a! obje8tT its o!ly 8o!te!t is the orm o sel:ide!tity
itsel79! GolarIs readi!g- the irst t6o hypotheses are t6o 8ir8les 6hi8h partially i!terse8t- so that the
irst hypothesis sta!ds or the H!e 6ithout 3ei!g- that is- the H!e rom 6hi8h the part o it 6hi8h
i!terse8ts 6ith 3ei!g is subtra8ted- a!d the se8o!d hypothesis sta!ds or the !arro6 i!terse8tio! o the
t6o 8ir8les o H!e a!d 3ei!g7
@"A H!e 6ith 3ei!g does !ot pre8lude Hthers 6ith 3ei!g+ there 8a! be Hthers 6ith predi8ates7
@(A H!e 6ithout 3ei!g pre8ludes Hthers a!d thus also their predi8atio!7
@#A 9t 8o!8er!s a H!e- somethi!g that is a! e!tity- but 6hi8h does !ot e?ist- i7e7- does !ot have 3ei!g7
0ve! i H!e is not- 6e 8a! still predi8ate it- i7e7- !egative predi8atio! is possible- 6e k!o6 6hat 6e are
sayi!g 6he! 6e !egate a predi8ate7
@'A The H!e is here !ot o!ly deprived o 3ei!g- but deprived o its very 8hara8ter o H!e+ it is !o
lo!ger a !o!:e?iste!t e!tity- but a !o!e!tityEa!d- as su8h- 8a!!ot be predi8ated7
@$A /hat does the a8t that the H!e is a !o!:e?isti!g e!tity mea! or HthersM As i! the 8ase o the
hypothesis #- Hthers 8a! be predi8ated7
@&A 9- ho6ever- H!e is !ot o!ly a !o!:e?iste!t e!tity- but a !o!e!tity- the! there are also !o Hthers-
e?isti!g or !o!:e?isti!gEthere is !othi!g at all7
To a88ou!t or the diere!8e bet6ee! hypothesis #Eo!e 8a! talk @make propositio!s- say true
thi!gsA about !o!:bei!gT truth has a stru8ture o @symboli8A i8tio!Ea!d hypothesis $Eeverythi!g is a
luid appeara!8eE6e must i!trodu8e a tripartite disti!8tio! bet6ee! symbolic i8tio!- imaginary
illusio!- a!d the appeara!8e o the 7eal+ the H!e o hypothesis #- the H!e that does !ot e?ist- but 6hi8h
6e 8a! talk about- is the symboli8 i8tio!T the dispersed !ot:H!e o hypothesis $ is that o imagi!ary
illusio!T a!d- 6e may add- the H!e that is !ot H!e o hypothesis & is the Feal as impossible7
Fadi8ally opposed to GolarIs readi!g o )armenides is that o Arma!d BalosUy8- a88ordi!g to
6hom J: a dl3nK is the ormula or the pure 1ouissance:H!e- that is- a 1ouissance !ot yet mediated by
the Hther- the symboli8 order- !ot yet Jdepartme!taliUed-K a88ou!table7 The missi!g li!k 6hi8h
legitimiUes us i! establishi!g a 8o!!e8tio! bet6ee! this thesis o .a8a! a!d the irst hypothesis o
ClatoIs )armenides @6hi8h asserts the H!e totally e?ter!al to 3ei!g- 6ith !o relatio! to or parti8ipatio!
i! 3ei!gA is provided by the 4eoplato!ist Jmysti8ismK o Cloti!usEre8all that- or .a8a!- the mysti8al
e?:stasis is the paradigmati8 e?ample o the 1ouissance:H!e7 )armenides 6as the 4eoplato!istsI
avorite o ClatoIs te?ts- a!d they read it as a po6erul assertio! o the i!eability o the H!e 6ith
6hi8h the mysti8al e?perie!8e reu!ites us+

The demo!stratio! o the irst hypothesis o the Carme!ides leads to the 8o!8lusio! that it is impossible
that the H!e e?ists7 So it is- the H!e o this irst hypothesis- bei!g o!e by dei!itio!- 8ould !either have
parts !or be a 6hole7 Thereore- it 6ill have !either begi!!i!g- !or e!d- !or limits7 For the same reaso!-
it 6ill !ot parti8ipate i! time7 9t 6ill thereore have !o bei!g si!8e to be implies the parti8ipatio! i! a
time7 A!d- i it is !ot at all- the! 8a! it have somethi!g that belo!gs to it or 8omes rom itM ,ost
8ertai!ly !ot7 Thereore it has !o !ameT there is !o dei!itio!- !o per8eptio!- a!d !o k!o6ledge o it7 9s
it possible that this be so o the H!eM 4o7 From this demo!stratio! o impossibility it 8a! surely be
legitimately i!trodu8ed that Jsi!8e the H!e i! !o 6ay parti8ipates 6ith bei!g-K it does !ot e?ist- that
there is !othi!g beyo!d bei!g- that bei!g is thereore all7 The 4eoplato!ists 8hose to read the
Carme!ides demo!stratio! o impossibility diere!tly7 They agreed that there is a! i!8ompatibility
bet6ee! the H!e a!d bei!g- but rather tha! dedu8i!g that the H!e does !ot e?ist- they 8o!8luded that
!o doubt the H!e did !ot e?ist i! terms o bei!g- but that beyo!d bei!g- there is the H!e- that the H!e
e?:sists rom bei!g7 9! this 6ay- Jthere is the H!eK 8o!stitutes a ormula that opposes o!tology a!d
leads to6ards the !otio! o the !ot:all o a radi8al Hther- i! terms o the other!ess 6ith 6hi8h there is
!o relatio!- 6here emerges the logi8 o the Carme!ides demo!stratio!7 3ei!g o! o!e side- a!d o! the
other- the there isEthey are i!8ompatible7 3ei!g o! o!e side- the real o! the other7 /e immediately see
that this oppositio! is the o!e at 6ork i! !egative theologies- i! the pursuit o a !o!:k!o6ledge that
eNuals itsel to lear!ed ig!ora!8e- i! the a88ou!ts give! by the great Dhristia! mysti8s o their
e?perie!8e- usi!g o?ymoro!s dra6! rom The ,ysti8 Theology o Cseudo:Gio!ysius the
Aeropagite7
("
There are t6o argume!ts or this readi!g7 /he! .a8a! talks about 1ouissance feminine- he
al6ays Nualiies itEJi a thi!g like that 6ere to e?ist @but it does !otAKEthereby 8o!irmi!g its
i!8omme!surability 6ith the order o bei!g @e?iste!8eA7 Clus- his ormula is : a dl3n- a!d the
imperso!al il y a is- like the 1erma! es gibt 6hi8h plays su8h a key role i! late =eidegger- 8learly
opposed to bei!g @i! 0!glish- this disti!8tio! gets blurred- si!8e o!e 8a!!ot avoid the verb Jto beK i!
tra!slatio!A7 There is- ho6ever- o!e 8o!8lusive 8ou!ter:argume!t 6hi8h pretty mu8h rui!s the 8ase+
BalosUy8 reers to the 4eoplato!i8 mysti8s as the missi!g li!k bet6ee! Clato a!d .a8a!- yet- as 6e
have already see!- .a8a! e?pli8itly reje8ts the 4eoplato!ist readi!g o )armenides7 9t thus seems that
GolarIs opposed readi!gE6herei! the H!e versus 3ei!g is- i! .a8a!ese- the symboli8 versus the
FealEis mu8h more 8o!vi!8i!g7 3ut let us see 6here BalosUy8Is readi!g leads him+

The H!e that there is- is the o!e o the jouissa!8e H!e- that is- the jouissa!8e desig!ated i! the terms o
the irst hypothesis o the Carme!ides O it is opposed to a jouissa!8e developed partes e&tra partes
that is 8o!seNue!tially a88ou!table a!d !umerable a88ordi!g to the measureme!ts o the sig!iier7 9 6e
thi!k about it- the bei!g itsel is o!ly determi!ed by mea!i!gul!ess- 6hereas 6e reer the jouissa!8e
H!e to the real7 The real as impossible- as 6e have already see!7 So there is a jouissa!8e that is !ot
6ithout a relatio! to the Hther o the sig!iier @that is alie!ated to the sig!iierA- a!d there is a! autisti8
jouissa!8e- separated rom the sig!iier a!d separated rom the Hther- or 6hi8h the paradigm is the
!o!:relatio!7 That is the jouissa!8e H!e7 From there- there are t6o 6ays to go+ either mai!tai! that
there is !o other bei!g tha! bei!g- 6ith the 6ill to ore8lose the jouissa!8e H!e- or support the idea that
there is the H!e that e?ists apart rom bei!g- i! 6hi8h 8ase the demo!stratio! o impossibility takes i!to
a88ou!t the tra8e that this H!e leaves i! the Hther- i! the orm o Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!K O The
passage rom the jouissa!8e H!e to the 4ame:o:the:Father is the passage rom the !ot:all to a! all- but
this passage leaves a! u!:sublated remai!der>e?8ess- the tra8e that the jouissa!8e H!e 6ill leave there7
H!e o the orms o this e?8ess is jouissa!8e emi!i!e- the other is the Freudia! )r:Vater- the o!e 6ho
e!joys all the 6ome!7
((
9!soar as- or .a8a!- this H!e is @alsoA a! Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h makes the se?ual
relatio!ship i!e?iste!t- o!e 8a! u!dersta!d ho6 : a dl3n is stri8tly 8orrelative to il ny a pas de
rapport se&uel+ it is the very obje8t:obsta8le to itT it is !ot primarily the mysti8al all:e!8ompassi!g H!e
o the i!amous Jo8ea!i8 eeli!gK derided by Freud- but a Jlittle pie8e o the Feal-K the e?8reme!tal
remai!der 6hi8h disturbs the harmo!y o the T6o7 The eNuatio! o the t6o e?8esses @1ouissance
feminine a!d 3r*6aterA also makes se!se+ it poi!ts to6ards .a8a!Is stateme!t that J6oma! is o!e o
the !ames o the ather7K
/hat makes BalosUy8Is solutio! problemati8 is that it is ultimately i!8ompatible 6ith the very
logi8 o the !o!:All to 6hi8h it reers+ it redu8es it to the Jmas8uli!eK logi8 o e?8eptio!T
symptomati8ally- BalosUy8 himsel uses the term Je?8eptio!K to desig!ate the emi!i!e positio!+ JThe
emi!i!e side o se?uatio! 6ill prese!t itsel- !ot 6ithout a tie to the phalli8 sig!iier- but also !ot
6ithout havi!g preserved a relatio! 6ith the jouissa!8e H!eKT this is 6hat Jmakes a 6oma! a!
e?8eptio!-K !amely a! e?8eptio! to the phalli8:symboli8 order7
=o6 are 6e to relate the H!e o : a dl3n @Jthere is [some\ H!e- somethi!g o a H!e-K
developed by .a8a! i! Seminar ;; DEncoreEA to the series o u!ary sig!iiers- prior to their u!ii8atio!
through a phalli8 ,aster:Sig!iierEthe i!i!itely sel:divisible series o S
1
@S
1
@S
1
@S
1
OAAA- 6hi8h
also repli8ates the rame o the materialist o!tology o multipli8ities a!d VoidM There is a good reaso!
.a8a! uses the 8ommo! Fre!8h e?pressio! : a dl3n- 6hi8h is as ar as possible rom the elevated
mysti8al assertio! o the H!e beyo!d all bei!g@sA- epe"eina tes ousias @like Jthere is 6ater thereKEa!
u!spe8iied Nua!tumA7 =o6ever- the H!e o : a dl3n is !ot yet the H!e o 8ou!ti!g+ the diuse
Jthere is somethi!g o the H!eK pre8isely preve!ts the i?atio! o limits 6hi8h 6ould re!der possible
the 8ou!ti!g o H!es7 /hat i o!e reads .a8a!Is : a dl3n as the ormula o the mi!imal libidi!al
i?atio! @o! some H!eA 8o!stitutive o drive- as the mome!t o the emerge!8e o drive rom the pre:
eve!tal H!e:less multipli8ityM As su8h- this H!e is a Jsinthome-K a ki!d o Jatom o e!joyme!t-K the
mi!imal sy!thesis o la!guage a!d e!joyme!t- a u!it o sig!s permeated 6ith e!joyme!t @like a ti8 6e
8ompulsively repeatA7 Are su8h H!es !ot <uanta of en1oyment- its smallest- most eleme!tary pa8kagesM
Hbs8ura!tist idealists like to vary the moti o Jalmost !othi!gK+ a mi!imum o bei!g 6hi8h
!o!etheless bears 6it!ess to divi!ity @J1od is also prese!t i! the ti!iest spe8k o dust OKA7 The
materialist a!s6er to this is the less than nothing7 The irst to propose this a!s6er 6as Gemo8ritus- the
ather o A!8ie!t 1reek materialism @a!d also- i!8ide!tally- o!e o the irst to ormulate the pri!8iple o
eNualityEJ0Nuality is every6here !oble-K as he put itA7 To e?press this Jless tha! !othi!g-K
Gemo8ritus took re8ourse to a 6o!derul !eologism den @irst 8oi!ed by the si?th:8e!tury:3D poet
Al8aeusA- so the basi8 a?iom o his o!tology is+ J4othi!g is !o less tha! Hthi!g-K or- as the 1erma!
tra!slatio! goes- JDas ichts e&istiert ebenso sehr wie das IchtsFK
(#
9t is 8ru8ial to !ote ho6- 8o!trary
to the late /ittge!stei!ia! thrust to6ards ordi!ary la!guage- to6ards la!guage as part o a lie 6orld-
materialism begi!s by violati!g the rules o ordi!ary la!guage- by thi!ki!g agai!st la!guage7 @Si!8e
medhen does !ot literally mea! J!othi!g-K but rather J!ot:o!e-K a more adeNuate tra!spositio! o den
i!to 0!glish 6ould have bee! somethi!g like Joto!eK or eve! Jto!e7K
('
A
The A!8ie!t 1reeks had t6o 6ords or !othi!g- meden a!d ouden- 6hi8h sta!d or t6o types o
!egatio!+ ouden is a a8tual !egatio!- somethi!g that is !ot but 8ould have bee!T meden is- o! the
8o!trary- somethi!g that i! pri!8iple 8a!!ot be7 From meden 6e get to den !ot simply by !egati!g the
!egatio! i! meden- but by displa8i!g !egatio!- or- rather- by suppleme!ti!g !egatio! 6ith a
subtra8tio!7 That is to say- 6e arrive at de! 6he! 6e take a6ay rom meden !ot the 6hole !egati!g
prei?- but o!ly its irst t6o letters+ meden is medhen- the !egatio! o hen @o!eA+ !ot:o!e7 Gemo8ritus
arrives at den by leavi!g out o!ly me a!d thus 8reati!g a totally artii8ial 6ord den7 Den is thus !ot
!othi!g 6ithout J!o-K !ot a thi!g- but a! othing- a somethi!g but still within the domain of nothing- like
a! o!tologi8al livi!g dead- a spe8tral !othi!g:appeari!g:as:somethi!g7 Hr- as .a8a! put it+ J4othi!g-
perhapsM 4oEperhaps !othi!g- but !ot !othi!gKT
($
to 6hi8h Dassi! adds+ J9 6ould love to make him
say+ )as rien! mais moins <ue rien ?ot nothing! but less than nothing@K
(&
Eden is a Jbli!d passe!gerK
o every o!tology7
(%
As su8h- it is Jthe radi8al real-K a!d Gemo8ritus is a true materialist+ J4o more
materialist i! this matter tha! a!yo!e 6ith his se!ses- tha! me or tha! ,ar?- or e?ample7 3ut 9 8a!!ot
s6ear that this also holds or FreudKE.a8a! suspe8ts FreudIs li!k to kabbala obs8ura!tism7
#0
9! 8hara8teriUi!g den as the result o Jsubtra8tio! ater !egatio!K
@somethingGnothingGothingA- Dassi!- o 8ourse- 8a!!ot resist the temptatio! to have a stab at =egel+
J9t 8a!!ot be diale8ti8iUed pre8isely i!soar as it is !ot a! assumed a!d sublated !egatio! o !egatio!-
but a subtra8tio! ater !egatio!7K
#1
The rise o den is thus stri8tly homologous to that o ob1et a 6hi8h-
a88ordi!g to .a8a!- emerges 6he! the t6o la8ks @o the subje8t a!d o the HtherA 8oi!8ide- that is-
6he! alie!atio! is ollo6ed by separatio!+ den is the Ji!divisible remai!derK o the sig!iyi!g pro8ess
o double !egatio!Esomethi!g like Syg!e de Doco!tai!eIs ti8- this mi!imal eppur si muove 6hi8h
survives her utter 6ersagung @re!u!8iatio!A7 The later re8eptio! o Gemo8ritus- o 8ourse- immediately
Jre!ormaliUedK den by 6ay o o!tologiUi!g it+ den be8omes a positive H!e- atoms are !o6 e!tities i!
the empty spa8e- !o lo!ger spe8tral Jothi!gsK@less:tha!:!othi!gsA7
The !eologism den evokes de!sity a!d thus poi!ts to6ards the primordial- pre:o!tologi8al-
8o!tra8tio!+ den is- arguably- the irst !ame or .a8a!Is : a dl3nEthere are o!es- mi!imal poi!ts o
8o!tra8tio!- o ens 6hi8h is !ot yet the o!tologi8ally 8o!stituted H!e7 Cerhaps- a! a!a8hro!isti8
reere!8e to *a!t 8a! !o!etheless be o some help here+ meden ollo6s the logi8 o !egative judgme!t-
it !egates bei!g as a predi8ate- 6hile den asserts !o!:bei!g as a @positiveA predi8ateEden is
!othi!g!ess @the voidA 6hi8h someho6 JisK i! itsel- !ot o!ly as a !egatio! o @a!otherA bei!g7 9! other
6ords- den is the spa8e o i!disti!8tio! bet6ee! bei!g a!d !o!:bei!g- Ja thi!g o !othi!g-K as the
Ju!deadK are the livi!g dead7 @The 6ell:k!o6! J)anta rei! ouden meneiK o =era8litus 8a! thus be read
as+ Jeverythi!g lo6s- !othi!g remai!sKEJ!othi!gK as the very spa8e o i!disti!8tio! o thi!gs a!d !o:
thi!g7A
Credi8tably- the 0leati8 ,elissus- i! his 8ritiNue o Gemo8ritus- dismissed de! 6ith the s8athi!g
remark that Jar rom bei!g a !e8essary e?iste!t- [it\ is !ot eve! a 6ord7K 9! a 6ay- he is right+ 6e !eed
a !o!:6ord to desig!ate somethi!g that- pre8isely- does !ot yet e?ist @as a thi!gAEden lies outside the
s8ope o the u!ity o logos a!d bei!g7 Gemo8ritea! atomism is thus the irst materialist a!s6er to
0leati8 idealism+ 0leati8s argue rom the logi8al impossibility o the void to the impossibility o
motio!T Gemo8ritea! atomists seem to reaso! i! reverse- dedu8i!g rom the a8t that motio! e?ists the
!e8essity that the void @empty spa8eA e?ists7 The ultimate divide bet6ee! idealism a!d materialism
does !ot 8o!8er! the materiality o e?iste!8e @Jo!ly material thi!gs really e?istKA- but the Je?iste!8eK o
!othi!g!ess>the void+ the u!dame!tal a?iom o materialism is that the void>!othi!g!ess is @the o!ly
ultimateA real- i7e7- there is a! i!disti!8tio! o bei!g a!d the void7 9- or Carme!ides- o!ly bei!g is- or
Gemo8ritus- !othi!g is as mu8h as bei!g7 9! order to get rom !othi!g to somethi!g- 6e do !ot have to
add somethi!g to the voidT o! the 8o!trary- 6e have to subtra8t- take a6ay- somethi!g rom !othi!g7
4othi!g a!d othi!g are thus !ot simply the same+ J4othi!gK is the ge!erative void out o 6hi8h
othi!gs- primordially 8o!tra8ted pre:o!tologi8al e!tities- emergeEat this level- !othi!g is more tha!
othi!g- !egative is more tha! positive7 H!8e 6e e!ter the o!tologi8ally ully 8o!stituted reality-
ho6ever- the relatio!ship is reversed+ somethi!g is more tha! !othi!g- i! other 6ords- !othi!g is purely
!egative- a privatio! o somethi!g7
This- perhaps- is ho6 o!e 8a! imagi!e the Uero:level o 8reatio!+ a red dividi!g li!e 8uts
through the thi8k dark!ess o the void- a!d o! this li!e- a uUUy somethi!g appears- the obje8t:8ause o
desireEperhaps- or some- a 6oma!Is !aked body @as o! the 8over o this bookA7 Goes this image !ot
supply the mi!imal 8oordi!ates o the subje8t:obje8t a?is- the truly primordial a?is o evil+ the red li!e
6hi8h 8uts through the dark!ess is the subje8t- a!d the body its obje8tM
J4HT=941 0d9STSK

=ypotheses 1 a!d 2Eif the $ne is a!d if the $ne is notEare ollo6ed by a brie argume!t
@1##eX1#$bA 6hi8h is sometimes take! as a hypothesis o its o6! @so that 6e get !i!e i!stead o eight
hypothesesA- but more ote! as a mere appe!di? to the irst t6o7 This reaso!i!g ee8tively provides a
ki!d o mediatio! bet6ee! hypotheses 1 a!d 2+ i the result o hypothesis 1 6as that the H!e- take!
solely i! virtue o itsel- apart rom everythi!g else- is !othi!g at all @or totally u!des8ribableA- a!d i
the result o hypothesis 2 6as that the H!e- take! i! virtue o others- is everythi!g i!dis8rimi!ately
@large a!d small- similar a!d dissimilar- i! moveme!t a!d at rest OA- the appe!di? tries to resolve this
a!ti!omy by i!trodu8i!g the temporal dime!sio!7 A H!e 6hi8h e?ists i! time 8a! 6ithout a!y
8o!tradi8tio! 8ha!ge i! time rom o!e state to a!other @it 8a! move- say- a!d the! be at restA7 3ut the
i!terest o this other6ise 8ommo!se!si8al solutio! is that it agai! arrives at a parado?i8al result 6he!
Carme!ides o8uses o! the simple Nuestio!+ 6he! does the H!e i! Nuestio! 8ha!geM J9 it is i! motio!-
it has !ot yet 8ha!ged7 9 it is at rest- it has already 8ha!ged7 /he! it 8ha!ges must it !ot be !either i!
motio! !or at restM 3ut there 8a! be !o time 6he! a thi!g is !either i! motio! !or at rest7K Carme!ides
proposes that the 8ha!ge bet6ee! the t6o states o88urs i! a! i!sta!t- a!d that the i!sta!t is !ot i! time7
At that i!sta!t- the obje8t is !either i! motio! !or at rest- but is poised or both alter!atives+

The i!sta!t seems to sig!iy somethi!g su8h that 8ha!gi!g o88urs rom it to ea8h o t6o states7 For a
thi!g does!It 8ha!ge rom rest 6hile rest 8o!ti!ues- or rom motio! 6hile motio! 8o!ti!ues7 Father-
this Nueer 8reature- the i!sta!t- lurks bet6ee! motio! a!d restEbei!g i! !o time at allEa!d to it a!d
rom it the movi!g thi!g 8ha!ges to resti!g a!d the resti!g thi!g 8ha!ges to movi!g7 @1#'dXeA
Carme!ides goes o! to 8ompli8ate the issue 6he! he applies the same !otio! o the i!sta!t to
the 8ha!ge rom bei!g to !o!:bei!g or vi8e versa+ at that i!sta!t- a thi!g !either is !or is !ot7 @The
problem 6ith this solutio! is that it violates the .a6 o 0?8luded ,iddle 6hi8h says that- at a!y
i!sta!t- a thi!g should be either F or !ot F7A 9! this middle spa8e- ma!y 6eird thi!gs 8a! take
pla8eEho6 8a! 6e !ot thi!k o 1rams8iIs remark+ Jthe 8risis lies pre8isely i! the a8t that the old is
dyi!g a!d the !e6 8a!!ot be bor!7 9! the i!terreg!um- a variety o morbid symptoms appearKM
The Feal 6e are deali!g 6ith here is the Feal o the pure virtual sura8e- the Ji!8orporealK Feal-
6hi8h is to be opposed to the Feal i! its most terriyi!g imagi!ary dime!sio!- the primordial abyss
6hi8h s6allo6s up everythi!g- dissolvi!g all ide!titiesEa igure 6ell k!o6! i! literature i! multiple
guises- rom 0dgar Alla! CoeIs maelstrom a!d *urtUIs JhorrorK at the e!d o Do!radIs 0eart of
Dar"ness- to Cip rom ,elvilleIs Moby Dic" 6ho- 8ast to the bottom o the o8ea!- e?perie!8es the
demo! 1od+

Darried do6! alive to 6o!drous depths- 6here stra!ge shapes o the u!6arped primal 6orld glided to
a!d ro beore his passive eyes O Cip sa6 the multitudi!ous- 1od:om!iprese!t- 8oral i!se8ts- that out
o the irmame!t o 6aters heaved the 8olossal orbs7 =e sa6 1odIs oot upo! the treadle o the loom-
a!d spoke to itT a!d thereore his shipmates 8alled him mad7
#2
This Feal @6hose best:k!o6! Freudia! 8ase is the dreamerIs look i!to 9rmaIs throat rom
-raumdeutungA- this over:abu!da!t obs8e!e:morbid vitality o the primordial Flesh- is not the Feal o
pure appeara!8e 6hi8h is the truth o the Clato!i8 9dea7 9t is agai! GeleuUe 6ho 8a! help us dra6 a
8learer li!e o disti!8tio! bet6ee! these t6o Feals7 H! the very irst page o his .ogic of Sense-
GeleuUe des8ribes pure be8omi!g 6ith a reere!8e to +lice in Wonderland+ 6he! Ali8e Jbe8omes
larger-K

she be8omes larger tha! she 6as7 3y the same toke!- ho6ever- she be8omes smaller tha! she is !o67
Dertai!ly- she is !ot bigger a!d smaller at the same time7 She is larger !o6T she 6as smaller beore7 3ut
it is at the same mome!t that o!e be8omes larger tha! o!e 6as a!d smaller tha! o!e be8omes7 This is
the simulta!eity o a be8omi!g 6hose 8hara8teristi8 is to elude the prese!t7 9!soar as it eludes the
prese!t- be8omi!g does !ot tolerate the separatio! or the disti!8tio! o beore a!d ater- or o past a!d
uture7 9t pertai!s to the esse!8e o be8omi!g to move a!d to pull i! both dire8tio!s at o!8e+ Ali8e does
!ot gro6 6ithout shri!ki!g- a!d vi8e versa7
#"
Temporarily- the Se!se:0ve!t- its 3e8omi!g- is a pure 9!sta!t- the borderli!e bet6ee! the past
a!d the uture- the poi!t at 6hi8h opposites 8oi!8ide- at 6hi8h a thi!g simulta!eously gro6s bigger a!d
smaller- et87Ethe 9!sta!t is pre8isely the a88umulatio! o the opposite predi8ates Clato is struggli!g
6ith7 H!e should thus !ot be surprised that GeleuUe li!ks this !otio! o be8omi!g to ClatoIs )hilebos
a!d )armenides- 6here Clato des8ribes a pro8ess i! 6hi8h

hotter !ever stops 6here it is but is al6ays goi!g a poi!t urther- a!d the same applies to J8older-K
6hereas dei!ite Nuality is somethi!g that has stopped goi!g o! a!d is i?ed7 @)hilebos 2(dA the
you!ger be8omi!g older tha! the older- the older be8omi!g you!ger tha! the you!gerEbut they 8a!
!ever i!ally be8ome soT i they did they 6ould !o lo!ger be be8omi!g- but 6ould be so7 @)armenides
1#(eX1##aA
As GeleuUe sho6s i! -he .ogic of Sense- the Se!se:0ve!t as pure i!substa!tial 3e8omi!g takes
pla8e o! the borderli!e bet6ee! the t6o JpositiveK domai!s @o thi!gs a!d o 6ordsA+

Sense is both the e&pressible or the e&pressed of the proposition! and the attribute of the state of
affairsF 9t tur!s o!e side to6ards thi!gs a!d o!e side to6ards propositio!s O 9t is e?a8tly the bou!dary
bet6ee! thi!gs a!d propositio!s7 9t is this ali<uid at o!8e e?tra:3ei!g a!d i!here!8e- that is- this
mi!imum o bei!g 6hi8h beits i!here!8es7
#(
GeleuUe i!trodu8es here the oppositio! bet6ee! t6o modes o time- Dhro!os @the time o bodily
substa!8esA a!d Aio! @the time o immaterial be8omi!gA+ the 8y8li8 time o material tra!sormatio!s- o
the ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio! o thi!gsE6hi8h is- at its most basi8 level- the Jterriyi!g- measureless
prese!tK o the primordial DhaosEa!d the pure li!earity o the lu? o be8omi!g7 9! Dhro!os- Jo!ly the
prese!t e?ists i! time7 Cast- prese!t a!d uture are !ot three dime!sio!s o timeT o!ly the prese!t ills
time- 6hereas past a!d uture are t6o dime!sio!s relative to the prese!t i! time7K
##
This 4o6 o
Dhro!os should be opposed to the 9!sta!t o Aio!+

9! a88orda!8e 6ith Aio!- o!ly the past a!d uture i!here or subsist i! time7 9!stead o a prese!t 6hi8h
absorbs the past a!d uture- a uture a!d past divide the prese!t at every i!sta!t a!d subdivide it ad
i!i!itum i!to past a!d uture- i! both dire8tio!s at o!8e7 Hr- rather- it is the i!sta!t 6ithout thi8k!ess
a!d 6ithout e?te!sio!- 6hi8h subdivides ea8h prese!t i!to past a!d uture- rather tha! vast a!d thi8k
prese!ts 6hi8h 8omprehe!d both uture a!d past i! relatio! to o!e a!other7
#'
This diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o be8omi!gs- the be8omi!g:mad o the depths o the primordial
ormless Dhaos a!d the sura8e o the i!i!ite divisibility o the 9!sta!t- is Jalmost the diere!8e
bet6ee! the se8o!d a!d third hypotheses o )armenidesEthat o the V!o6I a!d that o the Vi!sta!tIK
#$
+

/hereas Dhro!os 6as i!separable rom 8ir8ularity a!d its a88ide!tsEsu8h as blo8kages or
pre8ipitatio!s- e?plosio!s- dis8o!!e8tio!s- a!d i!duratio!sEAio! stret8hes out i! a straight li!e-
limitless i! either dire8tio!7 Al6ays already passed a!d eter!ally yet to 8ome- Aio! is the eter!al truth
o time+ pure empty form of time- 6hi8h has reed itsel o its prese!t 8orporeal 8o!te!t a!d has thereby
u!6ou!d its o6! 8ir8le- stret8hi!g itsel out i!to a straight li!e7
#&
=ypothesis " proper- 6hi8h the! ollo6s @Ji o!e is- 6hat are the 8o!seNue!8es or the othersKA-
avoids this parado? by 6ay o outli!i!g a 8ommo!:se!se- realisti8 o!tology+ although the others are !ot
the H!e- they 8a! have some relatio! to the H!e- they 8a! partake o the orm o the H!e+ 6he! they
are 8ombi!ed i!to a /hole- this /hole is H!eT as parts o this /hole- ea8h o them is also H!e- et87
The orm o H!e thus delimits the parts i! relatio! to ea8h other a!d to the 6holeT it Ja88ou!ts or the
orga!iUatio! o parts i! a u!iied 6hole-K
#%
that is- it a8ts as the Jprinciple of structure or the e!tities
it 8ombi!es7K
'0
9 6e take the orm o the H!e a6ay rom the others- 6e get a 8haoti8 u!limited
multitude7
Da! ClatoIs Jillogi8alK 8ha!ge o order bet6ee! hypotheses " a!d ( be e?plai!ed as a! ater:
ee8t o the mysterious appe!di? @or hypothesis "A 6hi8h ollo6s hypothesis 2 a!d is a ki!d o
symptomal e?8ess o the e!tire matri?- its Jpart o !o:part-K a somethi!g @a! hypothesisA 6hi8h 8ou!ts
or !othi!gM 9 6e 8orre8t the order o hypotheses a!d e?8ha!ge the pla8es o " a!d (- the u!derlyi!g
patter! emerges+ e!tities that result rom the hypothesis are des8ribable>sayable i the H!e is or i it is
!ot- that is- i 6e are 6ithi! the order o positive bei!g @asserted or !egatedA- 6hereas the result is
!egative i 6e are 6ithi! the order o Jthere is @or is !oA H!e7K The reaso! or this repartitio! is that- to
put it i! GeleuUia! terms- or Clato- predi8atio! @i!soar as it is possibleA 6ithi! the order o bei!g is at
the level o bodies a!d their properties>Nualities- !ot at the level o be8omi!g+ its basi8 orm is
substa!8e:8opula:predi8ate- !ot substa!8e:verb or eve! dire8tly imperso!al verbEit is JAli8e is
gree!-K !ot JAli8e gree!sK or eve! Jit gree!s @o! Ali8eA7K
9! order to grasp properly the key disti!8tio! bet6ee! the !e?t t6o hypotheses- # a!d '- o!e
should o8us o! a detail 6hi8h may appear mi!or but o! 6hi8h everythi!g hi!ges+ the status o
predi8atio!7 =ypotheses # a!d ' e?plore the 8o!seNue!8es or the H!e i JH!e is !otKT # reads Jis !otK
as the assertio! o a !o!:predi8ate- 6hile ' reads Jis !otK as a dire8t outright !egatio!7 9! other 6ords-
i! #- JH!e is !otK mea!s that the H!e partakes o ma!y 8hara8teristi8s @is u!like the others- like itsel-
a!d so o!A- amo!g them !o!:bei!g7 The 8o!seNue!8es o this tripli8ity are ar:rea8hi!g+ 6he! 6e say
J? is large-K this does !ot mea! that the obje8t ? is large be8ause it dire8tly parti8ipates i! the 9dea o
large!essT it rather mea!s that ? parta"es of being in relation to largeness7 This tripli8ity holds !ot o!ly
or the predi8ative use o the verb Jbei!gK+ i 6e say that So8rates a!d Clato are similar i! that they are
both 1reek- they are !ot similar be8ause they both partake o the 9dea o 1reekEthey are similar
because they both parta"e of the Idea of similarity in relation to being*(ree"7
So it is !ot o!ly a Nuestio! o the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the tra!sitive:predi8ative a!d the
i!tra!sitive:e?iste!tial use o JisK @JSo8rates is uglyK versus JSo8rates isKAEi! the logi8 that rules
hypothesis #- the very bei!g is rele8ted:i!to:itsel+ 6he! 6e say that JSo8rates is-K it mea!s JSo8rates
is VisI- he partakes i! bei!g7K /e are thus deali!g 6ith two different modes of being- the immediate-
dire8t e?iste!8e:i!:reality- a!d the luid sura8e Jbei!gK 6hi8h is i!diere!t to JrealK bei!g or !o!:
bei!g7 So- 6hat i 6e ollo6 GeleuUe a!d read these t6o types o bei!g a!a8hro!isti8ally- through the
later Stoi8 disti!8tio! bet6ee! material bodies that e?ist i! spatio:temporal reality- a!d the amous
Jimmaterials-K pure sura8e:eve!ts 6hi8h 8omprise 6hat is sayable- 6hat 6e 8a! speak aboutM The
mome!t 6e speak about somethi!g- its immediate e?iste!8e is suspe!ded- its bei!g be8omes a rele?ive
predi8ate- 6hi8h is 6hy 6e 8a! speak about thi!gs 6hi8h are i! the mode o bei!g or i! the mode o
!o!:bei!gEor- to Nuote 1illIs 8o!8lusio!+ J,a!y more thi!gs e?ist i! ClatoIs o!tology tha! e?ist i!
ours7 For him a!ythi!g des8ribable is7K
'1
A u!i8or! 8a! have o!e hor!- our legs- a!d so o!- a!d !ot
e?ist7 @/e 8a! also dis8er! i! this GeleuUia! readi!g a! e8ho o Carme!idesIs ou!di!g ormula o
philosophy 6hi8h asserts the same!ess o thi!ki!g>speaki!gElogosEa!d bei!g7A
The !e?t step i! our i!terpretatio! o )armenides should be to li!k this oppositio! bet6ee!
material bodies a!d the JimmaterialK to the e!igmati8 diere!8e bet6ee! the irst t6o hypotheses+ Ji it
is H!eK a!d Ji H!e is7K Cerhaps 6e should read Ji it is H!eK as .a8a! does- as the imperso!al Jsil y a
dl3n-K as a Jthere is O-K !ot the ull assertio! o bei!g7 The diere!8e bet6ee! the irst t6o
hypotheses is thus the diere!8e bet6ee! Jthere is H!eK a!d Jthe H!e is7K
So- i 6e 8a! properly talk o!ly about e!tities suspe!ded i! limbo bet6ee! bei!g a!d !o!:
bei!g- o bei!g i! the mode o !o!:bei!g- 6hy 8a! 6e !ot say a!ythi!g about this H!e o the irst
hypothesisM 9! other 6ords- i 6e 8a! o!ly des8ribe a!d talk about that 6hi8h partakes o H!e- 6he! is
the result o Jthere is o!eK the impossibility o sayi!g a!ythi!g at allM The !egative results o some o
the hypotheses i! )armenides should be read i! a =egelia! 6ay- as a determi!ate !egatio!+ ea8h time
6e get a very spe8ii8 !egative result !ot to be 8o!used 6ith the others7 The !egative result o
hypothesis 1 is thus to be opposed to the result o the last hypothesis- 6hi8h is also total !othi!g!ess+
the void o hypothesis 1 is !ot the ultimate abyss o reality @the 3uddhist sunyataA- but a pure H!e
6hi8h- la8ki!g a!y urther Nualii8atio!s- immediately erases itsel7 To put it i! .a8a!ese- it is the la8k
o sig!iier:H!e 6hi8h is still i!here!t to the order o the sig!iier:H!e- b- the barred sig!iier O i!
short- the void o subje8tivity7 b is !ot the u!sayable beyo!d the sayable- but the u!sayable that is
i!here!t to the sayable7
The last t6o hypotheses @$ a!d &A e?plore the 8o!seNue!8es o JH!e is !otK or the others- a!d
6hat makes them so i!teresti!g is !ot the logi8al @i!Aa88ura8y o the u!derlyi!g reaso!i!g- but the a8t
that- take! together- they 8ome u!8a!!ily 8lose to des8ribi!g 6hat 6e i! the /est per8eive as the
3uddhist o!tology o pure leeti!g substa!8e:less appeara!8es @hypothesis $A be!eath 6hi8h there is
!othi!g but the void o 4othi!g!ess @hypothesis &A7 1ill is right to poi!t out ho6 Jthe eort reNuired to
make o!eIs 6ay through the previous dedu8tio!s is re6arded by vivid imagery hereK+

The others appear o!e a!d ma!y- but are!It so really7 They appear large- small- a!d eNual- a!d they
appear like a!d u!like themselves a!d ea8h other- but they are!It really O i the others are other- they
must be other tha! somethi!g7 They 8a!It be other tha! the o!e- i it is !ot- so they must be other tha!
ea8h other O they are other tha! ea8h other- a!d they are u!limited i! multitude O 5ou take some
small mass that seems to be o!e- but it sudde!ly disi!tegrates i!to ma!y little bits7 The small mass you
started 6ith !o6 seems imme!se i! relatio! to them7 These are mere appeara!8es- be8ause 6ithout
o!e!ess to determi!e the i!dividuality o thi!gs a!d the relatio!s bet6ee! them- the properties a!d
relatio!s 6e observe alter 6ith our perspe8tive O 9magi!e looki!g at a dista!t gala?y 6ith the !aked
eye a!d the! looki!g at it 6ith a po6erul teles8ope7 At irst you see o!ly o!e ti!y glo6i!g obje8t- but
the! a multitude o stars7 /hat you see depe!ds o! your perspe8tive7
'2
The result o the last hypothesis is the reality be!eath this t6i!kli!g play o
appeara!8esE!othi!g7 So 6hy do 6e get irst the play o appeara!8es a!d the! just outright
4othi!g!essM 9t all hi!ges agai! o! the diere!8e bet6ee! Jthere is !o H!eK a!d Jthe H!e is !otK+
hypothesis $ 8o!siders the 8o!seNue!8es or the others i the H!e is !ot- 6hile hypothesis & 8o!siders
the 8o!seNue!8es or the others i there is !o H!e7 9 the H!e is !ot @as ull o!tologi8al realityA- the
spa8e remai!s ope! or H!es 6hi8h just are- that is- or the luid play o appeara!8es i! 6hi8h others
8a! partake o the H!e a!d thus a8Nuire a temporary ragile 8o!siste!8y7 9- ho6ever- there is !o H!e-
!ot eve! a temporary delusive appeara!8e o H!e!ess is possible- leavi!g just the void o 4othi!g!ess7
/e 8a! take the 8o!8lusio! o )armenides @the result o hypothesis &+ J!othi!g e?istsKA i! t6o
opposed 6ays+ either literally- as the 8o!8lusio! o the e!tire matri? o hypotheses- i7e7- as the ultimate
o!tologi8al stateme!t- or as a reductio ad absurdum 6hi8h i! a !egative 6ay demo!strates the
!e8essity o some ki!d o stable orms+ JThe lesso! is that there must be orms- or stable obje8ts o
some sort- i there is to be a!y 6orld at all7K
'"
9s this alter!ative !ot the alter!ative bet6ee!
materialism a!d idealism at its purestM =ere are the very last li!es o )armenides+

The! may 6e !ot sum up the argume!t i! a 6ord a!d say truly+ 9 o!e is !ot- the! !othi!g isM
Dertai!ly7
.et thus mu8h be saidT a!d urther let us airm 6hat seems to be the truth- that- 6hether o!e is or is
!ot- o!e a!d the others i! relatio! to themselves a!d o!e a!other- all o them- i! every 6ay- are a!d are
!ot- a!d appear to be a!d appear !ot to be7
,ost true7
9s this !ot the most su88i!8t- mi!imal dei!itio! o diale8ti8al materialismM 9 there is !o H!e-
just multipli8ities o multipli8ities- the! the ultimate reality is the Void itselT all determi!ate thi!gs
Jare a!d are !ot7K
'(
Should 6e the! add to the eight hypotheses a !i!th o!e- 6hi8h- although !ot
e?pli8itly posited as a hypothesis- is the truth o the e!tire series+ J4othi!g isKM @Hr is it rather that
J!othi!g isK is the truth o the eighth hypothesis alo!eMA
9t all depe!ds o! 6hat- pre8isely- 6e mea! by Uero- !othi!g- or the void7 First- there are t6o
Ueroes- the Uero o measure @like a Uero degree- the poi!t o reere!8e 8hose! to establish a Nua!titative
diere!8e- 6hi8h is arbitraryEor measuri!g temperature- Delsius a!d Fahre!heit posit a diere!t
UeroA a!d Uero as the !eutral eleme!t- like 0 i! additio! a!d subtra8tio!+ 6hi8hever !umber 6e add 0 to
or subtra8t 0 rom- this !umber remai!s the same7 This- perhaps- oers o!e approa8h to the Ja!alystIs
!eutralityK+ the a!alyst is just there as a! i!ert ob1et a- s>he does !ot a8tively i!terve!e7 =o6ever- 6e
should add to this !eutrality o 0 the opposite 8ase o multipli8atio! 6herei! 0 is- o! the 8o!trary- the
absorbi!g eleme!t+ 6hi8hever !umber 6e multiply 6ith 0- the result is 07 /hat this mea!s is that it is
!o!etheless the a!alystIs mere presence 6hi8h has the magi8 ee8t o tra!sormi!g the patie!tIs lo6
o spee8h i!to a prosopopoeia7 9magi!e the patie!t telli!g his a!alyst a passio!ate story about some o
his re8e!t adve!tures or a!tasies+ the very prese!8e o the a!alyst- her Jiro!i8K sta!8e- de:subje8tiviUes
the patie!tT it tra!substa!tiates his authe!ti8 subje8tive e?pressio! i!to a puppet:like delivery o a bric*
a*brac o alsiied memories a!d ragme!ts lited rom totally diere!t situatio!s- origi!ally addressed
to diere!t perso!s @like the patie!tIs atherA- or eve! origi!ally spoke! by others7 9! this se!se- the
a!alystIs !eutral prese!8e u!8tio!s as the absorbi!g eleme!t+ !o matter ho6 6ell thought out a!d
pla!!ed the patie!tIs spee8h is- o!8e it is perormed i! the a!alyti8 setti!g @rameA- its status is that o
prosopopoeia a!d is JabsorbedK i!to a ree asso8iatio!7
'#
This disti!8tio! bet6ee! the !eutral>absorbi!g Uero a!d the Uero o measure is !ot to be
8o!used 6ith a!other disti!8tio! 6hi8h also relates to the psy8hoa!alyti8 pra8ti8e+ the disti!8tio!
bet6ee! nothing a!d the void7 4othi!g is lo8aliUed- like 6he! 6e say Jthere is !othi!g here-K 6hile the
void is a dime!sio! 6ithout limits7
''
9! psy8hoa!alyti8 8li!i8s- this 8ouple is 8learly operative i! the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! psy8hosis a!d hysteria+ i! psy8hosis- 6e e!8ou!ter so:8alled Jdeperso!aliUatio!K or
the eeli!g o the loss o reality- 6hi8h reers to a voidT 6hile i! hysteria- this void is lo8aliUed as a
!othi!g- a spe8ii8 dissatisa8tio!7 /hat this mea!s is that !othi!g is al6ays a !othi!g 6ithi! some
spe8ii8 rame6ork+ there is !othi!g 6ithi! a rame 6here 6e e?pe8ted somethi!g7
'$
The irst task i!
the a!alysis o a psy8hoti8 is thus arguably the most dii8ult- but also the most 8ru8ial+ that o
Jhysteri8iUi!gK the psy8hoti8 subje8t- that is- tra!sormi!g the void o his Jdeperso!aliUatio!K i!to a
hysteri8al dissatisa8tio!7 The opposite o this tra!sormatio! is the 8ase o psy8hoti8 forclusion- 6here
the e?8luded eleme!t thro6s the subje8t ba8k i!to the void7 3ut 6hyM 3e8ause the e?8luded
eleme!tEthe 4ame:o:the:FatherEis !ot just o!e amo!g the sig!iiers- but a sig!iier:rame- a
sig!iier 6hi8h sustai!s the te?ture o a! e!tire symboli8 rame6ork7
So- to 8o!8lude- i 6e retur! rom the se8o!d to the irst part o )armenides- i7e7- to the status o
9deas- the! the result should be that 9deas do !ot e?ist- do !ot have o!tologi8al reality o their o6!+ they
persist as purely virtual poi!ts o reere!8e7 That is to say- the o!ly appropriate 8o!8lusio! is that
eter!al 9deas are H!es a!d Hthers 6hi8h do !ot parti8ipate i! @spatio:temporalA 3ei!g @6hi8h is the
o!ly a8tual bei!g there isA+ their status is purely virtual7 This virtual status 6as made 8lear by GeleuUe-
o!e o the great a!ti:Clato!ists7 GeleuUeIs !otio! o the Virtual is to be opposed to the all:pervasive
topi8 o virtual reality+ 6hat matters to GeleuUe is !ot virtual reality- but the reality of the virtual
@6hi8h- i! .a8a!ia! terms- is the FealA7 Virtual Feality i! itsel is a rather miserable idea+ that o
imitati!g reality- o reprodu8i!g e?perie!8e i! a! artii8ial medium7 The reality o the Virtual- o! the
other ha!d- sta!ds or the reality o the Virtual as su8h- or its real ee8ts a!d 8o!seNue!8es7
1HF19AS- 4HT C.ATH- /AS T=0 AFD=:STA.949STR

From this 8o!8ludi!g poi!t- 6e 8a! retur! to 1orgias a!d raise agai! the Nuestio! o the
relatio!ship bet6ee! Clato a!d the sophists7 .et us approa8h the problem i! the terms o the Clato!i8
dieresis+ the gradual subdivisio! o a ge!us i!to spe8ies 6hi8h allo6s us to dei!e the parti8ular e!tity
6e are tryi!g to grasp @to arrive at huma!s- 6e divide bei!gs i!to livi!g a!d !o!:livi!gT the livi!g i!to
pla!ts a!d a!imalsT a!imals i!to mammals a!d all othersT mammals i!to those 6ho have spee8h a!d
those 6ho do !ot OA7 /he! su8h divisio! i!volves a! Ja!tago!isti8K either>or @1ood agai!st 0vil-
reedom agai!st oppressio!- morality agai!st hedo!ism- et87A- there are- roughly speaki!g- t6o
philosophi8al approa8hes to it+ either o!e opts or o!e pole agai!st the other- or o!e adopts the JdeeperK
attitude o emphasiUi!g the 8ompli8ity o the opposites- a!d o advo8ati!g a proper bala!8ed measure
or u!ity7 Although =egelIs diale8ti8 seems like a versio! o the se8o!d approa8h @the Jsy!thesisK o
oppositesA- he a8tually opts or a! u!heard:o third versio!+ the 6ay to resolve the deadlo8k is !either
to e!gage i! ighti!g or the JgoodK side agai!st the Jbad-K !or to try to bri!g them together i! a
bala!8ed Jsy!thesis-K but to opt or the bad side o the i!itial either>or7 .a8a! made the same poi!t i!
his semi!ar 4ou pire+ i! the 8hoi8e bet6ee! Jle p>re ou pireK @the ather or 6orseA- the ethi8al 8hoi8e
opts or 6hat is 6orse7 H 8ourse- this J8hoi8e o 6hat is 6orseK ails- but i! that ailure it u!dermi!es
the e!tire ield o the alter!ative a!d thus e!ables us to over8ome its terms7 @Say- i! politi8s- i! the
8hoi8e bet6ee! orga!i8 u!ity a!d destru8tive terror- the o!ly 6ay to arrive at the truth is to begi! 6ith
the J6ro!gK 8hoi8e o destru8tive terror7A
Therei! resides the i!surmou!table diere!8e bet6ee! =egel a!d the 4e6 Age !otio! o
bala!8i!g opposites7 Take the 8lassi8 8ase o the Fre!8h revolutio!ary Terror+ a88ordi!g to the 8ommo!
per8eptio!- =egel 8o!dem!s the Fre!8h Fevolutio! as the immediate assertio! o a! abstra8t:u!iversal
Freedom 6hi8h- as su8h- has to e!d i! its opposite+ a u!iversal terror dire8ted at all parti8ular 8o!te!t7
To this abstra8t reedomEso the story goesE=egel opposes the J8o!8rete FreedomK o the moder!
ratio!al state i! 6hi8h o!eIs i!dividual reedom is grou!ded i! assumi!g o!eIs pla8e 6ithi! the
arti8ulated totality o the so8ial order O The problem 6ith this 8ommo! per8eptio! is that it does !ot
take i!to a88ou!t the imma!e!t temporal dime!sio! o the diale8ti8al pro8ess7 A histori8al age!t is
!ever dire8tly 8o!ro!ted 6ith the 8hoi8e+ either revolutio!ary terror or orga!i8 ratio!al state7 H! the
eve o the revolutio!- the o!ly 8hoi8e is bet6ee! the old Jorga!i8K order a!d revolutio!- i!8lusive o its
terror7 /hat tips the bala!8e o 8hoi8e to6ards revolutio! i! this situatio! is the i!sight i!to ho6 the
orga!i8 harmo!y o the ancien rAgime is itsel a ake- a! illusio! 8o!8eali!g the reality o brutal
viole!8e- divisio!- a!d 8haos7
Adolphe de Dusti!eIs e?perie!8e o visiti!g Fussia i! the 1&"0s illustrates a! i!teresti!g-
properly =egelia! poi!t+ the very obje8t o his i!Nuiry alie!ated itsel rom him 6he! he approa8hed it7
Dusti!e 6e!t to Fussia sear8hi!g or a! immediate orga!i8 order- that is- he 6a!ted to i!d a so8iety
6hi8h- u!like moder! /ester! 0urope ater the Fre!8h Fevolutio!- remai!ed hierar8hi8ally ordered
a!d grou!ded i! traditio!7 =o6ever- 6hat he ou!d there 6as the e?a8t opposite+ !ot a! orga!i8 so8ial
u!ity- but a ragile mi?ture o brutal order a!d 8haos7 4ot o!ly 6as there a! imme!se 8haos behi!d the
appeara!8e o total po6er a!d orderT the state po6er itsel u!8tio!ed 8haoti8ally- e?posed as it 6as to
the 6hims o the Tsar7 @This eatureE8haos i! the guise o order a!d totalitaria! 8o!trolEpersists eve!
today a!d 6as striki!gly prese!t i! the Soviet era7A
'&
JHrga!i8 u!ityK thus reveals itsel to be the mode
i! 6hi8h its opposite- i!here!t i!stability- appears7 The Jse8retK o despoti8 so8ieties is that they did !ot
i!d their Jinneres (estalt-K their i!!er ormT this holds also or as8ism 6hi8h 6as al6ays tor!
bet6ee! moder!ism a!d a retur! to traditio!7 Agai!st a!y ki!d o Jorga!i8K temptatio!- it is absolutely
8ru8ial or ema!8ipatory politi8s to remai! aithul to the u!iversalist>se8ular proje8t o moder!ity7
Hur irst 8hoi8e thus has to be revolutio!- be8ause it is o!ly ater 6e pass through the Uero:level
o revolutio! that the spa8e or the moder! ratio!al state @al6ays reerred to by =egel as the Jpost:
revolutio!aryK stateA ope!s up+ o!ly the J6ro!gK 8hoi8e o abstra8t terror 8reates the spa8e or the
8hoi8e o ratio!al state7 /e 8a! see !o6 ho6 the i!amous =egelia! triad is grou!ded i! the temporal
stru8ture o a repeated 8hoi8e+ i! this 8ase- the JtriadK o ancien rAgime- its abstra8t !egatio! i! the
Fevolutio!ary Terror- a!d its sublatio! i! the post:revolutio!ary ratio!al state- is set i! motio! by t6o
8o!se8utive 8hoi8esEirst- the 8hoi8e o revolutio! agai!st the ancien rAgimeT the!- the 8hoi8e o the
moder! ratio!al state 6ith its 8o!8rete reedom7 =o6 are 6e to sNuare these diale8ti8al reversals 6ith
the Clato!i8 dieresisM H!e has to go ba8k rom Clato to 1orgias- the irst to propose a diereti8 matri? o
divisio!sT his $n ature! or the on*e&istent @the te?t survived o!ly i! summary orm i! Se?tus
0mpiri8us a!d AristotleIs $n Melissus! ;enophanes! and (orgiasA 8a! be summed up i! three
propositio!s+ @aA !othi!g e?istsT @bA i a!ythi!g e?isted- it 8ould !ot be k!o6!T @8A i a!ythi!g did e?ist-
a!d 8ould be k!o6!- it 8ould !ot be 8ommu!i8ated to others7 9 ever there 6as a 8lear 8ase o the
Freudia! logi8 o the borro6ed kettle @providi!g mutually e?8lusive reaso!sA- this is it+ @1A !othi!g
e?istsT @2A 6hat e?ists 8a!!ot be k!o6!T @"A 6hat 6e k!o6 8a!!ot be 8ommu!i8ated to others O 3ut
more i!teresti!g is the repeated Jdiago!alK mode o divisio! o ge!re i!to spe8ies+ Thi!gs either e?ist
or do !ot7 9 they e?ist- they 8a! either be k!o6! or 8a! !ot7 9 they 8a! be k!o6!- they 8a! either be
8ommu!i8ated to others or 8a! !ot7 Surprisi!gly- 6e i!d the same progressive diere!tiatio! at the
opposite e!d o the history o /ester! philosophy- i! the t6e!tieth:8e!tury sophisti8s 8alled
Jdiale8ti8al materialism7K Stali!Is JGiale8ti8al a!d =istori8al ,aterialismK e!umerates our eatures o
,ar?ist diale8ti8s+
The pri!8ipal eatures o the ,ar?ist diale8ti8al method are as ollo6s+

Do!trary to metaphysi8s- diale8ti8s does !ot regard !ature as a! a88ide!tal agglomeratio! o thi!gs- o
phe!ome!a- u!8o!!e8ted 6ith- isolated rom- a!d i!depe!de!t o- ea8h other- but as a 8o!!e8ted a!d
i!tegral 6hole- i! 6hi8h thi!gs- phe!ome!a are orga!i8ally 8o!!e8ted 6ith- depe!de!t o!- a!d
determi!ed by- ea8h other7Do!trary to metaphysi8s- diale8ti8s holds that !ature is !ot a state o rest a!d
immobility- stag!atio! a!d immutability- but a state o 8o!ti!uous moveme!t a!d 8ha!ge- o
8o!ti!uous re!e6al a!d developme!t- 6here somethi!g is al6ays arisi!g a!d developi!g- a!d
somethi!g al6ays disi!tegrati!g a!d dyi!g a6ay7Do!trary to metaphysi8s- diale8ti8s does !ot regard
the pro8ess o developme!t as a simple pro8ess o gro6th- 6here Nua!titative 8ha!ges do !ot lead to
Nualitative 8ha!ges- but as a developme!t 6hi8h passes rom i!sig!ii8a!t a!d imper8eptible
Nua!titative 8ha!ges to u!dame!tal Nualitative 8ha!gesT a developme!t i! 6hi8h the Nualitative
8ha!ges o88ur !ot gradually- but rapidly a!d abruptly- taki!g the orm o a leap rom o!e state to
a!otherT they o88ur !ot a88ide!tally but as the !atural result o a! a88umulatio! o imper8eptible a!d
gradual Nua!titative 8ha!ges7Do!trary to metaphysi8s- diale8ti8s holds that i!ter!al 8o!tradi8tio!s are
i!here!t i! all thi!gs a!d phe!ome!a o !ature- or they all have their !egative a!d positive sides- a past
a!d a uture- somethi!g dyi!g a6ay a!d somethi!g developi!gT a!d that the struggle bet6ee! these
opposites- the struggle bet6ee! the old a!d the !e6- bet6ee! that 6hi8h is dyi!g a6ay a!d that 6hi8h
is bei!g bor!- bet6ee! that 6hi8h is disappeari!g a!d that 6hi8h is developi!g- 8o!stitutes the i!ter!al
8o!te!t o the pro8ess o developme!t- the i!ter!al 8o!te!t o the tra!sormatio! o Nua!titative
8ha!ges i!to Nualitative 8ha!ges7
'%
First- !ature is !ot a 8o!glomerate o dispersed phe!ome!a- but a 8o!!e8ted 6hole7 The!- this
/hole is !ot immobile- but i! a state o 8o!sta!t moveme!t a!d 8ha!ge7 4e?t- this 8ha!ge is !ot o!ly a
gradual Nua!titative driti!g- but i!volves Nualitative jumps a!d ruptures7 Fi!ally- this Nualitative
developme!t is !ot a matter o harmo!ious deployme!t- but is propelled by the struggle o the
opposites O The tri8k here is that 6e are ee8tively not deali!g merely 6ith the Clato!i8 dieresis- the
gradual subdivisio! o a ge!us i!to spe8ies a!d the! spe8ies i!to subspe8ies+ the u!derlyi!g premise is
that this Jdiago!alK pro8ess o divisio! is really verti8al- i7e7- that 6e are deali!g 6ith diere!t aspe8ts
o the same divisio!7 To put it i! Stali!ist jargo!+ a! immobile /hole is !ot really a /hole- but just a
8o!glomerate o eleme!tsT developme!t 6hi8h does !ot i!volve Nualitative jumps is !ot really a
developme!t- but just a! immobile steppi!g at the same pla8eT a Nualitative 8ha!ge 6hi8h does !ot
i!volve a struggle o the opposites is !ot really a 8ha!ge- but just a Nua!titative mo!oto!ous moveme!t7
Hr- to put it i! more omi!ous terms+ those 6ho advo8ate Nualitative 8ha!ge 6ithout a struggle o the
opposites really oppose 8ha!ge a!d advo8ate the 8o!ti!uatio! o the sameT those 6ho advo8ate 8ha!ge
6ithout Nualitative jumps really oppose 8ha!ge a!d advo8ate immobility O The politi8al aspe8t o this
logi8 is 8learly dis8er!ible+ Jthose 6ho advo8ate the tra!sormatio! o 8apitalism i!to so8ialism
6ithout 8lass struggle really reje8t so8ialism a!d 6a!t 8apitalism to 8o!ti!ue-K a!d so o!7
There are t6o amous Nuips by Stali! 6hi8h are both grou!ded i! this logi87 /he! he a!s6ered
the Nuestio! J/hi8h deviatio! is 6orse- the rightist or the letist o!eMK 6ith JThey are both 6orseRK the
u!derlyi!g premise 6as that the letist deviatio! 6as really @Jobje8tively-K as Stali!ists liked to put itA
!ot letist at all- but a 8o!8ealed rightist o!eR /he! Stali! 6rote- i! a report o! a party 8o!gress- that
the delegates u!a!imously approved the De!tral Dommittee resolutio! by a large majority- the
u!derlyi!g premise 6as- agai!- that there 6as really !o mi!ority 6ithi! the party+ those 6ho had voted
agai!st thereby e?8luded themselves rom the party7 9! all these 8ases- the genus repeatedly overlaps
?fully coincides@ with one of its species7 This is also 6hat allo6s Stali! to read history retroa8tively- so
that thi!gs Jbe8ome 8learK retroa8tively+ it 6as !ot that Trotsky irst ought or the revolutio! alo!gside
.e!i! a!d Stali! a!d the!- at a 8ertai! stage- opted or a diere!t strategy tha! the o!e advo8ated by
Stali!T this last oppositio! @Trotsky>Stali!A Jmakes it 8learK ho6- Jobje8tively-K Trotsky 6as agai!st
revolutio! rom the begi!!i!g7
/e i!d the same pro8edure i! the 8lassii8atory impasse the Stali!ist ideologists a!d politi8al
a8tivists a8ed i! their struggle or 8olle8tiviUatio! i! the years 1%2&X""7 9! their attempt to a88ou!t or
their eort to 8rush the peasa!tsI resista!8e i! Js8ie!tii8K ,ar?ist terms- they divided peasa!ts i!to
three 8ategories @8lassesA+ bednya"i- the Jmiserable o!es-K the poor peasa!ts @!o la!d or mi!imal la!d-
6orki!g or othersA- !atural allies o the 6orkersT serednya"i- the Jmiddle o!es-K the auto!omous
middle peasa!ts @o6!i!g la!d- but !ot employi!g othersA- ri8h but os8illati!g bet6ee! the e?ploited a!d
e?ploitersT a!d JkulaksK @"ula"iA 6ho- apart rom employi!g other 6orkers to 6ork o! their la!d- 6ere
also le!di!g them mo!ey or seeds- et87Ethey 6ere the e?ploiters proper- the J8lass e!emyK 6hi8h- as
su8h- has to be JliNuidated7K =o6ever- i! pra8ti8e- this 8lassii8atio! be8ame more a!d more blurred
a!d i!operative+ i! the ge!eraliUed poverty- 8lear 8riteria !o lo!ger applied- a!d peasa!ts i! the other
t6o 8ategories ote! joi!ed kulaks i! their resista!8e to or8ed 8olle8tiviUatio!7 A! additio!al 8ategory
6as thus i!trodu8ed- that o a Jsubkulak-K a peasa!t 6ho- although too poor to be 8o!sidered a kulak
proper- !o!etheless shared the kulak J8ou!ter:revolutio!aryK attitude7 JSubkulakK 6as thus

a term 6ithout a!y real so8ial 8o!te!t eve! by Stali!ist sta!dards- but merely rather u!8o!vi!8i!gly
masNueradi!g as su8h7 As 6as oi8ially stated- Jby Vkulak-I 6e mea! the 8arrier o 8ertai! politi8al
te!de!8ies 6hi8h are most reNue!tly dis8er!ible i! the subkulak- male a!d emale7K 3y this mea!s-
a!y peasa!t 6hatever 6as liable to dekulakisatio!T a!d the JsubkulakK !otio! 6as 6idely employed-
e!largi!g the 8ategory o vi8tims greatly beyo!d the oi8ial estimate o kulaks proper eve! at its most
strai!ed7
$0
The JsubkulakK 6as thus the parado?i8al i!terse8tio! o spe8ies+ a subspe8ies o the spe8ies
JkulaksK 6hose members 8ame rom the other t6o spe8ies7 As su8h- JsubkulakK 6as the embodime!t
o the ideologi8al lie @alsityA o the e!tire Jobje8tiveK 8lassii8atio! o armers i!to three 8ategories+ its
u!8tio! 6as to a88ou!t or the a8t that all strata o armers- !ot o!ly the 6ealthy o!es- resisted
8olle8tiviUatio!7 4o 6o!der that the oi8ial ideologists a!d e8o!omists i!ally gave up tryi!g to
provide a! Jobje8tiveK dei!itio! o kulak+ JThe grou!ds give! i! o!e Soviet 8omme!t are that Vthe old
attitudes o a kulak have almost disappeared- a!d the !e6 o!es do !ot le!d themselves to
re8og!itio!7IK
$1
The art o ide!tiyi!g a kulak 6as thus !o lo!ger a matter o obje8tive so8ial a!alysisT
it be8ame the matter o a 8omple? Jherme!euti8s o suspi8io!-K o ide!tiyi!g a! i!dividualIs Jtrue
politi8al attitudesK hidde! be!eath their de8eptive publi8 pro8lamatio!s- so that )ravda had to 8o!8ede
that Jeve! the best a8tivists ote! 8a!!ot spot the kulak7K
$2
/hat all this poi!ts to6ards is the diale8ti8al mediatio! o the Jsubje8tiveK a!d Jobje8tiveK
dime!sio!+ JsubkulakK !o lo!ger desig!ates a! Jobje8tiveK so8ial 8ategory but rather the poi!t at 6hi8h
obje8tive so8ial a!alysis breaks do6! a!d the subje8tive politi8al attitude dire8tly i!s8ribes itsel i!to
the Jobje8tiveK orderEi! .a8a!ese- %sub"ula"' is the point of sub1ectivi2ation of the %ob1ective'
chain8 poor peasantGmiddle peasantG"ula"7 9t is !ot a! Jobje8tiveK sub:8ategory @or sub:divisio!A o
the 8lass o Jkulaks-K but simply the !ame or the subje8tive politi8al attitude o the Jkulak7K This
a88ou!ts or the parado? that- although it appears as a subdivisio! o the 8lass o Jkulaks-K JsubkulaksK
is a spe8ies that overlo6s its o6! ge!us @that o kulaksA- si!8e JsubkulaksK are also to be ou!d amo!g
middle a!d eve! poor armers7 9! short- JsubkulakK !ames politi8al divisio! as su8h- the 0!emy 6hose
prese!8e traverses the entire so8ial body o peasa!ts- 6hi8h is 6hy he 8a! be ou!d every6here- i! all
three peasa!t 8lasses7
This bri!gs us ba8k to the pro8edure o Stali!ist dieresis+ JsubkulakK !ames the e?8essive
eleme!t that traverses all 8lasses- the outgro6th 6hi8h has to be elimi!ated7 There is- i! every
Jobje8tiveK 8lassii8atio! o so8ial groups- a! eleme!t 6hi8h u!8tio!s like JsubkulakKEthe poi!t o
subje8tiviUatio! masked as a subspe8ies o Jobje8tiveK eleme!ts o the so8ial body7 9t is this poi!t o
subje8tiviUatio! 6hi8h- i! the stri8test se!se o the term- sutures the Jobje8tiveK so8ial stru8tureEa!d
o!e should bear i! mi!d the 8o!trast bet6ee! this !otio! o suture a!d the predomi!a!t use o the term
@the eleme!t 6hi8h JsuturesK the ideologi8al spa8e- obliterati!g the tra8es o its depe!de!8e o! its
de8e!tered JHther S8e!e-K e!abli!g it to prese!t itsel as sel:sui8ie!tA+ the poi!t o subje8tiviUatio!
JsuturesK !ot the ideologi8al 9!side- but the $utside itself+ the JsutureK is the poi!t o subje8tiviUatio!
6hi8h guara!tees the 8o!siste!8y o the Jobje8tiveK ield itsel7 /hat this also mea!s is that the
pro8edure o dieresis is !ot e!dless+ it rea8hes its e!d 6he! a divisio! is !o lo!ger a divisio! i!to t6o
spe8ies- but a divisio! i!to a spe8ies a!d a! e?8reme!tal letover- a ormless sta!d:i! or !othi!g- a
Jpart o !o:part7K At this i!al poi!t- the si!gular e?8reme!t reu!ites 6ith its opposite- the u!iversalT
that is- the e?8reme!tal letover u!8tio!s as a dire8t sta!d:i! or the )!iversal7
9! his polemi8 agai!st 3adiouIs readi!g o Caul- Agambe! dei!es the si!gularity o the
Dhristia! positio! 6ith regard to the oppositio! bet6ee! 2e6s a!d 1reeks @paga!sA !ot as a dire8t
airmatio! o a! all:e!8ompassi!g u!iversality @Jthere are !either 2e6s !or 1reeksKA- but as a!
additio!al divide that 8uts diago!ally a8ross the e!tire so8ial body a!d as such suspe!ds the li!es o
separatio! bet6ee! so8ial groups+ a @JDhristia!KA subdivisio! o ea8h group is dire8tly li!ked 6ith a
@JDhristia!KA subdivisio! o all other groups7 @The diere!8e bet6ee! 3adiou a!d Agambe! is that- or
3adiou- this !e6 JDhristia!K 8olle8tive is the site o si!gular u!iversality- the sel:relati!g u!iversality
o !ami!g- o subje8tive re8og!itio! i! a !ame- 6hile Agambe! reje8ts the title o u!iversality7A The
8ommo!:se!se 8lassii8atory approa8h 6ould say- 6hatIs the big dealM 3ei!g Dhristia! or !o!:
Dhristia! is simply a!other 8lassii8atio! that 8uts a8ross a!d overlaps 6ith other 8lassii8atio!s- like
the a8t that there are me! a!d 6ome!- 6hi8h also 8uts a8ross all eth!i8- religious- a!d 8lass divides7
There is- ho6ever- a 8ru8ial diere!8e here+ or Caul- JDhristia!K does !ot desig!ate yet a!other
predi8ate @property or NualityA o the i!dividual- but a JperormativeK sel:re8og!itio! grou!ded o!ly i!
its o6! !ami!gT i! other 6ords- it is a purely subje8tive eatureEa!d- 3adiou adds- o!ly as su8h 8a! it
be truly u!iversal7 The oppositio! bet6ee! the obje8tive:!eutral u!iversal approa8h a!d the subje8tive:
partisa! approa8h is alse+ o!ly a radi8al subje8tive e!gageme!t 8a! grou!d true u!iversality7 The
8o!stellatio! here is thereore e?a8tly the same as that o the JsubkulaksK i! the Stali!ist dis8ourse+
JsubkulaksK are also the Jremai!derK o kulaks 6hi8h 8uts a8ross the e!tire ield- a subje8tive:politi8al
8ategory masked as a so8ial:obje8tive Nuality7
So- 6he! Agambe! dei!es JDhristia!sK !ot dire8tly as J!o!:2e6s-K but as J!o!:!o!:2e6s-K
$"

this double !egatio! does !ot bri!g us ba8k to the starti!g positive determi!atio!T it should rather be
read as a! e?ample o 6hat *a!t 8alled Ji!i!ite judgme!t-K 6hi8h- i!stead o !egati!g a predi8ate-
asserts a !o!:predi8ate+ i!stead o sayi!g that Dhristia!s arent Cews- o!e should say that they are non*
Cews- i! the same se!se that horror i8tio! talks about the Ju!dead7K The u!dead are alive while dead-
they are the livi!g deadT i! the same 6ay- Dhristia!s are !o!:2e6s while remaining Cews @at the level o
their pre:eve!tal- positive so8ial determi!atio!AEthey are 2e6s 6ho- as Caul put it- Jdied or [i! the
eyes o\ the [2e6ish\ .a67K
To go eve! urther ba8k- 1orgiasIs argume!tatio! should be read i! the same 6ay7 9t may
appear that 1orgias pro8eeds i! three 8o!se8utive divisio!s+ irst- thi!gs either e?ist or do !otT the!- i
they e?ist- they 8a! either be k!o6! or 8a! !otT i!ally- i they 8a! be k!o6!- 6e 8a! either
8ommu!i8ate this k!o6ledge to others or 8a! !ot7 =o6ever- the truth o this gradual subdivisio! is
agai! the repetitio! o o!e a!d the same li!e o divisio!+ i 6e 8a!!ot 8ommu!i8ate somethi!g to
others- it mea!s that 6e JreallyK do !ot k!o6 it ourselvesT i 6e 8a!!ot k!o6 somethi!g- it mea!s that
it JreallyK does !ot e?ist i! itsel7 There is a truth i! this logi8T as Carme!ides- 1orgiasIs tea8her a!d
reere!8e poi!t here- already put it+ thi!ki!g @k!o6i!gA is the same as bei!g- a!d thi!ki!g @k!o6i!gA
itsel is rooted i! la!guage @8ommu!i8atio!AEJThe limits o my la!guage are the limit o my 6orld7K
The lesso! o =egel a!d .a8a! is that o!e should tur! this dieresis arou!d+ 6e 8a! o!ly speak
about thi!gs that do not e?ist @3e!tham himsel 6as o! the right tra8k here 6ith his theory o
i8tio!sAEor- more modestly a!d pre8isely- spee8h @presupAposes a la8k>hole i! the positive order o
bei!g7 So !ot o!ly 8a! 6e thi!k about !o!:e?isti!g thi!gs @6hi8h is 6hy religio! is 8o!substa!tial 6ith
Jhuma! !ature-K its eter!al temptatio!A- 6e 8a! also talk 6ithout thi!ki!gE!ot o!ly i! the vulgar se!se
o just babbli!g i!8ohere!tly- but i! the Freudia! se!se o Jsayi!g more tha! 6e i!te!ded-K o maki!g a
symptomati8 slip o the to!gue7 9t is !ot that 6e k!o6 somethi!g but 8a!!ot 8ommu!i8ate it to
othersErather that 6e 8a! 8ommu!i8ate to others thi!gs 6e do!It k!o6 @or- more pre8isely- to
paraphrase Go!ald Fumseld- thi!gs 6e do !ot k!o6 6e k!o6- si!8e- or .a8a!- the u!8o!s8ious as
une bAvue is un savoir <ui ne se sait pasA7
This is 6hy the =egelia!:.a8a!ia! positio! is !either that o Clato !or that o his sophist
oppo!e!ts+ agai!st Clato- it asserts that 6e !ot o!ly can talk about thi!gs that 6e do !ot u!dersta!d or
thi!k- but that ultimately 6e talk only about them- about i8tio!sT 6hile agai!st the sophists it asserts
that this i! !o 6ay devalues truth- si!8e- as .a8a! put it- truth has the stru8ture o a i8tio!7
Goes so:8alled Jpostmoder! relativismK thus o!ly rea8h a deadlo8k that Clato 6as already
struggli!g 6ith i! his repeated attempts to disti!guish true philosophi8al k!o6ledge rom sophisti8
tri8keryM 9s the very dra6i!g o su8h a li!e !ot the highest a8t o sophisti8 tri8kery @i! the same 6ay it
is 8laimed that the very attempt to dra6 a stri8t li!e bet6ee! ideology a!d JtrueK !o!:ideologi8al
k!o6ledge is the most ideologi8al a8t o allAM Goes this the! mea! that .a8a! himsel ee8tively was a
sophist- i! this se!se- 6he! he asserted that Jthere is !o Hther o the Hther-K !o ultimate guara!tee o
Truth e?empted rom the 8ir8ular @sel:reere!tialA play o la!guageM 9 every su8h li!e o separatio! is
Ju!de8idable-K does this mea! that 3adiouIs desperate struggle agai!st postmoder!ist:de8o!stru8tio!ist
Jsophists-K a!d his heroi8 Clato!i8 i!siste!8e o! Truth as i!depe!de!t o histori8al la!guage games-
amou!ts to a! empty gesture 6ith !o ou!datio!M 3adiou 8a! !o!etheless be dee!ded here+ the
oppositio! bet6ee! Truth a!d do?a o88urs within the Ju!de8idableK sel:reere!tial ield o la!guage-
so 6he! 3adiou emphasiUes the u!de8idability o a Truth:0ve!t- his 8o!8eptio! is radi8ally diere!t
rom the sta!dard de8o!stru8tio!ist !otio! o u!de8idability7
$(
For 3adiou- u!de8idability mea!s that
there are !o !eutral Jobje8tiveK 8riteria or a! 0ve!t+ a! 0ve!t appears as su8h o!ly to those 6ho
re8og!iUe themselves i! its 8allT or- as 3adiou puts it- a! 0ve!t is sel:relati!g- i!8ludi!g itselEits o6!
!omi!atio!Eamo!g its 8ompo!e!ts7 /hile this does mea! that o!e has to decide about a! 0ve!t- su8h
a! ultimately grou!dless de8isio! is !ot Ju!de8idableK i! the sta!dard se!se7 9t is- rather- u!8a!!ily
similar to the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess i! 6hi8hEas =egel had already made 8lear i! the
9!trodu8tio! to his )henomenologyEa Jigure o 8o!s8ious!essK is !ot measured by a!y e?ter!al
sta!dard o truth but i! a! absolutely imma!e!t 6ay- through the gap bet6ee! itsel a!d its o6!
e?emplii8atio!>stagi!g7 A! 0ve!t is thus J!o!:AllK i! the pre8ise .a8a!ia! se!se o the term+ it is
!ever ully veriied pre8isely be8ause it is i!i!ite- that is- be8ause there is !o e?ter!al limit to it7 The
8o!8lusio! to be dra6! is that- or the very same reaso!- the =egelia! JtotalityK is also J!o!:All7K
The reere!8e to =egel is 8ru8ial here- si!8e- espe8ially i! the A!glo:Sa?o! traditio!- he is ote!
per8eived as the ultimate Jsophist-K aba!do!i!g a!y obje8tive ratio!al 8riteria o truth a!d su88umbi!g
to the mad sel:reere!tial play o the Absolute 9dea7 The eleme!t o truth i! this reproa8h is that- or
=egel- the truth o a propositio! is i!here!tly !otio!al- determi!ed by the imma!e!t !otio!al 8o!te!t-
!ot a matter o 8ompariso! bet6ee! !otio! a!d realityEi! .a8a!ia! terms- there is a !o!:All @pas*toutA
o truth7 9t may sou!d stra!ge to i!voke =egel 6ith regard to the !o!:AllEis he !ot the philosopher o
All par e?8elle!8eM The =egelia! truth- ho6ever- is pre8isely 6ithout a! e?ter!al limitatio!>e?8eptio!
that 6ould serve as its measure or sta!dard- 6hi8h is 6hy its 8riterio! is absolutely imma!e!t+ a
stateme!t is 8ompared 6ith itsel- 6ith its o6! pro8ess o e!u!8iatio!7
3adiou a!d 3arbara Dassi! are e!gaged i! a! o!goi!g dialogue 6hi8h 8a! best be 8hara8teriUed
as a !e6 versio! o the a!8ie!t dialogue bet6ee! Clato a!d the sophists+ the Clato!ist 3adiou agai!st
Dassi!Is i!siste!8e o! the irredu8ibility o the sophistsI rupture7 The a8t that 3adiou is a ma! a!d
Dassi! a 6oma! takes o! a spe8ial sig!ii8a!8e here+ the oppositio! bet6ee! the Clato!istIs trust i! the
irm ou!datio! o truth a!d the sophistsI grou!dless play o spee8h is 8o!!oted by se?ual diere!8e7
So- rom the stri8t =egelia! sta!dpoi!t- perhaps Dassi! is right to i!sist o! the irredu8ible 8hara8ter o
the sophistIs positio!+ the sel:reere!tial play o the symboli8 pro8ess has !o e?ter!al support 6hi8h
6ould allo6 us to dra6 a li!e- 6ithi! the la!guage game- bet6ee! truth a!d alsity7 Sophists are the
irredu8ible Jva!ishi!g mediatorsK bet6ee! mythos a!d logos- bet6ee! the traditio!al mythi8 u!iverse
a!d philosophi8al ratio!ality- a!d- as su8h- they are a perma!e!t threat to philosophy7 /hy is this the
8aseM
The sophists broke do6! the mythi8 u!ity o 6ords a!d thi!gs- playully i!sisti!g o! the gap
that separates 6ords rom thi!gsT a!d philosophy proper 8a! o!ly be u!derstood as a rea8tio! to this- as
a! attempt to 8lose the gap the sophists ope!ed up- to provide a ou!datio! o truth or 6ords- to retur!
to mythos but u!der the !e6 8o!ditio!s o ratio!ality7 This is 6here o!e should lo8ate Clato+ he irst
tried to provide this ou!datio! 6ith his tea8hi!g o! 9deas- a!d 6he!- i! )armenides- he 6as or8ed to
admit the ragility o that ou!datio!- he e!gaged i! a lo!g struggle to re:establish a 8lear li!e o
separatio! bet6ee! sophisti8s a!d truth7
$#
The iro!y o the history o philosophy is that the li!e o
philosophers 6ho struggle agai!st the sophisti8 temptatio! e!ds 6ith =egel- the Jlast philosopher-K
6ho- i! a 6ay- is also the ultimate sophist- embra8i!g the sel:reere!tial play o the symboli8 6ith !o
e?ter!al support o its truth7 For =egel- there is truth- but it is imma!e!t to the symboli8 pro8essEthe
truth is measured !ot by a! e?ter!al sta!dard- but by the Jpragmati8 8o!tradi8tio!-K the i!!er
@i!A8o!siste!8y o the dis8ursive pro8ess- the gap bet6ee! the e!u!8iated 8o!te!t a!d its positio! o
e!u!8iatio!7
CHAPTER 2

J/here There 9s 4othi!g- Fead That 9 .ove 5ouK

/he! a! atheist philosopher 6rites about religio!- she should take great 8are to resist the
temptatio! ormulated lo!g ago by Fousseau+ J3y a88usi!g me o bei!g religious you e?8use yoursel
or bei!g a philosopherT it is as i 9 6ere to re!ou!8e 6i!e 6he! it 6ould make you dru!k7K
1
This
temptatio! is at its most sedu8tive 6he! a philosopher e!8ou!ters 8ases 6hi8h reveal the obs8e!e
disavo6ed u!derside o a religious edii8e- as is the 8ase 6ith -he (athering @200"A- a modest but
i!teresti!g horror ilm set i! the 0!glish 8ou!tryside7 The remai!s o a! old Dhristia! 8hur8h are
dis8overed buried be!eath the earth- reveali!g sto!e statues a!d relies o the sueri!g Dhrist a!d a
heteroge!eous group o i!dividuals observi!g him dyi!g7 9t takes the lo8al 8lergy a!d ar8haeologists
some time to get the poi!t+ the s8ulpture is !ot about Dhrist @6ho is- stra!gely- sho6! rom behi!dA but
about those 6ho 8ame to see him die7 A priest rom the lo8al 8hur8h li!ks the s8ulpture to the 6ords
allegedly 6ritte! by St7 Aristobulus @a irst:8e!tury bishopA about Jthose 6ho 8ame to 6at8hK+ JFrom
the east a!d the 6est they 8ame- rom the 8ity a!d the plai!7 4ot i! holy revere!8e to our .ord- but i!
lust7K At the same time- the ilm sho6s us people 6a!deri!g arou!d the 8ity 6hose a8es stra!gely
resemble those o! the statues- a!d- urthermore- a resear8her i!ds the same a8es o! ma!y depi8tio!s
o the 8ru8ii?io! rom the ,iddle Ages a!d the Fe!aissa!8e7 The 8o!8lusio! is 8lear+ those 6ho 8ame
to the 8ru8ii?io! !ot to mour! or 6orship- but or e!tertai!me!t or out o mere 8uriosity- 6ere 8ursed
to 6alk the 0arth immortal a!d bear 6it!ess to the sueri!g o me!Eas i! the 8ase o the /a!deri!g
2e6- immortality is here !ot a blessi!g but a 8urse7 @Fe8all that =amletIs ather also retur!s as a ghost
be8ause he 6as murdered i! the ull lo6er o his si!s7A The movie the! takes a predi8table tur!+ the
immortal 6it!esses are gatheri!g i! the 8ity be8ause they have a premo!itio! that somethi!g terrible is
about to happe! there7
A D=F9ST9A4 TFA10G5M

There is a deeper Nuestio! that has to be raised here+ is there !ot always a mome!t o lust
@Freud 8alled it SchaulustA i! 6it!essi!g a traumati8 eve!t like a 8ru8ii?io!M A!d does !ot the 8laim
that 6e 8ome to 6at8h out o 8ompassio! a!d respe8t make it eve! @hypo8riti8allyA 6orseM Su8h a
perverse logi8 6as brought to its peak by 4i8olas ,alebra!8he- or 6hom- i! the same 6ay that the
sai!tly perso! uses the sueri!g o others to bri!g about his o6! !ar8issisti8 satisa8tio! i! helpi!g
those i! distress- 1od also ultimately loves only himself- a!d merely uses ma! to promulgate his o6!
glory7 ,alebra!8he here dra6s a 8o!seNue!8e 6orthy o .a8a!Is reversal o Gostoyevsky @JIf (od
doesnt e&ist- then nothing is permittedKA+ it is !ot true that- had Dhrist !ot 8ome to 0arth to deliver
huma!ity- everyo!e 6ould have bee! lostENuite the 8o!trary- nobody 6ould have bee! lostT i! other
6ords- every huma! bei!g had to all so that Dhrist 8ould 8ome a!d deliver some o them7
,alebra!8heIs 8o!8lusio! is here properly perverse+ si!8e the death o Dhrist is a key step i! realiUi!g
the goal o 8reatio!- at !o time 6as 1od @the FatherA happier the! 6he! he 6as observi!g his So!
sueri!g a!d dyi!g o! the Dross7
9s this perversio! i!s8ribed i!to the very 8ore o Dhristia!ity- or 8a! the Dhristia! edii8e be
read i! a diere!t 6ayM A!d i so- is this path ope!ed up by the spe8ii8ally Dhristia! !otio! o loveM
The 6ager o properly Dhristia! love is to demo!strate to the Hther @1odA that it e?ists by 6ay o
lovi!g it u!8o!ditio!ally- beyo!d the 1oodT i! this 6ay- the a!?iety a!d i!8ertitude over the HtherIs
desire is JsublatedK i! the act o love7 Fra!eois 3alm`s dra6s atte!tio! here to the parallel 6ith
Ges8artesIs cogito a!d its doubt+ 9! the same 6ay that the i!8ertitude o radi8al doubt tur!s i!to the
8ertitude o cogito ergo sum- the i!8ertitude over 1odIs desire>6ill- take! to the e?treme- tur!s i!to the
8ertitude o love- regardless o my e?posure to dam!atio!7 This e?treme orm o e8stati8 love is to be
radi8ally opposed to @A!8ie!tA tragedy+ i! pure love- 9 reely 8o!se!t to my o6! dam!atio! or
disappeara!8e- 9 e8stati8ally assume it- 6hile i! tragedy- 9 @alsoA a88ept my Fate- but 9 a88ept it as a!
e?ter!al or8e 6ithout 8o!se!ti!g to itEthe tragi8 hero reje8ts it absolutely- protesti!g agai!st it to the
e!d @Hedipus at Dolo!usEthe 8ase o A!tigo!e is here more ambiguousA7 9! other 6ords- i! 8o!trast to
the !otio! o amor fati- there is !o love i! the tragi8 heroIs a88epta!8e o his dam!atio! by Fate7
Therei! resides the tragi8 heroIs u!8ompromisi!g idelity to his desire+ !ot i! the a88epta!8e o Fate-
but i! holdi!g o! to his desire against Fate- i! a situatio! 6here everythi!g is lost7
9s there- the!- !o properly Dhristia! tragedyM =ere- A!tigo!e is to be opposed to Syg!e de
Doco!tai!e rom Caul DlaudelIs .$tage+ i Hedipus a!d A!tigo!e are the e?emplary 8ases o A!8ie!t
tragedy- Syg!e sta!ds or the Dhristia! tragedy7
2
Syg!e lives i! the moder! 6orld 6here 1od is dead+
there is !o obje8tive Fate- our ate is our o6! 8hoi8e- 6e are ully respo!sible or it7 Syg!e irst ollo6s
the path o e8stati8 love to the e!d- sa8rii8i!g her good- her ethi8al substa!8e or 1od- or his pure
Hther!essT a!d she does it !ot o! a88ou!t o some e?ter!al pressure- but out o the i!!ermost reedom
o her bei!gEhe!8e she 8a!!ot blame Fate 6he! she i!ds hersel totally humiliated- deprived o all
ethi8al substa!8e7 This- ho6ever- is 6hy her tragedy is mu8h more radi8al tha! that o either Hedipus
or A!tigo!e+ 6he!- mortally 6ou!ded ater taki!g the bullet mea!t or her despi8able a!d hated
husba!d- she reuses to 8o!er a!y deeper sa8rii8ial mea!i!g o! her sui8idal i!terve!tio!- there is !o
tragi8 beauty i! this reusalEher JoK is sig!aled merely by a repelle!t grima8e- a 8ompulsive a8ial
ti87 There is !o tragi8 beauty be8ause her total sa8rii8e has deprived her o all i!!er beauty a!d ethi8al
gra!deur- so that all that remai!s is a disgusti!g e?8reme!tal stai!- a livi!g shell deprived o lie7 There
is !o love here eitherT all her love 6as 8o!sumed i! her previous re!u!8iatio!s7 9! a 6ay- Syg!e is here
8ru8iied- her JoK aki! to DhristIs JFather- 6hy have you orsake! meMKE6hi8h is also a gesture o
deia!8e- a ki!d o J)p yoursRK dire8ted at the 1od:Father7 3alm`s is right to poi!t out that this
properly Dhristia! JoK i! all its orms is the Ju!thi!kableK traumati8 8ore o pure love- a s8a!dal
6hi8h u!dermi!es it rom 6ithi!7 =ere is his breathtaki!gly pre8ise ormulatio!+

The u!thi!kable i! pure love is- i! a se!se- Dhristia!ity itsel- the s8a!dal o the Dross- the Cassio! a!d
the death o Dhrist- the J/hy did you aba!do! meMK rom the psalm take! over by Dhrist a!d o! 6hi8h
the mysti8s o pure love 8o!erred a radi8ality i!tolerable or the Dhur8h7
"
This mome!t o tragedy- this retur! o the tragi8 at the very heart o Dhristia!ity as the religio!
o love- is also the poi!t 6hi8h the sel:erasi!g mysti8ism o e8stati8 love 8a!!ot properly grasp+ 6he!
mysti8s talk about the J4ight o the /orld-K they dire8tly ide!tiy this 4ight @the 6ithdra6al rom
e?ter!al reality i!to the void o pure i!!er!essA 6ith the divi!e 3eatitude- 6ith the sel:erasi!g
immersio! i!to Givi!ityT or Dhristia!ity- i! 8o!trast- the u!bearable a!d u!surpassable te!sio!
remai!s- there is a! e?:timate JoK at the very heart o the lovi!g J:esHK to it all7 This JoK has
!othi!g to do 6ith the imagi!ary logi8 o hainamoration- the reversal o !ar8issisti8 love i!to hatred7
Dlaudel himsel ou!d Syg!eIs reusal o re8o!8iliatio! 6ith Turelure at the e!d o .$tage
mysterious+ it imposed itsel o! him 6hile he 6as 6riti!g the drama- si!8e it 6as !ot part o the
origi!al pla! @irst- he i!te!ded the marriage o Syg!e a!d Turelure to mark the re8o!8iliatio! o the
ancien rAgime a!d the !e6 regime i! the Festoratio!T later- he pla!!ed to have 3adillo! 8o!vi!8e the
dyi!g Syg!e to give the dema!ded sig! o pardo! a!d re8o!8iliatio! to TurelureA7 Sig!ii8a!tly- most
8riti8s per8eived Syg!eIs reusal as a mark !ot o her radi8ality but o her ailure to ollo6 through 6ith
the sa8rii8e dema!ded o her- that is- to give her ull 8o!se!t to marriage 6ith the despi8able Turelure7
The idea is that- by reusi!g to give a!y sig! o 8o!se!t a!d dyi!g i! i8e:8old sile!8e- Syg!e disavo6s
the religious pri!8iples 6hi8h had hitherto di8tated her behavior7 As Abel =erma!t 6rote+

Turelure tries to e?tra8t rom Syg!e a 6ord- a sig! o pardo!- 6hi8h 6ould be or him the sig! that he
has dei!itely 8o!Nuered her a!d rea8hed the e!d o his ambitio!s7 3ut Syg!e reuses this pardo!- o!
6hi8h !o!etheless her eter!al salvatio! seems to depe!d7 She thus re!ders all her sa8rii8es 6orthless
i! the last mi!ute7
(
Dlaudel eebly protested su8h readi!gs+ J9 believe she is saved-K but 8o!8eded that the mea!i!g
o her i!al a8t 6as !ot 8lear eve! to him+ JAt the playIs e!d- the 8hara8ters es8ape all psy8hologi8al
i!vestigatio!+ at the huma! level- Syg!e o 8ourse reused to ulill her sa8rii8eT 6e do !ot k!o6 a!y
more about it- a!d the author himsel 8a! o!ly VsupposeI a mea!i!g or her i!al gesture7K
#
9! JThe A!8ie!t Tragi8al ,oti as Fele8ted i! the ,oder!-K a 8hapter o Volume 9 o
Either9$r- *ierkegaard proposed his a!tasy o 6hat a moder! A!tigo!e 6ould have bee!7
'
The
8o!li8t is !o6 e!tirely i!ter!aliUed+ there is !o lo!ger a !eed or Dreo!7 /hile A!tigo!e admires a!d
loves her ather Hedipus- the publi8 hero a!d savior o Thebes- she k!o6s the truth about him @his
murder o the ather- his i!8estuous marriageA7 =er deadlo8k is that she is preve!ted rom shari!g this
a88ursed k!o6ledge @like Abraham- 6ho like6ise 8ould !ot 8ommu!i8ate to others the divi!e
i!ju!8tio! to sa8rii8e his so!A+ she 8a!!ot 8omplai!- or share her pai! a!d sorro6 6ith others7 9!
8o!trast to Sopho8lesIs A!tigo!e- 6ho a8ts @to bury her brother a!d thus a8tively assume her ateA- she
is u!able to a8t- 8o!dem!ed orever to impassive sueri!g7 The u!bearable burde! o her se8ret- o her
destru8tive agalma- i!ally drives her to death- i! 6hi8h alo!e she i!ds the pea8e that 6ould other6ise
have 8ome 6ith symboliUi!g or shari!g her pai! a!d sorro67 *ierkegaardIs poi!t is that this situatio! is
!o lo!ger properly tragi8 @agai!- i! a similar 6ay- Abraham is also !ot a tragi8 igureA7
/e 8a! imagi!e the same shit also i! the 8ase o Abraham7 The 1od 6ho 8omma!ds him to
sa8rii8e his so! is the superego:1od- the perverse Jversio! o the ather-K the 1od 6ho- or his o6!
pleasure- submits his serva!t to the ultimate test7 /hat makes AbrahamIs situatio! !o!:tragi8 is that
1odIs dema!d 8a!!ot be made publi8- shared 6ith the 8ommu!ity o believers- i!8luded i! the big
Hther- u!like the sublime tragi8 mome!t 6hi8h o88urs pre8isely 6he! the hero addresses the publi8
6ith his terrible plight- 6he! he puts his predi8ame!t i!to 6ords7 To put it su88i!8tly- the dema!d
addressed to Abraham has a status similar to that o a rulerIs Jdirty se8retK 6he! soli8ited to 8ommit a
8rime 6hi8h the State !eeds- but 6hi8h 8a!!ot be admitted publi8ly7 /he!- i! the all o 1#&'- Wuee!
0liUabeth 9 6as u!der pressure rom her mi!isters to agree to the e?e8utio! o ,ary Stuart- she replied
to their petitio! 6ith the amous Ja!s6er 6ithout a! a!s6erK+ J9 9 should say 9 6ould !ot do 6hat you
reNuest- 9 might say perhaps more tha! 9 thi!k7 A!d i 9 should say 9 6ould do it- 9 might plu!ge mysel
i!to peril- 6hom you labor to preserve7K
$
The message 6as 8lear+ she 6as !ot ready to say that she did
!ot 6a!t ,ary e?e8uted- si!8e this 6ould be Jmore tha! 9 thi!kKT but 6hile she 8learly 6a!ted her
dead- she did !ot 6a!t to airm this a8t o judi8ial murder publi8ly7 The impli8it message is thus also
8lear+ J9 you are my true a!d aithul serva!ts- do this 8rime or me- kill her 6ithout maki!g me
respo!sible or her death- allo6 me to protest my ig!ora!8e a!d eve! pu!ish some o you to mai!tai!
this alse appeara!8e OK Da! 6e !ot imagi!e 1od himsel givi!g a similar a!s6er 6ere Abraham to
ask him publi8ly- i! ro!t o his ello6 elders- i he really 6a!ted him to kill his o!ly so!M J9 9 should
say 9 do !ot 6a!t you to kill 9saa8 9 might say perhaps more tha! 9 thi!k7 A!d i 9 should say you
should do it- 9 might plu!ge mysel i!to peril @that o appeari!g to be a! evil barbari8 1od- aski!g you
to violate my o6! sa8red .a6sA- rom 6hi8h you- my aithul ollo6er- labor to save me7K
Furthermore- i!soar as *ierkegaardIs A!tigo!e is a paradigmati8ally moder!ist igure- 6e 8a!
e?te!d his me!tal e?perime!t a!d imagi!e a postmoder! A!tigo!e- 6ith a Stali!ist t6ist+ i! 8o!trast to
the moder!ist o!e- she 6ould i!d hersel i! a positio! i! 6hi8h- to Nuote *ierkegaard himsel- the
ethi8al itsel 6ould be the temptatio!7 H!e versio! 6ould u!doubtedly be or A!tigo!e to publi8ly
re!ou!8e- de!ou!8e- a!d a88use her ather @or- i! a diere!t versio!- her brother Coly!i8esA o his
terrible si!s out of her unconditional love for him7 The *ierkegaardia! 8at8h is that su8h a public a8t
6ould re!der A!tigo!e eve! more isolated- absolutely alo!e+ !o o!eE6ith the e?8eptio! o Hedipus
himsel- 6ere he still aliveE6ould u!dersta!d that her a8t o betrayal is the supreme a8t o love O 9s
this predi8ame!t o the Jpostmoder!K A!tigo!e !ot also that o 2udas- 6ho 6as se8retly e!joi!ed by
Dhrist to publi8ly betray him a!d pay the ull pri8e or itM
A!tigo!e 6ould thus be e!tirely deprived o her sublime beautyEall that 6ould sig!al the a8t
that she 6as !ot a pure a!d simple traitor to her ather- but that she a8ted out o love or him- 6ould be
some barely per8eptible repulsive ti8- like Syg!e de Doco!tai!eIs hysteri8 t6it8h o the lips- a ti8
6hi8h !o lo!ger belo!gs to the a8e- but 6hose i!siste!8e disi!tegrates the u!ity o a a8e7 Da! 6e !ot
imagi!e a similar ti8 o! 2udasIs a8eEa desperate t6it8h o his lips sig!ali!g the terrible burde! o his
roleM
Far rom just thro6i!g hersel i!to the ja6s o death- possessed by a stra!ge 6ish to die or to
disappear- Sopho8lesIs A!tigo!e i!sists up to her death o! perormi!g a pre8ise symboli8 gesture+ the
proper burial o her brother7 .ike 0amlet- +ntigone is a drama o a ailed symboli8 ritualE.a8a!
i!sisted o! this 8o!ti!uity @he had a!alyUed 0amlet i! the semi!ar that pre8eded -he Ethics of
)sychoanalysis- 6hi8h deals 6ith +ntigoneA7 A!tigo!e does !ot sta!d or some e?tra:symboli8 real- but
or the pure sig!iierEher JpurityK is that o a sig!iier7 This is 6hy- although her a8t is sui8idal- the
stakes are symboli8+ her passio! is the death drive at its purestEbut here- pre8isely- 6e should
disti!guish bet6ee! the Freudia! death drive a!d the Hrie!tal !irva!a7 /hat makes A!tigo!e a pure
age!t o the death drive is her u!8o!ditio!al dema!d or the symboli8 ritual to be perormed- a!
i!siste!8e 6hi8h allo6s or !o displa8eme!t or other orm o 8ompromiseEthis is 6hy .a8a!Is
ormula o drive is b:G+ the subje8t u!8o!ditio!ally i!sisti!g o! a symboli8 dema!d7
The problem 6ith A!tigo!e is !ot the sui8idal purity o her death drive but- Nuite the opposite-
that the mo!strosity o her a8t is 8overed up by its aestheti8iUatio!+ the mome!t she is e?8luded rom
the 8ommu!ity o huma!s- she tur!s i!to a sublime apparitio! evoki!g our sympathy by 8omplai!i!g
about her plight7 This is o!e o the key dime!sio!s o .a8a!Is move rom A!tigo!e to Syg!e de
Doco!tai!e+ there is !o sublime beauty i! Syg!e at the playIs e!dEall that marks her as diere!t rom
8ommo! mortals is the ti8 that mome!tarily disigures her a8e7 This eature 6hi8h spoils the harmo!y
o her beautiul a8e- the detail that sti8ks out a!d re!ders it ugly- is the material tra8e o her resista!8e
to bei!g 8o:opted i!to the u!iverse o symboli8 debt a!d guilt7
This- the!- should be the irst step i! a 8o!siste!t readi!g o Dhristia!ity+ the dyi!g Dhrist is o!
the side o Syg!e- !ot o A!tigo!eT Dhrist o! the Dross is !ot a sublime apparitio! but a! embarrassi!g
mo!strosity7 A!other aspe8t o this mo!strosity 6as 8learly per8eived by Fembra!dt- 6hose J.aUarus-K
o!e o the most traumati8 8lassi8 pai!ti!gs- depi8ts Dhrist i! the a8t o raisi!g .aUarus rom the dead7
/hat is striki!g is !ot o!ly the portrayal o .aUarus- a mo!strous livi!g:dead igure retur!i!g to lie-
but- eve! more so- the terriied e?pressio! o! DhristIs a8e- as i he 6ere a magi8ia! sho8ked that his
spell has a8tually 6orked- disgusted by 6hat he has brought ba8k to lie- a6are that he is playi!g 6ith
or8es better let alo!e7 This is a true *ierkegaardia! Dhrist- sho8ked !ot by his mortality but by the
heavy burde! o his super!atural po6ers 6hi8h border o! blasphemy- the blasphemy at 6ork i! every
good biography+ J3iography is i! a8t o!e o the o88ult arts7 9t uses s8ie!tii8 mea!sEdo8ume!tatio!-
a!alysis- i!NuiryEto a8hieve a hermeti8 e!d+ the tra!sormatio! o base material i!to gold7 9ts i!al
i!te!tio! is the most ambitious a!d blasphemous o allEto bri!g ba8k a huma! bei!g to lie7K
&
The death o 1od- as is 6ell k!o6!- 8a! be e?perie!8ed i! a plurality o modes+ as a tragi8 loss
ge!erati!g a deep mela!8holyT as a joyul ope!i!g i!to a !e6 reedomT as a simple a8t to be 8oldly
a!alyUed O 3ut i! its most radi8al dime!sio!- the death o 1od is stri8tly 8orrelative toEis the other
side oEthe immortali2ation of the body sig!aled by JDhrist is !ot deadK+ there is somethi!g i! the
huma! body 6hi8h is more tha! a huma! body- a! obs8e!e u!dead partial obje8t 6hi8h is more i! the
body tha! this body itsel7
%
To e?plai! this parado?- let me 8ite J2oe =ill-K the amous /obblies so!g
rom 1%2# @6ords by Alred =ayes- musi8 by 0arl Fobi!so!A about the judi8ial murder o =ill- a
S6edish:bor! trade u!io! orga!iUer a!d si!ger7 9! the ollo6i!g de8ades- it be8ame a true olk so!g-
populariUed arou!d the 6orld by Caul Fobeso!T here are the @slightly shorte!edA lyri8s 6hi8h prese!t i!
a simple but ee8tive 6ay the Dhristologi8al aspe8t o the ema!8ipatory 8olle8tive- a struggli!g
8olle8tive bou!d by love+

9 dreamed 9 sa6 2oe =ill last !ightAlive as you or me7Says 9- J3ut 2oe- youIre te! years dead7KJ9 !ever
died-K says he7
JThe 8opper bosses killed you- 2oe-They shot you- 2oe-K says 97JTakes more tha! gu!s to kill a
ma!7KSays 2oe- J9 did!It die7K
A!d sta!di!g there as big as lie-A!d smili!g 6ith his eyes-2oe says- J/hat they orgot to kill/e!t o!
to orga!iUe7K
J2oe =ill ai!It dead-K he says to me-J2oe =ill ai!It !ever died7/here 6orki!g me! are out o! strike-2oe
=ill is at their side7K
Dru8ial here is the subje8tive reversal+ the mistake o the a!o!ymous !arrator 6ho does !ot
believe that 2oe =ill is still alive is that he orgets to i!8lude himsel- his o6! subje8tive positio!- i! the
series+ 2oe =ill is !ot alive Jout there-K as a separate ghostT he is alive here- i! the very mi!ds o the
6orkers rememberi!g him a!d 8o!ti!ui!g his ightEhe is alive i! the very gaUe 6hi8h @mistake!lyA
looks or him out there7 The same mistake o Jreiyi!gK the sear8hed:or obje8t is made by DhristIs
dis8iples- a mistake 6hi8h Dhrist 8orre8ts 6ith the amous 6ords+ J/here t6o or three are gathered i!
my !ame- 9 6ill be there7K
THE BIG OTHER

9s this- the!- the Dhristia! =oly SpiritEthe .a8a!ia! Jbig Hther-K the virtual- ideal age!8y kept
alive by the 6ork o i!dividuals parti8ipati!g i! itM 3a8k i! 1%#'- .a8a! oered a short a!d 8lear
dei!itio! o the =oly 1host alo!g these li!es+ JThe =oly 1host is the e!try o the sig!iier i!to the
6orld7 This is 8ertai!ly 6hat Freud brought us u!der the title o death drive7K
10
/hat .a8a! mea!s- at
this stage o his thought- is that the =oly 1host sta!ds or the symboli8 order as that 6hi8h 8a!8els @or-
rather- suspe!dsA the e!tire domai! o JlieKElived e?perie!8e- the libidi!al lu?- the 6ealth o
emotio!s- or- to put it i! *a!tIs terms- the Jpathologi8al7K /he! 6e lo8ate ourselves 6ithi! the =oly
1host- 6e are tra!substa!tiatedE6e e!ter a!other lie beyo!d the biologi8al o!e7 The status o this big
Hther is iro!i8- a! age!8y o obje8tive iro!yEi! 6hat se!seM 9! the i!trodu8tio! to my book -he
Fright of 7eal -ears- 9 relate a! e?perie!8e o mi!e to illustrate the sad state o Dultural Studies today+

Some mo!ths beore 6riti!g this- at a! art rou!d table- 9 6as asked to 8omme!t o! a pai!ti!g 9 had see!
there or the irst time7 9 did !ot have any idea about it- so 9 e!gaged i! total blu- 6hi8h 6e!t o!
somethi!g like this+ the rame o the pai!ti!g i! ro!t o us is !ot its true rameT there is a!other-
i!visible- rame- implied by the stru8ture o the pai!ti!g- the rame that e!rames our per8eptio! o the
pai!ti!g- a!d these t6o rames do !ot overlapEthere is a! i!visible gap separati!g the t6o7 The pivotal
8o!te!t o the pai!ti!g is !ot re!dered i! its visible part- but is lo8ated i! this dis:lo8atio! o the t6o
rames- i! the gap that separates them7 Are 6e- today- i! our post:moder! mad!ess- still able to dis8er!
the tra8es o this gapM Cerhaps more tha! the readi!g o a pai!ti!g hi!ges o! itT perhaps- the de8isive
dime!sio! o huma!ity 6ill be lost 6he! 6e 6ill lose the 8apa8ity to dis8er! this gap O To my
surprise- this brie i!terve!tio! 6as a huge su88ess- a!d ma!y ollo6i!g parti8ipa!ts reerred to the
dime!sio! i!:bet6ee!:the:t6o:rames- elevati!g it i!to a term7 This very su88ess made me sad- really
sad7 /hat 9 e!8ou!tered here 6as !ot o!ly the ei8ie!8y o a blu- but a mu8h more radi8al apathy at
the very heart o todayIs Dultural Studies7
11
=o6ever- 12# pages later- i! the bookIs last 8hapter- 9 rei!trodu8e the same !otio! o Jbet6ee!:
the:t6o:rames-K this time 6ithout iro!y- as a straightor6ard theoreti8al 8o!8ept+

H!e o the mi!imal dei!itio!s o a moder!ist pai!ti!g 8o!8er!s the u!8tio! o its rame7 The rame o
the pai!ti!g i! ro!t o us is !ot its true rameT there is a!other- i!visible- rame- the rame implied by
the stru8ture o the pai!ti!g- the rame that e!rames our per8eptio! o the pai!ti!g- a!d these t6o
rames by dei!itio! !ever overlapEthere is a! i!visible gap separati!g them7 The pivotal 8o!te!t o
the pai!ti!g is !ot re!dered i! its visible part- but is lo8ated i! this dis:lo8atio! o the t6o rames- i! the
gap that separates them7
12
/hat distressed me 6as ho6 eve! some o my rie!ds a!d ollo6ers missed the poi!tEmost o
those 6ho !oti8ed this repetitio! read it either as a sel:parodi8 i!di8atio! o ho6 9 do !ot take my o6!
theories seriously- or as a sig! o my gro6i!g se!ility @assumi!g 9 had simply orgotte! by the e!d o
the book that 9 had mo8ked the very same !otio! i! the i!trodu8tio!A7 /as it really so dii8ult to
per8eive ho6 my pro8edure here pere8tly illustrated the poi!t 9 6as @a!d amA repeatedly tryi!g to
make apropos o todayIs predomi!a!t attitude o 8y!i8ism a!d o !ot:taki!g:o!esel:seriouslyM 0ve!
6he! a subje8t mo8ks a 8ertai! belie- this i! !o 6ay u!dermi!es the belieIs symboli8 ei8a8yEthe
belie ote! 8o!ti!ues to determi!e the subje8tIs a8tivity7 /he! 6e make u! o a! attitude- the truth is
ote! i! this attitude- !ot i! the dista!8e 6e take to6ards it+ 9 make u! o it to 8o!8eal rom mysel the
a8t that it a8tually determi!es my a8tivity7 Someo!e 6ho mo8ks his o6! love or a 6oma!- say- ote!
thereby e?presses his u!easi!ess at bei!g so deeply atta8hed to her7
Ceter SellarsIs versio! o ,osI fan tutte takes pla8e i! the prese!t @a )S !aval base- 6ith
Gespi!a as a lo8al bar o6!er- a!d the t6o ge!tleme!E!aval oi8ersEretur!i!g !ot as JAlba!ia!s-K
but as violet:a!d:yello6:haired pu!ksA7 The mai! premise is that the o!ly true passio!ate love is that
bet6ee! the philosopher Alo!Uo a!d Gespi!a- 6ho e?perime!t 6ith t6o you!g 8ouples i! order to a8t
out the impasse o their o6! desperate love7 This readi!g hits the very heart o the ,oUartea! irony
6hi8h is to be opposed to 8y!i8ism7 9- to simpliy it to the utmost- a 8y!i8 akes a belie that he
privately mo8ks @prea8hi!g sa8rii8e or the atherla!d- say- 6hile privately amassi!g proits OA- a!
iro!ist takes thi!gs more seriously tha! he appears toEhe se8retly believes i! 6hat he publi8ly mo8ks7
Alo!Uo a!d Gespi!a- the 8old philosophi8al e?perime!ter a!d the 8orrupt- dissolute serva!t girl- are
the true passio!ate lovers usi!g the t6o patheti8 8ouples a!d their ridi8ulous eroti8 imbroglio as
i!strume!ts to 8o!ro!t their traumati8 atta8hme!t7 A!d it is o!ly today- i! our postmoder! age-
allegedly ull o iro!y a!d la8ki!g all belie- that the ,oUartea! iro!y rea8hes its ull a8tuality-
8o!ro!ti!g us 6ith the embarrassi!g a8t thatE!ot i! our i!terior lives- but i! our a8ts themselves- i!
our so8ial pra8ti8eE6e believe mu8h more tha! 6e are a6are o7 Apropos o ,oli`reIs -artuffe- =e!ri
3ergso! emphasiUed ho6 Tartue is u!!y !ot o! a88ou!t o his hypo8risy- but be8ause he gets 8aught
i! his o6! mask o hypo8risy+

=e e!ters so thoroughly i!to the role o a hypo8rite that he plays it almost si!8erely7 9! this 6ay- a!d
this 6ay o!ly- 8a! he be8ome 8omi87 /ere it !ot or this material si!8erity- 6ere it !ot or the la!guage
a!d attitudes that his lo!g:sta!di!g e?perie!8e as a hypo8rite has tra!sormed i!to !atural gestures-
Tartue 6ould be simply odious7
1"
3ergso!Is pre8ise e?pressio! Jmaterial si!8erityK its pere8tly 6ith the Althusseria! !otio! o
the 9deologi8al State Apparatus- the e?ter!al ritual 6hi8h materialiUes ideology+ the subje8t 6ho
mai!tai!s his dista!8e to6ards the ritual is u!a6are o the a8t that the ritual already domi!ates him
rom 6ithi!7 0ve! i it is misre8og!iUed or simply J!ot take! seriously-K this big Hther is !o!etheless
effectiveEa! ei8a8y 8learly dis8er!ible i! the 8ase o the big Hther as the Jsubje8t supposed to not
k!o6-K as the age!8y o i!!o8e!t appeara!8e 6hose ig!ora!8e should be mai!tai!ed7
1(
This poi!t is
!i8ely e?pressed i! the disti!8tio! bet6ee! mere polite!ess a!d ta8t proper+

Follo6i!g the rules o polite!ess is !ever Nuite e!ough- it reNuires ta8t7 9! a 6o!derul s8e!e i! o!e o
TruautIs early movies- Gelphi!e Seyrig- a femme du monde- tries to tea8h the you!g 2ea!:Cierre
.Laud the diere!8e bet6ee! polite!ess a!d ta8t7 J9magi!e you i!adverte!tly e!ter a bathroom 6here a
6oma! is sta!di!g !aked u!der a sho6er7 Colite!ess reNuires that you Nui8kly 8lose the door a!d say
VCardo!- ,adameRI /hereas ta8t 6ould be to Nui8kly 8lose the door a!d say VCardo!- ,o!sieurRIK 9!
both 8ases there is the respe8t or the other- or the otherIs i!tima8y upo! 6hi8h o!e has u!6itti!gly
i!truded- a!d this reNuires a polite e?8use7 The rules are satisied i! the irst 8ase7 3ut i! the se8o!d
8ase- o!e makes more+ o!e prete!ds !ot to have see!- o!e prete!ds that the i!trusio! 6as so margi!al
that o!e 8ould!It eve! make out the se? o the e?posed perso!- a!d eve! though the hapless lady may
6ell k!o6 that you are prete!di!g- she 6ill still very mu8h appre8iate your eort7
1#
Su8h dis8retio! 8a! appear i! u!e?pe8ted orms a!d pla8es7 9! Dhi!a- the lo8al party bosses are
popular targets o obs8e!e jokes mo8ki!g their vulgar tastes a!d se?ual obsessio!s7 @Far rom
origi!ati!g 6ith ordi!ary people- these jokes mostly e?press the attitude o the higher nomen"latura
to6ards the lo6er 8adres7A 9! o!e joke- a small provi!8ial party boss has just retur!ed rom the big 8ity
6ith a pair o shi!y !e6 bla8k shoes7 /he! his you!g se8retary bri!gs him tea- he 6a!ts to impress her
6ith the Nuality o his shoesT so 6he! she lea!s over his table he moves his oot just u!der her skirt a!d
tells her he 8a! see @rele8ted i! his shoeA that her u!derpa!ts are blue7 The !e?t day the lirti!g goes
o!- a!d he tells her that today her u!derpa!ts are gree!7 H! the third day- the se8retary de8ides !ot to
6ear a!y u!der6ear at allT looki!g at his shoes or the rele8tio!- the party boss desperately e?8laims+
J9Ive just bought these shoes- a!d already the sura8e is 8ra8kedRK 9! the i!al displa8eme!t- pre8isely
6he! the boss is able to see the rele8ted Jthi!g itsel-K he 6ithdra6s rom re8og!iUi!g it a!d reads it as
a eature o the mirror rele8ti!g it7 H!e might eve! dete8t here- be!eath the sura8e o the bossIs vulgar
boastul!ess- a gesture o hidde! polite!ess+ i! a ge!tle misre8og!itio!- he preers to appear a! idiot
tha! to 8omme!t rudely o! 6hat he 8a! see7 The pro8edure is here diere!t rom that o etishisti8
displa8eme!t+ the subje8tIs per8eptio! does !ot stop at the last thi!g he sees beore the dire8t vie6 o
the vagi!al ope!i!g @as i! the etishisti8 i?atio!A- or his shoe is !ot his etish- the last thi!g he sees
beore seei!g the vagi!al 8ra8kT 6he!- u!e?pe8tedly a!d i!adverte!tly- he does get the vie6 o the
8ra8k- he as it 6ere assumes it as his o6!- as his o6! dei8ie!8y7
9! politi8s- a supreme 8ase o dis8retio! or the art o the u!said took pla8e duri!g the se8ret
meeti!g bet6ee! Alvaro Du!hal- the leader o the Cortuguese Dommu!ist Carty- a!d ,elo A!tu!es- the
pro:demo8ra8y member o the army body 6hi8h de a8to ra! the 8ou!try ater the 8oup agai!st the old
SalaUar regime i! 1%$(7 The situatio! 6as e?tremely te!se+ o! the o!e side there 6as the Dommu!ist
Carty a!d the radi8al army oi8ers- ready to start the real so8ialist revolutio!- taki!g over a8tories a!d
la!d @arms 6ere already bei!g distributed to the people- et87AT o! the other side 8o!servatives a!d
demo8rati8 liberals 6ere ready to stop the revolutio! by a!y mea!s !e8essary- i!8ludi!g military
i!terve!tio!7 9! their meeti!g- A!tu!es a!d Du!hal- both highly respe8ted i!telle8tuals- made a deal
6ithout stati!g it+ there 6as !o agreeme!t 6hatsoeverEe?pli8itly- they only disagreedEbut they let
the meeti!g 6ith the u!dersta!di!g that the 8ommu!ists 6ould !ot start a revolutio!- thereby allo6i!g
the J!ormalK demo8rati8 state to ully orm- a!d that the a!ti:so8ialist military 6ould !ot ba! the
Dommu!ist Carty- but a88ept it as a key player i! the Cortuguese demo8rati8 pro8ess7 H!e 8a! 8laim
that this dis8reet meeti!g literally saved Cortugal- preve!ti!g a bloody 8ivil 6ar at the very last mi!ute7
The logi8 o their dis8retio! later e?te!ded to ho6 the t6o parti8ipa!ts treated their meeti!g7 /he!
asked about it @by a jour!alist rie!d o mi!eA- Du!hal said that he 6ould 8o!irm it o!ly i A!tu!es did
!ot de!y itEi A!tu!es de!ied it- the! the thi!g !ever took pla8e7 /he! my rie!d the! visited
A!tu!es- he did !ot 8o!irm the meeti!g- but liste!ed sile!tly as my rie!d told him 6hat Du!hal had
saidEthus- by 6ay o !ot de!yi!g it- he met Du!halIs 8o!ditio! a!d impli8itly 8o!irmed it7 This is
ho6 ge!tleme! o the .et a8t i! politi8s7
There are- o 8ourse- limits to this logi8 o polite ig!ora!8e7 Some de8ades ago- a 6oma! 6as
slo6ly beate! to death i! the 8ourtyard o a big apartme!t blo8k i! 3rookly!T o the more tha! seve!ty
6it!esses 6ho 8learly sa6 6hat 6as goi!g o! rom their 6i!do6s- !ot o!e 8alled the poli8e7 /hy !otM
As the later i!vestigatio! established- the most prevale!t e?8use by ar 6as that ea8h 6it!ess thought
someo!e else 6ould surely have already reported it7 This a8t should !ot be dismissed moralisti8ally as
a mere e?8use or moral 8o6ardi8e a!d egotisti8 i!diere!8e+ 6hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is also a u!8tio!
o the big HtherEthis time !ot as .a8a!Is Jsubje8t supposed to k!o6-K but as 6hat o!e might 8all Jthe
subje8t supposed to 8all the poli8e7K
The me8ha!ism at 6ork here is the same as that u!derlyi!g 1olda ,eirIs amous reply 6he!
asked 6hether she believed i! 1od+ J9 believe i! the 2e6ish people- a!d they believe i! 1od7K This
ormula o tra!sitive belie is today u!iversaliUed+ o!e does !ot believe o!esel- but- relyi!g o! a!other
Jsubje8t supposed to believe-K o!e 8a! a8t as i o!e believes7 Furthermore- o!e should read ,eirIs
stateme!t i! a very pre8ise 6ay+ it does !ot imply the positio! o the elitist leader 6ho eeds his !aSve:
believi!g subje8ts 6ith Clato!i8 Jbeautiul lies7K The State o 9srael is here e?emplary+ the etishist
disavo6al is i!s8ribed i!to its very ou!datio!s7 Although it has- a88ordi!g to surveys- the most
atheisti8 populatio! i! the 6orld @more tha! '0 per8e!t o the 2e6s i! 9srael do !ot believe i! 1odA- its
basi8 legitimiUatio! @8laimi!g the la!d give! to them by 1odA is theologi8alEthe impli8it ormula is
thus+ J/e k!o6 very 6ell there is !o 1od- but 6e !o!etheless believe he gave us the holy la!d7K
The Jsubje8t supposed to believeK thus does !ot have to e?istT it sui8es that its e?iste!8e is
presupposed as a purely virtual e!tity- Jthe 2e6ish people7K A!d this 6as also the atal mistake o the
6it!esses o the dra6!:out 3rookly! murder+ they misread the symboli8 @i8tio!alA u!8tio! o the
Jsubje8t supposed to 8all the poli8eK as a! empiri8al u!8tio!- 6ro!gly 8o!8ludi!g that there must be at
least someo!e 6ho 6ould a8tually make the 8all- that is- they overlooked the a8t that the u!8tio! is
operative eve! i there is !o a8tual subje8t 6ho e!a8ts it7 H!e 8ould eve! imagi!e a! empiri8al test or
this 8laim+ i the 8ir8umsta!8es 8ould be re8reated so that ea8h o the 6it!esses 6ere to thi!k that he or
she 6as alo!e i! observi!g the gruesome s8e!e- o!e 8ould predi8t that- despite their opportu!isti8
avoida!8e o Jgetti!g i!volved i! somethi!g that is!It my busi!ess-K the majority o them 6ould have
8alled the poli8e7
So- agai!- 6hat is the big HtherM A lady rom 1erma!y o!8e told me that her se? lie 6as
mi!imal+ she had to sedu8e her husba!d o!8e every 8ouple o 6eeks- Jjust so that 9 8a! tell my
psy8hoa!alyst that 9 still have se? lieKEthe a!alyst is here the big Hther- the age!8y or 6hi8h o!e has
to mai!tai! the appeara!8e @o a! a8tive se? lieA7 =ere is a more omi!ous versio! o the same logi8+ i!
200%- a! u!ortu!ate 1reek ma! 6rote several letters to a 1reek 8ivil serva!t over several mo!ths-
8omplai!i!g that he had yet to re8eive his pe!sio!T the 8ivil serva!t i!ally replied 6ith a letter
i!ormi!g him that the reaso! or the delay 6as that he 6as dead7
1'
The sho8ki!g !ature o the
message lies !ot o!ly i! its obvious 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith the a8t that the addressee 6as a8tually alive-
a!d the perormative parado? that this a8t implies @the message sayi!g that 9 am dead is addressed to
me- that is- it presupposes that 9 am aliveA7 The very a8t that this parado? 8a! o88ur implies a more
8omple? situatio!+ the message addresses the dime!sio! i! me 6hi8h makes me dead eve! 6hile 9 am
still alive- the Jmortiyi!gK dime!sio! o the sig!iier- o bei!g i!s8ribed i!to @redu8ed toA the !et6ork
o symboli8 represe!tatio!7 9! other 6ords- 6hat the message is sayi!g is somethi!g like the ollo6i!g+
eve! i you are biologi8ally alive- you !o lo!ger e?ist or the big HtherT as ar as the state !et6ork is
8o!8er!ed- you are dead7
Apropos o the multiple mea!i!gs o the Jbig HtherK i! .a8a!- 3alm`s 6as right to emphasiUe
that the solutio! is !ot to attempt to disti!guish 8learly bet6ee! the various mea!i!gs @the Hther as the
pla8e o spee8h- the desiri!g Hther- et87A7
1$
/hat is mu8h more importa!t is to a!alyUe 6hat =egel
6ould have 8alled the Jsel:moveme!t o the !otio!-K the 6ay o!e mea!i!g- o! a88ou!t o its i!here!t
te!sio!s a!d impli8atio!s- passes i!to a!other @ote! its oppositeA7 For e?ample- 6hat diere!tiates
hysteria rom psy8hosis is their diere!t relatio! to the Je!joyme!t o the HtherK @!ot the subje8tIs
e!joyme!t o the Hther- but the Hther 6ho e!joys [i!\ the subje8tA+ a hysteri8 i!ds it u!bearable to be
the obje8t o the HtherIs e!joyme!t- she i!ds hersel JusedK or Je?ploited-K 6hile a psy8hoti8 6illully
immerses himsel i! it a!d 6allo6s i! it7 @A pervert is a spe8ial 8ase+ he posits himsel !ot as the obje8t
o the HtherIs e!joyme!t- but as the instrument o the HtherIs e!joyme!tEhe serves the HtherIs
e!joyme!t7A The root o these shits i! the mea!i!g o big Hther is that- i! the subje8tIs relatio! to it-
6e are ee8tively deali!g 6ith a 8losed loop best re!dered by 0s8herIs amous image o t6o ha!ds
dra6i!g ea8h other7 The big Hther is a virtual order 6hi8h e?ists o!ly through subje8ts Jbelievi!gK i!
itT i- ho6ever- a subje8t 6ere to suspe!d its belie i! the big Hther- the subje8t itsel- its Jreality-K
6ould disappear7 The parado? is that symboli8 i8tio! is 8o!stitutive o reality+ i 6e take a6ay the
i8tio!- 6e lose reality itsel7 This loop is 6hat =egel 8alled Jpositi!g the presuppositio!s7K This big
Hther should !ot be redu8ed to a! a!o!ymous symboli8 ieldEthere are ma!y i!teresti!g 8ases 6here
a! i!dividual sta!ds or the big Hther7 H!e should thi!k !ot primarily o leader:igures 6ho dire8tly
embody their 8ommu!ities @ki!g- preside!t- masterA- but rather o the more mysterious protectors of
appearancesEsu8h as other6ise 8orrupted pare!ts 6ho desperately try to keep their 8hild ig!ora!t o
their depraved lives- or- i it is a leader- the! o!e or 6hom Cotemki! villages are built7
1&
/he!- i! Gavid .ea!Is /rief Encounter- the lovers meet or the last time at the desolate trai!
statio!- their solitude is immediately disturbed by Delia 2oh!so!Is !oisy a!d i!Nuisitive rie!d 6ho-
u!a6are o the u!derlyi!g te!sio! bet6ee! the 8ouple- goes prattli!g o! about ridi8ulously
i!sig!ii8a!t everyday i!8ide!ts7 )!able to 8ommu!i8ate dire8tly- the 8ouple 8a! o!ly stare
desperately7 This 8ommo! prattler is the big Hther at its purest+ 6hile it appears as a! a88ide!tal a!d
u!ortu!ate i!trusio!- its role is stru8turally !e8essary7
1%
/he!- to6ards the e!d o the ilm- 6e see
this s8e!e a se8o!d time- a88ompa!ied by Delia 2oh!so!Is voi8eover- she tells us that she 6as !ot
liste!i!g to 6hat her rie!d 6as sayi!g- i!deed she had !ot u!derstood a 6ordT ho6ever- pre8isely as
su8h- her prattli!g provided the !e8essary support- as a ki!d o saety:8ushio!- or the loversI last
meeti!g- preve!ti!g its sel:destru8tive e?plosio! or- 6orse- its de8li!e i!to ba!ality7 That is to say- o!
the o!e ha!d- the very prese!8e o the !aSve prattler 6ho Ju!dersta!ds !othi!gK o the situatio! e!ables
the lovers to mai!tai! a mi!imum o 8o!trol over their predi8ame!t- si!8e they eel 8ompelled to
Jmai!tai! proper appeara!8esK i! ro!t o this gaUe7 H! the other ha!d- i! the e6 6ords privately
e?8ha!ged beore the big HtherIs i!terruptio!- they had 8ome to the bri!k o 8o!ro!ti!g the u!pleasa!t
Nuestio!+ i theyIre really so passio!ately i! love that they 8a!It live 6ithout ea8h other- 6hy do!It they
simply divor8e their spouses a!d get togetherM The prattler the! arrives at e?a8tly the right mome!t-
e!abli!g the lovers to mai!tai! the tragi8 gra!deur o their predi8ame!t7 /ithout the i!trusio!- they
6ould have had to 8o!ro!t the ba!ality a!d vulgar 8ompromise o their situatio!7 The shit to be made
i! a proper diale8ti8al a!alysis thus goes rom the 8o!ditio! o impossibility to the 8o!ditio! o
possibility+ 6hat appears as the J8o!ditio! o impossibility-K or the obsta8le- is i! a8t the 8o!ditio! that
e!ables 6hat it appears to threate! to e?ist7
T6o urther Jas iIsK i! /rief Encounter- the irst i! Foald:Gahl:style+ 6hat i Delia 2oh!so!
6ere sudde!ly to dis8over that Trevor =o6ard 6as really a ba8helor 6ho had 8o!8o8ted the story o
his marriage a!d t6o 8hildre! to add a melodramati8:tragi8 lavor to the aair- a!d to avoid the
prospe8t o lo!g:term 8ommitme!tM The!- o!e i! 3ridges:o:,adiso!:Dou!ty:style+ 6hat i- at the e!d-
Delia 2oh!so! 6ere to dis8over that her husba!d had k!o6! all about the aair rom the begi!!i!g a!d
had just bee! prete!di!g ig!ora!8e i! order to mai!tai! appeara!8es a!d>or !ot to hurt or put additio!al
pressure o! his 6ieM
To a perso! i! a state o emotio!al trauma- possessed by a desire to disappear or all i!to the
void- a superi8ial e?ter!al i!trusio! @like the rie!d prattli!g o!A is ote! the o!ly thi!g sta!di!g
bet6ee! him a!d the abyss o sel:destru8tio!+ 6hat appears as a ridi8ulous i!trusio! be8omes a lie:
savi!g i!terve!tio!7 So 6he!- alo!e 6ith her 8ompa!io! i! a 8arriage 8ompartme!t- Delia 2oh!so!
8omplai!s about the i!8essa!t yappi!g a!d eve! e?presses a desire to kill the i!truder @J9 6ish you
6ould stop talki!g7 O 9 6ish you 6ere dead !o67 4o- that 6as silly a!d u!ki!d7 3ut 9 6ish you 6ould
stop talki!gKA- 6e 8a! 6ell imagi!e 6hat 6ould have happe!ed had the a8Nuai!ta!8e really stopped
talki!g+ either Delia 6ould have immediately 8ollapsed- or she 6ould have bee! 8ompelled to utter a
humiliati!g plea+ JClease- just 8arry o! talki!g- !o matter 6hat you are sayi!g OK 9s this u!ortu!ate
i!truder !ot a ki!d o e!voy o @a sta!d:i! orA the abse!t husba!d- his represe!tative @i! the se!se o
.a8a!Is parado?i8al stateme!t that 6oma! is o!e o the 4ames:o:the:FatherAM She i!terve!es at
e?a8tly the right mome!t to preve!t the drit i!to sel:a!!ihilatio! @as i! the amous s8e!e i! 6ertigo
6here the pho!e ri!gs just i! time to stop S8ottie a!d ,adelei!eIs da!gerous drit i!to eroti8 8o!ta8tA7
The husba!d a!d the prattler are ee8tively t6o aspe8ts o o!e a!d the same e!tity- the big
Hther- the addressee o Delia 2oh!so!Is 8o!essio!7 The husba!d is both the ideal re8ipie!t o the
8o!essio!Edepe!dable- ope!- u!dersta!di!gEa!d the o!e 6ho above all 8a!!ot be 8o!essed toEhe
must be prote8ted rom the truthT he is the subje8t supposed to not k!o6+ JGear Fred7 ThereIs so mu8h
that 9 6a!t to say to you7 5ouIre the o!ly o!e i! the 6orld 6ith the 6isdom a!d ge!tle!ess to
u!dersta!d it7 O As it is- you are the o!ly o!e i! the 6orld that 9 8a! !ever tell7 4ever- !ever7 O 9
do!It 6a!t you to be hurt7K The prattler- or her part- is the 6ro!g perso! at the right time a!d pla8e+
Delia 2oh!so! 6a!ts to 8o!ess to her- but 8a!!ot+ J9 6ish 9 8ould trust you7 9 6ish you 6ere a 6ise-
ki!d rie!d i!stead o a gossipi!g a8Nuai!ta!8e 9Ive k!o6! 8asually or years a!d !ever parti8ularly
8ared or7K
20
9! deali!g 6ith the big Hther- it is 8ru8ial to be atte!tive to the i!terplay bet6ee! the
a!o!ymous ield a!d the subje8t imperso!ati!g it7 H!e popular myth rom the late Dommu!ist era i!
0aster! 0urope 6as that there e?isted a departme!t o the se8ret poli8e 6hose u!8tio! 6as to i!ve!t
a!d put i!to 8ir8ulatio! politi8al jokes about the regime a!d its represe!tatives- or they 6ere a6are o
the positive stabiliUi!g u!8tio! o su8h jokes @oeri!g ordi!ary people a! easy a!d tolerable 6ay to let
o steam- easi!g their rustratio!s- et87A7 Attra8tive as it is- this myth overlooks a rarely me!tio!ed but
!o!etheless 8ru8ial eature o jokes+ they !ever seem to have a! author- as i the Nuestio! J6ho is the
author o this jokeMK 6ere a! impossible o!e7 2okes are origi!ally Jtold-K they are al6ays already
JheardK @J=ave you heard the o!e about OMKA7 Therei! resides their mystery+ they are idiosy!8rati8T
they sta!d or the u!iNue 8reativity o la!guage but are !o!etheless J8olle8tive-K a!o!ymous-
authorless- arrivi!g all o a sudde! out o !o6here7 The idea that there has to be a! author o a joke is
properly para!oid+ it mea!s that there has to be a! JHther o the Hther-K o the a!o!ymous symboli8
order- as i the u!athomable ge!erative po6er o la!guage has to be perso!aliUed- lo8ated i! a! age!t
6ho 8o!trols it a!d se8retly pulls the stri!gs7 This is 6hy- rom the theologi8al perspe8tive- 1od is the
ultimate jokester7 This is the thesis o 9saa8 AsimovIs 8harmi!g short story J2okester-K about a group o
historia!s o la!guage 6ho- i! support o the hypothesis that 1od 8reated ma! out o apes by telli!g
them a joke- try to re8o!stru8t this joke- the Jmother o all jokesK 6hi8h irst gave birth to spirit7
@9!8ide!tally- or those i! the 2udeo:Dhristia! traditio!- this is superluous- si!8e 6e all k!o6 6hat the
joke 6as+ JGo !ot eat rom the tree o k!o6ledgeRKEthe irst prohibitio! 6hi8h is 8learly a joke- a
perple?i!g temptatio! 6hose poi!t is u!8lear7A
9s 1od the! the big HtherM The a!s6er is !ot as simple as it may appear7 H!e 8a! say that he is
the big Hther at the level o the e!u!8iated- but !ot at the level o the e!u!8iatio! @the level 6hi8h
really mattersA7 Sai!t Augusti!e 6as already ully a6are o this problem- 6he! he asked the !aSve but
8ru8ial Nuestio!+ i 1od sees i!to the i!!ermost depths o our hearts- k!o6i!g 6hat 6e really thi!k a!d
6a!t better tha! 6e do ourselves- 6hy the! is a 8o!essio! to 1od !e8essaryM Are 6e !ot telli!g him
6hat he already k!o6sM 9s 1od the! !ot like the ta? authorities i! some 8ou!tries 6ho already k!o6 all
about our i!8ome- yet still ask us to report it- just so they 8a! 8ompare the t6o lists a!d establish 6ho is
lyi!gM The a!s6er- o 8ourse- lies i! the positio! o e!u!8iatio!7 9! a group o people- eve! i everyo!e
k!o6s my dirty se8ret @a!d eve! i everyo!e k!o6s that everyo!e else k!o6s itA- it is still 8ru8ial or
me to say it ope!lyT the mome!t 9 do- everythi!g 8ha!ges7 3ut 6hat is this Jeverythi!gKM The mome!t 9
say it- the big Hther- the i!sta!8e o appeara!8e- k!o6s itT my se8ret is thereby i!s8ribed i!to the big
Hther7 =ere 6e e!8ou!ter the t6o opposite aspe8ts o the big Hther+ the big Hther as the Jsubje8t
supposed to k!o6-K as the ,aster 6ho sees everythi!g a!d se8retly pulls the stri!gsT a!d the big Hther
as the age!t o pure appeara!8e- the age!t supposed to not k!o6- the age!t or 6hose be!eit
appeara!8es are to be mai!tai!ed7 Crior to my 8o!essio!- 1od i! the irst aspe8t o the big Hther
already k!o6s everythi!g- but 1od i! the se8o!d aspe8t does !ot7 This diere!8e 8a! also be e?pressed
i! terms o subje8tive assumptio!+ i!soar as 9 merely k!o6 it- 9 do !ot really assume it subje8tively- i!
other 6ords- 9 8a! 8o!ti!ue to a8t as i 9 do !ot k!o6 itT o!ly 6he! 9 8o!ess to it i! publi8 8a! 9 !o
lo!ger prete!d !ot to k!o67
21
The theologi8al problem is the ollo6i!g+ does !ot this disti!8tio!
bet6ee! the t6o 1ods i!trodu8e i!itude i!to 1od himselM Should !ot 1od as the absolute Subje8t be
pre8isely the o!e or 6hom the e!u!8iated a!d its e!u!8iatio! totally overlap- so that 6hatever 6e
i!timately k!o6 has already bee! 8o!essed to himM The problem is that su8h a 1od is the 1od o a
psy8hoti8- the 1od to 6hom 9 am totally tra!spare!t also at the level o e!u!8iatio!7
THE DEATH OF GOD

9s the =oly Spirit- the!- a versio! o this big Hther- o 6hat =egel 8alls Jobje8tive spiritK or
spiritual substa!8eM 9t is 8ru8ial not to eNuate them+ the properly Dhristia!:=egelia! !otio! o the =oly
Spirit is misu!derstood 6he! redu8ed to the huma!ist 8laim that J1odK is !othi!g but our @huma!A
a6are!ess o 1od- so that the =oly Spirit is simply the spiritual substa!8e o huma!ity7 =ere are t6o
represe!tative passages+

Fi!ite 8o!s8ious!ess k!o6s 1od o!ly to the e?te!t to 6hi8h 1od k!o6s himsel- spirit is nothing other
than those 6ho 6orship him7
,a! k!o6s 1od o!ly i!soar as 1od k!o6s himsel as ma!7 The Spirit o ma!- 6hereby he k!o6s
1od- is simply the spirit o 1od himsel7
22
9! short- rom the properly =egelia! perspe8tive- a!!ou!8ed already i! 08khart- o!e should
reverse the propositio! that Jto believe that 1od e?ists is to believe that 9 sta!d i! some relatio! to his
e?iste!8e such that his e&istence is itself the reason for my belief7 K
2"
,y belie i! 1od is- o! the
8o!trary- the reaso! or 1odIs very e?iste!8e- or- 1od Nua =oly 1host- the spiritual substa!8e o the
Dhristia! 8olle8tive- its presuppositio!- is alive o!ly i!soar as it is itsel posited by the 8o!ti!uous
a8tivity o i!dividuals7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial not to 8o!use this gesture 6ith the sta!dard JmaterialistK
!otio! that 1od is just a i8tio! proje8ted by the believers- the 8o!8lusio! dra6! by Solomo!+ Jthere is
!o Valie!I 1od 6ho rea8hes do6! to usT 1od is Spirit a!d Spirit is us- !othi!g more7K
2(
/hat o!e
should re!der problemati8 here is the ateul J!othi!g moreK+ o 8ourse there is !o Spirit as a
substa!tial e!tity above a!d beyo!d i!dividuals- but this does !ot make =egel a !omi!alistEthere is
Jsomethi!g moreK tha! the reality o i!dividuals- a!d this JmoreK is the virtual Feal 6hi8h al6ays
suppleme!ts reality- Jmore tha! !othi!g- but less tha! somethi!g7K 9! other 6ords- i there is J!othi!g
moreK tha! us @huma! i!dividualsA i! Spirit- ho6 are 6e to a88ou!t or the 8e!tral te!et o Dhristia!ity-
the eve!t o DhristIs i!8ar!atio!M /hy do huma!s !ot dire8tly re8og!iUe themselvesEtheir SpiritEi!
the igure o a! alie! substa!tial 1odM /hy do they !ot dire8tly Jkill 1odK as a tra!s8e!de!t Subje8t-
allo6i!g him to survive o!ly as the virtual symboli8 order kept alive by the i!8essa!t a8tivity o ea8h
a!d everyo!e o usM Solomo! 8o!ro!ts this problem+

9t is the Jmiddle termK o the Tri!ity that e?er8ises =egel the most+ 1od or JSpiritK is easily
rei!terpreted as imma!e!t- a!d the J=oly 1hostK already has pre8isely the status =egel 6a!ts it to
have- as Spirit eused throughout the 8ommu!ity7 3ut it is the role o 2esus that disti!guishes
Dhristia!ity rom other religio!s- a!d the !otio! o Ji!8ar!atio!K 6hi8h J8o!tradi8ts all
u!dersta!di!g7K
2#
3ut this solutio! avoids the problem !i8ely stated 8e!turies ago by .essi!g @J=o6 is it possible
that Dhristia!ity 8a! base the 6hole o its aith o! a! histori8al a88ide!tMKA by 8laimi!g that J=egelIs
a!s6er- i! a8t- is ou!d i! 1oethe- 6ho des8ribed this as a! allegory- Va parti8ular 8o!sidered o!ly as
a! illustratio!- as a! e?ample o the u!iversal7IK
2'
Fead i! this 6ay- o 8ourse- =egel is !ot

a religious ma!- mu8h less the Jgreatest abstra8t thi!ker o Dhristia!ity7K =e is- perhaps- o!e o the irst
great huma!ists o 1erma! philosophy7 That 6as =egelIs se8ret- a!d the sour8e o *ierkegaardIs
righteous 8omplai!t+ J,oder! philosophy is !either more !or less tha! paga!ism7 3ut it 6a!ts to make
itsel a!d us believe that it is Dhristia!ity7K
2$
Alasdair ,a8i!tyre 6as thus Nuite 8orre8t 6he! he 8laimed that Ji *ierkegaard had!It e?isted-
it 6ould be !e8essary to i!ve!t himKEor eve! J1od i!ve!ted *ierkegaard to thro6 light o! =egel7K
2&
=egel does i!deed say that Dhrist is a! e?ampleEbut- he adds- a! Je?ample o e?ampleK a!d
thus Jthe absolute e?ample-K 6hi8h mea!s- pre8isely- that it is !o lo!ger a mere e?ample- but a!
e?ample 6hi8h is more the Jthi!g itselK e?empliied i!>by it tha! the thi!g itselEi! other 6ords- it is
o!ly through this Je?ampleK that the e?empliied Jthi!g itselK be8omes 6hat it is7 This is 6hy DhristIs
i!8ar!atio! J8o!tradi8ts all u!dersta!di!gK+ 6hat u!dersta!di!g 8a!!ot grasp is ho6- i! Dhristia!ity- its
u!iversal>eter!al Truth is based Jo! a! histori8al a88ide!t-K !amely ho6 its !e8essity is itsel grou!ded
i! a 8o!ti!ge!8y7 9! this pre8ise se!se- =egel is not a Jhuma!istK+ or a huma!ist- it is easy to see ho6
all i!dividuals are passi!g 8o!ti!ge!t embodime!ts>e?amples o the eter!al huma! Spirit7
2%
/hat a
huma!ist 8a!!ot grasp is that this u!iversal Spirit- i! order to be8ome Jor itsel-K to ully a8tualiUe
itsel- has to be dire8tly i!8ar!ated i! a si!gular 8o!ti!ge!t i!dividual 6ho is !ot its mere Je?ampleK
but the ull a8tuality o the )!iversal7 So 6he! this si!gular i!dividual dies- it is !ot just the substa!tial
9!:itsel o a tra!s8e!de!t 1od 6hi8h diesT 6hat dies is also 1od Nua spiritual substa!8e- the u!iversal
Spirit 6hi8h is kept alive by the i!8essa!t a8tivity o all passi!g 8o!ti!ge!t i!dividualsEsu8h a
represe!tatio! is still too Jsubsta!tial7K
At a more basi8 level- 6hat 6e are deali!g 6ith here is the shit rom abstra8t to 8o!8rete
u!iversality7 At the level o abstra8t u!iversality- 6e 8a! oppose the u!iversal symboli8 system as a
!o!:psy8hologi8al Jobje8tive so8ial a8tK to i!dividual subje8ts a!d their i!tera8tio!7 /e rea8h
8o!8rete u!iversality 6he! 6e ask ho6 the a!o!ymous symboli8 system e?ists for the subje8t- that is-
ho6 the subje8t e&periences it as Jobje8tive-K u!iversal7 9! order or a u!iversality to be8ome
J8o!8rete-K For:itsel- it has to be e?perie!8ed as su8h- as a !o!:psy8hologi8al u!iversal order- by the
subje8t7
"0
This pre8ise disti!8tio! e!ables us to a88ou!t or the passage o 6hat =egel 8alled
Jobje8tive spiritK @HSA to Jabsolute spiritK @ASA7 /e do !ot pass rom HS to AS by 6ay o a simple
subje8tive appropriatio! o JreiiedK HS subje8tivity @i! the 6ell:k!o6! Feuerba8h:you!g:,ar?
pseudo:=egelia! mode+ Jthe 8olle8tive huma! subje8tivity re8og!iUes i! HS its o6! produ8t- the
reiied e?pressio! o its o6! 8reative po6erKAEthis 6ould be a simple redu8tio! o HS to subje8tive
spirit @SSA7 3ut !either do 6e a88omplish this passage by positi!g beyo!d HS a!other- eve! more 9!:
itsel absolute e!tity that e!8ompasses both SS a!d HS7 The passage rom HS to AS resides i! !othi!g
but the diale8ti8al mediatio! bet6ee! HS a!d SS- i! the above:i!di8ated i!8lusio! o the gap that
separates HS rom SS 6ithi! SS- so that HS has to appear @be e?perie!8edA as su8h- as a! obje8tive
JreiiedK e!tity- by SS itsel @a!d i! the i!verted re8og!itio! that- 6ithout the sub1ective reere!8e to a!
9!:itsel o the HS- subje8tivity itsel disi!tegrates- 8ollapses i!to psy8hoti8 autismA7
"1
/hat- the!- is that 6hi8h does !ot die- the material support o the =oly SpiritM /he! Fobeso!
sa!g J2oe =illK at the lege!dary Cea8e Ar8h 8o!8ert i! 1%#2- he 8ha!ged the key li!e rom J/hat they
orgot to killK i!to+ J/hat they 8a! !ever kill 6e!t o! to orga!iUe7K The immortal dime!sio! i! ma!-
that i! ma! 6hi8h it Jtakes more tha! gu!s to kill-K the Spirit- is 6hat 6e!t o! to orga!iUe itsel7 This
should !ot be dismissed as a! obs8ura!tist:spiritualist metaphorEthere is a subje8tive truth i! it+ 6he!
ema!8ipatory subje8ts orga!iUe themselves- it is the JspiritK itsel 6hi8h orga!iUes itsel through them7
H!e should add to the series o 6hat the imperso!al JitK @das Es- BaA does @i! the u!8o!s8ious- Jit
talks-K Jit e!joysKA+ it organi2es itself @Ba sorganiseEtherei! resides the 8ore o the Jeter!al 9deaK o a
revolutio!ary partyA7 H!e should also shamelessly evoke the sta!dard s8e!e rom s8ie!8e:i8tio! horror
movies i! 6hi8h the alie! 6ho has take! o! huma! appeara!8e @or i!vaded a!d 8olo!iUed a huma!
bei!gA is e?posed- its huma! orm destroyed- so that all that remai!s is a ormless slime- like a pool o
melted metal O the hero leaves the s8e!e- satisied that the threat has bee! dealt 6ithEa!d the! the
ormless slime that the hero orgot to kill @or 8ould !ot killA starts to move- slo6ly orga!iUi!g itsel- a!d
the old me!a8i!g igure is re8o!stituted7 Cerhaps it is alo!g these li!es that 6e should read the
Dhristia! pra8ti8e o 0u8harist-

i! 6hi8h the parti8ipa!ts i! this love east or sa8rii8ial meal establish solidarity 6ith o!e a!other
through the medium o a mutilated body7 9! this 6ay- they share at the level o sig! or sa8rame!t i!
DhristIs o6! bloody passage rom 6eak!ess to po6er- death to tra!sigured lie7
"2
9s !ot 6hat 6e believers 8o!sume i! the 0u8harist- DhristIs lesh @breadA a!d blood @6i!eA-
pre8isely the same ormless remai!der- J6hat they [the Foma! soldiers 6ho 8ru8iied him\ 8a! !ever
kill-K 6hi8h the! goes o! to orga!iUe itsel as a 8ommu!ity o believersM From this sta!dpoi!t 6e
should reread Hedipus himsel as a pre8ursor o Dhrist+ agai!st thoseEi!8ludi!g .a8a! himselE6ho
per8eive Hedipus at Dolo!us a!d A!tigo!e as igures drive! by the u!8ompromisi!gly sui8idal death
drive- Ju!yieldi!g right to the e!d- dema!di!g everythi!g- givi!g up !othi!g- absolutely
u!re8o!8iled-K
""
Terry 0agleto! is right to poi!t out that Hedipus at Dolo!us

be8omes the 8or!ersto!e o a !e6 politi8al order7 HedipusIs polluted body sig!iies amo!g other thi!gs
the mo!strous terror at the gates i! 6hi8h- i it is to have a 8ha!8e o rebirth- the polis must re8og!iUe
its o6! hideous deormity7 This proou!dly politi8al dime!sio! o the tragedy is give! short shrit i!
.a8a!Is o6! meditatio!s O
"(
9! be8omi!g !othi!g but the s8um a!d reuse o the polisEthe Jshit o
the earth-K as St Caul ra8ily des8ribes the ollo6ers o 2esus- or the Jtotal loss o huma!ityK 6hi8h ,ar?
portrays as the proletariatEHedipus is divested o his ide!tity a!d authority a!d so 8a! oer his
la8erated body as the 8or!ersto!e o a !e6 so8ial order7 JAm 9 made a ma! i! this hour 6he! 9 8ease to
beMK @or perhaps JAm 9 to be 8ou!ted as somethi!g o!ly 6he! 9 am !othi!g > am !o lo!ger huma!MKA-
the beggar ki!g 6o!ders aloud7
"#
Goes this !ot re8all a later beggar ki!g- Dhrist himsel- 6ho- by his death as a !obody- a!
out8ast aba!do!ed eve! by his dis8iples- grou!ds a !e6 8ommu!ity o believersM They both re:emerge
by 6ay o passi!g through the Uero:level o bei!g redu8ed to a! e?8reme!tal remai!der7 The !otio! o
the Dhristia! 8olle8tive o believers @a!d its later versio!s- rom ema!8ipatory politi8al moveme!ts to
psy8hoa!alyti8 so8ietiesA is a! a!s6er to a pre8ise materialist Nuestio!+ ho6 to assert materialism !ot as
a tea8hi!g- but as a orm o 8olle8tive lieM Therei! resides the ailure o Stali!ism+ !o matter ho6
JmaterialistK its tea8hi!g 6as- its orm o orga!iUatio!Ethe Carty- 6hi8h is a! i!strume!t o the
histori8al big HtherEremai!ed idealist7 H!ly a 8olle8tive o the =oly Spirit ou!ded o! the Jdeath o
1od-K o! a88epti!g the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther- is materialist i! its very orm o so8ial
orga!iUatio!7
This Jtra!substa!tiatio!-K by mea!s o 6hi8h our a8ts are e?perie!8ed as dra6i!g stre!gth rom
their o6! result- should !ot be dismissed as a! ideologi8al illusio! @Ji! reality there are simply
i!dividuals 6ho are orga!iUi!g themselvesKA7 =ere is the shortest 2a8ob a!d /ilhelm 1rimm airy tale-
JThe /illul DhildK+

H!8e upo! a time there 6as a 8hild 6ho 6as 6illul a!d did !ot do 6hat his mother 6a!ted7 For this
reaso! 1od 6as displeased 6ith him a!d 8aused him to be8ome ill- a!d !o do8tor 8ould help him- a!d
i! a short time he lay o! his deathbed7 =e 6as lo6ered i!to a grave a!d 8overed 6ith earth- but his little
arm sudde!ly 8ame orth a!d rea8hed up- a!d it did!It help 6he! they put it ba8k i! a!d put resh earth
over it- or the little arm al6ays 8ame out agai!7 So the mother hersel had to go to the grave a!d beat
the little arm 6ith a s6it8h- a!d as soo! as she had do!e that- it 6ithdre6- a!d the 8hild i!ally 8ame to
rest be!eath the earth7
9s !ot this obsti!a8y that persists eve! beyo!d death reedomEthe death driveEat its most
eleme!taryM 9!stead o 8o!dem!i!g it- should 6e !ot rather 8elebrate it as the last resort o our
resista!8eM The death o Dhrist is also the death>e!d o huma! mortality- the Jdeath o death-K the
!egatio! o !egatio!+ the death o 1od is the rise o the u!dead drive @the u!dead partial obje8tA7 =ere-
ho6ever- =egel is !ot radi8al e!ough+ si!8e he is !ot able to thi!k ob1et a- he also ig!ores bodily
immortality @Ju!dead!essKAEboth Spi!oUa a!d =egel share this bli!d!ess or the proper dime!sio! o
the ob1et a7 =o6 8a! a Dhristia! believer 8ome to terms 6ith this obs8e!e e?8ess o immortalityM 9s the
a!s6er- o!8e agai!- loveM Da! o!e love this e?8essM
9! 6hat pre8ise se!se is Dhristia!ity the religio! o loveM 3adiou provides a sta!dard readi!g+
6hile- like Clato- Dhristia!ity mobiliUes the po6er o love to bi!d together subje8ts a!d sustai! their
idelity to a! eve!t 6hi8h marks a rupture 6ith their utilitaria! daily lives- it subordi!ates love proper
as the rise o the T6oEas the 8o!stru8tio! o a 6orld rom the T6oEto a H!e- the H!e o
tra!s8e!de!t divi!ity7 The ope! risk o a love aair- the e?ploratio! o the 8o!seNue!8es o love 6ith
!o guara!tee o a i!al su88ess- is thus re:i!s8ribed i!to the H!e- the 1od above the T6o as the ultimate
goal a!d guara!tee o love7 Agai!st this i!terve!tio! o a tra!s8e!de!t H!e 6hi8h resolves the
impossibility i!s8ribed i!to the T6o- 3adiou i!sists o! the imma!e!8e o love+ the real o a love:
e!8ou!ter is tra!sormed i!to a symboli8 bo!d- 8o!ti!ge!8y is tra!sormed i!to !e8essity- by the love
de8laratio! @J9 love youKA- a!d the 8ommitme!t a!!ou!8ed i! this de8laratio! has the! to be tested i!
the 8o!ti!uous 6ork o love7 The Jeter!ityK o love is the eter!ity o this 8ommitme!t- !ot the eter!ity
o a tra!s8e!de!t:eter!al guara!tee7
3ut is su8h a readi!g o Dhristia!ity the o!ly o!e possibleM /he! Dhrist a!s6ers his dis8iples-
J/here t6o or three are gathered i! my !ame- 9 6ill be there-K does this also !ot dispe!se 6ith a!y
tra!s8e!de!8eM 9s love- divi!e love- here !ot also redu8ed to the imma!e!8e o the li!k 6hi8h u!ites
the T6oM 9! other 6ords- is the passage rom 1od to the =oly 1host !ot pre8isely the passage rom
tra!s8e!de!8e to a! imma!e!t li!kM The problem resides i! the pre8ise !ature o this li!k+ ater the
redu8tio! o tra!s8e!de!8e- is the big Hther still hereM Furthermore- 8a! 6e simply get rid o the big
Hther- or is a detour through the illusio! o the big Hther i!evitableM 9! Seminar ;;III- .a8a! poi!ts
out that Jpsy8hoa!alysis- 6ith its su88ess- demo!strates that o!e 8a! also get rid o the 4ame:o:the:
Father7 H!e 8a! get rid o it @ig!ore it+ sen passerA o! 8o!ditio! that o!e makes use o it @sen
serverA7K
"'
/hat lurks i! the ba8kgrou!d here is .a8a!Is di8tum la vAritA surgit de la mApriseEmore
pre8isely- de la mAprise du sss @su1et supposA savoirA+ o!e 8a!!ot get dire8tly at the i!e?iste!8e o the
big Hther- o!e has irst to be duped by the Hther- be8ause le om*du*)>re mea!s that les non*dupes
errent+ those 6ho reuse to su88umb to the illusio! o sss also miss the truth 8o!8ealed by this illusio!7
This bri!gs us ba8k to J1od is u!8o!s8iousK+ J1odK @as subje8t supposed to k!o6- as big Hther- as the
ultimate addressee beyo!d all empiri8al addresseesA is a perma!e!t- 8o!stitutive stru8ture o la!guageT
6ithout =im- 6e are i! psy8hosisE6ithout the pla8e o 1od:Father- the subje8t e!ds up i! a
S8hreberia! delirium7
"$
1od as sss is u!surpassable- i! its basi8 dime!sio! o big Hther- o the pla8e o
Truth7 The big Hther is thus the Uero:level o the divi!e- it is Jproperly the pla8e 6here- i you allo6
me this play 6ith 6ords- godEgodspeakEspeaki!g @le dieuGle dieurGle direA produ8es itsel7 9t is
sayi!g 6hi8h makes 1od out o a !othi!g7 A!d as lo!g as somethi!g 6ill be said- the hypothesis o
1od 6ill be here7K
"&
The mome!t 6e speak- 6e @u!8o!s8iously- at leastA believe i! 1odEit is here that 6e
e!8ou!ter .a8a!Is Jtheologi8al materialismK at its purest+ it is spee8h @ours- ultimatelyA 6hi8h 8reates
1odT ho6ever- 1od is here the mome!t 6e speakEor- to Nuote the Talmud+ J5ou have made me i!to a
si!gle e!tity i! the 6orld- or it is 6ritte! V=ear H 9srael- the .ord is our god- the .ord is o!e-I a!d 9
shall make you i!to a si!gle e!tity i! the 6orld7K
"%
Therei! resides the limit o 2udaism+ o 8ourse it
8a! perorm the huma!ist reversal- 6eEthe 8olle8tive o believersE8reate 1od:H!e by prayi!g to
himT but ,hrist- its mo!strous e?8ess- 8a!!ot be thought here7 The Talmudi8 ormula e?empliies the
sta!dard 8ir8le o subje8ts a!d their virtual substa!8e kept alive by the subje8tsI i!8essa!t a8tivity-
substa!8e as Jthe 6ork o o!e a!d all7K 9! his semi!ar o! -he Ethics of )sychoanalysis- .a8a! opposes
to the thesis o the death o 1od the 8laim that 1od is dead rom the very begi!!i!g- it is just that he
just did !ot k!o6 itT i! Dhristia!ity he i!ally lear!s itEo! the Dross7 The death o Dhrist is thus !ot a!
a8tual death- but rather a be8omi!g a6are o 6hat is already here7 H!e should !o!etheless take !ote o
ho6 this pro8ess u!olds i! t6o stages- the 2e6ish a!d the Dhristia!7 /hile- i! paga! religio!s- the
gods are alive- 2e6ish believers already took 1odIs death i!to a88ou!tEi!di8atio!s o this a6are!ess
abou!d i! the 2e6ish sa8red te?ts7 Fe8all- rom the Talmud- the story about the t6o rabbis 6ho
basi8ally tell 1od to shut up+ they ight over a theologi8al Nuestio! u!til- u!able to resolve it- o!e o
them proposes+ J.et =eave! itsel testiy that the .a6 is a88ordi!g to my judgme!t7K A voi8e rom
heave! agrees 6ith the rabbi 6ho irst appealedT ho6ever- the other rabbi the! sta!ds up a!d 8laims
that eve! a voi8e rom heave! 6as !ot to be regarded- JFor Thou- H 1od- didst lo!g ago 6rite do6! i!
the la6 6hi8h Thou gavest o! Si!ai- VThou shalt ollo6 the multitude7IK 1od himsel had to agree+
ater sayi!g- J,y 8hildre! have va!Nuished meR ,y 8hildre! have va!Nuished meRK he ru!s a6ay O
There is a similar story i! the 3abylo!ia! Talmud @3aba ,etUia #%bA- but here- i! a 6o!derul
4ietUs8hea! t6ist- 1od a88epts his deeat 6ith joyous laughter+

F7 0lieUer brought or6ard every imagi!able argume!t- but the Sages did !ot a88ept a!y o them7
Fi!ally he said to them+ J9 the =alakhah [religious la6\ is i! a88orda!8e 6ith me- let this 8arob tree
prove itRK Sure e!ough the 8arob tree immediately uprooted itsel a!d moved o!e hu!dred 8ubits- a!d
some say (00 8ubits- rom its pla8e7 J4o proo 8a! be brought rom a 8arob tree-K they retorted7 A!d
agai! he said to them J9 the =alakhah agrees 6ith me- let the 8ha!!el o 6ater prove itRK Sure e!ough-
the 8ha!!el o 6ater lo6ed ba8k6ard7 J4o proo 8a! be brought rom a 8ha!!el o 6ater-K they
rejoi!ed7 Ater yet a!other trial 6ith a 6all- F7 0lieUer the! said to the Sages+ J9 the =alakhah agrees
6ith me- let it be proved rom heave!7K Sure e!ough- a divi!e voi8e 8ried out- J/hy do you dispute
6ith F7 0lieUer- 6ith 6hom the =alakhah al6ays agreesMK F7 2oshua stood up a!d protested+ JVThe
Torah is !ot i! heave!RI @Geut7 "0+12A7 /e pay !o atte!tio! to a divi!e voi8e be8ause lo!g ago at
,ou!t Si!ai 5ou 6rote i! your Torah at ,ou!t Si!ai- VAter the majority must o!e i!8li!eI @0?7
2"+2A7K F7 4atha! met [the prophet\ 0lijah a!d asked him- J/hat did the =oly H!e do at that
mome!tMK 0lijah+ J=e laughed [6ith joy\- sayi!g- V,y 8hildre! have deeated me- my 8hildre! have
deeated me7IK
The outsta!di!g eature o this story is !ot o!ly the divi!e laughter 6hi8h repla8es the
sorro6ul 8omplai!t- but the 6ay the Sages @6ho sta!d or the big Hther- o 8ourseA 6i! the argume!t
agai!st 1od+ eve! 1od =imsel- the absolute Subje8t- is de8e!tered 6ith regard to the big Hther @the
order o symboli8 registratio!A- so that- o!8e his i!ju!8tio!s are 6ritte! do6!- he 8a! !o lo!ger tou8h
them7 /e 8a! thus imagi!e 6hy 1od rea8ts to his deeat 6ith joyous laughter+ the Sages have lear!t his
lesso! that 1od is dead- a!d that the Truth resides i! the dead letter o the .a6 6hi8h is beyo!d his
8o!trol7 9! short- ater the a8t o 8reatio! is a88omplished- 1od loses eve! the right to i!terve!e i! ho6
people i!terpret his la67
,oder! liberal:demo8rati8 readers like to reer to this story as a parable about demo8ra8y+ the
majority 6i!s- 1od as the ultimate ,aster has to 8o!8ede deeat7 This is- ho6ever- to miss the key
message+ the Sages do !ot simply sta!d or the majority- they sta!d or the big Hther- or the
u!8o!ditio!al authority o the dead letter o the .a6 to 6hi8h eve! 1od himsel has to bo67 To give
this story a Dhristia! @a!d- simulta!eously- radi8al:demo8rati8A t6ist- 6e have to suspe!d the reere!8e
to the big Hther- a88ept the big HtherIs i!e?iste!8e- a!d 8o!8eive the Sages as a 8olle8tive 6hi8h ne
sautorise <ue de lui*mJme7 To put it i! =egelese- i! the t6o Talmudi8 stories- 1od is dead JFor us or
i! himsel-K 6hi8h is 6hy- eve! i believers !o lo!ger really believe i! him- they 8o!ti!ue to pra8ti8e
the ritual o belieEit is o!ly i! Dhristia!ity that 1od dies Jor himsel7K 1od thus has to die t6i8e- i!
itsel a!d or itsel+ i! 2udaism- he dies i! itsel by 6ay o bei!g redu8ed to the perormative ee8t o
@huma!sA talki!g about himT but su8h a 1od 8o!ti!ues to u!8tio!- so has to die or itsel- 6hi8h
happe!s i! Dhristia!ity7
This- perhaps- is the most 8o!8ise dei!itio! o the =egelia! Absolute *!o6i!g+ ully assumi!g
the big HtherIs i!e?iste!8e- that is to say- the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther as the subje8t:supposed:to:
k!o67 There is a key diere!8e bet6ee! this k!o6i!g a!d 6hat- i! a 8ertai! So8rati8 or mysti8al
traditio!- is 8alled docta ignorantia+ the latter reers to the sub1ects k!o6i!g its ig!ora!8e- 6hile the
ig!ora!8e registered by the subje8t o Absolute *!o6i!g is that o the big $ther itself7 The ormula o
true atheism is thus+ divi!e k!o6i!g a!d e?iste!8e are i!8ompatible- 1od e?ists o!ly i!soar as he
does!It k!o6 @take !ote o- registerA his o6! i!e?iste!8e7 The mome!t 1od k!o6s- he 8ollapses i!to
the abyss o i!e?iste!8e- like the amiliar 8artoo! 8at 6hi8h alls o!ly 6he! it !oti8es there is !o
grou!d be!eath its eet7
So 6hy did Dhrist have to dieM The parado? is that- i! order or the virtual Substa!8e @the big
HtherA to die- the pri8e had to be paid i! the real o lesh a!d blood7 9! other 6ords- 1od is a i8tio!- but
or the i8tio! @6hi8h stru8tures realityA to die- a pie8e o the real had to be destroyed7 Si!8e the big
Hther as a virtual order- a symboli8 i8tio!- is ee8tive i! its very i!e?iste!8eEit does !ot e?ist- but it
!evertheless 6orksEit is thus !ot e!ough to destroy the i8tio! rom the outside- to redu8e it to reality-
to demo!strate ho6 it emerged rom reality @pace JvulgarK atheists like Fi8hard Ga6ki!sA7 The i8tio!
has to be destroyed rom 6ithi!- that is- its i!here!t alsity has to be brought out7 To put it i!
des8riptive terms- it is !ot e!ough to prove that 1od does !ot e?istEthe ormula o true atheism is that
(od himself must be made to proclaim his own ine&istence- must stop believi!g i! himsel7 Therei! lies
the parado?+ i 6e destroy the i8tio! rom outside- redu8i!g it to reality- it continues to function in
reality- to e?ert its symboli8 ei8a8yEas i! the amous joke about the aoreme!tio!ed atheist Bio!ists
6ho do !ot believe that 1od e?ists- but !o!etheless believe he gave them the la!d o 9srael7 J3ut !o6
thus said the .ord that 8reated you- 2a8ob- a!d he that ormed you- 9srael+ Fear !ot- or 9 have redeemed
you- 9 have 8alled you by your !ameT you are mi!eK @9saiah ("+1A7 This- e?a8tly- is 6hat is reversed
@u!do!eA i! the Jsubje8tive destitutio!K at 6ork i! 8o!siste!t Dhristia!ity+ 9 have to 8o!ro!t the terror
o the big HtherIs !o!:e?iste!8e- 6hi8h mea!s that 9 mysel am deprived o my symboli8 ide!tityEas a
barred subje8t @bA- 9 am !o o!eIs a!d !ameless7 A!d the same applies to 1od himsel- 6hi8h is 6hy- i!
his u!published semi!ar rom 1%$(X#- .a8a! e?plai!s that Dhristia!ity is the JtrueK religio!+ i! it- 1od
e?:sists 6ith regard to all+ J=e is e?:siste!8e par e&cellence- that is to say- i! short- he is repressio! i!
perso!- he is eve! the perso! supposed i! repressio!7 A!d it is 6ith regard to this that Dhristia!ity is
true7K
(0
.a8a! reers here to J9 am 6hat 9 am-K the a!s6er the bur!i!g bush o! ,ou!t Si!ai gives
6he! ,oses asks it 6hat it isT he reads it as the desig!atio! o a poi!t at 6hi8h a sig!iier is la8ki!g- at
6hi8h there is a hole i! the symboli8 orderEa!d this should be take! i! a stro!g rele?ive se!se- !ot
o!ly as a! i!di8atio! that 1od is a deep reality beyo!d the rea8h o our la!guage- but that 1od is
nothing but this la8k i! the symboli8 order @big HtherA7 As su8h- the divi!e J9 am 6hat 9 amK
ee8tively preigures the Dartesia! cogito- the barred subje8t @bA- this pure eva!es8e!t poi!t o
e!u!8iatio! betrayed by a!y e!u!8iated7 This !othi!gE6hose sta!d:i! @or pla8e:holderA is ob1et aEis
the o8us o love- or- as Simo!e /eil put it+ J/here there is !othi!g- read that 9 love you7K
9t is 6ith regard to this 8ru8ial eature that 6e might also lo8ate the ultimate limitatio! o
,alabouIs !otio! o plasti8ity- 6hi8h she still 8o!8eives o as the u!ity o opposites- o a8tivity a!d
passivity- o gatheri!g a!d splitti!g7 ,alabou seems to be 8aught i! the !otio!al rame o polarityEo
@the bad i!i!ity oA t6o poles ea8h reverti!g i!to the other i!dei!itely- alo!g the li!es o the Freudia!
0ros a!d Tha!atos or the paga! !otio! o the u!iverse as origi!ati!g i! the 8o!sta!t struggle o
mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e- light a!d dark!ess- et87 So 6he! she 6rites- i! a! almost programmati8
passage- the ollo6i!g- 6hat is missi!g is the assertio! o the singular punctual moment of the full
identity of the opposites+

A! i!tegrati!g a!d i!ormi!g po6er- a! origi!ary sy!theti8 po6er- plasti8ity also reNuires a 8o!trary
po6er o disso8iatio! a!d rupture7 These t6o po6ers 8hara8teriUe pere8tly the gait o the =egelia!
te?t+ gatheri!g a!d splitti!g- both at 6ork i! the SystemIs o6! ormatio!7 They are t6o i!separable
po6ers allo6i!g a! idea o temporaliUi!g sy!thesis a!d a! idea o a8tual eruptio! to be arti8ulated
together7 ,y 6hole 6ork is i!vested here- as it tries to sho6 that the =egelia! !otio! o temporality is
lo8ated !o6here else but i! the e8o!omy ope!ed up by this arti8ulatio!7
(1
/he! a 8haoti8 period o gestatio! 8ulmi!ates i! the e?plosive eruptio! o a !e6 Form 6hi8h
reorga!iUes the e!tire ield- this very impositio! o the !e6 4e8essity>Hrder is i! itsel thoroughly
8o!ti!ge!t- a! a8t o abyssal>u!grou!ded subje8tive de8isio!7 This bri!gs us to the stri8t philosophi8al
!otio! o subje8tivity- si!8e 6hat 8hara8teriUes the subje8tEi! 8o!trast to substa!8eEis pre8isely su8h
a 8omplete 8oi!8ide!8e o opposites+ i! the 8ase o substa!8e- sy!thesis a!d splitti!g remai! e?ter!ally
opposed7 /hile Jsubsta!8eK already sta!ds or the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o opposites- or the medium
6ithi! 6hi8h parti8ular or8es reprodu8e themselves through their struggle- i! a Jsubsta!tialK
relatio!ship the t6o aspe8ts- sy!thesis a!d splitti!g- are !ot yet brought to sel:relati!g- so that splitti!g
as such 6ould be that 6hi8h bri!gs about a sy!thesis- so that imposi!g a !e6 4e8essity 6ould be the
highest gesture o 8o!ti!ge!8y7
T6o eatures 6hi8h 8a!!ot but appear opposed 8hara8teriUe the moder! subje8t as it 6as
8o!8eptualiUed by 1erma! 9dealism+ @1A the subje8t is the po6er o Jspo!ta!eousK @i7e7- auto!omous-
starti!g:i!:itsel- irredu8ible to a prior 8auseA synthetic a8tivity- the or8e o u!ii8atio!- o bri!gi!g
together the ma!iold o se!suous data 6e are bombarded 6ith i!to a u!iied represe!tatio! o obje8tsT
@2A the subje8t is the po6er o !egativity- o i!trodu8i!g a gap>8ut i!to the give!:immediate substa!tial
u!ityT it is the po6er o differentiating- o Jabstra8ti!g-K teari!g apart a!d treati!g as sel:sui8ie!t
6hat i! reality is part o a! orga!i8 u!ity7 9! order to truly u!dersta!d 1erma! 9dealism- it is 8ru8ial to
thi!k these t6o eatures !ot o!ly together @as t6o aspe8ts o o!e a!d the same a8tivityEi7e7- the subje8t
irst tears apart !atural u!ity the! bri!gs the membra dis1ecta together i!to a !e6 [his o6!
Jsubje8tiveK\ u!ityA- but as stricto sensu identical+ the sy!theti8 a8tivity itsel i!trodu8es a
gap>diere!8e i!to substa!tial realityT like6ise the diere!tiatio! itsel 8o!sists i! imposi!g a u!ity7
3ut ho6- e?a8tly- are 6e to u!dersta!d thisM The subje8tIs spo!ta!eity emerges as a disturbi!g
cut i!to substa!tial reality- si!8e the u!ity the tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis imposes o!to the !atural
ma!iold is pre8isely Jsy!theti8K @i! the sta!dard rather tha! *a!tia! se!se- i7e7- artii8ial- Ju!!aturalKA7
To evoke a 8ommo! politi8al e?perie!8e+ all great u!iiers begi! 6ith a divisive gestureEde 1aulle-
or e?ample- u!iied the Fre!8h by 6ay o i!trodu8i!g a! irre8o!8ilable diere!8e bet6ee! those 6ho
6a!ted pea8e 6ith 1erma!y a!d those 6ho did !ot7
The same goes or Dhristia!ity+ 6e are !ot first separated rom 1od a!d then mira8ulously
u!ited 6ith himT the poi!t o Dhristia!ity is that the very separatio! u!ites usEit is i! this separatio!
that 6e are Jlike 1od-K like Dhrist o! the Dross- su8h that our separatio! rom 1od is tra!sposed i!to
1od himsel7 So 6he! ,eister 08khart speaks o ho6- i! order to ope! o!esel up to the gra8e o 1od-
allo6i!g Dhrist to be bor! i! o!eIs soul- o!e has to JemptyK o!esel o everythi!g J8reaturely-K ho6 is
this "enosis related to the properly divi!e "enosis @or- or that matter- eve! to the "enosis o alie!atio!-
o the subje8t bei!g deprived o its substa!tial 8o!te!tAM
A!d like6ise or ethi8s+ a radi8al a8t o 1ood has to appear irst as Jevil-K as disturbi!g the
substa!tial stability o traditio!al mores7 *aka ormulated su88i!8tly the basi8 2udeo:Dhristia! te!et
8o!8er!i!g 1ood a!d 0vil+ J0vil k!o6s o the 1ood- but 1ood does !ot k!o6 o 0vil7 *!o6ledge o
o!esel is somethi!g o!ly 0vil has7K
(2
This is the proper 2udeo:Dhristia! a!s6er to the 1!osti8:
So8rati8 motto J*!o6 yourselRK The u!derlyi!g idea that 0vil 8omes rom eati!g the ruit o the tree
o k!o6ledge is radi8ally opposed to the Hrie!tal a!d Clato!i8 traditio! or 6hi8h 0vil is grou!ded i!
the la8k o the evildoerIs k!o6ledge @you 8a!!ot k!o6i!gly do evil thi!gsA- so that the motto J*!o6
yourselRK is simulta!eously both ethi8al a!d epistemologi8al7 @This is 6hy- i! some 1!osti8 readi!gs
o the Hld Testame!t- the s!ake that sedu8es Adam a!d 0ve i!to eati!g rom the tree o k!o6ledge is
a! age!t o the 1ood- 6orki!g agai!st the evil 1od:Dreator7A Goes this mea! that- i! order to be good-
6e should limit ourselves to ig!ora!8eM The diale8ti8al positio! is more radi8al+ there is a third 6ay-
that o the prima8y o 0vil over the 1ood7 9t is !e8essary to begi! by 8hoosi!g 0vilT or- more pre8isely-
every true 3egi!!i!g as a radi8al break 6ith the past is by dei!itio! 0vil- rom 6hi8h the 1ood 8a!
emerge o!ly ater6ards- i! the spa8e ope!ed up by that 0vil7
("
The i!amous series o bla8k books @o
8ommu!ism- 8apitalism- psy8hoa!alysis OA should be re8apitulated i! a bla8k book o! huma!ity
itselE3re8ht 6as right- huma!s are by !ature evil a!d 8orruptT o!e 8a!!ot 8ha!ge them- but o!ly limit
their opportu!ities to a8tualiUe their evil pote!tial7
This is 6hy- i! Dhristia!ity- opposed eatures are attributed to Dhrist+ he bri!gs pea8e- love-
et87- and he bri!gs a s6ord- tur!i!g so! agai!st ather- brother agai!st brother7 Agai!- this is one and
the same gesture- !ot a logi8 o Jirst divide i! order to u!ite7K A!d- agai!- it is 8ru8ial !ot to 8o!use
this Jide!tity o oppositesK 6ith the sta!dard paga! moti o a divi!ity havi!g t6o a8es- a lovi!g o!e
a!d a destru8tive o!eE6e are talki!g about o!e a!d the same a8e7 3ut this does !ot mea! that Jthe
diere!8e is o!ly i! us- !ot i! 1od- 6ho d6ells i! his blessed 3eyo!dK @as i! the old simile that sees
reality as like a pai!ti!g+ i 6e look at it rom too 8lose up- 6e see o!ly blurred stai!sT but vie6ed rom
a proper dista!8e 6e 8a! see the global harmo!yAEor- rather- it is like that- but !ot as e?ter!al to 1od:
i!:himsel+ this shit is i!here!t to 1od7 The diale8ti8 o appeara!8e holds here also+ appeari!g is !ot
e?ter!al to 1odT 1od also is o!ly as deep as he appearsT his depth has to appear as depth- a!d it is this
appeari!g that i!trodu8es a gap>8ut7 1od has to appear Jas su8hK i! the domai! o appeara!8e itsel-
teari!g it apartEit is nothing but this appeari!g7
This is 6hy those 6ho see a deep ai!ity bet6ee! =eidegger a!d 3uddhism miss the poi!t+
6he! =eidegger speaks about the Jappropriati!g eve!t @EreignisA-K he i!trodu8es a dime!sio! 6hi8h-
pre8isely- is missi!g i! 3uddhismEthat o the u!dame!tal histori8ity o 3ei!g7 Although 6hat is
erro!eously 8alled J3uddhist o!tologyK desubsta!tialiUes reality i!to a pure lo6 o si!gular eve!ts-
6hat it 8a!!ot thi!k is the Jeve!tualityK o the Void o 3ei!g itsel7 To put it a!other 6ay- the goal o
3uddhism is to e!able a perso! to a8hieve 0!lighte!me!t by Jtraversi!gK the illusio! o the Sel a!d
rejoi!i!g the VoidE6hat is u!thi!kable 6ithi! this spa8e is =eideggerIs !otio! o the huma! bei!g as
Da*Sein- as the Jbei!g:thereK o 3ei!g itsel- as the site o the eve!t:arrival o 3ei!g- so that it is 3ei!g
itsel that J!eedsK DaseinT 6ith the disappeara!8e o Dasein- there is also !o 3ei!g- !o pla8e 6here
3ei!g 8a!- pre8isely- take pla8e7 Da! o!e imagi!e a 3uddhist 8laimi!g that the Void @sunyataA itsel
!eeds huma!s as the site o its arrivalM H!e perhaps 8a!- but i! a 8o!ditio!al orm 6hi8h totally diers
rom =eideggerIs+ !amely i! the se!se that- o all se!tie!t bei!gs- o!ly huma!s are able to a8hieve
0!lighte!me!t a!d thus break the 8ir8le o sueri!g7
Cerhaps the 8learest i!di8atio! o the gap that separates Dhristia!ity rom 3uddhism is the
diere!8e i! their respe8tive triads7 That is to say- i! their respe8tive histories- ea8h divided itsel i!to
three mai! stra!ds7 9! the 8ase o Dhristia!ity- 6e get the triad o Hrthodo?y:Datholi8ism:
Crotesta!tism- 6hi8h !eatly its the logi8 o )!iversal:Carti8ular:9!dividual7 9! 3uddhism- by 8o!trast-
6e get a 8ase o 6hat i! =egel o88urs as a Jdo6!6ard sy!thesisK i! 6hi8h the third term- 6hose
u!8tio! is to mediate bet6ee! the irst t6o- does so i! a disappoi!ti!g:regressive 6ay @i! =egelIs
)henomenology- or e?ample- the 6hole diale8ti8 o observi!g Feaso! 8ulmi!ates i! the ridi8ulous
igure o phre!ologyA7 The mai! split 6ithi! 3uddhism is bet6ee! =i!aya!a @Jthe small 6heelKA a!d
,ahaya!a @Jthe great 6heelKA7 The irst is elitist a!d dema!di!g- tryi!g to mai!tai! a idelity to
3uddhaIs tea8hi!g- o8usi!g o! the i!dividualIs eort to over8ome the illusio! o the Sel a!d attai!
0!lighte!me!t7 The se8o!d- 6hi8h arose rom a split 6ith the irst- subtly shits the a88e!t o!to
8ompassio! or others+ its 8e!tral igure is the bodhisattva- the i!dividual 6ho- ater a8hievi!g
0!lighte!me!t- de8ides out o 8ompassio! to retur! to the 6orld o material illusio!s i! order to help
others to a8hieve 0!lighte!me!t- i! other 6ords- to 6ork to e!d the sueri!g o all se!tie!t bei!gs7 The
split here is irredu8ible+ 6orki!g or o!eIs o6! 0!lighte!me!t o!ly reasserts the 8e!trality o the Sel
i! the very a8t o strivi!g or its over8omi!g- 6hile the Jgreat 6heelK route out o this predi8ame!t just
displa8es the deadlo8k+ egotism is over8ome- but at the pri8e o u!iversal 0!lighte!me!t itsel tur!i!g
i!to a! obje8t o the i!strume!tal a8tivity o the Sel7
9t is easy to ide!tiy the i!8o!siste!8y o the ,ahaya!a move- 6hi8h 8a!!ot but have ateul
8o!seNue!8es+ 6he! the ,ahaya!a rei!terpretatio! o8uses o! the igure o the bodhisattvaEthe o!e
6ho- ater a8hievi!g 0!lighte!me!t a!d e!teri!g !irva!a- retur!s to the lie o illusory passio!s out o
8ompassio! or all those still 8aught i! the /heel o Dravi!gEa simple Nuestio! arises+ i- as radi8al
3uddhists emphati8ally poi!t out- e!teri!g !irva!a does !ot mea! that 6e leave this 6orld a!d e!ter
a!other- higher realityEi! other 6ords- i reality remai!s as it is a!d all that 8ha!ges is the i!dividualIs
attitude to6ards itE6hy- the!- i! order to help other sueri!g bei!gs- must 6e return to our ordi!ary
realityM /hy 8a! 6e !ot 8o!ti!ue to d6ell i! the state o 0!lighte!me!t i! 6hi8h- as 6e are taught- 6e
remai! livi!g i! this 6orldM There is thus !o !eed or ,ahaya!a- or the Jlarger 6heelK+ the small
@=i!aya!aA 6heel is itsel large e!ough to allo6 the 0!lighte!ed o!e to help others a8hieve
0!lighte!me!t7 9! other 6ords- is !ot the very 8o!8ept o the bodhisattva based o! a theologi8o:
metaphysi8al misu!dersta!di!g o the !ature o !irva!aM Goes it !ot- i! a! u!derha!d 6ay- tur!
!irva!a i!to a higher meta:physi8al realityM 4o 6o!der that ,ahaya!a 3uddhists 6ere the irst to give
a religious t6ist to 3uddhism- aba!do!i!g the 3uddhaIs origi!al ag!osti8 materialism- his e?pli8it
i!diere!8e to6ards the religious topi87
9t 6ould- ho6ever- be a! utterly !o!:=egelia! readi!g o 3uddhism i 6e 6ere to lo8ate Jthe
FallK i! its histori8al developme!t i! the huma!itaria! JbetrayalK o its origi!al message e!a8ted by the
,ahaya!a tur!+ i there is a! =egelia! a?iom- it is that the la6 has to be lo8ated at the very begi!!i!g
o the e!tire moveme!t7 /hat- the!- is already 6ro!g 6ith the =i!aya!a itselM 9ts la6 is pre8isely that
to 6hi8h the ,ahaya!a rea8ts- as its symmetri8al reversal+ i! strivi!g or my o6! 0!lighte!me!t- 9
regress i!to egotism i! my very attempt to erase the 8o!strai!ts o my Sel7
So- ho6 to bri!g these t6o orie!tatio!s- =i!aya!a a!d ,ahaya!a- togetherM /hat they both
e?8lude is a shatteri!g proto:8o!servative i!sight+ 6hat i truth does !ot alleviate our sueri!gM /hat i
truth hurtsM /hat i the o!ly pea8e attai!able 8omes rom immersi!g o!esel i! illusio!M 9s this
8o!8lusio! !ot the hidde! u!derlyi!g premise o the third major s8hool- the Vajraya!a- 6hi8h
predomi!ates i! Tibet a!d ,o!goliaM Vajraya!a is 8learly regressive- i!volvi!g the rei!s8riptio! o
traditio!al ritualisti8 a!d magi8al pra8ti8es i!to 3uddhism+ the oppositio! bet6ee! Sel a!d others is
here over8ome- but through its Jreii8atio!K i! ritualiUed pra8ti8es 6hi8h are i!diere!t to this
disti!8tio!7 9t is a! i!teresti!g a8t o histori8al diale8ti8 that 3uddhism- 6hi8h origi!ally dispe!sed
6ith all i!stitutio!al ritual a!d dogma to o8us solely o! the i!dividualIs 0!lighte!me!t a!d
over8omi!g o sueri!g- e!ded up 8li!gi!g to the most me8ha!i8al a!d irmly e!tre!8hed i!stitutio!al
hierar8hi8al rame6ork7
The poi!t here is !ot to make u! o the JsuperstitiousK eatures o Tibeta! 3uddhism- but to
be8ome a6are o ho6 this total e?ter!aliUatio! does the 1ob- Jdelivers the goodsK+ is !ot the use o the
prayer:6heelEa!d o ritual more ge!erallyEalso a mea!s to a8hieve Jmi!dless!ess-K to empty o!eIs
mi!d a!d repose i! pea8eM So- i! a 6ay- Tibeta! 3uddhism is 6holly aithul to the 3uddhaIs
pragmati8 orie!tatio! @ig!ore theologi8al !i8eties- o8us o! helpi!g peopleA+ sometimes- ollo6i!g
bli!d ritual a!d immersi!g o!esel i! theologi8o:dogmati8 hair:splitti!g is pragmati8ally the most
ee8tive 6ay to a8hieve the goal o i!!er pea8e7 The same holds or se?uality- 6here- sometimes- the
best 8ure or impote!8e is !ot just to Jrela? a!d let goK @the mome!t o!e ormulates this as a!
i!ju!8tio!- it has the opposite o the i!te!ded ee8tA- but to approa8h se? as a bureau8rati8 pro8edure-
establishi!g i! detail 6hat o!e is pla!!i!g to do7 This logi8 is also that o i!tellige!t utilitaria!s 6ho are
6ell a6are that moral a8ts 8a!!ot be dire8tly grou!ded i! utilitaria! 8o!sideratio!s @J9 6ill do this
be8ause- i! the lo!g ru!- it is the best strategy or bri!gi!g me the most happi!ess a!d pleasure OKAT
but the 8o!8lusio! they dra6 is that the *a!tia! JabsolutistK morality @Jdo your duty or the sake o
dutyKA 8a! a!d should be dee!ded pre8isely o! utilitaria! grou!dsEit is also the o!e that 6orks best i!
real lie7
/hat the! is the 3uddhist a!s6er to the =egelia! Nuestio!+ i 6e sueri!g huma!s !eed to be
a6ake!ed i!to 0!lighte!me!t- ho6 did 6e all asleep i! the irst pla8eM =o6 did the /heel o Gesire
emerge out o the eter!al VoidM There are three mai! a!s6ers 6hi8h stra!gely e8ho the triad o
=i!aya!a- ,ahaya!a- a!d Vajraya!a7 The irst- sta!dard a!s6er i!vokes the 3uddhaIs pra8ti8o:ethi8al
attitude+ i!stead o d6elli!g o! metaphysi8al e!igmas- begi! 6ith the a8t o sueri!g a!d the task o
helpi!g people out o it7 The !e?t a!s6er dra6s our atte!tio! to the obvious 8og!itive parado? implied
i! the Nuestio! itsel+ our very state o ig!ora!8e makes it impossible or us to a!s6er itEit 8a! o!ly be
a!s6ered @or eve! posed i! a proper 6ayA o!8e o!e rea8hes ull 0!lighte!me!t7 @/hy the! do 6e !ot
re8eive a! a!s6er rom those 6ho 8laim to have rea8hed 0!lighte!me!tMA Fi!ally- there are some
Tibeta! 3uddhist hi!ts at dark demo!i8 or8es 6hi8h disturb the bala!8e o !irva!a rom 6ithi!7
9t is here that the gap separati!g =egel rom the 3uddhist e?perie!8e is u!bridgeable+ or =egel
as a Dhristia! philosopher- the problem is !ot Jho6 to over8ome the split-K si!8e the split sta!ds or
subje8tivity- or the gap o !egativity- a!d this negativity is not a problem but a solution- it is already i!
itsel divine7 The divi!e is !ot the abyssal- all:e!8ompassi!g Substa!8e>)!ity behi!d the multitude o
appeara!8esT the divi!e is the !egative po6er teari!g apart the orga!i8 u!ity7 DhristIs JdeathK is !ot
over8ome- but elevated i!to SpiritIs !egativity7
((
9magi!e e?perie!8i!g o!esel aba!do!ed by 1od- let
to o!eIs o6! devi8es- 6ith !o big Hther se8retly 6at8hi!g over o!e a!d guara!teei!g a happy
out8omeEis this !ot a!other !ame or the abyss o reedomM This aba!do!me!t i! a state o reedom
8auses a!?ietyEas .a8a! rei!terpreted FreudE!ot be8ause the divi!e is ar rom us- but be8ause it is
all too 8lose- si!8e it is i! our reedom that 6e are Jdivi!eKEas .a8a! put it- a!?iety does !ot sig!al
the loss o the obje8t:8ause o desire- but its over:pro?imity7 9 reedom is 1odIs supreme git to us
@taki!g the 6ord JgitK i! all its u!dame!tal ambiguity+ Jprese!tK a!d Jpoiso!KEa poiso!ous a!d
da!gerous prese!t- the!A- the! bei!g aba!do!ed by 1od is the most 1od 8a! give us7 Dru8ial or
Dhristia!ity- i! 8o!trast to all other religio!s- is this imma!e!t reversal o aba!do!me!t i!to
pro?imityEor- to put it i! terms o Jbad !e6s>good !e6sK medi8al jokes+ the bad !e6s is that 6e are
aba!do!ed by 1odT the good !e6s is that 6e are aba!do!ed by 1od a!d let 6ith our reedom7
/hat to make- the!- o the sta!dard reproa8h that =egel tra!sposes Dhristia!ityEa religio! o
love a!d passio!- o total subje8tive e!gageme!tEi!to a !arrative represe!tatio! o Jabstra8tK
spe8ulative truthM Although Dhristia!ity is the JtrueK religio!- i! it the truth still appears i! the medium
o represe!tatio! @a!d !ot i! its o6! 8o!8eptual mediumA- so that spe8ulative philosophy is the truth
@the true:adeNuate ormA o the Dhristia! truth @8o!te!tAT the passio! a!d pai! o subje8tive e!gageme!t
are thus dismissed as a se8o!dary !arrative husk to be dis8arded i 6e 6a!t to rea8h the truth i! its o6!
8o!8eptual eleme!t7 /hat this 8ritiNue misses is that the 8asti!g o o the patheti8:!arrative e?iste!tial
e?perie!8eEthe tra!substa!tiatio! o the subje8t rom a J8o!8reteK sel immersed i! its lie 6orld i!to
the subje8t o pure thoughtEis itself a process of %abstraction' which has to be accomplished in the
individuals %concrete' e&perience! and which as such involves the supreme pain of renunciation7
For 3adiou- love is a Js8e!e o the T6oK as su8h- grou!ded o!ly i! itsel- its o6! J6ork o
love-K la8ki!g a!y Third 6hi8h 6ould provide a proper support or 1rou!d+ 6he! 9 am i! love 6ith
someo!e- my love is !either H!e !or Three @9 do !ot orm 6ith my beloved a harmo!ious H!e i!
usio!- !or is our relatio!ship grou!ded i! a Third- a medium 6hi8h 6ould provide predetermi!ed
8oordi!ates or our love a!d thus guara!tee its harmo!yA7
(#
This is 6hat makes love so ragile+ it is- as
3adiou puts it- a pro8ess o pure prese!tatio!- a radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter i!8essa!tly i! sear8h o
some orm o re:prese!tatio! i! the big Hther that 6ould guara!tee its 8o!siste!8y7 Therei! resides the
u!8tio! o marriage+ through its ritual- the ra6 real o a love passio! is registered i!- a!d thus
re8og!iUed by- the big Hther o the publi8 order- a!d- ultimately @i! a 8hur8h marriageA- by 1od- the
ultimate big Hther itsel7 This is 6hy- as 3adiou perspi8uously !otes- love is i! its very !otio! atheist-
godless+ all the talk about 1odIs love or us or our love or 1od should !ot de8eive us7 =o6- the!- are
6e to e?plai! the 8e!tral role o love @o 1odIs love or huma!ityA i! Dhristia!ityM Cre8isely by the a8t
that Dhristia!ity is- at its deepest 8ore- already atheisti8- a parado?i8ally atheisti8 religio!7 /he! Dhrist
says to his ollo6ers de8eived ater his death o! the Dross that- 6he!ever there is love bet6ee! them-
he 6ill be there- alive amo!g them- this should !ot be read as a guara!tee that Dhrist:.ove is a Third
term i! the relatio!ship o love- its guara!tee a!d ou!datio!- but- o! the 8o!trary- as a!other 6ay o
pro8laimi!g the death o 1od+ there is !o big Hther 6hi8h guara!tees our ateT all 6e have is the sel:
grou!ded abyss o our love7
/hat this mea!s is also that =egel really is the ultimate Dhristia! philosopher+ !o 6o!der he
ote! uses the term JloveK to desig!ate the play o the diale8ti8al mediatio! o opposites7 /hat makes
him a Dhristia! philosopher a!d a philosopher o love is the a8t that- 8o!trary to the 8ommo!
misu!dersta!di!g- i! the are!a o diale8ti8al struggle there is !o Third 6hi8h u!ites a!d re8o!8iles the
t6o struggli!g opposites7
THE ATHEIST AGER

9! .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- J!o!:AllK desig!ates the emi!i!e positio!- a ield 6hi8h is
!ot totaliUed be8ause it la8ks the e?8eptio!- the ,aster:Sig!iier7 Applied to Dhristia!ity- this mea!s
that the =oly Spirit is feminine- a 8ommu!ity not based o! a leader7 The shit to the emi!i!e o88urs
already i! Dhrist+ Dhrist is !ot a male igureT as ma!y subtle readers have !oted- his stra!gely passive
sta!8e is that o emi!iUatio!- !ot o male i!terve!tio!7 DhristIs impassivity thus poi!ts to6ards the
emi!iUatio! o 1od+ his sa8rii8e ollo6s the same logi8 as that o the heroi!e o =e!ry 2amesIs
)ortrait of a .ady- or o Syg!e de Doco!tai!e i! DlaudelIs .$tage7 Dhrist is !ot a ,aster igure- but
the ob1et a- o88upyi!g the positio! o the a!alyst+ a! embarrassi!g e?8ess- a!s6eri!g Nuestio!s 6ith
jokes a!d riddles that o!ly 8o!ou!d his liste!ers urther- already a8ti!g as his o6! blasphemy7
('

Fe8all the stra!ge parable o the tale!ts rom the 1ospel o ,atthe6+

For it 6ill be as 6he! a ma! goi!g o! a jour!ey 8alled his serva!ts a!d e!trusted to them his propertyT
to o!e he gave ive tale!ts- to a!other t6o- to a!other o!e- to ea8h a88ordi!g to his ability7 The! he
6e!t a6ay7 =e 6ho had re8eived the ive tale!ts 6e!t at o!8e a!d traded 6ith themT a!d he made ive
tale!ts more7 So also- he 6ho had the t6o tale!ts made t6o tale!ts more7 3ut he 6ho had re8eived the
o!e tale!t 6e!t a!d dug i! the grou!d a!d hid his masterIs mo!ey7 4o6 ater a lo!g time the master o
those serva!ts 8ame a!d settled a88ou!ts 6ith them7 A!d he 6ho had re8eived the ive tale!ts 8ame
or6ard- bri!gi!g ive tale!ts more- sayi!g- J,aster- you delivered to me ive tale!tsT here 9 have made
ive tale!ts more7K =is master said to him- J/ell do!e- good a!d aithul serva!tT you have bee!
aithul over a little- 9 6ill set you over mu8hT e!ter i!to the joy o your master7K A!d he also 6ho had
the t6o tale!ts 8ame or6ard- sayi!g- J,aster- you delivered to me t6o tale!tsT here 9 have made t6o
tale!ts more7K =is master said to him- J/ell do!e- good a!d aithul serva!tT you have bee! aithul
over a little- 9 6ill set you over mu8hT e!ter i!to the joy o your master7K=e also 6ho had re8eived the
o!e tale!t 8ame or6ard- sayi!g- J,aster- 9 k!e6 you to be a hard ma!- reapi!g 6here you did !ot so6-
a!d gatheri!g 6here you did !ot 6i!!o6T so 9 6as araid- a!d 9 6e!t a!d hid your tale!t i! the grou!d7
=ere you have 6hat is yours7K 3ut his master a!s6ered him- J5ou 6i8ked a!d slothul serva!tR 5ou
k!e6 that 9 reap 6here 9 have !ot so6ed- a!d gather 6here 9 have !ot 6i!!o6edM The! you ought to
have i!vested my mo!ey 6ith the ba!kers- a!d at my 8omi!g 9 should have re8eived 6hat 6as my o6!
6ith i!terest7 So take the tale!t rom him- a!d give it to him 6ho has the te! tale!ts7 For to every o!e
6ho has 6ill more be give!- a!d he 6ill have a! abu!da!8eT but rom him 6ho has !ot- eve! 6hat he
has 6ill be take! a6ay7 A!d 8ast the 6orthless serva!t i!to the outer dark!essT there me! 6ill 6eep a!d
g!ash their teeth7K @,atthe6 2#+1(X"0A
9t is !ot hard to imagi!e ho6 mu8h a! Ameri8a! busi!ess:orie!ted 3aptist pastor 6ould love
this parable+ does it !ot 8o!irm the parallel bet6ee! religio! a!d busi!ess- promoti!g i! both the
dy!ami8 8apitalist spirit o ve!ture- 8ir8ulatio!- risk- a!d e?pa!sio!M Crea8hers 6ho e?pou!d the 6ord
o 1od must a8t like busi!essme! e?pa!di!g their busi!essR =o6ever- is it !ot also possible to read the
parable i! the opposite 6ay- espe8ially i 6e bear i! mi!d the alter!ative versio! i! .uke 1%+11X2$+
here the master is a !oblema! 6ho has to leave or Ja dista!t 8ou!try to re8eive or himsel a
ki!gdom-K although he is !ot 6a!ted thereT the three me! are !ot serva!ts but @te!A slavesT the
!oblema!Is atte!da!ts protest at his de8isio! to give the third ma!Is mi!as to the o!e 6ho already has
te! @JVSir- he has te! mi!as alreadyRIKAT a!d the parable 8o!8ludes 6ith a 8ruel order+ JV3ut as or these
e!emies o mi!e 6ho did !ot 6a!t me to be their ki!g- bri!g them here a!d slaughter them i! ro!t o
meRIKEhardly a gesture 6orthy o a good ma!7 9s it !ot mu8h more appropriate to do as /illiam
=erUog proposed- a!d 8elebrate the third serva!t as a 6histle:blo6er de!ou!8i!g the e?ploitatio! o the
poorM
($
9! other 6ords- 6hat i 6e read the third ma!Is de8isio! to hide the tale!t- 6ithdra6i!g it rom
8ommer8ial 8ir8ulatio!- as a gesture o subtraction rom the ield o @e8o!omi8A po6er- as a reusal to
parti8ipate i! itM The masterIs urious rea8tio! is thus ully justiied+ 6hat this serva!t did is mu8h
6orse tha! steali!g his mo!ey or hidi!g the proitEhad he do!e that- the serva!t 6ould still have
parti8ipated i! the busi!ess spirit o Jreapi!g 6here 9 have !ot so6ed7K 3ut the serva!t 6e!t mu8h
urther+ he reje8ted the e!tire JspiritK o proit a!d e?ploitatio! a!d thus atta8ked the very ou!datio!s
o the masterIs e?iste!8eEa!d 6as this !ot 6hy Dhristia!ity had su8h problems 8omi!g to terms 6ith
8olle8ti!g i!terest- 6hi8h mea!s pre8isely to Jreap 6here 9 have !ot so6edKM The parable is dei!itely
a! e?er8ise i! 6eird humor- so 2oh! Daputo is right to reer to *ierkegaardIs 2oha!!es Dlima8us 6ho
says that humor serves as the i!8og!ito o the religiousEthe problem resides i! the pre8ise
determi!atio! o this humor- a humor i!e?tri8ably mi?ed 6ith horror7
(&
H!e 8a! 8o!8eive o the e!tire history o Dhristia!ity as a rea8tio! !ot agai!st pre8edi!g
religio!@sA- but agai!st its own e&cessive9subversive core- that o the true dime!sio! o the =oly 1host
@the egalitaria! ema!8ipatory 8olle8tive 6hi8h 8a!8els a!y orga!i8:hierar8hi8al so8ial li!kA+ all the
great theologia!s embra8ed the task o maki!g Dhristia!ity 8ompatible 6ith a hierar8hi8al so8ial body7
Sai!t Augusti!e took the irst major step i! this dire8tio! by 6ay o Ji!ve!ti!g psy8hologi8al
i!teriority-K thereby 6ithdra6i!g rom a literal a!d so8ially da!gerous i!terpretatio! o DhristIs radi8al
sayi!gs @to ollo6 him o!e must hate o!eIs mother a!d atherT the ri8h 6ill !ever e!ter paradiseT et87A7
The 6hole art o Thomas ANui!as 8ulmi!ates i! a orm o sophistry desig!ed to re8o!8ile the literal
mea!i!g o the 3ible 6ith the dema!ds o a hierar8hi8al so8iety7 Fe8all- or e?ample- his demo!stratio!
that although Dhrist prea8hes the re!u!8iatio! o earthly 6ealth @i7e7- the si!ul 8hara8ter o private
propertyA- this holds o!ly or people 6ho are themselves holy @priests- et87AT i ordi!ary people 6ere to
6a!t to abolish private property- they 6ould si! agai!st 1od7 This- ho6ever- i! !o 6ay leads to a
Jspurious i!i!ityK o the gap bet6ee! really e?isti!g Dhristia!ity a!d the true Dhristia!ity- so that
every really e?isti!g orm o the Dhur8h !e8essarily misses its !otio!7 The solutio! here is the properly
=egelia! o!e+ the true 9dea o the Dhristia! 8olle8tive was realiUed- but outside o the Dhur8h as a!
i!stitutio!E6hi8h- ho6ever- does !ot mea! that it survived i! i!timate- authe!ti8 religious e?perie!8es
6hi8h had !o !eed or the i!stitutio!al rameT rather- it survived i! other i!stitutio!s- rom
revolutio!ary politi8al parties to psy8hoa!alyti8 so8ieties O 9t is thus o!ly i! post:religious JatheistK
radi8al:ema!8ipatory 8olle8tives that 6e i!d the proper a8tualiUatio! o the 9dea o the Dhristia!
8olle8tiveEthe !e8essary 8o!seNue!8e o the Jatheisti8K !ature o Dhristia!ity itsel7
The sta!dard reproa8h addressed to this proje8t o JDhristia! materialismK is that it amou!ts to
a JbarredK belie+ !ot bei!g 8ourageous e!ough to make the Jleap o aith-K 9 retai! the Dhristia! orm
o religious e!gageme!t 6ithout its 8o!te!t7 ,y reply is that this Jemptyi!g the orm o its 8o!te!tK
already takes pla8e i! Dhristia!ity itsel- at its very 8oreEthe !ame o this emptyi!g is "enosis+ 1od
dies a!d resurre8ts itsel as the =oly 1host- as the form o 8olle8tive belie7 9t is a etishisti8 mistake to
sear8h or the material support o this orm @the resurre8ted DhristAEthe =oly 1host is the very
8olle8tive o believers- 6hat they are sear8hi!g or outside o the 8olle8tive is already there i! the guise
o the love that bi!ds them7 Adria! 2oh!sto! re8e!tly ormulated a perti!e!t 8riti8al poi!t apropos o
my proje8t o JDhristia! atheismK+

5ou a!d 3adiou 8learly- ope!ly- a!d u!ambiguously are thoroughgoi!g atheists- thi!kers i!sisti!g o!
the !o!:e?iste!8e o a!y big Hther- H!e:All- a!d so o!7 ,oreover- both o you labor to reveal- i! a
!o!:redu8tive ma!!er- the material basis>ge!esis o JspiritualK phe!ome!a7 A!d- o 8ourse- you
yoursel veheme!tly i!sist o! readi!g Dhristia!ity as the Jreligio! o atheism7K 3ut- rom othersI te?ts
9Ive read a!d 8o!versatio!s 9Ive had these past e6 years- some people register you a!d 3adiou as
religious i! the same ashio! that audie!8es register Ce!! a!d Teller as magi8al+ J9 k!o6 ull 6ell that
3adiou a!d iek are atheists- but !o!etheless OKT J9 k!o6 that Dhristia!ity is- as the religio! o
atheism- a! imma!e!t sel:!egatio! o religio!- but !o!etheless O @9 8o!ti!ue to relate to it as religio!-
i! a religious mode replete 6ith all its established rituals- pra8ti8es- et87A7K 9 guess o!e o the thi!gs 9Im
sayi!g is that the ta8ti8 o employi!g Dhristia!ity as a tempti!g Troja! horse 8arryi!g 6ithi! it the
e?plosive pote!tials o a! atheisti8:materialist radi8al politi8s 8arries da!gerous risks arisi!g rom this
1e sais bien! mais <uand mJme rea8tio! evide!t i! those 6ho lat8h o!to you a!d 3adiou as li8e!si!g- as
displayi!g strai!s o phe!ome!ology a!d its oshoots- a versio! o Jpost:se8ularK Do!ti!e!tal
philosophy7
(%
9s it true- the!- that 6hat 9 oer is a orm o belie deprived o its stru8ture- 6hi8h ee8tively
amou!ts to a disavo6ed belieM ,y 8ou!ter:argume!t here is double7 First- 9 8o!8eive my positio! !ot
as bei!g some6here i! bet6ee! atheism a!d religious belie- but as the only true radi8al atheism- that
is- a! atheism 6hi8h dra6s all the 8o!seNue!8es rom the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther7 Therei! resides
the lesso! o Dhristia!ity+ as 6e have see!- it is !ot o!ly that 6e do !ot believe i! 1od- but that 1od
himsel does !ot believe i! himsel- so that he also 8a!!ot survive as the !o!:substa!tial symboli8
order- the virtual big Hther 6ho 8o!ti!ues to believe i! our stead- o! our behal7 Se8o!d- o!ly a belie
6hi8h survives su8h a disappeara!8e o the big Hther is belie at its most radi8al- a 6ager more 8raUy
tha! Cas8alIs+ Cas8alIs 6ager remai!s epistemologi8al- 8o!8er!i!g o!ly our attitude to6ards 1od- that
is- 6e have to assume that 1od e?ists- the 6ager does !ot 8o!8er! 1od himselT or radi8al atheism- by
8o!trast- the 6ager is o!tologi8alEthe atheist subje8t e!gages itsel i! a @politi8al- artisti8- et87A proje8t-
JbelievesK i! it- 6ithout a!y guara!tee7 ,y thesis is thus double+ !ot o!ly is ,hristianity @at its 8ore- i
disavo6ed by its i!stitutio!al pra8ti8eA the only truly consistent atheism- it is also that atheists are the
only true believers7
.et us or a mome!t retur! to Cas8al7 The irst thi!g o !ote is his reje8tio! o all attempts to
demo!strate the e?iste!8e o 1od+ Cas8al 8o!8edes that J6e do !ot k!o6 i =e is-K a!d so seeks i!stead
to provide prude!tial reaso!s or believi!g i! him+ 6e should 6ager that 1od e?ists be8ause it is the
best bet+

J1od is- or =e is !ot7K 3ut to 6hi8h side shall 6e i!8li!eM Feaso! 8a! de8ide !othi!g here7 There is a!
i!i!ite 8haos 6hi8h separates us7 A game is bei!g played at the e?tremity o this i!i!ite dista!8e
6here heads or tails 6ill tur! up O /hi8h 6ill you 8hoose the!M .et us see7 Si!8e you must 8hoose- let
us see 6hi8h i!terests you least7 5ou have t6o thi!gs to lose- the true a!d the goodT a!d t6o thi!gs to
stake- your reaso! a!d your 6ill- your k!o6ledge a!d your happi!essT a!d your !ature has t6o thi!gs
to shu!- error a!d misery7 5our reaso! is !o more sho8ked i! 8hoosi!g o!e rather tha! the other- si!8e
you must o !e8essity 8hoose O 3ut your happi!essM .et us 6eigh the gai! a!d the loss i! 6ageri!g
that 1od e?ists7
#0
Cas8al appears to be a6are o the immediate obje8tio! to this argume!t- or he imagi!es a!
oppo!e!t replyi!g+ JThat is very i!e7 5es- 9 must 6agerT but 9 may perhaps 6ager too mu8h7K 9! short-
6he! o!e 6agers o! 1od- o!e does put somethi!g at stake- 6hi8h presumably o!e loses i 1od does
!ot e?ist+ truth- the respe8t or o!eIs 6orldly lie O @9!deed- it is stra!ge ho6 utilitaria!:pragmatist
Cas8alIs reaso!i!g is7A A series o other obje8tio!s ollo6+

@1A Cas8al assumes that the same matri? o de8isio! a!d re6ard applies to everybodyEbut 6hat i the
re6ards are diere!t or diere!t peopleM Cerhaps- or e?ample- there is a predesti!ed i!i!ite re6ard
or the Dhose!- 6hatever they do- a!d i!ite utility or the restM
@2A The matri? should have more ro6s+ perhaps there is more tha! o!e 6ay to 6ager or 1od- a!d the
re6ards that 1od besto6s vary a88ordi!gly7 For i!sta!8e- 1od might !ot re6ard i!i!itely those 6ho
strive to believe i! him o!ly or the utilitaria!:pragmati8 reaso!s that Cas8al gives7 H!e 8ould also
imagi!e disti!guishi!g belie based o! aith rom belie based o! evide!tial reaso!s- a!d posit diere!t
re6ards i! ea8h 8ase7
@"A The! there is the obvious ma!y:1ods obje8tio!+ Cas8al had i! mi!d the Datholi8 1od- but other
theisti8 hypotheses are also live optio!s- i7e7- the J@Datholi8A 1od does !ot e?istK 8olum! really
subdivides i!to various other theisti8 hypotheses @but the Crotesta!t 1od e?ists- Allah e?ists- there is !o
1od OA7 The obverse o this obje8tio! is the 8laim that Cas8alIs argume!t proves too mu8h+ its logi8al
8o!8lusio! is that ratio!ality reNuires believi!g i! various i!8ompatible theisti8 hypotheses7
@(A Fi!ally- o!e 8a! argue that morality reNuires you to 6ager agai!st 1od+ 6ageri!g or 1od be8ause
o the promise o uture proit violates the *a!tia! dei!itio! o the moral a8t as a! a8t a88omplished
or !o Jpathologi8alK reaso!s7 Voltaire- argui!g alo!g these li!es- suggested that Cas8alIs 8al8ulatio!s-
a!d his appeal to sel:i!terest- 6ere u!6orthy o the gravity o the subje8t7
)!derlyi!g all this is the basi8 parado? o belie as a matter o de8isio!+ as i to believe
somethi!g or !ot 6ere a matter o de8isio! a!d !ot o i!sight7 So- i 6e read Cas8alIs 6ager together
6ith his !o less 6ell:k!o6! topi8 o 8ustoms- o!e 8a! argue that the 8ore o his argume!t does !ot
dire8tly 8o!8er! belie but rather a8ti!g+ o!e 8a!!ot de8ide to believe- o!e 8a! o!ly de8ide to a8t as if
o!e believes- i! the hope that belie 6ill arise by itselT perhaps this trust that i you a8t as i you
believe- belie 6ill arise- is itsel the 6ager+

5ou 6ould like to attai! aith- a!d do !ot k!o6 the 6ayT you 6ould like to 8ure yoursel o u!belie-
a!d ask the remedy or it7 .ear! o those 6ho have bee! bou!d like you- a!d 6ho !o6 stake all their
possessio!s7 These are people 6ho k!o6 the 6ay 6hi8h you 6ould ollo6- a!d 6ho are 8ured o a! ill
o 6hi8h you 6ould be 8ured7 Follo6 the 6ay by 6hi8h they bega!T by a8ti!g as i they believed-
taki!g the holy 6ater- havi!g masses said- et87
#1
Cerhaps the o!ly 6ay out o these impasses is 6hat- i! his u!published Jse8retK 6riti!gs- Ge!is
Giderot elaborated u!der the title o the JmaterialistIs 8redo7K 9! J0!tretie! dIu! Chilosophe ave8 la
marL8hale de fff-K he 8o!8luded+ J+pr>s tout! le plus court est de se conduire comme si le vieillard
e&istait 4 mJme <uand on ny croit pasFK @Ater all- the most straightor6ard 6ay is to behave as i the
old guy e?ists O eve! i o!e does!It believe it7A This may appear to amou!t to the same as Cas8alIs
6ager 6ith regard to rituals+ eve! i you do !ot believe i! them- a8t as i you believe7 =o6ever-
GiderotIs poi!t is e?a8tly the opposite o!e+ the o!ly 6ay to be truly moral is to a8t morally 6ithout
regard to 1odIs e?iste!8e7 9! other 6ords- Giderot dire8tly i!verts Cas8alIs 6ager @the advi8e to pla8e
your bet o! the e?iste!8e o 1odA+ JEn un mot <ue la plupart ont tout K perdre et rien K gagner K nier
un Dieu rAnumArateur et vengeurFK @9! a 6ord- it is that the majority o those 6ho de!y a remu!erati!g
a!d reve!gi!g 1od have all to lose a!d !othi!g to gai!7A
#2
9! his de!ial o the remu!erative a!d
ve!geul 1od- the atheist either loses everythi!g @i he is 6ro!g- he 6ill be dam!ed oreverA or gai!s
!othi!g @i he is right- there is !o 1od- so !othi!g happe!sA7 9t is this attitude 6hi8h e?presses true
8o!ide!8e i! o!eIs belie a!d makes o!e do good deeds 6ithout regard to divi!e re6ard or Jas i the
old guy e?istsKEthis old guy is- o 8ourse- 1od:the:Father- 6hi8h re8alls .a8a!Is ormula le p>re ou
pireEather or 6orse7 9t is at this level that o!e should oppose Cas8al a!d Giderot+ 6hile Cas8al bets o!
1od:the:Father- Giderot e!joi!s us to parier sur le pire- to put o!eIs 6ager o! the 6orse7 9! true ethi8s-
o!e a8ts rom the positio! o the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther- assumi!g the abyss o the a8t deprived o
a!y guara!tee or support7
Authe!ti8 belie is to be opposed to the relia!8e o! @or reere!8e toA a@!otherA subje8t supposed
to believe+ i! a! authe!ti8 a8t o belie- 9 mysel ully assume my belie a!d thus have !o !eed or a!y
igure o the Hther to guara!tee that belieT to paraphrase .a8a!- a! authe!ti8 belie ne sauthorise <ue
de lui*mJme7 9! this pre8ise se!se- authe!ti8 belie !ot o!ly does !ot presuppose a!y big Hther @is !ot a
belie i! a big HtherA- but- o! the 8o!trary- presupposes the destitutio! o the big Hther- the ull
a88epta!8e o its i!e?iste!8e7
This is also 6hy a true atheist is at the opposite e!d rom those 6ho 6a!t to save religio!Is
spiritual truth rom its Je?ter!alK dogmati8:i!stitutio!al 8o!te?t7 A proou!dly religious rie!d o!8e
8omme!ted o! the subtitle o a book o mi!e- Jthe perverse 8ore o Dhristia!ityK+ J9 ully agree 6ith
you thereR 9 believe i! 1od- but 9 i!d repulsive a!d deeply disturbi!g all the t6ists 8elebrati!g sa8rii8e
a!d humiliatio!- redemptio! through sueri!g- 1od orga!iUi!g his o6! so!Is killi!g by me!7 Da!It 6e
have Dhristia!ity 6ithout this perverse 8oreMK 9 8ould !ot bri!g mysel to a!s6er him+ J3ut that is
pre8isely the poi!t o my book+ 6hat 9 6a!t is all those perverse t6ists o redemptio! through
sueri!g- the death o 1od- et87- but 6ithout 1odRK
Thus- as 6e have said- 1od has to die t6i8e- irst as real- the! as symboli8T irst i! 2udaism- the!
i! Dhristia!ity7 9! 2udaism- the 1od o the real survives as /ord- as the virtual:dead Hther 6hose
spe8ter is kept alive by the ritual perorma!8e o his subje8tsT i! Dhristia!ity- this virtual Hther itsel
dies7 9! 2udaism- the 1od per8eived dire8tly as real diesT i! Dhristia!ity- the 1od 6ho is u!8o!s8ious
dies7 The passage rom paga!ism to 2udaism is o!e o sublimatio! @the dead god survives as the
symboli8 HtherAT the death o Dhrist is !ot sublimatio!- i! other 6ords it is !ot the death o the real
1od 6ho is resurre8ted i! the =oly 1host as the symboli8 Hther- like 2ulius Daesar 6ho retur!s as
sublimated i! the symboli8 title JDaesar7K
9! stri8t parallel 6ith this double move rom paga!ism to 2udaism a!d rom 2udaism to
Dhristia!ity is the move rom traditio!al authoritaria! po6er to demo8ra8y a!d rom demo8ra8y to
revolutio!ary po6er+ it is o!ly i! revolutio!ary po6er that the big Hther really dies7 9! demo8ra8y- the
pla8e o po6er is empty- but the ele8toral pro8edure u!8tio!s as a ki!d o ersat2:Hther providi!g the
legitima8y or po6er7 That is to say- demo8ra8yEi! the 6ay this term is used todayE8o!8er!s above
all ormal legality+ its mi!imal reNuireme!t is the u!8o!ditio!al adhere!8e to a 8ertai! set o ormal
rules 6hi8h guara!tee that a!tago!isms are ully absorbed i!to the ago!isti8 game7 JGemo8ra8yK
mea!s that- 6hatever ele8toral ma!ipulatio! takes pla8e- every politi8al age!t 6ill u!8o!ditio!ally
respe8t the results7 9! this se!se- the )S preside!tial ele8tio!s o 2000 6ere ee8tively Jdemo8rati8K+ i!
spite o the obvious ele8toral dupli8ity a!d the pate!t mea!i!gless!ess o the a8t that a 8ouple o
hu!dred voters i! Florida de8ided 6ho 6ould be the preside!t- the Gemo8rati8 8a!didate a88epted
deeat7 9! the 6eeks o u!8ertai!ty ater the ele8tio!s- 3ill Dli!to! made a! appropriately a8erbi8
8omme!t+ JThe Ameri8a! people have spoke!T 6e just do!It k!o6 6hat they said7K This 8omme!t
should be take! more seriously tha! Dli!to! himsel i!te!ded+ eve! !o6- 6e do !ot k!o6 6hat they
saidEmaybe be8ause there 6as !o substa!tial JmessageK behi!d the result at all7 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller
has elaborated o! the idea that demo8ra8y implies the JbarredK big HtherT
#"
ho6ever- the Florida
e?ample demo!strates that there !evertheless is a Jbig HtherK 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues to e?ist i! demo8ra8y+
the pro8edural Jbig HtherK o ele8toral rules 6hi8h must be obeyed 6hatever the resultEa!d this Jbig
Hther-K this u!8o!ditio!al relia!8e o! rules- is 6hat a more radi8al politi8s threate!s to suspe!d7
This *a!tia! limitatio! o demo8ra8y is stri8tly homologous to the limitatio! o *oji!
*arata!iIs *a!tia! Jtra!s8e!de!talK solutio! to the a!ti!omy o mo!ey @6e !eed a! d 6hi8h 6ill be
mo!ey a!d 6ill !ot be mo!eyA7 /he! *arata!i reapplies this solutio! to po6er @6e !eed some
8e!traliUed po6er- but !ot etishiUed i!to a substa!8e 6hi8h is Ji! itselK Co6erAEa!d 6he! he
e?pli8itly evokes the stru8tural homology 6ith Gu8hamp @the obje8t be8omes a 6ork o art !ot be8ause
o its i!here!t properties- but simply by o88upyi!g a 8ertai! pla8e i! the stru8tureAEdoes this !ot all
e?a8tly it .eortIs theoriUatio! o demo8ra8y as a politi8al order i! 6hi8h the pla8e o po6er is
origi!ally empty a!d is o!ly temporarily o88upied by the ele8ted represe!tativesM Alo!g these li!es-
eve! *arata!iIs appare!tly e88e!tri8 suggestio! o 8ombi!i!g ele8tio!s 6ith sele8tio! by lot is more
traditio!al tha! it may appear @he himsel me!tio!s A!8ie!t 1ree8eAEparado?i8ally- it ulills the same
u!8tio! as does =egelIs theory o mo!ar8hy7
*arata!i here takes a heroi8 risk i! proposi!g a 8raUy:sou!di!g dei!itio! o the diere!8e
bet6ee! the di8tatorship o the bourgeoisie a!d the di8tatorship o the proletariat+ J9 u!iversal surage
by se8ret ballot- !amely- parliame!tary demo8ra8y- is the di8tatorship o the bourgeoisie- the
i!trodu8tio! o lottery should be deemed the di8tatorship o the proletariat7K 9! this 6ay- Jthe center
e&ists and does not e&ist at the same timeK
#(
+ it e?ists as a! empty pla8e- a tra!s8e!de!tal d- a!d it
does !ot e?ist as a substa!tial positive e!tity7 3ut is this really e!ough to u!dermi!e the Jetishism o
po6erKM /he! a! ordi!ary i!dividual is allo6ed temporarily to o88upy the pla8e o po6er- the
8harisma o po6er is besto6ed o! him- ollo6i!g the usual logi8 o etishisti8 disavo6al+ J9 k!o6 very
6ell that this is a! ordi!ary perso! like me- but nonetheless O @6hile i! po6er- he be8omes the
i!strume!t o a tra!s8e!de!t or8e- po6er speaks a!d a8ts through himARK Goes this !ot it the ge!eral
matri? o *a!tIs solutio!s- 6here metaphysi8al propositio!s @1od- immortality- et87A are asserted-
Ju!der erasure-K as postulatesM Do!seNue!tly- 6ould !ot the true task be pre8isely to get rid o the very
mystiNue o the place o po6erM This is 6hy- i! his 6riti!gs o 1%1$- .e!i! reserves his most a8erbi8
iro!y or those 6ho e!gage i! a! e!dless sear8h or some ki!d o Jguara!teeK or the revolutio!7 This
guara!tee takes t6o mai! orms- i! terms o either the reiied !otio! o so8ial 4e8essity @the revolutio!
must !ot be risked too earlyT o!e has to 6ait or the right mome!t- 6he! the situatio! is JmatureK 6ith
regard to the la6s o histori8al developme!tA or the idea o !ormative @Jdemo8rati8KA legitima8y @Jthe
majority o the populatio! is !ot o! our side- so the revolutio! 6ould !ot really be demo8rati8KAEas i-
beore the revolutio!ary age!t risks the seiUure o state po6er- it should seek permissio! rom some
igure o the big Hther @orga!iUe a reere!dum to as8ertai! 6hether the majority supports the
revolutio!A7 4ot surprisi!gly- a very Dhristia! poi!t7
JGH 4HT DH,CFH,9S0 5H)F G0S9F0K

9t is o!ly agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o the all o the big Hther that o!e 8a! properly grasp
.a8a!Is amous ormulatio! o the basi8 ethi8al a?iom implied by psy8hoa!alysis+

9t is be8ause 6e k!o6 better tha! those 6ho 6e!t beore ho6 to re8og!iUe the !ature o desire- 6hi8h
is at the heart o our e?perie!8e- that a re8o!sideratio! o ethi8s is possible- that a orm o ethi8al
judgme!t is possible- o a ki!d that gives this Nuestio! the or8e o a .ast 2udgme!t+ =ave you a8ted i!
8o!ormity 6ith the desire that is i! youM
##
This is .a8a!Is ma?im o the ethi8s o psy8hoa!alysis+ Jthe o!ly thi!g o 6hi8h o!e 8a! be
guilty is o havi!g give! grou!d relative to o!eIs desire7K
#'
This ma?im- simple a!d 8lear as it appears-
be8omes elusive the mome!t o!e tries to spe8iy its mea!i!g7 For .a8a!- properly ethi8al a8ts are rare+
they o88ur like Jmira8lesK 6hi8h i!terrupt the ordi!ary ru! o thi!gsT they do !ot Je?pressK the e!tire
Jperso!alityK o the subje8t- but u!8tio! as a break i! the 8o!ti!uity o Jperso!al ide!tity7K Take the
8ase o ,a?imilia! *olbe- 6hi8h 8o!ro!ts us 6ith a 6eird but 8ru8ial ethi8al dilemma7 *olbe 6as a
Colish Fra!8is8a! mo!k 6ho- duri!g the 1%20s a!d 1%"0s- 6as i!volved i! 6riti!g a!d orga!iUi!g
mass propaga!da or the Datholi8 Dhur8h- 6ith a 8lear a!ti:Semiti8 a!d a!ti:,aso!i8 edge7 /ith the
outbreak o /orld /ar 99- he helped people threate!ed by the 4aUis- amo!g them ma!y 2e6s- a!d or
this he 6as arrested a!d se!t to Aus8h6itU7 /he!- i! the summer o 1%(1- ater the es8ape o a
priso!er- the 1erma!s sele8ted te! others to be starved to death as a pu!ishme!t- o!e o them broke
do6! i! tears- 8laimi!g he had a amily 6hi8h !eeded himT *olbe volu!tarily oered himsel i! the
ma!Is stead a!d died three 6eeks later o starvatio!7 For this- he 6as later beatiied by Cope 2oh! Caul
997 =o6 to it these t6o aspe8ts o *olbeIs lie togetherM ,ost 8omme!tators take o!e o the ma!y easy
6ays out7 Some simply try to de!y or mi!imiUe *olbeIs a!ti:Semitism @eve! dismissi!g the rumors
about it as a *13 plotA7 Some i!sist o! the s8holasti8 disti!8tio! bet6ee! a!ti:Semitism proper a!d
a!ti:2udaismEa JmereK prejudi8e agai!st 2e6s- !ot a murderous hatred o themE8laimi!g that
*olbeIs error 6as o the se8o!d- mi!or sort7 Hthers i!terpret his helpi!g the 2e6s a!d i!al sa8rii8e as
a8ts o repe!ta!8e+ havi!g 6it!essed the sueri!g o the 2e6s u!der the 4aUi o88upatio!- *olbe
8ha!ged his vie6 a!d tried to assuage his guilt7 Still others take the risky step o mi!imiUi!g !ot his
a!ti:Semitism- but his i!al sel:sa8rii8ial gesture- poi!ti!g out that the ma! he saved 6as !ot a 2e6
but a Datholi8 Cole7 All these versio!s are desperate attempts to avoid the embarrassi!g a8t that the
t6o attitudes @a!d a8tivitiesA 8a! easily 8oe?ist+ a perso! 6ho is a!ti:Semiti8 8a! also be 8apable o a
dig!iied a8t o ethi8al sel:sa8rii8eEa!d- eve! more embarrassi!gly- the @e?pli8itA motivatio! or
*olbeIs !oble sel:sa8rii8e may 6ell have bee! the very 8o!servative:Datholi8 ideology 6hi8h had
sustai!ed his a!ti:Semitism7
A! ethi8al a8t is o!e that does !ot 8omprise or e?press the e!tire perso!- but is a mome!t o
gra8e- a Jmira8leK 6hi8h 8a! o88ur also i! a !o!:virtuous i!dividual7 This is 6hy su8h a8ts are dii8ult
to imagi!e- a!d 6hy- 6he! they do o88ur- o!e ote! te!ds to i!ve!t a !arrative 6hi8h !ormaliUes them7
Fe8all the JAssassi!s-K the 9smaili se8t- part o the Shia orie!tatio! o 9slam- that as8i!ated the
/ester! gaUe rom the t6elth 8e!tury o!+ a88ordi!g to myth they 6ere ruthless murderers 6ho obeyed
their masterIs orders u!8o!ditio!ally- 6ithout regard or their o6! livesT ater they had killed their
target @al6ays i! publi8 a!d 6ith a daggerA- they did !ot ru! a6ay- but 6aited to be apprehe!ded a!d
pu!ished7 They 6ere able to perorm these ruthless a8ts be8ause they 6ere u!der the i!lue!8e o
hashish7 9! the mysterious mou!tai! ortress o Alamut i! !orther! 9ra!- they 6ere ma!ipulated by their
leader- 6ho irst drugged them a!d the!- 6hile they 6ere 8omatose- moved them to a se8luded garde!
de8ked out 6ith all the eatures o the ,uslim paradise- i!8ludi!g beautiul girls ready or se?7 H!
bei!g retur!ed to ordi!ary lie- they 6ere 8o!vi!8ed they had e?perie!8ed a heave!ly episodeEso
6he! their leader told them that- i they su88eeded i! assassi!ati!g the desig!ated target- they 6ould
retur! to paradise- they 6illi!gly 8omplied7 A 8loser histori8al study- ho6ever- Nui8kly dispels the
myth+ the !ame hashishi is lo8al to Syria o!ly- 6here it u!8tio!s as a ge!eral term o popular abuseT it
6as applied to JAssassi!sK as Ja! e?pressio! o 8o!tempt or the 6ild belies a!d e?travaga!t
behaviour o the se8tariesEa derisive 8omme!t o! their 8o!du8t7K
#$
The sta!dard e?pla!atio! @they
6ere 8alled Jassassi!sK be8ause they used hashish to ready themselves or their ruthless a8tsA has thus
to be i!verted+ Jit was the name that gave rise to the story- rather tha! the reverse O For /ester!
observers i! parti8ular- su8h stories may also have served to provide a ratio!al e?pla!atio! or behavior
that 6as other6ise totally i!e?pli8able7K
#&
The story about the re8reated paradise 6as thus a a!tasy
8o!8o8ted to ratio!aliUe the traumati8ally Ji!8omprehe!sibleK a8t that the 9smaili ollo6ers 6ere ready
to u!8tio! as pere8t killi!g ma8hi!es- 6illi!g to sa8rii8e their o6! lives i! the a88omplishme!t o the
taskEa a!tasy- i! short- that e!abled /ester!ers to re:tra!slate a pure Jethi8alK a8t i!to a! a8t
determi!ed Jpathologi8allyK @i! the *a!tia! se!se o the termA7 =o6- the!- does su8h a! ethi8s sta!d
6ith regard to the pa!oply o todayIs ethi8al optio!sM 9t seems to it three o its mai! versio!s+ liberal
hedo!ism- immoralism- a!d J/ester! 3uddhism7K
#%
.et us ru! through these positio!s o!e by o!e7
The irst thi!g to state 8ategori8ally is that .a8a!ia! ethi8s is !ot a! ethi8s o hedo!ism+
6hatever Jdo !ot 8ompromise your desireK mea!s- it does not mea! the u!restrai!ed rule o 6hat Freud
8alled Jthe pleasure pri!8iple-K the u!8tio!i!g o the psy8hi8 apparatus that aims at a8hievi!g pleasure7
For .a8a!- hedo!ism is i! a8t the model o postpo!i!g desire o! behal o Jrealisti8 8ompromisesK+ it
is !ot o!ly that- i! order to attai! the greatest amou!t o pleasure- 9 have to 8al8ulate a!d e8o!omiUe-
sa8rii8i!g short:term pleasures or more i!te!se lo!g:term o!esT 6hat is eve! more importa!t is that
1ouissance hurts7 So- irst- there is !o break bet6ee! the pleasure pri!8iple a!d its 8ou!terpart- the
Jreality pri!8ipleK+ the latter @8ompelli!g us to take i!to a88ou!t the limitatio!s that th6art our dire8t
a88ess to pleasureA is a! i!here!t prolo!gatio! o the ormer7 Se8o!d- eve! @/ester!A 3uddhism is !ot
immu!e to the lures o the pleasure pri!8ipleT the Galai .ama himsel 6rote+ JThe purpose o lie is to
be happyKEnot true for psychoanalysis- o!e should add7
'0
9t 6as 4ietUs8he 6ho observed that
Jhuma! bei!gs do !ot desire happi!ess- o!ly the 0!glishme! desire happi!essKEtodayIs globaliUed
hedo!ism is thus merely the obverse o the a8t that- i! the 8o!ditio!s o global 8apitalism- 6e are
ideologi8ally Jall 0!glishme!K @or- rather- A!glo:Sa?o! Ameri8a!s OA7 So 6hat is 6ro!g 6ith the rule
o the pleasure pri!8ipleM 9! *a!tIs des8riptio!- ethi8al duty u!8tio!s like a oreig! i!truder that
disturbs the subje8tIs homeostati8 bala!8e- its u!bearable pressure or8i!g the subje8t to a8t Jbeyo!d
the pleasure pri!8iple-K ig!ori!g the pursuit o pleasures7 For .a8a!- e?a8tly the same des8riptio! holds
or desire- 6hi8h is 6hy e!joyme!t is !ot somethi!g that 8omes !aturally to the subje8t- as a realiUatio!
o his or her i!!er pote!tial- but is the 8o!te!t o a traumati8 superegoi8 i!ju!8tio!7
9 hedo!ism is to be reje8ted- is .a8a!ia! ethi8s the! a versio! o the heroi8 immoralist ethi8s-
e!joi!i!g us to remai! aithul to ourselves a!d persist o! our 8hose! 6ay beyo!d good a!d evilM Thi!k
o do! 1iova!!i i! the last a8t o ,oUartIs opera- 6he! the Sto!e 1uest 8o!ro!ts him 6ith a 8hoi8e+
he is !ear death- but i he repe!ts o his si!s- he 8a! still be redeemedT i- ho6ever- he does !ot
re!ou!8e his si!ul lie- he 6ill bur! i! hell orever7 Go! 1iova!!i heroi8ally reuses to repe!t-
although 6ell a6are that he has !othi!g to gai!- e?8ept eter!al sueri!g- or his persiste!8e7 /hy does
he do itM Hbviously !ot or a!y proit or promise o pleasure to 8ome7 The o!ly e?pla!atio! is his
utmost idelity to the dissolute lie he has 8hose!7 This is a 8lear 8ase o immoral ethi8s+ do!
1iova!!iIs lie 6as u!doubtedly immoralT ho6ever- as his idelity to himsel proves- he 6as immoral
!ot or pleasure or proit- but out o pri!8iple- a8ti!g the 6ay he did i! a88orda!8e 6ith a u!dame!tal
8hoi8e7
Hr- to take a emi!i!e e?ample also rom opera+ 1eorge 3iUetIs ,armen7 Darme! is- o 8ourse-
immoral @ruthlessly promis8uous- rui!i!g me!Is lives- destroyi!g amiliesA- but !o!etheless thoroughly
ethi8al @aithul to her 8hose! path to the e!d- eve! 6he! this mea!s 8ertai! deathA7 Alo!g these li!es-
.ee 0delma! has developed the !otio! o homose?uality as i!volvi!g a! ethi8s o J!o6-K o
u!8o!ditio!al idelity to 1ouissance- o ollo6i!g the death drive by totally ig!ori!g a!y reere!8e to
the uture or e!gageme!t 6ith the pra8ti8al 8omple? o 6orldly aairs7 =omose?uality thus sta!ds or
the thorough assumptio! o the !egativity o the death drive- o 6ithdra6i!g rom reality i!to the real
o the J!ight o the 6orld7K Alo!g these li!es- 0delma! opposes the radi8al ethi8s o homose?uality to
the predomi!a!t obsessio! 6ith posterity @i7e7- 8hildre!A+ 8hildre! are the Jpathologi8alK mome!t 6hi8h
bi!ds us to pragmati8 8o!sideratio!s a!d thus 8ompels us to betray the radi8al ethi8s o 1ouissance7
'1

@9!8ide!tally- does this li!e o thoughtEthe idea that homose?uality at its most u!dame!tal i!volves
the reje8tio! o 8hildre!E!ot justiy those 6ho argue that gay 8ouples should !ot be allo6ed to adopt
8hildre!MA The igure o a! i!!o8e!t a!d helpless 8hild is the ultimate ethi8al trap- the emblem:etish o
betrayi!g the ethi8s o 1ouissance7
Friedri8h 4ietUs8he @a great admirer o ,armenA 6as the great philosopher o immoral ethi8s-
a!d 6e should al6ays remember that the title o 4ietUs8heIs masterpie8e is Jge!ealogy o morals-K not
Jo ethi8sK+ the t6o are !ot the same7 ,orality is 8o!8er!ed 6ith the symmetry o my relatio!s to other
huma!sT its Uero:level rule is Jdo !ot do to me 6hat you do !ot 6a!t me to do to you7K
'2
0thi8s- i!
8o!trast- deals 6ith my 8o!siste!8y i! relatio! to mysel- my idelity to my o6! desire7 H! the ba8k
lylea o the 1%"% editio! o .e!i!Is Materialism and Empirio*,riticism- Stali! made the ollo6i!g
!ote i! red pe!8il+

1A /eak!ess2A 9dle!ess"A StupidityThese are the o!ly thi!gs that 8a! be 8alled vi8es7 0verythi!g else-
i! the abse!8e o the aoreme!tio!ed- is u!doubtedly virtue743R 9 a ma! is 1A stro!g @spirituallyA- 2A
a8tive- "A 8lever @or 8apableA- the! he is good- regardless o a!y other Jvi8esKR
1A plus "A make 2A7
'"
This is as 8o!8ise as ever a ormulatio! o immoral ethicsT i! 8o!trast- a
6eakli!g 6ho obeys moral rules a!d 6orries about his guilt sta!ds or unethical morality- the target o
4ietUs8heIs 8ritiNue o rese!tme!t7 9t is a supreme iro!y @a!d o!e o the greatest 8ases o poeti8 justi8eA
that- amo!g Ameri8a! 6riters- the o!e 6ho provided the most pre8ise ormulatio! o the same immoral
ethi8s 6as !o!e other tha! the rabidly a!ti:Dommu!ist Fussia! emigra!t Ay! Fa!d- i! her irst @still
moderateA )S su88ess- the play ight of Canuary LMth7 Although 6ritte! i! a traditio!al realist mode-
this 8ourtroom @meloAdrama e!gages its spe8tators i! a very 8o!temporary- almost 3re8htia!- ma!!er+
at the begi!!i!g- the t6elve jury members are ra!domly sele8ted rom amo!g the theater audie!8eT they
are seated o! the stage a!d- at the playIs e!d- they briely 6ithdra6 beore retur!i!g to deliver the
verdi8t o guilty or !ot guiltyEFa!d provided diere!t i!al li!es depe!di!g o! 6hi8h it 6as7 The
de8isio! they have to make is !ot o!ly about the murder o 3jor! Faulk!er- a ruthless S6edish ty8oo!+
did *are! A!dre- his devoted mistress a!d se8retary- do it or !otM 9t is also about t6o opposed
ethi8sEto Nuote the play itsel+

i you value a stre!gth that is its o6! motor- a! auda8ity that is its o6! la6- a spirit that is its o6!
vi!di8atio!Ei you are able to admire a ma! 6ho- !o matter 6hat mistakes he may have made i! orm-
had !ever betrayed his esse!8e+ his sel:esteemEi- deep i! your hearts- youIve elt a lo!gi!g or
great!ess a!d or a se!se o lie beyo!d the lives arou!d you- i you have k!o6! a hu!ger 6hi8h gray
timidity 8a!It satisy O
'(
9! short- i you advo8ate immoral ethi8s- you 6ill i!d *are! !ot guiltyT i- ho6ever- you
believe i! so8ial respe8tability- i! a lie o servi8e- duty- a!d u!selish!ess- et87- the! you 6ill i!d
*are! guilty7
There is- ho6ever- a limit to this Stali!ist immoral ethi8s+ !ot that it is too immoral- but that it is
se8retly too moral- still relyi!g o! a igure o the big Hther7 9! 6hat is arguably the most i!tellige!t
legitimiUatio! o Stali!ist terror- ,auri8e ,erleau:Co!tyIs 0umanism and -error rom 1%('- the terror
is justiied as a ki!d o 6ager o! the uture- almost i! the mode o Cas8al+ i the i!al result o todayIs
horror tur!s out to be a bright 8ommu!ist uture- the! this out8ome 6ill retroa8tively redeem the
terrible thi!gs a revolutio!ary has to do today7 Alo!g similar li!es- eve! some Stali!ists
themselvesE6he! or8ed to admit @mostly i! privateA that ma!y o the vi8tims o the purges 6ere
i!!o8e!t- that they 6ere a88used a!d killed be8ause Jthe Carty !eeded their blood to ortiy its
u!ityKEimagi!ed a uture mome!t o i!al vi8tory 6he! all the vi8tims 6ould be give! their due- a!d
their i!!o8e!8e a!d sa8rii8e or the Dause 6ould be re8og!iUed7 This is 6hat .a8a!- i! his semi!ar o!
0thi8s- reers to as the Jperspe8tive o the .ast 2udgme!t-K a perspe8tive eve! more 8learly dis8er!ible
i! t6o key terms o the Stali!ist dis8ourse- Jobje8tive guiltK a!d Jobje8tive mea!i!gK+ 6hile you 8a! be
a! ho!est i!dividual 6ho a8ts 6ith the most si!8ere i!te!tio!s- you are !o!etheless Jobje8tively guiltyK
i your a8ts serve rea8tio!ary or8esEa!d it is- o 8ourse- the Carty that de8ides 6hat your a8ts
Jobje8tively mea!7K
=ere- agai!- 6e get !ot o!ly the perspe8tive o the .ast 2udgme!t @rom 6hi8h the Jobje8tive
mea!i!gK o your a8ts is ormulatedA- but also the age!t i! the prese!t 6ho already has the u!iNue
ability to judge todayIs eve!ts a!d a8ts rom this perspe8tive7
'#
The !ame o Faskol!ikov @the hero o
GostoyevskyIs ,rime and )unishmentA evokes a split @ras"olAT Faskol!ikov is Jthe split o!eKEbut
split bet6ee! 6hat a!d 6hatM The sta!dard a!s6er is that he is Jtor! bet6ee! the V4apoleo!i8 idea-I
the !otio! that all is permitted to a stro!g perso!- a!d the VFussia! ideaI o selless devotio! to
huma!ityK
''
Eho6ever- this versio! misses the properly Jtotalitaria!K coincidence o the t6o ideas+ it
is my very selless devotio! to huma!ity- my a6are!ess that 9 am a! i!strume!t o =uma!ity- 6hi8h
justiies my 8laim that all is permitted to me7 The parado? is thus that 6hat Faskol!ikov la8ks is the
split itself- the dista!8e bet6ee! the t6o ideas- the J4apoleo!i8K a!d the JFussia!7K
/e 8a! see !o6 6hy .a8a!Is motto Jil ny a pas de grand +utreK @there is !o big HtherA takes
us to the very 8ore o the ethi8al problemati8+ 6hat it e?8ludes is pre8isely this Jperspe8tive o the .ast
2udgme!t-K the idea that some6hereEeve! i as a thoroughly virtual reere!8e poi!t- eve! i 6e
8o!8ede that 6e 8a! !ever o88upy its pla8e a!d pass the a8tual judgme!tEthere must be a sta!dard
6hi8h 6ould allo6 us to take the measure o our a8ts a!d pro!ou!8e o! their Jtrue mea!i!g-K their true
ethi8al status7 0ve! GerridaIs !otio! o Jde8o!stru8tio! as justi8eK seems to rely o! a utopia! hope
6hi8h sustai!s the spe8ter o Ji!i!ite justi8e-K orever postpo!ed- al6ays to 8ome- but !o!etheless here
as the ultimate horiUo! o our a8tivity7
The harsh!ess o .a8a!ia! ethi8s lies i! its dema!d that 6e thoroughly reli!Nuish this reere!8e
to the big HtherEa!d its urther 6ager is that !ot o!ly does this re!u!8iatio! !ot plu!ge us i!to ethi8al
i!se8urity or relativism @or eve! sap the very u!dame!tals o ethi8al a8tivityA- but that re!ou!8i!g the
guara!tee o some big Hther is the very 8o!ditio! o a truly auto!omous ethi8s7 Fe8all that the
e?emplary dream Freud used to illustrate his pro8edure o dream a!alysis 6as a dream about
respo!sibility @FreudIs o6! respo!sibility or the ailure o his treatme!t o 9rmaAEthis a8t alo!e
i!di8ates that respo!sibility is a 8ru8ial Freudia! !otio!7 3ut ho6 are 6e to 8o!8eive o this
respo!sibilityM =o6 are 6e to avoid the 8ommo! misper8eptio! that the basi8 ethi8al message o
psy8hoa!alysis is- pre8isely- that 6e should relieve ourselves o respo!sibility a!d i!stead pla8e the
blame o! the Hther @Jsi!8e the )!8o!s8ious is the dis8ourse o the Hther- 9 am !ot respo!sible or its
ormatio!s- it is the big Hther 6ho speaks through me- 9 am merely its i!strume!tKAM .a8a! himsel
poi!ted the 6ay out o this deadlo8k by reerri!g to *a!tIs philosophy as the 8ru8ial a!te8ede!t o
psy8hoa!alyti8 ethi8s7
LACAN AGAINST B!DDHISM

A88ordi!g to the sta!dard 8ritiNue- the limitatio! o the *a!tia! u!iversalisti8 ethi8 o the
J8ategori8al imperativeK @the u!8o!ditio!al i!ju!8tio! to do o!eIs dutyA resides i! its ormal
i!determi!a8y+ the moral .a6 does !ot tell me what my duty is- it merely tells me that 9 should
a88omplish my duty- a!d so leaves room or a! empty volu!tarism @6hatever 9 de8ide 6ill be my duty
is my dutyA7 =o6ever- ar rom bei!g a limitatio!- this very eature bri!gs us to the 8ore o *a!tia!
ethi8al auto!omy+ it is !ot possible to derive the 8o!8rete obligatio!s pertai!i!g to o!eIs spe8ii8
situatio! rom the moral .a6 itselE6hi8h mea!s that the subje8t himsel must assume the
respo!sibility o tra!slati!g the abstra8t i!ju!8tio! i!to a series o 8o!8rete obligatio!s7 The ull
a88epta!8e o this parado? 8ompels us to reje8t a!y reere!8e to duty as a! e?8use+ J9 k!o6 this is
heavy a!d 8a! be pai!ul- but 6hat 8a! 9 do- this is my duty OK *a!tIs ethi8s is ote! take! as
justiyi!g su8h a! attitudeE!o 6o!der Adol 0i8hma!! himsel reerred to *a!t 6he! tryi!g to justiy
his role i! pla!!i!g a!d e?e8uti!g the =olo8aust+ he 6as just doi!g his duty a!d obeyi!g the FYhrerIs
orders7 =o6ever- the aim o *a!tIs emphasis o! the subje8tIs ull moral auto!omy a!d respo!sibility
6as pre8isely to preve!t a!y su8h ma!euver o putti!g the blame o! some igure o the big Hther7
Guri!g a! u!ortu!ate debate 9 had 6ith 3er!ard:=e!ri .Lvy @i! the premises o .e ouvel
$bservateur i! CarisA- he related @6hat maybe 6as- or !otA a perso!al e?perie!8e to illustrate his
oppositio! to killi!g7 Guri!g the 3os!ia! 6ar i! the early 1%%0s- he had visited the besieged Sarajevo-
6here he 6as take! to a ro!tli!e tre!8h by a! oi8er o the 3os!ia! gover!me!t7 From here- looki!g
through the s8ope o a gu!- he 6as able to see a Serb soldier o! a !earby hill o88asio!ally shooti!g at
8ivilia!s i! the 8ity7 .ooki!g at the soldier 6ith his i!ger o! the trigger- .Lvy 6as tempted to shoot-
but he resistedEthe i!ju!8tio! JGo !ot killRK is or him u!8o!ditio!al7 To me- su8h a rea8tio! 6as
moralisti8 hypo8risy at its purest+ .Lvy ully supported the 3os!ia! side i! the 8o!li8t @as did 9- so
there 6as !o disagreeme!t thereA- but his reusal to take the shot mea!t that- 6hile he 6ould have
e?pe8ted a 3os!ia! soldier i! the same positio! to pull the trigger- he 6a!ted to keep his ha!ds 8lea!
a!d leave the !e8essary dirty 6ork to others7 9! the a8e o su8h a dilemma- the o!ly truly u!iversalisti8
sta!8e is to be ready to dirty o!eIs o6! ha!ds7
The 8ore o .a8a!Is atheism is best dis8er!ed i! the 8o!8eptual 8ouple o Jalie!atio!K a!d
Jseparatio!K 6hi8h he develops i! his Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis7
'$
9! a irst
approa8h- the big Hther sta!ds or the subje8tIs alie!atio! i! the symboli8 order+ the big Hther pulls the
stri!gsT the subje8t does !ot speak- he is Jspoke!K by the symboli8 stru8ture7 9! short- this Jbig HtherK
is the !ame or the so8ial substa!8e- or all that o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h the subje8t !ever ully 8o!trols the
ee8ts o his a8ts- so that their i!al out8ome is al6ays other tha! 6hat he aimed at or a!ti8ipated7
Separatio! takes pla8e 6he! the subje8t takes !ote o ho6 the big Hther is i! itsel i!8o!siste!t- la8ki!g
@Jbarred-K as .a8a! liked to put itA+ the big Hther does !ot possess 6hat the subje8t la8ks7 9! separatio!-
the subje8t e?perie!8es ho6 his o6! la8k 6ith regard to the big Hther is already the la8k that ae8ts
the big Hther itsel7 To re8all =egelIs immortal di8tum 8o!8er!i!g the Sphi!?+ JThe e!igmas o the
A!8ie!t 0gyptia!s 6ere e!igmas also or the 0gyptia!s themselves7K Alo!g the same li!es- the elusive-
impe!etrable Dieu obscur has to be impe!etrable also to himselT he has to have a dark side- somethi!g
that is i! him more tha! himsel7
'&
Guri!g the Dhi!ese Dultural Fevolutio!- the Fed 1uards reerred to sui8ide as Jalie!ati!g
o!esel rom the Carty a!d people7K
'%
H!e is tempted to ask here- 6ith regard to the .a8a!ia! 8ouple
o alie!atio! a!d separatio!+ 6hat- the!- 6ould separation rom the Carty a!d people have bee!M The
Nuestio! is !ot as mea!i!gless as it may appear- i!soar as- or .a8a!- separatio! sta!ds or redoubled
alie!atio!+ the subje8t e!a8ts separatio! 6he! his la8k 8oi!8ides 6ith the la8k i! the Hther- that is-
6he! he re8og!iUes that the Hther also does !ot have 6hat he is missi!g7 9! short- i! this 8o!te?t-
separatio! i!volves the i!sight that the dista!8e separati!g the subje8t rom the Carty a!d people is
already imma!e!t to the Carty a!d people themselvesEi! other 6ords- the )arty itself is already
alienated from the people7
So 6hat does it mea! to aba!do! the topi8 o the .ast 2udgme!tM As is ote! the 8ase- *aka
provides the key here+ J9t is o!ly our 8o!8eptio! o time that makes us 8all the .ast 2udgme!t by this
!ame7 9t is- i! a8t- a ki!d o martial la67K
$0
9! other 6ords- the abse!8e o the .ast 2udgme!t does !ot
mea! that there is merely histori8al evolutio! 6ith !o mome!ts o 6hat 3e!jami! 8alled Jsuspe!ded
diale8ti8s-K 6he! the 8o!ti!uous lo6 is mome!tarily immobiliUed+ the .ast 2udgme!t does !ot 8ome at
the e!d o times- it is the martial la6Ethe state o e?8eptio!Ehere a!d !o67
The o!ly other s8hool o thought that ully a88epts the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther is
3uddhism7 9s the solutio! the! to be ou!d i! 3uddhist ethi8sM There are reaso!s to 8o!sider this
optio!7 Goes !ot 3uddhism lead us to Jtraverse the a!tasy-K over8omi!g the illusio!s o! 6hi8h our
desires are based a!d 8o!ro!ti!g the void be!eath ea8h obje8t o desireM Furthermore- psy8hoa!alysis
shares 6ith 3uddhism the i!siste!8e that there is !o Sel as a substa!tive age!t o psy8hi8 lie+ !o
6o!der ,ark 0pstei!- i! his book o! 3uddhism a!d psy8hoa!alysis- reers positively to .a8a!Is early
essay o! the Jmirror stage-K 6ith its !otio! o the 0go as a! obje8t- the result o the subje8tIs
ide!tii8atio! 6ith the idealiUed i?ed image o itsel+
$1
the Sel is the etishiUed illusio! o a
substa!tial 8ore o subje8tivity 6here- i! reality- there is !othi!g7 This is 6hy- or 3uddhism- the poi!t
is !ot to dis8over o!eIs Jtrue Sel-K but to a88ept that there is !o su8h thi!g- that the JSelK as su8h is a!
illusio!- a! imposture7 9! more psy8hoa!alyti8 terms+ !ot o!ly should o!e a!alyUe resista!8es- but-
ultimately- Jthere is really nothing but resista!8e to be a!alyUedT there is !o true sel 6aiti!g i! the
6i!gs to be released7K
$2
The sel is a disruptive- alse- a!d- as su8h- u!!e8essary metaphor or the
pro8ess o a6are!ess a!d k!o6i!g+ 6he! 6e a6ake! to k!o6i!g- 6e realiUe that all that goes o! i! us
is a lo6 o Jthoughts 6ithout a thi!ker7K The impossibility o iguri!g out 6ho or 6hat 6e really are is
i!here!t- si!8e there is !othi!g that 6e Jreally are-K just a void at the 8ore o our bei!g7 Do!seNue!tly-
i! the pro8ess o 3uddhist 0!lighte!me!t- 6e do !ot Nuit this terrestrial 6orld or a!other truer
realityE6e just a88ept its !o!:substa!tial- leeti!g- illusory 8hara8terT 6e embra8e the pro8ess o
Jgoi!g to pie8es 6ithout alli!g apart7K 9! the 1!osti8 mode- or 3uddhism- ethi8s is ultimately a
Nuestio! o k!o6ledge a!d ig!ora!8e+ our 8ravi!g @desireA- our atta8hme!t to terrestrial goods- is
8o!ditio!ed by our ig!ora!8e- so that delivera!8e 8omes 6ith proper k!o6i!g7 @/hat Dhristia! love
mea!s- o! the 8o!trary- is that there is a de8isio! !ot grou!ded i! k!o6ledgeEDhristia!ity thus breaks
6ith the e!tire traditio! o the prima8y o *!o6ledge 6hi8h ru!s rom 3uddhism through 1!osti8ism
to Spi!oUa7A
Dru8ial to 3uddhism is the rele?ive 8ha!ge rom the obje8t to the thi!ker himsel+ irst- 6e
isolate the thi!g that bothers us- the 8ause o our sueri!gT the! 6e 8ha!ge !ot the obje8t but ourselves-
the 6ay 6e relate to @6hat appears to us asA the 8ause o our sueri!g+ J/hat 6as e?ti!guished 6as
o!ly the false view o sel7 /hat had al6ays bee! illusory 6as u!derstood as su8h7 4othi!g 6as
8ha!ged but the perspe8tive o the observer7K
$"
This shit i!volves great pai!T it is !ot merely a
liberatio!- a step i!to the i!8estuous bliss o the i!amous Jo8ea!i8 eeli!gKT it is also the viole!t
e?perie!8e o losi!g the grou!d u!der o!eIs eet- o bei!g deprived o the most amiliar stage o o!eIs
bei!g7 This is 6hy the path to6ards 3uddhist 0!lighte!me!t begi!s by o8usi!g o! the most
eleme!tary eeli!gs o Ji!jured i!!o8e!8e-K o sueri!g a! i!justi8e 6ithout 8ause @the preerred topi8
o !ar8issisti8- maso8histi8 thoughts+ J=o6 8ould she do this to meM 9 do!It deserve to be treated that
6ayKA7
$(
The !e?t step is to make the shit to the 0go itsel- the subje8t o these pai!ul emotio!s-
re!deri!g 8lear a!d palpable its o6! leeti!g a!d irreleva!t statusEthe aggressio! dire8ted agai!st the
obje8t 8ausi!g the sueri!g should be tur!ed agai!st the Sel itsel7 /e do !ot repair the damageT
rather- 6e gai! the i!sight i!to the illusory !ature o that 6hi8h appears to !eed repair7
$#
/hat- the!- is the !ature o the gap that separates psy8hoa!alysis rom 3uddhismM 9! order to
a!s6er this Nuestio!- 6e !eed to 8o!ro!t the basi8 e!igma o 3uddhism- its bli!d spot+ ho6 did the all
i!to samsara- the /heel o .ie- o88urM This e!igma is the e?a8t opposite o the mai! 3uddhist
8o!8er!+ ho6 8a! 6e break out o the /heel o .ie a!d attai! !irva!aM
$'
The !ature a!d origi! o the
impetus by mea!s o 6hi8h desire @de8eptio!A emerged out o the Void is the big u!k!o6! i! the heart
o the 3uddhist edii8e+ it poi!ts to6ards a! a8t that Jbreaks the symmetryK 6ithi! !irva!a itsel a!d
thus makes somethi!g appear out o !othi!g @as i! Nua!tum physi8s 6ith its !otio! o symmetry:
breaki!gA7 The Freudia! a!s6er is the drive+ 6hat Freud 8alls the JdriveK is !ot- as it may appear- the
3uddhist /heel o .ie- the 8ravi!g that e!slaves us to the 6orld o illusio!s7 The drive- o! the
8o!trary- goes o! eve! 6he! the subje8t has Jtraversed the a!tasyK a!d broke! out o its illusory
8ravi!g or the @lostA obje8t o desire7 A!d therei! lies the diere!8e bet6ee! 3uddhism a!d
psy8hoa!alysis- redu8ed to its ormal mi!imum+ or 3uddhism- ater 0!lighte!me!t @or Jtraversi!g the
a!tasyKA- the /heel !o lo!ger tur!s- the subje8t de:subje8tiviUes itsel a!d i!ds pea8eT or
psy8hoa!alysis- o! the other ha!d- the wheel continues to turn- a!d this 8o!ti!ued tur!i!g:o:the:6heel
is the drive @as .a8a! put it i! the last pages o Seminar ;I+ ater the subje8t traverses the a!tasy-
desire is tra!sormed i!to driveA7 /hat psy8hoa!alysis adds to 3uddhism is thus i! a8t a !e6 versio!
o 1alileoIs eppur si muove+ imagi!e a .a8a!ia! bei!g tortured by a 4e6 Age /ester! 3uddhist i!to
admitti!g that i!!er pea8e 8a! be a8hievedT ater the or8ed 8o!8essio!- as he leaves the room- he
Nuietly mumbles+ J3ut !o!etheless- it 8o!ti!ues to moveRK
$$
This is 6hat .a8a! is aimi!g at 6he! he emphasiUes the diere!8e bet6ee! the Freudia! death
drive a!d the so:8alled J!irva!a pri!8ipleK a88ordi!g to 6hi8h every lie system te!ds to6ards the
lo6est level o te!sio!- ultimately to6ards death7 To put it i! terms o the =iggs ield i! Nua!tum
physi8s- J!othi!g!essK @the void- bei!g deprived o all substa!8eA a!d the lo6est level o e!ergy
parado?i8ally !o lo!ger 8oi!8ideT at the lo6est level o te!sio!- or i! the void- the dissolutio! o all
order- it is J8heaperK @it 8osts the system less e!ergyA to persist i! Jsomethi!gK tha! to d6ell i!
J!othi!g7K 9t is this dista!8e that sustai!s the death drive @!amely- the drive as su8h- si!8e Jevery drive
is virtually a death driveKA7
$&
Far rom bei!g the same as the !irva!a pri!8iple @the strivi!g to6ards the
dissolutio! o all te!sio!- the lo!gi!g or a retur! to origi!al !othi!g!essA- the death drive is the te!sio!
6hi8h persists a!d i!sists beyo!d a!d agai!st the !irva!a pri!8iple7 9! other 6ords- ar rom bei!g
opposed to the pleasure pri!8iple- the !irva!a pri!8iple is its highest a!d most radi8al e?pressio!7 9!
this pre8ise se!se- the death drive sta!ds or its e?a8t opposite- or the dime!sio! o the Ju!dead-K o a
spe8tral lie 6hi8h i!sists beyo!d @biologi8alA death7 So does the parado? o the =iggs ield !ot also
preigure the mystery o symboli8 8astratio! i! psy8hoa!alysisM /hat .a8a! 8alls Jsymboli8
8astratio!K is a deprivatio!- a gesture o taki!g a6ay @the loss o the ultimate a!d
absoluteEJi!8estuousKEobje8t o desireA 6hi8h is in itself giving- produ8tive- ge!erative- ope!i!g up
a!d sustai!i!g the spa8e o desire a!d o mea!i!g7 The rustrati!g !ature o our huma! e?iste!8e- the
very a8t that our lives are orever out o joi!t- marked by a traumati8 imbala!8e- is 6hat propels us
to6ards perma!e!t 8reativity7
This is 6hy psy8hoa!alysis is irmly e!tre!8hed i! the /ester! 2udeo:Dhristia! traditio!- !ot
o!ly agai!st Hrie!tal spirituality but also agai!st 9slam- 6hi8h- like Hrie!tal spirituality- e!dorses the
thesis o! the ultimate va!ity a!d illusory !ature o every obje8t o desire7 H! the '1(th !ight o $ne
-housand and $ne ights- 2udar- ollo6i!g the orders o a ,oro88a! magi8ia!- had to ope! seve!
doors that 6ould lead him to a treasure7 /he! he 8ame to the seve!th door-

there issued orth to him his mother- sayi!g- J9 salute thee- H my so!RK =e asked- J/hat art thouMK a!d
she a!s6ered- JH my so!- 9 am thy mother 6ho bare thee !i!e mo!ths a!d su8kled thee a!d reared
thee7K Wuoth he- JCut o thy 8lothes7K Wuoth she- JThou art my so!- ho6 6ouldst thou strip me
!akedMK 3ut he said JStrip- or 9 6ill strike o thy head 6ith this s6ordTK a!d he stret8hed out his ha!d
to the bra!d a!d dre6 it upo! her sayi!g- J0?8ept thou strip- 9 6ill slay thee7K The! the strie be8ame
lo!g bet6ee! them a!d as ote! as he redoubled o! her his threats- she put o some6hat o her 8lothes
a!d he said to her- JGo the rest-K 6ith ma!y me!a8esT 6hile she removed ea8h arti8le slo6ly a!d kept
sayi!g- JH my so!- thou hast disappoi!ted my osterage o thee-K till she had !othi!g let but her
petti8oat trousers7 The! said she- JH my so!- is thy heart sto!eM /ilt thou disho!our me by dis8overi!g
my shameM 9!deed- this is u!la6ul- H my so!RK A!d he a!s6ered- JThou sayest soothT put !ot o thy
trousers7K At o!8e- as he uttered these 6ords- she 8ried out- J=e hath made deaultT beat himRK
/hereupo! there ell upo! him blo6s like rai! drops a!d the serva!ts o the treasure lo8ked to him
a!d dealt him a u!di!g 6hi8h he orgot !ot i! all his days7
$%
H! '1#th !ight- 6e lear! that 2udar 6as give! a!other 8ha!8e a!d tried agai!T 6he! he 8ame to
the seve!th door-

the sembla!8e o his mother appeared beore him- sayi!g- J/el8ome- H my so!RK 3ut he said to her-
J=o6 am 9 thy so!- H a88ursedM StripRK A!d she bega! to 6heedle him a!d put o garme!t ater
garme!t- till o!ly her trousers remai!edT a!d he said to her- JStrip- H a88ursedRK So she put o her
trousers a!d be8ame a body 6ithout a soul7 The! he e!tered the hall o the treasures- 6here he sa6 gold
lyi!g i! heapsO
&0
Fethi 3e!slama has poi!ted out ho6 this passage i!di8ates that 9slam k!o6s 6hat our /ester!
u!iverse de!ies+ the a8t that i!8est is !ot orbidde!- but i!here!tly impossible @6he! o!e i!ally gets
the !aked mother- she ades a6ay as a bad spe8terA7 3e!slama reers here to 2ea!:2oseph 1ou?-
&1
6ho
demo!strated ho6 the Hedipus myth is a /ester! myth a!d as su8h a! e?8eptio! 6ith regard to other
mythsT its basi8 eature is pre8isely that Jbehi!d the prohibitio!- the impossible 6ithdra6s itselK+
&2
the
very prohibitio! is read as a! i!di8atio! that i!8est is possible7
=ere- ho6ever- 6e should remai! aithul to the /ester! JHedipalK traditio!+ o 8ourse every
obje8t o desire is a! illusory lureT o 8ourse the ull 1ouissance o i!8est is !ot o!ly prohibited- but i!
itsel impossibleT !evertheless- .a8a!Is les non*dupes errent must still be asserted7 0ve! i the obje8t o
desire is illusory- there is a real i! this illusio!+ the obje8t o desire i! its positive 8o!te!t is vai!- but
!ot the pla8e it o88upies- the pla8e o the FealT 6hi8h is 6hy there is more truth i! the u!8o!ditio!al
idelity to o!eIs desire tha! i! the resig!ed i!sight i!to the va!ity o o!eIs strivi!g7
As 6e have see!- at the 8ore o this parado? is a ormal stru8ture homologous to that o the
=iggs ield i! Nua!tum physi8s+ 6hat- i! the =iggs ield- is 8alled the double va8uum
&"
appears here i!
the guise o the irredu8ible gap bet6ee! ethi8s @u!derstood as the 8are o the sel- as strivi!g to6ards
authe!ti8 bei!gA a!d morality @u!derstood as the 8are or others- respo!di!g to their 8allA7 9!soar as the
authe!ti8ity o the Sel is take! to the e?treme i! 3uddhist meditatio!- 6hose goal is pre8isely to e!able
the subje8t to over8ome @or- rather- suspe!dA its Sel a!d e!ter the va8uum o !irva!a- o!e should
remember the Be! 3uddhist 8laim that JBe! a!d the s6ord are o!e a!d the same-K a pri!8iple grou!ded
i! the oppositio! bet6ee! the rele?ive attitude o our ordi!ary daily lives @i! 6hi8h 6e 8li!g to lie a!d
ear death- strive or egotisti8 pleasures a!d proits- hesitate i!stead o a8ti!g dire8tlyA a!d the
e!lighte!ed sta!8e i! 6hi8h the diere!8e bet6ee! lie a!d death !o lo!ger matters- i! 6hi8h 6e
regai! the origi!al sel:less u!ity a!d be8ome dire8tly our a8ts7 9! a u!iNue short:8ir8uit- militaristi8
Be! masters i!terpret the basi8 Be! message @that liberatio! e!tails losi!g o!eIs Sel- u!iti!g
immediately 6ith the primordial VoidA as bei!g ide!ti8al 6ith total military idelity- 6ith immediately
ollo6i!g orders a!d perormi!g o!eIs duty 6ithout 8o!8er! or the Sel a!d its i!terests7 The sta!dard
a!ti:militaristi8 8li8hL about soldiers bei!g drilled i!to a state o mi!dless subordi!atio! is here asserted
as bei!g ide!ti8al to Be! 0!lighte!me!t7 /ithi! this attitude- the 6arrior !o lo!ger a8ts as a perso!T he
is thoroughly de:subje8tiviUedT or- as G7 T7 SuUuki himsel put it+ Jit is really !ot he but the s6ord itsel
that does the killi!g7 =e had !o desire to do harm to a!ybody- but the e!emy appears a!d makes
himsel a vi8tim7 9t is as though the s6ord perorms automati8ally its u!8tio! o justi8e- 6hi8h is the
u!8tio! o mer8y7K
&(
Goes this des8riptio! !ot provide the ultimate e?ample o the phe!ome!ologi8al attitude 6hi8h-
i!stead o i!terve!i!g i!to reality- just lets thi!gs appear as they areM The s6ord itsel does the killi!gT
the e!emy just appears a!d makes himsel a vi8timEthe 6arrior is i! it or !othi!g- redu8ed to bei!g
the passive observer o his o6! a8ts7 4o 6o!der that- Jstru8k by his leaderIs 8old demea!or a!d his
utter ruthless!ess to6ards their e!emies- o!e o his 8omrades o!8e 8ompared Col Cot 6ith a 3uddhist
mo!k 6ho had attai!ed the Vthird levelI o 8o!s8ious!ess+ V5ou are 8ompletely !eutral7 4othi!g moves
you7 This is the highest level7IK
&#
H!e should !ot dismiss this as a! obs8e!e alse parallel+ Col Cot did
i!deed 8ome rom a 3uddhist 8ultural ba8kgrou!d- a!d there is a lo!g traditio! o militarist dis8ipli!e
i! 3uddhism7 /e i!d the same authoritaria! streak i! Tibeta! 3uddhismEor e?ample- i! a traditio!al
Tibeta! 8ustom 6hi8h has u!dergo!e a stra!ge tra!sormatio! over the last hal:8e!tury+

Guri!g the Dultural Fevolutio!- i a! old la!do6!er met ema!8ipated sers o! the road he 6ould sta!d
to the side- at a dista!8e- putti!g a sleeve over his shoulder- bo6i!g do6! a!d sti8ki!g out his
to!gueEa 8ourtesy paid by those o lo6er status to their superiorsEa!d 6ould o!ly dare to resume his
jour!ey ater the ormer sers had passed by7 4o6 thi!gs have 8ha!ged ba8k+ the ormer sers sta!d at
the side o the road- bo6 a!d sti8k out their to!gues- maki!g 6ay or their old lords7 This has bee! a
subtle pro8ess- 8ompletely volu!tary- !either imposed by a!yo!e !or e?plai!ed7
&'
9! short- the e?:sers someho6 dete8ted that 6ith Ge!g diaopi!gIs Jreorms-K they 6ere o!8e
agai! at the bottom o the so8ial s8aleT ho6ever- mu8h more i!teresti!g tha! the redistributio! o so8ial
hierar8hy sig!aled by this 8ha!ge is the a8t that the same traditio!al ritual survived su8h treme!dous
so8ial tra!sormatio!s7 9! order to dispel a!y illusio!s about Tibeta! so8iety- is it !ot e!ough to !ote
the distasteul !ature o this 8ustom7 Hver a!d above the usual steppi!g aside a!d bo6i!gEto add
i!sult to i!jury- as it 6ereEthe subordi!ated i!dividual had to i? his a8e i! a! e?pressio! o
humiliati!g stupidity @ope! mouthed 6ith to!gue stret8hed out- eyes tur!ed up6ards- et87A i! order to
sig!al 6ith this grotesNue grima8e his 6orthless stupidity7 The 8ru8ial poi!t here is to re8og!iUe the
viole!8e o this pra8ti8e- a viole!8e that !o 8o!sideratio! o 8ultural diere!8es a!d !o respe8t or
other!ess should 6ash over7
The poi!t here is !ot to 8riti8iUe 3uddhism- but merely to emphasiUe the irredu8ible gap
bet6ee! subje8tive authe!ti8ity a!d moral good!ess @i! the se!se o so8ial respo!sibilityA+ the dii8ult
thi!g to a88ept is that o!e 8a! be totally authe!ti8 i! over8omi!g o!eIs alse Sel a!d yet still 8ommit
horrible 8rimesEa!d vi8e versa- o 8ourse+ o!e 8a! be a 8ari!g subje8t- morally 8ommitted to the ull-
6hile e?isti!g i! a! i!authe!ti8 6orld o illusio! 6ith regard to o!esel7 This is 6hy all the desperate
attempts by 3uddhists to demo!strate ho6 respe8t a!d 8are or others are !e8essary steps to6ards @a!d
8o!ditio!s oA 0!lighte!me!t misire+ SuUuki himsel 6as mu8h more ho!est i! this regard 6he! he
poi!ted out that Be! is a meditatio! te8h!iNue 6hi8h implies !o parti8ular ethi8o:politi8al sta!8eEi!
his politi8al lie- a Be! 3uddhist may be a liberal- a as8ist- or a 8ommu!ist7 Agai!- the t6o va8uums
!ever 8oi!8ide+ i! order to be ully e!gaged ethi8o:politi8ally- it is !e8essary to e?it the Ji!!er pea8eK
o o!eIs subje8tive authe!ti8ity7
CHAPTER "

Fi8hteIs Dhoi8e

Cerhaps the most produ8tive 6ay to deal 6ith a! Joi8ialK history o philosophy is to 8o!sider
ho6 a philosopher 6ho 6as Jover8omeK by his su88essor @a88ordi!g to this Joi8ialK li!eA reacted ?or
would have reacted@ to his successor7 =o6 6ould Clato rea8t to Aristotle- or /ag!er to 4ietUs8he- or
=usserl to =eidegger- or =egel to ,ar?M
1
The most i!trigui!g 8ase o this Jrebellio! o the
va!NuishedK 6as 1erma! 9dealism- 6herei! ea8h o the Jprede8essorsK i! the Joi8ialK li!e o
progress @*a!t:Fi8hte:S8helli!g:=egel:late S8helli!gA rea8ted to the 8ritiNue or i!terpretatio! o his
6ork by his su88essor7 Fi8hte 6a!ted merely to 8omplete *a!tIs philosophy 6ith his
Wissenschaftslehre- a!d *a!tIs disparagi!g remarks about Fi8hte are 6ell k!o6!+ he reje8ted as
mea!i!gless a!d tautologi8al the very term Wissenschaftslehre @Jdo8tri!e about k!o6ledgeKA7 Fi8hteIs
Jsubje8tive idealismK 6as the! ollo6ed by S8helli!gIs philosophy o ide!tity- 6hi8h suppleme!ts the
tra!s8e!de!tal:subje8tive ge!esis o reality 6ith a philosophy o !ature7 Fi8hte bitterly reje8ted this
Jsuppleme!tK as a misreadi!g o his Wissenschaftslehre- as o!e 8a! read i! their 8orrespo!de!8e7 @H!
the other ha!d- S8helli!g himsel 6as !ot slo6 to retort that Fi8hte had radi8ally 8ha!ged his positio!
i! rea8tio! to S8helli!gIs 8ritiNue7A =egelIs Jover8omi!gK o S8helli!g is a 8ase i! itsel+ S8helli!gIs
rea8tio! to =egelIs idealist diale8ti8 6as so stro!g that it has i!8reasi!gly 8ome to be see! as the !e?t
@eve! i!alA step i! the i!!er developme!t o 1erma! 9dealismEi!deed- there is a book @by /alther
S8hulUeA 6ith the title -he +ccomplishment of (erman Idealism in Schellings .ate )hilosophy7
S8helli!gIs irst a!d de8isive break out o the 8o!strai!ts o his early philosophy o ide!tity o88urs 6ith
his -reatise on the Essence of 0uman Freedom rom 1&0$ @the year o =egelIs )henomenology of
SpiritRA- to 6hi8h =egel rea8ted i! his @posthumously publishedA le8tures o! the history o philosophy
6ith a brie a!d ridi8ulously i!adeNuate dismissal 6hi8h totally misses the poi!t o S8helli!gIs
masterpie8e7 /hat is today 8o!sidered a highpoi!t i! the e!tire history o philosophy appeared to =egel
as a! i!sig!ii8a!t mi!or essay7 4o 6o!der- the!- that the topi8 amo!g 8o!temporary =egel s8holars is
J/hat 6ould =egelIs rejoi!der have bee! to S8helli!gIs 8ritiNue o diale8ti8s as a mere V!egative
philosophyIMK Amo!g others- Gieter =e!ri8h a!d Frederi8k 3eiser have tried to re8o!stru8t a =egelia!
a!s6er7
/he!- i! 1&(1- it 6as a!!ou!8ed that the old S8helli!g 6ould go to 3erli! a!d start tea8hi!g
there- a!s6eri!g the 8all by the Crussia! ki!g himsel to ight the Jdrago!seed o =egelia! pa!theismK
6ith its Ja8ile om!is8ie!8e-K *arl Fose!kra!U- a leadi!g pupil o =egel- 6rote that he 6as JdelightedK
by this prospe8t+

9 looked or6ard to the ight that this o88asio! must 8ause7 9 rejoi8ed i! Nuiet over 6hat by all
appeara!8es 6ould be the toughest test o the =egelia! system a!d its adhere!ts7 9 revelled i! the
eeli!g o progress- 6hi8h or philosophy must spri!g rom this7 9 greeted this 8halle!ge as a
phe!ome!o! !ever beore e!8ou!tered i! philosophy- 6here a philosopher should have the po6er to
step beyo!d the 8ir8le o his 8reatio! a!d grasp its 8o!seNue!8es- 6hi8h i! the history o philosophy
u!til !o6 is 6ithout pre8ede!t7
2
9t is ee8tively as i- o! su8h o88asio!s- a! impossible e!8ou!ter takes pla8e+ a philosopher is
someho6 able to step o!to his o6! shoulders a!d see himsel- his thought- Jobje8tively-K as part o a
larger moveme!t o ideas- i!tera8ti!g 6ith 6hat 8omes ater7 /hat is the philosophi8al status o these
Jretroa8tiveK rejoi!dersM 9t is all too easy to 8laim @i! the postmoder! vei! o the Je!d o the gra!d
!arrativesKA that they bear 6it!ess to the ailure o every ge!eral s8heme o progress+ they do !ot so
mu8h u!dermi!e the u!derlyi!g li!e o su88essio! @rom *a!t to late S8helli!gA as- rather- highlight its
most i!teresti!g a!d lively mome!t- the mome!t 6he!- as it 6ere- a thought rebels agai!st its redu8tio!
to a term i! the 8hai! o Jdevelopme!tK a!d asserts its absolute right @or 8laimA7
Sometimes- su8h rea8tio!s are mere outbursts o a helpless disorie!tatio!T sometimes- they are
themselves the true mome!ts o progress7 That is to say- 6he! the Hld is atta8ked by the 4e6- this irst
appeara!8e o the 4e6 is- as a rule- lat a!d !aSveEthe true dime!sio! o the 4e6 arises o!ly 6he! the
Hld rea8ts to @the irst appeara!8e oA the 4e67 Cas8al rea8ted rom a Dhristia! sta!dpoi!t to s8ie!tii8
se8ular moder!ity- a!d his Jrea8tio!K @his struggli!g 6ith the problem o ho6 to remai! a Dhristia! i!
the !e6 8o!ditio!sA tells us mu8h more about moder!ity tha! its dire8t partisa!s7
"
True JprogressK
emerges rom the rea8tio! o the Hld to progress7 True revolutio!aries are al6ays rele8ted
8o!servatives7 As Foma! 3ai!to!- .utherIs 8omme!tator- put it+ JThe most i!trepid revolutio!ary is
the o!e 6ho has a ear greater tha! a!ythi!g his oppo!e!ts 8a! i!li8t upo! himK
(
Ea versio! o
Fa8i!eIs J9 ear 1od- a!d 9 have !o other ears-K rom his +thalie7
H!e o the great 8ases o a philosopher a!s6eri!g his su88essor is that o =usserl vis:g:vis
=eidegger7 =usserl is ote! reproa8hed or tryi!g to 8li!g o!to the Jabstra8tK Dartesia! subje8t- that is-
or aili!g to ully grasp In*der*Welt*Sein- the subje8tIs a8tive e!gageme!t i! its lie 6orldEo!ly
=eidegger- it is said- 6as able to make this move- i! Sein und Neit7 /hat i- ho6ever- it is =eidegger
6ho is !ot J8o!8reteK e!ough i! his 8ritiNue o =usserlM /hat i he overlooks the e?iste!tial base o
=usserlIs phe!ome!ologi8al redu8tio!M =usserlIs phe!ome!ologi8al redu8tio! is a! e?emplary 8ase o
the gap bet6ee! the pure logi8al pro8ess o reaso!i!g a!d the 8orrespo!di!g spiritual attitude7 9 o!e
limits o!esel to the pro8ess o reaso!i!g- =usserlIs dedu8tio! 8a!!ot but appear a! e?travaga!t
e?er8ise i! Jabstra8t reaso!i!gK at its 6orst+ all 6e 8a! be sure that really e?ists is the pro8ess o
thi!ki!g that is 9T so i 6e 6a!t a! absolutely s8ie!tii8 starti!g poi!t- 6e 6ill have to bra8ket the !aSve:
realist !otio! o thi!gs e?isti!g out there i! the 6orld a!d take i!to a88ou!t o!ly their pure appeara!8e-
the 6ay they appear to us a!d are 8orrelative to our @tra!s8e!de!talA a8ts7 /hat su8h a! u!dersta!di!g
misses is that the state des8ribed by =usserl i! terms o the Jphe!ome!ologi8al redu8tio!K is mu8h
more tha! this- approa8hi!g a! e?iste!tial e?perie!8e a!d attitude 8lose to some 8urre!ts 6ithi! early
3uddhism+ the attitude o 7ealit=tsverlust- o e?perie!8i!g reality as a dream- a totally de:
substa!tialiUed lo6 o ragile a!d ephemeral appeara!8es- i! relatio! to 6hi8h 9 am !ot a! e!gaged
age!t- but a stu!!ed passive observer observi!g my o6! dream7 0ve! 6he! 9 a8t- it is !ot the 8ore o
me that a8tsE9 observe my Jsel-K a!other ethereal appeara!8e- i!tera8ti!g 6ith other appeara!8es7
=usserl should thus also be read agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the u!ity o philosophy a!d the
e?iste!tial positio! i! a8tual lie- 6hi8h 6as or the irst time e?pli8itly posited by Fi8hte- 6ho
Jproposed to develop a philosophi8al theory rom the perspe8tive o the livi!g mi!d that dire8tly
rele8ted the a8tual lie o the mi!d7K
#
This attitude is best e?pressed i! Fi8hteIs sayi!g that the ki!d o
philosophy o!e has depe!ds o! 6hat ki!d o ma! o!e is+ philosophy is !ot a !eutral 6orld:vie6- but a
rele8tive appropriatio! o o!eIs pre:theoreti8al e?iste!tial attitudes7 A!d is !ot =egelIs
)henomenology of Spirit a systemati8 deployme!t o this sta!8eM 9s !ot every Jigure o 8o!s8ious!essK
des8ribed by =egel a u!ity o a philosophi8al !otio! a!d a pra8ti8al lie:6orld positio!M
'
This bri!gs
us ba8k to 3alm`s a!d the reaso!s 6hy .a8a! retai!ed the term Jsubje8tK+ =usserlIs phe!ome!ologi8al
redu8tio! impli8itly reers to the e?iste!tial e?perie!8e o a ki!d o Jpsy8hoti8K dise!gageme!t or
6hi8h there is !o pla8e i! the =eideggeria! edii8e7 This is 6hy =usserlIs ma!us8ripts o! passive
sy!thesis a!d time:8o!s8ious!ess are so pre8ious7
Far rom bei!g mere oot!otes i! the history o philosophy or patheti8 dead e!ds- these detours
o the Hld 6hi8h- i!stead o gra8iously 8o!8edi!g deeat a!d leavi!g the s8e!e- persist a!d 8ou!ter:
atta8k the 4e6- are i! a8t the very 8atalysts o its Jdevelopme!t7K To grasp a philosophy at its most
radi8al- o!e should imagi!e- or e?ample- ho6 *a!t 6ould have a!s6ered =egel- ho6 =egel 6ould
have a!s6ered the late S8helli!g or ,ar?- ho6 =usserl 6ould have a!s6ered =eidegger7
FFH, F9D=T0IS I,0 TH =010.IS S)320DT

Arguably the most i!teresti!g 8ase o su8h a retroa8tive rejoi!der is prese!ted by Fi8hteIs late
philosophy i! 6hi8h he @impli8itly or e?pli8itlyA a!s6ers his 8riti8s- primarily S8helli!g7 .et us the!
o8us o! Fi8hteIs shit rom the sel:positi!g 9 to the asubje8tive divi!e 3ei!g as the ultimate grou!d o
all reality7 =ere is 1Y!ter BZllerIs su88i!8t des8riptio! o this basi8 shit i! Fi8hteIs do8tri!e rom the
2e!a period @1$%(X%%A to the 3erli! period @1$%%X1&1(A+ i! the 2e!a period-

the 9- i! its 8apa8ity as absolute 9- had u!8tio!ed as the pri!8iple o all k!o6ledge7 Ater 1&00- the 9
provides the orm @Ichform+ J9:ormKA- o k!o6ledge as su8h7 The grou!d is !o6 !o lo!ger ide!tiied
6ith the 9 <ua absolute 9 but 6ith somethi!g absolute prior to a!d origi!ally i!depe!de!t o the 9 @Seyn-
J3ei!g-K or (ott- J1odKA7 3y 8o!trast- the 9 <ua 9:orm is the basi8 mode or the appeara!8e o the
absolute- 6hi8h does !ot appear itsel a!d as su8h7
$
H!e should be very pre8ise i! readi!g this shit+ it is !ot simply that Fi8hte Jaba!do!sK the 9 as
the absolute grou!d- redu8i!g it to a subordi!ate mome!t o the tra!s:subje8tive Absolute- to a mode or
orm o appeara!8e o this Absolute7 9 a!ythi!g- it is o!ly !o6 @ater 2e!aA that Fi8hte 8orre8tly
grasped the basi8 eature o the 9+ the 9 is Jas su8hK a split o the Absolute- the Jmi!imal diere!8eK o
its sel:appeari!g7 9! other 6ords- the !otio! o 9 as the absolute 1rou!d o all bei!g se8retly but
u!avoidably Jsubsta!tiviUesK the subje8t7
Fi8hte is- ho6ever- u!able to ormulate this i!sight 8learlyEhis limitatio! is dis8er!ible i! the
6ro!g a!s6er he gives to the 8ru8ial Nuestio!+ to 6hom does the Absolute appear i! the 9:ormM
Fi8hteIs a!s6er is+ to @subje8tiveA appeara!8e- to the subje8t to 6hom the Absolute appears7 /hat he is
!ot able to assert is that- i! appeari!g to the subje8t- the Absolute also appears to itself- i7e7- that the
subje8tive rele8tio! o the Absolute is the AbsoluteIs sel:rele8tio!7
The key te?t is here the Wissenschaftslehre rom 1&12- i! 8o!trast to the 2e!a versio!s o
Wissenschaftslehre rom 1$%(X%%7 9! these early versio!s- Fi8hteIs strategy is the sta!dard subje8tive:
idealist o!e o 8riti8ally de!ou!8i!g the JreiiedK !otio! o obje8tive reality- o thi!gs e?isti!g out there
i! the 6orld o 6hi8h the subje8t is also part+ o!e should dispel this !e8essary illusio! o i!depe!de!t
obje8tive reality by 6ay o deployi!g its subje8tive ge!esis7 =ere- the o!ly Absolute is the spo!ta!eous
sel:positi!g o the absolute 9+ the absolute 9 desig!ates the 8oi!8ide!8e o bei!g a!d a8ti!g @-at*
0andlungA- it is 6hat it does7 Agai!st this versio! o the Fi8htea! 9- =egel made the 6ell:k!o6!
remark that it has the same relatio! to thi!gs as a! empty purse has to mo!ey7 H!e should !ot dismiss
this parallel as simply a 8ase o mo8ki!g aggressio!- implyi!g that Fi8hteIs sel:positi!g o the absolute
9 6hi8h e!ge!ders all its 8o!te!t out o itsel has the same @!ilA value as a! empty purse e?pe8ted to
ge!erate mo!ey out o itselT that is- i! the same 6ay that someo!e has to put mo!ey i!to the purse
rom outside- the 8o!te!t o the pure 9 should Jae8tK the 9 rom outside a!d thus 8a!!ot be ge!erated
out o the absolute 9Is Jsel:ae8tio!7K H! the 8o!trary- this parallel should be give! its ull 6eight-
also taki!g i!to a88ou!t *a!tIs use o mo!ey as a! e?ample i! his 8riti8ism o the o!tologi8al proo o
the e?iste!8e o 1odEyou 8a!!ot dedu8e e?iste!8e rom the 8o!8ept alo!e- it is !ot the same thi!g to
have a 8o!8ept o 100 thalers a!d to have 100 thalers i! your po8ket7 =egelIs reply is that- pre8isely-
1od is !ot the same type o obje8t as 100 thalers+ at the level o the Absolute- the 8o!tai!i!g Form can
ge!erate its o6! 8o!te!t7
9! 1&12- ho6ever- Fi8hte takes o!e urther step ba8k6ards+ Jit is !o lo!ger the absolute!ess o
the thi!gs that is u!veiled as a! u!avoidable illusio!- but the absolute!ess o the 9 itsel7K
&
The sel:
positi!g o the 9 is itsel a! illusory appeara!8e- a! JimageK o the o!ly true Absolute- the tra!s:
subje8tive immovable absolute 3ei!g @J1odKA7 3a8k i! 1$%0s- ater Fi8hte had e?plai!ed to ,adame
de Stael the 9Is sel:positi!g- she s!apped ba8k+ JSo you mea! that the absolute 9 is like 3aro!
,Y!8hhause!- 6ho saved himsel rom dro6!i!g i! a s6amp by grabbi!g his hair a!d pulli!g himsel
out 6ith his o6! ha!dsMK 9t is as i the late Fi8hte a88epted this 8ritiNue- 8o!8edi!g that the sel:
rele8ti!g 9 is a 8himera loati!g i! mid:air- 6hi8h has to be grou!ded i! some irm positive Absolute7
The 8riti8al a!alysis has thus to take a urther step ba8k+ irst rom obje8tive reality to the
tra!s8e!de!tal 9- the! rom the tra!s8e!de!tal 9 to the absolute 3ei!g+ the 9Is sel:positi!g is a! image
o the divi!e Absolute- !ot the Absolute itsel+

the Absolute appears- as lie tea8hes us7 The appeara!8e o the Absolute mea!s that it appears as the
Absolute7 Si!8e determi!a8y 8omes 6ith !egatio!- the Absolute must bri!g orth its o6! opposite- a
!o!:Absolute- to be able to appear as the Absolute7 This !o!:Absolute is the AbsoluteIs appeara!8e7
The appeara!8e is also that to 6hi8h the Absolute appears7 Thus- the Absolute 8a! appear to the
appeara!8e o!ly i at the same time its opposite- !amely the appeara!8e- appears to the appeara!8e as
6ell7 There is !o appeari!g o the Absolute 6ithout a! appeari!g o the appeara!8e to itsel- that is-
6ithout rele8tivity o the appeara!8e7 Si!8e the Absolute appears !e8essarily- the sel:rele8tio! o the
appeara!8e is !e8essary too7Fi8hte relates the u!itary aspe8t o the appeara!8e to the appeari!g o the
Absolute- 6hereas the multipli8ity aspe8t is li!ked to the appeara!8eIs sel:rele8tio!7 Si!8e sel:
rele8tio! is a pro8ess- there is tra!smutatio! a!d ge!esis 6ithi! the appeara!8e 6he! it appears to
itsel7 0mployi!g the !otio! o bei!g as u!ity a!d immutability- Fi8hte 8o!8ludes that the appeara!8e is
i!soar as it is a ma!iestatio! or a sel:revelatio! o the AbsoluteT a!d that the appeara!8e is !ot
i!soar as it is sel:rele8tive7
%
This shit 8a! also be ormulated as o!e rom positi!g to appeari!g+ 6hile i! 1$%(- the I posits
itself as positing itself- i! 1&12-

the appearance appears to itself as appearing to itself7 To appear- ho6ever- is a! a8tivity7 Thus- the
appeara!8e appears to itsel as bei!g a8tive through itsel- or as a pri!8iple Jrom itsel- out o itsel-
through itsel7K Fi8hte 8o!8ludes that- si!8e the appeara!8e is 8o!stituted by the a8t o appeari!g to
itsel- it 8o!8eives o its o6! e?iste!8e @its Jormal bei!gKA as grou!ded i! itsel7 As soo! as the
appeara!8e rele8ts o! itsel- it u!dersta!ds itsel to e?ist through itsel- that is- to be a se7 3ut this
8a!!ot be true- as the Wissenschaftslehre demo!strates7 H!ly H!e is i! the se!se o aseitas- !amely the
Absolute- so that appeara!8e 8a!!ot truly be i! this se!se7
10
A double mediatio! has to be a88omplished here7 Firstly- i- i! the appeari!g o the Absolute-
the Absolute appears as the Absolute- this mea!s that the Absolute has to appear as absolute in contrast
to other %mere' appearancesEso there must be a 8ut i! the domai! o appeara!8es- a 8ut bet6ee!
JmereK appeara!8es a!d the appeara!8e through 6hi8h the Absolute itsel tra!spires7 9! other 6ords-
the gap bet6ee! appeara!8e a!d true 3ei!g must i!s8ribe itsel i!to the very domai! o appeari!g7
3ut 6hat this rele8tivity o appeari!g mea!s is that the Absolute also e?poses itsel to the
da!ger o merely Jappeari!gK to be the AbsoluteEthe appeari!g of the Absolute tur!s i!to the
@misleadi!g- illusoryA appeari!g to be the Absolute7 9s !ot the e!tire history o religio! @rom a
materialist sta!dpoi!t- o 8ourseA the history o su8h alse appeara!8es o the AbsoluteM At this level-
Jthe AbsoluteK is its o6! appeari!g- that is- a! orga!iUatio! o appeara!8es 6hi8h evokes the mirage
that there is- hidde! behi!d it- a! Absolute 6hi8h appears @shi!es through itA7 =ere- i! ee8t- the
illusio! is !o lo!ger o!e o mistaki!g appeari!g or bei!g- but o mistaki!g bei!g or appeari!g+ the
o!ly Jbei!gK o the Absolute is its appeari!g- a!d the illusio! is that this appeari!g is a mere JimageK
behi!d 6hi8h there is a tra!s8e!de!t true 3ei!g7 So 6he! Fi8hte 6rites the ollo6i!g he overlooks that
error 6hi8h is the e?a8t opposite o mistaki!g images or bei!g @that o taki!g as the true bei!g 6hat is
ee8tively o!ly its imageA- !amely the error o mista"ing being for images @i! other 6ords o taki!g as
merely a! image o the true bei!g 6hat is ee8tively the true bei!g itselA+ J0very error 6ithout
e?8eptio! 8o!sists i! mistaki!g images or bei!g7 The Wissenschaftslehre has or the irst time
pro!ou!8ed ho6 ar this error e?te!ds through sho6i!g that bei!g is o!ly i! 1od7K
11
At this level- o!e
should thus a88ept the Gerridea! theologi8al 8o!8lusio!+ J1odK is !ot a! absolute 3ei!g persisti!g i!
itsel- it is the pure virtuality o a Cromise- the pure appeari!g o itsel7 9! other 6ords- the %+bsolute'
beyond appearances coincides with an %absolute appearance!' an appearance beneath which there is
no substantial /eing7
Se8o!d mediatio!+ i the Absolute is to appear- appeari!g itsel must appear to itsel as
appeari!g- a!d Fi8hte 8o!8eives this sel:appeari!g o appeara!8e as subje8tive sel:rele8tio!7 Fi8hte is
right to e!dorse a t6o:step 8riti8al approa8h @irst the move rom the obje8t to its subje8tive
8o!stitutio!- the! the meta:8riti8al step o deployi!g the abyssal mirage o the subje8tIs sel:positi!gAT
6hat he gets 6ro!g is the !ature o the Absolute that grou!ds subje8tivity itsel7 The late Fi8hteIs
Absolute is a! immovable tra!s8e!de!t 9!:itsel- e?ter!al to the moveme!t o rele8tio!7 /hat Fi8hte
8a!!ot thi!k is the Jlie-K moveme!t- mediatio!- i! the Absolute itsel+ ho6- pre8isely- the AbsoluteIs
appeari!g is !ot a mere appeara!8e- but a sel:a8tualiUatio!- a sel:revelatio!- o the Absolute7 This
imma!e!t dy!ami8s does not make the Absolute itsel a subje8t- but it i!s8ribes subje8tiviUatio! i!to its
very 8ore7
/hat Fi8hte 6as urthermore u!able to grasp is the spe8ulative ide!tity o these t6o e?treme
poles @pure absolute 3ei!g a!d the appeara!8e appeari!g to itselA+ the 9Is sel:positi!g sel:rele8tivity
is- Nuite literally- the JimageK o the Absolute as sel:grou!ded 3ei!g7 Therei! resides the obje8tive
iro!y o Fi8hteIs developme!t+ Fi8hte- the philosopher o subje8tive sel:positi!g- e!ds up redu8i!g
subje8tivity to a mere appeara!8e o a! immovable absolute 9!:itsel7 The proper =egelia! reproa8h to
Fi8hte is thus !ot that he is too Jsubje8tive-K but- o! the 8o!trary- that he is u!able to really thi!k
Substa!8e also as Subje8t+ the shit o his thought to6ards the asubje8tive Absolute is !ot a rea8tio! to
his earlier e?8essive subje8tivism- but a rea8tio! to his i!ability to ormulate the 8ore o subje8tivity7
=egelIs true !ovelty 8a! be see! 6ith regard to the topi8 o JabsoluteK idealism- i! terms o the
sta!dard history o post:*a!tia! thought ormed by the triad o Fi8hteIs Jsubje8tiveK idealism-
S8helli!gIs Jobje8tiveK idealism- a!d =egelIs JabsoluteK idealism7 The desig!atio! o S8helli!gIs
Identit=tsphilosophie as Jobje8tiveK idealism is- ho6ever- de8eivi!g+ the 6hole poi!t o his
Identit=tsphilosophie is that subje8tive idealism @tra!s8e!de!tal philosophyA a!d obje8tive idealism
@philosophy o !atureA are t6o approa8hes to the Third- the Absolute beyo!d or be!eath the duality o
spirit a!d !ature- subje8t a!d obje8t- u!derlyi!g a!d ma!iesti!g itsel i! both7 @The late Fi8hte does
somethi!g similar 6he! he passes rom the tra!s8e!de!tal 9 to the divi!e 3ei!g as the absolute 1rou!d
o all reality7A 9! this se!se- it is mea!i!gless to 8all =egelIs philosophy Jabsolute idealismK+ his poi!t
is pre8isely that there is no need for a -hird element- the medium or 1rou!d beyo!d subje8t a!d obje8t:
substa!8e7 /e start 6ith obje8tivity- a!d the subje8t is !othi!g but the sel:mediatio! o obje8tivity7
/he!- i! =egelIs diale8ti8s- 6e have a 8ouple o opposites- their u!ity is !ot a Third- a! u!derlyi!g
medium- but one of the two+ a ge!us is its o6! spe8ies- or- a ge!us ultimately has o!ly o!e spe8ies-
6hi8h is 6hy spe8ii8 diere!8e 8oi!8ides 6ith the diere!8e bet6ee! ge!us a!d spe8ies7
/e 8a! thus ide!tiy three positio!s+ metaphysi8al- tra!s8e!de!tal- a!d Jspe8ulative7K 9! the
irst- reality is simply per8eived as e?isti!g out there- a!d the task o philosophy is to a!alyUe its basi8
stru8ture7 9! the se8o!d- the philosopher i!vestigates the subje8tive 8o!ditio!s o the possibility o
obje8tive reality- its tra!s8e!de!tal ge!esis7 9! the third- subje8tivity is re:i!s8ribed i!to reality- but !ot
simply redu8ed to a part o obje8tive reality7 /hile the subje8tive 8o!stitutio! o realityEthe split that
separates the subje8t rom the 9!:itselEis ully admitted- this very split is tra!sposed ba8k i!to reality
as its ke!oti8 sel:emptyi!g @to use the Dhristia! theologi8al termA7 Appeara!8e is !ot redu8ed to
realityT rather the very pro8ess o appeara!8e is 8o!8eived rom the sta!dpoi!t o reality- so that the
Nuestio! is !ot J=o6- i at all- 8a! 6e pass rom appeara!8e to realityMK but J=o6 8a! somethi!g like
appeara!8e arise i! the midst o realityM /hat are the 8o!ditio!s or reality appeari!g to itselMK
For =e!ri8h- Fi8hteIs problem is that o re8og!itio!+ ho6 do 9 k!o6 that 6hat 9 see 6he! 9 look
at mysel is JmeKM .a8a!Is solutio! is+ 9 do not k!o6- re8og!itio! is misre8og!itio!T i! other 6ords-
J9K is origi!ally a void- a failure to lo8ate mysel i! the order o 3ei!g7 There is a 8o!stitutive gap
bet6ee! the 9 a!d the substa!8e o 9- or 6hat 9 am as obje8tEthis impossibility is missed by Fi8hte a!d
=e!ri8h7
H!e o the sta!dard gags i! Ameri8a! TV 8omedy is the late:re8og!itio! s8e!eEa ma! sees a
8ar bei!g to6ed a6ay- laughs 8ruelly at the o6!erIs misortu!e- beore re8oili!g i! surprise a 8ouple o
se8o!ds later+ J3ut- 6ait- thatIs my 8arRK The most eleme!tary orm o this gag is- o 8ourse- that o
delayed self:re8og!itio!+ 9 pass a glass door a!d thi!k 9 see behi!d it a! ugly- disigured guyT 9 laugh-
a!d the!- all o a sudde!- realiUe that the glass 6as a mirror- a!d that the igure 9 sa6 6as mysel7 The
.a8a!ia! thesis is that this delay is stru8tural+ there is !o dire8t sel:a8Nuai!ta!8eT the sel is empty7
THE FICHTEAN AGER

/hat are the philosophi8al roots o Fi8hteIs error regardi!g the status o appeari!gM .et us
retur! to the early Fi8hte @o the 2e!a periodA- 6ho is usually per8eived as a radi8al subje8tive idealist7
H! this readi!g- there are t6o possible des8riptio!s o our reality+ Jdogmati8K @Spi!oUa! determi!isti8
materialism+ 6e are part o reality- submitted to its la6s- a! obje8t amo!g others- our reedom is a!
illusio!A a!d JidealistK @the subje8t is auto!omous a!d reeT as the absolute 9 it spo!ta!eously posits
realityA7 Feaso!i!g alo!e 8a!!ot de8ide bet6ee! the t6o- the de8isio! is a pra8ti8al o!eT or- to Nuote
agai! Fi8hteIs amous di8tum+ 6hat philosophy o!e 8hooses depe!ds o! 6hat ki!d o ma! o!e isEa!d-
i! this 8hoi8e- Fi8hte passio!ately opts or idealism7 =o6ever- a 8loser look Nui8kly makes 8lear that
this is not Fi8hteIs positio!7 9dealism is or Fi8hte !ot a !e6 positive tea8hi!g 6hi8h should repla8e
materialism- but- to Nuote Ceter CreussIs perspi8uous ormulatio!+

merely a! i!telle8tual e?er8ise ope! to a!yo!e 6ho a88epts the auto!omy o theoreti8al reaso!7 9ts
u!8tio! is to destroy the 8urre!t determi!isti8 dogma7 3ut i it 6ere !o6 itsel to be8ome a theoreti8al
u!dersta!di!g o reality it 6ould be every bit as bad7 /hile huma! lie is !o lo!ger see! as a mere
!atural eve!t it 6ould !o6 be see! as a mere dream7 /e 6ould be !o more huma! i! the o!e
u!dersta!di!g tha! the other7 9! the o!e u!dersta!di!g 9 am the material to 6hi8h lie happe!s as a!
eve!t- i! the other 9 am the u!i!volved spe8tator o the dream 6hi8h is my lie7 Fi8hte i!ds ea8h o
these to be eNual 8ause or lame!t7 4o- the task is !ot to repla8e o!e theoreti8al philosophy 6ith
a!other o!e- but to get out o philosophy altogether7 Chilosophi8al reaso! is !ot auto!omous- but has its
ou!datio! i! pra8ti8al reaso!- i7e7- the 6ill O Fi8hte is 6idely misu!derstood as opti!g or idealism
over realism O !either realism @o 6hatever ki!dA !or idealism @o 6hatever ki!dA yields k!o6ledge-
theoreti8al u!dersta!di!g o reality7 3oth yield u!a88eptable !o!se!se i take! to their i!al
8o!8lusio!s7 A!d pre8isely this yields the valuable 8o!8lusio! that the i!telle8t is !ot auto!omous7 The
i!telle8t- to u!8tio! properly as part o a 6hole huma! bei!g- must relate to the a8tivity o that bei!g7
=uma! bei!gs do 8o!template a!d try to u!dersta!d reality- but !ot rom a sta!dpoi!t outside the
6orld7 =uma! bei!gs are i! the 6orld a!d it is as age!ts i! the 6orld that 6e reNuire a! u!dersta!di!g
o the 6orld7 The i!telle8t is !ot auto!omous but has its ou!datio! i! our age!8y- i! pra8ti8al reaso! or
the 6ill7
12
=o6 does the 6ill provide this ou!datio!M

O i! a! a8t o aith it tra!sorms the appare!t pi8ture sho6 o e?perie!8e i!to a! obje8tive 6orld o
thi!gs a!d o other people O aith i!di8ates a ree @i7e7- theoreti8ally u!justiiableA a8t o mi!d by
6hi8h the 8o!ditio!s 6ithi! 6hi8h 6e 8a! a8t a!d use our i!telle8ts 8ome to be or us7
1"
Fi8hteIs positio! is thus !ot that a passive observer o reality 8hooses determi!ism- 6hile a!
e!gaged age!t 8hooses idealism+ take! as a! e?pla!atory theory- idealism does !ot lead to pra8ti8al
e!gageme!t- but to the passive positio! o bei!g the observer o o!eIs o6! dream @reality is already
8o!stituted by me- 9 o!ly have to observe it like that- that is- !ot as a substa!tial i!depe!de!t reality- but
as a dreamA7 3oth materialism a!d idealism lead to 8o!seNue!8es 6hi8h make pra8ti8al a8tivity
mea!i!gless or impossible7 9! order or me to be pra8ti8ally a8tive- e!gaged i! the 6orld- 9 have to
a88ept mysel as a bei!g Ji! the 6orld-K 8aught i! a situatio!- i!tera8ti!g 6ith real obje8ts 6hi8h resist
me a!d 6hi8h 9 try to tra!sorm7 Furthermore- i! order to a8t as a ree moral subje8t- 9 have to a88ept
the i!depe!de!t e?iste!8e o other subje8ts like me- as 6ell as the e?iste!8e o a higher spiritual order
i! 6hi8h 9 parti8ipate a!d 6hi8h is i!depe!de!t o !atural determi!ism7 To a88ept all this is !ot a
matter o k!o6ledgeEit 8a! o!ly be a matter o aith7 Fi8hteIs poi!t is thus that the e?iste!8e o
e?ter!al reality @o 6hi8h 9 mysel am a partA is !ot a matter o theoreti8al proos- but a pra8ti8al
!e8essity- a !e8essary presuppositio! o mysel as a! age!t i!terve!i!g i! reality- i!tera8ti!g 6ith it7
The iro!y is that Fi8hte here 8omes u!8a!!ily 8lose to 4ikolai 3ukhari!- a die:hard diale8ti8al
materialist 6ho- i! his )hilosophical +rabes<ues @o!e o the most tragi8 6orks i! the e!tire history o
philosophyEa ma!us8ript 6ritte! i! 1%"$- 6he! he 6as i! the .ubya!ka priso!- a6aiti!g e?e8utio!A-
tries to bri!g together or the last time his e!tire lie:e?perie!8e i!to a 8o!siste!t philosophi8al edii8e7
The irst a!d 8ru8ial 8hoi8e he 8o!ro!ts is that bet6ee! the materialist assertio! o the reality o the
e?ter!al 6orld a!d 6hat he 8alls the Ji!trigues o solipsism7K H!8e this key battle is 6o!- o!8e the lie:
asserti!g relia!8e o! the real 6orld liberates us rom the damp priso!:house o our a!tasies- 6e 8a!
breathe reely- simply goi!g o! to dra6 all the 8o!seNue!8es rom this irst key result7 The mysterious
eature o the bookIs irst 8hapter- i! 6hi8h 3ukhari! 8o!ro!ts this dilemma- is its te!sio! bet6ee!
orm a!d 8o!te!t+ although- at the level o 8o!te!t- 3ukhari! adama!tly de!ies that his book is deali!g
6ith a 8hoi8e bet6ee! t6o belies or primordial e?iste!tial de8isio!s- the 6hole 8hapter is stru8tured
like a dialogue bet6ee! a healthy but !aSve materialist a!d ,ephistopheles- sta!di!g or the Jdevil o
solipsism-K a J8u!!i!g spiritK 6hi8h Jdrapes itsel i! a! e!8ha!ti!gly patter!ed 8loak o iro! logi8- a!d
O laughs- poki!g out its to!gue7K
1(
JDurli!g his lips iro!i8ally-K ,ephistopheles tempts the
materialist 6ith the idea that- si!8e all 6e have dire8t a88ess to are our subje8tive se!satio!s- the o!ly
6ay 6e 8a! pass rom them to the belie i! some e?ter!al reality i!depe!de!t o them is by a leap o
aith- Ja salto vitale @as opposed to salto mortaleA7K
1#
9! short- ,ephistophelesIs Jdevil o logi8K tries
to sedu8e us i!to a88epti!g that the belie i! i!depe!de!t e?ter!al reality is a matter o aith- that the
e?iste!8e o Jholy matterK is the u!dame!tal dogma o the JtheologyK o diale8ti8al materialism7 Ater
a series o argume!ts @6hi8h- o!e has to admit- although !ot all devoid o philosophi8al i!terest- are
irredeemably marked by a pre:*a!tia! !aSvetLA- 3ukhari! 8o!8ludes the 8hapter 6ith the iro!i8 8all
@6hi8h- !o!etheless- 8a!!ot 8o!8eal the u!derlyi!g despairA+ J=old your to!gue- ,ephistophelesR =old
your dissolute to!gueRK
1'
3ut i! spite o this e?or8ism- the devil 8o!ti!ues to reappear throughout the
bookEsee the irst se!te!8e o Dhapter 12+ JAter a lo!g i!terval- the demo! o iro!y agai! makes his
appeara!8e7K
1$
As i! Fi8hte- e?ter!al reality is a matter o aith- o breaki!g the deadlo8k o theoreti8al
sophistry 6ith a pra8ti8al salto vitale7
/here Fi8hte is more 8o!siste!t tha! 3ukhari! is i! his a6are!ess that there is a! eleme!t o
credo <ua absurdum i! this leap+ the dis8ord bet6ee! our k!o6ledge a!d our ethi8o:pra8ti8al
e!gageme!t is irredu8ible- o!e 8a!!ot bri!g them together i! a 8omplete J6orld:vie67K Fi8hte here
radi8aliUes *a!t- 6ho had already 8o!je8tured that the tra!s8e!de!tal 9- i! its Jspo!ta!eity-K o88upies a
third spa8e bet6ee! phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a7 The subje8tIs reedom>spo!ta!eity is !ot the property o
a phe!ome!al e!tity- he!8e it 8a!!ot be dismissed as a alse appeara!8e 8o!8eali!g the !oume!al a8t
that 6e are totally 8aught i! a! i!a88essible !e8essityT ho6ever- it is also !ot simply !oume!al7 9! a
mysterious sub8hapter o his ,riti<ue of )ractical 7eason e!titled JH the /ise Adaptatio! o ,a!Is
Dog!itive Fa8ulties to =is Cra8ti8al Vo8atio!-K *a!t e!deavors to a!s6er the Nuestio! o 6hat 6ould
happe! to us i 6e 6ere to gai! a88ess to the !oume!al domai!- to the Ding an sich+

i!stead o the 8o!li8t 6hi8h !o6 the moral dispositio! has to 6age 6ith i!8li!atio!s a!d i! 6hi8h-
ater some deeats- moral stre!gth o mi!d may be gradually 6o!- 1od a!d eter!ity i! their a6ul
majesty 6ould sta!d u!8easi!gly beore our eyes O Thus most a8tio!s 8o!ormi!g to the la6 6ould be
do!e rom ear- e6 6ould be do!e rom hope- !o!e rom duty7 The moral 6orth o a8tio!s- o! 6hi8h
alo!e the 6orth o the perso! a!d eve! o the 6orld depe!ds i! the eyes o supreme 6isdom- 6ould !ot
e?ist at all7 The 8o!du8t o ma!- so lo!g as his !ature remai!ed as it is !o6- 6ould be 8ha!ged i!to
mere me8ha!ism- 6here- as i! a puppet sho6- everythi!g 6ould gesti8ulate 6ell but !o lie 6ould be
ou!d i! the igures7
1&
9! short- the dire8t a88ess to the !oume!al domai! 6ould deprive us o the very Jspo!ta!eityK
6hi8h orms the ker!el o tra!s8e!de!tal reedom+ it 6ould tur! us i!to lieless automata- or- to put it i!
todayIs terms- Jthi!ki!g ma8hi!es7K The impli8atio! o this passage is mu8h more radi8al a!d
parado?i8al tha! it may appear7 9 6e ig!ore its i!8o!siste!8y @ho6 8ould ear a!d lieless gesti8ulatio!
8oe?istMA- the 8o!8lusio! it imposes is that- at the level o phe!ome!a as 6ell as at the !oume!al level-
huma!s are a Jmere me8ha!ismK 6ith !o auto!omy a!d reedom+ as phe!ome!a- 6e are !ot ree- 6e
are a part o !ature- a Jmere me8ha!ism-K totally subjugated by 8ausal li!ks- a part o the !e?us o
8auses a!d ee8tsT a!d as !oume!a- 6e are agai! !ot ree- but redu8ed to a Jmere me8ha!ism7K
1%
Hur
reedom persists o!ly i! a spa8e between the phe!ome!al a!d the !oume!al7 9t is thereore !ot that
*a!t simply limited 8ausality to the phe!ome!al domai! i! order to be able to assert that- at the
!oume!al level- 6e are ree auto!omous age!ts+ 6e are o!ly ree i!soar as our horiUo! is that o the
phe!ome!al- i!soar as the !oume!al domai! remai!s i!a88essible to us7
20
*a!t ormulated this
impasse i! his amous stateme!t that he had to limit k!o6ledge i! order to 8reate spa8e or aith7 Alo!g
the same li!es-

Fi8hteIs philosophy e!ds i! total 8og!itive skepti8ism- i7e7- i! the aba!do!me!t o philosophy proper-
a!d looks i!stead to a ki!d o Nuasi:religious aith or 6isdom7 3ut he thi!ks that this is !ot a problem-
si!8e all that matters is pra8ti8al+ to produ8e a 6orld it or huma! bei!gs- a!d to produ8e mysel as the
perso! 9 6ould be or all eter!ity7
21
The limitatio! o this positio! resides i! *a!tIs a!d Fi8hteIs i!ability to 8o!8eive positively o
the o!tologi8al status o this !either:phe!ome!al:!or:!oume!al auto!omous:spo!ta!eous subje8t @this
is already =eideggerIs reproa8h i! Sein und Neit+ traditio!al metaphysi8s 8a!!ot thi!k the o!tologi8al
status o DaseinA7 =egelIs solutio! here i!volves the tra!spositio! o the epistemologi8al limitatio! i!to
o!tologi8al a8t+ the void o our k!o6ledge 8orrespo!ds to a void i! bei!g itsel- to the o!tologi8al
i!8omplete!ess o reality7
This tra!spositio! e!ables us to 8ast !e6 light o! the =egelia! dei!itio! o reedom as
J8o!8eived !e8essityK+ the 8o!siste!t !otio! o subje8tive idealism 8ompels us to i!vert this thesis a!d
8o!8eive o !e8essity as @ultimately !othi!g butA 8o!8eived reedom7 The 8e!tral te!et o *a!tIs
tra!s8e!de!tal idealism is that it is the subje8tIs Jspo!ta!eousK @i7e7- radi8ally freeA a8t o
tra!s8e!de!tal apper8eptio! that 8ha!ges the 8o!used lo6 o se!satio!s i!to Jreality-K 6hi8h obeys
!e8essary la6s7 The poi!t is eve! 8learer i! moral philosophy+ 6he! *a!t 8laims that moral .a6 is the
ratio cognoscendi o our tra!s8e!de!tal reedom- does he !ot literally say that !e8essity is 8o!8eived
reedomM 9! other 6ords- the o!ly 6ay or us to get to k!o6 @8o!8eive oA our reedom is via the a8t o
the u!bearable pressure o the moral .a6- o its necessity- 6hi8h e!joi!s us to a8t agai!st the
8ompulsio! o our pathologi8al impulses7 At the most ge!eral level- o!e should posit that J!e8essityK
@the symboli8 !e8essity that regulates our livesA relies o! the abyssal ree a8t o the subje8t- o! its
8o!ti!ge!t de8isio!- o! 6hat .a8a! 8alls the point de capiton- the JNuilti!g poi!t-K 6hi8h magi8ally
tur!s 8o!usio! i!to a !e6 Hrder7 9s this reedom that is !ot yet 8aught up i! the 6eb o !e8essity !ot
the abyss o the J!ight o the 6orldKM
For this reaso!- Fi8hteIs radi8aliUatio! o *a!t is 8o!siste!t- !ot just a subje8tivist e88e!tri8ity7
Fi8hte 6as the irst philosopher to o8us o! the u!8a!!y 8o!ti!ge!8y at the very heart o subje8tivity+
the Fi8htea! subje8t is !ot the overblo6! 0go ] 0go as the absolute Hrigi! o all reality- but a i!ite
subje8t thro6! i!to- 8aught up i!- a 8o!ti!ge!t so8ial situatio! orever eludi!g mastery7
22
The +nstoss-
the primordial impulse that sets i! motio! the gradual sel:limitatio! a!d sel:determi!atio! o the
i!itially void subje8t- is !ot merely a me8ha!i8al e?ter!al impulse+ it also poi!ts to6ards a!other
subje8t 6ho- i! the abyss o its reedom- u!8tio!s as the 8halle!ge @+ufforderungA 8ompelli!g me to
limit>spe8iy my reedom- that is- to a88omplish the passage rom the abstra8t egotisti8 reedom to
8o!8rete reedom 6ithi! the ratio!al ethi8al u!iverseT perhaps this i!tersubje8tive +ufforderung is !ot
merely the se8o!dary spe8ii8atio! o the +nstoss- but its e?emplary origi!al 8ase7 9t is importa!t to
bear i! mi!d the t6o primary mea!i!gs o +nstoss i! 1erma!+ 8he8k- obsta8le- hi!dra!8e- somethi!g
that resists the bou!dless e?pa!sio! o our strivi!gT a!d a! impetus or stimulus- somethi!g that i!8ites
our a8tivity7 +nstoss is !ot simply the obsta8le the absolute 9 posits or itsel i! order to stimulate its
a8tivity- so that by over8omi!g the obsta8le it 8a! assert its 8reative po6er @like the games the
proverbial as8eti8 sai!t plays 6ith himsel- i!ve!ti!g i!8reasi!gly perverse temptatio!s i! order to
8o!irm his stre!gth by su88essully resisti!g themA7 9 the *a!tia! Ding an sich 8orrespo!ds to the
Freudia!:.a8a!ia! Thi!g- +nstoss is 8loser to the ob1et petit a- to the primordial oreig! body that
Jsti8ks i! the throatK o the subje8t- to the obje8t:8ause o desire that splits it up+ Fi8hte himsel dei!es
+nstoss as the !o!:assimilable oreig! body that 8auses the subje8tIs divisio! i!to the empty absolute
subje8t a!d the i!ite determi!ate subje8t- limited by the !o!:97
+nstoss thus desig!ates the mome!t o the Jru!:i!-K the haUardous k!o8k- the e!8ou!ter 6ith
the Feal i! the midst o the ideality o the absolute 9+ there is !o subje8t 6ithout A!stoss- 6ithout the
8ollisio! 6ith a! eleme!t o irredu8ible a8ti8ity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8yEJthe 9 is supposed to e!8ou!ter
6ithi! itsel somethi!g oreig!7K The poi!t is thus to a8k!o6ledge Jthe prese!8e- 6ithi! the 9 itsel- o
a realm o irredu8ible other!ess- o absolute 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d i!8omprehe!sibility O )ltimately- !ot
just A!gelus SilesiusIs rose- but every +nstoss 6hatsoever ist ohne Warum7K
2"
9! 8lear 8o!trast to the
*a!tia! !oume!al Ding that ae8ts our se!ses- +nstoss does !ot 8ome rom outside- it is stricto sensu
e?:timate+ a !o!:assimilable oreig! body i! the very 8ore o the subje8t7 As Fi8hte himsel
emphasiUes- the parado? o +nstoss resides i! the a8t that it is simulta!eously Jpurely subje8tiveK a!d
!ot produ8ed by the a8tivity o the 97 9 +nstoss 6ere !ot Jpurely subje8tive-K i it 6ere already the !o!:
9- part o obje8tivity- 6e 6ould all ba8k i!to Jdogmati8ismKT that is- +nstoss 6ould ee8tively amou!t
to !o more tha! a shado6y remai!der o the *a!tia! Ding an sich a!d 6ould thus o!ly 8o!irm
Fi8hteIs i!8o!seNue!tiality @the most 8ommo! reproa8h agai!st himA7 9 +nstoss 6ere simply
subje8tive- it 6ould be a 8ase o the subje8tIs va8uous playi!g 6ith itsel- a!d 6e 6ould !ever rea8h
the level o obje8tive realityT that is- Fi8hte 6ould ee8tively be a solipsist @a!other 8ommo!pla8e
reproa8h agai!st his philosophyA7 The 8ru8ial poi!t is that +nstoss sets i! motio! the 8o!stitutio! o
JrealityK+ at the begi!!i!g is the pure 9 6ith the !o!:assimilable oreig! body at its heartT the subje8t
8o!stitutes reality by 6ay o assumi!g a dista!8e to6ards the Feal o the ormless +nstoss a!d
8o!erri!g o! it the stru8ture o obje8tivity7 /hat imposes itsel here is the parallel bet6ee! the
Fi8htea! +nstoss a!d the Freudia!:.a8a!ia! s8heme o the relatio!ship bet6ee! the primordial Ich
@3r*IchA a!d the obje8t- the oreig! body i! its midst- 6hi8h disturbs its !ar8issisti8 bala!8e- setti!g i!
motio! the lo!g pro8ess o the gradual e?pulsio! a!d stru8turatio! o this i!!er s!ag- through 6hi8h
@6hat 6e e?perie!8e asA Je?ter!al- obje8tive realityK is 8o!stituted7
9 *a!tIs Ding an sich is !ot Fi8hteIs +nstoss- 6hat is the diere!8eM Hr- to put it i! a!other
6ay+ 6here do 6e i!d i! *a!t somethi!g preiguri!g Fi8hteIs +nstossM H!e should !ot 8o!use *a!tIs
Ding an sich 6ith the Jtra!s8e!de!tal obje8t-K 6hi8h @8o!trary to some 8o!used a!d misleadi!g
ormulatio!s ou!d i! *a!t himselA is !ot !oume!al but the J!othi!g!ess-K the void o! the horiUo! o
obje8tivity- o that 6hi8h sta!ds agai!st the @i!iteA subje8t- the mi!imal orm o resista!8e that is !ot
yet a!y positive determi!ate obje8t that the subje8t e!8ou!ters i! the 6orldE*a!t uses the 1erma!
e?pressio! Dawider- 6hat is Jout there opposi!g itsel to us- sta!di!g agai!st us7K This Dawider is not
the abyss o the Thi!g- it does !ot poi!t to the dime!sio! o the u!imagi!able- but is- o! the 8o!trary-
the very horiUo! o ope!!ess to6ards obje8tivity 6ithi! 6hi8h parti8ular obje8ts appear to a i!ite
subje8t7
+S-$SS A4G -+-*0+D.3(

To re8apitulate- +nstoss is ormally homologous to the .a8a!ia! ob1et a+ like a mag!eti8 ield-
it is the o8us o the 9Is positi!g a8tivity- the poi!t arou!d 6hi8h this a8tivity 8ir8ulates- yet it is i! itsel
e!tirely i!substa!tial- si!8e it is created*posited! generated! by the very process which reacts to it and
deals with it7 9t is like i! the old joke about the 8o!s8ript 6ho pleaded i!sa!ity i! order to avoid
military servi8e+ his JsymptomK 6as to 8ompulsively e?ami!e every paper 6ithi! rea8h a!d e?8laim-
JThatIs !ot itRK /he! e?ami!ed by the military psy8hiatrists- he does the same- so the psy8hiatrists
i!ally gave him a paper 8o!irmi!g his release rom military servi8e7 The 8o!s8ript rea8hes or it-
e?ami!es it- a!d e?8laims+ JThatIs itRK =ere- also- the sear8h itsel ge!erates its obje8t7 A!d therei!
resides the ultimate parado? o the Fi8htea! +nstoss+ it is !ot immediately e?ter!al to the 8ir8ular
moveme!t o rele8tio!- but a! obje8t 6hi8h is posited by this very @sel:reere!tialA moveme!t7 9ts
tra!s8e!de!8e @impe!etrability- irredu8ibility to a! ordi!ary represe!ted obje8tA 8oi!8ides 6ith its
absolute imma!e!8e7
9s +nstoss the! imma!e!t or tra!s8e!de!tM Goes it Jprovoke>disturbK the 9 rom the outside- or
is it posited by the 9 itselM 9! other 6ords+ do 6e have- irst @ideallyA- the pure .ie o the sel:positi!g
9- 6hi8h the! posits the obsta8leM 9 it is tra!s8e!de!t- 6e have the i!ite subje8t limited by +nstoss @be
it i! the orm o the *a!tia! Thi!g:i!:itsel- or i! the orm- today mu8h more a88eptable- o
i!tersubje8tivity- o a!other subje8t as the o!ly true Thi!g- as the ethi8al +nstossAT i it is imma!e!t- 6e
get the bori!g- perverse logi8 o the 9 6hi8h posits a! obsta8le i! order to over8ome it7 So the o!ly
solutio! is+ absolute simulta!eity>overlappi!g o sel:positi!g a!d obsta8leT that is- the obsta8le is the
e?8reme!tal Jreje8tK o the pro8ess o sel:positi!g- !ot so mu8h posited as eje8ted- e?8reted>se8reted-
as the obverse o the a8tivity o sel:positi!g7 9! this se!se- +nstoss is the tra!s8e!de!tal a priori o
positi!g- that 6hi8h i!8ites the 9 to e!dless positi!g- the o!ly !o!:posited eleme!t7 Hr- i! .a8a!ese-
ollo6i!g .a8a!Is logi8 o J!o!:AllK+ the @i!iteA 9 a!d the !o!:9 @obje8tA limit ea8h other- 6hile- at the
absolute level- there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot 9- the 9 is u!limited- a!d or that reaso! !o!:AllEthe
+nstoss is that 6hi8h makes it !o!:All7
Sylvai! Cortier ormulated this 8ru8ial poi!t 8learly+ J9 6e are tryi!g to a88ou!t or the Vlimit-I
6e should be 8areul !ever to represe!t it i! a! ob1ective- or- rather- ob1ectivi2ed 6ay7K
2(
The sta!dard
assertio! that *a!t 6as a6are o the !e8essity o presupposi!g a! e?ter!al d that ae8ts us 6he! 6e
e?perie!8e se!satio!s- 6hile Fi8hte 8losed the 8ir8le o tra!s8e!de!tal solipsism- misses the poi!t- the
i!esse o Fi8hteIs argume!tatio!+ Fi8hte dispe!ses 6ith the Ding an sich !ot be8ause he posits the
tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t as a! i!i!ite Absolute- but pre8isely o! a88ou!t o the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8tIs
finitudeEor- as the early /ittge!stei! put it+ JHur lie has !o e!d i! just the 6ay i! 6hi8h our visual
ield has !o limits7K .ike the ield o visio!- lie is i!ite- a!d- or that very reaso!- 6e 8a!!ot ever see
its limitEi! this pre8ise se!se- Jeter!al lie belo!gs to those 6ho live i! the prese!tK @-ractatus
'7("11A+ pre8isely be8ause 6e are within our i!itude- 6e 8a!!ot step out o it a!d per8eive its
limitatio!7 This is 6hat Fi8hte aims at 6he! he emphasiUes that o!e should !ot 8o!8eive o the
tra!s8e!de!tal 9 as a 8losed spa8e surrou!ded by a!other e?ter!al spa8e o !oume!al e!tities7
This poi!t 8a! be made very 8learly i! terms o .a8a!Is disti!8tio! bet6ee! the subje8t o the
e!u!8iated a!d the subje8t o the e!u!8iatio!+ 6he! 9 dire8tly posit>dei!e mysel as a i!ite bei!g-
e?isti!g i! the 6orld amo!g other bei!gs- at the level o e!u!8iatio! @the positio! rom 6hi8h 9 speakA 9
already obje8tiviUe the limit bet6ee! mysel a!d the rest o the 6orldT that is- 9 adopt the i!i!ite
positio! rom 6hi8h 9 8a! observe reality a!d lo8ate mysel i! it7 Do!seNue!tly- the o!ly 6ay or me to
truly assert my i!itude is to a88ept that my 6orld is i!i!ite- si!8e 9 8a!!ot lo8ate its limit within it7
2#

As /ittge!stei! poi!ts out- this is also the problem 6ith death+ death is the limit o lie 6hi8h 8a!!ot
be lo8ated within lieEa!d o!ly a true atheist 8a! ully a88ept this a8t- as 6as made 8lear by 9!gmar
3ergma! i! his great ma!iesto or atheism- 6hi8h he develops pre8isely apropos o his JreligiousK
ilm -he Seventh Seal+

,y ear o death 6as to a great degree li!ked to my religious 8o!8epts7 .ater o!- 9 u!der6e!t mi!or
surgery7 3y mistake- 9 6as give! too mu8h a!aesthesia7 9 elt as i 9 had disappeared out o reality7
/here did the hours goM They lashed by i! a mi8rose8o!d7Sudde!ly 9 realiUed- that is how it is7 That
o!e 8ould be tra!sormed rom being to non*beingEit 6as hard to grasp7 3ut or a perso! 6ith a
8o!sta!t a!?iety about death- !o6 liberati!g7 5et at the same time it seems a bit sad7 5ou say to
yoursel that it 6ould have bee! u! to e!8ou!ter !e6 e?perie!8es o!8e your soul had had a little rest
a!d gro6! a88ustomed to bei!g separated rom your body7 3ut 9 do!It thi!k that is 6hat happe!s to
you7 First you are- the! you are not7 This 9 i!d deeply satisyi!g7 That 6hi8h had ormerly bee! so
e!igmati8 a!d righte!i!g- !amely- 6hat might e?ist beyo!d this 6orld- does !ot e?ist7 0verythi!g is o
this 6orld7 0verythi!g e?ists a!d happe!s i!side us- a!d 6e lo6 i!to a!d out o o!e a!other7 9tIs
pere8tly i!e like that7
2'
There is thus a truth i! 0pi8urusIs 6ell:k!o6! argume!t agai!st the ear o death @there is
!othi!g to ear+ 6hile you are still alive- you are !ot dead- a!d 6he! you are dead- you eel !othi!gA+
the sour8e o the ear o death is the po6er o imagi!atio!T death as a! eve!t is the ultimate
a!amorphosisEi! eari!g it- 6e e?perie!8e a !o!:eve!t- a !o!:e!tity @our passage to !o!:bei!gA- as a!
eve!t7
0r!esto .a8lau has developed the idea that- i! a! a!tago!isti8 relatio!ship- e?ter!al diere!8e
8oi!8ides 6ith i!ter!al diere!8e+ the diere!8e that separates me rom other e!tities arou!d me- a!d
thus guara!tees my ide!tity- simulta!eously 8uts i!to my ide!tity- leavi!g it la6ed- u!stable-
tru!8ated7
2$
This te!sio! should be e?te!ded to the ull diale8ti8al ide!tity o opposites+ the 8o!ditio!
o possibility o ide!tity is- at the same time- its 8o!ditio! o impossibilityT the assertio! o sel:ide!tity
is based o! its opposite- o! a! irredu8ible remai!der that tru!8ates every ide!tity7
This is 6hy Fi8hte is right to 8laim that the ar8h:model or all ide!tity is 9 ] 9- the subje8tIs
ide!tity 6ith itselT the ormal:logi8al !otio! o @sel:Aide!tity 8omes se8o!d- it has to be grou!ded i! a
transcendental logi8al !otio! o the sel:ide!tity o the 97 /he! Fi8hte emphasiUes that the absolute 9 is
!ot a a8t @-atsacheA but a deed @-at*0andlungAEthat its ide!tity is purely a!d thoroughly
pro8essualEhe mea!s pre8isely that the subje8t is the result o its o6! ailure to be8ome a subje8t+ 9 try
to ully a8tualiUe mysel as a subje8t- 9 ail @to be8ome a subje8tA- a!d this ailure is the subje8t @that 9
amA7 $nly i! the 8ase o the subje8t do 6e get this ull 8oi!8ide!8e o ailure a!d su88ess- o ide!tity as
grou!ded i! its o6! la8kT i! all other 8ases- there is the appeara!8e o a substa!tial ide!tity that
pre8edes or u!derlies pro8essuality7 A!d the poi!t o Fi8hteIs 8ritiNue o realist JdogmatismK is to
assert the tra!s8e!de!tal:o!tologi8al priority o this pure pro8essuality o the 9 over every substa!tial
e!tity+ every appeara!8e o substa!tial ide!tity has to be a88ou!ted or i! terms o tra!s8e!de!tal
ge!esis- as the JreiiedK result o the pure 9Is pro8essuality7 The passage rom 9 ] 9 to the delimitatio!
bet6ee! the 9 a!d the !o!:9 is thus the passage rom imma!e!t a!tago!ism to e?ter!al limitatio! that
guara!tees the ide!tity o the opposed poles+ the pure sel:positi!g 9 does !ot simply divide itsel i!to
the posited !o!:9 a!d the i!ite 9 opposed to itT it posits the !o!:9 a!d the i!ite 9 as mutually limiti!g
opposites i! order to resolve the imma!e!t te!sio! o its pro8essuality7
The 8laim that the limitatio! o the subje8t is simulta!eously e?ter!al a!d i!ter!al- that the
subje8tIs e?ter!al limit is al6ays its i!ter!al limitatio!- is- o 8ourse- developed by Fi8hte i!to the mai!
thesis o his Jabsolute tra!s8e!de!tal idealismK+ every e?ter!al limit is the result o a! i!ter!al sel:
limitatio!7 This is 6hat *a!t does !ot see+ or him- the Thi!g:i!:itsel is dire8tly the e?ter!al limit o
the phe!ome!al ield 8o!stituted by the subje8t- i! other 6ords the limit that separates the !oume!al
rom the phe!ome!al is !ot the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8tIs sel:limitatio!- but simply its e?ter!al limit7
=o6ever- does all this e!dorse the sta!dard readi!g- a88ordi!g to 6hi8h Fi8hte marks the
passage to tra!s8e!de!tal absolute idealism 6herei! every e?ter!al limit o subje8tivity is 8o:opted- re:
i!s8ribed as a mome!t o the subje8tIs i!i!ite sel:mediatio!>limitatio!M /e should read the thesis that
every limit o the subje8t is @grou!ded i!A the subje8tIs sel:limitatio! i! 8o!ju!8tio! 6ith the thesis o!
the overlappi!g o e?ter!al a!d i!ter!al limitatio!T i 6e do so- the! the a88e!t o the subje8tIs Jsel:
limitatio!K shits rom the subje8tive to the obje8tive ge!itive+ the Jlimitatio! o the selK !ot i! the
se!se that the subje8t is the ull age!t a!d master o its o6! limitatio!- e!8ompassi!g its limits 6ithi!
the a8tivity o its sel:mediatio!- but i! the se!se that the e?ter!al limitatio! o the sel tru!8ates rom
6ithi! the very ide!tity o the subje8t7E9t is @agai!A Cortier 6ho 8learly spells out this poi!t+

/hat the 9- i!soar as it is pre8isely the Jabsolute 9-K is !ot- that is to say- the J!o!:9K itsel- is thus @or
the 9A absolutely !othi!g- a pure !othi!g!ess or- as Fi8hte himsel put it- a ki!d o J!o!:bei!gK O 6e
should thus take 8are !ot to represe!t to ourselves the !o!:9 as a! other level tha! that o the 9+ outside
the Jtra!s8e!de!tal ieldK o the positi!g 9- there is truly !othi!g but the abse!8e o all spa8e- i! other
6ords- the non*level- the void that is proper to the !o!:97
2&
/hat this mea!s is that- si!8e there is !othi!g outside the @sel:Apositi!g o the absolute 9- the
!o!:9 8a! o!ly emergeE8a! o!ly be positedEas 8orrelative to the 9Is !o!:posited!ess+ the non*I is
nothing but the non*positedness of the I7 Hr- tra!slated i!to terms 8loser to our 8ommo! e?perie!8e+
si!8e- i! Fi8hteIs absolute egologi8al perspe8tive- all positi!g a8tivity is the a8tivity o the 9- 6he! the 9
e!8ou!ters the !o!:9 as a8tive- as obje8tive reality e?erti!g a8tive pressure o! the 9- a8tively resisti!g it-
this 8a! o!ly be the result o the 9Is o6! passivity+ the non*I is active only insofar as I render myself
passive and thus let it act bac" upon me7
2%
Therei! lies- or Fi8hte- the atal la6 o *a!tIs Thi!g:i!:
itsel+ i!soar as the *a!tia! Thi!g is 8o!8eived as e?isti!g i!depe!de!tly o the 9 a!d- as su8h-
e?erti!g pressure o! it- 6e are deali!g here 6ith an activity in the non*I to which no passivity in the I
itself correspondsEa!d this is totally u!thi!kable or Fi8hte- a remai!der o metaphysi8al dogmatism7
This bri!gs us to the topi8 o the subje8tIs i!itude+ i! Fi8hte- the a priori sy!thesis o the i!ite
a!d the i!i!ite is the finitude o the positi!g 9+

the 9- that is to say- the Ja8t o rele8tio!:i!to:itsel-K al6ays has to Jposit somethi!g absolute outside
itsel-K all the 6hile re8og!iUi!g that this e!tity 8a! o!ly e?ist Jor it-K that is to say- relatively to the
i!itude a!d the pre8ise mode o i!tuitio! o the 97
"0
Fi8hte thus resumes the basi8 i!sight o the philosophy o rele8tio!- 6hi8h is usually
ormulated i! a 8riti8al mode+ the mome!t the subje8t e?perie!8es itsel as redoubled i! rele8tio!-
8aught i! oppositio!s- a!d so o!- it has to relate this split>mediated 8o!ditio! o its o6! to some
presupposed Absolute i!a88essible to it- set up as the sta!dard 6hi8h the subje8t tries to rejoi!7 The
same i!sight 8a! also be made i! more 8ommo!:se!se terms+ 6he! 6e huma!s are 8aught i! a turmoil
o a8tivity- it is our prope!sity to imagi!e a! e?ter!al absolute poi!t o reere!8e that 6ould provide a!
orie!tatio! or- a!d bri!g some stability to- that a8tivity7 /hat Fi8hte does here- i! the best traditio! o
tra!s8e!de!tal phe!ome!ology- is to read this 8o!stellatio! i! a purely imma!e!t 6ay+ 6e should !ever
orget that this Absolute- pre8isely i!soar as it is e?perie!8ed by the subje8t as the presuppositio! o its
a8tivity- is a8tually posited by it- that is J8a! o!ly e?ist Vor it7IK T6o 8ru8ial 8o!seNue!8es ollo6 rom
su8h a! imma!e!t readi!g+ irst- the i!i!ite Absolute is the presuppositio! o a i!ite subje8tT its
spe8ter 8a! o!ly arise 6ithi! the horiUo! o a i!ite subje8t e?perie!8i!g its i!itude as su8h7 Se8o!d-
this e?perie!8e o the gap that separates the subje8t rom the i!i!ite Absolute is i!here!tly pra8ti8al-
8ompelli!g the subje8t to i!8essa!t a8tivity7 Seidel perspi8uously 8o!8ludes that- 6ith this pra8ti8al
visio!- Fi8hte also ope!s up the spa8e or a !e6 radi8al despair+ !ot o!ly the despair that 9 8a!!ot
realiUe the 9dealT !ot o!ly the despair that reality is too hard or meT but despair at the suspi8io! that the
9deal is in itself i!validated- !ot 6orth the eort7
"1
DI#ISION AND LIMITATION

H!e 8a! see !o6 the absolutely 8e!tral role o the !otio! o limitation i! Fi8hteIs e!tire
theoreti8al edii8e+ i! 8o!trast to dogmati8 realism 6hi8h posits the substa!tial !o!:9 as the o!ly true
a!d i!depe!de!t age!8y- a!d i! 8o!trast to Jidealist realismK K la Ges8artes or .eib!iUEor 6hi8h the
o!ly true reality is that o mo!adi8 spiritual substa!8e- a!d all a8tivity o the !o!:9 is a mere
illusio!Eor Fi8hte- the relatio!ship o the 9 a!d the !o!:9 is o!e o mutual limitatio!7 Although this
mutual limitatio! is al6ays posited within the absolute 9- the key poi!t is to 8o!8eive o this 9 not i! a
realist 6ay- as a spiritual substa!8e 6hi8h J8o!tai!s i! itsel everythi!g-K but as a! abstra8t- purely
tra!s8e!de!tal:ideal medium i! 6hi8h the 9 a!d the !o!:9 delimit themselves mutually7 9t is !ot the
absolute 9 6hi8h is J@the highestA realityKT o! the 8o!trary- the 9 itsel only ac<uires reality through9in
its real engagement with the opposing force of the non*I which frustrates and limits itEthere is !o
reality o the 9 outside its oppositio! to the !o!:9- outside this sho8k- this e!8ou!ter o a!
opposi!g>rustrati!g po6er @6hi8h- i! its ge!erality- e!8ompasses everythi!g- rom the !atural i!ertia
o o!eIs o6! body to the pressure o so8ial 8o!strai!ts a!d i!stitutio!s upo! the 9- !ot to me!tio! the
traumati8 prese!8e o another 9A7 Geprivi!g the 9 o the !o!:9 eNuals deprivi!g it o its reality7 The !o!:
9 is thus primordially !ot the abstra8t obje8t @$b1e"tA o the subje8tIs dista!8ed 8o!templatio!- but the
obje8t as (egenstand- 6hat sta!ds there agai!st me- as a! obsta8le to my eort7 As su8h- the subje8tIs
passivity i! the a8e o a! obje8t that rustrates its pra8ti8al eort o positi!g- its thetic eort- is
properly pathetic- or- rather- pathic7
"2
Hr- to put it i! yet a!other 6ay- the subje8t 8a! o!ly be
rustrated @a!d e?perie!8e the obje8t as a! obsta8leA i!soar as it is itsel orie!ted to6ards the outside-
Jpushi!gK outside i! its pra8ti8al eort7
So- 6ithi! the @absolutely positi!gA 9- the @i!iteA 9 a!d the !o!:9 are posited as divisible-
limiti!g ea8h otherEor- as Fi8hte put it i! his amous ormula+ JI oppose in the I a divisible non*I to
the divisible IFK 2a8obi 6as thus i! a 6ay right 6he!- i! a u!iNue ormula rom his amous letter to
Fi8hte- he desig!ated the latterIs Wissenschaftslehre as a Jmaterialism 6ithout matterK+ the Jpure
8o!s8ious!essK o the absolute 9 6ithi! 6hi8h the 9 a!d the !o!:9 mutually delimit ea8h other
ee8tively u!8tio!s as the idealist versio! o matter i! abstra8t materialism- that is- as abstra8t
@mathemati8alA spa8e e!dlessly divided bet6ee! the 9 a!d the !o!:97
4o6here is the pro?imity o @a!d- simulta!eously- the gap bet6ee!A Fi8hte a!d =egel more
8learly dis8er!ible tha! i! the diere!8e bet6ee! their respe8tive !otio!s o limitatio!7 /hat they both
share is the i!sight i!to ho6- parado?i8ally- ar rom e?8ludi!g ea8h other- limitatio! a!d true i!i!ity
are t6o aspe8ts o the same 8o!stellatio!7 9! =egel- the overlappi!g o true i!i!ity a!d sel:limitatio!
is developed i! the !otio! o sel:relati!g+ i! true i!i!ity- the relatio!:to:other 8oi!8ides 6ith sel:
relati!gEthis is 6hat- or =egel- dei!es the most eleme!tary stru8ture o lie7 A !umber o
8o!temporary resear8hers i! the lie s8ie!8es- rom .y!! ,argulis to Fra!8is8o Varela- assert that the
true problem o biology is !ot ho6 a! orga!ism a!d its e!viro!me!t i!tera8t or 8o!!e8t- but- rather-
ho6 a disti!8t sel:ide!ti8al orga!ism emerges out o its e!viro!s7 =o6 does a 8ell orm the membra!e
6hi8h separates its i!side rom its outsideM The true problem is thus !ot ho6 a! orga!ism adapts to its
e!viro!me!t- but ho6 there 8omes to be somethi!g- a disti!8t e!tity- 6hi8h must adapt itsel i! the irst
pla8e7 At this 8ru8ial poi!t- the la!guage o 8o!temporary biology starts to resemble- Nuite u!8a!!ily-
the la!guage o =egel7 /he! Varela- or e?ample- e?plai!s his !otio! o autopoiesis- he repeats almost
verbatim the =egelia! !otio! o lie as a teleologi8al- sel:orga!iUi!g e!tity7 =is 8e!tral !otio! o the
loop or bootstrap poi!ts to6ards the =egelia! Set2ung der 6orausset2ungen @positi!g the
presuppositio!sA+

Autopoiesis attempts to dei!e the u!iNue!ess o the emerge!8e that produ8es lie i! its u!dame!tal
8ellular orm7 9tIs spe8ii8 to the 8ellular level7 ThereIs a 8ir8ular or !et6ork pro8ess that e!ge!ders a
parado?+ a sel:orga!iUi!g !et6ork o bio8hemi8al rea8tio!s produ8es mole8ules- 6hi8h do somethi!g
spe8ii8 a!d u!iNue+ they 8reate a bou!dary- a membra!e- 6hi8h 8o!strai!s the !et6ork that has
produ8ed the 8o!stitue!ts o the membra!e7 This is a logi8al bootstrap- a loop+ a !et6ork produ8es
e!tities that 8reate a bou!dary- 6hi8h 8o!strai!s the !et6ork that produ8es the bou!dary7 This
bootstrap is pre8isely 6hatIs u!iNue about 8ells7 A sel:disti!guishi!g e!tity e?ists 6he! the bootstrap
is 8ompleted7 This e!tity has produ8ed its o6! bou!dary7 9t does!It reNuire a! e?ter!al age!t to !oti8e
it- or to say- J9Im here7K 9t is- by itsel- a sel:disti!8tio!7 9t bootstraps itsel out o a soup o 8hemistry
a!d physi8s7
""
The 8o!8lusio! to be dra6! is thus that the o!ly 6ay to a88ou!t or the emerge!8e o the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! the Ji!sideK a!d JoutsideK 8o!stitutive o a livi!g orga!ism is to posit a ki!d o
sel:rele?ive reversal by mea!s o 6hi8hEto put it i! =egeleseEthe H!e o a! orga!ism as a /hole
retroa8tively JpositsK as its result- as that 6hi8h it domi!ates a!d regulates- the set o its o6! 8auses
@i7e7- the very multiple pro8esses out o 6hi8h it emergedA7 9! this 6ay- a!d o!ly i! this 6ay- a!
orga!ism is !o lo!ger limited by e?ter!al 8o!ditio!s- but is u!dame!tally sel:limitedEagai!- as
=egel 6ould have arti8ulated it- lie emerges 6he! the e?ter!al limitatio! @o a! e!tity by its e!viro!sA
tur!s i!to sel:limitatio!7 This bri!gs us ba8k to the problem o i!i!ity+ or =egel- true i!i!ity does
!ot sta!d or limitless e?pa!sio!- but or a8tive sel:limitatio! @sel:determi!atio!A i! 8o!trast to bei!g:
determi!ed:by:the:other7 9! this pre8ise se!se- lie @eve! at its most eleme!tary- as a livi!g 8ellA is the
basi8 orm o true i!i!ity- si!8e it already i!volves the mi!imal loop through 6hi8h a pro8ess is !o
lo!ger simply determi!ed by the Hutside o its e!viro!s but is itsel able to @overAdetermi!e the mode
o this determi!atio! a!d thus Jposits its presuppositio!s7K 9!i!ity a8Nuires its irst a8tual e?iste!8e the
mome!t a 8ellIs membra!e starts to u!8tio! as a sel:bou!dary7 So- 6he! =egel i!8ludes mi!erals i!
the 8ategory o Jlie-K as the lo6est orm o orga!isms- does he !ot a!ti8ipate .y!! ,argulis- 6ho also
i!sists o! orms o lie pre8edi!g vegetable a!d a!imal lieM
9! Fi8hte- ho6ever- the li!k bet6ee! i!i!ity a!d limitatio! is 8ompletely diere!t+ the Fi8htea!
i!i!ity is a! Ja8ti!g i!i!ity-K the i!i!ity o the subje8tIs pra8ti8al e!gageme!t7
"(
Although-
obviously- a! a!imal 8a! also be rustrated by obje8ts>obsta8les- it does !ot e?perie!8e its predi8ame!t
as stricto sensu limitedT it is !ot a6are o its limitatio!- si!8e it is simply 8o!strai!ed by>i! it7 3ut ma!
does e?perie!8e his predi8ame!t itsel as rustrati!gly limited- a!d this e?perie!8e is sustai!ed by his
i!i!ite strivi!g to break out o it7 9! this 6ay- ma!Is Ja8ti!g i!i!ityK is dire8tly grou!ded i! his
e?perie!8e o his o6! i!itude7 Hr- to put it i! a slightly diere!t 6ay- 6hile a! a!imal is
simply>immediately limited- !amely 6hile its limit is e?ter!al to it a!d thus i!visible rom 6ithi! its
8o!strai!ed horiUo! @i a! a!imal 6ere to speak- it 6ould !ot be able to say- J9 am limited to my small-
poor 6orld- u!a6are o 6hat 9 am missi!gKA- a ma!Is limitatio! is Jsel:limitatio!K i! the pre8ise se!se
that it 8uts i!to his very ide!tity rom 6ithi!- rustrati!g it- Ji!itiUi!gK itEa!d this preve!ts ma! !ot
o!ly rom Jbe8omi!g the 6orld-K but rom be8omi!g himself7 This is the @ote! overlookedA
8ou!terpart o Fi8hteIs basi8 thesis o! ho6 JI oppose in the I a divisible non*I to the divisible IFK The
a8t that the limit bet6ee! the 9 a!d the obje8t>obsta8le alls 6ithi! the 9 e!tails !ot o!ly the triumpha!t
8o!8lusio! that the 9 is the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o itsel a!d its obje8tive otherT it also e!tails the mu8h
more u!pleasa!t a!d properly traumati8 8o!8lusio! that the obje8t>obsta8le 8uts i!to the 9Is ide!tity
itsel- re!deri!g it i!ite>rustrated7
This 8ru8ial i!sight e!ables us to approa8h 6hat some i!terpreters see as the problem or Fi8hte+
ho6 to pass rom the 9 to the !o!:9 as a! 9!:itsel that has a 8o!siste!8y outside the 9Is rele?ive sel:
moveme!tM Goes the 9Is 8ir8ular sel:positi!g ha!g i! mid:air- u!able ever to really grou!d itselM
@Fe8all ,adame de StaelIs 8ompariso! o Fi8hteIs sel:positi!g 9 to 3aro! ,Y!8hhause!7A Cierre .ivet
proposed a! i!ge!ious solutio!+
"#
si!8e there must be a ki!d o e?ter!al poi!t o reere!8e or the 9
@6ithout it- the 9 6ould simply 8ollapse i!to itselA- a!d si!8e this poi!t !o!etheless 8a!!ot be dire8tly
e?ter!al to the 9 @si!8e a!y su8h e?ter!ality 6ould amou!t to a 8o!8essio! to the *a!tia! Thi!g:i!:
itsel that impedes the 9Is absolute sel:positi!gA- there is o!ly o!e 8o!siste!t 6ay out o this deadlo8k+
to grou!d the 8ir8ular moveme!t o rele?ivity i! itselE!ot by 6ay o the impossible ,Y!8hhause!
tri8k i! 6hi8h the ou!ded d retroa8tively provides its o6! ou!datio!- but by 6ay o reerri!g to
another 97 9! this 6ay- 6e get a poi!t o reere!8e 6hi8h is e?ter!al to a si!gular 9- a!d 6hi8h the latter
e?perie!8es as a! opaNue impe!etrable ker!el- yet 6hi8h is !o!etheless not oreig! to the rele?ive
moveme!t o @sel:Apositi!g- si!8e it is merely another 8ir8le o su8h @sel:Apositi!g7 @9! this ma!!er-
Fi8hte 8a! grou!d the a priori !e8essity o i!tersubje8tivity7A
H!e 8a! o!ly admire the elega!t simpli8ity o this solutio! 6hi8h 8alls to mi!d the .a8a!ia!:
Freudia! !otio! o the !eighbor as the impe!etrable traumati8 Thi!g7 =o6ever- i!ge!ious as the
solutio! is- it !o!etheless ails- i! !egle8ti!g the a8t that the 9Is relati!g to the obje8t- i! the stri8t
ormal se!se o tra!s8e!de!tal ge!esis- pre8edes the 9Is relati!g to a!other 9+ the primordial Hther- the
4eighbor Nua Thi!g- is not a!other subje8t7 The +nstoss 6hi8h a6ake!s @6hat 6ill have bee!A the
subje8t out o its pre:subje8tive status is a! Hther- but !ot the Hther o @re8ipro8alA i!tersubje8tivity7
THE FINITE ABSOL!TE

/e 8a! see !o6 the atal la6 i! dismissi!g Fi8hteIs thought as the e?treme poi!t o 1erma!
9dealism- as represe!ti!g idealism Jat its 6orst7K A88ordi!g to this 8ommo!pla8e- =egel represe!ts the
mome!t o mad!ess- the dream o a System o Absolute *!o6ledgeT but- as this vie6 goes- his 6ork
!o!etheless 8o!tai!s a lot o useul histori8al material as 6ell as ma!y valuable i!sights o! history-
politi8s- 8ulture- a!d aestheti8s7 Fi8hte- o! the 8o!trary- as a! earlier- 8raUier versio! o =egel-
represe!ts nothing more tha! mad!ess @see 3ertra!d Fussell i! his 0istory of Western )hilosophyA7
0ve! .a8a! reers i! passi!g to the radi8al positio! o solipsism as a orm o mad!ess advo8ated by !o
6ise ma!7 0ve! those 6ho praise Fi8hte see i! his thought a! e?treme ormulatio! o moder!
subje8tivity7 A!d- upo! skimmi!g Fi8hteIs 6ork- it 8a!!ot but appear to be so+ 6e start 6ith Ich O Ich-
the 9Is sel:positi!gT the! 6e pass to !ot:9T the! O 9! other 6ords- pure abstra8t ratio8i!atio!s-
supported by ridi8ulous argume!ts a!d reere!8es to mathemati8s- os8illati!g bet6ee! 6eird jumps a!d
poor 8ommo! se!se7
=o6ever- the parado? is that- as i! *a!t- S8helli!g- a!d all o 1erma! 9dealism- 6hat appears
as abstra8t spe8ulatio! be8omes a sour8e o substa!tial i!sight the mome!t 6e relate it to our most
8o!8rete e?perie!8e7 For e?ample- 6he! Fi8hte 8laims that it is be8ause the absolute>ideal sel is
posited by the i!ite sel that the op:positi!g o the !o!:sel o88urs- this makes se!se as a spe8ulative
des8riptio! o the i!ite subje8tIs 8o!8rete pra8ti8al e!gageme!t+ 6he! 9 @as i!ite subje8tA JpositK a!
ideal>u!attai!able pra8ti8al goal- the i!ite reality outside me appears as J!ot:sel-K as a! obsta8le to my
goal to be over8ome- tra!sormed7 This is Fi8hteIs versio! @ater *a!tA o the Jprima8y o pra8ti8al
reaso!K+ the 6ay 9 per8eive reality depe!ds o! my pra8ti8al proje8ts7 A! obsta8le is !ot a! obsta8le to
me as a! e!tity- but to me as e!gaged i! realiUi!g a proje8t+ Ji my ideal as a health proessio!al is to
save lives- the! 9 6ill begi! to see i! my patie!ts the thi!gs 9 !eed to be 8o!8er!ed about+ 9 6ill begi!
to see Vthi!gsI su8h as high blood pressure- high 8holesterol levels- et87K
"'
Hr- a! eve! more
perspi8uous e?ample+ J9 O 9 am a ri8h 8apitalist bei!g drive! through a slum distri8t i! my air:
8o!ditio!ed limousi!e- 9 do !ot see the poverty a!d misery o the lo8al i!habita!ts7 /hat 9 see is people
o! 6elare 6ho are too laUy to 6ork- et87K
"$
Sartre 6as thus really i! a Fi8htea! mood 6he!- i! a
amous passage rom /eing and othingness- he 8laimed that

6hatever may be the situatio! i! 6hi8h he i!ds himsel- the or:itsel must 6holly assume this
situatio! 6ith its pe8uliar 8oei8ie!t o adversity- eve! though it be i!supportable7 9s it !ot 9 6ho
de8ides the 8oei8ie!t o adversity i! thi!gs a!d eve! their u!predi8tability by de8idi!g myselM
"&
The 6eird:sou!di!g sy!tagm J8oei8ie!t o adversityK belo!gs to 1asto! 3a8helard- 6ho
subje8ted to 8ritiNue =usserlIs !otio! o !oemati8 obje8tivity as 8o!stituted by the tra!s8e!de!tal
subje8tIs !oeti8 a8tivity- argui!g that this !otio! ig!ores the obje8tIs J8oei8ie!t o adversity-K the
i!ertia o obje8ts resisti!g subje8tive appropriatio!7 /hile 8o!8edi!g the poi!t about the i!ertia o the
9!:itsel- the idio8y o the real- Sartre poi!ts out- i! a Fi8htea! ma!!er- that o!e e?perie!8es this i!ertia
o the Feal as adversity- as a! obsta8le- o!ly 6ith regard to o!eIs determi!ate proje8ts+

my reedom to 8hoose my goals or proje8ts e!tails that 9 have also 8hose! the obsta8les 9 e!8ou!ter
alo!g the 6ay7 9t is by de8idi!g to 8limb this mou!tai! that 9 have tur!ed the 6eak!ess o my body a!d
the steep!ess o the 8lis i!to obsta8les- 6hi8h they 6ere !ot so lo!g as 9 6as 8o!te!t simply to gaUe at
the mou!tai! rom the 8omort o my 8hair7
"%
9t is o!ly this prima8y o the pra8ti8al 6hi8h provides the key to the proper u!dersta!di!g o
ho6 Fi8hte redu8es the per8eived thi!g to the a8tivity o its per8eivi!g- that is- ho6 he e!deavors to
ge!erate the @per8eivedA thi!g out o its per8eptio!7 From this phe!ome!ologi8al sta!dpoi!t- the 9!:
itsel o the obje8t is the result o the lo!g arduous 6ork through 6hi8h the subje8t lear!s to
disti!guish- 6ithi! the ield o its represe!tatio!s- bet6ee! mere illusory appeara!8e a!d the 6ay the
appeari!g thi!g is itsel7 The 9!:itsel is thus also a 8ategory o appeari!g+ it does !ot desig!ate the
immedia8y o the thi!g i!depe!de!t o its appeari!g to us- but the most mediated mode o appeari!g7
3ut ho6M
The 9 tra!sers a 8ertai! Nua!tum o reality outside o itselT it e?ter!aliUes part o its a8tivity i!
a !o!:9 6hi8h is thereby Jposited as !o!:posited-K that is- appears as Ji!depe!de!tK o the 97 Fi8hteIs
parado? here is that Jit is the 9Is finitude O a!d !ot its refle&ivity proper- 6hi8h re!ders !e8essary the
diere!t modalities o the obje8tiviUatio! o the !o!:9 to 6hi8h this 9 relates itsel7K
(0
To put it i!
some6hat simpliied terms- the 9 is 8aught i! its sel:e!8losed 8ir8le o obje8tiviUatio!s !ot be8ause it is
the i!i!ite 1rou!d o all bei!g- but pre8isely be8ause it is i!ite7 The key poi!t here is the parado?i8al
li!k bet6ee! i!i!ity @i! the se!se o the abse!8e o e?ter!al limitatio!A a!d i!itude+ every limitatio!
has to be sel:limitatio! !ot be8ause the 9 is a! i!i!ite divi!e grou!d o all bei!g- but pre8isely be8ause
o its radi8al i!itude+ as su8h- as i!ite- it 8a!!ot J8limb upo! its o6! shouldersK @or Jjump over its
o6! shado6KA a!d per8eive its o6! e?ter!al limitatio!7 Cortier is ully justiied i! speaki!g o the
JV8ir8leI o the i!ite absolute *!o6i!gK+ i!itude a!d i!i!ity are here !o lo!ger opposedT it is our very
e!8ou!ter 6ith the obsta8le @a!d thus our brutal a6are!ess o our i!itudeA that- simulta!eously- makes
us a6are o the i!i!ity i! ourselves- o the i!i!ite Guty that hau!ts us i! the very 8ore o our bei!g7
(1
The sta!dard i!terpretatio! 8laimi!g that Fi8hte 8a!!ot dedu8e the !e8essity o the Jsho8k-K o
the e!8ou!ter 6ith the obsta8le 6hi8h triggers the subje8tIs a8tivity- thus simply misses his poi!t+ this
Jsho8kK has to arise Jout o !o6hereK be8ause o the subje8tIs radi8al i!itudeEit sta!ds or the
i!terve!tio! o the radi8al Hutside 6hi8h by dei!itio! 8a!!ot be dedu8ed @i it 6ere dedu8ible- 6e
6ould be ba8k 6ith the metaphysi8al subje8t>substa!8e 6hi8h ge!erates its e!tire 8o!te!t out o itselA+

Fi8hteIs stroke o ge!ius resides u!doubtedly i! the a8t that he makes out o the i!evitable lac" that
pertai!s to his 8ategori8al dedu8tio!- !ot the 6eak!ess- but the supreme or8e o his system+ the a8t
that 4e8essity 8a! o!ly be dedu8ed rom the pra8ti8al poi!t o vie6 is itsel @theoreti8ally a!d
pra8ti8allyA necessary7
(2
9t is here- i! this 8oi!8ide!8e o 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d !e8essity- o reedom a!d limitatio!- that 6e
ee8tively e!8ou!ter the Ja8me o Fi8hteIs edii8e7K
("
9! this Jsho8k-K i! the impa8t o the !o!:9 o!
the 9Edes8ribed by Fi8hte as simulta!eously JimpossibleK a!d J!e8essaryKEi!itude @bei!g
8o!strai!ed by a! HtherA a!d reedom are !o lo!ger opposed- si!8e it is o!ly through the sho8ki!g
e!8ou!ter 6ith the obsta8le that 9 be8ome ree7
This is 6hy- or Fi8hte- it is the i!i!ite 9- !ot the !o!:9- 6hi8h has to Ji!itiUeK itsel- to appear
as the @sel:Alimited 9- to split itsel i!to the absolute 9 a!d the i!ite 9 opposed to !o!:97 /hat this
mea!s is that- as Cortier puts it i! a 6o!derully 8o!8ise 6ay- Jevery !o!:9 is the !o!:9 o a! 9- but !o 9
is the 9 o a !o!:97K
((
This- ho6ever- does !ot mea! that the !o!:9 is simply i!ter!al to the 9- the
out8ome o its sel:relati!g7 H!e should be very pre8ise here+ over a!d above the sta!dard Jdogmati8K
temptatio! to 8o!8eive o the 9 as part o the !o!:9- as part o obje8tive reality- there is the mu8h more
tri8ky a!d !o less Jdogmati8K temptatio! o tra!s8e!de!tal realism itsel- o hypostasiUi!g the absolute
9 i!to a ki!d o !oume!al meta:Subje8t>Substa!8e 6hi8h e!ge!ders the i!ite subje8t as its
phe!ome!al>empiri8al appeara!8e7 9! this 8ase- there 6ould be !o truly JrealK obje8ts+ the obje8ts
6ould be ultimately mere pha!tom:obje8ts- spe8ters e!ge!dered by the absolute 9 i! its 8ir8ular play
6ith itsel7 This poi!t is absolutely 8ru8ial i 6e are to avoid the !otio! o Fi8hte as the ridi8ulous
igure o the Jabsolute idealistK+ the absolute 9 is !ot merely playi!g 6ith itsel- positi!g obsta8les a!d
the! over8omi!g them- all the 6hile se8retly a6are that it is the o!ly player>age!t i! the house7 The
absolute 9 is not the absolute real>ideal 1rou!d o everythi!gT its status is radi8ally ideal- it is the ideal
presuppositio! o the pra8ti8ally e!gaged i!ite 9 as the o!ly JrealityK @si!8e- as 6e have see!- the 9
be8omes JrealK o!ly through its sel:limitatio! i! e!8ou!teri!g the obsta8le o the !o!:9A7 This is 6hy
Fi8hte is a moralist:idealist- a! idealist o i!i!ite Guty+ reedom is !ot somethi!g that substa!tially
8oe?ists 6ith the 9- but somethi!g that has to be a8Nuired through arduous struggle- through the eort
o 8ulture a!d sel:edu8atio!7 The i!i!ite 9 is !othi!g but the pro8ess o its o6! i!i!ite be8omi!g7
This bri!gs us to Fi8hteIs solutio! o the problem o solipsism+ although at the level o
theoreti8al observatio! 6e are passive re8eivers a!d at the level o pra8ti8e 6e are a8tive @6e i!terve!e
i! the 6orld- impose our proje8ts o!to itA- 6e 8a!!ot over8ome solipsism rom a theoreti8al sta!dpoi!t-
but o!ly rom a pra8ti8al o!e+ J[i\ !o eort- [the!\ !o obje8t7K
(#
As a theoreti8al 9- 9 8a! easily
imagi!e mysel as a solitary mo!ad 8aught i! a! ethereal- !o!:substa!tial 6eb o my o6!
pha!tasmagoriasT but the mome!t 9 e!gage i! pra8ti8e- 9 have to struggle 6ith the obje8tIs
resista!8eEor- as Fi8hte himsel put it+ JThe 8oer8io! o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h belie i! reality imposes
itsel is a moral 8oer8io!- the o!ly o!e possible or a ree bei!g7K
('
Hr- as .a8a! put it mu8h later+
ethi8s is the dime!sio! o the Feal- the dime!sio! i! 6hi8h imagi!ary a!d symboli8 bala!8es are
disturbed7 This is 6hy Fi8hte 8a! a!d has to reje8t the *a!tia! solutio! o the dy!ami8 a!ti!omies+ i
6e resolve them i! the *a!tia! 6ay- by simply assig!i!g ea8h o the t6o opposed theses to a diere!t
level @phe!ome!ally 6e are subje8t to !e8essity- 6hile !oume!ally 6e are reeA- 6e obus8ate the a8t
that the world into which we intervene with our free acts is the very world of phenomenal reality in
which we struggle for our freedom7 This is also 6hy Fi8hte 8a! avoid the above:me!tio!ed impasse
rea8hed by *a!t i! his ,riti<ue of )ractical 7eason- 6here he e!deavors to a!s6er the Nuestio! o
6hat 6ould happe! to us 6ere 6e to gai! a88ess to the !oume!al domai!- to the Ding an sich @6e
6ould be mere puppets deprived o our reedomA7 Fi8hte allo6s us to 8lariy this 8o!usio! 6hi8h
arises 6he! 6e i!sist o! the oppositio! bet6ee! the !oume!al a!d the phe!ome!al+ the 9 is !ot a
!oume!al substa!8e- but the pure spo!ta!eity o sel:positi!gT this is 6hy its sel:limitatio! does !ot
!eed a tra!s8e!de!t 1od 6ho ma!ipulates our terrestrial situatio! @limiti!g our k!o6ledgeA i! order to
oster our moral gro6thEo!e 8a! dedu8e the subje8tIs limitatio! i! a totally imma!e!t 6ay7
9!terpreters like to emphasiUe the radi8al break or Jparadigm shitK that takes pla8e bet6ee!
*a!t a!d Fi8hteT ho6ever- Fi8hteIs o8us o! the subje8tIs i!itude 8ompels us to a8k!o6ledge a !o less
radi8al break bet6ee! Fi8hte a!d S8helli!g7 S8helli!gIs idea @shared also by the you!g =egelA is that
Fi8hteIs o!e:sided subje8tive idealism should be suppleme!ted by obje8tive idealism- si!8e o!ly su8h a
t6o:sided approa8h 8a! give us a 8omplete image o the absolute Subje8t:Hbje8t7 /hat gets lost i! this
shit rom Fi8hte to S8helli!g is the u!iNue sta!dpoi!t o the subje8tIs i!itude @the i!itude that
determi!es Fi8hteIs basi8 attitude to6ards reality as a! e!gaged:pra8ti8al o!e+ the Fi8htea! sy!thesis
8a! o!ly be give! as pra8ti8al eort- as e!dless strivi!gA7 9! Fi8hte- the sy!thesis o the i!ite a!d the
i!i!ite is give! i! the i!i!ite eort o the i!ite subje8t- a!d the absolute 9 itsel is a hypo:thesis o the
Jtheti8K pra8ti8al:i!ite subje8tT 6hereas- i! S8helli!g- the origi!al datum is the Absolute Nua
i!diere!8e o the subje8t:obje8t- a!d the subje8t as opposed to the obje8t emerges as the +bfall- a
alli!g:o- rom the Absolute- 6hi8h is 6hy rejoi!i!g the Absolute is or S8helli!g !o lo!ger a matter
o the 9Is pra8ti8al eort- but o a! aestheti8 submerge!8e i!to the AbsoluteIs i!diere!8e- 6hi8h
amou!ts to the subje8tIs sel:over8omi!g7 9! other 6ords- rom Fi8hteIs sta!dpoi!t- S8helli!g regresses
to a pre:*a!tia! Jidealist realismK+ his Absolute is agai! the !oume!al absolute 0!tity- a!d all
i!ite>delimited e!tities are its results>all:os7 For Fi8hte- o! the 8o!trary- the status o the Absolute
@the sel:positi!g 9A remai!s thoroughly tra!s8e!de!tal:idealT it is the tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!ditio! o the
i!ite 9Is pra8ti8al e!gageme!t- its hypo:thesis- !ever a positively give! ens realissimus7
9t is pre8isely be8ause the status o the Absolute is- or Fi8hte- tra!s8e!de!tal:ideal that he
remai!s aithul to the basi8 *a!tia! i!sight that time a!d spa8e are a priori forms o se!sibilityT this
prohibits a!y !aSve:Clato!i8 !otio! o i!ite>material>se!suous reality as the se8o!dary J8o!usedK
versio! o the true i!telligible>!oume!al u!iverse7 For *a!t @a!d Fi8hteA- material reality is not a
blurred versio! o the true !oume!al 6orld- but a ully 8o!stituted reality o its o6!7 9! other 6ords-
the a8t that time a!d spa8e are a priori forms o se!sibility mea!s that 6hat *a!t 8alled
Jtra!s8e!de!tal s8hematismK is irredu8ible+ the orders>levels o se!sibility a!d i!telligibility are
irredu8ibly heteroge!eous- a!d o!e 8a!!ot dedu8e a!ythi!g about material reality rom the 8ategories
o pure reaso! themselves7
Fi8hteIs positio! 6ith regard to the status o !ature !o!etheless remai!s the radi8aliUed *a!tia!
o!e+ i reality is primordially e?perie!8ed as the obsta8le to the 9Is pra8ti8al a8tivity- this mea!s that
!ature @the i!ertia o material obje8tsA e?ists o!ly as the stu o our moral a8tivity- that its justii8atio!
8a! o!ly be pra8ti8al:teleologi8al- !ot spe8ulative7 This is 6hy Fi8hte reje8ted all attempts at a
spe8ulative philosophy o !atureEa!d 6hy S8helli!g- the great pra8titio!er o the philosophy o
!ature- ridi8uled Fi8hte+ i !ature 8a! o!ly be justiied teleologi8ally- this mea!s that air a!d light e?ist
o!ly so that moral i!dividuals 8a! see ea8h other a!d thus i!tera8t7 /ell a6are o the dii8ulties su8h a
vie6 poses to our se!se o 6hat is 8redible- Fi8hte replied 6ith sar8asti8 laughter+

They a!s6er me+ JAir a!d light a priori- just thi!k o itR =a ha haR =a ha haR =a ha haR Dome o!- laugh
alo!g 6ith usR =a ha haR =a ha haR =a ha haR Air a!d light a priori+ tarte K la cr>me- ha ha haR Air a!d
light a prioriR -arte K la cr>me- ha ha haR Air a!d light a prioriR -arte K la cr>me- ha ha haRK et 8etera ad
i!i!itum7
($
The 6eird !ature o this outburst i! part resides i! its 8o!trast to the more typi8al 8ommo!:
se!se laughter at the philosopherIs stra!ge spe8ulatio!s- the ki!d o laughter 6hose e?emplary 8ase is
the joke told i! poor taste about the philosopher:solipsist+ J.et him hit his head agai!st a 6all a!d he
6ill soo! dis8over i he is alo!e i! the 6orld- ha ha haRK =ere- the philosopher:Fi8hte laughs at the
8ommo!:se!se argume!t that air a!d light are obviously !ot here just to e!able our moral a8tivity- but
just are out there- 6hether 6e a8t or !ot7 Fi8hteIs laughter is all the more stra!ge or resembli!g the
traditio!al realist philosopherIs dire8t appeal to the obvious!ess o reality as the best argume!t agai!st
abstra8t spe8ulatio!s7 /he! Be!o the Dy!i8 6as 8o!ro!ted 6ith 0leati8 proos o the !o!:e?iste!8e o
moveme!t- he simply raised a!d moved his middle i!ger- or so the story goes O @9! a!other versio!-
he simply stood up a!d started to 6alk about7A =o6ever- a88ordi!g to =egel- 6he! o!e o the stude!ts
prese!t applauded the master or this proo that moveme!t e?ists- Be!o beat him upEappeals to
immediate reality do !ot 8ou!t i! philosophy- o!ly 8o!8eptual thi!ki!g 8a! do the job o
demo!stratio!7 /hat- the!- 8ould Fi8hteIs laughter mea!- si!8e he laughs !ot from the sta!dpoi!t o
8ommo!:se!se realism @6hi8h tells us that moveme!t e?ists a!d that air a!d light are out there
i!depe!de!tly o our a8tivityA- but at this sta!dpoi!tM The key to the a!s6er is @as is ote! the 8ase 6ith
philosophers 6ho hide their 8ru8ial ormulatio! i! a oot!ote or a se8o!dary remarkA sNueeUed bet6ee!
pare!theses7 =ere is Fi8hteIs de8isive e?pla!atio! o the !o!:9+

@[A88ordi!g to the usual opi!io!-\ the 8o!8ept o the !o!:sel is merely a ge!eral 8o!8ept 6hi8h
emerges through abstra8tio! rom everythi!g represe!ted [allem 6orgestellten\7 3ut the shallo6!ess o
this e?pla!atio! 8a! easily be demo!strated7 9 9 am to represe!t a!ythi!g at all- 9 must oppose it to that
6hi8h represe!ts [the represe!ti!g sel\7 4o6 6ithi! the obje8t o represe!tatio! [6orstellung\ there
8a! a!d must be a! d o some sort- 6hereby this obje8t dis8loses itsel as somethi!g to be represe!ted-
a!d !ot as that 6hi8h represe!ts7 3ut that everythi!g 6herei! this d may be is !ot that 6hi8h
represe!ts but somethi!g to be represe!ted- is somethi!g that !o obje8t 8a! tea8h meT or merely to be
able to posit somethi!g as a! ob1ect- 9 have to k!o6 this alreadyT he!8e it must lie i!itially i! mysel-
that 6hi8h represe!ts- prior to a!y possible e?perie!8e7EA!d this is a! observatio! so striki!g that
a!yo!e 6ho ails to grasp it a!d is !ot thereby uplited i!to tra!s8e!de!tal idealism- must
u!Nuestio!ably be sueri!g rom me!tal bli!d!ess7A
(&
The logi8 o this argume!tatio! may appear surprisi!g to a!yo!e !ot 6ell:versed i! 1erma!
idealism+ it is pre8isely be8ause there is somethi!g more i! the !o!:Sel- i! the obje8t- tha! the
subje8tIs represe!tatio!s @6orstellungenAT pre8isely be8ause it 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a ge!eral- shared-
eature abstra8ted rom represe!tatio!sT a!d pre8isely be8ause it Jdis8loses itsel as somethi!g to be
represe!ted- a!d !ot as that 6hi8h represe!ts-K that this surplus over my represe!tatio!s must lie in me-
i! the represe!ti!g subje8t7
(%
Seidel is thus ully justiied i! emphasiUi!g that Fi8hteIs icht*Ich should be read a88ordi!g to
6hat *a!t 8alled Ji!i!ite judgme!t7K *a!t i!trodu8ed the key disti!8tio! bet6ee! !egative a!d
i!dei!ite judgme!t+ the positive judgme!t Jthe soul is mortalK 8a! be !egated i! t6o 6ays- 6he! a
predi8ate is de!ied to the subje8t @Jthe soul is !ot mortalKA- a!d 6he! a !o!:predi8ate is airmed @Jthe
soul is !o!:mortalKAEthe diere!8e is e?a8tly the same as the o!e- k!o6! to every reader o Stephe!
*i!g- bet6ee! Jhe is !ot deadK a!d Jhe is u!dead7K The i!dei!ite judgme!t ope!s up a third domai!
6hi8h u!dermi!es the u!derlyi!g disti!8tio!+ the Ju!deadK is !either alive !or dead- but pre8isely the
mo!strous Jlivi!g dead7K A!d the same goes or Ji!huma!K+ Jhe is !ot huma!K is !ot the same as Jhe is
i!huma!KEJhe is !ot huma!K mea!s simply that he is e?ter!al to huma!ity- a!imal or divi!e- 6hile
Jhe is i!huma!K mea!s somethi!g thoroughly diere!t- !amely that he is !either huma! !or !ot:
huma!- but marked by a terriyi!g e?8ess 6hi8h- although !egati!g 6hat 6e u!dersta!d as Jhuma!ity-K
is i!here!t to bei!g huma!7 A!d- perhaps- o!e should risk the hypothesis that this is 6hat 8ha!ges 6ith
the *a!tia! revolutio!+ i! the pre:*a!tia! u!iverse- huma!s 6ere simply huma!s- bei!gs o reaso!-
ighti!g the e?8ess o a!imal lust a!d divi!e mad!essT o!ly 6ith *a!t a!d 1erma! 9dealism does the
e?8ess to be ought be8ome absolutely imma!e!t- lo8ated at the very 8ore o subje8tivity itsel @6hi8h
is 6hy- 6ith 1erma! 9dealism- the metaphor or that 8ore is the !ight- the J!ight o the 6orld-K i!
8o!trast to the 0!lighte!me!t !otio! o the .ight o Feaso! dispelli!g the surrou!di!g dark!essA7 So
6he!- i! the pre:*a!tia! u!iverse- a hero goes mad- it mea!s he is deprived o his huma!ity- as the
a!imal passio!s or divi!e mad!ess take overT 6ith *a!t- by 8o!trast- mad!ess sig!als a! e?plosio! o
the very 8ore o a huma! bei!g7 9! pre8isely the same 6ay- the Fi8htea! !o!:Sel is !ot a !egatio! o
the predi8ate- but a! airmatio! o a !o!:predi8ate+ it is !ot Jthis is!It a Sel-K but Jthis is a !o!:Sel-K
6hi8h is 6hy it should be tra!slated i!to 0!glish more ote! as J!o!:SelK rather tha! J!ot:Sel7K
#0

@,ore pre8isely+ the mome!t 6e arrive at Fi8hteIs third propositio!Ethe mutual
delimitatio!>determi!atio! o Sel a!d !o!:SelEthe !o!:Sel ee8tively tur!s i!to a not:Sel-
somethi!g7A
Fi8hte starts 6ith the theti8 judgme!t+ Ich O Ich- pure imma!e!8e o .ie- pure 3e8omi!g- pure
sel:positi!g- -at*0andlung- the ull 8oi!8ide!8e o posited 6ith positi!g7 9 am o!ly through the
pro8ess o positi!g mysel- a!d 9 am !othi!g but this pro8essEthis is i!telle8tual i!tuitio!- this
mysti8al lo6 i!a88essible to 8o!s8ious!ess+ every 8o!s8ious!ess !eeds somethi!g opposed to itsel7
4o6Ea!d here is the keyEthe rise o on*Ich out o this pure lo6 is !ot @yetA delimited rom Ich+ it
is a pure ormal 8o!versio!- like =egelIs passage rom 3ei!g to 4othi!g!ess7 /oth Ich and non*Ich are
unlimited! absolute7 =o6- the!- do 6e pass rom non*Ich to Hbje8t as !ot:IchM Through +nstoss- this
e?:timate obsta8le7 +nstoss is !either icht*Ich @6hi8h 8omprises meA !or Hbje8t @6hi8h is e?ter!ally
opposed to meA7 +nstoss is !either Jabsolutely !othi!gK !or somethi!g @a delimited obje8tAT it is @to
reer to the .a8a!ia! logi8 o suture- as deployed by ,iller i! his 8lassi8al te?tA !othi!g counted as
somethi!g @i! the same 6ay as the !umber o!e is Uero 8ou!ted as o!eA7 The disti!8tio! bet6ee! orm
a!d 8o!te!t o! 6hi8h Fi8hte i!sists so mu8h is 8ru8ial here+ as to its 8o!te!t- +nstoss is !othi!gT as to
its orm- it is @alreadyA somethi!gEit is thus J!othi!g i! the orm o somethi!g7K This mi!imal
disti!8tio! bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!t is already at 6ork i! the passage rom the irst to the se8o!d
thesis+ A ] A is the pure orm- the ormal gesture o sel:ide!tity- the sel:ide!tity o a orm 6ith itselT
!o!:Sel is its symmetri8al opposite- a ormless 8o!te!t7 This mi!imal rele?ivity is also 6hat makes
the passage rom A ] A @Ich O IchA to the positi!g o !o!:Sel !e8essary+ 6ithout this mi!imal gap
bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!t- the absolute Sel a!d the absolute !o!:Sel 6ould simply a!d dire8tly
overlap7
9! the Crea8e to the se8o!d editio! o the ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- *a!t 8o!te!ds that

all possible spe8ulative k!o6ledge o reaso! is limited to mere obje8ts o e&perience7 3ut our urther
8o!te!tio! must also be duly bor!e i! mi!d- !amely- that though 6e 8a!!ot "now these obje8ts as
thi!gs i! themselves- 6e must yet be i! the positio! at least to thin" them as thi!gs i! themselvesT
other6ise 6e should be la!ded i! the absurd 8o!8lusio! that there 8a! be appearance without anything
that appears7
#1
9s this !ot e?a8tly the =egelia!:.a8a!ia! thesis- ho6everM 9s !ot the superse!sible 6hi8h is
Jappeara!8e Nua appeara!8eK pre8isely a! appeara!8e i! 6hi8h !othi!g appearsM As =egel put it i! his
)henomenology+ beyo!d the veil o appeara!8es- there is o!ly 6hat the subje8t puts there7 This is the
se8ret o the Sublime that *a!t 6as !ot ready to 8o!ro!t7 So 6e tur! ba8k to Fi8hte+ is !ot the +nstoss
pre8isely su8h a! appeara!8e 6ithout a!ythi!g that appears- a !othi!g 6hi8h appears as somethi!gM
This is 6hat bri!gs the Fi8htea! +nstoss u!8a!!ily 8lose to the .a8a!ia! ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause
o desire- 6hi8h is also a positiviUatio! o a la8k- a sta!d:i! or a void7
Some de8ades ago- .a8a! i!vited ridi8ule 6he! he stated that the mea!i!g o the phallus is Jthe
sNuare o :1KEbut *a!t had already 8ompared the Thi!g:i!:itsel as ens rationis to a JsNuare root o a
!egative !umber7K
#2
9t is i!soar as 6e apply this 8ompariso! also to Fi8hteIs +nstoss that the *a!tia!
disti!8tio! bet6ee! 6hat 6e 8a! o!ly thi!k a!d 6hat 6e 8a! k!o6 assumes all its 6eight+ 6e 8a! o!ly
thi!k the +nstoss- 6e 8a!!ot k!o6 it as a determi!ate obje8t:o:represe!tatio!7
THE POSITED PRES!PPOSITION

To re8apitulate- Fi8hteIs attempt to get rid o the Thi!g:i!:itsel ollo6s a very pre8ise logi8 a!d
i!terve!es at a very pre8ise poi!t i! his 8ritiNue o *a!t7 .et us re8all that- or *a!t- the Thi!g is
i!trodu8ed as the d that ae8ts the subje8t 6he! it e?perie!8es a! obje8t through its se!ses+ the Thi!g
is primarily the sour8e o se!suous ae8tio!s7 9 6e are to get rid o the Thi!g- it is thus absolutely
8ru8ial to sho6 ho6 the subje8t 8a! ae8t a!d a8t upo! itsel- !ot o!ly at the i!telligible level but also
at the level o @se!suousA ae8tio!sT the absolute subje8t must be 8apable o temporal auto*affection7
For Fi8hte- this 9Is Jse!time!tal auto:ae8tio!K by mea!s o 6hi8h the subje8t e?perie!8es its
o6! e?iste!8e- its o6! i!ert give! 8hara8ter- a!d thus relates to itsel @or- rather- is or itselA as passive-
as ae8ted- is the ultimate ou!datio! o all reality7 This does !ot mea! that all reality- all e?perie!8e o
the other as i!ert>resisti!g- 8a! be redu8ed to the subje8tIs sel:e?perie!8eT it mea!s that it is o!ly the
subje8tIs passive sel:relatio! 6hi8h ope!s the subje8t up to the e?perie!8e o other!ess7
Therei! 8ulmi!ates Fi8hteIs e!tire eort- i! the deployme!t o the !otio! o the subje8tIs
%sensuous auto*affection' as the ultimate synthesis of the sub1ect and the ob1ect7 9 this is easible- the!
there is !o lo!ger the !eed to posit- behi!d the tra!s8e!de!tal 9Is spo!ta!eity- the u!k!o6able
J!oume!al dK that the subje8t Jreally isK+ i there is ge!ui!e sel:ae8tio!- the! the 9 is also able to
ully "now itsel- that is- 6e !o lo!ger have to reer to a !oume!al J9 or he or it- the Thi!g that thi!ks-K
as *a!t does i! -he ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason7 A!d- thereby- 6e 8a! also see ho6 Fi8hteIs urge!8y to
get rid o the Thi!g:i!:itsel is li!ked to his o8us o! the ethi8o:pra8ti8al e!gageme!t o the subje8t as
grou!ded i! its freedom+ i the subje8tIs phe!ome!al @sel:Ae?perie!8e is just the appeara!8e o a!
u!k!o6! !oume!al substa!8e- the! our reedom is just a! illusory appeara!8e a!d 6e are really like
puppets 6hose a8ts are 8o!trolled by a! u!k!o6! me8ha!ism7 *a!t 6as ully a6are o this radi8al
8o!seNue!8eEa!d- perhaps- all o Fi8hte 8a! be read as a! attempt to avoid this *a!tia! deadlo8k7
3ut- o!e may ask- does this assertio! o the subje8tIs 8apa8ity to get to k!o6 itsel ully !ot
8o!tradi8t Fi8hteIs o8us o! the subje8t as pra8ti8ally e!gaged- struggli!g 6ith obje8ts>obsta8les that
rustrate its e!deavors- a!d thereby as i!iteM So 8a! o!ly a! i!i!ite bei!g ully k!o6 itselM The
a!s6er is that the Fi8htea! subje8t is pre8isely the parado?i8al 8o!ju!8tio! o these t6o eatures-
i!itude a!d reedom- si!8e the sub1ects infinity ?the infinite striving of its ethical engagement@ is itself
an aspect of its finite condition7
The key here is agai! provided by Fi8hteIs !otio! o the mutual delimitatio! o subje8t a!d
obje8t- Sel a!d !ot:Sel+ every a8tivity is posited i!>as the obje8t o!ly i!soar as the Sel is posited as
passiveT a!d this positi!g o the Sel as passive is still a! act o the Sel- its sel:limitatio!7 9 am o!ly a
passive d ae8ted by obje8ts i!soar as 9 @a8tivelyA posit mysel as a passive re8ipie!t7 Seidel iro!i8ally
8alls this the Jla6 o the 8o!servatio! o a8tivityK+ J6he! reality @a8tivityA is 8a!8eled i! the sel- that
Nua!tum o reality @a8tivityA gets posited i! the !o!:sel7 9 a8tivity is posited i! the !o!:sel- the! its
opposite @passivityA is posited i! the sel+ 9 @passivelyA see the @a8tivelyA bloomi!g apple7K =o6ever-
this 8a! o!ly happe! Jbe8ause 9 @a8tivelyA posit passivity i! my:sel so that a8tivity may be posited i!
the !o!:sel O The !o!:sel 8a!!ot a8t upo! my 8o!s8ious!ess u!less 9 @a8tively- that is- reelyA allo6
it to do so7K
#"
*a!t had already preigured this i! his so:8alled Ji!8orporatio! thesisK+ 8auses o!ly ae8t me
i!soar as 9 allo6 them to ae8t me7 This is 6hy Jyou 8a! be8ause you mustK+ every e?ter!al
impossibility @to 6hi8h the e?8use J9 k!o6 9 must- but 9 8a!!ot- it is impossible OK reersA relies o! a
disavo6ed sel:limitatio!7 Applied to the se?ual oppositio! o the Ja8tiveK male a!d JpassiveK emale
sta!8e- this Fi8htea! !otio! o the a8tivity o the !o!:9 as stri8tly 8orrelative to the 9Is passivity bri!gs
us dire8tly to Htto /ei!i!gerIs !otio! o 6oma! as the embodime!t o ma!Is all+ 6oma! e?ists @as a
thi!g out there- a8ti!g upo! ma!- disturbi!g his ethi8al sta!8e- thro6i!g him o the railsA o!ly i!soar
as ma! adopts the sta!8e o passivityT she is literally the result o ma!Is 6ithdra6al i!to passivity- so
there is !o !eed or ma! to a8tively ight 6oma!Ehis adoptio! o a! a8tive sta!8e automati8ally pulls
the grou!d out rom u!der 6oma!Is e?iste!8e- si!8e her e!tire bei!g is !othi!g but ma!Is !o!:bei!g7
=ere JFi8hte asks himsel 6hether the Nua!tity @that is- the a8tivityA o the sel 8a! ever eNual
Uero @] 0A- 6hether the sel 8a! ever be totally at rest- ever totally passive7K Fi8hteIs a!s6er- o 8ourse-
is !o+ JFor the !o!:sel has reality o!ly to the e?te!t that the sel is ae8ted by itT other6ise- as su8h- it
has !o reality at all O 9 do !ot see a!ythi!g 9 do !ot will to see7K
#(
=o6ever- the 6ay 6e read the
e?a8t status o the !o!:Sel is 8ru8ial here+ i 6e read it i! a88orda!8e 6ith the *a!tia! i!i!ite
judgme!t- that is- as a !o!:Sel that comprises Sel itsel @i! the same 6ay that the Ju!deadK 8omprises
the deadA- the!- prior to positi!g obje8tivity- the 8o!stituti!g>8o!stitutive gesture o Ich should be a!
immobiliUatio!- a 6ithdra6al- a sel:emptyi!g o the !o!:Sel- a sel:redu8tio! to a Uero 6hi8h is the
SelT this redu8tio! to Uero ope!s up the spa8e- literally- or IchIs a8tivity o positi!g>mediati!g7
Fi8hte gets 8aught i! a 8ir8le here7 =is irst propositio! is+ A ] A- Ich O Ich- i7e7- absolute sel:
positi!g- pure substa!8eless be8omi!g- -at*0andlung @deed:a8tivityA- Ji!telle8tual i!tuitio!7K The!
8omes the se8o!d propositio!+ A ] !o!:A- Ich O non*Ich- the sel posits a !o!:sel 6hi8h is absolutely
opposed to itEhere e!ters the absolute 8o!tradi8tio!7 The! 8omes the mutual limitatio! 6hi8h resolves
this sel:8o!tradi8tio! i! its double orm- pra8ti8al @the Sel posits the !ot:sel as limited by the selA
a!d theoreti8al @the sel posits itsel as limited by the !ot:selAEthe Sel a!d the !ot:sel are at the same
level- divisible7
##
The ambiguity here lies i! the a8t that Jthe absolute sel o the irst pri!8iple is !ot
something O it is simply what it is7K
#'
H!ly 6ith delimitatio!-

[b\oth are somethi!g+ the !ot:sel is 6hat the sel is !ot- a!d vice versa7 As opposed to the absolute sel
@though- as 6ill be sho6! i! due 8ourse- it 8a! o!ly be opposed to it i!soar as it is represe!ted [by it\-
!ot i!soar as it is i! itselA- the !o!:sel is absolutely nothing @schlechthin ichtsAT as opposed to the
limitable sel- it is a negative <uantity7
#$
=o6ever- rom the pra8ti8al sta!dpoi!t- the i!ite Sel posits the i!i!ite Sel i! the guise o the
9deal o )!ity o Sel a!d !ot:Sel- a!d- 6ith it- the !o!:sel as a! obsta8le to be over8ome7 /e thus
i!d ourselves i! a 8ir8le+ the absolute Sel posits !o!:sel a!d the! i!itiUes itsel by its delimitatio!T
ho6ever- the 8ir8le 8loses itsel- the absolute presuppositio! itsel @the pure sel:positi!gA retur!s as
presupposed- that is- as the presuppositio! of the posited- a!d- i! this se!se- as depe!di!g o! the
posited7 Far rom bei!g a! i!8o!siste!8y- this is the 8ru8ial- properly spe8ulative- mome!t i! Fi8hte+ the
presuppositio! itsel is @retroa8tivelyA posited by the pro8ess it ge!erates7
T=0 F9D=T0A4 3H40 94 T=0 T=FHAT

So perhaps- beore dismissi!g his philosophy as the 8lima8ti8 poi!t o subje8tivist mad!ess- 6e
should give Fi8hte a 8ha!8e7 To properly u!dersta!d his passage to ull idealism it is !e8essary to bear
i! mi!d ho6 he radi8aliUes the prima8y o pra8ti8al reaso!- 6hi8h had already bee! asserted by *a!t7
*a!tIs irst 8riti8s had already !oti8ed the ambiguous relatio!ship- i! his pra8ti8al philosophy- bet6ee!
the 8ategori8al imperative itsel as the dire8t Ja8t o reaso!K a!d the postulates o pure pra8ti8al reaso!
@the immortality o the soul- the e?iste!8e o 1od OA- i! other 6ords the so:8alled Jmoral image o the
6orldK 6hi8h alo!e makes our moral a8tivity mea!i!gul+ 6e have to trust that the reality i! 6hi8h 6e
i!terve!e is already i! itsel stru8tured i! su8h a 6ay that 6ill e!able us to a8hieve our pra8ti8al goals
a!d progress to a better 6orld7 *a!tIs premise is that these postulatesEthe e!tire Jmoral image o the
6orldKEdo !ot have the same dire8t a!d u!8o!ditio!al status as does our moral a6are!ess @o the
8ategori8al imperativeA- but are the result o a se8o!dary reaso!i!g o! the 8og!itive impli8atio!s o our
moral a6are!ess7 H!8e 6e 8o!8ede this poi!t- the parallel imposes itsel bet6ee! the postulates o
pra8ti8al reaso! 6hi8h guara!tee the mea!i!gul!ess o our moral a8tivity a!d the regulative ideas o
pure @theoreti8alA reaso! 6hi8h guara!tee the 8o!siste!8y o our k!o6ledge7 The divi!e teleology that
6e 8a! obs8urely dis8er! i! !ature is !ot a 8og!itive 8ategory- it just helps us systematiUe our
k!o6ledge o !atureT that is- 6e pro8eed as if there 6as a 1od 6ho rules the 6orld- but 6ithout
k!o6i!g this or sure7 A!d the same holds also or pra8ti8al reaso!+ 6he! 6e a8t morally- 6e pro8eed
as if there is a Jmoral 6orld order7K 9t 6as- as =e!ri8h !otes- S8hulUe 6ho developed this 8ritiNue i!
detail- like!i!g

the stru8ture o *a!tIs moral theology to the 8osmologi8al proo o the e?iste!8e o 1od- i! 6hi8h o!e
moves rom the u!avoidability o thi!ki!g the idea o 1od to the belie i! the e?iste!8e o 6hat 6e are
thi!ki!g O 9! *a!tIs moral theology- 6e have- irst- the a8t o the moral la6 that 6e presuppose7 /e
the! i!er rom this a8t o reaso!- 6hi8h is merely the a6are!ess o the 8ategori8al imperative- the
e?iste!8e o a moral 6orld order O the i!ere!8e pursues the same illegitimate 8ourse o reaso!i!g as
the 8osmologi8al proo7 3oth i!er rom somethi!g give! somethi!g else that is i!a88essible to our
e?perie!8e7
#&
This gap thus leaves ope! the possibility that our moral reedom is just a! illusio!- that 6e are
!oume!ally bli!d automata7 Fi8hteIs a!s6er to this reproa8h is very pre8ise a!d rei!ed+ the reproa8h
itsel sile!tly presupposes the prima8y o theoreti8al over pra8ti8al reaso!7 9t is o!ly or theoreti8al
reaso! that obje8tive reality is more tha! JmereK subje8tive 8ertai!tyT rom the sta!dpoi!t o theoreti8al
reaso!- the sel:positi!g 9 @6hi8h e?ists o!ly i! the subje8tive mode- Jor itselKA does !ot e?ist at all-
there is !o su8h thi!g i! Jobje8tive reality7K Furthermore- i!soar as the spa8e o pra8ti8al a8tivity
i!volves the oppositio!>8o!li8t bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t- the 9 a!d the !o!:9Ethat is- the e!dless
eort o the 9 to impose its mould o! obje8tive realityEJthe e!tire e?iste!8e o pra8ti8al reaso! is
ou!ded o! the conflict bet6ee! the sel:determi!i!g eleme!t 6ithi! us a!d the theoreti8al:k!o6i!g
eleme!t7 A!d pra8ti8al reaso! 6ould itsel be 8a!8eled i this 8o!li8t 6ere elimi!ated7K
#%
Therei!
resides the diere!8e bet6ee! the o!tologi8al proo o 1odIs e?iste!8e a!d the postulates o pra8ti8al
reaso!+ Jthe 8osmo:theologi8al o!e is based e!tirely upo! theoreti8al reaso!- 6hereas the moral proo
is based upo! the 8o!li8t bet6ee! theoreti8al reaso! a!d the 9 i! itsel7K
'0
This Fi8htea! prima8y o pra8ti8al over theoreti8al reaso! is mu8h more radi8al tha! the
*a!tia! o!e+ 6hile *a!t asserts the prima8y o pra8ti8al reaso!- he still keeps the t6o spheres
apartEhis poi!t is ultimately that o!e has to limit the s8ope o @theoreti8alA k!o6ledge to make spa8e
or @pra8ti8alA belies7 /ith Fi8hte- o! the 8o!trary- pra8ti8al philosophy Jbe8omes or the irst time a
part o epistemologyK+ he i!ds Jeleme!ts to be basi8 i! 8og!itio! itsel that traditio!ally had bee!
separated rom 8og!itio! a!d 8o!!e8ted i!stead 6ith pleasure a!d a8tio!7K
'1
9t is o!ly by taki!g i!to a88ou!t this prima8y o pra8ti8al philosophy that 6e 8a! a!s6er the key
Nuestio!+ ho6 does Fi8hte pass rom the 9Is sel:positi!g to the 9Is sel:limitatio! by 6ay o positi!g
the !o!:9M 9! simpler terms- ho6 does he pass rom the absolute subje8tIs sel:positi!g to the mutual
delimitatio! o subje8t a!d obje8tM The problem resides i! the a8t that Fi8hte does !ot subs8ribe to the
ou!di!g a?iom o the post:=egelia! tra!s8e!de!tal philosophy o i!itude- 6hi8h asserts the
8orrelatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t as the ultimate horiUo! o our e?perie!8e+ or him- the t6o relata
o the subje8t:obje8t relatio!ship are !ot o eNual 6eight- o!e o themEthe 9Eis absolutely privileged-
si!8e the 9 is all reality7 For this reaso!- Fi8hte 8a! o!ly desig!ate the obje8t as J!ot:9-K that is- its status
has to be purely !egative- 6ith !o positive or8e to it7 The relatio!ship is here that o a logi8al !egatio!+
the obje8t is a !o!:subje8t and nothing above that7 =o6ever- Fi8hteIs thought i! its e!tirety is a
giga!ti8 eort to 8o!8eive o all reality as origi!ati!g rom the 9Is @mi!dIsA sel:relati!g a!d the 9Is
e!dless Jpra8ti8alK struggle 6ith its opposite @the obje8t- !ot:9A as the u!surpassable a8t o our
livesEa!d the 8ategory 6hi8h its this relatio! is !ot that o !egatio!- but that o 6hat *a!t 8alled Jreal
oppositio!K @i! his JAttempt to 9!trodu8e the Do!8ept o 4egative ,ag!itude i!to ChilosophyK rom
his pre:8riti8al phase- 1$'"X(A7 /he! t6o opposed or8es 8ollide- ea8h 8a! dimi!ish the i!te!sity
@JNua!tity o a NualityKA o the opposite- but this dimi!ishi!g is by dei!itio! the ee8t o the opposed
positive or8e7 To give a thoroughly simpliied e?ample+ t6o groups o boys pull a rope i! opposite
dire8tio!sT i the rope moves let- this mea!s that the J!egative mag!itudeK o the right groupIs or8e is
the result o the over6helmi!g po6er o the let groupIs or8e @the rope !ot o!ly did !ot move i! the
dire8tio! i! 6hi8h they pulled it- but moved a6ay rom themA7 A88ordi!g to =e!ri8h @6ho is 6orth
Nuoti!g in e&tenso o! this poi!tA- Fi8hte ultimately 8heats here+ his 6hole 8o!stru8tio! o the !ot:9 is
based upo! 8o!usi!g @or jumpi!g bet6ee!A logi8al !egatio! a!d real oppositio!Ei! other 6ords- he
treats 6hat he i!trodu8es as the result o a logi8al !egatio! @a!d as su8h a purely !egative e!tity- a !o!:
e!tityA as a positive 8ou!ter:or8e+

*a!t takes it or gra!ted that su8h a redu8tio! o reality i! o!e parti8ular is due to a real or8e i!
a!other parti8ular O the o!tologi8al status o bei!g a !egative parti8ular depe!ds- i! some respe8t- o!
some other parti8ularIs bei!g positive7 3y 6ay o 8o!trast- Fi8hte assumes that all reality has to be
ou!d i! the sel7 =e thereore 8a!!ot avoid sayi!g that the !o!:sel is !othi!g but a! d that redu8es the
selIs reality7 This is the origi! o Fi8hteIs i!amous a!d u!settli!g theory o the +nstossEthe impulse
that takes pla8e i! the a8tivity o the sel a!d bri!gs about its rele8ti!g o! itsel OFi8hteIs assumptio!
that there is absolute reality i! the sel depe!ds e!tirely o! his smuggli!g i! a real o!tologi8al !egatio!-
by 6ay o the !egative eleme!t i! the term J!ot:sel7K Fi8hte simply 8alls the obje8t the !ot:sel- a!d
the! he i!trodu8es the idea o its bei!g !egative7 4o6 he mea!s that the bei!g !egative o the !ot:sel
is a! ontological !egativity- a!d only !egative i! this se!se7 This is obviously a philosophi8al sleight:
o:ha!d- a shell game- i! 6hi8h Fi8hte shits the mea!i!g o his terms7
'2
4ote =e!ri8hIs e?8essively aggressive dismissal o +nstoss- betrayi!g tra8es o u!easi!ess @to
be 8o!trasted to Ga!iel 3reaUealeIs mu8h more subtle a!alysisA a!d beari!g 6it!ess to his i!ability to
per8eive the i!!er !e8essity o +nstoss7 True- Fi8hte himsel 6as !ot able ully to a88ou!t or the
pre8ise status o +nstoss @is it the last remai!der o the Thi!g:i!:itsel- absolutely e?ter!al to the 9 a!d
thus limiti!g it- or just a sel:posited obsta8leMAT ho6ever- the urge that pushed him to i!trodu8e this
!otio! 6as absolutely 8o!siste!t 6ith the deepest logi8 o his thought7 /hat Fi8hte ailed to see 6as
that- i! the subje8t:obje8t relatio!ship- the sub1ect is a !egative e!tity- a pure sel:relati!g
!egativityE6hi8h is 6hy- i! order !ot to Jimplode i!to itsel-K it !eeds a mi!imum o obje8tal support7
That is to say- although Fi8hte repeatedly emphasiUes ho6 the subje8t is !ot a thi!g but a sel:relati!g
pro8ess- a -at*0andlung- he 8o!8eives o the subje8t i! a! all:too:positive 6ay 6he! he 8laims that the
absolute 9 @subje8tA is all realityEthe subje8t is- o! the 8o!trary- a hole i! reality7 As su8h- the 9
@subje8tA is i! !o positio! to Jtra!serK its reality o!to the !ot:9 @obje8tAT o! the 8o!trary- it is itsel i!
!eed o a Jlittle bit o realityK @o a! obje8tA to regai! its mi!imum 8o!siste!8y7 /hat this mea!s is that
the subje8t by dei!itio! 8a!!ot be J8ompleteK+ it is i! itsel Jth6arted-K the parado?i8al result o its
o6! ailure:to:be7 To des8ribe it i! the simpliied terms o the loop o symboli8 represe!tatio!+ the
subje8t e!deavors to adeNuately represe!t itsel- this represe!tatio! ails- a!d the subje8t is the result o
this ailure7 Fe8all 6hat o!e might be tempted to 8all the J=ugh 1ra!t parado?K @reerri!g to the
amous s8e!e rom Four Weddings and a FuneralA+ the hero tries to e?press his love to his beloved-
o!ly to get 8aught i! stumbli!g a!d 8o!used repetitio!sT yet it is i! this very ailure to deliver his
message i! a pere8t 6ay that he bears 6it!ess to its authe!ti8ity7 9s !ot Fi8hte himsel u!e?pe8tedly o!
the tra8k o this same i!sight 6he! he

shits rom the term vorstellen @represe!tatio!A to the 6ord darstellen @prese!tatio!A7 3ut 6hat !o6
does represe!tatio! prese!tM As soo! as 9 have arrived at prese!tatio! rom represe!tatio!- the Nuestio!
JWhat is represe!tedMK has a! e!tirely diere!t mea!i!g7 9! represe!tatio!- o 8ourse- it 6ould be the
obje8t that is represe!ted7 3ut 6hat is prese!ted i! the represe!tatio! i! the se!se o darstellenM The
a!s6er is obvious+ the selR
'"
A!d here 6e 8ome to the 8ru8ial poi!t+ the other!ess- the Jstra!ger i! my very heart-K 6hi8h
Fi8hte e!deavored to dis8er! u!der the !ame o +nstoss- is this Jbo!e i! the throatK 6hi8h preve!ts the
dire8t e?pressio! o the subje8t @a!d 6hi8hEsi!8e the Jsubje8tK is the ailure o its o6! dire8t
e?pressio!Eis stri8tly 8orrelative to the subje8tA7 /hi8h mea!s that the mi!imal emptyi!g o subje8t-
the redu8tio! o its reality @o its Jthi!g!essKA- is 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity+ the subje8t is 8aught i! its
loop be8ause it is !ot:All- i!ite- la8ki!g- be8ause a loss:o:reality is 8o:substa!tial 6ith it- a!d +nstoss
is the positiviUatio! o this gap7 +nstoss is the 9!:itsel i! the mode o For:the:subje8t>sel7
A 8e!tury a!d a hal later- .a8a! 8alled this same Jbo!e i! the throatK the ob1et petit a7 9!soar
as the Jsubje8tK is the !ame or sel:relati!g absolute !egativity- +nstoss as the mi!imal orm o !ot:9 is
!ot a @logi8alA !egatio! o the subje8tIs @ull a!d o!lyA reality- but- o! the 8o!trary- the result o the
!egatio! o the !egatio! 6hi8h JisK the subje8t7 H!e does !ot begi! 6ith a positivity 6hi8h is the!
!egatedT o!e begi!s 6ith !egatio!- a!d the obje8tIs positivity is the result o the @sel:relatedA !egatio!
o this !egatio!7 Hr- to put it i! .a8a!ese- the obje8t a has !o positive substa!tial bei!g o its o6!- is
!othi!g but the positivatio! o a la8k+ !ot a la8ki!g obje8t- but a! obje8t 6hi8h positiviUes a la8k
@!egativityA- 6hose positivity is !othi!g but a positiviUed !egativity7 9t is here that imagination e!ters+
this positiviUatio! o a la8k is the Uero:level imagi!atio!7 At its most radi8al o!tologi8al level-
imagi!atio! ills i! the void>la8k that JisK the subje8t- that is- 6hat the subje8t origi!ally Jimagi!esK is
its o6! obje8tal 8ou!terpoi!t- itsel as a determi!ate bei!g7
9t is 8ru8ial to grasp 8orre8tly here the li!k bet6ee! imagi!atio! @EinbildungA a!d
represe!tatio! @6orstellungA7 Although 8losely 8o!!e8ted- they are !ot simply the same @i! the
simpliied Jtra!s8e!de!talK se!se that- si!8e all reality is subje8tive- its status has to be that o the
subje8tIs imagi!atio!AT there is a very pre8ise disti!8tio! bet6ee! the t6o7 First- represe!tatio!+ ho6
does Fi8hte 8ome to re:prese!tatio! as the mediati!g mome!t bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t- bet6ee! the 9
a!d the !ot:9M Agai!- his idea is !ot the simple 8ommo!:se!si8al !otio! o represe!tatio! as the
subje8tive sta!d:i! @represe!tativeA o a @represe!tedA obje8t7 =ere =e!ri8h is agai! 6orth Nuoti!g i!
detail+

i the Sel is absolute reality itsel- its reality cannot be redu8ed7 Si!8e the relatio! bet6ee! the subje8t
a!d the obje8t is the relatio! bet6ee! the real a!d the !egative- !o real relatio! bet6ee! the real a!d the
!egative is possible7 Thereore- o!ly a logi8al relatio! that e?8ludes a!y real relatio! bet6ee! the t6o
o them 6ill do7 A real relatio! bet6ee! the t6o o them presupposes some third mediati!g eleme!t7
This eleme!t must have the 8hara8ter o the subje8t to a 8ertai! degree- a!d just as this eleme!t has the
8hara8ter o the sel o!ly to a 8ertai! degree- so also it is ae8ted by the obje8t7 O 9! this third eleme!t-
the Sel itsel is !ot limited+ the limitatio! o the Sel 6ould be impossible- i the Sel really is all
reality7 4o!etheless- there is somethi!g that is limitatio! O So 8o!8eived- limitatio! is a! e!tity that
makes the relatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t possible7 9! this respe8t the limited relatio! bet6ee!
subje8t a!d obje8t is the eleme!tary o!tologi8al status o represe!tatio!7K
'(
So 6hy 8a! the subje8t !ot simply be limited by the obje8tM 4ot be8ause the subje8t is absolute
i! the !aSve se!se o bei!g the all:e!8ompassi!g reality- but pre8isely be8ause it is i!ite- 8aught i! its
sel:relati!g loop a!d thereore u!able to step out o itsel a!d dra6 a li!e o delimitatio! bet6ee!
subje8tive a!d obje8tive+ every limit the subje8t dra6s is already Jsubje8tive7K 9! other 6ords- or the
subje8t to be able to dra6 a 8lear Jobje8tiveK limit bet6ee! itsel a!d the !ot:9- its obje8tivity- it 6ould
have to break out o its o6! loop a!d adopt a !eutral positio! rom 6hi8h it 6ould have bee! possible
or the subje8t to 8ompare itsel 6ith obje8tivity7 The subje8t 8a!!ot simply be limited by the obje8t
be8ause it is 8aught i! its o6! loop- that is- be8ause every relatio! it e!tertai!s 6ith obje8tivity is
already a mode o sel:relati!gT the subje8tIs dire8t relatio! to the obje8t 8a!!ot be a relatio! o real
oppositio! bet6ee! t6o positive or8es delimiti!g ea8h other- but o!ly a purely logi8al relatio!
bet6ee! the subje8t a!d a! empty:!egative d- !ot eve! the *a!tia! Thi!g:i!:itsel7
/e 8a! !o6 see 6hy represe!tatio! !eeds to be suppleme!ted by imagi!atio! proper+ si!8e the
ield o represe!tatio!s remai!s 6ithi! the loop o the subje8tIs sel:relati!g- it is by dei!itio! al6ays
i!8o!siste!t- ull o la8u!ae- 6hi8h the subje8t must someho6 ill i! to 8reate a mi!imally 8o!siste!t
/hole o a 6orldEa!d the u!8tio! o imagi!atio! is pre8isely to ill i! these gaps7 4o6 6e 8a! also
see 8learly the diere!8e bet6ee! represe!tatio! a!d imagi!atio!+ represe!tatio! is the subje8tive
mode o obje8tivity @obje8ts are Jreprese!tedK or the subje8tA- 6hile imagi!atio! is the obje8tive mode
o subje8tivity @the subje8tIs void is prese!t[ii\ed as a! [imagi!ed\ obje8tA7 9! other 6ords- 6hile
represe!tatio! represe!ts somethi!g @its obje8tA- imagi!atio! represe!ts !othi!g @6hi8h JisK the
subje8tA7 Fi8hte did !ot see all o this 8learly- 6hi8h e?plai!s 6hy he ote! seems to be usi!g
Jimagi!atio!K simply as a !ame or the subje8tive positi!g o obje8tivity- that is- or Jsubje8tive
obje8tivity7K 3ut *a!t already had a prese!time!t o the u!derlyi!g true raison dJtre o imagi!atio!+ it
arises be8ause the subje8t is i!ite and bou!dless- 6ith !o e?ter!alityEthis is 6hy the sy!thesis
through imagi!atio! is !eeded to 8o!stitute reality+ J4o psy8hologist has yet thought that the
imagi!atio! is a !e8essary i!gredie!t o [the\ per8eptio! [o reality\ itsel7K
'#
0ve! =eidegger ell short here i! his elaboratio! o the diere!8e bet6ee! the A!8ie!t 1reek
a!d the moder! u!dersta!di!g o a!tasy+ i! 1reek thought- phantasia reerred to the 8omi!g:i!to:
appeara!8e o e!tities- to their u!:8o!8ealme!t agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o 6ithdra6al>8o!8ealme!t7 As
su8h- phantasia 8o!8er!s 3ei!g itselEi! 8o!trast to moder! subje8tivism- 6herei! a!tasy desig!ates
ma!Is Jmerely subje8tiveK a!tasiUi!g- dis8o!!e8ted rom Jobje8tiveK reality+

9! u!8o!8ealme!t fantasia 8omes to pass+ the 8omi!g:i!to:appeara!8e- as a parti8ular somethi!g- o
that 6hi8h prese!8esEor ma!- 6ho himsel prese!8es to6ard 6hat appears7 ,a! as represe!ti!g
subje8t- ho6ever Ja!tasiUes-K i7e7- he moves i! imaginatio- i! that his represe!ti!g imagi!es- pi8tures
orth- 6hatever is- as the obje8tive- i!to the 6orld as pi8ture7
''
.a8a!Is pre8ise use o a!tasy restores somethi!g o the origi!al 1reek mea!i!g+ Ja!tasyK has
or him a ki!d o tra!s8e!de!tal statusT it is 8o!stitutive o reality itsel- a rame 6hi8h guara!tees the
o!tologi8al 8o!siste!8y o reality7 =eidegger !o!etheless alls short here+ 6hat he ails to see is ho6
imagi!atio! as opposed to the Jobje8tiveKEthat is- pre8isely i! its Jmerely subje8tiveK aspe8tEis
!eeded to 8o!stitute the phe!ome!al Jobje8tive reality7K Thi!gs be8ome eve! more 8omple? 6he!
Fi8hte tries to sho6 ho6- out o the play o subje8tive imagi!atio! 6hi8h is e!tirely 8o!tai!ed 6ithi!
the loop o the mi!dIs sel:relati!g- the !e8essary belie i! a! e?ter!al 6orld i!depe!de!t o our
per8eptio!>imagi!atio! arises7 The 9Is sel:limitatio! a!d its 8o!sta!t over8omi!g irst 8o!stitute a play
o imagi!atio! 6ithi! 6hi8h J8o!s8ious!ess i! a state o dreami!g 8a! be u!derstood as related to itsel
so that it e?perie!8es itsel as 6averi!g- or as movi!g i!to a!d out o states reely7 9t is thus !ot really
determi!ed by a!ythi!g that 8ould adeNuately be des8ribed as a! obje8t7K
'$
So- agai!- ho6 do 6e pass
rom here to the @belie i! theA e?ter!al 6orldM Fi8hteIs a!s6er is beautiully parado?i8al+ it is !ot that-
i! its represe!tatio!s- the 9 stumbles upo! somethi!g 6hi8h so resists the ree play o its imagi!atio!
that it 8a! o!ly be a88ou!ted or as a! e?ter!al 8ou!ter:or8eT o! the 8o!trary- the problem the 9
resolves 6ith the @hypo:Athesis o e?ter!al reality is that o its o6! ull sel:a6are!ess as a mi!dE6hat
happe!s i! the mi!d must be posited or it as Jme!tal7K =ere agai!- a lo!ger passage rom =e!ri8h is
u!avoidable+

First- se!satio!s are !othi!g but states o the mi!d7 9! order to k!o6 them as me!tal- that is- to have
them for the mi!d as su8h- 6e must disti!guish se!satio!s rom somethi!g that is !ot me!tal at all O 9!
order to be8ome a6are o itsel- the mi!d has to i!trodu8e reely a mental 8o!stru8t o somethi!g that
8orrespo!ds to the se!satio!s- 6hi8h is the image o the e?ter!al 6orld O o!8e 6e are able to thi!k o
se!satio!s as someho6 havi!g somethi!g 8orrespo!di!g to them- 6e have perceptions7 So 8o!strued-
se!satio!s are !ot !o6 states o the mi!dT they are 8orrelated to somethi!g that is !ot me!tal+ they are
of somethi!g7 At this poi!t- the 8losed- sel:relati!g system o the mi!d is ope!ed or the irst time O
To the Nuestio! J/hat is the 6orldMK 6e may !o6 oer the ollo6i!g a!s6er+ it is the i!determi!ate
dime!sio! o 8orrelates to the states o our mi!ds7
'&
9t is easy to see the parado? here+ the mi!d has to posit somethi!g as !ot:me!tal i! order to
be8ome a6are o itsel as mi!d- a!d this !o!:me!tal d is agai! Ja me!tal 8o!stru8t o somethi!g that
8orrespo!ds to the se!satio!sKT so Jthe 8losed- sel:relati!g system o the mi!d is ope!ed or the irst
timeKEbut it is obviously a alse ope!i!g- be8ause it is ope!ed to6ards somethi!g 6hi8h is agai! a
me!tal 8o!stru8t7 9s the absurd:subje8tivist sleight:o:ha!d !ot 8learly dis8er!ible here- i7e7- is Fi8hte
!ot 8learly 8laimi!g that J6hat is outside the mi!d is !othi!g but a 8o!stru8t o the sel:reere!8e o the
mi!d itselKM
'%
The mistake agai! is to 8o!8eive o this 8o!stellatio! o!ly i! a theoreti8al mode o
subje8tivity+ i o!e adopts the sta!8e o a passive:!eutral observer- the! the obje8tive 8orrelatio!s to our
se!satio!s remai! purely me!tal- la8ki!g a!y real 8ou!ter:or8e able to resist the subje8tE6ithi! this
mode- o 8ourse- all 9 have dire8t a88ess to are my se!satio!s- a!d all other e!tities are my Jme!tal
8o!stru8ts7K 9! short- i Fi8hte 6ere to have remai!ed at this level- he 6ould have really bee! a
3erkeleya! subje8tivist @as .e!i! 6ro!gly assumed i! his Materialism and Empirio*,riticismA7 So the
key Nuestio! is+ ho6 does the relatio!ship bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t be8ome o!e o real oppositio!-
that is- ho6 does the e?ter!al 6orld be8ome a real opposi!g or8e to the 9M A88ordi!g to Fi8hte- this
happe!s o!ly 6he! our mi!d adopts a pra8ti8al sta!8e to6ards the 6orld7 9! the theoreti8al:
observatio!al sta!8e- it is easy to 8o!8eive o reality as a mere dream that u!olds i! ro!t o our
eyesEbut reality JhurtsK a!d resists us o!8e 6e start i!terve!i!g i! it a!d tryi!g to 8ha!ge it7 =ere
e!ters- o 8ourse- Fi8hteIs i!amous Jspurious i!i!ityK+ the pra8ti8al Sel 8a! !ever totally over8ome
the resista!8e o the !ot:9- so Jthe selIs origi!al pra8ti8al 8o!stitutio! is a strivi!g
@StrebenAKEultimately the e!dless ethi8al strivi!g to 8reate a reality that 6ould ully 8o!orm to the
moral ideal7
$0
=ere- ho6ever- a!other surprise a6aits us7 Fi8hte does !ot remai! at the level o
abstra8t>i!determi!ate strivi!g- but tries to sho6 ho6 this strivi!g @8orrespo!di!g to pure subje8tive
i!6ard!essA be8omes determi!ate i! the guise o a parti8ular obje8tEa!d the !ame he 8hooses or this
obje8t:6hi8h:is:determi!ate:strivi!g is !o!e other tha! drive+ J/hat begi!s as i!determi!ate strivi!g
be8omes determi!ate- o!8e it is a! obje8t o thought7 /e may 6ell 6o!der 6hat this obje8t is 6hi8h
simulta!eously has the !ature o strivi!g7 Fi8hteIs a!s6er+ VThis obje8t is a drive @-riebAI7K
$1
The
parallel 6ith Freud is here truly breathtaki!g+ i! e?a8tly the same 6ay that- i! Fi8hteIs 8o!8eptio! o
drive- strivi!g is posited as su8h @i7e7- i! its limitatio!:determi!atio!A- the drive or Freud is al6ays
irredu8ibly li!ked to a partial obje8t7 Fi8hte a88omplishes here a 8ru8ial step beyo!d subje8tivism
6hi8h .a8a! himsel 6as !ot able to make u!til his Seminar ;I @1%'"X(A7 Crior to this date- .a8a!
really did !ot k!o6 6hat to do 6ith the Freudia! drive or JlibidoKEbasi8ally- he redu8ed it to the
s8ie!tii8 obje8tii8atio!>Jreii8atio!K o the authe!ti8 i!tersubje8tive reality o desire7 H!ly 6ith
Seminar ;I 6as .a8a! able to thin" the Freudia! drive as a! u!8a!!y Ju!deadK partial obje8t7
THE FIRST MODERN THEOLOG$

H!ly agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o Fi8hteIs 8omple? positio! 8a! 6e properly approa8h the
ge!ealogi8al topi8 o 2a8obiIs !e8essary role i! the passage rom *a!t to Fi8hte7 Fi8hteIs rea8tio! to
2a8obiIs 8riti8ism o *a!t is paradigmati8 o ho6 a true philosopher pro8eeds- earlessly ru!!i!g
agai!st the grai! o the predomi!a!t 8ommo! se!se7 2a8obi 8laimed that *a!t 6as i!8o!siste!t i! his
8li!gi!g to the !otio! o a Thi!g:i!:itsel+ the o!ly truly 8o!siste!t tra!s8e!de!tal philosophy 6ould
have bee! Jtra!s8e!de!tal egoismKEthe de!ial o the real give!!ess o other mi!ds- a!d o a!y
k!o6ledge o a! e?ter!al 6orld+ 6e are !ever i! 8o!ta8t 6ith a!ythi!g other tha! our o6! mi!ds- eve!
our most immediate se!satio!s are !othi!g but Nualii8atio!s o our me!tal states7 J*a!t should have
had the 8ourage to tea8h this theory- but he shra!k rom it7K
$2
For 2a8obi- o 8ourse- this result is
pate!tly absurd- sel:reuti!g- a 8lear e?ample o the ki!d o bli!d alley do6! 6hi8h philosophi8al
spe8ulatio! 8a! leadT he me!tio!s it merely i! order to step out o the domai! o philosophy a!d
advo8ate a retur! to the origi!al Jirratio!alK belies o huma!ity+ Jphilosophy 8ould !ever be a
satisa8tory e?pli8atio! o reality-K si!8e Ja!y philosophy 6hatsoever- o!8e made 8o!siste!t- i!evitably
de!ies u!dame!tal belies that !o huma! lie 8a! aba!do!7K
$"
Fi8hte- ho6ever- did not shri!k rom
the ull impli8atio!s o *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!talism+ he met 2a8obiIs 8halle!ge a!d ope!ly e!dorsed 6hat
2a8obi had deemed a! absurd @imApossibility7 4ote ho6 the triad *a!t:2a8obi:Fi8hte reverses the
e?pe8ted J!ormalK su88essio! o philosophi8al positio!s+ it is !ot that a hal:6ay positio! is irst
radi8aliUed to its 8o!siste!t:but:absurd 8o!8lusio! a!d the! reje8tedT o! the 8o!trary- 6hat is irst
treated as a reductio ad absurdum- proposed iro!i8ally as a plai!ly !o!se!si8al a!d sel:deeati!g
radi8aliUatio!- is the! take! seriously a!d ully e!dorsed7 The truly tragi8 positio! here is 2a8obiIs+ he
outli!ed the 8o!tours o a! e?treme positio! he abhorred @tra!s8e!de!tal egoismA- 6ith the 8riti8al
i!te!t o 8ombati!g te!de!8ies that might lead to6ards it- but his eorts had the u!i!te!ded
8o!seNue!8e o providi!g a program or his oppo!e!ts to ollo6Eto Ju!dersta!d the 6orld i! terms o
the sel:reere!tial !ature o the mi!d7K
$(
The key Nuestio! is thus+ ho6 did 6hat appeared to 2a8obi @a!d also to *a!tA as a !o!se!si8al
Jtra!s8e!de!tal egoismK sudde!ly be8ome a viable philosophi8al optio!M /hat 8ha!ged i! the
u!derlyi!g presuppositio!sM This bri!gs us to 6hat =e!ri8h repeatedly a!alyUes as JFi8hteIs
u!dame!tal i!sight-K the 8ore o 6hi8h is the 8riti8al reje8tio! o the sel:rele8tive model o sel:
8o!s8ious!ess+ sel:8o!s8ious!ess 8a!!ot be a88ou!ted or as a se8o!d:level 8o!s8ious!ess- a mi!d
tur!i!g its eye upo! itsel- taki!g itsel as its obje8tT that is- it is !ot that there is irst a 8o!s8ious!ess o
obje8ts a!d the! the mi!d be!ds ba8k a!d makes itsel its obje8tEthis 6ould i!volve a! i!i!ite
regress- plus it 6ould leave u!a!s6ered the simple Nuestio!+ 6he! 9 see mysel as a! obje8t- ho6 do 9
re8og!iUe it as JmyselKM 9t is- rather- that 9 must i! a 8ertai! 6ay already be pre:rele?ively a8Nuai!ted
6ith mysel @6hat =e!ri8h 8alls Selbst*6ertrautheitA i! order to be able to re8og!iUe JmyselK i! the
obje8t o rele8tio!7 3ut Fi8hte does !ot stop here- 6ith this vague !otio! o a pre:rele?ive sel:
a6are!ess or sel:a8Nuai!ta!8eT he develops all the 8o!seNue!8es o the ailure o the sel:rele?ive
model o sel:8o!s8ious!ess- the irst o 6hi8h is his o6! versio! o .a8a!Is a?iom il ny a pas de
mAta*langage+ sel:8o!s8ious!ess is 8aught i! a! i!es8apable 8ir8le or- rather- a sel:reere!tial loopEa
huma! mi!d is !ot o!ly a6are o itsel- it e&ists only through this ?self*@awareness! for itself+

the a8ulty o represe!tatio! @i7e7- the mi!dA does !ot e?ist at all e?8ept for the a8ulty o represe!tatio!7
There is !o mi!d plus somethi!g or 6hi8h it is that 6ould e!tail a separatio! bet6ee! the mi!d a!d its
bei!g:or:d7 There is !o a88ess to the mi!d rom the outsideT a!d there is !o mi!d that is !ot already
or itsel7 The very esse!8e o the mi!d is its sel:reere!tial 8hara8ter7
$#
There is thus !o Jobje8tiveK approa8h to sel:8o!s8ious!ess @9A+ i 6e look at it rom the outside-
it disappears- dissolvi!g i!to a! obje8tive psy8ho:physi8al pro8ess+

The a8ulty o represe!tatio! e?ists for the a8ulty o represe!tatio! a!d through the a8ulty o
represe!tatio!+ this is the 8ir8le 6ithi! 6hi8h every i!ite u!dersta!di!g- that is- every u!dersta!di!g
that 6e 8a! 8o!8eive- is !e8essarily 8o!i!ed7 A!yo!e 6ho 6a!ts to es8ape rom this 8ir8le does !ot
u!dersta!d himsel a!d does !ot k!o6 6hat he 6a!ts7
$'
4ote here the absolutely 8ru8ial i!vo8atio! o i!itude+ the 8ir8le holds or Jevery finite
u!dersta!di!g7K /hat this mea!s is that the sel:relati!g loop o the 9 is !ot a sig! o its
absolute>i!i!ite po6er @as i! primitive solipsisti8 subje8tivism- 6here the 9 is the o!ly absolute>i!i!ite
reality 6hi8h 8reates everythi!g elseA- but- o! the 8o!trary- the sig! o its i!itude7 So 6he! 6e read i!
Fi8hte 6hat 8a! o!ly appear to 8ommo! se!se as ridi8ulously overblo6! stateme!ts about the absolute
9 positi!g itsel a!d the!- 6ithi! the absolute 9- op:positi!g the i!ite 9 a!d the i!ite !o!:9- 6e should
al6ays bear i! mi!d that the 9Is sel:positi!g is !ot a mira8le perormed by a Nuasi:divi!e i!i!ite e!tity
6hi8h a8ts as causa sui @like 3aro! ,Y!8hhause! pulli!g himsel out o the s6amp by his o6!
hairAEo! the 8o!trary- the 8losed loop o sel:relati!g is the sig! o the 9Is ultimate i!itude- o its
bei!g 8aught 6ithi! its o6! horiUo!- o bei!g itsel o!ly or itsel7
The key term Jpositi!gK is to be opposed here to Jrele8ti!gK+ i! sel:8o!s8ious!ess- the 9 does
!ot rele8t upo! itsel as its o6! obje8t- it dire8tly posits itselE6hi8h mea!s that 6e 8a!!ot eve!
disti!guish bet6ee! the positi!g subje8t a!d the subje8t as the result o this positi!g7 As Fi8hte puts it-
the 9 absolutely posits itsel as positing- it JisK !othi!g but the pro8ess o its @sel:Apositi!g7 Fi8hteIs
ormulatio! is very pre8ise a!d has to be take! literally+ it is !ot just that the mi!d @9A relates to
itselEthe mi!d @9A is nothing but this pro8ess o sel:relati!g7 Therei! lies the 8ir8le or loop Fi8hte
talks about+ the relati!g itsel !ot o!ly 8reates 6hat it relates to- it also is 6hat it relates to7
3ut eve! thisEthe !otio! o the 9Is absolute sel:positi!gEis o!ly the irst step7 Arou!d 1&00-
Fi8hte e!gaged i! a 8loser a!d very rei!ed a!alysis o the 9Is sel:positi!g- a!d arrived at a urther
surprisi!g result- a ki!d o Jsplitti!g the atomK o the absolute 9Is sel:positi!g+ he dis8overed that the
most eleme!tary stru8ture o sel:8o!s8ious!essEthe 9Is sel:positi!gEis more 8omple? tha! it
i!itially appears- a!d displays a pre8ise stru8ture7 Fi8hteIs starti!g poi!t is that the Sel is !ot a produ8t
o some pre:subje8tive a8tivity that ge!erates itEthe Sel 8omes immediately 6ith the a8tivity7 Already
i! 1$%#- Fi8hte employed the metaphor o the eye @das +ugeA+ the Sel is a! a8tivity i!to 6hi8h a! eye
is i!serted- a! a8tivity 6hi8h sees itsel a!d is o!ly through seei!g itsel7 =is !e?t step is to admit that
J6e 8a!!ot account or the duality o the a8tivity a!d the eye i! terms o o!e o them alo!eK+ J4either
the eye !or the a8tivity 8a! provide this a88ou!t7 9! this mome!t- the idea o a grou!d o the stru8ture
be8omes i!dispe!sable7K
$$
9! other 6ords- the 8o!8ept o the Sel loses its e?pla!atory po6er+ it 8a!
!o lo!ger be the ultimate e&planans- but is itsel i! !eed o e?pla!atio!7 9t is here that Fi8hte 8o!ro!ts
his greatest theoreti8al 8halle!ge+ ho6 8a! o!e 8o!8eive this 1rou!d o the Sel 6ithout betrayi!g the
basi8 i!sight i!to the 9Is sel:positi!g- i!to ho6 the 9 e?ists o!ly or the 9- a!d 6ithout thereby
regressi!g i!to a pre:*a!tia! metaphysi8s i! 6hi8h the 1rou!d is 1od as a !oume!al Thi!g 6hi8h de
facto 8a!8els the 9Is reedom- depre8ati!g it as a mere Jsubje8tiveK illusio!M
The o!ly solutio! is or sel:8o!s8ious!ess @i7e7- the 9A to be Ji!8orporated i!to the grou!d rather
tha! o!ly bei!g O a! ee8t o itK+
$&
i! sel:8o!s8ious!ess- the 1rou!d itsel Je!ters i!to a relatio!ship
o sel:reere!8e-K that is- the 9Is sel:8o!s8ious!ess is simulta!eously a!d immediately the sel:
8o!s8ious!ess o the 1rou!d itsel7
$%
The i!terdepe!de!8e o the 1rou!d a!d sel:8o!s8ious!ess is
here radi8ally o!tologi8al a!d !ot merely epistemologi8al+ it is !ot o!ly that the 1rou!d be8omes a6are
o itsel through the 9Is sel:8o!s8ious!essT i!soar as the 1rou!d 8o!stitutes sel:8o!s8ious!ess- 6e
should say that the 1rou!d Jis 6hat it is o!ly in 6hat it 8o!stitutes7K
&0
9! his very subtle readi!g i! 6hi8h he tries to re8o!stru8t Fi8hteIs impli8it reaso!i!g- =e!ri8h
poi!ts out that Fi8hte here imper8eptibly i!trodu8es a !otio! o sel:relati!g that is radi8ally diere!t
rom the sel:relati!g o the absolute 9 6ho is !othi!g but its o6! sel:positi!g+ be8ause o this !e6
!otio! o relatio!- 6e have to i!terpret Jthe k!o6ledge of the produ8t about itsel a!d its origi! as a!
o!tologi8al relatio! bet6ee! the grou!d a!d itsel- by 6ay o its esse!tial produ8t- the mi!dK+
&1
Jsel:
8o!s8ious!ess relates itsel to the absolute grou!d a!d presuppositio! o its a8tivityT but sel:
8o!s8ious!ess also relates itsel to itself- be8ause the ultimate grou!d a!d a8tivity is !othi!g but the
ma!iestatio! o itsel in self*consciousness7K
&2
1od !ot o!ly has to ma!iest itsel- but is nothing but its o6! sel:ma!iestatio! @i! a! e?a8t
homology to the 9 6hi8h !ot o!ly posits itsel- but is !othi!g but its sel:positi!gAT o!ly i! this 6ay is
1od !ot a Thi!g:i!:itsel 6hi8h as su8h limits huma! reedom7 A bei!g 6hi8h e?ists o!ly through its
sel:ma!iestatio! is a livi!g bei!g- a!d so it is be8ause o this thoroughly pro8essual 8hara8ter o 1od
that Fi8hte 8alls the 1rou!d o the Sel lie+ J1od is !othi!g but spiritual lie7K
&"
3ut i! spite o this ull imma!e!8e o the ree sel:8o!s8ious!ess to the 1rou!d- Jthis pro8ess o
the 6orld is absolutely justiied by virtue o itsel7 We are o!ly esse!tial eleme!ts i! it- Vesse!tialI o!ly
as vehi8les for it7 The ma!iestatio! takes pla8e i! a!d by ourselves- but 6hat is ma!iested is !ot our
o6! i!dividual !ature7K
&(
/hat this mea!s is that- 6ith his ateul step to6ards the 1rou!d o the 9-
Fi8hte !o!etheless violates the basi8 a?iom o his proje8t o the s8ie!8e o k!o6ledge- the thesis that
the 9 e?ists o!ly or the 9 as absolutely sel:positi!g- i7e7- that there 8a!!ot be a!y e?ter!al grou!d or it7
Fi8hteIs passage to theology is thus agai! !ot simply a 8o!seNue!8e o the i!sight i!to ho6 the
sel:positi!g 9 is a! illusio! o grou!dless sel:relati!g 6hi8h 6ould have imploded i!to !othi!g!ess
6ithout a! e?ter!al supporti!g 1rou!d7 =e!ri8h provides a detailed a!alysis o the li!e o reaso!i!g
6hi8h brought Fi8hte to pass rom the absolute 9 to 1od as the ultimate grou!d o bei!g7 Fi8hteIs
problem here is this+ ho6 8a! o!e 8o!8eive o a tra!s:subje8tive 1od- a 1od 6ho grou!ds subje8tivity-
but 6ho is !o!etheless not a Thi!g:i!:itselM The problem is stri8tly homologous to that o the ,ar?ist
!otio! o 8lass @sel:A8o!s8ious!ess @or- more ge!erally- ideologi8al 8o!s8ious!essA+ ho6 to 8o!8eive o
the sel:8o!s8ious!essIs depe!de!8e o! the 1rou!d @the Je8o!omi8 base-K the material pro8ess o
so8ial lieA 6ithout alli!g i!to Je8o!omi8 redu8tio!ismK a!d 8o!8eivi!g sel:8o!s8ious!ess as a mere
Jideologi8al ee8tK o the e8o!omi8 material pro8ess 6hi8h is the o!ly JrealKM
&#
=e!ri8h is right to try to e?pli8ate Fi8hteIs impli8it reaso!i!g- but perhaps he is !ot 8lear
e!ough i! sho6i!g ho6 Fi8hteIs os8illatio!s a!d ambiguities demo!strate t6o thi!gs simulta!eously+
@1A that there is a deep !e8essity i!volved i! a88omplishi!g the step to the 1rou!d o the SelIs
reedom- a!d to the irredu8ible multipli8ity o Selves 6hi8h 8oe?ist 6ithi! this 1rou!dT a!d @2A that-
6ithi! Fi8hteIs horiUo!- it is impossible to a88omplish this step- i! other 6ords- that all o Fi8hteIs
reaso!i!g is alse a!d ultimately irreleva!t here7 9! short- Fi8hte is 8o!ro!ti!g the Feal o his
thoughtEsomethi!g simulta!eously both !e8essary a!d impossible7 A!dEto make a leap o thought- i
!ot o aithEthere is a 8o!8ept 6hi8h its pere8tly Fi8hteIs reNuireme!ts or the 1rou!d o reedom+
.a8a!Is 8o!8ept o the Jbig Hther7K @/e leave aside here the 8omple? relatio!ship bet6ee! the big
Hther a!d =egelIs Jobje8tive Spirit7KA This is 6hy Fi8hte 8a! 8o!8eive 1od as the spiritual .ie i!
6hi8h i!dividual sel:8o!s8ious!esses parti8ipateT it is !ot a limitatio! o the 9Is reedom- but its very
grou!d7 This is ho6 he tries to realiUe the proje8t o the JSpi!oUism o reedom-K a!d this is 6hy his
theology is

the irst modern theology a!d perhaps the o!ly o!eE=egelIs- o 8ourse- bei!g the alter!ative7 9t
Nualiies as the irst moder! theology be8ause it 8o!tai!s a pote!tial or over8omi!g the a!tago!ism
bet6ee! reedom a!d religio!7 Fi8hte 8o!8eives o the 8o!8ept o 1od i! su8h a 6ay that- by dei!itio!-
1od 8a!!ot impose a!y restri8tio! upo! reedom7 1od is ma!iestatio!- a!d ma!iestatio! takes pla8e
i! ree sel:reere!8e7 For this reaso!- it is absolutely u!i!telligible to thi!k o 1od as a perso! 6ho
imposes dema!ds o! huma! bei!gs7 Fi8hteIs 8o!8eptio! o 1od pre8ludes this a!tago!ism7
&'
As =e!ri8h demo!strates- Fi8hte 8a!!ot resolve the problem o the multipli8ity o 9IsE!ot o!ly
ho6 to a88ou!t or it- i7e7- des8ribe its ge!esis- but ho6 eve! to 8o!8eive o it7 That is to say- the
mome!t Fi8hte i!trodu8es the idea o a pre:subje8tive 1rou!d o the 9- he has to 8o!ro!t the Nuestio!
o ho6 a multitude o 9Is 8a! 8oe?ist a!d i!tera8t 6ithi! this shared 1rou!d7 The problem here is that-
o!8e 6e a88ept the premise o a pre: a!d tra!s:subje8tive order 6hi8h serves as the subje8tsI shared
1rou!d-

the order i! 6hi8h these disti!8t selves e?ist 6ould prove !ot to be me!tal at all7 9! other 6ords- a!y
i!dividual sel is a 8losed system- a!d 6hile there are ma!y i!dividual selves- the ma!iestatio! takes
pla8e i! all selves i!dividually7 9! order or us to a88ou!t or the e?iste!8e o su8h a! order o diere!t
selves- 6e 6ould have to violate Fi8hteIs methodologi8al pri!8iple- be8ause !o6 6e 6ould i!voke a
!o!:me!tal stru8ture that is- !evertheless- esse!tial or u!dersta!di!g 6hat the mi!d is7
&$
This leads Fi8hte to postulateEi! a 6holly justiied imma!e!t 6ayEa! a: or pre:subje8tive
k!o6ledge+ i!soar as the divi!e 1rou!d is !ot a bli!d me8ha!i8al substa!8e- but a spiritual order- a!
order o k!o6ledge- a!d- simulta!eously- a!o!ymous>pre:subje8tive- 6e must presuppose that
Jsomethi!g that is already k!o6ledge pre8edes the i!dividual selves7K
&&
9! other 6ords- agai!st a!y
ki!d o phe!ome!ologi8al dedu8tio! o this k!o6ledge out o i!ter:subje8tive i!tera8tio!- 6e must
presuppose that-

rather tha! all k!o6ledge someho6 belo!gi!g to the k!o6er @the sel:asserti!g selA- !o6 the k!o6i!g
subje8ts have to belong to this non*individual epistemic process O the primary- a!o!ymous
k!o6ledge- 6hi8h Fi8hte al6ays tried to re!der plausible by appeal to the paradigm o mathemati8al
evide!8e @a some6hat Clato!i8 moveA- is a orm o k!o6ledge that 6e 8a!!ot i! a!y 6ay 8laim to be
i!dividualiUed7
&%
A!d it is o!ly here that Fi8hte rea8hes the true limit o his dari!g e!deavor+ although this
stru8ture o a!o!ymous k!o6ledge is pre:subje8tive- it has to i!8lude Ja dime!sio! 6ith respe8t to
6hi8h 6e 8a! disti!guish a multitude o i!dividual k!o6ers O This mea!s that a!y o these selves
k!o6s- i! adva!8e- that there are other selves- despite havi!g !o dire8t a88ess to their mi!ds7K
%0
The
problem Fi8hte struggles 6ith @a!d 8a!!ot resolveA here 8orrespo!ds pere8tly to the problem i! Dlaude
.Lvi:StraussIs Jstru8tural a!thropologyK solved by .a8a!+ 6hat ki!d o subje8t its the symboli8
stru8tureM =o6 8a! 6e thi!k the imma!e!8e o the e?8luded subje8t to the a!o!ymous symboli8
stru8ture @big HtherAM Hr- to put it the other 6ay rou!d+ 6hat ki!d o stru8ture do 6e have to thi!k so
that it ee8tively i!volves the subje8t- !ot o!ly as its epiphe!ome!al Jee8t-K but as its imma!e!t
8o!stitue!tM .a8a!Is a!s6er- o 8ourse- is that the 8o!ditio! o reedom @o a ree subje8tA is the
JbarredK big Hther- a stru8ture 6hi8h is i!8o!siste!t- 6ith gaps7
As =e!ri8h demo!strates i! a detailed re8o!stru8tio! o Fi8hteIs reaso!i!g- the 8lose a!alysis o
the stru8ture o subje8tive sel:relati!g reveals a split i! the midst o subje8tivity+ a split bet6ee! the
subje8tIs immediate @but pre:8o!8eptualA sel:a8Nuai!ta!8e @sel:a6are!essA a!d a mome!t o
k!o6ledge 6hi8h is !ot yet subje8tiviUed but remai!s Ja!o!ymousKEis this !ot pre8isely the split
bet6ee! b a!d S
2
- the sig!iyi!g 8hai! o k!o6ledgeM =o6 8a! the t6o be mediatedM Through S
1
-
6hi8h represe!ts the subje8t i! the 8hai! o k!o6ledge at the site o its i!8o!siste!8y7
The .a8a!ia! !otio! o le grand +utre @the big Hther- vaguely 8orrespo!di!g to 6hat =egel
8alled Jobje8tive spiritK or the Jspiritual substa!8eK o i!dividual livesA- triumpha!tly resolves this
problem7 The big Hther is a totally subje8tiviUed substa!8e+ !ot a Thi!g:i!:itsel- but a Substa!8e
6hi8h e?ists o!ly i!soar as it is 8o!ti!uously sustai!ed by the 6ork o Jall a!d everyo!e7K
Feprodu8i!g Fi8hteIs ormula o the subje8tIs sel:positi!g- the big Hther is the 1rou!d:presuppositio!
6hi8h is o!ly as perma!e!tly JpositedK by subje8ts7
Fi8hte 8a!!ot resolve the status o 1rou!d be8ause he does !ot have at his disposal a term
6hi8h 6ould desig!ate a! e!tity that is !ot:me!tal- that is asubje8tive- a!d yet at the same time is !ot a
material Jthi!g-K but purely ideal7 This- ho6ever- is e?a8tly 6hat the .a8a!ia! Jbig HtherK is+ it is
dei!itely !ot:me!tal @.a8a! repeatedly emphasiUes that the status o the big Hther is !ot
psy8hologi8alA- it does !ot belo!g to the order o the subje8tIs e?perie!8eT but it is also !ot the pre:
symboli8 material Feal- a thi!g or pro8ess i! reality i!depe!de!t o subje8tivityEthe status o the big
Hther is purely virtual- as a! ideal stru8ture o reere!8eT that is- it e?ists o!ly as the subje8tIs
presuppositio!7 @The big Hther is thus 8lose to 6hat *arl Copper- i! his late 6riti!gs- desig!ated as the
Third /orld- !either obje8tive reality !or subje8tive i!!er e?perie!8e7A The .a8a!ia! Jbig HtherK also
resolves the problem o the plurality o subje8ts+ its role is pre8isely that o the Third- the very medium
o the e!8ou!ter bet6ee! subje8ts7
This is also ho6 o!e should approa8h =egelIs outrageously Jspe8ulativeK ormulatio!s about
Spirit as its o6! result- as a produ8t o itsel+ 6hile JSpirit has its begi!!i!gs i! !ature i! ge!eral-K

the e?treme to 6hi8h spirit te!ds is its reedom- its i!i!ity- its bei!g i! a!d or itsel7 These are the t6o
aspe8tsT but i 6e ask 6hat Spirit is- the immediate a!s6er is that it is this motio!- this pro8ess o
pro8eedi!g rom- o reei!g itsel rom- !atureT this is the bei!g- the substa!8e o spirit itsel7
%1
Spirit is thus radi8ally de:substa!tialiUed+ Spirit is !ot a positive 8ou!ter:or8e to !ature- a
diere!t substa!8e 6hi8h gradually breaks a!d shi!es through the i!ert !atural stuT it is nothing but
this pro8ess o reei!g:itsel:rom7 =egel e?pli8itly diso6!s the !otio! o Spirit as some ki!d o
positive Age!t 6hi8h u!derlies the pro8ess+

Spirit is usually spoke! o as subje8t- as doi!g somethi!g- a!d apart rom 6hat it does- as this motio!-
this pro8ess- as still somethi!g parti8ular- its a8tivity bei!g more or less 8o!ti!ge!t O it is o the very
!ature o spirit to be this absolute liveli!ess- this pro8ess- to pro8eed orth rom !aturality- immedia8y-
to sublate- to Nuit its !aturality- a!d to 8ome to itsel- a!d to free itself- it bei!g itsel o!ly as it 8omes to
itsel as su8h a produ8t o itselT its actuality being merely that it has made itself into what it is7
%2
9 Jit is only as a result o itsel that it is spirit-K
%"
the! this mea!s that the sta!dard talk about
the =egelia! Spirit 6hi8h alie!ates itsel to itsel a!d the! re8og!iUes itsel i! its other!ess a!d thus
reappropriates its 8o!te!t is deeply misleadi!g+ the Sel to 6hi8h spirit retur!s is produ8ed i! the very
moveme!t o this retur!T or- that to 6hi8h the pro8ess o retur! retur!s to is produ8ed by the very
pro8ess o retur!i!g7 Fe8all here the 8o!8ise a!d u!surpassed ormulatio!s rom =egelIs .ogic o! ho6
esse!8e

presupposes itsel a!d the sublati!g o this presuppositio! is esse!8e itselT 8o!versely- this sublati!g o
its presuppositio! is the presuppositio! itsel7 Fele8tio! thereore finds before it a! immediate 6hi8h it
tra!s8e!ds a!d rom 6hi8h it is the retur!7 3ut this retur! is o!ly the presupposi!g o 6hat rele8tio!
i!ds beore it7 /hat it thus ou!d o!ly comes to be through bei!g left behind O For the presuppositio!
o the retur!:i!to:selEthat rom 6hi8h esse!8e comes- a!d is o!ly as this retur!Eis o!ly i! the retur!
itsel7
%(
/he! =egel says that a 4otio! is the result o itsel- that it provides its o6! a8tualiUatio!- this
8laim 6hi8h at irst 8a!!ot but appear e?travaga!t @the !otio! is !ot simply a thought a8tivated by the
thi!ki!g subje8t- but that it possesses a magi8 property o sel:moveme!t OA- loses its mystery the
mome!t 6e grasp that the Spirit as the spiritual substa!8e is a substa!8e- a! 9!:itsel- 6hi8h sustai!s
itsel only through the i!8essa!t a8tivity o the subje8ts e!gaged i! it7 Say- a !atio! e?ists only i!soar
as its members take themselves to be members o this !atio! a!d a8t a88ordi!glyT it has absolutely !o
8o!te!t- !o substa!tial 8o!siste!8e- outside this a8tivity7 The same goes or- say- the !otio! o
8ommu!ismEthis !otio! Jge!erates its o6! a8tualiUatio!K by 6ay o motivati!g people to struggle or
it7
=e!ri8h raises here 6hat is or him a key Nuestio!+ 8a! =egel @a!d S8helli!g- 6e have to addA
a88ou!t or the 8e!tral problem 6ith 6hi8h Fi8hte struggled through his e!tire lie- that o sel:relati!g
subje8tivityM Fi8hte a!d =egel share the proje8t o graspi!g the basi8 o!tologi8al stru8ture o reality
simultaneously as 8omplete sel:reere!8e a!d as the struggle o oppositio!s7 So 6hile both their
systems are based o! a sel:reere!tial stru8ture- the spe8ii8 matri? o sel:reere!8e is diere!t i! ea8h
8ase+ Fi8hte o8uses o! the me!tal sel:reere!8e that 8o!stitutes the 9 a!d o! the 9Is sel:ide!tii8atio!
@=o6 do 9 k!o6 6ho 9 amMA- 6hereas =egelIs matri? is that o the sel:relati!g !egatio!7 /ith this
shit o o8us- =egel !ever eve! e!8ou!tered the problem Fi8hte struggled 6ith his 6hole lieT so the
8ru8ial Nuestio! @ig!ored by =egelA is+ 8a! o!e demo!strate- rom the =egelia! premises- that o!8e 6e
move 6ithi! the matri? o sel:relati!g !egatio!- the Fi8htea! problem o me!tal sel:relati!g 8a! either
be resolved or else dismissed as a! illusory pseudo:problemM =e!ri8hIs reply is a !egative o!e- 6hi8h
is 6hy he i!sists that 6e bear i! mi!d J!ot o!ly the 8orrespo!de!8e bet6ee! the ailures o Fi8hte a!d
the merits o =egel- but also that bet6ee! the merits o Fi8hte a!d the ailures o =egel7K
%#
9! other
6ords- there is !o u!ilateral progress i! 1erma! 9dealism+ ea8h o its our great !ames @*a!t- Fi8hte-
S8helli!g- =egelA struggled 6ith a u!dame!tal problem a!d ultimately ailed to resolve it- but this
does !ot mea! that ea8h li!ear su88essor resolved his prede8essorIs problem i! a move o
+ufhebungErather- the su88essor radi8ally 8ha!ged the ield- so that the problem itsel disappeared7
Fi8hte Jmissed the poi!tK o *a!tIs thoughtT S8helli!g a!d =egel Jmissed the poi!tK o Fi8hteIs @a!d o
ea8h otherIsA7
,easured by his o6! i!here!t sta!dards- the passage i! Fi8hte rom the sel:positi!g subje8t to
its grou!d @1od as i!i!ite .ieA is !ot a 8ompromise- a 6ithdra6al rom his earlier assertio! o radi8al
subje8tivity- but a !e8essary 8o!seNue!8e o thi!ki!g through the impli8atio!s o the very !otio! o
subje8tivity7 The subje8t is !ot o!ly or pri!8ipally the a8tive age!t 6ho JpositsK @8reates- domi!ates-
e?ploitsA obje8tivity @=eideggerA- but a site o Jabstra8tio!-K teari!g apart the li!ks o orga!i8 totality-
illusio!- i!itudeEo 6hat 6e reer to as Jmerely subje8tive7K Subje8t o!ly emerges as a gap i!
substa!8e- as a! ee8t o its i!8omplete!ess>i!8o!siste!8y7 This is 6hat =egel celebrates as the
absolute po6er o )!dersta!di!g+ JThe a8tio! o separati!g the eleme!ts is the e?er8ise o the or8e o
)!dersta!di!g- the most asto!ishi!g a!d greatest o all po6ers- or rather the absolute po6er7K This
8elebratio! is i! !o 6ay NualiiedT that is- =egelIs poi!t is !ot that this po6er is !o!etheless later
JsublatedK i!to a subordi!ate mome!t o the u!iyi!g totality o Feaso!7 The problem 6ith
)!dersta!di!g is rather that it does !ot u!leash this po6er to the e!d- that it takes it as e?ter!al to the
thi!g itselElike- i! the above:Nuoted passage rom the )henomenology- the sta!dard !otio! that it is
merely our )!dersta!di!g @Jmi!dKA that separates i! its imagi!atio! 6hat i! JrealityK belo!gs together-
so that the )!dersta!di!gIs Jabsolute po6erK is merely the po6er o our imagi!atio! 6hi8h i! !o 6ay
8o!8er!s the reality o the thi!g a!alyUed7 /e pass rom )!dersta!di!g to Feaso! !ot 6he! this
a!alyUi!g- or teari!g apart- is over8ome i! a sy!thesis 6hi8h bri!gs us ba8k to the 6ealth o reality- but
6he! this Jteari!g apartK is displa8ed rom bei!g Jmerely a po6er o our mi!dK o!to thi!gs
themselves- as their i!here!t po6er o !egativity7EA!d the key diale8ti8al i!sight is that the
Jsy!thesis-K the bri!gi!g:together o 6hat 6as tor! apart by )!dersta!di!g- is the absolute- most
radi8al- a8t o teari!g apartEa viole!t impositio! o u!ity7
=e!ri8h 8orre8tly lo8ates =egelIs great breakthrough- the mome!t J=egel be8ame =egel-K at
the pre8ise poi!t 6here he dropped the Jmethodologi8al disti!8tio! bet6ee! the 8riti8al a!d the
systemati8 dis8ourses @reflectionis a!d rationisA-K
%'
bet6ee! the 8riti8al a!alysis o the !otio!s o
)!dersta!di!g a!d the positive deployme!t o the 8ategories i! the guise o a 8o!stru8tive system o
Feaso!+ the positive system o Feaso! is !othi!g but the J6ay to6ards itselK through the diale8ti8al
a!alysis o the 8ategories o )!dersta!di!g7 =e also 8orre8tly 8laims that this te!sio! !o!etheless
persists i! the guise o the diere!8e bet6ee! the )henomenology of Spirit a!d the Science of .ogic+
ho6 does the )henomenology relate to the systemM 9s it a! e?ter!al i!trodu8tio! to it or part o itM The
problem is !ot o!ly a! abstra8t o!eT it gets 8ompli8ated by the a8t that ma!y o the a!alyses o the
)henomenology are @sometimes almost verbatimA i!8luded i! the system @or e?ample- the diale8ti8 o
the struggle o 8o!s8ious!ess[es\ or re8og!itio! reappears at the begi!!i!gEse8o!d 8hapter o part
o!eEo the )hilosophy of SpiritA7
/hat makes =e!ri8hIs rele8tio!s so i!teresti!g is that he relies o! them i! his 8ritiNue o ,ar?
@a!d o ,ar?Is 8ritiNue o =egelAT his basi8 8laim is that ,ar?Is proje8t o the 8ritiNue o ideology
Jdepe!ds o! the 8o!8eptual apparatus o the )henomenology of Spirit-K 6hi8h is 6hy- i! his 8ritiNue o
=egelIs )hilosophy of 7ight- ,ar? 8a!!ot properly get =egelIs !otio! o the State @6hi8h already
presupposes the !otio!al stru8ture o the Science of .ogicA7
%$
The problem =egel struggles 6ith i! his
)hilosophy of 7ight is that a ully realiUed auto!omy a!d reedom do !ot 8o!sist o!ly i!

a88epti!g a!d ollo6i!g the 6illIs o6! la6- but also i!volve reNuiri!g that there be a reality that
8orrespo!ds stru8turally to the 6illIs o6! stru8ture O =egelIs a!s6er is that it is the ratio!al state
6hose good 8o!stitutio! respe8ts the reedom o its 8itiUe!s7 This is the structure i! reality that
8orrespo!ds to the i!ter!al stru8ture o the 6ill7
%&
For this pre8ise reaso!- a state is !ot o!ly a! i!strume!t o 8ivil so8iety desti!ed to guara!tee
the satisa8tio! o its subje8tsI parti8ular !eeds+ the subje8ts do !ot a88ept the la6s o their ratio!al
state Jbecause it provides or the ulillme!t o all the !eeds o the !atural i!dividual7 9!stead- the 6ill
a88epts the state be8ause only 6ith reere!8e to it 8a! the sel:reere!8e o the 6illIs o6! stru8ture be
8ompleted7K
%%
=e!ri8hIs 8ritiNue o ,ar? should thus i! !o 6ay be dismissed as a proo that he
Jremai!s 8aught up i! bourgeois ideology7K
The ,ar?ist a!alysis o the state as a stru8ture o 8lass domi!atio! @a!d- i! this se!se- as a!
i!strume!t o 8ivil so8ietyA misses the 8ru8ial problem =egel 6as struggli!g 6ith- Jleavi!g the
ob1ective issue bet6ee! =egelIs i!stitutio!alism o reedom a!d so8ialism @6ith its spo!ta!eityA
e!tirely u!settled7K
100
The pri8e paid or this !egle8t 6as that the problem retur!ed 6ith a ve!gea!8e
i! the guise o the Stali!ist Jtotalitaria!K state7

Part 2

T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ =010.
CHAPTER %

9s 9t Still Cossible to 3e a =egelia! TodayM

The mai! eature o histori8al thought proper is !ot JmobilismK @the moti o the luidii8atio!
or histori8al relativiUatio! o all orms o lieA- but the ull e!dorseme!t o a 8ertai! impossibility+ ater
a true histori8al break- o!e simply 8a!!ot retur! to the past- or go o! as i !othi!g happe!edEeve! i
o!e does- the same pra8ti8e 6ill have a8Nuired a radi8ally 8ha!ged mea!i!g7 Ador!o provided a !i8e
e?ample 6ith S8hoe!bergIs ato!al revolutio!+ ater it took pla8e- it 6as @a!d isA- o 8ourse- possible to
go o! 8omposi!g i! the traditio!al to!al 6ay- but the !e6 to!al musi8 has lost its i!!o8e!8e- si!8e it is
already JmediatedK by the ato!al break a!d thus u!8tio!s as its !egatio!7 This is 6hy there is a!
irredu8ible eleme!t o "itsch i! t6e!tieth:8e!tury to!al 8omposers su8h as Fa8hma!i!ovEsomethi!g
o a !ostalgi8 8li!gi!g to the past- somethi!g ake- like the adult 6ho tries to keep alive the !aSve 8hild
6ithi!7 A!d the same goes or all other domai!s+ 6ith the emerge!8e o ClatoIs philosophi8al a!alysis
o !otio!s- mythi8al thought loses its immedia8y- a!y revival o it be8omes akeT ater Dhristia!ity-
revivals o paga!ism be8ome !ostalgi8 simula8ra7
/riti!g- thi!ki!g- or 8omposi!g as i a Fupture has !ot o88urred is more ambiguous tha! it may
appear a!d 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a !o!:histori8al de!ial7 3adiou o!8e amously 6rote that 6hat u!ites
him 6ith GeleuUe is that they are both 8lassi8al philosophers or 6hom *a!t- the *a!tia! break- did !ot
happe!Ebut is this really soM ,aybe this holds or GeleuUe- but dei!itely !ot or 3adiou7
1
4o6here is
this 8learer tha! i! their diere!t ha!dli!g o the 0ve!t7 For GeleuUe- a! 0ve!t really is a pre:*a!tia!
8osmologi8al H!e 6hi8h ge!erates a multitude- 6hi8h is 6hy the 0ve!t is absolutely imma!e!t to
reality- 6hile the 3adiouia! 0ve!t is a break i! the order o bei!g @tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted
phe!ome!al realityA- the i!trusio! o a radi8ally heteroge!eous @J!oume!alKA order- so that 6e are
8learly i! @post:A*a!tia! spa8e7 This is 6hy o!e 8a! eve! dei!e 3adiouIs systemati8 philosophy
@developed i! his last masterpie8e- .ogics of WorldsA as *a!tia!ism rei!ve!ted or the epo8h o radi8al
8o!ti!ge!8y+ i!stead o o!e tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted reality- 6e get a multipli8ity o 6orlds- ea8h
deli!eated by its tra!s8e!de!tal matri?- a multipli8ity 6hi8h 8a!!ot be mediated>u!iied i!to a si!gle
larger tra!s8e!de!tal rameT i!stead o the moral .a6- 6e get idelity to the Truth:0ve!t- 6hi8h is
al6ays spe8ii8 6ith regard to a parti8ular situatio! o a /orld7
9s !ot =egelIs spe8ulative idealism the e?emplary 8ase o su8h a properly histori8al
impossibilityM Da! o!e still be a =egelia! ater the post:=egelia! break 6ith traditio!al metaphysi8s
6hi8h o88urred more or less simulta!eously i! the 6orks o S8hope!hauer- *ierkegaard- a!d ,ar?M
Ater all this- is there !ot somethi!g i!here!tly alse i! advo8ati!g a =egelia! Jabsolute 9dealismKM
/ill !ot a!y re:airmatio! o =egel all vi8tim to the same a!ti:histori8al illusio!- by:passi!g the
impossibility o bei!g a =egelia! ater the post:=egelia! break- 6riti!g as i that break had !ot
happe!edM =ere- ho6ever- o!e should 8ompli8ate thi!gs a little bit+ u!der 8ertai! 8o!ditio!s- o!e 8a!
a!d should 6rite as i a break had !ot happe!ed7 /hat are these 8o!ditio!sM To put it simply a!d
dire8tly+ 6he! the break i! Nuestio! is !ot a true but a alse break- i! a8t o!e 6hi8h obliterates the true
break- the true poi!t o impossibility7 Hur 6ager is that this- pre8isely- is 6hat happe!ed 6ith the
Joi8ialK post:=egelia! a!ti:philosophi8al break @S8hope!hauer:*ierkegaard:,ar?A+ although it
prese!ts itsel as a break 6ith idealism as embodied i! its =egelia! 8lima?- it ig!ores a 8ru8ial
dime!sio! o =egelIs thoughtT that is- it ultimately amou!ts to a desperate attempt to go on thin"ing as
if 0egel had not happened7 The hole let by this abse!8e o =egel is the!- o 8ourse- illed i! 6ith the
ridi8ulous 8ari8ature o =egel the Jabsolute idealistK 6ho Jpossessed Absolute *!o6ledge7K The re:
assertio! o =egelIs spe8ulative thought is thus !ot 6hat it may appear to beEa de!ial o the post:
=egelia! breakEbut rather a bri!gi!g:orth o that very dime!sio! 6hose de!ial sustai!s the post:
=egelia! break itsel7
HEGEL #ERS!S NIET&SCHE

.et us develop this poi!t apropos o 1Lrard .ebru!Is posthumously published .envers de la
dialecti<ue- o!e o the most 8o!vi!8i!g a!d or8eul attempts to demo!strate the impossibility o bei!g
=egelia! todayEa!d- or .ebru!- JtodayK sta!ds u!der the sig! o 4ietUs8he7
2
.ebru! a88epts that o!e 8a!!ot JreuteK =egel+ the ma8hi!ery o his diale8ti8s is so all:
e!8ompassi!g that !othi!g is easier or =egel tha! to demo!strate triumpha!tly ho6 all su8h
reutatio!s are i!8o!siste!t- to tur! them agai!st themselves @Jo!e 8a!!ot reute a! eye disease-K as
.ebru! Nuotes 4ietUs8he approvi!glyA7 ,ost ridi8ulous amo!g su8h 8riti8al reutatio!s is- o 8ourse-
the sta!dard ,ar?ist:evolutio!ist idea that there is a 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! =egelIs diale8ti8al
methodE6hi8h demo!strates ho6 every i?ed determi!atio! is s6ept a6ay by the moveme!t o
!egativity- ho6 every determi!ate shape i!ds its truth i! its a!!ihilatio!Ea!d =egelIs system+ i the
desti!y o everythi!g is to pass a6ay i! the eter!al moveme!t o sel:sublatio!- does the same !ot hold
or the system itselM 9s !ot =egelIs o6! system a temporary- histori8ally relative ormatio! 6hi8h 6ill
be over8ome by the progress o k!o6ledgeM A!yo!e 6ho i!ds su8h a reutatio! 8o!vi!8i!g is !ot to
be take! seriously as a reader o =egel7
=o6- the!- 8a! o!e move beyo!d =egelM .ebru!Is solutio! goes by 6ay o 4ietUs8hea!
histori8al philology+ o!e should bri!g to light the Jemi!e!tly i!ra:ratio!alK le?i8al 8hoi8es 6hi8h are
grou!ded i! ho6 livi!g bei!gs 8ope 6ith threats to their vital i!terests7 3eore =egel sets i! motio! his
diale8ti8al ma8hi!ery- 6hi8h Js6allo6s upK all 8o!te!t a!d elevates it to its truth by destroyi!g it i! its
immediate bei!g- a 8omple? !et6ork o sema!ti8 de8isio!s has already bee! take! imper8eptibly7 9!
u!8overi!g these- o!e begi!s to Ju!veil the obverse o the diale8ti8s7 Giale8ti8s is also partial7 9t also
obus8ates its presuppositio!s7 9t is !ot the meta:dis8ourse it prete!ds to be 6ith regard to the
philosophies o V)!dersta!di!gI7K
"
.ebru!Is 4ietUs8he is de8idedly a!ti:=eideggeria!+ or .ebru!-
=eidegger re:philosophiUes 4ietUs8he by 6ay o i!terpreti!g the /ill to Co6er as a !e6 o!tologi8al
First Cri!8iple7 ,ore tha! 4ietUs8hea!- .ebru!Is approa8h may appear Fou8auldia!+ 6hat he aims at is
a! Jar8haeology o the =egelia! k!o6ledge-K its ge!ealogy i! 8o!8rete lie:pra8ti8es7
3ut is .ebru!Is Jphilologi8alK strategy radi8al e!ough i! philosophi8al termsM Goes it !ot
amou!t to a !e6 versio! o histori8ist herme!euti8s or- rather- o a Fou8auldia! su88essio! o epo8hal
epistemiM Goes this !ot- i !ot legitimiUe- at least re!der u!dersta!dable =eideggerIs re:
philosophiUatio! o 4ietUs8heM That is to say- o!e should raise the Nuestio! o the o!tologi8al status o
the Jpo6erK 6hi8h sustai!s parti8ular Jphilologi8alK 8o!iguratio!sEor 4ietUs8he himsel- it is the
/ill to Co6erT or =eidegger- it is the abyssal game o Jthere isK 6hi8h Jse!dsK diere!t epo8hal
8o!iguratio!s o the dis8losure o the 6orld7 9! a!y 8ase- o!e 8a!!ot avoid o!tology+ histori8ist
herme!euti8s 8a!!ot sta!d o! its o6!7 =eideggerIs history o 3ei!g is a! attempt to elevate histori8al
@!ot histori8istA herme!euti8s dire8tly i!to tra!s8e!de!tal o!tology+ there is or =eidegger !othi!g
behi!d or be!eath 6hat .ebru! 8alls i!ra:ratio!al sema!ti8 8hoi8esT they are the ultimate a8t>horiUo!
o our bei!g7 =eidegger- ho6ever- leaves ope! 6hat o!e might 8all the ontic Nuestio!+ there are
obs8ure hi!ts all through his 6ork o a JrealityK 6hi8h persists out there prior to its o!tologi8al
dis8losure7 That is to say- =eidegger i! !o 6ay eNuates the epo8hal dis8losure o 3ei!g 6ith a!y ki!d
o J8reatio!KEhe repeatedly 8o!8edes as a! u!:problemati8 a8t that- eve! prior to their epo8hal
dis8losure or outside it- thi!gs someho6 JareK @persistA out there- although they do !ot yet Je?istK i! the
ull se!se o bei!g dis8losed Jas su8h-K as part o a histori8al 6orld7 3ut 6hat is the status o this o!ti8
persiste!8e outside o o!tologi8al dis8losureM
(
From the 4ietUs8hea! sta!dpoi!t- there is more i! the Ji!ra:ratio!alK sema!ti8 de8isio!s tha!
the a8t that every approa8h to reality has to rely o! a pre:e?isti!g set o herme!euti8 Jprejudi8esK or-
as =eidegger 6ould have put it- o! a 8ertai! epo8hal dis8losure o bei!g+ these de8isio!s ee8tuate the
vital pre:rele?ive strategy o the /ill to Co6er7 For su8h a! approa8h- =egel remai!s a proou!dly
Dhristia! thi!ker- a !ihilist 6hose basi8 strategy is to repa8kage a proou!d deeat- the 6ithdra6al rom
lie i! all its pai!ul vitality- as a triumph o the absolute Subje8t7 That is to say- rom the sta!dpoi!t o
the /ill to Co6er- the ee8tive 8o!te!t o the =egelia! pro8ess is o!e lo!g story o deeats a!d
6ithdra6als- o sa8rii8es o vital sel:assertio!+ agai! a!d agai!- o!e has to re!ou!8e vital e!gageme!t
as still too JimmediateK a!d Jparti8ular7K 0?emplary is here =egelIs passage rom the Fevolutio!ary
Terror to the *a!tia! morality+ the utilitaria! subje8t o 8ivil so8iety- the subje8t 6ho 6a!ts to redu8e
the State to bei!g the guardia! o his private saety a!d 6ell:bei!g- has to be 8rushed by the Terror o
the revolutio!ary State 6hi8h 8a! a!!ihilate him at a!y mome!t or !o reaso! 6hatsoever @the subje8t
is !ot pu!ished or somethi!g he has do!e- or some parti8ular 8o!te!t or a8t- but or the very a8t o
bei!g a! i!depe!de!t i!dividual opposed to the u!iversalAEthis Terror is his Jtruth7K So ho6 do 6e
pass rom Fevolutio!ary Terror to *a!tIs auto!omous a!d ree moral subje8tM 3y 6ay o 6hat- i!
more 8o!temporary la!guage- o!e 8ould 8all a ull ide!tii8atio! 6ith the aggressor+ the subje8t should
re8og!iUe i! the e?ter!al Terror- i! this !egativity 6hi8h 8o!sta!tly threate!s to a!!ihilate him- the
very 8ore o his @u!iversalA subje8tivityT i! other 6ords- he should ully ide!tiy 6ith it7 Freedom is
thus !ot reedom from a ,aster- but the repla8eme!t o o!e ,aster 6ith a!other+ the e?ter!al ,aster is
repla8ed 6ith a! i!ter!al o!e7 The pri8e or this ide!tii8atio! is- o 8ourse- the sa8rii8e o all
Jpathologi8alK parti8ular 8o!te!tEduty should be a88omplished Jor the sake o duty7K
.ebru! demo!strates ho6 this same logi8 holds also or la!guage+

State a!d la!guage are t6o 8ompleme!tary igures o the Subje8tIs a88omplishme!t+ here as 6ell as
there- the se!se that 9 am a!d the se!se that 9 e!u!8iate are submitted to the same imper8eptible
sa8rii8e o 6hat appeared to be our JselK i! the illusio! o immedia8y7
#
=egel 6as right to poi!t out agai! a!d agai! that- 6he! o!e talks- o!e al6ays d6ells i! the
u!iversalE6hi8h mea!s that- 6ith its e!try i!to la!guage- the subje8t loses its roots i! the 8o!8rete lie
6orld7 To put it i! more patheti8 terms- the mome!t 9 start to talk- 9 am !o lo!ger the se!sually 8o!8rete
9- si!8e 9 am 8aught up i! a! imperso!al me8ha!ism 6hi8h al6ays makes me say somethi!g diere!t
rom 6hat 9 6a!ted to sayEas the early .a8a! liked to say- 9 am !ot speaki!g- 9 am bei!g spoke! by
la!guage7 This is o!e 6ay to u!dersta!d 6hat .a8a! 8alled Jsymboli8 8astratio!K+ the pri8e the subje8t
pays or its Jtra!substa!tiatio!K rom bei!g the age!t o a dire8t a!imal vitality to bei!g a speaki!g
subje8t 6hose ide!tity is kept apart rom the dire8t vitality o passio!s7
A 4ietUs8hea! readi!g easily dis8er!s i! this reversal o Terror i!to auto!omous morality a
desperate strategy o tur!i!g deeat i!to triumph+ i!stead o heroi8ally ighti!g or o!eIs vital i!terests-
o!e pre:emptively de8lares total surre!der a!d gives up all 8o!te!t7 .ebru! is here 6ell a6are ho6
u!justiied the sta!dard 8ritiNue o =egel is a88ordi!g to 6hi8h the diale8ti8al reversal o utter
!egativity i!to a !e6 higher positivity- o 8atastrophe i!to triumph- u!8tio!s as a ki!d o deus e&
machina- pre8ludi!g the possibility that the 8atastrophe might be the i!al out8ome o the pro8essEthe
6ell:k!o6! 8ommo!:se!se argume!t+ J3ut 6hat i there is !o reversal o !egativity i!to a !e6 positive
orderMK This argume!t misses the poi!t- 6hi8h is that this is- pre8isely- 6hat happe!s i! the =egelia!
reversal+ there is !o real reversal o deeat i!to triumph but o!ly a purely ormal shit- a 8ha!ge o
perspe8tive- 6hi8h tries to prese!t deeat itsel as a triumph7 4ietUs8heIs poi!t is that this triumph is a
ake- a 8heap magi8ia!Is tri8k- a 8o!solatio! priUe or losi!g all that makes lie 6orth livi!g+ the real
loss o vitality is suppleme!ted by a lieless spe8ter7 9! .ebru!Is 4ietUs8hea! readi!g- =egel thus
appears as a ki!d o atheist Dhristia! philosopher+ like Dhristia!ity- he lo8ates the JtruthK o all
terrestrial i!ite reality i! its @sel:Aa!!ihilatio!Ereality rea8hes its truth o!ly through>i! its sel:
destru8tio!T u!like Dhristia!ity- =egel is 6ell a6are that there is !o Hther /orld i! 6hi8h 6e 6ill be
repaid or our terrestrial losses+ tra!s8e!de!8e is absolutely imma!e!t- what is %beyond' finite reality
is nothing but the immanent process of its self*overcoming7 =egelIs !ame or this absolute imma!e!8e
o tra!s8e!de!8e is Jabsolute !egativity-K as he makes 8lear i! a! e?emplary 6ay i! the diale8ti8s o
,aster a!d Serva!t+ the Serva!tIs se8ure parti8ular>i!ite ide!tity is u!settled 6he!- i! e?perie!8i!g the
ear o death duri!g his 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the ,aster- he gets a 6hi o the i!i!ite po6er o
!egativityT through this e?perie!8e- the Serva!t is or8ed to a88ept the 6orthless!ess o his parti8ular
Sel+

For this 8o!s8ious!ess 6as !ot i! peril a!d ear or this eleme!t or that- !or or this or that mome!t o
time- it 6as araid or its e!tire bei!gT it elt the ear o death- the sovereig! master7 9t has bee! i! that
e?perie!8e melted to its i!most soul- has trembled throughout its every ibre- a!d all that 6as i?ed a!d
steadast has Nuaked 6ithi! it7 This 8omplete perturbatio! o its e!tire substa!8e- this absolute
dissolutio! o all its stability i!to lue!t 8o!ti!uity- is- ho6ever- the simple- ultimate !ature o sel:
8o!s8ious!ess- absolute !egativity- pure sel:relati!g e?iste!8e- 6hi8h 8o!seNue!tly is i!volved i! this
type o 8o!s8ious!ess7
'
/hat- the!- does the Serva!t get i! e?8ha!ge or re!ou!8i!g all the 6ealth o his parti8ular
SelM othingEi! over8omi!g his parti8ular terrestrial Sel- the Serva!t does !ot rea8h a higher level
o a spiritual SelT all he has to do is to shit his positio! a!d re8og!iUe i! @6hat appears to him asA the
over6helmi!g po6er o destru8tio! 6hi8h threate!s to obliterate his parti8ular ide!tity the absolute
!egativity 6hi8h orms the very 8ore o his o6! Sel7 9! short- the subje8t has to ully ide!tiy 6ith the
or8e that threate!s to 6ipe him out+ 6hat he eared i! eari!g death 6as the !egative po6er o his o6!
Sel7 There is thus !o reversal o !egativity i!to positive great!essEthe o!ly Jgreat!essK here is this
!egativity itsel7 Hr- 6ith regard to sueri!g+ =egelIs poi!t is !ot that the sueri!g brought about by
the alie!ati!g labor o re!u!8iatio! is a! i!termediary mome!t that must be patie!tly e!dured 6hile 6e
6ait or our re6ard at the e!d o the tu!!elEthere is !o priUe or proit to be gai!ed at the e!d or our
patie!t submissio!T sueri!g a!d re!u!8iatio! are their o6! re6ard- all that has to be do!e is to 8ha!ge
our subje8tive positio!- to re!ou!8e our desperate 8li!gi!g to our i!ite Selves 6ith their Jpathologi8alK
desires- to puriy our Selves to6ards their u!iversality7 This is also ho6 =egel e?plai!s the over8omi!g
o tyra!!y i! the history o states+ JH!e says that tyra!!y is overtur!ed by the people be8ause it is
u!dig!iied- shameul- et87 9! reality- it disappears simply be8ause it is superluous7K
$
9t be8omes
superluous 6he! people !o lo!ger !eed the e?ter!al or8e o the tyra!t to make them re!ou!8e their
parti8ular i!terests- but 6he! they be8ome Ju!iversal 8itiUe!sK by dire8tly ide!tiyi!g the 8ore o their
bei!g 6ith this u!iversalityEi! short- people !o lo!ger !eed the e?ter!al master 6he! they are
edu8ated i!to doi!g the job o dis8ipli!e a!d subordi!atio! themselves7
The obverse o =egelIs J!ihilismK @all i!ite>determi!ate orms o lie rea8h their JtruthK i!
their sel:over8omi!gA is its appare!t opposite+ i! 8o!ti!uity 6ith the Clato!i8 metaphysi8al traditio!-
he is !ot ready to give !egativity ull rei!- that is- his diale8ti8s is ultimately a! eort to J!ormaliUeK
the e?8ess o !egativity7 For late Clato already- the problem 6as ho6 to relativiUe or 8o!te?tualiUe !o!:
bei!g as a subordi!ate mome!t o bei!g @!o!:bei!g is al6ays a parti8ular>determi!ate la8k o bei!g
measured by the ull!ess it ails to a8tualiUeT there is !o !o!:bei!g as su8h- there is al6ays o!ly- e7g7-
Jgree!K 6hi8h parti8ipates i! !o!:bei!g by !ot bei!g JredK or a!y other 8olor- et87A7 9! the same vei!-
=egelia! J!egativityK serves to Jpros8ribe absolute diere!8eK or J!o!:bei!gK+
&
!egativity is limited
to the obliteratio! o all i!ite>immediate determi!atio!s7 The pro8ess o !egativity is thus !ot just a
!egative pro8ess o the sel:destru8tio! o the i!ite+ it rea8hes its telos 6he! i!ite>immediate
determi!atio!s are mediated>mai!tai!ed>elevated- posited i! their JtruthK as ideal !otio!al
determi!atio!s7 /hat remai!s ater !egativity has do!e its 6ork is the eter!al parousia o the ideal
!otio!al stru8ture7 /hat is missi!g here- rom the 4ietUs8hea! sta!dpoi!t- is the airmative no+ the no
o the joyous a!d heroi8 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the adversary- the no o struggle 6hi8h aims at sel:
assertio!- !ot sel:sublatio!7
STR!GGLE AND RECONCILIATION

This bri!gs us ba8k to the i!8ompatibility bet6ee! =egelIs thought a!d a!y ki!d o
evolutio!ary or histori8ist JmobilismK+ =egelIs diale8ti8s Ji! !o 6ay i!volves the re8og!itio! o the
irresistible or8e o be8omi!g- the epopee o a lu? 6hi8h takes everythi!g 6ith itK+

The =egelia! diale8ti8s 6as ote!Ebut superi8iallyEassimilated to a mobilism7 A!d it is u!doubtedly
true that the 8ritiNue o the i?ity o determi!atio!s 8a! give rise to the 8o!vi8tio! o a! i!i!ite
diale8ti8al pro8ess+ the limited bei!g has to disappear agai! a!d al6ays- a!d its destru8tio! e?te!ds to
the very limit o our sight O =o6ever- at this level- 6e are still deali!g 6ith a simple goi!g:o!
@(eschehenA to 6hi8h o!e 8a!!ot 8o!er the i!!er u!ity o a history @(eschichteA7
%
To re8og!iUe this- to thoroughly reje8t the JmobilistK topi8 o the eter!al lu? o 3e8omi!g
6hi8h dissolves all i?ed orms- is the irst step to6ards diale8ti8al reaso! i! its radi8al i!8ompatibility
6ith the allegedly JdeepK i!sight that everythi!g 8omes out o the primordial Dhaos a!d is agai!
s6allo6ed by it- a orm o /isdom 6hi8h persists rom a!8ie!t 8osmologies up to a!d i!8ludi!g
Stali!ist Jdiale8ti8al materialism7K The most popular orm o JmobilismK is the traditio!al vie6 o
=egel as the philosopher o Jeter!al struggle-K populariUed by ,ar?ists rom 0!gels to Stali! a!d ,ao+
the 6ell:k!o6! Jdiale8ti8alK !otio! o lie as a! eter!al 8o!li8t bet6ee! rea8tio! a!d progress- old a!d
!e6- past a!d uture7 This belligere!t vie6- 6hi8h advo8ates our e!gageme!t o! the JprogressiveK side-
is totally oreig! to =egel- or 6hom Jtaki!g sidesK as su8h is illusory @si!8e it is by dei!itio!
u!ilateralA7
.et us take so8ial struggle at its most viole!t+ 6ar7 /hat i!terests =egel is !ot struggle as su8h-
but the 6ay the JtruthK o the e!gaged positio!s emerges through it- !amely ho6 the 6arri!g parties are
Jre8o!8iledK through their mutual destru8tio!7 The true @spiritualA mea!i!g o 6ar is !ot ho!or- vi8tory-
dee!se- et87- but the emerge!8e o absolute !egativity @deathA as the absolute ,aster 6hi8h remi!ds us
o the alse stability o our orga!iUed- i!ite lives7 /ar serves to elevate i!dividuals to their JtruthK by
maki!g them re!ou!8e their parti8ular sel:i!terests a!d ide!tiy 6ith the StateIs u!iversality7 The true
e!emy is !ot the e!emy 6e are ighti!g but our o6! i!itudeEre8all =egelIs a8erbi8 remark o! ho6
easy it is to pro8laim the va!ity o our i!ite terrestrial e?iste!8e- but ho6 mu8h more dii8ult it is to
a88ept 6he! e!or8ed by a 6ild e!emy soldier 6ho breaks i!to our home a!d starts to sli8e up
members o our amily 6ith a saber7
9! philosophi8al terms- =egelIs poi!t here 8o!8er!s the prima8y o Jsel:8o!tradi8tio!K over the
e?ter!al obsta8le @or e!emyA7 /e are !ot i!ite a!d sel:i!8o!siste!t be8ause our a8tivity is al6ays
th6arted by e?ter!al obsta8lesT 6e are th6arted by e?ter!al obsta8les be8ause 6e are i!ite a!d
i!8o!siste!t7 9! other 6ords- 6hat the subje8t e!gaged i! a struggle per8eives as the e!emy- the
e?ter!al obsta8le he has to over8ome- is the materialiUatio! o the subje8tIs imma!e!t i!8o!siste!8y+
the struggli!g subje8t !eeds the igure o the e!emy to sustai! the illusio! o his o6! 8o!siste!8y- his
very ide!tity hi!ges o! his opposi!g the e!emy- so mu8h so that his @eve!tualA vi8tory amou!ts to his
o6! deeat or disi!tegratio!7 As =egel likes to put it- i! ighti!g the e?ter!al e!emy- o!e
@u!k!o6i!glyA ights o!eIs o6! esse!8e7 So- ar rom 8elebrati!g e!gaged struggle- =egelIs poi!t is
rather that every embattled positio!- every taki!g o sides- has to rely o! a !e8essary illusio! @the
illusio! that- o!8e the e!emy is a!!ihilated- 9 6ill a8hieve the ull realiUatio! o my bei!gA7 This bri!gs
us to 6hat 6ould have bee! a properly =egelia! !otio! o ideology+ the misapprehe!sio! o the
8o!ditio! o possibility @o 6hat is a! i!here!t 8o!stitue!t o your positio!A as the 8o!ditio! o
impossibility @as a! obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts your ull realiUatio!AEthe ideologi8al subje8t is u!able to
grasp ho6 his e!tire ide!tity hi!ges o! 6hat he per8eives as the disturbi!g obsta8le7 This !otio! o
ideology is !ot just a! abstra8t me!tal e?er8ise+ it its pere8tly 6ith as8ist a!ti:Semitism as the most
eleme!tary orm o ideologyEo!e is eve! tempted to say+ as ideology as su8h- "at e&ochen7 The a!ti:
Semiti8 igure o the 2e6- the oreig! i!truder 6ho disturbs a!d 8orrupts the harmo!y o the so8ial
order- is ultimately a etishisti8 obje8tiviUatio!- a sta!d:i!- or the Ji!8o!siste!8yK o the so8ial order
itsel- or the imma!e!t a!tago!ism @J8lass struggleKA 6hi8h ge!erates the dy!ami8 o its i!stability7
=egelIs i!terest i! the J8o!li8t o the oppositesK is thus that o the !eutral diale8ti8al observer
6ho dis8er!s the JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K at 6ork i! struggle+ a subje8t e!gages i! struggle- is deeated
@as a rule- i! his very vi8toryA- and this defeat brings him to his truth7 /e 8a! 8learly measure here the
dista!8e that separates =egel rom 4ietUs8he+ the i!!o8e!8e o e?ubera!t heroism that 4ietUs8he 6a!ts
to resus8itate- the passio! o risk- o ully e!gagi!g i! a struggle- o vi8tory or deeatEthese are all
abse!tT the JtruthK o the struggle emerges o!ly i! a!d through deeat7
This is 6hy the sta!dard ,ar?ist de!u!8iatio! o the alsity o the =egelia! re8o!8iliatio!
@already made by S8helli!gA misses the poi!t7 A88ordi!g to this 8ritiNue- the =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! is
alse be8ause it o88urs o!ly i! the 9dea- 6hile real a!tago!isms persistEi! the J8o!8reteK e?perie!8e o
the Jreal lieK o i!dividuals 6ho 8li!g to their parti8ular ide!tity- state po6er remai!s a! e?ter!al
8ompulsio!7 Therei! resides the 8ru? o the you!g ,ar?Is 8ritiNue o =egelIs politi8al thought+ =egel
prese!ts the moder! 8o!stitutio!al mo!ar8hy as a ratio!al State i! 6hi8h a!tago!isms are re8o!8iled- as
a! orga!i8 /hole i! 6hi8h every 8o!stitue!t i!ds- or 8a! i!d- its proper pla8e- but he thereby
obus8ates the 8lass a!tago!ism 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues i! moder! so8ieties- ge!erati!g the 6orki!g 8lass as
the J!o!:reaso! o the e?isti!g Feaso!-K as the part o moder! so8iety 6hi8h has !o proper part i! it- as
its Jpart o !o:partK @Fa!8i`reA7
/hat .ebru! reje8ts i! this 8ritiNue is !ot its diag!osis @that the proposed re8o!8iliatio! is
disho!est- a! Je!or8ed re8o!8iliatio!K [erpresste 6ersPhnung\Ethe title o o!e o Ador!oIs
essaysE6hi8h obus8ates the a!tago!ismsI persiste!8e i! so8ial realityA- rather+ J6hat is so admirable
i! this portrait o the diale8ti8ia! re!dered disho!est by his bli!d!ess is the suppositio! that he 8ould
have bee! ho!est7K
10
9! other 6ords- i!stead o reje8ti!g the =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! as alse- .ebru!
reje8ts as illusory the very !otio! o diale8ti8al re8o!8iliatio!- re!ou!8i!g the dema!d or a JtrueK
re8o!8iliatio! itsel7 =egel 6as ully a6are that re8o!8iliatio! does !ot alleviate real sueri!g a!d
a!tago!ismsEhis ormula rom the ore6ord to his )hilosophy of 7ight is that o!e should Jre8og!iUe
the Fose i! the Dross o the prese!tKT or- to put it i! ,ar?Is terms+ i! re8o!8iliatio! o!e does !ot
8ha!ge e?ter!al reality to it some 9dea- o!e re8og!iUes this 9dea as the i!!er JtruthK o the miserable
reality itsel7 The ,ar?ist reproa8h that- i!stead o tra!sormi!g reality- =egel merely proposes a !e6
i!terpretatio! o it- thus i! a 6ay misses the poi!tEit is k!o8ki!g o! a! ope! door- si!8e- or =egel- i!
order to pass rom alie!atio! to re8o!8iliatio!- 6e do !ot have to 8ha!ge reality- but rather the 6ay 6e
per8eive a!d relate to it7
The same i!sight u!derlies =egelIs a!alysis o the passage rom labor to thought i! the
sub8hapter o! ,aster a!d Serva!t i! the )henomenology of Spirit7 .ebru! is ully justiied i!
emphasiUi!g- agai!st *oj`ve- that =egel is ar rom 8elebrati!g @8olle8tiveA labor as the site o the
produ8tive sel:assertio! o huma! subje8tivity- as the pro8ess o or8eul tra!sormatio! a!d
appropriatio! o !atural obje8ts- their subordi!atio! to huma! goals7 All i!ite thought remai!s 8aught
i! the Jspurious i!i!ityK o the !ever:e!di!g pro8ess o the @tra!sAormatio! o obje8tive reality 6hi8h
al6ays resists the ull subje8tive grasp- so that the subje8tIs 6ork is !ever do!e+ JAs a! aggressive
a8tivity deployed by a i!ite bei!g- labor sig!als above all ma!Is impote!8e to i!tegrally take
possessio! o !ature7K
11
This i!ite thought is the horiUo! o *a!t a!d Fi8hte+ the e!dless pra8ti8o:
ethi8al struggle to over8ome e?ter!al obsta8les as 6ell as the subje8tIs o6! i!!er !ature7 Their
philosophies are the philosophies o struggle- 6hile i! =egelIs philosophy- the u!dame!tal sta!8e o
the subje8t to6ards obje8tive reality is !ot that o pra8ti8al e!gageme!t- o 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the
i!ertia o obje8tivity- but that o letti!g:it:be+ puriied o its pathologi8al parti8ularity- the u!iversal
subje8t is 8ertai! o itsel- it k!o6s that its thought already is the orm o reality- so it 8a! re!ou!8e
e!or8i!g its proje8ts upo! reality- it 8a! let reality be the 6ay it is7
This is 6hy my labor gets all the more 8lose to its truth the less 9 6ork to satisy my !eed- that
is- to produ8e obje8ts 9 6ill 8o!sume7 This is 6hy i!dustry 6hi8h produ8es or the market is spiritually
JhigherK tha! produ8tio! or o!eIs o6! !eeds+ i! market:produ8tio!- 9 ma!ua8ture obje8ts 6ith !o
relatio! to my !eeds7 The highest orm o so8ial produ8tio! is thereore that o a merchant+ Jthe
mer8ha!t is the o!ly o!e 6ho relates to the 1ood as a pere8t u!iversal subje8t- si!8e the obje8t i! !o
6ay i!terests him o! behal o its aestheti8 prese!8e or its use value- but o!ly i!soar as it 8o!tai!s a
desire o a! other7K
12
A!d this is also 6hy- i! order to arrive at the JtruthK o labor- o!e should
gradually abstra8t rom the @e?ter!alA goal it strives to realiUe7
The parallel 6ith 6ar is appropriate here+ i! the same 6ay that the JtruthK o the military
struggle is !ot the destru8tio! o the e!emy- but the sa8rii8e o the Jpathologi8alK 8o!te!t o the
6arriorIs parti8ular Sel- its purii8atio! i!to the u!iversal Sel- the JtruthK o labor as the struggle 6ith
!ature is also !ot vi8tory over !ature- 8ompelli!g it to serve huma! goals- but the sel:purii8atio! o
the laborer itsel7 .abor is simulta!eously the @tra!sAormatio! o e?ter!al obje8ts a!d the dis8ipli!ary
sel:ormatio!>edu8atio! @/ildungA o the subje8t itsel7 =egel here 8elebrates pre8isely the alie!ated
a!d alie!ati!g 8hara8ter o labor+ ar rom bei!g a dire8t e?pressio! o my 8reativity- labor or8es me to
submit to artii8ial dis8ipli!e- to re!ou!8e my i!!ermost immediate te!de!8ies- to alie!ate mysel rom
my !atural Sel+

Gesire has reserved to itsel the pure !egati!g o the obje8t a!d thereby u!alloyed eeli!g o sel7 This
satisa8tio!- ho6ever- just or that reaso! is itsel o!ly a state o eva!es8e!8e- or it la8ks obje8tivity or
subsiste!8e7 .abour- o! the other ha!d- is desire restrai!ed a!d 8he8ked- eva!es8e!8e delayed a!d
postpo!edT i! other 6ords- labour shapes a!d ashio!s the thi!g7
1"
As su8h- labor preigures thought- it a8hieves its telos i! thi!ki!g 6hi8h !o lo!ger 6orks o! a!
e?ter!al stu- but is already its o6! stu- or- 6hi8h !o lo!ger imposes its subje8tive>i!ite orm o!to
e?ter!al reality but is already i! itsel the i!i!ite orm o reality7 For i!ite thought- the 8o!8ept o a!
obje8t is a mere 8o!8ept- the subje8tive goal o!e a8tualiUes 6he!- by 6ay o labor- o!e imposes it o!to
reality7 For spe8ulative thought- o! the 8o!trary- thought is !ot merely subje8tive- it is i! itsel already
obje8tiveEit re!ders the obje8tive 8o!8eptual orm o the obje8t7 This is 6hy i!!er Spirit- 8ertai! o
itsel- J!o lo!ger !eeds to orm>shape !ature a!d to re!der it spiritual i! order to i?ate the divi!e a!d to
make its u!ity 6ith !ature e?ter!ally visible+ i!soar as the ree thought thi!ks e?ter!ality- it 8a! leave
it the 6ay it is @"ann er es lassen wie es istA7K
1(
This sudde! retroa8tive reversal rom !ot:yet to already:is @6e !ever dire8tly realiUe a
goalE6e pass rom strivi!g to realiUe a goal to a sudde! re8og!itio! that it is already realiUedA is 6hat
disti!guishes =egel rom all ki!ds o histori8ist tropes- i!8ludi!g the sta!dard ,ar?ist 8riti8al reproa8h
that the =egelia! ideal re8o!8iliatio! is i!sui8ie!t- si!8e it leaves reality @real pai! a!d sueri!gA the
6ay it is- a!d that 6hat is !eeded is a8tual re8o!8iliatio! through radi8al so8ial tra!sormatio!7 For
=egel- the illusio! is !ot that o the e!or8ed Jalse re8o!8iliatio!K 6hi8h ig!ores the persisti!g
divisio!sT the true illusio! resides i! !ot seei!g that- i! 6hat appears to us as the 8haos o be8omi!g-
the i!i!ite goal is already reali2ed+ J/ithi! the i!ite order- 6e 8a!!ot e?perie!8e or see that the goal
is truly a8hieved7 The a88omplishme!t o the i!i!ite goal resides o!ly i! over8omi!g the illusio!
[-=uschungGde8eptio!\ that this goal is !ot yet a8hieved7K
1#
9! short- the ultimate de8eptio! lies i! the ailure to see that o!e already has 6hat o!e is looki!g
orElike DhristIs dis8iples a6aiti!g his JrealK rei!8ar!atio!- bli!d to the a8t that their 8olle8tive
already 6as the =oly Spirit- the retur! o the livi!g Dhrist7 .ebru! is thus justiied i! !oti!g that the
i!al reversal o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- as 6e have see!- ar rom i!volvi!g the magi8al i!terve!tio! o
a deus e& machina- is a purely ormal tur!arou!d- a shit i! perspe8tive+ the o!ly thi!g that 8ha!ges i!
the i!al re8o!8iliatio! is the subje8tIs sta!dpoi!tEthe subje8t e!dorses the loss- re:i!s8ribes it as its
triumph7 Fe8o!8iliatio! is thus simulta!eously both less a!d more tha! the sta!dard idea o over8omi!g
a! a!tago!ism+ less- be8ause !othi!g Jreally 8ha!gesKT more- be8ause the subje8t o the pro8ess is
deprived o its very @parti8ularA substa!8e7
=ere is a! u!e?pe8ted e?ample+ at the e!d o =o6ard =a6ksIs 8lassi8 /ester! 7ed 7iver- a
Jpsy8hologi8ally u!ou!dedK t6ist o88urs 6hi8h is usually dismissed as a simple 6eak!ess o the
s8ript7 The e!tire ilm moves to6ards the 8lima8ti8 8o!ro!tatio! bet6ee! Gu!so! a!d ,att- a duel o
almost mythi8 proportio!s- predesti!ed by ate- as a! i!e?orable 8o!li8t bet6ee! t6o i!8ompatible
subje8tive sta!8esT i! the i!al s8e!e- Gu!so! approa8hes ,att 6ith the determi!atio! o a tragi8 hero
bli!ded by his hatred a!d mar8hi!g to6ards his rui!7 The brutal ist ight 6hi8h the! e!sues is
u!e?pe8tedly e!ded 6he! Tess- 6ho is i! love 6ith ,att- ires a gu! i!to the air a!d shouts at the t6o
me!+ Ja!ybody 6ith hal a mi!d 6ould k!o6 you t6o love ea8h other7K A Nui8k re8o!8iliatio! ollo6s-
6ith Gu!so! a!d ,att 8hatti!g like old buddies+ this Jtra!sitio! o Gu!so! rom a!ger i!8ar!ate- all
A8hilles all the time- to s6eet!ess a!d light- happily yieldi!g to ,att O is breathtaki!g i! its
rapidity7K
1'
Fobert Cippi! is ully justiied i! dete8ti!g be!eath this te8h!i8al 6eak!ess o the s8ript a
deeper message+

the struggle or po6er a!d suprema8y that 6e have bee! 6at8hi!g O has bee! a ki!d o shado6 play
O a a!tasy largely staged by Gu!so! to justiy himsel7 There !ever 6as a!y great struggle- !ever a!y
real threat o a ight to the death O The mythi8 struggle 6e have bee! 6at8hi!g is itsel the result o a
ki!d o sel:mythologiUatio! O a a!tasy !arrative rame that is also demythologiUi!g itsel i! ro!t o
us7
1$
This is ho6 =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! 6orksE!ot as a positive gesture o resolvi!g or
over8omi!g the 8o!li8t- but as a retroa8tive i!sight i!to ho6 there never really was a serious conflict-
ho6 the t6o oppo!e!ts 6ere al6ays o! the same side @a little bit like the re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! Figaro
a!d ,ar8elli!a i! -he Marriage of Figaro- 6here they are brought together by the realiUatio! that they
are mother a!d so!A7 This retroa8tivity a88ou!ts also or the spe8ii8 temporality o re8o!8iliatio!7
Fe8all the parado? o the pro8ess o apologiUi!g+ i 9 hurt someo!e by maki!g a! u!ki!d remark- the
proper thi!g or me to do is to oer a si!8ere apology- a!d the proper thi!g or her to do is to say
somethi!g like- JTha!ks- 9 appre8iate it- but 9 6as!It oe!ded- 9 k!e6 you did!It mea! it- so you really
o6e me !o apologyRK The poi!t- o 8ourse- is that despite this i!al result- o!e still has to go through
the e!tire pro8ess o oeri!g the apology+ Jyou o6e me !o apologyK 8a! o!ly be said ater 9 have
oered a! apology- so that although- ormally- J!othi!g happe!s-K a!d the oer o apology is
pro8laimed u!!e8essary- somethi!g is gai!ed at the e!d o the pro8ess @perhaps- eve!- a rie!dship is
savedA7
1&
Cerhaps this parado? provides a 8lue to u!dersta!di!g the t6ists a!d tur!s o the =egelia!
diale8ti8al pro8ess7 .et us take =egelIs 8ritiNue o the 2a8obi! Fevolutio!ary Terror- u!derstood as a!
e?er8ise i! the abstra8t !egativity o absolute reedom 6hi8h- u!able to stabiliUe itsel i! a 8o!8rete
so8ial order- has to e!d i! a ury o sel:destru8tio!7 H!e should bear i! mi!d here that- i!soar as 6e
are deali!g 6ith a histori8al 8hoi8e @bet6ee! the JFre!8hK path o remai!i!g 6ithi! Datholi8ism- a!d
thus bei!g obliged to e!gage i! Fevolutio!ary Terror- a!d the J1erma!K path o Feormatio!A- this
8hoi8e i!volves e?a8tly the same eleme!tary diale8ti8al parado? as that- also rom the )henomenology
of Spirit- bet6ee! the t6o readi!gs o Jthe Spirit is a bo!eK 6hi8h =egel illustrates by the phalli8
metaphor @phallus as the orga! o i!semi!atio! or phallus as the orga! o uri!atio!A+ =egelIs poi!t is
not that- i! 8o!trast to the vulgar empiri8ist mi!d 6hi8h sees o!ly uri!atio!- the proper spe8ulative
attitude has to 8hoose i!semi!atio!7 The parado? is that to 8hoose i!semi!atio! dire8tly is the i!allible
6ay to miss it+ it is !ot possible to 8hoose dire8tly the Jtrue mea!i!g-K i! other 6ords- o!e has to begi!
by maki!g the J6ro!gK 8hoi8e @o uri!atio!AEthe true spe8ulative mea!i!g emerges o!ly through the
repeated readi!g- as the ater:ee8t @or by:produ8tA o the irst- J6ro!g-K readi!g7
1%
A!d the same goes or so8ial lie i! 6hi8h the dire8t 8hoi8e o the J8o!8rete u!iversalityK o a
parti8ular ethi8al lie 6orld 8a! o!ly e!d i! a regressio! to premoder! orga!i8 so8iety that de!ies the
i!i!ite right o subje8tivity as the u!dame!tal eature o moder!ity7 Si!8e the subje8t:8itiUe! o a
moder! state 8a! !o lo!ger a88ept his immersio! i! some parti8ular so8ial role that 8o!ers o! him a
determi!ate pla8e 6ithi! the orga!i8 so8ial /hole- the o!ly route to the ratio!al totality o the moder!
State leads through Fevolutio!ary Terror+ o!e should ruthlessly tear up the 8o!strai!ts o premoder!
orga!i8 J8o!8rete u!iversalityK a!d ully assert the i!i!ite right o subje8tivity i! its abstra8t
!egativity7
9! other 6ords- the poi!t o =egelIs a!alysis o the Fevolutio!ary Terror is !ot the rather
obvious i!sight i!to ho6 the revolutio!ary proje8t i!volved the u!ilateral assertio! o abstra8t
)!iversal Feaso! a!d 6as as su8h doomed to perish i! sel:destru8tive ury- bei!g u!able to tra!spose
its revolutio!ary e!ergy i!to a stable so8ial orderT =egelIs poi!t is rather to highlight the e!igma o
6hy- i! spite o the a8t that Fevolutio!ary Terror 6as a histori8al deadlo8k- 6e have to pass through it
i! order to arrive at the moder! ratio!al State7
=ere also- the!- o!e has to do somethi!g @oer a! apology- e!a8t a reig! o TerrorA i! order to
see ho6 it is superluous7 This parado? is sustai!ed by the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the J8o!stativeK a!d the
JperormativeK dime!sio!s o spee8h- bet6ee! the Jsubje8t o the e!u!8iatedK a!d the Jsubje8t o the
e!u!8iatio!K+ at the level o the e!u!8iated 8o!te!t- the 6hole operatio! is mea!i!gless @6hy do
itEoer a! apology- go through the TerrorE6he! it is superluousMAT ho6ever- 6hat this 8ommo!:
se!se i!sight orgets is that o!ly the J6ro!gK superluous gesture 8reates the subje8tive 8o!ditio!s
6hi8h make it possible or the subje8t to really see why the gesture is superluous7 9t o!ly be8omes
possible to say that my apology is u!!e8essary ater 9 have oered it- to see ho6 the Terror is
superluous a!d destru8tive ater o!e has go!e through it7 The diale8ti8al pro8ess is thus more rei!ed
tha! it may appear+ the sta!dard !otio! is that o!e 8a! o!ly arrive at the i!al truth alo!g the path o
error- so that the errors alo!g the 6ay are !ot simply dis8arded- but JsublatedK i! the i!al truth-
preserved i! it as its mome!ts7 The evolutio!ary !otio! o diale8ti8al pro8ess tells us that the result is
!ot just a dead body- that it does !ot sta!d alo!e- i! abstra8tio! rom the pro8ess that e!ge!dered it+ i!
this pro8ess- diere!t mome!ts irst appeared i! their u!ilateral immediate orm- 6hile the i!al
sy!thesis gathers them as sublated- mai!tai!i!g their ratio!al 8ore7 /hat this sta!dard !otio! misses is
ho6 the previous mome!ts are preserved precisely as superfluous7 9! other 6ords- 6hile the pre8edi!g
stages are i!deed superluous- 6e !eed time to arrive at the poi!t rom 6hi8h 6e 8a! see that they are
so7
A STOR$ TO TELL

=o6 are 6e to 8ou!ter this diag!osis o the Jdisease 8alled =egel-K 6hi8h 8e!ters o! the
diale8ti8al reversal as a! empty ormal gesture o prese!ti!g deeat as vi8toryM The irst observatio!
that imposes itsel is that readi!g Ji!ra:ratio!alK sema!ti8 8hoi8es as strategies or 8opi!g 6ith
obsta8les to the assertio! o lie is i! itsel already a! Ji!ra:ratio!alK sema!ti8 8hoi8e7 3ut more
importa!t is to !ote ho6 su8h a readi!g subtly perpetuates a !arro6 vie6 o =egel 6hi8h obliterates
ma!y key dime!sio!s o his thought7 9s it !ot possible to read =egelIs systemati8 Jsublatio!K o ea8h
a!d every shape o 8o!s8ious!ess or so8ial lie:orm as- pre8isely- a des8riptio! o all possible lie:
orms- 6ith their vital Jsema!ti8 8hoi8es-K a!d their i!here!t a!tago!isms @J8o!tradi8tio!sKAM
20
9 there
is a Jsema!ti8 8hoi8eK that u!derlies =egelIs thought- it is !ot the desperate 6ager that- retroa8tively-
o!e 6ill be able to tell a 8o!siste!t- all:e!8ompassi!g a!d mea!i!gul story i! 6hi8h every detail 6ill
be allotted its proper pla8e- but- o! the 8o!trary- the 6eird 8ertai!ty @8omparable to the psy8hoa!alystIs
8ertai!ty that the repressed 6ill al6ays retur!- that a symptom 6ill al6ays spoil every igure o
harmo!yA that- 6ith every igure o 8o!s8ious!ess or orm o lie- thi!gs 6ill al6ays someho6 Jgo
6ro!g-K that ea8h positio! 6ill ge!erate a! e?8ess 6hi8h 6ill augur its sel:destru8tio!7
Goes this mea! that =egel does !ot advo8ate a!y determi!ate Jsema!ti8 8hoi8e-K si!8e- or him-
the o!ly JtruthK is the e!dless pro8ess o the Jge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!K o determi!ate Jsema!ti8
8hoi8esKM 5es- but o! 8o!ditio! that 6e do !ot 8o!8eive this pro8ess i! the usual JmobilistK se!se7
=o6- the!- does the truly histori8al thought break 6ith su8h u!iversaliUed JmobilismKM 9! 6hat
pre8ise se!se is it histori8al a!d !ot simply the reje8tio! o JmobilismK o! behal o some eter!al
Cri!8iple e?empted rom the lo6 o ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!M The key resides i! the 8o!8ept o
retroa8tivity 6hi8h 8o!8er!s the very 8ore o the relatio!ship bet6ee! =egel a!d ,ar?+ it is the mai!
reaso! 6hy- today- o!e should retur! rom ,ar? to =egel a!d e!a8t a Jmaterialist reversalK o ,ar?
himsel7
To approa8h this 8omple? issue- let me begi! 6ith 1illes GeleuUeIs !otio! o a pure past+ !ot
the past i!to 6hi8h thi!gs prese!t pass- but a! absolute past J6here all eve!ts- i!8ludi!g those that have
su!k 6ithout tra8e- are stored a!d remembered as their passi!g a6ay-K
21
a virtual past 6hi8h already
8o!tai!s thi!gs 6hi8h are still prese!t @a prese!t 8a! be8ome past be8ause i! a 6ay it is already- it 8a!
per8eive itsel as part o the pastT J6hat 6e are doi!g !o6 is [6ill have bee!\ historyKA7 J9t is 6ith
respe8t to the pure eleme!t o the past- u!derstood as the past i! ge!eral- as a! a priori past- that a give!
ormer prese!t is reprodu8ible a!d the prese!t prese!t is able to rele8t itsel7K
22
Goes this mea! that
the pure past i!volves a thoroughly determi!isti8 !otio! o the u!iverse i! 6hi8h everythi!g that is still
to happe! @to 8omeA- all a8tual spatio:temporal deployme!t- is already part o a! immemorial>atemporal
virtual !et6orkM 4o- a!d or a very pre8ise reaso!+ be8ause Jthe pure past must be all the past but must
also be ame!able to 8ha!ge through the o88urre!8e o a!y !e6 prese!t7K
2"
9t 6as !o!e other tha! T7 S7
0liot- that great 8o!servative- 6ho irst 8learly ormulated this li!k bet6ee! our depe!de!8e o!
traditio! a!d our po6er to 8ha!ge the past+

[traditio!\ 8a!!ot be i!herited- a!d i you 6a!t it you must obtai! it by great labour7 9t i!volves- i! the
irst pla8e- the histori8al se!se- 6hi8h 6e may 8all !early i!dispe!sable to a!yo!e 6ho 6ould 8o!ti!ue
to be a poet beyo!d his t6e!ty:ith yearT a!d the histori8al se!se i!volves a per8eptio!- !ot o!ly o the
past!ess o the past- but o its prese!8eT the histori8al se!se 8ompels a ma! to 6rite !ot merely 6ith his
o6! ge!eratio! i! his bo!es- but 6ith a eeli!g that the 6hole o the literature o 0urope rom =omer
a!d 6ithi! it the 6hole o the literature o his o6! 8ou!try has a simulta!eous e?iste!8e a!d 8omposes
a simulta!eous order7 This histori8al se!se- 6hi8h is a se!se o the timeless as 6ell as o the temporal
a!d o the timeless a!d o the temporal together- is 6hat makes a 6riter traditio!al7 A!d it is at the
same time 6hat makes a 6riter most a8utely 8o!s8ious o his pla8e i! time- o his 8o!tempora!eity74o
poet- !o artist o a!y art- has his 8omplete mea!i!g alo!e7 =is sig!ii8a!8e- his appre8iatio! is the
appre8iatio! o his relatio! to the dead poets a!d artists7 5ou 8a!!ot value him alo!eT you must set him-
or 8o!trast a!d 8ompariso!- amo!g the dead7 9 mea! this as a pri!8iple o aestheti8- !ot merely
histori8al- 8riti8ism7 The !e8essity that he shall 8o!orm- that he shall 8ohere- is !ot o!e:sidedT 6hat
happe!s 6he! a !e6 6ork o art is 8reated is somethi!g that happe!s simulta!eously to all the 6orks o
art 6hi8h pre8eded it7 The e?isti!g mo!ume!ts orm a! ideal order amo!g themselves- 6hi8h is
modiied by the i!trodu8tio! o the !e6 @the really !e6A 6ork o art amo!g them7 The e?isti!g order is
8omplete beore the !e6 6ork arrivesT or order to persist ater the superve!tio! o !ovelty- the whole
e?isti!g order must be- i ever so slightly- alteredT a!d so the relatio!s- proportio!s- values o ea8h 6ork
o art to6ard the 6hole are readjustedT a!d this is 8o!ormity bet6ee! the old a!d the !e67 /hoever
has approved this idea o order- o the orm o 0uropea!- o 0!glish literature- 6ill !ot i!d it
preposterous that the past should be altered by the prese!t as mu8h as the prese!t is dire8ted by the
past7 A!d the poet 6ho is a6are o this 6ill be a6are o great dii8ulties a!d respo!sibilities O/hat
happe!s is a 8o!ti!ual surre!der o himsel as he is at the mome!t to somethi!g 6hi8h is more
valuable7 The progress o a! artist is a 8o!ti!ual sel:sa8rii8e- a 8o!ti!ual e?ti!8tio! o perso!ality7
There remai!s to dei!e this pro8ess o deperso!aliUatio! a!d its relatio! to the se!se o traditio!7 9t is
i! this deperso!aliUatio! that art may be said to approa8h the 8o!ditio! o s8ie!8e7
2(
/he! 0liot says that i! judgi!g a livi!g poet Jyou must set him among the dead!K he ormulates
a pre8ise e?ample o GeleuUeIs pure past7 A!d 6he! he 6rites that Jthe e?isti!g order is 8omplete
beore the !e6 6ork arrivesT or order to persist ater the superve!tio! o !ovelty- the whole e?isti!g
order must be- i ever so slightly- alteredT a!d so the relatio!s- proportio!s- values o ea8h 6ork o art
to6ard the 6hole are readjusted-K he !o less 8learly ormulates the parado?i8al li!k bet6ee! the
8omplete!ess o the past a!d our 8apa8ity to 8ha!ge it retroa8tively+ pre8isely be8ause the pure past is
8omplete- ea8h !e6 6ork re:sets its e!tire bala!8e7 This is ho6 o!e should read *akaIs 8ritiNue o the
!otio! o the Gay o 2udgme!t as somethi!g 6hi8h 6ill arrive at the e!d o time+ JH!ly our 8o!8ept o
time makes it possible or us to speak o the Gay o 2udgme!t by that !ameT i! reality it is a summary
8ourt i! perpetual sessio!7K 0very histori8al mome!t 8o!tai!s its o6! 2udgme!t i! the se!se o its
Jpure pastK 6hi8h allo8ated a pla8e to ea8h o its eleme!ts- a!d this 2udgme!t is bei!g 8o!sta!tly
re6ritte!7 Fe8all 3orgesIs pre8ise ormulatio! o the relatio!ship bet6ee! *aka a!d his multitude o
pre8ursors- rom a!8ie!t Dhi!ese authors to Fobert 3ro6!i!g+

*akaIs idiosy!8rasy- i! greater or lesser degree- is prese!t i! ea8h o these 6riti!gs- but i *aka had
!ot 6ritte! 6e 6ould !ot per8eive itT that is to say- it 6ould !ot e?ist O ea8h 6riter creates his
pre8ursors7 =is 6ork modiies our 8o!8eptio! o the past- as it 6ill modiy the uture7
2#
9! the same 6ay- a radi8al revolutio! does @6hat previously appeared asA the impossible a!d
thereby 8reates its o6! pre8ursorsEthis- perhaps- is the most su88i!8t dei!itio! o 6hat a! authe!ti8
act is7 Su8h a! a8t proper should be lo8ated i! the trilogy @6hi8h stra!gely rele8ts the J0uropea!
tri!ityK o 0!glish- Fre!8h- a!d 1erma!A+ acting out! passage K lacte! -at*0andlung @Fi8hteIs
!eologism or the ou!di!g gesture o the subje8tIs sel:positi!g i! 6hi8h the a8tivity a!d its result
ully overlapA7 +cting out is a hysteri8al outburst 6ithi! the same big HtherT passage K lacte
destru8tively suspe!ds the big HtherT -at*0andlung retroa8tively rearra!ges it7 As 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller
put it- Jthe status o the a8t is retroa8tiveK+
2'
a gesture J6ill have bee!K a! a8tT it be8omes a! a8t i- i!
its 8o!seNue!8es- it su88eeds i! disturbi!g a!d rearra!gi!g the Jbig Hther7K The properly diale8ti8al
solutio! o the dilemma J9s it really there- i! the sour8e- or did 6e just read it i!to the sour8eMK is thus+
it is there- but 6e 8a! o!ly per8eive a!d state this retroa8tively- rom the perspe8tive o the prese!t
72$
H!e o the sta!dard pro8edures o de:etishiUi!g>de:reiyi!g 8ritiNue is to de!ou!8e @6hat
appears asA a dire8t property o the per8eived obje8t as the subje8tIs @the observerIsA Jrele?ive
determi!atio!K+ the subje8t ig!ores ho6 her gaUe is already i!8luded i! the per8eived 8o!te!t7 A!
e?ample rom re8e!t theory+ post:stru8turalist de8o!stru8tio!ism does !ot e?ist @i! itsel- i! Fra!8eA-
si!8e it 6as i!ve!ted i! the )S- or a!d by the Ameri8a! a8ademi8 gaUe 6ith all its 8o!stitutive
limitatio!s7
2&
9! short- a! e!tity like Jpost:stru8turalist de8o!stru8tio!ismK @a term !ot used i! Fra!8eA
8omes i!to e?iste!8e o!ly or a gaUe that is u!a6are o the details o the philosophi8al s8e!e i! Fra!8e+
this gaUe bri!gs together authors @Gerrida- GeleuUe- Fou8ault- .yotard- a!d so o!A 6ho are simply !ot
per8eived as part o the same episteme i! Fra!8e- just as the 8o!8ept o ilm !oir posits a u!ity 6hi8h
did !ot e?ist Ji! itsel7K A!d i! the same 6ay- the Fre!8h gaUe- ig!ora!t o the ideologi8al traditio! o
Ameri8a! i!dividualist- a!ti:8ombo populism- a!d looki!g through e?iste!tialist le!ses- mistook the
heroi8:8y!i8al- pessimist:atalist sta!8e o the !oir hero or a so8ially 8riti8al attitude7 .ike6ise- the
Ameri8a! per8eptio! i!s8ribed the Fre!8h authors i!to the ield o radi8al 8ultural 8riti8ism- thereby
8o!erri!g o! them a emi!ist- et87- 8riti8al so8ial sta!8e or the most part abse!t i! Fra!8e itsel7 So
just as ilm !oir is !ot a 8ategory o Ameri8a! 8i!ema- but primarily a 8ategory o the Fre!8h 8i!ema
8riti8ism a!d @laterA o the historiography o 8i!ema- so too Jpost:stru8turalist de8o!stru8tio!ismK is !ot
a 8ategory o Fre!8h philosophy- but primarily a 8ategory o the Ameri8a! @misAre8eptio! o the Fre!8h
theorists desig!ated as su8h7
This- ho6ever- is o!ly the irst step- at the level o @e?ter!alA rele8tio!7 9! the !e?t a!d 8ru8ial
step- these subje8tive determi!atio!s are developed pre8isely as !ot merely Jsubje8tiveK but as
simulta!eously ae8ti!g the Jthi!g itsel7K The !otio! o Jpost:stru8turalist de8o!stru8tio!ism-K
although resulti!g rom a limited oreig! perspe8tive- dra6s out o its obje8t pote!tials i!visible to
those dire8tly e!gaged 6ithi! it7 Therei! resides the ultimate diale8ti8al parado? o truth a!d alsity+
sometimes- the aberra!t vie6 6hi8h misreads a situatio! rom its limited perspe8tive 8a!- o! a88ou!t o
this very limitatio!- per8eive the JrepressedK pote!tial o the observed 8o!stellatio!7 A!d- urthermore-
the e?ter!al misper8eptio! 8a! sometimes have a produ8tive i!lue!8e o! the misper8eived Jorigi!alK
itsel- or8i!g it to be8ome a6are o its o6! JrepressedK truth @arguably- the Fre!8h !otio! o !oir-
although the result o a misper8eptio!- e?erted a stro!g i!lue!8e o! later Ameri8a! movie:maki!gA7 9s
!ot the Ameri8a! re8eptio! o Gerrida a supreme e?ample o this produ8tivity o the e?ter!al
misper8eptio!M Although it 8learly was a misper8eptio!- did it !ot have a retroa8tive but produ8tive
i!lue!8e o! Gerrida himsel- or8i!g him to 8o!ro!t ethi8o:politi8al issues more dire8tlyM /as the
Ameri8a! re8eptio! o Gerrida i! this se!se !ot a ki!d o pharma"on- a suppleme!t to the Jorigi!alK
Gerrida himselEa poiso!ous stai!:ake- distorti!g the origi!al but at the same time keepi!g it aliveM
9! short- 6ould Gerrida still be so JaliveK today had it !ot bee! or the Ameri8a! misper8eptio! o his
6orkM
=ere- Ceter =all6ard alls short i! his other6ise e?8elle!t $ut of -his World- 6here he stresses
o!ly the aspe8t o the pure past as the virtual ield i! 6hi8h the ate o all a8tual eve!ts is sealed i!
adva!8e- si!8e Jeverythi!g is already 6ritte!K i! it7
2%
At this poi!t- 6here 6e vie6 reality sub specie
aeternitatis- absolute reedom 8oi!8ides 6ith absolute !e8essity a!d its pure automatism+ to be ree
mea!s to let o!esel reely lo6 i!>6ith the substa!tial !e8essity7 This topi8 reverberates eve! i!
todayIs 8og!itivist debates o! the problem o ree 6ill7 Dompatibilists su8h as Ga!iel Ge!!ett have a!
elega!t solutio! to the i!8ompatibilistsI 8omplai!ts about determi!ism+
"0
6he! i!8ompatibilists
8omplai! that our reedom 8a!!ot be 8ombi!ed 6ith the a8t that all our a8ts are part o the great 8hai!
o !atural determi!ism- they se8retly make a! u!6arra!ted o!tologi8al assumptio!+ irst- they assume
that 6e @the Sel- the ree age!tA someho6 sta!d outside reality- the! they go o! to 8omplai! about ho6
they eel oppressed by the !otio! that reality i! its determi!ism 8o!trols them totally7 This is 6hat is
6ro!g 6ith the !otio! o us bei!g Jimpriso!edK by the 8hai!s o !atural determi!ism+ 6e thereby
obus8ate the a8t that 6e are part of reality- that the @possible- lo8alA 8o!li8t bet6ee! our JreeK
strivi!g a!d the e?ter!al reality that resists it is a 8o!li8t i!here!t i! reality itsel7 That is to say- there
is !othi!g JoppressiveK or J8o!strai!i!gK about the a8t that our i!!ermost strivi!gs are
@preAdetermi!ed+ 6he! 6e eel th6arted i! our reedom by the pressure o e?ter!al reality- there must
be somethi!g i! us- some desire or strivi!g- 6hi8h is thus th6arted- but 6here do su8h strivi!gs 8ome
rom i !ot this same realityM Hur Jree 6illK does !ot i! some mysterious 6ay Jdisturb the !atural
8ourse o thi!gs-K it is part a!d par8el o this 8ourse7 For us to be JtrulyK a!d Jradi8allyK ree 6ould
e!tail that there be !o positive 8o!te!t i!volved i! our ree a8tEi 6e 6a!t !othi!g Je?ter!alK a!d
parti8ular or give! to determi!e our behavior- the! Jthis 6ould i!volve bei!g ree o every part o
ourselves7K
"1
/he! a determi!ist 8laims that our ree 8hoi8e is Jdetermi!ed-K this does !ot mea! that
our ree 6ill is someho6 8o!strai!ed- that 6e are or8ed to a8t against our 6illE6hat is Jdetermi!edK
is the very thi!g that 6e 6a!t to do Jreely-K that is- 6ithout bei!g th6arted by e?ter!al obsta8les7
To retur! to =all6ard+ 6hile he is right to emphasiUe that- or GeleuUe- reedom Jis!It a matter
o huma! liberty but o liberatio! from the huma!-K
"2
o ully submergi!g o!esel i! the 8reative lu?
o absolute .ie- the politi8al 8o!8lusio! he dra6s rom this seems too a8ile+

The immediate politi8al impli8atio! o su8h a positio! O is 8lear e!ough+ si!8e a ree mode or mo!ad
is simply o!e that has elimi!ated its resista!8e to the sovereig! 6ill that 6orks through it- so the! it
ollo6s that the more absolute the sovereig!Is po6er- the more JreeK are those subje8t to it7
""
3ut does =all6ard !ot overlook here the retroa8tive moveme!t o! 6hi8h GeleuUe also i!sists-
!amely ho6 this eter!al pure past 6hi8h ully determi!es us is itsel subje8ted to retroa8tive 8ha!geM
/e are thus simulta!eously less ree a!d more ree tha! 6e thi!k+ 6e are thoroughly passive-
determi!ed by a!d depe!de!t o! the past- but 6e have the reedom to dei!e the s8ope o this
determi!atio!- to @overAdetermi!e the past 6hi8h 6ill determi!e us7 GeleuUe is here u!e?pe8tedly 8lose
to *a!t- or 6hom 9 am determi!ed by 8auses- but 9 @8a!A retroa8tively determi!e 6hi8h 8auses 6ill
determi!e me+ 6e- subje8ts- are passively ae8ted by pathologi8al obje8ts a!d motivatio!sT but- i! a
rele?ive 6ay- 6e have the mi!imal po6er to a88ept @or reje8tA bei!g ae8ted i! this 6ay- that is- 6e
retroa8tively determi!e the 8auses allo6ed to determi!e us- or- at least- the mode o this li!ear
determi!atio!7 JFreedomK is thus i!here!tly retroa8tive+ at its most eleme!tary- it is !ot simply a ree
a8t 6hi8h- out o !o6here- starts a !e6 8ausal li!k- but a retroa8tive a8t o determi!i!g 6hi8h li!k or
seNue!8e o !e8essities 6ill determi!e us7 =ere- o!e should add a =egelia! t6ist to Spi!oUa+ reedom is
!ot simply Jre8og!iUed>k!o6! !e8essity-K but re8og!iUed>assumed !e8essity- the !e8essity
8o!stituted>a8tualiUed through this re8og!itio!7 So 6he! GeleuUe reers to CroustIs des8riptio! o
Vi!teuilIs musi8 that hau!ts S6a!!EJas i the perormers !ot so mu8h played the little phrase as
e?e8uted the rites !e8essary or it to appearKEhe is evoki!g the !e8essary illusio!+ ge!erati!g the
se!se:eve!t is e?perie!8ed as ritualisti8 evo8atio! o a pre:e?isti!g eve!t- as i the eve!t 6as already
there- 6aiti!g or our 8all i! its virtual prese!8e7
The key philosophi8al impli8atio! o =egelia! retroa8tivity is that it u!dermi!es the reig! o the
Cri!8iple o Sui8ie!t Feaso!+ this pri!8iple o!ly holds i! the 8o!ditio! o li!ear 8ausality 6here the
sum o past 8auses determi!es a uture eve!tEretroa8tivity mea!s that the set o @past- give!A reaso!s
is !ever 8omplete a!d Jsui8ie!t-K si!8e the past reaso!s are retroa8tively a8tivated by 6hat is- 6ithi!
the li!ear order- their ee8t7
CHANGING THE DESTIN$

/hat dire8tly reso!ates i! this topi8 is- o 8ourse- the Crotesta!t moti o predesti!atio!+ ar
rom bei!g a rea8tio!ary theologi8al moti- predesti!atio! is a key eleme!t o the materialist theory o
se!se- o! 8o!ditio! that 6e read it alo!g the li!es o the GeleuUia! oppositio! bet6ee! the virtual a!d
the a8tual7 That is to say- predesti!atio! does !ot mea! that our ate is sealed i! a! a8tual te?t e?isti!g
rom eter!ity i! the divi!e mi!dT the te?ture 6hi8h predesti!es us belo!gs to the purely virtual eter!al
past 6hi8h- as su8h- 8a! be retroa8tively re6ritte! by our a8ts7 9! predesti!atio!- ate is substa!tialiUed
i!to a de8isio! that pre8edes the pro8ess- so that the burde! o i!dividualsI a8tivities is !ot to
perormatively 8o!stitute their ate- but to dis8over @or guessA their pre:e?isti!g ate7 /hat is thereby
obus8ated is the diale8ti8al reversal o 8o!ti!ge!8y i!to !e8essity- that is- the 6ay the out8ome o a
8o!ti!ge!t pro8ess takes o! the appeara!8e o !e8essity+ thi!gs retroa8tively J6ill have bee!K
!e8essary7
This- perhaps- 6ould have bee! the ultimate mea!i!g o the si!gularity o DhristIs i!8ar!atio!+
it is a! act 6hi8h radi8ally 8ha!ges our desti!y7 Crior to Dhrist- 6e 6ere determi!ed by Fate- 8aught up
i! the 8y8le o si! a!d its payme!tT but DhristIs erasure o our past si!s mea!s pre8isely that his
sa8rii8e 8ha!ges our virtual past a!d thus sets us ree7 /he! GeleuUe 6rites that Jmy 6ou!d e?isted
beore meT 9 6as bor! to embody it-K does !ot this variatio! o! the theme o the Dheshire 8at a!d its
smile rom +lice in Wonderland @the 8at 6as bor! to embody its smileA provide a pere8t ormula or
DhristIs sa8rii8e+ Dhrist 6as bor! to embody his 6ou!d- to be 8ru8iiedM The problem is 6ith the
literal teleologi8al readi!g o this propositio!+ as i the a8tual deeds o a perso! merely a8tualiUe their
atemporal:eter!al ate i!s8ribed i! their virtual idea+

DaesarIs o!ly real task is to be8ome 6orthy o the eve!ts he has bee! 8reated to embody7 +mor fatiF
/hat Daesar a8tually does adds !othi!g to 6hat he virtually is7 /he! Daesar a8tually 8rosses the
Fubi8o! this i!volves !o deliberatio! or 8hoi8e si!8e it is simply part o the e!tire- immediate
e?pressio! o Daesar!ess- it simply u!rolls or Ju!olds somethi!g that 6as e!8ompassed or all times i!
the !otio! o Daesar7K
"(
3ut 6hat about the retroa8tivity o a gesture 6hi8h @reA8o!stitutes this past itselM This- perhaps-
is the most su88i!8t dei!itio! o 6hat a! authe!ti8 act is+ i! our ordi!ary a8tivity- 6e ee8tively just
ollo6 the @virtual:a!tasmati8A 8oordi!ates o our ide!tity- 6hile a! a8t proper i!volves the parado? o
a! a8tual move 6hi8h @retroa8tivelyA 8ha!ges the very virtual Jtra!s8e!de!talK 8oordi!ates o its
age!tIs bei!gEor- i! Freudia! terms- 6hi8h !ot o!ly 8ha!ges the a8tuality o our 6orld but also
Jmoves its u!dergrou!d7K /e have thus a ki!d o rele?ive Joldi!g ba8k o the 8o!ditio! o! to the
give! it 6as the 8o!ditio! orK+
"#
6hile the pure past is the tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!ditio! or our a8ts- our
a8ts !ot o!ly 8reate !e6 a8tual reality- they also retroa8tively 8ha!ge this very 8o!ditio!7
This bri!gs us to the GeleuUia! !otio! o the sign+ a8tual e?pressio!s are sig!s o a virtual 9dea
6hi8h is !ot a! ideal but- rather- a problem7 Dommo! se!se tells us that there are true a!d alse
solutio!s to every problemT or GeleuUe- o! the 8o!trary- there are !o dei!itive solutio!s to problems-
solutio!s are just repeated attempts to deal 6ith the problem- 6ith its impossible:real7 )roblems
themselves! not solutions! are true or falseF 0a8h solutio! !ot o!ly rea8ts to JitsK problem- but
retroa8tively redei!es it- ormulati!g it rom 6ithi! its o6! spe8ii8 horiUo!7 /hi8h is 6hy the
problem is u!iversal a!d the solutio!s or a!s6ers are parti8ular7 GeleuUe is here u!e?pe8tedly 8lose to
=egel+ or =egel- the 9dea o the State- say- is a problem- a!d ea8h spe8ii8 orm o the state @A!8ie!t
republi8- eudal mo!ar8hy- moder! demo8ra8y OA simply proposes a solutio!- redei!i!g the problem
itsel7 The passage to the !e?t JhigherK stage o the diale8ti8al pro8ess o88urs pre8isely 6he!- i!stead
o 8o!ti!ui!g to sear8h or a solutio!- 6e problematiUe the problem itsel- aba!do!i!g its termsE6he!-
or e?ample- i!stead o 8o!ti!ui!g to sear8h or a JtrueK State- 6e drop the very reere!8e to the State
a!d look or a 8ommu!al e?iste!8e beyo!d the State7 A problem is thus !ot o!ly Jsubje8tive-K !ot just
epistemologi8al- a problem or the subje8t 6ho tries to solve itT it is stricto sensu o!tologi8al- i!s8ribed
i!to the thi!g itsel+ the stru8ture o reality is Jproblemati87K That is to say- a8tual reality 8a! o!ly be
grasped as a series o a!s6ers to a virtual problemEi! GeleuUeIs readi!g o biology- or i!sta!8e- the
developme!t o the eye as a! orga! must be grasped as a solutio! to the problem o ho6 to deal 6ith
light7 A!d this bri!gs us ba8k to the sig!Ea8tual reality appears as a Jsig!K 6he! it is per8eived as a!
a!s6er to virtual problem+ J4either the problem !or the Nuestio! is a subje8tive determi!atio! marki!g
a mome!t o i!sui8ie!8y i! k!o6ledge7 Croblemati8 stru8ture is part o obje8ts themselves- allo6i!g
them to be grasped as sig!s7K
"'
This e?plai!s the stra!ge 6ay i! 6hi8h GeleuUe opposes sig!s a!d represe!tatio!s+ or 8ommo!
se!se- a me!tal represe!tatio! dire8tly reprodu8es the 6ay a thi!g is- 6hile a sig! just poi!ts to6ards it-
desig!ati!g it 6ith a @more or lessA arbitrary sig!iier7 @9! a represe!tatio! o a table- 9 Jsee dire8tlyK a
table- 6hile its sig! just poi!ts to6ards the table7A For GeleuUe- o! the 8o!trary- represe!tatio!s are
mediate- 6hile sig!s are dire8t- a!d the task o a 8reative thought is that o Jmaki!g moveme!t itsel a
6ork- 6ithout i!terpositio!sT o substituti!g dire8t sig!s or mediate represe!tatio!s7K
"$

Feprese!tatio!s are igures o obje8ts as obje8tive e!tities deprived o their virtual support or
ba8kgrou!d- a!d 6e pass rom represe!tatio! to sig! 6he! 6e are able to dis8er! i! a! obje8t that
6hi8h poi!ts to6ards its virtual grou!d- to6ards the problem 6ith regard to 6hi8h it is a! a!s6er7 To
put it su88i!8tly- every a!s6er is a sig! o its problem7 This bri!gs us to GeleuUeIs !otio! o the Jbli!d
seerK+ bli!d to a8tual reality- se!sible o!ly to the virtual dime!sio! o thi!gs7 GeleuUe resorts to a
6o!derul metaphor o a spider deprived o eyes a!d ears but i!i!itely se!sitive to 6hatever reso!ates
through its virtual 6eb7 As =all6ard paraphrases it+

A8tual or 8o!stituted orms slip through the 6eb a!d make !o impressio!- or the 6eb is desig!ed to
vibrate o!ly o! 8o!ta8t 6ith virtual or i!te!sive orms7 The more leeti!g or mole8ular the moveme!t-
the more i!te!se its reso!a!8e through the 6eb7 The 6eb respo!ds to the moveme!ts o a pure
multipli8ity beore it has take! o! a!y dei!ite shape7
"&
This bri!gs us to the 8e!tral problem o GeleuUeIs o!tology+ ho6 are the virtual a!d the a8tual
relatedM JA8tual thi!gs e?press 9deas but are !ot 8aused by them7K
"%
The !otio! o 8ausality is limited
to the i!tera8tio! o a8tual thi!gs a!d pro8essesT o! the other ha!d- this i!tera8tio! also 8auses virtual
e!tities @se!se- 9deasA+ GeleuUe is !ot a! idealist- Se!se is or him al6ays a! i!ee8tive- sterile shado6
a88ompa!yi!g a8tual thi!gs7 /hat this mea!s is that- or GeleuUe- @tra!s8e!de!talA genesis and
causality are totally opposed+ they move at diere!t levels+

A8tual thi!gs have a! ide!tity- but virtual o!es do !ot- they are pure variatio!s7 A! a8tual thi!g must
8ha!geEbe8ome somethi!g diere!tEi! order to e?press somethi!g7 /hereas- the e?pressed virtual
thi!g does !ot 8ha!geEo!ly its relatio! to other virtual thi!gs- other i!te!sities a!d 9deas 8ha!ges7
(0
=o6 does this relatio! 8ha!geM $nly through the changes in actual things which e&press Ideas!
since the entire generative power lies in actual things+ 9deas belo!g to the domai! o Se!se 6hi8h is
Jo!ly a vapor 6hi8h plays at the limit o thi!gs a!d 6ordsKT as su8h- Se!se is Jthe 9!ee8tual- a sterile
i!8orporeal deprived o its ge!erative po6er7K
(1
Thi!k o a group o dedi8ated i!dividuals ighti!g or
the 9dea o 8ommu!ism+ i! order to grasp their a8tivity- 6e have to take i!to a88ou!t the virtual 9dea7
3ut this 9dea is i! itsel sterile- it has !o proper 8ausality+ all 8ausality lies i! the i!dividuals 6ho
Je?pressK it7
The lesso! to be dra6! rom the basi8 parado? o Crotesta!tism @ho6 is it possible that a
religio! 6hi8h taught predesti!atio! sustai!ed 8apitalism- the greatest e?plosio! o huma! a8tivity a!d
reedom i! historyA is that reedom is !either grasped !e8essity @the vulgata rom Spi!oUa to =egel a!d
traditio!al ,ar?istsA !or overlooked @ig!oredA !e8essity @the thesis o the 8og!itive a!d brai! s8ie!8es+
reedom is the JuserIs illusio!K o our 8o!s8ious!ess- 6hi8h is u!a6are o the bio:!euro!al pro8esses
that determi!e itA- but a ecessity which is presupposed and9as un"nown9un"nowable7 /e k!o6 that
everythi!g is predetermi!ed- but 6e do !ot k!o6 what our predetermi!ed desti!y is- a!d it is this
u!8ertai!ty 6hi8h drives our i!8essa!t a8tivity7 FreudIs i!amous stateme!t Ja!atomy is desti!yK
should also be read alo!g these li!es- as a =egelia! spe8ulative judgme!t i! 6hi8h the predi8ate
Jpasses overK i!to the subje8t7 That is to say- its true mea!i!g is !ot the obvious o!e- the sta!dard target
o emi!ist 8ritiNue @Jthe a!atomi8al diere!8e bet6ee! the se?es dire8tly determi!es the diere!t
so8io:symboli8 roles o me! a!d 6ome!KA- but rather the opposite+ the JtruthK o a!atomy is Jdesti!y-K
i! other 6ords a symboli8 ormatio!7 9! the 8ase o se?ual ide!tity- a! a!atomi8 diere!8e is
Jsublated-K tur!ed i!to the medium o appeara!8e>e?pressio!Emore pre8isely- i!to the material
supportEo a 8ertai! symboli8 ormatio!7
This is ho6 o!e should diere!tiate histori8ity proper rom orga!i8 evolutio!7 9! the latter- a
u!iversal Cri!8iple is slo6ly a!d gradually diere!tiati!g itselT as su8h- it remai!s the 8alm-
u!derlyi!g- all:e!8ompassi!g grou!d that u!iies the bustli!g a8tivity o struggli!g i!dividuals- the
e!dless pro8ess o ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio! that is the J8y8le o lie7K 9! history proper- o! the
8o!trary- the u!iversal Cri!8iple is 8aught i! a! Ji!i!iteK struggle 6ith itselT that is- the struggle is
ea8h time a struggle or the ate o the u!iversality itsel7 9! orga!i8 lie- parti8ular mome!ts are i!
struggle 6ith o!e a!other- a!d through this struggle the )!iversal reprodu8es itselT i! Spirit- the
)!iversal is i! struggle 6ith itsel7
This is 6hy the emi!e!tly Jhistori8alK mome!ts are those marked by great 8ollisio!s i! 6hi8h a
6hole orm o lie is threate!ed- 6he! the established so8ial a!d 8ultural !orms !o lo!ger guara!tee a
mi!imum o stability a!d 8ohesio!T i! su8h ope! situatio!s- a !e6 orm o lie has to be i!ve!ted- a!d
it is at this poi!t that =egel lo8ates the role o great heroes7 They operate i! a pre:legal- stateless Uo!e+
their viole!8e is !ot bou!d by the usual moral rules- they e!or8e a !e6 order 6ith the subterra!ea!
vitality 6hi8h shatters all established orms7 A88ordi!g to the usual do&a o! =egel- heroes ollo6 their
i!sti!8tual passio!s- their true motis a!d goals are !ot 8lear to themselves- they are the u!8o!s8ious
i!strume!ts o a deeper histori8al !e8essity givi!g birth to a !e6 spiritual lie orm7 =o6ever- as
.ebru! poi!ts out- here o!e should !ot impute to =egel the sta!dard teleologi8al !otio! o a hidde!
ha!d o Feaso! pulli!g the stri!gs o the histori8al pro8ess- ollo6i!g a pla! established i! adva!8e a!d
usi!g the passio!s o i!dividuals as i!strume!ts or its impleme!tatio!7 First- si!8e the mea!i!g o their
a8ts is a priori i!a88essible to the i!dividuals 6ho a88omplish them- heroes i!8luded- there is !o
Js8ie!8e o politi8sK able to predi8t the 8ourse o eve!ts+ J!obody ever has the right to de8lare himsel a
depositary o the SpiritIs sel:k!o6ledge-K
(2
a!d this impossibility Jspares =egel the a!ati8ism o
Vobje8tive respo!sibilityIK
("
Ei! other 6ords- there is !o pla8e i! =egel or the ,ar?ist:Stali!ist igure
o the 8ommu!ist revolutio!ary 6ho u!dersta!ds the histori8al !e8essity a!d posits himsel as the
i!strume!t o its impleme!tatio!7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial to add a urther t6ist here+ i 6e merely assert
this impossibility- 6e are still J8o!8eivi!g the Absolute as Substa!8e- !ot as Subje8tKE6e are still
surmisi!g that there is some pre:e?isti!g Spirit imposi!g its substa!tial 4e8essity o! history- 6hile
a88epti!g that k!o6ledge o this 4e8essity is de!ied us7 To be 8o!siste!tly =egelia!- ho6ever- 6e
must take a 8ru8ial step urther a!d i!sist that histori8al 4e8essity does !ot pre:e?ist the 8o!ti!ge!t
pro8ess o its a8tualiUatio!- that is- that the histori8al pro8ess is also i! itsel Jope!-K u!de8idedEthis
8o!used mi?ture Jge!erates se!se insofar as it unravels itselfK+

9t is people- a!d they o!ly- 6ho make history- 6hile Spirit e?pli8ates itsel through this maki!g O The
poi!t is !ot- as i! a !aSve theodi8y- to i!d a justii8atio! or every eve!t7 9! a8tual time- !o heave!ly
harmo!y reso!ates i! the sou!d a!d ury7 9t is o!ly o!8e this tumult re8olle8ts itsel i! the past- o!8e
6hat took pla8e is 8o!8eived- that 6e 8a! say- to put it briely- that the J8ourse o =istoryK is a little bit
better outli!ed7 =istory ru!s or6ard o!ly or those 6ho look at it ba8k6ardsT it is li!ear progressio!
o!ly i! retrospe8t O =egelia! Jprovide!tial !e8essityK has so little authority that it seems as i it lear!s
rom the ru! o thi!gs i! the 6orld 6hi8h 6ere its goals7
((
This is ho6 o!e should read =egelIs thesis that- i! the 8ourse o the diale8ti8al developme!t-
thi!gs Jbe8ome 6hat they areK+ it is !ot that a temporal deployme!t merely a8tualiUes some pre:
e?isti!g atemporal 8o!8eptual stru8tureEthis atemporal 8o!8eptual stru8ture is itsel the result o
8o!ti!ge!t temporal de8isio!s7 .et us take a! e?emplary 8ase o a 8o!ti!ge!t de8isio! 6hose out8ome
dei!ed the age!tIs e!tire lieEDaesarIs 8rossi!g o the Fubi8o!+

9t is !ot e!ough to say that 8rossi!g the Fubi8o! is part o the 8omplete !otio! o Daesar7 H!e should
rather say that Daesar is dei!ed by the a8t that he 8rossed the Fubi8o!7 =is lie did!It ollo6 a
s8e!ario 6ritte! i! the book o some goddess+ there is !o book 6hi8h 6ould already have 8o!tai!ed the
relatio!s o DaesarIs lie- or the simple reaso! that his lie itsel is this book- a!d that- at every
mome!t- a! eve!t is i! itsel its o6! !arrative7
(#
3ut 6hy should 6e !ot the! say that there is simply !o atemporal 8o!8eptual stru8ture- that all
there is is a gradual temporal deployme!tM =ere 6e e!8ou!ter the properly diale8ti8al parado? 6hi8h
dei!es true histori8ity as opposed to evolutio!ist histori8ism- a!d 6hi8h 6as mu8h later- i! Fre!8h
stru8turalism- ormulated as the Jprima8y o sy!8hro!y over dia8hro!y7K )sually- this prima8y 6as
take! to mea! the ultimate de!ial o histori8ity i! stru8turalism+ a histori8al developme!t 8a! be
redu8ed to the @impere8tA temporal deployme!t o a pre:e?isti!g atemporal matri? o all possible
variatio!s>8ombi!atio!s7 This simplisti8 !otio! o the Jprima8y o sy!8hro!y over dia8hro!yK
overlooks the properly diale8ti8al poi!t- made lo!g ago by- amo!g others- T7 S7 0liot @see the lo!g
Nuote aboveA 6ith regard to ho6 ea8h truly !e6 artisti8 phe!ome!o! !ot o!ly desig!ates a break 6ith
the e!tire past- but retroa8tively 8ha!ges this past itsel7 At every histori8al 8o!ju!8ture- the prese!t is
!ot o!ly prese!t- it also e!8ompasses a perspe8tive o! the past imma!e!t to itEater the disi!tegratio!
o the Soviet )!io!- say- the H8tober Fevolutio! is !o lo!ger the same histori8al eve!t+ it is @rom the
triumpha!t liberal:8apitalist vie6A !o lo!ger the begi!!i!g o a !e6 progressive epo8h i! the history o
huma!ity- but the begi!!i!g o a 8atastrophi8 s6ervi!g o:8ourse o history 6hi8h rea8hed its e!d i!
1%%17
This is the ultimate lesso! o =egelIs a!ti:JmobilismK+ diale8ti8s has !othi!g 6hatsoever to do
6ith the histori8ist justii8atio! o a parti8ular politi8s or pra8ti8e at a 8ertai! stage o histori8al
developme!t- a justii8atio! 6hi8h may the! be lost at a later JhigherK stage7 Fea8ti!g to the revelatio!
o Stali!Is 8rimes at the t6e!tieth 8o!gress o the Soviet Dommu!ist Carty- 3re8ht !oted ho6 the same
politi8al age!t 6ho had earlier played a! importa!t role i! the revolutio!ary pro8ess @Stali!A had !o6
be8ome a! obsta8le to it- a!d praised this as a proper Jdiale8ti8alK i!sightEbut o!e should thoroughly
reje8t this logi87 9! the diale8ti8al a!alysis o history- o! the 8o!trary- ea8h !e6 JstageK Jre6rites the
pastK a!d retroa8tively de:legitimiUes the previous o!e7
THE OL OF MINER#A

3a8k to Daesar+ o!8e he 8rossed the Fubi8o!- his previous lie appeared i! a !e6 6ay- as a
preparatio! or his later 6orld:histori8al roleT that is- it 6as tra!sormed i!to part o a totally diere!t
lie story7 This is 6hat =egel 8alls JtotalityK or 6hat stru8turalism 8alls Jsy!8hro!i8 stru8tureK+ a
histori8al mome!t 6hi8h is !ot limited to the prese!t but i!8ludes its o6! past a!d uture- i! other
6ords- the 6ay the past a!d the uture appeared to a!d rom this mome!t7 The mai! impli8atio! o
8o!8eivi!g the symboli8 order as su8h a totality is that- ar rom redu8i!g it to a ki!d o tra!s8e!de!tal
a priori @a ormal !et6ork- give! i! adva!8e- 6hi8h limits the s8ope o huma! pra8ti8eA- o!e should
ollo6 .a8a! a!d o8us o! ho6 the gestures o symboliUatio! are e!t6i!ed 6ith a!d embedded i! the
pro8ess o 8olle8tive pra8ti8e7 /hat .a8a! elaborates as the Jt6oold mome!tK o the symboli8
u!8tio! rea8hes ar beyo!d the sta!dard theory o the perormative dime!sio! o spee8h- as developed
i! the traditio! rom 27 .7 Austi! to 2oh! Searle+

The symboli8 u!8tio! prese!ts itsel as a t6oold moveme!t i! the subje8t+ ma! makes his o6! a8tio!
i!to a! obje8t- but o!ly to retur! its ou!datio!al pla8e to it i! due time7 9! this eNuivo8atio!- operati!g
at every i!sta!t- lies the 6hole progress o a u!8tio! i! 6hi8h a8tio! a!d k!o6ledge alter!ate7
('
The histori8al e?ample evoked by .a8a! to 8lariy this Jt6oold moveme!tK is i!di8ative i! its
hidde! reere!8es+ Ji! phase o!e- a ma! 6ho 6orks at the level o produ8tio! i! our so8iety 8o!siders
himsel to belo!g to the ra!ks o the proletariatT i! phase t6o- i! the !ame o belo!gi!g to it- he joi!s i!
a ge!eral strike7K
($
.a8a!Is @impli8itA reere!8e here is to .ukh8sIs 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness- a
8lassi8 ,ar?ist 6ork rom 1%2" 6hose 6idely a88laimed Fre!8h tra!slatio! 6as published i! the mid:
1%#0s7 For .ukh8s- 8o!s8ious!ess is opposed to mere k!o6ledge o a! obje8t+ k!o6ledge is e?ter!al to
the k!o6! obje8t- 6hile 8o!s8ious!ess is i! itsel Jpra8ti8al-K a! a8t 6hi8h 8ha!ges its very obje8t7
@H!8e a 6orker J8o!siders himsel to belo!g to the ra!ks o the proletariat-K this 8ha!ges his very
reality+ he a8ts diere!tly7A H!e does somethi!g- o!e 8ou!ts o!esel as @de8lares o!eselA the o!e 6ho
did it- a!d- o! the base o this de8laratio!- o!e does somethi!g !e6Ethe proper mome!t o subje8tive
tra!sormatio! o88urs at the mome!t o de8laratio!- !ot at the mome!t o the a8t7 This rele?ive
mome!t o de8laratio! mea!s that every uttera!8e !ot o!ly tra!smits some 8o!te!t- but also-
simulta!eously- determines how the sub1ect relates to this content7 0ve! the most do6!:to:earth obje8ts
a!d a8tivities al6ays 8o!tai! su8h a de8larative dime!sio!- 6hi8h 8o!stitutes the ideology o everyday
lie7
=o6ever- .ukh8s remai!s all too idealist 6he! he proposes simply repla8i!g the =egelia! Spirit
6ith the proletariat as the Subje8t:Hbje8t o =istory+ .ukh8s is here !ot really =egelia!- but a pre:
=egelia! idealist7
(&
H!e is eve! tempted to talk here o ,ar?Is Jidealist reversal o =egelK+ i! 8o!trast
to =egel- 6ho 6as 6ell a6are that the o6l o ,i!erva takes 6i!g o!ly at dusk- ater the a8tEthat
Thought ollo6s 3ei!g @6hi8h is 6hy- or =egel- there 8a! be !o s8ie!tii8 i!sight i!to the uture o
so8ietyAE,ar? reasserts the prima8y o Thought+ the o6l o ,i!erva @1erma! 8o!templative
philosophyA should be repla8ed by the si!gi!g o the 1aeli8 rooster @Fre!8h revolutio!ary thoughtA
a!!ou!8i!g the proletaria! revolutio!Ei! the proletaria! revolutio!ary a8t- Thought 6ill pre8ede
3ei!g7 ,ar? thus sees i! =egelIs moti o the o6l o ,i!erva a! i!di8atio! o the se8ret positivism o
=egelIs idealist spe8ulatio!+ =egel leaves reality the 6ay it is7
The =egelia! reply is that the delay o 8o!s8ious!ess does !ot imply a !aSve obje8tivism 6hi8h
8laims that 8o!s8ious!ess is 8aught i! a tra!s8e!de!t obje8tive pro8ess7 A =egelia! a88epts .ukh8sIs
!otio! o 8o!s8ious!ess as opposed to mere k!o6ledge o a! obje8tT 6hat is i!a88essible to
8o!s8ious!ess is the impa8t o the subje8tIs a8t itsel- its o6! i!s8riptio! i!to obje8tivity7 H 8ourse
thought is imma!e!t to reality a!d 8ha!ges it- but !ot as ully sel:tra!spare!t sel:8o!s8ious!ess- !ot
as a! A8t a6are o its o6! impa8t7 ,ar? himsel !o!etheless 8omes 8lose to this parado? o !o!:
teleologi8al retroa8tivity 6he!- i! his (rundrisse ma!us8ripts- apropos the !otio! o labor- he poi!ted
out ho6

eve! the most abstra8t 8ategories- despite their validityEpre8isely be8ause o their abstra8t!essEor
all epo8hs- are !evertheless- i! the spe8ii8 8hara8ter o this abstra8tio!- themselves like6ise a produ8t
o histori8 relatio!s- a!d possess their ull validity o!ly or a!d 6ithi! these relatio!s73ourgeois so8iety
is the most developed a!d the most 8omple? histori8 orga!iUatio! o produ8tio!7 The 8ategories 6hi8h
e?press its relatio!s- the 8omprehe!sio! o its stru8ture- thereby also allo6s i!sights i!to the stru8ture
a!d the relatio!s o produ8tio! o all the va!ished so8ial ormatio!s out o 6hose rui!s a!d eleme!ts it
built itsel up- 6hose partly still u!8o!Nuered rem!a!ts are 8arried alo!g 6ithi! it- 6hose mere !ua!8es
have developed e?pli8it sig!ii8a!8e 6ithi! it- et87 =uma! a!atomy 8o!tai!s a key to the a!atomy o
the ape7 The i!timatio!s o higher developme!t amo!g the subordi!ate a!imal spe8ies- ho6ever- 8a! be
u!derstood o!ly ater the higher developme!t is already k!o6!7
(%
9! short- to paraphrase Cierre 3ayard- 6hat ,ar? is sayi!g here is that the a!atomy o the ape-
although it 6as ormed earlier i! time tha! the a!atomy o ma!- !o!etheless i! a 8ertai! 6ay
plagiari2es by anticipation the anatomy of man7 The Nuestio!- ho6ever- remai!s+ does =egelIs thought
harbor su8h a! ope!!ess to6ards the uture- or does the 8losure o his System a priori pre8lude itM 9!
spite o misleadi!g appeara!8es- 6e should a!s6er yes- =egelIs thought is ope! to6ards the uture- but
pre8isely o! a88ou!t o its 8losure7 That is to say- =egelIs ope!i!g to6ards the uture is a negative+ it is
arti8ulated i! his !egative>limiti!g stateme!ts like the amous Jo!e 8a!!ot jump ahead o o!eIs timeK
rom his )hilosophy of 7ight7 The impossibility o dire8tly borro6i!g rom the uture is grou!ded i!
the very a8t o retroa8tivity 6hi8h makes the uture a priori u!predi8table+ 6e 8a!!ot 8limb o!to our
o6! shoulders a!d see ourselves Jobje8tively-K i! terms o the 6ay 6e it i!to the te?ture o history-
be8ause this te?ture is agai! a!d agai! retroa8tively rearra!ged7 9! theology- *arl 3arth e?te!ded this
u!predi8tability to the .ast 2udgme!t itsel- emphasiUi!g ho6 the i!al revelatio! o 1od 6ill be totally
i!8omme!surable 6ith our e?pe8tatio!s+

1od is !ot hidde! to usT =e is revealed7 3ut 6hat a!d ho6 6e shall be i! Dhrist- a!d 6hat a!d ho6 the
/orld 6ill be i! Dhrist at the e!d o 1odIs road- at the breaki!g i! o redemptio! a!d 8ompletio!- that
is !ot revealed to usT that is hidde!7 .et us be ho!est+ 6e do !ot k!o6 6hat 6e are sayi!g 6he! 6e
speak o 2esus DhristIs 8omi!g agai! i! judgme!t- a!d o the resurre8tio! o the dead- o eter!al lie
a!d eter!al death7 That 6ith all these there 6ill be bou!d up a pier8i!g revelatio!Ea seei!g- 8ompared
to 6hi8h all our prese!t visio! 6ill have bee! bli!d!essEis too ote! testiied i! S8ripture or us to eel
6e ought to prepare ourselves or it7 For 6e do !ot k!o6 6hat 6ill be revealed 6he! the last 8overi!g
is removed rom our eyes- rom all eyes+ ho6 6e shall behold o!e a!other a!d 6hat 6e shall be to o!e
a!otherEme! o today a!d me! o past 8e!turies a!d mille!!ia- a!8estors a!d des8e!da!ts- husba!ds
a!d 6ives- 6ise a!d oolish- oppressors a!d oppressed- traitors a!d betrayed- murderers a!d murdered-
/est a!d 0ast- 1erma!s a!d others- Dhristia!s- 2e6s- a!d heathe!- orthodo? a!d hereti8s- Datholi8s
a!d Crotesta!ts- .uthera!s a!d FeormedT upo! 6hat divisio!s a!d u!io!s- 6hat 8o!ro!tatio!s a!d
8ross:8o!!e8tio!s the seals o all books 6ill be ope!edT ho6 mu8h 6ill seem small a!d u!importa!t to
us the!- ho6 mu8h 6ill o!ly the! appear great a!d importa!tT or 6hat surprises o all ki!ds 6e must
prepare ourselves7 /e also do !ot k!o6 6hat 4ature- as the 8osmos i! 6hi8h 6e have lived a!d still
live here a!d !o6- 6ill be or us the!T 6hat the 8o!stellatio!s- the sea- the broad valleys a!d heights-
6hi8h 6e see a!d k!o6 !o6- 6ill say a!d mea! the!7
#0
/ith this i!sight- it be8omes 8lear ho6 alse- ho6 Jall too huma!-K is the ear that the guilty
6ill !ot be properly pu!ishedEhere- espe8ially- 6e must aba!do! our e?pe8tatio!s+ JStra!ge
Dhristia!ity- 6hose most pressi!g a!?iety seems to be that 1odIs gra8e might prove to be all too ree
o! this side- that hell- i!stead o bei!g populated 6ith so ma!y people- might some day prove to be
emptyRK
#1
A!d the same u!8ertai!ty holds or the Dhur8h itselEit possesses !o superior k!o6ledge-
it is like a postma! 6ho delivers the mail 6ith !o idea 6hat it says+ JThe Dhur8h 8a! o!ly deliver it the
6ay a postma! delivers his mailT the Dhur8h is !ot asked 6hat it thi!ks it is thereby starti!g- or 6hat it
makes o the message7 The less it makes o it a!d the less it leaves o! it its o6! i!gerpri!ts- the more it
simply ha!ds it o! as it has re8eived itEa!d so mu8h the better7K
#2
There is o!ly o!e u!8o!ditio!al
8ertai!ty i! all thisEthe 8ertai!ty o 2esus Dhrist as our savior- 6hi8h is a Jrigid desig!atorK remai!i!g
the same i! all possible 6orlds+

/e k!o6 just o!e thi!g+ that 2esus Dhrist is the same also i! eter!ity- a!d that =is gra8e is 6hole a!d
8omplete- e!duri!g through time i!to eter!ity- i!to the !e6 6orld o 1od 6hi8h 6ill e?ist a!d be
re8og!iUed i! a totally diere!t 6ay- that it is u!8o!ditio!al a!d he!8e is 8ertai!ly tied to !o
purgatories- tutori!g sessio!s- or reormatories i! the hereater7
#"
4o 6o!der =egel ormulated this same limitatio! apropos politi8s+ espe8ially as 8ommu!ists-
6e should abstai! rom a!y positive imagi!atio! o the uture 8ommu!ist so8iety7 /e are- o 8ourse-
borro6i!g rom the uture- but ho6 6e are doi!g so 6ill o!ly be8ome readable o!8e the uture is here-
so 6e should !ot put too mu8h hope i! the desperate sear8h or the Jgerms o 8ommu!ismK i! todayIs
so8iety7
9s the ultimate 8o!seNue!8e o our a6are!ess o the Jretroversive ee8tK thus a !egative o!eM
Should 6e limit- reje8t eve!- ambitious so8ial a8tio!s- si!8e they al6ays- or stru8tural reaso!s- lead to
u!i!te!ded @a!d as su8h pote!tially 8atastrophi8A resultsM A urther disti!8tio! has to be dra6! here+
bet6ee! the Jope!!essK o the o!goi!g symboli8 a8tivity 6hi8h is 8aught up i! the Jretroversive
ee8t-K 6ith the mea!i!g o ea8h o its eleme!ts de8ided retroa8tively- a!d the a8t i! a mu8h stro!ger
se!se o the term7 9! the irst 8ase- the u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8es o our a8ts are simply due to the big
Hther- the 8omple? symboli8 !et6ork 6hi8h overdetermi!es @a!d thus displa8esA their mea!i!g7 9! the
se8o!d 8ase- the u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8es emerge rom the very ailure o the big Hther- that is- rom
the 6ay our a8t !ot o!ly relies o! the big Hther- but radi8ally 8halle!ges a!d tra!sorms it7 The
a6are!ess that the po6er o a proper a8t is to retroa8tively 8reate its o6! 8o!ditio!s o possibility
should !ot make us araid to embra8e 6hat- prior to the a8t- appears as impossible+ o!ly i! this 6ay
does our a8t tou8h the Feal7 Feplyi!g to 2udith 3utlerIs reproa8h that it is !ot 8lear to 6hat moral or
politi8al e!d his eort at e?plori!g a!d problematiUi!g liberal !otio!s o reedom a!d justi8e is
dire8ted- Talal Asad oers a 6o!derul =egelia! a!s6er+

there 8a! be !o abstra8t a!s6er to this Nuestio! be8ause it is pre8isely the impli8atio!s o thi!gs said
a!d do!e i! diere!t 8ir8umsta!8es that o!e tries to u!dersta!d O o!e should be prepared or the a8t
that 6hat o!e aims at i! o!eIs thi!ki!g may be less sig!ii8a!t tha! 6here o!e e!ds up O i! the
pro8ess o thi!ki!g o!e should be ope! to e!di!g up i! u!a!ti8ipated pla8esE6hether these produ8e
satisa8tio! or desire- dis8omort or horror7
#(
/e are ree o!ly agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o this !o!:tra!spare!8y+ i it 6ere possible or us to
ully predi8t the 8o!seNue!8es o our a8ts- our reedom 6ould ee8tively be o!ly Jk!o6! !e8essityK i!
the pseudo:=egelia! 6ay- or it 6ould 8o!sist i! reely 8hoosi!g a!d 6a!ti!g 6hat 6e k!o6 to be
!e8essary7 9! this se!se- reedom a!d !e8essity 6ould ully 8oi!8ide+ 9 a8t reely 6he! 9 k!o6i!gly
ollo6 my i!!er !e8essity- the i!stigatio!s that 9 i!d i! mysel as my true substa!tial !ature7 3ut i this
is the 8ase- 6e are steppi!g ba8k rom =egel to Aristotle- or 6e are !o lo!ger deali!g 6ith the
=egelia! subje8t 6ho produ8es @JpositsKA its o6! 8o!te!t- but 6ith a! age!t be!t o! a8tualiUi!g its
imma!e!t pote!tials- its positive Jesse!tial or8es-K as the you!g ,ar? put it i! his deeply Aristotelia!
8ritiNue o =egel7 /hat gets lost here is the diale8ti8s o the 8o!stitutive retroa8tivity o se!se- o the
8o!ti!uous retroa8tive @reAtotaliUatio! o our e?perie!8e7
Su8h ope!!ess or radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y is dii8ult to mai!tai!Eeve! a ratio!alist like =abermas
6as !ot able to do so7 =is late i!terest i! religio! breaks 6ith the traditio!al liberal 8o!8er! or the
huma!ist- spiritual- et87- 8o!te!t hidde! i! the religious ormT 6hat i!terests him is this orm itsel+ i!
parti8ular- amo!g those 6ho really u!dame!tally believe a!d are ready to put their lives at stake or
their belies- displayi!g the ra6 e!ergy a!d u!8o!ditio!al 8ommitme!t missi!g rom the a!emi8
s8epti8al:liberal sta!8eEas i the i!lu? o su8h u!8o!ditio!al e!gageme!t 8ould revitaliUe the post:
politi8al dessi8atio! o demo8ra8y7 =abermas is rea8ti!g here to the same problem as Dha!tal ,oue
does 6ith her Jago!isti8 pluralismKE!amely- ho6 to rei!trodu8e passio! i!to politi8s7 9s he !ot-
ho6ever- thereby e!gaged i! a ki!d o ideologi8al vampirism- su8ki!g the e!ergy rom !aSve believers
6ithout bei!g ready to aba!do! his o6! basi8 se8ular:liberal sta!8e- so that ull religious belie retai!s
a ki!d o as8i!ati!g a!d mysterious Hther!essM As =egel already sho6ed apropos the diale8ti8 o
0!lighte!me!t a!d aith i! his )henomenology of Spirit- su8h a! oppositio! o ormal 0!lighte!me!t
a!d u!dame!tal:substa!tial belies is alse- a! u!te!able ideologi8o:e?iste!tial positio!7 /hat should
be do!e is to ully assume the ide!tity o the t6o opposed mome!ts- 6hi8h is pre8isely 6hat
apo8alypti8 JDhristia! materialismK 8a! do+ it bri!gs together the reje8tio! o divi!e Hther!ess a!d the
u!8o!ditio!al 8ommitme!t7
9t is- ho6ever- at this very poi!tEater ully 8o!8edi!g =egelIs radi8al break 6ith traditio!al
metaphysi8al theodi8y- a!d ully admitti!g =egelIs ope!!ess to6ards the yet:to:8omeEthat .ebru!
makes his 8riti8al move7 .ebru!Is u!dame!tal 4ietUs8hea! strategy is- irst- to admit the radi8al !ature
o =egelIs u!dermi!i!g o traditio!al metaphysi8s- but the!- i! a 8ru8ial se8o!d step- to demo!strate
ho6 this radi8al sa8rii8e o metaphysi8al 8o!te!t saves the mi!imal orm o metaphysi8s7 The
a88usatio!s 8o!8er!i!g =egelIs theodi8y- o 8ourse- all short+ there is !o substa!tial 1od 6ho 6rites
the s8ript o =istory i! adva!8e a!d 6at8hes over its realiUatio!T the situatio! is ope!- truth emerges
o!ly through the very pro8ess o its deployme!t- a!d so o! a!d so orthEbut 6hat =egel !o!etheless
mai!tai!s is the mu8h deeper presuppositio! that- as dusk alls over the eve!ts o the day- the owl of
Minerva will ta"e wing- that there al6ays is a story to be told at the e!d- a story 6hi8h @Jretroa8tivelyK
a!d J8o!ti!ge!tlyK as mu8h as o!e 6a!tsA re8o!stitutes the Se!se o the pre8edi!g pro8ess7 .ike6ise-
6ith regard to domi!atio!- =egel is o 8ourse agai!st every orm o despoti8 domi!atio!- so the 8ritiNue
o his thought as a divi!iUatio! o the Crussia! mo!ar8hy is ridi8ulousT ho6ever- his assertio! o
subje8tive reedom 8omes 6ith a 8at8h+ it is the reedom o the subje8t 6ho u!dergoes a viole!t
Jtra!substa!tiatio!K rom the i!dividual stu8k o! his parti8ularity to the u!iversal subje8t 6ho
re8og!iUes i! the State the substa!8e o his o6! bei!g7 The mirror:obverse o this mortii8atio! o
i!dividuality as the pri8e to be paid or the rise o the JtrulyK ree u!iversal subje8t is that the StateIs
po6er retai!s its ull authorityEall that 8ha!ges is that this authority @as i! the e!tire traditio! rom
Clato o!6ardsA loses its tyra!!i8al:8o!ti!ge!t 8hara8ter a!d be8omes a ratio!ally justiied po6er7
The Nuestio! is thus 6hether or !ot =egel is ee8tively pursui!g a desperate strategy o
sa8rii8i!g everythi!g- all metaphysi8al 8o!te!t- i! order to save the esse!tial- the orm itsel @the orm
o a retrospe8tive ratio!al re8o!stru8tio!- the orm o authority 6hi8h imposes o! the subje8t the
sa8rii8e o all parti8ular 8o!te!t- et87A7 Hr is it rather that .ebru! himsel- i! maki!g this type o
reproa8h- e!a8ts the etishisti8 strategy o 1e sais bien! mais <uand meme 4EJ9 k!o6 very 6ell that
=egel goes to the e!d i! destroyi!g metaphysi8al presuppositio!s- but !o!etheless OKM The a!s6er to
this ki!d o reproa8h takes the orm o a pure tautology 6hi8h marks the passage rom 8o!ti!ge!8y to
!e8essity+ there is a story to be told if there is a story to be told7 That is to say- if- due to 8o!ti!ge!8y- a
story emerges at the e!d- then this story 6ill appear as !e8essary7 5es- the story is !e8essary- but its
!e8essity is itsel 8o!ti!ge!t7
4evertheless- is there !ot a grai! o truth i! .ebru!Is 8riti8al poi!tM Goes =egel !ot ee8tively
presuppose that- 8o!ti!ge!t a!d ope! as history may be- a 8o!siste!t story 8a! al6ays be told ater the
eve!tM Hr- to put it i! .a8a!Is terms- is !ot the e!tire edii8e o =egelia! historiography based o! the
premise that- !o matter ho6 8o!used the eve!ts themselves- a sub1ect supposed to "now 6ill emerge at
the e!d- magi8ally 8o!verti!g !o!se!se i!to se!se- 8haos i!to a !e6 orderM Fe8all simply his
philosophy o history 6ith its !arrative o 6orld history as the story o the progress o reedom O A!d
is it !ot true that- i there is a lesso! to be lear!ed rom the t6e!tieth 8e!tury- it is that all the e?treme
phe!ome!a that o88urred i! it 8a! !ever be u!iied i! a si!gle e!8ompassi!g philosophi8al !arrativeM
H!e simply 8a!!ot 6rite a Jphe!ome!ology o the Spirit o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury-K u!iti!g
te8h!ologi8al progress- the rise o demo8ra8y- the ailed 8ommu!ist e?perime!t- the horrors o as8ism-
the gradual e!d o 8olo!ialism O 3ut 6hy !otM 9s this really the 8aseM /hat i o!e 8a! a!d should
6rite pre8isely su8h a =egelia! history o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury- this Jage o e?tremesK @0ri8
=obsba6mA- as a global !arrative delimited by t6o epo8hal 8o!stellatio!s- 6ith its starti!g poi!t i! the
@relativelyA lo!g pea8eul period o 8apitalist e?pa!sio! rom 1&(& till 1%1(- 6hose subterra!ea!
a!tago!isms the! e?ploded 6ith the First /orld /ar- a!d its 8o!8lusio! i! the o!goi!g global:
8apitalist J4e6 /orld HrderK 6hi8h emerged ater 1%%0- as a retur! to a !e6 all:e!8ompassi!g system
sig!ali!g a ki!d o =egelia! Je!d o history-K but 6hose a!tago!isms already a!!ou!8e !e6
e?plosio!sM Are the great reversals a!d u!e?pe8ted e?plosio!s o the topsy:turvy t6e!tieth 8e!tury- its
!umerous J8oi!8ide!8es o the oppositesKEthe reversal o liberal 8apitalism i!to as8ism- the eve!
more 6eird reversal o the H8tober Fevolutio! i!to the Stali!ist !ightmareE!ot the very privileged
stu 6hi8h seems to 8all or a =egelia! readi!gM /hat 6ould =egel have made o todayIs struggle o
liberalism agai!st u!dame!talist aithM H!e thi!g is sure+ he 6ould !ot have simply take! the side o
liberalism- but 6ould have i!sisted o! the Jmediatio!K o the opposites7
##
POTENTIALIT$ #ERS!S #IRT!ALIT$

Do!vi!8i!g as it may appear- .ebru!Is 8riti8al diag!osis o the =egelia! 6ager that there is
al6ays a story to tell !o!etheless o!8e agai! alls short+ .ebru! misses a! additio!al t6ist 6hi8h
8ompli8ates the image o =egel7 5es- =egel sublates time i! eter!ityEbut this sublatio! itsel has to
appear as @hi!ges o!A a 8o!ti!ge!t temporal eve!t7 5es- =egel sublates 8o!ti!ge!8y i! a u!iversal
ratio!al orderEbut this order itsel hi!ges o! a 8o!ti!ge!t e?8ess @the State as a ratio!al totality- say-
8a! o!ly a8tualiUe itsel through the Jirratio!alK igure o the ki!g at its headA7 5es- struggle is sublated
i! the pea8e o the re8o!8iliatio! @mutual a!!ihilatio!A o the opposites- but this re8o!8iliatio! itsel has
to appear as its opposite- as a! a8t o e?treme viole!8e7 So .ebru! is right i! emphasiUi!g that =egelIs
topi8 o the diale8ti8al struggle o the opposites is as ar as possible rom a! e!gaged attitude o Jtaki!g
sidesK+ or =egel- the JtruthK o the struggle is al6ays- 6ith a! i!e?orable !e8essity- the mutual
destru8tio! o the oppositesEthe JtruthK o a phe!ome!o! al6ays resides i! its sel:a!!ihilatio!- i! the
destru8tio! o its immediate bei!g7 3ut .ebru! here !o!etheless misses the parado? proper+ !ot o!ly
did =egel have !o problem taki!g sides @6ith a! ote! very viole!t partialityA i! the politi8al debates o
his time- his e!tire mode o thi!ki!g is deeply Jpolemi8alKEal6ays i!terve!i!g- atta8ki!g- taki!g
sides- a!d- as su8h- a lo!g 6ay rom the deta8hed positio! o /isdom observi!g the o!goi!g struggle
rom a !eutral dista!8e- a6are o its !ullity sub specie aeternitatis7 For =egel- the true @J8o!8reteKA
u!iversality is a88essible o!ly rom a! e!gaged JpartialK sta!dpoi!t7
The =egelia! relatio!ship bet6ee! !e8essity a!d reedom is usually read i! terms o their
ultimate 8oi!8ide!8e+ true reedom has !othi!g to do 6ith 8apri8ious 8hoi8eT it mea!s the priority o
sel:relati!g to relati!g:to:otherT i! other 6ords- a! e!tity is ree 6he! it 8a! deploy its imma!e!t
pote!tial 6ithout bei!g impeded by a!y e?ter!al obsta8le7 From here- it is easy to develop the sta!dard
argume!t agai!st =egel+ his system is a ully JsaturatedK set o 8ategories- 6ith !o pla8e or
8o!ti!ge!8y a!d i!determi!a8y- or i! =egelIs logi8- ea8h 8ategory ollo6s 6ith a! i!e?orable
imma!e!t:logi8al !e8essity rom the pre8edi!g o!e- 6ith the e!tire series o 8ategories ormi!g a sel:
e!8losed /hole7 /e 8a! see !o6 6hat this argume!t misses+ the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess is !ot
this JsaturatedK- sel:8o!tai!ed- !e8essary /hole- but the open and contingent process through which
such a Whole forms itself7 9! other 6ords- the reproa8h 8o!uses bei!g 6ith be8omi!g+ it per8eives as a
i?ed order o 3ei!g @the !et6ork o 8ategoriesA 6hat is or =egel the pro8ess o 3e8omi!g 6hi8h-
retroactively- e!ge!ders its !e8essity7
The same poi!t 8a! also be made i! terms o the disti!8tio! bet6ee! pote!tiality a!d virtuality7
Wue!ti! ,eillassou? has outli!ed the 8o!tours o a post:metaphysi8al materialist o!tology 6hose basi8
premise is the Da!toria! multipli8ity o i!i!ities 6hi8h 8a!!ot be totaliUed i!to a! all:e!8ompassi!g
H!e7 =e relies here o! 3adiou- 6ho also poi!ted out ho6 Da!torIs great materialist breakthrough
8o!8er!s the status o i!i!ite !umbers @a!d it 6as pre8isely be8ause this breakthrough 6as materialist
that it 8aused so mu8h psy8hi8 trauma or Da!tor- a devout Datholi8A+ prior to Da!tor- the 9!i!ite 6as
li!ked to the H!e- the 8o!8eptual orm o 1od i! religio! a!d metaphysi8sT ater Da!tor- the 9!i!ite
e!ters the domai! o the ,ultipleEit implies the a8tual e?iste!8e o i!i!ite multipli8ities- as 6ell as a!
i!i!ite !umber o diere!t i!i!ities7
#'
Goes- the!- the 8hoi8e bet6ee! materialism a!d idealism
8o!8er! the most basi8 s8heme o the relatio!ship bet6ee! multipli8ity a!d the H!e i! the order o the
sig!iierM 9s the primordial a8t that o the multipli8ity o sig!iiers- 6hi8h is the! totaliUed through the
subtra8tio! o the H!eT or is the primordial a8t that o the Jbarred H!eKEmore pre8isely- that o the
te!sio! bet6ee! the H!e a!d its empty pla8e- o the Jprimordial repressio!K o the bi!ary sig!iier- so
that multipli8ity emerges to ill i! this empti!ess- the la8k o the bi!ary sig!iierM Although it may
appear that the irst versio! is materialist a!d the se8o!d idealist- o!e should resist this easy temptatio!+
rom a truly materialist positio!- multipli8ity is o!ly possible agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the VoidEit is
o!ly this 6hi8h makes the multipli8ity !o!:All7 The @GeleuUia!A Jge!esisK o the H!e out o primordial
multipli8ity- this prototype o JmaterialistK e?pla!atio! o ho6 the totaliUi!g H!e arises- should
thereore be reje8ted+ !o 6o!der that GeleuUe is simulta!eously the philosopher o the @vitalistA H!e7
/ith regard to its most eleme!tary ormal 8o!iguratio!- the 8ouple o idealism a!d materialism
8a! also be re!dered as the oppositio! bet6ee! primordial la8k a!d the sel:i!verted 8urvature o bei!g+
6hile- or Jidealism-K la8k @a hole or gap i! the order o bei!gA is the u!surpassable a8t @6hi8h 8a!
the! either be a88epted as su8h- or illed i! 6ith some imagi!ed positive 8o!te!tA- or Jmaterialism-K
la8k is ultimately the result o a 8urvature o bei!g- a Jperspe8tival illusio!-K a orm o appeara!8e o
the torsio! o bei!g7 9!stead o redu8i!g o!e to the other @i!stead o 8o!8eivi!g the 8urvature o bei!g
as a! attempt to obus8ate the primordial la8k- or the la8k itsel as a mis:apprehe!sio! o the 8urvatureA-
o!e should i!sist o! the irredu8ible paralla? gap bet6ee! the t6o7 9! psy8hoa!alyti8al terms- this is the
gap bet6ee! desire a!d drive- a!d here also- o!e should resist the temptatio! to give priority to o!e
term a!d redu8e the other to its stru8tural ee8t7 That is to say- o!e 8a! 8o!8eive the rotary motio! o
the drive as a 6ay to avoid the deadlo8k o desire+ the primordial la8k>impossibility- the a8t that the
obje8t o desire is al6ays missed- is 8o!verted i!to a proit 6he! the aim o libido is !o lo!ger to rea8h
its obje8t- but to repeatedly tur! arou!d itEsatisa8tio! is ge!erated by the very repeated ailure o
dire8t satisa8tio!7 A!d o!e 8a! also 8o!8eive desire as a mode o avoidi!g the 8ir8ularity o the drive+
the sel:e!8losed rotary moveme!t is re8ast as a repeated ailure to rea8h a tra!s8e!de!t obje8t 6hi8h
al6ays eludes its grasp7 9! philosophi8al terms- this 8ouple e8hoes @!ot the 8ouple o Spi!oUa a!d
=egel- butA the 8ouple o Spi!oUa a!d *a!t+ the Spi!oUa! drive @!ot grou!ded i! a la8kA versus *a!tia!
desire @to rea8h the !oume!al Thi!gA7
3ut does =egel really begi! 6ith 8o!ti!ge!t multipli8ityM Goes he !ot rather oer a Jthird
6ay-K through the poi!t o !o!:de8isio! bet6ee! desire a!d driveM Goes he !ot a8tually begi! 6ith
3ei!g- a!d the! dedu8e the multipli8ity o e?iste!ts @bei!gs:thereA- 6hi8h emerges as the result o the
irst triad @or- rather- NuadrupleA bei!g:!othi!g:be8omi!g:e?iste!tM =ere- o!e should bear i! mi!d the
key a8t that- 6he! he 6rites about the passage rom 3ei!g to 4othi!g!ess- =egel resorts to the past
te!se+ 3ei!g does !ot pass i!to 4othi!g!ess- it has always already passed i!to 4othi!g!ess- a!d so o!7
The irst triad o the .ogi8 is !ot a diale8ti8al triad- but a retroa8tive evo8atio! o a ki!d o shado6y
virtual past- o somethi!g 6hi8h !ever passes si!8e it has al6ays already passed+ the a8tual begi!!i!g-
the irst e!tity 6hi8h is Jreally here-K is the 8o!ti!ge!t multipli8ity o bei!gs:there @e?iste!tsA7 To put it
a!other 6ay- there is !o te!sio! bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d 4othi!g!ess 6hi8h 6ould ge!erate the i!8essa!t
passage o o!e i!to the other+ i! themselves- prior to diale8ti8s proper- 3ei!g a!d 4othi!g!ess are
dire8tly a!d immediately the same- they are i!dis8er!ibleT their te!sio! @the te!sio! bet6ee! orm a!d
8o!te!tA appears o!ly retroa8tively- i o!e looks at them rom the sta!dpoi!t o diale8ti8s proper7
Su8h a! o!tology o the !o!:All asserts a radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y+ !ot o!ly are there !o la6s 6hi8h
hold o !e8essity- every la6 is i! itsel 8o!ti!ge!tEit 8a! be overtur!ed at a!y mome!t7 This amou!ts
to a suspe!sio! o the Cri!8iple o Sui8ie!t Feaso!+ a suspe!sio! !ot o!ly epistemologi8al- but also
o!tologi8al7 That is to say- it is !ot o!ly that 6e 8a! !ever get to k!o6 the e!tire !et6ork o 8ausal
determi!atio!s- but this 8hai! is i! itsel Ji!8o!8lusive-K ope!i!g up the spa8e or the imma!e!t
8o!ti!ge!8y o be8omi!gEsu8h a 8haos o be8omi!g- subje8ted to !o pre:e?isti!g order- is 6hat
dei!es radi8al materialism7 Alo!g these li!es- ,eillassou? proposes a pre8ise disti!8tio! bet6ee!
contingency a!d chance- li!ki!g it to the disti!8tio! bet6ee! virtuality a!d potentiality+

)otentialities are the !o!:a8tualiUed 8ases o a! i!de?ed set o possibilities u!der the 8o!ditio! o a
give! la6 @6hether aleatory or !otA7 ,hance is every a8tualiUatio! o a pote!tiality or 6hi8h there is !o
u!ivo8al i!sta!8e o determi!atio! o! the basis o the i!itial give! 8o!ditio!s7 Thereore 9 6ill 8all
contingency the property o a! i!de?ed set o 8ases @!ot o a 8ase belo!gi!g to a! i!de?ed setA o !ot
itsel bei!g a 8ase o sets o 8asesT a!d virtuality the property o every set o 8ases o emergi!g 6ithi! a
be8omi!g 6hi8h is !ot domi!ated by a!y pre:8o!stituted totality o possibles7
#$
A 8lear 8ase o pote!tiality is the thro6 o a die through 6hi8h 6hat 6as already a possible 8ase
be8omes a real 8ase+ it 6as determi!ed by the pre:e?isti!g order o possibilities that there is a o!e i! si?
8ha!8e o !umber si? tur!i!g up- so 6he! !umber si? does a8tually tur! up- a pre:e?isti!g possible is
realiUed7 Virtuality- o! the 8o!trary- desig!ates a situatio! i! 6hi8h o!e 8a!!ot totaliUe the set o
possibles- so that somethi!g !e6 emerges- a 8ase is realiUed or 6hi8h there 6as !o pla8e i! the pre:
e?isti!g set o possibles+ Jtime 8reates the possible at the very mome!t it makes it 8ome to pass- it
bri!gs orth the possible as it does the real- it i!serts itsel i! the very thro6 o the die- to bri!g orth a
seve!th 8ase- i! pri!8iple u!oreseeable- 6hi8h breaks the i?ity o pote!tialities7K
#&
H!e should !ote
here ,eillassou?Is pre8ise ormulatio!+ the 4e6 arises 6he! a! d emerges 6hi8h does !ot merely
a8tualiUe a pre:e?isti!g possibility- but whose actuali2ation creates ?retroactively opens up@ its own
possibility+

9 6e mai!tai! that be8omi!g is !ot o!ly 8apable o bri!gi!g orth 8ases o! the basis o a pre:give!
u!iverse o 8ases- 6e must the! u!dersta!d that it ollo6s that su8h 8ases irrupt- properly speaki!g-
from nothing- si!8e !o stru8ture 8o!tai!s them as eter!al pote!tialities beore their emerge!8e+ we thus
ma"e irruption e? !ihilo the very concept of a temporality delivered to its pure immanence7
#%
9! this 6ay- 6e obtai! a pre8ise dei!itio! o time i! its irredu8ibility+ time is !ot o!ly the
Jspa8eK o the uture realiUatio! o possibilities- but the Jspa8eK o the emerge!8e o somethi!g
radi8ally !e6- outside the s8ope o the possibilities i!s8ribed i!to a!y atemporal matri?7 This
emerge!8e o a phe!ome!o! e& nihilo- !ot ully 8overed by the sui8ie!t 8hai! o reaso!s- is thus !o
lo!gerEas i! traditio!al metaphysi8sEa sig! o the dire8t i!terve!tio! o some super:!atural po6er
@1odA i!to !ature- but- o! the 8o!trary- a sig! o the ine&istence o 1od- that is- a proo that !ature is
!ot:All- !ot J8overedK by a!y tra!s8e!de!t Hrder or Co6er 6hi8h regulates it7 A Jmira8leK @6hose
ormal dei!itio! is the emerge!8e o somethi!g !ot 8overed by the e?isti!g 8ausal !et6orkA is thus
8o!verted i!to a materialist 8o!8ept+ JEvery Qmiracle thus becomes the manifestation of the
ine&istence of (od- i!soar as every radi8al rupture o the prese!t i! relatio! to the past be8omes the
ma!iestatio! o the abse!8e o a!y order 8apable o overseei!g the 8haoti8 po6er o be8omi!g7K
'0
H! the basis o these i!sights- ,eillassou? brillia!tly u!dermi!es the sta!dard argume!t agai!st
the radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y o !ature a!d its la6s @i! both se!ses+ o the hold o la6s a!d o the la6s
themselvesA- !amely+ i it is so radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t- ho6 is it that !ature is so perma!e!t- that it
@mostlyA 8o!orms to la6sM 9s this !ot highly improbable- the same improbability as that o the die
al6ays alli!g 6ith si? a8e upM This argume!t relies o! a possible totaliUatio! o
possibilities>probabilities- with regard to which the u!iormity is improbable+ i there is !o sta!dard-
!othi!g is more improbable tha! a!ythi!g else7 This is also 6hy the Jasto!ishme!tK o! 6hi8h the
Stro!g A!thropi8 Cri!8iple i! 8osmology 8ou!ts is alse+ 6e start rom huma! lie- 6hi8h 8ould have
evolved o!ly 6ithi! a set o very pre8ise pre8o!ditio!s- a!d the!- movi!g ba8k6ards- 6e 8a!!ot but be
asto!ished at ho6 our u!iverse 6as ur!ished 6ith pre8isely the right set o 8hara8teristi8s or the
emerge!8e o lieEo!ly a slightly diere!t 8hemi8al 8ompositio!- de!sity- et87- 6ould have made lie
impossible7 This Jasto!ishme!tK agai! relies o! the probabilisti8 reaso!i!g 6hi8h presupposes a pre:
e?isti!g totality o possibilities7
This is ho6 o!e should read ,ar?Is aoreme!tio!ed thesis about the a!atomy o ma! as a key
to the a!atomy o ape+ it is a proou!dly materialist thesis i! that it does !ot i!volve a!y teleology
@6hi8h 6ould propose that ma! is Ji! germK already prese!t i! apeT that the ape imma!e!tly te!ds
to6ards ma!A7 9t is pre8isely be8ause the passage rom ape to ma! is radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t a!d
u!predi8table- be8ause there is !o i!here!t JprogressK i!volved- that o!e 8a! o!ly retroa8tively
determi!e or dis8er! the 8o!ditio!s @!ot Jsui8ie!t reaso!sKA or ma! i! the ape7 A!d- agai!- it is
8ru8ial to bear i! mi!d here that the !o!:All is o!tologi8al- !ot o!ly epistemologi8al+ 6he! 6e stumble
upo! Ji!determi!a8yK i! !ature- 6he! the rise o the 4e6 8a!!ot be ully a88ou!ted or by the set o its
pre:e?isti!g 8o!ditio!s- this does !ot mea! that 6e have e!8ou!tered a limitatio! o our k!o6ledge-
our i!ability to u!dersta!d the JhigherK reaso! at 6ork here- but- o! the 8o!trary- that 6e have
demo!strated the ability o our mi!d to grasp the !o!:All o reality+

The !otio! o virtuality permits us O to reverse the signs- maki!g o every radi8al irruptio! the
ma!iestatio!- !ot o a tra!s8e!de!t pri!8iple o be8omi!g @a mira8le- the sig! o a DreatorA- but o a
time that !othi!g subte!ds @a! emerge!8e- the sig! o !o!:AllA7 /e 8a! the! grasp 6hat is sig!iied by
the impossibility o tra8i!g a ge!ealogy o !ovelties dire8tly to a time beore their emerge!8e+ !ot the
i!8apa8ity o reaso! to dis8er! hidde! pote!tialities- but- Nuite o! the 8o!trary- the 8apa8ity o reaso! to
a88ede to the i!ee8tivity o a! All o pote!tialities 6hi8h 6ould pre:e?ist their emerge!8e7 9! every
radi8al !ovelty- time makes ma!iest that it does !ot a8tualiUe a germ o the past- but that it bri!gs orth
a virtuality 6hi8h did !ot pre:e?ist i! a!y 6ay- i! a!y totality i!a88essible to time- its o6! adve!t7
'1
For 6e =egelia!s- the 8ru8ial Nuestio! here is this+ 6here does =egel sta!d 6ith regard to this
disti!8tio! bet6ee! pote!tiality a!d virtualityM H! a irst approa8h- there is massive evide!8e that
=egel is the philosopher o pote!tiality+ is !ot the 6hole poi!t o the diale8ti8al pro8ess as the
developme!t rom 9!:itsel to For:itsel that- i! the pro8ess o be8omi!g- thi!gs merely Jbe8ome 6hat
they already areK @or 6ere rom all eter!ityAM 9s !ot the diale8ti8al pro8ess the temporal deployme!t o
a! eter!al set o pote!tialities- 6hi8h is 6hy the =egelia! System is a sel:e!8losed set o !e8essary
passagesM This mirage o over6helmi!g evide!8e dissipates- ho6ever- the mome!t 6e ully take i!to
a88ou!t the radi8al retroactivity o the diale8ti8al pro8ess+ the pro8ess o be8omi!g is !ot i! itsel
!e8essary- but is the becoming @the gradual 8o!ti!ge!t emerge!8eA of necessity itself7 This is also
@amo!g other thi!gsA 6hat Jto 8o!8eive substa!8e as subje8tK mea!s+ the subje8t as the Void- the
4othi!g!ess o sel:relati!g !egativity- is the very nihil out o 6hi8h every !e6 igure emergesT i!
other 6ords- every diale8ti8al passage or reversal is a passage i! 6hi8h the !e6 igure emerges e&
nihilo a!d retroa8tively posits or 8reates its !e8essity7
THE HEGELIAN CIRCLE OF CIRCLES

The stakes i! this debateEis =egel a thi!ker o pote!tiality or a thi!ker o virtualityMEare
e?tremely high+ they 8o!8er! the @i!Ae?iste!8e o the Jbig HtherK itsel7 That is to say- the atemporal
matri? 6hi8h 8o!tai!s the s8ope o all possibilities is o!e !ame o the Jbig Hther-K a!d a!other is the
totaliUi!g story 6e 8a! tell ater the a8t- or the 8ertai!ty that su8h a story 6ill al6ays emerge7
4ietUs8he reproa8hes moder! atheism pre8isely or the a8t that- i! it- the Jbig HtherK survivesEtrue-
!o lo!ger as the substa!tial 1od- but as the totaliUi!g symboli8 rame o reere!8e7 This is 6hy .ebru!
8o!te!ds that =egel is !ot a! atheist 8o!ve!ie!tly prese!ti!g himsel as a Dhristia!- but ee8tively the
ultimate Dhristia! philosopher7 =egel al6ays i!sisted o! the deep truth o the Crotesta!t sayi!g J1od is
deadK+ i! his o6! thought- the substa!tial:tra!s8e!de!t 1od dies- but is resurre8ted as the symboli8
totality 6hi8h guara!tees the mea!i!gul 8o!siste!8y o the u!iverseEi! a stri8t homology 6ith the
passage rom 1od Nua substa!8e to the =oly Spirit as the 8ommu!ity o believers i! Dhristia!ity7 /he!
4ietUs8he talks about the death o 1od- he does !ot have i! mi!d the paga! livi!g 1od- but pre8isely
this 1od Nua =oly Spirit- the 8ommu!ity o believers7 Although this 8ommu!ity !o lo!ger relies o! a
tra!s8e!de!t 1uara!tee o a substa!tial big Hther- the big Hther @a!d thereby the theologi8al
dime!sio!A is still here as the symboli8 rame o reere!8e @i! Stali!ism- say- i! the guise o the big
Hther o =istory 6hi8h guara!tees the mea!i!gul!ess o our a8tsA7
3ut is this shit rom the livi!g gods o the real to the dead 1od o the .a6 really 6hat happe!s
i! Dhristia!ityM 9s it !ot that this shit already takes pla8e i! 2udaism- so that the death o Dhrist 8a!!ot
sta!d or this shit- but or somethi!g mu8h more radi8alEpre8isely or the death o the
symboli8:JdeadK big Hther itselM The key Nuestio! is thus+ is the =oly Spirit still a igure o the big
Hther- or is it possible to 8o!8eive it outside o this rameM 9 the dead 1od 6ere to morph dire8tly i!to
the =oly 1host- the! 6e 6ould still have the symboli8 big Hther7 3ut the mo!strosity o Dhrist- this
8o!ti!ge!t si!gularity i!ter8edi!g bet6ee! 1od a!d ma!- is proo that the =oly 1host is !ot the big
Hther survivi!g as the spirit o the 8ommu!ity ater the death o the substa!tial 1od- but a 8olle8tive
li!k o love 6ithout a!y support i! the big Hther7 Therei! resides the properly =egelia! parado? o the
death o 1od+ i 1od dies dire8tly- as 1od- he survives as the virtualiUed big HtherT o!ly i he dies i!
the guise o Dhrist- his earthly embodime!t- does he also disi!tegrate as the big Hther7
As Dhrist died o! the Dross- the earth shook a!d dark!ess des8e!ded- sig!s that the heave!ly
order itselEthe big HtherE6as disturbed+ !ot o!ly did somethi!g horrible happe! i! the 6orld- but
the very 8oordi!ates o the 6orld itsel 6ere shake!7 9t 6as as i the sinthome- the k!ot tyi!g the 6orld
together- had bee! u!raveled- a!d the auda8ity o the Dhristia!s 6as to take this as a good ome!- or- as
,ao 6ould put it mu8h later+ Jthere is great disorder u!der heave!- the situatio! is e?8elle!t7K Therei!
resides 6hat =egel 8alls the Jmo!strosityK o Dhrist+ the insertion of ,hrist between (od and man is
strictly e<uivalent to the fact that %there is no big $ther'G,hrist is inserted as the singular
contingency on which the universal necessity of the %big $ther' itself hinges7 9! 8laimi!g that =egel is
the ultimate Dhristia! philosopher- .ebru! is thusEto paraphrase T7 S7 0liotEright or the 6ro!g
reaso!7
H!ly i 6e bear i! mi!d this dime!sio! 8a! 6e really see 6hy the Gar6i!ia! @or other
evolutio!aryA 8riti8s o =egel miss the poi!t 6he! they ridi8ule his 8laim that there is !o history i!
!ature- that there is history o!ly i! huma! so8ieties+ =egel does !ot imply that !ature is al6ays the
same- that orms o vegetal a!d a!imal lie are orever i?ed- so that there is !o evolutio! i!
!atureE6hat he 8laims is that there is !o history proper i! !ature+ JThe livi!g 8o!serves itsel- it is the
begi!!i!g a!d the e!dT the produ8t i! itsel is also the pri!8iple- it is al6ays as su8h a8tive7K
'2
.ie
eter!ally repeats its 8y8le a!d retur!s to itsel+ substa!8e is agai! a!d agai! reasserted- 8hildre! be8ome
pare!ts- a!d so o!7 The 8ir8le here is pere8t- at pea8e 6ith itsel7 9t is ote! perturbedErom 6ithout+
i! !ature 6e do o 8ourse have gradual tra!sormatio!s o o!e spe8ies i!to a!other- a!d 6e do get
8lashes a!d 8atastrophes 6hi8h obliterate e!tire spe8iesT but 6hat 6e do !ot per8eive i! !ature is the
)!iversal appeari!g @positedA as su8h- i! 8o!trast to its o6! parti8ular 8o!te!tEa )!iversal i! 8o!li8t
6ith itsel7 9! other 6ords- 6hat is missi!g i! !ature is 6hat =egel 8alled the Jmo!strosityK o Dhrist+
the dire8t embodime!t o the ar"he o the e!tire u!iverse @1odA i! a si!gular i!dividual 6ho 6alks
arou!d as o!e amo!g the mortals7 9t is i! this pre8ise se!se that- i! order to disti!guish !atural rom
spiritual moveme!t- =egel uses the stra!ge term Ji!sertio!K+ i! a! orga!i8 pro8ess- J!othi!g 8a! i!sert
itsel bet6ee! the 4otio! a!d its realiUatio!- bet6ee! the !ature o the ge!us determi!ed i! itsel a!d
the e?iste!8e 6hi8h is 8o!ormed to this !atureT i! the domai! o the Spirit- thi!gs are 6holly
diere!t7K
'"
Dhrist is su8h a igure 6hi8h Ji!serts itselK bet6ee! 1od a!d its 8reatio!7 4atural
developme!t is domi!ated a!d regulated by a pri!8iple- ar"he- 6hi8h remai!s the same throughout the
moveme!t o its a8tualiUatio!- be it the developme!t o a! orga!ism rom its 8o!8eptio! to its maturity
or the 8o!ti!uity o a spe8ies through the ge!eratio! a!d de8ay o its i!dividual membersEthere is !o
te!sio! here bet6ee! the u!iversal pri!8iple a!d its e?emplii8atio!- the u!iversal pri!8iple is the 8alm
u!iversal or8e 6hi8h totaliUes a!d e!8ompasses the 6ealth o its parti8ular 8o!te!tT ho6ever- Jlie
does!It have history be8ause it is totaliUi!g o!ly e&ternallyK
'(
Eit is a u!iversal ge!us 6hi8h
e!8ompasses the multitude o i!dividuals 6ho struggle- but this u!ity is !ot posited in a! i!dividual7 9!
spiritual history- o! the 8o!trary- this totaliUatio! o88urs or itsel- it is posited as su8h i! the si!gular
igures 6hi8h embody u!iversality agai!st its o6! parti8ular 8o!te!t7
Hr- to put it a!other 6ay- i! orga!i8 lie- substa!8e @the u!iversal .ieA is the e!8ompassi!g
u!ity o the i!terplay o its subordi!ate mome!ts- that 6hi8h remai!s the same through the eter!al
pro8ess o ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!- that 6hi8h retur!s to itsel through this moveme!tT 6ith
subje8tivity- ho6ever- predicate passes into sub1ect+ substa!8e does !ot retur! to itself- it is re:totaliUed
by 6hat 6as origi!ally its predi8ate- its subordi!ated mome!t7 The key mome!t i! a diale8ti8al pro8ess
thus i!volves the Jtra!substa!tiatio!K o its o8al poi!t+ 6hat 6as at irst just a predi8ate- a subordi!ate
mome!t o the pro8ess @say- mo!ey i! the developme!t o 8apitalismA- be8omes its 8e!tral mome!t-
retroa8tively degradi!g its presuppositio!s- the eleme!ts out o 6hi8h it emerged- i!to its subordi!ate
mome!ts- eleme!ts o its sel:propelli!g 8ir8ulatio!7
Fobert Cippi! e?empliies i! 6hat se!se the =egelia! Spirit is Jits o6! resultK 6ith reere!8e to
the i!ale o CroustIs R la 7echerche+ ho6 does ,ar8el i!ally Jbe8ome 6hat he isKM 3y 6ay o
breaki!g 6ith the Clato!i8 illusio! that his Sel 8a! be Jse8ured by a!ythi!g- a!y value or reality that
tra!s8e!ds the 6holly temporal huma! 6orldK+

9t 6as O by aili!g to be8ome J6hat a 6riter is-K to realiUe his i!!er J6riterly esse!8eKEas i that role
must be some tra!s8e!de!tally importa!t or eve! a dei!ite- substa!tial roleEthat ,ar8el realiUes that
su8h a be8omi!g is importa!t by not bei!g se8ured by the tra!s8e!de!t- by bei!g 6holly temporal a!d
i!ite- al6ays a!d every6here i! suspe!se- a!d yet !o!etheless 8apable o some illumi!atio! O 9
,ar8el has be8ome 6ho he is- a!d this someho6 8o!ti!uous 6ith a!d a produ8t o the e?perie!8e o
his o6! past- it is u!likely that 6e 6ill be able to u!dersta!d that by appeal to a substa!tial or
u!derlyi!g sel- !o6 dis8overed- or eve! by appeal to su88essor substa!tial selves- ea8h o!e li!ked to
the uture a!d past by some sort o sel:regard7
'#
9t is thus o!ly by 6ay o ully a88epti!g this abyssal 8ir8ularity- i! 6hi8h the sear8h itsel
8reates 6hat it is looki!g or- that the Spirit Ji!ds itsel7K This is 6hy the verb Jaili!g-K as used by
Cippi!- is to be give! ull 6eight+ the ailure to a8hieve the @immediateA goal is absolutely 8ru8ial to-
8o!stitutive o- this pro8essEor- as .a8a! put it+ la vAritA surgit de la mAprise7 9- the!- Jit is only as a
result o itsel that it is spirit-K
''
this mea!s that the sta!dard talk about the =egelia! Spirit 6hi8h
alie!ates itsel to itsel- the! re8og!iUes itsel i! its other!ess a!d thus re:appropriates its 8o!te!t- is
deeply misleadi!g+ the Sel to 6hi8h Spirit retur!s is produ8ed i! the very moveme!t o this retur!- or-
that to 6hi8h the pro8ess o retur! is retur!i!g is produ8ed by the very pro8ess o retur!i!g7 9! a
subje8tive pro8ess- there is !o Jabsolute subje8t-K !o perma!e!t 8e!tral age!t playi!g 6ith itsel the
game o alie!atio! a!d disalie!atio!- losi!g or dispersi!g itsel a!d the! re:appropriati!g its alie!ated
8o!te!t+ ater a substa!tial totality is dispersed- it is a!other age!tEpreviously its subordi!ated
mome!tE6hi8h re:totaliUes it7 9t is this shiti!g o the 8e!ter o the pro8ess rom o!e mome!t to
a!other 6hi8h disti!guishes a diale8ti8al pro8ess rom the 8ir8ular moveme!t o alie!atio! a!d its
over8omi!gT it is be8ause o this shit that the Jretur! to itselK 8oi!8ides 6ith a88omplished alie!atio!
@6he! a subje8t re:totaliUes the pro8ess- its substa!tial u!ity is ully lostA7 9! this pre8ise se!se-
substa!8e retur!s to itsel as subje8t- a!d this tra!s:substa!tiatio! is 6hat substa!tial lie 8a!!ot
a88omplish7
The logi8 o the =egelia! triad is thus !ot the e?ter!aliUatio! o 0sse!8e ollo6ed by the
re8uperatio! o the alie!ated Hther!ess by 0sse!8e- but a 6holly diere!t o!e7 The starti!g poi!t is the
pure multipli8ity o 3ei!g- a lat appeari!g 6ith !o depth7 Through sel:mediatio! o its i!8o!siste!8y-
this appeari!g 8o!stru8ts or e!ge!ders the 0sse!8e- the depth- 6hi8h appears i! a!d through it @the
passage rom 3ei!g to 0sse!8eA7 Fi!ally- i! the passage rom 0sse!8e to Do!8ept- the t6o dime!sio!s
are Jre8o!8iledK so that 0sse!8e is redu8ed to the sel:mediatio!- 8ut- 6ithi! appeari!g itsel+ 0sse!8e
appears as 0sse!8e 6ithi! appeari!g- this is its e!tire 8o!siste!8y- its truth7 Do!seNue!tly- 6he! =egel
talks about ho6 the 9dea Je?ter!aliUesK @ent=ussertA itsel i! 8o!ti!ge!t appeara!8es- a!d the! re:
appropriates its e?ter!ality- he applies o!e o his ma!y mis!omers+ 6hat he is a8tually des8ribi!g is the
very opposite pro8ess- that o Ji!ter!aliUatio!-K the pro8ess 6hereby the 8o!ti!ge!t sura8e o bei!g is
posited as su8h- as 8o!ti!ge!t:e?ter!al- as Jmere appeara!8e-K by 6ay o ge!erati!g- i! a sel:rele8tive
moveme!t- @the appearance oA its o6! esse!tial Jdepth7K 9! other 6ords- the pro8ess i! 6hi8h 0sse!8e
e?ter!aliUes itsel is simulta!eously the pro8ess 6hi8h ge!erates this very esse!8e+ Je?ter!aliUatio!K is
stri8tly the same as the ormatio! o the 0sse!8e 6hi8h e?ter!aliUes itsel7 The 0sse!8e retroa8tively
8o!stitutes itsel through its pro8ess o e?ter!aliUatio!- through its lossEthis is ho6 o!e should
u!dersta!d the mu8h:Nuoted stateme!t o =egel that the 0sse!8e is o!ly as deep as it is 6ide7
This is 6hy the pseudo:=egelia! topi8 o the subje8t 6hi8h irst e?ter!aliUes itsel a!d the! re:
appropriates its alie!ated substa!tial Hther!ess is to be reje8ted7 First- there is !o pre:e?isti!g subje8t
6hi8h alie!ates itsel by 6ay o positi!g its other!ess+ the subje8t stricto sensu emerges through this
pro8ess o alie!atio! i! the Hther7 This is 6hy the se8o!d moveE.a8a! 8alls it separatio!Ei! 6hi8h
the subje8tIs alie!atio! i! the Hther is posited as 8orrelative to the separatio! o the Hther itsel rom its
e?:timate 8ore- this overlappi!g o t6o la8ks- has !othi!g to do 6ith the subje8t i!tegrati!g or
i!ter!aliUi!g its other!ess7 @=o6ever- a problem remai!s here+ .a8a!Is duality o alie!atio! a!d
separatio! obviously also displays the ormal stru8ture o a ki!d o J!egatio! o !egatio!-K but ho6 is
this redoubled !egatio! related to the =egelia! !egatio! o !egatio!MA
Cerhaps 6hat is missi!g i! .ebru! is the proper image o a 8ir8le that 6ould re!der the u!iNue
8ir8ularity o the diale8ti8al pro8ess7 For pages- he ights 6ith diere!t images to diere!tiate the
=egelia! J8ir8le o 8ir8lesK rom the 8ir8ularity o traditio!al @premoder!A /isdom- rom the a!8ie!t
topi8 o the J8y8le o lie-K its ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!7 =o6- the!- are 6e to read =egelIs
des8riptio!- 6hi8h seems to evoke a ull 8ir8le i! 6hi8h a thi!g merely be8omes 6hat it isM J4e8essity
o!ly sho6s itsel at the e!d- but i! su8h a 6ay pre8isely that this e!d reveals ho6 it 6as eNually the
First7 Hr- the e!d reveals this priority o itsel by the a8t that- i! the 8ha!ge a8tualiUed by it- !othi!g
emerges 6hi8h 6as !ot already there7K
'$
The problem 6ith this ull 8ir8le is that it is too pere8t- that
its sel:e!8losure is doubleEits very 8ir8ularity is re:marked i! yet a!other 8ir8ular mark7
9! other 6ords- the very repetitio! o the 8ir8le u!dermi!es its 8losure a!d surreptitiously
i!trodu8es a gap i!to 6hi8h radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y is i!s8ribed+ i the 8ir8ular 8losure- i! order to be ully
a8tual- has to be re:asserted as 8losure- this mea!s that- i! itsel- it is !ot yet truly a 8losureEit is o!ly
@the 8o!ti!ge!t e?8ess oA its repetitio! 6hi8h makes it a 8losure7 @Fe8all agai! the parado? o the
mo!ar8h i! =egelIs theory o the ratio!al State+ o!e !eeds this 8o!ti!ge!t e?8ess to a8tualiUe the State
as a ratio!al totality7 This e?8ess is- i! .a8a!ese- that o the sig!iier 6ithout the sig!iied+ it adds !o
!e6 8o!te!t- it just perormatively registers somethi!g that is already here7A As su8h- this 8ir8le
u!dermi!es itsel+ it o!ly 6orks i 6e suppleme!t it 6ith a! additio!al i!ter!al 8ir8le- so that 6e get the
igure o the Ji!side:i!verted eightK @regularly reerred to by .a8a!- a!d also i!voked o!8e by =egelA7
This is the true igure o the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess- a igure missi!g i! .ebru!Is book7
This bri!gs us i!ally to =egelIs absolutely u!iNue positio! i! the history o philosophy7 The
ultimate a!ti:=egelia! argume!t i!vokes the very a8t o the post:=egelia! break+ 6hat eve! the most
a!ati8al partisa! o =egel 8a!!ot de!y is that somethi!g 8ha!ged ater =egel- that a !e6 era o thought
bega! 6hi8h 8a! !o lo!ger be a88ou!ted or i! =egelia! terms o absolute 8o!8eptual mediatio!T this
rupture o88urs i! diere!t guises- rom S8helli!gIs assertio! o the abyss o pre:logi8al /ill
@vulgariUed later by S8hope!hauerA a!d *ierkegaardIs i!siste!8e o! the u!iNue!ess o aith a!d
subje8tivity- through ,ar?Is assertio! o the a8tual so8io:e8o!omi8 lie:pro8ess- a!d the ull
auto!omiUatio! o the mathemati8iUed !atural s8ie!8es- up to FreudIs moti o the Jdeath driveK as a
repetitio! that i!sists beyo!d all diale8ti8al mediatio!7 Somethi!g happe!ed here- or there is a 8lear
break bet6ee! beore a!d ater- a!d 6hile o!e 8a! argue that =egel already a!!ou!8es this break- that
he is the last idealist metaphysi8ia! a!d the irst post:metaphysi8al histori8ist- o!e 8a!!ot really be a
=egelia! ater this break- or =egelia!ism has lost its i!!o8e!8e orever7 To a8t like a ull =egelia!
today is eNuivale!t to 6riti!g to!al musi8 ater the S8hoe!bergia! revolutio!7 =egel is the ultimate
Jbad guyK i! this gra!d !arrative- his 6ork the i!al a8hieveme!t o metaphysi8s7 9! his thought-
system a!d history thoroughly overlap+ the 8o!seNue!8e o the eNuatio! o the Fatio!al a!d the A8tual
is that the 8o!8eptual system is !othi!g but the !otio!al stru8ture o history- a!d history is !othi!g but
the e?ter!al deployme!t o this system7
The predomi!a!t =egelia! strategy that is emergi!g as a rea8tio! to this s8are8ro6 image o
=egel the Absolute 9dealist oers a JdelatedK image o =egel reed o o!tologi8al:metaphysi8al
8ommitme!ts- redu8ed to a ge!eral theory o dis8ourse- o possibilities o argume!tatio!7 This
approa8h is best e?empliied by so:8alled Cittsburgh =egelia!s @3ra!dom- ,8Go6ellA- a!d is
ultimately advo8ated also by Fobert Cippi!- or 6hom the poi!t o =egelIs thesis o! Spirit as the
JtruthK o 4ature Jis simply that at a 8ertai! level o 8omple?ity a!d orga!iUatio!- !atural orga!isms
8ome to be o88upied 6ith themselves a!d eve!tually to u!dersta!d themselves i! 6ays !o lo!ger
appropriately e?pli8able 6ithi! the bou!daries o !ature or i! a!y 6ay the result o empiri8al
observatio!7K
'&
Do!seNue!tly- the Jsublatio!K o 4ature i! Spirit ultimately mea!s that J!atural bei!gs
6hi8h by virtue o their !atural 8apa8ities 8a! a8hieve it are spiritual+ havi!g a8hieved it a!d
mai!tai!i!g it is bei!g spiritualT those 6hi8h 8a!!ot are !ot7K
'%
So- ar rom des8ribi!g a! o!tologi8al
or 8osmi8 pro8ess through 6hi8h a! e!tity 8alled 4otio! e?ter!aliUes itsel i! !ature a!d the! retur!s to
itsel rom it- all =egel tried to do 6as to provide Jsome ma!ageable a88ou!t o the !ature o the
8ategori8al @i !ot o!tologi8alA !e8essity or spirit:8o!8epts i! maki!g se!se o 6hat these [huma!\
orga!isms are doi!g- sayi!g- a!d buildi!g7K
$0
This ki!d o avoida!8e o ull o!tologi8al 8ommitme!t-
o 8ourse- bri!gs us 8lose to *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!talismE6hi8h Cippi! 6illi!gly 8o!8edes- 8o!8eivi!g
=egelIs system as a systemati8 e?positio! o all possible orms o i!telligibility+

The idea is that the stru8ture J.ogi8EChilosophy o !atureEChilosophy o spiritK is a! attempt at
8omprehe!di!g the possibility o all determi!ate i!telligibility @the possibility o represe!tatio!al or
8o!8eptual 8o!te!t- o obje8tive purport- 6hatever o!eIs most ge!eral stateme!t o su8h possibility
amou!ts toA O So or the Do!8ept to be i! or to u!derlie somethi!g is to 8laim that the thi!g has a
pri!8iple o i!telligibility- it 8a! be re!dered i!telligible- give! a! a88ou!t o- illumi!ated as 6hat it
truly is- 6here i!telligibility is itsel a logi8al !otio! a!d o!e i!separable rom sel:k!o6ledge-
k!o6ledge o 6hat e?pla!atory satisa8tio! amou!ts to7 9 have already me!tio!ed the similarity 6ith
*a!tIs ,riti<ueEJ,etaphysi8s o 4atureKEJ,etaphysi8s o ,oralsK stru8ture- although or ma!y
reaso!s =egel 6ould 8ertai!ly i!sist that he is !ot prese!ti!g *a!tia!:like subje8tive 8o!ditio!s o
i!telligibility7 3ut the issue is still- 9 am suggesti!g- i!telligibility- a re!deri!g o a88ou!ts- a!d =egel
8learly believed he 8ould provide somethi!g like the 8omprehe!sive possibility o any a88ou!t:
givi!g7
$1
The =egelia! passage rom 4ature to Spirit is thus !ot a moveme!t i! the Jthi!g itsel-K but
o88urs i! the domai! o the sel:rele8tive moveme!t o thi!ki!g about !ature+

4ature itself- that is- does !ot Jdevelop i!to spirit7K Thi!ki!g through a88ou!ts o !ature 8a! be said to
lead o!e to spiritIs o6! sta!dards @Jor itselKA o a88ou!t:givi!g- a!d there6ith to the !ature o
!ormative authority i! ge!eral- the 8e!tral issue i! our a8hieveme!t o 8olle8tive like:mi!ded!ess- i!
spiritIs o6! sel:realiUatio!7
$2
9- the!- i! o!tologi8al terms- spirit !aturally evolves as a 8apa8ity o !atural bei!gs- 6hy !ot
simply e!dorse materialist evolutio!ismM That is to say- iEto Nuote Cippi!EJat a 8ertai! level o
8omple?ity a!d orga!iUatio!- !atural orga!isms 8ome to be o88upied 6ith themselves a!d eve!tually to
u!dersta!d themselves-K does this !ot mea! that- pre8isely- i! a 8ertai! se!se !ature itsel does
Jdevelop i!to spiritKM /hat o!e should re!der problemati8 is pre8isely Cippi!Is ragile bala!8e
bet6ee! o!tologi8al materialism a!d epistemologi8al tra!s8e!de!tal idealism+ he reje8ts the dire8t
idealist o!tologiUatio! o the tra!s8e!de!tal a88ou!t o i!telligibility- but he also reje8ts the
epistemologi8al 8o!seNue!8es o the o!tologi8al evolutio!ary materialism7 @9! other 6ords- he does !ot
a88ept that the sel:rele8tio! o k!o6ledge should 8o!stru8t a ki!d o bridge to materialist o!tology-
a88ou!ti!g or ho6 the !ormative attitude o Ja88ou!ti!g orK itsel 8ould have emerged out o !ature7A
The same ambiguity 8a! be dis8er!ed already i! =abermas+ !o 6o!der he praises 3ra!dom-
si!8e =abermas also avoids dire8tly approa8hi!g the JbigK o!tologi8al Nuestio! @Jare huma!s really a
subspe8ies o a!imals- is Gar6i!ism trueMKA- the Nuestio! o 1od or 4ature- o idealism or materialism7
9t 6ould be easy to prove that =abermasIs !eo:*a!tia! avoida!8e o o!tologi8al 8ommitme!t is i!
itsel !e8essarily ambiguous+ 6hile =abermasia!s treat !aturalism as a! obs8e!e se8ret !ot to be
publi8ly admitted @Jo 8ourse ma! developed rom !ature- o 8ourse Gar6i! 6as right OKA- this
obs8ure se8ret is a lie- it 8overs up the idealist form o their thought @the a priori !ormative
tra!s8e!de!tals o 8ommu!i8atio! 6hi8h 8a!!ot be dedu8ed rom !atural bei!gA7 /hile =abermasia!s
se8retly thi!k they are really materialists- the truth resides i! the idealist orm o their thi!ki!g7
To avoid a atal misu!dersta!di!g+ the poi!t is !ot that o!e should take sides a!d opt or o!e
8o!siste!t sta!8e- either evolutio!ary materialism or spe8ulative idealism7 The poi!t is rather that o!e
should ully a!d e?pli8itly a88ept the gap 6hi8h ma!iests itsel i! the i!8ompatibility o the t6o
sta!8es+ the tra!s8e!de!tal sta!dpoi!t is i! a se!se irredu8ible- or o!e 8a!!ot look Jobje8tivelyK at
o!esel a!d lo8ate o!esel i! realityT a!d the task is to thin" this impossibility itself as an ontological
fact- !ot o!ly as a! epistemologi8al limitatio!7 9! other 6ords- the task is to thi!k this impossibility !ot
as a limit- but as a positive a8tEa!d this- perhaps- is 6hat at his most radi8al =egel does7
Su8h a JdelatedK image o =egel is !ot e!oughT the post:=egelia! break must be approa8hed i!
more dire8t terms7 True- there is a break- but i! it =egel is the Jva!ishi!g mediatorK bet6ee! its
JbeoreK a!d its Jater-K bet6ee! traditio!al metaphysi8s a!d post:metaphysi8al !i!etee!th:a!d
t6e!tieth:8e!tury thought7 That is to say- somethi!g happe!s i! =egel- a breakthrough i!to a u!iNue
dime!sio! o thought- 6hi8h is obliterated- re!dered i!visible i! its true dime!sio!- by post:
metaphysi8al thought7
$"
This obliteratio! leaves a! empty spa8e 6hi8h has to be illed i! so that the
8o!ti!uity o the developme!t o philosophy 8a! be re:established7 3ut- 6e may ask- illed i! 6ith
6hatM The i!de? o this obliteratio! is the absurd image o =egel as the Jabsolute idealistK 6ho
Jprete!ded to k!o6 everythi!g-K to possess Absolute *!o6ledge- to read the mi!d o 1od- to dedu8e
the 6hole o reality out o the sel:moveme!t o @hisA ,i!dEa! image 6hi8h is a! e?emplary 8ase o
6hat Freud 8alled Dec"*Erinnerung @s8ree!:memoryA- a a!tasy:ormatio! desti!ed to 8over up a
traumati8 truth7 9! this se!se- the post:=egelia! tur! to J8o!8rete reality- irredu8ible to !otio!al
mediatio!-K should rather be read as a desperate posthumous reve!ge o metaphysi8s- as a! attempt to
rei!stall metaphysi8s- although i! the i!verted orm o the prima8y o 8o!8rete reality7
$(
Cerhaps- ho6ever- 6e e!8ou!ter here also the limit o =egel- although !ot i! the 4ietUs8hea!
se!se deployed by .ebru!7 9 lie is a substa!tial u!iversality- is !ot the! 6hat i!serts itsel i! the gap
bet6ee! its 4otio! a!d the 4otio!Is a8tualiUatio!- a!d 6hat thereby breaks the substa!tial 8ir8ularity o
lie- deathM To put it blu!tly+ i Substa!8e is .ie- is the Subje8t !ot GeathM 9!soar as- or =egel- the
basi8 eature o pre:subje8tive .ie is the Jspurious i!i!ityK o the eter!al reprodu8tio! o the lie
substa!8e through the i!8essa!t moveme!t o the ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio! o its eleme!tsEthat is- the
Jspurious i!i!ityK o a repetitio! 6ithout progressEthe ultimate iro!y 6e e!8ou!ter here is that Freud-
6ho 8alled this e?8ess o death over lie the Jdeath drive-K 8o!8eived it pre8isely as repetitio!- as a
8ompulsio! to repeat7 Da! =egel thi!k this 6eird repetitio! 6hi8h is !ot progress- but also !ot the
!atural repetitio! through 6hi8h substa!tial lie reprodu8es itselM A repetitio! 6hi8h- by its e?8essive
i!siste!8e- breaks pre8isely 6ith the 8y8le o !atural repetitio!M
94T0F.)G0 1

Mar& as a 7eader of 0egel! 0egel as a 7eader of Mar&

The big politi8al shit i! =egelIs developme!t o88urred 6he! he aba!do!ed his early
as8i!atio! 6ith the Foma!ti8 visio! o the !o!:alie!ated so8iety o A!8ie!t 1ree8e as a beautiul
orga!i8 8ommu!ity o love @as opposed to the moder! so8iety o the )!dersta!di!g- 6ith its
me8ha!i8al i!tera8tio! bet6ee! auto!omous egotisti8al i!dividualsA7 /ith this shit- =egel bega! to
appre8iate the very thi!g that had previously repelled him+ the Jprosai8-K !o!:heroi8 8hara8ter o
moder! so8ieties 6ith their 8omple? divisio! o proessio!al a!d admi!istrative labor- i! 6hi8h J!o
o!e simply 8ould be heroi8ally respo!sible or mu8h o a!ythi!g @a!d so 8ould !ot be beautiul i!
a8tio!A7K
1
=egelIs ull e!dorseme!t o the prose o moder! lie- his ruthless dismissal o all lo!gi!g or
the heroi8 old times- is the @ote! !egle8tedA histori8al root o his thesis about the Je!d o artK+ art is !o
lo!ger a! adeNuate medium or e?pressi!g su8h a Jprosai8K dise!8ha!ted reality- reality deprived o all
mystery a!d tra!s8e!de!8e7
2
The you!g =egel- espe8ially i! his System der Sittlich"eit- 6as still as8i!ated by the 1reek
polis as the orga!i8 u!ity o i!dividual a!d so8iety+ here- so8ial substa!8e does !ot yet sta!d opposed to
i!dividuals as a 8old- abstra8t- obje8tive legality imposed rom outside- but appears as the livi!g u!ity
o J8ustoms-K o a 8olle8tive ethi8al lie i! 6hi8h i!dividuals are Jat home-K re8og!iUi!g it as their o6!
substa!8e7 From this perspe8tive- 8old u!iversal legality is a regressio! rom the orga!i8 u!ity o
8ustomsEthe regressio! rom 1ree8e to the Foma! empire7 Although =egel soo! a88epted that the
subje8tive reedom o moder!ity has to be a88epted- that the orga!i8 u!ity o the polis 6as orever lost-
he !o!etheless i!sisted o! the !eed or some ki!d o retur! to a re!e6ed u!ity- to a !e6 polis that
6ould oer i!dividuals a deeper se!se o so8ial solidarity a!d orga!i8 u!ity beyo!d the Jme8ha!isti8K
i!tera8tio! a!d i!dividualist 8ompetitio! o 8ivil so8iety7
=egelIs 8ru8ial step to6ards maturity o88urs 6he! he really Jaba!do!s the paradigm o the
polisK by re8o!8eptualiUi!g the role o 8ivil so8iety7
"
First- 8ivil so8iety is or =egel the Jstate o
)!dersta!di!g-K the state redu8ed to the poli8e:apparatus regulati!g the 8haoti8 i!tera8tio! o
i!dividuals ea8h o 6hom pursues his egotisti8 i!terests7 This i!dividualisti8:atomisti8 !otio! o
reedom a!d the !otio! o a legal order imposed o! i!dividuals as a! e?ter!al limitatio! o that reedom
are stri8tly 8orrelative7 The !eed thus arises to pass rom this Jstate o )!dersta!di!gK to the true Jstate
o Feaso!-K i! 6hi8h i!dividualsI subje8tive dispositio!s are harmo!iUed 6ith the so8ial /hole- i!
6hi8h i!dividuals re8og!iUe the so8ial substa!8e as their o6!7 The key move o88urs 6he! =egel ully
develops the mediati!g role o 8ivil so8iety+ the Jsystem o multilateral depe!de!8eK 6hose ultimate
moder! orm is the market e8o!omyEi! 6hi8h parti8ular a!d u!iversal are separated a!d opposed- i!
6hi8h every i!dividual pursues o!ly his private goals- i! 6hi8h orga!i8 so8ial u!ity de8omposes i!to
e?ter!al me8ha!i8al i!tera8tio!Eis i! itsel already the re8o!8iliatio! o the parti8ular a!d the
u!iversal i! the guise o the amous Ji!visible ha!dK o the market- o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h- by pursui!g
his private i!terests at the e?pe!se o others- every i!dividual 8o!tributes to the 6elare o all7 9t is thus
!ot simply that o!e has to Jover8omeK the me8ha!i8al or e?ter!al i!tera8tio! o 8ivil so8iety i! a higher
orga!i8 u!ity+ 8ivil so8iety a!d its disi!tegratio! plays a 8ru8ial mediati!g role- so that the true
re8o!8iliatio! @6hi8h does !ot abolish moder! subje8tive reedomA has to re8og!iUe ho6 this
disi!tegratio! is i! itsel already its opposite- a or8e o i!tegratio!7 Fe8o!8iliatio! is thus radi8ally
immanent+ it implies a shit o perspe8tive 6ith regard to 6hat irst appeared as disi!tegratio!7 9! other
6ords- i!soar as 8ivil so8iety is the sphere o alie!atio!- o the separatio! bet6ee! subje8tivity
persisti!g i! its abstra8t i!dividuality a!d a! obje8tive so8ial order opposi!g it as a! e?ter!al !e8essity
limiti!g its reedom- the resour8es or re8o!8iliatio! should be ou!d i! this very sphere @i! 6hat
appears- Jat irst sight- as the least spiritual- as the most alie!ati!g+ the system o !eedsK
(
A- !ot i! the
passage to a!other JhigherK sphere7 The stru8ture here is that o the Fabi!ovit8h joke+ Fabi!ovit8h
6a!ts to emigrate rom the Soviet )!io! or t6o reaso!s+ JFirst- 9 ear that- i the so8ialist order
disi!tegrates- all the blame or the 8ommu!ist 8rimes 6ill be put o! us- the 2e6s7K To the state
bureau8ratIs obje8tio!+ J3ut !othi!g 6ill ever 8ha!ge i! the Soviet )!io!R So8ialism is here to stay
oreverRK Fabi!ovit8h 8almly a!s6ers+ JThis is my se8o!d reaso!7K The true @se8o!dA reaso! 8a! be
e!u!8iated o!ly i!soar as it is produ8ed as a rea8tio! to the bureau8ratIs reje8tio! o the irst reaso!7
The 8ivil so8iety versio! is+ JThere are t6o reaso!s moder! so8iety is re8o!8iled 6ith itsel7 The irst is
the i!tera8tio! 6ithi! 8ivil so8iety OK J3ut 8ivil:so8iety i!tera8tio! is a matter o 8o!sta!t strie- the
very me8ha!ism o disi!tegratio!- o ruthless 8ompetitio!RK J/ell- this is the se8o!d reaso!- si!8e this
very strie a!d 8ompetitio! makes i!dividuals thoroughly i!terdepe!de!t a!d thus 8reates the ultimate
so8ial li!k OK
The 6hole perspe8tive thus 8ha!ges+ it is !o lo!ger that the orga!i8 Sittlich"eit o the polis
disi!tegrates u!der the 8orrosive i!lue!8e o moder! abstra8t i!dividuality i! its multiple modes @the
market e8o!omy- Crotesta!tism- et87A- a!d that this u!ity should someho6 be restored at a higher level+
the poi!t o =egelIs a!alyses o a!tiNuity- best e?empliied by his repeated readi!gs o +ntigone- is that
the 1reek polis itsel 6as already marked- 8ut through- by atal imma!e!t a!tago!isms @publi8:private-
mas8uli!e:emi!i!e- huma!:divi!e- ree me!:slaves- et87A 6hi8h belie its orga!i8 u!ity7 Abstra8t
u!iversal i!dividualism @Dhristia!ityA- ar rom 8ausi!g the disi!tegratio! o the 1reek orga!i8 u!ity-
6as- o! the 8o!trary- the !e8essary irst step to6ards true re8o!8iliatio!7 .ike6ise the market- ar rom
bei!g simply a 8orrosive or8e- provides the mediati!g pro8ess 6hi8h orms the basis o a true
re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d the si!gular7 ,arket 8ompetitio! really bri!gs people together-
6hile orga!i8 order divides them7 The best i!di8atio! o this shit i! the mature =egel 8o!8er!s the
oppositio! o 8ustoms a!d la6+ or the early =egel- the tra!sormatio! o 8ustoms i!to i!stitutio!aliUed
la6 is a regressive move rom orga!i8 u!ity to alie!atio! @the !orm is !o lo!ger e?perie!8ed as part o
my substa!tial ethi8al !ature- but as a! e?ter!al or8e that 8o!strai!s my reedomA- 6hile or the mature
=egel- this tra!sormatio! is a 8ru8ial step or6ard- ope!i!g up a!d sustai!i!g the spa8e o moder!
subje8tive reedom7
The problem here- o 8ourse- is 6hether the market dy!ami8 really provides 6hat it promises7
Goes it !ot i! a8t ge!erate a perma!e!t destabiliUatio! o the so8ial body- espe8ially by i!8reasi!g
8lass disti!8tio!s a!d givi!g rise to a JmobK deprived o the basi8 8o!ditio!s o lieM =egelIs solutio!
here 6as very pragmati8Ehe opted or se8o!dary palliative measures like 8olo!ial e?pa!sio! a!d-
espe8ially- the mediati!g role o estates @St=ndeA7 A!d his dilemma is still ours today- t6o hu!dred
years later7 The 8learest i!di8atio! o =egelIs histori8al limit lies i! his double use o the same term
Sitten @8ustoms- so8ial ethi8al orderA+ it sta!ds or the immediate orga!i8 u!ity that has to be let behi!d
@the A!8ie!t 1reek idealA- a!d or the higher orga!i8 u!ity 6hi8h should be realiUed i! a moder! state7
9t is easy to play the histori8ist 8ard here a!d 8laim that =egel 6as u!able to grasp the 8apitalist
dy!ami8 proper be8ause o the limitatio! o his histori8al e?perie!8e7 2ameso! is right to dra6 atte!tio!
to the a8t that- Jdespite his amiliarity 6ith Adam Smith a!d emerge!t e8o!omi8 do8tri!e- =egelIs
8o!8eptio! o 6ork a!d laborE9 have spe8ii8ally 8hara8teriUed it as a ha!di8rat ideologyEbetrays !o
a!ti8ipatio! o the origi!alities o i!dustrial produ8tio! or the a8tory systemK
#
Ei! short- =egelIs
a!alyses o 6ork a!d produ8tio! 8a!!ot be Jtra!serred to the !e6 i!dustrial situatio!7K
'
There is a
series o i!ter8o!!e8ted reaso!s or this limitatio!- all grou!ded i! the 8o!strai!ts o =egelIs histori8al
e?perie!8e7 First- his !otio! o the i!dustrial revolutio! i!volved o!ly Adam:Smith:type ma!ua8turi!g
6here the 6ork pro8ess 6as still that o a group o i!dividuals usi!g tools- !ot yet that o the a8tory i!
6hi8h the ma8hi!ery sets the rhythm a!d i!dividual 6orkers are de a8to redu8ed to orga!s servi!g the
ma8hi!ery- to its appe!di8es7 Se8o!d- he 8ould !ot yet imagi!e the 6ay abstra8tio! rules 6ould
develop i! 8apitalism+ 6he! ,ar? des8ribes 8apitalIs mad sel:e!ha!8i!g 8ir8ulatio!- 6hi8h rea8hes its
apogee i! todayIs meta:rele?ive spe8ulatio!s o! utures- it is ar too simplisti8 to 8laim that the spe8ter
o this sel:e!ge!deri!g mo!ster pursui!g its i!terests 6ith !o regard or huma! or e!viro!me!tal
8o!8er!s is a! ideologi8al abstra8tio!- a!d that- behi!d this abstra8tio!- there are real people a!d
!atural obje8ts o! 6hose produ8tive 8apa8ities a!d resour8es 8apitalIs 8ir8ulatio! is based a!d o!
6hi8h it eeds like a giga!ti8 parasite7 The problem is that this Jabstra8tio!K is !ot o!ly 8hara8teristi8 o
our @the i!a!8ial spe8ulatorIsA misper8eptio! o so8ial reality- but that it is JrealK i! the pre8ise se!se
o determi!i!g the stru8ture o material so8ial pro8esses themselves+ the ate o 6hole s6athes o the
populatio! a!d sometimes o 6hole 8ou!tries 8a! be de8ided by the Jsolipsisti8K spe8ulative da!8e o
Dapital- 6hi8h pursues its goal o proitability 6ith blessed i!diere!8e to ho6 its moveme!ts 6ill
ae8t so8ial reality7 Therei! lies the u!dame!tal systemi8 viole!8e o 8apitalism- mu8h more u!8a!!y
tha! the dire8t pre:8apitalist so8io:ideologi8al viole!8e+ it is !o lo!ger attributable to 8o!8rete
i!dividuals a!d their JevilK i!te!tio!s- but is purely Jobje8tive-K systemi8- a!o!ymous7
=ere 6e e!8ou!ter the .a8a!ia! diere!8e bet6ee! reality a!d the Feal+ JrealityK is the so8ial
reality o the a8tual people i!volved i! i!tera8tio! a!d i! the produ8tive pro8esses- 6hile the Feal is the
i!e?orable Jabstra8tK spe8tral logi8 o Dapital that determi!es 6hat goes o! i! so8ial reality7 This gap is
ta!gible i! the 6ay the e8o!omi8 situatio! o a 8ou!try 8a! be 8o!sidered to be good a!d stable by the
i!ter!atio!al i!a!8ial e?perts- eve! 6he! the majority o its people are 6orse o tha! beoreEreality
does !ot matter- 6hat matters is the situatio! o Dapital7 A!d- agai!- is this !ot more true tha! ever
todayM Go !ot phe!ome!a usually 8lassed as eatures o Jvirtual 8apitalismK @uture tradi!g a!d similar
i!a!8ial spe8ulatio!sA poi!t to6ards the reig! o Jreal abstra8tio!K at its purest- mu8h more radi8al
tha! i! ,ar?Is timeM 9! short- the highest orm o ideology does !ot i!volve getti!g 8aught i!
ideologi8al spe8trality- orgetti!g about real people a!d their relatio!s- but pre8isely i! overlooki!g this
Feal o spe8trality a!d i! prete!di!g to address dire8tly Jreal people 6ith their real problems7K Visitors
to the .o!do! Sto8k 0?8ha!ge are give! a ree lealet e?plai!i!g ho6 the sto8k market is !ot about
mysterious lu8tuatio!s- but about real people a!d their produ8tsEthis is ideology at its purest7
=ere- i! the a!alysis o the u!iverse o Dapital- 6e should !ot o!ly push =egel to6ards ,ar?-
,ar? himsel should be radi8aliUed+ it is o!ly today- i! relatio! to global 8apitalism i! its Jpost:
i!dustrialK orm- that- to put it i! =egelia! terms- really e?isti!g 8apitalism is rea8hi!g the level o its
!otio!7 Cerhaps- 6e should o!8e agai! ollo6 ,ar?Is old a!ti:evolutio!ist motto @i!8ide!tally- take!
verbatim rom =egelA that the a!atomy o ma! provides the key to the a!atomy o a mo!keyEi7e7- that-
i! order to des8ribe the i!here!t !otio!al stru8ture o a so8ial ormatio!- 6e must start 6ith its most
developed orm7 ,ar? lo8ated the eleme!tary 8apitalist a!tago!ism i! the oppositio! bet6ee! use:
value a!d e?8ha!ge:value+ i! 8apitalism- the pote!tial o this oppositio! is ully realiUed- the domai! o
e?8ha!ge:value a8Nuires auto!omy- is tra!sormed i!to the spe8ter o sel:propelli!g spe8ulative
8apital 6hi8h uses the produ8tive 8apa8ities a!d !eeds o a8tual people o!ly as its temporary disposable
embodime!t7 ,ar? derived his !otio! o e8o!omi8 8risis rom this very gap+ a 8risis o88urs 6he!
reality 8at8hes up 6ith the illusory sel:ge!erati!g mirage o mo!ey begetti!g more mo!eyEthis
spe8ulative mad!ess 8a!!ot go o! i!dei!itely- it has to e?plode i! ever more serious 8rises7 The
ultimate root o the 8risis is or ,ar? the gap bet6ee! use: a!d e?8ha!ge:value+ the logi8 o e?8ha!ge:
value ollo6s its o6! path- its o6! mad da!8e- irrespe8tive o the real !eeds o real people7 9t may
appear that this a!alysis is highly releva!t today- 6he! the te!sio! bet6ee! the virtual u!iverse a!d the
real is rea8hi!g almost u!bearable proportio!s+ o! the o!e ha!d- 6e have 8raUy solipsisti8 spe8ulatio!s
about utures- mergers- et87- ollo6i!g their o6! i!here!t logi8T o! the other ha!d- reality is 8at8hi!g up
i! the guise o e8ologi8al 8atastrophes- poverty- the 8ollapse o so8ial lie i! the Third /orld- a!d the
spread o !e6 diseases7
This is 6hy 8yber:8apitalists appear as the paradigmati8 8apitalists todayE6hy 3ill 1ates 8a!
dream o 8yberspa8e as providi!g the rame or 6hat he 8alls Jri8tio!less 8apitalism7K /hat 6e have
here is a! ideologi8al short:8ir8uit bet6ee! t6o versio!s o the gap bet6ee! reality a!d virtuality+ the
gap bet6ee! real produ8tio! a!d the virtual or spe8tral domai! o Dapital- a!d the gap bet6ee!
e?perie!tial reality a!d the virtual reality o 8yberspa8e7 The real horror o the motto Jri8tio!less
8apitalismK is that- eve! though a8tual Jri8tio!sK 8o!ti!ue to i!sist- they be8ome i!visible- or8ed i!to
a !ether6orld outside our Jpostmoder!K a!d post:i!dustrial u!iverseT this is 6hy the Jri8tio!lessK
u!iverse o digitaliUed 8ommu!i8atio!- te8h!ologi8al gadgets- et87- is 8o!sta!tly hau!ted by the !otio!
o a global 8atastrophe lurki!g just arou!d the 8or!er- threate!i!g to e?plode at a!y mome!t7
9t seems as i the gap bet6ee! my as8i!ati!g 8yberspa8e perso!a a!d the miserable lesh 6hi8h
is JmeK o:s8ree! tra!slates i!to the immediate e?perie!8e o the gap bet6ee! the Feal o the
spe8ulative 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital a!d the drab reality o the impoverished masses7 =o6ever- is this
re8ourse to a JrealityK 6hi8h 6ill soo!er or later 8at8h up 6ith the virtual game really the o!ly 6ay to
pursue a 8ritiNue o 8apitalismM /hat i the problem o 8apitalism is !ot this solipsisti8 da!8e- but
pre8isely the opposite+ that it 8o!ti!ues to disavo6 its gap 6ith Jreality-K that it prese!ts itsel as
servi!g the real !eeds o real peopleM The parado? o this virtualiUatio! o 8apitalism is ultimately the
same as that o the ele8tro! i! parti8le physi8s7 The mass o ea8h eleme!tary parti8le is 8omposed o its
mass at rest plus the surplus provided by the a88eleratio! o its moveme!tT ho6ever- a! ele8tro!Is mass
at rest is Uero- its mass 8o!sists o!ly o the surplus ge!erated by the a88eleratio!- as i 6e are deali!g
6ith a !othi!g 6hi8h a8Nuires some de8eptive substa!8e o!ly by magi8ally spi!!i!g itsel i!to a!
e?8ess o itsel7 Goes !ot todayIs virtual 8apitalist u!8tio! i! a homologous 6ayEhis J!et valueK is
Uero- he just operates 6ith the surplus- borro6i!g rom the utureM
This 8ompels us to thoroughly reormulate the sta!dard ,ar?ist topi8 o Jreii8atio!K a!d
J8ommodity etishism-K i!soar as the latter still relies o! a !otio! o the etish as a solid obje8t 6hose
stable prese!8e obus8ates its so8ial mediatio!7 Carado?i8ally- etishism rea8hes its a8me pre8isely
6he! the etish itsel is JdematerialiUed-K tur!ed i!to a luid JimmaterialK virtual e!tityT mo!ey
etishism 6ill 8ulmi!ate 6ith the passage to its ele8tro!i8 orm- 6he! the last tra8es o its materiality
6ill disappearEele8tro!i8 mo!ey is the third orm- ater JrealK mo!ey- 6hi8h dire8tly embodies its
value @i! gold or silverA- a!d paper mo!ey 6hi8h- although a Jmere sig!K 6ith !o i!tri!si8 value- still
8li!gs to a material e?iste!8e7 A!d it is o!ly at this stage- 6he! mo!ey be8omes a purely virtual poi!t
o reere!8e- that it i!ally assumes the orm o a! i!destru8tible spe8tral prese!8e+ 9 o6e you b1000-
a!d !o matter ho6 ma!y material !otes 9 bur!- 9 still o6e you b1000- the debt is i!s8ribed some6here
i! virtual digital spa8e7
Goes the same !ot hold also or 6arareM Far rom poi!ti!g to6ards t6e!ty:irst:8e!tury
6arare- the atta8k o! the /orld Trade De!ter i! September 2001 6as rather the last spe8ta8ular a8t o
t6e!tieth:8e!tury 6arare7 /hat a6aits us is somethi!g mu8h more u!8a!!y+ the spe8ter o a!
JimmaterialK 6ar i! 6hi8h the atta8ks are i!visibleEviruses- poiso!s- 6hi8h 8a! be every6here a!d
!o6here7 At the level o visible material reality- !othi!g happe!s- there are !o big e?plosio!s- a!d yet
the k!o6! u!iverse starts to 8ollapse- lie disi!tegrates7 /e are e!teri!g a !e6 era o para!oid 6arare
i! 6hi8h the greatest task 6ill be to ide!tiy the e!emy a!d his 6eapo!s7 9t is o!ly 6ith this
thoroughgoi!g JdematerialiUatio!KE6he! ,ar?Is amous thesis rom -he ,ommunist Manifesto- that
i! 8apitalism Jall that is solid melts i!to air-K a8Nuires a mu8h more literal mea!i!g tha! the o!e he had
i! mi!d- 6he! our material so8ial reality is !ot o!ly domi!ated by the spe8tral or spe8ulative
moveme!t o Dapital but is itsel progressively Jspe8traliUedK @the JCrotea! SelK repla8i!g the old sel:
ide!ti8al Subje8t- the elusive luidity o its e?perie!8es supersedi!g the stability o o6!ed obje8tsA- i!
short- 6he! the usual relatio!ship bet6ee! solid material obje8ts a!d luid ideas is i!verted @obje8ts are
progressively dissolved i! luid e?perie!8es- 6hile the o!ly stable thi!gs are virtual symboli8
obligatio!sAEit is o!ly at this poi!t that 6hat Gerrida 8alled the spe8tral aspe8t o 8apitalism is ully
a8tualiUed7
This is 6hy the key eature o 8o!temporary 8apitalism is !ot o!ly the hegemo!y- but also the
@relativeA auto!omy o i!a!8ial 8apital+ it may seem like the ba!ks are just e!gagi!g i! spe8ulatio!-
shuli!g !umbers here a!d there- a!d !obody is e?ploited- si!8e e?ploitatio! happe!s i! JrealK
produ8tio!7 3ut 6hy did 6e have to give billio!s o dollars to the ba!ks i! 200& a!d 200%M 3e8ause-
6ithout a u!8tio!i!g ba!ki!g system- the e!tire @8apitalistA e8o!omy 8ollapses7 3a!ks should thus also
8ou!t as privatiUed 8ommo!s+ i!soar as private ba!ks 8o!trol the lo6 o i!vestme!ts a!d thus
represe!t- or i!dividual 8ompa!ies- the u!iversal dime!sio! o so8ial 8apital- their proit is really a re!t
6e pay or their role as u!iversal mediator7 This is 6hy state or other orms o so8ial 8o!trol over ba!ks
a!d 8olle8tive 8apital i! ge!eral @like pe!sio! u!dsA are 8ru8ial i! taki!g a irst step to6ards the so8ial
8o!trol o 8ommo!s7 Apropos the reproa8h that su8h 8o!trol is e8o!omi8ally i!ei8ie!t- 6e should
re8all !ot o!ly those 8ases i! 6hi8h su8h 8o!trol 6as very ee8tive @this 6as- or e?ample- ho6
,alaysia avoided 8risis i! the late 1%%0sA- but also the obvious a8t that the 200& i!a!8ial 8risis 6as
triggered pre8isely by the ailure o the ba!ki!g system7
.et us take a 8loser look at ,ar?Is 8lassi8al des8riptio! o the passage rom mo!ey to 8apital-
6ith its e?pli8it allusio!s to the =egelia! a!d Dhristia! ba8kgrou!d7 First- there is the simple a8t o
market e?8ha!ge i! 6hi8h 9 sell i! order to buyE9 sell the produ8t 9 o6! or have made i! order to buy
a!other o!e 6hi8h is o some use to me+ JThe simple 8ir8ulatio! o 8ommoditiesEselli!g i! order to
buyEis a mea!s o 8arryi!g out a purpose u!8o!!e8ted 6ith 8ir8ulatio!- !amely- the appropriatio! o
use:values- the satisa8tio! o 6a!ts7K
$
/hat happe!s 6ith the emerge!8e o 8apital is !ot just the
simple reversal o D:,:D @Dommodity:,o!ey:DommodityA i!to ,:D:,- i7e7- o i!vesti!g mo!ey i!
some 8ommodity i! order to sell it agai! a!d thus get ba8k to @moreA mo!eyT the key ee8t o this
reversal is the eternali2ation o 8ir8ulatio!+ JThe 8ir8ulatio! o mo!ey as 8apital is- o! the 8o!trary- a!
e!d i! itsel- or the e?pa!sio! o value takes pla8e o!ly 6ithi! this 8o!sta!tly re!e6ed moveme!t7 The
8ir8ulatio! o 8apital has thereore !o limits7K
&
Dru8ial here is the diere!8e bet6ee! the traditio!al
miser- hoardi!g his treasure i! se8ret- a!d the 8apitalist 6ho augme!ts his treasure by thro6i!g it i!to
8ir8ulatio!+

The restless !ever:e!di!g pro8ess o proit:maki!g alo!e is 6hat he aims at7 This bou!dless greed ater
ri8hes- this passio!ate 8hase ater e?8ha!ge:value- is 8ommo! to the 8apitalist a!d the miserT but 6hile
the miser is merely a 8apitalist go!e mad- the 8apitalist is a ratio!al miser7 The !ever:e!di!g
augme!tatio! o e?8ha!ge:value- 6hi8h the miser strives ater- by seeki!g to save his mo!ey rom
8ir8ulatio!- is attai!ed by the more a8ute 8apitalist- by 8o!sta!tly thro6i!g it aresh i!to 8ir8ulatio!7
%
This mad!ess o the miser is !o!etheless !ot somethi!g 6hi8h simply disappears 6ith the rise
o J!ormalK 8apitalism- !or is it a pathologi8al deviatio!7 9t is rather inherent to it+ the miser has his
mome!t o triumph i! the e8o!omi8 crisis7 9! a 8risis- it is !otEas o!e 6ould e?pe8tEmo!ey 6hi8h
loses its value- so that 6e have to resort to the JrealK value o 8ommoditiesT 8ommodities themselves
@the embodime!t o Jreal [use\ valueKA be8ome useless- be8ause there is !o o!e to buy them7 9! a 8risis-

mo!ey sudde!ly a!d immediately 8ha!ges rom its merely !omi!al shape- mo!ey o a88ou!t- i!to hard
8ash7 Croa!e 8ommodities 8a! !o lo!ger repla8e it7 The use:value o 8ommodities be8omes value:less-
a!d their value va!ishes i! the a8e o their o6! orm o value7 The bourgeois- dru!k 6ith prosperity
a!d arroga!tly 8ertai! o himsel- has just de8lared that mo!ey is a purely imagi!ary 8reatio!7
JDommodities alo!e are mo!ey-K he said7 3ut !o6 the opposite 8ry resou!ds over the markets o the
6orld+ o!ly mo!ey is a 8ommodity O 9! a 8risis- the a!tithesis bet6ee! 8ommodities a!d their value:
orm- mo!ey- is raised to the level o a! absolute 8o!tradi8tio!7
10
9t is 8ru8ial ho6- i! des8ribi!g this elevatio! o mo!ey to the status o the o!ly true 8ommodity
@JThe 8apitalist k!o6s that all 8ommodities- ho6ever s8urvy they may look- or ho6ever badly they
may smell- are i! aith a!d i! truth mo!ey- i!6ardly 8ir8um8ised 2e6sK
11
A- ,ar? resorts to the pre8ise
Cauli!e dei!itio! o Dhristia!s as Ji!6ardly 8ir8um8ised 2e6sK+ Dhristia!s do !ot !eed a8tual
8ir8um8isio! @the aba!do!me!t o ordi!ary 8ommodities 6ith use values- deali!g o!ly 6ith mo!eyA-
si!8e they k!o6 that ea8h o these ordi!ary 8ommodities is already Ji!6ardly 8ir8um8ised-K that its
true substa!8e is mo!ey7 9! a 8ertai! se!se- this sel:e!ge!deri!g spe8ulative moveme!t o Dapital 8a!
also be said to i!di8ate a limit o the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess- a!d o!e that eludes =egelIs grasp7 9t
is i! this se!se that .ebru! me!tio!s the Jas8i!ati!g imageK o Dapital prese!ted by ,ar? @espe8ially
i! his (rundrisseA+ Ja mo!strous mi?ture o the good i!i!ity a!d the bad i!i!ity- the good i!i!ity
6hi8h 8reates its presuppositio!s a!d the 8o!ditio!s o its gro6th- the bad i!i!ity 6hi8h !ever 8eases
to surmou!t its 8rises- a!d 6hi8h i!ds its limit i! its o6! !ature7K
12
A8tually- it is i! ,apital itsel that
6e i!d this =egelia! des8riptio! o the 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital+

i! the 8ir8ulatio! ,:D:,- both the mo!ey a!d the 8ommodity represe!t o!ly diere!t modes o
e?iste!8e o value itsel- the mo!ey its ge!eral mode- a!d the 8ommodity its parti8ular- or- so to say-
disguised mode7 9t is 8o!sta!tly 8ha!gi!g rom o!e orm to the other 6ithout thereby be8omi!g lost-
a!d thus assumes a! automati8ally a8tive 8hara8ter7 9 !o6 6e take i! tur! ea8h o the t6o diere!t
orms 6hi8h sel:e?pa!di!g value su88essively assumes i! the 8ourse o its lie- 6e the! arrive at these
t6o propositio!s+ Dapital is mo!ey+ Dapital is 8ommodities7 9! truth- ho6ever- value is here the a8tive
a8tor i! a pro8ess- i! 6hi8h- 6hile 8o!sta!tly assumi!g the orm i! tur! o mo!ey a!d 8ommodities- it
at the same time 8ha!ges i! mag!itude- diere!tiates itsel by thro6i!g o surplus:value rom itselT
the origi!al value- i! other 6ords- e?pa!ds spo!ta!eously7 For the moveme!t- i! the 8ourse o 6hi8h it
adds surplus:value- is its o6! moveme!t- its e?pa!sio!- thereore- is automati8 e?pa!sio!7 3e8ause it is
value- it has a8Nuired the o88ult Nuality o bei!g able to add value to itsel7 9t bri!gs orth livi!g
ospri!g- or- at the least- lays golde! eggs7Value- thereore- bei!g the a8tive a8tor i! su8h a pro8ess-
a!d assumi!g at o!e time the orm o mo!ey- at a!other that o 8ommodities- but through all these
8ha!ges preservi!g itsel a!d e?pa!di!g- it reNuires some i!depe!de!t orm- by mea!s o 6hi8h its
ide!tity may at a!y time be established7 A!d this orm it possesses o!ly i! the shape o mo!ey7 9t is
u!der the orm o mo!ey that value begi!s a!d e!ds- a!d begi!s agai!- every a8t o its o6!
spo!ta!eous ge!eratio!7
1"
4ote ho6 =egelia! reere!8es abou!d here+ 6ith 8apitalism- value is !ot a mere abstra8t JmuteK
u!iversality- a substa!tial li!k bet6ee! the multipli8ity o 8ommoditiesT rom the passive medium o
e?8ha!ge- it tur!s i!to the Ja8tive a8torK o the e!tire pro8ess7 9!stead o just passively assumi!g the
t6o diere!t orms o its a8tual e?iste!8e @mo!eyE8ommodityA- it appears as the subje8t Je!do6ed
6ith a motio! o its o6!- passi!g through a lie:pro8ess o its o6!K+ it diere!tiates itsel rom itsel-
positi!g its other!ess- a!d the! agai! over8omes this diere!8eEthe e!tire moveme!t is its own
moveme!t7 9! this pre8ise se!se- Ji!stead o simply represe!ti!g the relatio!s o 8ommodities- it e!ters
O i!to private relatio!s 6ith itselK+ the JtruthK o its relati!g to its other!ess is its sel:relati!g- i! its
sel:moveme!t- 8apital retroa8tively JsublatesK its o6! material 8o!ditio!s- 8ha!gi!g them i!to
subordi!ate mome!ts o its o6! Jspo!ta!eous e?pa!sio!KEi! pure =egelese- it posits its o6!
presuppositio!s7
Dru8ial i! the Nuoted passage is the e?pressio! Ja! automati8ally a8tive 8hara8ter-K a!
i!adeNuate tra!slatio! o the 1erma! 6ords used by ,ar? to 8hara8teriUe 8apital as Jautomatischem
Sub1e"t-K a! Jautomati8 subje8t-K a! o?ymoro! u!iti!g livi!g subje8tivity a!d dead automatism7 This is
6hat 8apital is+ a subje8t- but a! automati8 o!e- !ot a livi!g o!eEa!d- agai!- 8a! =egel thi!k this
Jmo!strous mi?ture-K a pro8ess o subje8tive sel:mediatio! a!d retroa8tive positi!g o presuppositio!s
6hi8h- as it 6ere- gets 8aught up i! a substa!tial Jspurious i!i!ity-K a subje8t 6hi8h itsel be8omes a!
alie!ated substa!8eM
This is perhaps also the reaso! 6hy ,ar?Is reere!8e to =egelIs diale8ti8s i! his J8ritiNue o
politi8al e8o!omyK is ambiguous- os8illati!g bet6ee! taki!g it as a mystiied e?pressio! o the logi8 o
8apital a!d taki!g it as a model or the revolutio!ary pro8ess o ema!8ipatio!7 First- there is the
diale8ti8 as the Jlogi8 o 8apitalK+ the developme!t o the 8ommodity:orm a!d the passage rom
mo!ey to 8apital are 8learly ormulated i! =egelia! terms @8apital is mo!ey:substa!8e tur!i!g i!to the
sel:mediati!g pro8ess o its o6! reprodu8tio!- et87A7 The!- there is the =egelia! !otio! o the
proletariat as Jsubsta!8e:less subje8tivity-K the gra!diose =egelia! s8heme o the histori8al pro8ess
movi!g rom pre:8lass so8iety to 8apitalism i! a gradual separatio! o the subje8t rom its obje8tive
8o!ditio!s- so that the over8omi!g o 8apitalism mea!s that the @8olle8tiveA subje8t re:appropriates its
alie!ated substa!8e7 Cerhaps this os8illatio! bet6ee! the t6o is 8o!ditio!ed by a third term+ the pre8ise
status o the so8ial a!tago!ism @J8lass struggleKA7 The problem here is 6hether =egel 8a! thi!k the
8lass struggle- or 6hether *a!t gets 8loser to it 6ith his a!ti!omies- 6hi8h just have to be o!tologiUed-
8o!8eived as a parado?i8al eature o reality itsel7 3ut does !ot su8h a! o!tologiUatio! 8o!tradi8t
,ar?Is !otio! o 8lass struggle as histori8ally limited- as a! a!tago!ism to be over8ome 6ith the
disappeara!8e o 8apitalismM 9! respo!se- o!e 8a! argue that !either ,ar? !or Freud are really able to
thi!k a!tago!ism+ ultimately- they both redu8e it to a eature o @so8ial or psy8hi8A reality- u!able to
arti8ulate it as 8o!stitutive o reality itsel- as the impossibility arou!d 6hi8h reality is 8o!stru8tedEthe
o!ly thought able to do this 8omes later- origi!ati!g i! the diere!tial logi8 o Jstru8turalism7K
,ar?Is readi!g o =egelIs diale8ti8 as a! idealist ormulatio! o the logi8 o 8apitalist
domi!atio! ails to go all the 6ay+ 6hat the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess deploys is the @mystiiedA
e?pressio! o the mystification imma!e!t to the 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital- or- i! .a8a!ia! terms- o its
Jobje8tively:so8ialK a!tasyEto put it i! some6hat !aSve terms- or ,ar?- 8apital is !ot JreallyK a
subje8t:substa!8e 6hi8h reprodu8es itsel by 6ay o positi!g its o6! presuppositio!s a!d so o!T 6hat
this =egelia! a!tasy o 8apitalIs sel:ge!erati!g reprodu8tio! obliterates is 6orkersI e?ploitatio!- that
is- ho6 the 8ir8le o 8apitalIs sel:reprodu8tio! dra6s its e!ergy rom the e?ter!al @or- rather- Je?:
timateKA sour8e o value- ho6 it has to parasitiUe 6orkers7 So 6hy !ot pass dire8tly to a des8riptio! o
6orkersI e?ploitatio!- 6hy bother 6ith a!tasies 6hi8h sustai! the u!8tio!i!g o 8apitalM 9t is 8ru8ial
or ,ar? to i!8lude i! his des8riptio! o 8apital this i!termediary level o Jobje8tive a!tasy-K 6hi8h is
!either the 6ay 8apitalism is a8tually e?perie!8ed by its subje8ts @they are good empiri8al !omi!alists
u!a6are o the Jtheologi8al !i8etiesKA !or the Jreal state o thi!gsK @6orkers e?ploited by 8apitalA7 3ut
the problem is ho6 to thi!k together the =egelia! 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital a!d its de:8e!tered 8ause- the
labor or8e- that is- ho6 to thi!k the 8ausality o a produ8tive subje8t e?ter!al to the 8ir8ulatio! o
8apital 6ithout resorti!g to the Aristotelia! positivity o 6orkersI produ8tive pote!tialM For ,ar?- the
starti!g poi!t is pre8isely su8h a positivity+ the produ8tive or8e o huma! laborT a!d he a88epts this
starti!g poi!t as u!surpassable- reje8ti!g the logi8 o the diale8ti8al pro8ess 6hi8h- as =egel put it-
progresses Jrom !othi!g through !othi!g to !othi!g7K
9! short- 8apital is mo!ey 6hi8h is !o lo!ger a mere substa!8e o 6ealth- its u!iversal
embodime!t- but value 6hi8h- through its 8ir8ulatio!- ge!erates more value- value 6hi8h mediates or
posits itsel- retroa8tively positi!g its o6! presuppositio!s7 First- mo!ey appears as a mere mea!s or
the e?8ha!ge o 8ommodities+ i!stead o e!dless barteri!g- 6e irst e?8ha!ge our produ8t or the
u!iversal eNuivale!t o all 8ommodities- 6hi8h 8a! the! be e?8ha!ged or a!y 8ommodity 6e may
!eed7 The!- o!8e the 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital is set i! motio!- the relatio!ship is i!verted- the mea!s tur!s
i!to a! e!d:i!:itsel- the very passage through the JmaterialK domai! o use:values @the produ8tio! o
8ommodities 6hi8h satisy i!dividualsI parti8ular !eedsA is posited as a mome!t o 6hat is substa!tially
the sel:moveme!t o 8apital itsel7 From this mome!t o!- the true aim is !o lo!ger the satisa8tio! o
i!dividualsI !eeds- but simply more mo!ey- the e!dless repeati!g o the 8ir8ulatio! as su8h7 This
ar8a!e 8ir8ular moveme!t o sel:positi!g is the! eNuated 6ith the 8e!tral Dhristia! te!et o the ide!tity
o 1od:the:Father a!d his So!- o the imma8ulate 8o!8eptio! i! 6hi8h the si!gle Father dire8tly
@6ithout a emale spouseA begets his o!ly So! a!d thus orms 6hat is arguably the ultimate si!gle:
pare!t amily7
9s 8apital the! the true Subje8t or Substa!8eM 5es a!d !o+ or ,ar?- this sel:e!ge!deri!g
8ir8ular moveme!t isEto put it i! Freudia! termsEpre8isely the Ju!8o!s8ious a!tasyK o 8apitalism
6hi8h parasitiUes the proletariat as Jpure substa!8eless subje8tivityKT or this reaso!- 8apitalIs
spe8ulative sel:ge!erati!g da!8e has a limit- a!d bri!gs about the 8o!ditio!s or its o6! 8ollapse7 This
i!sight allo6s us to solve the key i!terpretive problem o the passage Nuoted above+ ho6 are 6e to read
its irst three 6ords- Jin truth! howeverKM First- o 8ourse- they imply that this truth has to be asserted
agai!st some alse appeara!8e or e?perie!8e+ the everyday assumptio! that the ultimate goal o
8apitalIs 8ir8ulatio! is still the satisa8tio! o huma! !eeds- that 8apital is just a mea!s to bri!g about
this satisa8tio! i! a more ei8ie!t 6ay7 =o6ever- this JtruthK is not the reality o 8apitalism+ i! reality-
8apital does !ot e!ge!der itsel- but e?tra8ts the 6orkerIs surplus:value7 There is thus a !e8essary third
level to be added to the simple oppositio! o subje8tive e?perie!8e @o 8apital as a mea!s o satisyi!g
peopleIs !eedsA a!d obje8tive so8ial reality @o e?ploitatio!A+ !amely- the Jobje8tive de8eptio!-K the
disavo6ed Ju!8o!s8iousK a!tasy @o the mysterious sel:ge!erati!g 8ir8ular moveme!t o 8apitalA-
6hi8h is the truth @although !ot the realityA o the 8apitalist pro8ess7 Agai!- to Nuote .a8a!- truth has
the stru8ture o i8tio!+ the o!ly 6ay to ormulate the truth o 8apital is through a reere!8e to this
i8tio! o its Jimma8ulateK sel:ge!erati!g moveme!t7 A!d this i!sight also allo6s us to lo8ate the
6eak!ess o the above:me!tio!ed Jde8o!stru8tio!istK appropriatio! o ,ar?Is a!alysis o 8apitalism+
although it emphasiUes the e!dless pro8ess o deerral 6hi8h 8hara8teriUes this moveme!t- as 6ell as its
u!dame!tal i!8o!8lusive!ess- its sel:blo8kage- the Jde8o!stru8tio!istK retelli!g still des8ribes the
fantasy o 8apitalEit des8ribes 6hat i!dividuals believe- although they do !ot k!o6 it7
/hat all this mea!s is that the urge!t task is to repeat ,ar?Is J8ritiNue o politi8al e8o!omy-K
but 6ithout su88umbi!g to the temptatio! o the multiple ideologies o Jpost:i!dustrialK so8iety7 The
key 8ha!ge 8o!8er!s the status o private property+ the ultimate eleme!t o po6er a!d 8o!trol is !o
lo!ger the last li!k i! the 8hai! o i!vestme!tEthe irm or i!dividual 6ho Jreally o6!sK the mea!s o
produ8tio!7 The ideal 8apitalist today u!8tio!s i! a 6holly diere!t 6ay+ i!vesti!g borro6ed mo!ey-
Jreally o6!i!gK !othi!g- maybe eve! i!debted- but !o!etheless still 8o!trolli!g thi!gs7 A 8orporatio! is
o6!ed by a!other 8orporatio!- 6hi8h agai! borro6s mo!ey rom ba!ks- 6hi8h may ultimately
ma!ipulate mo!ey o6!ed by ordi!ary people like ourselves7 /ith 3ill 1ates- the !otio! o Jprivate
property o the mea!s o produ8tio!K be8omes mea!i!gless- at least i! its sta!dard se!se7
9t is easy to miss the iro!y here+ the a8t that ,ar? !eeded =egel to ormulate the logi8 o
8apital @the 8ru8ial breakthrough i! ,ar?Is 6ork o88urred i! the mid:1&#0s- 6he!- ater the ailure o
the 1&(& revolutio!s- he started to read =egelIs .ogic agai!A mea!s that 6hat =egel 6as !ot able to see
6as !ot some post:=egelia! reality but rather the properly 0egelian aspe8t o the 8apitalist e8o!omy7
=ere- parado?i8ally- =egel 6as !ot idealist e!ough- or 6hat he did !ot see 6as the properly
speculative 8o!te!t o the 8apitalist e8o!omy- the 6ay i!a!8ial 8apital u!8tio!s as a purely virtual
!otio! pro8essi!g Jreal people7K A!d does !ot e?a8tly the same hold or moder! artM Fobert Cippi!
e!dorses =egelIs thesis o! the Je!d o artKE6ith a Nualii8atio!+ it does !ot reer to art as su8h- but
o!ly to represe!tatio!al art- to the art 6hi8h relies o! some pre:subje8tive substa!tial !otio! o JrealityK
that art should rele8t- re:prese!t i! the medium o se!suous materials+

7epresentational art cannot ade<uately e&press the full sub1ectivity of e&perience! the wholly self*
legislating! self*authori2ing status of the norms that constitute such sub1ectivity! or! thus! cannot
ade<uately e&press who we ?now@ areF H!ly philosophy 8a! JhealK su8h a sel:i!li8ted 6ou!d a!d
allo6 the sel:determi!i!g 8hara8ter o e?perie!8e its adeNuate e?pressio!7 @JH!ly philosophy-K that is-
o! =egelIs oi8ial a88ou!t7 9 am tryi!g to suggest here that there is !o reaso! a orm o art- like
abstra8tio!- 8ould !ot make su8h a poi!t i! a !o!dis8ursive 6ay7A
1(
This is ho6 Cippi! readsEi! a 8o!s8iously a!a8hro!isti8 6ay- 6ith the be!eit o the hi!dsight
o those 6ho live t6o 8e!turies ater =egelE=egelIs prophe8y- i! his .ectures on +esthetics- that post:
Foma!ti8 art 6ill e!a8t the Jsel:tra!s8e!de!8e o art but 6ithi! its o6! sphere a!d i! the orm o art
itselK+
1#
art tra!s8e!ds itsel as represe!tatio!al art- it over8omes its limitatio! to the represe!tatio!al
sphere7 /hat =egel 8ould !ot grasp @i!soar as his thought 6as- as every thought is- Jhis time
8o!8eived i! thoughtKA 6as the !otio!al possibility o a! art that 6ould over8ome in itself! as art- the
medium o represe!tatio!- a!d thus u!8tio! as a! art adeNuate to the total rele?iviUatio! @subje8tive
mediatio!A o lie 8o!8eptualiUed i! his absolute 9dealism7
1'
The i!terest o Cippi!Is gesture resides i! the a8t that he reje8ts the sta!dard story 6hi8h goes
somethi!g like this+ 6ith =egel- /ester! metaphysi8s rea8hed its apogee i! the igure o Absolute
*!o6i!g- the a8tual i!i!ity o the total 8o!8eptual mediatio! o all realityE!othi!g 8a! a!y lo!ger
resist the po6er o !otio!al 8o!8eivi!gT 1od himsel is- as =egel put it 6ith a! impli8it but all the more
u!surpassable a8erbi8 iro!y- Ja! i!teresti!g represe!tatio!K @mea!i!g+ a mere represe!tatio!-
6orstellung- 6hose truth is its !otio!al 8o!te!tA7 =o6ever- post:=egelia! philosophy- i! all its versio!s-
is a rea8tio! agai!st this totality o absolute !otio!al sel:mediatio!- agai!st this all:po6erul Spirit
6hi8h s6allo6s everythi!g up7 Fi!itude @either huma! i!itude as su8h- ma!Is separated!ess rom 1odT
or the i!itude o ma!Is se!sual lie a!d material produ8tio!A is ully reasserted- mea!i!g- amo!g other
thi!gs- that art regai!s its rights agai!st philosophy7 The irst step i! this dire8tio! 6as already take! by
S8helli!g i! his System of -ranscendental Idealism- 6here he pla8es art above philosophy as the
highest sy!thesis o Spirit a!d 4ature- o Subje8t a!d Hbje8t- o thought a!d se!ses+ philosophy is
limited to the thi!ki!g subje8t opposed to !ature- to se!suous realityT the harmo!ious bala!8e o the
t6o sides is a8hieved o!ly i! a 6ork o art7
/he!- ho6ever- Cippi! e!visages a !e6 possibility or art ater =egel- he does !ot grou!d it i!
a!y limitatio! o Feaso!- o rele?ive mediatio!+ or him- the moder!ist break @abstra8t artA has !othi!g
to do 6ith the reassertio! o the u!surpassable horiUo! o i!itude7 Cippi! remai!s aithul to =egel+
there is !o tra!s8e!de!t Truth rom 6hi8h 6e- as i!ite huma!s- remai! orever 8ut o- either i! the
orm o a! 9!i!ite Feality 6hi8h art 8a!!ot properly represe!t- or i! the orm o a Givi!ity too sublime
to be grasped by our i!ite mi!d7 9! other 6ords- the poi!t o Cippi!Is rehabilitatio! o art is !ot that the
Absolute 8a!!ot be dire8tly 8o!8eptually grasped- that it 8a! o!ly be hi!ted at- evoked as a!
u!athomable d- i! artisti8 metaphorsT his rehabilitatio! o art has !othi!g to do 6ith the assertio! o a!
irratio!al spirituality- too subtle to let itsel be 8aught i! the 8rude a!alyti8al 8ategories o huma!
Feaso!- o a spirituality 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be e?perie!8ed i! the orm o artisti8 i!tuitio!7 ,oder!ist art is
thoroughly rele?ive- i! 8o!trast to traditio!al art 6hi8h still relies o! a !o!:rele8ted a88epta!8e o
some substa!tial medium or realityT it is rele?ive i! the radi8al se!se o Nuestio!i!g its o6! medium7
This is 6hat Jabstra8tio!K mea!s+ a rele?ive Nuestio!i!g o the very medium o artisti8 represe!tatio!-
so that this medium loses its !atural tra!spare!8y7 Feality is !ot just Jout there-K rele8ted or imitated
by art- it is somethi!g 8o!stru8ted- somethi!g 8o!ti!ge!t- histori8ally 8o!ditio!edEa!d therei! resides
the lega8y o 1erma! 9dealism- 6hi8h

destroyed the 8lassi8al pi8ture o the se!sible:i!telligible relatio!7 Se!sibility 8ould !ot !o6 be
u!derstood as a! u!8lear represe!tatio! o the 6orld that reaso! 8ould 6ork to 8lariy or 8ould
represe!t better- !or 8ould it be u!derstood as a vivid- JlivelyK impressio!- guidi!g the abstra8ti!g a!d
ge!eraliUi!g i!telle8t O The 8o!te!t o se!sibility 6as- ater *a!t- to be u!derstood as the material
obje8t o the u!dersta!di!gIs sy!thesiUi!g- a8tive 6ork O Se!sory data be8ame represe!tative as a
result o this 6ork by the u!dersta!di!g- a!d 8o!sidered apart rom su8h e!ormi!g- 8o!8eptualiUi!g
a8tivity- it 8ou!ted as mere stu- prei!telligible materiality7
1$
The 8o!seNue!8e o all this or the visual arts is that Jpai!terly a!d i!deed se!sible
represe!tatio!s 8a!!ot be u!derstood o! some mimeti8 model o seei!g through the image @or
se!satio!A to the obje8t itselK+
1&

JAbstra8tio!K i! this =egelia! se!se does !ot mea! abstra8tio! o Jeverythi!g that 6as !ot i!tri!si8 to
art as su8h-K but abstra8tio! rom depe!de!8e o! se!sual immedia8y- a!d so a ki!d o e!a8tme!t o the
moder!ist take o! !ormativity si!8e *a!t+ sel:legislatio! O Cai!ti!gs by Collo8k a!d Fothko are !ot
prese!tatio!s o pai!t drips a!d 8olor ields a!d lat 8a!vas7 They thematiUe a!d so re!der sel:
8o!s8ious 8ompo!e!ts o se!sible mea!i!g that 6e traditio!ally 6ould !ot see a!d u!dersta!d as su8h-
6ould treat as give!7 Said a!other 6ay- they prese!t the materiality o su8h 8ompo!e!ts i! their
8o!8eptual sig!ii8a!8eT su8h materiality is me!tio!ed- 8ited- or Nuoted- as 6ell as used- as 6ell as
o88upyi!g spa8e o! a stret8hed 8a!vas7 A!d this 8a! make se!se be8ause the JresultK 8hara8ter o eve!
se!sible apprehe!sio! O has 8ome to be part o the i!telle8tual habits o mi!d o moder! sel:
u!dersta!di!g- eve! i u!atte!ded to as su8h7
1%
This is 6hy o!e 8a! o!ly agree 6ith Cippi!Is e!dorseme!t o ,i8hael FriedIs reje8tio! o
moder!ism a!d postmoder!ism as 8o!se8utive JstagesK o histori8al developme!tT Jpostmoder!ismK is
rather the !ame or a regressio!- or a reusal to ollo6 the 8o!seNue!8es o the moder!ist break+

There 6as !o ailure o moder!ism- !o e?haustio! by the e!d o abstra8t e?pressio!ism7 Father- there
6as @a!d still isA a ailure to appre8iate a!d i!tegrate the sel:u!dersta!di!g rele8ted i! su8h art @the
same ki!d o ailure to appre8iate moder!ism- or the same ki!d o stra6:me! atta8ks- i! 6hat 6e 8all
postmoder!ismA7 The atermathEmi!imalism- Jliteralism-K op a!d pop art- postmoder!ismE8a! be
u!derstood better as evasio!s a!d repressio!s tha! as alter!atives7
20
Hr- to put it i! 3adiouIs terms- there is no postmodernist Event+ postmoder!ism is !ot a! 0ve!t
proper- but- at its most basi8- a reactive ormatio!- a 6ay o betrayi!g the moder!ist break- o re:
i!tegrati!g its a8hieveme!t i!to the domi!a!t ield7 The appare!t Jradi8alityK o some postmoder!
tre!ds should !ot de8eive us here+ thisEote! spe8ta8ularEJradi8alityK is there to as8i!ate us 6ith its
de8eptive lure- a!d thus to bli!d us to the u!dame!tal absence of thought proper7 Sui8e it to re8all
re8e!t tre!ds i! the visual arts+ go!e are the days o simple statues or ramed pai!ti!gsE6hat 6e see
!o6 are the rames themselves 6ithout pai!ti!gs- dead 8o6s a!d their e?8reme!t- videos o the i!side
o the huma! body @gastros8opy a!d 8olo!os8opyA- the i!8lusio! o odors i! the e?hibitio!- a!d so o!
a!d so orth7 =ere- agai!- as i! the domai! o se?uality- perversio! is !o lo!ger subversive+ the
sho8ki!g e?8esses are part o the system itsel- 6hat the system eeds o! i! order to reprodu8e itsel7
Cerhaps this gives us o!e possible dei!itio! o postmoder! art as opposed to moder!ist art+ i!
postmoder!ism- the tra!sgressive e?8ess loses its sho8k value a!d is ully i!tegrated i!to the
established art market7
This 6eird postmoder! spa8e 6here e?8esses lose their subversive edge bri!gs us to a urther
8riti8al poi!t 6hi8h 8o!8er!s the properly moder! 8apitalist 8lass struggle i! its diere!8e rom
traditio!al 8aste a!d eudal hierar8hies+ si!8e =egelIs !otio! o domi!atio! 6as limited to the
traditio!al struggle bet6ee! master a!d serva!t- 6hat he 8ould !ot e!visage 6as the ki!d o
relatio!ship o domi!atio! 6hi8h persists i! a post:revolutio!ary situatio! @reerri!g here to the
JbourgeoisK revolutio! doi!g a6ay 6ith traditio!al privilegesA- 6here all i!dividuals re8og!iUe ea8h
other as auto!omous ree subje8ts7 This Jprodigious so8ial leveli!gK o a moder! demo8ra8y

8ertai!ly does !ot e?8lude the emerge!8e o 6ealth a!d o proou!d disti!8tio!s bet6ee! ri8h a!d poor-
eve! i! the so8ialist 8ou!tries7 4or is it i! a!y 6ay to be u!derstood as the e!d o 8lasses i! their
e8o!omi8 se!se+ there are still 6orkers a!d ma!agers i! these so8ieties- there is still proit a!d
e?ploitatio!- reserve armies o the u!employed- a!d so o! a!d so orth7 3ut the !e6 8ultural eNuality O
is i!used 6ith a po6erul hatred o hierar8hy a!d spe8ial privileges a!d 6ith a passio!ate rese!tme!t
o 8aste disti!8tio!s a!d i!herited 8ultural superiority7 9t is permitted to be 6ealthy- so lo!g as the ri8h
ma! is as vulgar as everyo!e else7
21
A situatio! 6hi8h- o!e might add- ope!s up the u!e?pe8ted possibility o a ge!ui!ely
proletaria! re:appropriatio! o Jhigh 8ulture7K
All these 8ases o =egelIs histori8al limitatio! seem to themselves 8all or a! =egelia! a!alysis+
laborers redu8ed to a! appe!di? o ma8hi!eryT reality domi!ated by the virtual>ideal sel:moveme!t o
8apitalIs 8ir8ulatio!T a hierar8hy persisti!g i! the very orm o Jplebeia!iUatio!KEparado?i8al
reversals 6hi8h seem to give body to all the t6ists a!d tur!s o the most sophisti8ated diale8ti87 /hat
ki!d o Jre8o!8iliatio!K 8a! 6e the! imagi!e i! these !e6 8o!ditio!sM Apropos =egelIs
Jre8o!8iliatio!K i! a moder! post:revolutio!ary state- 2ameso! outli!es a higher- Je!largedK versio! o
=egelia! re8o!8iliatio!- a versio! appropriate or our global 8apitalist epo8h+ the proje8t o a Jhuma!
ageK 8hara8teriUed by Jprodu8tio!:or:usK @the e!d o 8lassesA a!d e8ology7
22
2ameso!Is vie6 is that-
ar rom sta!di!g or the ultimate Je!d o history-K the re8o!8iliatio! proposed at the e!d o the 8hapter
o! Spirit i! the )henomenology is a temporary- ragile sy!thesisE=egel himsel 6as a6are that this
re8o!8iliatio! 6as u!der threat- as is 8lear rom his pa!i8ky rea8tio! to the revolutio! o 1&"0 a!d the
irst sig!s o u!iversal demo8ra8y @re8all his urious reje8tio! o the 3ritish ele8toral Feorm 3ill- the
irst step to6ards u!iversal ele8tio!sA7 9s it the! !ot 8o!siste!t that- i! vie6 o the !e6 8o!tradi8tio!s o
the !i!etee!th:8e!tury 8apitalist system 6hi8h e?ploded the ragile =egelia! sy!thesis- a re!e6ed
=egelia! approa8h 6hi8h remai!s aithul to the idea o 8o!8rete u!iversality- o u!iversal rights or
all- J8alls i! its very stru8ture or the subseNue!t e!largeme!ts o later historyK
2"
a!d or a !e6 proje8t
o re8o!8iliatio!M Su8h a move is !o!etheless illegitimate+ it does !ot take i!to a88ou!t i! a sui8ie!tly
radi8al 6ay that the same parado? as that o the retroa8tive positi!g o presuppositio!s holds also or
the uture7
This is 6hy =egel 6as right to i!sist that the o6l o ,i!erva takes light o!ly at duskT a!d also
6hy the t6e!tieth:8e!tury 8ommu!ist proje8t 6as utopia! pre8isely i!soar as it 6as !ot radi8al
e!oughEthat is- i!soar as the u!dame!tal 8apitalist thrust o u!leashed produ8tivity survived i! it-
deprived o its 8o!8rete 8o!tradi8tory 8o!ditio!s o e?iste!8e7 The i!adeNua8y o =eidegger- Ador!o
a!d =orkheimer- a!d so o!- lies i! their aba!do!me!t o the 8o!8rete so8ial a!alysis o 8apitalism+ i!
their very 8ritiNue or over8omi!g o ,ar?- they i! a 8ertai! 6ay repeat ,ar?Is mistakeElike him- they
take u!leashed produ8tivity as somethi!g ultimately i!depe!de!t o the 8o!8rete 8apitalist so8ial
ormatio!7 Dapitalism a!d 8ommu!ism are !ot t6o diere!t histori8al realiUatio!s- t6o spe8ies- o
Ji!strume!tal reaso!KEi!strume!tal reaso! as su8h is 8apitalist- grou!ded i! 8apitalist relatio!s- a!d
Jreally e?isti!g so8ialismK ailed be8ause it 6as ultimately a subspe8ies o 8apitalism- a! ideologi8al
attempt to Jhave o!eIs 8ake a!d eat it-K to break out o 8apitalism 6hile retai!i!g its key i!gredie!t7
,ar?Is !otio! o the 8ommu!ist so8iety is itsel the i!here!t 8apitalist a!tasyT that is- a a!tasmati8
s8e!ario or resolvi!g the 8apitalist a!tago!isms he so aptly des8ribed7 9! other 6ords- our 6ager is
that- eve! i 6e take a6ay the teleologi8al !otio! o 8ommu!ism @the so8iety o ully u!leashed
produ8tivityA as the impli8it sta!dard by 6hi8h ,ar? measures the alie!atio! o e?isti!g so8iety- the
bulk o his J8ritiNue o politi8al e8o!omy-K his i!sights i!to the sel:propelli!g vi8ious 8y8le o
8apitalist @reAprodu8tio!- survives7
The task o 8o!temporary theory is thus double+ o! the o!e ha!d- to repeat the ,ar?ist J8ritiNue
o politi8al e8o!omyK 6ithout the utopia!:ideologi8al !otio! o 8ommu!ism as its i!here!t sta!dardT
o! the other ha!d- to imagi!e really breaki!g out o the 8apitalist horiUo! 6ithout alli!g i!to the trap
o retur!i!g to the emi!e!tly premoder! !otio! o a bala!8ed- @sel:Arestrai!ed so8iety @the Jpre:
Dartesia!K temptatio! to 6hi8h most 8o!temporary e8ology su88umbsA7 A retur! to =egel is 8ru8ial i!
order to perorm this task- a retur! 6hi8h dispe!ses 6ith all the 8lassi8 a!ti:=egelia! topi8s- espe8ially
that o =egelIs vora8ious !ar8issism- o the =egelia! 9dea s6allo6i!g up or i!ter!aliUi!g the 6hole o
reality7 9!stead o tryi!g to u!dermi!e or over8ome this J!ar8issismK rom the outside- emphasiUi!g the
Jprepo!dera!8e o the obje8tiveK @or the a8t that Jthe /hole is the !o!:true-K a!d every other similar
moti i! Ador!oIs reje8tio! o Jide!titaria!K idealismA- o!e should rather problematiUe this igure o
=egel by aski!g a simple Nuestio!+ which =egel is our poi!t o reere!8e hereM Go !ot both .ukh8s a!d
Ador!o reer to the Jidealist:subje8tivistK @misAreadi!g o =egel- to the sta!dard image o =egel as the
Jabsolute idealistK 6ho posited Spirit as the true age!t o history- its Subje8t:Substa!8eM /ithi! this
rame6ork- Dapital 8a! ee8tively appear as a !e6 embodime!t o the =egelia! Spirit- a! abstra8t
mo!ster 6hi8h moves a!d mediates itsel- parasitiUi!g the a8tivity o a8tual- really e?isti!g i!dividuals7
This is 6hy .ukh8s also remai!s all too idealist 6he! he proposes simply repla8i!g the =egelia! Spirit
6ith the proletariat as the Subje8t:Hbje8t o =istory+ .ukh8s is here !ot really =egelia!- but a pre:
=egelia! idealist7
9- ho6ever- o!e problematiUes this igure- a!other =egel appears- a more JmaterialistK =egel
or 6hom the re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d substa!8e does !ot mea! that the subje8t Js6allo6sK
its substa!8e- i!ter!aliUi!g it i!to its o6! subordi!ate mome!t7 Fe8o!8iliatio! rather amou!ts to a
mu8h more modest overlappi!g or redoubli!g o the t6o separatio!s+ the subje8t has to re8og!iUe i! its
alie!atio! rom substa!8e the separatio! o substa!8e rom itsel7 This overlappi!g is 6hat is missed i!
the Feuerba8hia!:,ar?ia! logi8 o dis:alie!atio! i! 6hi8h the subje8t over8omes its alie!atio! by
re8og!iUi!g itsel as the a8tive age!t 6hi8h has itsel posited 6hat appears to it as its substa!tial
presuppositio!7 9! the =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K bet6ee! subje8t a!d substa!8e- there is !o absolute
Subje8t 6hi8h- i! total sel:tra!spare!8y- appropriates or i!ter!aliUes all obje8tive substa!tial 8o!te!t7
3ut Jre8o!8iliatio!K also does !ot mea! @as it does i! the li!e o 1erma! 9dealism rom =Zlderli! to
S8helli!gA that the subje8t should re!ou!8e the hubris o per8eivi!g itsel as the a?is o the 6orld a!d
a88ept its 8o!stitutive Jde:8e!teri!g-K its depe!de!8y o! some primordial- abyssal Absolute beyo!d or
be!eath the subje8t>obje8t divide- a!d- as su8h- also beyo!d the subje8tIs 8o!8eptual grasp7 The subje8t
is !ot its o6! origi!+ =egel irmly reje8ts Fi8hteIs !otio! o the absolute 9 6hi8h posits itsel a!d is
!othi!g but the pure a8tivity o this sel:positi!g7 3ut the subje8t is also !ot just a se8o!dary a88ide!tal
appe!di? or outgro6th o some pre:subje8tive substa!tial reality+ there is !o substa!tial 3ei!g to 6hi8h
the subje8t 8a! retur!- !o e!8ompassi!g orga!i8 Hrder o 3ei!g i! 6hi8h the subje8t has to i!d its
proper pla8e7 JFe8o!8iliatio!K bet6ee! subje8t a!d substa!8e mea!s the a88epta!8e o this radi8al la8k
o a!y irm ou!datio!al poi!t+ the subje8t is !ot its o6! origi!- it 8omes se8o!d- it is depe!de!t upo!
its substa!tial presuppositio!sT but these presuppositio!s also do !ot have a substa!tial 8o!siste!8y o
their o6! but are al6ays retroa8tively posited7
/hat this also mea!s is that 8ommu!ism should !o lo!ger be 8o!8eived as the subje8tive
@reAappropriatio! o the alie!ated substa!tial 8o!te!tEall versio!s o re8o!8iliatio! as Jsubje8t
s6allo6s the substa!8eK should be reje8ted7 So- agai!- Jre8o!8iliatio!K is the ull a88epta!8e o the
abyss o the de:substa!tialiUed pro8ess as the o!ly a8tuality there is+ the subje8t has !o substa!tial
a8tuality- it 8omes se8o!d- it emerges o!ly through the pro8ess o separatio!- the over8omi!g o its
presuppositio!s- a!d these presuppositio!s are also just a retroa8tive ee8t o the same pro8ess o their
over8omi!g7 The result is thus that there is- at both e?tremes o the pro8ess- a ailure or !egativity
i!s8ribed i! the very heart o the e!tity 6e are deali!g 6ith7 9 the status o the subje8t is thoroughly
Jpro8essual-K this mea!s that it emerges o!ly through the ailure to ully a8tualiUe itsel7 This bri!gs us
agai! to o!e possible ormal dei!itio! o the subje8t+ a subje8t tries to arti8ulate @Je?pressKA itsel i! a
sig!iyi!g 8hai!- this arti8ulatio! ails- a!d i! a!d through this ailure- the subje8t emerges+ the subje8t
is the ailure o its sig!iyi!g represe!tatio!E6hi8h is 6hy .a8a! 6rites the subje8t o the sig!iier as
b- as Jbarred7K 9! a love letter- the very ailure o the 6riter to ormulate his de8laratio! i! a 8lear a!d
ee8tive 6ay- his va8illatio!s- the letterIs ragme!tary style- a!d so o!- 8a! i! themselves be proo
@perhaps the !e8essary a!d o!ly reliable prooA that the love he proesses is authe!ti8Ehere- the very
ailure to deliver the message properly is the sig! o its authe!ti8ity7 9 the message is delivered too
smoothly- it 6ill arouse the suspi8io! that it is part o a 6ell:pla!!ed approa8h- or that the 6riter loves
himsel- the beauty o his 6riti!g- more tha! his love:obje8t- that the latter is ee8tively redu8ed to a
prete?t or e!gagi!g i! the !ar8issisti8ally satisyi!g a8tivity o 6riti!g7
A!d the same goes or substa!8e+ substa!8e is !ot o!ly al6ays already lost- it o!ly 8omes to be
through its loss- as a se8o!dary retur!:to:itselE6hi8h mea!s that substa!8e is al6ays already
subje8tiviUed7 9! the Jre8o!8iliatio!K bet6ee! subje8t a!d substa!8e- both poles thus lose their irm
ide!tity7 Take the 8ase o e8ology+ radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8s should aim !either at 8omplete
mastery over !ature !or at huma!ityIs humble a88epta!8e o the predomi!a!8e o ,other 0arth7
Father- !ature should be e?posed i! all its 8atastrophi8 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d i!determi!a8y- a!d the
u!predi8table 8o!seNue!8es o huma! age!8y ully assumedEvie6ed rom this perspe8tive o the
Jother =egel-K the revolutio!ary a8t !o lo!ger i!volves the .ukh8sia! substa!8e:subje8t as its age!t- as
the age!t 6ho k!o6s 6hat it is doi!g 6hile a8ti!g7
=egel is- o 8ourse- ully a6are o the a8t that our thi!ki!g 6a!ts to Jjump ahead o its timeK
a!d proje8t a utureT his poi!t is that su8h thi!ki!g is al6ays a!d by dei!itio! Jideologi8al-K mistake!+
its i!terve!tio! i!to 3ei!g ge!erates somethi!g u!e?pe8ted- totally diere!t rom 6hat 6as proje8ted7
Therei! resides the lesso! o the Fre!8h Fevolutio!+ the pure thought o u!iversal eNuality a!d
reedom- imposi!g itsel o!to so8ial 3ei!g- ge!erated the Terror7 ,ar?Is 8ou!ter:argume!t here is that
his revolutio!ary theory is !ot a utopia! proje8tio! i!to the uture+ it merely e?trapolates te!de!8ies
a!d possibilities rom the a!tago!isms o the prese!t7 =egel is 6ro!g i! his basi8 presuppositio! that
o!e 8a! ratio!ally grasp the Crese!t as a Totality+ it 8a!!ot be do!e be8ause our histori8al Crese!t is i!
itsel split- traversed by a!tago!isms- i!8ompleteEthe o!ly 6ay to 8o!8retely grasp it as a ratio!al
totality is rom the sta!dpoi!t o the revolutio!ary age!t 6hi8h 6ill resolve those a!tago!isms7 Crese!t
a!tago!isms are !ot JreadableK o! their o6! termsT they are like the 3e!jami!ia! tra8es 6hi8h are
readable o!ly rom the uture7 /hat =egel reje8ts is pre8isely su8h a totaliUatio!:rom:the:uture+ the
o!ly totality a88essible to us is the la6ed totality o the prese!t- a!d the task o Thought is to
Jre8og!iUe the =eart i! the Dross o the prese!t-K to grasp ho6 the -otality of the )resent is complete
in its very incompleteness- ho6 this Totality is sustai!ed by those very eatures 6hi8h appear as its
obsta8les or atal la6s7
The task here is to leave behi!d the sta!dard Jsubje8tivistK readi!g o =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K
6hose 8learest i!sta!8e is .ukh8sIs 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness but 6hi8h also u!derlies ,ar?Is
reere!8e to =egel7
2(
A88ordi!g to this readi!g- i! re8o!8iliatio!- the subje8t re8og!iUes itsel i! the
alie!ated substa!8e @substa!tial 8o!te!tAT that is- it re8og!iUes i! it the reiied produ8t o its o6! 6ork-
a!d thereby re:appropriates it- tra!sorms it i!to a tra!spare!t medium o its sel:e?pressio!7 The key
eature here is that the subje8t- the age!t o re:appropriatio!- is i! the si!gular @eve! i it is 8o!8eived as
a 8olle8tive subje8tAT 6hat thereby disappears is the dime!sio! o 6hat .a8a! 8alls the Jbig Hther-K the
mi!imally Jobje8tiviUedK symboli8 order- the mi!imal sel:tra!s8e!de!8e 6hi8h alo!e sustai!s the
dime!sio! o i!tersubje8tivityEi!tersubje8tivity 8a! !ever be dissolved i!to the dire8t i!tera8tio! o
i!dividuals7
This is 6hy o!e should reje8t !ot o!ly the @i!Aamously stupid Jdiale8ti8al:materialistK
substitutio! o JideaK 6ith JmatterK as the absolute @so that diale8ti8s be8omes a set o diale8ti8al
Jla6sK o matterIs moveme!tA- but also .ukh8sIs more rei!ed Jmaterialist reversal o =egel-K his
substitutio! o =egelIs JidealistK subje8t:obje8t @the absolute 9deaA 6ith the proletariat as the Ja8tualK
histori8al subje8t:obje8t7 .ukh8sIs JreversalK also implies a ormalist a!d !o!:=egelia! separatio! o
the diale8ti8al method rom the material to 6hi8h it is applied+ =egel 6as right to des8ribe the pro8ess
o the subje8tIs alie!atio! a!d re:appropriatio! o the JetishiUedK or reiied substa!tial 8o!te!t- he just
did !ot see that 6hat he des8ribed as the 9deaIs sel:moveme!t is a8tually a! histori8al developme!t
6hi8h 8ulmi!ates i! the emerge!8e o the substa!8eless subje8tivity o the proletariat a!d its re:
appropriatio! o the alie!ated substa!8e through a revolutio!ary a8t7 The reaso! 6e should reje8t this
Jmaterialist reversalK is that it remai!s all too idealist+ lo8ati!g =egelIs idealism i! the Jsubje8tK o the
pro8ess @the Jabsolute 9deaKA- it ails to see the subje8tivist JidealismK i!here!t i! the very matri? o the
diale8ti8al pro8ess @the sel:alie!ated subje8t 6hi8h re:appropriates its JreiiedK substa!tial 8o!te!t-
positi!g itsel as the absolute subje8t:obje8tA7
There are t6o 6ays to break out o this JidealismK+ either o!e reje8ts =egelIs diale8ti8s as su8h-
dismissi!g the !otio! o the subje8tive Jmediatio!K o all substa!tial 8o!te!t as irredu8ibly Jidealist-K
proposi!g to repla8e it 6ith a radi8ally diere!t matri? @Althusser+ stru8tural @overAdetermi!atio!T
GeleuUe+ diere!8e a!d repetitio!T Gerrida+ diffAranceT Ador!o+ !egative diale8ti8s 6ith its
Jprepo!dera!8e o the obje8tiveKAT or o!e reje8ts su8h a readi!g o =egel @o8used o! the idea o
Jre8o!8iliatio!K as the subje8tive appropriatio! o the alie!ated substa!tial 8o!te!tA as Jidealist-K as a
misreadi!g 6hi8h remai!s bli!d to the true subversive 8ore o =egelIs diale8ti87 This is our positio!+
the =egel o the absolute Subje8t s6allo6i!g up all obje8tive 8o!te!t is a retroa8tive a!tasy o his
8riti8s- starti!g 6ith late S8helli!gIs tur! to Jpositive philosophy7K This JpositivityK is ou!d also i! the
you!g ,ar?- i! the guise o the Aristotelia! reassertio! o positive or8es or pote!tials o 3ei!g pre:
e?isti!g logi8al or !otio!al mediatio!7 H!e should thus Nuestio! the very image o =egel:the:absolute:
idealist presupposed by his 8riti8sEthey atta8k the 6ro!g =egel- a stra6 ma!7 /hat are they u!able to
thi!kM The pure pro8essuality o the subje8t 6hi8h emerges as Jits o6! result7K This is 6hy talk about
the subje8tIs Jsel:alie!atio!K is de8eptive- as i the subje8t someho6 pre8edes its alie!atio!E6hat this
misses is the 6ay the subje8t emerges through the Jsel:alie!atio!K o the substa!8e- not o itsel7 /e
should thereore reje8t the you!g ,ar?Is 8elebratio! o the subje8tIs produ8tive po6ers or pote!tials-
o its esse!tial !atureE,ar? is here se8retly Aristotelia!- presupposi!g a Jsubsta!tialK subje8t 6hi8h
pre:e?ists the deployme!t o these pote!tials i! historyT that is- his 8riti8al move

represe!ts a ki!d o regressio! to a! Aristotelia! or !aturalist esse!tialism- o!e 6hi8h borro6s a
teleologi8al logi8 o su8h J!aturesK that aba!do!s rather tha! 8ompletes the =egelia! proje8t7 The key
a!d very 8o!troversial poi!t to be dee!ded is+ =egelIs sel:maki!g model is !ot derived rom the
Aristotelia! !otio!s o !atural gro6th a!d maturatio! i!to some lourishi!g state7
2#
H!e sta!dard 8riti8ism addressed by some late partisa!s o Jdiale8ti8al materialismK agai!st the
Jsubje8tivistK ,ar?ism o the you!g .ukh8s is that there is at least o!e key adva!tage o Jdiale8ti8al
materialismK+ si!8e it lo8ates huma! history i! the ge!eral rame o a! all:e!8ompassi!g Jdiale8ti8s o
!ature-K it is mu8h more appropriate or graspi!g the e8ologi8al problemati87 3ut is this really soM 9s it
!ot- o! the 8o!trary- that the diale8ti8al:materialist visio! 6ith its Jobje8tive la6s o !atureK justiies a
ruthless te8h!ologi8al domi!atio! over a!d e?ploitatio! o !atureM /hile the philosophi8ally mu8h
more rei!ed Ador!ia! vie6 o !ature as the e!8ompassi!g Hther o huma!ity- out o 6hi8h huma!ity
emerged a!d to 6hi8h it orever remai!s i!debted @rom Dialectic of EnlightenmentA- 8learly sees this-
it does !ot oer mu8h more tha! the 6ell:k!o6! 8li8hLs o the J8ritiNue o i!strume!tal reaso!K+ it
ails to provide a 8lear 6ay to thi!k J!atureK philosophi8ally- i! its priority to huma!ity7
/e 8a! see !o6 6hy Ador!oIs proje8t o J!egative diale8ti8s-K 6hi8h sees itsel as the
over8omi!g o =egelIs JpositiveK diale8ti8s- misses the poi!t7 J4egative diale8ti8sK 6a!ts to break out
o the 8o!i!es o the Jpri!8iple o ide!tityK 6hi8h e!slaves or subordi!ates every other!ess through
8o!8eptual mediatio!7 9! =egelIs idealism- !egativity- alterity- a!d diere!8e are asserted- but o!ly as
subordi!ate se8o!dary mome!ts servi!g their oppositeEthe absolute Subje8t re:appropriates all
other!ess- Jsublati!gK it i!to a mome!t o its o6! sel:mediatio!7 Ador!o 8ou!ters this 6ith his
Jprima8y o the obje8tiveK+ i!stead o appropriati!g or i!ter!aliUi!g all other!ess- diale8ti8s should
remai! ope! to6ards it- gra!ti!g ultimate prima8y to the obje8tive over the subje8tive- to diere!8e
over ide!tity7 /hat i- ho6ever- the image o =egelIs diale8ti8 this 8ritiNue presupposes is 6ro!gM
/hat i- i! its i!!ermost 8ore- =egelIs diale8ti8 is !ot a ma8hi!e or appropriati!g or mediati!g all
other!ess- or sublati!g all 8o!ti!ge!8y i!to a subordi!ated ideal mome!t o the !otio!al !e8essityM
/hat i =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K already is the a88epta!8e o a! irredu8ible 8o!ti!ge!8y at the very
heart o !otio!al !e8essityM /hat i it i!volves- as its 8ulmi!ati!g mome!t- the setti!g:ree o
obje8tivity i! its other!essM 9! this 8ase- it is Ador!oIs J!egative diale8ti8sK 6hi8h- parado?i8ally-
remai!s 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o Jide!titaria!K thought+ the e!dless 8riti8al J6ork o the !egativeK 6hi8h
is !ever do!e- si!8e it presupposes 9de!tity as its starti!g poi!t a!d ou!datio!7 9! other 6ords- Ador!o
does !ot see ho6 6hat he is looki!g or @a break:out rom the 8o!i!es o 9de!tityA is already at 6ork at
the very heart o the =egelia! diale8ti8- so that it is Ador!oIs very 8ritiNue 6hi8h obliterates the
subversive 8ore o =egelIs thought- retroa8tively 8eme!ti!g the igure o his diale8ti8 as the pa!:
logi8ist mo!ster o the all:8o!sumi!g Absolute 4otio!7
Goes this mea! that the ultimate subje8tive positio! 6e 8a! adopt is that o a split 6hi8h
8hara8teriUes the etishisti8 disavo6alM 9s it the 8ase that all 6e 8a! do is take the sta!8e o+ Jalthough 9
k!o6 very 6ell that there is !o big Hther- that the big Hther is o!ly the sedime!tatio!- the reiied orm-
o i!tersubje8tive i!tera8tio!s- 9 am 8ompelled to a8t as i the big Hther is a! e?ter!al or8e 6hi8h
8o!trols us allKM 9t is here that .a8a!Is u!dame!tal i!sight i!to ho6 the big Hther is Jbarred-K la8ki!g-
i!:e?iste!t eve!- a8Nuires its 6eight+ the big Hther is !ot the substa!tial 1rou!d- it is i!8o!siste!t or
la8ki!g- its very u!8tio!i!g depe!ds o! subje8ts 6hose parti8ipatio! i! the symboli8 pro8ess sustai!s
it7 9! pla8e o both the submersio! o the subje8t i! its substa!tial Hther a!d the subje8tIs appropriatio!
o this Hther 6e thus have a mutual impli8atio! through la8k- through the overlappi!g o the t6o la8ks-
the la8k 8o!stitutive o the subje8t a!d the la8k o>i! the Hther itsel7 9t is perhaps time to read =egelIs
amous ormula JH!e should grasp the Absolute !ot o!ly as substa!8e- but also as subje8tK more
8autiously a!d literally+ the poi!t is !ot that the Absolute is !ot substa!8e- but subje8t7 The poi!t is
hidde! i! the J!ot o!ly O but also-K that is- i! the i!terplay bet6ee! the t6o- 6hi8h also ope!s up the
spa8e o reedomE6e are ree be8ause there is a la8k i! the Hther- be8ause the substa!8e out o 6hi8h
6e gre6 a!d o! 6hi8h 6e rely is i!8o!siste!t- barred- ailed- marked by a! impossibility7
3ut 6hat ki!d o reedom is thereby ope!ed upM =ere 6e should raise a 8lear a!d brutal
Nuestio! i! all its !aSvetL+ i 6e reje8t ,ar?Is 8ritiNue a!d embra8e =egelIs !otio! o the o6l o
,i!erva 6hi8h takes light o!ly at duskEthat is- i 6e a88ept =egelIs 8laim that the positio! o a!
histori8al age!t able to ide!tiy its o6! role i! the histori8al pro8ess a!d to a8t a88ordi!gly is i!here!tly
impossible- si!8e su8h sel:reere!tiality makes it impossible or the age!t to a8tor i! the impa8t o its
o6! i!terve!tio!- o ho6 this a8t itsel 6ill ae8t the 8o!stellatio!E6hat are the 8o!seNue!8es o this
positio! or the a8t- or ema!8ipatory politi8al i!terve!tio!sM Goes it mea! that 6e are 8o!dem!ed to
a8ti!g bli!dly- to taki!g risky steps i!to the u!k!o6! 6hose i!al out8ome totally eludes us- to
i!terve!tio!s 6hose mea!i!g 6e 8a! establish o!ly retroa8tively- so that- at the mome!t o the a8t- all
6e 8a! do is hope that history 6ill sho6 mer8y @gra8eA a!d re6ard our i!terve!tio! 6ith at least a
modi8um o su88essM 3ut 6hat i- i!stead o 8o!8eivi!g this impossibility o a8tori!g i! the
8o!seNue!8es o our a8ts as a limitatio! o our reedom- 6e 8o!8eive it as the Uero:level @!egativeA
8o!ditio! o our reedomM
The !otio! o reedom as k!o6! !e8essity ou!d its highest e?pressio! i! Spi!oUaIs thought-
a!d !o 6o!der that Spi!oUa also provided the most su88i!8t dei!itio! o the perso!aliUed !otio! o
1od+ the o!ly true 1od is !ature itselEthat is- substa!8e as causa sui- as the eter!al te?ture o 8auses:
ee8ts7 The perso!aliUed !otio! o 1od as a 6ise old ma! 6ho- sitti!g some6here up there i! the
heave!s- rules the 6orld a88ordi!g to his 8apri8e- is !othi!g but the mystiied positive e?pressio! o
our ig!ora!8eE6he! our k!o6ledge o a8tual !atural 8ausal !et6orks is limited- 6e as it 6ere ill i!
the bla!ks by proje8ti!g a supreme Dause o!to a! u!k!o6! highest e!tity7 From the =egelia! vie6-
Spi!oUa just !eeds to be take! more literally tha! he 6as ready to take himsel+ 6hat i this la8k or
i!8omplete!ess o the 8ausal !et6ork is !ot o!ly epistemologi8al but also o!tologi8alM /hat i it is !ot
o!ly our k!o6ledge o reality but reality itsel 6hi8h is i!8ompleteM 9! this 8ase- is !ot the perso!aliUed
!otio! o 1od also a! i!di8atio! @a mystiied i!di8atio!- but !o!etheless a! i!di8atio!A o the
o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o reality itselM Hr- to put it i! terms o the 8lassi8al =egelia! disti!8tio!
bet6ee! 6hat 9 6a!t or mea! to say a!d 6hat 9 a8tually say- 6he! 9 say J1od-K 9 6a!t to !ame the
tra!s8e!de!t absolute Cerso! 6ho gover!s reality- but 6hat 9 really say is that reality is o!tologi8ally
i!8omplete- that it is marked by a u!dame!tal impossibility or i!8o!siste!8y7
9! this se!se Gostoyevsky 6as right+ it is o!ly the perso!aliUed 1odEi!soar as he is the !ame
or a desiri!g>la8ki!g Hther- or a gap i! the HtherE6ho gives reedom+ 9 am !ot ree by bei!g the
8reator a!d master o all reality- 6he! !othi!g resists my po6er to appropriate all heteroge!eous
8o!te!tT 9 am ree i the substa!8e o my bei!g is !ot a ull 8ausal !et6ork- but a! o!tologi8ally
i!8omplete ield7 This i!8omplete!ess is @or- rather- 8a! also beA sig!aled by a! opaNue desiri!g 1od- a
1od 6ho is himsel marked by impere8tio!s a!d i!itude- so that 6he! 6e e!8ou!ter him- 6e 8o!ro!t
the e!igma o J/hat does he 6a!tMK a! e!igma 6hi8h holds also or 1od himsel @6ho does !ot k!o6
6hat he 6a!tsA7
3ut- agai!- 6hat does this mea! or our ability to a8t- to i!terve!e i! historyM There are i!
Fre!8h t6o 6ords or the JutureK 6hi8h 8a!!ot be adeNuately re!dered i! 0!glish+ futur a!d avenir7
Futur sta!ds or the uture as the 8o!ti!uatio! o the prese!t- as the ull a8tualiUatio! o te!de!8ies
6hi8h are already prese!t- 6hile avenir poi!ts more to6ards a radi8al break- a dis8o!ti!uity 6ith the
prese!tEavenir is 6hat is to 8ome @K venirA- !ot just 6hat 6ill be7 For e?ample- i! the 8o!temporary
apo8alypti8 situatio!- the ultimate horiUo! o the JutureK is 6hat 2ea!:Cierre Gupuy 8alls the dystopia!
Ji?ed poi!t-K the Uero:poi!t o e8ologi8al breakdo6!- global e8o!omi8 a!d so8ial 8haos- et87Eeve! i
it is i!dei!itely postpo!ed- this Uero:poi!t is the virtual Jattra8torK to6ards 6hi8h our reality- let to
itsel- te!ds7 The 6ay to 8ombat the uture 8atastrophe is through a8ts 6hi8h i!terrupt this driti!g
to6ards the dystopia! Ji?ed poi!t-K a8ts 6hi8h take upo! themselves the risk o givi!g birth to some
radi8al Hther!ess Jto 8ome7K /e 8a! see here ho6 ambiguous the sloga! J!o utureK is+ at a deeper
level- it desig!ates !ot the impossibility o 8ha!ge- but pre8isely 6hat 6e should be strivi!g orEto
break the hold the 8atastrophi8 JutureK has over us- a!d thereby to ope! up the spa8e or somethi!g
4e6 Jto 8ome7K
CHAPTER '

Carata?is+ Figures o the Giale8ti8al Cro8ess

The 6idespread use o the !otio! o Ji!telle8tual i!tuitio!K i! post:*a!tia! 1erma! 9dealism is
not the sig! o a regressio! to pre:8riti8al metaphysi8s @as orthodo? *a!tia!s 8laimA7 For post:*a!tia!
9dealists- Ji!telle8tual i!tuitio!K is !ot a passive i!tuitive re8eptio! or visio! o !oume!al reality+ o! the
8o!trary- it al6ays desig!ates a! active- produ8tive- spo!ta!eous a8ulty- a!d- as su8h- it remai!s irmly
rooted i! the *a!tia! topi8 o the a8tive sy!thesis o tra!s8e!de!tal imagi!atio! @6hi8h is 6hy those
6ho rehabilitate this !otio! e!thusiasti8ally reer to se8tio!s $' a!d $$ o *a!tIs ,riti<ue of
CudgmentA7
1
So 6hy did *a!t reje8t this !otio!M /hat threshold did he reuse to 8rossM
9! 1&0(- to6ards the e!d o his lie- *a!t 6rote that the t6o hi!ges o! 6hi8h his e!tire thought
tur!s are the ideality o spa8e a!d time a!d the reality o the 8o!8ept o reedom7
2
*a!tIs oppositio! to
the 8ommo!:se!se attitude is 8lear here+ or 8ommo!:se!se !aturalism- spa8e a!d time are real @real
obje8ts a!d pro8esses JareK i! spa8e a!d time- spa8e a!d time are !ot merely the tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!
o our e?perie!8e o realityA- 6hile reedom is ideal @a orm o the sel:per8eptio! o our 8o!s8ious Sel
6ith- perhaps- !o ou!datio! i! basi8 reality 6here o!ly matter really e?istsA7 For *a!t- o! the 8o!trary-
spa8e a!d time are ideal @!ot properties o thi!gs i! themselves- but orms o per8eptio! imposed o!
phe!ome!a by the tra!s8e!de!tal SelA- 6hile reedom is real i! the most radi8al @eve! .a8a!ia!A
se!se+ reedom is a! i!e?pli8able- Jirratio!al-K u!a88ou!table Ja8t o reaso!-K a 7eal 6hi8h disturbs
our !otio! o @phe!ome!alA spatio:temporal reality as gover!ed by !atural la6s7 For this reaso!- our
e?perie!8e o reedom is properly traumatic- eve! or *a!t himsel- 6ho mistakes the Feal as the
impossible 6hi8h happens @that 6hi8h J9 8a!!ot !ot doKA or the Feal as the impossible:to:happe! @that
6hi8h J9 8a!!ot ever ully a88omplishKA7 That is to say- i! *a!tia! ethi8s- the true te!sio! is !ot
bet6ee! the subje8tIs idea that he is a8ti!g o!ly or the sake o duty a!d the hidde! a8t that there 6as
a8tually some pathologi8al motivatio! at 6ork @vulgar psy8hoa!alysisAT the true te!sio! is e?a8tly the
opposite o!e+ the abyssally ree a8t is u!bearable- traumati8- i! that 6he! 6e a88omplish a! a8t out o
reedom- a!d i! order to sustai! it- 6e e?perie!8e it as 8o!ditio!ed by some pathologi8al motivatio!7
H!e is tempted to reer here to the key *a!tia! 8o!8ept o s8hematiUatio!+ a ree a8t cannot be
schemati2ed- i!tegrated i!to our e?perie!8e- so- i! order to s8hematiUe it- 6e have to JpathologiUeK it7
A!d *a!t himsel- as a rule- misreads the true te!sio! @the dii8ulty i! e!dorsi!g a!d assumi!g a ree
a8tA as the sta!dard te!sio! ae8ti!g the age!t 6ho 8a! !ever be sure i his a8t really 6as ree- rather
tha! motivated by hidde! pathologi8al impulses7 This is 6hy- as *ierkegaard put it- the true trauma lies
!ot i! our mortality- but i! our immortality+ it is easy to a88ept that 6e are just a spe8k o dust i! the
i!i!ite u!iverseT 6hat is mu8h more dii8ult to a88ept is that 6e ee8tively are immortal ree bei!gs
6ho- as su8h- 8a!!ot es8ape the terrible respo!sibility o our reedom7
The root o this trouble lies 6ith the deadlo8k at the heart o the *a!tia! edii8e- as !oted by
=e!ri8h+ *a!t starts 6ith our 8og!itive 8apa8ityEthe Sel 6ith its three eatures @u!ity- sy!theti8
a8tivity- empti!essA is ae8ted by !oume!al thi!gs a!d- through its a8tive sy!thesis- orga!iUes
impressio!s i!to phe!ome!al realityT ho6ever- o!8e he arrives at the o!tologi8al result o his 8ritiNue
o k!o6ledge @the disti!8tio! bet6ee! phe!ome!al reality a!d the !oume!al 6orld o Thi!gs:i!:
themselvesA- Jthere 8a! be !o retur! to the sel7 There is !o plausible i!terpretatio! o the sel as a
member o o!e o the t6o 6orlds7K
"
This is 6here pra8ti8al reaso! 8omes i!+ the o!ly 6ay to retur!
rom o!tology to the Sel is via reedom+ reedom u!ites the t6o 6orlds- a!d provides or the u!ity or
8ohere!8e o the SelEthis is 6hy *a!t repeated agai! a!d agai! the motto+ Jsubordi!ate everythi!g to
reedom7K
(
=ere- ho6ever- a gap bet6ee! *a!t a!d his ollo6ers o88urs+ or *a!t- reedom is a!
Jirratio!alK a8t o reaso!- it is simply a!d i!e?pli8ably give!- somethi!g like a! umbili8al 8ord
i!e?pli8ably rooti!g our e?perie!8e i! the u!k!o6! !oume!al reality- !ot the First Cri!8iple out o
6hi8h o!e 8a! develop a systemati8 !otio! o reality- 6hile the 9dealists rom Fi8hte o!6ards 8ross this
limit a!d e!deavor to provide a systemati8 a88ou!t o reedom itsel7 The status o this limit 8ha!ges
6ith the 9dealists+ 6hat 6as or *a!t a! a priori limitatio!- so that the very !otio! o Jgoi!g overK is
stricto sensu mea!i!gless- be8omes or the 9dealists just a! i!di8atio! that *a!t 6as !ot yet ready to
pursue his proje8t to the e!d- to dra6 all the 8o!seNue!8es rom his breakthrough7 For the 9dealists-
*a!t got stu8k hal:6ay- 6hile or *a!t- his 9dealist ollo6ers totally misu!derstood his 8ritiNue a!d
ell ba8k i!to pre:8riti8al metaphysi8s or- 6orse- mysti8al Schwarmerei7
There are thus t6o mai! versio!s o this passage+
#
@1A *a!t asserts the gap o i!itude-
tra!s8e!de!tal s8hematism- the !egative a88ess to the 4oume!al @via the SublimeA as the o!ly o!e
possible- a!d so orth- 6hile =egelIs absolute idealism 8loses the *a!tia! gap a!d retur!s to pre:8riti8al
metaphysi8s7 @2A 9t is *a!t 6ho goes o!ly hal:6ay i! his destru8tio! o metaphysi8s- still mai!tai!i!g
the reere!8e to the Thi!g:i!:itsel as a! e?ter!al i!a88essible e!tity- a!d =egel is merely a radi8aliUed
*a!t- 6ho moves rom our !egative a88ess to the Absolute to the Absolute itsel as !egativity7 Hr- to
put it i! terms o the =egelia! shit rom epistemologi8al obsta8le to positive o!tologi8al 8o!ditio! @our
i!8omplete k!o6ledge o the thi!g be8omes a positive eature o the thi!g 6hi8h is i! itsel i!8omplete-
i!8o!siste!tA+ it is !ot that =egel Jo!tologiUesK *a!tT o! the 8o!trary- it is *a!t 6ho- i!soar as he
8o!8eives the gap as merely epistemologi8al- 8o!ti!ues to presuppose a ully 8o!stituted !oume!al
realm e?isti!g out there- a!d it is =egel 6ho Jdeo!tologiUesK *a!t- i!trodu8i!g a gap i!to the very
te?ture o reality7 9! other 6ords- =egelIs move is !ot to Jover8omeK the *a!tia! divisio!- but- rather-
to assert it Jas su8h-K to remove the need for its %overcoming!' or the additio!al Jre8o!8iliatio!K o the
opposites- that is- to gai! the i!sightEthrough a purely ormal paralla? shitEi!to ho6 positi!g the
disti!8tio! Jas su8hK already is the looked:or Jre8o!8iliatio!7K *a!tIs limitatio! lies !ot i! his
remai!i!g 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o i!ite oppositio!s- i! his i!ability to rea8h the 9!i!ite- but- o! the
8o!trary- i! his very sear8h or a tra!s8e!de!t domai! beyo!d the realm o i!ite oppositio!s+ *a!t is
!ot u!able to rea8h the 9!i!iteE6hat he is u!able to see is ho6 he already has what he is loo"ing for7
1Lrard .ebru! has 8lariied this 8ru8ial poi!t i! his a!alysis o =egelIs 8ritiNue o *a!tIs a!ti!omies7
'
The 8ommo!pla8e amo!g dee!ders o *a!t is that =egelIs 8ritiNue- although appare!tly more
auda8ious @=egel sees 8o!tradi8tio!s every6hereA- o!ly domesti8ates or blu!ts the *a!tia! a!ti!omies7
*a!t is- so the story goes @as retold rom =eidegger to postmoder!istsA- the irst philosopher 6ho really
8o!ro!ted the subje8tIs i!itude !ot o!ly as a! empiri8al a8t- but as the very o!tologi8al horiUo! o
our bei!g7 This led him to 8o!8eive a!ti!omies as ge!ui!e u!resolvable deadlo8ks- i!es8apable
s8a!dals o reaso!- i! 6hi8h huma! reaso! be8omes i!volved by its very !atureEthe s8a!dal o 6hat
he eve! 8alls Jeutha!asia o Feaso!7K The impasse is here irredu8ible- there is !o mediatio! bet6ee!
the opposites- !o higher sy!thesis7 /e thus get the very 8o!temporary image o a huma! subje8t 8aught
i! a 8o!stitutive deadlo8k- marked by a! a priori o!tologi8al split or gap7 As or =egel- although he
may appear to radi8aliUe a!ti!omies by 8o!8eivi!g them as J8o!tradi8tio!sK a!d u!iversaliUi!g them-
seei!g them every6here- i! every 8o!8ept 6e use- a!d- goi!g eve! urther- o!tologiUi!g them @6hile
*a!t lo8ates a!ti!omies i! our 8og!itive approa8h to reality- =egel lo8ates them i! reality itselA-
=egelIs radi8aliUatio! is a ruse+ o!8e reormulated as J8o!tradi8tio!s-K a!ti!omies are 8aught i! the
ma8hi!ery o the diale8ti8al progress- redu8ed to a! i!:bet6ee! stage- a mome!t o! the road to6ards
the i!al re8o!8iliatio!7 =egel thus ee8tively blu!ts the s8a!dalous edge o the *a!tia! a!ti!omies
6hi8h threate!ed to bri!g Feaso! to the edge o mad!ess- re!ormaliUi!g them as part o a global
o!tologi8al pro8ess7
.ebru! demo!strates that this 8ommo!ly shared 8o!8eptio! is thoroughly 6ro!g+ it is *a!t
himsel 6ho a8tually deuses the a!ti!omies7 H!e should al6ays bear i! mi!d *a!tIs result+ there are
no antinomies as such- they emerge simply out o the subje8tIs epistemologi8al 8o!usio! bet6ee!
phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a7 Ater the 8ritiNue o Feaso! has do!e its 6ork- 6e e!d up 6ith a 8lear a!d
u!ambiguous- !o!:a!tago!isti8- o!tologi8al pi8ture- 6ith phe!ome!a o! o!e side a!d !oume!a o! the
other7 The 6hole threat o the Jeutha!asia o Feaso!-K the spe8ta8le o Feaso! as orever 8aught i! a
atal deadlo8k- is ultimately revealed as a mere theatri8al tri8k- a staged perorma!8e desig!ed to 8o!er
8redibility o! *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal solutio!7 This is the eature that *a!t shares 6ith pre:8riti8al
metaphysi8s+ both positio!s remai! i! the domai! o )!dersta!di!g a!d its i?ed determi!atio!s- a!d
*a!tIs 8ritiNue o metaphysi8s spells out the i!al result o metaphysi8s+ as lo!g as 6e move i! the
domai! o )!dersta!di!g- Thi!gs:i!:themselves are out o rea8h- our k!o6ledge is ultimately i! vai!7
9! 6hat- the!- does the diere!8e bet6ee! *a!t a!d =egel 6ith regard to a!ti!omies ee8tively
resideM =egel 8ha!ges the e!tire terrai!+ his basi8 reproa8h 8o!8er!s !ot 6hat *a!t says- but *a!tIs
u!said- *a!tIs Ju!k!o6! k!o6!sK @to use Go!ald FumseldIs !e6speakAE*a!t 8heats- his a!alysis o
a!ti!omies is !ot too poor- but rather too rich- or he smuggles i!to it a 6hole series o additio!al
presuppositio!s a!d impli8atio!s7 9!stead o really a!alyUi!g the immanent nature of the categories
involved in antinomies @i!itude versus i!i!ity- 8o!ti!uity versus dis8o!ti!uity- et87A- he shits the
e!tire a!alysis o!to the 6ay 6e- as thi!ki!g subje8ts- use or apply these 8ategories7 /hi8h is 6hy
=egelIs basi8 reproa8h to *a!t 8o!8er!s !ot the imma!e!t !ature o the 8ategories- but- i! a! almost
/ittge!stei!ia! 6ay- their illegitimate use- their appli8atio! to a domai! 6hi8h is !ot properly theirs7
+ntinomies are not inscribed into categories themselves! they only arise when we go beyond the proper
domain of their use ?the temporal*phenomenal reality of our e&perience@ and apply them to noumenal
reality- to obje8ts 6hi8h 8a!!ot ever be8ome obje8ts o our e?perie!8e7 9! short- a!ti!omies emerge the
mome!t 6e 8o!use phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a- obje8ts o e?perie!8e 6ith Thi!gs:i!:themselves7
*a!t 8a! o!ly per8eive i!itude as the i!itude o the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t 6ho is 8o!strai!ed
by s8hematism- by the temporal limitatio!s o tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis+ or him- the o!ly i!itude is the
i!itude o the subje8tT he does !ot 8o!sider the possibility that the very categories he is dealing with
may be %finite-' i7e7- that they may remai! 8ategories o abstra8t )!dersta!di!g- !ot yet the truly
i!i!ite 8ategories o spe8ulative Feaso!7 A!d =egelIs poi!t is that this move rom 8ategories o
)!dersta!di!g to Feaso! proper is !ot a! illegitimate step beyo!d the limits o our reaso!T it is rather
*a!t himsel 6ho oversteps the proper limits o the a!alysis o 8ategories- o pure !otio!al
determi!atio!s- illegitimately proje8ti!g o!to this spa8e the topi8 o temporal subje8tivity- a!d so orth7
At its most eleme!tary- =egelIs move is a redu8tio!- !ot a! e!ri8hme!t- o *a!t+ a subtractive move- a
gesture o taki!g a6ay the metaphysi8al ballast a!d o a!alyUi!g !otio!al determi!atio!s i! their
imma!e!t !ature7
IN PRAISE OF !NDERSTANDING

So 6hat- pre8isely- is )!dersta!di!gM 2ameso! 8hara8teriUes )!dersta!di!g @6erstandA as a
ki!d o spo!ta!eous ideology o our daily lives- o our immediate e?perie!8e o reality7 As su8h- it is
!ot merely a histori8al phe!ome!o! to be dissolved through diale8ti8al 8ritiNue a!d the pra8ti8al
tra!sormatio! o the relatio!s 6hi8h e!ge!der it- but a perma!e!t- tra!s:histori8al i?ture o our
everyday reality7 True- Feaso! @6ernunftA Jhas the task o tra!sormi!g the !e8essary errors o
6erstand i!to !e6 a!d diale8ti8al ki!ds o truths-K
$
but this Jtra!sormatio!K leaves i!ta8t the everyday
ei8a8y o )!dersta!di!g- its ormative role i! our ordi!ary e?perie!8eEall Feaso! 8a! a8hieve is a
ki!d o *a!tia! 8riti8al delimitatio! o the proper sphere o )!dersta!di!gT i! other 6ords- it 8a! o!ly
make us a6are o ho6- i! our daily lives- 6e are vi8tims o !e8essary @Jtra!s8e!de!talKA illusio!s7
)!derlyi!g this readi!g o the oppositio! o Feaso! a!d )!dersta!di!g is a proou!dly !o!:,ar?ia!
!otio! o ideology @or- rather- a proou!dly !o!:,ar?ia! splitti!g o this !otio!A probably take! rom
Althusser @a!d- maybe- .a8a!A+ i! a *a!tia! mode- 2ameso! seems to imply that there are t6o modes
o ideology- a histori8al o!e @orms li!ked to spe8ii8 histori8al 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h disappear 6he! these
8o!ditio!s are abolished- like traditio!al patriar8hyA a!d a! a priori tra!s8e!de!tal o!e @a ki!d o
spo!ta!eous te!de!8y to ide!titaria! thi!ki!g- to reii8atio!- et87- 6hi8h is 8o:substa!tial 6ith la!guage
as su8h- a!d 6hi8h- or this reaso!- 8a! be assimilated to the illusio! o the big Hther as the Jsubje8t
supposed to k!o6KA7 Dlosely li!ked to this !otio! o ideology is 2ameso!Is @rarely !oti8ed- but all the
more persiste!tA moti o the u!sayable- o thi!gs better let u!saidEor e?ample- i! his revie6 o my
)aralla& 6iew i! the .ondon 7eview of /oo"s- his argume!t agai!st the !otio! o paralla? is that- as the
!ame or the most eleme!tary split>dira8tio!- it e!deavors to !ame somethi!g 6hi8h is better let
u!!amed7 9! a similar 6ay- 2ameso! subs8ribes to the *a!tia! te!de!8y o @some oA todayIs brai!
s8ie!tists to i!sist o! the a priori stru8tural u!k!o6ability o 8o!s8ious!ess+

6hat =egelIs 8o!temporaries 8alled the !ot:9 is that 6hi8h 8o!s8ious!ess is 8o!s8ious o as its other-
a!d !ot a!y abse!8e o 8o!s8ious!ess itsel- somethi!g i!8o!8eivable e?8ept as a ki!d o s8ie!8e:
i8tio!al pi8ture:thi!ki!g- a ki!d o thought o other!ess7 3ut it is hard to u!dersta!d ho6 6e 8ould
k!o6 somethi!g 6ithout k!o6i!g 6hat its abse!8e e!tails+ a!d it may 6ell be- as Doli! ,81i!!
argues- that 8o!s8ious!ess is o!e o those philosophi8al problems 6hi8h huma! bei!gs are stru8turally
u!it to solveT a!d that i! that se!se *a!tIs 6as the right positio! to take+ that- although its e?iste!8e is
as 8ertai! as the Dartesia! 8ogito- 8o!s8ious!ess must also remai! perpetually u!k!o6able as a thi!g:
i!:itsel7
&
The least o!e 8a! say about these li!es is that they are proou!dly !o!:=egelia!- eve! taki!g
i!to a88ou!t 2ameso!Is u!e?pe8ted diale8ti8al poi!t+ si!8e a! eleme!t 8a! be properly grasped o!ly
through its diere!8e to its opposite- a!d si!8e the 9Is oppositeEthe !ot:9Eis i!a88essible to the 9 as it
is i! itsel- the 8o!seNue!8e o the u!k!o6ability o the !ot:9 as it is 9!:itsel- i!depe!de!tly o the 9- is
the un"nowability of consciousness ?the I@ itself as it is 9!:itsel7 The sta!dard solipsist:empiri8ist 8laim
that Jthe subje8t 8a! o!ly k!o6 itsel- its se!satio!sK is thus prove! 6ro!g+ i the !ot:9 is u!k!o6able-
the 9 itsel suers the same lot7 The Nuestio! to be raised here is 6hether this 8ir8le is i!es8apable7 Are
6e 8aught i! it right to the e!d- so that every spe8ulatio! about the Hutside is al6ays already a
retroa8tive a!tasy rom the sta!dpoi!t o the 9!sideM Hr- as =egel 6ould have put it- is every
presuppositio! already positedM 2ameso! develops this impossibility o breaki!g out i! his perspi8uous
readi!g o the 8o!8ept o positing as the key to 6hat =egel mea!s by Jidealism7K =is irst move is to
diale8ti8ally mediate the very oppositio! o positi!g a!d presupposi!g+ the 8ore o Jpositi!gK is !ot the
dire8t produ8tio! o obje8ts- si!8e su8h a produ8tio! remai!s abstra8tly opposed to 6hat is simply
give! @9 as a i!ite subje8t i!d i! ro!t o me material obje8ts a!d the! pro8eed to Jpositi!gK by
6orki!g o! themAT the 8ore o Jpositi!gK 8o!8er!s these presuppositio!s themselvesT that is- 6hat are
primordially posited are presuppositio!s themselves7 Fe8all =eideggerIs !otio! o the esse!8e o
moder! te8h!ology as (estell+ i! order or the subje8t to te8h!ologi8ally ma!ipulate a!d e?ploit reality-
this reality has to be JpositedK>presupposed @or- as =eidegger puts it- dis8losedA i! adva!8e as a! obje8t
o possible te8h!ologi8al e?ploitatio!- as a reserve o ra6 materials a!d e!ergies- a!d so o!7 9t is i! this
se!se that o!e should 8o!8eive 6hat is posited Ji! terms o presuppositio!s+ or positi!g someho6
al6ays takes pla8e Vi! adva!8eI o other ki!ds o thi!ki!g a!d other ki!ds o a8ts a!d eve!ts-K
%
or-
eve! more poi!tedly- Ji! terms o theatri8al setti!gs or pro:ilmi8 arra!geme!ts- i! 6hi8h- ahead o
time- a 8ertai! !umber o thi!gs are pla8ed o! stage- 8ertai! depths are 8al8ulated- a!d a! opti8al 8e!ter
also 8areully provided- the la6s o perspe8tive i!voked i! order to stre!gthe! the illusio! to be
a8hievedK+
10

*a!tIs theoryEphe!ome!o! a!d !oume!o!Elooks some6hat diere!t i it is grasped as a spe8ii8
6ay o positi!g the 6orld O it is !o lo!ger a Nuestio! o belie+ o taki!g the e?iste!8e o obje8tive
reality- o the !oume!o!- o a 6orld i!depe!de!t o huma! per8eptio!s- o! aith7 3ut it is also !ot a
Nuestio! o ollo6i!g i! Fi8hteIs ootsteps a!d airmi!g that obje8tive realityEthe !oume!o!- 6hi8h
has !o6 be8ome the !ot:9Eis summo!ed i!to bei!g by the primal a8t o the 9- 6hi8h JpositsK it @!o6
usi!g the term i! a metaphysi8al se!seA7Father- that beyo!d as 6hi8h the !oume!o! is 8hara8teriUed
!o6 be8omes somethi!g like a 8ategory o thi!ki!g O 9t is the mi!d that posits noumena i! the se!se
i! 6hi8h its e?perie!8e o ea8h phe!ome!o! i!8ludes a beyo!d alo!g 6ith it O The noumenon is !ot
somethi!g separate rom the phe!ome!o!- but part a!d par8el o its esse!8eT a!d it is 6ithi! the mi!d
that realities outside or beyo!d the mi!d are Jposited7K
11
/e should i!trodu8e here a pre8ise disti!8tio! bet6ee! the presupposed or shado6y part o
6hat appear as o!ti8 obje8ts a!d the o!tologi8al horiUo! o their appeari!g7 H! the o!e ha!d- as 6as
brillia!tly developed by =usserl i! his phe!ome!ologi8al a!alysis o per8eptio!- every per8eptio! o
eve! a! ordi!ary obje8t i!volves a series o assumptio!s about its u!see! ba8k:side- as 6ell as about its
ba8kgrou!dT o! the other ha!d- a! obje8t al6ays appears 6ithi! a 8ertai! horiUo! o herme!euti8
Jprejudi8esK 6hi8h provide a! a priori rame 6ithi! 6hi8h 6e lo8ate the obje8t a!d 6hi8h thus make it
i!telligibleEto observe reality J6ithout prejudi8esK mea!s to u!dersta!d !othi!g7 This same diale8ti8
o Jpositi!g the presuppositio!sK plays a 8ru8ial role i! our u!dersta!di!g o history+ Jjust as 6e
al6ays posit the a!teriority o a !ameless obje8t alo!g 6ith the !ame or idea 6e have just arti8ulated-
so also i! the matter o histori8al temporality 6e al6ays posit the pre:e?iste!8e o a ormless obje8t
6hi8h is the ra6 material o our emerge!t so8ial or histori8al arti8ulatio!7K
12
This Jormless!essK
should also be u!derstood as a viole!t erasure o @previousA orms+ 6he!ever a 8ertai! a8t is JpositedK
as a ou!di!g o!e- as a histori8al 8ut or the begi!!i!g o a !e6 era- the previous so8ial reality is as a
rule redu8ed to a 8haoti8 Jahistori8alK 8o!u!drumEsay- 6he! the /ester! 8olo!ialists Jdis8overedK
bla8k Ari8a- this dis8overy 6as read as the irst 8o!ta8t o Jpre:histori8alK primitives 6ith 8iviliUed
history proper- a!d their previous history basi8ally blurred i!to a Jormless matter7K 9t is i! this se!se
that the !otio! o Jpositi!g the presuppositio!sK is J!ot o!ly a solutio! to the problems posed by
8riti8al resista!8e to mythi8 !arratives o origi! O it is also o!e i! 6hi8h the emerge!8e o a spe8ii8
histori8al orm retroa8tively 8alls i!to e?iste!8e the e?iste!8e o the hitherto ormless matter rom
6hi8h it has bee! ashio!ed7K
1"
This last 8laim should be Nualiied- or- rather- 8orre8ted+ 6hat is retroa8tively 8alled i!to
e?iste!8e is !ot the Jhitherto ormless matterK but- pre8isely- matter 6hi8h 6as 6ell arti8ulated beore
the rise o the !e6- a!d 6hose 8o!tours 6ere o!ly blurred- or be8ame i!visible- rom the horiUo! o the
!e6 histori8al ormE6ith the rise o the !e6 orm- the previous orm is @misAper8eived as Jhitherto
ormless matter-K that is- the %formlessness' itself is a retroactive effect- a viole!t erasure o the
previous orm7
1(
9 o!e misses the retroactivity o su8h positi!g o presuppositio!s- o!e i!ds o!esel
i! the ideologi8al u!iverse o evolutio!ary teleology+ a! ideologi8al !arrative thus emerges i! 6hi8h
previous epo8hs are 8o!8eived as progressive stages or steps to6ards the prese!t J8iviliUedK epo8h7
This is 6hy the retroa8tive positi!g o presuppositio!s is the materialist Jsubstitute or that VteleologyI
or 6hi8h [=egel\ is ordi!arily i!di8ted7K
1#
/hat this mea!s is that- although presuppositio!s are @retroa8tivelyA posited- the 8o!8lusio! to
be dra6! is !ot that 6e are orever 8aught i! this 8ir8le o retroa8tivity- so that every attempt to
re8o!stru8t the rise o the 4e6 out o the Hld is !othi!g but a! ideologi8al !arrative7 =egelIs diale8ti8
itsel is !ot yet a!other gra!d teleologi8al !arrative- but pre8isely a! eort to avoid the !arrative
illusio! o a 8o!ti!uous pro8ess o orga!i8 gro6th o the 4e6 out o the HldT the histori8al orms
6hi8h ollo6 o!e a!other are !ot su88essive igures 6ithi! the same teleologi8al rame- but su88essive
re:totaliUatio!s- ea8h o them 8reati!g @Jpositi!gKA its o6! past @as 6ell as proje8ti!g its o6! utureA7 9!
other 6ords- =egelIs diale8ti8 is the s8ie!8e o the gap bet6ee! the Hld a!d the 4e6- o a88ou!ti!g or
this gapT more pre8isely- its true topi8 is !ot dire8tly the gap bet6ee! the Hld a!d the 4e6- but its sel:
rele8tive redoubli!gE6he! it des8ribes the 8ut bet6ee! the Hld a!d the 4e6- it simulta!eously
des8ribes the gap- 6ithi! the Hld itsel- bet6ee! the Hld Ji!:itselK @as it 6as beore the 4e6A a!d the
Hld retroa8tively posited by the 4e67 9t is be8ause o this redoubled gap that every !e6 orm arises as
a creation e& nihilo+ the 4othi!g!ess out o 6hi8h the 4e6 arises is the very gap bet6ee! the Hld:i!:
itsel a!d the Hld:or:the:4e6- the gap 6hi8h makes impossible a!y a88ou!t o the rise o the 4e6 i!
terms o a 8o!ti!uous !arrative7
1'
/e should add a urther Nualii8atio! here+ 6hat es8apes our grasp is !ot the 6ay thi!gs 6ere
beore the arrival o the 4e6- but the very birth of the ew- the 4e6 as it 6as Ji! itsel-K rom the
perspe8tive o the Hld- beore it ma!aged to Jposit its presuppositio!s7K This is 6hy a!tasy- the
a!tasmati8 !arrative- al6ays i!volves a! impossible ga2e- the gaUe by mea!s o 6hi8h the subje8t is
already prese!t at the s8e!e o its o6! abse!8eEthe illusio! is here the same as that o Jalter!ate
realityK 6hose other!ess is also JpositedK by the a8tual totality- 6hi8h is 6hy it remai!s 6ithi! the
8oordi!ates o the a8tual totality7 The 6ay to avoid this utopia! redu8tio! o the subje8t to the
impossible gaUe 6it!essi!g a! alter!ate reality rom 6hi8h it is abse!t is !ot to aba!do! the topos o
alter!ate reality as su8h- but to reormulate it so as to avoid the mystii8atio! o the theosophi8 mytho:
poeti8 !arrative 6hi8h prete!ds to re!der the ge!esis o the 8osmos @o the ully 8o!stituted reality-
ruled by logosA out o the proto:8osmi8 pre:o!tologi8al 8haos7 Su8h attempts o!ly obus8ate the poi!t
that the repressed spe8tral Jvirtual historyK is !ot the JtruthK o the oi8ial publi8 history- but the
a!tasy 6hi8h ills i! the void o the act that brought about history7 At the level o amily lie- this
disti!8tio! is palpable i! so:8alled False ,emory Sy!drome+ the JmemoriesK u!earthed @bei!g sedu8ed
or molested by a amily memberA- the repressed stories that hau!t the imagi!atio! o the livi!g- are
pre8isely su8h Jprimordial liesK desti!ed to orestall the e!8ou!ter 6ith the ultimate ro8k o
impossibility- the a8t that Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!ship7K A!d the same goes- at the level o so8ial
lie- or the !otio! o the primordial Drime that grou!ds the legal Hrder+ the se8ret !arrative that tells its
story is purely a!tasmati87
9! philosophy proper- this a!tasmati8 mystii8atio! resides at the very 8ore o S8helli!gIs
Weltalter proje8t7 /hat S8helli!g e!deavored to a88omplish i! Weltalter is pre8isely su8h a mytho:
poeti8 a!tasmati8 !arrative that 6ould a88ou!t or the emerge!8e o logos itsel out o the pre:logi8al
proto:8osmi8 FealT ho6ever- at the very e!d o ea8h o the three su88essive drats o WeltalterEthat is
to say- at the very poi!t at 6hi8h the passage rom mythos to logos- rom the Feal to the Symboli8-
should have bee! deployedES8helli!g 6as 8ompelled to posit a! u!8a!!y act o Ent*Scheidung
@de8isio! or separatio!A- a! a8t i! a 6ay more primordial tha! the Feal o the Jeter!al CastK itsel7 The
repeated ailure o his Weltalter drats sig!als pre8isely S8helli!gIs ho!esty as a thi!kerEthe a8t that
he 6as radi8al e!ough to a8k!o6ledge the impossibility o grou!di!g the a8t or de8isio! i! a proto:
8osmi8 myth7 The li!e o separatio! bet6ee! materialism a!d obs8ura!tist idealism i! S8helli!g thus
8o!8er!s pre8isely the relatio!ship bet6ee! the a8t a!d the proto:8osmos+ idealist obs8ura!tism
dedu8es or ge!erates the a8t rom the proto:8osmos- 6hile materialism asserts the prima8y o the a8t
a!d de!ou!8es the a!tasmati8 8hara8ter o the proto:8osmi8 !arrative7
So- apropos S8helli!gIs 8laim that ma!Is 8o!s8ious!ess arises rom the primordial a8t 6hi8h
separates the prese!t:a8tual 8o!s8ious!ess rom the spe8tral- shado6y realm o the u!8o!s8ious- o!e
has to ask a seemi!gly !aSve but 8ru8ial Nuestio!+ 6hat- pre8isely- is the u!8o!s8ious hereM S8helli!gIs
a!s6er is u!ambiguous+ the Ju!8o!s8iousK is !ot primarily the rotary motio! o drives eje8ted i!to the
eter!al pastT the Ju!8o!s8iousK is rather the very a8t o Ent*Scheidung by mea!s o 6hi8h drives 6ere
eje8ted i!to the past7 Hr- to put it i! slightly diere!t terms+ 6hat is truly Ju!8o!s8iousK i! ma! is !ot
the immediate opposite o 8o!s8ious!ess- the obs8ure a!d 8o!used vorte? o Jirratio!alK drives- but
the very ou!di!g gesture o 8o!s8ious!ess- the a8t o de8isio! i! 6hi8h 9 J8hoose mysel-K by 6hi8h 9
8ombi!e this multitude o drives i!to the u!ity o my Sel7 The Ju!8o!s8iousK is !ot the passive stu o
i!ert drives to be used by the 8reative Jsy!theti8K a8tivity o the 8o!s8ious 0goT the Ju!8o!s8iousK i!
its most radi8al dime!sio! is rather the highest Geed o my sel:positi!g- or @to resort to later
Je?iste!tialistK termsA the 8hoi8e o my u!dame!tal Jproje8tK 6hi8h- i! order to remai! operative-
must be Jrepressed-K kept out o the light o day7 To Nuote rom the admirable i!al pages o the se8o!d
drat o Weltalter+

That primordial deed 6hi8h makes a ma! ge!ui!ely himsel pre8edes all i!dividual a8tio!sT but
immediately ater it is put i!to e?ubera!t reedom- this deed si!ks i!to the !ight o u!8o!s8ious!ess7
This is !ot a deed that 8ould happe! o!8e a!d the! stopT it is a perma!e!t deed- a !evere!di!g deed-
a!d 8o!seNue!tly it 8a! !ever agai! be brought beore 8o!s8ious!ess7 For ma! to k!o6 o this deed-
8o!s8ious!ess itsel 6ould have to retur! i!to !othi!g- i!to bou!dless reedom- a!d 6ould 8ease to be
8o!s8ious!ess7 This deed o88urs o!8e a!d the! immediately si!ks ba8k i!to the u!athomable depthsT
a!d !ature a8Nuires perma!e!8e pre8isely thereby7 .ike6ise that 6ill- posited o!8e at the begi!!i!g
a!d the! led to the outside- must immediately si!k i!to u!8o!s8ious!ess7 H!ly i! this 6ay is a
begi!!i!g possible- a begi!!i!g that does !ot stop bei!g a begi!!i!g- a truly eter!al begi!!i!g7 For
here as 6ell- it is true that the begi!!i!g 8a!!ot k!o6 itsel7 That deed- o!8e do!e- is do!e or all
eter!ity7 The de8isio! that i! some ma!!er is truly to begi! must !ot be brought ba8k to 8o!s8ious!essT
it must !ot be 8alled ba8k- be8ause this 6ould amou!t to bei!g take! ba8k7 9- i! maki!g a de8isio!-
somebody retai!s the right to ree?ami!e his 8hoi8e- he 6ill !ever make a begi!!i!g at all7
1$
/hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is- o 8ourse- the logi8 o the Jva!ishi!g mediatorK+ o the ou!di!g
gesture o diere!tiatio! 6hi8h must si!k i!to i!visibility o!8e the diere!8e bet6ee! the vorte? o
Jirratio!alK drives a!d the u!iverse o logos is i! pla8e7 S8helli!gIs u!dame!tal move is thus !ot
simply to grou!d the o!tologi8ally stru8tured u!iverse o logos i! the horrible vorte? o the FealT i 6e
read him 8areully- there is a premo!itio! i! his 6ork that this terriyi!g vorte? o the pre:o!tologi8al
Feal is itsel @a88essible to us o!ly i! the guise oA a a!tasmati8 !arrative- a lure desti!ed to detra8t us
rom the true traumati8 8ut- that o the abyssal a8t o Ent*Scheidung7
9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e 8a! raise t6o urther 8riti8al poi!ts about 2ameso!Is
!otio! o )!dersta!di!g as a! eter!al or u!surpassable orm o ideology7 The irst thi!g to !ote is that
this u!surpassable 8hara8ter is i! itsel redoubled+ irst- there is )!dersta!di!g as the a priori te!de!8y
o huma! thi!ki!g to6ards ide!titaria! reii8atio!T the!- there is the u!surpassability o the 8ir8le o
Jpositi!g the presuppositio!sK 6hi8h preve!ts us rom steppi!g outside ourselves a!d graspi!g the !ot:
9 i! all its orms- spatial a!d temporal @rom e?ter!al reality as it is i!depe!de!tly o us- to our o6!
histori8al pastA7 The irst 8riti8al poi!t to be made here is that the eatures 2ameso! attributes to
)!dersta!di!g @J8ommo!:se!se empiri8al thi!ki!g o e?ter!ality- ormed i! the e?perie!8e o solid
obje8ts a!d obedie!t to the la6 o !o!:8o!tradi8tio!KA 8learly are histori8ally limited+ they desig!ate
moder!:se8ular empiri8ist 8ommo! se!se- 6hi8h is very diere!t rom- say- a JprimitiveK holisti8
!otio! o reality permeated by spiritual or8es7
=o6ever- a mu8h more importa!t 8riti8al poi!t 8o!8er!s the 6ay 2ameso! ormulates the
oppositio! bet6ee! )!dersta!di!g a!d Feaso!+ )!dersta!di!g is u!derstood as the eleme!tary orm o
a!alyUi!g- o i?i!g diere!8es a!d ide!tities- redu8i!g the 6ealth o reality to a! abstra8t set o
eaturesT this spo!ta!eous te!de!8y to6ards ide!titaria! reii8atio! has to be the! 8orre8ted by
diale8ti8al Feaso!- 6hi8h aithully reprodu8es the dy!ami8 8omple?ity o reality by outli!i!g the luid
!et6ork o relatio!s 6ithi! 6hi8h every ide!tity is lo8ated7 This !et6ork both ge!erates every ide!tity
a!d- simulta!eously- 8auses its ultimate do6!all7 This- ho6ever- is emphati8ally not the 6ay =egel
8o!8eives the diere!8e bet6ee! )!dersta!di!g a!d Feaso!Elet us read 8areully a 6ell:k!o6!
passage rom the JFore6ordK to the )henomenology+

To break up a! idea i!to its ultimate eleme!ts mea!s retur!i!g upo! its mome!ts- 6hi8h at least do !ot
have the orm o the give! idea 6he! ou!d- but are the immediate property o the sel7 Goubtless this
a!alysis o!ly arrives at thoughts 6hi8h are themselves amiliar eleme!ts- i?ed i!ert determi!atio!s7
3ut 6hat is thus separated- a!d i! a se!se is u!real- is itsel a! esse!tial mome!tT or just be8ause the
8o!8rete a8t is sel:divided- a!d tur!s i!to u!reality- it is somethi!g sel:movi!g- sel:a8tive7 The
a8tio! o separati!g the eleme!ts is the e?er8ise o the or8e o )!dersta!di!g- the most asto!ishi!g
a!d greatest o all po6ers- or rather the absolute po6er7 The 8ir8le- 6hi8h is sel:e!8losed a!d at rest-
a!d- <ua substa!8e- holds its o6! mome!ts- is a! immediate relatio!- the immediate- 8o!ti!uous
relatio! o eleme!ts 6ith their u!ity- a!d he!8e arouses !o se!se o 6o!derme!t7 3ut that a! a88ide!t
as su8h- 6he! 8ut loose rom its 8o!tai!i!g 8ir8umere!8e-Ethat 6hat is bou!d a!d held by somethi!g
else a!d a8tual o!ly by bei!g 8o!!e8ted 6ith it-Eshould obtai! a! e?iste!8e all its o6!- gai! reedom
a!d i!depe!de!8e o! its o6! a88ou!tEthis is the porte!tous po6er o the !egativeT it is the e!ergy o
thought- o pure Sel7
1&
)!dersta!di!g- pre8isely i! its aspe8t o a!alyUi!g- teari!g the u!ity o a thi!g or pro8ess apart-
is here 8elebrated as Jthe most asto!ishi!g a!d greatest o all po6ers- or rather the absolute po6erKEas
su8h- it is- surprisi!gly @or those 6ho sti8k to the 8ommo!ly held vie6 o diale8ti8sA- 8hara8teriUed i!
e?a8tly the same terms as Spirit 6hi8h is- 6ith regard to the oppositio! bet6ee! )!dersta!di!g a!d
Feaso!- 8learly o! the side o Feaso!+ JSpirit is- i! its simple truth- 8o!s8ious!ess- a!d or8es its
mome!ts apart7K 0verythi!g tur!s o! ho6 6e are to u!dersta!d this ide!tity:a!d:diere!8e bet6ee!
)!dersta!di!g a!d Feaso!+ it is !ot that Feaso! adds somethi!g to the separati!g po6er o
)!dersta!di!g- re:establishi!g @at some Jhigher levelKA the orga!i8 u!ity o 6hat )!dersta!di!g has
su!dered- suppleme!ti!g a!alysis 6ith sy!thesisT Feaso! is- i! a 6ay- !ot more but less tha!
)!dersta!di!g- it isEto put it i! the 6ell:k!o6! terms o =egelIs oppositio! bet6ee! 6hat o!e 6a!ts
to say a!d 6hat o!e a8tually saysE6hat )!dersta!di!g- i! its a8tivity- really does- i! 8o!trast to 6hat
it 6a!ts or mea!s to do7 Feaso! is thereore !ot a!other a8ulty suppleme!ti!g )!dersta!di!gIs Jo!e:
sided!essK+ the very idea that there is somethi!g @the 8ore o the substa!tial 8o!te!t o the a!alyUed
thi!gA 6hi8h eludes )!dersta!di!g- a tra!s:ratio!al 3eyo!d out o its rea8h- is the u!dame!tal illusio!
o )!dersta!di!g7 9! other 6ords- all 6e have to do to get rom )!dersta!di!g to Feaso! is to subtract
rom )!dersta!di!g its 8o!stitutive illusio!7
)!dersta!di!g is !ot too abstra8t or viole!t- it is- o! the 8o!trary- as =egel remarked o *a!t-
too soft towards things- too araid to lo8ate its viole!t moveme!t o teari!g thi!gs apart i! the thi!gs
themselves7
1%
9! a 6ay- it is epistemology versus o!tology+ the illusio! o )!dersta!di!g is that its
o6! a!alyti8al po6erEthe po6er to make Ja! a88ide!t as su8h O obtai! a! e?iste!8e all its o6!- gai!
reedom a!d i!depe!de!8e o! its o6! a88ou!tKEis o!ly a! Jabstra8tio!-K somethi!g e?ter!al to Jtrue
realityK 6hi8h persists out there i!ta8t i! its i!a88essible ull!ess7 9! other 6ords- it is the sta!dard
8riti8al vie6 o )!dersta!di!g a!d its po6er o abstra8tio! @that it is just a! impote!t i!telle8tual
e?er8ise 6hi8h misses the 6ealth o realityA 6hi8h 8o!tai!s the 8ore illusio! o )!dersta!di!g7 To put
it i! yet a!other 6ay- the mistake o )!dersta!di!g is to per8eive its o6! !egative a8tivity @o
separati!g- teari!g thi!gs apartA o!ly i! its !egative aspe8t- ig!ori!g its JpositiveK @produ8tiveA
aspe8tEFeaso! is )!dersta!di!g itsel i! its produ8tive aspe8t7
20
.et us i!dulge i! a! e?8ursus at this poi!t7 /hat is abstra8t thi!ki!gM Fe8all Samuel ,aoUIs
.ebanon- a re8e!t ilm about the 1%&2 .eba!o! 6ar 6hi8h dra6s o! ,aoUIs o6! memories as a you!g
soldier- re!deri!g the 6arIs ear a!d 8laustrophobia by shooti!g most o the a8tio! rom i!side a ta!k7
The movie ollo6s our i!e?perie!8ed soldiers dispat8hed to Jmop upK e!emies i! a .eba!ese to6!
that has already bee! bombarded by the 9sraeli Air For8e7 9!tervie6ed at the 200% Ve!i8e estival-
5oav Go!at- the a8tor 6ho played ,oaU as a you!g soldier- said+ JThis is a movie that makes you eel
like youIve bee! to 6ar7K ,aoU himsel said his ilm 6as !ot a 8o!dem!atio! o 9sraelIs poli8ies- but a
perso!al a88ou!t o 6hat he 6e!t through+ JThe mistake 9 made is to 8all the ilm V.eba!o!I be8ause
the .eba!o! 6ar is !o diere!t i! its esse!8e rom a!y other 6ar a!d or me a!y attempt to be politi8al
6ould have latte!ed the ilm7K
21
This is ideology at its purest+ the o8us o! the perpetratorIs traumati8
e?perie!8e e!ables us to ig!ore the e!tire ethi8o:politi8al ba8kgrou!d o the 8o!li8t+ 6hat 6as the
9sraeli army doi!g deep i! .eba!o!M a!d so o!7 Su8h a Jhuma!iUatio!K thus serves to obus8ate the key
Nuestio!+ the !eed or a ruthless politi8al a!alysis o the stakes i!volved i! the deployme!t o armed
or8es7
=ere o!e immediately e!8ou!ters the ideologi8al moro!Is riposte+ but 6hy should!It the
depi8tio! o the horror a!d perple?ity o 8ombat be a legitimate topi8 or artM 9s !ot su8h perso!al
e?perie!8e also part o 6arM /hy should artisti8 depi8tio!s o 6ar be limited to the great politi8al
divisio!s 6hi8h determi!e su8h 8o!li8tsM 9s !ot 6ar a multi:a8eted totalityM 9! a! abstra8t 6ay- all
this is o 8ourse trueT ho6ever- 6hat gets lost is that the true global mea!i!g o a 6ar a!d o!eIs
perso!al e?perie!8e o it 8a!!ot 8oe?ist 6ithi! the same spa8e+ a! i!dividualIs e?perie!8e o 6ar- !o
matter ho6 Jauthe!ti8-K i!evitably !arro6s its s8ope a!d as su8h is i! itsel a violent abstraction from
the totality7 .ike it or !ot- reusi!g to ight is !ot the same or a 4aUi murderi!g 2e6s i! the ghetto as
or a partisa! resisti!g the 4aUisT like6ise- i! the .eba!o! 6ar o 1%&2- the JtraumaK o the 9sraeli
soldier i! the ta!k is !ot the same as the trauma o the Calesti!ia! 8ivilia! he is shelli!gEo8usi!g o!
the ormer o!ly serves to obus8ate 6hat 6as at stake i! the 9sraeli i!vasio!7
Fredri8 2ameso! has argued that Sai!t Augusti!eIs most 8elebrated a8hieveme!tEhis i!ve!tio!
o the psy8hologi8al depth o the believer- 6ith all the 8omple?ity 8o!stituted by i!!er doubt a!d
despairEis stri8tly 8orrelative to @or is the other side oA his legitimiUatio! o Dhristia!ity as a state
religio!- as ully 8ompatible 6ith the obliteratio! o the last rem!a!ts o radi8al politi8s rom the
Dhristia! edii8e7
22
The same holds or- amo!g others- the a!ti:8ommu!ist re!egades o the Dold /ar
era+ as a rule- their tur! agai!st 8ommu!ism 6e!t ha!d i! ha!d 6ith a tur! to6ards a 8ertai!
Freudia!ism- 6ith their dis8overy o the psy8hologi8al 8omple?ity o i!dividual lives7
3ut does this mea! that the o!ly truthul a88ou!t is a de:subje8tiviUed o!e- 6ith !o pla8e or
subje8tive e?perie!8eM 9t is here that the key .a8a!ia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! the subje8t @b- the JbarredK
!o!:psy8hologi8al age!tA a!d the Jperso!K has to be mobiliUed+ 6hat lies behi!d the s8ree! o the
6ealth o a perso!Is Ji!!er lieK is !ot Jobje8tive realityK but the subje8t itselEthe political subje8t- i!
our 8ase7
The a8t o abstra8tio!- o teari!g apart- 8a! also be u!derstood as a! a8t o sel:imposed
bli!d!ess- o reusi!g to Jsee it all7K 9! his /lindness and Insight- Caul de ,a! developed a rei!ed
readi!g o GerridaIs Jde8o!stru8tio!K o Fousseau i! $n (rammatology7
2"
Ge ,a!Is thesis is that- i!
prese!ti!g Fousseau as a Jlogo8e!tristK 8aught i! the metaphysi8s o prese!8e- Gerrida overlooks ho6
the motis a!d theoreti8al moves i!volved i! de8o!stru8ti!g that metaphysi8s are already operative i!
FousseauIs te?tEote!- the Jde8o!stru8tiveK poi!t Gerrida is maki!g about Fousseau has already bee!
arti8ulated by Fousseau himsel7 Furthermore- this oversight is !ot a! a88ide!t- but a stru8tural
!e8essity+ Gerrida 8a! o!ly see 6hat he sees @deploy his de8o!stru8tive readi!gA through su8h
bli!d!ess7 A!d it 6ould be easy to demo!strate the same parado?i8al overlappi!g o bli!d!ess a!d
i!sight i! other great Gerridea! readi!gsEsay- or his detailed readi!g o =egel i! (las7 =ere also- the
pri8e or the 8omple? theoreti8al move o demo!strati!g ho6 =egel ails to see that a 8o!ditio! o
impossibility is a 8o!ditio! o possibilityEho6 he produ8es somethi!g 6hose status he has to disavo6
i! order to mai!tai! the 8o!siste!8y o his edii8e- a!d so orthEis a viole!t simplii8atio! o the
u!derlyi!g rame o =egelIs thought7 The latter is redu8ed by Gerrida to the absolute:idealist
Jmetaphysi8s o prese!8e-K 6here the 9deaIs sel:mediatio! is able to redu8e all Hther!ess- a!d all
=egelIs ormulatio!s 6hi8h ru! agai!st this image are read as so ma!y sig!s o his symptomati8
i!8o!siste!8y- o =egel !ot bei!g able to 8o!trol his o6! theoreti8al produ8tio!- o bei!g or8ed to say
more- or somethi!g diere!t- tha! 6hat he 6a!ted to say7
3ut ho6- e?a8tly- are 6e to read this 8o:depe!de!8e o i!sight a!d bli!d!essM 9s it possible to
avoid the sta!dard readi!g that imposes itsel 6ith a! appare!tly sel:evide!t or8e+ the readi!g
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h the 8o:depe!de!8e o i!sight a!d bli!d!ess is a! i!di8atio! o our u!surpassable
i!itude- o the radi8al impossibility o our rea8hi!g the sta!dpoi!t o i!i!ity- o a! i!sight !o lo!ger
marred by a!y ki!d o bli!d!essM 9t is our 6ager that =egel oers a!other 6ay here+ 6hat he 8alls
J!egativityK 8a! also be 8ou8hed i! terms o i!sight a!d bli!d!ess- as the JpositiveK po6er o
Jbli!d!ess-K o ig!ori!g parts o reality7 =o6 does a !otio! emerge out o the 8o!used !et6ork o
impressio!s 6e have o a! obje8tM Through the po6er o Jabstra8tio!-K o bli!di!g o!esel to most o
the eatures o the obje8t- redu8i!g it to its 8o!stitutive key aspe8ts7 The greatest po6er o our mi!d is
!ot to see more- but to see less i! a 8orre8t 6ay- to redu8e reality to its !otio!al determi!atio!sEo!ly
su8h Jbli!d!essK ge!erates the i!sight i!to 6hat thi!gs really are7
The same pri!8iple o Jless is moreK holds or readi!g the body o a book+ i! his 6o!derul
0ow to -al" +bout /oo"s :ou 0avent 7ead- Cierre 3ayard demo!strates @taki!g a! iro!i8 li!e o
reaso!i!g 6hi8h is ultimately mea!t Nuite seriouslyA that- i! order to really ormulate the u!dame!tal
i!sight or a8hieveme!t o a book- it is ge!erally better not to read it allEtoo mu8h data o!ly blurs our
8lear visio!7
2(
For e?ample- ma!y essays o! 2oy8eIs 3lyssesEa!d ote! the best o!esE6ere 6ritte!
by s8holars 6ho had !ot read the 6hole bookT the same goes or books o! *a!t or =egel- 6here a truly
detailed k!o6ledge ote! o!ly gives rise to a bori!g spe8ialist e?egesis- rather tha! livi!g i!sights7 The
best i!terpretatio!s o =egel are al6ays partial+ they e?trapolate the totality rom a parti8ular igure o
thought or o diale8ti8al moveme!t7 As a rule- it is !ot a readi!g o a thi8k book by =egel himsel- but
some striki!g- detailed observatio!Eote! 6ro!g or at least o!e:sidedEmade by a! i!terpreter that
allo6s us to grasp =egelIs thought i! its livi!g moveme!t7
The te!sio! bet6ee! i!sight a!d bli!d!ess a88ou!ts or the a8t that =egel uses the term /egriff
@!otio!A 6ith t6o opposed mea!i!gs+ J!otio!K as the very 8ore- the esse!8e- o the thi!g- a!d J!otio!K
as Jmere !otio!K i! 8o!trast to Jthe thi!g itsel7K A!d o!e should bear i! mi!d that the same goes or
his use o the term Jsubje8tK+ the subje8t as elevated above the obje8tive- as the pri!8iple o lie a!d
mediatio! o obje8ts- a!d the subje8t as desig!ati!g somethi!g Jmerely subje8tive-K a subje8tively
distorted impressio! i! 8o!trast to the 6ay thi!gs really are7 9t is all too simple to treat these t6o
aspe8ts i! terms o the Jlo6erKEpertai!i!g to the abstra8t approa8h o )!dersta!di!g @the redu8tio! o
the subje8t to the Jmerely subje8tiveKAEa!d the JhigherKEi!volvi!g the truly spe8ulative !otio! o the
Subje8t as the mediati!g pri!8iple o .ie or reality7 The poi!t is- rather- that the Jlo6erK aspe8t is the
key 8o!stitue!t o the JhigherK+ o!e over8omes the Jmerely subje8tiveK pre8isely by ully e!dorsi!g it7
Fe8all agai! the passage rom the Crea8e to the )henomenology 8elebrati!g the disju!8tive po6er o
Jabstra8tK )!dersta!di!g+ =egel does !ot over8ome the abstra8t 8hara8ter o )!dersta!di!g by
substa!tially 8ha!gi!g it @repla8i!g abstra8tio! 6ith sy!thesis et87A- but by per8eivi!g i! a !e6 light
this same po6er o abstra8tio!+ 6hat at irst appears as the 6eak!ess o )!dersta!di!g @its i!ability to
grasp reality i! all its 8omple?ity- its teari!g apart o realityIs livi!g te?tureA is i! a8t its greatest
po6er7
C=04H,04A- 4H),04A- A4G T=0 .9,9T

Although *a!t makes it 8lear that a!ti!omies result rom the misappli8atio! o 8ategories- a!d
that they disappear the mome!t 6e 8lariy this 8o!usio! a!d respe8t the gap that separates !oume!a
rom phe!ome!a- he !o!etheless has to i!sist that this misappli8atio! is !ot a 8o!ti!ge!t mistake- but a
ki!d o !e8essary illusio! i!s8ribed i!to the very u!8tio!i!g o our Feaso!7 H!e thus !eeds to be very
pre8ise i! des8ribi!g the true 8o!tours o the passage rom *a!t to =egel+ 6ith his philosophi8al
revolutio!- *a!t made a breakthrough the radi8ality o 6hi8h he 6as himsel u!a6areT so- i! a se8o!d
move- he 6ithdra6s rom this radi8ality a!d desperately tries to !avigate i!to the sae 6aters o a more
traditio!al o!tology7 Do!seNue!tly- i! order to pass Jrom *a!t to =egel-K 6e have to move !ot
Jor6ardK but ba8k6ard+ ba8k rom the de8eptive e!velope to ide!tiy the true radi8ality o *a!tIs
breakthroughEi! this se!se- =egel 6as literally Jmore *a!tia! tha! *a!t himsel7K H!e o the poi!ts
6here 6e see this 8learly is i! the disti!8tio! bet6ee! phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a+ *a!tIs e?pli8it
justii8atio! o 6hy 6e !eed to i!trodu8e !oume!a remai!s 6ell 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o traditio!al
o!tology 6ith its disti!8tio! bet6ee! appeara!8e a!d true realityEappeara!8es 8a!!ot sta!d o! their
o6!- there must be somethi!g behi!d them 6hi8h sustai!s them+

The 8ause o our !ot bei!g satisied 6ith the substrate o se!sibility- a!d o our thereore addi!g to the
phe!ome!a !oume!a 6hi8h o!ly the pure u!dersta!di!g 8a! thi!k- is simply as ollo6s7 The se!sibility
@a!d its ield- that o the appeara!8esA is itsel limited by the u!dersta!di!g i! su8h ashio! that it does
!ot have to do 6ith thi!gs i! themselves but o!ly 6ith the mode i! 6hi8h- o6i!g to our subje8tive
8o!stitutio!- they appear7 The Tra!s8e!de!tal Aestheti8- i! all its tea8hi!g- has led to this 8o!8lusio!T
a!d the same 8o!8lusio! also- o 8ourse- ollo6s rom the 8o!8ept o a! appeara!8e i! ge!eralT !amely-
that somethi!g 6hi8h is !ot i! itsel appeara!8e must 8orrespo!d to it7 For appeara!8e 8a! be !othi!g
by itsel- outside our mode o represe!tatio!7 )!less- thereore- 6e are to move 8o!sta!tly i! a 8ir8le-
the 6ord appeara!8e must be re8og!iUed as already i!di8ati!g a relatio! to somethi!g- the immediate
represe!tatio! o 6hi8h is- i!deed- se!sible- but 6hi8h- eve! apart rom the 8o!stitutio! o our
se!sibility @upo! 6hi8h the orm o our i!tuitio! is grou!dedA- must be somethi!g i! itsel- that is- a!
obje8t i!depe!de!t o se!sibility7
2#
There is- ho6ever- a! impli8it 8lash bet6ee! this a88ou!t- i! 6hi8h phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a
are disti!guished as t6o types @spheresA o @positively e?isti!gA obje8ts- a!d *a!tIs key thesis that-
si!8e !oume!a are radi8ally tra!s8e!de!t- !ever give! as obje8ts o our e?perie!8e- the 8o!8ept o a
!oume!o! is Ja merely limiting concept- the u!8tio! o 6hi8h is to 8urb the prete!sio!s o se!sibilityT
a!d it is thereore o!ly o !egative employme!tK+
2'

The divisio! o obje8ts i!to phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a- a!d the 6orld i!to a 6orld o the se!ses a!d a
6orld o the u!dersta!di!g- is thereore Nuite i!admissible i! the positive se!se although the disti!8tio!
o 8o!8epts as se!sible a!d i!telle8tual is 8ertai!ly legitimate7 For !o obje8t 8a! be determi!ed or the
latter 8o!8epts- a!d 8o!seNue!tly they 8a!!ot be asserted to be obje8tively valid O /hat our
u!dersta!di!g a8Nuires through this 8o!8ept o a !oume!o!- is a !egative e?te!sio!T that is to say-
u!dersta!di!g is !ot limited through se!sibilityT o! the 8o!trary- it itsel limits se!sibility by applyi!g
the term !oume!a to thi!gs i! themselves @thi!gs !ot regarded as appeara!8esA7 3ut i! so doi!g it at the
same time sets limits to itsel- re8og!iUi!g that it 8a!!ot k!o6 these !oume!a through a!y o the
8ategories- a!d that it must thereore thi!k them o!ly u!der the title o a! u!k!o6! somethi!g7
2$
True- 6e 8a! read these li!es as simply restati!g the sta!dard divisio! o all obje8ts i!to
phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a+ the J!egative employme!tK o J!oume!o!K merely reasserts the radi8al
tra!s8e!de!8e o the 9!:itsel- its i!a88essibility to our e?perie!8e+ there is a! e!dless ield o positive
thi!gs out there- 6hi8h 8a! !ever be8ome obje8ts o our e?perie!8e- so 6e 8a! reer to them o!ly i! a
!egative 6ay- 6ell a6are that they are Ji! themselvesK ully positive- the proper 8ause a!d ou!datio!
o phe!ome!a7 3ut is there !ot a!other- mu8h more radi8al !otio! lurki!g behi!d the 8o!8ept o a
!oume!o!Ethat o the pure negativity! that is! the self*limitation! of phenomena as such- as opposed to
their limitatio! by a!other positive tra!s8e!de!t domai!M 9! this 8ase- !egativity is !ot a mirror:like
ee8t o tra!s8e!de!t positivity @so that 6e 8a! o!ly grasp the tra!s8e!de!t 9!:itsel i! a !egative 6ayAT
o! the 8o!trary- every positive igure o the 9!:itsel is a JpositiviUatio!K o !egativity- a a!tasmati8
ormatio! 6e 8o!stru8t i! order to ill i! the gap o !egativity7 As =egel put it 6ith u!surpassable
8larity i! his )henomenology+ behi!d the 8urtai! o phe!ome!a- there is o!ly 6hat 6e put there7
4egativity thus pre8edes tra!s8e!de!t positivity- the sel:limitatio! o phe!ome!a pre8edes 6hat is
beyo!d the limitEthis is the deep spe8ulative se!se o *a!tIs thesis that the Jdivisio! o obje8ts i!to
phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a- a!d the 6orld i!to a 6orld o the se!ses a!d a 6orld o the u!dersta!di!g- is
O i!admissible i! the positive se!seK+ the limit bet6ee! phe!ome!a a!d !oume!a is !ot the limit
bet6ee! t6o positive spheres o obje8ts- si!8e there are only phenomena and their ?self*@limitation!
their negativity7 The mome!t 6e get this- the mome!t 6e take *a!tIs thesis o! the !egative
employme!t o J!oume!aK more literally tha! he did himsel- 6e pass rom *a!t to =egel- to =egelia!
!egativity7
This is ho6 o!e should read the key stateme!t that u!dersta!di!g Jlimits se!sibility by applyi!g
the term !oume!a to thi!gs i! themselves @thi!gs !ot regarded as appeara!8esA7 3ut i! so doi!g it at the
same time sets limits to itsel- re8og!iUi!g that it 8a!!ot k!o6 these !oume!a through a!y o the
8ategories7K Hur u!dersta!di!g irst posits !oume!a as the e?ter!al limit o Jse!sibilityK @that is- o the
phe!ome!al 6orld- obje8ts o possible e?perie!8eA+ it posits a!other domai! o obje8ts- i!a88essible to
us7 3ut i! doi!g so- it Jlimits itselK+ it admits that- si!8e !oume!a are tra!s8e!de!t- !ever to be a!
obje8t o possible e?perie!8e- it 8a!!ot legitimately treat them as positive obje8ts7 That is to say- i!
order to disti!guish !oume!a a!d phe!ome!a as t6o positive domai!s- our u!dersta!di!g 6ould have
to adopt the positio! o a meta:la!guage- e?empt rom the limitatio! o phe!ome!a- d6elli!g
some6here above the divisio!7 Si!8e- ho6ever- the subje8t d6ells 6ithi! phe!ome!a- ho6 8a! it
per8eive their limitatio! @as /ittge!stei! also !oted- 6e 8a!!ot see the limits o our 6orld rom 6ithi!
our 6orldAM The o!ly solutio! is that the limitation of phenomena is not e&ternal but internal- i! other
6ords that the ield o phe!ome!a is in itself !ever Jall-K 8omplete- a 8o!siste!t /holeT this sel:
limitatio! o phe!ome!a assumes i! *a!t the orm o the a!ti!omies o pure reaso!7 There is !o !eed
or a!y positive tra!s8e!de!t domai! o !oume!al e!tities 6hi8h limit phe!ome!a rom
outsideEphe!ome!a 6ith their i!8o!siste!8ies- their sel:limitatio!s- are Jall there is7K The key
8o!8lusio! to be dra6! rom this sel:limitatio! o phe!ome!a is that it is stri8tly 8orrelative to
subje8tivity+ there is a @tra!s8e!de!talA subje8t o!ly as 8orrelative to the i!8o!siste!8y- sel:limitatio!-
or- more radi8ally- Jo!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess-K o phe!ome!al reality7 The mome!t 6e 8o!8eive the
i!8o!siste!8y a!d sel:limitatio! o phe!ome!al reality as se8o!dary- as the ee8t o the subje8tIs
i!ability to e?perie!8e the tra!s8e!de!t 9!:itsel the 6ay it Jreally is-K the subje8t @as auto!omous:
spo!ta!eousA be8omes a mere epi:phe!ome!o!- its reedom be8omes a Jmere appeara!8eK 8o!ditio!ed
by the a8t that !oume!a are i!a88essible to it @to put it i! a some6hat simpliied 6ay+ 9 e?perie!8e
mysel as ree i!soar as the 8ausality 6hi8h ee8tively determi!es me is i!a88essible to meA7 9! other
6ords- the subje8tIs reedom 8a! be o!tologi8ally grou!ded o!ly i! the o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o
reality itsel7
A!d- to avoid the obvious reproa8h- this purely !egative use o !oume!a i! !o 6ay implies a
!aSve Jsubje8tive idealism-K a u!iverse i! 6hi8h there is !othi!g but @sel:Alimited subje8tive
phe!ome!a+ o 8ourse there are thi!gs:pro8esses out there !ot yet k!o6! or dis8overed by us- there is
6hat !aSve realism desig!ates as Jobje8tive reality-K but it is 6ro!g to desig!ate it as !oume!alEthis
desig!atio! is all too %sub1ectiveF' 4oume!a desig!ate the 9!:itsel as it appears to us! embedded in
phenomenal realityT i 6e desig!ate our u!k!o6!s as J!oume!a-K 6e thereby i!trodu8e a gap 6hi8h is
!ot 6arra!ted by their mere u!k!o6ability+ there is !o mysterious gap separati!g us rom the u!k!o6!-
the u!k!o6! is simply u!k!o6!- i!diere!t to bei!g:k!o6!7 9! other 6ords- 6e should !ever orget
that 6hat 6e k!o6 @as phe!ome!aA is !ot separated rom thi!gs:i!:themselves by a dividi!g li!e- but is
constitutive o them+ phe!ome!a do !ot orm a spe8ial o!tologi8al domai!- they are simply part o
reality7
This bri!gs us to =egelIs basi8 8riti8ism o *a!t- o his i!siste!8e o! the limitatio! that our
i!itude imposes o! our k!o6ledge7 9t is that- be!eath *a!tIs modesty- there is a hidde! arroga!8e+
6he! *a!t 8laims that 6e huma!s- 8o!strai!ed by our i!ite )!dersta!di!g- 8a!!ot ever 8ome to k!o6
the totality o the u!iverse- he 8o!ti!ues to represe!t this i!i!ite task as o!e that a!other- i!i!ite-
)!dersta!di!g 6ould be able to a88omplish- as i the problem is simply o!e o e?te!di!g or
e?trapolati!g our 8apa8ity to i!i!ity- rather tha! 8ha!gi!g it Nualitatively7 The model or su8h alse
reaso!i!g is the 6ell:k!o6! !aturalist:determi!ist idea that- 6ere a! i!i!ite mi!d able to k!o6
e?te!sively all the atoms i! the u!iverse- their positio!- or8e- a!d moveme!t- it 6ould be able to
predi8t their uture behavior 6ith the utmost pre8isio!Eas i the very !otio! o a i!ite mi!d e?te!ded
to i!i!ity 6ere !ot i! itsel !o!se!si8al7 /he! 6e represe!t to ourselves a mi!d able to grasp i!i!ity-
the image 6e reer to is that o a mi!d someho6 able to 8ou!t a! i!i!ite !umber o eleme!ts i! the
same 6ay 6e are able to 8ou!t a i!ite !umber o them7 9! a 6o!derully vi8ious image- =egel like!s
*a!tIs !otio! o a! i!i!ite mi!d to the 6ay a poor 8hur8h orga!ist tries to e?plai! 1odIs great!ess to a
simple peasa!t+ J9! the same 6ay you k!o6 every i!dividual i! our village by !ame- 1od i!timately
k!o6s every si!gle ly amo!g the i!i!ite !umber o lies that buUU arou!d the globe OK
2&
This bri!gs us to the gap bet6ee! 6hat is e?plai!able:i!:pri!8iple a!d 6hat is a8tually
e?plai!ed:i!:a8tEthis gap is ully operative i! the 8og!itive s8ie!8es+ thought is a produ8t o the brai!
a!d 8a! i! pri!8iple be a88ou!ted or i! terms o !euro!al pro8essesT it is o!ly a matter o a8t that 6e
are !ot yet there7 A88ordi!g to this vie6- this gap is purely 8og!itive+ it is simply the gap bet6ee! the
empiri8al limitatio! o our k!o6ledge o reality a!d reality itsel7 For =egel- o! the 8o!trary- this gap is
!otio!al- 8ategori8al+

The propositio! 6hi8h states that our a8tual- real k!o6ledge- the 6ay it e?ists at this mome!t-
arti8ulated i! 8ausal e?pla!atio!s- is i!ite a!d eve! !o k!o6ledge i! the absolute mea!i!g o the 6ord-
but a mere 8ertai!ty- is ultimately !ot really a propositio! about the limits o our k!o6ledge- but a
propositio! about the orm o our k!o6ledge7 9t is a !otio!al- tautologi8al- propositio!7
2%
The mistake resides i! the a8t that the limit pertai!i!g to the orm itsel @to the 8ategories usedA
is misper8eived as a 8o!ti!ge!t empiri8al limitatio!7 9! the 8ase o 8og!itivism+ it is !ot that 6e already
have the 8ategorial apparatus !e8essary to e?plai! 8o!s8ious!ess @!euro!al pro8esses- et87A- a!d our
ailure to have yet do!e so pertai!s o!ly to the empiri8al limitatio! o our k!o6i!g the releva!t a8ts
about our brai!T the true limitatio! lies i! the very orm o our k!o6ledge- i! the very 8ategorial
apparatus 6e are usi!g7 9! other 6ords- the gap bet6ee! the orm o k!o6ledge a!d its empiri8al
limitatio! is i!s8ribed i! this orm itsel7 9t is be8ause *a!t lo8ates the limitatio! i! the i!itude o our
temporal:empiri8al e?perie!8e that he is i!8o!siste!t i! his deali!g 6ith the a!ti!omies o pure reaso!7
=ere- the!- possibility is !arro6ed do6!+ 6hat appears as possible:i!:pri!8iple- re!dered
impossible o!ly o! a88ou!t o our empiri8al limitatio!s- is revealed to be impossible also i! pri!8iple-
i! its very !otio!al:ormal determi!atio!s7 =o6ever- the obverse o this !arro6i!g:do6! o the ield o
the possible is its e?te!sio!+ the =egelia! totality is !ot merely the totality o the a8tual 8o!te!tT it
i!8ludes the imma!e!t possibilities o the e?isti!g 8o!stellatio!7 To Jgrasp a totalityK o!e should
i!8lude its possibilitiesT to grasp the truth o 6hat there is- o!e should i!8lude its ailure- 6hat might
have happe!ed but 6as missed7 3ut 6hy should this be the 8aseM 3e8ause the =egelia! totality is a!
Je!gagedK totality- a totality dis8losed to a partial partisa! vie6- !ot a J!eutralK overvie6 tra!s8e!di!g
e!gaged positio!sEas 1eorg .ukh8s re8og!iUed- su8h a totality is a88essible o!ly rom a pra8ti8al
sta!dpoi!t that 8o!siders the possibility o 8ha!gi!g it7 =egel has thus a lot to tea8h us about the topi8
o possibility versus a8tuality7 /hat is i!volved i! a diale8ti8al a!alysis o- say- a past eve!t- su8h as a
revolutio!ary breakM Goes it really amou!t to ide!tiyi!g the u!derlyi!g !e8essity that gover!ed the
8ourse o eve!ts i! all their appare!t 8o!usio!M /hat i the opposite is true- a!d diale8ti8al a!alysis
reinserts possibility into the necessity of the pastM There is somethi!g o a! u!predi8table mira8ulous
emerge!8e i! every passage rom J!egatio!K to J!egatio! o !egatio!-K i! every rise o a !e6 Hrder
out o the 8haos o disi!tegratio!E6hi8h is 6hy or =egel diale8ti8al a!alysis is al6ays the a!alysis o
past eve!ts7
"0
4o dedu8tio! 6ill bri!g us rom 8haos to orderT a!d to lo8ate this mome!t o the
magi8al tur!- this u!predi8table reversal o 8haos i!to Hrder- is the true aim o diale8ti8al a!alysis7 For
e?ample- the aim o the a!alysis o the Fre!8h Fevolutio! is !ot to u!earth the Jhistori8al !e8essityK o
the passage rom 1$&% to the 2a8obi! Terror a!d the! to Thermidor a!d 0mpire- but rather to
reconstruct this succession in terms of a series of ?to use this anachronistic term@ e&istential decisions
made by agents who! caught up in a whirlwind of action! had to invent a way out of the deadloc" @i! the
same 6ay that .a8a! re8o!8eptualiUes the su88essio! o oral- a!al- a!d phalli8 stages as a series o
diale8ti8al reversalsA7
As a rule- =egelIs amous suggestio! that o!e should 8o!8eive the Absolute !ot o!ly as
substa!8e but also as subje8t 8o!jures up the dis8redited !otio! o some ki!d o Jabsolute Subje8t-K a
mega:Subje8t 8reati!g the u!iverse a!d keepi!g 6at8h over our desti!y7 For =egel- ho6ever- the
subje8t- at its very 8ore- also sta!ds or i!itude- the 8ut- the gap o !egativity- 6hi8h is 6hy 1od o!ly
be8omes subje8t through 9!8ar!atio!+ he is !ot already i! himsel- prior to 9!8ar!atio!- a mega:Subje8t
ruli!g the u!iverse7 *a!t a!d =egel are usually 8o!trasted alo!g the li!es o i!ite versus i!i!ite+ the
=egelia! subje8t as the totaliUi!g a!d i!i!ite H!e 6hi8h mediates all multipli8ityT the *a!tia! subje8t
marked by i!itude a!d the gap that orever separates it rom the Thi!g7 3ut- at a more u!dame!tal
level- is !ot e?a8tly the opposite the 8aseM The basi8 u!8tio! o the *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t is to
8o!ti!uously e!a8t the tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis o apper8eptio!- to bri!g i!to H!e the multitude o
se!sible impressio!sT 6hile the =egelia! subje8t is- i! its most basi8 dime!sio!- the age!t o splitti!g-
divisio!- !egativity- redoubli!g- the JallK o Substa!8e i!to i!itude7
Do!seNue!tly- it is 8ru8ial !ot to 8o!use =egelIs Jobje8tive spiritK 6ith the Giltheya! !otio! o
a lie:orm- a 8o!8rete histori8al 6orld- as Jobje8tiviUed spirit-K the produ8t o a people- its 8olle8tive
ge!ius+ the mome!t 6e do this- 6e miss the poi!t o Jobje8tive spirit-K 6hi8h is pre8isely that it is spirit
i! its obje8tive orm- e?perie!8ed by i!dividuals as a! e?ter!al impositio!- a 8o!strai!t eve!Ethere is
!o 8olle8tive or spiritual super:Subje8t that 6ould be the author o Jobje8tive spirit-K 6hose
Jobje8tiviUatio!K this spirit 6ould have bee!7 9! short- or =egel there is !o 8olle8tive Subje8t- !o
Subje8t:Spirit beyo!d a!d above i!dividual huma!s7 Therei! resides the parado? o Jobje8tive spiritK+
it is i!depe!de!t o i!dividuals- e!8ou!tered by them as give!- pre:e?iste!t- as the presuppositio! o
their a8tivityT yet it is !o!etheless spirit- that is- somethi!g that e?ists o!ly i!soar as i!dividuals relate
their a8tivity to it- o!ly as their @preAsuppositio!7
"1
THE DIFFEREND

Su8h a readi!g 8a!!ot but appear to be at odds 6ith the sta!dard readi!g o =egel as a!
Jabsolute idealist7K There is a !i8e e?er8ise i! the ge!re o iek:bashi!g 6hi8h pere8tly illustrates
this gap that separates me rom the 8ommo!:se!se !otio! o =egelT the author takes as his starti!g
poi!t a passage rom my Crea8e to the !e6 editio! o For -hey 5now ot What -hey Do 6hi8h
allegedly demo!strates Jho6 badly iek misha!dles =egel7K 9 origi!ally 6rote+

=egel has !othi!g to do 6ith su8h a pseudo:=egelia! visio! @espoused by some 8o!servative =egelia!s
like 3radley a!d ,8TaggartA o so8iety as a! orga!i8 harmo!ious /hole- 6ithi! 6hi8h ea8h member
asserts his or her JeNualityK 6ith others through perormi!g his or her parti8ular duty- o88upyi!g his or
her parti8ular pla8e- a!d thus 8o!tributi!g to the harmo!y o the /hole7 For =egel- o! the 8o!trary- the
Jtra!s8e!de!t 6orld o ormless!essK @i! short+ the AbsoluteA is at 6ar with itselfT this mea!s that
@sel:Adestru8tive ormless!ess @absolute- sel:relati!g !egativityA must appear as su8h i! the realm o
i!ite reality7 The poi!t o =egelIs !otio! o the revolutio!ary Terror [i! the )henomenology\ is
pre8isely that it is a !e8essary mome!t i! the deployme!t o reedom7
"2
From this- my 8riti8 ge!erates his s8athi!g 8omme!tary+

/e 8orre8t+ 3radley @a!d the 3ritish 9dealists ge!erallyA 6ere !ot bad readers o =egel 6he! it 8ame to
politi8al philosophy O =egel 6as very mu8h 8o!8er!ed- rom his stude!t days up through his mature
System- 6ith the possibility o lie i! a so8iety as a harmo!ious e?iste!8e- o bei!g re8o!8iled to the
6orld a!d to o!eIs lie i! it7 0arly:o!- this takes the orm o a Foma!ti8 idoliUatio! o 1reek lie as a
sort o naturliche 0armonieT by the poi!t o his 2e!a 6riti!gs- =egel had already be8ome 8riti8al o this
te!de!8y i! the thought o his 8o!temporaries79 a moder! ma! 6as to be re8o!8iled to his 6orld- the!
it 8ould o!ly be through a moralische 0armonie- a harmo!y 6hi8h 6as !ot merely give! but 6hi8h
6as 8omprehe!ded i! thoughtT a ma! had to !ot merely be a! harmo!ious part o his so8iety- but had to
re8og!iUe this harmo!y- had to 8omprehe!d his o6! e?iste!8e @i!8ludi!g 6hat is most Ji!6ardK a!d
private or him- su8h as his eeli!gs i religious se!time!tsA as bei!g i!tegrated 6ith the 6hole o lie7
The bulk o =egelIs 8riti8isms o his 8o!temporary so8iety make the 8omplai!t that it does !ot make
sui8ie!t allo6a!8e or this re8o!8iliatio! to be8ome possibleT the lie o private i!dividuals is too
abstra8t rom the aairs o the state @or the 8hur8h- or various other so8ial orga!iUatio!sA- or else the
state @or the 8hur8h- or various other so8ial orga!iUatio!sA does !ot make sui8ie!t allo6a!8e or the
ree sel:determi!atio! o i!dividual a8tors to do as they judge best7 =egel does !ot thi!k that
moralische 0armonie is impossibleT o! the 8o!trary- the possibility o this harmo!y is the highest
a8hieveme!t o moder! 8iviliUatio! @a!d its philosophi8al ha!dmaide!- =egelIs System- is dire8ted
to6ards helpi!g this 0armonie 8ome about more ullyA7 This is the Je!d o =istoryK+ 6ith moder!ity
Spirit k!o6s its 6orld as its o6! produ8t- 8omprehe!ds 6hat is give! to it as al6ays already impli8itly
Spirit- as 8apable o bei!g ratio!ally 8omprehe!ded- a!d the so8ial 6orld o JHbje8tive SpiritK is a
pla8e 6here Spirit 8a! eel Jat home 6ith itsel i! its other-K 6here the i!dividual pe8uliarities o a
parti8ular subje8t are re8og!iUed as determi!atio!s o the Ju!iversalK o so8iety- a!d !ot somethi!g
over a!d agai!st it7BiUek is o!e hu!dred eighty degrees 6ro!g about =egelIs Jthe AbsoluteK+ it is !ot a
nihil- a Jtra!s8e!de!t 6orld o ormless!ess-K or a!y other di!g:a!:si8h:like tra!s8e!de!8e7 =egelIs
Absolute is !ot the S8helli!gia! J!ight i! 6hi8h all 8o6s are bla8kKT the Absolute is the most
8o!te!tul thi!g there is7 The Absolute is a 8o!8rete u!iversalT it has its bei!g- its truth- o!ly i! the
parti8ular determi!atio!s @Jmome!tsKA 6hi8h make up =egelIs systemEthose 6hi8h make up the triad
o .ogi8- 4ature- a!d Spirit7 The Absolute is !ot Jat 6ar 6ith itselKT the Absolute parti8ulariUes itsel
i! the asu!der!ess o !ature a!d retur!s to u!ity 6ith itsel i! the re8o!8iliatio! o asu!der!ess 6ith
u!ity7 To put it i! religious terms- the Father begets the So!- a!d they are u!ited i! the Spirit o 8harity
6hi8h pro8eeds rom bothT 1od 8reates a Jalle!K 6orld o disorder- e!ters i!to it i! =is o!ly So!- a!d
the 6orld is re8o!8iled to 1od through the lie o the SpiritT the si!ul i!dividual- separated rom 1od-
be8omes a! adopted 8hild o 1od i! the 8ommu!ity o the Spirit7 The Absolute does !ot 6age 6ar i!
the divi!e 8omedy7The Jabsolute- sel:!egati!g !egativityK [si8\ o the Terror is a mome!t o history-
just as the Fall o Adam is a mome!t i! the Dhristia! story o salvatio!:history7 For =egel- the Terror is
a! e?emplar o the Jabstra8t u!iversalK+ i! Jabsolute reedomK o!e reuses to re8og!iUe a!y Jgive!K
8o!te!t as adeNuate to the u!iversal- to Feaso!-Ethus the purely ormal JSupreme 3ei!gK o the
Fre!8h Fevolutio!- a!d its trumpeti!g o J.iberty- 0Nuality- a!d Frater!ityK 6hile the a8tual state 6as
ra!k tyra!!y o the lo6est sort7 The Jpoi!tK o =egelIs reere!8e to the Terror is !ot Jthat it is a
!e8essary mome!t i! the deployme!t o reedomK @or this 6ould apply to everythi!g =egel i!8ludes i!
his SystemA- but that the Terror sho6s 6hat happe!s 6he! the drive or the )!iversal i! huma! lie
takes a utopia! orm- tryi!g to build everythi!g up a!e6 out o pure thought rather tha! re8og!iUi!g
a!d 8ultivati!g 6hat is already ratio!al i! huma! lie7
""
=ere 6e have the differend at its purest- a!d- i!soar as 6e remai! 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o the
sta!dard:te?tbook i!terpretatio!- the !otio! o =egel 6hi8h u!derlies this 8ritiNue 6ill appear !ot o!ly
8o!vi!8i!g but eve! obviousEas i 6hat 9 am oeri!g is a! e88e!tri8 readi!g agai!st 6hi8h it sui8es
to re8all the basi8 a8ts k!o6! to a!y stude!t o =egel7 This is 6hy- or me- replyi!g to this 8ritiNue is
almost embarrassi!g+ everythi!g it 8laims about =egel is- o 8ourse- 6ell k!o6! to me- si!8e it 8o!sists
i! pre8isely the predomi!a!t image o =egel that 9 e!deavor to u!dermi!eEso o!e 8a!!ot simply
i!voke it agai!st me O The Nuestio! !o!etheless remai!s+ 6hat justiies me reje8ti!g this imageM .et
us begi! 6ith the last se!te!8e rom the Nuoted passage+ ater admitti!g that Fevolutio!ary Terror 6as
!e8essary @i! a purely ormal se!se- as a subordi!ate mome!t i! the developme!tA- my 8riti8 redu8es it
to the out8ome o a 6ro!g 8hoi8e+ the Terror Jsho6s 6hat happe!s 6he! the drive or the )!iversal i!
huma! lie takes a utopia! orm- tryi!g to build everythi!g up a!e6 out o pure thoughtKEit e?plodes
6he!- i!stead o Jre8og!iUi!g a!d 8ultivati!g 6hat is already ratio!al i! huma! lie-K that is- i!stead o
sear8hi!g or a!d e!dorsi!g the u!derlyi!g ratio!ality o the e?isti!g order a!d imposi!g 8ha!ges i!
8o!ti!uity 6ith this traditio!- people 6a!t to e!a8t a viole!t rupture 6ith the past- tur! the 6orld o! its
head a!d start agai! rom year:Uero7 The problem here is that it is pre8isely this Nuality o the Fre!8h
Fevolutio! that =egel u!ambiguously 8elebrated to the e!d o his lieEhere are his sublime 6ords
rom the .ectures on the )hilosophy of World 0istory+

9t has bee! said that the Fre!8h revolutio! resulted rom philosophy- a!d it is !ot 6ithout reaso! that
philosophy has bee! 8alled Weltweisheit [6orld 6isdom\T or it is !ot o!ly truth i! a!d or itsel- as the
pure esse!8e o thi!gs- but also truth i! its livi!g orm as e?hibited i! the aairs o the 6orld7 /e
should !ot- thereore- 8o!tradi8t the assertio! that the revolutio! re8eived its irst impulse rom
philosophy O 4ever si!8e the su! had stood i! the irmame!t a!d the pla!ets revolved arou!d him had
it bee! per8eived that ma!Is e?iste!8e 8e!ters i! his head- i7e7 i! thought- i!spired by 6hi8h he builds
up the 6orld o reality O !ot u!til !o6 had ma! adva!8ed to the re8og!itio! o the pri!8iple that
thought ought to gover! spiritual reality7 This 6as a88ordi!gly a glorious me!tal da6!7 All thi!ki!g
bei!g shared i! the jubilatio! o this epo8h7 0motio!s o a loty 8hara8ter stirred me!Is mi!ds at that
timeT a spiritual e!thusiasm thrilled through the 6orld- as i the re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! the divi!e a!d
the se8ular 6as !o6 irst a88omplished7
"(
This- o 8ourse- did !ot preve!t =egel rom 8oldly a!alyUi!g the i!!er !e8essity o this
e?plosio! o abstra8t reedom tur!i!g i!to its opposite- the sel:destru8tive Fevolutio!ary TerrorT
ho6ever- o!e should !ever orget that =egelIs 8ritiNue is imma!e!t- a88epti!g the basi8 pri!8iple o the
Fre!8h Fevolutio! @a!d its key suppleme!t- the =aitia! Fevolutio!A7 H!e should be very 8lear here+
=egel i! !o 6ay subs8ribes to the sta!dard liberal 8ritiNue o the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 6hi8h lo8ates the
6ro!g tur! i! 1$%2X"- 6hose ideal is 1$&% 6ithout 1$%"- the liberal phase 6ithout the 2a8obi!
radi8aliUatio!Eor him 1$%"X( is a !e8essary imma!e!t 8o!seNue!8e o 1$&%T by 1$%2- there 6as !o
possibility o taki!g a more JmoderateK path 6ithout u!doi!g the Fevolutio! itsel7 H!ly the Jabstra8tK
Terror o the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 8reates the 8o!ditio!s or post:revolutio!ary J8o!8rete reedom7K
9 o!e 6a!ts to put it i! terms o 8hoi8e- the! =egel here ollo6s a parado?i8al a?iom 6hi8h
8o!8er!s logi8al temporality+ the irst 8hoi8e has to be the 6ro!g 8hoi8e7 H!ly the 6ro!g 8hoi8e 8reates
the 8o!ditio!s or the right 8hoi8e7 Therei! resides the temporality o a diale8ti8al pro8ess+ there is a
8hoi8e- but i! t6o stages7 The irst 8hoi8e is bet6ee! the Jgood oldK orga!i8 order a!d the viole!t
rupture 6ith that orderEa!d here- o!e should take the risk o opti!g or Jthe 6orse7K This irst 8hoi8e
8lears the 6ay or the !e6 begi!!i!g a!d 8reates the 8o!ditio! or its o6! over8omi!g- or o!ly ater
the radi8al !egativity- the Jterror-K o abstra8t u!iversality has do!e its 6ork 8a! o!e 8hoose bet6ee!
this abstra8t u!iversality a!d 8o!8rete u!iversality7 There is !o 6ay to obliterate the temporal gap a!d
prese!t the 8hoi8e as threeold- as the 8hoi8e bet6ee! the old orga!i8 substa!tial order- its abstra8t
!egatio!- a!d a !e6 8o!8rete u!iversality7
9t is this parado?i8al priority o the 6ro!g 8hoi8e that provides the key to the =egelia!
Jre8o!8iliatio!K+ it is !ot the orga!i8ist harmo!y o a /hole 6ithi! 6hi8h every mome!t sti8ks to its
parti8ular pla8e- as opposed to a ield tor! apart- i! 6hi8h every mome!t strives to assert its o!e:sided
auto!omy7 0very parti8ular mome!t does ully assert itsel i! its o!e:sided auto!omy- but this assertio!
leads to its rui!- to its sel:destru8tio!Ea!d this is the =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K+ !ot a dire8t
re8o!8iliatio! i! mutual re8og!itio!- but a re8o!8iliatio! i! a!d through the struggle itsel7 The
Jharmo!yK =egel depi8ts is the stra!ge harmo!y o Je?tremesK themselves- the mad viole!t da!8e o
every e?treme tur!i!g i!to its opposite7 /ithi! this mad da!8e- the Absolute is !ot the all:
e!8ompassi!g 8o!tai!er- the spa8e or ield 6ithi! 6hi8h parti8ular mome!ts are at 6ar 6ith ea8h
otherEit is itsel 8aught up i! the struggle7 =ere- agai!- my 8riti8 misreads my 8laim that Jthe
Vtra!s8e!de!t 6orld o ormless!essI @i! short+ the AbsoluteA is at 6ar 6ith itselT this mea!s that
@sel:Adestru8tive ormless!ess @absolute- sel:relati!g !egativityA must appear as su8h i! the realm o
i!ite realityK+ he reads these li!es as i 9 am asserti!g that the =egelia! Absolute is the abstra8t
!egativity o a )!iversal suspe!di!g all its parti8ular 8o!te!t- the proverbial !ight i! 6hi8h all 8o6s are
bla8k- a!d the! triumpha!tly makes the eleme!tary poi!t that- o! the 8o!trary- the =egelia! Absolute is
a 8o!8rete u!iversal7 3ut the 8hoi8e proposed here by my 8riti8Ethe 8hoi8e bet6ee! abstra8t
u!iversality a!d 8o!8rete orga!i8 system i! 6hi8h the u!iversal e!ge!ders a!d 8o!tai!s the 6ealth o
its parti8ular determi!atio!sEis a alse o!e+ 6hat is missi!g here is the third- properly =egelia!-
8hoi8e- pre8isely the o!e 9 i!voked i! the Nuoted passage- !amely the 8hoi8e o abstract universality as
such! in its opposition to its particular content! appearing within its own particular content @as o!e o
its o6! spe8iesA- e!8ou!teri!g amo!g its spe8ies as its o6! Joppositio!al determi!atio!7K 9t is i! this
se!se that Jthe Vtra!s8e!de!t 6orld o ormless!essI @i! short+ the AbsoluteA is at 6ar 6ith itselK a!d
that J@sel:Adestru8tive ormless!ess @absolute- sel:relati!g !egativityA must appear as su8h i! the
realm o i!ite realityK+ this abstra8t u!iversality be8omes J8o!8reteK !ot o!ly by deployi!g itsel i! the
series o its parti8ular determi!atio!s- but by including itself in this series7 9t is be8ause o this sel:
i!8lusio! @sel:reere!tialityA that the Absolute is Jat 6ar 6ith itsel-K as i! the 8ase o Fevolutio!ary
Terror- 6here abstra8t !egativity is !o lo!ger a tra!s8e!de!t 9!:itsel- but appears Ji! its oppositio!al
determi!atio!-K as a parti8ular or8e opposed to a!d destroyi!g all @otherA parti8ular 8o!te!t7 9! more
traditio!al =egelia! terms- this is 6hat it mea!s to say that- i! a diale8ti8al pro8ess- every e?ter!al
oppositio!- every struggle bet6ee! the subje8t a!d its e?ter!al opposite- gives 6ay to a! Ji!ter!al
8o!tradi8tio!-K to a struggle o the subje8t 6ith itsel+ i! its struggle agai!st Faith- 0!lighte!me!t is at
6ar 6ith itsel- it opposes itsel to its o6! substa!8e7 Ge!yi!g that the Absolute is Jat 6ar 6ith itselK
mea!s de!yi!g the very 8ore o the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess- redu8i!g it to a ki!d o Hrie!tal
Absolute- a !eutral or impassive medium i! 6hi8h parti8ulars struggle agai!st ea8h other7
This is also 6hy my 8riti8 is 6ro!g 6he! he 8laims that the Absolute

is !ot Jat 6ar 6ith itselKT the Absolute parti8ulariUes itsel i! the asu!der!ess o !ature a!d retur!s to
u!ity 6ith itsel i! the re8o!8iliatio! o asu!der!ess 6ith u!ity7 To put it i! religious terms- the Father
begets the So!- a!d they are u!ited i! the Spirit o 8harity 6hi8h pro8eeds rom bothT 1od 8reates a
Jalle!K 6orld o disorder- e!ters i!to it i! =is o!ly So!- a!d the 6orld is re8o!8iled to 1od through the
lie o the SpiritT the si!ul i!dividual- separated rom 1od- be8omes a! adopted 8hild o 1od i! the
8ommu!ity o the Spirit7
"#
Although this may appear a aithul summary o =egelIs deployme!t o the Absolute- it misses
the key eatureEthe a8t that- as =egel repeats agai! a!d agai!- the Absolute is the Jresult o itsel-K
the out8ome o its o6! a8tivity7 /hat this mea!s is that- i! the stri8t se!se o the term- there is !o
Absolute 6hi8h e?ter!aliUes or parti8ulariUes itsel a!d the! u!ites itsel 6ith its alie!ated Hther!ess+
the Absolute emerges out o this pro8ess o alie!atio!T that is- as the result o its o6! a8tivity- the
Absolute JisK !othi!g but its Jretur! to itsel7K The !otio! o a! Absolute 6hi8h e?ter!aliUes itsel a!d
the! re8o!8iles itsel 6ith its Hther!ess presupposes the Absolute as give! i! adva!8e- prior to the
pro8ess o its be8omi!gT it posits as the starti!g poi!t o the pro8ess 6hat is ee8tively its result7 The
i!sui8ie!8y o this sta!dard !otio! o the =egelia! pro8ess be8omes palpable 6he! my 8riti8 puts it i!
religious terms+ o! a 8lose readi!g- o!e 8a!!ot ail to !ote ho6 he evokes t6o diere!t Jtriads-K irst
the triad o the Father begetti!g the So! a!d the! u!iti!g 6ith him i! the Spirit- the! the triad o 1od
8reati!g a alle! 6orld a!d the! re8o!8ili!g himsel 6ith it by e!teri!g i!to it i! the guise o Dhrist- his
So!7 9t is true that- i! this 6ay- Jthe si!ul i!dividual- separated rom 1od- be8omes a! adopted 8hild o
1od i! the 8ommu!ity o the SpiritKT ho6ever- the pri8e paid or this is that 1od himsel has to be
separated rom himsel- that he has to die i! the guise o his So!Is 8ru8ii?io!7 9s the death o Dhrist !ot
the ultimate proo that- i! the te!sio! bet6ee! 1od a!d the alle! 6orld- 1od is at 6ar 6ith himsel-
6hi8h is 6hy he has to Je!terK the alle! 6orld i! the guise o his oppositio!al determi!atio!- as a
miserable i!dividual 8alled 2esusM
NEGATION OF THE NEGATION

3ut is !ot the 8laim that the Absolute is the Jresult o itsel-K the out8ome o its o6! a8tivity-
yet a!other sophism re8alli!g 3aro! ,Y!8hhause!M Gieter =e!ri8h made this poi!t i! philosophi8al
terms 6he! he e?plai!ed ho6 =egel !ever su88eeded i! 8learly prese!ti!g the basi8 Jmatri?K o his
diale8ti8al pro8edure- Ja se8o!d:order dis8ourse that 8ould i!terpret 6hat he 6as doi!g7 9 believe that
6ithout that key 9 am oeri!g to you [my readers\- the system remai!s ultimately i!a88essible7K
"'
As
is 6ell k!o6!- =e!ri8h tries to i!d this key i! his 8lassi8 essay o! =egelIs logi8 o rele8tio!+ his 8laim
is that =egel 8ame 8losest to arti8ulati!g the basi8 matri? o his pro8edure 6he!- at the begi!!i!g o his
logi8 o 0sse!8e- he deals briely 6ith the diere!t modes o rele8tio!7 The Nuestio!- as al6ays- is
6hether this key delivers 6hat it promises+ does it really ope! the door to the i!!ermost se8ret o
=egelIs diale8ti8sM =ere is ho6 =e!ri8h begi!s his e?pla!atio!+

Starti!g o!ly 6ith !egatio! mea!s havi!g nothing but negation7 4o6 i! order to have !othi!g but
!egatio!- 6e !eed !egatio! more tha! o!8e7 For- i! =egelIs vie6- !egatio! is relational i! the se!se
that there must be somethi!g it !egates7 3ut i!asmu8h as there is !othi!g that !egatio! 8ould possibly
!egateEo6i!g to the assumptio! that 6e have only !egatio!E!egatio! 8a! o!ly !egate itself7
A88ordi!gly- autonomous !egatio! 8a! o!ly be a !egatio! of negation7 This mea!s that auto!omous
!egatio! is origi!ally sel:reere!tial+ i! order to have o!ly !egatio!- 6e have to have !egatio! t6i8e O
/e do not have- irst- some parti8ular propositio!- a!d subseNue!t to this the !egatio! o it- a!d- the!- a
urther !egatio! o the !egatio! that might give us ba8k the propositio!7
"$
For 8ommo!:se!se reaso!i!g- all this is- o 8ourse- mea!i!gless sophistry+ o!e 8a!!ot begi!
6ith !egatio!- !egatio! presupposes a positive e!tity that is !egated7 This is 6hy it is 8ru8ial to e?plai!
6hat is mea!t by the sel:reere!tial !egatio! through 8o!vi!8i!g e?amplesEa!d here- it seems-
=e!ri8h does !ot live up to his o6! sta!dards+ a gap persists bet6ee! the above:Nuoted abstra8t
determi!atio! o the sel:relati!g !egatio! a!d the e?ample o =egelIs pro8edure provided by =e!ri8h
some pages earlier+

[=egel\ pursues the ollo6i!g strategy+ he i!vokes *a!tIs idea o auto!omy @8omplete sel:
determi!atio!A as his 8riterio!- a!d the! !otes that there are various 6ays i! 6hi8h the i!dividual age!t
8a! a8Nuire a!d observe this pri!8iple O 4o6 the 8riti8al a!alysis o the philosopher 8a! sho6 that the
dis8repa!8y remai!s bet6ee! the dema!ds o auto!omy a!d the state o 8o!s8ious!ess or behavior that
the age!t has already a8hieved7 ,oreover- the proo o this dis8repa!8y is simulta!eously the
justii8atio! o the dema!d or a higher orm o moral lie7 This higher orm elimi!ates the dee8ts o
the previous o!es a!d so completes it O the !e6 orm reNuires that the pre8edi!g o!e remai! prese!t-
a!ti8ipati!g 8ompletio!- eve! though it is !o lo!ger the ultimate orm7
"&
To illustrate this very pro8edure @i! a 6ay 6hi8h- o 8ourse- ru!s 8ou!ter to =e!ri8hIs politi8al
orie!tatio!A- let us !ote ho6 the ,ar?ist 8ritiNue o JbourgeoisK reedom a!d eNuality provides a
pere8t 8ase o su8h a pleroma @ulillme!t o the la6A+ i 6e remai! at the level o merely legal
eNuality a!d reedom- this has 8o!seNue!8es 6hi8h lead to the imma!e!t sel:!egatio! o reedom a!d
eNuality @the u!:reedom a!d i!eNuality o the e?ploited 6orkers 6ho JreelyK sell their labor:po6er o!
the marketAT the abstra8t legal pri!8iple o reedom a!d eNuality has thus to be suppleme!ted by a
so8ial orga!iUatio! o produ8tio! 6hi8h 6ill !o lo!ger allo6 or the sel:u!dermi!i!g o the pri!8iple
i! its very e!a8tme!t7 The pri!8iple o reedom a!d eNuality is thereby JsublatedK+ !egated- but i! su8h
a 6ay that it is mai!tai!ed at a higher level7
"%
This e?ample e!ables us to 8lariy the parado?i8al
starti!g poi!t o =e!ri8hIs JkeyK+ =egel does !ot a8tually start 6ith !egatio!- he starts 6ith a! appare!t
positivity 6hi8h- upo! 8loser i!spe8tio!- immediately reveals itsel to be its o6! !egatio!+ so- i! our
e?ample- positive JbourgeoisK reedom a!d eNuality reveal themselves @i! their a8tualiUatio!A as their
opposites- as their o6! !egatio!7 This is !ot yet !egatio! proper- !egatio! as a moveme!t o
mediatio!Ethe moveme!t proper begi!s 6he! the origi!al orm @6hi8h JisK its o6! !egatio!A is
!egated or repla8ed by a higher ormT a!d the J!egatio! o !egatio!K o88urs 6he! 6e realiUe that this
higher orm 6hi8h !egated the irst ee8tively mai!tai!s @a!d eve! asserts more stro!glyA the starti!g
poi!t- i! other 6ords truly a8tualiUes it- 8o!ers o! it some positive 8o!te!t+ the immediate assertio! o
reedom a!d eNuality really is its opposite- its sel:destru8tio!T it is o!ly 6he! it is !egated or elevated
to a higher level @i! the so8ially just orga!iUatio! o the e8o!omy- a!d so o!A that reedom a!d eNuality
be8ome actual7 This is 6hy- at the e!d o his Science of .ogic- =egel says that i o!e 6a!ts to 8ou!t the
mome!ts o a diale8ti8al pro8ess- they 8a! be 8ou!ted either as three or as ourE6hat is !egated is
already i! itsel !egated7 3ut there is a urther poi!t to be added here+ it is !ot o!ly that- as i! our
e?ample- i o!e sti8ks to abstra8t subje8tive auto!omy 6ithout its more 8o!8rete ulillme!t- this
auto!omy !egates itsel7 ,u8h more importa!tly- this Jsti8ki!gK is !e8essary- u!avoidable- o!e 8a!!ot
by:pass it a!d move o! dire8tly to a more 8o!8rete higher orm+ it is o!ly through the Je?8essiveK
sti8ki!g to the lo6er orm that the sel:!egatio! takes pla8e 6hi8h the! 8reates the !eed @or ope!s up
the spa8eA or the higher orm7 @Fe8all =egelIs e?ample o the Fre!8h Fevolutio!+ the Jabstra8tK
reedom a!d eNuality had irst to !egate themselves i! [or reveal themselves as\ absolute TerrorEo!ly
i! this 6ay 6as the spa8e 8reated or a post:revolutio!ary J8o!8reteK State7A
/e 8a! 8learly see here 6hat is 6ro!g 6ith o!e o the basi8 8ommo!:se!se 8riti8isms o =egel+
J=egel al6ays presupposes that the moveme!t goes o!Ea thesis is opposed by its a!ti:thesis- the
V8o!tradi8tio!I gets aggravated- 6e pass to the !e6 positio!- et87- et87 3ut 6hat i a mome!t reuses to
get 8aught i! the moveme!t- 6hat i it simply i!sists i! @or resig!s itsel toA its i!ert parti8ularity+ VH*-
9 am i!8o!siste!t 6ith mysel- but so 6hatM 9 preer to stay 6here 9 am OIK The mistake o this
8riti8ism is that it misses the poi!t+ ar rom bei!g a threate!i!g ab!ormality- a! e?8eptio! to the
J!ormalK diale8ti8al moveme!t- thisEthe reusal o a mome!t to be8ome 8aught i! a moveme!t- its
sti8ki!g to its parti8ular ide!tityEis pre8isely 6hat happe!s as a rule7 A mome!t tur!s i!to its opposite
pre8isely by 6ay o sti8ki!g to 6hat it is- by reusi!g to re8og!iUe its truth i! its opposite7
3ut is there !ot a more radi8al @i! theoreti8al and politi8al termsA e?ample 6hi8h its mu8h
better =e!ri8hIs abstra8t des8riptio! o starti!g 6ith !egatio! a!d the! rea8hi!g a !e6 positivity
through sel:relati!g !egatio!Ethat o crimeM The 8e!tral igure o 17 *7 Dhesterto!Is religious thriller
-he Man Who Was -hursday is a mysterious 8hie o a super:se8ret S8otla!d 5ard departme!t 6ho is
8o!vi!8ed that Ja purely i!telle8tual 8o!spira8y 6ould soo! threate! the very e?iste!8e o 8iviliUatio!K+

=e is 8ertai! that the s8ie!tii8 a!d artisti8 6orlds are sile!tly bou!d i! a 8rusade agai!st the Family
a!d the State7 =e has- thereore- ormed a spe8ial 8orps o poli8eme!- poli8eme! 6ho are also
philosophers7 9t is their busi!ess to 6at8h the begi!!i!gs o this 8o!spira8y- !ot merely i! a 8rimi!al
but i! a 8o!troversial se!se O The 6ork o the philosophi8al poli8ema! O is at o!8e bolder a!d more
subtle tha! that o the ordi!ary dete8tive7 The ordi!ary dete8tive goes to pot:houses to arrest thievesT
6e go to artisti8 tea:parties to dete8t pessimists7 The ordi!ary dete8tive dis8overs rom a ledger or a
diary that a 8rime has bee! 8ommitted7 /e dis8over rom a book o so!!ets that a 8rime 6ill be
8ommitted7 /e have to tra8e the origi! o those dreadul thoughts that drive me! o! at last to
i!telle8tual a!ati8ism a!d i!telle8tual 8rime7
(0
/ould !ot thi!kers as diere!t as Copper- Ador!o- a!d .evi!as also subs8ribe to a slightly
modiied versio! o this idea- 6here the a8tual politi8al 8rime is 8alled Jtotalitaria!ismK a!d the
philosophi8al 8rime is 8o!de!sed i! the !otio! o JtotalityKM A straight road leads rom the
philosophi8al !otio! o totality to politi8al totalitaria!ism- a!d the task o the Jphilosophi8al
poli8ema!K is to dis8over rom o!e o ClatoIs dialogues or a treatise by Fousseau that a politi8al 8rime
6ill be 8ommitted7 The ordi!ary politi8al poli8ema! goes to se8ret meeti!gs to arrest revolutio!ariesT
the philosophi8al poli8ema! goes to philosophi8al symposia to dete8t propo!e!ts o totality7 The
ordi!ary a!ti:terrorist poli8ema! tries to dete8t those prepari!g to blo6 up buildi!gs a!d bridgesT the
philosophi8al poli8ema! tries to dete8t those about to de8o!stru8t the religious a!d moral ou!datio!s
o our so8ieties7 The same i!sight 6as already ormulated by =ei!ri8h =ei!e i! his 0istory of 7eligion
and )hilosophy i! 1erma!y rom 1&"(- although as a positive- admirable a8t+ J,ark you this- you
proud me! o a8tio!- you are !othi!g but the u!8o!s8ious he!8hme! o i!telle8tuals- 6ho- ote! i! the
humblest se8lusio!- have meti8ulously plotted your every deed7K
(1
As 8ultural 8o!servatives 6ould put
it today- de8o!stru8tio!ist philosophers are mu8h more da!gerous tha! a8tual terrorists+ 6hile the latter
6a!t to u!dermi!e our politi8o:ethi8al system i! order to impose their o6! religious:ethi8al regime-
de8o!stru8tio!ists 6a!t to u!dermi!e order as su8h+

/e say that the most da!gerous 8rimi!al !o6 is the e!tirely la6less moder! philosopher7 Dompared to
him- burglars a!d bigamists are esse!tially moral me!T my heart goes out to them7 They a88ept the
esse!tial ideal o ma!T they merely seek it 6ro!gly7 Thieves respe8t property7 They merely 6ish the
property to be8ome their property that they may more pere8tly respe8t it7 3ut philosophers dislike
property as propertyT they 6ish to destroy the very idea o perso!al possessio!7 3igamists respe8t
marriage- or they 6ould !ot go through the highly 8eremo!ial a!d eve! ritualisti8 ormality o bigamy7
3ut philosophers despise marriage as marriage7 ,urderers respe8t huma! lieT they merely 6ish to
attai! a greater ull!ess o huma! lie i! themselves by the sa8rii8e o 6hat seems to them to be lesser
lives7 3ut philosophers hate lie itsel- their o6! as mu8h as other peopleIs O The 8ommo! 8rimi!al is
a bad ma!- but at least he is- as it 6ere- a 8o!ditio!al good ma!7 =e says that i o!ly a 8ertai! obsta8le
be removedEsay a 6ealthy u!8leEhe is the! prepared to a88ept the u!iverse a!d to praise 1od7 =e is
a reormer- but !ot a! a!ar8hist7 =e 6ishes to 8lea!se the edii8e- but !ot to destroy it7 3ut the evil
philosopher is !ot tryi!g to alter thi!gs- but to a!!ihilate them7
(2
This provo8ative a!alysis demo!strates the limitatio! o Dhesterto!- a!d the i!adeNua8y o his
=egelia!ism+ 6hat he does !ot grasp is that universal?i2ed@ crime is no longer a crimeGit sublates
?negates9overcomes@ itself as crime and turns from transgression into a new order7 =e is right to 8laim
that- 8ompared to the Je!tirely la6lessK philosopher- burglars- bigamists- murderers eve!- are
esse!tially moral+ a thie is a J8o!ditio!ally good ma!-K he does !ot de!y property as such- he just
6a!ts more o it or himsel a!d is the! Nuite ready to respe8t it7 =o6ever- the 8o!8lusio! to be dra6!
rom this is that crime is as such %essentially moral!K that it desires simply a parti8ular illegal
reorderi!g o the global moral order 6hi8h itsel should remai! u!8ha!ged7 A!d- i! a truly =egelia!
spirit- o!e should take this propositio! @o the Jesse!tial moralityK o the 8rimeA as ar as its imma!e!t
reversal+ !ot o!ly is 8rime Jesse!tially moralK @i! =egelese+ a! i!here!t mome!t o the deployme!t o
the i!!er a!tago!isms a!d J8o!tradi8tio!sK o the very !otio! o moral order- !ot somethi!g that
disturbs moral order rom outside- as a! a88ide!tal i!trusio!AT but morality itself is essentially
criminalEagai!- !ot o!ly i! the se!se that the u!iversal moral order !e8essarily J!egates itselK i!
parti8ular 8rimes- but- more radi8ally- i! the se!se that the way morality ?and! in the case of theft!
property@ asserts itself is already in itself a crimeEJproperty is thet-K as they used to say i! the
!i!etee!th 8e!tury7 That is to say- 6e should pass rom thet as a parti8ular 8rimi!al violatio! o the
u!iversal orm o property to this orm itsel as a 8rimi!al violatio!+ 6hat Dhesterto! ails to per8eive is
that the Ju!iversaliUed 8rimeK he proje8ts o!to Jla6less moder! philosophyK a!d its politi8al
eNuivale!t- the Ja!ar8histK moveme!t that aims at destroyi!g the totality o 8iviliUed lie- already e&ists
in the guise of the e&isting rule of the law- so that the a!tago!ism bet6ee! the la6 a!d 8rime reveals
itsel to be i!here!t to 8rime- as the a!tago!ism bet6ee! u!iversal a!d parti8ular 8rime7
("
This poi!t
6as 8learly made by !o!e other tha! Fi8hard /ag!er 6ho- i! his drat or the play Cesus of a2areth-
6ritte! some time bet6ee! late 1&(& a!d early 1&(%- attributes to 2esus a series o alter!ate
suppleme!tatio!s o the Domma!dme!ts+

The 8omma!dme!t saith+ Thou shalt !ot 8ommit adulteryR 3ut 9 say u!to you+ 5e shall !ot marry
6ithout love7 A marriage 6ithout love is broke! as soo! as e!tered i!to- a!d 6hoso hath 6ooed
6ithout love- already hath broke! the 6eddi!g7 9 ye ollo6 my 8omma!dme!t- ho6 8a! ye ever break
it- si!8e it bids you do 6hat your o6! heart a!d soul desireME3ut 6here ye marry 6ithout love- ye
bi!d yourselves at varia!8e 6ith 1odIs la6- a!d i! your 6eddi!g ye si! agai!st 1odT a!d this si!
ave!geth itsel by your strivi!g !e?t agai!st the la6 o ma!- i! that ye break the marriage:vo67
((
The shit rom 2esusI a8tual 6ords is 8ru8ial here+ 2esus Ji!ter!aliUesK the prohibitio!- re!deri!g
it mu8h more severe @the .a6 says do !ot 8ommit adultery- but 9 say i you eve! 8ovet a!otherIs 6ie
i! your mi!d- it is the same as i you had already 8ommitted adultery- et87AT /ag!er also i!ter!aliUes it-
but i! a diere!t 6ayEthe i!!er dime!sio! is !ot that o i!te!tio!- but o the love that should
a88ompa!y the .a6 @marriageA7 True adultery is !ot 8opulati!g outside marriage- but 8opulati!g i!
marriage 6ithout love+ simple adultery just violates the .a6 rom outside- 6hile marriage 6ithout love
destroys it rom 6ithi!- tur!i!g the letter o the .a6 agai!st its spirit7 So- to paraphrase 3re8ht o!8e
agai!+ 6hat is simple adultery 8ompared to the adultery that is a loveless marriageM 9t is !ot by 8ha!8e
that /ag!erIs u!derlyi!g ormula Jmarriage is adulteryK re8alls Croudho!Is Jproperty is thetKEi! the
stormy eve!ts o 1&(&- /ag!er 6as !ot o!ly a Feuerba8hia! 8elebrati!g se?ual love- but also a
Croudho!ia! revolutio!ary dema!di!g the abolitio! o private propertyT so !o 6o!der that- o! the same
page- /ag!er attributes to 2esus a Croudho!ia! suppleme!t to JThou shalt !ot stealRK+

This also is a good la6+ Thou shalt !ot steal- !or 8ovet a!other ma!Is goods7 /ho goeth agai!st it-
si!!eth+ but 9 preserve you rom that si!- i!asmu8h as 9 tea8h you+ .ove thy !eighbour as thyselT
6hi8h also mea!eth+ .ay !ot up or thysel treasures- 6hereby thou stealest rom thy !eighbour a!d
makest him to starve+ or 6he! thou hast thy goods saeguarded by the la6 o ma!- thou provokest thy
!eighbour to si! agai!st the la67
(#
This is ho6 the Dhristia! Jsuppleme!tK to the 3ook should be 8o!8eived+ as a properly
=egelia! J!egatio! o !egatio!-K 6hi8h resides i! the de8isive shit rom the distortion of a notion to a
distortion constitutive of this notion- that is- to this !otio! as a distortio!:i!:itsel7 Fe8all agai!
Croudho!Is diale8ti8al motto Jproperty is thetK+ the J!egatio! o !egatio!K is here the shit rom thet
as a distortio! @J!egatio!-K violatio!A o property to the dime!sio! o thet i!s8ribed i!to the very
!otio! o property @!obody has the right to ully o6! the mea!s o produ8tio!T they are by !ature
i!here!tly 8olle8tive- so every 8laim Jthis is mi!eK is illegitimateA7 As 6e have just see!- the same goes
or 8rime a!d la6- or the passage rom 8rime as the distortio! @J!egatio!KA o the la6 to 8rime as
sustai!i!g the la6 itsel- the idea o the la6 itsel as u!iversaliUed 8rime7 /e should !ote that- i! this
!otio! o the J!egatio! o !egatio!-K the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o the t6o opposed terms is the Jlo6est-K
Jtra!sgressiveK o!e+ it is !ot 8rime 6hi8h is a mome!t o la6Is sel:mediatio! @or thet 6hi8h is a
mome!t o propertyIs sel:mediatio!AT the oppositio! o 8rime a!d la6 is i!here!t to 8rime- la6 is a
subspe8ies o 8rime- 8rimeIs sel:relati!g !egatio! @i! the same 6ay that property is thetIs sel:relati!g
!egatio!A7 A!d- ultimately- does !ot the same go or !ature itselM =ere- the J!egatio! o !egatio!K is
the shit rom the idea that 6e are violati!g some !atural bala!8ed order to the idea that imposi!g o!
the Feal su8h a !otio! o bala!8ed order is i! itsel the greatest violatio!E6hi8h is 6hy the premise-
the irst a?iom eve!- o every radi8al e8ology is Jthere is !o 4ature7K Dhesterto! 6rote+ JTake a6ay the
super!atural a!d 6hat you are let 6ith is the u!!atural7K /e should e!dorse this stateme!t- but i! a
se!se opposite to that i!te!ded by Dhesterto!+ 6e should a88ept that !ature is Ju!!atural-K a reak sho6
o 8o!ti!ge!t disturba!8es 6ith !o i!!er rhyme or reaso!7 The same diale8ti8al reversal 8hara8teriUes
the !otio! o viole!8e+ it is !ot o!ly that a! outburst o viole!8e is ote! a passage K lacte as a sig! o
impote!8eT o!e 8ould 8laim that this reversal is i!here!t to the !otio! o viole!8e as su8h- a!d !ot o!ly
a eature or sig! o a dei8ie!t viole!8e7 Viole!8e as suchEthe !eed to atta8k the oppo!e!tEis a sig!
o impote!8e- o the age!tIs e?8lusio! rom 6hat it atta8ks7 9 treat 6ith viole!8e o!ly that 6hi8h
es8apes my 8o!trol- that 6hi8h 9 8a!!ot regulate or steer rom 6ithi!7
The li!es Nuoted above rom /ag!er 8a!!ot but evoke the amous passages rom -he
,ommunist Manifesto 6hi8h respo!d to the bourgeois reproa8h that 8ommu!ism 6a!ts to abolish
reedom- property- a!d amily+ it is 8apitalist reedom itsel 6hi8h- as the reedom to buy a!d sell o!
the market- is the very orm o u!:reedom or those 6ho have !othi!g but their labor:po6er to sellT it
is 8apitalist property itsel 6hi8h is the Jabolitio!K o property or those 6ho do !ot o6! the mea!s o
produ8tio!T it is bourgeois marriage itsel 6hi8h is u!iversaliUed prostitutio!7 9! all these 8ases- the
e?ter!al oppositio! is i!ter!aliUed- so that o!e opposed term be8omes the orm o appeara!8e o the
other @bourgeois reedom is the orm o appeara!8e o the u!reedom o the majority- et87A7 =o6ever- at
least i! the 8ase o reedom- or ,ar? this mea!s that 8ommu!ism 6ill !ot abolish reedom but- by
abolishi!g 8apitalist servitude- bri!g about a8tual reedom- the reedom 6hi8h 6ill !o lo!ger be the
orm o appeara!8e o its opposite7 9t is thus !ot reedom itsel 6hi8h is the orm o appeara!8e o its
opposite- but o!ly a alse reedom- reedom distorted by relatio!s o domi!atio!7
)!derlyi!g the diale8ti8 o the J!egatio! o !egatio!-K the!- a =abermasia! J!ormativeK
approa8h immediately imposes itsel+ ho6 8a! 6e talk about 8rime 6ithout a pre8edi!g !otio! o legal
order that is violated by the 8rimi!al tra!sgressio!M 9! other 6ords- is !ot the !otio! o la6 as
u!iversaliUed or sel:!egated 8rime sel:destru8tiveM This- pre8isely- is 6hat a properly diale8ti8al
approa8h reje8ts+ 6hat pre8edes tra!sgressio! is just a !eutral state o thi!gs- !either good !or bad
@!either property !or thet- !either la6 !or 8rimeAT the bala!8e o this state o thi!gs is the! violated-
a!d the positive !orm @la6- propertyA arises as a se8o!dary move- as a! attempt to 8ou!tera8t a!d
8o!tai! the tra!sgressio!7 /ith regard to the diale8ti8 o reedom- this mea!s that it is Jalie!ated-
bourgeoisK reedom itsel 6hi8h 8reates the 8o!ditio!s a!d ope!s up the spa8e or Ja8tualK reedom7
('
The shit rom !egatio! to the !egatio! o !egatio! is thus a shit rom the obje8tive to the
subje8tive dime!sio!+ i! dire8t !egatio!- the subje8t observes a 8ha!ge i! the obje8t @its disi!tegratio!-
its passage i!to its oppositeA- 6hile i! the !egatio! o !egatio!- the subje8t i!8ludes itsel i! the
pro8ess- taki!g i!to a88ou!t ho6 the pro8ess it is observi!g ae8ts its o6! positio!7 .et us take the
JhighestK e?ample- that o the 8ru8ii?io!+ the subje8t irst observes the most radi8al J!egatio!K
imagi!able- the death o 1odT the!- it be8omes a6are o ho6 the death o 1od ope!s up the spa8e or
its o6! @subje8tiveA reedom7
Su8h a readi!g o the !egatio! o !egatio! ru!s 8ou!ter to the 8ommo!ly held !otio! a88ordi!g
to 6hi8h the irst !egatio! is the splitti!g or parti8ulariUatio! o the i!!er esse!8e- its e?ter!aliUatio!-
a!d the se8o!d !egatio! the over8omi!g o that split7 4o 6o!der that this !otio! 8aused ma!y
i!terpreters o =egel to mo8k the !egatio! o !egatio! as a magi8al me8ha!ism 6hi8h guara!tees that
the i!al out8ome o a pro8ess 6ill al6ays be happy7 3a8k i! 1%#"- the you!g .ouis Althusser
published a te?t i! .a revue de lenseignement philosophi<ue i! 6hi8h he 8o!gratulated Stali! or
reje8ti!g the J!egatio! o !egatio!K as a u!iversal la6 o diale8ti8s-
($
a reje8tio! shared by ,ao7 9t is
easy to u!dersta!d this reje8tio! as the e?pressio! o the spirit o struggle- o Jo!e divides i!to t6oK+
there is !o reu!ii8atio!- !o i!al sy!thesis- the struggle goes o! orever7 =o6ever- the =egelia!
diale8ti8al Jsy!thesisK has to be 8learly delimited rom the Jsy!thesis:o:the:oppositesK model 6ith
6hi8h it is as a rule ide!tiied7 9! psy8hoa!alysis- this model has t6o versio!s7 The irst is sub1ectivist+
the psy8hoa!alyti8al treatme!t is 8o!8eived as the rele?ive appropriatio! o the alie!ated u!8o!s8ious
substa!8e- a!d- o! a irst approa8h- it may appear that FreudIs amous wo es war soll ich werden its
pere8tly the pro8ess o Jthe u!8o!s8ious substa!8e be8omi!g subje8t7K The se8o!d versio! is
substantialist- a!d it should 8ome as !o surprise to true Freudia!s that the irst perso! to propose it 6as
2u!g- the ar8h:re!egade- i! his pseudo:=egelia! J8ompe!satio! theory7K @9! the oppositio! bet6ee!
Freud a!d 2u!g- Freud 6as here the truer =egelia!7A The basi8 idea o J8ompe!satio! theoryK is the
elevatio! o the )!8o!s8ious i!to the hidde! substa!tial Truth o the huma! subje8tE6ith our o!e:
sided ratio!alist subje8tivism- 6e i! the /est have lost sight o this substa!tial Truth i! the depth o
our bei!g+

/he!ever lie pro8eeds o!e:sidedly i! a!y give! dire8tio!- the sel:regulatio! o the orga!ism
produ8es i! the u!8o!s8ious a! a88umulatio! o all those a8tors 6hi8h play too small a part i! the
i!dividualIs 8o!s8ious e?iste!8e7 For this reaso! 9 have put or6ard the 8ompe!satio! theory o the
u!8o!s8ious as a 8ompleme!t to the repressio! theory7
(&
9t is easy to see ho6 this relates to !euroti8 symptoms a!d therapy+ 6he! the ego be8omes too
!arro6 a!d rigid- e?8ludi!g the @Jirratio!alKA te!de!8ies that do !ot it its @sel:Aimage- these te!de!8ies
retur! i! the guise o !euroti8 symptoms7 For e?ample- 6he! a ma! 8urtails his emi!i!e Jshado6K
@a!imaA- 8utti!g it out o his ide!tity- it retur!s to hau!t him i! the guise o mo!strous a!d obs8e!e
emi!i!e igures i! 6hi8h he is !ot able to re8og!iUe himsel- a!d 6hi8h he e?perie!8es as brutal
oreig! i!trusio!s7 The goal o therapy is thereore !ot to elimi!ate these symptoms- but to i!tegrate
them i!to a 6ider Sel that tra!s8e!ds the !arro6 8o!i!es o ego7 The symptoms sta!d or or8es that
are !ot i! themselves evil a!d destru8tive+ 6hat makes them su8h is the alse perspe8tive o the ego- or-
as =egel 6ould have put it- evil resides i! the very gaUe that sees evil every6here arou!d it7 So 6he!
the ego is hau!ted by !euroti8 symptoms- the task o the therapist is to get the patie!t to see ho6 his
ego is part o the problem- !ot its solutio!+ the patie!t should shit his perspe8tive a!d re8og!iUe i! his
symptoms the viole!t e?pressio! o the disavo6ed part o himsel7 The true ill!ess is that o the ego
itsel- a!d the !euroti8 symptoms are desperate attempts at a 8ure- attempts to re:establish the bala!8e
disturbed by the egoIs !arro6 rame 6hi8h has e?8luded 8ru8ial parts o the SelIs 8o!te!t+

A !eurosis is truly removed o!ly 6he! it has removed the alse attitude o the ego7 /e do !ot 8ure
itEit 8ures us7 A ma! is ill- but the ill!ess is !atureIs attempt to heal him- a!d 6hat the !euroti8 li!gs
a6ay as absolutely 6orthless 8o!tai!s the true gold 6e should !ever have ou!d else6here7
(%
4o 6o!der that some partisa!s o 2u!g see i! this J8ompe!satio! theoryK a =egelia!
i!spiratio!+

9t 6as =egel 6ho argued that the o!ly 6ay a battle 8ould 8ease bet6ee! a thesis a!d a! a!tithesis 6as
through the 8o!stru8tio! o a synthesis that 6ould i!8lude eleme!ts rom both sides a!d tra!s8e!d the
oppositio!7 Although 2u!g de!ied that =egel 6as a! i!lue!8e o his thought- it is hard to imagi!e
2u!gia! thought 6ithout the =egelia! model that sees 8o!li8t over8ome through the 8reatio! o a
tra!s8e!de!t JthirdK 6hi8h is !either thesis !or a!tithesis but a !e6 e!tity i! 6hi8h both are
i!8luded7
#0
=ere- ho6ever- 2u!g 6as or o!8e right+ there really is !o tra8e o =egel i! 2u!gIs
J8ompe!satio! theory7K This may appear too hasty- si!8e ma!y o 2u!gIs ormulatio!s ee8tively
re8all =egelIs !otio! o the re8o!8iliatio! o the subje8t 6ith its alie!ated substa!8eEho6 the subje8t
has to re8og!iUe i! the oreig! po6er it ights the misre8og!iUed part o its o6! substa!8e7 This
diale8ti8 o re8og!itio! ee8tively belo!gs to the you!g =egelT it ou!d its dei!itive e?pressio! i! the
2e!a:period ragme!ts o! love a!d re8o!8iliatio!- a!d- later- i! =egelIs readi!g o +ntigone as the
tragi8 8o!ro!tatio! o t6o opposed positio!s- A!tigo!eIs a!d Dreo!Is- both bli!ded by their o!e:
sided!ess a!d thus ea8h u!able to re8og!iUe the mome!t o their o6! truth i! the other7 =ere is 2u!gIs
most J=egelia!K ormulatio!+ JThe i!dividual is a8ed 6ith the !e8essity o re8og!iUi!g a!d a88epti!g
6hat is diere!t a!d stra!ge as a part o his o6! lie- as a ki!d o Valso:9I7K
#1
9s it the! possible to say- i! li!e 6ith Jre8og!iUi!g a!d a88epti!g 6hat is diere!t a!d stra!ge
as a part o his o6! lie-K that the goal o the a!alyti8 pro8ess is- i! a vaguely =egelia! 6ay- to e!able
the patie!t to Jset straightK the libidi!al 8ompromises that 8hara8teriUe his subje8tive positio!- a!d to
arrive at the truth about his desireM 4o- or a very pre8ise a!d simple reaso!+ be8ause there is !o
substa!tial truth to be appropriated- i! 6hi8h the subje8t or patie!t might re8og!iUe his authe!ti8 pla8e7
/e should thus reje8t the matri? u!derlyi!g the irst philosophi8ally releva!t attempt to establish the
li!k bet6ee! =egel a!d psy8hoa!alysis- !amely- that u!dertake! 6ithi! the traditio! o the Fra!kurt
S8hool- irst elaborated by 2Yrge! =abermas i! Interest and 0uman 5nowledge- a!d later a8Nuiri!g its
dei!itive ormulatio! i! =elmut GahmerIs .ibido and Society7 The basi8 matri? i!volved here is
provided by the homology bet6ee! the =egelia! pro8ess o alie!atio! a!d its over8omi!g through
subje8tive mediatio!- or rele?ive re:appropriatio!- o the alie!ated substa!tial 8o!te!t- a!d the
Freudia! pro8ess o repressio! a!d its over8omi!g through the a!alyti8 pro8ess 6herei! the patie!t is
brought to re8og!iUe his o6! 8o!te!t i! 6hat appeared to him as the 6eird ormatio!s o the
u!8o!s8ious7 .ike =egelia! rele8tio!- psy8hoa!alysis does !ot ge!erate !eutral:obje8tive k!o6ledge-
but a Jpra8ti8alK k!o6ledge 6hi8h- 6he! subje8tively assumed- radi8ally 8ha!ges its bearer7
From a 8o!temporary perspe8tive- it is easy to see the limitatio!s o su8h a !otio! o
re8o!8iliatio!Eit sui8es to attempt to apply it to the struggle bet6ee! the 4aUis a!d the 2e6s7 Agai!-
o! a irst approa8h- the 2u!gia! !otio! o the Jshado6K as the misre8og!iUed alter ego seems itti!g
here+ is there !ot i!deed a stra!ge e8hoi!g a!d redoubli!g bet6ee! the 4aUi elevatio! o Arya!
1erma!s a!d the 2e6sI per8eptio! o themselves as the 8hose! !atio!M /as it !ot already S8hoe!berg
6ho dismissed 4aUi ra8ism as a miserable imitatio! o the 2e6ish ide!tity as the 8hose! peopleM A!d
yet 6ould it !ot be obs8e!e to say that ea8h o these t6o parties should re8og!iUe i! its oppo!e!t its
o6! truth a!d substa!8e- its o6! se8o!d SelM For the 2e6s- this 8ould o!ly mea! that they should
re8og!iUe ho6- i! the guise o the 4aUi hatred o them- they suer the rea8tio! to the a8t that they
e?8luded themselves rom orga!i8 8ommu!al lie a!d thereby aba!do!ed themselves to a rootless-
alie!ated e?iste!8e7 9t is immediately 8lear 6hat is 6ro!g here+ 6hatIs missi!g is the radi8al asymmetry
o the opposed poles7 /hile the @a!ti:Semiti8 igure o theA J2e6K really is a ki!d o JsymptomK o
4aUism- 4aUism is dei!itely !ot i! a!y symmetri8al 6ay a symptom o 2udaism- the retur! o its
repressed- its i!!er truth- or it is a! obs8e!ity to say that- i! their struggle agai!st 4aUism- the 2e6s
Jli!g a6ay as absolutely 6orthless the true gold they should !ever have ou!d else6here7K
The oppositio! o poles thus 8o!8eals the a8t that o!e o the poles already is the u!ity o the
t6oEso- or =egel- there is !o !eed or a third eleme!t to bri!g the t6o together7
#2
This is 6hy
=egelIs diale8ti8s is radi8ally grou!dless- abyssal- a pro8ess o the sel:relati!g o the T6o 6hi8h la8ks
a!y ThirdEor e?ample- there is !o e?ter!al Third- !o 1rou!d- !o shared medium i! 6hi8h the
oppositio! bet6ee! la6 a!d 8rime is Jsy!thesiUedK+ the diale8ti8al JtruthK o their oppositio! is that
8rime is its o6! spe8ies- the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o itsel a!d its opposite7 /ith regard to the
oppositio! o liberal i!dividualism a!d u!dame!talism- todayIs 8ommu!itaria!s advo8ate a ki!d o
2u!gia! J8ompe!satio! theoryK+ 6e i! the /est put too mu8h emphasis o! i!dividualism- !egle8ti!g
the bo!ds o 8ommu!ity- 6hi8h the! retur! to hau!t us i! the guise o the u!dame!talist threatT the
6ay to ight u!dame!talism is thus to 8ha!ge our o6! vie6- to re8og!iUe i! it the distorted image o
the !egle8ted aspe8t o our o6! ide!tity7 The solutio! lies i! restori!g the proper bala!8e bet6ee!
i!dividual a!d 8ommu!ity- 8reati!g a so8ial body i! 6hi8h 8olle8tive a!d i!dividual reedom
orga!i8ally suppleme!t ea8h other7 /hat is 6ro!g here is this very igure o a bala!8ed harmo!y o the
t6o opposed pri!8iples7 /e should start- o! the 8o!trary- 6ith the imma!e!t J8o!tradi8tio!K
@a!tago!ismA o 8apitalist i!dividualismEu!dame!talism is ultimately a se8o!dary- Jrea8tiveK
phe!ome!o!- a! attempt to 8ou!tera8t a!d Jge!triyK this a!tago!ism7
For =egel- the goal is thus !ot to @reAestablish the symmetry a!d bala!8e o the t6o opposi!g
pri!8iples- but to re8og!iUe i! o!e pole the symptom o the ailure o the other @a!d not vice versaA+
u!dame!talism is a symptom o liberalism- A!tigo!e is a symptom o Dreo!- et87 The solutio! is to
revolutio!iUe or 8ha!ge the u!iversal term itsel @liberalism- et87A- so that it 6ill !o lo!ger reNuire its
symptom as the guara!tee o its u!ity7 Do!seNue!tly- the 6ay to over8ome the te!sio! bet6ee! se8ular
i!dividualism a!d religious u!dame!talism is !ot to i!d a proper bala!8e bet6ee! the t6o- but to
abolish or over8ome the sour8e o the problem- the a!tago!ism at the very heart o the 8apitalist
i!dividualist proje8t7
9t is this move to6ards sel:relati!g !egativity that is abse!t i! Be! 3uddhism- 6hi8h also relies
o! a ki!d o J!egatio! o !egatio!K+ irst- 6e de!y the substa!tial 8hara8ter o reality a!d assert that the
o!ly Absolute is the Void itselT the!- 6e over8ome the Void itsel i!soar as it is still opposed to
positive reality a!d assert the ultimate same!ess o the plurality o phe!ome!a a!d the Void7 This is
6hy the basi8 eature o the 3uddhist o!tology is the !otio! o the radi8al i!terdepe!de!8e o
phe!ome!a+ phe!ome!a are totally !o!:substa!tial- there is !othi!g behi!d them- !o 1rou!d- o!ly the
VoidT that is- i 6e isolate a thi!g rom its relatio!s to other thi!gs a!d try to grasp it as it is Ji! itsel-K
6e get o!ly Void7 9! !irva!a- 6e e?iste!tially assume this VoidE!ot by de!yi!g phe!ome!a- but by
ully assumi!g their !o!:substa!tial 8hara8ter7 The ethi8al impli8atio! o this !otio! o Void is that
Jgood has !o priority over evil7 The priority o good over evil is a! ethi8al imperative but !ot a! a8tual
huma! 8o!ditio!7K
#"
J1ood a!d evil are 8ompletely i!terdepe!de!t7 There is !o good 6ithout evil a!d
vi8e versa7 There is !o !othi!g!ess 6ithout somethi!g!ess a!d vi8e versa7K
#(
/he! 6e realiUe this
@!ot o!ly !otio!ally- but also e?iste!tiallyA- 6e rea8h Jthe poi!t 6here there is !either good !or evil-
!either lie !or death- !either !othi!g!ess or somethi!g!ess O This is reedom7K
##
At this poi!t- J9 am
!either good !or bad7 9 am !othi!g 6hatsoever7K
#'
From this positio!- eve! =egelIs diale8ti8s appears
!ot radi8al e!ough+ or =egel- 3ei!g still has priority over 4othi!g- !egativity is 8o!tai!ed to the sel:
mediati!g moveme!t o the absolute Spirit 6hi8h thus mai!tai!s a mi!imum o substa!tial ide!tity- a!d
the =egelia! JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K i!di8ates that a substa!tial or8e u!derlies the i!terplay o
phe!ome!a- teleologi8ally dire8ti!g it7
From the =egelia! sta!dpoi!t- 6hat is missi!g here is the properly diale8ti8al parado? o a
4othi!g!ess 6hi8h is prior to Somethi!g!ess a!d- eve! more- o a 6eird Somethi!g 6hi8h is less tha!
!othi!g7 9! other 6ords- the 3uddhist i!ter:relatio! a!d de:substa!tialiUatio! o reality remai!s at the
level o the thorough i!terdepe!de!8e o the opposite poles+ !o good 6ithout evil- !o somethi!g
6ithout !othi!g- a!d vi8e versaEa!d 6e 8a! over8ome this duality o!ly by 6ay o 6ithdra6i!g i!to
the abyss o the absolute a!d u!8o!ditio!al Void7 3ut 6hat about a properly =egelia! diale8ti8al
pro8ess i! 6hi8h !egativity is !ot redu8ed to a sel:mediatio! o the positive Absolute- but i! 6hi8h- o!
the 8o!trary- positive reality appears as the result o sel:relati!g !egativity @or- 6ith regard to ethi8s- i!
6hi8h the good is a sel:!egated or sel:mediated evilAM
FORM AND CONTENT

Da! the matri? o the Jsubje8tive re:appropriatio! o the alie!ated obje8tive 8o!te!tK still be
applied to .a8a!Is Jretur! to FreudKM 9s !ot the 6hole thrust o .a8a!Is readi!g o Freud dire8ted
agai!st su8h a subje8tive re:appropriatio! o alie!ated Hther!essM For .a8a!- is !ot the alie!atio! o the
subje8t i! the Hther 8o!stitutive o subje8tivityM The obvious a!s6er is !oEho6ever- it is our aim to
give this J!oK a diere!t t6ist rom the usual o!e+ !ot to 8ut the li!k 6hi8h 8o!!e8ts .a8a! to =egel @a
path 6hi8h 6as i!8reasi!gly ollo6ed by .a8a! himselA- but to make- i! readi!g =egel through .a8a!-
a !e6 Jretur! to =egel-K that is- to dis8er! the 8o!tours o a diere!t =egel- a =egel 6ho !o lo!ger its
the subje8tivist matri? o the subje8t appropriati!g @i!ter!aliUi!g through !otio!al mediatio!- sublati!g-
idealiUi!gA all substa!tial 8o!te!t7
H!e o the best i!di8ators o the dime!sio! 6hi8h resists the pseudo:=egelia! u!dersta!di!g o
psy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t as the pro8ess o the patie!tIs appropriatio! o repressed 8o!te!t is the
parado? o perversio! i! the Freudia! theoreti8al edii8e+ perversio! demo!strates the i!sui8ie!8y o
the simple logi8 o tra!sgressio!7 The sta!dard 6isdom tells us that perverts a8tually do 6hat hysteri8s
o!ly dream about doi!g- or Jeverythi!g is allo6edK i! perversio!- a pervert ope!ly a8tualiUes all
repressed 8o!te!tEa!d yet- !o!etheless- as Freud emphasiUes- nowhere is repression as strong as in
perversion- a a8t amply 8o!irmed by our late:8apitalist reality i! 6hi8h total se?ual permissive!ess
8auses a!?iety a!d impote!8e or rigidity i!stead o liberatio!7 This 8ompels us to dra6 a disti!8tio!
bet6ee! the repressed 8o!te!t a!d the orm o repressio!- 6here the orm remai!s operative eve! ater
the 8o!te!t is !o lo!ger repressedEi! short- the subje8t 8a! ully appropriate the repressed 8o!te!t- but
repressio! remai!s7 Domme!ti!g o! a short dream had by o!e o his patie!ts @a 6oma! 6ho at irst
reused to tell Freud the dream Jbe8ause it 6as so i!disti!8t a!d muddledKA- 6hi8h revealed itsel to
reer to the a8t that the patie!t 6as preg!a!t but i! doubt as to the babyIs ather @i7e7- the pare!thood
6as Ji!disti!8t a!d muddledKA- Freud dra6s a key diale8ti8al 8o!8lusio!+

the la8k o 8larity sho6! by the dream 6as a part o the material 6hi8h i!stigated the dream+ part o
this material- that is- 6as represe!ted i! the form o the dream7 -he form of a dream or the form in
which it is dreamt is used with <uite surprising fre<uency for representing its concealed sub1ect*
matterF
ST
The gap bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!t is here properly diale8ti8al- i! 8o!trast to the tra!s8e!de!tal
gap 6hose poi!t is that every 8o!te!t appears 6ithi! a! a priori ormal rame- a!d he!8e 6e should
al6ays be a6are o the i!visible tra!s8e!de!tal rame 6hi8h J8o!stitutesK the 8o!te!t 6e per8eiveEor-
i! stru8tural terms- 6e should disti!guish bet6ee! the eleme!ts a!d the ormal pla8es these eleme!ts
o88upy7 /e o!ly attai! the level o proper diale8ti8al a!alysis o a orm 6he! 6e 8o!8eive a 8ertai!
ormal pro8edure !ot as e?pressi!g a 8ertai! aspe8t o the @!arrativeA 8o!te!t- but as marki!g or
sig!ali!g that part o the 8o!te!t 6hi8h is e?8luded rom the e?pli8it !arrative li!e- so thatEa!d herei!
resides the proper theoreti8al poi!tEi 6e 6a!t to re8o!stru8t JallK o the !arrative 8o!te!t- 6e must
rea8h beyo!d the e?pli8it !arrative 8o!te!t as su8h a!d i!8lude those ormal eatures 6hi8h a8t as a
sta!d:i! or the JrepressedK aspe8t o the 8o!te!t7
#&
To take the 6ell:k!o6! eleme!tary e?ample rom
the a!alysis o melodramas+ the emotio!al e?8ess that 8a!!ot e?press itsel dire8tly i! the !arrative li!e
i!ds its outlet i! the ridi8ulously se!time!tal musi8al a88ompa!ime!t or i! other ormal eatures7
0?emplary is here the 6ay Dlaude 3erriIs Cean de Florette a!d Manon des Sources displa8e
,ar8el Cag!olIs origi!al ilm @a!d his o6! later !oveliUatio! o itA o! 6hi8h they are based7 That is to
say- Cag!olIs origi!al retai!s tra8es o the Jauthe!ti8K Fre!8h provi!8ial 8ommu!ity lie- 6ith its old-
Nuasi:paga! religious patter!s- 6hile 3erriIs ilms ail i! their eort to re8apture the spirit o this
8losed- premoder! 8ommu!ity7 =o6ever- u!e?pe8tedly- the i!here!t obverse o Cag!olIs u!iverse is
the theatri8ality o the a8tio! a!d the eleme!t o iro!i8 dista!8e a!d 8omi8ality- 6hile 3erriIs ilms-
though shot more Jrealisti8ally-K pla8e the emphasis o! desti!y @the musi8al leitmoti o the ilms is
based o! VerdiIs .a for2a del destinoA- a!d o! the melodramati8 e?8ess 6hose hysteri8ality ote!
borders o! the ridi8ulous @like the s8e!e i! 6hi8h- ater the rai! by:passes his ield- the desperate 2ea!
8ries a!d shouts at =eave!A7 So- parado?i8ally- the 8losed- ritualiUed- premoder! 8ommu!ity implies
theatri8al 8omi8ality a!d iro!y- 6hile the moder!- Jrealisti8K re!deri!g i!volves Fate a!d melodramati8
e?8ess7 9! this respe8t- 3erriIs t6o ilms are to be opposed to .ars vo! TrierIs /rea"ing the Waves+ i!
both 8ases- 6e are deali!g 6ith the te!sio! bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!tT ho6ever- i! /rea"ing the Waves-
the e?8ess is lo8ated i! the 8o!te!t @the subdued pseudo:do8ume!tary orm makes this e?8ess
palpableA- 6hile i! 3erri- the e?8ess i! the orm obus8ates a!d thus re!ders palpable the la6 i! the
8o!te!t- the impossibility today o realiUi!g the pure 8lassi8al tragedy o Gesti!y7
Therei! lies the key 8o!seNue!8e o the move rom *a!t to =egel+ the very gap bet6ee!
8o!te!t a!d orm is to be rele8ted ba8k i!to the 8o!te!t itsel- as a! i!di8atio! that the 8o!te!t is !ot
all- that somethi!g 6as repressed>e?8luded rom it7 This e?8lusio! 6hi8h establishes the orm itsel is
the Jprimordial repressio!K @3r*6erdr=ngungA- a!d !o matter ho6 mu8h 6e bri!g out all the repressed
8o!te!t- this primordial repressio! persists7 =o6 do 6e e?plai! thisM The immediate a!s6er i!volves
the ide!tity o the repressio! 6ith the retur! o the repressed- 6hi8h mea!s that the repressed 8o!te!t
does !ot pre:e?ist repressio!- but is retroa8tively 8o!stituted by the very pro8ess o repressio!7 Through
diere!t orms o !egatio! or obus8atio! @8o!de!satio!- displa8eme!t- de!egatio!- disavo6al OA- the
repressed is allo6ed to pe!etrate publi8 8o!s8ious spee8h- to i!d a! e8ho i! it @the most dire8t e?ample
8omes rom Freud+ 6he! o!e o his patie!ts said- J9 do!It k!o6 6ho this 6oma! i! my dream is- but 9
am sure she is !ot my motherRK the mother- the repressed- e!tered i!to spee8hA7 /hat 6e get here is
a!other ki!d o J!egatio! o !egatio!KT that is- the 8o!te!t is !egated or repressed- but this repressio! is
i! the same gesture itsel !egated i! the guise o the retur! o the repressed @6hi8h is 6hy 6e are
dei!itely !ot deali!g here 6ith the properly =egelia! !egatio! o !egatio!A7 The logi8 seems similar to
that o the relatio!ship bet6ee! si! a!d .a6 i! Caul- 6here there is !o si! 6ithout .a6- 6here the .a6
itsel 8reates the tra!sgressio! it tries to subdue- so that- i 6e remove the .a6- 6e also lose 6hat the
.a6 tried to JrepressKEor- i! more Freudia! terms- i 6e remove the Jrepressio!-K 6e also lose the
repressed 8o!te!t7 9s the proo !ot provided by todayIs typi8al patie!t- 6hose rea8tio! to the same
dream 6ould be+ J9 do!It k!o6 6ho this 6oma! i! my dream is- but 9 am sure she has somethi!g to do
6ith my motherRKM The patie!t says this- but there is !o liberatio!- !o truth:ee8t- !o shit i! his
subje8tive positio!E6hyM Agai!- 6hat remai!s JrepressedK eve! 6he! the barriers preve!ti!g a88ess
to the repressed 8o!te!t 8ome do6!M The irst a!s6er is- o 8ourse+ the orm itsel7 That is to say- both
the positive a!d the !egative orm @Jthis is my motherKT Jthis is !ot my motherKA move 6ithi! the same
ield- the ield o the symboli8 orm- a!d 6hat 6e should o8us o! is a more radi8al Jrepressio!K
8o!stitutive o this orm itsel- 6hat .a8a! @at some poi!tA 8alled symboli8 8astratio! or the prohibitio!
o i!8estEa !egative gesture 6hi8h sustai!s the very symboli8 orm- so that eve! 6he! 6e say- JThis
is my motherRK the mother is already lost7 That is to say- this !egative gesture sustai!s the mi!imal gap
bet6ee! the symboli8 a!d the Feal- bet6ee! @symboli8A reality a!d the impossible Feal7
=o6ever- i!soar as 6e are deali!g here 6ith the properly diale8ti8al mediatio! bet6ee! orm
a!d 8o!te!t- 6e should !ot redu8e primordial repressio! simply to the orm o a gap+ somethi!g i!sists-
the 6eird positivity o a! e?8essive J8o!te!tK !ot o!ly impervious to !egatio!- but produ8ed by the
very pro8ess o redoubled @sel:relati!gA !egatio!7 Do!seNue!tly- this somethi!g is !ot simply a
remai!der o the pre:symboli8 Feal that resists symboli8 !egatio!- but a spe8tral d 8alled by .a8a! the
ob1et a or surplus:e!joyme!t7 =ere .a8a!Is key disti!8tio! bet6ee! pleasure @.ust! plaisirA a!d
e!joyme!t @(eniessen! 1ouissanceA 8omes i!to play+ 6hat is Jbeyo!d the pleasure pri!8ipleK is
e!joyme!t itsel- the drive as su8h7 The basi8 parado? o 1ouissance is that it is both impossible and
u!avoidable+ it is !ever ully a8hieved- al6ays missed- but- simulta!eously- 6e !ever 8a! get rid o
itEevery re!u!8iatio! o e!joyme!t ge!erates a! e!joyme!t i! re!u!8iatio!- every obsta8le to desire
ge!erates a desire or a! obsta8le- a!d so o!7 This reversal provides the mi!imal dei!itio! o surplus:
e!joyme!t+ it i!volves a parado?i8al Jpleasure i! pai!7K That is to say- 6he! .a8a! uses the term plus*
de*1ouir- o!e has to ask a!other !aSve but 8ru8ial Nuestio!+ i! 6hat does this surplus 8o!sistM 9s it
merely a Nualitative i!8rease o ordi!ary pleasureM The ambiguity o the Fre!8h e?pressio! is de8isive
here+ it 8a! mea! Jsurplus o e!joyme!tK as 6ell as J!o e!joyme!tKEthe surplus o e!joyme!t over
mere pleasure is ge!erated by the prese!8e o the very opposite o pleasure- !amely pai!T it is the part
o 1ouissance 6hi8h resists bei!g 8o!tai!ed by homeostasis- by the pleasure:pri!8ipleT it is the e?8ess
o pleasure produ8ed by Jrepressio!K itsel- 6hi8h is 6hy 6e lose it i 6e abolish repressio!7 This is
6hat =erbert ,ar8use- i! his Eros and ,ivili2ation- misses 6he! he proposes a disti!8tio! bet6ee!
Jbasi8 repressio!K @Jthe Vmodii8atio!sI o the i!sti!8ts !e8essary or the perpetuatio! o the huma!
ra8e i! 8iviliUatio!KA a!d Jsurplus:repressio!K @Jthe restri8tio!s !e8essitated by so8ial domi!atio!KA+

6hile a!y orm o the reality pri!8iple dema!ds a 8o!siderable degree a!d s8ope o repressive 8o!trol
over the i!sti!8ts- the spe8ii8 histori8al i!stitutio!s o the reality pri!8iple a!d the spe8ii8 i!terests o
domi!atio! i!trodu8e additional 8o!trols over a!d above those i!dispe!sable or 8iviliUed huma!
asso8iatio!7 These additio!al 8o!trols arisi!g rom the spe8ii8 i!stitutio!s o domi!atio! are 6hat 6e
de!ote as surplus*repression7
#%
,ar8use oers as e?amples o surplus:repressio! Jthe modii8atio!s a!d dele8tio!s o
i!sti!8tual e!ergy !e8essitated by the perpetuatio! o the mo!ogami8:patriar8hal amily- or by a
hierar8hi8al divisio! o labor- or by publi8 8o!trol over the i!dividualIs private e?iste!8e7K
'0
Although
he 8o!8edes that basi8 a!d surplus:repressio! are de a8to i!e?tri8ably i!tert6i!ed- o!e should go a
step urther a!d re!der problemati8 their very 8o!8eptual disti!8tio!+ it is the parado? o libidi!al
e8o!omy that surplus or e?8ess is !e8essary or eve! or the most Jbasi8K u!8tio!i!g7 A! ideologi8al
edii8e JbribesK subje8ts i!to a88epti!g Jrepressio!K or re!u!8iatio! by 6ay o oeri!g surplus:
e!joyme!t @.a8a!Is plus*de*1ouirAEthat is- e!joyme!t ge!erated by the Je?8essiveK re!u!8iatio! o
e!joyme!t itselT surplus:e!joyme!t is by dei!itio! e!joyme!t:i!:pai!7 @9ts paradigmati8 8ase is the
Fas8ist 8all JFe!ou!8e 8orrupt pleasuresR Sa8rii8e yoursel or your 8ou!tryRK a 8all 6hi8h promises
a! obs8e!e e!joyme!t brought about by this very re!u!8iatio!7A Thus o!e 8a!!ot have o!ly Jbasi8K
repressio! 6ithout surplus:repressio!- si!8e it is the very e!joyme!t ge!erated by surplus:repressio!
6hi8h re!ders Jbasi8K repressio! palpable to subje8ts7 The parado? 6e are deali!g 6ith here is thus a
ki!d o Jless is moreK+ JmoreK repressio! is less traumati8- more easily a88epted- tha! less7 /he!
repressio! is dimi!ished- it be8omes mu8h more dii8ult to e!dure a!d provokes rebellio!7 @This may
be o!e o the reaso!s 6hy revolutio!s break out !ot 6he! oppressio! is at its height- but 6he! it
dimi!ishes to a more Jreaso!ableK or Jratio!alK levelEthe dimi!ishi!g deprives repressio! o the aura
6hi8h makes it a88eptable7A
To retur! to =egel+ 8a! o!e really 8laim that this e?8ess produ8ed by the very pro8ess o sel:
relati!g !egatio! is beyo!d his s8opeM 9! a !egle8ted passage rom the sub8hapter o the
)henomenology des8ribi!g the stru8ture o the utilitaria! 0!lighte!me!t u!iverse- =egel @or the irst
timeA ormulates the basi8 parado? o the Jpleasure pri!8ipleK+ the a8t that the greatest threat to
pleasure is !ot a s8ar8ity that preve!ts ull a88ess to it- but the e?8ess o pleasure itsel7 9! the utilitaria!
u!iverse- Jeverythi!g e?ists to pleasure a!d delight [ma!\- a!d- as he irst 8omes rom the ha!d o 1od-
he 6alks the earth as i! a garde! pla!ted or him7K 3ut 6hat disturbs this paradise is that- havi!g also
Jplu8ked the ruit o the tree o k!o6ledge o good a!d evil-K ma!Is

i!here!tly good !ature is also so 8o!stituted that the superluity o delight does it harm- or rather his
si!gle!ess 8o!tai!s as a a8tor i! its 8o!stitutio! a pri!8iple that goes beyo!d itT his si!gle!ess 8a!
overrea8h itsel a!d destroy itsel7 To preve!t this- he i!ds reaso! a useul mea!s or duly restrai!i!g
this sel:tra!s8e!de!8e- or rather or preservi!g himsel 6he! he does go beyo!d the determi!ate+ or
su8h is the or8e o 8o!s8ious!ess O The pri!8iple o measure or proportio! has- thereore- the
determi!ate u!8tio! o preve!ti!g pleasure i! its variety a!d duratio! rom bei!g Nuite broke! o+ i7e7
the u!8tio! o JmeasureK is immoderatio!7
'1
This lesso! is repeatedly imparted to us by advertisi!g+ to e!joy our produ8t ully a!d
perma!e!tly- 6e must e!joy it i! proper measure @dri!k reaso!ably- 8o!sume o!ly o!e bar o 8ho8olate
at a time OAEo!ly su8h restrai!t guara!tees true Jimmoderatio!-K a prolo!ged lie o pleasureT as
.a8a! poi!ted out- the Freudia! pleasure pri!8iple is !ot a pri!8iple o u!bridled e8stati8 e!joyme!t-
but a pri!8iple o restrai!t7
The proo that =egelIs ormulatio! o the Jbeyo!d o the pleasure pri!8ipleK is embedded i! his
!otio! o subje8tivity lies i! his dei!itio! o the subje8t as Jthe a8tivity o the ormal ratio!ality o
satisyi!g impulses7K
'2
This idea is developed i! his 9!trodu8tio! to the .ectures on the )hilosophy of
World 0istory+

[,a!\ pla8es the ideal- the realm o thought- between the dema!ds o the impulse a!d their satisa8tio!7
9! the a!imal- the t6o 8oi!8ideT it 8a!!ot sever their 8o!!e8tio! by its o6! eortsEo!ly pai! or ear
8a! do so7 9! ma!- the impulse is prese!t beore it is satisied a!d i!depe!de!tly o its satisa8tio!T i!
8o!trolli!g or givi!g rei! to his impulses- ma! a8ts i! a88orda!8e 6ith ends a!d determi!es himsel i!
the light o a ge!eral pri!8iple7 9t is up to him to de8ide 6hat e!d to ollo6T he 8a! eve! make his e!d a
u!iversal o!e7 9! so doi!g- he is determined by 6hatever 8o!8eptio!s he has ormed o his o6! !ature
a!d volitio!s7 9t is this 6hi8h 8o!stitutes ma!Is i!depe!de!8e+ or he k!o6s 6hat it is that determi!es
him7
'"
This mea!s that ratio!ality- at irst merely i!terposi!g itsel as a! age!8y or the better
satisa8tio! o impulses- e!ds up subordi!ati!g all !atural goals to itsel @Jpositi!g its presuppositio!sKA
a!d be8omi!g its o6! goal+ ratio!ality irst emerges as

a hedo!i8 8al8ulus aimi!g at the ge!eral satisa8tio! o my impulses @i! happi!essAT but i!ally- i 9 am
to be ully satisied i! my a8tio!Ei! my regard that it is my o6!Ethe ratio!ality pri!8iple that 9 apply
must !ot be 8o!ditio!al o! a 8o!ti!ge!t e!d like happi!ess @6hi8h may depe!d o! some vie6 o desire
preere!8e that 9 8a!It be sure is my o6!- si!8e others may have i!lue!8ed my sele8tio! o itA7 Father-
the pri!8iple o my a8tio! must i!volve my 6illi!g that 9 be prese!t i! my a8tio! as a ree age!t7
'(
4o 6o!der- the!- that the ide!tity o opposites is 8learly dis8er!ible i! the 8ase o pleasure a!d
duty7 4ot o!ly is it possible to elevate pleasure i!to a duty @K la the !ar8issisti8 hedo!istA- it is also
possible to elevate duty i!to a pleasure @K la the se!time!tal moralistA7 3ut 6hat about the majority o
8ases i! 6hi8h the t6o are simply opposedM The 8at8h is+ am 9 able to do my duty- !ot 6he! it 8urtails
my pleasures- but 6he! it gives me pleasure to do itM H!ly i 9 am able to do so 6ill the t6o domai!s be
truly separated7 9 9 8a!!ot tolerate the pleasure that may result as a by:produ8t- the! my 8arryi!g out o
my duty 6ill already be 8o!tami!ated by pleasure- by the e8o!omy o Jmoral maso8hism7K 9! other
6ords- it is 8ru8ial to disti!guish bet6ee! tolerati!g pleasure as a! a88ide!tal by:produ8t o doi!g my
duty- a!d doi!g a duty because it provides me pleasure7
NEGATION ITHO!T A FILLING

The J8oi!8ide!8e o the oppositesK thus has !othi!g 6hatsoever to do 6ith the Jeter!al
harmo!y>struggleK o opposed or8es- the 8o!stitue!t o every paga! 8osmology7 9! a give! so8iety-
8ertai! eatures- attitudes- a!d !orms o lie are !ot per8eived as ideologi8ally marked but appear as
J!eutral-K as part o a !o!:ideologi8al 8ommo!:se!se 6ay o lie7 J9deologyK is the! reserved or those
e?pli8itly posited @JmarkedK i! the semioti8 se!seA positio!s 6hi8h sta!d out rom or agai!st this
ba8kgrou!d @like e?treme religious Ueal- dedi8atio! to some politi8al orie!tatio!- et87A7 The =egelia!
poi!t here 6ould be that it is pre8isely this !eutraliUatio! o 8ertai! eatures 6ithi! a spo!ta!eously
a88epted ba8kgrou!d 6hi8h is ideology at its purest @a!d at its most ee8tiveA7 =ere- the!- is a true 8ase
o the J8oi!8ide!8e o the oppositesK+ the a8tualiUatio! o a !otio! @ideology i! this 8aseA at its purest
8oi!8ides 6ith @or more pre8isely appears asA its opposite @as !o!:ideologyA7 A!d- mutatis muta!dis-
the same goes or viole!8e+ so8ial:symboli8 viole!8e at its purest appears as its opposite- as the
spo!ta!eity o the milieu i! 6hi8h 6e d6ell- as !eutral as the air that 6e breathe7
/hat this last e?ample 8learly sho6s is that- i! the =egelia! J!egatio! o !egatio!-K the level
shits+ irst !egatio! dire8tly 8ha!ges the 8o!te!t 6ithi! the same horiUo!- 6hile i! the !egatio! o
!egatio!- J!othi!g really 8ha!ges-K the horiUo! is simply tur!ed arou!d- so that Jthe sameK 8o!te!t
appears as its opposite7 A!other u!e?pe8ted e?ample+ i! the mid:1%%0s- the servi8i!g o goods
orga!iUed by the state i! 4orth *oreaIs 8e!traliUed a!d ully regulated e8o!omy gradually 8eased to
u!8tio!+ the ood distributio! system delivered i!8reasi!gly smaller ratio!s- a8tories simply stopped
payi!g salaries- the medi8al system 6as 6ithout medi8i!es- ele8tri8ity a!d 6ater 6ere available or
o!ly a 8ouple o hours per 6eek- 8i!emas stopped sho6i!g ilms- et87 The rea8tio! o ordi!ary 4orth
*orea!s to this disi!tegratio! may be surprisi!g to some+ the !eeds 6hi8h 6ere !o lo!ger bei!g met by
the state 6ere- up to a poi!t- a88ommodated by primitive orms o a modest market 8apitalism-
grudgi!gly tolerated by the state+ i!dividuals selli!g home:gro6! vegetables- ish or mushrooms- dogs
a!d rats @or tradi!g them or amily valuables like je6elry or 8lothesAT ele8tro!i8 devi8es a!d GVGs
smuggled i! rom Dhi!a7 /hat emerged 6as a brutal survivalist market e8o!omy- as i the 8ou!try had
regressed to a ki!d o =obbesia! state o !ature+ i!d your market !i8he @rom selli!g homemade 8or!
!oodles to hairdressi!gA or die7 9t 6as thus !ot some eleme!tary orm o solidarity but ra6 egoism
6hi8h 6o! the day+ i! a 8ruel iro!y- at this Uero:poi!t- the oi8ial ideology o total solidarity a!d the
dedi8atio! o i!dividuals to the 8ommu!ity 6as suppleme!ted by its pure a!d simple opposite7 The
=egelia! poi!t to be made here is- o 8ourse- that this !egatio! o the oi8ial ideology 6as !ot e?ter!al-
but i!ter!al to it+ the e?plosio! o egoism 6as Ji! itselK already there i! the a8tual subje8tive e8o!omy
o those 6ho parti8ipated i! the oi8ial 8ommu!al ritualsEthey parti8ipated as a matter o survival- as
part o a pure egoist strategy o avoidi!g state terror7 A re8e!t do8u:i8tio! book @based o! i!tervie6s
6ith reugeesA des8ribes the mome!t 6he! 2u!:sa!g- a privileged stude!t at a Cyo!gya!g u!iversity-
ater e!8ou!teri!g a starvi!g homeless 8hild- sudde!ly realiUed that he !o lo!ger believed i! the 4orth
*orea! oi8ial ideology+

=e !o6 k!e6 or sure that he did!It believe7 9t 6as a! e!ormous mome!t o sel:revelatio!- like
de8idi!g o!e 6as a! atheist7 9t made him eel alo!e7 =e 6as diere!t rom everybody else- burde!ed
by a se8ret he had dis8overed about himsel7 At irst he thought his lie 6ould be dramati8ally diere!t
6ith his !e6ou!d 8larity7 9! a8t- it 6as mu8h the same as ever beore7 =e 6e!t through the motio!s o
bei!g a loyal subje8t7 H! Saturday mor!i!gs he sho6ed up pu!8tually at the ideologi8al le8tures at the
u!iversity7
'#
=o6ever- he the! !oti8ed that the a8es o his ello6 stude!ts

6ere still a!d e?pressio!less- as bla!k as ma!!eNui!s i! a departme!t store 6i!do67=e realiUed
sudde!ly he 6ore the same va8a!t e?pressio! o! his a8e7 9! a8t- they all probably elt e?a8tly the
same 6ay he did about the 8o!te!ts o the le8ture7JThey k!o6R They all k!o6RK he !early s8reamed- he
6as so 8ertai! O 2u!:sa!g realiUed he 6as !ot the o!ly !o!believer out there7 =e 6as eve! 8o!vi!8ed
that he 8ould re8og!iUe a orm o sile!t 8ommu!i8atio! that 6as so subtle it did!It eve! rise to the level
o a 6i!k or a !od7
''
H!e should read these li!es literally+ ar rom e?perie!8i!g a loss o i!dividuality through
immersio! i! a primordial 8olle8tive ide!tity- the i!dividuals 6ho parti8ipated i! the obligatory
ideologi8al rituals 6ere absolutely alo!e- redu8ed to a pu!8tual i!dividuality- u!able to 8ommu!i8ate
their true i!!er subje8tive sta!8e- totally divor8ed rom the ideologi8al big Hther7 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter
here is o!e o the purest e?amples o the shit rom alie!atio! to separatio! as developed by .a8a! i!
his semi!ar o! the our u!dame!tal 8o!8epts o psy8hoa!alysis+ radi8al alie!atio! i! the publi8
ideologi8al order- 6here people seem to lose their i!dividuality a!d a8t like puppets- is !o less a orm
o radi8al separatio!- the total 6ithdra6al o subje8ts i!to their mute si!gularity e?8luded rom a!y
symboli8 8olle8tiveEit 6as this si!gularity produ8ed by the state:ideologi8al ma8hi!e 6hi8h e?ploded
i! 4orth *orea 6he! the state servi8i!g o goods 8eased to u!8tio!7 @Cerspi8uous a!alysts o Stali!ism
had already !oted that the Stali!ist 8olle8tive re!dered i!dividuals less solidary a!d more survivalist:
egotist tha! !ormal bourgeois so8iety- 6here eleme!ts o solidarity survive as a rea8tio! agai!st market
8ompetitio!7A
'$
The u!derlyi!g logi8 here is that o the retroa8tive positi!g o presuppositio!s7 This logi8 also
allo6s us to see 6hat is 6ro!g i! the =obbesia! visio! o the ,o!ar8h as the H!e 6ho brutally but
!e8essarily imposes pea8eul 8oe?iste!8e upo! the multitude o i!dividuals 6ho- let to themelves-
6ould des8e!d i!to a state 6here homo homini lupus7 This supposedly J!aturalK state o the 6ar o all
agai!st all is a retroa8tive produ8t o the imposed state po6erT that is- i! order or that po6er to
u!8tio!- the H!e has to sever the dire8t lateral li!ks bet6ee! i!dividuals+ Jthe relatio! to the H!e
makes o every subje8t a traitor to his ello6s7 9t is alse to assert that the H!e is put i! the pla8e o the
third be8ause homo homini lupus- as =obbes 6ould say7 9t is the a8t o putti!g the H!e i! the pla8e o
the tra!s8e!de!t la6giver or 8o!sideri!g him as its represe!tative that makes a 6ol out o a ma!7K
'&
A
similar poi!t 6as made by Soia 4jsstrZm+ it is the state itsel that JreesK people rom their
respo!sibility to ea8h other- !arro6i!g the spa8e o dire8t 8ommu!al solidarity a!d redu8i!g people to
abstra8t i!dividualsEi! short- the state itsel 8reates the problem it the! strives to resolve7
'%
/hat this more 8ompli8ated model i!8ludi!g retroa8tivity i!di8ates is that the =egelia! triad is
!ever really a triad- that its !umber is !ot "7 There 6ere three steps i! the ormatio! o Fussia! !atio!al
ide!tity+ irst- the substa!tial starti!g poi!t @premoder! Hrthodo? FussiaAT the!- the viole!t
moder!iUatio! e!or8ed by Ceter the 1reat- 6hi8h 8o!ti!ued throughout eightee!th 8e!tury a!d 8reated
a !e6 Fre!8h:speaki!g eliteT i!ally- ater 1&12- the redis8overy o JFussia!!ess-K the retur! to
orgotte! authe!ti8 origi!s7
$0
9t is 8ru8ial to bear i! mi!d that this redis8overy o authe!ti8 roots 6as
o!ly possible through a!d for the edu8ated eyes o the Fre!8h:speaki!g elite+ Jauthe!ti8K Fussia
e?isted o!ly or the JFre!8h gaUe7K This is 6hy it 6as a Fre!8h 8omposer @6orki!g at the imperial
8ourtA 6ho 6rote the irst opera i! Fussia! a!d thus started the traditio!- a!d 6hy Cushki! himsel had
to use Fre!8h 6ords to make 8lear to his readers @a!d to himselA the true mea!i!g o his authe!ti8
Fussia! terms7 .ater- o 8ourse- the diale8ti8al moveme!t goes o!+ JFussia!!essK immediately splits
i!to liberal populism a!d 8o!servative Slavophilism- a!d the pro8ess 8ulmi!ates i! the properly
diale8ti8al 8oi!8ide!8e o moder!ity a!d primitivism+ the as8i!atio! o the early t6e!tieth:8e!tury
moder!ists 6ith a!8ie!t barbari8 8ultural orms7 The 8omple?ity o this e?ample a88ou!ts or 6hy it
seems that =egel se8retly os8illates bet6ee! t6o matri8es o the !egatio! o !egatio!7 The irst matri?
is+ @1A substa!tial pea8eT @2A the subje8tIs a8t- its o!e:sided i!terve!tio! 6hi8h disturbs the pea8e-
disrupts the bala!8eT @"A the reve!ge o Gesti!y 6hi8h re:establishes the bala!8e by 6ay o a!!ihilati!g
the subje8tIs e?8ess7 The se8o!d is+ @1A the subje8tIs a8tT @2A the ailure o the a8tT @"A the shit o
perspe8tive 6hi8h i!verts this ailure i!to su88ess7
$1
9t is easy to see that the last t6o mome!ts o the
irst triad overlap 6ith the irst t6o mome!ts o the se8o!d triadEit all depe!ds o! 6here 6e start to
8ou!t+ i 6e start 6ith substa!tial u!ity a!d bala!8e- the subje8tive a8t is the !egatio!T i 6e start 6ith
the subje8tive a8t as the mome!t o positi!g- !egatio! is its ailure7
/hat this 8ompli8atio! implies is that- already at the abstra8t:ormal level- 6e should
disti!guish our rather tha! o!ly three stages o a diale8ti8al pro8ess7 Ge8ades ago- M+D magaUi!e
published a series o variatio!s o! the topi8 o ho6 a subje8t 8a! relate to a !orm at our levels+ i!
ashio!- say- the poor do!It 8are ho6 they dressT the lo6er middle 8lasses try to ollo6 the ashio! but
al6ays lag behi!dT the upper middle 8lasses dress i! a88orda!8e 6ith the latest ashio!T those at the top-
the tre!d:setters- also do!It 8are ho6 they dress si!8e the 6ay they dress is the ashio!7 Hr- 6ith regard
to the la6- the out8asts do !ot 8are 6hat the la6 says- they just do 6hatever they 6a!tT the utilitaria!
egotists ollo6 the la6- but o!ly appro?imately- 6he! it suits their i!terestsT the moralists stri8tly
ollo6 the la6T 6hile those at the top- like the absolute mo!ar8h- agai! do 6hatever they 6a!t si!8e
6hat they do or say is the la67 9! both 8ases- the logi8 is the same+ 6e progress rom ig!ora!8e to
partial 8ommitme!t a!d the! to ull 8ommitme!t- but to these three steps a!other is added+ the highest
level 6hi8h parado?i8ally 8oi!8ides 6ith the lo6estEat this highest level- people do e?a8tly the same
as at the previous level- but 6ith a subje8tive attitude 6hi8h is the same as the attitude o those at the
lo6est level7 Goes this !ot it 6ith Augusti!eIs sayi!g that- i you have Dhristia! love- you 8a! do
6hatever you 6a!t si!8e 6hat you do 6ill automati8ally be i! a88orda!8e 6ith the la6M A!d do these
our steps !ot also provide a model or the J!egatio! o !egatio!KM /e start 6ith a totally !o!:
alie!ated attitude @9 do 6hat 9 6a!tA- the! 6e progress through partial alie!atio! @9 restrai! mysel- my
egotismA ollo6ed by total alie!atio! @9 surre!der mysel 8ompletely to the !orm or la6A- u!til i!ally-
i! the igure o the ,aster- this total alie!atio! is sel:!egated- 8oi!8idi!g 6ith its opposite7
This more 8omple? model- 6hi8h disti!guishes bet6ee! t6o alie!atio!s or !egatio!s- partial
a!d total- also e!ables us to a!s6er o!e o the 8riti8al poi!ts ote! made agai!st =egel+ !amely that he
8heats 6he! he prese!ts the i!!er deployme!t o a 8o!stellatio! i! su8h a 6ay that the lo6est poi!t o
sel:relati!g !egatio! magi8ally reverts i!to a !e6 higher positivityEat best- 6hat 6e should get-
i!stead o the total destru8tio! or sel:erasure o the e!tire moveme!t- is a retur! to the immediate
substa!tial starti!g poi!t- so that 6e 6ould i!d ourselves i! a 8y8li8al u!iverse7 3ut the irst surprise is
that =egel himsel outli!es this optio! i! his )henomenology- i! the 8hapter o! absolute reedom a!d
the Terror+

Hut o this tumult spirit 6ould be hurled ba8k upo! its starti!g poi!t- the ethi8al 6orld a!d the real
6orld o spiritual 8ulture- 6hi8h 6ould thus have bee! merely rereshed a!d rejuve!ated by the ear o
the lord- that has agai! e!tered me!Is hearts7 Spirit 6ould have a!e6 to traverse a!d 8o!ti!ually repeat
this 8y8le o !e8essity- i o!ly 8omplete i!terpe!etratio! o sel:8o!s8ious!ess a!d the substa!8e 6ere
the i!al result+ a! i!terpe!etratio! i! 6hi8h sel:8o!s8ious!ess- 6hi8h has e?perie!8ed the or8e o its
u!iversal !ature operati!g !egatively upo! it- 6ould try to k!o6 a!d i!d itsel !ot as this parti8ular
sel:8o!s8ious!ess but o!ly as u!iversal- a!d he!8e- too- 6ould be able to e!dure the obje8tive reality
o u!iversal spirit- a reality- e?8ludi!g sel:8o!s8ious!ess <ua parti8ular7
$2
9! Fevolutio!ary Terror- the si!gular 8o!s8ious!ess e?perie!8es the destru8tive 8o!seNue!8es
o keepi!g itsel separate rom the u!iversal substa!8e+ i! su8h a separatio!- substa!8e appears as a
!egative po6er 6hi8h arbitrarily a!!ihilates every si!gular 8o!s8ious!ess7 =ere 6e 8a! employ o!e o
=egelIs amous 6ord plays+ the ambiguity o the 1erma! e?pressio! 2ugrundegehen- 6hi8h mea!s to
disi!tegrate- all apart- but literally also 2u (runde gehen- to rea8h o!eIs grou!dEthe positive out8ome
o the Terror is that- i! the subje8tIs very a!!ihilatio!- the subje8t rea8hes its grou!d- i!ds its pla8e i!
the ethi8al substa!8e- a88epts its u!ity 6ith this substa!8e7 H! the other ha!d- si!8e ethi8al substa!8e is
a8tual o!ly as the or8e 6hi8h mobiliUes si!gular subje8ts- the a!!ihilatio! o the si!gular subje8t by
the substa!8e is simulta!eously the substa!8eIs sel:a!!ihilatio!- 6hi8h mea!s that this !egative
moveme!t o sel:destru8tio! seems 8ompelled to repeat itsel i!dei!itely7 9t is at this poi!t- ho6ever-
that the i!evitable JbutK e!ters- arti8ulated i! a pre8ise li!e o argume!tatio!+

3ut this is !ot the orm the i!al result assumed7 For i! absolute reedom there 6as !o re8ipro8al
i!tera8tio! either bet6ee! a! e?ter!al 6orld a!d 8o!s8ious!ess- 6hi8h is absorbed i! ma!iold
e?iste!8e or sets itsel determi!ate purposes a!d ideas- or bet6ee! 8o!s8ious!ess a!d a! e?ter!al
obje8tive 6orld- be it a 6orld o reality or o thought7 /hat that reedom 8o!tai!ed 6as the 6orld
absolutely i! the orm o 8o!s8ious!ess- as a u!iversal 6ill- a!d- alo!g 6ith that- sel:8o!s8ious!ess
gathered out o all the dispersio! a!d ma!iold!ess o e?iste!8e or all the ma!iold e!ds a!d judgme!ts
o mi!d- a!d 8o!8e!trated i!to the bare a!d simple sel O 9! the sphere o 8ulture itsel it does !ot get
the le!gth o vie6i!g its !egatio! or alie!atio! i! this orm o pure abstra8tio!T its !egatio! is !egatio!
6ith a illi!g a!d a 8o!te!tEeither ho!our a!d 6ealth- 6hi8h it gai!s i! the pla8e o the sel that it has
alie!ated rom itselT or the la!guage o esprit a!d i!sight- 6hi8h the distraught 8o!s8ious!ess a8NuiresT
or- agai!- the !egatio! is the heave! o belie or the pri!8iple o utility belo!gi!g to the stage o
e!lighte!me!t7 All these determi!ate eleme!ts disappear 6ith the disaster a!d rui! that overtake the
sel i! the state o absolute reedomT its !egatio! is mea!i!gless death- sheer horror o the !egative
6hi8h has !othi!g positive i! it- !othi!g that gives a illi!g7At the same time- ho6ever- this !egatio! i!
its a8tual ma!iestatio! is !ot somethi!g alie! a!d e?ter!al7 9t is !either that u!iversal ba8kgrou!d o
!e8essity i! 6hi8h the moral 6orld is s6amped- !or the parti8ular a88ide!t o private possessio!- the
6hims a!d humours o the o6!er- o! 6hi8h the distraught 8o!s8ious!ess i!ds itsel depe!de!tT it is
u!iversal 6ill- 6hi8h i! this its last abstra8tio! has !othi!g positive- a!d he!8e 8a! give !othi!g i!
retur! or the sa8rii8e7 3ut just o! that a88ou!t this 6ill is i! u!mediated o!e!ess 6ith sel:
8o!s8ious!ess- it is the pure positive be8ause it is the pure !egativeT a!d that mea!i!gless death- the
u!illed- va8uous !egativity o sel- i! its i!!er 8o!stitutive pri!8iple- tur!s rou!d i!to absolute
positivity7
$"
9! a! u!8a!!y a8t o 6hat Cierre 3ayard 8alls JplagiariUi!g the uture-K =egel seems to Nuote
.a8a! here+ ho6 8a! J!egatio! 6ith a illi!gK !ot evoke all the .a8a!ia! ormulae or illi!g i! the
la8k- or a! obje8t 6hi8h serves as the pla8e:holder o the la8k @le tenant*lieu du man<ueA- et87M The
i!amous reversal o the !egative i!to the positive o88urs here at a very pre8ise poi!t+ at the mome!t
6he! the e?8ha!ge breaks do6!7 Throughout the 6hole period o 6hat =egel 8alls /ildung @8ulture or
edu8atio! through alie!atio!A- the subje8t is deprived o @a part oA its substa!tial 8o!te!t- yet it gets
somethi!g i! e?8ha!ge or this deprivatio!- Jeither ho!our a!d 6ealth- 6hi8h it gai!s i! the pla8e o
the sel that it has alie!ated rom itselT or the la!guage o esprit a!d i!sight- 6hi8h the distraught
8o!s8ious!ess a8NuiresT or- agai!- the !egatio! is the heave! o belie or the pri!8iple o utility
belo!gi!g to the stage o e!lighte!me!t7K 9! Fevolutio!ary Terror- this e?8ha!ge breaks do6!- the
subje8t is e?posed to the destru8tive abstra8t !egativity @embodied i! the StateA 6hi8h deprives it eve!
o its biologi8al substa!8e @o lie itselA- 6ithout givi!g a!ythi!g i! retur!Edeath is here utterly
mea!i!gless- Jthe most 8old:blooded a!d mea!i!gless death o all- 6ith !o more sig!ii8a!8e tha!
8leavi!g a head o 8abbage or s6allo6i!g a draught o 6ater-K 6ithout eve! survivi!g as a !oble
memory i! the mi!ds o rie!ds a!d amily7 =o6- the!- does this pure !egativity or loss Jmagi8allyK
tur! i!to !e6 positivityM /hat do 6e get 6he! 6e get !othi!g i! e?8ha!geM There is o!ly o!e
8o!siste!t a!s6er+ this nothingness itself7 /he! there is !o illi!g o the !egatio!- 6he! 6e are or8ed
to 8o!ro!t the po6er o !egativity i! its !aked purity a!d are s6allo6ed by it- the o!ly 6ay to go o! is
to realiUe that this !egativity is the very 8ore o our bei!g- that the subje8t JisK the void o !egativity7
The 8ore o my bei!g is !ot some positive eature- but merely the 8apa8ity to mediate or !egate all
i?ed determi!atio!sT it is !ot 6hat 9 am- but the !egative 6ay 9 am able to relate to 6hat@everA 9 am7
$(

3ut does =egel !ot thereby e!dorse 6hat o!e is tempted to 8all the mother o all ideologi8al
mystii8atio!s o the Fre!8h Fevolutio!- irst ormulated by *a!t- or 6hom- more importa!t tha! the
ote! bloody reality o 6hat o88urred o! the streets o Caris- 6as the e!thusiasm that the Fevolutio!
gave rise to amo!g sympatheti8 observers throughout 0uropeM

The revolutio! 6hi8h 6e have see! taki!g pla8e i! our o6! times i! a !atio! o gited people may
su88eed- or it may ail7 9t may be so illed 6ith misery a!d atro8ities that !o right:thi!ki!g ma! 6ould
ever de8ide to make the same e?perime!t agai! at su8h a pri8e- eve! i he 8ould hope to 8arry it out
su88essully at the se8o!d attempt7 3ut 9 mai!tai! that this revolutio! has aroused i! the hearts a!d
desires o all spe8tators 6ho are !ot themselves 8aught up i! it a sympathy 6hi8h borders almost o!
e!thusiasm- although the very uttera!8e o this sympathy 6as raught 6ith da!ger7 9t 8a!!ot thereore
have bee! 8aused by a!ythi!g other tha! a moral dispositio! 6ithi! the huma! ra8e7
$#
The mystii8atio! resides i! the reversal o the e?ter!al !egativity o the Fevolutio!ary Terror
i!to the sublime i!ter!al po6er o the moral .a6 6ithi! ea8h o usEbut 8a! this sublation
@+ufhebungA a8tually be a88omplishedM 9s the viole!8e o the Terror !ot too stro!g or su8h a
domesti8atio!M *a!t himsel is ully a6are o this e?8ess+ i! the Metaphysics of Morals @1$%$A- he
8hara8teriUes the 8e!tral dei!i!g eve!t o the Fre!8h Fevolutio! @regi8ideA as a Jsui8ide o the state-K
as a pragmati8 parado? ope!i!g up a! JabyssK i!to 6hi8h reaso! alls- as a! i!delible 8rime @crimen
immortale! ine&piableA 6hi8h pre8ludes orgive!ess i! this 6orld or i! the !e?t+

H all the atro8ities i!volved i! overthro6i!g a state by rebellio! O it is the ormal e&ecution o the
mo!ar8h that strikes horror i! a soul illed 6ith the idea o huma! rights- a horror that o!e eels
repeatedly as soo! a!d as ote! as o!e thi!ks o su8h s8e!es as the ate o Dharles 9 or .ouis dV97
$'
All the os8illatio!s i!volved i! the e!8ou!ter 6ith the Feal are here+ a regi8ide is somethi!g so
terrible o!e 8a!!ot ully represe!t it to o!esel i! all its dime!sio!sT it 8a!!ot really happe! @people
8a!!ot be so evilA- it should o!ly be 8o!stru8ted as a !e8essary virtual poi!tT the a8tual regi8ide 6as !ot
a 8ase o diaboli8al evil- o a! evil a88omplished or !o pathologi8al reaso! @a!d thus i!disti!guishable
rom the 1oodA- si!8e it 6as i! a8t do!e or a pathologi8al reaso! @the ear that- i the ki!g 6ere
allo6ed to live- he might retur! to po6er a!d e?a8t reve!geA7 9t is i!teresti!g to !ote ho6 the sta!dard
*a!tia! suspi8io! about a! a8t bei!g truly good or ethi8al is here 6eirdly mobiliUed i! the opposite
dire8tio!+ 6e 8a!!ot be sure that a! a8t really 6as Jdiaboli8ally evil-K that some pathologi8al
motivatio! did !ot make it a !ormal 8ase o evil7 9! both 8ases- empiri8al 8ausality appears to be
suspe!ded- the e?8ess o a!other !oume!al dime!sio! seems to i!trude viole!tly i!to our reality7 *a!t
is thus u!able to assume this ultimate politi8al i!i!ite judgme!t7
=egel is the o!ly o!e 6ho ully asserts the ide!tity o the t6o e?tremes- o the Sublime a!d o
the Terror+ J=egelIs u!li!8hi!g ide!tii8atio! o the Terror as the i!auguratio! o politi8al moder!ity
does !ot preve!t him rom airmi!g the Fevolutio! i! its e!tirety as i!evitable- 8omprehe!sible-
justiiable- horrible- thrilli!g- mi!d:!umbi!gly bori!g- a!d i!i!itely produ8tive7K
$$
=egelIs sublime
6ords o! the Fre!8h Fevolutio! rom his .ectures on the )hilosophy of World 0istory are- i a!ythi!g-
eve! more e!thusiasti8 tha! *a!tIs- a!d he reje8ts the easy 6ay out o the traumati8 Ji!i!ite
judgme!tK i! both its versio!s+ First- the liberal dream o J1$&% 6ithout 1$%"K @the idea that 6e 8ould
have had the Fevolutio! 6ithout the Terror- 6ith the latter see! as a! a88ide!tal distortio!A7 Se8o!d-
the 8o!ditio!al e!dorseme!t o 1$%" as the pri8e that had to be paid i! order or the !atio! to e!joy the
i!stitutio!s o moder! 8ivil so8iety as the Jratio!al ker!elK 6hi8h remai!s ater the repelle!t shell o the
revolutio!ary upheaval has bee! dis8arded7
$&
@,ar? reverses this relatio!ship+ he praises the
e!thusiasm o the Fevolutio!- treati!g the later prosai8- 8ommer8ial order as its ba!al truth7A
Furthermore- =egel also 8learly registers the limit o 6hat may appear to be his o6! solutio!+
the above:me!tio!ed +ufhebung o the abstra8t reedom or !egativity o the Fevolutio! i! the 8o!8rete
post:revolutio!ary ratio!al state7 As Febe88a Domay summariUes this argume!t @!ot 6ithout iro!yA+
J=egel loves the Fre!8h Fevolutio! so mu8h he !eeds to purge it o the revolutio!aries7K
$%
=o6ever-
as Domay makes 8lear- a 8lose readi!g o the last part o the 8hapter o! Spirit i! the )henomenology
reveals ho6- ar rom 8elebrati!g the +ufhebung o Terror i! the i!!er reedom o the subje8t obeyi!g
o!ly his auto!omous voi8e o 8o!s8ie!8e- =egel is ully a6are that

su8h reedom o! its o6! terms does !othi!g to redeem the blo8ked promise o the Fevolutio!7 =egel
makes it bitterly 8lear that the sublime purity o the moral 6ill 8a! be !o a!tidote to the terriyi!g
purity o revolutio!ary virtue7 =e demo!strates that all the eatures o absolute reedom are 8arried over
i!to *a!tia! morality+ the obsessio!ality- the para!oia- the suspi8io!- the surveilla!8e- the evaporatio!
o obje8tivity 6ithi! the sadisti8 veheme!8e o a subje8tivity be!t o! reprodu8i!g itsel 6ithi! a 6orld
it must disregard7
&0
The e?8ess o the Fevolutio! thus resists its +ufhebung i! both its dime!sio!s+ !ot o!ly is i!!er
moral reedom !ot stro!g e!ough to pa8iy the Fevolutio!ary Terror @to a88ou!t or it- to justiy itA- it is
alsoEa!d this is the obverse o the same ailureE!ot stro!g e!ough to a8tualiUe the Fevolutio!Is
ema!8ipatory promise7 9!!er moral reedom- eve! 6he! overblo6! i! the Foma!ti8 absolute subje8t-
al6ays a!d by dei!itio! 8o!8eals a resig!ed a88epta!8e o the e?isti!g so8ial order o domi!atio!+

=egel has rele!tlessly disma!tled every attempt to displa8e or dissolve the traumati8 rupture o the
Fre!8h Fevolutio! 6ithi! a spiritual- philosophi8al- or aestheti8 upheaval7 Coliti8al revolutio! 8a! !o
lo!ger be absorbed i!to the Doper!i8a! revolutio! o *a!t or Fi8hte- or i!to the various 8ultural
revolutio!s proje8ted rom S8hiller o! O =egel is as u!orgivi!g here as ,ar?+ every retreat rom
politi8s to the reedom o moral sel:8o!s8ious!ess rehearses the Stoi8 impasse- provokes the s8epti8al
rejoi!der- a!d 8ulmi!ates i! a sel:servi!g misery i! 6hi8h 8a! be dis8er!ed a se8ret 8ollusio! 6ith the
e?iste!t7
&1
Domay !otes ho6 this brutal 8ritiNue o *a!tIs pra8ti8al thought reveals =egel at his most
Freudo:4ietUs8hea!- deployi!g the Jherme!euti8s o suspi8io!K at its most radi8al+ JThe 8atalogue o
Freudia! 8o!8epts @a!d at times eve! vo8abularyA marshalled by =egel throughout this se8tio! is
impressive+ repressio!- perversio!- isolatio!- splitti!g- disavo6al- etishism- proje8tio!- i!troje8tio!-
i!8orporatio!- maso8hism- mour!i!g- mela!8holia- repetitio!- death drive7K
&2
/ith =egelIs a!alysis o
the steps 6hi8h ollo6 his 8ritiNue o the *a!tia! ethi8al edii8e @Fi8htea! 8o!8rete duty- the
S8hilleria! aestheti8iUatio! o ethi8s- the hypo8risy o the 3eautiul SoulA- 6e are just 8aught urther i!
this do6!6ard spiral- right do6! to the solipsisti8 mad!ess o JvaporiUed subje8tivityK a!d its sel:
iro!i8 mirrori!g7 0ve! 6he! des8ribi!g ho6 this sel:destru8tive pathologi8al 4ar8issism rea8hes its
peak- admitti!g the void i! its heart- =egel is 6ell a6are that the etish is !ot o!ly a! obje8t illi!g i!
the void+ JThe void 8arved by the missi!g obje8t tur!s i!to a illi!g or itsel+ eve! abse!8e provides its
o6! bitter 8o!solatio!7K
&"
Feerri!g to Hrige!- =egel Jgoes so ar as to suggest gleeully- o!
0!lighte!me!tIs behal- that eve! 8astratio! 8a! be a dee!8e agai!st 8astratio!+ the lorid e?ample o
Hrige! sho6s ho6 a! all too literal i!jury 8a! serve to preempt the ultimate traumati8 6ou!di!gK
&(
Ea
thesis ully 8o!irmed by psy8hoa!alysis- 6hi8h demo!strates ho6 a 8astratio! i! reality @8utti!g o
o!eIs pe!is or testi8lesA 8a! u!8tio! as a 6ay o avoidi!g the 6ou!d o symboli8 8astratio! @this 6as
the strategy o the Jskop8iK se8t i! Fussia a!d 0aster! 0urope duri!g the late !i!etee!th 8e!turyA7
/e tou8h here o! a problemati8 !erve- highlighted by the 5ou!g =egelia! reproa8h that =egel
surre!ders to the e?isti!g so8ial misery7 Goes =egel !ot dete8t a hidde! 8o!ormism i! the 8riti8al
sta!8e itselM This is 6hy- i! a proou!dly =egelia! 6ay- Datheri!e ,alabou 8alls or the aba!do!me!t
o the critical sta!8e to6ards reality as the ultimate horiUo! o our thi!ki!g- u!der 6hatever !ame it
may appear- rom the 5ou!g =egelia! J8riti8al 8ritiNueK to t6e!tieth:8e!tury Driti8al Theory7
&#
/hat
su8h a 8riti8al sta!8e ails to a88omplish is the ulillme!t o its o6! gesture+ the radi8aliUatio! o the
subje8tive !egative:8riti8al attitude to6ards reality i!to a ull 8riti8al sel:!egatio!7 0ve! i it leaves
o!e ope! to the a88usatio! o havi!g JregressedK to the Hld =egelia! positio!- o!e should adopt the
authe!ti8ally =egelia! absolute positio! 6hi8h- as ,alabou poi!ts out- i!volves a ki!d o spe8ulative
Jsurre!derK o the Sel to the Absolute- albeit i! a =egelia!:diale8ti8al 6ay+ !ot the immersio! o the
subje8t i! the higher u!ity o a! all:e!8ompassi!g Absolute- but the i!s8riptio! o the J8riti8alK gap
separati!g the subje8t rom the @so8ialA substa!8e i!to this substa!8e itsel- as its o6! a!tago!ism- or
sel:dista!8e7 The J8riti8alK sta!8e is thus !ot dire8tly 8a!8eled i! some higher:level :es to a positive
AbsoluteT it is rather i!s8ribed i!to the Absolute itsel as its o6! gap7 This is 6hy =egelia! Absolute
*!o6ledge- ar rom sig!ali!g a ki!d o subje8tive appropriatio! or i!ter!aliUatio! o all substa!tial
8o!te!t- should be read agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o 6hat .a8a! 8alled Jsubje8tive destitutio!7K 9! the
very last pages o the 8hapter o! Spirit- this Jsurre!der to the AbsoluteK takes the orm o a!
u!e?pe8ted a!d abrupt gesture o reconciliation+ JThe re8o!8ili!g :es- i! 6hi8h the t6o 9Is let go their
a!titheti8al e?iste!8e- is the e?iste!8e o the V9I 6hi8h has e?pa!ded i!to a duality- a!d therei! remai!s
ide!ti8al 6ith itsel7K
&'
/hile this ormulatio! may sou!d emptily abstra8t- the 6orst ki!d o e?er8ise
i! ormal:diale8ti8al thi!ki!g- it pays to read it 8losely- beari!g i! mi!d its pre8ise 8o!te?t7 2ust beore
the Nuoted passage- =egel 8hara8teriUes re8o!8iliatio! as Je?ter!aliUatio!-K a ki!d o 8ou!ter:move to
the sta!dard diale8ti8al i!ter!aliUatio! o the e?ter!al oppositio!+ here- it is the i!!er 8o!tradi8tio! o
the subje8t 6hi8h is e?ter!aliUed i! the relatio!ship amo!g subje8ts- i!di8ati!g the subje8tIs a88epta!8e
o itsel as part o the outer so8ial 6orld over 6hi8h it does !ot e?ert 8o!trol7 /hat is a88epted i! the
:es o re8o!8iliatio! is thus a basi8 alie!atio! i! a! almost ,ar?ist se!se+ the mea!i!g o my a8ts does
!ot depe!d o! me- o! my i!te!tio!s- it is de8ided ater6ards- retroa8tively7 9! other 6ords- 6hat is
a88epted- 6hat the subje8t has to assume- is its radi8al a!d 8o!stitutive de8e!teri!g i! the symboli8
order7
JThe t6oK i! the passage just Nuoted reers to the oppositio! bet6ee! the a8ti!g a!d the judgi!g
8o!s8ious!ess+ to a8t is to err- the a8t is by dei!itio! partial- it i!volves guilt- but the judgi!g
8o!s8ious!ess does !ot admit that its judgi!g is also a! a8t- it reuses to i!8lude itsel i! 6hat it judges7
9t ig!ores the a8t that the true evil lies i! the !eutral gaUe 6hi8h sees evil every6here arou!d itsel- so
that it is !o less tai!ted tha! the a8ti!g 8o!s8ious!ess7 9! geopoliti8al terms- this gap bet6ee! the
judgi!g 8o!s8ious!ess a!d the a8ti!g 8o!s8ious!ess- bet6ee! k!o6i!g a!d doi!g- is the gap bet6ee!
1erma!y a!d Fra!8e+ re8o!8iliatio! is the re8o!8iliatio! o the t6o !atio!s- 6here the /ord o
re8o!8iliatio! should be pro!ou!8ed by 1erma!yE1erma! thought should re8o!8ile itsel 6ith the
a8ti!g Fre!8h hero @4apoleo!A7 /e are deali!g here 6ith a purely perormative ormal gesture o
aba!do!i!g purity a!d a88epti!g the Jstai!K o o!eIs 8ompli8ity 6ith the 6orld7 The o!e 6ho
pro!ou!8es the 6ord o re8o!8iliatio! is the judgi!g 8o!s8ious!ess- re!ou!8i!g its 8riti8al attitude7 3ut
ar rom amou!ti!g to 8o!ormism- o!ly su8h a :es @e?pressi!g a readi!ess to a88ept the evil- to dirty
o!eIs ha!dsA ope!s up the spa8e or real 8ha!ge7 As su8h- this re8o!8iliatio! is simulta!eously both
pre8ipitous a!d belated+ it o88urs all o a sudde!- as a ki!d o light or6ard- beore the situatio! seems
ready or it- a!d- at the same time- like *akaIs ,essiah- it 8omes o!e day too late- 6he! it !o lo!ger
matters7
3ut ho6 does su8h a! eleme!tary gesture o a88epti!g @o!esel as part oA the 8o!ti!ge!8y o
the 6orld ope! up the spa8e or real 8ha!geM To6ards the e!d o the JCrea8eK to his )hilosophy of
7ight- =egel dei!es the task o philosophy+ like the o6l o ,i!erva 6hi8h takes light at dusk-
philosophy 8a! o!ly pai!t Jgray o! gray-K i! other 6ords it o!ly tra!slates i!to a lieless 8o!8eptual
s8heme a orm o lie 6hi8h has already rea8hed its peak a!d e!tered its de8li!e @is be8omi!g JgrayK
itselA7 Domay perspi8uously reads this Jgray o! grayK as a igure o Jmi!imal diere!8eK
&$
@or- as
4ietUs8he 6ould have put it- o the Jshortest shado6-K although 4ietUs8he speaks o midday- o
8ourseA+ the diere!8e bet6ee! the de8repit reality a!d its !otio! 6he! the diere!8e is at its minimal-
purely ormal- i! 8o!trast to 6he! a 6ide gap e?ists bet6ee! a! ideal a!d the misery o its a8tual
e?iste!8e7
=o6 8a! su8h a tautology ope! up the spa8e or the 4e6M The o!ly solutio! to this parado? is
that the 4e6 6e are deali!g 6ith is !ot primarily the uture 4e6- but the ew of the past itself- o the
th6arted- blo8ked- or betrayed possibilities @Jalter!ate realitiesKA 6hi8h have disappeared i! the
a8tualiUatio! o the past+ the a8tualiUatio! @6erwir"lichungAEthat is- the a88epta!8e o
a8tualityEbrought about by Fe8o!8iliatio! i!volves the Jdeactivation o the e?iste!t a!d the
rea8tivatio! a!d ree!a8tme!t @i! every se!seA o the th6arted utures o the past7 A8tuality thus
e?presses pre8isely the prese!8e o the virtual+ it ope!s history to the V!o lo!gerI o a blo8ked
possibility a!d the persiste!8e o a! u!a8hieved V!ot yetI7K
&&
The =egelia! tautology Jgray o! grayK
should be li!ked to the GeleuUia! !otio! o pure repetitio! as the rise o the 4e6+ 6hat emerges i! the
repetitio! o the same a8tual JgrayK is its virtual dime!sio!- the lost Jalter!ate historiesK o 6hat might
have happe!ed but did !ot7 JThe Fre!8h Fevolutio! is the Fre!8h Fevolutio!K does !ot add a!y !e6
positive k!o6ledge- a!y !e6 positive determi!atio!s- but it remi!ds us o the spe8tral dime!sio! o the
hopes that the Fevolutio! evoked a!d 6hi8h 6ere th6arted by its out8ome7 Su8h a readi!g also e!ables
us to see ho6 6e 8a! thi!k together Fe8o!8iliatio! as i!ter!aliUi!g memory @Er*InnerungA and the
retroa8tive heali!g o the 6ou!ds o the Spirit 6hi8h u!does @ungeschehenmachenA 8atastrophes o the
past i! a! a8t o radi8al forgetting+

Forgetti!g is !ot opposed to the 6ork o remembra!8e but proves here to be its most radi8al
a8hieveme!t+ oblivio! bri!gs memory itsel to a poi!t beyo!d its o6! begi!!i!g7 To orget- to u!do the
past- to make it all Ju!:happe!-K is pre8isely to remember a mome!t before it all happe!ed- to u!do the
i!e?orability o ate by restagi!g the begi!!i!g- eve! i o!ly i! imagi!atio! a!d i! pro?y+ to a8t as if 6e
8ould take it over agai!- as i 6e 8ould 8ast aside the lega8y o dead ge!eratio!s- as i 6e 8ould reuse
the mour!i!g 6ork o 8ultural su88essio!- as i 6e 8ould 8ast o our patrimo!y- re6rite our origi!s- as
i every mome!t- eve! those lo!g va!ished- 8ould be8ome a radi8ally !e6 begi!!i!gEu!pre8ede!ted-
u!rehearsed- u!remembered7
&%
Fe8o!8iliatio! as pure repetitio! does !ot bri!g us ba8k to some mythi8al begi!!i!g- but to the
mome!t just beore the begi!!i!g- beore the lo6 o eve!ts orga!iUed itsel i!to a Fate- obliterati!g
other alter!ative possibilities7 For e?ample- i! the 8ase o A!tigo!e- the poi!t is !ot to someho6 restore
the orga!i8 u!ity o mores @Sittlich"eitA- si!8e there !ever 6as su8h a u!ityEa split is 8o!stitutive o
the very order o Sittlich"eit7 +ntigone is a story about this divisio! 8o!stitutive o po6er- a!d o!e
should avoid the bori!g moralisti8 topi8 o 6ho is right or 6ho is 6orse- A!tigo!e or Dreo!- the
represe!tative o respe8t or the sa8red or the represe!tative o se8ular po6er7 As Stali! 6ould have put
it- they are both 6orse @tha! 6hatM Tha! the po6er o the peopleRA- part o the same hierar8hi8 po6er
ma8hi!e7 The o!ly 6ay to break the deadlo8k o their 8o!li8t is to step outside o their 8ommo!
grou!d a!d imagi!e a third optio! rom 6hi8h to reje8t the e!tire 8o!li8t as alseEsomethi!g like the
Dhorus taki!g over- arresti!g both A!tigo!e a!d Dreo! or posi!g a threat to the people- putti!g at risk
their very survival- a!d establishi!g itsel as a 8olle8tive body o revolutio!ary justi8e- a ki!d o
2a8obi! 8ommittee or publi8 saety keepi!g the guilloti!e busy7
The problem here is+ ho6 does this !egatio! o !egatio! 6hi8h 8ha!ges the e!tire ield relate to
the Freudo:.a8a!ia! !egatio! o !egatio! 6hi8h e!ds 6ith the spe8tral !ot:!ot:!othi!g!essM Goes !ot
the shit rom the irst !egatio! @J!egatio! 6ith a illi!gKA- 6here 9 sa8rii8e the 8ore o my bei!g i!
e?8ha!ge or somethi!g @heave! o belie- ho!or- utility- 6ealth OA- to the !egatio! o !egatio!
@J!egatio! 6ithout a illi!gKA poi!t to6ards 6hat .a8a!- i! his readi!g o Dlaudel- deployed as the
stru8ture o 6ersagung- 6here 6e pass rom the sa8rii8e made or somethi!g to the sa8rii8e made or
!othi!gM
.et us 8lariy this 8ru8ial poi!t by 6ay o a detour through literature+ !ot DlaudelIs .$tage
@.a8a!Is o6! reere!8e i! his e?pli8atio! o 6ersagungA- but 27 ,7 DoetUeeIs Disgrace- a proou!dly
=egelia! !ovel set i! post:apartheid South Ari8a7 Gavid .urie is a divor8ed- middle:aged s8holar o
Foma!ti8 poetry 6hose u!realiUed ambitio! is to 6rite a 8hamber opera about 3yro!Is lie i! 9taly7 =e
has be8ome a vi8tim o Jthe great ratio!aliUatio!K o his Dape To6! u!iversity- 6hi8h has bee! tur!ed
i!to a te8h!i8al 8ollege- 6here he !o6 tea8hes 8ourses i! J8ommu!i8atio! skillsK that he i!ds
!o!se!si8al7 =e is su8h a !o!e!tity that !ot o!ly do his stude!ts look straight through him- eve! the
prostitute he patro!iUes 6eekly- a!d or 6hom he has begu! buyi!g gits- stops re8eivi!g him7 /he! he
is hauled beore a! a8ademi8 tribu!al ater a misbegotte! aair 6ith ,ela!ie- a beautiul bla8k stude!t-
he reuses to dee!d himsel agai!st 8harges o se?ual harassme!t- although his 8o!du8t to6ards
,ela!ie has alle! o!ly a little short o rape7 =e i!ally blurts out a! apology- but the members o the
tribu!al are !ot satisied- a!d dema!d to k!o6 6hether it rele8ts his si!8ere eeli!gs a!d 8omes rom
the heart7 =e rashly tells his judges that his liaiso! 6ith the pretty a!d almost totally passive ,ela!ie
tra!sormed him- i o!ly briely+ J9 6as !o lo!ger a ity:year:old divor8L at a loose e!d7 9 be8ame a
serva!t o 0ros7K
To es8ape this suo8ati!g situatio!- Gavid moves i! 6ith his daughter .u8y- a stolid lesbia!
6ho- like him- seems to have bee! aba!do!ed by the 6orld- a!d lives i! a! isolated arm o! the South
Ari8a! plai!- survivi!g by selli!g lo6ers a!d vegetables at a lo8al market7 Their relatio!s 6ith Cetrus-
the Ari8a! armer 6ho is their !earest !eighbor- be8ome i!8reasi!gly troubled7 H!8e .u8yIs serva!t-
he !o6 o6!s his o6! plot o la!d- a!d is 8o!spi8uously abse!t 6he! Gavid a!d .u8y be8ome the
vi8tims o a vi8ious 8rimi!al assault+ three bla8k you!gsters beat Gavid a!d bur! his a8e- 6hile .u8y
is ga!g raped7 /e are give! hi!ts that the atta8ks are part o CetrusIs pla! to take over .u8yIs arm7 9!
the 6ake o these brutal atta8ks- GavidIs a!gry dema!ds or justi8e re8eive !o respo!se rom the
overstret8hed poli8e- a!d his attempts to 8o!ro!t o!e o the assaila!ts @6hom Cetrus is prote8ti!gA are
met 6ith sile!8e a!d evasive lies7 Fi!ally- Cetrus i!orms Gavid that he pla!s to marry .u8y a!d take
8o!trol o her arm to provide her 6ith prote8tio!7 To GavidIs sho8k a!d surprise- .u8y tells him that
she 6ill a88ept CetrusIs oer a!d give birth to the 8hild she bears as the result o the rape7 .u8y seems
to u!dersta!d 6hat Gavid 8a!!ot+ that to live 6here she lives she must tolerate brutaliUatio! a!d
humiliatio! a!d simply keep goi!g7 JCerhaps that is 6hat 9 must lear! to a88ept-K she tells her ather7
JTo start at grou!d level7 /ith !othi!g O 4o 8ards- !o 6eapo!s- !o property- !o rights- !o dig!ity O
.ike a dog7K
Agai! !eedi!g to es8ape a terrible deadlo8k- Gavid volu!teers to 6ork or 3ev- a rie!d o
.u8yIs 6ho ru!s the lo8al veteri!ary 8li!i87 =e soo! 8omes to realiUe that 3evIs primary role- i! this
impoverished la!d- is !ot to heal a!imals but to kill them 6ith as mu8h love a!d mer8y as she 8a!
summo!7 =e be8omes 3evIs lover- although she is 8o!spi8uously ugly7 =e retur!s briely to Dape
To6!- 6here he visits ,ela!ieIs amily a!d apologiUes to her ather7 At the !ovelIs e!d- Gavid is also
re8o!8iled to his lie 6ith .u8yT he thus re8laims a ki!d o dig!ity based o! the very a8t that he has
give! up everythi!g+ his daughter- his !otio! o justi8e- his dream o 6riti!g a! opera o! 3yro!- a!d
eve! his avorite dog- 6hi8h he helps 3ev to put do6!7 =e !o lo!ger !eeds a dog- si!8e he has himsel
a88epted to live Jlike a dogK @e8hoi!g the i!al 6ords o *akaIs -he -rialA7
Cerhaps this is 6hat true =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! looks likeEa!d maybe this e?ample e!ables
us to 8lear up some 8o!usio!s about 6hat that re8o!8iliatio! a8tually i!volves7
%0
Gavid is portrayed as
a dise!8ha!ted 8y!i8 6ho e?ploits his po6er over stude!ts- a!d the rape o his daughter seems a ki!d
o repetitio! 6hi8h establishes a 8ertai! justi8e+ 6hat he did to ,ela!ie happe!s agai! to his daughter7
=o6ever- it is all too simple to say that Gavid should re8og!iUe his o6! respo!sibility or the
predi8ame!t he i!ds himsel i!Esu8h a readi!g o Gavid as a Jtragi8K 8hara8ter 6ho gets his
8omeuppa!8e i! his i!al humiliatio! still relies o! a ki!d o moral bala!8e or justi8e bei!g established
at the e!d- a!d thus avoids the deeply disturbi!g a8t that the !ovel i! a8t has !o 8lear moral 8ompass7
This ambiguity is 8o!de!sed i! the 8hara8ter o Cetrus 6ho- 6hile ruthlessly ambitious a!d
ma!ipulative be!eath his polite e?terior- !o!etheless sta!ds or a ki!d o so8ial stability a!d order7 The
politi8al message implied by his as8e!da!8e to po6er 6ithi! the small lo8al 8ommu!ity is !ot a ra8ist
o!e @Jthis is 6hat happe!s i you allo6 the bla8ks to take over+ !o real 8ha!ge- just a reorga!iUatio! o
domi!atio! 6hi8h makes thi!gs eve! 6orse tha! beoreKA- but o!e that highlights the re:emerge!8e o a
ga!gster:like patriar8hal:tribal order 6hi8h- o!e 8a! argue- is the result o 6hite rule 6hi8h kept the
bla8ks i! a state o apartheid- preve!ti!g their i!8lusio! i! moder! so8iety7
The 6ager o the !ovel is that the very radi8ality o the 6hite heroIs utter resig!atio! a!d
a88epta!8e o this !e6 oppressive order 8o!ers o! him a ki!d o ethi8al dig!ity7 9 Gavid 8a! be see!
as a 8o!temporary Syg!e de Doco!tai!e- 6ersagung is e!a8ted here i! a reversed 6ay+ it is !ot that the
subje8t re!ou!8es everythi!g or a higher Dause a!d the! !oti8es he has thereby lost the Dause itselT it
is rather that the subje8t simply loses everything- his egoist i!terests as 6ell as his higher ideals- a!d his
6ager is the! that this total loss itsel 6ill be 8o!verted i!to some ki!d o ethi8al dig!ity7
3ut somethi!g is missi!g at the e!d o Disgrace- somethi!g that 6ould 8orrespo!d to the
repulsive ti8 o! the a8e o the dyi!g Syg!e- as a mute gesture o protest- o the reusal to re8o!8ile- or
to 2ulieIs J=appi!ess is bori!gK at the e!d o .a ouvelle 0AloUse7 H!e 8a! imagi!e the boy i! Der
Casager or i! Massnahme- 6he! he a88epts his death- doi!g the sameEemitti!g a barely per8eptible
repetitive gesture o resista!8e- a! eppur si muove that persists- a pure igure o the u!dead drive7 =ere
the ob1et a is ge!erated through the pro8ess o the !egatio! o !egatio! as its e?8ess or produ8t7 3ut is
!ot the pro8ess o 6ersagung as the loss o a loss pre8isely the pro8ess o the loss o the ob1et a- the
obje8t:8ause o desireM 9! 6ertigo- S8ottie irst loses the obje8t o his desire @,adelei!eA- a!d the!-
6he! he lear!s that ,adelei!e 6as a ake rom the very begi!!i!g- loses his desire itsel7 9s there a 6ay
out o this abyss to a !e6 ob1et aM Da! 6e say that 6hat is lost i! 6ersagung is the a!tasmati8 status o
the ob1et a @the a!tasy:rame 6hi8h sustai!ed the subje8tIs desireA- so that the 6ersagung- 6hi8h
eNuals the a8t o traversi!g the a!tasy- ope!s up the spa8e or the emerge!8e o the pure drive beyo!d
a!tasyM
94T0F.)G0 2

Dogito in the 0istory of Madness

.evi!asIs early 8ritiNue o =egel a!d =eidegger i! his -otality and Infinity is a model o the
a!ti:philosophi8al pro8edure+ or .evi!as- the i!i!ity o relati!g to the divi!e Hther is the e?8ess
6hi8h breaks out o the 8ir8le o philosophi8al totality7 9t is 8ru8ial to !ote here that Gerrida is not a!
a!tiphilosopherEo! the 8o!trary- Gerrida at his best @say- i! his detailed Jde8o!stru8tiveK readi!gs o
.evi!as- Fou8ault- 3ataille- et87A 8o!vi!8i!gly demo!strates ho6- i! their eort to break out o the
8losed 8ir8le o philosophy- to assert a poi!t o reere!8e outside the horiUo! o philosophy @i!i!ity
versus totality i! .evi!as- mad!ess versus cogito i! the early Fou8ault- sovereig!ty versus =egelia!
domi!atio! i! 3atailleA- they remai! 6ithi! the ield they try to leave behi!d7
1
4o 6o!der- the!- that
Fou8ault rea8ted so viole!tly to GerridaIs 8riti8al a!alysis o his 0istory of Madness- a88usi!g Gerrida
o remai!i!g 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o philosophy+ yes- Gerrida does- but therei! lies his stre!gth 6ith
regard to those 6ho prete!d all too easily to have rea8hed a domai! beyo!d philosophy7 /hat Gerrida
does is !ot o!ly Jde8o!stru8tK philosophy- demo!strati!g its depe!de!8e o! a! e?ter!al HtherT eve!
more so- he Jde8o!stru8tsK the attempt to lo8ate a sphere outside philosophy- demo!strati!g ho6 all
a!ti:philosophi8al eorts to determi!e this Hther remai! i!debted to a rame o philosophi8al
8ategories7
,ogito! madness! a!d religion are i!terli!ked i! Ges8artes @see his thought e?perime!t 6ith the
malin gAnieA as 6ell as i! *a!t @his !otio! o the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t emerged rom the 8ritiNue o
S6ede!borg- 6hose religious dreams sta!d or mad!essA7 Simulta!eously- the cogito emerges through
a diere!tiatio! rom @or a reere!8e toA mad!ess- and the cogito itsel @the idea o the cogito as the
poi!t o absolute 8ertai!ty- Jsubje8tive idealismKA is per8eived @!ot o!lyA by 8ommo! se!se as the very
epitome o the mad!ess o philosophy- o its 8raUy para!oid system:buildi!g @87 the Jphilosopher as
madma!K moti i! the late /ittge!stei!A7 Simulta!eously- religio! @dire8t aithA is evoked as a orm o
mad!ess @S6ede!borg or *a!t- or religio! ge!erally or 0!lighte!me!t ratio!alists- up to Ga6ki!s
todayA- and religio! @1odA e!ters as the solutio! to @solipsisti8A mad!ess @Ges8artesA7
This tria!gle o cogito- religio!- a!d mad!ess is the o8us o the polemi8 bet6ee! Fou8ault a!d
Gerrida- i! 6hi8h they both share the key u!derlyi!g premise+ that the cogito is i!here!tly related to
mad!ess7 The diere!8e is that- or Fou8ault- the cogito is grou!ded i! the e?8lusio! o mad!ess-
6hile- or Gerrida- the cogito itsel 8a! o!ly emerge through a JmadK hyperbole @u!iversaliUed doubtA-
a!d remai!s marked by this e?8ess+ beore it stabiliUes itsel as res cogitans- the sel:tra!spare!t
thi!ki!g substa!8e- the cogito e?plodes as a 8raUy pu!8tual e?8ess7
2
Fou8aultIs starti!g poi!t is a u!dame!tal 8ha!ge i! the status o mad!ess 6hi8h took pla8e i!
the passage rom the Fe!aissa!8e to the 8lassi8al Age o Feaso! @the begi!!i!g o the seve!tee!th
8e!turyA7 Guri!g the Fe!aissa!8e @Derva!tes- Shakespeare- 0rasmus- et87A- mad!ess 6as a spe8ii8
phe!ome!o! o the huma! spirit 6hi8h belo!ged to the series o prophets- possessed visio!aries- sai!ts-
8lo6!s- those obsessed by demo!s- a!d so o!7 9t 6as a mea!i!gul phe!ome!o! 6ith a truth o its o6!+
eve! i madme! 6ere viliied- they 6ere treated 6ith a6e- as i messe!gers o a sa8red horror7 /ith
Ges8artes- ho6ever- mad!ess is e?8ludedT i! all its varieties- it 8omes to o88upy a positio! that 6as
ormerly the preserve o leprosy7 9t is !o lo!ger a phe!ome!o! to be i!terpreted- its mea!i!g sear8hed
or- but a simple ill!ess to be treated u!der the 6ell:regulated la6s o a medi8i!e or a s8ie!8e that is
already sure o itsel- sure that it 8a!!ot be mad7 This 8ha!ge 8o!8er!s !ot o!ly theory- but so8ial
pra8ti8e itsel+ rom the Dlassi8al Age o!- madme! 6ere i!ter!ed- impriso!ed i! psy8hiatri8 hospitals-
deprived o the ull dig!ity o a huma! bei!g- studied a!d 8o!trolled like a !atural phe!ome!o!7
9! his 0istoire de la folie- Fou8ault dedi8ated three or our pages to the passage i! the
Meditations i! 6hi8h Ges8artes arrives at cogito ergo sum7 Sear8hi!g or the absolutely 8ertai!
ou!datio! o k!o6ledge- Ges8artes a!alyses the mai! orms o delusio!+ delusio!s o the se!ses a!d
se!se per8eptio!- the illusio!s o mad!ess- dreams7 =e e!ds 6ith the most radi8al delusio! imagi!able-
the hypothesis that everythi!g that 6e e?perie!8e is !ot true- but a u!iversal dream- a! illusio! staged
by a! evil ge!ius @malin gAnieA7 From here- he arrives at the 8ertai!ty o the cogito @9 thi!kA+ eve! i 9
8a! doubt everythi!g- eve! i all 9 see is a! illusio!- 9 8a!!ot doubt that 9 thi!k all this- so the cogito is
the absolutely 8ertai! starti!g poi!t or philosophy7 Fou8aultIs obje8tio! here is that Ges8artes does !ot
really 8o!ro!t mad!ess- but rather avoids thi!ki!g it+ he e&cludes mad!ess rom the domai! o reaso!7
9! the Dlassi8al Age- Feaso! is thus based o! the e?8lusio! o mad!ess+ the very e?iste!8e o the
8ategory Jmad!essK is histori8ally determi!ed- alo!g 6ith its opposite Jreaso!KT that is- it is determi!ed
through po6er relatio!s7 ,ad!ess i! the moder! se!se is !ot dire8tly a phe!ome!o! 6e 8a! observe-
but a dis8ursive 8o!stru8t 6hi8h emerges at a 8ertai! histori8al mome!t- together 6ith its double-
Feaso! i! the moder! se!se7
9! his readi!g o 0istoire de la folie- Gerrida o8used o! these our pages o! Ges8artes 6hi8h-
or him- provided the key to the e!tire book7 Through a detailed a!alysis- he tries to demo!strate that-
ar rom e?8ludi!g mad!ess- Ges8artes pushes it to a! e?treme+ u!iversal doubt- 6here 9 suspe8t that
the e!tire 6orld is a! illusio!- is the greatest mad!ess imagi!able7 Hut o this u!iversal doubt the
cogito emerges+ eve! i everythi!g is a! illusio!- 9 8a! still be sure that 9 thi!k7 ,ad!ess is thus !ot
e?8luded by the cogito+ it is !ot that the cogito is !ot mad- but the cogito is true even if I am totally
mad7 0?treme doubt- the hypothesis o u!iversal mad!ess- is !ot e?ter!al to philosophy- but stri8tly
i!ter!al to it- a hyperboli8 mome!t- the mome!t o mad!ess- 6hi8h grou!ds philosophy7 H 8ourse-
Ges8artes later Jdomesti8atesK this radi8al e?8ess 6ith his image o ma! as a thi!ki!g substa!8e-
domi!ated by reaso!T he 8o!stru8ts a philosophy 6hi8h is 8learly histori8ally 8o!ditio!ed7 3ut the
e?8ess- the hyperbole o u!iversal mad!ess- is !ot itsel histori8alT it is the e?8essive mome!t 6hi8h
grou!ds philosophy i! all its histori8al orms7 ,ad!ess is thus !ot e?8luded by philosophy+ it is i!ter!al
to it7 H 8ourse- every philosophy tries to 8o!trol this e?8ess- to repress itEbut i! repressi!g it- it
represses its o6! i!!ermost ou!datio!+ JChilosophy is perhaps the reassura!8e give! agai!st the
a!guish o bei!g mad at the poi!t o greatest pro?imity to mad!ess7K
"
9! his reply- Fou8ault irst tries to prove- through a detailed readi!g o Ges8artes- that the
mad!ess he evokes does !ot have the same status as se!sory illusio!s a!d dreams7 /he! 9 suer
se!sory illusio!s o per8eptio! or 6he! 9 dream- 9 remain normal and rational- 9 o!ly de8eive mysel
6ith regard to 6hat 9 see7 9! mad!ess- o! the 8o!trary- 9 mysel am !o lo!ger !ormal- 9 lose my reaso!7
So mad!ess has to be e?8luded i 9 am to be a ratio!al subje8t7 GerridaIs reusal to e?8lude mad!ess
rom philosophy bears 6it!ess to the a8t that he remai!s a philosopher 6ho is u!able to thi!k the
Hutside o philosophy- 6ho is u!able to thi!k ho6 philosophy itsel is determi!ed by somethi!g that
es8apes it7 Apropos the hypothesis o u!iversal doubt a!d the 0vil 1e!ius- 6e are !ot deali!g 6ith true
mad!ess- but 6ith the ratio!al subje8t 6ho eig!s to be mad- 6ho makes a ratio!al e?perime!t- !ever
losi!g his 8o!trol over it7
Fi!ally- o! the very last page o his reply- Fou8ault tries to ide!tiy the true diere!8e bet6ee!
himsel a!d Gerrida7 =e atta8ks @6ithout !ami!g itA the pra8ti8e o de8o!stru8tio! a!d te?tual a!alysis-
or 6hi8h Jthere is !othi!g outside the te?t-K so that 6e are 8aught i! a! e!dless pro8ess o
i!terpretatio!7 Fou8ault- o! the 8o!trary- does !ot pra8ti8e te?tual a!alysis- but a!alyses dis8ourses-
Jdispositifs-K ormatio!s i! 6hi8h te?ts a!d stateme!ts are i!terli!ked 6ith e?tra:te?tual me8ha!isms o
po6er a!d 8o!trol7 /hat 6e !eed is !ot deeper te?tual a!alyses- but a!alyses o the 6ay dis8ursive
pra8ti8es are 8ombi!ed 6ith pra8ti8es o po6er a!d domi!atio!7 3ut does this reje8tio! o Gerrida
holdM .et us go through the debate o!8e agai!- this time taki!g Gerrida as the starti!g poi!t7 As Gerrida
made 8lear i! his essay o! Fou8aultIs 0istoire de la folie- mad!ess is i!s8ribed i! the history o cogito
at t6o levels7 First- throughout the e!tire philosophy o subje8tivity rom Ges8artes through *a!t-
S8helli!g- a!d =egel- up to 4ietUs8he a!d =usserl- the cogito is related to its shado6y double- the
pharma"on- 6hi8h is mad!ess7 Se8o!d- mad!ess is i!s8ribed i!to the very @preAhistory o the cogito
itsel- as part o its tra!s8e!de!tal ge!esis+

the Dogito es8apes mad!ess o!ly be8ause at its o6! mome!t- u!der its o6! authority- it is valid eve! i
9 am mad- eve! i my thoughts are 8ompletely mad O Ges8artes !ever i!ter!s mad!ess- !either at the
stage o !atural doubt !or at the stage o metaphysi8al doubt O /hether 9 am mad or !ot- ,ogito! sum
O eve! i the totality o the 6orld does !ot e?ist- eve! i !o!mea!i!g has i!vaded the totality o the
6orld- up to a!d i!8ludi!g the very 8o!te!ts o my thought- 9 still thi!k- 9 am 6hile 9 thi!k7
(
Gerrida leaves us i! !o doubt that- Jas soo! as Ges8artes has rea8hed this e?tremity- he seeks to
reassure himsel- to 8ertiy the Dogito through 1od- to ide!tiy the a8t o the Dogito 6ith a reaso!able
reaso!7K
#
This 6ithdra6al sets i! Jrom the mome!t 6he! he pulls himsel out o mad!ess by
determi!i!g !atural light through a series o pri!8iples a!d a?ioms7K
'
The term JlightK is here 8ru8ial
i! measuri!g Ges8artesIs dista!8e rom 1erma! 9dealism- i! 6hi8h- pre8isely- the 8ore o the subje8t is
!o lo!ger light- but the abyss o dark!ess- the J4ight o the /orld7K This- the!- is GerridaIs
u!dame!tal i!terpretive gesture+ o!e o

separati!g- 6ithi! the Dogito- on the one hand- hyperbole @6hi8h 9 mai!tai! 8a!!ot be e!8losed i! a
a8tual a!d determi!ed histori8al stru8ture- or it is the proje8t o e?8eedi!g every i!ite a!d determi!ed
totalityA- a!d- on the other hand- that i! Ges8artesIs philosophy @or i! the philosophy supporti!g the
Augusti!ia! Dogito or the =usserlia! Dogito as 6ellA 6hi8h belo!gs to a a8tual histori8al stru8ture7
$
=ere- 6he! Gerrida asserts that Jthe histori8ity proper to philosophy is lo8ated a!d 8o!stituted
i! the tra!sitio!- the dialogue bet6ee! hyperbole a!d the i!ite stru8ture- O i! the diere!8e bet6ee!
history a!d histori8ity-K he perhaps alls too short7
&
This te!sio! may appear very J.a8a!ia!K+ is it !ot
a versio! o the te!sio! bet6ee! the FealEthe hyperboli8 e?8essEa!d its @ultimately al6ays ailedA
symboliUatio!M The matri? 6e thus arrive at is that o a! eter!al os8illatio! bet6ee! the t6o e?tremes-
the radi8al e?pe!diture- hyperbole- e?8ess- a!d its later domesti8atio! @as i! *risteva- the os8illatio!
bet6ee! Semioti8 a!d Symboli8A7 3oth e?tremes are illusio!ary+ pure e?8ess as 6ell as pure i!ite
order 6ould disi!tegrate- 8a!8el themselves out7 Su8h a! approa8h misses the true poi!t o Jmad!ess-K
6hi8h is !ot the pure e?8ess o the J!ight o the 6orld-K but the mad!ess o the passage to the symboli8
itsel- o imposi!g a symboli8 order o!to the 8haos o the Feal7
%
9 mad!ess is 8o!stitutive- the! every
system o mea!i!g is mi!imally para!oid- Jmad7K Fe8all agai! 3re8htIs sloga! J/hat is the robbi!g o
a ba!k 8ompared to the ou!di!g o a !e6 ba!kMKEtherei! resides the lesso! o Gavid .y!8hIs
Straight Story+ 6hat is the ridi8ulously patheti8 perversity o igures like 3obby Ceru i! Wild at 0eart
or Fra!k i! /lue 6elvet 8ompared to de8idi!g to 8ross the )S 8e!tral pla!e o! a la6!mo6er to visit a
dyi!g relativeM ,easured agai!st this a8t- Fra!kIs a!d 3obbyIs outbreaks o rage are but the impote!t
theatri8s o old a!d sedate 8o!servatives7 9! the same 6ay- 6e should say+ 6hat is the mere mad!ess
8aused by the loss o reaso! 8ompared to the mad!ess o reaso! itselM
This step is the properly J=egelia!K o!eE6hi8h is 6hy =egel- the philosopher 6ho made the
most radi8al attempt to thi!k the abyss o mad!ess at the 8ore o subje8tivity- is also the philosopher
6ho brought to its JmadK 8lima? the philosophi8al System as the totality o mea!i!g7 This is 6hy- or
very good reaso!s- rom the 8ommo!:se!se perspe8tive J=egelK sta!ds or the mome!t at 6hi8h
philosophy goes Jmad-K e?plodes i! a J8raUyK prete!se to JAbsolute *!o6ledge7K
9t is thus !ot e!ough simply to oppose Jmad!essK a!d symboliUatio!+ there is- i! the history o
philosophy itsel @o philosophi8al JsystemsKA- a privileged poi!t at 6hi8h the hyperbole- philosophyIs
e?:timate 8ore- dire8tly i!s8ribes itsel i!to it- a!d this is the mome!t o the cogito- o tra!s8e!de!tal
philosophy7 J,ad!essK is here JtamedK i! a diere!t 6ay- through a Jtra!s8e!de!talK horiUo! 6hi8h
does !ot 8a!8el it i! a! all:e!8ompassi!g 6orld:vie6- but mai!tai!s it7
J9! the sere!e 6orld o me!tal ill!ess- moder! ma! !o lo!ger 8ommu!i8ates 6ith the madma!+
O the ma! o reaso! delegates the physi8ia! to mad!ess- thereby authoriUi!g a relatio! o!ly through
the abstra8t u!iversality o disease7K
10
=o6ever- 6hat about psy8hoa!alysisM 9s !ot psy8hoa!alysis
pre8isely the poi!t at 6hi8h the Jma! o reaso!K re:establishes his dialogue 6ith mad!ess-
redis8overi!g the dime!sio! o truth i! itE!ot the same truth as beore- i! the premoder! u!iverse- but
a diere!t- properly s8ie!tii8- o!eM Fou8ault himsel dealt 6ith this i! his later 0istory of Se&uality-
6here psy8hoa!alysis is 8o!8eived as the 8ulmi!atio! o Jse?:as:the:ultimate:truthK logi8 o
8o!essio!7
9! spite o the finesse o Fou8aultIs reply- he ultimately alls i!to the trap o a! histori8ism
6hi8h 8a!!ot a88ou!t or its o6! positio! o e!u!8iatio!T this impossibility is redoubled i! Fou8aultIs
8hara8teriUatio! o his Jobje8t-K mad!ess- 6hi8h os8illates bet6ee! t6o e?tremes7 H! the o!e ha!d- his
strategi8 aim is to make mad!ess itsel talk- as it is i! itsel- outside o the @s8ie!tii8- et87A dis8ourse o!
it+ Jit is dei!itely !ot a Nuestio! o a history o ideas- but o the rudime!tary moveme!ts o a!
e?perie!8e7 A history !ot o psy8hiatry- but o mad!ess itsel- i! its viva8ity- beore k!o6ledge has
eve! begu! to 8lose i! o! it7K
11
H! the other ha!d- the @laterA model deployed i! his Discipline and
)unish a!d 0istory of Se&uality 8ompels him to posit the absolute imma!e!8e o the @e?8essive-
tra!sgressive- resisti!g OA obje8t to its ma!ipulatio! by the dispositif o po6er:k!o6ledge+ i! the same
6ay that Jthe 8ar8eral !et6ork does !ot 8ast the i!assimilable i!to a 8o!used hellT there is !o
outsideKT
12
i! the same 6ay that the JliberatedK ma! is himsel ge!erated by the dispositif that 8o!trols
a!d regulates himT i! the same 6ay that Jse?K as the i!assimilable e?8ess is itsel ge!erated by the
dis8ourses a!d pra8ti8es that try to 8o!trol a!d regulate itT mad!ess is also ge!erated by the very
dis8ourse that e?8ludes- obje8tiviUes- a!d studies it- there is !o JpureK mad!ess outside it7 As 3oy!e
puts it- Fou8ault here Jee8tively a8k!o6ledg[es\ the 8orre8t!ess o GerridaIs ormulatio!-K
1"
that is-
o il ny a pas de hors*te&te-
1(
providi!g his o6! versio! o it7 /he! Fou8ault 6rites that JCerhaps o!e
day [tra!sgressio!\ 6ill seem as de8isive or our 8ulture- as mu8h a part o its soil- as the e?perie!8e o
8o!tradi8tio! 6as at a! earlier time or diale8ti8al thought-K
1#
does he !ot thereby miss the poi!t-
6hi8h is that this day has already arrived- that perma!e!t tra!sgressio! already is a key eature o late
8apitalismM A!d this is 6hy his 8o!8ludi!g obje8tio! to GerridaIs il ny a pas de hors*te&te seems to
miss the mark- 6he! he 8hara8teriUes it i! terms o a

redu8tio! o dis8ursive pra8ti8es to te?tual tra8esT elisio! o the eve!ts 6hi8h are produ8ed i! these
pra8ti8es- so that all that remai!s o them are marks or a readi!gT i!ve!tio!s o voi8es behi!d the te?ts-
so that 6e do !ot have to a!alyUe the modes o the impli8atio! o the subje8t i! the dis8oursesT the
assig!atio! o the origi!ary as [6hat is\ said a!d !ot:said i! the te?t- so that 6e do !ot have to lo8ate
dis8ursive pra8ti8es i! the ield o tra!sormatio!s i! 6hi8h they ee8tuate themselves7
1'
4o 6o!der that some ,ar?ists took Fou8aultIs side here- 8o!8eivi!g his polemi8 6ith Gerrida
as the latest 8hapter i! the eter!al struggle bet6ee! materialism a!d idealism+ Fou8aultIs materialist
a!alysis o dis8ursive pra8ti8es versus GerridaIs e!dless sel:rele?ive te?tual games7 A urther poi!t i!
avor o Fou8ault seems to be that he remai!s a radi8al histori8ist- reproa8hi!g Gerrida or his i!ability
to thi!k the e?teriority o philosophy7 This is ho6 he sums up the stakes o their debate+

8ould there be somethi!g prior or e?ter!al to the philosophi8al dis8ourseM Da! the 8o!ditio! o this
dis8ourse be a! e?8lusio!- a reusal- a! avoided risk- a!d- 6hy !ot- a earM A suspi8io! reje8ted
passio!ately by Gerrida7 )udenda origo- said 4ietUs8he 6ith regard to religious people a!d their
religio!7
1$
=o6ever- Gerrida is mu8h 8loser to thi!ki!g this e?ter!ality tha! Fou8ault- or 6hom
e?teriority i!volves a simple histori8ist redu8tio! 6hi8h 8a!!ot a88ou!t or itsel @6he! Fou8ault 6as
asked rom 6hat positio! he 6as speaki!g- he employed the 8heap rhetori8al tri8k o 8laimi!g that this
6as a Jpoli8eK Nuestio!- J6ho are you to say thatKEbut he 8ombi!ed this reply 6ith the opposite 8laim
that ge!ealogi8al history is a! Jo!tology o the prese!tKA7 9t is easy to submit philosophy to su8h a
histori8ist redu8tio! @philosophers 8a! easily dismiss su8h e?ter!al redu8tio! as relyi!g o! a 8o!usio!
bet6ee! ge!esis a!d valueAT it is mu8h more dii8ult to thi!k its inherent e?8ess- its e?:timate 8ore7
These- the!- are the true stakes o the debate+ e?:tima8y or dire8t e?ter!alityM
This dark 8ore o mad!ess at the heart o the cogito 8a! also be determi!ed i! a more ge!eti8
6ay7 Ga!iel Ge!!ett dra6s a 8o!vi!8i!g a!d i!sightul parallel bet6ee! a! a!imalIs physi8al
e!viro!me!t a!d the huma! e!viro!me!t- i!8ludi!g !ot o!ly huma! artia8ts @8lothes- houses- toolsA
but also the JvirtualK e!viro!me!t o the dis8ursive 6eb+ JStripped o [the V6eb o dis8oursesI\- a!
i!dividual huma! bei!g is as i!8omplete as a bird 6ithout eathers- a turtle 6ithout its shell7K
1&
A
!aked ma! is the same !o!se!se as a shaved ape+ 6ithout la!guage @a!d tools a!d OA- ma! is a
8rippled a!imalEit is this la8k 6hi8h is suppleme!ted by symboli8 i!stitutio!s a!d tools- so that the
poi!t made obvious today i! popular 8ulture igures like Fobo8op @ma! as simulta!eously super:a!imal
a!d 8rippledA holds rom the very begi!!i!g7 =o6 do 6e pass rom the J!aturalK to the Jsymboli8K
e!viro!me!tM This passage is !ot dire8t- o!e 8a!!ot a88ou!t or it 6ithi! a 8o!ti!uous evolutio!ary
!arrative+ somethi!g has to i!terve!e bet6ee! the t6o- a ki!d o Jva!ishi!g mediator-K 6hi8h is !either
4ature !or DultureEthis i!:bet6ee! is !ot the spark o logos magi8ally 8o!erred o! homo sapiens-
e!abli!g him to orm his suppleme!tary virtual symboli8 e!viro!me!t- but pre8isely somethi!g 6hi8h-
although it is also !o lo!ger !ature- is !ot yet logos- a!d has to be JrepressedK by logosEthe Freudia!
!ame or this i!:bet6ee! is- o 8ourse- the death drive7
Cerhaps- eve! more tha! Ges8artes- the philosopher 6ho sta!ds or o!e e?treme o Jmad!essK is
4i8olas ,alebra!8he- 6ith his Jo88asio!alism7K ,alebra!8he- a dis8iple o Ges8artes- drops the latterIs
ridi8ulous reere!8e to the pi!eal gla!d as the poi!t o 8o!ta8t bet6ee! material a!d spiritual substa!8e-
body a!d soulT but ho6- the!- are 6e to e?plai! their 8oordi!atio!- i there is !o 8o!ta8t bet6ee! the
t6o- !o poi!t at 6hi8h a soul 8a! a8t 8ausally o! a body or vi8e versaM Si!8e the t6o 8ausal !et6orks
@that o ideas i! my mi!d a!d that o bodily i!ter8o!!e8tio!sA are totally i!depe!de!t- the o!ly solutio!
is that a third- true Substa!8e @1odA 8o!ti!uously 8oordi!ates a!d mediates bet6ee! the t6o- thereby
mai!tai!i!g the sembla!8e o 8o!ti!uity+ 6he! 9 thi!k about raisi!g my ha!d a!d my ha!d the! rises-
my thought 8auses the raisi!g o my ha!d !ot dire8tly but o!ly Jo88asio!allyKEupo! !oti8i!g my
thought dire8ted at raisi!g my ha!d- 1od sets i! motio! the other- material- 8ausal 8hai! 6hi8h leads to
my ha!d a8tually bei!g raised7
9 6e repla8e J1odK 6ith the big Hther- the symboli8 order- 6e 8a! see the pro?imity o
o88asio!alism to .a8a!Is positio!+ as .a8a! put it i! his polemi8 agai!st Aristotle i! JTelevisio!-K the
relatio!ship bet6ee! soul a!d body is !ever dire8t- si!8e the big Hther al6ays i!terposes itsel bet6ee!
the t6o7
1%
H88asio!alism is thus esse!tially a !ame or the Jarbitrari!ess o the sig!iier-K or the gap
that separates the !et6ork o ideas rom the !et6ork o bodily @realA 8ausality- or the a8t that it is the
big Hther 6hi8h a88ou!ts or the 8oordi!atio! o the t6o !et6orks- so that- 6he! my body bites i!to a!
apple- my soul e?perie!8es a pleasurable se!satio!7 This same gap 6as targeted by the a!8ie!t AUte8
priests 6ho orga!iUed huma! sa8rii8es to e!sure that the su! 6ould rise agai!+ the huma! sa8rii8e 6as
a! appeal to 1od to sustai! the 8oordi!atio! bet6ee! the t6o series- bodily !e8essity a!d the
8o!8ate!atio! o symboli8 eve!ts7 J9rratio!alK as the AUte8 priestIs sa8rii8e may appear- its u!derlyi!g
premise is ar more i!sightul tha! our 8ommo!pla8e i!tuitio! a88ordi!g to 6hi8h the 8oordi!atio!
bet6ee! body a!d soul is dire8t- i7e7- that it is J!aturalK or me to have a pleasurable se!satio! 6he! 9
bite i!to a! apple si!8e this se!satio! is 8aused dire8tly by the apple+ 6hat gets lost is the i!termediary
role o the big Hther i! guara!teei!g the 8oordi!atio! bet6ee! reality a!d our me!tal e?perie!8e o it7
A!d is it !ot the same 6ith our immersio! i! Virtual FealityM /he! 9 raise my ha!d i! order to push a!
obje8t i! virtual spa8e- this obje8t ee8tively movesEmy illusio!- o 8ourse- is that it 6as the
moveme!t o my ha!d 6hi8h dire8tly 8aused the relo8atio! o the obje8t- or i! my immersio!- 9
overlook the i!tri8ate me8ha!isms o 8omputeriUed 8oordi!atio!- homologous to the role o 1od
guara!teei!g the 8oordi!atio! bet6ee! the t6o series i! o88asio!alism7
20
9t is a 6ell:k!o6! a8t that the J8lose the doorK butto! i! most elevators is a totally !o!:
u!8tio!i!g pla8ebo- pla8ed there just to give us the impressio! that 6e 8a! someho6 speed thi!gs
upE6he! 6e push the 8lose butto!- the door 8loses i! e?a8tly the same amou!t o time as it 6ould had
6e o!ly pressed the loor butto!7 This e?treme a!d 8lear 8ase o ake parti8ipatio! is a! appropriate
metaphor or the parti8ipatio! o i!dividuals i! our Jpostmoder!K politi8al pro8ess7 A!d it represe!ts
o88asio!alism at its purest+ rom ,alebra!8heIs perspe8tive- 6e are ee8tively pressi!g su8h butto!s
all the time- a!d it is 1odIs i!8essa!t a8tivity that 8oordi!ates bet6ee! our a8tio! a!d the eve!t that
ollo6s- 6hile 6e thi!k the eve!t results rom our a8tio!7
For this reaso!- it is 8ru8ial to keep ope! the radi8al ambiguity i!volved i! ho6 8yberspa8e 6ill
ae8t our lives+ it does !ot depe!d o! te8h!ology as su8h but o! the mode o its so8ial i!s8riptio!7
9mmersio! i! 8yberspa8e 8a! i!te!siy our bodily e?perie!8e @a !e6 se!suality- a !e6 body 6ith more
orga!s- !e6 se?es OA- but it also ope!s up the possibility or someo!e ma!ipulati!g the 8yberspa8e
ma8hi!ery to literally steal our o6! @virtualA body- deprivi!g us o 8o!trol over it- so that o!e !o lo!ger
relates to o!eIs body as to Jo!eIs o6!7K /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is the 8o!stitutive ambiguity o the
!otio! o mediatiUatio!7
21
Hrigi!ally this reerred to the gesture by mea!s o 6hi8h a subje8t 6as
stripped o its dire8t- immediate right to make de8isio!sT the great master o politi8al mediatiUatio! 6as
4apoleo!- 6ho let to the mo!ar8hs he 8o!Nuered the appeara!8e o po6er- 6hile they 6ere ee8tively
!o lo!ger i! a positio! to e?er8ise it7 At a more ge!eral level- o!e 8ould say that just su8h a
JmediatiUatio!K o the mo!ar8h dei!es 8o!stitutio!al mo!ar8hy+ i! it- the mo!ar8h is redu8ed to the
poi!t o a purely ormal symboli8 gesture o Jdotti!g the iIs-K o sig!i!g a!d thereby 8o!erri!g
perormative or8e o! the edi8ts 6hose 8o!te!t has bee! determi!ed by the ele8ted gover!i!g body7
A!d- mutatis mutandis- does !ot the same hold also or the progressive digitaliUatio! o our everyday
lives- i! the 8ourse o 6hi8h the subje8t is also more a!d more JmediatiUed-K imper8eptibly stripped o
his po6er- all the 6hile u!der the alse impressio! that it is bei!g i!8reasedM /he! our body is
mediatiUed @8aught i! the !et6ork o ele8tro!i8 mediaA- it is simulta!eously e?posed to the threat o a
radi8al Jproletaria!iUatio!K+ the subje8t is pote!tially redu8ed to the pure b- si!8e eve! my o6!
perso!al e?perie!8e 8a! be stole!- ma!ipulated- regulated by the me8ha!i8al Hther7
H!e 8a! see- agai!- ho6 the prospe8t o radi8al virtualiUatio! besto6s o! the 8omputer a
positio! stri8tly homologous to that o 1od i! ,alebra!8hea! o88asio!alism+ si!8e the 8omputer
8oordi!ates the relatio!ship bet6ee! my mi!d a!d @6hat 9 e?perie!8e asA the moveme!t o my limbs
@i! virtual realityA- o!e 8a! easily imagi!e a 8omputer 6hi8h ru!s amok a!d starts to a8t like a! 0vil
1od- disturbi!g that 8oordi!atio!E6he! the me!tal sig!al to raise my ha!d is suspe!ded or eve!
8ou!tera8ted i! @the virtualA reality- the most u!dame!tal e?perie!8e o the body as Jmi!eK is
u!dermi!ed7 9t thus seems that 8yberspa8e ee8tively realiUes the para!oid a!tasy elaborated by
S8hreber- the 1erma! judge 6hose memoirs 6ere a!alyUed by Freud+ the J6ired u!iverseK is psy8hoti8
i!soar as it seems to materialiUe S8hreberIs hallu8i!atio! o the divi!e rays through 6hi8h 1od
dire8tly 8o!trols the huma! mi!d7 9! other 6ords- does !ot the e?ter!aliUatio! o the big Hther i! the
8omputer a88ou!t or the i!here!t para!oia8 dime!sio! o the 6ired u!iverseM Hr- to put it a!other
6ay+ the 8ommo!pla8e is that the ability to upload 8o!s8ious!ess i!to a 8omputer i!ally rees people
rom their bodiesEbut it also frees the machines from %their' people O /hi8h bri!gs us to the
/a8ho6ski brothersI Matri& trilogy+ mu8h more tha! 3erkeleyIs 1od 6ho sustai!s the 6orld i! his
mi!d- the ultimate ,atri? is ,alebra!8heIs o88asio!alist 1od7
/hat- the!- is the ,atri?M Simply the .a8a!ia! Jbig Hther-K the virtual symboli8 order- the
!et6ork that stru8tures reality or us7 This dime!sio! o the Jbig HtherK is that o the 8o!stitutive
alienation o the subje8t i! the symboli8 order+ the big Hther pulls the stri!gs- the subje8t does !ot
speak- he Jis spoke!K by the symboli8 stru8ture7 9! short- this Jbig HtherK is the !ame or the so8ial
Substa!8e- or the age!8y tha!ks to 6hi8h the subje8t !ever ully domi!ates the ee8ts o his a8ts-
tha!ks to 6hi8h the i!al out8ome o his a8tivity is al6ays somethi!g other tha! 6hat he aimed at or
a!ti8ipated7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial to !ote that- i! the key 8hapters o his Four Fundamental ,oncepts
of )sycho*+nalysis- .a8a! struggles to deli!eate the operatio! that ollo6s alie!atio! a!d is i! a se!se
its 8ou!terpoi!t- that o separation+ alie!atio! in the big Hther is ollo6ed by the separatio! from the
big Hther7 Separatio! takes pla8e 6he! the subje8t takes !ote o ho6 the big Hther is i! itsel
i!8o!siste!t- purely virtual- Jbarred-K deprived o the Thi!gEa!d a!tasy is a! attempt to ill out this
la8k of the $ther! not of the sub1ect- that is- to @reA8o!stitute the 8o!siste!8y o the big Hther7
Follo6i!g the same para!oid t6ist- the thesis o -he Matri& is that this big Hther is e?ter!aliUed
i! the really e?isti!g ,ega:Domputer7 There isEthere has to beEa ,atri? be8ause Jthi!gs are !ot
right- opportu!ities have bee! missed- somethi!g goes 6ro!g all the time-K i! other 6ords- the ilmIs
idea is that it is so be8ause the ,atri? obus8ates the JtrueK reality behi!d it all7 The problem 6ith the
ilm is that it is not J8raUyK e!ough- be8ause it supposes a!other JrealK reality behi!d our everyday
reality sustai!ed by the ,atri?7 H!e is tempted to 8laim- i! *a!tia! ashio!- that the mistake o
8o!spira8y theory is homologous to the Jparalogism o pure reaso!-K to the 8o!usio! bet6ee! the t6o
levels+ suspi8io! @o re8eived s8ie!tii8- so8ial- et87- opi!io!A as the ormal methodologi8al sta!8e- a!d
the positiviUatio! o this suspi8io! i! a!other global all:e?pla!atory para:theory7
The e?8ess o mad!ess at the heart o the cogito is thus 8losely li!ked to the topi8 o reedom7
The Ja!tago!ismK o the *a!tia! !otio! o reedom @as the most 8o!8ise e?pressio! o the a!tago!ism
o reedom i! bourgeois lie itselA does !ot lie 6here Ador!o lo8ates it @the sel:imposed la6 mea!s
that reedom 8oi!8ides 6ith sel:e!slaveme!t a!d sel:domi!atio!- that *a!tia! Jspo!ta!eityK is i!
a8tuality its opposite- utter sel:8o!trol- the th6arti!g o all spo!ta!eous impetusesA- but is- as Fobert
Cippi! put it- Jmuch more on the surface7K
22
For *a!t as or Fousseau- the greatest moral good is to
lead a ully auto!omous lie as a ree ratio!al age!t- a!d the 6orst evil is subje8tio! to the 6ill o
a!otherT ho6ever- *a!t has to 8o!8ede that ma! does !ot emerge as a ree mature ratio!al age!t
spo!ta!eously- through his !atural developme!t- but o!ly through a! arduous pro8ess o maturatio!
sustai!ed by harsh dis8ipli!e a!d edu8atio! 6hi8h 8a!!ot but be e?perie!8ed by the subje8t as a!
e?ter!al 8oer8io!+

So8ial i!stitutio!s both to !ourish a!d to develop su8h i!depe!de!8e are !e8essary a!d are 8o!siste!t
6ith- do !ot th6art- its realiUatio!- but 6ith reedom u!derstood as a! i!dividualIs 8ausal age!8y this
6ill al6ays look like a! e?ter!al !e8essity that 6e have good reaso!s to try to avoid7 This 8reates the
problem o a orm o depe!de!8e that 8a! be 8o!sidered 8o!stitutive o i!depe!de!8e a!d that 8a!!ot
be u!derstood as a mere 8ompromise 6ith the parti8ular 6ill o a!other or as a separate- margi!al topi8
o *a!tIs dotage7 -his is- i! ee8t- the a!ti!omy 8o!tai!ed 6ithi! the bourgeois !otio!s o
i!dividuality- i!dividual respo!sibility O
2"
=ere o!e 8a! i!deed imagi!e *a!t as a! u!e?pe8ted pre8ursor o Fou8aultIs thesis- i! his
Discipline and )unish- o! the ormatio! o the ree i!dividual through a 8omple? set o dis8ipli!ary
mi8ro:pra8ti8esEa!d- as Cippi! does !ot hesitate to poi!t out- this a!ti!omy e?plodes eve! more
i!te!sely i! *a!tIs so8io:histori8al rele8tio!s- o8used o! the !otio! o Ju!so8ial so8iabilityK+ 6hat is
*a!tIs !otio! o the histori8al relatio! bet6ee! demo8ra8y a!d mo!ar8hy i !ot this same thesis @o the
li!k bet6ee! reedom a!d submissio! to a higher authorityA applied to the histori8al pro8ess itselM 9!
the lo!g term @or i! its !otio!A- demo8ra8y is the o!ly appropriate orm o gover!me!tT ho6ever-
be8ause o the immaturity o the people- the 8o!ditio!s or a u!8tio!i!g demo8ra8y 8a! o!ly be
established through a !o!:demo8rati8 mo!ar8hy 6hi8h- i! the e?ertio! o its be!evole!t po6er- bri!gs
the people to politi8al maturity7 A!d- as to be e?pe8ted- *a!t does !ot ail to me!tio! the ,a!devillea!
ratio!ality o the market i! 6hi8h ea8h i!dividualIs pursuit o his or her egotisti8 i!terests is 6hat
6orks best @mu8h better tha! dire8t altruismA or the 8ommo! good7 At its most e?treme- this leads
*a!t to the !otio! that huma! history itsel is gover!ed by a! i!s8rutable divi!e pla!- 6ithi! 6hi8h 6e
mortals are desti!ed to play a role u!bek!o6!st to usEhere- the parado? gro6s eve! stro!ger+ our
reedom is li!ked to its opposite !ot o!ly Jrom belo6K but also Jrom aboveKT that is- !ot o!ly 8a! it
arise o!ly through our submissio! a!d depe!de!8e- but our reedom as su8h is a mome!t i! a larger
divi!e pla!Eour reedom is !ot truly a! aim:i!:itsel- but serves a higher purpose7
/e 8a! 8lariyEi !ot to resolveEthis dilemma by i!trodu8i!g some urther disti!8tio!s i!to
the !otio! o J!oume!alK reedom itsel7 )po! a 8loser look- it be8omes evide!t that- or *a!t-
dis8ipli!e a!d edu8atio! do !ot dire8tly 6ork o! our a!imal !ature- orgi!g it i!to huma! i!dividuality+
as *a!t poi!ts out- a!imals 8a!!ot be properly edu8ated- si!8e their behavior is already predesti!ed by
their i!sti!8ts7 /hat this mea!s is that- parado?i8ally- i! order to be edu8ated i!to reedom @Nua moral
auto!omy a!d sel:respo!sibilityA- I already have to be free i! a se!se mu8h more radi8al- J!oume!al-K
mo!strous eve!7 The Freudia! !ame or this mo!strous reedom is- agai!- the death drive7 9t is
i!teresti!g to !ote ho6 philosophi8al !arratives o the Jbirth o ma!K are al6ays 8ompelled to
presuppose a mome!t i! huma! @preAhistory 6he! @6hat 6ill be8omeA ma! is !o lo!ger a mere a!imal
but also !ot yet a Jbei!g o la!guage-K bou!d by symboli8 .a6T a mome!t o thoroughly Jperverted-K
Jde!aturaliUed-K JderailedK !ature 6hi8h is !ot yet 8ulture7 9! his a!thropologi8al 6riti!gs- *a!t
emphasiUed that the huma! a!imal !eeds dis8ipli!ary pressure i! order to tame that u!8a!!y
Ju!ruli!essK 6hi8h seems to be i!here!t to huma! !atureEa 6ild- u!8o!strai!ed prope!sity to i!sist
stubbor!ly o! o!eIs o6! 6ill- 6hatever the 8ost7 9t is o! a88ou!t o this that the huma! a!imal !eeds a
,aster to dis8ipli!e him+ dis8ipli!e targets this Ju!ruli!ess-K !ot the a!imal !ature i! ma!7 9! =egelIs
.ectures on )hilosophy of 0istory- a similar role is played by the reere!8e to J!egroesK+ sig!ii8a!tly-
=egel deals 6ith J!egroesK beore history proper @6hi8h starts 6ith a!8ie!t Dhi!aA- i! the se8tio!
e!titled JThe 4atural Do!te?t or the 1eographi8al 3asis o /orld =istoryK+ J!egroesK here sta!d or
the huma! spirit i! its Jstate o !ature-K they are des8ribed as a ki!d o perverted- mo!strous 8hildre!-
simulta!eously !aSve a!d 8orrupted- livi!g i! a pre:lapsaria! state o i!!o8e!8e- a!d- pre8isely as su8h-
the 8ruelest o barbaria!sT part o !ature a!d yet thoroughly de!aturaliUedT ruthlessly ma!ipulati!g
!ature through primitive sor8ery- yet simulta!eously terriied by ragi!g !atural or8esT mi!dlessly
brave 8o6ards7
2(
This i!:bet6ee! is the JrepressedK o the !arrative orm @i! this 8ase- o =egelIs Jgra!d
!arrativeK o the 6orld:histori8al su88essio! o spiritual ormsA+ !ot !ature as su8h- but the very break
6ith !ature 6hi8h is @laterA suppleme!ted by the virtual u!iverse o !arratives7 A88ordi!g to S8helli!g-
prior to its assertio! as the medium o the ratio!al /ord- the subje8t is the Ji!i!ite la8k o bei!gK
@unendliche Mangel an SeinA- the viole!t gesture o 8o!tra8tio! that !egates every bei!g outside itsel7
This i!sight also orms the 8ore o =egelIs !otio! o mad!ess+ 6he! =egel determi!es mad!ess to be a
6ithdra6al rom the a8tual 6orld- the 8losi!g o the soul o!to itsel- its J8o!tra8tio!-K he all too Nui8kly
8o!8eives o this 6ithdra6al as a Jregressio!K to the level o the Ja!imal soulK still embedded i! its
!atural e!viro!me!t a!d determi!ed by the rhythm o !ature @!ight a!d day- et87A7 3ut does !ot this
6ithdra6al- o! the 8o!trary- amou!t to a severi!g o li!ks 6ith the 3mwelt- the e!d o the subje8tIs
immersio! i! its immediate !atural e!viro!me!t- a!d is it !ot- as su8h- the ou!di!g gesture o
Jhuma!iUatio!KM /as !ot this 6ithdra6al:i!to:the:sel a88omplished by Ges8artes 6ith his u!iversal
doubt a!d redu8tio! to the cogito- 6hi8h- as Gerrida poi!ted out- also i!volves a passage through the
mome!t o radi8al mad!essM
This bri!gs us to the !e8essity o the Fall+ give! the *a!tia! li!k bet6ee! depe!de!8e a!d
auto!omy the Fall is u!avoidable- a !e8essary step i! the moral progress o ma!7 That is to say- i!
pre8ise *a!tia! terms+ the JFallK is the very re!u!8iatio! o my radi8al ethi8al auto!omyT it o88urs
6he! 9 take reuge i! a hetero!omous .a6- i! a .a6 e?perie!8ed as imposed o! me rom the outside7
The i!itude i! 6hi8h 9 sear8h or support to avoid the diUUi!ess o reedom is the i!itude o the
e?ter!al:hetero!omous .a6 itsel7 Therei! resides the difficulty of being a 5antianF 0very pare!t
k!o6s that the 8hildIs provo8atio!s- 6ild a!d Jtra!sgressiveK as they may appear- ultimately 8o!8eal
a!d e?press a dema!d or the igure o authority to set irm limits- to dra6 a li!e 6hi8h mea!s JThis ar
a!d !o urtherRK thus e!abli!g the 8hild to 8learly map 6hat is possible a!d 6hat is !ot possible7 @A!d
does the same !ot go also or hysteri8Is provo8atio!sMA This- pre8isely- is 6hat the a!alyst reuses to
do- a!d this is 6hat makes him so traumati8 or the a!alysa!dEparado?i8ally- it is the setti!g o a irm
limit 6hi8h is liberati!g- a!d it is the very abse!8e o a irm limit 6hi8h is e?perie!8ed as suo8ati!g7
-his is 6hy the *a!tia! auto!omy o the subje8t is so dii8ultEits impli8atio! is pre8isely that
there is !o o!e else- !o e?ter!al age!t o J!atural authority-K 6ho 8a! do the job or me- that 9 mysel
have to set the limit to my !atural Ju!ruli!ess7K Although *a!t amously 6rote that ma! is a! a!imal
6hi8h !eeds a master- this should !ot de8eive us+ 6hat *a!t 6as aimi!g at 6as !ot the philosophi8al
8ommo!pla8e a88ordi!g to 6hi8h- i! 8o!trast to a!imals 6hose behavioral patter!s are grou!ded i!
their i!herited i!sti!8ts- ma! la8ks su8h irm 8oordi!ates 6hi8h- thereore- have to be imposed o! him
rom outside- through a 8ultural authorityT rather- *a!tIs true aim is to poi!t out ho6 the very need for
an e&ternal master is a deceptive lure+ ma! !eeds a master i! order to 8o!8eal rom himsel the
deadlo8k o his o6! dii8ult reedom a!d sel:respo!sibility7 9! this pre8ise se!se- a truly e!lighte!ed
JmatureK huma! bei!g is a subje8t 6ho no longer needs a master- 6ho 8a! ully assume the heavy
burde! o dei!i!g his o6! limitatio!s7 This basi8 *a!tia! @a!d also =egelia!A lesso! 6as put very
8learly by Dhesterto!+ J0very a8t o 6ill is a! a8t o sel:limitatio!7 To desire a8tio! is to desire
limitatio!7 9! that se!se every a8t is a! a8t o sel:sa8rii8e7K
2#
The lesso! here is thus i! a pre8ise se!se a! =egelia! o!e+ the e?ter!al oppositio! bet6ee!
reedom @tra!s8e!de!tal spo!ta!eity- moral auto!omy- a!d sel:respo!sibilityA a!d slavery @submissio!-
either to my o6! !ature- its Jpathologi8alK i!sti!8ts- or to a! e?ter!al po6erA has to be transposed into
freedom itself- as the JhighestK a!tago!ism bet6ee! mo!strous reedom Nua Ju!ruli!essK a!d the true
moral reedom7 =o6ever- a possible 8ou!ter:argume!t here 6ould be that this !oume!al e?8ess o
reedom @*a!tia! Ju!ruli!ess-K the =egelia! J!ight o the 6orldKA is a retroa8tive result o the
dis8ipli!ary me8ha!isms themselves @alo!g the li!es o the Cauli!ia! moti o J.a6 8reates
tra!sgressio!-K or the Fou8auldia! topi8 o ho6 the very dis8ipli!ary measures that try to regulate
se?uality ge!erate Jse?K as the elusive e?8essAEthe obsta8le 8reates that 6hi8h it e!deavors to 8o!trol7
Are 6e the! deali!g 6ith the 8losed 8ir8le o a pro8ess positi!g its o6! presuppositio!sM Hur
6ager is that the =egelia! diale8ti8al 8ir8le o positi!g presuppositio!s- ar rom bei!g 8losed-
ge!erates its o6! ope!i!g a!d thus the spa8e or reedom7 9! order to see this- o!e has to begi! 6ith
6hat appears to be the very opposite o reedom+ bli!d me8ha!i8al habit7 9! the shit rom Aristotle to
*a!t- to moder!ity 6ith its subje8t as pure auto!omy- the status o habit 8ha!ges rom orga!i8 i!!er
rule to somethi!g me8ha!i8al- the opposite o huma! reedom+ reedom 8a! !ever be8ome habit@ualAT i
it be8omes a habit- it is !o lo!ger true reedom @6hi8h is 6hy Thomas 2eerso! 6rote that i people are
to remai! ree- they have to rebel agai!st the gover!me!t every 8ouple o de8adesA7 This eve!tuality
rea8hes its apogee i! Dhrist- 6ho is Jthe igure o a pure eve!t- the e?a8t opposite o the habitual7K
2'
=egel here provides the imma!e!t 8orre8tive to *a!tia! moder!ity7 As Datheri!e ,alabou
!otes- =egelIs )hilosophy of Spirit begi!s 6ith a study o the same topi8 6ith 6hi8h )hilosophy of
ature e!ds+ the soul a!d its u!8tio!s7 This redoubli!g oers a 8lue as to ho6 =egel 8o!8eptualiUes
the tra!sitio! rom !ature to spirit+ J!ot as a sublatio!- but as a reduplication- a pro8ess through 6hi8h
spirit 8o!stitutes itsel i! a!d as a second nature7K
2$
The !ame or this se8o!d !ature is habit7 So it is
!ot that the huma! a!imal breaks 6ith !ature through the 8reative e?plosio! o spirit- 6hi8h the! gets
Jhabituated-K alie!ated- tur!ed i!to a mi!dless routi!eT the redupli8atio! o !ature i! Jse8o!d !atureK is
primordial- it is o!ly this redupli8atio! that ope!s up the spa8e or spiritual 8reativity7
Cerhaps this =egelia! !otio! o habit allo6s us to a88ou!t or the igure o the Uombie- slo6ly
draggi!g itsel arou!d i! a 8atato!i8 mode but persisti!g orever+ are Uombies !ot igures o pure habit-
o habit at its most eleme!tary- prior to the rise o i!tellige!8e @la!guage- 8o!s8ious!ess- a!d thi!ki!gAM
2&
This is 6hy a Uombie par e?8elle!8e is al6ays someo!e 6e k!e6 beore- 6he! he 6as still !ormally
aliveEthe sho8k or a 8hara8ter i! a Uombie movie 8omes 6he! they re8og!iUe the ormerly rie!dly
!eighbor i! the 8reepi!g igure rele!tlessly stalki!g them7
2%
/hat =egel says about habits thus has to
be applied to Uombies+ at the most eleme!tary level o huma! ide!tity- we are all 2ombiesT our JhigherK
a!d JreeK huma! a8tivities are depe!de!t o! the reliable u!8tio!i!g o our Uombie:habitsEi! this
se!se- bei!g:a:Uombie is a Uero:level o huma!ity- huma!ityIs i!huma! or me8ha!i8al 8ore7 The sho8k
o meeti!g a Uombie is thus !ot the sho8k o e!8ou!teri!g a oreig! e!tity- but the sho8k o bei!g
8o!ro!ted by the disavo6ed ou!datio! o our o6! huma!ity7
"0
=egelIs 8o!8eptio! o habit is u!e?pe8tedly 8lose to the logi8 o 6hat Gerrida 8alled
pharma"on- the ambiguous suppleme!t 6hi8h is simulta!eously a or8e o death a!d a or8e o lie7
=abit is- o! the o!e ha!d- the dulli!g o lie- its me8ha!iUatio! @=egel 8hara8teriUes it as a Jme8ha!ism
o sel:eeli!gK
"1
A+ 6he! somethi!g tur!s i!to a habit- it mea!s that its vitality is lost- 6e just
me8ha!i8ally repeat it 6ithout bei!g a6are o it7 =abit thus appears to be the very opposite o reedom+
reedom mea!s maki!g 8reative 8hoi8es- i!ve!ti!g somethi!g !e6- i! short- pre8isely brea"ing with
?old@ habits7 Thi!k about la!guage- 6hose JhabitualK aspe8t is best e?empliied by sta!dard ritualiUed
greeti!gs+ J=ello- ho6 are youM 4i8e to see youRKE6e do !ot really mea! it- there is !o livi!g
i!te!tio! i! it- it is just a Jhabit7K
H! the other ha!d- =egel emphasiUes agai! a!d agai! that there is !o reedom 6ithout habit+
habit provides the ba8kgrou!d a!d ou!datio! or every e?er8ise o reedom7 Take la!guage agai!+ i!
order or us to e?er8ise reedom i! usi!g la!guage- 6e have to get ully a88ustomed to it- habituated
@i!Ato it- 6e have to lear! to pra8ti8e it- to apply its rules Jbli!dly-K me8ha!i8ally- as a habit+ o!ly 6he!
a subje8t e?ter!aliUes 6hat he lear!s i! me8ha!iUed habits is he Jope! to be other6ise o88upied a!d
e!gaged7K
"2
4ot o!ly la!guage- but a mu8h more 8omple? set o spiritual a!d bodily a8tivities have to
be tur!ed i!to a habit i! order or a huma! subje8t to be able to e?ert his JhigherK u!8tio!s o 8reative
thi!ki!g a!d 6orki!gEall the operatio!s 6e perorm all the time mi!dlessly- su8h as 6alki!g- eati!g-
holdi!g thi!gs- a!d so o! a!d so orth- have to be lear!ed a!d tur!ed i!to mi!dless habits7 Through
habits- a huma! bei!g tra!sorms his body i!to a mobile a!d luid mea!s- the soulIs i!strume!t- 6hi8h
serves us 6ithout our havi!g to o8us 8o!s8iously o! it7 9! short- through habits- the subje8t
appropriates his body7 As Alai! poi!ts out i! his 8omme!tary o! =egel+

/he! reedom 8omes it is i! the sphere o habit O =ere the body is !o lo!ger a oreig! bei!g- rea8ti!g
belligere!tly agai!st meT rather it is pervaded by soul a!d has be8ome soulIs i!strume!t a!d mea!sT yet
at the same time- i! habit the 8orporeal sel is u!derstood as it truly isT body is re!dered somethi!g
mobile a!d luid- able to e?press dire8tly the i!!er moveme!ts o thought 6ithout !eedi!g to i!volve
thereby the role o 8o!s8ious!ess or rele8tio!7
""
,ore radi8ally eve!- or =egel- livi!g itsel @leadi!g a lieA is or us somethi!g 6e must lear! as
a habit- starti!g 6ith birth itsel7 Fe8all ho6- se8o!ds ater birth- the baby has to be shake! a!d thereby
remi!ded to breatheEother6ise- orgetti!g to breathe- it 6ill die7 9!deed- as =egel remi!ds us- a
huma! bei!g 8a! also die o habit+ J=uma! bei!gs eve! die as result o habitEthat is- i they have
be8ome totally habituated to lie- a!d spiritually a!d physi8ally blu!ted7K
"(
4othi!g thus 8omes
J!aturallyK to huma! bei!g- i!8ludi!g 6alki!g a!d seei!g+

The orm o habit applies to spirit i! all its degrees a!d varieties7 H all these modii8atio!s- the most
e?ter!al is the determi!atio! o the i!dividual i! relatio! to spa8eT this- 6hi8h or ma! mea!s an
upright posture- is somethi!g 6hi8h by his 6ill he has made i!to a habit7 Adopted directly! without
thin"ing- his upright sta!8e 8o!ti!ues through the persiste!t i!volveme!t o his 6ill7 ,a! sta!ds
upright o!ly be8ause a!d i!soar as he 6a!ts to sta!d- a!d o!ly as lo!g as he 6ills to do so 6ithout
8o!s8ious!ess o it7 Similarly- to take a!other 8ase- the a8t o seeing- a!d others like it- are 8o!8rete
habits 6hi8h 8ombi!e i! a si!gle a8t the multiple determi!atio!s o se!satio!- o 8o!s8ious!ess-
i!tuitio!- u!dersta!di!g- a!d so orth7
"#
=abit is thus Jdeperso!aliUedK 6illi!g- a me8ha!iUed emotio!+ o!8e 9 be8ome habituated to
sta!di!g- 9 6ill it 6ithout 8o!s8iously 6illi!g it- si!8e my 6ill is embodied i! the habit7 9! a habit-
prese!8e a!d abse!8e- appropriatio! a!d 6ithdra6al- e!gageme!t a!d dise!gageme!t- i!terest a!d
disi!terest- subje8tiviUatio! a!d obje8tiviUatio!- 8o!s8ious!ess a!d u!8o!s8ious!ess- are stra!gely
i!terli!ked7 =abit is the u!8o!s8ious!ess !e8essary or the very u!8tio!i!g o 8o!s8ious!ess+

i! habit our 8o!s8ious!ess is at the same time present i! the subje8t:matter- interested i! it- yet
8o!versely absent rom it- indifferent to itT O our Sel just as mu8h appropriates the subje8t:matter as-
o! the 8o!trary- it dra6s a6ay rom itT O the soul- o! the o!e ha!d- 8ompletely pervades its bodily
a8tivities a!d- o! the other ha!d- deserts them- thus givi!g them the shape o somethi!g mechanical- o
a merely !atural effect7
"'
A!d the same goes or my emotio!s+ their display is !ot purely !atural or spo!ta!eousT 6e lear!
to 8ry or laugh at appropriate mome!ts @re8all ho6- or the 2apa!ese- laughter u!8tio!s i! a diere!t
6ay tha! or us i! the /est+ a smile 8a! also be a sig! o embarrassme!t a!d shameA7 The e?ter!al
me8ha!iUatio! o emotio!sErom the a!8ie!t Tibeta! prayer 6heel 6hi8h prays or me to J8a!!ed
laughterK 6here the TV set laughs or me- tur!i!g my emotio!al display Nuite literally i!to a
me8ha!i8al displayEis thus based i! the a8t that emotio!al displays- i!8ludi!g the most Jsi!8ere-K are
already i! themselves Jme8ha!iUed7K
=o6ever- the highest level @a!d- already- the sel:sublatio!A o habit is language as the medium
o thoughtEi! it- the 8ouple o possessio! a!d 6ithdra6al is take! to the limit7 The poi!t is !ot o!ly
that- i! order to speak a la!guage Jlue!tly-K 6e have to master its rules me8ha!i8ally- 6ithout thi!ki!g
about itT mu8h more radi8ally- the 8o:depe!de!8e o i!sight a!d bli!d!ess determi!es the very a8t o
u!dersta!di!g+ 6he! 9 hear a 6ord- 9 !ot o!ly immediately abstra8t rom its sou!d a!d Jsee through itK
to its mea!i!g @re8all the 6eird e?perie!8e o be8omi!g a6are o the !o!:tra!spare!t vo8al materiality
o a 6ordEit appears as i!trusive a!d obs8e!e OA- but 9 have to do so i 9 am to e?perie!8e mea!i!g at
all7
9- or =egel- ma! is u!dame!tally a bei!g o habit- i habits a8tualiUe themselves 6he!
adopted as automati8 rea8tio!s 6hi8h o88ur 6ithout the subje8tIs 8o!s8ious parti8ipatio!- a!d- i!ally-
i 6e lo8ate the 8ore o subje8tivity i! its ability to perorm i!te!tio!al a8ts- to realiUe 8o!s8ious goals-
the!- parado?i8ally- the huma! subje8t is at its most u!dame!tal a Jdisappeari!g subje8t7K
"$
The
habitIs Ju!rele8tive spo!ta!eityK
"&
a88ou!ts or the 6ell:k!o6! parado? o sub1ectively choosing an
ob1ective necessity- o willing what unavoidably will occur+ through its elevatio! i!to a habit- a rea8tio!
6hi8h 6as irst somethi!g imposed o! me rom outside is i!ter!aliUed- tra!sormed i!to somethi!g that
9 perorm automati8ally a!d spo!ta!eously- Jrom i!sideK+

9 a! e?ter!al 8ha!ge is repeated- it tur!s i!to a te!de!8y i!ter!al to the subje8t7 The 8ha!ge itsel is
tra!sormed i!to a dispositio!- a!d re8eptivity- ormerly passive- be8omes a8tivity7 Thus habit is
revealed as a pro8ess through 6hi8h ma! e!ds by willing or 8hoosi!g 6hat 8ame to him rom outside7
=e!8eorth the 6ill o the i!dividual does !ot !eed to oppose the pressure o the e?ter!al 6orldT the
6ill lear!s gradually to 6a!t 6hat is7
"%
/hat makes habit so 8e!tral is the temporality it i!volves+ havi!g a habit i!volves a relatio!ship
to the uture- pres8ribi!g ho6 9 6ill rea8t to some uture eve!t7 =abit is a eature o the orga!ismIs
e8o!omiUi!g o its or8es- o buildi!g up a reserve or the uture7 That is to say- i! its habits-
subje8tivity Jembra8es i! itsel its uture 6ays o bei!g- the 6ays it 6ill be8ome a8tual7K
(0
This mea!s
that habit also 8ompli8ates the relatio!ship bet6ee! possibility a!d a8tuality+ it is stricto sensu the
actuality of a possibility7 This mea!s is that habit belo!gs to the level o virtuality @dei!ed by GeleuUe
pre8isely as the a8tuality o the possibleA+ habit is a8tual- a 8apa8ity to rea8t i! a 8ertai! 6ay that 9 ully
possess here a!d !o6- a!d simulta!eously a possibility poi!ti!g to6ards my rea8ti!g a 8ertai! 6ay i!
the uture7
9!teresti!g 8o!8eptual 8o!seNue!8es ollo6 rom this !otio! o habit7 H!tologi8ally- 6ith
regard to the oppositio! bet6ee! parti8ular a88ide!ts a!d u!iversal esse!8e- habit 8a! be des8ribed as
the Jbe8omi!g:esse!tial o the a88ide!tK+
(1
o!8e a! e?ter!ally 8aused a88ide!t has bee! repeated
e!ough times- it is elevated i!to the u!iversality o the subje8tIs i!!er dispositio!- i!to a eature that
belo!gs to a!d dei!es its i!!er esse!8e7 This is 6hy 6e 8a! !ever determi!e the pre8ise begi!!i!g o a
habit- the poi!t at 6hi8h e?ter!al o88urre!8es 8ha!ge i!to habitEo!8e a habit has bee! ormed- its
origi!s are obliterated a!d it appears as i it 6as al6ays already there7 The 8o!8lusio! is thus 8lear-
almost Sartrea!+ ma! has !o perma!e!t substa!8e or u!iversal esse!8eT he is to his very 8ore a 8reature
o habit- a bei!g 6hose ide!tity is ormed through the elevatio! o 8o!ti!ge!t e?ter!al a88ide!ts or
e!8ou!ters i!to a! i!ter!al@iUedA u!iversal habit7 Goes this mea! that o!ly huma!s have habitsM =ere-
=egel is mu8h more radi8alEhe takes a de8isive urther step a!d leaves behi!d the old oppositio! o
!ature as ully determi!ed i! its 8losed 8ir8ular moveme!t versus ma! as a bei!g o ope!!ess a!d
e?iste!tial reedom+ Jor =egel- !ature is al6ays second natureFK
(2
0very !atural orga!ism has to
regulate its e?8ha!ge 6ith its e!viro!me!t- the assimilatio! o the e!viro!me!t i!to itsel- through
habitual pro8edures 6hi8h Jrele8tK i!to the orga!ism- as its i!!er dispositio!s- its e?ter!al i!tera8tio!s7
3e8ause o the virtual status o habits- adopti!g a @!e6A habit is !ot simply a matter o 8ha!gi!g
a! a8tual property o the subje8tT rather- it i!volves a ki!d o rele?ivity- a 8ha!ge i! the subje8tIs
dispositio! 6hi8h determi!es his rea8tio! to 8ha!ges- a 8ha!ge i! the ki!d o 8ha!ges to 6hi8h the
subje8t is submitted+ J=abit does !ot simply i!trodu8e mutability i!to somethi!g that 6ould other6ise
8o!ti!ue 6ithout 8ha!gi!gT it suggests 8ha!ge 6ithi! a dispositio!- 6ithi! its pote!tiality- 6ithi! the
i!ter!al 8hara8ter o that i! 6hi8h the 8ha!ge o88urs- 6hi8h does !ot 8ha!ge7K
("
This is 6hat =egel
mea!s by sel:diere!tiatio! as the Jsublatio!K o e?ter!ally imposed 8ha!ges i!to sel:8ha!ges- o
e?ter!al i!to i!ter!al diere!8eEo!ly orga!i8 bodies diere!tiate themselves+ a! orga!i8 body
mai!tai!s its u!ity by i!ter!aliUi!g a! e?ter!ally imposed 8ha!ge i!to a habit to deal 6ith uture su8h
8ha!ges7
9 this is the 8ase- ho6ever- i the 6hole o @orga!i8- at leastA !ature is already se8o!d !ature- i!
6hat does the diere!8e bet6ee! a!imal a!d huma! habits 8o!sistM =egelIs most provo8ative a!d
u!e?pe8ted 8o!tributio! 8o!8er!s this very Nuestio! o the ge!esis o human habits+ i! his
+nthropology @6hi8h ope!s the )hilosophy of SpiritA 6e i!d a u!iNue Jge!ealogy o habitsK
remi!is8e!t o 4ietUs8he7 This part o the )hilosophy of Spirit is o!e o the hidde!- !ot yet ully
e?ploited- treasures o the =egelia! system- 6here 6e i!d the 8learest tra8es o 6hat o!e 8a! o!ly 8all
the diale8ti8al:materialist aspe8t o =egel+ the passage rom !ature to @huma!A spirit is developed here
!ot as a dire8t e?ter!al i!terve!tio! o Spirit- as the i!terve!tio! o a!other dime!sio! disturbi!g the
bala!8e o the !atural 8ir8uit- but as the result o a lo!g a!d tortuous J6orki!g throughK by mea!s o
6hi8h i!tellige!8e @embodied i! la!guageA emerges rom !atural te!sio!s a!d a!tago!isms7 This
passage is !ot dire8t- or Spirit @i! the guise o spee8h:mediated huma! i!tellige!8eA does !ot dire8tly
8o!ro!t a!d domi!ate biologi8al pro8essesESpiritIs Jmaterial baseK orever remai!s pre:symboli8
@pre:li!guisti8A habit7
So ho6 does habit itsel ariseM 9! his ge!ealogy- =egel 8o!8eives habit as the third- 8o!8ludi!g-
mome!t o the diale8ti8al pro8ess o the Soul- 6hose stru8ture ollo6s the triad o !otio!Xjudgme!tX
syllogism7 At the begi!!i!g- there is Soul i! its immediate u!ity- i! its simple !otio!- the Jeeli!g
soulK+ J9! the se!satio!s 6hi8h arise rom the i!dividualIs e!8ou!ter 6ith e?ter!al obje8ts- the soul
begi!s to a6ake! itsel7K
((
The Sel is here a mere Jse!tie!t Sel-K !ot yet a subje8t opposed to obje8ts-
but just e?perie!8i!g a se!satio! i! 6hi8h the t6o sides- subje8t a!d obje8t- are immediately u!ited+
6he! 9 e?perie!8e a se!satio! o tou8h- it is simulta!eously the tra8e o the e?ter!al obje8t 9 am
tou8hi!g a!d my i!!er rea8tio! to itT se!satio! is a 2a!us:a8ed e!tity i! 6hi8h subje8tive a!d obje8tive
immediately 8oi!8ide7 0ve! i! later stages o the i!dividualIs developme!t- this Jse!tie!t SelK
survives i! the guise o 6hat =egel 8alls a Jmagi8al relatio!ship-K reerri!g to phe!ome!a that- i!
=egelIs times- 6ere desig!ated 6ith terms like Jmag!eti8 som!ambulismK @hyp!osisA- all the
phe!ome!a i! 6hi8h my Soul is dire8tlyEi! a pre:rele?ive- !o!:thi!ki!g 6ayEli!ked to e?ter!al
pro8esses a!d ae8ted by them7 9!stead o bodies i!lue!8i!g ea8h other at a dista!8e @4e6to!ia!
gravityA- 6e have spirits i!lue!8i!g ea8h other at a dista!8e7 =ere- the Soul remai!s at the lo6est level
o its u!8tio!i!g- dire8tly immersed i! its e!viro!me!t7 @/hat Freud 8alled Jo8ea!i8 eeli!g-K the
sour8e o religious e?perie!8e- is thus or =egel a eature o the lo6est level o the Soul7A /hat the
Soul la8ks here is a 8lear sel:eeli!g- a eeli!g o itsel as disti!guished rom e?ter!al reality- 6hi8h is
6hat happe!s i! the !e?t mome!t- that o judgme!t @3rteilE=egel here mobiliUes the 6ord:play o
3rteil 6ith 3r*-eil- Jprimordial divide>divisio!KA+

The se!sitive totality is- i! its 8apa8ity as a! i!dividual- esse!tially the te!de!8y to disti!guish itsel i!
itsel- a!d to 6ake up to the 1udgment in itself- i! virtue o 6hi8h it has particular eeli!gs a!d sta!ds as
a sub1ect i! respe8t o these aspe8ts o itsel7 The subje8t as su8h gives these eeli!gs a pla8e as its own
i! itsel7
(#
All problems arise rom this parado?i8al short:8ir8uit o the eeli!g o Sel be8omi!g a spe8ii8
eeli!g amo!g others- a!d- simulta!eously- the e!8ompassi!g 8o!tai!er o all eeli!gs- the site 6here
all dispersed eeli!gs 8a! be brought together7 ,alabou provides a 6o!derully pre8ise ormulatio! o
this parado? o the eeli!g o Sel+

0ve! i there is a possibility o bri!gi!g together eeli!gIs ma!iold material- that possibility itsel
be8omes part o the obje8tive 8o!te!t7 The orm !eeds to be the 8o!te!t o all that it orms+ subje8tivity
does !ot reside i! its o6! bei!g- it Jhau!tsK itsel7 The soul is possessed by the possessio! o itsel7
('
This is the 8ru8ial eature+ possibility itsel has to a8tualiUe itsel- to be8ome a a8tT or- the orm
!eeds to be8ome part o its o6! 8o!te!t @or- to add a urther variatio! o! the same moti- the rame
itsel has to be8ome part o the ramed 8o!te!tA7 The subje8t is the rame>orm>horiUo! o his 6orld and
part o the ramed 8o!te!t @o the reality it observesA- a!d the problem is that it 8a!!ot see or lo8ate
itsel 6ithi! its o6! rame+ si!8e all there is is already 6ithi! the rame- the rame as su8h is i!visible7
The possibility o lo8ati!g o!esel 6ithi! o!eIs reality has to remai! a possibilityEho6ever- a!d
herei! lies the 8ru8ial poi!t- this possibility itsel has to a8tualiUe itsel <ua possibility- to be a8tive- to
e?ert i!lue!8e- <ua possibility7
There is a li!k to *a!t here- to the old e!igma o 6hat e?a8tly *a!t had i! mi!d 6ith his !otio!
o Jtra!s8e!de!tal apper8eptio!-K o sel:8o!s8ious!ess a88ompa!yi!g every a8t o my 8o!s8ious!ess
@6he! 9 am 8o!s8ious o somethi!g- 9 am thereby al6ays also 8o!s8ious o the a8t that 9 am 8o!s8ious
o itA7 9s it !ot a! obvious a8t that this is empiri8ally !ot true- that 9 am !ot al6ays rele?ively a6are o
my a6are!ess itselM 9!terpreters o *a!t try to resolve this problem by 8laimi!g that every 8o!s8ious
a8t o mi!e 8a! pote!tially be re!dered sel:8o!s8ious+ i 9 6a!t to- 9 al6ays 8a! tur! my atte!tio! to
6hat 9 am doi!g7 3ut this is !ot stro!g e!ough+ tra!s8e!de!tal apper8eptio! 8a!!ot be a! a8t that !ever
!eed a8tually happe!- that just 8ould have happe!ed at a!y poi!t7 The solutio! to this dilemma lies
pre8isely i! the !otio! o virtuality i! the stri8t GeleuUia! se!se- as the a8tuality o the possible- as a
parado?i8al e!tity the very possibility o 6hi8h already produ8es or has a8tual ee8ts7 9s !ot this
Virtual ultimately the symboli8 as su8hM Take symboli8 authority+ i! order to u!8tio! as a! ee8tive
authority- it has to remai! !ot:ully:a8tualiUed- a! eter!al threat7
This- the!- is the status o the Sel+ its sel:a6are!ess is- as it 6ere- the a8tuality o its o6!
possibility7 Do!seNue!tly- 6hat Jhau!tsK the subje8t is his i!a88essible !oume!al Sel- the JThi!g that
thi!ks-K a! obje8t i! 6hi8h the subje8t 6ould ully Je!8ou!ter himsel7K
($
H 8ourse- or *a!t- the
same goes or every obje8t o my e?perie!8e 6hi8h is al6ays phe!ome!al- that is i!a88essible i! its
!oume!al dime!sio!T ho6ever- 6ith the Sel- the impasse is a88e!tuated+ all other obje8ts o
e?perie!8e are give! to me phe!ome!ally- but- i! the 8ase o the subje8t- 9 8a!!ot eve! get a
phe!ome!al e?perie!8e o meEsi!8e 9 am deali!g 6ith Jmysel-K i! this u!iNue 8ase- phe!ome!al sel:
e?perie!8e 6ould eNual !oume!al a88essT that is- i 9 6ere to be able to e?perie!8e JmyselK as a
phe!ome!al obje8t- 9 6ould thereby eo ipso e?perie!8e mysel i! my !oume!al ide!tity- as a Thi!g7
The u!derlyi!g problem here is the impossibility o the subje8tIs obje8tiviUi!g himsel+ the
subje8t is si!gular and the u!iversal rame o Jhis 6orld-K or every 8o!te!t he per8eives is Jhis o6!KT
so ho6 8a! the subje8t i!8lude himsel @8ou!t himselA i! the series o his obje8tsM The subje8t
observes reality rom a! e?ter!al positio! a!d is simulta!eously part o this reality- 6ithout ever bei!g
able to attai! a! Jobje8tiveK vie6 o reality 6ith himsel i!8luded it7 The Thi!g that hau!ts the subje8t
is himself i! his obje8tal 8ou!terpoi!t- Nua obje8t7 =egel 6rites+ JThe subje8t i!ds itsel i!
8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the totality systematiUed i! its 8o!s8ious!ess- a!d the parti8ular determi!atio!
6hi8h- i! itsel- is !ot luid a!d is !ot redu8ed to its proper pla8e a!d ra!k7 This is me!tal dera!geme!t
[6errVc"theit\7K
(&
This has to be read i! a very pre8ise 6ay7 =egelIs poi!t is !ot simply that mad!ess
sig!als a short:8ir8uit bet6ee! totality a!d o!e o its parti8ular mome!ts- a Ji?atio!K o totality i! this
mome!t o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h the totality is deprived o its diale8ti8al luidityEalthough some o his
ormulatio!s may appear to poi!t i! this dire8tio!7
(%
The Jparti8ular determi!atio! 6hi8h- i! itsel- is
!ot luidK a!d resists bei!g Jredu8ed to its proper pla8e a!d ra!kK is the sub1ect himself- or- more
pre8isely- the eature @sig!iierA that re:prese!ts him @holds his pla8eA 6ithi! the stru8tured
@JsystematiUedKA totalityT a!d si!8e the subje8t 8a!!ot ever obje8tiviUe himsel- the J8o!tradi8tio!K here
is absolute7
#0
/ith this gap- the possibility o mad!ess emergesEa!d- as =egel puts it i! proto:
Fou8auldia! terms- mad!ess is !ot a! a88ide!tal lapse- a distortio!- or a! Jill!essK o huma! spirit- but
is i!s8ribed i!to a! i!dividual spiritIs basi8 o!tologi8al 8o!stitutio!- or to be huma! mea!s to be
pote!tially mad+

This i!terpretatio! o i!sa!ity as a !e8essarily o88urri!g orm or stage i! the developme!t o the soul is
!aturally !ot to be u!derstood as i 6e 6ere asserti!g that every mi!d- every soul- must go through this
stage o e?treme dera!geme!t7 Su8h a! assertio! 6ould be as absurd as to assume that be8ause i! the
Chilosophy o Fight 8rime is 8o!sidered as a !e8essary ma!iestatio! o the huma! 6ill- thereore to
8ommit 8rime is a! i!evitable !e8essity or every i!dividual7 Drime a!d i!sa!ity are e&tremes 6hi8h the
huma! mi!d in general has to over8ome i! the 8ourse o its developme!t7
#1
Although !ot a a8tual !e8essity- mad!ess is a ormal possibility 8o!stitutive o huma! mi!d+ it
is somethi!g 6hose threat has to be over8ome i 6e are to emerge as J!ormalK subje8ts- 6hi8h mea!s
that J!ormalityK 8a! o!ly arise as the over8omi!g o this threat7 This is 6hy- as =egel puts it a 8ouple
o pages later- Ji!sa!ity must be dis8ussed beore the healthy- i!telle8tual 8o!s8ious!ess- although it
has that 8o!s8ious!ess or its presupposition7K
#2
=egel here evokes the relatio!ship bet6ee! the
abstra8t a!d the 8o!8rete+ although- i! the empiri8al state o thi!gs- abstra8t determi!atio!s are al6ays
already embedded i! a 8o!8rete /hole as their presuppositio!- the !otio!al reprodu8tio! or dedu8tio!
o this /hole has to progress rom the abstra8t to the 8o!8rete+ 8rimes presuppose the rule o la6- they
8a! o!ly o88ur as their violatio!- but must be !o!etheless grasped as a! abstra8t a8t that is JsublatedK
through the la6T abstra8t legal relatio!s a!d morality are de facto al6ays embedded i! some 8o!8rete
totality o Dustoms- but- !o!etheless- the Chilosophy o Fight has to progress rom the abstra8t
mome!ts o legality a!d morality to the 8o!8rete /hole o Dustoms @amily- 8ivil so8iety- stateA7 The
i!teresti!g poi!t here is !ot o!ly the parallel bet6ee! mad!ess a!d 8rime- but the a8t that mad!ess is
lo8ated i! a spa8e ope!ed up by the dis8ord bet6ee! a8tual histori8al developme!t a!d its 8o!8eptual
re!deri!g- that is- i! a spa8e 6hi8h u!dermi!es the vulgar:evolutio!ist !otio! o diale8ti8al
developme!t as a 8o!8eptual reprodu8tio! o a8tual histori8al developme!t 6hi8h puriies the latter o
its i!sig!ii8a!t empiri8al 8o!ti!ge!8ies7 9!soar as mad!ess de facto presupposes !ormality 6hile
8o!8eptually pre8edi!g it- o!e 8a! say that the Jmadma!K is pre8isely a subje8t 6ho 6a!ts to
JliveKEto reprodu8e i! a8tuality itselEthe 8o!8eptual order- to a8t as i mad!ess also effectively
pre8edes !ormality7
/e 8a! !o6 see i! 6hat pre8ise se!se habits orm the third- 8o!8ludi!g- mome!t o the triad- its
JsyllogismK+ in a habit! the sub1ect finds a way to %possess itself!' to stabiliUe its o6! i!!er 8o!te!t i!
Jhavi!gK as its property a habit- !ot a positive a8tual eature- but a virtual e!tity- a u!iversal dispositio!
to @reAa8t i! a 8ertai! 6ay7 =abit a!d mad!ess are thus to be thought together+ habit is a 6ay o
stabiliUi!g the imbala!8e o mad!ess7 A!other 6ay to approa8h the topi8 is via the relatio!ship bet6ee!
soul a!d body as the 9!!er a!d the Huter- as a 8ir8ular relatio!ship i! 6hi8h body e?presses the soul
a!d the soul re8eives impressio!s rom the bodyEthe soul is al6ays already embodied a!d the body
al6ays already impreg!ated 6ith its soul+

/hat the se!tie!t sel i!ds 6ithi! it is- o! the o!e ha!d- the !aturally immediate- as JideallyK i! it a!d
made its o6!7 H! the other ha!d a!d 8o!versely- 6hat origi!ally belo!gs to the 8e!tral i!dividuality O
is determi!ed as !atural 8orporeity- a!d is so elt7
#"
So- o! the o!e ha!d- through eeli!gs a!d per8eptio!s- 9 i!ter!aliUe obje8ts that ae8t me rom
outside+ i! a eeli!g- they are prese!t i! me !ot i! their ra6 reality- but Jideally-K as part o my mi!d7
H! the other ha!d- through grima8es- et87- my body immediately Jgives bodyK to my i!!er soul 6hi8h
thoroughly impreg!ates it7 =o6ever- i this 6ere the e!tire truth- the! ma! 6ould have bee! simply a
Jpriso!er o this state o !ature-K
#(
movi!g i! the 8losed loop o absolute tra!spare!8y provided by the
mutual mirrori!g o body a!d soul7
##
/hat happe!s 6ith the mome!t o Jjudgme!tK is that the loop o
this 8losed 8ir8le is broke!E!ot by the i!trusio! o a! e?ter!al eleme!t- but by a sel:reere!tiality
6hi8h t6ists this 8ir8le i!to itsel7 9! other 6ords- the problem is that- Jsi!8e the i!dividual is at the
same time o!ly 6hat he has do!e- his body is also the e?pressio! o himsel 6hi8h he has himsel
produ8ed7K
#'
This mea!s that the pro8ess o 8orporeal sel:e?pressio! has !o pre:e?isti!g reere!t as
its moori!g poi!t+ the e!tire moveme!t is thoroughly sel:reere!tial- it is o!ly through the pro8ess o
Je?pressio!K @e?ter!aliUatio! i! bodily sig!sA that the e?pressed 9!!er Sel @the 8o!te!t o these sig!sA
is retroa8tively 8reatedEor- as ,alabou puts it 8o!8isely+ JCsy8hosomati8 u!ity results rom a! auto:
i!terpretatio! i!depe!de!t o a!y reere!t7K
#$
The tra!spare!t mirrori!g o the soul a!d the body i! the
!atural e?pressivity thus tur!s i!to total opa8ity+

9 a 6ork sig!iies itsel- this implies that there is !o JoutsideK o the 6ork- that the 6ork a8ts as its
o6! reere!t+ it prese!ts 6hat it i!terprets at the same mome!t it i!terprets it- ormi!g o!e a!d the same
ma!iestatio! O The spiritual besto6s orm- but o!ly be8ause it is itsel ormed i! retur!7
#&
/hat this Jla8k o a!y o!tologi8al guara!tee outside the play o sig!ii8atio!K
#%
mea!s is that
the mea!i!g o our gestures a!d spee8h a8ts is al6ays hau!ted by the spirit o iro!y+ 6he! 9 say A- it is
al6ays possible that 9 do it i! order to 8o!8eal the a8t that 9 am !o!:AE=egel reers to .i8hte!bergIs
6ell:k!o6! aphorism+ J5ou 8ertai!ly a8t like a! ho!est ma!- but 9 see rom your a8e that you are
or8i!g yoursel to do so a!d are a rogue at heart7K
'0
The ambiguity is here total a!d u!de8idable-
be8ause the de8eptio! is the o!e that .a8a! desig!ates as spe8ii8ally huma!- !amely the possibility o
lyi!g i! the guise o truth7 /hi8h is 6hy it goes eve! urther tha! the Nuote rom .i8hte!bergEthe
reproa8h should rather be+ J5ou a8t like a! ho!est ma! i! order to 8o!vi!8e us that you mea! it
iro!i8ally- a!d thus to 8o!8eal rom us the a8t that you really are a! ho!est ma!RK This is 6hat =egel
mea!s i! his pre8ise 8laim that- Jor the i!dividuality- it is as mu8h its 8ou!te!a!8e as its mask 6hi8h it
8a! lay asideK+
'1
i! the gap bet6ee! appeara!8e @maskA a!d my true i!!er sta!8e- the truth 8a! be
either i! my i!!er sta!8e or i! my mask7 This mea!s that the emotio!s 9 perorm through the mask @the
alse perso!aA 9 adopt 8a! i! a stra!ge 6ay be more authe!ti8 a!d truthul tha! 6hat 9 really eel i!
mysel7 /he! 9 8o!stru8t a alse image o mysel 6hi8h sta!ds i! or me i! a virtual 8ommu!ity i!
6hi8h 9 parti8ipate @i! virtual se?ual i!tera8tio!- or e?ample- a shy ma! ote! assumes the s8ree!
perso!a o a! attra8tive- promis8uous 6oma!A- the emotio!s 9 eel a!d eig! as part o my s8ree!
perso!a are !ot simply alse+ although @6hat 9 thi!k o asA my true sel does !ot eel them- they are
!o!etheless i! a se!se Jtrue7K For e?ample- 6hat i- deep i!side- 9 am a sadisti8 pervert 6ho dreams o
beati!g up other me! a!d rapi!g 6ome!T i! my real:lie i!tera8tio! 6ith other people- 9 am !ot allo6ed
to e!a8t this true sel- so 9 adopt a more humble a!d polite perso!aEi! this 8ase- is !ot my true sel
mu8h 8loser to 6hat 9 adopt as a i8tio!al s8ree! perso!a- 6hile the sel o my real:lie i!tera8tio!s is a
mask 8o!8eali!g the viole!8e o my true selM
=abit provides the 6ay out o this predi8ame!t7 =o6M 4ot as the subje8tIs Jtrue e?pressio!-K
but by lo8ati!g the truth i! Jmi!dlessK e?pressio!Ere8all =egelIs 8o!sta!t moti that truth is i! 6hat
you say- !ot i! 6hat you mean to say7 Do!sider agai! the e!igmati8 status o 6hat 6e 8all Jpolite!essK+
6he!- upo! meeti!g a! a8Nuai!ta!8e- 9 say- J1lad to see youR =o6 are you todayMK it is 8lear to both
o us that- i! a 6ay- 9 Jdo !ot mea! it seriously7K
'2
=o6ever- it 6ould !o!etheless be 6ro!g to label
my a8t as simply Jhypo8riti8al-K si!8e- i! a!other 6ay- 9 do mea! it+ the polite e?8ha!ge does establish
a ki!d o pa8t bet6ee! the t6o o usT i! the same se!se as 9 do Jsi!8erelyK laugh through the 8a!!ed
laughter @the proo bei!g that 9 ee8tively do Jeel relievedK ater6ardsA7 This bri!gs us to o!e possible
dei!itio! o a madma!- as a subje8t u!able to parti8ipate i! this logi8 o Jsi!8ere lies-K so that 6he! a
rie!d greets him 6ith J4i8e to see youR =o6 are youMK he e?plodes+ JAre you really glad to see me or
are you just prete!di!gM A!d 6ho gave you the right to probe i!to my stateMK
The same overlappi!g o appeara!8e 6ith truth is ote! at 6ork i! ideologi8al sel:per8eptio!7
Fe8all ,ar?Is brillia!t a!alysis o ho6- i! the Fre!8h revolutio! o 1&(&- the 8o!servative:republi8a!
Carty o Hrder u!8tio!ed as a 8oalitio! o the t6o bra!8hes o royalism @Hrlea!ists a!d .egitimistsA i!
the Ja!o!ymous ki!gdom o the Fepubli87K
'"
The parliame!tary deputies o the Carty o Hrder sa6
their republi8a!ism as a mo8kery+ i! parliame!tary debates- they reNue!tly made royalist slips o the
to!gue a!d ridi8uled the Fepubli8 to let it be k!o6! that their true aim 6as to restore the mo!ar8hy7
/hat they 6ere !ot a6are o 6as that they themselves 6ere duped as to the true so8ial impa8t o their
rule7 /hat they 6ere ee8tively doi!g 6as establishi!g the 8o!ditio!s o the bourgeois republi8a!
order they despised so mu8h @by- or i!sta!8e- guara!teei!g the saety o private propertyA7 So it is !ot
that they 6ere just royalists 6eari!g a republi8a! mask+ although they e?perie!8ed themselves as su8h-
it 6as their very Ji!!erK royalist 8o!vi8tio! that 6as the de8eptive ro!t maski!g their true so8ial role7
9! short- ar rom bei!g the hidde! truth o their publi8 republi8a!ism- their si!8ere royalism 6as the
a!tasmati8 support o their a8tual republi8a!ismEit 6as 6hat added the passio! to their a8tivity7 9s it
!ot the 8ase- the!- that the deputies o the Carty o Hrder 6ere also feigning to feign to be republi8a!s-
to be 6hat they really 6ereM
=egelIs radi8al 8o!8lusio! is that the sig! 6ith 6hi8h 6e are deali!g here- i! 8orporeal
e?pressio!s- Ji! truth sig!iies !othi!gK @in Wahrheit nicht be2eichnetA7
'(
=abit is thus a stra!ge sig!
6hi8h Jsig!iies the a8t that it sig!iies !othi!g7K
'#
/hat =Zlderli! proposed as the ormula or our
destitute predi8ame!tEor a! era i! 6hi8h- be8ause the gods have aba!do!ed us- 6e are Jsig!s 6ithout
mea!i!gKEa8Nuires here a! u!e?pe8ted positive i!terpretatio!7 A!d 6e should take =egelIs ormula
literally+ the J!othi!gK i! it has a positive 6eightT that is- the sig! 6hi8h Ji! truth sig!iies !othi!gK is
6hat .a8a! 8alls the signifier- that 6hi8h represe!ts the subje8t or a!other sig!iier7 The J!othi!gK is
the void o the subje8t itsel- so that the abse!8e o a! ultimate reere!8e mea!s that abse!8e itsel is the
ultimate reere!8e- a!d this abse!8e is the subje8t itsel7 This is 6hy ,alabou 6rites+ JSpirit is !ot that
6hi8h is e?pressed by its e?pressio!sT it is that 6hi8h origi!ally terriies spirit7K
''
The dime!sio! o
hau!ti!g- the li!k bet6ee! spirit Nua the light o Feaso! a!d spirit Nua obs8e!e ghost- is 8ru8ial here+
spirit or Feaso! is- by a stru8tural !e8essity- orever hau!ted by the obs8e!e apparitio!s o its o6!
spirit7

The huma! bei!g is this !ight- this empty !othi!g- that 8o!tai!s everythi!g i! its simpli8ityEa!
u!e!di!g 6ealth o ma!y represe!tatio!s- images- o 6hi8h !o!e belo!gs to himEor 6hi8h are !ot
prese!t7 This !ight- the i!terior o !ature- that e?ists hereEpure selEi! pha!tasmagori8al
represe!tatio!s- is !ight all arou!d it- i! 6hi8h here shoots a bloody headEthere a!other 6hite ghastly
apparitio!- sudde!ly here beore it- a!d just so disappears7 H!e 8at8hes sight o this !ight 6he! o!e
looks huma! bei!gs i! the eyeEi!to a !ight that be8omes a6ul7
'$
Agai!- o!e should !ot be bli!ded by the poeti8 po6er o this des8riptio!- but read it pre8isely7
The irst thi!g to !ote is ho6 the obje8ts 6hi8h reely loat arou!d i! this J!ight o the 6orldK are
membra dis1ecta- partial obje8ts- obje8ts deta8hed rom their orga!i8 /holeEis there !ot a stra!ge
e8ho bet6ee! this passage a!d =egelIs des8riptio! o the !egative po6er o )!dersta!di!g 6hi8h is
able to abstra8t a! e!tity @a pro8ess- a propertyA rom its substa!tial 8o!te?t a!d treat it as i it has a!
e?iste!8e o its o6!M JThat a! a88ide!t as su8h- deta8hed rom 6hat 8ir8ums8ribes it- 6hat is bou!d
a!d is a8tual o!ly i! its 8o!te?t 6ith others- should attai! a! e?iste!8e o its o6! a!d a separate
reedomEthis is the treme!dous po6er o the !egative7K
'&
9t is thus as i- i! the ghastly s8e!ery o the
J!ight o the 6orld-K 6e e!8ou!ter somethi!g like the power of 3nderstanding in its natural state-
spirit i! the guise o a proto*spiritEthis- perhaps- is the most pre8ise dei!itio! o horror+ 6he! a
higher state o developme!t viole!tly i!s8ribes itsel i! the lo6er state- i! its grou!d>presuppositio!-
6here it 8a!!ot but appear as a mo!strous mess- a disi!tegratio! o order- a terriyi!g u!!atural
8ombi!atio! o !atural eleme!ts7
9! the 8o!te?t o 8o!temporary s8ie!8e- 6e e!8ou!ter this horror at its purest 6he! ge!eti8
ma!ipulatio!s go a6ry a!d ge!erate obje8ts !ever see! i! !ature- reaks like goats 6ith a giga!ti8 ear
i!stead o a head or a head 6ith o!e eye- mea!i!gless a88ide!ts 6hi8h !o!etheless tou8h our deeply
repressed a!tasies a!d thus trigger 6ild i!terpretatio!s7 The pure Sel as the Ji!!er o !atureK
'%
sta!ds
or this parado?i8al short:8ir8uit o the super!atural @spiritualA i! its !atural state7 /hy does it o88urM
The o!ly 8o!siste!t a!s6er is a materialist o!e+ because spirit is part of nature- a!d 8a! o88ur or arise
o!ly through a mo!strous sel:li8tio! @distortio!- derangementA o !ature7 Therei! lies the parado?i8al
materialist edge o 8heap spiritualism+ it is pre8isely be8ause spirit is part o !ature- be8ause spirit does
!ot i!terve!e i!to !atureE6hi8h is already 8o!stituted- ready:made some6here elseEbut has to
emerge out o !ature through its dera!geme!t- that there is !o spirit @Feaso!A 6ithout spirits @obs8e!e
ghostsA- that spirit is orever hau!ted by spirits7
9t is rom this sta!dpoi!t that 6e should @reAread SartreIs deservedly amous des8riptio! i!
/eing and othingness o the 8aL 6aiter 6ho- 6ith a! e?aggerated theatri8ality- perorms the 8li8hLd
gestures o a 6aiter a!d thus Jplays at bei!g a 6aiter i! a 8aLK+

=is moveme!t is Nui8k a!d or6ard- a little too pre8ise- a little too rapid7 =e 8omes to6ard the patro!s
6ith a step a little too Nui8k7 =e be!ds or6ard a little too eagerlyT his voi8e- his eyes e?press a!
i!terest a little too soli8itous or the order o the 8ustomer7 Fi!ally there he retur!s- tryi!g to imitate i!
his 6alk the i!le?ible sti!ess o some ki!d o automato! O
$0
Goes !ot SartreIs u!derlyi!g o!tologi8al thesisEthat Jthe 6aiter i! the 8aL 8a! !ot be
immediately a 8aL 6aiter i! the se!se that this i!k6ell is a! i!k6ellKEpoi!t or6ard to6ards .a8a!Is
8lassi8 thesis that a madma! is !ot o!ly a beggar 6ho thi!ks he is a ki!g- but also a ki!g 6ho thi!ks he
is a ki!gM /e should be very pre8ise i! this readi!g+ as Fobert 3er!as8o!i !otes i! his 8omme!tary-
there is mu8h more to SartreIs thesis tha! a simple poi!t about mauvaise foi a!d sel:obje8tiviUatio! @i!
order to 8over upEor es8ape romEthe void o his reedom- a subje8t 8li!gs to a irm symboli8
ide!tityAT 6hat Sartre does is sho6 ho6- through the very e?aggeratio! o his gestures- through his very
over:ide!tii8atio! 6ith the role- the 6aiter i! Nuestio! sig!als his dista!8e rom it a!d thus asserts his
subje8tivity7 True- this Fre!8h 6aiter

plays at bei!g a 6aiter by a8ti!g like a! automato!- just as the role o a 6aiter i! the )!ited States- by a
stra!ge i!versio!- is to play at a8ti!g like o!eIs rie!d7 =o6ever- SartreIs poi!t is that- 6hatever game
the 6aiter is 8alled upo! to play- the ultimate rule that the 6aiter ollo6s is that he must break the rules-
a!d to do so by ollo6i!g them i! a! e?aggerated ma!!er7 That is to say- the 6aiter does !ot simply
ollo6 the u!6ritte! rules- 6hi8h 6ould be obedie!8e to a 8ertai! ki!d o tyra!!y- but- i!stead- goes
overboard i! ollo6i!g those rules7 The 6aiter su88eeds i! reje8ti!g the attempt to redu8e him to
!othi!g more tha! bei!g a 6aiter- !ot by reusi!g the role- but by highlighti!g the a8t that he is
playi!g it to the poi!t that he es8apes it7 The 6aiter does this by overdoi!g thi!gs- by doi!g too mu8h7
The Fre!8h 6aiter- i!stead o disappeari!g i!to the role- e?aggerates the moveme!ts that make him
somethi!g o a! automato! i! a 6ay that dra6s atte!tio! to him- just as- 6e 8a! add- the Nui!tesse!tial
4orth Ameri8a! 6aiter is !ot so mu8h rie!dly as overrie!dly7 Sartre uses the same 6ord- trop- that 6e
sa6 him usi!g i! ausea to e?press this huma! superluity7
$1
A!d it is 8ru8ial to suppleme!t this des8riptio! 6ith its symmetri8al opposite+ o!e is truly
ide!tiied 6ith o!eIs role pre8isely 6he! o!e does !ot Jover:ide!tiyK 6ith it- but a88ompa!ies o!eIs
role:playi!g- ollo6i!g the rules- 6ith small violatio!s or idiosy!8rasies desig!ed to sig!al that-
be!eath the role- there is a real perso! 6ho 8a!!ot be dire8tly ide!tiied 6ith it or redu8ed to it7 9! other
6ords- it is totally 6ro!g to read the 6aiterIs behavior as a 8ase o mauvaise foi+ his e?aggerated a8t
ope!s up- i! a !egative 6ay- the spa8e or his authe!ti8 sel- si!8e its message is J9 am !ot 6hat 9 am
playi!g at bei!g7K True mauvaise foi 8o!sists pre8isely i! embellishi!g my playi!g a role 6ith
idiosy!8rati8 detailsEit is this Jperso!al tou8hK 6hi8h provides the spa8e or alse reedom- allo6i!g
me to a88ommodate mysel to my sel:obje8tiviUatio! i! the role 9 am playi!g7 @So 6hat about those
rare a!d 6eird mome!ts i! a! Ameri8a! 8aeteria 6he! 6e sudde!ly suspe8t that the 6aiterIs
rie!dli!ess is ge!ui!eMA
$2
This bri!gs us ba8k to our origi!al Nuestio!+ i! 6hat does the diere!8e bet6ee! a!imal a!d
huma! habits 8o!sistM H!ly huma!s- spiritual bei!gs- are hau!ted by spiritsE6hyM 4ot simply
be8ause- i! 8o!trast to a!imals- they have a88ess to u!iversality- but be8ause this u!iversality is or
them simultaneously necessary and impossibleT that is- it is a problem7 9! other 6ords- 6hile or huma!
subje8ts the pla8e o u!iversality is pres8ribed- it has to remai! empty- it 8a! !ever be illed i! 6ith its
JproperK 8o!te!t7 The spe8ii8ity o ma! thus 8o!8er!s the relatio!ship bet6ee! u!iversal esse!8e a!d
its a88ide!ts+ or a!imals- a88ide!ts remai! mere a88ide!tsT o!ly the huma! bei!g posits u!iversality as
su8h- relates to it- a!d 8a! thereore rele8tively elevate a88ide!ts i!to u!iversal esse!8e7 -his is why
ma! is a Jge!eri8 bei!gK @,ar?A+ to paraphrase =eideggerIs dei!itio! o Dasein- ma! is a bei!g or
6hi8h its ge!us is or itsel a problem+ J,a! 8a! Vprese!t the ge!usI to the degree that habit is the
u!oresee! eleme!t o the ge!us7K
$"
This ormulatio! ope!s up a! u!e?pe8ted li!k to the !otio! o hegemony as developed by
0r!esto .a8lau+ there is orever a gap bet6ee! the u!iversality o ma!Is ge!us a!d the parti8ular habits
6hi8h ill i! its voidT habits are al6ays Ju!e?pe8ted-K 8o!ti!ge!t- a88ide!ts elevated to u!iversal
!e8essity7 The predomi!a!8e o o!e or a!other habit is the result o a struggle or hegemo!y- a struggle
over 6hi8h a88ide!t 6ill o88upy the empty pla8e o the u!iversality7 That is to say- 6ith regard to the
relatio!ship bet6ee! u!iversality a!d parti8ularity- the J8o!tradi8tio!K i! the huma! 8o!ditio!Ea
huma! subje8t per8eives reality rom a si!gular subje8tive vie6poi!t a!d- simulta!eously- per8eives
himsel as i!8luded i! this same reality as a part- as a! obje8t i! itEmea!s that the subje8t has to
presuppose u!iversality @there is a u!iversal order- some ki!d o J1reat Dhai! o 3ei!g-K o 6hi8h he is
a partA- 6hile- simulta!eously- it is orever impossible or him to e!tirely ill i! this u!iversality 6ith its
parti8ular 8o!te!t- to harmo!iUe the )!iversal a!d the Carti8ular @si!8e his approa8h to reality is orever
markedE8olored- t6isted- distortedEby his si!gular perspe8tiveA7 )!iversality is al6ays
simulta!eously necessary a!d impossible7
.a8lauIs 8o!8ept o hegemo!y oers a! e?emplary matri? o the relatio!ship bet6ee!
u!iversality- histori8al 8o!ti!ge!8y- a!d the limit o a! impossible FealEa!d o!e should al6ays keep
i! mi!d that 6e are deali!g here 6ith a disti!8t 8o!8ept 6hose spe8ii8ity is ote! missed @or redu8ed to
some vague Nuasi:1rams8ia! ge!eralityA by those 6ho reer to it7 The key eature o the 8o!8ept o
hegemo!y resides i! the 8o!ti!ge!t 8o!!e8tio! bet6ee! i!tra:so8ial diere!8es @eleme!ts within the
so8ial spa8eA a!d the limit that separates so8iety itsel rom !o!:so8iety @8haos- utter de8ade!8e- the
dissolutio! o all so8ial li!ksAEthe limit bet6ee! the so8ial a!d its e?teriority- the !o!:so8ial- 8a! o!ly
arti8ulate itsel i! the guise o a diere!8e @by mappi!g itsel o!to a diere!8eA bet6ee! eleme!ts
6ithi! so8ial spa8e7 9! other 6ords- radi8al a!tago!ism 8a! o!ly be represe!ted i! a distorted 6ay-
through parti8ular diere!8es i!ter!al to the system7 0?ter!al diere!8es are thus al6ays already also
i!ter!al- a!d- urthermore- the li!k bet6ee! the i!ter!al a!d e?ter!al diere!8e is ultimately
8o!ti!ge!t- the result o politi8al struggle or hegemo!y7
The sta!dard a!ti:=egelia! 8ou!ter:argume!t here is- o 8ourse- that this irredu8ible gap
bet6ee! the u!iversal @rameA a!d its parti8ular 8o!te!t is 6hat 8hara8teriUes *a!tia! i!ite
subje8tivity7 9s !ot =egelia! J8o!8rete u!iversalityK the most radi8al e?pressio! o the a!tasy o ull
re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d the parti8ularM 9s !ot its basi8 eature the sel:ge!eratio! o the
e!tire parti8ular 8o!te!t out o the sel:moveme!t o u!iversality itselM Agai!st this 8ommo! reproa8h-
6e should i!sist o! the 8lose!ess o .a8lauIs !otio! o hegemo!y to the =egelia! !otio! o J8o!8rete
u!iversality7K 9! the latter- the spe8ii8 diere!8e overlaps 6ith the diere!8e 8o!stitutive o the ge!us
itsel- just as- i! .a8lauIs !otio! o hegemo!y- the a!tago!isti8 gap bet6ee! so8iety a!d its e?ter!al
limit- !o!:so8iety- is mapped o!to a! i!tra:so8ial stru8tural diere!8e7 .a8lau himsel reje8ts the
=egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K bet6ee! u!iversal a!d parti8ular o! behal o the gap that orever separates
the empty or impossible u!iversal rom the 8o!ti!ge!t parti8ular 8o!te!t that hegemo!iUes it7 9-
ho6ever- 6e take a 8loser look at =egel- 6e see thatEi!soar as every parti8ular spe8ies does !ot JitK
its u!iversal ge!usE6he! 6e i!ally arrive at a parti8ular spe8ies that ully its its !otio!- that
u!iversal !otio! itsel is tra!sormed i!to a!other !otio!7 4o e?isti!g histori8al State ully its the
!otio! o the StateEthe !e8essity o a diale8ti8al passage rom the State @Jobje8tive spirit-K historyA
i!to Feligio! @Jabsolute spiritKA i!volves the a8t that the o!ly e?isti!g State that ee8tively its its
!otio! is a religious 8ommu!ityE6hi8h- pre8isely- is !o lo!ger a State7 =ere 6e e!8ou!ter the
properly diale8ti8al parado? o J8o!8rete u!iversalityK Nua histori8ity+ i! the relatio!ship bet6ee! a
ge!us a!d its subspe8ies- o!e o these subspe8ies 6ill al6ays be the eleme!t that !egates the very
u!iversal eature o the ge!us7 Giere!t !atio!s have diere!t versio!s o so88erT Ameri8a!s do !ot @or
did !otA have so88er- be8ause Jbaseball is their so88er7K =e!8e also =egelIs amous 8laim that moder!
people do !ot pray i! the mor!i!g- be8ause readi!g the !e6spaper is their mor!i!g prayer7 9! the same
6ay- i! disi!tegrati!g Jso8ialistK states- 6ritersI a!d other 8ultural 8lubs did a8t as politi8al parties7 9!
the same 6ay- J6oma!K be8omes o!e o the subspe8ies o ma!- =eideggeria! Daseinsanalyse o!e o
the subspe8ies o phe!ome!ology- Jsublati!gK the pre8edi!g u!iversality7
The impossible poi!t o Jsel:obje8tiviUatio!K 6ould be pre8isely the poi!t at 6hi8h
u!iversality a!d its parti8ular 8o!te!t are ully harmo!iUedEi! short- 6here there 6ould be !o struggle
or hegemo!y7 A!d this bri!gs us ba8k to mad!ess+ its most su88i!8t dei!itio! is that o a direct
harmo!y bet6ee! u!iversality a!d its a88ide!ts- o a 8a!8ellatio! o the gap that separates the t6oEor
the madma!- the obje8t 6hi8h is his impossible sta!d:i! 6ithi! obje8tal reality loses its virtual
8hara8ter a!d be8omes a ully i!tegral part o that reality7 9! 8o!trast to mad!ess- habit avoids this trap
o dire8t ide!tii8atio! tha!ks to its virtual 8hara8ter+ the subje8tIs ide!tii8atio! 6ith a habit is !ot a
dire8t ide!tii8atio! 6ith some positive eature- but a! ide!tii8atio! 6ith a dispositio!- 6ith a
virtuality7 =abit is the out8ome o a struggle or hegemo!y+ it is an accident elevated to an %essence!'
to universal necessity- made to ill i! its empty pla8e7
CHAPTER (

J4ot H!ly as Substa!8e- 3ut Also as Subje8tK

CONCRETE !NI#ERSALIT$

=egelIs great origi!ality is that he sho6s e?a8tly ho6 a! i!terpretatio! that aims at !othi!g more tha!
u!iversality- that disallo6s a!y role or the si!gularity o the e?egete- a! i!terpretatio!- i!deed- that
reuses to be plasti8- i! the se!se o both Ju!iversal a!d i!dividual-K 6ould be i! reality parti8ular a!d
arbitrary7
1
The stakes are very pre8ise i! this passage rom Datheri!e ,alabouIs grou!d:breaki!g book o!
=egel7 0very i!terpretatio! is partial- JembeddedK i! a! i!terpreterIs ultimately 8o!ti!ge!t subje8tive
positio!T ho6ever- ar rom blo8ki!g a88ess to the u!iversal truth o the i!terpreted te?t- ull a88epta!8e
o this 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d o the !eed to 6ork through it is the o!ly 6ay the i!terpreter 8a! a88ess the
u!iversality o the 8o!te!t o the te?t7 The i!terpreterIs 8o!ti!ge!t subje8tive positio! provides the
impetus- the urge or urge!8y- 6hi8h sustai!s a! authe!ti8 i!terpretatio!7 9 6e 6a!t to attai! the
u!iversality o the i!terpreted te?t dire8tly- as it is Ji! itsel-K bypassi!g- erasi!g- or abstra8ti!g rom
the e!gaged positio! o the i!terpreter- the! 6e either have to admit deeat a!d a88ept histori8ist
relativism- or elevate i!to a i?ed u!iversal 9!:itsel 6hat is ee8tively a parti8ular a!d arbitrary
readi!g o the te?t7 9! other 6ords- the u!iversality 6e arrive at i! this 6ay is abstract u!iversality- a
u!iversality 6hi8h e?8ludes rather tha! e!8ompasses the 8o!ti!ge!8y o the parti8ular7 The true
J8o!8rete u!iversalityK o a great histori8al te?t like +ntigone @or the 3ible or a play by ShakespeareA
lies i! the very totality o its histori8ally determi!ed readi!gs7 The 8ru8ial eature to bear i! mi!d here
is ho6 concrete universality is not true concrete universality without including in itself the sub1ective
position of its reader*interpreter as the particular and contingent point from which the universality is
perceived7 That is to say- i! the =egelia! deployme!t o a pro8ess o 8og!itio!- the subje8t o 8og!itio!
is !ot o!ly the u!iversal medium o rele8tio! i! 6hi8h parti8ular thoughts o88ur- a ki!d o re8epta8le
8o!tai!i!g thoughts about determi!ate obje8ts as its parti8ular 8o!te!t7 The opposite also holds+ the
obje8t o 8og!itio! is a u!iversal 9!:itsel- a!d the subje8t sta!ds pre8isely or 6hat the 6ord
Jsubje8tiveK mea!s i! its sta!dard use- as 6he! 6e talk about Jsubje8tive per8eptio!s 6hi8h distort the
6ay a thi!g really is7K =e!8e the true parti8ularity o a u!iversal 4otio! is !ot simply o!e o its spe8ies
6hi8h 8a!- as su8h- be grasped by a !eutral subje8t observi!g this u!iversality @as 6he!- i! rele8ti!g
upo! the !otio! o the State- 9 see that the state i! 6hi8h 9 live is a parti8ular spe8ies- a!d that there are
also other ki!ds o statesAT rather- the true parti8ularity is- primarily- the particular sub1ective position
from which the universal otion is acceptable to me @i! the 8ase o State+ the a8t that 9 am a member
o some parti8ular state- rooted i! its parti8ular ideologi8al stru8ture- J8olorsK my u!iversal !otio! o
the StateA7 A!d- as ,ar? k!e6 very 6ell- this diale8ti8 holds also or the rise o u!iversality itsel+ it is
o!ly i! a spe8ii8- parti8ular- histori8al 8o!stellatio! that the u!iversal dime!sio! o a 4otio! 8a!
appear Jas su8h7K ,ar?Is e?ample is that o labor+ o!ly i! 8apitalism- i! 6hi8h 9 e?8ha!ge my labor
po6er or mo!ey as the u!iversal 8ommodity- do 9 relate to my spe8ii8 proessio! as o!e 8o!ti!ge!t
parti8ular orm o employme!tT o!ly here does the abstra8t !otio! o 6ork be8ome a so8ial a8t- i!
8o!trast to medieval so8ieties i! 6hi8h the laborer does !ot 8hoose his ield o 6ork as a proessio!-
si!8e he is dire8tly Jbor!K i!to it7 @The same goes or Freud a!d his dis8overy o the u!iversal u!8tio!
o the Hedipus 8omple?7A 9! other 6ords- the very gap bet6ee! a u!iversal !otio! a!d its parti8ular
histori8al orm appears o!ly i! a 8ertai! histori8al epo8h7 /hat this mea!s is that 6e truly pass rom
abstra8t to 8o!8rete u!iversality o!ly 6he! the k!o6i!g subje8t loses its e?ter!al positio! a!d itsel
be8omes 8aught up i! the moveme!t o its 8o!te!tEo!ly i! this 6ay does the u!iversality o the obje8t
o 8og!itio! lose its abstra8t 8hara8ter a!d e!ter i!to the moveme!t o its parti8ular 8o!te!t7
Do!8rete u!iversality should thus be stri8tly disti!guished rom histori8ism7 9! relatio! to the
!otio! o huma! rights- a ,ar?ist symptomal readi!g 8a! 8o!vi!8i!gly ide!tiy the parti8ular 8o!te!t
that gives it a spe8ii8ally bourgeois ideologi8al spi!+ u!iversal huma! rights are ee8tively the rights
o 6hite male property o6!ers to e?8ha!ge reely o! the market- e?ploit 6orkers a!d 6ome!- as 6ell
as e?ert politi8al domi!atio!7 The ide!tii8atio! o the parti8ular 8o!te!t that hegemo!iUes the u!iversal
orm is- ho6ever- o!ly hal the story7 The other hal- !o less 8ru8ial- 8o!sists i! aski!g a mu8h more
dii8ult Nuestio! 8o!8er!i!g the emerge!8e o the orm o u!iversality itsel7 =o6 a!d u!der 6hat
spe8ii8 histori8al 8o!ditio!s does abstra8t )!iversality itsel be8ome a Ja8t o @so8ialA lieKM )!der
6hat 8o!ditio!s do i!dividuals e?perie!8e themselves as subje8ts o u!iversal huma! rightsM This is the
poi!t o ,ar?Is a!alysis o 8ommodity etishism+ i! a so8iety i! 6hi8h 8ommodity e?8ha!ge
predomi!ates- i!dividuals i! their daily lives relate to themselves- as 6ell as to the obje8ts they
e!8ou!ter- as 8o!ti!ge!t embodime!ts o abstra8t a!d u!iversal !otio!s7 /hat 9 am- i! terms o my
8o!8rete so8ial or 8ultural ba8kgrou!d- is e?perie!8ed as 8o!ti!ge!t- si!8e 6hat ultimately dei!es me
is the abstra8t u!iversal 8apa8ity to thi!k a!d>or to 6ork7 A!y obje8t that 8a! satisy my desire is
e?perie!8ed as 8o!ti!ge!t- si!8e my desire is 8o!8eived as a! abstra8t ormal 8apa8ity- i!diere!t
to6ards the multitude o parti8ular obje8ts that may satisy it- but !ever ully do7 The moder! !otio! o
a proessio!- as just !oted- implies that 9 e?perie!8e mysel as a! i!dividual 6ho is !ot dire8tly Jbor!
i!toK his so8ial role7 /hat 9 6ill be8ome depe!ds o! the i!terplay bet6ee! 8o!ti!ge!t so8ial
8ir8umsta!8es a!d my ree 8hoi8e7 The 8o!temporary i!dividual has a proessio!Ehe is a! ele8tri8ia!
or a proessor or a 6aiterEbut it 6ould be mea!i!gless to 8laim that a medieval ser 6as a peasa!t by
proessio!7 The 8ru8ial poi!t here is that- agai!- i! the spe8ii8 so8ial 8o!ditio!s o 8ommodity
e?8ha!ge 6ithi! a global market e8o!omy- Jabstra8tio!K be8omes a dire8t eature o a8tual so8ial lie7
9t has a! impa8t o! the 6ay i!dividuals behave a!d relate to their ate a!d to their so8ial surrou!di!gs7
,ar? shares =egelIs i!sight i!to ho6 )!iversality be8omes Jor itselK o!ly i!soar as i!dividuals !o
lo!ger ully ide!tiy the ker!el o their bei!g 6ith their parti8ular so8ial situatio!+ they e?perie!8e
themselves as orever Jout o joi!tK 6ith regard to this situatio!7 9! other 6ords- i! a give! so8ial
stru8ture- )!iversality be8omes Jor itselK o!ly i! those i!dividuals 6ho la8k a proper pla8e i! it7 The
mode o appeara!8e o a! abstra8t )!iversality- its e!teri!g i!to a8tual e?iste!8e- thus produ8es
viole!8e- disrupti!g the ormer orga!i8 eNuilibrium7
9t is thus !ot o!ly that every u!iversality is hau!ted by a parti8ular 8o!te!t that tai!ts itT it is
also that every parti8ular positio! is hau!ted by its impli8it u!iversality- 6hi8h u!dermi!es it7
Dapitalism is !ot just u!iversal 9!:itsel- it is u!iversal For:itsel- as the treme!dous 8orrosive po6er
6hi8h u!dermi!es all parti8ular lie 6orlds- 8ultures- a!d traditio!s- 8utti!g a8ross them- su8ki!g them
i!to its vorte?7 9t is mea!i!gless to ask- J9s this u!iversality ge!ui!e or merely a mask or parti8ular
i!terestsMK This u!iversality is dire8tly a8tual as u!iversality- as the !egative or8e o mediati!g a!d
destroyi!g all parti8ular 8o!te!t7 A!d the same logi8 holds or ema!8ipatory struggle+ the parti8ular
8ulture desperately tryi!g to dee!d its ide!tity has to repress the u!iversal dime!sio! 6hi8h is a8tive at
its very heart- that is- the gap bet6ee! the parti8ular @its ide!tityA a!d the u!iversal 6hi8h destabiliUes it
rom 6ithi!7 This is 6hy the Jleave our 8ulture alo!eK argume!t ails7 /ithi! every parti8ular 8ulture-
i!dividuals do suer a!d do protestE6ome! protest 6he! or8ed to u!dergo 8litoride8tomy- or
e?ampleEa!d these protests against the parochial constraints of ones culture are formulated from the
standpoint of universalityF A8tual u!iversality is !ot the JdeepK eeli!g that diere!t 8ultures ultimately
share the same basi8 values- et87T actual universality %appears' ?actuali2es itself@ as the e&perience of
negativity! of the inade<uacy*to*itself! of a particular identity7 JDo!8rete u!iversalityK does !ot 8o!8er!
the relatio!ship o a parti8ular to the 6ider /hole- the 6ay it relates to others a!d to its 8o!te?t- but
rather the way it relates to itself- the 6ay its very parti8ular ide!tity is split rom 6ithi!7 The sta!dard
problem o u!iversality @ho6 8a! 9 be sure that 6hat 9 per8eive as u!iversality is !ot 8olored by my
parti8ular ide!tityA thereby disappears+ J8o!8rete u!iversalityK mea!s pre8isely that my parti8ular
ide!tity is 8orroded rom 6ithi!- that the te!sio! bet6ee! parti8ularity a!d u!iversality is i!here!t to
my parti8ular ide!tityEor- to put it i! more ormal terms- that spe8ii8 diere!8e overlaps 6ith ge!eri8
diere!8e7
9! short- a u!iversality arises Jor itselK o!ly through or at the site o a thwarted particularity7
)!iversality i!s8ribes itsel i!to a parti8ular ide!tity as its i!ability to ully be8ome itsel+ 9 am a
u!iversal subje8t i!soar as 9 8a!!ot realiUe mysel i! my parti8ular ide!tityEthis is 6hy the moder!
u!iversal subje8t is by dei!itio! Jout o joi!t-K la8ki!g its proper pla8e i! the so8ial edii8e7 This thesis
has to be take! literally+ it is !ot o!ly that u!iversality i!s8ribes itsel i!to my parti8ular ide!tity as its
rupture- its out:o:joi!t!essT u!iversality Ji! itselK is i! its a8tuality nothing but this 8ut 6hi8h blo8ks
rom 6ithi! all a!d every parti8ular ide!tity7 /ithi! a give! so8ial order- a u!iversal 8laim 8a! be made
o!ly by a group that is preve!ted rom realiUi!g its parti8ular ide!tityE6ome! th6arted i! their eort
to realiUe their emi!i!e ide!tity- a! eth!i8 group preve!ted rom asserti!g its ide!tity- a!d so o!7 This
is also 6hy- or Freud- Jeverythi!g has a se?ual 8o!!otatio!-K 6hy se?uality 8a! i!e8t everythi!g+ !ot
be8ause it is Jthe stro!gestK 8ompo!e!t i! peopleIs lives- e?erti!g a hegemo!y over all other
8ompo!e!ts- but be8ause it is the o!e most radi8ally th6arted i! its a8tualiUatio!- marked by that
Jsymboli8 8astratio!K o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h- as .a8a! put it- there is !o se?ual relatio!ship7 0very
u!iversality that arises- that is posited Jas su8h-K bears 6it!ess to a s8ar i! some parti8ularity- a!d
remai!s orever li!ked to this s8ar7
Fe8all *rUysUto *ieslo6skiIs passage rom do8ume!tary to i8tio! 8i!ema+ 6e do !ot simply
have t6o spe8ies o 8i!ema- do8ume!tary a!d i8tio!T the i8tio! 8i!ema emerged out o the i!here!t
limitatio!s o the do8ume!tary 8i!ema7 *ieslo6skiIs starti!g poi!t 6as the same as or all ilmmakers
i! the Jso8ialistK 8ou!tries+ the 8o!spi8uous mismat8h bet6ee! the drab so8ial reality a!d the bright-
optimisti8 images 6hi8h pervaded the heavily 8e!sored oi8ial media7 *ieslo6skiIs i!itial rea8tio! to
the a8t that Colish so8ial reality 6as- as he put it- Ju!represe!tedK 6as- o 8ourse- to pursue a more
adeNuate represe!tatio! o real lie i! all its drab!ess a!d ambiguityEi! short- to adopt a! authe!ti8
do8ume!tary approa8h7 3ut *ieslo6ski soo! 8ame to reje8t this- or reaso!s best 8aptured by the e!d o
the do8ume!tary First .ove @1%$(A7 =ere the 8amera ollo6s a you!g u!married 8ouple through the
girlIs preg!a!8y- their 6eddi!g- a!d the delivery o the baby- e!di!g by sho6i!g the ather holdi!g the
!e6bor! baby a!d 8ryi!g7 *ieslo6ski rea8ted to the obs8e!ity o su8h u!6arra!ted i!trusio! i!to the
i!timate lives o others 6ith the Jright o real tearsK+ there is a domai! o a!tasmati8 i!tima8y marked
by a J4o trespassi!gRK sig! a!d 6hi8h should be approa8hed o!ly via i8tio!7 This is also the 6hy the
Fre!8h VLro!iNue i! -he Double .ife of 6Aroni<ue reje8ts the puppeteer+ he 6a!ts to probe too ar-
6hi8h is 6hy- ater he tells her the story o her double lie- she is deeply hurt a!d es8apes ba8k to her
ather to6ards the e!d o the ilm7
2
JDo!8rete u!iversalityK is a !ame or this pro8ess through 6hi8h
i8tio! e?plodes do8ume!tary from within- or the 6ay the emerge!8e o i8tio! 8i!ema resolves the
i!here!t deadlo8k o the do8ume!tary 8i!ema7
"
A!other e?ample rom 8i!ema history is provided by
o!e o its great mysteries+ the sudde! e8lipse o the /ester! i! the mid:1%#0s7 Cart o the a!s6er lies i!
the a8t that- at the same mome!t- spa8e opera emerged as a ge!reEso o!e 8a! ve!ture the hypothesis
that spa8e opera took the pla8e o the /ester! i! the late 1%#0s7 The diale8ti8al poi!t here is that the
/ester! a!d spa8e opera are !ot t6o subspe8ies o the ge!re Jadve!ture7K Father- 6e should shit the
perspe8tive a!d start only 6ith the /ester!Ei! the 8ourse o its developme!t- the /ester! the!
e!8ou!ters a deadlo8k a!d- i! order to survive- has to Jrei!ve!tK itsel as spa8e operaEspa8e opera is
thus stru8turally a subspe8ies o the /ester!- i! the same 6ay that- or *ieslo6ski- i8tio! is a
subspe8ies o do8ume!tary7
A!d does the same !ot hold or the passage rom the State to the religious 8ommu!ity i! =egelM
They are !ot simply t6o spe8ies o the ge!re o Jlarge so8io:ideologi8al 8ommu!itiesKT it is rather that
the State- i! its parti8ular orms- 8a!!ot ever resolve the deadlo8k i!s8ribed i! its !otio! @i7e7- 8a!!ot
adeNuately represe!t a!d totaliUe the 8ommu!ityEi! the same 6ay that- or *ieslo6ski- do8ume!tary
8a!!ot adeNuately re!der the 8ore o so8ial realityA a!d so !eeds to pass over i!to a!other !otio!- that
o the Dhur8h7 The Dhur8h is- i! this se!se- Jmore State tha! the State itsel-K it a8tualiUes the !otio! o
the State by shiti!g to a!other !otio!7 9! all these 8ases- u!iversality is lo8ated i! the e!8hai!me!t or
overlappi!g o parti8ularities+ A a!d 3 are !ot parts @spe8iesA o their e!8ompassi!g u!iversalityT A
8a!!ot ully be8ome A- a8tualiUe its !otio!- 6ithout passi!g i!to 3- 6hi8h is ormally its subspe8ies-
but a subspe8ies 6hi8h u!dermi!es the very spe8ies u!der 6hi8h it is ormally subsumed7 0very
spe8ies 8o!tai!s a subspe8ies 6hi8h- pre8isely i!soar as it ee8tively realiUes the !otio! o this
spe8ies- e?plodes its rame+ the spa8e opera is Ja /ester! at the level o its !otio!K a!d- or that very
reaso!- !o lo!ger a /ester!7 9!stead o a u!iversality subdivided i!to t6o spe8ies- 6e thus get a
parti8ular spe8ies 6hi8h ge!erates a!other spe8ies as its o6! subspe8ies- a!d true @J8o!8reteKA
u!iversality is !othi!g but this moveme!t i! the 8ourse o 6hi8h a spe8ies e!ge!ders a subspe8ies
6hi8h !egates its o6! spe8ies7 The same diale8ti8al mediatio! bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d the parti8ular
8a! also be ormulated i! terms o a u!iversal !otio! a!d its e?amples7 The diere!8e bet6ee! the
idealist a!d the materialist use o e?amples is that- i! the Clato!i8:idealist approa8h- e?amples are
al6ays impere8t- they !ever pere8tly re!der 6hat they are supposed to e?empliy- 6hile or a
materialist there is al6ays more i! the e?ample tha! i! 6hat it e?empliies- i! other 6ords- the e?ample
al6ays threate!s to u!dermi!e 6hat it is supposed to e?empliy si!8e it gives body to 6hat the
e?empliied !otio! itsel represses or is u!able to 8ope 6ith7 @Therei! resides =egelIs materialist
pro8edure i! the )henomenology+ ea8h Jigure o 8o!s8ious!essK is irst e?empliied a!d the!
u!dermi!ed through its o6! e?ample7A This is 6hy the idealist approa8h al6ays dema!ds a multitude
o e?amplesEsi!8e !o si!gle e?ample really its- o!e has to e!umerate a great ma!y o them i! order
to i!di8ate the tra!s8e!de!t 6ealth o the 9dea they e?empliy- the 9dea bei!g the i?ed poi!t o
reere!8e or the loati!g e?amples7 A materialist- o! the 8o!trary- te!ds to retur! obsessively to o!e
a!d the same e?ample+ it is the parti8ular e?ample 6hi8h remai!s the same i! all symboli8 u!iverses-
6hile the u!iversal !otio! it is supposed to e?empliy 8o!ti!ually 8ha!ges its shape- so that 6e get a
multitude o u!iversal !otio!s 8ir8ulati!g arou!d a si!gle e?ample7 9s this !ot 6hat .a8a! does-
retur!i!g to the same e?emplary 8ases @the guessi!g:game 6ith ive hats- the dream o 9rmaIs i!je8tio!-
et87A- ea8h time providi!g a !e6 i!terpretatio!M The materialist e?ample is thus a universal Singular+ a
si!gular e!tity 6hi8h persists as the u!iversal through the multitude o its i!terpretatio!s7
This diale8ti8 rea8hes its apogee 6he! the u!iversal as su8h- i! 8o!trast to its parti8ular 8o!te!t-
e!ters i!to bei!g- a8Nuires real e?iste!8eEthis is the rise o subje8tivity des8ribed i! =egelIs theory o
the 4otio! as the irst mome!t o his Jsubje8tive logi87K T6o i!trodu8tory remarks should be made
here7 First- o!e should !ote the parado? o the u!dame!tal diere!8e bet6ee! the logi8 o 0sse!8e a!d
the logi8 o the 4otio!+ pre8isely be8ause the logi8 o 0sse!8e is the logi8 o )!dersta!di!gEa!d- as
su8h- sti8ks to i?ed oppositio!s- bei!g u!able to grasp their sel:mediatio!Eit results i! a mad da!8e
o sel:destru8tio! i! 6hi8h all i?ed determi!atio!s are dissolved7 The logi8 o the 4otio!- by 8o!trast-
is the logi8 o luid sel:mediatio!s 6hi8h- pre8isely or this reaso!- is able to ge!erate a stable
stru8ture7 Se8o!d- the term Jsubje8tive logi8K is ully justiied i! the pre8ise se!se that- or =egel- the
J4otio!K is !ot the usual abstra8t u!iversality desig!ati!g a 8ommo! eature o a! empiri8al
multipli8ityEthe original %otion' is the %I!' the sub1ect itself7 =egel provides the most 8o!8ise
prese!tatio! o the Jsubje8tivityK o the 4otio! at the begi!!i!g o his JSubje8tive .ogi8-K 6here he
irst dei!es i!dividuality as Jthe rele8tio! o the 4otio! out o its determi!ate!ess into itself7 9t is the
sel:mediation o the 4otio! i!soar as its otherness has made itsel i!to a! other agai!- 6hereby the
4otio! has rei!stated itsel as sel:ide!ti8al- but i! the determi!atio! o absolute !egativity7K
(
9t is easy to see ho6 u!iversality a!d parti8ularity are 8o:prese!t i! every 4otio!+ every 4otio!
is by dei!itio! u!iversal- desig!ati!g a si!gle abstra8t eature that u!ites a series o parti8ulars- a!d
pre8isely as su8h- it is al6ays already parti8ularE!ot i! additio! to its u!iversality- but by virtue o it7
J=uma!K is a u!iversal 4otio!- desig!ati!g the u!iversal dime!sio! o all huma! bei!gs- a!d as su8h it
is parti8ular- or determi!ateEit desig!ates a 8ertai! eature- ig!ori!g e!dless others @!ot o!ly are there
bei!gs 6ho are !ot huma!- but every huma! bei!g has a! e!dless !umber o other properties 6hi8h 8a!
also be desig!ated by other determi!ate 4otio!s7 )!iversality a!d parti8ularity are thus t6o aspe8ts o
o!e a!d the same 4otio!+ its very Jabstra8tK u!iversality makes it parti8ular7 A 4otio! is thus a!
immediate u!ity o i!determi!a8y a!d determi!atio!+ it is both elevated above- or subtra8ted rom- the
te?ture o spatio:temporal reality- a!d simulta!eously a i?ed abstra8t determi!atio!7 /hy a!d ho6 is
the 4otio! subje8tiveM First i! the simple se!se that it is posited as su8h o!ly i! the mi!d o a subje8t- a
thi!ki!g bei!g 6ho possesses the po6er o abstra8tio!+ o!ly a thi!ki!g bei!g 8a! subtra8t or abstra8t
rom the empiri8al multitude a si!gle u!iti!g eature a!d desig!ate it as su8h7 The!- i! a mu8h more
radi8al se!se+ the passage to i!dividuality is the passage from sub1ective otion to Sub1ect ?Self! I@
itself as a pure otion7 /hat 8a! this mea!M 9s !ot the subje8t i! its si!gularity 6hat *ierkegaard
emphasiUes as the si!gularity irredu8ible to all u!iversal mediatio!M
9! a determi!ate 4otio!- u!iversality a!d parti8ularity immediately 8oe?istT that is- the !otio!Is
u!iversality immediately JpassesK i!to its parti8ular determi!atio!7 The problem here is !ot ho6 to
re8o!8ile or Jsy!thesiUeK the opposites @the u!iversal a!d the parti8ular aspe8ts o a 4otio!A- but- o! the
8o!trary- ho6 to pull them apart- ho6 to separate u!iversality rom its Jother!ess-K rom its parti8ular
determi!atio!s7 The absolute 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! u!iversality a!d parti8ularity 8a! o!ly be resolved-
their immediate overlappi!g 8a! o!ly be mediated- 6he! the 4otio!Is u!iversality is asserted or
posited @or appearsA as su8h- i! oppositio! to its other!ess- to every parti8ular determi!atio!7 9! su8h a
move- the 4otio! retur!s Jout o its determi!ate!ess into itself-K it rei!states itsel Jas sel:ide!ti8al- but
i! the determi!atio! o absolute !egativityKEabsolutely !egati!g all a!d every positive 8o!te!t- all a!d
every parti8ular determi!atio!7 The pure 9 @the Dartesia! cogito- or *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal
apper8eptio!A is just su8h a! absolute !egatio! o all determi!ate 8o!te!t+ it is the void o radi8al
abstra8tio! rom all determi!atio!s- the orm o J9 thi!kK emptied o all determi!ate thoughts7 /hat
happe!s here is 6hat =egel himsel reers to as a Jmira8leK+ this pure u!iversality emptied o all
8o!te!t is simulta!eously the pure si!gularity o the J9KT it reers to mysel as the u!iNue eva!es8e!t
poi!t 6hi8h e?8ludes all others- 6hi8h 8a!!ot be repla8ed by a!y othersEmy sel is- by dei!itio!-
o!ly me a!d !othi!g else7 The 9 is- i! this se!se- the 8oi!8ide!8e o pure u!iversality 6ith pure
si!gularity- o radi8al abstra8tio! 6ith absolute si!gularity7
#
A!d this is also 6hat =egel aims at 6he!
he says that i! J9K the 4otio! as su8h 8omes to e?ist+ the u!iversal 4otio! e?ists i! the orm o the 9 i!
6hi8h absolute si!gularity @it is me- o!ly meA overlaps 6ith radi8al abstra8tio! @as pure 9- 9 am totally
i!disti!guishable rom all other 9IsA7
'
9! Caragraphs 1"(" a!d 1"(( o the Science of .ogic- he the!
adds the Jbad !e6sK that a88ompa!ies the Jgood !e6sK o the 4otio!Is retur!:to:itsel rom its
other!ess+ J9!dividuality is !ot o!ly the retur! o the 4otio! i!to itselT but immediately its lossKT that
is- i! the guise o a! i!dividual 9- the 4otio! !ot o!ly retur!s to itsel @to its radi8al u!iversalityA-
reei!g itsel rom the other!ess o all parti8ular determi!atio!sT it simulta!eously emerges as a!
a8tually e?isti!g Jthis-K a 8o!ti!ge!t empiri8al i!dividual immediately a6are o itsel- a Jbei!g:or:
selK+

Through i!dividuality- 6here the 4otio! is i!ter!al to itsel- it be8omes e?ter!al to itself a!d e!ters i!to
a8tuality O The i!dividual- thereore- as sel:related !egativity- is immediate ide!tity o the !egative
6ith itselT it is a being*for*self7 Hr it is the abstra8tio! that determi!es the 4otio!- a88ordi!g to its
ideal mome!t o being- as a! immediate7 9! this 6ay- the i!dividual is a Nualitative one or this7
$
/e i!d here already the allegedly JillegitimateK move rom !otio!al determi!atio!s to a8tual
e?iste!8e 6hose best:k!o6! versio! o88urs at the e!d o the .ogic- 6he! the 9dea releases itsel i!to
4ature as its e?ter!ality7 .et us avoid the sta!dard idealist misu!dersta!di!g+ o 8ourse- this spe8ulative
move does !ot J8reateK the lesh:a!d:blood i!dividual- but it J8reatesK the J9-K the sel:relati!g empty
poi!t o reere!8e that the i!dividual e?perie!8es as Jitsel-K as the void at the 8ore o its bei!g7
This is the irst- theoreti8al- triad o the 4otio!T o!8e this is a88omplished a!d the si!gular
u!iversality o the Subje8t is i! pla8e- 6e a8e the opposite pro8ess+ !ot ):C:9- but ):9:CE!ot the
8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! )!iversal a!d Carti8ular resolved by the 9- but the 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the
)!iversal a!d the 9 resolved by the Carti8ular7 That is to say- ho6 8a! the pure 9 break out o the abyss
o radi8al sel:relati!g !egativity i! 6hi8h u!iversality a!d si!gularity immediately 8oi!8ide- e?8ludi!g
all determi!ate 8o!te!tM =ere 6e e!ter the pra8ti8al domai! o 6ill a!d de8isio!+ the subje8t Nua pure
4otio! has to reely determi!e itsel- to posit some determi!ate parti8ular 8o!te!t 6hi8h 6ill 8ou!t as
Jits o6!7K A!d 6hat 6e should !ot orget is that this determi!ate 8o!te!t @as the e?pressio! o the
subje8tIs reedomA is irredu8ibly arbitrary+ it is ultimately grou!ded o!ly i! the subje8tIs J9t is so
be8ause 9 6ill it so-K the mome!t o pure subje8tive de8isio! or 8hoi8e 6hi8h stabiliUes a 6orld7 9! his
.ogics of Worlds- by 6ay o desig!ati!g this mome!t- 3adiou proposes the 8o!8ept o Jpoi!tK
u!derstood as a simple de8isio! i! a situatio! redu8ed to a 8hoi8e o :es or o7 =e impli8itly reers to
.a8a!Is point de capiton- o 8ourseEa!d does !ot this imply that there is !o J6orldK outside la!guage-
!o 6orld 6hose horiUo! o mea!i!g is !ot determi!ed by a symboli8 orderM The passage to truth is
thereore the passage rom la!guage @Jthe limits o my la!guage are the limits o my 6orldKA to the
letter- to JmathemesK 6hi8h ru! diago!ally a8ross a multitude o 6orlds7 Costmoder! relativism is
pre8isely the thought o the irredu8ible multitude of worlds- ea8h o them sustai!ed by a spe8ii8
la!guage game- so that ea8h 6orld JisK the !arrative its members tell themselves about themselves-
6ith !o shared terrai!- !o 8ommo! la!guageT a!d the problem o truth is ho6 to establish somethi!g
thatEto use the terms popular i! modal logi8Eremai!s the same i! all possible 6orlds7
=010.- SC94HBA O A4G =9TD=DHD*

9t is at this pre8ise poi!t that the 8o!trast bet6ee! =egel a!d Spi!oUa appears at its purest+
Spi!oUaIs Absolute is a Substa!8e 6hi8h Je?pressesK itsel i! its attributes a!d modes 6ithout the
subje8tiviUi!g point de capiton7 True- Spi!oUaIs amous propositio! omnis determinatio est negatio
may sou!d =egelia!- but the t6o opposed 6ays i! 6hi8h it 8a! be read @depe!di!g o! 6hat negatio
reers toA are both de8idedly a!ti:=egelia!+ @1A i it reers to the Absolute itsel- it makes a !egative:
theologi8al poi!t+ every positive determi!atio! o the Absolute- every predi8ate 6e attribute to it- is
i!adeNuate- ails to grasp its esse!8e a!d thus already !egates itT @2A i it reers to parti8ular empiri8al
thi!gs- it makes a poi!t about their tra!sie!t !ature+ every e!tity delimited rom others by a parti8ular
determi!atio! 6ill soo!er or later joi! the 8haoti8 abyss out o 6hi8h it arose- or every parti8ular
determi!atio! is a !egatio! !ot o!ly i! the se!se that it 6ill i!volve the !egatio! o other parti8ular
determi!atio!s @i a rose is red- it is !ot blue- gree!- yello6 OA- but i! a more radi8al se!se that reers
to its lo!g:term i!stability7 9s =egelIs poi!t the! that these t6o readi!gs are i! a8t simply ide!ti8al-
somethi!g like+ Jthe Absolute is !ot a positive e!tity persisti!g i! its impermeable ide!tity beyo!d the
tra!sie!t 6orld o i!ite thi!gsT the o!ly true Absolute is !othi!g but this very pro8ess o the risi!g a!d
passi!g a6ay o all parti8ular thi!gsKM Su8h a visio! remai!s- ho6ever- all too 8lose to a pseudo:
Hrie!tal =era8litea! 6isdom 8o!8er!i!g the eter!al lo6 o the ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio! o all thi!gs
u!der the su!Ei! more philosophi8al terms- su8h a visio! relies o! the u!ivo8ity o bei!g7
9! dee!se o Spi!oUa- o!e 8ould dei!itely 8laim that Substa!8e is !ot simply the eter!al
ge!erative pro8ess 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues 6ithout a!y i!terruptio! or 8ut- but that it is- o! the 8o!trary- the
u!iversaliUatio! o a 8ut or all @clinamenA+ Substa!8e is !othi!g but the 8o!sta!t pro8ess o Jalli!gK
@i!to determi!ate>parti8ular e!titiesAT everythi!g there is- is a all @i 6e are permitted to read the
amous propositio! rom /ittge!stei!Is -ractatusE%Der Welt ist was der Fall ist'Emore literally
tha! he mea!t it- dis8er!i!g i! der Fall also the mea!i!g JallKA7 There is !o Substa!8e 6hi8h alls-
8urves- i!terrupts the lo6- et87T substa!8e simply is the i!i!itely produ8tive 8apa8ity o su8h
alls>8uts>i!terruptio!s- they are its o!ly reality7
&
9! su8h a readi!g o Spi!oUa- Substa!8e a!d clinamen
@the 8urvature o the Substa!8e 6hi8h ge!erates determi!ate e!titiesA dire8tly 8oi!8ideT i! this ultimate
spe8ulative ide!tity- Substa!8e is !othi!g but the pro8ess o its o6! Jall-K the !egativity that pushes
to6ards produ8tive determi!atio!T or- i! .a8a!ia! terms- the Thi!g is dire8tly the ob1et a7
=o6ever- the problem 6ith su8h a u!iversaliUatio! o the clinamen @6hat the late Althusser
8alled Jaleatory materialismKA is that it Jre!ormaliUesK the clinamen a!d thus tur!s i!to its opposite+ i
all that there is are i!terruptio!s or alls- the! the key aspe8t o surprise- o the i!trusio! o a!
u!e?pe8ted 8o!ti!ge!8y- is lost- a!d 6e i!d ourselves i! a bori!g- lat u!iverse 6hose 8o!ti!ge!8y is
totally predi8table a!d !e8essary7 /he! Wue!ti! ,eillassou? i!sists o! 8o!ti!ge!8y as bei!g the o!ly
!e8essity- he i!ds himsel i! the same predi8ame!t+ his mistake is to 8o!8eive the assertio! o
8o!ti!ge!8y a88ordi!g to the mas8uli!e side o .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- !amely a88ordi!g to the
logi8 o u!iversality a!d its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!+ everythi!g is 8o!ti!ge!t- with the e&ception of
contingency itself! which is absolutely necessaryE!e8essity thus be8omes the e?ter!al guara!tee o the
u!iversal 8o!ti!ge!8y7 /hat 6e should oppose to this u!iversaliUatio! o 8o!ti!ge!8y is !ot the
u!iversaliUatio! o !e8essity @everythi!g that is is !e8essary- e?8ept or this !e8essity itsel- 6hi8h is
8o!ti!ge!tA- but the Jemi!i!eK !o!:All o 8o!ti!ge!8y+ there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot 8o!ti!ge!t- 6hi8h
is 6hy !ot:all is 8o!ti!ge!t7 Simulta!eously- there is the !o!:All o !e8essity+ there is !othi!g 6hi8h is
!ot !e8essary- 6hi8h is 6hy !ot:all is !e8essary7 J4ot:all is !e8essaryK mea!s that- rom time to time- a
8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter o88urs 6hi8h u!dermi!es the predomi!a!t !e8essity @the spa8e o possibilities
sustai!ed by this !e8essityA- so that i! it- the JimpossibleK happe!s7
%
The key poi!t is that- i there is to
be a mome!t o surprise i! the 8ut or all- it 8a! o!ly o88ur agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o a 8o!ti!uous
lo6- as its i!terruptio!7
9! 8o!trast to Spi!oUa- or 6hom there is !o ,aster:Sig!iier e!a8ti!g a 8ut- marki!g a
8o!8lusio!- Jdotti!g the i-K but just a 8o!ti!uous 8hai! o 8auses- the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess
i!volves 8uts- sudde! i!terruptio!s o the 8o!ti!uous lo6- reversals 6hi8h retroa8tively restru8ture the
e!tire ield7 9! order to properly u!dersta!d this relatio!ship bet6ee! a 8o!ti!uous pro8ess a!d its 8uts
or e!ds- 6e should ig!ore the stupid !otio! o a J8o!tradi8tio!K i! =egelIs thought bet6ee! method
@e!dless pro8essA a!d system @e!dAT it is also !ot sui8ie!t to 8o!8eive 8uts as mome!ts 6ithi! a!
e!8ompassi!g pro8ess- i!ter!al diere!8es 6hi8h arise a!d disappear7 A parallel 6ith the lo6 o
spee8h might be o some help here+ the lo6 o spee8h 8a!!ot go o! i!dei!itely- there has to be le
moment de conclure- like the poi!t that 8o!8ludes a se!te!8e7 9t is o!ly the dot at the e!d that
retroa8tively i?es or determi!es the mea!i!g o the se!te!8e7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial to add that this dot
is !ot a simple i?atio! 6hi8h removes all risk- abolishi!g all ambiguity a!d ope!!ess7 9t is- o! the
8o!trary- the dotti!g itsel- its 8ut- 6hi8h releasesEsets reeEmea!i!g a!d i!terpretatio!+ the dot
al6ays o88urs 8o!ti!ge!tly- as a surprise- it ge!erates a surplusE6hy hereM /hat does this mea!M
This eleme!t o surprise emerges at its purest i! tautologyE=egel himsel a!alyUes tautology
through e?pe8tatio! a!d surprise- the e?8ess is here the u!e?pe8ted la8k itsel+ JA rose is O a
roseKE6e e?pe8ted somethi!g- a determi!atio!- a predi8ate- but 6hat 6e get is just the repetitio! o
the subje8t- 6hi8h makes the phrase late!t 6ith virtual mea!i!g7 Far rom 8lariyi!g thi!gs- tautology
gives birth to the spe8ter o some impo!derable depth 6hi8h es8apes 6ordsT ar rom bei!g a! i!de? o
pere8tio!- it hi!ts at a! obs8e!e 8o!ti!ge!t u!derside7 /he! do 6e say- JThe la6 is the la6KM
Cre8isely 6he! the la6 is e!8ou!tered as u!just- arbitrary- et87- a!d 6e the! add- J3ut- !o!etheless- the
la6 is the la67K The i!al 8ut is the! simulta!eously the ope!i!g- 6hat triggers or sets i! motio! a !e6
pro8ess o e!dless i!terpretatio!7 A!d- o 8ourse- the same goes or the absolute e!di!g- the 8o!8lusio!
o =egelIs system7
The 8o!seNue!8e o asserti!g the radi8al u!ivo8ity o bei!g is that all disti!8tio!s bet6ee!
Jesse!tialK a!d Jse8o!dary-K bet6ee! Ja8tualK a!d Jvirtual-K a!d so orth- have to be dropped7 /ith
regard to the 8lassi8 ,ar?ist disti!8tio! bet6ee! base a!d superstru8ture- this mea!s that the sphere o
e8o!omi8 produ8tio! is i! !o 6ay more JrealK tha! ideology or s8ie!8e- that it has !o o!tologi8al
priority over them- so 6e should aba!do! eve! the !otio! o the Jdetermi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8eK o
all so8ial lie by the e8o!omy7 /ith regard to the topi8 o virtual reality- this mea!s that it is !ot e!ough
to say that reality is al6ays suppleme!ted by virtualityT o!e should drop the disti!8tio! itsel a!d 8laim
that all reality is virtual7 9! the e8o!omy- o!e should also drop the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the Jreal
e8o!omyK @the produ8tio! o material goodsA a!d the Jvirtual e8o!omyK @i!a!8ial spe8ulatio! 6ith !o
ou!datio! i! real produ8tio!A+ the 6hole e8o!omy- !o matter ho6 real- is already virtual7 Su8h a dire8t
u!iversaliUatio! is !o!etheless too hasty7 9 6hat 6e e?perie!8e as reality is to retai! its 8o!siste!8y- it
has to be suppleme!ted by a virtual Ji8tio!KEthis parado?- k!o6! already to 3e!tham- 6as
poig!a!tly ormulated by Dhesterto!+ J.iterature a!d i8tio! are t6o e!tirely diere!t thi!gs7
.iterature is a lu?ury- i8tio! is a !e8essity7K
10
=o6ever- it 6as also 3e!tham 6ho sa6 8learly that 6e
!evertheless 8a! @a!d shouldA 8learly disti!guish bet6ee! reality a!d i8tio!Etherei! resides the
parado? he tried to 8apture 6ith his !otio! o i8tio!s+ although 6e 8a! 8learly disti!guish bet6ee!
reality a!d i8tio!- 6e 8a!!ot simply drop i8tio! a!d retai! o!ly realityT i 6e drop i8tio!- reality itsel
disi!tegrates- loses its o!tologi8al 8o!siste!8y7
A e6 years ago- a 8ari8ature appeared i! a 1erma! daily !e6spaper depi8ti!g ive me!
a!s6eri!g the Nuestio!+ J/hat 6ould you like to do duri!g your summer holidayMK 0a8h o them gave
a diere!t a!s6er @read a good book- visit a ara6ay 8ou!try- rest o! a su!!y bea8h- have u! eati!g
a!d dri!ki!g 6ith rie!ds OA- but- i! a 8loud above the head o ea8h o them- depi8ti!g 6hat they 6ere
really dreami!g about- 6as a! image o a !aked 6oma!7 The poi!t is obvious7 3e!eath the sembla!8e
o 8iviliUed i!terests- there is o!ly o!e thi!g+ se?7 The 8ari8ature is ormally 6ro!g+ 6e all k!o6 that
6e are Jreally al6ays thi!ki!g about that-K but the Nuestio! is i! 6hat pre8ise 6ay- 6hat 6orks as the
obje8t:8ause o our desire- 6hat a!tasy:rame sustai!s our desireM H!e 6ay to make this poi!t 8lear
6ould be to i!vert the 8ari8ature a!d have ea8h ma! givi!g the same a!s6erEJ9 6a!t to have a lot o
se?RKEa!d putti!g the !o!:se?ual ideas @resti!g o! a su!!y bea8h- et87A i!to the 8louds to represe!t
their i!timate thoughts- thus providi!g a 8lue to 6hat pre8ise mode o 1ouissance is bei!g targeted+ o!e
ma! dreams o havi!g se? i! a ara6ay- e?oti8 pla8e like a =i!du temple- surrou!ded by eroti8 statuesT
a!other dreams about maki!g love o! a se8luded- sa!dy bea8h @maybe 6ith a! e?hibitio!ist t6ist su8h
as bei!g se8retly observed by a group o 8hildre! playi!g !earbyA- a!d so o!7
At its best- 8i!ema plays 6ith this role o i8tio! @or a!tasyA as a suppleme!t to reality-
guara!teei!g its 8o!siste!8y7 This is !ot just a 8ase o relyi!g o! spe8ial ee8ts to prese!t a a!tasiUed
6orld as reality+ 8i!ema is at its best 6he!- through the subtleties o mise*en*sc>ne- it makes the
spe8tator e?perie!8e reality itsel as somethi!g a!tasmati87 9! the i!al s8e!e o Alo!so Duaro!Is
,hildren of Men- Theo a!d *ee- a you!g bla8k illegal:immigra!t 6oma! 6ith the irst !e6bor! baby- a
hope or all huma!ity- board a small boat7 Theo ro6s *ee a!d her baby out to the buoy that marks the
re!deUvous poi!t 6ith the -omorrow- a lab:ship 8arryi!g the i!depe!de!t s8ie!tist 6ho is 6orki!g o!
solvi!g the i!ertility problem7 *ee sees blood drippi!g i! the boat- a!d Theo admits that he 6as shot
duri!g their es8ape7 As the -omorrow emerges rom the thi8k og- Theo loses 8o!s8ious!ess a!d
slumps to the side o the boat7 The beauty o this e!di!g is that- although shot realisti8ally- as a! a8tual
eve!t- it 8a! 8learly also be read as the a!tasy o the dyi!g Theo to 6hom the boat magi8ally appears
out o the mysti8 ogEi! reality- they are just alo!e i! a driti!g boat- goi!g !o6here7
A more 8omple? pro8edure is that o the so:8alled J=it8h8o8kia! ellipse-K 6hose e?emplary
8ase is the murder o To6!se!d i! the )4 buildi!g i! orth by orthwest7
11
Foger Thor!hill arrives
at the )4- se8retly ollo6ed by the killer Valeria!7 9! the re8eptio! hall- Thor!hill asks a 8lerk to 8all
To6!se!d- 6ho duly arrives7 /he! the t6o me! are sta!di!g a8e to a8e- 6e see Valeria! observi!g
them rom the 8orridor a!d putti!g o! his glovesEa! i!di8atio! that he is about to kill someo!e7 /e do
!ot yet k!o6 6ho he pla!s to murder- though 6e probably assume that it is Thor!hill- si!8e Valeria!Is
group already tried to kill him the previous eve!i!g7 The three 8hara8ters are positio!ed i! a li!e- 6ith
Thor!hill a!d To6!se!d a8i!g ea8h other- a!d Valeria! behi!d To6!se!d- so that the latter also
u!8tio!s as a! obsta8le- preve!ti!g a dire8t 8o!ro!tatio! bet6ee! Thor!hill a!d Valeria!- the true
oppo!e!ts7 Thor!hill sudde!ly dra6s rom his po8ket the photo he ou!d i! J*apla!IsK hotel room-
sho6i!g To6!se!d- va! Gamme @the master 8rimi!al o the ilmA- a!d a e6 others7 Coi!ti!g at va!
Gamme- Thor!hill asks To6!se!d- JGo you k!o6 this ma!MK 3ut there is !o time or To6!se!d to
reply+ i! a short blurred shot- 6e see a k!ie lyi!g to6ards him- the! To6!se!dIs a8e distorted i!to a
grima8e o pai! a!d surprise as he alls or6ard i!to Thor!hillIs arms7 A brie shot o Valeria! ru!!i!g
a6ay rom the s8e!e ollo6s- beore the ilm 8uts ba8k to Thor!hill a!d To6!se!d- 6ho slides do6!-
reveali!g a big k!ie stu8k i! his ba8k7 Do!used- Thor!hill automati8ally grabs the k!ie a!d pulls it
out7 At that very mome!t a photographer takes a shot o Thor!hill holdi!g the k!ie above To6!se!dIs
body- obviously 8reati!g the impressio! that he is the murderer7 FealiUi!g this- Thor!hill drops the
k!ie a!d ru!s a6ay i! the 8o!usio!E8learly a8ti!g like a guilty suspe8t7
/hat is !otable about this s8e!e is that 6e do !ot really see the murder bei!g 8arried outE!ot
o!ly do 6e !ever see To6!se!d a!d Valeria! i! the same shot- but the very 8o!ti!uity o the a8tio! is
broke!+ 6e see 6hat happe!s beoreha!d @Valeria!Is preparatio!sA a!d ater6ards @To6!se!d droppi!g
i!to Thor!hillIs armsA- but 6e do !ot see Valeria! thro6i!g the k!ie- !or eve! his a8e 6he! he
de8ides to a8tT 6e o!ly see its ee8t- To6!se!dIs sho8ked a8e7 The 8ausal 8hai! seems i!terrupted i!
this J=it8h8o8kia! abstra8tio!K+ the 8lear li!k bet6ee! Valeria! a!d To6!se!dIs death is- o 8ourse-
implied- but at the same time the immediate impressio! is that To6!se!d drops dead be8ause he has
see! somethi!g terriyi!g a!d>or orbidde!- somethi!g he should !ot have see!- i! the photo sho6! to
him by Thor!hill @6hi8h- i! a 6ay- is trueRA- so that Thor!hillIs sudde! gesture o rea8hi!g i!to his
po8ket a!d pulli!g out the photo be8omes eNuivale!t to the threate!i!g gesture o pulli!g out a gu!7
This ee8t is rei!or8ed by the ge!eral spatial dispositio! o the s8e!e- 6hi8h 8learly mobiliUes
=it8h8o8kIs 8lassi8al divisio! bet6ee! the spa8e o ordi!ary reality @the busy re8eptio! hall o the )4
buildi!g 6ith groups o people talki!g i! the ba8kgrou!dA a!d the spa8e o a! obs8e!e subterra!ea!
proto:reality i! 6hi8h da!ger lurks @the 8ellar i! )sychoT i! 6ertigo- the dark room behi!d the mirror i!
the loristIs re8eptio! room- rom 6hi8h S8ottie observes ,adelei!e through the 8ra8k- et87A7 9! other
6ords- it is as i the o!ly reality o the s8e!e is that o the big re8eptio! hall i! 6hi8h Thor!hill a!d
To6!se!d meet- 6hile Valeria! operates rom a!other spe8tral spa8e- visible to !o o!e- i!terrupti!g the
!ormal 8ausal 8hai! o ordi!ary reality- a!d thus dispossessi!g Thor!hill o the a8t attributed to him
@or- rather- attributi!g to him a! a8t 6hi8h 6as !ot hisA7
/hy is this i8tio!al suppleme!t !eededM /hat hole does it illM 9! order to guara!tee the
symboli8 8o!siste!8y o our JsphereK o lie @to use SloterdijkIs e?pressio!A- somethi!gEsome
e?8reme!tal 6asteEhas to disappear7 The parado? o radi8al e8ology- 6hi8h blames huma!ity or
disturbi!g the !atural homeostasis- is that- i! it- a sel:relati!g reversal o this logi8 o e?8lusio! takes
pla8e+ the Je?8reme!t-K the destru8tive eleme!t 6hi8h has to disappear so that the bala!8e 8a! be re:
established- is ultimately humanity itself7 As a result o its hubris- its 6ill to domi!ate a!d e?ploit
!ature- huma!ity has be8ome the stai! i! the pi8ture o the !atural idyll @as i! those !arratives i! 6hi8h
e8ologi8al 8atastrophe is see! as the reve!ge o the ,other 0arth or 1aia or the 6ou!ds i!li8ted o!
her by huma!ityA7 9s this !ot the ultimate proo o the ideologi8al !ature o e8ologyM /hat this mea!s is
that there is !othi!g more dista!t rom a truly radi8al e8ology tha! the image o a pure idylli8 !ature
8lea!sed o all huma! dirt7 Cerhaps- the!- i! order to break out o this logi8- 6e should 8ha!ge the very
8oordi!ates o the relatio!ship bet6ee! huma!ity a!d pre:huma! !ature+ huma!ity is a!ti:!ature- it
does i!terve!e i! the !atural 8y8le- disturbi!g or 8o!trolli!g it Jartii8ially-K postpo!i!g the i!evitable
dege!eratio!- buyi!g itsel time7 4evertheless- as su8h- it is still part o !ature- si!8e Jthere is !o
!ature7K 9 4ature 8o!8eived as the bala!8ed 8y8le o .ie is a huma! a!tasy- the! huma!ity is @8losest
toA !ature pre8isely 6he! it brutally establishes its divisio! rom !ature- imposes o! it its o6!
temporary- limited order- 8reati!g its o6! JsphereK 6ithi! the !atural multipli8ity7
12
Go 6e !ot i!d a
similar logi8 i! the radi8al:revolutio!ary imagi!aryM 9! a so!g origi!ally part o -he Measure -a"en-
but later let out- 3re8ht proposes to ide!tiy the revolutio!ary age!t 6ith the 8a!!ibal 6ho ate the last
o the 8a!!ibals i! order to a!!ihilate 8a!!ibalismEthe Dhorus si!gs o the 6ish to be the last bit o
dirt i! the room- 6hi8h- i! the i!al gesture o erasi!g itsel- 6ill make the e!tire spa8e 8lea!7
Di!ema at its 6orst tries to ill this void !ot by 6ay o i8tio!- but by dire8tly depi8ti!g the
e?8luded dirt7 For e?ample- the 6orst mome!t o vulgarity i! Schindlers .ist o88urs 6he! Spielberg
8ould !ot resist the temptatio! o dire8tly stagi!g the mome!t o S8hi!dlerIs ethi8al tra!sormatio!
rom a 8old ma!ipulator o the misortu!es o others to a subje8t over6helmed by a se!se o
respo!sibility to6ards the 2e6s7 The tra!sormatio! o88urs 6he! S8hi!dler- out o! a mor!i!g ride 6ith
his mistress o! a hill above Dra8o6- observes 1erma! u!its e!teri!g the 2e6ish ghetto7 The mome!t o
ethi8al a6are!ess is a88ompa!ied by the shots o the little 2e6ish girl i! the red 8oat @i! a bla8k:a!d:
6hite ilmA7 This depi8tio! is properly obs8e!e a!d blasphemous+ it e!8roa8hes i! a vulgar 6ay upo!
the abyssal mystery o the sudde! rise o good!ess- tryi!g to establish a 8ausal li!k 6here a gap should
be let ope!7 A similar vulgarity o88urs i! )olloc"- a ilm 6hi8h like6ise ailed to resist a temptatio!-
i! this 8ase that o depi8ti!g the very mome!t o the i!ve!tio! o a8tio! pai!ti!g7 Credi8tably e!ough-
the dru!ke! Collo8k a88ide!tally spills a jug o pai!t o!to a 8a!vas- a!d- surprised by the 8omple? a!d
stra!gely attra8tive stai! that results- gets a! idea or a !e6 te8h!iNue7 The value o this vulgar a88ou!t
o the mysterious mome!t o 8reatio! is the same as that o 2o!atha! S6itIs iro!i8 a88ou!t o the birth
o la!guage+ at irst- i! order to i!orm others about abse!t obje8ts- people 8arried o! their ba8ks small
repli8as o all obje8ts- u!til someo!e 8ame up 6ith the i!ge!ious idea o repla8i!g the models 6ith
6ords desig!ati!g the obje8ts7
The relatio!ship bet6ee! reality a!d i8tio! also holds or substa!8e a!d subje8t+ true- substa!8e
is al6ays already a subje8t- it emerges o!ly retroa8tively- through its subje8tive mediatio!T !o!etheless-
6e should disti!guish themEthe subje8t al6ays- 8o!stitutively- 8omes se8o!d- it reers to a! already
give! Substa!8e- i!trodu8i!g i!to it abstra8t disti!8tio!s a!d i8tio!s- teari!g apart its orga!i8 u!ity7
This is 6hy- 6hile 6e 8a! i!terpret the Spi!oUa! substa!8e as the Jsubje8t at 6ork-K there is i! Spi!oUa
!o subje8t at a dista!8e rom Substa!8e7
9 the limit has priority over 6hat is beyo!d it- the! all there is is @phe!ome!alA reality a!d its
limitatio!7 There is !othi!g beyo!d the limit- or- more pre8isely- 6hat is beyo!d the limit 8oi!8ides
6ith the limit itselT this 8oi!8idi!g o the limit 6ith its beyo!d mea!s that the 3eyo!d has al6ays
already passed over i!to the pro8ess o be8omi!g 6hi8h ge!erates determi!ate @phe!ome!alA e!tities7
9! other 6ords- the 3eyo!d is like =egelIs pure 3ei!g+ al6ays already rele8ted>mediated- passed:over
i!to be8omi!g7 The limit is thus !ot merely !egative- it is the produ8tive !egativity 6hi8h ge!erates
determi!ate realityT alter!atively+ !egatio! is al6ays already the !egatio! o !egatio!- the produ8tive
moveme!t o its o6! disappeari!g7
/hat is beyo!d the limit- beyo!d the s8ree! 6hi8h de!ies us @prote8ts us romA a!y dire8t
a88ess to the 9!:itselM There is o!ly o!e 8o!vi!8i!g a!s6er+ 6hat is JreallyK beyo!d the limit- o! the
other side o the s8ree!- is !ot !othi!g- but rather the same reality we find in front of the screen7 Thi!k
o a theater stage a!d all the ma8hi!ery behi!d it used to ge!erate the staged illusio!+ 6hat really
a88ou!ts or the latter is !ot this ma8hi!ery as su8h but the rame 6hi8h delimits the Jmagi8K spa8e o
the stage rom the Jordi!aryK reality o:stageT i 6e 6a!t to e?plore the mystery o the illusio! by
goi!g ba8kstage- 6e 6ill dis8over there e?a8tly the same ordi!ary reality as e?ists i! ro!t o stage7
@The proo is that- eve! i the ba8kstage ma8hi!ery is totally visible- as i! some theaters- the staged
reality is still ge!erated7A /hat 8ou!ts is that o!e part o ordi!ary reality is separated rom the rest by a
rame 6hi8h desig!ates it as a magi8al spa8e o illusio!7 /e have o!e a!d the same reality- separated
rom itsel @or- rather- redoubledA by a s8ree!7 This i!versio!:i!to:itsel by 6ay o 6hi8h reality
e!8ou!ters itsel o! a a!tasmati8 stage is 6hat 8ompels us to aba!do! the u!ivo8ity o bei!g+ the ield
o @6hat 6e e?perie!8e asA reality is al6ays traversed by a 8ut 6hi8h i!s8ribes appeara!8e i!to
appeara!8e itsel7 9! other 6ords- i there is a ield o reality- the! it is !ot e!ough to 8laim that reality
is i!here!tly a!tasmati8- that it is al6ays 8o!stituted by a tra!s8e!de!tal rameT this rame has to
i!s8ribe itsel i!to the ield o reality- i! the guise o a diere!8e bet6ee! Jordi!aryK reality a!d the
ethereal reality+ 6ithi! our e?perie!8e o reality @stru8tured by a!tasyA- a part o reality has to appear
to us as Ja!tasmati8-K as !ot Jreal reality7K
Fe8all the s8e!e- rom 6ertigo- o S8ottieIs a!d 2udyIs irst date @at 0r!ieIs agai!- as 6ith
,adelei!eA- 6here the 8ouple ails to e!gage i! a mea!i!gul 8o!versatio!7 All o a sudde!- S8ottieIs
gaUe i?es o! some poi!t behi!d 2udy- a!d 6e see that he is looki!g at a 6oma! vaguely similar to
,adelei!e- dressed i! the same gray go6!7 /he! 2udy !oti8es 6hat has attra8ted S8ottieIs gaUe- she is-
o 8ourse- deeply hurt7 The 8ru8ial mome!t here is 6he! 6e see- rom S8ottieIs poi!t o vie6- the t6o
6ome! i! the same shot+ 2udy o! the right- 8lose to him- the 6oma! i! gray to the let- i! the
ba8kgrou!d7 Agai!- 6e have vulgar reality side:by:side 6ith a! ethereal apparitio! o the ideal7 The
split rom the shot o ,idge a!d the portrait o Darlotta is here e?ter!aliUed o!to t6o diere!t perso!s+
2udy 8lose up a!d the mome!tary spe8tral apparitio! o ,adelei!e behi!dE6ith the additio!al iro!y-
missed by S8ottie- that the vulgar 2udy is i! a8t the ,adelei!e he is desperately seeki!g amo!g the
leeti!g appeara!8es o stra!gers7 This brie mome!t i! 6hi8h S8ottie is deluded i!to thi!ki!g that 6hat
he sees is ,adelei!e is the mome!t at 6hi8h the +bsolute appears+ it appears Jas su8hK i! the very
domai! o appeara!8es- i! those sublime mome!ts 6he! a supra:se!sible dime!sio! Jshi!es throughK
i! our ordi!ary reality7 /he! Clato i!trodu8es three o!tologi8al levels @9deas- their material 8opies- a!d
8opies o these 8opiesA a!d dismisses art as the J8opy o a 8opy-K 6hat gets lost is that the 9dea 8a! o!ly
emerge i! the dista!8e that separates our ordi!ary material reality @the se8o!d levelA rom its 8opy7
/he! 6e 8opy a material obje8t- what 6e a8tually 8opy- 6hat our 8opy reers to- is !ever this
parti8ular obje8t itsel but its 9dea7 9t is similar to a mask 6hi8h e!ge!ders a third reality- a ghost i! the
mask 6hi8h is !ot the a8e hidde! be!eath it7 9! this pre8ise se!se- the 9dea is the appeara!8e as
appeara!8e @as =egel a!d .a8a! put itA+ the 9dea is somethi!g that appears 6he! reality @the irst:level
8opy or imitatio! o the 9deaA is itsel 8opied7 9t is that 6hi8h is i! the 8opy more tha! the origi!al itsel7
4o 6o!der that Clato rea8ted i! su8h a pa!i8ky 6ay agai!st the threat o art+ as .a8a! poi!ted out i! his
Seminar ;I- art @as the 8opy o a 8opyA does !ot 8ompete 6ith material obje8ts as Jdire8t-K irst:level
8opies o the 9deaT rather- it 8ompetes 6ith the supra:se!sible 9dea itsel7 /e should take this
redoubli!g o reality i! the stro!gest se!se- as a u!dame!tal eature o the o!tology o our 6orld+
every ield o reality 8o!tai!s a! e!ramed- separated- part 6hi8h is !ot e?perie!8ed as ully real- but as
i8tio!7
Goes this 8ut i! the u!ivo8ity o bei!g- this !e8essity o suppleme!ti!g Jordi!ary realityK 6ith
i8tio!- demo!strate that la8k is primordial 6ith regard to 8urvatureM H!e 8a! easily ge!erate 8urvature
rom la8k a!d vi8e versa7 H! the o!e ha!d- 6e 8a! 8o!8eive 8urvature @the rotary moveme!t o the
driveA as a 6ay o avoidi!g the deadlo8k o primordial la8k7 /hat 8omes irst is the la8k+ the
i!8estuous Hbje8t o desire is al6ays missi!g- it eludes the subje8tIs grasp- all that desire 8a! 8at8h are
the meto!ymies o the Thi!g- !ever the Thi!g itsel7 =o6ever- this repeated ailure to rea8h the Thi!g
8a! be i!verted i!to su88ess i the sour8e o e!joyme!t is dei!ed !ot as rea8hi!g the Thi!g- but as the
satisa8tio! brought about by the repeated eort to arrive at it7 This bri!gs us to the Freudia! drive-
6hose true aim is !ot its goal @obje8tA- but the repeated attempt to rea8h it @or e?ample- 6hat bri!gs
satisa8tio! i! the oral drive is !ot its obje8t [milk\- but the repeated a8t o su8ki!gA7 /e 8a! thus
8o!8eive 8urvature- its 8ir8ular moveme!t- as o!tologi8ally se8o!dary- as a 6ay o tur!i!g the ailure o
desire i!to su88ess7
H! the other ha!d- i! a GeleuUia! mode- o!e 8a! 8o!8eive the e?perie!8e o la8k itsel as a ki!d
o perspe8tival illusio!- as a misre8og!itio! o the rotary moveme!t o the drive7 9! this 8ase- 6hat
8omes irst- the primordial a8t- is the rotary moveme!t o the drive- a!d desire emerges rom a
teleologi8al misreadi!g o the drive- as i its 8ir8ular moveme!t does !ot bri!g satisa8tio! i! itsel but
has to be read as a rea8tio! to some primordial la8k7
1"
/hat- the!- 8omes irst- la8k or 8urvatureM
=egel or Spi!oUaM This 8hoi8e is a trap to be avoided+ o!e should i!sist that the alter!ative Jla8k or
8urvatureK is a ki!d o primordial dira8tio!- a paralla? 6ith !o priority7
9t is pre8isely apropos the topi8 o the clinamen that the gap separati!g =egel rom Spi!oUa 8a!
be ormulated7 Spi!oUa! Substa!8e 8a! be 8o!8eived as the produ8tive or8e 6hi8h ge!erates the
multipli8ity o clinamina- a!d 6hi8h is as su8h a virtual e!tity totally imma!e!t to its produ8ts- prese!t
a!d a8tual o!ly i! its produ8ts- i! clinamina7 For =egel- ho6ever- the a8tually e?isti!g plurality o
8li!ami!a presupposes a more radi8al J8li!ame!KEa reversal or !egativityEi! the Substa!8e itsel
@6hi8h is 6hy Substa!8e has to be 8o!8eived also as subje8tA7 To put it i! 1!osti8 terms- the Fall- the
gap bet6ee! 1od a!d reality- presupposes a prior reversal i! 1od himsel7 The e?ample o alter!ative
moder!ities 6ill help make this 8lear+ or a Spi!oUa!- the plurality o moder!ities e?presses the
produ8tive po6er o the 8apitalist so8ial Substa!8e- 6hile or a =egelia!- there is a plurality o
moder!ities be8ause the 8apitalist so8ial Substa!8e is i! itsel Jperverted-K a!tago!isti87 So 6hy is there
somethi!g rather tha! !othi!gM 3e8ause !othi!g itsel is divided i!to t6o @the JalseK a!d the JtrueK
va8uum- to put it i! the terms o Nua!tum physi8sAEit is this te!sio! or gap i! the void 6hi8h pushes it
to6ards ge!erati!g somethi!gs7
1(
=o6- the!- are 6e to thi!k together the t6o mome!ts o !egativity u!ited i! the 1erma! 6ord
6erneinung- the Freudo:Spi!oUa! ver @clinamen a!d other orms o displa8eme!tA a!d the more radi8al
=egelia! nein @8ut- !egatio!- voidAM /hat i the t6o dime!sio!s are brought together i! .a8a!Is
ormula b:a- 6hi8h 8o!joi!s the void or !egativity o the subje8t a!d the stai! that blurs realityM 6er
sta!ds or the a!amorphi8 distortio! o reality- or the stai! 6hi8h i!s8ribes the subje8t i!to reality- a!d
nein is the gap- hole- i! reality7 They are t6o sides o the same 8oi!- or- rather- the opposite sides o a
,Zbius ba!d+ the 8orrelatio! o the empty pla8e a!d the e?8essive obje8t7 There is !o gap 6ithout a
protra8tio! or distortio! o reality @!o subje8t 6ithout its obje8tal 8ou!terpartA- a!d vi8e versa- every
a!amorphi8 distortio! o reality bears 6it!ess to a subje8t7
9s it the! possible to des8ribe some ki!d o u!derlyi!g stru8ture 6hi8h allo6s us to ge!erate the
alter!ative o la8k a!d 8urvatureM 9t is here- perhaps- that the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the t6o va8uums- the
JalseK o!e a!d the JrealK o!e- 8a! be o some use i!soar as it re!ders a mi!imal stru8ture o
imbala!8e- o a gap that divides a thi!g rom itsel- 6hi8h 8a! be operatio!aliUed i! the dire8tio! either
o the JalseK va8uum @ull pea8e as the u!attai!able goalA or o the JtrueK va8uum @the bala!8e o the
8ir8ular moveme!tA7 Cerhaps this gap separati!g the t6o va8uums is the! the ultimate 6ord @or o!e o
them- at leastA that 6e 8a! pro!ou!8e o! the u!iverse+ a ki!d o primordial o!tologi8al dislo8atio! or
diffArance o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h- !o matter ho6 pea8eul thi!gs may appear sub specie aeternitatis- the
u!iverse is out o joi!t a!d eppur si muove7
1#
So it is !ot e!ough to say- i! a radi8al readi!g o
Spi!oUa- that Substa!8e is !othi!g but the pro8ess o its clinamenEhere- Substa!8e remai!s H!e- a
Dause imma!e!t to its ee8ts7 =ere 6e should take a step urther a!d reverse the relatio!ship+ there is
!o Substa!8e- o!ly the Feal as the absolute gap- !o!:ide!tity- a!d parti8ular phe!ome!a @modesA are
H!es- so ma!y attempts to stabiliUe this gap7 @/hat this also mea!s is that the Feal at its most radi8al is
!ot a 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter+ the e!8ou!ter is ho6 the FealEthe Feal o the absolute gapEretur!s
6ithi! the 8o!stituted reality as its symptomal poi!t o impossibility7A
This !otio! o t6o va8uums- ho6ever- bri!gs us ba8k to =egel- to the gap bet6ee! Substa!8e
a!d Subje8t hi!ted at i! the amous ormula about the Absolute bei!g J!ot only a Substa!8e- but also a
Subje8t7K The =egelia! totality is !ot the ideal o a! orga!i8 /hole- but a 8riti8al !otio!Eto lo8ate a
phe!ome!o! i! its totality does !ot mea! to see the hidde! harmo!y o the /hole- but to i!8lude i! a
system all its Jsymptoms-K a!tago!isms- a!d i!8o!siste!8ies as i!tegral parts7 H! this readi!g- the
Jalse va8uumK desig!ates the e?isti!g orga!i8 /hole- 6ith its de8eitul stability a!d harmo!y- 6hile
the true va8uum i!tegrates i!to this /hole all the destabiliUi!g e?8esses 6hi8h are !e8essary or its
reprodu8tio! @a!d 6hi8h ultimately bri!g about its rui!A7 The =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess thus
u!8tio!s as a repetitive u!dermi!i!g o a Jalse va8uumK by a JtrueK o!e- as a repetitive shit rom
Substa!8e to Subje8t7 At its most radi8al- this gap appears as the mi!imal ethi8al 8o!trast bet6ee!
3uddhism a!d =egelia! diale8ti8s- bet6ee! the attai!me!t o pea8e @the primordial Void- Symmetry-
3ala!8e- =armo!y- or 6hatever it is 8alledA a!d the persiste!t eppur si muoveF 3uddhism thus provides
a radi8al a!s6er to the Nuestio! J/hy is there somethi!g a!d !ot !othi!gMK+ there is o!ly 4othi!g-
!othi!g Jreally e?ists-K all Jsomethi!gs-K all determi!ate e!tities- emerge o!ly rom a subje8tive
perspe8tival illusio!7 Giale8ti8al materialism here goes a step urther+ even othing does not e&istEi
by J4othi!gK 6e mea! the primordial abyss i! 6hi8h all diere!8es are obliterated7 /hat- ultimately-
Jthere isK is o!ly the absolute Giere!8e- the sel:repelli!g 1ap7
9! order to grasp the radi8al li!k bet6ee! the subje8t a!d !othi!g!ess @the VoidA- o!e should be
very pre8ise i! readi!g =egelIs amous stateme!t o! substa!8e a!d the subje8t+ it is !ot e!ough to
emphasiUe that the subje8t is !ot a positively e?isti!g sel:ide!ti8al e!tity- that it sta!ds or the
i!8omplete!ess o substa!8e- or its i!!er a!tago!ism a!d moveme!t- or the 4othi!g!ess 6hi8h
th6arts the substa!8e rom 6ithi!- destroyi!g its u!ity- a!d thus dy!amiUes itEthe !otio! best
re!dered by =egelIs remark- apropos the Ju!restK o substa!tial u!ity- that the Sel is this very u!rest
@Jeben diese 3nruhe ist das SelbstKA7 This !otio! o the subje8t still presupposes the substa!tial H!e as
a starti!g poi!t- eve! i this H!e is al6ays already distorted- split- a!d so o!7 A!d it is this very
presuppositio! that should be aba!do!ed+ at the begi!!i!g @eve! i it is a mythi8al o!eA- there is !o
substa!tial H!e- but 4othi!g!ess itselT every H!e 8omes se8o!d- emerges through the sel:relati!g o
this 4othi!g!ess7 9! other 6ords- 4othi!g as !egatio! is !ot primarily the !egatio! o somethi!g- o a
positive e!tity- but the !egatio! o itsel7
=egel ormulated this 8ru8ial i!sight at the begi!!i!g o the se8o!d book o his .ogic @o!
J0sse!8eKA- 6he! he deals 6ith the logi8 o rele8tio!7
1'
=egel begi!s 6ith the oppositio!- 8o!stitutive
o the !otio! o esse!8e- bet6ee! esse!8e a!d its appeari!g i! the illusory bei!g @ScheinA+ JThe
immedia8y o the determi!ate!ess i! illusory bei!g over agai!st esse!8e is 8o!seNue!tly !othi!g other
tha! esse!8eIs o6! immedia8yK
1$
Ebe!eath the lu? o the illusory bei!g @o appeari!g+ ScheinA- there
is !o substa!tial sel:ide!ti8al 0sse!8e+ the immedia8y o illusory appeari!g overlaps 6ith the
immedia8y o the !o!:illusory substa!8e- o its JtrueK bei!gT or- i! .a8a!ia! terms- Jesse!8e is this
stru8ture i! 6hi8h the most i!terior is 8o!joi!ed to the most e?terior i! its tur!i!g7K
1&
/hat this mea!s
is that all there is is the lu? o illusory bei!g- o its passi!g determi!atio!s- a!d the !othi!g!ess
be!eath it+

These t6o mome!ts- !amely the !othi!g!ess- but as persisti!g [/estehen\- a!d the bei!g- but as a
mome!t- or the !egativity i! itsel a!d the rele8ted immedia8y- that 8o!stitute the mome!ts o illusory
bei!g- are thus moments of the essence itselfT 6hat 6e have here is !ot a! illusory sho6 o bei!g in
esse!8e- or a! illusory sho6 o esse!8e in bei!gT the illusory bei!g i! esse!8e is !ot the illusory bei!g
o a! other- but is illusory being in itself! the illusory being of essence itself7 9llusory bei!g is esse!8e
itsel i! the determi!ate!ess o bei!g7
1%
=egel had already made this 8laim i! his )henomenology- 6here he stated that the supra:
se!sible esse!8e is appeara!8e as appeara!8eT it is that 6hi8h is i! the 8opy more tha! the origi!al
itsel7
THE HEGELIAN S!B)ECT

This bri!gs us ba8k to the stateme!t o! substa!8e a!d subje8t rom the J9!trodu8tio!K to the
)henomenology+ =egel does !ot simply say that JSubsta!8e is Subje8tKE6hat he says is that o!e
should !ot 8o!8eive the Absolute Jonly as Substa!8e- but also as Subje8t7K The Subje8t is thus !ot
merely a subordi!ated mome!t o Substa!8e- o the substa!tial totalityT but !either is Substa!8e
dire8tly the Subje8t- so that 6e should !ot assert their immediate ide!tity7 @JSubsta!8eEthe Hrigi! o
everythi!g- its ou!di!g pri!8ipleEis the produ8tive po6er o sel:relati!g !egativity 6hi8h is the 8ore
o subje8tivityKT that is- Substa!8e i! its a8tuality is !othi!g but the sub1ect at wor"7A The Subje8t is
al6ays already related to some heteroge!eous substa!tial 8o!te!t- it al6ays 8omes se8o!d- as the
!egatio! or mediatio! o this 8o!te!t- as its splitti!g or distortio!- a!d this se8o!dary 8hara8ter should
be mai!tai!ed to the e!d- the subje8t should !ever be dire8tly elevated i!to the grou!di!g Cri!8iple o
all reality7
This Jrestrai!i!gK o the subje8tEthe idea that =egelIs Substa!8e ] Subje8t 6orks as a!
Ji!i!ite judgme!tK o t6o i!8ompatible terms a!d !ot as a ull subje8tiviUatio! o Substa!8e- !ot as the
dire8t assertio! o the Subje8t as the produ8tive grou!d o all reality- as the age!t 6hi8h Js6allo6s upK
or appropriates all there isEshould not be read as a hal:baked 8ompromise- i! the se!se o Jtoo mu8h
subje8tivity is sel:destru8tive- so 6e must mai!tai! the proper measure7K Su8h a 8ompromised positio!
is !ot o!ly philosophi8ally !aSve- but outright 6ro!g+ the move towards %restraining' the sub1ect
e<uals the full assertion of sub1ectivity- si!8e- at its most eleme!tary- the Jsubje8tK is !ot a substa!tial
age!t ge!erati!g all reality- but pre8isely the mome!t o 8ut- ailure- i!itude- illusio!- Jabstra8tio!7K
J4ot o!ly as Substa!8e- but also as Subje8tK does not mea! simply that Substa!8e is JreallyK a or8e o
subje8tive sel:mediatio!- et87- but that Substa!8e is i! itsel o!tologi8ally la6ed- i!8omplete7 This is
6hat =egel 8learly sa6- agai!st the Jsubje8tivistK traditio! 6hi8h peaks i! Fi8hteIs !otio! o the sel:
positi!g o the absolute 9+ the subje8t does !ot 8ome irst- it is !ot a !e6 !ame or the H!e 6hi8h
grou!ds all- but the !ame or the i!!er impossibility or sel:blo8kage o the H!e7
/hat this mea!s is that illusio! is !e8essary- that it is i!here!t to truth+ la vAritA surgit de la
mAprise @Jtruth arises out o misre8og!itio!KA- as .a8a! at his most =egelia! put it- a!d this is 6hat the
Spi!oUa! 8a!!ot a88ept7 /hat the Spi!oUa! 8a! a!d does thi!k is the !e8essity o errorT 6hat he 8a!!ot
a88ept is error or misre8og!itio! as imma!e!t to truth a!d prior to itEepistemologi8ally a!d
o!tologi8ally- the pro8ess has to begi! 6ith error- a!d truth 8a! o!ly emerge se8o!d- as a repeated
error- as it 6ere7 /hyM 3e8ause- as 6e have see! apropos )!dersta!di!g a!d Feaso!- truth @Feaso!A is
!ot a 8orre8tio! o error @o the u!ilateral abstra8tio!s o )!dersta!di!gAT truth is error as such- 6hat
6e ee8tively do 6he! 6e 8ommit @per8eive ourselves as 8ommitti!gA a! error- so that error lies i! the
very gaUe 6hi8h per8eives the a8t as a! error7 9! other 6ords- =egelIs JSubsta!8e as Subje8tK should
thus be read i! a 6ay homologous to .a8a!Is re:readi!g o FreudIs amous ormula wo es war soll ich
werden- 6hi8h also should !ot be i!terpreted as a dema!d or the simple subje8tiviUatio! o the
u!8o!s8ious substa!8e @J9 should appropriate my u!8o!s8iousKA- but as the re8og!itio! o my pla8e
6ithi! it- o ho6 the subje8t e?ists o!ly through the i!8o!siste!8y o the u!8o!s8ious7
To re8apitulate- the =egelia! moti o Substa!8e as Subje8t mea!s that the Absolute Nua Feal is
!ot simply diere!t or diere!tiated rom i!ite e!titiesEthe Absolute is nothing but this diere!8e7
At its most eleme!tary- the Feal is !o!:ide!tity itsel+ the impossibility or d to be@8omeA Jully itsel7K
The Feal is !ot the e?ter!al i!truder or obsta8le preve!ti!g the realiUatio! o dIs ide!tity 6ith itsel-
but the absolutely imma!e!t impossibility o this ide!tity7 9t is !ot that d 8a!!ot ully realiUe itsel as d
be8ause a! e?ter!al obsta8le hi!ders itEthe impossibility 8omes irst- a!d the e?ter!al obsta8le
ultimately just materialiUes this impossibility7 As su8h- the Feal is opaNue- i!a88essible- out o rea8h-
and u!de!iable- impossible to by:pass or removeEi! it- la8k a!d surplus 8oi!8ide7 This overlappi!g
seems oreig! to diale8ti8s+ its 8oi!8ide!8e o opposites appears to be !ot o the same !ature as the
reversals a!d mediatio!s o the diale8ti8al pro8ess7 The Feal is rather the opaNue:i!determi!ate-
abyssal- pre:logi8al 3a8kgrou!d that is al6ays already there- presupposed by every properly diale8ti8al
pro8ess7 4o 6o!der that the philosopher 6ho irst 8omes to mi!d here is S8helli!g- 6ho- i! his 8ritiNue
o =egelIs J!egativeK philosophy- thematiUed the pre:logi8al 1rou!d o 3ei!g as a positivity 6hi8h is
opaNue a!d simulta!eously u!avoidable7 3ut is this really soM
The =egelia! 6ager is that the diale8ti8al pro8ess retroa8tively posits this presupposed
3a8kgrou!d as a sig! o its o6! i!8omplete!ess7 That is to say- i! =egel- the begi!!i!g has the status
o the .a8a!ia! Feal- 6hi8h is al6ays already lost- let behi!d- mediated- a!d so o!- a!d yet
simulta!eously somethi!g 6e 8a! !ever get rid o- somethi!g 6hi8h orever i!sists- 8o!ti!ues to hau!t
us7 For e?ample- 1ouissance as real is lost or those 6ho d6ell i! the symboli8 order- is !ever give!
dire8tly a!d so orthT ho6ever- the very loss o e!joyme!t ge!erates a! e!joyme!t o its o6!- a surplus:
e!joyme!t @plus*de*1ouirA- so that 1ouissance is simulta!eously somethi!g al6ays already lost a!d
somethi!g 6e 8a!!ot ever rid ourselves o7 /hat Freud 8alled the 8ompulsio! to repeat is grou!ded i!
this radi8ally ambiguous status o the Feal+ 6hat repeats itsel is the Feal itsel- 6hi8h- lost rom the
very begi!!i!g- persists i! retur!i!g agai! a!d agai!7
Goes !ot the =egelia! begi!!i!g have the same status- espe8ially 6he! he deals 6ith the
begi!!i!g o philosophyM 9t seems to repeat itsel agai! a!d agai!+ Hrie!tal spirituality- Carme!ides-
Spi!oUaEall sta!d or the i!augural gesture o philosophy 6hi8h has to be let behi!d i 6e are to
progress o! the lo!g road rom Substa!8e to Subje8t7 =o6ever- this begi!!i!g is !ot a! obsta8le pulli!g
us ba8k- but the very moti or i!stigator o Jdevelopme!tK+ the true developme!t- the passage to a !e6
level- o88urs o!ly through settli!g a88ou!ts 6ith the i!augural gesture agai! a!d agai!7 The begi!!i!g
is thus 6hat Fi8hte 8alled +nstoss+ obsta8le a!d i!8iteme!t at the same time7 The i!augural gesture
al6ays repeats itsel i! a !e6 guise+ the Hrie!tal begi!!i!g @Dhi!a a!d 9!dia- the irst versio! o /eing
and othingnessA sta!ds or the pre:philosophi8al abyss o 8haoti8 mythologyT Carme!ides sta!ds or
the philosophi8al begi!!i!g proper- the break 6ith mythology a!d the 8o!8eptual assertio! o the H!eT
6hile Spi!oUa desig!ates the moder! begi!!i!g @Substa!8e as the 8o!tai!er o thrivi!g multipli8itiesA7
/hy is Carme!ides- 6ho asserts that o!ly 3ei!g- the H!e- e?ists- !ot Hrie!talM /hy is he the irst
/ester! philosopherM The diere!8e is !ot at the level o 8o!te!t- but at the level o orm+ Carme!ides
says the same as the Hrie!tals- but he says it i! 8o!8eptual orm7 3y stati!g that J3ei!g is a!d !o!:
3ei!g is !ot-K by airmi!g the u!ity o bei!g a!d thi!ki!g- he i!trodu8es diere!8e- a mi!imal ormal
mediatio!- i!to the H!e- i! 8o!trast to Hrie!tal H!e 6hi8h is totally abyssal- 6hi8h !either is !or is
!ot7
20
The diere!8e bet6ee! Hrie!tal thought a!d Carme!idesIs is thus the diere!8e bet6ee! the 9!:
itsel a!d the For:itsel+ Carme!ides is the irst Jdogmati8K i! Dhesterto!Is se!se7 Dhesterto! 6rote
$rthodo&y as a reply to the 8riti8s o his previous book- 0eretics @1%0&AT i! the very last paragraph o
JDo!8ludi!g Femarks o! the 9mporta!8e o Hrthodo?y-K the last 8hapter o 0eretics- he says+

Truths tur! i!to dogmas the i!sta!t that they are disputed7 Thus every ma! 6ho utters a doubt dei!es a
religio!7 A!d the s8epti8ism o our time does !ot really destroy the belies- rather it 8reates themT gives
them their limits a!d their plai! a!d deia!t shape7 /e 6ho are .iberals o!8e held .iberalism lightly as
a truism7 4o6 it has bee! disputed- a!d 6e hold it ier8ely as a aith7 /e 6ho believe i! patriotism
o!8e thought patriotism to be reaso!able- a!d thought little more about it7 4o6 6e k!o6 it to be
u!reaso!able- a!d k!o6 it to be right7 /e 6ho are Dhristia!s !ever k!e6 the great philosophi8
8ommo! se!se 6hi8h i!heres i! that mystery u!til the a!ti:Dhristia! 6riters poi!ted it out to us7 The
great mar8h o me!tal destru8tio! 6ill go o!7 0verythi!g 6ill be de!ied7 0verythi!g 6ill be8ome a
8reed7 9t is a reaso!able positio! to de!y the sto!es i! the streetT it 6ill be a religious dogma to assert
them7
21
This is a proou!dly =egelia! i!sight+ o!e should !ot 8o!use dogma 6ith the immediate pre:
rele?ive a88epta!8e o a! attitude7 ,edieval Dhristia!s 6ere !ot Jdogmati8K @just as it is se!seless to
say that the a!8ie!t 1reeks Jdogmati8allyK believed i! Beus a!d other Hlympia! divi!ities+ they 6ere
simply part o their lie 6orldA- they be8ame Jdogmati8K o!ly 6he! moder! Feaso! started to doubt
religious truths7 A Jdogmati8K sta!8e is al6ays already mediated by its opposite- a!d this is also 6hy
8o!temporary u!dame!talism really is Jdogmati8K+ it 8li!gs to its arti8les o aith agai!st the threat o
moder! se8ular ratio!alism7 9! short- JdogmaK is already the result o the de8ompositio! o a
substa!tial orga!i8 /hole7 =egel des8ribes this de8ompositio! as a t6oold moveme!t7 First- there is
the Jauto!omiUatio!K o 6hat 6ere origi!ally o!ly a88ide!tal predi8ates o the Substa!8eEre8all the
amous passage rom the )henomenology+

The 8ir8le that remai!s sel:e!8losed a!d- like substa!8e- holds its mome!ts together- is a! immediate
relatio!ship- o!e thereore 6hi8h has !othi!g asto!ishi!g about it7 3ut that the a88ide!tal as su8h-
deta8hed rom 6hat 8ir8ums8ribes it- 6hat is bou!d a!d is a8tual o!ly i! its 8o!te?t 6ith others- should
attai! a! e?iste!8e o its o6! a!d a separate reedomEthis is the treme!dous po6er o the !egative7
22
Se8o!d- there is the opposite auto!omiUatio! o substa!tial u!ity itsel+ Substa!8e !o lo!ger
u!8tio!s as the 8o!tai!er- the mediati!g u!ity- o its parti8ular 8o!te!t- but i!stead posits or asserts
itsel as the !egative u!ity o that 8o!te!t- as the po6er o destru8tio! o all its parti8ular
determi!atio!sEthis !egativity lies at the base o spiritual reedom- si!8e spirit is- Jormally speaki!g-
freedom- the 8o!8eptIs absolute !egativity or sel:ide!tity7 Do!sidered as this ormal aspe8t- it may
6ithdra6 itsel by abstra8ti!g rom everythi!g e?terior a!d rom its o6! e?ter!ality- its very
e?iste!8e7K
2"
This sel:relati!g !egativity o substa!8e- its sel:8o!tra8tio! to a! empty poi!t- is
singularity as opposed to parti8ularity7 The spe8ulative poi!t here is to thi!k these t6o moves together+
a88ide!ts o a substa!8e 8a! attai! a! e?iste!8e o their o6!- 8ut o rom their substa!tial /hole- o!ly
i!soar as Substa!8e itsel redu8es or 8o!tra8ts itsel to the poi!t o si!gularity7 The gap- the loose!i!g
o the li!ks- bet6ee! Substa!8e a!d its a88ide!ts @parti8ular determi!atio!sA presupposes the radi8al
J8o!tradi8tio!-K at the very heart o Substa!8e itsel- bet6ee! its ull!ess a!d its void- bet6ee! its all:
i!8lusive!ess a!d its all:e?8ludi!g sel:relatio!ship- bet6ee! S a!d b @the subje8t as JbarredK
Substa!8e- Substa!8e dispossessed o its 8o!te!tA7 The 8o!8rete e?pressio! o this li!k is the
spe8ulative ide!tity bet6ee! the subje8t @the void o sel:relati!g !egativityA a!d a! a88ide!tal aspe8t o
Substa!8e auto!omiUed i!to a! Jorga! 6ithout a bodyK+ this Jpartial obje8tK is the 8orrelate o the
JpureK subje8t7 The subje8t is to be opposed here to 6hat 6e usually reer to as the Jperso!K+ Jperso!K
sta!ds or the substa!tial 6ealth o a Sel- 6hile the subje8t is this substa!8e 8o!tra8ted to the si!gular
poi!t o !egative sel:relati!g7 H!e should bear i! mi!d here that the t6o 8ouples- subje8t:obje8t a!d
perso!:thi!g- orm a 1reimasia! semioti8 sNuare7 That is to say- i 6e take the Jsubje8tK as the starti!g
poi!t- it has t6o opposites+ its 8o!trary @8ou!terpartA is- o 8ourse- the Jobje8t-K but its J8o!tradi8tio!K
is the Jperso!K @the Jpathologi8alK 6ealth o i!!er lie as opposed to the void o pure subje8tivityA7 9! a
symmetri8al 6ay- the opposite 8ou!terpart to a Jperso!K is a Jthi!g-K a!d its J8o!tradi8tio!K is the
subje8t7 JThi!gK is somethi!g embedded i! a 8o!8rete lie 6orld- i! 6hi8h the e!tire 6ealth o the
mea!i!g o the lie 6orld e8hoes- 6hile Jobje8tK is a! Jabstra8tio!-K somethi!g e?tra8ted rom its
embedded!ess i! the lie 6orld7
The subje8t is !ot the 8orrelate o a thi!g @or- more pre8isely- a bodyA+ a perso! d6ells i! a
body- 6hile the subje8t is the 8orrelate o a @partialA obje8t- o a! orga! 6ithout a body7 Agai!st the
sta!dard !otio! o perso!:thi!g as a lie:6orld totality rom 6hi8h the subje8t:obje8t 8ouple is
e?trapolated- o!e should thus i!sist o! the subje8t:obje8t 8ouple @i! .a8a!ese+ b:a- the barred subje8t
8oupled 6ith the ob1et petit aA as primordialEthe 8ouple perso!:thi!g is its se8o!dary Jdomesti8atio!7K
/hat gets lost i! the passage rom subje8t:obje8t to perso!:thi!g is the t6isted relatio!ship o the
,Zbius ba!d+ Jperso!sK a!d Jthi!gsK are part o the same reality- 6hile the obje8t is the impossible
eNuivale!t o the subje8t itsel7 /e arrive at the obje8t 6he! 6e pursue the side o the subje8t @o its
sig!iyi!g represe!tatio!A o! the ,Zbius tra8k to the e!d a!d i!d ourselves o! the other side o the
same pla8e rom 6here 6e started7 H!e should thus reje8t the topi8 o the perso!ality as a soul:body
u!ity or orga!i8 /hole 6hi8h is dismembered i! the pro8ess o reii8atio! a!d alie!atio!+ the subje8t
emerges out o the perso! as the produ8t o the viole!t redu8tio! o the perso!Is body to a partial
obje8t7
2(
So 6he! =egel 6rites that the 8o!8ept is a Jree subje8tive 8o!8ept that is or itsel a!d
thereore possesses personalityEthe pra8ti8al- obje8tive 8o!8ept determi!ed i! a!d or itsel 6hi8h- as
perso!- is impe!etrable atomi8 subje8tivity-K he may appear to be 8reati!g a mea!i!gless short:8ir8uit
bet6ee! the abstra8t:logi8al domai! o 8o!8epts- o !otio!al determi!atio!s- a!d the psy8hologi8al
domai! o perso!ality- o a8tual perso!s7
2#
=o6ever- upo! a 8loser look- o!e 8a! 8learly see his poi!t+
perso!ality i! its Jimpe!etrable atomi8 subje8tivity-K the abyss or void o the J9K beyo!d all my
positive properties- is a conceptual si!gularity+ it is the Ja8tually e?isti!gK abstra8tio! o the 8o!8eptT
i7e7- i! it- the !egative po6er o the 8o!8ept a8Nuires a8tual e?iste!8e- be8omes Jor itsel7K A!d
.a8a!Is b- the Jbarred subje8t-K is pre8isely su8h a 8o!8eptual si!gularity- a si!gularity devoid o a!y
psy8hologi8al 8o!te!t7 9t is i! this pre8ise se!se that =egel 6rites+ JThe si!gular i!dividual is- o! its
o6! terms- the tra!sitio! o the 8ategory rom its 8o!8ept i!to e?ter!al realityT it is pure s8hema
itsel7K
2'
0very 6ord 8arries its ull 6eight i! this pre8ise a!d 8o!de!sed propositio!7 The subje8t i! its
u!iNue!ess- ar rom sta!di!g or the si!gularity o e?iste!8e irredu8ible to a!y u!iversal !otio! @a!
idea varied e!dlessly by *ierkegaard i! his 8ritiNue o =egelA- sta!ds or pre8isely the opposite+ the
6ay the u!iversality o a !otio! passes over i!to Je?ter!al reality-K a8Nuires a8tual e?iste!8e as part o
this temporal reality7 The properly diale8ti8al t6ist here is- o 8ourse- that u!iversality a8Nuires a8tual
e?iste!8e i! the guise o its very opposite- o the retra8tio! o the multipli8ity o reality i!to pure
si!gularity7 Si!8e e?ter!al reality is dei!ed by its spatio:temporal 8oordi!ates- the subje8t i! his or her
a8tuality has to e?ist i! time- as the sel:sublatio! o spa8e i! timeT a!d si!8e he or she is the !otio! that
a8Nuires temporal e?iste!8e- this temporality 8a! o!ly be that o a Js8hemaK i! *a!tIs se!se o the
term- !amely the a priori temporal orm that mediates bet6ee! the atemporal 8o!8eptual u!iversality
a!d the spatio:temporal Je?ter!al reality7K Do!seNue!tly- si!8e e?ter!al reality is 8orrelative to the
subje8t that 8o!stitutes it tra!s8e!de!tally- this subje8t is the Jpure s8hemaK o this realityEnot simply
its tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!- the rame o a priori 8ategories o Feaso!- but its schema- the a priori orm
o temporal i!itude itsel- the temporal hori2on of the atemporal a priori itself7 Therei! resides the
parado? @6hi8h =eidegger 6as the irst to ide!tiyEi! his 5ant and the )roblem of MetaphysicsA+ the
pure 9 as the age!t o tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis is !ot JaboveK atemporal 8ategories o reaso!- but the
Js8hemaK o temporal i!itude 6hi8h deli!eates the ield o their appli8atio!7
3ut is !ot this subje8t 6hi8h- through tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis- JsuturesK reality i!to a
8o!siste!t /hole- a !e6 versio! o 9de!tity embra8i!g its oppositeM 9s !ot radi8al !egativity here
tur!ed i!to the grou!d o a !e6 ide!tityM There is a parallel bet6ee! Fou8aultIs 8ritiNue o GerridaIs
readi!g o Ges8artesIs cogito- a!d the sta!dard Jpostmoder!K 8ritiNue o the =egelia! !otio! o
8o!tradi8tio!- o the series diere!8e:oppositio!:8o!tradi8tio!7 For Fou8ault- Ges8artes @a!d- ollo6i!g
him- GerridaA progresses rom mad!ess to u!iversal doubt as a more Jradi8alK versio! o mad!ess- so
that he 8a! the! sel:8a!8el it i! the ratio!al cogito7 Fou8aultIs 8ou!ter:argume!t is that mad!ess is !ot
less but more radi8al tha! the !otio! o u!iversal doubt- that the passage rom mad!ess to dream
sile!tly e&cludes the u!bearable e?8ess o mad!ess7 9! a homologous 6ay- =egel appears to
Jradi8aliUeK diere!8e i! oppositio!- a!d the! oppositio! i! 8o!tradi8tio!T ho6ever- this JprogressK
ee8tively 8a!8els 6hat is really troubli!g i! the !otio! o diere!8e or a mo!ist philosopher+ the
!otio! o radi8al heteroge!eity- o a totally 8o!ti!ge!t e?ter!al other!ess 6hi8h 8a!!ot be related
diale8ti8ally to the i!6ard!ess o the H!e7 /ith the passage rom @the simple e?ter!alA diere!8e @o
indifferent u!itsA to oppositio! @6hi8h already i!here!tly relates the opposed u!itsA a!d the! to
8o!tradi8tio! @i! 6hi8h the gap is posited within the H!e- as its i!here!t split- or sel:i!8o!siste!8yA-
the road is prepared or the sel:sublati!g o the diere!8e a!d or the retur! to the H!e able to
i!ter!aliUe a!d thus Jdiale8ti8ally mediateK all diere!8es7
.a8lau also ollo6s this li!e o 8ritiNue 6he!- i! deali!g 6ith the Feal- he seems to os8illate
bet6ee! the ormal !otio! o Feal as a!tago!ism a!d the more Jempiri8alK !otio! o the Feal as that
6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a ormal oppositio!+ Jthe oppositio! A:3 6ill !ever ully be8ome A:!ot A7
The V3:!essI o the 3 6ill be ultimately !o!:diale8tiUable7 The VpeopleI 6ill al6ays be somethi!g more
tha! the pure opposite o po6er7 There is a Feal o the VpeopleI 6hi8h resists symboli8 i!tegratio!7K
2$

The 8ru8ial Nuestio!- o 8ourse- is+ 6hat- e?a8tly- is the 8hara8ter o this e?8ess o the JpeopleK that is
Jmore tha! the pure opposite o po6er-K what i! the JpeopleK resists symboli8 i!tegratio!M 9s it simply
the 6ealth o its @empiri8al or otherA determi!atio!sM 9 this is the 8ase- the! 6e are not deali!g 6ith a
Feal that resists symboli8 i!tegratio!- be8ause the Feal here is pre8isely the a!tago!ism A:!ot A- so
that Jthat 6hi8h is i! 3 more tha! !ot AK is !ot the Feal i! 3 but 3Is symboli8 determi!atio!s7 Si!8e
.a8lau- o 8ourse- ully admits that every H!e:!ess is split by a! i!here!t gap- the dilemma is this+ is
the i!here!t impossibility o the H!e a8hievi!g ull sel:ide!tity the result o the a8t that it is al6ays
ae8ted by heteroge!eous Hthers- or is the H!eIs bei!g:ae8ted by Hthers a! i!di8atio! o ho6 it is
split or th6arted i! itselM The o!ly 6ay to Jsave the FealK is to assert the prima8y o the i!!er split+
the primordial a8t is the H!eIs i!!er impedime!tT the heteroge!eous Hthers merely materialiUe- or
o88upy the pla8e o- that impedime!tE6hi8h is 6hy- eve! i they are a!!ihilated- the impossibility @o
the H!e rea8hi!g its ull sel:ide!tityA remai!s7 9! other 6ords- i the i!trusio! o heteroge!eous Hthers
6ere the primary a8t- the a!!ihilatio! o these e?ter!al obsta8les 6ould allo6 the H!e to realiUe its ull
sel:ide!tity7
2&
ABSOL!TE *NOING

9t is o!ly this spe8ulative !otio! o ide!tity 6hi8h e!ables us to ully grasp the thrust o =egelIs
8ritiNue o *a!t- !amely his reje8tio! o the !eed or a! a priori ormal:tra!s8e!de!tal rame as a
measure or sta!dard 6hi8h 6ould allo6 us to judge rom the outside the validity o all 8o!te!t
@8og!itive- ethi8al- or aestheti8A+ J6e do !ot !eed to import 8riteria- or to make use o our o6! bright
ideas a!d thoughts duri!g the 8ourse o the i!NuiryT it is pre8isely 6he! 6e leave these aside that 6e
su88eed i! 8o!templati!g the matter at ha!d as it is in and for itself7K
2%
This is 6hat =egel mea!s by
JabsoluteK 9dealism+ !ot the magi8al ability o Spirit to ge!erate all 8o!te!t- but SpiritIs thorough
passivity+ adopti!g the sta!8e o JAbsolute *!o6i!g-K the subje8t does !ot ask i the 8o!te!t @some
parti8ular obje8t o i!NuiryA meets some a priori sta!dard @o truth- good!ess- beautyAT it lets the 8o!te!t
measure itsel- by its o6! imma!e!t sta!dards- a!d thus sel:authoriUes itsel7 The sta!8e o JAbsolute
*!o6i!gK thus ully 8oi!8ides 6ith thorough @absoluteA histori8ism+ there is !o tra!s8e!de!tal Jbig
Hther-K there are !o 8riteria that 6e 8a! apply to histori8al phe!ome!a to judge themT all su8h 8riteria
must be imma!e!t to the phe!ome!a themselves7 9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e should
u!dersta!d the J!ear:*akaesNueK @Cippi!A 8laim i! =egelIs +esthetics that a portrait o a perso! 8a!
be Jmore like the i!dividual tha! the a8tual i!dividual himselK+
"0
6hat this implies is that the perso!
itsel is !ever ully Jitsel-K that it does !ot 8oi!8ide 6ith its 8o!8ept7
Su8h a !otio! o Absolute *!o6i!g is grou!ded already i! =egelIs dei!itio! o Sel:
Do!s8ious!ess- i! the passage rom Do!s8ious!ess to Sel:Do!s8ious!ess @i! the )henomenologyA7
Do!s8ious!ess irst e?perie!8es a ailure to grasp the 9!:itsel+ the 9!:itsel repeatedly eludes the
subje8t- all 8o!te!t supposed to pertai! to the 9!:itsel reveals itsel as havi!g bee! put there by the
subje8t itsel- so that the subje8t be8omes i!8reasi!gly 8aught up i! the 6eb o its o6!
pha!tasmagorias7 The subje8t passes rom the attitude o Do!s8ious!ess to that o Sel:Do!s8ious!ess
6he! it rele?ively assumes this ailure as a positive result- i!verti!g the problem i!to its o6! solutio!+
the subje8tIs 6orld is the result o its o6! Jpositi!g7K
"1
This is also ho6 =egel resolves the appare!t
8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the rele?ivity o moder! art a!d the rise o Jstill lieK or la!ds8ape pai!ti!g- that
is- depi8tio!s o !ature at its most JspiritlessK+ his solutio! is that the proper obje8t o atte!tio! is the
la!ds8ape pai!ti!g itsel- !ot the !atural la!ds8ape as su8h
"2
Esu8h pai!ti!gs are really pai!ti!gs about
pai!ti!g itsel- a visual 8ou!terpart to poems or !ovels about 6riti!g literature- or 6hat 6e admire i! a
pai!ti!g o a dead ish o! a kit8he! table is the artii8e o the pai!ter 6hose mastery is displayed7
""
Care!theti8ally- a dead ish is a good e?ample or a!other- Nuite diere!t- reaso!+ 6hat re!ders
it u!8a!!y are its eyes- 6hi8h 8o!ti!ue to stare at us- a!d lead us to a urther 8o!seNue!8e =egel dra6s-
6hi8h is more dari!g- almost surrealisti87 0ve! 6he! a pai!ti!g depi8ts !atural obje8ts- it is al6ays
about spirit- the material appeari!g o spirit7 There is- ho6ever- a privileged orga! o the huma! body
i! 6hi8h spirit reverberates most dire8tly+ the eye as the J6i!do6 i!to the huma! soul-K as the obje8t
6hi8h- 6he! 6e look i!to it- 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the abyss o the perso!Is i!!er lie7 The 8o!8lusio! rom
these t6o premises is that- i!soar as art 8reates !atural obje8ts 6hi8h are Je!souledK @beseeltA- i!soar
as- i! a pai!ti!g- all obje8ts be8ome suused 6ith huma! mea!i!g- it is as i the artisti8 treatme!t
tra!sorms every visible sura8e i!to a! eye- so that- 6he! 6e look at a pai!ti!g- 6e look at a
Jthousa!d:eyed Argus7K
"(
The art6ork thus be8omes a mo!strosity- a multipli8ity o eyes stari!g at us
rom all sidesEhe!8e o!e 8a! say that artisti8 beauty is- as .a8a! put it i! his Seminar ;I- pre8isely a!
attempt to 8ultivate- to tame- this traumati8 dime!sio! o the HtherIs gaUe- to Jput the gaUe to rest7K
A!d is !ot 6hat =egel 8alls JAbsolute *!o6i!gK @Wissen- !ot Er"enntniss or k!o6ledgeA the
e!d:poi!t o these reversals- 6he! the subje8t stumbles upo! the i!al limitatio!- the limitatio! as su8h-
6hi8h 8a! !o lo!ger be i!verted i!to a produ8tive sel:assertio!M Absolute *!o6i!g thus Jdoes !ot
mea! Vk!o6i!g everythi!g7I 9t rather mea!sEre8og!iUi!g o!eIs limitatio!s7K
"#
JAbsolute *!o6i!gK
is the i!al re8og!itio! o a limitatio! 6hi8h is JabsoluteK i! the se!se that it is !ot determi!ate or
parti8ular- !ot a JrelativeK limit or obsta8le to our k!o6ledge that 6e 8a! 8learly see a!d lo8ate as su8h7
9t is i!visible Jas su8hK be8ause it is the limitatio! o the e!tire ield as su8hEthat 8losure o the ield
6hi8h- rom 6ithi! the ield itsel @a!d 6e are al6ays by dei!itio! 6ithi! it- be8ause i! a 6ay this ield
JisK ourselvesA 8a!!ot but appear as its opposite- as the very ope!!ess o the ield7 The diale8ti8al bu8k
stops here+ the subje8t 8a! !o lo!ger play the game o the Je?perie!8e o 8o!s8ious!ess-K 8ompari!g
the For:us 6ith the 9!:itsel a!d thereby subverti!g both o them- si!8e there is !o lo!ger a!y shape o
the 9!:itsel available as a measure o the truth o the For:us7
Surprisi!gly- =egel here rejoi!s Fi8hteIs 8ritiNue o *a!tIs Thi!g:i!:itsel7 The problem o the
9!:itsel should thus be radi8ally tra!sormed+ i- by the 9!:itsel- 6e u!dersta!d the tra!s8e!de!t d to
6hi8h our represe!tatio!s reer- the! this d 8a! o!ly be a void o 4othi!g!essT this- ho6ever- i! !o
6ay implies that there is !o real- that there are o!ly our subje8tive represe!tatio!s7 All determi!ate
bei!g is relatio!al- thi!gs o!ly are 6hat they are i! relatio! to other!ess- or- as GeleuUe put it-
perspe8tival distortio! is i!s8ribed i!to the very ide!tity o the thi!g7 The Feal is !ot out there- as the
i!a88essible tra!s8e!de!t d !ever rea8hed by our represe!tatio!sT the Feal is here- as the obsta8le or
impossibility 6hi8h makes our represe!tatio!s la6ed- i!8o!siste!t7 The Feal is !ot the 9!:itsel but the
very obsta8le 6hi8h distorts our a88ess to the 9!:itsel- a!d this parado? provides the key or 6hat
=egel 8alls JAbsolute *!o6i!g7K
Absolute *!o6i!g thus takes the impossibility o a meta:la!guage to the e?treme7 9! our
ordi!ary e?perie!8e- 6e rely o! the disti!8tio! bet6ee! For:us a!d 9!:itsel+ 6e attempt to dra6 the
li!e bet6ee! ho6 thi!gs appear to us a!d ho6 they are i! themselves- outside o their relatio! to us+ 6e
disti!guish se8o!dary properties o thi!gs @6hi8h e?ist o!ly or us- like their 8olor or tasteA rom their
primary properties @shape- a!d so o!A 6hi8h 8hara8teriUe thi!gs as they are i! themselvesT at the e!d o
this road is the pure mathemati8al ormalism o Nua!tum physi8s as the o!ly @totally !o!:i!tuitiveA 9!:
itsel a88essible to us7 This i!al result- ho6ever- simulta!eously re!ders visible the parado? 6hi8h
u!derlies all disti!8tio!s bet6ee! the 9!:itsel a!d the For:us+ 6hat 6e posit as the J9!:itselK o thi!gs
is a produ8t o the 8e!turies:lo!g labor o s8ie!tii8 resear8hEi! short- a lot o subje8tive a8tivity @o
e?perime!tatio!- 8reati!g !e6 8o!8epts- et87A is !eeded to arrive at 6hat is Jobje8tive7K The t6o
aspe8ts- the 9!:itsel a!d the For:itsel- thus reveal themselves to be diale8ti8ally mediatedEas =egel
put it- they both @alo!g 6ith their disti!8tio!A Jall i!to 8o!s8ious!ess7K /hat =egel 8alls JAbsolute
*!o6i!gK is the poi!t at 6hi8h the subje8t ully assumes this mediatio!- 6he! he aba!do!s the
u!te!able proje8t o taki!g up a positio! rom 6hi8h he might 8ompare his subje8tive e?perie!8e a!d
the 6ay thi!gs are i!depe!de!tly o his e?perie!8eEi! other 6ords- Absolute *!o6i!g is a !ame or
the a88epta!8e o the absolute limitatio! o the 8ir8le o our subje8tivity- o the impossibility o
steppi!g outside o it7 =ere- ho6ever- 6e should add a 8ru8ial Nualii8atio!+ this a88epta!8e i! !o 6ay
amou!ts to a!y ki!d o @i!dividual or 8olle8tiveA subje8tivisti8 solipsism7 /e must displa8e the 9!:itsel
rom the etishiUed JoutsideK @6ith regard to subje8tive mediatio!A to the very gap bet6ee! the
subje8tive a!d the obje8tive @bet6ee! For:us a!d 9!:itsel- bet6ee! appeara!8es a!d Thi!gs:i!:
themselvesA7 Hur k!o6i!g is irredu8ibly Jsubje8tiveK !ot be8ause 6e are orever separated rom
reality:i!:itsel- but pre8isely be8ause 6e are part o this reality- be8ause 6e 8a!!ot step outside it a!d
observe it Jobje8tively7K Far rom separati!g us rom reality- the very limitatio! o! our k!o6i!gEits
i!evitably distorted- i!8o!siste!t 8hara8terEbears 6it!ess to our i!8lusio! i! reality7
9t is a 8ommo!pla8e to oppose =egelIs Jridi8ulousK Absolute *!o6i!g to a modest skepti8al
approa8h 6hi8h re8og!iUes the e?8ess o reality over every 8o!8eptualiUatio!7 /hat i- ho6ever- it is
=egel 6ho is mu8h more modestM /hat i his Absolute *!o6i!g is the assertio! o a radi8al 8losure+
there is !o meta:la!guage- 6e 8a!!ot 8limb o! our o6! shoulders a!d see our o6! limitatio!s- 6e
8a!!ot relativiUe or histori8iUe ourselvesM /hat really is arroga!t- as Dhesterto! made 8lear- is
pre8isely su8h sel:relativiUatio!- the attitude o Jk!o6i!g o!eIs limitatio!s-K o !ot agreei!g 6ith
o!eselEas i! the proverbial J6iseK i!sight a88ordi!g to 6hi8h 6e 8a! o!ly approa8h reality
asymptoti8ally7 /hat =egelIs Absolute *!o6i!g deprives us o is pre8isely this mi!imal sel:dista!8e-
the ability to put ourselves at a Jsae dista!8eK rom our o6! lo8atio!7
This bri!gs us to the dii8ult Nuestio! raised by Datheri!e ,alabou i! -he Future of
0egelEthat o the histori8ity o =egelIs o6! system7 There are passages i! =egel @!ot too ma!y- but
!umerous e!ough to be 8o!sidered systemati8A 6hi8h e?pli8itly belie the !otio! o the Je!d o history-K
demo!strati!g that he i! !o 6ay thought that- at his histori8al mome!t- history had 8ome to a! e!d7 At
the very e!d o his e!tire Jsystem-K i! the 8o!8lusio! to the .ectures on the 0istory of )hilosophy- he
tersely states that this is- for the time being- the state o k!o6ledge+ JDies ist nun der Standpun"t der
1et2igen Neit! und die 7eihe der geistigen (estaltungen ist Yr jetUt damit geschlossen7K
"'
@JThis is !o6
the sta!dpoi!t o our time- a!d the series o spiritual ormatio!s is thereby- or !o6- 8losed7KA 4ote the
triple histori8al relativiUatio! @now! our time! for nowA- a! over:i!siste!8e 6hi8h makes the stateme!t
almost symptomati8Eo!e thi!g is sure here+ =egel dei!itely applied also to himsel the 6ell:k!o6!
li!es rom the JCrea8eK to his )hilosophy of 7ight+

As or the i!dividual- every o!e is a so! o his timeT so philosophy also is its time apprehe!ded i!
thoughts7 9t is just as oolish to a!8y that a!y philosophy 8a! tra!s8e!d its prese!t 6orld- as that a!
i!dividual 8ould leap out o his time or jump over Fhodes7 9 a theory tra!sgresses its time- a!d builds
up a 6orld as it ought to be- it has a! e?iste!8e merely i! the u!stable eleme!t o opi!io!- 6hi8h gives
room to every 6a!deri!g a!8y7
"$
Croo abou!ds that this 6as !ot just a ormal 8o!8essio!7 9! the 9!trodu8tio! to .ectures on the
)hilosophy of World 0istory- he 8o!8ludes that JAmeri8a is thereore the 8ou!try o the uture- a!d its
6orld:histori8al importa!8e has yet to be revealed i! the ages that lie ahead-K
"&
a!d he makes a similar
stateme!t about Fussia+ both are JimmatureK states- states 6hi8h have !ot yet rea8hed the ull
a8tualiUatio! o their histori8al orm7 0ve! i! his mu8h:malig!ed philosophy o !ature- he 8o!8edes his
o6! histori8ally 8o!ditio!ed limitatio!+ J/e must be 8o!te!t 6ith 6hat 6e 8a!- i! a8t- 8omprehe!d at
prese!t7 There is ple!ty that 8a!!ot be 8omprehe!ded yet7K
"%
9! all these 8ases- =egel- Jor a mome!t-
[takes\ a! e?ter!al poi!t o vie6 6ith respe8t to the @u!iversally 8omprehe!siveA story he is telli!g a!d
a!!ou!8es that at some later stage a more arti8ulate @u!iversally 8omprehe!siveA story 6ill be
availableKEho6- rom 6hat positio!- 8a! he do thisM
(0
/he!8e 8omes this e?8ess or remai!der o
histori8ist 8ommo! se!se 6hi8h relativiUes the highest spe8ulative i!sightsM 9t is 8lear that there is !o
spa8e or it within the =egelia! philosophi8al !arrative7
9s this the! the task o a proper Jmaterialist reversal o =egelK+ to i!trodu8e this sel:
relativiUatio! into the JsystemK itselM To re8og!iUe tra8es 6hi8h- or us today- remain u!readable
tra8esT to re8og!iUe the irredu8ible paralla? gap bet6ee! multiple !arratives @o those i! po6er- o
those oppressed OA 6hi8h 8a!!ot be brought together- et87M /hat i- ho6ever- this 8o!8lusio!-
8o!vi!8i!g as it may appear prima facie- pro8eeds all too astM /hat i there is !o e?ter!al oppositio!
bet6ee! the Jeter!alK System o *!o6i!g a!d its histori8ist @sel:ArelativiUatio!M /hat i this
@sel:ArelativiUatio! does !ot 8ome rom outside- but is i!s8ribed i! the very heart o the SystemM The
true J!o!:AllK is thus !ot to be sought i! a re!u!8iatio! o systemati8ity that pertai!s to the proje8t o
J!egative diale8ti8s-K i! the assertio! o i!itude- dispersio!- 8o!ti!ge!8y- hybridity- multitude- a!d so
orth- but in the absence of any e&ternal limitation that would allow us to construct and9or validate
elements with regard to an e&ternal measure7 Fead i! this 6ay- the i!amous J8losure o the =egelia!
systemK is stri8tly 8orrelative to @the obverse oA its thorough @sel:ArelativiUatio!+ the J8losureK o the
System does not mea! that there is !othi!g outside the System @the !aSve !otio! o =egel as the
i!dividual 6ho 8laimed to have a8hieved JAbsolute *!o6ledge o everythi!gKAT it mea!s that we are
forever unable to %refle&ivi2e' this $utside! to inscribe it within the Inside- eve! i! the purely !egative
@a!d de8eptively modest- sel:depre8ati!gA mode o a8k!o6ledgi!g that reality is a! absolute Hther!ess
6hi8h orever eludes our 8o!8eptual grasp7
Throughout his )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Cippi! disti!guishes bet6ee! the a8tual- histori8ally
limited =egel- a!d 6hat he @o!8eA reers to as the Jeter!al =egel-K by 6hi8h he mea!s !ot a tra!s:
histori8al eter!al truth o =egel- but- rather- the 6ay ea8h post:=egelia! epo8h has to rei!ve!t the
positio! o JAbsolute *!o6i!gK to ask the Nuestio!+ ho6 6ould =egel have 8o!8eptualiUed our
predi8ame!t- ho6 8a! o!e be =egelia! todayM For e?ample- Cippi! is ully a6are that =egelIs a!s6er
to the so8ial 8risis o his time @his !otio! o 8o!stitutio!al mo!ar8hy orga!iUed i!to JestatesKA is !ot
J6orkableK today- does !ot do the job o bri!gi!g about the Jre8o!8iliatio!K o our a!tago!ismsT
ho6ever- 6hat 6e 8a! elaborate is a =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K @diale8ti8al mediatio!A o todayIs
te!sio!s7 Hr- i! the 8ase o abstra8t art @arguably Cippi!Is most brillia!t e?ampleA+ o 8ourse =egel did
!ot predi8t it- there is !o theory o abstra8t art i! =egelIs aestheti8sT ho6ever- o!e 8a! easily a!d
8o!vi!8i!gly e?trapolate rom =egelIs rele8tio!s o! the de8li!e o the key role o art i! the moder!
Jrele?iveK 6orld the !otio! @a!d possibilityA o abstra8t art- as a Jrele?iviUatio!K o art itsel- as art
Nuestio!i!g a!d thematiUi!g its o6! possibility a!d pro8edures7
The problem here is 6hether this disti!8tio! bet6ee! the Ja8tualK =egel @some o 6hose
solutio!s are obviously datedA a!d the Jeter!alK =egel i!trodu8es a *a!tia! ormalism- i! terms o the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! Absolute *!o6i!g as a ormal pro8edure o totaliUed sel:rele8tio!- a!d its
8o!ti!ge!t- empiri8ally 8o!ditio!ed- histori8al i!sta!tiatio!s7 9s !ot this idea o a orm i!depe!de!t o
its a88ide!tal 8o!te!t proou!dly a!ti:=egelia!M 9! other 6ords- does !ot this solutio! amou!t to a
Jhistori8iUatio!K o =egel 6hose obverse is the Jspurious i!i!ityK o rele?ive k!o6ledge+ i! ea8h
epo8h- huma!ity tries to ormulate its auto!omy- to grasp its predi8ame!tT it ultimately ails- but the
pro8ess goes o!- 6ith the ormulatio!s getti!g better a!d better over timeM
=o6 the! are 6e to es8ape rom this deadlo8kM =o6 to over8ome the debilitati!g alter!ative o
either asserti!g =egelIs philosophy as the mome!t o Absolute *!o6i!g i! the !aSve se!se o the term
@6ith =egel- history rea8hed its e!d- he basi8ally Jk!e6 everythi!g there is to k!o6KA- or the !o less
!aSve evolutio!ist histori8iUatio! o =egel i! 6hi8h- 6hile droppi!g the obviously histori8ally
8o!ditio!ed 8o!te!t o =egelIs thought- the !otio! o the Jeter!al =egelK is retai!ed as a ki!d o
regulative 9dea to be approa8hed agai! a!d agai!M The properly diale8ti8al 6ay out is to 8o!8eive the
gap that separates the Jeter!alK =egel rom the Jempiri8alK =egel !ot as a diale8ti8al te!sio!- !ot as the
gap bet6ee! the i!a88essible 9deal a!d its impere8t realiUatio!- but as a! empty- purely ormal
dista!8e- as a! i!de? o their identity7 That is to say- =egelIs ultimate poi!t is !ot that- i! spite o our
limitatio!- our embedded!ess i! a 8o!ti!ge!t histori8al 8o!te?t- 6eEor =egel himsel- at leastE8a!
someho6 over8ome this limitatio! a!d gai! a88ess to Absolute *!o6ledge @to 6hi8h histori8ist
relativism the! respo!ds that 6e 8a! !ever rea8h this positio!- that 6e 8a! o!ly aim at it as at a!
impossible 9dealA7 /hat he 8alls Absolute *!o6i!g is- o! the 8o!trary- the very sig! o our total
8aptureE6e are condemned to Absolute *!o6i!g- 6e 8a!!ot escape it- si!8e JAbsolute *!o6i!gK
mea!s that there is !o e?ter!al poi!t o reere!8e rom 6hi8h 6e 8ould per8eive the relativity o our
o6! Jmerely subje8tiveK sta!dpoi!t7
/hat i- the!- 6e 8o!8eive =egelIs Absolute *!o6i!g as a! a8t o Jdotti!g the iK 6hi8h is
simulta!eously the 8losi!g mome!t o traditio!al metaphysi8s a!d- by the same toke!- the ope!i!g
mome!t i! the e?te!sive ield o post:=egelia! thought7 9t is as i =egel himsel- by 6ay o 8losi!g his
system- ope!s up the ield or the multiple reje8tio!s o his thought7 The best 6ay to e!8apsulate the
=egelia! mome!t o i!al 8losure is thus to repeat the ormula used by the you!g 1eorg .ukh8s i! his
-heory of the ovel+ JThe path is i!ished- the jour!ey begi!s7K The 8ir8le is 8losed- 6e have rea8hed
the e!d- the imma!e!t possibilities are e?hausted- a!d- at this same poi!t- everythi!g is ope!7 This is
6hy to be a =egelia! today does !ot mea! to assume the superluous burde! o some metaphysi8al
past- but to regai! the ability to begi! rom the begi!!i!g7
H!e 8a! read the ormula o Absolute *!o6i!g as a! i!i!ite judgme!t 6hose truth resides i!
the ridi8ulous disso!a!8e bet6ee! its t6o poles+ the k!o6ledge o the Absolute- the mi!d o 1od- the
ultimate truth about the u!iverse- 6as ormulated by that 8o!ti!ge!t i!dividual- Croessor =egel rom
1erma!y7 ,aybe 6e should really read this i!i!ite judgme!t just like the i!amous Jthe Spirit is a
bo!eK+ JAbsolute *!o6i!gK is !ot the total k!o6ledge o the u!iverse the i!dividual =egel 8laimed to
a8hieve- but a parado?i8al !ame or the very absurdity o this 8laim- or- to paraphrase the Fabi!ovit8h
joke o!8e agai!+ J9 possess Absolute *!o6i!g7K J3ut that is absurd- !o i!ite bei!g 8a! possess itRK
J/ell- Absolute *!o6i!g is !othi!g but the demo!stratio! o that limit7K
9t is thus emphati8ally a 8ase o sheddi!g the JalseK ski! o =egel:the:Absolute:9dealist i!
order to e?tra8t the Jratio!al 8oreK o =egelIs diale8ti8s+ =egel does 6rite a!d sou!d as i he is !aSvely
8laimi!g JAbsolute *!o6i!gK @a!d the idealist Du!!i!g o Feaso!- et87A- but this detour through a alse
appeara!8e is !e8essary- or =egelIs poi!t 8a! o!ly be made through the pate!t absurdity o his starti!g
poi!t7 The same goes or our @reAassertio! o diale8ti8al materialism+ that- philosophi8ally speaki!g-
Stali!ist Jdiale8ti8al materialismK is imbe8ility embodied is !ot so mu8h beside the poi!t as- rather- the
point itself- si!8e the poi!t is pre8isely to 8o!8eive the ide!tity o our =egelia!:.a8a!ia! positio! a!d
the philosophy o diale8ti8al materialism as a =egelia! i!i!ite judgme!t- a spe8ulative ide!tity o the
highest a!d the lo6est- like the ormula o phre!ology Jthe Spirit is a bo!e7K 9! 6hat- the!- does the
diere!8e bet6ee! the JhighestK a!d the Jlo6estK readi!g o diale8ti8al materialism 8o!sistM The
steely Fourth Tea8her
(1
8ommitted a serious philosophi8al error 6he! he o!tologiUed the diere!8e
bet6ee! diale8ti8al a!d histori8al materialism- 8o!8eivi!g it as the diere!8e bet6ee! metaphysica
universalis a!d metaphysica specialis- u!iversal o!tology a!d its appli8atio! to the spe8ial domai! o
so8iety7 All o!e has to do here i! order to pass rom the Jlo6estK to the JhighestK is to displace this
difference between the universal and the particular into the particular itself+ Jdiale8ti8al materialismK
provides a!other vie6 o! huma!ity itsel- diere!t rom histori8al materialism7 5es- agai!- the
relatio!ship bet6ee! histori8al a!d diale8ti8al materialism is that o a paralla?+ they are substa!tially
the same- the shit rom the o!e to the other is purely o!e o perspe8tive7 9t i!trodu8es topi8s like the
death drive- the Ji!huma!K 8ore o the huma!- 6hi8h rea8h beyo!d the horiUo! o the 8olle8tive pra&is
o huma!ityT the gap bet6ee! histori8al a!d diale8ti8al materialism is thus asserted as i!here!t to
huma!ity itsel- as the gap bet6ee! huma!ity a!d its own i!huma! e?8ess7
T=0 9G0AIS DH4ST9CAT9H4M

Su8h a !otio! o Absolute *!o6i!g e!ables us to avoid the trap i!to 6hi8h eve! 2ameso! alls
6he! he ide!tiies narcissism as that 6hi8h Jmay sometimes be elt to be repulsive i! the =egelia!
system as su8h-K
(2
or- i! short- as the 8e!tral 6eak!ess o =egelIs thought e?pressed i! his 8laim that
reaso! should i!d itsel i! the a8tual 6orld+

/e thereby sear8h the 6hole 6orld- a!d outer spa8e- a!d e!d up o!ly tou8hi!g ourselves- o!ly seei!g
our o6! a8e persist through multitudi!ous diere!8es a!d orms o other!ess7 4ever truly to
e!8ou!ter the !ot:9- to 8ome a8e to a8e 6ith radi8al other!ess @or- eve! 6orse- to i!d ourselves i! a!
histori8al dy!ami8 i! 6hi8h it is pre8isely diere!8e a!d other!ess 6hi8h is rele!tlessly bei!g stamped
outA+ su8h is the dilemma o the =egelia! diale8ti8- 6hi8h 8o!temporary philosophies o diere!8e a!d
other!ess seem o!ly able to 8o!ro!t 6ith mysti8al evo8atio!s a!d imperatives7
("
.et us take =egelIs diale8ti8s at its most Jidealist-K that is- at the level 6hi8h appears to 8o!irm
the a88usatio! o !ar8issism+ the !otio! o the sublatio! @+ufhebungA o all immediate material reality7
The u!dame!tal operatio! o +ufhebung is redu8tio!+ the sublated thi!g survives- but i! a! JabridgedK
editio!- as it 6ere- tor! out o its lie:6orld 8o!te?t- redu8ed to its esse!tial eature- all the moveme!t
a!d 6ealth o its lie redu8ed to a i?ed mark7 9t is !ot that- ater the abstra8tio! o Feaso! does its
mortiyi!g job 6ith its i?ed 8ategories or !otio!al determi!atio!s- spe8ulative J8o!8rete u!iversalityK
someho6 retur!s us to the lush!ess o .ie+ o!8e 6e pass rom empiri8al reality to its !otio!al
+ufhebung- the immedia8y o .ie is lost orever7 There is !othi!g more oreig! to =egel tha!
lame!ti!g the loss o the ri8h!ess o reality 6he! 6e grasp it 8o!8eptuallyEre8all his u!ambiguous
8elebratio! o the absolute po6er o )!dersta!di!g rom his Fore6ord to the )henomenology+ JThe
a8tio! o separati!g the eleme!ts is the e?er8ise o the or8e o )!dersta!di!g- the most asto!ishi!g
a!d greatest o all po6ers- or rather the absolute po6er7K This 8elebratio! is i! !o 6ay Nualiied- or
=egelIs poi!t is !ot that this po6er is !o!etheless later JsublatedK i!to a subordi!ate mome!t o the
u!iyi!g totality o Feaso!7 The problem 6ith )!dersta!di!g is rather that it does !ot u!leash this
po6er to the e!d- that it takes itsel as bei!g e?ter!al to the Thi!g itsel7 The sta!dard !otio! is that it is
merely our )!dersta!di!g @Jthe mi!dKA that separates i! its imagi!atio! 6hat i! JrealityK belo!gs
together- so that the )!dersta!di!gIs Jabsolute po6erK is merely the po6er o our imagi!atio! 6hi8h i!
!o 6ay 8o!8er!s the reality o the thi!g a!alyUed7 /e pass rom )!dersta!di!g to Feaso! !ot 6he!
this a!alyUi!g- teari!g apart- is over8ome i! a sy!thesis 6hi8h bri!gs us ba8k to the 6ealth o reality-
but 6he! this po6er o Jteari!g apartK is tra!serred rom bei!g Jmerely i! our mi!dK i!to Thi!gs
themselves- as their i!here!t po6er o !egativity7
This poi!t 8a! also be made apropos the properly diale8ti8al !otio! o abstra8tio!+ 6hat makes
=egelIs J8o!8rete u!iversalityK i!i!ite is that it includes %abstractions' in concrete reality itself! as
their immanent constituents7 To put it a!other 6ay+ 6hat- or =egel- is the eleme!tary move o
philosophy 6ith regard to abstra8tio!M 9t is to aba!do! the 8ommo!:se!se empiri8ist !otio! o
abstra8tio! as a step a6ay rom the 6ealth o 8o!8rete empiri8al reality 6ith its irredu8ible multipli8ity
o eatures+ lie is gree!- 8o!8epts are gray- they disse8t- mortiy- 8o!8rete reality7 @This 8ommo!:se!se
!otio! eve! has its pseudo:diale8ti8al versio!- a88ordi!g to 6hi8h su8h Jabstra8tio!K is a eature o
mere )!dersta!di!g- 6hile Jdiale8ti8sK re8uperates the ri8h tapestry o reality7A Chilosophi8al thought
proper begi!s 6he! 6e be8ome a6are o ho6 such a process of %abstraction' is inherent to reality
itself+ the te!sio! bet6ee! empiri8al reality a!d its Jabstra8tK !otio!al determi!atio!s is imma!e!t to
reality- it is a eature o JThi!gs themselves7K Therei! lies the a!ti:!omi!alist a88e!t o philosophi8al
thi!ki!gEor e?ample- the basi8 i!sight o ,ar?Is J8ritiNue o politi8al e8o!omyK is that the
abstra8tio! o the value o a 8ommodity is its Jobje8tiveK 8o!stitue!t7 9t is lie 6ithout theory 6hi8h is
gray- a lat stupid realityEit is o!ly theory 6hi8h makes it Jgree!-K truly alive- bri!gi!g out the
8omple? u!derlyi!g !et6ork o mediatio!s a!d te!sio!s 6hi8h makes it move7
This is ho6 6e should disti!guish Jtrue i!i!ityK rom Jspurious @or badA i!i!ityK+ bad i!i!ity
is the asymptoti8 pro8ess o dis8overi!g ever !e6 layers o realityEreality is posited here as the 9!:
itsel 6hi8h 8a! !ever be ully grasped- o!ly gradually approa8hed- or all 6e 8a! do is dis8er!
parti8ular Jabstra8tK eatures o the tra!s8e!de!t a!d i!a88essible ple!itude o the Jreal Thi!g7K The
moveme!t o Jtrue i!i!ityK is e?a8tly the opposite+ o!e i!8ludes the pro8ess o Jabstra8tio!K i! the
JThi!g itsel7K This bri!gs us- u!e?pe8tedly- to the Nuestio!+ 6hat is i!volved i! the diale8ti8al sel:
deployme!t o a !otio!M 9magi!e- as a starti!g poi!t- bei!g 8aught i! a 8omple? a!d 8o!used empiri8al
situatio! 6hi8h 6e try to u!dersta!d- to bri!g some order to7 Si!8e 6e !ever start rom the Uero:poi!t
o pure pre:!otio!al e?perie!8e- 6e begi! 6ith the double moveme!t o applyi!g to the situatio! the
abstra8t u!iversal !otio!s at our disposal- a!d o a!alyUi!g the situatio!- 8ompari!g its eleme!ts to o!e
a!other a!d 6ith our previous e?perie!8es- ge!eraliUi!g a!d ormulati!g empiri8al u!iversals7 Soo!er
or later- 6e be8ome a6are o i!8o!siste!8ies i! the !otio!al s8hemes 6e are usi!g to u!dersta!d the
situatio!+ somethi!g 6hi8h should have bee! a subordi!ate spe8ies seems to e!8ompass a!d domi!ate
the e!tire ieldT diere!t 8lassii8atio!s a!d 8ategoriUatio!s 8lash- 6ithout us bei!g able to de8ide
6hi8h is the more Jtrue-K a!d so o! a!d so orth7 /e spo!ta!eously dismiss su8h i!8o!siste!8ies as
sig!s o the dei8ie!8y o our u!dersta!di!g+ reality is mu8h too ri8h a!d 8omple? or our abstra8t
8ategories- 6e 6ill !ever be able to deploy a !otio!al !et6ork 8apable o 8apturi!g its diversity7 The!-
ho6ever- i 6e have a rei!ed theoreti8al se!se- 6e soo!er or later !oti8e somethi!g stra!ge a!d
u!e?pe8ted+ it is !ot possible to 8learly disti!guish the i!8o!siste!8ies o our !otio! o a! obje8t rom
the i!8o!siste!8ies 6hi8h are imma!e!t to the obje8t itsel7 The JThi!g itselK is i!8o!siste!t- ull o
te!sio!s- os8illati!g bet6ee! its diere!t determi!atio!s- a!d the deployme!t o these te!sio!s- this
struggle- is 6hat makes it Jalive7K Take a parti8ular politi8al state+ 6he! it malu!8tio!s- it is as i its
parti8ular @spe8ii8A eatures are i! te!sio! 6ith the u!iversal 9dea o the StateT or take the Dartesia!
cogito+ the diere!8e bet6ee! me as a parti8ular perso! embedded i! a parti8ular lie 6orld a!d me as
a! abstra8t Subje8t is part o my parti8ular ide!tity itsel- si!8e to a8t as a! abstra8t Subje8t is a eature
that 8hara8teriUes i!dividuals i! moder! /ester! so8iety7 =ere- agai!- 6hat appears as a 8o!li8t
bet6ee! t6o Jabstra8tio!sK i! our mi!d reveals itsel as a te!sio! i! the Thi!g itsel7
A similar 8ase o =egelia! J8o!tradi8tio!K may be ou!d the !otio! o Jliberalism-K as it
u!8tio!s i! 8o!temporary dis8ourse+ its ma!y mea!i!gs tur! arou!d t6o opposed poles+ e8o!omi8
liberalism @ree market i!dividualism- oppositio! to stro!g state regulatio!- et87A a!d politi8al
libertaria! liberalism @6here the a88e!t is o! eNuality- so8ial solidarity- permissive!ess- et87AEi! the
)S- Fepubli8a!s are more liberal i! the irst se!se a!d Gemo8rats i! the se8o!d7 The poi!t- o 8ourse-
is that 6hile o!e 8a!!ot de8ide through 8loser a!alysis 6hi8h is the JtrueK liberalism- o!e also 8a!!ot
resolve the deadlo8k by tryi!g to propose a ki!d o JhigherK diale8ti8al sy!thesis- or Javoid the
8o!usio!K by dra6i!g a 8lear disti!8tio! bet6ee! the t6o se!ses o the term7 The te!sio! bet6ee! the
t6o mea!i!gs is i!here!t i! the very 8o!te!t that JliberalismK tries to desig!ate- it is 8o!stitutive o the
!otio! itselT he!8e this ambiguity- ar rom sig!ali!g the limitatio! o our k!o6ledge- sig!als the
i!!ermost JtruthK o the !otio! o liberalism7 /hat happe!s here is !ot that Jabstra8tio!sK lose their
abstra8t 8hara8ter a!d are dro6!ed i! ull 8o!8rete realityEthey remain Jabstra8tio!sK a!d relate to
ea8h other as Jabstra8tio!s7K
3a8k i! the 1%'0s- o!e JprogressiveK theorist o edu8atio! 8reated a stir 6he! he published the
results o a simple e?perime!t+ he asked a group o ive:year:old 8hildre! to dra6 a! image o
themselves playi!g at homeT t6o years later- he asked the group to do the same thi!g agai!- ater they
had u!dergo!e a year a!d a hal o primary s8hool7 The diere!8e 6as striki!g+ the sel:portraits o the
ive:year:olds 6ere e?ubera!t- lively- ull o 8olor- surrealisti8ally playul- but t6o years later- the
portraits 6ere mu8h more rigid a!d subdued- plus a large !umber o 8hildre! spo!ta!eously 8hose to
use o!ly a! ordi!ary gray pe!8il- although other 8olors 6ere available7 Wuite predi8tably- this
e?perime!t 6as i!voked as proo o the Joppressive!essK o the s8hool apparatus- o ho6 the s8hool
drill a!d dis8ipli!e 6as 8rushi!g 8hildre!Is spo!ta!eous 8reativity- a!d so o!7 From a =egelia!
sta!dpoi!t- o!e should- o! the 8o!trary- 8elebrate this shit rom 8olorul liveli!ess to gray order as a!
i!di8atio! o spiritual progress+ !othi!g is lost i! the redu8tio! o lively 8olorul!ess to gray dis8ipli!e-
everythi!g sta!ds to be gai!edEthe po6er o the spirit is pre8isely to progress rom the Jgree!K
immedia8y o lie to its JgrayK 8o!8eptual stru8ture- a!d to reprodu8e i! this redu8ed medium the
esse!tial determi!atio!s to 6hi8h our immediate e?perie!8e bli!ds us7
The same mortii8atio! o88urs i! histori8al memory a!d mo!ume!ts o the past 6here 6hat
survives are obje8ts deprived o their livi!g soulsEhere is =egelIs 8omme!t apropos A!8ie!t 1ree8e+
JThe statues are !o6 o!ly sto!es rom 6hi8h the livi!g soul has lo6!- just as the hym!s are 6ords
rom 6hi8h belie has go!e7K
((
As 6ith the passage rom substa!tial 1od to =oly Spirit- the properly
diale8ti8al re:a!imatio! is to be sought i! this very medium o JgrayK !otio!al determi!atio!s+ JThe
u!dersta!di!g- through the orm o abstra8t u!iversality- does give [the varieties o the se!suous\- so to
speak- a rigidity o bei!g O but- at the same time through this simplii8atio! it spiritually animates
them a!d so sharpe!s them7K
(#
This Jsimplii8atio!K is pre8isely 6hat .a8a!- reerri!g to Freud-
deployed as the redu8tio! o a thi!g to le trait unaire @der ein2ige Nug- the u!ary eatureA+ 6e are
deali!g 6ith a ki!d o epitomiUatio! by mea!s o 6hi8h a multitude o properties is redu8ed to a si!gle
domi!a!t 8hara8teristi8- so that 6e get Ja 8o!8rete shape i! 6hi8h o!e determi!atio! predomi!ates- the
others bei!g prese!t o!ly i! blurred outli!eK+
('
Jthe 8o!te!t is already the a8tuality redu8ed to a
possibility @2ur Moeglich"eit getilgte Wir"lich"eitA- its immedia8y over8ome- a!d the embodied shape
redu8ed to abbreviated- simple determi!atio!s o thought7K
($
The diale8ti8al approa8h is usually see! as tryi!g to lo8ate the phe!ome!o!:to:be:a!alyUed i!
the totality to 6hi8h it belo!gs- embedded i! its ri8h histori8al 8o!te?t- a!d thus to break the spell o
etishiUi!g abstra8tio!7 This- ho6ever- is the most da!gerous trap to be avoided+ or =egel- the true
problem is the opposite o!e- the a8t that- 6he! 6e observe a thi!g- 6e see too much i! it- 6e all u!der
the spell o the 6ealth o empiri8al detail 6hi8h preve!ts us rom 8learly per8eivi!g the !otio!al
determi!atio! 6hi8h orms the 8ore o the thi!g7 The problem is thus !ot ho6 to grasp the 6ealth o
determi!atio!s- but pre8isely ho6 to abstract rom them- ho6 to restri8t our gaUe a!d lear! to grasp
o!ly the !otio!al determi!atio!7
=egelIs ormulatio! is here very pre8ise+ the redu8tio! to the sig!iyi!g Ju!ary eatureK redu8es
or 8o!tra8ts a8tuality to possibility- i! the pre8ise Clato!i8 se!se i! 6hi8h the !otio! @9deaA o a thi!g
al6ays has a deo!tologi8al dime!sio! to it- desig!ati!g what the thing should become in order to fully
be what it is7 JCote!tialityK is thus !ot simply a !ame or the esse!8e o a thi!g as the pote!tiality
a8tualiUed i! the multitude o empiri8al thi!gs o a 8ertai! ge!re @the 9dea o a 8hair is a pote!tiality
a8tualiUed i! empiri8al 8hairsA7 The multiple a8tual properties o a thi!g are !ot simply redu8ed to the
i!!er 8ore o the thi!gIs Jtrue realityKT 6hat is more importa!t is that a !ame a88e!tuates @proilesA the
thi!gIs i!!er pote!tial7 /he! 9 8all someo!e Jmy tea8her-K 9 thereby outli!e 6hat 9 e?pe8t rom himT
6he! 9 reer to a thi!g as J8hair-K 9 proile the 6ay 9 i!te!d to use it7 /he! 9 observe the 6orld arou!d
me through the le!ses o a la!guage- 9 per8eive its a8tuality through the le!ses o the pote!tialities
hidde! or late!tly prese!t i! it7 Cote!tiality thus appears Jas su8h-K be8omes a8tual as potentiality- o!ly
through la!guage+ it is the appellatio! o a thi!g that bri!gs to light @JpositsKA its pote!tials7
H!8e 6e grasp +ufhebung i! this 6ay- 6e 8a! immediately see 6hat is 6ro!g 6ith o!e o the
mai! pseudo:Freudia! reaso!s or dismissi!g =egel+ the !otio! o =egelIs System as the highest a!d
most over:blo6! e?pressio! o the oral e8o!omy7 9s the =egelia! 9dea !ot ee8tively a vora8ious eater
Js6allo6i!gK every obje8t it stumbles upo!M 4o 6o!der =egel per8eived himsel as Dhristia!+ or him-
the tra!substa!tiatio! o the bread i!to DhristIs lesh sig!als that the Dhristia! subje8t 8a! i!tegrate a!d
digest 1od himsel 6ithout remai!der7 9s !ot the =egelia! pro8ess o 8o!8eivi!g or graspi!g a
sublimated versio! o digestio!M =egel 6rites+

9 the i!dividual huma! bei!g does somethi!g- a8hieves somethi!g- attai!s a goal- this a8t must be
grou!ded i! the 6ay the thi!g itsel- i! its 8o!8ept- a8ts a!d behaves7 9 9 eat a! apple- 9 destroy its
orga!i8 sel:ide!tity a!d assimilate it to mysel7 That 9 8a! do this e!tails that the apple i! itsel-
already- i! adva!8e- beore 9 take hold o it- has i! its !ature the determi!atio! o bei!g subje8t to
destru8tio!- havi!g i! itsel a homoge!eity 6ith my digestive orga!s su8h that 9 8a! make it
homoge!eous 6ith mysel7
(&
9s !ot 6hat he des8ribes here a lo6er versio! o the 8og!itive pro8ess itsel- i! 6hi8h- as =egel
likes to poi!t out- 6e 8a! o!ly grasp the obje8t i this obje8t itsel already J6a!ts to be 6ith or by usKM
H!e should pursue this metaphor to the e!d+ the sta!dard 8riti8al readi!g 8o!stru8ts the =egelia!
absolute Substa!8e:Subje8t as thoroughly constipatedEretai!i!g 6ithi! itsel the i!gested 8o!te!t7 Hr-
as Ador!o put it i! o!e o his 8utti!g remarks @6hi8h- as is all too ote! the 8ase 6ith him- miss the
markA- =egelIs system Jis the belly tur!ed mi!d-K prete!di!g that it has s6allo6ed the totality o
i!digestible Hther!ess7
(%
3ut 6hat about the i!evitable 8ou!ter:moveme!t- =egelia! dee8atio!M 9s !ot
the subje8t o 6hat =egel 8alls JAbsolute *!o6i!gK also a thoroughly emptied subje8t- a subje8t
redu8ed to the role o pure observer @or- rather- registrarA o the sel:moveme!t o the 8o!te!t itselM

The ri8hest is thereore the most 8o!8rete a!d most sub1ective- a!d that 6hi8h 6ithdra6s itsel i!to the
simplest depth is the mightiest a!d most all:embra8i!g7 The highest- most 8o!8e!trated poi!t is the
pure perso!ality 6hi8h- solely through the absolute diale8ti8 6hi8h is its !ature- !o less embraces and
holds everything within itself7
#0
9! this stri8t se!se- the subje8t itsel is the abrogated or 8lea!sed substa!8e- a substa!8e redu8ed
to the void o the empty orm o sel:relati!g !egativity- emptied o all the 6ealth o Jperso!alityKEi!
.a8a!ese- the move rom substa!8e to subje8t is the move rom S to b- the subje8t is the barred
substa!8e7 @Ador!o a!d =orkheimer- i! -he Dialectic of Enlightenment- make the 8riti8al poi!t that the
Sel be!t o! mere survival has to s8ariy all 8o!te!t that 6ould make survival 6orth6hileT this very
move is 6hat =egel asserts7A S8helli!g reerred to this same move as contraction @agai!- 6ith the
e?8reme!tal 8o!!otatio!A+ the subje8t is the 8o!tra8ted substa!8e7
Goes the i!al subje8tive positio! o the =egelia! System thus 8ompel us to tur! arou!d the
digestive metaphorM The supreme @a!d or ma!y the most problemati8A 8ase o this 8ou!ter:moveme!t
o88urs at the very e!d o the .ogic- 6he!- ater the !otio!al deployme!t is 8ompleted- 8losi!g the 8ir8le
o the absolute 9dea- the 9dea- i! its resolutio! or de8isio!- Jreely releases itselK i!to 4atureElets it
go- dis8ards it- pushes it a6ay rom itsel- a!d thus liberates it7
#1
/hi8h is 6hy- or =egel- the
philosophy o !ature is !ot a viole!t re:appropriatio! o its e?ter!alityT it rather i!volves the passive
attitude o a! observer+ Jphilosophy has- as it 6ere- simply to 6at8h ho6 !ature itsel sublates its
e?ter!ality7K
#2
The same move is a88omplished by 1od himsel 6ho- i! the guise o Dhrist- as a i!ite mortal-
also Jreely releases itselK i!to temporal e?iste!8e7 A!d the same goes or early moder! art- 6here
=egel a88ou!ts or the rise o Jdead !atureK pai!ti!gs @!ot o!ly o la!ds8apes- lo6ers- et87- but o ood
a!d dead a!imalsA i! the ollo6i!g 6ay+ pre8isely be8ause- i! the developme!t o art- subje8tivity !o
lo!ger !eeds the visual as the pri!8ipal medium o its e?pressio!Ethe a88e!t havi!g shited to poetry
as a more dire8t mea!s o e?pressi!g the subje8tIs i!!er lieEthe !atural is JreleasedK rom the burde!
o e?pressi!g subje8tivity a!d 8a! thus !o6 be approa8hed- a!d visually depi8ted- o! its o6! terms7
Furthermore- as some perspi8uous readers o =egel have already poi!ted out- the very sublatio! o art
itsel i! the philosophi8al s8ie!8es @i! 8o!8eptual thoughtAEthe a8t that it is !o lo!ger obliged to serve
as the pri!8ipal medium o the e?pressio! o spiritEbri!gs art a 8ertai! reedom- allo6i!g it to sta!d
o! its o6!7 9s this !ot the very dei!itio! o the birth o moder! art proper- as a pra8ti8e !o lo!ger
subordi!ated to the task o represe!ti!g spiritual realityM
The 6ay abrogatio! relates to sublatio! is !ot i! terms o a simple su88essio! or e?ter!al
oppositio!+ !ot Jirst you eat- the! you shit7K Gee8atio! is the imma!e!t conclusion o the e!tire
pro8ess+ 6ithout it- 6e 6ould be deali!g 6ith the Jspurious i!i!ityK o a! e!dless pro8ess o sublatio!7
The pro8ess o sublatio! itsel 8a! o!ly rea8h its e!d i! this 8ou!ter:moveme!t+

8o!trary to 6hat o!e 6ould i!itially imagi!e- these t6o pro8esses o sublatio! a!d abrogatio! are
8ompletely i!terdepe!de!t7 Do!sideri!g the last mome!t o absolute spirit @)hilosophyA- o!e readily
!otes the sy!o!ymy bet6ee! the verbs aufheben a!d befreien @Jto liberateKA- as 6ell as ablegen @Jto
dis8ard-K Jto remove-K Jto take a6ayKA7 Spe8ulative abrogatio!- i! !o 6ay alie! to the pro8ess o
+ufhebung- is i!deed its ulillme!t7 Abrogatio! is a sublation of sublation- the result o the
+ufhebungIs 6ork o! itsel a!d- as su8h- its tra!sormatio!7 The moveme!t o suppressio! a!d
preservatio! produ8es this tra!sormatio! at a 8ertai! mome!t i! history- the mome!t o Absolute
*!o6ledge7 Spe8ulative abrogatio! is the absolute sublation- i by JabsoluteK 6e mea! a relie or
sublatio! that rees rom a 8ertai! type o atta8hme!t7
#"
True 8og!itio! is thus !ot o!ly the !otio!al Jappropriatio!K o its obje8t+ the pro8ess o
appropriatio! goes o! o!ly as lo!g as 8og!itio! remai!s i!8omplete7 The sig! o its 8ompletio! is that it
liberates its obje8t- lets it be- drops it7 This is 6hy a!d ho6 the moveme!t o sublatio! has to 8ulmi!ate
i! the sel:relati!g gesture o sublati!g itsel7
So 6hat about the obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t+ is !ot the part 6hi8h is abrogated or released
merely the arbitrary- temporary aspe8t o the obje8t- that 6hi8h the !otio!al mediatio! or redu8tio! 8a!
aord to let go as bei!g i! itsel 6orthlessM This is pre8isely the mistake to be avoided- or t6o reaso!s7
First @i o!e may be permitted to e?te!d the e?8reme!tal metaphorA- the released part is- pre8isely as
dis8arded- the manure o spiritual developme!t- the grou!d out o 6hi8h urther developme!t 6ill
gro67 The release o 4ature i!to its o6! thus lays the ou!datio! or Spirit proper- 6hi8h 8a! develop
itsel o!ly out o 4ature- as its i!here!t sel:sublatio!7 Se8o!d @a!d more u!dame!tallyA- 6hat is
released i!to its o6! bei!g i! spe8ulative 8og!itio! is ultimately the obje8t o 8og!itio! itsel 6hi8h-
6he! truly grasped @begriffenA- !o lo!ger has to rely o! the subje8tIs a8tive i!terve!tio!- but develops
a88ordi!g to its o6! 8o!8eptual automatism- 6ith the subje8t redu8ed to a passive observer 6ho-
6ithout maki!g a!y 8o!tributio! @NutunA- allo6s the thi!g to deploy its pote!tial a!d merely registers
the pro8ess7 This is 6hy =egelia! 8og!itio! is simulta!eously both a8tive a!d passive- but i! a se!se
6hi8h radi8ally displa8es the *a!tia! !otio! o 8og!itio! as the u!ity o a8tivity a!d passivity7 9! *a!t-
the subje8t a8tively sy!thesiUes @8o!ers u!ity o!A the 8o!te!t @the se!suous multipli8ityA by 6hi8h it is
passively ae8ted7 For =egel- o! the 8o!trary- at the level o Absolute *!o6i!g- the 8og!iUi!g subje8t
is thoroughly passiviUed+ it !o lo!ger i!terve!es i! the obje8t- but merely registers the imma!e!t
moveme!t o the obje8tIs sel:diere!tiatio!>determi!atio! @or- to use a more 8o!temporary term- the
obje8tIs autopoieti8 sel:orga!iUatio!A7 The subje8t is thus- at its most radi8al- !ot the age!s o the
pro8ess+ the age!s is the System @o k!o6ledgeA itsel 6hi8h Jautomati8allyK deploys itsel- 6ithout the
!eed or a!y e?ter!al impetus7 This utter passivity- ho6ever- simulta!eously i!volves the greatest
a8tivity+ it takes the most stre!uous eort or the subje8t to Jerase itselK i! its parti8ular 8o!te!t- as a!
age!t i!terve!i!g i! the obje8t- a!d to e?pose itsel as a !eutral medium- as the site o the SystemIs
sel:deployme!t7 =egel thereby over8omes the sta!dard dualism bet6ee! System a!d Freedom-
bet6ee! the Spi!oUist !otio! o a substa!tial deus sive natura o 6hi8h 9 am a part- 8aught i! its
determi!ism- a!d the Fi8htea! !otio! o the subje8t as a! age!t opposed to i!ert stu- tryi!g to
domi!ate a!d appropriate it7 -he supreme moment of the sub1ects freedom is when it sets free its
ob1ect- leavi!g it alo!e to reely deploy itsel+ JThe 9deaIs absolute reedom 8o!sists i! [its resolutio!\
to reely let go out o itsel the mome!t o its parti8ularity7K
#(
JAbsolute reedomK is here literally
absolute i! the etymologi8al mea!i!g o absolvere+ releasi!g- letti!g go7 S8helli!g 6as the irst to
8riti8iUe this move as illegitimate+ ater 8ompleti!g the 8ir8le o the logi8al sel:developme!t o the
4otio!- a!d bei!g a6are that it had all take! pla8e i! the abstra8t medium o thought- =egel had
someho6 to make the passage to real lieEho6ever- there 6ere !o 8ategories i! his logi8 8apable o
a88omplishi!g this passage- 6hi8h is 6hy he had to resort to terms like Jde8isio!K @the 9dea Jde8idesK
to release 4ature rom itselA- 6hi8h are !ot 8ategories o logi8- but o the 6ill a!d pra8ti8al lie7 /hat
this 8ritiNue 8learly misses is the 6ay the a8t o releasi!g the other is thoroughly immanent to the
diale8ti8al pro8ess- as its 8o!8lusive mome!t- the sig! o the 8ompletio! o the diale8ti8al 8ir8le7 9s this
!ot the =egelia! versio! o (elassenheitM
This- the!- is ho6 o!e should read =egelIs Jthird syllogism o Chilosophy-K Spirit:.ogi8:
4ature+ the starti!g poi!t o the spe8ulative moveme!t is spiritual substa!8e- i!to 6hi8h subje8ts are
immersedT the!- through a stre!uous 8o!8eptual eort- the 6ealth o this substa!8e is redu8ed to its
u!derlyi!g logi8al or !otio!al stru8tureT o!8e this task is a88omplished- the ully developed logi8al 9dea
8a! release 4ature out o itsel7 =ere is the key passage+

The 9dea- O i! positi!g itsel as absolute u!ity o the pure 4otio! a!d its reality a!d thus 8o!tra8ti!g
itsel i!to the immedia8y o bei!g- is the totality i! this ormE!ature73ut this determi!atio! has !ot
issued rom a pro8ess o be8omi!g- !or is it a tra!sitio!- as 6he! above- the subje8tive 4otio! i! its
totality be8omes obje8tivity- a!d the subje8tive e!d be8omes lie7 H! the 8o!trary- the pure 9dea i!
6hi8h the determi!ate!ess or reality o the 4otio! is itsel raised i!to 4otio!- is a! absolute liberatio!
or 6hi8h there is !o lo!ger a!y immediate determi!atio! that is !ot eNually posited a!d itsel 4otio!T
i! this reedom- thereore- !o tra!sitio! takes pla8eT the simple bei!g to 6hi8h the 9dea determi!es itsel
remai!s pere8tly tra!spare!t to it a!d is the 4otio! that- i! its determi!atio!- abides 6ith itsel7 The
passage is thereore to be u!derstood here rather i! this ma!!er- that the 9dea reely releases itsel i! its
absolute sel:assura!8e a!d i!!er poise7 3y reaso! o this reedom- the orm o its determi!ate!ess is
also utterly reeEthe e?ter!ality o spa8e a!d time e?isti!g absolutely o! its o6! a88ou!t 6ithout the
mome!t o subje8tivity7
##
=egel here repeatedly i!sists ho6 this Jabsolute liberatio!K is thoroughly diere!t rom the
sta!dard diale8ti8al Jtra!sitio!7K 3ut ho6M The suspi8io! lurks that =egelIs Jabsolute liberatio!K relies
o! the absolute mediatio! o all other!ess+ 9 set the Hther ree ater 9 have 8ompletely i!ter!aliUed it O
3ut is this really soM
H!e should reread here .a8a!Is 8ritiNue o =egel+ 6hat i- ar rom de!yi!g 6hat .a8a! 8alls
the Jsubje8tive disju!8tio!-K =egel o! the 8o!trary asserts a! u!heard:o divisio! that runs through the
?particular@ sub1ect as well as through the ?universal@ substantial order of %collectivity!' uniting the
twoM That is to say- 6hat i the Jre8o!8iliatio!K bet6ee! the Carti8ular a!d the )!iversal o88urs
pre8isely through the divisio! that 8uts a8ross the t6oM The basi8 Jpostmoder!K reproa8h to
=egelEthat his diale8ti8 admits a!tago!isms o!ly to resolve them magi8ally i! a higher
sy!thesisEstra!gely 8o!trasts 6ith the good old ,ar?ist reproa8h @already ormulated by S8helli!gA
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h =egel resolves a!tago!isms o!ly i! Jthought-K through 8o!8eptual mediatio!- 6hile
i! reality they remai! u!resolved7 H!e is tempted to a88ept this se8o!d reproa8h at a8e value a!d use it
agai!st the irst o!e+ 6hat i this is the proper a!s6er to the a88usatio! that =egelia! diale8ti8s
magi8ally resolves a!tago!ismsM /hat i- or =egel- the poi!t is pre8isely not to JresolveK a!tago!isms
Ji! reality-K but just to e!a8t a paralla? shit by mea!s o 6hi8h a!tago!isms are re8og!iUed Jas su8hK
a!d thereby per8eived i! their JpositiveK roleM
The passage rom *a!t to =egel is thus mu8h more 8o!voluted tha! it may appearElet us
approa8h it agai! through their oppositio! 6ith regard to the o!tologi8al proo o 1odIs e?iste!8e7
*a!tIs reje8tio! o this proo takes as its starti!g poi!t the thesis that bei!g is !ot a predi8ate+ eve! i
o!e k!o6s all the predi8ates o a! e!tity- its bei!g @e?iste!8eA does !ot ollo6- or o!e 8a!!ot 8o!8lude
rom a !otio! to bei!g7 @The argume!t is 8learly posed agai!st .eib!iU- a88ordi!g to 6hom t6o obje8ts
are i!dis8er!ible i all o their predi8ates are the same7A The impli8atio!s or the o!tologi8al proo are
8lear+ i! the same 6ay that 9 8a! have a pere8t !otio! o 100 thalers a!d still !ot have them i! my
po8ket- 9 8a! have a pere8t !otio! o 1od a!d 1od 8a! still !ot e?ist7 =egelIs irst remark o! this li!e
o reaso!i!g is that Jbei!gK is the poorest- most impere8t- !otio!al determi!atio! @everythi!g JisK i!
some 6ay- eve! my 6ildest imagi!i!gsAT it is o!ly through urther !otio!al determi!atio!s that 6e get
to e?iste!8e- to reality- to a8tuality- 6hi8h are all mu8h more tha! mere bei!g7 =is se8o!d remark is
that the gap bet6ee! !otio! a!d e?iste!8e is pre8isely the mark o i!itude- it holds or i!ite obje8ts
like 100 thalers- but !ot or 1od+ 1od is !ot somethi!g 9 8a! have @or !ot haveA i! my po8ket7
H! a irst approa8h- it may seem that the oppositio! is here ultimately that bet6ee! materialism
a!d idealism+ *a!t i!sists o! a mi!imum o materialism @the i!depe!de!8e o reality 6ith regard to
!otio!al determi!atio!sA- 6hile =egel totally dissolves reality i! its !otio!al determi!atio!s7 =o6ever-
=egelIs true poi!t lies else6here+ it i!volves a mu8h more radi8al JmaterialistK 8laim that a 8omplete
!otio!al determi!atio! o a! e!tity- to 6hi8h o!e 6ould o!ly have to add Jbei!gK i! order to arrive at
its e?iste!8e- is i! itsel a! abstra8t !otio!- a! empty abstra8t possibility7 The la8k o @a 8ertai! mode
oA bei!g is al6ays also a! i!here!t la8k o some !otio!al determi!atio!Eor a thi!g to e?ist as part o
material reality- a 6hole set o !otio!al 8o!ditio!s or determi!atio!s have to be met @a!d other
determi!atio!s to be la8ki!gA7 /ith regard to 100 thalers @or a!y other empiri8al obje8tA- this mea!s
that their !otio!al determi!atio! is abstra8t- 6hi8h is 6hy they possess a! opaNue empiri8al bei!g a!d
!ot ull a8tuality7 So 6he! *a!t dra6s a parallel bet6ee! 1od a!d 100 thalers- o!e should ask a simple
a!d !aSve Nuestio!+ does *a!t really possess a @ully developedA concept o 1odM
This bri!gs us to the true i!esse o =egelIs argume!tatio!- 6hi8h ru!s i! both dire8tio!s+
agai!st *a!t but also agai!st A!selmIs 8lassi8 versio! o the o!tologi8al proo7 =egelIs argume!t
agai!st the latter is !ot that it is too 8o!8eptual- but that it is !ot 8o!8eptual e!ough+ A!selm does !ot
develop the 8o!8ept o 1od- he just reers to it as the sum o all pere8tio!s 6hi8h- as su8h- is pre8isely
beyo!d the 8omprehe!sio! o our i!ite huma! mi!d7 9! other 6ords- A!selm merely presupposes
J1odK as a! impe!etrable reality beyo!d our 8omprehe!sio! @outside the !otio!al domai!A- or his 1od
is pre8isely !ot a 8o!8ept @somethi!g posited by our 8o!8eptual 6orkA- but a purely presupposed pre: or
!o!:8o!8eptual reality7 Alo!g the same li!es- albeit i! the opposite se!se- 6e should !ote the iro!y that
*a!t talks about thalers- that is- money- 6hose e?iste!8e as money is !ot Jobje8tive-K but depe!ds o!
J!otio!alK determi!atio!s7 True- as *a!t says- havi!g a 8o!8ept o 100 thalers is !ot the same as havi!g
them i! your po8ketT but let us imagi!e a pro8ess o rapid i!latio! 6hi8h totally devalues the po8keted
100 thalersT yes- the same obje8ts are there i! reality- but they are !o lo!ger mo!ey- just mea!i!gless-
6orthless 8oi!s7 9! other 6ords- mo!ey is pre8isely a! obje8t 6hose status depe!ds o! ho6 6e Jthi!kK
about it+ i people !o lo!ger treat this pie8e o metal as mo!ey- i they !o lo!ger JbelieveK i! it as
mo!ey- it !o lo!ger is mo!ey7
#'
So 6he! *a!t argues that those 6ho 6a!t to prove the e?iste!8e o
1od rom his !otio! are like those 6ho thi!k they 8a! be8ome ri8her by addi!g Ueros to their
ba!k!otes- he misses the a8t that- i! 8apitalism- o!e a8tually can get ri8h i! this 6ay+ i! a su88essul
a8t o raud- say- o!e alsiies o!eIs i!a!8ial assets i! order to get 8redit- the! i!vests the mo!ey a!d
gets ri8h7
/ith regard to material reality- the o!tologi8al proo o 1odIs e?iste!8e should thus be tur!ed
arou!d+ the e?iste!8e o material reality bears 6it!ess to the a8t that the 4otio! is !ot ully a8tualiUed7
Thi!gs Jmaterially e?istK !ot 6he! they meet 8ertai! !otio!al reNuireme!ts- but 6he! they fail to meet
themEmaterial reality is as su8h a sig! o impere8tio!7 9! this se!se- as 6e sa6 i! Dhapter 1- or
=egel the truth o a propositio! is i!here!tly !otio!al- determi!ed by the imma!e!t !otio!al 8o!te!t-
!ot a matter o 8ompariso! bet6ee! !otio! a!d realityEi! .a8a!ia! terms- there is a !o!:All @pas*toutA
o truth7 So- to pursue the rather tasteless metaphor- =egel 6as !ot a sublimated 8oprophagist- as the
usual !otio! o the diale8ti8al pro8ess 6ould lead us to believe7 The matri? o the diale8ti8al pro8ess is
!ot that o dee8atio!:e?ter!aliUatio! ollo6ed up by a s6allo6i!g up @re:appropriatio!A o the
e?ter!aliUed 8o!te!tT o! the 8o!trary- it is o!e o appropriatio! ollo6ed by the e?8reme!tal moveme!t
o droppi!g- releasi!g- letti!g go7 /hat this mea!s is that o!e should !ot eNuate e?ter!aliUatio! 6ith
alie!atio!+ the e?ter!aliUatio! 6hi8h 8o!8ludes a 8y8le o diale8ti8al pro8ess is !ot alie!atio!- it is the
highest poi!t o dis:alie!atio!+ o!e really re8o!8iles o!esel 6ith some obje8tive 8o!te!t !ot 6he! o!e
still has to strive to master a!d 8o!trol it- but 6he! o!e 8a! aord the supreme sovereig! gesture o
letti!g this 8o!te!t go- o setti!g it ree7 /hi8h is 6hy- i!8ide!tally- as some per8eptive i!terpreters
have poi!ted out- ar rom subdui!g !ature totally to ma!- =egel u!e?pe8tedly ope!s up a spa8e or
e8ologi8al a6are!ess7 For him- the drive to e?ploit !ature te8h!ologi8ally is still a mark o ma!Is
i!itudeT i! su8h a! attitude- !ature is per8eived as a! e?ter!al obje8t- a! opposi!g or8e to be
domi!atedT adopti!g the sta!dpoi!t o Absolute *!o6i!g- ho6ever- the philosopher does !ot
e?perie!8e !ature as a threate!i!g other to be 8o!trolled a!d domi!ated- but as somethi!g that should
be let to ollo6 its i!here!t path7
=ere .ouis Althusser 6as 6ro!g 6he! he opposed the =egelia! Subje8t:Substa!8e- as a
Jteleologi8alK pro8ess:6ith:a:subje8t- to the materialist:diale8ti8al Jpro8ess 6ithout a subje8t7K The
=egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess is i! a8t the most radi8al versio! o a Jpro8ess 6ithout a subje8t-K i! the
se!se o a! age!t 8o!trolli!g a!d dire8ti!g itEbe it 1od or huma!ity- or a 8lass as a 8olle8tive subje8t7
9! his late 6riti!gs- Althusser 8ame to re8og!iUe this- but 6hat remai!ed obs8ure to him 6as ho6 the
a8t that the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess is J6ithout a subje8tK mea!s e?a8tly the same as =egelIs
u!dame!tal thesis that Jthe Absolute must be grasped !ot o!ly as Substa!8e- but also as Subje8tK+ the
emerge!8e o a pure subje8t Nua void is stri8tly 8orrelative to the !otio! o JSystemK as the sel:
deployme!t o the obje8t itsel 6ith !o !eed or a!y subje8tive age!t to drive it or6ard or dire8t it7
This is 6hy it is a mistake to treat =egelia! sel:8o!s8ious!ess as a ki!d o meta:Subje8t- a
,i!d- mu8h larger tha! a! i!dividual huma! mi!d- a6are o itsel+ o!8e 6e do this- =egel 8a! o!ly
appear as a ridi8ulous spiritualist obs8ura!tist- 8laimi!g that there is some ki!d o mega:Spirit
8o!trolli!g our history7 Agai!st this 8li8hL- o!e should emphasiUe ho6 ully a6are =egel is that Jit is i!
the i!ite 8o!s8ious!ess that the pro8ess o k!o6i!g spiritIs esse!8e takes pla8e a!d that the divi!e sel:
8o!s8ious!ess thus arises7 Hut o the oami!g erme!t o i!itude- spirit rises up ragra!tly7K
#$

=o6ever- although our a6are!essEthe @sel:A8o!s8ious!ess o i!ite huma!sEis the o!ly a8tual site o
spirit- this does !ot e!tail a!y ki!d o !omi!alist redu8tio!7 There is a!other dime!sio! at 6ork i!
Jsel:8o!s8ious!ess-K the o!e desig!ated by .a8a! as the Jbig HtherK a!d by *arl Copper as the Third
/orld7 That is to say- or =egel- Jsel:8o!s8ious!essK i! its abstra8t dei!itio! sta!ds or a purely !o!:
psy8hologi8al sel:rele?ive old o registeri!g @re:marki!gA o!eIs o6! positio!- o rele?ively Jtaki!g
i!to a88ou!tK 6hat o!e is doi!g7
Therei! resides the li!k bet6ee! =egel a!d psy8hoa!alysis+ i! this pre8ise !o!:psy8hologi8al
se!se- Jsel:8o!s8ious!essK or psy8hoa!alysis is a! obje8tEa ti8- say- a symptom 6hi8h betrays the
alsity o my positio! o 6hi8h 9 am u!a6are7 For e?ample- 9 do somethi!g 6ro!g- a!d 9 8o!s8iously
tell mysel that 9 had the right to do itT but- u!bek!o6! to me- a 8ompulsive a8t 6hi8h to me appears
mysterious a!d mea!i!gless JregistersK my guilt- bears 6it!ess to the a8t that- some6here- my guilt is
remarked7 Alo!g the same li!es- 9!gmar 3ergma! o!8e !oted that- to6ards the e!d o their 8areers-
both Felli!i a!d Tarkovsky @6hom he admiredA u!ortu!ately started to make JFelli!i ilmsK a!d
JTarkovsky ilms-K a!d that the same 6eak!ess ae8ted his +utumn SonataEit is a J3ergma! ilm
made by 3ergma!7K 9! -he +utumn Sonata- 3ergma! lost his 8reative spo!ta!eity+ he started to
Jimitate himsel-K to rele?ively ollo6 his o6! ormulaEi! short- -he +utumn Sonata is a Jsel:
8o!s8iousK ilm- eve! i 3ergma! himsel 6as psy8hologi8ally totally u!a6are o this7 This is the
u!8tio! o the .a8a!ia! Jbig HtherK at its purest+ this imperso!al- !o!:psy8hologi8al- age!8y @or rather
siteA o registeri!g- o Jtaki!g !ote oK 6hat takes pla8e7
This is ho6 o!e should grasp =egelIs !otio! o the State as the Jsel:8o!s8ious!essK o a
people+ JThe state is the self*conscious ethi8al substa!8e7K
#&
A State is !ot merely a bli!d me8ha!ism
applied to regulate so8ial lie- it al6ays also 8o!tai!s a series o pra8ti8es- rituals- a!d i!stitutio!s that
serve to Jde8lareK its o6! status- i! the guise o 6hi8h the State appears to its subje8ts as 6hat it
isEparades a!d publi8 8elebratio!s- solem! oaths- legal a!d edu8atio!al rituals 6hi8h assert @a!d
thereby e!a8tA the subje8tIs belo!gi!g!ess to the State+

the sel:8o!s8ious!ess o the state has !othi!g me!tal about it- i by Jme!talK 6e u!dersta!d the sorts
o o88urre!8es a!d Nualities that are releva!t to our own mi!ds7 /hat sel:8o!s8ious!ess amou!ts to- i!
the stateIs 8ase- is the e?iste!8e o rele8tive pra8ti8es- su8h as- but !ot limited to- edu8atio!al o!es7
Carades displayi!g the stateIs military stre!gth 6ould be pra8ti8es o this ki!d- a!d so 6ould stateme!ts
o pri!8iple by the legislature- or se!te!8es by the Supreme DourtEa!d they 6ould be that even if all
i!dividual @huma!A parti8ipa!ts i! a parade- all members o the legislature or o the Supreme Dourt
6ere perso!ally motivated to play 6hatever role they play i! this aair by greed- i!ertia- or ear- and
eve! i all su8h parti8ipa!ts or members 6ere thoroughly u!i!terested a!d bored through the 6hole
eve!t- a!d totally la8ki!g i! a!y u!dersta!di!g o its sig!ii8a!8e7
#%
So it is Nuite 8lear to =egel that this appeari!g has !othi!g to do 6ith 8o!s8ious a6are!ess+ it
does !ot matter 6hat i!dividualsI mi!ds are preo88upied 6ith 6hile they are parti8ipati!g i! a
8eremo!y- the truth resides i! the 8eremo!y itsel7 =egel made the same poi!t apropos the marriage
8eremo!y- 6hi8h registers the most i!timate li!k o love+ Jthe solem! de8laratio! o 8o!se!t to the
ethi8al bo!d o marriage a!d its re8og!itio! a!d 8o!irmatio! by the amily a!d 8ommu!ity 8o!stitute
the ormal conclusion a!d actuality o marriage-K 6hi8h is 6hy it belo!gs to Jimperti!e!8e a!d its ally-
u!dersta!di!g-K to see Jthe 8eremo!y 6hereby the esse!8e o this bo!d is e?pressed a!d confirmed O
as a! e?ter!al ormality-K irreleva!t 6ith regard to the i!6ard!ess o passio!ate eeli!g7
'0
This- o 8ourse- is !ot the 6hole story+ =egel also emphasiUed the !eed or a subje8tive eleme!t
o i!dividual sel:a6are!ess through 6hi8h a State alo!e ully a8tualiUes itselEthere has to be a!
a8tual i!dividual J9 6illRK 6hi8h immediately embodies the 6ill o the State- a!d therei! 8o!sists
=egelIs dedu8tio! o mo!ar8hy7 =o6ever- here- 6e are i! or a surprise+ the ,o!ar8h is !ot the
privileged poi!t at 6hi8h the State be8omes ully a6are o itsel- o its o6! !ature a!d spiritual 8o!te!tT
the ,o!ar8h is rather a! idiot 6ho merely supplies the purely ormal aspe8t o JThis is my 6illR So be
itRK to a 8o!te!t imposed o! it rom outside+ J9! a ully orga!iUed state O all that is reNuired i! a
mo!ar8h is someo!e to say VyesI a!d to dot the ViIT or the supreme oi8e should be su8h that the
parti8ular 8hara8ter o its o88upa!t is o !o sig!ii8a!8e7K
'1
The StateIs Jsel:8o!s8ious!essK is thus
irredu8ibly split bet6ee! its Jobje8tiveK aspe8t @the sel:registratio! i! State rituals a!d de8laratio!sA
a!d its Jsubje8tiveK aspe8t @the perso! o the ,o!ar8h 8o!erri!g o! it the orm o i!dividual
6illAEthe t6o !ever overlap7 The 8o!trast bet6ee! the =egelia! ,o!ar8h a!d the Jtotalitaria!K .eader
6ho is ee8tively supposed to k!o6 8ould !ot be stro!ger7
THE ANIMAL THAT I AM

/hat the 8riti8s o =egelIs vora8ity !eed is thus- perhaps- a dose o a good la?ative7 =egel is
mu8h less a vora8ious subje8tivist eve! 6ith regard to the idealist topi8 par e?8elle!8e- that o the
debaseme!t o the a!imality o ma!7 .et us approa8h this topi8 through GerridaIs -he +nimal -hat
-herefore I +m7
'2
Although the title 6as i!te!ded as a! iro!i8 stab at Ges8artes- o!e should perhaps
take it 6ith a more literal !aSvetLEthe Dartesia! cogito is !ot a separate substa!8e diere!t rom the
body @as Ges8artes himsel misu!derstood the cogito i! his illegitimate passage rom cogito to res
cogitansAT at the level o substa!tial 8o!te!t- 9 am !othi!g but the a!imal that 9 am7 /hat makes me
huma! is the very orm- the ormal de8laratio!- o me as a! a!imal7
GerridaIs starti!g poi!t is that every 8lear a!d ge!eral diere!tiatio! bet6ee! huma!s a!d Jthe
a!imalK i! the history o philosophy @rom Aristotle to =eidegger- .a8a!- a!d .evi!asA should be
de8o!stru8ted+ 6hat really authoriUes us to say that o!ly huma!s speak- 6hile a!imals merely emit
sig!sT that o!ly huma!s respo!d- 6hile a!imals merely rea8tT that o!ly huma!s e?perie!8e thi!gs Jas
su8h-K 6hile a!imals are just 8aptivated by their lie 6orldT that o!ly huma!s 8a! eig! to eig!- 6hile
a!imals just dire8tly eig!T that o!ly huma!s are mortal- e?perie!8e death- 6hile a!imals just dieT or
that a!imals e!joy a harmo!ious se?ual relatio!ship o i!sti!8tual mati!g- 6hile or huma!s- il ny a
pas de rapport se&uelT a!d so o! a!d so orthM Gerrida displays here the best o 6hat 6e 8a!!ot but 8all
the J8ommo! se!se o de8o!stru8tio!-K aski!g !aSve Nuestio!s 6hi8h u!dermi!e philosophi8al
propositio!s take! or gra!ted or 8e!turies7 /hat- or e?ample- allo6s .a8a! to 8laim 6ith su8h sel:
8o!ide!8e- 6ithout providi!g a!y data or argume!ts- that a!imals 8a!!ot eig! to eig!M /hat allo6s
=eidegger to 8laim as a sel:evide!t a8t that a!imals do !ot relate to their deathM As Gerrida
emphasiUes agai! a!d agai!- the poi!t o this Nuestio!i!g is !ot to 8a!8el the gap that separates ma!
rom @otherA a!imals a!d attribute also to @otherA a!imals properly JspiritualK propertiesEthe path
take! by some e8o:mysti8s 6ho 8laim that !ot o!ly a!imals- but eve! trees a!d pla!ts 8ommu!i8ate i!
a la!guage o their o6! to 6hi8h 6e huma!s are dea7 The poi!t is rather that all these diere!8es
should be re:thought a!d 8o!8eived i! a diere!t 6ay- multiplied- Jthi8ke!edKEa!d the irst step o!
this path is to de!ou!8e the all:e!8ompassi!g 8ategory o Jthe a!imal7K
Su8h a !egative 8hara8teriUatio!s o a!imals @as spee8hless- 6orldless- et87A ge!erate the
appeara!8e o a positive determi!atio! 6hi8h is alse+ a!imals as bei!g 8aptured 6ithi! their
e!viro!me!t- a!d so o!7 Go 6e !ot e!8ou!ter the same phe!ome!o! i! traditio!al 0uro8e!tri8
a!thropologyM Vie6ed through the le!ses o moder! /ester! Jratio!alK thought take! as the sta!dard
o maturity- its Hthers 8a!!ot but appear as JprimitivesK trapped i! magi8 thi!ki!g- Jreally believi!gK
that their tribe origi!ates rom their totemi8 a!imal- that a preg!a!t 6oma! has bee! i!semi!ated by a
spirit a!d !ot by a ma!- et87 Fatio!al thought thus e!ge!ders the igure o Jirratio!alK mythi8al thought
E6hat 6e get here is @agai!A a pro8ess o viole!t simplii8atio! @redu8tio!- obliteratio!A 6hi8h o88urs
6ith the rise o the 4e6+ i! order to assert somethi!g radi8ally 4e6- the e!tire past- 6ith all its
i!8o!siste!8ies- has to be redu8ed to some basi8 dei!i!g eature @Jmetaphysi8s-K Jmythi8al thought-K
JideologyKOA7 Gerrida himsel su88umbs to the same simplii8atio! i! his de8o!stru8tive mode+ the
past as a 6hole is totaliUed as Jphallogo8e!trismK or Jmetaphysi8s o prese!8e-K 6hi8hEit 8a! be
arguedEis se8retly modeled upo! =usserl7 @Gerrida here diers rom GeleuUe a!d .a8a!- 6ho treat
philosophers o!e by o!e- 6ithout totaliUi!g them7A Goes !ot the same thi!g happe! 6he! the /ester!
2udeo:1reek lega8y is opposed to the JHrie!talK sta!8e- thereby obliterati!g the i!8redible 6ealth o
positio!s 8overed by the term JHrie!tal thoughtKM Da! 6e really put i!to the same 8ategory- say- the
)pa!ishads- 6ith their J8orporateK metaphysi8s o 8astes- a!d Do!u8ia!ism 6ith its ag!osti8:
pragmati8 sta!8eM
3ut is !ot su8h a viole!t leveli!g a !e8essary eature o every 8riti8al move- o every rise o the
4e6M Cerhaps the!- i!stead o dismissi!g en bloc su8h Jbi!ary logi8-K o!e should assert it- !ot o!ly as
a !e8essary step o simplii8atio!- but as i!here!tly true i! that very simplii8atio!7 To put it i!
=egelese- it is !ot o!ly that- say- the totaliUatio! ee8ted u!der the headi!g Jthe a!imalK i!volves the
viole!t obliteratio! o a 8omple? multipli8ityT it is also that the viole!t redu8tio! o su8h a multipli8ity
to a mi!imal diere!8e is the mome!t o truth7 That is to say- the multipli8ity o a!imal orms is to be
8o!8eived as a series o attempts to resolve some basi8 a!tago!ism or te!sio! 6hi8h dei!es a!imality
as su8h- a te!sio! 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be ormulated rom a mi!imal dista!8e- o!8e huma!s are i!volved7
Fe8all the 6ell:k!o6! elaboratio! o the ge!eral eNuivale!t rom the irst editio! o ,apital- Volume
1- 6here ,ar? 6rites+

9t is as i- alo!gside a!d e?ter!al to lio!s- tigers- rabbits- a!d all other a8tual a!imals- 6hi8h orm 6he!
grouped together the various ki!ds- spe8ies- subspe8ies- amilies- et87 o the a!imal ki!gdom- there
e?isted i! additio! the animal- the i!dividual i!8ar!atio! o the e!tire a!imal ki!gdom7
'"
Goe !ot this image o mo!ey as Jthe a!imalK rompi!g alo!gside all the heteroge!eous i!sta!8es
o parti8ular sorts o a!imality that e?ist arou!d it 8apture 6hat Gerrida des8ribes as the gap that
separates the A!imal rom the multipli8ity o a8tual a!imal lieM 9! =egelese agai!- 6hat ma!
e!8ou!ters i! the A!imal is itsel i! the oppositio!al determi!atio!+ vie6ed as a! a!imal- ma! is the
spe8tral a!imal e?isti!g alo!gside really e?isti!g a!imal ki!ds7 Goes this !ot also allo6 us to give a
perverse t6ist to the early ,ar?Is determi!atio! o ma! as (attungswesen- a spe8ies:bei!g+ it is as i-
alo!gside parti8ular subspe8ies- the spe8ies as su8h 8omes to e?ist7 Cerhaps this is ho6 a!imals vie6
huma!s- a!d this is the reaso! or their perple?ity7
The key poi!t here is that it is !ot e!ough to say that- 6hile su8h a determi!atio! o a!imals as
spee8hless- et87- is 6ro!g- the determi!atio! o huma!s as ratio!al- speaki!g- et87- is right- so that 6e
just have to provide a more adeNuate dei!itio! o a!imalityEthe e!tire ield is alse7 This alsity 8a!
be thought i! terms o the *ierkegaardia! 8ouple o be8omi!g a!d bei!g+ the sta!dard oppositio!
a!imal>huma! is ormulated rom the perspe8tive o the huma! as bei!g- as already 8o!stitutedT it
8a!!ot thi!k the huma! i! its be8omi!g7 9t thi!ks a!imals rom 6ithi! the give! huma! sta!dpoi!t- it
8a!!ot thi!k the huma! rom the a!imal sta!dpoi!t7 9! other 6ords- 6hat this huma!>a!imal diere!8e
obus8ates is !ot o!ly the 6ay a!imals really are i!depe!de!tly o huma!s- but the very diere!8e
6hi8h ee8tively marks the rupture o the huma! 6ithi! the a!imal u!iverse7 9t is here that
psy8hoa!alysis e!ters+ the Jdeath driveK as FreudIs !ame or the u!8a!!y dime!sio! o the huma!:i!:
be8omi!g7 This 9!:bet6ee! is the JrepressedK o the !arrative orm @i! =egelIs 8ase- o the Jgra!d
!arrativeK o the 6orld:histori8al su88essio! o spiritual ormsA+ !ot !ature as su8h- but the very break
6ith !ature 6hi8h is @laterA suppleme!ted by the virtual u!iverse o !arratives7 The a!s6er to GerridaIs
8laim that every eature attributed e?8lusively to Jma!K is a i8tio! 8ould thus be that su8h i8tio!s
!o!etheless have a reality o their o6!- ee8tively orga!iUi!g huma! pra8ti8esEthat huma!s are
pre8isely a!imals 6ho be8ome 8ommitted to their i8tio!s- adheri!g to them s8rupulously @a versio! o
4ietUs8heIs 8laim that ma! is the a!imal 8apable o maki!g promisesA7
Gerrida begi!s his e?ploratio! o this obs8ure Jt6ilight Uo!eK 6ith a report o! a ki!d o
primordial s8e!e+ ater 6aki!g- he goes !aked to the bathroom 6here his 8at ollo6s himT the! the
a6k6ard mome!t o88ursEhe is sta!di!g i! ro!t o the 8at 6hi8h is looki!g at his !aked body7 )!able
to e!dure this situatio!- he puts a to6el arou!d his 6aist- 8hases the 8at outside- a!d takes a sho6er7
The 8atIs gaUe sta!ds or the gaUe o the HtherEa! i!huma! gaUe- but or this reaso! all the more the
HtherIs gaUe i! all its abyssal impe!etrability7 Seei!g o!esel bei!g see! by a! a!imal is a! abyssal
e!8ou!ter 6ith the HtherIs gaUe- si!8eEpre8isely be8ause 6e should !ot simply proje8t o!to the
a!imal our i!!er e?perie!8eEsomethi!g is retur!i!g the gaUe 6hi8h is radi8ally Hther7 The e!tire
history o philosophy is based upo! a disavo6al o su8h a! e!8ou!ter- right up to 3adiou- 6ho is all too
Nui8k i! 8hara8teriUi!g a huma! bei!g !ot yet 8o!verted i!to a subje8t @to the 0ve!tA as a Jhuma!
a!imal7K Sometimes- at least- the e!igma is admittedEby- amo!g others- =eidegger- 6ho i!sists that
6e are !ot yet able to determi!e the esse!8e o a bei!g 6hi8h is Jlivi!g7K A!d- sporadi8ally- 6e 8a!
eve! i!d dire8t reversals o this disavo6al+ !ot o!ly is the gaUe o the a!imal re8og!iUed- it is also
dire8tly elevated i!to the key preo88upatio! o philosophy- as i! Ador!oIs surprisi!g pro8lamatio!+
JChilosophy e?ists i! order to redeem 6hat you see i! the gaUe o a! a!imal7K
'(
9 remember seei!g a photo o a 8at ater it had bee! subje8ted to some lab e?perime!t i! a
8e!triuge- its bo!es hal broke!- its ski! hal hairless- its eyes looki!g helplessly i!to the 8ameraEthis
is the gaUe o the Hther disavo6ed !ot o!ly by philosophers- but by huma!s Jas su8h7K 0ve! .evi!as-
6ho 6rote so mu8h about the a8e o the helpless other as the origi!al site o the ethi8al respo!sibility-
e?pli8itly de!ied that a! a!imalIs a8e 8ould u!8tio! like this7 H!e o the e6 e?8eptio!s here is
3e!tham- 6ho made a simple proposal+ i!stead o aski!g- JDa! a!imals reaso! a!d thi!kM Da! they
talkMK 6e should rather ask- JDa! they suerMK =uma! i!dustry alo!e is 8o!ti!uously 8ausi!g a!
imme!se sueri!g to a!imals 6hi8h is systemati8ally disavo6edE!ot o!ly laboratory e?perime!ts- but
spe8ial regimes to produ8e eggs a!d milk @tur!i!g lights o! a!d o to shorte! the day- the use o
hormo!es- et87A- pigs 6hi8h are hal bli!d a!d barely able to 6alk- atte!ed up rapidly to be
slaughtered- a!d so o! a!d so orth7 ,a!y o those 6ho visit a 8hi8ke! a8tory i!d themselves !o
lo!ger able to eat 8hi8ke! meat- a!d although all o us k!o6 6hat goes o! i! su8h pla8es- this
k!o6ledge has to be !eutraliUed so that 6e 8a! a8t as i 6e do !ot k!o67 H!e 6ay to a8ilitate this
ig!ora!8e is 6ith the Dartesia! !otio! o the animal*machine7 Dartesia!s 6ar! us agai!st havi!g
8ompassio! or a!imals+ 6he! 6e hear a! a!imal emitti!g sou!ds o pai!- 6e should al6ays bear i!
mi!d that these sou!ds do !ot e?press a!y real i!!er eeli!gEsi!8e a!imals do !ot have souls- they are
just sou!ds ge!erated by a 8omple? me8ha!ism o mus8les- bo!es- luids- et87- that o!e 8a! 8learly see
through disse8tio!7 The problem is that the !otio! o the animal*machine developed i!to .a ,ettrieIs
.0omme*Machine+ or a ully 8ommitted !euro:biologist- e?a8tly the same 8laim 8a! be made about
the sou!ds a!d gestures emitted by huma!s i! pai!T there is !o separate i!terior domai! o the soul
6here pai! is Jreally elt-K su8h sou!ds a!d gestures are simply produ8ed by the 8omple? !euro:
biologi8al me8ha!isms o the huma! orga!ism7
9! reveali!g the larger o!tologi8al 8o!te?t o this a!imal sueri!g- Gerrida resus8itates the old
moti o 1erma! Foma!ti8ism a!d S8helli!g- take! over by =eidegger a!d 3e!jami!- o the Jgreat
sorro6 o !atureK+ J9t is i! the hope o reNuiti!g that [sorro6\- o redemptio! rom that sueri!g- that
huma!s live a!d speak i! !ature7K
'#
Gerrida reje8ts this S8helli!gia!:3e!jami!ia!:=eideggeria! moti
o the sad!ess o !ature- the idea that !atureIs !umb!ess a!d mute!ess sig!als a! i!i!ite pai!- as bei!g
teleologi8ally logo8e!tri8+ la!guage be8omes a telos o !ature- !ature strives to6ards the /ord to be
relieved o its sad!ess- to rea8h its redemptio!7 3ut this mysti8al topos !o!etheless raises the right
Nuestio! by- agai!- reversi!g the sta!dard perspe8tive+ !ot J/hat is !ature or la!guageM Da! 6e grasp
!ature adeNuately i! or through la!guageMK but J/hat is la!guage or !atureM =o6 does its emerge!8e
ae8t !atureMK Far rom belo!gi!g to logo8e!trism- su8h a reversal is the stro!gest suspe!sio! o
logo8e!trism a!d teleology- i! the same 6ay that ,ar?Is thesis o! the a!atomy o ma! as the key to the
a!atomy o ape subverts a!y teleologi8al evolutio!ism7 Gerrida is a6are o this 8omple?ity+ he
des8ribes ho6 the a!imal sad!ess

does!It just derive rom the i!ability to speak a!d rom mute!ess- rom a stupeied or aphasi8 privatio!
o 6ords7 9 this putative sad!ess also gives rise to a lame!t- i !ature lame!ts- e?pressi!g a mute but
audible lame!t through se!suous sighi!g a!d eve! the rustli!g o pla!ts- it is perhaps be8ause the terms
have to be i!verted7 3e!jami! suggests as mu8h7 There must be a reversal- a! 3m"ehrung i! the
esse!8e o !ature O !ature @a!d a!imality 6ithi! itA is!It sad be8ause it is mute7 H! the 8o!trary- it is
!atureIs sad!ess or mour!i!g that re!ders it mute a!d aphasi8- that leaves it 6ithout 6ords7
''
Follo6i!g 3e!jami!- Gerrida thus i!terprets this reversal as reveali!g that 6hat makes !ature
sad is !ot Ja mute!ess a!d the e?perie!8e o po6erless!ess- a! i!ability ever to !ameT it is- i! the irst
pla8e- the a8t o receiving ones name7K
'$
Hur i!sertio! i!to la!guage- our bei!g give! a !ame-
u!8tio!s as a memento moriEi! la!guage- 6e die i! adva!8e- 6e relate to ourselves as already dead7
.a!guage is i! this se!se a orm o mela!8holy- !ot o mour!i!g+ i! it- 6e treat a! obje8t 6hi8h is still
alive as already dead or lost- so that 6he! 3e!jami! speaks about Ja foreshadowing of mourning-K o!e
should take this as the very ormula o the mela!8holy7
There is- ho6ever- a barely 8o!8ealed ambiguity i! GerridaIs 8laims+ i sad!ess is prior to
mute!ess @la8k o la!guageA- i it 8auses mute!ess- is the! the primordial u!8tio! o la!guage to
release or abolish this sad!essM 3ut i this is the 8ase- ho6 8a! this sad!ess origi!ally be the sad!ess o
re8eivi!g o!eIs !ameM Am 9 let 6ithout 6ords at the u!heard:o viole!8e o someo!e !ami!g me-
imposi!g a symboli8 ide!tity o! to me- 6ithout aski!g or my 8o!se!tM A!d ho6 8a! the sad!ess
8aused by this redu8tio! to the passivity o bei!g:!amed be e?perie!8ed by !ature itselM Goes !ot su8h
a! e?perie!8e presuppose that o!e already d6ells i! the dime!sio! o !ami!g- o la!guageM Should o!e
!ot limit su8h a 8laim to so:8alled domesti8 a!imalsM .a8a! !oted some6here that- 6hile a!imals do
!ot speak- domesti8 a!imals !o!etheless already d6ell i! the dime!sio! o la!guage @they rea8t to their
!ames- ru! to their master 6he! they hear it 8alled- obey orders- et87A- 6hi8h is 6hy- although they do
!ot have a88ess to J!ormalK subje8tivity- they 8a! !o!etheless be ae8ted by @huma!A pathology+ a dog
8a! be hysteri8iUed- a!d so o!7 So- to retur! to the sad a!d perple?ed gaUe o the laboratory 8at- 6hat it
e?presses is perhaps the 8atIs horror at havi!g e!8ou!tered The A!imal- !amely ourselves- huma!s+
6hat the 8at sees is us i! all our mo!strosity- a!d 6hat 6e see i! its tortured gaUe is our o6!
mo!strosity7 9! this se!se- the big Hther @the symboli8 orderA is already here or the poor 8at+ like the
priso!er i! *akaIs pe!al 8olo!y- the 8at suered the material 8o!seNue!8es o bei!g 8aught i! the
symboli8 gridlo8k7 9t ee8tively suered the 8o!seNue!8es o bei!g !amed- i!8luded i! the symboli8
!et6ork7
To resolve this problem- should 6e disti!guish bet6ee! two sad!esses+ the sad!ess o !atural
lie prior to a!d i!depe!de!t o la!guage- a!d the sad!ess o bei!g !amed- subjugated to la!guageM
There is- irst- the Ji!i!ite mela!8holy o all livi!g thi!gs-K a te!sio! or pai! 6hi8h is resolved 6he! a
/ord is spoke!T the!- ho6ever- the pro!u!8iatio! o a /ord itsel ge!erates a sad!ess o its o6!
@reerred to by GerridaA7 Goes !ot this i!sight i!to the i!timate li!k bet6ee! la!guage a!d pai! bri!g us
8lose to Fi8hard FortyIs dei!itio! o huma!s as bei!gs 6ho suer a!d are able to !arrate their
sueri!gEor- as Gerrida put it- to ma! as the autobiographi8al a!imalM /hat Forty does !ot take i!to
a88ou!t is the additio!al pai! @the surplus:pai!A ge!erated by la!guage itsel7
,aybe =egel 8a! sho6 us a 6ay out here- 6he! he i!terprets gravity as a! i!di8atio! that
matter @!atureA has its 8e!ter outside itsel a!d is 8o!dem!ed to strive e!dlessly to6ards itT spirit- o! the
8o!trary- has its 8e!ter i! itsel- 6ith the rise o spirit- reality retur!s to itsel rom its sel:
e?ter!aliUatio!7 Spirit- ho6ever- is o!ly a8tual i! huma! thought- 6hose medium is la!guage- a!d
la!guage i!volves a! eve! more radi8al e?ter!aliUatio!E!ature thus retur!s to itsel through a repeated
e?ter!aliUatio! @or- as S8helli!g 6ould have put it- i! la!guage- a subje8t 8o!tra8ts itsel outside itselA7
There is a! u!derlyi!g !e8essity at 6ork here+ every speakerEevery !ame:giverEhas to be
!amed- has to be i!8luded i! its o6! 8hai! o !omi!atio!s- or- to reer to the joke ote! Nuoted by
.a8a!+ J9 have three brothers- Caul- 0r!est- a!d mysel7K 4o 6o!der that- i! ma!y religio!s- 1odIs
!ame is se8ret- o!e is prohibited rom pro!ou!8i!g it7 The speaki!g subje8t persists i! this i!:bet6ee!+
prior to !omi!atio!- there is !o subje8t- but o!8e it is !amed- it already disappears i! its sig!iierEthe
subje8t !ever is- it al6ays will have been7
3ut 6hat i that 6hi8h 8hara8teriUes huma!s is this very ope!!ess to the abyss o the radi8al
Hther- this perple?ity o J/hat does the Hther really 6a!t rom meMK 9! other 6ords- 6hat i 6e tur!
the perspe8tive arou!d hereM /hat i the perple?ity a huma! sees i! the a!imalIs gaUe is the perple?ity
aroused by the mo!strosity o the huma! bei!g itselM /hat i it is my o6! abyss 9 see rele8ted i! the
abyss o the HtherIs gaUeEJdans ses yeu&! 1e vois ma perte Acrite-K as Fa8i!e put it i! )h>dreM Hr- i!
=egelese- i!stead o aski!g 6hat Substa!8e is or the Subje8t- ho6 the Subje8t 8a! grasp Substa!8e-
o!e should ask the obverse Nuestio!+ 6hat is @the rise o theA Subje8t or @pre:subje8tiveA Substa!8eM 17
*7 Dhesterto! proposed su8h a =egelia! reversal pre8isely apropos ma! a!d a!imals+ i!stead o aski!g
6hat a!imals are or huma!s- or our e?perie!8e- 6e should ask 6hat ma! is or a!imalsEi! his less
6ell:k!o6! Everlasting Man- Dhesterto! 8o!du8ts a 6o!derul me!tal e?perime!t alo!g these li!es-
imagi!i!g the mo!ster that ma! might have seemed at irst to the merely !atural a!imals arou!d him+

The simplest truth about ma! is that he is a very stra!ge bei!gT almost i! the se!se o bei!g a stra!ger
o! the earth7 9! all sobriety- he has mu8h more o the e?ter!al appeara!8e o o!e bri!gi!g alie! habits
rom a!other la!d tha! o a mere gro6th o this o!e7 =e has a! u!air adva!tage a!d a! u!air
disadva!tage7 =e 8a!!ot sleep i! his o6! ski!T he 8a!!ot trust his o6! i!sti!8ts7 =e is at o!8e a 8reator
movi!g mira8ulous ha!ds a!d i!gers a!d a ki!d o 8ripple7 =e is 6rapped i! artii8ial ba!dages 8alled
8lothesT he is propped o! artii8ial 8rut8hes 8alled ur!iture7 =is mi!d has the same doubtul liberties
a!d the same 6ild limitatio!s7 Alo!e amo!g the a!imals- he is shake! 6ith the beautiul mad!ess 8alled
laughterT as i he had 8aught sight o some se8ret i! the very shape o the u!iverse hidde! rom the
u!iverse itsel7 Alo!e amo!g the a!imals he eels the !eed o averti!g his thought rom the root
realities o his o6! bodily bei!gT o hidi!g them as i! the prese!8e o some higher possibility 6hi8h
8reates the mystery o shame7 /hether 6e praise these thi!gs as !atural to ma! or abuse them as
artii8ial i! !ature- they remai! i! the same se!se u!iNue7
'&
This is 6hat Dhesterto! 8alled Jthi!ki!g ba8k6ardsK+ 6e have to put ourselves ba8k i! time-
beore the ateul de8isio!s 6ere made or beore the a88ide!ts o88urred that ge!erated the state 6hi8h
!o6 seems !ormal to us- a!d the best 6ay to do it- to re!der palpable this ope! mome!t o de8isio!- is
to imagi!e ho6- at that poi!t- history might have take! a diere!t tur!7 /ith regard to Dhristia!ity-
i!stead o losi!g time probi!g i!to ho6 it related to 2udaismEho6 it misu!dersta!ds the Hld
Testame!t by readi!g it as a!!ou!8i!g the arrival o DhristEa!d the! tryi!g to re8o!stru8t 6hat the
2e6s 6ere like prior to Dhristia!ity- u!ae8ted by the retroa8tive Dhristia! perspe8tive- o!e should
rather tur! the perspe8tive arou!d a!d Je?tra!eateK Dhristia!ity itsel- treat it as Dhristia!ity:i!:
be8omi!g a!d o8us o! 6hat a stra!ge beast- 6hat a s8a!dalous mo!strosity- Dhrist must have appeared
to be i! the eyes o the 2e6ish ideologi8al establishme!t7
A hyperboli8 e?ample is provided by those rare so8ieties 6hi8h- u!til !o6- had su88eeded i!
avoidi!g 8o!ta8t 6ith J8iviliUatio!7K 9! ,ay 200&- the media reported o! the dis8overy o a!
Ju!8o!ta8ted tribeK i! the thi8k rai!orest alo!g the 3raUilia!:Ceruvia! ro!tier+ they had !ever had a!y
8o!ta8t 6ith the Joutside 6orldKT their 6ay o lie had probably remai!ed u!8ha!ged or over 10-000
years7 Chotos o their village 6ere released- take! rom a pla!e7 /he! a!thropologists irst le6 over
the area- they sa6 6ome! a!d 8hildre! i! the ope! a!d !o o!e appeared to be pai!ted7 H!ly 6he! the
pla!e retur!ed a e6 hours later did they see tribesme! 8overed head:to:toe i! red+ 6ith their ski!
pai!ted bright red- heads partially shaved- arro6s dra6! ba8k i! the lo!gbo6s a!d aimed sNuare at the
air8rat buUUi!g overhead- their gesture 6as u!mistakable+ Stay a6ayR A!d the gesture 6as 8orre8t+
8o!ta8t is usually a disaster or su8h remote tribes7 0ve! i the loggers do !ot shoot them or or8e them
o the la!d- diseases agai!st 6hi8h these isolated huma!s have !o resista!8e typi8ally 6ipe out hal a!
u!8o!ta8ted tribeIs !umbers i! o!ly a e6 years7 Hur 8iviliUatio! is or them literally a melti!g
potEthey melt a!d disappear i!to it- like the a!8ie!t res8oes i! Fellinis 7oma 6hi8h 6ere prote8ted
as lo!g as they 6ere isolated i! their u!dergrou!d va8uumEthe mome!t the @very 8areul a!d
respe8tulA resear8hers e!tered their domai!- they started to disi!tegrate7 /e ote! ask ourselves ho6
6e 6ould rea8t to meeti!g alie!s mu8h more developed tha! ourselvesEi! the 8ase o u!8o!ta8ted
tribes- 6e ourselves are the alie!s7 Therei! resides the horror o these pi8tures+ 6e see the terriied
!atives observi!g a! i!huma! Hther- a!d 6e ourselves are this Hther7
=o6- the!- do 6e huma!s ae8t !atureM /he! ires raged i! the Celopo!!ese i! the summer o
200$- o!e photo o the ravaged area sho6ed a ield o large 8a8ti hal:bur!ed i! su8h a stra!ge 6ay that
they appeared almost melted- their shape protra8ted i! a multitude o 6ays- someho6 like GaliIs
amous pai!ti!g o the JmeltedK 8lo8k- t6isted i! the middle like a thi8k pa!8ake7 /hat makes su8h
images so as8i!ati!g is the 6ay they represe!t !ot o!ly a destru8tio! i!ter!al to reality- but a
destru8tio! o the very te?ture o reality- o realityIs basi8 8oordi!ates7 The irst ee8t is that o a
de!aturaliUed !ature+ !ature hal:destroyed loses its Jorga!i8K 8hara8ter- appeari!g as a bricolage- a!
artii8ial 8omposite o heteroge!eous eleme!ts 8haoti8ally thro6! together7 The se8o!d ee8t is that o
a temporal disturba!8e+ it seems as i 6e are !o lo!ger deali!g 6ith !ature i! its regular rhythm o
ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!- gro6th a!d de8ay- but 6ith a t6isted spa8e i! 6hi8h- i! a! obs8e!e 6ay- as
i! the 8ase o 8a!8erous protubera!8es- !e6 orms o lie gro6 out o de8ay itsel7 A third ee8t is that
o a multiple a!amorphi8 distortio!+ 6he! pla!ts appear as partially Jmelted-K u!!aturally prolo!ged i!
diere!t dire8tio!s- it is as i the obje8t itsel- i! its distorted material reality- has i!8orporated multiple
perspe8tives- ra8tured vie6s o ho6 6e 6ould per8eive it i 6e 6ere to look at it rom diere!t
sta!dpoi!ts7 9t thus appears that o!e 8a! !o lo!ger 8learly disti!guish bet6ee! the obje8tIs immediate
reality a!d the subje8tive perspe8tives o! itEthe distortio!s i!volved i! looki!g a6ry at the obje8t are
i!s8ribed i!to its very obje8tive reality7
9! =egelia! terms- su8h a la!ds8ape embodies the 8oi!8ide!8e o the e?tremes o 9!:itsel a!d
For:us+ i! 8at8hi!g sight o su8h a 6eird s8e!e- our irst impressio! is that 6e are getti!g a glimpse o
!ature 9!:itsel i! its mo!strous pre:huma! orm7 =o6ever- it is pre8isely as su8h that !ature i!s8ribes-
i! the guise o its distortio!- the mo!strosity o ma!- his a6k6ard pla8e 6ithi! !ature7 ,a! is su8h a!
a!amorphi8 distortio! o !ature- a perturba!8e o the J!aturalK rhythm o ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!7
/he! 6e hear a stateme!t like =Zlderli!Is amous Jpoeti8ally d6ells ma! o! this earth-K 6e should !ot
imagi!e ma!Is d6elli!g as a hut !ear a stream i! a orest- but pre8isely as su8h a distorted
Jde!aturaliUedK la!ds8ape7
94T0F.)G0 "

5ing! 7abble! War 4 and Se&

The most amous passage i! 2a8k .o!do!Is Martin Eden is the i!al paragraph- des8ribi!g the
heroIs sui8ide by dro6!i!g+

=e seemed loati!g la!guidly i! a sea o dreamy visio!7 Dolors a!d radia!8es surrou!ded him a!d
bathed him a!d pervaded him7 /hat 6as thatM 9t seemed a lighthouseT but it 6as i!side his brai!Ea
lashi!g- bright 6hite light7 9t lashed s6iter a!d s6iter7 There 6as a lo!g rumble o sou!d- a!d it
seemed to him that he 6as alli!g do6! a vast a!d i!termi!able stair6ay7 A!d some6here at the
bottom he ell i!to dark!ess7 That mu8h he k!e67 =e had alle! i!to dark!ess7 A!d at the i!sta!t he
k!e6- he 8eased to k!o67
=o6 had ,arti! arrived at this poi!tM /hat pushed him to sui8ide 6as his very su88essEthe
!ovel prese!ts the 8risis o i!vestiture i! its simple but most radi8al orm+ ater lo!g years o struggle
a!d hard 6ork- ,arti! i!ally su88eeds a!d be8omes a amous 6riterT ho6ever- 6hile he is loati!g i!
6ealth a!d ame- o!e thi!g puUUles him-

a little thi!g that 6ould have puUUled the 6orld had it k!o6!7 3ut the 6orld 6ould have puUUled over
his bepuUUleme!t rather tha! over the little thi!g that to him loomed giga!ti87 2udge 3lou!t i!vited him
to di!!er7 That 6as the little thi!g- or the begi!!i!g o the little thi!g- that 6as soo! to be8ome the big
thi!g7 =e had i!sulted 2udge 3lou!t- treated him abomi!ably- a!d 2udge 3lou!t- meeti!g him o! the
street- i!vited him to di!!er7 ,arti! bethought himsel o the !umerous o88asio!s o! 6hi8h he had met
2udge 3lou!t at the ,orsesI a!d 6he! 2udge 3lou!t had !ot i!vited him to di!!er7 /hy had he !ot
i!vited him to di!!er the!M he asked himsel7 =e had !ot 8ha!ged7 =e 6as the same ,arti! 0de!7 /hat
made the diere!8eM The a8t that the stu he had 6ritte! had appeared i!side the 8overs o booksM
3ut it 6as 6ork perormed7 9t 6as !ot somethi!g he had do!e si!8e7 9t 6as a8hieveme!t a88omplished
at the very time 2udge 3lou!t 6as shari!g this ge!eral vie6 a!d s!eeri!g at his Spe!8er a!d his
i!telle8t7 Thereore it 6as !ot or a!y real value- but or a purely i8titious value that 2udge 3lou!t
i!vited him to di!!er7
This little puUUli!g thi!g gro6s larger a!d larger- tur!i!g i!to the 8e!tral obsessio! o his lie+

=is thoughts 6e!t ever arou!d a!d arou!d i! a 8ir8le7 The 8e!tre o that 8ir8le 6as J6ork perormedKT
it ate at his brai! like a deathless maggot7 =e a6oke to it i! the mor!i!g7 9t torme!ted his dreams at
!ight7 0very aair o lie arou!d him that pe!etrated through his se!ses immediately related itsel to
J6ork perormed7K =e drove alo!g the path o rele!tless logi8 to the 8o!8lusio! that he 6as !obody-
!othi!g7 ,art 0de!- the hoodlum- a!d ,art 0de!- the sailor- had bee! real- had bee! heT but ,arti!
0de!R the amous 6riter- did !ot e?ist7 ,arti! 0de!- the amous 6riter- 6as a vapor that had arise! i!
the mob:mi!d a!d by the mob:mi!d had bee! thrust i!to the 8orporeal bei!g o ,art 0de!- the
hoodlum a!d sailor7
0ve! his beloved .iUUy- 6ho had !ot 6a!ted to marry him- !o6 desperately thro6s hersel at
him- pro8laimi!g that she loves him totallyT 6he! she 8laims that she is ready to die or him- ,arti!
tau!ti!gly replies+

/hy did!It you dare it beoreM /he! 9 had!It a jobM /he! 9 6as starvi!gM /he! 9 6as just as 9 am
!o6- as a ma!- as a! artist- the same ,arti! 0de!M ThatIs the Nuestio! 9Ive bee! propou!di!g to mysel
or ma!y a dayE!ot 8o!8er!i!g you merely- but 8o!8er!i!g everybody7 5ou see 9 have !ot 8ha!ged-
though my sudde! appare!t appre8iatio! i! value 8ompels me 8o!sta!tly to reassure mysel o! that
poi!t7 9Ive got the same lesh o! my bo!es- the same te! i!gers a!d toes7 9 am the same7 9 have !ot
developed a!y !e6 stre!gth !or virtue7 ,y brai! is the same old brai!7 9 have!It made eve! o!e !e6
ge!eraliUatio! o! literature or philosophy7 9 am perso!ally o the same value that 9 6as 6he! !obody
6a!ted me7 A!d 6hat is puUUli!g me is 6hy they 6a!t me !o67 Surely they do!It 6a!t me or mysel-
or mysel is the same old sel they did !ot 6a!t7 The! they must 6a!t me or somethi!g else- or
somethi!g that is outside o me- or somethi!g that is !ot 9R Shall 9 tell you 6hat that somethi!g isM 9t is
or the re8og!itio! 9 have re8eived7 That re8og!itio! is !ot 97 9t resides i! the mi!ds o others7
/hat ,arti! 8a!!ot a88ept is the radi8al gap that orever separates his JrealK Nualities rom his
symboli8 status @i! the eyes o the othersA+ all o a sudde!- he is !o lo!ger a !obody avoided by the
respe8table publi8 but a amous author i!vited to di!!er by the pillars o so8iety- 6ith eve! the beloved
6oma! !o6 thro6i!g hersel at his eet7 3ut he is ully a6are that !othi!g has 8ha!ged i! him i!
reality- he is !o6 the same perso! as he 6as- a!d eve! all his 6orks 6ere already 6ritte! 6he! he 6as
ig!ored a!d despised7 /hat ,arti! 8a!!ot a88ept is this radi8al de:8e!teri!g o the very 8ore o his
perso!ality 6hi8h Jresides i! the mi!ds o othersK+ he is !othi!g i! himsel- just a 8o!8e!trated
proje8tio! o othersI dreams7 This per8eptio! that his agalma- 6hat !o6 makes him desired by others-
is somethi!g outside o him !ot o!ly rui!s his !ar8issism- it also kills his desire+ JSomethi!g has go!e
out o me7 9 have al6ays bee! u!araid o lie- but 9 !ever dreamed o bei!g sated 6ith lie7 .ie has so
illed me that 9 am empty o a!y desire or a!ythi!g7K 9t is this J8o!8lusio! that he 6as !obody-
!othi!gK 6hi8h drove him to sui8ide7
Fra!k G7 1ilroyIs From oon -ill -hree- a Nuite u!iNue 8omedy /ester! rom 1%$'- deals 6ith
the same topi8 o the 8o!seNue!8es o symboli8 alie!atio!7 =ere is a summary o the plot- 8ourtesy o
/ikipedia+ 9! the Ameri8a! /est o the late !i!etee!th 8e!tury- 1raham Gorsey @Dharles 3ro!so!A- a
member o a ga!g- is i!volved i! a ailed ba!k robberyT o! the ru!- he i!ds himsel at the ra!8h o the
6ido6 Ama!da Starbu8k @2ill 9rela!dA a!d stays there or three hours @Jrom !oo! till threeKA7 =e tries
to or8e himsel o! Ama!da- 6ho resists his adva!8es rather i!ve!tivelyT the rustrated 1raham de8ides
o! a ruse+ he prete!ds he is impote!t- hopi!g to play o! Ama!daIs sympathy7 The de8eptio! 6orks- a!d
they make love three timesT ater6ards- they have a lo!g talk a!d eve! da!8e to Ama!daIs musi8 bo?-
6ith 1raham 6eari!g ,r7 Starbu8kIs old tu?edo7 A !eighbor boy stops by to tell Ama!da about a!
attempted ba!k robbery i! to6!7 H! Ama!daIs i!stigatio!- 1raham leaves to help his ello6s- but he is
spotted a!d 8hased7 1raham eludes them 6he! he 8omes upo! Gr7 Fi!ger- a traveli!g de!tist- steals his
horse a!d 6ago!- a!d e?8ha!ges 8lothes 6ith him at gu!poi!t7 Gr7 Fi!ger is take! or 1raham a!d shot
deadT the posse- re8og!iUi!g ,r7 Starbu8kIs horse a!d tu?- bri!g the dead body ba8k to the Starbu8k
ra!8h7 Ama!da- seei!g 6hat she thi!ks is 1rahamIs body @she 8a!!ot see the a8eA ai!ts7 3ut it tur!s
out Gr7 Fi!ger 6as a Nua8k- a!d the irst perso! 1raham e!8ou!ters ater his es8ape is o!e o Gr7
Fi!gerIs dissatisied 8ustomers- 6hi8h leads to 1raham bei!g se!t to priso! o! a year:lo!g se!te!8e or
Gr7 Fi!gerIs 8rimes7 Guri!g this time- Ama!da is at irst ostra8iUed by the to6!speople- but a!
impassio!ed spee8h pro8laimi!g her love or 1raham leads to a surprisi!g tur!arou!d+ the to6!speople
!ot o!ly orgive her- they see 1raham a!d Ama!daIs story as remarkable7 The story the! be8omes a
lege!d- spa6!i!g a popular book @e!titled From oon -ill -hreeA- dime !ovels- a stage play- a!d eve!
a popular so!g7 The lege!d o 1raham a!d Ama!da be8omes bigger tha! the reality- a!d 6he! her
book be8omes a 6orld6ide bestseller it makes Ama!da a very 6ealthy 6oma!7 1raham- 6ho reads the
book 6hile i! priso!- is amused by the distortio!s7 Ater servi!g his time- a disguised 1raham takes
o!e o Ama!daIs guided tours o her ra!8h a!d stays behi!d- i!te!di!g to reveal himsel7 Ama!da does
!ot re8og!iUe him a!d be8omes righte!ed+ or every detail o their love e!8ou!ter he tells her- she
8ries ba8k+ J9tIs i! the bookRK 9t is o!ly 6he! 1raham sho6s her Jsomethi!g thatIs !ot i! the bookK
@his pe!isA that Ama!da believes himT but i!stead o joy- she is 6orried+ i 6ord got out that 1raham
6as alive- the lege!d o 1raham a!d Ama!da 6ould be do!e or7 0ve! 1rahamIs suggestio! that he
live 6ith her i!8og!ito is !o goodT ater all- i Ama!da 6ere to live 6ith a!other ma!- the lege!d 6ould
still be destroyed7 The e!8ou!ter e!ds up 6ith Ama!da poi!ti!g a gu! at 1raham O but at the last
mome!t she de8ides to shoot hersel7 1raham is !o6 heartbroke!+ !ot o!ly has he lost Ama!da- he also
loses his ide!tity+ people laugh 6he! he tells them he is 1raham- si!8e he looks !othi!g like his
des8riptio! i! the book7 The a8t that he e!8ou!ters his publi8 igure every6here @he hears Jtheir so!gK
at a lo8al saloo! a!d 6alks i! o! a stage produ8tio! o From oon -ill -hreeA literally drives him
8raUy7 9! the e!d he is 8o!i!ed to a! i!sa!e asylum- 6here he meets the o!ly people 6ho believe him
a!d a88ept him as 1raham+ his ello6 i!mates7 Fi!ally- he is 8o!te!t7 9!deed- as .a8a! o!8e remarked-
every o!e o us al6ays tries to tra!sorm himsel i!to a 8hara8ter i! the !ovel 6hi8h is his o6! lie7
1
4ote the symmetry 6ith Martin Eden+ both 1raham a!d Ama!da relate to their Jlege!dK @their
publi8 symboli8 ide!tityA- but they rea8t diere!tly 6he! reality 8at8hes up 6ith it+ Ama!da 8hooses
the lege!d over reality- or i! a 6eird variatio! o the amous li!e rom a 2oh! Ford /ester! @J6he!
reality does!It it the lege!d- pri!t the lege!dKA- she shoots hersel to save her o6! lege!d7 1raham- o!
the 8o!trary- 8hooses reality @they should live together eve! i this 6ill rui! the lege!dA- but is u!a6are
that the lege!d has a po6er o its o6! 6hi8h also determi!es their @so8ialA reality7 The pri8e he pays is
that his symboli8 ide!tity is literally take! rom him+ the material proo o his ide!tityE@the shape oA
his pe!isEdoes !ot hold i! publi8- si!8e the pe!is should !ot be 8o!used 6ith the phallus7 The o!ly
pla8e 6here he is re8og!iUed as 6ho he is is the lu!ati8 asylumT to paraphrase .a8a!+ a madma! is !ot
o!ly someo!e other tha! 1raham Gorsey thi!ki!g he is 1raham Gorsey- a madma! is also 1raham
Gorsey thi!ki!g he is 1raham GorseyEa urther 8o!irmatio! that the de!ial o symboli8 8astratio!
leads to psy8hosis7
9!soar as symboli8 8astratio! is also a !ame or the gap bet6ee! my immediate stupid bei!g
a!d my symboli8 title @re8all the proverbial disappoi!tme!t o the adoles8e!t+ is that miserable 8o6ard
really my fatherMA- a!d si!8e a symboli8 authority 8a! o!ly u!8tio! i!soar as- i! a ki!d o illegitimate
short:8ir8uit- this gap is obus8ated a!d my symboli8 authority appears as a! immediate property or
Nuality o me as a perso!- ea8h authority has to prote8t itsel rom situatio!s i! 6hi8h this gap be8omes
palpable7 For e?ample- politi8al leaders k!o6 very 6ell ho6 to avoid situatio!s i! 6hi8h their
impote!8e might be revealedT a ather k!o6s ho6 to hide his humiliatio!s @6he! his boss shouts at
him- a!d so orthA rom the gaUe o his so!7 /hat is prote8ted by su8h Ja8e savi!gK strategies is
appearance+ although 9 k!o6 very 6ell my ather is ultimately impote!t- 9 reuse to believe it- 6hi8h is
6hy the ee8t o 6it!essi!g the ope! display o his impote!8e 8a! be so shatteri!g7 Su8h humiliati!g
mome!ts ully deserve to be 8alled J8astrati!g e?perie!8es-K !ot be8ause ather is sho6! to be 8astrated
or impote!t- but be8ause the gap bet6ee! his miserable reality a!d his symboli8 authority is re!dered
palpable a!d 8a! !o lo!ger by ig!ored by 6ay o etishisti8 disavo6al7
9s this !ot the problem o -he 5ings Speech- the ilm 6hi8h triumphed at the 2011 Hs8arsM The
problem o the soo!:to:be:ki!g- the 8ause o his stutteri!g- is pre8isely his i!ability to assume his
symboli8 u!8tio!- to ide!tiy 6ith his title7 The ki!g thus displays a mi!imum o 8ommo! se!se-
e?perie!8i!g the stupidity o seriously a88epti!g that o!e is a ki!g by divi!e 6illEa!d the task o the
Australia! voi8e:8oa8h is to re!der him stupid e!ough to a88ept his bei!g a ki!g as his !atural property7
As usual- Dhesterto! got it right+ Ji a ma! says that he is the rightul *i!g o 0!gla!d- it is !o
8omplete a!s6er to say that the e?isti!g authorities 8all him madT or i he 6ere *i!g o 0!gla!d that
might be the 6isest thi!g or the e?isti!g authorities to do7K 9! the key s8e!e o the ilm- the 8oa8h sits
o! the ki!gIs 8hairT the urious ki!g dema!ds that he sta!d up- a!d the 8oa8h reuses- aski!g by 6hat
right the ki!g 8a! 8omma!d him7 The ki!g shouts ba8k+ JGivi!e right- i you mustR 9Im your ki!gRRRK at
6hi8h poi!t the 8oa8h has 6o! the argume!tE!o6 the ki!g believes he is a ki!g7 The solutio! o the
ilm is thus- o 8ourse- a rea8tio!ary o!e+ the ki!g is J!ormaliUed-K the or8e o his hysteri8al
Nuestio!i!g is obliterated7
A!other 6i!!er at the 2011 Hs8ars- /lac" Swan- the emi!i!e 8ou!terpart to -he 5ings Speech-
is eve! more rea8tio!ary+ its premise is that- 6hile a ma! 8a! be dedi8ated to his missio! @as the ki!g is
i! -he 5ings SpeechA a!d still lead a !ormal private lie- a 6oma! 6ho totally dedi8ates hersel to her
missio! @here- to be a balleri!aA e!ters o! the path to sel:destru8tio!Eher su88ess is paid or by her
death7 9t is easy to re8og!iUe i! this plot the old topos o a 6oma! tor! bet6ee! her artisti8 vo8atio!
a!d a happy- 8alm private lie- 6ho makes the 6ro!g 8hoi8e a!d diesEi! ,i8hael Co6ellIs 7ed Shoes
it is also a balleri!a- 6hile i! He!ba8hIs 0offmans -ales a!d *ieslo6skiIs Double .ife of 6Aroni<ue
it is a si!ger7 0offmans -ales prese!ts the heroi!eIs dedi8atio! to her artisti8 vo8atio! as the result o
ma!ipulatio! by a dark devilish 8hara8ter- 6hile -he Double .ife of 6Aroni<ue stages both versio!s o
the 8hoi8e+ the Colish /ero!ika- 6ho has 8hose! to si!g- dies duri!g a perorma!8e- 6hile the Fre!8h
VLro!iNue 6ithdra6s i!to priva8y a!d survives7 The t6o re8e!t ilms- -he 5ings Speech a!d /lac"
Swan- thus 6ork i! a 8ompleme!tary 6ay as a reassertio! o the traditio!al 8ouple u!der the mas8uli!e
authority+ or the ma!- a !aSve assumptio! o symboli8 authorityT or the 6oma!- 6ithdra6al i!to
priva8yEa 8lear 8o!servative strategy desig!ed to 8ou!tera8t the rise o the postmoder! post:Hedipal
mode o subje8tivity7
For =egel- the ki!g is dei!ed as a subje8t 6ho a88epts this radi8al de8e!teri!g- that is- to Nuote
,ar? agai!- a88epts the a8t that he is a ki!g be8ause others treat him as a ki!g- !ot the other 6ay
rou!dEother6ise- i he thi!ks that he is a ki!g Ji! himsel-K he is a madma!7 A88ordi!g to lege!d-
duri!g the de8isive battle bet6ee! the Crussia! a!d the Austria! armies i! the 1&'' 6ar- the Crussia!
ki!g- ormally the supreme 8omma!der o the Crussia! army- observi!g the ight rom a !earby hill-
looked 6orried at @6hat appeared to himA the 8o!usio! o! the battlegrou!d- 6here some o the
Crussia! troops eve! seemed to be retreati!g7 1e!eral vo! ,oltke- the great Crussia! strategist 6ho had
pla!!ed the battle deployme!t- tur!ed to the ki!g i! the middle o this 8o!usio! a!d said+ J,ay 9 be
the irst to 8o!gratulate your majesty o! a brillia!t vi8toryMK This e?empliies the gap bet6ee! S
1
a!d
S
2
at its purest+ the ki!g 6as the ,aster- the ormal 8omma!der totally ig!ora!t o the mea!i!g o 6hat
6as happe!i!g- 6hile vo! ,oltke embodied strategi8 k!o6ledgeEalthough- at the level o a8tual
de8isio!s- the vi8tory 6as ,oltkeIs- he 6as 8orre8t i! 8o!gratulati!g the ki!g o! behal o 6hom he
6as a8ti!g7 The stupidity o the ,aster is palpable i! this gap bet6ee! the 8o!usio! o the master:
igure a!d the obje8tive:symboli8 a8t that he had already 6o! a brillia!t vi8tory7 /e all k!o6 the old
joke reerri!g to the e!igma about 6ho really 6rote ShakespeareIs plays+ J4ot /illiam Shakespeare-
but someo!e else 6ith the same !ame7K This is 6hat .a8a! mea!s by the Jde8e!tered subje8t-K this is
ho6 a subje8t relates to the !ame 6hi8h i?es its symboli8 ide!tity+ 2oh! Smith is @al6ays- by
dei!itio!- i! its very !otio!A !ot 2oh! Smith- but someo!e else 6ith the same !ame7 As ShakespeareIs
2uliet already k!e6- 9 am !ever Jthat !ameKEthe 2oh! Smith 6ho really thi!ks he is 2oh! Smith is a
psy8hoti87 This key poi!t 6as missed by the you!g ,ar? i! his 8ritiNue o =egelIs )hilosophy of 7ightT
ater Nuoti!g the begi!!i!g o k2&1+

3oth mome!ts i! their u!divided u!ityE@aA the 6illIs ultimate u!grou!ded sel- a!d @bA thereore its
similarly u!grou!ded obje8tive e?iste!8e @e?iste!8e bei!g the 8ategory 6hi8h is at home i!
!atureAE8o!stitute the 9dea o somethi!g agai!st 6hi8h 8apri8e is po6erless- the JmajestyK o the
mo!ar8h7 9! this u!ity lies the a8tual u!ity o the state- a!d it is o!ly through this- its i!6ard a!d
out6ard immedia8y- that the u!ity o the state is saved rom the risk o bei!g dra6! do6! i!to the
sphere o parti8ularity a!d its 8apri8es- e!ds a!d opi!io!s- a!d saved too rom the 6ar o a8tio!s rou!d
the thro!e a!d rom the e!eebleme!t a!d overthro6 o the po6er o the state7
2
,ar? adds his @all too 8ommo!:se!si8alA iro!i8 8omme!tary+

The t6o mome!ts are [a\ the 8o!ti!ge!8y o the 6ill- 8apri8e- a!d [b\ the 8o!ti!ge!8y o !ature- birthT
thus- =is ,ajesty+ Do!ti!ge!8y7 Do!ti!ge!8y is thus the a8tual u!ity o the state7 The 6ay i! 6hi8h-
a88ordi!g to =egel- a! i!6ard a!d out6ard immedia8y [o the state\ is to be saved rom 8ollisio!- [due
to 8apri8e- a8tio!s-\ et87- is i!8redible- si!8e 8ollisio! is pre8isely 6hat it makes possible OThe
pri!8eIs hereditary 8hara8ter results rom his 8o!8ept7 =e is to be the perso! 6ho is spe8iied rom the
e!tire ra8e o me!- 6ho is disti!guished rom all other perso!s7 3ut the! 6hat is the ultimate i?ed
diere!8e o o!e perso! rom all othersM The body7 A!d the highest u!8tio! o the body is se?ual
a8tivity7 =e!8e the highest 8o!stitutio!al a8t o the ki!g is his se?ual a8tivity- be8ause through this he
makes a ki!g a!d 8arries o! his body7
"
,ar? 8o!8ludes 6ith the sar8asti8 !ote that the =egelia! mo!ar8h is !othi!g more tha! a!
appe!di? to his pe!isEto 6hi8h 6e should say+ yes- but that is pre8isely =egelIs poi!t- !amely that
su8h a! utter alie!atio!- su8h a reversal by 6hi8h a perso! be8omes a! appe!di? o its biologi8al orga!
o pro8reatio!- is the pri8e to be paid or a8ti!g like the stateIs sovereig!ty embodied7
(
H!e 8a! 8learly
see- rom k2&1 Nuoted above- ho6 the i!stitutio! o hereditary mo!ar8hy is or =egel the solutio! to
the problem o 8apri8e a!d o a8tio!s- the problem- i! short- o the 8o!ti!ge!8y o po6er7 This
8o!ti!ge!8y is over8ome !ot by a deeper !e8essity @say- i! the se!se o ClatoIs philosopher:ki!gs-
rulers 6hose k!o6ledge legitimiUes their po6erA- but by a! eve! more radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y+ 6e posit at
the top a subje8t ee8tively redu8ed to a! appe!di? o his pe!is- a subje8t 6ho did !ot make himsel
6hat he is @through the labor o mediatio!A- but is immediately bor! i!to it7 H 8ourse- =egel is ully
a6are that there is !o deeper !e8essity operati!g behi!d the s8e!es to guara!tee that the mo!ar8h 6ill
be a 6ise- just- a!d 8ourageous perso!Eo! the 8o!trary- i! the igure o the mo!ar8h- 8o!ti!ge!8y @the
8o!ti!ge!8y o his properties a!d Nualii8atio!sA is take! to a! e?tremeT all that matters is his birth7
#
9!
so8io:politi8al lie- stability 8a! o!ly be gai!ed 6he! all subje8ts a88ept the result o this 8o!ti!ge!t
pro8ess- si!8e the 8o!ti!ge!8y o birth is e?empted rom so8ial struggles7
A! obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t arises here+ does =egel !ot remai! 8aught i! a! illusio! o
purityE!amely o the purity o the e?pert:k!o6ledge o the state bureau8ra8y 6hi8h o!ly 6orks
ratio!ally or the 8ommo! goodM True- he 8o!8edes a! irredu8ible impurity @the 8o!ti!ge!t play o
partial i!terests a!d a8tio!al strugglesA o politi8al lie- but is !ot his illusory 6ager that- i o!e isolates
this mome!t o impurity @subje8tive 8apri8eA i! the igure o the mo!ar8h- this e?8eptio! 6ill make the
rest @the body o the state bureau8ra8yA ratio!al- e?empted rom the play o 8o!li8ti!g partial i!terestsM
/ith this !otio! o state bureau8ra8y as the Ju!iversal 8lass-K is !ot the state thus depoliti8iUed-
e?empted rom the properly politi8al differendM =o6ever- 6hile =egel is 6ell a6are that politi8al lie
8o!sists o a 8o!ti!ge!t J6ar o a8tio!s arou!d the thro!e-K his idea is !ot that the mo!ar8h takes upo!
himsel this 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d thus magi8ally tur!s the state bureau8ra8y i!to a !eutral ma8hi!e- but that-
o! a88ou!t o his bei!g:determi!ed by the 8o!ti!ge!8y o biologi8al des8e!t- the "ing himself is i! a
ormal se!se elevated above politi8al struggles7
9! .a8a!ese- the passage rom i!here!t !otio!al sel:developme!t 6hi8h mediates all 8o!te!t to
the a8t or de8isio! 6hi8h reely releases this 8o!te!t is- o 8ourse- the passage rom S
2
@k!o6ledge- the
8hai! o sig!iiersA to S
1
@the perormative ,aster:Sig!iierA7 9! a stri8tly homologous se!se- the
=egelia! Absolute *!o6i!g is a k!o6ledge 6hi8h is JabsolvedK rom its positive 8o!te!tEho6M 2ea!:
Dlaude ,il!er has developed a !otio! o Absolute *!o6i!g @savoir absoluA 6hi8h- 6ithout eve!
me!tio!i!g =egel- is simulta!eously 8lose a!d dista!t rom him7 ,il!erIs starti!g poi!t is the
grammati8al oppositio! bet6ee! relative a!d absolute i! the use o verbs+ 6he! 9 say- J9 k!o6 .ati!-K
my k!o6i!g is related to a determi!ate obje8t- it is suppleme!ted by this obje8t- i! 8o!trast to simply
sayi!g- J9 k!o6-K 6here k!o6ledge is JabsolvedK @reedA rom su8h atta8hme!ts7 Su8h JabsoluteK
k!o6i!g is Jthe age!t o its o6! deployme!t 6hose obje8t is merely its o88asio! a!d 6hose subje8t is
its i!strume!tT it ollo6s its i!ter!al la6 that 9 8all surplus:k!o6i!g7K
'
,il!erIs model o this Absolute
*!o6i!g is !ot =egel- but the post:=egelia! Wissenschaft- u!iversity s8ie!8e i! 8o!ti!uous progress+
its surplus is somethi!g 6hi8h is !ot yet here as said>k!o6!- but al6ays to be produ8ed7 The diere!8e
that separates surplus:k!o6i!g rom established k!o6ledge is thus a pure diere!8e imma!e!t to
k!o6i!g- 6ith !o reere!8e to its e?ter!al obje8t+ the diere!8e bet6ee! the k!o6! a!d the !ot:yet:
k!o6!- the diere!8e 6hi8h makes the ield o k!o6ledge orever i!8omplete7 ,il!erIs obje8tio! to
this !otio! o Absolute *!o6i!g is that it i!volves o!ly a JmoreK a!d !ot a Jless-K o!ly a surplus a!d
!ot a la8k o k!o6i!gEthe reaso! 6hy .a8a! reje8ts it as the pure igure o the )!iversity Gis8ourse7
So ar so goodEbut 6here does =egel- his Absolute *!o6i!g- it i!to all thisM =egelIs Absolute
*!o6i!g does i!volve a JlessK+ it reers to a 8o!stitutive la8k- the la8k i! the Hther itsel- !ot i! our
k!o6ledge7 =egelIs Absolute *!o6i!g is !ot a! ope! ield o e!dless progress- a!d it is the
overlappi!g o the t6o la8ks @the subje8tIs la8k o k!o6i!g a!d the la8k i! the Hther itselA that
a88ou!ts or its J8losure7K
To e?plai! the mode o u!8tio!i!g o the obje8tless k!o6i!g- ,il!er evokes the TV series
De&ter- i! 6hi8h a ather 6ho k!o6s his so! is ge!eti8ally determi!ed to be8ome a serial killer tells
him to be8ome a 8op a!d thus satisy his i!!ate urge to kill by killi!g o!ly the killers themselves7
$
9! a
homologous 6ay- ,il!erIs aim is to operate like a bird lyi!g high up i! the air- 6ith !o atta8hme!t to
a!y parti8ular obje8t o! the la!dT rom time to time- the bird dives a!d pi8ks out its vi8timElike ,il!er
6ho- i! his 6ork- pi8ks o! o!e parti8ular k!o6ledge ater a!other a!d tears it apart by displayi!g its
i!8o!siste!8y7 3ut is this !ot pre8isely the mode o u!8tio!i!g o =egelIs o6! Absolute *!o6i!g
6hi8h moves rom o!e to a!other shape o k!o6i!g- tou8hi!g it i! its Feal- i7e7- bri!gi!g out its
imma!e!t>8o!stitutive a!tago!ismM
S8helli!g 6as thus 6ro!g i! his 8ritiNue o =egel+ the i!terve!tio! o the a8t o de8isio! is
purely imma!e!t- it is the mome!t o the JNuilti!g poi!t-K o the reversal o 8o!stative i!to
perormative7 Goes !ot the same go or the ki!g i! the 8ase o the State- a88ordi!g to =egelIs dee!se
o the mo!ar8hyM The bureau8rati8 8hai! o k!o6ledge is ollo6ed by the ki!gIs de8isio! 6hi8h- as the
J8ompletely 8o!8rete obje8tivity o the 6ill-K Jreabsorbs all parti8ularity i!to its si!gle sel- 8uts short
the 6eighi!g o pros a!d 8o!s bet6ee! 6hi8h it lets itsel os8illate perpetually !o6 this 6ay a!d !o6
that- a!d by sayi!g V9 6illI makes its de8isio! a!d so i!augurates all a8tivity a!d a8tualityK @k2&1A7
=egel emphasiUes this apart!ess o the mo!ar8h already 6he! he states that the Jultimate sel:
determi!atio!K 8a! Jall 6ithi! the sphere o huma! reedom o!ly i!soar as it has the positio! o a
pi!!a8le- e?pli8itly disti!8t rom- a!d raised above- all that is parti8ular a!d 8o!ditio!al- or o!ly so is it
a8tual i! a 6ay adeNuate to its 8o!8eptK @k2&1A7 This is 6hy Jthe 8o!8eptio! o the mo!ar8hK is

o all 8o!8eptio!s the hardest or ratio8i!atio!- i7e7 or the method o rele8tio! employed by the
)!dersta!di!g7 This method reuses to move beyo!d isolated 8ategories a!d he!8e here agai! k!o6s
o!ly raisonnement- i!ite poi!ts o vie6- a!d dedu8tive argume!tatio!7 Do!seNue!tly it e?hibits the
dig!ity o the mo!ar8h as somethi!g dedu8ed- !ot o!ly i! its orm- but i! its esse!8e7 The truth is-
ho6ever- that to be somethi!g !ot dedu8ed but purely sel:origi!ati!g is pre8isely the 8o!8eptio! o
mo!ar8hy7
9! the !e?t paragraph- =egel urther elaborates this spe8ulative !e8essity o the mo!ar8h+

This ultimate sel i! 6hi8h the 6ill o the state is 8o!8e!trated is- 6he! thus take! i! abstra8tio!- a
si!gle sel a!d thereore is immediate i!dividuality7 =e!8e its J!aturalK 8hara8ter is implied i! its very
8o!8eptio!7 The mo!ar8h- thereore- is esse!tially 8hara8teriUed as this i!dividual- i! abstra8tio! rom
all his other 8hara8teristi8s- a!d this i!dividual is raised to the dig!ity o mo!ar8hy i! a! immediate-
!atural- ashio!- i7e7 through his birth i! the 8ourse o !ature77emar"+ This tra!sitio! o the 8o!8ept o
pure sel:determi!atio! i!to the immedia8y o bei!g a!d so i!to the realm o !ature is o a purely
spe8ulative 8hara8ter- a!d the apprehe!sio! o it thereore belo!gs to logi87 ,oreover- this tra!sitio! is
o! the 6hole the same as that amiliar to us i! the !ature o 6illi!g- a!d there the pro8ess is to tra!slate
somethi!g rom subje8tivity @i7e7 some purpose held beore the mi!dA i!to e?iste!8e7 3ut the proper
orm o the 9dea a!d o the tra!sitio! here u!der 8o!sideratio! is the immediate 8o!versio! o the pure
sel:determi!atio! o the 6ill @i7e7 o the simple 8o!8ept itselA i!to a si!gle a!d !atural e?iste!t 6ithout
the mediatio! o a parti8ular 8o!te!t @like a purpose i! the 8ase o a8tio!A79! the so:8alled Jo!tologi8alK
proo o the e?iste!8e o 1od- 6e have the same 8o!versio! o the absolute 8o!8ept i!to e?iste!8e O
+ddition+ 9t is ote! alleged agai!st mo!ar8hy that it makes the 6elare o the state depe!de!t o!
8ha!8e- or- it is urged- the mo!ar8h may be ill:edu8ated- he may perhaps be u!6orthy o the highest
positio! i! the state- a!d it is se!seless that su8h a state o aairs should e?ist be8ause it is supposed to
be ratio!al7 3ut all this rests o! a presuppositio! 6hi8h is !ugatory- !amely that everythi!g depe!ds o!
the mo!ar8hIs parti8ular 8hara8ter7 9! a 8ompletely orga!iUed state- it is o!ly a Nuestio! o the
8ulmi!ati!g poi!t o ormal de8isio! @a!d a !atural bul6ark agai!st passio!7 9t is 6ro!g thereore to
dema!d obje8tive Nualities i! a mo!ar8hAT he has o!ly to say JyesK a!d dot the JiK- be8ause the thro!e
should be su8h that the sig!ii8a!t thi!g i! its holder is !ot his parti8ular make:up O 9! a 6ell:
orga!iUed mo!ar8hy- the obje8tive aspe8t belo!gs to la6 alo!e- a!d the mo!ar8hIs part is merely to set
to the la6 the subje8tive J9 6illK7
The spe8ulative mome!t that )!dersta!di!g 8a!!ot grasp is Jthe tra!sitio! o the 8o!8ept o
pure sel:determi!atio! i!to the immedia8y o bei!g a!d so i!to the realm o !ature7K 9! other 6ords-
6hile )!dersta!di!g 8a! 6ell grasp the u!iversal mediatio! o a livi!g totality- 6hat it 8a!!ot grasp is
that this totality- i! order to a8tualiUe itsel- has to a8Nuire a8tual e?iste!8e i! the guise o a! immediate
J!aturalK si!gularity7
&
H!e 8a! also say that )!dersta!di!g misses the christological mome!t+ the
!e8essity o a si!gular i!dividual embodyi!g the u!iversal Spirit7 The term J!atureK should be give! its
ull 6eight here+ i! the same 6ay that- at the e!d o the .ogi8- the 9deaIs 8ompleted sel:mediatio!
releases rom itsel 4ature- 8ollapses i!to the e?ter!al immedia8y o 4ature- the StateIs ratio!al sel:
mediatio! has to a8Nuire a8tual e?iste!8e i! a 6ill 6hi8h is determi!ed as dire8tly !atural- u!mediated-
stricto sensu Jirratio!al7K Fe8all here Dhesterto!Is appraisal o the guilloti!e @6hi8h 6as used pre8isely
to behead a ki!gA+

The guilloti!e has ma!y si!s- but to do it justi8e there is !othi!g evolutio!ary about it7 The avourite
evolutio!ary argume!t i!ds its best a!s6er i! the a?e7 The 0volutio!ist says- J/here do you dra6 the
li!eMK the Fevolutio!ist a!s6ers- J9 dra6 it here+ e?a8tly bet6ee! your head a!d body7K There must at
a!y give! mome!t be a! abstra8t right or 6ro!g i a!y blo6 is to be stru8kT there must be somethi!g
eter!al i there is to be a!ythi!g sudde!7
%
9t is rom here that o!e 8a! u!dersta!d 6hy 3adiou- the theorist o the A8t- has to reer to
0ter!ity+ the A8t is o!ly 8o!8eivable as the i!terve!tio! o 0ter!ity i!to time7 =istori8ist evolutio!ism
leads to e!dless pro8rasti!atio!- the situatio! is al6ays too 8omple?- there are al6ays urther aspe8ts to
be a88ou!ted or- the po!deri!g o pros a!d 8o!s is !ever over7 Agai!st this sta!8e- the passage to the
a8t i!volves a gesture o radi8al a!d viole!t simplii8atio!- a 8ut like that o the proverbial 1ordia!
k!ot+ the magi8al mome!t 6he! the i!i!ite po!deri!g 8rystalliUes itsel i!to a simple JyesK or J!o7K
This bri!gs us to the topi8 o sublatio! versus sublimatio!7 9! Seminar 6II- .a8a! opposes
sublatio! as diale8ti8al mediatio! to sublimatio!+ sublatio! i!8ludes all parti8ulars i!to a diale8ti8al
totality- 6hile sublimatio! takes a !o!:sublated remai!der o the Feal a!d elevates it dire8tly i!to the
embodime!t o the impossible Thi!g that eludes all mediatio!7 3ut is this move o sublimatio! really
oreig! to =egelM /ith regard to the ki!g- is !ot =egelIs poi!t that- 6hile all i!dividuals have to
Jbe8ome 6hat they areK through their 6ork a!d thus to mediate or sublate their !atural immedia8y- the
ki!g is the o!ly o!e 6ho dire8tly @by his !atureA is that 6hi8h his symboli8 title desig!ates him to be
@o!e is a ki!g by birthA7 The 8ir8le o mediatio! 8a! thus o!ly be 8o!8luded 6he! it is suppleme!ted by
a Jra6K !o!:mediated Jirratio!alK eleme!t 6hi8h JsuturesK the ratio!al totality7
/he! =egel arti8ulates the three parallel movesErom .ogi8 to 4ature- rom the ratio!al
totality o the State to ,o!ar8h- a!d the o!tologi8al proo o 1odEdoes he !ot suggest that @a
perso!alA 1od arises out o the same !e8essity as the ,o!ar8hM That 1od is the ,o!ar8h o the
u!iverseM This e?ample makes it 8lear ho6 the !otio!al developme!t 8a! !ever rea8h its 8ompletio! @i!
the !aSve se!se o the 8ompleted 8hai! o reaso!s by mea!s o 6hi8h Jeverythi!g is dedu8edKAEthe
arbitrary i!terve!tio! o the ,aster:Sig!iier desig!ates the poi!t at 6hi8h 8o!ti!ge!8y i!terve!es i!
the very heart o !e8essity+ the very establishme!t o a !e8essity is a 8o!ti!ge!t a8t7
10
9! a totally
diere!t ield- Ge!!ett dete8ts the !eed or J8o!versatio!:stoppersK i! the e!dless pursuit o
argume!tatio! 6hi8h- be8ause o the i!itude a!d limitatio! o our situatio!- !ever 8omes to a! e!d+
there are al6ays some other aspe8ts to take i!to a88ou!t- et87
11
9s this !eed !ot the !eed or 6hat
.a8a! 8alled the ,aster:Sig!iier @Ge!!ett himsel reers to the Jmagi8 6ord-K or to a ake dogmaA+ or
somethi!g that 6ill 8ut the 1ordia! k!ot o e!dless pros a!d 8o!s 6ith a! a8t o @ultimately arbitrary
a!d impere8tA de8isio!M
Apropos s8hool e?ams- .a8a! poi!ted out a stra!ge a8t+ there must be a mi!imal gap- a delay-
bet6ee! the gradi!g o the e?am papers a!d the a8t o a!!ou!8i!g the results7 9! other 6ords- eve! i 9
k!o6 that 9 provided pere8t a!s6ers to the Nuestio!s- there 6ill remai! a mi!imal eleme!t o
i!se8urity u!til the results are a!!ou!8edEthis gap is the gap bet6ee! 8o!stative a!d perormative-
bet6ee! measuring the results a!d ta"ing note o them @registeri!g themA i! the ull se!se o the
symboli8 a8t7 The 6hole mystiNue o bureau8ra8y at its most sublime hi!ges o! this gap+ you k!o6 the
a8ts- but you 8a! !ever Nuite be sure ho6 these a8ts 6ill be registered by the bureau8ra8y7 A!d- as
2ea!:Cierre Gupuy poi!ts out- the same holds or ele8tio!s+ i! the ele8toral pro8ess also- the mome!t o
8o!ti!ge!8y- o haUard- o a Jdra6-K is 8ru8ial7
12
Fully Jratio!alK ele8tio!s 6ould !ot be ele8tio!s at
all- but a tra!spare!t obje8tiviUed pro8ess7 Traditio!al @premoder!A so8ieties resolved this problem by
i!voki!g a tra!s8e!de!t sour8e 6hi8h JveriiedK the result- 8o!erri!g authority o! it @1od- the ki!g
OA7 Therei! lies the problem o moder!ity+ moder! so8ieties per8eive themselves as auto!omous- sel:
regulatedT that is- they 8a! !o lo!ger rely o! a! e?ter!al @tra!s8e!de!tA sour8e o authority7 3ut
!evertheless- the mome!t o haUard has to remai! operative i! the ele8toral pro8ess- 6hi8h is 6hy
8omme!tators like to d6ell o! the Jirratio!alityK o votes @o!e !ever k!o6s 6here the votes 6ill s6i!g
i! the i!al days o a! ele8tio! 8ampaig! OA7 9! other 6ords- demo8ra8y 6ould !ot 6ork i it 6ere
redu8ed to perma!e!t opi!io!:polli!gEully me8ha!iUed a!d Nua!tiied- deprived o its
JperormativeK 8hara8terT as .eort poi!ted out- voti!g has to remai! a @sa8rii8ialA ritual- a ritualisti8
sel:destru8tio! a!d rebirth o so8iety7
1"
The reaso! is that this haUard itsel should !ot be tra!spare!t-
it should be mi!imally e?ter!aliUed>reiied+ Jthe peopleIs 6illK is our eNuivale!t o 6hat the A!8ie!ts
per8eived as the impo!derable 6ill o 1od or the ha!d o Fate7 /hat people 8a!!ot a88ept as their
dire8t arbitrary 8hoi8e- the result o a pure haUard- they 8a! a88ept i it reers to a mi!imum o the
JFealKE=egel k!e6 this lo!g ago- a!d this is the e!tire poi!t o his dee!se o mo!ar8hy7 A!d- last
but !ot least- the same goes or love+ there should be a! eleme!t o the Ja!s6er o the FealK i! it @J6e
6ere orever mea!t or ea8h otherKA- 9 8a!!ot really a88ept that my alli!g i! love hi!ges o! a pure
8o!ti!ge!8y7
1(
0ve! su8h a superb reader o =egel as 1Lrard .ebru! alls short here i! i!s8ribi!g =egel i!to
the Clato!i8 traditio! o Jphilosopher:ki!gsK+ every e?er8ise o po6er has to be justiied by good
reaso!s- the bearer o po6er has to be properly Nualiied or it by his k!o6ledge a!d abilities- a!d
po6er should be e?er8ised or the good o the e!tire 8ommu!ityEthis !otio! o po6er sustai!s =egelIs
8o!8ept o the state bureau8ra8y as the Ju!iversal 8lassK edu8ated to prote8t state i!terests agai!st the
parti8ular i!terests o members a!d groups i! 8ivil so8iety7 4ietUs8he 8ou!ters this re8eived !otio! by
Nuestio!i!g its u!derlyi!g premise+ 6hat ki!d o po6er @or authorityA is it 6hi8h !eeds to justiy itsel
6ith reere!8e to the i!terests o those over 6hom it rules- 6hi8h a88epts the !eed to provide reaso!s
or its e?er8iseM Goes !ot su8h a !otio! o po6er u!dermi!e itselM =o6 8a! 9 be your master i 9
a88ept the !eed to justiy my authority i! your eyesM Goes this !ot imply that my authority depe!ds o!
your approval- so that- a8ti!g as your master- 9 ee8tively serve you @re8all Frederi8k the 1reatIs
amous !otio! o the ki!g as the highest serva!t o his peopleAM 9s it !ot rather that authority proper
!eeds !o reaso!s- si!8e it is simply a88epted o! its o6!M As *ierkegaard put it- or a 8hild to say that
he obeys his ather be8ause the latter is 6ise- ho!est- a!d good- is a blasphemy- a total disavo6al o
true pater!al authority7 9! .a8a!ia! terms- this passage rom J!aturalK authority to authority justiied
6ith reaso!s is- o 8ourse- the passage rom the ,asterIs dis8ourse to the )!iversity dis8ourse7 This
u!iverse o the justiied e?er8ise o po6er is also emi!e!tly a!ti:politi8al a!d- i! this se!se-
Jte8h!o8rati8K+ my e?er8ise o po6er should be grou!ded i! reaso!s a88essible to a!d approved by all
ratio!al huma! bei!gs- or the u!derlyi!g premise is that- as a! age!t o po6er- 9 am totally
repla8eable- 9 a8t i! e?a8tly the same 6ay everyo!e else 6ould have a8ted i! my pla8eEpoliti8s as the
domai! o 8ompetitive struggle- as the arti8ulatio! o irredu8ible so8ial a!tago!isms- should be
repla8ed by ratio!al admi!istratio! 6hi8h dire8tly e!a8ts the u!iversal i!terest7
3ut is .ebru! right i! imputi!g to =egel su8h a !otio! o justiied authorityM /as =egel !ot
ully a6are that true authority al6ays 8o!tai!s a! eleme!t o tautologi8al sel:assertio!M J9t is so
be8ause 9 say it is soRK The e?er8ise o authority is a! Jirratio!alK a8t o 8o!ti!ge!t de8isio! 6hi8h
breaks the e!dless 8hai! o e!umerati!g reaso!s pro et contra7 9s this !ot the very ratio!ale o =egelIs
dee!se o mo!ar8hyM The state as a ratio!al totality !eeds at its head a igure o Jirratio!alK authority-
a! authority !ot justiied by its Nualii8atio!s+ 6hile all other publi8 serva!ts have to prove their
8apa8ity to e?ert po6er- the ki!g is justiied by the very a8t that he is a ki!g7 To put it i! more
8o!temporary terms- the perormative aspe8t o the stateIs a8tio!s is reserved or the ki!g+ the state
bureau8ra8y prepares the 8o!te!t o state a8tio!- but it is the sig!ature o the ki!g 6hi8h e!a8ts it-
e!or8i!g it upo! so8iety7 =egel 6as 6ell a6are that it is o!ly this dista!8e bet6ee! the Jk!o6ledgeK
embodied i! the state bureau8ra8y a!d the authority o the ,aster embodied i! the ki!g 6hi8h prote8ts
the so8ial body agai!st the Jtotalitaria!K temptatio!+ 6hat 6e 8all a Jtotalitaria! regimeK is !ot a regime
i! 6hi8h the ,aster imposes his u!8o!strai!ed authority a!d ig!ores the suggestio!s o ratio!al
k!o6ledge- but a regime i! 6hi8h *!o6ledge @the ratio!ally justiied authorityA immediately assumes
JperormativeK po6erEStali! 6as !ot @did !ot prese!t himsel asA a ,aster- he 6as the highest serva!t
o the people- legitimiUed by his k!o6ledge a!d abilities7
This i!sight o =egelIs poi!ts to6ards his u!iNue positio! bet6ee! the ,asterIs dis8ourse @o
traditio!al authorityA a!d the )!iversity dis8ourse @o moder! po6er justiied by reaso!s or by the
demo8rati8 8o!se!t o its subje8tsA+ =egel re8og!iUed that the 8harisma o the ,asterIs authority is a
ake- that the ,aster is a! impostorEit is o!ly the a8t that he o88upies the positio! o a ,aster @that
his subje8ts treat him as a ,asterA 6hi8h makes him a ,aster7 =o6ever- he 6as also 6ell a6are that- i
o!e tries to get rid o this e?8ess a!d impose a sel:tra!spare!t authority ully justiied by e?pert
k!o6ledge- the result is eve! 6orse+ i!stead o bei!g limited to the symboli8 head o state-
Jirratio!alityK spreads over the e!tire body o so8ial po6er7 *akaIs bureau8ra8y is just su8h a regime
o e?pert k!o6ledge deprived o the igure o the ,asterE3re8ht 6as right 6he!- as 3e!jami! reports
i! his diaries- he 8laimed that *aka is Jthe only genuine /olshevi" 6riter7K
1#
9s =egelIs positio! the! a 8y!i8al o!eM Goes he tells us to a8t as i a mo!ar8h is Nualiied to rule
by his properties- to 8elebrate his glory- et87- although 6e k!o6 very 6ell that he is a !obody i!
himselM A gap !o!etheless separates =egelIs positio! rom 8y!i8ism+ the =egelia! @utopia!MA 6ager is
that o!e 8a! admire a mo!ar8h !ot or his supposed real Nualities- but o! a88ou!t o his very
medio8rity- as a represe!tative o huma! railty7 =ere- ho6ever- thi!gs get 8ompli8ated+ is !ot the
e?8ess at the top o the so8ial edii8e @ki!g- leaderA to be suppleme!ted by the e?8ess at its bottom-
those 6ho have !o proper pla8e 6ithi! the so8ial body- 6hat Fa!8i`re 8alls its Jpart o !o:part-K a!d
6hat =egel 8alled the )Pbel @rabbleAM =egel ails to take !ote o ho6 the rabble- i! its very status as the
destru8tive e?8ess o the so8ial totality- its Jpart o !o:part-K is the Jrele?ive determi!atio!K o the
totality as su8h- the immediate embodime!t o its u!iversality- the parti8ular eleme!t i! the guise o
6hi8h the so8ial totality e!8ou!ters itsel amo!g its eleme!ts- a!d- as su8h- the key 8o!stitue!t o its
ide!tity7
1'
This is 6hy Fra!k Fuda is ully justiied i! readi!g =egelIs short passages o! the rabble i!
his )hilosophy of 7ight as a symptomati8 poi!t o his e!tire philosophy o right- i !ot o his e!tire
system7
1$
9 =egel had see! the u!iversal dime!sio! o the rabble- he 6ould have i!ve!ted the
symptom @as ,ar?E6ho sa6 i! the proletariat the embodime!t o the deadlo8ks o the e?isti!g
so8iety- the u!iversal 8lassEdidA7
1&
9! other 6ords- 6hat makes the !otio! o the rabble symptomati8
is that it des8ribes a !e8essarily produ8ed Jirratio!alK e?8ess o the moder! ratio!al state- a group o
people or 6hom there is !o pla8e 6ithi! the orga!iUed totality- although they ormally belo!g to itEas
su8h- they pere8tly e?empliy the 8ategory o si!gular u!iversality @a si!gular 6hi8h dire8tly gives
body to a u!iversality- by:passi!g the mediatio! through the parti8ularA+

k2(( /he! the sta!dard o livi!g o a large mass o people alls belo6 a 8ertai! subsiste!8e levelEa
level regulated automati8ally as the o!e !e8essary or a member o the so8ietyEa!d 6he! there is a
8o!seNue!t loss o the se!se o right a!d 6ro!g- o ho!esty a!d the sel:respe8t 6hi8h makes a ma!
i!sist o! mai!tai!i!g himsel by his o6! 6ork a!d eort- the result is the 8reatio! o a rabble o
paupers7 At the same time this bri!gs 6ith it- at the other e!d o the so8ial s8ale- 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h
greatly a8ilitate the 8o!8e!tratio! o disproportio!ate 6ealth i! a e6 ha!ds7
/e 8a! easily see here the li!k bet6ee! the emi!e!tly politi8al topi8 o the status o the rabble
a!d =egelIs basi8 o!tologi8al topi8 o the relatio!ship bet6ee! u!iversality a!d parti8ularity- that is-
the problem o ho6 to u!dersta!d =egelia! J8o!8rete u!iversality7K 9 6e u!dersta!d J8o!8rete
u!iversalityK i! the usual se!se o the orga!i8 subdivisio! o the u!iversal i!to its parti8ular mome!ts-
so that u!iversality is !ot a! abstra8t eature i! 6hi8h i!dividuals dire8tly parti8ipate- a!d the
parti8ipatio! o the i!dividual i! the u!iversal is al6ays mediated through the parti8ular !et6ork o
determi!atio!s- the! the 8orrespo!di!g !otio! o so8iety is a 8orporate o!e+ so8iety as a! orga!i8
/hole i! 6hi8h ea8h i!dividual has to i!d its parti8ular pla8e- i! 6hi8h 9 parti8ipate i! the State by
ulilli!g my parti8ular duty or obligatio!7 There are !o 8itiUe!s as su8h- o!e has to be a member o a
parti8ular estate @a armer- a state oi8ial- mother i! a amily- tea8her- artisa! OA i! order to 8o!tribute
to the harmo!y o the /hole7 This is the 3radleyia! proto:as8ist =egel 6ho opposes atomisti8
liberalism @i! 6hi8h so8iety is a me8ha!i8al u!ity o abstra8t i!dividualsA o! behal o the State as a
livi!g orga!ism i! 6hi8h ea8h part has its u!8tio!7 /ithi! this spa8e- the rabble has to appear as a!
irratio!al e?8ess- as a threat to so8ial order a!d stability- as out8asts e?8luded a!d e?8ludi!g themselves
rom the Jratio!alK so8ial totality7
3ut is this truly 6hat =egel is aimi!g at 6ith his J8o!8rete u!iversalityKM 9s !ot the 8ore o
diale8ti8al !egativity the short:8ir8uit bet6ee! the ge!us a!d @o!e oA its spe8ies- so that the ge!us
appears as o!e o its o6! spe8ies opposed to others- e!teri!g i!to a !egative relatio!ship 6ith themM 9!
this se!se- 8o!8rete u!iversality is pre8isely a u!iversality 6hi8h i!8ludes itsel amo!g its spe8ies- i!
the guise o a si!gular mome!t la8ki!g parti8ular 8o!te!tEi! short- it is pre8isely those 6ho are
6ithout their proper pla8e 6ithi! the so8ial /hole @like the rabbleA 6ho sta!d or the u!iversal
dime!sio! o the so8iety 6hi8h ge!erates them7 This is 6hy the rabble 8a!!ot be abolished 6ithout
radi8ally tra!sormi!g the e!tire so8ial edii8eEa!d =egel is ully a6are o thisT he is 8o!siste!t
e!ough to 8o!ess that a solutio! o this Jdisturbi!g problemK is impossible !ot or e?ter!al 8o!ti!ge!t
reaso!s- but or stri8tly imma!e!t 8o!8eptual reaso!s7 /hile he e!umerates a series o measures to
resolve the problem @poli8e 8o!trol a!d repressio!- 8harity- e?port o the rabble to 8olo!ies OA- he
himsel admits that these are o!ly se8o!dary palliatives 6hi8h 8a!!ot really resolve the problemE!ot
be8ause the problem is too hard @be8ause there is !ot e!ough 6ealth i! so8iety to take 8are o the poorA-
but be8ause there is too mu8h 6ealthEthe more so8iety is 6ealthy- the more poverty it produ8es+

k2(# /he! the masses begi! to de8li!e i!to poverty- @aA the burde! o mai!tai!i!g them at their
ordi!ary sta!dard o livi!g might be dire8tly laid o! the 6ealthier 8lasses- or they might re8eive the
mea!s o livelihood dire8tly rom other publi8 sour8es o 6ealth @e7g7 rom the e!do6me!ts o ri8h
hospitals- mo!asteries- a!d other ou!datio!sA7 9! either 8ase- ho6ever- the !eedy 6ould re8eive
subsiste!8e dire8tly- !ot by mea!s o their 6ork- a!d this 6ould violate the pri!8iple o 8ivil so8iety
a!d the eeli!g o i!dividual i!depe!de!8e a!d sel:respe8t i! its i!dividual members7 @bA As a!
alter!ative- they might be give! subsiste!8e i!dire8tly through bei!g give! 6ork- i7e7 the opportu!ity to
6ork7 9! this eve!t the volume o produ8tio! 6ould be i!8reased- but the evil 8o!sists pre8isely i! a!
e?8ess o produ8tio! a!d i! the la8k o a proportio!ate !umber o 8o!sumers 6ho are themselves also
produ8ers- a!d thus it is simply i!te!siied by both o the methods @aA a!d @bA by 6hi8h it is sought to
alleviate it7 9t he!8e be8omes appare!t that despite a! e?8ess o 6ealth 8ivil so8iety is !ot ri8h e!ough-
i7e7 its o6! resour8es are i!sui8ie!t to 8he8k e?8essive poverty a!d the 8reatio! o a pe!urious rabble7
4ote the i!esse o =egelIs a!alysis+ he poi!ts out that poverty is !ot o!ly a material 8o!ditio!-
but also the subje8tive positio! o bei!g deprived o so8ial re8og!itio!- 6hi8h is 6hy it is !ot e!ough to
provide or the poor through publi8 or private 8harityEi! this 6ay- they are still deprived o the
satisa8tio! o auto!omously taki!g 8are o their o6! lives7 Furthermore- 6he! =egel emphasiUes ho6
so8ietyEthe e?isti!g so8ial orderEis the ultimate spa8e i! 6hi8h the subje8t i!ds his or her
substa!tial 8o!te!t a!d re8og!itio!- !amely ho6 subje8tive reedom 8a! a8tualiUe itsel o!ly i! the
ratio!ality o the u!iversal ethi8al order- the implied @although !ot e?pli8itly statedA obverse is that
those 6ho do not i!d this re8og!itio! have also the right to rebel+ i a 8lass o people is systemati8ally
deprived o their rights- o their very dig!ity as perso!s- they are eo ipso also released rom their duties
to6ards the so8ial order- be8ause this order is !o lo!ger their ethi8al substa!8e7 The dismissive to!e o
=egelIs stateme!ts about the JrabbleK should !ot bli!d us to the basi8 a8t that he 8o!sidered their
rebellio! ully justiied i! ratio!al terms+ the JrabbleK is a 8lass o people to 6hom systemati8ally- !ot
just i! a 8o!ti!ge!t 6ay- re8og!itio! by the ethi8al substa!8e is de!ied- so they do !ot o6e a!ythi!g to
so8iety- a!d are dispe!sed o a!y duties to6ards it7
4egativityEthe !o!:re8og!iUed eleme!t o the e?isti!g orderEis thus !e8essarily produ8ed-
i!here!t to it- but 6ith !o pla8e 6ithi! the order7 =ere- ho6ever- =egel makes a! error @measured by
his o6! sta!dardsA+ he does !ot ve!ture the obvious thesis that- as su8h- the rabble should immediately
sta!d or the u!iversality o so8iety7 As e?8luded- la8ki!g re8og!itio! o its parti8ular positio!- the
rabble is the u!iversal as su8h7 H! this poi!t at least- ,ar? 6as right i! his 8ritiNue o =egel- si!8e he
6as here more =egelia! tha! =egel himselEas is 6ell k!o6!- this is the starti!g poi!t o the ,ar?ia!
a!alysis+ the JproletariatK desig!ates su8h a! Jirratio!alK eleme!t o the Jratio!alK so8ial totality- its
u!a88ou!table Jpart o !o:part-K the eleme!t systemati8ally ge!erated by it a!d- simulta!eously- de!ied
the basi8 rights that dei!e this totalityT as su8h- the proletariat sta!ds or the dime!sio! o u!iversality-
or its ema!8ipatio! is o!ly possible i!>through the u!iversal ema!8ipatio!7 9! a 6ay- every a8t is
proletaria!+ JThere is o!ly o!e so8ial symptom+ every i!dividual is ee8tively proletaria!- that is to
say- he does !ot dispose o a dis8ourse by mea!s o 6hi8h he 8ould establish a so8ial li!k7K
1%
9t is o!ly
rom su8h a Jproletaria!K positio! o bei!g deprived o a dis8ourse @o o88upyi!g the pla8e o the Jpart
o !o:partK 6ithi! the e?isti!g so8ial bodyA that a! a8t 8a! emerge7
=o6- the!- do the t6o e?8esses @at the top a!d at the bottomA relate to ea8h otherM Goes !ot the
li!k bet6ee! the t6o provide the ormula or a populist authoritaria! regimeM 9! his Eighteenth
/rumaire- a! a!alysis o the irst su8h regime @the reig! o 4apoleo! 999A- ,ar? poi!ted out that 6hile
4apoleo! 999 played o!e 8lass o agai!st the other- steali!g rom o!e i! order to satisy a!other- the
o!ly true 8lass base o his rule 6as the lumpe!proletaria! rabble7 9! a homologous 6ay- the parado? o
as8ism is that it advo8ates a hierar8hi8al order i! 6hi8h Jeverybody has his>her proper pla8e-K 6hile its
o!ly true so8ial base is a rabble @SA thugs a!d so orthAEi! it- the o!ly dire8t 8lass li!k o the .eader is
the o!e 6hi8h 8o!!e8ts him to the rabble- o!ly amo!g the rabble 6as =itler truly Jat home7K
=egel is o 8ourse a6are that obje8tive poverty is !ot e!ough to ge!erate a rabble+ this obje8tive
poverty must be subje8tiviUed- 8ha!ged i!to a Jdispositio! o the mi!d-K e?perie!8ed as a radi8al
i!justi8e o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h the subje8t eels !o duty or obligatio! to6ards so8iety7 =egel leaves !o
doubt that this i!justi8e is real+ so8iety has a duty to guara!tee the 8o!ditio!s or a dig!iied- ree-
auto!omous lie to all its membersEthis is their right- a!d i it is de!ied- they also have !o duties
to6ards so8iety+

+ddition+ The lo6est subsiste!8e level- that o a rabble o paupers- is i?ed automati8ally- but the
mi!imum varies 8o!siderably i! diere!t 8ou!tries7 9! 0!gla!d- eve! the very poorest believe that they
have rightsT this is diere!t rom 6hat satisies the poor i! other 8ou!tries7 Coverty i! itsel does !ot
make me! i!to a rabbleT a rabble is 8reated o!ly 6he! there is joi!ed to poverty a dispositio! o mi!d-
a! i!!er i!dig!atio! agai!st the ri8h- agai!st so8iety- agai!st the gover!me!t- i87 A urther
8o!seNue!8e o this attitude is that through their depe!de!8e o! 8ha!8e me! be8ome rivolous a!d idle-
like the 4eapolita! laUUaro!i or e?ample7 9! this 6ay there is bor! i! the rabble the evil o la8ki!g sel:
respe8t e!ough to se8ure subsiste!8e by its o6! labour a!d yet at the same time o 8laimi!g to re8eive
subsiste!8e as its right7 Agai!st !ature ma! 8a! 8laim !o right- but o!8e so8iety is established- poverty
immediately takes the orm o a 6ro!g do!e to o!e 8lass by a!other7 The importa!t Nuestio! o ho6
poverty is to be abolished is o!e o the most disturbi!g problems 6hi8h agitate moder! so8iety7 @k2((A
9t is easy to dis8er! the ambiguity a!d os8illatio! i! =egelIs li!e o argume!tatio! here7 =e irst
appears to blame the poor themselves or subje8tiviUi!g their positio! as that o a rabble- or
aba!do!i!g the pri!8iple o auto!omy 6hi8h obliges subje8ts to se8ure their subsiste!8e by their o6!
labor- a!d or 8laimi!g that they should re8eive rom so8iety the mea!s or survival as a right7 =e the!
subtly 8ha!ges the to!e- emphasiUi!g that- i! 8o!trast to his relatio!s 6ith !ature- ma! 8a! 8laim rights
agai!st so8iety- 6hi8h is 6hy poverty is !ot just a so8ial a8t but a 6ro!g do!e to o!e 8lass by a!other7
Furthermore- there is a subtle non se<uitur i! the argume!t+ =egel passes dire8tly rom the i!dig!atio!
o the rabble agai!st the ri8h>so8iety>gover!me!t to their la8k o sel:respe8tEthe rabble is irratio!al
be8ause it dema!ds a de8e!t lie 6ithout 6orki!g or it- thus de!yi!g the basi8 moder! a?iom that
reedom a!d auto!omy are based o! the 6ork o sel:mediatio!7 Do!seNue!tly- the right to subsist
6ithout labor

8a! o!ly appear as irratio!al be8ause [=egel\ li!ks the !otio! o right to the !otio! o the ree 6ill that
8a! o!ly be ree i it be8omes a! obje8t or itsel through obje8tive a8tivity7 To 8laim a right to subsist
6ithout a8tivity a!d to 8laim this right at the same time o!ly or o!esel- a88ordi!g to =egel- thereore
mea!s to 8laim a right that has !either the u!iversality !or the obje8tivity o a right7 The right that the
rabble 8laims is or =egel thereore a right without right a!d O he 8o!seNue!tly dei!es the rabble as
the parti8ularity that u!bi!ds itsel also rom the esse!tial i!terrelatio! o right a!d duty7
20
3ut i!dig!atio! is !ot the same as la8k o sel:respe8t+ it does !ot automati8ally ge!erate the
dema!d to be provided or 6ithout 6orki!g7 9!dig!atio! 8a! also be a dire8t e?pressio! o sel:respe8t+
si!8e the rabble is produ8ed !e8essarily- as part o the so8ial pro8ess o the @reAprodu8tio! o 6ealth- it
is so8iety itsel 6hi8h de!ies it the right to parti8ipate i! the so8ial u!iverse o reedoms a!d rightsEit
is de!ied the right to have rights- or the Jright 6ithout rightK is ee8tively a meta:right or rele?ive
right- a u!iversal right to have rights- to be i! a positio! to a8t as a ree auto!omous subje8t7 The
dema!d to be provided or 6ithout 6orki!g is thus a @possibly superi8ialA orm o appeara!8e o the
more basi8 a!d i! !o 6ay Jirratio!alK dema!d to be give! a 8ha!8e to a8t as a! auto!omous ree
subje8t- to be i!8luded i! the u!iverse o reedoms a!d obligatio!s7 9! other 6ords- si!8e the rabble are
e?8luded rom the u!iversal sphere o ree auto!omous lie- their dema!d is itsel u!iversalEtheir
J8laimed right without right 8o!tai!s a late!t u!iversal dime!sio! a!d is itsel !ot at all a mere
parti8ular right7 As a parti8ularly arti8ulated right it is a right that late!tly ae8ts a!yo!e a!d oers the
i!sight i!to a dema!d or eNuality beyo!d the e?isti!g obje8tive statist 8ir8umsta!8es7K
21
There is a urther key disti!8tio! to be i!trodu8ed here- a disti!8tio! o!ly late!t i! =egel @i! the
guise o the oppositio! bet6ee! the t6o e?8esses o poverty a!d 6ealthA but elaborated by Fuda+
members o the rabble @those e?8luded rom the sphere o rights a!d reedomsA+

8a! be stru8turally diere!tiated i!to t6o types+ there are the poor a!d there are the gamblers7 A!yo!e
8a! !o!:arbitrarily be8ome poor- but o!ly the o!e that arbitrarily de8ides !ot to satisy his egoist !eeds
a!d desires by 6orki!g 8a! be8ome a gambler7 =e relies ully o! the 8o!ti!ge!t moveme!t o
bourgeois e8o!omy a!d hopes to se8ure his o6! subsiste!8e i! a! eNually 8o!ti!ge!t ma!!erEor
e?ample by 8o!ti!ge!tly gai!i!g mo!ey o! the sto8k:market7
22
The e?8essively 6ealthy are thus also a spe8ies o the rabble i! the se!se that they violate the
rules o @or e?8lude themselves romA the sphere o duties a!d reedoms+ they !ot o!ly dema!d that
so8iety provide or their subsiste!8e 6ithout 6ork- they are de facto so provided7 Do!seNue!tly- 6hile
=egel 8riti8iUes the positio! o the rabble as that o a! irratio!al parti8ularity egoisti8ally opposi!g its
mere parti8ular i!terests agai!st the e?isti!g a!d ratio!ally orga!iUed u!iversality- this diere!tiatio!
bet6ee! the t6o disti!8t rabbles demo!strates that o!ly the ri8h rabble alls u!der =egelIs verdi8t+
J/hile the ri8h rabble is- as =egel judges 8orre8tly- a mere parti8ular rabble- the poor rabble 8o!tai!s-
agai!st =egelIs judgme!t- a late!t u!iversal dime!sio! that is !ot eve! i!erior to the u!iversality o
the =egelia! 8o!8eptio! o ethi8s7K
2"
H!e 8a! thus demo!strate that- i! the 8ase o the rabble- =egel 6as i!8o!siste!t 6ith regard to
his o6! matri? o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- de facto regressi!g rom the properly diale8ti8al !otio! o
totality to a 8orporate model o the so8ial /hole7 9s this a simple empiri8al a!d a88ide!tal ailure o!
=egelIs part- su8h that 6e 8a! 8orre8t this @a!d otherA similar poi!ts a!d thereby establish the JtrueK
=egelia! systemM The poi!t is- o 8ourse- that here also o!e should apply the u!dame!tal diale8ti8al
guideli!e+ su8h lo8al ailures to properly deploy the me8ha!ism o the diale8ti8al pro8ess are its
imma!e!t symptomal poi!ts- they i!di8ate a more u!dame!tal stru8tural la6 i! the basi8 me8ha!ism
itsel7 9! short- i =egel had arti8ulated the u!iversal 8hara8ter o the rabble- his e!tire model o the
ratio!al State 6ould have had to have bee! aba!do!ed7 Goes this mea! that all 6e have to do here is
make the passage rom =egel to ,ar?M 9s the i!8o!siste!8y resolved 6he! 6e repla8e the rabble 6ith
the proletariat as the Ju!iversal 8lassKM =ere is ho6 Febe88a Domay sums up the so8io:politi8al
limitatio! o =egel+

=egel is !ot ,ar?7 The rabble is !ot the proletariat- 8ommu!ism is !ot o! the horiUo!- a!d revolutio! is
!ot a solutio! O =egel is !ot prepared to see i! the 8o!tradi8tio! o 8ivil so8iety the death k!ell o
8lass so8iety- to ide!tiy 8apitalism itsel as its o6! gravedigger- or to see i! the dise!ra!8hised masses
a!ythi!g more tha! a surge o bli!d- ormless rea8tio!- Jeleme!tal- irratio!al- barbarous- a!d terriyi!gK
O a s6arm 6hose i!tegratio! remai!s u!realiUed a!d u!realiUable- a! JoughtK O 3ut the aporia-
u!typi8al or =egel- poi!ts to somethi!g u!i!ished or already 8rumbli!g 6ithi! the edii8e 6hose
8o!stru8tio! =egel de8lares to be 8ompleted- a ailure o both a8tuality a!d ratio!ality that u!dermi!es
the solidity o the state he else6here 8elebrates- i! =obbesia! la!guage- as a! earthly divi!ity7
2(
9s =egel thus simply 8o!strai!ed by his histori8al 8o!te?t- did he 8ome too early to see the
ema!8ipatory pote!tial o the Jpart o !o:part-K so that all he 8ould have do!e 6as to ho!estly register
the u!resolved a!d u!resolvable aporias o his ratio!al stateM CerhapsT but does !ot the histori8al
e?perie!8e o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury also re!der problemati8 ,ar?Is visio! o the revolutio!M Are 6e
!ot today- i! the post:Fukuyama 6orld- e?a8tly i! the late =egelIs situatio!M /e see Jsomethi!g
u!i!ished or already 8rumbli!g 6ithi! the edii8eK o the liberal:demo8rati8 6elare state 6hi8h- i! the
utopia! Fukuyama mome!t o the 1%%0s- may have appeared as the Je!d o history-K the i!ally ou!d
best possible politi8o:e8o!omi8 orm7 Cerhaps- the!- 6e e!8ou!ter here yet a!other 8ase o !o!:
sy!8hro!i8ity+ i! a 6ay- =egel 6as 8loser to the mark tha! ,ar?- the t6e!tieth:8e!tury attempts to
e!a8t the +ufhebung o the rage o the dise!ra!8hised masses i!to the 6ill o the proletaria! age!t to
resolve the so8ial a!tago!isms ultimately ailed- the Ja!a8hro!isti8K =egel is more our 8o!temporary
tha! ,ar?7
/e 8a! also see ho6 6ro!g Althusser 6as 6he!- i! his 8rude oppositio! bet6ee!
overdetermi!ed stru8ture a!d the =egelia! totality- he redu8ed the latter to a simple sy!8hro!i8ity that
he 8alled Je?pressive totalityK+ or AlthusserIs =egel- every histori8al epo8h is domi!ated by o!e
spiritual pri!8iple 6hi8h e?presses itsel i! all so8ial spheres7 =o6ever- as the e?ample o the temporal
dis8ord bet6ee! Fra!8e a!d 1erma!y demo!strated- !o!:8o!tempora!eity is or =egel a pri!8iple+
1erma!y 6as politi8ally i! delay 6ith regard to Fra!8e @6here the Fevolutio! took pla8eA- 6hi8h is
6hy it 8ould o!ly prolo!g it i! the domai! o thoughtT ho6ever- the Fevolutio! itsel emerged i!
Fra!8e o!ly be8ause Fra!8e itsel 6as i! delay 6ith regard to 1erma!y- that is- be8ause Fra!8e had
missed the Feormatio! 6hi8h asserts i!!er reedom a!d thus re8o!8iles se8ular a!d spiritual domai!s7
So- ar rom bei!g a! e?8eptio! or a! a88ide!tal 8ompli8atio!- a!a8hro!ism is the Jsig!atureK o
8o!s8ious!ess+ Je?perie!8e is 8o!ti!ually outbiddi!g itsel- perpetually maki!g dema!ds that it @i7e7-
the 6orldA is u!eNuipped to realiUe a!d u!prepared to re8og!iUe- a!d 8omprehe!sio! i!evitably 8omes
too late to make a diere!8e- i o!ly be8ause the stakes have already 8ha!ged7K
2#
This a!a8hro!isti8
u!timeli!ess holds espe8ially or revolutio!s+ JThe VFre!8hI Fevolutio! that provides the measure o
V1erma!I u!timeli!ess is itsel u!timely O There is !o right time or Vripe timeI or revolutio! @or there
6ould be !o !eed o o!eA7 The Fevolutio! al6ays arrives too soo! @8o!ditio!s are !ever readyA a!d too
late @it lags orever behi!d its o6! i!itiativeA7K
2'
/e 8a! see !o6 the stupidity o those J8riti8al
,ar?istsK 6ho repeat the ma!tra that Stali!ism emerged be8ause the irst proletaria! revolutio!
o88urred i! the 6ro!g pla8e @i! semi:developed JAsiati8K:despoti8 Fussia i!stead o /ester!
0uropeAErevolutio!s always- by dei!itio!- o88ur at the 6ro!g time a!d pla8e- they are al6ays Jout o
pla8e7K A!d 6as !ot the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 8o!ditio!ed by the a8t that- be8ause o its absolutism-
Fra!8e 6as laggi!g behi!d 0!gla!d i! terms o 8apitalist moder!iUatio!M 3ut is this !o!:
8o!tempora!eity irredu8ibleM 9s !ot Absolute *!o6i!g- the 8o!8ludi!g mome!t o the =egelia!
system- the mome!t 6he!- i!ally- history 8at8hes up 6ith itsel- 6he! !otio! a!d reality overlap i! ull
8o!tempora!eityM Domay reje8ts this easy readi!g+

Absolute k!o6i!g is the e?positio! o this delay7 9ts ma!date is to make e?pli8it the stru8tural
disso!a!8e o e?perie!8e7 9 philosophy makes a!y 8laim to u!iversality- this is !ot be8ause it
sy!8hro!iUes the 8ale!dars or provides i!telle8tual 8ompe!satio! or its o6! tardi!ess7 9ts 8o!tributio!
is rather to ormaliUe the !e8essity o the delay- together 6ith the i!ve!tive strategies 6ith 6hi8h su8h a
delay itsel is i!variably disguised- ig!ored- glamoriUed- or ratio!aliUed7
2$
This delayEultimately !ot o!ly the delay bet6ee! the eleme!ts o the same histori8al totality-
but the delay o the totality 6ith regard to itsel- the stru8tural !e8essity or a totality to 8o!tai!
a!a8hro!isti8 eleme!ts 6hi8h alo!e make it possible or it to establish itsel as a totalityEis the
temporal aspe8t o a gap 6hi8h propels the diale8ti8al pro8ess- a!d ar rom illi!g i! this gap-
JAbsolute *!o6i!gK makes it visible as su8h- i! its stru8tural !e8essity+

Absolute k!o6i!g is !either 8ompe!satio!- as i! the redemptio! o a debt- !or ulilme!t+ the void is
8o!stitutive @6hi8h does !ot mea! that it is !ot histori8ally overdetermi!edA7 Father tha! tryi!g to plug
the gap through the a88umulatio! o 8o!8eptual surplus value- =egel sets out to demystiy the
pha!tasms 6e i!d to ill it7
2&
Therei! lies the diere!8e bet6ee! =egel a!d histori8ist evolutio!ism+ the latter 8o!8eives
histori8al progress as the su88essio! o orms- ea8h o 6hi8h gro6s- rea8hes its peak- a!d the! be8omes
outdated a!d disi!tegrates- 6hile or =egel- disi!tegratio! is the very sig! o Jmaturity-K or there is !o
mome!t o pure sy!8hro!i8ity 6he! orm a!d 8o!te!t overlap 6ithout delay7
Cerhaps 6e should 8o!8eive the 0uropea! tri!ity itsel as a 3orromea! k!ot o a!a8hro!isms+
the model:like e?8elle!8e o ea8h !atio! @3ritish politi8al e8o!omy- Fre!8h politi8s- 1erma!
philosophyA is grou!ded i! a! a!a8hro!isti8 delay i! other domai!s @the e?8elle!8e o 1erma! thought
is the parado?i8al result o its politi8o:e8o!omi8 ba8k6ard!essT the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 6as grou!ded i!
the delay o 8apitalism due to Fre!8h state absolutism- a!d so o!7 9! this se!se- the tri!ity 6orked like a
3orromea! k!ot+ ea8h t6o !atio!s are li!ked o!ly through the i!termediary o the third @i! politi8s-
Fra!8e li!ks 0!gla!d a!d 1erma!y- et87A7
/e should risk taki!g a step urther here a!d demystiy the very !otio! o a 6orld:histori8al
!atio!- a !atio! desti!ed to embody the level 6orld history has rea8hed at a 8ertai! poi!t7 9t is ote!
8laimed that- i! Dhi!a- i you really hate someo!e- the 8urse you address to him is+ J,ay you live i!
i!teresti!g timesRK As =egel 6as ully a6are- i! our history- Ji!teresti!g timesK are ee8tively times o
u!rest- 6ar- a!d po6er struggles- 6ith millio!s o i!!o8e!t bysta!ders sueri!g the 8o!seNue!8es+
JThe history o the 6orld is !ot the theatre o happi!ess7 Ceriods o happi!ess are bla!k pagesT or they
are periods o harmo!y- periods o the missi!g oppositio!7K
2%
Should 6e the! 8o!8eive the su88essio!
o great Jhistori8alK !atio!s 6hi8h- passi!g the tor8h rom o!e to the other- embody progress or a
period @9ra!- 1ree8e- Fome- 1erma!y OA !ot as a blessi!g i! 6hi8h o!e !atio! is temporarily elevated
to 6orld:histori8al ra!k- but- rather- as the tra!smitti!g o a ki!d o 8o!tagious spiritual disease- a
disease 6hi8h a !atio! 8a! o!ly get rid o by passi!g it o! to a!other !atio!- a disease 6hi8h bri!gs
o!ly sueri!g a!d destru8tio! to the people 8o!tami!ated by itM The 2e6s 6ere a !ormal !atio! livi!g
i! a happy Jbla!k pageK o history u!til- or reaso!s u!k!o6!- 1od sele8ted them as his 8hose! people-
6hi8h brought them o!ly pai! a!d dispersio!E=egelIs solutio! is that this burde! 8a! be passed o!-
a!d o!e 8a! retur! to the happy Jbla!k page7K Hr- to put it i! Althusseria! terms- 6hile people live like
i!dividuals- rom time to time some o them have the misortu!e o bei!g i!terpellated i!to subje8ts o
the big Hther7
So- ba8k to rabble- o!e 8a! argue that the positio! o the Ju!iversal rabbleK pere8tly 8aptures
the plight o todayIs !e6 proletaria!s7 9! the 8lassi8al ,ar?ist dispositif o 8lass e?ploitatio!- 8apitalist
a!d 6orker meet as ormally ree i!dividuals o! the market- eNual subje8ts o the same legal order-
8itiUe!s o the same state- 6ith the same 8ivil a!d politi8al rights7 Today- this legal rame o eNuality-
this shared parti8ipatio! i! the same 8ivil a!d politi8al spa8es- is gradually dissolvi!g 6ith the rise o
!e6 orms o so8ial a!d politi8al e?8lusio!+ illegal immigra!ts- slum:d6ellers- reugees- et87 9t is as i-
i! parallel to the regressio! rom proit to re!t- the e?isti!g system- i! order to 8o!ti!ue to u!8tio!- has
to resus8itate premoder! orms o dire8t e?8lusio!Eit 8a! !o lo!ger aord e?ploitatio! a!d
domi!atio! i! the orm o legal a!d 8ivil authority7 9! other 6ords- 6hile the 8lassi8 6orki!g 8lass is
e?ploited through their very parti8ipatio! i! the sphere o rights a!d reedomsEi7e7- 6hile their de
facto e!slaveme!t is realiUed through the very orm o their auto!omy a!d reedom- through 6orki!g i!
order to provide or their subsiste!8eEtodayIs rabble is de!ied eve! the right to be e?ploited through
6ork- its status os8illati!g bet6ee! that o a vi8tim provided or by 8haritable huma!itaria! help a!d
that o a terrorist to be 8o!tai!ed or 8rushedT a!d- e?a8tly as des8ribed by =egel- they sometimes
ormulate their dema!d as the dema!d or subsiste!8e 6ithout 6ork @like the Somali piratesA7
/e should bri!g together here- as aspe8ts o the same limitatio!- the t6o topi8s o! 6hi8h =egel
ails @by his o6! sta!dardsA+ the rabble a!d se?7 Far rom providi!g the !atural ou!datio! o huma!
lives- se?uality is the very terrai! upo! 6hi8h huma!s deta8h themselves rom !ature+ the idea o
se?ual perversio! or o a deadly se?ual passio! is totally oreig! to the a!imal u!iverse7 =ere- =egel
himsel alls short o his o6! sta!dards+ he o!ly des8ribes ho6- through 8ulture- the !atural substa!8e
o se?uality is 8ultivated- sublated- mediatedE6e huma!s !o lo!ger just make love or pro8reatio!- 6e
e!ter i!to a 8omple? pro8ess o sedu8tio! a!d marriage i! 6hi8h se?uality be8omes a! e?pressio! o
the spiritual bo!d bet6ee! a ma! a!d a 6oma!- a!d so o!7 =o6ever- 6hat =egel misses is ho6- i!
huma!s- se?uality is !ot o!ly tra!sormed or 8iviliUed- but- mu8h more radi8ally- changed in its very
substance+ it is !o lo!ger the i!sti!8tual drive to reprodu8e- but a drive that i!ds itsel th6arted i!
relatio! to its !atural goal @reprodu8tio!A a!d thereby e?plodes i!to a! i!i!ite- properly meta:physi8al-
passio!7 The be8omi!g:8ultural o se?uality is thus !ot the be8omi!g:8ultural o !ature- but the attempt
to domesti8ate a properly u!:!atural e?8ess o the meta:physi8al se?ual passio!7 This e?8ess o
!egativity dis8er!ible i! se? a!d apropos the rabble is the very dime!sio! o Ju!ruli!essK ide!tiied by
*a!t as the viole!t reedom o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h ma!- i! 8o!trast to a!imals- !eeds a master7 So it is
!ot just that se?uality is the a!imal substa!8e 6hi8h is the! JsublatedK i!to 8iviliUed modes a!d rituals-
ge!triied- dis8ipli!ed- et87Ethe e?8ess o se?uality itsel- se?uality as the u!8o!ditio!al Cassio! 6hi8h
threate!s to e?plode all J8iviliUedK 8o!strai!ts- is the result o Dulture7 9! terms o /ag!erIs -ristan+
8iviliUatio! is !ot o!ly the u!iverse o the Gay- o the rituals a!d ho!ors that bi!d us- but the 4ight
itsel- the i!i!ite passio! i! 6hi8h the t6o lovers 6a!t to dissolve their ordi!ary daily
e?iste!8eEa!imals k!o6 !o su8h passio!7 9! this 6ay- 8iviliUatio!>Dulture retroa8tively
posits>tra!sorms its o6! !atural presuppositio!- retroa8tively Jde!aturaliUesK !ature itselEthis is
6hat Freud 8alled the 9d- libido7 This is ho6- here also- i! ighti!g its !atural obsta8le- its opposed
!atural substa!8e- Spirit ights itsel- its o6! esse!8e7
0lisabeth .loyd suggests that the emale orgasm has !o positive evolutio!ary u!8tio!+ it is !ot
a biologi8al adaptatio! 6ith evolutio!ary adva!tages- but a! Jappe!di?-K like male !ipples7
"0
9! the
embryo!i8 stage o gro6th- male a!d emale both have the same a!atomi8al stru8ture or the irst t6o
mo!ths- beore the diere!8es set i!Ethe emale a8Nuires the ability to orgasm o!ly be8ause the male
6ill later !eed it- just like the male a8Nuires !ipples o!ly be8ause the emale 6ill later !eed them7 All
the sta!dard e?pla!atio!s @like the Juteri!e upsu8kK thesisEthe orgasm 8auses 8o!tra8tio!s that Jsu8k
upK sperm a!d thus aid 8o!8eptio!A are alse+ 6hile se?ual pleasure a!d eve! the 8litoris are adaptive-
the orgasm is !ot7 The a8t that this thesis provoked a uror amo!g emi!ists is i! itsel proo o the
de8li!e o our i!telle8tual sta!dards+ as i the very superluity o the emi!i!e orgasm does !ot make it
all the more JspiritualKElet us !ot orget that- a88ordi!g to some evolutio!ists- la!guage itsel is a by:
produ8t 6ith !o 8lear evolutio!ary u!8tio!7 H!e should be atte!tive !ot to miss the properly diale8ti8al
reversal o substa!8e at 6ork here+ the mome!t 6he! the immediate substa!tial @J!aturalKA starti!g
poi!t is !ot o!ly a8ted upo!- tra!sormed- mediated>8ultivated- but 8ha!ged i! its very substa!8e7 /e
!ot o!ly 6ork upo! a!d thus tra!sorm !atureEi! a gesture o retroa8tive reversal- !ature itsel
radi8ally 8ha!ges its J!ature7K
"1
This is 6hy Datholi8s 6ho i!sist that o!ly se? or pro8reatio! is
huma!- 6hile 8oupli!g out o lust is bestial- totally miss the poi!t- a!d e!d up 8elebrati!g the a!imality
o me!7
/hy is Dhristia!ity opposed to se?uality- a88epti!g it as a !e8essary evil o!ly i it serves its
!atural purpose o pro8reatio!M 4ot be8ause i! se?uality our lo6er !ature e?plodes- but pre8isely
be8ause se?uality 8ompetes 6ith pure spirituality as the primordial meta:physi8al a8tivity7 The
Freudia! hypothesis is that the passage rom a!imal i!sti!8ts @o mati!gA to se?uality proper @to drivesA
is the primordial step rom the physi8al realm o biologi8al @a!imalA lie to meta:physi8s- to eter!ity
a!d immortality- to a level 6hi8h is heteroge!eous 6ith regard to the biologi8al 8y8le o ge!eratio! a!d
8orruptio!7
"2
Clato 6as already a6are o this 6he! he 6rote about 0ros- the eroti8 atta8hme!t to a
beautiul body- as the irst step o! the 6ay to6ards the supreme 1oodT per8eptive Dhristia!s @like
Simo!e /eilA dis8er!ed i! se?ual lo!gi!g a strivi!g or the Absolute7 =uma! se?uality is 8hara8teriUed
by the impossibility o rea8hi!g its goal- a!d this 8o!stitutive impossibility eter!aliUes it- as is the 8ase
i! the myths about great lovers 6hose love persists beyo!d lie a!d death7 Dhristia!ity 8o!8eives this
properly meta:physi8al e?8ess o se?uality as a disturba!8e to be erased- so it is parado?i8ally
Dhristia!ity itsel @espe8ially Datholi8ismA 6hi8h 6a!ts to get rid o its 8ompetitor by redu8i!g
se?uality to its a!imal u!8tio! o pro8reatio!+ Dhristia!ity 6a!ts to J!ormaliUeK se?uality-
spiritualiUi!g it rom 6ithout @imposi!g o! it the e?ter!al e!velope o spiritualityEse? must take pla8e
i! a lovi!g relatio!ship a!d 6ith respe8t or o!eIs part!er a!d so o!A- a!d thereby obliterati!g its
imma!e!t spiritual dime!sio!- the dime!sio! o u!8o!ditio!al passio!7 0ve! =egel su88umbs to this
mistake 6he! he sees the properly huma!:spiritual dime!sio! o se?uality o!ly i! its 8ultivated or
mediated orm- ig!ori!g ho6 this mediatio! retroa8tively tra!substa!tiates or eter!aliUes the very
obje8t o its mediatio!7 9! all these 8ases- the aim is to get rid o the u!8a!!y double o spirituality- o a
spirituality i! its obs8e!e libidi!al orm- o the e?8ess 6hi8h absolutiUes the i!sti!8t itsel i!to the
eter!al drive7
The limitatio! o =egelIs !otio! o se?uality is 8learly dis8er!ible i! his theory o marriage
@rom his )hilosophy of 7ightA- 6hi8h !o!etheless deserves a 8lose readi!g+ be!eath the sura8e o the
sta!dard bourgeois !otio! o marriage lurk ma!y u!settli!g impli8atio!s7 /hile a subje8t e!ters
marriage volu!tarily- surre!deri!g his or her auto!omy by 6ay o immersio! i!to the immediate or
substa!tial u!ity o the amily @6hi8h u!8tio!s 6ith regard to its outside as o!e perso!A- the u!8tio!
o the amily is the e?a8t opposite o su8h a substa!tial u!ity+ it is to edu8ate those bor! i!to it to
aba!do! their @pare!talA amily a!d pursue their path i!depe!de!tly o it7 The irst lesso! o marriage is
thus that that the ultimate goal o every substa!tial ethi8al u!ity is to dissolve itsel by givi!g rise to
i!dividuals 6ho 6ill assert their ull auto!omy agai!st the substa!tial u!ity 6hi8h gave birth to them7
This surre!der o auto!omous i!dividuality is the reaso! =egel opposes those @i!8ludi!g *a!tA
6ho i!sist o! the 8o!tra8tual !ature o marriage+ Jthough marriage begi!s i! 8o!tra8t- it is pre8isely a
8o!tra8t to tra!s8e!d the sta!dpoi!t o 8o!tra8t- the sta!dpoi!t rom 6hi8h perso!s are regarded i! their
i!dividuality as sel:subsiste!t u!its7 The ide!tii8atio! o perso!alities- 6hereby the amily be8omes
o!e perso! a!d its members be8ome its a88ide!ts @though substa!8e is i! esse!8e the relatio! o its
a88ide!ts to itselA- is the ethi8al mi!dK @k1'"A7 9t is 8lear i! 6hat se!se- or =egel- marriage is Ja
8o!tra8t to tra!s8e!d the sta!dpoi!t o 8o!tra8tK+ a 8o!tra8t is a deal bet6ee! t6o or more auto!omous
i!dividuals ea8h o 6hom retai!s their abstra8t reedom @as is the 8ase i! the e?8ha!ge o
8ommoditiesA- 6hile marriage is a 6eird 8o!tra8t by 6hi8h the t6o 8o!8er!ed parties oblige themselves
pre8isely to aba!do! or surre!der their abstra8t reedom a!d auto!omy a!d to subordi!ate it to a higher
orga!i8 ethi8al u!ity7
""
=egelIs theory o marriage is ormulated agai!st t6o oppo!e!ts+ his reje8tio! o the 8o!tra8t
theory is li!ked to his 8ritiNue o the Foma!ti8 !otio! o marriage 6hi8h 8o!8eives its 8ore as the
passio!ate love atta8hme!t o the 8ouple- so that the orm o marriage is at best merely the e?ter!al
registratio! o this atta8hme!t a!d at 6orst a! obsta8le to true love7 /e 8a! see ho6 these t6o !otio!s
suppleme!t ea8h other+ i the true 8ore o marriage is the passio!ate i!!er love- the!- o 8ourse-
marriage itsel is !othi!g but a! e?ter!al 8o!tra8t7 For =egel- o! the 8o!trary- the e?ter!al 8eremo!y is
pre8isely !ot merely e?ter!alEi! it resides the very ethi8al 8ore o marriage+

9t is i! the a8tual 8o!8lusio! o a marriage- i7e7 i! the 6eddi!g- that the esse!8e o the tie is e?pressed
a!d established beyo!d dispute as somethi!g ethi8al- raised above the 8o!ti!ge!8y o eeli!g a!d
private i!8li!atio!7 9 this 8eremo!y is take! as a! e?ter!al ormality- a mere so:8alled J8ivil
reNuireme!tK- it is thereby stripped o all sig!ii8a!8e e?8ept perhaps that o servi!g the purpose o
edii8atio! a!d attesti!g the 8ivil relatio! o the parties O As su8h it appears as somethi!g !ot merely
i!diere!t to the true !ature o marriage- but a8tually alie! to it7 The heart is 8o!strai!ed by the la6 to
atta8h a value to the ormal 8eremo!y a!d the latter is looked upo! merely as a 8o!ditio! 6hi8h must
pre8ede the 8omplete mutual surre!der o the parties to o!e a!other7 As su8h it appears to bri!g
disu!io! i!to their lovi!g dispositio! a!d- like a! alie! i!truder- to th6art the i!6ard!ess o their u!io!7
Su8h a do8tri!e prete!tiously 8laims to aord the highest 8o!8eptio! o the reedom- i!6ard!ess- a!d
pere8tio! o loveT but i! a8t it is a travesty o the ethi8al aspe8t o love- the higher aspe8t 6hi8h
restrai!s purely se!sual impulse a!d puts it i! the ba8kgrou!d O 9! parti8ular- the vie6 just 8riti8ised
8asts aside marriageIs spe8ii8ally ethi8al 8hara8ter- 6hi8h 8o!sists i! this- that the 8o!s8ious!ess o the
parties is 8rystallised out o its physi8al a!d subje8tive mode a!d lited to the thought o 6hat is
substa!tiveT i!stead o 8o!ti!ually reservi!g to itsel the 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d 8apri8e o bodily desire- it
removes the marriage bo!d rom the provi!8e o this 8apri8e- surre!ders to the substa!tive7 @k1'(A
Alo!g these li!es- =egel reje8ts the Foma!ti8 vie6 o S8hlegel a!d his rie!ds that Jthe
6eddi!g 8eremo!y is superluous a!d a ormality 6hi8h might be dis8arded7 Their reaso! is that love
is- so they say- the substa!8e o marriage a!d that the 8elebratio! thereore detra8ts rom its value7
Surre!der to se!sual impulse is here represe!ted as !e8essary to prove the reedom a!d i!6ard!ess o
loveEa! argume!t !ot u!k!o6! to sedu8ersK @k1'(A7 /hat the Foma!ti8 vie6 thus misses is that
marriage is Jethi8o:legal [rechtlich sittliche\ love- a!d this elimi!ates rom marriage the tra!sie!t-
i8kle- a!d purely subje8tive aspe8ts o love7K The parado? here is that- i! marriage- Jthe !atural se?ual
u!io!Ea u!io! purely i!6ard or impli8it a!d or that very reaso! e?iste!t as purely e?ter!alEis
8ha!ged i!to a u!io! o! the level o mi!d- i!to sel:8o!s8ious loveK+ the spiritualiUatio! o the !atural
li!k is thus !ot simply its i!ter!aliUatio!T it rather o88urs i! the guise o its opposite- o the
e?ter!aliUatio! i! a symboli8 8eremo!y+

the solem! de8laratio! by the parties o their 8o!se!t to e!ter the ethi8al bo!d o marriage- a!d its
8orrespo!di!g re8og!itio! a!d 8o!irmatio! by their amily a!d 8ommu!ity- 8o!stitutes the ormal
8ompletio! a!d a8tuality o marriage7 The k!ot is tied a!d made ethi8al o!ly ater this 8eremo!y-
6hereby through the use o sig!s- i7e7 o la!guage @the most me!tal embodime!t o mi!dA- the
substa!tial thi!g i! the marriage is brought 8ompletely i!to bei!g7 @k1'(A
=ere =egel oregrou!ds the JperormativeK u!8tio! o the marriage 8eremo!y+ eve! i it
appears to the love part!ers as mere bureau8rati8 ormalism- it e!a8ts the i!s8riptio! o their se?ual li!k
i!to the big Hther- a! i!s8riptio! 6hi8h radi8ally 8ha!ges the subje8tive positio! o the 8o!8er!ed
parties7 This e?plai!s the 6ell:k!o6! a8t that married people are ote! more atta8hed to their spouses
tha! may appear to be the 8ase @i!8ludi!g to themselvesA+ a ma! may have se8ret aairs- may eve!
dream about leavi!g his 6ie- but a!?iety preve!ts him rom doi!g so 6he! the 8ha!8e prese!ts
itselEi! short- 6e are ready to 8heat o! our spouses o! 8o!ditio! that the big Hther does !ot k!o6 it
@register itA7 The last Nuoted se!te!8e is very pre8ise here+ JThe k!ot is tied a!d made ethi8al o!ly ater
this 8eremo!y- 6hereby through the use o sig!s- i7e7 o la!guage @the most me!tal embodime!t o
mi!dA- the substa!tial thi!g i! the marriage is brought 8ompletely i!to bei!g7K The passage rom a
!atural li!k to spiritual sel:8o!s8ious!ess has !othi!g to do 6ith Ji!!er a6are!essK a!d everythi!g to
do 6ith the e?ter!al Jbureau8rati8K registratio!- a ritual 6hose true s8ope may be u!k!o6! to its
parti8ipa!ts- 6ho may thi!k they are just perormi!g a! e?ter!al ormality7
The key eature o marriage is !ot se?ual atta8hme!t- but Jthe ree 8o!se!t o the perso!s O to
make themselves o!e perso!- to re!ou!8e their !atural a!d i!dividual perso!ality to this u!ity o o!e
6ith the other7 From this poi!t o vie6- their u!io! is a sel:restri8tio!- but i! a8t it is their liberatio!-
be8ause i! it they attai! their substa!tive sel:8o!s8ious!essK @k1'2A7 9! short- true reedom is the
liberatio! rom pathologi8al atta8hme!ts to parti8ular obje8ts determi!ed by 8apri8e a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y7
3ut =egel here goes to the e!d- right up to the diale8ti8al reversal o !e8essity i!to 8o!ti!ge!8y+ to
over8ome 8o!ti!ge!8y does !ot mea! to arra!ge a marriage o! the basis o a 8areul e?ami!atio! o the
uture part!erIs me!tal a!d physi8al Nualities @as i! ClatoAT it is rather that- i! marriage- the part!er is
8o!ti!ge!t- a!d this 8o!ti!ge!8y should be assumed as !e8essary7 So 6he! =egel deals 6ith the t6o
e?tremes o prearra!ged marriages a!d marriages based o! attra8tio! a!d love- o! ethi8al grou!ds he
preers the irst o!e7 At o!e e?treme-

the marriage is arra!ged by the 8o!triva!8e o be!evole!t pare!tsT the appoi!ted e!d o the parties is a
u!io! o mutual love- their i!8li!atio! to marry arises rom the a8t that ea8h gro6s a8Nuai!ted 6ith the
other rom the irst as a desti!ed part!er7 At the other e?treme- it is the i!8li!atio! o the parties 6hi8h
8omes irst- appeari!g i! them as these t6o i!i!itely parti8ulariUed i!dividuals7 The more ethi8al 6ay
to matrimo!y may be take! to be the ormer e?treme or a!y 6ay at all 6hereby the de8isio! to marry
8omes irst a!d the i!8li!atio! to do so ollo6s- so that i! the a8tual 6eddi!g both de8isio! a!d
i!8li!atio! 8oales8e7 @k1'2A
The begi!!i!g o the last se!te!8e is 6orth rereadi!g+ JThe more ethi8al 6ay to matrimo!y may
be take! to be the ormer e?treme or a!y 6ay at all 6hereby the de8isio! to marry 8omes irst a!d the
i!8li!atio! to do so ollo6s OKEi! other 6ords- the prearra!ged marriage is more ethi8al !ot be8ause
the be!evole!t elder relatives 8a! see urther a!d are i! a better positio! tha! the you!g 8ouple- bli!ded
by their passio!s- to judge i they have the Nualities !eeded to make or a happy shared lieT 6hat
makes it more ethi8al is that- i! this 8ase- the 8o!ti!ge!8y o the part!er is dire8tly a!d ope!ly
assumedE9 am simply i!ormed that 9 am e?pe8ted to reely 8hoose as a lie:lo!g part!er a! u!k!o6!
perso! imposed o! me by others7 This reedom to 8hoose 6hat is !e8essary is more spiritual be8ause
physi8al love a!d emotio!al ties 8ome as se8o!dary+ they ollo6 the abyssal de8isio! to marry7 T6o
8o!seNue!8es ollo6 rom this parado?+ !ot o!ly is the surre!der o abstra8t reedom i! marriage a
double surre!der @9 !ot o!ly surre!der my abstra8t reedom by agreei!g to immerse mysel i! the
amily u!ityT this surre!der itsel is o!ly ormally ree- si!8e the part!er to 6hom 9 surre!der my
abstra8t reedom is de a8to 8hose! by othersAT urthermore- the surre!der o my abstra8t reedom is !ot
the o!ly surre!der implied by the a8t o marriageElet us read 8areully the ollo6i!g passage+

The disti!8tio! bet6ee! marriage a!d 8o!8ubi!age is that the latter is 8hiely a matter o satisyi!g
!atural desire- 6hile this satisa8tio! is made se8o!dary i! the ormer O The ethi8al aspe8t o marriage
8o!sists i! the partiesI 8o!s8ious!ess o this u!ity as their substa!tive aim- a!d so i! their love- trust-
a!d 8ommo! shari!g o their e!tire e?iste!8e as i!dividuals7 /he! the parties are i! this rame o mi!d
a!d their u!io! is a8tual- their physi8al passio! si!ks to the level o a physi8al mome!t- desti!ed to
va!ish i! its very satisa8tio!7 H! the other ha!d- the spiritual bo!d o u!io! se8ures its rights as the
substa!8e o marriage a!d thus rises- i!here!tly i!dissoluble- to a pla!e above the 8o!ti!ge!8y o
passio! a!d the tra!sie!8e o parti8ular 8apri8e7 @k1'"A
So 6hat do 6e surre!der i! marriageM
"(
9!soar as- i! marriage- pathologi8al attra8tio! a!d lust
are sublated i!to a symboli8 li!k a!d thus subordi!ated to spirit- the 8o!seNue!8e is a ki!d o de*
sublimation o the part!er+ the impli8it presuppositio! @or- rather- i!ju!8tio!A o the sta!dard ideology
o marriage is that- pre8isely- there should be !o love i! it7 The true Cas8alia! ormula o marriage is
thereore !ot J5ou do!It love your part!erM The! marry him or her- embra8e the rituals o a shared lie-
a!d love 6ill emerge by itselRK but- o! the 8o!trary+ JAre you too mu8h i! love 6ith somebodyM The!
get married- ritualiUe your relatio!ship i! order to 8ure yoursel o the e?8essive passio!ate atta8hme!t-
to repla8e it 6ith bori!g daily 8ustomsEa!d i you 8a!!ot resist passio!Is temptatio!- there are al6ays
e?tra:marital aairs OK ,arriage is thus a mea!s o re:!ormaliUatio! 6hi8h 8ures us o the viole!8e o
alli!g i! loveEi! 3asNue- the term or alli!g i! love is maitemindu 6hi8h- literally tra!slated- mea!s
Jto be i!jured by love7K 9! other 6ords- 6hat is sa8rii8ed i! marriage is the obje8tEthe lesso! o
marriage is that o ,oUartIs ,osI fan tutte+ the repla8eable obje8t7
/hat makes ,osI the most perple?i!g- traumati8 eve!- amo!g ,oUartIs operas is the very
ridi8ulous!ess o its 8o!te!t+ it is almost impossible to Jsuspe!d our disbelieK a!d a88ept the premise
that the t6o 6ome! do !ot re8og!iUe their o6! lovers i! the Alba!ia! oi8ers7 4o 6o!der- the!- that
throughout the !i!etee!th 8e!tury the opera 6as perormed i! a! ame!ded versio! i! order to re!der
the story 8redible7 There 6ere three mai! types o ame!dme!t- 6hi8h it pere8tly the mai! modes o
the Freudia! !egatio! o a 8ertai! traumati8 8o!te!t+ @1A the stagi!g implied that the t6o 6ome! k!e6
all alo!g the true ide!tity o the JAlba!ia! oi8ersKEthey just prete!ded !ot to k!o6 i! order to tea8h
their lovers a lesso!T @2A the 8ouples reu!ited at the e!d are !ot the same 8ouples as at the begi!!i!gT
they 8ha!ge pla8es diago!ally- so that- through the 8o!usio! o ide!tities- the true- !atural love li!ks
are establishedT @"A most radi8ally- o!ly the musi8 6as used- 6ith a 6holly !e6 libretto telli!g a totally
diere!t story7
0d6ard Said dre6 atte!tio! to ,oUartIs letters to his 6ie Do!sta!Ue rom September "0- 1$%0-
that is- at the time he 6as 8omposi!g ,osIT ater e?pressi!g his pleasure at the prospe8t o meeti!g her
agai! soo!- he goes o!+ J9 the people 6ere to be able to see i!to my heart- 9 6ould have to be almost
ashamed o mysel OK At this poi!t- as Said per8eptively !otes- o!e 6ould have e?pe8ted the
8o!essio! o some dirty private se8ret @se?ual a!tasies about 6hat he 6ill do to his 6ie 6he! they
6ill i!ally meet- et87AT ho6ever- the letter goes o!+ Jeverythi!g is 8old to meE8old like i8e7K
"#
9t is
here that ,oUart e!ters the u!8a!!y domai! o J*a!t ave8 Sade-K the domai! i! 6hi8h se?uality loses
its passio!ate- i!te!se 8hara8ter a!d tur!s i!to its opposite- a Jme8ha!i8alK e?er8ise i! pleasure
e?e8uted 6ith a 8old dista!8e- like the *a!tia! ethi8al subje8t doi!g his duty 6ithout a!y pathologi8al
8ommitme!t7 9s !ot this the u!derlyi!g visio! o ,osI+ a u!iverse i! 6hi8h subje8ts are determi!ed !ot
by their passio!ate e!gageme!ts- but by a bli!d me8ha!ism that regulates their passio!sM /hat
8ompels us to bri!g ,osI 8lose to the domai! o J*a!t ave8 SadeK is its very i!siste!8e o! the u!iversal
dime!sio! already i!di8ated by its title+ Jthey are all a8ti!g like this-K all determi!ed by the same bli!d
me8ha!ism7 9! short- Alo!so- the philosopher 6ho orga!iUes a!d ma!ipulates the game o 8ha!ged
ide!tities i! ,osI- is a versio! o the igure o the Sadea! pedagogue edu8ati!g his you!g dis8iples i!
the art o debau8hery7 9t is thus oversimpliied a!d i!adeNuate to 8o!8eive this 8old!ess as that o
Ji!strume!tal reaso!7K
The traumati8 8ore o ,osI lies i! its radi8al Jme8ha!i8al materialism-K i! the Cas8alia! se!se
alluded to above+ Cas8al advised !o!:believers to JA8t as i you believe- k!eel do6!- ollo6 the ritual-
a!d belie 6ill 8ome by itselRK ,osI applies the same logi8 to love+ ar rom bei!g e?ter!al e?pressio!s
o a! i!!er eeli!g- love rituals a!d gestures are 6hat ge!erate love itselEso a8t as i you are i! love-
ollo6 the pro8edures- a!d love 6ill emerge by itsel7 ,oralists 6ho 8o!dem! ,osI or its alleged
rivolity thus totally miss the poi!t+ ,osI is a! Jethi8alK opera i! the stri8t *ierkegaardia! se!se o the
Jethi8al stage7K The ethi8al stage is dei!ed by the sa8rii8e o the immediate 8o!sumptio! o lie- o
our yieldi!g to the leeti!g mome!t- i! the !ame o some higher u!iversal !orm7 9 ,oUartIs Don
(iovanni embodies the aestheti8 @as 6as developed by *ierkegaard himsel i! his detailed a!alysis o
the opera i! Either9$rA- the lesso! o ,osI is ethi8alE6hyM The poi!t o ,osI is that the love that
u!ites the t6o 8ouples at the begi!!i!g o the opera is !o less Jartii8ial-K me8ha!i8ally brought about-
tha! the se8o!d alli!g i! love o the sisters 6ith the e?8ha!ged part!ers dressed up as Alba!ia!
oi8ers- 6hi8h happe!s as the result o Alo!soIs ma!ipulatio!sEi! both 8ases- 6e are deali!g 6ith a
me8ha!ism that the subje8ts ollo6 i! a bli!d- puppet:like 6ay7 Therei! 8o!sists the =egelia!
J!egatio! o the !egatio!K+ irst- 6e per8eive the Jartii8ialK love- the produ8t o ma!ipulatio!- as
opposed to the i!itial Jauthe!ti8K loveT the!- all o a sudde!- 6e be8ome a6are that there is a8tually !o
diere!8e bet6ee! the t6oEthe origi!al love is !o less Jartii8ialK tha! the se8o!d7 The 8o!8lusio!
bei!g that- si!8e the o!e love 8ou!ts just as mu8h as the other- the 8ouples 8a! retur! to their i!itial
marital arra!geme!t7
9! .a8a!ia! terms- marriage subtra8ts rom the obje8t @part!erA J6hat is i! him>her more tha!
him>hersel-K the ob1et a- the obje8t:8ause o desire- it redu8es the part!er to a! ordi!ary obje8t7 The
lesso! o marriage 6hi8h ollo6s Foma!ti8 love is+ you are passio!ately i! love 6ith that perso!M So
marry her a!d you 6ill see 6hat he or she is i! everyday lie- 6ith his or her vulgar ti8s- petty
mea!!ess- dirty u!der6ear- s!ori!g- a!d so orth7 H!e should be 8lear here+ it is marriage 6hose
u!8tio! it is to vulgariUe se?- to take all true passio! out o it a!d tur! it i!to a bori!g duty7 A!d 6e
should eve! 8orre8t =egel o! this poi!t+ se? is i! itsel !ot !atural- it is the function of marriage to
reduce it to a subordinated pathological9natural moment7 =egel should also be 8orre8ted i!soar as he
8o!uses idealiUatio! a!d sublimatio!+ 6hat i marriage is the key test o true love i! 6hi8h sublimatio!
survives idealiUatio!M 9! bli!d passio!- the part!er is !ot sublimated- he or she is rather simply
idealiUedT married lie dei!itely de:idealiUes the part!er- but does !ot !e8essarily de:sublimate him or
her7
The old sayi!g Jlove is bli!d- but lovers are !otK should be read i! a pre8ise 6ay- as poi!ti!g
to6ards the stru8ture o disavo6al+ J9 k!o6 very 6ell @that my beloved is ull o la6sA- but
!o!etheless @9 ully love him>herA7K The poi!t is thus !ot that 6e are more 8y!i8al realists tha! it may
appear- but that- 6he! i! love- this realism be8omes i!operative+ i! our a8ts- 6e ollo6 our bli!d love7
9! a! old Dhristia! melodrama- a temporarily bli!ded e?:soldier alls i! love 6ith the !urse 6ho takes
8are o him- as8i!ated by her good!ess- ormi!g i! his mi!d a! idealiUed image o herT 6he! his
bli!d!ess is 8ured- he sees that- i! her bodily reality- she is ugly7 A6are that his love 6ould !ot survive
e?te!ded 8o!ta8t 6ith this reality- a!d that the i!!er beauty o her good soul has a higher value tha! her
e?ter!al appeara!8e- he i!te!tio!ally bli!ds himsel by looki!g i!to the su! or too lo!g- so that his
love or the 6oma! 6ill survive7 9 there ever 6as a alse 8elebratio! o love- this is it7 9! true love-
there is !o !eed or a! idealiUatio! o its obje8t- !o !eed to ig!ore the obje8tIs dis8orda!t eatures+ the
e?:soldier 6ould be able to see the beauty shi!i!g through the !urseIs Jugli!essK itsel7
9t is easy to see the parallel bet6ee! the rabble a!d se? here+ =egel does !ot re8og!iUe i! the
rabble @rather tha! the state bureau8ra8yA the Ju!iversal 8lassKT like6ise- he does !ot re8og!iUe i!
se?ual passio! the e?8ess 6hi8h is !either 8ulture !or !ature7 Although the logi8 is diere!t i! ea8h
8ase @apropos the rabble- =egel overlooks the u!iversal dime!sio! o the e?8essive>dis8orda!t eleme!tT
apropos se?- he overlooks the e?8ess as su8h- the u!dermi!i!g o the oppositio! !ature>8ultureA- the
t6o ailures are li!ked- si!8e e?8ess is the site o u!iversality- the 6ay u!iversality as su8h i!s8ribes
itsel i!to the order o its parti8ular 8o!te!t7
The u!derlyi!g problem is the ollo6i!g+ the sta!dard J=egelia!K s8heme o death @!egativityA
as the subordi!ate or mediati!g mome!t o .ie 8a! o!ly be sustai!ed i 6e remai! 6ithi! the 8ategory
o .ie 6hose diale8ti8 is that o the sel:mediati!g Substa!8e retur!i!g to itsel rom its other!ess7 The
mome!t 6e ee8tively pass rom Substa!8e to Subje8t- rom .ie@:pri!8ipleA to Geath@:pri!8ipleA-
there is !o e!8ompassi!g Jsy!thesis-K death i! its Jabstra8t !egativityK orever remai!s as a threat- a!
e?8ess 6hi8h 8a!!ot be e8o!omiUed7 9! so8ial lie- this mea!s that *a!tIs u!iversal pea8e is a vai!
hope- that war orever remai!s a threat to orga!iUed state .ie- a!d- i! i!dividual subje8tive lie- that
madness al6ays lurks as a possibility7
Goes this mea! that 6e are ba8k at the sta!dard topos o the e?8ess o !egativity 6hi8h 8a!!ot
be JsublatedK i! a!y re8o!8ili!g Jsy!thesis-K or eve! at the !aSve 0!gelsia! vie6 o the alleged
8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the ope!!ess o =egelIs JmethodK a!d the e!or8ed 8losure o his JsystemKM
There are i!di8atio!s 6hi8h poi!t i! this dire8tio!+ as has bee! !oted by ma!y 8omme!tators- =egelIs
J8o!servativeK politi8al 6riti!gs o his last years @su8h as his 8ritiNue o the 0!glish Feorm 3illA
betray a ear o a!y urther developme!t 6hi8h 6ill assert the Jabstra8tK reedom o 8ivil so8iety at the
e?pe!se o the StateIs orga!i8 u!ity a!d thereby ope! the 6ay to more revolutio!ary viole!8e7
"'
/hy
did =egel step ba8k here- 6hy did he !ot dare to ollo6 his basi8 diale8ti8al rule- 8ourageously
embra8i!g Jabstra8tK !egativity as the sole path to a higher stage o reedomM
=egel may appear to 8elebrate the prosaic 8hara8ter o lie i! a 6ell:orga!iUed moder! state-
6here heroi8 disturba!8es are over8ome i! the tra!Nuility o private rights a!d the se8urity o the
satisa8tio! o !eeds+ private property is guara!teed- se?uality is restri8ted to marriage- the uture is
sae7 9! this orga!i8 order- u!iversality a!d parti8ular i!terests appear re8o!8iled+ the Ji!i!ite rightK o
subje8tive si!gularity is give! its due- i!dividuals !o lo!ger e?perie!8e the obje8tive state order as a
oreig! po6er i!trudi!g o! their rights- they re8og!iUe i! it the substa!8e a!d rame o their very
reedom7 .ebru! here poses the ateul Nuestio!+ JDa! the se!time!t o the )!iversal be disso8iated
rom this appeaseme!tMK
"$
Agai!st .ebru!- our a!s6er should be+ yes- a!d this is 6hy 6ar is
!e8essaryEi! 6ar- u!iversality reasserts its right over a!d agai!st the 8o!8rete:orga!i8 appeaseme!t i!
prosai8 so8ial lie7 9s !ot the !e8essity o 6ar thus the ultimate proo that- or =egel- every so8ial
re8o!8iliatio! is doomed to ail- that !o orga!i8 so8ial order 8a! ee8tively 8o!tai! the or8e o
abstra8t:u!iversal !egativityM This is 6hy so8ial lie is 8o!dem!ed to the Jspurious i!i!ityK o a!
eter!al os8illatio! bet6ee! stable 8ivi8 lie a!d 6artime perturbatio!Ethe !otio! o Jtarryi!g 6ith the
!egativeK a8Nuires here a more radi8al mea!i!g+ !ot just to Jpass throughK the !egative but to persist i!
it7
This !e8essity o 6ar should be li!ked to its opposite+ the !e8essity o a rebellio! 6hi8h shakes
the po6er edii8e rom its 8ompla8e!8y- maki!g it a6are o both its depe!de!8e o! popular support
a!d o its a priori te!de!8y to Jalie!ateK itsel rom its roots7 Hr- as 2eerso! amously 6rote- Ja little
rebellio! !o6 a!d the! is a good thi!gK+ J9t is a medi8i!e !e8essary or the sou!d health o
gover!me!t7 1od orbid that 6e should ever be t6e!ty years 6ithout su8h a rebellio!7 The tree o
liberty must be rereshed rom time to time 6ith the blood o patriots a!d tyra!ts7 9t is its !atural
ma!ure7K
"&
9! both 8ases- 6ar a!d rebellio!- a Jterroristi8K pote!tial is u!leashed+ i! the irst- it is the
state that u!leashes absolute !egativity to shatter i!dividual subje8ts out o their parti8ular
8ompla8e!8yT i! the se8o!d- it is the people themselves 6ho remi!d the state po6er o the terroristi8
dime!sio! o demo8ra8y by shatteri!g all parti8ular state stru8tures7 The beauty o the 2a8obi!s is that-
i! their terror- they brought these t6o opposed dime!sio!s together+ the Terror 6as simulta!eously the
terror o the state agai!st i!dividuals a!d the terror o the people agai!st parti8ular state i!stitutio!s or
u!8tio!aries 6ho e?8essively ide!tiied 6ith their i!stitutio!al positio!s @the obje8tio! to Ga!to! 6as
simply that he 6a!ted to rise above othersA7 4eedless to say- i! a properly =egelia! 6ay- the t6o
opposed dime!sio!s are to be ide!tiiedT that is- the !egativity o state po6er agai!st i!dividuals soo!er
or later i!e?orably tur!s agai!st @the i!dividuals 6ho e?er8iseA the state po6er itsel7
Apropos 6ar- =egel is thus agai! !ot ully 8o!siste!t 6ith regard to his o6! theoreti8al
premises+ to be 8o!siste!t- he 6ould have had to a88omplish the 2eerso!ia! move- the obvious
diale8ti8al passage rom e?ter!al 6ar @bet6ee! statesA to Ji!ter!alK 6ar @revolutio!- rebellio! agai!st
state po6erA as a sporadi8 e?plosio! o !egativity 6hi8h rejuve!ates the edii8e o po6er7 This is 6hy-
i! readi!g the i!amous Caragraphs "22X"2( o =egelIs )hilosophy of 7ight- 6here =egel justiies the
ethi8al !e8essity o 6ar- o!e should be very 8areul to !ote the li!k bet6ee! his argume!tatio! here a!d
his basi8 propositio!s o! the sel:relati!g !egativity that 8o!stitutes the very 8ore o a ree auto!omous
i!dividual7 =ere =egel simply applies this basi8 sel:relati!g !egativity 8o!stitutive o ree subje8tivity
to relatio!s bet6ee! states+

k"22 9!dividuality is a6are!ess o o!eIs e?iste!8e as a u!it i! sharp disti!8tio! rom others7 9t
ma!iests itsel here i! the state as a relatio! to other states- ea8h o 6hi8h is auto!omous vis:g:vis the
others7 This auto!omy embodies mi!dIs a8tual a6are!ess o itsel as a u!it a!d he!8e it is the most
u!dame!tal reedom 6hi8h a people possesses as 6ell as its highest dig!ity7k"2" This !egative
relatio! o the state to itsel is embodied i! the 6orld as the relatio! o o!e state to a!other a!d as i the
!egative 6ere somethi!g e?ter!al7 9! the 6orld o e?iste!8e- thereore- this !egative relatio! has the
shape o a happe!i!g a!d a! e!ta!gleme!t 6ith 8ha!8e eve!ts 8omi!g rom 6ithout7 3ut i! a8t this
!egative relatio! is that mome!t i! the state 6hi8h is most supremely its o6!- the stateIs a8tual i!i!ity
as the ideality o everythi!g i!ite 6ithi! it7 9t is the mome!t 6herei! the substa!8e o the stateEi7e7 its
absolute po6er agai!st everythi!g i!dividual a!d parti8ular- agai!st lie- property- a!d their rights- eve!
agai!st so8ieties a!d asso8iatio!sEmakes the !ullity o these i!ite thi!gs a! a88omplished a8t a!d
bri!gs it home to 8o!s8ious!ess OA! e!tirely distorted a88ou!t o the dema!d or this sa8rii8e results
rom regardi!g the state as a mere 8ivil so8iety a!d rom regardi!g its i!al e!d as o!ly the se8urity o
i!dividual lie a!d property7 This se8urity 8a!!ot possibly be obtai!ed by the sa8rii8e o 6hat is to be
se8uredEo! the 8o!trary O/ar is !ot to be regarded as a! absolute evil a!d as a purely e?ter!al
a88ide!t- 6hi8h itsel thereore has some a88ide!tal 8ause- be it i!justi8es- the passio!s o !atio!s or the
holders o po6er- i87- or i! short- somethi!g or other 6hi8h ought !ot to be7 9t is to 6hat is by !ature
a88ide!tal that a88ide!ts happe!- a!d the ate 6hereby they happe! is thus a !e8essity7 =ere as
else6here- the poi!t o vie6 rom 6hi8h thi!gs seem pure a88ide!ts va!ishes i 6e look at them i! the
light o the 8o!8ept a!d philosophy- be8ause philosophy k!o6s a88ide!t or a sho6 a!d sees i! it its
esse!8e- !e8essity7 9t is !e8essary that the i!iteEproperty a!d lieEshould be dei!itely established as
a88ide!tal- be8ause a88ide!tality is the 8o!8ept o the i!ite7 From o!e poi!t o vie6 this !e8essity
appears i! the orm o the po6er o !ature- a!d everythi!g is mortal a!d tra!sie!t7 3ut i! the ethi8al
substa!8e- the state- !ature is robbed o this po6er- a!d the !e8essity is e?alted to be the 6ork o
reedom- to be somethi!g ethi8al7 The tra!sie!8e o the i!ite be8omes a 6illed passi!g a6ay- a!d the
!egativity lyi!g at the roots o the i!ite be8omes the substa!tive i!dividuality proper to the ethi8al
substa!8e O9! pea8e 8ivil lie 8o!ti!ually e?pa!dsT all its departme!ts 6all themselves i!- a!d i! the
lo!g ru! me! stag!ate7 Their idiosy!8rasies be8ome 8o!ti!ually more i?ed a!d ossiied7 3ut or health
the u!ity o the body is reNuired- a!d i its parts harde! themselves i!to e?8lusive!ess- that is death7
Cerpetual pea8e is ote! advo8ated as a! ideal to6ards 6hi8h huma!ity should strive7 /ith that e!d i!
vie6- *a!t proposed a league o mo!ar8hs to adjust diere!8es bet6ee! states- a!d the =oly Allia!8e
6as mea!t to be a league o mu8h the same ki!d7 3ut the state is a! i!dividual- a!d i!dividuality
esse!tially implies !egatio!7 =e!8e eve! i a !umber o states make themselves i!to a amily- this
group as a! i!dividual must e!ge!der a! opposite a!d 8reate a! e!emy7 As a result o 6ar- !atio!s are
stre!gthe!ed- but peoples i!volved i! 8ivil strie also a8Nuire pea8e at home through maki!g 6ars
abroad7 To be sure- 6ar produ8es i!se8urity o property- but this i!se8urity o thi!gs is !othi!g but their
tra!sie!8eE6hi8h is i!evitable7 /e hear ple!ty o sermo!s rom the pulpit about the i!se8urity- va!ity-
a!d i!stability o temporal thi!gs- but everyo!e thi!ks- ho6ever mu8h he is moved by 6hat he hears-
that he at least 6ill be able to retai! his o6!7 3ut i this i!se8urity !o6 8omes o! the s8e!e i! the orm
o hussars 6ith shi!i!g sabres a!d they a8tualiUe i! real ear!est 6hat the prea8hers have said- the! the
movi!g a!d ediyi!g dis8ourses 6hi8h oretold all these eve!ts tur! i!to 8urses agai!st the i!vader7
The u!8tio! o 6hat =egel 8o!8eptualiUes as the !e8essity o 6ar is pre8isely the repeated
u!tyi!g o orga!i8 so8ial li!ks7 /he!- i! his (roup )sychology- Freud outli!ed the J!egativityK o
u!tyi!g so8ial ties @-hanatos as opposed to Eros- the or8e o the so8ial li!kA- he @6ith his liberal
limitatio!sA all too easily dismissed the ma!iestatio!s o this u!tyi!g as the a!ati8ism o the
Jspo!ta!eousK 8ro6d @as opposed to artii8ial 8ro6ds+ the Dhur8h a!d ArmyA7 Agai!st Freud- 6e
should retai! the ambiguity o this moveme!t o u!tyi!g+ it is a Uero level that ope!s up the spa8e or
politi8al i!terve!tio!7 9! other 6ords- this u!tyi!g is the pre:politi8al 8o!ditio! o politi8s- a!d- 6ith
regard to it- every politi8al i!terve!tio! proper already goes Jo!e step too ar-K 8ommitti!g itsel to a
!e6 proje8t @or ,aster:Sig!iierA7
"%
Today- this appare!tly abstra8t topi8 is releva!t o!8e agai!+ the
Ju!tyi!gK e!ergy is largely mo!opoliUed by the 4e6 Fight @the Tea Carty moveme!t i! the )S- 6here
the Fepubli8a! Carty is i!8reasi!gly split bet6ee! Hrder a!d its )!tyi!gA7 =o6ever- here also- every
as8ism is a sig! o ailed revolutio!- a!d the o!ly 6ay to 8ombat this rightist u!tyi!g 6ill be or the
.et to e!gage i! its o6! u!tyi!gEa!d there are already sig!s o it @the large demo!stratio!s all arou!d
0urope i! 2010- rom 1ree8e to Fra!8e a!d the )*- 6here the stude!t demo!stratio!s agai!st
u!iversity ees u!e?pe8tedly tur!ed viole!tA7 9! asserti!g the threat o Jabstra8t !egativityK to the
e?isti!g order as a perma!e!t eature 6hi8h 8a! !ever be aufgehoben- =egel is here more materialist
tha! ,ar?+ i! his theory o 6ar @a!d o mad!essA- he is a6are o the repetitive retur! o the Jabstra8t
!egativityK 6hi8h viole!tly u!bi!ds so8ial li!ks7 ,ar? re:bi!ds viole!8e i!to the pro8ess out o 6hi8h a
4e6 Hrder arises @viole!8e as the Jmid6ieK o a !e6 so8ietyA- 6hile i! =egel- the u!bi!di!g remai!s
!o!:sublated7
H!e 8a!!ot emphasiUe e!ough ho6 these Jmilitaristi8K rumi!atio!s are dire8tly grou!ded i!
=egelIs u!dame!tal o!tologi8al i!sights a!d matri8es7 /he! =egel 6rites that the stateIs !egative
relatio! to itsel @its sel:assertio! as a! auto!omous age!t 6hose reedom is demo!strated through its
readi!ess to dista!8e itsel rom all its parti8ular 8o!te!tA Jis embodied i! the 6orld as the relatio! o
o!e state to a!other a!d as i the !egative 6ere somethi!g e?ter!al-K he evokes a pre8ise diale8ti8al
igure o the u!ity o 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d !e8essity+ the 8oi!8ide!8e o e?ter!al @8o!ti!ge!tA oppositio!
a!d imma!e!t @!e8essaryA sel:!egativityEo!eIs o6! i!!ermost esse!8e- the !egative relatio!:to:
o!esel- has to appear as a 8o!ti!ge!t e?ter!al obsta8le or i!trusio!7 This is 6hy- or =egel- the JtruthK
o the e?ter!al 8o!ti!ge!t oppositio! is the !e8essity o !egative sel:relati!g7 A!d this dire8t
8oi!8ide!8e o the opposites- this dire8t overlappi!g @or short:8ir8uitA bet6ee! e?treme i!ter!ality @the
i!!ermost auto!omy o the SelA a!d the e?treme e?ter!ality o a! a88ide!tal e!8ou!ter- 8a!!ot be
Jover8ome-K the t6o poles 8a!!ot be JmediatedK i!to a stable 8omple? u!ity7 This is 6hy =egel
surprisi!gly evokes the Jsolem! 8y8les o history-K maki!g it 8lear that there is !o i!al +ufhebung
here+ the e!tire 8omple? edii8e o the parti8ular orms o so8ial lie has to be put at risk agai! a!d
agai!Ea remi!der that the so8ial edii8e is a ragile virtual e!tity 6hi8h 8a! disi!tegrate at a!y
mome!t- !ot be8ause o 8o!ti!ge!t e?ter!al threats- but be8ause o its i!!ermost esse!8e7 This
rege!erati!g passage through radi8al !egativity 8a! !ever be JsublatedK i! a stable so8ial edii8eEa
proo- i o!e is !eeded- o =egelIs ultimate materialism7 That is to say- the persiste!t threat that radi8al
sel:relati!g !egativity 6ill threate! a!d ultimately dissolve a!y orga!i8 so8ial stru8ture poi!ts to6ards
the finite status o all su8h stru8tures+ their status is virtual:ideal- la8ki!g a!y ultimate o!tologi8al
guara!tee- al6ays e?posed to the da!ger o disi!tegratio! 6he!- triggered by a! a88ide!tal e?ter!al
i!trusio!- their grou!di!g !egativity e?plodes7 The ide!tity o opposites here does !ot mea! that- i! a!
idealist 6ay- the i!!er spirit Jge!eratesK e?ter!al obsta8les 6hi8h appear as a88ide!tal+ e?ter!al
a88ide!ts 6hi8h 8ause 6ars are ge!ui!ely a88ide!tal- the poi!t is that- as su8h- they Je8hoK the
i!!ermost !egativity that is the 8ore o subje8tivity7
CHAPTER +

The .imits o =egel

A LIST

.et us jump in medias res a!d 8o!ro!t the Nuestio! head:o!+ 8a! =egel thi!k the !otio! 6hi8h-
a88ordi!g to .a8a!- 8o!de!ses all the parado?es o the Freudia! ield- the !otio! o the non*+llM 9 6e
take J=egelK as the ridi8ulous te?tbook:igure o a! absolute idealist 6ho- u!der the headli!e Jthe
/hole is the True-K 8laims to i!tegrate the e!tire 6ealth o the u!iverse i!to the totality o ratio!al sel:
mediatio!- the! the a!s6er is- o 8ourse- a resou!di!g !o7 9- ho6ever- 6e take i!to a88ou!t the true
!ature o the =egelia! totalityEthat it desig!ates a /hole plus all its Jsymptoms-K the e?8esses 6hi8h
do !ot it i!to its rame- a!tago!isms 6hi8h rui! its 8o!siste!8y- a!d so o!Ethe! the a!s6er be8omes
more blurred7 =ere is a! improvised list o 6hat =egel J8a!!ot thi!k-K a series o 8o!8epts mostly
elaborated by psy8hoa!alysis a!d ,ar?ism+ repetitio!T the u!8o!s8iousT overdetermi!atio!T ob1et aT
matheme>letter @s8ie!8e a!d mathemati8sAT lalangueT a!tago!ism @paralla?AT 8lass struggleT se?ual
diere!8e7
1
)po! a 8loser look- ho6ever- it be8omes 8lear that o!e should be very pre8ise about 6hat
=egel J8a!!ot doK+ it is !ever a Nuestio! o simple impossibility or i!ability7 There is- i! all these
8ases- a ti!y- imper8eptible li!e o separatio! 6hi8h 8ompels us to suppleme!t the assertio! o
impossibility 6ith a Nualiyi!g Jyes- but OK+
=egel does thi!k repetitio!- but !ot a pure !o!:produ8tive o!e- !ot a Jme8ha!i8alK repetitio!
6hi8h just strives or more o the same+ his !otio! o repetitio! al6ays i!volves sublatio!T i! other
6ords- through repetitio!- somethi!g is idealiUed- tra!sormed rom a! immediate 8o!ti!ge!t reality to
a !otio!al u!iversality @Daesar dies as a perso! a!d be8omes a u!iversal titleAT or- at least- through
repetitio!- the !e8essity o a! eve!t is 8o!irmed @4apoleo! had to lose t6i8e to get the message that
his time 6as over- that his irst deeat 6as !ot just a! a88ide!tA7 The a8t that =egel misses the e?8ess
o purely me8ha!i8al repetitio! i! !o 6ay implies that he is e?8essively o8used o! the 4e6 @the
progress 6hi8h takes pla8e through idealiUi!g +ufhebungAEo! the 8o!trary- beari!g i! mi!d that the
radi8ally 4e6 emerges o!ly through pure repetitio!- 6e should say that =egelIs i!ability to thi!k pure
repetitio! is the obverse o his i!ability to thi!k the radi8ally 4e6- that is- a 4e6- 6hi8h is !ot
pote!tially already i! the Hld a!d has just to be brought out i!to the ope! through the 6ork o
diale8ti8al deployme!t7
=egel does also thi!k the u!8o!s8ious- but it is the ormal u!8o!s8ious- the tra!s8e!de!tal
u!iversal orm o 6hat 9 am doi!g as opposed to the immediate parti8ular 8o!te!t 6hi8h is the o8us o
my atte!tio!Eto take the most eleme!tary e?ample rom the begi!!i!g o the )henomenology+ 6he! 9
say J4o6RK 9 mea! this parti8ular mome!t- but 6hat 9 say is every !o6- a!d the truth is i! 6hat 9 say7
The Freudia! u!8o!s8ious is- o! the 8o!trary- the u!8o!s8ious o parti8ular 8o!ti!ge!t asso8iatio!s a!d
li!ksEto take a 8lassi8 Freudia! e?ample- 6he! his patie!t dreams about a u!eral she atte!ded the
previous day- the Ju!8o!s8iousK o this dream 6as the totally 8o!ti!ge!t a8t that- at the u!eral- the
dreamer had met a! old lame or 6hom she still 8ared7
.i!ked to this is the impossibility- or =egel- o thi!ki!g overdetermi!atio!+ =egel 8a! thi!k it-
but o!ly i! the ormal se!se o a u!iversal ge!us 6hi8h i!8ludes itsel as its o6! spe8ies a!d thus
e!8ou!ters- amo!g its spe8ies- itsel i! its Joppositio!al determi!atio!7K /hat he 8a!!ot thi!k is the
8omple? !et6ork o parti8ular li!ks orga!iUed alo!g the li!es o 8o!de!satio!- displa8eme!t- a!d so
o!7 9! more ge!eral terms- the =egelia! pro8ess al6ays deals 6ith radi8al 8lear 8ut @reAsolutio!sT 6hat
is totally oreig! to it is the Freudia! logi8 o pragmati8 a!d opportu!isti8 8ompromisesEsomethi!g is
reje8ted- but !ot Nuite- si!8e it retur!s i! a 8iphered modeT it is ratio!ally a88epted- but isolated or
!eutraliUed i! its ull symboli8 6eight a!d so o! a!d so orth7 /e thus get a mad da!8e o distortio!s
6hi8h ollo6 !o 8lear u!ivo8al logi8- but orm a pat8h6ork o improvised 8o!!e8tio!s7 Fe8all the
lege!dary 8ase o the orgetti!g o the !ame Sig!orelli rom FreudIs -he )sychopathology of Everyday
.ife+ Freud 8ould !ot re8all the !ame o the pai!ter o the Hrvieto res8os a!d produ8ed as substitutes
the !ames o t6o other pai!ters- 3otti8elli a!d 3oltraioT his a!alysis o the blo8kage bri!gs to light
the sig!iyi!g asso8iatio!s 6hi8h li!ked Sig!orelli to 3otti8elli a!d 3oltraio @the 9talia! village o
Traoi 6as 6here he re8eived the message i!ormi!g him o the sui8ide o o!e o his patie!ts- 6ho had
bee! struggli!g 6ith se?ual problemsT 0err- the 1erma! 6ord or ,isterESignorGis li!ked to a trip
to =erUegovi!a- 6here a! old ,uslim had told Freud that i o!e 8a! !o lo!ger have se?- the! there is
!o reaso! to go o! livi!gA7 The 8omple? rhiUomati8 te?ture o su8h asso8iatio!s a!d displa8eme!ts has
!o 8lear triadi8 stru8ture 6ith a 8lear i!al resolutio!T the result o the te!sio! bet6ee! JthesisK @the
!ame Sig!orelliA a!d Ja!ti:thesisK @its orgetti!gA is the 8ompromise:ormatio! o alsely rememberi!g
t6o other !ames i! 6hi8h @a!d this is their 8ru8ial eatureA the dime!sio! o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h Freud
6as u!able to remember Sig!orelli @the li!k bet6ee! se? a!d deathA retur!s i! a! eve! more
8o!spi8uous 6ay7 There is !o pla8e or su8h logi8 i! =egel- 6ho 6ould have dismissed FreudIs
e?ample as a game o trili!g 8o!ti!ge!8ies7 The Freudia! !egatio! o !egatio! is !ot a radi8al
resolutio! o a deadlo8k- but- i! its basi8 guise- the Jretur! o the repressedK a!d- as su8h- by dei!itio!
a 8ompromise:ormatio!+ somethi!g is asserted a!d simulta!eously de!ied- displa8ed- redu8ed-
e!8rypted i! a! ote! ridi8ulously ad ho8 6ay7
=egel does thi!k a ki!d o ob1et a- but it is merely the 8o!ti!ge!t si!gularity to 6hi8h the
ratio!al totality 8li!gsElike the state 8li!gs to the mo!ar8hEor the i!diere!t prete?t or a struggle7
For e?ample- o!e 6ay or the subje8t to demo!strate its auto!omy is or it to be ready to put
everythi!g- eve! its lie- at stake or some mi!or obje8t+ although this obje8t is i! itsel u!importa!t- its
very i!diere!8e sig!als that 6hat the struggle is about is the subje8tIs dig!ity a!d auto!omy- !ot its
i!terests7 This- ho6ever- is !ot yet the material remai!der to 6hi8h the subje8tIs very 8o!siste!8y
8li!gs+ =egel does propose the ormula Jthe Spirit is a bo!e-K but as the absolute 8o!tradi8tio!- !ot as a
little bit o the real 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity7
Although o!e i!ds i! =egelIs te?ts surprisi!g evo8atio!s o 1ouissance @(eniessen- !ot just
pleasure- .ustAEor e?ample- (eniessen o the believer is or him the true goal o religious
ritualsEthere is !o pla8e i! his thought or 1ouissance as the Feal- as a substa!8e @the o!ly substa!8e
re8og!iUed by psy8hoa!alysisA7 9!soar as 1ouissance is Feal a!d truth is symboli8- o!e should add that-
i! =egelIs !otio!al spa8e- there is also !o pla8e or the gap that separates truth rom the FealEor- as
.a8a! put it su88i!8tly+ JThe true or the realM At this level- everythi!g is set up as i these t6o terms are
sy!o!ymous7 3ut the u!pleasa!t thi!g is that they are !ot O /he! 6e are deali!g 6ith the real- the
true is i! diverge!8e7K
2
=ere @as else6hereA- a!d as is al6ays the 8ase i! a properly diale8ti8al misre8og!itio!- 6hat
=egel does !ot see is !ot simply some post:=egelia! dime!sio! totally beyo!d his grasp- but the very
%0egelian' dimension of the analy2ed phenomenon7 For e?ample- 6hat ,ar? demo!strates i! ,apital
is ho6 the sel:reprodu8tio! o 8apital obeys the logi8 o the =egelia! diale8ti8al pro8ess o a
substa!8e:subje8t 6hi8h retroa8tively posits its o6! presuppositio!s7 ,ar? desig!ates 8apital as Ja!
automati8ally a8tive 8hara8terKEa! i!adeNuate tra!slatio! o the 1erma! 6ords used by ,ar? to
8hara8teriUe 8apital as Jautomatischem Sub1e"t-K Jautomati8 subje8t-K a! o?ymoro! u!iti!g livi!g
subje8tivity a!d dead automatism7 This is 6hat 8apital is+ a subje8t- but a! automati8 o!e- !ot a livi!g
o!e7 Da! =egel thi!k this Jmo!strous mi?ture-K a pro8ess o subje8tive sel:mediatio! a!d retroa8tive
positi!g o presuppositio!s 6hi8h as it 6ere gets 8aught i! a substa!tial Jspurious i!i!ity-K a subje8t
6hi8h itsel be8omes a! alie!ated substa!8eM Cerhaps this same limitatio! also a88ou!ts or =egelIs
i!adeNuate u!dersta!di!g o mathemati8s- his redu8tio! o mathemati8s to the very model o the
abstra8t Jspurious i!i!ity7K /hat =egel 6as u!able to see is ho6- like the spe8ulative moveme!t o
8apital i! ,ar?- moder! mathemati8s also displays the same Jmo!strous mi?ture o the good i!i!ity
a!d the bad i!i!ityK+ the Jbad i!i!ityK o repetitio! 8ombi!ed 6ith the Jtrue i!i!ityK o sel:relati!g
parado?es7
4o moder! s8ie!8e 8a! be redu8ed to mathemati8al ormalism si!8e it al6ays i!8ludes also a
mi!imum o empiri8al testi!g a!d measuri!g 6hi8h i!trodu8e the aspe8t o 8o!ti!ge!8yE!o o!e
k!o6s i! adva!8e 6hat the measureme!ts 6ill sho67 This eleme!t is missi!g i! mathemati8s- 6here
the 8o!ti!ge!8y is limited to the sele8tio! or positi!g o the a?ioms 6ith 6hi8h the theoreti8ia! begi!s-
a!d all that ollo6s are the ratio!al 8o!seNue!8es o those a?ioms7 0ve! su8h a! Jabstra8tK s8ie!8e like
Nua!tum physi8s- i! 6hi8h de!se positive materiality is dissolved i!to the pure virtuality o Nua!tum
6aves- has to e?pose itsel to measureme!t7 ,oder! s8ie!8e rom 1alileo to Nua!tum physi8s is thus
8hara8teriUed by t6o 8o!!e8ted eatures+ mathematiUatio! @the stateme!ts to be prove! are
mathematiUed ormulaeA a!d a relia!8e o! measureme!t 6hi8h i!trodu8es a! irredu8ible eleme!t o
8o!ti!ge!8y7 3oth aspe8ts imply the mea!i!gless real o the sile!t- i!i!ite u!iverse+ the real o
mathematiUed ormulae deprived o se!se- the real o radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y7
"
9s there a pla8e or moder!
s8ie!8e i! =egelM 9s his thought !ot the last great attempt to JsublateK empiri8al:ormal s8ie!8e i!to
spe8ulative Feaso!M 9s !ot the e?plosive gro6th o the !atural s8ie!8es rom the eightee!th 8e!tury
o!6ards simply beyo!d o the s8ope o =egelIs thoughtM
The topi8 o !ature 8o!ro!ts us 6ith yet a!other problem raised by =egelIs 8riti8s+ does !ot
=egelIs dedu8tio! o !ature 8learly posit a limit to this retroa8tivityM 9s !ot the passage rom logi8 to
!ature a 8ase o e?ter!aliUatio!- o the 8o!8ept positi!g its other!essM Goes !ot =egel begi! 6ith logi8-
6ith ideal 8ategories- a!d the! try to Jdedu8eK material reality rom this shado6y realmM 9s this !ot a
model 8ase o idealist mystii8atio!M The problem 6ith this 8ou!ter:argume!t is that it k!o8ks at a!
ope! door+ =egel himsel e?pli8itly says that his Jsystem o logi8 is the realm o shado6s- the 6orld o
simple esse!tialities reed rom all se!suous 8o!8rete!ess7K
(
=egel is thus !o Clato!i8 idealist or 6hom 9deas 8o!stitute a higher o!tologi8al realm 6ith
regard to material reality+ they orm a pre:o!tologi8al realm o shado6s7 For =egel- spirit has !ature as
its presuppositio! a!d is simulta!eously the truth o !ature a!d- as su8h- the Jabsolute irstKT !ature thus
Jva!ishesK i! its truth- is JsublatedK i! the spiritIs sel:ide!tity+

This ide!tity is absolute !egativity- be8ause the !otio! has its complete e?ter!al obje8tivity i! !ature-
but this- its e?ter!aliUatio!- has bee! sublated- a!d it has be8ome ide!ti8al 6ith itsel7 At the same time
thereore- it is only as this retur! out o !ature that the 8o!8ept 8o!stitutes this ide!tity7
#
4ote the pre8ise triadi8 stru8ture o this passage- i! the most orthodo? J=egelia!K mode+
thesisEthe !otio! has its complete e?ter!al obje8tivity i! !atureT antithesis @JbutKAEthis e?ter!ality is
sublated a!d- through this sublatio!- the !otio! a8hieves its sel:ide!tityT synthesis @Jat the same time
thereoreKAEit is only as this retur! out o !ature that the 8o!8ept 8o!stitutes this ide!tity7 This is ho6
o!e should u!dersta!d ide!tity as absolute !egativity+ the spiritIs sel:ide!tity emerges through its
!egative relatio!ship @sublatio!A o its !atural presuppositio!s- a!d this !egativity is JabsoluteK !ot i!
the se!se that it !egates !ature Jabsolutely-K that !ature JabsolutelyK @totallyA disappears i! it- but i! the
se!se that the !egativity o sublatio! is sel:related- i! other 6ords that the out8ome o this 6ork o
!egativity is the spiritIs positive sel:ide!tity7 The key 6ords i! the Nuoted passage are+ complete a!d
only7 The !otio! Jhas its complete e?ter!al obje8tivity i! !atureK+ there is !o JotherK obje8tive reality-
all that Jreally e?istsK as reality is !ature- spirit is !ot a!other thi!g that adds itsel to !atural thi!gs7
This is 6hy Jit is only as this retur! out o !ature that the 8o!8ept 8o!stitutes [its\ ide!tityK+ there is !o
spirit pre:e?isti!g !ature 6hi8h someho6 Je?ter!aliUesK itsel i! !ature a!d the! re:appropriates this
Jalie!atedK !atural realityEthe thoroughly Jpro8essualK !ature o spirit @spirit is its o6! be8omi!g- the
result o its o6! a8tivityA mea!s that spirit is o!ly @i7e7- nothing butA its Jretur!i!g to itselK rom !ature7
9! other 6ords- Jretur!i!g toK is ully perormative- the moveme!t o the retur! 8reates 6hat it is
retur!i!g to7
The passage rom !ature to reedom 8a! be re!dered i! terms o a very pre8ise reversal o the
diale8ti8al relatio!ship bet6ee! !e8essity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y+ J!atureK sta!ds or the contingency of
necessity @i! !ature- eve!ts o88ur !e8essarily- ollo6i!g i!e?orable la6sT ho6ever- the very a8t o
these la6sE6hy su8h a ratio bet6ee! velo8ity a!d mass a!d !ot a diere!t o!eEis utterly 8o!ti!ge!t-
thi!gs are just like that- there is !o J6hyKA- 6hile JreedomK sta!ds or the necessity of contingency
@reedom is !ot just bli!d 8o!ti!ge!8y- a! a8t is !ot ree just be8ause it is 8o!ti!ge!t- just be8ause J9
8ould have de8ided other6iseKT i! true reedom- my abyssal>8o!ti!ge!t de8isio! grou!ds a !e6
!e8essity o its o6!- a8tualiUed i! the 8hai! o reaso!sE9 a8ted i! su8h a!d su8h a 6ay or that reaso!
OA7 To put it a!other 6ay+ i! !ature- !e8essity appears @realiUes itselA i! the orm o 8o!ti!ge!8y
@!e8essity is the u!derlyi!g la6 6hi8h regulates 6hat appears a 8haoti8 8o!ti!ge!t i!tera8tio!A- 6hile
i! reedom- 8o!ti!ge!8y appears @realiUes itselA i! the orm o !e8essity @my 8o!ti!ge!t de8isio! is a
de8isio! to grou!d a !e6 !e8essity- a !e8essity o a deo!tologi8alEethi8alEorderA7
4e8essity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y thus !ot o!ly diale8ti8ally suppleme!t ea8h other- but- i! a mu8h
more stri!ge!t 6ay- ree ea8h other i!to their o6! esse!8e through the mediatio! o reedom7 ,ere
bli!d !e8essity is best e!8apsulated i! the ormula J9t is so be8ause it is soKE!o urther Nuestio!s
asked7 0 ] m8
2
be8ause it is soEas i 6e are deali!g 6ith a 8o!ti!ge!t de8isio!- si!8e all 6e 8ould add
to this brute a8t is that Jit 8ould @alsoA be other6ise7K 3li!d !atural !e8essity is thus Jradi8ally passive
i! relatio! to itselK
'
+ it is- as it 6ere- oppressed by its o6! impositio!- 6ithout a!y spa8e to relate to
itselEa!d- o! behal o this impositio!- it 8oi!8ides 6ith its opposite- 6ith 8o!ti!ge!8y7 So ho6 8a!
!e8essity redeem itsel rom this 8o!tami!atio! by bli!d 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d posit itsel as true !e8essityM
=egelIs a!s6er is+ through the mediatio! o reedom+ J4e8essity does !ot be8ome freedom by
va!ishi!g- but o!ly be8ause its still inner ide!tity is manifested7K
$
9t is i! this se!se that reedom is
J8o!8eived !e8essityK+ !e8essity posited as su8h- 8o!8eived i! O 9! 6hatM In its necessity- pre8isely+ i!
its i!!er logi8 that makes it !e8essary a!d !ot just somethi!g that merely Jis so be8ause it is so7K
Freedom is thus the very Ji!ter:-K the gap that separates !e8essity rom itsel7 Do!versely- 8o!ti!ge!8y-
i! its immedia8y- as bli!d !atural 8o!ti!ge!8y- also 8oi!8ides 6ith its opposite- 6ith !e8essity+ that
somethi!g is 8o!ti!ge!t ultimately mea!s that it is just so a88ordi!g to bli!d !atural la6s7 The o!ly
6ay or 8o!ti!ge!8y to get rid o this stai! o !e8essity a!d posit itsel @ma!iest itselA as true
8o!ti!ge!8y is through the mediatio! o reedom+ it is o!ly here that 8o!ti!ge!8y is a matter o a
subje8tIs 8o!ti!ge!t de8isio!7
Do!ti!ge!8y is thus !ot e?ter!ally opposed to !e8essity- it is the result o !e8essityIs sel:
relati!g+ 6he! !e8essity loses its immediate:!atural 8hara8ter a!d rele8ts itsel as su8h- it a8Nuires
reedom 6hi8h- i! its immediate appeara!8e- is 8o!ti!ge!8y- the abyss o J9t is so be8ause 9 6a!t it so-
be8ause 9 de8ided it soRK This rele8tio!:i!to:itsel eNuals the i!s8riptio! o the e!u!8iatio! i!to the
e!u!8iated 8o!te!t+ as 6e sa6 earlier- 6he! the =egelia! mo!ar8h a!!ou!8es JSo be itR 9 6a!t it soRK
this is !ot o!ly the mome!t o the 8o!ti!ge!t suppleme!t 6hi8h 8o!8ludes the 8hai! o !e8essity- but
simulta!eously the mome!t o e!u!8iatio! 6ith regard to a series o stateme!ts+ through his a8t-
stateme!ts prepared by the state bureau8ra8y a8Nuire perormative po6er- be8ome a8tualiUed7 Dommo!
se!se tells us that every stateme!t has to be e!u!8iated i! order to a8tualiUe itsel- a!d that the mome!t
@a!d lo8atio!A o its e!u!8iatio! is 8o!ti!ge!tT 6hat philosophi8al rele8tio! adds is the i!sight i!to
ho6 this 8o!ti!ge!t mome!t is !ot simply e?ter!al but imma!e!t+ the 8o!ti!ge!t e?pressio! o a
!e8essary truth sig!als the 8o!ti!ge!8y o this !e8essary truth itsel7
/e should the! oppose the ,ar?ist li!e- rom the you!g .ukh8s to *oj`ve- 6hi8h reje8ted the
diale8ti8s o !ature as a mistake+ the philosophy o !ature is a 8ru8ial a!d imma!e!t part o the
=egelia! system7 9t is also by ar the most dis8redited part o =egelIs philosophy- the perma!e!t butt o
jokes- rom Nuoti!g =egelIs alleged 8laim that Ji theory does!It it the a8ts- so mu8h 6orse or the
a8tsK to the a!e8dote that he dedu8ed the !e8essity o eight pla!ets arou!d the su!- !ot k!o6i!g that
astro!omers had already dis8overed the !i!th @4eptu!eA7 @The iro!y here is that- a de8ade or so ago-
astro!omers re:8ategoriUed 4eptu!e as a satellite- !o lo!ger as a pla!etEso- i! a8t- =egel 6as right
OA The sta!dard reproa8h to =egel is that he tries to abolish the absolute heteroge!eity o the Hther- its
thoroughly 8o!ti!ge!t 8hara8ter7 3ut there is i! =egel a !ame or su8h irredu8ible 8o!ti!ge!t
Hther!ess+ nature7 9t is irredu8ible i! the se!se that- eve! i it is gradually more a!d more
J8o!8eptualiUed-K mediated- it remai!s there as the irredu8ibly 8o!ti!ge!t ba8kgrou!d or huma!
history7 4o big uss or =egel here+ the 8o!ti!ge!8y o !ature mea!s- amo!g other thi!gs- that there is
!o guara!tee that a mea!i!gless asteroid 6ill !ot hit the earth a!d kill us all7 4ature is 8o!ti!ge!t- there
is !o se8ret substa!tial ,i!d overseei!g thi!gs to make sure that !othi!g terrible 6ill happe!7
/he! =egel dei!es !ature- he says !ot o!ly that it is the Hther!ess of the 9dea- but that it is the
9dea itsel i! its Hther!essEho6ever- 6hat this JidealistK tur! mea!s is that Hther!ess should be
displa8ed i!to !ature itsel+ !ature is !ot o!ly the Hther o the 9dea- but Hther 6ith regard to itsel7 @So-
i!soar as the 9dea retur!s to itsel i! spirit- o!e should raise the Nuestio!+ is spirit the! also i! some
mode JHther 6ith regard to itselKM 5esEpre8isely as 6hat 6e usually 8all Jse8o!d !ature-K spirit
petriied i! spiritual substa!8e7A This is 6hy !ature at its Uero level is spa8e+ !ot o!ly the Hther!ess o
the 9dea @the 9dea i! its Hther!essA- but Hther!ess 6ith regard to itselEa 8oe?iste!8e o poi!ts
@e?te!sively side:by:sideA- 6ith !o 8o!te!t to it- !o diere!8e- the same throughout i! its pure
e?te!sive i!:diere!8e7 Far rom bei!g the JmysteryK o somethi!g 8o!tai!i!g obje8ts- spa8e is
literally the most stupid thi!g there is7 A!d it does !ot get JsublatedK i! the se!se that it is !o lo!ger
there+ !atural obje8ts 6hi8h JsublateK spa8e remai! spatial obje8tsR /here spatiality is !egated is i!
8hemism- mag!etism- a!d the! orga!ism- 6here obje8ts are !o lo!ger dead 8omposites o eleme!ts:
parts- 6here 6e get a! Jeter!alK ideal u!ity 6hi8h 8a!!ot be lo8ated at a 8ertai! poi!t i! spa8e+ there is
!o J8e!terK o a! orga!ism at some poi!t i! spa8e7 =ere- perhaps- =egel poi!ts to6ards relativity @it
has bee! !oted that his 8ritiNue o 4e6to!ia! spa8e oreshado6s the 0i!stei!ia! 8ritiNueA+ i the Uero
level o !ature is spa8e- the! !atural obje8ts should develop out o spa8e- !ot be 8o!8eived as
mysterious 8hu!ks o matter that rom 6ho:k!o6s:6here Je!terK spa8e7 The o!ly thi!g that 8a! happe!
to pure spa8e is asymmetry- its be8omi!g de:homoge!iUed- J8urvedKEso the idea that JmatterK is the
ee8t o 8urved spa8e is implied by =egelIs theory o spa8e7
0ve! su8h a per8eptive diale8ti8ia! as 2ameso! alls i!to a trap here i! his dismissive judgme!t
that =egelIs 8o!8ept o lie- Jpre:Gar6i!ia! as it is- is probably ar too metaphysi8al a!d
epistemologi8al @highest orm o the u!ity o subje8t a!d obje8tA to be o mu8h i!terest or us today7K
&

/hat about re8e!t biologi8al theories 6hi8h o8us o! sel:reere!tiality @dra6i!g a li!e bet6ee! i!side
a!d outsideA as a 8o!stitutive eature o the lie pro8ess- a!d 6hi8h ote! read as verbatim passages
rom =egelIs aturphilosophieM =o6ever- eve! 6he!- i! readi!g =egelIs philosophy o !ature- o!e
stumbles upo! ma!y u!e?pe8ted pearls @his 8ritiNue o 4e6to! u!8a!!ily poi!ti!g to6ards 0i!stei!T
his theory o lie u!8a!!ily preiguri!g theories o autopoiesisT et87A- the basi8 a8t remai!s that its
u!dame!tal te!or is totally i!adeNuate i! relatio! to the t6o key eatures o moder! 1alilea! s8ie!8e+
mathemati8al ormaliUatio! a!d ope!!ess to the 8o!ti!ge!8y o @e?perime!talA measureme!t7 As
Copper made abu!da!tly 8lear- the very 8ore o the moder! s8ie!tii8 method lies i! its eort to
ormulate a pre8ise e?perime!tal setup 8apable o alsiyi!g a prior hypothesisEa!d there is simply !o
pla8e or su8h a sta!8e i! =egel7
This i!ability o =egel to thi!k mathemati8al ormaliUatio! is the obverse o his i!ability to
thi!k the overdetermi!ed spa8e o 6hat .a8a! 8alled lalangue7 /hat happe!s i! late .a8a! is the
passage rom @or the splitti!g oA the u!ity o 8o!8eptual thi!ki!g @i!Ato the duality o matheme a!d
lalangue+ o! the o!e ha!d- mathemati8al or logi8al ormulae a!d s8hemes @ormulae o se?uatio!- the
our dis8ourses- et87AT o! the other- the e?plosio! o 6ord:play a!d other orms o poeti8 dis8ourseEa
move u!thi!kable or =egel- 6ho i!sists o! the priority o 8o!8eptual thi!ki!g7
%
NECESSIT$ AS SELF,S!BLATED CONTINGENC$

/hat i *ierkegaardIs 8ritiNue o =egel- 6hi8h e!dlessly varies this moti o irredu8ible
8o!ti!ge!8y- relies o! a atal misu!dersta!di!g o =egelIs u!dame!tal i!sightM The irst thi!g that
strikes the eye is that *ierkegaardIs 8ritiNue is based o! the @thoroughly =egelia!RA oppositio! bet6ee!
Jobje8tiveK a!d Jsubje8tiveK thought+ J/hile obje8tive thought tra!slates everythi!g i!to results O
subje8tive thought puts everythi!g i!to pro8ess a!d omits the result O be8ause a! e?isti!g i!dividual is
8o!sta!tly i! pro8ess o 8omi!g to be7K
10
For *ierkegaard- obviously- =egel represe!ts the ultimate
a8hieveme!t o Jobje8tive thoughtK+ he Jdoes !ot u!dersta!d history rom the poi!t o vie6 o
be8omi!g- but 6ith the illusio! atta8hed to past!ess u!dersta!ds it rom the poi!t o vie6 o a i!ality
that e?8ludes all be8omi!g7K
11
=ere- o!e should be very 8areul !ot to miss *ierkegaardIs poi!t+ or
him- o!ly subje8tive e?perie!8e is ee8tively Ji! be8omi!g-K a!d a!y !otio! o obje8tive reality as a!
ope!:e!ded pro8ess 6ith !o i?ed i!ality still remai!s 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o bei!g7 3ut 6hy- 6e may
askM 3e8ause a!y obje8tive reality- as Jpro8essualK as it might be- is by dei!itio! o!tologi8ally ully
8o!stituted- prese!t as a positively e?isti!g domai! o obje8ts a!d their i!tera8tio!sT o!ly subje8tivity
desig!ates a domai! 6hi8h is in itself Jope!-K marked by a! inherent o!tologi8al ailure+

/he!ever a parti8ular e?iste!8e has bee! relegated to the past- it is 8omplete- has a8Nuired i!ality- a!d
is i! so ar subje8t to a systemati8 apprehe!sio! O but or 6hom is it so subje8tM A!yo!e 6ho is
himsel a! e?isti!g i!dividual 8a!!ot gai! this i!ality outside e?iste!8e 6hi8h 8orrespo!ds to the
eter!ity i!to 6hi8h the past has e!tered7
12
/hat i- ho6ever- =egel a8tually does the e?a8t oppositeM /hat i the 6ager o his diale8ti8 is
!ot to adopt the Jpoi!t o vie6 o i!alityK to6ards the prese!t- vie6i!g it as i it 6ere already past- but-
pre8isely- to reintroduce the openness of the future into the past- to grasp that*which*was in its process
of becoming- to see the 8o!ti!ge!t pro8ess 6hi8h ge!erated e?isti!g !e8essityM 9s this !ot 6hy 6e have
to 8o!8eive the Absolute J!ot o!ly as Substa!8e- but also as Subje8tKM This is 6hy 1erma! 9dealism
already e?ploded the 8oordi!ates o the sta!dard Aristotelia! o!tology stru8tured arou!d the ve8tor
ru!!i!g rom possibility to a8tuality7 9! 8o!trast to the idea that every possibility strives to ully
a8tualiUe itsel- o!e should 8o!8eive o JprogressK as the moveme!t o restori!g the dime!sio! o
pote!tiality to mere a8tuality- o u!earthi!g- i! the very heart o a8tuality- a se8ret strivi!g to6ards
pote!tiality7 Fe8all /alter 3e!jami!Is !otio! o revolutio! as redemptio! through repetitio! o the
past+ apropos the Fre!8h Fevolutio!- the task o a true ,ar?ist historiography is !ot to des8ribe the
eve!ts the 6ay they really 6ere @a!d to e?plai! ho6 these eve!ts ge!erated the ideologi8al illusio!s
that a88ompa!ied themAT the task is rather to u!earth the hidde! pote!tiality @the utopia! ema!8ipatory
pote!tialA 6hi8h 6as betrayed i! the a8tuality o revolutio! a!d i! its i!al out8ome @the rise o
utilitaria! market 8apitalismA7 ,ar?Is poi!t is !ot primarily to make u! o the 2a8obi!Is 6ild
revolutio!ary hopes- to poi!t out ho6 their e!thused ema!8ipatory rhetori8 6as just a mea!s used by
the histori8al JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K to establish the vulgar 8ommer8ial 8apitalist realityT it is rather to
e?plai! ho6 these betrayed radi8al:ema!8ipatory pote!tials 8o!ti!ue to Ji!sistK as histori8al Jspe8tersK
that hau!t the revolutio!ary memory- dema!di!g their e!a8tme!t- so that the later proletaria!
revolutio! should also redeem @lay to restA these past ghosts7 These alter!ative versio!s o the past
6hi8h persist i! a spe8tral orm 8o!stitute the o!tologi8al Jope!!essK o the histori8al pro8ess- as
6asEagai!E8lear to Dhesterto!+

The thi!gs that might have bee! are !ot eve! prese!t to the imagi!atio!7 9 somebody says that the
6orld 6ould !o6 be better i 4apoleo! had !ever alle!- but had established his 9mperial dy!asty-
people have to adjust their mi!ds 6ith a jerk7 The very !otio! is !e6 to them7 5et it 6ould have
preve!ted the Crussia! rea8tio!T saved eNuality a!d e!lighte!me!t 6ithout a mortal Nuarrel 6ith
religio!T u!iied 0uropea!s a!d perhaps avoided the Carliame!tary 8orruptio! a!d the Fas8ist a!d
3olshevist reve!ges7 3ut i! this age o ree:thi!kers- me!Is mi!ds are !ot really ree to thi!k su8h a
thought7
/hat 9 8omplai! o is that those 6ho a88ept the verdi8t o ate i! this 6ay a88ept it 6ithout k!o6i!g
6hy7 3y a Nuai!t parado?- those 6ho thus assume that history al6ays took the right tur!i!g are
ge!erally the very people 6ho do !ot believe there 6as a!y spe8ial provide!8e to guide it7 The very
ratio!alists 6ho jeer at the trial by 8ombat- i! the old eudal ordeal- do i! a8t a88ept a trial by 8ombat
as de8idi!g all huma! history7
1"
This- ho6ever- does !ot mea! that- i! a histori8al repetitio! i! the radi8al 3e!jami!ia! se!se-
6e simply retur! to the ope! mome!t o de8isio! a!d- this time- make the right 8hoi8e7 The lesso! o
repetitio! is rather that our irst 8hoi8e 6as !e8essarily the 6ro!g o!e- a!d or a very pre8ise reaso!+
the Jright 8hoi8eK is o!ly possible the se8o!d time- or o!ly the irst 8hoi8e- i! its 6ro!g!ess- literally
8reates the 8o!ditio!s or the right 8hoi8e7 The !otio! that 6e might have already made the right 8hoi8e
the irst time- but just ble6 the 8ha!8e by a88ide!t- is a retroa8tive illusio!7 A reere!8e to 1eorg
3Y8h!er may be o some help here- 6ith his great moti o Gesti!y as that 6hi8h predetermi!es our
livesEthere is !o ree 6ill- Jthe i!dividual is !o more tha! a oam o! the 6aveK @as he put it i! a letter
to his ia!8Le i! 1&""A+ JThe 6ord must is o!e o the 8urses 6ith 6hi8h ma!ki!d is baptiUed7 The
sayi!g V9t must be that oe!ses 8omeT but 6oe to him by 6hom the oe!se 8omethI is terriyi!g7 /hat
is it i! us that lies- murders- stealsM 9 !o lo!ger 8are to pursue this thought7K
1(
/hat terriied 3Y8h!er
6as the a8t that- although our a8ts are predetermi!ed- 6e e?perie!8e ourselves as thoroughly
respo!sible or themEthe parado? resolved by *a!t a!d S8helli!g 6ith the hypothesis o a! atemporal
tra!s8e!de!tal a8t by mea!s o 6hi8h ea8h o us has al6ays already 8hose! our eter!al 8hara8ter+ 6hat
6e e?perie!8e as ate is our J!ature-K the out8ome o a! u!8o!s8ious 8hoi8e7 A!d it is o!ly at this poi!t
that the true diale8ti8 o reedom a!d !e8essity- o 8hoi8e a!d determi!atio!- begi!s7
The 8ommo!:se!se Jdiale8ti8sK o reedom a!d !e8essity 8o!8eives o their arti8ulatio! i! the
se!se o the amous li!es rom the begi!!i!g o ,ar?Is Eighteenth /rumaire of .ouis /onaparte+
J,e! make their o6! history- but they do !ot make it as they pleaseT they do !ot make it u!der sel:
sele8ted 8ir8umsta!8es- but u!der 8ir8umsta!8es e?isti!g already- give! a!d tra!smitted rom the
past7K
1#
/e are partially- but !ot totally- determi!ed+ 6e have a spa8e o reedom- but 6ithi! the
8oordi!ates imposed by our obje8tive situatio!7 /hat this vie6 ails to take i!to a88ou!t is the 6ay our
reedom @ree a8tivityA retroa8tively 8reates @JpositsKA its obje8tive 8o!ditio!s+ these 8o!ditio!s are !ot
simply give!- they emerge as the presuppositio!s o our a8tivity7 @A!d vi8e versa+ the spa8e o our
reedom itsel is sustai!ed by the situatio! i! 6hi8h 6e i!d ourselves7A The e?8ess is thus double+ 6e
are !ot o!ly less ree tha! 6e thi!k @the 8o!tours o our reedom are predetermi!edA- 6e are
simulta!eously more ree tha! 6e thi!k @6e reely JpositK the very !e8essity that determi!es usA7 This
is 6hy- to arrive at our JabsoluteK reedom @the ree positi!g o our presuppositio!sA- 6e have to pass
through absolute determi!ism7
3ut does !ot =egelIs reje8tio! o the JDleopatraIs !oseK thesis i! his great .ogic @6hat 6e
6ould 8all today the Jbutterly:ee8tK thesis- the idea that small a88ide!ts 8a! 8ha!ge the 8ourse o
6orld historyEas the beauty o DleopatraIs !ose 8ha!ged the 8ourse o a!8ie!t Foma! historyA poi!t
to6ards a vie6 6hi8h redu8es the role o 8o!ti!ge!8y i! historyM For =egel- the error o su8h reaso!i!g
i!volves the Ji!admissible appli8atio!K o a me8ha!i8al !otio! o 8ause to large:s8ale pro8esses i!
orga!i8 or spiritual lie+ the J8ommo! jestK that- i! history- great ee8ts 8a! result rom ridi8ulously
small 8auses is Ja! i!sta!8e o the 8o!versio! 6hi8h spirit imposes o! the e?ter!alT but or this very
reaso!- this e?ter!al is !ot a cause in the process- i! other 6ords- this 8o!versio! itsel sublates the
relatio!ship o 8ausality7K
1'
H!e should read these li!es very 8losely- !ot as a simplisti8 dismissal o
e?ter!al me8ha!i8al 8ausality7 /hat does =egel mea! here by J8o!versio!KM Fe8all the 8ase o
la!guage+ the leader says a simple 6ord @JyesK or J!oKA- a!d the result 8a! be a great 6ar 6ith
hu!dreds o thousa!ds o deadErom the e?ter!al me8ha!isti8 sta!dpoi!t- the vibratio! o a e6
sou!ds @a huma! voi8e pro!ou!8i!g a brie 6ordA J8ausedK a 8o!8ate!atio! o eve!ts- leadi!g to
thousa!ds o deathsEa!d i! a 6ay this is true- but o!ly i 6e take i!to a88ou!t the J8o!versio!K 6hi8h
makes material eleme!ts the bearers a!d tra!smitters o mea!i!g i! a 6ay 6hi8h has !othi!g to do 6ith
their little bit o immediate material reality7 9! this se!se- the relatio! o 8ausality is JsublatedK here+ it
is !egated- but mai!tai!ed a!d elevated at a higher level- or the 8ausality is !o lo!ger immediate
me8ha!i8al 8ausality @like the proverbial billiard ball hitti!g a!other ballA- but a 8ausality mediated by
mea!i!g7 3ut i! all this- 6e should bear i! mi!d that the 6hole pro8ess has also to take pla8e at the
level o immediate materiality+ there is mea!i!g- but this mea!i!g 8a! e?ert its JhigherK 8ausal po6er
o!ly as materialiUed i! sou!ds or letters- it has !o JpureK e?iste!8e o its o6!7
1$
/hat- the!- is the 8e!tral i!sight o the =egelia! diale8ti8s o !e8essity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8yM 4ot
o!ly does =egel @Nuite 8o!siste!tly 6ith his premisesA dedu8e the necessity of contingencyE!amely
ho6 the 9dea !e8essarily e?ter!aliUes itsel @a8Nuires realityA i! phe!ome!a 6hi8h are ge!ui!ely
8o!ti!ge!tEhe also @a!d this aspe8t is ote! !egle8ted by ma!y 8omme!tatorsA develops the opposite
a!d theoreti8ally mu8h more i!teresti!g thesis- that o the contingency of necessity7 That is to say- 6he!
=egel des8ribes the progress rom Je?ter!alK 8o!ti!ge!t appeara!8e to Ji!!erK !e8essary esse!8e- the
appeara!8eIs Jsel:i!ter!aliUatio!K through sel:rele8tio!- he is !ot thereby des8ribi!g the dis8overy o
some pre:e?isti!g i!!er 0sse!8e- somethi!g that 6as already there @this- e?a8tly- 6ould have bee! a
Jreii8atio!K o the 0sse!8eA- but a JperormativeK pro8ess o 8o!stru8ti!g @ormi!gA that 6hi8h is
Jdis8overed7K As =egel himsel puts it i! his .ogic- i! the pro8ess o rele8tio!- the very Jretur!K to the
lost or hidde! 1rou!d produ8es 6hat it retur!s to7 9t is the! !ot o!ly i!!er !e8essity that is the u!ity o
itsel a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y as its opposite- !e8essarily positi!g 8o!ti!ge!8y as its mome!tT it is also
8o!ti!ge!8y 6hi8h is the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o itsel a!d its opposite- !e8essityT that is to say- the
very process through which necessity arises out of necessity is a contingent process7
H!e 8a! put it also i! the terms o the diale8ti8s o o!tology a!d epistemology+ i the
e!8ompassi!g u!ity o !e8essity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y is !e8essity- the! the !e8essity @gradually dis8overed
by our 8og!itio! as the u!derlyi!g 4otio! o the phe!ome!al 8o!ti!ge!t multipli8ityA had to be there
all the time 6aiti!g to be dis8overed by our 8og!itio!Ei! short- i! this 8ase- =egelIs 8e!tral idea @irst
8learly ormulated i! his 9!trodu8tio! to the )henomenologyA that our 6ay to6ards truth is part o the
truth itsel- is 8a!8eled- a!d 6e regress to the sta!dard metaphysi8al !otio! o Truth as a substa!tial 9!:
itsel- i!depe!de!t o subje8tIs approa8h to it7 H!ly i the e!8ompassi!g u!ity is 8o!ti!ge!8y 8a! 6e
8laim that the subje8tIs dis8overy o !e8essary truth is simulta!eously the @8o!ti!ge!tA 8o!stitutio! o
this truth itsel- that- to paraphrase =egel- the very retur! to @redis8overy oA eter!al Truth ge!erates
this Truth7 So- ar rom bei!g a! Jesse!tialistK 6ho develops the e!tire 8o!te!t out o the !e8essary
sel:deployme!t o the 4otio!- =egel isEto use todayIs termsEthe ultimate thi!ker o autopoiesis- o
the pro8ess o the emerge!8e o !e8essary eatures out o 8haoti8 8o!ti!ge!8y- the thi!ker o
8o!ti!ge!8yIs gradual sel:orga!iUatio!- o the gradual rise o order out o 8haos7
=o6- the!- 8a! !e8essity arise out o 8o!ti!ge!8yM The o!ly 6ay to avoid the obs8ura!tism o
Jemerge!t propertiesK is to bri!g i!to play !egativity+ at its most radi8al- !e8essity is !ot a positive
pri!8iple o regularity that over8omes 8o!ti!ge!8y- but the !egative obverse o 8o!ti!ge!8y+ 6hat is
J!e8essaryK above all is that every 8o!ti!ge!t parti8ular e!tity i!d its truth i! its sel:8a!8ellatio!-
disi!tegratio!- death7 .et us imagi!e a! e!tity 6hi8h persists i! its si!gularity- e!deavori!g to impose
itsel as a lasti!g !e8essityEthe a8tual !e8essity is the !egativity 6hi8h destroys this e!tity7 This is
=egelia! u!iversal !e8essity i! its a8tuality+ the !egative po6er 6hi8h bri!gs to its truth every
parti8ularity by 6ay o destroyi!g it7 4e8essity is thus !othi!g but the JtruthK o 8o!ti!ge!8y-
8o!ti!ge!8y brought to its truth by 6ay o its @sel:A!egatio!7
The sta!dard vie6 o =egelIs system is that o a 8losed 8ir8le o 8ategories 6hi8h su88eed o!e
a!other 6ith a logi8al !e8essity- a!d the 8riti8al e!ergy is o8used o! the J6eak poi!tsK o that
dedu8tio!- o! passages 6here =egel seems to J8heat-K proposi!g a !e6 8ategory 6hi8h does !ot really
ollo6 rom 6hat pre8edes it7 This perspe8tive must be radi8ally reversed+ ea8h passage i! =egel is a
mome!t o 8reative i!ve!tio!- the 4e6 does !ot arise automati8ally but 8omes as a mira8ulous
surprise7 This is 6hat it mea!s to reprodu8e a pro8ess through its diale8ti8al a!alysis+ to re:i!trodu8e
possibility a!d o!tologi8al ope!!ess i!to 6hat retroa8tively appears as a 8losed su88essio! determi!ed
by its imma!e!t !e8essity7 So 6he! =egel says that- i! a diale8ti8al pro8ess- the thi!g be8omes 6hat it
al6ays already 6as- this 8learly oers itsel to be read as a! assertio! o ull o!tologi8al 8losure+ there
is !othi!g radi8ally !e6- 6hat emerges i! the diale8ti8al moveme!t is just the ull a8tualiUatio! o 6hat
6as in potentia @or i! itselA already there7 =o6ever- the same stateme!t 8a! also be read i! a mu8h
more radi8al @a!d literalA 6ay+ i! a diale8ti8al pro8ess- the thi!g becomes J6hat it al6ays already 6asKT
that is- the Jeter!al esse!8eK @or- rather- 8o!8eptA o a thi!g is !ot give! i! adva!8e- it emerges- orms
itsel i! a! ope! 8o!ti!ge!t pro8essEthe eter!ally past esse!8e is a retroactive result o the diale8ti8al
pro8ess7 This retroa8tivity is 6hat *a!t 6as !ot able to thi!k- a!d =egel himsel had to 6ork lo!g a!d
hard to 8o!8eptualiUe it7 =ere is ho6 the early =egel- still struggli!g to diere!tiate himsel rom the
lega8y o the other 1erma! 9dealists- Nualiies *a!tIs great philosophi8al breakthrough+ i! the *a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis- Jthe determi!ate!ess o orm is !othi!g but the ide!tity o opposites7 As a
result- the a priori i!telle8t be8omes- at least i! pri!8iple- a posteriori as 6ellT or a posteriority is
!othi!g but the positi!g o the opposite7K
1&
9! pri!8iple- the mea!i!g o this de!se passage seems 8lear+
the Jdetermi!ate!ess o ormK is a!other !ame or 8o!8rete u!iversality- or the a8t that the u!iversal
orm o a 8o!8ept ge!erates out o itsel its parti8ular 8o!te!t- that it is !ot merely a orm imposed o!
a! i!depe!de!t empiri8al 8o!te!t7 A!d si!8e the !otio!al u!iversality a!d the parti8ularity o its
8o!te!tEi! short- the a priori o the u!iversal orm a!d the a posteriori o its 8o!te!tEare the
opposites @pre8isely the opposites that *a!t keeps apart- ultimately e?ter!al to ea8h other- si!8e the
imma!e!t tra!s8e!de!tal orm is imposed o!to a 8o!te!t that ae8ts the subje8t rom the outsideA- the
determi!ate!ess o orm eNuals the u!ity o opposites- the a8t that the 8o!te!t is ge!erated by its orm7
The Nuestio! is ho6- 8o!8retely- 6e are to read this ide!tity o opposites7 The sta!dard 8riti8al readi!g
is satisied 6ith seei!g i! it the very model o ho6 the 9dea mediates or posits all its parti8ular 8o!te!t-
that is- as the e?treme JidealistK airmatio! o the prima8y o the a priori over the a posteriori7 /hat
su8h a readi!g 8learly misses is the opposite moveme!t- the irredu8ible Jumbili8al 8ordK o! a88ou!t o
6hi8h every a priori u!iversality remai!s atta8hed to @Joverdetermi!edK byA the a posteriori o a
parti8ular 8o!te!t7 To put it some6hat blu!tly+ yes- the u!iversal !otio!al orm imposes !e8essity upo!
the multitude o its 8o!ti!ge!t 8o!te!ts- but it does so in a way which itself remains mar"ed by an
irreducible stain of contingencyEor- as Gerrida 6ould have put it- the rame itsel is al6ays also a part
o the e!ramed 8o!te!t7 The logi8 here is that o the =egelia! Joppositio!al determi!atio!K
@gegens=t2liche /estimmungA- i! 6hi8h the u!iversal ge!us e!8ou!ters itsel amo!g its parti8ular a!d
8o!ti!ge!t spe8ies7
1%
=egel i!trodu8es this !otio! o Joppositio!al determi!atio!K i! his logi8 o esse!8e- 6he! he
dis8usses the relatio!ship bet6ee! ide!tity a!d diere!8eT his poi!t there is !ot o!ly that ide!tity is
al6ays the ide!tity o ide!tity a!d diere!8e- but that diere!8e itsel is also al6ays the diere!8e
bet6ee! itsel a!d ide!tityT i! the same 6ay- it is !ot o!ly !e8essity that e!8ompasses both itsel a!d
8o!ti!ge!8y- but alsoEa!d more u!dame!tallyEit is 8o!ti!ge!8y itsel 6hi8h e!8ompasses both
itsel a!d !e8essity7 Hr- 6ith regard to the te!sio! bet6ee! esse!8e a!d appeara!8e- the a8t that
esse!8e has to appear !ot o!ly mea!s that esse!8e ge!erates or mediates its appeara!8es- but that the
diere!8e bet6ee! esse!8e a!d appeara!8e is i!ter!al to appeara!8e+ esse!8e has to appear 6ithi! the
domai! o appeara!8es- as a hi!t that Jappeara!8es are !ot allK but are Jmerely appeara!8es7K 9!soar as
this oppositio! appears i! la!guage as the oppositio! bet6ee! the u!iversal 8o!te!t o mea!i!g a!d its
e?pressio! i! a 8o!ti!ge!t parti8ular orm @o the sig!iierA- it is !o 6o!der that la!guage provides the
ultimate e?ample o this diale8ti8al u!ity o oppositesEa!d !o 6o!der that =egel reje8ts the idea o
8o!stru8ti!g a !e6- more pre8ise- artii8ial la!guage 6hi8h 6ould elimi!ate the impere8tio!s o our
!atural la!guages+ JThere is !o su8h thi!g as a superior la!guage or be!8hmark idiom7 0very la!guage
is a! i!sta!8e o the spe8ulative7 ChilosophyIs role is to sho6 ho6- i! ea8h la!guage- the esse!tial is
said a!d e?hibited through the idiomIs a88ide!ts7K
20
The starti!g poi!t o a philosophi8al thought has to be the 8o!ti!ge!8y o o!eIs o6! la!guage
as the Jsubsta!8eK o o!eIs thi!ki!g+ there is !o dire8t path to u!iversal truth through abstra8ti!g rom
the 8o!ti!ge!8ies o o!eIs J!aturalK to!gue a!d 8o!stru8ti!g a !e6 artii8ial or te8h!i8al la!guage
6hose terms 6ould 8arry pre8ise mea!i!gs7 This- ho6ever- does !ot mea! that a thi!ker should !aSvely
rely o! the resour8es o his o6! la!guage+ the starti!g poi!t or his rele8tio! should rather be the
idiosyncrasies o this la!guage- 6hi8h are i! a 6ay redoubled 8o!ti!ge!8ies- 8o!ti!ge!8ies 6ithi! a
8o!ti!ge!t @histori8ally relativeA order itsel7 Carado?i8ally- the path rom the 8o!ti!ge!8y @o o!eIs
!atural la!guageA to the !e8essity @o spe8ulative thoughtA leads through the redoubled 8o!ti!ge!8y+
o!e 8a!!ot es8ape thi!ki!g i! o!eIs la!guage- this la!guage is o!eIs u!surpassable substa!8eT ho6ever-
thi!ki!g mea!s thi!ki!g against the la!guage i! 6hi8h o!e thi!ksEla!guage i!evitably ossiies our
thoughts- it is the medium o the i?ed disti!8tio!s o )!dersta!di!g par e&cellence7 3ut- 6hile o!e has
to thi!k agai!st the la!guage i! 6hi8h o!e thi!ks- o!e has to do so within la!guage- there is !o other
optio!7 This is 6hy =egel pre8ludes the possibility @developed later espe8ially i! A!glo:Sa?o!
a!alyti8al philosophyA o puriyi!g our !atural la!guage o its Jirratio!alK 8o!ti!ge!8ies a!d
8o!stru8ti!g a !e6 artii8ial la!guage that 6ould aithully rele8t 8o!8eptual determi!atio!s7 /here-
the!- i! la!guage itsel- 8a! 6e i!d some support or thi!ki!g agai!st itM =egelIs a!s6er is+ 6here
la!guage is !ot a ormal system- 6here la!guage is at its most i!8o!siste!t- 8o!ti!ge!t- idiosy!8rati87
The parado? is that o!e 8a! o!ly 8ombat the Jirratio!alityK o la!guage o! behal o the imma!e!t
!otio!al !e8essity i this !e8essity itsel relies o! 6hat is most Jirratio!alK i! la!guage- o! its redoubled
irratio!ality or 8o!ti!ge!8y7 The situatio! is similar to that o the Freudia! logi8 o the dream- i! 6hi8h
the Feal a!!ou!8es itsel i! the guise o a dream 6ithi! a dream7 /hat =egel has i! mi!d here is ote!
u!8a!!ily 8lose to .a8a!Is !otio! o lalangue+ 6ord:play- double mea!i!gs- a!d so o!Ehis great
e?ample i! 1erma! are 6ords 6ith opposite or multiple mea!i!gs @like 2u (runde gehen-
Jdisi!tegrate > all apartK and- literally- Jto go to- to rea8h- o!eIs grou!d-K et87- !ot to me!tio! the
!otorious +ufhebung 6ith its three mea!i!gs+ to 8a!8el>a!!ihilate- to preserve- to elevate to a higher
levelA7 +ufhebung is ote! put or6ard as e?emplary o everythi!g that is Jidealist:metaphysi8alK about
=egel+ does it !ot sig!al the very operatio! by mea!s o 6hi8h all e?ter!al 8o!ti!ge!8y is over8ome
a!d i!tegrated i!to the !e8essary sel:deployme!t o the u!iversal !otio!M Agai!st this operatio!- it is
ashio!able to i!sist that there is al6ays a remai!der o 8o!ti!ge!8y- o parti8ularity- 6hi8h 8a!!ot be
aufgehoben- 6hi8h resists its 8o!8eptual @disAi!tegratio!7 The iro!y here is that the very term =egel
uses to desig!ate this operatio! is marked by the irredu8ible 8o!ti!ge!8y o a! idiosy!8rasy o the
1erma! la!guage7
There is !o 8o!8eptual 8larity 6ithout taki!g lalangue as a starti!g poi!tEor- to put it i! more
8o!8eptual terms- !ot o!ly does !e8essity e?press itsel i! the appeara!8e o 8o!ti!ge!8y- but this
!e8essity itsel does !ot pre:e?ist the 8o!ti!ge!t multitude o appeara!8es as their grou!dEit itsel
emerges out o 8o!ti!ge!8y- as a 8o!ti!ge!8y @say- the multiple mea!i!gs o +ufhebungA elevated i!to
the !e8essity o a u!iversal 8o!8ept7
21
Goes !ot Freud i!te!d somethi!g stri8tly homologous 6ith his
!otio!s o symptoms- jokes- a!d slips o to!gueM A! i!!er !e8essity 8a! o!ly arti8ulate itsel through
the 8o!ti!ge!8y o a symptom- and vi8e versa+ this !e8essity @say- the 8o!sta!t urge o a repressed
desireA 8omes to be o!ly through this arti8ulatio!7 =ere also- !e8essity does !ot simply pre:e?ist
8o!ti!ge!8y+ 6he! .a8a! says that repressio! a!d the retur! o the repressed @i! symptomal
ormatio!sA are the ro!t a!d the ba8k o o!e a!d the same pro8ess- the impli8atio! is pre8isely that the
!e8essity @o the repressed 8o!te!tA hi!ges o! the 8o!ti!ge!8y @o its arti8ulatio! i! symptomsA7 Driti8s
o =egel emphasiUe o!ly the irst aspe8t- !e8essity as the i!!er pri!8iple domi!ati!g its 8o!ti!ge!t
e?pressio!s- !egle8ti!g the se8o!d o!e- !amely ho6 this !e8essity itsel hi!ges o! 8o!ti!ge!8y- is
!othi!g but 8o!ti!ge!8y elevated i!to the orm o !e8essity7
This bri!gs us to the =egelia! +ufhebung @sublatio!A as a moveme!t through 6hi8h every
8o!ti!ge!t parti8ularity is aufgehoben @sublatedA i! its u!iversal !otio!7 The sta!dard argume!t agai!st
+ufhebung is that there is al6ays a remai!der 6hi8h resists it- 6hi8h persists i! its immediate idio8y7
/hat i- ho6ever- this is the very poi!t o the truly =egelia! +ufhebung- o the J!egatio! o !egatio!KM
The dire8t attempt at +ufhebung is the i!itial Jpositio!KT it is J!egatedK i! its ailure- i! the eleme!t that
resists itT the J!egatio! o !egatio!K is the! the i!sight i!to ho6 this resisti!g eleme!t- this obsta8le- is
i! itsel a positive 8o!ditio! o possibilityEthe +ufhebung has to be sustai!ed by its 8o!stitutive
e?8eptio!7
So 6hat i the lesso! o the =egelia! +ufhebung is that the loss itsel @the ailureA is to be
8elebratedM =egel 6as ully a6are o ho6 the 6eight give! to a! eve!t by its symboli8 i!s8riptio!
JsublatesK its immediate realityEi! his )hilosophy of 0istory- he oers a 6o!derul 8hara8teriUatio!
o Thu8ydidesIs history o the Celopo!!esia! 6ar+ J9! the Celopo!!esia! /ar- the struggle 6as
esse!tially bet6ee! Athe!s a!d Sparta7 Thu8ydides has let us the history o the greater part o it- a!d
his immortal 6ork is the absolute gai! 6hi8h huma!ity has derived rom that 8o!test7K
22
H!e should
read this judgme!t i! all its !aSvetL+ i! a 6ay- rom the sta!dpoi!t o 6orld history- the Celopo!!esia!
/ar took pla8e so that Thu8ydides 8ould 6rite a book o! it7 The term JabsoluteK should be give! here
all its 6eight+ rom the relative sta!dpoi!t o our i!ite huma! i!terests- the !umerous real tragedies o
the Celopo!!esia! 6ar are- o 8ourse- i!i!itely more importa!t tha! a bookT but rom the sta!dpoi!t o
the Absolute- it is the book that matters7 H!e should !ot be araid to say the same thi!g about some
truly great 6orks o art+ the 0liUabetha! era o88urred i! order to produ8e ShakespeareT ShakespeareIs
6ork is Jthe absolute gai! 6hi8h huma!ity has derivedK rom the vi8issitudes o his era7 A!d yes- 6hy
!otME=it8h8o8kIs masterpie8es o the 1%#0s are the Jabsolute gai!K 6hi8h huma!ity derived rom the
0ise!ho6er period i! the )S7 Sometimes- eve!- a! authorIs importa!8e may be 8o!de!sed !ot i! his
6ork- but i! a book 6ritte! o! himEalthough Samuel 2oh!so! 6as the author o + Dictionary of the
English .anguage a!d the spiritus movens o the thrivi!g Jpubli8 sphereK o eightee!th:8e!tury
.o!do!- he is today remembered almost e?8lusively or -he .ife of Samuel Cohnson- the ample
biography 6ritte! by his rie!d 2ames 3os6ell @1$%1A7
=ere a surprisi!g li!k 6ith =eidegger suggests itsel7 9! his readi!g o Jesse!8eK @WesenA as a
verb @Jesse!8i!gKA- =eidegger provides a de:esse!tialiUed !otio! o esse!8e+ 6hile- traditio!ally-
Jesse!8eK reers to a stable 8ore that guara!tees the ide!tity o a thi!g- or =eidegger- Jesse!8eK is
somethi!g that depe!ds o! the histori8al 8o!te?t- o! the epo8hal dis8losure o bei!g that o88urs i! a!d
through la!guage as the Jhouse o bei!g7K The e?pressio! JWesen der SpracheK does !ot mea!s Jthe
esse!8e o la!guage-K but the Jesse!8i!gK do!e by la!guage-

la!guage bri!gi!g thi!gs i!to their esse!8e- la!guage Jmovi!g usK so that thi!gs matter to us i! a
parti8ular ki!d o 6ay- so that paths are made 6ithi! 6hi8h 6e 8a! move amo!g e!tities- a!d so that
e!tities 8a! bear o! ea8h other as the e!tities they are O /e share a! origi!ary la!guage 6he! the
6orld is arti8ulated i! the same style or us- 6he! 6e Jliste! to la!guage-K 6he! 6e Jlet it say its
sayi!g to us7K
2"
For e?ample- or a medieval Dhristia!- the Jesse!8eK o gold resides i! its i!8orruptibility a!d
divi!e shee!- 6hi8h make it a Jdivi!eK metal- 6hile or us- it is- amo!g other thi!gs- a resour8e to be
traded i! 8ommodity markets or a material appropriate or aestheti8 purposes7 @Hr- to take a!other
e?ample- the voi8e o a 8astrato 6as or Datholi8s the very voi8e o a! a!gel prior to the Fall- 6hile or
us today it is a mo!strosity7A There is thus a u!dame!tal viole!8e i! this Jesse!8i!gK ability o
la!guage+ our 6orld is give! a partial t6ist- it loses its bala!8ed i!!o8e!8e- o!e partial 8olor gives its
to!e to the /hole7 The operatio! desig!ated by .a8lau as that o hegemo!y is i!here!t to la!guage7
#ARIETIES OF SELF,RELATING NEGATION

=o6ever- the Nuestio! persists+ does this =egelia! assertio! o radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y ope! up the
spa8e or the 8oi!8ide!8e o repressio! 6ith the retur! o the repressed 6hi8h e?empliies the properly
Freudia! J!egatio! o !egatio!K @the repressio!E!egatio!Eo some 8o!te!t o!ly 6orks i it is itsel
!egated- i the repressed retur!sAM .a8a! repeats the 8lassi8 argume!t agai!st the diale8ti8al triad- the
retur! o the starti!g poi!t ba8k to itsel through its sel:mediatio!+ J/he! o!e makes t6o- there is
!ever a retur!7 9t !ever 8omes ba8k to make o!e agai!- even if it is a new one7K
2(
9t may seem that
=egelIs basi8 premise is that the t6o 8ome ba8k to H!e- eve! i 6e 8o!8ede the key poi!t that this H!e
is a !e6 H!e+ !ot the H!e 6hi8h 6as lost i! alie!atio!:e?ter!aliUatio!- but a !e6 H!e JperormativelyK
8reated i! the very pro8ess o retur!i!g:to:itsel7 /he! a substa!tial u!ity dissolves i!to the
multipli8ity o its predi8ates- it is o!e o its ormer predi8ates 6hi8h establishes itsel as a !e6 subje8t-
retroa8tively positi!g its presuppositio!s7 =o6ever- eve! this properly diale8ti8al image o perma!e!t
tra!substa!tiatio! remai!s misleadi!g+ to put it blu!tly- or =egel- there is !o H!e at the begi!!i!g-
every H!e is a retur!:to:itsel rom the t6o7 The H!e to 6hi8h o!e retur!s is 8o!stituted through retur!-
so it is !ot that H!e splits i!to t6oEH!e is a T6o o 6hi8h o!e part is !othi!g7 =ere is ho6- i! a!
e?tremely 8o!de!sed passage- =egel ormulated the gap that separates the diale8ti8al pro8ess proper
rom Cloti!ia! Jema!atio!K+ JThe simple u!ity- its be8omi!g- is that sublatio! o all predi8atesEthe
absolute !egativityT the 8omi!g:out [ema!atio!+ 0erausgehen\ is this !egativity i! itselEone should
not begin with oneness and then pass to duality7K
2#
The last part says it all- dire8tly reje8ti!g the
sta!dard !otio! o the diale8ti8al pro8ess as the deployme!t or divisio! o the i!itial or immediate H!e
i!to T6oEone should not begin with oneness and then pass to duality7 /hy !otM 3e8ause the H!e is
o!ly 8o!stituted through the passage to duality- through its divisio!7 The u!e?pe8ted 8o!seNue!8e o
this a8t is that- 8o!trary to the 8ommo! !otio! that the !umber o =egelia! diale8ti8s is "- i! other
6ords that =egelIs goal is to over8ome all dualisms i! a higher Jsy!thesis-K to re8o!8ile the opposites
i! a! e!8ompassi!g third medium- the proper !umber o diale8ti8s is 2+ !ot 2 as the duality o polar
opposites- but 2 as the i!here!t sel:dista!8i!g o the H!e itsel+ the H!e o!ly be8omes H!e by 6ay o
redoubli!g itsel- by a8Nuiri!g a mi!imal dista!8e to6ards itsel7 This is 6hy- 6he! 3adiou dei!es
love as the 8o!stru8tio! o a 6orld rom the perspe8tive o the T6o- o!e should re8og!iUe i! this
dei!itio! a! e8ho o the =egelia! diale8ti8+ love bri!gs the t6o together so that their gap is mai!tai!ed-
there is !o pseudo:/ag!eria! or mysti8al usio! here- the gap bet6ee! the t6o is paralla8ti8 a!d as
su8h u!surpassable7 This poi!t has already bee! made by 2ameso! 6he!- apropos +ntigone- he i!sisted
that the oppositio! bet6ee! huma! la6 a!d divi!e la6 has to be read

!ot as a struggle bet6ee! the state a!d the amily or 8la! that tears so8iety apartT but irst a!d oremost
as the divisio! 6hi8h bri!gs so8iety itsel i!to bei!g i! the irst pla8e by arti8ulati!g its irst great
diere!tiatio!s- that o 6arrior versus priest- or o 8ity versus 8la!- or eve! outside versus i!side O
0a8h o these larval po6ers bri!gs the other i!to bei!g a!d rei!or8es the disti!8tive!ess o its opposite
!umber O the 8o!tradi8tio! 6hi8h ultimately tears the polis apart a!d destroys it O is the same
oppositio! that bri!gs it i!to bei!g as a viable stru8ture i! the irst pla8e7
2'
=ere 6e 8a! see agai! the gap that separates =egel rom histori8ist evolutio!ism+ rom the
histori8ist sta!dpoi!t- every histori8al igure has its mome!t o maturity 6hi8h is the! ollo6ed by the
period o de8ay7 For e?ample- 8apitalism 6as progressive u!til the middle o the !i!etee!th 8e!tury-
6he! it had to be supported i! its struggle agai!st premoder! orms o lieT but 6ith the aggravatio! o
8lass struggle- 8apitalism be8ame a! obsta8le to the urther progress o huma!ity a!d 6ill have to be
over8ome7 For a real diale8ti8ia!- there is !o mome!t o maturity 6he! a system u!8tio!s i! a !o!:
a!tago!isti8 6ay+ parado?i8al as this may sou!d- 8apitalism 6as at the same time JprogressiveK a!d
a!tago!isti8- i! de8ay- a!d the threat o its de8ay is the very drivi!g or8e o its JprogressK @8apitalism
has to revolutio!iUe itsel 8o!sta!tly to 8ope 6ith its 8o!stitutive Jobsta8leKA7 The amily a!d the state
are thus !ot simply the t6o poles o the so8ial /holeT it is rather that so8iety has to split itsel rom
itsel i! order to be8ome H!eEit is this teari!g apart o the so8ial /hole- this divisio! itsel- 6hi8h
Jbri!gs so8iety itsel i!to bei!g i! the irst pla8e by arti8ulati!g its irst great diere!tiatio!s- that o
6arrior versus priest7K 9t is i! this pre8ise se!se that o!e should read 3adiouIs 8laim+ JThe real is !ot
6hat bri!gs together- but 6hat separates7K 0ve! more poi!tedly- o!e should add that the real is the
separatio! @a!tago!isti8 splitA 6hi8h- as su8h- bri!gs together a so8io:symboli8 ield7
The =egelia! readi!g o +ntigone as a play deali!g 6ith Jthe emerge!8e o a! arti8ulated
so8iety as su8hK thus demo!strates the radi8ally a!ti:8orporatist !ature =egelIs so8ial thought+
2$
the
u!derlyi!g premise o this thought is that every so8ial arti8ulatio! is by dei!itio! al6ays Ji!orga!i8-K
a!tago!isti87 A!d the lesso! o this i!sight is that- 6he!ever 6e read a des8riptio! o ho6 a! origi!al
u!ity be8omes 8orrupted a!d splits- 6e should remember that 6e are deali!g 6ith a retroa8tive
ideologi8al a!tasy 6hi8h obus8ates the a8t that su8h a! origi!al u!ity !ever e?isted- that it is a
retroa8tive proje8tio! ge!erated by the pro8ess o splitti!g7 There !ever 6as a harmo!ious state 6hi8h
6as split i!to 6arriors a!d priests7 Hr- at a diere!t level- 6he! 6e use a 8o!ve!tio!al gesture like
shaki!g ha!ds- 6e should !ot presume that origi!ally su8h a gesture or e?pressio! had a literal mea!i!g
@9 oer you my ha!d to demo!strate that 9 am !ot holdi!g a k!ie- a!d so o!AEthe gap bet6ee! literal
mea!i!g a!d 8li8hLd use is there rom the begi!!i!gT that is- rom the mome!t shaki!g ha!ds be8ame a
gesture- it mea!t more tha! demo!strati!g that o!e 6as !ot armed- it be8ame a perormative a8t o
sig!ali!g a! ope!!ess to so8ial 8o!ta8t- a!d so o! a!d so orth7 /e e!8ou!ter here the topi8 o 6hat
Nua!tum physi8s 8alls the t6o va8uums+
2&
i! order or the hierar8hi8al po6er to establish itsel- it has
to redouble or divide itsel i!to JtrueK @6arriorA a!d JalseK @priestlyA po6erEit is this divisio! 6hi8h-
ar rom 6eake!i!g po6er- 8o!stitutes it7 The ruli!g 8lass has to divide itsel i! order to ruleEthe rule
is here Jdivided 6e sta!d- u!ited 6e all7K A 8ertai! J!egatio! o !egatio!K is also 8o!stitutive o the
phalli8 sig!iier7 That is to say- 6hat makes the phalli8 sig!iier su8h a 8omple? !otio! is !ot o!ly that-
i! it- the symboli8- imagi!ary- a!d real dime!sio!s are i!tert6i!ed- but also that- i! a double sel:
rele?ive step 6hi8h u!8a!!ily imitates the pro8ess o the J!egatio! o !egatio!-K it 8o!de!ses three
levels+ it is @1A position+ the sig!iier o the lost part- o 6hat the subje8t loses a!d la8ks 6ith its e!try
i!to @or submissio! toA the sig!iyi!g orderT @2A negation+ the sig!iier o @thisA la8kT a!d @"A negation
of negation+ itsel the la8ki!g>missi!g sig!iier7
2%
The phallus is the part 6hi8h is lost @Jsa8rii8edKA
6ith the e!try i!to the symboli8 order a!d- simulta!eously- the sig!iier o this loss7
"0
/he! 3adiou emphasiUes that double !egatio! is !ot the same as airmatio!- he thereby
merely 8o!irms the old .a8a!ia! motto Jles non*dupes errent7K
"1
.et us take the airmatio! J9
believe7K 9ts !egatio! is+ J9 do !ot really believe- 9 am just prete!di!g to believe7K 9ts properly =egelia!
!egatio! o !egatio!- ho6ever- is !ot the retur! to dire8t belie- but the sel:relati!g prete!se+ J9 prete!d
to prete!d to believe-K 6hi8h mea!s+ J9 really believe 6ithout bei!g a6are o it7K 9s !ot iro!y- the!- the
ultimate orm o the 8ritiNue o ideology todayEiro!y i! the pre8ise Mo2artian se!se o taki!g
stateme!ts more seriously tha! the subje8ts 6ho utter them themselvesM Hr- as Ges8artes put it at the
begi!!i!g o Dhapter " o his Discourse on Method+ Jvery ma!y are !ot a6are o 6hat it is that they
really believeT or- as the a8t o mi!d by 6hi8h a thi!g is believed is diere!t rom that by 6hi8h 6e
k!o6 that 6e believe it- the o!e a8t is ote! ou!d 6ithout the other7K Agai!- ho6 does this .a8a!ia!
J!egatio! o !egatio!K relate to the =egelia! o!eM .et us take !egatio! i! the guise o ma!Is
aba!do!me!t by 1od+ there is !o happy e!di!g hereT i! the J!egatio! o !egatio!K 6e are !o less alo!e
a!d aba!do!ed as beore- all that happe!s is that 6e e?perie!8e this aba!do!me!t i! its positive
dime!sio!- as the spa8e o our reedom7 A!other versio! o this reversal 6as dis8er!ed by Dhesterto!
6ho- i! his 6o!derul te?t -he /oo" of Cob- sho6s 6hy 1od has to rebuke his o6! dee!ders- the
Jme8ha!i8al a!d super8ilious 8omorters o 2obK+

The me8ha!i8al optimist e!deavors to justiy the u!iverse avo6edly upo! the grou!d that it is a ratio!al
a!d 8o!se8utive patter!7 =e poi!ts out that the i!e thi!g about the 6orld is that it 8a! all be e?plai!ed7
That is the o!e poi!t- i 9 may put it so- o! 6hi8h 1od- i! retur!- is e?pli8it to the poi!t o viole!8e7
1od says- i! ee8t- that i there is o!e i!e thi!g about the 6orld- as ar as me! are 8o!8er!ed- it is that
it 8a!!ot be e?plai!ed7 =e i!sists o! the i!e?pli8able!ess o everythi!g7 J=ath the rai! a atherM O Hut
o 6hose 6omb 8ame the i8eMK @"&+2&A7 =e goes arther- a!d i!sists o! the positive a!d palpable
u!reaso! o thi!gsT J=ast thou se!t the rai! upo! the desert 6here !o ma! is- a!d upo! the 6ilder!ess
6herei! there is !o ma!MK @"&+2'A O To startle ma!- 1od be8omes or a! i!sta!t a blasphemerT o!e
might almost say that 1od be8omes or a! i!sta!t a! atheist7 =e u!rolls beore 2ob a lo!g pa!orama o
8reated thi!gs- the horse- the eagle- the rave!- the 6ild ass- the pea8o8k- the ostri8h- the 8ro8odile7 =e
so des8ribes ea8h o them that it sou!ds like a mo!ster 6alki!g i! the su!7 The 6hole is a sort o psalm
or rhapsody o the se!se o 6o!der7 The maker o all thi!gs is asto!ished at the thi!gs he has =imsel
made7
"2
1od is here over6helmed by the mira8le o his o6! 8reatio!Ea!d 6e should !ot miss the
!egative aspe8t also at 6ork here7 9! reerri!g to the 8haoti8 6ealth o 8reatures- 1od is !ot boastully
asserti!g the i!i!ite gap 6hi8h separates 2ob rom him @as i!+ J/ho are you to 8omplai! about your
little miseryM 5ou have !o idea 6hat the u!iverse is OKAT he isEimpli8itly- at leastEalso admitti!g
that 2ob has !othi!g to 8omplai! about be8ause his 8ase is i! !o 6ay u!iNue+ the 6hole 6orld is a
terriyi!g u!reaso!able mess7 This J!egatio! o !egatio!K thus deprives 2ob eve! o the last sola8e
brought by the hope that- i! 1odIs eyes at least- his sueri!g has some deeper mea!i!g+ 6hat he
thought to be his o6! perple?ity reveals itsel to be the perple?ity o 1od himsel7 This bri!gs us agai!
to .a8a!Is key moti o the la8k i! the Hther- best re!dered by =egelIs amous remark that the se8rets
o the 0gyptia!s 6ere se8rets also or the 0gyptia!s themselves+ the se8ret o 1od is also a se8ret or
1od himsel7
So ar so good- 6e may say+ by 6ay o tra!sposi!g 6hat appears as a! epistemologi8al limit
i!to the Thi!g itsel- =egel sho6s ho6 the problem is its o6! solutio!Ebut i! 6hat pre8ise se!seM To
avoid a atal misu!dersta!di!g+ this 8ru8ial diale8ti8al move rom epistemologi8al obsta8le to
o!tologi8al impossibility i! !o 6ay implies that all 6e 8a! do is re8o!8ile ourselves to this
impossibility- i7e7- a88ept reality itsel as impere8t7 The premise o psy8hoa!alysis is that o!e 8a!
i!terve!e 6ith the symboli8 i!to the Feal- be8ause the Feal is !ot e?ter!al reality:i!:itsel- but a 8ra8k
i! the symboli8- so o!e 8a! i!terve!e 6ith a! a8t 6hi8h re:8o!igures the ield a!d thus tra!sorms its
imma!e!t poi!t o impossibility7 JTraversi!g the a!tasyK does !ot mea! a88epti!g the misery o our
livesEo! the 8o!trary- it mea!s that o!ly ater 6e JtraverseK the a!tasies obus8ati!g this misery 8a!
6e ee8tively 8ha!ge it7
Furthermore- there is a subtle diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o versio!s o the reversal o the
epistemologi8al limit i!to o!tologi8al impossibility- JFabi!ovit8hIsK a!d JAdor!oIs7K
""
9! the irst
o!e- 6e get a 8lear solutio!- !o a!tago!ism persists here @i- o 8ourse- o!e ig!ores the so8ial
8e!sorship 6hi8h preve!ts Fabi!ovit8h rom dire8tly stati!g his true reaso!A7 The truth 6i!s- a!d the
i!teresti!g poi!t is ho6 it 8a! do so o!ly through error @8o!irmi!g =egelIs poi!t that the path to truth
is part o the truthA7 9! other 6ords- the elega!t e8o!omy o the joke is that the very !e8essity o the
detour through the irst @alseA reaso! 8o!irms the se8o!d @trueA reaso!+ Fabi!ovit8h 6a!ts to emigrate
be8ause o the so8ial oppressio! e?empliied by the bureau8ratIs respo!se to his irst reaso!
@8ommu!ism 6ill last oreverA7 Although it may appear to ollo6 the same logi8- Ador!oIs e?ample
does !ot resolve the a!tago!ism- or all that happe!s i! its resolutio! is that the epistemologi8al
a!ti!omy is displa8ed i!to the Thi!g itsel- as its imma!e!t a!tago!ismEthe a!tago!ism is thereby
ully 8o!irmed7 The key Nuestio! here is+ 6here i! the triad o the diale8ti8al pro8ess should o!e lo8ate
the pre8ise mome!t o the e?plosio! o the a!tago!ism 6hi8h u!derlies the e!tire pro8essM Go 6e
e!8ou!ter the a!tago!ism at its purest at the mome!t o the most aggravated !egativityEthat is- o the
!egativity brought to sel:relatio!Eor i! the i!al result o the pro8ess- !amely the reversal o
!egativity i!to the !e6 positivityM Goes the result assert or 8a!8el the a!tago!ismM Hr does it- i! some
6ay- do bothM
9!soar as the =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K is at its 8ore the reversal o the 8o!ditio! o
impossibility i!to a 8o!ditio! o possibility- or the re8og!itio! that 6hat appeared as a! obsta8le is a
positive 8o!ditio! o the e?iste!8e o the very thi!g th6arted by this obsta8le- the ambiguity remai!s+
does re8o!8iliatio! re8o!8ile i! the se!se o overcoming the a!tago!ism- or i! the se!se o the
re8o!8iliatio! with the a!tago!ism @or- i! some se!se- both at the same time- i 6e 8a! say that the
re8o!8iliatio! 6ith a!tago!ism 8ha!ges its a!tago!isti8 !atureAM /he!- i! the )henomenology- =egel
i!trodu8es the !otio! o re8o!8iliatio! as the 6ay to resolve the deadlo8k o the 3eautiul Soul- his
term desig!ates the a88epta!8e o the 8haos a!d i!justi8e o the 6orld as imma!e!t to the 3eautiul
Soul 6hi8h deplores it- the 3eautiul SoulIs a88epta!8e o the a8t that it parti8ipates i! the reality it
8riti8iUes a!d judges- !ot a!y ki!d o magi8al tra!sormatio! o this reality7
Goes !ot the developme!t o 3re8htIs plays rom the 1%20s to the early 1%"0s also e!a8t a!
homologous ki!d o re!u!8iatio!M The plays o the I20s- e?emplarily -he /eggars $pera- perorm a
brutal sa8rii8e o all ideologi8al ideals to 8y!i8al earthly i!terestsEpo6er- mo!ey- se?Ethat lie at the
8ore o the egotisti8 subje8tT the!- i! the Jlear!i!g playsK o the early I"0s- e?emplarily i! -he Measure
-a"en- this subje8t itsel is obliterated i! a gesture o radi8al sa8rii8e o! behal o the 8olle8tive7 9t is
8ru8ial to !ote ho6 the se8o!d sa8rii8e is !ot a! e?ter!al reversal o the irst o!e @o the sa8rii8e o all
ideologi8al idealsA- but its imma!e!t a88omplishme!t+ irst 6e sa8rii8e or re!ou!8e everythi!g or our
ego- the! 6e realiUe that 6e have thereby lost or sa8rii8ed the ego itsel7 /hyM 3e8ause the subje8tive
positio! o a thoroughly 8y!i8al ego is impossible+ the JegoK o!ly u!8tio!s i!soar as it is sustai!ed by
its a!tasmati8 support o illusio!s a!d dreams7
"(
/hat makes 3re8htIs lear!i!g plays so u!8a!!y a!d
disturbi!g is that there is !o deeper subje8tive 8o!ditio! or message be!eath this me8ha!ism
@de!ou!8i!g it as a! oppressive ideologi8al operatio!- 8elebrati!g it as a! eleme!tary ethi8al gesture
OAEall 3re8ht does is stage this me8ha!ism o sa8rii8e i! its ormal !eutrality7
"#
Hr- to shit the a88e!t slightly- 8a! 6e read =egelIs J!egatio! o !egatio!K Nua sel:relati!g
!egativity also i! the se!se o this positio! o utter despair 6he! the subje8t !ot o!ly assumes a radi8al
loss- but is the! deprived o this loss itselE!ot i! the se!se o regai!i!g 6hat 6as lost- but i! the mu8h
more radi8al se!se o i!di!g itsel i! a radi8al void ater losi!g the very 8oordi!ates 6hi8h made the
loss mea!i!gulM 9! =it8h8o8kIs 6ertigo- S8ottie irst e?perie!8es the loss o ,adelei!e- his atal loveT
6he! he re8reates ,adelei!e i! 2udy a!d the! dis8overs that the ,adelei!e he k!e6 6as 2udy all alo!g
prete!di!g to be ,adelei!e- 6hat he dis8overs is !ot simply that 2udy is a ake @he k!e6 that she 6as
!ot the true ,adelei!e- si!8e he had re8reated a 8opy o ,adelei!e out o herA- but that- because she is
not a fa"eGshe is MadeleineW Madeleine herself was already a fa"eEthe ob1et a disi!tegrates- the very
loss is lost- 6e get a !egatio! o !egatio!7 9t is importa!t to remember here that the last shot o
6ertigoEater 2udy alls rom the to6er- S8ottie sta!ds o! the edge- looki!g do6!Egave rise to
radi8ally opposed readi!gs+ or some i!terpreters- this shot sig!als that S8ottie survives as a totally
broke! ma!- or others- it is a ki!d o happy e!di!g @S8ottie is !o6 8ured o his disease- he 8a! look
do6! i!to the abyssAEa! ambivale!8e 6hi8h pere8tly reprodu8es the ambiguity o the out8ome o the
=egelia! !egatio! o !egatio! @utter despair or re8o!8iliatio!A7 So- agai!+ 6here does the =egelia!
!egatio! o !egatio! sta!d 6ith regard to this ambiguityM
A 8loser look at diere!t modalities o the !egatio! o !egatio! i! =egel is !eeded here7 First-
6e have the JFabi!ovit8h:matri?K @the reversal o the problem i!to its o6! solutio!+ JthesisKE9 6a!t
to emigrate be8ause- ater the all o so8ialism- they 6ill blame us- the 2e6s- or the 8ommu!ist 8rimesT
Ja!ti:thesisKEbut so8ialism 6ill !ever all- it 6ill last oreverT Jsy!thesisKEthat is the true reaso! 9
6a!t to emigrateA- 6hi8h e!ds 6ith a positive resolutio!7 The! 6e have the JAdor!o:matri?K i! 6hi8h
the reversal o the problem i!to its o6! solutio! @here+ the tra!spositio! o a! epistemologi8al
limitatio! i!to a! o!tologi8al impossibilityA bri!gs !o resolutio!- but- o! the 8o!trary- re!ders visible
the u!derlyi!g a!tago!ism i! its pure state7 Fi!ally- 6e have the J9rma:matri?-K the logi8 6hi8h
u!derlies FreudIs dream o 9rmaIs i!je8tio!7 The dream begi!s 6ith a 8o!versatio! bet6ee! Freud a!d
his patie!t 9rma about the ailure o her treatme!t due to a! i!e8ted !eedleT i! the 8ourse o the
8o!versatio!- Freud gets 8loser to her- approa8hes her a8e a!d looks deep i!to her mouth- 8o!ro!ti!g
the horrible sight o the red lesh o her throat7 At this poi!t o u!bearable horror- the to!e o the dream
8ha!ges- the horror all o a sudde! passes i!to 8omedy+ three do8tors- FreudIs rie!ds- appear- 6ho- i! a
ridi8ulous pseudo:proessio!al jargo!- e!umerate multiple @a!d mutually e?8lusiveA reaso!s 6hy
9rmaIs poiso!i!g by the i!e8ted !eedle 6as !obodyIs ault @there 6as !o i!je8tio!T the !eedle 6as
8lea! OA7 So there is irst a traumati8 e!8ou!ter @the sight o 9rmaIs throatA- ollo6ed by the sudde!
shit i!to 8omedy- 6hi8h e!ables the dreamer to avoid a! e!8ou!ter 6ith the true trauma7 9t may appear
that the triad o the J9rma:matri?K is that o J9FSK+ irst- the imagi!ary dualityT the!- its aggravatio!
i!to the abyss o the FealT i!ally- the symboli8 resolutio!7 =o6ever- a more pre8ise readi!g dis8loses
that i! a8t 6e get t6o Feals i! the dream- i! that ea8h o its t6o parts 8o!8ludes 6ith a iguratio! o
the Feal7 9! the 8o!8lusio! o the irst part @the 8o!versatio! bet6ee! 9rma a!d FreudA- this is obvious+
the look i!to 9rmaIs throat re!ders the Feal i! the guise o primordial lesh- the palpitatio! o the lie
substa!8e as the Thi!g itsel- i! its disgusti!g dime!sio! as a 8a!8erous outgro6th7 =o6ever- i! the
se8o!d part- the 8omi8 symboli8 e?8ha!ge or i!terplay bet6ee! the three do8tors also e!ds up 6ith the
Feal- this time i! its opposite aspe8tEthe Feal o 6riti!g- o the mea!i!gless ormula o
trimethylami!e7 The diere!8e hi!ges o! the diere!t starti!g poi!t+ i 6e start 6ith the imagi!ary @the
mirror:8o!ro!tatio! o Freud a!d 9rmaA- 6e get the Feal i! its imagi!ary dime!sio!- as a horriyi!g
primordial image that 8a!8els the imagery itselT i 6e start 6ith the symboli8 @the e?8ha!ge o
argume!ts bet6ee! the three do8torsA- 6e get the sig!iier itsel tra!sormed i!to the Feal o a
mea!i!gless letter or ormula7 These t6o igures are the t6o opposite aspe8ts o the Feal+ the abyss o
the primordial .ie:Thi!g a!d the mea!i!gless letter or ormula @as i! the Feal o the moder! s8ie!8eA7
=o6 does this duality o the imagi!ary Feal a!d the symboli8 Feal relate to the Feal 6e
e!8ou!tered at the e!d o the JAdor!o:matri?KM The Feal 6e get i! the JAdor!o:matri?K is !either o
the irst t6o- but the Jreal Feal-K a purely ormal Feal- the Feal o a! a!tago!ism @J8o!tradi8tio!KA7
A!d 6hat 6e should add here is this Feal is i! itsel redoubled+ as 6e have already see!- the Feal is
8hara8teriUed by a ki!d o J8oi!8ide!8e o opposites-K o the purely material 8o!ti!ge!t remai!der @the
ob1et a- a little pie8e o realityA a!d the pure Feal o ormal a!tago!ism7 This bri!gs us to the key
Nuestio!+ does =egel ge!erate the ob1et a at the e!d o the pro8ess o !egatio! o !egatio!M That is to
say+ the .a8a!ia! Feal at its most radi8al is !ot a pre:symboli8 substa!8eT it rather emerges through the
redoubli!g o the symboli8- through the passage rom alie!atio! to separatio! @dei!ed as the
overlappi!g o the t6o la8ksA7 So does !ot the triumpha!t to!e o the =egelia! !egatio! o !egatio!
hi!ge o! the a8t that- 6hile =egel 8a!Emaybe 8o!ditio!allyEthi!k a!tago!ism- he is !ot able to
thi!k the ultimate spe8ulative ide!tity o the purely ormal a!tago!ism a!d the 8o!ti!ge!t remai!der or
e?8ess o a little pie8e o realityM This limitatio!- this i!ability to thi!k the Ji!divisible remai!derK o
the diale8ti8al orm !ot as a! e?8ess o the Feal 6hi8h simply eludes diale8ti8al mediatio!- but as the
produ8t o this mediatio!- as its 8o!8ludi!g mome!t- is 8learly dis8er!ible i! =egelIs theory o
marriage @rom his )hilosophy of 7ightA7
"'
THE FORMAL ASPECT

So- agai!- 8a! =egel thi!k the e?8ess o the death drive @o love as the lethal passio!A 6hi8h
persists as a ki!d o Ji!divisible remai!derK ater the diale8ti8al resolutio! o the pro8ess i! a ratio!al
totalityM A!d i he 8a!!ot- are 6e really deali!g 6ith a u!dame!tal systemi8 ailureM /ould it !ot be
appropriate to 8laim that- i =egel 6ere aithul to his o6! i!!er logi8- he should have applied here the
same reaso!i!g as he does i! his dedu8tio! o the !e8essity o mo!ar8hy as the peak o the ratio!al
stateM /he! =egel 8laims that the 8o!8eptio! o the mo!ar8h is Jo all 8o!8eptio!s the hardest or
ratio8i!atio!- i7e7 or the method o rele8tio! employed by the )!dersta!di!g-K the spe8ulative
mome!t that )!dersta!di!g 8a!!ot grasp is Jthe tra!sitio! o the 8o!8ept o pure sel:determi!atio!
i!to the immedia8y o bei!g a!d so i!to the realm o !ature7K 9! other 6ords- 6hile )!dersta!di!g 8a!
6ell grasp the u!iversal mediatio! o a livi!g totality- 6hat it 8a!!ot grasp is that this totality- i! order
to a8tualiUe itsel- has to a8Nuire a8tual e?iste!8e i! the guise o a! immediate J!aturalK si!gularity7
Should 6e the! posit that- i! a stri8tly homologous 6ay- the ratio!al totality o re8o!8iled amily lie
has to ge!erate a Jpassio!ate atta8hme!tK to the 8o!ti!ge!t si!gularity o the belovedM
The diere!8e that separates .a8a! rom =egel is thus a mi!imal diere!8e- a ti!y- barely
per8eptible eature 6hi8h 8ha!ges everythi!g7 9t is !ot =egel versus a!other igure- but =egel a!d his
spe8tral doubleEi! the passage rom =egel to .a8a!- 6e do !ot pass rom H!e:=egel to a!other H!e:
.a8a!7 They are !ot t6o- but the H!e:=egel plus his ob1et a7 This bri!gs us ba8k to the relatio!ship
bet6ee! repetitio! a!d mi!imal diere!8e+ mi!imal diere!8e is somethi!g 6hi8h emerges i! pure
repetitio!7 9! =e!!i!g ,a!kelIs poli8e pro8edural series- 9!spe8tor *urt /alla!der has a ather 6hose
mea!s o survival is pai!ti!gEhe pai!ts all the time- maki!g hu!dreds o 8opies o the same pai!ti!g- a
orest la!ds8ape over 6hi8h the su! !ever sets @therei! resides the JmessageK o the pai!ti!g+ it is
possible to hold the su! 8aptive- to preve!t it rom setti!g- to reeUe a magi8al mome!t- e?tra8ti!g its
pure appeara!8e rom !atureIs eter!al 8ir8ular moveme!t o ge!eratio! a!d dege!eratio!A7 There is-
ho6ever- a Jmi!imal diere!8eK i! these other6ise ide!ti8al pai!ti!gs+ i! some- there is a small grouse
i! the la!ds8ape- 6hile others are 6ithout the grouse- as i eter!ity itsel- roUe! time- has to be
sustai!ed by a mi!imal variatio!- a ki!d o sta!d:i! or 6hat really disti!guishes ea8h pai!ti!g- its
u!iNue- purely virtual i!te!sity7
GeleuUeIs most radi8al a!ti:=egelia! argume!t 8o!8er!s this pure diere!8e+ =egel is u!able to
thi!k pure diere!8e 6hi8h is outside the horiUo! o ide!tity or 8o!tradi8tio!T =egel 8o!8eives a
radi8aliUed diere!8e as 8o!tradi8tio! 6hi8h is the!- through its diale8ti8al resolutio!- agai! subsumed
u!der ide!tity7 @=ere- GeleuUe is also opposed to Gerrida 6ho- rom GeleuUeIs perspe8tive- remai!s
8aught 6ithi! the vi8ious 8y8le o 8o!tradi8tio!>ide!tity- merely postpo!i!g resolutio! i!dei!itely7A
A!d- i!soar as =egel is the philosopher o a8tuality or a8tualiUatio!- i!soar as- or him- the JtruthK o
a pote!tiality is revealed i! its a8tualiUatio!- =egelIs i!ability to thi!k pure diere!8e is li!ked to his
i!ability to thi!k the virtual i! its proper dime!sio!- as a possibility 6hi8h already Nua possibility
possesses its o6! reality+ pure diere!8e is !ot a8tual- it does !ot 8o!8er! diere!t a8tual properties o
a thi!g or diere!8es amo!g thi!gs- its status is purely virtual- it is a diere!8e 6hi8h takes pla8e at its
purest pre8isely 6he! !othi!g 8ha!ges i! a8tuality- 6he!- i! a8tuality- the same thi!g repeats itsel7 9t
may appear that it is o!ly GeleuUe 6ho ormulates the truly post:=egelia! program o thi!ki!g
diere!8e+ the Gerridea! Jope!i!gK 6hi8h emphasiUes the e!dless diere!8e- the dissemi!atio! that
8a! !ever be sublated or re:appropriated- et87- remai!s 6ithi! the =egelia! rame6ork- merely
Jope!i!gK it up O 3ut- here- the =egelia! 8ou!ter:argume!t 6ould be+ is !ot JpureK virtual diere!8e
the very !ame or a8tual sel:ide!tityM 9s it !ot constitutive o a8tual ide!tityM ,ore pre8isely- i! the
terms o GeleuUeIs tra!s8e!de!tal empiri8ism- pure diere!8e is the virtual support or 8o!ditio! o
a8tual ide!tity+ a! e!tity is per8eived as J@sel:Aide!ti8alK 6he! @a!d o!ly 6he!A its virtual support is
redu8ed to a pure diere!8e7 9! .a8a!ese- pure diere!8e 8o!8er!s the suppleme!t o the virtual obje8t
@.a8a!Is ob1et aAT its most plasti8 e?perie!8e is that o a sudde! 8ha!ge i! @our per8eptio! oA a! obje8t
6hi8h- 6ith regard to its positive Nualities- remai!s the same+ Jalthough !othi!g 8ha!ges- the thi!g all
o a sudde! seemed totally diere!tKEas GeleuUe 6ould have put it- it is the thi!gIs intensity 6hi8h
8ha!ges7 @For .a8a!- the theoreti8al problem or task is here to disti!guish bet6ee! the ,aster:Sig!iier
a!d the ob1et a- both o 6hi8h reer to the abyssal d i! the obje8t beyo!d its positive properties7A As
su8h- pure diere!8e is 8loser to a!tago!ism tha! to the diere!8e bet6ee! t6o positive so8ial groups-
o!e o 6hi8h is to be a!!ihilated7 The u!iversalism that sustai!s a! a!tago!isti8 struggle is !ot
e?8lusive o a!yo!e- 6hi8h is 6hy the highest triumph lies !ot i! the destru8tio! o the e!emy- but i!
the e?plosio! o Ju!iversal brotherhoodK i! 6hi8h age!ts o the opposi!g 8amp 8ha!ge sides @re8all the
proverbial s8e!es o poli8e or military u!its joi!i!g demo!stratorsA7 9t is i! su8h a! e?plosio! o all:
e!8ompassi!g brotherhood- rom 6hi8h !o o!e is i! pri!8iple e?8luded- that the diere!8e bet6ee!
JusK a!d Jthe e!emyK as positive age!ts is redu8ed to a pure ormal diere!8e7
This bri!gs us to the topi8 o diere!8e- repetitio!- a!d 8ha!ge @i! the se!se o the rise o
somethi!g ge!ui!ely !e6A7 2ea!:.u8 1odard proposed the motto Je change rien pour <ue tout soit
diffArentK @JDha!ge !othi!g so that everythi!g 6ill be diere!tKA- a reversal o JSome thi!gs must
8ha!ge so that everythi!g remai!s the same7K 9! some politi8al 8o!stellatio!s- su8h as the late 8apitalist
dy!ami8 i! 6hi8h o!ly 8o!sta!t sel:revolutio!iUi!g 8a! mai!tai! the system- those 6ho reuse to
8ha!ge a!ythi!g are ee8tively the age!ts o true 8ha!ge+ the 8ha!ge o the very pri!8iple o 8ha!ge7
/e all k!o6 the Hrie!tal pri!8iple o the 8osmi8 /hole 6hi8h reprodu8es itsel through the i!8essa!t
moveme!t a!d struggle o its partsEall the parts move a!d thereby mai!tai! the deeper pea8e o the
8osmi8 /hole7 The most eleme!tary ormula o /ester! !egativity is the disturba!8e o the /hole
6hi8h o88urs pre8isely 6he! somethi!g gets stu8k- i?ed- reuses to move- thereby disturbi!g the
8osmi8 bala!8e o 8ha!ge- thro6i!g it out o joi!t7
GeleuUeIs thesis a88ordi!g to 6hi8h 4e6 a!d repetitio! are !ot opposed- or the 4e6 arises
o!ly rom repetitio!- must be read agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the diere!8e bet6ee! the virtual a!d the
a8tual+ 8ha!ges 6hi8h 8o!8er! o!ly the a8tual aspe8t o thi!gs are o!ly 8ha!ges 6ithi! the e?isti!g
rame- !ot the emerge!8e o somethi!g really 4e6Ethe 4e6 o!ly emerges 6he! the virtual support o
the a8tual 8ha!ges- a!d this 8ha!ge o88urs pre8isely i! the guise o a repetitio! i! 6hi8h a thi!g
remai!s the same i! its a8tuality7 9! other 6ords- thi!gs really 8ha!ge !ot 6he! A tra!sorms itsel i!to
3- but 6he!- 6hile A remai!s e?a8tly the same 6ith regard to its a8tual properties- it Jtotally 8ha!gesK
imper8eptibly7 This 8ha!ge is the mi!imal diere!8e- a!d the task o theory is to subtra8t this mi!imal
diere!8e rom the give! ield o multipli8ities7 9! this se!se- subtra8tio! is also a!other !ame or the
=egelia! sublatio! @+ufhebungA or !egatio! o !egatio!+ i! it- radi8al 8ha!ge @!egatio!A overlaps 6ith
the pure repetitio! o the same7 This mea!s that the i!ertia o the Hld a!d the rise o the 4e6 also
8oi!8ide i! the diale8ti8al !otio! o repetitio!7 The 4e6 emerges 6he!- i!stead o a pro8ess just
J!aturallyK evolvi!g i! its lo6 o ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio!- this lo6 be8omes stu8k- a! eleme!t @a
gestureA is i?ed- persists- repeats itsel a!d thus perturbs the J!aturalK lu? o @deA8ompositio!7 This
persiste!8e o the Hld- its Jstu8k!ess-K is the o!ly possible site o the rise o the 4e6+ i! short- the
minimal definition of the ew is as an $ld which gets stuc" and thereby refuses to pass awayF
=ere is the 8ru? o the post:=egelia! rupture+ its most eleme!tary eature- rom *ierkegaard to
,ar?- is the gap that emerges bet6ee! sublatio! a!d repetitio!T that is- repetitio! a8Nuires auto!omy
6ith regard to sublatio!- a!d the t6o are !o6 opposedEeither a thi!g is sublated i!to a higher mode o
its e?iste!8e- or it just drags o! i! its i!ertia7 This Jliberatio!K o repetitio! rom the hold o sublatio!-
this idea o a !o!:8umulative repetitio! 6hi8h just ru!s o! empty- !ot ge!erati!g a!ythi!g !e6- is
usually take! as the mi!imal i!de? o post:=egelia! materialism- i! its break 6ith the =egelia! 8ir8le
o total 8o!8eptual mediatio!7 )!der .a8a!Is i!lue!8e- 2ea! =yppolite read i! this 6ay the
philosophi8al ou!datio! o the Freudia! !otio! o death drive as the 8ompulsio! to repeat7 As .a8a!
poi!ts out i! his Seminar II- a!other !ame or this e?8ess o repetitio! over orga!i8 progress is
me8ha!ism+ 6hat the post:=egelia! thought bri!gs out is the !otio! o a !o!:8umulative me8ha!i8al
repetitio!7
9s this diag!osis 8orre8t- ho6everM /as !ot =egel ully a6are that the 6ay spirit arises out o
the orga!i8 !atural pro8ess is through a me8ha!i8al repetitio! 6hi8h disturbs the ree orga!i8
deployme!tM This is the poi!t o his dis8ussio!s o habit- et87- i! the JA!thropologyK se8tio! o his
)hilosophy of Spirit+ i! the triad o me8ha!i8al pro8ess- orga!i8 pro8ess- a!d the properly spiritual
pro8ess- the spiritual dime!sio! !eeds a JregressiveK support i! me8ha!i8al habits @Jbli!dK lear!i!g o
the rules o la!guage- et87A7 There is !o spirit 6ithout a ma8hi!e- the appeara!8e o spirit is a ma8hi!e
6hi8h 8olo!iUes the orga!ism- the vi8tory o spirit over mere lie appears as a Jregressio!K o lie to a
me8ha!ism7 @This a8t i!ds its e?treme e?pressio! i! Ges8artesIs JdualismK+ the assertio! o pure
thi!ki!g is 8orrelative to the redu8tio! o !ature to a bli!d me8ha!ism7A
=o6 are 6e to 8lariy this elusive diere!8e bet6ee! =egel a!d FreudM ,lade! Golar proposed
to read J=egel is FreudK as the ultimate philosophi8al i!i!ite judgme!t- si!8e =egel a!d Freud 8a!!ot
but appear absolute opposites+ Absolute *!o6i!g @the u!ity o the subje8t a!d the AbsoluteA versus the
u!8o!s8ious @the subje8t !ot master i! his o6! houseAT e?8essive k!o6ledge versus la8k o k!o6ledge7
The irst 8ompli8atio! i! this simple oppositio! is that- or Freud a!d .a8a!- the u!8o!s8ious is !ot a
bli!d i!sti!8tual ield but also a ki!d o k!o6ledge- a! u!8o!s8ious k!o6ledge- a k!o6ledge 6hi8h
does !ot k!o6 itsel @Ju!k!o6! k!o6!s-K i! terms o Fumseldia! epistemologyAEso 6hat i
Absolute *!o6i!g is to be lo8ated i!to the very te!sio! bet6ee! the k!o6ledge a6are o itsel a!d the
u!k!o6! k!o6ledgeM /hat i the Jabsolute!essK o k!o6i!g reers !ot to our a88ess to the divi!e
Absolute:i!:itsel- or to a total sel:rele8tio! through 6hi8h 6e 6ould gai! ull a88ess to our
Ju!k!o6! k!o6i!gK a!d thus a8hieve subje8tive sel:tra!spare!8y- but to a mu8h more modest @a!d all
the more dii8ult to thi!kA overlappi!g bet6ee! the la8k o our J8o!s8iousK k!o6ledge a!d the la8k
i!s8ribed i!to the very heart o our u!k!o6! k!o6ledgeM 9t is at this level that o!e should lo8ate the
parallel bet6ee! =egel a!d Freud+ i =egel dis8overs u!reaso! @8o!tradi8tio!- the mad da!8e o
opposites 6hi8h u!settles a!y ratio!al orderA i! the heart o reaso!- Freud dis8overs reaso! i! the heart
o u!reaso! @i! slips o to!gue- dreams- mad!essA7 /hat they share is the logi8 o retroa8tivity+ i!
=egel- the H!e is a retroa8tive ee8t o its loss- the very retur! to the lost H!e 8o!stitutes itT a!d i!
Freud- repressio! a!d the retur! o the repressed 8oi!8ide- the repressed is the retroa8tive ee8t o its
retur!7
There are also good reaso!s or li!ki!g the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious to sel:8o!s8ious!ess as sel:
rele?ivity+ Jsel:8o!s8ious!ess is a! obje8t-K or i! a! obje8t:symptom- 9 rele?ively register a truth
about mysel i!a88essible to my 8o!s8ious!ess7 This- ho6ever- is !ot Nuite the same as the =egelia!
u!8o!s8ious+ it is a parti8ular @si!gularA u!8o!s8ious- a ki!d o 8o!ti!ge!t tra!s8e!de!tal- a 8o!ti!ge!t
k!ot:sinthome holdi!g together the subje8tIs u!iverse7 9! 8lear 8o!trast to this Freudia! u!8o!s8ious-
the =egelia! u!8o!s8ious is ormal+ it is the orm o e!u!8iatio! i!visible i! the e!u!8iated 8o!te!tT it
is systemi8- !ot a 8o!ti!ge!t bricolage o lateral li!ks @6hat .a8a! 8alls lalangueAT that is- it resides i!
the u!iversal symboli8 orm o! 6hi8h the subje8t u!k!o6i!gly relies- !ot i! the 8o!ti!ge!t
Jpathologi8alK desire 6hi8h tra!spires i! slips o to!gue7 =egelIs u!8o!s8ious is the u!8o!s8ious o
sel:8o!s8ious!ess itsel- its o6! !e8essary !o!:tra!spare!8y- the !e8essary overlooki!g o its o6!
form @Jdas FormelleKA i! the 8o!te!t it 8o!ro!ts7 The u!8o!s8ious is the u!iversal orm o parti8ular
8o!te!t+ 6he! =egel says that the truth is i! 6hat 9 say- !ot i! 6hat 9 mea! @to sayA- he mea!s that truth
is i! the u!iversality o the mea!i!g o 6ords as opposed to the parti8ular i!te!tio!7 The 8o!trast
bet6ee! the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious @si!gular 8o!ti!ge!t li!ks- 6ord:playA a!d the =egelia! u!8o!s8ious
@the u!iversal s8heme overlooked by our 8o!s8ious o8usi!g o! the parti8ular- or 6hat =egel himsel
8alls das FormelleA is thus obviousE.a8a! speaks o the J=egelia! u!8o!s8ious-K opposi!g it to the
Freudia!7 The most su88i!8t dei!itio! o the =egelia! u!8o!s8ious is provided to6ards the e!d o the
J9!trodu8tio!K to the )henomenology- 6here =egel determi!es das Formelle as 9!:itsel or For:us @the
philosophi8al observerA i! 8o!trast to the or:8o!s8ious!ess @ho6 thi!gs appear to the e!gaged subje8t
itselA- as the pro8ess i! 8o!trast to its abstra8t result- a!d as the determi!ate !egatio! i! 8o!trast to
abstra8t !egatio! 6hi8h leaves the !egated 8o!te!t behi!d+

the result 6hi8h at a!y time 8omes about i! the 8ase o a! u!true mode o k!o6ledge 8a!!ot possibly
8ollapse i!to a! empty !othi!g- but must !e8essarily be take! as the !egatio! o that o 6hi8h it is a
result O this origi!atio! o the !e6 obje8tE6hi8h oers itsel to 8o!s8ious!ess 6ithout 8o!s8ious!ess
k!o6i!g ho6 it 8omes by itEthat to us- 6ho 6at8h the pro8ess- is to be see! goi!g o!- so to say-
behi!d its ba8k7 Thereby there e!ters i!to its pro8ess a mome!t o bei!g in itself- or o bei!g or us-
6hi8h is !ot e?pressly prese!ted to that 8o!s8ious!ess 6hi8h is i! the grip o e?perie!8e itsel7 The
content- ho6ever- o 6hat 6e see arisi!g- e?ists or it- a!d 6e lay hold o a!d 8omprehe!d merely its
ormal 8hara8ter [das Formelle\- i7e7 its bare origi!atio!T for it- 6hat has thus arise! has merely the
8hara8ter o obje8t- 6hile- for us- it appears at the same time as a pro8ess a!d 8omi!g i!to bei!g7
"$
9! short- 6he! the subje8t passes rom o!e Jobje8tK @6hi8h 8a! also be a! e!tire mode o lieA to
a!other- it appears to it that the !e6 Jobje8tK @8o!te!tA is simply immediately ou!dT 6hat the subje8t
does !ot see is the pro8ess o mediatio!- goi!g o! behi!d its ba8k- 6hi8h ge!erated the !e6 8o!te!t out
o the i!8o!siste!8ies o the old o!e7 The Freudia! u!8o!s8ious also has a ormal aspe8t a!d is !ot
merely a matter o 8o!te!t+ re8all the 8ases 6he! Freud i!terprets a dream so that 6hat is repressed or
e?8luded rom its 8o!te!t retur!s as a eature o the orm o the dream @i! a dream about preg!a!8y- the
a8t that the dreamer is !ot sure 6ho the ather is arti8ulates itsel i! the guise o a! u!8ertai!ty about
6hat the dream 6as aboutAT urthermore- Freud emphasiUes that the true se8ret o the dream is !ot its
8o!te!t @the Jdream:thoughtsKA- but the orm itsel+

The late!t dream:thoughts are the material 6hi8h the dream:6ork tra!sorms i!to the ma!iest dream
O The o!ly esse!tial thi!g about dreams is the dream:6ork that has i!lue!8ed the thought:material7
/e have !o right to ig!ore it i! our theory- eve! though 6e may disregard it i! 8ertai! pra8ti8al
situatio!s7 A!alyti8 observatio! sho6s urther that the dream:6ork !ever restri8ts itsel to tra!slati!g
these thoughts i!to the ar8hai8 or regressive mode o e?pressio! that is amiliar to you7 9! additio!- it
regularly takes possessio! o somethi!g else- 6hi8h is !ot part o the late!t thoughts o the previous
day- but 6hi8h is the true moti or8e or the 8o!stru8tio! o the dream7 This i!dispe!sable additio!
[unentbehrliche Nutat\ is the eNually u!8o!s8ious 6ish or the ulillme!t o 6hi8h the 8o!te!t o the
dream is give! its !e6 orm7 A dream may thus be a!y sort o thi!g i! so ar as you are o!ly taki!g i!to
a88ou!t the thoughts it represe!tsEa 6ar!i!g- a! i!te!tio!- a preparatio!- a!d so o!T but it is al6ays
also the ulillme!t o a! u!8o!s8ious 6ish a!d- i you are 8o!sideri!g it as a produ8t o the dream:
6ork- it is o!ly that7 A dream is thereore !ever simply a! i!te!tio!- or a 6ar!i!g- but al6ays a!
i!te!tio!- et87- tra!slated i!to the ar8hai8 mode o thought by the help o a! u!8o!s8ious 6ish a!d
tra!sormed to ulill that 6ish7 The o!e 8hara8teristi8- the 6ish:ulillme!t- is the i!variable o!eT the
other may vary7 9t may or its part o!8e more be a 6ish- i! 6hi8h 8ase the dream 6ill- 6ith the help o
a! u!8o!s8ious 6ish- represe!t as ulilled a late!t 6ish o the previous day7
"&
0very detail is 6orth a!alyUi!g i! this brillia!t passage- rom its impli8it ope!i!g motto J6hat
is good e!ough or pra8ti8eE!amely the sear8h or the mea!i!g o dreamsEis !ot good e!ough or
theory-K to its 8o!8ludi!g redoubli!g o the 6ish7 9ts key i!sight is- o 8ourse- the Jtria!gulatio!K o
late!t dream:thought- ma!iest dream:8o!te!t- a!d the u!8o!s8ious 6ish- 6hi8h limits the s8ope
oEor- rather- dire8tly u!dermi!esEthe herme!euti8 model o the i!terpretatio! o dreams @the path
rom the ma!iest dream:8o!te!t to its hidde! mea!i!g- the late!t dream:thoughtA- 6hi8h travels i! the
opposite dire8tio! to the path o the ormatio! o a dream @the tra!spositio! o the late!t dream:thought
i!to the ma!iest dream:8o!te!t by the dream:6orkA7 The parado? is that this dream:6ork is !ot merely
a pro8ess o maski!g the dreamIs Jtrue messageK+ the dreamIs true 8ore- its u!8o!s8ious 6ish- i!s8ribes
itsel o!ly through a!d i! this very pro8ess o maski!g- so that the mome!t 6e re:tra!slate the dream:
8o!te!t ba8k i!to the dream:thought e?pressed i! it- 6e lose the Jtrue motive or8eK o the dreamEi!
short- it is the pro8ess o maski!g itsel 6hi8h i!s8ribes i!to the dream its true se8ret7 H!e should
thereore reverse the sta!dard !otio! o pe!etrati!g deeper a!d deeper i!to the 8ore o the dream+ it is
!ot that 6e irst move rom the ma!iest dream:8o!te!t to the irst:level se8ret- the late!t dream:
thought- a!d the!- taki!g a step urther- go eve! deeper- to the dreamIs u!8o!s8ious 8ore- the
u!8o!s8ious 6ish7 The JdeeperK 6ish is lo8ated i! the very gap bet6ee! the late!t dream:thought a!d
the ma!iest dream:8o!te!t7
4o!etheless- the Freudia! orm o the u!8o!s8ious is !ot the same as the =egelia! o!e7 3ut-
more importa!tly- i!stead o automati8ally taki!g this gap that separates Freud rom =egel as a!
i!di8atio! o =egelIs limitatio! @J=egel 8ould !ot see that OKA- o!e should reverse the u!derlyi!g
Nuestio!+ !ot o!ly JDa! =egel thi!k the Freudia! u!8o!s8iousMK but also JDa! Freud thi!k the
=egelia! u!8o!s8iousMK 9t is !ot that there is somethi!g Jtoo radi8al or =egelK missi!g rom his
thought- somethi!g 6ith regard to 6hi8h Freud is more 8o!siste!t a!d Jgoes urther-K but the very
opposite+ like =egel- Freud is a thi!ker o 8o!li8t- struggle- o Jsel:8o!tradi8tio!K a!d i!here!t
a!tago!ismsT but- i! 8lear 8o!trast to =egel- i! Freud- a 8o!li8t is !ot resolved by a sel:8o!tradi8tio!
bei!g take! to a! e?treme a!d- 6ith its sel:8a!8ellatio!- a !e6 dime!sio! emergi!g7 H! the 8o!trary-
the 8o!li8t is !ot resolved at all- the J8o!tradi8tio!K is !ot brought to its 8lima?- but is rather stalled-
brought to a temporary halt i! the guise o a 8ompromise:ormatio!7 This 8ompromise is !ot the Ju!ity
o oppositesK i! the =egelia! se!se o the J!egatio! o !egatio!-K but a ridi8ulously failed !egatio!- a
!egatio! 6hi8h is hi!dered- derailed- distorted- t6isted- sidetra8ked- a ki!d o clinamen o the !egatio!
@to use the !eat ormulatio! proposed by ,lade! GolarA7 9! other 6ords- 6hat eludes =egel @or 6hat he
6ould have dismissed as trili!g or a88ide!talA is overdetermi!atio!+ i! the =egelia! diale8ti8al
pro8ess- !egativity is al6ays radi8al or radi8aliUed- a!d 8o!siste!tE=egel !ever 8o!siders the optio!
o a !egatio! that ails- so that somethi!g is just hal:!egated a!d 8o!ti!ues to lead a subterra!ea!
e?iste!8e @or- rather- i!siste!8eA7
"%
=e !ever 8o!siders a 8o!stellatio! i! 6hi8h a !e6 spiritual
pri!8iple 8o!ti!ues to 8oe?ist 6ith the old o!e i! a! i!8o!siste!t totality- or i! 6hi8h a mome!t
8o!de!ses @verdichtenA a multipli8ity o asso8iative 8ausal 8hai!s- so that its e?pli8it JobviousK
mea!i!g is there to 8o!8eal the true repressed o!e7 /hat 6ould =egel have made o FreudIs dream o!
9rmaIs i!je8tio!- the i!terpretatio! o 6hi8h u!earths a ki!d o superposition o multiple i!terpretive
li!es @getti!g rid o the guilt or the ailure o 9rmaIs treatme!tT the 6ish to be like the primordial ather
6ho possesses all the 6ome!T a!d so o!AM /hat 6ould =egel have said about a dream i! 6hi8h the
remai!s o the day @-agesresteA are 8o!!e8ted to the 8ore o the dream o!ly through verbal or similar
margi!al asso8iatio!sM /hat 6ould he have said about a dream o a 6oma! patie!t @J0er husband
as"ed her8 QDont you thin" we ought to have the piano tuned? +nd she replied8 QIts not worth it
4KA- 6here the 8lue is provided by the presumed me!tal o88urre!8e o the same ragme!t o spee8h i!
a previous a!alyti8 sessio! duri!g 6hi8h she had sudde!ly 8aught hold o her ja8ket- o!e o the butto!s
havi!g 8ome u!do!e- as though she 6ere sayi!g+ JClease do!It look [at my breasts\T its not worth it7K
There is !o !otio!al u!ity here bet6ee! the t6o levels @the dream s8e!e a!d the a88ide!t duri!g the
previous sessio!A- 6hat 8o!!e8ts them is just a sig!iyi!g bridge7 =egel does reer to lalangue- to
6ord:play- but J6ithi! the limits o reaso! alo!eK+ +ufhebung 8o!tai!s a happy 8oi!8ide!8e o three
mea!i!gs 6hi8h orm the same !otio!- 6hile i! the dream logi8- multiple mea!i!gs remai! disparate7
This is also 6hy =egel 8a!!ot thi!k overdetermi!atio!7 For e?ample- i! the so8ial sphere- this is
ho6 the e8o!omy plays its role o determi!i!g the so8ial stru8ture Ji! the last i!sta!8eK+ the e8o!omy
is !ever dire8tly prese!t as a! a8tual 8ausal age!t- its prese!8e is purely virtual- it is the so8ial Jpseudo:
8ause-K but- pre8isely as su8h- absolute- !o!:relatio!al- the abse!t 8ause- somethi!g that is !ever Jat its
o6! pla8eK+ Jthat is 6hy Vthe e8o!omi8I is !ever give! properly speaki!g- but rather desig!ates a
diere!tial virtuality to be i!terpreted- al6ays 8overed over by its orms o a8tualiUatio!7K
(0
9t is the
abse!t d 6hi8h 8ir8ulates bet6ee! the multiple levels o the so8ial ield @e8o!omi8- politi8al-
ideologi8al- legal OA- distributi!g them i! their spe8ii8 arti8ulatio!7 H!e should thus i!sist o! the
radi8al diere!8e bet6ee! the e8o!omi8 as this virtual d- the absolute poi!t o reere!8e o the so8ial
ield- a!d the e8o!omi8 i! its a8tuality- as o!e o the eleme!ts @JsubsystemsKA o the a8tual so8ial
totality+ 6he! they e!8ou!ter ea8h otherEor- i! =egelese- 6he! the e8o!omi8 as virtual e!8ou!ters
itsel i! the guise o its a8tual 8ou!terpart as its Joppositio!al determi!atio!KEthis ide!tity 8oi!8ides
6ith absolute @sel:A8o!tradi8tio!7 =o6ever- although the =egelia! 8o!8ept o oppositio!al
determi!atio! 8aptures the key eature o overdetermi!atio!- 6hat gets lost is the multipli8ity o
Ja8torsK @the 8ausal li!ks o sig!ii8atio!A 6hi8h are o!ly parasiti8ally e?ploited or ma!ipulated- !ever
8reated- by the Jlast i!sta!8e7K
At this pre8ise poi!t- politi8s e!ters+ the spa8e o politi8s is ope!ed up by the dista!8e o the
Je8o!omyK rom itsel- by the gap that separates the e8o!omy as the abse!t Dause rom the e8o!omy i!
its Joppositio!al determi!atio!-K as o!e o the eleme!ts o the so8ial totality7 The e8o!omy is thus here
doubly i!s8ribed i! the pre8ise se!se 6hi8h dei!es the .a8a!ia! Feal+ it is simulta!eously the hard
8ore @6hat the struggle ultimately is aboutA Je?pressedK i! other struggles through displa8eme!ts a!d
other orms o distortio!- a!d the very stru8turi!g pri!8iple o these distortio!s7 Coliti8s 6hi8h o88urs
i! this i!:bet6ee! spa8e is !o!:All+ its ormula is !ot Jeverythi!g is politi8al-K but Jthere is !othi!g
6hi8h is !ot politi8al-K 6hi8h mea!s that J!ot:all is politi8al7K The ield o the politi8al 8a!!ot be
totaliUed- Jthere is !o 8lass relatio!ship-K there is !o meta:la!guage i! 6hi8h 6e 8a! Jobje8tivelyK
des8ribe the 6hole politi8al ield- every su8h des8riptio! is already partial @or e?ample- .et a!d Fight
are !ot simply t6o optio!s 6ithi! a ield- but t6o diere!t visio!s o the e!tire ield- a!d there is !o
!eutral 6ay to des8ribe ho6 the ield Jreally is-K the diere!8e that 8o!stitutes it is the impossible>real
o a! a!tago!ismA7 9! this se!se- .e!i! 6as right to 8laim that- although the e8o!omy determi!es i! the
last i!sta!8e- everythi!g is de8ided i! the politi8al struggle7
There are- i! =egel- tra8es o the logi8 o 6erstellung @!ot dire8t !egatio!- but i!8o!seNue!tial
8ompli8atio!- displa8eme!t- et87A o a u!dame!tal pri!8ipleEsu8h a logi8 is i!s8ribed i!to the very
heart o the =egelia! !otio! o totality- 6hi8h is a /hole plus its 8o!stitutive distortio!s- symptoms-
e?8esses7 There are- i! =egel- tra8es o the J8ompromisi!gK logi8Eits mai! 8ase- sig!ii8a!tly- is the
!e8essary produ8tio! o the rabble i! the moder! bourgeois so8iety7 =egel outli!es a u!dame!tal
deadlo8k @the more a so8iety is ri8h- the less it 8a! take 8are o the rabbleA- a!d the! outli!es three mai!
strategies to deal 6ith the problem @publi8 6orks- private 8harities- e?port o the surplus rabble to
8olo!iesA- maki!g it 8lear that- i! the lo!g term- these pro8edures o!ly aggravate the problem- so that
all o!e 8a! do is more or less su88essully 8o!tai! itEthere is !o 8lear logi8al solutio! here- just a
8ompromise limiti!g the problem7 9! su8h 8ases- the o!ly re8o!8iliatio! is the @resig!edA re8o!8iliatio!
6ith the a8t that the problem is i!soluble @6ithi! the rame6ork o the Jratio!al stateK outli!ed by
=egelAEas market advo8ates 6ould put it- the e?8ess o the rabble is the pri8e 6e have to pay or
livi!g i! a ree ratio!al state7 3ut is !ot the amous diale8ti8 o servitude a!d domi!atio! also a 8ase o
8ompromiseM The @utureA serva!t de8ides !ot to go to the e!d a!d really risk his lieT his e?posure to
!egativity is thus th6arted- a!d the po6er o the !egative is re:8ha!!eled i!to the ormatio! o material
obje8ts7
9s it thus i!adeNuate to say that Freud 8ompli8ates the =egelia! !egatio! by addi!g a!
additio!al t6ist- a!other tur! o the s8re6- J!egati!g the !egatio! itselK !ot i! the =egelia! se!se o
radi8aliUi!g !egatio! a!d thus bri!gi!g it to its sel:relatio!- but i! the se!se o th6arti!g it- i!trodu8i!g
a! obsta8le to the ull deployme!t o the po6er o the !egativeEas i the po6er o the !egative gets
8aught up i! a Nuagmire o 8ompromises- o hal:su88esses- a!d is thus diverted rom its straight pathM
The diere!8e bet6ee! =egel a!d Freud 6ith regard to !egativity 8a! i! !o 6ay be redu8ed to the a8t
that- 6hile =egel radi8aliUes !egativity to its sel:destru8tive e?treme- Freud o8uses o! the
8ompromise:orms 6hi8h blo8k !egativity hal:6ay+ i! a! asymmetri8al 6ay- o!e should also tur!
thi!gs arou!d7 H!e o the sta!dard reproa8hes to =egel is that his radi8aliUatio! o !egativity is a raud+
as 1eorges 3ataille put it- the =egelia! J6ork o the !egativeK remai!s 6ithi! the 8o!strai!ts o the
Jrestri8ted e8o!omy-K 6ith a! i!:built me8ha!ism guara!teei!g that the radi8aliUed !egativity 6ill
8o!vert i!to the subordi!ated mome!t o a !e6 mediated positive order7
(1
FreudIs death drive- o! the
8o!trary- asserts the nihil unbound up to its radi8al 8lima?- the disappeara!8e o all lie @a!d- perhaps-
the predi8ted implosio! o the e!tire u!iverseAT Freudia! J8ompromisesK are thus dee!se me8ha!isms
postpo!i!g the absolute 8atastrophe 6hi8h does !ot eve! appear o! =egelIs horiUo!7 3ut- agai!- this
alter!ative simplii8atio! is also 6ro!g a!d misleadi!g+ as 6e have already amply demo!strated- the
=egelia! J!egatio! o !egatio!K is ar rom bei!g the simple sublatio! o !egativity i! a !e6 positive
order- 6hile the Freudia! death drive is !ot a push to6ards total disappeara!8e or sel:a!!ihilatio!- but
a! Ju!deadK persiste!8e atta8hed to a 8o!ti!ge!t parti8ularity7
The mai! poi!t is that the Nuagmire o obsta8les 6hi8h preve!ts the ull deployme!t o
!egativity i! Freud 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the 6ealth o empiri8al reality resisti!g abstra8t !otio!al
determi!atio!s+ 6hat it implies is !ot the e?ter!al e?8ess o reality over the 8o!8eptual po6er o the
!egative- but a more radi8al level o J!egativityK itsel- the level i!di8ated by the !otio! o the death
drive7 The Freudia! series o 6ers @6erdr=ngungErepressio!- 6erwerfungEore8losure-
6erleugnungGdisavo6al- 6erneinungEde!ialA 6hi8h suppleme!ts the =egelia!:diale8ti8al 4o is thus
!ot just a 8ompli8atio! o that 4o- it poi!ts to6ards a more radi8al 4o- the 8ore o !egativity 6hi8h
es8aped =egel a!d 6hi8h leaves its tra8es i! diere!t post:=egelia! versio!s o pure repetition7
A88ordi!g to Freud- the multipli8ity o phalli i! a dream al6ays poi!ts to6ards 8astratio!+ multipli8ity
8omes to ill i! the gap- the la8k- o the missi!g o!e7 Da! 6e the! say thatEi!soar as the u!8o!s8ious
does !ot k!o6 !egatio! @J!oKA- as Freud 8laimsEthe missi!g or e?8luded !egatio! retur!s 6ith a
ve!gea!8e i! the multiple orms o the pro8ess o repressio!+ repressio! itsel- disavo6al- de!ial- et87M
(2
The a!s6er is yesEo! 8o!ditio! that 6e add that the very a8t o the prolieratio! o Nuasi:
!egatio!s bears 6it!ess to the a8t that some ki!d o radi8al !egatio! is already at 6ork i! the
u!8o!s8ious- eve! i it is e?8luded7 The ield o the u!8o!s8iousEas the big HtherEis stru8tured
arou!d a loss or obsta8le- arou!d a! impossibility- a!d the key problem is dis8er!i!g the e?a8t !ature o
this ou!di!g impossibility7
+3F0E/3( A4G F0C0T9T9H4

The true move Jbeyo!d =egelK is !ot to be sought i! the post:=egelia! retur! to the positivity
o Jreal lie-K but i! the stra!ge airmatio! o death that o88urs i! the guise o pure repetitio!Ea!
airmatio! 6hi8h bri!gs i!to li!e t6o stra!ge bedello6s- *ierkegaard a!d Freud7 9! =egel- repetitio!
plays a 8ru8ial role- but 6ithi! the e8o!omy o +ufhebung+ through a mere repetitio!- a! immedia8y is
elevated i!to u!iversality- a 8o!ti!ge!8y is tra!sormed i!to !e8essityEater DaesarIs death- JDaesarK
is repeated !o lo!ger as the desig!atio! o a parti8ular i!dividual- but as the !ame o a u!iversal title7
There is !o pla8e- 6ithi! =egelIs system- or thi!ki!g JpureK repetitio!- a repetitio! !ot yet 8aught i!
the moveme!t o +ufhebung7 9! a amous passage rom his letter to S8hiller o August 1'>1$- 1$%$-
1oethe reports o! a! e?perie!8e 6hi8h made him per8eive a pie8e o rui!ed reality as a symbol+

,y gra!datherIs house- its 8ourtyard a!d its garde!s had bee! tra!sormed rom the paro8hial:
patri8ia! home o a! old Fra!kurt elder i!to the most useul tradi!g a!d market pla8e by 6isely
e!terprisi!g people7 Durious 8oi!8ide!8e duri!g the bombardme!t 8o!spired to see the stru8ture perish-
but eve! today- redu8ed- or the most part- to a pile o rubble- it is still 6orth t6i8e as mu8h as the
8urre!t o6!ers paid my amily or it 11 years ago7 Do!8eivably- the 6hole thi!g may- i! the uture- be
bought a!d restored by yet a!other e!trepre!eur- a!d you 8a! easily see that it 6ould- i! more tha! o!e
se!se- sta!d as a symbol o thousa!ds o other i!sta!8es- i! this i!dustrious 8ity a!d i! parti8ular i! my
o6! eyes7
("
The 8o!trast bet6ee! allegory a!d symbol is 8ru8ial here7 Allegory is mela!8holi8+ as Freud
poi!ted out- a mela!8holi8 treats a! obje8t 6hi8h is still here as already lost- or mela!8holy is pre:
emptive mour!i!g7 So- i! a! allegori8 approa8h- o!e looks at a busy market:pla8e a!d sees i! it already
the rui!s it 6ill be8omeEthe rui!s are the JtruthK o the proud buildi!g 6e see7 This is mela!8holy at
its purest7 @4o 6o!der that it 6as ashio!able amo!g the ri8h i! the Foma!ti8 era to build !e6 houses
partly as rui!s- 6ith bits o 6all missi!g a!d so o!7A 1oethe- ho6ever- does the e?a8t opposite+ he sees
@the pote!tial orA uture prosperity i! the prese!t pile o rubble7
((
Dru8ial here is the rise o the symbol
rom rui! a!d repetitio!+ 1oetheIs gra!datherIs house 6as !ot a symbol or its irst ge!eratio! o
o6!ersEor them- it 6as just a 2u*handenes obje8t- part o their e!viro!me!t 6ith 6hi8h they 6ere
e!gaged7 9t 6as o!ly its destru8tio!- its redu8tio! to a pile o rubble- that made it appear as a symbol7
@There is a temporal ambiguity i! 1oetheIs last se!te!8e+ 6ill the house be8ome a symbol 6he! it is
re!ovated- or is it already a symbol !o6- or the o!e able to see i! it its uture re!e6alMA
,ea!i!gEallegori8 or symboli8Earises o!ly through destru8tio!- through a! out:o:joi!t e?perie!8e-
or a 8ut 6hi8h i!terrupts the obje8tIs dire8t u!8tio!i!g i! our e!viro!me!t7
(#
/e should oppose
1oethe to *ierkegaard here+ 6hile- i! 1oethe- repetitio! ge!erates mea!i!g- or the post:idealist
*ierkegaard- there is only repetitio! @o the impossibility o rea8hi!g mea!i!gA- !o @rise o !e6A
mea!i!g7 This is o!e o the dei!itio!s o the !i!etee!th:8e!tury post:idealist break+ repetitio! is
asserted as su8h- as a or8e o its o6!- i! its me8ha!i8al Nuality- i! !o 6ay aufgehoben i! !e6
,ea!i!gErom physi8s a!d me8ha!i8s up to *ierkegaard a!d FreudIs Wiederholungs2wang7
3ut there is a parado? 6hi8h 8ompli8ates this 8ritiNue o =egel+ is !ot absolute !egativity- this
8e!tral !otio! o =egelia! thought- pre8isely a philosophi8al igure o 6hat Freud 8alled the Jdeath
driveKM 9!soar asEollo6i!g .a8a!Ethe 8ore o *a!tIs thought 8a! be dei!ed as the J8ritiNue o
pure desire-K is !ot the passage rom *a!t to =egel the! pre8isely the passage rom desire to driveM The
very 8o!8ludi!g li!es o =egelIs Encyclopedia @o! the 9dea 6hi8h e!joys repeatedly tra!sversi!g its
8ir8leA poi!t i! this dire8tio!- suggesti!g that the a!s6er to the sta!dard 8riti8al Nuestio!EJ/hy does
the diale8ti8al pro8ess al6ays go o!M /hy does diale8ti8al mediatio! al6ays 8o!ti!ue its 6orkMKEis
pre8isely the eppur si muove o the pure drive7 This stru8ture o !egativity also a88ou!ts or the
Nuasi:Jautomati8K 8hara8ter o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- or the 8ommo! reproa8h 8o!8er!i!g its
Jme8ha!i8alK 8hara8ter+ belyi!g all the assura!8es that diale8ti8s is ope! to the true lie o reality- the
=egelia! diale8ti8 is like a pro8essi!g ma8hi!e 6hi8h i!diere!tly s6allo6s up a!d pro8esses all
possible 8o!te!ts- rom !ature to history- rom politi8s to art- deliveri!g them pa8kaged i! the same
triadi8 orm7
=eidegger 6as thus right 6ith his thesis that =egel does !ot re!der themati8 his basi8 operatio!
o !egativity- but he is- as it 6ere- right or the 6ro!g reaso!+ the 8ore o =egelia! diale8ti8s-
i!a88essible to =egel himsel- is the repetitive @deathA drive 6hi8h be8omes visible ater the post:
=egelia! break7 3ut 6hy should there !ot be at the base o diale8ti8s a te!sio! bet6ee! diale8ti8s a!d
its !o!:diale8tiUable 8oreM 9! this se!se- the death drive or the 8ompulsio! to repeat is the heart o
!egativity- =egelIs !o!:thematiUed presuppositio!Ei!a88essible !ot o!ly to him- but- perhaps- to
philosophy as su8h+ its outli!es 6ere irst deployed by a theologia! @*ierkegaardA a!d a
@meta:Apsy8hologist @FreudA- a!d a 8e!tury later a philosopher @GeleuUeA i!8orporated *ierkegaardIs
a!d FreudIs lesso!7 /ith regard to the pre8ise status o !egativity- the situatio! is thus i! a 6ay
reversed+ it is =egel 6ho oers a series o 6ers- o displa8ed variatio!s o !egativity- a!d it is o!ly i!
psy8hoa!alysis- through Freud a!d .a8a!- that 6e 8a! ormulate the eleme!tary orm o !egativity7
The post:=egelia! break has t6o aspe8ts 6hi8h are !ot to be 8o!used+ the assertio! o the
positivity o a8tual bei!g as opposed to !otio!al mediatio! @airmatio!ismA- a!d the assertio! o pure
repetitio! 6hi8h 8a!!ot be 8o!tai!ed i! the idealist moveme!t o sublatio!7 Although the irst aspe8t
6as mu8h more to the ore- it is the se8o!d 6hi8h bears 6it!ess to a true philosophi8al revolutio!7
There is !o 8ompleme!tarity bet6ee! these t6o aspe8ts- they are mutually e?8lusive+ repetition relies
on the bloc"age of direct positive affirmation- 6e repeat be8ause it is impossible to dire8tly airm7
Felated to the oppositio! bet6ee! these t6o aspe8ts is the oppositio! bet6ee! i!itude a!d i!i!ity+ the
great moti o the post:=egelia! assertio! o positive bei!g is the a88e!t o! material- a8tual- i!itude-
6hile the 8ompulsio! to repeat i!trodu8es a! obs8e!e i!i!ity or JimmortalityKE!ot spiritual
immortality- but a! immortality o Jspirits-K o the livi!g dead7
9- ho6ever- the death drive or the 8ompulsio! to repeat lies at the heart o !egativity- ho6 are
6e to read FreudIs amous 8laim that the u!8o!s8ious @as e?empliied by the u!iverse o dreamsA
k!o6s !o !egatio!M 9t is all too easy to reute this 8laim empiri8ally by !oti!g that- !ot so ma!y pages
ater maki!g this 8laim- Freud himsel outli!es a !umber o 6ays i! 6hi8h dreams 8a! ee8t a !egatio!
o a 8ertai! state o thi!gs7 FreudIs e?ample o 6erneinung @6he! a patie!t says- J9 do!It k!o6 6ho the
6oma! is 6ho appears i! my dream- but o!e thi!g is sureEshe is !ot my motherRK o!e should i!terpret
this assertio! as a! u!ambiguous 8o!irmatio! that the 6oma! i! the dream is the patie!tIs motherA
remai!s perti!e!t here+ !egatio! belo!gs to the level o 8o!s8ious!ess>pre8o!s8ious!ess- it is o!e 6ay
or the 8o!s8ious subje8t to admit their u!8o!s8ious i!8estuous i?atio!7 The =egelia! !egatio! as the
u!iversaliUi!g abolitio! o parti8ular 8o!te!t @say- the !egatio! o the empiri8al 6ealth o a! obje8t i!
its !ameA- this viole!8e i!here!t to idealiUatio!- is 6hat is missi!g i! the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious7
=o6ever- there is also a 6eird !egativity 6hi8h pervades the e!tire sphere o the u!8o!s8ious- rom
brutal aggressio! a!d sel:sabotagi!g to hysteria- 6ith its basi8 e?perie!8e- apropos every obje8t- o ce
nest pas BaEso that it is as i @i! a88orda!8e 6ith FreudIs aoreme!tio!ed i!sight that the multipli8ity
o phalli is a sig! o 8astratio!A the suspe!sio! o !egatio! is paid or by its multipli8atio!7 /hat is the
ou!datio! a!d status o this all:pervasive J!egativityK 6hi8h eludes the logi8al orm o !egatio!M
Cerhaps o!e 6ay to read this !egatio! itsel is as a positive a8t- i! the same 6ay that- i! a diere!tial
system- abse!8e itsel 8a! be a positive eature @or e?ample- to reer to o!e o the best:k!o6! li!es
rom the Sherlo8k =olmes stories- the a8t that the dog did!It bark i! the !ight is i! itsel the 8urious
i!8ide!tA7 The diere!8e bet6ee! the system o 8o!s8ious!ess>pre8o!s8ious!ess a!d the u!8o!s8ious is
thus !ot simply that- i! the ormer- there is !egatio!- 6hile the u!8o!s8ious is too primitive to k!o6 the
u!8tio! o !egatio!T it is rather that the system o 8o!s8ious!ess>pre8o!s8ious!ess per8eives o!ly the
!egative aspe8t o the !egatio!- or it sees !egatio! o!ly i! its !egative dime!sio! @somethi!g is
missi!g- et87A- ig!ori!g the positive spa8e ope!ed up by this !egatio!7
/he! 8o!ro!ted by a a8t that 8learly goes agai!st some deep 8o!vi8tio! o ours- 6e 8a! rea8t
to it i! o!e o t6o basi8 6ays+ either simply a!d brutally reje8ti!g it- or e!dorsi!g it i! a Jsubl@imAatedK
orm- as somethi!g !ot to be take! literally- but rather as a! e?pressio! o a deeper or higher truth7 For
e?ample- 6e 8a! either reje8t outright the idea o =ell @as a real pla8e 6here si!!ers suer e!dless pai!
as pu!ishme!t or their deedsA- or 6e 8a! 8laim that =ell is a metaphor or the Ji!!er turmoilK 6e
suer 6he! 6e do somethi!g 6ro!g7 Fe8all the 6ell:k!o6! 9talia! e?pressio! se non e vero! e
bentrovatoEJ@eve!A i it is !ot true- it is 6ell:ou!ded @it hits the markA7K 9t is i! this se!se that
a!e8dotes about amous people- eve! 6he! i!ve!ted- ote! 8apture the 8ore o their perso!ality more
a88urately tha! 6ould a! e!umeratio! o their real NualitiesEhere also- Jtruth has the stru8ture o a
i8tio!-K as .a8a! put it7 There is a 6o!derully obs8e!e Serbo:Droat versio! o this e?pressio! 6hi8h
pere8tly re!ders the proto:psy8hoti8 reje8tio! o symboli8 i8tio!+ se non e vero! 1ebem ti mater#
J2ebem ti materK @pro!ou!8ed Jyebem ti mater-K mea!i!g J9Ill u8k your motherKA is o!e o the most
popular vulgar i!sultsT the joke- o 8ourse- relies o! the almost pere8t rhyme- 6ith the same !umber o
syllables- bet6ee! e bentrovato a!d 1ebem ti mater7 The mea!i!g thus 8ha!ges i!to a! e?plosio! o
obs8e!e rage- a! atta8k o! the otherIs most i!timate primordial obje8t+ J9t better be trueEi itIs !ot
true- 9Ill u8k your motherRK The t6o versio!s thus 8learly e!a8t the t6o rea8tio!s to 6hat literally tur!s
out to be a lie+ urious reje8tio!- or the Jsubl@imAatio!K i!to a JhigherK truth7 9! psy8hoa!alyti8al terms-
their diere!8e is that bet6ee! ore8losure @6erwerfungA a!d symboli8 tra!substa!tiatio!7
Freud deploys a 6hole series- a system eve!- o !egatio!s i! the u!8o!s8ious+ thro6i!g:out o
the 0go @+usstossungA- reje8tio! @6erwerfungA- repressio! @6erdr=ngung- itsel divided i!to primordial
repressio!E3r*6erdr=ngungEa!d J!ormalK repressio!A- disavo6al @6erleugnungA- de!ial
@6erneinungA- up to the 8omple? 6ays i! 6hi8h a88epta!8e itsel 8a! u!8tio! as a mode o de!ial- as i!
so:8alled Jisolatio!K @IsolierungA- 6here a traumati8 a8t is ratio!ally a88epted- but isolated rom its
libidi!al:symboli8 8o!te?t7
('
/hat urther 8ompli8ates the s8heme are obje8ts a!d sig!iiers 6hi8h
someho6 overlap 6ith their o6! la8k+ or .a8a!- the phallus is itsel the sig!iier o 8astratio! @this
i!trodu8es all the parado?es o the sig!iier o the la8k o sig!iier- o ho6 the la8k o a sig!iier is
itsel JremarkedK i! a sig!iier o this la8kA- !ot to me!tio! lob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire
6hi8h is !othi!g but the embodime!t o la8k- its pla8e:holder7 The relatio!ship bet6ee! obje8t a!d la8k
is here tur!ed arou!d+ ar rom la8k bei!g redu8ible to the la8k o a! obje8t- the obje8t itsel is a
spe8tral positiviUatio! o a la8k7 A!d o!e has to e?trapolate this me8ha!ism i!to the very
@pre:Ao!tologi8al ou!datio! o all bei!g+ the primordial gesture o 8reatio! is !ot that o a! e?8essive
givi!g- o assertio!- but a !egative gesture o 6ithdra6al- o subtra8ti!g- 6hi8h alo!e ope!s up the
spa8e or the 8reatio! o positive e!tities7 This is ho6 Jthere is somethi!g rather tha! !othi!gK+ i! order
to arrive at somethi!g- o!e has to subtract from nothing its nothing?ness@ itself- that is- o!e has to posit
the primordial pre:o!tologi8al Abyss Jas su8h-K as nothing- so that- i! 8o!trast to @or agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d oA !othi!g- somethi!g 8a! appear7
/hat pre8edes 4othi!g is less tha! !othi!g- the pre:o!tologi8al multipli8ity 6hose !ames ra!ge
rom Gemo8ritusIs den to .a8a!Is ob1et a7 The spa8e o this pre:o!tologi8al multipli8ity is !ot bet6ee!
4othi!g a!d Somethi!g @more tha! !othi!g but less tha! somethi!gAT den is- o! the 8o!trary- more
than Something but less than othing7 The relatio!ship bet6ee! these three basi8 o!tologi8al
termsE4othi!g- Somethi!g- denEthus takes the orm o a parado?i8al 8ir8le- like 0s8herIs amous
dra6i!g o the i!ter8o!!e8ted 6ateralls ormi!g a 8ir8ular perpetuum mobile+ Somethi!g is more tha!
4othi!g- den is more tha! Somethi!g @the ob1et a is i! e?8ess 6ith regard to the 8o!siste!8y o
Somethi!g- the surplus:eleme!t 6hi8h sti8ks outA- a!d 4othi!g is more tha! den @6hi8h is Jless tha!
!othi!gKA7
The u!derlyi!g problem here is to determi!e 6hi8h o the Freudia! !egatio!s is the primordial
o!eE6hi8h o!e ope!s up the spa8e or all the others7 From the .a8a!ia! perspe8tive- the most obvious
8a!didate may appear to be the !otorious Jsymboli8 8astratio!-K the loss 6hi8h ope!s up a!d sustai!s
the spa8e o symboliUatio!Ere8all- i! relatio! to the 4ame:o:the:Father as the bearer o symboli8
8astratio!- ho6 .a8a!- as 6e have see!- plays o! the Fre!8h homopho!y bet6ee! le om*du*)>re a!d
le on*du*)>re7 3ut it seems more produ8tive to ollo6 a more radi8al path o thi!ki!g beyo!d the
ather @p>reA to 6hat is eve! 6orse @pireA7 Agai!- the most obvious 8a!didate or this J6orseK is the
@deathA drive- a ki!d o Freudia! 8orrelate o 6hat S8helli!g 8alled the primordial J8o!tra8tio!-K a!
obsti!ate repetitive i?atio! o! a 8o!ti!ge!t obje8t 6hi8h subtra8ts the subje8t rom its dire8t
immersio! i! reality7
FROM REPETITION TO DRI#E

/hat does the drive mea! rom a philosophical sta!dpoi!tM 9! a vague ge!eral se!se- there is a
homology bet6ee! the shit rom *a!t to =egel a!d the shit rom desire to drive+ the *a!tia! u!iverse
is that o desire @stru8tured arou!d the la8k- the i!a88essible Thi!g:i!:itselA- o e!dlessly approa8hi!g
the goal- 6hi8h is 6hy- i! order to guara!tee the mea!i!gul!ess o our ethi8al a8tivity- *a!t has to
postulate the immortality o the soul @si!8e 6e 8a!!ot rea8h the goal i! our terrestrial lie- 6e must be
allo6ed to go o! ad infinitumA7 For =egel- o! the 8o!trary- the Thi!g:i!:itsel is !ot i!a88essible- the
impossible does happe! here a!d !o6E!ot- o 8ourse- i! the !aSve pre:8riti8al se!se o gai!i!g a88ess
to the tra!s8e!de!t order o thi!gs- but i! the properly diale8ti8al se!se o shiti!g the perspe8tive a!d
8o!8eivi!g the gap @that separates us rom the Thi!gA as the Feal7 /ith regard to satisa8tio!- this does
!ot mea! that- i! 8o!trast to desire 6hi8h is 8o!stitutively !o!:satisied- the drive a8hieves satisa8tio!
by 6ay o rea8hi!g the obje8t 6hi8h eludes desire7 True- i! 8o!trast to desire- the drive is by dei!itio!
satisied- but this is be8ause- i! it- satisa8tio! is a8hieved i! the repeated ailure to rea8h the obje8t- i!
repeatedly 8ir8li!g arou!d the obje8t7 Follo6i!g 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- a disti!8tio! has to be
i!trodu8ed here bet6ee! a la8k a!d a hole+ a la8k is spatial- desig!ati!g a void within a spa8e- 6hile a
hole is more radi8al- it desig!ates the poi!t at 6hi8h this spatial order itsel breaks do6! @as i! the
Jbla8k holeK i! physi8sA7
($
Therei! lies the diere!8e bet6ee! desire a!d drive+ desire is grou!ded i! its 8o!stitutive la8k-
6hile the drive 8ir8ulates arou!d a hole- a gap i! the order o bei!g7 9! other 6ords- the 8ir8ular
moveme!t o the drive obeys the 6eird logi8 o the 8urved spa8e i! 6hi8h the shortest dista!8e
bet6ee! t6o poi!ts is !ot a straight li!e- but a 8urve+ the drive Jk!o6sK that the Nui8kest 6ay to realiUe
its aim is to 8ir8ulate arou!d its goal:obje8t7 At the immediate level o addressi!g i!dividuals-
8apitalism o 8ourse i!terpellates them as 8o!sumers- as subje8ts o desire- soli8iti!g i! them ever !e6
perverse a!d e?8essive desires @or 6hi8h it oers produ8ts to satisy themAT urthermore- it obviously
also ma!ipulates the Jdesire to desire-K 8elebrati!g the very desire to desire ever !e6 obje8ts a!d
modes o pleasure7 =o6ever- eve! i it already ma!ipulates desire i! a 6ay 6hi8h takes i!to a88ou!t
the a8t that the most eleme!tary desire is the desire to reprodu8e itsel as desire @a!d !ot to i!d
satisa8tio!A- at this level- 6e do !ot yet rea8h the drive7 The drive i!heres i! 8apitalism at a more
u!dame!tal- systemic- level+ the drive is that 6hi8h propels or6ard the e!tire 8apitalist ma8hi!ery- it
is the imperso!al 8ompulsio! to e!gage i! the e!dless 8ir8ular moveme!t o e?pa!ded sel:
reprodu8tio!7 /e e!ter the mode o the drive the mome!t the 8ir8ulatio! o mo!ey as 8apital be8omes
a! e!d i! itsel- si!8e the e?pa!sio! o value takes pla8e o!ly 6ithi! this 8o!sta!tly re!e6ed
moveme!t7 @H!e should bear i! mi!d here .a8a!Is 6ell:k!o6! disti!8tio! bet6ee! the aim a!d the
goal o drive+ 6hile the goal is the obje8t arou!d 6hi8h the drive 8ir8ulates- its true aim is the e!dless
8o!ti!uatio! o this 8ir8ulatio! as su8h7A The 8apitalist drive thus belo!gs to !o parti8ular i!dividualEit
is rather that those i!dividuals 6ho a8t as the dire8t Jage!tsK o 8apital @8apitalists themselves- top
ma!agersA have to display it7
,iller re8e!tly proposed a 3e!jami!ia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! J8o!stituted a!?ietyK a!d
J8o!stitue!t a!?iety-K 6hi8h is 8ru8ial 6ith regard to the shit rom desire to drive+ 6hile the irst
desig!ates the sta!dard !otio! o the terriyi!g a!d as8i!ati!g abyss o a!?iety 6hi8h hau!ts us- its
i!er!al 8ir8le 6hi8h threate!s to dra6 us i!- the se8o!d sta!ds or the JpureK 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the
ob1et petit a as 8o!stituted i! its very loss7
(&
,iller is right to emphasiUe here t6o eatures+ the
diere!8e 6hi8h separates 8o!stituted rom 8o!stitue!t a!?iety 8o!8er!s the status o the obje8t 6ith
regard to a!tasy7 9! a 8ase o 8o!stituted a!?iety- the obje8t d6ells 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o a a!tasy-
6hile 6e get o!ly the 8o!stitue!t a!?iety 6he! the subje8t Jtraverses the a!tasyK a!d 8o!ro!ts the
void- the gap- illed up by the a!tasmati8 obje8t7 Dlear a!d 8o!vi!8i!g as it is- ,illerIs ormula misses
the true parado? or- rather- ambiguity o the ob1et a- the ambiguity 6hi8h 8o!8er!s the Nuestio!+ does
the ob1et a u!8tio! as the obje8t o desire or o the driveM That is to say- 6he! ,iller dei!es the ob1et
a as the obje8t 6hi8h overlaps 6ith its loss- 6hi8h emerges at the very mome!t o its loss @so that all its
a!tasmati8 i!8ar!atio!s- rom breast to voi8e to gaUe- are meto!ymi8 iguratio!s o the void- o
!othi!gA- he remai!s 6ithi! the horiUo! o desireEthe true obje8t:8ause o desire is the void illed i!
by its a!tasmati8 i!8ar!atio!s7 /hile- as .a8a! emphasiUes- the ob1et a is also the obje8t o the drive-
the relatio!ship is here thoroughly diere!t+ although i! both 8ases the li!k bet6ee! obje8t a!d loss is
8ru8ial- i! the 8ase o the ob1et a as the obje8t:8ause o desire- 6e have a! obje8t 6hi8h is origi!ally
lost- 6hi8h 8oi!8ides 6ith its o6! loss- 6hi8h emerges as lost- 6hile- i! the 8ase o the ob1et a as the
obje8t o the drive- the Jobje8tK is directly the loss itselfEi! the shit rom desire to drive- 6e pass
rom the lost ob1ect to loss itself as an ob1ect7 That is to say- the 6eird moveme!t 8alled JdriveK is !ot
drive! by the JimpossibleK Nuest or the lost obje8tT it is a drive to directly enact the %loss'Gthe gap!
cut! distanceGitself7 There is thus a double disti!8tio! to be dra6! here+ !ot o!ly bet6ee! the ob1et a
i! its a!tasmati8 a!d post:a!tasmati8 status- but also- 6ithi! this post:a!tasmati8 domai! itsel-
bet6ee! the lost obje8t:8ause o desire a!d the obje8t:loss o the drive7
This is 6hat .a8a! mea!s by the Jsatisa8tio! o the drivesK+ a drive does !ot bri!g satisa8tio!
be8ause its obje8t is a sta!d:i! or the Thi!g- but be8ause a drive- as it 6ere- tur!s ailure i!to
triumphEi! it- the very ailure to rea8h its goal- the repetitio! o this ailure- the e!dless 8ir8ulatio!
arou!d the obje8t- ge!erates a satisa8tio! o its o6!7 To put it eve! more poi!tedly- the obje8t o the
drive is !ot related to the Thi!g as a iller o its void+ the drive is literally a 8ou!ter:moveme!t to
desire- it does !ot strive to6ards impossible ull!ess a!d the!- bei!g or8ed to re!ou!8e it- get stu8k
o!to a partial obje8t as its remai!derEthe drive is Nuite literally the very JdriveK to brea" the All o
8o!ti!uity i! 6hi8h 6e are embedded- to i!trodu8e a radi8al imbala!8e i!to it- a!d the diere!8e
bet6ee! drive a!d desire is pre8isely that- i! desire- this 8ut- this i?atio! o!to a partial obje8t- is as it
6ere Jtra!s8e!de!taliUed-K tra!sposed i!to a sta!d:i! or the void o the Thi!g7
So- 6he! =egel 8o!8ludes his Encyclopedia 6ith the 8laim that Jthe eter!al idea 6hi8h e?ists i!
a!d or itsel- eter!ally sets itsel to 6ork- e!ge!ders a!d e!joys itsel as absolute spiritK @Jdie ewige an
und fVr sich seiende Idee sich ewig als absoluter (eist bet=tigt! er2eugt und genieXtK
(%
A- does he !ot
des8ribe here a repetitive 8ir8ular moveme!t o alie!ati!g or losi!g o!esel i! order to regai! o!esel
agai!- a moveme!t 6hi8h stra!gely re8alls .a8a!Is dei!itio! o 8astratio! as a moveme!t i! 6hi8h the
obje8t is lost i! order to be regai!ed o! the ladder o desireM 9s !ot the repetitive moveme!t o losi!g
a!d regai!i!g o!esel- o alie!atio! a!d disalie!atio!- a moveme!t 6hi8h- as =egel e?pli8itly 8laims-
bri!gs e!joyme!t- u!8a!!ily 8lose to the 8ir8ular moveme!t o the driveM
1regor ,oderIs ebullie!t 0egel in Spino2a o8uses o! this most eleme!tary oppositio!+ lac" or
curvatureM
#0
9! Freudia! terms- this oppositio! appears as that bet6ee! desire or drive+ desire is
stru8tured arou!d its 8o!stitutive la8k- ea8h determi!ate obje8t o desire is- as .a8a! put it- a
Jmeto!ymy o a la8k-K 6hile the drive- i!stead o pursui!g a! impossible obje8t 6hi8h orever eludes
the subje8t- i!ds satisa8tio! i! its 8urved path- i! 8ir8ulati!g arou!d its obje8t7 9! more philosophi8al
terms- applied to the !otio! o Substa!8e- this diere!8e bet6ee! la8k a!d 8urvature 8a! be ormulated
as the ollo6i!g alter!ative+ @1A Substa!8e is la8ki!g- th6arted- orga!iUed arou!d abse!8e- a!d the
subje8t is lo8ated i! this la8k- it is this la8kT @2A Substa!8e is !ot la8ki!g a!ythi!g- there is !o la8k
arou!d 6hi8h it is orga!iUedT Substa!8e is just 8urved- i!verted:i!to:itsel- like a ,Zbius ba!d7 The
ultimate lesso! o psy8hoa!alysis is that huma! lie is !ever Jjust lieK+ huma!s are !ot simply alive-
they are possessed by the stra!ge drive to e!joy lie i! e?8ess- passio!ately atta8hed to a surplus 6hi8h
sti8ks out a!d derails the ordi!ary ru! o thi!gs7
The basi8 parado? here is that the spe8ii8ally huma! dime!sio!Edrive as opposed to
i!sti!8tEemerges pre8isely 6he! 6hat 6as origi!ally a mere by:produ8t is elevated i!to a!
auto!omous aim+ ma! is !ot more Jrele?iveKT o! the 8o!trary- ma! per8eives as a dire8t goal 6hat- or
a! a!imal- has !o i!tri!si8 value7 9! short- the Uero:degree o Jhuma!iUatio!K is !ot a urther
Jmediatio!K o a!imal a8tivity- its rei!s8riptio! as a subordi!ated mome!t o a higher totality @or
e?ample- 6e eat a!d pro8reate i! order to develop our higher spiritual pote!tialsA- but a radi8al
!arro6i!g o o8us- the elevatio! o a mi!or a8tivity i!to a! e!d:i!:itsel7 /e be8ome Jhuma!sK 6he!
6e get 8aught up i! a 8losed- sel:propelli!g loop o repeati!g the same gesture a!d i!di!g satisa8tio!
i! it7 /e 8a! all re8all the ar8hetypal 8artoo! s8e!e+ a 8at jumps i!to the air a!d tur!s o! its o6! a?isT
but i!stead o plu!gi!g ba8k do6! i! a88orda!8e 6ith the !ormal la6s o gravity- it remai!s
suspe!ded- tur!i!g arou!d i! the levitated positio! as i 8aught i! a loop o time- repeati!g the same
8ir8ular moveme!t over a!d over agai!7
#1
9! su8h mome!ts- the J!ormalK ru! o thi!gs- o bei!g
8aught i! the imbe8ili8 i!ertia o material reality- is or a brie mome!t suspe!dedT 6e e!ter the magi8al
domai! o suspe!ded a!imatio!- o a ki!d o sel:sustai!i!g ethereal rotatio!7 This rotary moveme!t- i!
6hi8h the li!ear progress o time is suspe!ded i! a repetitive loop- is the drive at its most eleme!tary7
This- agai!- is Jhuma!iUatio!K at its Uero:level+ this sel:propelli!g loop 6hi8h suspe!ds or disrupts the
li!ear temporal e!8hai!me!t7 This shit rom desire to drive is 8ru8ial i o!e is to grasp the true !ature
o the Jmi!imal diere!8eK+ at its most u!dame!tal- the mi!imal diere!8e is !ot the u!athomable d
6hi8h elevates a! ordi!ary obje8t i!to a! obje8t o desire- but- rather- the i!!er torsio! 6hi8h 8urves
libidi!al spa8e a!d thus tra!sorms i!sti!8t i!to drive7
Do!seNue!tly- the 8o!8ept o drive makes the alter!ative Jeither get bur!ed by the Thi!g or
mai!tai! a sae dista!8eK alse+ or a drive- the JThi!g itselK is a 8ir8ulatio! arou!d the void @or- rather-
holeA7 The drive as su8h is the death driveE!ot i! the se!se o lo!gi!g or u!iversal !egatio! or the
dissolutio! o all parti8ularity- but- o! the 8o!trary- i! the se!se o the Jspo!ta!eousK lie:lo6 o
ge!eratio! a!d 8orruptio! be8omi!g Jstu8kK o! some a88ide!tal parti8ularity a!d 8ir8ulati!g e!dlessly
arou!d it7 9 .ie is a so!g played o! a! old .C @6hi8h it dei!itely is !otA- the drive arises 6he!- due to
a s8rat8h o! the .C sura8e- the !eedle gets stu8k a!d the same ragme!t is repeated over a!d over7 The
deepest spe8ulative i!sight is that u!iversality 8a! o!ly emerge 6he! a parti8ular lo6 gets stu8k o! a
si!gular mome!t7 This Freudia! !otio! o drive bri!gs us to the radi8al ambiguity o =egelIs diale8ti8+
does it ollo6 the logi8 o the drive or !otM =egelIs logi8 is a logi8 o purii8atio!- o Ju!sti8ki!gK+
eve! 6he! a subje8t puts the 6hole o its libidi!al i!vestme!t i!to a 8o!ti!ge!t ragme!t o bei!g @J9
am ready to risk everythi!g or thatRKA- this 8o!ti!ge!t ragme!tEthe .a8a!ia! ob1et petit aEis- i! its
i!diere!t a88ide!tality- a! operator o purii8atio!- o Ju!sti8ki!gK rom all @otherA parti8ular 8o!te!t7
9! .a8a!ese- this obje8t is a meto!ymy o la8k7 The subje8tIs desire is here the tra!s8e!de!tal void- a!d
the obje8t is a 8o!ti!ge!t o!ti8 iller o this void7 For the drive- i! 8o!trast- the ob1et a is !ot o!ly the
meto!ymy o la8k- but a ki!d o tra!s8e!de!tal stai!- irredu8ible a!d irrepla8eable i! its very
8o!ti!ge!t si!gularity- !ot just a 8o!ti!ge!t o!ti8 iller o a la8k7 /hile the drive i!volves getti!g stu8k
o! a 8o!ti!ge!t stai!:obje8t- diale8ti8al !egativity i!volves a 8o!sta!t pro8ess o Ju!:sti8ki!gK rom all
parti8ular 8o!te!t+ 1ouissance Jlea!s o!K somethi!g- ha!gi!g o! to its parti8ularityEa!d this is 6hat is
missi!g i! =egel- but operative i! Freud7
The relatio!ship bet6ee! =egelIs !egativity a!d FreudIs death drive @or 8ompulsio! to repeatA
is thus a very spe8ii8 o!e- 6ell beyo!d their @hidde!A outright ide!tity+ 6hat Freud 6as aimi!g at 6ith
his !otio! o death driveEmore pre8isely- the key dime!sio! o this !otio! to 6hi8h Freud himsel 6as
bli!d- u!a6are o the ull sig!ii8a!8e o his dis8overyEis the J!o!:diale8ti8alK 8ore o =egelia!
!egativity- the pure drive to repeat 6ithout a!y moveme!t o sublatio! or idealiUatio!7 The parado?
here is that pure repetitio! @i! 8o!trast to repetitio! as idealiUi!g sublatio!A is sustai!ed pre8isely by its
impurity- by the persiste!8e o a 8o!ti!ge!t Jpathologi8alK eleme!t to 6hi8h the moveme!t o
repetitio! gets a!d remai!s stu8k7 The key Nuestio! is thus+ 8a! =egel thi!k the Ji!divisible remai!derK
ge!erated by every move o idealiUatio! or sublatio!M 3eore 8o!8ludi!g too Nui8kly that he 8a!!ot- 6e
should bear i! mi!d that- at its most radi8al- the .a8a!ia! ob1et a @the !ame o this Ji!divisible
remai!derKA is !ot a substa!tial eleme!t disturbi!g the ormal me8ha!ism o symboliUatio!- but a
purely ormal 8urvature o symboliUatio! itsel7
The ob1et a a!d pure repetitio! are thus 8losely li!ked+ the a is the e?8ess 6hi8h sets repetitio!
i! motio! a!d simulta!eously preve!ts its su88ess @6hi8h 6ould reside i! ully re8apturi!g 6hat o!e
tries to repeatA7 A!d- i!soar as =egel 8a!!ot thi!k pure repetitio! @a repetitio! !ot yet 8aught i! the
moveme!t o sublatio! or idealiUatio!A- the ob1et a is simulta!eously the obje8t missi!g i! =egel and
the way in which this ob1ect is missing+ i! the same 6ay that- a88ordi!g to Gerrida- the diere!8e
bet6ee! the =egelia! +ufhebung a!d his o6! !otio! o diffArance is barely per8eptible- almost
i!disti!guishable- the diere!8e bet6ee! =egel a!d 6hat =egel misses @8a!!ot thi!kA is barely
per8eptible+ !ot a positive diere!8e @6here 6e 8ould 8learly ide!tiy 6hat is missi!gA- but just a
JpureK diere!8e- a barely per8eptible shit i! the virtual or spe8tral a88e!t o 6hat =egel a8tually says7
To produ8e this diere!8e the!- o!e !eed o!ly repeat =egel7
Carado?i8ally- repetitio! provides the @abse!tA =egelia! a!s6er to =eideggerIs 8riti8al poi!t
about ho6 =egel ails to deploy the phe!ome!ologi8al 8o!te!t o his 8e!tral !otio! o !egativity+ at its
Uero:level- !egativity is !ot a destru8tive a!!ihilatio! o 6hatever there isT it rather appears as a sudde!
immobili2ation o the !ormal lo6 o thi!gsEat some poi!t- thi!gs get stu8k- a si!gularity persists
beyo!d its proper term7 9! his readi!g o a ragme!t o A!a?ima!der o! order a!d disorder- =eidegger
8o!siders the possibility that a! e!tity

may eve! i!sist [bestehen\ upo! its 6hile solely to remai! more prese!t- i! the se!se o perduri!g
[/est=ndigen\7 That 6hi8h li!gers persists [beharrt\ i! its prese!8i!g7 9! this 6ay it e?tri8ates itsel
rom its tra!sitory 6hile7 9t strikes the 6ilul pose o persiste!8e- !o lo!ger 8o!8er!i!g itsel 6ith
6hatever else is prese!t7 9t stie!sEas i this 6ere the o!ly 6ay to li!gerEa!d aims solely or
8o!ti!ua!8e a!d subsiste!8e7
#2
This is ho6- a88ordi!g to GeleuUe- the 4e6 arises through repetitio!+ thi!gs lo6- they ollo6
their usual 8ourse o i!8essa!t 8ha!ge- a!d the!- all o a sudde!- somethi!g gets stu8k- i!terrupts the
lo6- imposi!g itsel as 4e6 by 6ay o its very persiste!8e7 9t is thus as i the e?8essive atta8hme!t- the
e?8essive :es to a partial obje8t- is a refle&ive determination of negativity- a mome!t o oppositio!al
determi!atio! i! 6hi8h !egativity e!8ou!ters itsel amo!g its spe8ies @6erdr=ngung! 6erwerfung OA7
9s !ot the e?8ess i! =egel- that 6hi8h 8a!!ot be 8ou!ted- to be lo8ated at the poi!t 6here =egel
himsel bri!gs i! the u!:a88ou!tableM /he!- at the e!d o his (reat .ogic- he provides a ki!d o ormal
des8riptio! o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- he says that its mome!ts 8a! be 8ou!ted as " or as (Eit is
!egativity 6hi8h 8a! be 8ou!ted t6o times- as dire8t !egatio! a!d as sel:relati!g !egatio!7 This e?8ess
o !egativity that is the death drive- the bli!d 8ompulsio! to repeat- that =egel misses apropos se?uality
as 6ell as the rabble- perhaps a88ou!ts or his i!ability to thi!k e?ploitatio! i! the stri8t ,ar?ist se!se+
.a8a! had already dra6! atte!tio! to the li!k bet6ee! surplus:value a!d surplus:e!joyme!t @surplus:
value bei!g the surplus that emerges i! the very eNuivale!t e?8ha!ge bet6ee! 6orker a!d 8apitalistA7
The de:8e!tered eleme!t 6hi8h is Je?ploitedK i! the diale8ti8al pro8ess is thus the third>ourth mome!t
o sel:relati!g !egativity- this bli!d repetitive produ8tive or8e7
The u!derlyi!g problem here is ho6 6e are to read =egelIs o88asio!al a!d te!tative but
!evertheless u!ambiguous sel:relativiUatio!s a!d>or sel:histori8iUatio!sEa8ts 6aiti!g to be
dis8overed by the !atural s8ie!8esT the impossibility o graspi!g the spiritual esse!8e o 8ou!tries like
4orth Ameri8a a!d Fussia 6hi8h 6ill deploy their pote!tial o!ly i! the !e?t 8e!turyT the 8o!seNue!8es
o his argume!tatio! or the !e8essity o 6arT a!d the 8hara8teriUatio! o his o6! thought as the
sta!dpoi!t rea8hed by spirit Jor the time bei!g7K Fobert Cippi!Is solutio!- disti!guishi!g bet6ee! the
Jeter!al =egelK a!d the histori8al =egel o the system- is the trap to be avoided i!soar as it
rei!trodu8es a !ormative logi8- a gap bet6ee! the JidealK =egelia! positio! a!d its histori8al
realiUatio!s7 The properly =egelia! move is to reje8t a!y tra!s:histori8al ideal 6hi8h 6ould e!able us
to measure a!d evaluate all empiri8al:histori8al realiUatio!s o the =egelia! system- a!d to 8o!sider the
8ha!ges i! this ideal itsel7 @,u8h more adeNuate is A!dre6 DutroelloIs !otio! o 1illes GeleuUe- the
great 8o!temporary a!ti:=egelia!- as embodyi!g a repetitio! o =egel today7A Hur starti!g poi!t should
be that JAbsolute *!o6i!gK i!volves a re8og!itio! o both radi8al histori8al 8losure @there is !o meta:
la!guage- !o 6ay o looki!g at o!esel rom the outsideA a!d- simulta!eously- o a radi8al ope!!ess o
the uture @the o8us o Datheri!e ,alabou i! her Future of 0egelA7 Furthermore- the task is to thi!k
@beyo!d =egelA this radi8al ope!!ess 6ith @or eve! asA repetitio!+ or =egel- repetitio! is sublatio! or
idealiUatio! @say- rom the Daesar:!ame to the Daesar:titleAT that is- he 8a!!ot thi!k the pure repetitio!
o *ierkegaard a!d Freud7 9s !ot the e?8ess o !egativity over the re8o!8iled so8ial order also the
e?8ess o repetitio! over sublatio!M The task =egel has let us 6ith- the big gap i! his thi!ki!g- is ho6
to thi!k this e?8ess @dis8er!ible at ma!y levels+ i! the !e8essity o 6ar- the threat o mad!ess OA
6ithout alli!g ba8k i!to a relativist histori8ismM This reere!8e to the persiste!t e?8ess o
!egativityErom the ever:prese!t possibility o mad!ess as 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity- to the !e8essity
o 6ar as the so8ial orm o the e?plosio! o abstra8t u!iversalityEis also 8ru8ial or u!dersta!di!g
6hat =egel mea!s by Jre8o!8iliatio!K 6hi8h- i! 8o!trast to a J8riti8alK attitude- 8hara8teriUes the
dime!sio! o the Absolute7 Fe8o!8iliatio! does !ot mea! that the subje8t i!ally su88eeds i!
appropriati!g the other!ess 6hi8h threate!s its sel:ide!tity- mediati!g or i!ter!aliUi!g @i7e7-
Jsublati!gKA it7 Wuite the 8o!trary- =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! 8o!tai!s a resig!ed !ote+ o!e has to
re8o!8ile o!esel 6ith the e?8ess o !egativity as a positive grou!d or 8o!ditio! o our reedom- to
re8og!iUe our o6! substa!8e i! 6hat appears to be a! obsta8le7
9! *ierkegaardia!:Freudia! pure repetitio!- as 6e have see!- the diale8ti8al moveme!t o
sublimatio! e!8ou!ters itsel- its o6! 8ore- outside itsel- i! the guise o a Jbli!dK 8ompulsio! to repeat7
9t is here that 6e should apply the great =egelia! motto 8o!8er!i!g the i!ter!aliUi!g o the e?ter!al
obsta8le+ i! ighti!g its e?ter!al opposite- bli!d !o!:sublatable repetitio!- the diale8ti8al moveme!t
ights agai!st its o6! abyssal grou!d- its o6! 8oreT i! other 6ords- the ultimate gesture o
re8o!8iliatio! is to re8og!iUe i! this threate!i!g e?8ess o !egativity the 8ore o the subje8t itsel7 This
e?8ess has diere!t !ames i! =egel+ the J!ight o the 6orld-K the !e8essity o 6ar- o mad!ess- et87
Cerhaps the same holds or the basi8 oppositio! bet6ee! =egelia! a!d Freudia! !egativity+ pre8isely
i!soar as there is a! u!bridgeable gap bet6ee! them @=egelia! !egativity idealiUes a!d sublates all
parti8ular 8o!te!t i! the abyss o its u!iversality- 6hile the !egativity o the Freudia! drive is e?pressed
i! its Jsti8ki!gK to a 8o!ti!ge!t parti8ular 8o!te!tA- Freudia! !egativity provides @Nuite literallyA the
Jmaterial basisK or idealiUi!g !egativity7 To put it i! some6hat simpliied terms- every
idealiUi!g>u!iversaliUi!g !egativity has to be atta8hed to a si!gular- 8o!ti!ge!t- Jpathologi8alK 8o!te!t
6hi8h serves as its JsinthomeK i! the .a8a!ia! se!se @i the sinthome is u!raveled or disi!tegrated-
u!iversality disappearsA7 The e?emplary model or this li!k is =egelIs dedu8tio! o the !e8essity o
hereditary mo!ar8hy+ the ratio!al state as a u!iversal totality mediati!g all parti8ular 8o!te!t has to be
embodied i! the 8o!ti!ge!t Jirratio!alK igure o the mo!ar8h @a!d 6e 8a! also apply the same matri?
to =egelIs treatme!t o the JrabbleKA7 This e?8ess o the drive Nua pure repetitio! is the Jde8e!teredK
sour8e o value that =egel 8ould !ot 8o!8eptualiUe- the libidi!al 8orrelate o the labor:po6er 6hi8h
produ8es surplus:value7
Goes this mea! that- o!8e 6e have e!tered the Freudo:*ierkegaardia! 6orld o pure repetitio!-
6e 8a! orget about =egelM Dlaude .Lvi:Strauss 6rote that the prohibitio! o i!8est is !ot a Nuestio!
6ithout a! a!s6er- but rather the opposite+ a! a!s6er 6ithout a Nuestio!- the solutio! o a! u!k!o6!
problem7 The same goes or pure repetitio!+ it is a! a!s6er to the 0egelian problem- its hidde! 8ore-
6hi8h is 6hy it 8a! o!ly be properly lo8ated 6ithi! the =egelia! problemati8Eo!8e 6e e!ter the post:
=egelia! 6orld- the 8o!8ept o repetitio! is Jre!ormaliUedK a!d loses its subversive edge7 The
relatio!ship is similar to that bet6ee! the i!ale o ,oUartIs Don (iovanni a!d post:,oUartia!
Foma!ti8ism+ the s8e!e o do! 1iova!!iIs death ge!erates a terriyi!g e?8ess 6hi8h disturbs the
8oordi!ates o ,oUartIs u!iverseT ho6ever- although this e?8ess poi!ts or6ard to6ards Foma!ti8ism-
it loses its subversive edge a!d is Jre!ormaliUedK o!8e 6e rea8h Foma!ti8ism proper7
3ut does this !ot- parado?i8ally a!d u!e?pe8tedly- bri!g us ba8k to the topi8 o +ufhebung- this
time applied to the very relatio!ship bet6ee! =egel a!d his post:=egelia! Jrepetitio!KM GeleuUe o!8e
8hara8teriUed his o6! thought as a! essay i! thi!ki!g as i =egel had !ot e?isted- repeatedly maki!g
the poi!t that =egel 6as a philosopher 6ho should be simply ig!ored- !ot 6orked:through7 /hat
GeleuUe missed 6as ho6 his o6! thought o pure repetitio! o!ly 6orks as a 6eird sublatio! o =egel7
9! this e?emplary last reve!ge o =egel- the great =egelia! moti o the path to6ards truth bei!g part o
the truthEo ho6- i! order to arrive at the right 8hoi8e- o!e has to begi! 6ith the 6ro!g
8hoi8eEreasserts itsel7 The poi!t is !ot so mu8h that 6e should not ig!ore =egel- but that 6e 8a! o!ly
aord to ig!ore him ater a lo!g a!d arduous 6orki!g:through:=egel7
The time has thus 8ome to repeat 0egel7

Part III

T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ .ADA4
CHAPTER -

.a8a! as a Feader o =egel

[The\ Nuestio! o the termi!atio! o a! a!alysis is that o the mome!t at 6hi8h the subje8tIs satisa8tio!
is a8hievable i! the satisa8tio! o allEthat is- o all those it i!volves i! a huma! u!dertaki!g7 H all
the u!dertaki!gs that have bee! proposed i! this 8e!tury- the psy8hoa!alystIs is perhaps the lotiest-
be8ause it mediates i! our time bet6ee! the 8are:ridde! ma! a!d the subje8t o absolute k!o6ledge7
1
This passage rom 7apport de 7ome 8o!tai!s in nuce .a8a!Is program o the early 1%#0sEa
program that every proessio!al philosopher 6ould u!doubtedly dismiss as !o!se!se+ !amely- to bri!g
together =eidegger @6ho dei!es J8areK as the u!dame!tal eature o i!ite DaseinA a!d =egel @the
philosopher o i!i!ite Absolute *!o6ledge i! 6hi8h the )!iversal a!d the Carti8ular are ully
mediatedA7
2
The .a8a!ia! a!alyst as a igure o Absolute *!o6i!gM 9s !ot this thesis restri8ted to a
spe8ii8 histori8al mome!t @the early 1%#0sA- 6he! =egelIs i!lue!8e o! .a8a! @mediated by Ale?a!dre
*oj`ve a!d 2ea! =yppoliteA 6as at its peakM Gid !ot .a8a! soo! move rom =egel to *a!t- i!sisti!g o!
the i!a88essible @JimpossibleKA 8hara8ter o the Feal that orever resists symboliUatio!- o! the subje8tIs
u!surpassable separatio! rom the 8ause o its desireM 9s !ot the best des8riptio! o .a8a!Is 8e!tral
proje8t that o a criti<ue of pure desire- 6here the term J8ritiNueK is to be u!derstood i! its pre8ise
*a!tia! se!se+ mai!tai!i!g the gap that orever separates every empiri8al @Jpathologi8alKA obje8t o
desire rom its JimpossibleK obje8t:8ause 6hose pla8e has to remai! emptyM A!d is !ot 6hat .a8a!
8alls Jsymboli8 8astratio!K this very gap 6hi8h re!ders every empiri8al obje8t u!satisa8toryM 9!deed-
i! the ollo6i!g paragraphs o the 7apport de 7ome itsel- .a8a! already outli!es the Jlimits 6ithi!
6hi8h it is impossible or our tea8hi!g to ig!ore the stru8turi!g mome!ts o =egelIs phe!ome!ologyK+

3ut i there is still somethi!g propheti8 i! =egelIs i!siste!8e o! the u!dame!tal ide!tity o the
parti8ular a!d the u!iversal- a! i!siste!8e that reveals the e?te!t o his ge!ius- it is 8ertai!ly
psy8hoa!alysis that provides it 6ith its paradigm by reveali!g the stru8ture i! 6hi8h this ide!tity is
realiUed as disju!8tive o the subje8t- a!d 6ithout appeali!g to the uture7.et me simply say that this- i!
my vie6- 8o!stitutes a! obje8tio! to a!y reere!8e to totality i! the i!dividual- si!8e the subje8t
i!trodu8es divisio! therei!- as 6ell as i! the 8olle8tivity that is the eNuivale!t o the i!dividual7
Csy8hoa!alysis is 6hat 8learly relegates both the o!e a!d the other to the status o mirages7
"
/e are thereby ba8k i! amiliar 6aters+ =egelia! sel:8o!s8ious!ess- the subje8t o absolute
!otio!al sel:mediatio! 6hi8h supersedes or devours every alterity- versus the .a8a!ia! divided subje8t
o the u!8o!s8ious- by dei!itio! separated rom its Dause7 9t is !ot e!ough- ho6ever- to redu8e =egel
to his gra!d ormulae @the Absolute !ot o!ly as Substa!8e but also as Subje8tT the a8tuality o the
ratio!alT Absolute *!o6i!gT the sel:8a!8eli!g or8e o !egativityT et87A a!d the! to Nui8kly reje8t him
as the most e?treme e?pressio! o the moder! delirium o the total subje8tive:!otio!al mediatio! or
appropriatio! o all reality7 H!e should display- apropos =egel himsel- 6hat the author o o!e o the
best books o! =egel- 1Lrard .ebru!- 8alled the Jpatie!8e o the !otio!K @.a patience du concept- the
bookIs titleA+ to read =egelIs theoreti8al pra8ti8e en dAtail- i! mi!iature- ollo6i!g all his diale8ti8al
8uts a!d tur!s7 The 6ager o su8h a! operatio! is double+ it 8a! grou!d the @o!ly seriousA 8ritiNue o
=egel- the imma!e!t 8ritiNue that measures him by his o6! sta!dards- a!alyUi!g ho6 he realiUes his
o6! programT but it 8a! also serve as a mea!s to redeem =egel- to u!earth the a8tual mea!i!g o his
great programmati8 ma?ims as opposed to the sta!dard u!dersta!di!g o them7
THE C!NNING OF REASON

/here the! do 6e sta!d 6ith regard to Absolute *!o6i!gM /he!- i! his 6riti!gs arou!d the
7apport de 7ome- .a8a! himsel dei!es the 8o!8lusio! o a treatme!t as the positio! o =egelia!
Absolute *!o6i!g- ho6 are 6e to read this together 6ith .a8a!Is i!siste!8e o! huma! i!itude- o! the
irredu8ible future antArieur that pertai!s to the pro8ess o symboliUatio! @every 8o!8lusio! i!volves a
gesture o pre8ipitatio!T it !ever o88urs J!o6-K but i! a !o6 vie6ed ba8k6ardsAM Take the ollo6i!g
passage+ J/hat is realiUed i! my history is !either the past dei!ite as 6hat 6as- si!8e it is !o more- !or
eve! the pere8t o 6hat has bee! i! 6hat 9 am- but the uture a!terior as 6hat 9 6ill have bee!- give!
6hat 9 am i! the pro8ess o be8omi!g7K
(
3ut the same goes or =egelE6he! he adopts the positio! o
the Je!d o history-K prese!ti!g us 6ith a 8ohere!t !arrative about the e!tirety o history- he does !ot
simply look at the past rom the prese!t positio!T although he prohibits philosophy rom spe8ulatio!
about the uture a!d restri8ts it to 8omprehe!di!g 6hat is the 8ase- past a!d prese!t- the positio! rom
6hi8h he e!a8ts the i!al Jre8o!8iliatio!K has a utural dime!sio! o its o6!- that o a Juture pere8tK
rom 6hi8h the prese!t itsel is see! rom a mi!imal dista!8e- i! its a88omplished orm+

9t is a prese!t that raises itsel- it is esse!tially re8o!8iled- brought to 8o!summatio! through the
!egatio! o its immedia8y- 8o!summated i! u!iversality- but i! a 8o!summatio! that is !ot yet
a8hieved- a!d 6hi8h must thereore be grasped as futureEa !o6 o the prese!t that has 8o!summatio!
beore its eyesT but be8ause the 8ommu!ity is posited !o6 i! the order o time- the 8o!summatio! is
disti!guished rom this J!o6K a!d is posited as uture7
#
This Juture pere8tK is that o a88omplished symboliUatio!- 6hi8h is 6hy- i! his 7apport de
7ome- .a8a! systemati8ally ide!tiies the 8o!8lusio! o the a!alyti8 treatme!t 6ith =egelia! JAbsolute
*!o6i!gK+ the aim o the treatme!t is to a8hieve the same Juture pere8tK o a88omplished
symboliUatio!7 0a8h dayIs editio! o .e Monde- the most prestigious @a!d proverbially haughtyA Fre!8h
daily !e6spaper- appears i! the early ater!oo! o the previous day @or e?ample- the issue or 2uly ( is
o! sale arou!d " p7m7 o! 2uly "A- as i the editors 6a!ted to sig!al a simulta!eous move o pre8ipitatio!
a!d delay+ they 6rite rom eter!ity- observi!g eve!ts rom a poi!t later tha! that o other daily
!e6spapers 8aught up i! immediate JliveK reporti!gT ho6ever- simulta!eously- they are able to see the
prese!t itsel rom its immediate uture @i7e7- i! its true pote!tial- !ot o!ly the 6ay it appears i! its
8haoti8 immedia8yAEso- you 8a! lear! already i! the ater!oo! o 2uly " ho6 thi!gs look rom the
perspe8tive o 2uly (7 4o 6o!der .e Monde is a88used o arroga!8e+ this 8oi!8ide!8e o delay a!d
pre8ipitatio! ee8tively betrays its prete!se to sta!di!g or a ki!d o JAbsolute *!o6i!g-K i! 8o!trast
to its rivals 6hi8h merely report leeti!g opi!io!s7
So 6he!- i! his 7apport de 7ome- .a8a! reers to Absolute *!o6i!g- 6e should look 8losely at
ho6 he 8o!8eives this ide!tii8atio! o the a!alyst 6ith the =egelia! master- a!d !ot su88umb to the
temptatio! o Nui8kly retra!slati!g Absolute *!o6i!g i!to the a88omplished symboliUatio!7 For .a8a!-
the a!alyst sta!ds or the =egelia! master- the embodime!t o Absolute *!o6i!g- i!soar as he
re!ou!8es all or8i!g @forBageA o reality a!d- ully a6are that the a8tual is already i! itsel ratio!al-
adopts the sta!8e o a passive observer 6ho does !ot i!terve!e dire8tly i! the 8o!te!t- but merely
ma!ipulates the s8e!e so that the 8o!te!t destroys itsel- 6he! 8o!ro!ted 6ith its o6! i!8o!siste!8ies7
This is ho6 o!e should read .a8a!Is i!di8atio! that =egelIs 6ork is Jpre8isely 6hat 6e !eed to 8o!er
a mea!i!g o! so:8alled a!alyti8 !eutrality other tha! that the a!alyst is simply i! a stuporK
'
Eit is this
!eutrality 6hi8h keeps the a!alyst Jo! the path o !o!:a8tio!7K
$
The =egelia! 6ager is that the best
6ay to destroy a! e!emy is to leave the ield ree or him to deploy his pote!tial- so that his su88ess
6ill be his ailure- si!8e the la8k o a!y e?ter!al obsta8le 6ill 8o!ro!t him 6ith the absolutely i!here!t
obsta8le o the i!8o!siste!8y o his o6! positio!+

Du!!i!g is somethi!g other tha! tri8kery7 -he most open activity is the greatest cunning @the other
must be take! i! its truthA7 9! other 6ords- 6ith his ope!!ess- a ma! e?poses the other i! himsel- he
makes him appear as he is i! a!d or himsel- a!d thereby does a6ay 6ith himsel7 Du!!i!g is the great
art o i!du8i!g others to be as they are i! a!d or themselves- a!d to bri!g this out to the light o
8o!s8ious!ess7 Although others are i! the right- they do !ot k!o6 ho6 to dee!d it by means of speech7
,ute!ess is bad- mea! 8u!!i!g7 Do!seNue!tly- a true master [Meister\ is at bottom o!ly he 6ho 8a!
provoke the other to transform himself through his act7
&
The 6ager o the =egelia! Du!!i!g o Feaso! thus i!volves !ot so mu8h a trust i! the po6er o
Feaso! @6e 8a! take it easy a!d 6ithdra6EFeaso! 6ill e!sure that the good side 6i!s outA- as a trust
i! the po6er o Ju!reaso!K i! every determi!ate age!t 6hi8h- let to itsel- 6ill destroy itsel+ J9 reaso!
is as 8u!!i!g as =egel said it 6as- it 6ill do its job 6ithout your help7K
%
The Du!!i!g o Feaso! thus i!
!o 6ay i!volves a aith i! a se8ret guidi!g ha!d guara!teei!g that all the appare!t 8o!ti!ge!8y o
u!reaso! 6ill someho6 8o!tribute to the harmo!y o the Totality o Feaso!T i a!ythi!g- it i!volves a
trust i! u!:Feaso!- the 8ertai!ty that- !o matter ho6 6ell:pla!!ed thi!gs are- someho6 they 6ill go
6ro!g7 This is 6hat .a8a! mea!t by his stateme!t that Ja letter al6ays rea8hes its desti!atio!K+ there is
!o repressio! 6ithout the retur! o the repressed- every totality:o:mea!i!g is al6ays disturbed by its
symptom7
So 6hat about the obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t that this reere!8e to =egel is operative o!ly i! the
early .a8a!- or 6hom the goal o the psy8hoa!alyti8 8ure is the 8omplete symboliUatio! @Jsymboli8
realiUatio!KA o symptoms- a!d !o lo!ger or the .a8a! 6ho be8omes a6are o the JbarredK big HtherM
For the .a8a! o the 1%#0s- o8used o! the symboli8- the su88ess o the a!alyti8 treatme!t relies o! the
liberati!g po6er o Jsymboli8 realiUatio!-K o liste!i!g to a!d assumi!g the J9- truthK 6hi8h JspeaksK
i! a!d through the u!8o!s8ious symptoms7 9! a =egelia! mode- .a8a! asserts the li!k- ide!tity eve!-
bet6ee! la!guage a!d death+ i! la!guage- immediate reality is mortiied or idealiUed i! its !otio!al
sublatio!- a!d i!soar as the symboli8 order is sustai!ed by death drive Jbeyo!d the pleasure:
pri!8iple-K o!e has to Jsubje8tiviUe o!eIs o6! death-K to re8og!iUe i! it the o!ly master to be obeyed-
a!d thereby to get rid o all other master igures7
10
The late .a8a!- !o6 o8used o! the Feal-
i!trodu8es the irredu8ible te!sio! bet6ee! the symboli8 a!d the real o death+ J9t is possible that all
la!guage is made [to e!able us\ !ot to thi!k death 6hi8h- ee8tively- is the least thi!kable thi!g7K
11

Far rom bei!g the operator o death- la!guage is here 8o!8eived as a dee!se agai!stEa s8ree!
prote8ti!g us romEthe 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith death7
12
Si!8e this te!sio! is irredu8ible- the goal o
a!alysis is !o lo!ger .a8a!Is versio! o =egelia! Absolute *!o6i!g- !amely the ideal o a total
symboliUatio! i! 6hi8h the subje8t gets rid o its imagi!ary egoT it is !o6 its very opposite @as
deployed i! the semi!ar o! -he Ethics of )sychoanalysisAEthe subje8tIs heroi8 Jor8i!gK o the
symboli8 prohibitio!- his or her 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the J3la8k Su!K o the Feal Thi!g7
.a8a!Is idea o the e!d or goal o the a!alyti8 treatme!t passes through three mai! phases
6hi8h vaguely it the triad o symboli8- Feal- a!d imagi!ary+ irst- the symboliUatio! o the symptomsT
the!- the viole!t e!8ou!ter 6ith the FealT i!ally- the modest amelioratio! o our daily psy8hi8
e8o!omy7 .a8a!Is limitatio! is 8learly dis8er!ible i! ho6- i! his last de8ades- he te!ds to os8illate
bet6ee! t6o poles 6hi8h are both J6orse-K as Stali! 6ould have put it7 Sometimes @e?emplarily i! his
readi!g o +ntigoneA- he 8o!8eives o the ethi8al a8t as a ki!d o Jor8i!g-K a viole!t a8t o
tra!sgressio! 6hi8h 8uts i!to imagi!ary a!d symboli8 sembla!8es a!d makes the subje8t 8o!ro!t the
terriyi!g Feal i! its bli!di!g destru8tive po6erEsu8h traumati8 e!8ou!ters- su8h pe!etratio!s i!to the
orbidde! or dam!ed domai!- i! +ntigone- are 8alled ate- a!d 8a! o!ly be sustai!ed or a brie mome!t7
These authe!ti8 mome!ts are rareT o!e 8a! o!ly survive them i o!e soo! retur!s to the sae domai! o
sembla!8esEtruth is too pai!ul to be sustai!ed or more tha! a passi!g mome!t7 At other times
@espe8ially i! his rumi!atio!s about the symptom to6ards the e!d o his lieA- .a8a! adopts the
opposite @but ee8tively 8ompleme!taryA attitude o 6isdom+ the a!alyst !ever k!o6s 6hat 6ill
happe! 6he! he pushes a!alysis too ar a!d dissolves the a!alysa!dIs symptoms too radi8allyEo!e
8a! get more tha! o!e e?pe8ted- a lo8al i!terpretive i!terve!tio! i!to a parti8ular symptomal ormatio!
8a! destabiliUe the subje8tIs e!tire symboli8 e8o!omy a!d bri!g about a 8atastrophi8 disi!tegratio! o
his 6orld7 The a!alyst should thus remai! modest a!d respe8t appeara!8es 6ithout taki!g them too
seriouslyT they are ultimately all 6e have- all that sta!ds bet6ee! us a!d the 8atastrophe7 9t is easy to
see ho6 these t6o sta!8es 8ompleme!t ea8h other+ they rely o! a @rather =eideggeria!A image o
huma! lie as a 8o!ti!uous d6elli!g i! Ji!authe!ti8K sembla!8es- i!terrupted rom time to time by
viole!t e!8ou!ters 6ith the Feal7 @/hat this e!tire ield e!8ompassi!g the t6o sta!8es e?8ludes is the
Dhristia! J6ork o love-K the patie!t 6ork o 8o!ti!uous idelity to the e!8ou!ter 6ith the Feal7A This
modest approa8h o merely Jmaki!g lie a little bit easier-K o dimi!ishi!g sueri!g a!d pai!-
orgetti!g about 8apitaliUed Truth- makes the late .a8a! almost a Fortya!- a!d 8learly reverses his
earlier idelity to the bibli8al pres8riptio!+

3ut i 1od so 8lothes the grass o the ield- 6hi8h is alive today a!d tomorro6 is thro6! i!to the
ur!a8e- 6ill =e !ot mu8h more 8lothe youM 5ou o little aithR Go !ot 6orry the!- sayi!g- J/hat 6ill
6e eatMK or J/hat 6ill 6e dri!kMK or J/hat 6ill 6e 6ear or 8lothi!gMK For the 1e!tiles eagerly seek
all these thi!gsT or your heave!ly Father k!o6s that you !eed all these thi!gs7 3ut seek irst =is
ki!gdom a!d =is righteous!ess- a!d all these thi!gs 6ill be added to you7 So do !ot 6orry about
tomorro6T or tomorro6 6ill 8are or itsel7 0a8h day has e!ough trouble o its o6!7 @,atthe6 '+"0X(A
.a8a! ote! reers to these li!es i! order to de!igrate heali!g as the primary goal o
psy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t+ health 8omes par surcroYtEi! additio! or i! e?8ess- a!d by itsel- as a!
u!i!te!ded bo!us7 9!soar as health 8o!8er!s the orga!ism a!d its homeostasis- !ot Truth- its status is
pathologi8al i! the *a!tia! se!se- so that .a8a!Is motto 8a! also be e?pressed i! terms o o8usi!g o!
ethi8al duty a!d ig!ori!g utilitaria! 8o!8er!s+ do your duty- a!d happi!ess a!d the 1ood 6ill take 8are
o themselves7 There are ma!y variatio!s o this attitude- best re!dered by the sayi!g JTake 8are o the
pe!!ies- a!d the pou!ds 6ill take 8are o themselves-K 6hi8h should be i!verted i!to+ Take 8are o the
sou!ds @sig!iiersA- a!d the se!se @sig!iiedA 6ill take 8are o itsel7 .a8a! aims at the heroi8 sta!8e o
JTake 8are o the truth- a!d the heali!g 6ill take 8are o itselK+ 8o!ro!t the Truth- risk everythi!g-
ig!ore the 8o!seNue!8es- a!d health 6ill 8ome par surcroYt O 9! short+ 8o!ro!t the Feal- a!d reality
6ill take 8are o itsel7 Go !ot 8ompromise your desire- a!d your !eeds a!d dema!ds 6ill be provided
or7
There is- ho6ever- a u!dame!tal ambiguity 6hi8h pertai!s to this attitude+ does it mea! that
o!e should ig!ore health a!d o8us o! the esse!tial- o! the patie!tIs arti8ulatio! a!d assumptio! o the
Truth o his or her desire- or does it mea!- i! a more rei!ed 6ay- that psy8hi8 health is Jesse!tially a
by:produ8tKM 9! the latter 8ase- health remai!s the true goal o the treatme!t- the poi!t is simply that it
is 8ou!ter:produ8tive- sel:destru8tive eve!- to make it a dire8t goalEo!e should 6ork o! other thi!gs
a!d 8ou!t o! health emergi!g as a by:produ8t7 3ut i this is the 8ase- should 6e !ot also i!vert the
motto a88ordi!gly+ take 8are o the pathologi8al reality- a!d the Feal 6ill take 8are o itselM 3e
modest- try to help the patie!t by easi!g his sueri!g- a!d the Truth 6ill emerge by itselM
Furthermore- this bibli8al ormula 8a! also be 8o!sidered a de!ial o the u!8o!s8ious+ Jseek
irst =is ki!gdom a!d =is righteous!ess- a!d all these thi!gs 6ill be added to youKEby 6homM 3y
1od- 6ho 6ill do the 6ork behi!d the s8e!es- i! the same 6ay =e J8lothes the grass o the ield7K
1"

.a8a!Is thesis that J1od is u!8o!s8iousK is e!do6ed here 6ith a !e6 mea!i!g+ do your duty- a!d 1od
6ill be the mole- the age!t o that subterra!ea! u!8o!s8ious J6eavi!g o the spiritK 6hi8h 6ill 8reate
the 8o!ditio!s or my a8t to su88eed7 9! other 6ords- does .a8a! himsel !ot rely here o! some ki!d o
Du!!i!g o Feaso! 6hi8h 6ill help the patie!t a8hieve health 6ithout dire8tly looki!g or itM
THE LACANIAN PROSOPOPOEIA

The mode o appeara!8e o this Du!!i!g o Feaso! is iro!y- 6hi8h or =egel lies at the very
8ore o diale8ti8s+ JAll diale8ti8s lets hold that 6hi8h should hold- treats it as i it ully holds [l=sst das
gelten! was gelten soll! als ob es gelte\- a!d- i! this 6ay- it lets it destroy itselEthe ge!eral iro!y o the
6orld7K
1(
/ith his method o Nuestio!i!g- So8rates merely pushes his oppo!e!t:part!er to make his
abstra8t idea more 8o!8rete @J6hat do you mea! by justi8e- by happi!ess OMKA- a!d- i! this 6ay- lets
him reveal the i!8o!siste!8y o his positio! a!d lets this positio! destroy itsel7 The method does !ot
impose e?ter!al sta!dards o!to a! idea- it measures the idea by its o6! sta!dards a!d lets it destroy
itsel through its o6! sel:e?pli8atio!7 /he! =egel 6rites that 6oma!ki!d is Jthe everlasti!g iro!y o
the 8ommu!ity-K
1#
does he thereby !ot assert the emi!i!e 8hara8ter o iro!y or diale8ti8sM
1'
/hat
this mea!s is that the very prese!8e o So8rates- his Nuestio!i!g attitude- tra!sorms the spee8h o his
part!er i!to prosopopoeia+

/he! the parti8ipa!ts i! a 8o!versatio! are 8o!ro!ted 6ith So8rates- their 6ords all o a sudde! start
to sou!d like Nuotes a!d 8li8hLs- like borro6ed voi8esT the parti8ipa!ts are 8o!ro!ted 6ith the abyss o
6hat authoriUes them i! their spee8h- a!d the mome!t they try to rely o! the usual supports o
authoriUatio!- authoriUatio! ails7 9t is as i a! i!audible e8ho o iro!y adds itsel to their spee8h- a!
e8ho 6hi8h hollo6s out their 6ords a!d their voi8e- a!d their voi8e appears as borro6ed a!d
e?propriated7
1$
Fe8all the proverbial s8e!e o a ma! maki!g a spee8h i! ro!t o his 6ie- boasti!g o his great
e?ploits- evoki!g high ideals- et87- a!d his 6ie sile!tly observi!g him 6ith a barely 8o!8ealed mo8ki!g
smileEher sile!t prese!8e has the ee8t o rui!i!g the pathos o his spee8h- o u!maski!g him i! all
his misery7 9t is i! this se!se that- or .a8a!- the So8rati8 iro!y a!!ou!8es the subje8tive positio! o the
a!alyst+ does !ot the same hold also or the a!alyti8 sessio!M Fe8all )mberto 08oIs a!alysis o
,asablanca- 6here he dra6s atte!tio! to a stra!ge habit o the Fesista!8e hero Vi8tor .asUlo+ i! every
s8e!e- he orders a diere!t dri!k- a Cer!od- a 8og!a8- a 6hisky7 3ut 6hyM 9s this to be read as a!
i!di8atio! that- be!eath the image o a heroi8 a!ti:as8ist ighter- there d6ells a rei!ed- de8ade!t
hedo!istM 4o+ it is simply that the s8ript6riters did !ot treat Vi8tor .asUlo as a psy8hologi8ally
8o!siste!t perso!ality- but as a 8omposite o multiple 8li8hLs7 A!d it is the same i! subje8tive reality+
the mysterious Jdepth o perso!alityK has to be demystiied as the illusory ee8t o prosopopoeia- o
the a8t that the subje8tIs dis8ourse is a bri8olage o ragme!ts rom diere!t sour8es7
The status o prosopopoeia i! .a8a! 8ha!ges radi8ally 6ith the shit i! the status o the a!alyst
rom bei!g the sta!d:i! or the Jbig HtherK @the symboli8 orderA to bei!g the Jsmall otherK @the obsta8le
6hi8h sta!ds or the i!8o!siste!8y- ailure- o the big HtherA7 The a!alyst 6ho o88upies the pla8e o the
big Hther is himsel the medium o prosopopoeia+ 6he! he speaks- it is the big Hther 6ho speaks @or-
rather- keeps sile!8eA through himT i! the i!tersubje8tive e8o!omy o the a!alyti8 pro8ess- he is !ot just
a!other subje8t- he o88upies the empty pla8e o death7 The patie!t talks- a!d the a!alystIs sile!8e sta!ds
or the abse!t mea!i!g o the patie!tIs talk- the mea!i!g supposed to be 8o!tai!ed i! the big Hther7 The
pro8ess e!ds 6he! the patie!t 8a! himsel assume the mea!i!g o his spee8h7 The a!alyst as the Jsmall
other-K o! the 8o!trary- magi8ally tra!sorms the 6ords o the a!alysa!d i!to prosopopoeia- de:
subje8tiviUi!g his 6ords- deprivi!g them o the Nuality o bei!g a! e?pressio! o the 8o!siste!t subje8t
a!d his i!te!tio!:to:mea!7 The goal is !o lo!ger or the a!alysa!d to assume the mea!i!g o his spee8h-
but or him to assume its !o!:mea!i!g- its !o!se!si8al i!8o!siste!8y- 6hi8h implies- 6ith regard to his
o6! status- his de:subje8tiviUatio!- or 6hat .a8a! 8alls Jsubje8tive destitutio!7K
Crosopopoeia is dei!ed as Ja igure o spee8h i! 6hi8h a! abse!t or imagi!ary perso! is
represe!ted as speaki!g or a8ti!g7K The attributio! o spee8h to a! e!tity 8ommo!ly per8eived to be
u!able to speak @!ature- the 8ommodity- truth itsel OA is or .a8a! the 8o!ditio! o spee8h as su8h-
!ot o!ly its se8o!dary 8ompli8atio!7 Goes !ot .a8a!Is disti!8tio! bet6ee! the Jsubje8t o the
e!u!8iatio!K a!d the Jsubje8t o the e!u!8iatedK poi!t i! this dire8tio!M /he! 9 speak- it is !ever
dire8tly JmyselK 6ho speaksE9 have to have re8ourse to a i8tio! 6hi8h is my symboli8 ide!tity7 9!
this se!se- all spee8h is Ji!dire8tK+ J9 love youK has the stru8ture o+ Jmy ide!tity as lover is telli!g you
that it loves you7K
1&
The impli8atio! o prosopopoeia is thus a 6eird split o 6hi8h Fobert ,usil 6as
a6are+ the Jma! 6ithout propertiesK @der Mann ohne EigenschaftenA has to be suppleme!ted 6ith
properties 6ithout ma! @Eigenschaften ohne MannA- 6ithout a subje8t to 6hom they are attributed7
There are t6o 8orrelative traps to be avoided here- the rightist a!d the letist deviatio!s7 The
irst- o 8ourse- is the pseudo:=egelia! !otio! that this gap sta!ds or a Jsel:alie!atio!K 6hi8h 9 should
strive to abolish ideally a!d the! ully assume my spee8h as dire8tly my o6!7 Agai!st this versio!- o!e
should i!sist that there is !o 9 6hi8h 8a!- eve! ideally- assume its spee8h Jdire8tly-K by:passi!g the
detour o prosopopoeia7 /eari!g a mask 8a! thus be a stra!ge thi!g+ sometimes- more ote! tha! 6e
te!d to believe- there is more truth i! the mask tha! i! 6hat 6e assume to be our Jreal sel7K Thi!k o
the proverbial shy a!d impote!t ma! 6ho- 6hile playi!g a! i!tera8tive video game- adopts the s8ree!
ide!tity o a sadisti8 murderer a!d irresistible sedu8erEit is all too simple to say that this ide!tity is
just a! imagi!ary suppleme!t- a temporary es8ape rom his real:lie impote!8e7 The poi!t is rather that-
si!8e he k!o6s that the video game is Jjust a game-K he 8a! Jreveal his true sel-K do thi!gs he 6ould
!ever do i! real:lie i!tera8tio!sEi! the guise o a i8tio!- the truth about himsel is arti8ulated7
Therei! lies the truth o a 8harmi!g story like Ale?a!dre GumasIs -he Man in the Iron Mas"+ 6hat i
6e i!vert the topi8 a88ordi!g to 6hi8h- i! our so8ial i!tera8tio!s- 6e 6ear masks to 8over our true
a8eM /hat i- o! the 8o!trary- i! order or us to i!tera8t i! publi8 6ith our true a8e- 6e have to have a
mask hidde! some6here- a mask 6hi8h re!ders our u!bearable e?8ess- 6hat is i! us more tha!
ourselves- a mask 6hi8h 6e 8a! put o! o!ly e?8eptio!ally- i! those 8ar!ivalesNue mome!ts 6he! the
sta!dard rules o i!tera8tio! are suspe!dedM 9! short- 6hat i the true u!8tio! o the mask is !ot to be
6or!- but to be kept hidde!M
1%
The opposite trap is to elevate Jthat through 6hi8h 9 speakK i!to a! authe!ti8 site o Truth- so
that Jsomethi!g i! me deeper tha! mysel- the Truth itsel- speaks through me7K This is the 2u!gia!
versio!- i!volvi!g a disti!8tio! bet6ee! my 0go a!d the Sel- a mu8h broader grou!d o my
subje8tivity- 6ith the task bei!g to progress rom my 0go to my true Sel7 Agai!st this versio!- o!e
should assert that that 6hi8h speaks through me is u!dame!tally a lie7
20
The temptatio! here- o
8ourse- is to say that it is !ot the other through 6hom 9 speak- but that the Hther itsel speaks through
me+ the ultimate prosopopoeia is the o!e i! 6hi8h 9 mysel am the other- the mea!s used by d to speak7
Goes- the!- the key diale8ti8al reversal apropos prosopopoeia go rom the subje8t talki!g through
others to the subje8t itsel as the site through 6hi8h the Hther speaksM The shit rom me speaki!g
through some igure o the Hther to the 9 itsel as prosopopoeiaM From J9 8a!!ot tell the truth about
mysel dire8tlyT this most i!timate truth is so pai!ul that 9 8a! o!ly arti8ulate it through a!other- by
adopti!g the mask- talki!g through the mask- o a!other e!tity-K to Jtruth itsel is talki!g through meKM
This reversal i!volves the diale8ti8al shit rom predi8ate to subje8tErom J6hat 9 am sayi!g is trueK
to Jtruth is talki!g through me7K A!d- urthermore- is !ot this shit also 8learly se?ualiUedM /oma! is
ma!Is prosopopoeia+ she is ma!Is symptom- she has !o substa!8e o her o6!- she is a mask through
6hi8h ma! speaks @more pre8isely- as Htto /ei!i!ger demo!strated- a mask through 6hi8h the alle!
!ature o ma! speaksA7 /oma! 8a!!ot relate to truth as a! i!here!t value- she 8a!!ot tell the truthT
ho6ever- truth 8a! speak i! or through her7 The reversal rom J9 speak the truthK to J9- the truth- speakK
o88urs 6ith 6oma!Is ide!tii8atio! 6ith the truth+ me! tell the truth- 6hile i! 6oma!- truth itsel
speaks7
The Jprimordial prosopopoeiaK is ee8tively that o the symboli8 order itsel- o the subje8t
@8o!stituti!g itsel throughA assumi!g a symboli8 ma!dateEor- as .i8hte!berg put it i! o!e o his
aphorisms+ JThere is a tra!s8e!de!t ve!triloNuism that makes people believe that somethi!g that 6as
said o! earth 8ame rom heave!7K 9! o!e o the ,ar? brothersI ilms- 1rou8ho- 8aught telli!g a lie-
a!s6ers a!grily+ J/hom do you believe- your eyes or my 6ordsMK This appare!tly absurd logi8 re!ders
pere8tly the u!8tio!i!g o the symboli8 order i! 6hi8h the symboli8 mask matters more tha! the
dire8t reality o the i!dividual 6ho 6ears it7 9t i!volves the by !o6 amiliar stru8ture o 6hat Freud
8alled Jetishisti8 disavo6alK+ J9 k!o6 very 6ell that thi!gs are the 6ay 9 see them- that the perso! i!
ro!t o me is a 8orrupt 6eakli!g- but 9 !o!etheless treat him respe8tully- si!8e he 6ears the i!sig!ia o
a judge- so that 6he! he speaks- it is the law itself which spea"s through him7K So- i! a 6ay- 9 really do
believe his 6ords- !ot my eyes7 This is 6here the 8y!i8 6ho believes o!ly hard a8ts alls short+ 6he! a
judge speaks- there is i! a 6ay more truth i! his 6ords @the 6ords o the i!stitutio! o la6A tha! i! the
dire8t reality o the perso! o judgeT i o!e limits o!esel to 6hat o!e sees- o!e simply misses the poi!t7
This parado? is 6hat .a8a! aims at 6ith his les non*dupes errent @those i! the k!o6 errA+ those 6ho
reuse to let themselves get 8aught i! the symboli8 i8tio! a!d believe o!ly 6hat they see 6ith their
o6! eyes are those 6ho err most7 /hat the 8y!i8 misses here is the ei8ie!8y o the symboli8 i8tio!-
the 6ay it stru8tures our @e?perie!8e oA reality7 A 8orrupt priest prea8hi!g o! good!ess may be a
hypo8rite- but i people e!do6 his 6ords 6ith the authority o the Dhur8h- they may i!spire them to
perorm good deeds7
=ere o!e should take !ote o a 8ertai! parado?+ it is pre8isely 6he! J9 speakKE6he! 9 per8eive
mysel as the age!t o my spee8hEthat- ee8tively- Jthe big Hther speaks through me-K that 9 am
Jspoke!-K si!8e my spee8h a8ts are totally regulated by the symboli8 order i! 6hi8h 9 d6ell7 A!d-
8o!versely- the o!ly 6ay or me to bri!g my subje8tive positio! o e!u!8iatio! i!to 6ords is to let
mysel be surprised by 6hat 9 say- to e?perie!8e my o6! 6ords as a 8ase o Jit speaks i!>through me7K
This is 6hat happe!s i! the 8ase o a symptom+ i! it- my true subje8tive positio! i!ds a 6ay to
arti8ulate itsel agai!st my 6ill a!d i!te!tio!7 The oppositio! is thus !ot dire8tly bet6ee! J9 speakK a!d
Jthe Hther speaks through me-K si!8e these are the t6o sides o the same 8oi!7 /he! Jit speaksK
through me- it is !ot the big Hther 6hi8h speaks+ the truth that arti8ulates itsel is the truth about the
ailures- gaps- a!d i!8o!siste!8ies o the big Hther7
21
The Talmud says+ JThe o!e 6ho Nuotes properly bri!gs redemptio! to the 6orld7K 9s this !ot
literally the ormula o Stali!ist argume!tatio!M Freud also emphasiUes that the u!8o!s8ious i! dreams
8a! o!ly NuoteEdreams are like a parrot- they are the ultimate prosopopoeia- just repeati!g spee8h
ragme!ts Nua rem!a!ts o the day- 6hile also- o 8ourse- submitti!g them to 8ruel 8uts a!d
rearra!geme!ts i! order to sNueeUe its message i!to them7 @The u!derlyi!g premise o Nuotatio!+ the
big Hther is al6ays there- everythi!g is already 6ritte!- so all that 6e 8a! say should- i true- be
supported by a Nuotatio!7A ThisEa!d !ot the ridi8ulous !otio! o some mysterious Spirit se8retly
pulli!g the stri!gs to guara!tee a happy out8omeEis 6hat the =egelia! JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K amou!ts
to+ 9 hide !othi!g rom you- 9 re!ou!8e all Jherme!euti8s o suspi8io!-K 9 do !ot impute a!y dark
motives to you- 9 just leave the ield ree or you to deploy your pote!tial a!d thus destroy yoursel7
There is more tha! superi8ial 6ord:play i! the reso!a!8e bet6ee! .ist der 6ernunft @Du!!i!g o
Feaso!A a!d .ust der 6ernunft @Cleasure o Feaso!A+ the Du!!i!g o Feaso! o!ly 6orks- the subje8t
o!ly allo6s itsel to get 8aught i! the trap o reaso!- i it is bribed by some surplus:pleasure- a!d it is
this surplus that is brought out by the a!alyti8 sta!8e7
9t is easy to dis8er! here the u!e?pe8ted pro?imity o the =egelia! master to the a!alyst- to
6hi8h .a8a! alludes+ the =egelia! Du!!i!g o Feaso! mea!s that the 9dea realiUes itsel i! a!d through
the very ailure o its realiUatio!7 9t is 6orth re8alli!g the sublime reversal ou!d i! Dharles Gi8ke!sIs
(reat E&pectations+ 6he!- as a you!g ma!- Cip is des8ribed as a Jello6 o great e?pe8tatio!s-K
everybody per8eives this as a predi8tio! o his uture 6orldly su88ess7 At the !ovelIs e!d- ho6ever-
6he! Cip aba!do!s .o!do! a!d retur!s to his modest 8hildhood 8ommu!ity- 6e realiUe that he lived up
to the predi8tio! that marked his lie o!ly by i!di!g the stre!gth to leave behi!d the vai! thrill o
.o!do!Is high so8iety- a!d thereby authe!ti8ate the !otio! o his bei!g a Jma! o great e?pe8tatio!s7K
Furthermore- as beits a =egelia! !ovel- the e!di!g o (reat E&pectations is deeply ambiguous i! a
6ay 6hi8h evokes the radi8al ambiguity o the =egelia! re8o!8iliatio!Ehere is the !ovelIs last
paragraph- des8ribi!g Cip a!d 0stella meeti!g agai! at the rui!s o Satis =ouse+

J/e are rie!ds-K said 9- risi!g a!d be!di!g over her- as she rose rom the be!8h7 JA!d 6ill 8o!ti!ue
rie!ds apart-K said 0stella7 9 took her ha!d i! mi!e- a!d 6e 6e!t out o the rui!ed pla8eT a!d- as the
mor!i!g mists had rise! lo!g ago 6he! 9 irst let the orge- so the eve!i!g mists 6ere risi!g !o6- a!d
i! all the broad e?pa!se o tra!Nuil light they sho6ed to me- 9 sa6 !o shado6 o a!other parti!g rom
her7
=o6 are 6e to read the last 6ords- J9 sa6 !o shado6 o a!other parti!g rom herKM Go they
mea! that 0stella a!d Cip 6ill !ever part- that they 6ill stay together orever- or that it is only at this
moment that )ip did not ?or could not@ see the shadow of a future partingM 0ve! more i!teresti!gly- 6e
!o6 k!o6 that this e!di!g 6as a revised se8o!d versio!+ i! the origi!al e!di!g- 0stella has remarried
a!d Cip remai!s si!gleT ollo6i!g the advi8e o 8ertai! rie!ds @0d6ard 3ul6er:.ytto!- /ilkie
Dolli!sA- Gi8ke!s 6rote a more upbeat e!di!g- suggesti!g that 0stella a!d Cip 6ould marry7 ,a!y
8riti8s !ot o!ly ou!d this !e6 e!di!g a 8o!8essio! to popular tasteT some eve! proposed their o6!
!e6 e!di!gEhere is 17 37 Sha6Is versio!- des8ribi!g 6hat happe!s ater 0stella a!d Cip ru! i!to o!e
a!other a!d the! part agai!+ JSi!8e that parti!g- 9 have bee! able to thi!k o her 6ithout the old
u!happi!essT but 9 have !ever tried to see her agai!- a!d 9 k!o6 9 !ever shall7K There is a! ambiguity
here agai!+ J9 k!o6 9 !ever shallKEshall 6hatM See 0stella agai! or try to see her again @6hi8h leaves
ope! the prospe8t o a! u!premeditated e!8ou!terAM A!other attempt 6as made by Gouglas 3rooks:
Gavies- 6ho resolved the ambiguity o Gi8ke!sIs se8o!d e!di!g by opti!g or the pessimisti8 versio!+
6he! 0stella a!d Cip are leavi!g the garde! together- Jthe eve!i!g su!light o the mome!t 6he! 9 let
Satis holdi!g 0stellaIs ha!d 6as so bright that it ba!ished all shado6sEeve! the metaphori8al shado6
o the parti!g that 6e 6ere soo! @a!d perma!e!tlyA to e!dure7K =o6ever- this dispelli!g o the
ambiguity does !ot 6ork be8ause- i! a 6ay- it is superluous- it says too muchEi! a! e?a8t parallel
6ith =egelIs JAbsolute *!o6i!g-K 6here 6e also see J!o shado6 o a!other parti!g rom itK+ it- o
8ourse- i!8ludes its o6! histori8ityT ho6ever- to say this e?pli8itly is already to say too mu8h a!d
i!volves a regressio! to histori8ism7 The de!oueme!t o (reat E&pectations thus relies o! a ki!d o
=egelia! rele?ivity+ 6hat 8ha!ges i! the 8ourse o the heroIs ordeal is !ot o!ly his 8hara8ter- but also
the very ethi8al sta!dard by 6hi8h 6e measure his 8hara8ter7
9! his revie6 o 3adiouIs Ethics- Terry 0agleto! 6rote+

There is a parado? i! the idea o tra!sormatio!7 9 a tra!sormatio! is deep:seated e!ough- it might
also tra!sorm the very 8riteria by 6hi8h 6e 8ould ide!tiy it- thus maki!g it u!i!telligible to us7 3ut i
it is i!telligible- it might be be8ause the tra!sormatio! 6as !ot radi8al e!ough7 9 6e 8a! talk about the
8ha!ge the! it is !ot ull:blooded e!oughT but i it is ull:blooded e!ough- it threate!s to all outside our
8omprehe!sio!7 Dha!ge must presuppose 8o!ti!uityEa subje8t to 6hom the alteratio! o88ursEi 6e
are !ot to be let merely 6ith t6o i!8omme!surable statesT but ho6 8a! su8h 8o!ti!uity be 8ompatible
6ith revolutio!ary upheavalM
22
The properly =egelia! solutio! to this dilemma is that a truly radi8al 8ha!ge is sel:relati!g+ it
8ha!ges the very 8oordi!ates by mea!s o 6hi8h 6e measure 8ha!ge7 9! other 6ords- a true 8ha!ge sets
its own standards+ it 8a! o!ly be measured by 8riteria that result rom it7 This is 6hat the J!egatio! o
!egatio!K is+ a shit o perspe8tive 6hi8h tur!s ailure i!to true su88ess7 A!d does the same !ot go or
the Freudia! Fehlleistung @acte man<uAAEa! a8t 6hi8h su88eeds i! its very ailureM Fobert Cippi! is
right to emphasiUe that Jthe realiUatio! that o!ly i! su8h VailureI is there su88ess @su88ess at bei!g
(eistA is a! a8hieveme!t like !o otherK i! the history o philosophy7
2"
This is 6here the sta!dard
reproa8h to =egel @that he ails to ully 8o!ro!t !egativity- ailure- 8ollapse- et87- si!8e there is al6ays
a me8ha!ism o redemptio! built i!to the diale8ti8al pro8ess 6hi8h guara!tees that the utter ailure 6ill
magi8ally be 8o!verted i!to its oppositeA alls short+ the story o the =egelia! diale8ti8al reversal is !ot
the story o ailure as a blessi!g i! disguise- as a @pai!ul but !e8essaryA step or detour to6ards the i!al
triumph that retroa8tively redeems it- but- o! the 8o!trary- the story o the !e8essary ailure o every
su88ess @o every dire8t proje8t or a8tA- the story o ho6 the o!ly Jsu88essK the subje8t 8a! gai! is the
rele?ive shit o perspe8tive 6hi8h re8og!iUes su88ess i! ailure itsel7
.ADA4- ,AFd- =09G0110F

Su8h a shit also lies at the very heart o the =egelia! relatio!ship bet6ee! lies a!d truth7
/i!sto! Dhur8hill 6as right 6he! he 8hara8teriUed truth !ot as somethi!g 6e sear8h or- but as
somethi!g upo! 6hi8h- o88asio!ally- 6e a88ide!tally stumble+ J,e! stumble over the truth rom time
to time- but most pi8k themselves up a!d hurry o as i !othi!g happe!ed7K A psy8hologi8ally i!tuitive
perso! may be able to re8og!iUe immediatelyErom a slight 8ha!ge o to!e or o gestureE6he!
somebody has started to lieT but perhaps 6hat o!e !eeds mu8h more is someo!e able to re8og!iUe
6he!- i! the ge!eraliUed babble o daily 8ommu!i8atio!- a perso! stumbles upo! truth @or- rather- 6he!
the truth starts to talk i! or through the babbleAE!ot- o 8ourse- a8tual truth- but subje8tive truth-
6hi8h 8a! also @eve! as a rule doesA e?press itsel i! the guise o a @a8tualA lie7 The reaso! is that- at
their most radi8al- lies are !ot a simple de!ial o truthT they serve a mu8h more rei!ed prote8tive
u!8tio!+ to re!der the truth palpable- tolerable7 Guri!g /orld /ar 99- Dhur8hill Nuipped+ J9! 6artime-
truth is so pre8ious that she should al6ays be atte!ded by a bodyguard o lies7K A!d si!8e- i! a 6ay-
lie itsel- espe8ially love- is perma!e!t 6arare- lyi!g is 6hat keeps the 6orld together7 2oseph de
,aistre 6rote+ Ji 6e 6a!t to tea8h a! error- 6e should O al6ays begi! 6ith a truth7K
2(
Ge ,aistre
had i! mi!d ho6 eve! the most 8ruel sa8rii8ial rituals o paga! religio! impli8itly harbor a 8orre8t
i!sight i!to the ei8a8y o sa8rii8e brought out i! its true orm by Dhristia!ity7 =o6ever- rom a
=egelia! sta!dpoi!t- 6e should i!vert this stateme!t+ Ji 6e 6a!t to tea8h a truth- 6e should al6ays
begi! 6ith a! error7K
The basi8 strategy o 3re8htIs 8elebrated adaptive 8u!!i!g- e?empliied by his behavior duri!g
his i!tervie6 by the =ouse )!:Ameri8a! A8tivities Dommittee @=)ADA- is to Jlie 6ith @partialA truthK+
6hile all 3re8htIs a!s6ers to the Dommittee 6ere a8tually true- he tailored the a8ts to 8reate a alse
overall impressio! @i! short+ that he 6as !ot a dedi8ated 8ommu!ist propaga!dist- but just a! a!ti:
as8ist demo8ratA7 The pri!8iple u!derlyi!g 3re8htIs strategy is best e?pressed i! his 8y!i8al reply to
the reproa8h that he a8ted like a 8o6ard+ J,y proessio! is !ot a hero- but a 6riter7K The problem here-
o 8ourse- is that bei!g a heroEthat is- havi!g 8ourageEis pre8isely not a proessio!- but a
8hara8teristi8 that 8a! be displayed i! a!y situatio! 6here 6hat is at stake is 6hat 3adiou 8alls idelity
to a Truth:0ve!t7 3re8htIs sta!8e should be 8o!trasted to that o Gashiell =ammett- 6ho ou!d himsel
i! a similar predi8ame!t at the same time+ 8alled to testiy beore the =)AD- he 6as asked i he really
6as a trustee or a u!d that the Dommu!ist Carty o the )SA had orga!iUed to prote8t its perse8uted
members a!d sympathiUers7 The truth 6as that he k!e6 !othi!g about the u!d- but he 6as too proud to
a!s6er truthully- si!8e this 6ould have implied that he re8og!iUed the authority o the =)AD a!d
a88epted the !eed to dee!d himselT so he reused to a!s6er @a!d 6as duly se!t to priso! 6here- ater
o!ly t6o 6eeks- the guards bega! to address him as JSirKEproo o the e?traordi!ary po6er a!d
dig!ity o his perso!alityA7 3oth 3re8ht a!d =ammett lied- but 6here 3re8ht lied 6ith @partialA truth-
=ammett lied to save his dig!ity a!d truthul!ess7
2#
4o 6o!der that 1eorg .ukh8s- 3re8htIs great
,ar?ist oppo!e!t- displayed more ethi8al 8ourage tha! 3re8ht 6he!- ater the 8rushi!g o the
=u!garia! rebellio! at the e!d o 1%#'- he 6as arrested by the Soviets- 6ho oered him reedom o!
o!e 8o!ditio!+ they had tapes o his pho!e 8o!versatio!s 6ith the other members o the 9mre 4agy
gover!me!t a!d they k!e6 that he had e?pressed his disagreeme!t 6ith some o the gover!me!tIs a!ti:
so8ialist measuresEall the Soviets 6a!ted rom him 6as to restate these disagreeme!ts publi8ly7
.ukh8s de8li!ed- k!o6i!g pere8tly 6ell that to state the a8tual truth u!der su8h 8o!ditio!s 6ould
have bee! to lie7
9! his irst Seminar- .a8a! dei!es error as a habitual embodime!t o truth+ Jas lo!g as the truth
6ill !ot be revealed i! its e!tirety- that is to say- i! all probability till the e!d o time- it 6ill be i! its
!ature to propagate itsel i! the guise o error+ error is thus a 8o!stitutive stru8ture o the revelatio! o
bei!g as su8h7K
2'
The reere!8e here- o 8ourse- is to the Freudia! u!iverse i! 6hi8h truth arti8ulates
itsel as a rupture o the !ormal or regular lo6 o our spee8h or a8tivity+ the truth leaks out i! the guise
o slips o the to!gue- ailures to a8t- et87 .a8a! 6a!ts to dra6 a stri8t disti!8tio! bet6ee! this Freudia!
pro8edure a!d the =egelia! diale8ti8 i! 6hi8h truth also arises out o errors- through the sel:sublatio!
o the latter+ =egelia! truth is the absolute dis8losure 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be ormulated at the e!d o
history- 6he! the histori8al pro8ess is ully a8tualiUed- 6hile Freudia! truth is partial- ragme!tary-
al6ays just a rupture i! the lo6 o ig!ora!8e- !ever the revealed totality7 The problem here is that
si!8e psy8hoa!alysis thus la8ks the i!al poi!t o total revelatio! 6hi8h 6ould e!able it to irmly
disti!guish truth rom error- ho6 8a! it be sure that the other dis8ourse 6hi8h the psy8hoa!alyti8
i!terpretatio! dis8er!s be!eath the dis8ourse o mAprise is !ot just a!other dis8ourse o misre8og!itio!M
A6are o the problem- or a 8ouple o years .a8a! ee8tively i!sisted o! a homology bet6ee!
psy8hoa!alysis a!d =egelia! Absolute *!o6i!g+ the o!ly diere!8e bei!g that the psy8hoa!alyst is
more modest- a6are that 6e 8a!!ot ever rea8h the poi!t o a88omplished symboliUatio!>revelatio!7
@.ater- .a8a! resorted to the 8lassi8 Freudia! a!s6er+ the proo o the truth o a psy8hoa!alyti8
i!terpretatio! is its o6! symboli8 ei8a8y- the 6ay it tra!sorms the subje8t7A =o6ever- su8h a readi!g
o .a8a! as a J6eak =egelia!-K still aithul to the =egelia! goal a!d merely postpo!i!g i!dei!itely
the i!al re8o!8iliatio!- is stricto sensu 6ro!gEthat is- 6ro!g 6ith regard to =egel7 9! other 6ords- the
very !otio! o Absolute *!o6i!g as a88omplished symboliUatio!- the ull revelatio! o 3ei!g- et87-
totally misses the poi!t o the =egelia! Jre8o!8iliatio!K by tur!i!g it i!to a! 9deal to be rea8hed- rather
tha! somethi!g that is always already here and should merely be assumed7 =egelia! temporality is
8ru8ial here+ 6e e!a8t Jre8o!8iliatio!K !ot by 6ay o a mira8ulous heali!g o 6ou!ds- a!d so orth- but
by re8og!iUi!g Jthe rose i! the 8ross o the prese!t-K by realiUi!g that re8o!8iliatio! is already
a88omplished i! 6hat 6e @misAper8eived as alie!atio!7
Do!seNue!tly- =egel does deal 6ith symptomsEi! the se!se that every u!iversality i! its
a8tualiUatio! ge!erates a! e?8ess 6hi8h u!dermi!es it7 The =egelia! totality is by dei!itio! Jsel:
8o!tradi8tory-K a!tago!isti8- i!8o!siste!t+ the J/holeK 6hi8h is the JTrueK @=egel+ Jdas (an2e is das
WahreKA is the /hole plus its symptoms- the u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8es 6hi8h betray its u!truth7 For
,ar?- the JtotalityK o 8apitalism i!8ludes 8rises as its i!tegral mome!tsT or Freud- the JtotalityK o a
huma! subje8t i!8ludes pathologi8al symptoms as i!di8ators o 6hat is JrepressedK i! the oi8ial
image o the subje8t7 The u!derlyi!g premise is that the Whole is never truly whole+ every !otio! o the
/hole leaves somethi!g out- a!d the diale8ti8al eort is pre8isely the eort to i!8lude this e?8ess- to
a88ou!t or it7 Symptoms are !ever just se8o!dary ailures or distortio!s o the basi8ally sou!d
SystemEthey are i!di8ators that there is somethi!g Jrotte!K @a!tago!isti8- i!8o!siste!tA i! the very
heart o the System7 This is 6hy the a!ti:=egelia! rhetori8 6hi8h i!sists o! ho6 =egelIs totality misses
the details 6hi8h sti8k out a!d destroy its eNuilibrium misses the poi!t+ the spa8e o the =egelia!
totality is the very spa8e o the i!tera8tio! bet6ee! the @Jabstra8tKA /hole a!d the details that elude its
grasp- although they are ge!erated by it7 So 6hat i =egelIs thought is !ot a metaphysi8s- but a orm o
pataphysi8s i! Alred 2arryIs se!se- a thi!ki!g o pathologi8al i!8ide!ts 6hi8h i!evitably disturb the
i!!er logi8 o a pro8essM
The paradigmati8 8ase o )!dersta!di!g- o its Jabstra8tK reaso!i!g- is thus !ot primarily the
isolated a!alysis o obje8ts a!d pro8esses- or a bli!d!ess to the 8omple? dy!ami8 /hole 6ithi! 6hi8h
a! obje8t is lo8ated @eve! Stali! 6as 6ell a6are o this topi8- 6ith his e!dless variatio!s o! the moti o
ho6 Jeverythi!g is 8o!!e8ted 6ith everythi!g elseKA- but rather a bli!d!ess to the stru8tural role o
symptoms- o e?8esses a!d obsta8les- a bli!d!ess to the produ8tive role o these obsta8les7 For
e?ample- at the level o )!dersta!di!g- 8rises appear as obsta8les to 8apitalismIs smooth u!8tio!i!g-
obsta8les that 8a! a!d should be avoided by the adoptio! o i!tellige!t e8o!omi8 poli8ies7 .ike6ise- or
)!dersta!di!g- the Jtotalitaria!K 8hara8ter o the 8ommu!ist regimes o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury appears
as a regrettable 8o!seNue!8e o J!egle8ti!gK the 8e!tral role o demo8rati8 de8isio!:maki!g- !ot as a
!e8essary eature o the t6e!tieth:8e!tury 8ommu!ist proje8t as su8h7 J)!dersta!di!gK is thus
i!here!tly utopia! @i! the ideologi8al se!se o the termA+ it dreams o- say- a so8iety based o! mo!ey-
but i! 6hi8h mo!ey 6ould !ot be a! i!strume!t o etishisti8 alie!atio! a!d e?ploitatio!- but 6ould
simply mediate the e?8ha!ge bet6ee! ree i!dividualsT or o a so8iety based o! parliame!tary
demo8ra8y 6hi8h 6ould ully a!d ee8tively represe!t the peopleIs 6ill a!d so o!7
So =egel J8a!!ot thi!k the symptomK i!soar as 6e u!dersta!d the Du!!i!g o Feaso! i! its
traditio!al teleologi8al se!se- as a hidde! ratio!al order 8o!trolli!g histori8al 8o!ti!ge!8y-
ma!ipulatively e?ploiti!g parti8ular mome!ts i! order to realiUe its hidde! u!iversal goal7 =o6ever-
the mome!t 6e take i!to a88ou!t the retroa8tivity o u!iversal !e8essityEthe a8t that ea8h JuseK o
parti8ular mome!ts or some u!iversal goal- as 6ell as this goal itsel- emerge retroa8tively i! order-
pre8isely- to Jratio!aliUeK the symptomal e?8essE6e 8a! !o lo!ger a88ept the =egelia! Du!!i!g o
Feaso! i! its sta!dard se!se7 9! his early- ,aoist:phase -heory of ,ontradiction- 3adiou 6rote+ JTo the
!othi!g:!e6:u!der:the:su!- the thi!ki!g o revolt opposes the ever !e6 i!surge!t red su!- u!der the
emblem o 6hi8h the u!limited airmative hope o rebellious produ8ers e!ge!ders ruptures7K This
upbeat stateme!t is suppleme!ted by a mu8h more omi!ous:sou!di!g o!e+ JThere is the radi8ally 4e6
o!ly be8ause there are 8orpses that !o trumpet o 2udgme!t 6ill ever rea6ake!7K
2$
The sho8ki!g
brutality o this last stateme!t should !ot bli!d us to its truth+ i 6e really 6a!t to assert a radi8al break-
6e must aba!do! the 3e!jami!ia! !otio! o retroa8tive redemptio!- o a revolutio!ary a8t 6hi8h
redeems all past sueri!g a!d deeatsEas the Dhristia!s say- the dead should be let to bury the dead7
4o Du!!i!g o Feaso! 8a! retroa8tively justiy prese!t sueri!g- as i! the Stali!ist idea- elaborated by
,erleau:Co!ty i! 0umanism and -error- that the good lie o the 8ommu!ist uture 6ill justiy the
8ruelty o the 8o!temporary revolutio!ary pro8ess7
Fobert Cippi! is the o!ly thi!ker today 6ho heroi8ally dei!es his goal as the promotio! o
Jbourgeois philosophy-K that is- the philosophy o legitimiUi!g a!d a!alyUi!g the JbourgeoisK 6ay o
lie 8e!tered o! the !otio! o auto!omous a!d respo!sible i!dividuals leadi!g a sae lie 6ithi! the
8o!i!es o 8ivil so8iety7 The problem- o 8ourse- 8omes ba8k to the skeleto! i! the 8loset o every
bourgeois so8iety+ Cippi! as a =egelia! @the )S =egelia!A should k!o6 that- or =egel- moder!
bourgeois so8iety 8ould o!ly have arise! through the mediatio! o Fevolutio!ary Terror @e?empliied
by 2a8obi!sAT urthermore- =egel is also a6are that- i! order to preve!t its o6! death by habituatio!
@immersio! i! the lie o parti8ular i!terestsA- every bourgeois so8iety !eeds to be shattered rom time
to time by 6ar7
A problem su8h as J8a! e?8esses like Aus8h6itU be justiied- e8o!omiUed- as !e8essary detours
o! the road to6ards a ree so8iety- 8a! they be aufgehoben as mome!ts o histori8al progressMK is-
thereore- rom a stri8t =egelia! perspe8tive- badly posed+ it presupposes a positio! o e?ter!al
substa!tial teleology that is pre8luded by =egel7 There is !o substa!tial histori8al Spirit 6eighi!g up i!
adva!8e the 8osts a!d be!eits o a prospe8tive histori8al 8atastrophe @e7g7- is the massa8re o 0uropea!
2e6ry a pri8e 6orth payi!g or the u!pre8ede!ted pea8e a!d prosperity o post6ar 0uropeMA+ it is o!ly
a8tual huma!s- 8aught up i! a histori8al pro8ess- 6ho ge!erate a 8atastrophe 6hi8h 8a! the! give birth
to !e6 ethi8o:politi8al a6are!ess- 6ithout a!y 8laim that this u!i!te!ded result i! a!y 6ay JjustiiesK
or legitimiUes the e!ormous sueri!g that led to it7 ,easured i! this 6ay- !o histori8al progress is
J6orth the pri8eK+ all o!e 8a! say is that the ultimate out8ome o histori8al 8atastrophes is sometimes a
higher ethi8al a6are!ess 6hi8h o!e should a88ept 6ith humility a!d i! memory o the blood spilled o!
the path to realiUi!g it7 Su8h Jblessi!gs i! disguiseK are !ever guara!teed i! adva!8e- 6hi8h is 6hy-
i!soar as a symptom is the poi!t o Jirratio!alityK o the e?isti!g totality- a poi!t 6hi8h 8a!!ot be
subsumed u!der a!y igure o totaliUi!g Feaso!- 6e should i!vert ,ar?Is amous ormula o
re8overi!g the Jratio!al 8oreK o =egelIs diale8ti8 a!d boldly propose to re8over its irrational 8ore7
3ut- agai!- are 6e !ot 8o!tradi8ti!g here .a8a!Is e?pli8it 8ritiNue o the =egelia! JDu!!i!g o
Feaso!KM Goes !ot .a8a! advo8ate ,ar?Is Jmaterialist reversal o =egelK+ 6hat =egel 8a!!ot thi!k is
the radi8al se!se o a symptom 6hi8h u!dermi!es rom 6ithi! a!y Du!!i!g o Feaso!M For ,ar?- the
totality o Feaso! @6hi8h asserts its reig! through its J8u!!i!gKA is u!dermi!ed i! its symptom @the
proletariat as the Ju!reaso! 6ithi! the domai! o Feaso!-K as the !o!:se!se that !o 8u!!i!g 8a!
legitimate a!d>or ratio!aliUeA7 This dime!sio! o the symptom as Jthe retur! o truth as su8h i!to the
gap o a 8ertai! k!o6ledgeK

is highly diere!tiated i! ,ar?Is 8ritiNue- eve! i it is !ot made e?pli8it there7 A!d o!e 8a! say that a
part o the reversal o =egel that he 8arries out is 8o!stituted by the retur! @6hi8h is a materialist retur!-
pre8isely i!soar as it gives it igure a!d bodyA o the Nuestio! o truth7 The latter a8tually or8es itsel
upo! us O !ot by taki!g up the thread o the ruse o reaso!- a subtle orm 6ith 6hi8h =egel se!ds it
pa8ki!g- but by upsetti!g these ruses @read ,ar?Is politi8al 6riti!gsA 6hi8h are merely dressed up 6ith
reaso!7
2&
,ar? Ji!ve!ts the symptomK 6he! he 8o!8eptualiUes the positio! o the proletariat as the
material Jigure a!d bodyK 6hi8h gives body to the Ju!:reaso!K o the totality o Feaso! @the moder!
Fatio!al StateA 8o!8eptualiUed a!d legitimiUed by =egelia! *!o6ledge7 ,ar? thus sees through the
=egelia! tri8k o legitimiUi!g e?ploitatio! a!d other horrors as !e8essary mome!ts o the progress o
Feaso! @Feaso! usi!g evil huma! passio!s as mea!s to a8tualiUe itselA- de!ou!8i!g it as the
legitimiUatio! o a miserable so8ial reality 6hi8h is merely Jdressed up 6ith reaso!7K As su8h- the
JmessageK o the symptom is+ J,e!- liste!- 9 am telli!g you the se8ret7 9- truth- speak7K
2%
9! a
symptom- Jit speaks-K the subje8t is surprised by it- take! aba8k- 8aught 6ith his pa!ts do6!T a
symptom is thus somethi!g that 8a!!ot be attributed to a!y subje8t or age!t7 The temptatio! to be
resisted hereEthe very temptatio! o the Du!!i!g o Feaso!Eis to surmise a!other meta:Subje8t or
Age!t 6ho orga!iUes these appare!t ailures a!d mistakes- tur!i!g them i!to steps to6ards the i!al
Truth7 The Du!!i!g o Feaso! is the desperate 6ager o trusti!g i! history- the belie that the big Hther
guara!tees its i!al happy out8omeEor- as .a8a! put it i! his a8erbi8 6ay+

The dis8ourse o errorEits arti8ulatio! i! a8tio!E8ould bear 6it!ess to the truth agai!st the appare!t
a8ts themselves7 9t 6as the! that o!e o them tried to get the 8u!!i!g o reaso! a88epted i!to the ra!k
o obje8ts deemed 6orthy o study7 )!ortu!ately- he 6as a proessor O Femai! 8o!te!t- the!- 6ith
your vague se!se o history a!d leave it to 8lever people to ou!d the 6orld market i! lies- the trade i!
all:out 6ar- a!d the !e6 la6 o sel:8riti8ism o! the guara!tee o my uture irm7 9 reaso! is as
8u!!i!g as =egel said it 6as- it 6ill do its job 6ithout your help7
"0
A symptom is- o! the 8o!trary- that 6hi8h u!dermi!es the big Hther- that i! 6hi8h the big Hther
reveals its gaps- i!8o!siste!8y- ailure- impote!8e7 /he! .a8a! 6rites- J9- truth- speak-K this does !ot
mea! that the substa!tial Jbig HtherK i! me speaks- but- o! the 8o!trary- that the big HtherIs ailure
breaks through7 0rror is the partial u!:truth 6hi8h 8a! be sublated i!to a subordi!ate mome!t o the
truth o Totality- 6hile a symptom is a partial break:through o the repressed truth o the Totality- a
truth 6hi8h belies totality7 .a8a! here opposes error a!d mistake @mApriseA+ 6hile- i! the =egelia!
diale8ti8al pro8ess- truth arises through error- i! the psy8hoa!alyti8 pro8ess- it arises rom a mistake
@or- rather- mis:apprehe!sio!AEtruth says+ J/hether you lee rom me i! de8eit or thi!k you 8a! 8at8h
me i! error- 9 6ill 8at8h up 6ith you i! the mistake rom 6hi8h you 8a!!ot hide7K
"1
/he! 9 am i!
error- 9 hold as true somethi!g that is !ot trueT i! a symptom- o! the 8o!trary- truth appears i! 6hat 9
hold as least true- most 8o!ti!ge!t- u!6orthy o u!iversality7 Agai!- truth says+

9 6a!der about i! 6hat you regard as least true by its very !ature+ i! dreams- i! the 6ay the most ar:
et8hed 6itti8isms a!d the most grotesNue !o!se!se o jokes dey mea!i!g- a!d i! 8ha!8eE!ot i! its
la6- but rather i! its 8o!ti!ge!8y7 A!d 9 !ever more surely pro8eed to 8ha!ge the a8e o the 6orld tha!
6he! 9 give it the proile o DleopatraIs !ose7
"2
The impli8atio!s o su8h a radi8al !otio! o the symptom are mu8h more ar:rea8hi!g tha! it
may appear+ the symptom is !ot a se8o!dary e?pressio! o some substa!tial 8o!te!t already d6elli!g
deep i! the subje8tEo! the 8o!trary- the symptom is Jope!-K 8omi!g rom the uture- poi!ti!g to6ards
a 8o!te!t that 6ill o!ly 8ome to be through the symptom7
""
Fe8all .a8a!Is stateme!t that J6oma! is a
symptom o ma!KEdoes this mea! that- vulgari elo<uentia- a 6oma! 8omes to e?:sist o!ly 6he! a
ma! sele8ts her as a pote!tial obje8t o libidi!al i!vestme!tM So 6hat is she prior to this i!vestme!tM
/hat i 6e 8o!8eive the idea o a symptom that pre:e?ists 6hat it is a symptom o- so that 6e 8a!
8o!sider 6ome! as symptoms 6a!deri!g arou!d i! sear8h o somethi!g to atta8h themselves to as
symptomsEor eve! just bei!g satisied 6ith their role as empty symptomsM
"(
H!e 8a! ee8tively
8laim that a 6oma! 6ho 6ithdra6s rom se?ual 8o!ta8t 6ith me! is a symptom at its purest- a Uero:
level symptomEa !u!- or e?ample- 6ho- i! reje8ti!g be8omi!g the symptom o a parti8ular ma! @her
se?ual part!erA- posits hersel as the symptom o Dhrist- the ma! @ecce homoA7
This !otio! o the parado?i8al pre:e?iste!8e o a symptom 8a! also be give! a 3e!jami!ia!
t6ist7 9! the middle o T8haikovskyIs JFra!8es8a da Fimi!iK @eleve! mi!utes i!to itA- there is a passage
6hi8h sou!ds almost like 3er!ard =errma!!- a ki!d o light i!to the utureT the! the sta!dard
Foma!ti8ism re8overs itsel7 9t is really as i T8haikovsky produ8ed here a symptom i! the early
.a8a!ia! @or 3e!jami!ia!A se!se o a message rom the uture- somethi!g that its o6! time la8ked the
proper mea!s to hear or u!dersta!d7 @This is ho6 moder!ism 6orks+ 6hat 6ere origi!ally ragme!ts o
a! orga!i8 /hole are auto!omiUedEthe same goes or 2oa! ,irlIs pai!ti!gs7A 4o 6o!der that this is
the musi8 used or the ballet seNue!8e at the e!d o -orn ,urtainEa ki!d o reve!ge o =errma!!
6hose s8ore =it8h8o8k dis8ardedEa s8e!e i! 6hi8h the Jrepressed retur!s7K @Gid he 8hoose this
pie8eMA
"#
There is a !i8e a!e8dote about a .ati! Ameri8a! poet 6ho modiied the politi8al te!or o his
poetry a88ordi!g to 6hoever 6as his most re8e!t mistress+ 6he! she 6as a proto:as8ist rightist- he
8elebrated military dis8ipli!e a!d patrioti8 sa8rii8eT 6he! he got i!volved 6ith a pro:8ommu!ist
6oma!- he started to 8elebrate guerrilla 6arareT later- he moved o! to a hippy mistress a!d 6rote
about drugs a!d tra!s8e!de!tal meditatio!7 -his is 6hat J6oma! as a symptom o ma!K mea!s- !ot
merely that a ma! uses a 6oma! to arti8ulate his messageEo! the 8o!trary- 6oma! is the determi!i!g
a8tor+ ma! orie!ts himsel to6ards his symptom- he 8li!gs to it to give 8o!siste!8y to his lie7 A!d the
=egelia! Du!!i!g o Feaso! 6orks i! a similar 6ay+ it is !ot that Feaso! is a se8ret or8e behi!d the
s8e!es usi!g huma! age!ts or its purposes+ there are nothing but age!ts ollo6i!g their parti8ular
purposes- a!d 6hat they do Jauto:poeti8allyK orga!iUes itsel i!to a larger patter!7
3ut did !ot =eidegger propose a mu8h more radi8al 8ritiNue o the =egelia! Du!!i!g o
Feaso!- i! a 6ay 6hi8h diers radi8ally rom ,ar?Is 8ritiNue @a!d 6hi8h e!ables us to re8og!iUe i!
,ar? himsel the prese!8e o the =egelia! !otio! o history as the story o diale8ti8al redemptio!
"'
AM
For the Du!!i!g o Feaso! to be operative- there is !o !eed to resus8itate a!y tra!s8e!de!t ratio!al
age!8yT parti8ular 8o!ti!ge!t i!ite a8ts must be a88ou!ted or !ot i! terms o a!y su8h higher po6er-
but i! terms o their o6! i!telligibility- 6hi8h is the true Ji!i!iteK imma!e!t to the i!ite itsel7 The
8o!trast 6ith =eideggerIs o6! ull assertio! o i!itude 8ould !ot be 8learer7 =eidegger deploys all the
8o!seNue!8es o su8h a radi8al assertio! o i!itude- up to a!d i!8ludi!g a series o sel:reere!tial
parado?es7 =is 8laim is that the ultimate ailure- the breakdo6! o the e!tire stru8ture o mea!i!g- the
6ithdra6al rom e!gageme!t a!d 8areEi! other 6ords the possibility that the totality o DaseinIs
i!volveme!ts J8ollapses i!to itselT the 6orld has the 8hara8ter o 8ompletely la8ki!g
sig!ii8a!8eK
"$
Eis the i!!ermost possibility o Dasein- that Dasein 8a! su88eed i! its e!gageme!t
o!ly agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o a possible ailure+ Jthe i!terrelatio!al stru8ture o the 6orld o Dare 8a!
ail i! su8h a 8atastrophi8 6ay that Dasein 6ill appear !ot as the 6orld:embedded- ope!:to:mea!i!g-
e!gaged age!t i! a shared 6orld that it is- but- all at o!8e as it 6ere- the !ull basis o a !ullity7K
"&
=ere
=eidegger is !ot just maki!g the de8isio!ist:e?iste!tialist poi!t about ho6 Jbei!g a subje8t mea!s
bei!g able to ail to be o!e-K ho6 the 8hoi8e is ours a!d utterly 8o!ti!ge!t- 6ith !o guara!tee o
su88ess7
"%
=is poi!t is rather that the histori8al totality:o:mea!i!g i!to 6hi8h 6e are thro6! is al6ays
already- J8o!stitutively-K th6arted from within by the possibility o its utmost impossibility7 Geath- the
8ollapse o the stru8ture o mea!i!g a!d 8are- is !ot a! e?ter!al limit 6hi8h- as su8h- 6ould e!able
Dasein to JtotaliUeK its mea!i!gul e!gageme!tT it is !ot the i!al Nuilti!g poi!t that Jdots the iK o
o!eIs lie spa!- e!abli!g us to totaliUe a lie story i!to a 8o!siste!t- mea!i!gul !arrative7 Geath is
pre8isely that 6hi8h cannot be i!8luded i! a!y mea!i!gul totality- its mea!i!gless a8ti8ity is a
perma!e!t threat to mea!i!g- its prospe8t a remi!der that there is !o i!al 6ay out7
(0
The 8o!seNue!8e
o this is that the 8hoi8e is !ot a dire8t 8hoi8e bet6ee! su88ess a!d ailure- bet6ee! authe!ti8 a!d
i!authe!ti8 modes o e?iste!8e+ si!8e the very !otio! that o!e 8a! su88essully totaliUe o!eIs lie 6ithi!
a! all:e!8ompassi!g stru8ture:o:mea!i!g is the ultimate i!authe!ti8 betrayal- the o!ly true Jsu88essK
Dasein 8a! have is to heroi8ally 8o!ro!t a!d a88ept its ultimate ailure7
T=0 J,A19DA. FHFD0K HF F0V0FSA.

The 8o!trast 6ith =egel is thus striki!g7 9 =egelIs u!derlyi!g a?iom is that Jthe result o a!
u!true mode o k!o6ledge must !ot be allo6ed to ru! a6ay i!to a! empty !othi!gK
(1
@!ote the
prohibitive mode+ Jmust !ot be allo6ed to OKRAEi7e7- that- through the 6ork o Jtarryi!g 6ith the
!egative-K every outbreak o !egativity 8a! be a88ou!ted or @re!dered i!telligibleA i! a !arrative o
mea!i!g a!d thus aufgehoben i! a! e!8ompassi!g i!i!ite totalityEor =eidegger- it is a ormal @a
prioriA 8hara8teristi8 o DaseinIs i!itude that every mea!i!gul e!gageme!t 6ill i!ally Jru! a6ay i!to
a! empty !othi!gK+ all our mea!i!gul e!gageme!ts are just so ma!y 8o!ti!ge!t attempts to postpo!e
the i!evitableT heroi8 a8ts agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the ultimate !ullity o all huma! e!deavor7 Goes
this 8ritiNue o =egel hold up ho6everM H! a irst approa8h- it may 6ell appear justiiedEas Cippi! has
!oted- 6he!- i! a amous passage rom the Fore6ord to the )henomenology- =egel provides the most
outsta!di!g ormulatio! o the reversal o the !egative i!to a higher positivity- o the resurre8tio! o the
i!i!ite lie ater death- he has re8ourse to a very stra!ge term+ JSpirit is this po6er o!ly by looki!g the
!egative i! the a8e- a!d tarryi!g 6ith it7 This tarryi!g 6ith the !egative is the magi8al or8e
[Nauber"raft\ that 8o!verts it i!to bei!g7K
(2
0e8tively- it is Jas i =egel 8a!!ot help givi!g a6ay his
dodge a!d his o6! u!8ertai!ty 6ith that reveali!g @most u!:=egelia!A 6ord or Freudia! slip-
Nauber"raftK
("
Ea! admissio! that there is somethi!g magi8al- somethi!g like the i!terve!tio! o a
deus e& machina- i! the diale8ti8al reversal o the !egative i!to the positive7 This is 6hy 6e !eed to be
very pre8ise i! 8ir8ums8ribi!g this reversal7 9t is a 8ommo!pla8e about =egel that he 8riti8iUed the idea
o the Drusades or 8o!ou!di!g the possessio! o the spiritual Truth o Dhristia!ity 6ith the
possessio! o the physi8al site o DhristIs tomb- the pla8e o his 8ru8ii?io! a!d resurre8tio!7 =o6ever-
here agai!- the 8hoi8e is !ot a! immediate o!e+ i! order to e?perie!8e the spiritual Truth o Dhristia!ity
o!e has to irst o88upy the tomb a!d e?perie!8e its empti!essEo!ly i! this disappoi!tme!t- through
this ailure:i!:triumph- does o!e rea8h the i!sight that- i! order to Jlive i! Dhrist-K it is !ot !e8essary to
travel to ara6ay la!ds a!d o88upy empty tombs- si!8e Dhrist is already here 6he!ever there is .ove
bet6ee! his ollo6ers7 To re8ast this e?perie!8e i! the terms o the Fabi!ovit8h joke+

J/e are goi!g to 2erusalem to i!d DhristIs tomb a!d to d6ell i! the prese!8e o divi!ity7K J3ut 6hat
you 6ill dis8over i! 2erusalem is that the tomb is empty- that there is !othi!g to i!d- that all you have
is yourselves- the 8ommu!ity o visiti!g Dhristia!s OK J/ell- this 8ommu!ity o spirit is the livi!g
Dhrist- a!d this is 6hat 6e 6ere really looki!g orRK
The same goes or the resurre8tio! itsel+ JDhrist 6ill be resurre8tedRK J3ut 6e- his ollo6ers
6ho 6ait or him- see !othi!g OK JTrue- you do!It seeEbut 6hat you do!It see is that the spirit o this
8ommu!ity o yours- the love that bo!ds you- is the resurre8ted DhristRK A!d like6ise eve! more so or
the topi8 o the Se8o!d Domi!g+ !othi!g 6ill Jreally happe!-K !o 1od 6ill mira8ulously appearT people
6ill just realiUe that 1od is already here- i! the spirit o their 8olle8tive7
Dhristopher 4ola!Is ilm -he )restige @200'AEa story about the deadly rivalry bet6ee! t6o
magi8ia!s- the lo6er:8lass Alred 3orde! a!d the upper:8lass Fobert A!gier- i! fin de si>cle
.o!do!E8a!- surprisi!gly- help us to grasp 8learly this Jmagi8alK aspe8t o =egelia! diale8ti8s7 The
ilm 8a! be read as a! allegory o the struggle or =egelIs lega8y bet6ee! Fight a!d .et =egelia!s7
The t6o magi8ia!s 8ompete over 6ho 8a! deliver the best perorma!8e o the JTra!sported ,a!K tri8kT
3orde!- the irst to perorm it- disappears i!to a bo?- bou!8es a ball to a!other bo? a8ross the stage- a!d
i!sta!tly reappears 6ithi! the se8o!d bo? to 8at8h the ball7 3la8kmailed i!to reveali!g the sour8e o his
tri8k to A!gier- 3orde! gives him o!e 8lue- the !ame o a! i!ve!tor+ JTesla7K @This- 6e later lear!- is a
lie+ 3orde! simply used his t6i! brother to repla8e him7A A!gier travels to Dolorado Spri!gs to meet
4ikola Tesla a!d lear! the se8ret o 3orde!Is illusio!7 Tesla 8o!stru8ts a teleportatio! ma8hi!e- but the
devi8e ails to 6ork7 A!gier the! lear!s rom 3orde!Is !otebook that he has bee! se!t o! a 6ild:goose
8hase7 Feeli!g he has 6asted his mo!ey- he retur!s to TeslaIs lab a!d dis8overs that the ma8hi!e 8a! i!
a8t 8reate a!d teleport a dupli8ate o a!y item pla8ed i! it7 /he! Tesla is or8ed to leave Dolorado
Spri!gs- A!gier is let 6ith the ma8hi!e7 9! a letter- Tesla 6ar!s A!gier to destroy it7 A!gier reuses to
do so a!d retur!s to .o!do! to begi! a i!al set o 100 perorma!8es 6ith his !e6 a8t- JThe Feal
Tra!sported ,a!-K i! 6hi8h he disappears u!der huge ar8s o ele8tri8ity a!d JteleportsK ity yards
rom the stage to the bal8o!y i! a se8o!d7 3orde! atte!ds A!gierIs perorma!8e a!d is baledT he slips
ba8kstage a!d i!ds A!gier i!side a 6ater ta!k- 6ith a padlo8k o! the lat8h that preve!ts his es8ape7 At
the ilmIs e!d- the mortally 6ou!ded A!gier reveals his se8ret to 3orde!+ ea8h time he disappeared
duri!g the illusio!- he ell through a trap door i!to the ta!k a!d dro6!edT the ma8hi!e 8reated a
dupli8ate 6ho teleported to the bal8o!y a!d basked i! the applause7 A!gier says he suered to be8ome
greatEa philosophy 3orde! thought A!gier had !ever lear!ed7
The 8lass rivalry bet6ee! the upper:8lass A!gier a!d the lo6er:8lass 3orde! is rele8ted i!-
amo!g other thi!gs- the diere!t 6ays i! 6hi8h they orga!iUe the illusio!+ 3orde! uses his t6i!
brother to repla8e him- 6hile A!gier does it 6ith the help o true s8ie!tii8 6iUardry @he really is
redoubledA7 There is a 8elebratio! o the aristo8rati8 ethi8 o sa8rii8e @agai!st 8heap lo6er:8lass
tri8keryA at 6ork here+ or the sake o his art- A!gier u!dergoes the terrible pai! o dro6!i!g duri!g
ea8h perorma!8e7 Therei! resides A!gierIs reve!ge+ 3orde! thi!ks that o!ly he is ready to truly suer
to be8ome great @6he! he loses some i!gers o! his ha!d- his t6i! brother also 8uts o the same
i!gers to remai! i!dis8er!ible rom him- et87AT ho6ever- at the e!d- he is or8ed to admit that be!eath
A!gierIs 8orrupted:aristo8rat attitude there is a mu8h more terrible sa8rii8eEea8h perorma!8e is paid
or 6ith a sui8ide7
0arly i! the ilm- 6he! a magi8ia! perorms a tri8k 6ith a small bird 6hi8h disappears i! a 8age
o! the table- a small boy i! the audie!8e starts to 8ry- 8laimi!g that the bird has bee! killed7 The
magi8ia! approa8hes him a!d i!ishes the tri8k- ge!tly produ8i!g a live bird out o his ha!dEbut the
boy is !ot satisied- i!sisti!g that this must be a!other bird- the dead o!eIs brother7 Ater the sho6- 6e
see the magi8ia! i! a room behi!d the stage- bri!gi!g i! a latte!ed 8age a!d thro6i!g a sNuashed bird
i!to a trash bi!Ethe boy 6as i!deed 8orre8t7 The ilm des8ribes the three stages o a magi8
perorma!8e+ the setup- or the Jpledge-K 6here the magi8ia! sho6s the audie!8e somethi!g that
appears ordi!ary but is probably !ot- maki!g use o misdire8tio!T the Jtur!-K 6here the magi8ia! makes
the ordi!ary a8t e?traordi!aryT a!d the Jprestige-K 6here the ee8t o the illusio! is produ8ed7 9s !ot
this triple moveme!t the =egelia! triad at its purestM The thesis @pledgeA- its 8atastrophi8 !egatio!
@tur!A- a!d the magi8al resolutio! o the 8atastrophe @prestigeAM The 8at8h- as =egel 6as 6ell a6are- is
that i! order or the mira8le o the JprestigeK to o88ur- some6here there must be a sNuashed birdEi!
-he )restige- it is A!gierIs dro6!ed body7
/e should thus have !o Nualms about admitti!g that there is somethi!g o the J8heap
magi8ia!K about =egel- i! his tri8k o sy!thesis- o +ufhebung7 )ltimately- there are o!ly t6o 6ays to
a88ou!t or this tri8k- like the t6o versio!s o the vulgar bad !e6s>good !e6s medi8al joke+ @1A the
good !e6s is good- but it 8o!8er!s another subje8t @JThe bad !e6s is that you have a termi!al 8a!8er
a!d 6ill die i! a mo!th7 The good !e6s is+ you see that beautiul !urse over thereM 9Ive bee! tryi!g to
get her i!to bed or mo!thsT i!ally- yesterday- she said yes a!d 6e made love the 6hole !ight like
8raUy OKAT @2A the good !e6s is bad !e6s or the subje8t- but rom a diere!t perspe8tive @JThe bad
!e6s is you have severe AlUheimerIs7 The good !e6s is+ you have AlUheimerIs- so you 6ill have
orgotte! the bad !e6s by the time you get homeKA7 The true =egelia! Jsy!thesisK is the sy!thesis o
these t6o optio!s+ the good !e6s is the bad !e6s itselEbut i! order or us to see that- 6e have to shit
to a diere!t age!t @rom the bird 6hi8h dies to the o!e 6hi8h repla8es itT rom the 8a!8er:ridde!
patie!t to the happy do8tor- rom Dhrist as i!dividual to the 8ommu!ity o believersA7 9! other 6ords-
the dead bird remai!s dead- it really diesT like6ise i! the 8ase o Dhrist- 6ho is rebor! as another
subje8t- as the =oly 1host7
/e are deali!g here 6ith jokes i! 6hi8h 6e arrive at the i!al li!e o!ly through a dialogi8
u!dermi!i!g o a pre8edi!g positio!- a! u!dermi!i!g 6hi8h u!e?pe8tedly i!volves our subje8tive
sta!dpoi!t7
((
The basi8 idea o =egelIs diale8ti8 is- o! the 8o!trary- that this dialogi8 pro8ess is !ot just
subje8tive but is i!s8ribed i! the reality o the JThi!g itselK+ the te!sio! 6hi8h is rele8ted i! the
dialogue is 8o!stitutive o realityEthis is ho6 =egelIs thesis that the path to truth is part o truth itsel
should be 8o!8eived7 0ve! the remark allegedly made by 3re8ht i! Sid!ey =ookIs apartme!t- apropos
the a88used at the ,os8o6 sho6 trials i! the 1%"0s- 8a! be re8ast i! these terms+

9! 1%"# 3re8ht visited =ookIs house i! ,a!hatta!7 /he! =ook raised the Nuestio! o the re8e!t arrest
a!d impriso!me!t o Bi!oviev- *ame!ev- a!d thousa!ds o others- 3re8ht is alleged by =ook to have
replied 8almly i! 1erma!+ JThe more i!!o8e!t they are- the more they deserve to be shot7K As =ook
tells it- he the! ha!ded 3re8ht his hat a!d 8oat7 3re8ht let J6ith a si8kly smile7K
(#
3re8htIs stateme!t is thoroughly ambiguousEit 8a! be read as a sta!dard assertio! o radi8al
Stali!ism @your very i!siste!8e o! your i!!o8e!8e- your reusal to sa8rii8e yoursel or the Dause-
bears 6it!ess to your guilt- 6hi8h resides i! givi!g preere!8e to your i!dividual i!terests over the
larger i!terests o the CartyA- or it 8a! be read i! a radi8ally a!ti:Stali!ist ma!!er+ i they 6ere i! a
positio! to plot the assassi!atio! o Stali! a!d his e!tourage- a!d 6ere Ji!!o8e!tK @that is- did !ot grasp
the opportu!ityA- the! they really deserve to die or havi!g ailed to rid us o Stali!7 The true guilt o
the a88used is thus that- i!stead o reje8ti!g the very ideologi8al rame6ork o Stali!ism a!d ruthlessly
a8ti!g agai!st Stali!- they !ar8issisti8ally ell i! love 6ith their vi8timiUatio! a!d either protested their
i!!o8e!8e or be8ame as8i!ated by the ultimate sa8rii8e they 8ould make or the Carty by 8o!essi!g to
!o!:e?iste!t 8rimes7 The properly diale8ti8al 6ay to grasp the imbri8atio! o these t6o mea!i!gs
6ould be to start 6ith the irst readi!g- ollo6ed by the 8ommo!:se!se moralisti8 rea8tio! to 3re8ht+
J3ut ho6 8a! you say somethi!g so ruthlessM Surely su8h a logi8- dema!di!g a bli!d sel:sa8rii8e to
satisy the a88usatory 6hims o the .eader- 8a! o!ly u!8tio! 6ithi! a terriyi!g a!d 8rimi!al
totalitaria! systemEit is surely the duty o every ethi8al subje8t to ight su8h a system 6ith all mea!s
possible- i!8ludi!g the physi8al removal- murder i !e8essary- o the totalitaria! leadershipMK J5es- so
you 8a! see ho6- i the a88used 6ere i!!o8e!t- they deserve all the more to be shotEthey ee8tively
were i! a positio! to rid us o Stali! a!d his he!8hme!- a!d missed this u!iNue opportu!ity to spare
huma!ity rom his terrible 8rimesRK
('
The same ambiguity 8a! be dis8er!ed i! the i!amous stateme!t attributed to various 4aUi
leaders+ J/he! 9 hear the 6ord V8ulture-I 9 rea8h or my pistol7K The 4aUiIs i!te!ded mea!i!g 6as
probably that he 6as ready to dee!d high 1erma! 8ulture 6ith arms- i !e8essary- agai!st the 2e6s a!d
other barbaria!sT the true mea!i!g- ho6ever- is that he is himsel a barbaria! 6ho e?plodes 6ith
viole!8e 6he! 8o!ro!ted 6ith true 6orks o 8ulture7
($
=egelIs versio! o Ji!i!ite judgme!tK is thus diere!t rom *a!tIsEthere is a !egatio! o
!egatio! @o the Fabi!ovit8h typeA at 6ork i! its most amous e?ample- Jthe Spirit is a bo!eK+ @1A the
Spirit is a bo!eT @2A this is !o!se!se- there is a! absolute 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! these t6o termsT @"A
6ell- the Spirit is this 8o!tradi8tio!7 H!e 8a! see the oppositio! bet6ee! this pro8edure a!d the parado?
o ide!tity as ide!tiied by =egel- 6here the very o88urre!8e o a! ide!ti8al term 8auses surprise+ A
rose is O @6e e?pe8t a predi8ate- but getA a rose7 The =egelia! move is to treat this surprise>parado? as
8o!stitutive o ide!tity+ there is surprise @a!d a temporal logi8A i! both 8ases- but o a diere!t ki!d7
(&
This i! tur! mea!s that =eideggerIs !otio! o death as the ultimate poi!t o impossibility that
8a!!ot be diale8ti8ally JsublatedK or i!8luded i! a higher totality is !o argume!t agai!st =egel+ the
=egelia! respo!se is just to shit the perspe8tive i! order to re8og!iUe this !egativity itsel i! its
positive aspe8t- as a 8o!ditio! o possibility+ 6hat appears as the ultimate obsta8le is i! itsel a positive
8o!ditio! o possibility- or the u!iverse o mea!i!g 8a! o!ly arise agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o its
a!!ihilatio!7 Furthermore- the properly diale8ti8al reversal is !ot o!ly the reversal o !egative i!to
positive- o the 8o!ditio! o impossibility i!to the 8o!ditio! o possibility- o obsta8le i!to e!abli!g
age!8y- but- simulta!eously- the reversal o tra!s8e!de!8e i!to imma!e!8e- a!d the i!8lusio! o the
subje8t o e!u!8iatio! i! the e!u!8iated 8o!te!t7
This reversal:i!to:itselEthe shit i! the status o 6hat:is:at:stake rom sig! to Thi!g- rom
predi8ate to subje8tEis 8ru8ial or the diale8ti8al pro8ess+ 6hat irst appears as a mere sig! @property-
rele8tio!- distortio!A o the Thi!g tur!s out to be the Thi!g itsel7 9 the 9dea 8a!!ot adeNuately
represe!t itsel- i its represe!tatio! is distorted or dei8ie!t- the! this simulta!eously sig!als a
limitatio! or dei8ie!8y o the 9dea itsel7 Furthermore- !ot o!ly does the u!iversal 9dea al6ays appear
i! a distorted or displa8ed 6ayT this 9dea is nothing but the distortio! or displa8eme!t- the sel:
i!adeNua8y- o the parti8ular 6ith regard to itsel7
This bri!gs us to the most radi8al dime!sio! o the @i!Aamous Jide!tity o oppositesK+ i!soar
as J8o!tradi8tio!K is the =egelia! !ame or the Feal- this mea!s that the Feal is simultaneously the
Thi!g to 6hi8h dire8t a88ess is impossible and the obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts this dire8t a88essT the Thi!g
6hi8h eludes our grasp and the distorti!g s8ree! 6hi8h makes us miss the Thi!g7 9s this !ot ho6
trauma 6orksM H! the o!e ha!d- trauma is the d that the subje8t is u!able to approa8h dire8tly- that 8a!
o!ly be per8eived i! a distorted 6ay- through some ki!d o prote8tive le!s- that 8a! o!ly be alluded to
i! a rou!dabout 6ay- !ever 8o!ro!ted head o!- et87 H! the other ha!d- ho6ever- or a subje8t 6ho has
e?perie!8ed a traumati8 sho8k- the trauma also u!8tio!s as the very opposite o the i!a88essible Thi!g:
i!:itsel 6hi8h eludes its grasp+ it u!8tio!s as somethi!g here- i! me- that distorts a!d disturbs my
perspe8tive o! reality- t6isti!g it i! a parti8ular 6ay7 A 6oma! 6ho has bee! brutally raped a!d
humiliated !ot o!ly 8a!!ot dire8tly re8all the rape s8e!eT the repressed memory o the rape also distorts
her approa8h to reality- maki!g her overse!sitive to some o its aspe8ts- ig!ori!g others a!d so o!7
A!d is !ot this shit stru8turally homologous to that o the Fabi!ovit8h joke Nuoted aboveM The
very problem @obsta8leA retroa8tively appears as its o6! solutio!- si!8e 6hat preve!ts us rom dire8tly
a88essi!g the Thi!g is the Thi!g itsel7 The o!ly 8ha!ge here lies i! the shit o perspe8tive7 9! e?a8tly
the same 6ay- the i!al t6ist i! *akaIs parable J3eore the .a6K relies o! a mere shit o perspe8tive+
the ma! rom the 8ou!try- 8o!ro!ted 6ith the door o the .a6 that preve!ts his a88ess to the terriyi!g
Thi!g @the .a6A- is told that rom the very begi!!i!g the door 6as there o!ly or him- i! other 6ords
that he 6as rom the begi!!i!g included i! the .a6Ethe .a6 6as !ot just the Thi!g 6hi8h as8i!ated
his gaUe- it al6ays already retur!ed his gaUe7 A!d- to go a step urther- the gap that separates me rom
1od is the gap that separates 1od rom himsel+ the dista!8e is !ot abolished @9 do !ot mira8ulously
rejoi! 1odA- it is merely displa8ed i!to 1od himsel7
5et a!other 6ay to arti8ulate this key mome!t is i! the more traditio!al terms o the diale8ti8al
te!sio! bet6ee! the epistemologi8al a!d the o!tologi8al dime!sio!s+ the gap that separates the
k!o6i!g subje8t rom the k!o6! obje8t is i!here!t to the obje8t itsel- my k!o6i!g a thi!g is part o a
pro8ess i!ter!al to the thi!g- 6hi8h is 6hy the sta!dard epistemologi8al problem should be tur!ed
arou!d+ !ot J=o6 is my k!o6ledge o the thi!g possibleMK but J=o6 is it that k!o6ledge appears
6ithi! the thi!g as a mode o the thi!gIs relati!g to itselMK /ith regard to 1od- the problem is !ot
J=o6 8a! 9 k!o6 1odMK but J=o6 a!d 6hy does 1od ge!erate i! huma!s k!o6ledge about himselMK
that is- ho6 does my k!o6ledge @a!d ig!ora!8eA o 1od u!8tio! 6ithi! 1od himselM Hur alie!atio!
rom 1od is 1odIs sel:alie!atio!7 /he! 6e lose 1od- it is !ot o!ly that 1od aba!do!s us- 1od
aba!do!s himsel7
REFLECTION AND S!PPOSITION

=egelia! rele8tio! is thus the opposite o the tra!s8e!de!tal approa8h 6hi8h rele?ively
regresses rom the obje8t to its subje8tive 8o!ditio!s o possibility7 0ve! the philosophy o the
Jli!guisti8 tur!K remai!s at this tra!s8e!de!tal level- addressi!g the tra!s8e!de!tal dime!sio! o
la!guageEthat is- ho6 the horiUo! o possible mea!i!g sustai!ed by la!guage i! 6hi8h 6e d6ell
u!8tio!s as the tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!ditio! o possibility or all our e?perie!8e o reality7 =ere- the!- Jthe
sig!iied alls i!to the sig!iier-K or the sig!iied is a! ee8t o the sig!iier- it is a88ou!ted or i! the
terms o the symboli8 order as its tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stitutive 8o!ditio!7
(%
/hat diale8ti8al rele8tio!
adds to this is a!other rele?ive t6ist 6hi8h grou!ds the very subje8tive:tra!s8e!de!tal site o
e!u!8iatio! i! the Jsel:moveme!tK o the Thi!g itsel+ here- Jthe sig!iier alls i!to the sig!iied-K the
a8t o e!u!8iatio! alls i!to the e!u!8iated- the sig! o the thi!g alls i!to the Thi!g itsel7 /he! asked
to e?plai! the mea!i!g o a term d to someo!e 6ho- 6hile more or less lue!t i! our la!guage- does !ot
k!o6 this spe8ii8 term- 6e i!variably respo!d 6ith a pote!tially e!dless series o sy!o!yms-
paraphrases- or des8riptio!s o situatio!s i! 6hi8h the use o the term 6ould be appropriate7 9! this
6ay- through the very ailure o our e!deavor- 6e 8ir8ums8ribe a! empty pla8e- the pla8e o the right
6ordEpre8isely the 6ord 6e are tryi!g to e?plai!7 So at some poi!t- ater our paraphrases ail- all 6e
8a! do is to 8o!8lude i! e?asperatio!+ J9! short- it is dRK Far rom u!8tio!i!g as a simple admissio! o
ailure- ho6ever- this 8a! ee8tively ge!erate a! i!sightEif- that is- through our ailed paraphrases 6e
have su88essully 8ir8ums8ribed the place o the term to be e?plai!ed7 At this poi!t- as .a8a! 6ould
have put it- Jthe sig!iier alls i!to the sig!iied-K the term be8omes part o its o6! dei!itio!7 9t is a
little bit like liste!i!g to old mo!o re8ordi!gs+ the very 8ra8kli!g sou!ds that ilter a!d disturb the pure
reprodu8tio! o the huma! voi8e ge!erate a! ee8t o authe!ti8ity- the impressio! that 6e are liste!i!g
to @6hat 6as o!8eA a real perso! si!gi!g- 6hile the very pere8tio! o moder! re8ordi!gs- 6ith their
stereo a!d other ee8ts- stra!gely de:realiUe 6hat 6e hear7 This is 6hy the Je!lighte!edK 4e6 Ager
6ho implores us to ully realiUe or e?press our true Sel 8a!!ot but appear as its oppositeEas a
me8ha!i8al- depthless subje8t bli!dly repeati!g his or her ma!tra7
To re8apitulate+ diale8ti8al reversal is more 8omple? tha! it may appearT at its most radi8al- it is
!ot o!ly the reversal o a predi8ate @the reaso! agai!st be8omes the reaso! orA- but the shit o the
predi8ate itsel i!to the positio! o the subje8t7 This key eature o the =egelia! diale8ti8 8a! be
8lariied by 6ay o the 6ell:k!o6! male:8hauvi!ist !otio! o ho6- i! 8o!trast to ma!Is irm sel:
ide!tity- Jthe esse!8e o 6oma! is dispersed- elusive- displa8ed7K The appropriate respo!se here is to
move rom this 8laim that the esse!8e o 6oma! is orever dispersed to the more radi8al 8laim that this
dispersion or displacement as such is the %essence of femininityF' This is a shit 6hi8h- o!8e agai!- 8a!
be retold i! terms o the Fabi!ovit8h ormula+ J9 have ou!d the esse!8e o emi!i!ity7K J3ut o!e
8a!!ot i!d it- emi!i!ity is dispersed- displa8ed OK J/ell- this dispersio! is the esse!8e o emi!i!ity
OK H!e should agai! i!sist here o! the irredu8ible 8hara8ter o this dialogi8al pro8ess+ the a8t that o!e
8a!!ot dire8tly pass to the Jesse!8e o emi!i!ity-K but must pass through the illusory assertio! J9 have
ou!d the esse!8e o emi!i!ityK a!d its ailure- is !ot o!ly a !e8essity 6hi8h ae8ts our 8og!itive
approa8h- but 8o!stitutes the Thi!g itsel @the Jesse!8e o emi!i!ityKA7 A!d the Jsubje8tK is !ot just a!
e?ample here- but the !ame or a ormal stru8ture+ the subje8t Jas su8hK is a subje8tiviUed predi8ateT the
subje8t is !ot o!ly al6ays already displa8ed- a!d so o!- it is this displa8eme!t7 /hat this mea!s is-
agai!- that the above:des8ribed dialogi8al stru8ture is i!s8ribed i!to the very bei!g o subje8t+ the
subje8t aims at represe!ti!g itselT this represe!tatio! ailsT the subje8t is this ailure o its o6!
represe!tatio!7
The supreme 8ase o this shit 8o!stitutive o the dime!sio! o subje8tivity is that o
supposition7 .a8a! bega! 6ith the !otio! o the a!alyst as the Jsubje8t supposed to k!o6-K 6hi8h
arises through tra!sere!8e @the a!alyst is the o!e supposed to k!o6 the mea!i!g o the patie!tIs
symptomsA7 =o6ever- he soo! realiUed that he 6as deali!g 6ith a more ge!eral stru8ture o
suppositio!- i! 6hi8h a igure o the Hther is !ot o!ly supposed to k!o6- but 8a! also believe- e!joy-
8ry- a!d laugh- or eve! not k!o6 or us @rom Tibeta! prayer mills to 8a!!ed laughterA7 This stru8ture
o presuppositio! is !ot i!i!ite+ it is stri8tly limited- 8o!strai!ed by the our eleme!ts o the dis8ourse7
S
1
Ethe subje8t supposed to believeT S
2
Ethe subje8t supposed to k!o6T aEthe subje8t supposed to
e!joyT a!d O 6hat about bM 9s it a Jsubje8t supposed to be a subje8tKM /hat 6ould this mea!M /hat i
6e read it as sta!di!g or the very stru8ture o suppositio!+ it is !ot o!ly that the subje8t is supposed to
have a Nuality- to do or u!dergo somethi!g @to k!o6- to e!joy OAEthe sub1ect itself is a supposition-
or the subje8t is !ever dire8tly Jgive!-K as a positive substa!tial e!tity- 6e !ever dire8tly e!8ou!ter it-
it is merely a li8keri!g void JsupposedK bet6ee! the t6o sig!iiers7 @/e e!8ou!ter here agai! the
=egelia! passage rom subje8t to predi8ate+ rom the subje8t supposed to O to the subje8t itsel as a
suppositio!7A That is to say- 6hat- pre8isely- is a Jsubje8tKM Thi!k o a propositio!- a stateme!tEho6-
6he!- does this stateme!t be8ome Jsubje8tiviUedKM 9t be8omes so 6he! some rele?ive eature
i!s8ribes i!to it the subje8tive attitudeEi! this pre8ise se!se- a sig!iier Jreprese!ts the subje8t or
a!other sig!iier7K The subje8t is the abse!t d that has to be supposed i! order to a88ou!t or this
rele?ive t6ist- or this distortio!7 A!d .a8a! pushes o! here to the e!d+ the subje8t is !ot o!ly
supposed by the e?ter!al observer:liste!er o a sig!iyi!g 8hai!T it is in itself a supposition7 The subje8t
is i!a88essible to itsel as a Thi!g- i! its !oume!al ide!tity- a!d- as su8h- it is orever hau!ted by itsel
as obje8t+ 6hat are all Doppelg=nger igures i !ot igures o mysel as a! obje8t that hau!ts meM 9!
other 6ords- !ot o!ly are others a suppositio! or me @9 8a! o!ly suppose their e?iste!8e be!eath the
rele?ive distortio! o a sig!iyi!g 8hai!A- I myself am no less a supposition for myself+ somethi!g to be
presumed @there must be a! d that J9 am-K the J9 or 9t or a Thi!g that thi!ks-K as *a!t put itA a!d !ever
dire8tly a88essible7 =umeIs amous observatio! that- !o matter ho6 8losely or deeply 9 look i!to
mysel- all 9 6ill i!d are spe8ii8 ideas- parti8ular me!tal states- per8eptio!s- emotio!s- et87- !ever a
JSel-K misses the poi!t+ this !o!:a88essibility o the subje8t to itsel as a! obje8t is 8o!stitutive o
bei!g a Jsel7K
H!e 8ould eve! 8laim that- ormally- this reversal rom the subje8t supposed to O to the subje8t
itsel as a suppositio! defines subje8tivity+ substa!8e appears i! phe!ome!a- 6hile a subje8t is nothing
but its o6! appeara!8e7 @A!d these ormulae 8a! be multiplied+ the u!iversal is nothing but the
i!adeNua8y- the !o!:ide!tity- o the parti8ular to>6ith itselT the esse!8e is nothing but the i!adeNua8y
o the appeara!8e to itsel- a!d so o! a!d so orth7A This does !ot mea! that the subje8t is the stupid
tautology o the Feal @Jthi!gs just are 6hat they seem to beKA- but- mu8h more pre8isely- that the
subje8t is nothing but its own appearing! the appearing reflected*into*itself
SZ
Ea parado?i8al torsio!
i! 6hi8h a Thi!g starts to u!8tio! as a substitute for itself7 As Fobert Caller observes apropos this
substitutio!+

/hat is substituted 8a! also appear itsel- i! a 1+1 s8ale- i! the role o the substituteEthere o!ly must
be some eature e!suri!g that it is !ot take! to be itsel7 Su8h a eature is provided or by the threshold
6hi8h separates the pla8e o 6hat is substituti!g rom 6hat is bei!g substitutedEor symboliUes their
deta8hme!t7 0verythi!g that appears i! ro!t o the threshold is the! assumed to be the ersatU- as
everythi!g that lies behi!d it is take! to be 6hat is bei!g substituted7There are s8ores o e?amples o
su8h 8o!8ealme!ts that are obtai!ed !ot by mi!iaturiUatio! but o!ly by mea!s o 8lever lo8aliUatio!7 As
Freud observed- the very a8ts that are orbidde! by religio! are pra8ti8ed i! the !ame o religio!7 9!
su8h 8asesEas- or i!sta!8e- murder i! the !ame o religio!Ereligio! also 8a! do e!tirely 6ithout
mi!iaturiUatio!7 Those adama!tly milita!t advo8ates o huma! lie- or e?ample- 6ho oppose abortio!-
6ill !ot stop short o a8tually murderi!g 8li!i8 perso!!el7 Fadi8al right:6i!g oppo!e!ts o male
homose?uality i! the )SA a8t i! a similar 6ay7 They orga!iUe so:8alled Jgay bashi!gsK i! the 8ourse
o 6hi8h they beat up a!d i!ally rape gays7 The ultimate homi8idal or homose?ual gratii8atio! o
drives 8a! thereore also be attai!ed- i it o!ly ulils the 8o!ditio! o evoki!g the sembla!8e o a
8ou!ter:measure7 /hat seems to be Joppositio!K the! has the ee8t that the ? to be e!ded o 8a!
appear itsel a!d be take! or a !o!:?7
#1
/hat 6e e!8ou!ter here yet agai! is the =egelia! Joppositio!al determi!atio!K+ i! the igure o
the gay:basher rapi!g a gay ma!- the gay e!8ou!ters himsel i! his oppositio!al determi!atio!T that is-
tautology @sel:ide!tityA appears as the highest 8o!tradi8tio!7
#2
9! other 6ords- the stru8ture is agai!
that o the ,Zbius ba!d+ i 6e progress ar e!ough o! o!e side- 6e rea8h our starti!g poi!t agai! @a gay
se? a8tA- but o! the other side o the ba!d7 .e6is Darroll 6as thereore right+ a 8ou!try can serve as its
o6! map i!soar as the model or map is the thi!g itsel i! its oppositio!al determi!atio!- that is- i!soar
as a! i!visible s8ree! e!sures that the thi!g is !ot take! to be itsel7 9! this pre8ise se!se- the
JprimordialK diere!8e is !ot bet6ee! thi!gs themselves- also !ot bet6ee! thi!gs a!d their sig!s- but
bet6ee! the thi!g a!d the void o a! i!visible s8ree! 6hi8h distorts our per8eptio! o the thi!g so that
6e do !ot take the thi!g or itsel7 The moveme!t rom thi!gs to their sig!s is !ot that o a repla8eme!t
o the thi!g by its sig!- but that o the thi!g itsel be8omi!g the sig! oE!ot a!other thi!g- butEitself-
the void at its very 8ore7
#"
This parado? bri!gs us to the relatio!ship bet6ee! ma! a!d Dhrist+ the tautology Jma! is ma!K
is to be read as a =egelia! i!i!ite judgme!t- as the e!8ou!ter o Jma!K 6ith its oppositio!al
determi!atio!- 6ith its 8ou!terpart o! the other side o the ,Zbius ba!d7 9! the same 6ay that- already
i! our everyday u!dersta!di!g- Jthe la6 is the la6K mea!s its opposite- the 8oi!8ide!8e o la6 6ith
arbitrary viole!8e @J/hat 8a! you do- eve! i it is u!just a!d arbitrary- the la6 is the la6- you have to
obey itRKA- Jma! is ma!K sig!als the !o!:8oi!8ide!8e o ma! 6ith ma!- the properly inhuman e?8ess
6hi8h disturbs its sel:ide!tityEa!d 6hat- ultimately- is Dhrist but the !ame o this e?8ess i!here!t to
ma!- ma!Is e?timate ker!el- the mo!strous surplus 6hi8h- ollo6i!g the u!ortu!ate Co!tius Cilatus-
o!e o the e6 ethi8al heroes o the 3ible @the other bei!g 2udas- o 8ourseA- 8a! o!ly be desig!ated as
Jecce homoKM
BE$OND INTERS!B)ECTI#IT$

/hat is the status o this i!:huma! e?8essM 9! his attempt to des8ribe the ge!esis o our sear8h
or mea!i!g- /olram =ogrebe 8laims that the subje8tIs relatio! to obje8tivity has to be grou!ded i!
i!tersubje8tivity+ J6ithout a dark 5ou [das dun"le Du\- 6e do !ot have a 8ha!8e to begi! developi!g
obje8tive relatio!s 6ith thi!gs7K
#(
JHbje8tivityK 8a! o!ly arise as the !otio! o a! d that remai!s the
same u!der diere!t subje8tive perspe8tives or des8riptio!sEit is the result o su8h abstra8tio! rom
subje8tive sta!dpoi!ts7 /hat pre8edes it is the Jma!ti8K a!imist e?perie!8e o reality as mea!i!gul-
ull o u!k!o6! mea!i!g7 9t is !ot that 9 begi! 6ith the e!8ou!ter 6ith obje8ts arou!d me- a!d the!
!oti8e ho6 some o these obje8ts have a! i!!er lie like me- so tra!ser o!to them my i!!er lieT o! the
8o!trary- the tra!sere!8e 8omes irst- obje8tiviUatio! 8omes ater7
Agai!st this ba8kgrou!d- =ogrebe i!terprets popular:8ulture igures like vampires- Uombies-
alie!s- a!d repli8a!ts as u!8a!!y igures o i!tellige!t bei!gs deprived o emotio!s a!d o a horiUo! o
mea!i!g- la8ki!g the sear8hi!g:or:mea!i!g attitude- properly J6orld:lessK bei!gs7 As ,arkus 1abriel
poi!ts out- there is a shit here rom Foma!ti8ism- i! 6hi8h u!8a!!y mo!strous doubles sta!d or the
Ji!huma!K abyss o the subje8t itsel- to our o6! time i! 6hi8h repli8a!ts- et87- sta!d or 6orldless
Jthi!ki!g ma8hi!es7K
##
3ut is there !ot a! ambiguity prese!t also i! todayIs repli8a!ts or robots- rom
Jtermi!atorsK o!6ardsM Are they !ot- be!eath the appeara!8e o desubje8tiviUed Jthi!ki!g ma8hi!es-K
igures o the subje8t i! its pure i!:huma! stateM 9s !ot the alie! or termi!ator todayIs image o the
Jdark 9K beyo!d huma! empathyM
H!e o the strategies or tami!g this Jdark 9K is a kiss7 Sh!dor ,hraiIs Embers e!ds 6ith a
dei!itio! o the kiss as Ja! a!s6er- a 8lumsy but te!der a!s6er to a Nuestio! that eludes the po6er o
la!guage7K
#'
This short dei!itio! ee8tively 8ir8ums8ribes the key dime!sio! o a kiss+ 8ru8ially- it is
give! by the mouth- the very orga! o spee8h @a!d- i! a ull eroti8 kiss- also 8o!ta8ts the otherIs
mouthA- deprivi!g it o its ability to talk- shutti!g it o7 As su8h- the kiss is a! a!s6er to the JNuestio!
that eludes the po6er o la!guage-K 6hi8h is !othi!g other tha! 6hat .a8a! 8alls J,he vuoi?K @/hat do
you 6a!tMA- the Nuestio! 6hi8h 8o!8er!s the abyss o the HtherIs desire- the abyss ope!ed up by spee8h
but or 6hi8h every 6ord ails7 A kiss is a 8lumsy a!d desperate measure to pa8iy this abyss by 6ay o
8losi!g o its sour8e through a dire8t i!terve!tio! i!to the bodily Feal+ JShut upR .et my 8lose!ess to
you 8lose the gap 6hi8h threate!s to rui! our relatio!shipRK This is the truth i! the 8li8hL about
prostitutes 6ho allo6 their 8ustomers to pe!etrate them but !ot to kiss them o! the mouthEa sig!al
that they do !ot 6a!t to surre!der the abyss o their subje8tivity to the 8lose!ess o a stra!ger7
9s the traumati8 e!8ou!ter 6ith the Jdivi!eKEi! the guise o a mea!i!gless @or pre:mea!i!gA
Absolute 6hi8h triggers- as a rea8tio!- the sear8h or mea!i!gEee8tively the primordial a8tM
Csy8hoa!alysis provides a key i!sight here7 .et us approa8h it through -he )erple&ity of 0ariya
0ercules- a! e?traordi!ary short !ovel by ,a!ohar Shyam 2oshi- a!d o!e o the 8lassi8s o t6e!tieth:
8e!tury 9!dia! literature7
#$
Set i! Gelhi arou!d 1%'0- the !ovel tells the story o =arihar Gatt T6ari
@mo8ki!gly k!o6! as =ariya =er8ules ater the !ame o his bi8y8le- 6hi8h 8o!trasts 6ith =ariyaIs
utterly !o!:heroi8 !atureA- a! i!i!itely patie!t- u!married- middle:aged ma! 6ho spe!ds all his time
atte!di!g to his bli!d- i!irm- a!d 8hro!i8ally 8o!stipated old ather- 6ho 6as o!8e a pillar o so8iety7
=ariyaIs 8are or his ather i!8ludes regularly 8lea!si!g his re8tum to 8lea! out the dried e?8reme!t7
H!e day- 6hile visiti!g a relative- =ariya hears that there is a to6! 8alled 1oomalli!g i! AustraliaT he
hallu8i!ates that his o6! double lives there7 The 6ord J1oomalli!g-K a sig!iier o atherIs desire- thus
disturbs =ariyaIs i!!er pea8e a!d triggers his perple?ity- !ot o!ly about his ather but about all thi!gs
se?ual7 =avi!g up to !o6 simply ig!ored se?uality- he be8omes i!trigued by ho6 a!d 6hy the se?ual
a8t bri!gs pleasure- a!d tries to lear! rom his older emale relatives all about it7 /he! his ather dies
soo! ater6ards- =ariya i!herits o!e o his most pre8ious possessio!s- a tru!k 8o!tai!i!g je6elry-
por!ographi8 pi8tures o group se? a8ts i! 6hi8h his ather parti8ipated- a!d a letter rom a Tibeta!
lama7 The letter des8ribes the 8urse brought by the ather upo! a T6ari amily 6he!- i! the mythi8
=imalaya! to6! o 1oomalli!g @the same !ame as the real Australia! to6!RA- he stole the tru!k that
belo!ged to the terrible deity o 1oomalli!g7 As a dutiul so!- =ariya goes looki!g or 1oomalli!g to
retur! the tru!k to the deity7 Ater he mysteriously va!ishes- members o his 8ommu!ity ba8k i! Gelhi
8ompose a multitude o stories- some des8ribi!g him as a sel:sa8rii8i!g sai!t- others as a vi8tim o
ma!ipulatio! a!d robbery7 9! spite @or- rather- be8auseA o all the disgusti!g details- this !ovel is o!e o
the most beautiul a!d tou8hi!g stories about the rise o desire out o a! e!8ou!ter 6ith 6hat 2ea!
.apla!8he 6ould have 8alled a! Je!igmati8 sig!iier-K a sig!iier 6hi8h 8o!de!ses the mystery o the
HtherIs desire7 As 6e k!o6 rom Freud a!d .a8a!- the ather is !ot simply a bearer o prohibitio!Ethe
pri8e he has to pay or o88upyi!g this pla8e is that he himsel gets prohibited- a!d 6hat triggers
=ariyaIs desire is this dark- prohibited side o the ather7 Furthermore- a similar sel:rele?ive reversal
o subje8t i!to obje8t ae8ts =ariya himsel+ ater he be8omes perple?ed by the mystery- he himsel
tur!s i!to a! ob1ect o mystery- or his disappeara!8e triggers a multitude o i!8o!siste!t !arratives
8o!8er!i!g his ate7
=o6ever- rom a stri8t materialist sta!dpoi!t- .apla!8heIs !otio! o the Je!igmati8 sig!iierK
should be 8riti8ally suppleme!ted+ it is !ot a primordial a8t- a! Jorigi!al traumaK 6hi8h sets the huma!
a!imal o! the path o subje8tiviUatio!T it is- rather- a se8o!dary phe!ome!o!- a rea8tio! to the
primordial a8t o the over:pro?imity o the other- o his or her i!trusive prese!8e or bodily:material
too:mu8h:!ess7 9t is this i!trusive prese!8e 6hi8h is the! i!terpreted as a! Je!igma-K as a! obs8ure
JmessageK rom the other 6ho J6a!ts somethi!gK rom me7 9! this se!se- the J4eighborK reers !ot
primarily to the abyss o the HtherIs desire- the e!igma o J,he vuoi?K o J/hat do you really 6a!t
rom meMK but to a! i!truder 6ho is al6ays a!d by dei!itio! too !ear7 This is 6hy or =itler the 2e6
6as a !eighbor+ !o matter ho6 ar a6ay the 2e6s 6ere- they 6ere al6ays too 8loseT !o matter ho6
ma!y 6ere killed- the rem!a!ts 6ere al6ays too stro!g7
#&
As usual- Dhesterto! made this poi!t 6ith
utmost 8larity+ JThe 3ible tells us to love our !eighbors- a!d also to love our e!emiesT probably
be8ause they are ge!erally the same people7K
There is a problem to be 8lariied here+ !o matter ho6 i!trusively o!e tou8hes a dog or a 8at- the
i!trusio! 6ill !ever be i!terpreted by it as a! Je!igmati8 sig!iierKT 6hi8h mea!s that somethi!g- some
radi8al 8ha!ge- must have already happe!ed i! a livi!g bei!g or it to e?perie!8e somethi!g as a!
i!trusio!7 9t seems obvious that a violatio! is al6ays a violatio! 6ith regard to some presupposed !orm7
Should o!e the! say that- i! order or somethi!g to be e?perie!8ed by the body as i!trusio!- a ki!d o
primordial 0go already has to be 8o!stituted- implyi!g a li!e o divisio! bet6ee! the 9!side a!d the
HutsideM 9s it the! the homeostasis o the primordial 0go 6hi8h is disturbed- derailed- by the i!trusio!
o the @deathA drive- so that the oppositio! bet6ee! 0go a!d drive is the oppositio! bet6ee! .ie a!d
GeathM /hi8h !orm is violated i! too:mu8h!essM The properly Freudia! materialist solutio! 6ould be
to tur! this relatio!ship arou!d a!d to posit the parado? o a! origi!al e?8ess- a! e?8ess Ji! itselK
rather tha! i! relatio! to a presupposed !orm7 The Freudia! drive is just su8h a! e?8ess:i!:itsel+ there
is !o J!ormalK drive7 The ormatio! o the 0go 6ith its borderli!e bet6ee! 9!side @0goA a!d Hutside
@!o!:0goA is already a dee!se:ormatio!- a rea8tio! agai!st the e?8ess o the drive7 9! short- it is !ot
the e?8ess o the drive 6hi8h violates the J!ormK o the 0go- it is the J!ormK @proper measureA itsel
6hi8h is a dee!se agai!st the e?8ess o the drive7
9t is or this reaso! that i!tersubje8tivity is !ot a primordial or J!aturalK state o huma! bei!g7
To i!d tra8es o a dime!sio! Jbeyo!d i!tersubje8tivityK i! =egel- o!e should look or them i! the very
pla8e 6hi8h is the 8e!tral reere!8e or the partisa!s o re8og!itio!+ the amous 8hapter o! servitude
a!d domi!atio! rom the )henomenology7 ,alabou has !oted per8eptively that- i! spite o the pre8ise
logi8al dedu8tio! o the plurality o subje8ts out o the !otio! o lie- there is a! irredu8ible scandal-
somethi!g traumati8 a!d u!e?pe8ted- i! the e!8ou!ter 6ith another subje8t- that is- i! the a8t that the
subje8t @a sel:8o!s8ious!essA e!8ou!ters outside itsel- i! ro!t o it- a!other livi!g bei!g i! the 6orld
6hi8h also 8laims to be a subje8t @a sel:8o!s8ious!essA7
#%
As a subje8t- 9 am by dei!itio! alo!e- a
si!gularity opposed to the e!tire 6orld o thi!gs- a pu!8tuality to 6hi8h all the 6orld appears- a!d !o
amou!t o phe!ome!ologi8al des8riptio! o ho6 9 am al6ays already Jtogether:6ithK others 8a! 8over
up the s8a!dal o a!other su8h si!gularity e?isti!g i! the 6orld7 9! the guise o the livi!g bei!g i! ro!t
o me 6ho 8laims to be also a sel:8o!s8ious!ess- i!i!ity assumes a determi!ate orm- a!d this
8oi!8ide!8e o opposites @the i!i!ity o sel:relati!g 8o!s8ious!ess is this parti8ular livi!g bei!gA
poi!ts to6ards the i!i!ite judgme!t Jthe Spirit is a bo!e-K 6hi8h 8o!8ludes the se8tio! o! observi!g
reaso! i! the )henomenology7
The sour8e o this s8a!dal is that sel:8o!s8ious!ess breaks 6ith the os8illatio! bet6ee!
atta8hme!t a!d deta8hme!t that 8hara8teriUes the pro8ess o lie+ lie is at the same time the lie o the
spe8ies 6hi8h reprodu8es itsel through the lie a!d death o its members- a!d the lie o ea8h member7
0a8h memberIs atta8hme!t is thus split- divided bet6ee! a! atta8hme!t to its o6! parti8ular i!ite
bei!g a!d a! atta8hme!t to its spe8ies @6hi8h mea!s a deta8hme!t rom its parti8ular bei!gA7 H!8e 6e
e!ter Spirit proper- ho6ever- this diale8ti8 o atta8hme!t a!d deta8hme!t 6hi8h 8hara8teriUes the lie o
a spe8ies radi8ally 8ha!ges+ i! the lie o Spirit- a si!gularity i!terposes itsel bet6ee! the spe8ies a!d
its i!dividual members7 This mea!s that a! i!dividual 8a! !o lo!ger be redu8ed to bei!g a parti8ular
member o its spe8ies- subordi!ated to its higher u!iversal i!terest+ a spiritual i!dividual @Jsel:
8o!s8ious!essKA has the Ji!i!ite rightK to u!iversality- be8ause his si!gular e?iste!8e is !ot merely that
o a member o the spe8iesEi! it- the u!iversality o the spe8ies be8omes Jor itsel-K assumes a
determi!ate orm7 So 6he! 9 e!8ou!ter i! ro!t o me a!other sel:8o!s8ious!ess- there is somethi!g i!
me @!ot simply my egotism- but somethi!g i! the very !otio! o sel:8o!s8ious!essA 6hi8h resists the
redu8tio! o both mysel a!d the opposed sel:8o!s8ious!ess to simple members o the huma! spe8ies+
6hat makes the e!8ou!ter sho8ki!g is that i! it- two universalities meet where there is room only for
one7
'0
9! the origi!al e!8ou!ter- the Hther is thus !ot simply a!other subje8t 6ith 6hom 9 share the
i!tersubje8tive spa8e o re8og!itio!- but a traumati8 Thi!g7 This is 6hy this e?8ess 8a!!ot be properly
8ou!ted+ subje8ts are !ever 1 m 1 m 1O- there is al6ays a! obje8tal e?8ess 6hi8h adds itsel to the
series7 /e i!d a! e8ho o this e?8ess i! those s8ie!8e:i8tio! or horror stories 6here stra!ge thi!gs
start to happe! @murders- as a ruleA amo!g a group o people i! a! isolated pla8e @a small isla!d or
spa8eship- sayA a!d everythi!g poi!ts to somethi!g else bei!g prese!tE!ot a!other huma!- all o
6hom 8a! be 8ou!ted 6ithout ever graspi!g the e?8ess- but a! alie! mo!ster 6hi8h is less tha! H!e but
more tha! Uero7 @The psy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t re8reates this s8e!e+ the a!alyst is !ot a!other subje8t-
there is !o a8e to a8e- s>he is a! obje8t 6hi8h adds itsel to the patie!t7A This e?8essive spe8tral obje8t
is- o 8ourse- a sta!d:i! or the subje8t- the subje8t itsel as obje8t- the subje8tIs impossible:real obje8tal
8ou!terpart7
DRI#E #ERS!S ILL

The Freudia! !ame or this e?8essive atta8hme!t to the obje8tal e?8ess is the drive- 6hi8h
bri!gs us to the key Nuestio!+ 8a! =egel thi!k the driveM =egel 8omes 8lose to the Freudia! drive i! his
elaboratio! o the !otio! o For8e @to6ards the e!d o the 8hapter o! Do!s8ious!ess i! the
)henomenologyA7
'1
The diale8ti8 o the @substa!tialA Thi!g a!d its properties dissolves i!to the
Ju!8o!ditio!ed u!iversalK be!eath the lo6 o phe!ome!aT this u!iversal gives a positive orm to the
void at the heart o every Thi!g- the void that a88ou!ts or the H!e:!ess o the Thi!g a!d that 8a! o!ly
be a88ou!ted or by the Thi!gIs !ame7 J9! itsel-K this void is already the subje8t- the u!iversal
dime!sio! o subje8tivityT ho6ever- it Jis still a! ob1ect o 8o!s8ious!ess-K Jthe result has to be give!
a! obje8tive sig!ii8a!8e for consciousnessFK Do!s8ious!ess does !ot yet k!o6 that there is !othi!g
behi!d the veil o appeara!8esE!othi!g but 6hat 8o!s8ious!ess itsel puts there7 This eature 8aptures
the a8ephalous 8hara8ter o the drive+ it is !ot Jmi!e-K the subje8tIs- it is the very 8ore o my bei!g
i!sisti!g Jout there-K as a partial obje8t 6hi8h is !ot me7 This remai!i!g split bet6ee! 8o!s8ious!ess
a!d obje8tive bei!g has to be rele8ted i!to the obje8t itselT it appears there i! the guise o the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!t+ the orm o u!iversality a!d its 8o!te!t- multiple parti8ular
Ji!depe!de!tK eleme!ts7 The t6o mome!ts o this disti!8tio!- o 8ourse- are !ot i?ed opposites- but
are 8aught i! a! e!dless pro8ess o passi!g:i!to:ea8h:other- i! a! os8illatio! typi8al o Jspurious
i!i!ityK+

the JmattersK posited as i!depe!de!t dire8tly pass over i!to their u!ity- a!d their u!ity dire8tly u!olds
its diversity- a!d this o!8e agai! redu8es itsel to u!ity7 3ut this moveme!t is 6hat is 8alled Force7 H!e
o its mome!ts- the dispersal o the i!depe!de!t JmattersK i! their [immediate\ bei!g- is the e&pression
o For8eT but For8e- take! as that i! 6hi8h they have disappeared- is Force proper- For8e 6hi8h has
bee! drive! ba8k i!to itsel rom its e?pressio!7 First- ho6ever- the For8e 6hi8h is drive! ba8k i!to
itsel must e?press itselT a!d- se8o!dly- it is still For8e remai!i!g 6ithi! itsel- just as mu8h as it is
e?pressio! i! this sel:8o!tai!ed!ess7
'2
Goes this bei!g Jdrive! ba8k i!to itselK o the For8e already poi!t to6ards the Freudo:
.a8a!ia! driveM 9s the drive a For8e i! its bei!g:drive!:ba8k:i!to:itselM Goes the rhythm o For8e
poi!t to6ards the repetitive moveme!t o the driveM =egelIs For8e is drive! ba8k i!to itsel as the very
po6er o a!!ihilati!g the appeara!8es i! 6hi8h it e?presses itselT it is !ot yet the pote!tiality o virtual
Co6er 6hi8h retai!s its authority o!ly as virtual- as the threat o its a8tualiUatio!7 ,ore pre8isely- the
drive is !ot Co6er- but also !ot For8e7 9t is a For8e th6arted i! its goal- i!di!g its aim i! repeati!g the
very ailure to rea8h its goal7 The drive does !ot e?press itsel- it stumbles upo! a! e?ter!al eleme!t or
obsta8leT it does !ot pass rom o!e to a!other o its ma!iestatio!s or e?pressio!s- it gets stu8k o! o!e
o them7 9t is !ot drive! ba8k to itsel through over8omi!g or a!!ihilati!g its e?pressio!s- but through
not being able to do so7
The drive has !othi!g 6hatsoever to do 6ith psy8hology+ the death drive @a!d the drive as su8h
is the death driveA is !ot a psy8hi8 @or biologi8alA strivi!g or death a!d destru8tio!Eas .a8a!
emphasiUes repeatedly- the death drive is a! o!tologi8al 8o!8ept- a!d it is this properly o!tologi8al
dime!sio! o the death drive 6hi8h is so dii8ult to thi!k7 Freud dei!ed -rieb @driveA as a limit:
8o!8ept situated bet6ee! biology a!d psy8hology- or !ature a!d 8ultureEa !atural or8e k!o6! o!ly
through its psy8hi8 represe!tatives7 3ut 6e should take a step urther here a!d read Freud more
radi8ally+ the drive is !atural- but the !atural thro6! out o joi!t- distorted or deormed by 8ultureT it is
8ulture i! its !atural state7 This is 6hy the drive is a ki!d o imagi!ary o8us- or meeti!g pla8e- bet6ee!
psy8hoa!alysis a!d 8og!itive brai! s8ie!8es+ the parado? o the sel:propelli!g loop o! 6hi8h the e!tire
Freudia! edii8e is based a!d 6hi8h the brai! s8ie!8es approa8h i! metaphori8 ormulatio!s- 6ithout
bei!g able to dei!e it pre8isely7 Gue to this i!:bet6ee! status- the i!siste!8e o the drive is Jimmortal-K
a! Ju!deadK strivi!g that i!sists beyo!d lie a!d death7 9! the 8lassi8 1erma! poem about t6o !aughty
8hildre!- /ilhelm 3us8hIs J,a? u!d ,oritUK @irst published i! 1&'#A- the 8hildre! 8o!ti!ually a8t i! a
disgra8eul 6ay to6ards respe8ted authorities- u!til i!ally they both all i!to a 6heat mill a!d 8ome
out 8ut up i!to ti!y grai!s7 3ut 6he! the grai!s all o! the loor- they orm i!to the shapes o the t6o
boys+

Fi8kera8keR Fi8kera8keR1eht die ,Yhle mit 1ek!a8ke7=ier ka!! ma! sie !o8h erbli8ke!-Fei!
ges8hrote! u!d i! StY8ke!7
9! the origi!al illustratio!- the shapes are s!eeri!g obs8e!ely- i!sisti!g i! their evil eve! ater
death O @Ador!o 6as right 6he! he 6rote that 6he! o!e e!8ou!ters a truly evil perso!- it is dii8ult to
imagi!e that this perso! 8a! ever die7A The ormula o the drive is thus the same as *a!tIs ormula o
duty- JGu ka!!st- de!! du sollstRK @5ou 8a!- be8ause you mustRAEa deeply ambiguous ormula that
8a! be read i! t6o 6ays 6hi8h may appear to overlap- but are i! a8t very diere!t+ @1A !o matter ho6
hard or impossible the task appears- you simply have to do itRT @2A si!8e you should do it- although you
really 8a!!ot- you are orever 8o!dem!ed to eel guilty or !ot havi!g do!e it7 The irst versio! is the
ormula o the u!8o!ditio!al drive 6hi8h i!sists beyo!d lie a!d deathT the se8o!d is its superego
perversio!7
This obsti!a8y 8a! also be embodied i! a parti8ular orga!- like a ist or the eet- as i! =a!s
Dhristia! A!derse!Is JFed Shoes-K the story o *are!- a poor little girl adopted by a ri8h old lady ater
her motherIs death7 1ro6i!g up vai!- she buys a pair o red shoes a!d 6ears them to 8hur8h- 6here she
pays !o atte!tio! to the servi8e7 /he! her adoptive mother be8omes ill- *are! deserts her- preerri!g to
atte!d a party i! her red shoes7 3ut o!8e she begi!s da!8i!g- she 8a!!ot stopEthe shoes take over+ she
8a!!ot 8o!trol them- they are stu8k to her eet a!d 8o!ti!ue to da!8e- through ields a!d meado6s-
8ome rai! or shi!e- !ight a!d day7 She 8a!!ot eve! atte!d her adoptive motherIs u!eral7 A! a!gel
appears to her- 8o!dem!i!g her to da!8e u!til she gro6s 8old a!d pale- as a 6ar!i!g to vai! 8hildre!
every6here7 *are! the! asks the e?e8utio!er to 8hop o her eet7 =e does so a!d gives her a pair o
6oode! eet a!d 8rut8hes7 Thi!ki!g that she has suered e!ough or the red shoes- *are! de8ides to go
to 8hur8h- but the 8hopped:o eet still 6eari!g the red shoes da!8e beore her- barri!g the 6ay7 The
ollo6i!g Su!day she tries agai!- thi!ki!g hersel at least as good as the others i! 8hur8h- but agai! the
da!8i!g shoes bar the 6ay7 *are! the! goes to do servi8e i! the parso!age- a!d 6he! Su!day 8omes
she dares !ot go to 8hur8h7 As she sits alo!e at home a!d prays to 1od- it is as though the 8hur8h 8omes
home to her a!d her heart be8omes so illed 6ith pea8e a!d joy that it bursts7 She dies- a!d her soul
lies o! rays o su!light to heave!- 6here !o o!e asks her about the red shoes7
'"
9! his ilm -he 7ed Shoes- ,i8hael Co6ell tra!sposed A!derse!Is airy tale i!to a moder!
ballet:8ompa!y setti!g- but 6ith a stra!ge t6ist+ the da!8i!g shoes bri!g death to the heroi!e @8alled
Vi8kyA !ot be8ause they e!a8t her idelity to her vo8atio!- but be8ause they push her to6ards the
sui8idal a8t o sabotagi!g her retur! to a da!8i!g 8areer7 To6ards the ilmIs e!d- Vi8ky is tor! bet6ee!
the 8harismati8:demo!ia8 .ermo!tov- the dire8tor o the ballet 8ompa!y- a!d 2ulia!- a you!g 8omposer
or 6hom she gave up her 8areer7 .ermo!tov 8o!vi!8es her to retur! to the 8ompa!y to da!8e i! a
revival o -he 7ed Shoes- 2ulia!Is ballet based o! A!derse!Is airy tale7 H! the ope!i!g !ight- as she is
prepari!g to perorm- 2ulia! appears i! her dressi!g room to take her ba8k 6ith him7 .ermo!tov
arrives- a!d he a!d 2ulia! 8o!te!d or Vi8kyIs soul7 Tor! bet6ee! her love or 2ulia! a!d her !eed to
da!8e- she 8a!!ot de8ide 6hat to do7 2ulia!- realiUi!g that he has lost her- leaves or the rail6ay statio!-
6hile .ermo!tov 8o!soles Vi8ky+ JSorro6 6ill pass- believe me7 .ie is so u!importa!t7 A!d rom
!o6 o!6ards- you 6ill da!8e like !obody ever beore7K =o6ever- 6hile bei!g es8orted to the stage by
her dresser- a!d 6eari!g the red shoes- Vi8ky is sudde!ly seiUed by a! irresistible impulse a!d ru!s out
o the theater7 2ulia!- o! the platorm at the trai! statio!- sees her a!d ru!s helplessly to6ards her7
Vi8ky jumps rom a bal8o!y a!d alls i! ro!t o a! approa8hi!g trai!7 /hile lyi!g o! a stret8her-
bloody a!d battered- Vi8ky asks 2ulia! to remove the red shoes7 Shake! by Vi8kyIs death a!d broke! i!
spirit- .ermo!tov appears beore the audie!8e to a!!ou!8e that J,iss Cage is u!able to da!8e to!ight-
!or i!deed a!y other !ight7K 4evertheless- the 8ompa!y perorms -he 7ed Shoes 6ith a spotlight o! the
empty spa8e 6here Vi8ky 6ould have bee!7
This e!di!g is deeply ambiguous 6ith regard to the role o the shoes+ did Vi8ky ru! out o the
theater to joi! 2ulia! against @the 6ill oA the red shoes- a!d the shoes merely sabotaged the reu!io! o
lovers by 8ausi!g her deadly all- or did the shoes also lead her to ru! a6ayM The key to this ambiguity
is provided by the diere!8e bet6ee! the drive a!d the /ill+ it is !ot that JdriveK suggests a!
u!o8used pressure or impulse- 6hile J6illK implies 8o!8e!tratio! a!d domi!atio!T or Freud- the
JdriveK is !o less o8used tha! the J6ill-K it al6ays has a! obje8t- the d o!to 6hi8h it is stu8k a!d to
6hi8h it repetitively retur!s- arou!d 6hi8h it 8ir8ulates7 The JdriveK is i! ma!y 6ays almost a
photographi8 !egative o the J6illK+ it is the push to eje8t its obje8t- to lose it- to i!trodu8e a gap- !ot to
over8ome it7 Thus- 6e 8ould eve! say that the 6ill is a 8ou!ter:moveme!t to the drive- a! attempt to re:
i!s8ribe the Jasubje8talK drive i!to the e8o!omy o the 0go as the age!8y o 8o!trol a!d domi!atio!7
9! the sta!dard des8riptio! o the 8ir8ular pro8ess o alie!atio! a!d re:appropriatio!- the subje8t
loses itsel i! its other!ess i! order to re:appropriate its alie!ated substa!tial 8o!te!tT the drive is- at its
most u!dame!tal- this gesture o loss itsel- !ot as e?ter!ally imposed- but as J6illedK by the subje8t7
9! every heroi8 !arrative o re8uperatio!- there is a mome!t o loss or betrayal 6hi8h e!ables the later
redemptio!+ Adam a!d 0ve had to all i! order or Dhrist to redeem usT 2udas had to betray Dhrist i!
order or Dhrist to ulill his missio!- a!d so o!7 There is a perverse 8ore that 6e al6ays stumble upo!
i! these !arratives+ 6as the Fall !ot a feli& culpaM Gid !ot 1od play a perverse game 6ith huma!s-
provoki!g the Fall so that he 6ould the! be able to display his mer8y a!d love or alle! huma!ityM
/as !ot DhristIs betrayal by 2udas a key mome!t that e!abled huma!ityIs redemptio! through DhristIs
8ru8ii?io!- that is- a! a8t that had to happe! a!d that 6as 8learly- i ambiguously- 6illed by DhristM
This !egative a8t is the ma!iestatio! o the drive at its purest7
This- perhaps- is 6hat 4ietUs8he had i! mi!d 6he! he i!sisted that the /ill 6as u!8o!ditio!al-
a matter o 6illi!g it all @the idea u!derlyi!g the 0ter!al Fetur! o the SameA+ 6e should also 6ill- ully
assume as 6hat 6e 6a!ted- the dirty 6ork that 6e preer to leave to others i! order to e!joy the result
6hile hypo8riti8ally 8o!dem!i!g the 6ay it 6as obtai!ed7 The pure /ill to /ill mea!s that Dhrist
6illed 2udas to betray him- that 1od 6illed Adam a!d 0ve to all7 H! the other ha!d- 6e should also
avoid the perverse temptatio! o 6illi!g the Fall i! order to 8ast o!esel as the Savior- like the !a!!y
rom Catri8ia =ighsmithIs very irst short story JThe =eroi!e-K 6ho sets the house o! ire i! order to be
able to save the 8hildre! rom death a!d thus ear! the love a!d respe8t o their pare!ts7 There lies the
thi! li!e that separates the drive rom perversio!+ i! the drive proper- the loss is 6illed as su8h- i! itsel-
!ot o! a88ou!t o its i!strume!taliUatio!7
H!e 8ould thus ve!ture the hypothesis that- i desire is as su8h- i! its i!!ermost esse!8e-
hysteri8alEthat is- marked by the hysteri8al Jthis is !ot thatKEthe! the drive is as su8h @almostA
perverse7 This is 6here .a8a!Is readi!g o A!tigo!e as e?empliyi!g the ethi8s o desire @Jdo !ot give
6ay o! your desireKA should be 8orre8ted7 9! his Acrit JSubversio! o the Subje8t a!d Giale8ti8s o
Gesire-K .a8a! proposes b:G as the ormula o the drive+ i!stead o movi!g beyo!d dema!d to its gaps-
to 6hat is Ji! dema!d more tha! dema!d-K the drive i!sists o! the literality o the dema!dE6hi8h is
e?a8tly 6hat A!tigo!e does+ her u!8o!ditio!al dema!d is or the proper symboli8 burial o her brother-
a!d she i!sists o! it up to pereat mundus7 /hatever she is- she is !ot hysteri8al+ she 6a!ts 6hat she
6a!ts literally7 As su8h- her a8t is beyo!d the oppositio! bet6ee! 8o!s8ious!ess a!d the u!8o!s8ious-
a!d also beyo!d a!y igure o the big Hther- i!8lusive o the eter!al u!6ritte! .a6sEit is a! a8t o
abyssal reedom a!d- as su8h- political7 .a8a! proposes as the true ormula o atheism J1od is
u!8o!s8iousK+ J1od 8ould be u!8o!s8ious7 The hypothesis o the u!8o!s8ious!ess o 1od rele8ts the
hypothesis that k!o6ledge is !ot gited 6ith rele?ivity o 8o!s8ious!ess7K
'(
=o6- pre8isely- are 6e to
grasp this ambiguous ormulaM 9s it that 1od is our u!8o!s8ious @u!8o!s8ious for us- operati!g as our
Ju!k!o6! k!o6!s-K as the Ju!8o!s8ious prejudi8esK or magi8al belies 6hi8h determi!e our a8tivityA-
or is it that 1od i! himsel JhasK a! u!8o!s8ious- that his a8tivity a!d k!o6ledge are !ot tra!spare!t to
himselM Goes !ot the traditio! rom 3oehme to S8helli!g poi!t i! this se8o!d- more radi8al- dire8tio!M
9!soar as deus sive natura- the e!8ompassi!g u!iverse o reality- is Ju!8o!s8ious-K a!d i!soar as the
Freudia! u!8o!s8ious belo!gs to the pre:o!tologi8al level- this leads us to the 8o!8lusio! that reality is
i! itsel !ot ully o!tologi8ally 8o!stituted- !o!:All7
'#
Furthermore- should 6e !ot read the thesis J1od
is the u!8o!s8iousK together 6ith the thesis Jthe u!8o!s8ious is politi8sKM J9 am !ot eve! sayi!g
Vpoliti8s is the u!8o!s8ious-I but o!ly Vthe u!8o!s8ious is politi8sI7K
''
The diere!8e is 8ru8ial here7 9!
the irst 8ase- the u!8o!s8ious is elevated i!to the Jbig HtherK 6hi8h e?ists+ it is posited as a substa!8e
6hi8h really domi!ates a!d regulates politi8al a8tivity- i! the se!se o Jthe true mobiliUers o our
politi8al a8tivity are !ot ideology or i!terests- but u!8o!s8ious libidi!al motivatio!s7K 9! the se8o!d
8ase- the big Hther itsel loses its substa!tial 8hara8ter- it is !o lo!ger Jthe )!8o!s8ious-K it 8ha!ges
i!to a ragile i!8o!siste!t ield overdetermi!ed by politi8al struggles7
THE !NCONSCIO!S OF SELF,CONSCIO!SNESS

9t is alo!g these li!es that 6e 8a! dis8er! the 8o!tours o the theologi8o:politi8al i! .a8a!+ the
politi8al !ature o the u!8o!s8ious mea!s that it is !ot a! u!derlyi!g deeper or8e se8retly gover!i!g
6hat appear as 8o!ti!ge!8ies- e?pressi!g itsel through them+ 8o!ti!ge!8ies are irredu8ible- primary-
they really are 8o!ti!ge!8ies- a!d the u!8o!s8ious is stri8tly parasiti8- opportu!isti8ally e?ploiti!g
u!e?pe8ted 8o!ti!ge!8ies to deliver its message7 Freud is here radi8ally opposed to that 2u!gia! 4e6
Age obs8ura!tism or 6hi8h- pre8isely- Jthere are !o a88ide!ts-K a!d everythi!g has a deeper
mea!i!gEtherei! resides the diere!8e bet6ee! idealism a!d materialism @a!d- u!e?pe8tedly- =egel
is here o! the side o materialism+ or him- spe8ulative mea!i!g arti8ulates itsel by 6ay o e?ploiti!g
the 8o!ti!ge!t ambiguities or double mea!i!gs o our ordi!ary la!guageA7 This is 6hy the .a8a!ia!
Jde:8e!tered subje8tK does not imply the ki!d o de:8e!teri!g usually asso8iated 6ith psy8hoa!alysis+
Jthere is somethi!g i! me more tha! mysel- some oreig! po6er 6hi8h ru!s the sho6- so that 9 am !ot
respo!sible or my a8ts OK 9 a!ythi!g- .a8a! i!sists o! the subje8tIs total respo!sibility+ 9 am
respo!sible eve! or a8ts a!d de8isio!s o 6hi8h 9 am !ot a6are7
Apropos the ear that the brai! s8ie!8es 6ill eve!tually demo!strate that huma!s are i! reality
merely !euro:biologi8al me8ha!isms- that there is J!obody homeK be!eath the sura8e o our
phe!ome!al @sel:Ae?perie!8e- o!e should ully a88ept this ear a!d avoid the primordial idealist lure
6hi8h tempts us to substa!tialiUe our 8o!s8ious!ess i! some determi!ate 8ompo!e!t o reality @the
temptatio! to 6hi8h Gavid Dhalmers su88umbed i! a! e?emplary 6ayA7 There ee8tively is !othi!g
Jbe!eathK or Jbehi!d-K si!8e 8o!s8ious!ess is e!tirely phe!ome!al+ the mome!t o!e bra8kets the
phe!ome!al level o @sel:Aa6are!ess a!d limits o!esel to Jreality-K 8o!s8ious!ess by dei!itio!
disappears7 9t is as i o!e 6ere to take a 8lose look at a rai!bo6 i! order to lo8ate some mysterious d i!
reality that 8orrespo!ds to Jrai!bo6 i! itsel7K Do!s8ious!ess thus 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the hard task o
graspi!g the ee8tive!ess- the @Nuasi:A8ausal po6er- o the appeara!8e as su8hEa!d the Freudia!
u!8o!s8ious should also be u!derstood alo!g these li!es+ !ot as a substa!8e behi!d the appeara!8es o
8o!s8ious!ess- but as itsel a mode o appeari!g7 9! other 6ords- the term Ju!8o!s8iousK must be
u!derstood i! terms o the *a!tia! i!i!ite judgme!t rather tha! !egative judgme!t+ it is !ot that 6hat
it desig!ates Jis !ot 8o!s8ious-K it is rather that 6hat it desig!ates Jis u!8o!s8ious7K This is 6hat
diere!tiates the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious rom the !euro!al u!8o!s8ious o the material pro8esses goi!g
o! i! our brai! 6he! 6e thi!k+ the !euro!al u!8o!s8ious is merely !ot 8o!s8ious- 6hile the Freudia!
u!8o!s8ious is like the Ju!dead-K it is i!here!t to the psy8he7
=ere the Freudia! hypothesis o the u!8o!s8ious 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the limits o a!y torture or
truth serum pro8edure desig!ed to e?tra8t rom the subje8t his true positio!- J6hat he really thi!ks7K A
truth serum may get results i there is a! ultimate truth the subje8t is tryi!g to 8o!8ealEit may 6ork i
6e are deali!g 6ith a8ts the subje8t k!o6s a!d is tryi!g to hideEbut 6hat i the subje8t is radi8ally
dividedM For e?ample- 6hat i 9 prete!d to believe i! 1od- 6hile si!8erely thi!ki!g that there is !o 1od-
but this si!8ere 8o!vi8tio! o mi!e is itsel mistake!- a!d the truth lies i! the e?ter!al rituals 9 ollo6M
9! other 6ords- 6hat i 9 believe more tha! 9 believe 9 believeM Hr- 6hat i- 6hile lovi!g a perso!- 9 hate
lovi!g herE6hat 6ould the truth serum make me sayM
/e 8a! see rom this last e?ample that the divisio! o the subje8t is !ot to be take! as a simple
separatio! i!to t6o parts 6here Jthe right ha!d does !ot k!o6 6hat the let ha!d is doi!g7K The
divisio! rather relies o! a ki!d o rele?ivity+ 6he! 9 hate to love someo!e- my love is rele?ively
mediated by hatred7 Cippi! i!di8ates this rele?ivity 6he! he provides a 8o!8ise dei!itio! o 6hat
=egel mea!s by JspiritualK bei!g- that is- o ho6 the subje8t is a JspiritualK e!tity+ JThe subje8t Vtaki!g
itselI to be a 8ertai! 6ay is the Vobje8tI to be su8h a 6ay7K
'$
Spirit mea!s that a huma! bei!g- i! its
spe8ii8 bei!g:huma!- ultimately is 6hat it Jtakes itsel to be7K The key problem- o 8ourse- is ho6-
e?a8tly- 6e are to u!dersta!d this Jtaki!g o!esel7K Cerhaps Cippi! all too Nui8kly redu8es it to a
J!ormativeK dime!sio!+ Jtaki!g mysel to be a atherK mea!s that a behavior 6hi8h ollo6s 8ertai!
!orms @taki!g 8are o a!d edu8ati!g my 8hildre!- et87A is e?pe8ted o me7 3ut is it !ot more appropriate
to 8o!8eive this Jtaki!g asK as the a8t o assumi!g a 8ertai! symboli8 ide!tity @or titleA 8o!erred upo!
me- as the Jsymboli8 registratio!K o my ide!tityM A JatherK is someo!e 6ho takes himsel @a!d is
take! by othersA as a atherT !ormative dema!ds or e?pe8tatio!s are here se8o!dary+ eve! i 9 do !ot
meet or ollo6 them- 9 am still a ather- just a Jbad ather-K o!e 6ho ails to a8t the 6ay his title obliges
him to a8t7 9! other 6ords- or the !ormative dime!sio! to be operative- the Jbig HtherKEthe s8e!e o
symboli8 i!s8riptio!s a!d a8tio!s diere!t rom my immediate physi8al or psy8hi8 ide!tityEalready
has to be i! pla8e- a!d or .a8a!- it is this rele?ive Jgivi!g a88ou!t-K the i!s8riptio! o 6hat a subje8t
does i! the symboli8 te?ture- 6hi8h is the proper lo8us o the u!8o!s8ious7
There is thus a rele?ivity i!s8ribed i!to the very heart o psy8hoa!alysis7 /hat Cippi! ails to
take i!to a88ou!t is ho6 the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious is !ot ra6 stu to be Jmediated-K rele?ively
appropriated- by the subje8t- but the very site o this rele8tive i!s8riptio!7 4o 6o!der- the!- that i! his
8riti8al remarks o! psy8hoa!alysis Cippi! redu8es it to yet a!other mode o the Jsubsta!tialK
determi!atio! o the subje8t 6hi8h misses the *a!tia!:=egelia! dime!sio! o rele?ivity that sustai!s
the subje8tIs auto!omy a!d sel:respo!sibility+ as a subje8t- 9 8a!!ot reer to the u!8o!s8ious that
determi!es me as a dire8t motivatio!Ei u!8o!s8ious motives ee8tively determi!e me as an
autonomous sub1ect- 9 should be the o!e 6ho reely e!dorses the or8e o su8h motis- 6ho accepts
them as motivesEi! short- every reere!8e to the irresistible or8e o su8h motives has to i!volve a
mi!imum o 6hat Sartre 8alled mauvaise foi7 /hat i- ho6ever- it is Cippi! himsel 6ho misses a
8ru8ial homology bet6ee! the rele?ivity i!s8ribed i!to the very heart o *a!tia!:=egelia! subje8tivity
a!d the Jrele?ivityK o desire elaborated i! detail by .a8a!M /hat 6e have i! mi!d here 6ith regard to
*a!t is the so:8alled Ji!8orporatio! thesis-K the i!e?tri8able !ormativity o eve! the most eleme!tary
per8eptio!s+ eve! 6he! 9 merely state the obvious- maki!g the most basi8 stateme!t o a8t- Ja table is
there i! ro!t o me-K 9 am !ot purely passive- 9 also declare a a8t- 9 rele8tively sig!al that 9 uphold
this stateme!t7 This- ho6ever- is e?a8tly 6hat .a8a! has i! mi!d 6he! he i!sists that- i! every
stateme!t- the subje8tIs positio! o e!u!8iatio! is i!s8ribed+ 6he! 9 state+ J9 6ear sto!e:6ashed jea!s-K
my stateme!t al6ays also re!ders ho6 9 relate to this a8t @9 6a!t to appear as havi!g a do6!:to:earth
attitude- or ollo6i!g a ashio! OA7 This i!here!t rele?ive mome!t o Jde8laratio!K @the a8t that every
8ommu!i8atio! o a 8o!te!t al6ays simulta!eously Jde8lares itselK as su8hA is 6hat =eidegger
desig!ated as the Jas su8hK that spe8iies the properly huma! dime!sio!+ a! a!imal per8eives a sto!e-
but it does !ot per8eive this sto!e Jas su8h7K This is the Jrele?ivityK o the sig!iier+ every uttera!8e
!ot o!ly tra!smits some 8o!te!t- but- simulta!eously- re!ders ho6 the subje8t relates to this 8o!te!t @i!
the terms o 1erma! 9dealism- every 8o!s8ious!ess is al6ays already sel:8o!s8ious!essA7
'&
Cippi! is sympatheti8 to ,a!red Fra!kIs reje8tio! o J!eostru8turalismK as u!able to a88ou!t
or subje8tivity or mea!i!g- but 8riti8al o Fra!kIs versio! o pre:rele?ive sel:a8Nuai!ta!8e as a
8ru8ial dime!sio! o subje8tivity7 Cippi! sees this dime!sio! i! *a!tia!:=egelia!
rele?ivity>auto!omy>sel:respo!sibility- but 6hat he ails to see is ho6 this *a!tia! rele?ivity ope!s
up a spa8e or the .a8a!ia! subje8t o the u!8o!s8ious7
'%
The Freudia! Ju!8o!s8iousK is i!s8ribed i!to
this very rele?ivityT take- or e?ample- someo!e 9 Jlove to hate-K su8h as a villai! i! a =it8h8o8k ilm+
8o!s8iously- 9 just hate his guts- yet u!8o!s8iously 9 @do !ot love him- butA love to hate himT that is-
6hat is u!8o!s8ious here is the 6ay 9 rele?ively relate to my 8o!s8ious attitude7 @Hr take the opposite
8ase o someo!e 9 Jhate to loveKElike the hero i! a ilm !oir 6ho 8a!!ot help lovi!g the evil femme
fatale but hates himsel or lovi!g her7A This is 6hat .a8a! mea!s 6he! he says that ma!Is desire is
al6ays a desire to desire+ i! a! e?a8t ormal repli8a o *a!tia! rele?ivity- 9 !ever simply a!d dire8tly
desire a! obje8t- 9 al6ays rele?ively relate to this desireE9 8a! desire to desire it- 9 8a! hate to desire
it- 9 8a! be i!diere!t to this desire o mi!e- just tolerati!g it !eutrally7 The philosophi8al 8o!seNue!8e
o this rele?ivity o desire is 8ru8ial+ it tells us ho6 the oppositio! bet6ee! the 8o!s8ious a!d the
u!8o!s8ious is related to the oppositio! bet6ee! 8o!s8ious!ess a!d sel:8o!s8ious!ess+ the
u!8o!s8ious is !ot some ki!d o pre:rele?ive- pre:theti8- primitive substrate later elaborated upo! by
8o!s8ious rele?ivityT Nuite the 8o!trary- 6hat is most radi8ally Ju!8o!s8iousK i! a subje8t is his sel:
8o!s8ious!ess itsel- the 6ay he rele?ively relates to his 8o!s8ious attitudes7 The Freudia! subje8t is
thus ide!ti8al to the Dartesia! cogito- or- more pre8isely- to its later elaboratio! i! *a!tia!:=egelia!
sel:8o!s8ious!ess7
Guri!g a re8e!t multi:li!gual publi8 debate i! Spai!- 1ia!!i VattimoIs remarks 6ere by
mistake tra!slated ba8k to him i! 0!glish- to 6hi8h he mo8ki!gly replied+ J9 do!It !eed a tra!slator to
u!dersta!d myselRK The Freudia! divided subje8t is someo!e 6ho- pre8isely- does !eed a tra!slator to
u!dersta!d him or herselE6hi8h is e?a8tly the role the psy8hoa!alyst plays or them7 There is a joke
6hi8h tells us more about 6hat .a8a! mea!s 6ith regard to the Jdivided subje8tK tha! pages a!d pages
o theoreti8al elaboratio! @though- i! order to u!dersta!d 6hat it tells us- o 8ourse 6e !eed pages a!d
pages o theoreti8al elaboratio! OA+ T6o me!- havi!g had a dri!k or t6o- go to the theater- 6here they
be8ome thoroughly bored 6ith the play7 H!e o them eels a! urge!t !eed to uri!ate- so he tells his
rie!d to mi!d his seat 6hile he goes to i!d a toilet+ J9 thi!k 9 sa6 o!e do6! the 8orridor outside7K The
ma! 6a!ders do6! the 8orridor- but i!ds !o /DT 6a!deri!g ever urther i!to the re8esses o the
theater- he 6alks through a door a!d sees a pla!t pot7 Ater 8opiously uri!ati!g i!to it a!d retur!i!g to
his seat- his rie!d says to him+ J/hat a pityR 5ou missed the best part7 Some ello6 just 6alked o!
stage a!d pissed i! that pla!t potRK
$0
The subje8t !e8essarily misses its o6! a8t- it is !ever there to see
its o6! appeara!8e o! the stage- its o6! i!terve!tio! is the bli!d spot o its gaUe7
/hat- the!- divides the subje8tM .a8a!Is a!s6er is simple a!d radi8al+ its @symboli8A ide!tity
itselEprior to bei!g divided bet6ee! diere!t psy8hi8 spheres- the subje8t is divided bet6ee! the
void o its cogito @the elusively pu!8tual pure subje8t o e!u!8iatio!A a!d the symboli8 eatures 6hi8h
ide!tiy it i! or or the big Hther @the sig!iier 6hi8h represe!ts it or other sig!iiersA7 9! Ag!iesUka
=olla!dIs Europa! Europa- the hero @a you!g 1erma! 2e6 6ho passes as a! Arya! a!d ights i! the
/ehrma8ht i! FussiaA asks a ello6 soldier 6ho had bee! a! a8tor prior to the 6ar+ J9s it hard to play
someo!e elseMK The a8tor a!s6ers+ J9tIs mu8h easier tha! playi!g o!esel7K /e e!8ou!ter this
other!ess at its purest 6he! 6e e?perie!8e the other as a !eighbor+ as the impe!etrable abyss beyo!d
a!y symboli8 ide!tity7 /he! a perso! 9 have k!o6! or a lo!g time does somethi!g totally u!e?pe8ted-
disturbi!gly evil- so that 9 have to ask mysel- JGid 9 really ever k!o6 himMK does he !ot ee8tively
be8ome Ja!other perso! 6ith the same !ameKM
H!e strategy or 8opi!g 6ith this gap that separates me rom my !ame is to add a!other @se8retA
!ame desig!ed to 8apture the 8ore o my bei!g 6hi8h eludes my publi8 !ame7 9! a 1erma! ilm about
high:s8hool deli!Nue!8y- a ga!g member says to his appre!ti8e+ J,y !ame is 2a8k7 3ut you 8a! 8all
me 2a8k7K A !i8e play 6ith tautology+ i! the 8losed ga!g u!iverse- the !orm is that o!e is o!ly allo6ed
to 8all the boss by his !i8k!ame+ J,y !ame is 2a8k- but you 8a! 8all me 2a8koRKEthe pseudo:i!tima8y
o this i!vitatio! to use the !i8k!ame implies a! i!ju!8tio! to a88ept a!d parti8ipate i! the relatio!s o
domi!atio! a!d servitude that 8hara8teriUe the ga!g u!iverse7 The permissio! to address the boss
dire8tly by his proper !ame is thus the highest privilege7 9magi!e 1od telli!g you- J,y !ame is 1od-
but you 8a! 8all me 1odRKEsomethi!g dei!itely mu8h more righte!i!g tha! J,y !ame is 1od- but
you 8a! 8all me the Hld H!e i! the Sky7K
94T0F.)G0 (

/orrowing from the Future! ,hanging the )ast

9! his 6o!derul .e plagiat par anticipation- Cierre 3ayard developed i! detail the idea that
6riters 8a! plagiariUe !ot o!ly 6orks rom the past- but also 6orks rom the uture7
1
The a88usatio! o
plagiarism is grou!ded o! a resembla!8e bet6ee! t6o 6orks 6hi8h is so stro!g that it 8a!!ot be
dismissed as a mere 8oi!8ide!8e or a shari!g o the same styleEso 6he! 6e have t6o 6orks rom
diere!t periods 6hi8h very 8losely resemble ea8h other- 6hat is the key argume!t or taki!g this as a
parado?i8al 8ase o the earlier 6ork plagiariUi!g the !ot:yet e?isti!g 6ork rom its uture- a!d !ot- as i!
the sta!dard approa8h- treati!g the latter as plagiariUi!g the ormerM 3ayard proposes the 8riterio! o
disso!a!8e+ i 6e 8a! 8learly establish that- i! relatio! to the eatures shared by the t6o 6orks- the later
o!e 8o!tai!s these eatures i! a more ully developed orm- 6hile the earlier o!e 8o!tai!s o!ly
u!developed ragme!ts 6hi8h do !ot it i!to the totality o the 6ork- but appear to strike a disso!a!t
to!e @or i this 6ork itsel- as a 6hole- strikes a disso!a!t to!e i! its o6! 8ultural 8o!te?tA- the! 6e 8a!
assume 6ith reaso!able 8ertai!ty that the earlier 6ork is a plagiarism o the later o!e7 Amo!g other
amusi!g reere!8es @like a passage rom VoltaireIs Nadig 6hi8h 8learly poi!ts or6ard to Sherlo8k
=olmesIs method o dedu8tio!A- 3ayardIs great e?ample is rom a lesser:k!o6! !ovel by 1uy de
,aupassa!t 6hi8h 8o!tai!s a! u!8a!!ily JCroustia!K passage o! ho6 a 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter 6ith a!
everyday obje8t 8a! trigger a multipli8ity o hal:orgotte! memories about the past7 This !ovel 6as
6ritte! three de8ades beore Croust bega! to publish his great 8y8le- a!d the passage is 8learly Jout o
sy!8K 6ith the rest o the !ovel- so it really is as i ,aupassa!t plagiariUed CroustEas i- i! a 6eird
rupture o the li!ear temporal 8o!ti!uum- a door i!to the uture mome!tarily ope!ed up- givi!g
,aupassa!t a glimpse i!to 6hat lay ahead i! literature7
There is a! u!8a!!y mome!t o plagiariUi!g the uture i! =it8h8o8kIs 6ork7 6ertigo 8o!tai!s a!
e!igmati8 episode i! 6hi8h ,adelei!e is see! by S8ottie as she ope!s a 6i!do6 a!d the! i!e?pli8ably
disappears rom the house7 Goes this s8e!e !ot poi!t or6ard to )sycho- to the appeara!8e o the
motherIs silhouette i! the 6i!do6Ei! both 8ases- a body appears out o !o6here a!d disappears ba8k
i!to the voidM The a8t that i! 6ertigo this episode remai!s u!e?plai!ed tempts o!e to read it i! a ki!d
o futur antArieur- as already poi!ti!g to6ards )sycho+ is !ot the old lady 6ho is the hotel 8lerk o the
house i! 6ertigo a ki!d o stra!ge 8o!de!satio! o 4orma! 3ates a!d his mother- the 8lerk @4orma!A
6ho is at the same time the old lady @motherA- thus providi!g i! adva!8e a 8lue to their ide!tity- 6hi8h
is the great mystery o the ilmM
The Nuestio! 6hi8h immediately arises here is- o 8ourse- ho6 seriously 6e should take these
8laims7 Surely !ot too seriously- si!8e- i! this 8ase- 6e 6ould have to embra8e the 4e6 Age topi8 o
sy!8hro!i8ity a!d mysti8al 8ommu!io! bet6ee! spirits rom diere!t epo8hs- able to 8o!verse 6ith
ea8h other i! a! eter!al prese!t7 4o!etheless- the idea o a Jplagiarism by a!ti8ipatio!K should !ot to be
dismissed as a mere provo8atio!T still less so does it imply a!y ki!d o a hidde! teleology i! 6hi8h the
prese!t poi!ts to6ards a uture determi!ed i! adva!8e7 H! the 8o!trary- this idea is proou!dly a!ti:
teleologi8al a!d materialistEall that !eeds addi!g to it is the key 8o!8ept o retroa8tivity7 9talo
Dalvi!oIs story JA 3eautiul ,ar8h GayK oers a! idiosy!8rati8 des8riptio! o the 8o!spira8y agai!st
2ulius Daesar7 Dalvi!o o8uses o! the u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8es o the a8t o killi!g Daesar+ 6hile the
8o!spiratorsI i!te!tio! 6as to kill a tyra!t a!d thereby restore Fome to its republi8a! glory- their a8t
ee8tively abolishes the very 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h sustai!ed its i!te!ded mea!i!g7 As ,olly Fothe!berg
e?plai!s+

The very 6orld i! 6hi8h it made se!se to get rid o Daesar also va!ishes 6ith those dagger
strokesE!ot be8ause Daesar held that 6orld together- but be8ause the assassi!s 8ould !ot oresee that
their a8t 6ould also tra!sorm the 6ay the a8t 6ould be judged7 They 8ould !ot a8tor i! the histori8ity
o their a8tio!T !either they !or a!yo!e else 8ould predi8t or gover! ho6 the uture 6ould i!terpret the
assassi!atio!7 Cut a!other 6ay- 6e 8ould say that there simply 6as !o 6ay or them to take i!to
a88ou!t the retroversive ee8t o uture i!terpretatio!s7
2
=ere 6e e!8ou!ter the key eature o the symboli8+ the u!dame!tal Jope!!essK it i!trodu8es
i!to a 8losed order o reality7 H!8e 6e e!ter the symboli8- thi!gs !ever simply are- they all J6ill have
bee!-K they as it 6ere borro6 @part oA their bei!g rom the uture7 Fothe!berg employs a simple
e?ample o a te!der stateme!t+ JDarl smiled as he ge!tly stroked the velvety ski! o his lover O-K
6hi8h 8o!ti!ues 6ith a suppleme!t that brutally 8ha!ges the mea!i!g o the irst part+ JO6ith the kee!
edge o a steak k!ie7K The 8ause o this irredu8ible Jope!!essK o the symboli8 is !ot its e?8essive
8omple?ity @6e !ever k!o6 i!to 6hat de8e!tered 8o!te?t our stateme!t 6ill be i!s8ribedA- but the
mu8h more rei!ed- properly diale8ti8al impossibility o taki!g i!to a88ou!t the 6ay our o6!
i!terve!tio! 6ill tra!sorm the ield7 The speaki!g subje8t 8a!!ot take i!to a88ou!t the 6ay it is itsel
J8ou!tedK i! the sig!iyi!g seriesT 6ith regard to its o6! i!8lusio!- it is irredu8ibly split- redoubled7
=o6- the!- to resolve this e!igma 6ithout resorti!g to 4e6 Age obs8ura!tismM The key is the
properly diale8ti8al !otio! o repetitio! through 6hi8h thi!gs Jbe8ome 6hat they are7K ,aupassa!t
be8omes a plagiarist:i!:adva!8e o Croust- he be8omes 6hat he is @a Croustia! avant la lettreA- o!ly
once )roust arrives7 9! =egelese- the shit is rom 9!:itsel to For:itsel+ through his repetitio! i!
Croust- ,aupassa!t retroa8tively be8omes Croustia!7 This mea!s that 6e have to i!trodu8e a radi8al
split bet6ee! ,aupassa!tIs book as it is i! itsel a!d his book as it is 6he! read retroa8tively- ater
CroustEi7e7- the a8t o CroustIs te?t ge!erates another ,aupassa!t- the Croustia! o!e7 /e are thus
deali!g 6ith three @a!d !ot t6oA te?ts here+ ,aupassa!tIs origi!al !ovel- CroustIs 8y8le o !ovels- a!d
the Croustia! ,aupassa!t7 3ut 6hy talk like this- 6hy !ot simply say that Croust i!lue!8es our readi!g
o ,aupassa!tM 3e8ause su8h a retroa8tive readi!g does !ot simply add a!other dime!sio! to ho6 6e
re8eive ,aupassa!t+ rather- 6e !eed to grasp ,aupassa!tIs te?t as !ot:All- as ope! to6ards the uture-
as ull o gaps a!d i!8o!siste!8ies 6aiti!g to be illed i!7
3ayard himsel retreats here 6ith regard to his o6! theory 6he!- i! a! all too !aSve 6ay- he
tries to outli!e the uture *aka 6as plagiariUi!g by a!ti8ipatio!7 /hat should make us suspi8ious o
his attempt is the image o *akaIs u!iverse to 6hi8h he reersEthe bori!g sta!dard image o *aka as
the pre8ursor o t6e!tieth:8e!tury Jtotalitaria!ismK @a! oppressed i!dividual e?posed to the 6hims o
arbitrary po6er- et87A7 9!voki!g the eve! greater oppressio! o 6ome! des8ribed i! *akaIs te?ts-
3ayard e!gages i! a ridi8ulously Coliti8ally Dorre8t spe8ulatio! that *aka had plagiariUed a uture @!ot
yet 6ritte!A !ovel about a! oppressed ,uslim 6oma!7 This is 3ayard at his 6orst- ig!ori!g all the
proou!d ambiguities 8o!8er!i!g the role o 6ome! i! *akaIs te?ts+ they are !ot o!ly serva!ts- but
also 8orrupted 6ith lust- helpi!g those i! po6er to harass the hero7 As Fei!hard Sta8h demo!strated
lo!g ago- *akaIs image o 6ome! is deeply i!debted to Htto /ei!i!ger- the ultimate a!ti:emi!ist
@a!d a!ti:SemiteA7 9! outli!i!g his ridi8ulous proposal- 3ayard ig!ores his o6! basi8 rule+ i!stead o
looki!g or disso!a!8es i! *akaIs 6ork- he simply e?trapolates the 8o!tours o the uture 6ork rom
the sta!dard 8li8hLs about *aka7 The great disso!a!8es i! *akaIs 6ork are 8o!stituted by his a!imal
stories @about dogs- a!d so orthA- 6hi8h 8learly sta!d apart rom the 8li8hLd image o the hero 8aught
up i! a totalitaria! ma8hi!e7 Amo!g them- o!e should espe8ially o8us o! the very last literary te?t he
6as 6riti!g 6hile 8lose to death- the story about the si!gi!g mouse 2osephi!eEi! this disso!a!t image
o the role o the artist i! a 8ommu!ist so8iety- 6e i!d a 6oma! o the uture diere!t rom all the
8orrupted sedu8tive heroi!es rom *akaIs great !ovels7
"
A!other versio! o the same retroa8tive me8ha!ism is at 6ork i! 8ases 6here a substa!tial
de8isio!- i!volvi!g the rise o a !e6 ,aster:Sig!iier 6hi8h rearra!ges the age!tIs e!tire symboli8
e8o!omy- is take! a!d the! u!do!e- like se!di!g a letter 6hi8h 8ommits me to a !e6 relatio!ship a!d
the!- 6he! 9 dis8over that the letter 6as lost i! the post- re!egi!g o! the 8ommitme!t7 A 8ase o
u!doi!g 8a! be ou!d i! -wo .overs @2ames 1ray- 200&A- a ilm loosely based o! GostoyevskyIs
J/hite 4ights-K 6hi8h takes pla8e i! the Fussia! 2e6ish part o the 3righto! bea8h suburb o 4e6
5ork7 The hero- .eo!ard- emotio!ally u!stable- makes several u!su88essul sui8ide attempts @a8ts a!d
the! 8ha!ges his mi!dA7 At the start o the ilm- he jumps i!to the 6ater i! a! attempted sui8ide- the!
8ha!ges his mi!d a!d sura8es to be helped by a passer:by7 =e is split bet6ee! t6o 6ome!7 =is pare!ts
set him up 6ith Sa!dra- the daughter o their pote!tial busi!ess part!er- 6ho is lovi!g a!d 8ari!g- but
8o!ve!tio!alT the other 6oma! is ,i8helle- his outrageously dari!g a!d u!8o!ve!tio!al !e6 !eighbor7
/he! he lear!s that ,i8helle is dati!g Fo!ald- a married part!er i! her la6 irm- he tries to break all
8o!ta8t 6ith her a!d be8omes more deeply i!volved 6ith Sa!dra7 =o6ever- 6he! a desperate ,i8helle
8alls him rom the hospital 6here she is bei!g treated or a mis8arriage- they be8ome atta8hed agai!T
disappoi!ted 6ith Fo!ald or !ot helpi!g her e!ough i! her distress- ,i8helle i!orms .eo!ard that she
has broke! o the relatio!ship a!d is goi!g to Sa! Fra!8is8o7 Ge8idi!g to go 6ith her- .eo!ard buys
t6o ti8kets o!li!e- pur8hases a! e!gageme!t ri!g- a!d pa8ks or his trip7 At a party the !e?t day-
Sa!draIs ather- believi!g that .eo!ard is pla!!i!g to marry Sa!dra- oers him a part!ership i! the
soo!:to:be merged amily busi!esses7 .eo!ard du8ks out to meet ,i8helle- 6ho tells him that she is !ot
goi!g to Sa! Fra!8is8o ater all be8ause Fo!ald has let his 6ie a!d 6ill marry her7 Gistraught-
.eo!ard goes to the bea8h to kill himselT ho6ever- as he steps i! the o8ea!- he drops a glove that
Sa!dra had bought or him earlierT pi8ki!g it up- he retur!s to the party a!d gives Sa!dra the
e!gageme!t ri!g he bought or ,i8helle7
The movie deals 6ith the sta!dard theme o the 8hoi8e bet6ee! a se8ure- emotio!ally stable
marriage a!d a 6ild passio!ate bo!d desti!ed to e!d i! 8atastrophe7 9t is a 8hoi8e bet6ee! happi!ess
a!d 6hat .a8a! 8alls 1ouissance- e?8essive e!joyme!t beyo!d the pleasure pri!8iple- 6ith the
u!derlyi!g impli8atio! that- agai!st the e?8ess o 1ouissance- hedo!ism @the reig! o pleasureA a!d la6
@i! the !arro6er se!se o publi8 moralityA are on the same side7 To be able to put everythi!g at risk a!d
jump i!to the u!k!o6! 6aters o a passio!ate aair reNuires a! a8t 6hi8h may irreparably 8ha!ge the
most basi8 8oordi!ates o a subje8tIs lie7 =o6ever- the true i!terest a!d origi!ality o the plot lies
else6here+ i! the pre8ise temporality o the heroIs de8isio! a!d its retroa8tive 8a!8ellatio!7 Ater
maki!g the ateul de8isio! @the 8hoi8e o ,i8helleA a!d thus appare!tly rea8hi!g the poi!t o !o
retur!- .eo!ard lear!s that his de8isio! has bee! re!dered mea!i!gless @,i8helle is !o lo!ger
availableA- a!d so u!does it7 Si!8e Sa!dra k!o6s !o!e o this- .eo!ard just a8ts as i !othi!g has
happe!ed- as i there 6as !o de8isio!- a!d eve! opportu!isti8ally gives her the ri!g mea!t or ,i8helle7
The appeara!8e o a smooth a!d seamless relatio!ship 6ith Sa!dra is restored7
To get at the 8ore o this situatio!- 6e 8a! imagi!e three diere!t versio!s o the same plot-
three 6hat:is+
@1A /hat i- eve! ater lear!i!g that ,i8helle 6ill retur! to Fo!ald- .eo!ard 6ere to sti8k to his
de8isio! a!d drop Sa!dra- i! re8og!itio! o the authe!ti8ity o his love or ,i8helleM Cerhaps- this
6ould have bee! a true a8tM
@2A /hat i- ater the de8isio! is take!- .eo!ard is over8ome 6ith a!?iety as he be8omes ully
a6are o the 8o!seNue!8es o his a8tM 9! a pa!i8- he 6ould the! desperately sear8h or a 6ay out a!d
i!d that he 8a! u!do the de8isio!- retroa8tively erasi!g its tra8es7 @The diere!8e 6ith the ilm plot is
that- i! this versio!- he u!does the a8t !ot be8ause ,i8helle dropped him- but o his o6! a88ord7A
@"A Fi!ally- 6hat i- se8retly k!o6i!g about .eo!ardIs distress a!d his 8ommitme!t to ,i8helle-
Sa!dra helped him by eig!i!g ig!ora!8eM .et us imagi!e that .eo!ard had 6ritte! Sa!dra a letter
i!ormi!g her o his de8isio! to leave 6ith ,i8helle- but Sa!dra prete!ded that she missed the letter-
thus givi!g him the 8ha!8e to u!do his JmadK de8isio! 6ith gra8e a!d 6ithout a s8a!dal7 Su8h a! a8t o
ig!ori!g- o prete!di!g !ot to k!o6- is 6hat is usually reerred to as 6isdom7
The 8ir8ular relatio!ship bet6ee! the uture a!d the past that 6e e!8ou!ter here goes Jall the
6ay do6!-K to the very emerge!8e o the speaki!g subje8t out o the Jhuma! a!imalK+ i! .a8a!Is
a88ou!t o this emerge!8e- it sometimes appears that the primordial a8t is the e!8ou!ter 6ith the
symboli8 order- the parasiti8 i!trusio! o the sig!iier 6hi8h upsets the bala!8e o the Jhuma! a!imal-K
i!trodu8i!g a gap i!to it- e!ge!deri!g a pathologi8al e?8ess o Ju!deadK lie over mere biologi8al lieT
sometimes- it appears that it is- o! the 8o!trary- the derailme!t o lie itsel- the emerge!8e o a
traumati8 e?8ess o Jmore tha! lie-K 6hi8h is the primordial a8t- a!d the symboli8 orderIs u!8tio! is
rather to J!ormaliUeK a!d tame this e?8ess7 The solutio! to this alter!ative is retroa8tive 8ausality+ the
e?8ess o lie 8omes irst- but it 8a! be re8og!iUed as su8h o!ly retroa8tively- o!8e the symboli8 order is
already thereT 6ithout this ater:ee8t- the e?8ess o lie is merely a !atural a88ide!t7 H! a irst
approa8h- it may appear that the irst a88ou!t is the JidealistK o!e @the sig!iyi!g order i!terve!es i!to
a!imal lie rom a mysterious outside- like a ha!d o 1od imparti!g spirit i!to bodiesA- 6hile the
se8o!d !arrative is the JmaterialistK o!e @the disturba!8e o material:biologi8al lie 8omes irst- the
symboli8 order arises as a se8o!dary dee!se me8ha!ismA7 =o6ever- the properly =egelia! @that is-
diale8ti8al:materialistA solutio! is more 8omple? as it i!volves retroa8tivity7 True- there is irst a!
e?8ess- a deraili!g- o the !atural 8ir8uit o i!sti!8tsT ho6ever- this derailme!t is 8o!irmed as the
ou!datio! o bei!g:huma! @as its i!huma! 8oreA o!ly by its ee8t- by the rise o the symboli8 order
6hi8h e!deavors to !ormaliUe it7 /ithout the symboli8 order- the e?8ess remai!s a! aberratio! o
!ature- a mea!i!gless reakish a88ide!t7 The sear8h or this JpureK e?8ess o lie !ot yet
8o!tami!ated>obus8ated by the symboli8 order is thus a mythi8al sear8h or a a!tasmati8 e!tity+ it is
!ot that su8h a sear8h is 8o!dem!ed to ailureE6e may 6ell su88eed i! isolati!g this e?8essT but there
6ould be !othi!g Jhuma!K about it- it 6ould be just a mea!i!gless deormatio!7
/e e!8ou!ter here yet agai! the i!!ermost parado? o the symboli8 order- !amely its
retroa8tivity7 The symboli8 order is !ot a 8ause 6hi8h i!terve!es rom the outside- viole!tly deraili!g
the huma! a!imal a!d thus setti!g i! motio! its be8omi!g:huma!T it is a! ee8t- but a parado?i8al
ee8t 6hi8h retroa8tively posits its presuppositio!- its o6! 8ause7
(
This temporal parado? holds eve!
more stro!gly or the relatio!ship bet6ee! a literary te?t a!d real lie+ i! his -omorrow is Written-
6ritte! beore )lagiari2ing the Future- 3ayard preigures the a!alyses o the later book- o8usi!g o!
those literary te?ts i! 6hi8h the author seems to predi8t his o6! uture- espe8ially the mode o his
death7
#
=ere it is !ot a uture te?t 6hi8h is plagiariUed- but reality itsel 6hi8h is @!ot plagiariUed butA
des8ribed beore it has happe!ed7 @4ote ho6- i! 3ayardIs o6! 8ase- the later book seems to pre8ede the
earlier o!e7A Apart rom the obvious 8ase o Hs8ar /ilde 6ho- i! his -he )icture of Dorian (ray-
displayed a! u!8a!!y a6are!ess o the 8atastrophe 6hi8h a6aited him years later- the most i!teresti!g
e?ample here is 2a8k .o!do!Is Martin Eden- 6ith its des8riptio! o the 6riterIs sui8ide by
dro6!i!gEa 6eird 8ase o a! autobiography 6hi8h stret8hes i!to the 6riterIs uture7 A! author usually
6rites his autobiography i! old age- 6he! his lie has 8ome ull 8ir8le- re8apitulati!g his traje8tory rom
the perspe8tive o maturity 6hi8h allo6s him to see it i! its totality- assig!i!g ea8h eve!t to its proper
pla8e7 The e?traordi!ary thi!g about Martin Eden @a !ovel- but 8learly a! autobiographi8al o!eA is that
2a8k .o!do! 6rote it i! the middle o his lie- at the height o his su88ess a!d 8reative po6ersEat this
poi!t- i!stead o e!di!g i! the prese!t- he did !ot stop but 8ourageously 6e!t o!- 8o!ti!ui!g his lie
story i!to the uture- right up to its tragi8 e!d7
'
Cerhaps a little prematurely- 3ayard opposes his approa8h to that o psy8hoa!alysis- 6hi8h sees
the roots o the prese!t !arrative i! the real o a past trauma 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be des8ribed @a!d may
eve! be 8o!stitutedA apr>s coup- retroa8tively7 =ere- by 8o!trast- the trauma lies !ot i! the past but i!
the uture- rom 6here it mysteriously 8asts its shado6 over the prese!t 6riti!g7 9! his 8o!8eptual
elaboratio!s 6hi8h ollo6 the a!alyses o literary 8ases- 3ayard proposes t6o !e6 grammati8al:
temporal 8ategories i! order to a88ou!t or su8h stra!ge o88urre!8es+ the past to come @i! the utureA
a!d the future which already happened @i! the pastA- that is- 6hi8h belo!gs to the past7
/hat- the!- 8ha!ges i! the passage rom the Feal o a! a88ide!t to its i!s8riptio! i!to a
!arrative as a part o the subje8tIs FateM The Feal a88ide!t is purely 8o!ti!ge!t- 6hile its symboli8
i!s8riptio! i!to a lie !arrative makes it !ot so mu8h !e8essary as a! e?pressio! o the subje8tIs 6ill7
0ve! i the uture is that o a terriyi!g 8atastrophe- the subje8t 6ills it i! the se!se o 6illi!gly
a88epti!g the 8omi!g 8atastrophe- o reely assumi!g its !e8essity7
$
3ayard is !ot a spiritual
obs8ura!tist+ 6he! he talks about Jthe uture bei!g already 6ritte!-K he is !ot i!voki!g some ki!d o
divi!e big Hther able to see a8ross time i!to the past as 6ell as the utureT o! the 8o!trary- he
emphasiUes huma! i!itude a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y- 6hi8h mea!s that the gap bet6ee! the symboli8
@!arrativeA a!d the Feal is irredu8ibleEthe uture that has a retroa8tive 8ausality o! the prese!t 8a! also
not happe!- due to some totally u!oresee! 8o!ti!ge!8y+

/hat the! happe!s 6ith the eve!tsEa!d 6hi8h is the 6orld that is sui8ie!tly ge!erous to gather
themMEor 6hi8h the 6riti!g sho6s that they should have bee! produ8ed- but 6hi8h 6ere i! the last
mome!t stopped i! their path to6ards realiUatio!M The lie o *aka- the very symbol o the pre8ursor-
bears 6it!ess to ho6 a! e!tire huma! e?iste!8e 8a! be orga!iUed i! su8h a 6ay that it poi!ts to6ards
a! eve!t 6hi8h should take pla8e- but is i!ally th6arted7
&
The uture Feal 6hi8h 8auses its prese!t literary registratio! @i!verti!g the proper temporal
order- so that the uture 8ause pre8edes its ee8t- the prese!t !arrativeA may be a 8atastrophe that 6ill
beall the author @death- so8ial disgra8e- et87A- but may also be a happy 8ulmi!atio! o his eorts7 The
subje8t @authorA 8a! thus relate i! t6o 6ays to the uture eve!t+ he 8a! ully e!gage i! bri!gi!g it about-
i! realiUi!g his Fate- but be th6arted by @6hat appears as- but may !ot beA a pure e?ter!al 8o!ti!ge!8yT
or- a6are o his Fate as the 8atastrophe a6aiti!g him at the e!d o the path- he 6orks desperately to
th6art @or at least postpo!eA its arrivalEu!til- as i! the 6ell:k!o6! t6ist o the Hedipus myth or the
appoi!tme!t i! Samara- he dis8overs that the very eort to avoid his Fate e!sures that it 6ill a8tually
be realiUed7 This basi8 temporal parado? o the symboli8 order- its Jborro6i!g rom the utureKEor
ho6 the goal to6ards 6hi8h our a8tivity is dire8ted does !ot pre8ede it but emerges through this very
a8tivity o tryi!g to rea8h itEbri!gs us ba8k to =egel- to the li!k bet6ee! i!te!tio! a!d a8t 6hi8h lies
at the 8ore o his literary reere!8es7
H!e o the e!igmas o =egelIs )henomenology is ho6- i! roughly the middle o the book- there
is a sudde! surge i! reere!8es to literary e?amples- 6hi8h had bee! abse!t up to that poi!t7 Alle!
Speight 6as right to ide!tiy as the key a8tor the topi8 o agency- o the subje8t as a! auto!omous
age!t 6ho has to justiy its a8ts 6ith reaso!s a!d the! assume their u!e?pe8ted 8o!seNue!8esEa!d the
!arrative @the story told i! literature or i! a theatri8al pie8eA is ultimately al6ays the drama o the
subje8tIs a8tio!- relati!g the subje8tIs @pai!ul or ridi8ulous- tragi8 or 8omi8A e?perie!8e o the
u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8es set i! motio! by his a8tio!7
%
A story is the story o thi!gs go!e 6ro!g- o
i!terve!i!g to a8hieve A a!d getti!g 37 This is 6hy literary reere!8es arise !ot o!ly i! the lo!g se8tio!
o! JSpirit-K the Nua!titative a!d Nualitative 8e!ter o the e!tire book- but already i! the pre8edi!g
se8tio! o! JFeaso!-K 6ith its se8o!d divisio! o! JThe a8tualiUatio! o ratio!al sel:8o!s8ious!ess
through its o6! a8tivity-K 6hi8h ollo6s the 6eird 8lima? o! JHbservi!g Feaso!-K the !otorious
subdivisio! o! physiog!omy a!d phre!ology7 As Speight per8eptively !oti8es- the passage is
a!!ou!8ed i! =egelIs brie reere!8e to =amletIs meditatio!s o! 5ori8kIs skull+ i! 8o!trast to the
se8tio! o! phre!ology- 6here the skull as a dead obje8t- i! its immediate material bei!g- is supposed to
provide the key to the huma! mi!d- 5ori8kIs skull is or =amlet a sel:erasi!g sig!- a remi!der o all
the past a8ts a!d e?perie!8es o the dead subje8t7
The three mai! igures rom literature that are the! reerred to are 1oetheIs Faust- S8hillerIs
5arl Moor- a!d Derva!tesIs Don [ui&ote7 9! all these 8ases- it is as i JSpiritK 8asts its shado6
ba8k6ards o!to the 8hapter o! Feaso!+ the literary reere!8es 8o!tai!ed i! the latter poi!t or6ard-
to6ards their proper orm i! Spirit7 9! other 6ords- at the level o Feaso!- 6e do !ot yet have a proper
spiritual substa!8e- a histori8al totality 6hi8h e?ists as a! a8tual orm o lie- but just abstra8t orms o
subje8tive lie- orms 6hi8h 8a! appear 6ithi! diere!t histori8al epo8hs+ it is o!ly 6ith Spirit that the
su88essio! o igures @Jshapes o 8o!s8ious!essKA reprodu8es the su88essio! o a8tual histori8al
ormatio!s rom 1reek A!tiNuity through Fome a!d the medieval sel:alie!atio! o Spirit- up to the
struggle o the 0!lighte!me!t agai!st 3elie- the Fre!8h Fevolutio! a!d the post:revolutio!ary
morality o the emergi!g bourgeois orderEi! short- the se8tio! o! Spirit is =egelIs irst systemati8
e?positio! o a philosophy o history7
The i!!er stru8ture o the se8tio! o! Spirit is- as e?pe8ted- triadi87 9t starts 6ith the A!8ie!t
1reek substa!tial order o 8ustoms @Sittlich"eitA- a!d the readi!g o +ntigone 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the
subterra!ea! a!tago!ism 6hi8h leads to the 8ollapse o this order- to the split o its substa!tial u!ity
i!to abstra8t i!dividuals opposed to the alie!ated obje8tivity7 The !e?t stage- Dulture or sel:alie!ated
Spirit- deals 6ith the pai!ul pro8ess o the subje8tIs gradual over8omi!g o this alie!atio! through the
hard 6ork o /ildung- o the sel:sa8rii8i!g Jedu8atio!K desti!ed to elevate the subje8t to the level o
u!iversality+ to be8ome a u!iversal subje8t re8o!8iled 6ith Substa!8e- o!e has to re!ou!8e a!y dire8t
ide!tii8atio! 6ith the parti8ular !ature o o!eIs ide!tity7 The readi!g o GiderotIs 7ameaus ephew
the! sho6s ho6 the sel:re!ou!8i!g sa8rii8e o servi!g a !oble Dause shits i!to a diere!t sel:
alie!atio!- the sa8rii8e o o!eIs ethi8al substa!8e itsel i! the vai! lattery o the ,o!ar8h7 The logi8 is
agai! that o the imma!e!t sel:relati!g reversal+ o!e begi!s 6ith a si!8ere readi!ess to sa8rii8e
everythi!g or the ho!or o servi!g a !oble Dause- a!d o!e e!ds by sa8rii8i!g this Dause itsel- o
losi!g the ho!or itsel7
10
Fi!ally- the third part des8ribes the post:revolutio!ary JSpirit 8ertai! o
itselK+ the rise o the @*a!tia!A subje8t 6ho dire8tly k!o6s itsel as the bearer o the u!iversal moral
.a67 This dire8t ide!tii8atio! 6ith the )!iversal agai! leads to a! a!tago!ism+ the 8o!li8t bet6ee!
the a8ti!g subje8t 6ho- as is the 8ase 6ith every a8t- imposes o! obje8tivity its partial proje8t- a!d the
judgi!g subje8t 6ho 8o!dem!s the a8ti!g subje8t @the Jbeautiul soulsKA- but 6hose positio! is !o less
u!ilateral a!d alse7 The judgi!g subje8t reuses to see ho6 he parti8ipates i! the 8orrupted 6orld he so
vigorously 8o!dem!sEas =egel deploys it through impli8it reere!8es to Fousseau @-he ew 0eloiseA
a!d 2a8obi @!ot his philosophi8al 6orks- but his !ovelsA- evil is also i! the eye o those 6ho per8eive
evil every6here arou!d them7
Speight develops i! detail ho6 ea8h o the three epo8hs has its o6! literary ge!re 6hi8h
arti8ulates the 8ore o its so8io:ethi8al a!tago!ism @1reek tragedy- Foma! a!d the! early moder!
8omedy- the Foma!ti8 !ovelA- as 6ell as a !otio! 6hi8h ormulates the lesso! o this a!tago!ism7 The
lesso! o the a!tago!isms 6hi8h lead to the heroIs tragi8 ate i! 1reek drama is the imma!e!t
retrospectivity o the true mea!i!g o our a8ts @or- as 6e 6ould put it today- Jmoral lu8kKA+ it is o!ly
retrospe8tively- through a88omplishi!g the a8t- that the subje8t be8omes a6are o its true dime!sio!
@a!d o its o6! true motivatio!s or a88omplishi!g it7A The lesso! o 8omedy is the i!here!t
theatricality o our so8ial lives+ every a8t is a8ti!g- eve! 6he! 6e @thi!k 6eA just are 6ho 6e are- 6e
Ja8t ourselves-K 6e play a so8ially mediated role7 A!d- i!ally- the lesso! o the Foma!ti8 !ovel
8o!8er!s 0vil a!d its orgive!ess- !amely the possibility o reconciliation+ 6hile i! 1reek tragedy
re8o!8iliatio! 6as o!ly possible i! the guise o amor fati- as the tragi8:heroi8 a88epta!8e o Fate- the
Foma!ti8 u!iverse ope!s up the possibility o resolvi!g the 8o!li8t !ot 6ith the age!tIs destru8tio!-
but 6ith the mutual re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! the age!t a!d its judge- both sides admitti!g their atal
limitatio!7
/e 8a! !o6 also see ho6 reerri!g to literature is a! imma!e!t part o the =egelia! pro8edure+
the 6ay =egel u!dermi!es a 8ertai! Jshape o 8o!s8ious!essK is by irst prese!ti!g it Ji! itsel-K i! its
abstra8t !otio! @the 6ay it per8eives itsel as a 8o!siste!t so8io:ethi8al proje8tA- a!d the!
problematiUi!g it- !ot by measuri!g it agai!st a pre:e?isti!g higher sta!dard !or by submitti!g it to a!
abstra8t:logi8al a!alysis 6hi8h 6ould u!earth its J8o!tradi8tio!s-K but by staging it as a 8o!8rete sta!8e
o subje8tivity i! a histori8al lie 6orld+ i! todayIs termi!ology- =egel is !ot i!terested o!ly i! logi8al
8o!tradi8tio!s- but more so i! pragmati8 8o!tradi8tio!s- i! the te!sio! bet6ee! 6hat 6e 8laim 6e are
doi!g a!d 6hat 6e are a8tually doi!g7 +ntigone des8ribes 6hat happe!s 6he! a subje8t ee8tively a8ts
upo! the premises o the ethi8s o immediate substa!tial 8ustoms- a!d thereby bri!gs out the
i!8o!siste!8y o this ethi8al igure- the i!8o!siste!8y 6hi8h leads to its sel:destru8tio!7 The reere!8e
to +ntigone provides a model o =egelIs readi!g7 =e begi!s 6ith A!tigo!e beore her a8t o
disobedie!8e to Dreo!Is prohibitio!+ her starti!g poi!t is the simple substa!tial ethi8al a6are!ess that
there are higher @or- rather- deeperA la6s tha! the publi8 la6s o the 8ity- la6s 6hi8h are Jirratio!al-K
8omi!g rom !o6here- but !o!etheless have to be obeyed u!8o!ditio!ally+

Beus did !ot a!!ou!8e those la6s to me7 A!d 2usti8e livi!g 6ith the gods belo6se!t !o su8h la6s or
me!7 9 did !ot thi!k a!ythi!g 6hi8h you pro8laimed stro!g e!oughto let a mortal override the godsa!d
their u!6ritte! a!d u!8ha!gi!g la6s7
TheyIre !ot just or today or yesterday-but e?ist orever- a!d !o o!e k!o6s6here they irst appeared7
So 9 did !ot mea!to let a ear o a!y huma! 6illlead to my pu!ishme!t amo!g the gods7
3ut o!8e she e!gages i! the orbidde! a8t @perormi!g the u!eral rite or Coly!i8esA a!d a8es
the 8o!seNue!8es- the threat that she 6ill Jdie 6hile still alive-K o!ly the! does she be8ome a6are o
the a8tual rule that guided her+

/hat la6 do 9 appeal to- 8laimi!g thisM9 my husba!d died- thereId be a!other o!e-a!d i 9 6ere to lose
a 8hild o mi!e 9Id have a!other 6ith some other ma!73ut si!8e my ather a!d my mother- too-are
hidde! a6ay i! =adesI house-9Ill !ever have a!other livi!g brother7That 6as the la6 9 used to ho!or
you7
=o6 are 6e to read this des8e!t rom the highly pri!8ipled appeal to u!iversal eter!al u!6ritte!
la6s to the Jappare!tly 8o!ti!ge!t a!d prude!tial reaso!i!gK 6hi8h reers to Nuite pre8ise parti8ular
pragmati8 8o!sideratio!sM
11
These s8a!dalous li!es- 6hi8h have bothered i!terpreters up to a!d
i!8ludi!g 2udith 3utler @1oethe a!d ma!y others eve! suggested they must be a later i!trusio!A- are
8ru8ial or the J8o!8rete u!iversalityK =egel is aimi!g at+ or a sister- the brother is the particular
which directly stands for the universal- he is a pure Hther !ot marked by a!y @se?ual or po6erA i!terest-
a!d love or him is pure love7
12
9t is this a!8hori!g o her persiste!8e i! the igure o the brother that
provides A!tigo!e 6ith the Jhighest i!tuitio! o ethi8al esse!8e-K a!d it is 8ru8ial that A!tigo!e 6as
able to ormulate this i!sight o!ly ater she a88omplished her a8t+ o!ly the! did she be8ome a6are o
6hat she had do!e- o 6hat had really motivated herEthere is !o prior JgoalK or J!ormK 6hi8h is
merely e?e8uted i! the a8t7 /e should !ot read this retroa8tivity as A!tigo!e simply be8omi!g:a6are
o 6hat 6as already there i! her u!8o!s8ious- o 6hat u!8o!s8iously she al6ays already k!e6 @su8h a
readi!g merely moves the pre:e?isti!g goal>!orm i!to the u!8o!s8iousA- but i! a more radi8ally
Jde8e!teredK ashio!+ the very !orm that ee8tively guided her 8omes:to:be o!ly through its
a8tualiUatio!- or the a8t ge!erates its o6! !orm- the passage rom i!te!tio! to a8t is the passage rom
the Jabstra8t u!iversalityK o the .a6 @respe8t or the dead- they all deserve u!eral ritesA to the
J8o!8rete u!iversalityK 6hi8h e?poses the parti8ular 8o!te!t that sustai!s the u!iversality o the .a67
At the level o spee8h- this mea!s that our thoughtEour i!te!tio!:to:mea!- 6hat 6e 6a!t to
sayEis depe!de!t o! the pro8ess o its Je?pressio!K+ 9 dis8over 6hat 9 6a!t to say o!ly by sayi!g it7 9!
todayIs 8og!itive s8ie!8es- this depe!de!8e o thought o! the li!guisti8 pro8ess o its arti8ulatio! 6as
most 8learly poi!ted out by Ga!iel Ge!!ett- 6ho Nuotes .i!8ol!Is amous li!e J5ou 8a! ool all the
people some o the time- a!d some o the people all the time- but you 8a!!ot ool all the people all o
the time-K dra6i!g atte!tio! to its logi8al ambiguity+ does it mea! that there are some people 6ho 8a!
al6ays be ooled- or that- o! every o88asio!- someo!e or other is bou!d to be ooledM =is poi!t is that
it is 6ro!g to ask- J/hat did .i!8ol! really mea!MKEi! all probability- .i!8ol! himsel 6as !ot a6are
o the ambiguity7
1"
=e simply 6a!ted to make a 6itty poi!t- a!d the phrase Jimposed itsel o! himK
be8ause Jit sou!ded good7K =ere 6e have a! e?emplary 8ase o ho6- 6he! the subje8t has a vague
i!te!tio!:to:sig!iy a!d is Jlooki!g or the right e?pressio!K @as 6e usually put itA- the i!lue!8e goes
both 6ays+ it is !ot o!ly that- amo!g the multitude o 8o!te!ders- the best e?pressio! 6i!s- but some
e?pressio! might impose itsel 6hi8h 8ha!ges more or less 8o!siderably the very i!te!tio!:to:sig!iy7
9s this !ot 6hat .a8a! reerred to as the Jei8a8y o the sig!iierKM The thought itsel ormulates itsel
through the pro8ess o its arti8ulatio!+

/e do!It irst apprehe!d our e?perie!8e i! the Dartesia! Theater a!d the!- o! the basis o that a8Nuired
k!o6ledge- have the ability to rame reports to e?press O The emerge!8e o the e?pressio! is pre8isely
6hat 8reates or i?es the 8o!te!t o the higher:order thought e?pressed7 There !eed be !o additio!al
episodi8 Jthought7K The higher:order state literally depe!ds o!E8ausally depe!ds o!Ethe e?pressio!
o the spee8h a8t7
1(
The pere8t e?ample is a situatio! i! 6hi8h 9 be8ome a6are o a JdeepK attitude o mi!e- 6he!-
i! a totally u!e?pe8ted 6ay- 6ithout a!y premeditatio!- 9 simply blurt somethi!g out7 Ge!!ett himsel
reers to the amous passage rom o!e o 3ertra!d FussellIs letters to .ady Httoli!e i! 6hi8h he re8alls
the 8ir8umsta!8es o his de8laratio! o love to her+ J9 did !ot k!o6 9 loved you till 9 heard mysel
telli!g you soEor o!e i!sta!t 9 thought V1ood 1od- 6hat have 9 saidMI a!d the! 9 k!e6 it 6as the
truth7K
1#
For Ge!!ett- this is !ot a! e?8eptio!al eature but the basi8 me8ha!ism 6hi8h ge!erates
mea!i!g+ a 6ord or a phrase or8es itsel upo! us- a!d thereby imposes a sembla!8e o !arrative order
o! our 8o!used e?perie!8eT there is !o pre:e?isti!g Jdeep a6are!essK e?pressed i! this phraseEit is-
o! the 8o!trary- this very phrase 6hi8h orga!iUes our e?perie!8e i!to a Jdeep a6are!ess7K
9! literature- a! outsta!di!g e?ample is provided by the very last li!es o Catri8ia =ighsmithIs
Strangers on a -rain+ i! 8o!trast to =it8h8o8kIs ilm versio!- 1uy does also kill 3ru!oIs ather- a!d- at
the e!d o the !ovel- the dete8tives 6ho have bee! 8losely mo!itori!g him or some time i!ally
approa8h him to take him i! or Nuestio!i!g7 1uy- 6ho has bee! prepari!g or this mome!t or a lo!g
time a!d has memoriUed his alibi i! detail- rea8ts 6ith a 8o!essio!ary gesture o surre!der 6hi8h takes
eve! him by surprise+ J1uy tried to speak- a!d said somethi!g e!tirely diere!t rom 6hat he had
i!te!ded7 VTake me7IK
1'
Agai!- Ge!!ettIs poi!t 6ould be that it is 6ro!g to Jsubsta!tialiUeK the
attitude e?pressed i! 1uyIs last 6ords- as i- Jdeep 6ithi! himsel-K he 6as all the time a6are o his
guilt a!d !ourished a desire to be arrested a!d pu!ished or it7 There 6as- o 8ourse- a 8o!essio!al
Jdispositio!K i! 1uy- but it 6as 8ompeti!g 6ith other dispositio!s- ambiguous- !ot 8learly dei!ed- a!d
it 6o! out due to a 8o!8rete 8o!ti!ge!t 8o!stellatio!E!ot u!like *ieslo6skiIs early ilm /lind ,hance
@1%&1A- 6hi8h deals 6ith three diere!t out8omes o a ma! ru!!i!g or a trai!+ he 8at8hes it a!d
be8omes a 8ommu!ist oi8ialT he misses it a!d be8omes a disside!tT there is !o trai! a!d he settles
do6! to a mu!da!e lie7 This !otio! o mere 8ha!8e determi!i!g the 8ourse o a ma!Is lie 6as
u!a88eptable to both 8ommu!ists a!d disside!ts @it deprives the disside!t attitude o its deep moral
ou!datio!A7 The poi!t is that i! all three 8ases- the 8o!ti!ge!8y 6hi8h gave the Jspi!K to his lie is
JrepressedKT that is- the hero 8o!stru8ts his lie story as a !arrative leadi!g to its i!al result @a disside!t-
a! ordi!ary ma!- a 8ommu!ist apparat8hikA 6ith a Jdeep !e8essity7K 9s this !ot 6hat .a8a! reerred to
as the futur antArieur o the u!8o!s8ious 6hi8h J6ill have bee!KM
9! =egelIs o6! time- this properly diale8ti8al sel:relati!g i! 6hi8h mea!i!g emerges through
the retroa8tive i!lue!8e o its Je?pressio!K 6as ormulated i! a! u!surpassable 6ay by =ei!ri8h vo!
*leist- i! his essay JH! the 1radual Formatio! o Thoughts i! the Cro8ess o Spee8hK @rom 1&0#- irst
published posthumously i! 1&$&A- 6hi8h deserves to be Nuoted i! ull+

The Fre!8h say lappAtit vient en mangeant- a!d this empiri8al ma?im remai!s true i o!e makes a
parody o it a!d says lidAe vient en parlant7Hte! 9 sit over my papers a!d 9 try to i!d out rom 6hat
a!gle a give! 8o!li8t has to be judged7 )sually- 9 look i!to the light- as the brightest spot 9 8a! i!d- as
9 try to e!lighte! my i!!er bei!g7 Hr else 9 seek out the irst approa8h- the irst eNuatio! 6hi8h
e?presses the obtai!i!g relatio!s- a!d rom 6hi8h the solutio! may be derived simply through plai!
arithmeti87 A!d look 6hat happe!s+ as soo! as 9 talk to my sisterE6ho is sitti!g a!d 6orki!g behi!d
meEabout this matter- 9 realiUe 6hat hours o hard thi!ki!g have !ot bee! able to make 8lear to me7 9t
is!It as i she 6as telli!g me i! a!y dire8t se!se7 She does !ot k!o6 the la6- a!d has !ever studied her
0uler a!d her *jst!er7 4either is that 6hat she leads me to the 8ru8ial poi!t through det
Nuestio!sEalthough this latter 8ase may o88asio!ally o88ur7 3ut si!8e 9 have some vague thoughts that
are i! some 6ay 8o!!e8ted 6ith 6hat 9 am looki!g or- the! o!8e 9 have embarked o! the ormulatio!
o the thought it is as i the !eed to lead 6hat has bee! begu! to some 8o!8lusio! tra!sorms my haUy
imagi!atio!s i!to 8omplete 8larity i! su8h a 6ay that my i!sight is 8ompleted together 6ith my
rambli!g se!te!8e7 9 mi? i! i!arti8ulate !oises- 9 dra6 out my se!te!8e 8o!!e8tives- 9 use appositio!s
6here they are !ot stri8tly !e8essary a!d 9 use other rhetori8al tri8ks that 6ill dra6 out spee8h+ i! this
6ay 9 gai! the time to abri8ate my idea i! this 6orkshop o reaso!74othi!g i! all this is more useul
tha! some moveme!t o! the part o my sister- a moveme!t i!di8ati!g that she i!te!ds to i!terrupt me7
For my strai!ed mi!d be8omes eve! more e?8ited by the !eed to dee!d this i!here!t right to speak
agai!st atta8k rom the outside7 The mi!dIs abilities gro6 like those o a great ge!eral 6ho is a8ed
6ith a very dii8ult situatio!79t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that 9 u!dersta!d ho6 useul ,oli`re ou!d
his maid7 For i- as he 8laims- he trusted her judgme!t more tha! his o6!- this 6ould i!di8ate a degree
o modesty o! his part 6hi8h 9 reuse to believe 6as there7The other perso!Is a8e is a 8urious sour8e o
i!spiratio! or a perso! 6ho speaks7 A si!gle gla!8e 6hi8h i!di8ates that a hal:e?pressed thought is
already u!derstood- besto6s o! us the other hal o the ormulatio!79 believe that ma!y a great orator-
beore he ope!ed his mouth- did !ot k!o6 6hat he 6as goi!g to say7 3ut the 8o!vi8tio! that the
!e8essary 6ealth o thought 6ould be !aturally i!spired by the 8o!ditio!s surrou!di!g his spee8h a!d
his resulti!g e?8iteme!t- 8auses him to be bold e!ough to make a begi!!i!g 6ith his spee8h7This makes
me thi!k o that Jthu!derboltK o ,irabeau7 ,irabeau se!t the ,aster o Deremo!ies pa8ki!g 6he! the
latter ater the last !atio!al meeti!g led by the *i!g o! 2u!e 2"- i! 6hi8h the *i!g had ordered the
members o the assembly to disperse- retur!ed to the meeti!g room 6here the assembly had !ot
dispersed- a!d asked 6hether they had re8eived the *i!gIs orders7 J5es-K ,irabeau replied- J6e have
u!derstood the *i!gIs orders7KE9 am 8o!vi!8ed that 6he! he made this huma!e start he did !ot thi!k
o those bayo!ets 6ith 6hi8h he 8losed his spee8h7 J5es- Sir-K he repeated- J6e have u!derstood
them7KEH!e 8a! see that he has !o idea o 6here he is goi!g7 J=o6ever- o! 6hat authority do you
thi!k you are e!titledK he 8o!ti!ues- a!d a sudde! sour8e o amaUi!g thoughts bega! to lo6 or him-
Jto address orders to usM /e are the represe!tatives o the !atio!RKEAh- this 6as 6hat he !eededR
JThe !atio! gives orders7 9t does !ot re8eive orders7KEA!d he surges up the heights o hubris7 JA!d to
make everythi!g pere8tly plai! to you-KEA!d o!ly at this poi!t he i!ds the proper e?pressio! or the
a8t o deia!8e or 6hi8h his soul is prepared- Jyou should go a!d tell your *i!g that 6e shall !ot leave
our pla8es here e?8ept 6he! or8ed 6ith bayo!ets7K )po! 6hi8h he settled- utterly satisied- i!to a
8hair7Thi!ki!g about the ,aster o Deremo!ies it is impossible to visualise him e?8ept i! a state o
8omplete spiritual ba!krupt8y7 The la6 is the same as that by 6hi8h a! ele8tri8ally !eutral body- 6he!
e!teri!g the atmosphere o a 8harged body- 6ill a8Nuire the opposite @!egative- ba!kruptA ele8tri8al
8harge7 A!d just as the e!ergy 8harge i! the 8harged body is stre!gthe!ed through i!tera8tio!- so i! the
8ase o this a!!ihilatio! o the oppo!e!t- ,irabeauIs e!thusiasm k!e6 !o bou!ds7Cerhaps it 6as just
the t6it8hi!g o the upper lip or a! ambiguously u!8ertai! moveme!t about the sleeves that 8aused the
8ha!ge o the 8ourse o eve!ts i! Fra!8e7H!e reads that ,irabeau stood up- as soo! as the ,aster o
Deremo!ies had let- a!d proposed that the assembly should 8o!stitute itsel as the !atio!al assembly
a!d as i!violable7 For si!8e he had lost his 8harge- like a *leistia! bottle- he had be8ome !eutraliUed
a!d he gave room i! his mi!d to ear o the judi8iary at Dhatelet a!d to 8areul!ess i! politi8al
a8tio!7This is a 8urious 8o!verge!8e bet6ee! the phe!ome!a o the !atural a!d the moral 6orld 6hi8h-
i o!e 6ished to pursue the matter- 8ould be sho6! to apply eve! i! the mi!or subplots o this episode7
3ut 9 shall leave my simile- a!d 9 shall retur! to my subje8t70ve! .a Fo!tai!e gives a very i!e
e?ample o the gradual 8o!stitutio! o thought i! the pro8ess o speaki!g i! his able e!titled .es
animau& malades de la peste7 9! this able the o? is or8ed to give a spee8h i! dee!8e o the lio!
6ithout k!o6i!g 6here o! earth he should i!d support or his dee!8e7 The 6ell:rou!ded idea is bor!
rom a begi!!i!g 6hi8h is di8tated by !e8essity7The able is 6ell k!o6!7 The plague is ravagi!g the
a!imal ki!gdom7 The lio! assembles the Jimporta!tK a!imals a!d e?plai!s that it must be oered
=eave! 6ith a sa8rii8e i! order to get it to rele!t7 The lio! mai!tai!ed that there 6ere ma!y si!!ers
amo!g the a!imals- a!d the greatest o these 6ould have to be sa8rii8ed or the survival o the others7
=e thereore suggested that everyo!e should 8o!ess their si!s to him7 =e- or his part- had to admit
that i! the heat o hu!ger he had killed ma!y a sheep a!d eve! some dogs 6ho had 8ome too 8lose7
,oreover- he had o!8e by 8ha!8eEi! a gourmet moodEeasted o! a shepherd7 9 !o o!e else 8ould
sho6 greater 6eak!esses he 6as ready to die7JSir-K said the o?- 6ho 6as tryi!g to avert disaster rom
himsel- J5ou are too ge!erous7 5our ho!est e!deavour leads you too ar7 /hatIs 6ro!g 6ith
stra!gli!g a sheepM Hr a dog- 6orthless 8reatureRK A!d the!+ JNua!t au bergerK he 8o!ti!ues- or this is
the mai! poi!t- Jo! peut direK although he has !o idea 6hat to say about himR- JNuIil mLritait tout malK+
he says that o! the o 8ha!8e that he 8a! thi!k o somethi!g- a!d !o6 he is i! trouble7 Jnta!tK he
8o!ti!ues- a poor phrase to use- but it does give him time+ Jde 8es ge!s lgK a!d o!ly at this poi!t does
he hit that thought 6hi8h gets him out o trouble+ JNui sur les a!imau? se o!t u! 8himLriNue
empireKEA!d !o6 or the demo!stratio! that the ass- the bloodthirsty o!eR @6ho eats a6ay at the
herbsA- that the ass 6as the proper sa8rii8ial vi8tim7 A!d everyo!e pou!8es o! the ass- tears him to
pie8es7Su8h spee8h is truly thought i! the vo8al medium7 The seNue!8es o thoughts a!d e?pressio!s go
alo!gside ea8h other- a!d the u!derlyi!g psy8hologi8al realities 8o!verge7 .a!guage- u!der these
8o!ditio!s- is !ot ma!a8les- it is !ot like some impedime!t o! the 6heel o the spirit7 .a!guage is a
se8o!d 6heel o! the same a?leRThe situatio! is Nuite diere!t i the mi!d is i!ished already 6ith a
thought beore the speaki!g starts7 The! the spirit stays ba8k i! the pro8ess o mere arti8ulatio! a!d this
busi!ess o arti8ulatio!- ar rom e?8iti!g the spirit- o! the 8o!trary redu8es the me!tal i!te!sity7 9
thereore a thought is e?pressed i! a uUUy 6ay- the! it does !ot at all ollo6 that this thought 6as
8o!8eived i! a 8o!used 6ay7 H! the 8o!trary it is Nuite possible that the ideas that are e?pressed i! the
most 8o!usi!g ashio! are the o!es that 6ere thought out most 8learly7H!e ote! sees- i! so8ial
8ompa!y 6here 8o!ge!ial 8o!versatio! i!spires everyo!e 6ith 8o!ti!uous resh ideas- that people 6ho
usually eel li!guisti8ally i!ept eel i!spired to break i!to li8keri!g o u!stable arti8ulatio!- to take
hold o la!guageEa!d produ8e somethi!g utterly i!8omprehe!sible7 A!d 6he! these people have the
othersI atte!tio! they sho6 through their embarrassed gestures that they have !o idea 6hat they 6ere
really tryi!g to say7 9t is Nuite probable that these people have thought up somethi!g Nuite apt a!d 8lear7
3ut the abrupt 8ha!ge i! a8tivity- the passage o the mi!d rom thi!ki!g to arti8ulatio!- this abrupt
8ha!ge dampe!ed that very e?8iteme!t 6hi8h 6as !e8essary or keepi!g the thought i! mi!d as 6ell as
or putti!g it i!to 6ords7 9! su8h 8ases it is all the more !e8essary that la!guage is available to us 6ith
a8ility a!d ease so that 6hat 6e have just thought a!d are u!able to arti8ulate at that very same time-
8a! at least be put i!to 6ords as soo! as possible ater6ards7Wuite ge!erally- someo!e 6hoE6ith the
same degree o 8larityEspeaks aster tha! his oppo!e!t- 6ill have a disti!8t adva!tage over him7 The
reaso! is that the ast talker is leadi!g more troops i!to the ield7/he!- i! e?ami!atio!s- o!e abruptly
e?ami!es ope!:mi!ded a!d 6ell:edu8ated people- 6ithout i!trodu8tio!- o! Nuestio!s like J/hat is the
stateMK or J/hat is propertyMK- o!e realiUes ho6 !e8essary it is that the mi!d be e?8ited i! a 8ertai!
6ay or us to be able to re8reate i! our mi!ds eve! thoughts that 6e have had beore7 9 the same
people 6hom 6e e?ami!e i! this 6ay are ou!d i! 8o!ge!ial 8ompa!y 6here the talk has bee! about
Nuestio!s o the state a!d o property or a 6hile- the! perhaps these people 6ould have !o trouble
through 8ompariso!s- 8o!trasts a!d summary o the 8o!8epts 8o!8er!ed to i!d a88eptable dei!itio!s7
3ut u!der e?ami!atio! 8o!ditio!s- 6here the preparatio! o the mi!d is missi!g- o!e i!ds that they
alter7 H!ly a! ig!ora!t e?ami!er 6ill 8o!8lude that they do !ot k!o67For it is !ot 6e 6ho k!o67 9t is a
8ertai! state o us that k!o6s7H!ly truly vulgar spirits- people 6ho have lear!t by heart yesterday 6hat
the state is supposed to be a!d 6ho have orgotte! it tomorro6- 6ill have a ready a!s6er7 Cerhaps there
is !o more i!appropriate o88asio! to sho6 o!esel i! a positive light tha! a publi8 e?ami!atio!7 9
disregard the a8t that publi8 e?ami!atio!s are disgusti!g a!d hurtul to the se!sitive mi!d7 9 disregard
the a8t that it is provoki!g to be a8ed 6ith a ha8k 6ho looks at our k!o6ledge i! order to de8ide
6hether to buy us i the !umber is ive a!d to se!d us a6ay i the !umber is si?79t is very hard to play
o! the i!strume!t o the huma! mi!d- to eli8it its proper sou!d rom it7 The mi!d gets so easily out o
tu!e u!der 8lumsy ha!ds7 So mu8h so- that the greatest 8o!!oisseur o me!- the 8o!summate spe8ialist
i! the mid6iery o thoughtsEas *a!t 8alls itEmight 6ell 8ommit serious mistakes 6ith the you!g
soul e!trusted to him7/hat e!sures good results or su8h you!g people- by the 6ay- eve! the most
ig!ora!t amo!g them- is the 8ir8umsta!8e that the e?ami!ersI mi!ds- i! the 8ase o publi8
e?ami!atio!s- are ar too preo88upied to be able to pass a ree judgme!t7 4ot o!ly do they ote! eel the
i!de8e!8y o the 6hole pro8edure+ it 6ould be i!de8e!t e!ough to ask someo!e to ope! his purse
beore our eyes- but ho6 mu8h more i!de8e!t it is to ask him to ope! up his soul or e?ami!atio!R
There is a!other thi!g+ the e?ami!ers themselves have to pass a severe test i! these e?ami!atio!s- a!d
they may ote! tha!k the .ord or bei!g able to leave e?ami!atio!s 6ithout sho6i!g 6eak!esses that
are greater- perhaps- tha! those dis8losed i! the youth that has just emerged rom the u!iversity a!d
6hom they have e?ami!ed7
1$
*leist thus i!verts the 8ommo! 6isdom a88ordi!g to 6hi8h o!e should ope! o!eIs mouth a!d
say somethi!g o!ly 6he! o!e has a 8lear idea o 6hat o!e 6a!ts to say+ J9 thereore a thought is
e?pressed i! a uUUy 6ay- the! it does !ot at all ollo6 that this thought 6as 8o!8eived i! a 8o!used
6ay7 H! the 8o!trary it is Nuite possible that the ideas that are e?pressed i! the most 8o!usi!g ashio!
are the o!es that 6ere thought out most 8learly7K .et us retur! to his 8omme!t o! the amous episode
rom the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 6hi8h o88urred o! 2u!e 2"- 1$&%- 6he! the ki!g ordered the members o
the assembly to disperse a!d the! letT the members reused to leave- so the ki!g se!t the ,aster o
Deremo!ies ba8k to the assembly- aski!g the members 6hether they had re8eived the ki!gIs orders+

J5es-K ,irabeau replied- J6e have u!derstood the *i!gIs orders7KE9 am 8o!vi!8ed that 6he! he
made this huma!e start he did !ot thi!k o those bayo!ets 6ith 6hi8h he 8losed his spee8h7 J5es- Sir-K
he repeated- J6e have u!derstood them7KEH!e 8a! see that he has !o idea o 6here he is goi!g7
J=o6ever- o! 6hat authority do you thi!k you are e!titled-K he 8o!ti!ues- a!d a sudde! sour8e o
amaUi!g thoughts bega! to lo6 or him- Jto address orders to usM /e are the represe!tatives o the
!atio!RKEAh- this 6as 6hat he !eededR JThe !atio! gives orders7 9t does !ot re8eive orders7KEA!d he
surges up the heights o hubris7 JA!d to make everythi!g pere8tly plai! to you-KEA!d o!ly at this
poi!t he i!ds the proper e?pressio! or the a8t o deia!8e or 6hi8h his soul is prepared- Jyou should
go a!d tell your *i!g that 6e shall !ot leave our pla8es here e?8ept 6he! or8ed 6ith bayo!ets7K )po!
6hi8h he settled- utterly satisied- i!to a 8hair7
1&
/hat *leist makes 8lear is the prese!8e- i! the =egelia! spa8e- o a!other 6er: 6hi8h
suppleme!ts the Freudia! list o 6er:s @6erdr=ngung! 6erneinung! 6erwerfung OA+ the 6er: o
6ersprechen- o sayi!g more tha! o!e 6a!ted to say7 9s !ot the same me8ha!ism- the same pa!i8ky
reversal rom impasse i!to passe- at 6ork i! ma!y lege!dary revolutio!ary gesturesM 9! a amous
spee8h i! +ssemblAe nationale- Fobespierre 8laimed that there 6ere traitors o the Fevolutio! eve! i!
the very hall- a!d the! 6e!t o!+ J9 say that a!yo!e 6ho trembles at this mome!t is guiltyT or i!!o8e!8e
!ever ears publi8 s8ruti!y7K /e 8a! imagi!e his reaso!i!g+ ater the irst stateme!t- he !oti8ed sig!s o
u!rest a!d ear amo!g the liste!ersT he Nui8kly thought about ho6 to e?ploit this earEshould he oer
a 8arrot by addi!g somethi!g like- J9 you are i!!o8e!t- you have !othi!g to earKM 4o- better to use
this ear itsel as a! argume!t or guilt7
Cerhaps the same goes or the late .e!i!Is programmati8 !ote+ J/hat i the 8omplete
hopeless!ess o the situatio!- by stimulati!g the eorts o the 6orkers a!d peasa!ts te!old- oered us
the opportu!ity to 8reate the u!dame!tal reNuisites o 8iviliUatio! i! a diere!t 6ay rom that o the
/est 0uropea! 8ou!triesMK
1%
Ater 8o!8edi!g the 8omplete hopeless!ess o the situatio! i! 6hi8h the
3olshevik state ou!d itsel i! 1%22- 6ith !o realisti8 optio! o buildi!g so8ialism- .e!i! thought i!
pa!i8 about ho6 to blo8k the obvious 8o!8lusio! @that the 3olsheviks should simply step do6!A- a!d-
sudde!ly- the idea 8ame to him o prese!ti!g this hopeless situatio! itsel as oeri!g a! u!e?pe8ted
opportu!ity7 There is a passage i! o!e o Stali!Is spee8hes rom the early 1%"0s 6here he proposes
radi8al measures agai!st all those 6ho eve! se8retly oppose the 8olle8tiviUatio! o arms+ J/e should
dete8t a!d ight 6ithout mer8y eve! those 6ho oppose 8olle8tiviUatio! o!ly i! their thoughtsEyes- 9
mea! this- 6e should ight eve! peopleIs thoughts7K H!e 8a! saely presume that this passage 6as !ot
prepared i! adva!8e+ Stali! got 8aught up i! his rhetori8al e!thusiasm a!d 6as spo!ta!eously 8arried
a6ay i!to addi!g that eve! peopleIs private thoughts should be 8o!trolled a!d oughtT the! he
immediately be8ome a6are o 6hat he had just said- but- i!stead o admitti!g that he had gotte! 8arried
a6ay- Nui8kly de8ided to sti8k heroi8ally to his hyperbole7 .ooki!g urther ba8k- does !ot e?a8tly the
same hold or A!tigo!eIs 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith Dreo!M At the outset- A!tigo!e grou!ds her i!siste!8e o!
the proper burial or Coly!i8es i! the simple substa!tial ethi8al a6are!ess that there are higher @or-
rather- deeperA la6s tha! the publi8 la6s o the 8ityT it is o!ly through her a8t that she be8omes a6are
o the spe8ii8 motive that guided her @she 6as ready to do 6hat she did o!ly or her brother- !ot or all
the oppressed a!d e?8ludedA7
,irabeau a!d A!tigo!e+ t6o e?emplary 8ases o ho6 Jtruth is a! ee8t o surprise triggered by
its e!u!8iatio!K
20
Eor- as Althusser put it- reerri!g to the 6ord:play bet6ee! prise a!d surprise- every
authe!ti8 Jgraspi!gK @priseA o some 8o!te!t 8omes as a surprise to the o!e 6ho a88omplishes it7
Althusser lo8ates this i!sight i! the same *ierkegaardia! oppositio! bet6ee! the ope! 8o!ti!ge!t
pro8ess o be8omi!g a!d the retroa8tive systemi8 illusio!+ JThe 6orld is a! a88omplished a8t7 H!8e it
is a88omplished- se!se et87 take over i! it7 3ut the a88omplishme!t o the a8t is a! ee8t o
8o!ti!ge!8y7K
21
The iro!y is that- or Althusser as or *ierkegaard- =egel is the systemi8 philosopher
o the fait accompli- 6hile- as 6e have just see!- the poi!t o =egelia! diale8ti8al a!alysis is !ot to
redu8e the 8haoti8 lo6 o eve!ts to a deeper !e8essity- but to u!earth the 8o!ti!ge!8y o the rise o
!e8essity itselEthis is 6hat it mea!s to grasp thi!gs Ji! their be8omi!g7K So 6he!- i! his late te?t
JThe Subterra!ea! Durre!t o the ,aterialism o 0!8ou!ter-K Althusser e!deavors to dis8er!- be!eath
the hegemo!i8 idealist orie!tatio! o Hrigi!s>Se!se- et87- the subterra!ea! traditio! o Jaleatory
materialismKE0pi8urus @a!d the Stoi8sMA versus Clato- ,a8hiavelli versus Ges8artes- Spi!oUa versus
*a!t a!d =egel- ,ar?- =eideggerEthe least o!e 8a! say is that he is 6ro!g to lo8ate =egel i! the
hegemo!i8 JidealistK li!e7
0verythi!g is thus here- i! *leistIs rei!ed des8riptio!- up to a!d i!8ludi!g the temporal
diale8ti8 o tra!sere!8e a!d the proto:.a8a!ia! i!vo8atio! o the 8ut @the a!alystIs sudde!
i!terve!tio!A i!to the lo6 o a!alysa!dIs rambli!g @Jree asso8iatio!sKA as ge!erative o the sudde!
emerge!8e o !e6 mea!i!g+ J4othi!g i! all this is more useul tha! some moveme!t o! the part o my
sister- a movement indicating that she intends to interrupt me7 For my strai!ed mi!d be8omes eve!
more e?8ited by the !eed to dee!d this i!here!t right to speak agai!st atta8k rom the outside7K 9t is
easy to miss the 8omple?ity o *leistIs poi!t+ it is !ot simply that the eort to put o!eIs thought i!to
6ords 8lariies a!d orms it- but that- or this to happe!- my spee8h should be addressed to a! Hther
6ho- i! the tra!sere!tial illusio!- is presupposed to already k!o6 the mea!i!g 9 struggle to
ormulateEi! order to ormulate a thought- 6e must presuppose that this thought already e?ists i! the
HtherIs mi!d+ JThe other perso!Is a8e is a 8urious sour8e o i!spiratio! or a perso! 6ho speaks7 A
si!gle gla!8e which indicates that a half*e&pressed thought is already understood- besto6s o! us the
other hal o the ormulatio!7K
This- the!- bri!gs us ba8k to =egel+ the stru8ture o the =egelia! Jdiale8ti8al pro8essK is !ot the
automati8 deployme!t o 8o!seNue!8es regulated by a! i!e?orable 8o!8eptual !e8essity- but pre8isely
the pro8ess o getti!g lost a!d the! improvisi!g a! i!ve!tio! des8ribed by *leist7 H!e pla!s to say @doA
somethi!g- thi!gs go 6ro!g- o!e gets lost a!d- to es8ape the deadlo8k- o!e i!ve!ts a! improvised
solutio!7 A!d o!e should go to the e!d here+ does !ot e?a8tly the same hold or the 8ru8ii?io! itselM
DhristIs pla! 6as to give himsel up to the Foma! authorities via the deli8ate !egotiatio!s 8arried out
by 2udasT ho6ever- thi!gs took a! u!e?pe8ted tur! or the 6orse a!d- i! a truly *leistia! t6ist- as a
desperate attempt to get somethi!g out o the ias8o- the story o redemptio!:through:death 6as duly
8o!8o8ted7 A!d- i! e?a8tly the same 6ay- it 6as o!ly Dreo!Is i!terruptio! 6hi8h made A!tigo!e a6are
o her true i!te!tio!7
There is- ho6ever- a limitatio! i! this igure o the brother as the sta!d:i! or the u!iversality o
a huma! bei!g deservi!g u!eral rites+ the brother as Hther is deprived o all perso!al eatures- or
A!tigo!eIs deed J!o lo!ger 8o!8er!s the livi!g but the dead- the i!dividual 6ho- ater a lo!g
su88essio! o separate dis8o!!e8ted e?perie!8es- 8o!8e!trates himsel i!to a si!gle 8ompleted shape-
a!d has raised himsel out o the u!rest o the a88ide!ts o lie i!to the 8alm o simple u!iversality7K
22

Speight is right to add 6ryly that Jto love someo!e or 6hat he is- or his bei!g- is to love him i! his
i!a8tio!- is to love a 8orpse7K
2"
This limitatio! is the !e8essary result o A!tigo!eIs immediate
immersio! i! the ethi8al substa!8e+ there is !o 8all o duty here e?erti!g pressure o! us- so that- i!
order to a8t upo! it- 6e have to ight our spo!ta!eous pathologi8al impulsesEA!tigo!eIs pathos is
dire8tly substa!tially ethi8al7 This is 6hy- as =egel puts it- e?perie!8i!g the limited 8hara8ter o this
ethi8al ide!tity 8a! o!ly happe! through sueri!g+ i! e?perie!8i!g the 8o!ti!ge!8y o this ide!tity- the
subje8t has to separate itsel rom its very ethi8al J!ature7K
=o6ever- i! a! e?emplarily =egelia! 6ay- this utter tragedy- this loss o our very ethi8al
grou!d- tur!s i!to 8omedy7 9! other 6ords- =egel !oti8ed somethi!g 6eird happe!i!g to A!tigo!e ater
she patheti8ally assumes her ateEto put it blu!tly- she starts to act- or her stateme!ts display a level
o sel:a6are!ess a!d rele?ivity about her JroleK 6hi8h u!dermi!e her immediate ethi8al spo!ta!eity
rom 6ithi!+

9Ive heard about a guest o ours-daughter o Ta!talus- rom ChrygiaEshe 6e!t to a! e?8ru8iati!g
deathi! Sipylus- right o! the mou!tai! peak7The sto!e there- just like 8li!gi!g ivy-6ore her do6!- a!d
!o6- so people say-the s!o6 a!d rai! !ever leave her there-as she lame!ts7 3elo6 her 6eepi!g eyesher
!e8k is 6et 6ith tears7 1od bri!gs meto a i!al rest 6hi8h most resembles hers7
A!tigo!e is usi!g metaphors to desig!ate herselEdo !ot these li!es display a Jsel:8o!s8iously
artistic ability i!volved i! playing the role o a 8hara8terKM
2(
A!tigo!e is a8ti!g here- modeli!g her
predi8ame!t o! mythi8al e?amplesEi! short- she is a6are o the imma!e!t theatri8ality o her tragi8
predi8ame!t- a theatri8ality 6hi8h by dei!itio! 8o!ers o! it a mi!imal tou8h o 8omedyEo!e 8a!
@a!d shouldA imagi!e her i!terrupti!g her patheti8 8omplai!t- 6orryi!g briely 6hether her outburst o
spo!ta!eous passio! is 6ell a8ted7 9!deed- the tragi8 8hara8ters

are artists- 6ho do !ot e?press 6ith u!8o!s8ious !atural!ess a!d !aivety the e&ternal aspe8t o their
resolves a!d e!terprises- as happe!s i! the la!guage a88ompa!yi!g ordi!ary a8tio!s i! a8tual lieT o!
the 8o!trary- they give uttera!8e to the i!!er esse!8e- they prove the right!ess o their a8tio!- a!d the
JpathosK 6hi8h moves them is soberly asserted a!d dei!itely e?pressed i! its u!iversal i!dividuality-
ree rom the a88ide!ts o 8ir8umsta!8e a!d perso!al idiosy!8rasies7
2#
The lesso! 8o!8er!s the Ji!here!t theatri8ality i!volved i! sel:k!o6ledge a!d a8tio!7 4o
a8tio! or motivatio! o [the age!t\ is directly his o6!- but must be assessed i! the light o othersI
rea8tio!s to itT he u!dersta!ds himsel by 8o!sta!tly looki!g at his a8tio!s i! the light o the mask that
he 6ears i! them7K
2'
9! other 6ords- the lesso! 8o!8er!s Jthe mediatio! o desire a!d eeli!g by the
imagi!atio! or i8tio! i!here!t i! the relatio! bet6ee! a8tor a!d spe8tator-K !amely the Ji!here!tly
so8ially mediated 8hara8ter o desire ormatio! itsel7K
2$
/hat .a8a! 8alls Jthe big HtherK is this
age!8y o so8ial rules a!d appeara!8es 6hi8h 8o!ers o! everythi!g 6e do a mi!imal aspe8t o
theatri8ality+ !o matter ho6 passio!ately 6e a8t- our desire is al6ays a desire o the Hther- mediated by
the Hther @the symboli8 te?ture 6hi8h provides the s8ripts or possible desiresAT 6e are !ot dire8tly
ourselves- 6e play the role o ourselves- 6e imitate a i8tio! o 6hat 6e are7
/e should li!k this topi8 6ith =egelIs le8tures o! aestheti8s- 6here he des8ribes ho6 the
passage rom tragedy to 8omedy 8o!8er!s over8omi!g the limits o represe!tatio!+ 6hile i! a tragedy
the i!dividual a8tor represe!ts the u!iversal 8hara8ter he plays- i! a 8omedy he immediately is this
8hara8ter7 The gap o represe!tatio! is thus 8losed- 6hi8h- ho6ever- does !ot mea! that- i! a 8omedy-
the a8tor 8oi!8ides 6ith the perso! he plays i! the 6ay that he plays himsel o! the stage- that there he
just Jis 6hat he really is7K 9t is rather that- i! a properly =egelia! 6ay- the gap 6hi8h separates the
a8tor rom his stage perso!a i! a tragedy is tra!sposed i!to the stage perso!a itsel+ a 8omi8 8hara8ter is
!ever ully ide!tiied 6ith his role- he al6ays retai!s the ability to observe himsel rom outside-
Jmaki!g u! o himsel7K
2&
Speight !oti8es the i!versio! o theatri8ality that o88urs i! moder!ity-
6he! the alie!ati!g pro8ess o /ildung rea8hes its 8lima?+ Ji! a!8ie!t 8omedy- it 6as the re8og!itio! o
real lie 8omi!g o!to the stage that 6as at issue i! the 8omi8 a8torIs droppi!g o his mask- 6hereas here
6e 6ill be 8o!8er!ed 6ith ho6 the theatri8al 8omes i!to lieKEthe artii8ial so8ial 6orld o moder!ity
8o!ro!ts us 6ith Jroles a!d imitatio! i! so8ial lie itsel7K
2%
This reversal is i! itsel deeply diale8ti8al+
the intrusion of reality onto the stage @a! a8tor dista!8i!g himsel rom his role- sho6i!g his a6are!ess
o playi!g a roleA is paid or by the theatricali2ation of real life itself+ you start 8laimi!g that 6e should
!ot get 8aught up i! the theatri8al i8tio!- that 6e should be a6are o ho6 theater is part o our real
lives- a!d you e!d up 8laimi!g that real lie itsel is a theater7
CHAPTER .

Suture a!d Cure Giere!8e

,ore tha! orty years ago- a short debate bet6ee! 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller a!d Alai! 3adiou took
pla8e i! ,ahiers pour l+nalyse- a jour!al that sta!ds or everythi!g i! JFre!8h theoryK that resists
bei!g i!8orporated i!to Jde8o!stru8tio!7K The debate o8used o! the !otio! o JsutureK+ to ,illerIs
semi!al te?t JSuture @0leme!ts o the .ogi8 o the Sig!iierA-K 3adiou replied 6ith JThe ,ark a!d the
.a8k7K .urki!g i! the ba8kgrou!d 6as the status o the sub1ect- the relatio!ship bet6ee! the
subje8t>la8k a!d stru8ture- a!d o!e 8a! say that this 6as the key problem o the e!tire ield o
Jstru8turalism7K 9ts ou!di!g gesture is to assert the diere!tial or sel:relatio!al stru8ture i! its ormal
purity- puriyi!g it o all Jpathologi8alK imagi!ary eleme!ts7 =ere is .a8a!Is 8lassi8 ormulatio!+

it is the spe8ii8 la6 o [the symboli8\ 8hai! 6hi8h gover!s those psy8hoa!alyti8 ee8ts that are
de8isive or the subje8t+ su8h as ore8losure- repressio!- de!ial itselEspe8iyi!g 6ith appropriate
emphasis that these ee8ts ollo6 so aithully the displa8eme!t o the sig!iier that imagi!ary a8tors-
despite their i!ertia- igure o!ly as shado6s a!d rele8tio!s i! the pro8ess7
1
The Nuestio! is+ ater this purii8atio!- is there a subje8t to this stru8tureM The predomi!a!t
a!s6er 6as a resou!di!g !o7 0ve! post:stru8turalist de8o!stru8tio!- 6ith its emphasis o! gaps-
ruptures- diere!8es- a!d deerrals- et87- 8o!8eived the subje8t as the 8ulmi!atio! o the metaphysi8s o
sel:prese!8e- a!d its sel:ide!tity as somethi!g to be de8o!stru8ted @by 6ay o demo!strati!g ho6 its
8o!ditio! o impossibility is its 8o!ditio! o possibility- ho6 the subje8tIs ide!tity is al6ays already
deerred- ho6 it has to rely o! the very pro8ess that u!dermi!es itA7 GerridaIs early a!alyses o
=usserlIs phe!ome!ology are e?emplary here+ the subje8tIs sel:prese!8e a!d sel:ide!tity- 6hose
supreme a!d ou!di!g 8ase is the e?perie!8e o sentendre*parler @o heari!g or u!dersta!di!g:o!esel:
talki!gA- is al6ays already u!dermi!ed by the pro8ess o J6riti!g-K 6hi8h sta!ds or the deerral o
sel:ide!tity- or the Jdead letterK i! the very heart o the livi!g spirit7 Although Jde8o!stru8tio!K
e!dlessly i!sists o! the gap- rupture- deerral- la8k- ailure- et87- it 8o!8eives the subje8t as the age!t a!d
result o the obus8atio! o this la8k7
So 6hat 6ere the positio!s take! up i! this struggleM The ultimate reaso! or the breathtaki!g
reso!a!8e o ,illerIs JSutureK 6as that- by systematiUi!g .a8a!Is dispersed stateme!ts @let us !ot
orget that .a8a! uses the term o!ly o!8e- a!d eve! the! i! a verbal ormA- ,iller or the irst time
proposed a!d elaborated the 8o!8ept o a subje8t 6hi8h belo!gs to the very Jabstra8t-K purely
diere!tial !otio! o stru8ture7 9! ier8e a!d rigorous oppositio! to this !otio! o a subje8tiviUed
stru8ture- 3adiou i!sisted o! the a!o!ymous or asubje8tive stru8ture+ stru8ture re!ders the k!o6ledge
o the realT there is !o la8k i! it- so the 8o!8ept o the subje8t should be stri8tly limited to the level o
imagi!ary misre8og!itio!T it is the 6ay 6e illusorily live or e?perie!8e a!o!ymous stru8tural 8ausality7
FFH, G9FF0F04T9A.9T5 TH T=0 C=A..9D S9149F90F

9! order to elaborate o! the idea o a subje8tiviUed stru8ture- 6e !eed to radi8aliUe the !otio! o
diere!tiality- bri!gi!g it to sel:reere!tiality7 Ferdi!a!d de Saussure 6as the irst to ormulate the
!otio! o diere!tiality- poi!ti!g out that the ide!tity o a sig!iier resides o!ly i! a series o
diere!8es @the eatures 6hi8h disti!guish it rom other sig!iiersAEthere is !o positivity i! a sig!iier-
it JisK o!ly a series o 6hat it is not7 The 8ru8ial 8o!seNue!8e o diere!tial ide!tity is that the very
abse!8e o a eature 8a! itsel 8ou!t as a eature- as a positive a8tEi every prese!8e arises o!ly
agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o pote!tial abse!8e- the! 6e 8a! also talk about the prese!8e o abse!8e as
su8h7 For e?ample- somethi!g !ot happe!i!g 8a! also be a positive eve!tEre8all the amous dialogue
rom JSilver 3laUeK bet6ee! S8otla!d 5ard dete8tive 1regory a!d Sherlo8k =olmes about the J8urious
i!8ide!t o the dog i! the !ight:timeK+

J9s there a!y other poi!t to 6hi8h you 6ould 6ish to dra6 my atte!tio!MKJTo the 8urious i!8ide!t o
the dog i! the !ight:time7KJThe dog did !othi!g i! the !ight:time7KJThat 6as the 8urious i!8ide!t7K
This positive e?iste!8e o the abse!8e itsel- the a8t that the abse!8e o a eature is itsel a
positive eature 6hi8h dei!es the thi!g i! Nuestio!- is 6hat 8hara8teriUes a diere!tial order- a!d- i!
this pre8ise se!se- diere!tiality is the 8ore eature o diale8ti8s proper7 Do!seNue!tly- 2ameso! 6as
right to emphasiUe- agai!st the sta!dard =egelia!:,ar?ist reje8tio! o stru8turalism as Ju!diale8ti8al-K
that the role o the stru8turalist e?plosio! i! the 1%'0s 6as Jto sig!al a rea6ake!i!g or a redis8overy o
the diale8ti87K
2
This is also 6hy- i! a !i8e jab at 8ultural studiesI ashio!able reje8tio! o Jbi!ary
logi8-K 2ameso! 8alls or Ja ge!eraliUed 8elebratio! o the bi!ary oppositio!K 6hi8h- brought to sel:
reere!tiality- is the very matri? o stru8tural relatio!ality or diere!tiality7
"
Furthermore- i!soar as
=egel is the diale8ti8ia! a!d his )henomenology of Spirit is the u!surpassed model o diale8ti8al
a!alysis- 2ameso! is ully justiied i! dra6i!g his !o!:i!tuitive 8o!8lusio!+ Jit is 8ertai! that the
)henomenology is a proou!dly stru8turalist 6ork avant la lettre7K
(
This ba8kgrou!d should be bor!e
i! mi!d 6he! 8o!sideri!g Ador!oIs very last 8ourse o! the J9!trodu8tio! to So8iologyK rom 1%'&-
6here Ador!o t6i8e sig!als his i!terest i! Fre!8h stru8turalism @6hi8h at that poi!t 6as e?plodi!g i!
popularity i! Fra!8eA7
#
First- ater opposi!g the methods o /eber a!d Gurkheim a!d e!dorsi!g the
the! 8urre!t 8li8hL about the Fre!8h Gurkheimea! traditio! as J8hosisme-K he says+ JTra8es o this
!otio! survive today i! Fre!8h stru8turalism- to 6hi8h- by the 6ay- 9 pla! to dedi8ate o!e o the !e?t
mai! semi!ars- be8ause 9 thi!k 1erma! stude!ts o so8iology should be able to obtai! a irst:ha!d
k!o6ledge o pre8isely these thi!gs7K
'
Forty pages later- Ador!o makes it 8lear that so8iologi8al theory
deals 6ith phe!ome!a 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the purely so8ial+

To reer to a re8e!t phe!ome!o! 6ithi! so8ial thi!ki!g- stru8turalism- Fre!8h stru8turalism- 6hi8h is
li!ked above all to the !ames o .Lvi:Strauss a!d .a8a!- a!d 6hi8h i!lue!8es very stro!gly
so8iologi8al thi!ki!gE9 hope 9 6ill be able to hold a semi!ar o! stru8turalism i! the semester ater the
!e?t o!eEor esse!tial reaso!s- ully justiied by the developme!t o its theory- this stru8turalism takes
its material above all rom a!thropology a!d- over a!d above that- rom a very spe8ii8 orie!tatio! o
la!guage resear8h- pho!ology- 6hose mai! represe!tative 6as TrubetUkoj i! Vie!!a7 /he! o!e 6a!ts
to separate stru8turalism- 6hi8h u!dersta!ds itsel esse!tially as a theory o so8iety- rom this
eth!ologi8al or a!thropologi8al material- the! basi8ally !othi!g at all remai!s rom its 8o!8eptio!7
$
9s !ot this a!!ou!8eme!t that the topi8 or a later semester 6ill be Dlaude .Lvi:Strauss a!d
2a8Nues .a8a! a 8lear sig! o Ador!oIs a6are!ess that somethi!g importa!t 6as goi!g o! i! Fra!8e at
that mome!tM /ithout 8asti!g him as a 1erma! 2oh! the 3aptist 6ith regard to .a8a!- a!d 6ithout
spe8ulati!g o! his readi!g o the latter- 6e 8a! !evertheless assume that Ador!oIs 8o!ro!tatio! 6ould
have bee! mu8h more substa!tial tha! 6as either Alred S8hmidtIs or 2Yrge! =abermasIs a8ile
dismissal o stru8turalism as a regressio! to a! u!histori8al a!d !o!:diale8ti8al mode o thi!ki!g7 The
very term chosisme should make us suspi8ious+ i there is a purely relatio!al thought 6hi8h dispe!ses
6ith a!y reere!8e to the positivity o Jthi!gsK it is stru8turalism 6ith its basi8 !otio! o the ide!tity o
d as redu8ible to a faisceau o its diere!8es rom other eleme!ts- 6hi8h is 6hy the abse!8e o a
eature 8a! itsel u!8tio! as a positive property @the li!k bet6ee! this diere!tialist approa8h a!d
=egelia! diale8ti8s 6as 8learly per8eived by Foma! 2akobso!A7
3ut i abse!8e itsel 8a! u!8tio! as prese!8e or as a positive a8tEi- or e?ample- 6oma!Is
la8k o a pe!is is i! itsel a J8urious i!8ide!tKEthe! prese!8e @ma!Is possessio! o a pe!isA 8a! also
arise o!ly agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o its @possibleA abse!8e7 3ut ho6- pre8iselyM =ere 6e !eed to
i!trodu8e sel:rele?ivity i!to the sig!iyi!g order+ i the ide!tity o a sig!iier is !othi!g but the series
o its 8o!stitutive diere!8es- the! every sig!iyi!g series has to be suppleme!tedEJsuturedKEby a
rele?ive sig!iier 6hi8h has !o determi!ate mea!i!g @sig!iiedA- si!8e it sta!ds o!ly or the prese!8e
o mea!i!g as su8h @as opposed to its abse!8eA7 The irst to ully arti8ulate the !e8essity o su8h a
sig!iier 6as .Lvi:Strauss- i! his amous i!terpretatio! o Jma!aKT his a8hieveme!t 6as to demystiy
ma!a- redu8i!g its irratio!al 8o!!otatio! o a mythi8 or magi8al po6er to a pre8ise symboli8 u!8tio!7
.Lvi:StraussIs starti!g poi!t is that la!guage as a bearer o mea!i!g by dei!itio! arises at o!8e-
8overi!g the e!tire horiUo!+ J/hatever may have bee! the mome!t a!d the 8ir8umsta!8es o its
appeara!8e i! the as8e!t o a!imal lie- la!guage 8a! o!ly have arise! all at o!8e7 Thi!gs 8a!!ot have
begu! to sig!iy gradually7K
&
This sudde! emerge!8e- ho6ever- i!trodu8es a! imbala!8e bet6ee! the
t6o orders o the sig!iier a!d the sig!iied+ si!8e the sig!iyi!g !et6ork is i!ite- it 8a!!ot adeNuately
8over the e!dless ield o the sig!iied i! its e!tirety7 9! this 6ay-

a u!dame!tal situatio! perseveres 6hi8h arises out o the huma! 8o!ditio!+ !amely- that ma! has rom
the start had at his dispositio! a sig!iier:totality 6hi8h he is at a loss to k!o6 ho6 to allo8ate to a
sig!iied- give! as su8h- but !o less u!k!o6! or bei!g give!7 There is al6ays a !o!:eNuivale!8e or
Ji!adeNuatio!K bet6ee! the t6o- a !o!:it a!d overspill 6hi8h divi!e u!dersta!di!g alo!e 8a! soak upT
this ge!erates a sig!iier:sureit relative to the sig!iieds to 6hi8h it 8a! be itted7 So- i! ma!Is eort to
u!dersta!d the 6orld- he al6ays disposes o a surplus o sig!ii8atio! O That distributio! o a
suppleme!tary ratio! O is absolutely !e8essary to i!sure that- i! total- the available sig!iier a!d the
mapped:out sig!iied may remai! i! the relatio!ship o 8ompleme!tarity 6hi8h is the very 8o!ditio! o
the e?er8ise o symboli8 thi!ki!g7
%
0very sig!iyi!g ield thus has to be JsuturedK by a suppleme!tary Uero:sig!iier- Ja 2ero
symbolic value- that is- a sig! marki!g the !e8essity o a suppleme!tary symboli8 8o!te!t over a!d
above that 6hi8h the sig!iied already 8o!tai!s7K
10
This sig!iier is Ja symbol i! its pure stateK+
la8ki!g a!y determi!ate mea!i!g- it sta!ds or the prese!8e o mea!i!g as such i! 8o!trast to its
abse!8eT i! a urther diale8ti8al t6ist- the mode o appeara!8e o this suppleme!tary sig!iier 6hi8h
sta!ds or mea!i!g as su8h is !o!:se!se @GeleuUe developed this poi!t i! his .ogic of SenseA7 4otio!s
like ma!a thus Jreprese!t !othi!g more or less tha! that floating signifier 6hi8h is the disability o all
i!ite thought7K
11
The irst thi!g to !ote here is .Lvi:StraussIs 8ommitme!t to s8ie!tii8 positivism+ he grou!ds
the !e8essity o ma!a i! the gap bet6ee! the 8o!strai!ts o our la!guage a!d i!i!ite reality7 .ike the
early 3adiou a!d Althusser- he e?8ludes s8ie!8e rom the diale8ti8s o la8k that ge!erates the !eed or a
suturi!g eleme!t7 For .Lvi:Strauss- ma!a sta!ds or the Jpoeti8K e?8ess 6hi8h 8ompe!sates or the
8o!strai!ts o our i!ite predi8ame!t- 6hile the eort o s8ie!8e is pre8isely to suspe!d ma!a a!d
provide dire8t adeNuate k!o6ledge7 Follo6i!g Althusser- o!e 8a! 8laim that ma!a is a! eleme!tary
operator o ideology 6hi8h reverses the la8k o our k!o6ledge i!to the imagi!ary e?perie!8e o the
i!eable surplus o ,ea!i!g7 The !e?t step to6ards JsutureK proper 8o!sists o three i!ter8o!!e8ted
gestures+ the universali2ation o ma!a @the Uero:sig!iier is !ot just a mark o ideology- but a eature o
every sig!iyi!g stru8tureAT its sub1ectivi2ation @re:dei!i!g ma!a as the poi!t o the i!s8riptio! o the
subje8t i!to the sig!iyi!g 8hai!AT a!d its temporali2ation
L\
@a temporality 6hi8h is !ot empiri8al but
logi8al- i!s8ribed i!to the very sig!iyi!g stru8tureA7 /ith this subje8tiviUatio!- the sta!dard
Althusseria! diere!8e bet6ee! s8ie!8e a!d ideology is let behi!dE!o 6o!der 3adiou i!trodu8es the
Truth:0ve!t a!d the subje8t as the age!t o idelity to the Truth:0ve!t i! terms 6hi8h stra!gely
resemble AlthusserIs a!alysis o ideologi8al i!terpellatio! as the tra!sormatio! o @huma!:a!imalA
i!dividuals i!to subje8ts+ the Truth:0ve!t is the big Hther 6hi8h reNuires the idelity o the subje8t 6ho
re8og!iUes itsel i! it7
This triple gesture- a 8ru8ial step rom ma!a to Jsuture-K 6as gradually a88omplished by .a8a!-
starti!g 6ith his arti8ulatio! o the 8o!8ept o the Jpoint de capitonK @Nuilti!g poi!tA 6hose appare!t
reere!8e obviously poi!ts to6ards suture7 As i! .Lvi:Strauss- the JNuilti!g poi!tK sutures the t6o
ields- that o the sig!iier a!d that o the sig!iied- a8ti!g as the poi!t at 6hi8h- as .a8a! put it i! a
pre8ise 6ay- Jthe sig!iier alls i!to the sig!iied7K
1"
This is ho6 o!e should read the tautology
Jso8ialism is so8ialismKEre8all the old Colish a!ti:8ommu!ist joke+ JSo8ialism is the sy!thesis o the
highest a8hieveme!ts o all previous histori8al epo8hs+ rom tribal so8iety- it took barbarism- rom
A!tiNuity- it took slavery- rom eudalism- it took relatio!s o domi!atio!- rom 8apitalism- it took
e?ploitatio!- a!d rom so8ialism- it took the !ame OK Goes !ot the same hold or the a!ti:Semiti8
image o the 2e6M From the ri8h ba!kers- it took i!a!8ial spe8ulatio!- rom 8apitalists- it took
e?ploitatio!- rom la6yers- it took legal tri8kery- rom 8orrupt jour!alists- it took media ma!ipulatio!-
rom the poor- it took i!diere!8e to6ards hygie!e- rom se?ual liberti!es it took promis8uity- a!d
rom the 2e6s it took the !ame7 Hr take the shark i! SpielbergIs Caws+ rom immigra!ts- it took the
threat to small:to6! daily lie- rom !atural 8atastrophes- it took their bli!d destru8tive rage- rom big
8apital- it took the ravagi!g ee8ts o a! u!k!o6! 8ause o! the daily lives o ordi!ary people- a!d rom
the shark it took its image7 9! all these 8ases- the Jsig!iier alls i!to the sig!iiedK i! the pre8ise se!se
that the !ame is i!8luded i! the obje8t it desig!atesEthe sig!iier has to i!terve!e into the sig!iied to
e!a8t the u!ity o mea!i!g7 /hat u!ites a multitude o eatures or properties i!to a si!gle obje8t is
ultimately its name7
1(
@9! a stri8tly homologous 6ay- or 3adiou- a! 0ve!t i!8ludes its !ame i! its
dei!itio!7A
This is 6hy every !ame is ultimately tautologi8al+ a JroseK desig!ates a! obje8t 6ith a series o
properties- but 6hat holds all these properties together- 6hat makes them the properties o the same
H!e- is ultimately the !ame itsel7 9magi!e a situatio! o so8ial disi!tegratio! a!d 8o!usio! i! 6hi8h
the 8ohesive po6er o ideology loses its ei8a8y+ i! su8h a situatio!- the ,aster is the o!e 6ho i!ve!ts
a !e6 sig!iier- the amous JNuilti!g poi!t-K 6hi8h stabiliUes the situatio! a!d makes it readable7 The
Ju!iversity dis8ourseK that the! elaborates the !et6ork o *!o6ledge 6hi8h sustai!s this readability by
dei!itio! presupposes a!d relies o! the i!itial gesture o the ,aster7 The ,aster adds !o !e6 positive
8o!te!tEhe merely adds a sig!iier 6hi8h all o a sudde! tur!s disorder i!to order- i!to a J!e6
harmo!y-K as Fimbaud 6ould have put it7 Take a!ti:Semitism i! the 1erma!y o the 1%20s+ ollo6i!g
their Ju!deservedK military deeat- the 1erma! people 6ere disorie!ted- thro6! i!to a situatio! o
e8o!omi8 8risis- politi8al i!ei8ie!8y- a!d moral dege!eratio!Ea!d the 4aUis oered a si!gle age!t
6hi8h a88ou!ted or it all+ the 2e6- the 2e6ish plot7 Therei! resides the magi8 o a ,aster+ although
there is !othi!g !e6 at the level o positive 8o!te!t- J!othi!g is Nuite the sameK ater he pro!ou!8es his
/ord7 Fe8all ho6- to illustrate the point de capiton- .a8a! Nuotes the amous li!es rom Fa8i!eIs
+thalie+ JCe crains Dieu! cher +bner! et 1e nai point dautre crainteK @J9 ear 1od- my dear Ab!er- a!d
9 have !o other earsKAEall ears are e?8ha!ged or o!e ear- it is the very ear o 1od 6hi8h makes me
earless i! all 6orldly matters7 The same reversal that gives rise to a !e6 ,aster:Sig!iier is at 6ork i!
ideology+ i! a!ti:Semitism- all ears @o e8o!omi8 8risis- o moral degradatio! OA are e?8ha!ged or
the ear o the 2e6E1e crains le Cuif! cher citoyen! et 1e nai point dautre crainteF
LS
.a8a! is here a radi8al =egelia! @u!bek!o6!st to himsel- !o doubtA+ there is multipli8ity
be8ause the H!e does !ot 8oi!8ide 6ith itsel7 /e 8a! !o6 see the pre8ise se!se o .a8a!Is thesis
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h 6hat is Jprimordially repressedK is the bi!ary sig!iier @that o 6orstellungs*
7epr=sentan2A+ 6hat the symboli8 order pre8ludes is the ull harmo!ious prese!8e o the 8ouple o
,aster:Sig!iiers- S
1
:S
2
- as yin*yang or a!y other t6o symmetri8al Ju!dame!tal pri!8iples7K The a8t
that Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!shipK mea!s pre8isely that the se8o!dary sig!iier @that o the /oma!A
is Jprimordially repressed-K a!d what we get in place of this repression! what fills the gap! are the
multiple %returns of the repressed!' the series of %ordinary' signifiers7 /at8hi!g /oody Alle!Is
parody o TolstoyIs War and )eace- the irst asso8iatio! that spri!gs to mi!d is- o 8ourse+ J9 this is
Tolstoy- 6here is GostoyevskyMK 9! the ilm- Gostoyevsky @the Jbi!ary sig!iierK to TolstoyA remai!s
JrepressedKEho6ever- the pri8e to be paid or that appears i! a 8o!versatio! i! the middle o the ilm
6hi8h- a88ide!tally as it 6ere- i!8ludes the titles o all GostoyevskyIs mai! !ovels+ J9s that ma! still i!
the u!dergrou!dMK J5ou mea! o!e o the *aramaUov brothersMK J5es- that idiotRK J/ell- he did
8ommit his 8rime a!d 6as pu!ished or itRK J9 k!o6- he 6as a gambler 6ho al6ays risked too mu8hRK
a!d so o!7 =ere 6e e!8ou!ter the Jretur! o the repressed-K the series o sig!iiers 6hi8h ills i! the gap
o the repressed bi!ary sig!iier JGostoyevsky7K This is 6hy the sta!dard de8o!stru8tio!ist 8riti8ism
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h .a8a!Is theory o se?ual diere!8e alls oul o Jbi!ary logi8K totally misses the
poi!t+ .a8a!Is la Femme ne&iste pas aims pre8isely at u!dermi!i!g the Jbi!aryK polar 8ouple o
,as8uli!e a!d Femi!i!eEthe origi!al split is !ot bet6ee! the H!e a!d the Hther- but is stri8tly
i!here!t to the H!e- as the split bet6ee! the H!e a!d its empty pla8e o i!s8riptio! @this is ho6 6e
should read *akaIs amous stateme!t that the ,essiah arrives o!e day too lateA7 This is also ho6 o!e
should 8o!8eive the li!k bet6ee! the split i!here!t to the H!e a!d the e?plosio! o the multiple+ the
multiple is !ot the primordial o!tologi8al a8tT the Jtra!s8e!de!talK ge!esis o the multiple resides i!
the la8k o the bi!ary sig!iierT that is- the multiple emerges as a series o attempts to ill i! the gap o
the missi!g bi!ary sig!iier7 The diere!8e bet6ee! S
1
a!d S
2
is thus !ot the diere!8e o t6o
opposed poles 6ithi! the same ield- but- rather- the 8ut 6ithi! this ield @the 8ut o the level at 6hi8h
the pro8ess o88ursA i!here!t to the o!e term+ the origi!al 8ouple is !ot that o t6o sig!iiers- but that o
the sig!iier a!d its reduplicatio- the mi!imal diere!8e bet6ee! a sig!iier a!d the pla8e o its
i!s8riptio!- bet6ee! o!e a!d Uero7
A88ordi!g to Thomas S8helli!g- real huma! i!tera8tio!s are gover!ed !ot o!ly by a pure
strategi8 8al8ulus @6hi8h 8a! be ormaliUedA- but also by o8al poi!ts that are Ji!visible u!der a
mathemati8al ormulatio! o the problem7 S8helli!g did !ot believe that game theory 6as useless-
merely that most huma! i!tera8tio!s 6ere so shot through 6ith ambiguity that these o8al poi!ts 8ould
be the ultimate guide to 6hat might or should happe!7K
1'
=ere is S8helli!gIs most amous e?ample+ 9
arra!ge 6ith a rie!d to meet him the !e?t day i! 4e6 5ork- but- due to a breakdo6! o all
8ommu!i8atio! systems- !either o us k!o6s 6here a!d 6he! to meet7 /he! S8helli!g asked his
stude!ts 6hat to do- the majority suggested goi!g to the 8lo8k at the 1ra!d De!tral Statio! at !oo!Eit
is the meeti!g poi!t 6hi8h imposed itsel as the most JobviousK o!e @to a perso! rom our 8ulture- o
8ourseA i!depe!de!tly o all strategi8 8al8ulatio!s7 The reaso!i!g is here more 8omple? tha! it may
appear+ i! 8hoosi!g a o8al poi!t- 9 do !ot merely try to guess 6hi8h 6ill be the most obvious poi!t or
both o usEthe Nuestio! 9 try to a!s6er is J/hat do 9 e?pe8t the other to e?pe8t that 9 6ill e?pe8t o
himMK 9! other 6ords- 6he! 9 go to the 1ra!d De!tral 8lo8k at !oo!- 9 do so be8ause 9 e?pe8t that my
rie!d e?pe8ts me to e?pe8t him to go there7
9! !egotiatio!s- the Jo8al poi!tK 8a! be a! Jirratio!alK 8ommitme!t @i! the se!se o !ot bei!g
grou!ded i! a!y ratio!al strategi8 8al8ulatio!A 6hi8h i?es a !o!:!egotiable eature+ or the State o
9srael- 8o!trol over the 6hole o 2erusalem is J!o!:!egotiableKT ahead o salary !egotiatio!s- a trade
u!io! leader a!!ou!8es that he 6ill !ever settle or a pay raise o less tha! # per8e!t- a!d so o!7 /hile
there are- o 8ourse- al6ays 6ays to 8ompromise 6hile sti8ki!g to the letter o o!eIs e!gageme!t @the
trade u!io! leader- say- 8a! a88ept a # per8e!t rise spread over ive yearsA- su8h a! e!gageme!t rises
the stakes+ o!e 8a!!ot aba!do! it altogether 6ithout Jlosi!g a8e7K 9! 8o!trast to purely strategi8
reaso!i!g- su8h 8ommitme!t is !ot psy8hologi8al but properly symbolic+ it is Jperormative-K grou!ded
i! itsel @J9 say so be8ause 9 say soRKA7 As su8h- the Jo8al poi!tK is a!other !ame or 6hat .a8a! 8alled
the JNuilti!g poi!tK a!d- later- the ,aster:Sig!iier7
/e 8a! also say that- i! 8o!trast to the parti8ular eatures o a thi!g- a !ame is a symptom o the
thi!g it !ames+ i!soar as it is a sig!iier 6hi8h alls i!to the sig!iied- it sta!ds or ob1et a- the d- the 1e
ne sais <uoi- 6hi8h makes a thi!g a thi!g7 The !ame !ames the u!iversality o a thi!g i! its impossible
obje8tal 8ou!terpoi!t7 Fe8all agai! .a8a!Is pre8ise readi!g o FreudIs 8o!8ept o 6orstellungs*
7epr=sentan2+ !ot simply @as Freud probably i!te!ded itA a me!tal represe!tatio! or idea 6hi8h is the
psy8hi8 represe!tative o the biologi8al i!sti!8t- but @mu8h more i!ge!iouslyA the represe!tative @sta!d:
i!- pla8e:holderA o a missi!g represe!tatio!7 0very !ame is i! this se!se a 6orstellungs*7epr=sentan2+
the sig!iyi!g represe!tative o that dime!sio! i! the desig!ated obje8t 6hi8h eludes represe!tatio!-
that 6hi8h 8a!!ot be 8overed by our ideas:represe!tatio!s o the positive properties o this obje8t7
There is Jsomethi!g i! you more tha! yoursel-K the elusive 1e ne sais <uoi 6hi8h makes you 6hat you
are- 6hi8h a88ou!ts or your Jspe8ii8 lavorKEa!d the !ame- ar rom reerri!g to the 8olle8tio! o
your properties- ultimately reers to that elusive d7 A! a8t does have a 8ause+ it is 8aused by the ob1et a-
by the 1e ne sais <uoi 6hi8h pushes me to do it7 The mome!t o!e asks- J/hat to doMK this 8ause is
lost7
1$
Goes !ot the ormula o loveEJ5ou are O youRKErely o! the split 6hi8h is at the 8ore o
every tautologyM 5ouEthis empiri8al perso!- ull o dee8tsEare you- the sublime obje8t o love- or
the tautology itsel re!ders visible the radi8al split or gap7 This tautology surprises the lover agai! a!d
agai!+ ho6 8a! you be youM
1&
3ut 6e should take a step urther here a!d re8all that .a8a! dei!es
6orstellungs*7epr=sentan2 as the represe!tative o the missi!g bi!ary sig!iier- the emi!i!e ,aster:
Sig!iier 6hi8h 6ould be the 8ou!terpart o the phalli8 ,aster:Sig!iier- guara!teei!g the
8ompleme!tarity o the t6o se?es- ea8h at its o6! pla8eEyin a!d yang- et87 .a8a!Is thesis is that the
starti!g poi!t is the sel:deerral o the H!e- its !o!:8oi!8ide!8e 6ith itsel- a!d that the t6o se?es are
t6o 6ays o deali!g 6ith this deadlo8k7
9t is i! this pre8ise se!se that o!e 8a! agree 6ith 3re8ht 6he! he 6rote that there is !o diale8ti8s
6ithout humor+ diale8ti8al reversals are deeply 8o!!e8ted to 8omi8al t6ists a!d u!e?pe8ted shits o
perspe8tive7 9! his book o! jokes- Freud reers to the 6ell:k!o6! story o a go:bet6ee! 6ho tries to
8o!vi!8e a you!g ma! to marry a 6oma! he represe!tsT his strategy is to tur! every obje8tio! i!to a
positive eature+ /he! the ma! says- J3ut the 6oma! is uglyRK he a!s6ers+ JSo you 6ill !ot have to
6orry about her de8eivi!g you 6ith othersRK JShe is poorRK JSo she 6ill be used to !ot spe!di!g lots o
your mo!eyRK a!d so o! u!til- i!ally- 6he! the you!g ma! ormulates a reproa8h impossible to
rei!terpret i! this 6ay- the middlema! e?plodes+ J/hat do you 6a!tM Cere8tio!M 4obody is totally
6ithout aultsRK 9s it !ot also possible to dis8er! i! this joke the u!derlyi!g stru8ture o the
legitimiUatio! o a Jreally e?isti!gK so8ialist regimeM JThere is too little meat a!d ri8h ood i! the
storesRK JSo you do!It have to 6orry about getti!g at a!d sueri!g a heart atta8kRK JThere are !ot
e!ough i!teresti!g ilms or good books availableRK JSo you are all the more able to 8ultivate a ri8h
so8ial lie- visiti!g rie!ds a!d !eighborsRK JThe se8ret poli8e e?ert total 8o!trol over my lieRK JSo you
8a! just rela? a!d lead a lie sae rom 6orriesRK a!d so o!- u!til O J3ut the air is so polluted rom the
!earby a8tory that all my 8hildre! have lie:threate!i!g lu!g diseasesRK J/hat do you 6a!tM 4o
system is 6ithout its aultsRK
1%
For .a8a!- the phalli8 sig!iier is su8h a suturi!g eleme!t+ .a8a!Is
8o!8ept o the phallus is e?emplary o the diale8ti8 o the priority o la8k over the eleme!t that ills it
i!Ea!d- as .a8a! poi!ts out- or a very pre8ise reaso! @k!o6! to all .a8a!ia!sA- the phallus is the very
sig!iier o this la8k+

the !ature o the phallus itsel is J!othi!g but the site o the la8k it i!di8ates i! the subje8t7K A la8k i!
bei!g provided i! its i!de?- i! its sig!iier- is prese!ted to us the! as the ultimate !ature o the phallus7
Also- to dei!e it as la8k i! bei!g i! .a8a!Is 8li!i8al pra8ti8e makes it eNuivale!t to the barred subje8t7
This radi8al positio! o the !ature o the phallus as la8k i! bei!g allo6s or the eNuivale!8e bet6ee!
this la8ki!g phallus a!d subje8tive la8k itsel7
20
9!soar as the phalli8 ,aster:Sig!iier is the poi!t o the subje8tIs symboli8 ide!tii8atio!-
ide!tii8atio! is ultimately al6ays identification with a lac"7 Sometimes- me!tio!i!g the so:8alled
e?8esses o Coliti8al Dorre8t!ess is justiiedE!ot to make 8heap jibes about it- but to ide!tiy at its
purest the logi8 6hi8h u!derlies our so8ial spa8e7 Take the 8ase o Gea 4atio!+

Today dea a8tivists- 6ho argue that bei!g dea is !ot a disability but a disti!guishi!g mark o
separate!ess- are i! the pro8ess o 8reati!g a Gea 4atio!7 They resist medi8al i!terve!tio!s- su8h as
8o8hlear impla!ts- or attempts to trai! dea 8hildre! to speak @JHralism-K they say 6ith 8o!temptA a!d
i!sist that sig! la!guage is a ully ledged la!guage i! its o6! right7 DapitaliUi!g the G i! JGeaK
symboliUes the vie6 that dea!ess is a 8ulture a!d !ot simply the loss o heari!g7
21
The e!tire a8ademi8 ide!tity:politi8s ma8hi!e is thus set i! motio!+ s8holars give 8ourses a!d
publish books o! Jdea historyK deali!g 6ith the oppressio! o the dea a!d 8elebrati!g vi8tims o
Hralism- orga!iUe Gea 8o!ve!tio!s- de!ou!8e spee8h therapists a!d heari!g:aid ma!ua8turers as a
po6erul lobby 6hi8h 6a!ts to gri!d the dea mi!ority do6!- a!d so o! a!d so orth7 9t is easy to make
u! o this 8aseEa!d o!e 8a! imagi!e goi!g several steps urther+ i Gea 4atio!- 6hy !ot 3li!d
4atio!- ighti!g the tyra!!y o VisualismM /hy !ot 9mpote!t a!d Frigid !atio!- oppressed by
Se?ualismM /hy !ot the Fat 4atio!- terroriUed by the health:ood a!d the it!ess lobbiesM /hy !ot
Stupid 4atio!- brutally oppressed by the a8ademi8 lobbyM The sky is the limit here O =o6ever- it is
mu8h more i!teresti!g to see the ormatio! o the Gea 4atio! as a repetitio! o the very matri? o the
rise o a spe8ii8ally huma! 8ommu!ityEas a! attempt to elevate @6hat is rom a biologi8al
sta!dpoi!tA a la8k i!to a disti!guishi!g eature o 8olle8tive ide!tii8atio!- a!d the! to mobiliUe 8reative
e!ergy to i!ve!t !e6 modes o suppla!ti!g this la8k7 9! a 6ay- 6e huma!s are a JGea
4atio!KE.a8a!Is !ame or the Jdea!essK @the malu!8tio!A 8o!stitutive o bei!g:huma! is- o 8ourse-
symboli8 8astratio!7
This bri!gs us to the parado? o ho6 se?ual diere!8e relates to the phalli8 sig!iier+ the
mome!t 6e 8o!8eive the phallus as sig!iier a!d !ot o!ly as a! image @JsymbolKA o pote!8y- ertility-
or 6hatever- 6e should 8o!8eive it primarily as somethi!g that- due to the very a8t that a 6oma! la8ks
a pe!is- belo!gs to her @or- more pre8isely- to the motherA7 9t is thus !ot that- i! a irst mome!t- ma!
Jhas itK a!d 6oma! does !ot- a!d- i! a se8o!d mome!t- 6oma! a!tasiUes about Jhavi!g it7K As .a8a!
puts it o! the very last page o his ]crits+ Jthe la8k o pe!is i! the mother is V6here the !ature o the
phallus is revealed7I /e must give all its importa!8e to this i!di8atio!- 6hi8h disti!guishes pre8isely
the u!8tio! o the phallus a!d its !ature7K
22
A!d it is here that 6e should rehabilitate FreudIs
de8eptively J!aSveK !otio! o the etish as the last thi!g the subje8t sees beore it sees the la8k o a
pe!is i! a 6oma!+ 6hat a etish 8overs up is !ot simply the abse!8e o a pe!is i! a 6oma! @i! 8o!trast
to its prese!8e i! a ma!A- but the a8t that this very stru8ture o prese!8e>abse!8e is diere!tial i! the
stri8t Jstru8turalistK se!se7
2"
/hat makes the phalli8 sig!iier su8h a 8omple? !otio! is !ot o!ly that- i! it- the symboli8-
imagi!ary- a!d Feal dime!sio!s are i!tert6i!ed- but also that- i! a double sel:rele?ive step 6hi8h
u!8a!!ily imitates the pro8ess o the J!egatio! o the !egatio!-K it 8o!de!ses three levels+ @1A position+
the sig!iier o the lost part- o 6hat the subje8t loses a!d la8ks 6ith its e!try i!to @or submissio! toA the
sig!iyi!g orderT @2A negation+ the sig!iier o @thisA la8kT a!d @"A negation of the negation+ the
la8ki!g>missi!g sig!iier itsel7
2(
The phallus is the part 6hi8h is lost @Jsa8rii8edKA 6ith the e!try i!to
the symboli8 order a!d- simulta!eously- the sig!iier o this loss7
2#
@Therei! is grou!ded the li!k
bet6ee! the phalli8 sig!iier a!d the 4ame:o:the:Father- the pater!al .a6T here also- .a8a!
a88omplishes the same sel:relati!g reversal- or the pater!al prohibitio! is itsel prohibited7A /hy is
this the 8aseM /hy should the prohibitio! itsel be prohibitedM The a!s6er is+ because there is no meta*
language7
The idea@lA o a symboli8 order 6hi8h 8learly a!d e?pli8itly states its prohibitio!s presupposes a
level at 6hi8h prohibitio!s that grou!d the symboli8 spa8e are 8a!8eled- a level ree o prohibitio!s at
6hi8h 6e 8a!- i! this spa8e o J8ommu!i8atio! ree o domi!atio!-K establish the very rules o
domi!atio!7 9t is as i 6e are !ot ully 8aught up i! relatio!s o domi!atio! but are able to o88upy the
!eutral positio! o a meta:la!guage rom 6hi8h 6e 8a! vie6 domi!atio! rom the outside- observi!g it
6ithout our positio! o e!u!8iatio! already bei!g ae8ted by it7 Fe8all a typi8al 8hildIs strategy 6he!
8o!ro!ted 6ith his atherIs ster! prohibitio!+ i! a @sometimes tou8hi!gA gesture o tryi!g to e!sure a
level o basi8 solidarity above @or- rather- be!eathA their 8o!li8t- he tries to address the ather as a!
eNual part!er- to se8ure the 8o!ditio!s u!der 6hi8h he 6ill a88ept the pater!al prohibitio!7 At his sho6
trial- 4ikolai 3ukhari! ou!d himsel i! e?a8tly the same predi8ame!t 6he! he heroi8ally i!sisted that
the 8ore o his subje8tivity should be e?empted rom his 8o!essio!s7 9! his letter to Stali! o Ge8ember
10- 1%"$- 6hile maki!g 8lear that he 6ould obey the ritual o 8o!essio! in public @J9! order to avoid
a!y misu!dersta!di!gs- 9 6ill say to you rom the outset that- as ar as the 6orld at large [so8iety\ is
8o!8er!ed O 9 have !o i!te!tio! o re8a!ti!g a!ythi!g 9Ive 6ritte! do6! [8o!essed\K
2'
A- he
desperately addressed Stali! as a perso!- proessi!g his i!!o8e!8e7 3ukhari!Is atal mistake 6as to
thi!k that he 8ould i! a se!se have his 8ake a!d eat it+ to the very e!d- 6hile proessi!g utter devotio!
to the Carty a!d to Stali! perso!ally- he 6as !ot ready to re!ou!8e the mi!imum o subje8tive
auto!omy7 =e 6as ready to plead guilty in public i the party !eeded his 8o!essio!- but i! the i!!er
8ir8le- amo!g 8omrades- he 6a!ted it to be made 8lear that he 6as !ot really guilty- but just 6illi!g to
play the !e8essary role i! the publi8 ritual7 This- pre8isely- the Carty 8ould !ot allo6 him+ the ritual
loses its perormative po6er the mome!t it is e?pli8itly desig!ated as a mere ritual7
Far rom bei!g a symbol o po6er a!d ertility- the phalli8 sig!iier thus gives body to the
stru8tural ault o the systemT that is- it sta!ds or the poi!t at 6hi8h a ault 8a! !o lo!ger be re8ast as a
positive eature- the poi!t o J/hat do you 6a!tM 4o system is 6ithout aultsRK the poi!t at 6hi8h
8astratio! is i!s8ribed i!to a system7 This is 6hy it has to be 8overed up+ its dis8losure eNuals the
dis8losure o 8astratio!7 This 8overi!g:up has Jt6o esse!tial re8ourses+ the 6allE6hi8h is the phobi8
solutio!Eor the veilE6hi8h is the etishisti8 solutio!7K
2$
/e 8a! eve! take a step urther a!d
8o!8eive the veil as a painted wall- like the 3erli! /all- 6hi8h 6as pai!ted o! its /ester! side- or the
6all that separates the @very dimi!ished a!d ragme!tedA /est 3a!k rom 9srael proper7 The dream that
u!derlies this politi8s o Jpai!ti!g the 6allK is best illustrated by a 6all that separates a 2e6ish settlerIs
to6! rom the Calesti!ia! to6! o! a !earby hill some6here i! the /est 3a!k7 The 9sraeli side o the
6all is pai!ted 6ith the image o the 8ou!tryside beyo!d the 6allEbut mi!us the Calesti!ia! to6!7 9s
this !ot eth!i8 8lea!si!g at its purest- imagi!i!g the outside beyo!d the 6all as it should be- empty-
virgi!al- 6aiti!g to be settledM /ho is devouri!g 6hom hereM Araid o bei!g devoured by the Arabs
surrou!di!g it- 9srael is ee8tively gradually devouri!g the /est 3a!k7
2&
A!d the same goes or the so:8alled J!o!:8astratedK om!ipote!t devouri!g mother+ apropos the
real mother- .a8a! !oted that J!ot o!ly is there a! u!satisied mother but also a! all:po6erul o!e7 A!d
the terriyi!g aspe8t o this igure o the .a8a!ia! mother is that she is all:po6erul a!d u!satisied at
the same time7K
2%
Therei! resides the parado?+ the more Jom!ipote!tK a mother appears- the more
u!satisied @6hi8h mea!s+ la8ki!gA she is+ JThe .a8a!ia! mother 8orrespo!ds to the ormula <uaerens
<uem devoret+ she looks or someo!e to devour- a!d so .a8a! prese!ts her the! as the 8ro8odile- the
subje8t 6ith the ope! mouth7K
"0
This devouri!g mother does !ot respo!d @to the 8hildIs dema!d or a
sig! o loveA- a!d it is as su8h that she appears om!ipote!t+ JSi!8e the mother does !ot respo!d O she
is tra!sormed i!to the real mother- that is to say- i!to po6er O i the Hther does !ot respo!d- he is
tra!sormed i!to a devouri!g po6er7K
"1
The lesso! rom all this is a surprisi!gly emi!ist o!e+ bei!g a
mother is !ot the ultimate desti!y or path o ulillme!t or a 6oma!- but a se8o!dary substitute7 3ei!g:
a:mother makes a 6oma! Jthe o!e 6ho has-K it obus8ates her la8k- but

behi!d the mother there is al6ays a ,edeaT this is al6ays i! the order o the possible7 A!d eve! i the
mother is e?emplary- the 8hild is o!ly a substitute- to su8h a poi!t that o!e must assume the Nuestio!
6hi8h is prese!ted here+ is mater!ity the o!ly path or the privileged path o the realiUatio! o the
emaleM O .a8a! surely had the idea that mater!ity is !ot the path- it is a metaphori8al part or the
6oma!- to the poi!t that 9 thi!k that the ethi8s o psy8hoa!alysis 8a!!ot really impose this ideal that is
more o! the side o substitutio!- eve! or Freud himsel7
"2
The JgoodK mother ills i! her la8k 6ith a 8hild:etishT the JevilK devouri!g mother ills it i!
6ith her phobi8:terriyi!g igureEagai!- t6o modes o obus8ati!g the void that is @emi!i!eA
subje8tivity7
""
3ut this des8riptio! ope!s up the spa8e or a sta!dard reproa8h to the .a8a!ia! !otio!s o the
phallus a!d 8astratio!- 6hi8h is that they i!volve a! ahistori8al short:8ir8uit+ .a8a! dire8tly li!ks the
limitatio! o huma! e?iste!8e as su8h to a parti8ular threat @that o 8astratio!A 6hi8h relies o! a spe8ii8
patriar8hal ge!der 8o!stellatio!7 The !e?t move is usually to try to get rid o the idea o 8astratio!Ethis
Jridi8ulousK Freudia! !otio!Eby 8laimi!g that the threat o 8astratio! is- at best- just a lo8al
e?pressio! o the global limitatio! o the huma! 8o!ditio!- 6hi8h is that o huma! i!itude-
e?perie!8ed i! a 6hole series o 8o!strai!ts @the e?iste!8e o other people 6ho limit our reedom- our
mortality- a!d- also- the !e8essity o J8hoosi!g o!eIs se?KA7 This move rom 8astratio! to a! a!?iety
grou!ded i! the i!itude o the huma! 8o!ditio! is- o 8ourse- the sta!dard e?iste!tial:philosophi8al
move o Jsavi!gK Freud by getti!g rid o the embarrassi!g topi8 o 8astratio! a!d pe!is e!vy @J6ho 8a!
take this seriously todayMKA7 Csy8hoa!alysis is thus redeemed- magi8ally tra!sormed i!to a respe8table
a8ademi8 dis8ipli!e that deals 6ith ho6 sueri!g huma! subje8ts 8ope 6ith the a!?ieties o i!itude7
The @i!Aamous advi8e give! to Freud by 2u!g as their boat 6as approa8hi!g the )S 8oast i!
1%12Ethat Freud should leave out or at least limit his emphasis o! se?uality- i! order to re!der
psy8hoa!alysis more a88eptable to the Ameri8a! medi8al establishme!tEis resus8itated here7
/hy- the!- is it !ot sui8ie!t to emphasiUe ho6 J8astratio!K is just a parti8ular i!sta!8e o the
ge!eral limitatio! o the huma! 8o!ditio!M Hr- to put it i! a slightly diere!t 6ay- ho6 should o!e 8ut
the li!k bet6ee! the u!iversal symboli8 stru8ture a!d the parti8ular 8orporeal e8o!omyM The old
reproa8h agai!st .a8a! is that he 8o!lates t6o levels- the allegedly !eutral:u!iversal:ormal symboli8
stru8ture a!d the parti8ular:ge!dered:bodily reere!8e+ true- he emphasiUes that the phallus is !ot the
pe!is as a! orga!- but a sig!iier- eve! a JpureK sig!iierEso 6hy the! 8all this JpureK sig!iier a
JphallusKM =o6ever- as 6as 8lear to GeleuUe @a!d !ot o!ly to .a8a!A- the !otio! o 8astratio! a!s6ers
a very spe8ii8 Nuestio!+ ho6 does the u!iversal symboli8 pro8ess deta8h itsel rom its 8orporeal
rootsM =o6 does it emerge i! its relative auto!omyM JDastratio!K desig!ates the viole!t bodily 8ut
6hi8h e!ables us to e!ter the domai! o the i!8orporeal7 A!d the same goes or the topi8 o i!itude+
J8astratio!K is !ot simply o!e lo8al 8ase o the e?perie!8e o i!itudeEthe 8o!8ept o 8astratio! tries to
a!s6er a more u!dame!tal Jar8he:tra!s8e!de!talK Nuestio!- !amely- how do we! as humans!
e&perience ourselves as mar"ed by finitude in the first place? This a8t is !ot sel:evide!t+ =eidegger
6as right to emphasiUe that o!ly huma!s e?ist i! the mode o Jbei!g:to6ards:death7K H 8ourse-
a!imals are also someho6 Ja6areK o their limitatio!s- o their limited po6er- a!d so o!Ethe hare
does try to es8ape the o?7 A!d yet- this is !ot the same as huma! i!itude- 6hi8h emerges agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o the small 8hildIs !ar8issisti8 attitude o illusory om!ipote!8e @o 8ourse- 6e do i!deed
say that- i! order to be8ome mature- 6e have to a88ept our limitatio!sA7 /hat lurks behi!d this
!ar8issisti8 attitude is- ho6ever- the Freudia! death drive- a ki!d o Ju!deadK stubbor!!ess de!ou!8ed
already by *a!t as a viole!t e?8ess abse!t i! a!imalsE6hi8h is 6hy- or *a!t- o!ly huma!s !eed
edu8atio! through dis8ipli!e7 The symboli8 .a6 does !ot tame a!d regulate !ature- but- pre8isely-
applies itsel to a! u!!atural e?8ess7 Hr- to approa8h the same 8omple? rom a!other dire8tio!+ at its
most radi8al- the helpless!ess o the small 8hild about 6hi8h Freud speaks is !ot physi8al helpless!ess-
the i!ability to provide or o!eIs o6! !eeds- but a helpless!ess i! the a8e o the e!igma o the HtherIs
desire- a helpless as8i!atio! 6ith the e?8ess o the HtherIs e!joyme!t- a!d the e!sui!g i!ability to
a88ou!t or its mea!i!g i! the terms available7
So 6hat is symboli8 8astratio!- 6ith the phallus as its sig!iierM /e should begi! by 8o!8eivi!g
o the phallus as a sig!iierE6hi8h mea!s 6hatM From the traditio!al rituals o i!vestiture- 6e k!o6
the obje8ts 6hi8h !ot o!ly JsymboliUeK po6er- but put the subje8t 6ho a8Nuires them i!to the positio!
o ee8tively e&ercising po6erEi a ki!g holds the s8epter a!d 6ears the 8ro6!- his 6ords 6ill be
take! as the 6ords o a ki!g7 Su8h i!sig!ia are e?ter!al- !ot part o my !ature+ 9 do! themT 6ear them
i! order to e?ert po6er7 As su8h- they J8astrateK me+ they i!trodu8e a gap bet6ee! 6hat 9 immediately
am a!d the u!8tio! that 9 e?er8ise @thus 9 am !ever ully at the level o my u!8tio!A7 This is 6hat the
i!amous Jsymboli8 8astratio!K mea!s+ !ot J8astratio! as symboli8- as just symboli8ally e!a8tedK @i!
the se!se i! 6hi8h 6e say that o!e is Jsymboli8ally 8astratedK 6he! deprived o somethi!gA- but the
8astratio! 6hi8h o88urs by the very a8t o bei!g 8aught up i! the symboli8 order- assumi!g a symboli8
ma!date7 Dastratio! is the gap bet6ee! 6hat 9 immediately am a!d the symboli8 ma!date 6hi8h
8o!ers o! me this Jauthority7K 9! this pre8ise se!se- ar rom bei!g the opposite o po6er- it is
sy!o!ymous 6ith po6erT it is that 6hi8h 8o!ers po6er o! me7 A!d- o!e has to thi!k o the phallus !ot
as the orga! 6hi8h immediately e?presses the vital or8e o my bei!g- my virility- a!d so o!- but
pre8isely as su8h a! i!sig!ia- as a mask 6hi8h 9 put o! i! the same 6ay a ki!g or judge puts o! his
i!sig!iaEthe phallus is a! Jorga! 6ithout a bodyK 6hi8h 9 put o!- 6hi8h gets atta8hed to my body-
6ithout ever be8omi!g its Jorga!i8 part-K orever sti8ki!g out as a! i!8ohere!t- e?8essive suppleme!t7
3ut the a8t remai!s that the !otio! o the Jphalli8 sig!iierK e!a8ts a short:8ir8uit bet6ee! pure
diere!8e @the orm o mea!i!g prior to mea!i!gA a!d a 8o!ti!ge!t bodily eleme!t7 =o6 to justiy
thisM The poi!t is- pre8isely- that the short:8ir8uit is thoroughly 8o!ti!ge!t+ to be8ome operative- pure
diere!8e- its pure orm- has to atta8h itsel to a 8o!ti!ge!t bodily eleme!t @the abse!8e>prese!8e o a
pe!isA7 This short:8ir8uit bet6ee! the opposites is the same as that o the ratio!al order o the State-
6hi8h o!ly a8Nuires ull a8tuality i! the 8o!ti!ge!t mo!ar8hIs body- 6hi8h is thereby
tra!substa!tiated>aufgehoben- tur!ed i!to a Jrele?ive determi!atio!K o its opposite7 H!e should re8all
here the phe!ome!o! o the pha!tom limb+ the se!satio! that a! amputated limb or orga!- like a ha!d-
is still atta8hed to the body a!d movi!g appropriately 6ith other body parts7 9! 8o!trast to the pha!tom
orga! @6hi8h 6e eel eve! i it is 8ut oA- the phallus is the orga! 6hi8h me! ee8tively possess @as a
pe!isA- but they do !ot eel it as su8h- al6ays e?perie!8i!g it as missi!g- 8ut o- separated7
Da! this ide!tity bet6ee! pure orm a!d a 8o!ti!ge!t bodily eleme!t be broke!M Da! the
8o!ti!ge!t obje8tal mome!t be separated rom the symboli8 orm o a pure sig!iierM This- or .a8a!- is
pre8isely 6hat happe!s i! 6hat he 8alls separation- the separatio! o the obje8t rom the sig!iier-
6hi8h re!ders visible the utter 8o!ti!ge!8y o their li!k7
FFH, T=0 C=A..9D S9149F90F TH $/CE- +

The 8o!8ept o point de capiton u!der6e!t ma!y tra!sormatio!s i! .a8a!Is later 6ork beore
i!di!g its dei!ite orm i! the !otio! o the ,aster:Sig!iier7 This- i!ally- bri!gs us to ba8k to ,iller+
i! JSuture-K irst delivered as a! i!terve!tio! at 2a8Nues .a8a!Is semi!ar o! February 2(- 1%'#- he
elevated a 8asual 6ord that o88urs o!8e i! .a8a! i!to a 8o!8ept desig!ati!g the relatio!ship bet6ee!
the sig!iyi!g stru8ture a!d the subje8t o the sig!iier7 ,illerIs impli8it starti!g poi!t is .a8a!Is
dei!itio! o the sig!iier as that 6hi8h Jreprese!ts the subje8t or a!other sig!iierK+ all sig!iiers are
!ot o! the same levelEsi!8e !o stru8ture is 8omplete- si!8e there is- i! a stru8ture- al6ays a la8k- this
la8k is illed i!- re:marked- sustai!ed eve!- by a Jrele?iveK sig!iier 6hi8h is the sig!iier o the la8k
o the sig!iier7 9de!tiyi!g the subje8t 6ith the la8k- 6e 8a! thus say that the rele?ive sig!iier o the
la8k represe!ts the subje8t or the other sig!iiers7 9 this sou!ds abstra8t- re8all !umerous e?amples
rom the history o s8ie!8e- rom phlogisto! @a pseudo:8o!8ept 6hi8h merely betrayed the s8ie!tistIs
ig!ora!8e o ho6 light really travelsA to ,ar?Is JAsiati8 mode o produ8tio!K @6hi8h is a ki!d o
!egative 8o!tai!er+ the o!ly true 8o!te!t o this 8o!8ept bei!g Jall those modes o produ8tio! 6hi8h do
!ot it ,ar?Is sta!dard 8ategoriUatio! o modes o produ8tio!KA7 ,iller ge!erates the !otio! o the
subje8t 6ithout a!y reere!8e to the imagi!ary level+ this Jsubje8t o the sig!iierK i!volves !o lived
e?perie!8e- 8o!s8ious!ess- or a!y other predi8ates 6e usually asso8iate 6ith subje8tivity7
"(
The basi8 operatio! o suture is thus that 0 is 8ou!ted as o!e+ the abse!8e o a determi!atio! is
8ou!ted as a positive determi!atio! o its o6!- as i! 3orgesIs amous 8lassii8atio! o dogs 6hi8h
i!8ludes- as a spe8ies- all the dogs !ot i!8luded amo!g the previous spe8ies- i! other 6ords- the Jpart o
!o:partK o the 8a!i!e ge!us7 /hile all this is 6ell k!o6!- 6hat is usually let out o 8o!sideratio! is
the ormal homology @as 6ell as substa!tial diere!8eA bet6ee! this rele?ive logi8 o the ,aster:
Sig!iierEthe sig!iier o the la8k o the sig!iier- the sig!iier 6hi8h u!8tio!s as a sta!d:i! @illerA o
a la8kEa!d the logi8 o the ob1et petit a 6hi8h is also repeatedly dei!ed by .a8a! as the iller o a
la8k+ a! obje8t 6hose status is purely virtual- 6ith !o positive 8o!siste!8y o its o6!- o!ly a
positiviUatio! o a la8k i! the symboli8 order7 Somethi!g es8apes the symboli8 order- a!d this d is
positiviUed as the ob1et a- the 1e ne sais <uoi 6hi8h makes me desire a 8ertai! thi!g or perso!7 9t is all
too easy to 8ou!ter the herme!euti8 8ir8le o ,ea!i!g 6ith reere!8e to the e?ter!al reality o the voi8e
@or some other material mediumA itsel- emphasiUi!g ho6 the prese!8e o this e?ter!al reality is a! a
priori 8o!ditio! o every re:prese!tatio!Eevery herme!euti8ia! 6ill ully e!dorse this poi!t- addi!g
o!ly that 6e should repeat the same move i! the opposite dire8tio! a!d 8o!8ede that every su8h
prese!8e al6ays already appears to us 6ithi! a 8ertai! symboli8 horiUo! o u!dersta!di!g- !ever i! its
virgi! a8tuality7 The true task is to see ho6 ,ea!i!g is 8orroded from within by a! e?:timate obje8t-
a! obje8t i!here!t to it- a stra!ger 6ithi!7
=o6ever- this ormal parallel bet6ee! the ,aster:Sig!iier a!d the ob1et petit a should !ot
de8eive us+ although- i! both 8ases- 6e seem to be deali!g 6ith a! e!tity 6hi8h ills i! the la8k- 6hat
diere!tiates the ob1et a rom the ,aster:Sig!iier is that- i! the 8ase o the ormer- the la8k is
redoubled- that is- the ob1et a is the result o the overlappi!g o the t6o la8ks- the la8k i! the Hther @the
symboli8 orderA a!d the la8k i! the obje8tEi! the visual ield- say- the ob1et a is 6hat 6e 8a!!ot see-
our bli!d spot i! relatio! to the pi8ture7 0a8h o the t6o la8ks 8a! operate i!depe!de!tly o the other+
6e 8a! have the la8k o the sig!iier- as 6he! 6e have a ri8h e?perie!8e or 6hi8h J6ords are
missi!g-K or 6e 8a! have the la8k i! the visible or 6hi8h- pre8isely- there is a sig!iier- !amely the
,aster:Sig!iier- the mysterious sig!iier 6hi8h seems to re8apture the i!visible dime!sio! o the
obje8t7 Therei! resides the illusio! o the ,aster:Sig!iier+ it 8oales8es 6ith the ob1et a- so that it
appears that the subje8tIs Hther>,aster possesses 6hat the subje8t la8ks7 This is 6hat .a8a! 8alls
alie!atio!+ the 8o!ro!tatio! o the subje8t 6ith a igure o the Hther possessi!g 6hat the subje8t la8ks7
9! separatio!- 6hi8h ollo6s alie!atio!- the ob1et a is separated also rom the Hther- rom the ,aster:
Sig!iierT that is- the subje8t dis8overs that the Hther also does !ot have 6hat he is la8ki!g7 The a?iom
.a8a! ollo6s is J!o 9 6ithout aK+ 6herever a! 9 @u!ary eature- sig!iyi!g mark that represe!ts the
subje8tA emerges- it is ollo6ed by a! a- the sta!d:i! or 6hat 6as lost i! the sig!ii8atio! o the real7
"#
9s- the!- the ob1et a the sig!iied o the S
1
- o the ,aster:Sig!iierM 9t may appear so- si!8e the
,aster:Sig!iier sig!iies pre8isely that impo!derable d 6hi8h eludes the series o positive properties
sig!iied by the 8hai! o Jordi!aryK sig!iiers @S
2
A7 3ut- upo! a 8loser look- 6e see that the relatio!ship
is e?a8tly the i!verse+ 6ith regard to the divisio! bet6ee! sig!iier a!d sig!iied- the ob1et a is o! the
side o the sig!iier- it ills i! the la8k i!>o the sig!iier- 6hile the ,aster:Sig!iier is the JNuilti!g
poi!tK bet6ee! the sig!iier a!d the sig!iied- the poi!t at 6hi8h the sig!iier alls i!to the sig!iied7
=o6- the!- does H!e divide i!to T6oM 1ilbert Fyle o!8e played 6ith the idea that the o!ly 6ay
to bri!g to a! e!d the i!termi!able divisio! o a! e!tity i!to smaller a!d smaller parts 6ould be to
rea8h the poi!t o the Jlast divisio!-K the poi!t at 6hi8h H!e !o lo!ger divides i!to t6o positive parts-
but i!to a part and nothingness7 For .a8a!- this !othi!g!ess positiviUes itsel as the ob1et a7 This
!othi!g!ess 6hi8h suppleme!ts every positive ide!tity is !ot to be 8o!used 6ith the diere!tiality
8o!stitutive o every ide!tity+ the relatio! bet6ee! the H!e a!d the ob1et a is !ot that o diere!tiality-
but that o dira8tio! at its most eleme!tary+ the H!e @the 8learly deli!eated obje8tA plus its teleiosis- its
blurred virtual suppleme!t- Jmore tha! o!e but less tha! t6o7K
"'
This t6o:!ess- the doubli!g o a!
e!tity i!to itsel a!d its teleiosis- the !othi!g!ess o its obje8tal shado6- pre8edes a!y relatio!ship to
the big Hther @the symboli8 orderA as 6ell as to a 8ompleme!tary other @a polar opposite+ mas8uli!e
a!d emi!i!e- light a!d dark!ess- let a!d right OA7 The ob1et a is !ot 8ompleme!tary to the H!e- but
its suppleme!tT a stra!ge suppleme!t 6hi8h makes the H!e to 6hi8h it is atta8hed !ot so mu8h more as
less tha! H!e- 8orrodi!g it rom 6ithi!T it is a! e?8ess 6hi8h subtra8ts7
"$
This !othi!g!ess 6hi8h atta8hes itsel to every e!tity as its shado6y double is the Uero:level o
!egativity a!d is as su8h i!a88essible to =egel- as the !o!:thematiUed presuppositio! o his e!tire
deployme!t o !egativity7 =egel does ormulate the overlappi!g o t6o la8ks- the subje8tIs la8k a!d the
la8k o>i! the substa!8e itsel @re8all his amous stateme!t that the se8rets o the A!8ie!t 0gyptia!s
6ere se8rets also or the 0gyptia!s themselvesAT ho6ever- he does !ot see this overlappi!g @dis:
alie!atio!A as separatio!- but as a 8a!8ellatio! o the la8kEor e?ample- i my dista!8e rom 1od is
1odIs dista!8e rom himsel- the! there is a re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! me a!d 1od7 9! other 6ords- 6hat
=egel misses is the ob1et a- the obje8t produ8ed by the overlappi!g o the t6o la8ks7 Furthermore- it is
be8ause o his i!ability to thi!k the ob1et a that =egel 8a!!ot 8o!8eive pure repetitio!+ pure repetitio!
is sustai!ed by the !othi!g!ess o the ob1et a 6hi8h hau!ts every H!e- or the H!e repeats itsel i! the
attempt to re8apture its shado67
Although the ob1et a is the !o!:sig!iyi!g glit8h 6ithi! a symboli8 edii8e- it 8a! thus o!ly be
8o!8eived agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the gap that separates a ormal stru8ture rom the eleme!ts that ill
i! its pla8es7 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller re8e!tly elaborated this gap apropos the topi8 o stru8ture a!d
8ha!ge7 =e took .a8a!Is matri? o the our dis8oursesEi! 6hi8h- i! a! a!ti:8lo8k6ise moveme!t- ea8h
o the our terms @the subje8tEbT the ,aster:Sig!iierES
1
T the 8hai! o k!o6ledgeES
2
T the
obje8tEaA gradually o88upies all our pla8es i! the stru8ture @age!t- other- truth- produ8tio!AEas the
e?emplary 8ase o ho6

somethi!g remai!s 8o!sta!t a!d- at the same time- somethi!g 8ha!ges7 /hat remai!s 8o!sta!tM The
pla8es- the relatio!ships a!d the relatio!ships bet6ee! the pla8es7 /hat 8ha!ges are the terms that
o88upy these pla8es O This is 6hat allo6s us to say that pre8isely i! the stru8ture the tra!sormatio! is
a permutatio!- that speaki!g o permutatio! is the attempt- the 6ay o maki!g the stru8ture dy!ami8
a!d- 9 6ould say- it is a 8ertai! stru8tural solutio! or the arti8ulatio! o o!e a!d o multiple7 The pla8es
are i?ed a!d- 6ith the permutatio! o terms- 6e obtai! the varia!ts7
"&
This diere!8e bet6ee! @i?edA stru8tural pla8es a!d the @variableA terms that o88upy these
pla8es is 8ru8ial i! order to break the etishisti8 8oagulatio! o a term 6ith its pla8e- to make us a6are
o the e?te!t to 6hi8h the aura ema!ati!g rom a! obje8t hi!ges !ot o! the obje8tIs dire8t properties-
but o! the pla8e it o88upies7 The 8lassi8 e?ample o this depe!de!8y o! pla8e is- o 8ourse- ,ar8el
Gu8hampIs 6ell:k!o6! uri!al- 6hi8h be8ame a! art obje8t by bei!g e?hibited as su8h7 Gu8hampIs
a8hieveme!t 6as !ot just to e?te!d the s8ope o 6hat 8ou!ts as a 6ork o art @eve! a uri!alA- butEas a
ormal 8o!ditio! o su8h u!iversaliUatio!Eto i!trodu8e the disti!8tio! bet6ee! a! obje8t a!d the
@stru8turalA pla8e it o88upies+ 6hat makes a uri!al a 6ork o art is !ot its imma!e!t properties- but the
pla8e it o88upies @i! a! art galleryAEor- as ,ar? put it lo!g ago apropos 8ommodity etishism- people
do !ot treat a perso! as a ki!g be8ause he is a ki!g- he is a ki!g be8ause people treat him as su8h7
"%
9!
everyday lie- 6e are vi8tims o a ki!d o reii8atio!+ 6e misper8eive a purely ormal or stru8tural
determi!atio! as a dire8t property o a! obje8t7 This is 6hy o!e 8a! imagi!e a Nuite justiied
provo8atio! at a Gu8hamp e?hibitio!+ a spe8tator starts to uri!ate i!to the uri!alT 6he! the sho8ked
bysta!ders remi!d him that this is a! art gallery- !ot a toilet- he replies+ J4o- you do!It get it+ 6he! 9
e!tered the spa8e o the art obje8t- my a8tivity also be8ame a! art perorma!8eE6hat 9 did 6as !ot
vulgar desublimatio!- 9 merely illed the sublime spa8e o art 6ith !e6 8o!te!t OK This logi8 6as
take! to a! e?treme i! =al AshbyIs ilm /eing -here @based o! 2erUy *oUioskiIs short !ovelA i! 6hi8h
Ceter Sellers plays the )S preside!tIs autisti8- so8ially isolated garde!er7 /he! the preside!t dies
u!e?pe8tedly- Sellers is mistake! or the preside!tIs 6ise 8o!ida!te7 =is !aSve sayi!gs about ho6 to
8ultivate a garde! are take! as e!8oded deep i!sights i!to ho6 to ru! i!ter!atio!al aairs simply
be8ause he Jis thereKEi!ds himsel i! the 6ro!g pla8e- like Foger H7 Thor!hill 6ho is mistake! or
the i!e?iste!t 1eorge *apla! at the begi!!i!g o =it8h8o8kIs orth by orthwest7
(0
This purely ormal bou!dary bet6ee! daily lie i! 6hi8h 6e e!gage 6ith obje8ts a!d the
aestheti8 sta!8e i! 6hi8h 6e suspe!d the u!8tio!al use o obje8ts 8a! also be registered i! !o!:artisti8
6ays7 Fe8all chindogu- the 2apa!ese moveme!t popular a de8ade or more ago- devoted to i!ve!ti!g
obje8ts 6hi8h are useless i! their very over:u!8tio!ality @like spe8ta8les 6ith small 6iper:blades-
e!abli!g o!e to see 8learly 6hile 6alki!g i! rai!T or a lipsti8k:tube illed 6ith butter- allo6i!g me to
butter a sli8e o bread 6ithout a k!ieAEthrough this pro8edure- a ki!d o te8h!ologi8al 8ou!terpart to
ideologi8al over:ide!tii8atio!- our e!gageme!t 6ith te8h!ology itsel is tur!ed i!to a mea!s o
releasi!g ourselves rom its grip7 Although the shit rom a se?ual to a! aestheti8 attitude to6ards a
!aked body is ote! take! as a model or su8h dise!gageme!t- o!e should !ot orget the u!dame!tal
lesso! o psy8hoa!alysis- !amely that se?uality itsel emerges rom a similar dise!gageme!t+ the
dise!gageme!t rom the pro8reative u!8tio!ality o mati!g7 Se?uality proper o88urs o!ly 6he! the
pro8ess o mati!g is 8ut o rom its pro8reative goal a!d posited as a! e!d:i!:itsel- 8aught i! the
vi8ious 8y8le o repetitive i!siste!8e 6hi8h 8a!!ot ever be ully satisied7
(1
This diere!8e bet6ee! pla8e a!d term ope!s up the possibility @or- rather- stru8tural necessityA
o a! empty pla8e la8ki!g a!y eleme!t to ill it i!T or this pla8e to o88ur- it must itsel be JmarkedK as
empty- i! other 6ords- 6ithi! it- orm a!d 8o!te!t are mediated7 This pla8e is !ot simply empty or
6ithout 8o!te!t- empti!ess is its 8o!te!t @or- to put it i! stru8turalist jargo!- abse!8eEo 8o!te!tEis
itsel prese!t i! itA7 /e thus get t6o empti!esses+ dire8t pre:symboli8 empti!ess a!d empti!ess marked
as su8h 6ithi! the symboli8 spa8eT or- i! terms o musi8- 6e get t6o sile!8es- dire8t sile!8e a!d marked
sile!8e- a sile!8e heard as su8h+ the Jsou!d o sile!8e7K 9! the old days o the juke:bo?- some di!ers
oered a simple solutio! or those guests 6ho preerred sile!8e to the !oisy musi8+ the ma8hi!e 6ould
8o!tai! a dis8 6ith !othi!g re8orded o! it lasti!g the le!gth o a! average so!g- so the 8ustomer 6ho
6a!ted pea8e just had to slip i! the appropriate 8oi!s a!d sele8t the sile!t dis8Ea !i8e stru8tural
me8ha!ism or Jmarki!gK sile!8e itsel as prese!t+ ater the empty dis8 6as sele8ted- !ot o!ly 6as there
!o lo!ger musi8 playi!g- but- i! a 6ay- silence itself was playing7
3ut does this diere!8e bet6ee! pla8e a!d 8o!te!t !ot remai! too ormalisti8M Go 6e !ot- as
8ard:8arryi!g =egelia!s- have to take a urther step to6ards the ull diale8ti8al overlappi!g o orm a!d
8o!te!tM =ere is ,illerIs 8o!8ise des8riptio! o this overlappi!g apropos 6hat o!e 8a! o!ly 8all .Lvi:
StraussIs =egelia!ism @iro!i8ally- i! vie6 o the latterIs oppositio! to diale8ti8sA+

9t is a matter o a logi8- a logi8 o detail- it is a matter o assumi!g some details7 .Lvi:Strauss had
already said it- lo!g ago- that it 6as the superiority o stru8turalism over ormalism7 =e said it i! a!
i!trodu8tio! to Vladimir Cropp- 6ho had proposed a ormaliUatio! o airy tales7 =e said+ or the
ormalist there is a orm- a!d the details are like a! amorphous material that does !ot 8ou!tT or a
stru8turalist- o! the 8o!trary- there is !o disti!8tio! bet6ee! material a!d orm a!d the stru8ture is
ou!d i! the thi!gs themselves- so everythi!g 8ou!tsT o!e 8a!!ot be satisied 6ith a! abstra8t
ormula7
(2
/e are deali!g here 6ith the properly diale8ti8al parado? o an ob1ect which %is' only its
formal structure- a parado? that oers a solutio! to the problem o stru8tural 8ha!ge stro!ger tha! the
permutatio! o terms 6ithi! a i?ed set o pla8es+ permutatio!s 8ome to a! e!d 6he! a! eleme!t
i!terve!es whose emergence ?or disappearance@ changes the structure itself7 Su8h a! eleme!t is the
.a8a!ia! ob1et a+ a! eleme!t to 6hi8hEsi!8e its status is thoroughly !o!:substa!tialEthe orm@al
matri?A itsel is li!ked as to its umbili8al 8ord7 At the @admittedly rather abstra8tA level o so8ial
dy!ami8s- su8h a! eleme!t is 6hat 3adiou 8alls the Jsymptomal torsio!K o the so8ial edii8e- its
Fa!8i`ria! Jpart o !o:partK+ this eleme!t 8a!!ot just be submitted to permutatio! a!d made to o88upy
diere!t pla8es 6ithi! the same ormal edii8eEthe 8ha!ge i! its positio! !e8essarily bri!gs about a
radi8al tra!sormatio! o the e!tire edii8e itsel7 H!e 8a! o!ly talk about the Jpart o !o:partK agai!st
the ba8kgrou!d o the topi8 o suture7
This bri!gs us- i!ally- to the most spe8ulative aspe8t o the !otio! o suture+ the purely ormal
diere!8e bet6ee! a! eleme!t a!d its pla8e u!8tio!s as a pure difference 6hi8h is !o lo!ger a
diere!8e bet6ee! t6o positive e!titiesT a!d- as 6e have already see!- this pure diere!8e is the
8o!ditio! o symboli8 diere!tiality7 The parado? is thus that 6hat sutures a ield is !ot a u!iyi!g
eature but the pure diere!8e itselEho6M
S930.9)SIS S9.04D0

H!e aspe8t o the diere!8e bet6ee! moder!ism a!d postmoder!ism- !ot o!ly i! musi8- is that
moder!ism i!volves a logi8 o prohibitio! a!d>or limitatio!E6hat is dode8apho!y i !ot a sel:
imposed set o limitatio!s o! a!d prohibitio!s o harmo!iesM The parado? here- !oted already by
Ador!o- is that the liberatio! rom the 8hai!s o to!ality assumes the orm o a sel:imposed set o
limitatio!s a!d prohibitio!s 6hi8h dema!d a stri8t dis8ipli!e7 Costmoder!ism- o! the 8o!trary- sta!ds
or a massive retur! to the sta!8e o Jeverythi!g is permitted7K 3ut 6hyM Hur a6are!ess that the
authe!ti8 Thi!g is irrevo8ably lost- that !o substa!tial relatio!ship to6ards it is possible- ge!erates a!
attitude o playul!ess i! 6hi8h the old orms 8a! be ree!a8ted i! the orm o pasti8he- deprived o
their substa!tial 8o!te!t7 9! this se!se- 6as !ot Stravi!sky @as opposed to S8hoe!bergA the irst
postmoder! 8omposer- playi!g reely 6ith all i!herited stylesM
("
9 the 8ouple o S8hoe!berg a!d Stravi!sky e?empliies the oppositio! o moder!ity a!d
postmoder!ity- 6ho the! is emblemati8 o the missi!g third optio!- that o a persiste!t traditio!alismM
The a!s6er is the third S- Sibelius- so utterly despised by Ador!oT !ot a!y old Sibelius- but Sibelius
o!8e he had outgro6! the i!lue!8e o T8haikovsky- the Sibelius o the ourth sympho!y7 =ere o!e
e!8ou!ters the !otio! o Jsubsta!8eKEo bei!g immersed i! the eth!i8 substa!8e o o!eIs bei!gEat its
most radi8al- beyo!d all 8heap late:Foma!ti8 !atio!alism7 A!d here 6e should 8ou!terpose Sibelius
a!d ,ahler- i! parti8ular- the t6o similar moveme!ts rom their sympho!ies+ ,ahlerIs !otorious
Adagietto rom his ith sympho!y- a!d 6hat is arguably SibeliusIs supreme a8hieveme!t- the third
moveme!t @9l tempo largoA rom his ourth sympho!y7 9! spite o the striki!g similarity- o!e 8a! eel
here the gap su88i!8tly e?pressed i! the amous dialogue bet6ee! the t6o 8omposers that took pla8e
duri!g ,ahlerIs visit to =elsi!ki+ ,ahler emphasiUed ho6 a sympho!y has to e!8ompass the e!tire
6orld- 6hile Sibelius pleaded or restrai!t a!d reserve7
((
The proo o SibeliusIs artisti8 i!tegrity- the proo that his 8ase is !ot straightor6ardly that o a
pho!y 8o!servative- lies i! his ultimate failure+ his sile!8e rom the mid:1%20s o!6ards 6he!- or
thirty years- he 8omposed pra8ti8ally !othi!g7
(#
At 6hat pre8ise poi!t i! his developme!t did Sibelius
all i!to sile!8eMEat the poi!t 6he! the paralla? that provided the basi8 te!sio! o his 6ork 8ollapsed-
6he! the dista!8e bet6ee! the t6o li!es o his musi8- sympho!i8 a!d !arrative- dissolved7 =is last t6o
substa!tial 8ompositio!s are the seve!th sympho!y a!d the to!e poem JTapiolaK @6hi8h- as 6as ote!
remarked- is to the orest 6hat GebussyIs J.a merK is to the seaA- a!d their 8ru8ial eature is their
similarity @both are o appro?imately same le!gth- i! o!e lo!g moveme!t i!ter!ally subdivided- but
deeply i!ter8o!!e8tedA- as i Sibelius approa8hed the same ideal:impossible poi!t o e!8ou!ter rom
t6o diere!t dire8tio!s7 This impossible>ideal Sibelius 8ompositio! is the o!e 6hi8h 6ould JsublateK
the te!sio! bet6ee! Jabsolute musi8K @sympho!iesA a!d Jprogrammati8 musi8K @to!e poemsA- bet6ee!
musi8 as represe!ti!g @depi8ti!g- evoki!g OA a determi!ate J8o!te!tK a!d musi8 as re!deri!g its
spiritual 8o!te!t dire8tly by mea!s o its ormal arti8ulatio!- bet6ee! the 6ealth o perso!al e?perie!8e
@o !atureA a!d the void o subje8tivity7 @JTapiolaK i!ter!aliUes the e?perie!8e o orest i!to a purely
spiritual- Jabstra8tK i!!er jour!ey- 6hile the seve!th sympho!y 8omes imper8eptibly 8lose to bei!g a
to!e poem7A This sy!thesis- o 8ourse- is a priori impossible- the ailure is stru8tural- a!d Sibelius- to
retai! his artisti8 i!tegrity- had to remai! sile!t7 3ut it is pre8isely o! a88ou!t o this u!8a!!y pro?imity
a!d resembla!8e that the difference bet6ee! absolute a!d programmati8 musi8- bet6ee! sympho!y a!d
to!e poem- be8omes more palpable tha! ever+ the last sympho!y re!ders a state o i!!er 8alm a!d
satisa8tio!- o a battle i!ally 6o!- o the assertio! o .ie @!o 6o!der that it ote! resembles the ith
sympho!yA- 6hile JTapiolaKEar rom alli!g i!to the Foma!ti8 trap o a! immersio! i! the heali!g
lu? o 4atureEre!ders the restless!ess a!d horror at the ra6 po6er o !ature- ma!Is vai! attempt to
resist the po6er o !ature a!d his ultimate breakdo6!7 The i!al out8ome o the 8y8le o sympho!ies is
thus assertio! a!d re8o!8iliatio!- a!d o the to!e poems ailure a!d loss- 6ith !o urther mediatio!
possible bet6ee! these t6o poles7
The third moveme!t o SibeliusIs ourth sympho!y e?empliies his i!te!se relatio!ship to6ards
musi8al JstuK+ it is a ki!d o musi8al 8ou!terpart to the statues o Fodi! @or eve! late ,i8hela!geloA
i! 6hi8h the shape o the body pai!ully- 6ith stre!uous eort- e!deavors to emerge rom the i!ert
8aptivity o the sto!e- !ever Nuite getti!g rid o the oppressive 6eight o material i!ertia7 The great
eort o this moveme!t is to give birth to the 8e!tral melodi8 moti @melodi8 li!eA- 6hi8h o88urs o!ly a
8ouple o times to6ards the e!d o the moveme!t7 This pro8edure oers the greatest possible 8o!trast
to Vie!!ese 8lassi8ism i! 6hi8h the moti- the mai! melodi8 li!e- is dire8tly give! a!d re!dered @i!
,oUartIs amous third moveme!t o (ran )artita- the melodi8 li!e literally Jemerges rom up above-K
Jrom heave!-K delivered o a!y material 6eightA7
9 6e rea8h eve! urther ba8k i! time- 6e e!ter a period i! 6hi8h there 6as !o melody i! the
stri8t se!se o the term7 Take a popular baroNue pie8e like Ca8helbelIs JDa!o!K+ today- the irst !otes
are automati8ally per8eived as the a88ompa!ime!t- so that 6e 6ait or the mome!t 6he! the melody
proper 6ill emergeT si!8e 6e get !o melody but o!ly a more a!d more i!tri8ate polypho!i8 variatio! o
@6hat 6e per8eived asA the pre:melodi8 a88ompa!ime!t- 6e someho6 eel Jdisappoi!ted7K /here does
this horiUo! o e?pe8tatio!- 6hi8h sustai!s our eeli!g that the melody proper is missi!g- 8ome romM
The mome!t o the birth o a melody proper is- o 8ourse- the eve!t o Vie!!ese 8lassi8ismT sui8e it to
re8all agai! the third moveme!t o the (ran )artita sere!ade+ ater the irst !otes- 6hose status is
u!8ertai! @today- 6e per8eive them as a88ompa!ime!t prepari!g the 6ay or the melody proper- 6hile
i! its o6! time- there probably 6as u!8ertai!ty as to its status- or it 6as probably per8eived as already
the mai! melodi8 li!eA- the melody proper e!ters as i Jrom above-K rom the Jheave!ly heights7K A!d
6here does the! the melody proper e!dM The a!s6er is also 8lear+ i! late 3eethove! @espe8ially his last
pia!o so!atasA- i! Foma!ti8ism proper- 6hose true breakthrough resides pre8isely i! re!deri!g the
melody proper Jimpossible-K i! marki!g it 6ith a bar o impossibility @the lo6eri!g o Jbeautiul
Foma!ti8 melodiesK is !othi!g but the kits8hy obverse o this u!dame!tal impossibilityA7 So 6e have
a! appare!tly u!iversal phe!ome!o! @melodyA 6hi8h is- Jas su8h-K !o!etheless 8o!strai!ed- limited to
a pre8isely dei!ed histori8al period7 /hat is perhaps the ultimate a8hieveme!t o late Foma!ti8
e?pressio!ism is pre8isely the !otio! o the melodi8 li!e- o the mai! moti- as somethi!g 6hi8h has to
be J6rought out-K s8ulpted- e?tra8ted rom the i!ertia o vo8al material by mea!s o pai!ul labor+ ar
rom u!8tio!i!g as the starti!g poi!t or a series o variatio!s 6hi8h the! orm the mai! part o the
pie8e- the mai! musi8al moti results rom the pai!ul perlaboratio! o the musi8al matter 6hi8h orms
the mai! body o the pie8e7 Cerhaps this i!te!se relatio!ship to6ards the i!ertia o stu or matter is
6hat bri!gs together Sibelius a!d Tarkovsky- or 6hom- also- the earth- i! its i!ert- humid !ature- is !ot
opposed to spirituality but is its very medium7
9! this respe8t- the third moveme!t o SibeliusIs ourth sympho!y has to be 8o!trasted 6ith its
8o!8ludi!g ourth moveme!t7 0a8h o them re!ders a spe8ii8 mode o ailure7 As 6e have just see!-
the third moveme!t displays a pai!ul eort to e?tra8t the mai! melody- a! eort 6hi8h t6i8e 8omes to
the very verge o su88eedi!g- yet ultimately ails+ J6hat purports to be the mai! theme O as the
moveme!t evolves tries t6i8e to a8hieve the status o a ully ashio!ed melody- but ba8ks o ea8h
time- irst 6he! dissuaded by the retur! o the ope!i!g moti- se8o!dly 6he! 8rushed by the brass7K
('

This ailure- this i!here!t blo8kage 6hi8h preve!ted the ultimate assertio! o the melody- must have
bee! espe8ially dii8ult to bear or Sibelius- 6ho is other6ise k!o6! or his 8apa8ity to build te!sio!
slo6ly a!d the! release it 6ith the i!al emerge!8e o the ull melodi8 motiEsui8e it to re8all the
triumpha!t i!ales o his se8o!d a!d ith sympho!y7
The ourth moveme!t ails i! a mu8h more disturbi!g 6ay+

the irst part o the i!ale appears to be o! the poi!t o releasi!g melodi8 a!d impulsive ge!erosities- as
though the pri!8iple o layi!g lo!ger- more pliable se!te!8es alo!gside the 8o!8e!trated themati8
!u8lei is about to be ho!ored7 3ut it does !ot 8ome out like that+ beore lo!g a! u!!ervi!g pro8ess o
disi!tegratio! begi!s 6hi8h by the e!d has be8ome total a!d irre8o!8ilable7 The last pages die a6ay
i!to a ki!d o resig!ed !othi!g!ess- 6ith a thri8e repeated igure rom a solo oboe as o some mythi8al
8reature utteri!g a 8ry o i!i!ite lo!eli!ess i! the roUe! 6astes o the spirit O
($
The last part o this appre8iatio! is !ot o!ly pseudo:poeti8ally a6k6ard- but stricto sensu alse+
6hat ee8tively happe!s i! the last part o the i!ale o SibeliusIs ourth is somethi!g mu8h more
u!8a!!y tha! the sta!dard e?pressio!ist re!deri!g o the utterly isolated i!dividualIs s8ream heard by
!o o!e i! the void o a! empty 6astela!d7 /e rather 6it!ess a ki!d o musi8al 8a!8er or virus
triggeri!g the gradual progressive de8ompositio! o the very musi8al te?tureEas i the very
ou!datio!- the JstuK o @musi8alA reality- loses its 8o!siste!8yT as i- to use a!other poeti8 metaphor-
the 6orld 6e live i! is gradually losi!g its 8olor- its depth- its dei!ite shape- its most u!dame!tal
o!tologi8al 8o!siste!8y7
/hat happe!s i! the last moveme!t o SibeliusIs ourth is thus somethi!g homologous to the
s8e!e to6ards the e!d o 2ose Fus!akIs -he -hirteenth Floor @1%%%A- 6he! =all- the ilmIs hero-
drives to a pla8e he 6ould !ever have 8o!sidered goi!g to other6iseT at a give! poi!t duri!g the trip- he
stops the 8ar ater seei!g that everythi!g 6ithi! it has bee! repla8ed 6ith 6irerame models7 =e has
approa8hed the limit o our 6orld- the domai! 6here our de!se reality dissolves i!to abstra8t digital
8oordi!ates- a!d he i!ally grasps the truth+ that 1%%0s .os A!gelesEhis 6orldEis a simulatio!7
So- i!stead o be8omi!g e!gaged- like the third moveme!t- i! a struggle to 6rest out the
melody- the ourth moveme!t begi!s as i everythi!g is alright- as i the melodi8 starti!g poi!t is
already at our disposal- a!d the ull orga!i8 deployme!t o its pote!tial is promisedT but 6hat happe!s
!e?t is that the material does !ot resist our eort to mould it properly @as i! the third moveme!tAEit
rather dire8tly disi!tegrates- slips a6ay- gradually losi!g its material substa!8e- tur!i!g i!to a void7 /e
8a! do a!ythi!g 6e 6a!t 6ith it- the problem is that the stu o! 6hi8h 6e 6ork progressively
implodes- 8ollapses- simply adi!g out7 9s !ot this te!sio! bet6ee! third a!d ourth moveme!t o the
ourth sympho!y 8omparable to the te!sio! bet6ee! =it8h8o8kIs 6ertigo a!d his )sychoM
(&
9t is the
diere!8e bet6ee! the huma! a!d the i!huma!- or rather the post:huma!+ 6hile the third moveme!t
re!ders the huma! dime!sio! at its most mela!8holi8- the ourth moveme!t shits i!to a dime!sio!
beyo!d- i! 6hi8h a mad post:huma! playul!ess 8oi!8ides 6ith subje8tive destitutio!7
THE P!RE DIFFERENCE

GeleuUe ote! varies the moti o ho6- i! be8omi!g post:huma!- 6e should lear! to pra8ti8e Ja
per8eptio! as it 6as beore me! @or aterA O released rom their huma! 8oordi!atesK+
(%
those 6ho
ully e!dorse the 4ietUs8hea! Jretur! o the sameK are stro!g e!ough to sustai! a visio! o the
Jirides8e!t 8haos o a 6orld beore ma!7K
#0
Although GeleuUe ope!ly resorts here to *a!tia!
la!guage- talki!g about the dire8t a88ess to Jthi!gs @the 6ay they areA i! themselves-K his poi!t is
pre8isely that o!e should subtra8t the oppositio! bet6ee! phe!ome!a a!d thi!gs:i!:themselves-
bet6ee! the phe!ome!al a!d the !oume!al- rom its *a!tia! 8o!te?t- 6here !oume!a are tra!s8e!de!t
thi!gs that orever elude our grasp7 /hat GeleuUe reers to as Jthi!gs:i!:themselvesK are i! a 6ay even
more phenomenal tha! our shared phe!ome!al reality+ they are the impossible phe!ome!a- the
phe!ome!a e?8luded rom our symboli8ally 8o!stituted reality7 The gap that separates us rom
!oume!a is thus primarily !ot epistemologi8al- but pra8ti8o:ethi8al a!d libidi!al+ there is !o Jtrue
realityK behi!d or be!eath phe!ome!aT !oume!a are phe!ome!al thi!gs 6hi8h are Jtoo stro!g-K too
i!te!se or i!te!sive- or our per8eptual apparatus- attu!ed as it is to 8o!stituted reality7 =ere-
epistemologi8al ailure is a se8o!dary ee8t o libidi!al terror- its u!derlyi!g logi8 a reversal o *a!tIs
J5ou 8a!- be8ause you mustRK+ J5ou 8a!!ot @k!o6 !oume!aA- be8ause you must !otRK Thi!k o
someo!e bei!g or8ed to 6it!ess terriyi!g a8ts o torture+ i! a 6ay- the mo!strosity o 6hat they see
6ould make this a! e?perie!8e o the !oume!al impossible:real that shatters the 8oordi!ates o our
8ommo! reality7 @The same holds or 6it!essi!g i!te!se se?ual a8tivity7A
9! this se!se- i 6e 6ere to dis8over ilms shot i! a 8o!8e!tratio! 8amp amo!g the
Musulmannen- sho6i!g s8e!es rom their daily lie- ho6 they 6ere systemati8ally mistreated a!d
deprived o all dig!ity- 6e 6ould have Jsee! too mu8h-K see! the prohibited- 6e 6ould have e!tered a
orbidde! territory o 6hat should have remai!ed u!see!7 9s this !ot a! e?ample o i!te!sity gro6i!g so
stro!g that it u!dermi!es or e?plodes the very tra!s8e!de!tal 8oordi!ates o the 6orld i! 6hi8h it
o88ursM This- perhaps- is 6hat is missi!g i! 3adiouIs !otio! o i!te!sity as a eature o all e!tities that
belo!g to a 6orld+ they parti8ipate i! this 6orld 6ith more or less i!te!sity- do6! to the mi!imum o
the Jpart o !o:part-K o the eleme!t 6hi8h is ormally part o a 6orld- but deprived o a!y i!te!se
parti8ipatio! i! it7
#1
3ut 6hat about the idea o e&cessive intensityM Su8h a! i!te!sity e?plodes a 6orld-
but !ot rom outside- as a simple e?ter!al 8atastropheT it e?plodes it rom 6ithi!- overburde!i!g its
i!here!t or 8o!stitutive i!te!sity7 @For e?ample- a 8ommu!ity 8a! disi!tegrate 6he! its rulers take the
om!ipote!8e o their role too literally a!d e!gage i! a murderous a!!ihilatio! o their subje8ts7A
This is also 6hat makes it so u!bearable to 6it!ess the last mome!ts o people 6ho k!o6 they
are about to die a!d are i! this se!se already livi!g:dead7 Agai!- imagi!e that 6e dis8overed i!ta8t-
amo!g the rui!s o the T6i! To6ers- a video 8amera rom o!e o the pla!es 8o!tai!i!g ootage o 6hat
6e!t o! amo!g the passe!gers i! the mi!utes beore the pla!e 8rashed i!to o!e o the to6ers7
#2
9! all
these 8ases- 6e 6ould ee8tively see thi!gs as they are Ji! themselves-K outside huma! 8oordi!ates-
outside our huma! realityE6e 6ould see the 6orld 6ith i!huma! eyes7 9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d
that 6e should also lo8ate Dlaude .a!Uma!!Is amous stateme!t that- i by 8ha!8e he 6ere to stumble
upo! some do8ume!tary ootage depi8ti!g the a8tual pro8ess o 2e6s bei!g killed i! Aus8h6itU- he
6ould destroy it immediatelyEthis is 2e6ish i8o!o8lasm at its purest- as a prohibitio! o! sho6i!g
images o the ra6 Feal7 The lesso! here is proou!dly =egelia!+ the diere!8e bet6ee! the
phe!ome!al a!d the !oume!al has to be rele8ted or tra!sposed ba8k i!to the phe!ome!al- as the split
bet6ee! the !ormal Jge!triiedK phe!ome!o! a!d the JimpossibleK phe!ome!o!7
Fobert Altma!Is u!iverse- best e?empliied i! his masterpie8e Short ,uts- is ee8tively o!e o
8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ters bet6ee! a multitude o series- a u!iverse i! 6hi8h diere!t series 8ommu!i8ate
a!d reso!ate at the level o 6hat Altma! himsel reers to as Jsublimi!al realityK @mea!i!gless
me8ha!i8al sho8ks- e!8ou!ters- a!d imperso!al i!te!sities 6hi8h pre8ede the level o so8ial mea!i!gA7
H!e should thus avoid the temptatio! to redu8e Altma! to a poet o Ameri8a! alie!atio!- re!deri!g the
sile!t despair o everyday lives+ there is a!other Altma!- or 6hom the o8us is o! ope!i!g o!esel up
to joyul aleatory e!8ou!ters7 2ust as GeleuUe a!d 1uattari read the abse!8e o the i!a88essible a!d
elusive tra!s8e!de!t De!ter @Dastle- Dourt- 1odA i! *aka as the prese!8e o multiple passages a!d
tra!sormatio!s- o!e is tempted to read Altma!ia! Jdespair a!d a!?ietyK as the de8eptive obverse o a
more airmative immersio! i! a multitude o sublimi!al i!te!sities7 The diere!8e is pre8isely that
bet6ee! huma! a!d i!huma!+ the story read as o!e o despair a!d alie!atio! is the story redu8ed to its
huma! 8oordi!ates- 6hile the same story appears as a! i!terplay o 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ters bet6ee! a
multitude o series 6he! it is released rom those 8oordi!ates a!d read as part o the Jirides8e!t 8haos
o a 6orld beore ma!7K
This Jirides8e!t 8haosK is pure .ie as the lu? o virtual 8reativity- the lu? i! 6hi8h Spi!oUaIs
substa!8e as causa sui overlaps 6ith the Fi8htea! sel:positi!g o the pure absolute 9+ JThe 8o!8ept
posits itsel to the same e?te!t that it is 8reated7 /hat depe!ds o! a ree 8reative a8tivity is also that
6hi8h- i!depe!de!tly a!d !e8essarily- posits itsel i! itsel+ the most subje8tive 6ill be the most
obje8tive7K
#"
Do!seNue!tly- the most su88i!8t dei!itio! o GeleuUeIs late philosophy 6ould be that it
amou!ts to a JFi8htea!iUed Spi!oUismKEa!d 6e should just bear i! mi!d that Fi8hte 6as @or per8eived
himsel asA the absolute a!ti:Spi!oUist7 The purely virtual sel:reere!tial a8t o 8reatio! moves at
i!i!ite speed- si!8e it !eeds !o e?ter!ality i!>through 6hi8h to mediate its sel:positi!g moveme!t+
J9!i!ite speed thus des8ribes a moveme!t that !o lo!ger has a!ythi!g to do 6ith a8tual moveme!t- a
purely virtual Vmoveme!tI that has al6ays rea8hed its desti!atio!- 6hose movi!g is itsel its o6!
desti!atio!7K
#(
This is 6hy GeleuUe i!sists that desire has !o obje8t @6hose la8k 6ould trigger a!d
sustai! its moveme!tA+ desire itsel is Ja purely virtual Vmoveme!tI that has al6ays rea8hed its
desti!atio!- 6hose movi!g is its o6! desti!atio!7K This is also the thrust o GeleuUeIs readi!g o
maso8hism a!d 8ourtly loveEi! both 8ases 6hat is at stake is !ot the logi8 o sa8rii8e- but rather ho6
to sustai! desire7 A88ordi!g to the sta!dard readi!g o maso8hism- the maso8hist- like everyo!e else- is
also looki!g or pleasureT his problem is that- be8ause o his i!ter!aliUed superego- he has to a88ess
pleasure 6ith pai!- to pa8iy the oppressive age!8y 6hi8h i!ds pleasure i!tolerable7 For GeleuUe- o!
the 8o!trary- the maso8hist 8hooses pai! i! order to

dissolve the pseudo:li!k o desire 6ith pleasure as its e?tri!si8 measure7 Cleasure is i! !o 6ay
somethi!g that 8a! o!ly be rea8hed via the detour o pai!- but that 6hi8h has to be delayed to the
ma?imum si!8e it is somethi!g 6hi8h i!terrupts the 8o!ti!uous pro8ess o the positive desire7 There is
a! imma!e!t joy o desire- as i desire ills itsel 6ith itsel a!d its 8o!templatio!s- a!d 6hi8h does !ot
imply a!y la8k- a!y impossibility7
##
A!d the same goes or 8ourtly love+ its eter!al postpo!eme!t o ulillme!t does !ot obey a la6
o la8k or a! ideal o tra!s8e!de!8e+ here also- it sig!als a desire 6hi8h la8ks !othi!g- si!8e it i!ds its
ulillme!t i! itsel- i! its o6! imma!e!8eT every pleasure is- o! the 8o!trary- already a re:
territorialiUatio! o the ree lu? o desire7
#'
Therei! resides the ultimate iro!y o GeleuUeIs 8ritiNue o
=egel+ 6he!- agai!st =egel- GeleuUe 8laims that 8reatio! Jis immediately 8reativeT there is !o
tra!s8e!de!t or !egati!g subje8t o 8reatio! that might !eed time i! order to be8ome 8o!s8ious o itsel
or other6ise 8at8h up 6ith itsel-K he thereby imputes to =egel a substa!tialiUatio!:reii8atio! 6hi8h
6as !ever there- a!d- i! this 6ay- obliterates pre8isely that dime!sio! i! =egel 6hi8h is 8losest to
GeleuUe himsel7
#$
=egel repeatedly i!sists that Spirit is Ja produ8t o itselK+ it is !ot a pre:e?isti!g
Subje8t i!terve!i!g i!to obje8tivity- sublati!g:mediati!g it- but the result o its o6! moveme!t- that is-
pure pro8essuality7 As su8h- it !eeds time !ot to J8at8h up 6ith itsel-K but simply to ge!erate itsel7
#&
GeleuUeIs se8o!d reproa8h to =egel is the obverse o this irst misreadi!g+ J6hereas a88ordi!g
to =egel a!y give! Vthi!g diers 6ith itsel be8ause it diers irst 6ith all that it is !ot-I !amely 6ith
all the obje8ts to 6hi8h it relates- GeleuUeIs 3ergso! airms that a Vthi!g diers 6ith itsel irst-
immediately-I o! a88ou!t o the Vi!ter!al e?plosive or8eI it 8arries 6ithi! itsel7K
#%
9 ever there 6as a
stra6 ma!- it is GeleuUeIs =egel+ is !ot =egelIs basi8 i!sight pre8isely that every e?ter!al oppositio! is
grou!ded i! the thi!gIs imma!e!t sel:oppositio!- that every e?ter!al diere!8e implies sel:
diere!8eM A i!ite bei!g diers rom other @i!iteA thi!gs be8ause it is already !ot ide!ti8al 6ith itsel7
/he! GeleuUe talks about a pro8ess 6hi8h 8reates a!d sees i! a si!gle moveme!t- he thereby
8o!s8iously evokes the ormula o i!telle8tual i!tuitio!- the prerogative o 1od alo!e7 GeleuUe pursues
a pre:8riti8al age!da- passio!ately dee!di!g Spi!oUaIs a!d .eib!iUIs metaphysi8al JrealismK @dire8t
i!sight i!to the very 8ore o thi!gs:i!:themselvesA agai!st *a!tIs J8riti8alK limitatio! o our k!o6ledge
to the domai! o phe!ome!al represe!tatio!s7 =o6ever- the =egelia! reply to this 6ould be as ollo6s+
6hat i the dista!8e o re:prese!tatio!- the dista!8e that re!ders the Thi!g i!a88essible to us- is
i!s8ribed i!to the heart o the Thi!g itsel- so that the very gap that separates us rom the Thi!g
i!8ludes us i! itM Therei! lies the 8ore o =egelia! Dhristology- i! 6hi8h our alie!atio! rom 1od
8oi!8ides 6ith the alie!atio! o 1od rom himsel7 GeleuUe says that propositio!s do !ot des8ribe
thi!gs but are the verbal a8tualiUatio! o those thi!gs- !amely these thi!gs themselves i! their verbal
modeE6ould !ot =egel 8laim- i! the same 6ay- that our re:prese!tatio! o 1od is 1od himsel i! the
mode o represe!tatio!- that our erro!eous per8eptio! o 1od is 1od himsel i! erro!eous modeM
'0
The e?emplary 8ase o su8h a 8reative pro8ess is art 6hi8h Jallo6s or a! absolute a!d
ge!ui!ely tra!sormative liberatio!:e?pressio!- pre8isely be8ause 6hat it liberates is !othi!g other tha!
the liberati!g itsel- the moveme!t o pure spiritualiUatio! or dematerialiUatio!K+
'1
6hat has to be
liberated is ultimately liberatio! itsel- the moveme!t o JdeterritorialiUi!gK all a8tual e!tities7 This sel:
relati!g move is 8ru8ialEa!d- alo!g the same li!es- 6hat desire desires is !ot a determi!ate obje8t but
the u!8o!ditio!al assertio! o desiri!g itsel @or- as 4ietUs8he put it- the 6ill is at its most radi8al the
6ill to 6ill itselA7 A!other !ame or this pro8ess is individuation as Ja relatio! 8o!8eived as a pure or
absolute bet6ee!- a bet6ee! u!derstood as ully i!depe!de!t o or e?ter!al to its termsEa!d thus a
bet6ee! that 8a! just as 6ell be des8ribed as Vbet6ee!I !othi!g at all7K
'2
The status o this Jabsolute bet6ee!K is that o a pure antagonismF 9ts stru8ture 6as deployed by
.a8a! apropos se?ual diere!8e 6hi8h- as a diere!8e- pre8edes the t6o terms bet6ee! 6hi8h it is the
diere!8e+ the poi!t o .a8a!Is Jormulae o se?uatio!K is that both mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e positio!s
are 6ays o avoidi!g the deadlo8k o the diere!8e as su8h7 This is 6hy .a8a!Is 8laim that se?ual
diere!8e is Jreal:impossibleK is stri8tly sy!o!ymous 6ith his 8laim that Jthere is !o se?ual
relatio!ship7K Se?ual diere!8e is or .a8a! !ot a irm set o Jstati8K symboli8 oppositio!s a!d
i!8lusio!s or e?8lusio!s @heterose?ual !ormativity that relegates homose?uality a!d other
Jperversio!sK to some se8o!dary roleA- but the !ame o a deadlo8k- o a trauma- o a! ope! Nuestio!- o
somethi!g that resists every attempt at its symboliUatio!7 0very tra!slatio! o se?ual diere!8e i!to a
set o symboli8 oppositio!@sA is doomed to ail- a!d it is this very JimpossibilityK that ope!s up the
terrai! o the hegemo!i8 struggle or 6hat Jse?ual diere!8eK 6ill mea!7 A!d the same goes or
politi8al diere!8e @8lass struggleA+ the diere!8e bet6ee! .et a!d Fight is !ot o!ly the diere!8e
bet6ee! the t6o terms 6ithi! a shared ield- it is JrealK si!8e a !eutral des8riptio! o it is !ot
possibleEthe diere!8e bet6ee! .et a!d Fight appears diere!tly i per8eived rom the .et or rom
the Fight+ or the irst- it sig!als the a!tago!ism 6hi8h 8uts a8ross the e!tire so8ial ield @the
a!tago!ism 8o!8ealed by the FightA- 6hile the Fight per8eives itsel as a or8e o moderatio!- so8ial
stability- a!d orga!i8 u!ity- 6ith the .et redu8ed to the positio! o a! i!truder disturbi!g the orga!i8
stability o the so8ial bodyEor the Fight- the .et is as su8h Je?treme7K 9! this pre8ise se!se- se?ual
@or politi8alA diere!8e is the Jdark pre8ursor-K !ever prese!t- a purely virtual Jpseudo:8ause-K the d
6hi8h al6ays @8o!stitutivelyA Jla8ks at its o6! pla8eK @all its a8tualiUatio!s already displa8e itA a!d- as
su8h- distributes the t6o a8tual series @mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e i! se?uality- the Fight a!d the .et i!
politi8sA7 9! this se!se- .a8a! advo8ates a !o!:relatio!al 8o!8ept o the phallus+ the phalli8 sig!iier
Jou!ds se?uality i! its e!tirety as system or stru8tureK+ it is i! relatio! to the phalli8 obje8t

that the variety o terms a!d the variatio! o diere!tial relatio!s are determi!ed i! ea8h 8ase O The
relative pla8es o the terms i! the stru8ture depe!d irst o! the absolute pla8e o ea8h- at ea8h mome!t-
i! relatio! to the obje8t ] ? that is al6ays 8ir8ulati!g- al6ays displa8ed i! relatio! to itsel O
Gistributi!g the diere!8es through the e!tire stru8ture- maki!g the diere!tial relatio!s vary 6ith its
displa8eme!ts- the obje8t ] ? 8o!stitutes the diere!tiati!g eleme!t o diere!8e itsel7
'"
=ere- ho6ever- o!e should be 8areul to avoid the same trap that lurks apropos GeleuUeIs !otio!
o the Jpure pastK+ this i?ed eleme!t 6hi8h- as the Jabse!t 8ause-K distributes the eleme!ts is a purely
virtual eleme!t 6hi8h is prese!t o!ly i! its ee8ts a!d is- as su8h- retroa8tively posited @pre:sup:posedA
by its ee8tsT it has !o substa!tial i!depe!de!t e?iste!8e prior to this pro8ess7
'(
9t is be8ause o this
Jmi!imalistKEpurely ormal a!d i!substa!tialEstatus o the Feal that- or .a8a!- repetition precedes
repressionEor- as GeleuUe put it su88i!8tly+ J/e do !ot repeat be8ause 6e repress- 6e repress be8ause
6e repeat7K
'#
9t is !ot that- irst- 6e repress some traumati8 8o!te!t- a!d the!- si!8e 6e are u!able to
remember it a!d thus to 8lariy our relatio!ship to it- this 8o!te!t 8o!ti!ues to hau!t us- repeati!g itsel
i! disguised orms7 9 the Feal is a mi!imal diere!8e- the! repetitio! @6hi8h establishes this
diere!8eA is primordialT the prima8y o repressio! emerges 6ith the Jreii8atio!K o the Feal i!to a
Thi!g that resists symboliUatio!Eo!ly the! does it appear that the e?8luded or repressed Feal i!sists
a!d repeats itsel7 The Feal is primordially !othi!g but the gap that separates a thi!g rom itsel- the
gap o repetitio!7
''
GeleuUia! Jpure diere!8eK at its purest- i 6e may put it i! this tautologi8al 6ay- is the purely
virtual diere!8e o a! e!tity 6hi8h repeats itsel as totally ide!ti8al 6ith regard to its a8tual properties+
Jthere are sig!ii8a!t diere!8es i! the virtual i!te!sities e?pressed i! our a8tual se!satio!s7 These
diere!8es do !ot 8orrespo!d to a8tual re8og!iUable diere!8es7 That the shade o pi!k has 8ha!ged i!
a! ide!tiiable 6ay is !ot all:importa!t7 9t is that the 8ha!ge is a sig! o a re:arra!geme!t o a! i!i!ity
o other a8tual a!d virtual relatio!s7K
'$
Goes !ot su8h a pure diere!8e take pla8e i! the repetitio! o
the same a8tual melodi8 li!e i! Fobert S8huma!!Is J=umoresNueKM This pie8e is to be read agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o the gradual loss o the voi8e i! S8huma!!Is so!gs+ it is !ot a simple pia!o pie8e- but a
so!g 6ithout the vo8al li!e- 6ith the vo8al li!e redu8ed to sile!8e- so that all 6e a8tually hear is the
pia!o a88ompa!ime!t7 This is ho6 o!e should read the amous Ji!!er voi8eK @innere StimmeA added by
S8huma!! @i! the 6ritte! s8oreA as a third li!e bet6ee! the t6o pia!o li!es- higher a!d lo6er+ as the
vo8al melodi8 li!e 6hi8h remai!s a !o!:vo8aliUed Ji!!er voi8eK @6hi8h e?ists o!ly as +ugenmusi"-
musi8 or the eyes o!ly- i! the guise o 6ritte! !otesA7 This abse!t melody is to be re8o!stru8ted o! the
basis o the a8t that the irst a!d third levels @the right a!d the let ha!d pia!o li!esA do !ot relate to
ea8h other dire8tlyT that is- their relatio!ship is !ot that o a! immediate mirrori!g+ i! order to a88ou!t
or their i!ter8o!!e8tio!- o!e is thus 8ompelled to @reA8o!stru8t a third- JvirtualK i!termediate level
@melodi8 li!eA 6hi8h- or stru8tural reaso!s- 8a!!ot be played7 S8huma!! takes this use o the abse!t
melody to a! appare!tly absurd level o sel:reere!8e 6he!- later i! the same ragme!t o
J=umoresNue-K he repeats the same t6o a8tually played melodi8 li!es- yet this time the s8ore 8o!tai!s
!o third abse!t melodi8 li!e- !o i!!er voi8eEso that 6hat is abse!t here is the abse!t melody- abse!8e
itsel7 =o6 are 6e to play these !otes 6he!- at the level o 6hat is a8tually to be played- they repeat the
previous !otes e?a8tlyM The a8tually played !otes are deprived o!ly o 6hat is !ot there- o their
8o!stitutive la8kT or- to reer to the 3ible- they lose eve! that 6hi8h they !ever had7
'&
Do!seNue!tly-
6he! 6e suspe!d the symboli8 ei8ie!8y o the i!e?iste!t Jthird melody-K 6e do !ot simply retur! to
the e?pli8it li!eT 6hat 6e get is a double !egatio!Ei! the terms o the .ubit8h joke- 6e do !ot get
straight 8oee- but a !o:!o:milk 8oeeT
'%
i! terms o S8huma!!Is pie8e- 6e do !ot get a straight
melody- but a melody 6hi8h la8ks the la8k itsel- i! 6hi8h the la8ki!g Jthird li!eK is itsel la8ki!g7
H! a 8loser a!alysis- 6e 8ould say that J=umoresNueK 8a! be played i! our 6ays+ @1A simply
ig!ori!g the third @abse!tA li!eT @2A playi!g it so that the abse!t li!e reso!ates i! the other t6o li!esT @"A
playi!g it 6ithout the reso!a!8e o the third li!e- but so that this abse!8e o reso!a!8e is elt- that is-
playi!g the t6o li!es 6ith a8tive ig!ora!8e o the thirdT @(A playi!g the pie8e so that the third abse!t
li!e reso!ates i! it- but i! a! a8tive a!d rele8ted 6ay- ge!erati!g the impressio! that the third li!e does
!ot just orga!i8ally reso!ate- but someho6 imposes itselEthis last optio! is- o 8ourse- the most
dii8ult7
$0
9! 4atsume SosekiIs -he -hree*,ornered World- a pai!ter @the !arratorA- 6a!deri!g over the
mou!tai!s- i!ds himsel dra6! to H:4ami- the stra!ge a!d beautiul daughter o a! i!!keeper rumored
to have aba!do!ed her husba!d ater alli!g i! love 6ith a priest at a !earby temple7 =e 6a!ts to pai!t
her- but- troubled by a 8ertai! Nuality i! her e?pressio! 6hi8h 8o!de!ses the e!igma o her lie- ails to
8apture it+

J9 8ould pai!t it !o6 really7 3ut itIs just that thereIs somethi!g missi!g- a!d 9 thi!k it 6ould be a pity
to pai!t you 6ithout that somethi!g7KJ/hat do you mea!- Vsomethi!g missi!gIM Si!8e this is the a8e 9
6as bor! 6ith- there is !othi!g 9 8a! do about it- is thereMKJ0ve! the a8e you 6ere bor! 6ith 8a! be
varied i! ma!y 6ays7K
$1
To6ards the e!d o the !ovel- the pai!ter observes H:4ami givi!g some mo!ey to a destitute
bearded soldier 6ho- she later tells him- is her e?:husba!d7 The soldier the! departs o! a trai! to the
ro!t7 The !arrator sees ho6Ea!d these are the very last li!es o the !ovelEthe soldier-

illed 6ith the sad!ess o parti!g- 6as taki!g o!e last look out o the 6i!do67 2ust the!- he a!d H:4ami
happe!ed to 8at8h sight o ea8h other- but the e!gi!e 8o!ti!ued to 8hug o!- a!d very soo! his a8e
disappeared rom vie67H:4ami gaUed ater the trai! abstra8tedly- but stra!gely e!ough the look o
abstra8tio! 6as suused 6ith that J8ompassio!K 6hi8h had hitherto bee! la8ki!g7JThatIs itR ThatIs itR
4o6 that you 8a! e?press that eeli!g- you are 6orth pai!ti!g-K 9 6hispered- patti!g her o! the
shoulder7 9t 6as at that very mome!t that the pi8ture i! my mi!d re8eived its i!al tou8h7
$2
9s !ot this story a beautiul parable o a JpureK paralla? shitEa shit which does not relate to
the change in any of the ob1ects positive propertiesM 3adiouIs @a!d GeleuUeIsA !ame or this shit is Ja
mi!imal diere!8e7K 9! .a8a!ese- 6hat o88urs is the additio! or subtra8tio! o the ob1et a rom the
thi!g- o that u!athomable d 6hi8h sta!ds or the i!s8riptio! o the subje8t itsel @its gaUe or desireA
i!to the obje8t7 This mi!imal diere!8e 8a! o!ly be dete8ted at the mome!t o shortest shado6 6he!-
as 4ietUs8he put it i! /eyond (ood and Evil- Jat midday it happe!ed- at midday o!e be8ame t6o7K
This logi8 o virtual diere!8e 8a! also be dis8er!ed i! a!other parado?7 The 8i!ema versio! o
Go8toro6Is /illy /athgate is basi8ally a ailure- but a! i!teresti!g o!e+ a ailure 6hi8h !o!etheless
evokes i! the vie6er the spe8ter o a mu8h better !ovel7 =o6ever- 6he! o!e the! goes o! to read the
!ovel o! 6hi8h the ilm is based- o!e is disappoi!tedEthis is not the !ovel the ilm evoked as the
sta!dard 6ith regard to 6hi8h it ailed7 The repetitio! @o a ailed !ovel i! the ailed ilmA thus gives
rise to a third- purely virtual- eleme!t+ the better !ovel7 This is a! e?emplary 8ase o 6hat GeleuUe
des8ribes i! a 8ru8ial passage rom Difference and 7epetition+

6hile it may seem that the t6o prese!ts are su88essive- at a variable dista!8e apart i! the series o reals-
i! a8t they orm- rather- two real series which coe&ist in relation to a virtual ob1ect of another "ind-
o!e 6hi8h 8o!sta!tly 8ir8ulates a!d is displa8ed i! them O Fepetitio! is 8o!stituted !ot rom o!e
prese!t to a!other- but bet6ee! the t6o 8oe?iste!t series that these prese!ts orm i! u!8tio! o the
virtual obje8t @obje8t ] ?A7
$"
/ith regard to /illy /athgate- the ilm does !ot JrepeatK the !ovel o! 6hi8h it is basedT rather-
they both JrepeatK the u!repeatable virtual d- the JtrueK !ovel 6hose spe8ter is e!ge!dered i! the
passage rom the a8tual !ovel to the ilm7 This virtual poi!t o reere!8e- although Ju!real-K is i! a 6ay
more real tha! reality+ it is the absolute poi!t o reere!8e o the ailed real attempts7 This is ho6- rom
the perspe8tive o materialist theology- the divi!e emerges rom the repetitio! o terrestrial material
eleme!ts- as their J8auseK retroa8tively posited by them7 GeleuUe is right to reer to .a8a! here+ this
Jbetter bookK is 6hat .a8a! 8alls the ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire that Jo!e 8a!!ot re8apture
i! the prese!t- e?8ept by 8apturi!g it i! its 8o!seNue!8es-K the t6o really e?isti!g 6orks- the book a!d
the ilm7

/hy is stru8turalism seriousM For the serious to be truly serious- there must be the serial- 6hi8h is made
up o eleme!ts- o results- o 8o!iguratio!s- o homologies- o repetitio!s7 /hat is serious or .a8a! is
the logi8 o the sig!iier- that is to say the opposite o a philosophy- i!asmu8h as every philosophy rests
o! the appropriate!ess- tra!spare!8y- agreeme!t- harmo!y o thought 6ith itsel7 There is al6ays some
part hidde!- i! a philosophy- a! 9 ] 9- 6hi8h 8o!stitutes 6hat .a8a! 8alled at some mome!t Jthe i!itial
error i! philosophy-K 6hi8h 8o!sists i! privilegi!g this eNuality a!d thus maki!g o!e believe that the
J9K is 8o!temporary 6ith itsel- 6hile its 8o!stitutio! is al6ays ater the emerge!8e o its 8ause- o petit
aFThe u!8o!s8ious mea!s that thought is 8aused by the !o!:thought that o!e 8a!!ot re8apture i! the
prese!t- e?8ept by 8apturi!g it i! its 8o!seNue!8es7 This is ho6 1eorges Ga!di! re8aptures the
8o!seNue!8e o stopped time 6he! he stops to say+ J-u las voulu! (eorges Dandin#K @5ou 6a!ted it-
1eorges Ga!di!RA =e makes time stop to re8apture i! the 8o!seNue!8e 6hat 6as 8aused by the !o!:
thought7
$(
The o!ly thi!g 6ith 6hi8h o!e 8a!!ot ully agree i! this Nuoted passage 8o!8er!s ,illerIs @a!d
.a8a!IsA all too Nui8k a!d sli8k 8o!dem!atio! o philosophy+ Fi8hte- the very 1erma! idealist 6ho
arti8ulated the i!amous 9 ] 9- the ormula o the 9Is sel:ide!tity rom 6hi8h .a8a! is dista!8i!g
himsel- also made 8lear the subje8tIs depe!de!8e o! a 8ause 6hi8h is de:8e!tered 6ith regard to the
subje8tEthe subje8t !eeds a! absolutely 8o!ti!ge!t obje8t:8ause- 6hat Fi8hte 8alled +nstoss- obsta8le
or soli8itatio!7 The temporality o the subje8tIs 8ause is !ot that o the li!ear deployme!t o time @a!d
o the 8orrespo!di!g !otio! o 8ausality i! 6hi8h past 8auses determi!e the prese!tAT it is the
temporality o a 8ir8ular time i! 6hi8h Jtime stopsK 6he!- i! a 8o!voluted sel:relati!g- the subje8t
posits its o6! presupposed 8ause7 ,iller himsel 8o!8edes this 6he! he poi!ts out that the 8ause o
desire is Ja 8ause moreover 6hi8h is posed by retroa8tio!7K
$#
9t is i! this pre8ise se!se that subje8t a!d
obje8t are 8orrelative+ the subje8tIs emerge!8e- its breaki!g o @8ut i!to- suspe!sio! oA the li!ear
8ausality o JrealityK has a 8ause- but a 8ause 6hi8h is retroa8tively posited by its o6! ee8t7 9t is this
mi!imal retroa8tivity- !ot just some ki!d o stru8tural J8omple?ity-K 6hi8h allo6s us to pass rom
li!ear !atural 8ausality- !o matter ho6 8omple? it is- to stru8tural 8ausality proper7
J5ou 6a!ted it- 1eorges Ga!di!-K Nuoted by ,iller- is a li!e rom ,oli`re i! 6hi8h the subje8t
is remi!ded that the deadlo8k he i!ds himsel i! is the u!:i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8e o his o6! past a8tsT
,iller gives it a! additio!al t6ist+ the subje8t should re8apture i! the 8o!seNue!8es he e!8ou!ters i!
reality the results o their abse!t a!d !o!:thought 8auseEi! the 8ase o /illy /athgate- he should
re8apture i! the t6o JrealK obje8ts- the !ovel a!d the ilm- the 8o!seNue!8es o their virtual 8ause- the
spe8tral Jbetter !ovel7K
The u!derlyi!g moveme!t is thus here more 8omple? tha! it may appear7 9t is !ot that 6e
should simply 8o!8eive the starti!g poi!t @the !ovelA as a! Jope! 6ork-K ull o possibilities 6hi8h 8a!
later be deployed- a8tualiUed i! other versio!sT orEeve! 6orseEthat 6e should 8o!8eive the origi!al
6ork as a pre:te?t to be later i!8orporated i! other 8o!:te?ts a!d give! a mea!i!g totally diere!t rom
the origi!al o!e7 /hat is missi!g here is the retroa8tive- ba8k6ards moveme!t+ the ilm i!serts ba8k
i!to the !ovel the possibility o a diere!t- mu8h better !ovel7 A!d the iro!y is that this logi8 o
repetitio!- elaborated by GeleuUe- the a!ti:=egelia!- lies at the very 8ore o the =egelia! diale8ti8+ it
relies o! the properly diale8ti8al relatio!ship bet6ee! temporal reality a!d the eter!al Absolute7 The
eter!al Absolute is the immobile poi!t o reere!8e arou!d 6hi8h temporal iguratio!s 8ir8ulate- their
presuppositio!T ho6ever- pre8isely as su8h- it is posited by these temporal iguratio!s- si!8e it does !ot
pre:e?ist them+ it emerges i! the gap bet6ee! the irst a!d the se8o!d o!eEi! the 8ase o /illy
/athgate- bet6ee! the !ovel a!d its repetitio! i! the ilm7 Hr- to retur! to S8huma!!Is J=umoresNueK+
the eter!al Absolute is the third u!:played melodi8 li!e- the poi!t o reere!8e o the t6o li!es played i!
reality+ it is absolute- but ragileEi the t6o positive li!es are played 6ro!gly- it disappears7 This is
6hat o!e is tempted to 8all Jmaterialist theologyK+ temporal su88essio! 8reates eter!ity7
9t is alo!g these li!es that o!e should i!terpret the @ote! !otedA 6eird impassivity o the igure
o Dhrist- its JsterilityK+ 6hat i Dhrist is a! 0ve!t i! the GeleuUia! se!seEa! o88urre!8e o pure
i!dividuality 6ithout proper 8ausal po6erM /hi8h is 6hy Dhrist suers- but i! a thoroughly impassive
6ay7 Dhrist is Ji!dividualK i! the GeleuUia! se!se+ he is a pure i!dividual- !ot 8hara8teriUed by positive
properties 6hi8h 6ould make him JmoreK tha! a! ordi!ary huma!T the diere!8e bet6ee! Dhrist a!d
other huma!s is purely virtual7 Dhrist is- at the level o a8tuality- the same as other huma!s- o!ly the
u!played Jvirtual melodyK that a88ompa!ies him is added7 A!d 6ith the =oly Spirit- 6e get this
Jvirtual melodyK o! its o6!+ the =oly Spirit is a 8olle8tive ield o pure virtuality- 6ith !o 8ausal po6er
o its o6!7 DhristIs death a!d resurre8tio! is the death o the a8tual perso! 6hi8h 8o!ro!ts us dire8tly
6ith the @Jresurre8tedKA virtual ield that sustai!ed it7 The Dhristia! !ame or this virtual or8e is
JloveK+ 6he! Dhrist says to his 6orried ollo6ers ater his death J6here t6o or more are gathered i!
my !ame- 9 6ill be there-K he thereby asserts his virtual status7
Goes this virtual dime!sio! 6hi8h sustai!s a8tuality allo6 us to bri!g together .a8a! a!d
GeleuUeM The starti!g poi!t or a .a8a!ia! readi!g o GeleuUe should be a brutal a!d dire8t
substitutio!+ 6he!ever GeleuUe a!d 1uattari talk about Jdesiri!g ma8hi!esK @machines dAsirantesA- 6e
should repla8e this term 6ith drive7 The .a8a!ia! driveEthis a!o!ymous>a8ephalous immortal
i!siste!8e:to:repeat o a! Jorga! 6ithout a bodyK 6hi8h pre8edes the Hedipal tria!gulatio! a!d its
diale8ti8 o the prohibitory .a6 a!d its tra!sgressio!Eits pere8tly 6hat GeleuUe tries to 8ir8ums8ribe
as the pre:Hedipal !omadi8 ma8hi!es o desire+ i! the 8hapter dedi8ated to the drive i! his Seminar ;I-
.a8a! himsel emphasiUes the Jma8hi!alK 8hara8ter o a drive- its a!ti:orga!i8 !ature o a! artii8ial
8omposite or mo!tage o heteroge!eous parts7
$'
=o6ever- this should be o!ly the starti!g poi!t7 /hat immediately 8ompli8ates the issue is the
a8t that- i! this substitutio!- somethi!g gets lost+ the very irredu8ible diere!8e bet6ee! drive a!d
desire- the paralla? !ature o this diere!8e 6hi8h makes it impossible to dedu8e or ge!erate o!e rom
the other7 9! other 6ords- 6hat is totally oreig! to .a8a! is GeleuUeIs a!ti:represe!tatio!alist !otio! o
desire as the primordial lu? 6hi8h itsel 8reates its s8e!e o represe!tatio! or repressio!7 This is also
6hy GeleuUe talks about the liberatio! o desire- o liberati!g desire rom its represe!tatio!alist rame-
somethi!g 6hi8h is totally mea!i!gless 6ithi! .a8a!Is horiUo!+ or GeleuUe- desire at its purest sta!ds
or the ree lo6 o the libido- 6hile the .a8a!ia! drive is 8o!stitutively marked by a basi8 i!soluble
deadlo8kEthe drive is a! impasse- 6hi8h i!ds satisa8tio! @JpassLKA i! the very repetitio! o the
impasse7
To put it i! GeleuUeIs o6! terms- his lu? o desire is a 36H- a body 6ithout orga!s- 6hile
.a8a!Is drive is a! H63- a! orga! 6ithout body7 Gesire is !ot a partial obje8t- 6hile the drive is su8h
a! obje8t7 As GeleuUe emphasiUes- 6hat he is ighti!g agai!st are !ot orga!s but organism- the
arti8ulatio! o a body i!to a hierar8hi8al:harmo!ious /hole o orga!s- ea8h Ji! its pla8e-K 6ith its
u!8tio!+ Jthe 36H is i! !o 6ay the 8o!trary o the orga!s7 9ts e!emies are !ot orga!s7 The e!emy is
the orga!ism7K
$$
=e is ighti!g 8orporatism>orga!i8ism7 For him- Spi!oUaIs substa!8e is the ultimate
36H+ the !o!:hierar8hi8al spa8e i! 6hi8h a 8haoti8 multitude @o orga!sMA- all eNual @the u!ivo8ity o
bei!gA- loat7 4o!etheless- there is a strategi8 8hoi8e made here+ 6hy 36H- 6hy !ot @alsoA H63M /hy
!ot the 3ody as the spa8e i! 6hi8h auto!omous orga!s reely loatM 9s it be8ause Jorga!sK evoke a
u!8tio! 6ithi! a 6ider /hole- a subordi!atio! to a goalM 3ut does !ot this very a8t make their
auto!omiUatio!- H63- all the more subversiveM
The pri8e GeleuUe pays or his preere!8e o the body over orga!s is 8learly dis8er!ible i! his
a88epta!8e o the .eib!iUia! hierar8hy o mo!ads+ the diere!8e bet6ee! mo!ads is ultimately
Nua!titative- or every mo!ad is substa!tially the same- it e?presses the 6hole i!i!ite 6orld- but 6ith a
diere!t- al6ays spe8ii8- Nua!titative i!te!sity a!d adeNua8y+ at the o!e e?treme- the lo6est- there are
Jdarke!ed mo!adsK 6ith o!ly o!e 8lear per8eptio!- their hatred o 1odT at the highest e?treme- there
are Jreaso!able mo!adsK 6hi8h 8a! ope! themselves to rele8t the e!tire u!iverse7 /hat- i! a mo!ad-
resists the ull e?pressio! o 1od is its stubbor! atta8hme!t to its 8reatural delusio!- to its parti8ular
@ultimately materialA ide!tity7 =uma!ity o88upies here the pla8e o the highest te!sio!+ o! the o!e
ha!d- huma!s are- eve! more tha! other livi!g bei!gs- 8aught up i! the thrall o absolute egotism-
obsti!ately o8used o! the preservatio! o the ide!tity o their Sel @6hi8h is 6hy- or GeleuUe- the
highest task o philosophy is to elevate ma! above his huma! 8o!ditio!- to the Ji!huma!K level o the
Joverma!KAT o! the other ha!d- GeleuUe agrees 6ith 3ergso! that ma! sta!ds or a u!iNue breakthrough
a!d the highest poi!t i! the evolutio! o lieE6ith the emerge!8e o 8o!s8ious!ess- a livi!g bei!g is
i!ally able to by:pass its material @orga!i8A limitatio!s a!d adva!8e to a purely spiritual pla!e o u!ity
6ith the divi!e All7
From a =egelia! sta!dpoi!t- 6hat GeleuUe ails to ully per8eive is 6hat S8helli!g- amo!g
others- sa6 8learly+ the ultimate identity of these two features- o the lo6est a!d the highest7 9t is
pre8isely through its stubbor! atta8hme!t to its si!gular Sel that a huma! subje8t is able to e?tra8t
itsel rom the parti8ular 8o!volutio!s o a8tual lie @6ith its 8ir8ular moveme!t o ge!eratio! a!d
8orruptio!A a!d e!ter i!to relatio! 6ith virtual eter!ity7 This is 6hy @i!soar as J0vilK is a!other !ame
or this stubbor! egotisti8al atta8hme!tA 0vil is a ormal 8o!ditio! o the rise o the 1ood+ it literally
8reates the spa8e or the 1ood7 A!d do 6e !ot e!8ou!ter here the ultimate 8ase o suture+ i! order to
retai! its 8o!siste!8y- the ield o the 1ood has to be sutured by the si!gularity o 0vilM
The rest- as they say- is history+ already i! the late 1%'0s- the 8o!8ept o JsutureK 6as imported
i!to 8i!ema theory by 2ea!:Cierre HudartT
$&
later- 6he! it 6as agai! take! over a!d elaborated by the
0!glish Screen theorists- it be8ame a global 8o!8ept 6ithi! 8i!ema theory- the subje8t o 6ide
dis8ussio!7 Fi!ally- years later- it lost its spe8ii8 moori!g i! 8i!ema theory a!d be8ame part o the
de8o!stru8tio!ist jargo!- u!8tio!i!g as a vague !otio! rather tha! a stri8t 8o!8ept- as sy!o!ymous 6ith
J8losureK+ JsutureK sig!aled that the gap- the ope!i!g- o a stru8ture 6as obliterated- e!abli!g the
stru8ture to @misAper8eive itsel as a sel:e!8losed totality o represe!tatio!7
,illerIs suture thus made history @i! so8ial a!d 8i!ema theoryA- 6hile 3adiouIs reply 6as
largely ig!ored- or- rather- dro6!ed out by the Althusseria! orthodo?y7 Furthermore- soo! ater the
,ahiers debate- 3adiou shited his positio!- i!trodu8i!g his o6! theory o the subje8t @elaborated i!
detail i! his irst masterpie8e- -hAorie du su1etA7 9! a 8ru8ial diere!8e rom .a8a! a!d ,iller-
3adiouIs subje8t is !ot u!iversal @8o:e?te!sive 6ith the stru8ture as su8h- si!8e every stru8ture i!volves
a la8kA- but a rarity- somethi!g 6hi8h arises o!ly i! e?8eptio!al 8o!ditio!s 6he! a Truth:0ve!t disrupts
the ordi!ary ru! o thi!gs7 Although 3adiouIs !otio! o the subje8t i!volves a rele?ivity 6hi8h is
vaguely homologous to the rele?ivity o the subje8t o the sig!iier @the site o the emerge!8e o a
subje8t is the Jsuper!umeraryK eleme!t o the situatio!- its Jpart o !o:part-K homologous to the empty
sig!iierA- the gap that separates 3adiou rom ,iller thus remai!ed ater 3adiou i!trodu8ed his 8o!8ept
o the subje8t7
So did ,iller J6i!K i! the debateM The 8at8h here is that the very triumph o ,illerIs 8o!8ept o
suture 6as i!e?tri8ably mi?ed up 6ith a radi8al misu!dersta!di!g o the 8o!8ept+ parado?i8ally- 6hat
6o! out 6as a ki!d o perverted sy!thesis o the t6o positio!s- AlthusserIs a!d .a8a!Is7 As 6e have
see!- 6hat triumphed 6as the Althusseria! !otio! o the subje8t as the site o a! imagi!ary or
ideologi8al @misAre8og!itio! o stru8tural !e8essity- a!d the !otio! o JsutureK 6as- i! its predomi!a!t
popular re8eptio! a!d use- i!terpreted as the very operator o this misre8og!itio!T that is- it desig!ated
the operatio! by mea!s o 6hi8h the ield o ideologi8al e?perie!8e gets Jsutured-K its 8ir8le 8losed-
a!d the de:8e!tered stru8tural !e8essity re!dered i!visible7 9! this readi!g- Jsuturi!gK mea!s that all
disturbi!g tra8es o the radi8al Hutside 6ithi! the ield o ideologi8al e?perie!8e are obliterated- so that
this ield is per8eived as a seamless 8o!ti!uityEa gra!d histori8al pro8ess- say- is @overAdetermi!ed by
a 8omple? !et6ork o Ja!o!ymousK stru8tural 8auses- a!d this 8omple?ity is obus8ated 6he! 6e posit
a Subje8t @huma!ity- 8o!s8ious!ess- lie- 1od OA 6hi8h domi!ates a!d dire8ts the pro8ess7 This
misu!dersta!di!g emerges 6he! o!e reads suture agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the 8o!8eptual 8ouple
prese!8e>represe!tatio!7
/here do 6e sta!d today- the!- 6ith regard to the debate bet6ee! ,iller a!d 3adiouM 9!
8o!trast to 3adiou- 6e should i!sist o! a Ju!iversalK subje8t- si!8e a!?iety is 8o:e?te!sive 6ith the
huma! 8o!ditio!- a!d it is this a!?iety 6hi8h is the site o primordial subje8tiviUatio!Esubje8tive
idelity to a Truth:0ve!t 8omes later7 There is- ho6ever- also a 8ru8ial limitatio! to ,illerIs positio!
@6hi8h- o!e 8a! argue- is the limitatio! o psy8hoa!alysis as su8hA7 For ,iller @6ho here ollo6s
.a8a!A- a!?iety remai!s the o!ly ae8t 6hi8h does !ot 8heat @as Freud already put itA- 6hi8h mea!s
that there is i! every @politi8alA e!thusiasm or a Dause a! eleme!t o imagi!ary misre8og!itio!Eas
,iller has i!sisted espe8ially i! the last e6 years- politi8s is a domai! o imagi!ary or symboli8
ide!tii8atio!s a!d as su8h the domai! o illusio!s7 Su8h a positio! u!avoidably e!ds up i! some ki!d
o 8y!i8al pessimism @6hi8h 8a! be also masked as a tragi8 gra!deurA+ all 8olle8tive e!thusiasti8
e!gageme!t e!ds i! ias8o- the truth 8a! o!ly be e?perie!8ed mome!tarily- i! sel:bli!di!g a8ts o
tragi8 authe!ti8ity i! 6hi8h 6e Jtraverse the a!tasy7K These mome!ts 8a!!ot be sustai!ed
perma!e!tly- so the o!ly thi!g 6e 8a! do is to Jplay the @so8ialA game-K a6are that it is ultimately a
mere game o illusio!s7 3adiou e!ables us to break out o this e!!obled tragi8 8y!i8ism+ e!thusiasm is
!o less Jauthe!ti8K tha! a!?iety- a 8olle8tive politi8al e!gageme!t does !ot eo ipso i!volve imagi!ary
misre8og!itio!7
This diere!8e is absolutely 8ru8ial todayEit is the diere!8e bet6ee! politi8al death a!d lie-
bet6ee! e!dorsi!g the reig!i!g post:politi8al 8y!i8ism a!d gatheri!g the 8ourage or a radi8al
ema!8ipatory e!gageme!t7
94T0F.)G0 #

,orrelationism and Its Discontents

Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- i! his +fter Finitude- made a or8eul retur! to the J!aSveK Nuestio! o the
e?iste!8e a!d 8og!iUability o reality i! its i!depe!de!8e rom our @huma!A mi!d7
1
,eillassou?Is
argume!tatio! ote! sou!ds like a repetitio! o .e!i!Is ill:amed Materialism and Empirio*,riticism
@su8h as 6he!- i! a! e?a8t e8ho o .e!i!- he ultimately redu8es *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!talism to a re:
pa8kaged versio! o 3erkeleyIs solipsismA7 9!deed- +fter Finitude 8a! ee8tively be read as
Materialism and Empirio*,riticism re6ritte! or the t6e!ty:irst 8e!tury7 This is 6hy ,eillassou?
starts 6ith the !aSve but urge!t Nuestio! o the status o so:8alled Ja!8estralityK+ ho6 8a!
tra!s8e!de!tal philosophy @or 6hi8h all reality is subje8tively 8o!stitutedA a88ou!t or stateme!ts
about !atural pro8esses 6hi8h o88urred prior to the rise o huma!ity- rom the begi!!i!g o our
u!iverse @the 3ig 3a!gA to ossils rom the early stages o lie o! 0arthM /ithi! the tra!s8e!de!tal
approa8h- the ultimate horiUo! o subje8tivity is that o our i!itude- or 6e 8a!!ot rea8h beyo!d @or
abstra8t romA our e!gageme!t 6ith the 6orld7 =ere is =eideggerIs ambiguous ormulatio! o this
obs8ure poi!t+ J9 ote! ask myselEthis has or a lo!g time bee! a u!dame!tal Nuestio! or meE6hat
!ature 6ould be 6ithout ma!Emust it !ot reso!ate through him i! order to attai! its o6!most
pote!8y7K
2
,eillassou? is 6ell a6are o the i!esses o the tra!s8e!de!tal approa8hT that is- he is 6ell
a6are that *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutio! is !ot the same as the pre:tra!s8e!de!tal 3erkeleyia!
!otio! o the observer 6ho dire8tly @o!ti8allyA J8reatesK 6hat it observes7 =e is urthermore 6ell a6are
that the mi!imal eature o the positio! he is atta8ki!g is so:8alled J8orrelatio!ismK+ the idea that
subje8t a!d obje8t @or- to put it i! less subje8tivist terms- ma! a!d realityA o!ly e?ist @more pre8isely+
are o!ly give! to usA as 8orrelated- i! their i!ter:relatio!ship7 There is !o subje8t outside its e!gageme!t
6ith reality- 6e are Jbei!gs:i!:the:6orld-K a!d- or this very reaso!- every reality dis8losed to us is
al6ays already a reality dis8losed 6ithi! a 8ertai! lie 6orldEor- as the you!g 1eorg .ukh8s put it i!
,ar?ist terms- !ature is al6ays already a so8ial:histori8al 8ategory7
This J8orrelatio!ismK 8a! be urther grou!ded i! a multitude o positio!s+ subje8tivism @the
subje8tIs sel:divisio! as the origi! o the subje8t:obje8t disti!8tio!Eas Fi8hte put it- every obje8t
6hi8h opposes a subje8t is the result o the subje8tIs sel:limitatio!AT the positi!g o the subje8t:obje8t
@8orArelatio! itsel as the Absolute @basi8ally post:*a!tia! 1erma! 9dealism- espe8ially S8helli!gIs
Jphilosophy o ide!tityKAT a!d- i!ally- the sta!dard t6e!tieth:8e!tury positio!- i!volvi!g a! a88epta!8e
o the 8orrelatio! itsel as the u!surpassable horiUo!- the mark o the i!itude o the huma! 8o!ditio!7
=o6ever- 6hat all these positio!s share is their i!ability to provide a satisyi!g a88ou!t o the status o
Ja!8estralityK+ a 8osmologi8al des8riptio! o 6hat o88urred millio!s o years ago- beore the ormatio!
o our solar system- is !ot really 6hat it 8laims to be- i7e7- a des8riptio! o 6hat 6e!t o! millio!s o
years ago- beore the rise o huma!ity- but a des8riptio! o ho6 this past appears 6ithi! the horiUo! o
our huma! e?iste!8eEour positio! is al6ays already i!8luded i! 6hat is des8ribed7
Agai!st this ba8kgrou!d- ,eillassou? 8o!vi!8i!gly argues that the re8e!t rise o irratio!al
religious orie!tatio!s 6ithi! philosophy @so:8alled Jpost:se8ularK thoughtA is !ot a regressio! to
premoder! times- but a !e8essary out8ome o /ester! 8riti8al reaso!7 9! the *a!tia! versio! o the
0!lighte!me!t- the 8riti8al use o reaso! 6as al6ays aimed also at reaso! itsel+ the 8ritiNue o religio!
e!ded up as the 8ritiNue o reaso!- as reaso!Is sel:limitatio! 6hi8h agai! ope!ed up a spa8e or
religious aith- o!ly this time !ot or the J1od o Chilosophers-K the 1od 6hose e?iste!8e or eatures
8a! be demo!strated or at least 8ir8ums8ribed by our reaso!i!g- but or the parado?i8ally abyssal 1od
Nua radi8al Hther!ess- totally beyo!d logos7 The irst to make this move 6as *a!t himsel- 6he! he
amously 8laimed that he had to limit reaso! @huma! k!o6ledgeA to 8reate the spa8e or moralityT
today- the emblemati8 igure o this orie!tatio! is- o 8ourse- .evi!as- the 8e!tral poi!t o reere!8e or
all postmoder!:de8o!stru8tio!ist theologies o a J1od beyo!d 3ei!g7K GerridaIs theologi8al tur!
brought this orie!tatio! to its 8lima?+ the radi8al de8o!stru8tio! o the e!tire metaphysi8al traditio! has
to a88omplish a rele?ive tur! a!d re!der themati8 its o6! Ju!de8o!stru8tibleK 8o!ditio!s7 The
presuppositio! o this Jdeath o the death o 1odK is thus that the 0!lighte!me!t- to be 8o!siste!t- leads
to its sel:!egatio!+ the 8ritiNue 6hi8h irst targets religious a!d all other metaphysi8al superstitio!s has
to e!d up by !egati!g its o6! metaphysi8al presuppositio!s- its o6! trust i! a ratio!al determi!isti8
6orld 6hi8h i!e?orably leads to progress+ J9! *ierkegaard a!d 4ietUs8he- the 6orld o 0!lighte!me!t
Feaso! a!d =egelia! Absolute *!o6ledge is let ar behi!d7 They ea8h oresee i! his o6! 6ay the
mad!ess o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury 6hose ge!o8idal viole!8e made a mo8kery o =egelIs sa!gui!e vie6
o history as the autobiography o the Spirit o time7K
"
9! this 6ay- as o!e might e?pe8t- eve!
4ietUs8he- the ier8est 8riti8 o Dhristia!ity- 8a! be e!listed i! support o the postmoder! Jtheologi8al
tur!K+

/he! 4ietUs8he says J1od is dead-K heIs sayi!g that there is !o 8e!ter- !o si!gle- overar8hi!g
pri!8iple that e?plai!s thi!gs7 ThereIs just a multipli8ity o i8tio!s or i!terpretatio!s7 /ell- i thereIs
!o si!gle overar8hi!g pri!8iple- that mea!s s8ie!8e is also o!e more i!terpretatio!- a!d it does!It have
a! e?8lusive right to absolute truth7 3ut- i thatIs true- the! !o!:s8ie!tii8 6ays o thi!ki!g about the
6orld- i!8ludi!g religious 6ays- resura8e7
(
9t is i!deed true that the !o6 predomi!a!t Jskepti8ismK about the se8ular !arratives o the
0!lighte!me!t is the obverse o the so:8alled Jpost:se8ularK tur! i! 6hi8h religio! appears as a key
Jsite o resista!8eK agai!st the alie!atio!s o 6hat is per8eived as a si!gularly /ester! moder!ity7
Feligio! sta!ds here or a! Jaurati8K belie i! J1od-K a 6ord here deprived o a!y positive o!to:
teleologi8al status+ 1od is !o lo!ger the =ighest 3ei!g 6at8hi!g over our desti!y- but a !ame or
radi8al ope!!ess- or the hope o 8ha!ge- or the Hther!ess al6ays:to:8ome- et87 A88ordi!g to
,eillassou?- 6hat lies at the origi! o this Jdeath o the death o 1odK is the mistake i!here!t i! the
*a!tia! 8riti8ism+ *a!t 8o!used the reje8tio! o philosophi8al dogmati8ism @K la .eib!iUA 6ith the
reje8tio! o all philosophi8al @ratio!al- 8o!8eptualA reere!8e to the Absolute- as i the Absolute a!d
radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y 6ere i!8ompatible7 /he! *a!t prohibits us to thi!k the Absolute @si!8e the
!oume!al is beyo!d the grasp o our reaso!A- the Absolute itsel does not thereby disappearEsu8h a
8riti8al delimitatio! o huma! k!o6ledge ope!s up a !e6 dis8ursive spa8e or the a88ess to the
Absolute- Jthe only proviso being that nothing in these discourses resembles a rational 1ustification of
its validity7K
#
9! this 6ay- Jthe vi8torious 8ritiNue o ideologies has bee! tra!sormed i!to a re!e6ed
argume!t or bli!d aithK+
'
the ruthless 8ritiNue o every dogmati8ism 8ulmi!ated i! a! u!e?pe8ted
resurge!8e o credo <ua absurdum7 =o6ever- 6he! ,eillassou? sar8asti8ally !otes ho6 the *a!tia!
8ritiNue o idealist ratio!al metaphysi8s ope!s up the spa8e or irratio!al ideism- he stra!gely
overlooks ho6 the same is true o his o6! positio!+ does !ot his materialist 8ritiNue o 8orrelatio!ism
also ope! up the path to a !e6 divi!ity @as 6e k!o6 rom his mostly u!published te?ts o! the i!e?iste!t
virtual 1odAM
/e 6ill have to leave aside here ma!y 6o!derul li!es o thought i! +fter FinitudeEor
e?ample- ,eillassou?Is pre8ise a!d perspi8uous dedu8tio! o 6hy it ollo6s rom the assertio! o the
radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y o 3ei!g that Jthere is somethi!g a!d !ot !othi!gK+ the jump rom u!iversal !otio!
to a8tual empiri8al reality is al6ays 8o!ti!ge!tT that is- the a8tual e?iste!8e o a! e!tity 8a!!ot be
dedu8ed rom the i!!er !e8essity o its !otio!7 /hat this mea!s is that- i a bei!g is !e8essary- the! it
8a! al6ays !ot e?ist7 9- ho6ever- a bei!g is radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t- the! somethi!g @8o!ti!ge!tA has to
e?ist7
$
This i!sight is 8o!!e8ted to ,eillassou?Is reversal o the o!tologi8al proo o 1od+ it is the
radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y o 3ei!g itsel 6hi8h allo6s us to make a jump rom !otio! to reality- to prove that
some @8o!ti!ge!tA e!tity !e8essarily has to e?ist7 A!d- i! 8o!trast to the sta!dard opi!io! o! =egel
@u!ortu!ately shared by ,eillassou?A- =egelIs rehabilitatio! o the o!tologi8al proo o 1od i! !o 6ay
also rehabilitates the JillegitimateK jump rom !otio! to a8tual e?iste!8e+ =egel 8a! pass to the
e?iste!8e o Jsomethi!g a!d !ot !othi!gK pre8isely be8ause his starti!g poi!t is the pure 8o!ti!ge!8y o
3ei!g7
9! a!other ambiguous @misAreadi!g o =egel- ,eillassou? 8laims that the diale8ti8al pri!8iple o
8o!tradi8tio! @8o!tradi8tio!s are really prese!t i! thi!gsA e?8ludes a!y 8ha!ge+ 8ha!ge mea!s a
tra!sormatio! o p i!to !o!:p- o a eature i!to its opposite- but si!8e- i! a 8o!tradi8tio!- a thi!g
already is its opposite- it has !o6here to develop i!to7 The u!iverse 6hi8h ully embodied the reality o
8o!tradi8tio! 6ould be a! immovable sel:ide!ti8al u!iverse i! 6hi8h 8o!tradi8tory eatures 6ould
immediately 8oi!8ide7 9! the a8tual u!iverse- thi!gs move- 8ha!ge i! time- pre8isely be8ause they
cannot be dire8tly A a!d !o!:AEthey 8a! o!ly gradually change rom A to !o!:A7 There is time
be8ause the pri!8iple o ide!tity- o !o!:8o!tradi8tio!- resists the dire8t assertio! o 8o!tradi8tio!7 This
is 6hy =egel is !ot a philosopher o evolutio!- o moveme!t a!d developme!t+ =egelIs system is
Jstati8-K every evolutio! is 8o!tai!ed i! the atemporal sel:ide!tity o a 4otio!7
=ere- ho6ever- ,eillassou? misses the poi!t o =egelia! diale8ti8al moveme!t+ 8o!tradi8tio! is
!e8essary and at the same time impossibleT that is- a i!ite thi!g pre8isely cannot be simulta!eously A
a!d !o!:A- 6hi8h is 6hy the pro8ess through 6hi8h it is 8ompelled to assume 8o!tradi8tio! eNuals its
a!!ihilatio!7 4o 6o!der- the!- that =egel 6as the irst to outli!e the 8o!tours o a logical temporality+
eve! i! the sphere o pure 8o!8eptual reaso!i!g- the su88essio! o moves does !ot 6ork as a!
atemporal 8hai! o 8o!seNue!8esEsome logi8al moves @pre8isely the right o!esA 8a! be made o!ly
ater other @erro!eousA moves have bee! do!e7 ,eillassou? thus reads the JatemporalityK o the
diale8ti8al pro8ess i! a! all too JimmediateK 6ay+ he ails to grasp ho6- or =egel- J8o!tradi8tio!K is
!ot opposed to ide!tity- but is its very 8ore7 JDo!tradi8tio!K is !ot o!ly the Feal:impossible o! a88ou!t
o 6hi8h !o e!tity 8a! be ully sel:ide!ti8alT J8o!tradi8tio!K is pure sel:ide!tity as su8h- the
tautologi8al 8oi!8ide!8e o orm a!d 8o!te!t- o ge!us a!d spe8ies- i! the assertio! o ide!tity7 There is
time- there is developme!t- pre8isely be8ause opposites cannot dire8tly 8oi!8ide7 Therei! resides
already the lesso! o the very begi!!i!g o the .ogi8+ ho6 do 6e pass rom the irst ide!tity o
opposites- 3ei!g a!d 4othi!g- to 3e8omi!g @6hi8h the! stabiliUes itsel i! Somethi!g[s\AM 9 3ei!g a!d
4othi!g are ide!ti8al- i they overlap- 6hy move or6ard at allM Cre8isely be8ause 3ei!g a!d 4othi!g
are !ot dire8tly ide!ti8al+ 3ei!g is a orm- the irst ormal:!otio!al determi!atio!- 6hose o!ly 8o!te!t
is 4othi!gT the 8ouple 3ei!g>4othi!g orms the highest 8o!tradi8tio! 6hi8h is impossible- a!d to
resolve this impossibility- this deadlo8k- o!e passes i!to 3e8omi!g- i!to os8illatio! bet6ee! the t6o
poles7
3ut let us retur! to the 8ru? o +fter Finitude- the mutual impli8atio! o the contingency of
necessity a!d the necessity of contingency+ !ot o!ly is every !e8essity 8o!ti!ge!t @grou!dless- J6ithout
reaso!-K a!d u!der the shado6 o the perma!e!t possibility o its 8ollapseA- but- eve! more stro!gly-
the only thi!g that is absolutely !e8essary is the 8o!ti!ge!8y @o the la6s o !ature- o their !e8essityA7
The beauty a!d stre!gth o ,eillassou?Is argume!t is that the 8o!8lusio! he dra6s rom this
u!8o!ditio!al assertio! o 8o!ti!ge!8y is !ot some ki!d o u!iversaliUed ag!osti8 relativism- but- o!
the 8o!trary- the assertio! o the 8og!itive a88essibility o reality:i!:itsel- the 6ay it is i!depe!de!tly
o huma! e?iste!8e7 The Ji!itudeK to 6hi8h the bookIs title alludes is the i!itude o the *a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t 6hi8h 8o!stitutes the phe!ome!al Jobje8tive realityK+ ,eillassou?Is aim is !o
less tha! to demo!strateEafter *a!t- taki!g i!to a88ou!t the *a!tia! revolutio!Ethe possibility o the
8og!itio! o the !oume!al 9!:itsel7 =e rehabilitates the old disti!8tio! bet6ee! the JprimaryK
properties o obje8ts @6hi8h belo!g to obje8ts i!depe!de!tly o their bei!g:per8eived by huma!sA a!d
their Jse8o!daryK properties @8olor- tasteA- 6hi8h e?ist o!ly i! huma! per8eptio!T the basi8 8riterio! o
this disti!8tio! is a s8ie!tii8 o!e- !amely the possibility o des8ribi!g a! obje8t i! mathemati8iUed
terms+ Jall those aspects of the ob1ect that can be formulated in mathematical terms can be
meaningfully conceived as properties of the ob1ect in itself7K
&
A88ordi!g to ,eillassou?- the greatest iro!y i! the e!tire history o philosophy is the !ami!g o
the *a!tia! tur! as a JDoper!i8a! revolutio!K+ his tur! is- o! the 8o!trary- a Ctolemai8 counter*
revolution agai!st the 1alilea! de8e!teri!g o the u!iverse rom the mea!i!gul medieval 0arth:
8e!tered a!d teleologi8ally ordered /hole to the JgrayK i!i!ite u!iverse o s8ie!8e adeNuately
re!dered o!ly i! mathemati8iUed ormulae7 Although *a!tIs origi!al task @as ormulated i! his
,riti<ue of )ure 7easonA 6as to provide o!tologi8al grou!di!g or the @obviousA u!iversal validity o
moder! @4e6to!ia!A s8ie!8e- his Jgrou!di!gK is !othi!g but the !egatio! o the most basi8 o!tologi8al
premise o moder! s8ie!8e+ 6hile !atural s8ie!8e purports to des8ribe reality the 6ay it Jreally is-K
i!depe!de!tly o our observatio!s a!d o the mea!i!gs 6e i!troje8t i!to it o! a88ou!t o the i!terested
8hara8ter o those observatio!s- the tra!s8e!de!tal Jgrou!di!gK o the !atural s8ie!8es 8laims that the
very Jobje8tive realityK des8ribed by s8ie!8es hi!ges o! a subje8tive tra!s8e!de!tal rame- is
subje8tively 8o!stituted- or that the Jdisi!terested-K !eutral 8hara8ter o s8ie!8e is itsel sustai!ed by
8ertai! i!terests or pra8ti8al attitudes @say- or =eidegger- the attitude o te8h!ologi8al ma!ipulatio!
a!d e?ploitatio! o !atureA7
,eillassou? is very 8lear about ho6 his primary target here is !ot so mu8h *a!t himsel as
those t6e!tieth:8e!tury philosophers- rom =usserl to =eidegger- 6ho emphasiUe the J!aSvetLK o the
!atural s8ie!8es- their 8rude J!aturalism-K the Jabstra8tK 8hara8ter o their des8riptio! o reality7 As
6as e?emplarily asserted by the late =usserl a!d early =eidegger- the s8ie!tii8 Jobje8tiveK approa8h to
reality is al6ays already grou!ded i! our @huma!A immersio! i!to a 8o!8rete histori8al lie 6orld
@.ebensweltA- or 6e do !ot e!8ou!ter thi!gs primarily as obje8ts o !eutral observatio!- but as
somethi!g Jready:at:ha!d-K somethi!g 6hi8h belo!gs to the 6hole o our pra8ti8al:e!gaged e?iste!8e7
%
The dilemma that arises here 8a! also be e?pressed i! terms o the traditio!al disti!8tio!
bet6ee! ge!esis a!d value @o a s8ie!tii8 propositio!A7 A partisa! o s8ie!tii8 obje8tivism 6ould i! all
probability a88ept most o the 8laims about ho6 s8ie!8e is al6ays already rooted i! a 8o!8rete
histori8al lie 6orld- a!d so o!T he 6ould simply add that- 6hile these 8laims adeNuately des8ribe the
empiri8al ge!esis o the !atural s8ie!8es- it is epistemologi8ally illegitimate to see them as ae8ti!g
also their 8og!itive validity7 A some6hat simpliied e?ample+ 6hile it is probably true that 1alilea!
physi8s 8ould !ot have arise! outside o the developme!t o the 8apitalist market e8o!omy a!d o the
prospe8t o te8h!ologi8al domi!atio! over !ature- this a8t does !ot i!validate the obje8tive truth o
1alileoIs s8ie!tii8 dis8overiesEthey hold i!depe!de!tly o their 8o!ti!ge!t origi!s7 For a
tra!s8e!de!tal philosopher- ho6ever- the li!k bet6ee! s8ie!tii8 k!o6ledge a!d its histori8al
presuppositio!s 8o!8er!s the very epistemologi8al status o s8ie!tii8 k!o6ledge+ the !atural s8ie!8es
do !ot des8ribe a!d>or e?plai! reality Jthe 6ay it is i!depe!de!tly o usKT they des8ribe a!d>or e?plai!
reality they 6ay it appears only rom 6ithi! a 8ertai! histori8ally spe8iied horiUo! o mea!i!g a!d are
thereore stricto sensu mea!i!gless outside o this horiUo!7
=o6ever- are thi!gs as 8lear as all that 6ith regard to *a!tIs JCtolemai8 8ou!ter:revolutio!KM
3oth *a!t a!d Freud 8laim to repeat the JDoper!i8a! tur!K i! their respe8tive domai!s7 /ith regard to
Freud- the mea!i!g o this reere!8e seems simple e!ough+ i! the same 6ay that Doper!i8us
demo!strated that our 0arth is !ot the 8e!ter o the u!iverse- but a pla!et revolvi!g arou!d the Su!- a!d
i! this se!se Jde:8e!tered-K tur!i!g arou!d another 8e!ter- Freud also demo!strated that the
@8o!s8iousA 0go is !ot the 8e!ter o the huma! psy8he- but ultimately a! epiphe!ome!o!- a satellite
tur!i!g arou!d the true 8e!ter- the )!8o!s8ious or the 9d7 /ith *a!t- thi!gs are more ambiguousEi! a
irst approa8h @o! 6hi8h ,eillassou? reliesA- it appears that he a8tually did the e?a8t opposite o the
Doper!i8a! tur!+ is !ot the key premise o his tra!s8e!de!tal philosophy that the 8o!ditio!s o
possibility o our e?perie!8e o obje8ts are at the same time the 8o!ditio!s o possibility o these
obje8ts themselves- so that- i!stead o a subje8t 6ho- i! his 8og!itio!- has to a88ommodate itsel to
some e?ter!al- Jde8e!teredK measure o truth- the obje8ts have to ollo6 the subje8t- or it is the subje8t
itsel 6ho- rom its 8e!tral positio!- 8o!stitutes the obje8ts o k!o6ledgeM =o6ever- i o!e reads *a!tIs
reere!8e to Doper!i8us 8losely- it be8omes 8lear that his emphasis is !ot o! the shit o the substa!tial
i?ed De!ter- but o! somethi!g Nuite diere!tEo! the status o the subje8t itsel+

/e here propose to do just 6hat Doper!i8us did i! attempti!g to e?plai! the 8elestial moveme!ts7
/he! he ou!d that he 8ould make !o progress by assumi!g that all the heave!ly bodies revolved
rou!d the spe8tator- he reversed the pro8ess- a!d tried the e?perime!t o assumi!g that the spe8tator
revolved- 6hile the stars remai!ed at rest7
10
The pre8ise 1erma! terms @Jdie Nuschauer sich drehenKE!ot so mu8h tur! arou!d a!other
8e!ter as turn or rotate around themselves
LL
A make it 8lear 6hat i!terests *a!t+ the subje8t loses its
substa!tial stability or ide!tity a!d is redu8ed to the pure substa!8eless void o the sel:rotati!g abyssal
vorte? 8alled Jtra!s8e!de!tal apper8eptio!7K A!d it is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e 8a! lo8ate
.a8a!Is Jretur! to FreudK+ to put it as su88i!8tly as possible- .a8a! reads the Freudia! reere!8e to the
Doper!i8a! tur! in the original 5antian sense- as asserti!g !ot the simple displa8eme!t o the 8e!ter
rom the 0go to the 9d or the )!8o!s8ious as the JtrueK substa!tial o8us o the huma! psy8he- but as
the transformation of the sub1ect itself from the self*identical substantial Ego! the psychological sub1ect
full of emotions! instincts! dispositions! etcF! into what .acan calls the %barred sub1ect ?^@!' the vorte&
of the self*relating negativity of desire7 9! this pre8ise se!se- the subje8t o the u!8o!s8ious is !o!e
other tha! the Dartesia! cogito7
=o6- the!- does ,eillassou? a88omplish the shit- the reversal- rom tra!s8e!de!tal:
8orrelatio!ist 8losure to the ope!i!g o our k!o6ledge to6ards the 9!:itsel- to the a88essibility o the
9!:itselM The ultimate horiUo! o tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism is that o facticity+ thi!gs are the 6ay
they are Johne Warum-K as A!gelus Silesius put it7 Hur u!surpassable i!itude mea!s that- ultimately-
thi!gs appear to us the 6ay they do or !o reaso!- there is !o !e8essity i! the spe8ii8 mode o their
appeari!g- there is al6ays the possibility that they 8ould @haveA tur!@edA other6ise7 9t 6as =eidegger
6ho pushed this li!e o reaso!i!g to the e?treme- a li!e 6hi8h has a lo!g history i! moder! thought-
rom its begi!!i!gs i! Gu!s S8otus a!d Ges8artes @6ho both advo8ated the radi8al Jvolu!tarismK o
divi!e 8reatio!+ there is !o Feaso! 6hose !e8essity limits 1odIs reedomT i 1od 6ere to de8ide 2 m 2
] # a!d !ot ( it 6ould be soA through to igures like the late S8helli!g @6ho- agai!st =egel- i!sisted o!
the utter 8o!ti!ge!8y o the a8t o 8reatio!+ 1od 8ould also have de8ided !ot to 8reate the 6orldT the
ultimate reality is the abyss o the divi!e reedomA7 There is a li!k here bet6ee! the appare!t opposites
o the Jirratio!alK @de8isio!ist>volu!taristA assertio! o radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y a!d o the s8ie!tii8
u!iverse o !atural la6s+ or moder! mathemati8iUed s8ie!8e- every @dis8overedA !e8essity is
8o!ti!ge!t- there is !o !e8essity o the !e8essity itsel @6hi8h is 6hy Cope 3e!edi8t 6as i! a 6ay right
to a88use moder! s8ie!8e o Jirratio!alismK a!d to see i! Dhristia!ity a dee!se o Feaso! agai!st
s8ie!tii8 Jirratio!alityKA7 =eideggerIs JEr*Eignis-K the 0ve!t>Arrival o a !e6 histori8al epo8h- o a
!e6 mode o the dis8losure o 3ei!gEor- to put it i! i!adeNuate but !o!etheless appropriate terms+ o a
!e6 tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! o mea!i!gEasserts the radi8al a8ti8ity or 8o!ti!ge!8y o the
Tra!s8e!de!tal7 There is !o 4e8essity- !o Feaso!- !o /hy i! 6hy reality is dis8losed to us 6ithi! this
a!d !ot a!other tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! o mea!i!g- !o deeper logi8al pro8ess 6hi8h regulates the
su88essio! o the epo8hs o 3ei!gT the history o 3ei!g is a! abyssal gameT that is- Er*Eignis is !ot a
JdeeperK 1rou!d or Age!t regulati!g the su88essio! o the histori8al appeara!8es o 3ei!g- it is these
appeara!8es themselves as abyssal 0ve!ts- as thi!gs 6hi8h- i! the most radi8al se!se imagi!able- Jjust
happe!7K
The mistake o tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism does !ot reside i! this ull assertio! o a8ti8ity @o
radi8al o!tologi8al 8o!ti!ge!8yA- but- o! the 8o!trary- i! the @philosophi8ally i!8o!siste!t- sel:
8o!tradi8toryA limitation o this a8ti8ity7 Dorrelatio!ism reads the ultimate a8ti8ity- the Johne
Warum-K o our reality- as the i!delible mark o our i!itude- o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h 6e are orever
8o!dem!ed to remai! trapped behi!d the Veil o 9g!ora!8e separati!g us rom the u!k!o6able
Absolute7 9t is here that ,eillassou? pulls o a properly spe8ulative:=egelia! tour de force-
demo!strati!g ho6 the 6ay out o this deadlo8k is !ot to by:pass it by 8laimi!g that 6e 8a! !o!etheless
pe!etrate the Veil o 9g!ora!8e a!d rea8h the Absolute- but to assert it a!d e?trapolate all its
8o!seNue!8es7 The problem 6ith tra!s8e!de!tal ag!osti8ism 8o!8er!i!g the 9!:itsel is !ot that it is too
radi8ally skepti8al- that it Jgoes too ar-K but- o! the 8o!trary- that it remai!s stu8k hal:6ay7
9! 6hat- the!- does ,eillassou?Is operatio! 8o!sistM The very problemEthe
obsta8leEretroa8tively appears as its o6! solutio!- si!8e 6hat preve!ts us rom dire8tly a88essi!g the
Thi!g is the Thi!g itsel7 9s the logi8 o the i!al reversal !ot e?a8tly the same as that o Ador!oIs
a!alysis o the a!tago!isti8 8hara8ter o the !otio! o so8ietyM H! a irst approa8h- the split bet6ee! the
t6o !otio!s o so8iety @A!glo:Sa?o! i!dividualisti8:!omi!alisti8 a!d Gurkheimia! orga!i8ist !otio!s
o so8iety as a totality 6hi8h pre:e?ists i!dividualsA seems irredu8ible- 6e seem to be deali!g 6ith a
true *a!tia! a!ti!omy 6hi8h 8a!!ot be resolved via a higher Jdiale8ti8al sy!thesisK a!d 6hi8h elevates
so8iety i!to a! i!a88essible Thi!g:i!:itsel7 H! a se8o!d approa8h- ho6ever- o!e merely !eed take !ote
o ho6 this radi8al a!ti!omy 6hi8h seems to pre8lude our a88ess to the Thi!g already is the -hing
itselfEthe u!dame!tal eature o todayIs so8iety is the irre8o!8ilable a!tago!ism bet6ee! Totality a!d
the i!dividual7
,eillassou? does e?a8tly the same 6ith regard to the e?perie!8e o a8ti8ity a!d>or absolute
8o!ti!ge!8y+ he tra!sposes 6hat appears to tra!s8e!de!tal partisa!s o i!itude as the limitatio! o our
k!o6ledge @the i!sight that 6e 8a! be totally 6ro!g about our k!o6ledge- that reality i! itsel 8a! be
totally diere!t rom our !otio! o itA i!to the most basi8 positive o!tologi8al property o reality
itselEthe absolute Jis simply the capacity*to*be*other as such! as theori2ed by the agnostic7 The
absolute is the possible transition- devoid o reaso!- o my state to6ards a!y other state 6hatsoever7
3ut this possibility is !o lo!ger a Vpossibility o ig!ora!8e-I viU7- a possibility that is merely the result
o my i!ability to k!o6 O rather- it is the "nowledge o the very real possibilityK
12
i! the heart o the
9!:itsel+

/e must sho6 6hy thought- ar rom e?perie!8i!g its i!tri!si8 limits through a8ti8ity- e?perie!8es
rather its "nowledge o the absolute through a8ti8ity7 /e must grasp i! a8t !ot the i!a88essibility o
the absolute but the u!veili!g o the i!:itsel a!d the eter!al property o 6hat is- as opposed to the
pere!!ial dei8ie!8y i! the thought o 6hat is O [9! this 6ay-\ a8ti8ity 6ill be revealed to be a
k!o6ledge o the absolute because we are going to put bac" into the thing itself what we mista"enly
mistoo" to be an incapacity in thought7 9! other 6ords- i!stead o 8o!strui!g the abse!8e o reaso!
i!here!t i! everythi!g as a limit that thought e!8ou!ters i! its sear8h or the ultimate reaso!- 6e must
u!dersta!d that this abse!8e o reaso! is- a!d 8a! only be the ultimate property o the e!tity7
1"
The parado? o this Nuasi:magi8al reversal o epistemologi8al obsta8le i!to o!tologi8al premise
is that Jit is through a8ti8ity- a!d through a8ti8ity alo!e- that 6e are able to make our 6ay to6ards the
absoluteK+
1(
the radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y o reality- this Jope! possibility- this Veverythi!g is eNually
possible-I is a! absolute that 8a!!ot be de:absolutiUed 6ithout bei!g thought as absolute o!8e more7K
1#
=ere- o!e should also establish a li!k 6ith the great 8o!li8t over ho6 to i!terpret
i!determi!a8y i! Nua!tum physi8s+ or the Jorthodo?K Nua!tum physi8ists- this epistemologi8al
i!determi!a8y is simulta!eously o!tologi8al- a property o JrealityK itsel 6hi8h is Ji! itselK
i!determi!ate- 6hile or those- rom 0i!stei! o!6ards- 6ho hold to the 8lassi8al Jrealism:o:!e8essity-K
the epistemologi8al i!determi!a8y 8a! o!ly mea! that Nua!tum physi8s does !ot oer a 8omplete
des8riptio! o reality- that there must be some hidde! variables it does !ot take i!to a88ou!t7 To put it
i! a some6hat problemati8 a!d e?aggerated 6ay- the 0i!stei!ia! 8riti8s try to re:*a!tia!iUe Nua!tum
physi8s- e?8ludi!g rom its grasp reality:i!:itsel7
,eillassou? is 6ell a6are that Nua!tum physi8s- 6ith its u!8ertai!ty pri!8iple a!d emphasis o!
the role the observer plays i! the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio!- seems to u!dermi!e the !otio! o
obje8tive reality i!depe!de!t o a!y observer a!d thus give a! u!e?pe8ted boost to *a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!talismT ho6ever- as he poi!ts out- their similarity is de8eptive- a!d obus8ates a
u!dame!tal diere!8e+ JDertai!ly- the prese!8e o a! observer may eve!tually ae8t the ee8tuatio!
o a physi8al la6- as is the 8ase or some o the la6s o Nua!tum physi8sEbut the very a8t that a!
observer 8a! i!lue!8e the la6 is itsel a property o the la6 6hi8h is !ot supposed to depe!d upo! the
e?iste!8e o a! observer7K
1'
9! short- 6hile i! *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!talism the JobserverK:subje8t
8o!stitutes 6hat he observes- i! Nua!tum physi8s- the observerIs a8tive role itsel is re:i!s8ribed i!to
physi8al reality7
=o6- the!- 8a! this a88ess to the absolute be re8o!8iled 6ith the obvious limitatio! o our
k!o6ledge o realityM A reere!8e to 3re8ht may be o some use here+ i! o!e o his rele8tio!s about
the stage- 3re8ht ero8iously opposed the idea that the ba8kgrou!d o the stage should re!der the
impe!etrable depth o the All o Feality as the obs8ure Hrigi! o Thi!gs out o 6hi8h everythi!g 6e
see a!d k!o6 appear as ragme!ts7 For 3re8ht- the ba8kgrou!d o a stage should ideally be empty-
6hite- sig!ali!g that- behi!d 6hat 6e see a!d e?perie!8e- there is !o se8ret Hrigi! or 1rou!d7 This i!
!o 6ay implies that reality is tra!spare!t to us- that 6e Jk!o6 allKT o 8ourse there are i!i!ite bla!ks-
but the poi!t is that these bla!ks are 1ust that! blan"s- thi!gs 6e simply do !ot k!o6- !ot a substa!tial
JdeeperK reality7
4o6 6e 8ome to the properly speculative 8ru? o ,eillassou?Is argume!t+ ho6 to justiy this
passage rom @or reversal oA epistemologi8al limitatio! to @or i!toA positive o!tologi8al eatureM As 6e
have see!- the tra!s8e!de!tal 8riti8ism 8o!8eives a8ti8ity as the mark o our i!itude- o our 8og!itive
limitatio!s- o our i!ability to a88ess the absolute 9!:itsel+ to us- to our i!ite reaso!- reality appears
8o!ti!ge!t- ohne Warum- but 8o!sidered i! itsel- it may 6ell be true that reality is !o!:8o!ti!ge!t
@regulated by a deep spiritual or !atural !e8essityA- so that 6e are mere puppets o a tra!s8e!de!t
me8ha!ism- or that our Sel is itsel ge!erati!g the reality it per8eives- et87 9! other 6ords- or the
tra!s8e!de!talist- there is al6ays the radi8al Jpossibility of ignoranceK+
1$
6e are ig!ora!t o ho6
reality really is- there is al6ays the possibility that reality is radi8ally other tha! ho6 it appears to us7
=o6- the!- does ,eillassou? make the step rom this epistemologi8al limitatio! to the u!iNue a88ess to
the absoluteM 9! a deeply =egelia! 6ay- he lo8ates i! this very poi!t the parado?i8al overlappi!g o
possibility a!d a8tuality+ J=o6 are you able to thin" this Vpossibility o ig!ora!8eIOM The truth is that
you are o!ly able to thi!k this possibility o ig!ora!8e be8ause you have actually thought the
absoluteness o this possibility- 6hi8h is to say- its !o!:8orrelatio!al 8hara8ter7K
1&
The o!tologi8al
proo o 1od is here i!verted i! a materialist 6ay+ it is !ot that the very a8t that 6e 8a! thi!k the
possibility o a Supreme 3ei!g e!tails its a8tualityT it is- o! the 8o!trary- that the very a8t that 6e 8a!
thi!k the possibility o the absolute 8o!ti!ge!8y o reality- the possibility o its bei!g:other- o the
radi8al gap bet6ee! the 6ay reality appears to us a!d the 6ay it is i! itsel- e!tails its a8tuality- that is-
e!tails that reality i! itsel is radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t7 9! both 8ases- 6e are deali!g 6ith the dire8t passage
rom the !otio! o e?iste!8e to e?iste!8e 6hi8h is part o the !otio!T ho6ever- i! the 8ase o the
o!tologi8al proo o 1od- the term that mediates bet6ee! possibility @o thi!ki!gA a!d a8tuality is
Jpere8tio!K @the very !otio! o a pere8t bei!g i!8ludes its e?iste!8eA- 6hile i! the 8ase o
,eillassou?Is passage rom !otio! to e?iste!8e- the mediating term is imperfection7 9 6e 8a! thin" our
k!o6ledge o reality @the 6ay reality appears to usA as havi!g radi8ally ailed- as radi8ally diere!t
rom the Absolute- then this gap ?between For*us and In*itself@ must be part of the +bsolute itself- so
that the very eature that seemed orever to keep us a6ay rom the Absolute is the only eature 6hi8h
directly u!ites us 6ith the Absolute7 A!d does !ot e?a8tly the same shit lie at the very 8ore o the
Dhristia! e?perie!8eM 9t is the radi8al separatio! o ma! rom 1od 6hi8h u!ites us 6ith 1od- si!8e- i!
the igure o Dhrist- 1od is thoroughly separated from itselfEthe poi!t is thus !ot to Jover8omeK the
gap 6hi8h separates us rom 1od- but to take !ote o ho6 this gap is internal to (od himself
@Dhristia!ity as the ultimate versio! o the Fabi!ovit8h jokeAEo!ly 6he! 9 e?perie!8e the i!i!ite pai!
o separatio! rom 1od do 9 share a! e?perie!8e 6ith 1od himsel @Dhrist o! the DrossA7
T6o thi!gs must be !oted here7 First- 6he! ,eillassou? asserts 8o!ti!ge!8y as the o!ly
!e8essity- his mistake is to 8o!8eive this assertio! a88ordi!g to the mas8uli!e side o .a8a!Is ormulae
o se?uatio!- that is- a88ordi!g to the logi8 o u!iversality a!d its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!+ everythi!g is
8o!ti!ge!tE6ith the e?8eptio! o 8o!ti!ge!8y itsel- 6hi8h is absolutely !e8essary7 4e8essity thus
be8omes the e?ter!al guara!tee o the u!iversal 8o!ti!ge!8yEbut 6hat about the !o!:All o
8o!ti!ge!8y+ there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot 8o!ti!ge!t- 6hi8h is 6hy !ot:All is 8o!ti!ge!tM
Simulta!eously- there is the !o!:All o !e8essity+ there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot !e8essary- 6hi8h is 6hy
!ot:All is !e8essary7 4ot:All is !e8essary- 6hi8h mea!s that- rom time to time- a 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter
o88urs 6hi8h u!dermi!es the predomi!a!t !e8essity @the spa8e o possibilities sustai!ed by this
!e8essityA- so that i! it- the JimpossibleK happe!s7
1%
=o6 do these t6o !o!:Alls relateM Si!8e reality is
8o!ti!ge!t- 6e should begi! 6ith the !o!:All o 8o!ti!ge!8y+ it is out o 8o!ti!ge!8y that-
8o!ti!ge!tly- !e8essities arise7
Se8o!d- 6e should take !ote o ,eillassou?Is reNue!t a!d systemati8 use o =egelia! terms-
eve! @a!d espe8iallyA i! his 8ritiNue o =egel7 For e?ample- he repeatedly 8hara8teriUes his o6!
positio! as Jspe8ulativeK @i! the se!se o the post:*a!tia! assertio! o the a88essibility to our
k!o6ledge o the absoluteA i! 8o!trast to Jmetaphysi8alK pre:8riti8al dogmatism @6hi8h 8laims a88ess
to tra!s8e!de!t absolute !e8essityA7 Carado?i8ally- =egel 8ou!ts or him as Jmetaphysi8al-K although it
6as pre8isely =egel 6ho deployed the Jmetaphysi8al-K the J8riti8alK @i! the se!se o *a!tia! 8riti8ismA-
a!d the Jspe8ulativeK as the three basi8 sta!8es o thought to6ards reality- maki!g it 8lear that his o6!
Jspe8ulativeK sta!8e 8a! o!ly arise 6he! o!e has ully a88epted the lesso! o the 8riti8al sta!8e7 4o
6o!der that ,eillassou?- ollo6i!g =egel- desig!ates his o6! positio! as that o JAbsolute
*!o6ledge-K 8hara8teriUed i! a thoroughly =egelia! 6ay as Jthe pri!8iple o a! auto*limitation or
auto*normali2ation of the omnipotence of chaosK
20
Ei! short- as the rise o !e8essity out o
8o!ti!ge!8y+

/e 8a! o!ly hope to develop a! absolute k!o6ledgeEa k!o6ledge o 8haos 6hi8h 6ould !ot simply
keep repeati!g that everythi!g is possibleEo! 8o!ditio! that 6e produ8e !e8essary propositio!s about
it besides that o its om!ipote!8e7 3ut this reNuires that 6e dis8over !orms or la6s to 6hi8h 8haos itsel
is subje8t7 5et there is !othi!g over a!d above the po6er o 8haos that 8ould 8o!strai! it to submit to a
!orm7 9 8haos is subje8t to 8o!strai!ts- the! this 8a! o!ly be a 8o!strai!t 6hi8h 8omes rom the !ature
o 8haos itsel- rom its o6! om!ipote!8e O i! order or a! e!tity to be 8o!ti!ge!t a!d u!:!e8essary i!
this 6ay- it cannot be anything whatsoever7 This is to say that i! order to be 8o!ti!ge!t a!d u!:
!e8essary- the e!tity must 8o!orm to certain determinate conditions- 6hi8h 8a! the! be 8o!strued as
so many absolute properties of what is7
21
9s this !ot e?a8tly =egelIs programM For =egel- !e8essary la6s are 8o!ti!ge!t i! the simple
se!se that Jthey are be8ause they areKEthere is !o Nuestio! o 6hy7 9! a =egelia!:spe8ulative ma!!er
the regularities o !ature are pre8isely the highest assertio! o 8o!ti!ge!8y+ the more !ature behaves
regularly- ollo6i!g its J!e8essary la6s-K the more 8o!ti!ge!t is this !e8essity7 Fadi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y !ot
o!ly does !ot pre8lude- but eve! prefers the stability o la6s+ the highest 8o!ti!ge!8y is 6he! la6s are
eter!al- u!8ha!geableEbut 8o!ti!ge!tly so- or !o reaso! at all7 At the begi!!i!g o =egelIs .ogic- 6e
have the pro8ess o 3e8omi!g @the u!ity o 3ei!g a!d 4othi!g!essA- 6hi8h is the thoroughly
8o!ti!ge!t pro8ess o ge!erati!g the multipli8ity o Somethi!gs7 The Jspurious i!i!ityK o Somethi!gs
a!d Somethi!g:Hthers is 8haos at its purest- 6ith !o !e8essity 6hatsoever u!derlyi!g or regulati!g it-
a!d the e!tire developme!t o =egelIs .ogic is the deployme!t o the imma!e!t pro8ess o Jauto*
limitation or auto*normali2ation of the omnipotence of chaosK+ J/e the! begi! to u!dersta!d 6hat the
ratio!al dis8ourse about u!reaso!Ea! u!reaso! 6hi8h is !ot irratio!alE6ould 8o!sist i!+ it 6ould be
dis8ourse that aims to establish the 8o!strai!ts to 6hi8h the e!tity must submit i! order to e?er8ise its
8apa8ity:!ot:to:be a!d its 8apa8ity:to:be:other7K
22
This J8apa8ity:to:be:other-K as e?pressed i! the gap that separates For:us a!d 9!:itsel @i! the
possibility that reality:i!:itsel is totally diere!t rom the 6ay it appears to usA- is the sel:dista!8e o
the 9!:itsel- the negativity i! the very heart o 3ei!gEthis is 6hat ,eillassou? sig!als i! his
6o!derully de!se propositio! that Jthe thi!g:i!:itsel is !othi!g other tha! the a8ti8ity o the
tra!s8e!de!tal orms o represe!tatio!-K !othi!g other tha! the radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t 8hara8ter o our
rame o reality7
2"
To see reality the 6ay it Jreally isK is !ot to see a!other JdeeperK reality be!eath it-
but to see this same reality i! its thorough 8o!ti!ge!8y7
So 6hy does ,eillassou? !ot ope!ly a8k!o6ledge the =egelia! !ature o his breakthroughM
The irst reaso!- at least- is a simple o!e+ he e!dorses the sta!dard readi!g o =egelia! diale8ti8s as the
des8riptio! o the !e8essary sel:deployme!t o the 4otio!+

=egelia! metaphysi8s mai!tai!s the !e8essity o a mome!t o irremediable 8o!ti!ge!8y i! the
u!oldi!g o the absoluteT a mome!t 6hi8h o88urs i! the midst o !ature as the pure 8o!ti!ge!8y- the
reality devoid o a8tuality- the sheer i!itude 6hose 8haos a!d gratuitous!ess are re8al8itra!t to the
labour o the 4otio! O 3ut this 8o!ti!ge!8y is dedu8ed rom the u!oldi!g o the absolute- 6hi8h i!
itsel- <ua ratio!al totality- is devoid o 8o!ti!ge!8y7 Thus- i! =egel- the !e8essity o 8o!ti!ge!8y is !ot
derived rom 8o!ti!ge!8y as su8h a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y alo!e- but rom a /hole that is o!tologi8ally
superior to the latter7
2(
,eillassou? here 8ru8ially simpliies the properly =egelia! relatio!ship bet6ee! !e8essity a!d
8o!ti!ge!8y7 H! a irst approa8h- it appears that their e!8ompassi!g u!ity is !e8essity- that !e8essity
itsel posits a!d mediates 8o!ti!ge!8y as the e?ter!al ield i! 6hi8h it e?presses or a8tualiUes
itselE8o!ti!ge!8y itsel is !e8essary- the result o the sel:e?ter!aliUatio! a!d sel:mediatio! o
!otio!al !e8essity7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial to suppleme!t this u!ity 6ith the opposite- 6ith 8o!ti!ge!8y
as the e!8ompassi!g u!ity o itsel a!d !e8essity+ the very elevatio! o a !e8essity i!to the stru8turi!g
pri!8iple o the 8o!ti!ge!t ield o multipli8ity is a 8o!ti!ge!t a8tT o!e 8a! almost say+ the out8ome o a
8o!ti!ge!t @Jope!KA struggle or hegemo!y7 This shit 8orrespo!ds to the shit rom S to b- rom
substa!8e to subje8t7 The starti!g poi!t is a 8o!ti!ge!t multitudeT through its sel:mediatio!
@Jspo!ta!eous sel:orga!iUatio!KA- 8o!ti!ge!8y e!ge!ders or posits its imma!e!t !e8essity- i! the same
6ay that 0sse!8e is the result o the sel:mediatio! o 3ei!g7 H!8e 0sse!8e emerges- it retroa8tively
Jposits its o6! presuppositio!s-K that is- it sublates its presuppositio!s i!to subordi!ated mome!ts o its
sel:reprodu8tio! @3ei!g is tra!substa!tiated i!to Appeara!8eAT ho6ever- this positi!g is retroa8tive7
This bri!gs us to ,eillassou?Is basi8 strategi8 move @a!d a deeply =egelia! o!e- at thatA rom
the gap that separates us @i!ite huma!sA rom the 9!:itsel to the gap that is imma!e!t to the 9!:itselT
this move is stri8tly 8orrelative to .a8a!Is move rom desire to drive+ the drive is Jtra!s8e!de!tal-K its
spa8e is that o the a!tasy 6hi8h ills i! the void o the lost primordial Hbje8t @Thi!gAEi! short- desire
is *a!tia!- the drive is =egelia!7 The .a8a!ia! ob1et a as the obje8t 6hi8h overlaps 6ith its loss- 6hi8h
emerges at the very mome!t o its loss @so that all its a!tasmati8 i!8ar!atio!s- rom breast to voi8e a!d
gaUe- are meto!ymi8 iguratio!s o the void- o !othi!gA- remai!s 6ithi! the horiUo! o desireEthe true
obje8t:8ause o desire is the void illed i! by its a!tasmati8 i!8ar!atio!s7 /hile- as .a8a! emphasiUes-
the ob1et a is also the obje8t o the drive- the relatio!ship is here thoroughly diere!t+ although- i! both
8ases- the li!k bet6ee! obje8t a!d loss is 8ru8ial- i! the 8ase o the ob1et a as the obje8t:8ause o desire-
6e have a! obje8t 6hi8h is origi!ally lost- 6hi8h 8oi!8ides 6ith its o6! loss- 6hi8h emerges as lost-
6hile- i! the 8ase o the ob1et a as the obje8t o the drive- the Jobje8tK is directly the loss itselfGi! the
shit rom desire to drive- 6e pass rom the lost ob1ect to loss itself as an ob1ect7 9! other 6ords- the
6eird moveme!t 8alled JdriveK is !ot drive! by the JimpossibleK Nuest or the lost obje8tT it is a push
to directly enact the %loss'Gthe gap! cut! distanceGitself7 There is thus a double disti!8tio! to be
dra6! here+ !ot o!ly bet6ee! the ob1et a i! its a!tasmati8 a!d post:a!tasmati8 status- but also- 6ithi!
this post:a!tasmati8 domai! itsel- bet6ee! the lost obje8t:8ause o desire a!d the obje8t:loss o the
drive7
9t is thus 6ro!g to 8laim that the JpureK death drive 6ould be the impossible JtotalK 6ill to
@sel:Adestru8tio!- a! e8stati8 sel:a!!ihilatio! i! 6hi8h the subje8t 6ould rejoi! the ull!ess o the
mater!al Thi!g- but that this 6ill is !ot realiUable- that it gets blo8ked- stu8k to a Jpartial obje8t7K Su8h
a !otio! retra!slates the death drive i!to the terms o desire a!d its lost obje8t+ it is i! desire that the
positive obje8t is a meto!ymi8 sta!d:i! or the void o the impossible Thi!gT it is i! desire that the
aspiratio! to ull!ess is tra!serred to partial obje8tsEthis is 6hat .a8a! 8alled the meto!ymy o
desire7 /e have to be very pre8ise here i! order !ot to miss .a8a!Is poi!t @a!d thereby 8o!use desire
a!d driveA+ the drive is !ot a! i!i!ite lo!gi!g or the Thi!g 6hi8h gets i?ated o!to a partial
obje8tEthe JdriveK is this i?atio! itsel i! 6hi8h resides the JdeathK dime!sio! o every drive7 The
drive is !ot a u!iversal thrust @to6ards the i!8estuous Thi!gA 8he8ked a!d broke! up- it is this brake
itsel- a brake o! i!sti!8t- its Jstu8k!ess-K as 0ri8 Sa!t!er 6ould put it7
2#
The eleme!tary matri? o the
drive is not that o tra!s8e!di!g all parti8ular obje8ts to6ards the void o the Thi!g @6hi8h is the!
a88essible o!ly i! its meto!ymi8 sta!d:i!A- but that o our libido getti!g Jstu8kK o!to a parti8ular
obje8t- 8o!dem!ed to 8ir8ulate arou!d it orever7
Do!seNue!tly- as 6e have see!- the 8o!8ept o drive makes the alter!ative Jeither get bur!ed by
the Thi!g or mai!tai! a sae dista!8eK alse+ i! a drive- the JThi!g itselK is a 8ir8ulatio! arou!d the
void @or- rather- hole- !ot voidA7 To put it eve! more poi!tedly- the obje8t o the drive is !ot related to
the Thi!g as a iller o its void+ the drive is literally a 8ou!ter:moveme!t to desire- it does !ot strive
to6ards impossible ull!ess a!d- bei!g or8ed to re!ou!8e it- get stu8k o!to a partial obje8t as its
remai!derEthe drive is Nuite literally the very JdriveK to brea" the All o 8o!ti!uity i! 6hi8h 6e are
embedded- to i!trodu8e a radi8al imbala!8e i!to it- a!d the diere!8e bet6ee! drive a!d desire is
pre8isely that- i! desire- this 8ut- this i?atio! o!to a partial obje8t- is as it 6ere Jtra!s8e!de!taliUed-K
tra!sposed i!to a sta!d:i! or the void o the Thi!g7
From this parado? o the drive- 6e 8a! dis8er! the limitatio! o spe8ulative realism- a limitatio!
sig!aled i! the a8t that it immediately split i!to our orie!tatio!s 6hi8h orm a ki!d o 1reimasia!
semioti8 sNuare+ ,eillassou?Is Jspe8ulative materialism-K =arma!Is Jobje8t:orie!ted philosophy-K
2'

1ra!tIs !eo:vitalism-
2$
a!d 3rassierIs radi8al !ihilism7 The t6o a?es alo!g 6hi8h these our positio!s
are pla8ed are divi!e>se8ular a!d s8ie!tii8>metaphysi8al7 Although both ,eillassou? a!d 3rassier
advo8ate a s8ie!tii8 vie6 o reality as radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t a!d apprehe!sible through ormaliUed
s8ie!8e- 3rassier also e!dorses s8ie!tii8 redu8tio!ism- 6hile ,eillassou? leaves the spa8e ope! or a
!o!:e?iste!t divi!ity 6hi8h 6ill redress all past i!justi8es7 H! the other side- both =arma! a!d 1ra!t
advo8ate a !o!:s8ie!tii8 metaphysi8al approa8h- 6ith =arma! opti!g or a dire8tly religious @or
spiritualist- at leastA pa!psy8hism- outli!i!g a program o i!vestigati!g the J8osmi8 layers o psy8heK
a!d Jerreti!g out the spe8ii8 psy8hi8 reality o earth6orms- dust- armies- 8halk- a!d sto!e-K 6hile
1ra!t- i! GeleuUia! ashio!- lo8ates the meta:physi8al dime!sio! i! !ature itsel- 8o!8eivi!g the 6orld
o obje8ts as the produ8ts o a more primordial pro8ess o be8omi!g @6ill- drive- et87A7 /hat sta!ds out
i! this sNuare are the t6o positio!s 6hi8h u!settle the e?pe8ted overlappi!g o the t6o a?es
@metaphysi8al divi!ity versus se8ular s8ie!tii8 redu8tio!ismA+ ,eillassou?Is s8ie!tisti8 assertio! o
radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y 6hi8h !o!etheless leaves ope! the spa8e or a !o!:e?isti!g 1od 6ho may emerge
i! order to redress past i!justi8es- a!d 1ra!tIs a!ti:s8ie!tisti8 vitalist metaphysi8s 6hi8h !o!etheless
remai!s !aturalist>materialist7 The gap illed i! by these t6o additio!al optio!s sig!als that the pri8e
spe8ulative realism pays or leavi!g behi!d tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism is that it remai!s 8aught up i!
the traditio!al pre:8riti8al a!ti!omies- i7e7- that a dime!sio! is missi!g i! the basi8 oppositio! 6hi8h
dei!es spe8ulative realism+ realism versus 8orrelatio!ism7 /hat is this dime!sio!M
Fay 3rassier 6as right 6ith his programmati8 sloga! o nihil unboundEo!e should dei!itely
go all the 6ay i! Ju!bou!di!gK !othi!g!ess- or- i! other 6ords- pushi!g Jse8ulariUatio!K to the e!d7
H!e o the !ames o the e!emy today is Jpost:se8ular thoughtK+ the idea that the pro8ess o
Jdise!8ha!tme!tK has rea8hed its limit a!d that a !e6- post:metaphysi8al- retur! o the Sa8red is o! the
6ay- !o lo!ger grou!ded i! the a88ess to a! i!i!ite Absolute- but i! our very i!itude- i! our
irredu8ible rooted!ess i! the i!ite .ebenswelt 6ith its 8o!8rete e?perie!8e o bodily lie permeated
6ith mea!i!g7 9! order to overtur! this te!de!8y- 6e should begi! at the very begi!!i!g- 6ith the
reversal o the ide!tity o bei!g a!d logos irst ormulated by Carme!ides i! 6hat is the i!augural
gesture o philosophy+ Jbei!g a!d thi!ki!g>speaki!g are the same7K This same!ess should be 8o!8eived
as !egative+ 8o!trary to ClatoIs !otio! that 6hat o!e talks about has to e?ist i! some 6ay- o!e 8a! o!ly
talk about 6hat @pote!tially- at leastA is !ot- or there is !o spee8h 6ithout a hole i! the te?ture o the
FealT the very a8t o airmi!g somethi!g lo8ates this somethi!g agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o its
pote!tial disappeara!8e- or- to paraphrase Carme!ides- thi!ki!g>speaki!g a!d !o!:bei!g are the same7
Furthermore- this hole i! the te?ture o the Feal 8a! o!ly arise i the Feal itsel is ultimately !othi!g
but a void- i Jall there isK is- pre8isely- !ot:All- a distorted ragme!t 6hi8h is ultimately a Jmeto!ymy
o !othi!g7K
The problem here is ho6 6e 8ompou!d this ull deployme!t o !othi!g!ess 6ith the big
dilemma o 8o!temporary thought- 6hi8h is @to paraphrase 3rassierA+ do 6e 8o!8eive the s8ie!tii8
e?pla!atio! o reality as grou!ded i! our 8o!8rete e?perie!8e o reality- i! our .ebenswelt- or do 6e
e!dorse a versio! o Js8ie!tii8 redu8tio!ismK 6hi8h tries to e?plai! our very e?perie!8e o reality i!
s8ie!tii8 terms @i! terms o 8og!itive s8ie!8e- Gar6i!ism- et87AM The irst approa8h is a versio! o 6hat
,eillassou? 8alls J8orrelatio!ism-K 6hi8h 8a! also have a poi!tedly JmaterialistK a88e!t @as i! 6hat
6as o!8e 8alled Jhuma!ist ,ar?ism-K 6here s8ie!8e 6as see! as part o the pra8ti8al e!gageme!t o
huma!ity 6ith !atureA- so the problem is- agai!- ho6 to break out o the 8orrelatio!ist 8o!strai!ts7 9!
short+ 8a! s8ie!8e thi!k radi8al 4othi!g!essM ,eillassou? 8laims that my @a!d JperhapsK 3adiouIsA
positio!s

8o!sist at bottom i! maki!g o materialism a Jmisired 8orrelatio!ismK7 0ver si!8e Gerrida i!
parti8ular- materialism seems to have take! the orm o a Jsi8ke!ed 8orrelatio!ismK+ it reuses both the
retur! to a !aSve pre:8riti8al stage o thought and a!y i!vestigatio! o 6hat preve!ts the J8ir8le o the
subje8tK rom harmo!iously 8losi!g i! o! itsel7 /hether it be the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious- ,ar?ist
ideology- Gerridea! dissemi!atio!- the u!de8idability o the eve!t- the .a8a!ia! Feal 8o!sidered as the
impossible- et87- these are all supposed to dete8t the tra8e o a! impossible 8oi!8ide!8e o the subje8t
6ith itsel- a!d thus o a! e?tra:8orrelatio!al residue i! 6hi8h o!e 8ould lo8aliUe a Jmaterialist
mome!tK o thought7 3ut i! a8t- su8h misires are o!ly urther 8orrelatio!s amo!g others+ it is al6ays
for a subje8t that there is a! u!de8idable eve!t or a ailure o sig!ii8atio!7 )!less 6e all ba8k o! !aSve
realism- 6e 8a!!ot treat these misires as Jee8tsK o a 8ause that 8ould dei!itely be established as
e?ter!al to the subje8t or eve! to 8o!s8ious!ess7 9! a!y 8ase- a 8orrelatio!ist 6ould have !o dii8ulty
i! retorti!g that this ge!re o materialism is either a disi!ge!uous idealism or a dogmati8 realism o the
Jold styleK7 /he! a 8hair is 6obbly- the J6obblyK e?ists o!ly i! relatio! to the 8hair- !ot i!depe!de!tly
o it7 /he! o!e 8logs up the Subje8t- o!e does !ot go outside it+ i!stead- o!e merely 8o!stru8ts a
tra!s8e!de!tal or spe8ulative /obbly Subje8tEa subje8t that is assured a priori- a!d a88ordi!g to a
properly absolute *!o6i!g- or 6hi8h thi!gs al6ays tur! out badly i! its 6orld o represe!tatio!s7
2&
As usual 6ith ,eillassou?- this argume!tatio! is pre8ise a!d to the poi!tT my @dayAdream is that
i .e!i! 6ere alive a!d had time to read my )aralla& 6iew- somethi!g like this 6ould have bee! his
rea8tio! to my Jdiale8ti8al materialismKEbe!eath the rhetori8al materialist sura8e- there lies good old:
ashio!ed subje8tive idealism7 3ut is this really the 8aseM H! the a8e o it- the argume!t is 8o!vi!8i!g+
do 9 !ot 8laim that- be!eath the tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! bet6ee! @the 8o!s8iousA subje8t a!d reality-
there is the 8orrelative bet6ee! the subje8t @o the u!8o!s8iousA a!d its Feal>impossible obje8tal
8ou!terpoi!t- S:aM Stra!ge as this 8orrelatio! is- it still makes se!se o!ly i a subje8t is already there-
that is- it does !ot e!able us to thi!k reality without a subje8t7 3ut- agai!- is this truly the 8aseM The
poi!t ,eillassou? misses is that this impossible>Feal obje8t is the very mode o i!s8riptio! o the
subje8t i!to tra!s:subje8tive realityT as su8h- it is !ot tra!s8e!de!tal- but @6hat Gerrida 6ould have
8alledA ar8he:tra!s8e!de!tal- a! attempt to 8ir8ums8ribe the Jsubje8t i! be8omi!g-K the tra!s:subje8tive
pro8ess o the emerge!8e o the subje8t7
The 8riti8al impli8atio! 6ith regard to ,eillassou? is that the true problem is !ot to thi!k pre:
subje8tive reality- but to thi!k ho6 somethi!g like a subje8t 8ould have emerged 6ithi! itT 6ithout this
@properly =egelia!A gesture- a!y obje8tivism 6ill remai! 8orrelatio!ist i! a hidde! 6ayEits image o
Jreality i! itselK remai!s 8orrelated @eve! i i! a !egative 6ayA 6ith subje8tivity7 To make this gesture-
it is !ot e!ough to posit the subje8t @or- rather- presuppose itA as a 8o!ti!ge!t emerge!8eE6hile this is
true- o!e should lo8ate tra8es o this 8o!ti!ge!8y i! a ki!d o umbili8al 8ord 6hi8h li!ks the subje8t to
its pre:subje8tive Feal- a!d thus breaks the 8ir8le o tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism7 9! other 6ords- 6hat
,eillassou? 8alls Jsi8ke!edK or JailedK 8orrelatio!ism- ar rom bei!g a hal:hearted break:out rom
the 8orrelatio!ist 8o!strai!t- is the key 8ompo!e!t o a!y true es8ape+ it is !ot e!ough to oppose to
tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! a visio! o reality:i!:itselEtra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! itsel has to be
grou!ded i! reality:i!:itselT i7e7- its possibility has to be a88ou!ted or i! the terms o this reality7 As
4iels 3ohr @6ho is sometimes misu!derstood as havi!g 6a!ted to Jtra!s8e!de!taliUeK physi8sA liked to
repeat- at the level o the physi8s o mi8ro:parti8les- there is !o Jobje8tiveK measureme!t- !o a88ess to
Jobje8tiveK realityE!ot be8ause 6e @our mi!dA 8o!stitutes reality- but be8ause 6e are part o the
reality 6hi8h 6e measure- a!d thus la8k a! Jobje8tive dista!8eK to6ards it7
9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o the radi8al asymmetry or !o!:8orrelatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d
obje8t @or thi!ki!g a!d realityA that o!e 8a! 8learly see 6here ,eillassou?Is 8ritiNue o 8orrelatio!ism
alls short7 9! his very a!ti:tra!s8e!de!talism- ,eillassou? remai!s 8aught up i! the *a!tia! topi8 o
the a88essibility o the Thi!g:i!:itsel+ is 6hat 6e e?perie!8e as reality ully determi!ed by our
subje8tive:tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!- or 8a! 6e get to k!o6 somethi!g about the 6ay reality is
i!depe!de!tly o our subje8tivityM ,eillassou?Is 8laim is to have a8hieved the breakthrough i!to
i!depe!de!t Jobje8tiveK reality7 3ut there is a third =egelia! optio!+ the true problem that ollo6s rom
,eillassou?Is basi8 spe8ulative gesture @tra!sposi!g the 8o!ti!ge!8y o our !otio! o reality i!to the
Thi!g itselA is !ot so mu8h 6hat more 6e 8a! say about reality:i!:itsel- but ho6 our subje8tive
sta!dpoi!t a!d subje8tivity itsel it i!to reality7 The problem is !ot JDa! 6e pe!etrate the veil o
subje8tively 8o!stituted phe!ome!a to Thi!gs:i!:themselvesMK but J=o6 do phe!ome!a themselves
arise 6ithi! the lat stupidity o reality 6hi8h just isT ho6 does reality redouble itsel a!d start to appear
to itselMK For this- 6e !eed a theory o the subje8t 6hi8h i!volves !either tra!s8e!de!tal subje8tivity
!or a redu8tio! o the subje8t to a part o obje8tive realityT su8h a theory also e!ables us to ormulate i!
a !e6 6ay 6hat ,eillassou? 8alls the problem o 8orrelatio!ism @a!8estralityA7 =ere- both .a8a! a!d
=egel are a!ti:.e!i!ists- or their problem is !ot Jho6 to rea8h obje8tive reality 6hi8h is i!depe!de!t
o @its 8orrelatio! toA subje8tivity-K but ho6 subje8tivity is already i!s8ribed i!to realityEto Nuote
.a8a! agai!- !ot o!ly is the pi8ture i! my eye- but 9 am also i! the pi8ture7
To make this key poi!t agai!- i! his reje8tio! o tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism @the 8laim that i!
order to thi!k reality- there must already be a subje8t to 6hom this reality appearsA- ,eillassou?
remai!s trapped 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o the *a!tia!:tra!s8e!de!tal oppositio! bet6ee! reality the 6ay it
appears to us a!d the tra!s8e!de!t beyo!d o reality:i!:itsel- i!depe!de!tly o us7 9! a .e!i!:like
ma!!er @the .e!i! o Materialism and Empirio*,riticismA- he the! asserts that 6e 8a! a88ess a!d thi!k
reality i! itsel7 3ut somethi!g is lost i! this very ield o the tra!s8e!de!tal dilemma- somethi!g 6hi8h
8o!8er!s the very 8ore o the Freudia! dis8overy @or the 6ay this dis8overy 6as ormulated by .a8a!A+
the i!here!t t6ist>8urvature that is 8o!stitutive o the subje8t itsel7 9! other 6ords- 6hat .a8a! asserts
is pre8isely the irredu8ible @8o!stitutiveA dis8ord- or !o!:8orrelatio!- bet6ee! subje8t a!d reality+ i!
order or the subje8t to emerge- the impossible obje8t:that:is:subje8t must be e?8luded rom reality-
si!8e it is this very e?8lusio! 6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e or the subje8t7 The problem is !ot to thi!k the
Feal outside o tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!- i!depe!de!tly o the subje8tT the problem is to thi!k the
Feal inside the subje8t- the hard 8ore o the Feal i! the very heart o the subje8t- its e?:timate 8e!ter7
The true problem o 8orrelatio!ism is !ot 6hether 6e 8a! rea8h the 9!:itsel the 6ay it is
outside o a!y 8orrelatio! to the subje8t @or the 6ay the Hld is outside its per8eptio! rom the
sta!dpoi!t o the 4e6AT but the true problem is to thi!k the 4e6 itsel Ji! be8omi!g7K The ossil is !ot
the Hld the 6ay it 6as>is i! itsel- the true ossil is the subje8t itsel i! its impossible obje8tal
statusEthe ossil is mysel- the 6ay the terriied 8at sees me 6he! it looks at me7 This is 6hat truly
es8apes 8orrelatio!- !ot the 9!:itsel o the obje8t- but the subje8t as obje8t7
)sually 6e have the split i! the obje8t @bet6ee! the obje8t or us a!d the 6ay the obje8t is i!
itselA- but thi!ki!g a!d the subje8t are 8o!8eived as homoge!eous7 .a8a!- ho6ever- i!trodu8es a split
also i!to the subje8t- bet6ee! its thi!ki!g a!d its @!ot a8tual lie:bei!g but itsA !o!:thought thought- its
!o!:!o!:thought- bet6ee! dis8ourse a!d the Feal @!ot realityA7 So the poi!t is !ot o!ly to over8ome the
i!a88essible 9!:itsel by 8laimi!g that Jthere is !othi!g beyo!d the veil o sembla!8es e?8ept 6hat the
subje8t itsel put there-K but to relate the 9!:itsel to the split i! the subje8t itsel7
,eillassou? iro!i8ally me!tio!s the ridi8ulously i!ge!ious Dhristia! reply to the Gar6i!ist
8halle!ge+ o!e o Gar6i!Is 8o!temporaries proposed a !eat re8o!8iliatio! bet6ee! the 3ible a!d
evolutio!ary theory+ the 3ible is literally true- the 6orld 6as 8reated 87(000 years 3DEbut ho6 the!
do 6e e?plai! the ossilsM They 6ere directly created by (od as fossils- to give huma!ity a alse se!se
o livi!g i! a! older u!iverseEi! short- 6he! 1od 8reated the u!iverse- he also i!8luded i! it tra8es o
a! imagi!ary past7 ,eillassou?Is poi!t is that post:*a!tia! tra!s8e!de!talism a!s6ers the 8halle!ge o
obje8tive s8ie!8e i! a similar 6ay+ i- or the theologi8al literalists- 1od dire8tly 8reated ossils i! order
to e?pose me! to the temptatio! o de!yi!g the divi!e 8reatio!- to test their aith- the post:*a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!talists 8o!8eive the spo!ta!eous everyday J!aSveK !otio! o obje8tive reality e?isti!g
i!depe!de!tly o us as a similar trap- e?posi!g huma!s to the test- 8halle!gi!g them to see through this
Jevide!8eK a!d grasp ho6 reality is 8o!stituted by the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t7
2%
/e should !o!etheless
i!sist that the Dhristia! solutio!- mea!i!gless though it is as a s8ie!tii8 theory- 8o!tai!s a grai! o
truth+ 6hat .a8a! 8alls the ob1et a- the subje8tIs impossible:Feal obje8tal 8ou!terpart- is pre8isely su8h
a! Jimagi!edK @a!tasmati8- virtualA obje8t 6hi8h !ever positively e?isted i! realityEit emerges
through its loss- it is dire8tly 8reated as a ossil7
Simulta!eously- the e?8lusio! o this obje8t is 8o!stitutive o the appeara!8e o reality+ si!8e
reality @!ot the FealA is 8orrelative to the subje8t- it 8a! o!ly 8o!stitute itsel through the 6ithdra6al
rom it o the obje8t 6hi8h JisK the subje8tT that is- through the 6ithdra6al o the subje8tIs obje8tal
8orrelate7 Hr- to put it i! the old jargo! o the logi8 o the sig!iier- the subje8t is o!ly possible out o its
o6! impossibility- the impossibility o be8omi!g a! obje8t7 /hat breaks up the sel:8losure o
tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! is thus !ot the tra!s8e!de!t reality that eludes the subje8tIs grasp- but the
i!a88essibility o the obje8t that JisK the subje8t itsel7
"0
This is the true Jossil-K the bo!e that is the
spirit- to paraphrase =egel- a!d this obje8t is !ot simply the ull obje8tive reality o the subje8t @the
su88essul s8ie!tii8 redu8tio! o subje8tive e?perie!8e to obje8tive pro8esses- su8h as i! bioge!eti8sA-
but the !o!:8orporeal- a!tasmati8 lamella7
/hy this primordial loss- 6hy this 8o!stitutive 6ithdra6al rom reality o a part o the FealM
Cre8isely be8ause the subje8t is a part o reality- be8ause it emerges out o it7 This is 6hy- i the subje8t
is to emerge as the !o!:substa!tial cogito- its bei!g must be elevated i!to a spe8tral impossible obje8t
6hi8h orever hau!ts it @a!d 6hi8h 8a! assume ma!y a!tasmati8 orms- rom the lamella to the
doubleA7 The Joi8ialK tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t:obje8t 8orrelatio! is thus redoubled by a ki!d o !egative
8orrelatio! o the subje8t a!d the impossible:Feal obje8t+ beore relati!g to obje8ts 6hi8h are part o
e?ter!al reality- the subje8t is hau!ted by its o6! obje8tal shado6T i! the guise o this additio!al virtual
obje8t- the subje8t is e?:posed to the Feal- 8o!stitutively Jde:8e!tered-K mu8h more radi8ally eve! tha!
i! the symboli8 order7 This is ho6 6e 8a! read o!e o .a8a!Is re:ormulatio!s o Ges8artesIs cogito
ergo sum+ J9 am at that impossible pie8e o the real 6here 9 8a!!ot thi!k7K /e 8a! also see i! 6hat 6ay
t6o la8ks overlap i! this impossible obje8t+ the 8o!stitutive la8k o the subje8t @6hat the subje8t has to
lose i! order to emerge as the subje8t o the sig!iierA a!d the la8k i! the Hther itsel @6hat has to be
e?8luded rom reality so that reality 8a! appearA7 Agai!- the obje8t is !ot simply there at the
i!terse8tio! o the t6o la8ks+ it literally a!d mu8h more radi8ally emerges through the overlappi!g o
the t6o la8ks7 @H!8e .a8a! got this poi!t- he 8ha!ged the status o the ob1et a rom imagi!ary to Feal7A
So the Feal is !ot some ki!d o primordial 3ei!g 6hi8h is lost 6ith the oppositio! o subje8t a!d obje8t
@as =Zlderli! put it i! his amous 3r*Fragment o 1erma! 9dealismAT the Feal is- o! the 8o!trary- a
produ8t @o the overlappi!g o the t6o la8ksA7 -he 7eal is not lost! it is what we cannot get rid of- 6hat
al6ays sti8ks o! as the remai!der o the symboli8 operatio!7
9t is here that ,eillassou? is also too hasty i! dismissi!g the tra!s8e!de!tal positio!+ @6hat 6e
e?perie!8e asA reality is al6ays tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted7 The remai!der o the Feal is the pri8e 6e
pay or the i!versio! o the J!aturalK order that pertai!s to the symboli8 order+ although la!guage is
ultimately part o reality- reality @the 6ay it appears to usA is al6ays already tra!s8e!de!tally
8o!stituted through la!guage7 Hr- to put it a!other 6ay+ 6e 8a!!ot gai! ull !eutral a88ess to reality
because we are part of it7 The epistemologi8al distortio! o our a88ess to reality is the result o our
inclusion i! it- !ot o our dista!8e rom it7 The ob1et a is the spli!ter i! the eye 6hi8h distorts our 8lear
per8eptio! o reality- a!d the age!t o this distortio! is desire @re8all that the ob1et a is the obje8t:8ause
o desireA7 This bri!gs us to the u!iNue Jshort:8ir8uit bet6ee! epistemology a!d o!tologyK+ the very
epistemologi8al ailure @to rea8h realityA is a! i!di8atio! a!d ee8t o our bei!g part o reality- o our
i!8lusio! 6ithi! it7
"1
9! the oppositio! bet6ee! the symboli8 order a!d reality- the Feal is o! the side o the
symboli8Eit is the part o reality 6hi8h 8li!gs to the symboli8 @i! the guise o its
i!8o!siste!8y>gap>impossibilityA7 The Feal is the poi!t at 6hi8h the e?ter!al oppositio! bet6ee! the
symboli8 order a!d reality is imma!e!t to the symboli8 itsel- mutilati!g it rom 6ithi!+ it is the !o!:
All o the symboli87 There is a Feal !ot be8ause the symboli8 8a!!ot grasp its e?ter!al Feal- but
be8ause the symboli8 8a!!ot ully be8ome itself7 There is bei!g @realityA be8ause the symboli8 system
is i!8o!siste!t- la6ed- or the Feal is a! impasse o ormaliUatio!7 This thesis must be give! its ull
JidealistK 6eight+ it is !ot o!ly that reality is too ri8h- so that every ormaliUatio! ails to grasp it-
stumbles over itT the Feal is !othi!g but a! impasse o ormaliUatio!Ethere is de!se reality Jout thereK
because o the i!8o!siste!8ies a!d gaps i! the symboli8 order7 The Feal is !othi!g but the !o!:All o
ormaliUatio!- !ot its e?ter!al e?8eptio!7
Si!8e reality is i! itsel ragile a!d i!8o!siste!t- it !eeds the i!terve!tio! o a ,aster:Sig!iier
to stabiliUe itsel i!to a 8o!siste!t ieldT this ,aster:Sig!iier marks the poi!t at 6hi8h a sig!iier alls
i!to the Feal7 The ,aster:Sig!iier is a sig!iier 6hi8h !ot o!ly desig!ates eatures o reality- but
perormatively i!terve!es i!to reality7 As su8h- the ,aster:Sig!iier is the 8ou!terpart o the ob1et a+ i
the ob1et a is the Feal 6hi8h is o! the side o the symboli8- the ,aster:Sig!iier is the sig!iier 6hi8h
alls i!to the Feal7 9ts role is e?a8tly homologous to that o the tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis o apper8eptio!
i! *a!t+ its i!terve!tio! tra!sorms the i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity o ragme!ts o the Feal i!to the
8o!siste!t ield o Jobje8tive reality7K 9! the same 6ay that- or *a!t- it is the additio! o the subje8tive
sy!thesis 6hi8h tra!sorms the multipli8ity o subje8tive impressio!s i!to obje8tive reality- or .a8a!-
it is the i!terve!tio! o the ,aster:Sig!iier 6hi8h tra!sorms the 8o!used ield o impressio!s i!to
Je?tra:li!guisti8 reality7K This- the!- should be the .a8a!ia! a!s6er to 8orrelatio!ism+ 6hile
tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio!ism 8a! thi!k the i!terve!tio! o the ,aster:Sig!iier as 8o!stitutive o
reality- it misses this other i!verted 8orrelatio! bet6ee! the ,aster:Sig!iier a!d the ob1et aT that is- it
8a!!ot thi!k the stai! o the Feal 6hi8h de:8e!ters the subje8t rom 6ithi!7
So- to repeat ,eillassou?Is ossil Nuestio! i! the most dire8t 6ay+ is a di!osaur ossil proo that
di!osaurs e?isted o! 0arth i!depe!de!tly o a!y huma! observer- 6hether empiri8al or tra!s8e!de!talM
9 6e 8a! imagi!e tra!sposi!g ourselves i!to the pre:histori8al past- 6ould 6e e!8ou!ter di!osaurs the
6ay 6e re8o!stru8t them todayM 3eore rushi!g to a! a!s6er- 6e should remember ho6 relative
Je?ter!al realityK is 6ith regard to our poi!t o vie6- 6hi8h does !ot mea! that 6e J8reatedK it- but that
out o the i!i!ite 8omple?ity o the Feal:i!:itsel a part or sli8e o reality 6as sele8ted as 8orrelative to
our per8eptual apparatus7 So 6e 8a!!ot ever es8ape the 8ir8le+ the reality o a ossil is Jobje8tiveK
i!soar as it is observed rom our sta!dpoi!t- i! the same 6ay that a rai!bo6 Jobje8tively e?istsK rom
our sta!dpoi!tE6hat Jobje8tively e?istsK is the e!tire ield o i!tera8tio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t as
part o the Feal7
CHAPTER 1/

Hbje8ts- Hbje8ts 0very6here

S)3TFADT9H4- CFHTFADT9H4- H3STF)DT9H4 O G0STF)DT9H4

3a8k i! 200&- 6he! 8o!ro!ted 6ith his lo6 positio! i! the opi!io! polls- the Fepubli8a!
preside!tial 8a!didate ,ike =u8kabee @a igure 6ho seemed to have stepped right out o a! old Fra!k
Dapra ilm- i !ot a Gi8ke!s !ovelA said+ J9 k!o6 the pu!dits a!d 9 k!o6 6hat they say- the math
does!It 6ork out7 /ell 9 did!It major i! math- 9 majored i! mira8les7 A!d 9 still believe i! those- too7K
This a!e8dote is 6orth Nuoti!g !ot just to make u! o the sta!dard o politi8al debate i! the )S- but
be8ause- i! a !egative 6ay- it poi!ts to a 8e!tral 8ompo!e!t o 3adiouIs thi!ki!g 6hi8h- pre8isely-
bri!gs together mathemati8s a!d mira8les7 /he! talki!g about mira8les- 6e should o 8ourse bear i!
mi!d .a8a!Is Nualii8atio! that the o!ly Jirratio!alityK he admits is that o irratio!al !umbers i!
mathemati8sEi! a homologous 6ay- the o!ly Jmira8lesK a radi8al materialist allo6s or are
mathemati8al o!es7 A Jmira8leK is simply the sudde! emerge!8e o the 4e6- irredu8ible to its
pre8edi!g 8o!ditio!s- o somethi!g 6hi8h retroa8tively JpositsK its 8o!ditio!s7 0very authe!ti8 a8t
8reates its o6! 8o!ditio!s o possibility7
3ut 6hat is this Jirratio!alK eleme!tM As 3adiou has poi!ted out- 6hat dei!es a J6orldK is !ot
primarily its positive eatures- but the 6ay its stru8ture relates to its o6! i!here!t @poi!t oA
impossibility7 Dlassi8al mathemati8s dismissed the sNuare root o :1 as a! irreleva!t e?ter!ality- as
!o!se!se to be ig!ored- 6hile moder! mathemati8s makes this impossible 8al8ulable- marki!g it 6ith
the letter 9 @Jimagi!ary !umberKA+ Jmathemati8s histori8ally splits a!d remakes itsel by 8reati!g
8o!sta!ts that o88upy these impossible pla8es+ the root sNuare o :1 is baptiUed a! imagi!ary !umber
6hi8h is the! used i! a !e6 spa8e o 8al8ulatio!s7K
1
Thi!gs are similar 6ith Da!torIs 8o!8eptualiUatio! o diere!t modalities o the i!i!ite+ the
tra!si!ite a!d so orth7 The disti!8tio! bet6ee! Jtra!si!iteK a!d Ji!i!iteK as elaborated by Da!tor
roughly its the =egelia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! JtrueK a!d JbadK @or JspuriousKA i!i!ity+ 6ith the Jbad
i!i!ity-K 6e !ever a8tually rea8h the i!i!ite- a!other u!it 8a! be added to every !umber- a!d
Ji!i!ityK here reers pre8isely to this 8o!sta!t possibility o addi!g- to the impossibility o ever
rea8hi!g the ultimate eleme!t i! the series7 /hat i- ho6ever- 6e treat this set o eleme!ts orever
Jope!K to additio! as a 8losed totality a!d posit the i!i!ite as a! eleme!t o its o6!- as the e?ter!al
rame o the e!dless set o eleme!ts it 8o!tai!sM The tra!si!ite is thus a !umber or a! eleme!t 6ith the
parado?i8al property o bei!g i!se!sitive to additio! or subtra8tio!+ 6hether 6e add a u!it to it or
subtra8t o!e rom it- it remai!s the same7
2
Gid !ot *a!t i! a similar 6ay 8o!stru8t the 8o!8ept o the
Jtra!s8e!de!tal obje8tKM H!e is tempted to risk a pu! here+ *a!tor7 The tra!s8e!de!tal obje8t is
e?ter!al to the e!dless series o empiri8al obje8ts+ 6e arrive at it by 6ay o treati!g this e!dless series
as 8losed- a!d positi!g a! empty obje8t outside o it- the very orm o a! obje8t- that rames the series7
9t is also easy to dis8er! a urther homology 6ith the ob1et petit a- the .a8a!ia! obje8t:8ause o desire+
the latter is also Jtra!si!ite-K !amely a! empty obje8t that rames the e!dless set o empiri8al obje8ts7
9! this pre8ise se!se- our t6o ob1ets petit a- voi8e a!d gaUe- are Jtra!si!iteK+ i! both 8ases- 6e are
deali!g 6ith a! empty obje8t that rames the Jbad i!i!ityK o the ield o the visible a!d>or audible by
givi!g body to 6hat 8o!stitutively eludes this ield @o! this a88ou!t- the obje8t:gaUe is a bli!d spot
6ithi! the ield o the visible- 6hereas the obje8t:voi8e par e?8elle!8e is o 8ourse sile!8eA7
"
9! his debate 6ith the Athe!ia!s related i! +cts- Caul makes det use o the a8t that the
Athe!ia!s- i! their pragmati8 opportu!ism- built a statue to a! u!k!o6! god o! top o the statues o all
their k!o6! godsEthey just 6a!ted to be sure that their series o statues also i!8luded a reere!8e to a
divi!ity ig!ored by them- a reere!8e to 6hat might be e?8luded or missi!g rom their pa!theisti8
pa!demo!ium7 Caul 8u!!i!gly remarks that there already is i! Athe!s a statue o the u!iNue 1od o
6hom he speaksT the tri8k is that he repla8es the i!dei!ite arti8le 6ith a dei!ite o!e+ !ot a statue o an
u!k!o6! god @like the mo!ume!t to the u!k!o6! soldier- reerri!g to the a!o!ymous alle! ge!erallyA-
but a statue o the u!k!o6! god- mea!i!g the @o!e trueA god 6ho is>remai!s u!k!o6!- obus8ated by
the glitteri!g 8haos o polytheism7 Gid !ot Caul also thereby i!ter!aliUe the poi!t o impossibility o the
paga! u!iverseM
The same holds or 8apitalism+ its dy!ami8 o perpetual sel:revolutio!iUi!g relies o! the
e!dless postpo!eme!t o its poi!t o impossibility @its i!al 8risis or 8ollapseA7 /hat or earlier modes
o produ8tio! 6as a da!gerous e?8eptio! is or 8apitalism !ormality+ i! 8apitalism- 8risis is
i!ter!aliUed- take! i!to a88ou!t- as the poi!t o impossibility 6hi8h impels it i!to 8o!ti!uous a8tivity7
Dapitalism is stru8turally al6ays i! 8risisE6hi8h is 6hy it is e?pa!di!g all the time+ it 8a! o!ly
reprodu8e itsel by Jborro6i!g rom the uture-K i! a fuite en avant i!to the uture7 The i!al settli!g o
a88ou!ts 6he! all its debts 6ill have bee! paid 6ill !ever arrive7 ,ar? proposed his o6! !ame or the
so8ial poi!t o impossibility+ J8lass struggle7K
Cerhaps- o!e should e?te!d this to the very dei!itio! o huma!ity+ 6hat ultimately
disti!guishes huma!s rom a!imals is !ot some positive eature @spee8h- tool:maki!g- rele?ive
thi!ki!g- et87A- but the rise o a !e6 poi!t o impossibility desig!ated by Freud a!d .a8a! as das Ding-
the impossible:real ultimate reere!8e poi!t o desire7 The ote! !oted e?perime!tal diere!8e bet6ee!
huma!s a!d apes a8Nuires here all its sig!ii8a!8e+ 6he! a! ape is prese!ted 6ith a! obje8t out o
rea8h- it 6ill aba!do! it ater a e6 ailed attempts to grasp it a!d move o! to a more modest obje8t @a
less attra8tive se?ual part!er- sayA- 6hile a huma! 6ill persist i! its eort- remai!i!g tra!si?ed o! the
impossible obje8t7
This is 6hy the subje8t as su8h is hysteri8al+ pre8isely a subje8t 6ho posits 1ouissance as a!
absoluteT it respo!ds to the absolute o 1ouissance i! the orm o u!satisied desire7 Su8h a subje8t is
8apable o relati!g to a term that remai!s outside the limits o the gameT i!deed- this relatio!ship to a
term Jout:o:playK is 8o!stitutive o the subje8t itsel7 =ysteria is thus the eleme!tary Jhuma!K 6ay o
i!stalli!g a poi!t o impossibility i! the guise o absolute 1ouissance7 9s !ot .a8a!Is il ny a pas de
rapport se&uel also su8h a poi!t o impossibility 8o!stitutive o bei!g huma!M
/he! 8og!itivists rom Ge!!ett o!6ards try to e?plai! 8o!s8ious!ess- they e!umerate a 6hole
series o spe8ii8ally huma! 8apa8ities 6hi8h J8a!!ot really u!8tio! 6ithout 8o!s8ious!essKE6hat i-
ho6ever- i!stead o o8usi!g o! J6hat 6e 8a! @o!lyA do 6ith 8o!s8ious!ess-K 6e should shit the
terrai! a!d ask+ 6hat is the spe8ii8 poi!t o impossibility o 8o!s8ious!essM /hat is it that 6e cannot
do 6ith 8o!s8ious!essM =o6 is 8o!s8ious!ess related to 6hat 6e a priori 8a!!ot be8ome 8o!s8ious oM
A!d 6hat u!surpassable ailure gave birth to 8o!s8ious!essM 9s 8o!s8ious!ess at its Uero:level !ot
8o!s8ious!ess o a ailureEo 8omi!g up agai!st a radi8al impossibilityM =ere- the topi8 o mortality
re:emerges+ 6he! =eidegger 8laims that o!ly ma! is mortal- !ot a!imals- this agai! mea!s that death is
the ultimate possibility o impossibility or a huma! bei!g- its i!here!t poi!t o impossibility-
somethi!g o!e 8al8ulates 6ith- relates to- i! 8o!trast to the a!imal or 6hom death is simply e?ter!al7
,a!y a 8og!itivist @rom Ci!ker to ,81i!!A tries to a88ou!t or the parado? o
@sel:A8o!s8ious!ess by 8laimi!g that its i!ability to Jk!o6 itsel-K to a88ou!t or itsel as a! obje8t i!
the 6orld- is 8o:substa!tial 6ith 8o!s8ious!ess itsel- its i!here!t 8o!stitue!t7 @Ci!ker oers a more
s8ie!tii8- evolutio!ist versio!E8o!s8ious!ess did !ot emerge 6ith the aim o
u!dersta!di!g>e?plai!i!g itsel- but 6ith other evolutio!ary u!8tio!sE6hile ,81i!! oers a more
purely theoreti8al versio! o 6hy 8o!s8ious!ess is !e8essarily a! e!igma to itsel7A
(
/hat 6e get here
is !othi!g less tha! a! evolutio!ary biologi8al e?pla!atio! or the emerge!8e o metaphysi8s7 =o6ever-
a =eideggeria! 8ou!ter:Nuestio!- issui!g rom the rame6ork o /eing and -ime- immediately pops up
here+ does !ot 8o!s8ious!ess necessarily Nuestio! itsel- aski!g itsel about the e!igma it is a priori
u!able to a!s6erM @As =eidegger himsel puts it+ Dasein is a! e!tity that Nuestio!s its o6! bei!g7A =o6
did this property emerge 6ithi! the evolutio!ary logi8M The poi!t is !ot o!ly that- on top o its adaptive
u!8tio!s @ho6 to i!d o!eIs 6ay i! the e!viro!me!t- et87A- 8o!s8ious!ess is also bothered by e!igmas
havi!g !o evolutio!ary- adaptive u!8tio! @humor- art- metaphysi8al Nuestio!sA7 The urther @a!d
8ru8ialA poi!t is that this useless suppleme!t- this 8ompulsive i?atio! o! problems 6hi8h a priori
8a!!ot be solved- retroa8tively e!abled a! e?plosio! o pro8edures @te8h!iNues- i!sightsA 6hi8h
themselves had a major survival value7 9t is as i- i! order to assert its priority over other livi!g bei!gs
i! the struggle or survival- the huma! a!imal has to orsake the struggle or survival itsel a!d o8us o!
other Nuestio!s7 Vi8tory i! the struggle or survival 8a! o!ly be gai!ed as a by:produ8t+ i o!e o8uses
dire8tly o! the struggle- o!e loses7 H!ly a bei!g obsessed 6ith impossible or i!soluble problems 8a!
make a breakthrough i! possible k!o6ledge7 This mea!s that- i! 8o!trast to the a!imalIs struggle or
survival- ma!Is struggle is already Jrele8tive-K as =eidegger 6ould have put it- e?perie!8ed as the
horiUo! o mea!i!g or his e?iste!8e7 The developme!t o te8h!ology- the struggle or po6er- o88ur
6ithi! a!d as a 8ertai! dis8losure o 3ei!g- rather tha! bei!g a! immediate Ja8t o lie7K
#
/he! ,81i!! 8laims that there is- i! reality- !othi!g mysterious about ho6 the brai! ge!erates
8o!s8ious!ess @6e are just orever 8og!itively 8losed to u!dersta!di!g this pro8ess i! the same 6ay a!
u!dersta!di!g o Nua!tum me8ha!i8s lies beyo!d the 8og!itive 8apa8ities o mo!keysA- the iro!y here
is double+ !ot o!ly do 6e i!8essa!tly try to u!dersta!d 8o!s8ious!ess- i! 8lear 8o!trast to mo!keys
@6ho do !ot 8are about Nua!tum physi8sAEeve! huma!s themselves 8a!!ot really u!dersta!d Nua!tum
physi8s @i! the stri8t se!se o tra!slati!g it i!to their horiUo! o mea!i!gA7 9 6e 8laim that 6hat 6e are
deali!g 6ith here is a Jmismat8h bet6ee! the very !ature o these problems a!d the 8omputatio!al
apparatus that !atural sele8tio! has itted us 6ith-K
'
the true e!igma is !ot the e!igma o the mea!i!g
o lie as su8h- but- rather- why do we persistently probe into the meaning of life in the first place? 9
religio! a!d philosophy are @i! part- at leastA Jthe appli8atio! o me!tal tools to problems they 6ere !ot
desig!ed to solve-K ho6 did this misappli8atio! o88ur- a!d 6hy is it so persiste!tM
$
4ote the *a!tia!
ba8kgrou!d o this positio!+ it 6as already *a!t 6ho 8laimed that the huma! mi!d is burde!ed by
metaphysi8al Nuestio!s that- a priori- it 8a!!ot a!s6er7 These Nuestio!s 8a!!ot be suspe!dedT they are
part o huma! !ature itsel7
9magi!e s8ie!tists have dis8overed a giga!ti8 asteroid 6hi8h they are 8ertai! 6ill hit 0arth i!
thirty:ive yearsI time- !ot o!ly destroyi!g all lie but thro6i!g the pla!et itsel o its tra8k arou!d the
su!7 =o6 6ould people rea8tM /ould the so8ial a!d ethi8al order 8ollapseM /ould people lose all
shame a!d Nui8kly try to realiUe their se?ual a!d other a!tasiesM A!d yet- the true Nuestio! is+ do 6e
!ot all k!o6 that- i! a mu8h more dista!t @let us hope soA uture- somethi!g like this will indeed happe!
a!d huma!ity 6ill disappear 6ithout a tra8eM So 6hat is the diere!8eM The situatio! is aki! to that i!
the amous a!e8dote about 1eorge 3er!ard Sha6Eat a di!!er party- he asked the upper:8lass beauty at
his side i she 6ould spe!d a !ight 6ith him or 10 millio! pou!dsT 6he! she laughi!gly said yes- he
6e!t o! a!d asked i she 6ould do it or 10 pou!dsT 6he! the lady e?ploded i! rage at bei!g treated
like a 8heap 6hore- he 8almly replied+ JDome o!- 6e have already established that your se?ual avors
8a! be boughtE!o6 6e are o!ly haggli!g over the pri8e OK The diere!8e is the same as 6ith death
o 8ourse+ the eve!t should be ar e!ough i! the uture that 6e 8a! ig!ore it- prete!d !ot to k!o6 about
it- a!d thus a8t as i 6e k!o6 !othi!g about it7 This is 6hy almost everyo!e- though they k!o6 very
6ell they 6ill die at some poi!t- 6ould reuse to k!o6 i! adva!8e the e?a8t mome!t o their death+ they
se8retly reuse to believe they 6ill die- a!d the k!o6ledge o the e?a8t mome!t o their death 6ould
made this uture death ully a8tual7 *aka 6rote+ JThe lame!tatio! arou!d the deathbed is a8tually the
lame!tatio! over the a8t that here !o dyi!g i! the true se!se has take! pla8e7K
&
3ut 6hat i there is !o
dyi!g Ji! the true se!se-K 6hat i dyi!g is al6ays a!d by dei!itio! Jimproper-K arrivi!g at the 6ro!g
time a!d pla8eM
This poi!t o impossibility is o!e eature o the .a8a!ia! ob1et a+ it desig!ates that 6hi8h is
subtracted rom reality @as impossibleA a!d thus gives it 8o!siste!8yEi it gets i!8luded i! reality- it
8auses a 8atastrophe7 9! 6hat se!se is the ob1et a as the rame o reality surplus:e!joyme!tM 9! relatio!
to 8i!ema- thi!k about the Jprodu8tio! o a 8oupleKEa moti 6hi8h rames ma!y a =olly6ood
!arrative about a gra!d histori8al eve!t like a 6ar or !atural 8atastrophe+ this topi8 is- Nuite literally- the
ilmIs ideologi8al surplus:e!joyme!t7 Although i! a dire8t se!se 6e e!joy the spe8ta8ular shots o the
8atastrophe @the battle- the tidal 6ave- the si!ki!g ship OA- the surplus:e!joyme!t is provided by the
sub:!arrative about the 8ouple 6hi8h orms a JrameK or the spe8ta8ular eve!tEthe asteroid 6hi8h
hits 0arth i! Deep Impact materialiUes the daughterIs rage at her atherIs !e6 marriageT the H8tober
Fevolutio! i! 7eds reu!ites the loversT the ero8ious di!osaurs i! Curassic )ar" materialiUe the ather:
igureIs aggressive reje8tio! o pater!al authority a!d 8areT et87 9t is this rame- through its surplus:
e!joyme!t- that Jlibidi!ally bribesK us to a88ept the ideology o the story7 A! e?ample o subje8tivity
rui!ed by su8h a 8atastrophi8 i!8lusio! is provided by the hero o )erfume @Catri8k SYski!dIs !ovel a!d
Tom Tyk6erIs ilmA7
%
.a8a! suppleme!ted FreudIs list o partial obje8ts @breasts- e8es- pe!isA 6ith
t6o urther obje8ts+ the voi8e a!d the gaUe7 Cerhaps- 6e should add a!other item to this series+ smell7
)erfume seems to poi!t i! this dire8tio!7 1re!ouille- the !ovelIs u!ortu!ate hero- is odorless- others
8a!!ot smell himT but he himsel possesses su8h a! e?traordi!ary se!se o smell that he is able to dete8t
perso!s ar a6ay7 /he! his ideal 6oma! dies i! a! a88ide!t- he tries to re8reate !ot the 6oma! i! her
bodily e?iste!8eE)erfume is a true a!ti:Fran"enstein- but her odor by killi!g t6e!ty:ive pretty you!g
6ome! a!d s8rat8hi!g the sura8e o their ski! to subtra8t their odors- mi?i!g them i!to the ideal
perume7 This irresistible perume is the ultimate odor di femina- the e?tra8ted Jesse!8eK o emi!i!ity+
6he!ever ordi!ary huma!s smell it- they suspe!d all ratio!al restrai!t a!d e!gage i! a se?ual orgy7 So
6he!- to6ards the !ovelIs e!d- 1re!ouille is arrested or the murders a!d se!te!8ed to death- it is
e!ough or him to 6ave a !apki! soaked i! the perume i! ro!t o the 8ro6d- 6ho the!- i!sta!tly
orgetti!g their 8ries or his death- start u!dressi!g to take part i! a! orgy7 The e?tra8ted esse!8e o
emi!i!ity is 6hat .a8a! 8alled the ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire- that 6hi8h is Ji! you more
tha! yourselK a!d thus makes me desire youT this is 6hy 1re!ouille has to kill the virgi!s i! order to
e?tra8t rom them their Jesse!8e-K or- as .a8a! put it+ J9 love you- but there is somethi!g i! you more
tha! yoursel that 9 love- the ob1et petit a- so 9 destroy you7K
1re!ouilleIs ate is tragi8- ho6ever+ bei!g odorless- he is a pure sub1ect- 6ithout a! obje8t:
8ause o desire i! himsel- a!d as su8h !ever desired by others7 /hat he gai!s rom this predi8ame!t is
the dire8t a88ess to the obje8t:8ause o desire+ 6hile ordi!ary i!dividuals desire a!other perso! be8ause
o the lure o the ob1et a i! him- 1re!ouille has dire8t a88ess to this obje8t7 Hrdi!ary i!dividuals 8a!
o!ly desire i!soar as they be8ome vi8tims o a! illusio!+ they thi!k they desire a!other i!dividual
be8ause o the perso! they areT that is- they are !ot a6are that their desire is 8aused by the Jesse!8eK or
odor 6hi8h has !othi!g to do 6ith the perso! as su8h7 Si!8e 1re!ouille 8a! by:pass the perso! a!d
dire8tly target the obje8t:8ause o desire- he 8a! avoid this illusio!E6hi8h is 6hy or him eroti8ism is
a ridi8ulous game o lures7 The pri8e he pays or it- ho6ever- is that he 8a! !ever a88ept the i!verse
illusio! that someo!e loves him+ he is al6ays a6are that it is !ot him but his perume that makes
people adore him7 The o!ly 6ay out o this predi8ame!t- the o!ly 6ay to posit himsel as a! obje8t o
the othersI desire- is sui8idal+ i! the i!al s8e!e o the !ovel- he spills perume o! himsel a!d is
literally tor! apart a!d devoured by a bu!8h o thieves- beggars- a!d 6hores7
9s !ot this viole!t redu8tio! o the thi!g to its ob1et a also a! e?ample o 6hat 3adiou 8alls
subtractionM H!e subtra8ts rom the thi!g its de8e!tered 8ore- leavi!g behi!d its dead body7 The
opposite o this subtra8tio!- a!d also a 6ay to ge!erate the ob1et a- is protraction7 A! e?ample rom
8i!ema is provided by o!e o TarkovskyIs ormal te8h!iNues 6hi8h- iro!i8ally give! his Soviet origi!s-
8a!!ot but evoke the @i!Aamous diale8ti8al Jla6K o the i!versio! o Nua!tity i!to Nuality-
suppleme!ti!g it 6ith a ki!d o J!egatio! o the !egatio!K @6hi8h 6as e?8luded by Stali! rom the list
o these Jla6sK as bei!g too =egelia!- !ot properly JmaterialistKA7 As Sea! ,arti! put it+

Tarkovsky proposed that i a take is le!gthe!ed- boredom !aturally sets i! or the audie!8e7 3ut i the
take is e?te!ded eve! urther- somethi!g else arises+ 8uriosity7 Tarkovsky is esse!tially proposi!g
givi!g the audie!8e time to i!habit the 6orld that the take is sho6i!g us- !ot to watch it- but to loo" at
it- to e?plore it7
10
Cerhaps the ultimate e?ample o this pro8edure is the amous s8e!e i! TarkovskyIs Mirror- i!
6hi8h the heroi!e- 6ho 6orks as a prooreader or a daily !e6spaper i! the Soviet )!io! o the mid:
1%"0s- ru!s rom her home to the pri!ti!g oi8e eari!g she has missed a! obs8e!e mispri!t o Stali!Is
!ame7
11
,arti! is right to emphasiUe a! u!e?pe8ted eature o this s8e!e Eits immediate physi8al
beauty+

it is as i Tarkovsky 6ere 8o!te!t just to 6at8h ,argarita Terekhova ru!!i!g through the rai!- do6!
steps- a8ross yards- i!to 8orridors7 =ere- Tarkovsky reveals the prese!8e o beauty i! somethi!g that is
appare!tly mu!da!e a!d- parado?i8ally @give! the periodA- also pote!tially atal or ,aria i the
mistake she thi!ks sheIs made has go!e to press7
12
This ee8t o beauty is ge!erated pre8isely by the e?8essive le!gth o the s8e!e+ i!stead o just
6at8hi!g ,aria ru!!i!g a!d- immersed i! the !arrative- 6orryi!g 6hether she 6ill arrive o! time to
preve!t the 8atastrophe- 6e are sedu8ed i!to looki!g at the s8e!e- taki!g !ote o its phe!ome!al
eatures- the i!te!sity o moveme!ts- a!d so orth7
Dristia! ,u!giuIs _ Months! ` Wee"s and \ Days @Foma!ia 200$A- set i! 1%&$ duri!g the last
years o Deaupes8uIs rule- tells the story o Htilia a!d 1abita- t6o u!iversity rie!ds i! 3u8harest7
/he! 1abita alls preg!a!t- Htilia arra!ges or her rie!d a meeti!g 6ith ,r7 3ebe i! a hotel- 6here he
is to perorm the abortio! @abortio! 6as prohibited a!d severely pu!ished at that timeA7 The
righte!i!gly repulsive ,r7 3ebe @a ki!d o Foma!ia! versio! o the 2avier 3ardem igure i! o
,ountry for $ld MenA dema!ds se?ual avors rom Htilia as the pri8e or perormi!g the operatio!7
Htilia agrees or the sake o her rie!d- the abortio! is perormed- but at the ilmIs e!d she remai!s
alo!e- havi!g lost eve! the respe8t o her rie!d or 6hom she made the sa8rii8e7 Throughout the ilm-
the threat that ,r7 3ebe 6ill do somethi!g terriyi!g @but8her 1abita a!d bleed her to death- et87A lurks
i! the ba8kgrou!dT ho6ever- the elega!8e o the ilm is su8h that this threat remai!s purely virtual-
!othi!g happe!s- everythi!g basi8ally goes as pla!!ed- a!d yet !evertheless the i!al result is bitter
despair7 This e!dless postpo!eme!t o the threate!ed a8t u!8tio!s i! a similar 6ay to the Tarkovskia!
protra8tio!+ it elevates ,r7 3ebe to the ob1et a- to a sublime igure o 0vil7
Tarkovsky- ho6ever- all too ote! su88umbs to the temptatio! o re:i!s8ribi!g this e?8ess o
phe!ome!ality i!to herme!euti8s7 Fe8all the diere!8e bet6ee! Sta!isla6 .emIs 8lassi8 s8ie!8e:
i8tio! !ovel Solaris a!d TarkovskyIs 8i!ema versio!7 Solaris is a pla!et 6ith a! o8ea!i8 luid sura8e
6hi8h moves i!8essa!tly a!d- rom time to time- imitates re8og!iUable orms- !ot o!ly elaborate
geometri8 stru8tures- but also giga!ti8 8hildre! or huma! buildi!gs7 Although all attempts to
8ommu!i8ate 6ith the pla!et ail- s8ie!tists e!tertai! the hypothesis that Solaris is a massive brai!
6hi8h someho6 reads our mi!ds7 Soo! ater his arrival there- *elvi!- the hero- i!ds at his side i! his
bed his dead 6ie- =arey- 6ho- years ago o! 0arth- killed hersel ater he had aba!do!ed her7 *elvi!
grasps that =arey is a materialiUatio! o his o6! i!!ermost traumati8 a!tasies7 Solaris- this giga!ti8
3rai!- dire8tly materialiUes the i!!ermost a!tasies 6hi8h support our desire7 Fead i! this 6ay- the
story is really about the heroIs i!!er jour!ey- about his attempt to 8ome to terms 6ith a repressed truth-
or- as Tarkovsky himsel put it i! a! i!tervie6+ J,aybe- ee8tively- the missio! o *elvi! o! Solaris
has o!ly o!e goal+ to sho6 that love o the other is i!dispe!sable to all lie7 A ma! 6ithout love is !o
lo!ger a ma!7K 9! 8lear 8o!trast to this- .emIs !ovel o8uses o! the i!ert e?ter!al prese!8e o the pla!et
Solaris- o this JThi!g that thi!ksK @to use *a!tIs e?pressio!- 6hi8h ully its hereA+ the poi!t o the
!ovel is pre8isely that Solaris remai!s a! impe!etrable Hther 6ith 6hi8h 8ommu!i8atio! is
impossibleEtrue- it retur!s us our i!!ermost disavo6ed a!tasies- but it remai!s thoroughly
impe!etrable @/hy does 9t do itM As a purely me8ha!i8al respo!seM To play demo!i8 games 6ith usM
To help usEor 8ompel usEto 8o!ro!t our disavo6ed truthsMA7 9t 6ould thus be i!teresti!g to put
TarkovskyIs ilm i! the same bra8ket as =olly6ood 8ommer8ial re6riti!gs o !ovels 6hi8h have
served as the base or a movie+ Tarkovsky does e?a8tly the same as the lo6est =olly6ood produ8er-
rei!s8ribi!g the e!igmati8 e!8ou!ter 6ith Hther!ess i!to the rame6ork o the produ8tio! o the
8ouple7
3ut there is- perhaps- a li!k bet6ee! these t6o aspe8ts o Tarkovsky7 9! sta!dard pre:8riti8al
metaphysi8s- Ji!itudeK 6as asso8iated 6ith materialist empiri8ism @Jo!ly material i!ite obje8ts really
e?istKA- 6hile Ji!i!ityK 6as the domai! o idealist spiritualism7 9! a! u!e?pe8ted reversal- today- the
mai! argume!t or spiritualism relies o! the irredu8ibility o huma! i!itude as the u!surpassable
horiUo! o our e?iste!8e- 6hile it is the 8o!temporary orms o radi8al s8ie!tii8 materialism 6hi8h
keep the spirit o i!i!ity alive7 The sta!dard spiritualist argume!t is as ollo6s+ 6e should !ot orget
that the te8h!ologi8al dream o total mastery over !ature a!d our lives is i!deed just a dream- that 6e
huma!s remai! orever grou!ded i! our i!ite lie 6orld 6ith its u!athomable ba8kgrou!d- a!d that it
is this i!itude- this very limitatio! o our horiUo!- 6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e or spirituality proper7 All
todayIs predomi!a!t orms o spirituality thus parado?i8ally emphasiUe that 6e are !ot ree:loati!g
spirits but are irredu8ibly embodied i! a material lie 6orldT they all prea8h respe8t or this limitatio!
a!d 6ar! agai!st the JidealistK hubris o radi8al materialismEe?emplary here is the 8ase o e8ology7 9!
8o!trast to this spiritualist attitude o limitatio!- the radi8al s8ie!tii8 attitude 6hi8h redu8es ma! to a
biologi8al me8ha!ism promises the ull te8h!ologi8al 8o!trol over huma! lie- its artii8ial re8reatio!-
its bioge!eti8 a!d bio8hemi8al regulatio!- ultimately its immortality i! the guise o the redu8tio! o our
i!!er Sel to a sot6are program that 8a! be 8opied rom o!e pie8e o hard6are to a!other7 The
s8ie!tii8 basis o the 8laim that su8h immortality is easible lies i! the hypothesis o so:8alled
Jsubstrate i!depe!de!8eK+ J8o!s8ious mi!ds 8ould i! pri!8iple be impleme!ted !ot o!ly o! 8arbo!:
based biologi8al !euro!s @su8h as those i!side your headA but also o! some other 8omputatio!al
substrate su8h as sili8o!:based pro8essors7K
1"
The third igure o the ob1et a- ater subtraction a!d protraction- is that o obstruction+ the ob1et
a as a! age!t o the Du!!i!g o Feaso!- the obsta8le 6hi8h al6ays perturbs the realiUatio! o our goals7
A!other e?ample rom 8i!ema+ the libidi!al o8us o the Doe! brothersI o ,ountry for $ld Men
@200$A is the igure o the pathologi8al assassi! played by 2avier 3ardemEa ruthless killi!g ma8hi!e-
6ith a! ethi8 all his o6!- sti8ki!g to his 6ord- a igure o 6hat *a!t 8alled diaboli8al 0vil7 /he!- at
the ilmIs e!d- he or8es the heroIs 6ie to 8hoose head or tails to de8ide 6hether she lives or dies- she
replies that he should !ot hide behi!d the 8o!ti!ge!8y o lippi!g a 8oi!Eit is his 6ill that 6ill de8ide
to kill her7 =e replies that she has !ot u!derstood+ he- his 6ill- is like the 8oi!7 The key to this 8hara8ter
is the a8t that it represe!ts !ot a real:lie perso!- but a a!tasy:e!tity- a! embodime!t o the pure
obje8t:obsta8le- that u!athomable JdK o 3li!d Fate 6hi8h al6ays- i! a 6eird mi?ture o 8ha!8e a!d
i!e?orable !e8essity- as the !e8essity o 8ha!8e @o bad lu8kA- i!terve!es to u!dermi!e the ulillme!t
o the subje8tIs pla!s a!d i!te!tio!s- guara!teei!g that- o!e 6ay or a!other- thi!gs 6ill al6ays
someho6 go 6ro!g7
The 3ardem 8hara8ter is thus the opposite o the resig!ed old Sheri @Tommy .ee 2o!esA- 6ho
8omplai!s all the time about the 8raUy viole!8e o moder! timesEit is to him that the ilmIs title reers7
They are the obverse o ea8h other+ the Sheri as the ,aster re!dered impote!t- the ailure o pater!al
authorityT the 3ardem igure as embodyi!g the 8ause o his 8ollapse7 The proper 6ay to read o
,ountry for $ld Men is thereore irst to imagi!e the same story without the 3ardem igure+ just the
tria!gle o the hero 6ho ru!s a6ay 6ith the mo!ey ater stumbli!g upo! the site o the ga!gstersI
gu!ight- the ga!gsters hiri!g a reela!8er @/oody =arrelso!A to get the mo!ey ba8k- a!d the Sheri
observi!g their i!terplay rom a sae dista!8e- playi!g o o!e agai!st the other- a!d guara!teei!g a
happy @or at least justA out8ome7 The 3ardem igure is the ourth eleme!t- the ob1et a 6hi8h rui!s the
game7
A!other 6ay to put it is that the ob1et a preve!ts the letter arrivi!g at its desti!atio!Ebut does
itM 9s there !ot a Du!!i!g o Feaso! at 6ork here- su8h that the very ailure to rea8h the desti!atio!
8ompels us to 8ha!ge our perspe8tive a!d redei!e the latterM The 2001 Gar6i! a6ard or the most
stupid a8t o the year 6as posthumously 8o!erred o! a! u!ortu!ate Foma!ia! 6oma! 6ho a6oke i!
the middle o her u!eral pro8essio!T ater 8ra6li!g out o her 8oi! a!d seei!g 6hat 6as goi!g o!- she
ra! rom the pro8essio! i! terror a!d- 8rossi!g a busy road- 6as hit by a tru8k a!d i!sta!tly killedEso
they put her ba8k i! the 8oi! a!d the u!eral pro8essio! 8arried o!7 9s this !ot the ultimate e?ample o
6hat 6e 8all ateEo a letter arrivi!g at its desti!atio!M
The ate o 4ikolai 3ukhari!Is Jtestame!t-K a letter he 6rote to his 6ie A!!a .ari!a i! 1%"&-
o! the eve o his e?e8utio!- is a tragi8 8ase o the same thi!g7 3ukhari! e?horts his 6ie to JFemember
that the great 8ause o the )SSF lives o!- a!d this is the most importa!t thi!g7 Cerso!al ates are
tra!sitory a!d 6ret8hed by 8ompariso!7K
1(
The letter disappeared i!to the se8ret Soviet ar8hives a!d
6as delivered to A!!a .ari!a o!ly i! 1%%2Eshe 6as able to read it o!ly ater the all o the Soviet
)!io!7 3ukhari!Is letter did arrive at its desti!atio!Edid rea8h its addresseeEat pre8isely the right
mome!tT o!e 8a! eve! say that it 6as delivered as soo! as 6as possible- that is- as soo! as the histori8al
situatio! made it possible or its delivery to produ8e a truth:ee8t7 3ukhari! sa6 his perso!al ate as
i!sig!ii8a!t i! 8ompariso! to the su88ess o the great histori8al 8ause o the )SSFEthe 8o!ti!uity o
this 8ause guara!teed that his death 6as !ot mea!i!gless7 Fead ater the )SSF has disappeared- the
letter 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the mea!i!gless!ess o 3ukhari!Is death+ there is !o big Hther to redeem it- he
literally died i! vai!7
The ge!eral lesso! o this is that- i! order to i!terpret a s8e!e or a! uttera!8e- sometimes the key
thi!g to do is to locate its true addressee7 9! o!e o the best Cerry ,aso! !ovels- the la6yer 6it!esses a
poli8e i!terrogatio! o a 8ouple i! the 8ourse o 6hi8h the husba!d e?plai!s i! u!usually great detail
6hat happe!ed- 6hat he sa6- a!d 6hat he thi!ks happe!edE6hy this e?8ess o i!ormatio!M The
a!s6er is that the 8ouple themselves 8ommitted the murder- a!d si!8e the husba!d k!e6 that they
6ould both soo! be arrested o! suspi8io! a!d kept separated- he used the opportu!ity to tell his 6ie
the @alseA story they should both sti8k toEthe true addressee o his i!termi!able dis8ourse 6as thus
!ot the poli8e- but his 6ie7
Subtraction! protraction! obstruction+ three versio!s o the same e?8essive>la8ki!g obje8t- a!
obje8t 6hi8h is !ever at its o6! pla8e- al6ays missi!g a!d e?8eedi!g it7 H!e i!ds all three dime!sio!s
o the ob1et a i! the ormal stru8ture o 8apitalism itsel+ subtraction @o surplus:value as the movens o
the e!tire pro8essAT protraction @the 8apitalist pro8ess is by dei!itio! i!termi!able- or its ultimate goal
is the reprodu8tio! o the pro8ess itselAT a!d obstruction+ the gap bet6ee! the subje8tive e?perie!8e @o
i!dividuals pursui!g their i!terestsA a!d obje8tive so8ial me8ha!isms @6hi8h appear as a! Jirratio!alK
a!d u!8o!trollable FateA is i!s8ribed i!to the very !otio! o 8apitalism- a!d- o! a88ou!t o this gap-
there al6ays lurks the threat that i!dividualsI i!te!tio!s a!d pla!s 6ill be sabotaged- obstru8ted7 9t is i!
this gap that o!e should lo8ate the systemi8 viole!8e proper to 8apitalism7
To the three modes o the ob1et a- o ho6 it distorts reality by i!s8ribi!g itsel i!to it- o!e
should the! add a ourth+ destruction7 9s 6hat happe!s i! the 8ase o a post:traumati8 subje8t !ot the
destruction o the ob1et aM This is 6hy su8h a subje8t is deprived o e!gaged e?iste!8e a!d redu8ed to
JvegetativeK state o i!diere!8e7 /hat 6e should !o!etheless bear i! mi!d is that this destru8tio!
results also i! the loss o reality itsel- 6hi8h is sustai!ed by the ob1et aE6he! the subje8t is deprived
o the e?8ess- it at o!8e loses that 6ith regard to 6hi8h the e?8ess is a! e?8ess7 This is 6hy the
J,uslims-K the Jlivi!g deadK o the 8o!8e!tratio! 8amps- 6ere simulta!eously redu8ed to Jbare lieK
and stood or the pure e?8ess @the empty ormA 6hi8h remai!s 6he! all the 8o!te!t o huma! lie is
take! a6ay rom the subje8t7 To properly u!dersta!d the 6orld:histori8al dime!sio! o the post:
traumati8 subje8t- o!e should re8og!iUe i! this e?treme orm o subje8tivity the a8tualiUatio! o a
possibility that a!!ou!8es itsel i! the Dartesia! cogito+ is !ot the radi8al de:substa!tialiUatio! o the
subje8t- its redu8tio! to the eva!es8e!t poi!t o J9 thi!k-K the very operatio! that gives birth to the
cogitoM As su8h- the cogitoEthe moder! subje8t or- rather- the subje8t o moder!ityEshould !ot be too
hastily dismissed as J0uro8e!tri8K+ o!e 8a! argue that the cogito sta!ds or a ki!d o u!:histori8al
e?8ess 6hi8h u!derlies a!d sustai!s every histori8al lie:orm7
T=0 $/CE- + 30T/004 FHF, A4G DH4T04T

/hat these parado?es i!di8ate is that- i! the ob1et a- orm a!d 8o!te!t 8oi!8ide+ the ob1et a is
the Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h es8apes the symboli8 orm- a!d- simulta!eously- pure orm- a purely
ormal distortio! @protra8tio!- et87A o the 8o!te!t7 ,ore pre8isely- this os8illatio! o the ob1et a
bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!t i!volves our 8o!se8utive diale8ti8al reversals- i! a ki!d o 8omple?
!egatio! o the !egatio!7 9t is symptomati8 that- 6he! .a8a! a!d his ollo6ers des8ribe some pro8ess
that 8learly has the stru8ture o a J!egatio! o the !egatio!-K they almost 8ompulsively haste! to add
that this is !ot mea!t i! the =egelia! se!seEis this !ot a dee!se me8ha!ism par e?8elle!8e- the
disavo6al o a! u!8omortable pro?imityM =o6- the!- does it sta!d 6ith the J!egatio! o the !egatio!K
i! .a8a!M 9s his versio! 8ompatible 6ith =egelIsM Si!8e- i! .a8a!- i! appare!t 8o!trast to =egel- the
double moveme!t o J!egatio! o !egatio!K produ8es a! e?8ess or remai!der- that o the ob1et a- let us
begi! 6ith ,iller 6ho- i! his 8omme!tary o! .a8a!Is Seminar ;6I- elaborated the 8ru8ial 8ha!ge i!
the status o the ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire+ the passage rom 8orporeal spe8ime! @partial
obje8t+ breasts- e8es OA to a pure logi8al u!8tio!7 9! this semi!ar- J.a8a! does !ot really des8ribe
ob1ets a as 8orporeal spe8ime!s- he 8o!stru8ts them as a logi8al 8o!siste!8y- logi8 bei!g there i! the
pla8e o biology7 The logi8al 8o!siste!8y is like a u!8tio! that the body must satisy through diere!t
bodily dedu8tio!s7K
1#
This passage is the passage rom the oreig! i!truder- the grai!s o sa!d i! the sig!iyi!g
ma8hi!e 6hi8h preve!t its smooth u!8tio!i!g- to somethi!g 6hi8h is totally imma!e!t to the ma8hi!e7
/he! .a8a! is des8ribi!g the loops a!d t6ists o the symboli8 spa8e o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h its i!teriority
overlaps 6ith its e?teriority @Je?:tima8yKA- he does !ot merely des8ribe the stru8tural pla8e o the ob1et
a @surplus:e!joyme!tA+ surplus:e!joyme!t is nothing but this structure itself- this Ji!6ard loopK o the
symboli8 spa8e7 This 8a! be 8lariied i! relatio! to the gap that separates drive rom i!sti!8t+ 6hile
drive a!d i!sti!8t have the same Jobje8t-K the same goal- 6hat diere!tiates them is that the drive i!ds
satisa8tio! !ot i! rea8hi!g its goal- but i! 8ir8ulati!g arou!d it- repeati!g its ailure to rea8h it7 H!e 8a!
say- o 8ourse- that 6hat preve!ts the drive rom rea8hi!g its goal is the ob1et a 6hi8h is de8e!tered
6ith regard to it- so that- eve! i 6e rea8h the goal- the obje8t eludes us a!d 6e are 8o!dem!ed to
repeat the pro8edureT ho6ever- this ob1et a is purely ormal- it is the 8urvature o the spa8e o the drive-
he!8e the Jshortest 6ayK to rea8h the obje8t is !ot to aim dire8tly at it but to e!8ir8le it- to 8ir8le arou!d
it7
This shit is deeply =egelia!- ormi!g a ki!d o J!egatio! o the !egatio!K+ 6e begi! 6ith the
8o!siste!t Jbig Hther-K the sel:e!8losed symboli8 orderT the!- i! a irst !egatio!- this 8o!siste!8y is
disturbed by the remai!der o the Feal- a traumati8 let:over 6hi8h resists bei!g i!tegrated i!to the
symboli8 a!d thus disturbs its bala!8e- re!deri!g it Jbarred-K i!trodu8i!g i!to it a gap- la6- or
a!tago!ismT i! short- i!8o!siste!8yT the se8o!d !egatio!- ho6ever- reNuires a shit o perspe8tive i!
6hi8h 6e grasp this i!trusive let:over o the Feal as itsel the o!ly eleme!t that guara!tees the
mi!imal 8o!siste!8y o the i!8o!siste!t big Hther7 Take the logi8 o 8lass struggle+ it re!ders so8iety
Ji!8o!siste!t-K a!tago!isti8- perturbi!g its bala!8eT ho6ever- it is simulta!eously that 6hi8h holds the
e!tire so8ial body together- its u!derlyi!g stru8turi!g pri!8iple- si!8e all so8ial phe!ome!a are
overdetermi!ed by 8lass struggle7 At a more prosai8 level- is it !ot ote! struggle itsel- a basi8 te!sio!-
that keeps diere!t eleme!ts togetherM /he! struggle disappears- the eleme!ts drit apart i!to a sterile-
i!diere!t 8oe?iste!8e7 9! the same 6ay- 6hile trauma is- o 8ourse- 6hat disturbs the bala!8e o a
subje8tIs symboli8 spa8e- it is simulta!eously the ultimate reere!8e poi!t o the subje8tIs psy8hi8
lieEall its symboliUi!g a8tivity ultimately aims at 8opi!g 6ith the trauma- repressi!g it- displa8i!g it-
a!d so o!7
There is more+ !ot o!ly does the i!trudi!g eleme!t Jhold togetherK the big Hther 6hi8h- i! the
abse!8e o this i!truder- 6ould have alle! apartT this eleme!t- the ob1et a- has !o positive obje8tal
reality- its status is purely that o logi8al 8o!siste!8y+ it is logi8ally implied- presupposed- as the 8ause
o the i!8o!siste!8ies o>i! the big HtherT that is- it 8a! o!ly be dis8er!ed retroa8tively- through its
ee8ts7 Take a! attra8tor i! mathemati8s+ all positive li!es or poi!ts i! its sphere o attra8tio! 8a! o!ly
e!dlessly approa8h it- !ever a8tually rea8hi!g its ormEthe e?iste!8e o this orm is purely virtual-
bei!g !othi!g more tha! the shape to6ards 6hi8h the li!es a!d poi!ts te!d7 =o6ever- pre8isely as
su8h- the virtual orm is the Feal o this ield+ the immovable o8al poi!t arou!d 6hi8h all eleme!ts
8ir8ulate7
The =egelia! logi8 o these t6ists 8a! thus be re!dered eve! more pre8ise+ there are !ot o!ly
three- but our mome!ts at 6ork here7 First- the 8o!siste!t big HtherT the!- the big Hther re!dered
i!8o!siste!t by the ob1et a as i!trusive remai!derT the!- this obje8t as guara!teei!g the J8o!siste!8yK o
the big Hther @multiple i!8o!siste!t symboliUatio!s 8a! o!ly be JtotaliUedK as a !et6ork o rea8tio!s to
the i!trudi!g obje8tAT i!ally- 6e are ba8k at the begi!!i!g- although at a diere!t levelEthere is !o
obje8t that- rom outside- disturbs the 8o!siste!8y o the big HtherT the ob1et a as the JFealK is o!ly a
!ame or the purely ormal t6ist- the i!ter!al loop- o the symboli8 order itsel7
9!soar as it la8ks its mirror image- is the ob1et a the! the vampiri8 obje8t @vampires- as 6e
k!o6- are !ot rele8ted i! a mirrorAM 9t may seem so+ are !ot vampires versio!s o lamella- o the
u!dead partial obje8tM =o6ever- perhaps the e?a8t opposite 6ould be more appropriate as a! image o
the ob1et a+ 6he! 6e look at a thi!g dire8tly- i! reality- 6e do !ot see JitKEthis JitK o!ly appears 6he!
6e look at the thi!gIs mirror image- as i here there 6ere somethi!g more tha! i! reality- as i o!ly the
mirror image 8a! bri!g out that mysterious i!gredie!t or 6hi8h 6e sear8h i! vai! i! the obje8tIs
reality7 To put it i! GeleuUia! terms+ the mirror image desubsta!tialiUes a thi!g- deprivi!g it o its
de!sity a!d depth- redu8i!g it to a lat sura8e- a!d it is o!ly through this redu8tio! that the purely !o!:
substa!tial ob1et a be8omes per8eptible7
1'
Cerhaps this double status o the ob1et a also provides a 8lue to the relatio!ship bet6ee! the
death drive a!d the superego7 Some time ago- 0ri8 Sa!t!er raised a 8riti8al poi!t about my 6ork-
Nuestio!i!g JThe li!k- eve! at times ide!tity O o the orga! 6ithout body a!d the superego7 Should 6e
just 8ollapse the superego a!d the death drive like thisM Goes!It everythi!g depe!d o! keepi!g at least
a thi! li!e bet6ee! themM Should!It 6e speak o a superegoiUatio! o driveMK
1$
As Sa!t!er
emphasiUes- 6e are deali!g here 6ith a paralla? split- !ot 6ith the 8osmi8 polarity o t6o opposed
or8es+ the orga! 6ithout a body a!d the superego are !ot like yin a!d yang or the pri!8iples o light
a!d dark7 Furthermore- the te!sio! i! Nuestio! is asymmetri8- the t6o poles are !ot bala!8ed- the H63
aspe8t someho6 has priorityEbut 6hat ki!d o priority e?a8tlyM /hat 6e are !ot deali!g 6ith here is
yet a!other 8ase o the logi8 o sel:alie!atio!- at 6ork rom ,ar? a!d 4ietUs8he to GeleuUe- o a
ge!erative po6er 6hi8h misre8og!iUes itsel i! its o6! produ8t- i7e7- i! the same 6ay that- or ,ar?-
8apital is the result o 8olle8tive labor tur!ed agai!st itsel- its o6! origi!- or- or 4ietUs8he- moral
rese!tme!t is the produ8tivity o lie tur!ed agai!st itsel- the superego e?8ess is the e?8ess o the H63
tur!ed agai!st itsel7 Fead i! this 6ay- the task be8omes o!e o retur!i!g the alie!ated result ba8k to its
origi!- re:establishi!g the e?8ess o H63 6ithout its superego distortio!7 This- ho6ever- is the very
logi8 o!e should avoid at all 8osts7
1&
H!e path to take here 6ould be to li!k this duality o the superego a!d the drive to the duality i!
the status o the ob1et petit a+ is !ot the Jsuperego-K as the !ame or the e?8ess o the drive- the obje8t i!
its aspe8t o material reality- the oreig! i!truder that Jdrives me 8raUyK 6ith its impossible reNuestsT
a!d is !ot the H63 the obje8t i! its aspe8t o a purely ormal stru8tureM 3oth aspe8ts display the same
sel:propelli!g stru8ture o a loop+ the more the subje8t obeys the superego- the more he is guilty-
8aught up i! a repetitive moveme!t homologous to that o the drive 8ir8ulati!g arou!d its obje8t7 The
passage rom the irst to the se8o!d aspe8t is itsel stru8turally homologous to that o the Fabi!ovit8h
joke- or o the problem 6hi8h is its o6! solutio!+ 6hat- at the level o the superego- appears as a
deadlo8k @the more 9 obey- the more 9 am guilty OA tur!s i!to the very sour8e o satisa8tio! @6hi8h is
!ot the obje8t o the drive- but the very a8tivity o repeatedly e!8ir8li!g itA7
1%
So- ba8k to the t6o aspe8ts o the ob1et a- its 8orporeal reality a!d its logi8al 8o!siste!8y+
although a!ti!omi8- they it togetherEbut ho6- e?a8tlyM ,illerIs irst ormulatio! is that o a hole
@empty pla8eA a!d the 8o!ti!ge!t eleme!t illi!g it i!+ JThe small a- 6he! it is desig!ated as topologi8al
stru8ture a!d as logi8al 8o!siste!8y- has- i 9 may say so- the substa!8e o a hole- a!d the! some
deta8hed pie8es o the body are molded i! this abse!8e7K
20
This ormulatio!- ho6ever- appears all too
simplisti87 Goes !ot the parado? o a! obje8t 6hi8h JisK o!ly its ormal stru8ture disappear hereM =o6-
the!- are 6e to a88omplish that move 6hi8h- i! the terms o the 8lassi8al Tea8hers- o!e 8ould 8all the
move rom metaphysi8al>me8ha!i8al materialism to diale8ti8al materialismM 9! his .ogic of Sense-
GeleuUe provided a model 6hi8h allo6s o!e to grasp the mediatio! o orm a!d 8o!te!t i! sho6i!g
ho6 the t6o series @o the sig!iier a!d the sig!iiedA al6ays 8o!tai! a parado?i8al e!tity that is
Jdoubly i!s8ribedK @that is simulta!eously surplus a!d la8kA+ a surplus o the sig!iier over the sig!iied
@the empty sig!iier 6ithout a sig!iiedA a!d the la8k o the sig!iied @the poi!t o !o!se!se 6ithi! the
ield o Se!seA7 9! other 6ords- as soo! as the symboli8 order emerges- a mi!imal diere!8e is
i!trodu8ed bet6ee! a stru8tural pla8e a!d the eleme!t that o88upies or ills out this pla8e+ a! eleme!t is
al6ays logi8ally pre8eded by the pla8e i! the stru8ture it ills out7 The t6o series- thereore- 8a! also be
des8ribed as the JemptyK ormal stru8ture @sig!iierA a!d the series o eleme!ts illi!g out the empty
pla8es i! the stru8ture @sig!iiedA7 From this perspe8tive- the parado? 8o!sists i! the a8t that the t6o
series !ever overlap+ 6e al6ays e!8ou!ter a! e!tity that is simulta!eously @6ith regard to the stru8tureA
a! empty- u!o88upied pla8e a!d @6ith regard to the eleme!tsA a rapidly movi!g- elusive obje8t- a!
o88upa!t 6ithout a pla8e7 /e have thereby produ8ed .a8a!Is ormula o a!tasy b:a- si!8e the
matheme or the subje8t is b- a! empty pla8e i! the stru8ture- a! elided sig!iier- 6hile the ob1et a is- by
dei!itio!- a! e?8essive obje8t- a! obje8t that la8ks a pla8e i! the stru8ture7 Do!seNue!tly- the poi!t is
!ot simply that there is a surplus o a! eleme!t over the pla8es available i! the stru8ture- or the surplus
o a pla8e that has !o eleme!t to ill it out7 A! empty pla8e i! the stru8ture 6ould still sustai! the
a!tasy o a! eleme!t that 6ill emerge to ill the pla8eT a! e?8essive eleme!t la8ki!g its pla8e 6ould
still sustai! the a!tasy o some yet u!k!o6! pla8e 6aiti!g to be illed7 The poi!t is- rather- that the
empty pla8e i! the stru8ture is stri8tly 8orrelative to the erra!t eleme!t la8ki!g its pla8e+ they are !ot
t6o diere!t e!tities- but the t6o sides o o!e a!d the same e!tity- that is- o!e a!d the same e!tity
i!s8ribed o!to the t6o sura8es o a ,Zbius strip7 9! short- the subje8t Nua b does !ot belo!g to the
depths+ it emerges rom a topologi8al t6ist o the sura8e itsel7 Goes !ot ,iller himsel poi!t i! this
dire8tio! later i! the same te?tM

/he! .a8a! speaks o a hole at the level o the big Hther- he must say that the hole is !ot a la8k- but it
is 6hat permits- o! the 8o!trary- i! .a8a!Is logi8al elu8ubratio!s- the i!terior 8ir8le o the Hther to be
8o!sidered as 8o!joi!ed to the most e?terior 8ir8le- almost as its i!versio!7 .a8a! says i! passi!g that it
is the stru8ture itsel o the ob1et a- or rather that the ob1et a is this stru8ture i! 6hi8h the most i!terior
is 8o!joi!ed to the most e?terior i! its tur!i!g7
21
The Jor ratherK has to be give! ull 6eight here+ rom the stru8ture of the obje8t to a stra!ge
obje8t 6hi8h is !othi!g but this stru8ture- its substa!tial ide!tity merely a reiied spe8ter7 This obje8t
JisK the subje8t- the subje8tIs impossible>Feal obje8tal 8orrelate7 This 6eird 8orrelatio! subverts the
sta!dard tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t+ i! it- the subje8t is 8orrelated 6ith the
very impossible>Feal obje8t that has to be e?8luded rom the ield o reality so that the subje8t 8a!
relate to this ield7 9! order to deli!eate this u!iNue 8hara8ter o the ob1et a as the embodime!t o a
void- o the la8k or loss o the primordial obje8t 6hi8h 8a! o!ly emerge as al6ays already lost- .a8a!
opposes it to t6o other igures o !othi!g!ess- the !othi!g!ess o destru8tio! a!d the =egelia!
!egativity 6hi8h is the J!ullii8atio!K 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity- the !othi!g as the i!itial mome!t i!
the i!stauratio! o the subje8t7 9! 8o!trast to these t6o versio!s- he relates the ob1et a to 6hat *a!t
8alled Jder (egenstand ohne /egriff-K the obje8t 6ithout 8o!8ept @!ot 8overed by a!y 8o!8eptA7 The
ob1et a is as su8h Jirratio!al-K i! the stri8tly literal se!se o bei!g outside all ratio- all relatio! as
proportio!7 9! other 6ords- 6he! a parti8ular eleme!t resists bei!g subsumed u!der a u!iversal
8o!8ept- the ob1et a- J6hat is i! you more tha! yoursel-K is pre8isely that 1e ne sais <uoi 6hi8h
preve!ts this subsumptio!7
=ere- ho6ever- o!e must remai! a 8o!siste!t =egelia! a!d resist the empiri8ist temptatio!+ the
a8t that the assertio! o the e?iste!8e o a parti8ular eleme!t goes agai!st the u!iversal !otio!
supposed to 8over or 8o!tai! this eleme!t should !ot be dismissed as a 8ase o the 6ealth o parti8ular
8o!te!t over6helmi!g abstra8t !otio!al rame6orks7 The empiri8al e?8ess should rather be read as a!
i!di8atio! o the i!here!t i!8o!siste!8y or ailure o the u!iversal !otio! itsel7 So 6he! .a8a! says
that Jo!ly 6ith the a!alyti8 dis8ourse 8a! a u!iversal i!d its true grou!d i! the e?iste!8e o a!
e?8eptio!- 6hi8h is 6hy it is 8ertai! that 6e 8a! i! a!y 8ase disti!guish the u!iversal 6hi8h is thus
grou!ded rom all use o this same u!iversal re!dered 8ommo! by the philosophi8al traditio!-K
22
he
@as usualA ig!ores the u!iNue!ess o =egelia! J8o!8rete u!iversality7K .et us risk a politi8al e?ample
here7 /he!- i! order to ge!erate hope amo!g radi8al letists- 8ertai! i!telle8tuals poi!t out that there
i!deed e?ists today some authe!ti8 ema!8ipatory age!t @usually ar a6ay- i! =aiti or Ve!eUuela or
4epal OA- this triumpha!t assertio! @J5ou see- 6e are !ot dreami!g- there is a! authe!ti8 revolutio!ary
pro8ess goi!g o!RKA serves pre8isely as a etish e!abli!g us to avoid 8o!ro!ti!g the i!adeNua8y o the
sta!dard !otio! o radi8al ema!8ipatory age!8y or todayIs global struggle7 /hat this mea!s is that- i!
the oppositio! bet6ee! 8o!8ept a!d reality @real e?iste!8eA- the ob1et a is o! the side o the 8o!8ept+ it
is !ot the e?8ess o reality- but a! imma!e!t hole or 8ra8k i! the 8o!8eptual edii8e7
The ob1et a is thus !ot the 8ore o reality 6hi8h resists bei!g subsumed by the 8o!8eptual rame
imposed by the subje8tT it is- o! the 8o!trary- the obje8tiviUatio! o the subje8tIs desire+ the status o
that 6hi8h makes me desire a! obje8t is irredu8ibly li!ked to my Jsubje8tiveK perspe8tive- it is !ot
simply a! obje8tive property o the belovedEthat d 6hi8h as8i!ates me i! the beloved e?ists o!ly or
me- !ot or a! Jobje8tiveK vie67 /e 8a! eve! go a step urther a!d argue that the subje8tive mediatio!
here is double+ ar rom simply sta!di!g or the e?8ess i! the obje8t eludi!g the subje8tIs grasp- the
ob1et a is- at its most eleme!tary- 6hat 9 see i! the otherIs gaUe7 9! other 6ords- 6hat eludes me i! a
libidi!al obje8t is !ot some tra!s8e!de!t property- but the i!s8riptio! i!to it o my o6! desire+ 6hat 9
see i! the other is his or her desire or meT that is- 9 read i! his or her eyes my o6! status as a! obje8t
@o desireA- the 6ay 9 appear to the other7
#OICE AND GA&E

This bri!gs us to the parado?i8al status o the voi8e a!d the gaUe- the paradigmati8 ob1ets a i!
.a8a!Is theory7 As !oted above- the voi8e a!d the gaUe are the t6o obje8ts added by .a8a! to FreudIs
list o Jpartial obje8tsK @breasts- e8es- phallusA7 As obje8ts- they are !ot o! the side o the
looki!g>heari!g subje8t but o! the side o 6hat the subje8t sees or hears7 Fe8all the ar8hetypal s8e!e
rom =it8h8o8k+ a heroi!e @.ilah i! )sycho- ,ela!ie i! -he /irdsA approa8hes a mysterious- appare!tly
empty houseT she looks at it- yet 6hat makes a s8e!e so disturbi!g is that 6e- the spe8tators- get the
vague impressio! that the house is someho6 retur!i!g her gaUe7 The 8ru8ial poi!t- o 8ourse- is that this
gaUe should !ot be subje8tiviUed+ it is !ot simply that Jthere is somebody i! the house-K 6e are rather
deali!g 6ith a ki!d o empty- a priori gaUe 6hi8h 8a!!ot be tra8ed to a determi!ate realityEthe heroi!e
J8a!!ot see it all-K there is a bli!d spot i! 6hat she is looki!g at- a!d the obje8t retur!s her gaUe rom
this bli!d spot7 The situatio! is homologous 6ith the voi8e+ it is as i- 6he! 6e are talki!g- 6hatever 6e
say is already a! a!s6er to a primordial address by the HtherE6e are al6ays already addressed- a!d-
agai!- this address is bla!k- it 8a!!ot be attributed to a spe8ii8 age!t but is a ki!d o empty a priori- the
ormal J8o!ditio! o possibilityK o our speaki!g- just as the obje8t retur!i!g the gaUe is a ki!d o
ormal J8o!ditio! o possibilityK o our seei!g a!ythi!g at all7 /hat happe!s i! psy8hosis is that this
empty poi!t i! the other- i! 6hat 6e see a!d>or hear- is a8tualiUed- be8omes part o ee8tive reality+ the
psy8hoti8 a8tually hears the voi8e o the primordial Hther addressi!g him- k!o6s that he is bei!g
observed all the time7 )sually- psy8hosis is 8o!8eived as a orm o la8k 6ith reere!8e to the J!ormalK
state o thi!gs+ somethi!g is missi!g- the key sig!iier @the Jpater!al metaphorKA is reje8ted- ore8losed-
e?8luded rom the symboli8 u!iverse a!d the!8e retur!s i! the Feal i! the guise o psy8hoti8
apparitio!s7 =o6ever- 6e should !ot orget the obverse o this e?8lusio!+ the i!8lusio!7 .a8a! poi!ted
out that the 8o!siste!8y o our Je?perie!8e o realityK depe!ds o! the e?8lusio! o the ob1et petit a rom
it+ i! order or us to have a !ormal Ja88ess to reality-K somethi!g must be e?8luded- Jprimordially
repressed7K 9! psy8hosis- this e?8lusio! is u!do!e+ the obje8t @i! this 8ase- the gaUe or voi8eA is i!8luded
i! reality- the out8ome o 6hi8h is the disi!tegratio! o our Jse!se o reality-K the loss o reality7
2"
Fra!eois 3alm`s dra6s atte!tio! to the radi8al ambiguity i! ho6 the .a8a! o the 1%#0s dei!es
the relatio!ship bet6ee! the Feal- the symboli8- a!d the la8k+ he shits bet6ee! the thesis that the
symboli8 i!trodu8es the lac"*of*being i!to the FealEprior to the rise o the symboli8- there is !o la8k-
just a lat positivity o the FealEa!d the thesis that being arises o!ly 6ith the symboli8Eprior to the
symboli8- there is !o bei!g7
2(
Do!ro!ted 6ith this ambiguity- 6e 6ould be 6ise to avoid the all:too:
easy =eideggeria! solutio! that 6e are simply deali!g 6ith t6o diere!t mea!i!gs o Jbei!gK+ 3ei!g
i! the o!tologi8al se!se o the ope!!ess 6ithi! 6hi8h thi!gs appear- a!d bei!g i! the o!ti8 se!se o
reality- o e!tities e?isti!g i! the 6orld @6hat arises 6ith the symboli8 is the o!tologi8al horiUo! o
3ei!g- 6hile its obverse is the la8k:o:bei!g- i7e7- the a8t that a huma! bei!g as the there:o:3ei!g
@DaseinA la8ks its pla8e i! the positive order o reality- that it 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a! e!tity 6ithi! the
6orld- be8ause it is the pla8e o the very ope!!ess o a 6orldA7 3alm`s seeks the solutio! alo!g a
totally diere!t path+ he !otes per8eptively that .a8a! resolves the problem- the Nuestio!- by 6ay o
Jma"ing a response out of this <uestion-K
2#
o per8eivi!g the Nuestio! as its o6! a!s6er7 That is to
say- bei!g a!d the la8k:o:bei!g 8oi!8ide- they are the t6o sides o the same 8oi!Ethe 8leara!8e o the
horiUo! 6ithi! 6hi8h thi!gs ully JareK o!ly emerges o! 8o!ditio! that somethi!g is e?8luded
@Jsa8rii8edKA rom it- that somethi!g i! it is Jmissi!g at its o6! pla8e7K ,ore pre8isely- 6hat
8hara8teriUes a symboli8 u!iverse is the mi!imal gap bet6ee! its eleme!ts a!d pla8es they o88upy+ the
t6o dime!sio!s do !ot dire8tly 8oi!8ide- as is the 8ase i! the lat positivity o the Feal- 6hi8h is 6hy-
i! the diere!tial order o sig!iiers- abse!8e as su8h 8a! 8ou!t as a positive eature7 This bri!gs us
ba8k to .a8a!Is basi8 Jo!tologi8alK hypothesis+ i! order or this gap bet6ee! eleme!ts a!d their
stru8tural pla8es to o88ur- somethingGsome elementGhas to be radically ?constitutively@ e&cludedT
.a8a!Is !ame or this obje8t 6hi8h is al6ays @by dei!itio!- stru8turallyA missi!g at its o6! pla8e-
6hi8h 8oi!8ides 6ith its o6! la8k- is- o 8ourse- the ob1et petit a- as the obje8t:8ause o desire or
surplus:e!joyme!t- a parado?i8al obje8t 6hi8h gives body to the very la8k:o:bei!g7 The ob1et petit a is
that 6hi8h should be e?8luded rom the rame o reality- that 6hose e?8lusio! 8o!stitutes a!d sustai!s
the rame itsel7 A!d- as 6e have just see!- 6hat happe!s i! psy8hosis is pre8isely the inclusion o this
obje8t i!to the rame o reality+ it appears 6ithi! reality as the hallu8i!ated obje8t @the voi8e or gaUe
6hi8h hau!ts a para!oia8- et87A7
2'
9s it possible to 8o!8eive o this te!sio! bet6ee! the ob1et a a!d the rame o reality at the level
o the relatio!ship bet6ee! the visual a!d auditive dime!sio!s themselves- so that the voi8e itsel
6ould u!8tio! as the ob1et a o the visual- as the bli!d spot rom 6hi8h the pi8ture retur!s the gaUeM
Therei! seems to lie the lesso! o Jthe talkies7K That is to say- the ee8t o addi!g a spoke! sou!dtra8k
to the sile!t ilm 6as the e?a8t opposite o the e?pe8ted J!aturaliUatio!-K o a! eve! more Jrealisti8K
imitatio! o lie7 /hat o88urred rom the very begi!!i!g o the talki!g movie 6as a! u!8a!!y
auto!omiUatio! o the voi8e- baptiUed by Dhio! as Ja8ousmatiUatio!K+
2$
the emerge!8e o a voi8e that
is !either atta8hed to a! obje8t @a perso!A 6ithi! diegeti8 reality !or simply the voi8e o a! e?ter!al
8omme!tator- but a spe8tral voi8e 6hi8h loats reely i! a mysterious i!termediate domai! a!d thereby
a8Nuires a horriyi!g dime!sio! o om!iprese!8e a!d om!ipote!8e- the voi8e o a! i!visible
,asterErom FritU .a!gIs -estament of DrF Mabuse to the JmotherIs voi8eK i! =it8h8o8kIs )sycho7 9!
the i!al s8e!e o )sycho- the JmotherIs voi8eK literally 8uts a hole i! the visual reality+ the s8ree!:
image be8omes a delusive sura8e- a lure se8retly domi!ated by the bodiless voi8e o a! i!visible or
abse!t ,aster- a voi8e that 8a!!ot be atta8hed to a!y obje8t i! the diegeti8 realityEas i the true
subje8t o e!u!8iatio! o 4orma!Is>motherIs voi8e is death itsel- the skull that 6e per8eive or a brie
mome!t i! the ade:out o 4orma!Is a8e7
9! his .ectures on +esthetics- =egel me!tio!s a! A!8ie!t 0gyptia! sa8red statue 6hi8h- every
su!set- as i by a mira8le- issued a deeply reverberati!g sou!d7 This mysterious sou!d magi8ally
reso!ati!g rom 6ithi! a! i!a!imate obje8t is a good metaphor or the birth o subje8tivity7 =o6ever-
6e must be 8areul here !ot to miss the te!sio!- the a!tago!ism- bet6ee! the sile!t s8ream a!d the
vibra!t to!e- the mome!t 6he! the sile!t s8ream resou!ds7 The true obje8t:voi8e is mute- Jstu8k i! the
throat-K a!d 6hat a8tually reverberates is the void+ reso!a!8e al6ays takes pla8e i! a va8uumEthe to!e
as su8h is origi!ally the lame!t or the lost obje8t7 The obje8t is there as lo!g as the sou!d remai!s
sile!tT the mome!t it resou!ds- the mome!t it Jspills out-K the obje8t is eva8uated- a!d this voida!8e
gives birth to b- the barred subje8t lame!ti!g the loss o the obje8t7 This lame!t- o 8ourse- is deeply
ambiguous+ the ultimate horror 6ould be that o a! obje8t:voi8e 8omi!g too 8lose to us- so that the
reverberatio! o the voi8e is at the same time a 8o!juratio! desti!ed to keep the voi8e:obje8t at
sui8ie!t dista!8e7 /e 8a! !o6 a!s6er the simple Nuestio! J/hy do 6e liste! to musi8MK+ i! order to
avoid the horror o the e!8ou!ter 6ith the voi8e Nua obje8t7 /hat Filke said o beauty goes also or
musi8+ it is a lure- a s8ree!- the last 8urtai! prote8ti!g us rom dire8tly 8o!ro!ti!g the horror o the
@vo8alA obje8t7 /he! the i!tri8ate musi8al tapestry disi!tegrates or 8ollapses i!to a pure u!arti8ulated
s8ream- 6e approa8h voi8e Nua obje8t7 9! this pre8ise se!se- as .a8a! poi!ts out- voi8e a!d sile!8e
relate as igure a!d grou!d+ sile!8e is !ot @as o!e 6ould might thi!kA the grou!d agai!st 6hi8h the
igure o a voi8e emergesT Nuite the 8o!trary- the reverberati!g sou!d itsel provides the grou!d 6hi8h
re!ders visible the igure o sile!8e7 /e have thus arrived at the ormula o the relatio!ship bet6ee!
voi8e a!d image+ the voi8e does !ot simply persist at a diere!t level 6ith regard to 6hat 6e see- it
rather poi!ts to6ards a gap i! the ield o the visible- to6ards the dime!sio! o 6hat eludes our gaUe7 9!
other 6ords- their relatio!ship is mediated by a! impossibility+ ultimately- 6e hear thi!gs be8ause 6e
8a!!ot see everythi!g7
2&
The !e?t step is to reverse the logi8 o the Voi8e as the iller o the bodyIs 8o!stitutive gap+ the
obverse o the Voi8e that gives body to 6hat 6e 8a! !ever see- to 6hat eludes our gaUe- is a! image
that makes prese!t the ailure o the voi8eEa! image 8a! emerge as the pla8e:holder or a sou!d 6hi8h
does !ot yet reso!ate but remai!s stu8k i! the throat7 ,u!8hIs Scream- or e?ample- is by dei!itio!
sile!t+ i! ro!t o this pai!ti!g- 6e Jhear @the s8reamA 6ith our eyes7K =o6ever- the parallel is here by
!o mea!s pere8t+ to see 6hat o!e 8a!!ot hear is !ot the same as to hear 6hat o!e 8a!!ot see7 Voi8e
a!d gaUe relate to ea8h other as lie a!d death+ the voi8e viviies- 6hereas the gaUe mortiies7 For that
reaso!- Jheari!g o!esel speaki!gK @sentendre*parlerA- as Gerrida has demo!strated- is the very ker!el-
the u!dame!tal matri?- o e?perie!8i!g o!esel as a livi!g bei!g- 6hile its 8ou!terpart at the level o
the gaUe- Jseei!g o!esel looki!gK @se voir voyantA- u!mistakably sta!ds or death+ 6he! the gaUe Nua
obje8t is !o lo!ger the elusive bli!d spot i! the ield o the visible but is i!8luded i! this ield- o!e
meets o!eIs o6! death7 Sui8e it to re8all ho6- i! the u!8a!!y e!8ou!ter 6ith a double
@Goppelgj!gerA- 6hat eludes our gaUe is al6ays his eyes+ the double stra!gely seems al6ays to look
aske6- !ever to retur! our gaUe by looki!g straight i!to our eyesEthe mome!t he 6ere to do so- our
lie 6ould be over7
2%
9t 6as S8hope!hauer 6ho 8laimed that musi8 bri!gs us i!to 8o!ta8t 6ith the Ding an sich+ it
re!ders dire8tly the drive o the lie substa!8e that 6ords 8a! o!ly sig!iy7 For that reaso!- musi8
JseiUesK the subje8t i! the Feal o his or her bei!g- by:passi!g the detour o mea!i!g+ i! musi8- 6e hear
6hat 6e 8a!!ot see- the vibrati!g lie or8e be!eath the lo6 o 6orstellungen7 3ut 6hat happe!s 6he!
this lu? o lie substa!8e is itsel suspe!ded- dis8o!ti!uedM At this poi!t- a! image emerges- a! image
that sta!ds or absolute death- or death beyo!d the 8y8le o death a!d rebirth- 8orruptio! a!d
ge!eratio!7 Far more horriyi!g tha! to see 6ith our earsEto hear the vibrati!g lie substa!8e beyo!d
visual represe!tatio!- this bli!d spot i! the ield o the visibleEis to hear 6ith our eyes- to see the
absolute sile!8e that marks the suspe!sio! o lie- as i! DaravaggioIs -esta di Medusa+ is !ot the
s8ream o the ,edusa by dei!itio! sile!t- Jstu8k i! the throat-K a!d does !ot this pai!ti!g provide a!
image o the mome!t at 6hi8h the voi8e ailsM
"0
Agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o Jheari!g 6hat o!e 8a!!ot seeK a!d Jseei!g 6hat o!e 8a!!ot hear-K it
is possible to deli!eate the illusory lo8us o the Jmetaphysi8s o prese!8e7K .et us retur! or a brie
mome!t to the diere!8e bet6ee! Jheari!g o!esel speaki!gK a!d Jseei!g o!esel looki!gK+ o!ly the
se8o!d 8ase i!volves rele8tio! proper- !amely the a8t o re8og!iUi!g o!esel i! a! @e?ter!alA image-
6hile i! the irst 8ase 6e are deali!g 6ith the illusio! o a! immediate auto:ae8tio! 6hi8h pre8ludes
eve! the mi!imal sel:dista!8e implied by the !otio! o re8og!iUi!g o!esel i! o!eIs mirror:image7 9!
8o!trast to Gerrida- o!e is tempted to assert that the ou!di!g illusio! o the metaphysi8s o prese!8e is
!ot simply that o Jheari!g o!esel speaki!g-K but rather a ki!d o short:8ir8uit bet6ee! Jheari!g
o!esel speaki!gK a!d Jseei!g o!esel looki!gK+ a Jseei!g o!esel looki!gK i! the mode o Jheari!g
o!esel speaki!g-K a gaUe that regai!s the immedia8y o vo8al auto:ae8tio!7 9! other 6ords- 6e should
al6ays bear i! mi!d that- rom ClatoIs theoria o!6ards- metaphysi8s relies o! the predomi!a!8e o
seei!gEso ho6 are 6e to 8ombi!e this 6ith Jheari!g o!esel speaki!gKM J,etaphysi8sK resides
pre8isely i! the !otio! o a sel:mirrori!g seei!g 6hi8h 6ould abolish the dista!8e o rele8tio! a!d
attai! the immedia8y o Jheari!g o!esel speaki!g7K 9! other 6ords- Jmetaphysi8sK sta!ds or the
illusio! that- i! the a!tago!isti8 relatio!ship bet6ee! Jseei!gK a!d Jheari!g-K it is possible to abolish
the dis8ord- the impossibility- that mediates bet6ee! the t6o terms @6e hear thi!gs be8ause 6e 8a!!ot
see it all- a!d vi8e versaA a!d to 8o!late them i! a u!iNue e?perie!8e o Jseei!g i! the mode o
heari!g7K
True- the e?perie!8e o sentendre*parler grou!ds the illusio! o the tra!spare!t sel:prese!8e
o the speaki!g subje8tT ho6ever- is !ot the voi8e at the same time that 6hi8h u!dermi!es most
radi8ally the subje8tIs sel:prese!8e a!d sel:tra!spare!8yM 9 hear mysel speaki!g- yet 6hat 9 hear is
!ever ully mysel but a parasite- a oreig! body at the very heart o me7 This stra!ger i! mysel
a8Nuires positive e?iste!8e i! diere!t guises- rom the voi8e o 8o!s8ie!8e a!d the voi8e o the
hyp!otist to the perse8utor i! para!oia7 The voi8e is that 6hi8h- i! the sig!iier- resists mea!i!gT it
sta!ds or the opaNue i!ertia 6hi8h 8a!!ot be re8uperated by mea!i!g7 9t is o!ly the dime!sio! o
6riti!g 6hi8h a88ou!ts or the stability o mea!i!g- or- to Nuote the immortal 6ords o Samuel
1old6y!+ JA verbal agreeme!t is!It 6orth the paper itIs 6ritte! o!7K As su8h- the voi8e is !either dead
!or alive+ its primordial phe!ome!ologi8al status is rather that o the livi!g dead- o a spe8tral
apparitio! 6hi8h someho6 survives its o6! death- !amely the e8lipse o mea!i!g7 9! other 6ords-
6hile it is true that the lie o a voi8e 8a! be opposed to the dead letter o the 6ritte! 6ord- this lie is
the u!8a!!y lie o a! u!dead mo!ster- !ot the Jhealthy-K livi!g sel:prese!8e o ,ea!i!g7
To make ma!iest this u!8a!!y voi8e- it is sui8ie!t to 8ast a 8ursory gla!8e at the history o
musi8E6hi8h reads as a ki!d o 8ou!ter:history to the usual story o /ester! metaphysi8s as the
domi!atio! o voi8e over 6riti!g7 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here agai! a!d agai! is a voi8e that threate!s the
established Hrder a!d 6hi8h thus has to be brought u!der 8o!trol- subordi!ated to the ratio!al
arti8ulatio! o the spoke! a!d 6ritte! 6ord- i?ed i! 6riti!g7 9! order to desig!ate the da!ger that lurks
here- .a8a! 8oi!ed the !eologism 1ouis*sens- e!joyme!t:i!:mea!i!gEthe mome!t at 6hi8h the si!gi!g
voi8e 8uts loose rom its a!8hori!g i! mea!i!g a!d a88elerates i!to destru8tive sel:e!joyme!t7 The
problem is thus al6ays the same+ ho6 are 6e to preve!t the voi8e rom slidi!g i!to a destru8tive sel:
e!joyme!t that Jeemi!iUesK the reliable mas8uli!e /ordM The voi8e u!8tio!s here as a Jsuppleme!tK
i! the Gerridea! se!se+ o!e tries to restrai! it- to regulate it- to subordi!ate it to the arti8ulated /ord-
yet o!e 8a!!ot dispe!se 6ith it altogether- si!8e a proper dosage is vital or the e?er8ise o po6er
@sui8e it to re8all the role o patrioti8:military so!gs i! the 8o!stru8tio! o a totalitaria! 8ommu!ityA7
=o6ever- this brie des8riptio! may 8reate the 6ro!g impressio! that 6e are deali!g 6ith a simple
oppositio! bet6ee! the JrepressiveK arti8ulated /ord a!d the Jtra!sgressiveK voi8e+ o! the o!e ha!d-
the arti8ulated /ord that dis8ipli!es a!d regulates the voi8e as a mea!s o asserti!g so8ial dis8ipli!e
a!d authority- o! the other- the sel:e!joyi!g Voi8e 6hi8h a8ts as the medium o liberatio!- breaki!g
the dis8ipli!ary 8hai!s o la6 a!d order7 3ut 6hat about the )S ,ari!e DorpsI mesmeri8 Jmar8hi!g
8ha!tsKE6ith their debilitati!g rhythm a!d sadisti8ally se?ualiUed 8o!te!t are they !ot a! e?emplary
8ase o 8o!sumi!g sel:e!joyme!t i! the servi8e o Co6erM The e?8ess o the voi8e is thus radi8ally
u!de8idable7
T=0 1FA4G,HT=0FIS VH9D0

The magi8 po6er o the voi8e as obje8t is perhaps best re!dered to6ards the e!d o Dhapter 1 o
,ar8el CroustIs JThe 1uerma!tes /ay-K part o his In Search of .ost -ime7
"1
9! a memorable s8e!e-
the !arrator ,ar8el- usi!g the pho!e or the irst time- talks to his gra!dmother+

ater a e6 se8o!ds o sile!8e- sudde!ly 9 heard that voi8e 6hi8h 9 supposed mysel- mistake!ly- to
k!o6 so 6ellT or al6ays u!til the!- every time that my gra!dmother had talked to me- 9 had bee!
a88ustomed to ollo6 6hat she 6as sayi!g o! the ope! s8ore o her a8e- i! 6hi8h the eyes igured so
largelyT but her voi8e itsel 9 6as heari!g this ater!oo! or the irst time7 A!d be8ause that voi8e
appeared to me to have altered i! its proportio!s rom the mome!t that it 6as a 6hole- a!d rea8hed me
i! this 6ay alo!e a!d 6ithout the a88ompa!ime!t o her a8e a!d eatures- 9 dis8overed or the irst
time ho6 s6eet that voi8e 6as O 9t 6as s6eet- but also ho6 sad it 6as- irst o all o! a88ou!t o its
very s6eet!ess- a s6eet!ess drai!ed almostEmore tha! a!y but a e6 huma! voi8es 8a! ever have
bee!Eo every eleme!t o resista!8e to others- o all selish!essT ragile by reaso! o its deli8a8y it
seemed at every mome!t ready to break- to e?pire i! a pure lo6 o tearsT the!- too- havi!g it alo!e
beside me- see!- 6ithout the mask o her a8e- 9 !oti8ed or the irst time the sorro6s that had s8arred it
i! the 8ourse o a lietime7
CroustIs very pre8ise des8riptio! here u!8a!!ily poi!ts or6ard to .a8a!ia! theory+ the voi8e is
subtra8ted rom its J!aturalK totality o the body to 6hi8h it belo!gs- out o 6hi8h it emerges as a!
auto!omous partial obje8t- a! orga! magi8ally 8apable o survivi!g 6ithout the body 6hose orga! it
isEit is as i it sta!ds Jalo!e beside me- see!- 6ithout the mask o her a8e7K This subtra8tio!
6ithdra6s it rom @our ordi!aryA reality i!to the virtual domai! o the Feal- 6here it persists as a!
u!dead spe8ter hau!ti!g the subje8t+ JV1ra!!yRI 9 8ried to her- V1ra!!yRI a!d 6ould have kissed her-
but 9 had beside me o!ly that voi8e- a pha!tom- as impalpable as that 6hi8h 6ould 8ome perhaps to
revisit me 6he! my gra!dmother 6as dead7K As su8h- this voi8e sig!als simulta!eously a dista!8e
@1ra!!y is !ot hereA a!d a! obs8e!e over:pro?imity- a prese!8e more i!timate- more pe!etrati!g- tha!
that o a body i! ro!t o us+

A real prese!8e i!deed that voi8e so !earEi! a8tual separatio!7 3ut a premo!itio! also o a! eter!al
separatio!R Hver a!d agai!- as 9 liste!ed i! this 6ay- 6ithout seei!g her 6ho spoke to me rom so ar
a6ay- it has seemed to me that the voi8e 6as 8ryi!g to me rom depths out o 6hi8h o!e does !ot rise
agai!- a!d 9 have k!o6! the a!?iety that 6as o!e day to 6ri!g my heart 6he! a voi8e should thus
retur! @alo!e- a!d atta8hed !o lo!ger to a body 6hi8h 9 6as !ever more to seeA7
The term Ja!?ietyK is to be read i! the pre8ise .a8a!ia! se!se+ or .a8a!- a!?iety does !ot
sig!al the loss o the obje8t- but- o! the 8o!trary- its over:pro?imity7 A!?iety arises 6he! the ob1et a
alls dire8tly i!to reality- appears i! itE6hi8h is pre8isely 6hat happe!s 6he! ,ar8el hears the
gra!dmotherIs voi8e separated rom her body a!d dis8overs Jor the irst time ho6 s6eet that voi8e
6asK+ this s6eet!ess is- o 8ourse- the e?tra8ted Nui!tesse!8e 6hi8h led to ,ar8elIs i!te!se libidi!al
i!vestme!t i! the gra!dmother7 This- i!8ide!tally- is ho6 psy8hoa!alysis approa8hes the libidi!al:
subje8tive impa8t o !e6 te8h!ologi8al i!ve!tio!s+ Jte8h!ology is a 8ataliUer- it e!larges a!d e!ha!8es
somethi!g 6hi8h is already hereK
"2
Ei! this 8ase- a a!tasmati8 virtual a8t- like that o a partial
obje8t7
""
A!d- o 8ourse- this realiUatio! 8ha!ges the e!tire 8o!stellatio!+ o!8e a a!tasy is realiUed-
o!8e a a!tasmati8 obje8t dire8tly appears i! reality- reality is !o lo!ger the same7
=ere 6e might me!tio! the se?:gadget i!dustry+ o!e 8a! i!d today o! the market a so:8alled
JStami!a Trai!i!g )!it-K a masturbatory devi8e 6hi8h resembles a battery light @so that o!e 6ill !ot be
embarrassed 8arryi!g it arou!dA7 9t 6orks by putti!g the ere8t pe!is i!to the ope!i!g at the top a!d
movi!g the devi8e up a!d do6! u!til satisa8tio! is a8hieved7 The produ8t is available i! diere!t
8olors- 6idths- a!d orms that imitate all three mai! orii8es @mouth- vagi!a- a!usA7 /hat o!e is oered
here is simply the partial obje8t @eroge!ous Uo!eA alo!e- mi!us the embarrassi!g additio!al burde! o a
6hole perso!7 The a!tasy @o redu8i!g the se?ual part!er to a partial obje8tA is thus dire8tly realiUed-
6hi8h 8ha!ges the e!tire libidi!al e8o!omy o se?ual relatio!s7
This bri!gs us to the key Nuestio!+ 6hat happe!s to the body 6he! it is separated rom its voi8e-
6he! the voi8e is subtra8ted rom the 6hole!ess o the perso!M For a brie mome!t- 6e see Ja 6orld
robbed o a!tasy- o the ae8tive rame a!d se!se- a 6orld out o joi!t7K
"(
1ra!dmother appears to
,ar8el outside the a!tasmati8 horiUo! o mea!i!g- the ri8h te?ture o his previous lo!g e?perie!8e o
her as a 6arm- 8harmi!g perso!7 All o a sudde!- he sees her Jred:a8ed- heavy a!d 8ommo!- si8k- lost
i! thought- ollo6i!g the li!es o a book 6ith eyes that seemed hardly sa!e- a deje8ted old 6oma!
6hom 9 did !ot k!o67K See! ater the ateul pho!e 8o!versatio!- deprived o the a!tasy rame- the
gra!dmother is like a bea8hed sNuidEa 8reature 6hi8h moves elega!tly i! the 6ater but tur!s i!to a
disgusti!g pie8e o slimy lesh o!8e out o it7 =ere is CroustIs pre8ise des8riptio! o this ee8t+

e!teri!g the dra6i!g:room beore my gra!dmother had bee! told o my retur!- 9 ou!d her there-
readi!g7 9 6as i! the room- or rather 9 6as !ot yet i! the room si!8e she 6as !ot a6are o my prese!8e-
a!d- like a 6oma! 6hom o!e surprises at a pie8e o 6ork 6hi8h she 6ill lay aside i a!yo!e 8omes i!-
she had aba!do!ed hersel to a trai! o thoughts 6hi8h she had !ever allo6ed to be visible by me7 H
myselEtha!ks to that privilege 6hi8h does !ot last but 6hi8h o!e e!joys duri!g the brie mome!t o
retur!- the a8ulty o bei!g a spe8tator- so to speak- o o!eIs o6! abse!8e-Ethere 6as prese!t o!ly the
6it!ess- the observer- 6ith a hat a!d traveli!g 8oat- the stra!ger 6ho does !ot belo!g to the house- the
photographer 6ho has 8alled to take a photograph o pla8es 6hi8h o!e 6ill !ever see agai!7 The
pro8ess that me8ha!i8ally o88urred i! my eyes 6he! 9 8aught sight o my gra!dmother 6as i!deed a
photograph7 /e !ever see the people 6ho are dear to us save i! the a!imated system- the perpetual
motio! o our i!8essa!t love or them- 6hi8h beore allo6i!g the images that their a8es prese!t to
rea8h us 8at8hes them i! its vorte?- li!gs them ba8k upo! the idea that 6e have al6ays had o them-
makes them adhere to it- 8oi!8ide 6ith it O 3ut i- i! pla8e o our eye- it should be a purely material
obje8t- a photographi8 plate- that has 6at8hed the a8tio!- the! 6hat 6e shall see- i! the 8ourtyard o the
9!stitute- or e?ample- 6ill be- i!stead o the dig!iied emerge!8e o a! A8ademi8ia! 6ho is goi!g to
hail a 8ab- his staggeri!g gait- his pre8autio!s to avoid tumbli!g upo! his ba8k- the parabola o his all-
as though he 6ere dru!k- or the grou!d roUe! over7 So is it 6he! some 8asual sport o 8ha!8e preve!ts
our i!tellige!t a!d pious ae8tio! rom 8omi!g or6ard i! time to hide rom our eyes 6hat they ought
!ever to behold- 6he! it is orestalled by our eyes- a!d they- arisi!g irst i! the ield a!d havi!g it to
themselves- set to 6ork me8ha!i8ally- like ilms- a!d sho6 us- i! pla8e o the loved rie!d 6ho has
lo!g ago 8eased to e?ist but 6hose death our ae8tio! has al6ays hitherto kept 8o!8ealed rom us- the
!e6 perso! 6hom a hu!dred times daily that ae8tio! has 8lothed 6ith a dear a!d 8heati!g like!ess O
9- or 6hom my gra!dmother 6as still mysel- 9 6ho had !ever see! her save i! my o6! soul- al6ays at
the same pla8e i! the past- through the tra!spare!t sheets o 8o!tiguous- overlappi!g memories-
sudde!ly i! our dra6i!g:room 6hi8h ormed part o a !e6 6orld- that o time- that i! 6hi8h d6ell the
stra!gers o 6hom 6e say J=eIs begu! to age a good deal-K or the irst time a!d or a mome!t o!ly-
si!8e she va!ished at o!8e- 9 sa6- sitti!g o! the soa- be!eath the lamp- red:a8ed- heavy a!d 8ommo!-
si8k- lost i! thought- ollo6i!g the li!es o a book 6ith eyes that seemed hardly sa!e- a deje8ted old
6oma! 6hom 9 did !ot k!o67
This passage should read agai!st its impli8it *a!tia! ba8kgrou!d+ a !et6ork s8ree!s our ra6
per8eptio!s o beloved perso!sT that is- Jbeore allo6i!g the images that their a8es prese!t to rea8h us
8at8hes them i! its vorte?- [it\ li!gs them ba8k upo! the idea that 6e have al6ays had o them- makes
them adhere to it- 8oi!8ide 6ith itKT this !et6orkEthe 8omple? 6eb o past e?perie!8es- ae8tio!s-
et87- 6hi8h 8olors our ra6 per8eptio!sEplays e?a8tly the role o a tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! 6hi8h makes
our reality mea!i!gul7 /he! deprived o this !et6ork- o the a!tasmati8 8oordi!ates o mea!i!g- 6e
are !o lo!ger e!gaged parti8ipa!ts i! the 6orld- 6e i!d ourselves 8o!ro!ted 6ith thi!gs i! their
noumenal dime!sio!+ or a mome!t- 6e see them the 6ay they are Ji! themselves-K i!depe!de!tly o
usEor- as Croust puts it i! a 6o!derul ormula- o!e be8omes Ja spe8tator- so to speak- o o!eIs o6!
abse!8e7K H!8e the a!tasy:obje8t is subtra8ted rom reality- it is !ot o!ly the observed reality 6hi8h
8ha!ges- but also the observi!g subje8t himsel+ he is redu8ed to a gaUe observi!g ho6 thi!gs look i!
his o6! abse!8e @re8all the old Tom Sa6yer>=u8k Fi!! a!tasy about bei!g prese!t at o!eIs o6!
u!eralA7 A!d is !ot this- pre8isely- the eature 6hi8h makes the 8amera so u!8a!!yM 9s !ot a 8amera
our eye separated rom our body- driti!g arou!d a!d re8ordi!g ho6 thi!gs look i! our abse!8eM
So- to re8apitulate+ the gra!dmotherIs voi8e- heard o! the telepho!e- separated rom her body-
surprises ,ar8elEit is a voi8e o a rail old 6oma!- !ot the voi8e o the gra!dmother he remembers7
A!d the poi!t is that this e?perie!8e 8olors his per8eptio! o the gra!dmother+ 6he! he later visits her
i! perso!- he per8eives her i! a !e6 6ay- as a stra!ge old 6oma! dro6si!g over her book-
overburde!ed 6ith age- lushed a!d 8oarse- !o lo!ger the 8harmi!g a!d 8ari!g gra!dmother he
remembered7 This is ho6 voi8e as a! auto!omous partial obje8t 8a! ae8t our e!tire per8eptio! o the
body to 6hi8h it belo!gs7 The lesso! is pre8isely that the dire8t e?perie!8e o the u!ity o a body-
6here the voi8e seems to it its orga!i8 6hole- i!volves a !e8essary mystii8atio!T i! order to get to the
truth- o!e has to tear this u!ity apart- to o8us o! o!e o its aspe8ts i! isolatio!- a!d the! to allo6 this
eleme!t to 8olor our e!tire per8eptio!7 9! other 6ords- 6hat 6e i!d here is a!other 8ase o FreudIs
a!ti:herme!euti8 motto that o!e should i!terpret en dAtail- !ot en masse7 To lo8ate every eature o a
huma! bei!g i! the orga!i8 /hole o the perso! is to miss !ot o!ly its mea!i!g- but the true mea!i!g
o the /hole itsel7 9! this se!se also- perso! a!d subje8t are to be opposed+ the subje8t is de:8e!tered
6ith regard to perso!- it obtai!s its mi!imal 8o!siste!8y rom a si!gular eature @Jpartial obje8tKA- the
ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire7
/hat 6e have to re!ou!8e is thus the 8ommo!:se!se !otio! o a primordial- ully 8o!stituted
reality i! 6hi8h sight a!d sou!d harmo!iously 8ompleme!t ea8h other+ the mome!t 6e e!ter the
symboli8 order- a! u!bridgeable gap separates orever a huma! body rom JitsK voi8e7 The voi8e
a8Nuires a spe8tral auto!omy- it !ever Nuite belo!gs to the body 6e see speaki!g- there is al6ays a
mi!imum o ve!triloNuism at 6ork+ it is as i the speakerIs o6! voi8e hollo6s him out a!d i! a se!se
speaks Jby itsel-K through him7
"#
9! other 6ords- their relatio!ship is mediated by a! impossibility+
ultimately- we hear things because we cannot see everything7 /he!- i! !arrati!g the myth o the 8ave-
So8rates des8ribes the priso!ers 6ho 8a! see o!ly shado6s o! the 6all i! ro!t o them- he asks+ JA!d
i their priso! had a! e8ho rom the 6all opposite them- 6he! o!e o the passers:by uttered a sou!d- do
you thi!k that they 6ould suppose a!ythi!g else tha! the passi!g shado6 to be the speakerMK
"'
Goes
he !ot thereby reer to the gap bet6ee! the speaki!g body a!d the speaki!g voi8e 6hi8h is 8o!stitutive
o our e?perie!8e o a speaki!g subje8tM
H!e 8a! thus eve! go o! to 8laim that this gap is that o 8astratio!- so that the ultimate
moder!ist dream o Jseei!g voi8esK is the dream o e!teri!g a u!iverse 6here 8astratio! is
suspe!dedE!o 6o!der the Talmud de8lares that the ele8t Jhave see! the voi8es7K This is 6hy dire8tors
like 0ise!stei!- Dhapli!- a!d eve! =it8h8o8k 6ere so resista!t to embra8i!g sou!dEas i they 6a!ted
to prolo!g their sojour! i! the sile!t paradise i! 6hi8h 8astratio! is suspe!ded7 =it8h8o8k himsel
e?pe8ted his spe8tators Jto have auditory eyes7K
"$
The disembodied sedu8tive voi8e 6hi8h threate!s to
s6allo6 us thus simulta!eously bears 6it!ess to the a8t o 8astratio!7
This same lesso!- 8o!8er!i!g the te!sio! bet6ee! bodily appeara!8e a!d the voi8e as e?:8e!tri8
partial obje8t- is give! a se?ualiUed t6ist i! the story o 2a8ob7 2a8ob ell i! love 6ith Fa8hel a!d
6a!ted to marry herT her ather- ho6ever- 6a!ted him to marry .eah- Fa8helIs elder sister7 So that
2a8ob 6ould !ot be tri8ked by the ather or by .eah- Fa8hel taught him ho6 to re8og!iUe her at !ight i!
bed7 3eore the se?ual a8t- Fa8hel elt guilty to6ards her sister a!d told her 6hat the sig!s 6ere7 .eah
asked Fa8hel 6hat 6ould happe! i 2a8ob re8og!iUed her voi8e7 So the de8isio! 6as take! that Fa8hel
6ould lie u!der the bed- a!d 6hile 2a8ob 6as maki!g love to .eah- Fa8hel 6ould make the sou!ds- so
he 6ould !ot re8og!iUe that he 6as havi!g se? 6ith the 6ro!g sister7
"&
9! ShakespeareIs +lls Well -hat Ends Well- 6e 8a! also imagi!e Gia!a hidde! be!eath the bed
6here =ele! a!d 3ertram are 8opulati!g- maki!g the appropriate sou!ds so that 3ertram 6ill !ot
realiUe he is !ot havi!g se? 6ith her- her voi8e servi!g as the support or the a!tasmati8 dime!sio!7
ShakespeareIs +s :ou .i"e It proposes a diere!t versio! o this logi8 o double de8eptio!7 Hrla!do is
passio!ately i! love 6ith Fosali!d 6ho- i! order to test his love- disguises hersel as 1a!ymede a!d- as
a male 8ompa!io!- i!terrogates Hrla!do about his love7 She eve! takes o! the perso!ality o Fosali!d
@i! a redoubled maski!g- she prete!ds to be hersel- as 1a!ymede playi!g Fosali!dA a!d persuades her
rie!d Delia @disguised as Alie!aA to marry them i! a mo8k 8eremo!y7 =ere Fosali!d literally eig!s to
eig! to be 6hat she is+ truth itsel- i! order to 6i!- has to be staged i! a redoubled de8eptio!Ei! a
homologous 6ay to +lls Well i! 6hi8h marriage- i! order to be asserted- has to be 8o!summated i! the
guise o a! e?tramarital aair7
"%
/hat the! is the relatio! bet6ee! the voi8e @a!d the gaUeA a!d the triad imagi!ary:symboli8:
FealM /he! Cas8al- as a 2a!se!ist- says that the authe!ti8 image o 1od is spee8h- 6e should take this
8laim literally a!d i!sist o! JimageK as the e!8ompassi!g term 6hose subspe8ies is spee8h+ Cas8alIs
poi!t is !ot simply the sta!dard i8o!o8lasti8 o!e that spee8h- !ot the visual image- is the domai! o the
divi!eT it is rather that spee8h remai!s a parado?i8al image 6hi8h sublates itsel as image a!d thus
avoids the trap o idolatry7 Spee8h @the symboli8A deprived o its mediatio! by image @the imagi!aryA
disi!tegrates i! itsel- as mea!i!gul spee8h7 @Fe8all the last 6ords o Moses und +aron- S8hoe!bergIs
great i8o!o8lasti8 6ork a!d o!e 8a!didate or the ho!orii8 title o the Jlast operaK+ J$ Wort! das mir
fehlt#K [H the 6ord 6hi8h 9 la8kR\Ea Nuite appropriate des8riptio! o ,osesIs predi8ame!t ollo6i!g
his urious reje8tio! o images7A For a .a8a!ia!- the solutio! is simple @or- rather- eleme!tary i! the
=olmesia! se!seA+ 6e should read the 8laim about spee8h bei!g the true image o 1od together 6ith
the 2a!se!istIs basi8 thesis o! the Jdieu cachAK @the hidde! godAEthe 6ord 8ha!ges @the image oA 1od
i!to the void i! the image- i!to 6hat is hidde! i! a!d by the image 6e see7 The image thus be8omes a
s8ree! 6hi8h oers itsel as visible i! order to 8o!8eal 6hat is i!visibleEi! the se!se o the diale8ti8 o
appeara!8e deployed by .a8a!+ the symboli8 is appeara!8e as appeara!8e- a s8ree! 6hi8h hides !ot
a!other true 8o!te!t- but the a8t that there is !othi!g to hide7 9! other 6ords- the true u!8tio! o a
de8eptive s8ree! is !ot to 8o!8eal 6hat lies behi!d it- but- pre8isely- to 8reate a!d sustai! the illusio!
that there is somethi!g it is hidi!g7
THE MASTER AND ITS SPECTER

This !otio! o the la8ki!g Hther also ope!s up a !e6 approa8h to a!tasy- 8o!8eived as
pre8isely a! attempt to ill out this la8k o the Hther- to re8o!stitute the 8o!siste!8y o the big Hther7
(0

For that reaso!- a!tasy a!d para!oia are i!here!tly li!ked+ at it most eleme!tary- para!oia is a belie i!
a! JHther o the Hther-K i! a!other Hther 6ho- hidde! behi!d the Hther o the e?pli8it so8ial reality-
8o!trols @6hat appears to us asA the u!oresee! ee8ts o so8ial lie a!d thus guara!tees its 8o!siste!8y7
This para!oid sta!8e has a8Nuired a urther boost 6ith the o!goi!g digitaliUatio! o our daily lives+ it is
easy to imagi!e- o!8e our @so8ialA e?iste!8e is e!tirely e?ter!aliUed- materialiUed i! the big Hther o the
global 8omputer !et6ork- a! evil programmer erasi!g our digital ide!tity a!d thus deprivi!g us o our
so8ial e?iste!8e- tur!i!g us i!to !o!:perso!s7
9! the domai! o ideology- the primordial a!tasmati8 obje8t- the mother o all ideologi8al
obje8ts- is the obje8t o a!ti:Semitism- the so:8alled J8o!8eptual 2e6K+ be!eath the 8haos o the market-
the degradatio! o morals- a!d so o!- there lies the 2e6ish plot7 A88ordi!g to Freud- the attitude o the
male subje8t to6ards 8astratio! i!volves a parado?i8al splitti!g+ 9 k!o6 that 8astratio! is !ot a! a8tual
threat- that it 6ill !ot really o88ur- yet 9 am !o!etheless hau!ted by its prospe8t7 A!d the same goes or
the igure o the J8o!8eptual 2e6K+ he does !ot e?ist @as part o our e?perie!8e o so8ial realityA- but or
that reaso! 9 ear him eve! moreEi! short- the very !o!:e?iste!8e o the 2e6 i! reality u!8tio!s as the
mai! argume!t or a!ti:Semitism7 That is to say- a!ti:Semiti8 dis8ourse 8o!stru8ts the igure o the 2e6
as a pha!tom:like e!tity to be ou!d !o6here i! reality- a!d the! uses this very gap bet6ee! the
J8o!8eptual 2e6K a!d a8tually e?isti!g 2e6s as the ultimate argume!t or a!ti:Semitism7 /e are thus
8aught i! a ki!d o vi8ious 8ir8le+ the more thi!gs appear to be !ormal- the more suspi8io! they arouse
a!d the more pa!i8:stri8ke! 6e be8ome7 9! this respe8t- the 2e6 is like the mater!al phallus+ there is !o
su8h thi!g i! reality- but or that very reaso!- its pha!tom:like- spe8tral prese!8e gives rise to a!
u!bearable a!?iety7 Therei! 8o!sists also the most su88i!8t dei!itio! o the .a8a!ia! Feal+ the more
my @symboli8A reaso!i!g tells me that d is !ot possible- the more its spe8ter hau!ts meElike the
proverbial 8ourageous 0!glishma! 6ho !ot o!ly did!It believe i! ghosts but 6as !ot eve! araid o
them7
A homology imposes itsel here bet6ee! the J8o!8eptual 2e6K a!d the 4ame:o:the:Father+ i!
the latter 8ase- 6e also have a split bet6ee! k!o6ledge a!d belie @J9 k!o6 very 6ell that my ather is
a8tually a! impere8t- 8o!used- impote!t 8reature- yet 9 !o!etheless believe i! his symboli8
authorityKA7 The empiri8al ather !ever lives up to his 4ame- to his symboli8 ma!dateEa!d i!soar as
he does live up to it- 6e are deali!g 6ith a psy8hoti8 8o!stellatio! @S8hreberIs ather- rom the 8ase
a!alyUed by Freud- 6as a 8lear 8ase o a ather 6ho did live up to his 4ameA7 9s !ot the
Jtra!substa!tiatio!-K the Jsublatio!K @+ufhebungA- o the real ather i!to the 4ame:o:the:Father
thereore stri8tly homologous to the Jtra!substa!tiatio!K o the empiri8al 2e6 i!to @the orm o
appeara!8e oA the J8o!8eptual 2e6KM 9s !ot the gap that separates a8tual 2e6s rom the a!tasmati8
igure o the J8o!8eptual 2e6K o the same !ature as the gap that separates the empiri8al- al6ays
dei8ie!t perso! o the ather rom the 4ame:o:the:Father- rom his symboli8 ma!dateM 9! both 8ases-
a real perso! a8ts as the perso!ii8atio! o a! irreal- i8titious age!8yEthe a8tual ather as a sta!d:i!
or the age!8y o symboli8 authority a!d the a8tual 2e6 as a sta!d:i! or the a!tasmati8 igure o the
J8o!8eptual 2e67K
Do!vi!8i!g as it may sou!d- this homology has to be reje8ted as de8eptive+ i! the 8ase o the
2e6- the sta!dard logi8 o symboli8 8astratio! is reversed7 9! 6hat- pre8isely- does symboli8 8astratio!
8o!sistM A real ather e?erts authority o!ly i!soar as he posits himsel as the embodime!t o a
tra!s8e!de!t symboli8 age!8y- that is- i!soar as he a88epts that it is !ot himsel- but the big Hther 6ho
speaks through him @like the millio!aire rom o!e o Dlaude DhabrolIs ilms 6ho i!verts the sta!dard
8omplai!t about bei!g loved o!ly or his 6ealth+ J9 o!ly 9 6ere able to i!d a 6oma! 6ho 6ould love
me o!ly or my millio!s- !ot or myselRKA7 Therei! lies the ultimate lesso! o the Freudia! myth o
parri8ide- o the primordial ather 6ho- ater his viole!t death- retur!s stro!ger tha! ever i! the guise o
his 4ame- as a symboli8 authority+ i the real ather is to e?ert pater!al symboli8 authority- he must i! a
se!se die 6hile aliveEit is his ide!tii8atio! 6ith the Jdead letterK o the symboli8 ma!date that
besto6s authority o! his perso!- or- to paraphrase the old a!tiX4ative Ameri8a! sloga!+ JH!ly a dead
ather is a good atherRK
For this reaso!- our e?perie!8e o the pater!al igure !e8essarily os8illates bet6ee! la8k a!d
surplus+ there is al6ays Jtoo mu8hK or J!ot e!oughK o the ather- !ever the right measureEJeither he
is 6a!ti!g as prese!8e or- i! his prese!8e- he is all too mu8h here7K
(1
H! the o!e ha!d- 6e have the
re8urre!t moti o the abse!t ather- blamed or everythi!g up to a!d i!8ludi!g the 8rime rate amo!g
adoles8e!tsT o! the other ha!d- 6he! the ather is ee8tively Jthere-K his prese!8e is !e8essarily
e?perie!8ed as disturbi!g- vulgar- boastul- i!de8e!t- i!8ompatible 6ith the dig!ity o pare!tal
authority- as i his prese!8e as su8h is already a! obtrusive e?8ess7
This diale8ti8 o la8k a!d e?8ess a88ou!ts or the parado?i8al i!versio! i! our relatio!ship to a
igure o Co6er+ 6he! this igure @ather- ki!g OA !o lo!ger su88essully perorms his u!8tio!- 6he!
he !o lo!ger ully e?erts his po6er- this la8k is !e8essarily @misAper8eived as a! e?8ess- the ruler is
reproa8hed or havi!g Jtoo mu8h authority-K as i 6e 6ere deali!g 6ith a Jbrutal e?8ess o Co6er7K
This parado? is typi8al o the pre:revolutio!ary situatio!+ the more a regime @say- the ancien rAgime i!
Fra!8e i! the years beore 1$&%A is u!8ertai! o itsel- o its legitima8yEthe more it hesitates a!d
makes 8o!8essio!s to the oppositio!Ethe more it is atta8ked by the oppositio! as a tyra!!y7 The
oppositio!- o 8ourse- a8ts here as a hysteri8- si!8e its reproa8h 8o!8er!i!g the regimeIs e?8essive
e?er8ise o po6er 8o!8eals its e?a8t oppositeEits true reproa8h is that the regime is !ot stro!g e!ough-
that it does !ot live up to its ma!date o po6er7
A!other homology that has to be reje8ted or the same reaso!s is that bet6ee! the 4ame:o:the:
Father a!d the a!tasmati8 /oma!7 .a8a!Is J/oma! does!It e?istK @la Femme ne&iste pasA does !ot
mea! that !o empiri8al- lesh:a!d:blood 6oma! is ever JShe-K that she 8a!!ot ever live up to the
i!a88essible ideal o /oma! @i! the 6ay that the empiri8al- JrealK ather !ever lives up to his symboli8
u!8tio!- to his 4ameA7 The gap that orever separates a!y empiri8al 6oma! rom /oma! is !ot the
same as the gap bet6ee! a! empty symboli8 u!8tio! a!d its empiri8al bearer7 The problem 6ith
6oma! is- o! the 8o!trary- that it is !ot possible to ormulate her empty ideal:symboli8 u!8tio!Ethis
is 6hat .a8a! has i! mi!d 6he! he asserts that J/oma! does !ot e?ist7K The impossible J/oma!K is
!ot a symboli8 i8tio!- but agai! a a!tasmati8 spe8ter 6hose support is ob1et a- !ot S
1
7 The o!e 6ho
Jdoes !ot e?istK i! the same se!se as /oma! does !ot e?ist is the primordial Father:e!joyme!t @the
mythi8 pre:Hedipal ather 6ho had a mo!opoly over all 6ome! i! his groupA- 6hi8h is 6hy his status
is 8orrelative to that o /oma!7
The trouble 6ith most 8riti8isms o .a8a!Is Jphallo8e!trismK is that- as a rule- they reer to the
JphallusK a!d>or J8astratio!K i! a pre:8o!8eptual- 8ommo!:se!se metaphori8al 6ay+ 6ithi! sta!dard
emi!ist ilm:studies- or e?ample- every time a ma! behaves aggressively to6ards a 6oma! or asserts
his authority over her- o!e 8a! be airly sure his a8tio!s 6ill be desig!ated as Jphalli8KT every time a
6oma! is ramed- re!dered helpless- 8or!ered- a!d so orth- her e?perie!8e 6ill most likely be
desig!ated as J8astrati!g7K /hat gets lost here is pre8isely the parado? o the phallus as the sig!iier o
8astratio!+ i 6e are to assert our @symboli8A Jphalli8K authority- the pri8e to be paid is that 6e have to
re!ou!8e the positio! o age!t a!d 8o!se!t to u!8tio! as the medium through 6hi8h the big Hther a8ts
a!d speaks7 9!soar as the phallus Nua sig!iier desig!ates the age!8y o symboli8 authority- its 8ru8ial
eature thereore resides i! the a8t that it is !ot Jmi!e-K the orga! o a livi!g subje8t- but a pla8e at
6hi8h a oreig! po6er i!terve!es a!d i!s8ribes itsel o!to my body- a pla8e at 6hi8h the big Hther a8ts
through meEi! short- the a8t that the phallus is a sig!iier mea!s above all that it is stru8turally a!
orga! 6ithout a body- someho6 Jdeta8hedK rom my body7 This 8ru8ial eature o the phallus- its
deta8hability- be8omes 8learly visible i! the use o the plasti8 artii8ial phallus @JdildoKA i! lesbia!
sadomaso8histi8 pra8ti8es- 6here it 8ir8ulates as a playthi!gEthe phallus is ar too serious a thi!g or
its use to be let to stupid 8reatures like me!7
(2
There is- ho6ever- a pivotal diere!8e bet6ee! this symboli8 authority guara!teed by the
phallus as the sig!iier o 8astratio! a!d the spe8tral prese!8e o the J8o!8eptual 2e6K+ although i! both
8ases 6e are deali!g 6ith the split bet6ee! k!o6ledge a!d belie- the t6o splits are o a u!dame!tally
diere!t !ature7 9! the irst 8ase- the belie 8o!8er!s the JvisibleK publi8 symboli8 authority
@!ot6ithsta!di!g my a6are!ess o the atherIs impere8tio! a!d debility- 9 still a88ept him as a igure
o authorityA- 6hereas i! the se8o!d 8ase- 6hat 9 believe i! is the po6er o a! i!visible spe8tral
apparitio!7
("
The a!tasmati8 J8o!8eptual 2e6K is !ot a pater!al igure o symboli8 authority- a
J8astratedK bearer or medium o publi8 authority- but somethi!g de8idedly diere!t- a ki!d o u!8a!!y
double o the publi8 authority that perverts its proper logi8+ he has to a8t i! the shado6- i!visible to the
publi8 eye- irradiati!g a pha!tom:like- spe8tral om!ipote!8e7 H! a88ou!t o this u!athomable- elusive
status o the ker!el o his ide!tity- the 2e6 isEi! 8o!trast to the J8astratedK atherEper8eived as
uncastratable+ the more his a8tual- so8ial- publi8 e?iste!8e is 8ut short- the more threate!i!g his elusive
a!tasmati8 e?:siste!8e be8omes7
((
This a!tasmati8 logi8 o a! i!visible a!d or that very reaso! all:po6erul ,aster 6as 8learly
at 6ork i! the 6ay the igure o Abimael 1uUmh!EJCreside!te 1o!Ualo-K the leader o Se!dero
.umi!oso i! CeruEu!8tio!ed prior to his arrest+ the a8t that his very e?iste!8e 6as doubted @people
6ere !ot sure i he a8tually e?isted or 6as just a mythA o!ly added to his po6er7 The mysterious master
8rimi!al J*eyser SZUe-K rom 3rya! Si!gerIs -he 3sual Suspects- is a!other e?ample7 Agai!- it is !ot
8lear 6hether he e?ists at all+ as o!e o the 8hara8ters i! the ilm puts it- J9 do!It believe i! 1od- but
9Im !o!etheless araid o him7K Ceople are araid to see him or- o!8e or8ed to 8o!ro!t him a8e to
a8e- to me!tio! this to othersEhis ide!tity is kept highly se8ret7 At the e!d o the ilm- it is dis8losed
that *eyser SZUe is i! a8t the most miserable o the group o suspe8ts- a limpi!g- sel:humiliati!g
6imp- like Alberi8h i! Fi8hard /ag!erIs 7ing des ibelungen7 /hat is 8ru8ial is this very 8o!trast
bet6ee! the om!ipote!8e o the i!visible age!t o po6er a!d the 6ay this same age!t is redu8ed to a
8rippled 6eakli!g o!8e his ide!tity is made publi87 The a!tasmati8 eature that a88ou!ts or the po6er
e?erted by su8h a ,aster igure is !ot his symboli8 pla8e but a! a8t i! 6hi8h he has displayed his
ruthless 6ill a!d readi!ess to dispe!se altogether 6ith ordi!ary huma! 8o!sideratio!s @*eyser SZUe
supposedly shot his o6! 6ie a!d 8hildre! i! 8old blood i! order to preve!t a! e!emy ga!g rom
bla8kmaili!g him by threate!i!g to kill themEa! a8t stri8tly homologous to Alberi8hIs re!u!8iatio! o
loveA7
9! short- the diere!8e bet6ee! the 4ame:o:the:Father a!d the J8o!8eptual 2e6K is the
diere!8e bet6ee! a symboli8 i8tio! a!d a a!tasmati8 spe8ter+ i! .a8a!ia! algebra- bet6ee! S
1
- the
,aster:Sig!iier @the empty sig!iier o symboli8 authorityA- a!d the ob1et petit a7
(#
/he! the subje8t
is e!do6ed 6ith symboli8 authority- he a8ts as a! appe!di? o his symboli8 titleT that is- it is the big
Hther 6ho a8ts through him7 9! the 8ase o the spe8tral prese!8e- i! 8o!trast- the po6er 9 e?ert relies o!
Jsomethi!g i! me more tha! mysel-K best e?empliied by !umerous s8ie!8e:i8tio! thrillers rom +lien
to 0idden+ a! i!destru8tible oreig! body that sta!ds or the pre:symboli8 lie substa!8e- a !auseous
mu8ous parasite that i!vades my i!sides a!d takes over7
So- ba8k to DhabrolIs joke about the millio!aire+ 6he! someo!e says they love me !ot be8ause
o mysel but be8ause o my symboli8 sta!di!g @po6er- 6ealthA- my predi8ame!t is de8idedly better
tha! 6he! 9 am told that 9 am loved be8ause somebody eels the prese!8e i! me o Jsomethi!g more
tha! mysel7K 9 a millio!aire loses his millio!s- the part!er 6ho loved him or his 6ealth 6ill simply
lose i!terest a!d aba!do! him- 6ith !o deep trauma i!volvedT i- ho6ever- 9 am loved be8ause o
Jsomethi!g i! me more tha! mysel-K the very i!te!sity o this love 8a! easily 8o!vert i!to a !o less
passio!ate hatred- a viole!t attempt to a!!ihilate the surplus:obje8t i! me that disturbs my part!er7
('

H!e 8a! thereore sympathiUe 6ith the poor millio!aireIs plight+ it is ar more 8omorti!g to k!o6 that
a 6oma! loves me or my millio!s @or po6er or gloryAEthis a6are!ess allo6s me to mai!tai! a sae
dista!8e- to avoid getti!g 8aught up i! the relatio!ship too i!te!sely- e?posi!g to the other the very
ker!el o my bei!g7 /he! the other sees i! me Jsomethi!g more tha! mysel-K the path is 6ide ope!
or the parado?i8al short:8ir8uit bet6ee! love a!d hate or 6hi8h .a8a! 8oi!ed the !eologism
lhainamoration7
($
THE TO SIDES OF FANTAS$

This duality o symboli8 i8tio! a!d spe8tral apparitio! 8a! also be dis8er!ed i! the utter
ambiguity that surrou!ds the !otio! o a!tasy7 The latter oers a! e?emplary 8ase o the diale8ti8al
coincidentia oppositorum+ o! the o!e ha!d- a!tasy o! its beatii8 side- i! its stabiliUi!g dime!sio!- the
dream o a state 6ithout disturba!8es- out o rea8h o huma! depravityT o! the other ha!d- a!tasy i! its
destabiliUi!g dime!sio! 6hose eleme!tary orm is e!vyEall that JirritatesK me about the Hther- images
that hau!t me o 6hat he or she might be doi!g 6he! out o my sight- o ho6 he or she de8eives me
a!d plots agai!st me- o ho6 he or she ig!ores me a!d i!dulges i! a! e!joyme!t so i!te!se it lies
beyo!d my 8apa8ity to represe!t it- a!d so o! @this- or e?ample- is 6hat bothers S6a!! apropos Hdette
i! 3n amour de SwannA7 Goes !ot the u!dame!tal lesso! o so:8alled totalitaria!ism 8o!8er! the 8o:
depe!de!8e o these t6o aspe8ts o the !otio! o a!tasyM Those 6ho 8laimed to have ully realiUed
a!tasy 1 @the symboli8 i8tio!A had to have re8ourse to a!tasy 2 @the spe8tral apparitio!A i! order to
e?plai! their ailureEthe ore8losed obverse o the 4aUiIs harmo!ious 6ol"sgemeinschaft retur!ed i!
the guise o their para!oia8 obsessio! 6ith the 2e6ish plot7 Similarly- the Stali!istsI 8ompulsive
dis8overy o ever !e6 e!emies o So8ialism 6as the i!es8apable obverse o their prete!se to have
realiUed the ideal o the J!e6 So8ialist ma!7K @Cerhaps reedom rom the i!er!al hold o a!tasy 2
provides the most su88i!8t 8riterio! or sai!thood7A
Fa!tasy 1 a!d a!tasy 2- symboli8 i8tio! a!d spe8tral apparitio!- are thus t6o sides o the same
8oi!+ i!soar as a 8ommu!ity e?perie!8es its reality as regulated or stru8tured by a!tasy 1- it has to
disavo6 its i!here!t impossibility- the a!tago!ism at its very heartEa!d a!tasy 2 gives body to this
disavo6al7 9! short- the su88ess o a!tasy 1 i! mai!tai!i!g its hold depe!ds o! the ee8tive!ess o
a!tasy 27 .a8a! re6rote Ges8artesIs J9 thi!k- thereore 9 amK as J9 am the o!e 6ho thi!ks Vthereore 9
amI KEthe poi!t bei!g- o 8ourse- the !o!:8oi!8ide!8e o the t6o JamIs-K a!d the a!tasmati8 !ature o
the se8o!d7 The patheti8 assertio! o eth!i8 ide!tity should be submitted to the same reormulatio!+ the
mome!t J9 am Fre!8h @1erma!- 2e6ish- Ameri8a! OAK is rephrased as J9 am the o!e 6ho thi!ks
Vthereore 9 am Fre!8hI-K the gap at the 8ore o my sel:ide!tity be8omes visibleEa!d the u!8tio! o
the J8o!8eptual 2e6K is pre8isely to re!der this gap i!visible7
/hat- the!- is a!tasyM The desire JrealiUedK @stagedA i! a!tasy is !ot the subje8tIs o6! but the
otherIs desireEthat is to say- a!tasy- a a!tasmati8 ormatio!- is a! a!s6er to the e!igma o J,he
vuoi?K @/hat do you 6a!tMA- 6hi8h re!ders the subje8tIs primordial- 8o!stitutive positio!7 The origi!al
Nuestio! o desire is !ot dire8tly J/hat do 9 6a!tMK but J/hat do others 6a!t rom meM /hat do they
see i! meM /hat am 9 or othersMK A small 8hild is embedded i! a 8omple? !et6ork o relatio!s-
servi!g as a ki!d o 8atalyst a!d battleield or the desires o those arou!d himT his ather- mother-
brothers- a!d sisters- a!d so o!- ight out their battles arou!d him7 /hile bei!g 6ell a6are o this role-
the 8hild 8a!!ot athom 6hat obje8t he is or the others- or the e?a8t !ature o the games they are
playi!g arou!d him7 Fa!tasy provides him 6ith a! a!s6er to this e!igmaEat its most u!dame!tal
level- a!tasy tells me 6hat 9 am or my others7 9t is agai! a!ti:Semitism- a!ti:Semiti8 para!oia- 6hi8h
reveals i! a! e?emplary 6ay this radi8ally i!tersubje8tive 8hara8ter o a!tasy+ the so8ial a!tasy o the
2e6ish plot is a! attempt to provide a! a!s6er to the Nuestio! J/hat does so8iety 6a!t rom meMK to
u!earth the mea!i!g o the murky eve!ts i! 6hi8h 9 am or8ed to parti8ipate7 For that reaso!- the
sta!dard theory o Jproje8tio!-K a88ordi!g to 6hi8h the a!ti:Semite Jproje8tsK o!to the igure o the
2e6 the disavo6ed part o himsel- is i!adeNuateEthe igure o J8o!8eptual 2e6K 8a!!ot be redu8ed to
bei!g a! e?ter!aliUatio! o the a!ti:SemiteIs Ji!!er 8o!li8tKT o! the 8o!trary- it bears 6it!ess to @a!d
tries to 8ope 6ithA the a8t that the subje8t is origi!ally de8e!tered- part o a! opaNue !et6ork 6hose
mea!i!g a!d logi8 elude its 8o!trol7
H! that a88ou!t- the Nuestio! o la traversAe du fantasme @o ho6 to gai! a mi!imal dista!8e
rom the a!tasmati8 rame 6hi8h orga!iUes o!eIs e!joyme!t- o ho6 to suspe!d its ei8a8yA is !ot
o!ly 8ru8ial or the psy8hoa!alyti8 8ure a!d its 8o!8lusio!Ei! our era o re!e6ed ra8ist te!sio!- o
u!iversaliUed a!ti:Semitism- it is perhaps also the oremost politi8al Nuestio!7 The impote!8e o the
traditio!al 0!lighte!me!t attitude is best e?empliied by the a!ti:ra8ist 6ho- at the level o ratio!al
argume!tatio!- produ8es a series o 8o!vi!8i!g reaso!s or reje8ti!g the ra8ist Hther but is !o!etheless
8learly as8i!ated by the obje8t o his 8ritiNue7 Do!seNue!tly- all his dee!ses disi!tegrate the mome!t a
real 8risis o88urs @6he! Jthe atherla!d is i! da!ger-K or e?ampleA- like i! the 8lassi8al =olly6ood ilm
i! 6hi8h the villai!- though he 6ill be Joi8iallyK 8o!dem!ed at the e!d- is !o!etheless the o8us o
our libidi!al i!vestme!t @=it8h8o8k emphasiUed that a ilm is o!ly as alluri!g as its bad guyA7 The
oremost problem is !ot ho6 to de!ou!8e a!d ratio!ally deeat the e!emyEa task 6hi8h 8a! easily
result i! its stre!gthe!i!g its hold upo! usEbut ho6 to break its @a!tasmati8A spell7 The poi!t o la
traversAe du fantasme is !ot to get rid o 1ouissance @i! the mode o old:style letist Curita!ismA+ taki!g
a mi!imal dista!8e to6ards a!tasy rather mea!s that 9- as it 6ere- Ju!hookK 1ouissance rom its
a!tasmati8 rame a!d a8k!o6ledge it as that 6hi8h is properly u!de8idable- as a! i!divisible
remai!der 6hi8h is !either i!here!tly Jrea8tio!ary-K supporti!g histori8al i!ertia- !or a liberati!g or8e
e!abli!g us to u!dermi!e the 8o!strai!ts o the e?isti!g order7
9! his movie versio! o *akaIs -he -rial- Hrso! /elles a88omplishes su8h a breaki!g o the
a!tasmati8 spell i! a! e?emplary 6ay by rei!terpreti!g the pla8e a!d the u!8tio! o the amous
parable J3eore the .a67K 9! the ilm- 6e hear the story t6i8e+ at the very begi!!i!g- it serves as a ki!d
o prologue- read a!d a88ompa!ied by @akeA a!8ie!t e!gravi!gs proje8ted rom la!ter!:slidesT the!-
shortly beore the e!d- it is told to 2ose *7- !ot by the priest @as i! the !ovelA- but by *7Is la6yer
@played by /elles himselA- 6ho u!e?pe8tedly joi!s the priest a!d *7 i! the Dathedral7 The a8tio! the!
takes a stra!ge tur! a!d diverges rom *akaIs !ovelEeve! beore the la6yer has 6armed to his
theme- *7 8uts him short+ J9Ive heard it7 /eIve heard it all7 The door 6as mea!t o!ly or him7K /hat
e!sues is a pai!ul dialogue i! 6hi8h the la6yer advises *7 to Jplead i!sa!ityK by 8laimi!g that he is
the vi8tim o a diaboli8al plot hat8hed by a mysterious State age!8y7 *7- ho6ever- reje8ts the role o
vi8tim+ J9 do!It prete!d to be a martyr7K J4ot eve! a vi8tim o so8ietyMK J4o- 9Im !ot a vi8tim- 9Im a
member o so8iety OK 9! his i!al outburst- *7 the! asserts that the true 8o!spira8y @o Co6erA 8o!sists
i! the very attempt to persuade subje8ts that they are vi8tims o irratio!al- impe!etrable or8es- that
everythi!g is 8raUy- that the 6orld is absurd a!d mea!i!gless7 /he! *7 thereupo! leaves the Dathedral-
t6o plai!:8lothes poli8eme! are already 6aiti!g or himT they take him to a! aba!do!ed buildi!g site
a!d blo6 him up7 9! /ellesIs versio!- the reaso! *7 is killed is thereore the e?a8t opposite o the
reaso! implied i! the !ovelEhe represe!ts a threat to po6er the mome!t he u!masks- Jsees through-K
the i8tio! upo! 6hi8h the e?isti!g po6er stru8ture is ou!ded7
/ellesIs readi!g o -he -rial thus diers rom both predomi!a!t approa8hes to *aka- the
obs8ura!tist:religious as 6ell as the !aSve e!lighte!ed huma!ist perspe8tives7 A88ordi!g to the ormer-
*7 is ee8tively guilty+ 6hat makes him guilty is the very protestatio! o his i!!o8e!8e- his arroga!t
relia!8e o! !aSve:ratio!al argume!tatio!7 The 8o!servative message o this readi!g that sees *7 as
represe!tative o a! e!lighte!ed Nuestio!i!g o authority is u!mistakable+ *7 himsel is the true !ihilist-
6ho a8ts like the proverbial elepha!t i! the 8hi!a shopEhis 8o!ide!8e i! publi8 reaso! re!ders him
totally bli!d to the ,ystery o Co6er- to the true !ature o bureau8ra8y7 The Dourt appears to *7 as a
mysterious a!d obs8e!e age!8y bombardi!g him 6ith Jirratio!alK dema!ds a!d a88usatio!s e?8lusively
o! a88ou!t o *7Is distorted subje8tivist perspe8tive+ as the priest i! the Dathedral poi!ts out to *7- the
Dourt is i! a8t i!diere!t- it 6a!ts !othi!g rom him7 9! the 8o!trary readi!g- *aka is see! as a
deeply ambiguous 6riter 6ho revealed the a!tasmati8 basis o the totalitaria! bureau8rati8 ma8hi!ery
yet 6as himsel u!able to resist its atal attra8tio!7 Therei! resides the u!easi!ess elt by ma!y
Je!lighte!edK readers o *aka+ i! the e!d- did he !ot parti8ipate i! the i!er!al ma8hi!ery he 6as
des8ribi!g- thereby stre!gthe!i!g its hold i!stead o breaki!g its spellM
Although it may seem that /elles alig!s himsel 6ith the se8o!d readi!g- thi!gs are by !o
mea!s so u!eNuivo8al+ he- as it 6ere- adds a!other tur! o the s8re6 by raisi!g J8o!spira8yK to the
po6er o t6oEas *7 puts it i! the /ellesIs versio!- the true 8o!spira8y o Co6er resides i! the very
!otio! o 8o!spira8y- i! the !otio! o some mysterious Age!8y that ee8tively ru!s the sho6- that
behi!d the visible- publi8 Co6er- there lies a!other obs8e!e- i!visible- J8raUyK po6er stru8ture7 This
other- hidde! .a6 a8ts the part o the JHther o the HtherK i! the .a8a!ia! se!se- the part o the meta:
guara!tee o the 8o!siste!8y o the big Hther @the symboli8 order that regulates so8ial lieA7
JTotalitaria!K regimes 6ere espe8ially skilled i! 8ultivati!g the myth o a se8ret parallel po6er-
i!visible a!d or that very reaso! all:po6erul- a ki!d o Jorga!iUatio! 6ithi! the orga!iUatio!KEthe
*13- reemaso!s- or 6hateverEthat 8ompe!sated or the blata!t i!ei8ie!8y o the publi8- legal
Co6er a!d thus assured the smooth operatio! o the so8ial ma8hi!e7 This myth is !ot o!ly i! !o 6ay
subversive- it serves as the ultimate support o Co6er7 The pere8t Ameri8a! 8ou!terpart to it is @the
myth oA 27 0dgar =oover- the perso!ii8atio! o the obs8e!e Jother po6erK behi!d the preside!t- the
shado6y double o the legitimate Co6er7 =oover held o!to po6er by 8ompili!g se8ret iles that
allo6ed him to keep the e!tire politi8al a!d po6er elite i! 8he8k- 6hile he himsel regularly i!dulged i!
homose?ual orgies dressed up as a 6oma!7 /he! *7Is la6yer oers him- as a desperate last resort- the
role o playi!g the martyr:vi8tim o a hidde! 8o!spira8y- *7 tur!s it do6!- bei!g 6ell a6are that by
a88epti!g it he 6ould 6alk i!to the most peridious trap o Co6er7
This obs8e!e mirage o the Hther Co6er bri!gs i!to play the same a!tasmati8 spa8e as the
amous advertiseme!t or Smir!o vodka- 6hi8h also detly ma!ipulates the gap bet6ee! reality a!d
the Jother sura8eK o the a!tasy spa8e+ the 8amera- pla8ed behi!d a bottle o vodka o! a tray 8arried
by a 6aiter- 6a!ders arou!d the de8k o a lu?urious o8ea!:li!erT every time it passes a! obje8t- 6e irst
see it as it is i! its everyday reality- a!d the!- as the tra!spare!t glass o the bottle 8omes bet6ee! our
gaUe a!d the obje8t- 6e see it distorted i! a a!tasy dime!sio!Et6o ge!tleme! i! bla8k eve!i!g attire
be8ome t6o pe!gui!s- the !e8kla8e arou!d a ladyIs !e8k a livi!g s!ake- stairs a set o pia!o keys- et87
The Dourt i! *akaIs -he -rial possesses the same purely pha!tasmagori8al e?iste!8eT its prede8essor
is *li!gsorIs Dastle i! /ag!erIs )arsifal7 Si!8e its hold upo! the subje8t is e!tirely a!tasmati8- it is
sui8ie!t to break its spell via a gesture o dista!tiatio!- a!d the Dourt or Dastle alls to dust7 Therei!
resides the politi8al lesso! o )arsifal a!d o /ellesIs -he -rial+ i 6e are to over8ome the Jee8tiveK
so8ial po6er- 6e have irst to break its a!tasmati8 hold upo! us7
(&
JTraversi!g the a!tasyK does !ot mea! goi!g outside reality- but Jva8illati!gK it- a88epti!g its
i!8o!siste!t !o!:All7 The !otio! o a!tasy as a ki!d o illusory s8ree! blurri!g our relatio! to partial
obje8ts may seem to it pere8tly the 8ommo!:se!se idea o 6hat psy8hoa!alysis should do+ o 8ourse it
should liberate us rom the hold o idiosy!8rati8 a!tasies a!d e!able us to 8o!ro!t reality the 6ay it is7
This- pre8isely- is 6hat .a8a! does not have i! mi!dE6hat he is aimi!g at is almost the e?a8t
opposite7 9! our daily e?iste!8e- 6e are immersed i! JrealityK @stru8tured or supported by the a!tasyA-
but this immersio! is disturbed by symptoms 6hi8h bear 6it!ess to the a8t that a!other repressed level
o our psy8he resists the immersio!7 To Jtraverse the a!tasyK thereore mea!s- parado?i8ally- to fully
identify oneself with the fantasyE6ith the a!tasy 6hi8h stru8tures the e?8ess that resists our
immersio! i! daily reality7 9! Fi8hard 3oothbyIs su88i!8t ormulatio!+

JTraversi!g the a!tasyK thus does !ot mea! that the subje8t someho6 aba!do!s its i!volveme!t 6ith
a!8iul 8apri8es a!d a88ommodates itsel to a pragmati8 Jreality-K but pre8isely the opposite+ the
subje8t is submitted to that ee8t o the symboli8 la8k that reveals the limit o everyday reality7 To
traverse the a!tasy i! the .a8a!ia! se!se is to be more proou!dly 8laimed by the a!tasy tha! ever- i!
the se!se o bei!g brought i!to a! ever more i!timate relatio! 6ith that real 8ore o the a!tasy that
tra!s8e!ds imagi!g7
(%
3oothby is right to emphasiUe the 2a!us:like stru8ture o a a!tasy+ a a!tasy is simulta!eously
pa8iyi!g- disarmi!g @providi!g a! imagi!ary s8e!ario 6hi8h e!ables us to e!dure the abyss o the
HtherIs desireA and shatteri!g- disturbi!g- i!assimilable i!to our reality7 The ideologi8o:politi8al
dime!sio! o this !otio! o Jtraversi!g the a!tasyK 6as made 8lear by the u!iNue role the ro8k group
-op lista nadrealista @-he -op .ist of the SurrealistsA played duri!g the 3os!ia! 6ar i! the besieged
Sarajevo+ their iro!i8 perorma!8es 6hi8h- i! the midst o the 6ar a!d hu!ger- satiriUed the
predi8ame!t o the Sarajeva! populatio!- a8Nuired a 8ult status !ot o!ly i! the 8ou!ter8ulture- but also
amo!g the 8itiUe!s o Sarajevo i! ge!eral @the groupIs 6eekly TV sho6 6as broad8ast throughout the
6ar a!d be8ame e?tremely popularA7 9!stead o bemoa!i!g their tragi8 ate- they dari!gly mobiliUed all
the 8li8hLs about Jstupid 3os!ia!sK 8ommo! i! 5ugoslavia- ully ide!tiyi!g 6ith themEthe poi!t thus
made 6as that the path to true solidarity goes via a dire8t 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith obs8e!e ra8ist a!tasies
8ir8ulati!g i! symboli8 spa8e- through a playul ide!tii8atio! 6ith them- !ot through the de!ial o
them o! behal o J6hat people are really like7K
This bri!gs us to 6hat- or .a8a!- is the ultimate ethi8al trap+ to 8o!er o! the a!tasmati8
gesture o deprivatio! some sa8rii8ial value- somethi!g that 8a! o!ly be justiied 6ith a reere!8e to a
deeper mea!i!g7 This seems to be the trap i!to 6hi8h -he .ife of David (ale ell- a ilm 6hi8h has the
dubious disti!8tio! o bei!g the irst big =olly6ood produ8tio! to i!8lude a! e?pli8it .a8a!ia!
reere!8e7
#0
*evi! Spa8ey plays a philosophy proessor a!d oppo!e!t o the death pe!alty 6ho- very
early o!- is see! deliveri!g a 8ourse o! .a8a!Is Jgraph o desire7K .ater- he sleeps 6ith o!e o his
stude!ts- loses his job- is shu!!ed by the 8ommu!ity- a!d the! gets blamed or the murder o a 8lose
emale rie!d- e!di!g up o! death ro6- 6here a reporter @*ate /i!sletA 8omes to i!tervie6 him7
9!itially 8ertai! that he his guilty- she begi!s to have doubts 6he! he tells her+ JThi!k about itE9 6as
o!e o the biggest oppo!e!ts o the death pe!alty- a!d !o6 9Im o! death ro67K Cursui!g her resear8h-
/i!slet dis8overs a tape 6hi8h reveals that he did!It 8ommit the murderEbut too late- si!8e he has
already bee! e?e8uted7 She makes the tape publi8- ho6ever- a!d the i!adeNua8ies o the death pe!alty
are duly revealed7 9! the last mome!ts o the ilm- /i!slet re8eives a!other versio! o the tape i! 6hi8h
the 6hole truth be8omes 8lear+ the allegedly murdered 6oma! i! a8t killed hersel @she 6as dyi!g
a!y6ay o 8a!8erA- a!d Spa8ey 6as prese!t as she did so7 9! other 6ords- Spa8ey 6as e!gaged i! a!
elaborate a!ti:death:pe!alty a8tivist plot+ he sa8rii8ed himsel or the greater good o e?posi!g the
horror a!d i!justi8e o death pe!alty7 /hat makes the ilm i!teresti!g is that- retroa8tively- 6e see ho6
this a8t is grou!ded i! Spa8eyIs readi!g o .a8a! at the ilmIs begi!!i!g+ rom the @8orre8tA i!sight i!to
the a!tasmati8 support o desire- it dra6s the 8o!8lusio! that all huma! desires are vai!- a!d proposes
helpi!g others- right up to sa8rii8i!g o!eIs lie or them- as the o!ly proper ethi8al 8ourse7 =ere-
measured by the proper .a8a!ia! sta!dards- the ilm ails+ it e!dorses a! ethi8 o radi8al sel:sa8rii8e
or the good o othersT this is 6hy the hero makes sure /i!slet re8eives the i!al tapeEbe8ause
ultimately he !eeds the symboli8 re8og!itio! o his a8t7 4o matter ho6 radi8al the heroIs sel:sa8rii8e-
the big Hther is still there7
IMAGE AND GA&E

9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that 6e should read the mediatio! bet6ee! the imagi!ary a!d the
symboli8 i! .a8a!+ the imagi!ary relates to the see!- 6hile the symboli8 as it 6ere redoubles the
image- shiti!g the o8us o!to 6hat 8a!!ot be see!- o!to 6hat the image that 6e see obus8ates or
bli!ds us to7 .a8a! spells out very pre8isely the impli8atio!s o this redoubli!g+ it is !ot o!ly that- 6ith
the symboli8- the imagi!ary tur!s i!to the appeara!8e 8o!8eali!g a hidde! realityEthe appeara!8e the
symboli8 ge!erates is that o appeara!8e itsel- !amely the appeara!8e that there is a hidde! reality
be!eath the visible appeara!8e7 The pre8ise !ame or this appeara!8e o somethi!g that has !o
e?iste!8e i! itsel- that e?ists o!ly i! its ee8ts a!d thus o!ly appears to appear- is virtualityEthe
virtual is the i!visible d- the void 6hose 8o!tours 8a! o!ly be re8o!stru8ted rom its ee8ts- like a
mag!eti8 pole 6hi8h o!ly e?ists i!asmu8h as it attra8ts the small metal pie8es that gather arou!d it7
/ith regard to se?ual diere!8e- the u!dame!tal virtual e!tity- the most eleme!tary i!visible d 6hi8h
o!ly Jappears to appear-K is the mater!al phallus+ the mater!al phallus is imagi!edE!ot dire8tly- but as
a orever i!visible virtual poi!t o reere!8e+

/he! .a8a! spoke o the imagi!ary register- he 6as talki!g about images that 8ould be see!7 The
pigeo! is !ot i!terested i! the voidT i there is a void i! the pla8e o the image- the pigeo! does !ot
develop there- the i!se8t does !ot reprodu8e7 3ut it is a a8t that .a8a! does !ot stop talki!g about the
imagi!ary o!8e he has i!trodu8ed the symboli87 =e still talks a great deal about it- but it is a!
imagi!ary that has 8ompletely 8ha!ged its dei!itio!7 The post:symboli8 imagi!ary is very diere!t
rom the pre:symboli8 imagi!ary rom beore the i!trodu8tio! o this register7 =o6 is the 8o!8ept o
the imagi!ary tra!sormed ater the symboli8 has bee! i!trodu8edM 9! a very pre8ise 6ay7 The most
importa!t part o the imagi!ary is 6hat 8a!!ot be see!7 9! parti8ular- taki!g the pivot o the 8li!i8al
pra8ti8e that- or e?ample- is developed i! Semi!ar 9V- .a relation dob1et- it is the emale phallus- the
mater!al phallus7 9t is a parado? to 8all it the imagi!ary phallus 6he! pre8isely o!e 8a!!ot see itT it is
almost as i it 6ere a Nuestio! o imagi!atio!7 9! .a8a!Is 8elebrated observatio!s a!d theoriUatio!s o!
the mirror stage- .a8a!Is imagi!ary register 6as esse!tially li!ked to per8eptio!7 /hile !o6- 6he! the
symboli8 is i!trodu8ed- there is a disju!8tio! bet6ee! the imagi!ary a!d per8eptio!- a!d i! some 6ay
this imagi!ary o .a8a! is li!ked to the imagi!atio!7 O This implies the 8o!!e8tio! o the imagi!ary
a!d the symboli8 a!d thus a thesis that is separated rom per8eptio!+ the image is a s8ree! or 6hat
8a!!ot be see!7
#1
9!soar as the mater!al phallus is by dei!itio! veiled- this bri!gs us to the positive>8o!stitutive
o!tologi8al u!8tio! o the veil+ the image>s8ree!>veil itsel 8reates the illusio! that there is somethi!g
behi!d itEas o!e says i! everyday la!guage- 6ith the veil- there is al6ays Jsomethi!g let to the
imagi!atio!7K H!e should take this o!tologi8al u!8tio! at its stro!gest a!d most literal+ by hidi!g
!othi!g- the veil 8reates the spa8e or somethi!g to be imagi!edEthe veil is the origi!al operator o
8reatio! e? !ihilo- or- as =egel put it i! his )henomenology+ Jbehi!d the so:8alled 8urtai! 6hi8h is
supposed to 8o!8eal the i!!er 6orld- there is !othi!g to be see! u!less 6e go behi!d it ourselves- as
mu8h i! order that 6e may see- as that there may be somethi!g behi!d there 6hi8h 8a! be see!7K
#2
Te!
pages earlier- he puts it i! eve! stro!ger terms+ our per8eptio! is limited to the se!sible 6orldT beyo!d
this 6orld- there is o!ly the void- a!d i! order that- Ji! this 8omplete void- 6hi8h is eve! 8alled the holy
o holies- there may yet be somethi!g- 6e must ill it up 6ith reveries- appeara!8es- produ8ed by
8o!s8ious!ess itsel7 9t 6ould have to be 8o!te!t 6ith bei!g treated so badly or it 6ould !ot deserve
a!ythi!g better- si!8e eve! reveries are better tha! its o6! empti!ess7K
#"
/hat =egel is sayi!g here is-
o 8ourse- !ot that the se!sible 6orld is the o!ly real o!e- a!d that the Jtrue supra:se!sible 3eyo!dK is
o!ly a produ8t o our imagi!atio!T the se!sible 6orld is a 6orld o va!ishi!g- sel:8a!8eli!g
appeara!8esEtherei! lies =egelIs idealismEbut there is !o separate Jtrue realityK be!eath it7 The o!ly
Jtrue realityK is the a8t that appeara!8es are Jmere appeara!8es-K the tra!sormatio! o immediate
se!sible reality i!to appeara!8e+ JThe suprase!sible is thereore appeara!8e Nua appeara!8e7K
#(
/e
thus have t6o levels o appeara!8e+ the appeara!8es o the dire8t se!sible 6orld- a!d the appeara!8e-
6ithi! this 6orld o appeara!8es- o obje8ts 6hi8h are Jelevated to the dig!ity o a Thi!g-K that is-
6hi8h give body toEor poi!t beyo!d themselves to6ardsE6hat is beyo!d appeara!8e+ JTha!ks to the
veil- the la8k o obje8t is tra!sormed i!to obje8t- a!d the beyo!d makes its e!tra!8e i! the
6orldK
##
Ethis gap is 8ru8ial- a!d is missed by 3uddhist J!ihilismK 6here 6e have o!ly lat
appeara!8es a!d the Void7 A!d- i! the same 6ay that- as Freud put it- the real i!s8ribes itsel i! a dream
i! the guise o a dream 6ithi! a dream- the real beyo!d appeara!8es appears as a! appeara!8e 6ithi!
appeara!8e- as 6hat Clato 8alled the Jimitatio! o imitatio!7K As .a8a! per8eptively !otes- this is 6hy
Clato 6as so adama!tly opposed to pai!ti!g+ !ot be8ause pai!ti!g is eve! urther a6ay rom true reality
tha! the se!sible reality it imitates- but be8ause- i! it- true reality appears 6ithi! ordi!ary se!sible
reality+

The pai!ti!g does!It 8ompete 6ith appeara!8e- it 8ompetes 6ith 6hat Clato desig!ated as the 9dea
6hi8h is beyo!d appeara!8e7 9t is be8ause the pai!ti!g is this appeara!8e 6hi8h says that it is 6hat
gives appeara!8e that Clato rises agai!st pai!ti!g as agai!st a! a8tivity 6hi8h 8ompetes 6ith his
o6!7
#'
This is 6hy =it8h8o8kIs 6ertigo is the ultimate a!ti:Clato!i8 ilm- a systemati8 materialist
u!dermi!i!g o the Clato!i8 proje8t+ the murderous ury that seiUes S8ottie 6he! he i!ally dis8overs
that 2udy- 6hom he has tried to make i!to ,adelei!e- is @the 6oma! he k!e6 asA ,adelei!e is the ury
o the de8eived Clato!ist 6he! he per8eives that the origi!al he 6a!ts to remake i! a pere8t 8opy is
itsel already a 8opy7 The sho8k here is !ot that the origi!al tur!s out to be merely a 8opyEa sta!dard
de8eptio! agai!st 6hi8h Clato!ism 8o!ti!ually 6ar!s usEbut that @6hat 6e took to beA the 8opy tur!s
out to be the origi!al7 S8ottieIs sho8k at the mome!t o re8og!itio! is also a *akaesNue o!e7 9! the
same 6ay that- at the e!d o the parable J3eore the .a6-K the ma! rom the 8ou!try lear!s that the
door 6as there o!ly or him- i! 6ertigo too- S8ottie has to a88ept that the as8i!ati!g spe8ta8le o
,adelei!e- 6hi8h he 6as se8retly ollo6i!g- 6as staged or his gaUe o!ly- that his gaUe 6as i!8luded i!
it rom the very begi!!i!g7
This bri!gs us to .a8a!Is @a!d =egelIsA impli8it theology+ i 1od is the ultimate grou!d o all
thi!gs- the reaso! 6hy Jthere is somethi!g rather tha! !othi!g-K the! 1od is the veil itsel+ there is
somethi!g a!d !ot !othi!g tha!ks to the veil 6hi8h separates us rom the void o 4othi!g7 The
stateme!t J1od is the veilK has to be read as a =egelia! spe8ulative judgme!t 6hi8h u!ites t6o
opposite 8o!te!ts+ @1A 1od is the ultimate reverie 6ith 6hi8h our imagi!atio! ills i! the void behi!d
the veilT @2A 1od is this veil itsel as the ultimate 8reative po6er+

the image 8o!8ealsT the image that is sho6i!g is both a! image that 8o!8eals- a!d that sho6s i! order to
8o!8eal7 All o .a8a!Is 8omme!taries o! images rom that mome!t revolve arou!d this idea O So the
image is somethi!g that is prese!ted- a!d a ortiori 6he! it is a matter o the image i! a tableau- the
image that is give! to be see! is a de8eptio! be8ause it veils 6hat is ou!d behi!d7 9! this 6ay it repeats
a 6hole 8lassi8 rhetori8 that i!vites people to be 6ary- to reje8t images as de8eitul7 3ut at the same
timeE9 have said that the image hides at irst- 9Ive 8omme!ted o! thisEthe veil that hides 8auses 6hat
8a!!ot be see! to e?ist7 This is the s8hema that .a8a! prese!ts i! Semi!ar 9V- .a relatio! dIobjet+ o!
the let- the subje8t- a poi!tT the! the veilT a!d o! the other side- a!other poi!t- !othi!g!ess7 /ithout the
veil it is as i there is !othi!g!ess7 3ut 6ith a veil bet6ee! the subje8t a!d !othi!g!ess everythi!g is
possible7 H!e 8a! play 6ith the veil- imagi!e thi!gs- a little bit o simula8ra 8a! also help7 /here there
6as !othi!g beore the veil there is- perhaps- somethi!g a!d at least there is the beyo!d o the veil a!d
i! this 6ay- through this Jperhaps-K the veil 8reates somethi!g e? !ihilo7The veil is a 1od7 .eib!iU asks
Nuietly 6hy thi!gs e?ist rather tha! !otE9 say JNuietlyK be8ause itIs a little late- there already is
somethi!g- a!d he should have thought about this a little beore- beore developi!g this 6orld7 9 am
addressi!g the 1od O 6ho 8reates e& nihilo7 3ut the veil is ho6 o!e 8a! respo!d to .eib!iU+ i there is
somethi!g a!d !ot !othi!g- it is be8ause there is a veil some6here7 /ith this u!8tio! o the veil- the
s8ree! is i!trodu8ed- this s8ree! that 8o!verts the !othi!g i!to bei!g7 This is importa!t to all o us
i!asmu8h as 6e have 8ome here dressed7 H!e 8a! hide 6hat there is a!d- at the same time a!d i! the
same ma!!er- 6hat there is !ot+ hidi!g the obje8t a!d hidi!g- at the same time a!d 6ith the same
a8ility- the la8k o the obje8t7 Dlothi!g itsel is i! this moveme!t o sho6i!g a!d hidi!g7 The
tra!svestite sho6s somethi!g a!d hides it at the same time7 /hi8h is to say he gives somethi!g other
tha! 6hat he sho6s to be see!7 Tha!ks to the veil- the la8k o obje8t is tra!sormed i!to obje8t- a!d the
beyo!d makes its e!tra!8e i! the 6orld i! su8h a 6ay that 6ith the veil- as .a8a! says- already i! the
imagi!ary there is the symboli8 rhythm o the subje8t- the obje8t a!d the beyo!d7
#$
The 8o!seNue!8e o this i!sight is !othi!g less tha! a! u!dermi!i!g o both the basi8 pre:
=egelia! philosophi8al positio!s- the pre:8riti8al metaphysi8s o a JtrueK substa!tial reality behi!d
appeara!8es as 6ell as *a!tIs 8riti8al tra!s8e!de!talism7 9! order to ully grasp this 8o!seNue!8e- 6e
should take the 8ru8ial step rom the veil maski!g the Void to the gaUe o the Hther- the gaUe as obje8t+
the 9!:itsel beyo!d the veil- 6hat the veil masks- is !ot some substa!tial tra!s8e!de!t reality but the
HtherIs gaUe- the poi!t rom 6hi8h the Hther retur!s the gaUe7 /hat 9 do !ot see i! 6hat 9 see is the
gaUe itsel- the gaUe as obje8t7
=e!8e .a8a!Is a?iom+ i! every pi8ture- there is a bli!d spot- a!d the pi8ture at 6hi8h 9 look
retur!s the gaUe @stares ba8k at meA rom this poi!t7 9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e should read
.a8a!Is thesis o! the rele?ive 8hara8ter o the Freudia! drive- as the sta!8e o Jse faire OK @the visual
drive is !ot the drive to see- but- i! 8o!trast to the desire to see- the drive to ma"e oneself see!- et87A7
Goes !ot .a8a! here poi!t to6ards the most eleme!tary theatricality o the huma! 8o!ditio!M Hur
u!dame!tal strivi!g is !ot to observe- but to be part o a staged s8e!e- to e?pose o!esel to a gaUeE!ot
the determi!ate gaUe o a perso! i! reality- but the !o!:e?isti!g pure 1aUe o the big Hther7 This is the
gaUe or 6hi8h- o! a!8ie!t Foma! aNuedu8ts- the details 6ere 8arved o! the relies at the top- i!visible
to a!y huma! eyeT the gaUe or 6hi8h the a!8ie!t 9!8as made their giga!ti8 dra6i!gs out o sto!es
6hose orm 8ould be see! o!ly rom high up i! the airT the gaUe or 6hi8h the Stali!ists orga!iUed their
giga!ti8 publi8 spe8ta8les7 To spe8iy this gaUe as Jdivi!eK is already to Jge!triyK its status- to deprive
it o its Ja8ousmati8K !ature- o the a8t that it is a gaUe o !o o!e- a gaUe reely loati!g- 6ith !o bearer7
The t6o 8orrelative positio!s- that o the a8tor o! stage a!d that o the spe8tator- are !ot o!tologi8ally
eNuivale!t or 8o!temporary+ 6e are !ot origi!ally observers o the drama o reality- but part o the
tableau staged or the void o a !o!:e?isti!g gaUe- a!d it is o!ly i! a se8o!dary mome!t that 6e assume
the positio! o those 6ho look at the stage7 The u!bearable JimpossibleK positio! is !ot that o the
a8tor- but that o the observer- o the publi87
PRESENCE

This bri!gs us to a possible .a8a!ia! dei!itio! o a!tasy as a! imagi!ary s8e!ario 6hi8h
stages a! impossible s8e!e- somethi!g that 8ould o!ly be see! rom the poi!t o impossibility7
#&
A
a!tasy s8e!e is 6hat ully deserves the term Jaurati8 presence7K 9!soar as it i!volves the poi!t o
impossibility- it 8a! also be said to stage the ob1et petit a7 A!d- i!deed- does !ot the .a8a!ia! 8ouple o
sig!iier a!d ob1et a 8orrespo!d to the diere!8e bet6ee! represe!tatio! a!d prese!8eM /hile both are
sta!d:i!s- pla8e:holders- o the subje8t- the sig!iier re:prese!ts it- 6hile obje8t shi!es i! its prese!8e7
9! this se!se- 6e 8a! talk aboutE9 Nuote 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller hereEJthe represe!tatio! o the subje8t
through the ob1et a- e?8ept that the 6ord Vreprese!tatio!I does !ot suit7 ,ust o!e posit a! e?pressio!- a
prese!tatio!- a! ide!tii8atio!MK
#%
Cre8isely be8ause the ob1et a does !ot represe!t the subje8t- 6e
should !ot 8o!joi! them @as i! the ormula o a!tasy+ b:aA- limiti!g ourselves to

putti!g o!ly a a!d putti!g rays about it- rays be8ause o the impli8it prese!8e- o prese!8e as
ea8eme!t o the subje8t- si!8e- rather tha! o represe!tatio!- o e?pressio!- o ide!tii8atio!- it is a
Nuestio! here o ea8eme!t O The subje8t is prese!t here esse!tially i! its ea8eme!t- i! its ashio! o
bei!g ea8ed- 6hat [.a8a!\ 8alls- 6ith a great e8o!omy o 6ords- usi!g this !eologism+ the effacon7
'0
.a8a!Is t6ist here is that this prese!8e o the ob1et a ills i! the gap- the ailure- o
represe!tatio!Ehis ormula is that o the ob1et a above the bar- be!eath 6hi8h there is S@AA- the
sig!iier o the barred- i!8o!siste!t other7 The prese!t obje8t is a iller- a stop:gapT so 6he! 6e 8o!ro!t
the te!sio! bet6ee! the symboli8 a!d the Feal- bet6ee! mea!i!g a!d prese!8eEthe eve!t o prese!8e
6hi8h i!terrupts the smooth ru!!i!g o the symboli8- 6hi8h tra!spires i! its gaps a!d
i!8o!siste!8iesE6e should o8us o! the 6ay the Feal 8orrodes rom 6ithi! the very 8o!siste!8y o the
symboli87 A!d- perhaps- 6e should pass rom the 8laim that Jthe i!trusio! o the Feal 8orrodes the
8o!siste!8y o the symboli8K to the mu8h stro!ger 8laim that Jthe Feal is nothing but the i!8o!siste!8y
o the symboli87K
=eidegger liked to Nuote a li!e rom Stea! 1eorge+ J5ein Ding sei wo das Wort
gebrichtKEthere is !o thi!g 6here the 6ord breaks do6!7 /he! talki!g about the Thi!g- this li!e
should be reversed+ JEin Ding gibt es nur wo das Wort gebrichtKEthere is a Thi!g o!ly 6here the
6ord breaks do6!7 The sta!dard !otio! a88ordi!g to 6hi8h 6ords represe!t abse!t thi!gs is here
tur!ed arou!d+ the Thi!g is a prese!8e 6hi8h arises 6here 6ords @symboli8 represe!tatio!sA ail- it is a
thi!g sta!di!g or the missi!g 6ord7 9! this se!se- a sublime obje8t is Ja! obje8t elevated to the dig!ity
o the Thi!gK+ the void o the Thi!g is !ot a void i! reality- but- primarily- a void i! the symboli8- a!d
the sublime obje8t is a! obje8t at the pla8e o the ailed 6ord7
'1
This- perhaps- is the most su88i!8t
dei!itio! o aura+ aura e!velops a! obje8t 6he! it o88upies a void @holeA 6ithi! the symboli8 order7
/hat this implies is that the domai! o the symboli8 is !ot:AllEis th6arted rom 6ithi!7
'2
So- agai!- 6hat is prese!8eM 9magi!e a group 8o!versatio! i! 6hi8h all the parti8ipa!ts k!o6
that o!e o them has 8a!8er a!d also k!o6 that everyo!e i! the group k!o6s itT they talk about
everythi!g- the !e6 books they have read- movies they have see!- their proessio!al disappoi!tme!ts-
politi8s O just to avoid the topi8 o 8a!8er7 9! su8h a situatio!- o!e 8a! say that 8a!8er is ully present-
a heavy prese!8e that 8asts its shado6 over everythi!g the parti8ipa!ts say a!d that gets all the heavier
the more they try to avoid it7
/hat i- the!- the true li!e o separatio! is !ot the o!e dividi!g prese!8e a!d symboli8
represe!tatio!- but the o!e 6hi8h ru!s a8ross this divisio!- splitti!g rom 6ithi! ea8h o the t6o
mome!tsM 9t is to the eter!al 8redit o Jstru8turalismK to have Jde:herme!euti8iUedK the very ield o
the symboli8- to have treated the sig!iyi!g te?ture as i!depe!de!t o the u!iverse o the e?perie!8e o
mea!i!gT a!d it is the great a8hieveme!t o the late .a8a!Is elaboratio!s o the Feal to have u!8overed
a traumati8 i!trusive Jprese!8eK 6hi8h 6reaks havo8 upo! every mea!i!gul aurati8 e?perie!8e o
Crese!8e7 Fe8all SartreIs ausea- o!e o the paradigmati8 literary approa8hes to the Feal+ it is very
dii8ult- 8ou!ter:i!tuitive- to subsume the disgusti!g slime o the i!ert Feal u!der the 8ategory o
Jaura7K 9s !ot aura pre8isely a Jdomesti8atio!K o the Feal- a s8ree! that prote8ts us rom its traumati8
impa8tM The moti o a prese!8e Jthis side o herme!euti8sK is 8e!tral or .a8a!- or 6hom
psy8hoa!alysis is !ot herme!euti8s- espe8ially !ot a deep orm7 Csy8hoa!alysis deals 6ith the subje8t
8o!temporary to the rise o the moder! Feal 6hi8h emerges 6he! mea!i!g is eva8uated rom reality+
!ot o!ly the s8ie!tii8 real a88essible i! mathemati8al ormulae- but also- rom S8helli!g to Sartre- the
proto:o!tologi8al abyss o the i!ertia o the Jmere realK deprived o a!y mea!i!g7 For .a8a!- there is
thus !o !eed or a psy8hoa!alyti8 herme!euti8sEreligio! does this job pere8tly 6ell7
=ere ,ea!i!g a!d Se!se should be 8ou!terposed+ ,ea!i!g belo!gs to the big Hther- it is 6hat
guara!tees the 8o!siste!8y o our e!tire ield o e?perie!8e- 6hile Se!se is a lo8al- 8o!ti!ge!t
o88urre!8e i! the sea o !o!:se!se7 9! .a8a!ia! terms- ,ea!i!g belo!gs to the level o All- 6hile Se!se
is !o!:All+ ultimate ,ea!i!g is guara!teed by religio! @eve! i thi!gs appear mea!i!gless- like killi!gs-
ami!e- disasters- all this 8o!usio! has a higher ,ea!i!g rom 1odIs sta!dpoi!tA- 6hile Se!se is
materialist- somethi!g 6hi8h arises Jout o !o6hereK i! a magi8al e?plosio! o- say- a! u!e?pe8ted
metaphor7 ,ea!i!g is a! aair o herme!euti8s- Se!se is a! aair o i!terpretatio!- su8h as i!terpreti!g
the se!se o a symptom 6hi8h- pre8isely- belies a!d u!dermi!es the totality o ,ea!i!g7 ,ea!i!g is
global- the horiUo! e!8ompassi!g details 6hi8h- i! themselves- appear mea!i!glessT Se!se is a lo8al
o88urre!8e i! the ield o !o!:se!se7 ,ea!i!g is threate!ed rom the outside by !o!:,ea!i!gT Se!se is
i!ter!al to !o!:Se!se- the produ8t o a !o!se!si8al- 8o!ti!ge!t- or lu8ky e!8ou!ter7 Thi!gs have
,ea!i!g- but they make Se!se7
.a8a!Is !otio! o i!terpretatio! is thus opposed to herme!euti8s+ it i!volves the redu8tio! o
mea!i!g to the sig!iierIs !o!se!se- !ot the u!earthi!g o a se8ret mea!i!g7
'"
0ve! Jlo6er-K i 9 may put it i! this 6ay- there is the level o 6hat .a8a! 8alls sinthomes- as
opposed to symptomsEsig!iyi!g k!ots o 1ouis*sens- e!joy:mea!t- Jmea!i!gK 6hi8h dire8tly
pe!etrates the materiality o a letter7
'(
=ei!ri8h *leistIs short story JSt De8ilia or the Co6er o the
Voi8eK re!ders pere8tly the @si!gi!gA voi8e i! its u!8a!!y embodime!t o JuglyK 1ouissance7 9t takes
pla8e i! a 1erma! to6!- tor! bet6ee! Crotesta!ts a!d Datholi8s- duri!g the Thirty 5earsI /ar7 The
Crotesta!ts pla! to trigger a slaughter i! a large Datholi8 8hur8h duri!g mid!ight massT our people are
pla!ted to start maki!g trouble a!d thus give the sig!al to the others to 8ause havo87 =o6ever- thi!gs
take a stra!ge tur! 6he! a beautiul !u!- allegedly dead- mira8ulously a6ake!s a!d leads the 8horus i!
a sublime so!g7 The so!g mesmeriUes the our thugs+ they are u!able to start maki!g trouble a!d so-
si!8e there is !o sig!al- the !ight passes pea8eully7 0ve! ater the eve!t- the our Crotesta!ts remai!
!umbed+ they are lo8ked i!to a! asylum 6here or years they just sit a!d pray all day lo!g7 At mid!ight
ea8h !ight- they all promptly sta!d up a!d si!g the sublime so!g they had heard o! that ateul !ight7
=ere- o 8ourse- the horror arises- as the origi!al divi!e si!gi!g 6hi8h e?erted su8h a mira8ulous-
redemptive- pa8iyi!g ee8t be8omes- i! its repetitio!- a repulsive a!d obs8e!e imitatio!7 /hat 6e
have here is a! e?emplary 8ase o the =egelia! tautology as the highest 8o!tradi8tio!+ JVoi8e is O
voi8e-K the ethereal:sublime voi8e o a Dhur8h 8hoir e!8ou!ters itsel i! its other!ess i! the grotesNue
si!gi!g o the madme!7 This ee8tively i!verts the sta!dard versio! o the obs8e!e tur!Ethat o the
ge!tle girlIs a8e all o a sudde! distorted by rage as she starts to s6ear a!d spit out u!speakable
blasphemies @the possessed girl i! -he E&orcist- et87A7 This 8ommo! versio! reveals the horror a!d
8orruptio! be!eath the ge!tle sura8e+ the sembla!8e o i!!o8e!8e disi!tegrates- all o a sudde! 6e
per8eive the i!te!se obs8e!ity behi!d itE6hat 8a! be 6orse tha! thisM Cre8isely 6hat takes pla8e i!
*leistIs story+ the ultimate horror does !ot o88ur 6he! the mask o i!!o8e!8e disi!tegrates- but rather
6he! the sublime te?t is @misAappropriated by the 6ro!g speaker7 9! the sta!dard versio!- 6e have the
right obje8t @a ge!tle- i!!o8e!t a8eA i! the 6ro!g pla8e @e!gaged i! blasphemous proa!itiesA- 6hile i!
*leist the 6ro!g obje8t @the brutal thugsA i! the right pla8e @tryi!g to imitate the sublime religious
ritualA produ8es a mu8h stro!ger proa!atio!7
T6o Nuestio!s !o!etheless arise here+ ho6 does this subversive pra8ti8e relate to the similar
@though dei!itely !ot subversiveA pra8ti8e o obs8e!e Jmar8hi!g 8ha!tsKM /here is the diere!8eM
/hy is the irst pra8ti8e subversive a!d the se8o!d !otM Furthermore- 6hat 6ould have bee! a parallel
pro8edure or subverti!g the ruli!g ideology i! the state:so8ialist regimesM There is a so!g 6hi8h
8omes pretty 8lose to it+ the &7(0:mi!ute:lo!g (ruess an die )artei ?,hormusi" rF S fuer grossen
,hor! /ass*Solo und grosses $rchester@- 8omposed i! 1%$' by Caul Gessau @3re8htIs last
8ollaboratorA- 6ith 6ords byEagai!RE=ei!er ,Yller @3re8htIs u!oi8ial su88essor as the leadi!g
dramatist o the 1GFA- putti!g together Nuotes rom a spee8h by 0ri8h =o!e8ker- the! ge!eral
se8retary o the Socialist 3nity*)arty of (ermany @So2ialistische Einheits*)artei Deutschlands-
S0GEthe to!e:series J0s:0:GK appears agai! a!d agai! i! the musi8RA7 The lege!d o =o!e8ker as a
misre8og!iUed poet 6as o!e o the 1GFIs sta!dard jokes+ the idea 6as to take a passage rom o!e o
his spee8hes a!d add a !e6 li!e every e6 6ords- thereby 8reati!g a! abstra8t moder! poem7 9!
,Yller:GessauIs J1reeti!g to the Carty-K a supreme e?ample o 6hat the 1erma!s 8alled )olit*
/y2antinismus- this joke is realiUed i! su8h a 6ay that @as 6as ote! the 8ase i! the 8ommu!ist
8ou!triesA it is !ot 8lear 6hether ,Yller i!te!ded it as a se8ret parody- 6hether he 6rote @or 8hoseA the
6ords 6ith his i!gers 8rossed7 /hat sta!ds out is the e?treme disparity- te!sio! eve!- bet6ee! the
thoroughly moder!ist- !o!:melodi8- ato!al musi8 a!d the utter ba!ality o the 6ords7 =ere are the irst
three =o!e8ker JpoemsK+

1reat thi!gs 6ere a8hieved/ith the or8e o the people a!dFor the 6ell:bei!g o the people9! the
rater!al li!k 6ith the Soviet )!io!
4ever 6as so mu8h do!e9! the 8ommu!ity oSo8ialist statesFor pea8e a!d se8urityFor the reedom o
the people,a!y thi!gs remai! to be do!e9! the Dommu!ist 6ay5ear ater year
The obs8e!ity rea8hes its peak i! the last JpoemK 6here- to6ards its e!d- i! a 8elebratio! o the
o!goi!g passage rom so8ialism to 8ommu!ism- the harsh de8laratio!s a!d i!ju!8tio!s- a88ompa!ied
by rather brutal drum beati!gs- mome!tarily morph i!to a mu8h soter a!d sile!t 8ha!t- like the 8lima?
o a religious hym!- sig!ali!g ho6- ater the hard struggle o our epo8h o so8ialism- the harmo!y o
8ommu!ism 6ill 6i! the day7

Today everybody 8a! see+9mperialism is i! retreatCrogress is,ar8hi!g or6ard/ith the po6er o the
e!tire peopleFrom the prese!t o So8ialismTo the utureH Dommu!ism
'#
The ro!tier bet6ee! the @state:byUa!ti!eA Sublime a!d the ridi8ulous is here ee8tively
u!de8idableEo!e !eed o!ly imagi!e =o!e8ker- ater a spee8h at the Carty 8o!gress- singing these
6ords a88ompa!ied by a 8horus @8omposed o the delegatesA a!d or8hestra- to i!d o!esel i! the
middle o the ,ar? 3rothersI Duc" Soup7 3ut perhaps laughi!g at su8h spe8ta8les is all too
easyEperhaps it makes us miss their true addressee- the same imagi!ed or i!e?iste!t gaUe as the 9!8asI
impossible gaUe rom above7 9! short- the most eleme!tary a!tasmati8 !otio! is !ot that o a
as8i!ati!g s8e!e to be looked at- but the !otio! that Jthere is someo!e out there looki!g at usKT !ot a
dream but the !otio! that J6e are 8hara8ters i! someo!e elseIs dream7K Far rom sig!ali!g a subje8tive
pathology- su8h a a!tasmati8 gaUe is a sine <ua non o our !ormality- i! 8o!trast to psy8hosis- 6here
this gaUe appears as part o reality7 To make this 8ru8ial poi!t 8lear- let us begi! by 8lariyi!g the status
o the gaUe a!d the voi8e i! psy8hoa!alyti8 theory- 6here 6e must al6ays keep i! mi!d their diere!t
status i! !eurosis- psy8hosis- a!d perversio!+
''
@1A 9! !eurosis- 6e are deali!g 6ith hysteri8al bli!d!ess or loss o the voi8e- that is- the voi8e or
gaUe are i!8apa8itatedT i! psy8hosis- o! the 8o!trary- there is a surplus o the gaUe or voi8e- or a
psy8hoti8 e?perie!8es himsel as gaUed upo! @para!oia8A or he hears @hallu8i!atesA !o!:e?isti!g
voi8es7
'$
9! 8o!trast to both these sta!8es- a pervert uses the voi8e or gaUe as a! i!strume!t- he Jdoes
thi!gsK 6ith them7
@2A The 8ouple gaUe a!d voi8e should also be li!ked to the 8ouple Sach*6orstellungen a!d
Wort*6orstellungen+ the Jreprese!tatio!s:o:thi!gsK i!volve the gaUeE6e see thi!gs- 6hile the
Jreprese!tatio!s:o:6ordsK i!volve the voi8e @Jvo8al imagesKAE6e hear 6ords7
@"A Furthermore- the gaUe a!d the voi8e are li!ked- respe8tively- to the 9d @driveA a!d the
superego+ the gaUe mobiliUes the s8opi8 drive- 6hile the voi8e is the medium o the superego age!8y
6hi8h e?erts pressure o! the subje8t7 3ut o!e should also bear i! mi!d here that the superego dra6s its
e!ergy rom the 9d- 6hi8h mea!s that the superego voi8e also mobiliUes drives7 9! terms o the drives-
the voi8e a!d the gaUe are thus related as 0ros a!d Tha!atos- lie drive a!d death drive+ the gaUe
Jsiderates-K side:tra8ks- tra!si?es- or immobiliUes the subje8tIs a8e- tur!i!g the subje8t i!to a ,edusa:
like petriied e!tity7 The i!sight i!to the Feal mortiies- it sta!ds or death @the ,edusaIs head is itsel a
tra!si?ed>petriied gaUe- a!d seei!g it does !ot bli!d meEo! the 8o!trary- 9 mysel tur! i!to a
tra!si?ed gaUeA- 6hile the sedu8tive voi8e sta!ds or the pre:Hedipal mater!al li!k beyo!d>be!eath the
.a6- or the umbili8al 8ord 6hi8h viviies @rom the mater!al lullaby to the hyp!otistIs voi8eA7
@(A The relatio!ship bet6ee! the our partial obje8ts @oral- a!al- voi8e- gaUeA is that o a sNuare
stru8tured alo!g the t6o a?es o dema!d>desire a!d to the Hther>rom the Hther7 The oral obje8t
i!volves a dema!d addressed to the Hther @the mother- to give me 6hat 9 6a!tA- 6hile the a!al obje8t
i!volves a dema!d rom the Hther @i! the a!al e8o!omy- the obje8t o my desire is redu8ed to the
HtherIs dema!dE9 shit regularly i! order to satisy the pare!tsI dema!dA7 9! a homologous 6ay- the
s8opi8 obje8t i!volves a desire addressed to the Hther @to sho6 itsel- to allo6 to be see!A- 6hile the
vo8al obje8t i!volves a desire rom the Hther @a!!ou!8i!g 6hat it 6a!ts rom meA7 To put it i! a
slightly diere!t 6ay+ the subje8tIs gaUe i!volves its attempt to see the Hther- 6hile the voi8e is a!
i!vo8atio! @.a8a!+ Ji!vo8atory driveKA- a! attempt to provoke the Hther @1od- the ki!g- the belovedA to
respo!dT this is 6hy the gaUe mortiies:pa8iies:immobiliUes the Hther- 6hile the voi8e viviies it- tries
to eli8it a gesture rom it7
@#A =o6- the!- are the gaUe a!d the voi8e i!s8ribed i!to the so8ial ieldM Crimarily as shame a!d
guilt+ the shame o the Hther seei!g too mu8h- seei!g me i! my !aked!essT the guilt triggered by
heari!g 6hat others say about me7
'&
9s !ot the oppositio! o voi8e a!d gaUe thus li!ked to the
oppositio! o superego a!d 0go 9dealM The superego is a voi8e 6hi8h hau!ts the subje8t a!d i!ds it
guilty- 6hile the 0go 9deal is the gaUe i! ro!t o 6hi8h the subje8t is ashamed7 There is thus a triple
8hai! o eNuivale!8es+ gaUeXshameX0go 9deal- a!d voi8eXguiltXsuperego7
JT=0 C9DT)F0 9S 94 ,5 050- 3)T ,0- 9 A, 94 T=0 C9DT)F0K

This bri!gs us to the properly o!tologi8al lesso! o psy8hosis- o psy8hoti8 hallu8i!atio!s i!
6hi8h J6hat 6as ore8losed rom the symboli8 retur!s i! the Feal-K the lesso! 6hi8h ee8tively
u!dermi!es the Dartesia! cogito as the percipiens @per8eivi!g subje8tA e?ter!al to the perceptum7 The
lesso! is that

the percipiens is !ot e?terior to the perceptum but that it is i!8luded- that there is a bei!g i! the
perceptum itsel that is !ot e?terior to itT that it is !ot !e8essary to depart rom the idea o a
represe!tatio! i! 6hi8h the e?terior 6orld 6ould be 8o!voked a8i!g the subje8t sure o his e?iste!8e-
but that o!e must 8o!sider the i!8lusio! o the subje8t o per8eptio! i! the per8eived7 /ith
hallu8i!atio!s- or e?ample O it is !ot e!ough to say that the subje8t per8eives 6hat is !ot ou!d i! the
perceptum or o o!ly aski!g i the subje8t believes this- a!d o thi!ki!g that this is !ot 8o!siste!t7 /hy
does!It someo!e other tha! the subje8t e?perie!8e itM O /hat .a8a! stresses i! verbal hallu8i!atio!s
is that they have their o6! li!guisti8 stru8ture a!d that it is !ot !e8essary to 8o!sider them as a! error
or a malady o the subje8t- but as e?ploitatio! o the stru8ture itsel o la!guage7 The subje8t does !ot
u!iy per8eptio!T it is !ot a po6er o e?terior sy!thesis o the per8eived- but he is i!8luded O/he! the
Nuestio! is o!e o per8eptio! a!d more pre8isely o visual per8eptio!- o the relatio!ship 6ith the
s8opi8- it is a matter o re:establishi!g the percipiens i! the perceptum- o assuri!g a!d o basi!g the
prese!8e o the percipiens i! the perceptum7 H!e more prese!8e- o!e JmoreK let out o 8lassi8 theory7
3ut there is also a! abse!8e7 /e must reer to FreudIs 8o!8ept o reality7 The obje8tivity o reality
implies- a88ordi!g to Freud O that the libido does !ot i!vade the per8eptive ield7 This mea!s that or
Freud- the 8o!ditio! o obje8tivity o reality is a libidi!al disi!vestme!t7 9ts i!ge!uous tra!slatio! is the
ethi8s o the se!sible s8ie!tist to meti8ulously try !ot to employ his perso!al passio! a!d to ea8e a!y
libido- or at least the libido sciendi- to des8ribe or i!vestigate reality7 3ut the ethi8al suppositio! o the
s8ie!tist is tra!slated i!to the e?ige!8y o delibidi!aliUatio! o per8eptio! that .a8a! re!ders i! his
8ode as e?tra8tio! o the ob1et petit a a!d there- the 8o!ditio! o Jthe obje8tivity o realityKEi!
Nuotatio!s- be8ause the subje8t is al6ays i!8luded- as .a8a! says the perceptum is al6ays
impureEe?torts that reality be a desert o 1ouissance7This 1ouissance is 8o!de!sed i! the ob1et petit a
i! su8h a 6ay that the prese!8e o the percipiens i! the perceptum is 8orrelative to 6hat appears as a!
abse!8e o surplus:1ouir7 /he! o!e studies visio!- 6hi8h o!e studies i! psy8hology- i! medi8i!e- i!
ophthalmology- it is a relatio!ship to reality 6ithout 1ouissance7 This is 6hy .a8a! disti!guishes the
ield o visio! rom 6hat he 8alls the s8opi8 ield7 /hat he 8alls the s8opi8 ield is reality a!d
1ouissance7 .a8a! developed a theory o the s8opi8 ield by studyi!g ho6 the drive prese!ts itsel i!
this ield7
'%
This stru8ture o the s8opi8 ield as opposed to the ield o visio!- this e?perie!8e o J6he! 9
look at the 6orld- 9 al6ays someho6 eel that thi!gs stare ba8k at meKEas opposed to the pure
Dartesia! subje8t 6ho per8eives the 6orld alo!g 8lear geometri8 li!esEprovides the u!derlyi!g
mi!imal dispositif o religio!7 J1odK is- at its most eleme!tary- this HtherIs gaUe retur!ed by obje8ts-
a! imagi!ed gaUe- or sure @6e look or it i! vai! i! realityA- but !o less real7 This gaUe e?ists o!ly or a
desiri!g subje8t- as the obje8t:8ause o its desire- !ot i! reality @e?8ept or a psy8hoti8A7 9! passio!ate
love- there are mome!ts 6he! the beloved eels that her lover sees i! her somethi!g o 6hi8h she
hersel is !ot a6areEit is o!ly through his gaUe that she be8omes a6are o this dime!sio! i! her7 /hat
the beloved eels i! those mome!ts is J6hat is i! hersel more tha! hersel-K the 1e ne sais <uoi 6hi8h
8auses the loverIs desire or her a!d 6hi8h e?ists o!ly or the loverIs gaUe- 6hi8h is i! a 6ay the
desireIs obje8tal 8ou!terpart- the i!s8riptio! o desire i!to its obje8t7 /hat the lover sees is the lost part
o himsel 8o!tai!ed i! @e!veloped byA the Hther7 As su8h- the obje8t:gaUe 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a!
ee8t o the symboli8 order @the big HtherA+ Jthe gaUe o the Hther remai!s- eve! i the Hther has
8eased to e?ist7K
$0
Gue to its i!e?iste!8e- the status o this immaterial obje8t:8ause is !ot o!tologi8al- but purely
ethi8alEperhaps this eeli!g o a! HtherIs gaUe 6hi8h Jsees i! me more tha! myselK is the Uero:level
deo!tologi8al e?perie!8e- 6hat origi!ally pushes me to6ards ethi8al a8tivity 6hose goal is to re!der
me adeNuate to the e?pe8tatio! 6ritte! i!to the HtherIs gaUe7 H!e 8a!!ot but re8all here the last t6o
verses o FilkeIs amous so!!et JAr8hai8 Torso o ApolloK+ Jdenn da ist "eine Stelle 9 die dich nicht
siehtF Du musst dein .eben aendernK @or here there is !o pla8e that does !ot see you7 5ou must 8ha!ge
your lieA7 Ceter Sloterdijk- 6ho used the se8o!d li!e as the title or a book-
$1
!oted the u!derlyi!g
e!igmati8 i!terdepe!de!8e o the t6o stateme!ts+ rom the a8t that there is !o pla8e @i! the Thi!g
6hi8h is Auguste Fodi!Is torso o ApolloA 6hi8h does !ot gaUe ba8k at you- the 8all someho6 ollo6s
that you @the vie6er o the statueA must 8ha!ge your lieEho6M 9! his gra!diose readi!g o FilkeIs
poem- i! a sub8hapter e!titled JThe Hrder Hut o the Sto!e-K Sloterdijk illustrates ho6 the torso
regards or 8o!8er!s me- addresses me- ho6 the obje8t retur!s the gaUeEthis gaUe retur!ed by the
obje8t is the Jaura-K the mi!imum o Jreligiosity-K this ability to be ae8ted by the Hther>Thi!gIs gaUe-
to Jsee it as seei!g7K
$2
Subje8t a!d obje8t e?8ha!ge pla8es hereEbut !ot 6holly+ 9 remai! subje8t a!d
the obje8t remai!s obje8t- or 9 do !ot be8ome a! obje8t o the subje8tiviUed big HtherEthis happe!s
o!ly i! perversio!7 As Sloterdijk puts it- this gaUi!g Hther is a!tasiUed- !ever part o reality- it is o!ly
JsupposedK @unterstelltAEa supposed gaUe7
$"
Authe!ti8 religio! !ever takes the ateul step beyo!d
this supposed status o the Hther gaUi!g at usEthe mome!t 6e a88omplish this step- 6e i!d ourselves
i! psy8hosis+ a psy8hoti8 k!o6s himsel to be looked at i! reality7 Therei! also resides the ultimate
diere!8e bet6ee! k!o6ledge a!d belie+ 9 8a! k!o6 the obje8ts 9 look at @Ges8artesIs perspe8tiveA-
but 9 8a! o!ly believe that they retur! my gaUe7 ,ore pre8isely- 6hat retur!s the gaUe is by dei!itio!
the obje8t a!d not a!other subje8t- as i! psy8hosis7 This is 6hy- perhaps- there is !o!etheless a
psy8hoti8 8ore i! every religio!- i!soar as every religio tra!sorms the Ding i!to a!other Subje8t rom
6hi8h the gaUe ema!ates7 The 8li!i8al impli8atio!s o this purely virtual status o the gaUe @a!d the
voi8eA are thus 8lear+ 6hat 8hara8teriUes psy8hosis- the psy8hoti8 e?perie!8e- is that this gaUe is
pre8isely !o lo!ger a virtual Feal but alls i!to per8eptible realityEa psy8hoti8 8a! JseeK the obje8t:
gaUe @or JhearK the obje8t:voi8eA7 The key poi!t to bear i! mi!d is that the 8ou!terpoi!t to the psy8hoti8
is !ot a J!ormalK subje8t 6ho sees o!ly J6hat is really out there-K but a subje8t o desire 6ho relates to
a virtual Feal o the gaUe or the voi8e+

/hat .a8a! desig!ates as obje8ts 6e 8a!!ot per8eive7 /hat he 8alls gaUe or voi8e are obje8ts 6hose
substa!8e- the substa!tiality- 8a!!ot be 8aptured7 /hat he 8alls voi8e is !ot the to!e- it is !ot the breath-
!ot eve! the eeli!gT the voi8e is 6hat is already prese!t i! ea8h sig!iyi!g 8hai!- a!d 6hat he 8alls
gaUe is !ot somethi!g that is ou!d i! the eye or that 8omes out o the eye7 That is- he gives to these
obje8ts- gaUe a!d voi8e- a dei!itio! e?terior to per8eptio!7 /e 8a! all approa8h these t6o terms
through per8eptio! but they are o!ly really 8o!stituted 6he! per8eptio! is !ot possible79t is i! the
e?perie!8e o the psy8hoti8 that the voi8e that !o o!e 8a! hear- that the gaUe that !o o!e 8a! see- i!d
their e?iste!8e7 9t is i! relatio! to the psy8hoti8 that .a8a! i!ally i!trodu8es the theory o per8eptio! i!
order to deto!ate it- i! order !ot to redu8e the e?perie!8e o the psy8hoti8 to supposedly !ormal
e?perie!8e7 9! the psy8hoti8 e?perie!8e voi8e a!d gaUe are !ot elided7 9t is the privilege o the
psy8hoti8 to per8eive .a8a!ia! obje8ts- voi8e a!d gaUe7 =e per8eives the voi8e prese!t i! ea8h
sig!iyi!g 8hai!7 9t is e!ough to have a sig!iyi!g 8hai! to have a voi8e- a!d it is e!ough to have a!
arti8ulated thought i! order to per8eive the prese!8e o a voi8e7 Cai!ully- the psy8hoti8 e?perie!8es the
gaUe that 8omes rom the 6orld- but these are the Jthi!gs themselves that gaUe o! him-K somethi!g
sho6s Jitsel7K Thus the 6ell k!o6! e?ample o the sardi!e bo?- .a8a!Is amous little a!e8dote 6e
remember that gives pre8isely a simula8rum o a psy8hoti8 e?perie!8e7 This obje8t gaUes at me mysel
a!d 9 am- mysel- i! the perceptum o this obje8t7 .a8a! says that the rame is i! my eye- a!d this is the
truth o the theory o represe!tatio!- but mysel- 9- am i! the rame7
$(
9t is at this poi!t that .a8a!Is theory o visual art i!terve!es+ 6ith regard to the traumati8 gaUe
embodied i! a! obje8t- a pai!ti!g is the pro8ess o Jtami!g a shre6-K it impriso!s or tames this gaUe+

a tableau gives pleasure to the spe8tator 6ho i!ds i! reality somethi!g beautiul- a!d this appeases i!
him the a!?iety o 8astratio! be8ause !othi!g is la8ki!g7 The spe8tator 8a! see the gaUe i! the tableau
but it is a! impriso!ed gaUe- the gaUe materialiUed i! the orm o the stroke o the brush7 Thus the
tableau O is like a priso! or the gaUe7 .a8a! makes a! e?8eptio! or e?pressio!ist pai!ti!g i!asmu8h
as e?pressio!ist pai!ti!g tries to a8tivate the gaUe that is i! the tableau a!d i!asmu8h as the spe8tator
eels gaUed upo! a!d 8aptured by the spe8ta8le7
$#
4o 6o!der e?pressio!ism is usually asso8iated 6ith a!?iety+ a!?iety arises 6he! the gaUe:
obje8t is displayed too dire8tly7
$'
3e!jami! !oted that the aura surrou!di!g a! obje8t sig!als that it
retur!s the gaUeT he simply orgot to add that the aurati8 ee8t arises 6he! this gaUe is 8overed up-
Jge!triiedKEthe mome!t this 8over is removed- the aura 8ha!ges i!to a !ightmare- the gaUe be8omes
that o ,edusa7
This bri!gs us agai! to the key diere!8e bet6ee! the Dartesia! subje8t o the geometri8
perspe8tive a!d the Freudia! subje8t o the 8urved spa8e o desire+ the obje8t:gaUe @or the obje8t:voi8eA
does !ot e?ist or a !eutral gaUe observi!g reality- but or a gaUe sustai!ed by desireT 6hat 9 see i! the
obje8t that 9 desire is the obje8tal 8ou!terpoi!t to my desire itselEi! other 6ords- 9 see my gaUe itsel
as a! obje8t7 *a!t is here all too Dartesia!- 6hi8h is 6hy the a8ulty o desire is or him thoroughly
Jpathologi8alK+ there is or *a!t !o a priori obje8t:8ause o desire- every desire is a desire or some
8o!ti!ge!t Jpathologi8alK obje8t7 .a8a! suppleme!ts *a!t by 6ay o e?te!di!g the !otio! o
tra!s8e!de!tal 8ritiNue to the a8ulty o desire+ i! the same 6ay that- or *a!t- our pure @theoreti8alA
reaso! implies a priori u!iversal orms- a!d i! the same 6ay that our Jpra8ti8alK a8ulty is also Jpure-K
motivated by the a priori u!iversality o the moral la6- or .a8a!- our a8ulty o desire is also JpureK
si!8e- beyo!d all Jpathologi8alK obje8ts- it is sustai!ed by !o!:empiri8al obje8ts- 6hi8h is 6hy the most
su88i!8t ormula or .a8a!Is e!deavor is- i! pre8ise *a!tia! terms- the criti<ue of pure desire7 3ut
6hat 6e should add @si!8e this is !ot al6ays 8lear to .a8a! himselA is that this additio! o a Jpure
a8ulty o desireK !ot o!ly 8ompletes the *a!tia! edii8e- but sets i! motio! its radi8al
re8o!iguratio!Ei! short- 6e have to move from 5ant to 0egel7 9t is o!ly 6ith =egel that the
u!dame!tal a!d 8o!stitutive Jrele?ivityK o desire is take! i!to a88ou!t @a desire 6hi8h is al6ays
already desire o>or a desire- that is a Jdesire o the HtherK i! all variatio!s o this term+ 9 desire 6hat
my Hther desiresT 9 6a!t to be desired by my HtherT my desire is stru8tured by the big Hther- the
symboli8 ield i! 6hi8h 9 am embeddedT my desire is sustai!ed by the abyss o the real Hther:Thi!gA7
/hat u!8tio!s as a! obje8t i! the 8urved spa8e o su8h rele?ivity o desire is a! d 6hi8h u!dermi!es
the most eleme!tary 8oordi!ates o moder! philosophy- the oppositio! bet6ee! obje8tivist realism a!d
tra!s8e!de!tal idealism7 The obje8t:8ause o desire is !either part o substa!tial Jobje8tive realityK @6e
look or it i! vai! amo!g the properties a!d 8ompo!e!ts o the thi!gs arou!d usA !or a!other subje8t-
but the impossible>i!substa!tial Jobje8tK that is the desiri!g subje8t itsel7 The i!terve!tio! o this
purely virtual- i!e?iste!t but real- obje8t 6hi8h JisK the subje8t mea!s that the subje8t 8a!!ot be lo8ated
i! Jobje8tive realityK as a part o it- that 9 8a!!ot i!8lude mysel i! reality a!d see mysel as part o
reality- but !either 8a! the subje8t posit itsel as the age!t o the tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutio! o reality7 9t
is here that the move rom *a!t to =egel has to be a88omplished- the move rom tra!s8e!de!tal
8o!stitutio! to the diale8ti8al sel:i!8lusio! o the subje8t i!to substa!8e7 .a8a!Is most su88i!8t
ormula or this i!8lusio! is+ JThe pi8ture is i! my eye- but me- 9 am i! the pi8ture7K The pi8ture is i!
my eye+ as the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t 9 am the al6ays already give! horiUo! o all reality- but- at the
same time- 9 mysel am i! the pi8ture+ 9 e?ist o!ly through my 8ou!terpoi!t or 8ou!terpart i! the very
pi8ture 8o!stituted by meT 9 as it 6ere have to all i!to my o6! pi8ture- i!to the u!iverse 6hose rame 9
8o!stitute- i! the same 6ay that- i! the Dhristia! 9!8ar!atio!- the 8reator 1od alls i!to his o6!
8reatio!7
From the tra!s8e!de!tal sta!dpoi!t- su8h a! i!8lusio! o the subje8t i!to its o6! perceptum 8a!
o!ly be thought as the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8tIs 8o!stitutio! o itsel as a! eleme!t o @8o!stitutedA
reality+ 9 8o!stitute JmyselK as a! i!!er:6orldly e!tity- the Jhuma! perso!K that is Jme-K 6ith a set o
positive o!ti8 properties- et87 3ut the sel:i!8lusio! o the tra!s8e!de!tal 9 itsel i!to the ield o its o6!
perceptum is !o!se!si8al rom the tra!s8e!de!tal sta!dpoi!t+ the tra!s8e!de!tal 9 is the a priori rame
o reality 6hi8h- or that very reaso!- is e?empted rom it7 For .a8a!- ho6ever- su8h a sel:reere!tial
i!8lusio! is pre8isely 6hat happe!s 6ith the ob1et petit a+ the very tra!s8e!de!tal 9- b- is Ji!s8ribed i!to
the pi8tureK as its poi!t o impossibility7
A stateme!t is attributed to =itler+ J/e have to kill the 2e6 6ithi! us7K A7 37 5ehoshua has
provided a! adeNuate 8omme!tary+ JThis devastati!g portrayal o the 2e6 as a ki!d o amorphous
e!tity that 8a! i!vade the ide!tity o a !o!:2e6 6ithout his bei!g able to dete8t or 8o!trol it stems rom
the eeli!g that 2e6ish ide!tity is e?tremely le?ible- pre8isely be8ause it is stru8tured like a sort o
atom 6hose 8ore is surrou!ded by virtual ele8tro!s i! a 8ha!gi!g orbit7K
$$
9! this se!se- 2e6s are
ee8tively the ob1et petit a o the 1e!tiles+ 6hat is Ji! the 1e!tiles more tha! the 1e!tiles themselves-K
!ot a!other subje8t that 9 e!8ou!ter i! ro!t o me but a! alie!- a oreig!er- 6ithi! me- 6hat .a8a!
8alled the lamella- a! amorphous i!truder o i!i!ite plasti8ity- a! u!dead Jalie!K mo!ster 6hi8h 8a!
!ever be pi!!ed do6! to a determi!ate orm7 9! this se!se- =itlerIs stateme!t says more tha! it 6a!ts to
say+ agai!st its i!te!ded se!se- it 8o!irms that the 1e!tiles !eed the a!ti:Semiti8 igure o the J2e6K i!
order to mai!tai! their ide!tity7 9t is thus !ot o!ly that Jthe 2e6 is 6ithi! usKE6hat =itler ateully
orgot to add is that he- the a!ti:Semite- his ide!tity- is also i! the 2e67
$&
=ere 6e 8a! agai! lo8ate the
diere!8e bet6ee! *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!talism a!d =egel+ 6hat they both see is- o 8ourse- that the a!ti:
Semiti8 igure o the 2e6 is !ot to be reiied @to put it !aSvely- it does !ot it JVreal 2e6sKA- but is a!
ideologi8al a!tasy @Jproje8tio!KA- it is Ji! my eye7K /hat =egel adds is that the subje8t 6ho a!tasiUes
the 2e6 is itsel Ji! the pi8ture-K that its very e?iste!8e hi!ges o! the a!tasy o the 2e6 as the Jlittle bit
o the FealK 6hi8h sustai!s the 8o!siste!8y o its ide!tity+ take a6ay the a!ti:Semiti8 a!tasy- a!d the
subje8t 6hose a!tasy it is itsel disi!tegrates7 /hat matters is !ot the lo8atio! o the Sel i! obje8tive
reality- the impossible:real o J6hat 9 am obje8tively-K but how I am located in my own fantasy- ho6
my o6! a!tasy sustai!s my bei!g as subje8t7
9! philosophi8al terms- the task is to thi!k the subje8tIs emerge!8e or be8omi!g rom the sel:
splitti!g o substa!8e+ the subje8t is !ot dire8tly the Absolute- it emerges out o the sel:blo8kage o
substa!8e- out o the impossibility o substa!8e ully asserti!g itsel as H!e7 =egelIs positio! here is
u!iNue+ the subje8t is the operator o the AbsoluteIs @sel:Ai!itiUatio!- a!d to J8o!8eive the Absolute
!ot o!ly as Substa!8e- but also as Subje8tK mea!s to 8o!8eive the Absolute as ailed- marked by a!
i!here!t impossibility7 Hr- to borro6 terms rom o!e i!terpretatio! o Nua!tum physi8s+ the =egelia!
Absolute is diffracted- spli!tered by a! i!here!tEvirtual>realEimpossibility>obsta8le7 The key tur!i!g
poi!t i! the path to6ards =egel is Fi8hte+ the late Fi8hte 6as struggli!g 6ith the right problem resolved
later by =egel7 Ater radi8aliUi!g the *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t i!to the sel:positi!g Jabsolute 9-K
Fi8hte the! struggled till the e!d o his lie 6ith ho6 to limit this absolute 9- ho6 to thi!k the prima8y
o the tra!s:subje8tive absolute @J1odKA over the 9 6ithout alli!g ba8k i!to a pre:8riti8al Jdogmatism7K
@This problem is irst outli!ed i! =Zlderli!Is amous system:ragme!t7A Frederi8k 3eiser is right to
poi!t out that the basi8 problem o all post:*a!tia! 1erma! 9dealism is ho6 to limit subje8tivity+
Fi8hteIs attempt to thi!k a tra!s:subje8tive Absolute is based o! a 8orre8t i!sight- but he is u!able to
a88omplish his task su88essullyT later- S8helli!g a!d =egel oer t6o diere!t 6ays out o this
Fi8htea! deadlo8k7
.0AV0 T=0 SDF004 0,CT5R

The e?ter!al gaUe is JimpossibleK i! the pre8ise se!se that its pla8e is libidi!ally too stro!gly
i!vested to be o88upied by a!y huma! subje8t7 Fe8all the magi8 mome!t rom =it8h8o8kIs 6ertigo
6he!- i! 0r!ieIs restaura!t- S8ottie sees ,adelei!e or the irst time+ this as8i!ati!g shot is not
S8ottieIs poi!t:o:vie6 shot7 9t is o!ly ater 0lster rejoi!s ,adelei!e- 6ith the 8ouple movi!g a6ay
rom S8ottie a!d approa8hi!g the restaura!t e?it- that 6e get- as a 8ou!ter:shot to the shot o S8ottie
behi!d the bar- his poi!t:o:vie6 shot o ,adelei!e a!d 0lster7 This ambiguity o subje8tive a!d
obje8tive is 8ru8ial7 Cre8isely i!soar as ,adelei!eIs proile is !ot S8ottieIs poi!t o vie6- the shot o
her proile is totally subje8tiviUed- depi8ti!g- i! a 6ay- !ot 6hat S8ottie really sees- but 6hat he
imagi!es- that is- his hallu8i!atory i!!er visio! @re8all ho6- 6hile 6e see ,adelei!eIs proile- the red
ba8kgrou!d o the restaura!t 6all seems to get eve! more i!te!se- almost threate!i!g to e?plode i! red
heat tur!i!g i!to a yello6 blaUeEas i S8ottieIs passio! is dire8tly i!s8ribed i!to the ba8kgrou!dA7 4o
6o!der- the!- that although S8ottie does !ot see ,adelei!eIs proile he a8ts as i he is mysteriously
8aptivated by it- deeply ae8ted by it7 9! these t6o e?8essive shots- 6e e!8ou!ter the Jki!o:eyeK at its
purest+ as the shot 6hi8h is someho6 Jsubje8tiviUed-K 6ithout the subje8t bei!g give!7
$%
/e thus have- t6i8e- the same moveme!t rom the e?8ess o Jsubje8tivity 6ithout subje8t:
age!tK to the sta!dard pro8edure o JsutureK @the e?8ha!ge o obje8tive a!d subje8tive shotsE6e are
irst sho6! the perso! looki!g a!d the! 6hat he seesA7 The e?8ess is thus Jdomesti8ated-K 8aptivated i!
bei!g 8aught 6ithi! the subje8t:obje8t mirror relatio!ship as e?empliied by the e?8ha!ge o obje8tive
shot a!d poi!t:o:vie6 8ou!ter:shot7 This s8e!e 8a! be 8o!!e8ted to a!other 6o!derul mome!t i! the
ilm- the eve!i!g s8e!e i! 2udyIs 0mpire =otel room- to 6hi8h the 8ouple retur!s ater di!!er at
0r!ieIs7 9! this s8e!e- 6e see 2udyIs proile- 6hi8h is 8ompletely dark @i! 8o!trast to ,adelei!eIs
daUUli!g proile at 0r!ieIsA7 From this shot- 6e pass to a ro!t shot o her a8e- the let hal 8ompletely
dark- a!d the right hal a 6eird gree! @rom the !eo! light outside the roomA7
9!stead o readi!g this shot as simply desig!ati!g 2udyIs i!!er 8o!li8t- it should be allo6ed its
ull o!tologi8al ambiguity+ 2udy is depi8ted here as a proto:e!tity- !ot yet o!tologi8ally 8o!stituted i!
ull @a gree!ish e8toplasm plus dark!essA- as 8a! be ou!d i! some versio!s o 1!osti8ism7 9t is as i- i!
order to ully e?ist- her dark hal 6aits to be illed i! 6ith the ethereal image o ,adelei!e7 9! other
6ords- here 6e have literally the other side o the mag!ii8e!t proile shot o ,adelei!e at 0r!ieIs- its
!egative+ the previously u!see! dark hal o ,adelei!e @the gree! a!guished a8e o 2udyA- plus the
dark hal to be illed i! by ,adelei!eIs daUUli!g proile7 At this very poi!t at 6hi8h 2udy is redu8ed to
less:tha!:a!:obje8t- to a ormless pre:o!tologi8al stai!- she is sub1ectivi2edEthis a!guished hal:a8e-
totally u!sure o itsel- desig!ates the birth o the subje8t7 Fe8all the proverbial imagi!ary resolutio! o
Be!oIs parado? o i!i!ite divisibility+ i 6e 8o!ti!ue the divisio! lo!g e!ough- 6e 6ill i!ally stumble
upo! a poi!t at 6hi8h a part 6ill !o lo!ger be divided i!to smaller parts- but i!to a @smallerA part and
nothingEthis !othi!g JisK the subje8t7 9s this !ot- e?a8tly- the divisio! o 2udy i! the above:me!tio!ed
shotM /e see hal o her a8e- 6hile the other hal is a dark void7 A!d- agai!- the task is to leave this
void empty- !ot to ill it up by proje8ti!g o!to it the disgusti!g slime 8alled the J6ealth o perso!ality7K
This void is !ot the result o a! Jabstra8tio!K rom the 8o!8rete ull!ess o huma! e?iste!8eT
this void is primordial- 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity- it pre8edes a!y 8o!te!t 6hi8h might ill it up7 A!d it
poses a limit to the 8ommo!:se!se idea that our 8o!versatio! 6ith others should ollo6 the path o
straightor6ard si!8erity- avoidi!g the e?tremes o both hypo8riti8al etiNuette a!d u!6arra!ted
i!trusive i!tima8y7 Cerhaps the time has 8ome to a8k!o6ledge that this imaginary middle road has to
be suppleme!ted 6ith both its e?treme poles+ the J8oldK dis8retio! o symbolic etiNuette 6hi8h allo6s
us to mai!tai! a dista!8e to6ards our !eighbors- as 6ell as the @e?8eptio!alA risk o obs8e!ity 6hi8h
allo6s us to establish a li!k 6ith the other i! the 7eal o his>her 1ouissance7
.et us 8o!8lude 6ith a more politi8al e?ample o resisti!g the urge to proje8t7 The theologi8o:
politi8al topi8 o the *i!gIs T6o 3odies @developed by 0r!st *a!toro6i8U i! his 8lassi8 6ork o the
same titleA retur!s viole!tly i! Stali!ism- i! the guise o the .eaderIs t6o bodies @re8all the Stali!ist
pro8edures or deali!g 6ith the .eaderIs body- rom retou8hi!g photos to 8o!servi!g the body i! a
mausoleumA7 As 0ri8 Sa!t!er has poi!ted out- the sublime bodyIs obverse is a rotti!g u!dead body-
disgusti!g i! the literal 1erma! se!se o entset2lich- de:posed- 6hat remai!s ater the ki!g loses his
title7 This remai!der is !ot the ki!gIs biologi8al body- but the e?8ess o a! Ju!deadK horrible spe8terT
this is 6hy the Stali!ists put the dead .eaderIs body i! a mausoleum+ to preve!t its putrea8tio!7
&0
/he! the sovereig!ty o the State shits rom *i!g to Ceople- the problem be8omes that o the
peopleIs 3ody- o ho6 to i!8ar!ate the Ceople- a!d the most radi8al solutio! is to treat the .eader as
the Ceople i!8ar!ated7 9! bet6ee! these t6o e?tremes- there are ma!y other possibilitiesE8o!sider the
u!iNue!ess o 2a8Nues:.ouis GavidIs -he Death of Marat- Jthe irst moder!ist pai!ti!g-K a88ordi!g to
T7 27 Dlark7 The oddity o the pai!ti!gIs overall stru8ture is seldom !oted+ its upper hal is almost
totally bla8k7 @This is !ot a realisti8 detail+ the room i! 6hi8h ,arat a8tually died had lively 6allpaper7A
/hat does this bla8k void sta!d orM The opaNue body o the Ceople- the impossibility o represe!ti!g
the CeopleM 9t is as i the opaNue ba8kgrou!d o the pai!ti!g @the CeopleA i!vades it- o88upyi!g its
e!tire upper hal7 /hat happe!s here is stru8turally homologous to a ormal pro8edure ote! ou!d i!
film noir a!d Hrso! /elles movies- 6he! the dis8ord bet6ee! igure a!d ba8kgrou!d is mobiliUed+
6he! a igure moves i! a room- the ee8t is that the t6o are someho6 o!tologi8ally separated- as i! a
8lumsy rear:proje8tio! shot i! 6hi8h o!e 8a! 8learly see that the a8tor is !ot really i! a room- but just
movi!g i! ro!t o a s8ree! o!to 6hi8h the image o a room is proje8ted7 9! -he Death of Marat- it
appears as i 6e see ,arat i! his bathtub i! ro!t o a dark s8ree! o!to 6hi8h the ake ba8kgrou!d has
!ot yet bee! proje8tedEthis is 6hy the ee8t 8a! also be des8ribed as o!e o a!amorphosis+ 6e see the
igure- 6hile the ba8kgrou!d remai!s a! opaNue stai!T i! order to see the ba8kgrou!d- 6e 6ould have
to blur the igure7 3ut 6hat is impossible is to get the igure a!d the ba8kgrou!d i! the same o8us7
9s this !ot also the logi8 o the 2a8obi! TerrorEi!dividuals must be a!!ihilated i! order to make
the Ceople visibleT the CeopleIs /ill 8a! be made visible o!ly through the terrorist destru8tio! o the
i!dividualIs bodyM Therei! resides the u!iNue!ess o -he Death of Marat+ it 8o!8edes that o!e 8a!!ot
blur the i!dividual i! order to represe!t the Ceople dire8tlyEall o!e 8a! do to 8ome as 8lose as possible
to a! image o the Ceople is to sho6 the i!dividual at the poi!t o his disappeara!8eEhis tortured-
mutilated dead body agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the blur that JisK the Ceople7
There is !o!etheless a mi!imal sublimatio! at 6ork here+ 6hat 6e see i! -he Death of Marat is
,aratIs @sublimeA body- !ot his @s8arredA lesh7 That is to say- 6e all k!o6 ,arat suered rom a
disease 6hi8h 8overed his ski! 6ith s8ars a!d 8aused 8o!sta!t it8hi!gEhis lesh 6as almost literally
bur!i!g7 The o!ly 6ay to avoid the pai! a!d the 8o!sta!t pressure to s8rat8h 6as to be submerged i!
6ater7 The JrealK ,arat 6as thus like a J8reature rom the lagoo!K i!8apable o survivi!g i! resh air
a!d light- 6ho 8a! thrive o!ly i! a! Ju!!aturalK aNuati8 eleme!t7 Sig!ii8a!tly- Gavid omits this eature
i! his portrait @just as portraits o Stali! omit the s8ars 6hi8h besmir8h his a8eA+ ,aratIs ski! o! the
parts o his body that 6e 8a! see @a8e- shoulders- a!d armsA is smooth a!d shi!y- plus there is a 8lear
dese?ualiUatio! o his a8e- 6ith its sotly rou!ded- almost emi!i!e eatures7 Feerri!g to the Cauli!ia!
oppositio! bet6ee! body a!d lesh @a Dhristia! gets rid o lesh a!d e!ters Dorpus Dhristi- the body o
the Dhur8hA- 6here lesh belo!gs to the 2e6s 8aught up i! the 8y8le o the .a6 a!d its tra!sgressio!
@the .a6 makes lesh out o the bodyA- o!e 8a! say that -he Death of Marat also tra!sorms the lesh o
the JrealK ,arat i!to a body- i! a88orda!8e 6ith the Dhristologi8al aspe8ts o the pai!ti!g @,aratIs
ha!d ha!gi!g i! a Dhrist:like 6ayT his sa8rii8e or the Ceople- bri!gi!g them reedom a!d thus
redeemi!g them- et87A7 H!e usually talks here about a ailed DhristEbut 6hy ailedM As Thomas
AltiUer poi!ted out- i! Dhristia!ity also o!ly sueri!g 8a! be vividly represe!ted- !ot the heave!ly bliss
that 8omes ater6ards7
9t is Nuite impressive that this u!easy a!d disturbi!g pai!ti!g 6as adored by the revolutio!ary
8ro6ds i! CarisEproo that 2a8obi!ism 6as !ot yet Jtotalitaria!-K that it did !ot yet rely o! the
a!tasmati8 logi8 o a .eader 6ho is the Ceople7 )!der Stali!- su8h a pai!ti!g 6ould have bee!
u!imagi!able- the upper part 6ould have had to have bee! illed i!E6ith- say- the dream o the dyi!g
,arat- depi8ti!g the happy lie o a ree people da!8i!g a!d 8elebrati!g their reedom7 The great!ess o
the 2a8obi!s lay i! their attempt to keep the s8ree! empty- to resist illi!g it i! 6ith ideologi8al
proje8tio!s7 They thereby set i! motio! a pro8ess 6hi8h- i! art- 8ulmi!ated i! the mi!imalism o
*aUimir ,alevi8h- 6ith his redu8tio! o pai!ti!g to the a8t o registeri!g the mi!imal- purely ormal
diere!8e bet6ee! the rame a!d its ba8kgrou!d+ ,alevi8h is to the H8tober Fevolutio! 6hat ,arat
6as to the Fre!8h Fevolutio!7
Ater the mi!imalist radi8ality o his pai!ti!gs o the 1%10s a!d the early 1%20s- 6ith their
variatio!s o! the moti o a sNuare o! a sura8e- ,alevi8hIs last de8ade @1%2#X"#A is marked by a
retur! to igurative pai!ti!gT it is- o 8ourse- !ot the old realism- the igures are Jlat-K 8omposed o
abstra8t 8olor pat8hes- but the pat8hes are !o!etheless 8learly re8og!iUable as igures @mostly o
6ome! a!d peasa!tsA7 Da! this retur! be 6ritte! o as a mere 8ompromise 6ith the !e6 8ultural
politi8s- as bo6i!g to oi8ial pressureM ,alevi8h himsel sig!als his persiste!8e- his idelity to his
Jmi!imalistK breakthrough- i! his late realisti8 Self*)ortrait @1%""A- 6here the ope! ha!d 6ith
outstret8hed i!gers sket8hes the outli!e o the abse!t sNuare7 The same goes or )ortrait of the +rtists
Wife a!d Woman Wor"er rom the same year+ the virgi! ,ary be8omes a 6orker- the 8hild Dhrist
disappears- but the ha!ds retai! the impri!t o the 8hildIs orm7
&1
/e should bear i! mi!d that the
mi!imalism o the JsNuare a!d sura8eK pai!ti!gs 6as !ot a! asymptoti8 Uero:poi!t- but a starti!g
poi!t- a 8leari!g:o:the:de8ks ahead o a !e6 begi!!i!g7 The e!d is al6ays a !e6 begi!!i!g- 6hi8h is
6hy 6e should reje8t the topi8 o the asymptoti8 approa8h to Uero+ o!e is !ever Nuite there- 6here the
Feal Thi!g is- o!e 8a! o!ly rea8h the poi!t o mi!imal diere!8e>dista!8e- o bei!g almost there7 The
=egelia! lesso! is that the Uero:poi!t is the poi!t o!e must pass through i! order to start agai! Jrom
UeroKEi! art- ,alevi8hIs bla8k sNuare o! a 6hite sura8e is su8h a marki!g o the limi!al Uero:poi!t o
mi!imal diere!8e 6hi8h 8reates the 8o!ditio!s or a !e6 begi!!i!g7
/hat- ho6ever- does his retur! to igurality i!di8ateM From the late 1%20s- ,alevi8h !ot o!ly
made ma!y pai!ti!gs o peasa!ts @a!d also 6orkers a!d sportsme!A- he himsel started to dress like
o!e7 =is peasa!ts are pai!ted i! a! abstra8t:desubje8tiviUed mode+ igures redu8ed to brightly 8olored
lat orms- 6ith a8es simpliied to a bla8k 8ir8le or divided geometri8ally i!to symmetri8 8olored parts-
as i! :oung (irls in the Fields @1%2&X"2A- Sportsmen @1%2&X"2A- )easant Woman @1%"0A- )easants
@1%"0A- 7ed Figure @1%2&X"2A- a!d 7unning Man @early 1%"0sEbehi!d the igure o the ru!!i!g ma!
there is a red 8rossA7 =o6 to read this desubje8tiviUatio!M Go 6e really have here a dee!se o the
peasa!try agai!st brutal me8ha!iUatio! a!d 8olle8tiviUatio!M JFa8es 6ithout a8es- a8es that have lost
their beards- dummies 6ithout arms- stigmatised or 8ru8iied bei!gs+ ,alevi8hIs i8o!s sho6 huma!ity
to be the vi8tim o some !ihilisti8 apo8alypti8 devastatio!7 They are as i roUe! i! e?pe8tatio! o
6orldIs e!d7K
&2
3ut i this is the message- the! it presupposes as its sta!dard a ully realisti8 portrait o
peasa!ts 6ith ri8h eaturesT i! other 6ords- su8h a readi!g 6ould imply that ,alevi8h aba!do!ed his
mi!imalist breakthrough- retroa8tively rei!terpreti!g it as a depi8tio! o the Jsoulless!essK o moder!
ma!- !ot as a! a8t o artisti8 liberatio!7 9- o! the 8o!trary- 6e take i!to a88ou!t ,alevi8hIs 8o!ti!ui!g
idelity to his mi!imalism- the! the peasa!tsI Ja8eless a8esK 8a! be read as the i!sta!tiatio! o a !e6
dime!sio! o subje8tivity- o the post:psy8hologi8al Jdesubje8tiviUed subje8t7K
Su8h a readi!g allo6s us to establish a! u!e?pe8ted li!k bet6ee! ,alevi8h a!d =it8h8o8kIs
6ertigo+ the bla8k pat8hes 6hi8h depi8t a8es i! ,alevi8hIs late pai!ti!gs belo!g to the same series as
the bla8k proile o 2udyIs head i! 6ertigo7 Furthermore- 6ith regard to the history o pai!ti!g- o!e 8a!
posit ,alevi8h as the third- 8o!8ludi!g- term i! the series GavidX,u!8hX,alevi8h7 Fe8all ,u!8hIs
Madonna- 6here the voluptuous emi!i!e body is dra6! 6ithi! a double:li!ed rameT i! the ti!y spa8e
bet6ee! the t6o li!es o the rame- amo!g the loati!g sperm:like drops- 6e re8og!iUe a small
homu!8ulus- !o!e other tha! the igure rom -he Scream7 This homu!8ulus is desperate !ot be8ause o
a la8k or void- but be8ause it is over6helmed by the lu? o e?8essive e!joyme!t+ the ,ado!!a versus
the sperm i! the rame sta!ds or the i!8estuous 0!joyme!t:Thi!g versus the remai!ders o surplus:
e!joyme!t7
The li!e that ru!s rom Gavid through ,u!8h to ,alevi8h is thus 8lear7 9! ,u!8h- the igure o
J,aratK is sNueeUed i!to the rame- redu8ed to a homu!8ulus- 6hile the dark void that 8overs most o
GavidIs pai!ti!g is here illed i! by the impossible i!8estuous obje8t7 9! ,alevi8hIs sNuare- 6e get a
ki!d o iro!i8 !egatio! o the !egatio!+ the redu8tio! is total- both the rame a!d the 8e!ter are redu8ed
to !othi!g- all that remai!s is the mi!imal diere!8e- the purely ormal li!e 6hi8h separates the rame
rom the 8o!te!t it e!8ir8les7
94T0F.)G0 '

,ognitivism and the .oop of Self*)ositing

/he! a 8ertai! dis8ipli!e is i! 8risis- attempts are made to 8ha!ge or suppleme!t its theses
within its basi8 rame6orkEa pro8edure o!e might 8all JCtolemiUatio!K @ater data poured i! 6hi8h
8lashed 6ith CtolemyIs 0arth:8e!tered astro!omy- his supporters i!trodu8ed additio!al 8ompli8atio!s
to a88ou!t or the !e6 dataAT the!- the true JDoper!i8a!K revolutio! takes pla8e- 6hi8h- i!stead o just
addi!g additio!al 8ompli8atio!s a!d modiyi!g mi!or premises- 8ha!ges the basi8 rame6ork itsel7 So
6he! 6e are deali!g 6ith a sel:proessed Js8ie!tii8 revolutio!-K the Nuestio! to ask is al6ays 6hether
it is truly a Doper!i8a! revolutio!- or merely a CtolemiUatio! o the old paradigm7 T6o e?amples o the
latter+ there are good reaso!s to 8laim that Jstri!g theory-K 6hi8h prete!ds to provide the ou!datio!s o
the u!iied theory @8ombi!i!g relativity theory a!d Nua!tum physi8s by a88ou!ti!g i! a si!gle
theoreti8al rame6ork or all our eleme!tary or8esA- is still a! attempt at CtolemiUatio!- a!d that 6e
are still 6aiti!g or a !e6 begi!!i!g 6hi8h 6ill reNuire a! eve! more radi8al 8ha!ge i! our basi8
presuppositio!s @somethi!g like aba!do!i!g time or spa8e as the basi8 8o!stitue!t o realityA7
1
9! so8ial
theory- there are also good reaso!s or 8laimi!g that all the J!e6 paradigmK proposals about our epo8h
@that 6e are e!teri!g a post:i!dustrial- postmoder!- risk- or i!ormatio!al so8iety- a!d so o!A remai! so
ma!y CtolemiUatio!s o the Jold paradigmK o the 8lassi8 so8iologi8al models7
The Nuestio! is+ ho6 do thi!gs sta!d 6ith psy8hoa!alysisM Although Freud prese!ted his
dis8overy as a Doper!i8a! revolutio!- the u!dame!tal premise o the 8og!itive s8ie!8es is that
psy8hoa!alysis remai!s a JCtolemiUatio!K o 8lassi8al psy8hology- aili!g to really aba!do! its most
basi8 premises7
2
H!ly 6ith todayIs brai! s8ie!8es do 6e have the true revolutio!- !amely that- or the
irst time- 6e are approa8hi!g a s8ie!tii8 u!dersta!di!g o the emerge!8e o 8o!s8ious!ess7 Datheri!e
,alabou dra6s a radi8al 8o!seNue!8e rom the 8og!itivist sta!dpoi!t+ the task !o6 is !ot to
suppleme!t the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious 6ith the 8erebral u!8o!s8ious- but to repla8e the ormer 6ith the
latterEo!8e 6e a88ept the 8erebral u!8o!s8ious- there is !o lo!ger a!y spa8e or the Freudia! versio!7
There is- ho6ever- o!e problem 6ith this easy a!d 8lear solutio!+ readi!g the 8lassi8 8og!itivists- o!e
8a!!ot help !oti!g ho6 their des8riptio! o 8o!s8ious!ess at the phe!ome!al:e?perie!tial level is very
traditio!al a!d pre:Freudia!7 Fe8all GamasioIs !arrative o the gradual emerge!8e o Sel+ irst there is
the Jproto:SelK as the age!t 6hi8h regulates the homeostasis o the body- the sel:orga!iUi!g age!t
6hi8h mai!tai!s the body 6ithi! the limits o stability a!d sel:reprodu8tio!7 This- ho6ever- is !ot yet
the domai! o the Jme!talK proper+ the Jproto:SelK is ollo6ed by the emerge!8e o sel:a6are!ess-
the si!gular J9-K a!d- i!ally- by the Jautobiographi8 Sel-K the orga!iUatio! o the !arrative:history o
J6hat 9 am7K
"
T6o related poi!ts should be !oted here7 First- the 8ommo!:se!se simpli8ity o this
des8riptio!- 6hi8h pere8tly its the !aSve:evolutio!ist !otio! o ho6 the Sel must have developed7
Se8o!d+ as su8h- this des8riptio! sta!ds o! its o6!- it is ully u!dersta!dable 6ithout its !eurologi8al:
s8ie!tii8 ou!datio! @6ithout the pre8ise des8riptio! o the !euro!al ou!datio!s o the psy8hi8 lieA7
The key Nuestio! here is 6hat happe!s 6he! this des8riptio! is repla8ed 6ith the mu8h more 8ou!ter:
i!tuitive Freudo:.a8a!ia! des8riptio!- 6ith its parado?es o the Jdeath drive-K ormatio!s o the
u!8o!s8ious- a!d so orthM H!e 8a!!ot avoid the simple a8t that the epistemologi8al u!8tio! o the
developme!t o the !euro!al ou!datio! o the Sel is to e!able us to get rid o the parado?es o the
Freudia! subje8t- so that 6e 8a! retur! to the !aSve pre:Freudia! igure o the Sel- this time
legitimiUed by the !eurologi8al:s8ie!tii8 !otio!al edii8e7
Agai!st this 8og!itivist dismissal- 6e should rehabilitate psy8hoa!alysis i! its philosophi8al
8oreEas a theory i!debted to =egelIs diale8ti8 a!d o!ly readable agai!st this ba8kgrou!d7 This may
6ell appear as the 6orst possible move to make+ tryi!g to save psy8hoa!alysis- a dis8redited theory
@a!d pra8ti8eA- 6ith reere!8e to a! eve! more dis8redited theory- the 6orst o spe8ulative philosophy
re!dered irreleva!t by the progress o moder! s8ie!8e7 =o6ever- as .a8a! poi!ted out- 6he! 6e are
8o!ro!ted 6ith a! appare!tly 8lear 8hoi8e- the 8orre8t thi!g is sometimes to 8hoose the 6orst7
/e are deali!g here 6ith our basi8 positio!s+ @1A our 8ommo! everyday u!dersta!di!g o 6hat
6e are as SelvesT @2A the philosophi8al u!dersta!di!g o the Sel @6hi8h rea8hes its peak i! 1erma!
9dealism a!d its !otio! o the tra!s8e!de!tal 9AT @"A theories o the Sel i! 8o!temporary 8og!itivism
a!d brai! s8ie!8esT @(A the psy8hoa!alyti8 @Freudia!- .a8a!ia!A !otio! o the subje8t7 The impli8it
premise o the brai! s8ie!8es is that positio!s @2A a!d @(A are histori8al 8uriosities 6hi8h have !o
i!here!t role to play i! our k!o6ledge o the huma! mi!dEall 6e really !eed is our everyday
u!dersta!di!g o the Sel @6hi8h- eve! i alse- is part o our pre:theoreti8al e?perie!8e a!d- as su8h-
has to be a88ou!ted orA a!d s8ie!tii8 theories 6hi8h e?plai! that Sel7
(
The task is to see i @2A a!d @(A
are really basi8ally irreleva!t- or i they i!di8ate a dime!sio! missed !ot o!ly i! our everyday
e?perie!8e- but also by 8og!itivism a!d the brai! s8ie!8es7
.et us begi! 6ith some stra!ge e8hoes bet6ee! 8og!itivism a!d 1erma! 9dealism7 Goes !ot the
title o Gouglas =ostadterIs book o! the parado?es o @sel:A8o!s8ious!ess- I +m a Strange .oop- best
8apture Fi8hteIs early thoughtM
#
=ostadter u!dersta!ds his 6ork as a 8o!tributio! to the Jsel:
reere!tialistK theory o 8o!s8ious!essEthe u!derlyi!g idea is !ot a simple Jredu8tio!istK !eurologi8al
materialism @a sear8h or the material:!euro!al substrate o 8o!s8ious!essA- but a mu8h more
i!teresti!g o!e+ i!depe!de!tly o its material @!euro!alA support- a 8ertai! abstra8t:ormal parado?i8al
stru8ture o sel:reere!tiality at the level o thi!ki!g itsel is 8o!stitutive o 8o!s8ious!ess7 As is
usually the 8ase- =ostadter u!dersta!ds this sel:reere!tiality i! terms o 1ZdelIs theorem7
9! order to e?plai! the illusio! o 8o!s8ious!ess- o the Sel as a 8learly delimitated sel:
ide!ti8al e!tity- =ostadter reports o! a perso!al e?perie!8e 6hi8h- at irst gla!8e- may appear
8o!vi!8i!g as a metaphor but is mu8h more 6eird i! its presuppositio!s a!d 8o!seNue!8es7 Taki!g hold
o a pa8k o e!velopes i! a bo?- all o a sudde! he Jelt- bet6ee! my thumb a!d i!gers- somethi!g
very surprisi!g7 Hddly e!ough- there 6as a marble sitti!g @or loati!gMA right i! the middle o that
limsy little 8ardboard bo?RK
'
=e i!spe8ted the pa8kage e!velope by e!velope- looki!g or the small-
irm obje8t 6hi8h must have someho6 ou!d its 6ay there- but there 6as !othi!g7 Fi!ally- Jit da6!ed
o! me that there 6as!It a!y marble i! there at all- but that there 6as somethi!g that felt or all the
6orld e?a8tly like a marbleK+

9t 6as a! epiphenomenon 8aused by the a8t that- or ea8h e!velope- at the verte? o the JVK made by
the lap- there is a triple layer o paper as 6ell as a thi! layer o glue7 A! u!i!te!ded 8o!seNue!8e o
this i!!o8e!t desig! de8isio! is that 6he! you sNueeUe do6! o! a hu!dred su8h e!velopes all pre8isely
alig!ed 6ith ea8h other- you 8a!It 8ompress that little Uo!e as mu8h as the other Uo!es7
$
=ostadterIs poi!t- o 8ourse- is that the Sel i! its irm sel:ide!tityEthe Dartesia! 0goEis a!
e?a8tly homologous Jlarge:s8ale illusio! 8reated by the 8ollusio! o ma!y small a!d i!disputably !o!:
illusory eve!ts7K
&
Hur everyday e?perie!8e i!ds it dii8ult to a88ept that my Jme:!ess is more like a
shimmeri!g elusive rai!bo6 tha! it is like a solid- mass:possessi!g ro8kK+
%
J/e believe i! marbles that
disi!tegrate 6he! 6e sear8h or them but that are as real as a!y ge!ui!e marble 6he! 6eIre !ot looki!g
or them7K
10
Fe8all the amous ormula o phre!ology rom =egelIs )henomenology+ Jthe Spirit is a
bo!e @8ra!eA7K =ostadter here oers as a 8ommo!:se!se vie6 o the Sel a similar ormula+ JThe spirit
is a sto!e @marbleA7K 3ut 6as !ot this 8ommo!:se!se vie6 o the Sel as a substa!tial thi!g u!dermi!ed
lo!g ago by Gavid =umeM =ere is his 8lassi8 ormulatio!+

9t must be some o!e impressio! that gives rise to every real idea7 3ut sel or perso! is !ot a!y o!e
impressio!- but that to 6hi8h our several impressio!s a!d ideas are supposed to have a reere!8e7 9 a!y
impressio! gives rise to the idea o sel- that impressio! must 8o!ti!ue i!variably the same- through the
6hole 8ourse o our livesT si!8e sel is supposed to e?ist ater that ma!!er7 3ut there is !o impressio!
8o!sta!t a!d i!variable7 Cai! a!d pleasure- grie a!d joy- passio!s a!d se!satio!s su88eed ea8h other-
a!d !ever all e?ist at the same time7 9t 8a!!ot thereore be rom a!y o these impressio!s- or rom a!y
other- that the idea o sel is derivedT a!d 8o!seNue!tly there is !o su8h idea O For my part- 6he! 9
e!ter most i!timately i!to 6hat 9 8all mysel- 9 al6ays stumble o! some parti8ular per8eptio! or other-
o heat or 8old- light or shade- love or hatred- pai! or pleasure7 9 !ever 8a! 8at8h mysel at a!y time
6ithout a per8eptio!- a!d !ever 8a! observe a!y thi!g but the per8eptio! O 9 a!y o!e- upo! serious
a!d u!prejudi8ed rele8tio!- thi!ks he has a diere!t !otio! o himsel- 9 must 8o!ess 9 8a! reaso! !o
lo!ger 6ith him7 All 9 8a! allo6 him is- that he may be i! the right as 6ell as 9- a!d that 6e are
esse!tially diere!t i! this parti8ular7 =e may- perhaps- per8eive somethi!g simple a!d 8o!ti!ued-
6hi8h he 8alls himselT though 9 am 8ertai! there is !o su8h pri!8iple i! me7
11
The me!tio! o =ume is importa!t here be8ause his positio! o! the !o!:e?iste!8e o a
substa!tial Sel dra6s atte!tio! to a!other key disti!8tio! 6hi8h is ig!ored by =ostadter- or 6hom the
o!ly alter!ative is that bet6ee! @1A our higher:level- spo!ta!eously illusory @sel:Aper8eptio! o the 9 as
a! isolated mo!ad- a irm- sel:ide!ti8al me!tal age!t 6ho is e?empted rom the la6s o material reality
a!d- as su8h- JreelyK 8auses its a8tio!s- a!d @2A the lo6er:level reality o !euro!al loops et87Eall that
6hi8h the 9 Jreally isK but is u!able to per8eive itsel as su8h7 =o6ever- 6hat =ume does 6he! he tur!s
his gaUe upo! the Sel a!d dis8overs the illusory 8hara8ter o its substa!tial ide!tity is !either @1A !or
@2A+ he u!dermi!es the per8eptio! o Sel as a stable Jmarble-K but not through a!y s8ie!tii8 i!sight
i!to the !euro!al basis o 8o!s8ious!essEhe simply provides a 8lose des8riptio! o our stream:o:
8o!s8ious!ess itsel- demo!strati!g that the stable ide!tity o the Sel is !ot a spo!ta!eous illusio! o
our e?perie!8e- but the result o our imposi!g upo! our immediate e?perie!8e a set o metaphysi8al
8o!8epts7 As 2ames 1iles !otes- =ostadter thereby 8o!ou!ds s8ie!tii8 redu8tio!ism a!d the !o:sel
theory 6hi8h is

more phe!ome!ologi8ally based tha! are the redu8tio!ist theories7 To borro6 =usserlIs phrase- it goes
ba8k to the thi!gs themselves7 That is- it starts 6ith a! e?ami!atio! o e?perie!8e rather tha! 6ith a!
atta8hme!t to the proje8t o ho6 to a88ou!t or perso!al ide!tity7 This does !ot mea!- o 8ourse- that
the !o:sel theory !eed !ot a8e the issue o 6hy someo!e might 8ome to believe i! his o6! ide!tity7
For i there is !o su8h thi!g as perso!al ide!tity- the! it is esse!tial that 6e 8a! oer some other
a88ou!t o 6hy someo!e might be led to thi!k there is O
9! the earliest te?ts o 3uddhism- 6e 8ome a8ross a disti!8tio! dra6! bet6ee! t6o types o
dis8ourse+ that o dire8t mea!i!g a!d that o i!dire8t mea!i!g7 The ormer type o dis8ourse is said to
be o!e 6hose mea!i!g is plai! 6hile the latter type !eeds to have its mea!i!g i!erred 6ith reere!8e to
the ormer7 9! the dis8ourses o i!dire8t mea!i!g- 6ords are used 6hi8h appare!tly reer to persisti!g
e!tities su8h as a sel or a! 9 6hi8h- a88ordi!g to the 3uddha- are merely Je?pressio!s- tur!s o spee8h-
desig!atio!s i! 8ommo! use i! the 6orld 6hi8h the Tathagata @i7e7- the 3uddhaA makes use o 6ithout
bei!g led astray by them7K That is- although 6e may use 6ords like JselK a!d J9-K 6e should !ot be led
i!to thi!ki!g that they a8tually reer to somethi!g- or they are but grammati8al devi8es7 This !o!:
de!oti!g aspe8t o these e?pressio!s is somethi!g 6hi8h must be i!erred i! light o the dis8ourses o
dire8t mea!i!g7 9! this latter type o dis8ourse- the !o!:e?iste!8e o a!ythi!g perma!e!t or e!duri!g-
su8h as the sel or 9- is asserted- a!d the misleadi!g eatures o la!guageEthose eatures 6hi8h lead us
astray i!to the belie i! a! 9Eare made e?pli8it7 =ere there is !o !eed or i!ere!8e- si!8e the mea!i!g
o su8h dis8ourse is plai!7
Although the 3uddha 8ites various 8hara8teristi8s that somethi!g must have i it is to be
8o!sidered a sel- the most importa!t is that o perma!e!8e or ide!tity over time7 3ut 6he! 6e look to
our e?perie!8e- there is !othi!g but imperma!e!8e+ our bodies- eeli!gs- a!d thoughts are orever
8omi!g a!d goi!g7 9! this se!se the 3uddha is i! 8omplete agreeme!t 6ith =ume+ 6here there is
diversity there 8a! be !o ide!tity7
12
This bri!gs us to the passage rom =ume to *a!t+ 6hile =ume e!deavors to demo!strate ho6
there is !o Sel @6he! 6e look i!to ourselves- 6e o!ly e!8ou!ter parti8ular ideas- impressio!s- et87E!o
JSelK as su8hA- *a!t 8laims that this void is the Sel7 The proper *a!tia! a!s6er to =umeIs argume!t
agai!st the Sel @6he! 9 look i!to mysel- 9 see a multitude o parti8ular ae8ts- !otio!s- et87- but 9
!ever i!d a JSelK as a! obje8t o my per8eptio!A is a ki!d o Fabi!ovit8h joke+ J/he! you look i!to
yoursel- you 8a! dis8over your Sel7K J3ut 9 see !o Sel there- there is !othi!g i! me beyo!d the
multipli8ity o represe!tatio!sRK J/ell- the subje8t is pre8isely this 4othi!gRK The limitatio! o
3uddhism is that it is !ot able to a88omplish this se8o!d stepEit remai!s stu8k at the i!sight that Jthere
is !o true Sel7K All the 1erma! 9dealists i!sist o! this poi!t+ 6hile *a!t just leaves it empty @as the
tra!s8e!de!tal 0goEthe i!a88essible Thi!gA- Fi8hte e!dlessly emphasiUes that the 9 is !ot a thi!g- but
purely pro8essual- o!ly a pro8ess o its appeari!g:to:itselT =egel does the same7 They 6ould have bee!
the irst to laugh at 6hat =ostadter prese!ts as the idealist @dualistA vie6+

The problem is that- i! a se!se- a! J9K is somethi!g 8reated out o !othi!g7 A!d si!8e maki!g
somethi!g out o !othi!g is !ever possible- the alleged somethi!g tur!s out to be a! illusio!- i! the e!d-
but a very po6erul o!e- like the marble amo!g the e!velopes7 =o6ever- the J9K is a! illusio! ar more
e!tre!8hed a!d re8al8itra!t tha! the marble illusio!- be8ause i! the 8ase o J9-K there is !o simple
revelatory a8t 8orrespo!di!g to tur!i!g the bo? upside do6! a!d shaki!g it- the! peeri!g i! bet6ee!
the e!velopes a!d i!di!g !othi!g solid a!d spheri8al i! there7 /e do!It have a88ess to the i!!er
6orki!gs o our brai!s7 A!d so the o!ly perspe8tive 6e have o! our J9K:!ess marble 8omes rom the
8ou!terpart to sNueeUi!g all the e!velopes at o!8e- a!d that perspe8tive says itIs realR
1"
This is pate!tly 6ro!g+ 6e do have a! e?a8t 8ou!terpart to the Jsimple revelatory a8t
8orrespo!di!g to tur!i!g the bo? upside do6! a!d shaki!g it- the! peeri!g i! bet6ee! the e!velopes
a!d i!di!g !othi!g solid a!d spheri8al i! there-K !amely- the simple a8t o o8usi!g our gaUe upo! our
Sel itsel a!d dis8overi!g pre8isely that there is J!othi!g solid a!d spheri8al i! there-K the a8t
perormed i! moder! philosophy i! a! e?emplary 6ay by =ume @but perormed lo!g ago already by
3uddhist thi!kersA7
The post:=umea! 8riti8al:tra!s8e!de!tal idealists- rom *a!t to =egel- do not retur! to the pre:
8riti8al- ro8k:like- solid- substa!tial ide!tity o the 0goE6hat they struggled 6ith 6as pre8isely ho6 to
des8ribe the Sel 6hi8h has !o substa!tial ide!tity @as 6as stated by *a!t i! his 8ritiNue o Ges8artesIs
o6! readi!g o cogito as res cogitans- Ja thi!g that thi!ksKA- but !o!etheless u!8tio!s as the
irredu8ible poi!t o reere!8eEhere is *a!tIs u!surpassable ormulatio! i! his ,riti<ue of )ure
7eason+

The simple- a!d i! itsel 8ompletely empty- represe!tatio! V9I O 6e 8a!!ot eve! say that this is a
8o!8ept- but o!ly that it is a bare 8o!s8ious!ess 6hi8h a88ompa!ies all 8o!8epts7 Through this 9 or he
or it @the thi!gA 6hi8h thi!ks- !othi!g urther is represe!ted tha! a tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t o the
thoughts ] d7 9t is k!o6! o!ly through the thoughts 6hi8h are its predi8ates- a!d o it- apart rom them-
6e 8a!!ot have a!y 8o!8ept 6hatsoever- but 8a! o!ly revolve i! a perpetual 8ir8le- si!8e a!y judgme!t
upo! it has al6ays already made use o its represe!tatio!7
1(
*a!t thus prohibits the passage rom J9 thi!kK to J9 am a thi!g that thi!ksK+ o 8ourse there has
to be some !oume!al basis or @sel:A8o!s8ious!ess- o 8ourse 9 must be Jsomethi!gK obje8tively- but
the poi!t is pre8isely that this dime!sio! is orever i!a88essible to the 9Ea!d 8o:substa!tial 6ith the
very @Aa8t o the 97 A Sel that Jk!e6 itsel obje8tivelyK 6ould !o lo!ger be a Sel7
1#
So 6he! =ostadter proposes to Jsee the V9I as a hallu8i!atio! per8eived by a hallu8i!atio!-
6hi8h sou!ds pretty stra!ge- or perhaps eve! stra!ger+ the V9I as a hallu8i!atio! hallucinated by a
hallu8i!atio!-K the problem 6ith this stateme!t is !ot its stra!ge!ess- its sho8ki!g impa8t or 8ommo!:
se!se u!dersta!di!g- !or its appare!t parado? @at the e!d o the li!e- there must be some reality i!
6hi8h hallu8i!atio!s are grou!dedT that is- the loop o sel:relati!g hallu8i!atio!s 8a!!ot be
8ompleteEit 6ould imply the same !o!se!si8al parado? as 0s8herIs t6o ha!ds dra6i!g ea8h otherT or-
as Ges8artes 6ould have put it- eve! i everythi!g is just hallu8i!ated- there must be some d 6hi8h
does the hallu8i!ati!gA- but- o! the 8o!trary- that it remai!s all too mu8h 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o the
common*sense disti!8tio! bet6ee! basi8 reality a!d higher:level illusio!s7
1'
/hat =ostadter 8a!!ot
see is ho6 it is the higher:level Jillusio!K 6hi8h tra!sorms the pre:o!tologi8al blur o the Feal i!to
substa!tial reality7 9! =egelese- i! Ja hallu8i!atio! hallucinated by a hallu8i!atio!-K hallu8i!ati!g is
sel:sublated through its very sel:relati!g- a!d a !e6 JrealityK is established7
9! a 6ay- Fi8hte says the same thi!g 6he! he 8laims that the 9 e?ists o!ly or the 9- that me!tal
represe!tatio! e?ists o!ly or the me!tal represe!tatio!- that it has !o Jobje8tiveK e?iste!8e e?ter!al to
this loop7 So 6he! =ostadter dei!es @sel:A8o!s8ious!ess as a hallu8i!atio! per8eived by a
hallu8i!atio!- he is here !ot Jtoo radi8al-K pushi!g thi!gs to6ards a parado? u!a88eptable to our
8ommo! se!se- but not radical enough+ 6hat he does !ot see @a!d 6hat Fi8hte 8learly sa6A- is that the
parado?i8al redoubli!g o hallu8i!atio! @a hallu8i!atio! itsel per8eived by a hallu8i!atio!- that is by a
hallu8i!atory e!tityA 8a!8els @sublatesA itsel- ge!erati!g a !e6 reality o its o6!7
There is- o 8ourse- a 6ay to a88ou!t or the parado? o Ja hallu8i!atio! itsel per8eived by a
hallu8i!atio!K 6ithout getti!g 8aught up i! a mea!i!gless- vi8ious 8y8le+ stricto sensu- it is !ot a
hallu8i!atio! that per8eives a hallu8i!atio!T it is just that the asubje8tive !euro!al pro8ess @the Jreally
e?isti!gK ou!datio! o the pro8ess o per8eptio!A- together 6ith the illusio! that 6e dire8tly per8eive
reality- ge!erates the illusio! that the age!t o per8eptio! is a SelEboth poles o the per8eptual
pro8ess- the per8eived 8o!te!t a!d the per8eivi!g subje8t- are i! this se!se hallu8i!atio!s- a!d there is
!o parado? i!volved here7 Thomas ,etUi!ger has developed this positio! i! detailT
1$
a88ordi!g to him-
huma! phe!ome!al e?perie!8e is a dy!ami8 multi:dime!sio!al map o the 6orldEbut 6ith a t6ist+
Jlike o!ly very e6 o the e&ternal maps used by huma! bei!gs- it also has a little red arro6 O the
phe!ome!al sel is the little red arro6 i! your 8o!s8ious map o reality7K
1&
,etUi!ger here reers to
8ity- airport- or shoppi!g:mall maps i! 6hi8h a little red arro6 i!di8ates the observerIs lo8atio! 6ithi!
the mapped spa8e @J5ou are hereRKA+

,e!tal sel:models are the little red arro6s that help a phe!ome!al geographer to !avigate her o6!
8omple? me!tal map o reality O The most importa!t diere!8e bet6ee! the little red arro6 o! the
sub6ay map a!d the little red arro6 i! our !europhe!ome!ologi8al troglodyteIs brai! is that the
e?ter!al arro6 is opa<ue7 9t is al6ays 8lear that it is o!ly a represe!tatio!Ea pla8eholder or somethi!g
else O The 8o!s8ious sel:model i! the 8avema!Is brai! itsel- ho6ever- is i! large portio!s
tra!spare!t+ O it is a phe!ome!al sel 8hara8teriUed !ot o!ly by ull:blo6! prerele?ive embodime!t
but by the 8omprehe!sive- all:e!8ompassi!g subje8tive e?perie!8e o being situated7
1%
This Jred arro6-K o 8ourse- is 6hat .a8a! 8alled the sig!iier 6hi8h represe!ts the subje8t or
other sig!iiers7 ,etUi!ger illustrates our total immersio! i! the map 6ith the metaphor o a total flight
simulator+

The brai! diers rom the light simulator i! !ot bei!g used by a stude!t pilot- 6ho episodi8ally
Je!tersK it O A total light simulator is a sel:modeli!g airpla!e that has al6ays lo6! 6ithout a pilot
a!d has ge!erated a 8omple? i!ter!al image o itsel 6ithi! its own i!ter!al light simulator7 The image
is tra!spare!t7 The i!ormatio! that it is a! i!ter!ally ge!erated image is !ot yet available to the system
as a 6hole O .ike the !europhe!ome!ologi8al 8avema!- Jthe pilotK is bor! i!to a virtual reality right
rom the begi!!i!gE6ithout a 8ha!8e to ever dis8over this a8t7
20
Agai!- ho6 to avoid the vi8ious 8ir8le i! this versio! o ClatoIs Dave argume!tM A 8aver!
proje8ts a! image o itsel o!to the 8ave 6all- a!d it generates*simulates the observer itselfEbut is it
!ot the 8ase that- 6hile the 8ave 8a! simulate the substa!tial ide!tity or 8o!te!t o the observer- it
8a!!ot simulate the function o the observer- si!8e- i! this 8ase- 6e 6ould have a i8tio! observi!g
itselM 9! other 6ords- 6hile 6hat the observer immediately ide!tiies 6ith i! the e?perie!8e o sel:
a6are!ess is a i8tio!- somethi!g 6ith !o positive o!tologi8al status- his very activity of observing is a
positive ontological fact7 ,etUi!gerIs @a!d =ostadterIsA solutio! is to disti!guish bet6ee! the reality o
the observi!g pro8ess @there is !o JobserverK as a! auto!omous Sel- just the asubje8tive !euro!al
pro8essA a!d the Jtra!spare!tK @sel:Aper8eptio! o the age!t o this pro8ess as a Sel7 9! other 6ords-
the disti!8tio! bet6ee! appeara!8e @o phe!ome!al Jtra!spare!tK realityA a!d reality i! tra!sposed i!to
the per8eivi!g pro8ess itsel7
3ut does this solutio! a8tually 6orkM 9! his a!alysis o the Dartesia! J9 am 8ertai! that 9 e?ist-K
,etUi!ger i!trodu8es a disti!8tio! very 8lose to .a8a!Is o6! bet6ee! the Jsubje8t o the e!u!8iatio!K
a!d the Jsubje8t o the e!u!8iated7K
21
Dru8ial or ,etUi!ger is the disti!8t status o the t6o J9Ks i! J9
am 8ertai! that 9 e?istK+ 6hile the se8o!d J9K simply desig!ates the 8o!te!t o the transparent sel:
modelE.a8a!Is Jsubje8t o the e!u!8iated-K the ego as a! ob1ectEthe irst J9K sta!ds or the opa<ue
8ompo!e!t o the very thi!ker that thi!ks @i7e7- ge!eratesA this thoughtE.a8a!Is Jsubje8t o the
e!u!8iatio!7K The Dartesia! 8o!usio! is that the sel:tra!spare!t thi!ki!g substa!8e 6hi8h dire8tly
e?perie!8es itsel is ge!erated by the illegitimate ide!tii8atio! o the t6o 9Is- 6here the irst is
embedded i! the se8o!d+ the opaNue 8ompo!e!t Jhas already bee! embedded i! the 8o!ti!uously a8tive
ba8kgrou!d o the tra!spare!t sel:model7K
22
9! other 6ords- although the irst J9K @the d that thi!ks
this very thoughtA u!doubtedly reers to something- to a system that ge!erates this thought- J[6\hat is
!ot 8lear is i this system is a8tually a self7 K
2"
3ut here 6e are i! or a surprise+ this disti!8tio! 6as already k!o6! to *a!t- 6ho- as 6e have
see!- emphasiUed the thoroughly !o!:substa!tial 8hara8ter o the subje8t a!d dei!ed its !oume!al
substratum as the J9 or he or it that thi!ks-K ee8tively implyi!g that the ig!ora!8e o o!eIs o6!
!oume!al !ature is a positive 8o!ditio! o thi!ki!g subje8tivity7 There is- ho6ever- somethi!g more i!
*a!t- a key eleme!t 6hi8h missi!g i! ,etUi!ger+ the thoroughly !o!:substa!tial J9-K to be
disti!guished rom its !oume!al substratum- is also !ot 6hat *a!t 8alls a Jperso!-K the positive
phe!ome!al 8o!te!t o subje8tivity- i!8ludi!g all the psy8hologi8al 6ealth o desires- dreams-
k!o6ledge- abilities- et87- 6hi8h orm my perso!ality a!d 6hi8h is 6hat ,etUi!ger 8alls the 8o!s8ious
Jsel:modelK o the brai!7 The J9K is !either !oume!al !or phe!ome!al- !either the 9Is asubje8tive
!euro!al substratum !or my represe!tatio! o mysel7 This is 6hat is missi!g i! ,etUi!ger7 .et us
Nuote him agai!+ JThe most importa!t diere!8e bet6ee! the little red arro6 o! the sub6ay map a!d
the little red arro6 i! our !europhe!ome!ologi8al troglodyteIs brai! is that the e?ter!al arro6 is
opa<ue7 9t is al6ays 8lear that it is o!ly a represe!tatio!Ea pla8e:holder or somethi!g else7K The
*a!tia! reply is that the Jred arro6K that holds the pla8e o the 9 i! the 9Is 8og!itive mappi!g is also
Jo!ly a represe!tatio!Ea pla8e:holder or somethi!g elseKEho6ever- this Jsomethi!g elseK is !ot the
9Is !euro!al substratum- but the 9 itsel as the empty poi!t o @sel:Areere!8e- 6hat .a8a! 8alls the
Jbarred subje8t-K b7 This subje8t pre8isely cannot be i! the mapEto put it i! the map 6ould amou!t to
the subje8tIs ull sel:obje8tiviUatio!- or i! it- 9 6ould be able to see mysel Jobje8tively-K as a part o
the 6orld7 The parado? is here a very pre8ise o!e+ the Jred arro6K that holds the pla8e o the 9 i! the 9Is
8og!itive map is Jo!ly a represe!tatio!Ea pla8e:holder or somethi!g else-K but a represe!tatio! o
6hatM 4ot o somethi!g- but o nothing7 J9K am !ot just my sel:model- the 8o!te!t o my sel:
represe!tatio!- but that elusive d to 6hi8h this 8o!te!t appears- the JmyselK 6hi8h 8a!!ot be yet
a!other appeara!8e- si!8e it is that to 6hi8h>6hom appeara!8e appears as appeara!8e7 9! other 6ords-
or the dista!8e bet6ee! !oume!al a!d phe!ome!al- bet6ee! my !euro!al substratum a!d my sel:
model- to persist- a third virtual term is !eededEappeara!8e 8a!!ot appear to a!other appeara!8e- but
it also 8a!!ot appear to reality itsel7 The Jsubje8tK is the non*phenomenal support of appearance+ it is
!ot part o reality- si!8e- as Fi8hte 8learly sa6- a subje8t e?ists o!ly or a subje8tT that is- there is !o
subje8t or a! e?ter!al Jobje8tiveK vie6T but it is also !ot a!other appeara!8e7
9! order to a88ou!t or the Sel- 6e should thus problematiUe the sta!dard oppositio! bet6ee!
appeara!8e a!d reality @6here appeara!8e is pre8isely a Jmere appeara!8eKA a!d a88ept the
embarrassi!g parado? e!8ou!tered by the t6e!tieth:8e!tury JhardK s8ie!8es+ i! @amo!g othersA
Nua!tum physi8s- the Jappeara!8eK @per8eptio!A o a parti8le determi!es its realityEthe very
emerge!8e o Jhard realityK out o the Nua!tum lu8tuatio! through the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! is
the out8ome o observatio!- o the i!terve!tio! o 8o!s8ious!ess7 This !otio! o the o!tologi8al
superiority o appeara!8es is dii8ult to a88eptE!o 6o!der it is ote! shared by other6ise ier8e
oppo!e!ts+ =ostadter here shares a key premise 6ith his oi8ial oppo!e!t- Gavid Dhalmers- 6hom he
ote! mo8ks7 /he!- i! his argume!t agai!st the redu8tive e?pla!atio! o 8o!s8ious!ess- Dhalmers
6rites that Jeve! i 6e k!e6 every last detail about the physi8s o the u!iverseEthe 8o!iguratio!-
8ausatio!- a!d evolutio! amo!g all the ields a!d parti8les i! the spatiotemporal ma!ioldEthat
i!ormatio! 6ould !ot lead us to postulate the e?iste!8e o 8o!s8ious e?perie!8e-K he 8ommits the
sta!dard *a!tia! mistake+ su8h total k!o6ledge is stri8tly !o!se!si8al- epistemologi8ally and
o!tologi8ally7
2(
9t is the obverse o the vulgar determi!ist !otio!- arti8ulated i! ,ar?ism by 4ikolai
3ukhari! 6he! he 6rote that- i 6e k!e6 all physi8al reality- 6e 6ould also be able to predi8t pre8isely
the emerge!8e o a revolutio!7 This li!e o reaso!i!gE8o!s8ious!ess as a! e?8ess- surplus- over the
physi8al totalityEis misleadi!g- si!8e it has to evoke a mea!i!gless hyperbole+ 6he! 6e imagi!e the
/hole o reality- there is !o lo!ger a!y pla8e or 8o!s8ious!ess @a!d subje8tivityA7 There are t6o
optio!s here+ either subje8tivity is a! illusio!- or reality is in itself @a!d !ot o!ly epistemologi8allyA !ot:
All7 The premise =ostadter shares is that o the theoreti8al possibility o a total des8riptio! o reality at
the most basi8 levelEthe diere!8e is that he dra6s rom it the opposite 8o!8lusio!+ he thi!ks that at
this level- it 6ould be possible to a88ou!t or 8o!s8ious!ess7
=ostadter 8o!8eives o the 9 as a! age!t i! parallel 6ith ho6 6e spo!ta!eously per8eive
higher:level pro8esses- ig!ori!g their lo6er:level substratum7 /he! a high 6ave approa8hes the
seashore- 6e per8eive it as a substa!tial e!tity movi!g a8ross the sura8e o the 6aterT but this 6ave has
!o substa!tial ide!tity- its atoms are 8ha!gi!g all the timeE6hat is Jreally goi!g o!K is that a!
i!i!itely 8omple? i!tera8tio! o 6ater a!d other mole8ules ge!erates the ee8t o the same 6ave
movi!g a8ross the o8ea!7 This is a! ee8t o the spo!ta!eous Jthi!kody!ami8sK o our psy8hi8 lie+ to
avoid the i!i!ite 8omple?ity o 6hat really is goi!g o!- 6e 8o!stru8t higher:level e!tities a!d per8eive
them as Jage!ts7K The same goes or the 9+ 6he! 6e see a perso! perorm a! a8t- 6e 8a!!ot aord to
a!alyUe the i!i!itely 8omple? i!tera8tio! o brai! a!d mus8le @a!d- at a! eve! lo6er level- o the
eleme!tary parti8lesA 6hi8h 8o!stitutes this a8t- so 6e 8o!stru8t the J9K to 6hi8h 6e attribute the po6er
to 8ause the a8t i! Nuestio!7
2#
/e thus have t6o levels7 First- there is 6hat =ostadter 8alls the J1odIs
eye vie6-K the vie6 6hi8h per8eives reality i! its e!dless 8omple?ity a!d 8a! establish the ull
u!dame!tal 8ausal 8hai!Ehere- 6e Jsee it all-K the 8ausal !et6ork is 8omplete- !othi!g is let out7
The!- 6e have the Jhighly 8ompressed simplii8atio! i! 6hi8h vast amou!ts o i!ormatio! are thro6!
a6ayKT this simplii8atio! Jmight seem to be the more useful o!e or us mortals- as it is so mu8h more
ei8ie!t @eve! though some thi!gs seem to happe! Vor !o reaso!IEthatIs the tradeoA7K
2'
The eeli!g
o JreedomK @the per8eptio! that 6e did somethi!g Jor !o reaso! at all-K just be8ause the urge to do it
popped i!to our mi!dA is grou!ded pre8isely i! our ig!ori!g all the details 6e lose 6he! 6e per8eive
thi!gs at the higher level o simplii8atio!7 /he! 6e per8eive some a8ts as Ji!te!tio!al-K 6e 8ommit
the same spo!ta!eous simplii8atio!+ 6he! 9 raise a glass to my mouth a!d dri!k 6ater rom it- the true
a!s6er to the Nuestio! J/hy did 9 raise the glassMK 6ould i!volve the 8omple? o !euro!al pro8esses-
rea8ti!g to @6hat 9 e?perie!8e asA thirst- 6hi8h se!d sig!als to my ha!d mus8les- a!d so o!Eat this
level- there is !o i!te!tio!- just pure @although e?tremely 8omple?A !atural 8ausality7 9! order to
simpliy thi!gs- 9 posit i!te!tio! as a 8ause a!d say+ J9 raised the glass i! order to have a dri!k7K
So- 6hat is 6ro!g 6ith this premiseM 9ts i!itial presuppositio!- that there is somethi!g like a
J1odIs eye vie6-K that the idea o a! i!tellige!8e 6hi8h Jsees it all-K although @or a! atheistA
epistemologi8ally impossible- is o!tologi8ally grou!ded+ the i!i!itely 8omple? !et6ork o Jall realityK
really is out there- it is the ultimate true reality- it is just i!a88essible to our i!ite mi!ds7 3ut 6hat i
there simply is no basic level- 6hat i divisio!s go o! i!dei!itely- 6hat i the Nua!tum level marks the
begi!!i!g o the Jblurri!gK o Jbasi8K ull reality- so that the o!ly ultimate reality is a VoidM
2$
This bri!gs us to =ostadterIs limitatio!+ he is pre8isely u!able to thi!k the Jdo6!6ard
8ausalityK displayed by the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! i! Nua!tum physi8s- or his oppositio!
bet6ee! reality a!d appeara!8e remai!s the traditio!al o!e7 The gap that separates the Nua!tum level
rom our ordi!ary per8eived reality is not a gap bet6ee! ultimate hard reality a!d a higher:level
u!avoidable:but:illusory hallu8i!atio!7 H! the 8o!trary- it is the Nua!tum level 6hi8h is ee8tively
Jhallu8i!ated-K !ot yet o!tologi8ally ully 8o!stituted- loati!g a!d ambiguous- a!d it is the shit to the
JhigherK level o appeara!8es @appeari!g per8eived realityA that makes it i!to a hard reality7
Furthermore- 6he! =ostadter dei!es the Sel !ot as a substa!tial thi!g- but as a higher:level
patter! 6hi8h 8a! lo6 bet6ee! a multitude o material i!sta!tiatio!s- he is !ot 8o!siste!t e!ough a!d
repeats the mistake o the brai!:i!:the:vat a!tasy+ the Jpatter!K 6hi8h orms my Sel is !ot o!ly the
patter! o sel:reere!tial loops i! my brai!- but the mu8h larger patter! o i!tera8tio!s bet6ee! my
brai!:a!d:body a!d its e!tire material- i!stitutio!al- a!d symboli8 8o!te?t7 /hat makes me Jmy:SelK
is the 6ay 9 relate to the people- thi!gs- a!d pro8esses arou!d meEa!d this is 6hat by dei!itio! 6ould
be lost i o!ly my brai!:patter! 6ere tra!sposed rom my brai! here o! 0arth to a!other brai! o! ,ars+
this other Sel 6ould dei!itely !ot be me- si!8e it 6ould be deprived o the 8omple? so8ial !et6ork
6hi8h makes me my:Sel7
=ostadterIs alter!ative is+ either my Sel is someho6 dire8tly li!ked to a mysterious- u!k!o6!
physi8al property o my brai! a!d thus irredu8ibly rooted i! it- or it is a higher:level ormal patter! o
sel:relati!g loops 6hi8h is !ot limited to my i!dividuality but 8a! be tra!sposed i!to others7 /hat
=ostadter la8ks here is simply the !otio! o the 9 as the si!gular u!iversality- the abstra8t:u!iversal
poi!t o reere!8e 6hi8h- o 8ourse- is !ot to be ide!tiied 6ith its material support @my brai!A i! a
Searle:like 6ay- but is also !ot just a patter! loati!g arou!d a!d 8apable o bei!g tra!sposed i!to other
i!dividuals7
2&
This purely ormal:!egative sel:ide!tity is the 8ore o the Dartesia! cogito- a!d this is
6hy- 6he!ever =ostadter speaks @i! the usual mo8ki!g 6ayA o the Dartesia! 0go- he substantiali2es it
i!to a Thi!g7 4o 6o!der- the!- that thi!gs get 8ompli8ated 6he!- i! order to a88ou!t or the threshold
6hi8h separates huma!s rom a!imals- =ostadter reers to Turi!gIs !otio! o a Ju!iversal @8omputi!gA
ma8hi!eK+

the 8riti8al threshold or this ki!d o 8omputatio!al u!iversality 8omes at e?a8tly that poi!t 6here a
ma8hi!e is le?ible e!ough to read a!d 8orre8tly i!terpret a set o data that des8ribe its o6! stru8ture7
At this 8riti8al ju!8ture- a ma8hi!e 8a!- i! pri!8iple- e?pli8itly 6at8h ho6 it does a!y parti8ular task-
step by step7 Turi!g realiUed that a ma8hi!e that has this 8riti8al level o le?ibility 8a! imitate a!y
a!other [sic\ ma8hi!e- !o matter ho6 8omple? the latter is7 9! other 6ords- there is !othi!g more
le?ible tha! a u!iversal ma8hi!e O /e huma! bei!gs- too- are u!iversal ma8hi!es o a diere!t sort+
our !eural hard6are 8a! 8opy arbitrary patter!s- eve! i evolutio! !ever had a!y gra!d pla! or this
ki!d o Jreprese!tatio!al u!iversalityK to 8ome about7
2%
=o6 do 6e be8ome Ju!iversal ma8hi!esKM Through a sel:reere!tial loop7 This is
philosophi8ally the 8ru8ial i!sight+ it is the very Jlimitatio!K o u!iversality- the a8t that u!iversality
i!volves a short:8ir8uit 6ith a si!gularity- 6hi8h e!ables the u!iversality to be posited Jor itsel- K to
appear as su8h- to 8ut its li!ks 6ith a parti8ular 8o!te!t7
"0
The sta!dard !otio! o sel:reere!tiality
remai!s at the level o the Jspurious i!i!ityK+ a! image e!dlessly mirrors itselEsay- o! a TV s8ree!-
6e see a table 6ith a TV set 6hose s8ree! sho6s a table 6ith a TV set 6hose s8ree! sho6s O a!d so
o!7 9! order to disti!guish the Jtrue i!i!ityK that gives rise to the Sel rom this i!i!ite regress-
=ostadter evokes a !i8e old e?ample- !amely+

the amous label o a ,orto! Salt bo?- 6hi8h sho6s a girl holdi!g a bo? o ,orto! Salt7 5ou may
thi!k you smell i!i!ite regress o!8e agai!- but i so- you are ooli!g yourselR The girlIs arm is
8overi!g up the 8riti8al spot 6here the regress 6ould o88ur7 9 you 6ere to ask the girl to please ha!d
you her salt bo? so that you 8ould a8tually see the i!i!ite regress o! its label- you 6ould 6i!d up
disappoi!ted- or the label o! that bo? 6ould sho6 her holdi!g a yet smaller bo? 6ith her arm o!8e
agai! blo8ki!g the regress7A!d yet 6e still have a sel:reere!tial pi8ture- be8ause 8ustomers i! the
gro8ery store u!dersta!d that the little bo? sho6! o! the label is the same as the big bo? they are
holdi!g7 =o6 do they arrive at this 8o!8lusio!M 3y usi!g a!alogy7 To be spe8ii8- !ot o!ly do they
have the large bo? i! their o6! ha!ds- but they 8a! see the little bo? the girl is holdi!g- a!d the t6o
bo?es have a lot i! 8ommo! @their 8yli!dri8al shape- their dark:blue 8olor- their 6hite 8aps at both
e!dsAT a!d i! 8ase thatIs !ot e!ough- they 8a! also see salt spilli!g out o the little o!e7 These pie8es o
evide!8e sui8e to 8o!vi!8e everyo!e that the little bo? a!d the large bo? are ide!ti8al- a!d there you
have it+ sel:reere!8e 6ithout i!i!ite regressR
"1
Through su8h sel:reere!tial i!8lusio!- 6e get Jthe elepha!t i!to a mat8hbo?K+ the rame is
i!s8ribed as a! eleme!t i! the ramed 8o!te!t- the 6hole be8omes part o itsel7 The pri8e to be paid or
this vi8tory over i!i!ite regress is that the se8o!d image:6ithi!:the:image is i!8omplete- 8urtailed- !ot
ully the same but re8og!iUed as the same o!ly by a!alogy @6e see o!ly partially the bo? 6ithi! the
pi8tureAEthe suppleme!tary sel:rele?ive image has to be mi!imally Jmeto!ymi87K A!dEto simpliy
thi!gs to the utmostEthe idea is that the same 8urtailed symboli8 sel:represe!tatio! is 8o!stitutive o
6hat 6e 8all JSelK+ the Sel is 8o!stituted through its @sel:Areprese!tatio!T that is- the t6o mea!i!gs o
the term Jsel-K substa!tial a!d predi8ative @sel as the J9K a!d sel as desig!ati!g sel:relatio!A- are
8losely li!ked7 There is Jhuma! spee8hK o!ly i!soar as the speaki!g subje8t 6ho uses la!guage to
desig!ate obje8ts a!d pro8esses sel:rele?ively i!s8ribes itsel i!to its spee8h7 This sel:i!s8riptio!
6hi8h 8o!stitutes the subje8t 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a simple i!8lusio! o a represe!tatio! @a! image or
sig!A o me i!to the 8hai! o my spee8hEthe 8at8h is that this represe!tatio! has to u!8tio! as the
sta!d:i! o Jme-K the speaker itsel as the u!iNue poi!t rom 6hi8h 9 per8eive the 6orld a!d e!gage
6ith it- the poi!t or 6hi8h 6ords have mea!i!g7 Si!8e this operatio! is basi8ally impossible @9 8a!!ot
ully obje8tiviUe mysel i! my spee8h a!d see>represe!t mysel i! it as speaki!gA a!d yet !e8essary- it
8a! o!ly be perormed i! a tru!8ated 6ayEto put it i! .a8a!ese- the sig!iier 6hi8h sig!iies JmeK @the
very subje8t o the e!u!8iatio!A is a sig!iier 6ithout a sig!iied7 .a8a!Is !ame or this e?8eptio!al
sig!iier is the ,aster:Sig!iier @S1A- as opposed to the 8hai! o Jordi!aryK sig!iiers @S2A- a!d 6e 8a!
see !o6 ho6 the topi8 o Jdo6!6ard 8ausalityK 8a! be tra!slated i!to .a8a!ia! terms+ this e?8eptio!al
sig!iier e?erts Jdo6!6ard 8ausalityK i!soar as it Jalls i!to the sig!iied-K that is- i!soar as it
8o!stitutes the very u!ity o the sig!iied obje8t @a 2e6 be8omes a 2e6 6he! the name J2e6K is added
to him- or the !ame is !ot just his e?ter!al desig!atio!- it 8o!stitutes him o!tologi8allyA7 This 8ausality
ru!s Jdo6!6ardK i! 8o!trast to the sta!dard Jup6ardK 8ausality o sig!s 6hi8h Jrele8tK the reality
they desig!ate+ 8ausality ru!s here Jup6ard-K thi!gs 8ause 6ords- they determi!e their sig!s- 6hile i!
the 8ase o the ,aster:Sig!iier- a 6ord determi!es>8auses the desig!ated thi!g7
Goes this the! mea! that the JSelK is the d 8aused @positedA through its !omi!atio! i! the same
6ay a J2e6K emerges through his !omi!atio!M /e must i!trodu8e a key disti!8tio! here+ the Sel is not
sel:reere!tial i! the dire8t se!se o reerri!g to itsel a!d thus bei!g a88essible to itselEthe Sel is
the void that e!ables the i!i!ite regress to be 8ut short- a!d the sig! that dire8tly represe!ts the Sel @9A
is thereore a! empty sig!- a sig! 6hi8h holds the pla8e o a void7 This is the dime!sio! missi!g i! the
,etUi!ger metaphor o the subje8t as the red arro6 o! the mapEhere is the key passage agai!+

The most importa!t diere!8e bet6ee! the little red arro6 o! the sub6ay map a!d the little red arro6
i! our !europhe!ome!ologi8al troglodyteIs brai! is that the e?ter!al arro6 is opa<ue7 9t is al6ays 8lear
that it is o!ly a represe!tatio!Ea pla8eholder or somethi!g else O The 8o!s8ious sel:model i! the
8avema!Is brai! itsel- ho6ever- is i! large portio!s tra!spare!t+ O it is a phe!ome!al sel
8hara8teriUed !ot o!ly by ull:blo6! prerele?ive embodime!t but by the 8omprehe!sive- all:
e!8ompassi!g subje8tive e?perie!8e o being situated7
"2
/hat ,etUi!ger misses is that- i! 8o!trast to ordi!ary sig!s- 6hi8h are Jpla8eholders or
somethi!g else-K the Jred arro6K 6hi8h sta!ds i! or the Sel is a pla8e:holder or nothing @the !othi!g
6hi8h JisK the subje8t itselA7 =ere o!e should 8orre8t the sta!dard !otio! o the 9 as a set o eatures i!
6hi8h 9 @the subje8tA re8og!iUe mysel+ 9 by dei!itio! e?perie!8e mysel as absent- as a! empti!ess
to6ards 6hi8h my sta!d:i!s poi!t- 9 !ever dire8tly ide!tiy mysel 6ith my sta!d:i!s or 6ith my sel:
model7 9t is here that the @other6ise ashio!able a!d mu8h misusedA reere!8e to 1ZdelIs theorem
a8Nuires a pre8ise mea!i!g+ i! the same 6ay that- or 1Zdel- the la8k o proo o the Ju!de8idableK
propositio! is a dire8t 8o!seNue!8e o its truth- the very ailure o the subje8tIs represe!tatio! is a proo
that 6e are deali!g 6ith the dime!sio! o subje8tivity7 This bri!gs us ba8k to o!e o our ormal
dei!itio!s o the subje8t+ a subje8t tries to arti8ulate @Je?pressKA itsel i! a sig!iyi!g 8hai!- this
arti8ulatio! ails- a!d by means and through this failure! the sub1ect emerges+ the subje8t is the ailure
o its sig!iyi!g represe!tatio!Ethis is 6hy .a8a! 6rites the subje8t o the sig!iier as b- as Jbarred7K
9! this pre8ise se!se- the subje8t is a !o!:provable presuppositio!- somethi!g 6hose e?iste!8e 8a!!ot
be demo!strated but o!ly i!erred through the ailure o its dire8t demo!stratio!7 This 6eird
8oi!8ide!8e o the i!a88essible Thi!g 6ith the very obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts dire8t a88ess to it sig!als
that the status o the subje8t is that o a FealEthat- as .a8a! 6ould have put it- the subje8t is a!
Ja!s6er o the FealK to the ailed attempts to e!or8e its symboliUatio!7 The reaso! =ostadter misses
this dime!sio! is that- 6he! he des8ribes Jupside:do6! 8ausality-K he ultimately prese!ts it as a ki!d o
!e8essary illusio!+

evolutio! tailored huma! bei!gs to be per8eivi!g e!titiesEe!tities that ilter the 6orld i!to
ma8ros8opi8 8ategories7 /e are 8o!seNue!tly ated to des8ribe 6hat goes o! about us- i!8ludi!g 6hat
other people do a!d 6hat 6e ourselves do- !ot i! terms o the u!derlyi!g parti8le physi8s @6hi8h lies
ma!y orders o mag!itude removed rom our everyday per8eptio!s a!d our amiliar 8ategoriesA- but i!
terms o su8h abstra8t a!d ill:dei!ed high:level patter!s as mothers a!d athers- rie!ds a!d lovers-
gro8ery stores a!d 8he8kout sta!ds- soap operas a!d beer 8ommer8ials- 8ra8kpots a!d ge!iuses-
religio!s a!d stereotypes- 8omedies a!d tragedies7
""
Applied to ourselves- the same me8ha!ism a88ou!ts or the emerge!8e o the Sel+ J/e are
po6erully drive! to 8reate a term that summariUes the presumed u!ity- i!ter!al 8ohere!8e- a!d
temporal stability o all the hopes a!d belies a!d desires that are ou!d i!side our o6! 8ra!iumEa!d
that term- as 6e all lear! very early o!- is V9I7K
"(
A!d si!8e J6e per8eive !ot parti8les i!tera8ti!g but
ma8ros8opi8 patter!s i! 6hi8h 8ertai! thi!gs push other thi!gs arou!d 6ith a blurry 8ausality- a!d si!8e
the 1ra!d Cusher i! a!d o our bodies is our V9-I a!d si!8e our bodies push the rest o the 6orld arou!d-
6e are let 6ith !o 8hoi8e but to 8o!8lude that the V9I is 6here the 8ausality bu8k stops O This is O a
surprisi!gly reliable a!d totally i!dispe!sable distortio!7K
"#
The 9 is thus Ja useul shortha!d sta!di!g
or a myriad o i!i!itesimal e!tities a!d the i!visible 8hemi8al tra!sa8tio!s taki!g pla8e amo!g
them7K
"'
As a des8riptio! o our i!!ermost sel:e?perie!8e- this is 6ro!g+ the J9K does !ot sta!d or a!y
u!ity:8ohere!8e:stability o the substa!tial 8o!te!t o my perso!ality- but or a! eva!es8e!t- sel:
reere!tial si!gularity 6hi8h is at a dista!8e rom all substa!tial 8o!te!t7 Furthermore- 6he! =ostadter
talks about the te!de!8y o our mi!d to redu8e 8omple? reality to Jabstra8t a!d ill:dei!ed high:level
patter!s-K he seems to 8o!use t6o levels o o!tologi8ally diere!t !ature+

,ature huma! brai!s are 8o!sta!tly tryi!g to redu8e the 8omple?ity o 6hat they per8eive- a!d this
mea!s that they are 8o!sta!tly tryi!g to get u!amiliar- 8omple? patterns made o ma!y symbols that
have bee! reshly a8tivated i! 8o!8ert to trigger just one amiliar pre:e?isti!g symbol @or a very small
set o themA7 9! a8t- thatIs the mai! busi!ess o huma! brai!sEto take a 8omple? situatio! a!d to put
o!eIs i!ger o! what matters i! it- to distill rom a! i!itial 6elter o se!satio!s a!d ideas 6hat a
situatio! really is about7 To spot the gist7
"$
=ere- 6e have to be pre8ise+ the redu8tio! o 8omple?ity =ostadter is talki!g about is !ot the
same as the redu8tio! o lo6er:level !euro!al pro8esses to the higher:level per8eptio!s a!d symbols-
but a redu8tio!- i!here!t to this level o symbols- o 8omple? patter!s to the simple 8hoi8e @poi!t o
de8isio!A 6hi8h 8o!de!ses the e!tire situatio! to a simple eature7 These t6o levels are- o 8ourse-
li!ked- but i! a 6ay 6hi8h es8apes =ostadter+ the Jup6ard leap rom raw stimuli to symbols-K !amely
the emerge!8e o the symboli8 order- 8a! o!ly o88ur 6he!- 6ithi! this order @6hat .a8a! 8allsA a
,aster:Sig!iier JNuiltsK a!d thus stabiliUes the ield o mea!i!g7 9! a per8eptive observatio!-
=ostadter suggests that it is this Jlevel:shiti!gK 6hi8h a88ou!ts or the diere!8e bet6ee! the simple
eedba8k loop @like the TV mirror:image o the TV set i!i!itely rele8ted i! itselA a!d the Jstra!ge
loopK that 8o!stitutes a Sel+ i! the se8o!d 8ase-

the level:shiti!g a8ts o per8eptio!- abstra8tio!- a!d 8ategoriUatio! are 8e!tral- i!dispe!sable eleme!ts7
9t is the up6ard leap rom raw stimuli to symbols that imbues the loop 6ith Jstra!ge!essK O /hat
makes a stra!ge loop appear i! a brai! a!d !ot i! a video eedba8k system- the!- is a! abilityEthe
ability to thi!kE6hi8h is- i! ee8t- a o!e:syllable 6ord sta!di!g or the possessio! o a sui8ie!tly
large repertoire o triggerable symbols7
"&
/e should add here a key eature !oted by =ostadter else6here+ i! 8o!trast to the i!i!ite
reiteratio! o a simple eedba8k loop @a pi8ture 6ithi! a pi8ture 6ithi! a pi8ture OA- the Jstra!ge loopK
is pre8isely not i!i!ite- the i!i!ite series is 8ut short by a stop:gap- a Jrele?iveK symbol- the odd:o!e:
out i! the series7 Furthermore- as =ostadter is Nui8k to !ote- this very ability is grou!ded i! a! i!ability
6hi8h is its obverse+ the Ji!ability to peer belo6 the level o our symbols7 9t is our i!ability to see- eel-
or se!se i! a!y 6ay the 8o!sta!t- re!eti8 8hur!i!g a!d roili!g o mi8ro:stu- all the u!elt bubbli!g
a!d boili!g that u!derlies our thi!ki!g7K
"%
Do!seNue!tly- Jthe 8ombi!atio! o these t6o
i!gredie!tsEo!e a! ability a!d the other a! i!abilityEgives rise to the stra!ge loop o selhood- a trap
i!to 6hi8h 6e huma!s all all- every last o!e o us- 6illy:!illy7K
(0
=ere- =ostadter agai! displays his
eter!al os8illatio!+ he as a rule dismisses do6!6ard 8ausality as a! i!dispe!sable distortio!- as i! the
ollo6i!g passages+

The J9-KEyours- mi!e- everyo!eIsEis a treme!dously ee8tive illusio!- a!d alli!g or it has a!tasti8
survival value7 Hur J9Ks are sel:rei!or8i!g illusio!s that are a! i!evitable by:produ8t o stra!ge loops-
6hi8h are themselves a! i!evitable by:produ8t o symbol:possessi!g brai!s that guide bodies through
the da!gerous straits a!d trea8herous 6aters o lie O The J9K is a !e8essary- i!dispe!sable 8o!8ept to
all o us- eve! i itIs a! illusio!- like thi!ki!g that the su! is 8ir8li!g the earth be8ause it rises- moves
a8ross the sky- a!d sets O Deasi!g to believe altogether i! the J9K is i! a8t impossible- be8ause it is
i!dispe!sable or survival7 .ike it or !ot- 6e huma!s are stu8k or good 6ith this myth7
(1
There is thus a! u!bridgeable gap bet6ee! my spo!ta!eous sel:e?perie!8e 6hi8h tells me that
J9K am the age!t o my a8ts- a!d the s8ie!tii8 k!o6ledge 6hi8h tells me that there is !o J9-K just a
8omple? !et6ork o !euro!al pro8essesEi! this se!se- the J9K is literally a etish- or 6e are stu8k i! a
situatio! o etishisti8 disavo6al+ J9 k!o6 very 6ell [that 6hat s8ie!8e tells me is true\- but !o!etheless
OKEAt the same time- ho6ever- =ostadter ote! reiterates that Jhigh:level- emerge!t- sel:reere!tial
mea!i!gs i! a ormal mathemati8al system 8a! have a 8ausal pote!8y just as real as that o the systemIs
rigid- roUe!- lo6:level rules o i!ere!8e7K
(2
J9!dispe!sable illusio!K or Jjust as realKM
/e e!8ou!ter the same problem 6ith the Nuestio! J=o6 do 8hoi8e a!d ge!eti8 determi!ism
relateMK 9 9 stop smoki!g by ge!eti8 i!terve!tio!- !ot through my stre!uous eort- does this deprive
me o my reedom o 8hoi8eM The spo!ta!eous mystii8atio! here is+ i my attitude @say- desire to
smokeA is just a 8o!ti!ge!t a8t- 9 per8eive it as my 8hoi8e a!d mysel as respo!sible or itT i- o! the
8o!trary- my 8easi!g to smoke is the result o a bioge!eti8istIs i!terve!tio!- it is as i 9 am deprived o
my reedom- u!der the 8o!trol o others7 3ut- i my 8easi!g to smoke is 8o!ditio!ed by the ge!eti8istIs
meddli!g 6ith my ge!es- the! my previous smoki!g 6as also determi!ed by the previous 8o!stellatio!
o my ge!es7 9- o! the 8o!trary- my previous smoki!g 6as my 8hoi8e- the! eve! ater the ge!eti8istIs
meddli!g 9 am still ree to stop smoki!g- eve! i this !o6 takes more eort7 9 ge!es determi!e me-
the! they determi!e me always- 6hether their 8o!stellatio! is the result o !atural bli!d 8ha!8e or the
result o the i!terve!tio! o a!other perso! 6ho 8ha!ged my ge!ome7 /hy- the!- does it appear that the
ge!eti8istIs meddli!g deprives me o my reedomM There is o!ly o!e 8o!siste!t a!s6er+ i my ge!ome
depe!ds o! bli!d 8ha!8e- the! 9 8a! pretend that 9 am ree- save the appeara!8es7 9! my spo!ta!eous
per8eptio!- 9 thus se8retly believe i! the truth o determi!ismE6hat 9 6a!t to save is !ot reedom but
the appearance o reedom7
H!e should thus reje8t the JpositiveK o!tology 6hi8h presupposes some Uero:level o reality
6here thi!gs Jreally happe!K a!d dismisses the higher levels as mere abbreviatio!s- illusory sel:
per8eptio!- a!d so orth7 There is !o su8h Uero:level+ i 6e go Jall the 6ay do6!-K 6e arrive at the
Void7 3a8k i! 1%#%- Fi8hard Fey!ma! a!!ou!8ed !a!ote8h!ology i! a spee8h e!titled JThereIs Cle!ty
o Foom at the 3ottomKErom the sta!dpoi!t o the i!8omplete!ess o reality- 6e 8a! eve! make a
step urther a!d 8laim that- at the very bottom- there is all the room 6e 6a!t- si!8e there is !othi!g else
there- just the void7
A!d it is o!ly 6ithi! su8h a! i!8omplete!ess that the !otio! @a!d a8tualityA o the Sel is
thi!kable7 9! other 6ords- 6hat is the SelM /he! 6e see a table- 6e a88ept that there is !othi!g behi!d
its 8ompo!e!ts- !o se8ret d that sta!ds or the 8ore o its ide!tity beyo!d a!d i!depe!de!tly o all its
properties- 6hile- 6he! deali!g 6ith a Sel- 6e spo!ta!eously assume that the Sel is !ot simply a
8ombi!atio! o its properties a!d o thi!gs that happe!s to a!d i! itEthere has to be some d be!eath
all this 6ealth that gives the Sel its u!iNue!ess7 The problem is that- ater 6e abstra8t all determi!ate
Nualities rom the Sel- 6hat remai!s is just plai! !othi!g- a void7 So 6e should a88ept that our Sel is-
like a table- !othi!g but the !et6ork o its properties- o its 8o!te!ts- or- to put it i! a more postmoder!
vei!- o stories it tells itsel about itselEas 4ietUs8he put it- there is !o mysterious doer behi!d the
multitude o deeds7 There is- ho6ever- o!e optio! that this a88ou!t leaves out o 8o!sideratio!+ 6hat i
our Sel is this void itself- 6hat i its 8ore is !ot some positive 8o!te!t- but the Jsel:relati!g !egativityK
@=egelA- the very ability to !egate every determi!ate 8o!te!tM
The dilemma here is that bet6ee! the Jup6ardK or Jdo6!6ardK status o reedom7 That is to
say- o! the o!e ha!d- there are the attempts to a88ou!t or reedom as a higher:level property
Jemergi!gK out o the 8omple? i!tera8tio! o lo6er:level eleme!ts 6hi8h are part o a determi!ist
!et6orkEthe problem is the! to determi!e 6hat the status o reedom is i the same pro8ess 6hi8h- at
this higher level @the level o 6hat Ge!!ett 8alls Jdesig!KA- i!volves reedom- 8a! also be des8ribed at
the lo6er level o its 8o!stitue!t eleme!ts i! determi!isti8 terms7 H! the other ha!d- there are attempts
to grou!d reedom i! the a8t that the determi!isti8 i!tera8tio! is !ot the lo6est o!tologi8al level+ i!
terms o Nua!tum physi8s- it takes pla8e at the level o 8o!stituted reality- be!eath 6hi8h there are
Nua!tum os8illatio!s 6hi8h do !ot obey determi!isti8 la6sEthe problem here is that reedom i! !o
6ay i!volves pure 8o!ti!ge!8y- or i a! eve!t is u!der:determi!ed- i it is ge!ui!ely a88ide!tal- this i!
!o 6ay mea!s that it is ree- si!8e reedom is !ot the la8k o 8ausal determi!atio!- but a sui generis
orm o determi!atio!7
Furthermore- =ostadter disti!guishes the 9 rom a 8o!te!t:ree eedba8k loop @the Jva!illaK
loopA+ i o!e poi!ts a TV 8amera at the middle o a bla!k s8ree! to 6hi8h the 8amera is li!ked- all that
6e shall see o! the s8ree! is a i?ed 6hite image- the e!dless series o sel:rele8ted images
i!disti!guishable rom ea8h other7 /he!- ho6ever- the 8amera tur!s or Uooms out e!ough to take i!
somethi!g e?ter!al to the bla!k s8ree!- this !o!:bla!k pat8h gets su8ked i!to the video loop a!d 8y8led
arou!d- populati!g the s8ree! 6ith ma!y bits o 8olor ormi!g a 8omple? patter!7 Similarly- Ja VbareI
stra!ge loop o selhood does !ot give rise to a disti!8t selEit is just a ge!eri8- va!illa shell that
reNuires 8o!ta8t 6ith somethi!g else i! the 6orld i! order to start a8Nuiri!g a disti!8tive ide!tity- a
disti!8tive V9I7K
("
9s this !ot 6hat .a8a! 6as aimi!g at 6ith his ormula b:aM /hat =ostadter 8alls a
Jbare stra!ge loop o selhoodK is the void o sel:relati!g !egativity- the empty orm o sel:rele?ivity
deprived o all 8o!te!tEto ill i! this orm 6ith 8o!te!t @Jperso!al ide!tityKA- to pass rom a
pure>empty subje8t to a Jperso!-K o!e !eeds a mi!imum o 8o!ti!ge!t e?ter!al i!put- 6hat .a8a! 8alls
le peu de rAel- @or 6hat Fi8hte 8alled +nstossA7 From a stri8t .a8a!ia! poi!t- ho6ever- is !ot this
s8heme o the relatio!ship bet6ee! b a!d a- bet6ee! the empty orm o a subje8t @or- rather- subje8t as
a! empty orm o sel:relati!gA a!d the Jpathologi8alK 8o!te!t 6hi8h ills it i!- too 8lose to 8ommo!
se!seM /hat it misses is the proper diale8ti8al t6ist+ le peu de rAel o mi!imal 8o!te!t is !ot merely the
stai! 6hi8h spoils the purity o the Jbare stra!ge loop o selhood-K but its ormal 8o!ditio! o
possibilityEit is the very mi!imal motivatio!- the J8auseK 6hi8h sets i! motio! the sel:rele8ti!g o
the pure 97 A!d vi8e versa- the Jbare stra!ge loop o selhood-K the pure orm o sel:relati!g !egativity-
al6ays a88ompa!ies every positive 8o!te!t that orms a Jperso!alityK as a perma!e!t threat o radi8al
!egativity- that is- o the erasure o all 8o!te!t7 9! =egelese- the pure:empty orm o sel:relati!g
!egativity a!d the mi!imal Jstai!K o a 8o!ti!ge!t 8o!te!t 6ithout orm that ae8ts the Sel rom
outside are the t6o sides o the same 8oi!- they are ide!ti8al i! the se!se o a! Ji!i!ite judgme!t7K
Therei! resides the diere!8e rom the TV set e!dlessly rele8ti!g itsel+ i! the 8ase o the 9- the JbareK
loop is ormally- !ot o!ly empiri8ally- impossibleEi o!e erases the stai!- the Sel implodes- 8ollapses
i! o! itsel7
The problemati8 !ature o ide!tiyi!g a Sel 6ith the i!dividualsI sel:model @the 8omple?
!et6ork o memories- attitudes- opi!io!s- ideals- ears- et87- that orm a parti8ular perso!alityA be8omes
8lear 6he! =ostadter approa8hes the topi8 o the i!terpe!etratio! o Selves+ JThe more i!timately
someo!e 8omes to k!o6 you- the i!er:grai!ed 6ill be the VportraitI o you i!side their head7 The
highest:resolutio! portrait o you is o 8ourse your o6! sel:portraitEyour o6! mosai8 o yoursel-
your sel:symbol- built up over your e!tire lie7K
((
From this !otio! o the Sel as sel:model-
=ostadter dra6s the logi8al 8o!8lusio! that- 6he! 9 k!o6 a!other perso! i!timately e!ough- part o
his Sel is ee8tively i! meEo!8e the Sel is dei!ed as the te?ture o psy8hi8 eatures- there is !o
lo!ger a!y stro!g Nualitative diere!8e bet6ee! my eature a!d the same eature as it reverberates i!
the mi!ds o those 8lose to me- it is just that- or the obvious reaso!s @la8k o all the ba8kgrou!d
JmurmurK o i!!umerable other eaturesA- 9 am prese!t i! others i! a mu8h redu8ed 6ay7 =ostadter
goes o! to dra6 other 8o!8lusio!sEirst- Selves are !ot eNual- there is a! i!i!ite variety o Selves- up
to perso!s 6ith Jgreat soulsK @the mea!i!g o ,ahatma- 1a!dhiIs !ameA 6ho 8a! i!tegrate eleme!ts o
!umerous other Selves7 Se8o!d- o!e 8a! rehabilitate the old topi8 o the soulIs immortality+ o!8e a Sel
is dei!ed i! this 6ay- the biologi8al death o a! i!dividual does !ot automati8ally e!tail the death o
his Sel- si!8e parts o his Sel literally survive i! the lasti!g memory o all those 6ho remember him
a!d 8o!ti!ue to me!tally i!tera8t 6ith him7
This appare!tly !eutral a!d be!evole!t !otio! that there are large a!d small souls is !ot 6ithout
pote!tially da!gerous politi8al 8o!seNue!8es+ i there is !o u!derlyi!g eNuality bet6ee! Selves- 6hy
should 6e all be politi8ally eNualM =ostadter is a6are o the problemati8 8hara8ter o the Jdisti!8tio!s
bet6ee! the values o soulsK+ Ja!y hi!t at su8h a disti!8tio! risks be8omi!g i!lammatory- be8ause i!
our 8ulture there is a dogma that states- roughly- that all huma! lives are 6orth e?a8tly the same
amou!t7K
(#
=ostadterIs 8ou!ter:argume!t is here a 8ommo!:se!se 8ompariso! o the diere!8e
bet6ee! huma! souls 6ith the diere!8e bet6ee! huma! a!d a!imal souls+ J,ost people 9 k!o6
6ould rate O 8at souls as higher tha! 8o6 souls- 8o6 souls higher tha! rat souls O A!d so 9 ask
mysel- i soul:siUe disti!8tio!s between spe8ies are su8h a 8ommo!pla8e a!d !o!:threate!i!g !otio!-
6hy should 6e !ot also be 6illi!g to 8o!sider some ki!d o O spe8trum o soul:siUes within a si!gle
spe8ies- a!d i! parti8ular 6ithi! our o6!MK
('
9s the! politi8al eNuality just a! illusio!- a pure ethi8o:
politi8al presuppositio! 6ithout a!y ou!datio! i! realityM The solutio! is to o8us o! the J9K as the
pure subje8t- the eva!es8e!t poi!t o sel:relati!g !egativityEat this level @a!d at this level o!lyA- 6e
ee8tively are all eNual7 H!e should thus !o!etheless e!dorse our 8ommo!:se!se i!tuitio! 6hi8h tells
us that somethi!g is missi!g i! =ostadterIs a88ou!t+ !ot some mysterious para:!atural i!gredie!t- but
simply the sel:relati!g si!gularity o JmeK i! 6hi8h a Sel is o!ly actuali2ed7 There is !o substa!8e to
this H!e+ it is !either some mi!imal eature o my psy8hi8 8o!te!t !or the biologi8al base @brai!A 6hi8h
i!sta!tiates itEit is merely the abstra8t orm o sel:relati!g- but a orm 6hi8h is as su8h esse!tial or
the SelIs a8tuality7 9t is this H!e:!ess 6hi8h makes us eNual i! the moral a!d politi8al se!se+ !o matter
ho6 ri8h or pure our 8o!te!t- 6e are all H!es- poi!ts o irredu8ible si!gularity7
Sara 3aartma! 6as a you!g 6oma! rom the *hoi *hoi tribe 6ho- i! 1&10- 6as take! rom
Dape To6! to .o!do! a!d the! e?hibited as a reak a8ross 3ritai!- 6here the image o JThe =otte!tot
Ve!usK @o8used o! her broad behi!dA as8i!ated the publi87 Ater a 8ourt battle 6aged by abolitio!ists
to ree her rom her e?hibitors ailed- she 6as i! 1&1( take! to Fra!8e- 6here she be8ame the obje8t o
Js8ie!tii8K resear8h+ Duvier himsel @6ho- ater seei!g her head- said that he !ever sa6 a huma! bei!g
6hose physiog!omy 6as so 8lose to that o a! apeA measured a!d e?ami!ed her body i! detail- a!d 6as
espe8ially as8i!ated by her e?te!ded labia minora7 Sara died a year later- but her body remai!ed a!
obje8t o Js8ie!tii8K as8i!atio! or de8ades ater her death+ her se?ual orga!s a!d brai! 6ere
displayed i! the MusAe de l0omme i! Caris u!til 1%&#7 T6o outsta!di!g ilms o! Sara 3aartma! 6ere
made re8e!tly- a do8ume!tary -he .ife and -imes of Sara /aartman by Bola ,aseko @South Ari8a
2001A- a!d a i8tio!al ilm /lac" 6enus by Abdellati *e8hi8he @Fra!8e 2010A 6ith 5ahima Torres
playi!g Sara7 Torres re!dered 6ith disturbi!g a!d breathtaki!g or8e the eature emphasiUed by ma!y
6it!esses+ although Sara 6as hurt a!d elt betrayed 6he! she 6as e?ami!ed- she stood 6ith sile!t
dig!ity 6he! Js8ie!tistsK tou8hed her behi!d a!d poked a!d measured her labia7 The 8o!trast here is
absolute bet6ee! her poise a!d the vulgarity o her Je?plorersK+ i the 6ord J8iviliUatio!K has a!y
mea!i!g ater its history o abuses- it is Sara 6ho 6as truly 8iviliUed 6he! 8o!ro!ted 6ith the
barbarism o 0uropea! s8ie!tists- a!d the diere!8e bet6ee! barbarism a!d 8iviliUatio! is here !ot o!ly
Nua!titative- but Nualitative a!d- as su8h- absolute7
The very a8t o SaraIs dig!ity reutes o!e o the more disgusti!g books o 0uropea! 8ultural
8o!servatism- ,a? S8helerIs 7essentiment- a! attempt to Dhristia!iUe 4ietUs8he7
($
/he! S8heler
debates the issue o slavery- he i!trodu8es the disti!8tio! bet6ee! a mere huma! bei!g a!d a ree
perso!+ or Aristotle- slaves are o 8ourse huma!- but they are !ot perso!s- si!8e they do !ot possess the
i!!er dig!ity a!d ree auto!omy o a true perso!Ea!d- as he adds to dispel a!y ambiguity- this does
!ot mea! o!ly or primarily that a slave is !ot treated as a ree perso!- but that he does !ot treat himself
as a person- that he does !ot truly respe8t himsel- has !o se!se o the dig!ity o his perso!- is !ot
mortally oe!ded 6he! somethi!g is do!e to him that 6ould deprive a ree perso! o their dig!ity7
/hat S8heler misses here is that this la8k o dig!ity o a slave is !ot a simple a8t- but somethi!g
imposed o! him or her by edu8atio! a!d harsh dis8ipli!e e?erted by the masters+ i a slave displays
dig!ity- it is either brutally suppressed or mo8ked- take! as a ridi8ulous imitatio! o true dig!ity7 This
6as SaraIs positio!+ her @evide!tA dig!ity 6as simply ig!ored by her ordi!ary a!d Js8ie!tii8K
observers7 A!d this bri!gs us to the dime!sio! =ostadter misses+ the u!iNue dig!ity o a perso! has
!othi!g to do 6ith the Jgreat!essK o his or her soul i! =ostadterIs se!se o i!tegrati!g eleme!ts o
!umerous other Selves7
CHAPTER 11

The 4o!:All- or- the H!tology o Se?ual Giere!8e

S0d)A. G9FF0F04D0 94 T=0 G9S04D=A4T0G )49V0FS0

H! a irst approa8h- there is !othi!g sho8ki!g about the li!k bet6ee! o!tology a!d se?ual
diere!8e7 9s !ot su8h a li!k the dei!i!g eature o all premoder! 8osmologies 6hi8h e?plai! the
origi! o the u!iverse i! terms o a primordial 8o!li8t bet6ee! a mas8uli!e a!d a emi!i!e pri!8iple
@yi! a!d ya!g- light a!d dark!ess- =eave! a!d 0arthOAM 3a8k i! the hippie era o 1%'0s- 9 remember
readi!g a book by Ala! /atts- the Ue! populariUer- i! 6hi8h he e?plai!ed ho6- i! the simple a8tivity o
love:maki!g- the 6hole 8osmos reso!ates- the t6o opposi!g 8osmi8 pri!8iples- yi! a!d ya!g- da!8i!g
6ith ea8h otherEa message 6hi8h !o doubt boosted the 8o!ide!8e o adoles8e!ts 6a!ti!g se? as 6ell
as spiritual ulillme!t7
/hat 6e 8all the moder! Jdise!8ha!tme!tK o the u!iverse i!volves !ot o!ly the assertio! o
the gap bet6ee! the mea!i!gless a!d 8old Jobje8tive realityK a88essible to mathemati8iUed s8ie!8e a!d
the Jsubje8tiveK u!iverse o mea!i!gs a!d values 6hi8h 6e Jproje8tK o!to realityT u!derlyi!g this gap
is the de:se?ualiUatio! o reality7 9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that .a8a!Is a8hieveme!t should be
measured+ he reasserts the o!tologi8al status o se?ual diere!8e within the field of modern
scienceGho6 8a! this be do!e 6ithout regressi!g i!to a pre:s8ie!tii8 mythologyM That is to say- or
moder! tra!s8e!de!tal philosophy- se?ual diere!8e is deo!tologiUed- redu8ed to the o!ti8 sphere o
the huma! ra8eEi o!e o!tologiUes it- o!e is a88used o Ja!thropomorphism-K o proje8ti!g o!to the
u!iverse 6hat is merely a! empiri8al @biologi8al a!d psy8hi8A eature o huma! bei!gs7 This is 6hy
!either the *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t !or the =eideggeria! Dasein is se?ualiUed+ i! his a!alyti8 o
Dasein- =eidegger totally ig!ores se?uality7 @Typi8ally- 6he! philosophers deal 6ith Freudia! !otio!s
like J8astratio!-K they read them as o!ti8 metaphors or the o!tologi8al a priori o our i!itude-
limitatio!- po6erless!essOA
So ho6 e?a8tly does .a8a! su88eed i! re:o!tologiUi!g se?ual diere!8e 6ithout regressi!g to a
premoder! se?ualiUed 8osmologyM Dlearly- or .a8a!- Jse?ualityK does !ot desig!ate a parti8ular o!ti8
sphere o huma! reality+ it sta!ds or a 8ertai! displa8eme!t- a! a!amorphi8 distortio!- 6hose status is
stri8tly ormal7 0very JsphereK o huma! reality 8a! get Jse?ualiUed-K !ot be8ause se?uality is so
Jstro!gK that it 8a! spill over a!d 8o!tami!ate all other spheres- but or the very opposite reaso!+
be8ause it does not have its o6! JproperK sphere- be8ause it is primordially Jout o joi!t-K marked by a
8o!stitutive gap or dis8ord7
1
The irst philosopher to arti8ulate this deadlo8k @though he 6as u!a6are
o its li!k 6ith se?ual diere!8e- o 8ourseA 6as *a!t- 6he!- i! his ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- he
des8ribed the Jo!tologi8al s8a!dalK o the a!ti!omies o pure reaso!- the i!!er i!8o!siste!8y o the
basi8 o!tologi8o:tra!s8e!de!tal rame6ork 6e use to approa8h reality+ Jmathemati8alK a!ti!omies
re!der the deadlo8k 6hi8h 8hara8teriUes the emi!i!e positio!- a!d Jdy!ami8K a!ti!omies the deadlo8k
o the mas8uli!e positio!7
2
*a!t himsel- as 6e have see!- 6as u!able to 8o!ro!t a!d assume the
radi8ality o his breakthrough+ he ultimately 8o!ers o! these a!ti!omies a merely epistemologi8al
status7 A!ti!omies are i!di8atio!s o the i!ability o our i!ite reaso! to grasp the !oume!al reality+ the
mome!t 6e apply our 8ategories to 6hat 8a! !ever be8ome a! obje8t o our e?perie!8e- 6e be8ome
8aught up i! i!soluble 8o!tradi8tio!s a!d a!ti!omies7 As =egel put it 6ith his a8erbi8 iro!y- *a!t- the
great destroyer o metaphysi8s- all o a sudde! developed a te!der!ess to6ards Thi!gs:i!:themselves
a!d de8ided to spare them rom a!ti!omies7 =ere- ho6ever- .a8a! is at the level o moder!
s8ie!8eE6hat he does 6ith *a!t is- i! a 6ay- to raise his 4e6to!ia!ism to the level o Nua!tum
physi8s7
The passage rom 0i!stei! to 3ohr repeats the logi8 o the passage rom *a!t to =egel+ or
0i!stei!- i! a thoroughly *a!tia! 6ay- the Ja!ti!omyK o velo8ity a!d positio! demo!strates that
Nua!tum physi8s does !ot rea8h the !oume!al reality o Thi!gs:i!:themselvesT or =egel- Ja!ti!omyK
is the very sig! that 6e have tou8hed the !oume!al Feal7 9! the irst 8ase- o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess is
tra!sposed i!to a! epistemologi8al orm- the i!8omplete!ess is per8eived as a! ee8t o the a8t that
a!other @se8ret- but ully realA age!8y has 8o!stru8ted our reality as a simulated u!iverse7 The truly
dii8ult thi!g is to a88ept the se8o!d 8hoi8e- the o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o reality itsel7 Dommo!
se!se 6ill immediately 8omplai! loudly+ but ho6 8a! this o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess hold or reality
itselM 9s !ot reality defined by its o!tologi8al 8omplete!essM
"
9 reality Jreally e?ists out there-K it has
to be 8omplete Jall the 6ay do6!-K other6ise 6e are deali!g 6ith a i8tio! 6hi8h just Jha!gs i! the
air-K like appeara!8es 6hi8h are !ot appeara!8es o a substa!tial Somethi!g7 =ere- pre8isely- Nua!tum
physi8s e!ters i!- oeri!g a model o ho6 to thi!k @or at least imagi!eA su8h a! Jope!K o!tology7 Alai!
3adiou ormulated the same idea 6ith his !otio! o pure multipli8ity as the ultimate o!tologi8al
8ategory+ reality is the multipli8ity o multipli8ities 6hi8h 8a!!ot be ge!erated or 8o!stituted rom @or
redu8ed toA some orm o H!es as its eleme!tary @Jatomi8KA 8o!stitue!ts7 ,ultipli8ities are !ot
multipli8atio!s o H!e- they are irredu8ible multipli8ities- 6hi8h is 6hy their opposite is !ot H!e but
Uero- the o!tologi8al void+ !o matter ho6 ar 6e progress i! our a!alysis o multipli8ities- 6e !ever
rea8h the Uero:level o its simple 8o!stitue!tsEthe o!ly Jba8kgrou!dK or multipli8ities is thus Uero-
the void7
(
Therei! resides 3adiouIs o!tologi8al breakthrough+ the primordial oppositio! is !ot that o
H!e a!d Bero- but that o Bero a!d multipli8ities- a!d the H!e emerges later7 To put it eve! more
radi8ally- si!8e o!ly H!es Jreally e?ist-K multipli8ities a!d Bero are the same thi!g @!ot one and the
same thi!gA+ Bero JisK multipli8ities 6ithout the H!es 6hi8h 6ould guara!tee their o!tologi8al
8o!siste!8y7 This o!tologi8al ope!!ess o the H!e:less multipli8ity also allo6s us to approa8h i! a !e6
6ay *a!tIs se8o!d a!ti!omy o pure reaso!+ J0very 8omposite substa!8e i! the 6orld 8o!sists o
simple partsT a!d there e?ists !othi!g that is !ot either itsel simple- or 8omposed o simple parts7K
#

=ere is *a!tIs proo+

For- gra!t that 8omposite substa!8es do !ot 8o!sist o simple partsT i! this 8ase- i all 8ombi!atio! or
8ompositio! 6ere a!!ihilated i! thought- !o 8omposite part- a!d @as- by the suppositio!- there do !ot
e?ist simple partsA !o simple part 6ould e?ist7 Do!seNue!tly- !o substa!8eT 8o!seNue!tly- !othi!g
6ould e?ist7 0ither- the!- it is impossible to a!!ihilate 8ompositio! i! thoughtT or- ater su8h
a!!ihilatio!- there must remai! somethi!g that subsists 6ithout 8ompositio!- that is- somethi!g that is
simple7 3ut i! the ormer 8ase the 8omposite 8ould !ot itsel 8o!sist o substa!8es- be8ause 6ith
substa!8es 8ompositio! is merely a 8o!ti!ge!t relatio!- apart rom 6hi8h they must still e?ist as sel:
subsiste!t bei!gs7 4o6- as this 8ase 8o!tradi8ts the suppositio!- the se8o!d must 8o!tai! the truthEthat
the substa!tial 8omposite i! the 6orld 8o!sists o simple parts79t ollo6s- as a! immediate i!ere!8e-
that the thi!gs i! the 6orld are all- 6ithout e?8eptio!- simple bei!gsEthat 8ompositio! is merely a!
e?ter!al 8o!ditio! pertai!i!g to themEa!d that- although 6e !ever 8a! separate a!d isolate the
eleme!tary substa!8es rom the state o 8ompositio!- reaso! must 8ogitate these as the primary subje8ts
o all 8ompositio!- a!d 8o!seNue!tly- as prior theretoEa!d as simple substa!8es7
'
/hat i- ho6ever- 6e a88ept the 8o!8lusio! that ultimately J!othi!g e?istsKM @A 8o!8lusio!
6hi8h- i!8ide!tally- e?a8tly mat8hes that o ClatoIs )armenides+ JThe! may 6e !ot sum up the
argume!t i! a 6ord a!d say truly+ 9 o!e is !ot- the! !othi!g isMKA Su8h a move- although reje8ted by
*a!t as obvious !o!se!se- is !ot as u!:*a!tia! as it may appear+ it is here that 6e should apply yet
agai! the *a!tia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! !egative a!d i!i!ite judgme!t7
The stateme!t Jmaterial reality is all there isK 8a! be !egated i! t6o 6ays- i! the orm o
Jmaterial reality is not all there isK a!d Jmaterial reality is non*all7K The irst !egatio! @o a predi8ateA
leads to sta!dard metaphysi8s+ material reality is !ot everythi!g- there is a!other- higher- spiritual
reality7 As su8h- this !egatio! is- i! a88orda!8e 6ith .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- i!here!t to the
positive stateme!t Jmaterial reality is all there isK+ as its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!- it grou!ds its
u!iversality7 9- ho6ever- 6e assert a !o!:predi8ate a!d say Jmaterial reality is non*all-K this merely
asserts the !o!:All o reality 6ithout implyi!g a!y e?8eptio!Eparado?i8ally- o!e should thus 8laim
that the a?iom o true materialism is !ot Jmaterial reality is all there is-K but a double o!e+ @1A there is
!othi!g 6hi8h is !ot material reality- @2A material reality is !o!:All7
$
9 6e 6a!t to simulate reality 6ithi! a! artii8ial @virtual- digitalA medium- 6e do !ot have to go
all the 6ay+ 6e just have to reprodu8e those eatures 6hi8h 6ill make the image realisti8 rom the
spe8tatorIs poi!t o vie67 For e?ample- i there is a house i! the ba8kgrou!d- 6e do !ot have to
program the houseIs i!terior- si!8e 6e e?pe8t that the parti8ipa!t 6ill !ot 6a!t to e!ter the houseT or-
the 8o!stru8tio! o a virtual perso! i! this spa8e 8a! be limited to his e?teriorE!o !eed to bother 6ith
i!!er orga!s- bo!es- et87 /e just !eed to 8reate a program 6hi8h 6ill promptly ill i! this gap i the
parti8ipa!tIs a8tio!s !e8essitate it @say- i he plu!ges a k!ie deep i!to the virtual perso!Is bodyA7 9t is
similar to s8rolli!g do6! a lo!g passage o te?t o! a 8omputer s8ree!+ the pages do !ot pre:e?ist our
vie6i!g them7 The truly i!teresti!g idea here is that the Nua!tum i!determi!a8y 6e e!8ou!ter 6he!
i!Nuiri!g i!to the ti!iest 8ompo!e!ts o our u!iverse 8a! be read i! e?a8tly the same 6ay- as a eature
o the limited resolutio! o our simulated 6orld- as the sig! o the o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o @6hat
6e e?perie!8e asA reality itsel7 9magi!e a god 8reati!g the 6orld or us- its huma! i!habita!ts- to d6ell
i!7 =is task

8ould be made easier by ur!ishi!g it o!ly 6ith those parts that its i!habita!ts !eed to k!o6 about7 For
e?ample- the mi8ros8opi8 stru8ture o the 0arthIs i!terior 8ould be let bla!k- at least u!til someo!e
de8ides to dig do6! deep e!ough- i! 6hi8h 8ase the details 8ould be hastily illed i! as reNuired7 9 the
most dista!t stars are haUy- !o o!e is ever goi!g to get 8lose e!ough to them to !oti8e that somethi!g is
amiss7
&
The idea is that the god 6ho 8reated or JprogrammedK our u!iverse 6as too laUy @or- rather- he
u!derestimated our i!tellige!8eA+ he thought that 6e huma!s 6ould !ot su88eed i! probi!g i!to the
stru8ture o !ature beyo!d the level o atoms- so he programmed the ,atri? o our u!iverse o!ly to the
level o its atomi8 stru8tureEbeyo!d that- he simply let thi!gs uUUy7
%
This theologi8o:digital
i!terpretatio!- ho6ever- is !ot the o!ly 6ay to read the parado? i! Nuestio!7 9t 8a! be read as a sig! that
6e already live i! a simulated u!iverse- but it 8a! also be take! as a sig!al o the o!tologi8al
i!8omplete!ess o reality itsel7 Goes !ot this o!tologi8al JuUUi!essK o reality also oer us a !e6
approa8h to moder!ism i! pai!ti!gM Are !ot the Jstai!sK 6hi8h blur the tra!spare!8y o a realist
represe!tatio!- 6hi8h impose themselves as stai!s- pre8isely i!di8atio!s that the 8o!tours o 8o!stituted
reality are blurred- that 6e are approa8hi!g the pre:o!tologi8al level o uUUy proto:realityM Therei! lies
the 8ru8ial shit a vie6er has to a88omplish+ stai!s are !ot obsta8les that preve!t our dire8t a88ess to
represe!ted reality- they are- o! the 8o!trary- Jmore real tha! reality-K somethi!g that u!dermi!es its
o!tologi8al 8o!siste!8y rom 6ithi!Eor- to put it i! old:ashio!ed philosophi8al terms- their status is
!ot epistemologi8al but o!tologi8al7
Alo!g these li!es 6e 8a! also address the sta!dard problem o ho6 to u!ite the 8ausal
des8riptio! o a! eve!t 6ith its readi!g as a ree huma! a8t+ 6here- i! the !et6ork o !atural !e8essity-
is the spa8e or reedomM 9s the Jteleologi8alK 8ausality o motivatio! @9 a8ted i! su8h a 6ay be8ause 9
aimed at su8h a!d su8h a goalA just a! epiphe!ome!o!- the me!tal tra!slatio! o a pro8ess 6hi8h 8a!
@alsoA be ully des8ribed at the purely physi8al level o !atural determi!ism- or does su8h a
Jteleologi8alK 8ausatio! a8tually possess a po6er o its o6!- 6hi8h ills i! a gap i! physi8al 8ausalityM
The u!derlyi!g premise here is that the 8ausality o !atural !e8essity rea8hes Jall the 6ay do6!KEbut
is this level o total determi!ism really the Uero:level o the o!tologi8al stru8ture o realityM The lesso!
o Nua!tum physi8s is that- be!eath solid material reality- there is a Nua!tum level at 6hi8h
determi!ism breaks do6!7 =e!8e the 8laim that the i!determi!a8y dis8overed by Nua!tum physi8s
ope!s up a spa8e 6ithi! 6hi8h the Jhigher levelK teleologi8al 8ausality 8a! determi!e the Jlo6er levelK
material eve!ts- 6ithout relyi!g o! a!y spiritualist !otio! o the po6er o our mi!ds to magi8ally
suspe!d !atural 8ausality7
The o!ly true alter!ative to this o!tologi8al uUUi!ess is the aoreme!tio!ed a!d !o less
parado?i8al idea that- at some poi!t- the e!dless progress o dividi!g reality i!to its 8ompo!e!ts
rea8hes its e!d 6he! the divisio! is !o lo!ger a divisio! i!to t6o @or moreA parts- but a divisio! i!to a
part @somethi!gA a!d nothing7 This 6ould be proo that 6e had rea8hed the most eleme!tary 8o!stitue!t
o reality+ 6he! somethi!g 8a! o!ly be urther divided i!to a somethi!g a!d a !othi!g7 Go !ot these
t6o optio!s relate agai! to .a8a!Is Jormulae o se?uatio!-K so that the irredu8ible:multipli8ity optio!
is Jemi!i!eK a!d the divisio! o the last term i!to a somethi!g a!d a !othi!g is Jmas8uli!eKM
Furthermore- is it !ot the 8ase that- i 6e 8ould rea8h the poi!t o the last divisio! @a!d thus the ultimate
o!e- the last 8o!stitue!t o realityA- the! there 6ould be !o J8reatio!K proper- !othi!g really !e6 6ould
emerge- there 6ould be o!ly a @reA8ombi!atio! o e?isti!g eleme!ts- 6hile the emi!i!e JuUUi!essK o
reality leaves ope! the spa8e or 8reatio! properM The u!derlyi!g problem here is ho6 to pass rom the
multitude:that:is:Bero to the emerge!8e o H!e7 9s it that H!e is a multiple 6hi8h Jsta!ds or !othi!g-K
is it that H!es o!ly e?ist at the level o re:prese!tatio!M
THE REAL OF SE0!AL DIFFERENCE

H! a irst approa8h- se?uality is thus a or8e o disiguratio!- somethi!g 6hi8h distorts our
Jobje8tiveK vie6 o reality7 As su8h- it poi!ts to6ards a! irredu8ible- u!surpassable- o!tologi8al
s8a!dal- the true Jeutha!asia o reaso!K by 6hi8h *a!t 6as so sho8ked+ every attempt to thi!k reality
i! its totality has to e!d i! a deadlo8k- a! i!8o!siste!8y7 The parado?Ea!d the properly =egelia!
i!sightEis to a88ept that this distorti!g Jse?ual biasK o our per8eptio!- ar rom separati!g us rom
reality:i!:itsel- provides a dire8t li!k to it+ Jse?ualityK is the 6ay the o!tologi8al deadlo8k- the
i!8omplete!ess o reality i! itsel- is i!s8ribed i!to subje8tivity7 9t is !ot a subje8tive distortio! o
obje8tive reality- but a subje8tive distortio! 6hi8h is dire8tly ide!ti8al 6ith the !o!:All- the
i!8o!siste!8y>out:o:joi!t!ess- o reality itsel7 This is 6hy se?uality is- at its most radi8al- !ot huma!-
but the poi!t o i!:huma!ity- the Joperator of the inhuman7K
10
Caga! se?ualiUed 8osmology is a
a!tasmati8 attempt to suppleme!t a!d obus8ate the o!tologi8al s8a!dal i!here!t i! the deadlo8k o
huma! se?uality7
A! old Slove!e joke+ a you!g s8hoolboy has to 6rite a short 8ompositio! 6ith the title JThere
is o!ly o!e motherRK i! 6hi8h he is e?pe8ted to illustrate- apropos a si!gular e?perie!8e- the love 6hi8h
li!ks him to his motherT here is 6hat he 6rites+ JH!e day 9 retur!ed home earlier tha! e?pe8ted-
be8ause the tea8her 6as illT 9 looked or my mother a!d ou!d her !aked i! bed 6ith a!other ma! 6ho
6as !ot my ather7 ,y mother a!grily shouted at me+ V/hat are you stari!g at- you idiotM /hy do!It
you ru! to the rerigerator a!d get us t6o 8old beersRI 9 ra! to the kit8he!- ope!ed the rerigerator-
looked i!to it a!d shouted ba8k to the bedroom+ VThere is o!ly o!e- motherRI K 9s this !ot a supreme
8ase o a! i!terpretatio! i! 6hi8h a si!gle dia8riti8al sig! simply 8ha!ges everythi!g- as i! the 6ell:
k!o6! parody o the irst 6ords o Moby Dic"+ JDall me- 9shmaelRK /e 8a! i!d the same operatio! i!
=eidegger @the 6ay he reads J4othi!g is 6ithout reaso!K [nihil est sine ratione\- by shiti!g the a88e!t
to J4othi!g[!ess\ is 6ithout reaso!KA- or i! the superego displa8eme!t o the prohibitive i!ju!8tio! o
the symboli8 la6 @rom JGo!It killRK to JGo!ItRK O J*illRKA7 =o6ever- here o!e should risk a more
detailed i!terpretatio!7 The joke stages a =amlet:like 8o!ro!tatio! o the so! 6ith the e!igma o the
motherIs e?8essive desireT i! order to es8ape this deadlo8k- the mother as it 6ere takes reuge i! @the
desire orA a! e?ter!al partial obje8t- the bottle o beer- desig!ed to divert the so!Is atte!tio! rom the
obs8e!e Thi!g he has just stumbled upo!Ethe message o her dema!d is+ J5ou see- eve! i 9 am i! bed
6ith a ma!- my desire is or somethi!g else that o!ly you 8a! bri!g me- 9 am !ot e?8ludi!g you by
getti!g 8ompletely 8aught up i! the 8ir8le o passio! 6ith this ma!RK The t6o bottles o beer @alsoA
sta!d or the eleme!tary sig!iyi!g dyad- like .a8a!Is amous t6o restroom doors observed by t6o
8hildre! rom the trai! 6i!do6 i! his J9!sta!8e o the .etter i! the )!8o!s8ious7K From this
perspe8tive- the 8hildIs riposte is to be read as givi!g the mother a! eleme!tary .a8a!ia! lesso!+
JSorry- mother- but there is only one signifier- or the ma! o!ly- there is !o bi!ary sig!iier @or the
6oma!A- this sig!iier is ur*verdr=ngt- primordially repressedRK 9! short+ you have bee! 8aught !aked-
you are !ot 8overed by the sig!iier7 A!d 6hat i this is the u!dame!tal message o mo!otheismE!ot
the redu8tio! o the Hther to the H!e- but- o! the 8o!trary- the a88epta!8e o the a8t that the bi!ary
sig!iier al6ays already la8ksM This imbala!8e bet6ee! the H!e a!d its Jprimordially repressedK
8ou!terpart is the radi8al diere!8e- i! 8o!trast to the great 8osmologi8al 8ouples @yin a!d yang- et87A
6hi8h 8a! o!ly emerge 6ithi! the horiUo! o the u!diere!tiated H!e @tao- et87A7 0ve! attempts to
i!trodu8e a bala!8ed duality i!to trivial spheres o 8o!sumptio!- like the small blue a!d red bags o
artii8ial s6eete!er ou!d i! ma!y 8aes- betray yet a!other desperate eort to provide a symmetri8al
sig!iyi!g 8ouple or se?ual diere!8e @blue Jmas8uli!eK bags versus red Jemi!i!eK bagsA7 The poi!t
is !ot that se?ual diere!8e is the ultimate sig!iied o all su8h 8ouples- but rather that their
prolieratio! is a! attempt to 8ompe!sate or the lac" o the ou!di!g bi!ary sig!iyi!g 8ouple that
6ould dire8tly sta!d or se?ual diere!8e7
This is also 6hy the .a8a!ia! problemati8 o se?ual diere!8eEo the u!avoidability o
se?uatio! or huma! bei!gs @Jbei!gs o la!guageKAEhas to be stri8tly disti!guished rom the
@deA8o!stru8tio!ist problemati8 o the Jso8ial 8o!stru8tio! o ge!der-K the 8o!ti!ge!t dis8ursive
ormatio! o ge!der ide!tities 6hi8h emerge i! bei!g perormatively e!a8ted7 A! a!alogy 6ith 8lass
a!tago!ism may be o some help i! graspi!g the 8ru8ial disti!8tio!+ 8lass a!tago!ism @the
u!avoidability o the i!dividualIs J8lass i!s8riptio!K i! a 8lass so8iety- the impossibility o remai!i!g
u!marked by its 8e!tral a!tago!ismA also 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the !otio! o the Jso8ial 8o!stru8tio! o
8lass ide!tity-K si!8e every determi!ate J8o!stru8tio! o 8lass ide!tityK is already a Jrea8tiveK or
Jdee!seK ormatio!- a! attempt to J8ope 6ithK @to 8ome to terms 6ith- to pa8iyOA the trauma o 8lass
a!tago!ism7 0very symboli8 J8lass ide!tityK already displa8es the 8lass a!tago!ism by 6ay o
tra!slati!g it i!to a positive set o symboli8 eatures+ the 8o!servative orga!i8ist !otio! o so8iety as a
8olle8tive 3ody- 6ith diere!t 8lasses as bodily orga!s @the ruli!g 8lass as the be!evole!t a!d 6iser
Jhead-K 6orkers as the Jha!ds-K et87A is o!ly the most obvious 8ase7 For .a8a!- thi!gs are the same
6ith se?uatio!+ it is impossible to Jstay outsideK o it- the subje8t is al6ays already marked by it-
al6ays already Jtakes sides-K al6ays already JpartialK 6ith regard to it7 The parado? o the problemati8
o the Jso8ial 8o!stru8tio! o ge!derK is that- 6hile prese!ti!g itsel as a break 6ith Jmetaphysi8alK
a!d>or esse!tialist 8o!strai!ts- it impli8itly a88omplishes a retur! to the pre:Freudia! philosophi8al @i7e7-
!o!:se?ualiUedA subje8t7 The problemati8 o the Jso8ial 8o!stru8tio! o ge!derK presupposes the subje8t
as give!- presupposes the spa8e o 8o!ti!ge!t symboliUatio!- 6hile- or .a8a!- Jse?uatio!K is the pri8e
to be paid or the very 8o!stitutio! o the subje8t- or its e!try i!to the spa8e o symboliUatio!7 Therei!
lies the 8ru8ial diere!8e bet6ee! psy8hoa!alysis a!d philosophy 8o!8er!i!g the status o se?ual
diere!8e+ or philosophy- the subje8t is !ot i!here!tly se?ualiUed- se?ualiUatio! o!ly o88urs at the
8o!ti!ge!t- empiri8al level- 6hereas psy8hoa!alysis raises se?uatio! i!to a ki!d o ormal a priori
8o!ditio! or the very emerge!8e o the subje8t7 /e should thus dee!d the 8laim that 6hat philosophy
8a!!ot thi!k is se?ual diere!8e in its philosophical ?ontological@ dimension+ se?ual diere!8e sta!ds
or the primordial a!tago!ism- or the !o!:All that subverts a!y totality- a!d this is 6hat philosophy- up
to =eidegger- has to ig!ore+

The 1reeks had t6o 6ords or 6hat 6e 8all lie+ bios a!d 2aJ7 They used bios i! a t6oold se!se7 First-
i! the se!se o biology- the s8ie!8e o lie7 =ere 6e thi!k o the orga!i8 gro6th o the body- gla!dular
a8tivity- se?ual diere!8e- a!d so o! O A!other se!se o bios or the 1reeks is the 8ourse o a lie- the
history o a lie- more or less i! the se!se that the 6ord JbiographyK still has or us today7 /ios here
mea!s huma! history a!d e?iste!8eEso there 8a! be !o bios o a!imals7 /ios- as huma! bios- has the
pe8uliar disti!8tio! o bei!g able either to sta!d above the a!imal or to si!k be!eath it7
11
9 there is a lesso! o psy8hoa!alysis- it is that se?ual diere!8e belo!gs to the domai! o bios
as history- !ot to the domai! o gla!dular a8tivity- a!d so orth7
0ve! the Jmysti8alK e?perie!8e o Jdeperso!aliUatio!K is marked by se?ual diere!8e7 9! this
e?perie!8e- 9 see mysel as part o a pi8ture 6hi8h is !ot Jmi!e-K does !ot i!volve my sta!dpoi!tEi!
short- 9 see mysel Jobje8tivelyK @eve! i this obje8tivity is- o 8ourse- a!tasmati8A7 Fe8all .a8a!Is
ormula+ JThe pi8ture is i! my eye- but 9 am i! the pi8ture7K 9- i! the 8ommo! subje8tivist perspe8tival
vie6- every pi8ture is mi!e- Ji! my eye-K 6hile 9 am !ot @a!d by dei!itio! 8a!!ot beA i! the pi8ture-
the mysti8al e?perie!8e i!verts this relatio!+ 9 am i! the pi8ture that 9 see- but the pi8ture is !ot mi!e-
Ji! my eye7K This is ho6 .a8a!Is ormula o the male versio! o the mysti8al e?perie!8e should be
read+ it ide!tiies my gaUe 6ith the gaUe o the big Hther- or i! it 9 see mysel dire8tly through the eyes
o the big Hther7 This relia!8e o! the big Hther makes the male versio! o the mysti8al e?perie!8e
alse- i! 8o!trast to the emi!i!e versio! i! 6hi8h the subje8t ide!tiies her gaUe 6ith the small other7
/he! .a8a! 8laims that se?ual diere!8e is Jreal-K he is thereore ar rom elevati!g a
histori8ally 8o!ti!ge!t orm o se?uatio! i!to a tra!s:histori8al !orm @Ji you do !ot o88upy your
proper pre:ordai!ed pla8e i! the heterose?ual order- as either ma! or 6oma!- you are e?8luded- e?iled
i!to a psy8hoti8 abyss outside the symboli8 domai!KA+ the 8laim that se?ual diere!8e is JrealK eNuals
the 8laim that it is JimpossibleK+ impossible to symboliUe- to ormulate as a symboli8 !orm7 9! other
6ords- it is !ot that 6e homose?uals- etishists- a!d other perverts are proo o the ailure o se?ual
diere!8e to impose its !ormT it is !ot that se?ual diere!8e is the ultimate poi!t o reere!8e 6hi8h
a!8hors the 8o!ti!ge!t driti!g o se?ualityT it is- o! the 8o!trary- o! a88ou!t o the gap 6hi8h orever
persists bet6ee! the real o se?ual diere!8e a!d the determi!ate orms o heterose?ual symboli8
!orms that 6e have the multitude o JperverseK orms o se?uality7 Therei! lies the problem 6ith the
a88usatio! that se?ual diere!8e i!volves a Jbi!ary logi8K+ i!soar as se?ual diere!8e is
real>impossible- it is pre8isely not Jbi!ary-K but- agai!- that o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h every Jbi!aryK
i!terpretatio! @every tra!slatio! o se?ual diere!8e i!to symboli8 dualisms+ reaso! versus emotio!-
a8tive versus passive- et87A al6ays ails7
12
9! short- 6hat marks the diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o se?es is !ot a dire8t reere!8e to the series
o symboli8 oppositio!s- but a diere!t 6ay o 8opi!g 6ith the !e8essary i!8o!siste!8y i!volved i! the
a8t o assumi!g o!e a!d the same u!iversal symboli8 eature @ultimately that o J8astratio!KA7 9t is !ot
that ma! sta!ds or logos as opposed to the emi!i!e emphasis o! emotio!sT it is rather that- or ma!-
logos as the 8o!siste!t a!d 8ohere!t u!iversal pri!8iple o all reality relies o! the 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!
o some mysti8al i!eable d @Jthere are thi!gs o!e should !ot talk aboutKA- 6hile- i! the 8ase o
6oma!- there is !o e?8eptio!- Jo!e 8a! talk about everythi!g-K a!d- or that very reaso!- the u!iverse
o logos be8omes i!8o!siste!t- i!8ohere!t- dispersed- J!o!:All7K Hr- 6ith regard to the assumptio! o a
symboli8 title- a ma! 6ho te!ds to ide!tiy 6ith his title absolutely- to put everythi!g at stake or it @to
die or his DauseA- !o!etheless relies o! the myth that he is !ot o!ly his title- the Jso8ial maskK he is
6eari!g- that there is somethi!g be!eath it- a Jreal perso!KT i! the 8ase o a 6oma!- o! the 8o!trary-
there is !o irm- u!8o!ditio!al 8ommitme!t- everythi!g is ultimately a mask- a!d- or that very reaso!-
there is !othi!g Jbehi!d the mask7K Hr agai!- 6ith regard to love+ a ma! i! love is ready to give
everythi!g or it- the beloved is elevated i!to a! absolute- u!8o!ditio!al Hbje8t- but- or that very
reaso!- he is 8ompelled to sa8rii8e =er or the sake o his publi8 or proessio!al DauseT 6hile a 6oma!
is e!tirely- 6ithout restrai!t or reserve- immersed i! love- there is !o dime!sio! o her bei!g 6hi8h is
!ot permeated by loveEbut- or that very reaso!- Jlove is !ot allK or her- it is orever a88ompa!ied by
a! u!8a!!y u!dame!tal i!diere!8e7
9- the!- the a8tive:passive 8o!trast 8a!!ot serve to diere!tiate the t6o se?es- is the 8o!trast
bet6ee! i!tera8tivity @i! the se!se o the Du!!i!g o Feaso!- o the subje8t tra!sposi!g his>her a8tivity
o!to a!otherA a!d i!terpassivity more appropriateM 9!tera8tivity is Jemi!i!e-K a88ordi!g to the 8li8hL
about 6ome! k!o6i!g ho6 to remai! i! the ba8kgrou!d a!d- 6ith their 8u!!i!g plots- ho6 to
ma!ipulate me! i!to doi!g their dirty 6ork @destroyi!g their e!emies- sayA7 Agatha DhristieIs ,urtain8
)oirots .ast ,ase @published i! 1%$#- although 6ritte! de8ades earlierA 8o!8ludes 6ith a sel:relati!g
t6ist+ the i!al murder is 8ommitted by Coirot himsel7 The true 8rimi!al o the !ovel- 4orto!- is
respo!sible or a series o deaths but 6ithout getti!g blood o! his ha!ds+ he has pere8ted the 9ago:like
te8h!iNue o ma!ipulati!g someo!e psy8hologi8ally to provoke them i!to 8ommiti!g a murder7 9! the
middle o the !ovel- =asti!gs himsel- CoirotIs /atso!esNue 8ompa!io!- pla!s a poiso!i!g a!d is
preve!ted at the last mi!ute by Coirot7 Si!8e Coirot- himsel 8lose to death- 8a!!ot bri!g 4orto! to
8ourt- he shoots him i! 8old blood a!d the! lies do6! to die- de!yi!g himsel the pills that 6ould have
saved his lie7 4o 6o!der the author o this story is a 6oma!+ 4orto! is i!tera8tive 0vil at its purest7
9!terpassivity- o! the 8o!trary- is more a mas8uli!e strategy+ si!8e me! are !ot e?pe8ted to display their
emotio!s i! publi8- they let 6ome! to do it or them @6eepers hired to mour! at u!erals are al6ays
6ome!A- 6hile they retai! their sel:8o!strai!t7
The traditio!al metaphysi8s o subje8tivity opposes ma! a!d 6oma! as JpureK subje8t @ma! is
ratio!al- delivered o se!suality a!d bodily passio!sA a!d JimpureK subje8t @6oma! is u!able to 8ut her
li!ks 6ith se!suality- her mi!d at the mer8y o obs8ure irratio!al passio!s- a passive re8eiver o se!sual
impressio!s- et87AEto paraphrase =egel- 6oma! is a substa!8e 6hi8h has ailed to ully be8ome a
subje8t- to puriy itsel i!to subje8t @or a subje8t 6ho has ailed to 8ut its li!ks 6ith its substa!8eA7 For
e?ample- i! the domai! o ethi8s- o!ly a ma! is able to abstra8t rom his substa!tial amily ties a!d
reaso! a88ordi!g to u!iversal pri!8iples- that is- to a8t i! a truly ethi8al 6ayT 6hile 6ith 6ome!-
u!iversality is al6ays 8oloured by their parti8ular i!terests+ i a 6oma! a8Nuires u!iversal politi8al
po6er- she uses it to promote the i!terests o her parti8ular ki!Ea 6isdom e!dlessly varied by a!ti:
emi!ists like Htto /ei!i!ger @a!d tra8es o 6hi8h are dis8er!ible eve! i! =egelIs amous remarks-
apropos +ntigone- o emi!i!ity as the Jeter!al iro!yK o historyA7
.a8a! i!trodu8es a key 8ompli8atio! i!to this traditio!al s8heme+ or him- a subje8t @as b- a
barred o!eA is the ailure o its o6! a8tualiUatio!Ea subje8t e!deavors to a8tualiUe:e?press itsel- it
ails- a!d the subje8t is this ailure7 /hat .a8a! 8alls the ob1et petit a gives body to this ailure- it is the
substa!tial remai!der o the pro8ess o the subje8tiviUatio! o substa!8e- o the latterIs +ufhebung i! a
subje8tive orderT this is 6hy- or .a8a!- the subje8t is 8o!stitutively li!ked to the remai!der- it is
stri8tly 8orrelative to it- as registered i! .a8a!Is ormula o a!tasy+ b:a7 9!soar as 6oma! is a!
JimpureK subje8t- a!d i!soar as the ob1et petit a is the i!de? o this impurity- 6e 8a! thereore
8o!8lude that- o! a88ou!t o her very Jimpurity-K o!ly 6oma! is a pure subje8t- the subje8t as su8h- i!
8o!trast to mas8uli!e subje8tivity 6hose JpurityK is by dei!itio! ake- sustai!ed by a hidde!
substa!tialiUatio!7 9! Dartesia! terms- o!ly a 6oma! is a cogito- 6hile a ma! is al6ays already a res
cogitans7
So- ho6 does all this relate to our J8o!8rete-K JlivedK e?perie!8e o se?ual diere!8eM .et us
begi! 6ith a! ar8hetypal melodramati8 s8e!e+ that o a 6oma! 6riti!g a letter e?plai!i!g the situatio!
to her lover- a!d the!- ater some va8illatio!- teari!g it apart- thro6i!g it a6ay- a!d @usuallyA goi!g to
him- oeri!g hersel- i! lesh- i! her love- i!stead o the letter7 The 8o!te!t o the letter is stri8tly
8odiied+ as a rule- it e?plai!s to the beloved 6hy the 6oma! he ell i! love 6ith is !ot 6ho he thi!ks
she is- a!d- 8o!seNue!tly- 6hy- pre8isely be8ause she loves him- she must leave him i! order !ot to
de8eive him7 The teari!g up o the letter the! u!8tio!s as a retreat+ the 6oma! 8a!!ot go right to the
e!d a!d tell the truth- she preers to go o! 6ith her de8eptio!7 This gesture is u!dame!tally alse+ the
6oma!Is prese!8e is oered as a s8ree! desti!ed to repress the traumati8 truth 6hi8h 6as to be
arti8ulated i! the letterEas i! tra!sere!8e i! psy8hoa!alysis- 6here the patie!t oers hersel to the
a!alyst as the ultimate orm o dee!se- i! order to blo8k the emerge!8e o truth7
1"
9! other 6ords- love
emerges 6he! the a!alysis gets too 8lose to the u!8o!s8ious traumati8 truth+ at this poi!t- the a!alysa!d
oers hersel to the a!alyst as the obje8t o love- i!stead o the authe!ti8 letter to the a!alyst 6hi8h
6ould arti8ulate the traumati8 truth7 9! tra!sere!tial love- 9 oer mysel as obje8t i!stead o
k!o6ledge+ Jhere you have me @so that you 6ill !o lo!ger probe i!to meA7K
1(
This- ho6ever- is o!ly o!e 6ay to i!terpret the e!igma o the letter 6hi8h is 6ritte! but !ot
posted7 9! his Why Do Women Write More .etters -han -hey )ost?- Garia! .eader proposes a series o
a!s6ers to this Nuestio!-
1#
6hi8h 8a! be systematiUed by groupi!g them i!to t6o 8ouples+
@1A /ith regard to its addressee- the true addressee o a 6oma!Is love letter is the ,a!- the
abse!t symboli8 i8tio!- its ideal reader- the JthirdK i! the s8e!e- !ot the lesh:a!d:blood ma! to 6hom
it is addressedT alter!atively- its true addressee is the gap o abse!8e itsel- or the letter u!8tio!s as a!
obje8t- it is its very play 6ith abse!8e @the abse!8e o the addresseeA 6hi8h provides 1ouissance- si!8e
1ouissance is 8o!tai!ed i! the a8t o 6riti!g itsel- a!d si!8e its true addressee is thus the 6riter hersel7
@2A /ith regard to the 6ay it relates to its author- the letter remai!s u!posted be8ause it did !ot
say all @the author 6as u!able to e?press some 8ru8ial trauma 6hi8h 6ould a88ou!t or her true
subje8tive positio!AT or- it remai!s i! itsel orever u!i!ished- or there is al6ays somethi!g more to
say- si!8eElike moder!ity or =abermasE6oma! is i! hersel a! Ju!i!ished proje8t-K a!d the !o!:
posti!g o the letter a8k!o6ledges this a8t that 6oma!- like truth- 8a!!ot be Jall told-K that this is- as
.a8a! put it- Jmaterially impossible7K
Go 6e !ot e!8ou!ter here the split bet6ee! the phalli8 e8o!omy a!d the !o!:phalli8 domai!M
4ot posti!g a letter as a alse a8t o Jrepressio!K @o suppressi!g the truth a!d oeri!g o!esel as a love
obje8t i! order to mai!tai! the lieA is 8learly 8orrelated to the split bet6ee! the ma!- its lesh:a!d:blood
addressee- a!d some third ,a!- the bearer o phalli8 po6er- its ultimate addressee7 9! a! homologous
6ay- !ot posti!g a letter be8ause it is a! obje8t 6hi8h 8o!tai!s its o6! 1ouissance is 8orrelated to the
!o!:All o feminine 1ouissance- to the 1ouissance 6hi8h 8a! !ever be JsaidK i! its e!tirety7
The dire8t se?ualiUatio! o the gap itsel 6hi8h 8hara8teriUes emi!i!e se?ualityE!amely the
a8t that- i! it- mu8h stro!ger tha! i! ma!- the abse!8e as su8h @the 6ithdra6al- the !o!:a8tA is
se?ualiUedEalso a88ou!ts or the gesture o emi!i!e 6ithdra6al at the very mome!t 6he! Jshe 8ould
have had it allK @i7e7- the lo!ged:or part!erA i! a series o !ovels rom ,adame de .aayetteIs
)rincesse de ,leves to 1oetheIs Elective +ffinities @or- i! the obverse or 8ompleme!tary 8ase- the
6oma!Is !o!:6ithdra6al- her i!e?pli8able persevera!8e i! the u!happy marriage- eve! 6he! the
possibility has arise! or her to get out o it- as i! 2amesIs -he )ortrait of a .adyA7
1'
Although
ideology gets i!vested i! this gesture o re!u!8iatio!- the gesture itsel is !o!:ideologi8al7 H!e readi!g
o this gesture to be reje8ted is the sta!dard psy8hoa!alyti8 i!terpretatio! a88ordi!g to 6hi8h 6e are
deali!g 6ith the hysteri8al logi8 o the obje8t o love @the loverA 6ho is desired o!ly i!soar as he is
prohibited- o!ly i!soar as there is a! obsta8le i!- e7g7- the guise o the husba!dEthe mome!t the
obsta8le disappears- the 6oma! loses i!terest i! the love obje8t7 9! additio! to this hysteri8al e8o!omy
o bei!g able to e!joy the obje8t o!ly i!soar as it remai!s prohibited- i! other 6ords i! the guise o
a!tasies about 6hat Jmight be-K this 6ithdra6al @or i!siste!8eA 8a! also be i!terpreted i! a multitude
o other 6ays+ as the e?pressio! o so:8alled Jemi!i!e maso8hismK @6hi8h 8a! be urther read as a!
e?pressio! o the eter!al emi!i!e !ature- or as the i!ter!aliUatio! o patriar8hal pressureA preve!ti!g a
6oma! rom ully JseiUi!g the dayKT as a proto:emi!ist gesture o breaki!g 6ith the phalli8 e8o!omy
6hi8h posits happi!ess i! a relatio!ship 6ith a ma! as the 6oma!Is ultimate goal- a!d so o!7 =o6ever-
all these i!terpretatio!s seem to miss the poi!t- 6hi8h 8o!sists i! the absolutely u!dame!tal !ature o
the gesture o 6ithdra6al or substitutio! as 8o!stitutive o the subje8t hersel7 9- ollo6i!g the great
1erma! 9dealists- 6e eNuate the subje8t 6ith reedom a!d auto!omy- is !ot su8h a gesture o
6ithdra6alE!ot as a sa8rii8ial gesture addressed to some versio! o the big Hther- but as a gesture
6hi8h ge!erates its o6! satisa8tio!- i!di!g 1ouissance i! the very gap that separates the subje8t rom
the obje8tEthe ultimate orm o auto!omyM
1$
The 8o!8lusio! to be dra6! rom this is that it is 6ro!g to 8o!trast ma! a!d 6oma! i! a!
immediate 6ay- as i ma! dire8tly desires a! obje8t- 6hile 6oma!Is desire is a Jdesire to desire-K the
desire or the HtherIs desire7 /e are deali!g here 6ith se?ual diere!8e as real- 6hi8h mea!s that the
opposite also holds- albeit i! a slightly displa8ed 6ay7 True- a ma! dire8tly desires a 6oma! 6ho its
the rame o his a!tasy- 6hile a 6oma! alie!ates her desire mu8h more thoroughly i! a ma!Eher
desire is to be the obje8t desired by ma!- to it the rame o his a!tasy- 6hi8h is 6hy she e!deavors to
look at hersel through the otherIs eyes a!d is perma!e!tly bothered by the Nuestio! J/hat do others
see i! her>meMK =o6ever- a 6oma! is simulta!eously mu8h less depe!de!t o! her part!er- si!8e her
ultimate part!er is !ot the other huma! bei!g- her obje8t o desire @the ma!A- but the gap itsel- that
dista!8e rom her part!er i! 6hi8h the 1ouissance fAminine is lo8ated7 6ulgari elo<uentia- i! order to
8heat o! a 6oma!- a ma! !eeds a @real or imagi!edA part!er- 6hile a 6oma! 8a! 8heat o! a ma! eve!
6he! she is alo!e- si!8e her ultimate part!er is solitude itsel as the lo8us o 1ouissance fAminine
beyo!d the phallus7
Se?ual diere!8e is thus real also i! the se!se that !o symboli8 oppositio! 8a! dire8tly a!d
adeNuately re!der it7 The real diere!8e is !ot a diere!8e bet6ee! opposed symboli8 eatures- but a
diere!8e bet6ee! t6o types o oppositio!+ a 6oma! is esse!tial to a ma!Is se?ual lie- yet or that
very reaso! he has a domai! outside his se?ual lie 6hi8h matters more to himT to a 6oma!- se?uality
te!ds to be the eature 6hi8h permeates her e!tire lie- there is !othi!g 6hi8hEpote!tially- at leastEis
!ot se?ualiUed- yet or that very reaso! a 6oma!Is se?uality i!volves mu8h more that the prese!8e o a
ma!7 The poi!t- o 8ourse- is that this reversal is !ot purely symmetri8al- but slightly displa8edEa!d it
is this displa8eme!t 6hi8h poi!ts to6ards the Feal o se?ual diere!8e7 Agai!- the u!derlyi!g stru8ture
here is that o .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- the u!iversality @a 6oma! 6ho is esse!tial- allOA 6ith a!
e?8eptio! @8areer- publi8 lieA i! ma!Is 8aseT the !o!:u!iversality @a ma! is !ot:all i! 6oma!Is se?ual
lieA 6ith !o e?8eptio! @there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot se?ualiUedA i! 6oma!Is 8ase7 This parado? o the
emi!i!e positio! is 8aptured by the ambiguity o 0mily Gi8ki!so!Is 8elebrated Coem $"2+

She rose to =is FeNuireme!tEdropt The Claythi!gs o =er .ie To take the ho!orable /orkH
/oma!- a!d o /ieE
9 ought she missed i! =er !e6 Gay- H Amplitude- or A6eEHr irst Crospe8tiveEHr the 1old 9!
usi!g- 6ear a6ay-
9t lay u!me!tio!edEas the Sea Gevelop Cearl- a!d /heed- 3ut o!ly to =imselEbe k!o6! The
Fathoms they abideE
1&
This poem- o 8ourse- 8a! be read as alludi!g to the sa8rii8e o the agalmaEthe ob1et petit a-
the Jplaythi!gsK o emi!i!e 1ouissanceE6hi8h o88urs 6he! the 6oma! be8omes a /oma!- 6he! she
assumes the subordi!ate role o /ie+ u!der!eath- i!a88essible to the male gaUe- the part o JsheK
6hi8h does !ot it her role as J/oma!K @6hi8h is 6hy- i! the last sta!Ua- she reers to hersel as
J=imselKA 8o!ti!ues to lead its se8ret Ju!me!tio!edK e?iste!8e7 =o6ever- it 8a! also be read i! a!
opposite- a!d ar more u!8a!!y- 6ay+ 6hat i the status o this Jse8ret treasureK sa8rii8ed 6he! the
6oma! be8omes a /ie is purely a!tasmati8M /hat i she evokes this se8ret i! order to as8i!ate =is
@her husba!dIs- the maleA gaUeM 9s it !ot also possible to read Jbut o!ly to =imselK i! the se!se that the
!otio! o the emi!i!e treasure sa8rii8ed 6he! a 6oma! e!ters i!to a se?ual liaiso! 6ith a ma! is a
sembla!8e i!te!ded to as8i!ate =is gaUe- a!d thus sta!ds or the loss o somethi!g 6hi8h 6as !ever
prese!t- !ever possessedM @The very dei!itio! o the ob1et a is+ a! obje8t 6hi8h emerges i! the very
gesture o its loss7A 9! short- does !ot this Jlost treasureK ollo6 the li!e o the male a!tasy about the
emi!i!e se8ret 6hi8h lies beyo!d the limit o the symboli8 order- beyo!d its rea8hM Hr- i! =egelese+
the emi!i!e 9!:itsel- out o rea8h o the male gaUe- is already Jor the Hther-K a! i!a88essible ,ystery
imagi!ed by the male gaUe itsel7 This is 6hy 3adiou is ully justiied i! reje8ti!g the sta!dard versio!
o .a8a!Is 1ouissance fAminine 6hi8h li!ks its i!i!ity to the mysti8al )!sayable as the remai!der o
the J8ulturalK+ JThat emi!i!e e!joyme!t ties the i!i!ite to the u!sayable- a!d that mysti8al e8stasy
provides evide!8e or this- is a theme 9 6ould 8hara8teriUe as 8ultural7 H!e eels that- eve! i! .a8a!- it
has !ot yet bee! submitted to a radi8al test by the ideal o the matheme7K
1%
All o!e should add here is that there is also a more literal readi!g o the 1ouissance fAminine
6hi8h totally breaks 6ith the topos o the )!sayableEo! this opposite readi!g- the J!o!:AllK o the
emi!i!e implies that there is !othi!g i! emi!i!e subje8tivity 6hi8h is !ot marked by the phalli8:
symboli8 u!8tio!+ i a!ythi!g- 6oma! is more ully Ji! la!guageK tha! ma!7 /hi8h is 6hy a!y
reere!8e to pre:symboli8 Jemi!i!e substa!8eK is misleadi!g7 A88ordi!g to a re8e!tly popular theory-
the @biologi8alA male is just a @alsely ema!8ipatedA detour i! emale sel:reprodu8tio!- 6hi8h- i!
pri!8iple- is possible 6ithout me!7 0lisabeth 3adi!ter 8laims that- biologi8ally- 6e are all esse!tially
emi!i!e @the d 8hromosome is the patter! or all huma!ity- the 5 8hromosome a! additio!- !ot a
mutatio!AT or that reaso!- developme!t i!to a male implies a labor o diere!tiatio! that emale
embryos are spared7
20
Furthermore- i! relatio! to so8ial lie- males start o as 8itiUe!s i! a emale
homela!d @the uterusA beore bei!g or8ed to emigrate a!d live their lives as homesi8k e?iles7 That is to
say- si!8e me! 6ere origi!ally 8reated emale- they must have be8ome diere!tiated rom 6ome! by
mea!s o so8ial a!d 8ultural pro8essesEso it is ma!- !ot 6oma!- 6ho is the 8ulturally ormed Jse8o!d
se?7K
21
This theory 8a! be useul as a ki!d o politi8al myth a88ou!ti!g or the 8o!temporary
i!se8urity o male ide!tity7 3adi!ter is at a 8ertai! level right to poi!t out that the true so8ial 8risis
today is the 8risis o male ide!tity- o J6hat it mea!s to be a ma!K+ 6ome! are more or less
su88essully i!vadi!g ma!Is territory- assumi!g male u!8tio!s i! so8ial lie 6ithout losi!g their
emi!i!e ide!tity- 6hile the obverse pro8ess- the male @reA8o!Nuest o the Jemi!i!eK territory o
i!tima8y- is ar more traumati87 /hile the igure o publi8ly su88essul 6oma! is already part o our
Jso8ial imagi!ary-K problems 6ith a Jge!tle ma!K are ar more u!settli!g7 This theory- ho6ever- 6hile
it seems to assert i! a Jemi!istK 6ay the prima8y o the emi!i!e- reprodu8es u!dame!tal
metaphysi8al premises 8o!8er!i!g the relatio!ship bet6ee! the mas8uli!e a!d the emi!i!eT 3adi!ter
hersel asso8iates the male positio! 6ith the values o bei!g prepared to take the risk o e?ile- to leave
the sae have! o =ome- a!d o the !eed to 8reate o!eIs ide!tity through labor a!d 8ultural
mediatio!Eis this !ot a pseudo:=egelia! theory 6hi8h- o! a88ou!t o the a8t that labor a!d mediatio!
are o! the male side- 8learly privileges ma!M 9! short- the !otio! that 6oma! is the 3ase a!d ma! the
se8o!dary mediatio!>deviatio! 6ith !o proper>!atural ide!tity- lays the grou!d or the a!ti:emi!ist
argume!t par e?8elle!8e- si!8e- as =egel !ever tires o repeati!g- spirit itsel is- rom the sta!dpoi!t o
!ature- Jse8o!dary-K a pathologi8al deviatio!- J!ature si8k u!to death-K a!d the po6er o spirit resides
i! the very a8t that a margi!al>se8o!dary phe!ome!o!- Ji! itselK a mere detour 6ithi! some larger
!atural pro8ess- 8a!- through the labor o mediatio!- elevate itsel i!to a! 0!d:i!:itsel 6hi8h JpositsK
its o6! !atural presuppositio! as part o its o6! JspiritualK totality7 H! that s8ore- the appare!tly
Jdepre8iati!gK !otio!s o emi!i!ity as a mere masNuerade- la8ki!g a!y substa!tial ide!tity a!d i!!er
shape- o 6oma! as a J8astrated-K deprived- dege!erated- i!8omplete ma!- are pote!tially o ar greater
use or emi!ism tha! the ethi8al elevatio! o emi!i!ityEi! short- Htto /ei!i!ger is more useul tha!
Darol 1illiga!7
FHF,).A0 HF S0d)AT9H4+ T=0 A.. /9T= A4 0dD0CT9H4

.a8a! elaborated the i!8o!siste!8ies 6hi8h stru8ture se?ual diere!8e i! his Jormulae o
se?uatio!-K 6here the mas8uli!e side is dei!ed by the u!iversal u!8tio! a!d its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!-
a!d the emi!i!e side by the parado? o J!o!:AllK @pas*toutA @there is !o e?8eptio!- a!d or that very
reaso!- the set is !o!:All- !o!:totaliUedA7 Fe8all the shiti!g status o the 9!eable i! /ittge!stei!+ the
passage rom early to late /ittge!stei! is the passage rom All @the order o the u!iversal All grou!ded
i! its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!A to !o!:All @the order 6ithout e?8eptio! a!d or that reaso! !o!:u!iversal-
!o!:AllA7 That is to say- i! the early /ittge!stei! o the -ractatus- the 6orld is 8omprehe!ded as a sel:
e!8losed- limited- bou!ded /hole o Ja8tsK 6hi8h pre8isely as su8h presupposes a! 0?8eptio!+ the
mysti8al 9!eable 6hi8h u!8tio!s as its .imit7 9! late /ittge!stei!- o! the 8o!trary- the problemati8 o
the 9!eable disappears- yet or that very reaso! the u!iverse is !o lo!ger 8omprehe!ded as a /hole
regulated by the u!iversal 8o!ditio!s o la!guage+ all that remai!s are lateral 8o!!e8tio!s bet6ee!
partial domai!s7 The !otio! o la!guage as a system dei!ed by a set o u!iversal eatures is repla8ed
by the !otio! o la!guage as a multitude o dispersed pra8ti8es loosely i!ter8o!!e8ted by Jamily
resembla!8es7K
22
A 8ertai! type o eth!i8 8li8hL re!ders pere8tly this parado? o the !o!:All+ the !arratives o
Hrigi! i! 6hi8h a !atio! posits itsel as bei!g Jmore d tha! d itsel-K 6here d sta!ds or a!other
!atio! 8ommo!ly regarded as the paradigmati8 8ase o some property7 The myth o 98ela!d is that it
be8ame i!habited 6he! those 6ho ou!d 4or6ay- the reest la!d i! the 6orld- too oppressive- led to
98ela!dT the myth about Slove!es bei!g miserly 8laims that S8otla!d @the proverbial la!d o misersA
be8ame populated 6he! Slove!es e?pelled to S8otla!d someo!e 6ho had spe!t too mu8h mo!ey7 The
poi!t is !ot that Slove!es are the most avari8ious or 98ela!ders the most reedom:lovi!gES8ots remai!
the most miserly- but Slove!es are eve! more soT the people o 4or6ay remai! the most reedom:
lovi!g- but 98ela!ders are eve! more so7 This is the parado? o the J!o!:AllK+ i 6e totaliUe all !atio!s-
the! the S8ots are the most miserly- yet i 6e 8ompare them o!e by o!e- as J!o!:All-K Slove!es are
more miserly7 A variatio! o! the same moti o88urs i! Fossi!iIs amous stateme!t o! the diere!8e
bet6ee! 3eethove! a!d ,oUart+ 6he! asked- J/ho is the greatest 8omposerMK Fossi!i a!s6ered-
J3eethove!KT 6he! asked the additio!al Nuestio! J/hat about ,oUartMK he added- J,oUart is !ot the
greatest- he is the o!ly 8omposerOK This oppositio! bet6ee! 3eethove! @Jthe greatestK o them all-
si!8e he struggled 6ith his 8ompositio!s 6ith tita!i8 eort- over8omi!g the resista!8e o the musi8al
materialA a!d ,oUart @6ho reely loated i! the musi8al stu a!d 8omposed 6ith spo!ta!eous gra8eA
poi!ts to6ards the 6ell:k!o6! oppositio! bet6ee! the t6o !otio!s o 1od+ 1od as Jthe greatest-K
above all Dreatio!- the Fuler o the /orld- a!d so o!- a!d 1od 6ho is !ot the greatest but simply the
o!ly reality- 6ho does !ot relate to i!ite reality as separate rom him- si!8e he is Jall there is-K the
imma!e!t pri!8iple o all reality7
2"
The amous irst paragraph o GeleuUe a!d 1uattariIs +nti*$edipus 8o!tai!s a!other
u!e?pe8ted e?ample o u!iversality grou!ded i! a! e?8eptio!+ it begi!s 6ith a lo!g list o 6hat the
u!8o!s8ious @Jit-K !ot the substa!tialiUed J9d-K o 8ourseA does+ J9t is at 6ork every6here- u!8tio!i!g
smoothly at times- at other times i! its a!d starts7 9t breathes- it heats- it eats7 9t shits a!d u8ks7K
2(

Talki!g is 8o!spi8uously missi!g rom this series+ or GeleuUe a!d 1uattari- there is !o Jea parle-K the
u!8o!s8ious does !ot talk7 The plethora o u!8tio!s is i! pla8e to 8over up this abse!8eEas 6as 8lear
already to Freud- multipli8ity @o phalluses i! a dream- o the 6olves the /ol:ma! sees through the
6i!do6 i! his amous dreamA is the very image o 8astratio!7 ,ultipli8ity sig!als that the H!e is
la8ki!g7
2#
The logi8 o u!iversality a!d its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio! should be deployed i! three mome!ts+
@1A First- there is the e?8eptio! to u!iversality+ every u!iversality 8o!tai!s a parti8ular eleme!t 6hi8h-
6hile ormally belo!gi!g to the u!iversal dime!sio!- sti8ks out- does !ot it its rame7 @2A The! 8omes
the i!sight that every parti8ular e?ample or eleme!t o a u!iversality is a! e?8eptio!+ there is !o
J!ormalK parti8ularity- every parti8ularity sti8ks out- is i! e?8ess a!d>or la8ki!g 6ith regard to its
u!iversality @as =egel sho6ed- !o e?isti!g orm o state its the !otio! o the StateA7 @"A The! 8omes the
proper diale8ti8al t6ist+ the e?8eptio! to the e?8eptio!Estill a! e?8eptio!- but the e?8eptio! as si!gular
u!iversality- a! eleme!t 6hose e?8eptio! is its dire8t li!k to u!iversality itsel- 6hi8h sta!ds dire8tly
or the u!iversal7 @4ote here the parallel 6ith the three mome!ts o the value:orm i! ,ar?7A
The starti!g poi!t or .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio! is AristotleE6hyM Aristotle os8illates
bet6ee! t6o !otio!s o the relatio!ship bet6ee! orm a!d matter+ either orm is 8o!8eived as u!iversal-
a possibility o parti8ular bei!gs- a!d matter as the pri!8iple or age!t o i!dividualiUatio! @6hat makes
a table this parti8ular table is the parti8ular matter i! 6hi8h the u!iversal orm o Table is a8tualiUedA-
or matter is 8o!8eived as !eutral:u!iversal stu- a possibility o diere!t bei!gs- a!d orm as the
pri!8iple o i!dividualiUatio!- as the age!t 6hi8h tra!sorms !eutral matter i!to a parti8ular e!tity @the
orm o a table makes 6oodE6hi8h 8ould have be8ome ma!y other thi!gsEa tableA7 For =egel- o
8ourse- the irst !otio! is that o abstra8t u!iversality @u!iversality as a !eutral orm shared by ma!y
parti8ular e!titiesA- 6hile the se8o!d !otio! already 8o!tai!s the germ o 8o!8rete u!iversality+ the orm
@i7e7- u!iversal 8o!8eptA is i! itsel the pri!8iple or age!t o its o6! i!dividualiUatio!- o its 8o!8rete
sel:arti8ulatio!7 It is in order to resolve or obfuscate this deadloc" that +ristotle has to have recourse
to se&ual difference+ bei!g @a substa!tial e!tityA is the u!ity o orm a!d hyle- o mas8uli!e a!d
emi!i!e- o a8tive a!d passive7
This poi!t is 8ru8ial to bear i! mi!d+ .a8a!Is 8laim is !ot the rather obvious o!e that the
Aristotelia! 8ouple o orm a!d hyle is Jse?ualiUed-K that Aristotelia! o!tology remai!s i! the li!eage
o the a!8ie!t se?ualiUed 8osmologies7 9t is- o! the 8o!trary- that Aristotle has to have re8ourse to a
se?ualiUed 8ouple i! order to resolve a stri8tly 8o!8eptual problemEa!d that this solutio! does !ot
6ork- si!8e the parado? o ge!der is that it disturbs the 8lear divisio! i!to ge!us a!d spe8ies+ 6e 8a!!ot
say that huma!ity is a ge!us @ge!derA 8omposed o t6o spe8ies- me! a!d 6ome!- si!8e a spe8ies is a
u!ity 6hi8h 8a! reprodu8e itselE!o 6o!der our everyday use o these terms tur!s this hierar8hi8al
disti!8tio! arou!d+ 6e talk about the huma! species 8omposed o @divided i!toA t6o genders7
2'
/hat
this 8o!usio! i!di8ates is that there is i!deed Jge!der trouble-K but !ot i! 2udith 3utlerIs se!se+ the
poi!t is !ot o!ly that the ide!tity o ea8h se? is !ot 8learly established- !either so8ially !or symboli8ally
!or biologi8allyEit is !ot o!ly that se?ual ide!tity is a symboli8 !orm imposed o!to a luid a!d
polymorphous body 6hi8h !ever its the idealEthe JtroubleK is rather that this ideal itsel is
i!8o!siste!t- maski!g a 8o!stitutive i!8ompatibility7 Se?ual diere!8e is !ot simply a parti8ular
diere!8e subordi!ated to the u!iversality o the huma! ge!us>ge!der- but has a stro!ger status
i!s8ribed i!to the very u!iversality o the huma! spe8ies+ a diere!8e 6hi8h is the 8o!stitutive eature
o the u!iversal spe8ies itsel- a!d 6hi8h- parado?i8ally- or this reaso!- pre8edes
@logi8ally>8o!8eptuallyA the t6o terms it diere!tiates bet6ee!+ Jperhaps- the diere!8e 6hi8h keeps
apart o!e [se?\ rom the other belo!gs !either to the o!e !or to the other7K
2$
So ho6 do .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio! relate to AristotleM .a8a! proposes a readi!g o the
Aristotelia! Jlogi8al sNuareK diere!t rom the predomi!a!t o!e+ he i!trodu8es a subtle 8ha!ge i!to
ea8h o the our propositio!s7 First- i! his readi!g @here .a8a! ollo6s Ceir8eA- the truth o the u!iversal
airmatio! does !ot imply e?iste!8e+ it is true that Jall ? are F?K eve! i !o ? e?ists7 Se8o!d- he does
!ot read the parti8ular airmatio! @some ? are F?A i! the sta!dard Jmi!imalK 6ay @Jat least some
?Ebut maybe all ?Eare F?KA- but i! the Jma?imalK 6ay- that is- as e?8ludi!g the u!iversal
airmatio!- as i! 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith it @Jsome ? are F? mea!s that all ? are not F?KA7 Third- he 8ha!ges
the ormulatio! o the u!iversal !egative stateme!t i!to a double !egatio!+ i!stead o the sta!dard Jall ?
are !ot F?-K he 6rites- Jthere is !o ? 6hi8h is !ot F?7K Fourth- he 8ha!ges the ormulatio! o the
!egative parti8ular stateme!t- displa8i!g the !egatio! rom the u!8tio! to the Nua!tiier+ !ot Jsome ?
are !ot F?-K but J!ot:all ? are F?7K
/hat immediately sta!ds out is ho6 8o!tradi8tio! is displa8ed7 9! the 8lassi8 Aristotelia!
logi8al sNuare- 8o!tradi8tio! is verti8al- bet6ee! the let side @Jall ? are F?K a!d Jsome ? are F?KA a!d
the right side @Jall ? are !ot F?K a!d Jsome ? are !ot F?KA+ the t6o u!iversal propositio!s are 8o!trary
@all ? are F? or !ot F?A- 6hile the t6o diago!als are 8o!tradi8tory @Jsome ? are !o!F?K is i!
8o!tradi8tio! 6ith Jall ? are F?KT a!d Jsome ? are F?K is i! 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith Jall ? are !o!F?KA7
Furthermore- the relatio! bet6ee! ea8h u!iversal a!d parti8ular propositio! is o!e o impli8atio!+ Jall ?
are F?K implies that Jsome ? are F?-K a!d Jall ? are !ot F?K implies that Jsome ? are !ot F?KT plus the
relatio! bet6ee! the t6o parti8ular propositio!s is o!e o 8ompatibility @Jsome ? are F?K a!d Jsome ?
are !ot F?K 8a! both be trueA7 The sta!dard e?ample+ Jall s6a!s are 6hiteK a!d Jall s6a!s are !ot:
6hiteK is 8o!traryT Jall s6a!s are 6hiteK a!d Jsome s6a!s are !o!:6hiteK is 8o!tradi8tory- as 6ell as
Jall s6a!s are !o!:6hiteK a!d Jsome s6a!s are 6hiteKT Jsome s6a!s are 6hiteK is 8ompatible 6ith
Jsome s6a!s are !o!:6hite7K
9! the sNuare as re6ritte! by .a8a!- 8o!tradi8tio!s are o!ly bet6ee! the upper a!d the lo6er
levels @dire8tly a!d diago!allyA+ Jall ? are F?K is i! 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith Jthere is at least o!e ? 6hi8h is
!o!F?K as 6ell as 6ith J!ot:all ? are F?-K a!d vi8e versa or Jthere is !o ? 6hi8h is !ot F?KT the
relatio!ship bet6ee! the t6o horiUo!tal 8ouples- the upper a!d the lo6er- is- o! the 8o!trary- o!e o
eNuivale!8e+ Jall ? are F?K is eNuivale!t to Jthere is !o ? 6hi8h is !o!F?-K a!d Jthere is at least o!e ?
6hi8h is !o!F?K is eNuivale!t to J!ot:all ? are F?7K This lesso! is 8ru8ial+ Jthere is !o se?ual
relatio!shipK mea!s that there is !o dire8t relatio!ship bet6ee! the let @mas8uli!eA a!d the right
@emi!i!eA side- !ot eve! that o 8o!trari!ess or 8o!tradi8tio!T the t6o sides- set side by side- are
eNuivale!t- 6hi8h mea!s they just 8oe?ist i! a !o!:relatio!ship o i!diere!8e7 Do!tradi8tio! o!ly
o88urs within ea8h o the se?es- bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d the parti8ular o ea8h se?ual positio! @Jall ?
are F?K is i! 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith Jthere is at least o!e ? 6hi8h is !ot F?-K a!d Jthere is !o ? 6hi8h is !ot
F?K is i! 8o!tradi8tio! 6ith J!ot:all ? are F?KA7 Se?ual diere!8e is thus ultimately !ot the diere!8e
bet6ee! the se?es- but the diere!8e 6hi8h 8uts a8ross the very heart o the ide!tity o ea8h se?-
stigmatiUi!g it 6ith the mark o impossibility7 9 se?ual diere!8e is !ot the diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o
se?es- but a diere!8e 6hi8h 8uts rom 6ithi! ea8h se?- ho6 the! do the t6o se?es relate to ea8h
otherM .a8a!Is a!s6er is Ji!diere!8eK+ there is !o relatio!ship- il ny a pas de rapport se&uelEthe
t6o se?es are out o sy!87 Fe8all that- o! very last page o Seminar ;I- .a8a! dei!es the desire o the
a!alyst !ot as a pure desire @a sel:8riti8al remark- 8learlyEhe had himsel 8laimed this i! Seminar
6IIA- but as a desire to obtai! absolute diere!8e7
2&
9! order or the diere!8e to be Jabsolute-K it must
be a redoubled- sel:rele8ted diere!8e- a diere!8e o diere!8es- a!d this is 6hat the ormulae o
se?uatio! oer+ the Jdy!ami8K a!ti!omy o All a!d its e?8eptio!- a!d the Jmathemati8K a!ti!omy o
!o!:All 6ithout e?8eptio!7 9! other 6ords- there is !o dire8t 6ay to ormulate se?ual diere!8e+ se?ual
diere!8e !ames the Feal o a! a!tago!ism 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be 8ir8ums8ribed through t6o diere!t
8o!tradi8tio!s7
2%
.et us take a 8loser look at the irst a!ti!omy+ .a8a! reers here to Ceir8eIs logi8al sNuare o
u!iversal a!d parti8ular positive a!d !egative propositio!s- 6hi8h implies that the truth o a u!iversal
airmative propositio! does !ot imply the e?iste!8e o a term to 6hi8h it reers- i! 8o!trast to a
parti8ular airmative propositio! @Jall u!i8or!s have o!e hor!K is true eve! i there are !o u!i8or!s-
but !ot Jsome u!i8or!s have o!e hor!KEor the se8o!d propositio! to be true- at least o!e u!i8or! has
to e?istA7
"0
/hat are the 8o!seNue!8es or psy8hoa!alysis o the purely logi8al poi!t that the true o a
u!iversal airmatio! does !ot imply that a parti8ular eleme!t 6hi8h e?empliies this truth e?istsM 9t is
true that u!i8or!s have o!ly o!e hor!- but there are !o!etheless !o u!i8or!sO a!d i 6e go by 6ay o a
little 6ild a!alysis i!sisti!g o! the phalli8 value o the si!gle hor! gro6i!g out o the orehead- this
bri!gs us to the pater!al phalli8 authority- to 6hat .a8a! 8alls the 4ame:o:the:Father7 JAll athers are
F?K is true- but this mea!s that !o e?isti!g ather is Jreally ather-K thatEi! =egeleseEthere is !o
ather at the level o his !otio!+ every ather that e?ists is a! e?8eptio! to the u!iversal !otio! o ather+

the order o the u!8tio! 6hi8h 6e i!trodu8ed here as that o the !ame:o:the:ather is somethi!g 6hi8h
has u!iversal value- but- simulta!eously- puts o! you the 8harge to 8o!trol i there is or !ot a ather 6ho
its this u!8tio!7 9 there is !o su8h ather- it still remai!s true that the ather is 1od- it is simply that
this ormula is 8o!irmed o!ly by the empty se8tor o the sNuare7
"1
The impli8atio!s o this parado? or the i!dividualIs psy8hi8 e8o!omy are 8ru8ial+ the pater!al
u!8tio! is u!iversal- ea8h o us is determi!ed by it- but there is al6ays a gap bet6ee! the u!iversal
pater!al u!8tio! a!d the i!dividual 6ho o88upies this symboli8 pla8e+ !o ather is Jreally a ather-K
every JrealK ather is either !ot:e!ough:ather- a dei8ie!t ather- aili!g to play the role properly- or
too:mu8h:ather- a! overbeari!g prese!8e 6hi8h stai!s the pater!al symboli8 u!8tio! 6ith
pathologi8al obs8e!ity7 The o!ly ather 6ho ully e?ists is the e?8eptio! to the u!iversal u!8tio!- the
Jprimordial atherK e?ter!al to the symboli8 .a67
"2
Hr- a more problemati8 e?ample+ o!e 8urious story
about =itler reported i! the @i!Aamous re8ord o his Jtable 8o!versatio!sK is that- o!e mor!i!g i! the
early 1%(0s- he a6oke terriied a!d the!- 6ith tears ru!!i!g do6! his 8heeks- e?plai!ed to his do8tor
the !ightmare that had hau!ted him+ J9! my dream- 9 sa6 the uture overme!Ethey are so totally
ruthless- 6ithout a!y 8o!sideratio! or our pai!s- that 9 ou!d it u!bearableRK The very idea o =itler-
our mai! 8a!didate or the most evil perso! o all time- bei!g horriied at a la8k o 8ompassio! is- o
8ourse- 6eirdEbut- philosophi8ally- the idea makes se!se7 /hat =itler 6as impli8itly reerri!g to 6as
the 4ietUs8hea! passage rom .io! to Dhild+ it is !ot yet possible or us- 8aught as 6e are i! the
rele8tive attitude o !ihilism- to e!ter the Ji!!o8e!8e o be8omi!g-K the ull lie beyo!d justii8atio!T
all 6e 8a! do is e!gage i! a Jsel:over8omi!g o morality through truthul!ess7K
""
So it is all too easy
to dismiss the 4aUis as i!huma! a!d bestialE6hat i the problem 6as pre8isely that they remai!ed
Jhuma!- all too huma!KM 3ut let us go urther a!d move to the opposite e!d o the spe8trum- to 2esus
Dhrist+ is !ot 2esus also a 8ase o the si!gular e?8eptio! @Jthere is o!e 1od 6ho is a! e?8eptio! to
divi!ity- 6ho is ully huma!KA 6hi8h implies the i!e?iste!8e o the u!iversal 1odM
This airmatio! o e?iste!8e as a! e?8eptio! to @itsA u!iversal !otio! 8a!!ot but appear a!ti:
=egelia!- *ierkegaardia! eve!+ is !ot =egelIs poi!t pre8isely that every e?iste!8e 8a! be subsumed
u!der a u!iversal esse!8e through !otio!al mediatio!M 3ut 6hat i 6e 8o!8eive it as the eleme!tary
igure o 6hat =egel 8alled J8o!8rete u!iversalityKM Do!8rete u!iversality is !ot the orga!i8
arti8ulatio! o a u!iversality i!to its spe8ies or parts or orga!sT 6e approa8h 8o!8rete u!iversality o!ly
6he! the u!iversality i! Nuestio! e!8ou!ters- amo!g its spe8ies or mome!ts- itsel i! its oppositio!al
determi!atio!- i! a! e?8eptio!al mome!t 6hi8h de!ies the u!iversal dime!sio! a!d is as su8h its dire8t
embodime!t7 /ithi! a hierar8hi8al so8iety- the e?8eptio!al eleme!t are those at the bottom- like the
Ju!tou8hablesK i! 9!dia7 9! 8o!trast to 1a!dhi- Gr7 Ambedkar Ju!derli!ed the utility o merely
abolishi!g )!tou8hability+ this evil bei!g the produ8t o a so8ial hierar8hy o a parti8ular ki!d- it 6as
the e!tire 8aste system that had to be eradi8ated+ VThere 6ill be out 8astes [)!tou8hables\ as lo!g as
there are 8astes7I O 1a!dhi respo!ded that- o! the 8o!trary- here it 6as a Nuestio! o the ou!datio! o
=i!duism- a 8iviliUatio! 6hi8h- i! its origi!al orm- i! a8t ig!ored hierar8hy7K
"(
Although 1a!dhi a!d
Ambedkar respe8ted ea8h other a!d ote! 8ollaborated i! the struggle to dee!d the dig!ity o the
)!tou8hables- their diere!8e here is i!surmou!table+ it is the diere!8e bet6ee! the Jorga!i8K
solutio! @solvi!g the problem by retur!i!g to the purity o the origi!al u!8orrupted systemA a!d the
truly radi8al solutio! @ide!tiyi!g the problem as the JsymptomK o the e!tire system- a symptom 6hi8h
8a! o!ly be resolved by abolishi!g the e!tire systemA7 Ambedkar sa6 8learly ho6 the our:8aste
stru8ture does !ot u!ite our eleme!ts 6hi8h belo!g to the same order+ 6hile the irst three 8astes
@priests- 6arrior:ki!gs- mer8ha!ts:produ8ersA orm a 8o!siste!t All- a! orga!i8 triad- the )!tou8hables
are- like ,ar?Is JAsiati8 mode o produ8tio!-K the Jpart o !o:part-K the i!8o!siste!t eleme!t 6hi8h-
6ithi! the system- o88upies the pla8e o 6hat the system as su8h e?8ludesEa!d- as su8h- the
)!tou8hables sta!d or u!iversality7 0e8tively- there are !o 8astes 6ithout out8astsEas lo!g as there
are 8astes- there 6ill be a! e?8essive- e?8reme!tal Uero:value eleme!t 6hi8h- 6hile ormally part o the
system- has !o proper pla8e 6ithi! it7 1a!dhi obus8ates this parado?- 8li!gi!g to the @imApossibility o
a harmo!ious stru8ture that 6ould ully i!tegrate all its eleme!ts7 The parado? o the )!tou8hables is
that they are doubly marked by the e?8reme!tal logi8+ !ot o!ly do they deal 6ith impure e?8reme!t-
their o6! ormal status 6ithi! the so8ial body is that o e?8reme!t7 =e!8e the properly diale8ti8al
parado?+ to break out o the 8aste system- it is !ot e!ough to reverse the )!tou8hableIs status- elevati!g
them i!to the J8hildre! o 1od7K The irst step should rather be e?a8tly the opposite o!e+ to
universali2e their e?8reme!tal status to the 6hole o huma!ity7
3ut is there a! i!8o!siste!8y hereMEFirst- the 8laim 6as that every parti8ular e!tity is a!
e?8eptio!- u!it as a! e?ample o its u!iversalityT the! 6e posited the e?8eptio! as the si!gular ,aster:
Sig!iier 6hi8h holds- 6ithi! a stru8ture- the pla8e o its la8k7 The solutio! lies i! the redoubled
e?8eptio!+ every parti8ular e!tity is i! the positio! o a! e?8eptio! 6ith regard to its u!iversalityT 6ith
regard to the series o J!ormalK e?8eptio!s- the ,aster:Sig!iier 6hi8h represe!ts the subje8t is the
e&ception to the e&ception- the o!ly pla8e o dire8t u!iversality7 9! other 6ords- i! the ,aster:Sig!iier-
the logi8 o e?8eptio! is take! to its rele?ive e?treme+ the ,aster:Sig!iier is totally e?8luded rom the
u!iversal order @as its Jpart o !o:part-K 6ith !o proper pla8e i! itA- a!d- as su8h- it immediately sta!ds
or u!iversality as opposed to its parti8ular 8o!te!t7 @9t is i! this se!se that =egel 8hara8teriUes Dhrist as
a! Je?ample o e?ampleK a!d- as su8h- as the Jabsolute e?ample7KA
Su8h Joppositio!al determi!atio!K subje8tiviUes a stru8tureEho6M To grasp this logi8 o
subje8tiviUatio!- o!e has to i!trodu8e the diere!8e bet6ee! the e!u!8iated @8o!te!tA a!d its pro8ess o
e!u!8iatio!- that is- .a8a!Is diere!8e bet6ee! the subje8t o the e!u!8iated a!d the subje8t o
e!u!8iatio!+ the e&ception with regard to the universal order is the sub1ect itself- its positio! o
e!u!8iatio!7 To put it i! some6hat simplisti8 terms- i!soar as u!iversality is i! ro!t o me- the obje8t
o my thought or spee8h- 9 o88upy by dei!itio! a pla8e o mi!imal e?ter!ality 6ith regard to itE!o
matter ho6 mu8h 9 lo8ate mysel as a res cogitans- as a determi!ate obje8t 6ithi! the reality 9 am
graspi!g- that ti!y spot i! my 6orld is !ot me as the poi!t o Jsel:8o!s8ious!ess-K the poi!t rom
6hi8h 9 speak or thi!k7 H 8ourse- all my positive properties or determi!atio!s 8a! be Jobje8tiviUed-K
but !ot JmyselK as the si!gular sel:rele?ive poi!t o e!u!8iatio!7 9! this simple but stri8t se!se- the
subje8t is more u!iversal tha! u!iversality itsel+ it may be a ti!y part o reality- a ti!y spe8k i! the
Jgreat 8hai! o bei!g-K but it is simulta!eously the si!gular @sta!dApoi!t e!8ompassi!g reality as
somethi!g that appears 6ithi! its horiUo!7 /e e?perie!8e this e?8eptio! i! a poi!ted 6ay apropos
stateme!ts 6hi8h 8o!8er! our mortality+ Jevery huma! is mortalK impli8itly e?8ludes me as mortal-
e?8epts me rom the u!iversality o mortals- although 9 k!o6 very 6ell that @as a huma! a!imalA 9 am
also mortal7 H!e should take a step urther here+ !ot o!ly is the subje8t a 8ra8k i! u!iversality- a! d
6hi8h 8a!!ot be lo8ated i! a substa!tial totalityEthere is u!iversality @u!iversality Jor itsel-K as
=egel 6ould have put itA o!ly or the subje8t+ o!ly rom the mi!imally e?empted subje8tive sta!dpoi!t
8a! a! All- a u!iversality @as diere!t rom its parti8ular i!sta!tiatio!sA- appear as su8h- !ever to
someo!e or somethi!g ully embedded i! it as its parti8ular mome!t7 9! this se!se e?8eptio! literally
grou!ds u!iversality7
FHF,).A0 HF S0d)AT9H4+ T=0 4H4:A..

/hat i there is !o su8h e?8eptio!M The! 6e are deali!g 6ith parti8ularities 6hi8h- by
dei!itio! @or- i! =egelese- i! their very !otio!A- cannot be universali2ed7 The most i!teresti!g 8ase is
that o so:8alled Jdire8t demo8ra8yK i! its diere!t orms @rom J6orkersI 8ou!8ilsK or Jsel:
gover!me!tK to JmultitudesKA7 Coliti8al theorists a!d a8tivists 6ho today advo8ate su8h a! approa8h-
ighti!g or lo8al sel:orga!iUatio! agai!st state po6er a!d represe!tative demo8ra8y- as a rule hold to
the utopia! idea o a radi8al revolutio!ary rupture through 6hi8h dire8t:demo8rati8 sel:orga!iUatio!
6ill e!8ompass the e!tire so8ial body7 Typi8al here is =ardt a!d 4egriIs Multitude+ ater des8ribi!g
multiple orms o resista!8e to 0mpire- the book e!ds 6ith a messia!i8 !ote poi!ti!g to6ards the great
Fupture- the mome!t o Ge8isio! 6he! the moveme!t o multitudes 6ill be tra!substa!tiated i!to the
sudde! birth o a !e6 6orld+ JAter this lo!g seaso! o viole!8e a!d 8o!tradi8tio!s- global 8ivil 6ar-
8orruptio! o imperial bio:po6er- a!d i!i!ite toil o the bio:politi8al multitudes- the e?traordi!ary
a88umulatio!s o grieva!8es a!d reorm proposals must at some poi!t be tra!sormed by a stro!g
eve!t- a radi8al i!surre8tio!al dema!d7K
"#
=o6ever- at this poi!t- 6here o!e 6ould e?pe8t some
theoreti8al determi!atio! o this rupture- 6hat 6e get is agai! a 6ithdra6al i!to philosophy+ JA
philosophi8al book like this- ho6ever- is !ot the pla8e or us to evaluate 6hether the time or
revolutio!ary politi8al de8isio! is immi!e!t7K
"'
=ardt a!d 4egri here make a! all too hasty leap+ o
8ourse o!e 8a!!ot ask them or a detailed empiri8al des8riptio! o the Ge8isio!- o the passage to the
globaliUed Jabsolute demo8ra8y-K to the multitude that 6ill rule itselT but 6hat i their justiied reusal
to e!gage i! pseudo:8o!8rete uturisti8 predi8tio!s masks a! i!here!t !otio!al deadlo8k or
impossibilityM That is to say- 6hat o!e 8a! a!d should e?pe8t is some des8riptio! o the !otio!al
stru8ture o this Nualitative jump- o the passage rom the multitudes resisting the H!e o sovereig!
Co6er to the multitudes a!!ihilati!g state po6er a!d dire8tly be8omi!g the global stru8turi!g pri!8iple
o so8iety7 .eavi!g the !otio!al stru8ture o this passage i! a dark!ess elu8idated o!ly by vague
homologies a!d e?amples rom resista!8e moveme!ts o!ly raises the suspi8io! that this dire8t- sel:
tra!spare!t rule o everyo!e over everyo!e- this demo8ra8y tout court- 6ill 8oi!8ide 6ith its opposite7
This is 6hy su8h ge!eraliUatio! is properly utopian+ it 8a!!ot see its o6! stru8tural impossibility- ho6
it 8a! o!ly thrive 6ithi! a ield domi!ated by 6hat it ights agai!st7
To better grasp this !otio! o the !o!:All- let us tur! to a 6o!derul diale8ti8al joke i! .ubit8hIs
inotch"a+ the hero visits a 8aeteria a!d orders 8oee 6ithout 8reamT the 6aiter replies+ JSorry- but
6eIve ru! out o 8ream7 Da! 9 bri!g you 8oee 6ithout milkMK
"$
9! both 8ases- the 8ustomer gets
straight 8oee- but this H!e:8oee is ea8h time a88ompa!ied by a diere!t !egatio!- irst 8oee:6ith:
!o:8ream- the! 8oee:6ith:!o:milk7
"&
/hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is the logi8 o diere!tiality 6here the
la8k itsel u!8tio!s as a positive eatureEthe parado? also re!dered !i8ely by a! old 5ugoslav joke
about ,o!te!egri!s @people rom ,o!te!egro 6ere stigmatiUed as laUy i! e?:5ugoslaviaA+ 6hy does a
,o!te!egri! guy- 6he! goi!g to sleep- put t6o glasses- o!e ull a!d o!e empty- at the side o his bedM
3e8ause he is too laUy to thi!k i! adva!8e 6hether he 6ill be thirsty duri!g the !ight7 The poi!t o this
joke is that the abse!8e itsel has to be positively registered+ it is !ot e!ough to have a ull glass o
6ater- si!8e- i the ,o!te!egri! is !ot thirsty- he 6ill simply ig!ore itEthis !egative a8t itsel has to
be registered- the !o:!eed:or:6ater has to be materialiUed i! the void o the empty glass7 A politi8al
eNuivale!t 8a! be ou!d i! a 6ell:k!o6! joke rom so8ialist:era Cola!d7 A 8ustomer e!ters a store a!d
asks+ J5ou probably do!It have butter- or do youMK The a!s6er+ JSorry- but 6eIre the store that does!It
have toilet paperT the o!e a8ross the street is the o!e that does!It have butterRK Hr 8o!sider
8o!temporary 3raUil 6here- duri!g a 8ar!ival- people rom all 8lasses 6ill da!8e together i! the street-
mome!tarily orgetti!g their ra8e a!d 8lass diere!8esEbut it is obviously !ot the same i a jobless
6orker joi!s the da!8e- orgetti!g his 6orries about ho6 to take 8are o his amily- or i a ri8h ba!ker
lets himsel go a!d eels good about bei!g o!e 6ith the people- orgetti!g that he has just reused a loa!
to the poor 6orker7 They are both the same o! the street- but the 6orker is da!8i!g 6ithout milk- 6hile
the ba!ker is da!8i!g 6ithout 8ream7
/e should suppleme!t this stru8ture o the u!:said that a88ompa!ies 6hat is said- o the
!egatio! 6hi8h reverberates i! 6hat is asserted- 6ith the symmetri8al versio! o getti!g more tha! you
asked orEi! the terms o our joke- o getti!g 8oee 6ith milk 6he! o!e asked o!ly or a bla8k 8oee7
9s !ot this ideologi8al me8ha!ism stru8turally the same as the relatio!ship bet6ee! played a!d
u!played !otes i! S8huma!!Is J=umoresNueKM The poi!t is that the 6ay ideology 8heats is !ot so
mu8h by dire8tly lyi!g @telli!g us 6e are bei!g served 8oee 6hile 6e are ee8tively bei!g served teaA-
but by e!ge!deri!g the 6ro!g u!:said impli8atio! @telli!g us 6e are bei!g served 8oee 6ithout 8ream
6hile 6e are ee8tively bei!g served 8oee 6ithout milkA7 /e do !ot e?pe8t the publi8 dis8ourse o
those i! po6er to tell us everythi!g- to dis8lose all their se8ret ma!euversT most o us a88ept that some
thi!gs have to be do!e dis8reetly- i! the shado6s- but 6e also e?pe8t these thi!gs to be do!e or the
8ommo! good7 At the begi!!i!g o the ,ar? 3rothersI (o West @1%(0A- 1rou8ho buys a ti8ket at the
rail6ay statio! 8ou!ter a!d gives the 8lerk a bu!dle o dollar !otes- !o!8hala!tly remarki!g+ J9tIs H*-
you do!It have to 8ou!t itRK The 8lerk !o!etheless 8areully 8ou!ts the mo!ey a!d i!dig!a!tly replies+
J3ut there is !ot e!ough mo!ey hereRK To 6hi8h 1rou8ho respo!ds+ J9 told you !ot to 8ou!t itRK Gid
!ot Gi8k Dhe!ey treat us i! a similar 6ay 6he! he said that- i! the J6ar o! terror-K some thi!gs had to
be do!e out o publi8 vie6 i! order to get resultsM /he! 6e 6ere sho8ked to dis8over the truth about
mass killi!gs- torture- et87- but also about Dhe!ey promoti!g his o6! busi!ess i!terests @=alliburto!A-
his reply 6as basi8ally+ J9 told you thi!gs have to be do!e out o publi8 vie6RK
Da! the u!derlyi!g logi8 o these jokes- ho6ever- really be redu8ed to diere!tialityM 9s J8oee
6ith !o:milkK i!stead o J8oee 6ith !o:8reamK a 8ase o symboli8 diere!tiality- o abse!8e itsel
8ou!ti!g as a positive eatureM 9! other 6ords- i! both 8ases- 6hat 6e Jreally getK is e?a8tly the same
plai! 8oee- the diere!8e residi!g o!ly i! the purely diere!tial a8t that the abse!8e 6hi8h dei!es
this 8oee is the abse!8e o milk i!stead o the abse!8e o 8ream- a!d- as 6e k!o6 rom .a8a!- there is
!o abse!8e i! the Feal- thi!gs 8a! be Jprese!t i! the mode o abse!8eK o!ly i! the symboli8 spa8e
6here somethi!g 8a! be missi!g at its @symboli8A pla8e7
"%
/hat 8ompli8ates the issue is the double
!egatio! at 6ork i! J8oee 6ith !o:milkK+ this 8oee is !ot just J6ith !o:milkK but J!ot 6ith !o:
8ream-K a!d this se8o!d !egatio! is !ot purely symboli8- eve! i it may appear that 6hat is added is just
a !e6 diere!tial oppositio! @J6ith !o:8reamK versus J!ot 6ith !o:8reamKA7 9t is J8oee 6ith milkK
6hi8h 6ould have u!8tio!ed diere!tially- as J8oee 6ith !o:8ream-K a!d- 6ithi! this diere!tial
spa8e- J8oee !ot 6ith !o:8reamK is simply J8oee with 8ream7K 9s it the! that 6e have to add a!other
diere!tial oppositio!- that o J8oee 6ith dK versus J8oee 6ithout dKM Hur thesis is that this last
oppositio! is !ot symboli8 or diere!tial- si!8e it 8o!8er!s the ob1et petit a- the real o a 1e ne sais <uoi
6hi8h makes 8oee a! obje8t o desire- that 6hi8h is Ji! 8oee more tha! 8oee itsel7K Hr- as Ale!ka
Bupa!^i^ subtly re8o!stru8ted the 6aiterIs reaso!i!g+

9 [the 8ustomer\ 6a!ts just straight 8oee- he should have bee! i!diere!t to6ards 6hat it is 6ithout7
There is thus a desire at 6ork i! his e?pli8it reje8tio! o 8ream- a!d- as a good 6aiter- 9 should try to
ollo6 this desire- si!8e- i! this 8ase- J8oee 6ithout 8reamK is i! !o 6ay the same as Jstraight 8oee7K
The solutio! is i! the meto!ymy o la8k- si!8e desire itsel is !othi!g but this meto!ymy7 .et us the!
give him a 8oee 6ithout milk7
(0
9t may appear that J8oee 6ithout milkK i!stead o J8oee 6ithout 8reamK is a 8ase o
diere!tiality- !ot o the !egatio! o the !egatio! 6hi8h ge!erates the Jmi!imal diere!8eK o the
ob1et aEor is itM A 8oee J!ot 6ithout 8reamK is !ot a 8oee with milk- but a 8oee 6ithout mil"- i7e7-
the !egatio! o a!other suppleme!t7 There is a diere!8e bet6ee! Jplai! 8oeeK a!d J8oee !ot
6ithout 8reamK @i7e7- J8oee 6ithout milkKA+ the se8o!d is still marked by a la8k- but the pla8e o the
la8k has shited7 /here is the ob1et a hereM /e have to ask a simple Nuestio!+ 6hy do 6e add milk or
8ream to 8oeeM 3e8ause there is somethi!g missi!g i! 8oee alo!e- a!d 6e try to ill this voidEi!
short- the series o suppleme!ts to 8oee are attempts to ill i! the !o!:ide!tity o 8oee 6ith itsel7
/hat this mea!s @amo!g other thi!gsA is that there is !o ull sel:ide!ti8al Jplai! 8oee-K that every
simple Jjust 8oeeK is already a J8oee 6ithout7K A!d it is here that the ob1et a is lo8ated+ 8oee is i!
itsel !ot H!e but a H!e plus somethi!g 6hi8h is less tha! H!e a!d more tha! !othi!g7 The stru8ture is
the same as that o 5inder Surprise 8ho8olate eggs+ ater u!6rappi!g the egg a!d 8ra8ki!g the shell
ope!- o!e i!ds a small plasti8 toy i!side7 9s !ot this toy the ob1et petit a at its purest- a small obje8t
illi!g i! the 8e!tral void o our desire- the hidde! treasure- agalma- at the 8e!ter o the thi!g 6e
desireM This material @JFealKA void at the 8e!ter- o 8ourse- sta!ds or the stru8tural @JormalKA gap o!
a88ou!t o 6hi8h !o produ8t is Jreally that-K !o produ8t lives up to the e?pe8tatio! it arouses7 This
rele?ive logi8 o illi!g the void is at 6ork eve! @a!d espe8iallyA 6he! 6e are oered a produ8t J6ith
!othi!g added-K sta!di!g or authe!ti8 Nuality- like Jjust plai! best 8oee- 6ith !o additives to rui! the
tasteK+ i! this 8ase- the obje8t is !ot just dire8tly itsel- but is redoubled- u!8tio!i!g as its o6!
suppleme!tEit itsel ills the void its mere a8t 8reates- as i! sayi!g Jthis 8oee is O just simple
8oee7K
9t is hard !ot to me!tio! here a!other i!8ide!t i!volvi!g 8oee rom popular 8i!ema- this time
rom the 0!glish 6orki!g:8lass drama /rassed $ff7 The hero 6alks home a pretty you!g 6oma! 6ho-
6he! they rea8h the e!tra!8e to her lat- asks him i he 6ould like to 8ome i! or a 8oee7 To his
a!s6erEJThereIs a problemE9 do!It dri!k 8oeeKEshe replies 6ith a smile+ J4o problemE9 do!It
have a!yOK The eroti8 po6er o her reply lies i! ho6Eagai! through a double !egatio!Eshe makes
a! embarrassi!gly dire8t se?ual i!vitatio! 6ithout ever me!tio!i!g se?+ 6he! she irst i!vites the guy
i! or a 8oee a!d the! admits she has !o 8oee- she does !ot 8a!8el her i!vitatio!- she just makes it
8lear that the 8oee i!vitatio! 6as a sta!d:i! or prete?t- i!diere!t i! itsel- or the se?ual i!vitatio!7
Alo!g the same li!es- 6e 8a! imagi!e a dialogue bet6ee! the )S a!d 0urope i! late 2002- as the
i!vasio! o 9raN 6as bei!g prepared or+ the )S says to 0urope+ J/ould you 8are to joi! us i! the
atta8k o! 9raN to i!d the /,GMKT 0urope replies+ J3ut 6e have !o a8ilities to sear8h or the /,GRKT
the Fumseld a!s6er+ J4o problem- there are !o /,G i! 9raN7K 9s !ot the ge!eral ormula o
huma!itaria! i!terve!tio!s also similarMEJ.et us i!terve!e i! 8ou!try d to bri!g huma!itaria! help
a!d alleviate the sueri!g taki!g pla8e thereRK J3ut our i!terve!tio! 6ill mostly just 8ause more
sueri!g a!d deathRK J4o problem- this 6ill give us a reaso! to i!terve!e eve! more7K
/hat does all this mea! 6ith regard to se?ual diere!8eM Se?ual diere!8e is !ot diere!tial
@i! the pre8ise se!se o the diere!tiality o the sig!iierA+ 6he! .a8a! privileges the phallus- this does
!ot mea! that se?ual diere!8e is stru8tured alo!g the a?is o its prese!8e or abse!8eEma! has it-
6oma! does !ot have it- 6here @ollo6i!g the basi8 rule o the diere!tial systemA the abse!8e o a
eature also 8ou!ts as a positive eature- or- to paraphrase Sherlo8k =olmes+ J9s there a!y other poi!t
about seei!g your sister !aked to 6hi8h you 6ould 6ish to dra6 my atte!tio!MK JTo the 8urious thi!g 9
!oti8ed bet6ee! her legs7K JThere 6as !othi!g bet6ee! her legs7K JThat 6as the 8urious thi!g7K 9! this
reusal o diere!tiality as the pri!8iple o se?ual diere!8e- .a8a! moves beyo!d his o6! earlier
positio! 6hi8h 6as- pre8isely- a diere!tial o!e+ ma! a!d 6oma! 6ere opposed 6ith regard to the
8ouple bei!g>havi!g @ma! has the phallus- 6oma! does !ot have it- she is itA7 4o6- ho6ever- the
phalli8 sig!iier is !ot the eature 6hose prese!8e or abse!8e disti!guishes ma! a!d 6oma!+ i! the
ormulae o se?uatio!- it is operative o! both sides- mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e- a!d- i! both 8ases- it
6orks as the operator o the impossible relatio!ship @!o!:relatio!shipA bet6ee! S a!d 2- speaki!g
subje8t a!d 1ouissanceEthe phalli8 sig!iier sta!ds or the 1ouissance a88essible to a speaki!g bei!g-
i!tegrated i!to the symboli8 order7
(1
Do!seNue!tly- i! the same 6ay that there is o!ly o!e se? plus the
!ot:All 6hi8h resists it- there is o!ly phalli8 1ouissance plus a! d 6hi8h resists it- although- properly
speaki!g- it does !ot e?ist- si!8e Jthere is !o 1ouissance 6hi8h is !ot phalli87K
(2
This is 6hy- 6he!
.a8a! speaks o the mysteriously spe8tral Jother 1ouissance-K he treats it as somethi!g 6hi8h does !ot
e?ist a!d yet still 6orks- u!8tio!s- e?erts a 8ertai! ei8a8yEa !o!:e?isti!g obje8t 6ith real properties7
J,as8uli!eK a!d Jemi!i!eK are t6o modes @ea8h o them 8o!tradi8tory i! its o6! 6ayA o deali!g
6ith this impossible @!o!:Arelatio!ship bet6ee! the symboli8 order a!d 1ouissance7 Hr- i!soar as the
subje8t o the sig!iier @bA is the e?8eptio! to the symboli8 u!iversality- a!d the ob1et a its obje8tal
8ou!terpoi!t- sta!di!g or the e?8ess o e!joyme!t @surplus:e!joyme!tA- .a8a!Is ormula o a!tasy @b:
aA is yet a!other versio! o this same impossible !o!:relatio!ship+ the !o!:relatio!ship bet6ee! the t6o
sides o the same 8oi! @the empty pla8e 6ith !o eleme!t illi!g it i! a!d the e?8essive eleme!t 6ithout
its pla8eA7 1uy .e 1auey is right to emphasiUe that- i 6e ig!ore this 8ru8ial poi!t- the! !o matter ho6
ormaliUed a!d !o!:i!tuitive our propositio!s are 6e redu8e .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio! to bei!g
just a!other 6ay o grou!di!g- i! a moder! Js8ie!tii8K ma!!er- the oldest i!tuitio!s about the great
8osmi8 polarity a!d eter!al struggle o the se?es- 6ith all its 8o!8omita!t theses- i!8ludi!g the
!ormativity o se?ual diere!8e @the JproperK divisio! o se?ual roles- 6ith regard to 6hi8h o!e 8a!
dismiss diverge!8es as perversio!sA7
("
9! a purely diere!tial relatio!ship- ea8h e!tity 8o!sists i! its diere!8e rom its opposite+
6oma! is !ot:ma! a!d ma! is !ot:6oma!7 .a8a!Is 8ompli8atio! 6ith regard to se?ual diere!8e is
that- 6hile o!e may 8laim that Jall @all eleme!ts o the huma! spe8iesA that is !ot:ma! is 6oma!-K the
!o!:All o 6oma! pre8ludes us rom sayi!g that Jall that is !ot:6oma! is ma!K+ there is somethi!g o
!ot:6oma! 6hi8h is !ot ma!T or- as .a8a! put it su88i!8tly+ Jsi!8e 6oma! is V!o!:all-I 6hy should all
that is !ot 6oma! be ma!MK
((
The t6o se?es do !ot divide the huma! ge!der amo!g themselves so
that 6hat is !ot o!e is the other+ 6hile this holds or the mas8uli!e side @6hat is !ot ma! is 6oma!A- it
does !ot hold or the emi!i!e side @all that is !ot 6oma! is not ma!AEthe 8o!seNue!8e o this brea8h
o symmetry is+ Je&it yi! a!d ya!g a!d all those oppositio!s 6hi8h- i! diere!t 8ultures- prete!d to
regulate the !umber o se?es7K
(#
Se?es are more tha! o!e a!d less tha! t6o+ they 8a!!ot be 8ou!ted as
t6o- there is o!ly o!e a!d somethi!g @or- rather- less tha! somethi!g but more tha! !othi!gA 6hi8h
eludes it7 9! other 6ords- 1 m a pre8edes 1 m 17 Do!seNue!tly- 6hat- o! the emi!i!e side- 8o!tradi8ts
the !egative u!iversal @Jthere is !o ? or 6hi8h it holds that !o!F?KA- that is- the !egative parti8ular o
J!o!:all are ? F?-K is

the airmatio! o the J!othi!gK pursued by .a8a! rom the very begi!!i!g- this !othi!g 6hi8h is
!either that o =egel !or that o Freud- [a!d 6hi8h is\ the very abse!8e o the subje8t to 6hom o!e
8ould atta8h a predi8ate7 This airmatio! is thus the airmatio! o that 6hi8h e?ists 6ith regard to a
u!8tio! @o the predi8ateA- 6ithout satisyi!g this u!8tio! @possessi!g the predi8ateA7
('
9! other 6ords- si!8e Jthere is !o ? or 6hi8h it holds that !o!F?-K the ? 6hi8h makes the set
!o!:All 8a! o!ly be this !othi!g itsel- the JbarredK subje8t @bA7 This is ho6 6e should read the
impossible 8o!ju!8tio! @the !o!:relatio!shipA o b a!d a+ the subje8t is the void- the empty positio!- a
subje8t 6ithout a predi8ate- 6hile a is a predi8ate 6ithout its proper subje8tEsomethi!g like J8oee
6ithout milkK @or- rather- 8oee 6ithout 8aei!eA7
($
This !otio! o the subje8t as Jmore tha! o!e but
less tha! t6oK a88ou!ts or 6hy bei!g alo!e a!d bei!g solitary are !ot the same+ o!e 8a! be solitary
6ithout bei!g alo!e i!soar as o!e 8a! still be i! 8ompa!y 6ith o!esel- 6ith the shado6y double o
o!esel7 True lo!eli!ess o88urs !ot 6he! there are !o others arou!d me- but 6he! 9 am deprived eve!
o my shado67
0a8h se? is !ot the !egatio! o the other- but a! obsta8le to the other+ !ot somethi!g 6hose
ide!tity is established through its diere!8e to the other- but somethi!g 6hose ide!tity is th6arted rom
6ithi! by the other7 For su8h a @!o!:Arelatio!ship 6hi8h eludes diere!tiality- 0r!esto .a8lau reserved
the term Ja!tago!ism7K
(&
A!tago!ism is- at its most radi8al- !ot the oppositio! or i!8omme!surability
o the T6o- but a! ee8t or arti8ulatio! o the i!8o!siste!8y o the H!e- o its deerral 6ith regard to
itsel7 Se?ual diere!8e or a!tago!ism is !ot- as the 8ommo! 6isdom 6ould have it- about the
irre8o!8ilable struggle bet6ee! the t6o se?es @Jme! are rom ,ars a!d 6ome! are rom Ve!usKAEor
this 8li8hL- ea8h o the se?es has its ull ide!tity i! itsel- a!d the problem is that these t6o ide!tities are
Jout o sy!8-K !ot o! the same 6avele!gth7 This positio! merely tur!s arou!d the ideologi8al topi8 o
,a! a!d /oma! 8ompleme!ti!g ea8h other+ alo!e- they are tru!8atedT o!ly together do they orm the
H!e7 /e thus have the rightist deviatio! @the se?ualiUed 8osmology 6ith its polarity o t6o J8osmi8
pri!8iples-K yin a!d yang- et87- to 6hi8h todayIs pop:8ultural 4e6 Agers like Ga! 3ro6! are retur!i!gA
a!d the letist deviatio! @rom GeleuUe to 3utler+ the plurality o polymorphous perversio! is
se8o!darily restrai!ed by the imposed Hedipal !orm o se?ual diere!8eA7 A!d there should be !o
preere!8e or eitherEboth are 6orse7
THE ANTINOMIES OF SE0!AL DIFFERENCE

The a!tago!isti8 !ature o se?ual diere!8e mea!s that 6hat appears as the obsta8le to the
se?ual relatio!ship is simulta!eously its 8o!ditio! o possibilityEhere- J!egatio! o the !egatio!K
mea!s that i! riddi!g ourselves o the obsta8le 6e also lose that 6hi8h it had th6arted7 /e !o6 k!o6
that 0mily =ale 6as T7 S7 0liotIs Jlady o sile!8es-K the obje8t o his dis8reet love atta8hme!t- i! the
lo!g years o separatio! rom his 6ie Vivie!!e+ all this time- almost t6o de8ades- 6as spe!t 6aiti!g
or the mome!t 6he! 0liot 6ould be ree to marry her7 =o6ever- here is 6hat happe!ed 6he!- o!
2a!uary 2"- 1%($- 0liot 6as i!ormed that Vivie!!e had died+

=e 6as sho8ked by his 6ieIs death- but eve! more by its 8o!seNue!8es7 For !o6- u!e?pe8tedly- he
6as ree to marry 0mily =ale- 6hi8h- or the last itee! years- she a!d his amily had believed 6as
6hat he 6a!ted7 5et at o!8e he realiUed that he had !o emotio!s or desires to share O J9 have met
mysel as a middle:aged ma!-K says the hero o 0liotIs !e6 play- -he ,oc"tail )arty- 6he! he
dis8overs- ater his 6ie departs- that he has lost his 6ish to marry the shi!i!g- devoted Delia7 The
6orst mome!t- he adds- is 6he! you eel that you have lost the desire or all that 6as most desirable7
(%
The problem 6as that Vivie!!e remai!ed 0liotIs symptom throughout- the Jk!otK o his
ambiguous libidi!al i!vestme!t+ JThe death o Vivie!!e mea!t the loss o 0liotIs o8us o torme!t-K
#0

or- as 0liot himsel put it through his hero i! -he ,oc"tail )arty- a i8tio!al a88ou!t o this trauma+ J9
8a!!ot live 6ith her- but also 8a!!ot live 6ithout her7K The u!bearable 8ore o the Vivie!!e:Thi!g 6as
8o!8e!trated i! her hysteri8al outbursts+ 0liot !ever visited Vivie!!e i! the asylum- be8ause he eared
Jthe !aked!ess o her emotio!al dema!ds O the 8ompelli!g po6er o her V/elsh shriekI7K
#1
Vivie!!e
6as like Febe88a versus 0mily as the !e6 ,rs7 Ge /i!ter+ JThe 6hole oppressio!- the u!reality > H
the role she had almost imposed upo! me > /ith the obsti!ate- u!8o!s8ious- sub:huma! stre!gth > That
some 6oma! have7K As su8h- she 6as the obje8t:8ause o 0liotIs desire- that 6hi8h made him desire
0mily- or believe that he desired herE!o 6o!der- the!- that the mome!t she disappeared the desire or
0mily disappeared 6ith her7 The 8o!8lusio! to be dra6! rom 0liotIs imbroglio is 8lear+ there 6as !o
love i! his relatio!ship to either Vivie!!e or 0mily- or- as .a8a! poi!ted out- love suppleme!ts the
impossibility o se?ual relatio!ship7 9t 8a! do this i! diere!t 6ays- o!e o 6hi8h is or love to u!8tio!
as perversio!+ a perverse suppleme!t 6hi8h makes the Hther e?ist through love- a!d i! this se!se a
pervert is a Jk!ight o love7K
#2
=istori8al orms o love are thus- rom a 8li!i8al sta!dpoi!t- orms o
perversio! @a!d .a8a! 8omplai!s here that psy8hoa!alysis did !ot i!ve!t a!y !e6 perversio!sA7 9! 8lear
8o!trast- the late .a8a! airms love as a 8o!ti!ge!t e!8ou!ter bet6ee! t6o subje8ts- o their
u!8o!s8ious!esses- subtra8ted rom !ar8issismEi! this authe!ti8 love- se?ual relatio!ship Jcesse de ne
pas sAcrire7K =ere 6e are beyo!d pure a!d impure- love or the Hther a!d sel:love- disi!terested a!d
i!terested+ J.ove is !othi!g more tha! a sayi!g [un dire\ as eve!t7K
#"
The sta!dard !otio! o love i! psy8hoa!alysis is redu8tio!ist+ there is !o pure love- love is just
JsublimatedK se?ual lust7 )!til his late tea8hi!g- .a8a! also i!sisted o! the !ar8issisti8 8hara8ter o
love+ i! lovi!g a! Hther- 9 love mysel i! the HtherT eve! i the Hther is more to me tha! mysel- eve! i
9 am ready to sa8rii8e mysel or the Hther- 6hat 9 love i! the Hther is my idealiUed pere8ted 0go- my
Supreme 1oodEbut still my 1ood7 The surprise here is that .a8a! i!verts the usual oppositio! o love
versus desire as ethi8s versus pathologi8al lust+ he lo8ates the ethi8al dime!sio! !ot i! love but i!
desireEethi8s is or him the ethi8s o desire- o the idelity to desire- o !ot 8ompromisi!g o! o!eIs
desire7
#(
Furthermore- the late .a8a! surprisi!gly reasserts the possibility o a!other- authe!ti8 or pure
love o the Hther- o the Hther as su8h- !ot my imagi!ary other7 =e reers here to medieval a!d early
moder! theology @FL!Llo!A 6hi8h disti!guished bet6ee! Jphysi8alK love a!d pure Je8stati8K love7 9!
the irst @developed by Aristotle a!d ANui!asA- o!e 8a! o!ly love a!other i he is my good- so 6e love
1od as our supreme 1ood7 9! the se8o!d- the lovi!g subje8t e!a8ts a 8omplete sel:erasure- a 8omplete
dedi8atio! to the Hther i! its alterity- 6ithout retur!- 6ithout be!ei8e- 6hose e?emplary 8ase is
mysti8al sel:erasure7 =ere .a8a! e!gages i! a! e?treme theologi8al spe8ulatio!- imagi!i!g a!
impossible situatio!+ Jthe peak o the love or 1od should have bee! to tell him Vi this is thy 6ill-
8o!dem! me-I that is to say- the e?a8t opposite o the aspiratio! to the supreme good7K
##
0ve! i there
is !o mer8y rom 1od- eve! i 1od 6ere to dam! me 8ompletely to e?ter!al sueri!g- my love or =im
is so great that 9 6ould still ully love him7 This 6ould be love- i love is to have le moindre sens7
Fra!eois 3alm`s here asks the right Nuestio!+ 6here is 1od i! all this- 6hy theologyM As he
per8eptively !otes- pure love must be disti!guished rom pure desire+ the latter implies the murder o its
obje8t- it is a desire puriied o all pathologi8al obje8ts- as desire or the void or la8k itsel- 6hile pure
love !eeds a radi8al Hther to reer to7
#'
This is 6hy the radi8al Hther @as o!e o the !ames o the
divi!eA is a !e8essary 8orrelate o pure love7
This leads .a8a! to address the 8omple? i!tera8tio! bet6ee! love a!d se?uality- 8ulmi!ati!g i!
the 8a!o!i8al thesis a88ordi!g to 6hi8h love suppleme!ts the impossibility o se?ual relatio!ship7 The
starti!g poi!t is il ny a pas de rapport se&uel7 9! outli!i!g this dis8orda!8e- .a8a! reers to Freud+
there are !o represe!tatio!s o se?ual diere!8eT all 6e have is the a8tive>passive oppositio!- but eve!
this ailsEa!d 6hat this mea!s is that the o!ly support o se?ual diere!8e is- or both se?es-
masNuerade7 ,asNuerade has to be opposed here to parade i! the a!imal ki!gdom+ i! the latter- males
parade i! order to be a88epted as se?ual part!ers by the emales- 6hile i! masNuerade- it is the 6oma!
6ho is masked7 This reversal sig!als the passage rom imagi!ary to symboli8+ or the emi!i!e
masNuerade to 6ork- the big Hther has to be prese!t- si!8e se?ual diere!8e is Feal- but a Feal
imma!e!t to the symboli87
9! se?uality- everythi!g hi!ges o! the Hther!ess o the other se?+ mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e are
!ot simply opposed as others o ea8h other @6oma! as the other o ma! a!d vi8e versaA- si!8e the
mas8uli!e Jphalli8K positio! is the Same Ji! itsel-K a!d the emi!i!e positio! the Hther se? Ji! itsel7K
/e are deali!g here 6ith a rei!ed =egelia! sel:relati!g o opposites+ the relatio!ship o other!ess
@ea8h is related to its otherA is rele8ted ba8k i!to the terms- so that o!e o the terms @the mas8uli!eA
sta!ds or the Same a!d the other or the Hther7 9 the /oma! 6ere to e?ist- she 6ould be the Hther o
the Hther- the guara!tee o its 8omplete!ess a!d 8o!siste!8y7
#$
A similar sel:relati!g pertai!s to the status o se?uality itsel7 9t is a 8ommo!pla8e that- or
psy8hoa!alysis- se?uality is 6hat o!e dee!ds o!esel agai!st @through repressio!- et87AT ho6ever-
se?uality is simulta!eously- at a more radi8al level- itsel a dee!seEagai!st 6hatM Agai!st the
traumati8 truth that Jthere is !o Hther7K
#&
Si!8e the irst igure o the Hther is the mother- Jthere is !o
big HtherK irst mea!s that the Jmother is 8astratedKEse?uality @i! the ordi!ary se!se o se?ual
relatio!s 6ith a!other subje8t- a part!er- 6here the 8ouple orms a 8ompleme!tary /holeA is a dee!se
agai!st the a8t that the radi8al part!er @HtherA does !ot e?ist at all7
3a8k to FreudIs lege!dary e?ample o the patie!t 6ho told him+ J9 do !ot k!o6 6ho this
6oma! i! my dream is- but 9 am sure o o!e thi!g- that it is !ot my motherRK As Ale!ka Bupa!^i^ has
poi!ted out- the u!derlyi!g parado? is that the patie!tIs emphati8 JThis is !ot my motherRK mea!s the
e?a8t opposite at two different levels7 First- there is the obvious level o de!ial+ i! the patie!tIs
u!8o!s8ious- the igure is- o 8ourse- his mother- a!d de!ial is the pri8e the patie!t has to pay or
bri!gi!g this mater!al igure to 8o!s8ious!ess7 There is- ho6ever- a!other level at 6hi8h JThis is !ot
my motherRK asserts the e?iste!8e o the ,other+ the ,other- the impossible>Feal i!8estuous obje8t o
desire- ully e?ists i! its i!a88essible 9!:itsel- a!d JThis is !ot my motherRK just gives voi8e to the
disappoi!tme!t- sig!ali!g a! e?perie!8e o ce nest pas Ba- o JThis miserable igure 8a!!ot be that real
,otherRK
#%
4o obje8t 6e i!d i! reality is that- so the subje8t 8a! o!ly glide rom o!e to a!other
obje8t7 3ut is this meto!ymy o desire the last 6ordM =ere e!ter the drive a!d its sublimatio! i! love+
the obje8t o love is a mira8le o 8oi!8ide!8eT i! it- a! ordi!ary obje8t @perso!A is elevated to the level
o the Thi!g- so that here- the subje8t 8a! ully say- JThis is thatRK or J5ou are youRK 6here this
tautology a!!ou!8es the mira8le o the ragile 8oi!8ide!8e o a! ordi!ary obje8t 6ith the absolute
Thi!g7 All this is missed by the 8o!temporary patie!t 6hose a!s6er to FreudIs Nuestio! 6ould be+
J/hoever this 6oma! i! my dream is- 9 am sure she has somethi!g to do 6ith my motherRKEthis ope!
admissio! is so depressi!g si!8e it is sustai!ed by a radi8al de:sublimatio!+ mother is just mother- so
6hatM /e 8a! also see i! 6hat se!se de:sublimatio! 8oi!8ides 6ith ull a!d su88essul repressio!+ the
mother 8a! be ope!ly me!tio!ed- be8ause the properly i!8estuous dime!sio! is totally erased7
4egatio! thus operates at t6o levels here+ irst- there is the simple 6erneinung o JThis is !ot
my motherRKT the!- there is the gap bet6ee! the mother as a! obje8t i! reality a!d the ,other as the
impossible>Feal obje8t o desire7 This diere!8e 8a! be marked through the t6o opposed versio!s o
truth as ade<uatio+ the irst level 8o!8er!s the simple 8ommo!:se!se !otio! o truth as ade<uatio o our
!otio! @stateme!tA to reality @a stateme!t is true i 6hat it 8laims is 8o!irmed by realityAT the se8o!d
level 8o!8er!s truth as ade<uatio o a thi!g to its o6! !otio! @a! a8tual state is a JtrueK state i it meets
8ertai! 8o!ditio!sA7 9s this se8o!d gap bet6ee! mother as a! obje8t i! reality a!d the Feal:impossible
,other @i! short- the Jsymboli8 8astratio!-K the loss o the i!8estuous obje8t- the Jprimordial
repressio!KA the! the primordial orm o !egatio!M 9! other 6ords- does the origi! o !egativity lie i!
the a8t that- i that 6oma! is or is !ot the mother- the ,other is al6ays lostM
This bri!gs us to t6o parado?i8al 8o!8lusio!s !i8ely ormulated by 3alm`s+ Jse?uality is
8o!sta!tly sustai!ed by a8tively de!yi!g its esse!tial 8o!ditio! o possibilityKT 8astratio! is J6hat
re!ders possible se?uality as a relatio! to the Hther- a!d also 6hat re!ders it impossible7K
'0
=o6- the!- 8a! 6e 8o!8eptualiUe the se?ual a8t 6ith regard to the a8t that il ny a pas de
rapport se&uelM The philosophy o diale8ti8al materialism tea8hes us to reje8t simulta!eously both the
rightist a!d the letist deviatio!sT i! this 8ase- the rightist deviatio!- i! its 8o!servative:Datholi8 guise-
8laims that the se?ual a8t is i! itsel a! a8t o a!imal 8opulatio!- a!d that it !eeds to be suppleme!ted
by ge!tle kisses a!d 6hispers 6hi8h give it a more 8iviliUed spiritual 8oati!gT 6hile the letist deviatio!
prea8hes our total immersio! i! the se?ual a8tEthe t6o lovers should dissolve their separate ide!tities
a!d lose themselves i! the i!te!sity o 8opulatio!7 9! reje8ti!g both o these deviatio!s- diale8ti8al
materialism begi!s 6ith the a?iom o de:8e!teri!g+ the se? orga!s i!volved i! 8opulatio! u!8tio! as
Jorga!s 6ithout bodies-K orga!s i!vested 6ith libidi!al i!te!sity 6hi8h are e?perie!8ed as mi!imally
separated rom the subje8tsI bodiesEit is !ot the subje8ts themselves 6ho 8opulate but their orga!s
Jout there7K The subje8t 8a! !ever dire8tly ide!tiy 6ith these orga!s- it 8a!!ot ully assume them as
Jits o6!K+ the very o8us o its se?ual a8tivity at its most i!te!se is Je?:timateK 6ith regard to it7 This
mea!s that eve! @or pre8iselyA i! the most i!te!se se?ual a8tivity- the parti8ipati!g subje8t is redu8ed to
the role o a helpless- passive observer o its o6! a8tivity- to a gaUe as8i!ated by 6hat is taki!g
pla8eEa!d it is this 8oi!8ide!8e o the most i!te!se a8tivity 6ith a helplessly as8i!ated passivity
6hi8h 8o!stitutes the subje8tive attitude o the subje8t i!volved i! a se?ual a8t7
There is more to this passivity tha! may at irst appear7 9! De anima @2$+#A- Tertullia! provides
a delightul des8riptio! o the se?ual a8t- orgasm i!8luded7 9! the traditio!al Dhristia! ma!!er- he irst
e!dorses the a8t itsel- reje8ti!g it o!ly 6he! it is e?8essiveEthe dii8ulty here- o 8ourse- is that 6ith
regard to huma! se?uality proper it is ormally impossible to disti!guish !ormal or modest se?ual
a8tivity rom its e?8essive eroti8iUatio!7 The e?pla!atio! lies i! the i!here!t rele?ivity o se?ualiUatio!
dis8overed already by Freud+ the prote8tive rituals desig!ed to keep e?8essive se?uality at bay be8ome
se?ualiUed themselves- the prohibitio! o desire reverts i!to the desire o prohibitio!- a!d so o!7 H!e
8a! thus imagi!e a 8ouple redu8i!g their se?ual a8tivity to a mi!imal level- deprivi!g it o all e?8ess-
o!ly to i!d that the mi!imalism itsel be8omes i!vested 6ith a! e?8essive se?ual 1ouissance @alo!g the
li!es o those part!ers 6ho- to spi8e up their se? lie- treat it as a dis8ipli!ary measure- dress up i!
u!iorms- ollo6 stri8t rules- et87A7 Therei! lies the obs8e!ity o Tertullia!Is de facto role+ o!e 8a!
imagi!e a 8ouple- tired o e?perime!ti!g a!d orgies- de8idi!g to Jdo it K la Tertullia!K as a last
desperate solutio! to make se? more e?8iti!g7 There is !o e?8essive se? be8ause- the mome!t 6e e!ter
the huma! u!iverse- se? itsel is a! e?8ess7 Tertullia! the! goes o! to des8ribe ho6- i! the se?ual a8t-

both the soul a!d the lesh dis8harge a duty together+ the soul supplies desire- the lesh 8o!tributes the
gratii8atio! o itT the soul ur!ishes the i!stigatio!- the lesh aords the realiUatio!7 The e!tire ma!
bei!g e?8ited by the o!e eort o both !atures- his semi!al substa!8e is dis8harged- derivi!g its luidity
rom the body- a!d its 6armth rom the soul7 4o6 i the soul i! 1reek is a 6ord 6hi8h is sy!o!ymous
6ith 8old- ho6 does it 8ome to pass that the body gro6s 8old ater the soul has Nuitted itM 9!deed @i 9
ru! the risk o oe!di!g modesty eve!- i! my desire to prove the truthA- 9 8a!!ot help aski!g- 6hether
6e do !ot- i! that very heat o e?treme gratii8atio! 6he! the ge!erative luid is eje8ted- eel that
some6hat o our soul has go!e rom usM A!d do 6e !ot e?perie!8e a ai!t!ess a!d prostratio! alo!g
6ith a dim!ess o sightM This- the!- must be the soul:produ8i!g seed- 6hi8h arises at o!8e rom the out:
drip o the soul- just as that luid is the body:produ8i!g seed 6hi8h pro8eeds rom the drai!age o the
lesh7
'1
=o6ever- 6hat i 6e read the 8laim that- i! orgasm- Jsome6hat o our soul has go!e rom us-K
!ot as a tra!serri!g o the soul rom the ather to the uture !e6bor!- butEig!ori!g i!semi!atio! a!d
o8usi!g o! the phe!ome!ology o the a8t itselEas a "enotic emptying of the sub1ects substantial
content ?%soul'@M /hat i- i! the orgasm- the subje8t is mome!tarily deprived o the ballast o its
J6ealth o perso!alityK a!d is redu8ed to the eva!es8e!t void o a pure subje8t 6it!essi!g its o6!
disappeara!8eM
3alm`s systematiUes this parado?i8al !ature o se?uality i! a *a!tia! 6ay- e!umerati!g a series
o Ja!ti!omiesK o se?ual reaso!+

the antinomy of se&ual en1oyment+ thesisEse?ual 1ouissance is every6here- it 8olors all our pleasuresT
antithesisEse?ual 1ouissance is !ot se?ual7
The e?pla!atio! o this a!ti!omy resides i! the overlappi!g o la8k a!d e?8ess+ be8ause it la8ks
its proper pla8e- 1ouissance spreads every6here7 The t6o sides 8a! be 8o!de!sed i! the tautology+ Jthe
se?ual is dei!ed by the ailure to rea8h the se?ual7K
'2

the antinomy of the two and the $ther+ thesisEi! the real o se?- there are t6o- a!d o!ly t6o- se?es-
ma! a!d 6oma!T antithesisErom the mome!t 6e e!ter la!guage- there is !o se8o!d @otherA se?7
.a8a! i!sists here o! Jbi!ary logi8-K o! the Feal o se?ual diere!8e- a!d Nualiies the de!ial o
the Feal o se?ual diere!8e as the @idealistA de!ial o 8astratio!7 Fetroa8tively- this diag!osis takes o!
additio!al 6eight today- i! relatio! to the rise o 6hat 3alm`s iro!i8ally reers to as Jfoucauldo*
lacanisme-K the 8elebratio! o the multitude o Jse?es-K o se?ual ide!tities @e7g7- 2udith 3utlerIs
perormative 8o!stru8tivism as a! idealist de!ial o the Feal o se?ual diere!8eA7 =o6ever- 6e should
add that this duality o se?es is a stra!ge o!e- si!8e o!e o the t6o is missi!gT it is !ot the
8ompleme!tary duality o yin a!d yang- but a radi8ally asymmetri8 duality i! 6hi8h the Same 8o!ro!ts
the pla8e o>as its o6! la8k7

the antinomy of woman and $ther+ thesisE6oma! is !ot the pla8e o the HtherT antithesisE6oma! is
the radi8al Hther7
This a!ti!omy is ge!erated by the a8t that the symboli8 Hther as a pla8e emerges 6ith the
erasure o the emi!i!e Hther Se?7

the antinomy of $ther and body+ thesisEo!e o!ly e!joys the HtherT antithesisEthere is !o 1ouissance
o the Hther @obje8tive ge!itiveA7
The e?pla!atio! o this last a!ti!omy is that e!joyme!t as Feal has to reer to a! Hther!essT
ho6ever- this Hther!ess is as su8h i!a88essible- Feal>impossible7 The u!derlyi!g matri? ge!erati!g
these a!ti!omies is that- i! the se?ual relatio!ship- two relatio!ships overlap+ the relatio!ship bet6ee!
the t6o se?es @mas8uli!e- emi!i!eA- a!d the relatio!ship bet6ee! the subje8t a!d its @asymmetri8alA
Hther7 The Hther Se?- embodied i! the primordial Hther @,otherA- is eva8uated- emptied o 1ouissance-
e?8luded- a!d it is this Jvoida!8eK 6hi8h 8reates the Hther as the symboli8 pla8e- as the 3et6ee!- the
medium o i!tersubje8tive relatio!s7 This is the 3r*6erdr=ngung- the primordial metaphori8
substitutio!+ the Hther Se? is repla8ed by the symboli8 big Hther7 This mea!s that there is se?uality
@se?ual te!sio! bet6ee! ma! a!d 6oma!A pre8isely be8ause the /oma! as Hther does !ot e?ist7
'"
3alm`s is justiied i! poi!ti!g out that the relatio!ship here is ambiguous+ is it that la!guage
@the symboli8 HtherA 8omes se8o!d- as a dee!se- a prote8tive s8ree!- agai!st the Hther Se?- or is it that
the Hther Se? is repressed 6ith the e!try o the symboli8 big HtherM 9! other 6ords- is it that there is !o
se?ual relatio!ship be8ause 6e d6ell i! la!guage- or is it that la!guage is a dee!se agai!st the
impossibility o the se?ual relatio!shipM The u!derlyi!g parado? is that- i! the te!sio! bet6ee! the Feal
o se?ual diere!8e a!d the symboli8- the symboli8 order is a! ee8t 6hi8h rebels agai!st its o6!
8ause- a!d- vi8e versa- la!guage itsel retroa8tively ge!erates the heteroge!eous Hther!ess 6hi8h it
represses or e?8ludes7 =ere is 3alm`sIs superb iro!i8 8o!8lusio!+ J9t is thus Vi! the se?ual relatio!shipI
6hi8h is !ot a relatio!ship a!d 6hi8h is !ot se?ual @6hi8h mea!s the same thi!gA that the 6oma! is the
Hther @!either o 6hom e?istsA7 /ell- itIs e?a8tly like that7K
'(
/hile 6e should be 8areul !ot to
8o!use the diere!t 8ases- the u!derlyi!g model is !o!etheless ormally the same+ a! e!tityE6oma!-
the Hther- se?uality- the subje8t itselOEis re!dered possible by its o6! impossibilityT that is- i! @the
little bit oA its o6! positive e?iste!8e- it as it 6ere materiali2es its own impossibility7 The status o the
subje8t is thus imma!e!tly temporal+ the subje8t is a virtual e!tity- it JisK !ot @i! the prese!tA- it is a
virtual d 6hi8h al6ays J6ill have bee!KEthe pre:subje8tive thrust to6ards @sig!iyi!gA represe!tatio!
@.a8a! desig!ates it 6ith the tria!gle o the 1reek JdeltaKA ails- a!d the subje8t JisK this ailure-
emergi!g retroa8tively as the ailure o its o6! represe!tatio!7
/hat this parado?i8al 8oi!8ide!8e o opposites bears 6it!ess to is the a!tago!isti8 !ature o the
e!tity i! Nuestio!- a!tago!isti8 as opposed to diere!tial7 9! the same 6ay- the a!tago!isti8
i!separability o the t6o se?es does !ot mea! that their relatio!ship is diere!tial i! the symboli8
se!se- that ea8h se?Is ide!tity is !othi!g but its diere!8e 6ith regard to the opposite se?+ i this 6ere
the 8ase- the! the ide!tity o ea8h se? 6ould be ully determi!ed through its diere!tial eatures7 To
arrive at the a!tago!ism as Feal- 6e must add a urther tur! o the s8re6+ ea8h se? does !ot suppleme!t
the other- but u!8tio!s as the obsta8le preve!ti!g the other rom a8hievi!g its ull ide!tity7 J,a!K
!ames that 6hi8h preve!ts J6oma!K rom ully realiUi!g itsel- a!d vi8e versa7 9! the 8lass struggle-
there is also J!o 8lass relatio!shipK+ the JbourgeoisieK !ames the 8lass 6hi8h preve!ts the proletariat
rom ully be8omi!g itsel7 .a8a!Is 8laim that se?ual diere!8e is JFeal:impossibleK is stri8tly
sy!o!ymous 6ith his 8laim that Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!shipK+ se?ual diere!8e is !ot a i?ed set o
Jstati8K symboli8 oppositio!s a!d i!8lusio!s or e?8lusio!s @6ith heterose?ual !ormativity relegati!g
homose?uality a!d other Jperversio!sK to a se8o!dary roleA- but the !ame o a deadlo8k- a trauma- a!
ope! Nuestio!- somethi!g that resists every attempt at symboliUatio!7 0very tra!slatio! o se?ual
diere!8e i!to a set o symboli8 oppositio!s is doomed to ail- a!d it is this very JimpossibilityK that
ope!s up the terrai! o the hegemo!i8 struggle or 6hat Jse?ual diere!8eK 6ill mea!7
/=5 .ADA4 9S 4HT A 4H,94A.9ST

Se?ual diere!8e a!d 8lass diere!8e are thus both real i! the very pre8ise ormal se!se o
bei!g rooted i! a! a!tago!ism+ the diere!8e parado?i8ally pre8edes the t6o terms 6hose diere!8e it
is7 9! a de!se a!d u!iNue passage rom his 1%$1 Seminar ;6III- .a8a! provides a pre8ise dei!itio! o
this logi8 o a!tago!ism- i!8ludi!g his ide!tii8atio! 6ith diale8ti8al materialism- 6hi8h 8omes as a
surprise pre8isely be8ause it is stated as a sel:evide!t premise+

9 there is somethi!g 9 am- it is 8lear that 9 am !ot a !omi!alist7 /hat 9 6a!t to say is that my starti!g
poi!t is !ot that the !ame is somethi!g like a !ameplate 6hi8h atta8hes itsel- just like that- o!to the
real7 A!d o!e has to 8hoose7 9 o!e is a !omi!alist- o!e has to re!ou!8e 8ompletely diale8ti8al
materialism- so that- all i! all- 9 evide!tly reje8t the !omi!alist traditio! 6hi8h is ee8tively the o!ly
da!ger o idealism 6hi8h 8a! arise i! a dis8ourse like mi!e7 The poi!t is !ot to be a realist i! the se!se
i! 6hi8h o!e 6as a realist i! ,edieval times- i! the se!se o the realism o the u!iversalsT the poi!t is
to emphasiUe that our dis8ourse- our s8ie!tii8 dis8ourse- 8a! o!ly i!d the real i!soar as it depe!ds o!
the u!8tio! o the sembla!t7The arti8ulatio!- a!d 9 mea! the algebrai8 arti8ulatio!- o the
sembla!tEa!d be8ause o this 6e are o!ly deali!g 6ith lettersEa!d its ee8ts- this is the o!ly
apparatus 6hi8h e!ables us to desig!ate 6hat is real7 /hat is real is 6hat ope!s up a hole i! this
sembla!t- i! this arti8ulated sembla!t 6hi8h is the s8ie!tii8 dis8ourse7 The s8ie!tii8 dis8ourse
progresses 6ithout eve! 6orryi!g i it is a dis8ourse o sembla!8e or !ot7 All that matters is that its
!et6ork- its te?ture- its lattice- as o!e is used to say- makes the right holes appear at the right pla8e7 The
o!ly reere!8e rea8hed by its dedu8tio!s is the impossible7 This impossible is the real7 9! physi8s- 6e
aim at somethi!g 6hi8h is real 6ith the help o the dis8ursive apparatus 6hi8h- i! its 8risp!ess-
e!8ou!ters the limits o its 8o!siste!8y7
'#
As they say i! Inglourious /asterds- the FYhrer himsel 8ould !ot have put it betterEhere 6e
i!d in nuce the diere!8e bet6ee! .a8a!Is diale8ti8al materialism a!d the Jaleatory materialismK
Althusser struggled to ormulate i! his last 6riti!gs- 6here he also 8laims that !omi!alism is the o!ly
8o!siste!t materialist positio!7 3ut 6hat ki!d o JrealistK is .a8a!M =e dei!es his positio! as that o
the Jrealism o 1ouissance-K but here 6e should avoid the trap o elevati!g 1ouissance i!to some ki!d o
substa!tial 9!:itsel 6hi8h resists bei!g 8aptured by symboli8 sembla!ts7 For .a8a!- 1ouissance is a
6eird substa!8e 6ith !o substa!tial positivity+ it is dis8er!ible o!ly as the virtual 8ause o the 8ra8ks-
distortio!s- a!d imbala!8es i! the te?ture o symboli8 sembla!ts7 That is to say- 6ith regard to reality-
.a8a! agrees 6ith AlthusserIs materialist !omi!alism o e?8eptio!s @or J8li!ami!aKA+ 6hat a8tually
e?ists are o!ly e?8eptio!s- they are all the reality there is7 @This is the moti o histori8ist !omi!alism
e!dlessly repeated i! 8ultural studies+ there is !o /oma! as su8h- there are just lesbia!s- 6orki!g
6ome!- si!gle mothers- a!d so o! a!d so orth7A =o6ever- 6hat !omi!alism does !ot see is the 7eal o
a 8ertai! impossibility or a!tago!ism 6hi8h is the virtual 8ause ge!erati!g multiple realities7 9! his
book o! moder!ity- 2ameso! deploys this Feal i! his 8o!8ise 8ritiNue o re8e!tly ashio!able theories
o Jalter!ate moder!itiesK+

=o6 the! 8a! the ideologues o Jmoder!ityK i! its 8urre!t se!se ma!age to disti!guish their
produ8tEthe i!ormatio! revolutio!- a!d globaliUed- ree:market moder!ityErom the detestable older
ki!d- 6ithout getti!g themselves i!volved i! aski!g the ki!ds o serious politi8al a!d e8o!omi8-
systemi8 Nuestio!s that the 8o!8ept o a postmoder!ity makes u!avoidableM The a!s6er is simple+ you
talk about Jalter!ateK or Jalter!ativeK moder!ities7 0veryo!e k!o6s the ormula by !o6+ this mea!s
that there 8a! be a moder!ity or everybody 6hi8h is diere!t rom the sta!dard or hegemo!i8 A!glo:
Sa?o! model7 /hatever you dislike about the latter- i!8ludi!g the subalter! positio! it leaves you i!-
8a! be ea8ed by the reassuri!g a!d J8ulturalK !otio! that you 8a! ashio! your o6! moder!ity
diere!tly- so that there 8a! be a .ati!:Ameri8a! ki!d- or a! 9!dia! ki!d or a! Ari8a! ki!d- a!d so
orth O 3ut this is to overlook the other u!dame!tal mea!i!g o moder!ity 6hi8h is that o a
6orld6ide 8apitalism itsel7
''
The sig!ii8a!8e o this 8ritiNue rea8hes ar beyo!d the 8ase o moder!ityEit 8o!8er!s the
u!dame!tal limitatio! o !omi!alist histori8iUi!g7 The re8ourse to the multitude @Jthere is !o si!gle
moder!ity 6ith a i?ed esse!8e- there are multiple moder!ities- ea8h o them irredu8ible to the
othersOKA is alse !ot be8ause it does !ot re8og!iUe a u!iNue i?ed Jesse!8eK o moder!ity- but
be8ause multipli8atio! here u!8tio!s as a disavo6al o the a!tago!ism that i!heres i! the !otio! o
moder!ity as su8h+ its alsity lies i! the a8t that it rees the u!iversal !otio! o moder!ity o its
a!tago!ism- o the 6ay it is embedded i! the 8apitalist system- by relegati!g this aspe8t to just o!e o
its histori8al subspe8ies7
'$
9!soar as this i!here!t a!tago!ism 8ould be desig!ated as a J8astrativeK
dime!sio!Ea!d i!soar as- a88ordi!g to Freud- the disavo6al o 8astratio! is represe!ted as the
multipli8atio! o phallus:represe!tatives @a multitude o phalluses sig!als 8astratio!- the la8k o the
o!eAEit is easy to 8o!8eive su8h a multipli8atio! o moder!ities as a orm o etishist disavo6al7
2ameso!Is 8ritiNue o the !otio! o alter!ate moder!ities thus provides a model or the properly
dialectical relatio!ship bet6ee! the )!iversal a!d the Carti8ular+ the diere!8e is !ot o! the side o
parti8ular 8o!te!t @as the traditio!al differentia specificaA- but o! the side o the )!iversal7 The
)!iversal is !ot the e!8ompassi!g 8o!tai!er o the parti8ular 8o!te!t- the pea8eul medium or
ba8kgrou!d or the 8o!li8t o parti8ularitiesT the )!iversal Jas su8hK is the site o a! u!bearable
a!tago!ism or sel:8o!tradi8tio!- a!d @the multitude oA its parti8ular spe8ies are ultimately !othi!g but
so ma!y attempts to obus8ate>re8o!8ile>master this a!tago!ism7 9! other 6ords- the )!iversal !ames
the site o a Croblem:Geadlo8k- o a bur!i!g Wuestio!- a!d the Carti8ulars are attempted but ailed
A!s6ers to this Croblem7 For e?ample- the 8o!8ept o the State !ames a 8ertai! problem+ ho6 to
8o!tai! the 8lass a!tago!ism o a so8ietyM All parti8ular orms o the State are so ma!y @ailedA
attempts to i!d a solutio! to this problem7
This is ho6 6e should read .a8a!Is stateme!t that the poi!t is !ot to be a realist i! the medieval
se!se- but i! the se!se that our @s8ie!tii8A dis8ourse J8a! o!ly i!d the real i!soar as it depe!ds o! the
u!8tio! o the sembla!tK+ reality is a sembla!t- but !ot i! the simple se!se that it is a de8eptive
appeara!8e hidi!g true 3ei!gEthere is !othi!g- !o true substa!tial real- behi!d the veil o phe!ome!al
reality7 Feality is a sembla!t i! the se!se that its stru8ture already materialiUes a 8ertai! a!tasy 6hi8h
obus8ates the Feal o a so8ial a!tago!ism7 This is 6hy 6e J8a! o!ly i!d the real i!soar as it depe!ds
o! the u!8tio! o the sembla!tK+ by 6ay o ide!tiyi!g the impossibilities- 8ra8ks- a!tago!isms 6hi8h
u!derlie a!d ge!erate the i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity o sembla!ts7
Cerhaps 6e 8a! 8o!stru8t a triad here+ @1A or =egel- 6e have 8o!tradi8tio!- i!8o!siste!8y- as
Feal- but !ot i! mathemati8s- o!ly i! 8o!8eptsT @2A or moder! s8ie!8e- 6e have the Feal arti8ulated i!
mathemati8al ormulae- but !ot as i!8o!siste!tT @"A or .a8a!- 6e have the Feal residi!g i! the impasse
o mathemati8al ormaliUatio!7
A!d e?a8tly the same goes or 1ouissance+ 6he! .a8a! talks about 1ouissance fAminine- he
al6ays Nualiies itEJi a thi!g like that 6ere to e?ist @but it does !otAKEthereby 8o!irmi!g its
i!8omme!surability 6ith the order o @symboli8A e?iste!8e7
'&
Couissance fAminine does !ot e?ist- but il
y a de 1ouissance fAminine- Jthere isK emi!i!e e!joyme!t7 This il y a- like the 1erma! es gibt 6hi8h
plays su8h a key role i! late =eidegger- is 8learly opposed to e?iste!8e @i! 0!glish- the disti!8tio! gets
blurred- si!8e o!e 8a!!ot avoid the verb Jto beK i! tra!slatio!A7 Couissance is thus !ot a positive
substa!8e 8aught i! the symboli8 !et6ork- it is somethi!g that shi!es through o!ly i! the 8ra8ks a!d
ope!i!gs o the symboli8 orderE!ot be8ause 6e- 6ho d6ell 6ithi! that order- 8a!!ot regai! it dire8tly-
but- more radi8ally- be8ause it is ge!erated by the 8ra8ks a!d i!8o!siste!8ies o the symboli8 order
itsel7
/e should be atte!tive here to the diere!8e bet6ee! the i!e?iste!8e o 1ouissance fAminine
a!d the i!e?iste!8e o a ather 6ho 6ould it its symboli8 u!8tio!7 @J9 there is !o su8h ather- it still
remai!s true that the ather is 1od- it is simply that this ormula is 8o!irmed o!ly by the empty se8tor
o the sNuare7KA
'%
9! the 8ase o the ather- 6e have a dis8repa!8y bet6ee! the symboli8 u!8tio! @o
the FatherA a!d the reality o i!dividuals 6ho !ever it this u!8tio!- 6hile i! the 8ase o 1ouissance
fAminine- 6e have the Feal o 1ouissance 6hi8h eludes symboliUatio!7 9! other 6ords- i! the irst 8ase-
the gap is bet6ee! reality a!d the symboli8- 6hile i! the se8o!d 8ase- the gap is bet6ee! the symboli8
a!d the Feal+ miserable i!dividuals 8alled athers e?ist- they just do !ot it their symboli8 u!8tio!-
6hi8h remai!s a! Jempty se8tor o the sNuareKT but 1ouissance fAminine- pre8isely- does !ot e?ist7
H!e sta!dard dei!itio! o the .a8a!ia! Feal des8ribes it as that 6hi8h al6ays retur!s to the
same pla8e- that 6hi8h remai!s the same i! all possible symboli8 u!iverses7 This !otio! o the Feal as a
Jhard 8oreK that resists symboliUatio! must be suppleme!ted by its opposite+ the Feal is also a Jpure
appeara!8e-K that 6hi8h e?ists o!ly 6he! 6e look upo! reality rom a 8ertai! perspe8tiveEthe mome!t
6e shit our poi!t o vie6- the obje8t disappears7 /hat both e?tremes e?8lude i! the sta!dard !otio! o
reality as somethi!g 6hi8h resists i! its 9!:itsel- but 8ha!ges 6ith regard to its properties+ 6he! 6e
shit perspe8tive- it appears diere!t7 =o6ever- these t6o opposed !otio!s o reality 8a! be thought
togetherEi o!e bears i! mi!d the 8ru8ial shit that takes pla8e i! .a8a!Is tea8hi!g 6ith regard to the
Feal7 From the 1%'0s o!6ards- the Feal is !o lo!ger that 6hi8h remai!s the same i! all symboli8
u!iversesT 6ith regard to the 8ommo! !otio! o reality- the Feal is not the u!derlyi!g same!ess 6hi8h
persists through the multitude o diere!t poi!ts o vie6 o! a! obje8t7 The Feal is- o! the 8o!trary-
that which generates these differences- the elusive Jhard 8oreK that the multiple poi!ts o vie6 try @a!d
ailA to re8apture7 This is 6hy the Feal Jat its purestK is the Jpure appeara!8eK+ a diere!8e 6hi8h
8a!!ot be grou!ded i! a!y real eatures o the obje8tT a JpureK diere!8e7
9! MrF b MrsF Smith- 3rad Citt a!d A!geli!a 2olie play a bored married 8ouple seeki!g advi8e
rom a therapist- 6hile- u!bek!o6!st to ea8h other- they are both employed @6ith diere!t age!8iesA as
proessio!al assassi!s @the plot- o 8ourse- takes o 6he! ea8h is give! the assig!me!t to kill the
otherA7 =ere 6e e!8ou!ter a! i!terpretive dilemma+ are Citt a!d 2olie a! everyday 8ouple dreami!g
@a!tasiUi!gA about bei!g top 8o!tra8t killers i! order to live! up their marriage- or- vi8e versa- are they
proessio!al killers a!tasiUi!g about livi!g the lie o a! ordi!ary married 8oupleM @There is the! a li!k
6ith =it8h8o8kIs ilm o the same title+ both are J8omedies o remarriage7KA /he! *arl *raus- 6ho
k!e6 Trotsky rom his stay i! Vie!!a beore the First /orld /ar- heard that the latter had saved the
H8tober Fevolutio! by orga!iUi!g the Fed Army- he s!apped ba8k+ J/ho 6ould have e?pe8ted o =err
3ro!stei! rom DaL De!tral to do thatRK =ere agai! 6e have the same dilemma+ 6as it Trotsky- the
great revolutio!ary- 6ho- as part o his u!dergrou!d 6ork- had to spe!d time i! DaL De!tral i! Vie!!aT
or 6as it the ge!tle a!d loNua8ious =err 3ro!stei! rom DaL De!tral 6ho later be8ame the great
revolutio!aryM 3oth situatio!s are variatio!s o! Dhua!g:TUuIs amous story about ho6- o! 6aki!g
ater dreami!g that he 6as a butterly- he 6as !ot sure 6hether he 6as Dhua!g:TUu dreami!g he 6as a
butterly or a butterly dreami!g he 6as Dhua!g:TUu7 9deologists o multiple shiti!g ide!tities like to
Nuote this passage- but- as a rule- they stop short a!d leave out the key i!sight that ollo6s+ J=o6ever-
there must be some sort o diere!8e bet6ee! Dhua!g:TUu a!d a butterlyRK This gap is the site o the
Feal+ the Feal is !ot the Jtrue realityK to 6hi8h 6e a6ake! @i 6e ever doA- but the very gap that
separates o!e dream rom a!other7
H! a 8loser look- ho6ever- 6e 8a! immediately see that there is a urther step to be take! here-
si!8e the relatio!ship o the t6o opposites is !ot symmetri8al7 True- JbourgeoisieK !ames the 8lass
6hi8h preve!ts the proletariat rom ully be8omi!g itsel- but it is !ot true that the proletariat preve!ts
the bourgeoisie rom ully be8omi!g itsel7 True- the mas8uli!e subje8t preve!ts the emi!i!e subje8t
rom ully be8omi!g itsel- but the reverse is !ot true7 This mea!s that ea8h se? is !ot simply H!e:i!:
itsel a!d Hther:o:the:Hther+ the relatio!ship bet6ee! H!e a!d Hther is !ot purely ormal a!d as su8h
applied to ea8h o the t6o se?es- but is rele8ted i! the very Nuality o the t6o se?esEthe mas8uli!e
se? is Ji! itselK H!e- a!d the emi!i!e Ji! itselK @i7e7- !ot o!ly or its Hther- but 6ith regard to itselA
is Jthe other se?K @as Simo!e de 3eauvoir put itA7 So there is o!ly o!e se? 6hi8h is itsel- the H!e- a!d
the other se? is !either a!other H!e !or some ki!d o all:embra8i!g substa!tial Hther!ess 6ithi! 6hi8h
6e all d6ell @like the primordial ,otherA7 The same goes or 8lass struggle+ 6e do !ot simply have t6o
8lassesT there isEas ,ar? himsel put itEo!ly o!e 8lass Jas su8h-K the bourgeoisieT 8lasses prior to the
bourgeoisie @eudal lords- 8lergy- et87A are !ot yet 8lasses i! the ull se!se o the term- their 8lass
ide!tity is 8overed up by other hierar8hi8al determi!atio!s @8astes- estatesOAT ater the bourgeoisie-
there is the proletariat- 6hi8h is a !o!:8lass i! the guise o a 8lass a!d- as su8h- the Hther !ot o!ly or
the bourgeoisie but i! a!d or itsel7
=o6 the! to dei!e 6oma! i !ot as simply !o!:ma!- ma!Is symmetri8al or 8ompleme!tary
8ou!terpartM The *a!tia! !otio! o Ji!i!ite or i!dei!ite judgme!tK as opposed to !egative judgme!t
8a! agai! be o some help here+ the positive judgme!t Jthe soul is mortalK 8a! be !egated i! t6o 6ays-
6he! a predi8ate is de!ied to the subje8t @Jthe soul is !ot mortalKA a!d 6he! a !o!:predi8ate is
airmed @Jthe soul is !o!:mortalKA7 9! e?a8tly the same 6ay- 6e should !ot say that 6oma! is !ot ma!-
but that 6oma! is non*manEi! =egelese- 6oma! is !ot o!ly the !egatio! o ma!- but the !egatio! o
the !egatio!- ope!i!g up a third spa8e o !o!:!o!:ma! 6hi8h !ot o!ly does !ot bri!g us ba8k to ma!
but leaves behi!d the e!tire ield o ma! a!d its opposite7 A!d- agai!- i! e?a8tly the same 6ay- the
proletariat is !ot the 8lass opposite o the bourgeoisie- it is !o!:bourgeoisie- 6hi8h mea!s !o!:!o!:
bourgeoisie7 /e thus have !ot t6o 8lasses- but o!eEthe bourgeoisieEa!d its !egatio! o the !egatio!-
a !o!:!o!:8lass- a 6eird 8lass 6hi8h 8a! o!ly 6i! by abolishi!g itsel as 8lass a!d thereby doi!g a6ay
6ith all 8lasses7 The proletariat is the livi!g- e?isti!g parado? o a 8lass 6hi8h is a !o!:8lassEor- as
Fammstei! put it i! their $hne dich+ Johne dich "ann ich nicht sein! ohne dich 9 mit dir bin ich auch
allein! ohne dichK @6ithout you 9 8a!!ot be- 6ithout you > 6ith you 9 am also alo!e- 6ithout youAT i!
short- eve! 6he! 9 am 6ith you- 9 am Jalo!e 6ith you7K The proletariat is alo!e eve! 6he! it is 6ith the
bourgeoisie- related to it7
3ut is this Hther @the Hther 6hi8h is Hther 6ith regard to itselA radi8ally outside the order o
the H!e- like the mythi8al 1ouissance fAminineM Da! it have o!ly a spe8tral prese!8e- havi!g ee8ts but
6ithout properly e?isti!gM This- pre8isely- is the last trap to be avoided+ !o- the Hther 6hi8h is !ot:!ot:
H!e is eve! more JhereK tha! the H!eE6ome! are here- 6orkers are here7 /hat the! is their statusM
.et us go by 6ay o a more ge!eral o!tologi8al thesis+ 6e get rom 1 to 2 be8ause 1 is !ot ully 1+ the
emerge!8e o 2 is a! attempt by 1 to 8at8h its o6! e?8ess through its o6! redupli8atio!7 9! other
6ords- i! the passage rom 1 to 2- the split impli8it i! 1 is e?pli8ated7 =o6ever- this series o 1sE1 m 1
m 1 mOE!ever rea8hes the T6o o radi8al Hther!ess- the Hther 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a!other
H!e7 =o6 to rea8h this Hther!essM There are t6o pote!tial traps here+ @1A evadi!g the impasse o
radi8al Hther!ess by positi!g a! origi!al multipli8ity 6hi8h is o!ly se8o!darily 8o!strai!ed by bi!ary
logi8T @2A elevati!g Hther!ess- i! a .evi!asia! or some other 6ay- i!to a substa!tial or8e or site 6hi8h
domi!ates me @Jthere is a! Hther i! me- somethi!g stro!ger- a For8e 6hi8h speaks through me-K eve!
6he! this Hther is 8alled the J)!8o!s8iousKA7 .a8a! avoids this trap by ormulati!g the a!ti!omy o
the Hther @as elaborated by 3alm`sA+

-hesisE-here is the $ther+ the )!8o!s8ious is the spee8h o the Hther- desire is desire o the Hther-
the Hther is the pla8e o Truth presupposed or implied eve! @or espe8iallyA 6he! 6e are lyi!gT a!d so
o!7
+ntithesisE-here is no $ther+ the Hther is barred- i!8o!siste!t- la8ki!gT the goal o the a!alysis is to
bri!g the subje8t to assume the HtherIs i!e?iste!8eT a!d so orth7
$0
To 8lariy this- 6e should irst !ote that both thesis a!d a!tithesis 8a! be read i! @at leastA three
diere!t 6ays7 Follo6i!g the triad o 9SF- the Hther @6hi8h e?istsA 8a! be the imagi!ary Hther @the
egoIs mirror:imageA- the symboli8 Hther @the a!o!ymous symboli8 order- the pla8e o truthA- a!d the
real Hther @the abyss o the Hther:Thi!g- o the subje8t Nua 4eighborA7 JThere is !o HtherK 8a! be read
as+ a la8k or hole i! the Hther @a missi!g sig!iier- the e?8eptio! o! 6hi8h the Hther is grou!dedAT the
i!8o!siste!8y o the Hther @the Hther as !o!:All- a!tago!isti8- a!d 6hi8h as su8h 8a!!ot be totaliUedAT
or the simple assertio! o the virtual 8hara8ter o the big Hther @the symboli8 order does !ot e?ist as
part o reality- it is a! ideal stru8ture 6hi8h regulates our a8tivity i! so8ial realityA7
$1
The resolutio! o this Ja!ti!omyK is provided by the redoubled ormula+ there is no $ther of the
$ther- the Hther is the Hther 6ith regard to itsel7 /hat this mea!s is that the de:8e!teri!g o the
subje8t i! the Hther is i! itsel redoubled+ true- the subje8t is de:8e!tered- its truth is !ot deep i! itsel
but Jout there-K i! the symboli8 order i! 6hose 6eb it is 8aught a!d 6hose ee8t it ultimately is7
=o6ever- this symboli8 Hther i! 6hi8h the subje8t is 8o!stitutively alie!ated is !ot a ull substa!tial
ield- but is separated rom itsel- arti8ulated arou!d a! i!here!t poi!t o impossibility- arou!d 6hat
.a8a! desig!ated as its e?:timate 8ore7 .a8a!Is !ame or this e?:timate 8ore 6hi8h de:8e!ters the de:
8e!tered subje8tIs Hther itsel is- o 8ourse- the ob1et a- surplus:e!joyme!t- the obje8t:8ause o desire7
This parado?i8al obje8t u!8tio!s as a ki!d o bug or glit8h i! the big Hther- as a! imma!e!t obsta8le to
its ull a8tualiUatio!- a!d the subje8t is o!ly a 8orrelative to this glit8h+ 6ithout the glit8h- there 6ould
have bee! !o subje8t- the Hther 6ould have bee! a 8omplete- smoothly ru!!i!g order7 The parado? is
thus that the very glit8h 6hi8h makes the Hther i!8omplete- i!8o!siste!t- la8ki!g- a!d so o!- is
pre8isely 6hat makes the Hther Hther- irredu8ible to a!other H!e7
401AT9H4 HF T=0 401AT9H4+ .ADA4 V0FS)S =010.M

=o6 does this .a8a!ia! !egatio! o the !egatio!Ei! its t6o mai! versio!s+ the redoubled
!egatio! 6hi8h ge!erates the e?8ess o the !o!:All- a!d the move rom alie!atio! to separatio!Erelate
to the =egelia! !egatio! o the !egatio!M 9s the =egelia! versio! stro!g e!ough to 8o!tai! @a88ou!t
orA the .a8a!ia! versio!M .a8a! repeatedly i!sists that his J!egatio! o the !egatio!-K i! 8o!trast to
=egelIs- does !ot result i! a retur! to a!y ki!d o positivity- !o matter ho6 sublated or mediated that
positivity might be7 9! 6ertigo- S8ottie rea8hes the e!d 6he! he dis8overs that ,adelei!e 6as a ake
rom the very begi!!i!g- J!o lo!ger @!otA 6ithout ,adelei!e-K 6hi8h- agai!- does !ot mea! that he is
with ,adelei!e- but that he has lost the loss itsel- the very poi!t o reere!8e 6hi8h 8ir8ums8ribed the
pla8e o the loss stru8turi!g his desire7 9! a 6ay- he loses desire itsel- its obje8t:8ause7 This move is
still =egelia!- or =egel 8a! 6ell thi!k the !egatio! o the !egatio! as a radi8al loss7 The Nuestio! is
thus !ot JGoes the =egelia! !egatio! o the !egatio! erase the loss i! a retur! to ull u!ityMK but rather+
JDa! =egel thi!k the additio!al ourth phase i! 6hi8h the sel:relati!g moveme!t o the !egatio! o the
!egatio! itsel e!ge!ders a parti8ular ti8- a si!gular e?8essive:repetitive gesture @like 2ulieIs sui8idal
e?plosio! o passio! at the e!d o .a nouvelle 0eloise- or Syg!eIs ti8 at the e!d o DlaudelIs
.$tageAMK
As 6e have already see!- the .a8a!ia! !egatio! o the !egatio! is lo8ated o! the emi!i!e side
o the Jormulae o se?uatio!-K i! the !otio! o the !o!:All+ there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot a a8t o
dis8ourseT ho6ever- this !o!:!ot:dis8ourse does !ot mea! that all is dis8ourse- but- pre8isely- that !ot:
All is dis8ourseE6hat is outside is !ot a positive somethi!g but the ob1et a- more tha! !othi!g but !ot
somethi!g- !ot H!e7
$2
Alter!atively+ there is !o subje8t 6hi8h is !ot 8astrated- but this does !ot mea!
that all subje8ts are 8astrated @the !o!:8astrated remai!der is- o 8ourse- the ob1et aA7 The Feal that 6e
tou8h upo! here- i! this double !egatio!- 8a! be li!ked to *a!tia! i!i!ite judgme!t- the airmatio! o
a !o!:predi8ate+ Jhe is u!deadK does !ot simply mea! that he is alive- but that he is alive as !ot dead-
as a livi!g dead7 J=e is u!deadK mea!s that he is !ot:!ot:dead7
$"
9! the same 6ay- the Freudia!
)!8o!s8ious is like the u!dead+ it is !ot simply !ot:8o!s8ious but !o!:!ot:8o!s8ious- a!d- i! this
double !egatio!- a no !ot o!ly persists- but is eve! redoubled+ u!dead remai!s !ot:dead and !ot:alive7
9s !ot the ob1et a i! the same 6ay a !o!:!ot:obje8t a!d- i! this se!se- a! obje8t 6hi8h embodies the
voidM
This double !egatio! 8a! also have the stru8ture o a 8hoi8e 6hi8h- 6hile !ot or8ed- is
re!dered i!diere!t si!8e- 6hatever our de8isio!- the result 6ill be the same7 Su8h 6as allegedly the
8ase i! Viet!am 6here- ater the deeat o the South- 4orther! propaga!dists pi8ked up you!g people
o! the streets a!d or8ed them to 6at8h a lo!g do8ume!tary propaga!da ilm7 Ater the s8ree!i!g- the
vie6ers 6ere asked i they liked the ilm7 9 they a!s6ered !o- they 6ere told that obviously they did
!ot really u!dersta!d it a!d so 6ould have to 6at8h it agai!T i they a!s6ered yes- they 6ere told+
J1ood- si!8e you like it so mu8h- you 8a! !o6 6at8h it agai!RK 5es a!d !o amou!t to the same thi!g-
6hi8h- at a more basi8 level- amou!ts to a J!oK @the boredom i!volved i! seei!g the ilm agai!A7
Similar @but !ot the sameA is the lege!dary a!s6er o a =earst !e6spaper editor to =earstIs i!Nuiry as
to 6hy he did !ot 6a!t to take a lo!g:deserved holiday+ J9Im araid that i 9 go- there 6ill be 8haos-
everythi!g 6ill all apartEbut 9Im eve! more araid that- i 9 go- thi!gs 6ill just go o! as !ormal
6ithout me- provi!g that 9 am !ot really !eededRK A 8ertai! !egative 8hoi8e @!o holiday- seei!g the
ilm agai!A is supported by both yes a!d !oT there is- ho6ever- a! asymmetry i! the a!s6ers- 6hi8h
8omes out 8learly i 6e imagi!e the dialogue as a su88essio! o t6o a!s6ers+ irst- the rea8tio! is the
obvious @!egativeA o!e @9 did !ot like the ilmT 9 am araid everythi!g 6ill all apart i 9 take a holidayAT
the!- 6he! this rea8tio! ails to produ8e the desired out8ome- the opposite @positiveA reaso! is give! @9
liked the ilmT everythi!g 6ill be i!e 6ithout meA- 6hi8h ails eve! more miserably7 4o 6o!der that
the =earst editorIs a!s6er 8a! be reormulated as a dialogue alo!g the li!es o the Fabi!ovit8h joke+
J/hy do!It you take a holiday- you deserve itRKT J9 do!It 6a!t to- or t6o reaso!s7 First- 9Im araid that
everythi!g 6ill all apart here i 9 take a holidayOKT J3ut you are totally 6ro!g- thi!gs 6ill just go o!
as !ormal 6he! youIre !ot hereRK JThat is my se8o!d reaso!7K
This .a8a!ia! matri? o the J!egatio! o the !egatio!K is 8learly dis8er!ible i! .eo StraussIs
!otio! o the !eed or a philosopher to employ J!oble lies-K to resort to myth- to !arratives ad captum
vulgi7 The problem is that Strauss does !ot dra6 all the 8o!seNue!8es rom the ambiguity o this sta!8e-
tor! as he is bet6ee! the idea that 6ise philosophers k!o6 the truth but judge it i!appropriate or the
8ommo! people- 6ho 8a!!ot bear it @it 6ould u!dermi!e the very u!dame!tals o their morality-
6hi8h !eeds the J!oble lieK o a perso!al 1od 6ho pu!ishes si!s a!d re6ards good deedsA- a!d the idea
that the 8ore o truth is i!a88essible to 8o!8eptual thought as su8h- 6hi8h is 6hy philosophers
themselves have to resort to myths a!d other orms o abulatio! to ill i! the stru8tural gaps i! their
k!o6ledge7 Strauss is- o 8ourse- a6are o the ambiguity o the status o a se8ret+ a se8ret is !ot o!ly
6hat the tea8her k!o6s but rerai!s rom divulgi!g to the !o!:i!itiatedEa se8ret is also a se8ret or the
tea8her himsel- somethi!g that he 8a!!ot ully pe!etrate a!d arti8ulate i! 8o!8eptual terms7
Do!seNue!tly- a philosopher uses paraboli8 a!d e!igmati8 spee8h or t6o reaso!s+ i! order to 8o!8eal
the true 8ore o his tea8hi!g rom the 8ommo! people- 6ho are !ot ready or it- a!d be8ause the use o
su8h spee8h is the o!ly 6ay to des8ribe the highest philosophi8al i!sights7
$(
4o 6o!der- the!- that Strauss a!s6ers i! a properly =egelia! 6ay the 8ommo!:se!se reproa8h
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h- 6he! 6e are oered a! esoteri8 e?pla!atio! o a 6ork 6hi8h is already i! itsel
esoteri8 @as 6ith- say- ,aimo!idesIs readi!g o the 3ibleA- the e?pla!atio! 6ill be t6i8e as esoteri8
a!d- 8o!seNue!tly- t6i8e as dii8ult to u!dersta!d as the esoteri8 6ork itsel+

tha!ks to ,aimo!ides- the se8ret tea8hi!g is a88essible to us i! t6o diere!t versio!s+ i! the origi!al
3ibli8al versio!- a!d i! the derivative versio! o [,aimo!idesIs\ (uide7 0a8h versio! by itsel might
be 6holly i!8omprehe!sibleT but 6e may be8ome able to de8ipher both by usi!g the light 6hi8h o!e
sheds o! the other7 Hur positio! resembles the! that o a! ar8heologist 8o!ro!ted 6ith a! i!s8riptio! i!
a! u!k!o6! la!guage- 6ho subseNue!tly dis8overs a!other i!s8riptio! reprodu8i!g the tra!slatio! o
that te?t i!to a!other u!k!o6! la!guage O [,aimo!ides\ 6rote the (uide a88ordi!g to the rules
6hi8h he 6as 6o!t to ollo6 i! readi!g the 3ible7 Thereore- i 6e 6ish to u!dersta!d the (uide- 6e
must read it a88ordi!g to the rules 6hi8h ,aimo!ides applies i! that 6ork to the e?pla!atio! o the
3ible7
$#
The redoubli!g o the problem thus parado?i8ally ge!erates its o6! solutio!7 H!e should bear
i! mi!d here that 6he! Strauss emphasiUed the diere!8e bet6ee! e?oteri8 a!d esoteri8 tea8hi!g- he
8o!8eived this oppositio! i! a 6ay almost e?a8tly opposite to todayIs 4e6 Age dee!ders o esoteri8
6isdom7 The 8o!te!t o 4e6 Age 6isdom is some spiritual higher reality a88essible o!ly to the
i!itiated e6- 6hile 8ommo! mortals see arou!d them o!ly vulgar realityT or Strauss- o! the 8o!trary-
a!d i! a properly diale8ti8al 6ay- su8h !arratives o spiritual mystery are the very model o ables
8o!8o8ted ad captum vulgi7 9s this !ot 8o!irmed by the su88ess o the re8e!t 6ave o religious thrillers
epitomiUed by Ga! 3ro6!Is -he Da 6inci ,odeM These 6orks are perhaps the best i!di8ator o the
8o!temporary ideologi8al shit+ the hero is i! sear8h o a! old ma!us8ript 6hi8h 6ill reveal some
shatteri!g se8ret that threate!s to u!dermi!e the very ou!datio!s o @i!stitutio!aliUedA Dhristia!ityT a
J8rimi!alK edge is provided by the desperate a!d ruthless attempts o the Dhur8h @or some hard:li!e
a8tio! 6ithi! itA to suppress the do8ume!t7 The se8ret as a rule o8uses o! the JrepressedK emi!i!e
dime!sio! o the divi!e+ Dhrist 6as married to ,ary ,agdale!eT the 1rail is a8tually the emale body-
et87 The parado? assumed here is that it is only through the Jmo!otheisti8K suspe!sio! o the emi!i!e
sig!iier- o the polarity o mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e- that the spa8e emerges or 6hat 6e broadly reer to
as Jemi!ismK proper- or the rise o emi!i!e subje8tivity @6hi8h ultimately 8oi!8ides 6ith subje8tivity
as su8hA7 For Strauss- by 8o!trast- the u!bearable esoteri8 se8ret is the a8t that there is !o 1od or
immortal soul- !o divi!e justi8e- that there is o!ly this terrestrial 6orld 6hi8h has !o deeper mea!i!g
a!d 8arries !o guara!tee o a happy out8ome7
/he! Strauss deploys the i!here!t parado? o a theology 6hi8h pro8eeds ad captum vulgi- he
thus provides a te?tbook 8ase o the =egelia! !egatio! o the !egatio!7
$'
9! the irst step- Strauss-
ollo6i!g Spi!oUa- asserts that- i! the 3ible- 1od speaks i! the la!guage o ordi!ary people- adapti!g
his spee8h to vulgar prejudi8es @prese!ti!g himsel as a supreme perso!- a 6ise la6giver 6ho perorms
mira8les- utters prophe8ies- a!d dispe!ses mer8yAEi! short- he tells stories 6hi8h mobiliUe the po6ers
o huma! imagi!atio!7 =o6ever- i! the se8o!d step- the Nuestio! !e8essarily pops up+ is !ot the idea o
a 1od as a supreme Cerso! 6ho employs ruses- displays mer8y a!d rage- a!d so o!- i! itsel a 8ommo!
idea 6hi8h o!ly 8a! o88ur 6he! o!e speaks J6ith a vie6 to the 8apa8ity o the vulgarKM
A!other e?ample+ 3adiou uses the term Ji!aestheti8sK @inesthAti<ueA to reer to Ja relatio! o
philosophy to art that- mai!tai!i!g that art is itsel a produ8er o truths- makes !o 8laim to tur! art i!to
a! obje8t or philosophy7 Agai!st aestheti8 spe8ulatio!- i!aestheti8s des8ribes the stri8tly
i!traphilosophi8al ee8ts produ8ed by the i!depe!de!t e?iste!8e o some 6orks o art7K
$$
3adiouIs
oppositio! to philosophi8al aestheti8s is thus double+ @1A art is !ot opposed to thi!ki!g- art ge!erates its
o6! truth- 6hi8h is 6hy philosophy does !ot preside over art- e?pli8ati!g i! 8o!8eptual terms the truth
that art stages i! pre:8o!8eptual modes o represe!tatio! @but it also does !ot elevate art i!to a
privileged medium o truthAT @2A philosophy does !ot deploy a u!iversal theory o art- it des8ribes the
i!tra:philosophi8al ee8ts o some 6orks o art7 4evertheless- 6e should !ote that this dista!8e rom
aestheti8s is i!here!t to it- that the term Ji!aestheti8sK u!8tio!s like a predi8ate i! a! i!i!ite judgme!t-
as a !egatio! 6hi8h remai!s 6ithi! the !egated ieldEJi!aestheti8sK is !o!:!o!:aestheti8s @just as
Ji!huma!K is !o!:!o!:huma!- !o!:huma! 6ithi! the ield o the huma!A7
/here the! is the !o!:All i! the relatio!ship bet6ee! !e8essity a!d 8o!ti!ge!8yM 9s it that
!e8essity is u!iversal a!d 8o!ti!ge!8y its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!Eeverythi!g is !e8essary e?8ept
!e8essity itsel- the a8t o 6hi8h is 8o!ti!ge!t- a!d so o!T or vi8e versaEeverythi!g is 8o!ti!ge!t
e?8ept 8o!ti!ge!8y itsel- the a8t o 6hi8h is !e8essary- et87M A irst hi!t is give! by .e 1auey- 6ho
i!ge!iously li!ks this grou!di!g o u!iversality i! the e?8eptio! o its e!u!8iatio! to the @i!Aamous 8ry
o a 8ompulsive !euroti8+ JA!ythi!g but thatRKEe?pressi!g his readi!ess to give a6ay everythi!g but
that 6hi8h really matters @JTake it all- just !ot this bookRK et87A+ JVA!ythi!g but thatRI the 8ry- i there is
o!e- o a ma! 8o!ro!ted 6ith 8astratio!- assumes here [i! the 8ase o Vall me! are mortalI\ the orm o
a Veveryo!e- but !ot me-I 6hi8h asserts itsel as the sine <ua non o the e!u!8iatio! o a! VallI7K
$&
The
diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o is that the e?8eptio! 6hi8h grou!ds u!iversality is 8o!ti!ge!t @a
8o!ti!ge!8y o e!u!8iatio! grou!di!g the u!iversal !e8essityA- 6hile the 8ompulsive !euroti8Is
e?8eptio! is !e8essary+ the o!e thi!g he is !ot ready to give is !e8essary- everythi!g else is 8o!ti!ge!t7
This mea!s that 8o!ti!ge!8y as e?8eptio! is primordial- a!d that the reversal o roles @!e8essity as
e?8eptio!A is its 8ompulsive:!euroti8 i!versio!7 This 8o!8lusio! imposes itsel the mome!t 6e
ormulate all our positio!s that ollo6 rom ea8h o these t6o opposed starti!g poi!ts+ @1A everythi!g
is !e8essaryT there is somethi!g 6hi8h is !ot !e8essaryT there is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot !e8essaryT !ot:all
thi!gs are !e8essaryT @2A everythi!g is 8o!ti!ge!tT there is somethi!g 6hi8h is !ot 8o!ti!ge!tT there is
!othi!g 6hi8h is !ot 8o!ti!ge!tT !ot:all thi!gs are 8o!ti!ge!t7 The true ou!datio! o diale8ti8al
materialism is !ot the !e8essity o 8o!ti!ge!8y- but the 8o!ti!ge!8y o !e8essity7 9! other 6ords- 6hile
the se8o!d positio! opts or a se8ret i!visible !e8essity be!eath the sura8e o 8o!ti!ge!8y @the big
8ompulsive topi8A- the irst positio! asserts 8o!ti!ge!8y as the abyssal grou!d o !e8essity itsel7
9! a brillia!t move- .e 1auey applies this logi8 o u!iversality a!d its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio! to
the relatio!ship bet6ee! psy8hoa!alyti8 theory a!d 8li!i8al pra8ti8e7 9! the sta!dard theoreti8al vie6-
parti8ular 8ases are used to veriy @or alsiyA a ge!eral 8o!8eptEsay- 6e a!alyUe a 8o!8rete 8ase o
para!oia a!d see i it its our ge!eral !otio! @e7g7- para!oia is the result o displa8ed homose?ual
atta8hme!t- et87A7 .e 1auey- o! the 8o!trary- reads 8o!8rete 8ases as 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!s+ ea8h 8ase
JrebelsK agai!st its u!iversality- it !ever simply illustrates it7 =o6ever- .e 1auey here all too !aSvely
e!dorses the oppositio! bet6ee! 8o!8eptual realists a!d empiri8al !omi!alists+ JFor the irst- the
8o!8eptual ar8hite8ture irst arti8ulates the order o the 6orld7 For the se8o!d- it misses it at irst- a!d it
is rom this ailure that the obje8t shi!es orth- is grou!ded i! e?iste!8e7K
$%
For a =egelia!- this is
literally trueEmore literally tha! i!te!ded by .e 1auey+ it is !ot o!ly that the obje8t eludes our
8o!8eptual grasp- it is that the Jobje8tK i! the stri8t se!se emerges as the result o @is ge!erated byA the
ailure o our 8o!8eptual grasp7 This is 6hy .e 1auey also u!6itti!gly speaks the truth 6he! he
6rites+ J-he feature displayed by the ob1ect! the situation or the individual! and which allows us to
subsume it under a concept! is actually not of the same nature as the feature present in the concept
itselfFK
&0
/hat this mea!s- read literally- is that the JtruthK o the dis8ord bet6ee! the i!dividual 8ase
a!d its u!iversal 8o!8ept is the i!here!t dis8ord 6ithi! the 8o!8ept itsel+ the eature i! Nuestio!
redoubles itsel i!to the u!iversal eature a!d the same eature i! its parti8ular @overAdetermi!atio!7
9t is be8ause o this !omi!alist:empiri8ist @misAreadi!g o the logi8 o e?8eptio! that .e 1auey
misses the opposite aspe8t o the Freudia! relatio!ship bet6ee! theory a!d pra8ti8e- the obverse o the
e?8ess o pra?is+ psy8hoa!alyti8 theory is !ot merely the theory o psy8hoa!alyti8 pra8ti8e- but-
simulta!eously- the theory o the ultimate ailure o this @its o6!A pra8ti8e- a theoreti8al a88ou!t o 6hy
the very 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h gave birth to psy8hoa!alysis re!der it JimpossibleK as a proessio!Etheory
here relates to the impossible:Feal 8ore o the pra8ti8e7
&1
9t is this ultimate ailure o the pra8ti8e that
re!ders its theory !e8essary+ theory is !ot simply e?ter!al to pra8ti8e- 8o!ro!ti!g pra8ti8e as the
imme!se ield o realityT the ope!i!g o the very gap bet6ee! theory a!d pra8ti8e- the e?emptio!
@subtra8tio!A o theory rom pra8ti8e- is i! itsel a pra8ti8al a8t- maybe the most radi8al o!e7
/e 8a! thus arti8ulate the relatio!ship bet6ee! theory a!d pra8ti8e as a sNuare o the ormulae
o se?uatio!+ o! the let @mas8uli!eA side+ all 8ases are subsumed u!der a u!iversal 8o!8ept o 8li!i8al
theory > there e?ists at least o!e 8ase 6hi8h is !ot subsumed u!der a!y u!iversal 8o!8eptT o! the right
@emi!i!eA side+ there is !o 8ase 6hi8h is !ot subsumed u!der a u!iversal 8o!8ept > !ot:all 8ases are
subsumed u!der a u!iversal 8o!8ept7 The emi!i!e side @there is !othi!g outside theory- i!8o!siste!8y
is imma!e!t to theory- a! ee8t o its !o!:All 8hara8terA is here the JtruthK o the mas8uli!e side
@theory is u!iversal- but u!dermi!ed by a8tual e?8eptio!sA7
The .a8a!ia! !egatio! o the !egatio! also e!ables us to see 6hy the logi8 o 8ar!ivalesNue
suspe!sio! is limited to traditio!al hierar8hi8al so8ieties+ 6ith the ull deployme!t o 8apitalism- it is
J!ormalK lie itsel 6hi8h- i! a 6ay- is today 8ar!ivaliUed- 6ith its 8o!sta!t sel:revolutio!iUi!g- 6ith
its reversals- 8rises- a!d rei!ve!tio!s7 =o6- the!- are 6e to revolutio!iUe a! order 6hose very pri!8iple
is o!e o 8o!sta!t sel:revolutio!iUi!gM This is the problem o the !egatio! o the !egatio!+ ho6 to
!egate 8apitalism 6ithout retur!i!g to some orm o premoder! stability @or- eve! 6orse- to some ki!d
o Jsy!thesisK bet6ee! 8ha!ge a!d stability- a more stable a!d orga!i8 8apitalism k!o6! as as8ismOA7
=ere- agai!- !ot:!ot:8apitalism is !ot a premoder! order @or a!y 8ombi!atio! bet6ee! moder!ity a!d
traditio!- this eter!al as8ist temptatio! 6hi8h is today re:emergi!g as the Do!u8ia! J8apitalism 6ith
Asia! valuesKA- but also !ot the over8omi!g o 8apitalism the 6ay ,ar? 8o!8eived it- 6hi8h i!volved a
8ertai! versio! o the =egelia! +ufhebung- a versio! o thro6i!g out the dirty bath 6ater @8apitalist
e?ploitatio!A a!d keepi!g the healthy baby @u!leashed huma! produ8tivityA7 Therei! resides the
properly utopia! misu!dersta!di!g o +ufhebung+ to disti!guish i! the phe!ome!o! both its healthy
8ore a!d the u!ortu!ate parti8ular 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h preve!t the ull a8tualiUatio! o this 8ore- a!d the!
to get rid o those 8o!ditio!s i! order to e!able the 8ore to ully a8tualiUe its pote!tial7 Dapitalism is
thus aufgehoben- sublated- i! 8ommu!ism+ !egated but mai!tai!ed- si!8e its esse!tial 8ore is raised to a
higher level7 /hat su8h a! approa8h bli!ds us to is the a8t that the obsta8le to the ull deployme!t o
the esse!8e is simulta!eously its 8o!ditio! o possibility- so that 6he! 6e remove the alse e!velope o
the parti8ular 8o!ditio!s- 6e lose the 8ore itsel7 =ere- more tha! a!y6here- the true task is !ot to thro6
a6ay the dirty 6ater a!d keep the baby- but to thro6 a6ay the allegedly healthy baby @a!d the dirty
6ater 6ill disappear byEtake 8are oEitselA7
Fe8all the parado? o the !otio! o rele?ivity as Jthe movement whereby what has been used to
generate a system becomes! through a change in perspective! part of the system it generates7K
&2
As a
rule- this rele?ive appeara!8e o the ge!erati!g moveme!t 6ithi! the ge!erated system- i! the guise o
6hat =egel 8alled the Joppositio!al determi!atio!-K takes the orm o the opposite+ 6ithi! the material
sphere- Spirit appears i! the guise o the most i!ert mome!t @8ra!e- as i! Jthe Spirit is a bo!e-K the
ormless bla8k sto!e i! ,e88aAT i! the later stage o a revolutio!ary pro8ess- 6he! the Fevolutio! starts
to devour its o6! 8hildre!- the politi8al age!ts 6ho ee8tively set the pro8ess i! motio! are relegated
to the role o bei!g its mai! obsta8le- as 6averers or outright traitors 6ho are !ot ready to ollo6 the
revolutio!ary logi8 to its 8o!8lusio!7 Alo!g the same li!es- o!8e the so8io:symboli8 order is ully
established- the very dime!sio! 6hi8h i!trodu8ed the Jtra!s8e!de!tK attitude that dei!es a huma!
bei!g- !amely se&uality- the u!iNuely huma! Ju!deadK se?ual passio!- appears as its very opposite- as
the mai! obstacle to the elevatio! o a huma! bei!g to pure spirituality- as that 6hi8h ties him or her
do6! to the i!ertia o bodily e?iste!8e7 For this reaso!- the e!d o se?uality represe!ted by the mu8h:
vau!ted Jpost:huma!K sel:8lo!i!g e!tity soo! e?pe8ted to emerge- ar rom ope!i!g up the 6ay to a
pure spirituality- 6ill simulta!eously sig!al the e!d o 6hat is traditio!ally desig!ated as the u!iNuely
huma! 8apa8ity or spiritual tra!s8e!de!8e7 For all the 8elebratio! o the !e6 Je!ha!8edK possibilities
or se?ual lie that Virtual Feality has to oer- !othi!g 8a! 8o!8eal the a8t that- o!8e 8lo!i!g
suppleme!ts se?ual diere!8e- the game is ee8tively over7
&"
JT=0F0 IS A 4H4:F0.AT9H4S=9CK

So- to 8o!8lude- o!e 8a! propose a Ju!iied theoryK o the ormulae o se?uatio! a!d the
ormulae o our dis8ourses+ the mas8uli!e a?is 8o!sists o the masterIs dis8ourse a!d the u!iversity
dis8ourse @u!iversity as u!iversality a!d the master as its 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!A- a!d the emi!i!e a?is
o the hysteri8al dis8ourse a!d the a!alystIs dis8ourse @!o e?8eptio! a!d !o!:AllA7 /e the! have the
ollo6i!g series o eNuatio!s+

S
1
] ,aster ] e?8eptio! S
2
] )!iversity ] u!iversalityb ] =ysteria ] !o:e?8eptio! a ] A!alyst ] !o!:
All
/e 8a! see here ho6- i! order to 8orrelate the t6o sNuares- 6e have to tur! o!e %0 degrees i!
relatio! to the other+ 6ith regard to the our dis8ourses- the li!e that separates mas8uli!e rom emi!i!e
ru!s horiUo!tallyT that is- it is the upper 8ouple 6hi8h is mas8uli!e a!d the lo6er o!e 6hi8h is
emi!i!e7
&(
The hysteri8al subje8tive positio! allo6s or !o e?8eptio!- !o ? 6hi8h is !ot:F? @a hysteri8
provokes its master- e!dlessly Nuestio!i!g him+ sho6 me your e?8eptio!A- 6hile the a!alyst asserts the
!o!:AllE!ot as the e?8eptio!:to:All o a ,aster:Sig!iier- but i! the guise o a 6hi8h sta!ds or the
gap>i!8o!siste!8y7
&#
9! other 6ords- the mas8uli!e u!iversal is positive>airmative @all ? are F?A-
6hile the emi!i!e u!iversal is !egative @!o ? 6hi8h is !ot:F?AE!o o!e should be let outT this is 6hy
the mas8uli!e u!iversal relies o! a positive e?8eptio!- 6hile the emi!i!e u!iversal u!dermi!es the All
rom 6ithi!- i! the guise o its i!8o!siste!8y7
This theory !o!etheless leaves some Nuestio!s u!a!s6ered7 First- do the t6o versio!s o the
u!iversal @u!iversality 6ith e?8eptio!T !o!:All 6ith !o e?8eptio!A 8over the e!tire spa! o
possibilitiesM 9s it !ot that the very logi8 o Jsi!gular u!iversality-K o the symptomati8 Jpart o !o:
partK 6hi8h sta!ds dire8tly or u!iversality- its !either o the t6o versio!sM Se8o!d- a!d li!ked to the
irst- .a8a! struggled or years 6ith the passage rom Jthere is !o @se?ualA relatio!shipK to Jthere is a
!o!:relatio!shipK+ he 6as repeatedly tryi!g Jto give body to the diere!8e- to isolate the !o!:
relatio!ship as a! i!dispe!sable i!gredie!t o the 8o!stitutio! o the subje8t7K
&'
Frege dre6 atte!tio! to the ambiguity o the !otio! o i!determi!a8y+ J/e should- o 8ourse-
talk about Vi!determi!a8y-I but Vi!determi!ateI is !ot a Nualitative epithet o V!umber-I it is rather a!
adverb modiyi!g Vi!di8ate7I H!e does!It say that ? desig!ates a! i!determi!ate !umber- it i!di8ates i!
a! i!determi!ate 6ay !umbers7K
&$
There is a! u!derlyi!g shit at 6ork here+ rom i!di8ati!g i! a!
i!determi!ate 6ay !umbers to desig!ati!g a! i!determi!ate !umber @here- Ji!determi!ateK is a
Nualitative epithet o a !umberAEor- to put it i! a some6hat simpliied 6ay- a shit rom desig!ati!g a
broad ield o !umbers @ea8h o them determi!ateA 6hi8h 8a! o88upy the pla8e o ?- to a si!gle !umber
6hi8h is immediately i!determi!ate7 This dire8t Jreii8atio!K o i!determi!a8y- 6here the
i!determi!a8y as su8h @as the la8k o determi!atio!A be8omes dire8tly the determi!atio! o a! obje8t- is
also at 6ork i! the ob1et a- a! obje8t 6hi8h is the la8k @o the obje8tA positiviUed7
/he! .a8a! opposes the H!e- he targets t6o o its modalities- the imagi!ary H!e @o the
spe8ular usio! i!to H!e:!essA a!d the symboli8 H!e @6hi8h is redu8tive- 8o!8er!i!g the u!ary
eatureEle trait unaireEto 6hi8h a! obje8t is redu8ed i! its symboli8 registratio!T this o!e is the H!e
o diere!tial arti8ulatio!- !ot o usio!A7 The problem is+ is there also a H!e o the FealM 9s this role
played by the : a dl3n me!tio!ed i! Encore- 6hi8h is a H!e prior to the diere!tial arti8ulatio! o
the big Hther- a !o!:delimitated but !o!etheless parti8ular H!e- a H!e 6hi8h is !either Nualitatively !ot
Nua!titatively determi!ed- a Jthere is somethi!g o the H!eK desig!ati!g a mi!imal 8o!tra8tio!-
8o!de!satio!- o the libidi!al lo6 i!to a sinthomeM
.a8a!Is il ny a pas de l+utre is stri8tly 8orrelative to his : a dl3n- Jthere is somethi!g o the
H!eK+ i!soar as the H!e o : a dl3n is a! Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h makes the se?ual
relatio!ship i!e?iste!t- : a dl3n is also stri8tly 8orrelative to il ny a pas de rapport se&uel+ it is the
very obje8t:obsta8le to this rapport7 The H!e o : a dl3n is !ot primarily the mysti8al all:
e!8ompassi!g H!e o the i!amous Jo8ea!i8 eeli!gK derided by Freud- but a Jlittle pie8e o the real-K
the e?8reme!tal remai!der 6hi8h disturbs the harmo!y o the T6o7 Dlariyi!g this 8ru8ial disti!8tio!-
.e 1auey dra6s our atte!tio! to a subtle passage i! late .a8a! rom Jil ny a pas de rapport se&uelK to
Jil y a du non*rapport ?se&uel@-K a shit 6hi8h pre8isely its *a!tIs disti!8tio! bet6ee! !egative
judgme!t @the !egatio! o a predi8ateA a!d i!i!ite judgme!t @the airmatio! o a !o!:predi8ateA7
JThere is !o se?ual relatio!shipK 8a! still be read as a variatio! o! the old moti o the eter!al 8o!li8t
bet6ee! the se?es7 JThere is a !o!:relatio!shipK implies somethi!g mu8h more radi8al+ the
positiviUatio! o this impossibility o the se?ual relatio!ship i! a parado?i8al Jtra!s:i!iteK obje8t
6hi8h overlaps 6ith its o6! la8k or 6hi8h is i! e?8ess 6ith regard to itsel7 This mea!s that mas8uli!e
a!d emi!i!e are !ot simply t6o out:o:sy!8 e!tities- but that se?ual diere!8e i! a 6ay pre8edes the
t6o se?es @the diere!8e o 6hi8h it isA- so that the t6o se?es someho6 8ome @logi8allyA later- they
rea8t to- e!deavor to resolve or symboliUe- the deadlo8k o the Giere!8e- a!d this deadlo8k is
materialiUed i! the pseudo:obje8t 8alled the ob1et a7 This is 6hy 6e should !ot say o the ob1et a simply
that it is !ot se?ual+ it is u!:se?ual i! e?a8tly the same se!se i! 6hi8h vampires are u!dead+ the
Ju!deadK are !either alive !or dead but the mo!strous livi!g dead- a!d- i! the same 6ay- the ob1et a is
!either se?ual !or !o!:se?ual but Jse?ually ase?ual-K a mo!strosity 6hi8h does !ot it the 8oordi!ates
o either o the t6o se?es but is still se?ual7 As .a8a! poi!ted out- 6hat is at stake here is !othi!g less
tha! a 8ha!ge i! the Jpri!8iple o all pri!8iples-K rom the o!tologi8al pri!8iple o !o!:8o!tradi8tio! to
the pri!8iple that there is !o se?ual relatio!ship7
9t is easy to see ho6 this passage rom Jthere is !o relatio!shipK to Jthere is a !o!:relatio!shipK
evokes the *a!tia! passage rom !egative to i!i!ite judgme!t+ Jhe is !ot deadK is !ot the same as Jhe
is u!dead-K just as Jthere is !o relatio!shipK is !ot the same as Jthere is a !o!:relatio!ship7K The
importa!8e o this passage- 6ith regard to se?ual diere!8e- is that- i 6e stop at Jthere is !o se?ual
relatio!shipK as our ultimate horiUo!- 6e remai! i! the traditio!al spa8e o the eter!al struggle bet6ee!
the t6o se?es7 0ve! 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller sometimes sou!ds like thisE6he!- or e?ample- he reads
Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!shipK alo!g the li!es o Jmale 6ith regard to emale is !ot like a key 6hi8h
its its lo8k-K as a simple assertio! o disharmo!y i! 8o!trast to harmo!y7 H!8e 6e pass to Jthere is a
!o!:relatio!ship-K eve! this ki!d o =era8litea! Ju!ity>harmo!y i! 8o!li8tK is let behi!d- si!8e
mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e are !o lo!ger symmetri8al opposite poles+ o!e o them @emi!i!eA 8o!tai!s its
o6! !egatio! a!d thus breaks out o the 8o!i!es o the oppositio!E!ot:6oma! is !ot ma!- but the
abyss o !ot:6oma! within the emi!i!e- as the u!dead remai! 6ithi! the domai! o the dead @as the
livi!g deadA7
Fra!eois /ahl o!8e made a 8riti8al remark- dire8ted at 3adiou- that Jthe argume!t that e!joi!s
us to dedu8e the e?iste!8e o !o!:belo!gi!g rom the !egatio! o belo!gi!g merely reiterates the
o!tologi8al argume!tKEmaybe- but is this !ot the o!ly versio! o the o!tologi8al argume!t that a
materialist 8a! e!dorseM
&&
The situatio! is stri8tly homologous to that o relatio!ship+ i there is !o
se?ual relatio!ship- there has to be a! impossible obje8t 6hi8h gives body to a !o!:relatio!ship @the
ase?ual ob1et aAT i there is !o 8lass relatio!ship- there has to be a so8ial age!t 6hi8h embodies this
!o!:relatio!ship- 8lass struggle as su8h @the Jpart o !o:partK o the so8ial body- its Jorga! 6ithout a
bodyKA7 This reversal o Jthere is !o relatio!shipK i!to Jthere is a !o!:relatio!ship-K this !otio! o a
parado?i8al obje8t i! 6hi8h !egativity itsel a8Nuires positive e?iste!8e- is 8ru8ial+ 6ithout it- 6e
remai! at the abstra8t level o the Jeter!al struggle o t6o opposed pri!8iples7K
The passage rom Jil ny a pas de rapport se&uelK to Jil y a du non*rapport ?se&uel@K is also
homologous to the passage i! =egel rom determi!ate rele8tio! to rele?ive determi!atio!Eor i!deed
to the passage i! ,ar?ism rom materialist diale8ti8s to diale8ti8al materialism7 The shit 6e are
deali!g 6ith here is the key diale8ti8al shitEthe o!e most dii8ult to grasp or a J!egative diale8ti8sK
i! love 6ith e?plosio!s o !egativity- 6ith all imagi!able orms o Jresista!8eK a!d Jsubversio!-K but
u!able to over8ome its o6! parasitiUi!g o! the pre8edi!g positive orderErom the 6ild da!8e o the
liberatio! rom the @oppressiveA System to @6hat the 1erma! 9dealists 8alledA the System o .iberty7
T6o e?amples rom revolutio!ary politi8s should sui8e here+ it is easy to be8ome e!amored o the
multitude o ree:thi!kers 6ho blossomed i! the pre:revolutio!ary Fra!8e o the late eightee!th
8e!tury- rom libertaria!s debati!g i! the salo!s- e!joyi!g the parado?es o their o6! i!8o!siste!8ies-
to the patheti8 artists amusi!g those i! po6er 6ith their o6! protests agai!st po6erT it is mu8h more
dii8ult to ully e!dorse the reversal o this u!rest i! the harsh !e6 Hrder o the Fevolutio!ary Terror7
9! a homologous 6ay- it is easy to e!joy the 8reative u!rest o the years immediately ollo6i!g the
H8tober Fevolutio!- 6ith suprematists- uturists- 8o!stru8tivists- a!d so o!- 8ompeti!g or prima8y i!
revolutio!ary ervorT it is mu8h more dii8ult to re8og!iUe i! the horrors o the or8ed 8olle8tiviUatio!
o the late 1%20s a! attempt to tra!slate this revolutio!ary ervor i!to a !e6 positive so8ial order7
/e should also !ot 8o!use the series o .a8a!Is Jil ny a pas4K @de l+utreA 6ith the series o
Jne&iste pasK+ Jne&iste pasK de!ies the ull symboli8 e?iste!8e o the !egated obje8t @already or
=egel- e?iste!8e is !ot bei!g- but bei!g as the appeari!g o a! u!derlyi!g symboli8:!otio!al esse!8eA-
6hile Jil ny a pasK is more radi8al- it de!ies the very pre:esse!tial !omadi8 bei!g o spe8ters a!d other
pre:o!tologi8al e!tities7 9! short- la Femme ne&iste pas! mais il y a des femmes7 The same goes or
1od a!d the u!8o!s8ious+ 1od does !ot e?ist- but Jthere are godsK 6ho hau!t usT the u!8o!s8ious does
!ot e?ist as a ull o!tologi8al e!tity @2u!g thought it did e?istA- but it i!sists i! hau!ti!g usE6hi8h is
6hy .a8a! said that the true ormula o atheism is J1od is the u!8o!s8ious7K
&%
The reaso! .a8a!- i! his later tea8hi!g- tur!ed to the theme o k!ots 6as pre8isely i! order to
thi!k the !o!:relatio!ship as embodied i! a parado?i8al eleme!t @6hi8h 6ould vaguely it the si!gular
u!iversal- the Jpart o !o:partKA7
%0
=ere e!ters the 3orromea! k!ot- 8o!sisti!g o three 8ir8les
i!tert6i!ed i! su8h a 6ay that !o t6o are dire8tly 8o!!e8ted but are held together o!ly through the
third- so that i 6e 8ut the third k!ot- the other t6o 6ill also be dis8o!!e8tedEi! short- there is !o
relatio!ship bet6ee! a!y t6o 8ir8les7 /hat is this third 8ir8leM The ob1et aM The sinthomeM The
symboli8 order itselM =ere .a8a!- at the very e!d o his tea8hi!g- rea8hed a deadlo8k to 6hi8h- i! a!
authe!ti8ally tragi8 mode- he ope!ly 8o!essed+

The metaphor o the 3orromea! k!ot is- i! its most simple state- i!adeNuate7 9t abuses the metaphor-
be8ause there really is !o thi!g 6hi8h supports the imagi!ary- the symboli8- a!d the real7 /hat is
esse!tial i! 6hat 9 am sayi!g is that there is !o se?ual relatio!ship7 That there is !o se?ual relatio!ship
be8ause there is a! imagi!ary- a symboli8- a!d a real- this is 6hat 9 did !ot dare to say7 3ut 9
!o!etheless said it7 9t is evide!t that 9 6as 6ro!g- but 9 simply let mysel slide i!to it7 This is disturbi!g-
it is eve! more tha! a!!oyi!g7 9t is eve! more a!!oyi!g that it is !ot justiied7 This is ho6 thi!gs look
to me today- a!d this is 6hat 9 8o!ess to you7 All rightR
%1
T6o thi!gs should be !oted here7 First- retroa8tively- o!e 8a! see 6here the obvious mistake
lay+ the 3orromea! k!ot 6orks as a metaphor o!ly i 6e thi!k the three 8ir8les as simulta!eous-
i!tert6i!ed o! the same sura8e7 @The o!ly 6ay to save this model 6ould be to add a ourth eleme!t
holdi!g the three together- 6hi8h .a8a! did 6ith his !otio! o the sinthome holdi!g together the 9SF
triad7A Se8o!d- 6hy 6as .a8a!- by his o6! 8o!essio!- 6ro!g to say that there is !o se?ual relatio!ship
be8ause there is a! imagi!ary- a symboli8- a!d a FealM 3e8ause the three are !ot give! simulta!eously
as a triadEthey rather u!8tio! like the *ierkegaardia! triad o Aestheti8:0thi8al:Feligious- 6here the
8hoi8e is al6ays bet6ee! t6o terms- a! either>orT i! other 6ords- the three terms do !ot operate at the
same o!tologi8al level- so that 6e e!8ou!ter a 8ertai! mi!imal temporality+ irst the a!tago!ism
bet6ee! the Aestheti8 a!d the 0thi8alT the!- 6ith the passage to the 0thi8al- the a!tago!ism repeats
itsel i! the @!e6A guise o the jump rom the 0thi8al to the Feligious7 H!e 8a! thus eve! say that- i! a
6eird J!egatio! o the !egatio!-K the Feligious is the retur! o the Aestheti8 6ithi! the domai! o the
0thi8al+ the Feligious is !o!:!o!:Aestheti87
%2
Similarly- i! .a8a!Is triad o imagi!ary:symboli8:Feal-
or i! FreudIs o ego:superego:9d- 6he! 6e o8us o! o!e term- the other t6o get 8o!de!sed i!to o!e
@u!der the hegemo!y o o!e o themA7 9 6e o8us o! the imagi!ary- the Feal a!d the symboli8 get
8o!tra8ted i!to the imagi!aryIs opposite u!der the domi!atio! o the symboli8T i 6e o8us o! F- 9 a!d
S get 8o!tra8ted u!der the domi!atio! o S7
%"
/hat .a8a! is struggli!g 6ith here is ho6 to ormulate or ormaliUe a! impossible>Feal obje8t
6hi8h keeps the t6o se?es apart a!d- simulta!eously- is the o!ly thi!g- a third thi!g- 6hi8h i!dire8tly
8o!!e8ts the t6o7 9!soar as this obje8t is a! obsta8le to the ide!tity o ea8h se?- this mea!s that every
se? is grou!ded by its imma!e!t impossibility7 The i!adeNua8y o the 3orromea! metaphor is that it
makes it appear as i- 6he! the third 8ir8le is 8ut o- the t6o other 8ir8les @the t6o se?esA simply
6a!der o- ea8h goi!g its o6! 6ayEas i the t6o se?es have some ki!d o 8o!siste!8y outside o their
8o!stitutive diere!8e7 =o6 8a! 6e thi!k this depe!de!8e o the t6o se?es outside diere!tialityM

9! short- the !o!:relatio!shipE6hi8h had the ambitio! to airm the abse!8e o relatio!shipEloses its
support7 There is !o Jthi!gK to support su8h a O 8o!8ept O To 8o!8lude- the !o!:relatio!ship did !ot
i!d its obje8t- a!d remai!s a! airmatio! 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be related to its e!u!8iatio!7
%(
3ut is the! every obje8t 6hi8h gives body to !o!:relatio!ship a etishM Are 6e deali!g here
6ith somethi!g homologous to the stru8ture o a!ti:Semitism+ the t6o !o!:related 8ir8les are the t6o
8lasses- 8apitalists a!d proletaria!s- a!d their !o!:relatio!ship e?ists i! the igure o the 2e6M This
@alselyA radi8al ormulatio! bri!gs us to a Jdy!ami8K positio! 6hi8h presupposes a !o!:relatio!ship as
a! u!athomable elusive Jabsolute diere!8eK already betrayed by a!y obje8t 6hi8h tries to positiviUe
Jthere is !o relatio!shipK i!to Jthere is @embodied i! this obje8tA a !o!:relatio!ship-K like the ob1et a
6hi8h poses as the obsta8le to the dire8t relatio!ship bet6ee! the se?es7 /e 8a! see 6hat is 6ro!g here
i 6e pursue urther this homology o se?ual diere!8e a!d 8lass a!tago!ism7 The a?iomati8 basis o
8ommu!ist politi8s is !ot simply the dualist J8lass struggle-K but- more pre8isely- the Third mome!t as
the subtra8tio! rom the T6o o hegemo!i8 politi8s7 That is to say- the hegemo!i8 ideologi8al ield
imposes o! us a pla!e o @ideologi8alA visibility 6ith its o6! Jpri!8ipal 8o!tradi8tio!K @today- the
oppositio! bet6ee! market:reedom:demo8ra8y a!d u!dame!talism:terrorism:
totalitaria!ismEJ9slamo:Fas8ism-K et87A- a!d the irst thi!g 6e must do is reje8t @subtra8t romA this
oppositio!- re8og!iUe it as a alse oppositio! desti!ed to obus8ate the true li!e o divisio!7 .a8a!Is
ormula or this redoubli!g is 1 m 1 m a+ the Joi8ialK a!tago!ism @the T6oA is al6ays suppleme!ted by
a! Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h i!di8ates its ore8losed dime!sio!7 9! other 6ords- the true
a!tago!ism is al6ays rele?ive- it is the a!tago!ism bet6ee! the Joi8ialK a!tago!ism a!d that 6hi8h
is ore8losed by it @this is 6hy- i! .a8a!Is mathemati8s- 1 m 1 ] "A7 Today- agai!- the true a!tago!ism is
!ot bet6ee! liberal multi8ulturalism a!d u!dame!talism- but bet6ee! the very ield o their oppositio!
a!d the e?8luded Third @radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8sA7
This is 6hy .a8a!Is ormula o J1 m 1 m aK is best e?empliied by the 8lass struggle+ the t6o
8lasses plus the e?8ess o the J2e6-K the ob1et a- the suppleme!t to the a!tago!isti8 8ouple7 The
u!8tio! o this suppleme!tary eleme!t is double+ it is a etishisti8 disavo6al o the 8lass a!tago!ism-
yet pre8isely as su8h- it sta!ds or this a!tago!ism- orever preve!ti!g J8lass pea8e7K 9! other 6ords- i
6e had just the t6o 8lasses- just 1 m 1 6ithout the suppleme!t- 6e 6ould !ot have a JpureK 8lass
a!tago!ism but- o! the 8o!trary- 8lass pea8e+ t6o 8lasses 8ompleme!ti!g ea8h other i! a harmo!ious
/hole7 The parado? is thus that it is the very eleme!t 6hi8h blurs or displa8es the JpurityK o the 8lass
struggle that serves as its Jprime mover7K Driti8s o ,ar?ism 6ho poi!t out that there are !ever o!ly
t6o 8lasses opposed i! so8ial lie thus miss the poi!t+ it is pre8isely be8ause there are !ever just t6o
8lasses opposed that there is 8lass struggle7 /e !ever have a pure 8o!ro!tatio! o the t6o a!tago!isti8
8lasses- there are al6ays third eleme!ts 6hi8h displa8e the struggle- a!d these third eleme!ts are !ot
just a J8ompli8atio!K o the 8lass struggle- they are the 8lass struggle7 /ithout them- 6e 6ould !ot
have 8lass struggle proper- but a simple diere!tial relatio!ship o the t6o opposed 8lasses+ 8lass
struggle is pre8isely the struggle or hegemo!y- or the appropriatio! o these third eleme!ts7
=ere is the i!al se!te!8e rom the /ikipedia des8riptio! o the ilm Super c+ JThe movie e!ds
6ith the star ship blasti!g o to6ards the 8reatureIs home pla!et 6hile 2oe a!d Ali8e hold ha!ds7K The
8ouple is 8reated 6he! the Thi!g 6hi8h served as the ambiguous obsta8le disappearsEambiguous-
be8ause it 6as !o!etheless !eeded to bri!g the 8ouple together i! the irst pla8e7 This is 6hat il ny a
pas de rapport se&uel mea!s Ji! pra8ti8eK+ the dire8t relatio!ship is impossible- a third obje8t servi!g
as obsta8le is !eeded to establish a li!k7 .ars vo! TrierIs Melancholia stages a! i!teresti!g reversal o
this 8lassi8 ormula o a! obje8t:Thi!g @a! asteroid- alie!sA 6hi8h serves as the e!abli!g obsta8le to the
produ8tio! o the 8ouple+ at the ilmIs e!d- the Thi!g @a pla!et o! a 8ollisio! 8ourse 6ith 0arthA does
!ot 6ithdra6T it hits 0arth- destroyi!g all lie- a!d the ilm deals 6ith the diere!t 6ays the mai!
8hara8ters deal 6ith the impe!di!g 8atastrophe @rom sui8ide to 8y!i8al a88epta!8eA7
This allo6s us also to approa8h i! a !e6 6ay 3adiouIs 8o!8ept o the Jpoi!tK as the poi!t o
de8isio!- as the mome!t at 6hi8h the 8omple?ity o a situatio! is JilteredK through a bi!ary dispositio!
a!d thus redu8ed to a simple 8hoi8e+ all thi!gs 8o!sidered- are 6e against or for @Should 6e atta8k or
retreatM Support that pro8lamatio! or oppose itMA7 /ith regard to the Third mome!t as the subtra8tio!
rom the T6o o hegemo!i8 politi8s- 6e should al6ays bear i! mi!d that o!e basi8 operatio! o
hegemo!i8 ideology is to enforce a false point- to impose o! us a alse 8hoi8eEas i! todayIs J6ar o!
terror-K 6he! a!yo!e 6ho tries to dra6 atte!tio! to the 8omple?ity a!d ambiguity o the situatio! is
soo!er or later i!terrupted by a! impatie!t voi8e sayi!g+ JH*- e!ough o this muddleE6e are e!gaged
i! a dii8ult struggle i! 6hi8h the ate o the ree 6orld is at stake- so please- make it 8lear- 6here do
you really sta!d+ do you support reedom a!d demo8ra8y or !otMK
%#
The obverse o this impositio! o
a alse 8hoi8e is- o 8ourse- the blurri!g o the true li!e o divisio!Ehere 4aUism- 6ith its desig!atio!
o the 2e6ish e!emy as a! age!t o the Jpluto8rati8:3olshevik plot-K remai!s u!surpassed7 9! this
desig!atio!- the me8ha!ism is almost laid bare+ the true oppositio! @Jpluto8ratsK versus J3olsheviks-K
i7e7- 8apitalists versus proletaria!sA is literally obliterated- blurred i!to H!e- a!d therei! lies the u!8tio!
o the !ame J2e6KEto serve as the operator o this obliteratio!7 The irst task o ema!8ipatory politi8s
is thereore to disti!guish bet6ee! JalseK a!d JtrueK poi!ts- JalseK a!d JtrueK 8hoi8es- to bri!g ba8k
the third eleme!t 6hose obliteratio! sustai!s the alse 8hoi8eEjust as- today- the alse 8hoi8e o
Jliberal demo8ra8y or 9slamo:Fas8ismK is sustai!ed by the obliteratio! o radi8al se8ular ema!8ipatory
politi8s7
/e should be 8lear- the!- i! reje8ti!g the da!gerous motto Jmy e!emyIs e!emy is my rie!d-K
6hi8h may lead us i! parti8ular i!to dis8er!i!g a JprogressiveK a!ti:imperialist pote!tial i!
u!dame!talist 9slamist moveme!ts7 The ideologi8al u!iverse o orga!iUatio!s like =eUbollah is based
o! a blurri!g o the diere!8es bet6ee! 8apitalist !eo:imperialism a!d se8ular progressive
ema!8ipatio!+ 6ithi! =eUbollahIs ideologi8al spa8e- 6ome!Is ema!8ipatio!- gay rights- et87- are
nothing but the Jde8ade!tK moral aspe8t o /ester! imperialism7 /e 8a! see 8learly here ho6 the
bourgeoisie u!8tio!s i! the mas8uli!e 6ay- a!d the proletariat i! the emi!i!e+ or the bourgeoisie- the
ield o the politi8al is a 8losed dual relatio!ship 6here the e!emy o my e!emy is my rie!d- or 6hi8h
they are !o6 payi!g a heavy pri8eEtodayIs e!emies- ,uslim u!dame!talists- 6ere yesterday e!emies
o the @8ommo!A e!emy @Soviet 8ommu!ismAT or the proletariat as !o!:All- the ield is !ot 8losed i!
this bi!ary ashio!Emy e!emyIs e!emy is !ot my rie!d @!o allia!8e 6ith religious u!dame!talistsA-
but- o! the other ha!d- to be !o!:!o!:bourgeois is !ot to be bourgeois agai!- but our @the proletariatIsA
prospe8tive ally7

Part I#

,= C!@4$== 4)=$
CHAPTER 12

The Foursome o Terror- A!?iety- Dourage O a!d 0!thusiasm

,y o!goi!g debate 6ith 3adiou 8ould be read as a series o variatio!s o! the moti o ho6 to
redeem =egel- ho6 to re8laim him or the 8o!temporary u!iverse o radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y7 9! terms o
the most eleme!tary o!tologi8al 8oordi!ates- my diere!8e 6ith 3adiou is threeold- 6ith regard to the
triad 3ei!g>/orld>0ve!t7 At the level o bei!g- the multipli8ity o multiples has to be suppleme!ted by
the Jbarred H!e-K the Void as the impossibility o the H!e be8omi!g H!e7 At the level o appeara!8e-
the 6orld has to be 8o!8eived o as la!guage:bou!d+ ea8h 6orld is sustai!ed by a ,aster:Sig!iier @the
true reere!8e o 6hat 3adiou 8alls a Jpoi!tKA7 At the level o the 0ve!t- the J!egativityK o a!?iety a!d
the @deathA drive has to be posited as prior to the airmative e!thusiasm or the 0ve!t- as its 8o!ditio!
o possibility7
/hat is missi!g i! 3adiou is a! o!tology o the 0ve!t7 That is to say- 6he! 3adiou posits the
Truth:0ve!t as the e?8eptio! to the order o 3ei!g @all there is are bodies a!d la!guages- 6ith the
e?8eptio! o TruthsA- he adds that- as a materialist- he o 8ourse presumes that a! 0ve!t is just a
Jtorsio! o bei!g-K that it e?ists o!ly i! the sum o its 8o!seNue!8es- its i!s8riptio!s i!to the order o
3ei!g7 9! order to 8o!8eptualiUe the mode o e?iste!8e o the 0ve!t- 6e thus !eed a! o!tology o
virtual @!o!:Abei!g- o a virtual d prese!t o!ly i! its ee8ts- or- eve!- retroa8tively ge!erated by its
o6! ee8ts7
30941>/HF.G>0V04T

9t is easy to imagi!e 3adiouIs rejoi!der to my irst thesis+ is !ot the !otio! o a multipli8ity o
J6orldsK @tra!s8e!de!tal stru8turesA set agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the barred H!e yet a!other 8ase o
post:philosophi8al metaphysi8sM ,etaphysi8s be8ause it provides !o spa8e or @mathemati8s asA
ge!eral o!tology 6hi8h- or 3adiou- guara!tees that 6e remai! 6ithi! materialismM A!d does !ot this
la8k o a ge!eral o!tology 6hi8h dei!es the 8ommo! te?ture o bei!g also make it impossible to
a88ou!t or u!iversal Truths- Truths 6hi8h rea8h a8ross si!gle 6orlds @su8h as- i! art- the plays o
Aes8hylus a!d Sopho8les 6hi8h- although embedded i! the A!8ie!t 1reek 6orld- 8o!ti!ue to speak to
usAM The key poi!t here is ho6- pre8isely- 6e are to 8o!8eive the multipli8ity o 6orlds7 .et me begi!
by dee!di!g 3adiou agai!st a 8riti8al poi!t- re8e!tly made by Ceter =all6ard- 6hi8h 8o!8er!s the very
o!tologi8al u!dame!tals o 3adiouIs philosophi8al edii8e- the relatio!ship bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d bei!gs+

The problem is that 3adiou assumes but does !ot a88ou!t or the status o the middle a!d mediati!g
termEthe status o beings7 4either 3adiouIs o!tology !or his logi8 seem to provide a!y 8lear pla8e or
ordi!ary o!ti8 reality7 /hat appears i! our various Carisia! 6orlds- 8learly- are !ot i!sta!8es o pure
bei!g or multipli8ity- but people7 Gepe!di!g o! the tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!iguratio! o their 6orld- these
people 8a! the! appear or e?ist as tra!Nuil 6orkers- patrioti8 heroes or rebellious i!surge!ts- but i! ea8h
8ase the tra!s8e!de!tal appears to take the eleme!tary o!ti8 status o its i!habita!ts or gra!ted7
3et6ee! the bei!g o a pure multipli8ity a!d a! appeari!g as do8ile or i!surge!t lies a! abyss 6ithout
mediatio!7 The spa8e that i! other philosophies might be illed by a! a88ou!t o material a8tualiUatio!
or emerge!t sel:realiUatio! @or a!y !umber o alter!ativesA is o!e that 3adiou- so ar- preers to
8o!sig! to 8o!ti!ge!8y7 9 the tra!s8e!de!tal o a 6orld determi!es the 6ays i! 6hi8h its obje8ts may
appear- 3adiou seems to presume a meta:tra!s8e!de!tal register 6hi8h simply gives a 6orld the o!ti8
ra6 material o its obje8ts O
1
The gist o =all6ardIs argume!t is 8lear+ the o!tologi8al stru8ture o a purely ormal
mathemati8al multipli8ity is !ot e!ough to provide @a88ou!t orA the Jra6 material-K the o!ti8 de!sity o
bei!gs- o positive e!tities @material obje8tsA 8aught up i! a 6orld- orga!iUed through its tra!s8e!de!tal
rame7 Do!vi!8i!g as it appears- this argume!t !o!etheless imputes to 3adiouIs !otio! o the
Jtra!s8e!de!talK a perspe8tival status+ it o!ly 6orks i- i! a traditio!al *a!tia! 6ay- 6e 8o!8eive the
tra!s8e!de!tal as the !et6ork that stru8tures our perspe8tive o! !oume!al reality7 9- ho6ever- 6e
ollo6 3adiou a!d 8o!8eive the /orldEthe tra!s8e!de!tal stru8turi!g pri!8ipleEas stri8tly imma!e!t
to o!ti8 reality- the! 6e have to 8o!8lude that bei!gs- i! their material de!sity a!d 6ith their 6ealth o
properties- e?ist always a!d only as part o a /orld a!d its determi!ate situatio!7 3ei!gs are !ot !eutral
Jra6 stuK 8aught up i! o!e a!d the! a!other tra!s8e!de!tal !et6orkEthe o!ly !eutral JstuK outside
every situatio! is mathemati8al multipli8ity7 There is a!other importa!t 8o!seNue!8e to be dra6! rom
this absolute imma!e!8e o the tra!s8e!de!tal+ 6e should totally reje8t a!y !otio! o the symptomal
poi!t o a situatio! as a! ee8t o the resista!8e o the i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity o o!ti8 reality to
getti!g 8aught i! the grid o tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!siste!8y7 The poi!t o i!8o!siste!8y- o the Jsymptomal
torsio!K o a situatio!- is ge!erated by its imma!e!t tra!s8e!de!tal stru8ture7
=ere 6e 8a! dis8er! the key lesso! o =egelia! idealism or todayIs materialism+ the basi8
premise o materialism is !ot the e?iste!8e o some obs8ure impe!etrable material de!sity or thi8k
JmatterK 6hi8h i!di8ates that Jeverythi!g is !ot just thought-K just !otio!al determi!atio!s- that there is
somethi!g Jreally out thereK irredu8ible to !otio!al determi!atio!s7 For a materialism 6hi8h has
absorbed the lesso! o =egel- Jreality out thereK @the real:i!:itselA really is JdematerialiUed-K a!
Jabstra8tK i!terplay o purely ormal i!terrelatio!s i! 6hi8h Jmatter @i! its thi8k!essA disappears7K Far
rom i!di8ati!g a radi8al e?ter!ality resisti!g the subje8t- the thi8k!ess o obje8tivity resisti!g the
subje8tIs grasp is pre8isely the sub1ective mome!t- the most eleme!tary Jreiyi!gK illusio! o
subje8tivity- 6hat the subje8t adds to the real:i!:itsel7 This bri!gs us to a!other key lesso! o =egel+
6he!ever 6e are deali!g 6ith the te!sio! bet6ee! our @subje8tiveA !otio!al determi!atio!s a!d the
stu Jout thereK 6hi8h resists our grasp- this te!sio! is by dei!itio! se8o!dary- a! ee8t or reiyi!g
@misAper8eptio! o 6hat is origi!ally a! i!!er imbala!8e or a!tago!ism i! the te?ture o !otio!s
themselves7 Therei! lies =egelIs basi8 JidealistK 6ager+ every te!sio! bet6ee! !otio!al determi!atio!s
a!d reality 8a! be redu8ed to a! imma!e!t te!sio! o !otio!al determi!atio!s7 So 6here is the
JmaterialismK hereM 9! the a8t that these te!sio!s or a!tago!isms are 8o!stitutive a!d irredu8ible- that
6e 8a! !ever arrive at a JpureK a!d ully a8tualiUed !otio!al stru8ture7
There is !o!etheless a problem 6ith 3adiouIs elevatio! o mathemati8s i!to a model o the
s8ie!8es+ !o moder! s8ie!8e 8a! be redu8ed to mathemati8al ormalism- si!8e it al6ays i!8ludes also a
mi!imum o empiri8al testi!g a!d measureme!t 6hi8h i!trodu8e the aspe8t o the 8o!ti!ge!8y o the
FealE!o o!e k!o6s i! adva!8e 6hat the measureme!ts 6ill sho67 This eleme!t is missi!g i!
mathemati8s 6here the 8o!ti!ge!8y is limited to the sele8tio! or positi!g o the a?ioms 6ith 6hi8h the
theoreti8ia! begi!s- 6hile all that ollo6s are the ratio!al 8o!seNue!8es o the a?ioms7 0ve! su8h a!
Jabstra8tK s8ie!8e like Nua!tum physi8s- i! 6hi8h the de!se positive materiality is dissolved i!to the
pure virtuality o Nua!tum 6aves- has to e?pose itsel to measureme!t7
9s the 8o!8lusio! the! that- or this very reaso!- mathemati8s is !ot a s8ie!8e- but a
philosophi8al dis8ipli!e- the o!ly true u!iversal o!tologyM Hr- o! the 8o!trary- that i! order to pass
rom mathemati8s to o!tology proper- o!e !eeds a mi!imum o 8o!ti!ge!8y able to disrupt or surprise
the !e8essity i!volved i! ge!erati!g ormulae rom a?iomsM 9!soar as mathemati8s is the pure
o!tology o bei!g- 6e approa8h here the most se!sitive a!d obs8ure part o 3adiouIs philosophi8al
Jsystem-K the tra!sitio! rom bei!g to appeari!g7 Although the proessed task o 3adiouIs .ogics of
Worlds is to a!s6er the Nuestio! o ho6 a 6orld @o appeari!gA emerges rom the pure multipli8ity o
bei!g- he does !ot @eve! prete!d toA really a!s6er this Nuestio!Ehe merely posits this tra!sitio!-
!amely the emerge!8e o a 6orld- as a a8t- a!d the! goes o! to des8ribe the tra!s8e!de!tal stru8ture o
a 6orld7 From time to time- ho6ever- he risks a ormulatio! 6hi8h borders o! 1!osti8 Schw=rmerei- as
i! the ollo6i!g passage+

A ki!d o push- 6hi8h is esse!tially topologi8al- makes it that the multiple is !ot satisied by bei!g
6hat it is si!8e- as appeari!g- it is there that it has to be 6hat it is7 3ut 6hat does this Jbei!g:thereK
mea!- this bei!g 6hi8h 8omes to be i!soar as it appearsM 9t is !ot possible to separate a! e?te!sio!
rom 6hat d6ells i! it- or a 6orld rom the obje8ts 6hi8h 8ompose it7
2
4ote ho6 3adiou here 8laims the e?a8t opposite o =eidegger+ the 6hole poi!t o =eideggerIs
Jo!tologi8al diere!8eK as the diere!8e bet6ee! appeari!g e!tities a!d the horiUo!:6orld o
appeari!g is that o!e 8a! a!d should separate a 6orld rom the obje8ts 6hi8h 8ompose itEo!tologi8al
diere!8e is this separatio!7 The problem here is the problem+ !ot that o ho6 6e pass rom
appeara!8es to true bei!g- but the opposite- the truly hard o!eEho6 6e pass rom bei!g to appeari!g-
ho6 a!d 6hy does bei!g start to appear to itselM 9! other 6ords- the problem is o!e o lo8ality- o a
o8al poi!t al6ays presupposed i! a J6orld7K
9! his 0uman -ouch- ,i8hael Fray! !oted the radi8al relativity o our !otio! o the u!iverse+
6he! 6e talk about the mi8ro:dime!sio!s o Nua!tum physi8s- so small as to be u!imagi!able- or about
the vast!ess o the u!iverse- so large that 6e are a! imper8eptible spe8k 6ithi! it- 6e al6ays
presuppose our gaUe- our J!ormalK measure o great!ess+ Nua!tum 6aves are small- the u!iverse is
large- 6ith regard to our sta!dards7 The lesso! is that every !otio! o Jobje8tive realityK is bou!d to a
subje8tive poi!t7 =o6- the!- do 6e pass rom the totally JlatK a!d i!8omme!surable or de:o8aliUed
Feal to a o8used /orld- to a ield 8o!stituted through a tra!s8e!de!tal measureM =eidegger reuses
this problem as- pre8isely- metaphysi8al+ or him- the horiUo! o appeari!g is the ultimate horiUo!- there
is !othi!g beyo!d it- o!ly the abyssal play o Ereignis- a!d i 6e try to rea8h beyo!d- 6e be8ome
i!volved i! a !o!se!si8al e!deavor to dedu8e the very o!tologi8al horiUo! o o!ti8 reality rom this
reality7
Fay 3rassier is thus right to i!sist o! 3adiouIs Jailure to 8lariy the 8o!!e8tio! bet6ee!
o!tologi8al i!8o!siste!8y a!d o!ti8al 8o!siste!8y-K that is- the passage rom 3ei!g to a /orld7
"
/e
should add o!ly @but !ot o!lyA a termi!ologi8al 8larii8atio!+ the 8o!siste!8y o a 6orld is !ot merely
o!ti8- it is tra!s8e!de!tal:o!tologi8al- or a 6orld is the u!ity o the o!ti8 a!d the o!tologi8al:
tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!- it is the o!ti8 multipli8ity give! 6ithi! a 8ertai! o!tologi8al horiUo!- 6hile
bei!g:i!:itsel is purely o!ti8- o!ti8 6ithout a! o!tologi8al horiUo!- give! 6ithout give!!ess7 @This is
6hy its s8ie!8e is mathemati8s- 6hile 6orlds hi!ge o! a logi8- o! a! o!to:logi87A
9! the history o philosophy- the most 8o!siste!t a!s6er to this Nuestio! @i! a 8ertai! se!se o!e
8ould say the only true a!s6erA 6as provided by the 1erma! 9dealists- espe8ially S8helli!g a!d =egel7
9! his Weltalter ma!us8ripts- S8helli!g outli!ed the birth o logos @the arti8ulated /orldA out o the
pre:o!tologi8al a!tago!ism o drives- 6hile =egel- i! his .ogic- tries to demo!strate ho6 Jappeari!gK
@8orrelative to 0sse!8eA emerges out o the imma!e!t i!8o!siste!8ies @J8o!tradi8tio!sKA o 3ei!g7 9!
spite o the i!surmou!table diere!8es bet6ee! S8helli!g a!d =egel- the t6o share a key eature+ they
try to a88ou!t or the emerge!8e o appeari!g 6ith reere!8e to some ki!d o te!sio! or a!tago!ism or
8o!tradi8tio! i! the pre8edi!g order o bei!g7 This route- ho6ever- is e?8luded a priori by 3adiou- si!8e
his a?iom is that Jbei!g as bei!g is absolutely homoge!eous+ a mathemati8ally thi!kable pure
multipli8ity7K
(
This is 6hy all 3adiou 8a! do is oer obs8ure hi!ts about Ja ki!d o pushK o bei!g
to6ards appeari!g 6hi8h belo!gs more to the S8hope!haueria! 1!osti8 !otio! o ho6 the abyssal
1rou!d o 3ei!g harbors a! obs8ure i!e?pli8able 6ill to appear7
#
3adiou tou8hes upo! the same
problem 6he! he e?plai!s the Ju!dame!tal pri!8iple o materialismK+

J0very atom o appeari!g is real7K This a?iom i!di8ates that- at the atomi8 level @6hi8h mea!s+ 6he!
6e are deali!g 6ith o!ly o!e eleme!t o the multiple 6hi8h appearsA- 6e 8a! ide!tiy the atom o
appeari!g a!d a real eleme!t o the multiple i! Nuestio! @i! the o!tologi8al se!se+ this eleme!t
Jbelo!gsK to itA7 /e e!ter here the deepest 8o!sideratio!s o the li!k bet6ee! o!tology a!d logi8-
bet6ee! bei!g a!d appeari!g7 To adopt the pri!8iple o materialism mea!s to admit that- at a mi!imal
poi!t o appeari!g- there is a ki!d o Jusio!K 6ith the bei!g 6hi8h appears7 A! atom o appeari!g is i!
a 6ay Jpres8ribedK by a real eleme!t o the multiple7
'
3ut is !ot this !otio! o a Jusio!K bet6ee! appeari!g a!d bei!g a pseudo:solutio! alo!g the
li!es o Ges8artesIs pi!eal gla!dM 9s it !ot the 8ase that- o!8e 6e are 6ithi! a 6orld- there is !o
e?ter!ality 6ith regard to it si!8e everythi!g is o8aliUed 6ith regard to its tra!s8e!de!tal stru8tureM
=o6- the!- 8a! 6e break out o the priso!:house o a 6orldM This bri!gs us to our se8o!d 8riti8al
remark+ 3adiou does !ot really a88ou!t or ho6 Truths 8a! rea8h a8ross diere!t 6orlds7 =o6 8a! 6e
8ombi!e this tra!s:6orldly 8hara8ter o Truth 6ith his emphati8 8laim that every Truth is lo8aliUed- the
Truth of a 8ertai! situatio! 6ithi! a /orldM The key a?iom o 3adiouIs Jlogi8s o 6orldsK 8o!8er!s the
8o!8ept o the Ji!e?iste!tK o a 6orld+ JIf a multiplicity appears in a world! one element of this
multiplicity and only one is an ine&istent of this world7K
$
A J!o!:e?iste!tK is a! eleme!t 6hi8h is part
o a 6orld but parti8ipates i! it 6ith the mi!imal degree o i!te!sityT that is- the tra!s8e!de!tal stru8ture
o this 6orld re!ders it Ji!visibleK+ JThe thi!g is i! the 6orld- but its appeari!g i! the 6orld is the
destru8tio! o its ide!tity7K
&
The 8lassi8al e?ample is- o 8ourse- ,ar?Is !otio! o the proletariat 6hi8h
belo!gs to the e?isti!g so8iety but 6ithi! its horiUo! is i!visible i! its spe8ii8 u!8tio!7 Su8h a!
i!e?iste!t is- o 8ourse- the Jeve!tal siteK o a 6orld+ 6he! the 0ve!t o88urs- the i!e?iste!t passes rom
mi!imal to ma?imal e?iste!8e- or- to Nuote the 6ell:k!o6! li!e rom the J9!ter!atio!aleK+ J/e 6ere
!othi!g- 6e shall be all7K As 3adiou makes 8lear- this i!e?iste!8e is !ot o!tologi8al @at the level o
bei!g- 6orkers are massively prese!t i! 8apitalist so8ietyA- but phe!ome!ologi8al+ they are here- but
i!visible i! their spe8ii8 mode o e?iste!8e7 The philosophi8al Nuestio! here is+ 6hy- e?a8tly- does
every 6orld 8o!tai! a J!o!:e?iste!tKM 9ts !e8essity

depe!ds o! the a?iom o materialism- a88ordi!g to 6hi8h every atom is real7 Cerhaps 6e should see i!
this depe!de!8e a diale8ti8al stateme!t+ i the 6orld is regulated at the level o the H!e- or at the atomi8
level- by a materialist pres8riptio! o the type appeari!g ] bei!g- the! negation is [e&ists\! in the form
of an element hit by ine&istence7
%
9! short- pre8isely be8ause o the gap bet6ee! bei!g @irredu8ible multipli8ityA a!d appeari!g
@the domai! o atoms:H!esA- the u!ity @overlappi!gA o bei!g a!d appeari!g @e?iste!8eA 8a! o!ly
appear 6ithi! the @tra!s8e!de!talA spa8e o appeara!8e i! a !egative 6ay- i! the guise o a! i!e?iste!t-
a H!e 6hi8h is @rom 6ithi! the tra!s8e!de!tal rame that regulates appeari!gA !ot:H!e- a! atom
6hi8h- 6hile part o the 6orld o appeari!g- is !ot properly 8overed by it- parti8ipates mi!imally i! it7
This i!e?iste!t is the poi!t o symptomal torsio! o a 6orld+ it u!8tio!s as a Ju!iversal si!gular-K a
si!gular eleme!t 6hi8h dire8tly parti8ipates i! the u!iversal @belo!gs to its 6orldA- but la8ks a
determi!ate pla8e i! it7 At the ormal level o the logi8 o the sig!iier- this i!e?iste!t is the empty
Jsig!iier 6ithout a sig!iied-K the Uero:sig!iier 6hi8h- deprived o all determi!ate mea!i!g- sta!ds
o!ly or the prese!8e o mea!i!g as su8h- i! 8o!trast to its abse!8e- to !o!:mea!i!g+ its mea!i!g is
tautologi8al- it mea!s o!ly that thi!gs have mea!i!g- 6ithout sayi!g 6hat this mea!i!g is7 .Lvi:
Strauss- 6ho irst theoriUed this empty sig!iier- also grou!ded its !e8essity i! the gap bet6ee! the
irredu8ible multipli8ity o the Feal a!d the al6ays:limited !et6ork o sig!iiers @H!esA 6hi8h try to
8apture this e?8ess o the Feal7
10
Hr- to reer to ,ar?Is a!alysis o the 8ommodity:orm- it is as i-
over a!d above lio!s- tigers- 6orms- ishes- a!d other parti8ular spe8ies o a!imals- there e?ists a!imal
as su8h- a dire8t embodime!t o the ge!us7 /hat the tra!s8e!de!tal ield o a 6orld obus8ates is that
this Ji!e?iste!tK 6hi8h has !o pla8e 6ithi! its 6orld simulta!eously sta!ds or the u!iversality o its
6orld+ 6ithi! the horiUo! o a 6orld- the Ji!e?iste!tK appears simply as a dispersed multipli8ity o
obs8ure margi!al eleme!ts7
=o6- the!- does a! 0ve!t 8ha!ge a 6orld 6hose Truth it e!a8tsM =ere e!ters the !otio! o
subtra8tio!+ it is the 8o!8ept o subtra8tio! 6hi8h resolves the ope! Nuestio! o 3adiouIs /eing and
Event- 6hi8h is that o the li!k or i!terse8tio! bet6ee! bei!g a!d 0ve!t7 =o6 do 6e avoid the reproa8h
that a! 0ve!t is a proto:religious mira8le 6hi8h i!terve!es rom some tra!s8e!de!t 3eyo!d i!to the
order o bei!gM At its most eleme!tary- subtra8tio! is pre8isely the 6ay a! 0ve!t i!s8ribes itsel i!to
bei!g- it is the subtra8tive moveme!t 6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e or the 0ve!t 6ithi! the order o bei!g7
/e should also !ote ho6- i! 8o!trast to 3adiouIs Jairmatio!istK i!siste!8e o! the positivity o a!
0ve!t- subtra8tio! desig!ates a !egative move- a 6ithdra6al- the redu8tio! to a mi!imum @to the
Jmi!imal diere!8eKA7 /hat 3adiou 8alls Jsubtra8tio!K is thus a!other !ame- his !ame- or negativity
in its affirmative dimension- or a !egativity 6hi8h is !ot just a destru8tive gesture- but gives- ope!s up
a !e6 dime!sio!7 4o 6o!der- the!- that 3adiouIs Jsubtra8tio!K u!8tio!s like =egelIs +ufhebung+ it
8o!tai!s three diere!t layers o mea!i!g+ @1A to 6ithdra6- dis8o!!e8tT @2A to redu8e the 8omple?ity o
a situatio! to its mi!imal diere!8eT @"A to destroy the e?isti!g order7 As i! =egel- the solutio! is !ot to
diere!tiate the three mea!i!gs @eve!tually proposi!g a spe8ii8 term or ea8h o themA- but to grasp
subtra8tio! as the u!ity o its three dime!sio!s+ 6e should 6ithdra6 rom our immersio! i! a situatio!
i! su8h a 6ay that this 6ithdra6al re!ders visible the Jmi!imal diere!8eK sustai!i!g its multipli8ity
a!d thereby 8auses its disi!tegratio!- i! the same 6ay that removi!g a 8ard rom a house o 8ards
8auses the 8ollapse o the e!tire edii8e7
3adiou grou!ds this solutio! i! three premises+ @1A The multiple 6hi8h lo8aliUes the eve!tal
mutatio! should already be there i! the 6orld- it should appear i! itT that is- the mutatio! should !ot
o88ur as the ee8t o a tra!s8e!de!tal i!terve!tio! o some mira8ulous Hutside7 @2A The tra!s8e!de!tal
o the 6orld i! Nuestio! should !ot be modiied i! its i!ter!al rules- or 6e remai! i! the same 6orld7
@"A The Ji!e?iste!tK multiple someho6 suppleme!ts the u!8tio!i!g o the tra!s8e!de!tal rules- so that
the mutatio! should 8o!8er! the relatio!ship bet6ee! the multiple a!d the tra!s8e!de!tal o its 6orld7
=is solutio! is thus that Jthere is a local mutation in the appearing when a multiple falls itself under
the measure of the identities which authori2es the comparison between its elementsF $r when the
support*of*being of the appearing appears locallyFK
11
/hat happe!s here is that a multiple Jis 8ou!ted
u!der its o6! la6 o appeara!8eK+ J/e 8all VsiteI a multiple 6hi8h appears i! a !e6 6ay- i!soar as it
alls u!der the ge!eral measure o the degrees o ide!tity 6hi8h pres8ribe its o6! appeari!g eleme!t by
eleme!t7 .et us say that a site ma"es ?itself@ appear itself7K
12
This 8a! happe! pre8isely be8ause the
site is a Ju!iversal si!gularK+ si!8e the i!e?iste!t does !ot have a parti8ular 8o!te!t @its 8o!te!t is
redu8ed to a mi!imumA- o!e 8a!!ot just e!do6 it 6ith a greater i!te!sity o appeari!g @like the as8ists
6ho 6a!t the proper role o 6ork to be re8og!iUed i! the so8ial orga!ismAT at this symptomal poi!t- a
lo8al mutatio! is o!ly possible i the very u!iversal Jsupport:o:bei!g o the appeari!g appears
lo8ally7K /he! proletaria!s !o lo!ger appear as obs8ure ba8kgrou!d e!tities- but as a dire8t
embodime!t o the u!iversal- a! eve!tal mutatio! o88urs+ i! their si!gular bei!g- the u!iversality @o
their 6orldA as su8h is mome!tarily visible7
1"
The Nuestio! to be raised here is this+ 6hy should a! 0ve!t !ot desig!ate a modii8atio! o the
very i!ter!al rules o the tra!s8e!de!tal o a 6orldM /hy do 6e !ot a8tually pass rom o!e to a!other
6orldM 9s it !ot that- or a !o!:e?iste!t to 8ha!ge i!to a bei!g 6ith the ma?imum i!te!sity o e?iste!8e-
the very rules 6hi8h measure the i!te!sity o bei!g have to 8ha!geM 9 proletaria!s are to 8ou!t as
Jbei!g:huma! as su8h-K does !ot the very measure o 6hat 8ou!ts as Jbei!g:huma!K have to be
modiiedM 9! other 6ords- is it !ot that a! i!e?iste!t 6hi8h is the poi!t o symptomal torsio! o a 6orld
8a! o!ly be made ully e?iste!t i 6e pass i!to a!other 6orldM
This bri!gs us to the very 8omple? a!d ambiguous relatio!ship bet6ee! i!8o!siste!8y a!d truth
i! 3adiouIs thought7 As =all6ard has poi!ted out- or 3adiou- Ji!8o!siste!8y is a 8ategory o truth-
rather tha! k!o6ledge or e?perie!8eK+ reality is- at its most eleme!tary o!tologi8al level- a!
i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity that !o H!e 8a! totaliUe i!to a 8o!siste!t u!ity7
1(
H 8ourse- reality al6ays
appears to us 6ithi! a determi!ate situatio!- as a parti8ular 6orld 6hose 8o!siste!8y is regulated by its
tra!s8e!de!tal eatures7 3ut- as 3adiou puts it+

A truth is this mi!imal 8o!siste!8y @a part- a! imma!e!8e 6ithout 8o!8eptA 6hi8h i!di8ates i! the
situatio! the i!8o!siste!8y that makes its bei!g O Si!8e the grou!dless grou!d o 6hat is prese!ted is
i!8o!siste!8y- a truth 6ill be that 6hi8h- rom 6ithi! the prese!ted a!d as a part o the prese!ted-
bri!gs orth the i!8o!siste!8y upo! 6hi8h- ultimately- the 8o!siste!8y o prese!tatio! depe!ds7
1#
=ere is ho6 =all6ard deploys the 8o!seNue!8es o this !otio! o truth as i!8o!siste!8y+

Cerhaps the t6o most importa!t ge!eral !otio!s that u!derlie this philosophy o truth are fidelity a!d
inconsistency7 =o6ever varied the 8ir8umsta!8es o its produ8tio!- a truth al6ays i!volves a idelity to
i!8o!siste!8y7 The sema!ti8 te!sio! bet6ee! these terms is o!ly appare!t7 Fidelity+ a pri!8ipled
8ommitme!t- variously mai!tai!ed- to the i!i!ite a!d u!iversaliUable impli8atio!s o a disruptive
eve!t7
1'
9!8o!siste!8y+ the presumptio!- variously o88asio!ed- that su8h disruptio! tou8hes o! the very
bei!g o bei!g7 9!8o!siste!8y is the o!tologi8al basis- so to speak- o a determi!ed 6ager o! the
i!i!itely revolutio!ary orie!tatio! a!d desti!y o thought7 Fidelity is the subje8tive dis8ipli!e reNuired
to sustai! this desti!y a!d thus to airm a! JimmortalityK that 3adiou readily asso8iates 6ith the
lega8y o Sai!t Caul a!d Cas8al7 9!8o!siste!8y is 6hat there is a!d idelity is a respo!se to 6hat
happe!s- but it is o!ly by bei!g aithul to the 8o!seNue!8es o 6hat happe!s that 6e 8a! thi!k the truth
o 6hat there is7 9! every 8ase- Jthe truth o the situatio! is its i!8o!siste!8y-K a!d Ja truth does !ot
dra6 its support rom 8o!siste!8y but rom i!8o!siste!8y7K
1$
The term Ji!8o!siste!8yK is used here i! t6o se!ses that are !ot 8learly disti!guished7 First-
there is i!8o!siste!8y as the Jtrue o!tologi8al ou!datio! o a!y multiple:bei!g-K !amely Ja multiple:
deployme!t that !o u!ity 8a! gatherKEi!8o!siste!8y is here the starti!g poi!t- the Uero:level o pure
prese!8e- that 6hi8h is subseNue!tly 8ou!ted:as:o!e- orga!iUed i!to a 6orld- that 6hi8h subseNue!tly
appears 6ithi! a give! tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!7 The!- there is i!8o!siste!8y as the symptomal k!ot o a
6orld- the e?8ess 6hi8h 8a!!ot be a88ou!ted or i! its terms7 @0?a8tly the same ambiguity
8hara8teriUes the .a8a!ia! Feal7A
A bit o 8lumsy eleme!tary reaso!i!g may be useul here+ i i!8o!siste!8y is J6hat there isK
a!d idelity is idelity to i!8o!siste!8y- does this the! mea! that the 3adiouia! idelity to a Truth:0ve!t
is ultimately a idelity to 6hat there isM 9s a Truth:0ve!t the! o!ly the i!terve!tio! o the i!8o!siste!t
multipli8ity i!to a 8o!siste!t situatio!- the i!de? o ho6 every totaliUi!g represe!tatio! o the
i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity ails to 8apture it ullyM 9 this is the 8ase- the! 6e are ba8k i! the sta!dard
post:=egelia! u!iverse o the produ8tivity o a lie:pro8ess 6hi8h is al6ays i! e?8ess over its re:
prese!tatio!s- so that re:prese!tatio!s @situatio!s- /orlds- totaliUatio!sA are like temporary e!velopes
6hi8h 8a! be dis8arded 6he! the produ8tive or8e o prese!8e overgro6s them7 At this level-
i!8o!siste!8y as the symptomal poi!t o a situatio! is simply a! i!de? o the ailure o this situatio!- a!
i!de? o the !eed to drop it7 /e 8a! eve! a88ommodate at this level 3adiouIs !otio! o the symptomal
poi!t as J!othi!g @the eleme!t 6ithout pla8eA 6hi8h be8omes allK+ the symptomal poi!t is the eleme!t
6ithi! a situatio! 6hi8h 8ou!ts or !othi!g 6ithi! its @tra!s8e!de!talA 8oordi!atesT through the eve!tal
revolutio!- this !othi!g @the Jpart o !o:partKA be8omes All- the basi8 stru8turi!g pri!8iple o a !e6
situatio! @like the proletariat beore a!d ater the revolutio!A7 =o6ever- 8o!sidered i! this 6ay- the
0ve!t is o!ly a passage rom o!e to a!other /orld- a ou!di!g o a !e6 /orld- a J/orld i!
be8omi!gKEthe 6hole pro8ess 8a! be grasped i! the terms o a! oppositio! bet6ee! the i!8o!siste!t
multipli8ity o 3ei!g a!d the 8o!siste!8y o a /orld as a orm o appeara!8e o multipli8ity7
This 8ouple is- ho6ever- 8learly !ot Jstro!g e!oughK to provide the 8oordi!ates or 3adiouIs
!otio! o a Truth:0ve!t+ a Truth:0ve!t is !ot o!ly the Jreve!geK o the i!8o!siste!8y upo! a 8o!siste!t
situatio!T idelity to a Truth:0ve!t is a 6ork o imposi!g a !e6 order o!to the multipli8ity o 3ei!g- or
Truth is a Jproje8tK 6hi8h is e!or8ed upo! the u!!amable o a situatio!7 9! a 6ay- Truth is itsel eve!
more or8eully imposi!g tha! a /orld+ there is !o pre:established harmo!y bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d 0ve!t-
or the e!or8i!g o a Truth o!to the multiple reality i! !o 6ay Je?pressesK the Ji!!er truthK o reality
itsel7
TF)T=- 94DH4S9ST04D5- A4G T=0 S5,CTH,A. CH94T

There is thus a pote!tial te!sio! bet6ee! truth as idelity to i!8o!siste!8y a!d Truth as
e!or8i!g a proje8t upo! bei!gT that is to say- the key dilemma is 6hether it is sui8ie!t to dei!e a!
0ve!t as the i!trusio! o the i!8o!siste!8y i!to a 8o!siste!t situatio!- as the retur! o its repressed i!
the guise o a symptomal torsio!- o a! e?8essive eleme!t 6hi8h ormally belo!gs to a situatio! but
la8ks a proper pla8e i! it @Fa!8i`reIs Jpart o !o:partKA7 9s it !ot the 8ase that su8h poi!ts o symptomal
torsio! are !ot yet 0ve!ts themselves but o!ly 6hat 3adiou 8alls Jeve!tal sites-K possible pla8es 6here
a! 0ve!t 8a! o88urM
9- ho6ever- Truth is a! Hrder e!or8ed or imposed o! the multipli8ity o bei!g- the! the
Nuestio! arises+ ho6 does Truth dier rom a /orldM Da! Truth be8ome a /orldM
1&
To put it blu!tly+
does a! 0ve!t- like every situatio! @or /orldA- also have @or- rather- ge!erateA its poi!t o symptomal
torsio!- so that a Truth:0ve!t is merely the passage bet6ee! o!e a!d a!other /orldM The a!s6er- o
8ourse- is !o7 The Truth e!or8ed upo! a situatio! is o a radi8ally diere!t !ature to a /orld7 Agai!-
to put it blu!tly+ a /orld is histori8al- a tra!s8e!de!tal:histori8al orga!iUatio! o a sphere o 3ei!g-
6hileEas 3adiou repeatedly emphasiUes i! his u!abashedly Clato!i8 6ayETruth is eter!al- i!
e!or8i!g it o!e e!or8es o!to reality a! eter!al 9dea7 /e are thus deali!g 6ith t6o radi8ally diere!t
levels+ a /orld is a ormatio! o huma! i!itude- Jherme!euti8K @a horiUo! o mea!i!gAT the eve!tal
Truth is eter!al- the tra!s:histori8al persiste!8e o a! eter!al 9dea 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues to hau!t us Ji! all
possible 6orlds7K
As the 9dea Jo!ly e?ists i! its po6er to make a! obje8t 8ome Vi! truth-I a!d thus to sustai! that
there is u!iversal- it is !ot itsel prese!table- si!8e it is the prese!tatio!:to:the:true7 9! a 6ord+ there is
!o 9dea o 9dea7 3y the 6ay- o!e 8a! !ame this abse!8e VTruthI7K
1%
Truth thus al6ays relies o! a Jthere
is !o meta:la!guageK+ it o88urs 6he! 6e 8a!!ot step ba8k a!d adopt a rele?ive dista!8e- 6he! the o!ly
@impossibleA step ba8k 6ould have bee! i!to the horiUo! itsel7 The sig! o a! 9dea is that 6e J8a!!ot
go urther ba8kK+ 6e have rea8hed the limit- the o!ly thi!g behi!d a! obje8t is the void o its
prese!tatio!7 For e?ample- a 6ork o art is a Truth:0ve!t 6he! it 8a!!ot be dissolved urther i!to its
positive @so8ial- politi8o:ideologi8al- aestheti8A histori8al 8o!ditio!s- 6he! there is more i! its pure
appeari!g tha! i! the 8omple? 8o!ditio!s that sustai! it- so that 6e 8a! o!ly admire its appeara!8e as
su8h7
3oth /orld a!d Truth:0ve!t are modes o appeari!g+ a /orld 8o!sists o the tra!s8e!de!tal
8oordi!ates o appeari!g- 6hile a Truth:0ve!t @or a! immortal 9deaA is somethi!g that- rather tha!
appeari!g- Jshi!es through-K tra!s:pires i! reality7 The status o the /orld is herme!euti8- it provides
the horiUo! o mea!i!g that determi!es our e?perie!8e o reality- 6hile the status o the 9dea is Feal- it
is a virtual:immovable d 6hose tra8es are dis8er!ible i! reality7 9! other 6ords- the u!iversality o a
/orld is al6ays JalseK i! the ,ar?ist 8riti8o:ideologi8al se!se+ every /orld is based upo! a!
e?8lusio! or Jrepressio!K 6hi8h 8a! be dete8ted through its poi!ts o symptomal torsio!- 6hile the
u!iversality o Truth is u!8o!ditio!al- or it is !ot based upo! a 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!- it does !ot
ge!erate its poi!t o symptomal torsio!7
3adiou takes this 8laim literally+ at the begi!!i!g o his .ogics of Worlds- he takes the e?ample
o a horse as a! obje8t o visual art a!d attempts to demo!strate ho6 t6o histori8al e?tremesEthe
amous .as8au? 8ave:dra6i!gs o a horse a!d Ci8assoIs horsesEboth re!der the same Jeter!al 9deaK o
a horse7 ,u8h more importa!t e?amples i! this 8o!te?t are the great 0ve!ts o moder! ema!8ipatory
politi8s+ the Fre!8h Fevolutio!- the H8tober Fevolutio!- the Dhi!ese Dultural Fevolutio!7 9! all these
8ases- 3adiou stau!8hly opposes @6hat he per8eives asA the J=egelia!K readi!g 6hi8h i!terprets the
i!al ailure o these 0ve!ts as the result o their imma!e!t limitatio!s- so that the ailure o the 0ve!t is
its JtruthK+ due to the imma!e!t limitatio!s o its egalitaria! proje8t- the Fre!8h Fevolutio! had to e!d
i! the triumph o the bourgeois market- as the JtruthK o the e!thusiasti8 dreams 6hi8h had i!spired the
revolutio!ariesT like6ise- the H8tober Fevolutio! had to e!d i! Stali!ismT the Dultural Fevolutio! had
to e!d i! the re8e!t triumph o 8apitalism i! Dhi!a7 9! ea8h 8ase- the i!terpretive method is the same-
that o a Jsymptomal readi!gK 6hi8h sees i! 6hat appeared to the e!gaged parti8ipa!ts as the ailure or
betrayal o their proje8t the realiUatio! o the very truth o that proje8t7 The disappoi!ted
revolutio!aries are thus dismissed as hysteri8al Jbeautiul soulsK 6ho reuse to re8og!iUe i! the
8atastrophe they deplore the out8ome a!d JtruthK o their o6! a8ts7 9t is easy to dis8er! i! this the moti
o the Du!!i!g o Feaso!+ the revolutio!aries 6ere the i!strume!ts o histori8al 4e8essity- mere tools
employed i! the realiUatio! o somethi!g they themselves despised7
For 3adiou- o! the 8o!trary- the ailure o a revolutio! simply i!di8ates the e?haustio! o a
seNue!8e+ it does !ot i! a!y 6ay reveal its truth- its ateul limitatio!s7 Take the Dultural Fevolutio!-
6hi8h 8a! be read at t6o diere!t levels7 9 6e read it as a part o histori8al reality @bei!gA- 6e 8a!
easily submit it to a Jdiale8ti8alK a!alysis i! 6hi8h the i!al out8ome o a histori8al pro8ess is take! to
reveal its JtruthK+ the ultimate ailure o the Dultural Fevolutio! bears 6it!ess to the i!here!t
i!8o!siste!8y o the very proje8t @or J!otio!KA- it is the e?pli8atio!:deployme!t:a8tualiUatio! o that
i!8o!siste!8y @i! the same 6ay that- or ,ar?- the vulgar reality o 8apitalist proit:seeki!g 6as the
JtruthK o the !oble 2a8obi! revolutio!ary heroismA7 9- ho6ever- 6e a!alyUe it as a! 0ve!t- as a!
e!a8tme!t o the eter!al 9dea o egalitaria! 2usti8e- the! the ultimate out8ome o the Dultural
Fevolutio!- its 8atastrophi8 ailure a!d reversal i!to savage 8apitalist e?pa!sio!- does !ot e?haust the
Feal o the Dultural Fevolutio!+ its eter!al 9dea survives its deeat i! so8io:histori8al reality- it
8o!ti!ues to lead the spe8tral lie o a ailed utopia 6hi8h 6ill hau!t uture ge!eratio!s- patie!tly
a6aiti!g its !e?t resurre8tio!7
There is a basi8 philosophi8al dilemma u!derlyi!g this alter!ative+ it may seem that the o!ly
8o!siste!t =egelia! sta!dpoi!t is o!e 6hi8h measures the !otio! by the su88ess or ailure o its
a8tualiUatio!- so that- rom the perspe8tive o the total mediatio! o esse!8e by its appeara!8e- a!y
tra!s8e!de!8e o the 9dea over its a8tualiUatio! is dis8redited7 The 8o!seNue!8e is that- i 6e i!sist o!
the eter!al 9dea 6hi8h survives its histori8al deeat- the! this !e8essarily e!tailsEi! =egeleseEa
regressio! rom the level o the 4otio! as the ully a8tualiUed u!ity o esse!8e a!d appeara!8e to the
level o the 0sse!8e supposed to tra!s8e!d its appeari!g7 3ut is this a8tually the 8aseM H!e 8a! also
8laim that the e?8ess o the utopia! 9dea does !ot 8o!tradi8t the total mediatio! o the 9dea a!d its
appeari!g+ the basi8 =egelia! i!sight a88ordi!g to 6hi8h the ailure o reality to ully a8tualiUe a! 9dea
is simulta!eously the ailure @limitatio!A o this 9dea itsel 8o!ti!ues to hold7 The gap that separates the
9dea rom its a8tualiUatio! sig!als a gap 6ithi! this 9dea itselEbut i! 6hat- pre8isely- does this gap
8o!sistM
The ambiguity o .a8a!Is moti J*a!t ave8 SadeK may be o some help here- but o!ly i 6e
reverse the 8ommo!pla8e readi!g a88ordi!g to 6hi8h Sadea! perversio! is the JtruthK o *a!t- more
Jradi8alK tha! *a!t- that it dra6s out the 8o!seNue!8es *a!t himsel did !ot have the 8ourage to
8o!ro!t7 9t is !ot i! this se!se that Sade is the truth o *a!tT o! the 8o!trary- Sadea! perversio!
emerges as a result o the *a!tia! 8ompromise- o *a!tIs avoida!8e o the 8o!seNue!8es o his
breakthrough7 Sade is the symptom o *a!t+ 6hile it is true that *a!t retreated rom dra6i!g all the
8o!seNue!8es o his ethi8al revolutio!- the spa8e or the igure o Sade is ope!ed up by this
8ompromise- by *a!tIs u!6illi!g!ess to go to the e!d- to mai!tai! ull idelity to his philosophi8al
breakthrough7 Far rom bei!g simply a!d dire8tly Jthe truth o *a!t-K Sade is the symptom o ho6
*a!t betrayed the truth o his o6! dis8overyEthe obs8e!e Sadea! 1ouisseur is a stigma beari!g
6it!ess to *a!tIs ethi8al 8ompromiseT the appare!t Jradi8alityK o this igure @the 6illi!g!ess o the
Sadea! hero to go all the 6ay i! his /ill:to:0!joyA is a mask or its e?a8t opposite7 9! other 6ords- the
true horror is !ot the Sadea! orgy- but the real 8ore o the *a!tia! ethi8 itselEto paraphrase 3re8ht
yet agai!- 6hat is the miserable 0vil o a Sadea! group orgy i! 8ompariso! 6ith the Jdiaboli8al 0vilK
that pertai!s to a pure ethi8al a8tM Mutatis mutandis- the same goes or the relatio!ship bet6ee! the
Dultural Fevolutio! a!d 8o!temporary Dhi!ese 8apitalism as its JtruthK+ this out8ome is also a sig! that
,ao retreated rom dra6i!g all the 8o!seNue!8es o the Fevolutio!- or the spa8e or the triumph o
8apitalism 6as ope!ed up by this 8ompromise- by ,aoIs u!6illi!g!ess to go to the e!d- to mai!tai! his
idelity to the 9dea7
The JsymptomK u!8tio!s here i! a diere!t 6ay rom the Jsymptomal poi!tK o a situatio!+
6hile- i! the se8o!d 8ase- the JsymptomK i!di8ates the ailure or alsity o the situatio! as su8h a!d is
thereby its Jtruth-K i! the irst 8ase- the JsymptomK i!di8ates !ot the ailure o the 9dea as su8h- but
rather the ailure o the subje8tIs idelity to the 9dea7 9! the se8o!d 8ase- the symptom is Jthe truth o
O-K 6hile i! the irst 8ase it bears 6it!ess to the a8t that the subje8t J8ompromised @gave 6ay 6ith
regard toA his desire7K Do!sider a!other JsymptomK+ Fi8hard /ag!erIs a!ti:Semitism7 The
predomi!a!t 8riti8al Dultural Studies readi!g o /ag!er i!terprets his a!ti:Semitism as the JtruthK o
his proje8t- as the key 6hi8h e!ables us to ide!tiy 6hat is alse eve! i! /ag!erIs most sublime visio!s
a!d musi8al a8hieveme!ts7 3ut o!e 8a! also read it as a! i!di8atio! o /ag!erIs i!8o!siste!8y- o his
i!idelity to his o6! proje8t- a!d sho6 ho6 the very !arrative a!d musi8al te?ture o his 6ork
u!dermi!es it7
20
The Nuestio! is !ot 6hi8h o these t6o logi8s o the symptom is the right o!eEit depe!ds o!
6hat type o u!iversality or totality 6e are deali!g 6ith7 9! the 8ase o 8apitalism- the ,ar?ist vie6 that
8rises- 6ars- a!d other Jdevia!tK phe!ome!a are its JtruthK ully holds7 Gemo8ra8y is a more
ambiguous 8aseEe?emplary here is the lege!dary study o the Jauthoritaria! perso!alityK i! 6hi8h
Ador!o parti8ipated7 The eatures o the Jauthoritaria! perso!alityK are 8learly opposed to the sta!dard
igure o the Jope!K demo8rati8 perso!ality- a!d the u!derlyi!g dilemma is 6hether these t6o types o
perso!ality are opposed i! a struggle- so that 6e should ight or o!e agai!st the other- or 6hether the
Jauthoritaria!K perso!ality is i! a8t the symptomal JtruthK o the Jdemo8rati8K perso!ality7 Alo!g
these li!es- the shit rom Ador!o to =abermas apropos moder!ity 8a! itsel be ormulated i! these
terms+ at the heart o Ador!oIs a!d =orkheimerIs Jdiale8ti8 o e!lighte!me!tK is the idea that
phe!ome!a su8h as as8ism are JsymptomsK o moder!ity- its !e8essary 8o!seNue!8e @6hi8h is 6hy- as
=orkheimer memorably put it- those 6ho do !ot 6a!t to talk 8riti8ally about 8apitalism should also
keep sile!t about as8ismA7 For =abermas- by 8o!trast- they are JsymptomsK or i!di8ators o the a8t
that moder!ity remai!s a! Ju!i!ished proje8t-K that it has !ot yet deployed all its pote!tial7
Goes this logi8 o the 9dea as a! Ju!i!ished proje8tK !ot 8ommit us to GerridaIs !otio! o a gap
bet6ee! the spe8tral 9dea that 8o!ti!ues to hau!t histori8al reality a!d the 9dea i! its positive orm- as a
determi!ate program to be realiUedM 0very determi!ate orm o the 9dea- every tra!slatio! o the 9dea
i!to a positive program- betrays the messia!i8 Cromise at its spe8tral 8ore7 /e are thus ba8k i! pseudo:
*a!tia! .evi!asia! territory- 6here eter!al Truth is 8o!8eived as a regulative 9dea 6hi8h is orever Jto
8ome-K 6hi8h !ever arrives i! its ull a8tuality7 3ut is this the o!ly solutio!M
THERE IS NO H!MAN ANIMAL

There is a diere!t 6ay to read the Jeter!alityK o the 9dea7 Fe8all that- or =egel- the
Jresolutio!K o a 8o!tradi8tio! does !ot e!tail the abolitio! o diere!8e- but its ull admissio!7 9t took
eve! .a8a! a lo!g time to rea8h this i!sight7 Throughout his developme!t- .a8a! 6as looki!g or a
JNuilti!g poi!t-K a li!k that 6ould hold together or at least mediate bet6ee! S @the symboli8
sembla!8eA a!d 2 @the Feal o 1ouissanceA7 The mai! solutio! is to elevate the phallus i!to the sig!iier
o the la8k o a sig!iier 6hi8h- as the sig!iier o 8astratio!- holds the pla8e o 1ouissance 6ithi! the
symboli8 orderT the!- there is the ob1et a itsel as the surplus:e!joyme!t ge!erated by the loss o
1ouissance- 6hi8h is the obverse o the e!try i!to the symboli8 order- as 1ouissance lo8ated !ot o! the
side o the real 1ouissance but- parado?i8ally- o! the side o the symboli87 9! J.ituraterre-K he i!ally
drops this sear8h or the symboli8 pi!eal gla!d @6hi8h or Ges8artes marked the bodily poi!t at 6hi8h
body a!d soul i!tera8tA a!d e!dorses the =egelia! solutio!+ it is the gap itself that forever separates S
and C! which holds them together- si!8e this gap is 8o!stitutive o both o them+ the symboli8 arises
through the gap that separates it rom ull 1ouissance- a!d this 1ouissance itsel is a spe8ter produ8ed by
the gaps a!d holes i! the symboli87 To desig!ate this i!terdepe!de!8e- .a8a! i!trodu8es the term
littorale- sta!di!g or the letter i! its J8oast:likeK dime!sio! a!d thereby Jiguri!g that o!e domai!
[6hi8h\ i! its e!tirety makes or the other a ro!tier- be8ause o their bei!g oreig! to ea8h other- to the
e?te!t o !ot alli!g i!to a re8ipro8al relatio!7 9s the edge o the hole i! k!o6ledge !ot 6hat it
tra8esMK
21
So 6he! .a8a! says that Jbet6ee! k!o6ledge a!d jouissa!8e- there is a littoral-K 6e should
hear i! this the evo8atio! o 1ouis*sense @e!joy:mea!tA- o a letter redu8ed to a sinthome- a sig!iyi!g
ormula o e!joyme!t7
22
Therei! resides late .a8a!Is i!al J=egelia!K i!sight+ the 8o!verge!8e o the
t6o i!8ompatible dime!sio!s @the Feal a!d the symboli8A is sustai!ed by their very diverge!8e- or
diere!8e is 8o!stitutive o 6hat it diere!tiates7 Hr- to put it i! more ormal terms+ it is the very
i!terse8tio! bet6ee! the t6o ields 6hi8h 8o!stitutes them7
9t is alo!g these li!es that- i! his readi!g o Sai!t Caul- 3adiou oer a per8eptive i!terpretatio!
o the subje8tive passage rom the .a6 to love7 9! both 8ases- 6e are deali!g 6ith divisio!- 6ith a
Jdivided subje8tKT ho6ever- the modality o the divisio! is thoroughly diere!t7 The subje8t o the .a6
is Jde8e!teredK i! the se!se that it is 8aught up i! the sel:destru8tive- vi8ious 8y8le o si! a!d the .a6
i! 6hi8h o!e pole e!ge!ders its opposite7 Caul gave a! u!surpassable des8riptio! o this e!ta!gleme!t
i! 7omans $+

/e k!o6 that the la6 is spiritualT but 9 am 8ar!al- sold i!to slavery to si!7 /hat 9 do- 9 do !ot
u!dersta!d7 For 9 do !ot do 6hat 9 6a!t- but 9 do 6hat 9 hate7 4o6 i 9 do 6hat 9 do !ot 6a!t- 9 8o!8ur
that the la6 is good7 So !o6 it is !o lo!ger 9 6ho do it- but si! that d6ells i! me7 For 9 k!o6 that good
does !ot d6ell i! me- that is- i! my lesh7 The 6illi!g is ready at ha!d- but doi!g the good is !ot7 For 9
do !ot do the good 9 6a!t- but 9 do the evil 9 do !ot 6a!t7 4o6 i 9 do 6hat 9 do !ot 6a!t- it is !o
lo!ger 9 6ho do it- but si! that d6ells i! me7 So- the!- 9 dis8over the pri!8iple that 6he! 9 6a!t to do
right- evil is at ha!d7 For 9 take delight i! the la6 o 1od- i! my i!!er sel- but 9 see i! my members
a!other pri!8iple at 6ar 6ith the la6 o my mi!d- taki!g me 8aptive to the la6 o si! that d6ells i! my
members7 ,iserable o!e that 9 amR
9t is thus !ot that 9 am merely tor! bet6ee! t6o opposites- the .a6 a!d si!T the problem is that 9
8a!!ot eve! 8learly disti!guish them+ 9 6a!t to ollo6 the .a6- but 9 e!d up i! si!7 This vi8ious 8y8le is
@!ot so mu8h over8ome asA broke! out o i! the e?perie!8e o love- more pre8isely+ i! the e?perie!8e o
the radi8al gap that separates love rom the .a67 Therei! lies the radi8al diere!8e bet6ee! the 8ouple
.a6>si! a!d the 8ouple .a6>love7 The gap that separates .a6 a!d si! is !ot a real diere!8e+ their
truth is their mutual impli8atio! or 8o!usio!Ethe .a6 ge!erates si! a!d eeds upo! it- o!e 8a!!ot
ever dra6 a 8lear li!e o separatio! bet6ee! the t6o7 9t is o!ly 6ith the 8ouple .a6>love that 6e attai!
real diere!8e+ these t6o mome!ts are radi8ally separated- they are !ot Jmediated-K o!e is !ot the orm
o appeara!8e o its opposite7 9! other 6ords- the diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o 8ouples is !ot substa!tial-
but purely ormal+ 6e are deali!g 6ith the same 8o!te!t i! its t6o modalities7 9! its i!disti!8tio! or
mediatio!- the 8ouple is that o .a6>si!T i! the radi8al disti!8tio! o the t6o- it is .a6>love7 9t is
thereore 6ro!g to ask the Nuestio! JAre 6e the! orever 8o!dem!ed to the split bet6ee! the .a6 a!d
loveM /hat about the sy!thesis bet6ee! the .a6 a!d loveMK The split bet6ee! the .a6 a!d si! is o a
radi8ally diere!t !ature tha! the split bet6ee! the .a6 a!d love+ i!stead o a vi8ious 8y8le o mutual
rei!or8eme!t- 6e have a 8lear disti!8tio! o t6o diere!t domai!s7 H!8e 6e be8ome ully a6are o
the dime!sio! o love i! its radi8al diere!8e rom the .a6- love has i! a 6ay already 6o!- si!8e this
diere!8e is visible o!ly 6he! o!e already d6ells i! love- rom the sta!dpoi!t o love7 9! this pre8ise
se!se- there is !o !eed or a urther Jsy!thesisK bet6ee! .a6 a!d love+ parado?i8ally- their Jsy!thesisK
is already the very e?perie!8e o their radi8al split7 9! the same 6ay- or Dhesterto!- the book o 2ob
Jsaved [the 2e6s\ rom a! e!ormous 8ollapse a!d de8ayK+

=ere i! this book the Nuestio! is really asked 6hether 1od i!variably pu!ishes vi8e 6ith terrestrial
pu!ishme!t a!d re6ards virtue 6ith terrestrial prosperity7 9 the 2e6s had a!s6ered that Nuestio!
6ro!gly they might have lost all their ater i!lue!8e i! huma! history7 They might have su!k eve!
do6! to the level o moder! 6ell:edu8ated so8iety7 For 6he! o!8e people have begu! to believe that
prosperity is the re6ard o virtue- their !e?t 8alamity is obvious7 9 prosperity is regarded as the re6ard
o virtue it 6ill be regarded as the symptom o virtue7 ,e! 6ill leave o the heavy task o maki!g
good me! su88essul7 They 6ill adopt the easier task o maki!g out su88essul me! good7
2"
4o sy!thesis is !eeded here+ the e?perie!8e o the radi8al gap bet6ee! prosperity a!d virtue is
already the vi8tory o virtue7 9t is alo!g these li!es that 6e should oppose the Jeter!al 9deaK as the
i!a88essible 1oal to the Jeter!al 9deaK as a principle of divisionEor- as 3adiou put it+ JThe idea is that
6hi8h allo6s a divisio!7K
2(
9! relatio! to a 8o!usi!g a!d J8omple?K situatio!- a! 9dea re!ders its
8o!tours 8lear- allo6i!g us to dra6 a li!e o divisio! 6ith reere!8e to the a!tago!ism 6hi8h u!derlies
the situatio!7 The Jeter!ityK o the 9dea does !ot rely o! the Jspurious i!i!ityK o a! e!dless approa8h
to a! impossible goalT the Jeter!ityK o a! 9dea is the eter!ity o divisio!7 9t is this eature 6hi8h makes
the 9dea !o!:All @Jemi!i!eK i! the terms o .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!A+ the 9dea 8ompels us to
divide 6ithout a!y pre:e?isti!g e!8ompassi!g u!ityEmore pre8isely @a!d parado?i8allyA- every u!ity
is here a orm o divisio!7
The *a!tia! Jregulative 9deaK is o! the side o desire 6ith its orever elusive obje8t:8ause+ 6ith
every obje8t- the desiri!g subje8t e?perie!8es a Jce nest pas BaK @this is !ot thatE!ot 6hat 9 really
6a!tA- every positive determi!ate obje8t alls short o the elusive spe8tral JdK ater 6hi8h desire ru!s7
/ith the 9dea as the pri!8iple o divisio!- by 8o!trast- 6e are o! the side o the drive+ the Jeter!ityK o
the 9dea is !othi!g other tha! the repetitive i!siste!8e o the drive7 =o6ever- i! the terms o the triad o
3ei!g>/orld>0ve!t- this solutio! o!ly 6orks i 6e add to it a!other term- a !ame or the terriyi!g void
8alled by some mysti8s the J!ight o the 6orld-K the reig! o the pure death drive7 9 a! i!dividual
belo!gs to the order o bei!g- i a huma! @bei!gA is lo8ated i! a 6orld- a!d i a subje8t has its pla8e
6ithi! the order o a! 0ve!t- a !eighbor al6ays evokes the abyss o the J!ight o the 6orld7K Hur
hypothesis is that it is o!ly 6ith reere!8e to this abyss that o!e 8a! a!s6er the Nuestio! J=o6 8a! a!
0ve!t e?plode i! the midst o 3ei!gM =o6 must the domai! o 3ei!g be stru8tured so that a! 0ve!t is
possible 6ithi! itMK 3adiouEas a materialistEis a6are o the idealist da!ger that lurks i! the assertio!
o their radi8al heteroge!eity- o the irredu8ibility o the 0ve!t to the order o 3ei!g+

/e must poi!t out that i! 6hat 8o!8er!s its material the eve!t is !ot a mira8le7 /hat 9 mea! is that
6hat 8omposes a! eve!t is al6ays e?tra8ted rom a situatio!- al6ays related ba8k to a si!gular
multipli8ity- to its state- to the la!guage that is 8o!!e8ted to it- et87 9! a8t- so as !ot to su88umb to a!
obs8ura!tist theory o 8reatio! e& nihilo- 6e must a88ept that a! eve!t is !othi!g but a part o a give!
situatio!- !othi!g but a fragment of beingF
\S
=o6ever- here 6e should go urther tha! 3adiou himsel is prepared to+ there is !o 3eyo!d o
3ei!g 6hi8h i!s8ribes itsel i!to the order o 3ei!gEthere is !othi!g but the order o 3ei!g7 Fe8all
agai! the parado? o 0i!stei!Is ge!eral theory o relativity- i! 6hi8h matter does !ot 8urve spa8e but is
a! ee8t o spa8eIs 8urvature+ a! 0ve!t does !ot 8urve the spa8e o 3ei!g through its i!s8riptio! i!to
itEo! the 8o!trary- a! 0ve!t is nothing but this 8urvature o the spa8e o 3ei!g7 JAll there isK is the
i!tersti8e- the !o!:sel:8oi!8ide!8e o 3ei!g- the o!tologi8al !o!:8losure o the order o 3ei!g7
2'
The
diere!8e bet6ee! the 0ve!t a!d 3ei!g is the diere!8e o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h the JsameK series o real
o88urre!8es- 6hi8h- i! the eyes o a !eutral observer- are simply part o ordi!ary reality- are i! the eyes
o a! e!gaged parti8ipa!t i!s8riptio!s o the idelity to a! 0ve!t7 For e?ample- the JsameK o88urre!8es
@say- battles o! the streets o St7 CetersburgA- 6hi8h to a !eutral historia! are just viole!t t6ists a!d
tur!s i! Fussia! history- are- or a! e!gaged revolutio!ary- aspe8ts o the epo8hal 0ve!t o the H8tober
Fevolutio!7
3ut- agai!- ho6 are 6e to grasp the thesis that Ja! eve!t is !othi!g but a part o a give!
situatio!- !othi!g but a fragment of beingKM /hy- i it is a part o the situatio!- is it the! irredu8ible to
this situatio!- 6hy 8a!!ot it be 8ausally Jdedu8edK rom itM The u!derlyi!g philosophi8al 8hoi8e is here
o!8e agai!+ *a!t or =egel- *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal i!itude or =egelia! spe8ulative i!i!ity7 From the
*a!tia! vie6poi!t- a! 0ve!t appears as irredu8ible to its situatio! @to the order o 3ei!gA o! a88ou!t o
the radi8al i!itude o the subje8t 6ho is Jtou8hed by the gra8eK o a! 0ve!t a!d e!gaged i! it7 =ere
e!ters 3adiouIs disti!8tio! bet6ee! the multipli8ity o 3ei!g a!d a parti8ular /orld @a situatio!- a
mode o Appeara!8e o 3ei!gA- a disti!8tio! 6hi8h basi8ally 8orrespo!ds to *a!tIs disti!8tio! bet6ee!
9!:itsel a!d For:us7 As ,eillassou? has demo!strated- the o!ly 9!:itsel admissible 6ithi! our
s8ie!tii8 moder! u!iverse is the 9!:itsel o a radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t mathemati8iUed multipli8ity- a!d
there are !o 0ve!ts at the level o the multipli8ity o 3ei!gEa!y talk about 0ve!ts at the level o 3ei!g
6ould take us ba8k to the premoder! !otio! o Se!se as imma!e!t to reality7 3ut the!- agai!- the very
diere!8e o 0ve!t a!d 3ei!g hi!ges o! the i!itude o our subje8tivity+ ultimately- it is simply that- o!
a88ou!t o our i!itude- 6e 8a!!ot adopt a !eutral vie6 o the i!i!ity o 3ei!g- a vie6 6hi8h 6ould
e!able us to lo8ate the 0ve!t as a Jragme!t o bei!gK i! the totality o bei!g7
2$
The o!ly alter!ative to
this *a!tia! perspe8tive is a =egelia! o!e+ o!e 8a! a!d should ully assert 8reatio! e& nihilo i! a
materialist @!o!:obs8ura!tistA 6ay i o!e asserts the !o!:All @o!tologi8al i!8omplete!essA o reality7
From this sta!dpoi!t- a! 0ve!t is irredu8ible to the order o 3ei!g @or to a situatio! 6ith regard to
6hi8h it is 0ve!tAT it is also 9!:itsel not just a Jragme!t o bei!g-K !ot be8ause it is grou!ded i! some
JhigherK spiritual reality- but be8ause it emerges out o the void i! the order o bei!g7 9t is to this void
that suture reers7
The o!ly solutio! here is to admit that the 8ouple 3ei!g>0ve!t is !ot e?haustive- that there must
be a third level7 9!soar as a! 0ve!t is a distortio! or t6ist o 3ei!g- is it !ot possible to thi!k this
distortio! independently of @or as prior toA the 0ve!t- so that the J0ve!tK ultimately !ames a mi!imal
JetishiUatio!K o the imma!e!t distortio! o the te?ture o 3ei!g i!to its virtual obje8t:8auseM A!d is
!ot the Freudo:.a8a!ia! !ame or this distortio! the drive- the death driveM 3adiou disti!guishes ma!
Nua mortal Jhuma! a!imalK rom the Ji!huma!K subje8t as the age!t o a truth:pro8edure+ as a! a!imal
e!do6ed 6ith i!tellige!8e a!d able to develop i!strume!ts to rea8h its goals- ma! pursues happi!ess
a!d pleasure- 6orries about death- a!d so o!T but o!ly as a subje8t aithul to a Truth:0ve!t does ma!
truly rise above a!imality7 =o6- the!- does the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious it i!to this duality o the huma!
a!imal a!d the subje8t @dei!ed by its relatio! to the Truth:0ve!tAM 3adiou himsel proposed a 8lear:8ut
solutio!+

the ormal operatio!s o i!8orporatio! i!to the pla8e o the Hther a!d o the splitti!g o the subje8t
8o!stitute u!der the !ame o the u!8o!s8ious the substru8ture o the huma! a!imal- a!d !ot the
o88urre!8eE!o matter ho6 rareEo the pro8ess o a truth that a subje8tivated body treats poi!t by
poi!t7
2&
3ut this solutio! should be reje8ted+ there is !o 6ay to a88ou!t or the Freudia! )!8o!s8ious i!
terms o 6hat 3adiou 8alls the Jhuma! a!imal-K a livi!g bei!g be!t o! survival- a bei!g 6hose lie
ollo6s Jpathologi8alK i!terests @i! the *a!tia! se!seA+ the Jhuma! a!imalK leads a lie regulated by the
pleasure pri!8iple- a lie u!perturbed by the sho8ki!g i!trusio! o a Feal 6hi8h i!trodu8es a poi!t o
i?atio! that persists Jbeyo!d the pleasure pri!8iple7K /hat disti!guishes huma!s rom a!imals @the
Jhuma! a!imalK i!8ludedA is !ot 8o!s8ious!essEo!e 8a! easily 8o!8ede that a!imals do have some
ki!d o sel:a6are!essEbut the u!:8o!s8ious+ a!imals do !ot have the )!8o!s8ious7 H!e should thus
say that the )!8o!s8ious- or- rather- the domai! o the Jdeath drive-K this distortio! or destabiliUatio! o
a!imal i!sti!8tual lie- is 6hat re!ders a lie 8apable o tra!sormi!g itsel i!to a subje8t o Truth+ o!ly
a livi!g bei!g 6ith a! )!8o!s8ious 8a! be8ome the re8epta8le o a Truth:0ve!t7
The problem 6ith 3adiouIs dualism is thus that it ig!ores FreudIs basi8 lesso!+ there is !o
Jhuma! a!imal-K a huma! bei!g is rom its birth @a!d eve! beoreA tor! a6ay rom its a!imal
8o!strai!ts- its i!sti!8ts are Jde!aturaliUed-K 8aught up i! the 8ir8ularity o the @deathA drive-
u!8tio!i!g Jbeyo!d the pleasure pri!8iple-K marked by the stigma o 6hat 0ri8 Sa!t!er 8alled
Ju!dead!essK or the e?8ess o lie7 This is 6hy there is !o pla8e or the Jdeath driveK i! 3adiouIs
theory- or that Jdistortio!K o huma! a!imality 6hi8h pre8edes the idelity to a! 0ve!t7 9t is !ot o!ly
the Jmira8leK o a traumati8 e!8ou!ter 6ith a! 0ve!t 6hi8h deta8hes a huma! subje8t rom its
a!imality+ its libido is already i! itsel deta8hed7
2%
4o 6o!der- the!- that 3adiou has su8h problems
6ith the !otio! o the @deathA drive that he regularly dismisses it as a morbid obsessio!- a!d so orth7
"0
The sta!dard 8riti8ism o 3adiou 8o!8er!s the mira8ulous divi!e:like emerge!8e o the 0ve!t
6hi8h- as i rom !o6here- i!terve!es i!to the 8ompla8e!t order o 3ei!g+ is !ot su8h a !otio! o the
0ve!t a remai!der o religious thought- appare!t 6he!ever 3adiou himsel talks about Jgra8eK a!d the
Jmira8leK o the 0ve!tM Su8h 8riti8ism a88epts the order o 3ei!g 6ith its Ja!imal lieK as give!- a!d
the! goes o! to lo8ate the diere!8e bet6ee! materialism a!d idealism i! the Nuestio! JDa! 6e
Vmaterialisti8allyI ge!erate the 0ve!t out o the order o 3ei!g- or do 6e pro8eed like VidealistsI a!d
8o!8eive it as a! e?ter!al i!terve!tio! i!to the order o 3ei!gMK 9! both 8ases- the Ji!iteK order o
3ei!g is a88epted as a positive a8tT the Nuestio! is o!ly 6hether this order 8a! ge!erate the Ji!i!iteK
0ve!t out o itsel7 The properly =egelia! move here is to problematiUe the shared premise itsel7 9!
other 6ords- =egelIs 8riti8ism o all attempts to prove the e?iste!8e o 1od out o the stru8ture o the
i!ite !atural 6orld @6e 8a!!ot e?plai! its teleology 6ithout a higher ratio!al e!tity- a!d so o!A is that
they Jdogmati8allyK a88ept our ordi!ary i!ite reality as a! u!problemati8 a8t- a!d the! go o! to
demo!strate the e?iste!8e o 1od rom this premiseEi! this 6ay- their very pro8edure u!dermi!es
their thesis @asserti!g the origi! o i!ite reality i! 1odA+ 1od 8omes se8o!d- be8omes depe!de!t o!
6hat should depe!d o! =im7 9! 8o!trast to this 8ommo!:se!se relia!8e o! the a8t o i!ite reality- truly
diale8ti8al thought starts by problematiUi!g the ull a8tuality o i!ite reality itsel+ does this reality
ully e?ist- or is it just a sel:sublati!g 8himeraM
"1
So- retur!i!g to the 8riti8ism o 3adiouIs !otio! o the 0ve!t as Jreligious-K as a mira8le 6hi8h
disturbs the i!ite lie o the huma! a!imal- 6e should a!s6er 6ith a Nuestio!+ does this Jhuma!
a!imalK really e?ist- or is it just a mythEa!d a! idealist myth- or that matterM 9! other 6ords- the basi8
idealist strategy is to redu8e !ature @bodily realityA to a primitive level 6hi8h obviously e?8ludes
JhigherK 8apa8ities a!d thereby 8reate some spa8e or the e?ter!al i!terve!tio! o a JhigherK spiritual
dime!sio!7 *a!t is e?emplary here+ a88ordi!g to him- i o!e i!ds o!esel ship6re8ked alo!g 6ith
a!other survivor- a!d the largest pie8e o lotsam arou!d 6ill support o!ly a si!gle perso!- the! moral
8o!sideratio!s are !o lo!ger validEthere is !o moral la6 preve!ti!g me rom ighti!g to death 6ith the
other survivor to se8ure the ratT 9 8a! do so 6ith moral impu!ity7 9t is here that- perhaps- o!e
e!8ou!ters the limit o *a!tia! ethi8s+ 6hat about someo!e 6ho 6illi!gly sa8rii8es himsel to give the
other perso! a 8ha!8e to surviveEa!d- urthermore- is ready to do so or !o pathologi8al reaso!M Si!8e
there is !o moral la6 8omma!di!g him to do so- does this mea! that su8h a! a8t has !o ethi8al statusM
Goes !ot this stra!ge e?8eptio! demo!strate that ruthless egotism- a 8ommitme!t to perso!al survival
a!d gai!- is the sile!t Jpathologi8alK presuppositio! o *a!tia! ethi8sEthat is- that the *a!tia! ethi8al
edii8e 8a! o!ly sustai! itsel by sile!tly presupposi!g a Jpathologi8alK image o ma! as a ruthless
utilitaria! egotistM @9! e?a8tly the same 6ay- the *a!tia! politi8al edii8e- built o! the !otio! o ideal
legal po6er- 8a! o!ly mai!tai! itsel by sile!tly presupposi!g a Jpathologi8alK image o the subje8ts o
this po6er as Ja ra8e o devils7KA
9s !ot 3adiou also all too *a!tia! 6ith his oppositio! o Jmere a!imal lieK a!d the mira8le o
0ve!tM The properly diale8ti8al:materialist solutio! here is !ot- o 8ourse- the dire8t spiritualiUatio! o
!ature i! the mode o Foma!ti8 aturphilosophie- but a! imma!e!t de:!aturaliUatio! o !ature7 /e
should thus- or purely 8o!8eptual reaso!s- e?pa!d the oppositio! o huma! a!imal a!d subje8t
"2
i!to
our basi8 e?iste!tial positio!s+ the individual @6hat 3adiou 8alls the Jhuma! a!imal-K the ordi!ary
huma! bei!g orie!ted by utilitaria! motives a!d e!gaged i! Jservi8i!g the goodsKAT the human @the
i!dividual a6are o the pre8arious!ess a!d mortality o its positio!AT the sub1ect @a huma! bei!g that
over8omes its subordi!atio! to the Jpleasure pri!8ipleK by 6ay o a heroi8 idelity to a Truth:0ve!tAT
the neighbor @!ot the .evi!asia! versio!- 6hi8h is 8loser to the se8o!d positio!- but the Freudo:
.a8a!ia! o!e- the abyssal i!huma! Ding 6hose pro?imity 8auses a!?ietyA7 A 1reimasia! semioti8
sNuare imposes itsel here- 6ith the t6o a?es o huma! versus i!huma! a!d positivity versus !egativity+
the individual is a positively attu!ed huma! @livi!g a! ordi!ary lieA- i! 8o!trast to the !egatively
attu!ed human @a6are o the pre8arious!ess a!d mortality o its 8o!ditio!AT the sub1ect is a positively
attu!ed age!t e!gaged i! a! over:huma! truth:pro8ess- i! 8o!trast to the neighbor attu!ed to the
!egative sta!8e o a!?iety7 Giere!t igures 8a! be lo8ated alo!g these li!esEor e?ample- Dhrist is a
Jhuma! subje8t-K 8ombi!i!g pre8arious mortality 6ith a idelity to Truth7
BADIO! AGAINST LE#INAS

.esUek *olako6ski o!8e 6rote that ma! 8a! be a moral bei!g o!ly i!soar as he is 6eak-
limited- ragile- a!d 6ith a Jbroke! heartKEthis is the liberal 8ore o .evi!asIs thought- a 8ore to 6hi8h
3utler also subs8ribes 6he! she o8uses o! the ragile symboli8 status o a huma! subje8t- 8aught i! the
abyss o de8e!tered symboli8 represe!tatio!- a!d 6hose very ide!tity hi!ges o! a! e?ter!al-
i!8o!siste!t !et6ork7 9t is this pre8arious status o subje8tivity 6hi8h u!8tio!s as the Uero:level o all
ethi8s+ the absolute 8all- the i!ju!8tio!- ema!ati!g rom the vul!erable !eighborIs a8e7 To be a! ethi8al
subje8t mea!s to e?perie!8e o!esel- i! o!eIs si!gularity- as the addressee o that u!8o!ditio!al 8all- as
respo!sible a!d respo!di!g to it eve! 6he! o!e 8hooses to ig!ore it7
""
The irst thi!g to !ote here is the basi8 asymmetry o the situatio!+ the otherIs a8e makes a!
u!8o!ditio!al dema!d o! usT 6e did !ot ask or it- a!d 6e are !ot allo6ed to reuse it7 @A!d- o 8ourse-
6hat .evi!as mea!s by Jthe a8eK is !ot dire8tly the physi8al a8e+ a a8e 8a! also be a mask or the
a8e- there is !o dire8t represe!tatio! o the a8e7A This dema!d is the Feal 6hi8h 8a!!ot be 8aptured by
a!y 6ordsT it marks the limit o la!guage- every tra!slatio! o it i!to la!guage already distorts it7 9t is
!ot simply e?ter!al to dis8ourseEit is its i!!er limit- as the e!8ou!ter 6ith the other 6hi8h ope!s up
the spa8e or dis8ourse- si!8e there 8a! be !o dis8ourse 6ithout the other7 9t is the real o a viole!t
e!8ou!ter that @as 3adiou 6ould put itA thro6s me out o my e?iste!8e as a huma! a!imal7
"(
A!d
3utler is ully justiied i! emphasiUi!g that this ethi8al i!ju!8tio!- at its most basi8 level- is a rea8tio! to
the Nuasi:automati8 rea8tio! to get rid o the other:!eighbor- to kill him @this urge 8a! easily be
a88ou!ted or i! Freudo:.a8a!ia! terms as the basi8 rea8tio! to the e!8ou!ter 6ith the i!trusive
4eighbor:Thi!gA+

9 the irst impulse to6ards the otherIs vul!erability is the desire to kill- the ethi8al i!ju!8tio! is
pre8isely to militate agai!st that irst impulse7 9! psy8hoa!alyti8 terms- that 6ould mea! marshalli!g
the desire to kill i! the servi8e o a! i!ter!al desire to kill o!eIs o6! aggressio! a!d se!se o priority7
The result 6ould probably be !euroti8- but it may be that psy8hoa!alysis meets a limit here7 For
.evi!as- it is the ethi8al itsel that gets o!e out o the 8ir8uitry o bad 8o!s8ie!8e- the logi8 by 6hi8h
the prohibitio! agai!st aggressio! be8omes the i!ter!al 8o!duit or aggressio! itsel7 Aggressio! is the!
tur!ed ba8k upo! o!esel i! the orm o super:egoi8 8ruelty7 9 the ethi8al moves us beyo!d bad
8o!s8ie!8e- it is be8ause bad 8o!s8ie!8e is- ater all- o!ly a !egative versio! o !ar8issism- a!d so still a
orm o !ar8issism7 The a8e o the Hther 8omes to me rom outside- a!d i!terrupts the !ar8issisti8
8ir8uit7
"#
Somethi!g is terribly 6ro!g here+ psy8hoa!alysis is irst limited to the e8o!omy o !ar8issisti8:
egotisti8 aggressio! a!d its superegoi8 reversal- a!d rom that- o 8ourse- the i!evitable 8o!8lusio!
ollo6sEthat the proper dime!sio! o the ethi8al lies outside the s8ope o psy8hoa!alysis- that
Jpsy8hoa!alysis meets a limit here-K that it 8a! read the ethi8al o!ly as the !euroti8:maso8histi8
reversal o !ar8issisti8 aggressio!7 3ut or Freud a!d .a8a! @as 6as 8o!vi!8i!gly elaborated by 2ea!
.apla!8heA- the traumati8 e!8ou!ter 6ith the Hther as a desiri!g 6hi8h Ji!terrupts the !ar8issisti8
8ir8uitK is pre8isely the basi8 e?perie!8e 8o!stitutive o desiri!g subje8tivityE6hi8h is 6hy- or .a8a!-
desire is a Jdesire o the Hther7K Thus .a8a!Is Jethi8s o psy8hoa!alysisK sta!ds or his attempt to
demo!strate that there is a! ethi8al dime!sio! dis8overed i! the psy8hoa!alyti8 e?perie!8e- a
dime!sio! 6hi8h has !othi!g 6hatsoever to do 6ith a!y ki!d o redu8tio! o the JhigherK ethi8al
sphere to Jlo6erK !euroti8 libidi!al vi8issitudes7 .a8a!Is optio! i!volves !either the aggressive thrust
to a!!ihilate the Hther:4eighbor:Thi!g- !or its reversal i!to a88epti!g the Hther as the sour8e o a!
u!8o!ditio!al ethi8al i!ju!8tio!7 3ut 6hy !otM
/e should !ote that- i! .evi!asIs a88ou!t- it is !ot me 6ho e?perie!8es mysel as pre8arious-
but the Hther 6ho addresses me7 This is 6hy- i! my very asymmetri8 subordi!atio! to the HtherIs 8all-
i! my u!8o!ditio!al respo!sibility- i! my bei!g take! hostage by the Hther- 9 assume suprema8y over
the Hther7 Go 6e !ot e!8ou!ter this 6ou!ded:pre8arious Hther almost daily- i! advertiseme!ts or
8harity 6hi8h bombard us 6ith images o starvi!g or disigured 8hildre! 8ryi!g i! ago!yM Far rom
u!dermi!i!g the hegemo!i8 ideology- su8h adverts are o!e o its e?emplary ma!iestatio!s7 3utler
sho6s ho6 the a8e itsel 8a! u!8tio! as a! i!strume!t o dehuma!iUatio!- like the a8es o evil
u!dame!talists or despots @bi! .ade!- Saddam =ussei!A- a!d ho6 the po6er regime also de8ides
6hi8h a8es 6e are allo6ed to see as 6orthy o grie a!d mour!i!g a!d 6hi8h !otEit 6as pi8tures o
8hildre! bur!i!g rom !apalm that ge!erated ethi8al outrage i! the )S publi8 over Viet!am7 Today- the
very ragility o the sueri!g Hther is part o the huma!itaria! ideologi8al oe!sive7
/hat must be added to the pre8arious!ess a!d vul!erability o the ethi8al subje8t is the !otio!
o absolute idelity- the reere!8e to a! absolute poi!t o i!i!ity- i! a88orda!8e 6ith Cas8alIs 6ell:
k!o6! thought that ma! is a ti!y spe8k o dust i! the u!iverse- but at the same time i!i!ite spirit7
Fragility alo!e does !ot a88ou!t or ethi8sEthe gaUe o a tortured or 6ou!ded a!imal does !ot i! itsel
make it a! ethi8al subje8t7 The t6o mi!imal 8ompo!e!ts o the ethi8al subje8t are its pre8arious
vul!erability and its idelity to a! Jimmortal TruthK @a pri!8iple or 6hi8h- i! 8lear a!d sometimes
ridi8ulous 8o!trast to its vul!erability a!d limitatio!s- the subje8t is ready to put everythi!g at
stakeAEit is o!ly this prese!8e o a! Jimmortal TruthK that makes huma! vul!erability diere!t rom
that o a 6ou!ded a!imal7 Furthermore- to these t6o- 6e should also add the Jdemo!i8K immortality
6hose Freudia! !ame is the @deathA drive- the very 8ore o the 4eighbor:Thi!g7
"'
3ut- agai!- 8a!!ot this idelity be u!derstood pre8isely as a idelity to the 8all o the vul!erable
Hther i! all its pre8arious!essM The a!s6er is !ot that the ethi8al age!t should also e?perie!8e his or
her o6! ragilityEthe temptatio! to be resisted here is the ethi8al domestication o the !eighbor- or
6hat .evi!as ee8tively did 6ith his !otio! o the !eighbor as the abyssal poi!t rom 6hi8h the 8all o
ethi8al respo!sibility ema!ates7 .evi!as deploys the !otio! o the subje8t as 8o!stituted by its
re8og!itio! o a! u!8o!ditio!al ethi8al Dall e!ge!dered by the e?perie!8e o i!justi8es a!d 6ro!gs+ the
subje8t emerges as a rea8tio! to the traumati8 e!8ou!ter 6ith the helpless sueri!g Hther @the
4eighborA7 This is 6hy it is 8o!stitutively de8e!tered- !ot auto!omous- but split by the ethi8al Dall- a
subje8t dei!ed by the e?perie!8e o a! i!ter!aliUed dema!d that it 8a! !ever meet- a dema!d that
e?8eeds it7 The parado? 8o!stitutive o the subje8t is thus that the dema!d that the subje8t 8a!!ot meet
is 6hat makes the subje8t- so that the subje8t is 8o!stitutively divided- its auto!omy Jal6ays usurped
by the hetero!omous e?perie!8e o the otherIs dema!dK+ Jmy relatio! to the other is !ot some be!ig!
be!evole!8e- 8ompassio!ate 8are or respe8t or the otherIs auto!omy- but is the obsessive e?perie!8e o
a respo!sibility that perse8utes me 6ith its sheer 6eight7 9 am the otherIs hostage7K
"$
,y eleme!tary
situatio! is thus that o a! eter!al struggle agai!st mysel+ 9 am orever split bet6ee! egotisti8
rooted!ess i! a parti8ular amiliar 6orld arou!d 6hi8h my lie gravitates- a!d the u!8o!ditio!al 8all o
respo!sibility or the Hther+ JThe 9 6hi8h arises i! e!joyme!t as a separate bei!g havi!g apart i! itsel
the 8e!tre arou!d 6hi8h its e?iste!8e gravitates- is 8o!irmed i! its si!gularity by purgi!g itsel o this
gravitatio!- a!d purges itsel i!termi!ably7K
"&
.evi!as likes to Nuote Gostoyevsky here+ J/e are all
respo!sible or everythi!g a!d guilty i! ro!t o everyo!e- but 9 am that more tha! all others7K The
u!derlyi!g 8ruelty is that o the superego- o 8ourse7
/hat is the superegoM 9! a ,otel H!e- 8lose to Ale?a!derplatU i! 3erli!- the do:!ot:disturb
sig!s read+ J9 am e!joyi!g my ,otel H!e room O please do!It disturbRK 4ot o!ly is this message
obs8e!e i!soar as it 8ompels the hotel guest 6ho 6a!ts pea8e a!d Nuiet to de8lare that he is e!joyi!g
his room- the deeper obs8e!ity resides i! the a8t that his desire !ot to be disturbed is impli8itly
8hara8teriUed as a desire to e!joy himsel i! pea8e @a!d !ot- or e?ample- to sleep or to 6orkA7
Fe8all the stra!ge a8t- regularly evoked by Crimo .evi a!d other =olo8aust survivors- about
ho6 their i!timate rea8tio! to their survival 6as marked by a deep split+ 8o!s8iously- they 6ere ully
a6are that their survival 6as the result o a mea!i!gless a88ide!t- that they 6ere !ot i! a!y 6ay guilty
or it- that the o!ly guilty perpetrators 6ere their 4aUi torturers7 At the same time- they 6ere @more tha!
merelyA hau!ted by a! Jirratio!alK eeli!g o guilt- as i they had survived at the e?pe!se o others a!d
6ere thus someho6 respo!sible or their deathsEas is 6ell k!o6!- this u!bearable eeli!g o guilt
drove ma!y o them to sui8ide7 This displays the age!8y o the superego at its purest+ as the obs8e!e
age!8y 6hi8h ma!ipulates us i!to a spirali!g moveme!t o sel:destru8tio!7 The u!8tio! o the
superego is pre8isely to obus8ate the 8ause o the terror 8o!stitutive o our bei!g:huma!- the i!huma!
8ore o bei!g:huma!- the dime!sio! o 6hat the 1erma! 9dealists 8alled !egativity a!d Freud 8alled the
death drive7 Far rom bei!g the traumati8 hard 8ore o the Feal rom 6hi8h sublimatio!s prote8t us- the
superego is itsel a mask s8ree!i!g o the Feal7 For .evi!as- the traumati8 i!trusio! o the radi8ally
heteroge!eous Feal Thi!g 6hi8h de8e!ters the subje8t is identical with the ethi8al Dall o the 1ood-
6hile- or .a8a!- o! the 8o!trary- it is the primordial Jevil Thi!g-K somethi!g that 8a! !ever be
sublated i!to a versio! o the 1ood- somethi!g 6hi8h orever remai!s a disturbi!g 8ut7 Therei! lies the
reve!ge o 0vil or our domesti8atio! o the 4eighbor as the sour8e o the ethi8al 8all+ the Jrepressed
0vilK retur!s i! the guise o the superegoIs distortio! o the ethi8al 8all itsel7
3ut there is a urther Nuestio! to be raised here+ is the oppositio! bet6ee! ello6:ma! a!d
4eighbor the ultimate horiUo! o our e?perie!8e o othersM 9t is 8lear that or .evi!as the Ja8eK is !ot
the !ame or my ello6:ma! 6ith 6hom 9 8a! empathiUe- 6ho is Jlike me-K my semblant- but the !ame
or a radi8al a8eless!ess- or the Feal o the abyss o a! Hther!ess 6hose i!trusio! destabiliUes every
homeostati8 e?8ha!ge 6ith others7 =o6ever- does !ot the very a8t that .evi!as 8a! use the term
Ja8eK to desig!ate its opposite- the a8eless abyss o the other- poi!t to the li!k bet6ee! the t6o- to the
a8t that they belo!g to the same ieldM 9s !ot the a8eless abyss o the 4eighbor a a8eless 3eyo!d
e!ge!dered by the a8e itsel- the a8eIs i!here!t over8omi!g- like the terriyi!g image @vorte?-
maelstrom- ,edusaIs head- 9rmaIs throat OA 6hi8h is too stro!g or our eyes- 6hi8h 8loses do6! the
very dime!sio! o 6hat 8a! be see!M 9!soar as- or .a8a!- the a8e u!8tio!s as a! imagi!ary lure- the
Feal o the a8eless 4eighbor is the imagi!ary FealT the Nuestio! is thus 6hether there is a!other-
symboli8- Feal7 /hat emerges i- i! a vague homology- 6e push the symboli8 as ar as the same sel:
8a!8eli!g i!to 6hi8h the a8e is pushed to give rise to the a8eless abyss o the 4eighborM /hat 6ould
be the status o the huma! i!dividual as a symboli8 FealM /hat emerges at this poi!t is the subje8t- the
Dartesia! cogito 6hi8h- a88ordi!g to .a8a!- is !o!e other tha! the subje8t o the u!8o!s8ious7 4o
6o!der that .a8a! reers to this subje8t as a! Ja!s6er o the realK+ it emerges 6he! the symboli8 is
pushed to the limit o its impossibility- o its imma!e!t Feal7 This subje8t is totally de:substa!tialiUedT
8oi!8idi!g 6ith its o6! ailure:to:be- it is a mere 8ut- a gap- i! the order o bei!g7
9 the a?is ello6:ma!>4eighbor remai!s our ultimate horiUo!- 6e have to aba!do! the
dime!sio! o u!iversality+ the 4eighbor is a si!gular abyss 6hi8h resists u!iversality7 3ut is it the! the
8ase that the !o!:u!iversaliUable 4eighbor is the ultimate horiUo! o our ethi8o:politi8al a8tivityM 9s the
highest !orm the i!ju!8tio! to respe8t the !eighborIs Hther!essM 4o 6o!der .evi!as is so popular
today amo!g letist:multi8ulturalist liberals 6ho improvise e!dlessly o! the moti o impossible
u!iversalityEevery u!iversality is e?8lusive- it imposes a parti8ular sta!dard as u!iversal7 The Nuestio!
to be posed here is 6hether every ethi8al u!iversality is really based o! the e?8lusio! o the abyss o
the 4eighbor- or 6hether there is a u!iversality 6hi8h does not e?8lude the 4eighbor7 The a!s6er is+
yes- the u!iversality grou!ded i! the Jpart o !o:part-K the si!gular u!iversality e?empliied i! those
6ho la8k a determi!ed pla8e i! the so8ial totality- 6ho are Jout o pla8eK i! it a!d as su8h dire8tly sta!d
or the u!iversal dime!sio!7
FROM TERROR TO ENTH!SIASM

/hile the 4eighbor is !o!:u!iversaliUable- the Subje8t is u!iversal@iUableA7 This u!iversality is
!o lo!ger a u!iversality ou!ded o! a! e?8eptio!- it is the u!iversality o a gap- a 8ut+ !ot the
u!derlyi!g u!iversal eature shared by all parti8ulars- but the 8ut o a! impossibility 6hi8h ru!s
through them all7 Feadi!g 3adiou retroa8tively rom this sta!dpoi!t- 6e 8a! dis8er! ho6 he does
already oer a! impli8it reply to this Nuestio! @ho6 a distortio! at the level o 3ei!g- o its a!imal lie-
ope!s up the spa8e or a! 0ve!tA i! his early masterpie8e -he -heory of Sub1ect @1%&2A- 6here he
deploys his o6! our u!dame!tal 8o!8eptsEthe our u!dame!tal subje8tive:ae8tive attitudes
to6ards the Feal7 =e opposes t6o 8ouples+ the Sopho8lea! 8ouple o terror a!d a!?iety @Dreo!Is terror-
A!tigo!eIs a!?ietyA- a!d the Aes8hylea! 8ouple o 8ourage a!d justi8e @HrestesIs 8ourage- Athe!aIs
justi8eA7 H! the grou!ds o i!ter!al 8o!siste!8y- 9 proposed to repla8e justi8e 6ith e!thusiasm- or the
reaso!s 9 shall !o6 outli!e7
Hte! 8ited is the 8horus rom +ntigone about ma! bei!g the most Jdemo!i8K o all 8reatures- as
a bei!g o e?8ess- a bei!g that violates all proper measure7 =o6ever- it is 8ru8ial to bear i! mi!d the
e?a8t lo8atio! o these li!es+ the 8horus i!terve!es immediately ater it be8omes k!o6! that somebody
@it is !ot yet k!o6! 6hoA has deied Dreo!Is order a!d perormed the u!eral ritual o! Coly!i8esIs
body7 9t is this a8t 6hi8h is per8eived as a Jdemo!i8K e?8essive a8t- a!d !ot Dreo!Is
prohibitio!EA!tigo!e is ar rom bei!g the pla8e:holder o moderatio!- o respe8t or proper limits-
agai!st Dreo!Is sa8rilegious hubris7 This is 6hat makes problemati8 3adiouIs readi!g o Dreo! as the
igure 6ho sta!ds or Jthe la6Is i!!er e?8ess over itsel- laid bare i! superegoi8 uryK+

JDreo!K is the !ame o the superego+ the deregulated la6Edestroyed a!d- by its o6! !ative esse!8e-
retur!ed as a! e?8ess over the pla8e that it pres8ribes7 JA!tigo!eK is the !ame o a!?iety- that is- the
pri!8iple o the i!i!ity o the real 6hi8h is u!pla8eable i! the regulated i!itude o the pla8e7 From this
poi!t o vie6- A!tigo!e a!d Dreo!- although a!tago!ists i! the play- a88omplish the same pro8ess- the
ormatio! o the Sopho8lea! tragi8 subje8t7
"%
3osteels- 6ho re8e!tly took over this readi!g- spe8iies this dime!sio! o the .a6 as that o the
viole!8e registered by the tautology Jthe la6 is the la6K+

This eleme!t o e?8ess a!d destru8tio! is 6hat 3adiou 8alls the !o!la6 i! the la6- 6hi8h as su8h lies
revealed i! the ero8ity o the superego i!ju!8tio!- redu8ed to a pure :ou must- or to redu!da!8ies o
the type -he law is the law+ JThe !o!la6 is 6hat ma!iests itsel as the airmative o the la6T or this
reaso! the superego 8a! be simulta!eously the i!de? o the la6 a!d o its destru8tio!7K Through the
!otio! o the superego- the la6 itsel i! other 6ords parado?i8ally lays bare its pote!tial or subversio!
rom 6ithi!7
(0
=o6ever- is it !ot that- i! the 8e!tral 8o!ro!tatio! bet6ee! A!tigo!e a!d Dreo!- it is the
ormer 6ho sta!ds or the tautology Jthe la6 is the la6-K 6hile Dreo! is a pragmati8 7ealpoliti"er 6ho
gives reaso!s or his prohibitio! o Coly!i8esIs u!eral @the i!terests o the polis are superior to the
i!dividual grieva!8es- Coly!i8esIs u!eral 6ould trigger a !e6 8ivil 6ar 6hi8h might lead to the
destru8tio! o ThebesAM A!tigo!eIs o!ly a!s6er to all this is a repeated variatio! o! J9 i!sistR 9 sti8k to
my ruleRK
As 6e have said- 3adiou suppleme!ts the JSopho8lea!K 8ouple a!?iety:superego @A!tigo!e:
Dreo!A 6ith the JAes8hylea!K 8ouple o 8ourage a!d justi8e @Hrestes:Athe!aA+ 6hile the Sopho8lea!
u!iverse remai!s 8aught i! the 8y8le o viole!8e a!d reve!ge- Aes8hylus ope!s up the possibility o a
new la6 6hi8h 6ill break the 8y8le7 =o6ever- 3adiou i!sists that all our are !e8essary 8o!stitue!ts o
a Truth:0ve!t+ JThe 8ourage o the s8issio! o the la6s- the a!?iety o a! opaNue perse8utio!- the
superego o the blood:thirsty 0ri!yes- a!d i!ally justi8e a88ordi!g to the 8o!siste!8y o the !e6Eour
8o!8epts to arti8ulate the subje8t7K
(1
The a8tuality o Aes8hylus is attested by -he Suppliants- a play
6hi8h ta8kles the problem o ho6 to deal 6ith those seeki!g reuge rom tyra!!y7 The Jsupplia!tsK are
the ity daughters o Ga!ausT they arrive at Argos leei!g the ity so!s o *i!g Aegyptus @o 0gyptA-
6ho 6ish to marry them7 The ki!g o Argos is relu8ta!t to a88ept them- eari!g the 6rath o Aegyptus
a!d 6ar 6ith 0gyptT ho6ever- the popular assembly o the 8ity overrules him a!d the supplia!ts are
give! shelter7 /hat the people display here is 8ourage @riski!g 6ar 6ith 0gyptA a!d a se!se o justi8e
@prote8ti!g the Jsupplia!tsK rom their brutal ateA7
3adiou proposes his o6! tetrad o the Jour u!dame!tal 8o!8epts o the Truth:0ve!t-K his o6!
versio! o .a8a!Is Jour u!dame!tal 8o!8epts o psy8hoa!alysisKT 3osteels also !otes that- i!
.ogi<ues des mondes- 3adiou retur!s to this tetrad- 6ith a small but sig!ii8a!t 8ha!ge+ the JsuperegoK
is repla8ed by JterrorK as a !e8essary 8o!stitue!t o every Truth:0ve!tEi! politi8s as 6ell as i! other
domai!s- !o truth happe!s 6ithout some orm o terror+ J4o!e o that 6hi8h over8omes the i!itude i!
the huma! a!imal- subordi!ati!g it to the eter!ity o the True by its i!8orporatio! to a subje8t i!
be8omi!g- has ever bee! able to o88ur 6ithout a!?iety- 8ourage a!d justi8e7 3ut !o more- as a ge!eral
rule- 6ithout terror7K
(2
There are ma!y deeply releva!t i!sights i! this tetrad- rom the assertio! o the
i!evitable role o terror i! ema!8ipatory politi8s to the 8ru8ial disti!8tio! bet6ee! heroism a!d justi8e+

9 heroism is the subje8tive igure o a8i!g up to the impossible- the! 8ourage is the virtue o
e!dura!8e i! the impossible7 Dourage is !ot the poi!t itsel- it is holdi!g o! to the poi!t7 /hat dema!ds
8ourage is holdi!g o!- i! a diere!t duratio! rom the o!e imposed by the la6 o the 6orld7
("
=eroism 6ithout 8ourage is limited to a mome!tary patheti8 sui8idal gesture ollo6ed by the
8o!ormist JsobrietyK o retur!i!g to the 8ommo! se!se o everyday .ie+ the truly dii8ult thi!g is to
persist 8ourageously i! idelity to the 0ve!t7 Furthermore- 3adiouIs tetrad allo6s or a very perti!e!t
diag!osis o our 8o!temporary predi8ame!t+ J9 believe that this subje8tive igure- 6hose diale8ti8 is
built o! a!?iety a!d the superego- al6ays prevails i! times o de8ade!8e a!d disarray- both i! history
a!d i! lie7K
((
Hr- to Nuote 3osteelsIs perspi8uous paraphrase+

the Sopho8lea! domi!a!t o our times 8a! be see! as a symptom o the a8t that o!8e 8ourage a!d
justi8e are dismissed as so ma!y illusio!s o dogmati8 volu!tarism- 6hat 6e are let 6ith are pre8isely
o!ly the t6i! dispositio!s o a!?iety a!d terror- that is to say- a! e?8essive dime!sio! o the real as too:
mu8h that at the same time e?poses the ragility a!d pre8arious!ess o the la6 Nua !o!la67
(#
The problem 6hi8h persists here is double7 First- is Jjusti8eK really a term 6hi8h belo!gs to the
same series o Jemotio!alK respo!ses to the e!8ou!ter o a TruthM Goes lo8ati!g it i! this series !ot
Jsubje8tiviUeK it too mu8hM A possible alter!ative 8a!didate 6ould have bee! enthusiasm @6hi8h-
already i! *a!t- desig!ates a subje8tive elevatio! 6hi8h bears 6it!ess to the e!8ou!ter 6ith a
!oume!al FealA7 9! other 6ords- i!soar as a!?iety a!d 8ourage orm a pair o opposites- do !ot terror
a!d e!thusiasm orm a!other symmetri8al 8oupleM 9! the same 6ay that 8ourage 8a! o!ly emerge
agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o a!?iety @the 8ourage to a88omplish a! a8t 6hi8h is !ot 8overed by the Jbig
HtherKA- e!thusiasm 8a! o!ly emerge agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o terror- as its imma!e!t reversal7
('
As
is 6ell k!o6!- Freud 8laimed that a!?iety is the o!ly ae8t 6hi8h does !ot 8heatEso 6hat about
e!thusiasmM Goes !ot e!thusiasm as a rule 8heatM Go 6e !ot i!d all arou!d us alse e!thusiasmsM =ere
6e should re8all that e!thusiasm 8a! o!ly emerge agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o terror+ it is this
ba8kgrou!d 6hi8h as it 6ere guara!tees its authe!ti8ity- lo8ates it i!to the relatio! to the Feal- a!d
disti!guishes it rom the alse e!thusiasm7
Se8o!d- 8a! JterrorK really be 8o!8eived as repla8i!g the JsuperegoKM 9t is true that- a88ordi!g
to the vague !otio! o Jtotalitaria! terror-K the state does !ot u!8tio! as a 8o!strai!ed legal po6er- but
as a! u!8o!strai!ed e?er8ise o a superego age!8y 6hi8h makes you all the more guilty the more you
are i!!o8e!t7 =o6ever- to put it i! some6hat simpliied terms- !ot o!ly is terror- or 3adiou- a!
u!avoidable aspe8t o the subje8tive relati!g to a TruthT he also goes to the @politi8alA e!d a!d i!sists
that terror is prese!t i! all radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8s- iro!i8ally reerri!g to his o6! politi8s as the
Jsear8h or a good terror7K So it is !ot o!ly that the e?perie!8e o terror is al6ays part o the attitude o
the subje8t a6ed by the i!trusio! o a Truth that derails its daily lieEre8all =ei!er ,YllerIs amous
motto+ Jthe first appearance of the new is the dread7K ,u8h more radi8ally- terror is a legitimate part o
every radi8al demo8rati8 politi8s+ its ruthless e?er8ise o popular justi8e 8a!!ot but appear as terror7
A!d it is absolutely 8ru8ial to disti!guish this ema!8ipatory terror i! both its aspe8ts- the subje8tive
e?perie!8e as 6ell as the e?er8ise o po6er- rom the superego:e?8esses o legal po6er- the e?8ess o
!o!:la6 at the very heart o the la67 /hatever Dreo! sta!ds or- opportu!isti8 7ealpoliti" or the
superego:e?8ess o legal po6er- he dei!itely does !ot sta!d or ema!8ipatory terror7
Dorre8ti!g 3adiou- 6e should thus propose a !e6EthirdEseries o the Jour u!dame!tal
8o!8epts o ema!8ipatory politi8sK+ a!?iety- 8ourage- terror- e!thusiasm7 =eidegger already developed
i! detail this poi!t about a!?iety+ 6he! the very basis o our e?iste!8e is shattered by terror- 6he! a
mere o!ti8 ear 8ha!ges i!to a!?iety- 6he! 6e are 8o!ro!ted 6ith the o!tologi8al Void o our bei!g-
6e are viole!tly tor! out o 6hat 3adiou 8alls our utilitaria!:hedo!isti8 Ja!imal lieK @a!d 6hat
=eidegger 8alls our e!gaged bei!g:i!:the:6orldA7 Although su8h a! Jout:o:joi!tK e?perie!8e o radi8al
dislo8atio! is !ot yet a! 0ve!t- it is its !e8essary pre8o!ditio!+ o!ly a dislo8ated subje8t- a subje8t tor!
out o its lie 6orld- 8a! re8og!iUe itsel as the addressee o a! 0ve!t a!d 8ourageously 8ommit itsel to
a idelity to its Truth7
There is- ho6ever- a diere!8e 6ith 3adiou to be dra6! out here+ 6hile or him the e?perie!8e
o a!?iety- o out:o:joi!t!ess- o !egativity i! ge!eral- is a pre8o!ditio! o the 0ve!tEits retroa8tive
!egative shado6- as it 6ereE6e must 8o!er o! it a Jstro!ger-K more auto!omous role7 4egativity
@6hose Freudia! !ame is the Jdeath driveKA is the primordial o!tologi8al a8t+ or a huma! bei!g- there
is !o Ja!imal lieK prior to it- or a huma! bei!g is 8o!stitutively Jout:o:joi!t7K 0very J!ormalityK is a
se8o!dary normali2ation o the primordial dislo8atio! that is the Jdeath drive-K a!d it is o!ly through
the terroriUi!g e?perie!8e o the utter va8uity o every positive order o J!ormalityK that a spa8e is
ope!ed up or a! 0ve!t7
This- the!- is the ultimate diere!8e bet6ee! 3adiou a!d .a8a!+ 3adiouIs starti!g poi!t is a!
airmative proje8t a!d the idelity to itT 6hile- or .a8a!- the primordial a8t is that o !egativity
@o!tologi8ally- o the impossibility o the H!e bei!g H!eA- a!d the idelity to a Truth:0ve!t is
se8o!dary- a possibility 6hose spa8e is ope!ed up by !egativity7
This key i!termediary !otio! o a!?iety also e!ables us to resolve a! i!8o!siste!8y i! 3adiouIs
!otio! o a! 0ve!t+ i a! 0ve!t is sel:reere!tial i! the se!se that it i!8ludes its o6! !omi!atio! @there
is a! 0ve!t o!ly or the subje8ts e!gaged i! it- 6ho Jbelieve i! itKT there is !o 0ve!t or a !eutral
observerA- ho6 is it that 3adiou 8a! disti!guish diere!t modes o subje8tivity 6hi8h are
simulta!eously modalities o ho6 the subje8t relates to the 0ve!t @e8hoi!g *a!tIs thesis that the
8o!ditio!s o our e?perie!8e o the obje8t are simulta!eously the 8o!ditio!s o the obje8t itselAM /e
should thus drop the !otio! that truth- as opposed to k!o6ledge- is somethi!g that o!ly a! e!gaged
gaUe- the gaUe o a subje8t 6ho Jbelieves i! it-K 8a! see7 9! his .ogi<ues des mondes- 3adiou himsel
8orre8ted his thesis that there is a Truth:0ve!t o!ly or those 6ho re8og!iUe themselves i! it+ 6hile a
Truth is al6ays the truth o a parti8ular histori8al situatio!- it ae8ts the entire situatio!7 3adiou
elaborates our possible respo!ses to a! 0ve!t+ the aithul subje8tT the rea8tive subje8tT the obs8ure
subje8tT a!d resurre8tio!7 Cerhaps this list should be 8ompli8ated a little- so that there are si? respo!ses
i! allT or e?ample+
The respo!ses to the Freud:0ve!t are+ @1A idelity @.a8a!AT @2A rea8tive !ormaliUatio!- re:
i!tegratio! i!to the predomi!a!t ield @ego:psy8hology- Jdy!ami8 psy8hotherapyKAT @"A outright de!ial
@8og!itivismAT @(A obs8ura!tist mystii8atio! i! a pseudo:0ve!t @2u!gAT @#A total e!or8eme!t @Fei8h-
Freudo:,ar?ismAT @'A resurre8tio! o FreudIs Jeter!alK message i! the various Jretur!s to Freud7K
The respo!ses to a love:0ve!t are+ @1A idelityT @2A !ormaliUatio!- re:i!tegratio! @marriageAT @"A
outright reje8tio! o the eve!tal status @liberti!age- the tra!sormatio! o the 0ve!t i!to se?ual
adve!tureAT @(A thorough reje8tio! o se?ual love @absti!e!8eAT @#A obs8ura!tist sui8idal passio! K la
Trista!T @'A resurre8ted love @re:e!8ou!terA7
The respo!ses to the ,ar?ism:0ve!t are+ @1A idelity @8ommu!ism- .e!i!ismAT @2A rea8tive re:
i!tegratio! @so8ial demo8ra8yAT @"A outright de!ial o the eve!tal status @liberalism- FuretAT @(A
8atastrophi8 total 8ou!ter:atta8k i! the guise o a pseudo:0ve!t @as8ismAT @#A total e!or8eme!t o the
0ve!t- 6hi8h e!ds up i! a! Jobs8ure disasterK @Stali!ism- the *hmer FougeAT @'A re!e6al o ,ar?ism
@.e!i!- Trotsky- ,ao OA7
So ho6 do @1A a!d @'A 8oe?ist @i! igures like .e!i! or .a8a!AM This bri!gs us to a urther
hypothesis+ a! 0ve!t is !e8essarily missed the irst timeEtrue idelity is o!ly possible i! the orm o
resurre8tio!- as a dee!se agai!st Jrevisio!ismK+ Freud did !ot see the ull sig!ii8a!8e o his dis8overy-
it 6as o!ly .a8a!Is Jretur! to FreudK that allo6ed us to get to its 8oreT or- as Sta!ley Davell put it
apropos =olly6ood 8omedies o re:marriage- the o!ly true marriage is the se8o!d marriage @to the
same perso!A7
($
/he! 3adiou des8ribes the i!tera8tio! o the diere!t subje8tive types 6hi8h dei!e a histori8al
seNue!8e @aithul- rea8tive- obs8ureA- he emphasiUes ho6 Jcontrary to what 0egelian dialectics and
dogmati2ed Mar&ism claim! the historical present doesnt coincide with the present of the body of
truth7K
(&
9! every histori8al prese!t- the Jbody o truthK 8oe?ists a!d i!tera8ts 6ith those 6ho rea8t to
the Truth:0ve!t by tryi!g to rei!s8ribe it i!to the ield o pre:eve!tal pro8esses- a!d those 6ho struggle
to destroy the body o truth @as- i! politi8s- 8ommu!ists- liberal demo8rats- as8istsA- 6hile or
=egelia!s a!d vulgar ,ar?ists- every histori8al epo8h is u!der the sig! o o!e si!gle @hegemo!i8A
!otio!7 =o6ever- does !ot the ,ar?ist !otio! o the J!o!:sy!8hro!i8ity o the sy!8hro!ousK @0r!st
3lo8hA- o the 8oe?iste!8e 6ithi! the same epo8h o segme!ts 6hi8h belo!g to diere!t stages- i!di8ate
the very same i!tera8tio!M This is pre8isely the poi!t o the ,ar?ist 8o!8ept o Jarti8ulatio!K+ o ho6-
6ith the rise o the !e6- the old gets re:u!8tio!aliUed a!d assumes a diere!t role i! the !e6 totality
@re8all ho6 the Datholi8 Dhur8h rei!ve!ted itsel i! ea8h !e6 phase o moder!ityA7 Furthermore-
8o!trary to misleadi!g appeara!8es- does !ot =egelIs !otio! o JtotalityK also aim at the same 8omple?
arti8ulatio!M
3ut ba8k to 3adiou+ i a! 0ve!t e?ists o!ly or those e!gaged 6ithi! it- ho6 8a! 6e sustai! the
!otio! o a subje8tivity 6hi8h de!ies @or ig!oresA the 0ve!tM Goes de!yi!g it imply that the 0ve!t
already i! some se!se e?ists or the de!yi!g subje8tM ,y hypothesis is that a!?iety here plays the
8ru8ial role7 A! 0ve!t al6ays o88urs 6ithi! a 6orld- 6ithi! its tra!s8e!de!tal 8oordi!ates- a!d its
emerge!8e ae8ts the entirety o that 6orld+ !o o!e 8a! really ig!ore itEor e?ample- the post:0ve!tal
liberal 6ho tries to prove that there 6as !o 0ve!t- that the H8tober Fevolutio! 6as just a Nuirk o
Fussia! history- is !ot the same as the pre:0ve!tal liberal- si!8e he is already mediated by the 0ve!t-
rea8ti!g to it7 9t is o!e thi!g !ot to k!o6 somethi!g- a!other thi!g to a8t as i o!e does !ot k!o6 it7 The
0ve!t i! its irst emerge!8e 8auses a!?iety- si!8e by dei!itio! it shatters the tra!s8e!de!tal 8oordi!ates
o a 6orld7 9t is this a!?iety 6hi8h ae8ts everyo!e- all subje8ts o a 6orld- a!d de!yi!g or ig!ori!g the
0ve!t- tryi!g to rei!tegrate it i!to the 8oordi!ates o the @oldA 6orld- et87- are rea8tio!s triggered by this
a!?iety- rea8tive 6ays o 8opi!g 6ith the 0ve!tIs traumati8 impa8t7 @So8ial demo8ra8y- liberal
ig!ora!8e- a!d as8ism are rea8tio!s to the a!?iety 8aused by a 8ommu!ist eve!t7A 3ut o!ly a!
authe!ti8 subje8tive idelity to the 0ve!t su88eeds i! J8o!verti!gK a!?iety i!to e!thusiasm @almost i!
the Freudia! se!se o 8o!verti!g ae8tsA+ it displays the 8ourage to 8o!ro!t or a88ept the 0ve!t i! its
ull traumati8 impa8t- a!d to tra!sorm this a!?iety i!to the e!thusiasm o ema!8ipatory struggle7 9!
this pre8ise se!se- a!?iety is the !e8essary ba8kgrou!d o e!thusiasm+ there is !o e!thusiasm 6ithout
a!?iety- e!thusiasm does !ot begi! i! itsel- it is ormally the result o the 8o!versio! o a!?iety7 This
is also 6hy 3adiou is justiied i! desig!ati!g regressive rea8tio!s to the 0ve!t as modes o subje8tivity+
the emerge!8e o subje8tivity is !ot limited to the e!thusiasti8 e!dorseme!t o the 0ve!t- but to a!?iety-
a!d a!?iety as the irst rea8tio! to the 0ve!t is u!iversal- it ae8ts the e!tire ield o the 6orld shattered
by a! 0ve!t7
The reere!8e to a!?iety also e!ables us to ormulate the i!!er limit to ea8h o the post:0ve!tal
truth:pro8edures 6hi8h ollo6 the triad o True:3eautiul:1ood+ S8ie!8e 8o!8er!s the True- Art the
3eautiul- a!d Coliti8s the 1ood7 The ourth pro8edure- .ove- does !ot operate at the same level+ it is
more Ju!dame!talK a!d Ju!iversalK tha! the others7
(%
The stru8ture is thereore !ot that o the our-
but o " m 1Ea eature perhaps !ot emphasiUed e!ough by 3adiou @although- apropos se?ual
diere!8e- he does remark that 6ome! te!d to approa8h all [other\ truth:pro8edures through loveA7 4ot
o!ly psy8hoa!alysis- philosophy a!d religio! also belo!g to love @the very term JphilosophyK mea!s
love o 6isdomAEis love- the!- 3adiouIs JAsiati8 mode o produ8tio!-K the 8ategory i!to 6hi8h he
thro6s all truth:pro8edures 6hi8h do!It it the other three modes @rom psy8hoa!alysis to theologyA- as
6ell as the u!derlyi!g stru8turi!g pri!8iple o the e!tire ieldM
#0
9! ea8h truth:domai!- a!?iety sig!als the e!8ou!ter 6ith a minimal difference 6hi8h hi!ders the
absolute redu8tio! or purii8atio!- that is- 6hi8h is simulta!eously the 8o!ditio! o possibility a!d the
8o!ditio! o impossibility @the imma!e!t limitA o the domai! i! Nuestio!+ i! s8ie!8e- ontological
difference- 6hi8h preve!ts the s8ie!tisti8 redu8tio! o the obje8t o k!o6ledge to a positive e!tity @as i!
8og!itivist brai! s8ie!8esAT i! politi8s- class difference- 6hi8h preve!ts the politi8al proje8t rom
ulilli!g itsel i! a !e6 !o!:a!tago!isti8 Jharmo!ious so8ietyKT i! love- se&ual difference- 6hi8h
sta!ds or the impossibility o the se?ual relatio!shipT a!d- i! art- the mi!imal gap bet6ee! art a!d
daily lie 6hi8h 8o!dem!s to ailure all moder!ist attempts to u!ite the t6o7 0a8h time the diere!8e
persistsT ho6ever- ea8h time- the poi!t is !ot to Jrespe8t the limitK but to push through to the e!d i!
order to e!8ou!ter the mi!imal diere!8e+ to push through the 8og!itivist redu8tio! o ma! to a brai!
ma8hi!e to dis8over the J!egativityK o the death driveT to push through the moder!ist u!ii8atio! o art
a!d lie to dis8over the Jmi!imal diere!8eK bet6ee! the t6o dime!sio!s @,alevi8h- Gu8hampAT to
push through love to 8o!ro!t the limit o se?ual diere!8eT like6ise- o!e must push through a
revolutio!ary pro8ess to the e!d i! order to 8o!ro!t the i!surmou!table a!tago!ism7
3adiou 6rote re8e!tly o Jthe real as su8h- the real o Vthere is !o-I the real as the impossibility
o a relatio!ship- or- let us risk the philosopheme- pure bei!g as u!bou!d multipli8ity7 Hr the void7K
#1

=e poses here a problemati8 sig! o eNuality bet6ee! the .a8a!ia! Feal a!d his o6! real- ig!ori!g the
key diere!8e+ the .a8a!ia! Feal is !ot simply a void o u!bou!d multipli8ity- 6hat is missi!g here is
pre8isely the Jthere is !oK 6hi8h- or .a8a!- is !ot o!ly a Jthere is !o relatio!shipK bet6ee! u!bou!d
eleme!ts o a multipli8ity- but the e?treme o a! a!tago!ism 6hi8h i!e?tri8ably bi!ds together the
a!tago!ismIs t6o aspe8ts7 JThere is !o se?ual relatio!shipK does !ot mea! that there is a multipli8ity o
u!bou!d or u!related se?ual positio!s- i7e7- that there is !o 8ommo! measure bet6ee! the mas8uli!e
a!d the emi!i!e positio!sT se?ual diere!8e is rather JimpossibleK be8ause it is- i! a se!se- prior to
both positio!s+ mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e are the t6o 6ays to symboliUe the deadlo8k o se?ual
diere!8e7 This misu!dersta!di!g has 8ru8ial 8o!seNue!8es or ho6 3adiou ormulates the 8ore o
.a8a!Is a!tiphilosophy- his basi8 reproa8h to philosophy- summariUed by 3adiou i! the ollo6i!g+

Chilosophy is a subversio! o three by the t6o7 Chilosophy reuses to a88ept that the three is irredu8ibly
origi!ary- that it 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the t6o7 This is- 9 thi!k- the reaso! or the 8o!ti!uous a!d
8omple? 8o!troversy bet6ee! .a8a! a!d =egel- si!8e =egel proposes a positio! o the three 6hi8h is
!e8essarily e!ge!dered by the t6o7 /hi8h t6oM The t6o o 8o!tradi8tio!7 9t is 6ith regard to this
positio! that =egel is or .a8a! the most philosophi8al o philosophers7
#2
H!e is tempted to i!vert this reproa8h+ it is philosophy 6hi8h passes all too Nui8kly rom the
H!e to the Three- reusi!g to thi!k the T6o as the i!here!t impossibility o the H!e7 The primordial
@pre:philosophi8al- mythi8alA orm o the T6o is that o the 8osmi8 se?ualiUed polarity @light a!d
dark!ess- yin a!d yang- et87A7 /ith philosophy- this polarity is redu8ed to the H!e @logos- the higher
pri!8ipleA ge!erati!g the totality o bei!g out o itselT this is 6hy philosophy e!deavors to 8o!tai! the
lo6er eleme!t- to redu8e it to a mome!t i! the sel:deployme!t o the higher eleme!t7
#"
Goes the
a!s6er the! lie i! a JmaterialistK reversal 6hi8h ge!erates the higher eleme!t out o the lo6er @logos
rom the i!tera8tio! o bodies- the H!e rom the multipleEas i! a!8ie!t 1reek atomism 6hi8h
8o!8eives everythi!g as the result o the i!tera8tio! o atoms i! the voidAM
9t is here that 6e e!8ou!ter the u!pre8ede!ted origi!ality o =egel7 H! a irst approa8h
@a88ordi!g to the oi8ial do&aA- =egelIs thought is the ultimate e?ample o the H!e over8omi!g its
sel:divisio! through the Three @the Jsy!thesisK by mea!s o 6hi8h the H!e re:appropriates its
alie!ated Hther!essA7 9t is thus true that J=egel proposes a positio! o the three 6hi8h is !e8essarily
e!ge!dered by the t6oKT ho6ever- it is pre8isely through this e!ge!deri!g that =egel airms a T6o
6hi8h is !o lo!ger the pre:philosophi8al mythi8al T6o- the T6o o a symmetri8al polarity- but the T6o
o the !o!:8oi!8ide!8e o the H!e 6ith itsel7 This is 6hy- 6he! @agai!st the pha!tom o JSlove!e
readi!gsK o a *a!tia! .a8a!A 3adiou asserts .a8a!Is a!ti:*a!tia!ism- he misre8og!iUes the =egelia!
!ature o .a8a!Is dista!8e to6ards *a!t7 =ere is ho6 3adiou a!s6ers the key Nuestio! J=o6 does
.a8a! es8ape *a!tia!ismMK+

i the real is subtra8ted rom k!o6i!g- 6e e!ter the 8riti8al spee8h 6hi8h tells us that the real @the i!:
itselA is u!k!o6able- a!d 6hi8h limits k!o6ledge to phe!ome!a7 Fi!ally- reality 6ould be the
phe!ome!al do!atio! o thi!gs- a!d the real its poi!t o i!a88essibility to 6hi8h o!e simply relates
through the a8t- i7e7- to 6hi8h o!e has a pra8ti8al relatio!ship7 There is a pres8riptive- !ot a 8og!itive-
relatio!ship to6ards the real7 The real gives itsel i! pra8ti8al reaso!- i! the 8ategori8al imperative- a!d
!ot i! theoreti8al reaso! 6hi8h stru8tures phe!ome!a7 There are readi!gs o .a8a! a!d o *a!t-
Slove!e readi!gs @iek- Bupa!^i^- Fiha- Sumi8 OA 6hi8h go i! this dire8tio!- a!d 6hi8h are very
or8eul7 As ar as 9 am 8o!8er!ed- 9 thi!k that .a8a! avoids the 8riti8al trap- a!d that he is i! !o 6ay
*a!tia!7 =is gesture is !ot to propose that the real is u!k!o6able- or that it is k!o6able7 .a8a!Is thesis
asserts the e?teriority o the real to the a!ti!omy o k!o6i!g a!d ig!ori!g7 The real as su8h does !ot
rely o! the alter!ate 8ategories o k!o6i!g a!d ig!ori!g7 9t relies o! 6hat .a8a! tries to i!ve!t u!der
the !ame o Jdemo!strati!g7K
#(
For .a8a!- the Feal 8a! o!ly be demo!strated through ormal logi8- !ot i! a dire8t 6ay- but
!egatively- through a deadlo8k o logi8al ormaliUatio!+ the Feal 8a! o!ly be dis8er!ed i! the guise o a
gap- a! a!tago!ism7 The primordial status o the Feal is that o a! obsta8le- the abse!t 8ause o a
ailure- a 8ause 6hi8h has !o positive o!tologi8al 8o!siste!8y i! itsel but is prese!t o!ly through a!d
i! its ee8ts7 To put it su88i!8tly+ o!e tries to ormaliUe the Feal- o!e ails- a!d the Feal is this ailure7
This is 6hy- i! the .a8a!ia! Feal- opposites 8oi!8ide+ the Feal is simulta!eously 6hat 8a!!ot be
symboliUed and the very obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts this symboliUatio!7 A!d this 8oi!8ide!8e- the
8oi!8ide!8e o a Thi!g 6ith the very obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts our a88ess to it- i! other 6ords this
overlappi!g o epistemologi8al ailure a!d o!tologi8al impossibility- is proou!dly =egelia!7
BADIO! AND ANTIPHILOSOPH$

=o6 does this diere!8e bet6ee! 3adiou a!d .a8a! ae8t 3adiouIs delimitatio! o
a!tiphilosophyM The basi8 moti o a!tiphilosophy is the assertio! o a pure prese!8e @the Feal .ie o
so8iety or ,ar?- 0?iste!8e or *ierkegaard- /ill or S8hope!hauer a!d 4ietUs8he- et87A irredu8ible to
a!d e?8essive 6ith regard to the !et6ork o philosophi8al 8o!8epts or represe!tatio!s7 The surprise is
that 3adiou- 6ho 8oi!ed this 8riti8al term- retai!s a stra!ge solidarity 6ith a!ti:philosophers o! a88ou!t
o his u!problemati8 relia!8e o! the 8ouple Jprese!8e a!d represe!tatio!7K The great theme o post:
=egelia! a!tiphilosophy is the e?8ess o the pre:8o!8eptual produ8tivity o Crese!8e over its
represe!tatio!+ represe!tatio! is redu8ed to the Jmirror o represe!tatio!-K 6hi8h rele8ts i! a distorted
6ay its produ8tive grou!d+

Cost:=egelia! philosophy @or- i o!e preers- a!tiphilosophyA started o 6ith this u!dame!tal 8laim+
symboli8 represe!tatio!s 6hi8h 6ere traditio!ally 8o!sidered as a88ess to the truth a!d to the real o
3ei!g do i! a8t alie!ate us rom 3ei!g a!d deorm it @or our per8eptio! o itA7 A!d 8lassi8al
philosophy @or Jmetaphysi8sKA 6as sudde!ly re8og!ised as the Nuee! o this represe!tative
misreprese!tatio!79!deed- i o!e 6ere to !ame o!e 8e!tral issue that disti!guishes the rise o moder!
thought- it is perhaps !o!e other tha! pre8isely the issue o represe!tatio! @a!d the Nuestio! o H!e
a!d>or ,ultiple is part o this issueA- its proou!d i!terrogatio!- a!d the 6hole 8o!seNue!t tur! agai!st
@the logi8 oA represe!tatio!7 This is perhaps most per8eptible i! @moder!A art 6hi8h ro!tally atta8ked
the !otio! o art as represe!tatio! O 9! politi8s- this also 6as a 8e!tral issue+ 6ho represe!ts the people
a!d ho6 they 8a! be properly represe!tedM /hy are some represe!ted a!d some !otM A!d 6hat i the
very idea o represe!tatio! is the sour8e o so8ietyIs evils a!d its alie!atio!M The realm o politi8s is
espe8ially i!teresti!g i! this respe8t si!8e the i!trodu8tio! o a Jreprese!tativeK system 8oi!8ided 6ith
the very Nuestio!i!g o its perti!e!8e7 Somethi!g similar took pla8e i! respe8t to the ge!eri8 pro8edure
o love+ a simulta!eous dema!d that love be properly represe!ted by the i!stitutio! o marriage @the
!e6 imperative that o!e should marry out o loveA- a!d a massive Jobservatio!K that this is i! a8t
impossible- i7e7 that marriage 8a! !ever truly represe!t the real o love7
##
9! so:8alled Jpost:stru8turalism-K the relatio! bet6ee! the t6o terms is i!verted+ prese!8e itsel
is de!ou!8ed as the illusory result o a dispersed produ8tive pro8ess dei!ed as a!ti:prese!8e- as a
pro8ess o sel:dieri!g- a!d so o!T ho6ever- the e!8ompassi!g rame6ork remai!s that o produ8tio!
versus represe!tatio!- o a produ8tive pro8ess o88luded by>i! the alse tra!spare!8y o its
represe!tatio!7 /ith regard to 3adiou- the problem is ho6 to relate the 8ouple o prese!8e a!d
represe!tatio! to the triad o 3ei!g>/orld>0ve!tEmore pre8isely- i!soar as 3ei!g !ames the prese!8e
o i!8o!siste!t multipli8ity a!d /orld its represe!tatio!- its orga!iUatio! i!to a 8o!siste!t situatio!
regulated by its imma!e!t tra!s8e!de!talsEho6 to 8o!8eive the 0ve!t 6ith regard to the 8ouple o
prese!8e a!d represe!tatio!7
/here- the!- does the la6 i! 3adiouIs a88ou!t resideM 3adiou rea8ted to the Jobs8ure disasterK
o the all o the so8ialist regimesEa!d- more ge!erally- to the e?haustio! o the revolutio!ary eve!t o
the t6e!tieth 8e!turyEby taki!g a step rom history to o!tology+ it is importa!t to !ote ho6 it 6as o!ly
ater this Jobs8ure disasterK that 3adiou started to play 6ith the double mea!i!g o the term JstateK
@AtatAEthe Jstate o thi!gsK a!d State as the apparatus o so8ial po6er7 The da!ger o this move is that-
by establishi!g a dire8t li!k- a short:8ir8uit- as it 6ere- bet6ee! a parti8ular histori8al orm o so8ial
orga!iUatio! a!d a basi8 o!tologi8al eature o the u!iverse- it @impli8itly- at leastA o!tologiUes or
eter!aliUes the state as a orm o politi8al orga!iUatio!+ @the politi8alA state be8omes somethi!g 6e
should resist- subtra8t ourselves rom- a8t at a dista!8e rom- but simulta!eously somethi!g 6hi8h 8a!
!ever be abolished @save i! utopia! dreamsA7 9s !ot this step rom history to o!tology- rom the State
Nua politi8al apparatus to the state Nua state o thi!gs- this short:8ir8uit 6herei! State ] state- a!
eleme!tary ideologi8al operatio!M This overblo6! !otio! o the State- 6hi8h ee8tively te!ds to
overlap 6ith the state @o thi!gsA i! the broadest se!se- is ee8tively 3adiouIs symptomT alo!g these
li!es- at a 8o!ere!8e o! 8ommu!ism i! .o!do! i! ,ar8h 200%- 2udith 3also 8laimed that opi!io!s
themselves are part o the State7 The !otio! o the State has to be over:e?pa!ded i! this 6ay pre8isely
be8ause the auto!omy o J8ivil so8ietyK 6ith regard to the State is ig!ored- so the JStateK has to 8over
the e!tire e8o!omi8 sphere- as 6ell as the sphere o JprivateK opi!io!s7
As a 8o!seNue!8e o this short:8ir8uit- 3adiou gets 8aught i! the typi8al *a!tia! ambiguity
apropos the Nuestio! o 6hether aba!do!i!g the orm o Carty:State- subtra8ti!g o!esel rom State-
a8ti!g i! the i!tersti8es o State- is a! a priori !e8essity o radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8s as su8h- or just
the e?pressio! o a 8ertai! @ourA histori8al mome!t- that o the global deeat o radi8al politi8sM 9! other
6ords- 6he! 3adiou i!terprets the ailure o the Dultural Fevolutio! as the e?haustio! o the J.e!i!istK
Carty:State revolutio!ary paradigm- does he mea! that this paradigm 6as appropriate or its period @the
t6e!tieth 8e!turyA a!d is !o lo!ger appropriate or our period- or does he mea! that our histori8al
mome!t has the privilege o givi!g us a! i!sight i!to a u!iversal eature o radi8al ema!8ipatory
politi8s 6hi8h 6as obus8ated i! previous epo8hs @6hi8h is 6hy the J.e!i!istK paradigm e!ded up i! a
dismal ailure- i! a! Jobs8ure disasterKAM 3adiou is ambiguous here+ sometimes he implies that 6e are
deali!g 6ith a su88essio! o histori8al epo8hs- a!d sometimes @say- 6he! he talks about the e!d o
=istory- o global politi8s- eve! 8o!8eivi!g it as the last 8o!seNue!8e o the Jdeath o 1od-K a!d
emphasiUes that politi8s should be a lo8al i!terve!tio! i!to a lo8al situatio!A that 6e are deali!g 6ith a!
a priori !e8essity7
To put it a!other 6ay- the problem 6ith state:represe!tatio! is !ot that it 8o!tami!ates or
mystiies the prese!8e o the produ8tive Feal- but Nuite the opposite+ it 8o!stitutes this prese!8e @or-
rather- its illusio!A7 The state @apparatusA does !ot 8o!tami!ate @or a8t as a parasite upo!A the
Japoliti8alK spheres o the e8o!omy- o private lie- o se?uality- et87- rather it 8o!stitutes them as
apoliti8al or pre:politi8alEthe ultimate task o state apparatuses is to de:politi8iUe these spheres- to
regulate their apoliti8al status by mea!s o 8oer8ive a!d ideologi8al apparatuses7 This is 6hy- i! a
properly ,ar?ist perspe8tive- the ill:amed J6itheri!g a6ay o the StateK does !ot aim at a de:
politi8iUatio! o so8iety- but @i! its irst step- at leastA at its radi8al a!d thorough Jpoliti8iUatio!K+ o!e
does !ot Jabolish the stateK by getti!g rid o its e?8ess i! a tra!spare!t:harmo!ious sel:orga!iUatio! o
so8iety- but by Jabolishi!gK the spe8ter o apoliti8al spheres- by demo!strati!g ho6 Jthere is !othi!g
6hi8h is !ot politi8al-K up to a!d i!8ludi!g peopleIs most i!timate dreams7 4o 6o!der- the!- that i!
a88orda!8e 6ith his relia!8e o! the 8ouple prese!8e a!d represe!tatio!- 3adiou e?emptsEas a
mali8ious aterthought- o!e is tempted to say Jsubtra8tsKEthe e8o!omy @the sphere o Jservi8i!g the
goods-K o produ8tio!:e?8ha!ge:distributio!A rom the domai! o Truth7 Goes this e?emptio! !ot also
imply that the e8o!omy is a sphere o produ8tive prese!8e prior to its @politi8alA represe!tatio!M 3adiou
thereby ee8tively a88epts the depoliti8iUatio! o the e8o!omy as a a8t- !ot as a! ee8t o ideologi8al
8e!sorshipT that is- he ig!ores the u!dame!tal ,ar?ist i!sight that the e8o!omy is al6ays a political
e8o!omy7
J9dealismK a!d Jmetaphysi8sK are !ames or the illusio! that the 8ir8le o represe!tatio! 8a!
8lose i! upo! itsel- 6ipi!g out all tra8es o its de:8e!tered produ8tio! pro8ess7 A!tiphilosophy here
develops its o6! versio! o the logi8 o Jsuture-K 8o!8eivi!g it as the mode i! 6hi8h the e?terior is
i!s8ribed i! the i!terior- thus Jsuturi!gK the ield- produ8i!g the ee8t o sel:e!8losure 6ith !o !eed
or a! e?terior- ea8i!g the tra8es o its o6! produ8tio!7 Tra8es o the produ8tio! pro8ess- its gaps- its
me8ha!isms- are obliterated- so that the produ8t 8a! appear as a !aturaliUed orga!i8 6hole @like6ise
6ith ide!tii8atio!- 6hi8h is !ot simply ull emotio!al immersio! i! the Nuasi:reality o a story- but a
mu8h more 8omple? split pro8essA7 Suture is thus some6hat like the basi8 matri? o Alistair ,a8lea!Is
adve!ture thrillers rom the 1%#0s a!d 1%'0s @(uns of avarone- )olar Station Nebra- Where Eagles
DareA+ a group o dedi8ated 8omma!dos o! a da!gerous missio! all o a sudde! dis8over that there
must be a! e!emy age!t amo!g them- i7e7- that their Hther!ess @the 0!emyA is i!s8ribed within their set7
,u8h more 8ru8ial- ho6ever- is the obverse aspe8t+ !ot o!ly J!o i!terior 6ithout e?terior-K but
also J!o e?terior 6ithout i!terior7K Therei! lies the lesso! o *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal idealism+ i! order to
appear as a 8o!siste!t /hole- e?ter!al reality has to be JsuturedK by a subje8tive eleme!t- a! artii8ial
suppleme!t that must be added to it i! order to ge!erate the ee8t o reality- like the pai!ted
ba8kgrou!d that 8o!ers o! a s8e!e the illusory ee8t o Jreality7K This- or .a8a!- is the ob1et petit a+
the subje8tive eleme!t 8o!stitutive o obje8tive:e?ter!al reality7
The matri? o a! e?ter!al site o produ8tio! that i!s8ribes itsel i!to the domai! o illusio!s it
ge!erates thus has to be suppleme!ted+ by itsel- it simply 8a!!ot a88ou!t or the emerge!8e o the
sub1ect7 A88ordi!g to sta!dard @8i!emati8A suture theory- the Jsubje8tK is the illusory sta!d:i!- within
the domai! o the 8o!stituted or ge!erated- or its abse!t 8ause- or its produ8tio! pro8ess+ the Jsubje8tK
is the imagi!ary age!t 6hi8h- 6hile d6elli!g i!side the spa8e o the 8o!stituted phe!ome!a- is
@misAper8eived as their ge!erator7 This- ho6ever- is !ot 6hat the .a8a!ia! Jbarred subje8tK is about+
the latter 8a! be 8o!8eptualiUed o!ly i 6e take i!to a88ou!t ho6 the very e?ter!ality o the ge!erative
pro8ess e?:sists o!ly i!soar as the sta!d:i! o the 8o!stituted domai! is prese!t i! it7
/he!- i! CrokoievIs ballet 7omeo and Culiet- Fomeo i!ds 2uliet dead- his da!8e e?presses his
desperate eort to resus8itate herEhere- the a8tio! i! a se!se takes pla8e at t6o levels- !ot o!ly at the
level o 6hat the da!8e evokes- but also at the level o the da!8e itsel7 The a8t that the da!8i!g Fomeo
drags arou!d 2ulietIs 8orpse- suspe!ded like a bea8hed sNuid- 8a! also be read as his desperate eort to
retur! her immobile body to the state o dance itsel- to restore its 8apa8ity to magi8ally sublate the
i!ertia o gravity a!d reely loat i! the airEhis da!8e is thus i! a 6ay a rele?ive da!8e- a da!8e aimed
at the very @disAability o his part!er to da!8e7 The desig!ated e?ter!al 8o!te!t @FomeoIs lame!t or
2ulietA is sustai!ed by the sel:reere!8e to the orm itsel7
The !otio! o rele?ivity might be o some help here7
#'
To put it su88i!8tly- JsutureK mea!s
that e?ter!al diere!8e is al6ays also i!ter!al- that the e?ter!al limitatio! o a ield o phe!ome!a
al6ays rele8ts itsel 6ithi! this ield- as its i!here!t impossibility to ully be8ome itsel7 To take the
eleme!tary e?ample o se?ual diere!8e+ i! a patriar8hal so8iety- the e?ter!al limit or oppositio! that
divides 6ome! rom me! also u!8tio!s as the i!here!t obsta8le preve!ti!g 6ome! rom ully realiUi!g
their pote!tial7 /e 8a! see ho6- i! this pre8ise se!se- suture is the e?a8t opposite o the illusory sel:
e!8losed totality that su88essully erases the de8e!tered tra8es o its produ8tio! pro8ess+ suture mea!s
pre8isely that su8h sel:e!8losure is a priori impossible- that the e?8luded e?ter!ality al6ays leaves its
tra8es 6ithi!Eor- to put it i! sta!dard Freudia! terms- that there is !o repressio! @rom the s8e!e o
phe!ome!al sel:e?perie!8eA 6ithout the retur! o the repressed7
This is 6hat .a8a! aims at i! his persiste!t reere!8es to torus a!d other variatio!s o ,Zbius:
ba!d:like stru8tures i! 6hi8h the relatio!ship bet6ee! i!side a!d outside is i!verted+ i 6e 6a!t to
grasp the mi!imal stru8ture o subje8tivity- the 8lear:8ut oppositio! bet6ee! i!!er subje8tive
e?perie!8e a!d outer obje8tive reality is !ot sui8ie!tEthere is a! e?8ess o! both sides7 H! the o!e
ha!d- 6e should a88ept the lesso! o *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal idealism+ out o the 8o!used multitude o
impressio!s- Jobje8tive realityK emerges through the i!terve!tio! o the subje8tIs tra!s8e!de!tal a8t7 9!
other 6ords- *a!t does !ot de!y the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the multitude o subje8tive impressio!s a!d
obje8tive realityT his poi!t is merely that this very disti!8tio! results rom the i!terve!tio! o a
subje8tive gesture o tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutio!7 9! a homologous 6ay- .a8a!Is J,aster:Sig!iierK is
the Jsubje8tiveK sig!iyi!g eature 6hi8h sustai!s the Jobje8tiveK symboli8 stru8ture itsel+ i 6e
abstra8t this subje8tive e?8ess rom the obje8tive symboli8 order- the very obje8tivity o that order
disi!tegrates7 Suture is thus !ot a se8o!dary short:8ir8uit o the t6o levelsEit 8omes irst- it logi8ally
precedes the t6o levels that overlap i! it- as the subje8tive gesture o suturi!g that 8o!stitutes @6hat
appears to us asA obje8tive reality7
.a8a!Is 8laim that the Jimagi!aryK !umber @the sNuare root o :1A is the Jmea!i!g o the
phallus-K its sig!iied- is ote! i!voked as a! outsta!di!g e?ample his i!telle8tual impostureEso 6hat
does he mea! by itM The parado? o the sNuare root o :1 is that it is a! JimpossibleK !umber 6hose
value 8a! !ever be positiviUed- but 6hi8h !o!etheless Ju!8tio!s7K /hat does this have to do 6ith the
phallusM Cre8isely i!soar as it is the sig!iier o the impossible ull!ess o mea!i!g- the phallus is a
Jsig!iier 6ithout a sig!iiedKEthe Jmi!us 1-K the suppleme!tary eature 6hi8h sti8ks out rom the
series o J!ormalK sig!iiers- the eleme!t i! 6hi8h e?8ess a!d la8k 8oi!8ide7 The impossible ull!ess at
the level o mea!i!g @o the sig!iiedA is sustai!ed by the void @the 8astrati!g dime!sio!A at the level o
the sig!iierE6e e!8ou!ter the Jmea!i!g o the phallusK 6he!- apropos some !otio!- 6e
e!thusiasti8ally se!se that Jthis is it- the true thi!g- the true mea!i!g-K although 6e are !ever able to
e?pli8ate what- pre8isely- this mea!i!g is7 For e?ample- i! a politi8al dis8ourse- the ,aster:Sig!iier
JHur 4atio!K u!8tio!s as this ki!d o empty sig!iier sta!di!g or the impossible ull!ess o mea!i!gT
its mea!i!g is Jimagi!aryK i! the se!se that its 8o!te!t is impossible to positiviUeEi you ask a
member o the 4atio! to dei!e o 6hat his 4atio!al ide!tity 8o!sists- his ultimate a!s6er 6ill be- J9
8a!!ot e?plai!- you must eel it- it is it- 6hat our lives are really about7K
/e 8a! !o6 see ho6 .a8a!Is dei!itio! o the sig!iier as that 6hi8h Jreprese!ts the subje8t or
a!other sig!iier-K i! its 8o!voluted sel:reere!tial orm @e&planandum resurges i! e&planansA- relies
o! a very pre8ise rehabilitatio! o the 8e!trality o represe!tatio!E!ot represe!tatio! as the se8o!dary
mirror o a primordial produ8tive pro8ess- but represe!tatio! as somethi!g rele?ively i!s8ribed i!to the
very represe!ted dime!sio! o the produ8tive pro8ess7 This mea!s that the gap- the sel:reere!tially
8o!voluted t6ist- is operative already i! the Jprodu8tive prese!8eK itsel7 To put it i! 8lassi8al ,ar?ist
terms- it is !ot e!ough to demo!strate ho6 politi8o:ideologi8al struggles are a theater o shado6s
rele8ti!g the Jtrue realityK o the e8o!omi8 pro8essT o!e should suppleme!t this 6ith a demo!stratio!
o ho6 the politi8o:ideologi8al struggle is i!s8ribed i!to the very heart o the e8o!omi8 pro8ess7 This is
6hat ,ar? 8alled J8lass struggle-K a!d it is 6hy he speaks o Jpolitical e8o!omy7K @H!e o the !ames
or this stra!ge JideologyK at the very heart o the e8o!omi8 pro8ess- or the Jillusio!K 6hi8h sustai!s
reality itsel- is J8ommodity etishism7KA
Furthermore- this mea!s 6e must dispe!se 6ith the sta!dard !otio! o the H!e @i! all its
diere!t guises- right up to the ,aster:Sig!iierA as a se8o!dary JtotaliUatio!K o a primordially
dispersed a!d i!8o!siste!t ield o produ8tivity7 To e?press the parado? i! its most radi8al orm+ it is
the H!e itsel 6hi8h i!trodu8es i!8o!siste!8y properE6ithout the H!e- there 6ould have bee! just lat-
i!diere!t multipli8ity7 The JH!eK is origi!ally the sig!iier o @sel:Adivisio!- the ultimate suppleme!t
or e?8ess+ by 6ay o re:marki!g the pre:e?isti!g real- the H!e divides it rom itsel- i!trodu8es its !o!:
8oi!8ide!8e 6ith itsel7 Do!seNue!tly- to radi8aliUe thi!gs eve! urther- the .a8a!ia! H!e as the
,aster:Sig!iier is- stricto sensu! the signifier of its own impossibility7 .a8a! makes this 8lear 6he! he
emphasiUes ho6 every H!e- every ,aster:Sig!iier- is simulta!eously S@AA- a sig!iier o the la8k o>i!
the Hther- o its i!8o!siste!8y7 So it is !ot o!ly that there is the Hther be8ause the H!e 8a! !ever ully
8oi!8ide 6ith itselEthere is H!e @.a8a!Is : a dl3nA be8ause the Hther is Jbarred-K la8ki!g-
i!8o!siste!t+

.a8a!Is S
1
- the @i!Aamous Jmaster sig!iierK or Jphalli8 sig!iierK is- parado?i8ally- the o!ly 6ay to
6rite that JH!e is !otK a!d that 6hat JisK is the void that 8o!stitutes the origi!al disju!8tio! i! the
midst o every 8ou!t:or:o!e7 The 8ou!t:or:o!e is al6ays already t6o7 S
1
is the matheme o 6hat o!e
8a! des8ribe as Jthe H!e is !ot7K 9t 6rites that Jthe H!e is !otK by prese!ti!g the very thi!g that
preve!ts it rom bei!g H!e7 This is 6hat S
1
says+ the H!e is !otT yet 6hat is is !ot a pure multiple- but
t6o7 This is perhaps .a8a!Is 8ru8ial i!sight+ i there is somethi!g o! 6hi8h o!e 8ould lea! i! order to
leave the Jo!tology o the H!eK behi!d- this somethi!g is !ot simply the multiple- but a T6o7
#$
0verythi!g hi!ges o! this 8ru8ial poi!t+ de8o!stru8tio!ist or histori8ist Jdemo8rati8ally
materialistK a!tiphilosophy e?tols multipli8ity a!d abhors Jbi!ary logi8-K seei!g i! the T6o just a
mirror:like redoubli!g o the H!e @this is 6hy a!tiphilosophers like to 8riti8iUe =egelIs su88essio! o
multipli8ity- oppositio!- a!d 8o!tradi8tio!- rom the begi!!i!g o his Jlogi8 o esse!8e-K as a!
e?emplary 8ase o the gradual subordi!atio! o the multiple to the H!eAT materialist diale8ti8s k!o6s
that multipli8ity 6ithout the T6o is just a multipli8ity o H!es- the mo!oto!ous !ight o a plurality i!
6hi8h all 8o6s are bla8k7 /hat the a!ti:philosophi8al e?tolli!g o multipli8ity misses is the !o!:
8oi!8ide!8e o the H!e 6ith itsel- the !o!:8oi!8ide!8e 6hi8h makes the H!e the very orm o
appeara!8e o its opposite+ it is !ot o!ly that the 8omple?ity o its situatio! u!dermi!es every
H!eEmu8h more radi8ally- it is the very o!e:!ess o the H!e 6hi8h redoubles it- u!8tio!i!g as a!
e?8ess over the simple o!e7 The u!8tio! o void is 8ru8ial here+ 6hat e?plodes every H!e rom 6ithi!
is !ot a 8omple?ity 6hi8h subverts its u!ity- but the a8t that a void is a part o every H!e+ the sig!iier:
H!e- the sig!iier 6hi8h u!iies or totaliUes a multipli8ity- is the poi!t o the i!s8riptio! i!to this
multipli8ity o its o6! void7 Hr- i! terms o the GeleuUia! Jmi!imal diere!8eK @a purely virtual
diere!8e 6hi8h registers the dista!8e o a thi!g rom itsel- 6ithout reere!8e to a!y o its real
propertiesA- a! a8tual ide!tity is al6ays sustai!ed by a virtual mi!imal diere!8e7
The same poi!t 8a! be made 6ith regard to the shit i! the status o the Je?8essK+ i! the sta!dard
spa8e o a!tiphilosophy- Je?8essK !ames the e?8ess o produ8tive prese!8e over its represe!tatio!- that
d 6hi8h eludes the totaliUatio!:through:represe!tatio!7 3ut o!8e 6e a8k!o6ledge the gap i! the spa8e
o produ8tive prese!8e itsel- the e?8ess be8omes the e&cess of representation itself which always
already supplements productive presence7 A simple politi8al reere!8e 6ill make this poi!t 8lear+ the
,aster @a ki!g or leaderA at the 8e!ter o a so8ial body- the H!e 6ho totaliUes it- is simulta!eously the
e?8ess imposed o! it rom outside7 The 6hole struggle o the po6er:8e!ter agai!st the margi!al
e?8esses threate!i!g its stability 8a! !ever obus8ate the a8t- visible o!8e 6e a88omplish a paralla?
shit o our vie6- that the origi!al e?8ess is that o the 8e!tral H!e itselEas .a8a! 6ould have put it-
the H!e is al6ays already e?:timate 6ith regard to 6hat it u!iies7 The H!e totaliUes the ield it u!iies
by J8o!de!si!gK i! itsel the very e?8ess that threate!s the ield7 /e e!8ou!ter here the same sel:
relati!g move o redoubled !egatio! as i! the 8ase o the la6 as u!iversaliUed 8rime @or property as a
orm o thetA+ 6e pass rom the e?8ess 6ith regard to the ield o represe!tatio! @the e?8ess o that
6hi8h eludes represe!tatio!A to the e?8ess o represe!tatio! itsel- that is- to the represe!tatio! itsel as
a! e?8ess 6ith regard to 6hat it represe!ts7
9talo Dalvi!oIs JA *i!g .iste!sK o8uses o! the se!se o heari!g+ i! a! a!o!ymous ki!gdom-
the royal pala8e be8omes a gia!t ear a!d the ki!g- obsessed a!d paralyUed by ears o rebellio!- tries to
hear every ti!y sou!d that reverberates through the pala8e+ serva!tsI ootsteps- 6hispers a!d
8o!versatio!s- a!are trumpets at 8eremo!ies- the sou!ds o the 8ity o! the outskirts o the pala8e-
riots- et87
#&
=e 8a!!ot see the sour8e o the sou!ds but is obsessed by i!terpreti!g their mea!i!g a!d
the desti!y they predi8t7 This state o i!terpretive para!oia o!ly seems to 8ome to a halt 6he! he hears
somethi!g that 8ompletely e!8ha!ts him+ through the 6i!do6 the 6i!d 8arries the si!gi!g voi8e o a
6oma!- a voi8e o pure beauty- u!iNue a!d irrepla8eable7 For the ki!g it is the sou!d o reedomT he
steps out o the pala8e i!to the ope! spa8e a!d mi!gles 6ith the 8ro6d7 The irst thi!g to bear i! mi!d
here is that this ki!g is !ot a traditio!al mo!ar8h- but a moder! totalitaria! tyra!t+ the traditio!al ki!g
does !ot 8are about his e!viro!me!t- he arroga!tly ig!ores it a!d leaves 6orryi!g about plots to his
mi!istersT it is the moder! .eader 6ho is obsessed by plotsEJto rule is to i!terpretK is a pere8t
ormula o Stali!ism- the system o a! e!dless para!oid herme!euti8s7 So 6he! the ki!g is sedu8ed by
the pure emi!i!e voi8e o immediate lie:pleasure- this is obviously @although- u!ortu!ately- !ot or
Dalvi!o himselA a a!tasyEpre8isely the a!tasy o breaki!g out o the 8losed 8ir8le o represe!tatio!s
a!d rejoi!i!g the pure outside- that 6hi8h !eeds !o i!terpretatio! but merely gives body to the voi8e
6hi8h e!joys its o6! e?er8ise7 /hat is missi!g here is the 6ay the i!!o8e!t e?ter!ality o the voi8e is
itsel already rele?ively marked by the mirror o i!terpretive represe!tatio!sE6hi8h is 6hy o!e 8a!
imagi!e a! alter!ative e!di!g to the story+ 6he! the ki!g e?its the pala8e- ollo6i!g the voi8e- he is
immediately arrestedEthe emi!i!e voi8e 6as a tri8k used by the plotters to lure the ki!g out o the
saety o the pala8e7 H!e 8a! be sure that- ater a thorough poli8e i!terrogatio!- the 6oma! 6ould have
su!g a diere!t so!g7
The same i!sight 8a! also be ormulated i! the terms o the set:theoreti8al a?iomati8+ a set 3 is
8o!sidered to be part o set A @its subsetA i all the eleme!ts o 3 also belo!g to A- a!d- as is ge!erally
k!o6!- the !umber o eleme!ts o 3 is al6ays larger tha! the !umber o eleme!ts o AEevery A has
more subsets @partsA tha! eleme!ts7 .et us say that A is 8omposed o three eleme!ts- a- b- a!d 8T the
8orrespo!di!g !umber i! 3 8omprises all possible 8ombi!atio!s o a- b- a!d 8 @a alo!e- b alo!e- 8
alo!e- a m b- a m 8- b m 8A- plus a m b m 8 @si!8e a set is by dei!itio! a part o itselA- plus the empty set
6hi8h is al6ays a part o every setEaltogether eight subsets7 Da!tor ge!eraliUed this a?iom- applyi!g it
also to i!i!ite sets- 6hi8h gives rise to the prolieratio! o i!i!ities7 Cerhaps this abstra8t a?iom
provides the pri!8iple or 6hy a 8omplete mappi!g o the ge!ome o a huma! orga!ism i! !o 6ay
e!tails that 6e 6ill be able to master the 6ay this orga!ism u!8tio!s+ the mappi!g gives o!ly the
eleme!ts o the set- sayi!g !othi!g about the mu8h larger !umber o its subsets @6hi8h 8ome 8loser to
determi!i!g ho6 the ge!es ee8tively determi!e the orga!ismA7 This e?8ess o subsets over eleme!ts
justiies ,eillassou? i! desig!ati!g the prolieratio! o i!i!ities as the JDa!toria! !o!:AllKE6here
the term J!o!:AllK should be take! i! its stri8t .a8a!ia! se!se7
#%
This bri!gs us ba8k to a!tiphilosophy- to the post:=egelia! 8ut i! the history o philosophy7
/hat happe!ed Jater =egelK 6as !ot simply that the H!e o re:prese!tatio! 6as !o lo!ger able to
totaliUe the multipli8ity o prese!t reality- but somethi!g mu8h more pre8ise7 The H!e @o the ,aster:
Sig!iierA lost its ability to J8o!de!seK @or- i! Freudia! terms o libidi!al i!vestme!t- to Jbi!dKA the
e?8ess- to @re:Amark it- to ee8tively u!8tio! as its sta!d:i!- its pla8e:holderT so the e?8ess be8ame
Ju!bou!d-K a threat to the represe!tative system i! all its guises- rom the rabble i! politi8s to Jree
se?K i! perso!al relatio!sEsomethi!g 6hi8h 6as either to be eared a!d 8o!trolled or 8elebrated as the
site o reedom a!d resista!8e+

a spe8tre o e?8ess starts hau!ti!g the so8iety- i! its diere!t spheresT a!d its Jspe8tralK orm is i! !o
6ay i!sig!ii8a!t7 The ,asterIs dis8ourse @or- i o!e preers- the authority o the H!eA is a so8ial bo!d
i! 6hi8h this e?8essive eleme!t is- i o!e may say so- i! the JidealK pla8e- i! the servi8e o the
hegemo!i8 po6er o the H!e- 6hi8h reig!s by assuming the very e?8essive!ess o e?8ess7 /hat
happe!s 6ith the destitutio! o this bo!d is- so to speak- that the ghost o e?8ess es8apes rom the
bottle7 The pro8ess 8ould be said to have started 6ith the Fre!8h revolutio!- to have rea8hed its ull
e?te!t i! the !i!etee!th 8e!tury- a!d 8o!ti!ued through a part o t6e!tieth 8e!tury7 The !i!etee!th
8e!tury i! parti8ular 6as deeply hau!ted by this e?8essive eleme!t i! all possible orms- rom
8o!8eptual to pha!tasmagori8 O all serious thi!kers sought to thi!k at a ma?imal pro?imity to- i !ot i!
a dire8t 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith- this e?8ess7 A Jtarryi!g 6ith the e?8essK thus be8ame the most promi!e!t
igure o thought7 )topias- desig!ed to elimi!ate so8ial a!d other i!justi8e- mostly proposed to a8hieve
this by elimi!ati!g this very e?8ess7 To a 8ertai! e?te!t- eve! ,ar? 6as tempted by the possibility o
elimi!ati!g- o!8e a!d or all- the e?8essive- disharmo!ious eleme!t o so8ietyEthe eleme!t i! 6hi8h
he himsel re8og!ised its truth- its real a!d its symptom7
'0
The 8riti8al reere!8e to ,ar? is 8ru8ial hereEpre8isely as ,ar?ists- o! behal o our idelity to
,ar?Is 6ork- 6e should be 8lear o! his u!dame!tal mistake+ he rightly per8eived ho6 8apitalism
u!leashed the breathtaki!g dy!amo o sel:e!ha!8i!g produ8tivityEsee his as8i!ated des8riptio!s o
ho6- i! 8apitalism- Jall thi!gs solid melt i!to air-K o ho6 8apitalism is the greatest revolutio!iUer i! the
e!tire history o huma!ityT o! the other ha!d- he also 8learly per8eived ho6 this 8apitalist dy!ami8 is
propelled by its o6! i!!er obsta8le or a!tago!ismEthe ultimate limit o 8apitalism is Dapital itsel- its
i!8essa!t developme!t a!d revolutio!iUi!g o its o6! material 8o!ditio!s is ultimately !othi!g but a
desperate light or6ard to es8ape its o6! debilitati!g i!here!t 8o!tradi8tio!7 H! the basis o these
i!sights- ,ar?Is u!dame!tal mistake 6as to 8o!8lude that a !e6 so8ial order @8ommu!ismA 6as
possible- a! order that 6ould !ot o!ly mai!tai! but eve! raise to a higher degree a!d release the ull
pote!tial o that sel:propelli!g spiral o produ8tivity 6hi8h- i! 8apitalism- o! a88ou!t o its i!here!t
obsta8le @J8o!tradi8tio!KA- is agai! a!d agai! th6arted by so8ially destru8tive e8o!omi8 8rises7 9! short-
6hat ,ar? overlooked 6as that this i!here!t obsta8le or a!tago!ism as the J8o!ditio! o impossibilityK
o the ull deployme!t o the produ8tive or8es is simulta!eously its J8o!ditio! o possibilityK+ i 6e
abolish the obsta8le- 6e do !ot get the ully u!leashed drive to produ8tivity- but lose pre8isely this
produ8tivity itselEremove the obsta8le- a!d the very pote!tial it th6arted dissipates7 Therei! resides
.a8a!Is u!dame!tal reproa8h to ,ar?- 6hi8h o8uses o! the ambiguous overlappi!g bet6ee! surplus:
value a!d surplus:e!joyme!t7
As 6e have just see!- 3adiouIs o6! positio! is ambiguous here+ although he @rightlyA
e!deavors to dee!d philosophy agai!st the post:philosophi8al Jpassio! o the real-K he remai!s all too
i!debted to the post:philosophi8al topos o represe!tatio! as the mystiyi!g mirror o the produ8tive
real- o the re:prese!tative meta:stru8ture as the site o the J8ou!ti!g:as:H!eK o the i!8o!siste!t
multipli8ity o prese!8e+

The problem o represe!tatio! as meta:stru8ture- a!d the 8o!seNue!t imperative to restrai! o!esel rom
represe!tatio! or to pull o!esel a6ay rom the Jstate-K is somethi!g that belo!gs to a!other o!tology
tha! the o!tology o the pure multiple- o i!i!ity a!d o 8o!ti!ge!8y7 For i! a! i!i!ite 8o!ti!ge!t
u!iverse there is !o !e8essity or the J8ou!ti!g the 8ou!t itselK to be situated o! a meta:level7 9t 8a!
very 6ell be situated o! the same level as the 8ou!ti!g itsel- o!ly separated rom it by a! irredu8ible
i!terval @a!d it is this i!terval that .a8a! 8alls the FealA7 ,oreover- this is pre8isely what ma"es a
situatio! Ji!i!ite7K /hat makes it i!i!ite is !ot the e?8lusio! o a!y operatio! o represe!tatio!
@6hi8h 6ould J6a!tK to 8ou!t it or o!e a!d thus to 8lose it upo! itselA- but its i!8lusio!7 /hat makes
the Jprese!tatio!K i!i!ite is pre8isely that it already includes represe!tatio!7
'1
This bri!gs us ba8k to =egelIs u!iNue!ess+ the =egelia! Ja8tual i!i!ityK is the i!i!ity
ge!erated by the sel:relati!g o a totality- by the short:8ir8uit 6hi8h makes a totality a! eleme!t o
itsel @or- rather- 6hi8h makes a ge!us its o6! spe8iesA- 6hi8h makes re:prese!tatio! part o prese!8e
itselEa!d the =egelia! Feal is !othi!g but this purely ormal 8o!voluted stru8ture7 9! philosophi8al
terms- this passage rom the a!ti:philosophi8al substa!tial Feal to the purely ormal Feal Nua the
imma!e!t gap i! the order o represe!tatio!s 8a! agai! be lo8ated i! the passage rom *a!t to =egel7
4o 6o!der S8hope!hauer- the key igure i! !i!etee!th:8e!tury philosophy- 8laimed to be simply
e?te!di!g *a!t i! his i!terpretatio! o the /ill as the *a!tia! !oume!al Thi!g+ the u!k!o6able Thi!g
6hi8h es8apes our 8og!itive grasp a!d is a88essible o!ly at the level o pra8ti8al reaso! is the irst
igure o the post:philosophi8al Feal7 /hat happe!s i! =egel is that the Feal is thoroughly de:
substa!tialiUed+ it is !ot the tra!s8e!de!t d 6hi8h resists symboli8 represe!tatio!s- but the imma!e!t
gap- rupture- i!8o!siste!8y- the J8urvatureK o the spa8e o represe!tatio!s itsel7
As su8h- =egelIs thought sta!ds or the mome!t o passage bet6ee! philosophy as the ,asterIs
dis8ourse- the philosophy o the H!e that totaliUes the multipli8ity- a!d a!tiphilosophy 6hi8h i!sists o!
the Feal as that 6hi8h es8apes the grasp o the H!e7 H! the o!e ha!d- he 8learly breaks 6ith the
metaphysi8al logi8 o 8ou!ti!g:or:H!eT o! the other ha!d- he reuses to admit a!y e?8ess e?ter!al to
the ield o !otio!al represe!tatio!s7 For =egel- totaliUatio!:i!:H!e al6ays ails- the H!e is al6ays
already i! e?8ess 6ith regard to itsel- is itsel the subversio! o 6hat it purports to a8hieve- a!d it is
this te!sio! i!ter!al to the H!e- this T6o:!ess 6hi8h makes the H!e H!e a!d simulta!eously dislo8ates
it- 6hi8h is the motor o the Jdiale8ti8al pro8ess7K 9! other 6ords- =egel ee8tively asserts that there is
!o Feal e?ter!al to the !et6ork o !otio!al represe!tatio!s @6hi8h is 6hy he is regularly misread as a!
Jabsolute idealistKA7 =o6ever- the Feal does !ot disappear here i! the global sel:relati!g play o
symboli8 represe!tatio!sT it retur!s 6ith a ve!gea!8e as the imma!e!t gap- the obsta8le- o! a88ou!t o
6hi8h represe!tatio!s 8a! !ever totaliUe themselves- o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h they are J!o!:All7K
'2
9t is 8ru8ial !ot to 8o!use this =egelia! over8omi!g o the 8ouple prese!8e>represe!tatio! i!
the Jtrue i!i!ityK o spe8ulative sel:relati!g 6ith the sta!dard de8o!stru8tio!ist move o
demo!strati!g ho6 the ull!ess o prese!8e is Jal6ays alreadyK 8orroded rom 6ithi! by the gap i! re:
prese!tatio!- a!d so o!7 As 6e have see!- the diere!8e bet6ee! the t6o positio!s is 8o!de!sed i! the
diere!t status ea8h gives to the subje8t+ or de8o!stru8tio!- the subje8t is the sel:ide!tity to be
de8o!stru8ted- 6hile rom a =egelia! perspe8tive- the subje8t is the !ame or the rele?ive gap i! the
substa!8e7 Furthermore- 6e should also !ot 8o!use the a!tiphilosophi8al Je?8essK 6hi8h es8apes re:
prese!tatio! 6ith the traditio!al philosophi8o:theologi8al moti o the divi!e Absolute beyo!d the order
o @represe!tableA bei!gs- Jepe"eina tes ousiasK @ClatoA7 The !otio! o a divi!e Absolute beyo!d
represe!tatio! is a 8o!sta!t rom ClatoIs supreme 1ood to the 4eoplato!ist H!eT Hrthodo? Dhristia!ity
tries to 8lose this gap bet6ee! the divi!e e?8ess a!d the spa8e o represe!tatio! 6ith its u!iNue !otio!
o the i8o! @the prese!8e o the divi!e i! its imageA7 For the Hrthodo? Dhristia!s- the a8t that the
immaterial 1od took lesh i! the orm o 2esus Dhrist makes it possible to depi8t the So! o 1od i!
huma! orm+ si!8e Dhrist himsel is a! i8o! o 1od- the 9!8ar!atio! 8a!8els the Hld Testame!t
pres8riptio!s agai!st maki!g images7 4ot o!ly is Dhrist the Jimage o the i!visible 1odK @Dolossia!s
1+1#A- people are also Jmade i! 1odIs imageK a!d 8a! thereore be 8o!sidered livi!g i8o!s7 To avoid
the 8harge o idolatry- the Hrthodo? theologia!s emphasiUed that 6he! a perso! ve!erates a! image-
the i!te!tio! is to ho!or the perso! depi8ted- !ot the substa!8e o the i8o!7 As St7 3asil the 1reat said+
J9 9 poi!t to a statue o Daesar a!d ask you V/ho is thatMI- your a!s6er 6ould properly be- V9t is
Daesar7I /he! you say su8h you do !ot mea! that the sto!e itsel is Daesar- but rather- the !ame a!d
ho!or you as8ribe to the statue passes over to the origi!al- the ar8hetype- Daesar himsel7K This is also
6hy- i! the 0aster! Hrthodo? traditio!- o!ly lat or bas relie images are used+ the se!sual Nuality o
three:dime!sio!al statues is take! to gloriy the huma! aspe8t o the lesh rather tha! the divi!e !ature
o the spirit7 The highest orm o i8o! is JacheiropoietaK @!ot:made:by:ha!dA- a! i8o! that has
allegedly 8ome i!to e?iste!8e mira8ulously- !ot made by a huma! pai!ter- but the result o a
mysterious ema!atio! rom the depi8ted obje8t itsel- a!d so see! as espe8ially authoritative as to the
true appeara!8e o the subje8t7
A! i8o! thus poi!ts beyo!d itsel to the divi!e prese!8e that d6ells 6ithi! itEe?a8tly 8o!trary
to the a!tiphilosophi8al !otio! o a! e?8ess 6hi8h u!8tio!s as a rupture destabiliUi!g the harmo!ious
8o!ti!uity o a represe!tative image7 9! other 6ords- the Je?8essK i! a! i8o! is that o divi!e
tra!s8e!de!8e- o the Ji!visibleK spirit that reverberates i! or through 6hat 6e see- 6hile the
a!tiphilosophi8al Je?8essK is a! e?8ess o imma!e!8e over tra!s8e!de!8e- like the Jstai!sK i! the early
moder!ist pai!ti!gs o va! 1ogh or ,u!8h- the over:prese!t blot8hes o heavy 8olor @the yello6 sky i!
va! 1ogh- blue:gree! 6ater or grass i! ,u!8hA 6hose de!se !o!:tra!spare!8y dra6s atte!tio! to itsel
a!d thus disrupts the smooth passage o the eye to6ards the represe!ted 8o!te!t7
The same ambiguity holds or GeleuUe 6ho- bet6ee! -he .ogic of Sense a!d +nti*$edipus-
JregressesK to the logi8 o produ8tive prese!8e a!d its re:prese!tatio!7
'"
This logi8- 6hi8h 8learly
domi!ates the e!tire !otio!al apparatus o +nti*$edipus 6ith its oppositio! o mole8ular a!d molar- o
produ8tio! a!d its theatre o represe!tatio!- 8a! be dis8er!ed i! the radi8ally 8ha!ged status o o!e o
GeleuUeIs key 8o!8epts- that o the Jpseudo:8ause7K Si!8e +nti*$edipus is a study o 8apitalism- !o
6o!der that the supreme e?ample it gives o a Jpseudo:8auseK is Dapital itselT GeleuUe reers here to
the 6ell:k!o6! se8tio! i! the irst volume o ,ar?Is ,apital deali!g 6ith the passage rom mo!ey to
8apital7 /ith this passage- mo!ey:as:substa!8e be8omes mo!ey:as:subje8t- the Jabstra8tK u!iversality
o mo!ey @as u!iversal eNuivale!t o all 8ommoditiesA be8omes the J8o!8reteK u!iversality o a sel:
mediati!g or sel:e!ge!deri!g moveme!t7 9! this 6ay- the e!dless sel:propelli!g 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital
rea8hes the level o =egelia! Jtrue i!i!ityK+ every relatio! to e?ter!al other!ess is subsumed i!to a
Jprivate relatio! 6ith itsel7K From this vie6poi!t- the Jmaterialist reversal o =egelK i!volves breaki!g
this sel:e!8losed 8ir8le o sel:mediatio! a!d admitti!g a radi8al Hther!ess- !ot e!ge!dered by 8apital
itsel- as the sour8e o proit+ the Jde8e!teredK labor or8e a!d its e?ploitatio!7 9! this pre8ise se!se-
8apital is a Jpseudo:8auseK+ it appears to u!8tio! as a sel:e!ge!deri!g totality- as its o6! 8ause- but
this appeara!8e o!ly obus8ates its de8e!tered Jabse!t 8ause-K the labor 6hi8h produ8es surplus:value7
This is 6hy GeleuUe praises the 3ritish empiri8ists or i!sisti!g upo! e?ter!al 8ausality- or- rather- the
e?ter!ality o relatio!s bet6ee! thi!gs 6ith regard to these thi!gs themselvesEagai!st the 1erma!
9dealist traditio! o i!ter!al 8ausality- o the developme!t o a thi!g as a! e?pressio! or deployme!t o
its i!!er pote!tial- or- i! =egelia! terms- the developme!t rom 9!:itsel to For:itsel7 For GeleuUe- o!
the 8o!trary- there is !o 8o!ti!uity bet6ee! 9!:itsel a!d For:itselEa!d this is also the basi8 i!sight o
his i!terpretatio! o =it8h8o8kIs ilms7 9! a typi8al =it8h8o8kia! plot- the heroIs lie is all o a sudde!
perturbed 6he!- as a result o some 8o!ti!ge!t 8ha!ge i! e?ter!al 8ir8umsta!8es- his so8ial ide!tity is
radi8ally 8ha!ged @at the begi!!i!g o orth by orthwest- or e?ample- Thor!hill- a! ordi!ary
publi8ity ma!ager- is mistake!ly ide!tiied as theEi! reality !o!:e?iste!tEse8ret age!t 1eorge
*apla!A7
Are thi!gs really as simple a!d 8lear as this- ho6everM This GeleuUia! ormula o!ly 6orks i 6e
remai! 6ithi! the ield o the oppositio! bet6ee! prese!8e a!d re:prese!tatio!+ o!ly the! does the
Jpseudo:8auseK appear as the poi!t o JsutureK o the ield o re:prese!tatio!- as the imagi!ary Dause
6hi8h 8ompletes the sel:sui8ie!t 8ir8ularity o the sphere o re:prese!tatio! a!d thus obus8ates its
de8e!tered real 8auses7 This use o Jpseudo:8auseK displa8es a!d obus8ates GeleuUeIs origi!al use o
the 8o!8eptEthe !otio! o Jpseudo:8auseK 6as i!trodu8ed as a! a!s6er to a pre8ise problem i! his
o!tology o the virtual+ ho6 to 8ombi!e the u!ambiguous airmatio! o the Virtual as the site o
produ8tio! 6hi8h ge!erates 8o!stituted reality 6ith the !o less u!ambiguous stateme!t that Jthe virtual
is produ8ed out o the a8tualK+

,ultipli8ities should !ot be 8o!8eived as possessi!g the 8apa8ity to a8tively i!tera8t 6ith o!e a!other
through these series7 GeleuUe thi!ks about them as e!do6ed 6ith o!ly a mere 8apa8ity to be ae8ted-
si!8e they are- i! his 6ords- Jimpassive e!titiesEimpassive results7K The !eutrality or sterility o
multipli8ities may be e?plai!ed i! the ollo6i!g 6ay7 Although their diverge!t u!iversality makes them
i!depe!de!t o a!y parti8ular me8ha!ism @the same multipli8ity may be a8tualiUed by several 8ausal
me8ha!ismsA they do depend on the empirical fact that some causal mechanism or another actually
e&ists O they are !ot tra!s8e!de!t but imma!e!t e!tities O GeleuUe vie6s multipli8ities as
incorporeal effects of corporeal causes- that is- as histori8al results o a8tual 8auses possessi!g !o
8ausal po6ers o their o6!7 H! the other ha!d- as he 6rites- Jto the e?te!t that they dier i! !ature
rom these 8auses- they e!ter- 6ith o!e a!other- i!to relatio!s o <uasi*causality7 Together they e!ter
i!to a relatio! 6ith a <uasi*cause 6hi8h is itsel i!8orporeal a!d assures them a very spe8ial
i!depe!de!8eK O )!like a8tual 8apa8ities- 6hi8h are al6ays 8apa8ities to ae8t a!d be ae8ted-
virtual ae8ts are sharply divided i!to a pure 8apa8ity to be ae8ted @displayed by impassible
multipli8itiesA a!d a pure capacity to affect7
'(
The 8o!8ept o a Nuasi:8ause is 6hat preve!ts a regressio! i!to simple redu8tio!ism+ it
desig!ates the pure age!8y o tra!s8e!de!tal 8ausality7 Take GeleuUeIs o6! e?ample rom his ,inema
\8 -he -ime*Image+ the emerge!8e o 8i!emati8 !eorealism7 H!e 8a!- o 8ourse- e?plai! !eorealism i!
terms o a set o histori8al 8ir8umsta!8es @the trauma o /orld /ar 99- et87A7 =o6ever- there is here a!
e?8ess i! the emerge!8e o the 4e6+ !eorealism is a! 0ve!t 6hi8h 8a!!ot simply be redu8ed to its
material or histori8al 8auses- a!d the JNuasi:8auseK is the 8ause o this e?8ess- the 8ause o that 6hi8h
makes a! 0ve!t @a! emerge!8e o the 4e6A irredu8ible to its histori8al 8ir8umsta!8es7 H!e 8a! also say
that the Nuasi:8ause is a se8o!d:level 8ause- the meta:8ause o the very e?8ess o the ee8t over its
@8orporealA 8auses7 This is ho6 6hat GeleuUe says about bei!g ae8ted should be u!derstood+ i!soar
as the i!8orporeal 0ve!t is a pure ae8t @a! impassive:!eutral:sterile resultA- a!d i!soar as the 4e6 @a
!e6 0ve!t- a! 0ve!t o>as the 4e6A 8a! o!ly emerge i the 8hai! o its 8orporeal 8auses is !ot
8omplete- we must postulate! over and above the networ" of corporeal causes! a pure! transcendental!
capacity to affect7 This is also 6hy .a8a! so mu8h appre8iated -he .ogic of Sense+ is !ot the GeleuUia!
Nuasi:8ause the e?a8t eNuivale!t o .a8a!Is ob1et petit a- this pure- immaterial- spe8tral e!tity 6hi8h
serves as the obje8t:8ause o desireM
/e should be very pre8ise here i! order !ot to miss the poi!t+ GeleuUe is !ot airmi!g a simple
psy8ho:physi8al dualism K la someo!e like 2oh! SearleT he is !ot oeri!g t6o diere!t Jdes8riptio!sK
o the same eve!t7 9t is !ot that the same pro8ess @say- a spee8h a8tA 8a! be des8ribed i! a stri8tly
!aturalisti8 6ay- as a !euro!al a!d bodily pro8ess embedded i! its a8tual 8ausality- a!d also Jrom
6ithi!-K at the level o mea!i!g- 6here the 8ausality @J9 a!s6ered your Nuestio! be8ause 9 u!derstood
itKA is a pseudo:8ausality7 9! su8h a! approa8h- the material:8orporeal 8ausality remai!s 8omplete-
6hile the basi8 premise o GeleuUeIs o!tology is pre8isely that 8orporeal 8ausality is not 8omplete+ i!
the emerge!8e o the 4e6- somethi!g o88urs 6hi8h cannot be properly des8ribed at the level o
8orporeal 8auses a!d ee8ts7 The Nuasi:8ause is !ot a! illusory theater o shado6s- like that o the 8hild
6ho thi!ks he is magi8ally maki!g a toy move- u!a6are o the me8ha!i8al 8ausality 6hi8h a8tually
does the 6orkEo! the 8o!trary- the Nuasi:8ause fills in the gap of corporeal causality7 9! this stri8t
se!se- a!d i!soar as the 0ve!t is the Se!se:0ve!t- the Nuasi:8ause is !o!:se!se as i!here!t to Se!se+ i
a stateme!t 8ould be redu8ed to its se!se- it 6ould all i!to realityEthe relatio!ship bet6ee! Se!se a!d
its desig!ated reality 6ould simply be that o obje8ts i! the 6orld7 4o!:se!se is that 6hi8h mai!tai!s
the auto!omy o the level o se!se- o its sura8e lo6 o pure be8omi!g- 6ith regard to the desig!ated
reality @Jreere!tKA7
Goes this !ot bri!g us ba8k to the u!ortu!ate Jphalli8 sig!iierK as the JpureK sig!iier 6ithout
a sig!iiedM 9s !ot the .a8a!ia! phallus pre8isely the poi!t o !o!:se!se that sustai!s the lo6 o se!seM
As su8h- the phallus is the Jtra!s8e!de!tal sig!iierKEthe !o!:se!se 6ithi! the ield o se!seE6hi8h
distributes a!d regulates the series o Se!se7 9ts Jtra!s8e!de!talK status mea!s that there is !othi!g
Jsubsta!tialK about it+ the phallus is the sembla!8e par e?8elle!8e7 /hat the phallus J8ausesK is the gap
that separates the sura8e:eve!t rom bodily de!sity+ it is the Jpseudo:8auseK that sustai!s the auto!omy
o the ield o Se!se 6ith regard to its true- ee8tive- bodily 8ause7 /e might re8all here Ador!oIs
observatio! that the !otio! o tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutio! is the result o a ki!d o perspe8tival
i!versio!+ 6hat the subje8t @misAper8eives as his 8o!stitutive po6er is a8tually his impote!8e- his
i!8apa8ity to rea8h beyo!d the imposed limitatio!s o his horiUo!7 The tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!stitutive
po6er is a pseudo:po6er represe!ti!g the lipside o the subje8tIs bli!d!ess to the true bodily 8auses7
The phallus Nua 8ause is the pure sembla!8e o a 8ause7
There is !o stru8ture 6ithout the Jphalli8K mome!t as the 8rossi!g:poi!t o the t6o series @o
sig!iier a!d sig!iiedA- as the poi!t o the short:8ir8uit at 6hi8hEas .a8a! puts it i! a very pre8ise
6ayEJthe sig!iier alls i!to the sig!iied7K The poi!t o !o!:se!se 6ithi! the ield o Se!se is the
poi!t at 6hi8h the sig!iierIs 8ause is i!s8ribed i!to the ield o Se!se7 /ithout this short:8ir8uit- the
sig!iierIs stru8ture 6ould a8t as a! e?ter!al bodily 8ause a!d 6ould thus be u!able to produ8e the
ee8t o Se!se7 H! that a88ou!t- the t6o series al6ays 8o!tai! a parado?i8al e!tity that is Jdoubly
i!s8ribedK @that is simulta!eously surplus a!d la8kA+ a surplus o the sig!iier over the sig!iied @the
empty sig!iier 6ithout a sig!iiedA a!d the la8k o the sig!iied @the poi!t o !o!:se!se 6ithi! the ield
o Se!seA7
'#
The Jpseudo:8auseK is thus !ot a Jmere Nuasi:8ause-K a! Jillusory 8auseK i! 8o!trast to JrealK
8ausesErather- it gives body to ?fills in@ the gap in the order of real causes ?and not only the gap in the
order of re*presentation@7 This is 6hat 8ompli8ates the simplisti8 !otio! o JsutureK as the pla8e:holder
or the abse!t produ8tio! pro8ess 6ithi! the order o re:prese!tatio!s7 Alo!g these li!es- 3adiou
proposes to situate the 8ouple Sartre:Althusser alo!g the a?is o the Dause versus 8ausality+ 6hile
Althusser 8o!8eived the ield o history as determi!ed by a 8omple? asubje8tive stru8tural 8ausality-
Sartre opposed this redu8tio! a!d o8used o! Dauses i! the se!se o poi!ts o reere!8e 6hi8h motivate
politi8al subje8ts @like Jthe Dause o the peopleKA7 .a8a! also i!sists o! a Dause as opposed to
8ausality- although i! a se!se very diere!t rom that o Sartrea! subje8tive e!gageme!t+ or him- a
Dause is that 6hi8h i!terrupts the regular e?er8ise o 8ausality- that 6hi8h is e?:8e!tri8 6ith regard to
the 8ausal 8hai!7
''
9! this se!se- the ultimate Dause or .a8a! is the ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o
desire- or eve!- behi!d a!d be!eath it- the Dause:Thi!g @la ,ause*,hoseA itsel7 /ith regard to the
8hai! o 8ausality- this Dause is- agai!- a pseudo:Dause7
To retur! to the ,ar?ist reere!8e to =egel+ !o 6o!der thatErom ,ar? himsel through
.ukh8s to the Fra!kurt S8hoolEthis reere!8e is proou!dly ambiguous- os8illati!g bet6ee! t6o
e?tremes+ @1A the !otio! o =egelIs logi8 as the spe8ulative:mystiied arti8ulatio! o the Jlogi8 o
DapitalK @Dapital is the a8tual Substa!8e:Subje8t- the histori8al Absolute 6hi8h posits its o6!
presuppositio!s a!d thus e!ge!ders itselAT a!d @2A the !otio! o =egelIs logi8 as the idealist:mystiied
logi8 o the revolutio!ary pro8ess o ema!8ipatio!7
'$
/e i!d this ambiguity already i! ,ar? himsel-
6ho- i! the above:Nuoted passage rom ,apital- prese!ts 8apital as a =egelia! sel:ge!erati!g
J8o!8rete u!iversality-K 6hile- i! the amous ragme!t o! the pre:8apitalist modes o produ8tio! rom
the (rundrisse- he 8o!8eives the e!tire histori8al pro8ess i! =egelia! terms as a gradual emerge!8e o
a! alie!ated subje8tivity 6hi8h- through the 8ommu!ist revolutio!- 6ill u!ite itsel 6ith its substa!tial
presuppositio!s7
'&
From his early 6riti!gs @the o!8e amous J08o!omi8 a!d Chilosophi8al ,a!us8riptsK o 1&((A-
,ar? su88umbs to the @Feuerba8hia!A temptatio! o ormulati!g Jalie!atio!K a!d 8lass so8iety i! terms
o a mirror:reversal o the JproperK relatio! o 8ausality+ i! 8apitalism- the subje8t is e!slaved to its
o6! produ8t- Jdead laborK @8apitalA rules over Jlivi!g laborK @the 6orkersI produ8tivityA- the predi8ate
be8omes the subje8t o its o6! true subje8t- the ee8t be8omes the 8ause o its o6! 8ause7 /hat i-
ho6ever- this J8apitalist reversalK @the ee8t retroa8tively subsumes its 8ause- the pro8ess that
ge!erates 8apital appears as its o6! subordi!ated mome!tA is grou!ded i! a more u!dame!tal
JreversalK 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity as su8hM /hat i subje8tivity is a! ee8t 6hi8h retroa8tively
posits its 8ause- a Jpredi8ate reversed i!to subje8tKM /ith regard to the topi8 o produ8tive prese!8e
a!d its re:prese!tatio!- this mea!s that there is !o subje8t:o:prese!8e 6hi8h pre8edes represe!tatio!+
the subje8t is as su8h a! ee8t o represe!tatio! @6hi8h is 6hy .a8a! rehabilitates represe!tatio! i! his
very dei!itio! o the sig!iier as that 6hi8h Jreprese!ts the subje8t or a!other sig!iierKA7 The
diale8ti8al reversal is thus more 8omple? tha! it may appear+ at its most radi8al- it is !ot o!ly the
reversal o a predi8ate @the reaso! agai!st be8omi!g the reaso! orA- but the shit o the predi8ate itsel
i!to the positio! o subje8t7
CHAPTER 1"

The Foursome o Struggle- =istori8ity- /ill O a!d (elassenheit

/=5 .ADA4 9S 4HT A =09G0110F9A4

The mai! philosophi8al propo!e!t o the 8ritiNue o subje8tivity is =eidegger- o!e o .a8a!Is
mai! reere!8es- at least i! the 1%#0s7 For this reaso!- it is 8ru8ial to 8lariy ho6 .a8a! gradually
moves rom a88epti!g =eideggerIs 8ritiNue o the Dartesia! cogito as a!other versio! o the Freudia!
Jde8e!teri!gK o the subje8t to the parado?i8al a!d 8ou!ter:i!tuitive embra8i!g o the cogito as the
subje8t o the u!8o!s8ious7
.a8a!Is starti!g poi!t is FreudIs !otio! o a primordial /e1ahung- airmatio!- as opposed to
6erwerfung @usually [mis\tra!slated as Jore8losureKA+ he reads /e1ahung as primordial symboliUatio!-
agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o =eideggerIs !otio! o the esse!8e o la!guage as dis8losure o bei!g7
=o6ever- thi!gs Nui8kly get 8ompli8ated here7 As 6e sa6 earlier- i! Freud there are our mai! orms-
our versio!s- o J6er*K+ 6erwerfung @ore8losure>reje8tio!A- 6erdr=ngung @repressio!A- 6erneinung
@de!ialA- 6erleugnung @disavo6alA7 9! 6erwerfung- the 8o!te!t is thro6! out o the symboli8- de:
symboliUed- so that it 8a! o!ly retur! i! the Feal @i! the guise o hallu8i!atio!sA7 9! 6erdr=ngung- the
8o!te!t remai!s 6ithi! the symboli8 but is i!a88essible to 8o!s8ious!ess- relegated to the Hther S8e!e-
retur!i!g i! the guise o symptoms7 9! 6erneinung- the 8o!te!t is admitted i!to 8o!s8ious!ess- but
marked by a de!ial7 9! 6erleugnung- it is admitted a positive orm- but u!der the 8o!ditio! o
IsolierungEits symboli8 impa8t is suspe!ded- it is !ot really i!tegrated i!to the subje8tIs symboli8
u!iverse7 Take the sig!iier JmotherK+ i it is ore8losed or reje8ted- it simply has !o pla8e i! the
subje8tIs symboli8 u!iverseT i it is repressed- it orms the hidde! reere!8e o symptomsT i it is de!ied-
6e get the by !o6 amiliar orm J/hoever that 6oma! i! my dream is- she is !ot my motherRKT i it is
disavo6ed- the subje8t talks 8almly about his mother- 8o!8edi!g everythi!g @J5es- o 8ourse this
6oma! is my motherRKA- but remai!s u!ae8ted by the impa8t o this admissio!7 9t is easy to see ho6
the viole!8e o e?8lusio! gradually dimi!ishes here+ rom radi8al eje8tio!- through repressio! @6here
the repressed retur!s 6ithi! the symboli8A a!d de!ial @6here the de!ied 8o!te!t is admitted i!to
8o!s8ious!essA to disavo6al- 6here the subje8t 8a! ope!ly- 6ithout de!ial- talk about it7
All our orms already presuppose that the symboli8 order is i! pla8e- si!8e they deal 6ith ho6
some 8o!te!t relates to itT 8o!seNue!tly- a more radi8al- Jtra!s8e!de!talK Nuestio! must be raised here-
that o the !egativity 6hi8h ou!ds the symboli8 order itsel7 9s 6hat Freud 8alled 3r*6erdr=ngung
@primordial repressio!A a 8a!didate or this roleM Crimordial repressio! is !ot a repressio! o some
8o!te!t into the u!8o!s8ious- but a repressio! 8o!stitutive of the u!8o!s8ious- the gesture 6hi8h 8reates
the very spa8e o the u!8o!s8ious- the gap bet6ee! the system 8s>p8s a!d the u!8o!s8ious7 =ere 6e
must pro8eed very 8areully+ this primordial separatio! o the 9 rom the u!8o!s8ious- 6hi8h ge!erates
all the sta!dard a!ti:Dartesia! variatio!s @J9 am !ot 6here 9 thi!k-K et87A- should !ot be 8o!8eived o!ly
as the separatio! o the 9 rom the u!8o!s8ious Substa!8e- so that 9 per8eive the 8ore o my bei!g
outside mysel- out o my grasp7 The =egelia! lesso! o .a8a! is that de:8e!teri!g is al6ays redoubled+
6he! the subje8t i!ds itsel de:8e!tered- deprived o the 8ore o its bei!g- this mea!s that the Hther-
the de:8e!tered site o the subje8tIs bei!g- is also i! its tur! de:8e!tered- tru!8ated- deprived o the
u!athomable d that 6ould guara!tee its 8o!siste!8y7 9! other 6ords- 6he! the subje8t is de:8e!tered-
the 8ore o its bei!g is !ot the !atural Substa!8e- but the Jbig Hther-K the Jse8o!d !ature-K the virtual
symboli8 order 6hi8h is itsel 8o!stru8ted arou!d a la8k7 The gap that separates the subje8t rom the big
Hther is thus simulta!eously the gap i! the heart o the Hther itsel7 This overlappi!g o the t6o la8ks is
6hat makes it so hard to ormulate the ambiguous relatio! bet6ee! +usstossung @the e?pulsio! o the
Feal 6hi8h is 8o!stitutive o the emerge!8e o the symboli8 orderA a!d 6erwerfung @the Jore8losureK
o a sig!iier rom the symboli8 i!to the FealA i! Freud a!d .a8a!Esometimes they are ide!tiied a!d
sometimes disti!guished7 Fra!eois 3alm`s makes the appropriate observatio!+

9 +usstossung is 6hat 6e say it is- it is radi8ally diere!t rom 6erwerfung+ ar rom bei!g the
me8ha!ism proper to psy8hosis- it 6ould be the ope!i!g o the ield o the Hther as su8h7 9! a se!se- it
6ould !ot be the reje8tio! o the symboli8- but itsel symboliUatio!7 /e should !ot thi!k here
psy8hosis a!d hallu8i!atio!- but the subje8t as su8h7 Dli!i8ally- this 8orrespo!ds to the a8t that
ore8losure does!It preve!t psy8hoti8s rom d6elli!g i! la!guage7
1
This 8o!8lusio! is the result o a series o pre8ise Nuestio!s7 The a8t is that psy8hoti8s 8a!
speak- that- i! some se!se- they do d6ell i! la!guage+ Jore8losureK does !ot mea! their e?8lusio! rom
la!guage- but the e?8lusio! or suspe!sio! o the symboli8 ei8a8y o a key sig!iier 6ithi! their
symboli8 u!iverseEi a sig!iier is e?8luded- the! o!e must already be i! the sig!iyi!g order7 9!soar
as- or Freud a!d .a8a!- 6erwerfung is 8orrelative to /e1ahung @the Jairmatio!-K the primordial
gesture o subje8tively assumi!g o!eIs pla8e i! the symboli8 u!iverseA- 3alm`sIs solutio! is to
disti!guish bet6ee! this /e1ahung a!d a! eve! more origi!ary @or JprimaryKA symboliUatio! o the
Feal- the Nuasi:mythi8al Uero:level o dire8t 8o!ta8t bet6ee! the symboli8 a!d the Feal 6hi8h
8oi!8ides 6ith the mome!t o their diere!tiatio!- the pro8ess o the rise o the symboli8- o the
emerge!8e o the primary battery o sig!iiers- 6hose obverse @!egativeA is the e?pulsio! o the pre:
symboli8 Feal7 /he! the /olma!- at the age o o!e- observed his pare!tsI coitus a tergo- it let i! his
mi!d a memory tra8e+ it 6as symboliUed- but it 6as just retai!ed as a libidi!ally !eutral tra8e7 H!ly
ater three more years or soEater /olma!Is se?ual a!tasies had bee! a6ake!ed a!d he had be8ome
i!trigued by 6here 8hildre! 8ome romE6as this tra8e be1aht- properly histori8iUed- a8tivated i! his
perso!al !arrative as a 6ay o lo8ati!g himsel i! the u!iverse o mea!i!g7 Csy8hoti8s a88omplish the
irst step- they i!habit the symboli8 orderT 6hat they are u!able to do is to subje8tively or
perormatively e!gage i! la!guage- to Jhistori8iUeK their subje8tive pro8essEi! short- to a88omplish
the /e1ahung7
As 3alm`s per8eptively !oted- it is or this reaso! that the la8k o88urs at a diere!t level i!
psy8hosis+ psy8hoti8s 8o!ti!ue to d6ell i! the de!se symboli8 spa8e o the primordial JullK @mater!alA
big Hther- they do !ot assume symboli8 8astratio! i! the proper se!se o a loss 6hi8h is i! itsel
liberati!g- givi!g- Jprodu8tive-K ope!i!g up the spa8e or thi!gs to appear i! their @mea!i!gulA bei!gT
or them- a loss 8a! o!ly be purely privative- a Nuestio! o somethi!g bei!g take! rom them7
9! a risky i!terpretive move- .a8a! li!ks this JprimaryK symboliUatio!E6hi8h is a88essible to
psy8hoti8s a!d 6hi8h pre8edes the subje8tive e!gageme!t they la8kEto =eideggerIs disti!8tio!
bet6ee! the origi!ary dime!sio! o la!guage as the dis8losure o 3ei!g a!d the dime!sio! o spee8h as
the bearer o @subje8tiveA sig!ii8atio!s or as a mea!s o i!tersubje8tive re8og!itio!7 At this origi!ary
level o !ami!g as sho6i!g @Sagen as NeigenA- the diere!8e bet6ee! sig!ii8atio! a!d reere!8e alls
a6ay- a 6ord 6hi8h !ames a thi!g does !ot Jmea!K it- it 8o!stitutes or dis8loses it i! its 3ei!g- it ope!s
up the spa8e o its e?iste!8e7 This level is the level o appeari!g as su8h- !ot appeara!8e as opposed to
reality be!eath it- but JpureK appeari!g 6hi8h JisK e!tirely i! its appeari!g- behi!d 6hi8h there is
!othi!g7 9! his semi!ar o! psy8hoses- .a8a! provides a !i8e des8riptio! o su8h pure appeari!g a!d o
the 8o!8omita!t- properly meta:physi8al temptatio! to redu8e it to its grou!d- to its hidde! 8auses+

The rai!bo6- it is 1ust that [cest cela\7 A!d this it is 1ust that implies that 6e 6ill e!gage ourselves to
our last breath to lear! 6hat is hidde! behi!d it- 6hat is the 8ause to 6hi8h 6e 8a! redu8e it7 4ote ho6
6hat rom the very begi!!i!g 8hara8teriUes the rai!bo6 a!d the meteorEa!d everybody k!o6s this-
si!8e it is or this reaso! that 6e 8all it a meteorEis pre8isely that there is !othi!g hidde! behi!d7 9t is
e!tirely i! this appeara!8e7 /hat makes it persist or us- to the poi!t that 6e !ever 8ease to ask
Nuestio!s about it- 8o!sists solely i! the origi!ary it is 1ust that- that is to say- i! the !omi!atio! as su8h
o the rai!bo67 There is !othi!g else but this !ame7
2
This i!here!t rele?ive mome!t o Jde8laratio!K @the a8t that every 8ommu!i8atio! o a 8o!te!t
al6ays simulta!eously Jde8lares itselK as su8hA is 6hat =eidegger ide!tiied as the Jas su8hK that
spe8iies the properly huma! dime!sio!+ a! a!imal per8eives a sto!e- but it does !ot per8eive this sto!e
Jas su8h7K This is the Jrele?ivityK o the sig!iier+ every uttera!8e !ot o!ly tra!smits some 8o!te!t-
but- simulta!eously- determines how the sub1ect relates to this content @i! terms o 1erma! 9dealism-
determi!es that every 8o!s8ious!ess is al6ays already sel:8o!s8ious!essA7 To put it i! =eideggerIs
terms- the psy8hoti8 is !ot welt*los- deprived o the 6orld+ he already d6ells i! the ope!i!g o 3ei!g7
This readi!g- ho6ever- as is ote! the 8ase 6ith .a8a!- is a88ompa!ied by its @asymmetri8al-
trueA opposite+ by a readi!g 6hi8h attributes to psy8hoti8s a88ess to a JhigherK level o symboliUatio!
a!d deprives them o the Jlo6erK basi8 level7 9!soar as .a8a! reads the Freudia! disti!8tio! bet6ee!
Jreprese!tatio!s o thi!gsK @Sach*6orstellungenA a!d Jreprese!tatio!s o 6ordsK @Wort*6orstellungenA
as i!ter!al to the symboli8 orderEas the disti!8tio! bet6ee! primordial symboliUatio!- the
establishme!t o the origi!ary u!8o!s8iousIs battery o sig!iiers @Jmemory:tra8es-K i! the la!guage o
the early- pre:psy8hoa!alyti8- FreudA- a!d se8o!dary symboliUatio!- the 8o!s8ious>pre8o!s8ious system
o la!guageEthis ur!ishes him 6ith a parado?i8al dei!itio! o the psy8hoti8Is predi8ame!t+ a
psy8hoti8 is !ot o!e 6ho regresses to a more JprimitiveK level o represe!tatio!s:o:thi!gs- 6ho Jtreats
6ords as thi!gs-K as is 8ommo!ly saidT he is- o! the 8o!trary- someo!e 6ho pre8isely disposes o
represe!tatio!s:o:6ords 6ithout represe!tatio!s:o:thi!gs7
"
9! other 6ords- a psy8hoti8 8a! use
la!guage i! a !ormal ma!!er- but 6hat he la8ks is the u!8o!s8ious ba8kgrou!d 6hi8h gives the 6ords
6e use their libidi!al reso!a!8e- their spe8ii8 subje8tive 6eight a!d 8olor7 /ithout this ba8kgrou!d-
psy8hoa!alyti8 i!terpretatio! is po6erless- i!operative+ J9! psy8hosis- truth is 6ithout ee8t- 6hi8h
does!It preve!t the psy8hoti8 rom sayi!g it better tha! a!yo!e else7K
(
This is also o!e 6ay to
u!dersta!d .a8a!Is misleadi!gly Je88e!tri8K 8laim that !ormality is a spe8ies o psy8hosis+ our
J!ormalK 8ommo!:se!se dei!itio! o la!guage is that it is a! artii8ial se8o!dary system o sig!s 6e
use to tra!ser pre:e?isti!g i!ormatio!- a!d so o!E6hat this dei!itio! ig!ores is the u!derlyi!g level
o subje8tive e!gageme!t- the positio! o e!u!8iatio!T the parado? o the psy8hoti8 is that he is the o!ly
o!e 6ho ully its this dei!itio!- that is- 6ho ee8tively uses la!guage as a !eutral se8o!dary
i!strume!t 6hi8h does !ot 8o!8er! the speakerIs very bei!g+

8ertai! sig!iiers do !ot pass i!to the u!8o!s8ious 6riti!g- a!d this is the 8ase 6ith the pater!al
sig!iier i! psy8hosis7 This does !ot pre8lude their prese!8e at the pre8o!s8ious levelEas 6e 8a! see i!
the 8ase o the sig!iiers 6hi8h 6e 8all ore8losed i! psy8hosis a!d 6hi8h are at the subje8tIs disposal
i! his la!guage7
#
This os8illatio! seems to i!di8ate that there is somethi!g 6ro!g 6ith the solutio! o
disti!guishi!g the t6o levels- the level o primary symboliUatio! a!d the level o
/e1ahung96erwerfung7 @Solutio!s 6hi8h rely o! simply disti!guishi!g bet6ee! diere!t levels are a
priori suspi8ious7A /hat it loses is the basi8 parado? o the symboli8 as the two at the same+ ultimately-
the e?pulsio! o the Feal rom the symboli8 a!d the reje8tio! o a sig!iier overlapT that is- i! the 8ase
o the symboli8 Hther- e?ter!al a!d i!ter!al limitatio!s 8oi!8ide- the symboli8 order 8a! o!ly emerge
as delimited rom the Feal i it is delimited rom itsel- missi!g or e?8ludi!g a 8e!tral part o itsel- !ot
ide!ti8al 6ith itsel7 There is thus !o +usstossung 6ithout a 6erwerfungEthe pri8e the symboli8 has to
pay i! order to delimit itsel rom the Feal is its o6! bei!g:tru!8ated7 This is 6hat .a8a! is aimi!g at
6ith his ormula that there is !o big Hther- !o Hther o HtherEa!d- as the late .a8a! k!e6 very 6ell-
this implies that- at a 8ertai! most basi8 level- 6e are all psy8hoti8s7 =o6ever- 6e should be more
pre8ise here+ the sig!iier 6hi8h is ore8losed is !ot simply a missi!g o!e- o!e that is la8ki!g- but rather
a sig!iier that itsel sta!ds or the barred A- or the la8k o sig!iier- or the i!8omplete!ess:
i!8o!siste!8y o the symboli8 ield7 The psy8hoti8Is problem- the!- is !ot that he d6ells i! a tru!8ated
symboli8 order @HtherA- but- o! the 8o!trary- that he d6ells i! a J8ompleteK Hther- a! Hther 6hi8h
la8ks the i!s8riptio! o its la8k7
There is thus !o !eed to posit t6o phases- irst the symboliUatio!- the rise o the primary battery
o sig!iiers through the e?pulsio! o the Feal- the! the e?8lusio! o a sig!iier+ the t6o pro8esses are
o!e a!d the same- a!d psy8hosis 8omes ater6ards- i! a se8o!d stage- 6he!EiEthe sig!iier 6hi8h
sta!ds or the very i!8omplete!ess or i!8o!siste!8y o the Hther- 6hi8h registers this i!8omplete!ess- is
ore8losed7 This t6o:a8ed primordial +usstossung has to be disti!guished rom the viole!t dee!sive
measure o eje8ti!g @6hat is e?perie!8ed asA a oreig! i!truder- up to a!d i!8ludi!g the i!amous 8all
Cuden raus#- the eje8tio! 6hi8h reappears i! all its brutality i! todayIs hyper:rele?ive so8iety7
The =egelia! lesso! o the global rele?iviUatio!:mediatiUatio! o our livesEthat this pro8ess
ge!erates its o6! brutal immedia8yE6as best 8aptured by 0tie!!e 3alibarIs !otio! o e?8essive- !o!:
u!8tio!al 8ruelty as a eature o 8o!temporary lie- a 8ruelty 6hose igures ra!ge rom
Ju!dame!talistK ra8ist a!d>or religious slaughter to Jse!selessK outbursts o viole!8e perormed by
adoles8e!ts upo! the homeless i! our megalopolises- a viole!8e o!e is tempted to 8all 9d:0vil- a
viole!8e grou!ded i! !o utilitaria! or ideologi8al reaso!s7 All the talk about oreig!ers steali!g our jobs
rom us or about the threat they represe!t to our /ester! values should !ot de8eive us+ o! 8loser
e?ami!atio!- it soo! be8omes 8lear that this talk provides a rather superi8ial se8o!dary ratio!aliUatio!7
The e?pla!atio! 6e ultimately get rom a ski!head is that it makes him eel good to beat up oreig!ers
be8ause their prese!8e disturbs him7 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is i!deed 9d:0vil- 0vil stru8tured a!d
motivated by the most eleme!tary imbala!8e i! the relatio!ship bet6ee! the 0go a!d 1ouissance- by the
te!sio! bet6ee! pleasure a!d the oreig! body o 1ouissance at the very heart o it7 9d:0vil thus stages
the most eleme!tary Jshort:8ir8uitK i! the relatio!ship o the subje8t to the primordially missi!g obje8t:
8ause o his desire+ 6hat JbothersK us i! the JotherK @2e6- 2apa!ese- Ari8a!- TurkA is that he appears to
e!tertai! a privileged relatio!ship to the obje8tEthe other either possesses the obje8t:treasure- havi!g
s!at8hed it a6ay rom us @6hi8h is 6hy 6e do !ot have itA- or he poses a threat to our possessio! o the
obje8t7 =ere 6e 8a! agai! employ the =egelia! Ji!i!ite judgme!t-K asserti!g the spe8ulative ide!tity
o these JuselessK a!d Je?8essiveK outbursts o viole!t immedia8y- 6hi8h display !othi!g but a pure
a!d !aked @J!o!:sublimatedKA hatred o Hther!ess- 6ith the global rele?iviUatio! o so8iety7 Cerhaps
the ultimate e?ample o this 8oi!8ide!8e is the ate o psy8hoa!alyti8 i!terpretatio!7 Today- the
ormatio!s o the u!8o!s8ious @rom dreams to hysteri8al symptomsA have dei!itely lost their
i!!o8e!8e a!d are thoroughly rele?iviUed+ the Jree asso8iatio!sK o a typi8al edu8ated a!alysa!d
8o!sist or the most part o attempts to provide a psy8hoa!alyti8 e?pla!atio! o their disturba!8es- so
that o!e is Nuite justiied i! sayi!g that 6e have !ot o!ly 2u!gia!- *lei!ia!- .a8a!ia! O i!terpretatio!s
o the symptoms- but symptoms themselves 6hi8h are 2u!gia!- *lei!ia!- .a8a!ia! O that is- 6hose
reality i!volves a! impli8it reere!8e to some psy8hoa!alyti8 theory7 The u!ortu!ate result o this
global rele?iviUatio! o i!terpretatio! @everythi!g be8omes i!terpretatio!- the u!8o!s8ious i!terprets
itselA is that the a!alystIs i!terpretatio! itsel loses its perormative Jsymboli8 ei8a8y-K leavi!g the
symptom i!ta8t i! the immedia8y o its idioti8 1ouissance7
9! 6hat pre8ise se!se- the!- does that 6hi8h is ore8losed rom the symboli8 retur! i! the FealM
Do!sider verbal hallu8i!atio!s+ their 8o!te!t is massively symboli8- a!d they are- at the level o their
ordi!ary mea!i!g- ully u!derstood by the @psy8hoti8A subje8t- so- agai!- i! 6hat se!se do they belo!g
to the FealM T6o i!ter8o!!e8ted eatures make them Feal+ isolatio! a!d 8ertitude7 They are ore8losed
i! the pre8ise se!se that they do !ot Je?istK or the subje8t+ they e?:sist- persist- a!d impose themselves
outside the symboli8 te?ture7 They are isolated rom their symboli8 8o!te?t- 6hi8h is by dei!itio! o!e
o trust a!d suppositio!- the 8o!te?t i! 6hi8h every prese!8e arises agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o its
possible abse!8e- every 8ertitude is a88ompa!ied by a possible doubt- a!d i! 6hi8h o!e ultimately has
to rely o! a basi8 6ager to trust the symboli8 order7 9! religio! proper- o!e does !ot k!o6 1od- but o!e
risks trusti!g i! him- believi!g i! him7 A psy8hoti8- o! the 8o!trary- pro8eeds like the Slove!e pu!k
group .aiba8h 6ho- 6he! asked duri!g a! i!tervie6 about their relatio! to 1od- a!s6ered 6ith
reere!8e to the J9! 1od 6e trustK pri!ted o! every dollar !ote+ J.ike you Ameri8a!s- 6e believe that
1od e?ists- but- u!like you- 6e do !ot trust =im7K Hr- as 3alm`s puts it su88i!8tly- it is !ot that
psy8hoti8s believe in the voi8es they hear- they simply believe them7
'
This is 6hy psy8hoti8s have a!
absolute 8ertitude about the voi8es they hear+ they do !ot trust them- o 8ourse- they take them as evil
voi8es 6hi8h 6a!t to hurt themT but they simply k!o6 that the voi8es are realEthis absolute 8ertitude
itsel make them real7
HEGEL #ERS!S HEIDEGGER

J9t is time to talk about the late =egel7 9 there is somethi!g 6hi8h is little k!o6!- it is the last
period o =egelIs thought i! 3erli!7K
$
Far rom 8o!irmi!g =egelIs philosophy as a 8o!servative @or- at
least- 8o!ormistA Staatsphilosoph- it 6as duri!g his last years i! 3erli! that =egel- ater a lo!g eort-
provided the dei!itive ormulatio! o his key i!sights7 This poi!t should be i!sisted upo! espe8ially i!
respo!se to o!e sta!dard 8ritiNue o =egel- irst ormulated by the Jyou!g =egelia!s-K 8o!8er!i!g the
so:8alled 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! =egelIs diale8ti8al method a!d his system+ 6hile the method
approa8hes reality i! its dy!ami8 developme!t- dis8er!i!g i! every determi!ate orm the seeds o its
o6! destru8tio! a!d sel:over8omi!g- the system e!deavors to re!der the totality o bei!g as a!
a8hieved order i! 6hi8h !o urther developme!t is i! vie67
&
9! the t6e!tieth:8e!tury i!terpretatio!s o
=egel developed u!der =eideggerIs i!lue!8e- this 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the Jlogi8alK a!d the
Jhistori8alK a8Nuires a more radi8al u!derpi!!i!g+ 6hat they try to outli!e is a more u!dame!tal
o!tologi8al rame 6hi8h is simulta!eously both the sour8e o =egelIs diale8ti8al systematiUi!g a!d
6hat the latter betrays7 The histori8al dime!sio! is here !ot simply the a8t o the u!e!di!g evolutio! o
all lie orms- !or the philosophi8al oppositio! bet6ee! the you!g =egel 6ho tries to grasp the
histori8al a!tago!isms o so8ial lie a!d the old =egel 6ho 8ompulsively steam:rollers all 8o!te!t 6ith
his diale8ti8al ma8hi!e- but rather the i!here!t te!sio! bet6ee! =egelIs systemati8 drive o !otio!al
sel:mediatio!>sublatio! a!d a more origi!al o!tologi8al proje8t 6hi8h- ollo6i!g =eidegger-
Ale?a!dre *oyrL des8ribes as the histori8ity o the huma! 8o!ditio! orie!ted to6ards the uture7
%
The root o 6hat =egel 8alls J!egativityK is @our a6are!ess oA the uture+ the uture is 6hat is
!ot @yetA- the po6er o !egativity is ultimately ide!ti8al to the po6er o time itsel- this or8e 6hi8h
8orrodes every irm ide!tity7 The proper temporality o a huma! bei!g is thus !ot that o li!ear time-
but that o e!gaged e?iste!8e+ a ma! proje8ts his uture a!d the! a8tualiUes it by 6ay o a detour
through past resour8es7 This Je?iste!tialK root o !egativity is- a88ordi!g to *oyrL- obus8ated by
=egelIs system- 6hi8h abolishes the prima8y o the uture a!d prese!ts its e!tire 8o!te!t as the past
JsublatedK i! its logi8al ormEthe sta!dpoi!t adopted here is !ot that o e!gaged subje8tivity- but that
o Absolute *!o6i!g7 A similar 8ritiNue o =egel 6as deployed by Ale?a!dre *oj`ve a!d 2ea!
=yppolite+ 6hat they all try to ormulate is a te!sio! or a!tago!ism at the very 8ore o =egelIs thought
6hi8h remai!s u!thought by =egelE!ot or a88ide!tal reaso!s- but !e8essarily- 6hi8h is 6hy-
pre8isely- this antagonism cannot be dialectici2ed- resolved or JsublatedK through diale8ti8al
mediatio!7 /hat all these philosophers oer is thus a 8riti8al Js8hiUologyK o =egel7
10
9t is !ot dii8ult to re8og!iUe i! this visio! o the uture:orie!ted temporality o the e!gaged
subje8t the tra8es o =eideggerIs assertio! o i!itude as the u!surpassable predi8ame!t o bei!g:
huma!+ it is our radi8al i!itude 6hi8h e?poses us to the ope!i!g o the uture- to the horiUo! o 6hat is
to 8ome- or tra!s8e!de!8e a!d i!itude are t6o sides o the same 8oi!7 4o 6o!der- the!- that it 6as
=eidegger himsel 6ho proposed the most elaborate versio! o this 8riti8al readi!g o =egel7 4ot the
=eidegger o Sein und Neit- but the later =eidegger- 6ho tries to de8ipher the u!thought dime!sio! i!
=egel through a 8lose readi!g o the !otio! o the Je?perie!8eK @ErfahrungA o 8o!s8ious!ess i! the
)henomenology of Spirit7 =eidegger reads =egelIs amous 8ritiNue o *a!tia! skepti8ism @6e 8a! o!ly
get to k!o6 the Absolute i the Absolute already 6a!ts to be bei uns- 6ith usA through his o6!
i!terpretatio! o parousia as the epo8hal dis8losure o bei!g+ parousia is the 6ay the Absolute @=egelIs
!ame or the Truth o 3ei!gA is al6ays already dis8losed to us prior to a!y a8tive eort o! our part- that
is- the 6ay this dis8losure o the Absolute grou!ds a!d dire8ts our very eort to grasp itEor- as the
mysti8s a!d theologia!s say- Jyou 6ould !ot be sear8hi!g or me i you had !ot already ou!d me7K
=ere is the passageEi!8ludi!g the key 8laim that the Absolute itsel J6ishes to be beside us-K 6ith us-
prese!t to us- to dis8lose itsel to usE6hi8h =eidegger reads as =egelIs o6! ormulatio! o the old
1reek !otio! o parousia+

9 the Absolute 6ere o!ly to be brought o! the 6hole !earer to us by [our\ age!8y- 6ithout a!y 8ha!ge
bei!g 6rought i! it- like a bird 8aught by a limesti8k- it 6ould 8ertai!ly s8or! a tri8k o that sort- i it
6ere !ot i! its very !ature- a!d did it !ot 6ish to be- beside us rom the start7
11
Father tha! dismissi!g this 8laim as evide!8e o ho6 =egel remai!s a priso!er o the
Jmetaphysi8s o prese!8e-K 6e should dra6 atte!tio!- irst- to the a8t that =eidegger himsel oers a
urther variatio! o! this same topi8 6ith his !otio! o Dasein as das Da des Seins- the JthereK o 3ei!g
itsel- 6hi8h mea!s that 3ei!g itsel J!eedsK ma! as its o!ly Jthere-K a!d that- i! this se!se- i! spite o
its 6ithdra6al- it also J6a!ts to be 6ith us7K Furthermore- this J6ish to be 6ith usK is more e!igmati8
a!d 8omple? tha! it may appearEit 8a! be 8o!8eived- agai!- alo!g the li!es o *akaIs parable
J3eore the .a6-K 6he! the ma! rom the 8ou!try i!ally lear!s that the Goor 6as there o!ly or him
a!d that !o6- upo! his death- it 6ill be 8losed7 All the mystery o 6ithdra6al- o the i!a88essibility o
6hat the Goor 8o!8ealed- 6as thus there o!ly or the ,a!- desti!ed to as8i!ate his gaUeEthe GoorIs
reti8e!8e 6as a lure desti!ed to obus8ate the a8t that the Goor J6ished to be 6ith the ma!7K 9! other
6ords- the tri8k o the Goor 6as the same as that i! the 8ompetitio! bet6ee! Beu?is a!d Carrhasius+ the
Goor 6as like the pai!ti!g o a 8urtai! o! the 6all- there to 8reate the illusio! that it 8o!8ealed some
se8ret7
/hy the!- a88ordi!g to =eidegger- is =egel u!able to see the proper dime!sio! o parousiaM
This bri!gs us to =eideggerIs !e?t reproa8h+ that =egelIs !otio! o !egativity la8ks a phe!ome!al
dime!sio! @ails to des8ribe the e?perie!8e i! 6hi8h !egativity 6ould appear as su8hA- that =egel !ever
systemati8ally e?empliies or makes appear the diere!8e bet6ee! reje8tio!- !egatio!- !othi!g- Jis
!ot-K et87
12
=egelia! diale8ti8s just presupposes the o88ultatio! o its o6! phe!ome!ologi8o:
o!tologi8al ou!datio!T the !ame o this o88ultatio! is- o 8ourse- subje8tivity+ =egel al6ays already
subordi!ates !egativity to the subje8tIs J6ork o the !egative-K to the 8o!8eptual mediatio! or
sublatio! o all phe!ome!al 8o!te!t7 9! this 6ay- !egativity is redu8ed to a se8o!dary mome!t i! the
subje8tIs 6ork o sel:mediatio!7 This bli!d!ess to its o6! ou!datio! is !ot se8o!dary- but the
e!abli!g eature o =egelIs metaphysi8s o subje8tivity+ the diale8ti8al logos 8a! o!ly u!8tio! agai!st
the ba8kgrou!d o a pre:subje8tive +bsage- re!u!8iatio! or sayi!g:!o7
There is !o!etheless a privileged phe!ome!al mode i! 6hi8h !egativity 8a! be e?perie!8ed+
pai!7 The path o e?perie!8e is the path o the pai!ul realiUatio! that there is a gap bet6ee! J!aturalK
a!d tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!s8ious!ess- bet6ee! Jor the 8o!s8ious!ess itselK a!d Jor usK+ the subje8t is
viole!tly deprived o the J!aturalK ou!datio! o its bei!g- its e!tire 6orld 8ollapses- a!d this pro8ess is
repeated u!til it rea8hes Absolute *!o6i!g7 /he! he speaks about Jtra!s8e!de!tal pai!K as the
u!dame!tal Stimmung o =egelIs thought- =eidegger is ollo6i!g a li!e 6hi8h begi!s i! *a!tIs
,riti<ue of )ractical 7eason- 6here *a!t des8ribes pai! as the o!ly Ja prioriK emotio!- the emotio! o
my pathologi8al ego bei!g humiliated by the i!ju!8tio! o the moral la67
1"
@.a8a! sees i! this
tra!s8e!de!tal privilege o pai! the li!k bet6ee! *a!t a!d Sade7A
/hat =eidegger misses i! his des8riptio! o =egelia! Je?perie!8eK as the path o 6er2weiflung
is the proper !ature o the abyss it i!volves+ it is !ot o!ly !atural 8o!s8ious!ess 6hi8h is shattered
6he! it has to 8o!ro!t death- but also the tra!s8e!de!tal ba8kgrou!d or rame as the measure o 6hat
the !atural 8o!s8ious!ess e?perie!8es as its i!adeNua8y a!d ailureEas =egel put it- i 6hat 6e
thought to be true ails the measure o truth- this measure itsel has to be aba!do!ed7 This is 6hy
=eidegger misses the vertigi!ous abyss o the diale8ti8al pro8ess+ there is !o sta!dard o truth that
!atural 8o!s8ious!ess is gradually approa8hi!g through pai!ul e?perie!8e- or this very sta!dard is
itsel 8aught up i! the pro8ess- a!d thus u!dermi!ed agai! a!d agai!7
This is also 6hy =eideggerIs 8riti8ism regardi!g =egelIs Jma8hi!atio!K misses the poi!t7
A88ordi!g to =eidegger- the =egelia! pro8ess o e?perie!8e moves at t6o levels- that o lived
e?perie!8e @ErlebnisA a!d that o 8o!8eptual ma8hi!atio! @MachenschaftA+ at the level o lived
e?perie!8e- 8o!s8ious!ess sees its 6orld 8ollapse a!d a !e6 igure o the 6orld appear- a!d
e?perie!8es this passage as a pure leap 6ith !o logi8al bridge u!iti!g the t6o positio!s7 JFor us-K
ho6ever- the diale8ti8al a!alysis makes visible ho6 the !e6 6orld emerged as the Jdetermi!ate
!egatio!K o the old o!e- as the !e8essary out8ome o its 8risis7 Authe!ti8 lived e?perie!8e- the ope!i!g
to the 4e6- is thus revealed as bei!g u!derpi!!ed by !otio!al 6ork+ 6hat the subje8t e?perie!8es as the
i!e?pli8able rise o a !e6 6orld is a8tually the result o its o6! 8o!8eptual 6ork taki!g pla8e behi!d its
ba8k a!d 8a! thus ultimately be read as havi!g bee! produ8ed by the subje8tIs o6! 8o!8eptual
ma8hi!atio!7 =ere there is !o e?perie!8e o ge!ui!e other!ess- the subje8t e!8ou!ters o!ly the results
o its o6! @8o!8eptualA 6ork7 3ut this reproa8h o!ly holds i 6e ig!ore ho6 both sides- the
phe!ome!al Jor itselK o the !atural 8o!s8ious!ess a!d the Jor usK o the subterra!ea! 8o!8eptual
6ork- are 8aught up i! the grou!dless- vertigi!ous abyss o a repeated loss7 The Jtra!s8e!de!tal pai!K
is !ot o!ly the pai! the !atural 8o!s8ious!ess e?perie!8es- the pai! o bei!g separated rom its truthT it
is also the pai!ul a6are!ess that this truth itsel is !o!:All- i!8o!siste!t7
/hi8h bri!gs us ba8k to =eideggerIs 8laim that =egel ails to i!8lude the phe!ome!al
e?perie!8e o !egativity+ 6hat i !egativity !ames pre8isely the gap i! the order o phe!ome!ality-
somethi!g 6hi8h does not @a!d 8a! !everA appearM 4ot be8ause it is a tra!s8e!de!tal gesture 6hi8h by
dei!itio! eludes the phe!ome!al level- but be8ause it is the parado?i8al- dii8ult:to:thi!k !egativity
6hi8h 8a!!ot be subsumed u!der a!y age!t @e?perie!tial or !otAE6hat =egel 8alls Jsel:relati!g
!egativity-K a !egativity 6hi8h pre8edes all positive grou!di!g a!d 6hose !egative gesture o
6ithdra6al ope!s up the spa8e or all positivity7
THE TORT!RE,HO!SE OF LANG!AGE

At this poi!t- 6e 8a! eve! i!vert =eideggerIs 8ritiNue o =egel a!d 8laim that it is =eidegger
himsel 6ho is u!able to thi!k this Jtra!s8e!de!tal pai!KEa!d that he misses the path to thi!ki!g it
pre8isely be8ause he dispe!ses all too early 6ith the term Jthe subje8tK i! order to thi!k the @i!huma!A
8ore o bei!g:huma!7 /hat- the!- is the dime!sio! o pai! overlooked by =eideggerM
9! his JDritiNue o Viole!8e-K /alter 3e!jami! raises the Nuestio!+ J9s a!y !o!:viole!t
resolutio! o 8o!li8t possibleMK
1(
=is a!s6er is that it is possible i! Jrelatio!ships amo!g private
perso!s-K i! 8ourtesy- sympathy- a!d trust+ Jthere is a sphere o huma! agreeme!t that is !o!:viole!t to
the e?te!t that it is 6holly i!a88essible to viole!8e+ the proper sphere o Vu!dersta!di!g-I la!guage7K
1#

This thesis belo!gs to the mai!stream traditio! i! 6hi8h la!guage or the symboli8 order are 8o!8eived
as a medium o re8o!8iliatio! a!d mediatio!- o pea8eul 8o:e?iste!8e- as opposed to a viole!t medium
o immediate a!d ra6 8o!ro!tatio!7
1'
9! la!guage- rather tha! a8ti!g viole!tly to6ards o!e a!other-
6e are mea!t to debate- to e?8ha!ge 6ords- a!d su8h a! e?8ha!ge- eve! 6he! it is aggressive-
presupposes a mi!imum re8og!itio! o the other7
/hat i- ho6ever- huma!s e?8eed a!imals i! their 8apa8ity or viole!8e pre8isely because they
8a! speakM There are ma!y viole!t eatures o la!guage thematiUed by philosophers a!d so8iologists
rom =eidegger to 3ourdieu7 There is !evertheless at least o!e viole!t aspe8t o la!guage 6hi8h is
abse!t i! =eidegger- a!d 6hi8h is the o8us o .a8a!Is theory o the symboli8 order7 Throughout his
6ork- .a8a! varies =eideggerIs moti o la!guage as the house o bei!g+ la!guage is !ot ma!Is
8reatio! a!d i!strume!t- it is ma! 6ho Jd6ellsK i! la!guage+ JCsy8hoa!alysis should be the s8ie!8e o
la!guage i!habited by the subje8t7K
1$
.a8a!Is Jpara!oidK t6ist- his additio!al Freudia! tur! o the
s8re6- 8omes 6ith his 8hara8teriUatio! o this house as a torture*house+ J9! the light o the Freudia!
e?perie!8e- ma! is a subje8t 8aught i! a!d tortured by la!guage7K
1&
The military di8tatorship i! Arge!ti!a rom 1%$' to 1%&" i!ve!ted a grammati8al pe8uliarity- a
!e6 passive use o a8tive verbs+ 6he! thousa!ds o letist politi8al a8tivists a!d i!telle8tuals
disappeared- !ever to be see! agai!- tortured a!d killed by the military- 6ho de!ied a!y k!o6ledge o
their ate- they 6ere reerred to as Jdisappeared-K 6here the verb 6as used !ot i! the simple se!se that
they had disappeared- but i! a! a8tive tra!sitive se!se+ they J6ere disappearedK @by the military se8ret
servi8esA7 9! the Stali!ist regime- a similar irregular i!le?io! ae8ted the verb Jto step do6!K+ 6he! it
6as publi8ly a!!ou!8ed that a high:up member o the !ome!klatura had stepped do6! rom his post
@or health reaso!s- as a ruleA- a!d everyo!e k!e6 it 6as really be8ause he had lost out i! the struggle
bet6ee! diere!t 8liNues- people said he Jhad bee! stepped do6!KEagai!- a! a8t !ormally attributed
to the ae8ted perso! @he steps do6!- he disappearsA is rei!terpreted as the result o the !o!:tra!spare!t
a8tivity o a!other age!t @the se8ret poli8e disappeared him- the majority i! the !ome!klatura stepped
him do6!A7 A!d should 6e !ot read i! e?a8tly the same 6ay .a8a!Is thesis that a huma! bei!g does
!ot speak but is spoke!M The poi!t is !ot that it is Jspoke! about-K the topi8 o spee8h o other huma!s-
but that- 6he! @it appears thatA it speaks- it Jis spoke!-K i! the same 6ay that the u!ortu!ate
8ommu!ist u!8tio!ary 6as Jstepped do6!7K /hat this homology reveals is the status o la!guage- o
the Jbig Hther-K as the torture:house o the subje8t7
/e usually take a subje8tIs spee8h 6ith all its i!8o!siste!8ies as a! e?pressio! o his or her
i!!er turmoil- ambiguous emotio!s- a!d so orthT this holds eve! or a literary 6ork o art+ the task o a
psy8hoa!alyti8 readi!g is supposed to be to u!earth the i!!er psy8hi8 turbule!8e 6hi8h ou!d its 8oded
e?pressio! i! the 6ork o art7 3ut somethi!g is missi!g i! this 8lassi8al a88ou!t+ spee8h does !ot o!ly
register or e?press traumati8 psy8hi8 lieT the e!try i!to spee8h is i! itsel a traumati8 a8t @Jsymboli8
8astratio!KA7 This mea!s that 6e should i!8lude i! the list o traumas that spee8h tries to 8ope 6ith the
traumati8 impa8t o spee8h itsel7 The relatio!ship bet6ee! psy8hi8 turmoil a!d its e?pressio! i!
spee8h should thus also be reversed+ spee8h does !ot simply e?press or arti8ulate psy8hi8 troublesT at a
8ertai! key poi!t- psy8hi8 turmoil itsel is a rea8tio! to the trauma o d6elli!g i! the Jtorture:house o
la!guage7K
The Jpriso!:house o la!guageK @the title o Fredri8 2ameso!Is early book o! stru8turalismA- is
thus also a torture:house+ all the psy8hopathologi8al phe!ome!a des8ribed by Freud- rom 8o!versio!:
symptoms i!s8ribed i!to the body up to 8omplete psy8hoti8 breakdo6!s- are s8ars o this perma!e!t
torture- so ma!y sig!s o a! origi!al a!d irremediable gap bet6ee! the subje8t a!d la!guage- so ma!y
sig!s that ma! 8a! !ever be at home i! his o6! home7 This is 6hat =eidegger ig!ores- this dark side o
our d6elli!g i! la!guage- a!d this is 6hy there 8a! be !o pla8e or the Feal o 1ouissance i!
=eideggerIs edii8e- si!8e the torturi!g aspe8t o la!guage 8o!8er!s primarily the vi8issitudes o the
libido7 9t is also 6hy- i! order to get the truth to speak- it is !ot e!ough to suspe!d the subje8tIs a8tive
i!terve!tio! a!d let la!guage itsel speakEas 0lriede 2eli!ek put it 6ith e?traordi!ary 8larity+
J.a!guage should be tortured to tell the truth7K .a!guage must be t6isted- de!aturaliUed- e?te!ded-
8o!de!sed- 8ut a!d reu!ited- made to 6ork agai!st itsel7 .a!guage as the Jbig HtherK is !ot a! age!t
o 6isdom to 6hose message 6e should attu!e ourselves- but a medium o 8ruel i!diere!8e a!d
stupidity7 The most eleme!tary orm o torturi!g o!eIs la!guage is 8alled poetryEthi!k o 6hat a
8omple? orm like a so!!et does to la!guage+ it or8es the ree lo6 o spee8h i!to a Cro8rustea! bed o
i?ed orms o rhythm a!d rhyme7
3ut 6hat about =eideggerIs pro8edure o liste!i!g to the sou!dless 6ord o la!guage itsel- o
bri!gi!g out the truth that already d6ells 6ithi! itM 4o 6o!der that the late =eideggerIs thi!ki!g is
poeti8E8a! o!e imagi!e a torture more viole!t tha! 6hat he does i!- say- his amous readi!g o
Carme!idesIs propositio! Jthi!ki!g:speaki!g a!d bei!g are the sameKM To e?tra8t the i!te!ded truth
rom it- he has to reer to the literal mea!i!g o 6ords @legein as gatheri!gA- to 8ou!ter:i!tuitively
displa8e the a88e!t a!d s8a!sio! o the se!te!8e- to tra!slate si!gle terms i! a stro!gly i!terpretative
des8riptive 6ay- a!d so o!7 From this perspe8tive- late /ittge!stei!ia! Jordi!ary la!guage
philosophyKE6hi8h sees itsel as a ki!d o medi8al 8ure- 8orre8ti!g the erro!eous use o ordi!ary
la!guage 6hi8h gives rise to Jphilosophi8al problemsKE6a!ts to elimi!ate pre8isely this Jtorturi!gK o
la!guage 6hi8h 6ould or8e it to deliver the truth @re8all Fudolph Dar!apIs amous 8ritiNue o
=eidegger rom the late 1%20s- 6hi8h 8laimed that the latterIs ratio8i!atio!s 6ere based o! the misuse
o J!othi!gK as a substa!tiveA7
Goes the same !ot apply to 8i!emaM Goes !ot 8i!ema also or8e its visual material to tell the
truth through tortureM First- there 6as 0ise!stei!Is Jmo!tage o attra8tio!s-K the mother o all 8i!emati8
torture+ a viole!t 8utti!g o 8o!ti!uous shots i!to ragme!ts 6hi8h are the! re:u!ited i! a thoroughly
artii8ial 6ay- a !o less viole!t redu8tio! o the 6hole body or s8e!e to 8lose:ups o Jpartial obje8tsK
6hi8h loat arou!d i! the 8i!emati8 spa8e- 8ut o rom the orga!i8 /hole to 6hi8h they belo!g7 The!
there is Tarkovsky- 0ise!stei!Is great e!emy- 6ho repla8ed the ra!ti8 0ise!stei!ia! mo!tage 6ith its
opposite- a stret8hi!g:out o time- a ki!d o 8i!emati8 eNuivale!t o the Jra8k-K the 8lassi8 torture
ma8hi!e desig!ed to stret8h the vi8timIs limbs7 /e 8a! thus 8hara8teriUe TarkovskyIs polemi8 agai!st
0ise!stei! as a dispute bet6ee! t6o proessio!al torturers over the relative merits o diere!t devi8es7
This is also the ultimate reaso! 6hy- agai!st =eideggerIs histori8iUatio! o the subje8t as the
age!t o te8h!ologi8al mastery i! the moder! age- agai!st his repla8eme!t o the Jsubje8tK 6ith Dasein
as the !ame or the esse!8e o bei!g:huma!- .a8a! stu8k to the problemati8 term Jthe subje8t7K /he!
.a8a! implies that =eidegger misses a 8ru8ial dime!sio! o subje8tivity- his poi!t is !ot the silly
huma!ist argume!t that =eidegger e?8essively JpassiviUesK ma!- tur!i!g him i!to a! i!strume!t o the
revelatio! o 3ei!g a!d thus ig!ori!g huma! 8reativity- a!d so orth7 The poi!t is- o! the 8o!trary- that
=eidegger misses the properly traumati8 impa8t o the very JpassivityK o our bei!g 8aught up i!
la!guage- the te!sio! bet6ee! the huma! a!imal a!d la!guageT there is a Jsubje8tK be8ause the huma!
a!imal does !ot JitK la!guage- the .a8a!ia! Jsubje8tK is the tortured- mutilated subje8t7
Althusseria!s stro!gly i!sist o! the 8o!stitutive double mea!i!g o the term Jsubje8tK+ as the
a8tive tra!s8e!de!tal age!t- 8reator o @itsA reality- a!d as the passive age!t submitted @subje8tedA to a
legal state order @su1et de lAtatAEor- to give it a more ge!eral .a8a!ia! t6ist- subje8ted to the big
Hther7 =ere- ho6ever- .a8a! adds a mu8h more radi8al dime!sio! o passivity+ as he puts it i! his
semi!ar o! the ethi8s o psy8hoa!alysis- the subje8t is Jthat [part:aspe8t o\ the real 6hi8h suers rom
the sig!iier [ce <ue du rAel pdtit du signifiant\KEthe most eleme!tary dime!sio! o the subje8t is !ot
a8tivity- but passivity- e!duri!g somethi!g7 =ere is ho6 .a8a! lo8ates rituals o i!itiatio! 6hi8h make
a viole!t 8ut i!to the body- mutilati!g it+

The rituals o i!itiatio! assume the orm o the 8ha!gi!g o orm o these desires- o 8o!erri!g o! them
i! this 6ay a u!8tio! through 6hi8h the subje8tIs bei!g ide!tiies itsel or a!!ou!8es itsel as su8h-
through 6hi8h the subje8t- i o!e 8a! put it this 6ay- ully be8omes a ma!- but also a 6oma!7 The
mutilation serves here to orie!tate desire- e!abli!g it to assume pre8isely this u!8tio! o i!de?- o
somethi!g 6hi8h is realiUed a!d 6hi8h 8a! o!ly arti8ulate itsel- e?press itsel- i! a symbolic beyond- a
beyo!d 6hi8h is the o!e 6e today 8all bei!g- a realiUatio! o bei!g i! the subje8t7
1%
The gap that separates .a8a! rom =eidegger is here 8learly dis8er!ible pre8isely o! a88ou!t o
their pro?imity- o the a8t that- i! order to desig!ate the symboli8 u!8tio! at its most eleme!tary-
.a8a! still uses =eideggerIs term Jbei!gK+ i! a huma! bei!g- desires lose their moori!g i! biology-
they are operative o!ly i!soar as they are i!s8ribed 6ithi! the horiUo! o 3ei!g 6hi8h is sustai!ed by
la!guage7 =o6ever- i! order or this tra!spositio! rom the immediate biologi8al reality o the body to
the symboli8 spa8e o la!guage to take pla8e- it has to leave a mark o torture o! the body i! the orm
o its mutilatio!7 9t is thus !ot e!ough to say that Jthe /ord be8ame leshK+ 6hat 6e must add is that- i!
order or the /ord to i!s8ribe itsel i!to lesh- a part o that leshEthe proverbial Shylo8kia!
pou!dEhas to be sa8rii8ed7 Si!8e there is !o pre:established harmo!y bet6ee! the /ord a!d lesh- it
is o!ly through su8h a sa8rii8e that the lesh be8omes re8eptive or the /ord7
This bri!gs us- i!ally- to the topi8 o 1ouissance7 Chilippe .a8oue:.abarthe lo8ated very
pre8isely the gap that separates .a8a!Is i!terpretatio! o +ntigone rom =eideggerIs @to 6hi8h .a8a!
other6ise abu!da!tly reersA+ 6hat is totally missi!g i! =eidegger is !ot o!ly the dime!sio! o the Feal
o 1ouissance- but- above all- the dime!sio! o the Jbet6ee!:t6o:deathsK @the symboli8 a!d the FealA
6hi8h desig!ates A!tigo!eIs subje8tive positio! ater she is e?8ommu!i8ated rom the polis by Dreo!7
9! a! e?a8t symmetry 6ith her brother Coly!i8es- 6ho is dead i! reality but de!ied the symboli8 death-
the rituals o burial- A!tigo!e i!ds hersel dead symboli8ally- e?8luded rom the symboli8 8ommu!ity-
6hile biologi8ally a!d subje8tively still alive7 9! Agambe!Is terms- A!tigo!e i!ds hersel redu8ed to
Jbare lie-K to a positio! o homo sacer- 6hose e?emplary 8ase i! the t6e!tieth 8e!tury is that o the
i!mates o the 8o!8e!tratio! 8amps7 The stakes o this =eideggeria! omissio! are thus very high- si!8e
they 8o!8er! the ethi8o:politi8al 8ru? o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury- the Jtotalitaria!K 8atastrophe i! its
e?treme deployme!t7 The omissio! is thus Nuite 8o!siste!t 6ith =eideggerIs i!ability to resist the 4aUi
temptatio!+

the Jbet6ee!:t6o:deathsK is the hell 6hi8h our 8e!tury realiUed or still promises to realiUe- a!d it is to
this that .a8a! replies a!d to 6hi8h he 6a!ts to make psy8hoa!alysis respo!sible7 Gid he !ot say that
politi8s is the JholeK o metaphysi8sM The s8e!e 6ith =eideggerEa!d there is o!eEis i! its e!tirety
lo8ated here7
20
This also a88ou!ts or the disturbi!g ambiguity o =eideggerIs des8riptio! o death i!
e?termi!atio! 8amps as !o lo!ger authe!ti8 death- i!volvi!g the i!dividualIs assumptio! o its o6!
death as the possibility o its highest impossibility- but just a!other a!o!ymous i!dustrial:te8h!ologi8al
pro8essEpeople do !ot really JdieK i! the 8amps- they are just i!dustrially e?termi!ated7 =eidegger
thus obs8e!ely suggests that the vi8tims murdered i! the 8amps someho6 did !ot die Jauthe!ti8ally-K
thereby tra!slati!g their utter sueri!g i!to subje8tive J!o!:authe!ti8ity7K The Nuestio! he ails to raise
is pre8isely ho6 they subje8tiviUed @related toA their predi8ame!t7 Their death 6as i!deed a! i!dustrial
pro8ess o e?termi!atio! or their e?e8utio!ers- but not for themselves7
3alm`s here makes a! a8ute observatio!+ it is as i .a8a!Is impli8it 8li!i8al reproa8h to
=eideggerIs e?iste!tial a!alyti8 o Dasein as Jbei!g:to6ards:deathK is that it is appropriate o!ly or
!euroti8s a!d ails to a88ou!t or psy8hoti8s7
21
A psy8hoti8 subje8t o88upies a! e?iste!tial positio! or
6hi8h there is !o pla8e i! =eideggerIs mappi!g- the positio! o someo!e 6ho i! a 8ertai! se!se
Jsurvives his o6! death7K Csy8hoti8s !o lo!ger it =eideggerIs des8riptio! o DaseinIs e!gaged
e?iste!8e- their lie !o lo!ger i!volves reely e!gagi!g i! a utural proje8t agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o
assumi!g o!eIs pastT their lie is beyo!d J8areK @SorgeA- their bei!g is !o lo!ger dire8ted Jto6ards
death7K
This e?8ess o 1ouissance that resists symboliUatio! @logosA is the reaso! 6hy- i! the i!al t6o
de8ades o his tea8hi!g- .a8a! @sometimes almost patheti8allyA i!sists that he 8o!siders himsel a!
a!tiphilosopher- someo!e 6ho rebels agai!st philosophy+ philosophy is o!to:logy- its basi8 premise
isEas Carme!ides- the irst philosopher- had already put itEJthi!ki!g a!d bei!g are the same-K there is
a mutual a88ord bet6ee! thi!ki!g @logos as reaso! or spee8hA a!d bei!g7 )p to a!d i!8ludi!g
=eidegger- the 3ei!g philosophy had i! mi!d 6as al6ays the bei!g 6hose house 6as la!guage- the
bei!g sustai!ed by la!guage- the bei!g 6hose horiUo! 6as ope!ed by la!guageT or- as /ittge!stei! put
it+ the limits o my la!guage are the limits o my 6orld7 Agai!st this o!to:logi8al premise o
philosophy- .a8a! o8uses o! the Feal o 1ouissance as somethi!g 6hi8h- though ar rom bei!g simply
e?ter!al to la!guage @it is rather Je?:timateK 6ith regard to itA- resists symboliUatio!- remai!s a oreig!
ker!el 6ithi! it- appeari!g as a rupture- 8ut- gap- i!8o!siste!8y- or impossibility+

9 8halle!ge a!y philosopher to a88ou!t !o6 or the relatio! that there is bet6ee! the emerge!8e o the
sig!iier a!d the 6ay 1ouissance relates to bei!g O 4o philosophy- 9 say- meets us here today7 The
6ret8hed aborted reaks o philosophy 6hi8h 6e drag behi!d us rom the begi!!i!g o the last
[!i!etee!th\ 8e!tury as habits that are alli!g apart- are !othi!g but a 6ay o da!8i!g arou!d rather tha!
8o!ro!ti!g this Nuestio!- 6hi8h is the o!ly Nuestio! about truth a!d 6hi8h is 8alled- a!d !amed by
Freud- the death drive- the primordial maso8hism o 1ouissance O All philosophi8al spee8h es8apes
a!d 6ithdra6s here7
22
9t is i! this se!se that .a8a! des8ribes his positio! as the Jrealism o 1ouissance7K The J!aturalK
e!emy o this realism is- o 8ourse- =egelIs Jpa!logism-K dismissed by .a8a! as the 8lima? o
o!tology- o philosophi8al logi8 @the sel:deployme!t o logosA as the total e?pla!atio! o bei!g-
through 6hi8h bei!g loses its opa8ity a!d be8omes totally tra!spare!t7 3ut- as 6e have see!- thi!gs
6ith =egel are !ot so simple7 Follo6i!g .a8a!Is o6! ormulae o se?uatio!- is !ot the obverse o
=egelIs basi8 thesis- Jthere is !othi!g 6hi8h is !ot logos-K the assertio! o a !o!:AllEJ!ot:all is
logos-K or logos is !ot:all- si!8e it is 8orroded a!d tru!8ated rom 6ithi! by a!tago!isms a!d ruptures-
a!d !ever ully itselM
Cerhaps .a8a! 6as someho6 obs8urely a6are o all this- as implied i! the above:Nuoted
passage by the 8urious a!d u!e?pe8ted limitatio! o his brutal dismissal o philosophy to the J6ret8hed
aborted reaks o philosophy 6hi8h 6e drag behi!d us rom the begi!!i!g o the last 8e!tury-K that is-
to post:=egelia! thought7 9! other 6ords- the more obvious thi!g to say 6ould have bee! that it is
pre8isely post:=egelia! thought 6hi8h breaks 6ith o!to:logy- asserti!g the prima8y o a tra!s:logi8al
/ill or .ieEi! the a!ti:logos @a!tiphilosophyA that ru!s rom late S8helli!g through S8hope!hauer to
4ietUs8he7 9t is as i .a8a! had here lear!ed =eideggerIs lesso!+ ,ar?Is ormula Jbei!g determi!es
8o!s8ious!essK is !ot radi8al e!oughEall the talk about the a8tual lie o e!gaged subje8tivity as
opposed to Jmere spe8ulative thoughtK remai!s trapped 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o o!tology- be8ause @as
=eidegger demo!stratedA bei!g 8a! o!ly arise through logos7 The diere!8e 6ith =eidegger is that
.a8a!- i!stead o a88epti!g this a88ord @same!essA bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d logos- tries to move beyo!d it-
to a dime!sio! o the Feal i!di8ated by the impossible ju!8ture bet6ee! the subje8t a!d 1ouissance7 4o
6o!der- the!- that 6ith regard to a!?iety .a8a! preers *ierkegaard to =eidegger+ he per8eives
*ierkegaard as the a!ti:=egel or 6hom the parado? o Dhristia! aith sig!als a radi8al break 6ith the
A!8ie!t 1reek o!tology @i! 8o!trast to =eideggerIs redu8tio! o Dhristia!ity to a mome!t i! the
pro8ess o the de8li!e o that o!tology i! medieval metaphysi8sA7 Faith is a! e?iste!tial leap i!to 6hat
@rom a! o!tologi8al vie6poi!tA 8a! o!ly appear as mad!ess- a 8raUy de8isio! u!6arra!ted by a!y
reaso!E*ierkegaardIs 1od is really Jbeyo!d 3ei!g-K a 1od o the Feal- !ot the 1od o philosophers7
/hi8h is 6hy- agai!- .a8a! 6ould a88ept =eideggerIs amous stateme!t- rom the 1%20s- 6he! he
aba!do!ed the Datholi8 Dhur8h- that religio! is a mortal e!emy o philosophyEbut he 6ould see this
as all the more reaso! to sti8k to the 8ore o the Feal i!here!t i! the religious e?perie!8e7
The .a8a!ia! Jsubje8tK !ames a gap i! the symboli8- its status is FealEthis is 6hy- as 3alm`s
poi!ted out i! his 8ru8ial semi!ar o! the logi8 o the a!tasy @1%''X$A- ater more tha! a de8ade o
struggli!g 6ith =eidegger- .a8a! a88omplishes his parado?i8al a!d @or someo!e 6ho adheres to
=eideggerIs !otio! o moder! philosophyA totally u!e?pe8ted move rom =eidegger ba8k to Ges8artes-
to the Dartesia! cogito7 There really is a parado? here+ .a8a! irst a88epts =eideggerIs poi!t that the
Dartesia! cogito- 6hi8h grou!ds moder! s8ie!8e a!d its mathemati8iUed u!iverse- heralds the highest
orgetti!g o 3ei!gT but or .a8a!- the Feal o 1ouissance is pre8isely e?ter!al to 3ei!g- so that 6hat
6as or =eidegger the argume!t against the cogito be8omes or .a8a! the argume!t for itEthe Feal o
1ouissance 8a! o!ly be approa8hed 6he! 6e e?it the domai! o bei!g7 This is 6hy- or .a8a!- !ot o!ly
is the cogito !ot to be redu8ed to the sel:tra!spare!8y o pure thought- but- parado?i8ally- the cogito is
the subje8t o the u!8o!s8iousEa gap or 8ut i! the order o 3ei!g i! 6hi8h the Feal o 1ouissance
breaks through7
H 8ourse- this cogito is the cogito Ji! be8omi!g-K !ot yet the res cogitans- the thi!ki!g
substa!8e 6hi8h ully parti8ipates i! 3ei!g a!d i! the logos7 9! the semi!ar o! the logi8 o a!tasy-
.a8a! reads the truth o Ges8artesIs cogito ergo sum more radi8ally tha! i! his earlier semi!ars- 6here
he played e!dlessly o! variatio!s o Jsubverti!gK the subje8t7 =e bega! 6ith de8e!teri!g bei!g i!
relatio! to thoughtEJ9 am !ot 6here 9 thi!k-K the 8ore o my bei!g @J5ern unseres WesensKA is !ot i!
my @sel:A8o!s8ious!essT ho6ever- he Nui8kly be8ame a6are that su8h a readi!g o!ly paves the 6ay or
the irratio!alist .ebensphilosophie topi8 o .ie deeper tha! mere thi!ki!g or la!guage- 6hi8h ru!s
8ou!ter to .a8a!Is basi8 thesis that the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious is Jstru8tured like a la!guage-K that is- is
thoroughly Jratio!alK or dis8ursive7 So he moved o! to a mu8h more rei!ed J9 thi!k 6here 9 am !ot-K
6hi8h de8e!ters thi!ki!g 6ith regard to my 3ei!g- the a6are!ess o my ull prese!8e+ the )!8o!s8ious
is a purely virtual @i!:e?isti!g- i!sisti!gA Hther Cla8e o a thought 6hi8h es8apes my bei!g7 The!- there
is a diere!t pu!8tuatio!+ J9 thi!k+ Vthereore 9 amIKEmy 3ei!g devalued to a! illusio! ge!erated by
my thought a!d so o!7 /hat all these versio!s share is their a88e!t o! the gap that separates cogito
rom sum- thought rom bei!gE.a8a!Is aim 6as to u!dermi!e the illusio! o their overlap by poi!ti!g
to a issure i! the appare!t homoge!eity o thi!ki!g:bei!g7 9t 6as o!ly to6ards the e!d o his tea8hi!g
that he asserted their overlapEa !egative o!e- or sure7 9! other 6ords- .a8a! i!ally grasps the most
radi8al Uero:poi!t o the Dartesia! cogito as the poi!t o the !egative i!terse8tio! bet6ee! bei!g a!d
thi!ki!g+ the va!ishi!g poi!t at 6hi8h 9 do!It thi!k and 9 am !ot7 9 am not+ 9 am !ot a substa!8e- a
thi!g- a! e!tity- 9 am redu8ed to a void i! the order o bei!g- to a gap- a bAance7
2"
9 do not thin"+ here-
agai!- .a8a! parado?i8ally a88epts =eideggerIs thesis that @moder! mathematiUedA s8ie!8e Jdoes !ot
thi!kKEbut or him- this pre8isely mea!s that it breaks out o the rame o o!to:logy- o thi!ki!g as
logos 8orrelative to 3ei!g7 As pure cogito- 9 do !ot thi!k- 9 am redu8ed to Jpure @orm oA thoughtK
6hi8h 8oi!8ides 6ith its opposite- that is- 6hi8h has !o 8o!te!t a!d is as su8h !o!:thi!ki!g7 The
tautology o thi!ki!g is sel:8a!8eli!g i! the same 6ay as is the tautology o bei!g- 6hi8h is 6hy- or
.a8a!- the J9 am that 6hi8h 9 amK a!!ou!8ed by the bur!i!g bush to ,oses o! ,ou!t Si!ai i!di8ates a
1od beyo!d 3ei!g- 1od as Feal7
2(
The importa!8e o this .a8a!ia! assertio! o the cogito is that- 6ith regard to the 8ouple
la!guage:6orld- it assures a poi!t e?ter!al to it- a mi!imal poi!t o si!gular u!iversality 6hi8h is
literally 6orld:less- tra!s:histori8al7 This mea!s 6e are 8o!dem!ed to our 6orld- to the herme!euti8
horiUo! o our i!itude- or- as 1adamer put it- to the impe!etrable ba8kgrou!d o histori8al Jprejudi8esK
6hi8h predetermi!e the ield o 6hat 6e 8a! see a!d u!dersta!d7 0very 6orld is sustai!ed by la!guage-
a!d every Jspoke!K la!guage sustai!s a 6orldEthis is 6hat =eidegger 6as aimi!g at 6ith his thesis o!
la!guage as the Jhouse o bei!gKEis this !ot ee8tively our spo!ta!eous ideologyM There is a!
e!dlessly diere!tiated- 8omple? reality 6hi8h 6e- the i!dividuals a!d 8ommu!ities embedded 6ithi!
it- al6ays e?perie!8e rom the parti8ular- i!ite perspe8tive o our histori8al 6orld7 /hat demo8rati8
materialism uriously reje8ts is the !otio! that there 8a! be a! i!i!ite u!iversal Truth 6hi8h 8uts a8ross
this multitude o 6orldsEi! politi8s- this supposedly e!tails a Jtotalitaria!ismK 6hi8h imposes its truth
as u!iversal7 This is 6hy 6e are told to reje8t- or e?ample- the 2a8obi!s- 6ho imposed o!to the
ma!iold !ature o Fre!8h so8iety their u!iversal !otio!s o eNuality a!d other truths- a!d thus
!e8essarily e!ded i! terror7 So there is a!other versio! o the demo8rati8:materialist a?iom+ JAll that
takes pla8e i! todayIs so8iety is a 8o!seNue!8e o the dy!ami8 o postmoder! globaliUatio!- or o the
@8o!servative:!ostalgi8- u!dame!talist- old letist- !atio!alist- religious OA rea8tio!s a!d resista!8es to
itKEto 6hi8h materialist diale8ti8s adds its proviso+ J6ith the e?8eptio! o the radi8al:ema!8ipatory
@8ommu!istA politi8s o truth7K
H 8ourse- the o!ly 6ay or us to arti8ulate this truth is 6ithi! la!guageEby 6ay o torturi!g
la!guage7 As =egel already k!e6- 6he! 6e thi!k- 6e thi!k i! la!guage agai!st la!guage7 This bri!gs
us ba8k to 3e!jami!+ 8ould 6e !ot apply his disti!8tio! bet6ee! mythi8 viole!8e a!d divi!e viole!8e
to the t6o modes o viole!8e 6e 6ere deali!g 6ithM The viole!8e o la!guage to 6hi8h =eidegger
reers is Jmythi8 viole!8eK+ it is a sprach*bildende (ewalt- a la!guage:ormi!g viole!8e- to paraphrase
3e!jami!Is dei!itio! o mythi8 viole!8e as staats*bildendEthe or8e o mythos as primordial
!arrativiUatio! or symboliUatio!- or- to put it i! 3adiouIs terms- the viole!t impositio! o the
tra!s8e!de!tal 8oordi!ates o a /orld o!to the multipli8ity o 3ei!g7 The viole!8e o thi!ki!g @a!d o
poetry- i 6e u!dersta!d it diere!tly rom =eideggerA is- o! the 8o!trary- a 8ase o 6hat 3e!jami!
8alls Jdivi!e viole!8e-K it is sprach*2erstoerend- a la!guage:destroyi!g t6isti!g o la!guage that
e!ables the tra!s:symboli8 Feal o a Truth to tra!spire i! it7 The rehabilitatio! o Ges8artes is thus o!ly
a irst step+ it should be ollo6ed 6ith a rehabilitatio! o Clato7
Furthermore- the a!s6er to 3e!jami!Is Nuestio! 6ith 6hi8h 6e bega! is !ot simply !egative7
There is a Jla!guageK 6hi8h is outside viole!8e- but 3e!jami! looks or it i! the 6ro!g pla8e7 9t is !ot
the la!guage o pea8eul 8ommu!i8atio! amo!g subje8ts- but the la!guage o pure mathemati8s- this
joyul study o multipli8ities7 Should 6e still 8all it la!guageM .a8a!Is a!s6er 6as !o+ he played 6ith
terms like JmathemeK or J6riti!g7K
AN ALTERNATI#E HEIDEGGER

This e?8ess o the cogito over its histori8iUatio! also e!ables us to approa8h i! a !e6 6ay the
ambiguous status o 0vil i! =eidegger7 9! his semi!ar o! S8helli!gIs JTreatise o! Freedom-K
=eidegger has to admit a dime!sio! o radi8al 0vil 6hi8h 8a!!ot be histori8iUed- that is- redu8ed to the
!ihilism o moder! te8h!ology7 9t is to the merit o 3ret Gavis that he has a!alyUed i! detail this
deadlo8k i! =eideggerIs thought7
The period bet6ee! /eing and -ime a!d the 4ietUs8he semi!ars o the late 1%"0s 6as
=eideggerIs most produ8tive period o resear8h 6he!- havi!g a88epted the ultimate ailure o his
origi!al proje8t- he bega! looki!g or a !e6 begi!!i!g7 Crese!ti!g the 8o!8lusio! o this sear8h i! the
4ietUs8he semi!ars- =eidegger established his Jgra!d !arrativeK o the history o the /est as the
history o the oblivio! o 3ei!g- a!d it 6as o!ly at this poi!t that he histori8iUed /ill as the dei!i!g
eature o moder! subje8tivity a!d its viole!t !ihilism7
2#
9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that a88ou!ts o
=eideggerIs e!gageme!t 6ith 4aUism are usually give!- a! e!gageme!t most palpable i! JH! the
0sse!8e a!d Do!8ept o 4ature- =istory- a!d State-K =eideggerIs semi!ar o the 6i!ter semester o
1%""X(- i! 6hi8h he 6as still 8aptivated by the !ihilist de8isio!ism o the /ill7
The starti!g poi!t @a?iom- eve!A or our readi!g is that a 8ertai! dime!sio! 6hi8h ope!ed up
a!other pote!tial path 6as lost i! the elaboratio! o 6hat o!e is tempted to 8all late =eideggeria!
orthodo?y7 9t is thus importa!t to retur! to =eideggerIs te?ts bet6ee! /eing and -ime a!d the
4ietUs8he semi!ars a!d treat them !ot just as tra!sitio!al 6orks- but as 8o!tai!i!g a pote!tial 6hi8h
be8ame i!visible 6ith the establishme!t o the orthodo?y7 True- i! some se!se- these te?ts remai!
=eideggerIs Jlo6est poi!t-K more or less 8oi!8idi!g 6ith his 4aUi i!volveme!t7 Hur thesis- ho6ever- is
that these same te?ts ope! up possibilities 6hi8h poi!t i! a! e!tirely diere!t dire8tio!- to6ards a
radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8s7 Although !ot pursued by =eidegger himsel- these possibilities hau!t his
te?ts o the 1%"0s as a! omi!ous spe8tral shado67
9! the )S preside!tial ele8tio!s o 2000- Al 1ore- 6ho it 6as ge!erally thought 6ould 6i!-
u!e?pe8tedly lost to 1eorge /7 3ush @as a result o the ele8toral deba8le i! FloridaA7 9! the years
ollo6i!g- 1ore ote! iro!i8ally reerred to himsel as Jthe guy 6ho 6as o!8e the uture )S
preside!tKEa 8ase o the uture logged i!to the past- o somethi!g that 6as to:8ome but 6hi8h
u!ortu!ately did !ot 8ome7 9! the same 6ay- the =eidegger o the mid:1%"0s J6as a uture
8ommu!istK+ his i!volveme!t 6ith the 4aUis 6as !ot a simple mistake- but rather a Jright step i! the
6ro!g dire8tio!-K or =eidegger 8a!!ot be simply dismissed as a 1erma! vol"isch:rea8tio!ary7
2'
.et us the! take a 8loser look at JH! the 0sse!8e a!d Do!8ept o 4ature- =istory- a!d State7K
2$

=eideggerIs starti!g poi!t i!volves a! immediate tra!spositio! o the o!tologi8al diere!8e bet6ee! a!
e!tity @SeiendesA a!d its 3ei!g @SeinA o!to the relatio!ship bet6ee! a people a!d its state+ the state is Ja
6ay o 3ei!g a!d a ki!d o 3ei!g o the people7 The people is the e!tity 6hose 3ei!g is the state7K This
gesture may appear problemati8 rom 6ithi! =eideggerIs o6! ield+ is the state really a !ame or the
3ei!g o a people- or the o!tologi8al horiUo! o ho6 a mea!i!g o 3ei!g is dis8losed to a peopleM 9s
the state !ot rather a set o o!ti8 i!stitutio!s a!d pra8ti8esM 9 the state is the 3ei!g o a people- the! Jit
is ater all impossible to 8o!sider the people 6ithout a stateEthe e!tity 6ithout its 3ei!g- i! a 8ertai!
se!se7K Goes this mea! that those peoples 6hi8h do !ot have a state are e?8luded rom the history o
3ei!gM 9t is i!teresti!g to !ote here ho6- i! 8o!trast to the usual per8eptio! o him as a! advo8ate o
provi!8ial lie- =eidegger 8learly opposes homela!d to atherla!d+

The homela!d is !ot to be 8o!used 6ith the atherla!d7 /e 8a! speak o the state o!ly 6he! to
grou!ded!ess is added the 6ill to e?pa!sio!- or ge!erally speaki!g- i!tera8tio!7 A homela!d is
somethi!g 9 have o! the basis o my birth7 There are Nuite parti8ular relatio!s bet6ee! me a!d it i! the
se!se o !ature- i! the se!se o !atural or8es7 =omela!d e?presses itsel i! grou!ded!ess a!d bei!g
bou!d to the earth7 3ut !ature 6orks o! the huma! bei!g- grou!ds him- o!ly 6he! !ature belo!gs as a!
e!viro!me!t- so to speak- to the people 6hose member that huma! bei!g is7 The homela!d be8omes
the 6ay o 3ei!g o a people o!ly 6he! the homela!d be8omes e?pa!sive- 6he! it i!tera8ts 6ith the
outsideE6he! it be8omes a state7 For this reaso!- peoples or their subgroups 6ho do !ot step out
beyo!d their 8o!!e8tio! to the homela!d i!to their authe!ti8 6ay o 3ei!gEi!to the stateEare i!
8o!sta!t da!ger o losi!g their peoplehood a!d perishi!g7 This is also the great problem o those
1erma!s 6ho live outside the borders o the Fei8h+ they do have a 1erma! homela!d- but they do !ot
belo!g to the state o the 1erma!s- the Fei8h- so they are deprived o their authe!ti8 6ay o 3ei!g7
Femember that these li!es 6ere delivered i! 1%"(Edo they !ot imply that the 6ay to resolve
this Jgreat problemK is to anne& to the Fei8h the homela!d o those 1erma!s livi!g outside the 1erma!
state- a!d thus to e!able them to ully parti8ipate i! their Jauthe!ti8 6ay o 3ei!gK @i7e7- 6hat =itler
a8tually did a 8ouple o years laterAM =eidegger 8o!ti!ues 6ith his a!alysis+ 6hat happe!s to a people
@6ol"A 6he! it de8ides to orm a stateM J/e should urther i!Nuire i!to 6hat 6e u!dersta!d by
Vpeople-I si!8e- i! the Fre!8h Fevolutio!- the a!s6er 6as also+ the people7K @4ote the !egative to!e+ 6e
should i!Nuire urther- si!8e it is sure that 6e do !ot mea! JpeopleK i! the se!se o the Fre!8h
Fevolutio!7A 9! the Jde8isio! or a state-K a people determi!es itsel by 6ay o de8idi!g or a 8ertai!
ki!d o state- or- to paraphrase the 6ell:k!o6! proverb+ tell me 6hat ki!d o a state a people has- a!d 9
6ill tell you 6hat ki!d o people it is7 =uma!s have 8o!s8ious!essT they !ot o!ly i!tera8t 6ith thi!gs
like a!imals- they 8are about them- k!o6i!gly relate to them7 ,embers o a people thus k!o6 a!d 8are
about their state- they 6ill it7 For a people- their state is !ot just a! i!strume!t o their 6elare- but a
thi!g that matters- a thi!g they love a!d are ready to sa8rii8e themselves or- a! obje8t o their eros7
The 8o!stitutio! o a state is !ot just a matter o ratio!al 8o!sideratio! a!d !egotiatio!- o a so8ial
8o!tra8t 6hi8h regulates the 6elare o i!dividuals- but a 8ommitme!t to a visio! o shared lie7
9- the!- the people is the e!tity 6hi8h is i! the mode a!d 6ay o the state- 6e should urther
spe8iy the Nuestio!+ J/hat ki!d o shape or impri!t does the people make o! the state- a!d the state o!
the peopleMK =eidegger reje8ts the irst a!s6er- the shape o a! orga!ism- as missi!g the spe8ii8ally
huma! dime!sio!T the same holds or the ge!eral a!s6er+ Jorder-K si!8e a!y obje8ts- books- sto!es- 8a!
also be arra!ged i! a! order7 J=o6ever- 6hat does provide a! appropriate a!s6er is order i! the se!se
o domi!atio!- ra!k- leadership a!d ollo6i!g [0errschaft! 7ang! FVhrung und (efolgschaft\7 /hat
remai!s ope! here is+ 6ho domi!atesMK 9! its authe!ti8 mode- the relatio!ship o domi!atio! a!d
ollo6i!g is grou!ded i! a 8ommo! 6ill- i! a 8ommitme!t to a shared goal+ JH!ly 6here the leader a!d
those led by him are brought together i! o!e desti!y [Schic"sal\ a!d struggle or the realiUatio! o o!e
idea- does a true order gro67K /here this shared 8ommitme!t 6hi8h grou!ds the readi!ess to ight is
la8ki!g- domi!atio! tur!s i!to e?ploitatio! a!d order is e!or8ed- e?ter!ally imposed upo! the people7
This is 6hat happe!s i! the moder! liberal epo8h+ the state order is redu8ed to a! abstra8t !otio! o
order- the state be8omes =obbesIs .eviatha! imposed o! the people as the age!t o absolute
sovereig!ty 6hi8h- i!stead o e?pressi!g the deepest 6ill o the people- mo!opoliUes all viole!8e a!d
a8ts as the or8e o la6 8o!strai!i!g the 6ill o i!dividuals7 H!ly ater domi!atio! is redu8ed to
sovereig!ty does the Fre!8h Fevolutio! be8ome possible- i! 6hi8h sovereig! po6er is tra!serred to
the opposite pole o the so8ial order- to the people+ JThe esse!8e o the Fre!8h Fevolutio! 8a! be
properly u!derstood a!d e?plai!ed o!ly rom the pri!8iple o sovereig!ty i! absolutism- as its 8ou!ter:
phe!ome!o!7K
9! 1erma!y itsel- the livi!g u!ity o the state a!d the people bega! to disi!tegrate 6ith
3ismar8k+

/e have heard that a people- i! additio! to !eedi!g a leader- also !eeds a traditio! that is 8arried o! by
a politi8al !obility7 The Se8o!d Fei8h ell prey to a! irreparable 8ollapse ater 3ismar8kIs death- a!d
!ot o!ly be8ause 3ismar8k ailed to 8reate this politi8al !obility7 =e 6as also i!8apable o regardi!g
the proletariat as a phe!ome!o! that 6as justiied i! itsel- a!d to lead it ba8k i!to the state by rea8hi!g
out to it 6ith u!dersta!di!g7
To the obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t that- i! 3ismar8kIs 1erma!y- the 2u!kers 8o!ti!ued to play a
mu8h larger publi8 role tha! i! other 0uropea! states a!d- urthermore- that 3ismar8k pre8isely did
Jrea8h outK to the proletariat 6ith the irst eleme!ts o a 6elare state @so8ial i!sura!8e- et87A-
=eidegger 6ould have probably a!s6ered that 3ismar8kIs 1erma!y 6as a moder! authoritaria!:
bureau8rati8 state par e&cellence7 9! absolutism as 6ell as i! liberal demo8ra8y- the u!ity o 6ill
bet6ee! the leader a!d the people is thus lost+ the state moves bet6ee! the t6o e?tremes- sovereig!
absolute po6er e?perie!8ed by the people as a! e?ter!al authority- a!d the servi8e or i!strume!t o
8ivil so8iety- ulilli!g tasks !e8essary or the smooth ru!!i!g o so8ial lie i! 6hi8h i!dividuals ollo6
their o6! i!terests7 9! both 8ases- the authe!ti8 e?pressio! o the peopleIs 6ill by their leader is
u!thi!kable+

The Nuestio! o the 8o!s8ious!ess o the 6ill o the 8ommu!ity is a problem i! all demo8ra8ies- a
problem 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be8ome ertile 6he! the 6ill o the leader a!d the 6ill o the people are
re8og!iUed i! their esse!tial 8hara8ter7 Hur task today is to dire8t the basi8 relatio!ship o our
8ommu!al bei!g to6ards this a8tuality o people a!d leader- 6here the t6o are o!e i! a8tuality- si!8e
they 8a!!ot be separated7
/hat is there to add to these li!es- spoke! i! 1%"(- to e?plai! 6hy =eidegger e!dorsed the 4aUi
takeoverM Go 6e !ot have here a rather simplisti8 8o!servative:authoritaria! visio! 6hi8h is !ot eve!
very origi!al- si!8e it its pere8tly the sta!dard 8oordi!ates o the 8o!servative:!atio!al rea8tio! to the
/eimar republi8M 9!deed- the o!ly ope! Nuestio! here seems to be 6here- pre8isely- 6e should lo8ate
=eidegger o! the spe8trum deli!eated by the t6o e?tremes o 8ommitted 4aUism a!d politi8al !aSvetL+
6as =eidegger @as 0mma!uel Faye 8laimsA a ully ledged 4aUi- did he dire8tly Ji!trodu8e 4aUism i!to
philosophy-K or 6as he simply politi8ally !aSve- be8omi!g 8aught up i! a politi8al game 6ith !o dire8t
li!ks to his thoughtM 9 propose to ollo6 a diere!t li!e+ !either to assert a dire8t li!k bet6ee!
=eideggerIs thought a!d 4aUism- !or to emphasiUe the gap that divides them @that is- to sa8rii8e
=eidegger as a !aSve or 8orrupt perso! i! order to save the purity o his thoughtA- but to tra!spose this
gap i!to the heart o his thought itsel- to demo!strate ho6 the spa8e or the 4aUi e!gageme!t 6as
ope!ed up by the imma!e!t ailure or i!8o!siste!8y o his thought- by the jumps a!d passages 6hi8h
are JillegitimateK i! terms o this thought itsel7 9! a!y serious philosophi8al a!alysis- e?ter!al 8ritiNue
has to be grou!ded i! imma!e!t 8ritiNue+ he!8e 6e must sho6 ho6 =eideggerIs e?ter!al ailure @his
4aUi i!volveme!tA rele8ts the a8t that he ell short as measured by his o6! aims a!d sta!dards7
FROM ILL TO DRI#E

Su8h a! imma!e!t 8ritiNue o =eidegger has a lo!g history- begi!!i!g 6ith the early
=abermasIs attempt to thi!k J=eidegger agai!st =eidegger7K There are ma!y other perti!e!t readi!gs
alo!g these li!esEsui8e it to me!tio! 2ea!:.u8 4a!8yIs observatio! that- already i! /eing and -ime-
=eidegger stra!gely leaves out the a!alyti8 o Mit*Sein as a dime!sio! 8o!stitutive o Dasein7 Hur
starti!g poi!t 6ill be a diere!t o!e- o8usi!g o! a eature that 8a!!ot but strike the reader o
=eideggerIs te?ts o the 1%"0s- a!d espe8ially o the semi!ar JH! the 0sse!8e a!d Do!8ept o 4ature-
=istory- a!d StateK+ the prepo!dera!8e o the topi8 o the Will7 The homela!d a!d the atherla!d dier
i! that o!ly the latter implies the state- 6hile the ormer is a mere Jprovi!8e-K a disti!8tio! 6hi8h relies
o! the a8t that Jprovi!8eK sta!ds or a passive rooted!ess i! a parti8ular soil a!d set o 8ustoms- 6hile
the state implies a! a8tive 6ill to e?pa!sio! a!d 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith !eighbori!g peoples7 The provi!8e
thus la8ks politi8al 6ill proper- i! 8o!trast to the state- 6hi8h is grou!ded i! politi8al 6ill7 =eideggerIs
@i!Aamous short te?t rom 1%"(- J/hy Go 9 Stay i! the Crovi!8esMK @i! 6hi8h he e?plai!s his reusal
to a88ept a u!iversity post i! 3erli! 6ith reere!8e to a rather ridi8ulous igure o the Jsubje8t supposed
to k!o6-K a simple armer 6ho- ater =eidegger asked him or advi8e- respo!ded o!ly 6ith a shake o
his headA thus takes o! a! u!e?pe8ted propheti8 dime!sio!- poi!ti!g to6ards =eideggerIs later
advo8a8y o the provi!8e as the site o authe!ti8 bei!g over the state as the domai! o 6ill to po6er a!d
domi!atio!7
=o6- the!- should 6e i!terpret this stra!ge persiste!8e o the /ill 6hi8h 8o!ti!ues to hau!t
=eidegger !ot o!ly through the 1%"0s- but eve! later- 6he! its over8omi!g be8omes the very o8us o
his thoughtM 9! his detailed study o! this topi8- 3ret Gavis proposes a t6oold readi!g o this
persiste!8e+ irst- as a sig! o J(elassenheit as a! u!i!ished proje8t-K a! i!di8atio! that =eidegger did
!ot su88eed i! thoroughly Jde8o!stru8ti!gK the /ill- so that it is up to us- 6ho 8o!ti!ue i! his path- to
a88omplish the job a!d dra6 all the 8o!seNue!8es rom (elassenheitT se8o!d- as !e8essitati!g a
disti!8tio! Jbet6ee! @1A 6hat =eidegger 8alls Vthe 6illI o subje8tivity- a u!dame!tal @disAattu!eme!t
that has rise! up a!d prevailed i! a parti8ular epo8hal history o metaphysi8s- a!d @2A 6hat 6e have
@i!terpretively suppleme!ti!g =eideggerA 8alled Vur:6illi!g-I a !o!:histori8al disso!a!t e?8ess 6hi8h
hau!ts the proper esse!8e o !o!:6illi!g7K
2&
Fe8all ho6- i! his readi!g o the ragme!t o
A!a?ima!der o! order a!d disorder- =eidegger 8o!siders the possibility that a! e!tity

may eve! i!sist [bestehen\ upo! its 6hile solely to remai! more prese!t- i! the se!se o perduri!g
[/estaendigen\7That 6hi8h li!gers persists [beharrt\ i! its prese!8i!g7 9! this 6ay it e?tri8ates itsel
rom its tra!sitory 6hile7 9t strikes the 6ilul pose o persiste!8e- !o lo!ger 8o!8er!i!g itsel 6ith
6hatever else is prese!t7 9t stie!sEas i this 6ere the o!ly 6ay to li!gerEa!d aims solely or
8o!ti!ua!8e a!d subsiste!8e7
2%
GavisIs thesis is that this Jrebellious 6hili!gK reers to a !o!:histori8al ur:6illi!g- a 6illi!g
6hi8h is !ot limited to the epo8h o moder! subje8tivity a!d its 6ill to po6er7
"0
3ut o!e should here
raise a more u!dame!tal Nuestio!+ is the /ill the proper !ame or the Jstu8k!essK 6hi8h derails the
!atural lo6M 9s the !ot Freudia! drive @the death driveA a mu8h more appropriate !ameM The sta!dard
philosophi8al 8ritiNue o the Freudia! drive is that it is a!other versio! o the post:=egelia! J/illK irst
developed by the late S8helli!g a!d S8hope!hauer a!d 6hi8h rea8hed its highest ormulatio! i!
4ietUs8he7 9s this the 8ase- ho6everM
A reere!8e to the use o sou!d i! ilm might be o some help here7 Fe8all the remarkable s8e!e
at the begi!!i!g o Sergio .eo!eIs $nce 3pon a -ime in +merica- i! 6hi8h 6e see a pho!e ri!gi!g
loudly- but 6he! a ha!d pi8ks up the re8eiver- the ri!gi!g goes o!Eas i the musi8al lie or8e o the
sou!d is too stro!g to be 8o!tai!ed by reality a!d persists beyo!d its limitatio!s7 Hr re8all a similar
s8e!e rom Gavid .y!8hIs Mulholland Drive- i! 6hi8h a perormer si!gs Foy Hrbiso!Is JDryi!gK o!
stage- but 6he! she 8ollapses u!8o!s8ious- the so!g goes o!7 Therei! resides the diere!8e bet6ee!
the S8hope!haueria! /ill a!d the Freudia! @deathA drive+ 6hile the /ill is the substa!8e o lie- its
produ8tive prese!8e- i! e?8ess over its represe!tatio!s or images- the drive is a persistence which goes
on even when the Will disappears or is suspended+ the i!siste!8e 6hi8h persists eve! 6he! it is
deprived o its livi!g support- the appeara!8e 6hi8h persists eve! 6he! it is deprived o its substa!8e7
H!e has to be very pre8ise here i! order !ot to miss .a8a!Is poi!t @a!d thereby 8o!use desire a!d
driveA+ the drive is !ot a! i!i!ite lo!gi!g or the Thi!g 6hi8h gets i?ated o!to a partial obje8tEthe
JdriveK is this i?atio! itsel i! 6hi8h resides the JdeathK dime!sio! o every drive7 The drive is !ot a
u!iversal thrust @to6ards the i!8estuous Thi!gA 6hi8h brakes a!d is the! broke! up- it is this brake
itsel- a brake o! i!sti!8t- its Jstu8k!ess-K as 0ri8 Sa!t!er 6ould say7
"1
The eleme!tary matri? o the
drive is !ot o!e o tra!s8e!di!g all parti8ular obje8ts to6ards the void o the Thi!g @6hi8h is the!
a88essible o!ly i! its meto!ymi8 sta!d:i!A- but that o our libido getti!g Jstu8kK o! a parti8ular obje8t-
8o!dem!ed to 8ir8ulate arou!d it orever7
9! tryi!g to desig!ate the e?8ess o the drive- its too:mu8h!ess- o!e ote! resorts to the term
Ja!imalityK+ 6hat GeleuUe 8alled the Jbe8omi!g:a!imalK @le devenir*animalA o a huma! bei!g-
re!dered i! a! e?emplary 6ay i! some o *akaIs stories7 The parado? here is that o!e uses the term
Ja!imalityK or the u!dame!tal moveme!t o over8omi!g a!imality itsel- the 6orki!g over o a!imal
i!sti!8tsEthe drive is !ot i!sti!8t but its Jde!aturaliUatio!7K There is- ho6ever- a deeper logi8 to this
parado?+ rom 6ithi! the established huma! u!iverse o mea!i!g- its o6! ou!di!g gesture is i!visible-
i!dis8er!ible rom its opposite- so that it has to appear as its opposite7 This- i! simple terms- is the basi8
diere!8e bet6ee! psy8hoa!alysis a!d Dhristia!ity+ 6hile both agree that the lie o the Jhuma!
a!imalK is disrupted by the viole!t i!trusio! o a properly meta:physi8al JimmortalK dime!sio!-
psy8hoa!alysis ide!tiies this dime!sio! as that o @spe8ii8ally [i!\huma!A se?uality- o the Ju!deadK
drive as opposed to the a!imal i!sti!8t- 6hile Dhristia!ity sees i! se?uality the very or8e 6hi8h drags
huma!s to6ards a!imality a!d preve!ts their a88ess to immortality7 Su8h is the u!bearable J!e6sK o
psy8hoa!alysis+ !ot its emphasis o! the role o se?uality as su8h- but its re!deri!g visible the Jmeta:
physi8alK dime!sio! o huma! se?uality7 The parado? o Dhristia!ity is that- i! order to uphold its
edii8e- it has to viole!tly suppress this meta:physi8al dime!sio! o se?uality- to redu8e it to a!imality7
9! other 6ords- this viole!t de:spiritualiUatio! o the key dime!sio! o bei!g:huma! is the JtruthK o
the Dhristia! elevatio! o huma! spirituality7 )!ortu!ately- =egel does the same i! his theory o
marriageEas does =eidegger too7
The sta!dard idealist Nuestio! J9s there @eter!alA lie ater deathMK should be 8ou!tered by the
materialist Nuestio!+ J9s there lie beore deathMK This is the Nuestio! /ol 3ierma!! asked i! o!e o
his so!gsE6hat bothers a materialist is+ am 9 really alive here a!d !o6- or am 9 just vegetati!g- as a
mere huma! a!imal be!t o! survivalM /he! am 9 really aliveM Cre8isely 6he! 9 e!a8t the Ju!deadK
drive i! me- the Jtoo:mu8h:!essK o lie7 A!d 9 rea8h this poi!t 6he! 9 !o lo!ger a8t dire8tly- but 6he!
JitK @esAE6hose Dhristia! !ame is the =oly SpiritEa8ts through me7 At this poi!t- 9 rea8h the
Absolute7
The !e?t- a!d 8ru8ial- step is to see ho6 this Jstu8k!essK is !ot just a 8o!seNue!8e o our huma!
dei8ie!8y or i!itude- o our i!ability to grasp pure 3ei!g rom our partial perspe8tive @i it 6ere- the!
the solutio! 6ould lie i! a ki!d o Hrie!tal sel:ea8eme!t- a! immersio! i! the primordial VoidAT
rather- this Jstu8k!essK bears 6it!ess to a strie at the very heart o 3ei!g itsel7 Geeply perti!e!t here
is 1regory FriedIs readi!g o =eideggerIs e!tire opus through the i!terpretive le!se o his reere!8e to
=era8litusIs polemos @struggleEi! 1erma!- 5rieg- 5ampf- or- predomi!a!tly i! =eidegger-
+useinanderset2ungA rom the latterIs amous ragme!t #"+ J/ar is both ather o all a!d ki!g o all+ it
reveals the gods o! the o!e ha!d a!d huma!s o! the other- makes slaves o! the o!e ha!d- the ree o!
the other7K
"2
9t is !ot o!ly that the stable ide!tity o ea8h e!tity is temporary- that they all soo!er or
later disappear- disi!tegrate- retur! to the primordial 8haosT their @temporaryA ide!tity itsel emerges
through struggle- or stable ide!tity is somethi!g that must be gai!ed through a! ordealEeve! J8lass
struggleK is already prese!t here- i! the guise o the 6ar 6hi8h Jmakes slaves o! the o!e ha!d- the ree
o! the other7K
There is- ho6ever- a urther step to be take! 6ith regard to polemos+ it is easy to posit struggle
as Jather o allK a!d the! elevate this struggle itsel i!to a higher harmo!y- i! the se!se that 3ei!g
be8omes the hidde! 8o!8ord o the struggli!g poles- like a 8osmi8 musi8 i! 6hi8h the opposites
harmo!iously e8ho ea8h other7 So- to put it blu!tly- is this strie part o the =armo!y itsel- or is it a
more radi8al dis8ord- o!e 6hi8h derails the very =armo!y o 3ei!gM As Gavis per8eptively !otes-
=eidegger is ambiguous here- os8illati!g bet6ee! the radi8ally ope! JstrieK o 3ei!g a!d its
rei!s8riptio! i!to the teleologi8al reversal o Ga!ger i!to Savi!g i! 6hi8h- as 2ea!:.u8 4a!8y put it-
JVdis8ordI is at best 6hat makes Vu!ity appearIK+
""

9s bei!g a ugue i!to 6hi8h all disso!a!8e is i! the e!d !e8essarily harmo!iUedM Hr does evil hau!t the
git o bei!g as its !o!:sublatable disso!a!t e?8essM 9 the ormer idea pulls =eideggerIs thought ba8k
to6ards the systemati8ity o idealism- the latter suggestio! dra6s him i!to the u!8harted regio! o
thi!ki!g the esse!tial !egativity a!d i!itude o bei!g itsel7
"(
4ote ho6 the same reproa8h that =eidegger dire8ted at S8helli!g re8oils ba8k o!to =eidegger
himsel+ or =eidegger- S8helli!g 6as u!able to Ji!e?tri8ably i!s8ribe !o!:sublatable !egativity a!d
i!itude i!to the abyssal heart o bei!g itsel-K
"#
that is- to a88ept that the 3nwesen o evil

is !o lo!ger that o either a! i!esse!tial or diale8ti8ally !e8essary alie!atio! rom a! origi!al ple!umT it
is a! origi!ary disso!a!t e?8ess o the esse!8i!g o bei!g itsel7 The ambivale!t o88urre!8e o bei!g i!
its esse!tial i!itude e!tails the i!eradi8able possibility o evil7
"'
This optio! raises a! eve! more vertigi!ous series o Nuestio!s+ /hat i there is stricto sensu !o
6orld- !o dis8losure o bei!g- prior to this Jstu8k!essKM /hat i there is !o (elassenheit 6hi8h is
disturbed by the e?8ess o 6illi!gM /hat i it is this very e?8ess or stu8k!ess 6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e
or (elassenheitM The primordial a8t is the! !ot the ugue o 3ei!g @or the i!!er pea8e o
(elassenheitA- 6hi8h is later disturbed or perverted by the rise o ur:6illi!gT the primordial a8t is this
ur:6illi!g itsel- its disturba!8e o the J!aturalK ugue7 Cut a!other 6ay+ i! order or a huma! bei!g to
6ithdra6 rom ull immersio! i! its e!viro!me!t i!to the i!!er pea8e o (elassenheit- this immersio!
has irst to be broke! by 6ay o the e?8essive Jstu8k!essK o the drive7 Gavis talks reNue!tly about the
JresidueK o the 6illEa! e?pressio! 6hi8h 8a!!ot but remi!d us o S8helli!gIs Ji!divisible remai!derK
o the Feal 6hi8h 8a!!ot be dissolved or resolved i! its ideal or !otio!al mediatio!7 The 8o!8lusio! to
be dra6! rom this is that 6e must reverse the e!tire perspe8tive a!d per8eive the JresidueK itsel as
8o!stitutive o the very positive order it smears- per8eive the 6ill !ot just as a! irredu8ible obsta8le- but
as a positive 8o!ditio! o (elassenheit7
=eideggerIs relatio! to S8helli!g is 8ru8ial here+ his t6o 8o!se8utive readi!gs o the latterIs
treatise o! reedom play the same symptomal role as do his t6o 8o!se8utive readi!gs o the 8horus
rom +ntigoneGi! both 8ases- the se8o!d readi!g is a Jregressio!-K aili!g to resolve the 8reative
te!sio! o the irst7 A88ordi!g to =eidegger- the u!iNue!ess o S8helli!g 6as to try to elaborate a
Jsystem o reedomK as a Jmetaphysi8s o evilK+ or S8helli!g- reedom is !ot abstra8t idealist reedom-
reedom o the u!8o!strai!ed deployme!t o Feaso!- but the 8o!8rete reedom o a livi!g huma! bei!g
8aught up i! the te!sio! bet6ee! 1ood a!d 0vil- a!d the possibility o su8h utterly 8o!ti!ge!t a8tual
0vil 8a!!ot be justiied i! the terms o the systemati8ity o the Absolute7 /hat S8helli!g 6as !ot ready
to do 6as ully e!dorse the abyss o reedom by aba!do!i!g the idealist:systemati8 rame a!d
a88epti!g huma! i!itude a!d temporality as our u!surpassable horiUo!7
3ut 6hat i it is pre8isely this idealist:systemati8 rame o the Absolute 6hi8h e!ables S8helli!g
to make his most radi8al step- that o grou!di!g huma! reedom i! the 6errVc"theit
@mad!ess>i!versio!A o the Absolute itselM The mome!t 6e aba!do! the rame o the Absolute a!d
e!ter the spa8e o post:=egelia! i!itudeE6here- as the story goes- 6e are deali!g J!ot 6ith
abstra8tio!s- embodied !otio!s- but 6ith 8o!8rete livi!g i!dividuals- their pai! a!d strugglesKEthe
u!dame!tal S8helli!gia! Nuestio! J=o6 is the Absolute to be stru8tured i! order to re!der huma!
reedom thi!kableMK be8omes mea!i!gless7 9! .a8a!ese- 6ithi! this horiUo! o i!itude- o!ly alie!atio!
@o huma!ity rom itsel- rom its pote!tial- et87A is thi!kable- !ot separatio! @o the Absolute rom
itselA7 9! Dhristia! terms- o!ly the over8omi!g o 1odIs estra!geme!t rom ma! is thi!kable- !ot the
ke!osis o 1od himsel- his sel:emptyi!g a!d 9!8ar!atio!7 S8helli!g himsel struggled 6ith the
radi8ality o his 8o!8lusio!+

it is e!tirely 8orre8t to say diale8ti8ally that good a!d evil are the same thi!g- o!ly see! rom diere!t
aspe8ts- or evil i! itsel- i7e7- vie6ed i! the root o its ide!tity- is the goodT just as- o! the other ha!d- the
good- vie6ed i! its divisio! or !o!:ide!tity- is evil O there is o!ly o!e pri!8iple or everythi!gT it is
o!e a!d the same esse!8e O that rules 6ith the 6ill o love a!d the good a!d 6ith the 6ill o 6rath a!d
evil O 0vil- ho6ever- is !ot a! esse!8e but a disso!a!t e?8ess [3nwesen\ 6hi8h has reality o!ly i!
oppositio!- but !ot i! itsel7 A!d or this very reaso! absolute ide!tity- the spirit o love- is prior to evil-
be8ause evil 8a! appear o!ly i! oppositio! to it7
"$
3ut 6e should 8orre8t S8helli!g here+ evil is o!tologi8ally prior to good be8ause JevilK is the
primordial disso!a!8e or e?8ess i! the !atural order o bei!g- the Jstu8k!essK or derailme!t o the
!atural ru! o thi!gs- a!d JgoodK is the se8o!dary @reAi!tegratio! o this e?8ess7 9t is 3nwesen 6hi8h
8reates the spa8e or the appeara!8e o a Wesen- or- i! =egelese+ 1ood is sel:sublated @u!iversaliUedA
0vil7 So 6hy 6as =eidegger !ot ready to go to the e!d hereM /hat lurks behi!d here is- o 8ourse- the
igure o =Zlderli!7 3oth =Zlderli! a!d =eidegger deploy the same apo8alypti8:es8hatologi8al logi8 i!
6hi8h history 8ulmi!ates i! total da!ger a!d devastatio!+ i! order to gai! salvatio!- o!e must irst pass
through the greatest da!ger7
"&
H 8ourse- =eideggerIs emphasis is o! ho6 this logi8 must be
disti!guished rom the =egelia! J!egatio! o the !egatio!7K 3ut ho6 does =eidegger disti!guish his
o6! !otio! o the JstrieK at the heart o 3ei!g rom the 1erma! 9dealist !otio! o the !egativity at the
heart o the AbsoluteM H!e disti!guishi!g eature is that- i! 1erma! 9dealism- !egativity is a
subordi!ate mome!t i! the moveme!t o the 9deaIs sel:mediatio!- i! the game that the Absolute plays
6ith itsel- merely givi!g its opposite:other e!ough rope to ha!g itsel7 9! =egel- a88ordi!g to Gavis-

Spirit rea8hes out toEor i!deed posits out o itselEthe other tha! itsel o!ly to 8u!!i!gly bri!g this
other ba8k i!to its origi!al same!ess7 Spirit !eeds this rei!8orporatio! o the other eve! at the risk o
alie!ati!g itsel rom itsel- sa8rii8i!g its i!itial solitary immedia8y or the sake o the i!8orporative
tra!sormatio! o all other!ess i!to a mediated a!d thus sel:8o!s8iously sel:ide!ti8al totality7
"%
9! spite o his breakthrough to the very edge o metaphysi8s- S8helli!g remai!s 8aught i! the
same trap+ his dei!itio! o huma! reedom as the reedom or good a!d evil i!di8ates a shit rom the
systemati8 9dealist sel:developme!t o the Absolute to the radi8al e?iste!tial ope!!ess o the a8tual
i!ite huma! bei!g7 The status o this reedom- ho6ever- remai!s proou!dly ambiguous+

Goes 1odIs love let the grou!d operate or the sake o the most ar:rea8hi!g revelatio! o his
u!8o!ditio!al subje8tivityEa sel:revelatio! o absolute mastery that 6ould reNuire so mu8h as the
submissio! o Jree slavesKM Hr does this love i!timate a letti!g:be that lets go o the 6ill to 8losure o
the system o the Absolute- o the very 6ill to u!8o!ditio!al subje8tivity itselM
(0
)ltimately- as Gavis !otes- S8helli!g opts or the se8o!d versio!+

The 6ill o love Jlets the grou!d operateK i! i!depe!de!8eT it allo6s the i!surge!8e o the 6ill o the
grou!d i! order that- by ultimately subordi!ati!g this rebellious 6ill o dark!ess to the order o light- it
may ma!iest its o6! om!ipote!8e7 1od lets ma! reely be8ome the i!verse god- so that the disso!a!8e
o evil may i! the e!d serve as a oil or the sake o the revelatio! o the superior harmo!y o divi!e
love7
(1
3e8ause o this limitatio!- JS8helli!gIs bold attempt to thi!k a Vsystem o reedomI as a
Vmetaphysi8s o evilI i! the e!d alls ba8k i!to a Vsystemati8ityI o the Absolute7 0vil is reNuired a!d
justiied or the sake o the revelatio! o the om!ipote!8e o the divi!e 6ill o love7K
(2
9! 8o!trast to
=egel a!d S8helli!g- so the argume!t goes- =eideggerIs JstrieK is !ot the 8u!!i!g game o 3ei!gIs
sel:mediatio!- but a ge!ui!ely Jope!K game i! 6hi8h !othi!g guara!tees the out8ome- si!8e the strie
is primordial a!d 8o!stitutive a!d there is !o Jre8o!8iliatio!K that 6ould abolish it7 3ut is this s8heme
adeNuateM /ith regard to =egel- it misses the key aspe8t o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- the tra!s:
substa!tiatio! 6hi8h marks the diale8ti8al reversal+ the Jsame!essK to 6hi8h the pro8ess retur!s ater
alie!atio! is !ot Jsubsta!tially the sameK as the i!itial same!ess- it is a!other Same!ess 6hi8h totaliUes
the dispersed mome!ts7 This is 6hy alie!atio! or !egatio! is irredu8ible+ 6hat happe!s i! the J!egatio!
o the !egatio!K is the a88omplishme!t o !egatio!T i! it- the immediate starti!g poi!t is dei!itively
lost7 So there is !o si!gle Absolute Subje8t to 8u!!i!gly play the game o sel:alie!atio! 6ith
itselEthis subje8t emerges- is 8o!stituted- through alie!atio!7 9!soar as the starti!g poi!t is the
immedia8y o !ature- Spirit Jretur!s to itselK i! i!ter!aliUi!g:itsel rom the e?ter!ality o !ature- a!d
it constitutes itsel through this Jretur! to itsel7K Hr- to put it i! the traditio!al terms o 1ood versus
0vil- the =egelia! 1ood is !ot the Absolute that mediates or sublates 0vil- it is 0vil itsel 6hi8h gets
u!iversaliUed a!d thus reappears as 1ood7 =egelIs visio! here is eve! more radi8al tha! that o the
Jope!K strie o 1ood a!d 0vil+ or him- this strie is i!here!t to 0vil- it is 0vil- a!d 1ood !ames
merely the partial a!d ragile sel:sublatio!s o 0vil7
T=0 4H4:=9STHF9DA. DHF0 HF =9STHF9D9T5

/hat 6e 8o!ro!t here is the problem o histori8ity at its most radi8al+ a histori8ity 6hi8h goes
Jall the 6ay do6!K a!d 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the deployme!t or revelatio! i! history o a !o!:histori8al
Absolute7 9! a 6ay- the true 5ehre rom Sein und Neit to the late =eidegger is the shit rom ahistori8al
ormal:tra!s8e!de!tal a!alysis to radi8al histori8ity7
("
To put it i! @the !ot Nuite appropriateA terms o
1erma! 9dealism- =eideggerIs a8hieveme!t is to elaborate a radi8ally histori8iUed tra!s8e!de!talism+
=eideggeria! histori8ity is the histori8ity o tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!s themselves- o the diere!t modes
o the dis8losure o bei!g- 6ith !o age!t regulati!g the pro8essEhistori8ity happe!s as a! es gibt ?il y
a@- the radi8ally 8o!ti!ge!t abyss o a 6orld:game7
((
This radi8al histori8ity rea8hes its dei!itive ormulatio! 6ith the shit rom 3ei!g to Ereignis-
6hi8h thoroughly u!dermi!es the idea o 3ei!g as a ki!d o super:subje8t o history- se!di!g its
messages or epo8hs to ma!7 Ereignis mea!s that 3ei!g is nothing but the chiaroscuro o these
messages- nothing but the 6ay it relates to ma!7 ,a! is i!ite- a!d Ereignis also+ the very stru8ture o
i!itude- the play o Dleari!g or Do!8ealme!t 6ith !othi!g behi!d it7 J9tK is just the imperso!al it- a
Jthere is7K There is a! u!:histori8al dime!sio! at 6ork here- but 6hat is u!:histori8al is the very ormal
stru8ture o histori8ity itsel7
(#
9t is this emphasis o! radi8al histori8ity that orever separates
=eidegger rom so:8alled Hrie!tal thought+ i! spite o the similarity o (elassenheit to !irva!a a!d so
o!- the attai!me!t o the Uero:level o !irva!a is mea!i!gless 6ithi! the horiUo! o =eideggerIs
thoughtEit 6ould mea! somethi!g like doi!g a6ay 6ith all shado6s o 8o!8ealme!t7
('
.ike *akaIs
ma! rom the 8ou!try 6ho lear!s that the Goor is there or him o!ly- Dasein has to e?perie!8e ho6
3ei!g !eeds us- ho6 our strie 6ith 3ei!g is 3ei!gIs strie 6ith itsel7
/hat =eidegger 8alls Ereignis is the eve!t:arrival o Truth- o a !e6 Jherme!euti8K horiUo!
6ithi! 6hi8h bei!gs appear as 6hat they areE3ei!g is- or =eidegger- the JSe!se o 3ei!g7K
=eideggerIs o!tologi8al diere!8e is the diere!8e bet6ee! bei!gs a!d their !o!:o!ti8 horiUo! o
mea!i!g7 Some readers i!terpret o!tologi8al diere!8e i! terms o esse!8e versus e?iste!8eEas the
diere!8e bet6ee! what thi!gs are a!d the mere a8t that they areEa!d poi!t out that metaphysi8s
overlooks this diere!8e 6he! it subordi!ates bei!g to some esse!tial e!tity @9dea- 1od- Subje8t- /ill
OA7 3ut- as =eidegger makes 8lear i! his J.etter o! =uma!ism-K su8h a Sartrea! reversal 6hi8h asserts
the priority o e?iste!8e over esse!8e @re8all SartreIs disturbi!g des8riptio! o the i!ertia o se!seless
e?iste!8e i! his auseaA remai!s 6ithi! the 8o!i!es o metaphysi8s7 For =eidegger- the poi!t o
o!tologi8al diere!8e is pre8isely that to dra6 su8h a li!e o separatio! bet6ee! mere e?iste!8e a!d its
horiUo! o se!se is impossible+ radi8al histori8ity mea!s that bei!g is al6ays already dis8losed i! a
horiUo! o mea!i!g- !ever as pure !eutral bei!g7 So 6he! 3adiou 6rites that Ja poem is !ot a guardia!
o bei!g- as =eidegger thought- but the e&position i! la!guage o the resour8es o appeari!g-K he is-
rom the =eideggeria! sta!dpoi!t- 8o!stru8ti!g a alse a!d mea!i!gless oppositio!+ 6hat =eidegger
8alls J3ei!gK is the Jtruth o 3ei!g-K the spe8ii8 dis8losure o a 6orld as the horiUo! o appeari!g7
($

/e 8a! measure here the dista!8e that separates =eideggerIs !otio! o o!tologi8al diere!8e rom
3adiouIs+

/e k!o6 that =eidegger li!ked the desti!y o metaphysi8s to the misu!dersta!di!g o the o!tologi8al
diere!8e 6hi8h is thought as the diere!8e bet6ee! bei!g a!d e!tities7 9 o!e i!terprets e!tities as the
JthereK o bei!g- or as the 6orldly lo8aliUatio! o a pure multiple- or as the appeari!g o the multiple:
bei!gE6hi8h is i! a!y 8ase possibleEo!e 8a! say that 6hat =eidegger 8alls o!tologi8al diere!8e
8o!8er!s the imma!e!t gap bet6ee! mathemati8s a!d logi8s7 9! order to ollo6 =eidegger- it 6ould
thus be appropriate to 8all Jmetaphysi8sK every orie!tatio! o a thought 6hi8h 8o!ou!ds u!der the
same 9dea mathemati8s a!d logi8s7
(&
A brie !ote o e?pla!atio!+ or 3adiou- mathemati8s is the o!ly true o!tology- the s8ie!8e o
3ei!g as su8h- i! itsel- 6hi8h 8o!sists o pure multipli8ities o multipli8ities agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o
a Void- 6hile a logi8 is al6ays the logi8 o a 6orld- the imma!e!t stru8ture o the tra!s8e!de!tal
8oordi!ates o a 8ertai! mode o appeari!g o e!tities7 For 3adiou- the multipli8ity o 6orlds is
irredu8ible- a!d there is !o higher u!iyi!g matri? that 6ould allo6 us to dedu8e o!e rom the other- or
to mediate them i!to a higher totalityEtherei! resides the ateul limitatio! o =egelIs logi87
There is !o pla8e i! =eidegger or su8h a !otio! o o!tologi8al diere!8e+ =eideggerIs
o!tologi8al diere!8e is the diere!8e bet6ee! appeari!g e!tities a!d the o!tologi8al horiUo! o their
appeari!g- a!d- rom this perspe8tive- e!tities outside their appeari!g are a pre:o!tologi8al d 6hose
status is totally ambiguous a!d !o!:thematiUed7
A 8loser a!alysis reveals ho6 the radi8al histori8ity embra8ed by the late =eidegger resolves a
deadlo8k 6hi8h had hau!ted the a!alysis o Dasein i! Sein und Neit- i! 6hi8h t6o 8ouples e8ho ea8h
other 6ithout ully overlappi!g7 First- there is the oppositio! bet6ee! Nuhanden a!d 6orhanden-
bet6ee! bei!g e!gaged i! the 6orld a!d adopti!g to6ards it the attitude o a dise!gaged observer-
6hi8h is a! o!tologi8ally se8o!dary mode @6e assume theoreti8al dista!8e 6he! thi!gs malu!8tio!-
6he! our e!gageme!t meets a! obsta8leA7 The!- 6e have the oppositio! bet6ee! authe!ti8 Dasein a!d
its 6erfallenheit i!to Jdas Man-K bet6ee! 8hoosi!g o!eIs proje8t through assumi!g o!eIs mortality-
a!d !o!:authe!ti8 obedie!8e to the a!o!ymous Jthis is 6hat o!e does7K =o6- e?a8tly- are these t6o
8ouples relatedM Hbviously- they orm a ki!d o semioti8 sNuare 6hose terms are disposed alo!g the
t6o a?es o authe!ti8 versus i!authe!ti8 a!d e!gageme!t:i!:the:6orld versus 6ithdra6al:rom:the:
6orld+ there are t6o modes o e!gageme!t- authe!ti8 bei!g:i!:the:6orld a!d i!authe!ti8 Jdas ,a!-K
a!d there are t6o modes o 6ithdra6al- the authe!ti8 assumptio! o o!eIs mortality through a!?iety
a!d the i!authe!ti8 dista!8e o the subje8t to6ards obje8tiviUed Jreality7K The 8at8h is- o 8ourse- that
the t6o i!authe!ti8 modes overlap @partially- at leastA+ i!authe!ti8 e!gageme!t i!volves te8h!ologi8al
ma!ipulatio! i! 6hi8h subje8t sta!ds opposed to Je?ter!al reality7K
=eidegger sometimes hi!ts at a li!k bet6ee! Jdas ,a!K a!d the redu8tio! o thi!gs to
vorhandene obje8ts o theoryT this- ho6ever- implies the sta!dard doubtul presuppositio! that our most
8ommo! 6erfallenheit i!to Jdas ,a!K is stru8tured by the metaphysi8al 8ategoriesEalmost a ki!d o
the =egelia! i!i!ite judgme!t- a 8oi!8ide!8e o opposites+ here- o the most vulgar a!d superi8ial
ollo6i!g the predomi!a!t tre!d o 6hat Jo!eK is supposed to do a!d thi!k- a!d o the high spe8ulative
a!d metaphysi8al eorts o the greatest /ester! thi!kers rom Clato to =egel7 The most su88i!8t
dei!itio! o moder! te8h!ology is pre8isely that it parado?i8ally u!ites 6erfallenheit- immersio! i!
6orldly aairs- the 6ill to domi!ate- 6ith theoreti8al dista!8e+ obje8ts o te8h!ology are !ot Nuhanden-
they are 6orhanden- te8h!ologi8al Feaso! is theoreti8al- !ot pra8ti8al7
The irst task o Sein und Neit is to provide a phe!ome!ologi8al des8riptio! o the Jimmedia8y
o everyday Dasein-K !ot yet 8o!tami!ated by the traditio!al metaphysi8al 8ategori8al apparatus+ 6here
metaphysi8s talks about obje8ts e!do6ed 6ith properties- a phe!ome!ology o everyday lie sees
thi!gs 6hi8h are al6ays already ready:to:use- part o our e!gageme!t- 8ompo!e!ts o a mea!i!gul
6orld:stru8tureT 6here metaphysi8s talks about a subje8t 6ho relates to the 6orld- or is opposed to
obje8ts i! the 6orld- phe!ome!ology sees a huma! bei!g al6ays already i! the 6orld- e!gaged 6ith
thi!gs- a!d so o!7 The idea here is that traditio!al metaphysi8s @6hi8h is to be Jde@8o!Astru8tedK by
phe!ome!ologyA is a ki!d o se8o!dary s8ree!- a! imposed !et6ork 8overi!g up the true stru8ture o
everyday lie7 The task is thus to dispe!se 6ith the metaphysi8al prejudi8es a!d des8ribe phe!ome!a
the 6ay they are i! themselvesT ho6ever- si!8e our predomi!a!t philosophi8al attitude is already
deeply i!e8ted by metaphysi8s- su8h a pure phe!ome!ologi8al des8riptio! is the most dii8ult task-
reNuiri!g the hard 6ork o riddi!g ourselves o traditio!al metaphysi8s7 =eidegger thus sear8hes or the
8o!8eptual apparatus that 6ould sustai! su8h a des8riptio! i! diere!t sour8es- rom Cauli!ia! early
Dhristia!ity to Aristotelia! phronesis7
=eideggerIs o6! lie oers a! iro!i8 8omme!t o! this te!sio! bet6ee! the immedia8y o
everyday lie a!d its metaphysi8al misreadi!g+ it seems that- i! his i!al years at least- he retur!ed to
Datholi8ism- si!8e he let i!stru8tio!s that he should be buried as a Datholi8- 6ith a Dhur8h u!eral7 So
6hile i! his philosophy he theoriUed the immedia8y o pre:metaphysi8al lie- i! his everyday lie he
ultimately remai!ed aithul to Dhristia!ity- 6hi8h- i! his theory- he had dismissed as the result o the
Foma! misreadi!g o the origi!al 1reek dis8losure o 3ei!g- as the key step i! o!to:theologi8al
orgetti!g o 3ei!g- a!d as a metaphysi8al:o!tologi8al s8ree! obus8ati!g the immedia8y o lie7 9t is
thus as i the terms had 8ha!ged pla8es+ =eideggerIs immediate lie 6as metaphysi8ally stru8tured-
6hile his theory ope!ed up the stru8ture o the immedia8y o everyday lie7
As 6e have see!- i! the period that immediately ollo6ed Sein und Neit- havi!g rea8hed a!
impasse i! the proje8t as pla!!ed- =eidegger or a 8ouple o years sear8hed desperately or a
philosophi8al reere!8e poi!t that 6ould e!able him to re:ou!d the proje8t7 H greatest i!terest here
are his t6o attempts to JrepeatK *a!t+ i! 5ant and the )roblem of Metaphysics- he reerred to the
tra!s8e!de!tal imagi!atio! as the key to u!dersta!di!g the primordial temporaliUatio! o 3ei!g- 6hile
i! 1%"0- he briely e?plored the pote!tial o the ,riti<ue of )ractical 7eason- i!terpreti!g the
8ategori8al imperative as Jthe fundamental law of a finite pure willingFK
(%
The u!iNue a8t o authe!ti8
de8isio!- the 8hoi8e o a proje8t dei!i!g o!eIs lieEassumed 6he! o!e rea8hes the border o death as
the ultimate @imApossibility o a huma! lieEis !o6 i!terpreted i! the *a!tia! terms o the subje8tIs
auto!omy a!d sel:legislati!g reedom- as the a8t o pure 6ill 6hi8h u!ilaterally determi!es the la6 o
pra8ti8al reaso!7
=eidegger 6as 6ell a6are that *a!t 6ould reje8t su8h a @reAormulatio!- si!8e- rom the
sta!dpoi!t o his u!iversalist ratio!alism- it sma8ks too mu8h o volu!taristi8 sel:6ill+ the pure
pra8ti8al 6ill does !ot arbitrarily 8reate its o6! la6- it dis8overs it as the a priori tra!s8e!de!tal
stru8ture o every ethi8al a8tivity7 For =eidegger- o 8ourse- it is *a!t 6ho remai!s 6ithi! the 8o!i!es
o ratio!alist:u!iversalist metaphysi8s- u!able to thi!k the i!itude o huma! bei!g7 Gavis- as o!e might
e?pe8t- raises the suspi8io! that =eideggerIs subordi!atio! o ethi8al 6ill to a de8isio!ism o histori8al
8o!ti!ge!8y paved the 6ay or =eideggerIs 4aUi e!gageme!t7
=o6ever- 6e !eed to be very pre8ise here+ the *a!tia! ethi8s o the auto!omy o the 6ill is !ot
a J8og!itiveK ethi8s- a! ethi8s o re8og!iUi!g a!d ollo6i!g the moral .a6 6hi8h is already give!7
=eidegger is basi8ally right i! his readi!g o *a!t+ i! a! ethi8al a8t- 9 do !ot just ollo6 my duty- 9
de8ide 6hat my duty is7 3ut it is pre8isely or this reaso! that *a!t totally reje8ts a!y orm o sa8rii8ial
Jdeerred 6illi!g-K o deerri!g o!eIs 6ill to the 6ill o the State or o a .eader+ moral auto!omy
mea!s pre8isely that 9 have to sta!d ully behi!d my duty- that 9 8a! !ever assume the perverse positio!
o bei!g the i!strume!t o the HtherIs /ill7 The problem 6ith =eidegger here is that- parado?i8ally- he
is !ot Jsubje8tivist:de8isio!istK e!ough+ his early Jde8isio!ismK is all too mu8h the obverse o
respo!di!g toEollo6i!gEa pre:ordai!ed Gesti!y7 Fadi8al Jsubje8tivismK @the i!siste!8e o! the
de8isio!Ea!d the respo!sibility or itEbei!g absolutely mi!eA a!d u!iversalism are !ot opposed- they
are t6o aspe8ts o the same positio! o si!gular u!iversalityT 6hat both are opposed to is the parti8ular
histori8al Gesti!y o a 8ommu!ity @a peopleA7 -his is 6here the possibility o ollo6i!g =itler arises+
6he! 6e re8og!iUe i! him !ot the voi8e o u!iversal Feaso!- but the voi8e o a 8o!8rete histori8al
Gesti!y o the 1erma! !atio!7
The great shit that o88urs i! =eideggerIs thi!ki!g rom the 1%"0s o!6ards lies i! the radi8al
histori8iUatio! o this oppositio!+ traditio!al metaphysi8s is !o lo!ger a alse s8ree! 8overi!g up the
stru8ture o everyday lie- but the elaboratio! o the epo8hal- histori8ally spe8ii8- u!dame!tal
Jattu!eme!tK 6hi8h provides the stru8ture or our lives7 All great metaphysi8s ultimately is a
phe!ome!ologi8al o!tology o the histori8al Jimmedia8y o everyday DaseinK+ Aristotle provided the
o!tology that stru8tured the everyday e?perie!8e o 1reek 8itiUe!sT the philosophy o moder!
subje8tivity provides the stru8ture o 6illi!g- domi!atio!- a!d Ji!!er e?perie!8e-K 6hi8h is the
stru8ture o our daily lives i! moder! dy!ami8 8apitalist so8ieties7 Steppi!g out o metaphysi8s is thus
!o lo!ger just a matter o seei!g through the obus8ati!g !et6ork a!d per8eivi!g the true !ature o
everyday lie- but a matter o histori8al 8ha!ge i! the u!dame!tal attu!eme!t o everyday lie itsel7
The tur! i! philosophy rom traditio!al metaphysi8s to post:metaphysi8al phe!ome!ology is part o the
6orld:histori8al tur! @5ehreA i! 3ei!g itsel7
The !aSve Nuestio! to be asked here is this+ ho6 are igures like ,eister 08khart- A!gelus
Silesius- a!d =Zlderli! possible- ho6 are their i!timatio!s o a !o!:metaphysi8al dime!sio! @o
(elassenheit- o ohne Warum- o the esse!8e o poetryA possible i! the spa8e o su8h radi8aliUed
histori8ityM Go they !ot suggest Jthe possibility o a !o!:histori8al e?8ess to the history o metaphysi8s-
a! e?8ess 6hi8h both 8riti8ally 8alls i!to Nuestio! the seamless rule o its epo8hs a!d airmatively
suggests the possibility o parti8ipati!g i! a tra!sitio! to a! other begi!!i!g beyo!d the 8losure o
metaphysi8s i! the te8h!ologi8al 6ill to 6illKM
#0
The same should be asked apropos everyday lie+ i!
our epo8h o te8h!ology- is our daily lie today ully determi!ed by the epo8hal dis8losure o (estell-
or is there somethi!g i! our daily moresEe!8ou!teri!g a 6ork o art- 6o!deri!g at beauty- a simple
immersio! i! some a8tivityE6hi8h resists te8h!ologyM =eidegger seems to os8illate bet6ee! the
!otio! that su8h dista!tiatio!s are al6ays already i!8luded i! te8h!ology @su8h as tourism- artisti8
8o!sumptio!- et87- 6hi8h allo6 us to re8harge a!d the! retur! 6ith more e!ergy to the te8h!ologi8al
u!iverseA a!d the opposite idea thatEsi!8e te8h!ology is !ot redu8ible to ma8hi!es a!d so o!- but is a
6ay that 3ei!g is dis8losed to usEo!e 8a! 8o!ti!ue to use te8h!ology at a dista!8e- 6ithout bei!g
8aught up i! (estell a!d redu8i!g e!tities to material or te8h!ologi8al ma!ipulatio!+

/e 8a! use te8h!i8al devi8es- a!d yet 6ith proper use also keep ourselves so ree o them- that 6e may
let go o them at a!y time O let them alo!e as somethi!g 6hi8h does !ot ae8t our most i!!er a!d
proper bei!g O /e let te8h!i8al devi8es e!ter our daily lie- a!d at the same time leave them outside
O 9 6ould 8all this 8omportme!t to6ard te8h!ology 6hi8h e?presses JyesK at the same time as J!o-K
by a! old 6ord+ releaseme!t [(elassenheit\ to6ard thi!gs7
#1
=ere 6e e!8ou!ter =eidegger at his 6orst- pere8tly itti!g the J8oolK postmoder! attitude7 The
greatest Hrie!tal 6isdom is supposed to reside i! the ability !ot to simply 6ithdra6 rom the 6orld- but
to parti8ipate i! its aairs 6ith a! i!!er dista!8e- to Jdo it 6ithout doi!g it-K 6ithout bei!g really
e!gaged i! it7 9ro!i8ally- this versio! o (elassenheit i!ds its eNuivale!t i! todayIs e?pressio!
J8oolKEa J8oolK perso! does everythi!g 6ith a! air o i!diere!8e or i!!er dista!8e7
FFH, (E.+SSE0EI- TH D.ASS STF)11.0

The same te!sio! bet6ee! histori8ity a!d the a:histori8al dime!sio! is at 6ork also i! the
opposite o the /ill- i! (elassenheit7 (elassenheit is !ot merely the !ame or ma!Is !o!:histori8al
proper attitude to6ards 3ei!g- it is also the !ame or the spe8ii8 attu!eme!t that 6ill ollo6 the reig!
o te8h!ologyT the /ill is !ot o!ly the !ame or the epo8h o moder! subje8tivity- but also the !ame or
a! eter!al temptatio!- possibility o 3nwesen- that is part o the huma!ity o ma!7 ,ore pre8isely-
(elassenheit 6orks at three levels o temporality+ it is al6ays already here as 8o!stitutive o bei!g:
huma!T it is to 8ome as the predomi!a!t attitude 6ith the other begi!!i!g ater the Tur!T it is here a!d
!o6 as a possibility that ea8h o us 8a! a8tualiUe i! our attitude a!d behavior- thus prepari!g the 6ay
or the other begi!!i!g7
#2
=o6 are 6e to resolve the ambiguity o =eideggerIs attempt to go through
metaphysi8s+ is the goal to rea8h its hidde! begi!!i!gs- or to move beyo!d it to a radi8ally !e6
begi!!i!g- the Jother begi!!i!gK 6hi8h leaves behi!d the e!tire history o metaphysi8sM 4ote that a
homologous ambiguity is at 6ork i! Gerrida- 6ho ote! varies the moti that the e!d o the Jage o the
sig!K is dis8er!ible o! the horiUo!T although this age 6ill perhaps !ever pass- 6e 6ill !ever leave it
behi!d+ today- the metaphysi8s o prese!8e has rea8hed 8losure- but still 6e 6ill !ever be able to step
out o it7 The e!tire deadlo8k o Jde8o!stru8tio!K is 8o!de!sed i! this stra!ge temporality o the
e!dlessly postpo!ed @deerredA 8o!summatio! o the e!d o metaphysi8s- as i 6e are 8o!dem!ed to
d6ell e!dlessly i! the limbo o the time o the e!d o @metaphysi8alA time7 This- perhaps more tha!
demo8ra8y- is the true Gerridea! Jto:8omeK @K venirA+ al6ays to 8ome- !ever ully here7
#"
There are
basi8ally o!ly t6o 6ays to resolve this deadlo8k7 0ither the e?it out o metaphysi8s is i! itsel a 6ro!g
@metaphysi8alA !otio!- so that this d6elli!g i! the e!d o time is the o!ly !o!:metaphysi8al positio!
availableT or o!e defines metaphysics itself as the desire to e&it a field of containment- so that-
parado?i8ally- the o!ly 6ay to truly e?it metaphysi8s is to re!ou!8e this desire- to ully e!dorse o!eIs
8o!tai!me!t7 =o6 the! are 6e to get out o this impasseM A reere!8e to *ierkegaard is perti!e!t here+
the 4e6 is Fepetitio!- o!e 8a! o!ly retrieve the irst 3egi!!i!g by 6ay o a !e6 o!e 6hi8h bri!gs out
the lost pote!tial o the irst7
9 this is the 8ase- ho6ever- 6hat happe!s 6ith radi8al histori8ityEradi8al i! the se!se that
3ei!g is nothing but the eve!ts o the epo8hal history o bei!g- that there is !o substa!tial 3ei!g behi!d
this that o!ly partially dis8loses itsel i! the game o dis8losure or 6ithdra6alM

3ei!g itsel is Ji!iteK or Jhistori8alK i! the se!se that it JisK o!ly as the temporal eve!ts o
reveali!g>8o!8eali!g7 The history o bei!g is- o! the o!e ha!d- the 8o!ti!uity o a! i!8reasi!g
6ithdra6al o bei!g @a!d the 8orrespo!di!g rise o the 6illA- a!d yet- o! the other ha!d- bei!g is
!othi!g but this @disA8o!ti!uous moveme!t o reveali!g>8o!8eali!g- gra!ti!g:i!:6ithdra6al7
#(
Shall 6e say the! that history is !othi!g but the epo8hal deployme!t o the strie>J!egativityK i!
3ei!g itselM That the moder! /ill to po6er is !othi!g but a histori8al a8tualiUatio! o a pote!tial that
d6ells i! the !o!:histori8al stru8ture o 3ei!g itselM

The !o!:histori8al must be see! as i!separably i!ter6ove! 6ith the histori8al- rather tha! as
i!depe!de!tly set over agai!st it7 9! a8t- it is o!ly 6he! 6e all i!to histori8ism @i! the se!se o
histori8al relativismA that a!y suggestio! o the !o!:histori8al 8a! o!ly be heard as a ailure to thi!k
histori8ity7
##
=eideggerIs radical thi!ki!g o histori8ity- o! the other ha!d- dema!ds that 6e also thi!k
its relatio! to the !o!:histori8al7 =o6ever- the !o!:histori8al O JisK o!ly i! a!d through its histori8al
determi!atio!s7
#'
The 8o!8lusio! to be dra6! is 8lear+ i bei!g is !othi!g but the moveme!t o its reveali!g or
dis8losure- the! the Jorgetti!g o bei!gK is also a!d above all sel:relati!g- the orgetti!g or
6ithdra6al o this histori8al play o reveali!g a!d 6ithdra6al itsel7 A!d i 6e take this i!to a88ou!t-
the! Jthe other begi!!i!g 6ould !ot be a 8omplete eradi8atio! o the problem o 6illi!g- but rather a
vigila!t ope!i!g to it- a 6at8hul re8og!itio! o the i!itude o our selves 8aught bet6ee! this problem
o 6illi!g a!d the possibility o !o!:6illi!g7K
#$
/e should !ote here the i!vo8atio! o vigila!8e- 6hi8h o88urs a 8ouple o times i! GavisIs
book- su8h as o! page 2&0 @J6ould the other begi!!i!g be a time 6here !o!:6illi!g- or at least de8isive
or i!8isive mome!ts thereo- 6ould be made possible pre8isely through a vigila!t ope!!ess to a 8ertai!
!ever:i!ally:eradi8able problem o V6illi!gIMKA- o! page 2&2- a!d agai! o! page 2&'+ JThe other
begi!!i!g 6ould- i! that 8ase- !ot o!ly e!tail a! attu!eme!t to the harmo!ious play o ek:siste!8e>i!:
siste!8e- but also a vigila!t re8og!itio! o the impulse to persiste!8e- a! impulse 6hi8h- 6he! let
u!8he8ked- 6ould pull o!e ba8k to6ards 6ilul subje8tivity7K 3ut the term Jvigila!8eK is e?tremely
problemati8 here+ !ot o!ly is Jvigila!8eK a 6illi!g attitude par e?8elle!8e- so that 6e arrive at the
pragmati8 parado? o J6illi!gly 6at8h over our 6illi!g!essKT more radi8ally eve!- i 6hat is 8o!8ealed
i! the 6ithdra6al o bei!g is ultimately the very game o reveali!g or 8o!8eali!g- the! is !ot the
Jvigila!tK attitude o 6at8hi!g over orgetul!ess the very source of the problem @i! the same 6ay that
the absolute strivi!g to6ards the 1ood is the very sour8e o 0vilAM
To avoid su8h parado?es- 6e have to make a 8hoi8e+ either 6e take the Jimpulse to persiste!8eK
as a ki!d o eter!al temptatio! o the huma! mi!d aki! to *a!tia! Jradi8al evilK as the te!de!8y to
JallK i!s8ribed i!to the very huma! 8o!ditio!- or 6e ully assert this JallK @the Jrebellious 6hili!gK
6hi8h thro6s out o joi!t the lo6 o realityA as the grou!di!g gesture o bei!g:huma!7 /ith regard to
politi8s- this 8ha!ges everythi!g7 The irst 8ha!ge 8o!8er!s the status o the polemos 8o!stitutive o
politi8s7 Goes !ot =eideggerIs idea that the order implied by the state is the order o domi!atio! a!d
servitude stra!gely re8all the 8lassi8al ,ar?ist !otio! o the state as stri8tly li!ked to the divisio! o
so8iety i!to 8lassesM So 6he! =eidegger- i! his readi!g o =era8litusIs ragme!t #"- i!sists o! ho6 the
Jstruggle mea!t here is origi!ary struggle- or it allo6s those 6ho struggle to origi!ate as su8h i! the
irst pla8e-K is !ot 8lass struggle- 6ithi! the politi8al- the !ame o this struggle 8o!stitutive o those 6ho
struggle- a!d !ot just a 8o!li8t bet6ee! pre:e?isti!g so8ial age!tsM
#&
Fe8all here the lesso! o .ouis
Althusser+ J8lass struggleK parado?i8ally precedes 8lasses as determi!ate so8ial groups- or every 8lass
positio! a!d determi!atio! is already a! ee8t o the J8lass struggle7K @This is 6hy J8lass struggleK is
a!other !ame or the a8t that Jso8iety does !ot e?istKEit does !ot e?ist as a positive order o e!tities7A
9! other 6ords- 6e should al6ays bear i! mi!d that- or a true ,ar?ist- J8lassesK are not 8ategories o
positive so8ial reality- parts o the so8ial body- but 8ategories o the Feal o a politi8al struggle 6hi8h
8uts a8ross the e!tire so8ial body- preve!ti!g its JtotaliUatio!7K
=o6ever- =eidegger ig!ores su8h a readi!g o the polemos as the struggle bet6ee! those 6ho
domi!ate a!d those 6ho serve them+ i the homela!d Jbe8omes the 6ay o 3ei!g o a people o!ly
6he! the homela!d be8omes e&pansive- 6he! it interacts with the outsideE6he! it be8omes a state-K
the! it is 8lear that the polemos is primarily the strie 6ith the e&ternal e!emy7 4o 6o!der that- 6he!
=eidegger elaborates the esse!8e o the politi8al- he sympatheti8ally 8ompares his !otio! o the
politi8al 6ith t6o other !otio!s+ 3ismar8kIs idea o politi8s as the art o the possible @!ot just
opportu!isti8 strategi8 8al8ulatio!- but the leaderIs ability to grasp the Jesse!tial possibilityK oered by
a histori8al 8o!stellatio! a!d to mobiliUe the people or itA- a!d Darl S8hmittIs idea o the a!tago!isti8
rie!d>e!emy relatio!shipEthat is- the te!sio! 6ith the e&ternal e!emyEas the dei!i!g eature o the
politi8al7
The parado? is that @as i! the 8ase o se?ual diere!8eA =eidegger ig!ores the properly
o!tologi8al status o 8lass struggle as a strie or a!tago!ism 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a! o!ti8
8o!li8t- si!8e it overdetermi!es the horiUo! o appeara!8e o all o!ti8 so8ial e!tities7 9t is 8lass struggle
@so8ial a!tago!ismA- !ot the state- 6hi8h is the mode o 3ei!g o a peopleEthe state is there to
obus8ate this a!tago!ism7 Su8h a radi8aliUed !otio! o the polemos as 8lass struggle bri!gs us to the
se8o!d 8ha!ge- 8losely li!ked 6ith the irst+ a!other 6ay to approa8h the JNuestio! o the
8o!s8ious!ess o the 6ill o the 8ommu!ityK as Ja problem i! all demo8ra8ies7K =eideggerIs idea o
politi8al 8ommitme!t i!volves the u!ity o a people a!d the leader 6ho mobiliUes them i! a shared
struggle agai!st a! @e?ter!alA e!emy- bri!gi!g them all together @Ja88epti!gK eve! the proletariatA7 9-
ho6ever- 6e take 8lass struggle as the polemos 8o!stitutive o politi8al lie- the! the problem o the
8ommo! politi8al 6ill appears i! a radi8ally diere!t 6ay+ ho6 to build the 8olle8tive 6ill o the
oppressed i! the 8lass struggle- the ema!8ipatory 6ill 6hi8h takes the 8lass polemos to its e?treme7
@A!d 6as this 6ill !ot at 6ork already i! A!8ie!t 1reek demo8ra8y- 6as it !ot operative at the very
8ore o the Athe!ia! polisMA This 8olle8tive 6ill is the 8ru8ial 8ompo!e!t o 8ommu!ism- 6hi8h

seeks to e!able the 8o!versio! o 6ork i!to 6ill7 Dommu!ism aims to 8omplete the tra!sitio!- via the
struggle o 8olle8tive sel:ema!8ipatio!- rom a suered !e8essity to auto!omous sel:determi!atio!7 9t
is the deliberate eort- o! a 6orld:histori8al s8ale- to u!iversaliUe the material 8o!ditio!s u!der 6hi8h
ree volu!tary a8tio! might prevail over i!volu!tary labour or passivity7 Hr rather+ 8ommu!ism is the
proje8t through 6hi8h volu!tary a8tio! seeks to u!iversaliUe the 8o!ditio!s or volu!tary a8tio!7
#%
0?emplary 8ases o su8h a8tivity 8a! be ou!d i!

people like Fobespierre- Toussai!t .IHuverture or 2oh! 3ro6!+ 8o!ro!ted 6ith a! i!dee!sible
i!stitutio! like slavery- 6he! the opportu!ity arose they resolved to 6ork immediately a!d by all
available mea!s or its elimi!atio!7 Dhe 1uevara a!d Caulo Freire 6ould do the same i! the a8e o
imperialism a!d oppressio!7 Today Gr7 Caul Farmer a!d his JCart!ers i! =ealth-K i! =aiti- Dhile a!d
else6here- adopt a some6hat similar approa8h 6he! 8o!ro!ted by i!dee!sible i!eNualities i! the
global provisio! o health8are7 9! ea8h 8ase the basi8 logi8 is as simple as 8ould be+ a! idea- like the
idea o 8ommu!ism- or eNuality- or justi8e- 8omma!ds that 6e should strive to realiUe it 6ithout
8ompromises or delay- beore the mea!s o su8h realiUatio! have bee! re8og!iUed as easible or
legitimate- or eve! Jpossible7K 9t is the deliberate strivi!g to6ards realiUatio! itsel that 6ill 8o!vert the
impossible i!to the possible- a!d e?plode the parameters o the easible7
'0
Su8h 8olle8tive a8tivity realiUes the Ja8tuality o people a!d leader- 6here the t6o are o!e
a8tuality- si!8e they 8a!!ot be separated7K Alo!g these li!es- 3adiou re8e!tly proposed a rehabilitatio!
o the revolutio!ary 8ommu!ist J8ult o perso!alityK+ the real o a Truth:0ve!t is i!s8ribed i!to the
spa8e o symboli8 i8tio! through a proper !ame @o a leaderAE.e!i!- Stali!- ,ao- Dhe 1uevara7
'1

Far rom sig!ali!g the 8orruptio! o a revolutio!ary pro8ess- the 8elebratio! o the leaderIs proper
!ame is imma!e!t to that pro8ess+ to put it i! some6hat 8rude terms- 6ithout the mobiliUi!g role o a
proper !ame- the politi8al moveme!t remai!s 8aught i! the positive order o 3ei!g re!dered by the
8o!8eptual 8ategoriesEit is o!ly through the i!terve!tio! o a proper !ame that the dime!sio! o
Jdema!di!g the impossible-K o 8ha!gi!g the very 8o!tours o 6hat appears as possible- arises7
/hat i this Jesse!tial possibilityK o 8ommu!ism- ig!ored by =eidegger himsel- a!d !ot
=eideggerIs 8o!ti!ui!g hidde! idelity to as8ism- is the truth o his ill:amed doubts about demo8ra8y
i! his posthumously published Der Spiegel i!tervie6+ J=o6 8a! a politi8al system a88ommodate itsel
to the te8h!ologi8al age- a!d 6hi8h politi8al system 6ould this beM 9 have !o a!s6er to this Nuestio!7 9
am !ot 8o!vi!8ed that it is demo8ra8y7K
'2
=o6 are 6e to read this stateme!tM The obvious readi!g
6ould be that- or =eidegger- a more adeNuate politi8al respo!se to the te8h!ologi8al age tha! liberal
demo8ra8y is probably some ki!d o Jtotalitaria!K so8io:politi8al mobiliUatio! i! the 4aUi or Soviet
styleT the !o less obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t to su8h a positio! is that it ig!ores ho6 liberal:demo8rati8
reedom a!d i!dividualist hedo!ism mobiliUe i!dividuals mu8h more ee8tively- tur!i!g them i!to
6orkaholi8s+

H!e 8a! 6o!der as to 6hether =eidegger 6as right to suggest- as he did i! the Der Spiegel i!tervie6-
that demo8ra8y is perhaps !ot the most adeNuate respo!se to te8h!ology7 /ith the 8ollapse o as8ism
a!d o soviet 8ommu!ism- the liberal model has prove! to be the most ee8tive a!d po6erul vehi8le
o the global spread o te8h!ology- 6hi8h has be8ome i!8reasi!gly i!disti!guishable rom the or8es o
Dapital7
'"
3ut it 6ould also be easy to reply that the rise o so:8alled J8apitalism 6ith Asia! valuesK i! the
last de8ade u!e?pe8tedly justiies =eideggerIs doubtEthis is 6hat is so u!settli!g about 8o!temporary
Dhi!a+ the suspi8io! that its authoritaria! 8apitalism is !ot merely a remai!der o our past- a repetitio!
o the pro8ess o 8apitalist a88umulatio! 6hi8h i! 0urope took pla8e rom the si?tee!th 8e!tury to the
eightee!th- but a sig! o the uture7 /hat i it sig!als that demo8ra8y- as 6e u!dersta!d it- is !o lo!ger
a 8o!ditio! a!d drivi!g or8e o e8o!omi8 developme!t- but rather its obsta8leM
4evertheless- 6e 8a! take the risk o readi!g =eideggerIs stateme!t o! demo8ra8y i! a diere!t
6ay+ the problem he is struggli!g 6ith is !ot simply that o determi!i!g 6hi8h politi8al order best fits
the global spread o moder! te8h!ologyT it is- rather- 6hether a!ythi!g 8a! be do!e- at the level o
politi8al a8tivity- to counter the da!ger to bei!g:huma! that lurks i! moder! te8h!ology7 9t !ever
e!tered =eideggerIs mi!d to proposeEsay- i! a liberal modeEthat the ailure o his 4aUi e!gageme!t
6as merely the ailure o a 8ertai! ki!d o e!gageme!t 6hi8h 8o!erred o! the politi8al the task o
8arryi!g out Ja proje8t o o!to:desti!al sig!ii8a!8e-K so that the lesso! o this ailure 6as simply that
6e should e!dorse a more modest politi8al e!gageme!t7 Therei! lies the limitatio! o 6hat o!e may
8all Jliberal =eideggeria!ismK @rom =ubert Greyus to 2oh! DaputoA+ rom the ailure o =eideggerIs
politi8al e!gageme!t- they dra6 the 8o!8lusio! that 6e should re!ou!8e a!y su8h e!gageme!t 6ith
desti!al o!tologi8al prete!sio!s a!d e!gage i! a modest- Jmerely o!ti8-K pragmati8 politi8s- leavi!g
desti!al Nuestio!s to poets a!d thi!kers7
The a!s6er o traditio!al =eideggeria!s to the readi!g proposed here 6ould be- o 8ourse- that-
i! advo8ati!g a 8ommu!ist radi8aliUatio! o =eideggerIs politi8s- 6e are alli!g i!to the 6orst trap o
the moder! subje8tivist de8isio!ism o the /ill- repla8i!g o!e @as8istA totalitaria!ism 6ith its .et
mirror:imageE6hi8h is i! a 6ay eve! 6orse- si!8e- i! its Ji!ter!atio!alism-K it e!deavors to erase the
last tra8es o Jprovi!8ialK homela!d- to re!der people literally rootless @a eature it shares 6ith
8apitalist !eoliberalismA7 This- ho6ever- is !ot 6here the 8ore o the problem liesT it rather 8o!8er!s the
sphere o 8apitalist e8o!omi8 lie+ 8raUy- tasteless eve!- as it may sou!d- the problem 6ith =itler 6as
that he was %not violent enough!' his viole!8e 6as !ot Jesse!tialK e!ough7 =itler did not really a8t- all
his a8tio!s 6ere u!dame!tally reactions- or he a8ted so that !othi!g 6ould really 8ha!ge- stagi!g a
giga!ti8 spe8ta8le o pseudo:Fevolutio! so that the 8apitalist order 6ould survive7 =a!!ah Are!dt 6as
right 6he! @impli8itly agai!st =eideggerA she poi!ted out that as8ism- although a rea8tio! to bourgeois
ba!ality- remai!s its i!here!t !egatio!- remai!s trapped 6ithi! the horiUo! o bourgeois so8iety+ the
true problem o 4aUism is !ot that it J6e!t too arK i! its subje8tivist:!ihilist hubris o e?er8isi!g total
po6er- but that it did not go ar e!ough- that its viole!8e 6as a! impote!t a8ti!g:out 6hi8h- ultimately-
remai!ed i! the servi8e o the very order it despised7 =itlerIs gra!d gestures o 8o!tempt or bourgeois
sel:8ompla8e!8y a!d so o! 6ere ultimately i! the servi8e o e!abli!g this 8ompla8e!8y to survive+ ar
rom ee8tively disturbi!g the mu8h:despised Jde8ade!tK bourgeois order- ar rom a6ake!i!g the
1erma!s rom their immersio! i! its 8ompla8e!8y- 4aUism 6as a dream 6hi8h e!abled them to 8arry
o!7
The a8t remai!s that- as 6e have tried to i!di8ate apropos the status o the polemos a!d
8olle8tive 6ill- =eidegger does !ot ollo6 his o6! logi8 to the e!d 6he! he e!dorses the as8ist
8ompromise7 To employ agai! a amiliar metaphor+ as8ism 6a!ts to thro6 out the dirty bath 6ater @the
liberal:demo8rati8 i!dividualism that 8omes 6ith 8apitalismA a!d keep the baby @8apitalist relatio!s o
produ8tio!A- a!d the 6ay it tries to do this is- agai!- to thro6 out the dirty 6ater @the radi8al polemos
6hi8h 8uts a8ross the e!tire so8ial bodyA a!d keep the baby @the 8orporatist u!ity o the peopleA7 3ut
6hat should be do!e is the e?a8t opposite+ to thro6 out both babies @8apitalist relatio!s as 6ell as their
8orporatist pa8ii8atio!A a!d keep the dirty 6ater o radi8al struggle7 The parado? is thus that- i! order
to save =eidegger rom 4aUism- 6e !eed more 6ill a!d struggle a!d less (elassenheit7
'(
This- the!- is our true 8hoi8e 6he! 6e read =eideggerIs Jpro:4aUiK semi!ars rom 1%""X(+ do
6e e!gage i! sa!8timo!ious 8riti8ism a!d gloat i! the /esserwisserei o our later histori8al positio!- or
do 6e o8us o! the missed pote!tial i! these semi!ars- raisi!g the dii8ult Nuestio! o ho6 to
resus8itate them i! a! era 6he!- ater the great ailure o the t6e!tieth:8e!tury 8ommu!ist proje8t- the
problems to 6hi8h 8ommu!ism tried to i!d a! a!s6er @radi8al so8ial 8o!li8ts- 8olle8tive 6illA are still
6ith usM
CHAPTER 1%

The H!tology o Wua!tum Chysi8s

9s !ot 6hat 3adiou 8alls the 0ve!t- at its most basi8- the very rise o re:prese!tatio! or
appeari!g out o the lat stupidity o bei!gM So that the 0ve!t proper @the Truth:0ve!t i! 3adiouIs
se!seA is the For:itsel o the 9!:itsel o appeari!gM 9!soar as appeari!g is al6ays appeari!g or a
thought @or a thi!ki!g subje8tA- 6e 8a! go urther a!d say that the rise o a thought as su8h is a!
0ve!tEas 3adiou likes to say- thought as su8h is 8ommu!ist7
The key Nuestio! is thus+ ho6 is thought possible i! a u!iverse o matter- ho6 8a! it arise out o
matterM .ike thought- the subje8t @SelA is also immaterial+ its H!e:!ess- its sel:ide!tity- is !ot
redu8ible to its material support7 9 am pre8isely not my body+ the Sel 8a! o!ly arise agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o the death o its substa!tial bei!g- o 6hat it is Jobje8tively7K So- agai!- ho6 8a! o!e
e?plai! the rise o subje8tivity out o the Ji!8ompleteK o!tology- ho6 are these t6o dime!sio!s @the
abyss>void o subje8tivity- the i!8omplete!ess o realityA to be thought togetherM /e should apply here
somethi!g like a 6eak a!thropi8 pri!8iple+ ho6 should the Feal be stru8tured so that it allo6s or the
emerge!8e o subje8tivity @i! its auto!omous ei8a8y- !ot as a mere JuserIs illusio!KAM
This 8o!ro!ts us 6ith a hard 8hoi8e+ is the void o subje8tivity a parti8ular domai! @Jregio!KA
o the Ju!iversalK i!8omplete!ess > void o reality- or is that i!8omplete!ess already i! itsel a mode o
subje8tivity- su8h that subje8tivity is al6ays already part o the Absolute- a!d reality is !ot eve!
thi!kable 6ithout subje8tivity @as i! =eidegger- 6here there is !o Sein 6ithout Da*Sein as its lo8alityAM
9t is at this pre8ise poi!t that Fay 3rassier 8riti8iUes me or 8hoosi!g the se8o!d- Jtra!s8e!de!tal-K
optio!- u!able as 9 am to thi!k the Void o 3ei!g as su8h 6ithout subje8tivityT rom my sta!dpoi!t-
ho6ever- 3rassier is here ollo6i!g ,eillassou?- 6ho pays a ateul pri8e or his suspe!sio! o the
tra!s8e!de!tal dime!sio!Ethe pri8e o a regressio! to a J!aSveK o!tology o spheres or levels i! the
style o 4i8olai =artma!!+ material reality- lie- thought7 This is a move 6hi8h is to be avoided at all
8osts7
THE ONTOLOGICAL PROBLEM

The irst step i! resolvi!g this deadlo8k is to i!vert the sta!dard JrealistK !otio! o a!
o!tologi8ally ully 8o!stituted reality 6hi8h e?ists Jout there i!depe!de!tly o our mi!dK a!d is the!
o!ly impere8tly Jrele8tedK i! huma! 8og!itio!Ethe lesso! o *a!tIs tra!s8e!de!tal idealism should
be ully absorbed here+ it is the subje8tive a8t o tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis 6hi8h tra!sorms the 8haoti8
array o se!sual impressio!s i!to Jobje8tive reality7K Shamelessly ig!ori!g the obje8tio! that 6e are
8o!ou!di!g o!tologi8al a!d empiri8al levels- here 6e must i!voke Nua!tum physi8s+ it is the 8ollapse
o the Nua!tum 6aves i! the a8t o per8eptio! 6hi8h i?es Nua!tum os8illatio!s i!to a si!gle obje8tive
reality7 A!d- urthermore- this poi!t must be u!iversaliUed+ every igure o reality is rooted i! a
determi!ate sta!dpoi!t7 0ve! at a level 8loser to us- 6e k!o6 ho6 diere!t JrealityK appears to a rog
or a bird- starti!g 6ith the diere!t tapestry o 8olors+ ea8h livi!g bei!g per8eives @a!d i!tera8ts 6ithA
its o6! Jreality7K A!d o!e should push this i!sight to the e?treme o Dartesia! doubt+ the very !otio! o
great!ess should be relativiUed7 =o6 do 6e k!o6 that our ,ilky /ay is !ot just a spe8k o dust i!
a!other u!iverseM /hy- 6he! 6e thi!k about alie!s- do 6e al6ays a88ept that- though they may be
smaller or larger tha! us- they !o!etheless live i! a 6orld 6hi8h is proportio!ally o the same order o
great!ess as oursM Cerhaps alie!s are already here- but just so large or so small that 6e do !ot eve!
!oti8e ea8h other7 Femember that thought itsel e?ists o!ly or bei!gs 6hi8h thi!k- but also o!ly or
bei!gs o a physi8al gra!deur 8omparable to ours+ i 6e 6ere to observe ourselves rom too 8lose @or
too arA- there 6ould be !o mea!i!g or thought dis8er!ible i! our a8ts- a!d our brai! 6ould be just a
ti!y @or giga!ti8A pie8e o livi!g matter7
1
9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that o!e 8a! make out the 8o!tours o 6hat 8a! perhaps o!ly be
desig!ated by the o?ymoro! Jtra!s8e!de!tal materialismK @proposed by Adria! 2oh!sto!A+ all reality is
tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted- J8orrelativeK to a subje8tive positio!- a!d- to push this through to the e!d-
the 6ay out o this J8orrelatio!istK 8ir8le is !ot to try to dire8tly rea8h the 9!:itsel- but to i!s8ribe this
tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! into the -hing itself7 The path to the 9!:itsel leads through the subje8tive
gap- si!8e the gap bet6ee! For:us a!d 9!:itsel is imma!e!t to the 9!:itsel+ appeara!8e is itsel
Jobje8tive-K therei! resides the truth o the realist problem o J=o6 8a! 6e pass rom appeara!8e For:
us to reality 9!:itselMK
9t may appear that the basi8 dei!i!g eature o materialism is a 8ommo!:se!se trust i! the
reality o the e?ter!al 6orldE6e do !ot live i! the a!8ies o our imagi!atio!- 8aught up i! its 6eb-
there is a ri8h a!d ull:blooded 6orld ope! to us out there7 3ut this is the premise a!y serious orm o
diale8ti8al materialism has to do a6ay 6ith+ there is !o Jobje8tiveK reality- every reality is already
tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted7 JFealityK is !ot the tra!s8e!de!t hard 8ore that eludes our grasp-
a88essible to us o!ly i! a distorted perspe8tival approa8hT it is rather the very gap that separates
diere!t perspe8tival approa8hes7 The JFealK is !ot the i!a88essible d- it is the very 8ause or obsta8le
that distorts our vie6 o! reality- that preve!ts our dire8t a88ess to it7 The real dii8ulty is to thi!k the
subje8tive perspe8tive as i!s8ribed i! JrealityK itsel7
9t is true that- at the most eleme!tary level o the !atural s8ie!8es- epistemologi8al shits a!d
ruptures should !ot be dire8tly grou!ded i! o!tologi8al shits or ruptures i! the Thi!g itselE!ot every
epistemologi8al limitatio! is a! i!di8atio! o o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess7 The epistemologi8al passage
rom 8lassi8al physi8s to the theory o relativity did !ot mea! that this shit i! our k!o6ledge 6as
8orrelated to a shit i! !ature itsel- that i! 4e6to!Is times !ature itsel 6as 4e6to!ia! a!d that its la6s
mysteriously 8ha!ged 6ith the arrival o 0i!stei!Eat this level- 8learly- it 6as our k!o6ledge o !ature
that 8ha!ged- !ot !ature itsel7 3ut this is !ot the 6hole story+ there is !o!etheless a level at 6hi8h the
epistemologi8al break o moder! physi8s is to be 8orrelated to a! o!tologi8al shitEthe level !ot o
k!o6ledge- but o truth as the subje8tive positio! rom 6hi8h k!o6ledge is ge!erated7 /hat is totally
la8ki!g i! ,eillassou? is the dime!sio! o truth i! its oppositio! to k!o6ledge+ truth as that sel:
rele8tive Je!gagedK or Jpra8ti8alK k!o6ledge 6hi8h is validated !ot through its ade<uatio rei but
through the 6ay it relates to the subje8tIs positio! o e!u!8iatio! @a stateme!t 6hi8h is a8tually JtrueK
8a! be Je?iste!tiallyK a lieA7 This is the dime!sio! ,eillassou? ig!ores i! his 8riti8al a88ou!t o the
Tra!s8e!de!tal+ si!8e- or him- there is !o truth outside k!o6ledge- the Tra!s8e!de!tal is dismissed as
a de8eptive lure7
9s it !ot possible to dei!e =egelIs @idealistA premise as the 8laim that all k!o6ledge 8a! be
ultimately ge!erated rom truthM =egel tries to over8ome *a!tia! JormalismKEthe irredu8ible gap
that separates the tra!s8e!de!tal orm rom its heteroge!eous 8o!ti!ge!t 8o!te!tEby deployi!g their
total Jmediatio!-K that is- by redu8i!g obje8tive k!o6ledge to a reiied or !aturaliUed orm:o:
appeara!8e o the diale8ti8al truth7 The sta!dard s8ie!tii8 argume!t is that there is a limit to this
pro8edure7 .et us take s8ie!8e at its most Jsubje8tive-K i! Nua!tum physi8s- 6hi8h @i! its Dope!hage!
i!terpretatio!- at leastA ee8tively 8laims that the 8og!itio! o a! obje8t 8reates @or- at least- tra!sormsA
it+ the measureme!t itsel- through the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio!- makes the empiri8al reality as 6e
k!o6 it appear7 9t 6ould !o!etheless be 6ro!g to 8laim that the great revolutio!s i! the history o
physi8s @the rise o 4e6to!ia! physi8s- o relativity theory- a!d o Nua!tum physi8sA or o biology
@*arl .i!!LIs systematiUatio!- Gar6i!Is evolutio!ism- et87A are simulta!eously @diale8ti8ally mediated
byA the tra!sormatio! o its obje8t- i! the same 6ay that- or 1eorg .ukh8s- the proletariatIs a8Nuiri!g
o sel:8o!s8ious!ess @be8omi!g a6are o its histori8al missio!A 8ha!ges its obje8t @through this
a6are!ess- the proletariat i! its so8ial reality tur!s i!to a revolutio!ary subje8tA7 The most 6e 8a! say
6ith regard to the !atural s8ie!8es is that- as .ukh8s put it- !ature itsel is a histori8al 8ategory- that our
basi8 u!dersta!di!g o 6hat 8ou!ts as J!atureK 8ha!ges 6ith the great histori8al breaks+ i! the
absolutist seve!tee!th 8e!tury- !ature appeared as a hierar8hi8al system o spe8ies a!d subspe8iesT i!
the dy!ami8 !i!etee!th 8e!tury- 8hara8teriUed by 8apitalist 8ompetitio!- !ature appears as the site o
the evolutio!ary struggle or survival @it is 6ell k!o6! that Gar6i! 8ame up 6ith his theory by
tra!sposi!g ,althusIs i!sights o!to !atureAT i! the t6e!tieth 8e!tury- !ature 6as as a rule per8eived
through the le!ses o systems theoryT a!d it is already a 8ommo!pla8e to dra6 a parallel bet6ee! the
shit to the auto:poeti8- sel:orga!iUi!g dy!ami8 o !atural pro8esses i! re8e!t de8ades a!d the passage
to !e6 orms o the 8apitalist dy!ami8 ollo6i!g the de8li!e o the 8e!traliUed 6elare state7
=o6ever- it 6ould be a ar a!d ateul step to 8o!8lude rom su8h histori8al mediatio!s o our
!otio! o !ature that- i! the 8ourse o u!dame!tal histori8al 8ha!ges- !ature itsel also 8ha!ges+ 6he!
0i!stei!Is theory repla8ed 4e6to!Is- !o o!e 6ould have 8laimed that this rele8ted or registered a
homologous 8ha!ge i! its obje8t o 8og!itio!- i! !ature itsel7 /hat 0i!stei! did 6as oer a deeper a!d
more adeNuate s8ie!tii8 theory o !ature7 4ature did !ot be8ome o!tologi8ally i!determi!ate 6ith the
rise o Nua!tum physi8sT the dis8overy o the Jpri!8iple o u!8ertai!tyK mea!s that it al6ays 6as like
that- a!d !o matter ho6 stro!gly Jhistori8ally mediatedK these s8ie!tii8 dis8overies are- they reer to
some reality e?ter!al to the histori8al pro8ess7 To a tra!s8e!de!tal philosopher- it is 8learly too easy to
apply here the 6ell:k!o6! disti!8tio! bet6ee! the 8o!ditio!s o dis8overy or a 8ertai! s8ie!tii8
theory a!d the 8o!ditio!s o its validity @although 8apitalist 8ompetitio! 6as a !e8essary histori8al
8o!ditio! or Gar6i!Is dis8overy- this does !ot mea! that it also 8o!ditio!s the truth:value o the
theory o evolutio!A+ the o!tologi8al 8laims o a s8ie!tii8 theory are stro!ger- bei!g ultimately
i!8ompatible 6ith their histori8ist or tra!s8e!de!tal relativiUatio!7 To 8laim that moder! physi8s is part
o the male:domi!ated 8ulture o domi!atio! a!d e?ploitatio! is o!e thi!g- but to say that its basi8
u!derlyi!g premises are ormed i! adva!8e by this 8ulture is dei!itely sayi!g too mu8h7 A!d- as
,eillassou? has poi!ted out- the 8lassi8 tra!s8e!de!tal 8laim that the validity o every Jobje8tiveK
!atural s8ie!8e is 8o!strai!ed by the a priori horiUo! 6hi8h 8o!stitutes its domai!- i7e7- that its theories
are valid a!d mea!i!gul o!ly 6ithi! this horiUo!- also goes too ar7
The dii8ult problem is ho6 to thi!k the relatio!ship bet6ee! s8ie!tii8 k!o6ledge a!d
histori8al truth i !either o them 8a! be redu8ed to the other7 Cerhaps the solutio! is !o!etheless
provided by =egel7 =egel 6ill appear to be dedu8i!g or ge!erati!g all k!o6ledge rom the sel:relati!g
truth:pro8ess o!ly i 6e 8o!8eive his system as a 8losed 8ir8le o !e8essary dedu8tio!sT the mome!t 6e
ully take i!to a88ou!t the radi8al retroa8tivity o the diale8ti8al pro8ess- Jdedu8tio!K itsel be8omes a
retroa8tive orderi!g o a 8o!ti!ge!t pro8ess7 Take- or e?ample- the impossibility o re8o!8ili!g
relativity theory a!d Nua!tum physi8s i! a 8o!siste!t Theory o 0verythi!g+ there is !o 6ay to resolve
the te!sio! bet6ee! the t6o by mea!s o a! Jimma!e!tK diale8ti8al rele8tio! i! 6hi8h the problem
itsel be8omes its o6! solutio!7 All 6e 8a! do is 6ait or a 8o!ti!ge!t s8ie!tii8 breakthroughEo!ly
the! 6ill it be possible to retroa8tively re8o!stru8t the logi8 o the pro8ess7
As 6e have see!- the pri8e ,eillassou? pays or e?8ludi!g the 8omple? o Truth:0ve!t:Subje8t
is the retur! o a !aSve o!tology o levels+ physi8al reality- lie- mi!d7 The tra!s8e!de!tal dime!sio! o
tra!s8e!de!tal materialism preve!ts this regressio! to !aSve o!tology+ 6hat i 6e dis8over that this
hierar8hy is alseM That- or i!sta!8e- dolphi!s thi!k better tha! 6e doM H!ly tra!s8e!de!tal
materialism 8a! provide a materialist readi!g o the simple a8t @!oted by the JDhristia! materialistK
Ceter va! 9!6age!- i! o!e u!e?pe8ted e!8ou!ter o 8o!temporary philosophy 6ith =egelA that ordi!ary
obje8ts like 8hairs- 8omputers- et87- simply do not e&ist+ or e?ample- a 8hair is !ot a8tually- or itsel- a
8hairEall 6e have is a 8olle8tio! o JsimplesK @more eleme!tary obje8ts Jarra!ged 8hair6iseKAT so-
although a 8hair u!8tio!s as a 8hair- it is 8omposed o a multitude o parts @6ood- !ails- abri8 OA
6hi8h are- i! themselves- totally i!diere!t to this arra!geme!tT there is- stricto sensu- !o J6holeK o
6hi8h the !ail is here a part7 H!ly 6ith orga!isms do 6e have a /hole7 =ere- the u!ity is mi!imally
Jor itselKT parts really i!tera8t7
2
As 6as !oted already by .y!! ,argulis- the eleme!tary orm o lie-
a 8ell- is 8hara8teriUed pre8isely by su8h a mi!imum o sel:relati!g- a mi!imum e?8lusively through
6hi8h the limit bet6ee! 9!side a!d Hutside that 8hara8teriUes a! orga!ism 8a! emerge7 A!d- as =egel
put it- thought is o!ly a urther developme!t o this For:itsel7
9! biology- or i!sta!8e- 6e have at the level o reality o!ly bodily i!tera8tio!7 J.ie properK
emerges at the mi!imally JidealK level- as a! immaterial eve!t 6hi8h provides the orm o u!ity o the
livi!g body 6hi8h allo6s it to Jremai! the sameK throughout the i!8essa!t 8ha!ge o its material
8ompo!e!ts7 The basi8 problem o evolutio!ary 8og!itivismEthat o the emerge!8e o this ideal lie:
patter!Eis !o!e other tha! the old metaphysi8al e!igma o the relatio!ship bet6ee! 8haos a!d order-
bet6ee! the ,ultiple a!d the H!e- bet6ee! parts a!d their 6hole7 =o6 8a! 6e get Jorder or ree-K that
is- ho6 8a! order emerge out o i!itial disorderM =o6 8a! 6e a88ou!t or a 6hole that is more tha! the
mere sum o its partsM =o6 8a! a H!e 6ith a disti!8t sel:ide!tity emerge out o the i!tera8tio! o its
multiple 8o!stitue!tsM A series o 8o!temporary resear8hers- rom ,argulis to Fra!8is8o Varela- have
8o!te!ded that the true problem is !ot ho6 a! orga!ism a!d its e!viro!me!t i!tera8t or 8o!!e8t- but-
rather- the opposite+ ho6 does a disti!8t sel:ide!ti8al orga!ism emerge out o its e!viro!me!tM =o6
does a 8ell orm the membra!e 6hi8h separates its i!side rom its outsideM The true problem is thus !ot
ho6 a! orga!ism adapts to its e!viro!me!t- but ho6 it is that there is somethi!g- a disti!8t e!tity-
6hi8h must adapt itsel i! the irst pla8e7 A!d it is here- at this 8ru8ial poi!t- that todayIs biologi8al
la!guage starts to resemble- Nuite u!8a!!ily- the la!guage o =egel7
This relatio!ship bet6ee! the empiri8al a!d the tra!s8e!de!tal:histori8al gets urther
8ompli8ated 6ith the a8t that- over the last e6 de8ades- te8h!ologi8al progress i! e?perime!tal
physi8s has ope!ed up a !e6 domai!- that o Je?perime!tal metaphysi8s-K u!thi!kable i! the 8lassi8al
s8ie!tii8 u!iverse+ JNuestio!s previously thought to be a matter solely or philosophi8al debate have
bee! brought i!to the orbit o empiri8al i!Nuiry7K
"
/hat 6ere u!til !o6 merely topi8s or Jthought
e?perime!tsK are gradually be8omi!g the topi8s o a8tual laboratory e?perime!tsEe?emplary here is
the amous 0i!stei!:Fose!:Codolsky double:slit e?perime!t- irst just imagi!ed- the! a8tually
perormed by Alai! Aspe8t7 The properly Jmetaphysi8alK propositio!s tested are the o!tologi8al status
o 8o!ti!ge!8y- the lo8ality:8o!ditio! o 8ausality- the status o reality i!depe!de!t o our observatio!
o it @or some other orm o i!tera8tio! 6ith itA- a!d so o!7 4o!etheless- 6e should be 8areul here !ot
to overestimate the philosophi8al 8o!seNue!8es o this Je?perime!tal metaphysi8sK+ the very possibility
o Jempiri8ally testi!gK so:8alled metaphysi8al @basi8 o!tologi8al a!d epistemologi8alA propositio!s
bears 6it!ess to a radi8al break 6hi8h 8a!!ot be a88ou!ted or i! empiri8al terms7
This is 6here Stephe! =a6ki!g goes 6ro!g 6he!- at the very begi!!i!g o his bestseller -he
(rand Design- he triumpha!tly pro8laims that Jphilosophy is dead7K
(
/ith the latest adva!8es i!
Nua!tum physi8s a!d 8osmology @,:theoryA- he 8laims- so:8alled e?perime!tal metaphysi8s has
rea8hed its apogee7 )po! a 8loser look- o 8ourse- 6e soo! dis8over that 6e are !ot Nuite there
yetEalmost- but !ot Nuite7 Furthermore- it 6ould be easy to reje8t this 8laim by demo!strati!g the
8o!ti!ui!g perti!e!8e o philosophy or =a6ki!g himsel @!ot to me!tio! the a8t that his o6! book is
dei!itely !ot s8ie!8e- but a very problemati8 popular ge!eraliUatio!A+ =a6ki!g relies o! a series o
methodologi8al a!d o!tologi8al presuppositio!s 6hi8h he takes or gra!ted7 H!ly t6o pages ater
maki!g the 8laim that philosophy is dead- he des8ribes his o6! approa8h as Jmodel:depe!de!t
realism-K based o! Jthe idea that our brai!s i!terpret the i!put rom our se!sory orga!s by maki!g a
model o the 6orld7 /he! su8h a model is su88essul at e?plai!i!g eve!ts- 6e te!d to attribute to it O
the Nuality o realityKT ho6ever- Ji t6o models @or theoriesA a88urately predi8t the same eve!ts- o!e
8a!!ot be said to be more real tha! the otherT rather- 6e are ree to use 6hi8hever model is most
8o!ve!ie!t7K
#
9 ever there 6as a philosophi8al @epistemologi8alA positio!- this is o!e @a!d a rather
vulgar o!e at thatA7 4ot to me!tio! the urther a8t that this Jmodel:depe!de!t realismK is simply too
6eak to do the job assig!ed to it by =a6ki!g- that o providi!g the epistemologi8al rame or
i!terpreti!g the 6ell:k!o6! parado?es o Nua!tum physi8s- their i!8ompatibility 6ith 8ommo!:se!se
o!tology7 =o6ever- i! spite o all these problemati8 eatures- 6e should admit that Nua!tum physi8s
a!d 8osmology do have philosophi8al impli8atio!s- a!d that they do 8o!ro!t philosophy 6ith a
8halle!ge7
'
Similar here is the positio! o 4i8holas Fear!- 6hose JsymptomK is dis8er!ible already rom the
Do!te!ts list o his book+ the lo!gest 8hapter @JCostmoder!ism a!d CragmatismKA is a! umbrella
8hapter 8overi!g everythi!g that is e?8luded by the horiUo! o the book- by its 8hoi8e o 6hat
philosophy is7
$
The duality i! the 8hapter title is sig!ii8a!t+ Jpostmoder!ismK as the outside a!d
JpragmatismK @mai!ly FortyA as the i!s8riptio! o this outside 6ithi! the ield o a!alyti8al:8og!itive
thought7 The bookIs abidi!g theme is the gradual tra!spositio! o philosophi8al problems i!to s8ie!tii8
o!esEphilosophy- 8aught i! i!soluble dilemmas- rea8hes maturity 6he! it 8a!8els or over8omes itsel
by posi!g its problems i! s8ie!tii8 terms7 1e!eral o!tology thus be8omes Nua!tum physi8s cum theory
o relativityT epistemology the 8og!itive a88ou!t o our a8Nuisitio! o k!o6ledgeT ethi8s the
evolutio!ist i!Nuiry i!to the rise o moral !orms a!d their adaptive u!8tio!7 This is ho6 Fear!
elega!tly a88ou!ts or the a8t that- i! some philosophi8al dis8ipli!es- approa8hes out o tu!e 6ith
8urre!t s8ie!tii8 thi!ki!g te!d to prolierate+ this is J6hat o!e 6ould e?pe8t i! a ield that has bee!
va8ated by philosophyIs regular armies a!d let to partisa!s 6ho reuse to a88ept deeat7K
&
9! short-
o!8e the problem is ully tra!sposed i!to terms 6hi8h i! pri!8iple make its s8ie!tii8 solutio! possible-
there is !o more 6ork or philosophers to do o! it7 The serious o!es amo!g them 6ill move else6here-
6hile those 6ho remai! are simply partisa!s o the old positio!s resisti!g the i!evitable deeatEa!d-
parado?i8ally- their very predomi!a!8e @i7e7- the abse!8e o JseriousK philosophersA is a!other sig! o
that deeat7 Fear!Is e?ample is that o the problem o ree 6ill versus !atural determi!ism+ the a8t that
most philosophers today 6ho 6ork i! this ield are i!8ompatibilists simply sig!als that 8ompatibilists
have already 6o! the battle 6ith their !aturalisti8 a88ou!t o ho6 @6hat 6e mea! byA reedom 8a! be
u!ited 6ith determi!ism- so Jthey have better thi!gs to do tha! reo88upy se8ured grou!d7K
%
=o6 are 6e to es8ape rom this impasseM Adria! 2oh!sto! is right to emphasiUe the engaged
8hara8ter o 3adiouIs philosophy- its readi!ess to take risks by e!gagi!g itsel o! behal o parti8ular
s8ie!tii8- politi8al- a!d artisti8 a8hieveme!ts+ 3adiouIs thought is !ot a dista!8ed rele8tio!- it
8ourageously Jjumps i!to the 6orldK a!d li!ks its ate to the ate o a s8ie!tii8 dis8overy- politi8al
proje8t- love e!8ou!ter- a!d so o!7 This readi!ess o a philosopher to i!volve himsel 6ith a! impure-
8o!ti!ge!t- histori8al Jpathologi8alK stai! is 6hat 3adiou is aimi!g at 6he! he speaks about s8ie!8e-
art- politi8s- a!d love as the our J8o!ditio!sK o philosophy- a!d it is i! this se!se that o!e should also
read .e!i!Is stateme!t that- 6ith every great s8ie!tii8 dis8overy- the dei!itio! o materialism 8ha!ges
radi8ally7 Today- the s8ie!tii8 dis8overy 6hi8h !eeds philosophi8al rethi!ki!g is Nua!tum
physi8sEho6 are 6e to i!terpret its o!tologi8al impli8atio!s 6hilst avoidi!g the double trap o
superi8ial pragmati8 empiri8ism a!d obs8ura!tist idealism @Jmi!d 8reates realityKAM .e!i!Is
Materialism and Empirio*,riticism has to be thoroughly re6ritte!Eirstly by aba!do!i!g the
aoreme!tio!ed !aSve !otio! o ully 8o!stituted material reality as the sole true reality outside our
mi!ds7 This !otio! o material reality as JallK relies o! the overlooked e?8eptio! o its tra!s8e!de!tal
8o!stitutio!7 The mi!imal dei!itio! o materialism hi!ges o! the admissio! o a gap between what
Schelling called E&istence and the (round of E&istence+ prior to ully e?iste!t reality- there is a 8haoti8
!o!:All proto:reality- a pre:o!tologi8al- virtual lu8tuatio! o a !ot yet ully 8o!stituted real7 This pre:
o!tologi8al real is 6hat 3adiou 8alls pure multipli8ity- i! 8o!trast to the level o appeara!8es- 6hi8h is
the level o reality 8o!stituted by the tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! o a 6orld7 This is 6hy- i! a stra!ge
reversal o the sta!dard distributio! o predi8ates- 8o!temporary idealism i!sists o! 8orporeality- o! the
u!athomable de!sity a!d i!ertia o matter- 6hile materialism is more a!d more Jabstra8t-K redu8i!g
reality to a pro8ess re!dered i! mathemati8al ormulae a!d ormal permutatio!s o eleme!ts7
10
Fra!U 3re!ta!o- rom 6hom =usserl took the !otio! o i!te!tio!ality- proposed the 8o!8ept o
teleiosis i! order to resolve Be!oIs parado? o moveme!t @at a!y determi!ate mome!t- a lyi!g arro6
o88upies a 8ertai! poi!t i! spa8e- so 6he! does it moveMAT teleiosis sta!ds or the virtual orie!tatio! o
a! a8tual poi!t7 Take t6o arro6s at a 8ertai! poi!t i! time- o!e o them at rest- the other lyi!g+
although ea8h o them o88upies a determi!ate poi!t i! spa8e- they do !ot o88upy it i! the same 6ay-
be8ause their respe8tive teleiosis is diere!tEthe teleiosis o the irst arro6 is Uero- 6hile the teleiosis
o the se8o!d o!e is positive @its stre!gth depe!di!g o! the velo8ity o its moveme!tA a!d 6ith a give!
dire8tio!7 This pote!tiality o moveme!t is part o the a8tuality o a! obje8t+ i 6e 6a!t to des8ribe a!
obje8t i! its ull reality- 6e have to i!8lude its teleiosis7 Go 6e !ot e!8ou!ter somethi!g stri8tly
homologous i! diere!tial 8al8ulusM The primary motivatio! or the study o so:8alled diere!tiatio!
6as the ta!ge!tial li!e problem+ ho6 to i!d- or a give! 8urve- the slope o the straight li!e that is
ta!ge!tial to the 8urve at a give! poi!tM /he! 6e try to determi!e the slope o a li!e that Jtou8hesK a
give! 8urve at a give! poi!t- are 6e !ot tryi!g to determi!e the spatial dire8tio! o that poi!t- its
teleiosisM 4o 6o!der that- i! his 1reat .ogi8- i! the se8tio! o! JWua!tum-K =egel spe!ds doUe!s o
pages dis8ussi!g diere!tial 8al8ulus- reje8ti!g pre8isely the !otio!- usually attributed to him- that the
mathematical i!i!ite Jis 8alled the relative i!i!ite- 6hile the ordi!ary metaphysical i!i!iteEby
6hi8h is u!derstood the abstra8t- spurious i!i!iteEis 8alled absoluteK+

i! poi!t o a8t it is this metaphysi8al i!i!ite 6hi8h is merely relative- be8ause the !egatio! 6hi8h it
e?presses is opposed to a limit o!ly i! su8h a ma!!er that this limit persists outside it a!d is !ot
sublated by itT the mathemati8al i!i!ite- o! the 8o!trary- has 6ithi! itsel truly sublated the i!ite limit
be8ause the beyo!d o the latter is u!ited 6ith it7
11
The ordi!ary metaphysi8al !otio! o the i!i!ite 8o!8eives it as a! Absolute 6hi8h persists i!
itsel beyo!d the i!ite+ the limit 6hi8h separates it rom the i!ite is e?ter!al to it- or the !egatio! o
the i!ite is !ot part o the ide!tity o the Absolute7 9! the 8ase o the mathemati8al i!i!ite- o! the
8o!trary- the i!i!ite is !ot somethi!g outside the series o i!ite !umbers- but the i!i!ity o this very
series7 The limit that separates the i!i!ite rom the i!ite is imma!e!t to the i!iteEo!e 8a! eve! say
that the mathemati8al i!i!ite is !othi!g but this limit7 9! diere!tial 8al8ulus- this limit as su8h is
auto!omiUed- re!dered i!depe!de!t+ 6he! 6e 8al8ulate the slope o the straight li!e that is ta!ge!tial to
the 8urve at a give! poi!t- 6e ee8tively 8al8ulate the slope @spatial dire8tio!A o a give! poi!t o the
8urve- the spatial dire8tio! o somethi!g 6hose spatial le!gth is redu8ed to the i!i!itely small- to Uero7
This mea!s that- i! the result o diere!tial 8al8ulus- 6e have a Nua!titative relatio!ship bet6ee! t6o
terms @a straight li!e a!d a 8urveA 6hose Nua!tity is redu8ed to Uero @a poi!tA- that is- 6e have a
Nua!titative relatio!ship 6hi8h remai!s ater the Nua!tity o the t6o relata is abolishedT but 6he! 6e
subtra8t the Nua!tity o a! e!tity- 6hat remai!s is its Nuality- so the parado? o diere!tial 8al8ulus is
that the Nua!titative relatio!ship e?pressed i! its result u!8tio!s as a Nuality+ Jthe so:8alled
i!i!itesimals e?press the va!ishi!g o the sides o the ratio as Nua!ta- a!d 6hat remai!s is their
Nua!titative relatio! solely as Nualitatively determi!ed7K
12
A!d si!8e- or =egel- time is the sublatio! @!egatio! o the !egatio!A o spa8e- 6e 8a! also say
that teleiosis is the i!s8riptio! o time i!to spa8e i! the se!se o spa8e:time- o time as a!other @ourthA
dime!sio! o spa8e+ teleiosis suppleme!ts the three dime!sio!s 6hi8h determi!e the spatial positio! o
a! obje8t 6ith the virtual a!d temporal dime!sio! o its spatial moveme!t7 A purely spatial dei!itio!
6hi8h immobiliUes its obje8t produ8es a !o!:a8tual abstra8tio!- !ot a ull realityT the u!i!ished
@o!tologi8ally i!8ompleteA 8hara8ter o reality 6hi8h 8ompels us to i!8lude the virtuality o teleiosis i!
the dei!itio! o a! obje8t is thus !ot its limitatio!- but a positive 8o!ditio! o its a8tual e?iste!8e7 The
same holds also or large histori8al obje8ts+ the dei!itio! o a !atio! should i!8lude its past a!d uture-
its memories a!d illusio!s7 To paraphrase a! old 8riti8 o Fe!a!- a !atio! is a group o people u!ited by
a mistake! vie6 about the past- a hatred o their prese!t !eighbors- a!d da!gerous illusio!s about their
uture7 @For e?ample- todayIs Slove!es are u!ited by myths about a Slove!e ki!gdom i! the
eighth8e!tury- their hatred o [at this mome!t\ the Droats- a!d the illusio! that they are o! their 6ay to
be8omi!g the !e?t S6itUerla!d7A 0a8h histori8al orm is a totality 6hi8h e!8ompasses !ot o!ly its
retroa8tively posited past- but also its o6! uture- a uture 6hi8h is by dei!itio! !ever realiUed+ it is the
imma!e!t uture o this prese!t- so that- 6he! the prese!t orm disi!tegrates- it u!dermi!es also its past
a!d its uture7
1"
This is also ho6 6e should u!dersta!d dira8tio! i! relatio! to the blurred edges o a!
obje8t+ !ot i! the 8ommo!:se!se ma!!er 6hi8h tells us that- upo! a 8loser look- its li!es o demar8atio!
are impre8ise- but i! the se!se that the virtuality o a! obje8tIs uture moveme!ts are part o that
obje8tIs reality7
/e 8a! see rom this e?ample that- i or !o other reaso!- .e!i!Is gesture should be repeated i!
the 8o!te?t o de!ou!8i!g spiritualist appropriatio!s o Nua!tum physi8s7 For e?ample- there is !o
dire8t li!k or eve! a sig! o eNuatio! bet6ee! @huma!A reedom a!d Nua!tum i!determi!a8y+ simple
i!tuitio! tells us that i a! o88urre!8e depe!ds o! pure 8ha!8e- i there is !o 8ausality i! 6hi8h to
grou!d it- this i! !o 6ay makes it a! a8t o reedom7 Freedom is !ot the abse!8e o 8ausality- it o88urs
!ot 6he! there is !o 8ausality- but 6he! my ree 6ill is the 8ause o a! eve!t or de8isio!E6he!
somethi!g happe!s !ot 6ithout 8ause- but be8ause 9 6a!ted it to happe!7 H! the opposite side- Ge!!ett
pro8eeds all too Nui8kly i! !aturaliUi!g reedom- that is- i! eNuati!g it 6ith i!!er !e8essity- 6ith the
deployme!t o a! i!!er pote!tial+ a! orga!ism is JreeK 6he! !o e?ter!al obsta8les preve!t it rom
realiUi!g its i!!er i!8li!atio!sEagai!- simple i!tuitio! tells us that this is !ot 6hat 6e mea! by
reedom7
To avoid su88umbi!g to similar spe8ulatio!s about ho6- a88ordi!g to Nua!tum physi8s- mi!d
8reates reality a!d so o!- the irst thi!g to keep i! mi!d is that the propositio!s o Nua!tum physi8s o!ly
u!8tio! 6ithi! a 8omple? apparatus o mathemati8al ormaliUatio!+ i o!e dire8tly 8o!ro!ts its
parado?i8al impli8atio!s @sy!8hro!i8ity- time ru!!i!g ba8k6ards- et87A 6ith our 8ommo!:se!si8al
o!tology- ig!ori!g the apparatus o mathemati8al ormaliUatio!- the 6ay is the! ope! or 4e6 Age
mysti8ism7 The se8o!d thi!g to bear i! mi!d- ho6ever- is that the Nua!tum u!iverse is !ot
mathemati8al i! the se!se o i!volvi!g the imma!e!t developme!t o the 8o!seNue!8es o i!itial
a?ioms- but rather thoroughly s8ie!tii8 i! the se!se o relyi!g o! measureme!ts a!d thereby e?posi!g
itsel to the 8o!ti!ge!8y o empiri8al 8o!te!t7 This is 6hy s8ie!tii8 8ommo! se!se @6hat Althusser
8alled the Jspo!ta!eous ideology o s8ie!tistsKA dismisses Nuestio!s about the o!tologi8al impli8atio!s
o Nua!tum physi8s as irreleva!t to s8ie!8e+

9t is a 8ommo! vie6 amo!g ma!y o todayIs physi8ists that Nua!tum me8ha!i8s provides us 6ith !o
pi8ture o JrealityK at allR The ormalism o Nua!tum me8ha!i8s- o! this vie6- is to be take! as just
that+ a mathemati8al ormalism7 This ormalism- as ma!y Nua!tum physi8ists 6ould argue- tells us
esse!tially !othi!g about a! a8tual Nua!tum reality o the 6orld- but merely allo6s us to 8ompute
probabilities or alter!ative realities that might o88ur7
1(
There is a mome!t o truth i! this dismissal+ tra!slati!g Nua!tum phe!ome!a i!to a larger
8o!te?t to impress the publi8 is 6ro!g a!d misleadi!gEi! our reality- obje8ts do !ot o88upy t6o pla8es
at o!8e- a!d so o!7 =o6ever- the o!tologi8al Nuestio! persists- eve! i it remai!s u!a!s6ered+ 6hat is
the o!tologi8al status o the phe!ome!a 8overed by Nua!tum ormulaeM /hile obviously !ot part o our
daily reality- they must have a status 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the s8ie!tistsI imagi!atio! or
dis8ursive 8o!stru8ts7
The so:8alled Dope!hage! i!terpretatio! o Nua!tum me8ha!i8s- asso8iated 6ith 3ohr- gave
rise to a plethora o other i!terpretatio!s 6hi8h tried to resolve 6hat 6as see! as its deadlo8k7 These
i!8luded the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! by 8o!s8ious!ess or by gravityT the idea that the 6ave
u!8tio! !ever 8ollapses- si!8e all possibilities are a8tualiUed i! diere!t 6orldsT the !o!:lo8al hidde!
variables theory 6hi8h restores determi!ismT de8ohere!8e- 6hi8h a88ou!ts or the 8ollapse by 6ay o
the i!tera8tio! o the obje8t 6ith its ra!domly lu8tuati!g e!viro!me!t- a!d so o!7 All these attempts
should be read ollo6i!g the model o dira8tio!+ as attempts to Jre:!ormaliUeK the traumati8
o!tologi8al sho8k o Nua!tum physi8s7 To Nuote A!to! Beili!ger+ JThe sear8h or i!terpretatio!s
diere!t rom the Dope!hage! i!terpretatio! very ote! is motivated by tryi!g to evade its radi8al
8o!seNue!8es- that is- a! a8t o 8og!itive repressio! o! the part o the proposers7K
1#
Formulated by
0vely! Fo? *eller- this !otio! o J8og!itive repressio!K reers to the Ju!6illi!g!ess to let go o the
basi8 te!ets o 8lassi8al physi8s+ the obje8tivity a!d k!o6ability o !ature7K
1'
Da! 6e !ot also apply
here the !otio! o dira8tio!M Goes !ot the Dope!hage! i!terpretatio! 6ork as a ki!d o obsta8le- a
poi!t o impossibility- 8ausi!g epistemologi8al dira8tio!- that is- givi!g rise to a multipli8ity o
8o!li8ti!g i!terpretatio!s attempti!g to Jre!ormaliUeK its e?8ess- to re:i!s8ribe it i!to the traditio!al
epistemologi8al a!d o!tologi8al spa8eM
There are major debates about the e?a8t mome!t o the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio!T the three
mai! positio!s it pere8tly the .a8a!ia! triad o Feal>symboli8>imagi!ary+ the real o measureme!t
@6he! the result is registered by the measuri!g ma8hi!e- establishi!g 8o!ta8t bet6ee! Nua!tum mi8ro:
reality a!d ordi!ary ma8ro:realityA- the imagi!ary o per8eptio! @6he! the result is per8eived by a
8o!s8ious!essA- a!d the symboli8 i!s8riptio! @6he! the result is i!s8ribed i!to the la!guage shared by
the 8ommu!ity o resear8hersA7 Goes this debate !ot sig!al a ki!d o o!tologi8al i!8o!siste!8y i!
Nua!tum physi8sM The latter a88ou!ts or the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! @a!d thus or the emerge!8e
o Jordi!aryK realityA i! terms o the a8t o per8eptio! or registratio! @a si!gle reality emerges through
the a8t o measureme!tA- but it the! e?plai!s @or- rather- des8ribesA this measureme!t i! terms o the
ordi!ary reality that o!ly emerges through it @the measuri!g ma8hi!e is hit by ele8tro!s- et87A- a!d this
obviously i!volves a circulus vitiosus7 H!e 8o!siste!t solutio! here is a! e?pli8itly theologi8al o!e+ the
o!ly 6ay to a88ou!t or the reality o the u!iverse as su8h is to posit a poi!t o observatio! e?ter!al to
it- 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be somethi!g like a 1odIs eye7
There is- ho6ever- a!other 6ay to thi!k this parado?7 /he! 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller emphasiUes
the imma!e!8e o the percipiens to the perceptum as .a8a!Is 8ru8ial move i! the theory o the ield o
visio!- 6ould it be legitimate to li!k this to Nua!tum physi8s- 6hi8h also asserts the imma!e!8e o the
observer to the observedM There are- o 8ourse- diere!8es that sta!d out+ i! Nua!tum physi8s- the
observer is !ot imma!e!t to the observed i! the se!se o bei!g i!s8ribed i!to it- but i! the more
eleme!tary se!se o its a8t o observatio! bei!g 8o!stitutive o the observed7 Furthermore- this observer
is !ot the .a8a!ia! subje8t @o desireA- but the subje8t o s8ie!8e- the subje8t or 6hom reality is Jlat-K
or 6hom there is !o bli!d spot i! reality rom 6hi8h the obje8t retur!s the gaUe7 9! other 6ords- o!e
should bear i! mi!d that .a8a!Is !otio! o the imma!e!8e o the percipiens to the perceptum reers to
per8eptio! sustai!ed by desire+ the poi!t i! the per8eived pi8ture rom 6hi8h the obje8t retur!s the gaUe
is the JimpossibleK poi!t at 6hi8h the obje8t:8ause o desire is lo8ated7 9t is the obje8tal 8ou!terpoi!t to
the subje8tIs desire- 6hat attra8ts me Ji! you more tha! yoursel-K a!d is as su8h o!ly per8eivable-
i!deed o!ly e?:sists- or a per8eptio! sustai!ed by desire7
Wua!tum physi8s 8learly has 6eird o!tologi8al 8o!seNue!8es7 The origi! o this 6eird!ess is
the duality o @e?te!dedA 6ave a!d @8ompa8tA parti8le 6hi8h arose out o a! e!igma !oted by de
3roglie 6he! he tried to 8o!8eive the ele8tro! as a parti8le+ J9 a! ele8tro! i! a hydroge! atom 6ere a
8ompa8t parti8le- ho6 8ould it possibly Vk!o6I the siUe o a! orbit i! order to ollo6 o!ly those orbits
allo6ed by 3ohrIs by:!o6 amous ormulaMK
1$
3ohrIs solutio! to the o!tologi8al status o
8ompleme!tarity @6ave or parti8leA is that

the mi8ros8opi8 system- the atom- [does !ot e?ist\ i! a!d o itsel7 /e must al6ays i!8lude i! our
dis8ussio!Eimpli8itly at leastEthe diere!t ma8ros8opi8 e?perime!tal apparatuses used to display
ea8h o the t6o 8ompleme!tary aspe8ts7 All is the! i!e- be8ause it is ultimately o!ly the 8lassi8al
behavior o su8h apparatus that 6e report O although physi8ists talk o atoms a!d other mi8ros8opi8
e!tities as i they 6ere a8tual physi8al thi!gs- they are really o!ly 8o!8epts 6e use to des8ribe the
behavior o our measuri!g i!strume!ts7
1&
9t is 8ru8ial that this des8riptio! be give! i! the plai! la!guage used to talk about everyday
e?ter!al realityE8o!seNue!tly- it is tempti!g to apply here the early Althusseria! disti!8tio! bet6ee!
the Jreal obje8tK a!d the Jobje8t o k!o6ledgeK+ the o!ly real obje8ts 6e are deali!g 6ith i! Nua!tum
physi8s are the obje8ts o ordi!ary realityT the e!tire Nua!tum sphere has !o o!tologi8al status proper- it
is merely a! Jobje8t o k!o6ledge-K a 8o!8eptual 8o!stru8t 6hose u!8tio! is to provide the ormulae
to e?plai! the behavior o measuri!g obje8ts 6hi8h are part o ordi!ary reality7 9t is thus stri8tly
!o!se!si8al to speak about Nua!tum pro8esses as 8o!stituti!g a! auto!omous sphere o bei!g+ i!
reality- there are !o obje8ts 6hi8h 8a! be i! t6o pla8es simulta!eously- et87- Jall there isK o!tologi8ally
is our ordi!ary reality- 6hat is Jbeyo!dK are o!ly mathemati8al ormulae 6hi8h give a 8ertai!
8redibility to 6hat our i!strume!ts measure- !ot a!y ki!d o i!sight i!to J6hat 4ature is tryi!g to tell
us7K
1%
Hur e?perie!8e o everyday reality thus remai!s the phe!ome!ologi8al ba8kgrou!d a!d
ou!datio! o Nua!tum theory7
The temptatio! to be resisted here is that o i!terpreti!g the 6ay Nua!tum physi8s u!dermi!es
our 8ommo! !otio! o reality e?isti!g i!depe!de!tly o our per8eptio! as a sig! o some Jdeeper
mea!i!g-K o a!other- more JspiritualK realityEeve! 2oh! /heeler- himsel !o stra!ger to a
JspiritualistK readi!g o Nua!tum physi8s- has 8learly poi!ted out that JV8o!s8ious!essI has !othi!g
6hatsoever to do 6ith the Nua!tum pro8ess7 /e are deali!g 6ith a! eve!t that makes itsel k!o6! by
a! irreversible a8t o amplii8atio!- by a! i!delible re8ord- a! a8t o registratio! O [,ea!i!g\ is a
separate part o the story- importa!t but !ot to be 8o!used 6ith VNua!tum phe!ome!aI7K
20
Although 3ohr avoids this trap- his limit betrays his la8k o the properly philosophi8al
tra!s8e!de!tal rele8tio!- dis8er!ible i! the u!dame!tal o!tologi8al i!8o!siste!8y o his a88ou!t o
ho6 6hat 6e per8eive as ordi!ary Je?ter!al realityK emerges o!ly through the 8ollapse o the 6ave
u!8tio! i! the a8t o measuri!g+ i ordi!ary empiri8al reality 8o!stitutes itsel through measuri!g- ho6
do 6e a88ou!t or the measuri!g apparatuses themselves 6hi8h are part o this same empiri8al realityM
Are 6e !ot deali!g here 6ith a petitio principii- that is- is !ot the e&planandum part o the e&planansM
*NOLEDGE IN THE REAL

A a8t rarely !oti8ed is that the propositio!s o Nua!tum physi8s 6hi8h dey our 8ommo!:se!se
vie6 o material reality stra!gely e8ho a!other domai!- that o la!guage- o the symboli8 orderEit is as
i Nua!tum pro8esses are 8loser to the u!iverse o la!guage tha! a!ythi!g o!e i!ds i! J!ature-K as i- i!
the Nua!tum u!iverse- the huma! spirit e!8ou!ters itsel outside itsel- i! the guise o its u!8a!!y
J!aturalK double7 Take .a8a!Is 8hara8teriUatio! o the Jhard s8ie!8esK as deali!g 6ith 6hat he 8alls
savoir dans le rAel @k!o6ledge i! the realA+ it is as i there is a k!o6ledge o the la6s o !ature dire8tly
i!s8ribed i!to the Feal o !atural obje8ts a!d pro8essesEa sto!e- or i!sta!8e- Jk!o6sK 6hat la6s o
gravity to obey 6he! it alls7 9! a!other e?ample o the s8ie!tii8 Jk!o6ledge i! the real-K 0r!est
Futherord Nueried ho6 a parti8le k!o6s 6here to go 6he! it jumps rom o!e JrailK to a!other arou!d
the atomIs 8oreErails that do !ot e?ist as material obje8ts but are purely ideal traje8tories7 9t may seem
that therei! lies the diere!8e bet6ee! !ature a!d history+ i! huma! history- Jla6sK are !orms 6hi8h
8a! be orgotte! or disobeyed7
At its most dari!g- Nua!tum physi8s does seem to allo6 or the parado? o the proverbial
8artoo! 8at suspe!ded i! mid:air- o the mome!tary suspe!sio! or Jorgetti!gK o k!o6ledge i! the
real7 9magi!e you have to take a light o! day d to 8olle8t a !e6ly i!herited ortu!e 6hi8h must be
pi8ked up the !e?t day but do !ot have e!ough mo!ey to buy the ti8ket7 The! you dis8over that the
airli!eIs a88ou!ti!g system is set up so that i you 6ire the ti8ket payme!t 6ithi! 2( hours o arrivi!g
at your desti!atio!- !o o!e 6ill ever k!o6 it 6as !ot paid or prior to departure7 9! a homologous 6ay-

the e!ergy a parti8le has 8a! 6ildly lu8tuate so lo!g as this lu8tuatio! is over a short e!ough time
s8ale7 So- just as the a88ou!ti!g system o the airli!e Jallo6sK you to Jborro6K the mo!ey or a pla!e
ti8ket provided you pay it ba8k Nui8kly e!ough- Nua!tum me8ha!i8s allo6s a parti8le to Jborro6K
e!ergy so lo!g as it 8a! reli!Nuish it 6ithi! a time rame determi!ed by =eise!bergIs u!8ertai!ty
pri!8iple O 3ut Nua!tum me8ha!i8s or8es us to take the a!alogy o!e importa!t step urther7 9magi!e
someo!e 6ho is a 8ompulsive borro6er a!d goes rom rie!d to rie!d aski!g or mo!ey O 3orro6
a!d retur!- borro6 a!d retur!Eover a!d over agai! 6ith u!laggi!g i!te!sity he takes i! mo!ey o!ly
to give it ba8k i! short order O a similar ra!ti8 shiti!g ba8k a!d orth o e!ergy a!d mome!tum is
o88urri!g perpetually i! the u!iverse o mi8ros8opi8 dista!8e a!d time i!tervals7
21
This is ho6- eve! i! a! empty regio! o spa8e- a parti8le emerges out o 4othi!g- Jborro6i!gK
its e!ergy rom the uture a!d payi!g or it @6ith its a!!ihilatio!A beore the system !oti8es 6hat it has
do!e7 The 6hole !et6ork 8a! u!8tio! like this- i! a rhythm o borro6i!g a!d a!!ihilatio!- o!e
borro6i!g rom the other- displa8i!g the debt o!to the other- postpo!i!g the payme!tEit is really as i
the subparti8le domai! is playi!g /all:Street:style games 6ith utures7 /hat this presupposes is a
mi!imal gap bet6ee! thi!gs i! their immediate brute reality a!d the registratio! o this reality i! some
medium @o the big HtherA+ o!e 8a! 8heat i!soar as the se8o!d mome!t @registratio!A is delayed 6ith
regard to the irst7 /hat makes Nua!tum physi8s so stra!ge is that o!e 8a! 8heat Ji! reality-K 6ith o!eIs
bei!g7 9! other 6ords- the Jspooki!essK o Nua!tum physi8s is !ot its radi8al heteroge!eity 6ith regard
to our 8ommo! se!se- but- rather- its u!8a!!y resembla!8e to 6hat 6e 8o!sider spe8ii8ally
huma!Ehere- i!deed- o!e is tempted to say that Nua!tum physi8s Jde8o!stru8tsK the sta!dard bi!ary
oppositio! o !ature a!d 8ulture7 .et us go Nui8kly through the list o these eatures+
22
@1A /ithi! the symboli8 order- possibility as su8h possesses a! a8tuality o its o6!T that is- it
produ8es real ee8tsEor e?ample- the atherIs authority is u!dame!tally virtual- a threat o viole!8e7
9! a similar 6ay- i! the Nua!tum u!iverse- the a8tual traje8tory o a parti8le 8a! o!ly be e?plai!ed i
o!e takes i!to a88ou!t all o its possible traje8tories 6ithi! its 6ave u!8tio!7 9! both 8ases- the
a8tualiUatio! does !ot simply abolish the previous pa!oply o possibilities+ 6hat might have happe!ed
8o!ti!ues to e8ho i! 6hat a8tually happe!s as its virtual ba8kgrou!d7
@2A 3oth i! the symboli8 u!iverse a!d i! the Nua!tum u!iverse- 6e e!8ou!ter 6hat .a8a! 8alls
Jk!o6ledge i! the realK+ i- i! the amous double:slit e?perime!t- 6e observe a! ele8tro!Is traje8tory i!
order to dis8over through 6hi8h o the t6o slits it 6ill pass- the ele8tro! 6ill behave as a parti8leT i 6e
do !ot observe it- it 6ill display the properties o a 6aveEas i the ele8tro! someho6 k!e6 6hether it
6as bei!g observed or !ot7 9s su8h behavior !ot limited to the symboli8 u!iverse i! 6hi8h our Jtaki!g
ourselves to be dK makes us a8t like dM
@"A /he! Nua!tum physi8ists try to e?plai! the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio!- they resort agai!
a!d agai! to the metaphor o la!guage+ this 8ollapse o88urs 6he! a Nua!tum eve!t Jleaves a tra8eK i!
the observatio! apparatus- 6he! it is JregisteredK i! some 6ay7 /e obtai! here a relatio!ship o
e?ter!alityEa! eve!t be8omes ully itsel- it realiUes itsel- o!ly 6he! its e?ter!al surrou!di!gs Jtake
!oteK o itE6hi8h e8hoes the pro8ess o symboli8 realiUatio! i! 6hi8h a! eve!t ully a8tualiUes itsel
o!ly through its symboli8 registratio!- its i!s8riptio! i!to a symboli8 !et6ork- 6hi8h is e?ter!al to it7
@(A Furthermore- there is a temporal dime!sio! to this e?ter!ality o registratio!+ a mi!imum o
time al6ays elapses bet6ee! a Nua!tum eve!t a!d its registratio!- a!d this mi!imal delay ope!s up the
spa8e or a ki!d o o!tologi8al 8heati!g 6ith virtual parti8les @a! ele8tro! 8a! 8reate a proto! a!d
thereby violate the pri!8iple o 8o!sta!t e!ergy- o! 8o!ditio! that it reabsorbs it Nui8kly e!ough- beore
its e!viro!me!t Jtakes !oteK o the dis8repa!8yA7 This delay also ope!s the 6ay or temporal
retroa8tivity+ the prese!t registratio! de8ides 6hat must have happe!edEor e?ample- i- i! the double:
slit e?perime!t- a! ele8tro! is observed- it 6ill !ot o!ly @!o6A behave as a parti8le- its past 6ill also
retroa8tively be8ome @J6ill have bee!KA that o a parti8le- i! a homology 6ith the symboli8 u!iverse i!
6hi8h a prese!t radi8al i!terve!tio! @the rise o a !e6 ,aster:Sig!iierA 8a! retroa8tively re6rite the
@mea!i!g o theA e!tire past7
2"
Cerhaps- the!- i!soar as retroa8tivity is a 8ru8ial eature o the =egelia!
diale8ti8s- a!d i!soar as retroa8tivity is o!ly thi!kable i! a! Jope!K o!tology o !ot yet ully
8o!stituted reality- the reere!8e to =egel 8a! be o some help i! bri!gi!g out the o!tologi8al
8o!seNue!8es o Nua!tum physi8s7
=o6 ar should 6e go 6ith this parallelM 9s it just a! appro?imate metaphorM Goes it bear
6it!ess to the a8t that our e!tire 8omprehe!sio! o reality is already over determi!ed by the symboli8
order- so that eve! our grasp o !atural reality is al6ays already Jstru8tured like a la!guageKM Hr should
6e risk a step urther a!d 8laim that there is somethi!g 6hi8h stra!gely re8alls @or poi!ts to6ardsA
symboli8 stru8tures already prese!t i! Jphysi8alK reality itselM 9 6e do dra6 that 8o!8lusio!- the! the
e!tire Jspo!ta!eous philosophi8al ideologyK o the gap that separates !ature rom 8ulture @a orm o
ideology ote! 8learly dis8er!ible i! .a8a! himselA has to be aba!do!ed7 A88ordi!g to this
Jspo!ta!eous ideology-K !ature sta!ds or the prima8y o a8tuality over pote!tiality- its domai! is the
domai! o the pure positivity o bei!g 6here there are !o la8ks @gapsA i! the stri8t symboli8 se!seT i-
ho6ever- 6e take the o!tologi8al 8o!seNue!8es o Nua!tum physi8s seriously- the! 6e have to suppose
that the symboli8 order pre:e?ists i! a J6ildK !atural orm- albeit i! 6hat S8helli!g 6ould have 8alled a
lo6er pote!8y7 /e thus have to posit a ki!d o o!tologi8al triad o Nua!tum proto:reality @the pre:
o!tologi8al Nua!tum os8illatio!sA- ordi!ary physi8al reality- a!d the JimmaterialK virtual level o
Se!se:0ve!ts7 =o6 are these three aspe8ts relatedM
The basi8 eature o symboli8 reality is its o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess- its J!o!:AllK+ it has !o
imma!e!t 8o!siste!8y- it is a multipli8ity o Jloati!g sig!iiersK 6hi8h 8a! o!ly be stabiliUed through
the i!terve!tio! o a ,aster:Sig!iierEi! 8lear 8o!trast- so it seems- to !atural reality- 6hi8h is 6hat it
is- 6ithout a!y symboli8 i!terve!tio!7 3ut is this soM 9s !ot the key o!tologi8al 8o!seNue!8e o
Nua!tum physi8s that Nua!tum proto:reality also !eeds a homologous JNuilti!g poi!tK @here 8alled the
8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio!A to stabiliUe itsel i!to the ordi!ary reality o everyday obje8ts a!d
temporal pro8essesM /e thus e!8ou!ter here also the @temporalA gap bet6ee! the i!8o!siste!t proto:
reality a!d the de8e!tered age!8y o its registratio! 6hi8h 8o!stitutes it as ull reality+ here too- reality
is !ot ully itsel- but de8e!tered 6ith regard to itselT it be8omes itsel retroa8tively- through its
registratio!7 9! philosophy- this gap is preigured i! S8helli!gIs disti!8tio! bet6ee! 0?iste!8e a!d the
1rou!d o 0?iste!8e- bet6ee! reality a!d proto:reality7 .et us ba8ktra8k here+ i! 6hat does S8helli!gIs
philosophi8al revolutio! 8o!sistM A88ordi!g to the sta!dard a8ademi8 do&a- S8helli!g broke out o the
idealist 8losure o the 4otio!Is sel:mediatio! by 6ay o asserti!g a more bala!8ed bi:polarity o the
9deal a!d the Feal+ J!egative philosophyK @the a!alysis o the !otio!al esse!8eA must be suppleme!ted
by Jpositive philosophy-K 6hi8h deals 6ith the positive order o e?iste!8e7 9! !ature as 6ell as i!
huma! history- the ideal ratio!al order 8a! o!ly thrive agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the impe!etrable
1rou!d o Jirratio!alK drives a!d passio!s7 The 8lima? o philosophi8al developme!t- the sta!dpoi!t o
the Absolute- is thus !ot the Jsublatio!K @+ufhebungA o all reality i! its ideal 4otio!- but the !eutral
medium o the t6o dime!sio!sEthe Absolute is ideal:real7 Su8h a readi!g- ho6ever- obus8ates
S8helli!gIs true breakthrough- his disti!8tio!- irst i!trodu8ed i! his essay o! huma! reedom rom
1&0$- bet6ee! @logi8alA 0?iste!8e a!d the impe!etrable 1rou!d o 0?iste!8e- the Feal o pre:logi8al
drives7
2(
This proto:o!tologi8al domai! o drives is !ot simply J!ature-K but the spe8tral domai! o the
!ot yet ully 8o!stituted reality7 S8helli!gIs oppositio! o the proto:o!tologi8al Feal o drives @the
1rou!d o 3ei!gA a!d o!tologi8ally ully 8o!stituted 3ei!g itsel @6hi8h- o 8ourse- is Jse?edK as the
oppositio! o the Femi!i!e a!d the ,as8uli!eA thus radi8ally displa8es the sta!dard philosophi8al
8ouples o 4ature a!d Spirit- the Feal a!d the 9deal- 0?iste!8e a!d 0sse!8e- et87 The real 1rou!d o
0?iste!8e is impe!etrable- de!se- i!ert- yet at the same time spe8tral- Jirreal-K o!tologi8ally !ot ully
8o!stituted- 6hile 0?iste!8e is ideal- yet at the same time- i! 8o!trast to the 1rou!d- ully Jreal-K ully
e?iste!t7
The theologi8al impli8atio!s o this gap bet6ee! proto:reality a!d its ull 8o!stitutio! through
symboli8 registratio! are o spe8ial i!terest+ i!soar as J1odK is the age!t 6ho 8reates thi!gs by
observi!g them- Nua!tum i!determi!a8y 8ompels us to posit a 1od 6ho is omnipotent! but not
omniscient+ J9 1od 8ollapses the 6ave u!8tio!s o large thi!gs to reality by =is observatio!- Nua!tum
e?perime!ts i!di8ate that =e is !ot observi!g the small7K
2#
The o!tologi8al 8heati!g 6ith virtual
parti8les is a 6ay to 8heat 1od himsel- the ultimate age!8y taki!g !ote o everythi!g that goes o!T i!
other 6ords- 1od himsel does !ot 8o!trol the Nua!tum pro8esses- a!d therei! resides the atheist lesso!
o Nua!tum physi8s7 0i!stei! 6as right 6ith his amous 8laim J1od does!It 8heatKE6hat he orgot to
add is that he himsel 8a! be 8heated7 9!soar as the materialist thesis is that J1od is u!8o!s8iousK @1od
does!It k!o6A- Nua!tum physi8s is ee8tively materialist+ there are mi8ro:pro8esses @Nua!tum
os8illatio!sA !ot registered by the system7
.et us re8apitulate the Nua!tum measureme!t parado?7 9! the double:slit e?perime!t- 6he!
parti8les are se!t through the slits o!e by o!e- they !everthelessEi they are !ot observedEorm the
patter! o a 6ave7 Si!8e the 6ave:patter! presupposes the i!tera8tio! o parti8les- a!d si!8e- i! this
e?perime!t- ea8h parti8le travels alo!e- 6ith 6hat does it i!tera8tM Goes it i!habit a sy!8hro!ous
atemporal spa8e 6here it 8a! i!tera8t 6ith past a!d utureM Hr does it i!tera8t with itselfM This bri!gs us
to the !otio! o superpositio!+ the parti8le i!tera8ts 6ith itsel- so that it simulta!eously takes all
possible paths- 6hi8h are JsuperimposedK o! o!e a!other7 Goes this !ot evoke 4ietUs8heIs idea o the
Jshortest shado6-K the mome!t 6he! a! obje8t is !ot a88ompa!ied by a!other- but by its o6!
shado6Eor- rather- i! 6hi8h the obje8t is !ot a! a8tual H!e- but merely a 8omposite o its multiple
shado6s- o more:tha!:!othi!gs or less:tha!:UeroesM The e!igma o the double:slit e?perime!t is thus
triple+
@1A 0ve! i 6e shoot the ele8tro!s i!dividually- o!e ater the other- they 6ill- i 6e do !ot
measure their path- orm a 6ave patter!Ebut ho6 8a! theyM /ith 6hat does ea8h i!dividual ele8tro!
i!tera8tM @/ith itsel7A
@2A 0ve! i 6e measure @or !otA the path ater the ele8tro!s have already passed through the
slits- the patter! still depe!ds o! our measureme!tEbut ho6 8a! it- 6he! the measureme!t takes pla8e
ater the passage through the slitM 9t seems as though 6e 8a! retroa8tively 8ha!ge the past7
@"A 0ve! i 6e do !ot e!a8t measureme!t at all- the mere a8t that the measureme!t apparatus
@a!d- 6ith it- the possibility o measureme!tA is there makes the ele8tro! behave as a parti8leEbut ho6
8a! it- 6he! it 6as i! !o 6ay ae8ted by the measureme!t apparatusM
There are- agai!- t6o devia!t approa8hes to this e!igma+ the spiritualist o!e @the [observerIs\
mi!d 8reates reality- the u!iverse has to be observed by 1od i! order to e?istA- a!d over:hasty
!aturaliUatio! @the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! !eeds !o observer i! the se!se o a 8o!s8ious!ess-
observi!g sta!ds or simple registratio! by the e!viro!me!t- so everythi!g i! !ature is JobservedK all
the time by the e!viro!me!t 6ith 6hi8h it i!tera8tsA7 The basi8 e!igma is the ollo6i!g+ i!soar as the
result o our measureme!t depe!ds o! our ree 8hoi8e o 6hat to measure- the o!ly 6ay to avoid the
impli8atio! that our observatio! 8reates reality is either to de!y our ree 6ill or to adopt a
,alebra!8hea! solutio! @Jthe 6orld 8o!spires to 8orrelate our ree 8hoi8es 6ith the physi8al situatio!s
6e the! observeKA7
2'
The eter!al !aSve:realist Nuestio! J=o6 does obje8tive reality look 6ithout me- i!depe!de!tly
o meMK is a pseudo:problem- si!8e it relies o! a viole!t abstra8tio! rom the very reality it attempts to
grasp+ Jobje8tive realityK as a mathemati8iUed set o relatio!s is Jor usK the result o a lo!g pro8ess o
8o!8eptual abstra8tio!7 This does !ot devalue the result- maki!g it simply depe!de!t o! our Jsubje8tive
sta!dpoi!t-K but it does i!volve a parado?+ %ob1ective reality' ?the way we construct it through
science@ is a 7eal which cannot be e&perienced as reality7 9! its eort to grasp reality Ji!depe!de!tly
o me-K mathemati8iUed s8ie!8e erases JmeK rom reality- ig!ori!g @!ot the tra!s8e!de!tal 6ay 9
8o!stitute reality- butA the 6ay 9 am part of this reality7 The true Nuestio! is thereore ho6 9 @as the site
6here reality appears to itselA emerge i! Jobje8tive realityK @or- more poi!tedly- ho6 8a! a u!iverse o
mea!i!g arise i! the mea!i!gless FealA7 As materialists- 6e should take i!to a88ou!t t6o 8riteria that
a! adeNuate a!s6er should meet+ @1A the a!s6er should be ge!ui!ely materialist- 6ith !o spiritualist
8heati!gT @2A 6e should a88ept that the ordi!ary me8ha!isti8:materialist !otio! o Jobje8tive realityK
6ill !ot do the job7 9t is here that Nua!tum physi8s e!ters the stage+ the parado?es o the double:slit
e?perime!t 8learly demo!strate that the proto:real domai! o Nua!tum 6aves a!d parti8les is obviously
!ot redu8ible to our sta!dard !otio! o Je?ter!al reality-K its properties do !ot it our !otio! o material
obje8ts a!d pro8esses 6hi8h take pla8e Jout thereKT ho6ever- the domai! o Nua!tum 6aves a!d
parti8les is !o less obviously a mea!i!gless Feal7
=ere 6e must take i!to a88ou!t the subtle diere!8e bet6ee! =eise!bergIs u!8ertai!ty
pri!8iple a!d 3ohrIs 8ompleme!tarity- the diere!8e bet6ee! merely epistemologi8al a!d ully
o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess+ 6hile =eise!bergIs poi!t is that 6e 8a!!ot establish the simulta!eous
positio! a!d mome!tum o a parti8le be8ause the very a8t o measureme!t i!terve!es i! the measured
8o!stellatio! a!d disturbs its 8oordi!ates- 3ohrIs poi!t is a mu8h stro!ger o!e 8o!8er!i!g the very
!ature o reality itselEparti8les i! themselves do !ot have a determi!ate positio! a!d mome!tum- thus
6e should aba!do! the sta!dard !otio! o Jobje8tive realityK populated by thi!gs eNuipped 6ith a ully
determi!ed set o properties7
For =eidegger- o!tologi8al diere!8e is ultimately grou!ded i! our i!itude+ 6hat =eidegger
8alls the 0ve!t @EreignisA is the ultimate abyss out o 6hi8h 3ei!g reveals itsel to us i! a multitude o
histori8ally desti!ed horiUo!s- a!d 3ei!g dis8loses or 6ithdra6s itsel be8ause !ot all bei!gs ope! to
us7 To put it blu!tly- there is a diere!8e bet6ee! 6orldly e!tities a!d the horiUo! o their dis8losure
because e!tities dis8lose themselves to us 6ithi! a horiUo! 6hi8h is al6ays rooted i! our i!itude7
=ere- ho6ever- 6e should repeat the move rom *a!t to =egel+ =eidegger !ever 8o!ou!ds the
o!tologi8al dis8losure o e!tities 6ith their o!ti8 produ8tio!Eor him- the idea o huma!s as the 3ei!g:
There o the dis8losure o 3ei!g does !ot mea! that e!tities e?ist o!ly or huma!s- !ot i!depe!de!tly o
them7 9 all o huma!ity 6ere to be 6iped out- e!tities 6ould still be there as they 6ere prior to the
emerge!8e o ma!- they 6ould just !ot e?:sist i! the ull o!tologi8al se!se o appeari!g 6ithi! a
horiUo! o 3ei!g7 3ut 6hat i 6e tra!spose o!tologi8al diere!8e @the diere!8e bet6ee! e!tities a!d
J!othi!g!essK o the o!tologi8al horiUo! o their dis8losureA i!to the Thi!g:i!:itsel- a!d @reA8o!8eive it
as the o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o reality @as Nua!tum physi8s impliesAM /hat i 6e posit that
JThi!gs:i!:themselvesK emerge agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the Void or 4othi!g!ess- the 6ay this Void
is 8o!8eived i! Nua!tum physi8s- as !ot just a !egative void- but the porte!t o all possible realityM This
is the o!ly truly 8o!siste!t Jtra!s8e!de!tal materialismK 6hi8h is possible ater the *a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!tal idealism7 For a true diale8ti8ia!- the ultimate mystery is !ot J/hy is there somethi!g
rather tha! !othi!gMK but J/hy is there !othi!g rather tha! somethi!gMK+ ho6 is it that- the more 6e
a!alyUe reality- the more 6e i!d a voidM
/hat this amou!ts to is that o!tologi8al diere!8e should !ot be limited to the i!itude o
huma! bei!gs to 6hom e!tities appear 6ithi! the @histori8allyA give! horiUo! o a 6orld- that is- agai!st
the ba8kgrou!d o 6ithdra6al- i! the i!e?tri8able mi?ture o dis8losure a!d veil7 This stru8ture o
reality as J!o!:AllK is to be take! i! ully o!tologi8al terms+ it is !ot that- 6ithi! our i!ite horiUo!- the
9!:itsel o reality al6ays appears agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o its 6ithdra6al a!d 8o!8ealme!tT reality is
Ji! itselK !o!:All7 9! other 6ords- the stru8ture o dis8losure or 8o!8ealme!t- the a8t that thi!gs
al6ays emerge out o their ba8kgrou!d Void tru!8ated- !ever ully o!tologi8ally 8o!stituted- is that o
reality itsel- !ot o!ly o our i!ite per8eptio! o it7 Therei!- perhaps- lies the ultimate philosophi8al
8o!seNue!8e o Nua!tum physi8s+ that 6hat its most brillia!t a!d dari!g e?perime!ts demo!strate is !ot
that the des8riptio! o reality it oers is i!8omplete- but that reality itsel is o!tologi8ally Ji!8omplete-K
i!determi!ateEthe la8k that 6e take as a! ee8t o our limited k!o6ledge o reality is part o reality
itsel7 9! a properly =egelia! 6ay- the!- it is our very epistemologi8al limitatio! 6hi8h lo8ates us i! the
Feal+ 6hat appears as the limitatio! o our k!o6ledge is the eature o reality itsel- its J!o!:All7K
Agai!- 6hat this mea!s is that the move rom *a!t to =egel should be repeated apropos
=eidegger+ =eideggerIs history o 3ei!g is ultimately a histori8ally radi8aliUed versio! o *a!tia!
tra!s8e!de!talism7 For =eidegger- the history o 3ei!g is the history o epo8hal dis8losures o the
Se!se o 3ei!g desti!ed to ma!T as su8h- this history is the ultimate limit o 6hat 6e 8a! k!o6Eevery
k!o6ledge o ours already presupposes a!d moves 6ithi! a histori8ally give! dis8losure o 3ei!g- the
abyssal play o these dis8losures 6hi8h just Jhappe!K is as ar as 6e 8a! go7 The o!tologi8al
impli8atio! o Nua!tum physi8s is !ot that 6e 8a! go urther a!d pe!etrate reality i! itsel- but that the
limitatio! posited by =eidegger belo!gs to the 9!:itsel itsel7 9s this !ot the u!derlyi!g impli8atio! o
the Nua!tum 8o!8ept o 4othi!g!ess @VoidA as preg!a!t 6ith a multipli8ity o e!tities 6hi8h 8a!
emerge out o it- that is- Jout o !othi!gKM Feality:i!:itsel is 4othi!g!ess- the Void- a!d out o this
Void- partial- !ot yet ully 8o!stituted 8o!stellatio!s o reality appearT these 8o!stellatio!s are !ever
Jall-K they are al6ays o!tologi8ally tru!8ated- as i visible @a!d e?isti!gA o!ly rom a 8ertai! limited
perspe8tive7 There is o!ly a multipli8ity o tru!8ated u!iverses+ rom the sta!dpoi!t o the All- there is
!othi!g but the Void7 Hr- to risk a simpliied ormulatio!+ Jobje8tivelyK there is !othi!g- si!8e all
determi!ate u!iverses e?ist o!ly rom a limited perspe8tive7
The 8learest a!s6er to the e!igma J/hat happe!ed beore the 3ig 3a!g- that si!gular poi!t at
6hi8h all physi8al la6s are suspe!dedMK is thereore+ nothing7 For Caul Gavies- a partisa! o this vie6-
the 3ig 3a!g is the absolute begi!!i!g o timeEit did !ot happe! i! time- it 8reated time itsel- so the
Nuestio! J/hat happe!ed beoreMK is as mea!i!gless as the Nuestio! J/hat is arther !orth tha! the
4orth ColeMK 9 this 6ere !ot the 8ase- the! everythi!g that takes pla8e !o6 6ould be the i!i!itely
repeatable 8opy o somethi!g that has already happe!ed7 A88ordi!g to the sta!dard Jtheologi8alK
readi!g- the pu!8tual i!i!ite de!sity o matter at the poi!t o si!gularity 6hi8h is the 3ig 3a!g sta!ds
or the absolute 3egi!!i!g- the u!athomable poi!t o 8reatio! at 6hi8h 1od dire8tly i!terve!ed a!d
8reated the u!iverse7 The 3ig 3a!g is thus a ki!d o umbili8al 8ord dire8tly li!ki!g the material
u!iverse to a tra!s8e!de!t dime!sio!7 Su8h a! e?pa!di!g u!iverse is i!ite i! time a!d spa8e- yet
6ithout limits be8ause o the 8urvature o spa8e7 There are- ho6ever- problems 6ith this sta!dard vie67
A88ordi!g to some measureme!ts- there are tra8es o matter older tha! the e?trapolated mome!t o the
3ig 3a!g i! our u!iverse7 The solutio! 8ould be that our u!iverse is like a mirror:hall 6hose visual
e8hoi!g makes the spa8e appear larger tha! it is7 3e8ause o su8h e8hoi!g- 6he! the same sig!al rom
a!other gala?y rea8hes us via t6o diere!t paths- it appears to us that 6e are deali!g 6ith t6o diere!t
gala?ies @or that the same gala?y is simulta!eously at t6o dista!t pla8esA7
4i8k 3ostrom has proposed a more radi8al solutio! or su8h i!8o!siste!8ies+ our u!iverse is a
sophisti8ated 8omputer simulatio!- a ki!d o virtual reality programmed by a 8iviliUatio! i!8omparably
more developed tha! ours7 The program is so pere8t that it makes it possible or us- as simulated
bei!gs- to e?perie!8e emotio!s a!d the illusio! o reedom7 From time to time- ho6ever- there are
glit8hes i! the system- the system violates its o6! rules @or- perhaps- applies J8heat:8odesKA- a!d 6e
e?perie!8e the ee8ts as Jmira8lesK or )FHs7
2$
This versio! basi8ally reads as a se8ulariUed
theologi8al s8e!ario- 6ith the diere!8e that our 8reator is !ot a super!atural bei!g but just a!other-
mu8h more developed- !atural spe8ies7 So- i 6e k!o6 @or presumeA that our u!iverse is Jsimulated-K
has bee! 6illully 8reated by higher bei!gs- ho6 the! 8a! 6e dis8er! their tra8es a!d>or read their
motivesM Go they 6a!t us to remai! totally immersed i! the simulated e!viro!me!tM 9 yes- is this
be8ause they are testi!g us- epistemologi8ally or ethi8allyM
2&
/ere 6e 8reated or u!- as a 6ork o art-
as part o a s8ie!tii8 e?perime!t- or or some other reaso!M @Fe8all ma!y !ovels a!d ilms- rom
=ei!lei!Is Strange )rofession of Conathan 0oag to -he -ruman Show- -he -hirteenth Floor- a!d -he
Matri&7A Da! 6e imagi!e livi!g i! a simulated 6orld 6ithout a 8reatorIs i!te!tio!M
/hat this solutio! does is tra!spose the gap bet6ee! our phe!ome!al u!iverse a!d its !oume!al
3eyo!d i!to that u!iverse itsel- redoubli!g it i!to t6o u!iverses+ our phe!ome!al u!iverse is
virtualiUed- redu8ed to a simulatio! by age!ts operati!g i! a!other- mu8h more developed- JtrueK
u!iverse7 The !e?t logi8al step is to multiply the phe!ome!al u!iverses themselves- 6ithout i!voki!g a
Nuasi:divi!e privileged u!iverse7 Alo!g these li!es- 4eil Turok a!d Caul Stei!hardt proposed a !e6
versio! o the multiple:6orlds theory- a88ordi!g to 6hi8h our our:dime!sio!al reality @the three
dime!sio!s o spa8e plus timeA sta!ds i! relatio! to true reality the 6ay a t6o:dime!sio!al sura8e
sta!ds i! relatio! to our three:dime!sio!al reality+ there are more dime!sio!@sA a!d parallel u!iverses-
6e just 8a!!ot per8eive them7 A88ordi!g to this model- the 3ig 3a!g resulted rom a 8rash @8ollapseA
bet6ee! t6o su8h parallel u!iverses+ su8h a 8rash does !ot 8reate time- it just resets the 8lo8k o a
u!iverse7
The !e?t logi8al step ater that is to tra!spose this multipli8ity i!to a temporal su88essio! 6ithi!
the same u!iverse7 Alo!g these li!es- ,arti! 3ojo6ald repla8ed the 3ig 3a!g 6ith the 3ig 3ou!8e+ the
time:spa8e 8o!ti!uum rom time to time tears apartT the e!sui!g 8ollapse bri!gs about a !e6 3ig 3a!g-
i! 6hi8h the de!sity o Nua!tum or8es 8auses a ki!d o Jam!esiaK o the u!iverseEall i!ormatio!
about 6hat 6e!t o! beore the 3ig 3a!g is erased- thus 6ith every !e6 3ig 3a!g the u!iverse 6ipes
out its past a!d starts agai! e& nihilo7
Fi!ally- there is the Stephe! =a6ki!g hypothesis o Jirratio!al timeK @i! the se!se o irratio!al
!umbersA- 6hi8h dispe!ses 6ith the very !otio! o the 3ig 3a!g+ the 8urvature o time mea!s that- like
spa8e- time has !o limit- although it is i!ite @8urved i!to itselA7 The idea o the 3ig 3a!g results rom
applyi!g to the u!iverse the logi8 o a si!gle li!ear time a!d thus e?trapolati!g to a Uero:poi!t- 6here i!
truth there is merely a! e!dless 8ir8ular moveme!t7
Go !ot these ive versio!s orm a 8omplete series o possible variatio!sM Are 6e !ot deali!g
here 6ith a systemati8 series o hypotheses like the set o the relatio!s bet6ee! the H!e a!d the 3ei!g
deployed a!d a!alyUed by Clato i! the se8o!d part o his )armenidesM Cerhaps 8o!temporary
8osmology !eeds su8h a J=egelia!K 8o!8eptual systematiUatio! o the u!derlyi!g matri? that ge!erates
the multitude o a8tually e?isti!g theories7 Goes this take us ba8k to the a!8ie!t Hrie!tal 6isdom
a88ordi!g to 6hi8h all thi!gs are just ephemeral ragme!ts 6hi8h emerge out o the primordial Void
a!d 6ill i!evitably retur! ba8k to itM 4ot at all+ the key diere!8e is that- i! the 8ase o Hrie!tal
6isdom- the primordial Void sta!ds or eter!al pea8e- 6hi8h serves as the !eutral abyss or grou!d o
the struggle bet6ee! the opposite poles- 6hile rom the =egelia! sta!dpoi!t- the Void !ames the
e?treme te!sio!- a!tago!ism- or impossibility 6hi8h ge!erates the multipli8ity o determi!ate e!tities7
There is multipli8ity be8ause the H!e is i! itsel barred- out:o:joi!t 6ith regard to itsel7 This bri!gs us
o! to a!other 8o!seNue!8e o this 6eird o!tology o the th6arted @or barredA H!e+ the t6o aspe8ts o a
paralla? gap @6ave a!d parti8le- sayA are !ever symmetri8al- or the primordial gap is bet6ee!
@8urtailedA somethi!g a!d !othi!g- a!d the 8ompleme!tarity bet6ee! the t6o aspe8ts o the gap
u!8tio! so that 6e have irst the gap bet6ee! !othi!g @voidA a!d somethi!g- a!d o!ly the!- i! a
@logi8allyA se8o!d time- a se8o!d Jsomethi!gK that ills i! the Void- so that 6e get a paralla? gap
bet6ee! t6o somethi!gs7 For e?ample- i! .a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- the emi!i!e ormulae @or
mathemati8al a!ti!omiesA have a @logi8alA priorityT it is o!ly i! the se8o!d mome!t that the dy!ami8
a!ti!omies e!ter as attempts to resolve the deadlo8k o the mathemati8al a!ti!omies7
H!e 8a! ve!ture that the same holds or the a!ti!omy @8ompleme!tarityA bet6ee! 6aves a!d
parti8les7 9! our spo!ta!eous s8ie!tii8 o!tology- 6e take 8haoti8 6aves a!d luidity to be more
eleme!tary tha! irmly outli!ed a!d delimited obje8ts+ reaso! @or some other or8e o determi!atio!A
imposes o! the 8haoti8 luidity 8lear orms 6hi8h- upo! 8loser i!spe8tio!- reveal themselves to be
blurred- ae8ted by the 8haos o matter @!o physi8ally dra6! tria!gle is really a tria!gleA7 9t is agai!st
this spo!ta!eous image that the radi8al !ature o Nua!tum physi8s should be measured+ its o!tology is
the e?a8t opposite- or i! it- 8o!ti!uous luidity is a eature o the higher level- 6hile- 6he! 6e
approa8h reality i! its mi8ros8opi8 dime!sio!- 6e dis8over that it is a8tually 8o!stituted o dis8rete
parts @Nua!taA7 H!e should !ot u!derestimate the de!aturaliUi!g ee8t o this reversal+ the u!iverse all
o a sudde! be8omes somethi!g artii8ially 8omposed rom buildi!g blo8ksEit is as i- getti!g too
8lose to a perso!- 6e dis8over that they are !ot a Jreal-K orga!i8 perso! but are 8omposed o ti!y .ego
bri8ks7
9! our 8ommo!:se!se vie6 @a!d i! ordi!ary realityA- o! the 8o!trary- the parti8le has pre8ede!8e
over the 6ave7 For e?ample- i! a desert- sa!d du!es moved by the 6i!d u!8tio! like 6aves- but the
idea is that- had 6e mu8h greater k!o6ledge tha! 6e a8tually possess- 6e 6ould be able to redu8e this
6ave behavior to parti8les+ eve! the largest sa!d du!e is ultimately just a 8omposite o small grai!s7 To
treat the moveme!t o sa!d like a 6ave is thus a gross u!8tio!al simplii8atio!7
2%
The 8ommo!:se!se
o!tology that u!derlies this vie6 is that every 6ave:moveme!t must be a moveme!t o somethi!g- o
thi!gs 6hi8h materially e?ist a!d are moved+ 6aves do !ot properly e?ist- they are a property or eve!t
6hi8h happe!s to somethi!g that e?ists7 The Nua!tum revolutio! here !ot o!ly posits the origi!al
irredu8ible duality o 6aves a!d parti8lesT 6ithi! this duality- it @more or less ope!lyA privileges the
6ave+ or e?ample- it proposes a shit rom u!dersta!di!g 6aves as i!tera8tio!s bet6ee! parti8les to
u!dersta!di!g parti8les as !odal poi!ts i! the i!tera8tio! o 6aves7 For Nua!tum physi8s- 6aves thus
8a!!ot be redu8ed to a property o @or somethi!g that happe!s toA parti8les7 This is also 6hy 3ohr
8laims that Nua!tum physi8s deals 6ith @measuresA phe!ome!a- !ot thi!gs 6hi8h Jsta!d behi!dK
phe!ome!a as their substa!tial support+ the e!tire traditio!al problem o disti!guishi!g bet6ee!
properties 6hi8h belo!g to JThi!gs:i!:themselvesK a!d properties 6hi8h merely JappearK to belo!g to
thi!gs be8ause o our per8eptive apparatus is thus u!dermi!ed+ this disti!8tio! bet6ee! primary a!d
se8o!dary properties !o lo!ger makes se!se- be8ause the 6ay a thi!g Jappears-K the 6ay it is Jor the
other-K is i!s8ribed i!to it Ji!:itsel7K To add i!sult to i!jury- the very appeara!8e o Jthi!gsK as thi!gs-
as substa!tial e!tities- is the result o the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! through per8eptio!- so that the
8ommo!:se!se relatio!ship is agai! tur!ed arou!d+ the !otio! o Jobje8tiveK thi!gs is subje8tive-
depe!de!t o! per8eptio!- 6hile 6ave:os8illatio!s pre8ede per8eptio! a!d are thus more Jobje8tive7K
The key task is the! to i!terpret this i!8omplete!ess 6ithout aba!do!i!g the !otio! o the Feal-
that is- to avoid the subje8tivist readi!g o the a8t that the a8t o measureme!t itsel 8o:8o!stitutes 6hat
it measures7 =eise!bergIs versio! o i!determi!a8y @the Ju!8ertai!ty pri!8ipleKA still leaves e!ough
room !ot o!ly to save the !otio! o a! obje8tive reality i!depe!de!t o the observer @i out o the
observerIs rea8hA- but eve! to determi!e it- to get to k!o6 it as it is i! itsel+ i the i!a88essibility o the
9!:itsel is due o!ly to its distortio! by the measuri!g apparatus- is it !ot the! possible to determi!e the
ee8t o! the observed obje8t o the measuri!g pro8edure a!d the!- by subtra8ti!g this ee8t rom the
result- get the measured obje8t the 6ay it is i! itsel @or the 6ay it 6as- prior to measureme!tAM For
e?ample- i 9 k!o6 that my 8ou!ti!g a sum o mo!ey 6ill add t6e!ty u!its to it- a!d the result o my
8ou!ti!g is 120 u!its- the! 9 k!o6 that- prior to my 8ou!ti!g- the sum 6as 100 u!its7 3ohr argues
agai!st this possibility+ or a priori reaso!s- o!e 8a!!ot determi!e the ee8t o the measureme!t
i!tera8tio! o! the measured obje8t7 For e?ample- i 6e measure the positio! or mome!tum o a!
ele8tro! by iri!g a photo! at it-

it is !ot possible to determi!e the ee8t o the photo! o! the parti8le @ele8tro!A- si!8e 6e 6ould !eed to
determi!e the photo!Is positio! a!d mome!tum simulta!eously- 6hi8h is physi8ally impossible give!
that the measureme!ts o positio! a!d mome!tum reNuire mutually e?8lusive apparatuses or their
respe8tive determi!atio!7 Thereore 6e arrive at 3ohrIs 8o!8lusio!+ observation is only possible on the
condition that the effect of the measurement is indeterminable7 4o6- the a8t that the measureme!t
i!tera8tio! is i!determi!able is 8ru8ial be8ause it mea!s that 6e 8a!It subtra8t the ee8t o the
measureme!t a!d thereby dedu8e the properties that the parti8le @is presumed to haveA had beore the
measureme!t7
"0
H!e 8a!!ot but !oti8e the similarity o 3ohrIs reaso!i!g here to the very irst paragraphs o the
J9!trodu8tio!K to =egelIs )henomenology of Spirit- 6here he des8ribes the absurd 8o!seNue!8es o the
sta!dard represe!tatio!alist approa8h a88ordi!g to 6hi8h k!o6ledge is Jthe i!strume!t by 6hi8h to
take possessio! o the Absolute- or the mea!s through 6hi8h to get a sight o itK+

i k!o6ledge is the i!strume!t by 6hi8h to get possessio! o absolute Feality- the suggestio!
immediately o88urs that the appli8atio! o a! i!strume!t to a!ythi!g does not leave it as it is or itsel-
but rather e!tails i! the pro8ess- a!d has i! vie6- a mouldi!g a!d alteratio! o it7 Hr- agai!- i
k!o6ledge is !ot a! i!strume!t 6hi8h 6e a8tively employ- but a ki!d o passive medium through
6hi8h the light o the truth rea8hes us- the! here- too- 6e do !ot re8eive it as it is i! itsel- but as it is
through a!d i! this medium7 9! either 8ase 6e employ a mea!s 6hi8h immediately bri!gs about the
very opposite o its o6! e!dT or- rather- the absurdity lies i! maki!g use o a!y mea!s at all7 9t seems
i!deed ope! to us to i!d i! the k!o6ledge o the 6ay i! 6hi8h the instrument operates- a remedy or
this parlous stateT or thereby it be8omes possible to remove rom the result the part 6hi8h- i! our idea
o the Absolute re8eived through that i!strume!t- belo!gs to the i!strume!t- a!d thus to get the truth i!
its purity7 3ut this improveme!t 6ould- as a matter o a8t- o!ly bri!g us ba8k to the poi!t 6here 6e
6ere beore7 9 6e take a6ay agai! rom a dei!itely ormed thi!g that 6hi8h the i!strume!t has do!e
i! the shapi!g o it- the! the thi!g @i! this 8ase the AbsoluteA sta!ds beore us o!8e more just as it 6as
previous to all this trouble- 6hi8h- as 6e !o6 see- 6as superluous7 9 the Absolute 6ere o!ly to be
brought o! the 6hole !earer to us by this age!8y- 6ithout a!y 8ha!ge bei!g 6rought i! it- like a bird
8aught by a limesti8k- it 6ould 8ertai!ly s8or! a tri8k o that sort- i it 6ere !ot i! its very !ature- a!d
did it !ot 6ish to be- beside us rom the start7 For a tri8k is 6hat k!o6ledge i! su8h a 8ase 6ould be-
si!8e by all its busy toil a!d trouble it gives itsel the air o doi!g somethi!g Nuite diere!t rom
bri!gi!g about a relatio! that is merely immediate- a!d so a 6aste o time to establish7 Hr- agai!- i the
e?ami!atio! o k!o6ledge- 6hi8h 6e represe!t as a medium- makes us a8Nuai!ted 6ith the la6 o its
rera8tio!- it is like6ise useless to elimi!ate this e?ami!atio! rom the result7
"1
Although =egelIs 8o!te?t is totally diere!t rom that o 3ohr @i !othi!g else- =egel 6as
6riti!g about the philosophi8al k!o6ledge o the Absolute- 6hile 3ohr 6as struggli!g 6ith the
epistemologi8al impli8atio!s o measuri!g atomi8 parti8lesA- the u!derlyi!g li!e o argume!tatio! is
stri8tly homologous+ they both reje8t a positio! 6hi8h irst posits a gap bet6ee! the k!o6i!g subje8t
a!d the obje8t:to:be:k!o6!- a!d the! deals 6ith the @sel:8reatedA problem o ho6 to bridge this gap7 9!
other 6ords- they both 8ombi!e alse modesty @6e are just i!ite subje8ts 8o!ro!ti!g a! opaNue
tra!s8e!de!t realityA 6ith the arroga!8e o i!voki!g a meta:la!guage @the subje8t 8a! someho6 step
outside o its o6! limitatio!s to 8ompare its limited perspe8tive 6ith reality i! itselA7 A!d the solutio!
o both is basi8ally the same+ to i!8lude the subje8t i! the Jsel:moveme!tK o the obje8t:to:be:k!o6!7
The =egelia! !ame or this i!8lusio! is rele?ivity7
"2
=o6 does this 6ork i! Nua!tum physi8sM
AGENTIAL REALISM

=ere e!ters the Jage!tial realismK deployed by *are! 3arad+ JA88ordi!g to age!tial realism-
k!o6i!g- thi!ki!g- measuri!g- theoriUi!g- a!d observi!g are subje8tive material pra8ti8es o i!tra:
a8ti!g 6ithi! a!d as part o the 6orld7K
""
Age!tial realism leaves behi!d the sta!dard moder! topi8 o
the subje8t 8o!ro!ted 6ith Jobje8tive reality-K the topi8 6hi8h ope!s up the usual epistemologi8al
dilemmas @J8a! the subje8t rea8h i!depe!de!t reality- or is it 8aught i! the 8ir8le o its subje8tive
represe!tatio!sMKA+ its basi8 o!tologi8al u!it is the phenomenon i! 6hi8h both sides are irredu8ibly a!d
i!e?tri8ably e!ta!gled+ phe!ome!a display Jthe o!tologi8al i!separability o obje8ts a!d
apparatuses7K
"(
3ut the a8t that 6e do !ot produ8e our k!o6ledge rom aar- observi!g reality rom a
dista!t- obje8tive- !o!:e!ta!gled positio!- does !ot mea! that 6e should re!ou!8e obje8tivity as su8h-
that all our k!o6ledge is subje8tive+ su8h a readi!g still presupposes a represe!tatio!al dista!8e
bet6ee! our subje8tive vie6:rom:outside a!d the thi!gs themselves7 =o6- the!- are 6e to thi!k the
obje8tivity @also i! the se!se o u!iversalityA o our k!o6ledgeM
3ohr- 6hose rele8tio!s 3arad tries to systematiUe here- emphasiUes that su8h a! a88ou!t does
!ot imply subje8tivist relativism+ obje8tivity is mai!tai!ed- but it !o lo!ger mea!s that the result o the
observatio! tells us somethi!g about the reality o the observed obje8t prior to the a8t o measureme!tT
rather- it mea!s that 6he!ever 6e repeat the same a8t o measureme!t u!der the same 8o!ditio!s @the
same e!ta!gleme!t o obje8t a!d apparatusA- 6e 6ill obtai! the same result- so that there is !o
reere!8e to a parti8ular observer7 The subje8tivist or idealist readi!g o Nua!tum physi8s @Jthe mi!d
8reates reality- there is !o reality i!depe!de!t o our mi!dsKA is thus pate!tly alse+ the true impli8atio!
o Nua!tum physi8s is the opposite- 8ompelli!g us to 8o!8eive ho6 our k!o6i!g o reality is i!8luded
i! reality itsel7
The lesso! o 3ohr is thus !ot that reality is subje8tive- but that 6eEthe observi!g
subje8tsEare part o the reality 6e observe7 This is !ot a Nuestio! o spiritualism- but o k!o6ledge
itsel bei!g grou!ded i! material pra8ti8es7 9! short- the impli8it lesso! o 3ohrIs rele8tio!s amou!ts to
a materialist 8ritiNue o the !aSve:realist epistemology a!d o!tology o .e!i!Is Materialism and
Empirio*,riticism 6ith its !otio! o k!o6ledge as a! @al6ays impere8tA Jrele8tio!K o the obje8tive
reality e?isti!g i!depe!de!tly o us7 This !aSve materialism treats reality:i!:itsel i! t6o 8o!tradi8tory
6ays+ @1A as i!i!itely richer tha! our k!o6ledge a!d per8eptio! o it @6e 8a! o!ly approa8h
asymptoti8ally the i!i!ite 6ealth o realityAT @2A as mu8h poorer tha! our e?perie!8e a!d per8eptio! o
it+ reality is stripped o all Jse8o!dary propertiesK @8olors- tastes- a!d so o!A- so that all that remai!s are
the abstra8t mathemati8al orms o its basi8 eleme!ts7 This parado?i8al os8illatio! bet6ee! the
opposites is the pri8e !aSve materialism pays or its abstra8t pro8edure7
3ohr reveals the idealist presuppositio! o su8h a positio!+ i reality is Jout there-K a!d 6e are
e!dlessly approa8hi!g it- the!Eimpli8itly- at leastE6e- the observers- are !ot part o this reality- but
sta!d some6here outside o it7
"#
/ithi! the e!ta!gled u!ity o a phe!ome!o!- there is !o a priori
u!ambiguous 6ay to disti!guish bet6ee! the age!8y o observatio! a!d the observed obje8t+ every
su8h divisio! hi!ges o! a 8o!ti!ge!t age!tial 8ut 6ithi! the u!ity o a phe!ome!o!- a 8ut 6hi8h is !ot
just a Jsubje8tiveK me!tal de8isio!- but is J8o!stru8ted- age!tially e!a8ted- materially 8o!ditio!edK+
"'

-he boundary between the %ob1ect of observation' and the %agencies of observation' is indeterminate
in the sense of the absence of a specific physical arrangement of the apparatusF /hat 8o!stitutes the
obje8t o observatio! a!d 6hat 8o!stitutes the age!8ies o observatio! are determi!able o!ly o! the
8o!ditio! that the measureme!t apparatus is spe8iied7 -he apparatus enacts a cut delineating the
ob1ect from the agencies of observationF Dlearly- the!- as 6e have !oted- observations do not refer to
properties of observation*independent ob1ects ?since they dont pree&ist as such@7
"$
/ithi! the same phe!ome!o!- diere!t 8uts are possible- ea8h o them isolati!g a diere!t
aspe8t o the phe!ome!o! as the observed obje8t7 Take the 8ase o usi!g a sti8k to i!d o!eIs 6ay
arou!d a dark room+ 6e 8a! treat the sti8k as a measuri!g apparatus- as a prolo!gatio! o our ha!d- as a
tool e!abli!g us to JmeasureK @re8og!iUeA the 8o!tours o the roomT or- 8ompleme!tarily- i 6e already
k!o6 the 8o!tours o the room very 6ell- 6e 8a! treat the sti8k itsel as the obje8t to be measured
@6he! it tou8hes a 6all 6hi8h 6e k!o6 to be a 8ertai! dista!8e rom 6here 6e sta!d- 6e 8a! determi!e
the le!gth o the sti8kT i 6e hit the top o a table i! ro!t o us- 6e 8a! estimate the plasti8ity o the
sti8kT et87A7 9! a homologous 6ay- i! the double:slit e?perime!t- 6e 8a! use the slits as a! i!strume!t to
measure the lo6 o parti8les- or 6e 8a! use the lo6 o parti8les as a! i!strume!t to measure the
property o the slitsE6hat 6e 8a!!ot do is dire8tly measure the apparatus o measureme!t itselT to do
this- 6e 6ould !eed to e!a8t a diere!t age!tial 8ut by mea!s o 6hi8h both the measuri!g age!8y a!d
the measured obje8t both be8ome part o a !e6 obje8t+ Jthe measureme!t i!tera8tio! 8a! be a88ou!ted
or o!ly i the measuri!g devi8e is itsel treated as a! obje8t7K
"&
9! other 6ords- Ja Vmeasuri!g
i!strume!tI 8a!!ot 8hara8teriUe @i7e7- be used to measureA itsel-K it 8a!!ot measure its o6!
e!ta!gleme!t 6ith the measured obje8t- si!8e ea8h measureme!t relies o! a 8o!ti!ge!t 8ut 6ithi! a
phe!ome!o!- a 8ut by mea!s o 6hi8h a part o the phe!ome!o! is measured by a!other o its parts7
"%

This mea!s that measureme!ts @a!d- 8o!seNue!tly- our k!o6ledgeA are al6ays lo8al- dra6i!g a li!e o
separatio! 6hi8h makes a part o the phe!ome!o! des8ribable i! J8lassi8alK @!o!:Nua!tumA termsT as
su8h- measureme!ts are part o the global Nua!tum reality 6hi8h e!8ompasses the 6orld o 8lassi8ally
des8ribed obje8ts a!d pro8esses as its subordi!ate mome!t7 This i!sight has importa!t 8o!seNue!8es or
8osmology+

there simply is !o outside to the u!iverse or the measuri!g age!8ies to go to i! order to measure the
u!iverse as a 6hole O si!8e there is !o outside to the u!iverse- there is !o 6ay to des8ribe the e!tire
system- so that des8riptio! al6ays o88urs rom 6ithi!+ only one part of the world can be made
intelligible to itself at a time! because the other part of the world has to be the part that it ma"es a
difference to7
(0
9t may appear easy to oppose idealism a!d materialism here+ the idealist positio! proposes 1od
as the outside observer 6ho 8a! 8omprehe!d a!d JmeasureK the e!tire u!iverse- 6hile or the
materialist positio! there is !o outside- every observer remai!s 6ithi! the 6orld7 9! .a8a!ese- the
idealist positio! is Jmas8uli!e-K it totaliUes the u!iverse through the observer as the poi!t o e?8eptio!-
6hile materialism is Jemi!i!eKT that is- it asserts the J!o!:AllK o every measureme!t7
(1
=o6ever- it
6ould be too easy to simply privilege the Jemi!i!eK !o!:All a!d to redu8e the Jmas8uli!eK
totaliUatio!:through:e?8eptio! to a se8o!dary illusio!Ehere- more tha! ever- 6e should i!sist o!
@se?ualA diere!8e itsel as the primary a8t- as the impossible Feal 6ith regard to 6hi8h both
positio!s- Jmas8uli!eK a!d Jemi!i!e-K appear as se8o!dary- as t6o attempts to resolve its deadlo8k7
/hat this mea!s 6ith regard to the philosophi8al 8o!seNue!8es o Nua!tum physi8s a!d
8osmology is that o!e 8a!!ot simply lo8ate the Jage!tial 8utK 6hi8h ge!erates the 8lassi8al u!iverse
6ithi! the Nua!tum !o!:All- thereby redu8i!g the 8lassi8al reality to a phe!ome!o! 6ithi! the Nua!tum
u!iverse- or Nua!tum reality is !ot simply the e!8ompassi!g u!ity i!8ludi!g its Jopposite-K 8lassi8al
reality7 =ere also- 6e must be atte!tive to the rame 6ithi! 6hi8h Nua!tum reality appears to us+ the
e!8ompassi!g rame itsel is i! a 6ay already part o the e!ramed 8o!te!t7 9! other 6ords- 6hat 6e are
ee8tively deali!g 6ith is 8lassi8al reality- !o matter ho6 blurred it is+ the 6ave u!8tio!s a!d all other
Nua!ta are ultimately somethi!g 6e re8o!stru8t as the 8ause o the measureme!ts 6e observe a!d
register i! stri8tly 8lassi8al terms7 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is the parado? elaborated by .ouis Gumo!t
as 8o!stitutive o hierar8hy+ the JhigherK o!tologi8al order has to appear 6ithi! the perspe8tive o the
Jlo6erK order as subordi!ated to the latter- as its ee8tEi! this 8ase- Nua!tum reality 6hi8h is
o!tologi8ally JhigherK @8ausi!g a!d e!8ompassi!g 8lassi8al realityA has to appear- 6ithi! this reality- as
somethi!g subordi!ated to it a!d grou!ded i! it7 A!d it is !ot e!ough to dismiss this reversal as merely
epistemologi8al @J6hile Nua!tum reality is the true reality 6hi8h 8auses 8lassi8al reality- relatio!s are
reversed i! our pro8ess o k!o6ledgeKAEhere agai! 6e should tra!spose the epistemologi8al reversal
ba8k i!to o!tology a!d ask the key Nuestio!+ 6hy is this reversal !e8essary or the o!tologi8al sphere
itselM
(2
The a!s6er is that 6e have to presuppose a more radi8al Dut 6hi8h already traverses the !o!:
All7 The stru8ture o se?ual diere!8e is already that o dira8tio!+ the diere!8e itsel pre8edes the
t6o e!tities bet6ee! 6hi8h it diere!tiatesT i! other 6ords- it 6orks like the dira8tive obsta8le- so
that both se?ual positio!s- mas8uli!e a!d emi!i!e- must be 8o!8eived as rea8tio!s to the obsta8le or
deadlo8k- as t6o 6ays o 8opi!g 6ith it7 The reaso! 3arad does !ot take i!to a88ou!t this more radi8al
o!tologi8al 8ut lies i! her impli8it !aturalism7 Fully versed i! 3utlerIs a!d Fou8aultIs dis8ourse
theories- 3arad emphasiUes ho6 the apparatuses 6hi8h provide the rame or age!tial 8uts are !ot just
material- i! the immediate se!se o bei!g part o !ature- but are also so8ially 8o!ditio!ed- al6ays
relia!t o! a 8omple? !et6ork o so8ial a!d ideologi8al pra8ti8es7 =er 8riti8al poi!t agai!st 3utler-
Fou8ault- a!d other histori8ist dis8ourse:theorists is that- although they 8riti8ally reje8t the Dartesia!
huma!ist positio!- they 8o!ti!ue to privilege the huma! sta!dpoi!t+ their histori8ism limits history to
huma! history- to the 8omple? !et6ork o dis8ursive pra8ti8es a!d ormatio!s 6hi8h determi!e the
horiUo! o i!telligibility7 The gap bet6ee! @huma!A history a!d !ature persists i! their 6ork- oeri!g
o!ly yet a!other versio! o the sta!dard a!ti:!aturalist moti o !ature as a histori8ally 8o!ditio!ed
dis8ursive 8ategory+ 6hat 8ou!ts as J!aturalK ultimately depe!ds o! histori8al dis8ursive pro8esses7
3arad here risks a ateul step urther i!to a ull J!aturaliUatio!K o the very !otio! o dis8ourse+
reje8ti!g Jhuma!ist remai!sK i! 3ohrIs epistemology @his ide!tii8atio! o the JobserverK 6ith huma!
subje8tA- her age!tial realist a88ou!t argues that

i!telligibility is a! o!tologi8al perorma!8e o the 6orld i! its o!goi!g arti8ulatio!7 9t is !ot a huma!:
depe!de!t 8hara8teristi8- but a eature o the 6orld i! its diere!tial be8omi!g O *!o6i!g e!tails
spe8ii8 pra8ti8es through 6hi8h the 6orld is diere!tially arti8ulated a!d a88ou!ted or7 9! some
i!sta!8es- J!o!huma!sK @eve! bei!gs 6ithout brai!sA emerge as partaki!g i! the 6orldIs a8tive
e!gageme!t i! pra8ti8es o k!o6i!g7
("
3aradIs radi8al o!tologi8al 8o!8lusio! is thus that Jmatter a!d mea!i!g are mutually
arti8ulatedK+
((
JGis8ursive pra8ti8es are the material 8o!ditio!s or maki!g mea!i!g7 9! my
posthuma!ist a88ou!t- mea!i!g is !ot a huma!:based !otio!T rather- mea!i!g is a! o!goi!g
perorma!8e o the 6orld i! its diere!tial i!telligibility7K
(#
She me!tio!s a primitive- brai!less deep:
sea orga!ism 6hose e!tire sura8e mirrors light 8ha!ges a!d triggers a! es8ape motio! 6he! these
8ha!ges are read as da!gerousEa! e?ample o the mutual arti8ulatio! o mea!i!g a!d matter7 3ut
3aradIs 8o!8lusio! !o!etheless 6orks all too smoothly+ true- it liNuidates the last Jhuma!ist
remai!sKEthat is- it removes the i!al vestiges o 6hat ,eillassou? 8alls Jtra!s8e!de!tal
8orrelatio!ismK @the a?iom that every obje8t or part o reality emerges as the obje8tive 8orrelate o a
Jpositi!gK subje8tAEbut the pri8e it pays is that o ontologi2ing correlation itself by lo8ati!g mea!i!g
dire8tly i! !ature- i! the guise o the u!ity o apparatuses a!d obje8ts7
The problem here is the implied continuity o the li!e leadi!g rom the !atural 8orrelatio!
bet6ee! orga!ism a!d its e!viro!me!t to the stru8ture o mea!i!g proper to the symboli8 order7 9!
!ature- diere!8es make diere!8es+ there are age!tial 8uts 6hi8h establish a diere!8e bet6ee! the
series o J8ausesK a!d the series o Jee8ts-K a! orga!ism measures its e!viro!me!t a!d rea8ts
a88ordi!glyT !o!etheless- 6hat is missi!g is a short:8ir8uit bet6ee! the t6o series o diere!8es- a
mark belo!gi!g to the series o Jee8tsK 6hi8h retroa8tively i!s8ribes itsel i!to the series o J8auses7K
GeleuUeIs !ame or this parado?i8al mark is Jdark pre8ursor-K a term he i!trodu8es i! Difference and
7epetition+ JThu!derbolts e?plode bet6ee! diere!t i!te!sities- but they are pre8eded by a!
imper8eptible dark pre8ursor [prAcurseur sombre\- 6hi8h determi!es their path i! adva!8e- but i!
reverse- as though i!tagliated7K
('
As su8h- the dark pre8ursor is the sig!iier o a meta:diere!8e+

give! t6o heteroge!eous series- t6o series o diere!8es- the pre8ursor plays the part o the
diere!8iator o these diere!8es7 9! this ma!!er- by virtue o its o6! po6er- it puts them i!to
immediate relatio! to o!e a!other+ it is the i!:itsel o diere!8e or the Jdiere!tly diere!tKEi! other
6ords- diere!8e i! the se8o!d degree- the sel:diere!t 6hi8h relates diere!t to diere!t by itsel7
3e8ause the path it tra8es is i!visible a!d be8omes visible o!ly i! reverse- to the e?te!t that it is
traveled over a!d 8overed by the phe!ome!o! it i!du8es 6ithi! the system- it has !o pla8e other tha!
that rom 6hi8h it is Jmissi!g-K !o ide!tity other tha! that 6hi8h it la8ks+ it is pre8isely the obje8t ] ?-
the o!e 6hi8h is Jla8ki!g i! its pla8eK as it la8ks its o6! ide!tity7
($
Hr- as 9a! 3u8ha!a! puts it 8o!8isely+ JGark pre8ursors are those mome!ts i! a te?t 6hi8h must
be read i! reverse i 6e are !ot to mistake ee8ts or 8auses7K
(&
9! -he .ogic of Sense- GeleuUe
develops this 8o!8ept 6ith dire8t reere!8e to the .a8a!ia! !otio! o the Jpure sig!iierK+ there has to
be a short:8ir8uit bet6ee! the t6o series- that o the sig!iier a!d that o the sig!iied- i! order or the
ee8t:o:se!se to take pla8e7 This short:8ir8uit is 6hat .a8a! 8alls the JNuilti!g poi!t-K the dire8t
i!s8riptio! o the sig!iier i!to the order o the sig!iied i! the guise o a! JemptyK sig!iier 6ithout
sig!iied7 This sig!iier represe!ts the @sig!iyi!gA 8ause 6ithi! the order o its ee8ts- thus subverti!g
the @misAper8eived J!aturalK order 6ithi! 6hi8h the sig!iier appears as the ee8t or e?pressio! o the
sig!iied7 This is 6hy the 8orrespo!de!8e bet6ee! the t6o series o diere!8es that 6e i!d i! !ature is
!ot yet mea!i!gEor- i it is- it is merely a pure de!otative sig!al- the registeri!g o a 8orrespo!de!8e
bet6ee! t6o sets o diere!8es- but !ot yet sense7 ,ea!i!g has to be disti!guished rom se!se+
GeleuUe demo!strated ho6 se!se 8a! o!ly arise agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o !o!se!se- si!8e se!se is by
dei!itio! the maki!g se!se o a !o!se!se7
Take- o!8e agai!- the e?ample o a!ti:Semitism+ it e!a8ts a 8orrespo!de!8e bet6ee! a series o
eatures o so8ial lie @i!a!8ial 8orruptio!- se?ual depravity- media ma!ipulatio!- et87A a!d a series o
homologous hypotheti8 eatures o the J2e6ish 8hara8terK @2e6s are 8orrupt- se?ually depraved- they
8o!trol a!d ma!ipulate our media OA i! order establish the 8o!8lusio! that 2e6s are the ultimate 8ause
o these disturbi!g eatures o our so8iety7 This 8o!8lusio! is- ho6ever- supported by a mu8h more
8omple? i!telle8tual pro8ess7 First- there is a reversal at the level o 8ausality+ i someo!e 8laims that
Jthe 2e6s are dege!erate- e?ploitative- a!d ma!ipulative-K this does !ot yet make him a! a!ti:SemiteT
the true a!ti:Semite 6ill add+ JThis guy is dege!erate- e?ploitative- a!d ma!ipulative- because he is a
Cew7K /e are !ot deali!g here 6ith a simple 8ir8ularity- or the u!derlyi!g logi8 is !ot+ J=e is
dege!erate be8ause he is a 2e6- a!d 2e6s are dege!erate7K Somethi!g more takes pla8e here+ i! this
reversal- a! e?8ess- a mysterious 1e ne sais <uoi- is ge!erated- the u!derlyi!g logi8 o 6hi8h is+ Jthere is
some mysterious i!gredie!t i! 2e6s- a! esse!8e o bei!g:2e6ish- 6hi8h 8auses them to be dege!erate-
et87K A pseudo*cause is thus i!trodu8ed- as the mysterious i!gredie!t 6hi8h makes a 2e6 a 2e6T a
Jdeeper se!seK emerges- thi!gs all o a sudde! be8ome 8lear- everythi!g makes se!se- be8ause the 2e6
is ide!tiied as the sour8e o all our troubles7 This se!se is- o 8ourse- itsel sustai!ed by !o!:se!se- by
the !o!se!si8al short:8ir8uit o the i!8lusio! o the !ame o a! obje8t amo!g its properties7 A!d this
additio!al reversal 6hi8h Jmakes se!seK is 6hat is missi!g i! 3aradIs 8laim that 6e i!d mea!i!g
already i! pre:huma! !ature- i! the 6ay !atural orga!isms i!tera8t @or- rather- i!tra:a8tA 6ith their
e!viro!me!t7 9! other 6ords- although i! her 8ritiNue o Jesse!tialismK 3arad emphasiUes agai! a!d
agai! the importa!8e o diere!8es a!d diere!tiati!g- 6hat she leaves out o 8o!sideratio! is
ultimately difference itself- the sel:relati!g JpureK diere!8e 6hi8h pre8edes the terms it diere!tiates7
=ere 6e arrive at the 8ru? o the problem+ the aim o our 8ritiNue o 3aradIs 8o!8lusio!s is !ot
to propose a !e6 versio! o the 8lassi8al gap that separates huma!s rom a!imals by 8laimi!g that the
short:8ir8uit 6hi8h Jmakes se!seK out o !o!se!se is spe8ii8ally huma!7 The i!sight that- i! Nua!tum
me8ha!i8s- 6e e!8ou!ter i! !ature @i!- as it 6ere- a lo6er po6er>pote!8yA a 6eird proto:versio! o
6hat 6e usually per8eive as the spe8ii8ally huma! symboli8 dime!sio! should be mai!tai!edT our
thesis is that a proto:versio! o the diere!tial short:8ir8uit ig!ored by 3arad can be ou!d at 6ork i!
the Nua!tum ield7 To establish this- 6e must irst repeat the u!dame!tal =egelia! reversal+ the
problem is !ot Jho6 8a! 6e pass rom the 8lassi8al u!iverse to the u!iverse o Nua!tum 6avesMK but
e?a8tly the oppositeEJ6hy a!d ho6 does the Nua!tum u!iverse itsel imma!e!tly reNuire the 8ollapse
o the 6ave u!8tio!- its Vde:8ohere!8eI i!to the 8lassi8al u!iverseMK /hy a!d ho6 is the 8ollapse
i!here!t to the Nua!tum u!iverseM 9! other 6ords- it is !ot o!ly that there is !o 8lassi8al reality 6hi8h is
!ot sustai!ed by uUUy Nua!tum lu8tuatio!sT it is also that there is !o Nua!tum u!iverse 6hi8h is !ot
al6ays already hooked o!to some bit o 8lassi8al reality7 The problem o the 8ollapse o the 6ave
u!8tio! i! the a8t o measureme!t is that it has to be ormulated i! 8lassi8al- !ot Nua!tum- termsEthis
is 6hy

the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! o88upies a! a!omalous positio! 6ithi! Nua!tum me8ha!i8s7 9t is
re<uired by the a8t that observatio!s o88ur- but it is !ot predi8ted by Nua!tum theory7 9t is an
additional postulate! which must be made in order that <uantum mechanics be consistent7
(%
4ote the pre8ise ormulatio!+ a measureme!t ormulated i! the terms o 8lassi8al reality is
!e8essary or Nua!tum me8ha!i8s itsel to be 8o!siste!t- it is a! additio! o the 8lassi8 reality 6hi8h
JsuturesK the Nua!tum ield7 There have bee! multiple attempts to resolve this a!omaly7 First- there is
the dualist positio!+ 6e are deali!g 6ith t6o diere!t levels o reality- 8lassi8al Jma8roK:reality
obeyi!g ordi!ary la6s- a!d Jmi8roK:reality obeyi!g Nua!tum la6sT the!- there is the more e?treme
positio! a88ordi!g to 6hi8h all there is is 8lassi8al reality- a!d the Nua!tum sphere is just a ratio!al
8o!stru8t or presuppositio! desig!ed to a88ou!t or measureme!ts ormulated i! 8lassi8al terms7 For
3arad- reality is also o!e- but it is the o!e o e!ta!gled phe!ome!a 6hi8h obey Nua!tum la6s+ it is o!ly
within a phe!ome!o!- as part o the intra:a8tio! o its 8ompo!e!ts @to talk about Ji!tera8tio!K already
8o!8edes too mu8h to 8lassi8al o!tology- si!8e it implies that separated parts someho6 i!tera8tA- that a
8ut is e!a8ted a!d the obje8t is i?ed as observed7 The 8ut isolates the obje8t as the J8auseK a!d the
mark i! the measuri!g apparatus as the Jee8t-K so that a 8ha!ge or diere!8e i! the obje8t is
e!ta!gled 6ith a 8ha!ge or diere!8e i! the apparatusEbut this 8ut is inherent to a phe!ome!o!7
The key !otio! here is that o the u!ity o the e!tire phe!ome!o! 6hi8h e!8ompasses the obje8t
a!d the apparatusT this is 6hy- 6he!- i! the double:slit e?perime!t- the path o ea8h parti8le is
measured a!d the i!terere!8e patter! disappears- 6e should avoid a!y mystiNue about ho6 parti8les
someho6 Jk!o6K 6hether they are bei!g observed or !ot a!d behave a88ordi!gly7 3ut 6e should also
!ot read this a8t as the result o a! empiri8al disturba!8e o parti8les by the pro8ess o measureme!t @it
is !ot that a 6ave 8ha!ges i!to a 8olle8tio! o parti8les 6he! it is disturbed by photo!s measuri!g its
pathA7 /hat 8ha!ges is the e!tire phe!ome!al dispositif 6hi8h e!a8ts a diere!t age!tial 8ut- o!e 6hi8h
allo6s measuri!g+

all that is re<uired to degrade the interference pattern is the possibility of distinguishing paths O 6hat
matters is J8o!te?tualityKEthe 8o!ditio! o possibility o dei!itio!Erather tha! the a8tual
measureme!t itsel7 Si!8e it has bee! 8o!irmed e?perime!tally that the i!terere!8e patter! disappears
6ithout a!y 6hi8h:path measureme!t havi!g a8tually bee! perormedEbut 1ust by the mere possibility
of distinguishing pathsEthese i!di!gs oer a 8lear 8halle!ge to a!y e?pla!atio! o the destru8tio! o
the i!terere!8e patter! that relies o! a me8ha!i8al disturba!8e as its 8ausal me8ha!ism7
#0
4ote the o88urre!8e o the tra!s8e!de!tal term J8o!ditio! o possibilityK+ the apparatuses play a
ki!d o tra!s8e!de!tal role- stru8turi!g the ield o i!telligibility o a phe!ome!o!7 This is 6hy a mere
possibility o measuri!g sui8es+ the i!terere!8e patter! disappears 6ith the mere possibility o
disti!guishi!g paths- eve! i! the abse!8e o a!y empiri8al measureme!t- !ot be8ause i!dividual
parti8les someho6 Jk!o6K their path is observed- but be8ause the possibility o measuri!g is
tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stitutive o their ield o i!telligibility7 This is also ho6 o!e 8a! a88ou!t or the
eve! more perple?i!g 8ase o the delayed measureme!t 6hi8h seems to be able to J8ha!ge the pastK+

!ot o!ly is it possible to restore the i!terere!8e patter! by erasi!g the 6hi8h:path i!ormatio! O but
6e 8a! de8ide 6hether or !ot to erase the 6hi8h:path i!ormatio! ater the atom has passed through the
slits a!d registered its mark o! some s8ree! O i the e?perime!ter 8a! de8ide 6hether or !ot a!
i!terere!8e patter! 6ill result by de8idi!g 6hether or !ot to erase the 6hi8h path i!ormatio! lo!g
ater ea8h atom has already hit the 8aree! the! it seems the e?perime!ter has 8o!trol over the past7 =o6
8a! this beM
#1
Agai!- the key is provided by the u!ity o the phe!ome!o!- by the Jo!tologi8al priority o
phe!ome!a over obje8tsK+ the parado? o!ly arises i 6e isolate parti8les as auto!omous Jobje8tsK
6hi8h magi8ally 8ha!ge their behavior o!8e they Jk!o6K they are @or eve!+ 6ill beA observed+

9 o!e o8uses o! abstra8t i!dividual e!tities the result is a! utter mystery- 6e 8a!!ot a88ou!t or the
seemi!gly impossible behavior o the atoms7 9tIs !ot that the e?perime!ter 8ha!ges a past that had
already bee! prese!t or that atoms all i!to li!e 6ith a !e6 uture simply by erasi!g i!ormatio!7 The
poi!t is that the past 6as !ever simply there to begi! 6ith a!d the uture is !ot simply 6hat 6ill u!oldT
the JpastK a!d the JutureK are iteratively re6orked a!d e!olded O There is !o spooky:a8tio!:at:a:
dista!8e 8oordi!atio! bet6ee! i!dividual parti8les separated i! spa8e or i!dividual eve!ts separated i!
time7 Spa8e a!d time are phe!ome!al- that is- they are i!tra:a8tively produ8ed i! the maki!g o
phe!ome!aT !either spa8e !or time e?ist as determi!ate give!s outside o phe!ome!a7
#2
9! short- ea8h phe!ome!o! e!8ompasses its o6! JpastK a!d JutureK 6hi8h are 8reated o!8e the
8oordi!ates o this phe!ome!o! are set by a! age!tial 8ut7 /hat this mea!s is that ea8h phe!ome!o!
already i!volves a! age!tial 8ut- already i!volves the 8ollapse o the @lo8alA 6ave u!8tio!7 0a8h
phe!ome!o! thus gives body to a specific difference+ to a 8ut 6hi8h opposes a! age!t a!d a! obje8t7
The ba8kgrou!d o this plurality o phe!ome!aEthe 9!:itsel- to put it i! *a!tia! termsEis the void or
va8uum- pure Nua!tum pote!tiality+ every phe!ome!o! breaks the bala!8e o the va8uum7 9 it is
already dii8ult to imagi!e the emerge!8e out o !othi!g o a little pie8e o reality- ho6 8a! the e!tire
u!iverse emerge e& nihiloM Wua!tum physi8s here oers a beautiul a!d properly diale8ti8al solutio!+ o
8ourse !o si!gle obje8t 6ithi! a give! u!iverse 8a! emerge out o !othi!g- but the e!tire u!iverse 8a!
do so- a!d or a very pre8ise reaso!+ JH!e reNuireme!t a!y la6 o !ature must satisy is that it di8tates
that the e!ergy o a! isolated body surrou!ded by empty spa8e is positive- 6hi8h mea!s that o!e has to
do 6ork to assemble the bodyKT other6ise-

there 6ould be !o reaso! that bodies 8ould !ot appear a!y6here a!d every6here7 0mpty spa8e 6ould
thereore be u!stable O 9 the total e!ergy o the u!iverse must al6ays remai! Uero- a!d it 8osts e!ergy
to 8reate a body- ho6 8a! a 6hole u!iverse be 8reated out o !othi!gM That is 6hy there must be a la6
like gravity O 3e8ause gravity shapes spa8e a!d time- it allo6s spa8e:time to be lo8ally stable but
globally u!stable7 H! the s8ale o the e!tire u!iverse- the positive e!ergy o the matter 8a! be bala!8ed
by the !egative gravitatio!al e!ergy- a!d so there is !o restri8tio! o! the 8reatio! o 6hole u!iverses7
3e8ause there is a la6 like gravity- the u!iverse 8a! a!d 6ill 8reate itsel rom !othi!g7
#"
The diale8ti8al beauty o this argume!t is that it i!verts the sta!dard idea o a u!iverse 6hi8h is
lo8ally u!stable but globally stable- as i! the old 8o!servative sa6 that somethi!g must 8ha!ge so that
everythi!g remai!s the same+ the stability a!d harmo!y o the /hole is the very harmo!y o the
8o!ti!uous struggle bet6ee! its parts7 /hat Nua!tum physi8s proposes is- o! the 8o!trary- global
i!stability as the basis o lo8al stability+ e!tities 6ithi! a u!iverse have to obey stable rules- they are
part o a 8ausal 8hai!- but 6hat is 8o!ti!ge!t is the very totality o this 8hai!7 Goes this mea!- ho6ever-
that at this level o the pure pote!tiality o the Void- there are !o diere!8esM 4o+ there is pure
difference i! the guise o the gap bet6ee! t6o va8uums- the topi8 o the =iggs ield7 .et us approa8h
the parado? o the =iggs ield via- o!8e agai!- a parallel 6ith the status o the J4atio!K i! our so8io:
politi8al imagi!ary7
/hat is a J4atio!K to 6hi8h 6e Jbelo!gK i !ot o!e o the !ames or the Freudo:.a8a!ia!
JThi!gK+ the u!!amable d- the bla8k hole o the symboli8 u!iverse 6hi8h 8a! !ever be dei!ed by a set
o positive properties- but 8a! o!ly be sig!aled by tautologi8al pseudo:e?pla!atio!s like J9t is just 6hat
it is- you have to be a 1erma! @or OA to k!o6 6hat it mea!sKM 9t is !ot i! ro!t o us- its members- but
behi!d us- as the impe!etrable ba8kgrou!d o our 8olle8tive e?iste!8e7 Thi!k o the art o 8hoosi!g
6hi8h Nueue to joi!+ a!y pre8ise dei!able strategy 6ill tur! out to be 8ou!terprodu8tive i it is
ollo6ed by too ma!y parti8ipa!ts @like the 6ell:k!o6! e?ample o most drivers taki!g a detour
through a side:road be8ause the mai! road is e?pe8ted to be 8logged up- 6ith the result that the side:
road gets 8o!gested a!d the mai! road is ree o trai8A7 9- ho6ever- the opposite strategy o ra!domly
8hoosi!g a!y Nueue is ollo6ed by almost all parti8ipa!ts- a predi8table patter! 6ill emerge 6hi8h-
agai!- 6ill e!able those ollo6i!g a strategy that takes this patter! i!to a88ou!t to 8hoose the astest
li!e7 There are !o!etheless some people 6ho regularly do 8hoose the aster NueueEho6 do they do itM
The true art is to i!d a bala!8e bet6ee! these t6o e?tremes+ adopti!g a limited strategy 6hi8h takes
i!to a88ou!t the short:term lu8tuatio!s a!d imbala!8es beore every strategy be8omes ully sel:
destru8tive7 Somethi!g similar goes o! 6ith !ami!g the d o o!eIs 4atio!:Thi!g+ both ully 8o!siste!t
strategies @either a8ti!g as i o!e 8a! dei!e a 4atio!:Thi!g 6ith a set o propertiesEthe eNuivale!t o
a dei!able strategy o 8hoosi!g a Nueue- or just i!sisti!g that the 4atio!:Thi!g is a! u!athomable
tautologyEthe eNuivale!t o 8hoosi!g the Nueue ra!domlyA are sel:destru8tive- so that all that o!e 8a!
do is apply the Jpoeti8K approa8h o pi8ki!g out leeti!g parti8ular eatures 6hi8h someho6 give a
parti8ular spi! to the empty 4atio!:Thi!g- 6hile remai!i!g ever so parti8ular- that is- 6ithout imposi!g
themselves as u!iversal properties o all @or eve! the majority oA the members o a 4atio!Esay- i! the
8ase o the 0!glish- dri!ki!g 6arm beer- playi!g 8ri8ket- o? hu!ti!g- a!d so orth7
=a!i *ureishi 6as o!8e telli!g me about his !e6 !ovel- 6hi8h had a diere!t !arrative to his
earlier books7 9 iro!i8ally asked him+ J3ut the hero is !o!etheless a! immigra!t 6ith a Cakista!i ather
6ho is a ailed 6riter OK =e replied+ J/hatIs the problemM Go!It 6e all have Cakista!i athers 6ho
are ailed 6ritersMK =e 6as rightEa!d this is 6hat =egel mea!t by si!gularity elevated i!to
u!iversality+ the pathologi8al t6ist that *ureishi ide!tiied i! his ather is part o every atherT there is
!o !ormal ather- everybodyIs ather is a igure 6ho ailed to live up to his e?pe8tatio!s a!d thus let to
his so! the task o settli!g his symboli8 debts7 9! this se!se- *ureishiIs JCakista!i ailed 6riterK is a
u!iversal si!gular- a si!gular sta!di!g i! or u!iversality7 This is 6hat hegemo!y is about- this short:
8ir8uit bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d its paradigmati8 8ase @i! the pre8ise *uh!ia! se!se o the termA+ it is
!ot e!ough to say that *ureishiIs o6! 8ase is o!e i! a series o 8ases e?empliyi!g the u!iversal a8t
that bei!g a ather is yet a!other Jimpossible proessio!KEo!e should take a step urther a!d 8laim
that- pre8isely- 6e all have Cakista!i athers 6ho are ailed 6riters7 9! other 6ords- let us imagi!e
bei!g:a:ather as a u!iversal ideal 6hi8h all empiri8al athers e!deavor to approa8h but ultimately ail
to rea8h+ this mea!s that the true u!iversality is !ot that o the ideal bei!g:a:ather- but that o ailure
itsel7 The JCakista!i ailed 6riterK is *ureishiIs !ame or the Father:Thi!g- givi!g it a spe8ii8
spi!Eit is poets 6ho are the origi!al spi!:do8tors7 Therei! also resides the art o J!ami!gK a 4atio!:
Thi!g+ to i!ve!t or !ame su8h spe8ii8 Jspi!sK 6hi8h give a lavor o the 4atio!:Thi!g 6hile
mai!tai!i!g a proper dista!8e to6ards it- thereby respe8ti!g its u!!amability7 Su8h is the art- or o!e o
them- o the poets7
The parallel 6ith moder! 8osmology reveals more tha! o!e might e?pe8t here7 9!soar as the
4atio!:Thi!g u!8tio!s as a ki!d o semioti8 Jbla8k hole-K 6e should bri!g i!to play the !otio! o the
Jeve!t horiUo!7K 9! ge!eral relativity- the eve!t horiUo! desig!ates a bou!dary i! spa8e:time+ the area
surrou!di!g the bla8k hole- beyo!d 6hi8h eve!ts 8a!!ot ae8t a! outside observer7 .ight emitted rom
i!side the horiUo! 8a! !ever rea8h the observer- so that a!ythi!g that passes through the horiUo! rom
the observerIs side is !ever see! agai!7 /here is the eNuivale!t o a poeti8 !omi!atio! o the 4atio!:
Thi!gM Cerhaps i! so:8alled J=a6ki!g radiatio!-K a thermal radiatio! predi8ted by Stephe! =a6ki!g i!
1%$# to be emitted by bla8k holes+ Nua!tum ee8ts allo6 bla8k holes to emit bla8k body radiatio! rom
just beyo!d the eve!t:horiUo!T this radiatio! does !ot 8ome dire8tly rom the bla8k hole itsel- but is the
result o virtual parti8les bei!g boosted by the bla8k holeIs gravitatio! i!to be8omi!g real parti8les+
va8uum lu8tuatio!s 8ause a parti8le:a!tiparti8le pair to appear 8lose to the eve!t:horiUo! o a bla8k
holeT o!e o the pair alls i!to the bla8k hole 6hilst the other es8apes- a!d to a! outside observer it
6ould appear that the bla8k hole has just emitted a parti8le7 Are !ot poeti8 !omi!atio!s o a Thi!g
somethi!g like thisM To a! outside observer @readerA- it appears that the 4atio!:Thi!g itsel has emitted
this !omi!atio!7 H!e is tempted to go eve! urther 6ith this parallel a!d i!8lude i! it the J=iggs
boso!-K a hypotheti8al eleme!tary parti8le 6hi8h is the Nua!tum o the =iggs ield- a parado?i8al ield
6hi8h a8Nuires a !o!:Uero value i! empty spa8e7 This is 6hy the =iggs boso! is also 8alled the J1od
parti8leK+ it is a Jsomethi!gK o 6hi8h the J!othi!gK itsel is made- literally the Jstu o !othi!g7K So
too the Freudia! Thi!g+ the stu o !othi!g7
THE TO #AC!!MS

The =iggs ield u!dermi!es the sta!dard 4e6 Age appropriatio!s o the Nua!tum Void as the
4othi!g:All- a pure pote!tiality at the abyssal origi! o all thi!gs- the Cloti!ia! ormless Hver:H!e i!
6hi8h all determi!ate H!es disappear7 The J=iggs ieldK 8o!trols 6hether or8es a!d parti8les behave
diere!tly or !ot+ 6he! it is Js6it8hed o!K @operativeA- symmetries are broke! bet6ee! eleme!tary
parti8les- a!d their 8omple? patter! o diere!8es emergesT 6he! it is Js6it8hed oK @i!operativeA-
or8es a!d parti8les are i!disti!guishable rom o!e a!other- the system is i! a state o va8uumEthis is
6hy parti8le s8ie!tists sear8h so desperately or the @hypotheti8al- or the time bei!gA =iggs Carti8le-
sometimes reerri!g to it as the Jgod parti8le7K This parti8le is the eNuivale!t o 6hat .a8a! 8alls the
ob1et petit a- the obje8t:8ause o desire- !amely the 8ause disturbi!g the symmetry o a va8uum- the d
6hi8h breaks the symmetry a!d i!trodu8es diere!8esEi! short- !othi!g less tha! the 8ause o the
passage rom !othi!g @the va8uum- the void o pure pote!tialitiesA to somethi!g @a8tual diere!t
parti8les a!d or8esA7 =o6 is this mira8ulous parti8le eve! thi!kable i! a materialist 6ayM =o6 8a! 6e
avoid here the obs8ura!tist idea o a mysti8al 8ause o all obje8tsM
#(
The materialist solutio! is very pre8ise- a!d it 8o!8er!s the key parado? o the =iggs ield+ as
6ith every ield- =iggs is 8hara8teriUed by its e!ergy de!sity a!d by its stre!gthEho6ever- Jit is
e!ergeti8ally avorable or the =iggs ield to be s6it8hed o! a!d or the symmetries bet6ee! parti8les
a!d or8es to be broke!7K
##
9! short- 6he! 6e have the pure va8uum @6ith the =iggs ield s6it8hed
oA- the =iggs ield still has to spe!d some e!ergyE!othi!g 8omes or reeT it is !ot the Uero:poi!t at
6hi8h the u!iverse is just Jresti!g i! itselK i! total releaseEthe !othi!g has to be sustai!ed by a!
i!vestme!t o e!ergy7 9! other 6ords- e!ergeti8ally- it 8osts somethi!g to mai!tai! the !othi!g @the void
o the pure va8uumA7 ,aybe some theosophi8al traditio!s are o! the right tra8k here- su8h as the
Talmudi8 idea that- prior to 8reati!g somethi!g- 1od had to 8reate !othi!g- to 6ithdra6- to 8lear the
spa8e or 8reatio!7 This parado? 8ompels us to i!trodu8e a disti!8tio! bet6ee! t6o va8uums+ irst-
there is the JalseK va8uum i! 6hi8h the =iggs ield is s6it8hed o- i7e7- there is pure symmetry 6ith
!o diere!tiated parti8les or or8esT this va8uum is JalseK be8ause it 8a! o!ly be sustai!ed by a 8ertai!
amou!t o e!ergy e?pe!diture7 The!- there is the JtrueK va8uum i! 6hi8h- although the =iggs ield is
s6it8hed o! a!d the symmetry broke!- i7e7- there is a 8ertai! diere!tiatio! o parti8les a!d or8es- the
amou!t o e!ergy spe!t is Uero7 9! other 6ords- e!ergeti8ally- the =iggs ield is i! a state o i!a8tivity-
o absolute repose7
#'
At the begi!!i!g- there is the alse va8uumT this va8uum is disturbed a!d the
symmetry is broke! be8ause- as 6ith every e!ergeti8 system- the =iggs ield te!ds to6ards the
mi!imiUatio! o its e!ergy e?pe!diture7 This is 6hy Jthere is somethi!g a!d !ot !othi!gK+ be8ause-
e!ergeti8ally- something is cheaper than nothing7 /e are here ba8k at the !otio! o den i! Gemo8ritus+
a Jsomethi!g 8heaper tha! !othi!g-K a 6eird pre:o!tologi8al Jsomethi!gK 6hi8h is less tha! !othi!g7
9t is thus 8ru8ial to disti!guish bet6ee! the t6o 4othi!gs+ the 4othi!g o the pre:o!tologi8al
den- o Jless:tha!:!othi!gs-K a!d the 4othi!g posited as su8h- as dire8t !egatio!Ei! order or
Somethi!g to emerge- the pre:o!tologi8al 4othi!g has to be !egated- has to be posited as a
dire8t>e?pli8it empti!ess- a!d it is o!ly 6ithi! this empti!ess that Somethi!g 8a! emerge- that there 8a!
be JSomethi!g i!stead o 4othi!g7K The irst a8t o 8reatio! is thus the emptyi!g o the spa8e- the
8reati!g o 4othi!g @i! Freudia! terms- the death drive a!d 8reative sublimatio! are i!tri8ately li!kedA7
9s !ot the 0pi8urea! !otio! o the clinamen the irst philosophi8al model o this stru8ture o the
double va8uum- o the idea that a! e!tity o!ly is i!soar as it J8omes too lateK 6ith regard to itsel- to
its o6! ide!tityM 9! 8o!trast to Gemo8ritus- 6ho 8laimed that atoms all straight do6! i! empty spa8e-
0pi8urus attributed to them the spo!ta!eous te!de!8y to deviate rom their straight paths7 This is 6hy-
i! .a8a!ese- o!e 8ould say that the passage rom Gemo8ritus to 0pi8urus is the passage rom the H!e
to the surplus:obje8t+ Gemo8ritusIs atoms are Jo!es-K 6hile 0pi8urusIs atoms are surplus:obje8tsE!o
6o!der that ,ar?Is theoreti8al path begi!s 6ith his do8toral thesis o! the diere!8e bet6ee! the
philosophies o Gemo8ritus a!d 0pi8urus7
Cerhaps this gives us a mi!imal dei!itio! o materialism+ the irredu8ible dista!8e bet6ee! the
t6o va8uums7 A!d this is 6hy eve! 3uddhism remai!s JidealistK+ there- the t6o va8uums be8ome
8o!used i! the !otio! o !irva!a7 0ve! Freud did !ot Nuite grasp this 8learly- sometimes 8o!ou!di!g
the death drive 6ith the J!irva!a pri!8iple-K thereby missi!g the 8ore o his !otio! o the death drive as
the Ju!deadK obs8e!e immortality o a repetitio! 6hi8h i!sists beyo!d lie a!d death7 4irva!a as the
retur! to a pre:orga!i8 pea8e is a JalseK va8uum- si!8e it J8osts moreK @i! terms o e!ergy e?pe!ditureA
tha! the 8ir8ular moveme!t o the drive7
#$
/e e!8ou!ter a homologous stru8ture also o! the market+ 6he! Tim =artord talks about Jthe
me! 6ho k!e6 the value o !othi!g-K
#&
6e should 8ompli8ate the ormula by dra6i!g a parallel 6ith
Stephe! 2ay 1ouldIs amous essay o! the relatio!ship bet6ee! the pri8e a!d siUe o =ershey 8ho8olate
bars7 Dompari!g pri8e a!d siUe 8ha!ges rom 1%(% through 1%$%- 1ould dis8overed ho6 the 8ompa!y
gradually redu8ed the siUe o the bars- the! made them larger @though !ot as large as they 6ere
origi!allyA a!d raised the pri8e O the! they started to redu8e the siUe agai!7 9 6e take this pro8ess to
its logi8al 8o!8lusio!- at some poi!t 6hi8h 8ould be e?a8tly 8al8ulated- the 8ompa!y 6ould be selli!g a
pa8kage 6ith !othi!g i! it- a!d this !othi!g 6ould have a pri8e 6hi8h 8ould be pre8isely determi!ed7
#%
The .a8a!ia! ob1et a is pre8isely this somethi!g 6hi8h sustai!s the !othi!g- the Jpri8e o !othi!g-K i!
e?a8tly the same 6ay i! 6hi8h a 8ertai! e!ergy is !eeded to sustai! the va8uum7 The 8ommo!:se!se
rea8tio! to all this 6ould be that surely 6e 8a! o!ly talk about Jless tha! !othi!gK i! a symboli8 spa8e
6here- or e?ample- my ba!k bala!8e might be mi!us b1#-0007 9! reality- there is by dei!itio! !othi!g
that is Jless tha! !othi!g7K 3ut is this really the 8aseM Wua!tum physi8s u!dermi!es pre8isely this
eleme!tary o!tologi8al presuppositio!7
There is !o!etheless a 6ay i! 6hi8h authe!ti8 3uddhism is a6are o this parado?7 To take a!
e?ample rom popular 8ulture+ 6he!- i! the remake o -he 5arate 5id @2010A- the you!g Ameri8a! boy
protests to his Dhi!ese ku!g u tea8her- J=o6 8a! 9 6i! my ight i 9 o!ly sta!d stillMK the tea8her
replies+ J3ei!g still is !ot the same as doi!g !othi!g7K /e 8a! u!dersta!d this propositio! agai!st the
ba8kgrou!d o the 6ell:k!o6! @but !o less adeNuateA 8li8hL about a 6ise ruler 6ho k!o6s ho6 to play
o!e subordi!ate o agai!st a!other- so that their plots !eutraliUe ea8h otherEa simple e?ample o ho6
the /hole o the ki!gdom is at pea8e 6hile the parts ight ea8h other7 9! 8o!trast to this Jdoi!g
!othi!gK o the /hole sustai!ed by the ra!ti8 a8tivity o the parts- Jsta!di!g still-K as a sudde!
i!terruptio! o moveme!t- disturbs the pea8e o the harmo!ious u!8tio!i!g @the 8ir8ular moveme!tA o
the /hole7
'0
Go 6e !ot have here- o!8e agai!- a homologous duality o va8uums+ the va8uum o
Jsta!di!g stillK a!d the va8uum o Jdoi!g !othi!gKM 9! a ki!d o repetitio! o the parado? o the =iggs
ield- i! order to ee8tively Jdo !othi!g-K o!e should !ot Jsta!d still-K but be a8tive i! a 8ertai! 6ay-
si!8e- i o!e is really i!a8tive- i o!e just sta!ds still- this immobility 8auses havo8 a!d 8haos7
'1
9 6e 6a!t to des8ribe the mi!imal o!tologi8al 8oordi!ates o the u!iverse- it is thus !ot e!ough
simply to posit the e!dless multipli8ity o phe!ome!a agai!st the ba8kgrou!d o the va8uum or void as
their u!iversality+ the va8uum itsel is al6ays already split bet6ee! the JalseK a!d the JtrueK va8uum-
a split 6hi8h origi!ally or 8o!stitutively disturbs it7 Hr- to risk a! a!a8hro!isti8 =egelia! ormulatio!+ it
is tha!ks to this split i! the va8uum itsel that the Jsubsta!8e is al6ays already subje8t7K =ere it is
8ru8ial to disti!guish bet6ee! the subje8t a!d the age!t+ the age!t is a parti8ular e!tity embedded i! the
8o!te?t o a phe!ome!o!- the e!tity 6hose 8o!tours are 8o!stituted through a parti8ular age!tial 8ut
a!d i! 8o!trast to the obje8t 6hi8h emerges through the same 8utT the subje8t- o! the 8o!trary- is a void
6hi8h is !ot determi!ed by its 8o!te?t but dise!ta!gled rom it- or- rather- is the very gesture o su8h a
dise!ta!gleme!t7 9! other 6ords- the oppositio! o age!t a!d obje8t is the result o the age!tial 8utT but
6he! the Jobje8tK is the va8uum itsel- it is suppleme!ted by the pure diere!8e 6hi8h JisK subje8t7
The shit rom spe8ii8 to pure diere!8e is thus the same as the shit rom age!t to subje8t7 A!d-
i!soar as the subje8t is or =egel !ot o!ly the !ame or a 8ut- but also the !ame or the emerge!8e o
appeara!8e- is !ot so:8alled de:8ohere!8e- the 8ollapse o the 6ave u!8tio! 6hi8h makes ordi!ary
reality appear- also the !ame or a 8ut- a break- i! the e!ta!gleme!t o Nua!tum lu8tuatio!sM /hy does
3arad !ot make this poi!tM
3arad oers ma!y variatio!s o! the moti that Jdetails matterK+ i! every e?perime!tal set:up-
o!e must be very atte!tive to material details 6hi8h 8a! lead to e!ormous diere!8es i! the i!al result
@the Jbutterly ee8tKAT i! other 6ords- the e?perime!t 8a! !ever be redu8ed to its abstra8t:ideal
8oordi!ates7 =o6ever- is !ot the opposite a8t mu8h more i!teresti!g- !amely- that the same global
orm persists through all the variatio!s o the detailsM /hat should surprise us is that this ideal orm
e?erts its o6! ei8a8y- that it ge!erates the same material ee8ts- so that 6e 8a! almost al6ays saely
ig!ore the material detailsElike the orm o a 6ave 6hi8h remai!s the same i! a sa!d storm- although
the grai!s o sa!d 6hi8h 8o!stitute it are !ever the same7 Cerhaps this ei8a8y o the abstra8tio! @the
abstra8t ormA is the basis o idealism+ its status is !ot merely epistemologi8al- but also o!tologi8al- or
the te!sio! bet6ee! the abstra8t !otio! o a! obje8t a!d the details o its material e?iste!8e is part o
the obje8t itsel7 3arad is right to 8omme!d 3ohr or tra!sposi!g the merely epistemologi8al
Ju!8ertai!tyK o measureme!t i!to the o!tologi8al i!8omplete!ess o the @measuredA obje8t itsel- but
she ails to make the same move apropos ideality+ 6hat i all the JbadK eatures she e!umerates
@Jesse!tialistK !otio!s o ide!tity- a!d so o!A are also !ot o!ly a result o the observerIs epistemologi8al
mistake- but- as it 6ere- the result o a JmistakeK i!s8ribed i!to reality itselM To put it a!other 6ay-
3arad proposes a list o eatures opposi!g @JgoodKA dira8tio! a!d @JbadKA rele8tio!+ dira8tio!
patter! versus mirror image- diere!8es versus same!ess- relatio!alities versus mimesis- perormativity
versus represe!tatio!alism- e!ta!gled o!tology versus separate e!tities- i!tra:a8tio! versus i!tera8tio!
o separate e!tities- phe!ome!a versus thi!gs- atte!di!g to detailed patter!s a!d i!e:grai!ed eatures
versus reiyi!g simplii8atio!- the e!ta!gleme!t o subje8t a!d obje8t 6ithi! a phe!ome!o! versus the
i?ed oppositio! bet6ee! the t6o- 8omple? !et6ork versus bi!ary oppositio!s- et87 3ut is !ot this very
oppositio! bet6ee! dira8tio! a!d rele8tio! @or bet6ee! perormativity a!d represe!tatio!A itsel a
rude bi!ary oppositio! bet6ee! truth a!d illusio!M
'2
Dlosely li!ked to this 8riti8al poi!t is a!other+ 3arad also repeatedly 8laims that mea!i!g is !ot
a! ideal e!tity- but a material pra8ti8e embedded i! apparatuses- a!d so orth7 3ut ho6 are 6e the! to
a88ou!t or its ideal status- illusory as it may beM Do!8epts may be al6ays a!d 8o!stitutively embedded
i! material pra8ti8es- but they are !ot only this7 The problem is !ot to lo8ate 8o!8epts i! material
pra8ti8e- but to e?plai! ho6 material pra8ti8es 8a! ge!erate the ideal e!tity 6e e?perie!8e as a 8o!8ept7
9! a similar 6ay- 3arad repeatedly deploys the moti o the Dartesia! subje8t as the e?ter!al age!t o
dise!ta!gled observatio!- to be repla8ed by age!tial e!ta!gleme!t+ 6e are part o the observed reality-
the 8ut bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t is 8o!ti!ge!tly e!a8ted- a!d so o!7 3ut the true problem is to e?plai!
ho6 this JalseK appeara!8e o a dise!ta!gled subje8t 8a! emerge i! the irst pla8e+ 8a! it really be
a88ou!ted or i! the terms o the age!tial 8ut 6ithi! the e!ta!gleme!t o a phe!ome!o!M 9s it !ot that
6e have to presuppose a more radi8al tra!s:phe!ome!al 8ut as a ki!d o tra!s8e!de!tal a priori that
makes i!tra:a8tive age!tial 8uts possibleM
=ere- perhaps- a more radi8al readi!g o dira8tio! is !eeded+ the very !otio! o dira8tio! has
to be dira8ted7 As 3arad !otes- Jdira8tio! has to do 6ith the 6ay 6aves 8ombi!e 6he! they overlap
a!d the appare!t be!di!g a!d spreadi!g o 6aves that o88urs 6he! 6aves e!8ou!ter a! obstru8tio!7K
'"
Gira8tio! itsel is thus dira8ted i!to 8ombi!i!g a!d splitti!g- i!to overlappi!g a!d spreadi!g7 This
duality does !ot reer to t6o 8o!se8utive phases o a pro8ess- like a 6ave 6hi8h- upo! e!8ou!teri!g a!
obstru8tio!- splits i!to t6o 6aves 6hi8h the!- meeti!g up agai! o! the other side o the obsta8le-
i!terere7 Father- the duality reers to t6o aspe8ts o o!e a!d the same pro8ess+ dira8tio! is a splitti!g
6hi8h ge!erates 6hat it splits i!to t6o- or there is !o u!ity pre8edi!g the split7 9! other 6ords- 6e
should 8o!8eive dira8tio! !ot as a liberati!g dehiscence o the H!e- but as the very moveme!t o the
8o!stitutio! o the H!e- as the disu!ity- the gap- 6hi8h gives birth to the H!e7 Thus radi8aliUed-
dira8tio! is revealed as a!other !ame or paralla?- the shit o perspe8tive !eeded to produ8e the
ee8t o the depth o the Feal- as i a! obje8t a8Nuires the impe!etrable de!sity o the Feal o!ly 6he!
its reality reveals itsel to be i!8o!siste!t+ the observed d is real o!ly i!soar as it is the impossible
poi!t at 6hi8h t6o i!8ompatible realities overlapE!o6 it is a 6ave- but i 6e measure it diere!tly- it
is a parti8le7
This mea!s that the t6o va8uums are also !ot symmetri8al+ 6e are !ot deali!g 6ith a polarity-
but 6ith the displa8ed H!e- a H!e 6hi8h is- as it 6ere- retarded 6ith regard to itsel- al6ays already
Jalle!-K its symmetry al6ays already broke!7
'(
The JpureK va8uum al6ays reveals itsel as Jalse-K
dra6! to6ards the bala!8e o a JtrueK va8uum 6hi8h already i!volves a mi!imum o a8tivity a!d
disturba!8e7 9t is 8ru8ial that this te!sio! bet6ee! the t6o va8uums be mai!tai!ed+ the Jalse va8uumK
8a!!ot simply be dismissed as a mere illusio!- leavi!g o!ly the JtrueK va8uum- so that the o!ly true
pea8e is that o i!8essa!t a8tivity- o bala!8ed 8ir8ular motio!Ethe JtrueK va8uum itsel remai!s
orever a traumati8 disturba!8e7
Dompleme!tarity i! Nua!tum physi8s @6ave or parti8leA e?8ludes a!y diale8ti8al relatio!ship-
there is !o mediatio! bet6ee! the paralla? gap that separates the t6o aspe8tsEis this gap the !o!:
diale8ti8al grou!d o !egativityM The old metaphysi8al problem o ho6 to !ame the !ameless abyss
pops up here i! the 8o!te?t o ho6 to !ame the primordial gap+ 8o!tradi8tio!- a!tago!ism- symboli8
8astratio!- paralla?- dira8tio!- 8ompleme!tarity O up to difference7 As 2ameso! hi!ted- perhaps o!e
should leave this gap !ameless- but 6hat 6e should !ot abstai! rom is at least a! i!terim outli!e o the
o!tology implied by su8h a u!iverse7
Fe8all the e?ample o the revolutio!ary lovers livi!g i! a perma!e!t state o emerge!8y- totally
dedi8ated to the Dause- ready to sa8rii8e all perso!al se?ual ulillme!t or it- but simulta!eously
totally dedi8ated to ea8h other+ the radi8al dis1unction bet6ee! se?ual passio! a!d so8ial:revolutio!ary
a8tivity is ully re8og!iUed here- or the t6o dime!sio!s are a88epted as totally heteroge!eous- ea8h
irredu8ible to the other- a!d it is this very a88epta!8e o the gap 6hi8h makes the relatio!ship !o!:
a!tago!isti87 This e?ample 8a! serve as a model or the properly diale8ti8al re8o!8iliatio!+ the t6o
dime!sio!s are !ot mediated or u!ited i! a higher Jsy!thesis-K they are merely a88epted i! their
i!8omme!surability7 This is 6hy the i!surmou!table paralla? gap- the 8o!ro!tatio! o t6o 8losely
li!ked perspe8tives bet6ee! 6hi8h !o !eutral 8ommo! grou!d is possible- is not a *a!tia! reve!ge
over =egel- that is- yet a!other !ame or a u!dame!tal antinomy 6hi8h 8a! !ever be diale8ti8ally
mediated or sublated7 =egelia! re8o!8iliatio! is a re8o!8iliatio! 6ith the irredu8ibility o the a!ti!omy-
a!d it is i! this 6ay that the a!ti!omy loses its a!tago!isti8 8hara8ter7
:+ DE DE

So 6here does all this leave us 6ith regard to =egelM /e all k!o6 the amous ope!i!g li!es o
J3ur!t 4orto!-K the irst o T7 S7 0liotIs Four [uartets+

Time prese!t a!d time pastAre both perhaps prese!t i! time uture-A!d time uture 8o!tai!ed i! time
past79 all time is eter!ally prese!tAll time is u!redeemable7
There is a parody o! these li!es @admired by 0liot himselA 6hi8h- by merely 8ha!gi!g or
addi!g a 6ord here a!d there- tra!sorms them i!to a pure a!d simple ba!ality- i! the style o
J5esterday 9 6as a day you!ger tha! today- a!d tomorro6 9 6ill be a day older OK Goes !ot
somethi!g homologous o88ur i! the predomi!a!t re8eptio! o =egelIs thoughtM /hat 6e get is a!
e!dlessly repeated series o ba!alities+ =egelIs thought as the ultimate e?pressio!- to the poi!t o
mad!ess eve!- o metaphysi8al o!to:teleologyT the diale8ti8al pro8ess as a 8losed 8ir8le i! 6hi8h thi!gs
Jbe8ome 6hat they are-K i! 6hi8h !othi!g really !e6 8a! emergeT the elevatio! o the Do!8ept i!to a
mo!ster 6hose sel:moveme!t e!ge!ders all o realityT the a priori 8o!ide!8e that all !egativity- splits-
a!tago!isms- are Jre8o!8iledK i! the i!al sublatio!- a!d so o! a!d so orth7 =ere- 6e !eed o!ly
i!trodu8e a little displa8eme!t- a!d the e!tire image o a gra!d metaphysi8al pro8ess tur!s i!to a
reakish mo!strosity7 5es- thi!gs Jbe8ome 6hat they are-K but literally+ i! a 8o!ti!ge!t a!d ope!
pro8ess- they be8ome 6hat- retroactively- it appears that they al6ays already 6ere7 5es- a!tago!ism is
Jre8o!8iled-K but !ot i! the se!se that it magi8ally disappearsE6hat =egel 8alls Jre8o!8iliatio!K is- at
its most basi8- a re8o!8iliatio! 6ith the a!tago!ism7 5es- i! the 8ourse o a diale8ti8al pro8ess- its
grou!d @starti!g poi!tA is retroa8tively posited by its result- but this retroa8tive positi!g !ever 8loses i!
a ull 8ir8le- a dis8o!ti!uity al6ays persists bet6ee! a grou!d a!d 6hat the grou!d grou!ds- a!d so o!7
The ultimate J=egelia!K ba!ality 8o!8er!s the a8t- emphasiUed by .ebru!- that- 6hatever the
radi8al 8o!ti!ge!8y o the pro8ess- =egel holds out the promise that- at the e!d- we can always tell a
story about the process7 /hat the 8riti8s o =egel usually Nuestio! is the happy e!di!g+ the assura!8e
that every !egativity 6ill be sublated i! a higher u!ity7 This Nuestio!i!g- ho6ever- relies o! a alse
presuppositio!+ the idea that the story =egel is telli!g is the ar8h:ideologi8al story o the primordial
Fall- the story o ho6 H!e divides i!to T6o- o ho6 origi!al i!!o8e!8e is disturbed by divisio! or
alie!atio!- a!d so o!7 The!- o 8ourse- the reproa8h is that o!8e the origi!al u!ity is lost it 8a! !ever be
regai!ed7 3ut is this really the story =egel is telli!gM .et us approa8h this key Nuestio! through a
detour7
/he! 6e speak about myths i! psy8hoa!alysis- 6e are ee8tively speaki!g about one myth- the
Hedipus mythEall other Freudia! myths @the myth o the primordial ather- FreudIs versio! o the
,oses mythA are variatio!s o! it- although !e8essary o!es7 =o6ever- 6ith the =amlet !arrative- thi!gs
get 8ompli8ated7 The sta!dard- pre:.a8a!ia!- J!aSveK psy8hoa!alyti8 readi!g o 8ourse o8uses o!
=amletIs i!8estuous desire or his mother7 =amletIs sho8k at his atherIs death is thus e?plai!ed i!
terms o the traumati8 impa8t the ulillme!t o a! u!8o!s8ious viole!t desire @i! this 8ase- or the
ather to dieA has o! the subje8tT the spe8ter o the dead ather 6ho appears to =amlet is the proje8tio!
o his o6! guilt 6ith regard to his death:6ishT his hatred o Dlaudius is a! ee8t o !ar8issisti8
rivalryEDlaudius- i!stead o =amlet himsel- got his motherT his disgust or Hphelia a!d 6oma!ki!d
i! ge!eral e?presses his revulsio! at se? i! its suo8ati!g i!8estuous modality- 6hi8h arises 6ith the
la8k o the pater!al prohibitio! or sa!8tio!7 So- a88ordi!g to this sta!dard readi!g- =amlet as a
moder!iUed versio! o Hedipus bears 6it!ess to the stre!gthe!i!g o the Hedipal prohibitio! o i!8est
i! the passage rom A!tiNuity to ,oder!ity+ i! the 8ase o Hedipus- 6e are still deali!g 6ith i!8est-
6hile i! 0amlet- the i!8estuous 6ish is repressed a!d displa8ed7 A!d it seems that the very diag!osis o
=amlet as a! obsessio!al !euroti8 poi!ts i! this dire8tio!+ i! 8o!trast to hysteria 6hi8h is ou!d
throughout all @at least /ester!A history- obsessio!al !eurosis is a disti!8tly moder! phe!ome!o!7
/hile o!e should !ot u!derestimate the stre!gth o this robust- eve! heroi8- Freudia! readi!g o
=amlet as a moder!iUed versio! o the Hedipus myth- the problem is ho6 to harmo!iUe it 6ith the a8t
that- althoughEi! the 1oethea! li!eageE=amlet may appear a model o the moder! @i!troverted-
broodi!g- i!de8isiveA i!telle8tual- the myth o =amlet is older tha! that o Hedipus7 The ker!el o the
=amlet !arrative @the so! ave!ges his ather agai!st the atherIs evil brother 6ho murdered him a!d
took over his thro!eT the so! survives the illegitimate rule o his u!8le by playi!g the ool a!d maki!g
J8raUyK but truthul remarksA is a u!iversal myth ou!d every6here- rom old 4ordi8 8ultures through
A!8ie!t 0gypt up to 9ra! a!d Coly!esia7 The e?pe8ted 8hro!ologi8al order is thus reversed+ 6hat
appears to be the origi!al mythi8al story 8omes se8o!d- pre8eded by its more J8orrupted-K iro!i8-
mediated 8opy7 This parado? o @6hat is e?perie!8ed asA repetitio! @a distorted 8opyA pre8edi!g the
JpureK origi!al is 6hat dei!es historicity proper i! 8o!trast to the ideologi8al @hiAstory o a Fall+
history proper begi!s 6he! our visio! o the past is !o lo!ger 8olored by our @!egativeA e?perie!8e o
the prese!t- 6he! 6e are able to per8eive the past as a! epo8h regulated by orms o so8ial orga!iUatio!
6hi8h radi8ally dier rom the prese!t o!es7 Fredri8 2ameso! has poi!ted out that the origi!al topi8 o
a !arrative- the !arrative Jas su8h-K is the !arrative o a Fall- o ho6 thi!gs 6e!t 6ro!g- o ho6 the old
harmo!y 6as destroyed @i! the 8ase o =amlet- ho6 the evil u!8le overthre6 the good ather:ki!gA7
This !arrative is the eleme!tary orm o ideology- a!d as su8h the key step i! the 8ritiNue o ideology
should be to i!vert itE6hi8h bri!gs us ba8k to =egel+ the story he is telli!g i! his a88ou!t o a
diale8ti8al pro8ess is !ot the story o ho6 a! origi!al orga!i8 u!ity alie!ates itsel rom itsel- but the
story o ho6 this orga!i8 u!ity !ever e?isted i! the irst pla8e- o ho6 its status is by dei!itio! that o a
retroa8tive a!tasyEthe Fall itsel ge!erates the mirage o 6hat it is the Fall rom7
The same parado? holds or belie+ vie6i!g the prese!t as a! era o 8y!i8al !o!:belie- 6e te!d
to imagi!e the past as a time 6he! people Jreally believedKEbut 6as there ever a! era 6he! people
Jreally believedKM As Fobert Caller demo!strated i! his Illusionen der +nderen-
'#
the dire8t belie i! a
truth 6hi8h is subje8tively ully assumed @J=ere 9 sta!dRKA is a moder! phe!ome!o!- i! 8o!trast to
traditio!al belies:at:a:dista!8e- su8h as u!derpi! 8o!ve!tio!s o polite!ess or other rituals7 Cremoder!
so8ieties did !ot believe dire8tly- but at a dista!8e- 6hi8h e?plai!s the misreadi!g i!here!t i!- or
e?ample- the 0!lighte!me!t 8ritiNue o JprimitiveK mythsEa8ed 6ith a !otio! su8h as a tribe havi!g
origi!ated rom a ish or a bird- the 8riti8s irst take it as a literal belie- the! reje8t it as !aSve a!d
Jetishisti87K They thereby impose their o6! !otio! o belie o! the JprimitiviUedK Hther7
''
Caller is
right to emphasiUe ho6- today- 6e believe more tha! ever+ the most skepti8al attitude- that o
de8o!stru8tio!- relies o! the igure o a! Hther 6ho Jreally believes7K The postmoder! !eed or the
perma!e!t use o devi8es o iro!i8 dista!tiatio! @Nuotatio! marks- et87A betrays the u!derlyi!g ear that-
6ithout these devi8es- belie 6ould be dire8t a!d immediateEit is as i sayi!g J9 love youK i!stead o
the iro!i8 JAs the poets 6ould say- V9 love youI-K 6ould e!tail a dire8tly assumed belie that 9 love you-
as i a 8ertai! dista!8e is !ot operative already i! the stateme!t J9 love you7K /e 8a! see ho6 the idea
o a! earlier age o !aSve belie also ollo6s the logi8 o the Fall+ 6hat it obus8ates is the a8t that su8h
belie is a retroa8tive a!tasy ge!erated by the 8y!i8al prese!t7 9! reality- people !ever Jreally
believedK+ i! premoder! times- belie 6as !ot Jliteral-K it i!8luded a dista!8e 6hi8h 6as lost 6ith the
passage to moder!ity7
So- to 8o!8lude- let us re8apitulate !ot o!ly this 8hapter- but the o8al poi!t o the e!tire book-
by taki!g as a starti!g poi!t Fay 3rassierIs Nuestio!+ J0ow does thought thin" the death of
thin"ing?K
'$
To really thi!k the e!d o the u!iverse @!ot o!ly the e?ti!8tio! o the huma! ra8e- but the
e!d o the u!iverse itsel predi8ted by Nua!tum 8osmologyA- 6e have to grasp this e!d as Jsomethi!g
that has already happened-K
'&
a!d to thi!k our prese!t rom this impossible sta!dpoi!t7 The very last
6ords o 3rassierIs book dei!e philosophy at its most radi8al as Jthe orga!o! o e?ti!8tio!K
'%
Ethe
attempt to thi!k bei!g rom the sta!dpoi!t o e?ti!8tio! mea!s to thi!k e?ter!ality 6ithout thi!ki!g-
6ithout @the impli8it prese!8e oA the mi!d7 3ut there is somethi!g 6ro!g- some key dime!sio! is
blurred- 6he! 6e ormulate the problem i! this 6ay+ it is easy to thi!k the u!iverse prior to the
emerge!8e o huma!ity- there are hu!dreds o populariUi!g books 6ritte! about the 3ig 3a!g- the
evolutio! o lie o! 0arth- a!d so o!7 The true problem lies else6here a!d is o!ly i!di8ated by the
tra!s8e!de!tal retort J=o6 8a! 6e be sure that the s8ie!tii8 vie6 o pre:huma! obje8tive reality is !ot
already 8o!stituted by a tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo!MK+ the true problem is ho6 8a! 9 thi!k myself as i 9 am
already dead or- more pre8isely- e?ti!8tM Dertai!ly !ot through a!y ki!d o mysti8al immersio! i! a
primordial abyss- but- parado?i8ally- through a radi8al dis:embodyi!g- through deprivi!g mysel o all
Jpathologi8alK eatures o my i!itudeEa!d this is the cogito- this Uero:poi!t o the disembodied gaUe
6hi8h sustai!s Jobje8tiveK s8ie!8e7 This dis:embodied d 6hi8h may thi!k itsel as part o the obje8t- as
already dead- this Ju!deadK d is the subje8t- so that the problem is !ot ho6 to thi!k the 9!:itsel
6ithout mi!d- but ho6 to thi!k the Jobje8talK status o this Uero:poi!t o thi!ki!g itsel7 This orever:
elusive obje8tal 8ou!terpart o the subje8t- the JossilK 6hi8h JisK the subje8t- is 6hat .a8a! 8alls the
ob1et a- a!d it is this parado?i8al obje8t 6hi8h is the o!ly true 9!:itsel7
)ltimately- the alter!ative 6e are deali!g 6ith here is bet6ee! t6o versio!s o the death drive+
either 3rassierIs readi!g o Freud @as a! heroi8 step beyo!d the 4ietUs8hea! 6ill:to:lie i!to ully
assumi!g the 6ill:to:k!o6 as the 6ill:to:!othi!gess- the 6ill to rea8h the 9!:itsel by 6ay o thi!ki!g
the e!d o thi!ki!gA- or .a8a!Is readi!g o Freud @the death drive as the u!dead 8ompulsio!:to:repeatA7
3rassierIs Freudia! optio! repeats FreudIs 8o!usio! bet6ee! the death drive a!d the !irva!a pri!8iple-
readi!g the ormer as a strivi!g or the retur! o the orga!i8 to the i!orga!i8 or o matter itsel to the
primordial void- 6hile .a8a! 8o!8eives the death drive as a disturba!8e o a!y void- as the i!siste!8e
o a pre:o!tologi8al d o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h Jit moves7K The ultimate o!tologi8al 8hoi8e is thus !ot the
8hoi8e bet6ee! !othi!g a!d somethi!g- but bet6ee! !othi!g @e?ti!8tio!A a!d less tha! !othi!g @eppur
si muoveA7
9! a 6ay- the diere!8e bet6ee! 3rassierIs positio! a!d the .a8a!o:=egelia! positio! 8a! be
summed up by a simple repla8eme!t+ 3rassier reers to FreudIs triple de:8e!teri!g or humiliatio! o
ma!Is !ar8issismEDoper!i8us- Gar6i!- psy8hoa!alysisEbut he repla8es psy8hoa!alysis 6ith
8og!itivism7
$0
The latter ully !aturaliUes our mi!d- redu8i!g it to a phe!ome!o! arisi!g !aturally out
o evolutio!Ebut perhaps 3rassier pro8eeds too ast here+ 6hile 8og!itivism de:8e!ters the huma!
mi!d rom outside- treati!g it as a! ee8t o obje8tive !atural me8ha!isms- o!ly psy8hoa!alysis de:
8e!ters it from within- reveali!g ho6 the huma! mi!d i!volves !ot o!ly obje8tive !euro!al pro8esses
but also Jsubje8tiveK pro8esses o thi!ki!g 6hi8h are i!a88essible to it7
Feerri!g to Fra!eois .aruelle- 3rassier dei!es materialism i! terms o the ,ar?ist:sou!di!g
!otio! o Jdetermi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e-K 6hi8h should be opposed to the similar !otio! o
overdetermi!atio!+ Jdetermi!atio!:i!:the:last:i!sta!8e is the 8ausality 6hi8h re!ders it u!iversally
possible or a!y obje8t d to determi!e its o6! VrealI 8og!itio!- but o!ly i! the last i!sta!8e7K
$1

Hverdetermi!atio! is tra!s8e!de!talT that is- the poi!t o tra!s8e!de!talism is that a subje8t 8a! !ever
ully Jobje8tiviUeK itsel- redu8e itsel to a part o Jobje8tive realityK i! ro!t o it- si!8e su8h a reality is
al6ays already tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted by subje8tivity+ !o matter to 6hat e?te!t 9 su88eed i!
a88ou!ti!g or mysel as a phe!ome!o! 6ithi! the Jgreat 8hai! o bei!g-K as a! ee8t determi!ed by a
!et6ork o !atural @or super!aturalA 8auses- this 8ausal image is al6ays already overdetermi!ed by the
tra!s8e!de!tal horiUo! 6hi8h stru8tures my approa8h to reality7 To this tra!s8e!de!tal
overdetermi!atio!- 3rassier opposes the !aturalist determi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e+ a serious
materialist 8a! o!ly assume that every subje8tive horiUo! 6ithi! 6hi8h reality appears- every subje8tive
8o!stitutio! or mediatio! o reality- has to be ultimately determi!ed by its pla8e 6ithi! obje8tive
reality- has to be 8o!8eived as part o the all:e!8ompassi!g !atural pro8ess7 The 8o!trast is 8lear here+
overdetermi!atio! does !ot sta!d or the 6ay a! all:e!8ompassi!g /hole determi!es the i!terplay o
its parts- but- o! the 8o!trary- or the 6ay a part o the 6hole emerges as a sel:relati!g H!e 6hi8h
overdetermi!es the !et6ork o its relatio!s 6ith others7 9! this pre8ise se!se- the eleme!tary orm o
overdetermi!atio! is life+ a livi!g bei!g is part o the 6orld- but it relates to its e!viro!me!t as a
u!8tio! o its sel:relati!g @to take the simplest e?ample+ a! orga!ism relates to ood be8ause it !eeds
itA7 Hverdetermi!atio! is a !ame or this parado?i8al reversal by mea!s o 6hi8h a mome!t subsumes
u!der itsel the 6hole out o 6hi8h it gre6 @or- i! =egelese- posits its presuppositio!sA7
Su8h a relatio!ship bet6ee! overdetermi!atio! a!d determi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e is
a!tago!isti8- si!8e the ormer makes a!y dire8t 8o!8eptualiUatio! o the latter impossible7 At the level
o temporality- the stru8ture o overdetermi!atio! is that o retroa8tivity- o a! ee8t 6hi8h
retroa8tively posits @overdetermi!esA the very 8auses by 6hi8h it is determi!ed i! the last i!sta!8e- a!d
the redu8tio! o overdetermi!atio! to determi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e mea!s that 6e have su88eeded
i! retroa8tively tra!sposi!g 8ausality ba8k i!to the li!ear 8ausal !et6ork7 /hy- the!- does @symboli8:
retroa8tiveA overdetermi!atio! emerge at allM 9s its status ultimately that o a! illusio!- albeit a
spo!ta!eous a!d !e8essary o!eM The o!ly 6ay to avoid this 8o!8lusio! is to break the li!ear
determi!ist 8hai! a!d assert the o!tologi8al ope!!ess o reality+ overdetermi!atio! is !ot illusory
i!soar as it retroa8tively ills i! the gaps i! the 8hai! o 8ausality7
$2
Goes !ot 3rassier himsel admit this 8ompli8atio! 6he!Eagai!- ollo6i!g .aruelleEhe
8o!8edes that thought 8a! tou8h the Feal o!ly through the overlappi!g o t6o ore8losuresM

[9\dealism is !ot 8ir8umve!ted by subtra8ti!g i!telle8tual i!tuitio! rom the reality to 6hi8h it provides
a88ess- but by short:8ir8uiti!g the tra!s8e!de!tal diere!8e bet6ee! thi!ki!g a!d bei!g so that 6hat is
ore8losed to thought i! the obje8t 8oi!8ides @albeit !o!:sy!theti8allyA 6ith 6hat is ore8losed to the
obje8t i! thought7
$"
This ormula is very pre8ise+ J6hat is ore8losed to thought i! the obje8tK @the transcendent 9!:
itsel o the obje8t i!a88essible to thoughtA overlaps 6ith J6hat is ore8losed to the obje8t i! thoughtK
@the immanence o the subje8t e?8luded rom the realm o obje8tivityA7 This overlappi!g o the t6o
Jore8losuresK @!ot to be 8o!used 6ith .a8a!Is forclusionA repeats the basi8 =egelo:.a8a!ia! move+
the very dista!8e 6hi8h separates us rom the 9!:itsel is imma!e!t to the 9!:itsel- makes us @the
subje8tA a! u!a88ou!table>JimpossibleK gap or 8ut 6ithi! the 9!:itsel7 9!soar as- or .a8a!- J6hat is
ore8losed to thought i! the obje8tK is the JimpossibleK ob1et a- a!d J6hat is ore8losed to the obje8t i!
thoughtK is b- the void o the barred subje8t itsel- this overlappi!g bri!gs us ba8k to .a8a!Is ormula b:
a7
4o 6o!der- the!- that 6e 8a! approa8h the Feal o!ly via a @proto:=egelia!A detour through
error+ JThi!ki!g !eeds to be occasioned by obje8tiyi!g tra!s8e!de!8e i! order or it to be able to
assume the real as its u!obje8tiiable 8ause:o:the:last:i!sta!8e O Thus determi!atio!:i!:the:last:
i!sta!8e reNuires obje8tiyi!g tra!s8e!de!8e eve! as it modiies it7K
$(
9! other 6ords- la vAritA surgit
de la mAprise+ the pro8ess o k!o6i!g has to be triggered by a tra!s8e!de!t obje8t- i! order to 8a!8el
this erro!eous tra!s8e!de!8e i! the se8o!d step7 =o6- the!- 8a! 6e tou8h the Feal i! thi!ki!gM

To thi!k o!esel i! a88orda!8e 6ith a real 6hi8h is 6ithout esse!8e does !ot mea! to thi!k o!esel to
be this rather tha! thatT a huma! bei!g rather tha! a thi!g7 To thi!k o!esel a88ordi!g to a! i!8o!siste!t
real 6hi8h pu!8tures !othi!g!ess itsel mea!s to thi!k o!esel as ide!ti8al 6ith a last:i!sta!8e 6hi8h is
devoid o eve! the mi!imal 8o!siste!8y o the void7 The real is less tha! !othi!gE6hi8h is 8ertai!ly
!ot to eNuate it 6ith the impossible @.a8a!A7
$#
The o!ly thi!g to drop rom this @sympatheti8A summary o .aruelleIs positio! is the i!al
Nualii8atio!+ the .a8a!ia! Feal:impossible is pre8isely su8h a Jgive! 6ithout give!!ess-K 6ithout a
phe!ome!ologi8al horiUo! ope!i!g the spa8e or it to appear- the impossible poi!t o the o!ti8 6ithout
the o!tologi8al7 The key Nuestio! here is 6hether this impossibility applies o!ly to us @a!d as su8h is
epistemologi8al- 8o!8er!i!g the a8t that it is impossible or us- as i!ite huma!s- to relate to reality
outside o a! o!tologi8al horiUo!A- or 6hether it is i!here!t to the Feal 9!:itsel7
9! a 6ay- 3rassier is right to reje8t the ide!tity o the i!8o!siste!t @i8sA real 6ith the .a8a!ia!
Feal:impossible+ or .a8a!- there is a! impossibility i!s8ribed i!to the very 8ore o the Feal7 To retur!
to Gemo8ritus+ den is the !ame o the pre:o!tologi8al i8s multipli8ity o less:tha!:H!es @a!d thereby
less:tha!:4othi!gsA- 6hi8h is the o!ly diale8ti8al:materialist 8a!didate or the 9!:itsel7 The Nuestio! is+
is this i8s multipli8ity sui8ie!t as a @pre:Ao!tologi8al starti!g poi!tM /he! 3adiou says that there is !o
H!e- it all hi!ges o! ho6 this !egatio! is to be u!derstood+ is it simply the assertio! o pure
multipli8ity- or is it asserti!g that the !egatio! o the H!e is the imma!e!t !egative eature o that pure
multipli8ity itselM 9! the terms o the joke Nuoted i! Dhapter 10- is the i8s multipli8ity just plai! 8oee
or coffee without 4 ?&@M The .a8a!o:=egelia! a?iom is that the impossibility of the $ne is the
immanent negative feature of the ics multiplicity+ there is a! i8s multipli8ity be8ause there is !o H!e-
be8ause the H!e is i! itsel blo8ked- impossible7
$'
/hat- the!- is the JThi!g:i!:itselK rom a diale8ti8al:materialist sta!dpoi!tM The best 6ay to
a!s6er this Nuestio! is- agai!- to oppose diale8ti8al materialism to 3uddhism+ i! 3uddhism- the 9!:
itsel is the void- !othi!g- a!d ordi!ary reality is a play o appeara!8es7 The Nuestio! ultimately
u!a!s6ered here is ho6 6e get rom !othi!g to somethi!g7 =o6 do illusory appeara!8es arise out o
the voidM The diale8ti8al:materialist a!s6er is+ o!ly i this somethi!g is less tha! !othi!g- the pre:
o!tologi8al proto:reality o den7 From 6ithi! this proto:reality- our ordi!ary reality appears through the
emerge!8e o a subje8t 6hi8h 8o!stitutes Jobje8tive realityK+ every positive reality o H!es is already
phe!ome!al- tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted- J8orrelatedK to a subje8tEi! 3adiouIs terms- every reality is
that o a 6orld dei!ed by its tra!s8e!de!tal 8oordi!ates7
=o6- the!- do 6e pass rom the 9!:itsel o proto:reality to tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted reality
properM .aruelle is right to poi!t out that the 9!:itsel is !ot Joutside-K as a! e?ter!al Feal i!depe!de!t
o the tra!s8e!de!tal ield+ i! the 8ouple subje8t a!d obje8t- the 9!:itsel is o! the side o the subje8t-
si!8e there are ?transcendentally constituted@ ob1ects ?of %e&ternal reality'@ because there is a split
sub1ect7 This 8o!stitutive split o the subje8t @6hi8h pre8edes the split bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8tA is
the split bet6ee! the void that JisK the subje8t @bA a!d the impossible:Feal obje8tal 8ou!terpart o the
subje8t- the purely virtual ob1et a7 /hat 6e 8all Je?ter!al realityK @as a 8o!siste!t ield o positively
e?isti!g obje8tsA arises through subtra8tio!- that is- 6he! somethi!g is subtra8ted rom itEa!d this
somethi!g is the ob1et a7 The 8orrelatio! bet6ee! subje8t a!d obje8t @obje8tive realityA is thus sustai!ed
by the 8orrelatio! bet6ee! this same subje8t a!d its obje8tal 8orrelate- the impossible:Feal ob1et a- a!d
this se8o!d 8orrelatio! is o a totally diere!t ki!d+ it is a ki!d o !egative 8orrelatio!- a! impossible
li!k- a !o!:relatio!ship- bet6ee! t6o mome!ts 6hi8h 8a! !ever meet 6ithi! the same spa8e @like
subje8t a!d obje8tA- !ot be8ause they are too ar a6ay- but be8ause they are o!e a!d the same e!tity o!
the t6o sides o a ,Zbius ba!d7 This impossible:Feal virtual obje8t is !ot e?ter!al to the symboli8- but
its imma!e!t impedime!t- 6hat makes the symboli8 spa8e 8urvedT more pre8isely- it JisK !othi!g but
this 8urvature o the symboli8 spa8e7
/hat this mea!s- i! ee8t- is that there is no ontology of the 7eal+ the very ield o o!tology- o
the positive order o 3ei!g- emerges through the subtra8tio! o the Feal7 The order o 3ei!g a!d the
Feal are mutually e?8lusive+ the Feal is the imma!e!t blo8kage or impedime!t o the order o 3ei!g-
6hat makes the order o 3ei!g i!8o!siste!t7 This is 6hy- at the level o o!tology- tra!s8e!de!tal
8orrelatio!ism is right+ every Jreality-K every positive order o 3ei!g- is o!to:logi8al- 8orrelative to
logos- tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted through the symboli8 orderEJla!guage is the house o bei!g-K as
=eidegger put it7
3ut do 6e !ot get 8aught i! a 8o!tradi8tory redoubli!g here+ the Feal is a gap i! the order o
3ei!g @realityA and a gap i! the symboli8 orderM The reaso! there is !o 8o!tradi8tio! is that JrealityK is
tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stituted by the symboli8 order- so that Jthe limits o my la!guage are the limits o
my 6orldK @/ittge!stei!A7 9! the 8ommo! tra!s8e!de!tal vie6- there is some ki!d o Feal:i!:itsel
@like the *a!tia! Ding an sichA 6hi8h is the! ormed or J8o!stitutedK i!to reality by the subje8tT due to
the subje8tIs i!itude- 6e 8a!!ot totaliUe reality- reality is irredu8ibly i!8o!siste!t- Ja!ti!omi8-K a!d so
orthE6e 8a!!ot gai! a88ess to the Feal- 6hi8h remai!s tra!s8e!de!t7 The gap or i!8o!siste!8y thus
8o!8er!s o!ly our symboli8ally 8o!stituted reality- !ot the Feal i! itsel7 .a8a! here takes a step stri8tly
homologous to the move rom *a!t to =egel 6ith regard to a!ti!omies a!d the Thi!g:i!:itsel+ the Feal
is !ot the e?ter!al 9!:itsel that eludes the symboli8 grasp- that the symboli8 8a! o!ly e!8ir8le i! a!
i!8o!siste!t a!d a!ti!omi8 6ayT the Feal is nothing but the gap or a!tago!ism that th6arts the
symboli8 rom 6ithi!Ethe symboli8 tou8hes the Feal i! a totally imma!e!t 6ay7 /e are thus led ba8k
to the key parado? o the Feal+ it is !ot simply the i!a88essible 9!:itsel- it is simulta!eously the Thi!g:
i!:itsel a!d the obsta8le 6hi8h preve!ts our a88ess to the Thi!g:i!:itsel7 Therei! lies already the basi8
rele?ive move o Dhristia!ity- as 6ell as o the =egelia! diale8ti8+ i! Dhristia!ity- the very gap that
separates a believer rom 1od is 6hat e!sures his ide!tity 6ith 1od- si!8e- i! the igure o the
aba!do!ed Dhrist o! the Dross- 1od is separated rom himselT i! =egel- a! epistemologi8al obsta8le
be8omes a! o!tologi8al eature o the Thi!g itsel @8o!tradi8tio! is !ot o!ly a! i!de? o the
impere8tio! o our k!o6ledge- the limitatio! o our k!o6ledge bri!gs us i! 8o!ta8t 6ith the
[limitatio! o the\ Thi!g itselA7
The Feal is thus a! ee8t o the symboli8- !ot i! the se!se o perormativity- o the Jsymboli8
8o!stru8tio! o reality-K but i! the totally diere!t se!se o a ki!d o o!tologi8al J8ollateral damageK o
symboli8 operatio!s+ the pro8ess o symboliUatio! is i!here!tly th6arted- doomed to ail- a!d the Feal
is this imma!e!t ailure o the symboli87 The 8ir8ular temporality o the pro8ess o symboliUatio! is
8ru8ial here+ the Feal is the ee8t o the ailure o the symboli8 to rea8h @!ot the 9!:itsel- butA itself- to
ully realiUe itsel- but this ailure o88urs be8ause the symboli8 is th6arted i! itsel7 9t is i! this se!se
that- or .a8a!- the subje8t itsel is a! Ja!s6er o the FealK+ a subje8t 6a!ts to say somethi!g- it ails-
a!d this ailure is the subje8tEa Jsubje8t o the sig!iierK is literally the result o the ailure to be8ome
itsel7 9! this se!se- also- 6ithi! the symboli8 spa8e- the ee8t is a reaction against its cause- 6hile the
8ause is a retroa8tive ee8t o its 8ause+ the subje8t produ8es sig!iiers 6hi8h ail- a!d the subje8t Nua
Feal is the ee8t o this ailure7
3ut does this mea! that 6e e!d up i! a ki!d o idealism o the symboli8E6hat 6e e?perie!8e
as JrealityK is symboli8ally 8o!stru8ted- a!d eve! the Feal 6hi8h eludes the grasp o the symboli8 is a
result o the imma!e!t ailure o the symboli8M 4o- be8ause it is through this very failure to be itself
that the symbolic touches the 7eal7 9! 8o!trast to tra!s8e!de!talism- .a8a! agrees that 6e have a88ess
to the 9!:itsel+ .a8a! is !ot a dis8ourse:idealist 6ho 8laims that 6e are orever 8aught i! the 6eb o
symboli8 pra8ti8es- u!able to rea8h the 9!:itsel7 =o6ever- 6e do !ot tou8h the Feal by 6ay o
breaki!g out o the Jpriso!:house o la!guageK a!d gai!i!g a88ess to the e?ter!al tra!s8e!de!t
reere!tEevery e?ter!al reere!t @Jully e?isti!g positive realityKA is already tra!s8e!de!tally
8o!stituted7 /e tou8h the Feal:i!:itsel i! our very ailure to tou8h it- si!8e the Feal is- at its most
radi8al- the gap- the Jmi!imal diere!8e-K that separates the H!e rom itsel7
9t is thereore !ot e!ough to say that- 6hile thi!gs e?ist out there i! their mea!i!gless reality-
la!guage perormatively adds mea!i!g to them+ the symboli8 tra!s8e!de!tally 8o!stitutes reality i! a
mu8h stro!ger o!tologi8al se!se- i! its bei!g itsel7 The true Nuestio! is ho6 this perormativity @the
Jmagi8K o Jdoi!g thi!gs 6ith 6ordsKA is possible7 9t is !ot simply that the ultimate ailure o symboli8
perormativity produ8es the e?8ess o the Feal as the imma!e!t obsta8le to the pro8ess o
symboliUatio!T this obsta8le- the gap or a!tago!ism that hi!ders the symboli8 pro8ess rom 6ithi!- is
the 8o!ditio! o perormativity+

it is be8ause bei!g is al6ays also a orm o a!tago!ism>distortio! that these [perormative\ operatio!s
are ee8tive7 This is 6hat makes JperormativityK possible to begi! 6ith- 6hat makes it o!tologi8ally
@a!d !ot o!ly logi8allyA ee8tive7 9 the symboli8 is produ8tive o bei!g- a!d !ot o!ly o the 6ays @a!d
!ormsA o bei!g- it is be8ause o 6hat preve!ts bei!g to be <ua bei!g- be8ause o its i!here!t
8o!tradi8tio!- 6hi8h is pre8isely !ot symboli8- but real7
$$
9! short- the symboli8 8a! be produ8tive o bei!g o!ly i!soar as the order o bei!g is i! itsel
th6arted- i!8omplete- marked by a! imma!e!t gap or a!tago!ism7
This bri!gs us ba8k to the properly .a8a!ia! !otio! o se?uality as the imma!e!t limit o
o!tology7 H!e has to oppose here se?uality a!d a!imal se? @8opulatio!A+ a!imal se? is !ot Jse?ualK i!
the pre8ise se!se o huma! se?uality7
$&
=uma! se?uality is !ot dei!ed by its bodily 8o!te!tT it is a
ormal eature- a distortio! or protra8tio! o the spa8e:a!d:time 6hi8h 8a! ae8t a!y a8tivity- eve!
those 6hi8h have !othi!g to do 6ith se?uality7 =o6 does a! a8tivity that is i! itsel dei!itely ase?ual
a8Nuire se?ual 8o!!otatio!sM 9t is Jse?ualiUedK 6he! it ails to a8hieve its ase?ual goal a!d gets 8aught
up i! a vi8ious 8y8le o utile repetitio!7 /e e!ter se?uality 6he! a! a8tivity or gesture that Joi8iallyK
serves some i!strume!tal goal be8omes a! e!d:i!:itsel- 6he! 6e start to e!joy the very
Jdysu!8tio!alK repetitio! o this gesture a!d thereby suspe!d its purposeul!ess7 For e?ample+ 9 meet a
rie!d a!d 6e shake ha!ds- but i!stead o letti!g go ater the irst shake- 9 8o!ti!ue to hold his ha!d a!d
sNueeUe it rhythmi8allyE6ith this simple !o!:u!8tio!al protra8tio!- 9 ge!erate a! obs8e!e se?ual
u!derto!e7 9t is i! this se!se that Jse?uality @as the realA is !ot some bei!g that e?ists beyond the
symboli8- it Ve?istsI solely as the curving of the symbolic space that ta"es place because of the
additional something produced with the signifying gesture7K
$%
9! other 6ords- se?uality as Feal is !ot
e?ter!al to the symboli8 ield- it is its imma!e!t 8urvature or distortio!- it o88urs be8ause the symboli8
ield is blo8ked by a! i!here!t impossibility7
A!d this bri!gs us ba8k i!ally to the triad o the premoder! se?ualiUed vie6 o 8osmos-
moder! dese?ualiUed o!tology- a!d .a8a!Is re:assertio! o se?uality i! its o!tologi8al dime!sio!
within the moder! dese?ualiUed u!iverse- as its i!here!t limitatio!+ JGe:se?ualiUatio! o o!tology @its
!o lo!ger bei!g 8o!8eived as a 8ombi!atory o t6o- Vmas8uli!eI a!d Vemi!i!eI- pri!8iplesA 8oi!8ides
6ith the se?ual appeari!g as the real>disruptive poi!t o bei!g7K
&0
Gese?ualiUed moder! o!tology
attempts to des8ribe a lat- !eutral @!euteredA order o bei!g @the a!o!ymous multipli8ity o subatomi8
parti8les or or8esA- but i! order to do so- it has to ig!ore the i!8o!siste!8y or i!8omplete!ess o the
order o bei!g- the imma!e!t impossibility 6hi8h th6arts every o!tology7 0very ield o o!tology- eve!
at its most radi8al @like the mathemati8al o!tology o 3adiouA- has to subtra8t the impossible>Feal @the
8urved spa8e o se?uatio!A rom the order o bei!g7

Do!8lusio!+ The Coliti8al Suspe!sio! o the 0thi8al

/hat the i!e?iste!8e o the big Hther sig!als is that every ethi8al a!d>or moral edii8e has to be
grou!ded i! a! abyssal a8t 6hi8h is- i! the most radi8al se!se imagi!able- political7 Coliti8s is the very
spa8e i! 6hi8h- 6ithout a!y e?ter!al guara!tee- ethi8al de8isio!s are made a!d !egotiated7 The idea
that o!e 8a! grou!d politi8s i! ethi8s- or that politi8s is ultimately a strategi8 eort to realiUe prior
ethi8al positio!s- is a versio! o the illusio! o the Jbig Hther7K From the Nuestio! J/hi8h ethi8s its
psy8hoa!alysisMK 6e should thereore pass to the Nuestio! J/hi8h politi8s its psy8hoa!alysisMK
/ith regard to politi8s- FreudIs ultimate positio! is the same as .a8a!Is+ psy8hoa!alysis does
!ot provide !e6 positive politi8al programs or a8tio!T its ultimate a8hieveme!t- the Jbottom li!eK o
a!alysis- is to have dis8er!ed the 8o!tours o a J!egativity-K a disruptive or8e- 6hi8h poses a threat to
every stable 8olle8tive li!k7 Si!8e a politi8al a8t i!terve!es i! a state o thi!gs- simulta!eously 8reati!g
i!stability a!d tryi!g to establish a !e6 positive order- o!e 8a! say that psy8hoa!alysis 8o!ro!ts us
6ith the Uero:level o politi8s- a pre:politi8al Jtra!s8e!de!talK 8o!ditio! o possibility o politi8s- a gap
6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e or the politi8al a8t to i!terve!e i!- a gap 6hi8h is saturated by the politi8al
eort to impose a !e6 order7 9! .a8a!ia! terms- psy8hoa!alysis 8o!ro!ts us 6ith the Uero:level at
6hi8h J!othi!g is taki!g pla8e but the pla8e itsel-K 6hile politi8s proper i!terve!es i! this pla8e 6ith a
!e6 ,aster:Sig!iier- imposi!g idelity o! it- legitimiUi!g us i! Je!or8i!gK o! reality the proje8t
sustai!ed by this ,aster:Sig!iier7
Do!seNue!tly- o!e 8a! say that- 6ith regard to the gap or a!tago!ism 6hi8h dei!es the huma!
8o!ditio!- the relatio!ship bet6ee! psy8hoa!alysis a!d politi8s is that o a paralla? split- o a missed
e!8ou!ter bet6ee! a J!ot yetK a!d a Jtoo lateK+ psy8hoa!alysis ope!s up the gap beore the a8t- 6hile
politi8s already sutures the gap- i!trodu8i!g a !e6 8o!siste!8y- imposi!g a !e6 ,aster:Sig!iier7
1
3ut
does every politi8s- every politi8al a8t- !e8essarily i!volve a sel:bli!di!g 8over:up o the gapM /hat i
there is !o pure e?perie!8e o the gap- 6hat i every versio! o the gap is already vie6ed rom the
sta!dpoi!t o a 8ertai! politi8al e!gageme!tM So there is a 8o!servative:tragi8 8elebratio! o the gap
@6e are ultimately doomed to ail- heroi8 a8ts 8a! o!ly temporarily postpo!e the i!al all- the most 6e
8a! do is all i! a! authe!ti8 6ayA- a liberal pragmati8 assertio! o the gap @demo8ra8y admits the
impere8tio! o our so8ieties- there is !o i!al solutio! to our 6oes- just a more or less su88essul
pragmati8 ti!keri!gA- a!d the radi8al:letist eter!aliUatio! o struggle @,ao+ J8lass struggle 6ill go o!
oreverKA7 0a8h o these positio!s 8a! also be ormulated i! terms o its o6! spe8ii8 de!ial o the
a!tago!ism+ the 8o!servative orga!i8 harmo!y- the liberal bala!8i!g o 8o!li8ts through the tra!slatio!
o a!tago!ism i!to ago!isti8 8ompetitio!- the letist post:revolutio!ary paradise:to:8ome7
3ut- agai!- are these three versio!s o the gap eNualM 9s !ot the letist versio! to be privileged-
i!soar as it is the o!ly o!e to 8o!8eive the gap !ot o!ly as struggle but as a! imma!e!t a!tago!ism or
dis8ord 8o!stitutive o the so8ial dime!sio! itselM This mea!s that here- too- 6e should posit the
8oi!8ide!8e o opposites+ the gap is visible Jas su8hK o!ly rom the sta!dpoi!t o e?treme letist
e!gageme!t7 9s this paralla? gap- this e?treme 8oi!8ide!8e o opposites @pure orm a!d the 8o!ti!ge!t
material e?8ess 6hi8h gives body to it- 6ave a!d parti8le i! Nua!tum physi8s- u!iversality a!d ull
partisa! e!gageme!t- et87- up to a!d i!8ludi!g idelity to a u!iversal Dause a!d i!timate loveA- the
dead:poi!t o the Jdiale8ti8 i! suspe!seK @as 3e!jami! put itA- a 8ase o pure J8o!tradi8tio!K @or- rather-
a!ti!omyA 6hi8h !o diale8ti8al mediatio! or re8o!8iliatio! 8a! over8omeM The paralla? gap is- o! the
8o!trary- the very form of the %reconciliation' of opposites+ o!e simply has to re8og!iUe the gap7
)!iversality is Jre8o!8iledK 6ith partisa! politi8al e!gageme!t i! the guise o the e!gageme!t 6hi8h
sta!ds or u!iversality @the! proletaria! ema!8ipatory e!gageme!tAT pure orm is Jre8o!8iledK 6ith its
8o!te!t i! the guise o the ormless e?8ess o 8o!te!t 6hi8h sta!ds or orm as su8hT or- i! =egelIs
politi8al visio!- the u!iversal Fatio!al State is Jre8o!8iledK 6ith parti8ular 8o!te!t i! the guise o the
,o!ar8h- 6hose legitimiUatio! is simulta!eously purely symboli8 @his titleA a!d Jirratio!alK
@biologi8al+ his birth alo!e justiies his bei!g a mo!ar8hA7
/e should reje8t here the 8ommo!:se!se vie6 a88ordi!g to 6hi8h- by dispelli!g all
mystii8atio!s a!d illusio!s- psy8hoa!alysis makes us a6are o 6hat 6e truly are- 6hat 6e really 6a!t-
a!d thus leaves us at the threshold o a truly ree de8isio! !o lo!ger depe!de!t o! sel:delusio!7 .a8a!
himsel seems to e!dorse this vie6 6he! he 8laims that Ji- perhaps- the a!alysis makes us ready or
the moral a8tio!- it ultimately leaves us at its doorK+ Jthe ethi8al limits o the a!alysis 8oi!8ide 6ith the
limits o its pra?is7 This pra?is is o!ly a prelude to a moral a8tio! as su8h7K
2
=o6ever- does !ot .a8a!
outli!e here a ki!d o political suspension of the ethicalM H!8e 6e be8ome a6are o the radi8al
8o!ti!ge!8y o our a8ts- the moral a8t i! its oppositio! to the politi8al be8omes impossible- si!8e every
a8t i!volves a de8isio! grou!ded o!ly i! itsel- a de8isio! 6hi8h is- as su8h a!d i! the most eleme!tary
se!se- politi8al7 Freud himsel is here too hasty+ he opposes artii8ial 8ro6ds @the 8hur8h- the armyA a!d
JregressiveK primary 8ro6ds- like a 6ild mob e!gaged i! passio!ate 8olle8tive viole!8e @ly!8hi!g-
pogromsA7 Furthermore- rom his liberal perspe8tive- the rea8tio!ary ly!8h mob a!d the letist
revolutio!ary 8ro6d are treated as libidi!ally ide!ti8al- i!volvi!g the same u!leashi!g o the
destru8tive or u!bi!di!g death drive7
"
9t appears as though- or Freud- the JregressiveK primary 8ro6d-
e?emplarily operative i! the destru8tive viole!8e o a mob- is the Uero:level o the u!bi!di!g o a so8ial
li!k- the so8ial Jdeath driveK at its purest7
The theologi8al impli8atio!s o this viole!8e are u!e?pe8tedly ar:rea8hi!g+ 6hat i the ultimate
addressee o the bibli8al 8omma!dme!t JGo !ot killK is 1od @2ehovahA himsel- a!d 6e ragile huma!s
are his !eighbors e?posed to divi!e rageM =o6 ote!- i! the Hld Testame!t- do 6e e!8ou!ter 1od as a
dark stra!ger 6ho brutally i!trudes i!to huma! lives a!d so6s destru8tio!M /he! .evi!as 6rote that
our irst rea8tio! to a !eighbor is to kill him- 6as he !ot implyi!g that this origi!ally reers to 1odIs
relatio!ship to huma!s- so that the 8omma!dme!t JGo !ot killK is a! appeal to 1od to 8o!trol his rageM
9!soar as the 2e6ish solutio! is a dead 1od- a 1od 6ho survives o!ly i! the Jdead letterK o the sa8red
book- o the .a6 to be i!terpreted- 6hat dies 6ith the death o 1od is pre8isely the 1od o the Feal- o
destru8tive ury a!d reve!ge7 That ote! stated 8laimE1od died i! Aus8h6itUEthus has to be
i!verted+ 1od 8ame alive i! Aus8h6itU7 Fe8all the story rom the Talmud about t6o rabbis debati!g a
theologi8al poi!t+ the o!e losi!g the debate 8alls upo! 1od himsel to i!terve!e a!d de8ide the issue-
but 6he! 1od duly arrives- the other rabbi tells him that si!8e his 6ork o 8reatio! is already
a88omplished- he !o6 has !othi!g to say a!d should leave- 6hi8h 1od the! does7 9t is as i- i!
Aus8h6itU- 1od 8ame ba8k- 6ith 8atastrophi8 8o!seNue!8es7 The true horror does !ot o88ur 6he! 6e
are aba!do!ed by 1od- but 6he! 1od gets too 8lose to us7
/e should add to this Freudia! positio! at least three poi!ts7 First- Freud ails to 8learly
disti!guish bet6ee! the 8hur8h:model a!d the army:model o the artii8ial 8ro6d+ 6hile the J8hur8hK
sta!ds or the hierar8hi8al so8ial order 6hi8h tries to mai!tai! pea8e a!d eNuilibrium by maki!g
!e8essary 8ompromises- the JarmyK sta!ds or a! egalitaria! 8olle8tive dei!ed !ot by its i!ter!al
hierar8hy but by its oppositio! to a! e!emy 6hi8h is out to destroy itEradi8al ema!8ipatory
moveme!ts are al6ays modeled o! the army- !ot the 8hur8h- a!d mille!aria! 8hur8hes are really
stru8tured like armies7 Se8o!d- JregressiveK primary 8ro6ds do !ot 8ome irst- they are !ot the
J!aturalK ou!datio! or the rise o Jartii8ialK 8ro6ds+ they 8ome afterwards- as a ki!d o obs8e!e
suppleme!t that sustai!s the Jartii8ialK 8ro6d- thus relati!g to the latter like the superego to the
symboli8 .a67 /hile the symboli8 .a6 dema!ds obedie!8e- the superego provides the obs8e!e
e!joyme!t 6hi8h atta8hes us to the .a67 .ast but !ot least- is the 6ild mob really the Uero:level o the
u!bi!di!g o a so8ial li!kM 9s it !ot rather a pa!i8ky reaction to the gap or i!8o!siste!8y that 8uts
a8ross a so8ial edii8eM The viole!8e o the mob is by dei!itio! dire8ted at the obje8t @misAper8eived as
the e?ter!al 8ause o the gap @the 2e6s- e?emplarilyA- as i the destru8tio! o that obje8t 6ill abolish the
gap7
So- agai!- 6hat are the politi8al 8o!seNue!8es o asserti!g this gapM There are three basi8
optio!s7 First- there is the liberal optio! esse!tially advo8ated by Freud himsel+ the gap mea!s that 6e
should !ot ully ide!tiy 6ith a!y positive politi8al proje8t- but retai! a mi!imal dista!8e to6ards them
all- si!8e politi8s is as su8h the domai! o the ,aster:Sig!iier a!d o symboli8 a!d>or imagi!ary
ide!tii8atio!s7 The!- there is the 8o!servative optio!+ agai!st the eter!al threat o destru8tive
J!egativity-K it is all the more !e8essary to impose o!to so8ial lie a stri8t order based o! a ,aster:
Sig!iier7 Fi!ally- there is a Trotskyist:GeleuUia! letist versio!+ true radi8al politi8s is a matter o
Jperma!e!t revolutio!-K o persisti!g i! perma!e!t sel:revolutio!iUi!g- 6ithout allo6i!g this lu? to
stabiliUe itsel i!to a !e6 positive order7 /ith .a8a! a!d politi8s- it is thus the same as 6ith =egel+
there are three mai! i!terpretatio!s- the 8o!servative @emphasiUi!g the symboli8 authority as a sine <ua
non o the so8ial orderA- the letist @usi!g .a8a! or the 8ritiNue o patriar8hal ideology a!d pra8ti8eA-
a!d the 8y!i8ally permissive liberal versio! @to ea8h his or her o6! 1ouissanceA7 This liberal
i!terpretatio! parti8ipates i! the short:8ir8uit bet6ee! o!tology a!d politi8s typi8al o postmoder!
thought+ radi8al letist politi8s is reje8ted as Jmetaphysi8al-K as imposi!g o! so8ial lie a u!iversal
metaphysi8al visio!- as strivi!g or a totally sel:tra!spare!t a!d regulated so8iety- a!d- si!8e lie
resists the 8o!strai!ts o a!y su8h ideologi8al straight:ja8ket- this politi8s !e8essarily e!ds i!
totalitaria! terror7 Su8h a politi8al sta!8e is very 8omortable+ 6hile legitimiUi!g a pragmati8 politi8s
6ithout risks- it is able to prese!t its 8y!i8al liberalism as the most radi8al:8riti8al positio!7
So 6hi8h o these three optio!s is the 8orre8t o!eM The irst should be reje8ted as taki!g the
easy 6ay out- 8laimi!g that the Nuestio! itsel is 6ro!g+ there is !o JtrueK or J8orre8tK versio!- the
8hoi8e is u!de8idable- ope!7 3ut- agai!- 6hi8h o the three is the 8orre8t optio!M The a!s6er is- o
8ourse- the ourth7 9! other 6ords- as 6e have already see!- 6e should reje8t the presuppositio! shared
by all three7 9! a properly =egelia! 6ay- the disti!8tio! bet6ee! the Uero:level o the empty pla8e a!d
its illi!g:up 6ith a positive proje8t must be reje8ted as alse+ the Uero:level is !ever Jthere-K it 8a! be
e?perie!8ed o!ly retroa8tively- as the pre:suppositio! o a !e6 politi8al i!terve!tio!- o imposi!g a
!e6 order7 The Nuestio! is thus the =egelia! o!e o a positive order 6hose positivity gives body to the
!egativity by a88omplishi!g it7
For the earlier .a8a!- both the ethi8s o symboli8 realiUatio! a!d the ethi8s o 8o!ro!ti!g the
Feal Thi!g 8all or the heroi8 sta!8e o pushi!g thi!gs to the limit i! order to leave behi!d our
everyday 6erfallenheit- our alle! e?iste!8e @o!e must Jsubje8tiviUe o!eIs o6! deathK by 8asti!g o
the 6ealth o imagi!ary ide!tii8atio!s- thereby attai!i!g the limit:positio! o a pure subje8t 6ithout a!
egoT o!e must viole!tly tra!sgress the very limit o the symboli8 order- heroi8ally 8o!ro!ti!g the
da!gerous 3eyo!d o the Feal Thi!gA7 Fe!ou!8i!g this radi8alism- the later .a8a! re:8o!8eives
psy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t i! a mu8h more modest 6ay+ Jo!e does !ot !eed to lear! all o the truth7 A
little bit is sui8ie!t7K
(
=ere the very idea o psy8hoa!alysis as a radi8al Jlimit e?perie!8eK is reje8ted+
JH!e should !ot push a! a!alysis too ar7 /he! the patie!t thi!ks he is happy to live- it is e!ough7K
#

=o6 ar 6e are here rom A!tigo!eIs heroi8 attempt to attai! the Jpure desireK by e!teri!g the
prohibited domai! o ateR Csy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t is !o6 !o lo!ger a radi8al tra!sormatio! o
subje8tivity- but a lo8al pat8hi!g:up 6hi8h does !ot eve! leave a!y lo!g:term tra8es7 @Alo!g these
li!es- .a8a! dra6s atte!tio! to the !egle8ted a8t that- 6he! Freud met the Fat:ma! agai!- years ater
his treatme!t- the latter had totally orgotte! about his a!alysis7A This more modest approa8h 6as ully
arti8ulated i! 2a8Nues:Alai! ,illerIs readi!g 6hi8h o8uses o! late .a8a!+ i! his last semi!ars- .a8a!
leaves behi!d the !otio! o Jtraversi!g the a!tasyK as the 8o!8ludi!g mome!t o the psy8hoa!alyti8
pro8essT i! its pla8e he i!trodu8es the opposite gesture o a88epti!g the ultimate !o!:a!alyUable
obsta8le 8alled the sinthome7 9 the symptom is a ormatio! o the u!8o!s8ious to be dissolved through
i!terpretatio!- the sinthome is the Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h resists i!terpretatio! a!d i!terpretive
dissolutio!- a mi!imal igure or !ode 6hi8h 8o!de!ses the subje8tIs u!iNue mode o e!joyme!t7 The
goal o a!alysis is thus reormulated as Jide!tii8atio! 6ith the symptomK+ i!stead o dissolvi!g his
u!iNue sinthome- the subje8t should be8ome a6are o it a!d lear! ho6 to use it- ho6 to deal 6ith it-
i!stead o allo6i!g the sinthome to determi!e him behi!d his ba8k+

The a!alyti8 e?perie!8e e!ables us to re:appropriate our desire7 9! the best 8ase- o!e 8a! thus hope to
arrive at J6a!ti!g 6hat o!e desiresK a!d Jdesiri!g 6hat o!e 6a!ts7K 9 the e?perie!8e is brought to its
8o!8lusio!- it allo6s us to ide!tiy ourselves 6ith our Ji!8urableK+ !ot o!ly to i!d o!esel i! it- but to
make use o it7
'
Through this ide!tii8atio!- the oppositio! o mea!i!g a!d e!joyme!t is also over8ome i! their
Jsy!thesis-K that o 1ouis*sens @e!joy:mea!t- e!joyi!g the se!seA+ the subje8t is !ot redu8ed to a! idioti8
autisti8 e!joyme!t- s>he 8o!ti!ues to speak- but his>her talk !o6 u!8tio!s as a play 6ith sembla!8es- as
a! empty blah:blah:blah 6hi8h ge!erates e!joyme!t7 This 6ould be .a8a!Is versio! o eppur si muove+
eve! ater 6e have see! through imagi!ary a!d symboli8 sembla!8es- the game goes o! i! the guise o
the 8ir8ulatio! o 1ouis*sens- the subje8t is !ot dissolved i! the abyss o the Feal7
Felyi!g o! this !e6 !otio! o the i!al mome!t o the a!alyti8 pro8ess- ,iller deploys a
simpliied versio! o the J8ritiNue o i!strume!tal reaso!-K establishi!g a li!k bet6ee! demo8rati8
8ulture a!d ra8ism+ our era privileges the u!iversaliUi!g s8ie!tii8 ratio!ality 6hi8h admits o!ly
mathemati8ally Nua!tiied stateme!ts 6hose truth:value does !ot depe!d o! a! idiosy!8rati8 subje8tive
positio!T i! this se!se- both u!iversalism a!d egalitaria!:demo8rati8 passio! are the results o the
hegemo!y o the s8ie!tii8 dis8ourse7 3ut i 6e e?te!d the validity o s8ie!tii8 reaso! i!to the so8ial
ield- the results are da!gerous+ u!iversaliUi!g passio! pushes us to sear8h or a u!iversal mode o
e!joyme!t that 6ill be best or all- so those 6ho resist it are disNualiied as Jbarbaria!sK+ JGue to the
progress o s8ie!8e- ra8ism has thus a bright uture7 The more rei!ed dis8rimi!atio!s provided by
s8ie!8e 6e have- the more segregatio! i! so8iety 6e get7K
$
This is 6hy psy8hoa!alysis is u!der su8h
atta8k today+ it o8uses o! the u!iNue!ess o ea8h subje8tIs mode o e!joyme!t- a u!iNue!ess 6hi8h
resists s8ie!tii8 u!iversaliUatio! as 6ell as demo8rati8 egalitaria!ism+ JGemo8rati8 leveli!g may be
very !i8e- but it does!It repla8e the eroti8ism o e?8eptio!7K
&
H!e has to 8o!8ede that ,iller has earlessly spelt out the politi8al impli8atio!s o this
i!siste!8e o! the u!iNue!ess o the subje8tIs mode o e!joyme!t+ psy8hoa!alysis Jreveals so8ial ideals
i! their !ature o sembla!8es- a!d 6e 8a! add- o sembla!8es 6ith regard to a real 6hi8h is the real o
e!joyme!t7 This is the 8y!i8al positio!- 6hi8h resides i! sayi!g that e!joyme!t is the only thing that is
true7K
%
/hat this mea!s is that a psy8hoa!alyst

o88upies the positio! o a! iro!ist 6ho takes 8are !ot to i!terve!e i!to the politi8al ield7 =e a8ts so that
sembla!8es remai! at their pla8es 6hile maki!g sure that the subje8ts u!der his 8are do !ot take them
as real O o!e should someho6 bri!g o!esel to remai! ta"en in by them @ooled by themA7 .a8a! 8ould
say that Jthose 6ho are !ot take! i! errK+ i o!e does!It a8t as i sembla!8es are real- i o!e does!It
leave their ei8a8y u!disturbed- thi!gs take a tur! or the 6orse7 Those 6ho thi!k that all sig!s o
po6er are mere sembla!8es a!d rely o! the arbitrari!ess o the dis8ourse o the master are the bad
boys+ they are eve! more alie!ated7
10
9! relatio! to politi8s the!- a psy8hoa!alyst thus Jdoes!It propose proje8ts- he 8a!!ot propose
them- he 8a! o!ly mo8k the proje8ts o others- 6hi8h limits the s8ope o his stateme!ts7 The iro!ist has
!o great desig!- he 6aits or the other to speak irst a!d the! bri!gs about his all as ast as possible O
.et us say this is politi8al 6isdom- !othi!g more7K
11
The a?iom o this J6isdomK is that

o!e should prote8t the sembla!8es o po6er or the good reaso! that o!e should be able to 8o!ti!ue to
en1oy7 The poi!t is !ot to atta8h o!esel to the sembla!8es o the e?isti!g po6er- but to 8o!sider them
!e8essary7 JThis dei!es a 8y!i8ism i! the mode o Voltaire 6ho let it be u!derstood that 1od is our
i!ve!tio! 6hi8h is !e8essary to mai!tai! people i! a proper de8orum7K So8iety is kept together o!ly by
sembla!8es- J6hi8h mea!s+ there is !o so8iety 6ithout repressio!- 6ithout ide!tii8atio!- a!d above all
6ithout routi!e7 Fouti!e is esse!tial7K
12
The result is thus a ki!d o 8y!i8al liberal 8o!servatism+ i! order to mai!tai! stability- o!e has
to respe8t a!d ollo6 routi!es established by a 8hoi8e 6hi8h is

al6ays arbitrary a!d authoritaria!7 JThere is !o progressivism 6hi8h holds-K but rather a parti8ular ki!d
o hedo!ism 8alled Jliberalism o e!joyme!t7K H!e has to mai!tai! i!ta8t the routi!e o the citA- its
la6s a!d traditio!s- a!d a88ept that a ki!d o obs8ura!tism is !e8essary i! order to mai!tai! so8ial
order7 JThere are Nuestio!s o!e should!It ask7 9 you tur! the so8ial turtle o! its ba8k- you 6ill !ever
su88eed i! tur!i!g it ba8k o!to its pa6s7K
1"
Agai!st ,illerIs 8y!i8al:hedo!ist idea o a subje8t 6ho- 6hile admitti!g the !e8essity o
symboli8 sembla!8es @ideals- ,aster:Sig!iiers- 6ithout 6hi8h a!y so8iety 6ould all apartA- relates to
them at a dista!8e- a6are that they are sembla!8es a!d that the o!ly Feal is that o bodily 1ouissance-
6e should emphasiUe that su8h a sta!8e o Je!joy a!d let others e!joyK 6ould be possible o!ly i! a !e6
8ommu!ist order 6hi8h has ope!ed up the ield or authe!ti8 idiosy!8rasies+

a )topia o misits a!d oddballs- i! 6hi8h the 8o!strai!ts or u!iormiUatio! a!d 8o!ormity have bee!
removed- a!d huma! bei!gs gro6 6ild like pla!ts i! a state o !ature O !o lo!ger ettered by the
8o!strai!ts o a !o6 oppressive so8iality- [they\ blossom i!to the !euroti8s- 8ompulsives- obsessives-
para!oids a!d s8hiUophre!i8s- 6hom our so8iety 8o!siders si8k but 6ho- i! a 6orld o true reedom-
may make up the lora a!d au!a o Jhuma! !atureK itsel7
1(
As 6e have see!- ,iller is o 8ourse 8riti8al o the sta!dardiUatio! o e!joyme!t dema!ded by
the market to sell 8ommodities- but his obje8tio! remai!s at the level o sta!dard 8ultural 8ritiNueT
moreover- he ig!ores the spe8ii8 so8io:symboli8 8o!ditio!s or su8h a thrivi!g o idiosy!8rasies7 As
6as !oted lo!g ago- 8apitalism is marked by a 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! ideologi8al i!dividualism @the
i!terpellatio! o i!dividuals as subje8ts ree to ollo6 their u!iNue desiresA a!d the leveli!g pressures o
the market- imposi!g sta!dardiUed modes o e!joyme!t as a 8o!ditio! o the 8ommodii8atio! o mass
8o!sumptio! @6hile 6e are e!8ouraged to i!dulge i! our idiosy!8rasies- the media bombard us 6ith
ideals a!d paradigms o how to do thisA7 Dommu!ism is i! this se!se !ot a urther leveled do6!
Jso8ialiUatio!K 6hi8h 8urtails i!dividual idiosy!8rasies- but a so8ial re8o!stru8tio! 6hi8h 8reates the
spa8e or their ree deployme!t7 Tra8es o this are ou!d eve! i! literary a!d =olly6ood utopias o a
so8ial spa8e subtra8ted rom 8ommodii8atio!- rom the houses i! 6hi8h a group o e88e!tri8s d6ell i!
some o Gi8ke!sIs !ovels- to the 8raUy large amily house i! Fra!k DapraIs :ou ,ant -a"e It with :ou
6hose i!habita!ts i!8lude 0ssie Darmi8hael @6ho makes 8a!dy as a hobby a!d dreams o bei!g a
balleri!aA- Caul Sy8amore @a ti!kerer 6ho ma!ua8tures ire6orks i! the baseme!tA- ,r7 GeCi!a @6ho
visited to speak to Caul eight years previously a!d has !ever letA- 0d Darmi8hael @a! amateur pri!ter
6ho pri!ts a!ythi!g that sou!ds good to him- i!8ludi!g di!!er me!us or his amily a!d little Nuotes
that he pla8es i! the bo?es o 0ssieIs 8a!dyA- a!d 3oris *ole!khov @a Fussia! very 8o!8er!ed 6ith
6orld politi8sT he is opi!io!ated a!d ote! loudly de8lares that somethi!g Jsti!ksKA7
At a more theoreti8al level- 6e should problematiUe ,illerIs @a!d- maybe- i o!e a88epts his
readi!g- the late .a8a!IsA rather 8rude !omi!alist oppositio! bet6ee! the si!gularity o the Feal o
1ouissance a!d the e!velope o symboli8 sembla!8es7 /hat gets lost here is the great i!sight o .a8a!Is
Seminar ;; ?Encore@+ that the status o 1ouissance itsel is i! a 6ay that o a redoubled sembla!8e- a
sembla!8e 6ithi! sembla!8e7 Couissance does !ot e?ist i! itsel- it simply i!sists as a remai!der or
produ8t o the symboli8 pro8ess- o its imma!e!t i!8o!siste!8ies a!d a!tago!ismsT i! other 6ords-
symboli8 sembla!8es are !ot sembla!8es 6ith regard to some irm substa!tial Feal:i!:itsel- this Feal
is @as .a8a! himsel ormulated itA dis8er!ible o!ly through impasses o symboliUatio!7
From this perspe8tive- a! e!tirely diere!t readi!g o .a8a!Is les non*dupes errent imposes
itsel7 9 6e ollo6 ,illerIs readi!g based o! the oppositio! bet6ee! symboli8 sembla!8es a!d the Feal
o e!joyme!t- les non*dupes errent amou!ts the 8y!i8al old sa6 that- although our values- ideals- rules-
et87- are just sembla!8es- 6e should !ot u!dermi!e them but a8t as i they 6ere real i! order to preve!t
the so8ial abri8 rom disi!tegrati!g7 3ut rom a properly .a8a!ia! sta!dpoi!t- les non*dupes errent
mea!s almost the e?a8t opposite+ the true illusio! 8o!sists !ot i! taki!g symboli8 sembla!8es as real-
but i! substa!tialiUi!g the Feal itsel- i! taki!g the Feal as a substa!tial 9!:itsel a!d redu8i!g the
symboli8 to a mere te?ture o sembla!8es7 9! other 6ords- those 6ho err are pre8isely those 8y!i8s 6ho
dismiss the symboli8 te?ture as a mere sembla!8e a!d are bli!d to its ei8a8y- to the 6ay the symboli8
ae8ts the Feal- to the 6ay 6e 8a! i!terve!e i!to the Feal through the symboli87 9deology does !ot
reside primarily i! taki!g seriously the !et6ork o symboli8 sembla!8es 6hi8h e!8ir8le the hard 8ore o
1ouissanceT at a more u!dame!tal level- ideology is the 8y!i8al dismissal o these sembla!8es as Jmere
sembla!8esK 6ith regard to the Feal o 1ouissance7
/e should push o! to the e!d here a!d also apply this logi8 to the topi8 o the primordial 8rime
6hi8h ou!ds every po6erE2oseph de ,aistre is amo!g those 6ho 8learly ormulated this highest
a!ti:0!lighte!me!t a?iom+ JThere are mysterious la6s 6hi8h it is !ot good to reveal- 6hi8h should be
8overed by a religious sile!8e a!d revered as a mystery7K
1#
A!d he makes it 8lear 6hi8h mystery i!
parti8ular he has i! mi!d+ the mystery o the sa8rii8e- o the ei8a8y o the sa8rii8eEho6 is it that the
i!i!itely good 1od dema!ds blood sa8rii8es- that these sa8rii8es 8a! also be a8hieved by substitutio!
@sa8rii8i!g a!imals i!stead o huma! 8ulpritsA- a!d that the most ee8tive sa8rii8e is the o!e i! 6hi8h
the i!!o8e!t volu!tarily oers to spill his blood or the guiltyM 4o 6o!der de ,aistreIs booklet is
stra!gely pres8ie!t o Fe!L 1irard a!d his moti o Jthi!gs 6hi8h are hidde! rom the begi!!i!g o the
6orld7K =ere- ho6ever- 6e should resist the alse as8i!atio!+ 6hat the la6 ultimately hides is that
there is nothing to hide- that there is !o terriyi!g mystery sustai!i!g it @eve! i the mystery is that o a
horrible ou!di!g 8rime or some other orm o radi8al 0vilA- that the la6 is grou!ded o!ly i! its o6!
tautology7
The most radi8al 8riti8al a!alysis o the Jmystery o sa8rii8eK as a u!dame!tal ideologi8al
8ategory is i! a8t provided by 2ea!:Cierre Gupuy7 Although the Joi8ialK topi8 o GupuyIs -he Mar"
of the Sacred is the li!k bet6ee! sa8rii8e a!d the sa8red- its true o8us is the ultimate mystery o the
so:8alled huma! or so8ial s8ie!8es- that o the origi!s o 6hat .a8a! 8alls the Jbig Hther-K 6hat =egel
8alled Je?ter!aliUatio!K @Ent=usserungA- 6hat ,ar? 8alled Jalie!atio!-K a!dE6hy !otME6hat
Friedri8h vo! =ayek 8alled Jsel:tra!s8e!de!8eK+ ho6- out o the i!tera8tio! o i!dividuals- 8a! the
appeara!8e o a! Jobje8tive orderK arrive 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to that i!tera8tio!- but is
e?perie!8ed by the i!dividuals i!volved as a substa!tial age!8y 6hi8h determi!es their livesM
1'
9t is all
too easy to Ju!maskK su8h a Jsubsta!8e-K to sho6- by mea!s o a phe!ome!ologi8al ge!esis- ho6 it
gradually be8omes JreiiedK a!d sedime!ted+ the problem is that the presuppositio! o su8h a spe8tral
or virtual substa!8e is i! a 6ay 8o:substa!tial 6ith bei!g:huma!Ethose 6ho are u!able to relate to it
as su8h- those 6ho dire8tly subje8tiviUe it- are 8alled psy8hoti8s7
GupuyIs great theoreti8al breakthrough is to li!k this emerge!8e o the Jbig HtherK to the
8omple? logi8 o the sa8rii8e 8o!stitutive o the dime!sio! o the sa8red- that is- to the rise o the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! the sa8red a!d the proa!e+ through the sa8rii8e- the big Hther- the tra!s8e!de!t
age!8y 6hi8h sets limits to our a8tivity- is sustai!ed7 The third li!k i! this 8hai! is hierar8hy+ the
ultimate u!8tio! o sa8rii8e is to legitimiUe a!d e!a8t a hierar8hi8al order @6hi8h 6orks o!ly i it is
supported by some igure o the tra!s8e!de!t big HtherA7 9t is here that the irst properly dialectical
t6ist i! GupuyIs li!e o argume!tatio! o88urs+ relyi!g o! .ouis Gumo!tIs 0omo 0ierarchicus- he
e?plai!s ho6 hierar8hy implies !ot o!ly a hierar8hi8al order- but also its imma!e!t loop or reversal+
true- the so8ial spa8e is divided i!to higher a!d lo6er hierar8hi8al levels- but within the lower level! the
lower is higher than the higher7
1$
A! e?ample is provided by the relatio!ship bet6ee! Dhur8h a!d
State i! Dhristia!ity+ i! pri!8iple- o 8ourse- the Dhur8h is above the StateT ho6ever- as thi!kers rom
Augusti!e to =egel made 8lear- within the secular order of the State! the State is above the ,hurch @i!
other 6ords the Dhur8h as a social institution should be subordi!ated to the StateAEi it is !ot- i the
Dhur8h 6a!ts dire8tly to rule also as a se8ular po6er- the! it be8omes u!avoidably 8orrupted rom
6ithi!- redu8i!g itsel to just a!other se8ular po6er usi!g its religious tea8hi!g as the ideology to
justiy its se8ular rule7
1&
GupuyIs !e?t- eve! more 8ru8ial move is to ormulate this t6ist i! the logi8 o hierar8hy i!
terms o the !egative sel:relatio!ship bet6ee! the u!iversal a!d the parti8ular- bet6ee! the All a!d its
parts- that is- o a pro8ess i! the 8ourse o 6hi8h the u!iversal e!8ou!ters itsel amo!g its spe8ies i! the
guise o its Joppositio!al determi!atio!7K To retur! to our e?ample+ the Dhur8h is the e!8ompassi!g
u!ity o all huma! lives- sta!di!g or its highest authority a!d 8o!erri!g o! all its parts their proper
pla8e i! the great hierar8hi8al order o the u!iverseT ho6ever- it e!8ou!ters itsel as a subordi!ate
eleme!t o the terrestrial State po6er 6hi8h is i! pri!8iple subordi!ated to it+ the Dhur8h as a so8ial
i!stitutio! is prote8ted by a!d has to obey the la6s o the State7 9!soar as the higher a!d the lo6er also
relate here as the 1ood a!d the 0vil @the good divi!e domai! versus the terrestrial sphere o po6er
struggles- egotisti8al i!terests- the sear8h or pleasure- et87A- o!e 8a! also say that- through this loop or
t6ist imma!e!t to hierar8hy- the JhigherK 1ood domi!ates- 8o!trols- a!d uses the Jlo6erK 0vil- eve! i
it may appear- superi8ially @to a gaUe 8o!strai!ed by the terrestrial perspe8tiveA- that religio! 6ith its
prete!se to o88upyi!g a JhigherK pla8e is just a! ideologi8al legitimiUatio! o Jlo6erK i!terests @or
e?ample- that the Dhur8h ultimately just legitimiUes so8ially hierar8hi8al relatio!sA- that religio!
se8retly pulls the stri!gs as the hidde! po6er 6hi8h allo6s a!d mobiliUes 0vil or the larger 1ood7 H!e
is almost tempted to use the term Joverdetermi!atio!K here+ although it is the se8ular po6er 6hi8h
immediately plays the determi!i!g role- this role is itsel overdetermi!ed by the religious>sa8red All7
1%

=o6 are 6e to read this 8omple? sel:relati!g e!t6i!eme!t o the JhigherK a!d the Jlo6erKM There are
t6o mai! alter!atives- 6hi8h pere8tly it the oppositio! bet6ee! idealism a!d materialism+
@1A The traditio!al theologi8al @pseudo:A=egelia! matri? o 8o!tai!i!g the pharma"on+ the
higher all:embra8i!g All allo6s the lo6er 0vil- but 8o!tai!s it- maki!g it serve the higher goal7 There
are ma!y igures o this matri?+ the @pseudo:A=egelia! JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K @Feaso! is the u!ity o
itsel a!d parti8ular egotisti8al passio!s- mobiliUi!g the latter to a8hieve its se8ret goal o u!iversal
ratio!alityAT ,ar?Is histori8al pro8ess i! 6hi8h viole!8e serves progressT the Ji!visible ha!dK o the
market 6hi8h mobiliUes i!dividual egoism or the 8ommo! good a!d so o!7
@2A A more radi8al @a!d truly =egelia!A !otio! o 0vil 6hi8h disti!guishes itsel rom itsel by
6ay o e?ter!aliUi!g itsel i! a tra!s8e!de!t igure o the 1ood7 From this perspe8tive- ar rom 0vil
bei!g e!8ompassed as a subordi!ated mome!t- the diere!8e bet6ee! 1ood a!d 0vil is i!here!t to
0vil- 1ood is !othi!g but u!iversaliUed 0vil- 0vil is itsel the u!ity o itsel a!d 1ood7 0vil 8o!trols or
8o!tai!s itsel by ge!erati!g a spe8ter o tra!s8e!de!t 1oodT ho6ever- it 8a! o!ly do this by
supersedi!g its Jordi!aryK mode o 0vil i! a! i!i!itiUed or absolutiUed 0vil7 This is 6hy the sel:
8o!tai!i!g o 0vil through the positi!g o some tra!s8e!de!t po6er 6hi8h limits it 8a! al6ays e?plodeT
this is 6hy =egel has to admit a! e?8ess o !egativity 6hi8h al6ays threate!s to disturb the ratio!al
order7 All the talk about the Jmaterialist reversalK o =egel- about the te!sio! bet6ee! the JidealistK
a!d the JmaterialistK =egel- is poi!tless i it is !ot grou!ded i! pre8isely this topi8 o the t6o opposed
a!d 8o!li8ti!g 6ays o readi!g the !egative sel:relati!g o u!iversality7
This sel:rele8ted i!versio! o hierar8hy is 6hat disti!guishes Feaso! rom )!dersta!di!g+
6hile the ideal o )!dersta!di!g is a simple a!d 8learly arti8ulated hierar8hy- Feaso! suppleme!ts it
6ith a! i!versio! o! a88ou!t o 6hi8h- as Gupuy puts it- 6ithi! the lo6er level o a hierar8hy- the
lo6er sta!ds higher tha! the higher7 As 6e have see!- priests @or philosophersA sta!d higher tha! brutal
se8ular po6er- but 6ithi! the domai! o po6er- they are subordi!ated to itEthe gap that allo6s or this
reversal is 8ru8ial or the u!8tio!i!g o po6er- 6hi8h is 6hy the Clato!i8 dream o u!iyi!g the t6o
aspe8ts i! the igure o the philosopher:ki!g @realiUed o!ly 6ith Stali!A has to ail miserably7
20
The
same poi!t 8a! also be put i! the terms o the metaphor o 0vil as a stai! i! the pi8ture+ i- i! traditio!al
teleology- 0vil is a stai! legitimiUed by the overall harmo!y- 8o!tributi!g to it- the!- rom a materialist
sta!dpoi!t- the 1ood itsel is a sel:orga!iUatio! or sel:limitatio! o stai!s- the result o a limit- a
Jmi!imal diere!8e-K 6ithi! the ield o 0vil7 This is 6hy mome!ts o 8risis are so da!gerousEi!
them- the obs8ure obverse o the tra!s8e!de!t 1ood- the Jdark side o 1od-K the viole!8e 6hi8h
sustai!s the very 8o!tai!me!t o viole!8e- appears as su8h+ J/e believed that the good rules over the
evil- its Jopposite-K but it appears !o6 that it is rather the evil 6hi8h rules over itsel by assumi!g a
dista!8e to6ards itsel- by positi!g itsel outside itselT thus Vsel:e?ter!aliUed-I the superior level
appears as good7K
21
GupuyIs poi!t is that the sa8red is- as to its 8o!te!t- the same as the terrible or
0vilT their diere!8e is purely ormal or stru8turalE6hat makes the sa8red Jsa8redK is its e?orbita!t
8hara8ter- 6hi8h makes it a limitatio! o Jordi!aryK evil7 To see this- 6e should !ot o!ly o8us o!
religious prohibitio!s a!d obligatio!s- but also bear i! mi!d the rituals pra8ti8ed by a religio!- a!d the
8o!tradi8tio!- already !oted by =egel- bet6ee! prohibitio!s a!d rituals+ JHte!- the ritual 8o!sists i!
stagi!g the violatio! o O prohibitio!s a!d violatio!s7K
22
The sa8red is !othi!g but our o6! viole!8e-
but Je?pelled- e?ter!aliUed- hypostasiUed7K
2"
The sa8red sa8rii8e to the gods is the same as a! a8t o
murderE6hat makes it sa8red is the a8t that it limits or 8o!tai!s viole!8e- i!8ludi!g murder- i!
ordi!ary lie7 9! those mome!ts 6he! the sa8red alls i!to 8risis- this disti!8tio! disi!tegrates+ there is
!o sa8red e?8eptio!- a sa8rii8e is per8eived as a simple murderEbut this also mea!s that there is
!othi!g- !o e?ter!al limit- to 8o!tai! our ordi!ary viole!8e7
Therei! resides the ethi8al dilemma Dhristia!ity tries to resolve+ ho6 to 8o!tai! viole!8e
6ithout sa8rii8ial e?8eptio!- 6ithout a! e?ter!al limit7 Follo6i!g Fe!L 1irard- Gupuy demo!strates
ho6 Dhristia!ity stages the same sa8rii8ial pro8ess- but 6ith a 8ru8ially diere!t 8og!itive spi!+ the
story is !ot told by the 8olle8tive stagi!g the sa8rii8e- but by the vi8tim- rom the sta!dpoi!t o the
vi8tim 6hose ull i!!o8e!8e is thereby asserted7 @The irst step to6ards this reversal 8a! already be
dis8er!ed i! the 3ook o 2ob- 6here the story is told rom the perspe8tive o the i!!o8e!t vi8tim o
divi!e 6rath7A H!8e the i!!o8e!8e o the sa8rii8ial vi8tim is "nown- the ei8a8y o the e!tire sa8rii8ial
me8ha!ism o s8apegoati!g is u!dermi!ed+ sa8rii8es @eve! o the mag!itude o a holo8austA be8ome
hypo8riti8al- i!operative- ake- but 6e also lose the 8o!tai!me!t o viole!8e e!a8ted by the sa8rii8e+
JDo!8er!i!g Dhristia!ity- it is !ot a morality but a! epistemology+ it says the truth about the sa8red-
a!d thereby deprives it o its 8reative po6er- or better or or 6orse7 =uma!s alo!e de8ide o! this7K
2(

Therei! lies the 6orld:histori8al rupture e!a8ted by Dhristia!ity+ now we "now- a!d 6e 8a! !o lo!ger
prete!d that 6e do!It k!o67 As 6e have see!- the impa8t o this k!o6ledge o!e 8a!!ot get rid o o!8e
it has bee! gai!ed is !ot o!ly liberati!g- but deeply ambiguous+ it also deprives so8iety o the
stabiliUi!g role o s8apegoati!g a!d thus ope!s up the spa8e or a viole!8e !ot 8o!tai!ed by a!y mythi8
limit7 This is ho6- i! a truly per8eptive i!sight- Gupuy reads the s8a!dalous li!es rom ,atthe6+ JGo
!ot thi!k that 9 8ame to bri!g pea8e o! the earthT 9 did !ot 8ome to bri!g pea8e- but a s6ordK @,atthe6
10+"(A7 A!d the same logi8 holds or i!ter!atio!al relatio!s+ ar rom maki!g viole!t 8o!li8ts
impossible- the abolitio! o sovereig! states a!d the establishme!t o a si!gle 6orld state or po6er
6ould rather ope! up the ield or !e6 orms o viole!8e 6ithi! the J6orld empire-K 6ith !o sovereig!
state to set limits to it+ JFar rom guara!teei!g eter!al pea8e- the 8osmopolita! ideal 6ould rather be the
avorable 8o!ditio! or limitless viole!8e7K
2#
The role o 8o!ti!ge!8y is 8ru8ial here+ o!8e the ei8a8y o the tra!s8e!de!t Hther is suspe!ded
a!d the pro8ess @o de8isio!A has to be 8o!ro!ted i! its 8o!ti!ge!8y- the problem o the post:sa8red
6orld is that this 8o!ti!ge!8y 8a!!ot be ully assumed- a!d so has to be sustai!ed by 6hat .a8a! 8alled
le peu du rAel- a little pie8e o the 8o!ti!ge!t Feal 6hi8h a8ts as la rAponse du rAel- the Ja!s6er o the
Feal7K =egel 6as deeply a6are o this parado? 6he! he opposed a!8ie!t demo8ra8y to moder!
mo!ar8hy+ it 6as pre8isely be8ause the a!8ie!t 1reeks did !ot have a igure o pure subje8tivity @a
ki!gA at the summit o their state edii8e that they !eeded to resort to JsuperstitiousK pra8ti8esEsu8h as
looki!g or sig!s i! the light:paths o birds or i! the e!trails o a!imalsEto guide the polis i! maki!g
8ru8ial de8isio!s7 9t 6as 8lear to =egel that the moder! 6orld 8a!!ot dispe!se 6ith this 8o!ti!ge!t Feal
a!d orga!iUe so8ial lie o!ly through 8hoi8es a!d de8isio!s based o! Jobje8tiveK Nualii8atio!s @the
illusio! o 6hat .a8a! later 8alled the dis8ourse o the )!iversityA+ there is al6ays some aspe8t o ritual
i!volved i! bei!g i!vested 6ith a title- eve! i the 8o!erri!g o the title ollo6s automati8ally rom
8ertai! Jobje8tiveK 8riteria havi!g bee! met7 A sema!ti8 a!alysis o- or e?ample- 6hat Jpassi!g o!eIs
e?ams 6ith the highest gradesK mea!s- 8a!!ot be redu8ed to Jprovi!g that o!e has 8ertai! a8tual
propertiesEk!o6ledge- skills- et87KT to all this- a ritual must be added by mea!s o 6hi8h the results o
the e?am are pro8laimed a!d the grade is 8o!erred a!d a8k!o6ledged7 As 6e sa6 earlier- there is
al6ays a mi!imal gap- a dista!8e- bet6ee! these t6o levels+ eve! i 9 am absolutely sure that 9 have
a!s6ered all the e?am Nuestio!s 8orre8tly- there has to be somethi!g 8o!ti!ge!tEa mome!t o
surprise- the thrill o the u!e?pe8tedEi! the a!!ou!8eme!t o the results- 6hi8h is 6hy- 6he! 6aiti!g
or the a!!ou!8eme!t- 6e 8a!!ot ever ully es8ape the a!?iety o e?pe8tatio!7 Take politi8al ele8tio!s+
eve! i the result is k!o6! i! adva!8e- its publi8 pro8lamatio! is a!ti8ipated 6ith e?8iteme!tEi!deed-
to make somethi!g i!to Fate- 8o!ti!ge!8y is !eeded7 This is 6hat- as a rule- 8riti8s o the 6idespread
pro8edures o Jevaluatio!K miss+ 6hat makes evaluatio! problemati8 is !ot the a8t that it redu8es
u!iNue subje8ts 6ith a 6ealth o i!!er e?perie!8e to a set o Nua!tiiable properties- but that it tries to
redu8e the symboli8 a8t o i!vestiture @the i!vesti!g o a subje8t 6ith a titleA to a pro8edure totally
grou!ded i! the k!o6ledge a!d measureme!t o 6hat the subje8t i! Nuestio! Jreally is7K
Viole!8e threate!s to e?plode !ot 6he! there is too mu8h 8o!ti!ge!8y i! the so8ial spa8e- but
6he! o!e tries to elimi!ate this 8o!ti!ge!8y7 9s it at this level that 6e should look or 6hat o!e might
8all- i! rather bla!d terms- the so8ial u!8tio! o hierar8hyM Gupuy here makes yet a!other u!e?pe8ted
tur!- 8o!8eivi!g hierar8hy as o!e o the our pro8edures @Jsymboli8 dispositifsKA 6hose u!8tio! it is to
make the relatio!ship o superiority !o!:humiliati!g or those subordi!ated+ hierarchy
itselT
2'
demystificationT
2$
contingencyT
2&
a!d comple&ity7
2%
Do!trary to appeara!8es- these
me8ha!isms do !ot 8o!test or threate! hierar8hy- but make it palatable- si!8e J6hat triggers the turmoil
o e!vy is the idea that the other deserves his good lu8k a!d !ot the opposite idea 6hi8h is the o!ly o!e
that 8a! be ope!ly e?pressed7K
"0
From this premise- Gupuy dra6s the 8o!8lusio! that it 6ould be a
great mistake to thi!k that a so8iety 6hi8h is just a!d 6hi8h also per8eives itsel as just 6ill thereby be
ree o all rese!tme!tEo! the 8o!trary- it is pre8isely i! su8h a so8iety that those 6ho o88upy i!erior
positio!s 6ill o!ly i!d a! outlet or their hurt pride i! viole!t outbursts o rese!tme!t7
The sta!dard obje8tio! to utilitaria!ism is that it 8a!!ot really a88ou!t or the ull a!d
u!8o!ditio!al ethi8al 8ommitme!t to the 1ood+ its ethi8s is o!ly a ki!d o Jpa8t o the 6olvesK i!
6hi8h i!dividuals obey ethi8al rules i!soar as this suits their i!terests7 The truth is e?a8tly the
opposite+ egotism or the 8o!8er! or o!eIs 6ell:bei!g is not opposed to the 8ommo! 1ood- si!8e
altruisti8 !orms 8a! easily be dedu8ed rom egotisti8 8o!8er!s7
"1
9!dividualism versus
8ommu!itaria!ism- utilitaria!ism versus the assertio! o u!iversal !orms- are false oppositio!s- si!8e
the t6o opposed optio!s amou!t to the same i! their results7 Do!servative @Datholi8 a!d otherA 8riti8s
6ho 8omplai! ho6- i! todayIs hedo!isti8:egotisti8al so8iety- true values have disappeared totally miss
the poi!t7 The true opposite o egotisti8al sel:love is !ot altruism- a 8o!8er! or the 8ommo! 1ood- but
e!vy or ressentiment- 6hi8h makes me a8t against my o6! i!terests+ evil e!ters i! 6he! 9 preer the
misortu!e o my !eighbor to my o6! ortu!e- so that 9 am ready to suer mysel just to make sure that
my !eighbor 6ill suer more7 This e?8ess o e!vy lies at the basis o FousseauIs 6ell:k!o6!- but
!o!etheless !ot ully e?ploited- disti!8tio! bet6ee! egotism- amour*de*soi @that love o the sel 6hi8h
is !aturalA- a!d amour*propre- the perverted preere!8e o o!esel to others i! 6hi8h a perso! o8uses
!ot o! a8hievi!g a goal- but o! destroyi!g the obsta8le to it+

The primitive passio!s- 6hi8h all dire8tly te!d to6ards our happi!ess- make us deal o!ly 6ith obje8ts
6hi8h relate to them- a!d 6hose pri!8iple is o!ly amour:de:soi- are all i! their esse!8e lovable a!d
te!derT ho6ever- 6he!- diverted from their ob1ects by obstacles! they are more occupied with the
obstacle they try to get rid of! than with the ob1ect they try to reach! they 8ha!ge their !ature a!d
be8ome iras8ible a!d hateul7 This is ho6 amour:de:soi- 6hi8h is a !oble a!d absolute eeli!g- be8omes
amour:propre- that is to say- a relative eeli!g by mea!s o 6hi8h o!e 8ompares o!esel- a eeli!g
6hi8h dema!ds preere!8es- whose en1oyment is purely negative and which does not strive to find
satisfaction in our own well*being! but only in the misfortune of others7
"2
A! evil perso! is thus not a! egotist- Jthi!ki!g o!ly about his o6! i!terests7K A true egotist is
too busy taki!g 8are o his o6! good to have time to 8ause misortu!e to others7 The primary vi8e o a
bad perso! is pre8isely that he is more preo88upied 6ith others tha! 6ith himsel7 Fousseau is
des8ribi!g a pre8ise libidi!al me8ha!ism+ the i!versio! 6hi8h ge!erates the shit o the libidi!al
i!vestme!t rom the obje8t to the obsta8le itsel7
""
=ere is 6hy egalitaria!ism itsel should !ever be
a88epted at a8e value+ the !otio! @a!d pra8ti8eA o egalitaria! justi8e- i!soar as it is sustai!ed by e!vy-
relies o! a! i!versio! o the sta!dard re!u!8iatio! u!dertake! or the be!eit o others+ J9 am ready to
re!ou!8e it- so that others 6ill @alsoA not @be able toA have itRK Far rom bei!g opposed to the spirit o
sa8rii8e- 0vil here emerges as the very spirit o sa8rii8e- a readi!ess to ig!ore o!eIs o6! 6ell:
bei!gEi- through my sa8rii8e- 9 8a! deprive the Hther o his en1oyment7
True 0vil thus makes us a8t against our o6! i!terestsEor- to put it i! 3adiouIs terms- 6hat
i!terrupts the lie o the egotist:utilitaria! Jhuma! a!imalK is !ot a! e!8ou!ter 6ith the eter!al Clato!i8
9dea o the 1ood- but the e!8ou!ter 6ith a igure o 0vil- a!dEas .a8a! argued i! his semi!ar o! the
ethi8s o psy8hoa!alysis- J1ood is a mask o 0vil-K the 6ay or 0vil to be re:!ormaliUed or
domesti8ated7 /e should thus i!vert 3adiouIs !otio! o 0vil as se8o!dary 6ith regard to the 1ood- as a
betrayal o the idelity to a! 0ve!t- as a ailure o 1ood+ 0vil 8omes irst- i! the guise o a brutal
i!trusio! 6hi8h disturbs the lo6 o our a!imal lie7
3a8k to Gupuy+ his limitatio! is 8learly dis8er!ible i! his reje8tio! o 8lass struggle as
determi!ed by this logi8 o e!vious viole!8e+ 8lass struggle is or him the e?emplary 8ase o 6hat
Fousseau 8alled perverted sel:love- i! 6hi8h o!e 8ares more or the destru8tio! o the e!emy @6hi8h is
per8eived as the obsta8le to my happi!essA tha! or o!eIs o6! happi!ess7 GupuyIs o!ly 6ay out is to
aba!do! the logi8 o vi8timhood a!d a88ept !egotiatio!s bet6ee! all parties 8o!8er!ed- treated as eNual
i! their dig!ity+ JThe tra!sormatio! o the 8o!li8ts bet6ee! so8ial 8lasses- bet6ee! 8apital a!d labor-
i! the 8ourse o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury amply demo!strates that this path is !ot utopia!7 /e
progressively passed rom the 8lass struggle to so8ial 8oordi!atio!- the rhetori8 o vi8timhood 6as
mostly repla8ed by 6age !egotiatio!s7 From !o6 o!- bosses a!d trade u!io! orga!iUatio!s vie6 ea8h
other as part!ers 6ith i!terests 6hi8h are simulta!eously diverge!t a!d 8o!verge!t7K
"(
3ut is this
really the o!ly possible 8o!8lusio! rom GupuyIs premisesM Goes !ot su8h a repla8eme!t o struggle
by !egotiatio! also rely o! a magi8al disappeara!8e o e!vy- 6hi8h the! stages a surprisi!g 8omeba8k
i! the orm o diere!t u!dame!talismsM
Furthermore- 6e stumble here upo! a!other ambiguity+ it is !ot that this abse!8e o limits
should be read i! terms o the sta!dard alter!ative Jeither huma!ity 6ill i!d a 6ay to set itsel limits or
it 6ill perish rom its o6! u!8o!tai!ed viole!8e7K 9 there is a lesso! to be lear!ed rom the so:8alled
Jtotalitaria!K e?perie!8e- it is that the temptatio! is e?a8tly the opposite+ the da!ger o imposi!g- i! the
abse!8e o a!y divi!e limit- a new pseudo:limit- a ake tra!s8e!de!8e o! behal o 6hi8h 9 a8t @rom
Stali!ism to religious u!dame!talismA7 0ve! e8ology u!8tio!s as ideology the mome!t it is evoked as
a !e6 .imit+ it has every 8ha!8e o developi!g i!to the predomi!a!t orm o the ideology o global
8apitalism- a !e6 opium or the masses repla8i!g the de8li!i!g religio!-
"#
taki!g over the old latterIs
u!dame!tal u!8tio!- that o assumi!g a! u!Nuestio!able authority 6hi8h 8a! impose limits7 The
lesso! this e8ology 8o!sta!tly hammers i!to us is our i!itude+ 6e are !ot Dartesia! subje8ts e?tra8ted
rom reality- 6e are i!ite bei!gs embedded i! a bio:sphere 6hi8h vastly e?8eeds our o6! horiUo!s7 9!
our e?ploitatio! o !atural resour8es- 6e are borro6i!g rom the uture- a!d he!8e should treat the
0arth 6ith respe8t- as somethi!g ultimately Sa8red- somethi!g that should !ot be u!veiled totally- that
should a!d 6ill orever remai! a ,ystery- a po6er 6e should lear! to trust- !ot domi!ate7
Agai!st su8h temptatio!s- o!e should i!sist that the sine <ua non o a really radi8al e8ology is
the public use of reason @i! the *a!tia! se!se- as opposed to the Jprivate useK 8o!strai!ed i! adva!8e
by state a!d other i!stitutio!sA7 A88ordi!g to a! Asso8iated Cress report rom ,ay 1%- 2011- the
Dhi!ese authorities have !o6 admitted that the Three 1orges Gam- 6hi8h 8reated a (10:mile:lo!g
reservoir- the 6orldIs largest hydroele8tri8 proje8t- has 8aused a sle6 o urge!t e!viro!me!tal-
geologi8al- a!d e8o!omi8 problems7 They eve! !o6 admit that illi!g the reservoir has i!8reased the
reNue!8y o earthNuakes7 Amo!g the mai! problems are 6idespread 8o!tami!atio! o 5a!gtUe
tributaries a!d lakes 6ith 8opper- Ui!8- lead- a!d ammo!ium7 Furthermore- be8ause the dam blo8ked
the ree lo6 o 6ater o! 5a!gtUe- Dhi!aIs biggest 6atershed- it made the drought 6hi8h hit Dhi!a i!
the summer o 2011 mu8h 6orse+ 8rops 6ithered a!d the lo6 ebb alo!g ma!y rivers has ae8ted
hydroele8tri8 pla!ts- 8ompou!di!g 6idespread po6er shortages7 Fi!ally- mu8h o Dhi!aIs i!dustry a!d
i!la!d shippi!g depe!d o! the 5a!gtUe- but shippi!g is stalled at some poi!ts do6!stream rom the
dam be8ause o the lo6 6ater level7 Although the authorities have !o6 a!!ou!8ed major pla!s to deal
6ith the problems- it is 8lear that most o them 6ere 8aused by oi8ial pressures 6hi8h obstru8ted the
Jpubli8 use o reaso!K+ !o o!e 8a! !o6 say J6e did!It k!o6-K si!8e the problems had all bee!
predi8ted by i!depe!de!t s8ie!tists a!d 8ivi8 groups7
3ut is !ot the *a!tia! 8ouple o the publi8 versus the private use o reaso! a88ompa!ied by
6hat- i! more 8o!temporary terms- 6e 8ould 8all the suspe!sio! o the symboli8 ei8a8y @or
perormative po6erA o the publi8 use o reaso!M *a!t does !ot reje8t the sta!dard ormula o
obedie!8e JGo!It thi!k- obeyRK 6ith its dire8t Jrevolutio!aryK opposite JGo!It just obey @ollo6 6hat
others are telli!g youA- thi!k @or yourselARKT his ormula is JThi!k a!d obeyRK that is- thi!k publi8ly
@i! the ree use o reaso!A a!d obey privately @as part o the hierar8hi8al ma8hi!ery o po6erA7 9! short-
thi!ki!g reely does !ot legitimate my just doi!g a!ythi!gEthe most 9 8a! do 6he! my Jpubli8 use o
reaso!K leads me to see the 6eak!esses a!d i!justi8es o the e?isti!g order is to appeal to the ruler or
reorms7 H!e 8a! go eve! a step urther here a!d 8laim- 6ith Dhesterto!- that the abstra8t:i!8o!siste!t
reedom to thi!k @a!d doubtA a8tively preve!ts a8tual reedom+

/e may say broadly that ree thought is the best o all the saeguards agai!st reedom7 ,a!aged i! a
moder! style the ema!8ipatio! o the slaveIs mi!d is the best 6ay o preve!ti!g the ema!8ipatio! o
the slave7 Tea8h him to 6orry about 6hether he 6a!ts to be ree- a!d he 6ill !ot ree himsel7
"'
3ut is the subtra8tio! o thi!ki!g rom a8ti!g- the suspe!sio! o its ei8a8y- really as 8lear a!d
u!eNuivo8al as thatM 9s !ot *a!tIs se8ret strategy @i!te!ded or !otA like the 6ell:k!o6! tri8k employed
i! 8ourt battles- 6he! a la6yer makes a stateme!t i! ro!t o the jury 6hi8h he k!o6s the judge 6ill
i!d i!admissible a!d order the jury to Jig!oreKE6hi8h- o 8ourse- is impossible- si!8e the damage has
already bee! do!e7 9s !ot the suspe!sio! o ei8a8y i! the publi8 use o reaso! also a subtra8tio! 6hi8h
ope!s up a pla8e or some !e6 so8ial pra8ti8eM 9t is too easy to poi!t out the obvious diere!8e
bet6ee! the *a!tia! publi8 use o reaso! a!d ,ar?ist revolutio!ary 8lass 8o!s8ious!ess+ the irst is
!eutral or dise!gaged- the se8o!d is JpartialK a!d ully e!gaged7 =o6ever- the Jproletaria! positio!K
8a! be dei!ed pre8isely as that poi!t at 6hi8h the publi8 use o reaso! be8omes pra8ti8al:ee8tive i!
itsel 6ithout regressi!g i!to the Jpriva8yK o the private use o reaso!- si!8e the positio! rom 6hi8h it
is e?er8ised is that o the Jpart o !o:partK o the so8ial body- its e?8ess 6hi8h dire8tly sta!ds or
u!iversality7 /hat happe!s 6ith the Stali!ist redu8tio! o the ,ar?ist theory to the status o a serva!t
o the Carty:State is pre8isely the redu8tio! o the publi8 to the private use o reaso!7
9t is ashio!able- i! some o todayIs !eo:paga! Jpost:se8ularK 8ir8les- to airm the dime!sio! o
the Sa8red as a spa8e i! 6hi8h every religio! d6ells but 6hi8h is prior to religio! @there 8a! be the
Sa8red 6ithout religio!- but !ot the other 6ay rou!dA7 @Sometimes- this priority o the Sa8red is eve!
give! a! a!ti:religious spi!- as a 6ay to remai! ag!osti8 6hile !o!etheless e!gaged i! deep spiritual
e?perie!8e7A Follo6i!g Gupuy- 6e should reverse matters here+ the radi8al break i!trodu8ed by
Dhristia!ity 8o!sists i! the a8t that it is the irst religio! without the sa8red- a religio! 6hose u!iNue
a8hieveme!t is pre8isely to demystiy the Sa8red7
/hat pra8ti8al sta!8e ollo6s rom this parado? o religio! 6ithout the sa8redM There is a
2e6ish story about a Talmud spe8ialist opposed to the death pe!alty 6ho- embarrassed by the a8t that
the pe!alty 6as ordai!ed by 1od himsel- proposed a 6o!derully pra8ti8al solutio!+ !ot to overtur! the
divi!e i!ju!8tio! dire8tly- 6hi8h 6ould be blasphemous- but to treat it as 1odIs slip o the to!gue- his
mome!t o mad!ess- a!d i!ve!t a 8omple? !et6ork o sub:regulatio!s a!d 8o!ditio!s 6hi8h- 6hile
leavi!g the possibility o the death pe!alty i!ta8t- e!sure that it 6ill !ever be a8tually realiUed7
"$
The
beauty o this pro8edure is that it i!verts the sta!dard pro8edure o prohibiti!g somethi!g i! pri!8iple
@like tortureA- but the! slippi!g i! e!ough Nualii8atio!s @Je?8ept i! spe8iied e?treme 8ir8umsta!8es
OKA to e!sure that it 8a! be do!e 6he!ever o!e really 6a!ts to do it7 9t is thus either J9! pri!8iple- yes-
but i! pra8ti8e- !everK or J9! pri!8iple- !o- but 6he! e?8eptio!al 8ir8umsta!8es dema!d it- yes7K 4ote
the asymmetry bet6ee! the t6o 8ases+ the prohibitio! is mu8h stro!ger 6he! o!e allo6s torture i!
pri!8ipleEi! the irst 8ase- the pri!8ipled JyesK is never allo6ed to realiUe itsel- 6hile i! the other
8ase- the pri!8ipled J!oK is e&ceptionally allo6ed to realiUe itsel7 9!soar as the J1od 6ho e!joi!s us
to killK is o!e o the !ames o the apo8alypti8 Thi!g- the strategy o the Talmud s8holar is a 6ay o
pra8ti8i!g 6hat Gupuy 8alls Je!lighte!ed 8atastrophismK+ o!e a88epts the i!al 8atastropheEthe
obs8e!ity o people killi!g their !eighbors i! the !ame o justi8eEas i!evitable- 6ritte! i!to our
desti!y- a!d o!e e!gages i! postpo!i!g it or as lo!g as possible- hopeully i!dei!itely7 =ere is ho6-
alo!g these li!es- Gupuy sums up 1Y!ther A!dersIs rele8tio!s apropos =iroshima+

H! that day history be8ame Jobsolete7K =uma!ity be8ame able to destroy itsel- a!d !othi!g 8a! make
it lose this J!egative om!ipote!8e-K eve! a global disarmame!t or a total de!u8leariUatio! o the 6orld7
-he apocalypse is inscribed as a destiny in our future! and the best we can do is delay its occurrence
indefinitelyF /e are i! e?8ess7 H! August 1%(# 6e e!tered the era o the JreeUeK a!d o the Jse8o!d
deathK o all that e?isted+ si!8e the mea!i!g o the past depe!ds o! uture a8ts- the be8omi!g:obsolete
o the uture- its programmed e!di!g- does !ot mea! that the past !o lo!ger has a!y mea!i!g- it mea!s
that it !ever had a!y mea!i!g7
"&
9t is agai!st this ba8kgrou!d that 6e should read the basi8 Cauli!ia! !otio! o livi!g i! a!
Japo8alypti8 time-K a Jtime at the e!d o timeK+ the apo8alypti8 time is pre8isely the time o su8h a!
i!dei!ite postpo!eme!t- the time o reeUe i!:bet6ee! t6o deaths+ i! some se!se- 6e are already dead-
si!8e the 8atastrophe is already here- 8asti!g its shado6 rom the utureEater =iroshima- 6e 8a! !o
lo!ger play the simple huma!ist game o i!sisti!g that 6e have a 8hoi8e @J9t depe!ds o! us 6hether 6e
ollo6 the path o sel:destru8tio! or the path o gradual heali!gKAT o!8e su8h a 8atastrophe has
happe!ed- 6e lose the i!!o8e!8e o su8h a positio!- 6e 8a! o!ly @i!dei!itely- maybeA postpo!e its
reo88urre!8e7
"%
This is ho6- i! yet a!other herme!euti8 8oup- Gupuy reads DhristIs skepti8al 6ords
agai!st the prophets o doom+

As he 6e!t out o the temple- o!e o his dis8iples said to him- JTea8her- see 6hat ki!d o sto!es a!d
6hat ki!d o buildi!gsRK 2esus said to him- JGo you see these great buildi!gsM There 6ill !ot be let
here o!e sto!e o! a!other- 6hi8h 6ill !ot be thro6! do6!7K As he sat o! the ,ou!t o Hlives opposite
the temple- Ceter- 2ames- 2oh!- a!d A!dre6 asked him privately- JTell us- 6he! 6ill these thi!gs beM
/hat is the sig! that these thi!gs are all about to be ulilledMK 2esus- a!s6eri!g- bega! to tell them-
J3e 8areul that !o o!e leads you astray7 For ma!y 6ill 8ome i! my !ame- sayi!g- V9 am heRI a!d 6ill
lead ma!y astray7 /he! you hear o 6ars a!d rumors o 6ars- do!It be troubled7 For those must
happe!- but the e!d is !ot yet O The! i a!yo!e tells you- V.ook- here is the DhristRI or- V.ook- thereRI
do!It believe it7 For there 6ill arise alse Dhrists a!d alse prophets- a!d they 6ill sho6 sig!s a!d
6o!ders- that they may lead astray- i possible- eve! the 8hose! o!es7 3ut you 6at8h7K @,ark 1"+1X2"A
These li!es are treme!dous i! their u!e?pe8ted 6isdom+ do they !ot e?a8tly 8orrespo!d to the
sta!8e o the above:me!tio!ed Talmudi8 s8holarM Their message is+ yes- o 8ourse- there 6ill be a
8atastrophe- but 6at8h patie!tly- do!It believe it- do!It su88umb to hasty e?trapolatio!s- do!It i!dulge
yoursel i! the properly perverse pleasure o thi!ki!g JThis is itRK i! all its diverse orms @global
6armi!g 6ill dro6! us all i! a de8adeT bioge!eti8s 6ill mea! the e!d o bei!g:huma!T 6e are
approa8hi!g a so8iety o total digital 8o!trolT a!d so o! a!d so orthA7 Far rom luri!g us i!to su8h a
sel:destru8tive- perverse rapture- adopti!g the properly apo8alypti8 sta!8e isEtoday more tha!
everEthe o!ly 6ay to keep a 8ool head7 /hat gives this !eed to mai!tai! sobriety a! additio!al se!se
o urge!8y is the 8o!temporary predomi!a!8e o a 8y!i8al ideology 6hi8h seems to 8o!dem! every
8ritiNue to pra8ti8al irreleva!8e7 The irratio!ality o 8apitalist ratio!alism- the 8ou!ter:produ8tivity o
its a88elerated produ8tivism- are 6ell k!o6!- havi!g bee! a!alyUed i! detail !ot o!ly by the Fra!kurt
S8hool authors a!d lo!ers like 9va! 9lli8h- but also by !umerous 8riti8s i! the great ideologi8o:8riti8al
6ave 6hi8h a88ompa!ied the upheavals o the 1%'0s7 /he! the same topi8 is resus8itated today- i! our
8y!i8al times- it is !ot just i! order to retur! to the past- but rather to add a 8ru8ial rele?ive t6ist+

/hat is !e6 a!d diere!t today is pre8isely the a8t that- thirty years later- 6e k!o6 that the
"nowledge we already possessed 6as i! !o 6ay sui8ie!t to make us 8ha!ge our behavior7 This a8t is
!ot a mi!or detail- it 8o!stitutes a key eleme!t o the problem7 9! the 1%'0s a!d V$0s- it 6as simpler to
believe that a!other 6orld 6as possible7 This is 6hy these years 8o!ti!ue to i!spire so mu8h !ostalgia7
Guri!g this epo8h- o!e 8ould still imagi!e that 6ar!i!gs based o! the prese!t situatio! 8ould i!lue!8e
the uture i! a positive 6ay7 Today- 6e k!o6 it- the uture is !ot 6hat it 6as7
(0
Therei! lies the basi8 lesso! o the ailure o traditio!al Ideologie*5riti"+ k!o6i!g is !ot
e!ough- o!e 8a! k!o6 6hat o!e is doi!g a!d still go ahead a!d do it7 The reaso! is that su8h
k!o6ledge operates u!der the 8o!ditio! o its etishisti8 disavo6al+ o!e k!o6s- but o!e does !ot really
believe 6hat o!e k!o6s7 This i!sight led Gupuy to propose a radi8al solutio!+ si!8e o!e believes o!ly
6he! the 8atastrophe has really o88urred @by 6hi8h time it is too late to a8tA- o!e must proje8t o!esel
i!to the atermath o the 8atastrophe- 8o!er o! the 8atastrophe the reality o somethi!g 6hi8h has
already take! pla8e7 /e all k!o6 the ta8ti8al move o taki!g a step ba8k i! order to jump urther aheadT
Gupuy tur!s this pro8edure arou!d+ o!e has to jump ahead i!to the atermath o the 8atastrophe i! order
to be able to step ba8k rom the bri!k7
(1
9! other 6ords- 6e must assume the 8atastrophe as our
desti!y7 9! our ordi!ary lives- 6e pursue our i!dividual goals a!d ig!ore the Jdesti!yK i! 6hi8h 6e
parti8ipate i! this 6ay+ the 8atastrophi8 Ji?ed poi!tK 6hi8h appears as e?ter!al desti!y- although it is
6e ourselves 6ho bri!g it about through our a8tivity+ JGesti!y is here this e?teriority 6hi8h is !ot
e?terior- si!8e the age!ts themselves proje8t it out o their system+ this is 6hy it is appropriate to talk
about auto:e?ter!aliUatio! or auto:tra!s8e!de!8e7K
(2
1iorgio Agambe!Is !ame @take! rom Fou8aultA or 6hat Gupuy 8alls Jsel:tra!s8e!di!g o
so8ietyK is the dispositif- a!d it is striki!g ho6 Agambe! also li!ked it to the topi8 o the sa8red-
although- i! 8o!trast to Gupuy- 6ith a! a88e!t o! proa!atio!7 Agambe! poi!ted out the li!k bet6ee!
the Fou8auldia! dispositif a!d the you!g =egelIs !otio! o JpositivityK as the substa!tial so8ial order
imposed o! the subje8t a!d e?perie!8ed by it as e?ter!al ate- !ot as a! orga!i8 part o itsel7 As su8h-
the dispositif is the matri? o gover!ability+ it is Jthat i! a!d through 6hi8h a pure a8tivity o gover!i!g
6ithout a!y ou!datio! i! bei!g realiUes itsel7 9t is or this reaso! that dispositifs al6ays have to imply
a pro8ess o subje8tivatio!7 They have to produ8e their subje8t7K
("
The o!tologi8al presuppositio! o
su8h a !otio! o dispositif is Ja ge!eral a!d massive partitio! o bei!g i!to t6o large sets or 8lasses+ o!
the o!e ha!d- the livi!g bei!gs @or substa!8esA- o! the other ha!d- the dispositis 6ithi! 6hi8h the
livi!g bei!gs !ever 8ease to be 8aught7K
((
There is a series o 8omple? e8hoes bet6ee! this !otio! o a dispositif- AlthusserIs !otio! o
9deologi8al State Apparatuses a!d ideologi8al i!terpellatio!- a!d .a8a!Is !otio! o the Jbig HtherK+
Fou8ault- Althusser- a!d .a8a! i!sist o! the 8ru8ial ambiguity o the term the Jsubje8tK @as both ree
age!t a!d as subje8t to po6erAEthe subje8t Nua ree age!t emerges through its subje8tio! to the
dispositif>9SA>Jbig Hther7K As Agambe! poi!ts out- Jdesubje8tivatio!K @Jalie!atio!KA a!d
subje8tivatio! are thus the t6o sides o the same 8oi!+ it is the very desubje8tivatio! o a livi!g bei!g-
its subordi!atio! to a dispositif- 6hi8h subje8tiviUes it7 /he! Althusser 8laims that ideology
i!terpellates i!dividuals i!to subje8ts- Ji!dividualsK sta!d here or the livi!g bei!gs o! 6hi8h a
dispositif o 9SAs 6orks- imposi!g o! them a !et6ork o mi8ro:pra8ti8es- 6hile the Jsubje8tK is not a
8ategory o livi!g bei!g- o substa!8e- but the result o these livi!g bei!gs bei!g 8aught i! a! 9SA
dispositif @or i! a symboli8 orderA7
(#
/here Althusser alls short is i! his disappoi!ti!g a!d mispla8ed
i!siste!8e o! the JmaterialityK o the 9SA+ the primordial orm o dispositif- the Jbig HtherK o the
symboli8 i!stitutio!- is pre8isely immaterial- a virtual orderEas su8h- it is the 8orrelative o the subje8t
as disti!8t rom the i!dividual Nua livi!g bei!g7 4either the subje8t !or the dispositif o the big Hther
are 8ategories o substa!tial bei!g7 H!e 8a! pere8tly 6ell tra!slate these 8oordi!ates i!to .a8a!Is
matri? o the dis8ourse o the )!iversity+ homo sacer- the subje8t redu8ed to bare lie- is- i! terms o
.a8a!Is theory o dis8ourses- the ob1et a- the JotherK o the )!iversity dis8ourse 6orked upo! by the
dispositif o k!o6ledge7 Da! 6e the! say that Agambe! i!verts .a8a!+ that- or him- it is the )!iversity
dis8ourse 6hi8h is the truth o the ,asterIs dis8ourseM The Jprodu8tK o the )!iversity dis8ourse is b-
the subje8tEthe dispositif @the !et6ork o S
2
- o k!o6ledgeA 6orks o! the bare lie o the i!dividual-
e!ge!deri!g out o it the subje8t7 Today- ho6ever- 6e are 6it!essi!g a radi8al 8ha!ge i! the 6orki!g o
this me8ha!ismEAgambe! dei!es our 8o!temporary post:politi8al or bio:politi8al era as a so8iety i!
6hi8h multiple dispositifs desubje8tiviUe i!dividuals 6ithout produ8i!g a !e6 subje8tivity- 6ithout
subje8tiviUi!g them+

From here 8omes the e8lipse o politi8s 6hi8h supposed real subje8ts or ide!tities @6orkersI moveme!t-
bourgeoisie- et87A a!d the triumph o e8o!omy- that is to say- o the pure a8tivity o gover!i!g 6hi8h
pursues o!ly its o6! reprodu8tio!7 The Fight a!d the .et 6hi8h today ollo6 ea8h other i! ma!agi!g
po6er have thus very little to do 6ith the politi8al 8o!te?t rom 6hi8h the terms 6hi8h desig!ate them
origi!ate7 Today these terms simply !ame the t6o poles @the o!e 6hi8h targets 6ithout a!y s8ruples the
desubje8tivatio! a!d the o!e 6hi8h 6a!ts to 8over it up 6ith the hypo8riti8al mask o the good 8itiUe!
o demo8ra8yA o the same ma8hi!e o gover!me!t7
('
J3io:politi8sK desig!ates this 8o!stellatio! i! 6hi8h dispositifs !o lo!ger ge!erate subje8ts
@Ji!terpellate i!dividuals i!to subje8tsKA- but merely admi!ister a!d regulate i!dividualsI bare lieEi!
bio:politi8s- 6e are all pote!tially redu8ed to homini sacri7
($
The out8ome o this redu8tio!- ho6ever-
i!volves a! u!e?pe8ted t6istEAgambe! dra6s atte!tio! to the a8t that the i!oe!sive desubje8tiviUed
8itiUe! o post:i!dustrial demo8ra8ies- 6ho i! !o 6ay opposes the hegemo!i8 dispositifs but Uealously
e?e8utes all their i!ju!8tio!s a!d is thus 8o!trolled by them eve! i! the most i!timate details o his or
her lie- is J!o!etheless @a!d perhaps or this very reaso!A 8o!sidered as a pote!tial terroristK+
(&
J9! the
eyes o the authority @a!d- perhaps- the authority is right i! thisA- !othi!g resembles a terrorist more
tha! a! ordi!ary ma!7K
(%
The more the ordi!ary ma! is 8o!trolled by 8ameras- by digital s8a!!i!g- by
data 8olle8tio!- the more he appears as a! i!s8rutable- u!:gover!able d 6hi8h subtra8ts itsel rom the
dispositifs the more it obeys them 6ith do8ility7 9t is !ot that it poses a threat to the ma8hi!e o
gover!me!t by a8tively resisti!g it+ its very passivity suspe!ds the perormative ei8a8y o the
dispositifs- maki!g their ma8hi!e Jru! o! empty-K tur!i!g it i!to a sel:parody 6hi8h serves !othi!g7
=o6 8a! this happe!M /hat is the e?a8t status o this dM To eradi8ate the proou!d ambiguity o
Agambe!Is a88ou!t- 6e should apply here the .a8a!ia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! the subje8t @bA a!d
subje8tivatio!+ the d that emerges 6he! a dispositif totally desubje8tiviUes a! i!dividual is that o the
subje8t itsel- the u!athomable void that o!tologi8ally pre8edes subje8tiviUatio! @the rise o the Ji!!er
lieK o sel:e?perie!8eA7
Agambe! ormulates the problem i! terms o proa!atio!+ the !otio! o dispositif has its origi!
i! theology- li!ked the 1reek oi"onomia- 6hi8h- i! early Dhristia!ity- related !ot to 1od i! himsel- but
to 1odIs relatio! to the 6orld @o huma!sA- to ho6 1od admi!isters his ki!gdom7 @9! radi8al =egelia!
theology- this disti!8tio! va!ishes+ 1od is nothing but the Je8o!omyK o his relati!g to the 6orld7A A
dispositif is thus al6ays mi!imally sa8red+ 6he! a livi!g bei!g is 8aught i! a dispositif- it is by
dei!itio! dis:appropriated7 The pra8ti8es by mea!s o 6hi8h it parti8ipates i! a!d is regulated by a
dispositif are separated rom their J8ommo! useK by livi!g bei!gs+ bei!g 8aught i! a dispositif- a livi!g
bei!g serves the sa8red big Hther7 This is 6here proa!atio! 8omes i! as a 8ou!ter:strategy+ JThe
problem o proa!atio! o dispositifs @that is to say- o the restitutio! to the 8ommo! use o 6hat 6as
8aught i! dispositifs a!d separated [rom livi!g bei!gs\ i! themA is o the utmost urge!8y7K
#0
3ut 6hat i there is !o su8h J8ommo! useK prior to dispositifsM /hat i the primordial u!8tio!
o dispositifs is pre8isely to orga!iUe a!d admi!ister the J8ommo! useKM 9! this 8ase- proa!atio! is !ot
the restitutio! o a 8ommo! use- but- o! the 8o!trary- its destitutionEi! proa!atio!- a! ideologi8al
pra8ti8e is de:8o!te?tualiUed- de:u!8tio!aliUed- made to ru! o! empty7 To put it yet a!other 6ay- i the
ou!di!g move that establishes a symboli8 u!iverse is the empty gesture- ho6 is a gesture emptiedM
=o6 is its 8o!te!t !eutraliUedM Through repetitio!- 6hi8h orms the very 8ore o 6hat Agambe! 8alls
proa!atio!+ i! the oppositio! bet6ee! the sa8red a!d the se8ular- the proa!atio! o the se8ular does
!ot eNual se8ulariUatio!T proa!atio! puts the sa8red te?t or pra8ti8e i!to a diere!t 8o!te?t- it subtra8ts
it rom its proper 8o!te?t a!d u!8tio!i!g7 As su8h- proa!atio! remai!s i! the domai! o !o!:utility-
merely e!a8ti!g a JpervertedK !o!:utility7 To proa!e a mass is to perorm a bla8k mass- !ot to study
the mass as a! obje8t o the psy8hology o religio!7 9! *akaIs -he -rial- the 6eird e?te!ded debate
bet6ee! 2oseph *7 a!d the Criest about the .a6 is deeply proa!eEit is the Criest 6ho- i! his readi!g
o the parable J3eore the .a6-K is the true age!t o proa!atio!7 H!e 8a! eve! say that *aka is the
greatest proa!er o the 2e6ish .a67 Hr- apropos the topi8 o =eidegger a!d se?uality+ se8ulariUatio!
6ould be to i!terpret =eideggerIs style o 6riti!g as a! alie!ated etishiUatio! o la!guage- proa!atio!
6ould be to re!der i! this style phe!ome!a like se?ual pra8ti8es that =eidegger 6ould !ever have
addressed7 As su8h- proa!atio!E!ot se8ulariUatio!Eis the true materialist u!dermi!i!g o the Sa8red+
se8ulariUatio! al6ays relies o! its disavo6ed sa8red ou!datio!- 6hi8h survives either as a! e?8eptio!
or as a ormal stru8ture7 Crotesta!tism realiUes this split bet6ee! the Sa8red a!d the se8ular at its most
radi8al+ it se8ulariUes the material 6orld- but keeps religio! apart- a!d it i!trodu8es the ormal religious
pri!8iple i!to the 8apitalist e8o!omy itsel7
#1
=ere- ho6ever- 6e should perhaps suppleme!t Agambe!+ the parado?i8al pre8ede!8e o
tra!sgressio! over 6hat it violates allo6s us to thro6 a 8riti8al light o! his 8o!8ept o proa!atio!7 9
6e 8o!8eive proa!atio! as a gesture o e?tra8tio! rom the proper lie:6orld 8o!te?t a!d use- is !ot
su8h a! e?tra8tio! also the very definition of sacrali2ationM Take poetry+ is it !ot Jbor!K 6he! a phrase
or a group o 6ords is Jde8o!te?tualiUedK a!d be8omes 8aught up i! a! auto!omous pro8ess o
repetitive i!siste!8eM /he!- i!stead o J8ome here-K 9 say J8ome- 8ome here-K is this !ot the mi!imum
o poeti8iUatio!M There is thus a Uero:level at 6hi8h proa!atio! 8a!!ot be disti!guished rom
sa8raliUatio!7 So 6e have here agai! the same parado? o displa8ed 8lassii8atio! that 6e i!d i! 0mile
3e!ve!isteIs a!alysis o passive- a8tive- a!d middle verbs7 2ust as- i! 3e!ve!iste- the origi!al
oppositio! is !ot bet6ee! passive a!d a8tive- 6ith the middle i!terve!i!g as a third mediati!g or
!eutral mome!t- but bet6ee! a8tive a!d middle- so too here- the origi!al oppositio! is bet6ee! the
se8ular:everyday:useul a!d the Croa!e- a!d the JSa8redK sta!ds or a se8o!dary shit or mystii8atio!
o the Croa!e7 The emerge!8e o the huma! or symboli8 u!iverse lies i! the mi!imum gesture o a
Jproa!atory de8o!te?tualiUatio!K o a sig!al or gesture- a!d Jsa8raliUatio!K 8omes ater6ards- as a!
attempt to ge!triy- to domesti8ate- this e?8ess- this rapturous impa8t o the proa!e7 9! 2apa!ese-
ba""u*shan sig!iies Ja girl 6ho looks like she might be pretty 6he! see! rom behi!d- but is!It 6he!
see! rom the ro!tKEis !ot the relatio!ship bet6ee! proa!e a!d sa8red somethi!g like thisM A thi!g
6hi8h appears @is e?perie!8ed asA sa8red 6he! vie6ed rom behi!d- rom a proper dista!8e- is
ee8tively a proa!e e?8ess7 To paraphrase Filke- the Sa8red is the last veil that 8o!8eals the horror o
the Croa!e7 So 6hat 6ould the proa!atio! o Dhristia!ity beM /hat i Dhrist himselEthe 8omi8al
aspe8t o the embodime!t o 1od i! a ridi8ulous mortalEalready is the proa!atio! o divi!ityM /hat
i- i! 8o!trast to other religio!s 6hi8h 8a! be proa!ed o!ly by me!- i! Dhristia!ity 1od proa!es
himself M
For this solutio! to 6ork- 6e have to aba!do! the u!dame!tals o 6hat o!e 8a! o!ly 8all
Agambe!Is ideology+ his eleme!tary dualism o livi!g bei!gs a!d dispositifs7 There are !o livi!g
bei!gs- huma! i!dividuals @8a!A get 8aught i! dispositifs pre8isely be8ause they are !ot merely livi!g
bei!gs- be8ause their very lie substa!8e is derailed or distorted @the Freudia! !ame o this distortio! is-
o 8ourse- the death driveA7 This is 6hy the huma! bei!g is !ot a Jratio!al a!imal-K !ot dei!ed by a
dime!sio! or Nuality 6hi8h adds itsel to substa!tial a!imality+ i! order or su8h a! additio! to o88ur- a
spa8e or it- its possibility- has to be irst ope!ed up by a distortio! o a!imality itsel7 The .a8a!ia!
!ame or this distortio! or e?8ess is the ob1et a @surplus:e!joyme!tA- a!d- as .a8a! 8o!vi!8i!gly
demo!strated- eve! =egel here alls short- missi!g this dime!sio! o surplus:e!joyme!t i! the struggle
or re8og!itio! a!d its out8ome7
A88ordi!g to the sta!dard vie6 @propagated by- amo!g others- *oj`veA- 6hat is at stake i! the
=egelia! struggle bet6ee! the @utureA master a!d serva!t is the separatio! o the subje8t rom its body+
through its readi!ess to sa8rii8e its biologi8al body @lieA- the subje8t asserts the lie o the spirit as
higher a!d as i!depe!de!t o its biologi8al lie7 This other @higherA dime!sio! is embodied i! la!guage-
6hi8h is- i! a 6ay- the !egativity o death tra!sposed i!to a !e6 positive order+ the 6ord is the
murderer o the thi!g it desig!ates- it e?tra8ts the 8o!8ept o the thi!g i! its i!depe!de!8e rom the
empiri8al thi!g7 From the Freudia!:.a8a!ia! sta!dpoi!t- ho6ever- su8h a des8riptio! o the passage
rom the biologi8al body to its symboliUatio!- to the spiritual lie o la!guage- misses somethi!g
8ru8ial+ !amely- ho6 the symboliUatio! o the body retroa8tively ge!erates a a!tasmati8 i!e?iste!t
orga! 6hi8h sta!ds or 6hat is lost i! the pro8ess o symboliUatio!+

This lamella- this orga!- 6hose 8hara8teristi8 is !ot to e?ist- but 6hi8h is !evertheless a! orga! O is
the libido7 9t is the libido- Nua pure lie i!sti!8t- that is to say- immortal lie- irrepressible lie- lie that
has !eed o !o orga!- simpliied- i!destru8tible lie7 9t is pre8isely 6hat is subtra8ted rom the livi!g
bei!g by virtue o the a8t that it is subje8t to the 8y8le o se?ed reprodu8tio!7 A!d it is o this that all
the orms o the ob1et a that 8a! be e!umerated are the represe!tatives- the eNuivale!ts7
#2
A 8ommo! moti o the phe!ome!ologi8al des8riptio! o bei!g huma! is that o embodied
e?iste!8e- o e?perie!8i!g a body as o!eIs o6!- as a lived body- !ot just as a! obje8t- a res e&tensa- i!
the 6orldEthe e!igma o 6hat it mea!s !ot o!ly to have a body- but to JbeK @i!A a livi!g body7 The
t6e!tieth 8e!tury ee8ted a double u!dermi!i!g o this immediate e?perie!8e o the orga!i8 body+ o!
the o!e ha!d- the bioge!eti8 redu8tio! o the body to a me8ha!ism regulated by ge!eti8 8odes a!d- i!
this se!se- to a! Jartii8ialK me8ha!ismT o! the other ha!d- the a!tasmati8 body- a body stru8tured
a88ordi!g !ot to biology but to libidi!al i!vestme!ts- 6hi8h is the topi8 o psy8hoa!alysis- rom
Jpartial obje8tsK @auto!omous orga!s 6ithout bodies- like a! eye or a ist 6hi8h survive o! their o6!-
as a pere8t e?ample o the driveE!ot the obje8t o a drive- but the drive as a! [impossible\ obje8tA to
their mythi8al prototype- the lamella7 9! some o Fra!8is 3a8o!Is dra6i!gs- 6e i!d a @!aked- usuallyA
body a88ompa!ied by a ormless orm- 6eird- dark- a!d stai!:like- 6hi8h seems to gro6 out o it-
barely atta8hed to it- as a ki!d o u!8a!!y protubera!8e 6hi8h the body 8a! !ever ully re8uperate or
rei!tegrate- a!d 6hi8h thereby destabiliUes beyo!d repair the orga!i8 /hole o the bodyEthis is 6hat
.a8a! aimed at 6ith his !otio! o the lamella @or the hommeletteA7
This orever lost e?8ess o pure or i!destru8tible lie isEi! the guise o the ob1et a- the obje8t:
8ause o desireEalso 6hat Jeter!aliUesK huma! desire- maki!g it i!i!itely plasti8 a!d u!satisiable @i!
8o!trast to i!sti!8tual !eedsA7 9t is thereore 6ro!g to 8laim that- si!8e the master does !ot 6ork- he
remai!s stu8k at the !atural level+ 6hat the serva!tIs produ8ts satisy are !ot merely the masterIs
!atural !eeds- but his !eeds tra!sormed i!to a! i!i!ite desire or e?8essive lu?uries displayed i!
8ompetitio! 6ith the lu?uries o other mastersEthe serva!t bri!gs the master rare deli8a8ies- lu?ury
ur!iture- e?pe!sive je6elry- a!d so o!7 This is 6hy the master be8omes the serva!t o his serva!t+ he
depe!ds o! the serva!t !ot or the satisa8tio! o his !atural !eeds- but or the satisa8tio! o his highly
8ultivated artii8ial !eeds7
This e?8ess is at 6ork a8ross the e!tire ra!ge o 8ulture- rom high art to the lo6est
8o!sumerism7 The sta!dard ormula o artisti8 mi!imalism is Jless is moreK+ i 6e abstai! rom addi!g
a!y superi8ial or!ame!t- i 6e go eve! urther a!d reuse to ill i! the gaps or tru!8ate 6hat 6ould
have bee! the 8ompleted orm o our produ8t- this very loss 6ill ge!erate additio!al mea!i!g a!d
8reate a ki!d o depth7 Surprisi!gly @or perhaps !otA- 6e i!d a similar logi8 o Jmore or lessK i! the
8o!sumerist u!iverse o 8ommodities- 6here JlessK is the proverbial o!e 8e!t subtra8ted rom the ull
rou!ded pri8e @b(7%%- !ot b#A- a!d JmoreK the !o less proverbial surplus that 6e get or ree- k!o6! to
all buyers o toothpaste+ the top Nuarter o the tube is ote! a diere!t 8olor- 6ith large letters
a!!ou!8i!g+ J1>" more or ree7K The 8at8h is- o 8ourse- that the JullK produ8t 6hi8h sets the sta!dard
or this is more or less i8tio!al+ 6e !ever get to see a toothpaste 6ithout the surplus pri8ed at the ull
b#Ea 8lear sig! that the reality o this Jmore or lessK is Jless or more7K From a Freudia! perspe8tive-
it is easy to see ho6 this parado? o Jmore or lessK is grou!ded i! the rele?ive reversal o the
re!u!8iatio! o pleasure i!to a !e6 sour8e o pleasure7 .a8a!Is ormula or this reversal is a ra8tio! o
the small a @surplus:e!joyme!tA above mi!us phi @8astratio!A+ a! e!joyme!t ge!erated by the very
re!u!8iatio! o e!joyme!t a!d- i! this se!se- a JlessK 6hi8h is Jmore7K
This bri!gs us to the 8ru? o the debate bet6ee! 2udith 3utler a!d Datheri!e ,alabou over the
relatio!ship bet6ee! =egel a!d Fou8ault @re8all that Agambe! is a! a!ti:=egelia! Fou8auldia!A7
#"

A88ordi!g to Fou8ault- =egel assumes the total sublatio! @+ufhebungA o the body i! its symboliUatio!+
the subje8t emerges throughEa!d is eNuivale!t toEits subje8tio! @submissio!A to the symboli8 order-
its la6s a!d regulatio!sT that is- or =egel- the ree a!d auto!omous subje8t is the subje8t i!tegrated
i!to the symboli8 order7 /hat =egel does !ot see is ho6 this pro8ess o symboliUatio!- o submissive
regulatio!- ge!erates 6hat it JrepressesK a!d regulates7 Fe8all Fou8aultIs thesis- developed i! his
0istory of Se&uality- about ho6 the medi8al:pedagogi8al dis8ourse dis8ipli!i!g se?uality produ8es the
e?8ess it tries to tame @Jse?KA- a pro8ess already begu! i! late a!tiNuity 6he! the detailed Dhristia!
des8riptio!s o all possible se?ual temptatio!s retroa8tively ge!erated 6hat they tried to suppress7 The
prolieratio! o pleasures is thus the obverse o the po6er 6hi8h regulates them+ po6er itsel ge!erates
resista!8e to itsel- the e?8ess it 8a! !ever 8o!trolEthe rea8tio!s o a se?ualiUed body to its subje8tio!
to dis8ipli!ary !orms are u!predi8table7
Fou8ault remai!s ambiguous here- shiti!g the a88e!t @sometimes almost imper8eptiblyA
bet6ee! Discipline and )unish a!d the irst volume o 0istory of Se&uality a!d volumes t6o a!d three
o the latter+ 6hile i! both 8ases- po6er a!d resista!8e are i!tert6i!ed a!d support ea8h other- the
earlier 6orks put the a88e!t o! ho6 resista!8e is appropriated i! adva!8e by po6er- so that po6er
me8ha!isms domi!ate the e!tire ield a!d 6e are the subje8ts o po6er pre8isely 6he! 6e resist itT
later- ho6ever- the a88e!t shits o!to ho6 po6er ge!erates the e?8ess o resista!8e 6hi8h it 8a! !ever
8o!trolEar rom ma!ipulati!g resista!8e to itsel- po6er thus be8omes u!able to 8o!trol its o6!
ee8ts7 /hat this os8illatio! betrays is that the e!tire ield o the oppositio! bet6ee! po6er a!d
resista!8e is alse a!d has to be aba!do!edEbut ho6M 3utler hersel sho6s the 6ay+ as a good
=egelia!- she adds a key rele?ive tur! 6hi8h amou!ts to a ki!d o =egelia! respo!se to Fou8ault+ !ot
o!ly do the me8ha!isms o repressio! a!d regulatio! ge!erate the e?8ess they e!deavor to repressT
these me8ha!isms themselves be8ome libidi!ally i!vested- ge!erati!g a perverse sour8e o surplus:
e!joyme!t o their o6!7 9! short- the repressio! o a desire !e8essarily tur!s i!to a desire or repressio!-
the re!u!8iatio! o a pleasure tur!s i!to the pleasure o re!u!8iatio!- the regulatio! o pleasures i!to a
pleasure o regulatio!7 This is 6hat Fou8ault does !ot take i!to a88ou!t+ ho6- or e?ample- the
dis8ipli!ary pra8ti8e o regulati!g pleasures itsel gets i!e8ted by pleasure- as i! obsessive or
maso8histi8 rituals7 The true e?8ess @o pleasureA is thus !ot the e?8ess ge!erated by dis8ipli!ary
pra8ti8es- but these pra8ti8es themselves- 6hi8h literally 8ome i! e?8ess o 6hat they regulate7
#(
4o 6o!der that the sta!dard politi8al use o re8og!itio! as a key eature o =egelIs so8ial
thought is limited to liberal readi!gs o =egelE2ameso! has already !oted that the o!goi!g o8us o!
mutual re8og!itio! i! su8h readi!gs Jreveals yet a third =egel- alo!gside the ,ar?ist a!d the as8ist
o!e- !amely a Vdemo8rati8I or =abermasia! =egelK+
##
the o!tologi8ally a!d politi8ally JdelatedK
=egel- the =egel 6ho 8elebrates bourgeois la6 a!d order as the summit o huma! developme!t7
#'

Therei! lies the 8ommo! de!omi!ator o liberal readi!gs o =egelIs politi8al thought @a!d !ot o!ly the
politi8al thoughtA+ re8ipro8al re8og!itio! is the ultimate goal a!d at the same time the mi!imal
presuppositio! o subje8tivity- the imma!e!t 8o!ditio! o the very a8t o sel:8o!s8ious!essEJ9 am
re8og!iUed- thereore 9 am7K 9 am a ree subje8t o!ly i!soar 9 am re8og!iUed as ree by other ree
subje8ts @subje8ts re8og!iUed by me as reeA7 Cerhaps- ho6ever- the time has 8ome to problematiUe the
8e!tral role played by this !otio!+ it is stri8tly 8orrelative to the Jdelatio!aryK readi!g o =egel as a
philosopher 6ho arti8ulates the !ormative 8o!ditio!s o ree lie7
#$
,utual re8og!itio! is- o 8ourse- the out8ome o a lo!g pro8ess 6hi8h begi!s 6ith the struggle
to the death bet6ee! the @utureA master a!d serva!t7 9! this struggle- the te!sio! bet6ee! atta8hme!t
a!d deta8hme!t @to>rom o!eIs body- or to>rom material reality i! ge!eralA repeats itsel- but at a
higher level- 6hi8h bri!gs about their diale8ti8al u!ity+ atta8hme!t itsel be8omes the orm o
appeara!8e o its opposite7 /e thus !eed to break out o the alse os8illatio! bet6ee! atta8hme!t a!d
deta8hme!t+ deta8hme!t is primordial- 8o!stitutive o subje8tivity- a subje8t !ever dire8tly JisK its
bodyT all o!e !eed add is that this very deta8hme!t @rom the bodyA 8a! o!ly be e!a8ted through a!
e?8essive atta8hme!t to a! Jorga! 6ithout a body7K The parado? is thus that the Uero:level o !egativity
is !ot a !egative gesture- but a! e?8essive airmatio!+ by getti!g stu8k o! a partial obje8t- by airmi!g
it repetitively- the subje8t deta8hes itsel rom its body- e!ters i!to a !egative relatio!ship to6ards its
body7
=o6 do 9 sig!al to the other my deta8hme!t rom my parti8ular biologi8al lieM 3y
u!8o!ditio!ally atta8hi!g mysel to some totally trivial a!d i!diere!t little:bit:o:the:Feal or 6hi8h 9
am ready to put everythi!g- i!8ludi!g my lie- at stakeEthe very 6orthless!ess o the obje8t or 6hi8h
9 am ready to risk everythi!g makes it 8lear that 6hat is at stake is !ot it but mysel- my reedom7 9t is
agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o the subje8t as a8tual i!i!ity that 6e should read the 6ell:k!o6! passage i!
6hi8h =egel des8ribes ho6- i! e?perie!8i!g the ear o death duri!g his 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the master-
the serva!t gets a 6hi o the i!i!ite po6er o !egativityT through this e?perie!8e- he is or8ed to
a88ept the 6orthless!ess o his parti8ular Sel+

For this 8o!s8ious!ess 6as !ot i! peril a!d ear or this eleme!t or that- !or or this or that mome!t o
time- it 6as araid or its e!tire bei!gT it elt the ear o death- the sovereig! master7 9t has bee! i! that
e?perie!8e melted to its i!most soul- has trembled throughout its every ibre- a!d all that 6as i?ed a!d
steadast has Nuaked 6ithi! it7 This 8omplete perturbatio! o its e!tire substa!8e- this absolute
dissolutio! o all its stability i!to lue!t 8o!ti!uity- is- ho6ever- the simple- ultimate !ature o sel:
8o!s8ious!ess- absolute !egativity- pure sel:relati!g e?iste!8e- 6hi8h 8o!seNue!tly is i!volved i! this
type o 8o!s8ious!ess7
#&
The rather bori!g obje8tio! to the struggle to the death bet6ee! the uture master a!d the uture
serva!t is that =egel 8heats by sile!tly ig!ori!g the deadlo8k o the obvious radi8al solutio!+ the t6o
really do ight to the death- but si!8e that result 6ould bri!g the diale8ti8al pro8ess to a halt- the
struggle is !ot really ought 6ithout restrai!t- it presupposes a 8ertai! impli8it symboli8 pa8t that the
result 6ill !ot be death7 9! the days prior to the battle o 9lipa- o!e o the key battles o the Se8o!d
Cu!i8 /ar i! 20' 3D- a stra!ge ritual emerged bet6ee! the t6o armies- the Darthagi!ia!s 8omma!ded
by =asdrubal- =a!!ibalIs brother- a!d the Foma!s 8omma!ded by S8ipio7 H!e mor!i!g- ater
deployi!g their or8es i! a battle ormatio!-

the t6o armies stood a!d 6at8hed ea8h other7 For all their i!itial 8o!ide!8e- !either 8omma!der
6ished to push his me! or6ard a!d or8e a battle7 Ater some hours- 6ith the su! begi!!i!g to set-
=asdrubal gave the order or his me! to retur! to 8amp7 Hbservi!g this- S8ipio did the same7Hver the
ollo6i!g days this be8ame almost a routi!e7 At a late hour- 6hi8h i! itsel suggested !o great
e!thusiasm or battle- =asdrubal led his army o! to the edge o the plai!7 The Foma!s 6ould the!
mat8h the move- both armies deployi!g i! the same ormatio! as o! the irst day7 The! the armies
6ould sta!d a!d 6ait- u!til !ear the e!d o the day- irst the Darthagi!ia!s a!d the! the Foma!s
retur!ed to their respe8tive 8amps7
#%
H!ly ater several days o this did S8ipio de8ided to provoke the battle7 The o!ly be!eit o su8h
posturi!g 6as a margi!al moral o!e+ =asdrubal 8ould 8laim that he laid do6! the 8halle!ge to the
e!emy ea8h day- 6hile S8ipio 8ould 8laim that he o!ly 6ithdre6 ater the e!emy did so7 Su8h 8ases are
a 6el8ome remi!der o ho6 mu8h o 6arare i!volves !ot simply physi8al 8o!li8t but a 8omple?
symboli8 ritual o posturi!g7
3utler proposes a stra!ge a!d 8ou!ter:i!tuitive @but stra!gely 8o!vi!8i!gA readi!g o this
8o!8lusive mome!t o the diale8ti8 o master a!d serva!t+ through the ear o death 6hi8h shatters the
ou!datio!s o his e!tire bei!g- the serva!t assumes his i!itude- he be8omes a6are o himsel as a
ragile- vul!erable bei!g7 /hat 3utler ails to emphasiUe is the positive obverse o this ragile i!itude+
the !egative or8e 6hi8h threate!s the i!dividual a!d shakes the ou!datio!s o his lie is !ot i! itsel
the Jultimate !ature o sel:8o!s8ious!ess- absolute !egativity- pure sel:relati!g e?iste!8eKT it is thus
!ot e?ter!al to the subje8t @like the igure o the master i! ro!t o him- threate!i!g him rom outsideA-
but his very 8ore- the very heart o his bei!g7 This is the 6ay the a6are!ess o o!eIs i!itude
immediately reverts i!to the e?perie!8e o o!eIs true i!i!ity- 6hi8h is sel:relati!g !egativity7
This dime!sio! o i!i!ity is missi!g i! Fou8ault- 6hi8h is 6hy ,alabou is justiied i! her
reproa8h to Fou8ault @a!d- impli8itly- 3utlerA that the Fou8auldia! subje8t e!gaged i! the J8are o the
selK remai!s 8aught i! a 8losed loop o sel:ae8tio!7 Cre8isely i!soar as it is a6are o its ragile
i!itude a!d tur!ed to6ards the utureEthat is- i!soar as it is atta8hed !ot to 6hat it is but to the void
or ope!i!g o 6hat it may be8ome- a!d thereore e!gaged i! perma!e!t sel:8riti8ism- the 8o!ti!uous
J8ourageousK Nuestio!i!g o its give! ormsEthe Fou8auldia! subje8t remai!s atta8hed to itsel-
relati!g to its @sel:A8riti8al a8tivity as the i!al poi!t o reere!8e7 Su8h a sta!8e remai!s at the level o
the Jabstra8tK oppositio! o subje8t a!d substa!8e- asserti!g the predomi!a!8e o the subje8t atta8hed
to itsel i! 8o!trast to all obje8tive 8o!te!t7 ,ore spe8ii8ally- 6e should aba!do! the e!tire paradigm
o Jresista!8e to a dispositif K+ the idea that- 6hile a dispositif determi!es the !et6ork o the SelIs
a8tivity- it simulta!eously ope!s up the spa8e or the subje8tIs Jresista!8e-K or its @partial a!d
margi!alA u!dermi!i!g a!d displa8eme!t o the dispositif7 The task o ema!8ipatory politi8s lies
else6here+ !ot i! elaborati!g a prolieratio! o strategies or ho6 to JresistK the predomi!a!t dispositif
rom margi!al subje8tive positio!s- but i! thi!ki!g about the modalities o a possible radi8al rupture i!
the predomi!a!t dispositif itsel7 9! all the talk about Jsites o resista!8e-K 6e te!d to orget that-
dii8ult as it is to imagi!e today- rom time to time the very dispositifs 6hi8h 6e resist do a8tually
8ha!ge7
The debate bet6ee! 3utler a!d ,alabou is !o!etheless sustai!ed by a shared premise a88ordi!g
to 6hi8h- Jalthough there is !o body 6hi8h 6ould be mi!e 6ithout the otherIs body- there is also !o
possible dei!itive dis:appropriatio! o my body- !o more tha! a possible dei!itive appropriatio! o
the otherIs body7K
'0
9s this premise !ot 8o!irmed by t6o re8e!t =olly6ood produ8tio!s- ea8h o
6hi8h stages a!d tests the e?treme o a subje8t 8ompletely passi!g over i!to a!other body- but 6ith
opposite resultsM 9! +vatar- the tra!ser su88eeds a!d the hero su88essully moves his soul rom his
o6! to his other @aborigi!alA body- 6hile i! Surrogates @200%- based o! the 200#X' 8omi8 book series-
dire8ted by 2o!atha! ,osto6A- the huma!s rebel agai!st their avatars a!d retur! to their proper bodies7
+vatar should be 8ompared to ilms like Who Framed 7oger 7abbit? or -he Matri& i! 6hi8h
the hero is 8aught bet6ee! our ordi!ary reality a!d a! imagi!ed u!iverseEo 8artoo!s i! 7oger 7abbit-
o digital reality i! -he Matri&- a!d o the digitally e!ha!8ed ordi!ary reality o the aborigi!al pla!et i!
+vatar7 /hat o!e should thus bear i! mi!d is that- although +vatarIs !arrative is supposed to take
pla8e i! o!e a!d the same JrealK reality- 6e are deali!gEat the level o the u!derlyi!g symboli8
e8o!omyE6ith t6o realities+ the ordi!ary 6orld o imperialist 8olo!ialism a!d @!ot the miserable
reality o e?ploited aborigi!als- butA the a!tasy:6orld o the aborigi!als 6ho live i! a! i!8estuous li!k
6ith !ature7 The e!d o the ilm thus has to be read as a desperate solutio! i! 6hi8h the hero ully
migrates rom real reality i!to the a!tasy:6orldEas i- i! -he Matri&- 4eo 6ere to de8ide to ully
immerse himsel agai! i! the ,atri?7 A more immediate 8o!trast to +vatar is Surrogates- set i! 201$-
6he! people live i! !ear:total isolatio!- rarely leavi!g the saety a!d 8omort o their homes- tha!ks to
remotely 8o!trolled roboti8 bodies that serve as Jsurrogates-K desig!ed as better:looki!g versio!s o
their huma! operators7 3e8ause people are sae all the time- a!d a!y damage do!e to a surrogate is !ot
elt by its o6!er- it is a pea8eul 6orld ree rom ear- pai!- a!d 8rime7 Credi8tably- the story revolves
arou!d the alie!atio! a!d la8k o authe!ti8ity i! this 6orld+ at the ilmIs e!d- all the surrogates are
dis8o!!e8ted a!d people are 8ompelled to start usi!g their o6! bodies agai!7 The 8o!trast bet6ee!
Surrogates a!d +vatar 8ould !ot be more appare!t7
This does !ot mea!- ho6ever- that 6e should reje8t +vatar i! avor o a more Jauthe!ti8K a!d
heroi8 a88epta!8e o our ordi!ary reality as the o!ly real 6orld there is7 0ve! i reality is Jmore realK
tha! a!tasy- it still !eeds a!tasy to retai! its 8o!siste!8y+ i 6e subtra8t a!tasy- the a!tasmati8 rame-
rom reality- reality itsel loses its 8o!siste!8y a!d disi!tegrates7 The lesso! is thus that the very
alter!ative o Jeither a88ept reality or 8hoose a!tasyK is a alse o!e+ 6hat .a8a! 8alls la traversAe du
fantasme has !othi!g to do 6ith dispelli!g illusio!s a!d a88epti!g reality the 6ay it is7 This is 6hy-
pre8isely 6he! 6e are sho6! someo!e doi!g just thatEre!ou!8i!g all illusio!s a!d embra8i!g
miserable realityE6e should o8us o! ide!tiyi!g the mi!imal a!tasmati8 8o!tours o this reality7 9
6e really 6a!t to 8ha!ge or es8ape rom our so8ial reality- the irst thi!g to do is to 8ha!ge the
a!tasies tailored to make us it this realityT be8ause the hero o +vatar does !ot do this- his subje8tive
positio! is 6hat- apropos Sade- .a8a! 8alled le dupe de son fantasme7
=o6 to es8ape or J!egateK the 8o!strai!ts o the e?isti!g u!iverse is thus !ot o!ly a dii8ult
empiri8al problem- but perhaps eve! more dii8ult to imagi!e or to 8o!8eptualiUe7 9! mid:April 2011-
the media reported that the Dhi!ese gover!me!t had prohibited sho6i!g o! TV a!d i! 8i!emas ilms
deali!g 6ith time travel a!d alter!ative histories- 6ith the argume!t that su8h stories i!trodu8e rivolity
i!to serious histori8al mattersEeve! the i8tio!al es8ape i!to a! alter!ate reality is 8o!sidered too
da!gerous7 /e i! the /est do !ot !eed su8h a! e?pli8it prohibitio!+ as the dispositio! o 6hat is
8o!sidered possible a!d 6hat impossible sho6s- ideology e?erts sui8ie!t material po6er to preve!t
alter!ative history !arratives rom bei!g take! 6ith a mi!imum o serious!ess7
This material po6er be8omes most palpable pre8isely 6here o!e 6ould least e?pe8t it+ i!
8riti8al situatio!s- 6he! the hegemo!i8 ideologi8al !arrative is bei!g u!dermi!ed7 /e live i! su8h a
situatio! today7 A88ordi!g to =egel- repetitio! plays a pre8ise role i! history+ 6he! somethi!g happe!s
just o!8e- it may be dismissed as a mere a88ide!t- as somethi!g that might have bee! avoided 6ith a
better ha!dli!g o the situatio!T but 6he! the same eve!t repeats itsel- this is a sig! that 6e are deali!g
6ith a deeper histori8al !e8essity7 /he! 4apoleo! lost or the irst time i! 1&1"- it looked like just bad
lu8kT 6he! he lost the se8o!d time at /aterloo- it 6as 8lear that his time 6as over7 A!d does the same
!ot hold or the o!goi!g i!a!8ial 8risisM /he! it irst hit the markets i! September 200&- it looked like
a! a88ide!t to be 8orre8ted through better regulatio!- a!d so o!T !o6 that sig!s o a repeated i!a!8ial
meltdo6! are gatheri!g- it is 8lear that 6e are deali!g 6ith a stru8tural !e8essity7
=o6 does the hegemo!i8 ideology prepare us to rea8t to su8h a predi8ame!tM There is a!
a!e8dote @apo8ryphal- or sureA about a! e?8ha!ge o telegrams bet6ee! 1erma! a!d Austria! army
headNuarters i! the middle o the First /orld /ar+ the 1erma!s se!t the message J=ere- o! our part o
the ro!t- the situatio! is serious- but !ot 8atastrophi8-K to 6hi8h the Austria!s replied J=ere- the
situatio! is 8atastrophi8- but !ot serious7K 9s this !ot i!8reasi!gly the 6ay ma!y o us- at least i! the
developed 6orld- relate to our global predi8ame!tM /e all k!o6 about the impe!di!g 8atastrophe- but
someho6 6e 8a!!ot take it seriously7 9! psy8hoa!alysis- this attitude is 8alled a etishisti8 split+ 9 k!o6
very 6ell- but O @9 do !ot really believe itA- a!d is a 8lear i!di8atio! o the material or8e o ideology
6hi8h makes us reuse 6hat 6e see a!d k!o67
'1
So 6here does this split 8ome romM =ere is 0d AyresIs des8riptio!+ J/e are bei!g 8o!ro!ted
by somethi!g so 8ompletely outside our 8olle8tive e?perie!8e that 6e do!It really see it- eve! 6he! the
evide!8e is over6helmi!g7 For us- that Vsomethi!gI is a blitU o e!ormous biologi8al a!d physi8al
alteratio!s i! the 6orld that has bee! sustai!i!g us7K
'2
9! order to 8ope 6ith this threat- our 8olle8tive
ideology is mobiliUi!g me8ha!isms o dissimulatio! a!d sel:de8eptio! up to a!d i!8ludi!g the dire8t
6ill to ig!ora!8e+ Ja ge!eral patter! o behavior amo!g threate!ed huma! so8ieties is to be8ome more
bli!kered- rather tha! more o8used o! the 8risis- as they all7K
'"
Datastrophi8- but !ot serious O
/hile su8h a disavo6al is 8learly dis8er!ible i! ho6 the majority relates to e8ologi8al threats-
6e 8a! dis8er! the same me8ha!ism i! the predomi!a!t rea8tio! to the prospe8t o a !e6 i!a!8ial
8ollapse+ it is dii8ult to really a88ept that the lo!g period o post:/orld:/ar:99 progress a!d stability
i! the developed /ester! 6orld is approa8hi!g its e!d7 /hat makes the situatio! espe8ially volatile is
the a8t that the disavo6al is suppleme!ted by its opposite- e?8essive pa!i8ky rea8tio!s+ i! the ragile
domai! o i!a!8ial spe8ulatio!s- rumors 8a! i!late or destroy the value o 8ompa!iesEsometimes
eve! 6hole e8o!omiesEi! a matter o days7 Si!8e the 8apitalist e8o!omy has to borro6 rom the
uture- a88umulati!g debts 6hi8h 6ill !ever be ully repaid- trust is a u!dame!tal i!gredie!t o the
systemEbut this trust is i!here!tly parado?i8al a!d Jirratio!alK+ 9 trust that 9 8a! get a88ess to my ba!k
a88ou!t at a!y time- but 6hile this 8a! hold or me i!dividually- it 8a!!ot hold or the majority @i the
majority ee8tively test the system a!d try to 6ithdra6 their mo!ey- the e!tire system 6ill 8ollapseA7
Drises are thus simulta!eously disavo6ed a!d triggered out o !o6here- 6ith !o JrealK 8auses7 Da! 6e
eve! imagi!e- alo!g these li!es- the e8o!omi8 a!d so8ial 8o!seNue!8es o the 8ollapse o the )S dollar
or the 0uroM
The riots i! the )* suburbs i! 2011 6ere a Uero:level rea8tio! to this o!goi!g 8risisEbut 6hy
6ere the protesters pushed to6ards this ki!d o viole!8eM Bygmu!t 3auma! 6as o! the right tra8k
6he! he 8hara8teriUed the riots as a8ts o Jdee8tive a!d disNualiied 8o!sumersK+ more tha! a!ythi!g
else- they 6ere a 8o!sumerist 8ar!ival o destru8tio!- a 8o!sumerist desire viole!tly redire8ted 6he!
u!able to realiUe itsel i! the JproperK 6ay @by shoppi!gA7 As su8h- they o 8ourse also 8o!tai!ed a
mome!t o ge!ui!e protest- a ki!d o iro!i8 reply to the 8o!sumerist ideology 6ith 6hi8h 6e are
bombarded i! our daily lives+ J5ou 8all o! us to 8o!sume 6hile simulta!eously deprivi!g us o the
possibility to do it properlyEso here 6e are doi!g it the o!ly 6ay ope! to usRK The riots thus i! a 6ay
stage the truth o Jpost:ideologi8al so8iety-K displayi!g i! a pai!ully palpable orm the material or8e
o ideology7 The problem 6ith su8h riots is !ot their viole!8e per se- but the a8t that it is !ot truly sel:
assertiveEi! 4ietUs8heIs terms- it is rea8tive- !ot a8tive- impote!t rage a!d despair masked as a display
o or8e- e!vy masked as triumpha!t 8ar!ival7
The da!ger is that religio! 6ill ill i! this void a!d restore mea!i!g7 That is to say- the riots
!eed to be situated i! the series they orm 6ith a!other type o viole!8e per8eived by the liberal
majority today as a threat to our 6ay o lie+ terrorist atta8ks a!d sui8ide bombi!gs7 9! both i!sta!8es-
viole!8e a!d 8ou!ter:viole!8e are 8aught up i! a deadly vi8ious 8y8le- ea8h ge!erati!g the very or8es
it tries to 8ombat7 9! both 8ases- 6e are deali!g 6ith bli!d passages K lacte- 6here viole!8e is a!
impli8it admissio! o impote!8e7 The diere!8e is that- i! 8o!trast to the Caris banlieue or 3ritish riots
6hi8h 6ere a JUero:levelK protest- viole!t outbursts 6hi8h 6a!ted !othi!g- terrorist atta8ks a8t o!
behal o that absolute ,ea!i!g provided by religio!7 So ho6 are 6e to pass rom su8h viole!t
rea8tio!s to a !e6 reorga!iUatio! o the totality o so8ial lieM To do this reNuires a stro!g body able to
make Nui8k de8isio!s a!d realiUe them 6ith the !e8essary harsh!ess7 /ho 8a! a88omplish the !e?t
stepM A !e6 tetrad emerges here- the tetrad o people*movement*party*leader7
The people is still here- but !o lo!ger as the mythi8al sovereig! Subje8t 6hose 6ill is to be
e!a8ted7 =egel 6as right i! his 8ritiNue o the demo8rati8 po6er o the people+ Jthe peopleK should be
re:8o!8eived as the passive ba8kgrou!d o the politi8al pro8essEthe majority is al6ays a!d by
dei!itio! passive- there is !o guara!tee that it is right- a!d the most it 8a! do is a8k!o6ledge a!d
re8og!iUe itsel i! a proje8t imposed by politi8al age!ts7 As su8h- the role o the people is ultimately a
!egative o!e+ Jree ele8tio!sK @or a reere!dumA serve as a 8he8k o! the party moveme!ts- as a!
impedime!t desig!ed to preve!t 6hat 3adiou 8alls the brutal a!d destru8tive JforBageK @e!or8eme!tA
o the Truth o!to the positive order o 3ei!g regulated by opi!io!s7 This is all that ele8toral demo8ra8y
8a! doT the positive step i!to a !e6 order is beyo!d its s8ope7
9! 8o!trast to a!y elevatio! o authe!ti8 ordi!ary people- 6e should i!sist o! ho6 the pro8ess o
their tra!sormatio! i!to politi8al age!ts is irredu8ibly violent7 2oh! Darpe!terIs -hey .ive @1%&&A- a
!egle8ted masterpie8e o the =olly6ood .et- tells the story o 2oh! 4ada @Spa!ish or J!othi!gKA- a
homeless laborer 6ho i!ds 6ork o! a .os A!geles 8o!stru8tio! site but has !o pla8e to stay7 H!e o
the other 6orkers- Fra!k Armitage- takes him to spe!d the !ight at a lo8al sha!tyto6!7 /hile bei!g
sho6! arou!d that !ight- he !oti8es some odd behavior at a small 8hur8h a8ross the street7 9!vestigati!g
the !e?t day- he a88ide!tally stumbles o! several bo?es ull o su!glasses hidde! i! a se8ret
8ompartme!t i! a 6all7 /he! he later puts o! a pair o the glasses or the irst time- he !oti8es that a
publi8ity billboard !o6 simply displays the 6ord JH305-K 6hile a!other urges the vie6er to
J,AFF5 A4G F0CFHG)D07K =e also sees that paper mo!ey !o6 bears the 6ords JT=9S 9S 5H)F
1HG7K /hat 6e get here is a beautiully !aSve mise*en*sc>ne o the 8ritiNue o ideology+ through the
8riti8o:ideologi8al glasses- 6e dire8tly see the ,aster:Sig!iier be!eath the 8hai! o k!o6ledgeE6e
lear! to see di8tatorship in demo8ra8y- a!d seei!g it hurts7 /e lear! i! the ilm that 6eari!g the 8riti8o:
ideologi8al glasses or too lo!g gives the vie6er a bad heada8he+ it is very pai!ul to be deprived o the
ideologi8al surplus:e!joyme!t7 /he! 4ada tries to 8o!vi!8e Armitage to put the glasses o!- his rie!d
resists- a!d a lo!g ight ollo6s- 6orthy o Fight ,lub @a!other masterpie8e o the =olly6ood .etA7 9t
starts 6ith 4ada sayi!g to Armitage+ J9Im givi!g you a 8hoi8e7 0ither put o! these glasses or start
eati!g that trash 8a!7K @The ight takes pla8e amo!g overtur!ed trash bi!s7A The ight- 6hi8h goes o! or
a! u!bearable eight mi!utes- 6ith o88asio!al pauses or a! e?8ha!ge o rie!dly smiles- is i! itsel
totally Jirratio!alKE6hy does Armitage !ot just agree to put the glasses o! to satisy his rie!dM The
o!ly e?pla!atio! is that he "nows his rie!d 6a!ts him to see somethi!g da!gerous- to a88ess a
prohibited k!o6ledge 6hi8h 6ill totally spoil the relative pea8e o his daily lie7 The viole!8e staged
here is a positive viole!8e- a 8o!ditio! o liberatio!Ethe lesso! is that our liberatio! rom ideology is
!ot a spo!ta!eous a8t- a! a8t o dis8overi!g our true Sel7 The key eature here is that to see the true
!ature o thi!gs- 6e !eed the glasses+ it is !ot that 6e have to take o ideologi8al glasses i! order to see
Jreality as it isK+ 6e are J!aturallyK i! ideology- our !atural sight is ideologi8al7 =o6 does a 6oma!
be8ome a emi!ist subje8tM H!ly through re!ou!8i!g the 8rumbs o e!joyme!t oered by the
patriar8hal dis8ourse- rom relia!8e o! males or Jprote8tio!K to the pleasures provided by male
Jgalla!tryK @payi!g the restaura!t bill- ope!i!g doors- a!d so o!A7
/he! people try to Jorga!iUe themselvesK dire8tly i! moveme!ts- the most they 8a! 8reate is a!
egalitaria! spa8e or debate 6here speakers are 8hose! by lottery a!d everyo!e is give! the same
@shortA time to speak- et87 3ut su8h protest moveme!ts prove i!adeNuate the mome!t o!e has to a8t- to
impose a !e6 orderEat this poi!t- somethi!g like a )arty is !eeded7 0ve! i! a radi8al protest
moveme!t- people do not k!o6 6hat they 6a!t- they dema!d a !e6 ,aster to tell them7 3ut i the
people do !ot k!o6- does the CartyM Are 6e ba8k at the sta!dard topi8 o the Carty possessi!g
histori8al i!sight a!d leadi!g the peopleM
9t is 3re8ht 6ho gives us a 8lue here7 9! 6hat is or some the most problemati8 so!g o -he
Measure -a"en- the 8elebratio! o the Carty- he proposes somethi!g mu8h more u!iNue a!d pre8ise
tha! it may at irst appear7 9t looks like 3re8ht is simply elevati!g the Carty i!to the i!8ar!atio! o
Absolute *!o6ledge- a! histori8al age!t 6ith 8omplete a!d pere8t i!sight i!to the histori8al situatio!-
a Jsubje8t supposed to k!o6K i there ever 6as o!e+ J5ou have t6o eyes- but the Carty has a thousa!d
eyesRK =o6ever- a 8lose readi!g o the so!g makes it 8lear that somethi!g diere!t is goi!g o!+ i! their
reprima!d to the you!g 8ommu!ist- the 8horus says that the Carty does not k!o6 all- that the you!g
8ommu!ist may be right i! his disagreeme!t 6ith the predomi!a!t Carty li!e+ JSho6 us the 6ay 6hi8h
6e should take- a!d 6e > shall ollo6 it like you- but > do !ot take the right 6ay 6ithout us7 > /ithout
us- this 6ay is > the alsest o!e7 > Go !ot separate yoursel rom us7K This mea!s that the authority o the
Carty is not that o determi!ate positive k!o6ledge- but that o the form o k!o6ledge- o a !e6 type o
k!o6ledge li!ked to a 8olle8tive politi8al subje8t7 The 8ru8ial poi!t o! 6hi8h the 8horus i!sists is
simply that- i the you!g 8omrade thi!ks that he is right- he should ight or his positio! within the
8olle8tive orm o the Carty- !ot outside itEto put it i! a some6hat patheti8 6ay- i he is right- the! the
Carty !eeds him eve! more tha! its other members7 /hat the Carty dema!ds is that o!e grou!d o!eIs
J9K i! the J/eK o the CartyIs 8olle8tive ide!tity+ ight 6ith us- ight or us- ight or your truth agai!st
the Carty li!e- 1ust do not do it alone- outside the Carty7
,oveme!ts as age!ts o politi8iUatio! are a phe!ome!o! o JNualitative demo8ra8yK+ eve! i!
the mass protests i! Tahrir SNuare i! Dairo- the people 6ho gathered there 6ere al6ays a mi!orityEthe
reaso! they Jstood or the peopleK hi!ged o! their mobiliUi!g role i! the politi8al dy!ami87 9! a
homologous 6ay- the orga!iUi!g role o a Carty has !othi!g to do 6ith its a88ess to some privileged
k!o6ledge+ a Carty is !ot a igure o the .a8a!ia! subje8t:supposed:to:k!o6 but a! ope! ield o
k!o6ledge i! 6hi8h Jall possible mistakesK o88ur @.e!i!A7 =o6ever- eve! this mobiliUi!g role o
moveme!ts a!d parties is !ot e!ough+ the gap that separates the people themselves rom orga!iUed
orms o politi8al age!8y has to be someho6 over8omeEbut ho6M 4ot by the pro?imity o the people
a!d these orga!iUed ormsT somethi!g more is !eeded- a!d the parado? is that this JmoreK is a .eader-
the u!ity o Carty a!d people7 /e should !ot be araid to dra6 all the 8o!seNue!8es rom this i!sight-
e!dorsi!g the lesso! o =egelIs justii8atio! o mo!ar8hy a!d ruthlessly slaughteri!g ma!y liberal
sa8red 8o6s o! the 6ay7 The problem 6ith the Stali!ist leader 6as !ot a! e?8essive J8ult o
perso!ality-K but Nuite the opposite+ he 6as !ot e!ough o a ,aster but remai!ed part o the
bureau8rati8:party *!o6ledge- the e?emplary subje8t:supposed:to:k!o67
To take this step Jbeyo!d the possibleK i! todays 8o!stellatio!- 6e must shit the a88e!t o our
readi!g o ,ar?Is ,apital to Jthe u!dame!tal stru8tural 8e!trality o u!employme!t i! the te?t o
,apital itselK+ Ju!employme!t is stru8turally i!separable rom the dy!ami8 o a88umulatio! a!d
e?pa!sio! 6hi8h 8o!stitutes the very !ature o 8apitalism as su8h7K
'(
9! 6hat is arguably the e?treme
poi!t o the Ju!ity o oppositesK i! the sphere o the e8o!omy- it is the very su88ess o 8apitalism
@higher produ8tivity- et87A 6hi8h produ8es u!employme!t @re!ders more a!d more 6orkers
uselessAE6hat should be a blessi!g @less hard labor !eededA be8omes a 8urse7 The 6orld market is
thus- 6ith regard to its imma!e!t dy!ami8- Ja spa8e i! 6hi8h everyo!e has o!8e bee! a produ8tive
laborer- a!d i! 6hi8h labor has every6here begu! to pri8e itsel out o the system7K
'#
That is to say- i!
the o!goi!g pro8ess o 8apitalist globaliUatio!- the 8ategory o the u!employed a8Nuires a !e6 Nuality
beyo!d the 8lassi8 !otio! o the Jreserve army o laborK+ the 8ategory should !o6 i!8lude Jthose
massive populatio!s arou!d the 6orld 6ho have- as it 6ere- Vdropped out o history-I 6ho have bee!
deliberately e?8luded rom the moder!iUi!g proje8ts o First /orld 8apitalism a!d 6ritte! o as
hopeless or termi!al 8asesK+
''
so:8alled Jailed statesK @Do!go- SomaliaA- vi8tims o ami!e or
e8ologi8al disasters- trapped i! pseudo:ar8hai8 Jeth!i8 hatreds-K obje8ts o phila!thropy a!d 41Hs or
@ote! the same peopleA o the J6ar o! terror7K The 8ategory o the u!employed should thus be
e?pa!ded to e!8ompass a 6ide ra!ge o the global populatio!- rom the temporary u!employed-
through the !o:lo!ger employable a!d perma!e!tly u!employed- up to people livi!g i! slums a!d other
types o ghettos @i7e7- all those ote! dismissed by ,ar? himsel as Jlumpe!proletaria!sKA- a!d- i!ally-
all those areas- populatio!s or states e?8luded rom the global 8apitalist pro8ess- like bla!k spa8es i!
a!8ie!t maps7 Goes !ot this e?te!sio! o the 8ir8le o the Ju!employedK bri!g us ba8k rom ,ar? to
=egel+ the JrabbleK is ba8k- emergi!g at the very 8ore o ema!8ipatory strugglesM That is to say- su8h a
re:8ategoriUatio! 8ha!ges the e!tire J8og!itive mappi!gK o the situatio!+ 6hat o!8e lay i! the i!ert
ba8kgrou!d o =istory be8omes a pote!tial age!t o ema!8ipatory struggle7 Fe8all ,ar?Is dismissive
8hara8teriUatio! o the Fre!8h peasa!ts i! his Eighteenth /rumaire+

the great mass o the Fre!8h !atio! is ormed by the simple additio! o homologous mag!itudes- mu8h
as potatoes i! a sa8k orm a sa8k o potatoes O 9!soar as there is merely a lo8al i!ter8o!!e8tio!
amo!g these small:holdi!g peasa!ts- a!d the ide!tity o their i!terests orms !o 8ommu!ity- !o !atio!al
bo!d- a!d !o politi8al orga!iUatio! amo!g them- they do !ot 8o!stitute a 8lass7 They are thereore
i!8apable o asserti!g their 8lass i!terest i! their o6! !ame- 6hether through a parliame!t or a
8o!ve!tio!7 They 8a!!ot represe!t themselves- they must be represe!ted7
'$
9! the great t6e!tieth:8e!tury revolutio!ary mobiliUatio!s o peasa!ts @rom Dhi!a to 3oliviaA-
these Jsa8ks o potatoesK e?8luded rom the histori8al pro8ess bega! a8tively to represe!t themselves7
/e should !o!etheless add three Nualii8atio!s to 2ameso!Is deployme!t o this idea7 First- the
semioti8 sNuare proposed by 2ameso!E6hose terms are @1A 6orkers- @2A the reserve army o the
@temporarilyA u!employed- @"A the @perma!e!tlyA u!employable- a!d @(A the Jormerly employedK but
!o6 u!employableE!eeds to be 8orre8ted+ 6ould !ot a more appropriate ourth term be the illegally
employed- rom those 6orki!g i! bla8k markets a!d slums up to a!d i!8ludi!g diere!t orms o
slaveryM
'&
Se8o!d- 2ameso! ails to emphasiUe ho6 those Je?8ludedK are ote! !o!etheless included i!
the 6orld market7 Take the 8ase o todayIs Do!go+ be!eath the aeade o Jprimitive eth!i8 passio!sK
e?plodi!g yet agai! i! the Ari8a! Jheart o dark!ess-K it is easy to make out the 8o!tours o global
8apitalism7 Ater the all o ,obutu- Do!go !o lo!ger e?ists as a u!ited stateT its easter! part espe8ially
is !o6 a multipli8ity o territories ruled by lo8al 6arlords ea8h 8o!trolli!g their pat8h o la!d 6ith a!
army 6hi8h- as a rule- i!8ludes drugged 8hildre!- a!d ea8h 6ith busi!ess li!ks to a oreig! 8ompa!y or
8orporatio! e?ploiti!g the @mostlyA mi!i!g 6ealth i! the regio!7 This arra!geme!t suits both part!ers+
the 8orporatio!s get the mi!i!g rights 6ithout ta?es a!d so o!- the 6arlords get mo!ey7 The iro!y is
that ma!y o these mi!erals are used i! high:te8h produ8ts like laptops a!d 8ell pho!esEi! short+
orget about the savage 8ustoms o the lo8al populatio!- just subtra8t rom the eNuatio! the te8h!ology
8ompa!ies a!d the 6hole system o eth!i8 6arare uelled by a!8ie!t passio!s 6ill all apart7
2ameso!Is third 8ategory- the Jperma!e!tly u!employable-K should be suppleme!ted by its
opposite- 6hi8h 8o!sists o those edu8ated but 6ith !o 8ha!8e o i!di!g employme!t+ a 6hole
ge!eratio! o stude!ts have almost !o 8ha!8e o i!di!g a job 8orrespo!di!g to their Nualii8atio!s-
6hi8h leads to massive protestsT a!d the 6orst 6ay to resolve this gap is to dire8tly subordi!ate
edu8atio! to the dema!ds o the marketEi or !o other reaso! tha! that the market dy!ami8 itsel
re!ders the edu8atio! provided by u!iversities Jobsolete7K
2ameso! here makes a urther @parado?i8al- but thoroughly justiiedA step+ he 8hara8teriUes this
!e6 stru8tural u!employme!t as a orm o e&ploitationEthe e?ploited are !ot o!ly 6orkers produ8i!g
surplus:value appropriated by 8apital- they also i!8lude those stru8turally preve!ted rom getti!g
8aught up i! the 8apitalist vorte? o e?ploited 6age labor- i!8ludi!g 6hole geographi8al Uo!es a!d eve!
!atio! states7 =o6- the!- are 6e to rethi!k the 8o!8ept o e?ploitatio!M A radi8al 8ha!ge is !eeded here+
i! a properly diale8ti8al t6ist- e?ploitatio! i!8ludes its o6! !egatio!Ethe e?ploited are !ot o!ly those
6ho produ8e or J8reate-K but also @a!d eve! more soA those 6ho are 8o!dem!ed not to J8reate7K This
retur!s us or the last time to the stru8ture o the Fabi!ovit8h joke+ J/hy do you thi!k you are
e?ploitedMK JFor t6o reaso!s7 First- 6he! 9 6ork- the 8apitalist appropriates my surplus:value7K J3ut
you are !o6 u!employedE!o o!e is appropriati!g your surplus:value be8ause you 8reate !o!eRK JThis
is the se8o!d reaso! OK 0verythi!g hi!ges here o! the a8t that the 8apitalist 8ir8uit !ot o!ly !eeds
6orkers- but also ge!erates a Jreserve armyK o those 6ho 8a!!ot i!d 6ork+ the latter are !ot simply
outside the 8ir8ulatio! o 8apital- they are a8tively produ8ed as !ot:6orki!g by this 8ir8ulatio!7 Hr- to
reer agai! to the inotch"a joke- they are !ot simply !ot:6orki!g- their !ot:6orki!g is their positive
eature i! the same 6ay as J6ithout milkK is the positive eature o J8oee 6ithout milk7K
The importa!8e o this a88e!t o! e?ploitatio! be8omes 8lear 6he! 6e oppose it to domination-
the avored moti o diere!t versio!s o the post:moder! Jmi8ro:politi8s o po6er7K 9! short- the
theories o Fou8ault a!d Agambe! are i!sui8ie!t+ all their detailed elaboratio!s o the regulatory
po6er me8ha!isms o domi!atio!- all the 6ealth o !otio!s su8h as the e?8luded- bare lie- homo sacer-
et87- must be grou!ded i! @or mediated byA the 8e!trality o e?ploitatio!T 6ithout this reere!8e to the
e8o!omi8- the ight agai!st domi!atio! remai!s Ja! esse!tially moral or ethi8al o!e- 6hi8h leads to
pu!8tual revolts a!d a8ts o resista!8e rather tha! to the tra!sormatio! o the mode o produ8tio! as
su8hK
'%
Ethe positive program o su8h ideologies o Jpo6erK is ge!erally o!e o some type o Jdire8tK
demo8ra8y7 The out8ome o the emphasis o! domi!atio! is a demo8rati8 program- 6hile the out8ome
o the emphasis o! e?ploitatio! is a 8ommu!ist program7 There lies the limit o des8ribi!g the horrors
o the Third /orld i! terms o the ee8ts o domi!atio!+ the goal be8omes demo8ra8y a!d reedom7
0ve! the reere!8e to JimperialismK @i!stead o 8apitalismA u!8tio!s as a 8ase o ho6 Ja! e8o!omi8
8ategory 8a! so easily modulate i!to a 8o!8ept o po6er or domi!atio!K
$0
Ea!d the impli8atio! o this
shit to6ards domi!atio! is- o 8ourse- the belie i! a!other @Jalter!ateKA moder!ity i! 6hi8h 8apitalism
6ill u!8tio! i! a JairerK 6ay- 6ithout domi!atio!7
/hat this !otio! o domi!atio! ails to register is that o!ly i! 8apitalism is e?ploitatio!
J!aturaliUed-K i!s8ribed i!to the u!8tio!i!g o the e8o!omyEit is !ot the result o e?tra:e8o!omi8
pressure a!d viole!8e- a!d this is 6hy- i! 8apitalism- 6e have perso!al reedom a!d eNuality+ there is
!o !eed or dire8t so8ial domi!atio!- domi!atio! is already i!s8ribed i! the stru8ture o the produ8tio!
pro8ess7 This is also 6hy the 8ategory o surplus:value is 8ru8ial here+ ,ar? al6ays emphasiUed that
the e?8ha!ge bet6ee! 6orker a!d 8apitalist is JjustK i! the se!se that 6orkers @as a ruleA get paid the
ull value o their labor:po6er as a 8ommodityEthere is !o dire8t Je?ploitatio!K hereT that is- it is !ot
that 6orkers Jare !ot paid the ull value o the 8ommodity they are selli!g to the 8apitalists7K So 6hile
i! a market e8o!omy 9 remai! de facto depe!de!t- this depe!de!8y is !o!etheless J8iviliUed-K realiUed
i! the orm o a JreeK market e?8ha!ge bet6ee! me a!d other perso!s i!stead o i! the orm o dire8t
servitude or eve! physi8al 8oer8io!7 9t is easy to ridi8ule Ay! Fa!d- but there is a grai! o truth i! the
amous Jhym! to mo!eyK rom her +tlas Shrugged+ J)!til a!d u!less you dis8over that mo!ey is the
root o all good- you ask or your o6! destru8tio!7 /he! mo!ey 8eases to be8ome the mea!s by 6hi8h
me! deal 6ith o!e a!other- the! me! be8ome the tools o other me!7 3lood- 6hips a!d gu!s or dollars7
Take your 8hoi8eEthere is !o other7K
$1
Gid ,ar? !ot say somethi!g similar i! his 6ell:k!o6!
ormula o ho6- i! the u!iverse o 8ommodities- Jrelatio!s bet6ee! people assume the guise o
relatio!s amo!g thi!gsKM 9! the market e8o!omy- relatio!s bet6ee! people 8a! appear as relatio!s o
mutually re8og!iUed reedom a!d eNuality+ domi!atio! is !o lo!ger dire8tly e!a8ted a!d visible as
su8h7
The liberal a!s6er to domi!atio! is re8og!itio! @as 6e have see!- a avored topi8 amo!g
Jliberal =egelia!sKA+ re8og!itio! Jbe8omes a stake i! a multi8ultural settleme!t by 6hi8h the various
groups pea8eably a!d ele8torally divide up the spoils7K
$2
The subje8ts o re8og!itio! are !ot 8lasses @it
is mea!i!gless to dema!d the re8og!itio! o the proletariat as a 8olle8tive subje8tEi a!ythi!g- as8ism
does this- dema!di!g the mutual re8og!itio! o 8lassesA7 Subje8ts o re8og!itio! are those dei!ed by
ra8e- ge!der- et87Ethe politi8s o re8og!itio! remai!s 6ithi! the bourgeois 8ivil so8iety rame6ork- it
is !ot yet 8lass politi8s7
$"
The re8urre!t story o the 8o!temporary .et is that o a leader or party ele8ted 6ith u!iversal
e!thusiasm- promisi!g a J!e6 6orldK @,a!dela- .ula- et87AEbut- the!- soo!er or later- usually ater a
8ouple o years- they 8o!ro!t the key dilemma+ 6hether to dare to mess 6ith the 8apitalist me8ha!ism-
or 6hether to just Jplay the game7K 9 o!e disturbs the me8ha!ism- o!e 6ill be very s6itly Jpu!ishedK
by market perturbatio!s- e8o!omi8 8haos- a!d the rest7
$(
So although it is true that a!ti:8apitalism
8a!!ot be the dire8t goal o politi8al a8tio!Ei! politi8s- o!e opposes 8o!8rete politi8al age!ts a!d their
a8tio!s- !ot a! a!o!ymous JsystemKE6e should apply here the .a8a!ia! disti!8tio! bet6ee! goal a!d
aim+ a!ti:8apitalism- i !ot the immediate goal o ema!8ipatory politi8s- should be its ultimate aim- the
horiUo! o all its a8tivity7 9s this !ot the lesso! o ,ar?Is !otio! o the J8ritiNue o political e8o!omyKM
Although the sphere o the e8o!omy appears Japoliti8al-K it is the se8ret poi!t o reere!8e a!d
stru8turi!g pri!8iple o politi8al struggles7
Fetur!i!g to Fa!d- 6hat is problemati8 is her u!derlyi!g premise+ that the o!ly 8hoi8e is
bet6ee! dire8t a!d i!dire8t relatio!s o domi!atio! a!d e?ploitatio!- 6ith a!y alter!ative dismissed as
utopia!7 =o6ever- as !oted above- 6e should !o!etheless re8og!iUe the mome!t o truth i! Fa!dIs
other6ise ridi8ulously ideologi8al 8laim+ the great lesso! o state so8ialism 6as i!deed that a!
immediate abolitio! o private property a!d market:regulated e?8ha!ge- i! the abse!8e o 8o!8rete
orms o so8ial regulatio! o the pro8ess o produ8tio!- !e8essarily resus8itates dire8t relatio!s o
servitude a!d domi!atio!7 2ameso! himsel alls short 6ith regard to this poi!t+ o8usi!g o! ho6
8apitalist e?ploitatio! is 8ompatible 6ith demo8ra8y- ho6 legal reedom 8a! be the very orm o
e?ploitatio!- he ig!ores the sad lesso! o the t6e!tieth:8e!tury e?perie!8e o the .et+ i 6e merely
abolish the market @i!8ludi!g market e?ploitatio!A 6ithout repla8i!g it 6ith a! adeNuate orm o
8ommu!ist orga!iUatio! o produ8tio! a!d e?8ha!ge- domi!atio! retur!s 6ith a ve!gea!8e- a!d 6ith it
dire8t e?ploitatio!7
/he! deali!g 6ith the topi8 o huma! rights- the 8ritiNue o ideology te!ds to 8ommit t6o
@opposedA mistakes7 The irst is the obvious o!e+ the symptomal poi!t @e?8ess- sel:!egatio!-
a!tago!ismA o a ield is redu8ed to a mere a88ide!t- a! empiri8al impere8tio!- rather tha! somethi!g
that emerges !e8essarily7 The !otio! o u!iversal huma! rights de facto privileges a determi!ate set o
parti8ular 8ultural values @0uropea! i!dividualism- et87A- 6hi8h mea!s that their u!iversality is alse7
=o6ever- there is also the opposite mistake+ the e!tire ield is 8ollapsed i!to its symptomEJbourgeoisK
reedom a!d eNuality are directly and only 8apitalist ideologi8al masks or domi!atio! a!d e?ploitatio!-
Ju!iversal huma! rightsK are directly and only the mea!s o justiyi!g imperialist 8olo!ialist
i!terve!tio!s- et87 /hile the irst mistake is part o 8riti8o:ideologi8al 8ommo! se!se- the se8o!d is
usually !egle8ted a!d as su8h all the more da!gerous7 The properly ,ar?ist 8riti8al !otio! o Jormal
reedomK is mu8h more rei!ed+ yes- Jbourgeois reedomK is merely ormal- but- as su8h- it is the only
form of appearance ?or potential site@ of actual freedom7 9! short- i o!e prematurely abolishes
JormalK reedom- o!e loses also @the pote!tial oA a8tual reedomEor- to put it i! more pra8ti8al
terms- i! its very abstra8tio!- ormal reedom !ot o!ly obus8ates a8tual u!reedom- it simulta!eously
ope!s up the spa8e or the 8riti8al a!alysis o a8tual u!reedom7
$#
/hat urther 8ompli8ates the situatio! is that the rise o bla!k spa8es i! global 8apitalism is i!
itsel also a proo that 8apitalism 8a! !o lo!ger aord a u!iversal 8ivil order o reedom a!d
demo8ra8y- that it i!8reasi!gly reNuires e?8lusio! a!d domi!atio!7 The 8ase o the Tia!a!me!
8ra8kdo6! i! Dhi!a is e?emplary here+ 6hat 6as Nuashed by the brutal military i!terve!tio! 6as !ot
the prospe8t o a ast e!try i!to the liberal:demo8rati8 8apitalist order- but the ge!ui!ely utopia!
possibility o a more demo8rati8 and more just so8iety+ the e?plosio! o brutal 8apitalism ater 1%%0
6e!t ha!d i! ha!d 6ith the re:assertio! o !o!:demo8rati8 Carty rule7 Fe8all the 8lassi8al ,ar?ist
thesis o! early moder! 0!gla!d+ it 6as i! the bourgeoisieIs o6! i!terest to leave the political po6er to
the aristo8ra8y a!d keep or itsel the economic po6er7 ,aybe somethi!g homologous is goi!g o! i!
todayIs Dhi!a+ it 6as i! the i!terest o the !e6 8apitalists to leave politi8al po6er to the Dommu!ist
Carty7
=o6- the!- are 6e to break out o the deadlo8k o post:politi8al de:histori8iUatio!M /hat to do
ater the H88upy /all Street moveme!t- 6he! the protests 6hi8h started ar a6ay @,iddle 0ast-
1ree8e- Spai!- )*A rea8hed the 8e!ter- a!d are !o6 rei!or8ed a!d rolli!g out all arou!d the 6orldM
/hat should be resisted at this stage is pre8isely a Nui8k tra!slatio! o the e!ergy o the protest i!to a
set o J8o!8reteK pragmati8 dema!ds7 The protests did 8reate a va8uumEa va8uum i! the ield o
hegemo!i8 ideology- a!d time is !eeded to ill this va8uum i! a proper 6ay- si!8e it is preg!a!t- a!
ope!i!g or the truly 4e67 /hat 6e should al6ays bear i! mi!d is that a!y debate here a!d !o6
!e8essarily remai!s a debate o! the e!emyIs tur+ time is !eeded to deploy the !e6 8o!te!t7 All 6e say
!o6 8a! be take! @re8uperatedA rom usEeverythi!g e?8ept our sile!8e7 This sile!8e- this reje8tio! o
dialogue- o all orms o 8li!8hi!g- is our Jterror-K omi!ous a!d threate!i!g as it should be7
Goes this !egative gesture o protesters !ot bri!g us ba8k to ,elvilleIs /artleby- to 3artlebyIs
J9 6ould preer !ot toKM 3artleby says- J9 6ould preer !ot toK a!d not J9 do!It preer @or 8areA to do
itKE6e are thereby ba8k at *a!tIs disti!8tio! bet6ee! !egative a!d i!i!ite judgme!t7 9! his reusal o
the ,asterIs order- 3artleby does !ot !egate the predi8ate- he rather affirms a non*predicate+ 6hat he
says is !ot that he doesnt want to do itT he says that he prefers ?wants@ not to do it7 This is ho6 6e pass
rom the politi8s o Jresista!8e-K parasiti8al upo! 6hat it !egates- to a politi8s 6hi8h ope!s up a !e6
spa8e outside the hegemo!i8 positio! and its !egatio!7
$'
9! the terms o H88upy /all Street- the
protesters are !ot sayi!g o!ly that they 6ould preer !ot to parti8ipate i! the da!8e o 8apital a!d its
8ir8ulatio!- they 6ould also Jpreer !ot toK 8ast a 8riti8al vote @or JourK 8a!didatesA or e!gage i! a!y
orm o J8o!stru8tive dialogue7K This is the gesture o subtra8tio! at its purest- the redu8tio! o all
Nualitative diere!8es to a purely ormal mi!imal diere!8e 6hi8h ope!s up the spa8e or the 4e67
There is a lo!g road ahead- a!d soo! 6e 6ill have to address the truly dii8ult Nuestio!sE!ot about
6hat 6e do !ot 6a!t- but about 6hat 6e do 6a!t7 /hat orm o so8ial orga!iUatio! 8a! repla8e the
a8tually e?isti!g 8apitalismM /hat type o !e6 leaders do 6e !eedM A!d 6hat orga!s- i!8ludi!g those
o 8o!trol a!d repressio!M The t6e!tieth:8e!tury alter!atives obviously did !ot 6ork7 /hile it is
thrilli!g to e!joy the pleasures o JhoriUo!tal orga!iUatio!-K o protesti!g 8ro6ds 6ith their egalitaria!
solidarity a!d ree ope!:e!ded debates- these debates 6ill have to 8oales8e !ot o!ly arou!d some !e6
,aster:Sig!iiers- but also i! 8o!8rete a!s6ers to the old .e!i!ist Nuestio! J/hat is to be do!eMK
Fea8ti!g to the Caris protests o 1%'&- .a8a! said+ J/hat you aspire to as revolutio!aries is a master7
5ou 6ill get o!e7K
$$
Although this diag!osti8>prog!osti8 should be reje8ted as a u!iversal stateme!t
about every revolutio!ary upheaval- it 8o!tai!s a grai! o truth+ i!soar as the protest remai!s at the
level o a hysteri8al provo8atio! o the ,aster- 6ithout a positive program or the !e6 order to repla8e
the old o!e- it ee8tively u!8tio!s as a @disavo6ed- o 8ourseA 8all or a !e6 ,aster7
Fa8ed 6ith the dema!ds o the protesters- i!telle8tuals are dei!itely !ot i! the positio! o the
subje8ts supposed to k!o6+ they 8a!!ot operatio!aliUe these dema!ds- or tra!slate them i!to proposals
or pre8ise a!d realisti8 measures7 /ith the all o t6e!tieth:8e!tury 8ommu!ism- they orever oreited
the role o the va!guard 6hi8h k!o6s the la6s o history a!d 8a! guide the i!!o8e!ts alo!g its path7
The people- ho6ever- also do !ot have a88ess to the reNuisite k!o6ledgeEthe JpeopleK as a !e6 igure
o the subje8t supposed to k!o6 is a myth o the Carty 6hi8h 8laims to a8t o! its behal- rom ,aoIs
guideli!e to Jlear! rom the peasa!tsK to =eideggerIs aoreme!tio!ed appeal to his old armer rie!d i!
his short te?t J/hy Go 9 Stay i! the Crovi!8esMK rom 1%"(- a mo!th ater he resig!ed as the dea! o
the Freiburg )!iversity+

Fe8e!tly 9 got a se8o!d i!vitatio! to tea8h at the )!iversity o 3erli!7 H! that o88asio! 9 let Freiburg
a!d 6ithdre6 to the 8abi!7 9 liste!ed to 6hat the mou!tai!s a!d the orest a!d the armla!ds 6ere
sayi!g- a!d 9 6e!t to see a! old rie!d o mi!e- a $#:year old armer7 =e had read about the 8all to
3erli! i! the !e6spapers7 /hat 6ould he sayM Slo6ly he i?ed the sure gaUe o his 8lear eyes o! mi!e-
a!d keepi!g his mouth tightly shut- he thoughtully put his aithul ha!d o! my shoulder7 0ver so
slightly he shook his head7 That mea!t+ absolutely !oR
$&
H!e 8a! o!ly imagi!e 6hat the old armer 6as really thi!ki!gEi! all probability- he k!e6 6hat
a!s6er =eidegger 6a!ted rom him a!d politely provided it7 4o 6isdom o ordi!ary me! 6ill tell the
protesters warum bleiben wir in Wall Street7 There is !o Subje8t 6ho k!o6s- a!d !either i!telle8tuals
!or ordi!ary people are that subje8t7 9s this a deadlo8k the!+ a bli!d ma! leadi!g the bli!d- or- more
pre8isely- ea8h o them assumi!g that the other is !ot bli!dM 4o- be8ause their respe8tive ig!ora!8e is
!ot symmetri8al+ it is the people 6ho have the a!s6ers- they just do !ot k!o6 the Nuestio!s to 6hi8h
they have @or- rather- areA the a!s6er7 2oh! 3erger 6rote about the JmultitudesK o those 6ho i!d
themselves o! the 6ro!g side o the /all @6hi8h divides those 6ho are i! rom those 6ho are outA+

The multitudes have a!s6ers to Nuestio!s 6hi8h have !ot yet bee! posed- a!d they have the 8apa8ity to
outlive the 6alls7 The Nuestio!s are !ot yet asked be8ause to do so reNuires 6ords a!d 8o!8epts 6hi8h
ri!g true- a!d those 8urre!tly bei!g used to !ame eve!ts have bee! re!dered mea!i!gless+ Gemo8ra8y-
.iberty- Crodu8tivity- et87 /ith !e6 8o!8epts the Nuestio!s 6ill soo! be posed- or history i!volves
pre8isely su8h a pro8ess o Nuestio!i!g7 Soo!M /ithi! a ge!eratio!7
$%
Dlaude .Lvi:Strauss 6rote that the prohibitio! o i!8est is !ot a Nuestio!- a! e!igma- but a!
a!s6er to a Nuestio! that 6e do !ot k!o67 /e should treat the dema!ds o the /all Street protests i! a
similar 6ay+ i!telle8tuals should !ot primarily take them as dema!ds- Nuestio!s- or 6hi8h they should
produ8e 8lear a!s6ers- programs about 6hat to do7 They are a!s6ers- a!d i!telle8tuals should propose
the Nuestio!s to 6hi8h they are a!s6ers7 The situatio! is like that i! psy8hoa!alysis- 6here the patie!t
k!o6s the a!s6er @his symptoms are su8h a!s6ersA but does !ot k!o6 6hat they are the a!s6ers to-
a!d the a!alyst has to ormulate the Nuestio!s7 H!ly through su8h patie!t 6ork 6ill a program emerge7
3adiou has argued- i! relatio! to AristotleIs pri!8iple o !o!:8o!tradi8tio! a!d the pri!8iple o
the e?8luded middle- that there are three modes o !egatio!7
&0
H the our logi8al possibilities- 3adiou
begi!s by dismissi!g the last o!e @!egatio! 6hi8h obeys !either pri!8ipleA as Ji!8o!siste!t-K eNuivale!t
to the 8omplete dissolutio! o all pote!8y o !egativity- so that three 8o!siste!t orms remai!- ea8h o
them itti!g a 8ertai! logi8al rame6ork+ @1A !egatio! obeys both pri!8iplesE8lassi8al logi8 @AristotleAT
@2A !egatio! obeys the pri!8iple o 8o!tradi8tio!- but !ot the e?8luded middleEi!tuitio!ist logi8
@3rou6er- =eyti!gAT @"A !egatio! obeys the e?8luded middle- but !ot the pri!8iple o
8o!tradi8tio!Epara8o!siste!t logi8 @the 3raUilia! s8hool- da DostaA7 9! 8lassi8al logi8- the !egatio! o
C e?8ludes !ot o!ly C itsel- but a!y other possibility 8o!8er!i!g the 8o!te!ts o the propositio! C7 9!
i!tuitio!ist logi8- the !egatio! o C e?8ludes C itsel- but !ot some other possibilities 6hi8h are
some6here bet6ee! C a!d !o!:C7 9! para8o!siste!t logi8- the !egatio! o C e?8ludes that sort o spa8e
bet6ee! C a!d !o!:C- but !ot C itselEC is !ot really suppressed by its !egatio! @!o 6o!der 3adiou
li!ks this !egatio! i! 6hi8h JC lies i!side the !egatio! o CK to =egelIs diale8ti8A7 For e?ample- i! the
8lassi8al ethi8o:legal domai!- someo!e is either guilty or i!!o8e!t- 6ith !o Uo!e i! bet6ee!T i! the
i!tuitio!ist spa8e- 6e al6ays have i!termediate values- like Jguilty 6ith atte!uati!g 8ir8umsta!8es-K
Ji!!o8e!t be8ause- 6hile 8ertai!ly guilty- there is i!sui8ie!t proo-K et87 9! the para8o!siste!t spa8e
@!ot u!amiliar to 8ertai! theologiesA- o!e 8a! be both at the same time- although there is !o third
optio!+ my deep a6are!ess o my guilt is the o!ly proo 9 8a! have o my i!!o8e!8e- a!d so o!7
As might be e?pe8ted- 3adiouIs privileged e?ample is that o revolutio!7 The 8ommu!ist
revolutio! is 8lassi8al- a radi8al 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith !o third optio!- either us or them+ the poor 6orker
6ho beore the revolutio! appears as !othi!g i! the politi8al ield- be8omes the !e6 hero o this ield7
9! the i!tuitio!ist spa8e o so8ial:demo8rati8 reormism- the poor 6orker appears i! the politi8al ield-
but is i! !o 6ay its !e6 hero+ the idea is to rea8h a 8ompromise- to i!d a third 6ay- to mai!tai!
8apitalism- but 6ith more so8ial respo!sibility- a!d so orth7 9! the third 8ase o para8o!siste!t spa8e-
6e get a sort o u!de8idability bet6ee! eve!t a!d !o!:eve!t+ somethi!g happe!s- but- rom the poi!t o
vie6 o the 6orld- everythi!g is ide!ti8al- so 6e have eve!t a!d !o!:eve!t simulta!eouslyEa alse
eve!t- a simula8rum- as i! the as8ist Jrevolutio!K 6hi8h de!ou!8es Jpluto8rati8 e?ploitatio!K a!d
mai!tai!s 8apitalism7 As 3adiou 8o!8ludes+ JThe lesso! is that- 6he! the 6orld is i!tuitio!isti8- a true
8ha!ge must be 8lassi8al- a!d a alse 8ha!ge para8o!siste!t7K
3ut 6hat i todayIs late:8apitalist 6orld is !o lo!ger i!tuitio!isti8M 9s !ot Jpostmoder!K
8apitalism a! i!8reasi!gly para8o!siste!t system i! 6hi8h- i! a variety o modes- C is !o!:C+ the order
is its o6! tra!sgressio!- 8apitalism 8a! thrive u!der 8ommu!ist rule- a!d so o!M =ere- 8lassi8al 8ha!ge
!o lo!ger 6orks- be8ause the !egatio! gets 8aught up i! the game7 The o!ly remai!i!g solutio! is thus
to go 6ith the ourth optio! @dismissed by 3adiou- but 6hi8h should be give! a diere!t readi!gA7 The
irst thi!g to remember is the radi8al asymmetry o the 8lass struggle+ the aim o the proletariat is !ot
simply to !egate @i! 6hatever 6ayA its e!emy- the 8apitalists- but to !egate @abolishA itsel as a 8lass7
This is 6hy 6e are deali!g here 6ith a Jthird 6ayK @!either proletaria! !or 8apitalistA 6hi8h is !ot
e?8luded- but also 6ith a suspe!sio! o the pri!8iple o 8o!tradi8tio! @it is the proletariat itsel 6hi8h
strives to abolish itsel- its 8o!ditio!A7
/hat does this mea! i! terms o the libidi!al e8o!omyM 9! a letter to 0i!stei!- as 6ell as i! his
ew Introductory .ectures to )sychoanalysis- Freud proposed as a utopia! solutio! or the deadlo8ks
o huma!ity the Jdi8tatorship o reaso!KEme! should u!ite a!d together subordi!ate a!d master their
irratio!al u!8o!s8ious or8es7 The problem here- o 8ourse- lies 6ith the very disti!8tio! bet6ee!
reaso! a!d the u!8o!s8ious+ o! the o!e ha!d- the Freudia! u!8o!s8ious is Jratio!al-K dis8ursive- havi!g
!othi!g to do 6ith a reservoir o dark primitive i!sti!8tsT o! the other ha!d- reaso! is or Freud al6ays
8lose to Jratio!aliUatio!-K to i!di!g @alseA reaso!s or a 8ause 6hose true !ature is disavo6ed7 The
i!terse8tio! bet6ee! reaso! a!d drive is best sig!aled by the a8t that Freud uses the same ormulatio!
or both+ the voi8e o reaso! or o the drive is ote! sile!t- slo6- but it persists orever7 This i!terse8tio!
is our o!ly hope7
The 8ommu!ist horiUo! is peopled by t6o mille!!ia o ailed radi8al egalitaria! rebellio!s rom
Sparta8us o!6ardsEyes- they 6ere all lost 8auses- but- as 17 *7 Dhesterto! put it i! his Whats Wrong
with the World- Jthe lost 8auses are e?a8tly those 6hi8h might have saved the 6orld7K
&1
1 2a8Nues .a8a!- JVers u! sig!iia!t !ouveau-K $rnicar 1$X1& @1%$%A- p7 2"7
2 See Alai! 3adiou- .e fini et linfini- Caris+ 3ayard 2010- p7 107
" FreudIs o6! eppur si muove 6as the sayi!g o his tea8her Dhar8ot 6hi8h Freud ote!
repeated+ J.a thAorie! cest bon! mais Ba nempJche pas de&isterK @JTheory is good- but it does!It
preve!t [a8ts 6hi8h do !ot it it\ rom e?isti!gKA- a!d it goes 6ithout sayi!g that the same ambiguity
holds or this versio!- i7e7- that it should !ot be redu8ed to simple empiri8ism7
( This Jdis8ursive materialismK relies o! the so:8alled Jli!guisti8 tur!K i! philosophy 6hi8h
emphasiUes ho6 la!guage is !ot a !eutral medium o desig!atio!- but a pra8ti8e embedded i! a lie
6orld+ 6e do thi!gs 6ith it- a88omplish spe8ii8 a8ts O 9s it !ot time to tur! this 8li8hL arou!d+ 6ho is
it that- today- 8laims that la!guage is a !eutral medium o desig!atio!M So- perhaps- o!e should
emphasiUe ho6 la!guage is !ot a mere mome!t o the lie 6orld- a pra8ti8e 6ithi! it+ the true mira8le o
la!guage is that it 8a! also serve as a !eutral medium 6hi8h just desig!ates a 8o!8eptual>ideal 8o!te!t7
9! other 6ords- the true task is !ot to lo8ate la!guage as a !eutral medium 6ithi! a lie:6orld pra8ti8e-
but to sho6 ho6- 6ithi! this lie 6orld- a !eutral medium o desig!atio! 8a! !o!etheless emerge7
# 9- o 8ourse- ully e!dorse the results o the !e6 resear8h 6hi8h demo!strated 8o!8lusively
!ot o!ly that there is !o simple li!ear progressio! i! the order o su88essio! o these our
!amesEFi8hte a!d =egel 8learly Jmisu!derstoodK *a!t i! their 8ritiNue- S8helli!g misu!derstood
Fi8hte- =egel 6as totally bli!d to 6hat is arguably S8helli!gIs greatest a8hieveme!t- his treatise o
huma! reedomEbut also that- ote!- o!e 8a!!ot eve! dire8tly pass rom o!e !ame to a!other+ Gieter
=e!ri8h sho6ed ho6- i! order to grasp the i!!er logi8 o the passage rom *a!t to Fi8hte- o!e should
take i!to a88ou!t *a!tIs irst 8riti8al ollo6ers- Fei!hold- 2a8obi- a!d S8hulUe- i! other 6ords- ho6
Fi8hteIs early system 8a! o!ly be properly u!derstood as a rea8tio! to these early 8riti8s o *a!t7
' Gieter =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel8 .ectures on (erman Idealism- Dambridge- ,A+
=arvard )!iversity Cress 200&- p7 "27
$ 9bid7
& 9bid7
% 9bid7
10 3ret /7 Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will8 $n the Way to the (elassenheit- 0va!sto!+
4orth6ester! )!iversity Cress 200$- p7 10$7
11 For a more detailed a!alysis o this reversal- see my -he Indivisible 7emainder- .o!do!+
Verso 3ooks 1%%'7
12 F7 /7 27 S8helli!g- S=mmtliche Wer"e- Cart 2- Vol7 1- Stuttgart:Augsberg+ 27 17 Dotta- 1&#'X
'1- p7 2%(- as Nuoted a!d tra!slated by 3ru8e ,atthe6s i! his i!trodu8tio! to S8helli!gIs -he
(rounding of )ositive )hilosophy- Alba!y+ S)45 Cress 200$- p7 "(7
1" Friedri8h =Zlderli!- Jqber )rtheil u!d Sey!K @1$%#A- as tra!slated i! =7 S7 =arris- 0egels
Development8 -oward the Sunlight 1$$0X1&01- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress 1%$2- pp7 #1#X1'7
1( =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- pp7 2&%X%07
1# 9 am here deeply i!debted to Datheri!e ,alabou- .avenir de 0egel- Caris+ 27 Vri! 1%%'
@available i! 0!glish as -he Future of 0egel- tra!s7 .isabeth Guri!g- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200#A7
.avenir de 0egel isEtogether 6ith 1Lrard .ebru!Is .a patience du concept a!d 3eatri8e
.o!gue!esseIs 0egel et la criti<ue de la mAtaphysi<ueEo!e o the books o! =egel that- i! a! almost
regular rhythm o every de8ade or t6o- mysteriously sura8e i! Fra!8e- books 6hi8h are epochal i! the
stri8test mea!i!g o the 6ord+ they redei!e the e!tire ield i!to 6hi8h they i!terve!eEliterally-
nothing remains the same ater o!e immerses o!esel i! o!e o these books7 H!e 8a!!ot but ully agree
6ith Gerrida 6he! he 6rote that J!othi!g 6ill ever absolve us rom ollo6i!g step by step- page by
page- the e?traordi!ary traje8tory o -he Future of 0egel O 9 o!8e agai! urge all to read this book7K
To this series 6e should add Febe88a DomayIs Mourning Sic"ness Calo Alto+ Sta!ord
)!iversity Cress 2011A- the latest Jthe bookK o! =egel- 8o!irmi!g the suspi8io! thatEover the past
e6 de8ades- at leastEo!ly a 6oma! 8a! 6rite a really good book o! =egel7
1' For JThe Aristo8ratsK see the Wi"ipedia e!try or JThe Aristo8rats @jokeA7K H!e should
!o!etheless i!sist that- i!stead o relyi!g o! the reversal o superi8ial i!!o8e!8e i!to a dirty
@se?ualiUedA message- good jokes more ote! pra8ti8e the opposite reversal o vulgar obs8e!ity i!to
i!!o8e!8e- as i! the 6o!derully stupid @apoliti8alRA Fussia! joke rom the time o the Soviet )!io!+
t6o me!- stra!gers to ea8h other- sit i! the same 8ompartme!t o! a trai!7 Ater a lo!g sile!8e- o!e
sudde!ly addresses the other+ J=ave you ever u8ked a dogMK Surprised- the other replies+ J4oEhave
youMK JH 8ourse !ot7 9 just asked to start a 8o!versatio!RK
1$ Alai! 3adiou- Manifesto for )hilosophy- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 1%%%- p7 &(7 /ho is
a!tiphilosopher to 6homM 3adiou some6here spe8ulates that =era8litus is the a!ti:philosopher to
Carme!ides- the sophists to Clato @although they temporarily a!d logi8ally pre8ede himA- Cas8al to
Ges8artes- =ume to .eib!iU- *ierkegaard @a!d ,ar?MA to =egel- a!d eve! .a8a! to =eidegger7
=o6ever- this pi8ture has to be 8ompli8ated+ is *a!tIs thoughtEor eve! the e!tirety o 1erma!
9dealism 6ith its 8e!tral moti- the prima8y o pra8ti8al over theoreti8al reaso!E!ot the a!tiphilosophy
to 8lassi8al metaphysi8s i! its last great mode @o Spi!oUa a!d .eib!iUAM Hr is SadeEi! the .a8a!ia!
readi!gE!ot the a!tiphilosopher to *a!t- so that .a8a!Is Jave8K mea!s to read a philosopher through
his a!tiphilosopherM A!d is =egelIs true a!tiphilosopher !ot already the late S8helli!gM Hr- a step eve!
urther- is =egelIs u!iNue!ess !ot that he is his own antiphilosopherM
1& Follo6i!g this path- 2ambet immersed himsel i! the thought o ,olla Sadra- the great
9ra!ia! thi!ker rom the seve!tee!th 8e!turyEa positio! 6hi8h is !ot oreig! to the 1!osti8 tur! o
0uropea! thi!kers like Ceter Sloterdijk7 See Dhristia! 2ambet- -he +ct of /eing- 4e6 5ork+ Bo!e
3ooks 200'7
1 .ud6ig /ittge!stei!- -ractatus .ogico*)hilosophicus- 4e6 5ork+ Dosimo Dlassi8s 200$7
2 Wuoted rom 0lai!e Fei!stei!- +nna of +ll the 7ussians- 4e6 5ork+ Alred A7 *!op 200#- p7
1$07
" Crimo .eviIs late book o! the 8hemi8al eleme!ts @-he )eriodic -able- 4e6 5ork+ Alred A7
*!op 1%%'A should be read agai!st this ba8kgrou!d o the dii8ultiesEi!deed the u!dame!tal
impossibilityEo ully !arrativiUi!g o!eIs 8o!ditio!- o telli!g o!eIs lie story as a 8o!siste!t !arrative+
or .evi- the trauma o the =olo8aust preve!ted it7 So- or him- the o!ly 6ay to avoid the 8ollapse o his
symboli8 u!iverse 6as to i!d support i! some e?tra:symboli8 Feal- the Feal o the 8lassii8atio! o
8hemi8al eleme!ts @a!d- o 8ourse- i! his versio!- the 8lassii8atio! served o!ly as a! empty rame+
ea8h eleme!t 6as e?plai!ed i! terms o its symboli8 asso8iatio!sA7
( 17 *7 Dhesterto!- $rthodo&y- Sa! Fra!8is8o+ 9g!atius Cress 1%%#- p7 "&7
# 2orge Sempr_!- -he .ong 6oyage- 4e6 5ork+ Hverlook Cress 200#7
' 9bid7- p7 "%7
$ See Fobert A!telme- .esp>ce humaine- Caris+ 1allimard 1%$&7
& Crimo .evi- If -his Is a Man- 4e6 5ork+ Alred A7 *!op 2000- p7 '"7
% Sempr_!- -he .ong 6oyage- p7 1$27
10 9 o6e this i!ormatio! to Galmar Abdulmejid- Dhi8ago7
11 ,ar8us Aurelius- Meditations- tra!s7 1regory =ays- 4e6 5ork+ ,oder! .ibrary 2002- pp7
$0X17
12 9mma!uel *a!t- JThe Do!li8t o Fa8ulties-K i! )olitical Writings- Dambridge+ Dambridge
)!iversity Cress 1%%1- p7 1&27
1" 1illes GeleuUe- -he .ogic of Sense- tra!s7 ,ark .ester 6ith Dharles Stivale- 4e6 5ork+
Dolumbia )!iversity Cress 1%%0- p7 #7
1( 9bid- p7 $7
1# 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress 1%$$- p7 &%7
1' 2a8Nues .a8a!- -he Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7
4orto! i Dompa!y 1%$&- p7 10"7
1$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- -he Science of .ogic- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- Atla!ti8 =ighla!ds+ =uma!ities
Cress 1%'%- p7 (007
1& Clato- -he Dialogues of )lato- Vol7 (- tra!s7 37 2o6ett- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity Cress
1&%27
1% ,lade! Golar- J9! Carme!idem Carvi Domme!tarii-K 0elios "1+1X2 @200(A- p7 '#7
20 Goes the parallel bet6ee! the passage rom Clato to Aristotle a!d the passage rom *a!t to
=egel really holdM 9s =egel really- as 3ukhari! put it- Jthe Aristotle o the bourgeoisieKM 4ot so ast O
21 +uthors translation8 Alai! 3adiou- .ogi<ues des mondes- Caris+ Seuil 200'- p7 %7
22 2eli8a Sumi8- JH! the Cath o the Sembla!t-K 3mbr?a@ 1 @200$A- pp7 12X1"7
2" This poi!t 6as made already by Aristotle+ 6e are able to e!joy the mimesisEsay- i!
theatri8al stagi!g or i! a pai!ti!gEo somethi!g 6hi8h is i! itsel ugly a!d 6hi8h 6e 6ould i!d
e?tremely repelli!g 6ere 6e to e!8ou!ter it i! reality7
2( Sumi8- JH! the Cath o the Sembla!t-K p7 1"7
2# Fussell 1rigg- JSembla!t- Challus a!d Hbje8t i! .a8a!Is Tea8hi!g-K 3mbr?a@ 1 @200$A- p7
1"(7
2' 9t is said o 0dgar /alla8eEthe 0!glish dete8tive:i8tio! 6riter popular bet6ee! the t6o
6orld 6ars but today orgotte!- 6ho 6as k!o6! as a e?tremely ast a!d prolii8 6riterEthat o!e o his
se8retaryIs duties 6as to 8he8k the ate o his 8hara8ters to preve!t these ki!d o a88ide!ts- like the
same perso! bei!g killed t6i8e7
2$ The a8tress 6ho played the vi8tim o these lies 6as 2a!e /yma!- Fo!ald Feaga!Is irst
6ieT later- duri!g his preside!8y- Feaga! spe8ialiUed i! su8h violatio!s o eve! his o6! Ji8tio!al
truth7K =e o!8e told a 8ro6d the JtrueK story o a! heroi8 /orld /ar 99 pilot 6ho- ater all
8ommu!i8atio!s 6ith his doomed pla!e 6ere lost- did !ot eje8t- but tried to save his 8o:pilot- 6ith the
result that both 6ere killed7 /he! asked ho6 he k!e6 this- si!8e both pilots had died- Feaga!
mumbled somethi!g like- J9t must have bee! like this- he 6as a true Ameri8a! OK 4o 6o!der 2a!e a!d
Fo!ald split upE4a!8y 6as obviously more at home 6ith su8h redoubled lies7
2& See Gavid *7 .e6is- JTruth i! Fi8tio!-K i! )hilosophical )apers- Vol7 1- H?ord+ H?ord
)!iversity Cress 1%&"- p7 2"7
2% 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JH Sembla!ts i! the Felatio! 3et6ee! Se?es-K )sychoanalytical
oteboo"s " @1%%%A- p7 107
"0 See .a8a!- -he Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis- p7 10"7
"1 3er!ard 3aas- JSembla!8e+ Cutti!g ChilosophiUi!g to the Test-K 3mbr?a@ 1 @200$A- p7 &'7
"2 9 rely here o! Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JTruth A88ordi!g to 4ietUs8he-K a! i!terve!tio! at the
symposium +ntinomies of )ostmodern 7eason- 0sse!- ,ar8h 1#- 20027
"" 4ote the reversal o the usual rele?ive move+ it is !ot that 6hat 6e thought to be the Thi!g
reveals itsel to be merely a step to6ards the Thi!gT it is that 6hat appeared to be a mere preparatory
move reveals itsel to be already the Thi!g itsel7 A!d- !eedless to add- this rele?ive move 8ompels us
to 8ha!ge the very dei!itio! o 6hat Jthe Thi!g itselK isEit is !o lo!ger a substa!tial 9!:itsel7
"( Thomas 27 ,8Farla!e- JClatoIs )armenides-K De!ter or 9!tegral S8ie!8e- Ge8ember 1- 1%&&-
revised ,ar8h "- 200(- available at i!tegrals8ie!8e7org7
"# 27 47 Fi!dlay- )lato8 -he Written and 3nwritten Doctrines- 4e6 5ork+ =uma!ities Cress
1%$(- p7 2'7
"' Golar- J9! Carme!idem Carvi Domme!tarii-K p7 '$7
"$ ,ary .ouise 1ill- i!trodu8tio! to ClatoIs )armenides- tra!s7 ,ary .ouise 1ill a!d Caul
Fya!- 9!dia!apolis+ =a8kett 1%%'7
"& 9bid7- p7 10$7
"% Gieter =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- Dambridge- ,A+ =arvard )!iversity Cress 200&-
pp7 &#X'7
(0 Golar- J9! Carme!idem Carvi Domme!tarii-K p7 '$7
(1 9bid7- p7 &17
(2 9bid7- p7 &27
(" Arma!d BalosUy8- J5 a dIlI)!-K i!terve!tio! at the Do!gress o the /orld Asso8iatio! o
Csy8hoa!alysis- Fome- 2uly 1"X1'- 200'7
(( 9bid7
(# This tra!slatio! probably relies o! ,eister 08khart- 6ho had already 8oi!ed JIchtsK as a
positive versio! o Jichts-K i7e7- the void i! its positive>ge!erati!g dime!sio!Ethe nihil out o 6hi8h
every 8reatio! pro8eeds7 /hat 08khart sa6 6as the li!k bet6ee! the subje8t a!d !egativity7
(' 4ot to me!tio! the 6eird a8t that- i! 0!glish- den mea!s J8ave- hideout- !est- sae pla8e7K
($ .a8a!- -he Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis- p7 '27
(& Alai! 3adiou a!d 3arbara Dassi!- Il ny a pas de rapport se&uel- Caris+ Fayard 2010- p7 &27
(% 2a8Nues .a8a!- J.Intourdit-K Scilicet (- Caris+ Seuil 1%$"- p7 #17
#0 9bid7
#1 3adiou a!d Dassi!- Il ny a pas de rapport se&uel- p7 &"7
#2 =erma! ,elville- Moby Dic"W or! -he White Whale- 3osto!+ St7 3otolph So8iety 1&%2- p7
"%17
#" GeleuUe- -he .ogic of Sense- p7 17
#( 9bid7- p7 227
## 9bid7- p7 1'27
#' 9bid7- p7 1'(7
#$ 9bid7- p7 1'#7
#& 9bid7
#% 1ill- i!trodu8tio! to )armenides- p7 %07
'0 9bid7- p7 %17
'1 9bid7- p7 %%7
'2 9bid7- pp7 102X"7
'" 9bid7- p7 10'7
'( =aasIs !otio! o Jma!ysK @multiple multipli8itiesA is ee8tively 8lose to 3adiou+ Jma!ysK
mea!s that multipli8ity 8a!!ot be redu8ed to a multipli8ity o H!es- so that their 8orrelative is 4othi!g-
the Void7 @See A!dre6 =aas- 0egel and the )roblem of Multiplicity- 0va!sto!+ 4orth6ester!
)!iversity Cress 20007A The key dilemma here is 6hether this multiple multipli8ity is sustai!ed o!ly by
the Void as the ultimate o!tologi8al reere!8e- or 6hether 6e !eed a 8orrelative !otio! o H!e7 9 6e
do- the! 6hat "ind o H!eM The barred H!e- the H!e o pure Giere!8eM .a8a!Is : a dl3nM
'# 9t is 8ru8ial !ot to 8o!use this !eutral>absorbi!g Uero 6ith the Uero o measure- as do those
i!authe!ti8 a!alysts 6ho e!deavor to impose some !ormative sta!dard o psy8hi8 Jsa!ityK o!to the
patie!t i! order to measure his or her deviatio! rom it7
'' 9 rely here o! 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- J.ogiNue du !o!:savoir e! psy8ha!alyse-K .a cause
freudienne $# @2uly 2010A- pp7 1'%X&(7
'$ 9t is o!ly this !othi!g- a!d !ot the void- 6hi8h 8a! the! be 8ou!ted as 17 H!e should apply
this lesso! to the key problem o 4eoplato!ist mysti8s+ ho6 to pass rom the primordial abyss o the
limitless Void to the H!eM 3y 6ay o rami!g it a!d thus tur!i!g it i!to a !othi!g 6hi8h 8a! be 8ou!ted
as H!e7
'& See 9re!a 1ross- -he Scar of 7evolution- 3erkeley+ )!iversity o Dalior!ia Cress 1%%17
'% 2ose Stali!- JGiale8ti8al a!d =istori8al ,aterialism-K i! 0istory of the ,ommunist )arty of
the Soviet 3nion ?/olshevi"s@8 Short ,ourse- ed7 Dommissio! o the De!tral Dommittee o the D7C7S7)7
@37A- 4e6 5ork+ 9!ter!atio!al Cublishers 1%"%- pp7 10'X$7
$0 Fobert Do!Nuest- -he 0arvest of Sorrow- 4e6 5ork+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 1%&'- p7 11%7
$1 9bid7- p7 1207
$2 9bid7
$" 1iorgio Agambe!- .e temps <ui reste- Caris+ Cayot i Fivages 2000- p7 1'&7
$( See Alai! 3adiou- .Jtre et lAvenement- Caris+ ,i!uit 1%&%7
$# The oppositio! bet6ee! the sophists a!d Clato is also li!ked to the oppositio! bet6ee!
demo8ra8y a!d 8orporate orga!i8 order+ the sophists are 8learly demo8rati8- tea8hi!g the art o
sedu8i!g a!d 8o!vi!8i!g the 8ro6d- 6hile Clato outli!es a hierar8hi8 8orporate order i! 6hi8h every
i!dividual has his or her proper pla8e- allo6i!g or !o positio! o si!gular u!iversality7
1 JVous vous e?8useU dIrtre philosophe e! mIa88usa!t dIrtre dLvoteT 8Iest 8omme si jIavois
re!o!8L au vi! lorsNuIil vous eut e!ivrL7K 2ea!:2a8Nues Fousseau- CulieW ou! .a ouvelle 0AloUse-
Amsterdam+ ,ar8 ,i8hel Fey 1$'%- p7 2&(7
2 As a matter o a8t- Dhristia! tragedy is !o lo!ger a tragedy properT its horror rea8hes beyo!d
the tragi87 /he! Terry 0agleto! 6rote- JFor ma!y a tragi8 theorist- Agamem!o! is tragi8 but
Aus8h6itU is !ot-K he mea!t it as a sar8asti8 stab at those postmoder! elitists 6ho 8elebrate the ethi8al
gra!deur o a solitary heroIs sui8idal passio!- ig!ori!g the mu8h less heroi8 plight o the sueri!g o
millio!s o ordi!ary people7 H!e should !o!etheless read his stateme!t as simply bei!g true+ Aus8h6itU
is !ot tragi8T it is a blasphemy to 8all it tragi8- si!8e its vi8tims 6ere deprived o the mi!imum o
perso!al dig!ity 6hi8h e!ables the subje8t to pose as a tragi8 hero7
" Fra!eois 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 1%'7
( Wuoted rom 2ea!:Cierre *emp a!d 2a8Nues Cetit- .$tage- Caris+ Ar8hives des .ettres
,oder!es 1%''- p7 '#7
# 9bid7- p7 #"7
' Ssre! *ierkegaard- Either9$r- Vol7 1- 4e6 5ork+ A!8hor 3ooks 1%#%- pp7 1"$X'27
$ Fobert =ut8hi!so!- Eli2abeths Spymaster- .o!do!+ Hrio! 3ooks 200'- p7 1'&7
& Fi8hard =olmes- JThe 3iographi8al Arts-K revie6 o -ruth to .ife- by A7 H7 27 Do8kshut- -he
-imes @.o!do!A- ,ay "0- 1%$(- p7 117
% /he! @i! Foma!s $+(A Caul says that Dhristia!s die to the la6 through the body o Dhrist- o!e
should take !ote o the parado?+ Jla6 has bee! over8ome through that 6hi8h is 8losely tied up 6ith si!
amo!g huma!s7K The site o struggle a!d over8omi!g is the body- !ot the la67
10 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre I68 .a relation dob1et- Caris+ Seuil 1%%(- p7 (&7
11 Slavoj iek- -he Fright of 7eal -ears- .o!do!+ 3F9 1%%%- pp7 #X'7
12 9bid7- p7 1"07
1" =e!ri 3ergso!- .aughter8 +n Essay on the Meaning of the ,omic- tra!s7 Dloudesley
3rereto! a!d Fred Foth6ell- 4e6 5ork+ ,a8,illa! 1%1"- p7 1((X#7
1( The Jsubje8t supposed to believeK 8a! also be dei!ed as the Jsubje8t supposed not to
k!o6K+ i! a deli8ate situatio!- the polite thi!g to do is to prete!d to believe 6hat my part!er i!
8o!versatio! is 8laimi!g- i! other 6ords to prete!d !ot to k!o6 that 6hat he 8laims is !ot true- to a8t as
i it 6ere true7 For e?ample- 6he! a oreig!er desperately tryi!g to u!dersta!d me emphati8ally !ods-
sig!ali!g that he is ollo6i!g 6hat 9 am sayi!g- eve! i it is 8lear rom his replies that he is !ot- it
6ould be very impolite to brutally poi!t this out7
1# ,lade! Golar- JThe Art o the )!saidK @u!published paperA7
1' 9 o6e this reere!8e to 4ikitas Fessas- Athe!s7
1$ 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA7
1& Today- it seems that appeara!8es !o lo!ger have to be prote8ted7 /e all k!o6 the i!!o8e!t
8hild rom A!derse!Is JThe 0mperorIs 4e6 DlothesK 6ho publi8ly pro8laims the a8t that the emperor
is !akedEtoday- i! our 8y!i8al era- su8h a strategy !o lo!ger 6orks- it has lost its disturbi!g po6er-
si!8e everyo!e !o6 pro8laims that the emperor is !aked @that /ester! demo8ra8ies are torturi!g
terrorist suspe8ts- that 6ars are ought or proit- et87- et87A- a!d yet !othi!g happe!s- !obody seems to
mi!d- the system just goes o! u!8tio!i!g as i the emperor 6ere ully dressed7
1% A similar 8ase o a 8hara8ter sta!di!g i! or the big Hther o88urs i! the 3o!d ilm ,asino
7oyale- i! the guise o the 8o!used- i!trusively rie!dly a!d 8omi8ally pu!8tual S6iss ba!k
represe!tative 6ho orga!iUes the mo!ey tra!sers or the poker players7 To6ards the e!d o the
ilmE6he!- i! the lush garde! o a ,o!te!egri! villa- the re8uperati!g 3o!d a!d Vesper .y!d de8ide
to stay together- a!d start to embra8eEthe S6iss ba!ker appears- embarrassed but i!trusive- 6ith a
stupid smile- aski!g 3o!d to type i! the pass6ord !eeded to a88ess the mo!ey he has 6o!Ethe
proverbial .iebes*Stoerer O
20 /rief Encounter is a 8ult ilm amo!g gay me!- o! a88ou!t o the 6ay it re8alls the
atmosphere o gay 8ouples se8retly meeti!g i! the dark!ess o trai! statio!s at !ightT ho6ever- 6hat i
its libidi!al stru8ture is more that o a lesbia! aair @i! 6hi8h- as 6e k!o6 rom .a8a!- the Third 6ho
guara!tees it is the pater!al igureAM
21 9! his De Doctrina ,hristiana- Augusti!e artully evoked the i!depe!de!8e o the properly
symboli8:perormative dime!sio! o spee8h 6ith regard to the i!!er psy8hologi8al attitude o the
speaker- i! order to justiy the authority o the Dhur8h a!d its represe!tatives eve! 6he! they are @as
perso!sA si!ul a!d 8orruptedEthe moral Nuality o the speaker is irreleva!t- 6hat matters is that the
do8tri!e he prea8hes is orthodo?+ J9t is possible or a perso! 6ho is eloNue!t but evil a8tually to
8ompose a sermo! pro8laimi!g the truth or a!other- 6ho is !ot eloNue!t but 6ho is good to deliver7K
Go 6e !ot i!d here a! embryo o the 8orrupt a!d 8y!i8al ghost6riter 8omposi!g great spee8hes or the
!aSve politi8al leaderM
22 As Nuoted by Fobert D7 Solomo! i! In the Spirit of 0egel- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity Cress
1%&"- p7 '2'T based o! 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 7eligion- ed7 a!d tra!s7 07 37
Speirs a!d 27 3urdo! Sa!derso!- .o!do!+ *ega! Caul- Tre!8h- TrYb!er 1&%#7 0mphasis added7
2" Sam =arris- -he End of Faith- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 200#- p7 '"7
2( Solomo!- In the Spirit of 0egel- p7 '2%7
2# 9bid7- p7 '2&7
2' 9bid7
2$ 9bid7- p7 '"(7
2& Wuoted rom ibid7- p7 '"(7
2% 0ve! 3adiou remai!s a Jhuma!istK 6he! he remarks ho6 Jthe 9dea is !othi!g other tha! that
by 6hi8h i!dividuals dis8over 6ithi! themselves the a8tio! o thought as imma!e!8e to the True7 This
dis8overy immediately i!di8ates both that the i!dividual is !ot the author o this thought but merely
that through 6hi8h it passes- a!d that this thought 6ould- !evertheless- !ot have e?isted 6ithout all the
i!8orporatio!s 6hi8h make up its materiality7K @Alai! 3adiou- Second Manifesto for )hilosophy-
Dambridge+ Colity 2011- p7 10%7A 9s this !ot the old =egelia! idea o spiritual substa!8e as somethi!g
6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to i!dividualsI e?perie!8e a!d a8tivity- but 6hi8h !o!etheless o!ly e?ists
6he! it is kept alive by the i!dividualsI i!8essa!t a8tivityM
"0 The Freudo:.a8a!ia! a!s6er to this Nuestio! is symboli8 8astratio!7
"1 9! the same 6ay- i! Dhristia!ity- 6e over8ome the oppositio! bet6ee! 1od as a! obje8tive
spiritual 9!:itsel a!d huma! @believersIA subje8tivity by 6ay o tra!sposi!g this gap i!to 1od himsel+
Dhristia!ity is Jabsolute religio!K o!ly a!d pre8isely i!soar as- i! it- the dista!8e that separates 1od
rom ma! separates 1od rom himsel @a!d ma! rom ma!- rom the Ji!huma!K i! himA7
"2 Terry 0agleto!- -rouble with Strangers8 + Study of Ethics- H?ord+ /iley:3la8k6ell 200%-
p7 2$27
"" 2a8Nues .a8a!- -he Ethics of )sychoanalysis! LeSefLeMZ- tra!s7 Gavid Corter- 4e6 5ork+
/7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%2- p7 1$'7
"( 0agleto!- -rouble with Strangers- pp7 1&#X'7
"# 9bid7- p7 2$17
"' 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sinthome- Caris+ Seuil 200#- p7 1"'7
"$ See 2a8Nues .a8a!- J.a mLprise du sujet supposL savoir-K Scilicet 1 @1%'&A- p7 "%7
"& 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;8 Encore- Caris+ Seuil 1%$#- pp7 ((X#7
"% 3abylo!ia! Talmud- Dhagigah "a7
(0 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;II8 7FSFIF! LeT_fLeTS @u!publishedA7
(1 Datheri!e ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200#- p7 1&'7
(2 Fra!U *aka- -he /lue $ctavo oteboo"s- ed7 ,a? 3rod- Dambridge- ,A+ 0?a8t Dha!ge
1%%1- p7 2(7
(" This is 6hy a true Dhristia! should !ot rely too mu8h o! JFather- orgive them- or they
k!o6 !ot 6hat they doK+ ig!ora!8e is not a! e?8use- but a orm o hypo8risy7 The o!ly e?8usable
violatio! o the divi!e 8omma!d !ot to kill is 6he! it is do!e 6ith ull a6are!ess+ i! the terrible
solitude o the de8isio!- o!e assumes the a8t- k!o6i!g there is !o other 6ay7
(( This is 6hy there is also a! homology bet6ee! this !e8essity o Dhrist as the immediate
embodime!t o the spiritual substa!8e a!d the !e8essity o illusio! o! 6hi8h- amo!g others- 3ourdieu
i!sists i! his 8ritiNue o .Lvi:StraussIs e?pla!atio! o potlat8h+ it is !ot e!ough just to 8laim that Dhrist
is a reiied:immediate materialiUatio! o the =oly Spirit- the true Nuestio! is 6hy the =oly Spirit has to
appear irst i! the immediate orm o a si!gular huma! bei!g7
(# 9 rely here o! Alai! 3adiou- J/hat is .ove- or- The Are!a o the T6o-K le8ture at the
0uropea! 1raduate S8hool- Saas:Fee- S6itUerla!d- August %- 200&7
(' Caul relates to Dhrist a little bit like Clato does to So8rates+ like So8rates- Dhrist does !ot
e?pose a do8tri!e- he is a provo8ateur 6ho perormatively stages a! attitude to6ards lie by mea!s o
pragmati8 parado?esT like Clato- Caul the! arti8ulates these provo8atio!s i!to a 8o!siste!t do8tri!e7 9s
this attitude o So8rates- the irst philosopher- to6ards his polis @8ommu!ityA !ot that o subtra8tio! i!
the 3adiouia! se!se+ a gesture o reje8ti!g 6hat *a!t later 8alled the Jprivate use o reaso!-K o
bra8keti!g the possible uses o k!o6ledge or the so8ial good a!d 6elare- o pursui!g a! auto!omous
6ork o sel:e?ami!atio! 6herever it 6ill take usM 9! this simple se!se- the o!goi!g J3olog!a reormK
o 0uropea! higher edu8atio! is a! a!ti:So8rati8 gesture par e?8elle!8e- a threat to the very ou!datio!
o the 0uropea! lega8y7
($ /illiam F7 =erUog 99- )arables as Subversive Speech8 Cesus as )edagogue of the
$ppressed- .ouisville+ /estmi!ster>2oh! *!o? Cress 1%%#7
(& 2oh! G7 Daputo a!d 1ia!!i Vattimo- +fter the Death of (od- ed7 2erey /7 Fobbi!s- 4e6
5ork+ Dolumbia )!iversity Cress 200$- p7 1"&7
(% Adria! 2oh!sto!- perso!al 8ommu!i8atio!7
#0 Cas8al- 8ited i! Ala! =hjek- JCas8alIs /ager-K o!li!e e!try rom -he Stanford Encyclopedia
of )hilosophy @Summer 2011 0ditio!A- ed7 0d6ard 47 Balta7 9 rely here e?te!sively o! this e!try7
#1 Cas8al- 8ited i! ibid7
#2 Ge!is Giderot- JHbservatio!s sur =emsterhuis-K $euvres- Vol7 9- Caris+ Fobert .ao!t 1%%(-
p7 $#%7
#" 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- .e neveu de .acan- .agrasse+ Verdier 200"- p7 2$07
#( *oji! *arata!i- -ranscriti<ue8 $n Mar& and 0egel- tra!s7 Sabu *osho- Dambridge- ,A+
,9T Cress 200"- p7 1&"7
## .a8a!- -he Ethics of )sychoanalysis- p7 "1(7
#' 9bid7- p7 "1%7
#$ 3er!ard .e6is- -he +ssassins- 4e6 5ork+ 3asi8 3ooks 200"- p7 127
#& 9bid7
#% The larger problem here is that psy8hoa!alysis seems able to a88ommodate itsel to all
todayIs predomi!a!t ethi8al sta!8esEthe three me!tio!ed above plus a urther t6o+ the .evi!asia!:
Gerridea! ethi8s o respo!sibility to Hther!essT a!d the 8o!servative advo8a8y o the !eed to reassert
the symboli8 la6 @i! the guise o pater!al authorityA as the o!ly 6ay to resolve the deadlo8k o
hedo!isti8 permissive!ess7
'0 Galai .ama @Te!Ui! 1yatsoA- ore6ord to ,ark 0pstei!- -houghts Without a -hin"er- 4e6
5ork+ 3asi8 3ooks 1%%'- p7 ?iii7
'1 See .ee 0delma!- o Future8 [ueer -heory and the Death Drive- Gurham+ Guke )!iversity
Cress 200#7
'2 /hi8h is 6hy the best psy8hoa!alyti8 reply to this moral ma?im is to imagi!e 6hat it 6ould
mea! or a masochist to promise us that he 6ill ollo6 it i! relati!g to us7
'" First published i! Fussia! i! )ravda- Ge8ember 21- 1%%(7 3e!eath this !ote- Stali!
appe!ded i! blue pe!8il+ JAlas- 6hat do 6e see- 6hat do 6e seeMK The tra!slatio! Nuoted rom Go!ald
Fayield- Stalin and 0is 0angmen- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200(- p7 227
'( Ay! Fa!d- ight of Canuary LMth- 4e6 5ork+ Sig!et 3ooks 1%'&- p7 11&7 Fa!d hersel 6as
a6are o the limitatio!s o this early attempt o hersT as she 6rote i! the 1%'& J9!trodu8tio!K to the play
irst perormed i! 1%"(- at this stage i! her 8areer- she 6as !ot yet ready to portray dire8tly @her visio!
oA the ideal ma! @her irst versio! is =o6ard Foar i! -he Fountainhead- 4e6 5ork+ Sig!et 3ooks
1%%2A+ J/hat 9 was ready to 6rite about 6as a 6oma!Is eeli!g or her ideal ma!- a!d this is 6hat 9 did
i! the perso! o *are! A!dreK @p7 'A7 =o6ever- the a8t that the portrayal o the 6oma!Is lo!gi!g or
su8h a! ideal ma! pre8edes the dire8t portrayal o this ideal 8learly i!di8ates ho6 Fa!dIs igure o the
ideal ma! is ultimately a feminine fantasyE!o 6o!der that 6e i!d already i! this early play !oir:
sou!di!g emi!i!e:maso8hist dialogues 6hi8h are o!e o the trademarks o her later style- like the
ollo6i!g e?8ha!ge+ J*AF04+ =e seemed to take a delight i! givi!g me orders7 =e a8ted as i he 6ere
8ra8ki!g a 6hip over a! a!imal he 6a!ted to break7 A!d 9 6as araid7 ST0V04S+ 3e8ause you did!It
like thatM *AF04+ 3e8ause 9 liked it OK @p7 &2A7
'# The same goes or su8h a radi8al hedo!ist atheist like the ,arNuis de Sade+ perspi8uous
readers o his 6ork @su8h as Cierre *losso6skiA guessed lo!g ago that the 8ompulsio! to e!joy 6hi8h
drives the Sadea! liberti!e implies a hidde! reere!8e to a hidde! divi!ity- to 6hat .a8a! 8alled the
JSupreme:3ei!g:o:0vil-K a! obs8ure 1od dema!di!g to be ed 6ith the sueri!g o the i!!o8e!ts7
'' )lri8h S8hmidt- Nuoted i! Fyodor Gostoyevsky- -he /rothers 5arama2ov- 4orto! Driti8al
0ditio!- tra!s7 a!d ed7 Susa! ,8Fey!olds Hddo- se8o!d editio!- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i
Dompa!y 2011- p7 $$%7
'$ See Dhapter 11 i! 2a8Nues .a8a!- -he Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis- 4e6
5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%$&7
'& The same goes or 6ome! i! psy8hoa!alysis+ the masNuerade o emi!i!ity mea!s that there
is !o i!a88essible emi!i!e ? be!eath the multiple layers o masks- si!8e these masks ultimately
8o!8eal the a8t that there is !othi!g to 8o!8eal7
'% Wuoted rom 4iall Ferguso!- -he War of the World- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200$- p7 '207
$0 *aka- -he /lue $ctavo oteboo"s- p7 %07
$1 0pstei!- -houghts Without a -hin"er- p7 1#27
$2 9bid7- p7 1217
$" 9bid7- p7 &"7
$( 9bid7- p7 2117
$# Although- eve! here- there is a u!dame!tal ambiguity i! the 3uddhist edii8e+ is the goal o
the 3uddhist meditatio! !irva!a as the shit i! the subje8tIs sta!8e to6ards reality- or is this goal the
u!dame!tal tra!sormatio! o reality itsel- so that all sueri!g disappears a!d all livi!g bei!gs are
relieved o their sueri!gM That is to say- is !ot the eort to e!ter !irva!a 8aught bet6ee! t6o radi8ally
opposed e?tremes- the mi!imalist a!d the ma?imalistM H! the o!e side- reality remai!s as it is- !othi!g
8ha!ges- it is just ully per8eived as 6hat it is- a mere i!substa!tial lo6 o phe!ome!a that does !ot
really ae8t the void at the 8ore o our bei!gT o! the other side- the goal is to tra!sorm reality itsel so
that there 6ill be !o sueri!g i! it- so that all livi!g bei!gs 6ill e!ter !irva!a7
$' This shit is homologous to =egelIs reversal o the 8lassi8 metaphysi8al Nuestio!+ ho6 8a!
6e see through alse appeara!8es to their u!derlyi!g esse!tial realityM For =egel- the Nuestio! is- o! the
8o!trary+ ho6 has appeara!8e emerged out o realityM
$$ H 8ourse- the 3uddhist !irva!a is !ot to be 8o!used 6ith the /ester! mysti8al as8e!sio!
i!to a higher reality beyo!d this 6orld+ the /heel 8o!ti!ues to tur!- thi!gs i! their reality remai!
e?a8tly as they are- they are just per8eived i! a !e6 6ay- i7e7- the i!dividual e?iste!tially a88epts the
!o!:substa!tial 8hara8ter o reality7 /e are thus !ot deali!g 6ith the Jpurii8atio!K o desires- but 6ith
a diere!t 6ay o relati!g to desire7 The a8t is !o!etheless that- i! !irva!a- the Je!lighte!edK
i!dividual e?tra8ts himsel rom the /heel o Dravi!g+ eve! i the /heel goes o! tur!i!g- he is !o
lo!ger 8aught i! that tur!i!g7
$& 2a8Nues .a8a!- JCositio! o the )!8o!s8ious-K tra!s7 3ru8e Fi!k- i! Fi8hard Feldstei!-
3ru8e Fi!k- a!d ,aire 2aa!us- eds- 7eading Seminar ;I8 .acans Four Fundamental ,oncepts of
)sychoanalysis- 4e6 5ork+ S)45 Cress 1%%#- p7 2$#7
$% Fi8hard Fra!8is 3urto! @tra!s7A- -he +rabian ights8 -ales from + -housand and $ne
ights- 4e6 5ork+ Fa!dom =ouse 2001- p7 ((17
&0 9bid7- p7 (("7
&1 See 2ea!:2oseph 1ou?- $edipe philosophe- Caris+ Aubier 1%%07
&2 Fethi 3e!slama- .a psychanalyse K lApreuve de lIslam- Caris+ Aubier 2002- p7 2#%7
&" For a 8loser elaboratio! o this !otio!- see Dhapter 10 o the prese!t book7
&( Wuoted i! 3ria! Vi8toria- Nen at War- 4e6 5ork+ /eatherhill 1%%&- p7 1107
&# Wuoted rom Ferguso!- -he War of the World- p7 '2"7
&' /a!g .i?io!g a!d Tseri!g Shakya- -he Struggle for -ibet- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200%- p7
$$7
1 As to the last e?ample- there have bee! attempts to re8o!stru8t =egelIs a!s6er to ,ar?Is
Jmaterialist reversalK o diale8ti8sE9 mysel have else6here proposed a demo!stratio! o 6hy o!e
should speak o ,ar?Is idealist reversal o =egel7
2 *arl Fose!kra!U- gber Schelling und 0egel8 Ein Sendschreiben an )ierre .erou&-
*Z!igsberg+ 1ebrYder 3o!trjger 1&("- p7 $- as Nuoted a!d tra!slated by 3ru8e ,atthe6s i! his
i!trodu8tio! to F7 /7 27 S8helli!g- -he (rounding of )ositive )hilosophy- Alba!y+ S)45 Cress 200$-
p7 &7
" .ike6ise- i! 8i!ema history- it 6as the sile!t dire8tors 6ho resisted sou!d- rom Dhapli! to
0ise!stei!- 6ho brought to light the truly shatteri!g dime!sio! o sou!d 8i!ema7
( Wuoted rom 2ames 1ai!es- Evening in the )alace of 7eason- .o!do!+ =arper Dolli!s 200#-
p7 1%7
# Gieter =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- Dambridge- ,A+ =arvard )!iversity Cress 200&- p7
1'7
' As 6e have already see!- o!e should read eve! ClatoIs )armenides i! the same 6ay+ the o!ly
6ay to properly u!dersta!d the logi8al gym!asti8s o its se8o!d part is by readi!g the eight @or !i!eA
hypotheses as des8riptio!s o 8o!8rete e?perie!8es o reality7
$ 1Y!ter BZller- JThi!ki!g a!d /illi!g i! the .ater Fi8hte-K i! Ga!iel 3reaUeale a!d Tom
Fo8kmore- eds- +fter Cena8 ew Essays on Fichtes .ater )hilosophy- 0va!sto!+ 4orth6ester!
)!iversity Cress 200&- p7 ##7
& 2oha!!es 3ra8hte!dor- JThe 4otio! o 3ei!g i! Fi8hteIs .ate Chilosophy-K i! ibid7- p7 1#$7
% 9bid7
10 9bid7- p7 1#& @emphasis to irst se!te!8e addedA7
11 Wuoted i! ibid7- p7 1#&7
12 Ceter Creuss- tra!slatorIs i!trodu8tio! to 2oha!! 1ottlieb Fi8hte- -he 6ocation of Man-
9!dia!apolis+ =a8kett 1%&$- pp7 viii- ?X?i7
1" 9bid7- p7 ?i7
1( 4ikolai 3ukhari!- )hilosophical +rabes<ues- .o!do!+ Cluto 200#- p7 (07
1# 9bid7- p7 (17
1' 9bid7- p7 ('7
1$ 9bid7- p7 1"17
1& 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ractical 7eason- 4e6 5ork+ ,a8milla! 1%#'- pp7 1#2X"7
1% 9s !ot 6hat *a!t des8ribes as a perso! 6ho dire8tly k!o6s the !oume!al domai! stri8tly
homologous to the utilitaria! subje8t 6hose a8ts are ully determi!ed by the 8al8ulus o pleasures a!d
pai!sM
20 *a!tIs o6! ormulatio!s here are misleadi!g- si!8e he ote! ide!tiies the tra!s8e!de!tal
subje8t 6ith the !oume!al 9 6hose phe!ome!al appeara!8e is the empiri8al Jperso!-K thus re8oili!g
rom his radi8al i!sight that the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t is a pure ormal:stru8tural u!8tio! beyo!d the
oppositio! o the !oume!al a!d the phe!ome!al7
21 Creuss- i!trodu8tio! to -he 6ocation of Man- p7 ?ii7
22 See Ga!iel 3reaUeale- JDhe8k or Dhe8kmateM H! the Fi!itude o the Fi8htea! Sel-K i! *arl
Ameriks a!d Gieter Sturma- eds- -he Modern Sub1ect8 ,onceptions of the Self in ,lassical (erman
)hilosophy- Alba!y+ S)45 Cress 1%%#7
2" 9bid7- p7 1007
2( Sylvai! Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi' ?LTe\fLTee@- Caris+
.I=armatta! 200#- p7 "07
2# This is also 6hat makes Fi8hteIs !otio! o +nstoss so dii8ult+ +nstoss is !ot a! obje8t
within the represe!ted reality- but the sta!d:i!- 6ithi! reality- or 6hat is outside reality7
2' 9!gmar 3ergma!- My .ife in Film- .o!do!+ Faber a!d Faber 1%%#- pp7 2(0X17
2$ See 0r!esto .a8lau- Emancipation?s@- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 1%%#7
2& Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi-K pp7 1"(- 1"'7
2% /ith regard to Fi8hteIs i!te!se ethi8o:pra8ti8al sta!8e- this mea!s that 6he!ever 9 su88umb
to the pressure o 8ir8umsta!8es- I let myself be determi!ed by this pressureE9 am determi!ed by
e?ter!al 8auses o!ly i!soar as 9 let mysel be determi!ed by themT i! other 6ords- my determi!atio!
by e?ter!al 8auses is !ever dire8t- it is al6ays mediated by my a8Nuies8i!g to them7
"0 Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi-K p7 #(7
"1 1eorge 27 Seidel- Fichtes /isse!s8hatslehre of LTe_8 + ,ommentary on )art L- /est
.aayette+ Curdue )!iversity Cress 1%%"- pp7 11'X1$7
"2 Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi-K p7 1#(7
"" Fra!8is8o Varela- JThe 0merge!t Sel-K i! 2oh! 3ro8kma!- ed7- -he -hird ,ulture8 /eyond
the Scientific 7evolution- 4e6 5ork+ Simo! i S8huster 1%%'- p7 2127
"( Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi-K p7 1#&7
"# See Cierre .ivet- J9!tersubje8tivitL- rLle?ivitL et rL8ursivitL 8heU Fi8hte-K i! +rchives de
philosophie #0+( @H8toberXGe8ember 1%&$A7
"' Seidel- Fichtes /isse!s8hatslehre of LTe_- p7 1027
"$ 9bid7- pp7 &$X&7
"& 2ea!:Caul Sartre- /eing and othingness- .o!do!+ ,ethue! 1%#$- p7 "2$7
"% Fobert 3er!as8o!i- 0ow to 7ead Sartre- .o!do!+ 1ra!ta 3ooks 200'- p7 (&7
(0 Cortier- Fichte et le dApassement de la %chose en soi-K p7 2227
(1 9bid7- p7 2((7
(2 9bid7- p7 2"07
(" 9bid7- p7 2"&7
(( 9bid7- p7 2#"7
(# 9bid7- p7 2"27
(' Dited i! ibid7- p7 22(7
($ 27 17 Fi8hte- Fichte8 Early )hilosophical Writings- ed7 a!d tra!s7 Ga!iel 3reaUeale- 9tha8a+
Dor!ell )!iversity Cress 1%&&- p7 "($7
(& Wuoted rom Seidel- Fichtes /isse!s8hatslehre of LTe_- pp7 #0X17
(% *a!t had already made the same poi!t i! his a88ou!t o tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis+ ho6 do 6e
get rom the 8o!used multitude o passive subje8tive impressio!s to the 8o!siste!t per8eptio! o
obje8tive realityM 3y 6ay o suppleme!ti!g this subje8tive multitude 6ith- agai!- the subje8tIs a8t o
tra!s8e!de!tal sy!thesis 777
#0 See Seidel- Fichtes /isse!s8hatslehre of LTe_- p7 &%7
#1 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- tra!s7 4orma! *emp Smith- .o!do!+ ,a8,illa!
1%2%- p7 2$ @emphasis i! last se!te!8e addedA7
#2 *a!t- Nuoted i! .eo Freuler- 5ant et la mAtaphysi<ue spAculative- Caris+ Vri! 1%%2- p7 22"7
#" Seidel- Fichtes /isse!s8hatslehre of LTe_- p7 10(7
#( 9bid7
## 4ote the i!esse o Fi8hteIs rele?ive ormulatio!+ i! theoreti8al orm- the sel posits itsel as
limited- it does !ot dire8tly posit the obje8t as limiti!g the selT i! pra8ti8al orm- it posits the obje8t as
limited>determi!ed by the sel- it does !ot dire8tly posit itsel as limiti!g>ormi!g the obje8t7
#' =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- p7 '(7
#$ 9bid7- pp7 '(X#7
#& 9bid7- p7 1'17
#% 9bid7- p7 $'7
'0 9bid7- p7 1'17
'1 9bid7- p7 20&7
'2 9bid7- p7 1%(7
'" 9bid7- p7 2007 4ote ho6 the Gerridea! metaphysi8s:o:prese!8e relatio!ship bet6ee!
prese!tatio! a!d re:prese!tatio! is i!verted here+ the Jprese!tatio!K is more mediated- evasive- tha! the
re:prese!tatio! o the obje8tT i7e7- the subje8t is Jprese!tedK through the la8u!ae- distortio!s- repetitio!s-
t6ists- et87- o the obje8tIs re:prese!tatio!7
'( 9bid7- p7 1%#7
'# 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- ed7 a!d tra!s7 Caul 1uyer a!d Alle! /7 /ood-
Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%%&- p7 2"%7
'' ,arti! =eidegger- -he [uestion ,oncerning -echnology and $ther Essays- 4e6 5ork+
=arper i Fo6 1%$$- p7 1($7 9 o6e this reere!8e to =eidegger to A!drL 4usselder- Framewor"s8
Fantasy in .acanian )sychoanalysis @u!published ma!us8riptA7
'$ =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- p7 21"7
'& 9bid7- pp7 21(X1#7
'% 9bid7- p7 2217
$0 9bid7- p7 21"7
$1 9bid7- p7 21&7
$2 9bid7- p7 1117
$" 9bid7- p7 10%7
$( 9bid7- p7 20%7
$# 9bid7- p7 1$17
$' 9bid7- pp7 ''X$7
$$ 9bid7- p7 2'$7
$& 9bid7
$% 9bid7- p7 2'%7
&0 9bid7- p7 2'$7
&1 9bid7- p7 2$07
&2 9bid7- p7 2$27
&" 9bid7- p7 2$1
&( 9bid7- p7 2$27
&# 4o 6o!der- the!- that Fi8hteIs des8riptio! o the relatio!ship bet6ee! 1rou!d a!d sel:
8o!s8ious!ess ote! sou!ds like the you!g .ukh8sIs attempt to 8o!8eive o 8lass:8o!s8ious!ess !ot as a
passive Jrele8tio!K o its e8o!omi8 grou!d:base but as its imma!e!t 8o!stitue!t7
&' =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- p7 2$"7
&$ 9bid7- p7 2&17
&& 9bid7
&% 9bid7- pp7 2&1X"7
%0 9bid7- p7 2&"7
%1 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophie des sub1e"tiven (eistes90egels )hilosophy of
Sub1ective Spirit- tra!s7 a!d ed7 ,7 27 Cetry- Gordre8ht+ G7 Feidel 1%$&- pp7 'X$7
%2 9bid7
%" 9bid7
%( 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- Atla!ti8 =ighla!ds+ =uma!ities Cress
9!ter!atio!al 1%&%- p7 (027 Various !atio!alist moveme!ts 6ith their strivi!g to Jretur! to the origi!sK
are e?emplary here+ it is the very retur! to the Jlost origi!sK 6hi8h literally 8o!stitutes 6hat 6as lost-
a!d- i! this se!se- the 4atio!>!otio!Eas a spiritual substa!8eEis the Jprodu8t o itsel7K
%# =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- p7 ""07
%' 9bid7- p7 "1"7
%$ 9bid7- p7 "2&7
%& 9bid7- p7 "2'7
%% 9bid7- p7 "2$7
100 9bid7- p7 "2%7
1 Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 200#-
p7 2%'7
2 =a!!ah Are!dtIs reusal to 8arry out this shit is 6hat li!ks her to =eidegger+ she reje8ted the
Jprosai8K 8hara8ter o moder! JbourgeoisK lie7
" 2ea!:Fra!eois *ervLga!- J V.a vie LthiNue perdue da!s ses e?trrmesOI S8issio! et
rL8o!8iliatio! da!s la thLorie hLgLlie!!e de la VSittli8hkeit-IK i! Hlivier Ti!la!d- ed7- .ectures de 0egel-
Caris+ .e .ivre de Co8he 200#- p7 2&"7
( 9bid7- p7 2%17
# Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 '&7
' 9bid7
$ *arl ,ar?- ,apital8 + ,riti<ue of )olitical Economy- tra!s7 Samuel ,oore a!d 0d6ard
Aveli!g- 4e6 5ork+ Fa!dom =ouse 1%0'- p7 1'%7
& 9bid7- pp7 1'%X$07
% 9bid7- pp7 1$0X17
10 *arl ,ar?- ,apital8 + ,riti<ue of )olitical Economy- Vol7 1- tra!s7 3e! Fo6kes-
=armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 1%$'- pp7 2"'7
11 ,ar?- ,apital8 + ,riti<ue of )olitical Economy- tra!s7 ,oore a!d Aveli!g- p7 1$27
12 1Lrard .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue8 0egel K la lumi>re de iet2sche- Caris+ Seuil
200(- p7 "117
1" ,ar?- ,apital8 + ,riti<ue of )olitical Economy- tra!s7 ,oore a!d Aveli!g- pp7 1$1X27
1( Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- p7 "007
1# 17 /7 F7 =egel- +esthetics8 .ectures on Fine +rts- Vol7 1- tra!s7 T7 ,7 *!o?- H?ord+
Dlare!do! Cress 1%$#- p7 &07
1' 9t 6ould be i!teresti!g or =egelia! =igher Driti8ism to e!gage i! a debate about the
possible 8a!didates or this post:=egelia! artisti8 versio! o the total subje8tiviUatio! o substa!8e+ is it
o!ly the moder!ist break properES8hoe!bergIs ato!ality i! musi8- *a!di!skyIs abstra8tio! i!
pai!ti!g- et87Eor 8a! igures like Fi8hard /ag!er also be read i! this 6ayM
1$ Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- p7 2%$7
1& 9bid7- p7 "0(7
1% 9bid7- pp7 "0(X#7
20 9bid7- p7 "017
21 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- p7 1017
22 9bid7- pp7 11"X1#7
2" 9bid7- p7 11#7
2( See 1eorg .ukh8s- 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness- .o!do!+ ,erli! Cress 1%$#7
2# Fobert Cippi!- 0egels )ractical )hilosophy- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 200&-
p7 1$7
1 0ve! 6ith GeleuUe- o!e 8a! 8laim that his Spi!oUa is a post:*a!tia! Spi!oUa- a Spi!oUa
imper8eptibly re:read through a post:*a!tia! rame7 GeleuUe does somethi!g like Felli!i i! Satyricon-
6here he stages the Foma! paga! u!iverse the 6ay it appears retrospe8tively- rom the Dhristia!
sta!dpoi!tE6ith the u!derlyi!g idea that o!e 8a! really grasp 6hat paga!ism 6as o!ly i! this
retrospe8tive 6ay7
2 See 1Lrard .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue8 0egel K la lumi>re de iet2sche- Caris+ Seuil
200(7 The iro!y is that- three de8ades earlier- .ebru! published o!e o the greatest books o! =egel-
dee!di!g him agai!st his 8riti8s+ .a patience du concept @Caris+ 1allimard 1%$"A7
" .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue- p7 2"7
( A!d- i!8ide!tally- .a8a!Is prima facie 6eird de8isio! to sti8k to the term Jsubje8tK i! spite o
=eideggerIs 6ell:k!o6! 8ritiNue o subje8tivity is grou!ded pre8isely i! this obs8ure e?8ess o the
o!ti8 over its o!tologi8al dis8losure+ Jsubje8tK is or .a8a! !ot the sel:prese!t auto!omous age!t
redu8i!g the 6hole o reality to its obje8t- but a pathetic subje8t- that 6hi8h suers- 6hi8h pays the
pri8e or bei!g the site o the o!tologi8al dis8losure i! o!ti8 leshEthe pri8e 6hose Freudia! !ame is-
o 8ourse- J8astratio!7K
# .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue- p7 &"7
' 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- se8o!d revised editio!- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- ,i!eola+
Gover 200"- p7 1107
$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- Cenaer 7ealphilosophie- =amburg+ Feli? ,ei!er Verlag 1%'%- pp7 2($X&7
& .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue- p7 21&7
% 9bid7- p7 117
10 9bid7- p7 11#7
11 9bid7- p7 20$7
12 9bid7- p7 20'7
1" =egel- )henomenology of Mind- p7 1117
1( 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die )hilosophie der (eschichte @/erke- Vol7 12A-
Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 1%$0- p7 "2"7
1# 17 /7 F7 =egel- Ency"lop=die der philosophischen Wissenschaften im (rundrisse! 6olF L8
Die .ogi"- 3erli!+ Gu!der a!d =umblot 1&("- p7 "&( @k212A7
1' Fobert Cippi!- 0ollywood Westerns and +merican Myth- 4e6 =ave!+ 5ale )!iversity Cress
2010- p7 #27
1$ 9bid7- pp7 #(X#7
1& A s8e!e i! 0r!st .ubits8hIs 6o!derul -o /e or ot to /e- a short dialogue bet6ee! the t6o
amous Colish theater a8tors- ,aria Tura a!d her sel:8e!tered husba!d 2ose- playully subverts this
logi87 2ose tells his 6ie+ J9 gave orders that- i! the posters a!!ou!8i!g the !e6 play 6e are starri!g i!-
your !ame 6ill be at the top- ahead o! mi!eEyou deserve it- darli!gRK She ki!dly replies+ JTha!ks- but
you really did!It have to do it- it 6as !ot !e8essaryRK =is a!s6er is- o 8ourse+ J9 k!e6 you 6ould say
that- so 9 already 8a!8eled the order a!d put my !ame ba8k o! top 777K
1% This logi8 o uri!atio!>i!semi!atio! holds also or =egel himsel- or the t6o images o
=egel+ the J8orporate orga!i8ist =egelK is the uri!atio! aspe8t- 6ro!g but !e8essary+ o!e has to begi!
the readi!g o =egel 6ith the J6ro!g =egel-K o!ly i! this 6ay 8a! o!e arrive at the right o!e7
20 9! this pre8ise se!se- the eight hypotheses o the se8o!d part o ClatoIs )armenides orm a
systemati8 =egelia! e?er8ise+ they deploy the matri? o all possible Jsema!ti8 8hoi8esK i! the
relatio!ship bet6ee! the H!e a!d 3ei!g- 6ith the i!al J!ihilisti8K out8ome that there is !o ultimate
1rou!d guara!teei!g the 8o!siste!t u!ity o reality- i7e7- that the ultimate reality is the Void itsel7
21 2ames /illiams- (illes Deleu2es Giere!8e a!d Fepetitio!8 + ,ritical Introduction and
(uide- 0di!burgh+ 0di!burgh )!iversity Cress 200"- p7 %(7
22 1illes GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- tra!s7 Caul Catto!- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 2001- p7
&17
2" /illiams- (illes Deleu2es Giere!8e a!d Fepetitio!- p7 %'7
2( T7 S7 0liot- JTraditio! a!d the 9!dividual Tale!t-K i! -he Sacred Wood8 Essays on )oetry
and ,riticism- .o!do!+ ,ethue! 1%20- pp7 ("X#- ($7
2# 2orge .uis 3orges- J*aka a!d =is Cre8ursors-K i! $ther In<uisitions8 Le`TfLeS\- tra!s7
Futh .7 D7 Simms- 4e6 5ork+ Simo! i S8huster 1%'(- p7 10&7
2' 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- J.Ia8te e!tre i!te!tio! et 8o!sLNue!8e-K .a cause freudienne (2 @,ay
1%%%A- pp7 $X1'7
2$ The traditio!al dei!itio! o a good lover @the o!e 6ho- by ge!tly playi!g 6ith my body-
makes me a6are o !e6 8apa8ities or i!te!se e!joyme!tA also pere8tly e?empliies the gap bet6ee!
the 9!:itsel a!d For:itsel+ the poi!t is !either that the lover merely bri!gs to the light a 8apa8ity to
e!joy 6hi8h is already ully 8o!stituted deep 6ithi! me but that 9 am simply u!a6are o- !or that the
lover moulds- a8tively shapes- my 8apa8ity to e!joy7 The poi!t is rather that the lover a8tualiUes that
6hi8h 6as already i! me i! the status o a! 9!:itsel7
2& The prei? Jpost:K i! Jpost:stru8turalismK is thus a rele?ive determi!atio! i! the stri8t
=egelia! se!se o the term+ although it seems to desig!ate a property o its obje8tEthe 8ha!ge- the 8ut-
i! the Fre!8h i!telle8tual orie!tatio!Eit ee8tively i!volves a reere!8e to the gaUe o the subje8t
per8eivi!g it+ Jpost:K here reers to 6hat 6e!t o! i! Fre!8h theory ater the Ameri8a! @or 1erma!A gaUe
had bee! tur!ed its 6ay- 6hile Jstru8turalismK tout court desig!ates Fre!8h theory Ji! itsel-K beore it
6as !oti8ed by the oreig! gaUe7 9! short- Jpost:stru8turalismK is stru8turalism rom the mome!t it 6as
!oted by the oreig! gaUe7
2% Ceter =all6ard- $ut of -his World- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200'7
"0 See Ga!iel Ge!!ett- Freedom Evolves- =armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200"7
"1 4i8holas Fear!- )hilosophy8 -he .atest +nswers to the $ldest [uestions- .o!do!+ Atla!ti8
3ooks 200#- p7 2(7
"2 =all6ard- $ut of -his World- p7 1"%7
"" 9bid7
"( 9bid7- p7 #(7
"# /illiams- (illes Deleu2es Giere!8e a!d Fepetitio!- p7 10%7
"' GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- pp7 '"X(7
"$ 9bid7- p7 &7
"& =all6ard- $ut of -his World- p7 11&7
"% /illiams- (illes Deleu2es Giere!8e a!d Fepetitio!- p7 2007
(0 9bid7
(1 GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- p7 1#'7
(2 .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue- p7 (07
(" 9bid7- p7 (17
(( 9bid7- pp7 (1X(7
(# 9bid7- p7 &$7
(' 2a8Nues .a8a!- ]crits8 + Selection- tra!s7 3ru8e Fi!k- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i
Dompa!y 2002- pp7 $2X"7
($ 9bid7- p7 $"7
(& See 1eorg .ukh8s- 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness- Dambridge- ,A+ ,9T Cress 1%$27
(% *arl ,ar?- (rundrisse8 Foundations of the ,riti<ue of )olitical Economy- tra!s7 ,arti!
4i8olaus- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 1%%"- p7 10#7
#0 *arl 3arth- (od 0ere and ow- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200"- pp7 (#X'7
#1 9bid7- p7 (27
#2 9bid7- p7 (%7
#" 9bid7- p7 ('7
#( Talad Asad- /e!dy 3ro6!- 2udith 3utler- Saba ,ahmood- Is ,riti<ue Secular?- 3erkeley+
)!iversity o Dalior!ia Cress 200%- pp7 1"&X%7
## A!d let us !ot orget that- or =egel himsel- his philosophi8al re8o!stru8tio! o history i! !o
6ay prete!ds to J8over everythi!g-K but 8o!s8iously leaves bla!ks+ the medieval period- or e?ample- is
or =egel o!e big regressio!E!o 6o!der that- i! his le8tures o! the history o philosophy- he dismisses
the 6hole o medieval thought i! a 8ouple o pages- latly de!yi!g a!y histori8al great!ess to igures
like Thomas ANui!as7 4ot to me!tio! the destru8tio! o great 8iviliUatio!s like the ,o!golsI 6ipi!g
out so mu8h o the ,uslim 6orld @the destru8tio! o 3aghdad- et87A i! the thirtee!th 8e!turyEthere is
!o Jmea!i!gK i! this destru8tio!- the !egativity u!leashed here did !ot 8reate the spa8e or a !e6 shape
o histori8al lie7
#' Alai! 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- Caris+ Fayard 200%- pp7 12$X&7
#$ Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- JCote!tiality a!d Virtuality-K ,ollapse8 )hilosophic 7esearch and
Development 2 @200$A- pp7 $1X27
#& 9bid7- p7 $(7
#% 9bid7- p7 $27
'0 9bid7- p7 $#7
'1 9bid7- p7 &07
'2 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die )hilosophie der 7eligion @/erke- Vol7 1'A- Fra!kurt+
Suhrkamp 1%$0- pp7 #2#X'7
'" =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die )hilosophie der (eschichte- p7 %07
'( .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue- p7 2#07
'# Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress
200#- pp7 ""2X(7
'' =egel- 0egels )hilosophie des sub1e"tiven (eistes- pp7 'X$7
'$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- )h=nomenologie des (eistes- se8o!d editio!- 3erli!+ Gu!der a!d =umblot
1&("- p7 1%0 @k2#$A7
'& Fobert Cippi!- 0egels )ractical )hilosophy- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 200&-
p7 ('7
'% 9bid7- p7 #"7
$0 9bid7- pp7 #2X"7
$1 9bid7- pp7 (%X#07
$2 9bid7- p7 (%7
$" So 6hy did =egelIs thought o88ur 6he! it did- !ot earlier or laterM 9t appeared i! the u!iNue
histori8al mome!t o the passage bet6ee! the a!8ie!t @premoder!A a!d the !e6 @moder!A 6orldEi!
this i!:bet6ee!7 =egel- or a brie mome!t- sa6 somethi!g that 6as !ot visible either beore or ater7
Today- 6e i!d ourselves i! a!other su8h passage- 6hi8h is 6hy there is a !eed to repeat =egel7
$( A!other 6ay to deal 6ith this embarrassi!g e?8ess- this outgro6th o philosophy 6hi8h its
!either the 8oordi!ates o pre8edi!g metaphysi8s !or those o post:=egelia! Ja!tiphilosophyK
@3adiouA- is to 8ast =egel as a reak 6ho should simply be orgotte! or ig!ored7 To give just o!e
e?ample- rom ,ehdi 3elhaj *a8em+ J=egel is !othi!g but a pare!thesisEa gra!diose o!e- but still a
pare!thesisEbet6ee! *a!t a!d 3adiouK @Nuoted rom Marianne '$1- February 2$- 2010- p7 2(A7
1 See Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress
200#- p7 ("7
2 See Gieter =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel8 .ectures on (erman Idealism- Dambridge-
,A+ =arvard )!iversity Cress 200&- p7 #"7
" 9bid7- p7 #27
( 9bid7- p7 #%7
# /hi8h is still o!e o the great dividi!g li!es amo!g philosophers+ thoseEmostly o the
a!alyti8 orie!tatio!E6ho thi!k that *a!t is the last J8o!ti!e!talK philosopher 6ho Jmakes se!se-K a!d
that the post:*a!tia! tur! o 1erma! 9dealism is o!e o the greatest 8atastrophes- regressio!s i!to
mea!i!gless spe8ulatio!- i! the history o philosophy- a!d those or 6hom the post:*a!tia!
spe8ulative:histori8al approa8h is the highest a8hieveme!t o philosophy7
' 1Lrard .ebru!- J.Ia!ti!omie et so! 8o!te!u-K i! Hlivier Ti!la!d- ed7- .ectures de 0egel-
Caris+ .e .ivre de Co8he 200#7
$ Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 11%7
& 9bid7- p7 "27
% 9bid7- p7 2$7
10 9bid7- p7 2&7
11 9bid7- p7 2%7
12 9bid7- pp7 &#X'7
1" 9bid7- p7 &$7
1( So 6hat about the obvious 8ou!ter:argume!t- i!voki!g the abu!da!8e o eth!ologi8al
studies o these pre:histori8al so8ieties- 6ith detailed des8riptio!s o their rituals- systems o ki!ship-
myths- et87M Dlassi8 eth!ology a!d a!thropology 6ere pre8isely studies o Jpre:histori8K so8ieties-
studies 6hi8h systemati8ally overlooked the spe8ii8ity o these so8ieties- i!terpreti!g them as a
8o!trast to the 8iviliUed so8ieties7 Fe8all ho6- i! their des8riptio! o the primitive myths o origi!- the
early a!thropologists read- say- the stateme!t that a tribe origi!ates rom the o6l- as a literal belie
@Jthey really believe their prede8essors 6ere o6lsKA- totally missi!g the 6ay su8h stateme!ts
ee8tively u!8tio!ed7
1# 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- p7 &$7
1' ,ar? himsel 6as a6are o this gap 6he!- i! the last 8hapter o Volume 1 o ,apital- he
8o!ro!ted the 8haoti8 brutality o the a8tual rise o 8apitalism 6ith the !arrative o Jso:8alled
primordial a88umulatio!7K
1$ Slavoj iek a!d F7 /7 27 vo! S8helli!g- -he +byss of Freedom 9 +ges of the World- tra!s7
2udith 4orma!- A!! Arbor+ )!iversity o ,i8higa! Cress 1%%$- pp7 1&1X27
1& 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- ,i!eola+ Gover 200"-
p7 1&T tra!slatio! modiied7
1% There is a 6o!derully vulgar 2e6ish joke about a Colish:2e6ish 6ie- tired ater a hard
dayIs 6ork7 /he! her husba!d 8omes home- also tired but aroused- he says to her+ J9 8a!!ot make love
to you !o6- but 9 !eed some ki!d o releaseE8a! you su8k me o a!d s6allo6 my spermM This 6ould
help me a lot7K The 6ie replies+ J9 am too tired to do that !o6- darli!gE6hy do!It you just masturbate
a!d i!ish i! a glass- a!d 9 6ill dri!k it i! the mor!i!gMK Goes !ot this 6ieE8o!trary to the 8li8hL
about the holisti8:i!tuitive reaso!i!g o 6ome! as opposed to mas8uli!e ratio!al a!alysisEprovide a!
e?ample o the ruthless emi!i!e use o )!dersta!di!g- o its po6er to separate 6hat !aturally belo!gs
togetherM
20 9! a stri8t homology to this =egelia! logi8- it is mea!i!gless to dema!d that psy8ho:a!alysis
should be suppleme!ted by psy8ho:sy!thesis- re:establishi!g the orga!i8 u!ity o the perso! shattered
by psy8hoa!alysis+ psy8hoa!alysis already is this sy!thesis7
21 Silvia Aloisi- J9sraeli Film Felives .eba!o! /ar rom 9!side Ta!k-K Feuters- September &-
200%7
22 See Fredri8 2ameso!- JH! the Se?ual Crodu8tio! o /ester! Subje8tivityT or- Sai!t
Augusti!e as a So8ial Gemo8rat-K i! Fe!ata Sale8l a!d Slavoj iek- eds- (a2e and 6oice as .ove
$b1ects- Gurham+ Guke )!iversity Cress 1%%'7
2" See Caul de ,a!- /lindness and Insight8 Essays in the 7hetoric of ,ontemporary ,riticism-
se8o!d rev7 ed7- ,i!!eapolis+ )!iversity o ,i!!esota Cress 1%&"7
2( See Cierre 3ayard- 0ow to -al" +bout /oo"s :ou 0avent 7ead- .o!do!+ 1ra!ta 200%7
2# 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- tra!s7 4orma! *emp Smith- .o!do!+ ,a8milla!
1%2%- pp7 2'%X$07
2' 9bid7- p7 2$27
2$ 9bid7- p7 2$2X"7
2& 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die )hilosophie der 7eligion I @/erke- Vol7 1'A-
Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 1%&'- pp7 (%"X(7
2% Cirmi! Stekeler:/eithoer- )hilosophie des Selbstbewusstseins- Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 200#-
p7 2"7
"0 H!e o the parado?es o this properly diale8ti8al te!sio! bet6ee! possibility a!d a8tuality is
that- i! a situatio! i!volvi!g a! ultimate 8hoi8e @to live or to die- to kill o!esel or to go o! livi!g a!d
struggli!gA- the 8hoi8e o sui8ide 8a! help the subje8t to postpo!e a8tually killi!g themselves+ J4o6
that 9Ive de8ided to kill mysel- 9 k!o6 that the es8ape rom my desperate situatio! is ope! to me- a!d
till that mome!t- 9 8a! take lie more easily si!8e 9 am rid o the u!bearable pressure to 8hoose 777KEi!
this 6ay- 9 gai! time to eve!tually re8o!sider my de8isio! a!d go o! livi!g7
"1 See ,yriam 3ie!e!sto8k- JWuIest:8e Nue VlIesprit obje8tiI selo! =egelM-K i! Ti!la!d-
.ectures de 0egel7
"2 Slavoj iek- For -hey 5now ot What -hey Do- se8o!d ed7- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2002- p7
?liv7 Cassage reprodu8ed i! Ga!iel .i!dNuist- JDhristia!ity a!d the TerrorT or- ,ore iek:3ashi!g-K at
sohda!7blogspot78om- H8tober 1$- 200$7 =o6ever- .i!dNuist misNuotes the reere!8e to Jsel:relati!g
!egativityK as Jsel:negating !egativity7K
"" .i!dNuist- JDhristia!ity a!d the Terror7K
"( 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 0istory @tra!slatio! o 6orlesungen Vber die
)hilosophie der WeltgeschichteA- tra!s7 27 Sibree- .o!do!+ =e!ry 17 3oh! 1&'1-
pp7 ('#X'7
"# .i!dNuist- JDhristia!ity a!d the Terror7K
"' =e!ri8h- /etween 5ant and 0egel- p7 "1$7
"$ 9bid7- pp7 "1$X1&7
"& 9bid7- pp7 "0#X'7
"% Therei! resides the diere!8e bet6ee! ,ar?ist a!ti:8apitalism a!d the 8o!servative a!ti:
8apitalists 6ho 6a!t to sa8rii8e the very pri!8iple o reedom a!d eNuality i! order to establish a more
harmo!ious orga!i8 so8iety7
(0 17 *7 Dhesterto!- -he Man Who Was -hursday- =armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 1%&'- pp7
((X#7
(1 Wuoted rom Ga! =i!d- -he -hreat to 7eason- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200$- p7 17
(2 Dhesterto!- -he Man Who Was -hursday- pp7 (#X'7
(" /e might re8all here a! u!e?pe8ted =egelia! mome!t rom popular 8ulture+ the @some6hat
a6k6ardA =egelia!ism o the irst three i!stallme!ts o the Star Wars saga+ as i! Dhesterto!Is -he Man
Who Was -hursday- 6here the 8rimi!al mastermi!d is revealed to be !o!e other tha! 1od himsel- 6e
gradually dis8over that se!ator Calpati!e- the leader o the Fepubli8 i! its 6ar agai!st the separatist
ederatio!- is !o!e other tha! Garth Sidius- the mysterious supreme Sith lord behi!d the a8tio!s o the
separatistsEi! ighti!g the separatists- the Fepubli8 is ighti!g itsel- 6hi8h is 6hy the mome!t o its
triumph a!d the deeat o the separatists is the mome!t o the Fepubli8Is 8o!versio! i!to the evil
0mpire7
(( Fi8hard /ag!er- Cesus of a2areth and $ther Writings- .i!8ol!+ )!iversity o 4ebraska
Cress 1%%#- p7 "0"7
(# 9bid7- pp7 "0"X(7
(' 9! politi8al terms- J!egatio! o !egatio!K desig!ates the mome!t i! a pro8ess 6he! the age!t
radi8ally shits the blame or the deadlo8k- 6ith the result that it gets eve! 6orse7 A de8ade or so ago-
6he! 9srael 6as repeatedly hit by terror atta8ks- liberal pea8e:lovi!g 2e6s repeated the ma!tra that
6hile o 8ourse they re8og!iUed the i!justi8e o the o88upatio! o the /est 3a!k- i! order to have
proper !egotiatio!s- the other side had to stop the atta8ksEtheir 8o!ti!uatio! 6ould o!ly make the
9sraeli establishme!t more obsti!ate a!d a 8ompromise less likely7 For some years !o6 !o terror
atta8ks have bee! 8arried out i! 9sraelT the o!ly terror is the 8o!ti!uous lo6:level pressure o! the /est
3a!k Calesti!ia!s @8rop bur!i!gs- poiso!i!g o 6ater supplies- eve! the bur!i!g o mosNuesA- a!d the
result is the e?a8t opposite o 9srael 6ithdra6i!g rom the /est 3a!k+ the e?pa!sio! o 9sraeli
settleme!ts a!d a simple ig!ora!8e o the Calesti!ia!sI plight7 Shall 6e dra6 the sad 8o!8lusio! that-
6hile viole!8e does !ot 6ork- re!ou!8i!g it 6orks eve! lessM
($ See Gomi!iNue Caga!i- FAminitA et communautA che2 0egel- Caris+ 0ditio!s Gelga 2010- p7
("7
(& D7 17 2u!g- ,ivili2ation in -ransition @The Dolle8ted /orks o D7 17 2u!g- Vol7 10A-
.o!do!+ Foutledge 1%$%- p7 1( @k20A7
(% 9bid7- p7 1$07
#0 Gavid Tra8ey- 0ow to 7ead Cung- .o!do!+ 1ra!ta 3ooks 200'- p7 &17
#1 D7 17 2u!g- -he Structure and Dynamics of the )syche @The Dolle8ted /orks o D7 17 2u!g-
Vol7 &A- .o!do!+ Foutledge 1%$0- p7 "%" @k$'(A7
#2 A!other e?ample rom 8o!temporary politi8al 8o!li8ts suggests itsel here+ i! the struggle
bet6ee! market liberalism a!d state i!terve!tio!ism- ea8h side should re8og!iUe its !eed or the other7
H!ly a! ee8tive state guara!tees the 8o!ditio!s or the developme!t o the market- a!d o!ly a thrivi!g
market e8o!omy provides the resour8es or a! ei8ie!t state7 =o6ever- this very e?ample also
i!di8ates the limitatio! o su8h logi8+ 6hat i the a!tago!ism rea8hes su8h a pit8h that the re8o!8iliatio!
is !ot easibleM /hat i the o!ly viable solutio! is to 8ha!ge the e!tire systemM
#" ,asao Abe- Nen and Western -hought- =o!olulu+ )!iversity o =a6aii Cress 1%&#-
p7 1%17
#( 9bid7- p7 2017
## 9bid7
#' 9bid7- p7 1%17
#$ Sigmu!d Freud- -he Interpretation of Dreams- tra!s7 2ames Stra8hey- 4e6 5ork+ Avo!
3ooks 1%'#- p7 "'$7
#& The thesis that orm is part o 8o!te!t- the retur! o its repressed- should be suppleme!ted by
its reversal+ 8o!te!t is ultimately also !othi!g but a! ee8t a!d i!di8atio! o the i!8omplete!ess o the
orm- o its Jabstra8tK 8hara8ter7
#% =erbert ,ar8use- Eros and ,ivili2ation- 3osto!+ 3ea8o! Cress 1%$(- p7 "$7
'0 9bid7- pp7 "$X&7
'1 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- p7 ""07
'2 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophie des sub1e"tiven (eistes90egels )hilosophy of
Sub1ective Spirit- tra!s7 a!d ed7 ,7 27 Cetry- Gordre8ht+ G7 Feidel 1%$&- p7 2#" @k($#A7
'" 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of World 0istoryGIntroduction8 7eason in
0istory- tra!s7 =7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%$#- pp7 (%X#07
'( Alle! Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- Dambridge+ Dambridge
)!iversity Cress 2001- p7 12%7
'# 3arbara Gemi8k- othing to Envy8 $rdinary .ives in orth 5orea- 4e6 5ork+ Spiegel i
1rau 200%- pp7 1%#X'7
'' 9bid7- p7 1%'7
'$ ,ore ge!erally- o!e o the great iro!ies o the all o the 8ommu!ist regimes is that- 6hile it
6as per8eived as the e!d o ideology @8apitalism 6i!!i!g over a 8rude ideology 6hi8h had tried to
impose its !arro6 vie6s o! so8ietyA- the parties that su88eeded the 8ommu!ists i! the post:8ommu!ist
8ou!tries proved to be the most ruthless J!o!:ideologi8alK age!ts o 8apitalism @i! Cola!d- =u!garyA-
6hile eve! those 8ommu!ists 6ho are still i! po6er @i! Dhi!a- Viet!amA e!dorse a brutal 8apitalism7
'& ,oustapha Saoua!- Why +re the +rabs ot Free? -he )olitics of Writing- H?ord+ /iley:
3la8k6ell 200$7
'% See Soia 4jsstrZm- -he +n*+rchical State8 .ogics of .egitimacy in the Social ,ontract
,ondition- dissertatio!- Sto8kholm Series i! Coliti8s %%- Sto8kholm+ Sto8kholm )!iversity 200(7 Gid
!ot the same logi8 apply to 9raN i! 200$M The o!ly 8o!vi!8i!g argume!t that resura8ed to6ards the
e!d o 200' or 6hy the )S Army should !ot leave 9raN 6as that its abrupt 6ithdra6al 6ould plu!ge
the 8ou!try i!to the total 8haos o a large:s8ale 8ivil 6ar 6ith the disi!tegratio! o all state i!stitutio!s7
The supreme iro!y o this argume!t 6as that the )S i!terve!tio! itsel 8reated the 8o!ditio!s i! 6hi8h
the 9raNi state 6as !ot able to u!8tio! properly7
$0 Cerhaps- ho6ever- the true begi!!i!g- the irst term 6hi8h started the e!tire mome!t- the
Jthesis-K 6as CeterIs moder!iUatio!- so that 6hat pre8eded it 6as just its ormless substa!tial
presuppositio!7
$1 2ea! 3audrillard 6as thereore i! a 6ay right 6he!Eto!gue i! 8heek- o 8ourseEhe
proposed a !e6 =egelia! triad+ thesisXa!tithesisXprothesis7 The third mome!t 6hi8h JresolvesK the
8o!tradi8tio! is by dei!itio! Jprotheti8K @virtual- artii8ial- symboli8- !ot substa!tially !aturalA7
$2 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- pp7 "(&X%7
$" 9bid7- p7 "(%7
$( This po6er is !ot a merely !egative o!e- but the positive po6er o !egativity itsel- the
po6er to ge!erate !e6 orms- to 8reate e!tities e& nihilo7 Apropos labor as th6arted desire a!d the
ormi!g o obje8ts- 2ameso! makes a perspi8uous observatio! o! the diere!8e bet6ee! ,aster a!d
Serva!t+ the Serva!tIs !egativity- his re!ou!8i!g o immediate satisa8tio! a!d the ormi!g o obje8ts-
Jtrumps idealism a!d 8o!stitutes a philosophi8ally more satisa8tory or8e o the dissolutio! o the
physi8al @a!d o everythi!g elseA tha! the ,asterIs ig!ora!t Samurai:like earless!essK @2ameso!- -he
0egel 6ariations- p7 #'A7 9! short- 6hile the ,aster earlessly risks his lie a!d assumes the !egativity
o death- the lie he leads is a lie e!slaved to se!sual satisa8tio! @to 8o!sumi!g the obje8ts produ8ed
by the Serva!tA- 6hile the Serva!t ee8tively a!!ihilates immediate material e?iste!8e through its de:
ormatio!Ethe Serva!t is thus more JidealistK tha! the ,aster- si!8e he is able to or8e 9deas o!to
reality7
3ut- agai!- .ebru! voi8es a g!a6i!g suspi8io! that this triumph o !egativity 8o!8eals a bitter
taste+ is su8h a reversal o the !egative i!to the positive !ot yet a!other 8ase o Ji you 8a!It beat them-
joi! them-K o the desperate strategy o tur!i!g total deeat i!to vi8tory by 6ay o Jide!tiyi!g 6ith the
e!emyKM
$# 9mma!uel *a!t- JThe Do!test o Fa8ulties-K i! )olitical Writings- se8o!d ed7- tra!s7
=7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%%1- p7 1&27
$' 9mma!uel *a!t- -he Metaphysics of Morals- i! )ractical )hilosophy- tra!s7 a!d ed7 ,ary 27
1regor- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%%'- pp7 ('(X#7
$$ Febe88a Domay- Mourning Sic"ness8 0egel and the French 7evolution- Calo Alto+ Sta!ord
)!iversity Cress 2011- p7 $'7
$& 9bid7- pp7 $'X$7
$% 9bid7- p7 %07
&0 9bid7- p7 %"7
&1 9bid7- p7 1(%7
&2 9bid7- p7 %'7
&" 9bid7- p7 11(7
&( 9bid7- p7 12(7
&# See 2udith 3utler a!d Datheri!e ,alabou- Sois mon corpsF 3ne lecture contemporaine de la
domination et de la servitude che2 0egel- Caris+ 3ayard 20107
&' 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress 1%$$- p7 (0%7
&$ Domay- Mourning Sic"ness- p7 1(27
&& 9bid7- p7 1(#7
&% 9bid7- pp7 1($X&7
%0 A parti8ularly 8ruel variatio! o the bad !e6s>good !e6s medi8al joke- e!8ompassi!g the
e!tire triad o good:bad:good !e6s- useully illustrates the =egelia! triad i!8lusive o the i!al
Jre8o!8iliatio!K+ Ater his 6ie has u!dergo!e a lo!g a!d risky operatio!- the husba!d approa8hes the
do8tor to i!Nuire about the out8ome7 The do8tor begi!s+ J5our 6ie survived- she 6ill probably live
lo!ger tha! you7 3ut there are some 8ompli8atio!s+ she 6ill !o lo!ger be able to 8o!trol her a!al
mus8les- so e?8reme!t 6ill dribble 8o!ti!uously out o her a!usT there 6ill also be a lo6 o bad:
smelli!g yello6 jelly rom her vagi!a- so a!y se? is out7 Clus her mouth 6ill malu!8tio! a!d ood 6ill
all out 777K 4oti!g the e?pressio! o risi!g pa!i8 o! the husba!dIs a8e- the do8tor taps him ki!dly o!
the shoulder a!d smiles+ JGo!It 6orry- 9 6as o!ly joki!gR 0verythi!g is H*Eshe died duri!g the
operatio!7K
1 For e?ample- .evi!asIsEa!d- later- ,ario!IsEtalk about 1od Jbeyo!d 3ei!gK simply
redu8es bei!g to the domai! o positive reality- i!8ludi!g its tra!s8e!de!tal:o!tologi8al horiUo!- aili!g
to raise the phe!ome!ologi8al Nuestio! o ho6 the divi!e dime!sio! Jbeyo!d bei!gK !o!etheless
appears 6ithi! a 8ertai! horiUo! o the dis8losure o bei!g7
2 A solid- bala!8ed a88ou!t o this polemi8 is give! i! Foy 3oy!e- Foucault and Derrida8 -he
$ther Side of 7eason- .o!do!+ )!6i! =yma! 1%%07
" 2a8Nues Gerrida- JDogito a!d the =istory o ,ad!ess-K i! Writing and Difference- tra!s7 Ala!
3ass- Dhi8ago+ )!iversity o Dhi8ago Cress 1%$&- p7 #%7
( 9bid7- pp7 ##X'7
# 9bid7- p7 #&7
' 9bid7- p7 #%7
$ 9bid7- p7 '07
& 9bid7
% Fe8all Freud- 6ho- i! his a!alysis o the para!oid 2udge S8hreber- poi!ts out ho6 the
para!oid JsystemK is !ot mad!ess- but a desperate attempt to escape mad!essEthe disi!tegratio! o the
symboli8 u!iverseEthrough a! ersatU u!iverse o mea!i!g7
10 ,i8hel Fou8ault- Madness and ,ivili2ation- tra!s7 Fi8hard =o6ard- .o!do!+ Tavisto8k
1%'$- p7 ?7
11 ,i8hel Fou8ault- Folie et dAraison8 0istoire de la folie K ldge classi<ue- Caris+ Clo! 1%'1-
p7 viiT as tra!slated i! 3oy!e- Foucault and Derrida- pp7 ##X'7
12 ,i8hel Fou8ault- Discipline and )unish- tra!s7 Ala! Sherida!- =armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui!
3ooks 1%$$- p7 "017
1" 3oy!e- Foucault and Derrida- p7 11&7
1( JFeadi!g 777 8a!!ot legitimately tra!sgress the te?t to6ard somethi!g other tha! it 777 -here
is nothing outside the te&t7K @2a8Nues Gerrida- $f (rammatology- 3altimore+ 2oh!s =opki!s )!iversity
Cress 1%$'- p7 1#&7A
1# ,i8hel Fou8ault- .anguage! ,ounter*Memory! )ractice- tra!s7 Go!ald F7 3ou8hard a!d
Sherry Simo!- H?ord+ 3la8k6ell 1%$$- p7 ""7
1' ,i8hel Fou8ault- J,o! 8orps- 8e papier- 8e eu-K i! 0istoire de la folie K ldge classi<ue-
Caris+ 1allimard 1%b$2- p7 '027
1$ 9bid7- p7 #&(7
1& Ga!iel D7 Ge!!ett- ,onsciousness E&plained- 4e6 5ork+ .ittle- 3ro6! 1%%1- p7 (1'7
1% See 2a8Nues .a8a!- JTelevisio!-K $ctober (0 @Spri!g 1%&$A7
20 The mai! 6ork o 4i8olas ,alebra!8he is De la recherches de la vAritA- Caris+ Vri! 1%$#
@origi!ally published 1'$(X#A7
21 As to this ambiguity- see Caul Virilio- -he +rt of the Motor- ,i!!eapolis+ )!iversity o
,i!!esota Cress 1%%#7
22 Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress
200#- p7 11&7
2" 9bid7- pp7 11&X1%7
2( See 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of World 0istoryGIntroduction8 7eason in
0istory- tra!s7 =7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%$#- pp7 1$'X%07
2# 17 *7 Dhesterto!- $rthodo&y- Sa! Fra!8is8o+ 9g!atius Cress 1%%#- p7 (#7
2' Datheri!e ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200#- p7 11$7 @A 6ork o!
6hi8h 9 rely e?te!sively here7A
2$ 9bid7- p7 2'7
2& 9 o6e this observatio! to Daroli!e S8huster- Dhi8ago7
2% Bombies- these properly u!:8a!!y @un*heimlichA igures- are thereore to be opposed to
alie!s 6ho i!vade the body o a terrestrial+ 6hile alie!s look a!d a8t like huma!s- but are really oreig!
to the huma! ra8e- Uombies are huma!s 6ho !o lo!ger look a!d a8t like huma!sT 6hile- i! the 8ase o
a! alie!- 6e sudde!ly be8ome a6are that someo!e 8lose to usE6ie- so!- atherEhas bee! 8olo!iUed
by a! alie!- i! the 8ase o a Uombie- the sho8k is that this stra!ge 8reep is someo!e 8lose to us7
"0 There is- o 8ourse- a big diere!8e bet6ee! sluggish- automated- Uombie:like moveme!ts
a!d the subtle plasti8ity o habits proper- o their rei!ed k!o6:ho6T ho6ever- habits proper arise o!ly
6he! the level o habit is suppleme!ted by the level o 8o!s8ious!ess proper a!d spee8h7 /hat the
Jbli!dK Uombie:like behavior provides is- as it 6ere- the Jmaterial baseK or the rei!ed plasti8ity o
habits proper+ the stu rom 6hi8h these habits proper are made7
"1 17 /7 F7 =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- tra!s7 /illiam /alla8e- JAdditio!sK tra!s7 A7 V7
,iller- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress 1%$1- k(10 Femark7
"2 9bid7- k(107
"" Alai!- IdAes8 Introduction K la philosophie- Caris+ Flammario! 1%&"- p7 200T as tra!slated i!
,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 "'7
"( 17 /7 F7 =egel- Elements of the )hilosophy of 7ight- tra!s7 =7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+
Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%%1- p7 1%# @k1#1A7
"# =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- k(10 Additio!7
"' 9bid7
"$ ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 $#7
"& 9bid7- p7 $07
"% 9bid7- pp7 $0X17
(0 9bid7- p7 $'7
(1 9bid7- p7 $#7
(2 9bid7- p7 #$7
(" FLli? Favaisso!- De lhabitude- Caris+ Fayard 1%&(- p7 10T as tra!slated i! ,alabou- -he
Future of 0egel- p7 #&7
(( ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 "27
(# =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- k(0$7
(' ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 "#7
($ =ume dre6 a lot o mileageEtoo mu8hEout o this observatio! regardi!g ho6- upo!
i!trospe8tio!- all 9 per8eive i! mysel are my parti8ular ideas- se!satio!s- emotio!s- !ever my JSelK
itsel7
(& As Nuoted i! ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 "#T tra!slatio! modiied rom =egel-
)hilosophy of Mind- k(0&7
(% 9s !ot para!oid i?atio! su8h a short:8ir8uit- i! 6hi8h the totality o my e?perie!8e be8omes
!o!:diale8ti8ally Ji?atedK o! a parti8ular mome!t- the idea o my perse8utorM
#0 )po! a 8loser look- it be8omes 8lear that the =egelia! !otio! o mad!ess os8illates bet6ee!
the t6o e?tremes 6hi8h o!e is tempted to 8all- 6ith reere!8e to 3e!jami!Is !otio! o viole!8e-
8o!stitutive a!d 8o!stituted mad!ess7 First- there is 8o!stitutive mad!ess+ the radi8al J8o!tradi8tio!K o
the huma! 8o!ditio! itsel- bet6ee! the subje8t as J!othi!g-K as the eva!es8e!t pu!8tuality- a!d the
subje8t as Jall-K as the horiUo! o its 6orld7 The!- there is J8o!stitutedK mad!ess+ the dire8t i?atio!
upo!- ide!tii8atio! 6ith- a parti8ular eature as a! attempt to resolve @or- rather- 8ut shortA the
8o!tradi8tio!7 9! a 6ay homologous 6ith the ambiguity o the .a8a!ia! !otio! o the ob1et petit a-
mad!ess !ames at the same time the 8o!tradi8tio! or void a!d the attempt to resolve it7
#1 =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- k(0& Additio!7
#2 9bid7
#" 9bid7- k(01T tra!slatio! modiied via ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- pp7 "2X"7
#( ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 '$7
## Chysiog!omy a!d phre!ology remai! at this level- as do 8o!temporary 4e6 Age ideologies
e!joi!i!g us to e?press or realiUe our true Selves7
#' 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress- 1%$$- p7 1&#X'7
#$ ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 $17
#& 9bid7- p7 $27
#% 9bid7- p7 '&7
'0 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1%"7
'1 9bid7- p7 1%17
'2 9 my i!terlo8utor suspe8ts that 9 am really i!terested- he may eve! be u!pleasa!tly
surprised- as though 9 6ere aimi!g at somethi!g too i!timate a!d o !o 8o!8er! to meEor- to
paraphrase the old Freudia! joke- J/hy are you sayi!g youIre glad to see me- 6he! youIre really glad
to see meRMK
'" See *arl ,ar?- JDlass Struggles i! Fra!8e-K i! *arl ,ar? a!d Friedri8h 0!gels- ,ollected
Wor"s- Vol7 10- .o!do!+ .a6re!8e i /ishart 1%$&- p7 10(7
'( =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1%1T tra!slatio! modiied via ,alabou- -he Future of
0egel- p7 '$7
'# ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 '$7
'' 9bid7- p7 '&7
'$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- J2e!aer Fealphilosophie-K i! FrVhe politische Systeme- Fra!kurt+ )llstei!
1%$(- p7 20(T tra!slatio! Nuoted rom Go!ald Chillip Vere!e- 0egels 7ecollection- Alba!y+ S)45
Cress 1%&#- pp7 $X&7 =egel also me!tio!s the J!ight:like abyss 6ithi! 6hi8h a 6orld o i!i!itely
!umerous images a!d prese!tatio!s is preserved 6ithout bei!g i! 8o!s8ious!essK @17 /7 F7 =egel-
0egels )hilosophie des sub1e"tiven (eistes90egels )hilosophy of Sub1ective Spirit- Vol7 "- tra!s7 a!d
ed7 ,7 27 Cetry- Gordre8ht+ G7 Feidel 1%$&- p7 1#" [k(#"\A7 =egelIs histori8al sour8e here is 2a8ob
3ohme7
'& =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1%7
'% A stra!ge e?pressio!- si!8e- or =egel- !ature- pre8isely- has no interior+ its o!tologi8al
status is that o e?ter!ality- !ot o!ly e?ter!ality 6ith regard to some presupposed 9!terior- but
e?ter!ality 6ith regard to itsel7
$0 2ea!:Caul Sartre- /eing and othingness- .o!do!+ ,ethue! 1%#$- p7 #%7
$1 Fobert 3er!as8o!i- 0ow to 7ead Sartre- .o!do!+ 1ra!ta 200'- p7 "&7
$2 Sartre also dra6s atte!tio! to a 8ru8ial disti!8tio! bet6ee! this ki!d o Jplayi!g a roleK a!d a
theatri8al Jplayi!g a roleK 6here the subje8t merely imitates the gestures o a 6aiter or the amuseme!t
o spe8tators or as part o a stage perorma!8e+ i! 8lear oppositio! to the theatri8al imitatio!- the 6aiter
6ho Jplays bei!g a 6aiterK really is a waiter7 As Sartre put it- the 6aiter JrealiUesK the 8o!ditio! o
bei!g a 6aiter- 6hile a! a8tor 6ho plays a 6aiter o! stage is JirrealiUedK i! his role7 9! li!guisti8 terms-
6hat a88ou!ts or this diere!8e is the perormative status o my a8ts+ i! the 8ase o a! a8tor- the
perormative Jei8a8yK is suspe!ded7 A psy8hoti8 is pre8isely o!e 6ho does !ot see @or- rather- JeelKA
this diere!8e+ or him- both the real 6aiter a!d the a8tor are just Jplayi!g a role7K
$" ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 $(7
1 Datheri!e ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200#- p7 1&17
2 For a more detailed a88ou!t o this passage- see Dhapter 1 o Slavoj iek- -he Fright of 7eal
-ears8 5r2ys2tof 5ieslows"i /etween -heory and )ost*-heory- .o!do!+ 3ritish Film 9!stitute 20017
" Hr- i! philosophy- the poi!t is !ot to 8o!8eive eter!ity as bei!g opposed to temporality- but to
8o!8eive it as somethi!g that emerges rom 6ithi! our temporal e?perie!8e7 @This parado? 8a! also be
tur!ed arou!d- as 6as do!e by S8helli!g+ o!e 8a! 8o!8eive o time itsel as a subspe8ies o eter!ity- as
the resolutio! o a deadlo8k o eter!ity7A
( 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- Atla!ti8 =ighla!ds+ =uma!ities
Cress 9!ter!atio!al 1%&%- p7 '1&7
# Alo!g these li!es- =egel proposes a pre8ise dei!itio! o 8o!s8ious!ess+ it emerges 6he! the
disti!8tio! bet6ee! the u!iversal 8o!s8ious!ess a!d the i!dividual sel has bee! superseded+ the sel
k!o6s itsel i! its a6are!ess o its u!iversal duty7
' The t6o sides o u!iversality- positive a!d !egative- are easily dis8er!ible i! the 8ase o the
8ategory o (rund @grou!dA7 9! 1erma! as 6ell as i! 0!glish- the 6ord has a! u!derlyi!g mea!i!g that
is opposed to its mai! mea!i!g @reaso!:8ause a!d ou!datio!A+ =egel reers to the 1erma! e?pressio!
2u (runde gehen- 6hi8h mea!s Jto all apart- to disi!tegrateKT i! 0!glish- o!e o the mea!i!gs o
Jgrou!dK as a verb is Jto bri!g do6!- k!o8k do6!- latte!K @6ith a similar legal sub:mea!i!g o Jto
pu!ish- or impose a sa!8tio!KA7 H!e should take !ote o the a8t that the JpositiveK mea!i!gs @8ause-
ou!datio!A mostly belo!g to Jgrou!dK as a substa!tive a!d the J!egativeK mea!i!gs to Jgrou!dK as a
verb7 /hat this te!sio! poi!ts to6ards is the oppositio! o bei!g a!d be8omi!g- stasis a!d moveme!t-
substa!8e a!d subje8t- 9!:itsel a!d For:itsel+ as a8tivity- as moveme!t- grou!d is the a8tivity o sel:
erasure+ grou!d asserts itsel agai!st its grou!ded ee8ts by destroyi!g them7
$ =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 '217
& Spi!oUaIs thought should be 8learly disti!guished rom the Cloti!ia! traditio! o ema!atio!+
i! ema!atio!- ee8ts all outside o the H!e- the Supreme 3ei!g- they are o!tologi8ally i!erior to it-
the pro8ess o 8reatio! is the pro8ess o gradual degradatio!>8orruptio!- 6hile Spi!oUa asserts the
absolute u!ivo8ity o bei!g- 6hi8h mea!s that all reality is !ot o!ly 8aused by Substa!8e- but remai!s
within Substa!8e- it !ever alls out o it7 The sta!dard Cloti!ia! program o reversi!g degradatio!Ei!
short- the teleologi8al program o retur!i!g ee8ts to their Hrigi!Eis mea!i!gless or Spi!oUa+ 6hy
retur! to somethi!g 6e !ever let i! the irst pla8eM
% See Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JFeal!o i! !jegovo !emo!oK @JThe Feal a!d its 9mpossibleKA-
)roblemi 1X2 @2010A7
10 17 *7 Dhesterto!- JA Gee!8e o Ce!!y Greaduls-K i! -he Defendant- 4e6 5ork+ Godd
,ead 1%02- p7 107
11 9 rely here o! the outsta!di!g a!alysis i! 2ea!:2a8Nues ,arimbert- nri8 Guour- .aure!t
2ullier- a!d 2ulie! Servois- +nalyse dune oeuvre8 .a mort au? trousses+ +F 0itchcoc"! LeSe- Caris+ Vri!
200&- pp7 (%X#27
12 The ideologi8al aspe8t o e8ology should also be de!ou!8ed i! relatio! to ar8hite8ture7
Ar8hite8ture should be i! harmo!y 6ith its !atural e!viro!me!tM 3ut ar8hite8ture is by dei!itio! a!ti:
!ature- a! a8t o delimitatio! agai!st !ature+ o!e dra6s a li!e separati!g i!side rom outside- 8learly
stati!g to !ature- JStay outsideR The i!side is a domai! rom 6hi8h you are e?8ludedRKEthe 9!side is a
de:!aturaliUed spa8e to be illed 6ith artia8ts7 The eort to harmo!iUe ar8hite8ture 6ith the rhythms o
!ature is a se8o!dary phe!ome!o!- a! attempt to obliterate the tra8es o the origi!al ou!di!g 8rime7
1" GeleuUe provided ma!y 6o!derul des8riptio!s o this reversal- i! parti8ular i! his essay o!
*aka- 6here he reads the i!a88essible tra!s8e!de!8e @o the Dourt or DastleA the hero tries @a!d ailsA
to rea8h as a! i!verted misper8eptio! o the surplus o imma!e!t produ8tivity over its obje8t7
1( For a detailed elaboratio! o the !otio! o t6o va8uums- see the last 8hapter o the prese!t
book7
1# Although o!e should add that- i! his theologi8o:politi8al tur! relati!g the pro8ess o
diffArance to the impossible poi!t o ,essia!i8 2usti8e- Gerrida has privileged the side o desire>la8k-
8o!8eivi!g the pro8ess o diffArance as al6ays ailed a!d la8ki!g 6ith regard to the goal o ,essia!i8
2usti8e 6hi8h- like demo8ra8y- al6ays remai!s Jto 8ome7K
1' As 6e sa6 i! Dhapter #- ma!y i!terpreters o =egelEe?emplarily Gieter =e!ri8h i! his
8lassi8 essay J=egels .ogik der Fele?io!K @i! 0egel im 5onte&t- Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 2010AEhave
argued that this part o .ogic- 6hi8h arti8ulates the triad o positi!g:e?ter!al:determi!i!g rele8tio!-
provides the basi8 matri? or the diale8ti8al pro8ess as su8h7
1$ =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 "%$7
1& 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JA Feadi!g o the Semi!ar From an $ther to the other-K lacanian in"
2% @Spri!g 200$A- p7 1$7
1% =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- pp7 "%$X&7 A7 V7 ,illerIs other6ise e?8elle!t tra!slatio!
has bee! 8orre8ted i! a e6 pla8es i! the Nuotatio!s that ollo67
20 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is agai! the retroa8tive blurri!g o arti8ulatio!s- i7e7- the
tra!sormatio! o the past i!to a ormless matter+ or =egel- 6hat 6e have beore Carme!ides is a
8haoti8 multipli8ity 6ithout a!y proper i!!er 8o!8eptual arti8ulatio!- like the arbitrary mi?ture o
obje8ts @gods- a!imals- symbols- et87A i! 9!dia! mythology7
21 17 *7 Dhesterto!- 0eretics- 4e6 5ork+ 2oh! .a!e 1%0#- p7 "0(7
22 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress- 1%$$- pp7 1&X1%7
2" As Nuoted i! ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 1'0- 6hi8h is modiied rom the tra!slatio!
i! 17 /7 F7 =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- tra!s7 /illiam /alla8e- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress 1%$1- k"&27
2( H!e should also bear i! mi!d here ho6 the Freudia! !otio! o the Jpartial obje8tK is !ot that
o a! eleme!t or 8o!stitue!t o the body- but o a! orga! 6hi8h resists its i!8lusio! 6ithi! the /hole o
a body7 This obje8t- 6hi8h is the 8orrelate o the subje8t- is the subje8tIs sta!d:i! 6ithi! the order o
obje8tivity+ it is the proverbial Jpie8e o lesh-K that part o the subje8t that the subje8t had to re!ou!8e
i! order to emerge as subje8t7 9s this !ot 6hat ,ar? 6as aimi!g at 6he! he 6rote about the rise o the
8lass 8o!s8ious!ess o the proletariatM Croletaria! subje8tivity o!ly emerges 6he! the 6orker is
redu8ed to a! eNuivale!t o mo!ey- selli!g the 8ommodity Jlabor:po6erK o! the market7
2# =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 &2(7 Tra!slatio! slightly modiied7
2' As Nuoted i! ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 1&- modiied rom ,illerIs tra!slatio! i!
=egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1(" @k2"'A7
2$ 0r!esto .a8lau- $n )opulist 7eason- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200#- p7 1#27
2& The .a8a!ia! Jlogi8 o the sig!iierK eve! 8ompels us to go a step urther a!d assert that the
sel:ide!tity o a! e!tity itsel implies this e!tityIs i!!er split or impedime!t+ Jsel:ide!tityK i!volves
the rele?ive gesture o ide!tiyi!g a! e!tity 6ith the void o its stru8tural pla8e- the void illed i! by
the sig!iier ide!tiyi!g this e!tityEJA ] AK 8a! o88ur o!ly 6ithi! the symboli8 order- 6here the
ide!tity o A is guara!teed:8o!stituted by the Ju!ary eatureK that marks @sta!ds orA the void i! its
8ore7 J5ou are 2oh!K mea!s+ the 8ore o your ide!tity is the abyssal 1e ne sais <uoi desig!ated by your
!ame7 So it is !ot o!ly that every ide!tity is al6ays th6arted- ragile- i8titious @as the postmoder!
Jde8o!stru8tio!istK ma!tra goesA+ identity itself is stri8to se!su the mark o its opposite- o its o6! la8k-
o the a8t that the e!tity asserted as sel:ide!ti8al lac"s ull ide!tity7
2% =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 #(7
"0 17 /7 F7 =egel- +esthetics8 .ectures on Fine +rts- Vol7 2- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress 1%$#-
pp7 &''X$7
"1 Goes Ador!o !ot make a similar poi!t 6he! he 8laims that the *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal
8o!stitutio! is a mis!omer- or- more pre8isely- a positive spi! give! to a limitatio!- !amely to the a8t
that the subje8t is !ot able to rea8h beyo!d its subje8tive horiUo!M
"2 17 /7 F7 =egel- +esthetics8 .ectures on Fine +rts- Vol7 1- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress 1%$#- p7
2%7
"" This is 6hy- i! his 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness- .ukh8s is proou!dly =egelia! 6he!
he uses J@sel:A8o!s8ious!essK !ot as a term or passive re8eptio!>represe!tatio! or a6are!ess- but as
reerri!g to the u!ity o i!telle8t a!d 6ill+ J@sel:A8o!s8ious!essK is i!here!tly pra8ti8al- it 8ha!ges its
subje8t:obje8tEo!8e the 6orki!g 8lass arrives at its adeNuate 8lass 8o!s8ious!ess- it 8ha!ges i!to a!
a8tual revolutio!ary subje8t i! its so8ial reality7
"( =egel- +esthetics- Vol7 1- p7 1#"7
"# Fobert D7 Solomo!- In the Spirit of 0egel- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 1%&"- p7 '"%7
"' 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die (eschichte der )hilosophie- Vol7 "- .eipUig+ Chilipp
Fe8lam 1%$1- p7 '2&7
"$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophy of 7ight- tra!s7 S7 /7 Gyde- .o!do!+ 1eorge 3ell 1&%'-
pp7 ??viiiX??i?7
"& 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of World 0istoryGIntroduction8 7eason in
0istory- tra!s7 =7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%$#- p7 1$07
"% 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophy of ature- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ Dlare!do! Cress
1%$0- p7 '27
(0 0rma!!o 3e!8ive!ga- 0egels Dialectical .ogic- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 2000- p7
$#7
(1 /ho- today- has to remai! u!!amed- like 3e!jami!Is d6ar hidde! 6ithi! the puppet o
histori8al materialism7
(2 Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 1"07
(" 9bid7- p7 1"17
(( =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 (##7
(# As Nuoted i! ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 %$- modiied rom the tra!slatio! i! =egel-
0egels Science of .ogic- p7 '11 @k1""&A7
(' =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1' @k2&AT tra!slatio! modiied7
($ 9bid- p7 1$7
(& As Nuoted i! ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 %$- modiied rom the tra!slatio! i! 17 /7 F7
=egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 7eligion! 6olF `8 -he ,onsummate 7eligion- tra!s7 F7 F7 3ro6!-
C7 D7 =odgso! a!d 27 ,7 Ste6art- 3erkeley+ )!iversity o Dalior!ia Cress 1%&$- p7 12$7
(% Theodor /7 Ador!o- egative Dialectics- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200$- p7 2"7
#0 =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 &(17
#1 9bid7- p7 &("7
#2 =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- p7 2&7
#" ,alabou- Future of 0egel- p7 1#'7
#( 17 /7 F7 =egel- Ency"lop=die der philosophischen Wissenschaften im (rVndrisse! 6olF L8
Die .ogi"- 3erli!+ Gu!der a!d =umblot 1&("- pp7 (1"X1( @k2((A7
## =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 &("7
#' This poi!t- i!8ide!tally- 6as already made by the you!g ,ar?- 6ho !oted i! his do8toral
thesis+ JFeal talers have the same e?iste!8e that the imagi!ed gods have7 =as a real taler a!y e?iste!8e
e?8ept i! the imagi!atio!- i o!ly i! the ge!eral or rather 8ommo! imagi!atio! o ma!M 3ri!g paper
mo!ey i!to a 8ou!try 6here this use o paper is u!k!o6!- a!d everyo!e 6ill laugh at your subje8tive
imagi!atio!K @*arl ,ar?- JThe Giere!8e 3et6ee! the Gemo8ritea! a!d 0pi8urea! Chilosophy o
4ature+ Fragme!t rom the Appe!di?-K i! *arl ,ar? a!d Friedri8h 0!gels- Mar& and Engels8
,ollected Wor"s- Vol7 1- .o!do!+ .a6re!8e i /ishart 1%$#- p7 10(A7
#$ =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 7eligion! 6olF `- p7 2""7
#& =egel- )hilosophy of Mind- p7 2'"7
#% 3e!8ive!ga- 0egels Dialectical .ogic- pp7 '"X(7
'0 17 /7 F7 =egel- Elements of the )hilosophy of 7ight- tra!s7 =7 37 4isbet- Dambridge+
Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%%1- pp7 20(X#7
'1 9bid7- p7 "2"7 See 9!terlude "- belo6- or a detailed dis8ussio! o =egelIs dee!se o
mo!ar8hy7
'2 2a8Nues Gerrida- -he +nimal -hat -herefore I +m- 4e6 5ork+ Fordham )!iversity Cress
200&7
'" As reprodu8ed i! *arl ,ar?- 6alue8 Studies- tra!s7 Albert Gragstedt- .o!do!+ 4e6 Cark
1%$'7 ,ar? dropped this se!te!8e rom the se8o!d editio! o ,apital- 6here he rearra!ged the irst
8hapter7
'( Theodor Ador!o a!d ,a? =orkheimer- -owards a ew Manifesto- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks
2011- p7 $17 Tra!slatio! slightly modiied7
'# Gerrida- -he +nimal -hat -herefore I +m- p7 1%7
'' 9bid7
'$ 9bid7- pp7 1%X207
'& 17 *7 Dhesterto!- -he Everlasting Man- ,i!eola+ Gover 200$- pp7 "0X17
1 3ut does the same !ot also hold or philosophyM 9s !ot the ultimate goal o a philosophi8al
system to a88ou!t or the thi!ker himsel- to 8o!stru8t a !arrative i! 6hi8h the thi!ker is the mai!
8hara8ter @=egel- e?emplarilyAM *ierkegaardIs 8ritiNue is that =egel ails pre8isely here7
2 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophy of 7ight- tra!s7 T7 ,7 *!o?- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress 1%$&- p7 1&#7
" *arl ,ar?- ,riti<ue of 0egels %)hilosophy of 7ight-K tra!s7 A!!ette 2oli! a!d 2oseph
HI,alley- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 1%$0- pp7 "#- (07
( 4ote also the iro!y o the situatio!+ i!soar as the gap bet6ee! my immediate bodily bei!g
a!d my symboli8 ide!tity is the gap o 8astratio!- bei!g redu8ed to o!eIs pe!is is the very ormula o
8astratio!7
# Also i! i!here!t philosophi8al terms- 6e 8a! see here ho6 radi8al =egel is i! his assertio! o
8o!ti!ge!8y+ the o!ly 6ay to over8ome 8o!ti!ge!8y is through its redoubli!g7
' 2ea! Dlaude ,il!er- ,lartes de tout- Caris+ Verdier 2011- p7 #(7
$ 9bid7- p7 '07
& The ,ar?ists 6ho mo8ked =egel here paid the pri8e or this !eglige!8e+ i! the regimes 6hi8h
legitimiUed themselves as ,ar?ist- a .eader emerged 6ho- agai!- !ot o!ly dire8tly embodied the
ratio!al totality- but embodied it ully- as a igure o ull *!o6ledge a!d !ot merely the idioti8 dotter o
the iIs7 9! other 6ords- the Stali!ist .eader is not a mo!ar8h- 6hi8h makes him all the 6orse7
% 17 *7 Dhesterto!- $rthodo&y- Sa! Fra!8is8o+ 9g!atius Cress 1%%#- p7 11'7
10 Ges8artes a!d other Jvolu!taristsK 6ere o! the tra8k o this parado? 6he! they poi!ted out
ho6 u!iversal !e8essary la6s hold be8ause o the arbitrary divi!e de8isio!+ 2 m 2 ] ( a!d !ot # be8ause
1od 6illed it so7
11 Ga!iel Ge!!ett- Darwins Dangerous Idea8 Evolution and the Meanings of .ife- 4e6 5ork+
Tou8hsto!e 1%%'- p7 #0'7
12 2ea!:Cierre Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- Caris+ Dar!ets 4ord 200&7
1" See Dlaude .eort- Essais sur le politi<ue- Caris+ Seuil 1%&'7
1( See Slavoj iek- .oo"ing +wry- Dambridge- ,A+ ,9T Cress 1%%17
1# Wuoted i! Stathis 1ourgouris- Does .iterature -hin"?- Calo Alto+ Sta!ord )!iversity Cress
200"- p7 1$%7
1' 4ote the diale8ti8al i!esse o this last eature+ 6hat JsuturesK the ide!tity o a so8ial totality
as su8h is the very Jree:loati!gK eleme!t 6hi8h dissolves the i?ed ide!tity o a!y i!tra:so8ial
eleme!t7 H!e 8a! eve! establish a li!k bet6ee! =egelIs residual a!ti:Semitism a!d his i!ability to
thi!k pure repetitio!+ 6he! he gives 6ay to his displeasure 6ith the 2e6s 6ho stubbor!ly sti8k to their
ide!tity- i!stead o Jmovi!g or6ardK a!d- like other !atio!s- allo6i!g their ide!tity to be sublated
@aufgehobenA i! histori8al progress- is !ot his displeasure 8aused by the per8eptio! that the 2e6s remai!
8aught i! the repetitio! o the sameM Care!theti8ally- 9 am here i! ull solidarity 6ith 3e!jami! 4oys
6ho- i! his -he )ersistence of the egative @0di!burgh+ 0di!burgh )!iversity Cress 2010A- emphasiUes
a!d deploys the li!k bet6ee! the vi8issitudes o the Jpurely philosophi8alK !otio! o !egativity a!d the
shits a!d impasses o radi8al politi8s+ 6he! o!e talks o! !egativity- politi8s is !ever ar behi!d7
1$ 9 rely here o! Fra!k FudaIs 0egels 7abble8 +n Investigation into 0egels )hilosophy of
7ight- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 20117
1& 9 o6e this ormulatio! to ,lade! Golar7
1% 2a8Nues .a8a!- J.a troisi`me-K .ettres dEcole freudienne 1' @1%$#A- p7 1&$7
20 Fuda- 0egels 7abble- p7 1"27
21 9bid7
22 9bid7
2" 9bid7- p7 1""7
2( Febe88a Domay- Mourning Sic"ness8 0egel and the French 7evolution- Calo Alto+ Sta!ord
)!iversity Cress 2011- p7 1(17
2# 9bid7- p7 '7
2' 9bid7- p7 $7
2$ 9bid7- p7 '7
2& 9bid7- 12#7
2% 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 0istory- tra!s7 27 Sibree- .o!do!+ =e!ry 17
3oh! 1&'1- p7 $"T tra!slatio! modiied7
"0 See 0lisabeth .loyd- -he ,ase of the Female $rgasm- Dambridge- ,A+ =arvard )!iversity
Cress 200'7
"1 9! a homologous 6ay- o!8e 6e e!ter the domai! o legal 8ivil so8iety- the previous tribal
order o ho!or a!d reve!ge is deprived o its !obility a!d all o a sudde! appears as 8ommo!
8rimi!ality7
"2 This is 6hy the Datholi8 argume!t that se? 6ithout pro8reatio!- 6hose aim is !ot
pro8reative- is a!imal is so erro!eous+ the e?a8t opposite is true- se? spiritualiUes itsel o!ly 6he! it
abstra8ts rom its !atural e!d a!d be8omes a! e!d:i!:itsel7
"" 9! a 6eird argume!tative tur!- =egel dedu8es the prohibitio! o i!8est rom the very a8t that
Jmarriage results rom the ree surre!der by both se?es o their perso!alityEa perso!ality i! every
possible 6ay u!iNue i! ea8h o the partiesK+ JDo!seNue!tly- it ought !ot to be e!tered by t6o people
ide!ti8al i! sto8k 6ho are already a8Nuai!ted a!d pere8tly k!o6! to o!e a!otherT or i!dividuals i! the
same 8ir8le o relatio!ship have !o spe8ial perso!ality o their o6! i! 8o!trast 6ith that o others i! the
same 8ir8le7 H! the 8o!trary- the parties should be dra6! rom separate amilies a!d their perso!alities
should be diere!t i! origi!K @k1'&A7
"( 9 rely here o! 2ure Simo!iti- JVerjet!o bi pod drugim ime!om diPala druga^e-K )roblemi 1X2
@2010A7
"# See 0d6ard /7 Said- JDost a! tutte-K .ettre International "% @/i!ter 1%%$A- pp7 '%X$07
"' =egel died a year ater the Fre!8h Fevolutio! o 1&"07
"$ 1Lrard .ebru!- .envers de la dialecti<ue8 0egel K la lumi>re de iet2sche- Caris+ Seuil
200(- p7 21(7
"& Wuoted rom =o6ard Bi!!- + )eoples 0istory of the 3nited States- 4e6 5ork+
=arperDolli!s 2001- p7 %#7
"% 3adiou also jumps all too dire8tly rom mere Ja!imal lieK to the politi8al 0ve!t- ig!ori!g
the !egativity o the death drive 6hi8h i!terve!es bet6ee! the t6o7
1 This list 6as suggested to me by ,lade! Golar7
2 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;I;8 .insu <ue sait de lune bevue saile a mourre-
Ge8ember 1(- 1%$' @u!publishedA7
" Alo!g the same li!es- the time has 8ome to de8lare 3a8h the greatest moderni2er o 0uropea!
musi8- the key age!t i! i!s8ribi!g musi8 i!to the 4e6to!ia! s8ie!tii8:ormaliUed u!iverse7 Crior to
3a8hIs time- musi8 6as per8eived 6ithi! the Fe!aissa!8e horiUo! o harmonia mundi+ its harmo!ies
6ere 8o!8eived as part o the global harmo!y o the u!iverse- e?pressed i! the harmo!y o 8elestial
spheres- o @Cythagorea!A mathemati8s- o so8iety as a so8ial orga!ism- o the huma! bodyEall these
levels harmo!iously rele8ted i! ea8h other7 Arou!d 3a8hIs time- a totally diere!t paradigm started to
emerge+ that o a J6ell:temperedK s8ale- i! 6hi8h musi8al sou!ds are to be arra!ged ollo6i!g a! order
!ot grou!ded i! a!y higher 8osmi8 harmo!y- but 6hi8h has a! @ultimately arbitraryA ratio!al stru8ture7
@True- 3a8h 6as obsessed 6ith the Cythagorea! mysti8ism o !umbers a!d their se8ret mea!i!gs- but
the status o this obsessio! is e?a8tly the same as that o 4e6to!Is obs8ura!tist 1!osti8 a!tasies 6hi8h
8omprise more tha! t6o thirds o his 6ritte! 6ork+ a rea8tio! to the true breakthrough- a! i!ability to
assume all its 8o!seNue!8es7A This 6as 3a8hIs true fidelity @i! the 3adiouia! se!seA+ to dra6 all the
8o!seNue!8es rom this de:8osmologiUatio! o musi87 All the talk about 3a8hIs deep spirituality- about
ho6 his oeuvre is dedi8ated to 1od- should !ot de8eive us here+ i! his musi8al pra8ti8e- he 6as a
radi8al materialist @i! the moder! ormaliUed:mathematiUed se!seA- e?plori!g the imma!e!t
possibilities o the !e6 musi8al ormalism7 9t is the J9talia!K re:assertio! o emotio!al melody @pursued
also by his 8omposer:so! 6ho- i! taki!g this li!e- 8ommitted a ki!d o parri8ide a!d 6as or a short
6hile eve! more popular tha! his atherA 6hi8h marked the e?pressive:idealist rea8tio! to 3a8hIs
materialist breakthrough7
( 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- Atla!ti8 =ighla!ds+ =uma!ities
Cress 9!ter!atio!al 1%&%- p7 #&7
# 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophie des sub1e"tiven (eistes90egels )hilosophy of Sub1ective
Spirit- Vol7 1- tra!s7 a!d ed7 ,7 27 Cetry- Gordre8ht+ G7 Feidel 1%$&- pp7 2(X#7 0mphases mi!e7
' Datheri!e ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- .o!do!+ Foutledge 200#- p7 1'27
$ =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- p7 #$17
& Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 27
% A !i8ely vulgar e?ample o lalangue i! Slove!e+ every @ho!estA Slove!e k!o6s 6hat the
,o!a .isaIs smile is all about7 Slove!es do !ot have their o6! dirty 6ords- so they have to borro6
them- mostly rom Serbo a!d Droat- but also rom 9talia!7 So they k!o6 that J,o!aK is a popular
9talia! !ame or vagi!a- a!d JlisaK @pro!ou!8ed JleeUaKA is the root o the Slove!e verb Jto li8k7K
10 Ssre! *ierkegaard- ,oncluding 3nscientific )ostscript- tra!s7 Gavid F7 S6e!so! a!d /alter
.o6rie- Cri!8eto!+ Cri!8eto! )!iversity Cress 1%'&- p7 '&7
11 9bid7- p7 2$27
12 9bid7- p7 10&7
1" 17 *7 Dhesterto!- JThe Slavery o the ,i!d-K i! -he ,ollected Wor"s of (F 5F ,hesterton-
Vol7 "- Sa! Fra!8is8o+ 9g!atius 1%%0- p7 2%07
1( Wuoted i! 1eorg 3Y8h!er- ,omplete )lays and )rose- 4e6 5ork+ =ill a!d /a!g 1%'"- p7
?iii7
1# *arl ,ar?- -he 5arl Mar& .ibrary- Vol7 1- tra!s7 Saul *7 Cadover- 4e6 5ork+ ,81ra6 =ill
1%$2- p7 2(#7
1' =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- pp7 #'2X"7
1$ A!d it is easy to see 6hy =egel me!tio!s !ot o!ly spiritual lie- but also orga!i8 lie+ orga!i8
lie already poi!ts to6ards su8h a J8o!versio!K 6hi8h sublates me8ha!i8al 8ausality7 Gue to the
orga!i8 u!ity o a livi!g body- a 6eak part @the brai!A 8a! dire8t the moveme!ts o mu8h larger a!d
stro!ger parts- i7e7- to a88ou!t or ho6 a! orga!ism 6orks- o!e has to reer to a mi!imum o ideality- o
li!ks 6hi8h 8a!!ot be redu8ed to the me8ha!i8al i!tera8tio! o physi8al parts7
1& 17 /7 F7 =egel- Faith and 5nowledge- tra!s7 /alter Der a!d =7 S7 =arris- Alba!y+ State
)!iversity o 4e6 5ork Cress 1%$$- p7 $&7
1% 9! ,ar?Is ha!ds- this is re!dered as ollo6s+ amo!g the spe8ies o produ8tio!- there is
al6ays o!e 6hi8h gives a spe8ii8 8hara8ter to the u!iversality o produ8tio! 6ithi! a give! mode o
produ8tio!7 9! eudal so8ieties- artisa!al produ8tio! itsel is stru8tured like a!other domai! o
agri8ulture- 6hile i! 8apitalism- agri8ulture itsel is Ji!dustrialiUedKT that is- it be8omes o!e o the
domai!s o i!dustrial produ8tio!7
20 ,alabou- -he Future of 0egel- p7 1$17
21 A!d =egel 6as ar rom 8o!8edi!g a!y priority to the 1erma! la!guageEa! i!teresti!g
biographi8al detail+ 6he!- i! the 1&10s- he 6as 8o!sideri!g the i!vitatio! o a Gut8h rie!d to a88ept a
u!iversity post i! Amsterdam- he !ot o!ly started to lear! Gut8h- but immediately bombarded his
rie!d 6ith reNuests to i!orm him o! Gut8h:la!guage idiosy!8rasies like orms o 6ord:play- so that
he 6ould be able to develop his thoughts i! Gut8h7
22 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 0istory- tra!s7 27 Sibree- .o!do!+ =e!ry 17
3oh! 1&'1- p7 2$$7
2" ,ark /rathall- 0ow to 7ead 0eidegger- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 200'- pp7
%(X#7
2( 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;8 Encore- Caris+ Seuil 1%$#- p7 $%7
2# 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die (eschichte der )hilosophie @/erke- Vol7 1&A-
Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 1%$%- p7 (#07
2' 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- pp7 &2X"7
2$ 9bid7- p7 &07
2& For a more detailed a88ou!t o the !otio! o t6o va8uums- see Dhapter 1(7
2% Fra!eois 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 1#07
"0 9bid7- p7 1''7
"1 9! Alai! 3adiou- .ogics of Worlds- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200%7
"2 17 *7 Dhesterto!- -he /oo" of Cob- .o!do!+ De8il Calmer i =ay6ard- 1%1'- p7 ??iiX??iii7
"" These t6o !ames reer to the t6o e?amples me!tio!ed i! 9!terlude 1 @the Soviet joke o!
Fabi!ovit8hIs a!d Ador!oIs a!tago!isti8 !otio! o so8ietyA7
"( 9 rely here o! ,lade! Golar- J3re8htIs 1esture-K i! LLth International Istanbul /iennial
7eader8 What 5eeps Man"ind +live?- 9sta!bul+ usta!bul *YltYr ve Sa!at Vak< 200%7
"# 9 o6e this poi!t to Fredri8 2ameso!7
"' See 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels )hilosophy of 7ight- tra!s7 T7 ,7 *!o?- .o!do!+ H?ord
)!iversity Cress 1%$&- pp7 111X1'7
"$ 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- se8o!d rev7 ed7- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- ,i!eola+
Gover 200"- p7 #"7
"& Sigmu!d Freud- Introductory .ectures on )sychoanalysis- =armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui! 3ooks
1%$"- pp7 2'1X27
"% ,aybe this is 6hy it 6as a 2e6 6ho i!ve!ted psy8hoa!alysis+ are !ot the 2e6s as a !atio!
the e?emplary 8ase o the persiste!8e o the Hld 6hi8h reuses its sublatio!M
(0 1illes GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- tra!s7 Caul Catto!- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 2001- p7
1&'7
(1 As 6e have just see!- the ormal matri? o the diale8ti8al pro8ess pre8ludes i! adva!8e the
possibility that the struggle to the death bet6ee! the uture master a!d the uture serva!t 6ill e!d 6ith
the death o o!e o them7 9t is =egel 6ho here deuses the destru8tive 8o!seNue!8es a!d stages a
8ompromise i! the guise o a symboli8 pa8tEjust beore the e!d o the struggle- o!e o the 8ombata!ts
8o!8edes deeat- maki!g it 8lear he is !ot ready to ight to the death7
(2 4ote ho6 the 4ame:o:the:Father- the sig!iier 6hi8h is also the sig!iier o !egatio!
@prohibitio!AEle*om*du*)>re as le*on*du*)>reEis or .a8a! the 8e!tral sig!iier in the
unconscious7
(" 2oha!! /olga!g 1oethe- J3rie a! Friedri8h S8hiller- 1'7>1$7 August 1$%$-K i! S=mtliche
Wer"e! /riefe! -agebVcher und (espr=che! Vol7 "1+ Cohann Wolfgang (oethe mit Schiller ?LTe_f
LTee@- Fra!kurt+ Geuts8her *lassiker 1%%&- p7 "%07 9 o6e my tha!ks to Frauke 3er!dt @Fra!kurt am
,ai!A- 6ho proposed a perspi8uous readi!g o this passage7
(( 9! a some6hat patheti8 6ay- o!e 8ould say the same about the rui!s o %>11+ a mela!8holi8
6ould see i! them the JtruthK o the arroga!t dreams o )S gra!deurT i7e7- she 6ould see already i! the
T6i! To6ers themselves the rui!s that lay ahead- 6hile a 1oethea! optimist 6ould see i! the rui!s o
%>11 a symbol o the e!terprisi!g spirit o that other Ji!dustrious 8ityK that 6ill soo! repla8e the rui!s
6ith !e6 buildi!gs7
(# 9! a stri8tly homologous 6ay- or =egel- sel:8o!s8ious!ess arises out o the limitatio! o
8o!s8ious!ess+ 9 8a!!ot rea8h the obje8t 9 aim at- it eludes my grasp- i! all that 9 8a! rea8h 9 dis8over
my o6! produ8tEso 9 tur! my gaUe to6ards my o6! a8tivity a!d the 6ay it JpositsK 6hat appears to
me as presupposed7
(' A! e?emplary 8ase o Isolierung is the 6ay Dhi!aIs relatio! to the major ami!e that
o88urred duri!g the 1reat .eap For6ard relies o! a spe8ii8 symboli8 e8o!omy+ 6hile ormally
admitti!g the horror @,aoIs JmistakesKA- it 8o!ti!ues to be treated as taboo @the admissio! is purely
ormal a!d a88ompa!ied by a prohibitio! o! goi!g i!to a!y detailA7
($ See 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- J.e !om:du:p`re- sIe! passer- sIe! servir-K e?8erpted at
6667la8a!78om
(& See ibid7
(% 17 /7 F7 =egel- Ency"lop=die der philosophischen Wissenschaften! 6olF `8 Die )hilosophie
des (eistes- 3erli!+ Gu!der a!d =umblot 1&(#- pp7 (1"X1( @k#$$A7
#0 See 1regor ,oder- 0egel in Spino2a- .jublja!a+ A!ale8ta 200%7
#1 H!e also i!ds the same shot i! some musi8al 8omedies 6hi8h make use o the eleme!ts o
slapsti8k+ 6he! a da!8er tur!s arou!d i! the air- they remai! up there a little bit too lo!g- as i- or a
brie mome!t- they had su88eeded i! suspe!di!g the la6 o gravity7 A!d- i!deed- is !ot su8h a! ee8t
the ultimate goal o the art o da!8i!gM
#2 ,arti! =eidegger- JThe A!a?ima!der Fragme!t-K i! Early (ree" -hin"ing- tra!s7 Gavid
Farrell *rell a!d Fra!k A7 DapuUUi- 4e6 5ork+ =arper i Fo6 1%&(- p7 (27 Tra!slatio! slightly
modiied7
1 2a8Nues .a8a!- ]crits8 -he First ,omplete Edition in English- tra!s7 3ru8e Fi!k- 4e6 5ork+
/7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 200'- p7 2'(7
2 9- measured by todayIs sta!dards- this goal o u!iti!g =egel a!d =eidegger 8a!!ot but appear
blata!tly i!8o!siste!t- o!e should remember the 8ru8ial role o Ale?a!dre *oj`ve i! .a8a!Is
developme!tE.a8a! reerred to *oj`ve as his maYtre @the o!ly other maYtre bei!g the psy8hiatrist
DlLrambaultA7 *oj`veIs 8e!tral aim 6as pre8isely to bri!g together =egel a!d =eidegger- i7e7- to read
=egelIs motis o !egativity a!d- e?emplarily- the struggle:to:death bet6ee! the @utureA ,aster a!d
Slave- through =eideggerIs topi8 o bei!g:to6ards:death7
" .a8a!- ]crits8 -he First ,omplete Edition in English- p7 2(27 Sig!ii8a!tly- these paragraphs
6ere re6ritte! or ]critsEit 6ould be i!teresti!g to a!alyUe i! detail ho6- i! his re6riti!g o the
rapport or publi8atio! i! 1%''- .a8a! desperately tried to erase @or- at least- diluteA the tra8es o his
=egelia!ism7
( 9bid7- p7 2($7
# 17 /7 F7 =egel- .ectures on the )hilosophy of 7eligion! 6olF `8 -he ,onsummate 7eligion-
tra!s7 F7 F7 3ro6!- C7 D7 =odgso!- a!d 27 ,7 Ste6art- 3erkeley+ )!iversity o Dalior!ia Cress 1%&$- p7
1&&7
' .a8a!- ]crits8 -he First ,omplete Edition in English- p7 2(27
$ 9bid7- p7 2#&7
& 17 /7 F7 =egel- Cenaer 7ealphilosophie- =amburg+ Feli? ,ei!er 1%'%- p7 1%%7 9!8ide!tally-
the te?t goes o!+ JThrough 8u!!i!g- the 6illi!g be8omes feminine 777KEthe Jemi!i!e passivityK is thus
or =egel !ot i!erior to ma!Is- but superior to it+ it is a passivity that lets the @maleA other u!dermi!e
itsel7
% .a8a!- ]crits8 -he First ,omplete Edition in English- p7 "(17
10 2a8Nues .a8a!- ]crits- Caris+ Seuil 1%''- pp7 "(&X%7
11 2a8Nues .a8a!- J9mprovisatio!+ dLsir de mort- rrve et rLveil-K rom !otes take! by Datheri!e
,illot i! 1%$(- published i! .dne " @1%&1A7
12 H 8ourse- it 6ould be easy to u!ite the t6o opposed theses+ la!guage itsel makes us
Jmortal-K it makes us bei!gs that relate to death as their i!!ermost @imApossibility- so that it itsel ope!s
up the gap agai!st 6hi8h it prote8ts usEi! a stri8t homology 6ith the ob1et a 6hi8h is- or .a8a!- at the
same time the void a!d 6hat ills i! the void7
1" Fra!eois 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 21"7
1( 17 /7 F7 =egel- 6orlesungen Vber die (eschichte der )hilosophie- Vol7 1- .eipUig+ Chilipp
Fe8lam 1%$1- p7 #&17
1# 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress- 1%$$- p7 2&&7
1' 9 o6e this i!sight to ,lade! Golar- )ro2opope1a- .jublja!a+ A!ale8ta 200'- p7 1&'7
1$ 9bid7- pp7 21(X1#7
1& /e e!8ou!ter prosopopoeia i! the guise o lacrimae rerum Nuite literally at the very e!d o
part o!e o *ieslo6skiIs Decalogue- 6he! the ather 6hose small so! has just dro6!ed 6hile skati!g
o! a roUe! lake goes to a! empty 8hur8h to ve!t his despair7 9! a! impote!t outburst o destru8tive
rage- he k!o8ks over the altar- 8ausi!g the bur!i!g 8a!dles to allT the 6a? rom the overtur!ed 8a!dles
drips do6! a pai!ti!g o the Virgi! ,ary- 8reati!g a! image o tears7 This Ja!s6er o the Feal-K the
sig! o the divi!e 8ompassio! or the heroIs misery- o!ly takes pla8e 6he! he rea8hes the depth o
utmost despair- reje8ti!g divi!ity itselEollo6i!g the steps o Dhrist- o!e is u!ited 6ith 1od o!ly i!
the e?perie!8e o utter aba!do!me!t by him7 Sig!ii8a!tly- the melti!g 6a? is the last li!k i! the 8hai!
o meto!ymi8 displa8eme!ts o the moti o melti!g do6!+ irst- the roUe! milk meltsT the!- the i8e
that 8overs the lake melts- 8ausi!g the tragedyT i!ally- the 6a? meltsEis this the i!al a!s6er o the
Feal- the proo that 6e are !ot alo!e- that Jsomeo!e is out there-K or just a!other stupid 8oi!8ide!8eM
/hatever our readi!g- the ee8t o prosopopoeia is here- the Thi!g itsel 8ries o! our behal7
1% The sta!dard argume!t agai!st 8yberspa8e is that 6e 8a! al6ays step out o it a!d re:e!ter
the game at 6ill- i! 8o!trast to real lie i! 6hi8h 6e are stu8k- 6ith !o spa8e to 6ithdra6 to7 The lesso!
o 3uddhism @a!d the reaso! it 8omes 8lose to the !otio! o reality itsel as a virtual a!tasy spa8eA is
pre8isely that 6e can 6ithdra6 rom reality itsel- si!8e the very !otio! o irm reality is a!
illusio!E6e 8a! 6ithdra6 !ot i!to a!other reality- but i!to the primordial Void itsel7
20 A!d the! there is the third- postmoder!- temptatio!- the most da!gerous o all+ the 8laim that
there is !o site o truth- that there are o!ly layers o prosopopoeiae like the layers o a! o!io!- that
every truth 6hi8h speaks through a mask i! prosopopoeia is already a!other prosopopoeia7
21 Agai!- o!e should !ote a shit i! .a8a!+ 6hile or the .a8a! o the 1%#0s the u!8o!s8ious is
the Jdis8ourse o the Hther-K the mome!t he i!trodu8es the key !otio! o the Jbarred HtherK a!d dra6s
out its 8o!seNue!8es- the u!8o!s8ious tur!s i!to the dis8ourse that registers the gaps a!d ailures o the
Hther7
22 Terry 0agleto!- Figures of Dissent- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200"- p7 2('7
2" Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress
200#- p7 $&7
2( 2oseph de ,aistre- ]claircissement sur les sacrifices- Caris+ .I=er!e 200%- p7 2%+ J9l aut
do!8 toujours partir dIu!e vLritL pour e!seig!er u!e erreur7K
2# A!other 8ase o lyi!g i! the guise o truth+ a 8orrupt philosophy proessor rom my youth i!
Slove!ia ope!ly admitted his 8o!ormism- sayi!g 6ith a disarmi!g smile+ J9 am s8um- 9 k!o6 it- so
6hatMK The lie o su8h a! admissio! resides i! the gap bet6ee! the e!u!8iated 8o!te!t a!d its
subje8tive positio! o e!u!8iatio!+ by 6ay o admitti!g his 8orruptio! ope!ly- did he !ot adopt a!
ho!est positio! 6hi8h someho6 redeemed him rom 8orruptio!M 4ot at all+ the appropriate respo!se is
to paraphrase the old 2e6ish joke Nuoted by Freud+ J9 you are really s8um- 6hy are you telli!g us that
you are s8umMK Hr- a more aggressive versio!+ J5ou say that you are s8um- but this 6ill !ot ool
usEyou really are s8umRKEi! short+ JGo!It lie to us by telli!g the truthEyou are s8umRK
2' 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre I8 .es Acrits techni<ues de Freud- Caris+ Seuil 1%$#- p7
2&%7
2$ Alai! 3adiou- -hAorie de la contradiction- Caris+ ,aspero 1%$#- p7 &'7
2& .a8a!- ]crits- p7 1%(7
2% 9bid7- p7 "(07
"0 9bid7- p7 "(17
"1 9bid7
"2 9bid7- p7 "(27
"" 9!soar as a symptom is i!here!tly related to its i!terpretatio!- i7e7- i!soar as it u!8tio!s-
some6hat like 2oy8eIs Finnegans Wa"e- as a! attempt to take i!to a88ou!t a!d a!s6er i! adva!8e its
possible i!terpretatio!s- it has the i!tri8ate stru8ture o a temporal loop+ a symptom is a purely rele?ive
e!tity- a pre:emptive rea8tio! to its o6! uture ee8ts7
"( /hat the! is a ma! or a 6oma!M A 8atastrophe- as .a8a! 8o!je8turesM /hat i- beari!g i!
mi!d the 8ouple symptom>a!tasy- ma! is a a!tasy o a 6oma!M Goes .a8a! !ot poi!t i! this dire8tio!
6he! he 8laims that do! 2ua! is a emi!i!e a!tasyM 3oth 6oma! a!d ma!- !ot o!ly 6oma!- are thus
8o:depe!de!t o! ea8h other- like 0s8herIs t6o ha!ds dra6i!g ea8h other7 The trap to be avoided here is
to 8o!8eive this relatio!ship as bei!g someho6 8ompleme!taryEas i- o!8e a ma! i!ds his symptom
i! a 6oma! a!d the same 6oma! her a!tasy embodied i! a ma!- there i!ally is a ki!d o se?ual
relatio!ship7 /e must bear i! mi!d that a!tasy a!d symptom are stru8turally i!8ompatible7
"# =o6ever- =it8h8o8kIs dis8ardi!g o =errma!!Is s8ore 8a!!ot simply be dismissed as a
8o!8essio! to =olly6ood 8ommer8ial pressure7 9! the GVG editio! o -orn ,urtain- o!e 8a! also
6at8h some s8e!es a88ompa!ied 6ith the =errma!! s8ore- amo!g them the 1romek murder7 9! the
released versio!- this s8e!e has !o musi8al a88ompa!ime!t- all 6e hear are the o88asio!al gru!ts a!d
groa!s 6hi8h re!der the oppressive real presence o the pai!ully prolo!ged a8tivity o tryi!g to kill
1romek mu8h more ei8ie!tly tha! 6ould =errma!!Is sta!dard s8ore o brassy /ag!eria! osti!atiR
"' /hi8h a88ou!ts or the 8lear prese!8e o the moti o the JDu!!i!g o Feaso!K i! ,ar?Is
theoreti8al rame6orkT or e?ample- remarki!g o! the 8o!seNue!8es o 0!glish 8olo!ial rule i! 9!dia-
,ar? 8laimed that- i! spite o all its destru8tive ee8ts upo! 9!dia! so8iety- 8olo!iUatio! 6ould push
9!dia i!to moder!ity7
"$ ,arti! =eidegger- /eing and -ime- tra!s7 2oh! ,a8Wuarrie a!d 0d6ard Fobi!so!- 4e6
5ork+ =arperDolli!s 200&- p7 2"17
"& Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- p7 '(7
"% 9bid7- p7 '$7
(0 =ere 6e tou8h o! the topi8 o =eidegger a!d psy8hiatri8 8li!i8s+ 6hat about that 6ithdra6al
rom e!gageme!t 6hi8h is not death but the psy8hoti8 breakdo6! o a livi!g huma! bei!gM /hat about
the possibility o Jlivi!g i! death-K o vegetati!g 6ith !o 8are- like the Muselmannen i! the 4aUi
8ampsM
(1 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 #'7
(2 As Nuoted i! Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- p7 $$- modiied rom the tra!slatio! i!
=egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 1%7
(" Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- pp7 $$X&7
(( Agambe! is right i! poi!ti!g out the ambiguity o the apo8alypti8:messia!i8 Jtime that
remai!sK as the time to e!d time+ 6he! 6e d6ell i! it- 6hat appears to us as the slo6i!g do6! o the
i!al demise o the @rule oA .a6- as the e!dless deerral o this i!al poi!t- is retroa8tively revealed as
the very a!ar8hi8 state o reedom 6e 6ere 6aiti!g or7 9! a properly =egelia! t6ist- the protra8ted
deerral that bars ull a88ess to the Thi!g is already the Thi!g itselEthe stru8ture o this u!iNue
diffArance is thus yet agai! that o the Fabi!ovit8h joke+ JThe arrival o ull parousia is e!dlessly
postpo!ed 777K J3ut this postpo!eme!t is the parousia 6e strive or7K
(# Gavid Daute- -he Dancer Defects8 -he Struggle for ,ultural Supremacy During the ,old
War- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 200"- p7 2%%7
(' Although the same reversal also 6orks i! the opposite dire8tio!7 Fe8e!tly i! Slove!ia- the
publi8 prose8utor started a! a8tio! agai!st a! old 8ommu!ist u!8tio!ary i!volved i! the sho6 trials
a!d mass killi!gs o members o the Slove!e a!ti:8ommu!ist u!its impriso!ed immediately ater the
e!d o /orld /ar 997 4ot lo!g ater the prose8utio! 6as a!!ou!8ed- 9 happe!ed to meet a!other
u!repe!ta!t old 8ommu!ist 8adre a!d asked him or a rea8tio!T to my surprise- he told me that the
a88used u!8tio!ary ully deserved the harshest pu!ishme!t- a!d added+ J4ot or 6hat he is a88used o-
o 8ourse- but or his true 8rime- de8ades later- o allo6i!g the 8ommu!ists to lose po6erRK
($ This- o 8ourse- i! !o 6ay elevates 3re8ht above ethi8o:politi8al suspi8io!7 The 8ase agai!st
him 6as su88i!8tly e?pressed by /7 =7 Aude!+ JTo oer your art i! vo8al support o the Carty is o!e
thi!g7 To do so a!d still keep a bolt:hole a!d !est:egg is Nuite a!other 777 From the mome!t o his
espousal o Dommu!ism- 3re8ht stood o! the sideli!es- 8heeri!g o! a party he most emphati8ally did
!ot 6ish to joi!- re8omme!di!g that others submit to a dis8ipli!e 6hi8h he himsel reusedK @Nuoted i!
Daute- -he Dancer Defects- p7 "00A7 So 6he! 3re8ht- the 1GF Staatsdichter 6ith a! Austria! passport
a!d a S6iss ba!k a88ou!t- 6rote i! his poem J9! Gark TimesK agai!st poets 6ho remai! sile!t i! times
o oppressio!EJ[later ge!eratio!s\ 6o!It say+ the times 6ere dark > Father- 6hy 6ere these poets
sile!tMKEo!e should i!deed raise the Nuestio!+ JSo 6hy 6as he himsel sile!t 6he!ever the dark
pla8es o the )SSF a!d the i!ter!atio!al Dommu!ist moveme!t 6ere 8o!8er!edMK @ibid7A Furthermore-
6he! Fredri8 2ameso! @see his /recht and Method- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 1%%&- p7 10A dee!ds 3re8ht
agai!st the a88usatio! that he relied heavily o! a!o!ymous 8ollaborators- eve! 8opyi!g rom them the
majority o some o his 6orks- 6ith the 8ou!ter:argume!t that Jthese atta8ks depre8iate politi8s
altogetherEas the a8tio! o 8olle8tivesEi! the !ame o the perso!al a!d o i!dividual o6!ership-K
addi!g ho6- i! this 6ay- Jthe properly utopia! eatures o 3re8htIs 8olle8tive 6ork- a!d o 8olle8tive
a!d 8ollaborative 6ork o all ki!ds- are o88ulted a!d repudiated-K o!e 8a!!ot but take !ote o the
o?ymoro! J3re8htIs 8olle8tive 6orkKEa 8olle8tive 6ork 6hi8h 3re8ht !o!etheless- i! a very
pragmati8 a!d totally !o!:utopia! 6ay- sold o! the market as his o6!- resorti!g to all the i!esse o
JbourgeoisK 8opyright la6- a!d dema!di!g high sums o mo!ey as beitti!g o!e 6ho sells his
Ji!dividual o6!ership7K
(& A! u!e?pe8ted versio! o the Fabi!ovit8h joke 8ir8ulated i! e?:5ugoslavia+ a! oi8er 6a!ts
to edu8ate a 1ypsy soldier by tea8hi!g him poetryT so- i! order to e?plai! rhyme to him- he gives a!
e?ample+ J9 play balalaika- 9 s8re6 your motherK @the li!e rhymes i! the origi!al+ Igram balalai"u!
yebem tvoiu mai"uFA The 1ypsy a!s6ers+ JHh- 9 get itR =ereIs a!other o!e+ 9 play balalaika- 9 s8re6
your 6ie7K The oi8er 8omme!ts+ J3ut this does!It rhymeRK The 1ypsy retorts+ J4o- it does!It rhyme-
but it is true7K The 8at8h is that- i! Serb- this last li!e loosely rhymes @i1e rima! ali 1e istinaA- so that
6e do i!ally get a rhyme7
(% A brie !ote should be added here7 The partisa!s o Jdis8ourse a!alysisK ote! rail agai!st
those 6ho 8o!ti!ue to emphasiUe the key stru8tural role o the e8o!omi8 mode o produ8tio! a!d its
dy!ami8s- raisi!g the spe8ter o Jvulgar ,ar?ismK @or- a!other popular 8at8h6ord- Je8o!omi8
esse!tialismKA+ the i!si!uatio! is that su8h a vie6 redu8es la!guage to a se8o!dary a8tor- lo8ati!g
histori8al ei8a8y o!ly i! the JrealityK o material produ8tio!7 There is- ho6ever- a symmetri8al
simplii8atio! 6hi8h is !o less JvulgarK+ that o proposi!g a dire8t parallel bet6ee! la!guage a!d
produ8tio!- i7e7- o 8o!8eivi!gEi! Caul de ,a! styleEla!guage itsel as a!other mode o produ8tio!-
the Jprodu8tio! o mea!i!g7K A88ordi!g to this approa8h- i! parallel 6ith the Jreii8atio!K o
produ8tive labor i! its result- the 8ommo!:se!se !otio! o spee8h as a mere e?pressio! o some pre:
e?isti!g mea!i!g also JreiiesK mea!i!g- ig!ori!g ho6 mea!i!g is !ot o!ly rele8ted i! spee8h- but
ge!erated by itEit is the result o Jsig!iyi!g pra8ti8e-K as it 6as o!8e ashio!able to say7 H!e should
reje8t this approa8h as the 6orst e?ample o !o!:diale8ti8al formalism- i!volvi!g a hypostasis o
Jprodu8tio!K i!to a! abstra8t:u!iversal !otio! e!8ompassi!g e8o!omi8 a!d Jsymboli8K produ8tio! as
its t6o spe8ies- a!d !egle8ti!g their radi8ally diere!t status7
#0 This is 6hy the *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal 9- its pure apper8eptio!- is a purely ormal u!8tio!
6hi8h is !either !oume!al !or phe!ome!alEit is empty- !o phe!ome!al i!tuitio! 8orrespo!ds to it-
si!8e- i it 6ere to appear to itsel- its sel:appeara!8e 6ould be the JThi!g itsel-K i7e7- the dire8t sel:
tra!spare!8y o a !oume!o!7 The parallel bet6ee! the void o the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t @bA a!d the
void o the tra!s8e!de!tal obje8t- the i!a88essible d that 8auses our per8eptio!s- is misleadi!g here+ the
tra!s8e!de!tal obje8t is the void beyond phe!ome!al appeara!8es- 6hile the tra!s8e!de!tal subje8t
already appears as a void7
#1 Fobert Caller- JThe Cote!tial o Thresholds to Hbstru8t a!d to Fa8ilitate+ H! the Hperatio!
o Gispla8eme!t i! Hbsessio!al 4eurosis a!d Cerversio!K @u!published paper- 2002A7
#2 9! a homologous 6ay- the very e?8ess o e8ologi8al 8atastrophism @the e!d o the 6orld is
!igh- et87A u!8tio!s as a dee!se- a 6ay to obus8ate the true da!gers7 This is 6hy the o!ly appropriate
reply to a! e8ologist tryi!g to 8o!vi!8e us o the impe!di!g threat is to suggest that the true target o
his desperate argume!t is his own !o!:belieEi! other 6ords- our a!s6er should be somethi!g like
JGo!It 6orry- the 8atastrophe is sure to 8omeRK
#" For a more detailed a88ou!t o this stru8ture- see my -he )uppet and the Dwarf- Dambridge-
,A+ ,9T Cress 200"7
#( /olram =ogrebe- Die Wir"lich"eit des Den"ens- =eidelberg+ )!iversitjtsverlag /i!ter
200$- p7 1"7
## ,arkus 1abriel- JThe ,ythologi8al 3ei!g o Fele8tio!-K i! ,arkus 1abriel a!d Slavoj
iek- eds7- Mythology! Madness! and .aughter8 Sub1ectivity in (erman Idealism- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum
200%7
#' Sh!dor ,hrai- Embers- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200"- p7 2(%7
#$ ,a!ohar Shyam 2oshi- -he )erple&ity of 0ariya 0ercules- 4e6 Gelhi+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200%7
#& 9 o6e this idea to Ale!ka Bupa!^i^7
#% See 2udith 3utler a!d Datheri!e ,alabou- Sois mon corps8 3ne lecture contemporaine de la
domination et de la servitude che2 0egel- Caris+ 3ayard 20107
'0 The rather bori!g 8riti8ism o =egelIs starti!g poi!t i! the diale8ti8 o servitude a!d
domi!atio! @the struggle to the death bet6ee! the uture master a!d the uture serva!tA is that =egel
8heats by sile!tly ig!ori!g the obvious radi8al solutio!+ the t6o o them really ight to the death- i7e7-
u!til o!e o them is a8tually killedEthe J8riti8alK poi!t bei!g that si!8e this result 6ould have brought
the diale8ti8al pro8ess to a halt- the =egelia! struggle to death is !ot really ought 6ithout restrai!t- but
presupposes a 8ertai! impli8it symboli8 pa8t that the result 6ill !ot be death7 3ut here- o!e 8a!!ot 8heat
a!d prete!d to ight to the death k!o6i!g that !obody 6ill die+ the @utureA masterIs readi!ess to die
must be ully a8tual7 The o!ly solutio! is to a88ept that ma!y struggles do e!d i! death a!d deadlo8k-
so that- i! order or the histori8al pro8ess to be set i! motio! by the proper diale8ti8 o servitude a!d
domi!atio!- ma!y i!dividuals had to die a mea!i!gless death 6hi8h amou!ted to a pure e?pe!diture-
lost 6ithout tra8e i! the dark past o @preAhistory- as so ma!y !ameless skulls stre6! a8ross the lo!g
road o history- to paraphrase =egel7
'1 9 o6e this reere!8e to For8e to 3e!jami! 3liumis- 45)7
'2 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 &17
'" A!derse! himsel lo8ated the origi!s o the story i! a! i!8ide!t he 6it!essed as a small
8hildEi! a 6o!derul e?ample o the sel:destru8tive- u!8ompromisi!g sta!8e+ =is ather 6as se!t a
pie8e o red silk by a ri8h 8ustomer- to make a pair o da!8i!g slippers or her daughter7 )si!g red
leather alo!g 6ith the silk- the ather 6orked very 8areully o! the shoes- o!ly to have the ri8h lady tell
him they 6ere i!adeNuate7 She said he had do!e !othi!g but spoil her silk7 J9! that 8ase-K he said- J9
may as 6ell spoil my leather too-K a!d 8ut up the shoes i! ro!t o her7
'( 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 #"7
'# As .a8a! poi!ts out i! his Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis @4e6 5ork+ /7
/7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%&A7 See also S8helli!gIs tra!spositio! o the disti!8tio! bet6ee! 0?iste!8e
@o!tologi8ally ully:8o!stituted realityA a!d the dark spe8tral pre:o!tologi8al 1rou!d o 0?iste!8e i!to
1od himsel- so that 6e must disti!guish 1odIs e?iste!8e rom his 8haoti8 pre:o!tologi8al J!ature7K
The 6hole o late S8helli!g 8ould be 8o!de!sed i!to this reversal o deus sive natura+ 6here Spi!oUa
sees ide!tity- sy!o!ymity- J1od or !ature-K S8helli!g sees irredu8ible te!sio! a!d struggle7
'' .a8a!- semi!ar o ,ay 10- 1%'$- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;I68 .a logi<ue du fantasme
@u!publishedA7
'$ Fobert Cippi!- 0egels )ractical )hilosophy- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 200&-
p7 #17
'& This sel:de8laratory rele?ivity is also dis8er!ible i! regard to ame+ people 8a! be amous
or this or that- but they 8a! also be amous simply for being famous7 Fe8all the phe!ome!o! o Caris
=ilto!- a! absolute !obody adored by the trashy media- 6ho report o! her every step7 She is !ot amous
or doi!g or bei!g somethi!g spe8ialT the diale8ti8al reversal i! her 8ase 8o!sists i! the a8t that the
media report o! her most ba!al behaviorEjumpi!g over a 8ar i! a 8ro6ded parki!g lot- eati!g a
hamburger- shoppi!g at a dis8ou!t storeEsimply be8ause she is a 8elebrity7 =er ordi!ari!ess- vulgarity
eve!- is dire8tly tra!substa!tiated i!to the eature o a 8elebrity7
'% See JH! 4ot 3ei!g a 4eo:Stru8turalistK i! Cippi!- -he )ersistence of Sub1ectivity- pp7 1'&X
&#7
$0 9 o6e this joke to Simo! Drit8hley- 6ho used it i! a @veryA 8riti8al revie6 o a book o mi!e7
1 See Cierre 3ayard- .e plagiat par anticipation- Caris+ nditio!s de ,i!uit 200%7
2 ,olly A!!e Fothe!berg- -he E&cessive Sub1ect8 + ew -heory of Social ,hange- Dambridge+
Colity Cress 2010- p7 17
" /ith regard to /ei!i!ger- 6e should risk the hypothesis that his masterpie8e Se& and
,haracter is i! a ki!d o negative dialogue 6ith uture- !ot dire8tly borro6i!g rom it but rather
rea8ti!g uriously to the prospe8t o ema!8ipated emi!i!e subje8tivity7 Alo!g similar li!es- F7 /7 27
S8helli!g !oted some6here that the e?plosio! o de8ade!t 0vil i! A!8ie!t Fome just beore the rise o
Dhristia!ity obeyed a deep !e8essity+ it 6as as i- suspe8ti!g 6hat lay ahead- it made a last vi8ious
attempt to assert itsel7 The same holds or /ei!i!gerIs !egative plagiarism:by:a!ti8ipatio!+ he atta8ks
6hat has !ot yet arrived7
( A!d- i!8ide!tally- the same solutio! 8a! be proposed to resolve the ambiguity o the relatio!
bet6ee! a! 0ve!t a!d its !omi!atio! i! 3adiouIs thought+ the 0ve!t is !ot the same as its !omi!atio!-
it is a Feal to 6hi8h !omi!atio! rea8ts- i?i!g it 6ithi! the symboli8 spa8eT ho6ever- there is
!o!etheless !o 0ve!t prior to its !omi!atio!- si!8e o!ly a !omi!atio! tur!s somethi!g 6hi8h merely
happe!ed i!to a! 0ve!t7
# Cierre 3ayard- Demain est Acrit- Caris+ nditio!s de ,i!uit 200#7
' 9bid7- pp7 12"X(7
$ 9bid7- pp7 12&X%7
& 9bid7- p7 1(27
% 9 rely here o! Alle! Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- Dambridge+
Dambridge )!iversity Cress 20017
10 Goes !ot the same shit repeat itsel i! the passage rom .e!i!ism to Stali!ism+ dedi8ated
sel:sa8rii8i!g servi8e to the revolutio!ary Dause tur!s i!to a! u!pri!8ipled opportu!ist latteri!g o
the .eaderM 9t 6ould be i!teresti!g to e?plore ho6 the passage rom tragedy to 8omedy i! A!tiNuity is
repeated here i! the guise o the passage rom medieval epi8s about heroes servi!g a! ho!orable Dause
@0l Did- Fola!d- 4ibelu!gsA to early moder! 8omedy @rom Don [ui&ote to GiderotIs 7ameauA 6hi8h
des8ribes the i!here!t reversal o heroi8 servi8e i!to lattery a!d theatri8ality7
11 Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- p7 #%7
12 The obvious rebuke arises here+ but 6hat about i!8estuous desireM Ater all- 6e are i!
HedipusIs amily7 9t is here that 6e should i!voke the good old .Lvi:Straussia! e?ample o a tribe that
treats all dreams as havi!g a se?ual mea!i!gEe?8ept those 6hi8h deal dire8tly 6ith se?ual matters7 9!
the same 6ay- 6e should suspe8t i!8estuous desire i! all amilies 6ith 8lose li!ksEe?8ept or the
Hedipus amily7
1" Ga!iel D7 Ge!!ett- ,onsciousness E&plained- 4e6 5ork+ .ittle- 3ro6! 1%%1- p7 2((7
1( 9bid7- p7 "1#7
1# 9bid7- p7 2('- Nuoti!g rom F7 /7 Dlark- -he .ife of /ertrand 7ussell- .o!do!+ /eide!eld
i 4i8olso! 1%$#- p7 1$'7
1' Catri8ia =ighsmith- Strangers on a -rain- =armo!ds6orth+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 1%&2- p7 2#'7
1$ =ei!ri8h vo! *leist- JH! the 1radual Formatio! o Thoughts i! the Cro8ess o Spee8h-K
tra!slatio! by Dhristoph =arbsmeier o Jqber das Verertige! der 1eda!ke! beim Fede!-K i! Wer"e in
einem /and- ,u!i8h+ Darl =a!ser 1%''- pp7 &10X1(7 9 o6e this reere!8e to *leist to ,lade! Golar7
1& 9bid7
1% V7 97 .e!i!- JHur Fevolutio!-K i! ,ollected Wor"s- Vol7 ""- ,os8o6+ Crogress Cublishers
1%''- p7 ($&7
20 1regor ,oder- 0egel in Spino2a- .jublja!a+ A!ale8ta 200%- p7 2(07
21 .ouis Althusser- )hilosophy of the Encounter- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200'- p7 1'27
22 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress 1%$$- p7 2$07
2" Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- p7 '27
2( 9bid7- p7 '$7
2# =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- p7 (((7
2' Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- p7 $07
2$ 9bid7- p7 &17
2& Fe8all the immortal .u8y rom I .ove .ucy 6hose trademark gesture- 6he! somethi!g
u!usual happe!ed- 6as to slightly be!d her !e8k a!d 8ast a surprised look dire8t to the 8ameraEthis
6as !ot .u8ille 3all- the a8tress- mo8ki!gly addressi!g the publi8- but a! attitude o sel:estra!geme!t
that 6as part o J.u8yK @as a s8ree! perso!aA hersel7
2% Speight- 0egel! .iterature and the )roblem of +gency- p7 $$7
1 2a8Nues .a8a!- JSemi!ar o! the VCurloi!ed .etter-IK i! 2oh! C7 ,uller a!d /illiam 27
Fi8hardso!- eds7- -he )urloined )oe- 3altimore+ 2oh!s =opki!s )!iversity Cress 1%&&- pp7 2&X%7
2 Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 (&7
" 9bid7
( 9bid7
# See Theodor /7 Ador!o- Einleitung in die So2iologie! Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 1%%"7
' 9bid7- p7 1""7
$ 9bid7- pp7 1$(X#7
& Dlaude .Lvi:Strauss- Introduction to the Wor" of Marcel Mauss- .o!do!+ Foutledge 1%&$- p7
#%7
% 9bid7- pp7 '2X"7
10 9bid7- p7 '(7
11 9bid7- p7 '"7
12 For .Lvi:Strauss- the symboli8 stru8ture is a! atemporal matri? o all possible permutatio!s
o a stru8ture- 6hile the radi8aliUed ma!a i!trodu8es i!to the stru8ture a! irredu8ible temporality+ the
Jloati!gK Uero:sig!iier alter!ates e!dlessly bet6ee! 1 a!d 0- bet6ee! bei!g a!d !o!:bei!g- the
ull!ess o i!eable mea!i!g a!d !o!:se!se- providi!g the most eleme!tary ormula o 6hat Freud
8alled the 8ompulsio! to repeat7
1" /e should !ote here the li!k bet6ee! .a8a!Is JNuilti!g poi!tK a!d the 8o!8ept o a point
deployed by 3adiou i! his .ogics of Worlds- as the mome!t 6he! the 8omple?ity o a situatio! is
redu8ed to a simple 8hoi8e o JyesK or J!o-K 6he! 6e have to de8ideE6ar or pea8e- atta8k or
6ithdra6- a88ept or reje8t a! oer 777
1( ,a!y theorists sympatheti8 to 8ommu!ism me!tio! 6hat o!e 8ould 8all a CF:obje8tio!+ i!
most 8ou!tries- espe8ially post:so8ialist o!es- the very 6ord J8ommu!ismK has su8h a bad press-
evoki!g traumati8 memories- that- i o!e aims at a serious so8ial moveme!t- a!other 6ord should be
ou!d- o!e more a88eptable to the ge!eral publi87 9t is hard !ot to be remi!ded here o 0r!st 2o!esIs
!egotiatio!s o! the ate o psy8hoa!alysis i! 1erma!y ater 1%""- 6he! 2o!es rea8hed a 8ompromise
6ith the 4aUi regime to the ee8t that- i! order to save psy8hoa!alyti8 pra8ti8e @o! top o e?8ludi!g
2e6ish a!alysts- o 8ourseA- the term Jpsy8hoa!alysisK 6ould be repla8ed 6ith the term Jdy!ami8
psy8hology7K 9! other 6ords- the problem 6ith this easy solutio! is that the very taboo 6ith regard to
the 6ord J8ommu!ismK is the result o the deeat o the radi8al ema!8ipatory struggle- so that 6he!
o!e aba!do!s the 6ord- o!e soo!er or later also betrays the 8o!te!t 8overed by this 6ord7
1# 9! 8lear oppositio! to the idea that a!ti:8apitalism is today really a orm o a!ti:Semitism-
o!e should assert more tha! ever the !otio! o a!ti:Semitism as the eleme!tary orm o a 8ompromise
6ith 8apitalism- o a88epti!g 8apitalism+ i a JletistK moveme!t resorts to a!ti:Semitism- this eo ipso
mea!s that it displa8es the 8ause o 8apitalist a!tago!isms o!to a @pseudo:A8o!8rete i!trusive @ra8ialA
Hther- thereby evoki!g the a!tasy that- o!8e 6e get rid o this Hther- 6e 6ill get 8apitalism without its
a!tago!isms7 So i- i!deed- o!e 8a! i!d eleme!ts o a!ti:Semitism i! todayIs a!ti:imperialist struggles-
6hat they i!di8ate is simply the depth o the global vi8tory o 8apitalism- the 6ay 8apitalism pervades
our ideologi8al imagi!atio!+ eve! those 6ho proess to be a!ti:8apitalist 8a!!ot really es8ape the most
basi8 8oordi!ates o the 8apitalist u!iverse7
1' Tim =arord- -he .ogic of .ife- .o!do!+ Aba8us 200%- p7 #27
1$ This is 6hy a! a8t as a proper symboli8 i!terve!tio! has to be stri8tly disti!guished rom a
perormative o!e @a spee8h a8tA+ 6hile a spee8h a8t remai!s irmly embedded i! a Jbig Hther-K relyi!g
or its ee8t o! pre:established rules- a! i!terve!tio! proper i!terve!es i! the big Hther itsel- atta8ki!g
it at the poi!t o its i!8o!siste!8y- 8ha!gi!g its very rules7
1& 9 love is- as .a8a! put it- givi!g 6hat o!e does !ot have- ho6 the! does a true ,aster 6ho
loves you give you 6hat he does !ot haveM =e gives you- his pupil- yourself- the possibility o
be8omi!g 6hat you are7 3ut re8all here the appare!tly opposite use o tautology i! everyday pra8ti8e+
6he! o!e says Ja ma! is a ma!-K this mea!s pre8isely that !o ma! is at the level o its !otio!- that
every a8tual ma! is ull o impere8tio!sT or- agai!- 6he! 6e say Jthe la6 is the la6-K the impli8atio! is
that 6e have to obey it eve! 6he! it obviously violates our se!se o justi8eEJthe la6 is the la6K
mea!s that the la6 is u!dame!tally grou!ded o! a! illegal viole!8e7
1% 9t is similar 6ith the series seve!tee!- eightee!- !i!etee!- te!tee!Et6e!ty+ the reversal rom
Jte!tee!K to Jt6e!tyK sig!als the sel:rele?ive gesture o a! i!s8riptio! o the ma?imum at a lo6er
level i!to a higher e!8ompassi!g level7
20 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JChallus a!d Cerversio!-K lacanian in" "" @Spri!g 200%A- p7 #&7
21 ,argaret ,a8,illa!- -he 3ses and +buses of 0istory- .o!do!+ Croile 200%- p7 '07
22 Dited i! ,iller- JChallus a!d Cerversio!-K p7 #&7
2" Agai!st the sta!dard emi!ist 8ritiNues o FreudIs Jphallo8e!trism-K 3oothby makes 8lear
.a8a!Is radi8al rei!terpretatio! o the !otorious !otio! o Jpe!is e!vyK+ J.a8a! e!ables us i!ally to
u!dersta!d that pe!is e!vy is most proou!dly elt pre8isely by those 6ho have a pe!isK @Fi8hard
3oothby- Freud as )hilosopher- .o!do!+ Foutledge 2001- p7 2%2A7
2( Fra!eois 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 1#07
2# The properly Freudia! reply to the 8ommo!:se!se dig at alleged Jpsy8hoa!alyti8
symbolismK @JSometimes a 8igar is just a 8igarRKA is u!doubtedly+ JSometimes a phallus is just a
phallusRK 9t should be added- ho6ever- that the subje8t or 6hom a phallus is just a phallus has a
pre8ise !ame+ the pervert7
2' 27 Ar8h 1etty a!d Hleg V7 4aumov- -he 7oad to -error8 Stalin and the Self*Destruction of
the /olshevi"s! Le`\f`e- 4e6 =ave! a!d .o!do!+ 5ale )!iversity Cress 1%%%- p7 ##'7
2$ ,iller- JChallus a!d Cerversio!-K p7 '17
2& 9t 6ould be appropriate i the Bio!ists 6ho 6a!t to a!!e? the /est 3a!k 6ere to remember
passages rom the Hld Testame!t like the ollo6i!g+ JGo !ot oppress a! alie!T you yourselves k!o6
ho6 it eels to be alie!s- be8ause you 6ere alie!s i! 0gyptK @0?odus 2"+%AT J/he! a! alie! lives 6ith
you i! your la!d- do !ot ill:treat him7 The alie! livi!g 6ith you must be treated as o!e o your !ative:
bor!7 .ove him as yoursel- or you 6ere alie!s i! 0gyptK @.eviti8us 1%+""X(A7
2% ,iller- JChallus a!d Cerversio!-K p7 2"7
"0 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JThe .ogi8 o the Dure-K lacanian in" "" @Spri!g 200%A- p7 1%7
"1 9bid7- p7 2&7
"2 9bid7- p7 "17
"" So is there a vagi!a 6ith teethM There is- o 8ourse- a!d it is 8alled virgi!ityEthe poi!t o
losi!g virgi!ity is pre8isely that the vagi!al teeth get broke!7
"( 9! the later developme!t o .a8a!ia! theory- o 8ourse- 8ompli8atio!s arise+ there is a
pathologi8al Jstai!K that is the subje8tIs eNuivale!tE!ot imagi!ary- but real- the ob1et petit a- the Jstai!
i! the pi8ture-K the !o!:sig!iyi!g remai!der o the sig!iyi!g operatio!7 9! this 6ay- 6e arrive at the
our eleme!ts o .a8a!Is 8o!8ept o dis8ourse+ the 8hai! o ordi!ary sig!iiers @S
2
A- the ,aster:
Sig!iier @S
1
A- the JbarredK subje8t @bA- the obje8t @aA7
"# 5ears ago- o! the Sa!ta DruU 8ampus- o!e o the 8apitals o Coliti8al Dorre8t!ess- 9 6as told
that they had developed jokes 6hi8h 6ere u!!y 6ithout hurti!g- humiliati!g- or eve! maki!g u! o
a!yo!e- like- J/hat happe!s 6he! a tria!gle meets a 8ir8leM777K Credi8tably- 9 immediately e?ploded+ J9
do!It 8are 6hat happe!s 6he! a tria!gle meets a 8ir8le- the 6hole poi!t o a joke is that there must be
someo!e 6ho gets hurt- humiliated 777RK 3ut 6hat i 9 6as 6ro!g- 6hat i it is the purely ormal aspe8t
o a joke 6hi8h makes it u!!y mu8h more tha! its 8o!te!t- i! the same 6ay that se?uality is !ot a
matter o dire8t 8o!te!t- but o the 6ay this 8o!te!t is ormally treatedM The problem- o 8ourse- is
6hether this orm 8a! 6ork alo!e- or 6hether it !eeds Ja little pie8e o realityK added to it- i! the se!se
o some 8o!ti!ge!t positive 8o!te!t related to JdirtyK topi8s @se?- viole!8e- et87A7
"' For a more detailed a88ou!t o teleiosis- see Dhapter 1(7
"$ The relatio!ship bet6ee! a!ore?ia a!d bulimia is a supreme e?ample o the li!k bet6ee!
la8k a!d e?8ess+ a!ore?i8s as a rule tur! i!to bulimi8s a!d the!- i! order to pu!ish themselves- retur! to
a!ore?ia7 3ulimi8s eat to e?8ess 6hile- or a!ore?i8s- all ood is already a! e?8ess- a disgusti!g oreig!
body to be reje8ted7 /hi8h is 6hy the t6o 8oi!8ide+ they both la8k the J8ommo! measureK o the
J!ormalK habit o eati!gT they both bear 6it!ess to the imbala!8e i!trodu8ed i!to the a!imal rhythm o
digestio! by the emerge!8e o subje8tivity7
"& ,iller- JThe .ogi8 o the Dure-K p7 117
"% The diere!8e bet6ee! a stru8tural pla8e a!d the eleme!t illi!g it out is also dis8er!ible i!
the subtle disti!8tio! bet6ee! J6e are 6aiti!g or dK a!d Jd is 6hat 6e 6ere 6aiti!g or7K For
e?ample- i 6e are eagerly e?pe8ti!g a !e6 book rom a! author- a!d the book- 6he! it i!ally appears-
tur!s out to be a disappoi!tme!t- 6e 8a! say+ JAlthough 6e 6ere 6aiti!g or this book- this is !ot the
book 6e 6ere 6aiti!g or7K
(0 Hr- as /ill Sel 6rote apropos his -he /oo" of Dave+ JThe book is argui!g that 6hat you
!eed or a revealed religio! is a!y old bollo8ks- it just has to be there i! the right pla8e at the right
timeK @Nuoted i! =ele! 3ro6!- 9!tervie6 6ith /ill Sel- Daily -elegraph- ,ay 2&- 200'A7
(1 Ar8hite8ture @together 6ith desig!A is here u!iNue+ it has to ge!erate this ee8t o the
suspe!sio! o everyday u!8tio!i!g- o dise!gageme!t- 6hile simulta!eously 8o!stru8ti!g buildi!gs
6hi8h still meet the material !eeds o the people usi!g it a!d thus u!8tio! as part o everyday
u!8tio!al reality7 At its best- it su88eeds i! pervadi!g our utilitaria! use o the obje8t 6ith a ki!d o
dise!gageme!t- so that- i! a utopia! 6ay- our daily busi!ess is elevated to a! aestheti8 e?perie!8e7
(2 ,iller- JThe .ogi8 o the Dure-K p7 2%7
(" 9! .a8a!ia! terms- this diere!8e is that bet6ee! alie!atio! a!d separatio!+ moder!ism
e!a8ts alie!atio!- the loss o o!eIs roots i! traditio!- but o!ly 6ith postmoder!ism do 6e truly separate
ourselves rom traditio!+ its loss is !o lo!ger e?perie!8ed as a loss- 6hi8h is 6hy 6e 8a! playully
retur! to it7
(( This- perhaps- is 6hat makes Sibelius similar to ,auri8e Favel- the other great 8omposer o
restrai!t a!d reserve+ Stepha! i! Dlaude SautetIs 3n coeur en hiver is i! a 6ay a portrait o Favel
himsel- o the proper JspiritK o his musi87 The diere!8e bet6ee! Favel a!d Sibelius is the diere!8e
o the t6o types o reserve+ rei!ed a!d se!sitive Fre!8h bourgeois sel:8o!strai!t versus 4ordi8 rural
reti8e!8e a!d distrust o metropolita! so8iety7 Fe8all FavelIs iro!i8 stateme!t apropos his JTrio-K o!e
o his greatest masterpie8es- that he had i! his head the 6hole pie8e already 8omposedEhe just had to
i!ve!t a!d i!sert the melodi8 li!es7 This priority o stru8ture over the melodi8 li!e is perhaps the best
8hara8teriUatio! o the JreserveK o FavelIs musi8al style7
(# All great 8omposers ailE3eethove!Is !i!th is a ailure- /ag!erIs )arsifal is a ailure- the
i!ale o ,oUartIs ,osi is a ailureEailure is a sig! that the 8omposer is deali!g 6ith the 7eal o the
musi8al matter7 9t is o!ly the JlightK "itsch 8omposers 6ho 8a! pass rom o!e smooth triumph to the
!e?t7
(' 3ur!ett 2ames- -he Music of Cean Sibelius- Futherord+ Fairleigh Gi8ki!so! )!iversity Cress
1%&"- p7 $$7
($ 9bid7- p7 $#7
(& 9! short- the passage here is that rom Foma!ti8ism to moder!ism7 From the sta!dpoi!t o
the !e6 materialism- 6e should also rehabilitate musi8al Foma!ti8ism+ its basi8 eature is !ot the
8elebratio! o spiritual lo!gi!g- but the gradual a!d pai!ul emerge!8e o a melody out o a struggle
6ith the musi8al material7 9! this se!se- musi8al Foma!ti8ism is deeply materialist+ i! ,oUart a!d
@most oA 3eethove!- a melody is u!problemati8ally there- simply give! as the starti!g poi!t or its
variatio!s- 6hile i! Foma!ti8ism- the melody o!ly gradually emerges through the struggle 6ith a!d
6ork o! the material7 9! moder!ism proper- somethi!g eve! more radi8al happe!s+ the material itsel
loses its substa!tial de!sity a!d 6eight7
(% 1illes GeleuUe- ,inema L8 -he Movement*Image- tra!s7 =ugh Tomli!so! a!d 3arbara
=ammerjam- ,i!!eapolis+ )!iversity o ,i!!esota Cress 1%&'- p7 1227
#0 9bid7- p7 &17
#1 A! 0ve!t- o 8ourse- tur!s arou!d this dispositio!- so that the Jpart o !o:partK be8omes the
most i!te!se eleme!t o the !e6 6orldEproletaria!s 6ho 6ere !othi!g be8ome everythi!g- abstra8t
orm 6hi8h 6as !othi!g i! realisti8 pai!ti!g be8omes the hegemo!i8 style- et87
#2 ,aybe the )S authorities do possess su8h ootage a!d- or u!dersta!dable reaso!s- are
keepi!g it se8ret7
#" 1illes GeleuUe a!d FLli? 1uattari- What is )hilosophy?- tra!s7 =ugh Tomli!so! a!d 1raham
3ur8hell- 4e6 5ork+ Dolumbia )!iversity Cress 1%%(- p7 117
#( Ceter =all6ard- $ut of -his World- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200'- p7 1(27
## 1illes GeleuUe a!d FLli? 1uattari- Mille plateau&- Caris+ ,i!uit 1%&0- p7 1%27
#' 9bid7- p7 1%"7
#$ =all6ard- $ut of -his World- p7 1(%7
#& Furthermore- does !ot GeleuUeIs argume!t agai!st the @=egelia!A !egative hold o!ly i 6e
redu8e the !egative to the !egatio! o a pre:e?isti!g positive ide!tityM /hat about a !egativity 6hi8h is
i! itsel positive- givi!g- Jge!erativeKM
#% =all6ard- $ut of -his World- p7 1#7
'0 The gist o GeleuUeIs 8ritiNue o AristotleIs !otio! o spe8ii8 diere!8e is that it privileges
ide!tity over diere!8e+ spe8ii8 diere!8e al6ays presupposes the ide!tity o a ge!re i! 6hi8h
opposed spe8ies 8oe?ist7 3ut 6hat about the J=egelia! 8ompli8atio!K hereM /hat about a specific
difference which defines the genre itself- a diere!8e o spe8ies 6hi8h 8oi!8ides 6ith the diere!8e
bet6ee! ge!us a!d spe8ies- thus redu8i!g the ge!us itsel to o!e o its spe8iesM
'1 =all6ard- $ut of -his World- p7 1227
'2 9bid7- p7 1#(7
'" 1illes GeleuUe- Desert Islands and $ther -e&ts! LeS`fLeT_- .os A!geles+ Semiote?t@eA
200(- pp7 1&#X'7
'( This bri!gs us to the dime!sio! o symboli8 8astratio!+ the phallus as the sig!iier o the
pure virtuality o mea!i!g has to be a Jsig!iier 6ithout a sig!iiedK+ it is !o!:se!se- the abse!8e o a!y
determi!ate mea!i!g- 6hi8h sta!ds or the virtuality o pure mea!i!g7 @Hr- to put it i! more GeleuUia!
terms+ the very 8ou!ter:a8tualiUatio!- the move ba8k6ards rom a8tuality to the virtual ield that is its
tra!s8e!de!tal 8o!ditio!- has to o88ur within a8tuality- as a displa8eme!t or disorder- out:o:joi!t o the
eleme!ts 6ithi! this order7A This is 6hy it is !ot !o!se!si8al to speak o the Jsig!iier 6ithout a
sig!iiedK+ this abse!8e o mea!i!g is i! itsel a positive eature- i!s8ribed i!to the ield o mea!i!g as a
gapi!g hole i! its midst7 @9! a homologous 6ay- the 2e6s are the Jphalli8K !atio!- the Jphalli8K eleme!t
amo!g !atio!s+ they are a !atio! 6ithout a la!d- su8h that this abse!8e is i!s8ribed i!to their very
bei!g- as the absolute reere!8e to the virtual la!d o 9srael7A
'# 1illes GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- tra!s7 Caul Catto!- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 2001- p7
10#7 The 8o!seNue!8e o this also i!volves a! i!versio! i! the relatio!ship bet6ee! repetitio! a!d re:
memoratio!7 FreudIs amous motto J6hat 6e do !ot remember- 6e are 8ompelled to repeatK should
thus be reversed+ what we are unable to repeat! we are haunted with and are compelled to memori2e7
The 6ay to get rid o a past trauma is !ot to rememoriUe it- but to ully repeat it i! the *ierkegaardia!
se!se7
'' 0spe8ially i! the 8o!te?t o politi8al struggle- dete8ti!g the mi!imal diere!8e i! all its
guises is 8ru8ial+ the diere!8e bet6ee! authe!ti8 e!thusiasm a!d rea8tio!ary a!ati8ism- bet6ee! the
pursuit o !atio!al liberatio! a!d a!ti:immigra!t populism- bet6ee! obs8e!e solidarity a!d ra8ist jokes-
et87 This diere!8e is dii8ult to dei!e be8ause there are ote! !o 8lear 8riteria- !o positive properties
6hi8h allo6 us to de8ideEit is all a matter o proper 8o!te?tualiUatio!7 For e?ample- 3adiouIs ormula
J<ui est iBi est diBiK @those 6ho are here are rom hereA 6orks i! Fra!8e agai!st the a!ti:immigra!t
populists- but a similar ormula is also i!voked by 2e6ish settlers i! the /est 3a!k+ 6e are here- so 6e
are rom here !o less tha! the Calesti!ia!s7
'$ 2ames /illiams- (illes Deleu2es Giere!8e a!d Fepetitio!8 + ,ritical Introduction and
(uide- 0di!burgh+ 0di!burgh )!iversity Cress 200"- p7 2$7
'& A!other everyday e?ample o pure diere!8e+ 6he! 6at8hi!g a movie o! GVG 6ith the
subtitles or the heari!g:impaired tur!ed o!- 6hi8h also des8ribe all the sou!ds- o!e ote! e!8ou!ters a
stra!ge mome!t+ 6hat to do 6he! a s8e!e o88urs 6hi8h usually ge!erates a 8learly re8og!iUable sou!d-
but- o! the sou!dtra8k- 6e @6hose heari!g is !ot impairedA do not hear itM @Say someo!e o! s8ree!
shouts- but 6e do !ot hear a!y shoutMA At su8h mome!ts- the o!ly solutio! or the subtitles is to note
the absence itself @automati8ally assumed by the spe8tatorA- somethi!g like J!o 8ry heardK or J!o
ri!gi!g o the pho!e heard7K 9s !ot the diere!8e here also a purely virtual o!e- a diere!8e bet6ee!
me !ot heari!g a!ythi!g be8ause 9 am heari!g:impaired- a!d me !ot heari!g a sou!d 6hi8h- i 9 6ere
!ot heari!g:impaired- 9 6ould have heardM
'% See Dhapter 11 @o! the !o!:AllA o the prese!t book7
$0 /e should i!trodu8e the same Nuadruple stru8ture i!to +ntigone+ the 8o!li8t is !ot o!ly
bet6ee! A!tigo!e @sta!di!g or the amily pri!8ipleA a!d Dreo! @sta!di!g or the pri!8iple o the polis-
the stateA7 T6o other positio!s must be added to re!der this 8o!li8t u!dersta!dable+ that o =aimo!
@6ho sta!ds or !either amily !or state- but or eroti8 loveA a!d that o the Dhorus @6hi8h sta!ds or
8ommu!ity i! its dista!8e rom state po6erA7 /hat is 8ru8ial here is !ot the te!sio! bet6ee! amily a!d
state- but the te!sio! 6hi8h determi!es ea8h o these t6o terms rom 6ithi!+ i! the JprivateK domai!-
amily versus the si!gularity o eroti8 love @a 8ouple ultimately al6ays betrays their respe8tive
amiliesA- a!d- i! the Jpubli8K domai!- state versus so8iety outside the state stru8ture7
$1 4atsume Soseki- -he -hree*,ornered World- .o!do!+ Ceter H6e! 2002- pp7 1$&X%7
$2 9bid7- p7 1&(7
$" GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- pp7 10(X#7
$( 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JCroa!e 9llumi!atio!s-K lacanian in" 2& @Fall 200'A- pp7 22X"7
$# 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JGeta8hed Cie8es-K lacanian in" 2& @Fall 200'A- p7 "$7
$' For both .a8a! a!d GeleuUe- the drive has a! ethi8al status7 So 6he! 9 am i! doubt about
6hether 9 8a! perorm some dii8ult task- a!d a tea8her tells me- J9 trust youR 9 k!o6 you 8a! do itRK
he is reerri!g !ot o!ly to my symboli8 ide!tity be!eath my miserable psy8hologi8al reality- but also to
J6hat is i! me more tha! mysel-K to the impossible:real o the a8ephalous drive that is me7
$$ GeleuUe a!d 1uattari- Mille plateau&- p7 1%'7
$& 2ea!:Cierre Hudart- J.a suture-K ,ahiers du cinAma 211 @April 1%'%A- pp7 "'X%T a!d 2ea!:
Cierre Hudart- J.a suture-K ,ahiers du cinAma 212 @,ay 1%'%A- pp7 #0X#7
1 Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude8 +n Essay on the ecessity of ,ontingency- .o!do!+
Do!ti!uum 200&7
2 .etter rom H8tober 11- 1%"1- i! Martin 0eidegger9Elisabeth /lochmann8 /riefwechsel
LeLcfLeMe- ,arba8h+ Geuts8hes .iteratur:Ar8hiv 1%%0- p7 ((T as Nuoted i! ,eillassou?- +fter
Finitude- p7 1"$7 4ote that this passage is rom the time immediately ater =eideggerIs le8tures o! -he
Fundamental ,oncepts of Metaphysics rom 1%2%X"0- 6here a S8helli!gia! hypothesis is also
ormulated that- perhaps- a!imals are- i! a hitherto u!k!o6! 6ay- a6are o their la8k- o the Jpoor!essK
o their relati!g to the 6orldEperhaps there is a! i!i!ite pai! pervadi!g the e!tire livi!g !ature+ Ji
deprivatio! i! 8ertai! orms is a ki!d o sueri!g- a!d poverty a!d deprivatio! o 6orld belo!gs to the
a!imalIs bei!g- the! a ki!d o pai! a!d sueri!g 6ould have to permeate the 6hole a!imal realm a!d
the realm o lie i! ge!eral7K @,arti! =eidegger- -he Fundamental ,oncepts of Metaphysics-
3loomi!gto!+ 9!dia!a )!iversity Cress 1%%#- p7 2$17A
" 2oh! G7 Daputo- $n 7eligion- .o!do!+ Foutledge 2001- p7 ##7
( 2oh! G7 Daputo a!d 1ia!!i Vattimo- +fter the Death of (od- ed7 2erey /7 Fobbi!s- 4e6
5ork+ Dolumbia )!iversity Cress 200$- p7 1""7
# ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- pp7 ((X#7
' 9bid7- p7 (%7
$ 9s this !ot a variatio! o! the old i!sight i!to ho6 e?iste!8e does !ot ollo6 rom a true
u!iversal judgme!tM 9 a Ju!i8or! has o!e hor!K is true- it 8a! still be true that !o u!i8or! e?istsT but i
Jsome u!i8or!s have o!e hor!K is true- the! at least o!e u!i8or! has to e?ist7
& ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- p7 "7
% This tra!s8e!de!tal 8ritiNue:grou!di!g o the !atural s8ie!8es a!d their Jobje8tivismK 8a! also
be give! a disti!8tly ,ar?ist tou8h 6he! the !atural s8ie!8es are grasped as rooted i! a histori8al
8olle8tive pra&is7
10 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- tra!s7 27 ,7 G7 ,eiklejoh!- .o!do!+ =e!ry 17
3oh! 1&##- p7 ??i?7
11 For a good a88ou!t o the alse tra!slatio!s o this key passage- see 1Lrard 1uest- J.a
tour!ure de lILvL!eme!t-K 0eidegger Studies 10 @1%%(A7
12 ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- p7 #'7
1" 9bid7- pp7 #2X"7
1( 9bid7- p7 '"7
1# 9bid7- p7 #&7
1' 9bid7- p7 11(7
1$ 9bid7- p7 #&7
1& 9bid7
1% See Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JFeal!o i! !jegovo !emo!oK @JThe Feal a!d its 9mpossibleKA-
)roblemi 1X2 @2010A7
20 ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- p7 ''7
21 9bid7
22 9bid7
2" 9bid7- p7 $'7
2( 9bid7- p7 &07
2# See 0ri8 Sa!t!er- $n the )sychotheology of Everyday .ife- Dhi8ago+ )!iversity o Dhi8ago
Cress 20017
2' 1raham =arma!- -he [uadruple $b1ect- Fopley+ Bero 3ooks 20117
2$ 9ai! =amilto! 1ra!t- )hilosophies of ature +fter Schelling- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200'7
2& Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- i!tervie6 i! 1raham =arma!- [uentin Meillassou&8 )hilosophy in the
Ma"ing- 0di!burgh+ 0di!burgh )!iversity Cress- p7 1''7 9!8ide!tally- i there is a philosopher 6ho
ee8tively seems to be 8aught i! the 8ir8le o 6hat ,eillassou? 8alls Jailed 8orrelatio!ism-K it is
Gerrida- 6hose thought os8illates i! its de8o!stru8tive a!alyses bet6ee! t6o poles+ o! the o!e ha!d- he
emphasiUes that there is !o dire8t outside @o metaphysi8sA- that the very attempt to dire8tly break out o
the 8ir8le o logo8e!trism has to rely o! a metaphysi8al 8o!8eptual rameT o! the other ha!d- he
sometimes treats 6riti!g a!d diere!8e as a ki!d o ge!eral o!tologi8al 8ategory- talki!g about
Jtra8esK a!d J6riti!gK i! !ature itsel @ge!eti8 8odes- et87A7
2% ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- p7 '27
"0 See Bupa!^i^- JFeal!o i! !jegovo !emo!o7K
"1 At a diere!t level- therei! resides the basi8 epistemologi8al lesso! o Nua!tum physi8s+ 6e
8a!!ot get to k!o6 reality the 6ay it is i!depe!de!tly o us be8ause 6e are part o reality7
1 Hliver Feltham- JH! Dha!gi!g Appeara!8es i! .a8a! a!d 3adiou-K 3mbr?a@ 1 @200$A- p7 1217
2 H! a irst approa8h- it may appear that 6e are here as ar as possible rom =egel+ does !ot
Da!torIs 8o!8ept o the tra!si!ite as that 6hi8h persists outside the i!ite- 6hi8h sta!ds side by side
6ith it- 6hi8h is e?empted rom it as its e?ter!al rame- provide a! e?emplary 8ase o 6hat =egel 8alls
the Jabstra8t i!i!iteK 6hi8h- i!soar as it is e?ter!ally opposed to the i!ite a!d e?8ludes it- is i! itsel
agai! i!iteM A!d- i! 8o!trast- is !ot the =egelia! Jtrue i!i!iteK imma!e!t to the i!ite- is it !ot the
very orga!i8 totality o the i!ite i! its moveme!t o sel:sublatio!M 9t is- ho6ever- pre8isely su8h a!
Jorga!i8K !otio! o the i!i!ite as the livi!g totality o the i!ite that remai!s at the level o Substa!8e
si!8e- i! it- the i!i!ite is !ot yet or itsel+ it is 8ru8ial or =egel that the i!i!ite must appear- that it be
Jposited as su8h-K i! its diere!8e to the i!iteEo!ly thus do 6e pass rom Substa!8e to Subje8t7 For
=egel- the Jsubje8tK Nua the po6er o absolute !egativity desig!ates the poi!t at 6hi8h the i!i!ite is
posited as su8h- i! its !egative relatio!ship to everythi!g i!ite7
" Stri8tly speaki!g- the same goes also or the tra!s8e!de!tal dime!sio! as su8h7 The ield o
our e?perie!8e is i! pri!8iple Jope!-K i!i!ite- there is al6ays somethi!g to be added to itT 6e arrive at
the tra!s8e!de!tal dime!sio! 6he! 6e de8ide to treat this Jope!K ield o e?perie!8e as a 8losed-
ramed totality a!d to re!der themati8 the rame 6hi8h- although !ot part o our e?perie!8e- a priori
deli!eates its 8o!tours7
( See Doli! ,81i!!- -he Mysterious Flame8 ,onscious Minds in a Material World- 4e6 5ork+
3asi8 3ooks 20007
# Also- it is i!8redible ho6 dire8tly *a!tia! these ormulatio!s are @re8all *a!tIs amous J9 or
he or it- the thi!g that thi!ksKA- 6hi8h is 6hy o!e is tempted to apply to them the =egelia! solutio! or
tur!+ this u!k!o6able!ess o 8o!s8ious!ess to itsel is its o6! solutio!- si!8e 8o!s8ious!ess is this gap
i!>o bei!g7
' Steve! Ci!ker- 0ow the Mind Wor"s- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%$- p7 #'#7
$ 9bid7- p7 #2#7
& Fra!U *aka- -he /lue $ctavo oteboo"s- ed7 ,a? 3rod- Dambridge- ,A+ 0?a8t Dha!ge
1%%1- p7 #"7
% See Catri8k SYski!d- )erfume8 -he Story of a Murderer- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200'7
10 Sea! ,arti!- +ndrei -ar"ovs"y- =arpe!de!+ Co8ket 0sse!tials 200#- p7 (%7
11 Tarkovsky reers here to the lege!d a88ordi!g to 6hi8h- at the height o the purges- a! issue
o )ravda 6as almost pri!ted i! 6hi8h Stali!Is !ame 6as misspelled JSrali!KEthe Jshitter-K rom the
verb JsratI-K to shit7 At the s8e!eIs e!d- relieved that the atal mistake had !ot take! pla8e- the a8tress
6hispers the 6ord i!to her rie!dIs ear7
12 ,arti!- +ndrei -ar"ovs"y- p7 1"#7
1" 4i8k 3ostrom- JClaythi!gs o a =igher ,i!d-K -imes 0igher Education Supplement- ,ay
1'- 200"7 Also k!o6! as JThe Simulatio! Argume!t+ /hy the Crobability that 5ou Are .ivi!g i! a
,atri? is Wuite =igh7K
1( A!!a .ari!a- -his I ,annot Forget8 -he Memoirs of i"olai /u"harins Widow- 4e6 5ork+
/7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%"- p7 "##7
1# 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JA Feadi!g o the Semi!ar From an $ther to the other-K lacanian in"
2% @Spri!g 200$A- p7 1"7
1' H!e story i! the 8lassi8 3ritish horror om!ibus Dead of ight plays o! this very register+ a
8ouple moves i!to a re!ovated house 6ith a large- old mirror i! the livi!g roomT 6he!- i! the eve!i!g-
the husba!d looks i!to the mirror- he sees a s8e!e totally diere!t rom the reality o the livi!g room-
a! old:ashio!ed room 6ith a irepla8e7 The e?pla!atio! is that- t6o 8e!turies earlier- a terrible murder
6as 8ommitted i! this very room- 6hi8h is JrememberedK by the mirror7
1$ Crivate 8ommu!i8atio!7
1& A dire8t reere!8e to the ormulae o se?uatio! @the Jmas8uli!eK superego versus the
Jemi!i!eK driveA also has its limits7
1% A88ordi!g to Freud- love arises out o the i!hibited desire+ the obje8t 6hose @se?ualA
8o!summatio! is preve!ted is the! idealiUed as a love obje8t7 This is 6hy .a8a! establishes a li!k
bet6ee! love a!d drive+ the spa8e o the drive is dei!ed by the gap bet6ee! its goal @obje8tA a!d its
aim- 6hi8h is !ot to dire8tly rea8h its obje8t- but to 8ir8ulate arou!d the obje8t- to repeat the ailure to
rea8h itE6hat the drive a!d love share is this stru8ture o i!hibitio!7 A!d does !ot the same shit
determi!e also the status o the 3adiouia! 0ve!t 6ith regard to ho6 it relates to the order o 3ei!gM A!
0ve!t i!s8ribes itsel i!to the order o 3ei!g- leavi!g its tra8es i! it- or rather- a! 0ve!t is nothing but a
8ertai! distortio! or t6ist i! the order o 3ei!g7 The our stages i! the developme!t o the ob1et a 8a!
ee8tively be applied to the 0ve!t i! its relatio! to 3ei!g+ @1A there is the order o 3ei!gT @2A this order
is re!dered i!8omplete or i!8o!siste!t by the mira8le o a! 0ve!tT @"A this 0ve!t appears as the virtual
poi!t o 8o!siste!8y 6hi8h o!ly re!ders readable the i!8o!siste!tly distorted te?ture o 3ei!gT i!ally-
(A the 0ve!t appears as nothing but this distortio! o 3ei!g7 3ut perhaps this reere!8e to .a8a! also
e!ables us to ide!tiy 6hat is missi!g i! 3adiouIs s8heme+ is it !ot possible to thi!k this distortio! o
3ei!g independently of @or as prior toA the 0ve!t- so that the J0ve!tK ultimately !ames a mi!imal
JetishiUatio!K o the imma!e!t distortio! o the te?ture o 3ei!g i!to its virtual obje8t:8auseM A!d is
!ot the Freudo:.a8a!ia! !ame o this distortio! the drive- the death driveM
20 ,iller- JA Feadi!g o the Semi!ar From an $ther to the other-K p7 2#7
21 9bid7- p7 1&7
22 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o ,ar8h "- 1%$2- 4 ou pire @u!publishedA7
2" 9!soar as this obje8t is the eleme!tary a!tasmati8 obje8t @see .a8a!Is matheme o a!tasy-
b:aA- a!other 6ay to make the same poi!t is to say that our se!se o reality disi!tegrates the mome!t
reality approa8hes too 8losely our u!dame!tal a!tasy7 /e should be 8areul !ot to miss the parado?
here+ 6he!- e?a8tly- does the e?perie!8e o the Jloss o realityK take pla8eM 4ot- as o!e 6ould e?pe8t-
6he! the abyss that separates J6ordsK a!d Jthi!gsK gro6s too large- so that JrealityK !o lo!ger seems
to it the rame or horiUo! o our symboli8 pre:u!dersta!di!g- but- o! the 8o!trary- 6he! JrealityK its
J6ordsK too 8losely- 6he! the 8o!te!t o our 6ords is realiUed i! a! e?8essively JliteralK 6ay7 Sui8e
it to re8all FreudIs u!8a!!y rea8tio! 6he!- ater ma!y years o a!tasiUi!g about the A8ropolis- he
visited it or the irst time+ he 6as so amaUed by the a8t that 6hat he had read about si!8e his youth
really e?isted a!d looked e?a8tly the 6ay it 6as des8ribed i! the books- that his irst rea8tio! 6as a!
over6helmi!g eeli!g o a Jloss o realityKEJ4o- this 8a!!ot be real 777K
2( See Fra!eois 3alm`s- ,e <ue .acan dit de lJtre- Caris+ Cresses )!iversitaires de Fra!8e
1%%%7
2# 9bid7- p7 1"&7
2' 3alm`s also !otes this asymmetri8al 8ir8ularity i! the relatio!ship bet6ee! the Feal- reality-
a!d symboliUatio!+ reality is the Feal as domesti8atedEmore or less a6k6ardlyEby the symboli8T
6ithi! this symboli8 spa8e- the Feal retur!s as its 8ut- gap- poi!t o impossibility @see- or e?ample-
ibid7- p7 1$$A7
2$ See ,i8hel Dhio!- .a voi& au cinAma- Caris+ Dahiers du Di!Lma 1%&27
2& 9 6e imagi!e the respe8tive domai!s o 6hat 6e see a!d o 6hat 6e hear as t6o i!terse8ti!g
8ir8les- their i!terse8tio! is !ot simply 6hat 6e hear a!d seeT it has t6o sides+ the voi8e that 6e see @but
do !ot hearA a!d the image that 6e hear @but do !ot seeA7
2% =o6ever- although it is !ot possible to Jsee o!esel looki!g-K it is- or that very reaso!-
possible to Jsee o!esel [bei!g:\see!K @se voir Jtre vuAEtherei!- i! seei!g o!esel bei!g e?posed to the
otherIs gaUe- 8o!sists the e?hibitio!istIs e!joyme!t7 H! the other ha!d- the very possibility o Jheari!g
o!esel speaki!gK re!ders it impossible to Jhear o!esel bei!g heardK @sentrendre Jtre entenduAEas
.a8a! poi!ted out- those 6ho do Jhear themselves bei!g heardK are pre8isely those 6ho Jhear voi8es-K
psy8hoti8s 6ith auditory hallu8i!atio!s @see 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre 6III8 .e transfert-
Caris+ Seuil 1%%1- p7 "'0A7
"0 1eorges 3ala!8hi!e staged a short or8hestral pie8e by /eber! @they are all shortA i! 6hi8h-
o!8e the musi8 is over- the da!8ers 8o!ti!ue to da!8e or some time i! 8omplete sile!8e- as i they had
!ot !oti8ed that the musi8 providi!g the substa!8e or their da!8e 6as already over7 .ike the livi!g
dead 6ho d6ell i! the i!tersti8es o empty time+ their moveme!ts- la8ki!g vo8al support- allo6 us to
see !ot o!ly the voi8e but sile!8e itsel7
"1 ,ar8el Croust- -he (uermantes Way- tra!s7 D7 *7 S8ott ,o!8rie- 4e6 5ork+ ,oder!
.ibrary 1%#27
"2 ,lade! Golar- JTelepho!e a!d Csy8hoa!alysis-K Filo2ofs"i 6estni"- Vol7 2%- 4o7 1 @200&A- p7
127 9 rely here heavily o! this te?t7
"" Somethi!g like this happe!s i! a psy8hoa!alyti8 sessio! 6here- pre8isely- the patie!t is
redu8ed to a voi8e+ Jpsy8hoa!alysis makes out o the ordi!ary voi8e a telepho!e voi8eK @ibid7- p7 22A7
"( 9bid7- p7 117
"# The poi!t is thereore !ot o!ly that voi8e ills out the hole i! the image+ the voi8e
simulta!eously 8uts out this hole7 /hat 6e e!8ou!ter here is agai! the u!dame!tal parado? o a
a!tasy 6hi8h ills out the gap it itsel ope!s up+ the eleme!t 6hi8h 8o!8eals is simulta!eously that
6hi8h revealsT i7e7- the very pro8ess o 8o!8eali!g 8reates the 8o!8ealed 8o!te!t- 8reates the impressio!
that there is somethi!g to 8o!8eal7 A s8e!e rom ,el 3rooksIs 0igh +n&iety takes pla8e at a
psy8hoa!alyti8al 8o!ere!8e- 6ith a 8ouple o you!g 8hildre! o88upyi!g seats i! the irst ro67 The
speaker- s8ruti!iUed by the i!Nuisitive 8hildre!- eels embarrassed 6he! he 8omes to talk about
perversio!s- the phallus- 8astratio!- a!d so o!- so he gets arou!d the problem by tra!slati!g his 8omple?
psy8hoa!alyti8al jargo! i!to J8hildspeakK @Jpapa threate!s to 8ut o the little boyIs pipi-K et87A7 The
blu!der here resides i! the a8t that the very attempt to adapt the 8o!te!t to a88ommodate the 8hildre!
@a!d thus to !eutraliUe its traumati8 impa8tA re!ders it a88essible to themEhad the speaker simply read
his origi!al te?t- the 8hildre! 6ould have had !o idea as to its 8o!te!t7
"' Clato- -he 7epublic- Vol7 2- tra!s7 Caul Shorey- Dambridge- ,A+ =arvard )!iversity Cress
1%"#- p7 12" @3ook V99- #1#bA7
"$ Ceter Do!rad- -he 0itchcoc" Murders- .o!do!+ Faber i Faber 2000- p7 1#%7
"& 1alit =asa!:Fokem- Web of .ife8 Fol"lore and Midrash in 7abbinic .iterature- Calo Alto+
Sta!ord )!iversity Cress 20007
"% 9! the all o 200$- the 3os!ia! media reported o! a 8raUy 8ommu!i8atio!al short:8ir8uit+ A
6ie disappoi!ted by her marriage established a passio!ate li!k 6ith a !o less disappoi!ted married
ma! via a! i!ter!et 8hat:roomT they both ou!d i! their virtual part!er @ea8h k!o6! o!ly by
pseudo!ymsA 6hat they 6ere missi!g i! their real:lie part!er- a!d ell 6ildly i! love7 The 6ie 6rote+
J9 believed that 9 had i!ally ou!d someo!e 6ho u!derstood me- si!8e he 6as like me 8aught i! a!
u!happy marriage7K The virtual 8ouple i!ally de8ided to risk meeti!g i! real lieEa!d dis8overed that
the virtual part!er was the real:lie spouseR The disappoi!ted real:lie 8ouple had 8o!stru8ted i! the
virtual spa8e a! ideal 8ouple7
(0 A patie!t rom .ati! Ameri8a reported to his a!alyst a dream i! 6hi8h he elt a! u!bearable
8ompulsio! to eat 8aramel s6eets7 The a!alyst 6as 6ise e!ough to resist a!y Nui8k reere!8e to the oral
drive- et87- a!d i!stead o8used o! the Spa!ish e?pressio! Jto eat a 8aramel-K 6hi8h mea!s to s6allo6 a
lie or a a!tasy @to say that someo!e Jgave me a 8aramel to eatK mea!s that he put me o 6ith sola8i!g
liesA7 The dream 6as thus reveali!g the patie!tIs urge to be prote8ted by a 8ob6eb o a!tasies to sote!
the impa8t o the Feal7
(1 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre 6III8 .e transfert- Caris+ Seuil 1%%1- p7 "('7
(2 9 6e 6ere to i!dulge i! spe8ulatio! as to 6hy the phallus Nua orga! has bee! 8hose! to
u!8tio! as the phalli8 sig!iier- the! the 8hara8teristi8 that JpredisposesK it or this role 6ould be the
eature evoked by Sai!t Augusti!e+ the phallus is a! orga! o po6er:pote!8y- yet o!e 6hose display o
pote!8y esse!tially eludes the subje8tIs 8o!trolE6ith the alleged e?8eptio! o some =i!du priests- o!e
8a!!ot bri!g about a! ere8tio! at 6ill- he!8e it bears 6it!ess to some oreig! po6er at 6ork i! the very
heart o the subje8t7
(" The other @misAreadi!g- 8losely li!ked to the irst- 8o!8er!s the oppositio! bet6ee! the
phalli8 e8o!omy a!d the polymorphous plurality o subje8t positio!s+ a88ordi!g to the sta!dard vie6-
the task o the phalli8 e8o!omy is to mold the dispersed pre:Hedipal plurality o subje8t:positio!s i!to a
u!iied subje8t subordi!ated to the rule o the 4ame:o:the:Father @the bearer a!d relay o so8ial
authorityA a!d is as su8h the ideal subje8t o @so8ialA Co6er7 /hat should be 8alled i!to Nuestio! here is
the u!derlyi!g assumptio! that so8ial Co6er e?erts itsel via the u!iied Hedipal subje8t e!tirely
submitted to the phalli8 pater!al .a6 a!d- i!versely- that the dispersio! o the u!iied subje8t i!to a
multitude o subje8t:positio!s as it 6ere automati8ally u!dermi!es the authority a!d e?er8ise o Co6er7
Agai!st this 8ommo!pla8e- o!e has to poi!t out agai! a!d agai! that Co6er al6ays i!terpellates us-
addresses us- as split subje8ts- that- i! order to reprodu8e itsel- it relies upo! our splitti!g+ the message
the po6er dis8ourse bombards us 6ith is by dei!itio! i!8o!siste!t- there is al6ays a gap bet6ee!
publi8 dis8ourse a!d its a!tasmati8 support7 Far rom bei!g a ki!d o se8o!dary 6eak!ess- a sig! o
the Co6erIs impere8tio!- this splitti!g is 8o!stitutive o its e?er8ise7 /ith regard to the so:8alled
Jpostmoder!K orm o subje8tivity that beits late 8apitalism- 6e must eve! go a step urther+ the
Jpostmoder!K subje8t is dire8tly- at the level o the publi8 dis8ourse itsel- 8o!stituted as a!
i!8o!siste!t bu!dle o multiple Jsubje8t positio!sK @e8o!omi8ally 8o!servative but se?ually
Je!lighte!edK yuppie- et87A7
(( For a 8lassi8 stateme!t o the diere!t versio!s o J9 k!o6 very 6ell- but still 777K see H8tave
,a!!o!i- J2e sais bie!- mais Nua!d meme 777-K i! ,lefs pour limaginaireW ou! .autre sc>ne- Caris+
Seuil 1%'&7 For a politi8al readi!g o it- see Dhapter ' o Slavoj iek- For -hey 5now ot What -hey
Do- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 20027
(# The same logi8 seems to be at 6ork i! the a!ti:8ommu!ist- right:6i!g populism that has
re8e!tly bee! gai!i!g stre!gth i! the e?:so8ialist 0ast 0uropea! 8ou!tries+ its a!s6er to the prese!t
e8o!omi8 a!d other hardships is that- although they have oi8ially lost po6er- the 8ommu!ists
8o!ti!ue to pull the stri!gs- to 8o!trol the levers o e8o!omi8 po6er- to domi!ate the media a!d state
i!stitutio!s7 Dommu!ists are thus per8eived as a a!tasmati8 e!tity g la the 2e6s+ the more they lose
publi8 po6er a!d be8ome i!visible- the stro!ger their pha!tom:like om!iprese!8e- their shado6y
8o!trol7 This idLe i?e o the populistsEa88ordi!g to 6hi8h 6hat is !o6 emergi!g i! post:so8ialist
8ou!tries is !ot JtrueK 8apitalism but a alse imitatio! i! 6hi8h a8tual po6er a!d 8o!trol remai! i! the
ha!ds o e?:8ommu!ists dressed up as !e6 8apitalistsEalso oers a! e?emplary 8ase o the illusio!
6hose me8ha!ism 6as laid bare or the irst time by =egel+ 6hat the populists ail to re8og!iUe is that
their oppositio! to this JalseK 8apitalism is ee8tively a! oppositio! to 8apitalism tout 8ourt- i7e7- that
they- !ot the e?:8ommu!ists- are the true ideologi8al i!heritors o so8ialismE!o 6o!der that the
populists are 8ompelled to resus8itate the old 8ommu!ist oppositio! bet6ee! JormalK a!d JtrueK
demo8ra8y7 9! short- 6e are deali!g 6ith yet a!other e?ample o the iro!y that pertai!s to the
revolutio!ary pro8ess- already des8ribed by ,ar?+ all o a sudde!- the amaUed revolutio!aries realiUe
that they 6ere mere va!ishi!g mediators 6hose Jhistori8al roleK 6as to prepare the terrai! or the old
masters to take over i! a !e6 guise7
(' A 8lassi8 e?ample o this oppositio! bet6ee! symboli8 authority a!d the spe8tral- i!visible
,aster is provided by /ag!erIs Das 7heingold- i! the guise o oppositio! bet6ee! /ota! a!d
Alberi8h7
($ The millio!aireIs positio! is i! a8t eve! more 8omple?7 That is to say- 6he! a 6oma! says
to a ma!- J9 do!It love you or your millio!s [or your po6er 777\ but or 6hat you really areRK 6hat does
this amou!t toM The more she Jmea!s it si!8erelyK the more she is the vi8tim o a ki!d o perspe8tival
illusio!- aili!g to !oti8e ho6 the very a8t that @people k!o6 thatA 9 am a millio!aire @or a ma! o
po6erA ae8ts peopleIs per8eptio! o 6hat 9 am Ji! mysel-K irrespe8tive o this property o mi!e7 As
lo!g as 9 remai! ri8h- people per8eive me as a stro!g- i!depe!de!t perso!ality- 6hereas the mome!t 9
lose my millio!s- they all o a sudde! see i! me a dull 6eakli!g @or vi8e versaA7 9! short- the parado?
lies i! the a8t that o!ly a 6oma! 6ho @k!o6s that sheA loves me or my millio!s is able to see me the
6ay 9 truly am- si!8e my 6ealth !o lo!ger distorts her per8eptio!7
(& /hat i there isEas i!deed there al6ays isEa! a8tual 8o!spira8y or 8orruptio! s8a!dal i!
6hi8h state po6er itsel is i!volvedM The a!tasmati8 logi8 o Do!spira8y ee8tively hi!ders the publi8
revelatio! o a8tual 8o!spira8ies- 8orruptio! 8ases- et87Ethe ei8a8y o the a!tasmati8 logi8 o
Do!spira8y dema!ds that the 0!emy remai! a! u!athomable e!tity 6hose true ide!tity 8a! !ever be
ully dis8losed7
(% Fi8hard 3oothby- Freud as )hilosopher- .o!do!+ Foutledge 2001- pp7 2$#X'7
#0 -he .ife of David (ale- 200"- dire8ted by Ala! Carker a!d 6ritte! by Dharles Fa!dolph- a
!ative rom Te?as 6ho taught philosophy at /ebster )!iversity i! Vie!!a7
#1 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K lacanian in" "" @Spri!g 200%A- p7 "%7
#2 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Spirit- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- H?ord+ H?ord )!iversity
Cress 1%$$- p7 10"7
#" 9bid7- pp7 &&X%7
#( 9bid7- p7 &%7
## ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K p7 (#7
#' 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;I8 .es <uatre concepts fondamentau& de la
psychanalyse- Caris+ Seuil 1%$"- p7 10"7
#$ ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K pp7 ((X#7
#& =ere- 6e e!8ou!ter the limit o Ges8artesIs pro8edure o the e?haustio! o i8tio!+ 9 8a!!ot
eig! that 9 am !ot7 This- pre8isely- is 6hat happe!s i! a!tasy- 6hose eleme!tary 8oordi!ates are the
subje8tIs 8o!tra8tio! to a gaUe observi!g the 6orld as it is imagi!ed to be i! the abse!8e o the subje8t7
#% ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K p7 (#7
'0 9bid7- pp7 (#X'7
'1 Cippi! !oted the 8o!trast bet6ee! the *a!tia! a!d the religious sublime+ 6hile the latter
aims at provoki!g a humbli!g a6e @8o!ro!ted 6ith the i!i!ite a!d i!8o!8eivable divi!e po6er- 9 am a
!obodyA- i! *a!tIs Jhereti8alK vie6- the e?perie!8e o the sublime is a t6o:step pro8ess 6hi8h
8ulmi!ates i! the assertio! o Jma!Is absolute suprema8y over all o !ature by virtue o his moral
vo8atio! a!d its i!depe!de!8e rom a!y !atural 8o!ditio! or po6er7K Fobert Cippi!- -he )ersistence of
Sub1ectivity- Dambridge+ Dambridge )!iversity Cress 200#- p7 2%(7
'2 This la8k or impere8tio! o the @bigA Hther is re!dered i! a 6o!derully simple 6ay i! a
joke about t6o rie!ds playi!g a game o tryi!g to hit a 8a! 6ith a ball7 Ater repeated hits- o!e o them
says+ JFor devilIs sake- 9 missedRK =is rie!d- a religious a!ati8- 8omplai!s+ J=o6 dare you talk like
that- this is blasphemyR ,ay 1od strike you do6! 6ith a light!i!g bolt as pu!ishme!tRK A mome!t
later- light!i!g does strike- but it hits the religious boy 6ho- badly hurt a!d barely alive- tur!s to the
heave!s to ask+ J3ut 6hy did you strike me- my .ord- a!d !ot the real 8ulpritMK A deep voi8e reso!ates
rom above+ JFor devilIs sake- 9 missedRK
'" There is a 8ertai! a!ti:herme!euti8 literalism 6hi8h belo!gs to the very 8ore o 2e6ish
spirituality7 Gavid 1rossma! told me a !i8e perso!al a!e8dote+ 6he!- just prior to the 1%'$ 9sraeli:
Arab 6ar- he heard o! the radio about the Arab threat to thro6 the 2e6s i!to the sea- his rea8tio! 6as to
take s6immi!g lesso!sEa paradigmati8 2e6ish rea8tio! i there ever 6as o!e- i! the spirit o the lo!g
talk bet6ee! 2ose *7 a!d the priest @the priso! 8haplai!A that ollo6s the parable J3eore the .a67K
'( The sinthome should be opposed to the matheme+ although they both belo!g to the e!igmati8
spa8e Jbet6ee! !ature a!d 8ulture-K bet6ee! se!seless data a!d mea!i!gEthey are both pre:sema!ti8-
outside the domai! o mea!i!g- a!d yet !o!etheless are sig!iiers a!d as su8h irredu8ible to the
mea!i!gless te?ture o positive dataEJsi!thomeK is a !ame or the mi!imal ormula 6hi8h
i?ates>registers 6hat 0ri8 Sa!t!er 8alled the Jtoo:mu8h!ess o lie7K A sinthome is a ormula 6hi8h
8o!de!ses the e?8ess o 1ouissance- a!d this dime!sio! is 8learly missi!g i! the matheme- 6hose
e?emplary 8ases are mathemati8ally ormaliUed s8ie!tii8 stateme!tsEmathemes do !ot imply a!y
libidi!al i!vestme!t- they are !eutral- desubje8tiviUed7
'# So!g a!d te?t available o! the DG Die )artei hat immer 7echt8 Eine Do"umentation in
.iedern- Amiga- 3,1 $("21"%(&'27
'' 9 rely here o! Caul:.aure!t Assou!- .eBons psychanalyti<ues sur le regard et la voi&- Vols7
1 a!d 2- Caris+ A!thropos 20017
'$ This diere!8e 8a! also be li!ked to the diere!8e bet6ee! the i!ability to a8t a!d the
passage K lacte+ the hysteri8 positio! i!volves a blo8ked a8t- pro8rasti!atio!- os8illatio!- empty
gestures @6hi8h u!8tio! like Ja8ti!g out-K a theatri8al gesture i!stead o a true a8tAT the psy8hoti8
positio! i!volves the Feal o a viole!t passage K lacte 6hi8h suspe!ds the big Hther itsel7
'& The most disturbi!g thi!g here is the HtherIs ig!ora!8e- as i! the 6ell:k!o6! dream i!
6hi8h 9 6alk !aked i! the street or some other publi8 pla8e- but everyo!e ig!ores me a!d behaves as i
!othi!g e?traordi!ary is taki!g pla8eEsu8h a predi8ame!t is mu8h more disturbi!g tha! e?pressio!s o
sho8k at my !aked!ess7
'% ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K pp7 (&X#07
$0 9bid7- p7 ##7
$1 See Ceter Sloterdijk- Du muXt dein .eben =ndern- Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 200%7
$2 9bid7- p7 (#7
$" 9bid7- p7 ((7
$( ,iller- JThe Criso!s o Couissance-K pp7 #1X"7
$# 9bid7- p7 #(7
$' 4ote ho6 or .a8a!- i! 8o!trast to =eidegger a!d Freud- a!?iety has its obje8t- 6hi8h is the
obje8t:8ause o desire- the ob1et petit a i! all its versio!s7 A!?iety does !ot arise 6he! the obje8t is
missi!g- but i! the 8ase o its over:pro?imity7
$$ A7 37 5ehoshua- JA! Attempt to 9de!tiy the Foot Dause o A!tisemitism-K +2ure "2
@Spri!g 200&A- p7 $17
$& 9 am here- o 8ourse- paraphrasi!g .a8a!Is stateme!t+ JThe pi8ture is i! my eye- but me- 9
am i! the pi8ture7K
$% Su8h a! impossible poi!t o vie6 is ote! mobiliUed i! jokes7 H!e 8o!temporary Dhi!ese
se?ual joke relates a 8o!versatio! bet6ee! t6i! brothers 6ho are still etuses i! their motherIs 6omb7
H!e says to the other+ J9 love it 6he! our ather visits us- but 6hy is he so rude at the e!d o ea8h visit-
spitti!g all over usMK The other replies+ JTrue- our u!8le is mu8h !i8er+ he al6ays 8omes 6ith a !i8e hat
made o rubber o! his head- so that he does!It spit o! usRK
&0 The s8a!dal o Gomi!iNue Strauss:*ah!Is alleged rape o a 8hambermaid i! 4e6 5ork-
6hi8h erupted i! early 2011- 8o!ro!ted us 6ith a !e6 variatio! o! the topi8 o the Jki!gIs t6o
bodies7K =ere 6e had the ba!kerIs t6o bodies+ the Ji!i!ite judgme!t o! GS*K asserts the ultimate
ide!tity o the sublime body o a top ba!ker a!d the ridi8ulous tumes8e!t body o a 8ompulsive
sedu8er7 Somethi!g similar 8a! be ou!d i! ilms like )ercy Cac"son a!d -hor- 6here- respe8tively- a!
A!8ie!t 1reek a!d a 4ordi8 god @Cerseus- ThorA i!d themselves i! the body o a 8o!used )S
adoles8e!t7
&1 9t is sig!ii8a!t that persiste!8e is sig!aled by the ha!d a8ti!g as a! auto!omous Jorga!
6ithout a body-K deliveri!g a message o its o6!7
&2 1illes 4eret- Malevich- *Zl!+ Tas8he! 200"- p7 &(7
1 See .ee Smoli!- -he -rouble with )hysics- 4e6 5ork+ =oughto! ,ili! Dompa!y 200'7
2 A!d- i!8ide!tally- post:8lassi8al e8o!omists make the same 8laim about ,ar?+ his 8ritiNue o
Smith a!d Fi8ardo amou!ts to their CtolemiUatio!7
" See Dhapters V a!d V9 o A!to!io Gamasio- -he Feeling of What 0appens- .o!do!+ Vi!tage
20007
( 0ve! i some theories i! @"A a!d @(A are treated 6ith sympathy by brai! s8ie!tistsEsee- or
e?ample- GamasioIs 8elebratio! o Spi!oUaEthey are redu8ed to pre8ursors o brai! s8ie!8es+
GamasioIs poi!t is simply- J.ook ho6 mu8h Spi!oUa had already guessed about 6hat 6e k!o6 today
about the SelRK
# Gouglas =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- 4e6 5ork+ 3asi8 3ooks 200$7
' 9bid7- p7 %27
$ 9bid7- p7 %"7
& 9bid7
% 9bid7- p7 "'07
10 9bid7- p7 "'"7
11 Gavid =ume- + -reatise of 0uman ature- 3ook 9- Cart (- Se8tio! '- available o!li!e at
a!selm7edu7
12 2ames 1iles- JThe 4o:Sel Theory+ =ume- 3uddhism- a!d Cerso!al 9de!tity-K )hilosophy
East and West- Vol7 (" @1%%"A- available o!li!e at http+>>88bs7!tu7edu7t67
1" =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 2%27
1( 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- tra!s7 4orma! *emp Smith- .o!do!+ ,a8milla!
1%2%- p7 ""17
1# The passage rom *a!t to post:*a!tia! idealism is 8ru8ial here- i!volvi!g as it does not a
retur! to pre:8riti8al a88ess to the absolute reality o the 9- but a radi8al shit i! perspe8tive- so that the
problem itsel appears as its o6! solutio!E6hat i the !egativity that pertai!s to the 9- its 8o!stitutive
i!ability to lo8ate itsel Jobje8tively-K is !ot just epistemologi8al but o!tologi8al- a!d as su8h its
positive eatureM /hat i the 9 is the void o !egativityM
1' =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 2%"7
1$ Thomas ,etUi!ger- /eing o $ne8 -he Self*Model -heory of Sub1ectivity- Dambridge- ,A+
,9T Cress 200(- p7 ""17
1& 9bid7- p7 ##17
1% 9bid7- p7 ##27
20 9bid7- p7 ##$7
21 9bid7- pp7 "%&X(0"7
22 9bid7- p7 (017
2" 9bid7- p7 (0#7
2( Gavid Dhalmers- -he ,onscious Mind- 4e6 5ork+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 1%%$- p7 1017
2# /he!- i! a! other6ise Jrealisti8K video game- 6e get too 8lose to a si!gle igure- 6e all o a
sudde! see that it has !o a8e at all- but just 8rude abstra8t 8o!tours- like a! impre8ise dra6i!gT our
8ommo! se!se tells us that this is so be8ause 6e are !ot deali!g 6ith a real huma! perso!- but just a!
artii8ial- virtual 8opy7 =o6ever- does the same !ot hold also or real huma! perso!sM /he! 6e
approa8h them too 8losely- do 6e also !ot dis8over that- be!eath the sura8e- there are just orga!s-
blood- bo!es- that our thought JisK just the lesh o the brai!- a!d- 6he! 6e get eve! 8loser- just
mi!dless atoms a!d empty spa8eM
2' =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 %&7
2$ /hat makes !a!ote8h!ology so thrilli!g is the prospe8t o 8o!stru8ti!g obje8ts a!d
pro8esses i! su8h a small dime!sio! that all 8orrelatio! 6ith our ordi!ary lie 6orld is lost- so that it is
ee8tively as i 6e are deali!g 6ith a! alter!ate reality+ there are !o shared s8ales bet6ee! !a!o:reality
a!d our ordi!ary reality- a!d yet !o!etheless 6e 8a! i!lue!8e our reality through !a!o:pro8esses7
2& 9!8ide!tally- the stra!ge thi!g about the 8o!stellatio! des8ribed i! SearleIs @i!Aamous
Dhi!ese 3o? thought e?perime!t is that it 8a! also be take! as a des8riptio! o ho6 our mi!d 6orks+ i
6e take a 8lose look at our brai!- 6e 6ill !ever lo8ate the e?a8t pla8e 6here the brai! Ju!dersta!dsK
the symbol i!put- but just a dispersed !et6ork or the Jmea!i!glessK tra!smissio! a!d ma!ipulatio! o
sig!s 777
2% =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 2(2- p7 2(#7
"0 A!other 6ay to dei!e the terms o the amous Turi!g Test o! ho6 to gauge 6hether our
part!er i! a 8o!versatio! is huma! or a ma8hi!e 6ould have bee! to o8us o! the ability o the ma8hi!e
to ge!erate a true @Freudia!A slip+ !ot o!ly a mea!i!gless glit8h- but a failure with meaning- a!
u!8o!trolled Jmalu!8tio!K 6hi8h bears a message7
"1 =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- pp7 1((X#7
"2 ,etUi!ger- /eing o $ne- p7 ##27
"" =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 1$27
"( 9bid7- p7 1$%7
"# 9bid7- p7 1&27
"' 9bid7- p7 20"7
"$ 9bid7- p7 2$$7
"& 9bid7- p7 1&$- p7 20"7
"% 9bid7- p7 20(7
(0 9bid7- p7 20#7
(1 9bid7- pp7 2%1X2- p7 2%(7
(2 9bid7- p7 20'7
(" =ostadter- I +m a Strange .oop- p7 20&7
(( 9bid7- p7 2##7 3ut 6hat about the @Freudia!A hypothesis o the u!8o!s8iousM Goes it !ot
imply pre8isely that a subje8t is not the o!e 6hose sel:portrait has the highest resolutio!7 A! e?ter!al
observer 8a! see u!8o!s8ious patter!s 6hi8h determi!e my a8tivity mu8h more 8learly tha! 9 do-
pre8isely because he is !ot Jme7K
(# 9bid7- p7 "("7
(' 9bid7- p7 "((7
($ See ,a? S8heler- 7essentiment- 4e6 5ork+ S8ho8ke! 1%$27
1 .a8a! has ma!y !ames or this dis8ord- some Freudia!- some his o6!+ symboli8 8astratio!-
Jthere is !o se?ual relatio!ship-K the diere!8e bet6ee! the aim a!d the goal o a drive- et87
2 See 2oa! Dopje8- 7ead My Desire8 .acan +gainst the 0istoricists- Dambridge- ,A+ ,9T
Cress 1%%(T a!d Slavoj iek- -arrying With the egative- Gurham+ Guke )!iversity Cress 1%%"7
" The oppositio! to this !otio! o o!tologi8al 8omplete!ess dei!es =egelIs 9dealism+ its 8ore
lies i! the assertio! that i!ite @determi!ate- positive:substa!tialA reality is i! itsel empty- i!8o!siste!t-
sel:sublati!g7 =o6ever- it does !ot ollo6 rom this that i!ite reality is just a shado6- a se8o!dary
rele8tio!- et87- o some higher reality+ there is nothing but this reality- a!d the Jsuprase!sible is
appeara!8e Nua appeara!8e-K i7e7- the very moveme!t o the sel:sublatio! o this reality7 So 6e really
pass Jrom !othi!g through !othi!g to !othi!gK+ the starti!g poi!t- immediate reality- deploys its
!othi!g!ess- it 8a!8els itsel- !egates itsel- but there is !othi!g beyo!d it7 This is 6hy =egel 8a!!ot be
situated 6ith regard to the oppositio! bet6ee! tra!s8e!de!8e a!d imma!e!8e+ his positio! is that o the
absolute immanence of transcendence7 9! other 6ords- his positio! 8a! o!ly be grasped i! a temporal
shit+ irst- o!e asserts tra!s8e!de!8e @i! a! apophati8 6ayAEimma!e!t>immediate positive reality is
!ot all- it has to be !egated>over8ome- it poi!ts beyo!d itselT the!- this over8omi!g is posited as
thoroughly imma!e!t+ 6hat is beyo!d immediate reality is !ot a!other higher reality- but the moveme!t
o its !egatio! as su8h7
( See Alai! 3adiou- /eing and Event- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200#7
# 9mma!uel *a!t- ,riti<ue of )ure 7eason- tra!s7 27 ,7 G7 ,eiklejoh!- .o!do!+ =e!ry 17
3oh! 1&##- p7 2$17
' 9bid7- pp7 2$1X"7
$ Cerhaps the i!8ompatibility bet6ee! Gerrida a!d GeleuUe 8a! also be a88ou!ted or i! terms
o .a8a!Is Jormulae o se?uatio!7K /hat makes Gerrida Jmas8uli!eK is the persiste!8e- throughout his
6ork- o totaliUatio!:6ith:e?8eptio!+ the sear8h or a post:metaphysi8al 6ay o thi!ki!g- or a! es8ape
rom metaphysi8al 8losure- presupposes the viole!t gesture o u!iversaliUatio!- o a leveli!g:
eNualiUatio!:u!ii8atio! o the 6hole ield o i!tra:metaphysi8al struggles @Jall attempts to break out o
metaphysi8s- rom *ierkegaard to ,ar?- rom 4ietUs8he to =eidegger- rom .evi!as to .Lvi:Strauss-
ultimately remai! 6ithi! the horiUo! o the metaphysi8s o prese!8eKA7 This same gesture is 8learly
dis8er!ible i! =eidegger @or 6hom all reversals o metaphysi8s rom ,ar? to 4ietUs8he- rom =usserl
to Sartre- remai! 6ithi! the horiUo! o the orgetti!g o 3ei!g- ultimately 8aught i! the te8h!ologi8al
!ihilism o the a88omplishme!t o metaphysi8sA as 6ell as i! Ador!o a!d =orkheimer @or 6hom all
/ester!- a!d !ot o!ly /ester!- thought is totaliUed:eNualiUed as the gradual deployme!t o the
diale8ti8 o 0!lighte!me!t 6hi8h 8ulmi!ates i! todayIs Jadmi!istered 6orldKErom Clato to 4ATH-
as o!e used to sayA7 9! Gerrida- this logi8 o totaliUi!g e?8eptio! i!ds its highest e?pressio! i! the
ormula o justi8e as the Ji!de8o!stru8tible 8o!ditio! o de8o!stru8tio!K+ everythi!g 8a! be
de8o!stru8tedE6ith the e?8eptio! o the i!de8o!stru8tible 8o!ditio! o de8o!stru8tio! itsel7 Cerhaps
it is this very gesture o a viole!t eNualiUatio! o the e!tire ield- agai!st 6hi8h o!eIs o6! positio! as
0?8eptio! is the! ormulated- 6hi8h is the most eleme!tary gesture o metaphysi8s7 9! 8lear 8o!trast to
Gerrida- this gesture o viole!t eNualiUatio! is abse!t rom GeleuUeIs 6orkEhis gaUe upo! the traditio!
o philosophy is somethi!g like the gaUe o 1od upo! Dreatio! i! 1odIs reply to 2ob @as des8ribed by
Dhesterto!A+ there is !o !orm 6hi8h 6ould allo6 us to level the ield- mira8les are every6here- every
phe!ome!o!- per8eived properly @rom a positio! 6hi8h Jestra!gesK it rom its sta!dard 8o!te?tA is a!
e?8eptio!7 @This is also 6hy 6hat both GeleuUe a!d 3adiou 8all the Jmi!imal diere!8eK is !ot the
gesture o JtotaliUi!g the e!emyK perormed by 8riti8s o metaphysi8s rom =eidegger to Ador!o a!d
Gerrida- but its very opposite+ a de:totaliUatio! o the e!emy7A
& See 4i8holas Fear!- )hilosophy8 -he .atest +nswers to the $ldest [uestions- .o!do!+
Atla!ti8 3ooks 200#- p7 $$7
% 9bid7- pp7 $$X&7
10 Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JSe?uality a!d H!tology-K Filo2ofs"i 6estni"- Vol7 2%- 4o7 1 @200&A- p7 '"7
9 rely here heavily o! this te?t7
11 ,arti! =eidegger- J0egel und der Staat!K u!published semi!ar rom 1%"">"(T my tha!ks to
1regory Fried- 6ho provided me 6ith this tra!slatio!7
12 As 2oa! Dopje8 demo!strated i! 7ead My Desire- herei! resides the limit o the 3utleria!
moti o se?ual diere!8e as bei!g al6ays i!8omplete- as a perormative pro8ess 6hi8h !ever arrives at
its e!d @i7e7- i! i?ed ide!titiesA7 =ere o!e has to take o!ly a @=egelia!A step urther i!to sel:relati!g+
se?ual diere!8e is !ot al6ays i!8omplete- et87- it is this incompleteness itself which ma"es a
difference se&ual7
1" 9! this se!se- love is the Ji!terpretatio! o the otherIs desireK+ by 6ay o oeri!g mysel to
the other- 9 i!terpret his desire as the desire or mysel a!d thereby obus8ate the e!igma o the otherIs
desire7 Cut a!other 6ay+ 6he! a 6oma! oers her prese!8e i!stead o the symboli8 message- she
thereby posits her body as the e!velope o a se8ret- or her prese!8e be8omes a Jmystery7K
1( 9! 8o!trast to su8h a letter 6hi8h- appare!tly- does not arrive at its desti!atio!- there are @at
leastA t6o types o letters 6hi8h do arrive at their desti!atio!s7 H!e is the JGear 2oh!K letter- i! 6hi8h
the 6oma! e?plai!s to the husba!d or boyrie!d !ot love but the e!d o love- the a8t that she is leavi!g
him7 The other is the sui8idal letter desti!ed to rea8h its addressee 6he! the 6oma! is already dead- as
i! B6eigIs J.etter From a! )!k!o6! /oma!7K
1# See Garia! .eader- Why Do Women Write More .etters -han -hey )ost?- .o!do!+ Faber i
Faber 1%%'7
1' Furthermore- the Cri!8ess o Dleves subverts the logi8 o adultery as i!here!t tra!sgressio!
by reversi!g the sta!dard adulterous pro8edure o Jdoi!g itK @havi!g se? 6ith a!other ma!A a!d !ot
telli!g the husba!d+ o! the 8o!trary- she tells her husba!d- but does !ot Jdo it7K
1$ Although here agai! the obverse also holds+ is !ot the amous an die ferne (eliebte- to the
dista!t beloved- the motto o all love poetryM 9s !ot male love poetry thereore the e?emplary 8ase o
the se?ualiUatio! o the gap 6hi8h separates the poet rom the beloved- so that- 6he! the barrier
disappears a!d the beloved 8omes too 8lose- the 8o!seNue!8es 8a! be 8atastrophi8M The thi!g to do
6ould be- agai!- to 8o!stru8t t6o almost:symmetri8ally i!verted 8ouple o opposites+ me! preer their
beloved to remai! dista!t i! 8o!trast to 6ome! 6ho 6a!t their ma! 8lose to themT but- simulta!eously-
me! 6a!t to e!joy dire8tly the part!erIs body- 6hile 6ome! 8a! e!joy the very gap 6hi8h separates
them rom the part!erIs body7 /hat is 6ro!g 6ith the male versio!M H!e o S8hubertIs key so!gs-
JThe /a!dererK @G (%"- 6ords by 1eorg Chilipp S8hmidt vo! .uebe8kA- des8ribi!g the sear8h or the
beloved homela!d 6here Jmy rie!ds 6alk- 6here my dead rise agai!-K e!ds 6ith+ J9 6a!der- sile!t
a!d joyless- > my sighs orever aski!g+ /hereM > A ghostly 6hisper a!s6ers me+ > VThere 6here you are
!ot- there happi!ess lies7IK The i!al JDort! wo du nicht bist! dort ist das (lVc"RK is the most 8o!8ise
ormulatio! o 6hat is 6ro!g 6ith Foma!ti8 love- o 6hy this love is alse7
1& -he ,omplete )oems of Emily Dic"inson- 3osto!+ .ittle- 3ro6! 1%'0- p7 "#%7
1% Alai! 3adiou- -heoretical Writings- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200(- p7 12%7
20 See 0lisabeth 3adi!ter- ;:8 $n Masculine Identity- 4e6 5ork+ Dolumbia )!iversity Cress
1%%'7
21 At a more eleme!tary biologi8al @a!d also s8ie!tii8ally more 8o!vi!8i!gA level- some
s8ie!tists 8laim that 8omple? orms o orga!i8 lie result rom the malig!a!8y o simple @mo!o8ellularA
lie:orms 6hi8h- at a 8ertai! poi!t- Jra! amokK a!d started to multiply i! a pathologi8al
6ayE8omple? lie is thus i!here!tly- i! its very !otio!- a pathologi8al ormatio!7
22 9! 5u:1i:Hh- a massively popular 8ard game o !eo:1othi8 mythi8al 8o!te!t- the rules are
e!dless+ !e6 8ards are al6ays added- ea8h 8ard 8o!tai!i!g its o6! pre8ise rule o appli8atio!7 All the
8ards together thus 8a! !ever be subsumed u!der a ge!eral set o rulesEthey orm a ki!d o .a8a!ia!
J!o!:AllK multipli8ity- i! 8lear 8o!trast to the 8lassi8 games 6ith their limited !umber o 8ards a!d
8lear i!ite rules7
2" 4ietUs8heIs amous 8laim that Dhrist 6as the o!ly true Dhristia! also relies o! a reversal o
the usual role o the ou!di!g igure 6hi8h is that o the 8o!stitutive e?8eptio!+ ,ar? 6as !ot a
,ar?ist- si!8e he himsel 6as ,ar? a!d 8ould !ot e!tertai! to6ards himsel the rele?ive relatio!ship
implied by the term J,ar?ist7K Dhrist- o! the 8o!trary- !ot o!ly 6as a Dhristia!- butEor that very
reaso!- ollo6i!g a! i!e?orable !e8essityEhas to be the o!ly @trueA Dhristia!7 =o6 is this possibleM
H!ly i 6e i!trodu8e a radi8al gap bet6ee! Dhrist himsel a!d Dhristia!ity a!d assert that Dhristia!ity
is grou!ded i! the radi8al misre8og!itio!- eve! a8tive disavo6al- o DhristIs a8t7 Dhristia!ity is thus a
ki!d o dee!se:ormatio! agai!st the s8a!dalous !ature o DhristIs a8t7
2( 1illes GeleuUe a!d FLli? 1uattari- +nti*$edipus8 ,apitalism and Schi2ophrenia- tra!s7 F7
=urley- ,7 Seem- a!d =7 F7 .a!e- ,i!!eapolis+ )!iversity o ,i!!esota Cress 1%&"- p7 17
2# =o6ever- ho6 are 6e to read this thesis together 6ith 3adiouIs basi8 o!tologi8al a?iom o!
primordial multipli8ity 6hi8h is !ot the multipli8ity o H!esM The ide!tity o this multipli8ity a!d the
Void is 8learly not the sig! o the la8k o the H!e- but a primordial o!tologi8al a8t7
2' A urther i!di8atio! o this 8o!usio! is ou!d i! 1erma!- 6here the 6ord (eschlecht mea!s
spe8ies @like Menschengeschlecht- huma! spe8iesA or eve! tribe- and se? @(eschlechtdifferen2 is se?ual
diere!8eA7
2$ 1uy .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan8 consistance logi<ue! consA<uences clini<ues- Caris+
0C0. 200'- p7 117
2& The stru8tural role o .a8a!Is semi!ar o! the our u!dame!tal 8o!8epts o psy8hoa!alysis is
8omparable to that o ShakespeareIs late plays- ,oUartIs Magic Flute- or /ag!erIs )arsifal+ ater the
lo6est poi!t o despair @ShakespeareIs mature tragedies- ,oUartIs ,osi fan tutte- /ag!erIs -wilight of
the (odsA- the mood 8ha!ges- 6e e!ter a airy:tale spa8e 6here problems are magi8ally resolved- 6here
the tragi8 deadlo8k dissolves i!to bliss7 This shit is similar to the o!e i! the middle o FreudIs dream
o! 9rmaIs i!je8tio!+ the darkest mome!t o !ightmare- as Freud looks i!to 9rmaIs throat- 6hi8h sta!ds
or the abyss o the primordial Feal- sudde!ly shits i!to 8omedy- the lighthearted 8o!versatio!
bet6ee! the three do8tors 6ho try to pass the blame or the treatme!tIs ailure o!to ea8h other7 A!d is
it !ot similar 6ith the passage rom .a8a!Is Seminar ; @o! a!?ietyA to Seminar ;IM Seminar ; marks
the lo6est poi!t o !ightmare- the 8o!ro!tatio! 6ith the Feal o a!?iety- 6hile- i! Seminar ;I- the
mood 8ha!gesEstylisti8ally alsoErom the tragi8:patheti8 elaboratio! o 8o!8epts that 8hara8teriUes
.a8a!Is JmatureK semi!ars o the late 1%#0s a!d early 1%'0s- to the hermeti8 Jplayul!essK o the
semi!ars that ollo6 the eleve!th7
2% There are eve! t6o approa8hes to the i!!er logi8 o the our ormulae+ either 6e start o! the
mas8uli!e side- 6here it all begi!s 6ith the ma?imal parti8ular @e?iste!tialA judgme!t- a!d the emi!i!e
side the! emerges as the 8o!seNue!8e- or 6e begi! 6ith the emi!i!e !o!:All- 6hi8h is the! totaliUed
through e?8eptio!7
"0 Guri!g o!e o 3oris 5eltsi!Is visits abroad i! the mid:1%%0s- a oreig! dig!itary asked him+
JDa! you des8ribe- very briely- i! o!e 6ord- the situatio! i! FussiaMK 5eltsi! replied+ J1ood7K
Surprised- the oreig! dig!itary 6e!t o!+ JA!d a little bit more i! detail- i! t6o 6ordsMK J4ot good7K
5eltsi!Is a!s6er demo!strated a surprisi!g diale8ti8al finesse+ both o his replies 6ere trueT i7e7- i!
order to pass rom the positive judgme!t to !egativity @J!otKA- all o!e has to do is e?pa!d the judgme!t
i!to the parti8ular- si!8e parti8ularity is as su8h J!egative-K the !egatio! o its u!iversal dime!sio!7
"1 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o 2a!uary 1$- 1%'2- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;I8 .identification
@u!publishedA7
"2 The .a8a!ia! e?8eptio! is !i8ely 8aptured i! a vulgar 6isdom popular amo!g soldiers+ J4o
matter ho6 hard you shake your peg- youIll al6ays have a drop upo! your legRK
"" Friedri8h 4ietUs8he- Ecce 0omo- tra!s7 F7 27 =olli!gdale- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 1%%2- p7
%&7
"( Dhristophe 2arelot- Dr +mbed"ar and 3ntouchability8 +nalysing and Fighting ,aste- 4e6
Gelhi+ Cerma!e!t 3la8k 200#- pp7 '&X%7
"# ,i8hael =ardt a!d A!to!io 4egri- Multitude- 4e6 5ork+ The Ce!gui! Cress 200(- p7 "#&7
"' 9bid- p7 "#$7
"$ 9 o6e this reere!8e to Ale!ka Bupa!^i^7
"& 9! a similar 6ay- 0ast 0uropea!s i! 1%%0 6a!ted !ot o!ly demo8ra8y:6ithout:8ommu!ism-
but also demo8ra8y:6ithout:8apitalism7
"% This is 6hy- or .a8a!- 8astratio! is symboli8+ i! the Feal- !othi!g is missi!g i! a 6oma!Is
body- it is o!ly or the gaUe 6hi8h e?pe8ted to see a pe!is that its abse!8e is e?perie!8ed as su8h7
(0 Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- J,ed dvema !e-K )roblemi &X% @2010A7
(1 The deadlo8k o the phallus is re!dered superbly by .a8a! i! the iro!i8 stateme!t that the
Jphallus is the 8o!s8ie!tious obje8tor to the servi8e 6e o6e to the other se?K @Nuoted i! Fra!eois
3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 12%A+ phalli8 1ouissance is
masturbatory- it misses the Hther @se?A- redu8i!g it to the ob1et a7
(2 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;8 Encore- Caris+ Seuil 1%$#- p7 %$7
(" See .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan7
(( 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o ,ay 10- 1%$2- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;I;8 FFFou pire- Caris+ Seuil
20117
(# .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan- p7 (17
(' 9bid7- pp7 1(2X"7
($ 9 the subje8t is i!e?tri8ably li!ked 6ith !o!:e?iste!8e- i Jthe subje8t i!trodu8es the
!othi!g!ess as su8hK @the subje8t is barred- a void- the JnAantisationK [!othi!gii8atio!\ o bei!g- et87A-
the! does !ot .a8a!Is J/oma! does !ot e?istK poi!t to6ards the privileged li!k bet6ee! 6oma! a!d
subje8tivityM
(& .a8lauIs duality o diere!8e a!d eNuivale!8e- ho6ever- remai!s 8aught i! the logi8 o
e?ter!al oppositio!7 /hat .a8lau does !ot develop is the 8o!8eptual mediatio! o the t6o opposites-
ho6 the very logi8 o diere!8e @diere!tiality+ the ide!tity o ea8h eleme!t resides o!ly i! its
diere!8e to6ards all othersA immanently leads to a!tago!ism7 Giere!tiality- i! order to remai! pure
@i7e7- to avoid reere!8e to a!y ki!d o e?ter!al support i! the guise o some eleme!t 6hi8h is !ot
grou!ded i! diere!8es but sustai!s itsel i! its ide!tityA- has to i!8lude a marker o the diere!8e
bet6ee! the ield @o diere!8esA itsel a!d its outside- a JpureK diere!8e7 This JpureK diere!8e-
ho6ever- already has to u!8tio! as a!tago!ism- it is 6hat 8urtails or th6arts the ide!tity o ea8h o the
eleme!ts7 This is 6hy- as .a8lau put it- e?ter!al diere!8e is al6ays also i!ter!al diere!8e+ it is !ot
o!ly that the diere!8e bet6ee! the ield itsel a!d its outside has to be rele8ted i!to the ield itsel-
preve!ti!g its 8losure- th6arti!g its ull!essT it is also that the diere!tial ide!tity o every eleme!t is
simulta!eously 8o!stituted a!d th6arted by the diere!tial !et6ork7
(% .y!dall 1ordo!- - FSF Eliot8 +n Imperfect .ife- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 2000-
p7 "%(7
#0 9bid7- p7 "%#7
#1 9bid7
#2 See 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 1'17
#" 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o Ge8ember 1&- 1%$"- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;I8 .es non*dupes
errent @u!publishedA7
#( 9! the herme!euti8s o suspi8io! o love- .a8a! goes mu8h urther tha! a! ordi!ary
de!u!8iatio! o se8ret proit i! selless loveEeve! i my sa8rii8e or the Hther is pure- it is a sa8rii8e
do!e i! order to avoid or 8o!8eal the HtherIs 8astratio!- the la8k i! the Hther7 The surprisi!g e?ample
here is the Stali!ist sho6 trial- i! 6hi8h the a88used is 8alled o! to 8o!ess their guilt to save the purity
o the Carty7
## 2a8Nues .a8a!- .acan in Italia! LeS`fLeTc- ,ila!+ .a Salama!dra 1%$&- p7 %&7
#' 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- pp7 1&'X$7
#$ The big Hther is ambiguous+ there is the Hther as radi8al Hther- the ultimate addressee- the
other Subje8t Jbeyo!d the 6all o la!guage-K and the 3et6ee! itsel- the medium o the i!tera8tio!
bet6ee! the subje8t a!d its other7
#& 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 1017
#% Bupa!^i^- J,ed dvema !e7K
'0 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 1027
'1 Tertullia!- JA Treatise o! the Soul-K tra!s7 Ceter =olmes- i! -he +nte*icene Fathers- Vol7
"- 4e6 5ork+ Dharles S8rib!erIs So!s 1%1&- p7 20&7
'2 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 10#7 /hat is the pre8ise relatio!ship bet6ee! love a!d
the e?8ess o u!!amable 1ouissanceM 9s it e!ough to say that love as the e!8ou!ter o the T6o
tra!substa!tiates se?uality rom masturbatory pleasure i!to a! 0ve!tM Goes this !ot ollo6 the logi8 o
the All a!d its e?8eptio!M So 6hat about the abyss o the !o!:All o 1ouissanceM 9s !ot this oppositio!
the same as that o the mathemati8al a!d dy!ami8 a!ti!omies i! *a!tM The dy!ami8 a!ti!omy is
stru8turally se8o!dary- it resolves the deadlo8k o the mathemati8al a!ti!omyEso is it that- i! a
homologous 6ay- love resolves the deadlo8k o 1ouissanceM
'" This is 6hy- as .a8a! put it- /oma! is o!e o the 4ames:o:the:Father @o!e o the !ames o
the Givi!eA+ i the /oma! 6ere to e?ist- she 6ould be the Hther o the Hther- the Subje8t 6hi8h
perso!iies- domi!ates- a!d regulates the very imperso!al 3et6ee!- the big Hther as the a!o!ymous
symboli8 Hrder7
'( 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- p7 11&7
'# 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;6III8 Dun discours <ui ne serait pas du semblant-
Caris+ Seuil 200'- p7 2&7 ,y tha!ks to Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- 6ho dre6 my atte!tio! to this passage7
'' Fredri8 2ameso!- + Singular Modernity- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2002- p7 127
'$ /e should !ot orget that the irst hal o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury 6as marked by t6o big
proje8ts 6hi8h pere8tly it this !otio! o Jalter!ate moder!ityK+ as8ism a!d 8ommu!ism7 /as !ot the
basi8 idea o as8ism that o a moder!ity 6hi8h 6ould oer a! alter!ative to the sta!dard A!glo:Sa?o!
liberal:8apitalist o!e- 6hi8h 6ould save the 8ore o 8apitalist moder!ity by 8asti!g a6ay its
J8o!ti!ge!tK 2e6ish:i!dividualist:proiteeri!g distortio!M A!d 6as !ot the rapid i!dustrialiUatio! o the
)SSF i! the late 1%20s a!d 1%"0s !ot also a! attempt at moder!iUatio! diere!t rom the /ester!:
8apitalist versio!M
'& .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;8 Encore- p7 %$7
'% .a8a!- semi!ar o 2a!uary 1$- 1%'2- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;I8 .identification7
$0 See 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA7
$1 As 3ru8e Fi!k poi!ted out- 6e i!d i! .a8a! t6o types o !egative judgme!ts+ the !egatio!
o e?iste!8e @Jla Femme ne&iste pasKA a!d the more outright !egatio! @Jil ny a pas de l+utre de
l+utreKA7 These t6o !egatio!s are !ot to be 8o!used+ 6hile /oma! does !ot e?ist- there dei!itely are
6ome!7 /hat the !egatio! o e?iste!8e de!ies is the ull o!ti8 status o a! e!tity @the e?iste!8e o a
parti8ular e!tity guara!teed or 8o!stituted by its limitA- 6hile Jthere is !o su8h thi!g as777K is a! outright
de!ial7 The 8ouple o H!e a!d Hther should be read alo!g these li!es+ there is !o big Hther- but J: a
dl3n-K there is somethi!g o the H!e7
$2 /hat Freud 8alled a Jpartial obje8tK is also more tha! !othi!g a!d less tha! H!e+ H!e is a
3ody- a partial obje8t is its la8k or e?8essT i7e7- it is !ot o!ly a separated part o a /hole @bodyA- it is
partial with regard to itselfEthis is 6hat Gemo8ritus did !ot see 6he! he 8o!8eived atoms as H!es
6hi8h 8a! be 8ou!ted- a!d the void as e?ter!al to them- as the empty spa8e surrou!di!g them+ as =egel
put it- o!e should i!ter!aliUe the void- 8o!8eivi!g it as the very 8ore o the ide!tity o the H!eEo!ly i!
this 6ay does moveme!t be8ome imma!e!t to atoms7
$" This real o the double !egatio! is !o!etheless !ot the same as the *a!tia! sublime- 6here
the Feal is tou8hed through the ailure o phe!ome!al represe!tatio!+ the u!dead:real is !ot sublime-
but obs8e!e7
$( .eo Strauss- )ersecution and the +rt of Writing- Dhi8ago+ )!iversity o Dhi8ago Cress 1%&&-
p7 #$7
$# 9bid7- pp7 '0X17
$' 9bid7- pp7 1$&X%7
$$ Alai! 3adiou- 0andboo" of Inaesthetics- Calo Alto+ Sta!ord )!iversity Cress 200#- p7 ?ii7
$& .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan- p7 1(#7
$% 9bid7- p7 1227
&0 9bid7- p7 1217
&1 A!other parallel 6ith ,ar?ism- 6hi8h is also a theory o revolutio!ary pra8ti8e a!d a!
a88ou!t o the ailure o revolutio!ary attempts7
&2 47 *atheri!e =ayles- 0ow We /ecame )ost*0uman- Dhi8ago+ Dhi8ago )!iversity Cress
1%%%- p7 &7
&" A!d- i!8ide!tally- 6ith all the o8us o! the !e6 e?perie!8es o pleasure that lie ahead 6ith
the developme!t o Virtual Feality- !euro!al impla!ts- et87- 6hat about !e6 Je!ha!8edK possibilities o
tortureM Go !ot bioge!eti8s a!d Virtual Feality 8ombi!ed ope! up !e6 a!d u!heard:o horiUo!s or
e?te!di!g our ability to e!dure pai! @by 6ide!i!g our se!sory 8apa8ity to sustai! pai!- by i!ve!ti!g
!e6 orms o i!li8ti!g itAM Cerhaps the ultimate Sadea! igure o the Ju!deadK vi8tim o torture- 6ho
8a! bear e!dless pai! 6ithout re8ourse to the es8ape i!to death- may also be8ome a realityM Cerhaps- i!
a de8ade or t6o- the most horriyi!g 8ases o torture @say- 6hat 6as do!e to the Dhie:o:Sta o the
Gomi!i8a! Army ater the ailed 8oup i! 6hi8h the di8tator Trujillo 6as killedEse6i!g his eyes
together so that he 6as !ot able to see his torturers- a!d the! or our mo!ths slo6ly 8utti!g o parts o
his body i! the most pai!ul 6ays possible- like usi!g blu!t s8issors to deta8h his ge!italsA 6ill look
like !aSve 8hildre!Is games7
&( A!d- i!soar as- 6ith regard to the *a!tia! sublime- the mas8uli!e positio! is dy!ami8 a!d
the emi!i!e positio! mathemati8al- the ormulae o se?uatio! also allo6 us to ormaliUe the t6o modes
o the sublime+ the dy!ami8 sublime o8uses o! the ,aster:Sig!iier as the i!te!sity o the e?8essive
or8e domi!ati!g the series- 6hile the emi!i!e sublime e?poses itsel to the e!dless series 6hi8h
8a!!ot be totaliUed7
&# A typi8al hysteri8al positio! is that o a poet 8o!ro!ted 6ith the theorist+ he 8omplai!s that
the theorist redu8es his art to a! illustratio! o abstra8t theory- but at the same time 8halle!ges the
theorist to go o! a!d produ8e a theory 6hi8h 6ill ee8tively hold7
&' .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan- p7 1#17 There is also a !o!:relatio!ship bet6ee! the partial
obje8t a!d the body>orga!ism to 6hi8h it belo!gs+ the partial obje8t is !ot harmo!iously i!serted i!to
the /hole o a body- it rebels agai!st JitsK body a!d a8ts o! its o6!7 =o6ever- this !o!:relatio!ship is
!ot simply homologous to the !o!:relatio!ship bet6ee! the t6o se?esEo!e 8a! eve! say that the
e?8ess o the partial obje8t 6ith regard to the body 8omes irst- i7e7- that it is 6hat 8auses the !o!:
relatio!ship bet6ee! the t6o @se?edA bodies7
&$ 1ottlob Frege- ]crits logi<ues et philosophi<ues- Caris+ Seuil 1%$"- p7 1'"7
&& As paraphrased i! Fay 3rassier- ihil 3nbound8 Enlightenment and E&tinction- .o!do!+
Calgrave ,a8milla! 200$- p7 10(- 8iti!g Fra!eois /ahl- JCrLse!tatio!- FeprLse!tatio!- Apparavtre-K i!
+lain /adiou8 )enser le multiple- ed7 Dharles Famo!d- Caris+ .I=armatta! 2002- pp7 1'%X&$7
&% 9!8ide!tally- this !o!:e?iste!8e o 1od has !othi!g to do 6ith .evi!asIs a!d ,ario!Is J1od
beyo!d bei!g7K
%0 As 6e have already see!- den- Gemo8ritusIs !ame or the atom- is arguably the most
appropriate !ame or a !o!:relatio!ship7
%1 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o 2a!uary %- 1%$%- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;;6I8 .a topologie et le
temps @u!publishedA7
%2 H!e 8a! eve! se?ualiUe this shit+ the aestheti8:ethi8al a?is @the over8omi!g o the aestheti8
attitude through ethi8al e!gageme!tA is mas8uli!e- 6hile the ethi8al:religious a?is @the religious
suspe!sio! o the ethi8alA is emi!i!e7
%" Therei! resides the shit i! .a8a!Is 6ork a!!ou!8ed by his Seminar 6II o! the ethi8s o
psy8hoa!alysis+ the shit rom the a?is 9XS to the a?is SXF7
%( .e 1auey- .e )astout de .acan- pp7 1''- 1'&7
%# H!e 8a! also imagi!e a huma!itaria! versio! o su8h pseudo:ethi8al bla8kmail+ JH*-
e!ough o this muddle about !eo:8olo!ialism- the respo!sibility o the /est- a!d so o!Edo you 6a!t
to do somethi!g to really help the millio!s sueri!g i! Ari8a- or do you just 6a!t to use them to s8ore
poi!ts i! your ideologi8o:politi8al struggleMK
1 Ceter =all6ard- JHrder a!d 0ve!t+ H! 3adiouIs .ogics of Worlds-K ew .eft 7eview #"
@SeptemberXH8tober 200&A- p7 11&7
2 Alai! 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- Caris+ Fayard 200%- p7 "%7
" Fay 3rassier- ihil 3nbound8 Enlightenment and E&tinction- .o!do!+ Calgrave ,a8milla!
200$- p7 1117
( 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- pp7 "%X(07
# 4ot 6ithout iro!y- o!e 8a! 8ompare su8h spe8ulative ormulatio!s to the similar propositio!s
about the deeper u!ity o the se!sual a!d the !oume!al ou!d i! *a!tIs posthumously published
ma!us8ripts7
' 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- pp7 ''X$7
$ 9bid7- p7 $27
& 9bid7- p7 $$7
% 9bid7- p7 $(7
10 The u!derlyi!g a!d 8orre8t impli8atio! is that there is H!e o!ly at the level o the sig!iier+
i! the Feal- there is !o H!eEe?8ept or obs8ura!tists7
11 9bid7- p7 %17
12 9bid7- p7 %"7
1" =o6- the!- does the 3adiouia! 0ve!t sta!d 6ith regard to ormulae o se?uatio!M Some
.a8a!ia! emi!ist 8riti8s 8laim that the e?8eptio!al status o the 0ve!t 6ith regard to ordi!ary Jhuma!:
a!imalK lie- its status as the e?8eptio! to u!iversality- 8ompels us to lo8ate it o! the male side o the
ormulaeEa!d- i!deed- is !ot this logi8 o e?8eptio! to u!iversality 8o!irmed by 3adiouIs o6!
ormulatio!s- su8h as 6he! he says+ J-here is nothing but bodies and languages FFF-K to 6hi8h
materialist diale8ti8s adds J777with the e&ception of truthsK @Alai! 3adiou- .ogi<ues des mondes- Caris+
Seuil 200'- p7 %AM Furthermore- does !ot the heroi8:phalli8 8o!!otatio! o the idelity to a! 0ve!t @the
idea o Je!or8i!gK the truthA also bear 6it!ess to its mas8uli!e !atureM There is !o!etheless a key
eature 6hi8h re!ders su8h a readi!g problemati8- 8o!vi!8i!g as it may appear+ o! the male side o
.a8a!Is ormulae o se?uatio!- the e?8eptio! is the e?8eptio! to u!iversality @all but ? are 777A 6hi8h- as
su8h- grou!ds this u!iversality- 6hile i! the 8ase o the 3adiouia! Truth:0ve!t- the eve!tal Truth is
u!iversalT i7e7- here- e?8eptio! does !ot grou!d u!iversality @6ith regard to 6hi8h it is a! e?8eptio!A-
the e?8eptio! @a! eve!tal TruthA is u!iversality7 Hr- to put it i! a!other 6ay- u!iversality is here
si!gular- it is 6hat =egel 8alled a u!iversality Jor itsel-K a u!iversality posited as su8h i! a si!gular
poi!t7 Hr- to put yet a!other 6ay- u!iversality is here !ot the out8ome o a !eutral vie6 to 6hi8h 6e
gai! a88ess ater elevati!g ourselves above parti8ular or partial e!gaged positio!sT u!iversality is- o!
the 8o!trary- somethi!g 6hi8h is a88essible o!ly to a! e!gaged subje8tive positio!7 The supreme 8ase
here is the ,ar?ia! proletariat 6hi8h sta!ds or the e?8eptio!- the Jpart o !o:part-K o the so8ial body-
a!d is pre8isely as su8h the Ju!iversal 8lass7K
1( =all6ard- JHrder a!d 0ve!t-K p7 1007
1# Alai! 3adiou- Manifeste pour la philosophie- Caris+ Seuil 1%&%- pp7 %0- &&7
1' 9s !ot 3adiouIs !otio! o idelity to a! 0ve!t as the highest @the o!ly trueA reedom a
variatio! o! the old Crotesta!t motto that obedie!8e is the highest orm o reedomM
1$ =all6ard- JHrder a!d 0ve!t-K pp7 %&X%7
1& The ambiguity hereEthat 6hile or 3adiou a! 0ve!t is the poi!t o i!8o!siste!8y a!d
subversio! o a /orld- he e!ds up 8alli!g or a !e6 /orld agai!st 8apitalist ato!al 6orldless!essEis
symptomal o this subterra!ea! li!k bet6ee! /orld a!d Truth:0ve!t7
1% 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- p7 1127
20 For e?ample- the 8e!tral igure o his e!tire 6ork- the hero 8o!dem!ed to the obs8e!e
immortality o a! e!dless 6a!deri!g a!d seeki!g redemptio! i! death- is 8learly a igure o the
/a!deri!g 2e67
21 2a8Nues .a8a!- J.ituraterre-K +utres Acrits- Caris+ Seuil 2001- p7 1(7
22 9bid7- p7 1'7
2" 17 *7 Dhesterto!- J9!trodu8tio!-K i! -he /oo" of Cob- .o!do!+ De8il Calmer i =ay6ard
1%1'- p7 ??vi7
2( 3adiou- semi!ar o! Clato- Ge8ember #- 200$7
2# Alai! 3adiou- -heoretical Writings- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200(- p7 ("7
2' /hi8h is 6hy o!e should ask the key Nuestio!+ is there a 3ei!g 6ithout a! 0ve!t- simply
e?ter!al to it- or is every order o 3ei!g the disavo6al:obliteratio! o a ou!di!g 0ve!t- a JperverseK 1e
sais bien! mais <uand meme 777- a redu8tio!:rei!s8riptio! o the 0ve!t i!to the 8ausal order o 3ei!gM
2$ Do!seNue!tly- i!soar as the 0ve!t is the i!trusio! o i!i!ity i!to our lives- a!d i!soar as
the disti!8tio! bet6ee! 3ei!g a!d 0ve!t is o!ly operative rom the sta!dpoi!t o our i!itude- it seems
that 2ea!:.u8 4a!8y is right i! his 8laim that 3adiouIs Ji!i!ityK is a !ame or its e?a8t opposite- or
huma! i!itude+ the J0ve!tK is the i!i!ite the 6ay it appears 6ithi! the horiUo! o i!itude7
2& Alai! 3adiou- .ogi<ues des mondes- Caris+ Seuil 200'- pp7 #02X"- as tra!slated i! 3ru!o
3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6+ Alai! 3adiouIs Theory o 2usti8e-K ,ardo2o .aw 7eview 2% @April 200&A-
p7 1%1%7
2% Taki!g a step urther- 6e 8a! eve! ve!ture that there is !o a!imal tout court- i by Ja!imalK
6e mea! a livi!g bei!g ully itted to its e!viro!me!t+ the lesso! o Gar6i!ism is that every
harmo!ious bala!8e i! the e?8ha!ge bet6ee! a! orga!ism a!d its e!viro!me!t is temporary a!d
ragile- that it 8a! e?plode at a!y mome!tT su8h a !otio! o a!imality as a bala!8e disturbed by huma!
hubris is a a!tasy7
"0 3adiouIs relu8ta!8e to address the death drive should be 8o!trasted to some o the more
orthodo? Freudia! 8o!tributors to ,ahiers pour l+nalyse @i! parti8ular Serge .e8laire a!d A!drL
1ree!A- 6ho remai!ed skepti8al about the ,ahiers appare!t push to6ards u!8ompromisi!g
ormaliUatio! a!d emphasiUed the drive as the eleme!t 6hi8h resists ormaliUatio!7 /e should !ote
here that these authors 6ere also 8riti8al o .a8a! a!d- espe8ially- o ,iller+ 6hat the late .a8a! a!d
,iller tried to do 6as pre8isely to radi8ally ormaliUe @de:biologiUeA the drive- readi!g it as a purely
ormal Jt6istK or repetitive torsio! o the sig!iyi!g order7
"1 9t is at this level that =egel also lo8ates the diere!8e bet6ee! a!8ie!t a!d moder!
skepti8ism+ the great!ess o a!8ie!t skepti8ism 6as to doubt the e?iste!8e o JobviousK i!ite material
reality- 6hile moder! empiri8ist skepti8ism doubts the e?iste!8e o a!ythi!g beyo!d this reality7
"2 9! his ater6ord to Ceter =all6ardIs 8olle8tio! hinA 4gain# 3adiou approvi!gly Nuotes .i!
3iao+ JThe esse!8e o revisio!ism is the ear o deathK @Ceter =all6ard- ed7- -hin" +gain8 +lain
/adiou and the Future of )hilosophy- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200(- p7 2#$AB This e?iste!tial radi8aliUatio!
o the politi8al oppositio! bet6ee! orthodo?y a!d revisio!ism thro6s !e6 light o! the old I'& motto
Jthe perso!al is politi8alK+ here- the politi8al be8omes perso!al- the ultimate root o politi8al
revisio!ism is lo8ated i! the i!timate e?perie!8e o the ear o death7 3adiouIs versio! o it 6ould be
that- si!8e Jrevisio!ismK is- at its most basi8- the ailure to subje8tiviUe o!esel- to assume idelity to a
Truth:0ve!t- bei!g a revisio!ist mea!s remai!i!g 6ithi! the survivalist horiUo! o the Jhuma! a!imal7K
There is- ho6ever- a! ambiguity that 8li!gs to .i! 3iaoIs stateme!t+ it 8a! be read as sayi!g that the
root o politi8al revisio!ism lies i! huma! !ature 6hi8h makes us ear deathT but it 8a! also be read as
sayi!g that- si!8e there is !o u!8ha!geable huma! !ature- our very i!timate ear o death is already
politi8ally overdetermi!ed- or it arises i! a! i!dividualist a!d egotisti8al so8iety 6ith little se!se o
8ommu!al solidarity- 6hi8h is 6hy- i! a 8ommu!ist so8iety- people 6ould !o lo!ger ear death7
"" See 2udith 3utler- )recarious .ife- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200'7 From a Dhristia!
perspe8tive- 6e should go to the e!d here+ i ma! is 8reated i! 1odIs image- the be8omi!g:ma!:o:1od
mea!s that the same goes or 1od+ i! Dhrist- 1od be8omes a ragile absolute- pre8arious- vul!erable-
a!d impote!t7
"( The iro!y here is that- 6ith 3utler- the e!8ou!ter 6ith the Hther i! its pre8arious!ess a!d
ragility @i!itude- mortalityA has e?a8tly the same stru8ture as the 3adiouia! e!8ou!ter o the 0ve!t
6hi8h ope!s up the dime!sio! o immortality or eter!ity7
"# 3utler- )recarious .ife- pp7 1"$X&7
"' This is 6hy- i! psy8hoa!alyti8 treatme!t- there is !o a8e:to:a8e- !either the a!alyst !or his
a!alysa!d sees the otherIs a8e+ o!ly i! this 6ay 8a! the dime!sio! o the 4eighbor:Thi!g emerge7
"$ Simo! Drit8hley- Infinitely Demanding- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200$- p7 107
"& 0mma!uel .evi!as- -otality and Infinity- The =ague+ ,arti!us 4ijho 1%$%- p7 ((7 /ould
!ot this versio! o 6hat 3adiou 8alls Jpitiless 8e!sorship o o!eselK make the heart o every Stali!ist
lover o purges leap 6ith joyM
"% Alai! 3adiou- -hAorie du su1et- Caris+ Seuil 1%&2- p7 1$%- as tra!slated i! 3osteels- JFor8e o
4o!la6-K p7 1%0%7
(0 3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6-K p7 1%107
(1 3adiou- -hAorie du su1et- p7 1$'- as tra!slated i! 3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6-K p7 1%1"7
3adiou sometimes proposes Jjusti8eK as the ,aster:Sig!iier that should repla8e all:too:heavily
ideologi8ally i!vested !otio!s like JreedomK or Jdemo8ra8yKEbut do 6e !ot e!8ou!ter the same
problem 6ith justi8eM Clato @3adiouIs mai! reere!8eA determi!es justi8e as the state i! 6hi8h every
parti8ular determi!atio! o88upies its proper pla8e 6ithi! its totality- 6ithi! the global so8ial order7 9s
this !ot the 8orporatist a!ti:egalitaria! motto par e&cellenceM A lot o additio!al e?pla!atio! is thus
!eeded i Jjusti8eK is to be elevated i!to the ,aster:Sig!iier o radi8al ema!8ipatory politi8s7
(2 3adiou- .ogi<ues des mondes- p7 %%- as tra!slated i! 3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6-K p7 1%1#7
(" Alai! 3adiou- -he Meaning of Sar"o2y- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200&- pp7 $2X"7
(( 3adiou- -hAorie du su1et- p7 1&0- as tra!slated i! 3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6-K p7 1%207
(# 3osteels- JFor8e o 4o!la6-K p7 1%207
(' As- o!8e agai!- 6as already 8lear to *a!t- or 6hom the terror at our utter impote!8e i! a8e
o the u!leashed viole!8e o some !atural po6er tur!s i!to e!thusiasm 6he! 6e be8ome a6are o ho6
!ot eve! the mightiest !atural viole!8e 8a! threate! our auto!omy as ree moral age!ts7
($ 9s it the! possible to imagi!e the attitude o the etishisti8 split to6ards a! 0ve!t+ J9 k!o6
very 6ell that there 6as !o 0ve!t- just the ordi!ary ru! o thi!gs- but- perhaps u!ortu!ately-
!o!etheless 777 @9 believeA there was o!eKM
(& 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- p7 1217
(% /ithi! the domai! o art itsel- this triad is rele8ted as the triad o epi8 @the TrueA- lyri8 @the
3eautiulA- a!d drama @the 1oodA7
#0 3adiou is here ambiguous i! de!yi!g religio! a!y Truth status i! a materialist 6ay7 The
mystery remai!s+ ho6 the! 8a! a religious te?t @CaulA have bee! the irst to establish the very ormal
matri? o a Truth:0ve!tM H!e 8a! eve! go urther a!d- ollo6i!g 3adiou- li!k this triad to the three
gra!d theories o the t6e!tieth 8e!tury+ ,ar?ism is epi8 @privilegi!g literatureA- psy8hoa!alysis
dramati8 @privilegi!g theaterA- a!d @=eideggeria!A phe!ome!ology lyri8 @privilegi!g poetryA7
#1 Alai! 3adiou a!d 3arbara Dassi!- Il ny a pas de rapport se&uel- Caris+ Fayard 2010- p7 11$7
#2 9bid7- pp7 12(X#7
#" A!d the eter!al 1!osti8 sear8h or the Jse8ret tea8hi!gsK o the great philosophi8al masters
al6ays tries to u!earth tra8es o pre:philosophi8al mythi8 dualism+ i! the 8ase o Clato- say- his Jse8ret
tea8hi!gK is supposed to posit matter @chora- the Jre8eptableKA as a positive 8ou!ter:or8e to 9deasEi!
a! e?a8t parallel to the sear8h or the Jse8ret tea8hi!gK o Dhrist 6hi8h supposedly rei!s8ribes paga!
se?ual diere!8e i!to the divi!e sphere- rei!trodu8i!g i!to it the emi!i!e mome!t7
#( 3adiou a!d Dassi!- Il ny a pas de rapport se&uel- pp7 12&X%7
## Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JThe Fith Do!ditio!-K i! =all6ard- ed7- -hin" +gain8 +lain /adiou and
the Future of )hilosophy- pp7 1%$X&7
#' The term Jrele8tio!K had t6o mai! uses i! t6e!tieth:8e!tury epistemology7 H! the o!e
ha!d- there is Jrele8tio!K i! the =egelia! diale8ti8al se!se+ the be!di!g o the subje8tIs gaUe o!to
itsel- the i!8lusio! o the pro8ess o k!o6i!g itsel i!to the k!o6! obje8tT o! the other ha!d- there is
the i!amous diale8ti8al:materialist Jtheory o rele8tio!K+ the !otio! o our k!o6ledge as theEal6ays
impere8tEsubje8tive rele8tio!>mirrori!g o the Jobje8tiveK reality e?isti!g i!depe!de!tly o us7 The
poi!t is !ot just to dismiss the se8o!d use as vulgar- but to grasp the passage rom the se8o!d to the irst
use as a moveme!t i!here!t i! the very 8o!8ept o rele8tio!7
#$ Bupa!^i^- JThe Fith Do!ditio!-K p7 1%%7
#& 9talo Dalvi!o- JA *i!g .iste!s-K i! 3nder the Caguar Sun- .o!do!+ Vi!tage 1%%"7
#% Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200&- p7 12$7
'0 Bupa!^i^- JThe Fith Do!ditio!-K p7 1%'7
'1 9bid7- p7 2007
'2 As 6e sa6 i! Dhapter 1- at the very outset o philosophy- Clato also approa8hed this !o!:All
o the ield o logos i! his )armenidesEthis is 6hy the latter o88upies a u!iNue positio! bet6ee! early
a!d late Clato+ a gap be8omes visible here 6hi8h Clato desperately tries to ill i! his late dialogues7
)armenides is a proto:versio! o =egelIs logi8- truly readable o!ly retroa8tively- i7e7- rom the
sta!dpoi!t o =egelIs logi87 9ts eight @or !i!eA hypotheses are the irst versio! o the 8omplete @and
!o!:All+ 8omplete i! the se!se o J!o e?8eptio!KA set o 8ategories- a!d- as i! =egelIs logi8- it is
mea!i!gless to ask 6hi8h hypothesis is JtrueKEo!ly the 8o!8lusio! @!othi!g e?ists 777A is Jtrue-K 6hi8h
thro6s us ba8k i!to the e!tire moveme!t7
'" For a! outsta!di!g des8riptio! o this Jregressio!-K see Ceter *lepe8- JH! GeleuUeIs
Do!8eptio! o Wuasi:Dause-K Filo2ofs"i 6estni"- Vol7 2%- 4o7 1 @200&A- pp7 2#X(07
'( ,a!uel Ge.a!da- Intensive Science and 6irtual )hilosophy- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 2002- p7
$#7
'# 9 dealt i! detail 6ith this topi8 i! my $rgans without /odies8 $n Deleu2e and ,onse<uences-
.o!do!+ Foutledge 200"7
'' To take a Freudia! e?ample+ !ormally our spee8h is determi!ed by li!guisti8- psy8hologi8al-
et87- 8ausalitiesT but 6he! a slip o the to!gue o88urs 6hi8h 8o!veys a! u!8o!s8ious message- some e?:
8e!tri8 8ause has i!terrupted the smooth lo6 o 8ausality7
'$ As or e?ample i! .ukh8sIs 0istory and ,lass ,onsciousness+ the proletariat is the a8tual
Subje8t o history desti!ed to appropriate the alie!ated histori8al Substa!8e through the revolutio!ary
a8tE6hi8h is 6hy .ukh8s has to elevate *a!tia! tra!s8e!de!tal ormalism i!to the ideal e?pressio! o
8apitalist so8ial reality- so that =egel already appears as its mystiied over8omi!g7
'& For a more detailed developme!t o this poi!t- see 9!terlude "7
1 Fra!eois 3alm`s- ,e <ue .acan dit de lJtre- Caris+ Cresses )!iversitaires de Fra!8e 1%%%- p7
$27
2 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre III8 .es psychoses- Caris+ Seuil 1%&1- p7 "#&7
" 3alm`s- ,e <ue .acan dit de lJtre- p7 %17
( Fra!eois 3alm`s- Dieu! le se&e et la vAritA- Famo!ville Sai!t:Ag!e+ nr`s 200$- p7 #"7
# 9bid7- p7 &17
' 9bid7- p7 ''7
$ 2ea!:,arie .ardi8- i! 17 /7 F7 =egel- .eBons sur les preuves de le&istence de Dieu- Caris+
Aubier 1%%(- p7 %7
& =o6 are method a!d system related i! =egelIs thoughtM A88ordi!g to the sta!dard ,ar?ist
do&a- there is a 8o!tradi8tio! bet6ee! the t6o+ =egelIs system is 8o!servative- 6hile his diale8ti8al
method is revolutio!ary- so 6e should liberate the method rom the 8o!strai!ts o the system7 /hat this
!aSve oppositio! misses is the ide!tity o the t6o- some6hat like the stra!ge ate about Sta!islavskyIs
theatri8al tea8hi!g- 6hi8h i! Fussia 6as k!o6! as his Jsystem-K a!d later i! the )S- 6here it be8ame
very i!lue!tial @i! the A8torIs Studio- et87A- as his Jmethod7K
% See Ale?a!dre *oyrL- J=egel g 9e!a-K i! ]tudes dhistoire de la pensAe philosophi<ue- Caris+
1allimard 1%$17
10 9 rely here o! Datheri!e ,alabou- .a chambre du milieu- Caris+ =erma!! 200%7
11 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- se8o!d rev7 ed7- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- ,i!eola+
Gover 200"- p7 $(7
12 ,arti! =eidegger- (esamtausgabe! 6olF Mc8 0egel- Fra!kurt+ Vittorio *losterma!! 1%%"- p7
"$7
1" 9bid7- p7 10"7
1( /alter 3e!jami!- JDritiNue o Viole!8e-K i! Selected Writings- Dambridge+ =arvard
)!iversity Cress 1%%'- p7 2("7
1# 9bid7- p7 2(#7
1' A! idea propagated by =abermas @see 2Yrge! =abermas- -he -heory of ,ommunicative
+ction- Vols7 1 a!d 2- 4e6 5ork+ 3ea8o! Cress 1%&#A- but also !ot alie! to a 8ertai! .a8a! @see
2a8Nues .a8a!- JThe Fu!8tio! a!d Field o Spee8h a!d .a!guage i! Csy8hoa!alysis-K i! ]crits8 -he
First ,omplete Edition in English- tra!s7 3ru8e Fi!k- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 200'A7
1$ .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre III8 .es psychoses- p7 2$'7
1& 9bid7
1% 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o ,ay 20- 1%#%- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre 6I8 .e dAsir et son
interpretation @u!publishedA7
20 Chilippe .a8oue:.abarthe- JGe lILthiNue+ g propos dIA!tigo!e-K i! .acan avec les
philosophes- Caris+ Albi! ,i8hel 1%%1- p7 2&7
21 3alm`s- ,e <ue .acan dit de lJtre- p7 $"7
22 2a8Nues .a8a!- semi!ar o 2u!e &- 1%''- i! .e sAminaire! .ivre ;III8 .ob1et de la
psychanalyse @u!publishedA7
2" Fe8all ho6- or .a8a!- the dis8ourse o s8ie!8e presupposes the ore8losure o the
subje8tEto put it i! !aSve terms- i! it- the subje8t is redu8ed to Uero+ a s8ie!tii8 propositio! should be
valid or a!yo!e 6ho repeats the same e?perime!t7 The mome!t 6e have to i!8lude the subje8tIs
positio! o e!u!8iatio!- 6e are !o lo!ger i! s8ie!8e- but i! a dis8ourse o 6isdom or i!itiatio!7
2( 3alm`s- ,e <ue .acan dit de lJtre- pp7 211X1"7 =ere 6e 8a! also establish a li!k 6ith
,eillassou?Is versio! o spe8ulative materialism+ the s8ie!tii8 mathematiUed Feal is outside the
tra!s8e!de!tal 8orrelatio! o logos a!d bei!g7 See Wue!ti! ,eillassou?- +fter Finitude- .o!do!+
Do!ti!uum 200&7
2# 9! his Ereignis semi!ar o 1%"$- 6hi8h is usually take! as the begi!!i!g o his JmatureK late
thought- =eidegger still speaks o the J6ill to Ereignis-K a! e?pressio! u!thi!kable a 8ouple o years
later7
2' 0ve! at the superi8ial politi8al level- 6e !o6 k!o6 that =eidegger ollo6ed the stude!t
revolt o the late 1%'0s 6ith great sympathy- greeted /illy 3ra!dtIs ele8toral vi8tory e!thusiasti8ally-
a!d- ater /orld /ar 99- more or less 8o!siste!tly voted or the So8ial Gemo8rats7
2$ The Nuotes that ollo6 are rom the ma!us8ript o this semi!ar rom 1%"">1%"(7 See ,arti!
=eidegger- Jqber /ese! u!d 3egri vo! 4atur- 1es8hi8hte u!d Staat-K i! 0eidegger*Cahrbuch! 6olF
_8 0eidegger und der ationalso2ialismus I- Freiburg+ *arl Alber 20107
2& 3ret /7 Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will8 $n the Way to (elassenheit- 0va!sto!+
4orth6ester! )!iversity Cress 200$- p7 "0"7
2% As Nuoted i! ibid7- pp7 2&'X$T tra!slatio! rom ,arti! =eidegger- JThe A!a?ima!der
Fragme!t-K i! Early (ree" -hin"ing- tra!s7 Gavid Farrell *rell a!d Fra!k A7 DapuUUi- 4e6 5ork+
=arper i Fo6 1%&(- p7 (27
"0 For a 8loser a!alysis o the vi8issitudes o the /ill i! =eideggerIs developme!t- see Dhapter
" o Slavoj iek- In Defense of .ost ,auses- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200&7
"1 See 0ri8 Sa!t!er- $n the )sychotheology of Everyday .ife- Dhi8ago+ )!iversity o Dhi8ago
Cress 20017
"2 See 1regory Fried- 0eideggers )olemos8 From /eing to )olitics- 4e6 =ave!+ 5ale
)!iversity Cress 20007
"" 2ea!:.u8 4a!8y- -he E&perience of Freedom- tra!s7 3ridget ,8Go!ald- Calo Alto+ Sta!ord
)!iversity Cress 1%%"- pp7 1"1X27
"( Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will- p7 2%(7
"# 9bid7- p7 2%17
"' 9bid7
"$ F7 /7 27 S8helli!g- JChilosophi8al 9!vestigatio!s i!to the 0sse!8e o =uma! Freedom a!d
Felated ,atters-K tra!s7 Cris8illa =ayde!:Foy- i! 0r!st 3ehler- ed7- )hilosophy of (erman Idealism-
.o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 1%&$- pp7 2$0X1- 2$&X%7
"& Ceter *oslo6ski proposed a variatio! o Fi8hteIs amous thesis that the ki!d o philosophy
o!e upholds depe!ds o! the ki!d o ma! o!e is+ the ki!d o philosopher o!e is depe!ds o! the ki!d o
theory o origi!al si! @the FallA o!e upholds7 Goes !ot the same hold todayM For e8ologists- the
Jorigi!al si!K is the Dartesia! domi!atio! over a !ature redu8ed to me8ha!i8al obje8tT or ,ar?ists- the
Fall is the rise o 8lass so8ietyT or =eideggeria!s- the Fall is the orgetti!g o the truth o 3ei!g- et87
"% Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will- p7 1$17
(0 9bid7- p7 1207
(1 9bid7- p7 1107
(2 9bid7- pp7 11#X1'7
(" Atte!tive i!terpreters have !oti8ed the multipli8ity o mea!i!gs o =eideggerIs 5ehreT the
three mai! o!es are+ @1A the shit i! =eideggerIs thought rom 3ei!g to EreignisT @2A the shit i! the
6orld:history o 3ei!g rom te8h!ology to EreignisT @"A the strie i! Ereignis itsel bet6ee! it a!d its
3nwesen- Ent*Eignis7
(( This is also 6hy there is !o pla8e or the .a8a!ia! Feal i! =eideggerIs thought7 The most
8o!8ise dei!itio! o the Feal is that it is a given without givenness+ it is just give!- 6ith !o possibility
o a88ou!ti!g or its bei!g:give! by a!y age!8y o givi!g- eve! i it be the imperso!al Jes gibt 9 il y a-K
6ithout a phe!ome!ologi8al horiUo! ope!i!g the spa8e or it to appear7 9t is the impossible poi!t o the
o!ti8 6ithout the o!tologi8al7
(# 9s !ot =eideggerIs !otio! o epo8hal histori8ity a ki!d o reversal o the *a!tia! relatio!ship
bet6ee! the tra!s8e!de!tal a priori a!d the multipli8ity o the matter u!iied by the tra!s8e!de!tal
rameM /hile i! *a!t- the tra!s8e!de!tal rame is the u!iversal tra!s:histori8al mome!t a!d the o!ti8
the empiri8al multipli8ity o 8ha!geable matter- i! =eidegger- it is the tra!s8e!de!tal rame @the
dis8losure o bei!gA 6hi8h is histori8al- 8ha!gi!g 6ith the epo8hs- a!d the o!ti8 @the J0arthKA 6hi8h is
the tra!s:histori8al JstuK dis8losed i! diere!t histori8al modes o its appeari!g7 /e 8a! thus have the
same JrealityK 6hi8h appears diere!tly- 6hi8h is diere!tly dis8losed- to people livi!g i! diere!t
histori8al periods7
(' /he! =eidegger speaks o the J8o!8ealme!t o 8o!8ealme!t itselK or the Joblivio! o
oblivio!-K this should !ot be redu8ed to a double moveme!t o irst orgetti!g 3ei!g i! our immersio!
i! bei!gs a!d the! orgetti!g this orgetti!g itsel+ orgetti!g is al6ays also a orgetti!g o orgetti!g
itsel- other6ise it is !ot orgetti!g at allEi! this se!se- as =eidegger put it- it is !ot o!ly that 3ei!g
6ithdra6s itsel- but 3ei!g is nothing but its o6! 6ithdra6al7 @Furthermore- 8o!8ealme!t is a
8o!8ealme!t o 8o!8ealme!t i! a mu8h more literal 6ay+ 6hat is 8o!8ealed is !ot 3ei!g i! its purity but
the a8t that 8o!8ealme!t is part o 3ei!g itsel7A
($ Alai! 3adiou- Second manifeste pour la philosophie- Caris+ Fayard 200%- p7 "%7
(& 9bid7- p7 #17
(% ,arti! =eidegger- -he Essence of 0uman Freedom8 +n Introduction to )hilosophy- tra!s7
Ted Sadler- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 200#- p7 1%"7
#0 Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will- p7 1(#7
#1 ,arti! =eidegger- Discourse on -hin"ing- tra!s7 2oh! ,7 A!derso! a!d 07 =a!s Freu!d-
4e6 5ork+ =arper i Fo6 1%''- p7 #(7
#2 0ve! the 6ords =eidegger uses to des8ribe the outli!es o the J!e6 begi!!i!gK ote! rely o!
hidde! homologies 6ith metaphysi8s+ das (eviertEthe Four:Fold o earth- sky- huma!s- a!d godsEis
his versio! o the Aristotelia! our 8auses+ earth is the material 8ause- sky @the Apollo!ia! ormA the
ormal 8ause- huma!s as age!ts the ei8ie!t 8ause- a!d the gods the i!al 8ause7
#" Gerrida stri8tly opposes his Jto:8ome 777K to the *a!tia! regulative 9dea+ the to:8ome implies
a! u!8o!ditio!al urge!8y to a8t !o6 a!d is- as su8h- the very opposite o adopti!g a gradual approa8h
to a! i!a88essible 9deal7 =o6ever- there are t6o 8ou!ter:poi!ts to be made here7 First- this urge!8y is
there already i! *a!t- 6ho should !ot be set up as a stra6 ma!7 Se8o!d- Gerrida !e8essarily os8illates
here bet6ee! this urge!8y o a8ti!g i! the mome!t a!d the gap that separates ea8h a8t @as a 8o!ti!ge!t
i!terve!tio!A rom the spe8tral idea o 2usti8e7
#( Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will- p7 2''7
## Take histori8ism at its most radi8al+ todayIs a!ti:esse!tialist dis8ourse theories @3utler-
.a8lauA 6hi8h a88ou!t or every JstableK ormatio!- up to a!d i!8ludi!g our se?ual ide!tities a!d
!ature itsel- as a! ee8t o 8o!ti!ge!t arti8ulatio!sEthe e!sui!g visio! o history is that o a lat-
ahistori8al- Jeter!al prese!tK i! 6hi8h the game o re:arti8ulatio! goes o! a!d o!7
#' Gavis- 0eidegger and the Will- p7 20&7
#$ 9bid7- p7 2$%7
#& ,arti! =eidegger- Introduction to Metaphysics- tra!s7 1regory Fried a!d Fi8hard Colt- 4e6
=ave!+ 5ale )!iversity Cress 2000- p7 '#7
#% Ceter =all6ard- JDommu!ism o the 9!telle8t- Dommu!ism o the /ill-K i! Dostas GouUi!as
a!d Slavoj iek- eds7- -he Idea of ,ommunism- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 11$7
'0 9bid7- p7 1127
'1 See Alai! 3adiou- JThe 9dea o Dommu!ism-K i! GouUi!as a!d iek- eds7- -he Idea of
,ommunism7
'2 ,arti! =eidegger- JH!ly a 1od Da! Save )s+ Der SpiegelIs i!tervie6 6ith ,arti!
=eidegger-K i! Fi8hard /oli!- ed7- -he 0eidegger ,ontroversy8 + ,ritical 7eader- Dambridge- ,A+
,9T Cress 1%%"- p7 10(7
'" ,iguel de 3eistegui- 0eidegger and the )olitical- .o!do!+ Foutledge 1%%&- p7 11'7
'( Agai!st GavisIs sympathies or Be! 3uddhism- o!e should bear i! mi!d that 2apa!ese
militarism pere8tly suited Be! 6arriors 6ho killed 6ith (elassenheit7
1 9t is true that- i 6e a88ept the hypothesis o the 3ig 3a!g- 6e 8a! !o!etheless ormulate a!
imma!e!t measure or limit o gra!deur to the u!iverse- !amely that there is- i! this 8ase- a Uero:poi!t o
measureme!t @the si!gularity o the begi!!i!gA as 6ell as the All @o the i!ite u!iverseA- so that the
imagi!ed observer 8a!!ot jump alo!g a! i!i!ite s8ale o gra!deur7 =o6ever- 6hat about many 3ig
3a!gs ollo6i!g ea8h otherM
2 Ceter va! 9!6age!- Material /eings- 9tha8a+ Dor!ell )!iversity Cress 1%%07
" *are! 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway8 [uantum )hysics and the Entanglement of
Matter and Meaning- Gurham+ Guke )!iversity Cress 200$- p7 "#7
( Stephe! =a6ki!g a!d .eo!ard ,lodi!o6- -he (rand Design- 4e6 5ork+ 3a!tam 2010- p7 #7
# 9bid7- p7 $7
' Furthermore- o!e 8a!!ot help !oti8i!g that- as to the positive 8o!te!t o =a6ki!gIs Theory o
0verythi!g- it bears a! u!mistakable resembla!8e to diale8ti8al materialism- or is at least ully
8ompatible 6ith a reaso!able versio! o diale8ti8al materialism7
$ See 4i8holas Fear!- )hilosophy8 -he .atest +nswers to the $ldest [uestions- .o!do!+
Atla!ti8 3ooks 200#7
& 9bid7- p7 "$7
% 9bid7- p7 "'7
10 4o 6o!der the greatest poet o the material i!ertia i! 8i!ema- A!drei Tarkovsky- is
simulta!eously o!e o the great 8i!emati8 Jspiritualists7K ,ore broadly- do !ot the three aspe8ts o the
.a8a!ia! Feal it the three aspe8ts o materialismM First- the Jimagi!aryK Feal+ the proverbial grai! o
dust- the material Ji!divisible remai!derK 6hi8h 8a!!ot be sublated i! the symboli8 pro8ess7 The!- the
Jsymboli8K Feal+ s8ie!tii8 letters a!d ormulae 6hi8h re!der the stru8ture o material reality7 Fi!ally-
the JrealK Feal+ the 8ut o pure diere!8e- o the i!8o!siste!8y o stru8ture7
11 17 /7 F7 =egel- 0egels Science of .ogic- tra!s7 A7 V7 ,iller- Atla!ti8 =ighla!ds+
=uma!ities Cress 9!ter!atio!al 1%&%- p7 2(%7
12 9bid7- p7 2'%7
1" Alo!g these li!es- 6e 8a! perhaps 8o!8eive the 6ave u!8tio! i! Nua!tum physi8s as the
teleiosis o a! obje8t deprived o the obje8tIs a8tuality- as the dire8tio! o a poi!t 6ithout its reality7
1( Foger Ce!rose- -he 7oad to 7eality8 + ,omplete (uide to the .aws of the 3niverse-
.o!do!+ Vi!tage 3ooks 200(- p7 $&27
1# Wuoted rom 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 2&$7
1' Wuoted rom ibid7
1$ 3ru8e Fose!blum a!d Fred *utt!er- [uantum Enigma8 )hysics Encounters ,onsciousness-
.o!do!+ 1erald Gu8k6orth 200$- p7 ''7
1& As summariUed i! ibid7- pp7 10&X%7
1% 9bid7- p7 1'(7
20 Wuoted i! ibid7- p7 1'#7
21 3ria! 1ree!e- -he Elegant 3niverse- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%%- pp7 11'X
1%7
22 9 rely here o! the third 8hapter @JWua!tum Chysi8s 6ith .a8a!KA o my Indivisible
7emainder- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 1%%'7
2" To 8ite 3orges- 6ith the emerge!8e o *aka- Coe a!d Gostoyevsky are !o lo!ger 6hat they
6ere- or- rom the sta!dpoi!t o *aka- 6e 8a! see i! them dime!sio!s 6hi8h 6ere !ot previously
there7
2( See F7 /7 27 S8helli!g- JChilosophi8al 9!vestigatio!s i!to the 0sse!8e o =uma! Freedom
a!d Felated ,atters-K tra!s7 Cris8illa =ayde!:Foy- i! 0r!st 3ehler- ed7- )hilosophy of (erman
Idealism- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 1%&$7
2# Fose!blum a!d *utt!er- [uantum Enigma- p7 1$17
2' 9bid7- p7 1$07
2$ 4i8k 3ostrom- JClaythi!gs o a =igher ,i!d-K -imes 0igher Education Supplement- ,ay
1'- 200"7 Also k!o6! as JThe Simulatio! Argume!t+ /hy the Crobability that 5ou Are .ivi!g i! a
,atri? is Wuite =igh7K
2& Fe8all ho6 *a!t thought that our ig!ora!8e o !oume!al reality is a 8o!ditio! or our bei!g
able to a8t ethi8ally+ i 6e 6ere to k!o6 Thi!gs i! themselves- 6e 6ould a8t like automata7
2% Although a mystery remai!s here- the proverbial mystery o the additio!al grai! o sa!d
6hi8h makes out o i!dividual grai!s a heap proper @u!8tio!i!g like a 6aveA7
"0 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 11"7
"1 17 /7 F7 =egel- -he )henomenology of Mind- Vol7 1- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- 4e6 5ork+
,a8,illa! 1%10- pp7 $"X#7
"2 3arad reje8ts the !otio! o rele?ivity as a tool or 8o!8eivi!g the i!8lusio! o the observer
i! the observed 8o!te!t- 6ith the argume!t that Jrele?ivity is ou!ded o! represe!tatio!alismK+
JFele?ivity takes or gra!ted the idea that represe!tatio!s rele8t @so8ial or !aturalA reality7 That is-
rele?ivity is based o! the belie that pra8ti8es o represe!ti!g have !o ee8t o! the obje8ts o
i!vestigatio! a!d that 6e have a ki!d o a88ess to represe!tatio!s that 6e do!It have to the obje8ts
themselves7 Fele?ivity- like rele8tio!- still holds the 6orld at a dista!8eK @Meeting the 3niverse
0alfway- p7 &$A7 3ut this !otio! simply misses the 8ore o =egelia! rele?ivity- 6hi8h is the i!8lusio!
o the a8t o rele8tio! i! the obje8t itsel+ or =egel- the dista!8e bet6ee! the obje8t a!d its rele8tio! is
!ot e?ter!al @i7e7- the obje8t is i! itsel- the rele8tio! is ho6 it appears to the observi!g subje8tA- but is
i!s8ribed i!to the obje8t itsel as its i!!ermost 8o!stitue!tEthe obje8t be8omes 6hat it is through its
rele8tio!7 The e?teriority implied by the !otio! o rele?ivity is pre8isely 6hat 3arad 8alls a!
Je?teriority 6ithi!7K
"" 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 %07
"( 9bid7- p7 12&7
"# A!d the spiritualist misreadi!g o Nua!tum physi8s @Jthe observer 8reates realityKA merely
opposes to this vulgar abstra8t materialism a !o less vulgar idealism+ here- it is !ot the obje8t but the
subje8t 6hi8h is e?empted rom the 8o!8rete reality o a phe!ome!o! a!d presupposed as the abstra8t
sour8e o reality7
"' 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 11#7
"$ 9bid7- p7 11(7
"& 9bid7
"% 9bid7- p7 "($7
(0 9bid7- pp7 "#0X17
(1 A!other i!s8riptio! o the oppositio! bet6ee! idealism a!d materialism i! 8osmology o88urs
i! the o!goi!g debate about the 3ig 3a!g+ !o 6o!der the Datholi8 Dhur8h has or de8ades !o6
supported 3ig 3a!g theory- readi!g it as the mome!t o 1odIs dire8t i!terve!tio!- the si!gular poi!t at
6hi8h u!iversal la6s o !ature are suspe!ded7 The materialist a!s6er to 3ig 3a!g theory is the 8y8li8al
theory o the u!iverse- 6hi8h reads the 3ig 3a!g !ot as the Uero:poi!t o the i!e?pli8able absolute
begi!!i!g- but as the mome!t o passage rom o!e u!iverse to a!other- a passage 6hi8h 8a! also be
a88ou!ted or by the la6s o !ature7 The idea @relyi!g o! stri!g theoryEa!d the problems 6ith stri!g
theory sig!al the pote!tial 6eak!ess o this approa8hA is that there are more tha! the usual our
dime!sio!s i! the u!iverse @three spatial dime!sio!s plus timeA+ there is @at leastA a!other spatial
dime!sio! 6hi8h mai!tai!s a! i!i!itesimal but still operatio!al dista!8e bet6ee! our 6orld @a Jbra!eK+
a multi:dime!sio!al membra!eA a!d its doubleT at the e!d o a 8osmi8 8y8le- the t6o bra!es 8ollapse
i!to ea8h other- the dista!8e separati!g them is 8a!8eled- a!d this 8ollapse e!ge!ders the e?plosio! o a
!e6 6orld7 See Fose!blum a!d *utt!er- [uantum Enigma7
(2 This is homologous to the Nuestio! o hierar8hy+ 6hy 8a! the higher order retai! its priority
o!ly i it appears 6ithi! the lo6er order as subordi!ated to itM
(" 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 1(%7
(( 9bid7- p7 1#27
(# 9bid7- p7 ""#7
(' 1illes GeleuUe- Difference and 7epetition- tra!s7 Caul Catto!- .o!do!+ Do!ti!uum 2001- p7
11%7
($ 9bid7- pp7 11%X207
(& 9a! 3u8ha!a!- Deleu2ism8 + Metacommentary- Gurham+ Guke )!iversity Cress 2000- p7 #7
(% 1eorge 1ree!stei! a!d Arthur 17 Bajo!8- -he [uantum ,hallenge8 Modern 7esearch on the
Foundations of [uantum Mechanics- Sudbury- ,A+ 2o!es a!d 3artlett 1%%$- p7 1&$T as Nuoted i!
3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 2&# @emphases addedA7
#0 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- pp7 "0#X'7
#1 9bid7- pp7 "11X127
#2 9bid7- p7 "1#7
#" =a6ki!g a!d ,lodi!o6- -he (rand Design- pp7 1$%X&07
#( All theosophi8al spe8ulatio!s o8us o! this poi!t+ at the very begi!!i!g @or- more pre8isely-
before the begi!!i!gA- there is !othi!g- the void o pure pote!tiality- the 6ill 6hi8h 6a!ts !othi!g- the
divi!e abyss prior to 1od- a!d this void is the! i!e?pli8ably disturbed or lost7
## Caul 27 Stei!hardt a!d 4eil Turok- Endless 3niverse8 /eyond the /ig /ang- .o!do!+
Choe!i? 200&- p7 &27
#' 9bid7- p7 %27
#$ /ithi! the domai! o the drive- the same gap appears i! the guise o the diere!8e bet6ee!
the driveIs goal a!d aim- as elaborated by .a8a!+ the driveIs goalEto rea8h its obje8tEis Jalse-K it
masks its JtrueK aim- 6hi8h is to reprodu8e its o6! 8ir8ular moveme!t by 6ay o repeatedly missi!g its
obje8t7 9 the a!tasiUed u!ity 6ith the obje8t brought the ull>impossible i!8estuous 1ouissance- the
driveIs repeated missi!g o its obje8t does !ot simply 8ompel us to be satisied 6ith a lesser e!joyme!t-
but ge!erates a surplus:e!joyme!t o its o6!- the plus*de*1ouir7 The parado? o the death drive is thus
stri8tly homologous to that o the =iggs ield+ rom the sta!dpoi!t o the libidi!al e8o!omy- it is
J8heaperK or the system to repeatedly traverse the 8ir8le o the drive tha! to stay at absolute rest7
#& See Tim =artord- -he 3ndercover Economist- .o!do!+ Aba8us 200$- p7 $$X&7
#% See Stephe! 2ay 1ould- JChyleti8 SiUe Ge8rease i! =ershey 3ars-K i! 0ens -eeth and
0orses -oes- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7 4orto! i Dompa!y 1%%(7 This is the proit+ the pri8e o !othi!g 6e
pay 6he! 6e buy somethi!g rom a 8apitalist7 The 8apitalist e8o!omy 8ou!ts 6ith the pri8e o !othi!g-
it i!volves the reere!8e to a virtual Bero 6hi8h has a pre8ise pri8e7
'0 9! TolstoyIs War and )eace- the oppositio! bet6ee! 4apoleo! a!d *utuUov is o!e bet6ee!
a8tive passivity a!d passive a8tivity+ 4apoleo! is ra!ti8ally a8tive- movi!g a!d atta8ki!g all the time-
but this very a8tivity is u!dame!tally passiveEhe passively ollo6s his ate 6hi8h pushes him i!to
a8tivity- a vi8tim o histori8al or8es he does !ot u!dersta!d7 ,arshall *utuUov- his Fussia! military
8ou!terpart- is passive i! his a8tsE6ithdra6i!g- just persisti!gEyet his passivity is sustai!ed by a!
a8tive 6ill to e!dure a!d 6i!7
'1 There is a perso!ality type 6hi8h e?empliies the 8atastrophi8 8o!seNue!8es o Jdoi!g
!othi!gK+ the subje8t 6ho just sta!ds still- doi!g a!d !oti8i!g !othi!g 6ro!g- 6hile 8ausi!g
8atastrophes all arou!d him7 A88ordi!g to Fay ,o!k- 3ertra!d Fussell 6as su8h a type- sitti!g still at
the 8e!ter o his amily !et6ork a!d e!joyi!g lie- 6hile sui8ides multiplied arou!d him7 =ere 6e 8a!
i!voke a 8ommo! e?perie!8e+ 6he! o!e is over:e?8ited- attempti!g to 8alm o!esel do6! by 8easi!g
all a8tivity usually ails si!8e it is 8ou!ter:produ8tiveEit dema!ds a lot o eort to abstai! rom
a8tivity i! su8h a state7 9t is mu8h more ee8tive to pursue some mi!imal mea!i!gless a8tivity- like
rhythmi8ally pulli!g or sNueeUi!g o!eIs i!gersEsu8h automati8 a8tivity bri!gs mu8h more 8alm tha!
does 8omplete i!a8tivity7
'2 /e should make the same move apropos the oppositio! o performative a!d constative+ or
de8ades- 6e have heard ho6 la!guage is a! a8tivity- !ot a medium o represe!tatio! 6hi8h de!otes a!
i!depe!de!t state o thi!gs but a lie:pra8ti8e 6hi8h Jdoes thi!gs-K 6hi8h 8o!stitutes !e6 relatio!s i!
the 6orldEhas the time !ot 8ome to ask the obverse Nuestio!M =o6 8a! a pra8ti8e 6hi8h is ully
embedded i! a lie 6orld start to u!8tio! i! a represe!tative 6ay- subtra8ti!g itsel rom its lie:6orld
e!ta!gleme!t- adopti!g a dista!8ed positio! o observatio! a!d de!otatio!M =egel praised this
Jmira8leK as the i!i!ite po6er o )!dersta!di!g- 6hi8h 8a! separateEor- at least- treat as
separatedE6hat i! real lie belo!gs together7
'" 3arad- Meeting the 3niverse 0alfway- p7 $(7
'( Cerhaps Gerrida 6as aimi!g at somethi!g similar 6ith his !otio! o diffArance7
'# See Fobert Caller- Die Illusionen der anderen8 gber das .ustprin2ip in der 5ultur-
Fra!kurt+ Suhrkamp 20027
'' H!e 8ommo!pla8e about philosophers today is that their very a!alysis o the hypo8risy o
the domi!a!t system betrays their !aSvetL+ 6hy are they still sho8ked to see people i!8o!siste!tly
violate their proessed values 6he! it suits their i!terestsM Go they really e?pe8t people to be 8o!siste!t
a!d pri!8ipledM =e 6e should dee!d authe!ti8 philosophers+ 6hat surprises them is the e?a8t opposite
eatureE!ot that people do !ot Jreally believeK a!d a8t upo! their proessed pri!8iples- but that people
who profess their cynicism and radical pragmatic opportunism secretly believe much more than they
are ready to admit- eve! i they tra!spose these belies o!to @!o!:e?iste!tA Jothers7K
'$ Fay 3rassier- ihil 3nbound8 Enlightenment and E&tinction- .o!do!+ Calgrave ,a8milla!
200$- p7 22"7
'& 9bid7
'% 9bid7- p7 2"%7
$0 9bid7- p7 (07
$1 Fra!eois .aurelle- Introduction au non*mar&isme- Caris+ C)F- p7 (&T as Nuoted i! 3rassier-
ihil 3nbound- p7 1"&7
$2 The termi!ologi8al reere!8e to ,ar? is !ot as arbitrary as it may appear+ i! ,ar?ist terms-
the relatio!ship bet6ee! determi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e a!d overdetermi!atio! is that bet6ee! the
e8o!omy a!d politi8s+ the e8o!omy determi!es i! the last i!sta!8e- 6hile politi8s @politi8al 8lass
struggleA overdetermi!es the e!tire pro8ess7 H!e 8a!!ot redu8e overdetermi!atio! to determi!atio! i!
the last i!sta!8eEthis 6ould be the same as redu8i!g politi8al 8lass struggle to a se8o!dary ee8t o
e8o!omi8 pro8esses7 Agai!- the duality bet6ee! determi!atio! i! the last i!sta!8e a!d
overdetermi!atio! should be 8o!8eived as that o a paralla? split7
$" 3rassier- ihil 3nbound- p7 1"%7
$( 9bid7- p7 1(07
$# 9bid7- p7 1"$7
$' 4ote ho6 Jthe H!e is !otK bri!gs us ba8k to the hypotheses o ClatoIs )armenides7
$$ Ale!ka Bupa!^i^- JSe?ual Giere!8e a!d H!tologyK @u!published ma!us8riptA7
$& 9t is i! this se!se that 6e should read those theologia!s 6ho 8laim that Adam a!d 0ve did
8opulate 6hile i! the 1arde! o 0de!- but did so as a simple i!strume!tal a8tivity- like so6i!g seeds i!
a ield- 6ithout a!y u!derlyi!g se?ual te!sio!7
$% Bupa!^i^- JSe?ual Giere!8e a!d H!tology7K
&0 9bid7
1 See ,lade! Golar- $ficir1i! sluh"in1e in dimni"ar1i- .jublja!a+ A!ale8ta 20107 9! literature- the
8orrespo!di!g 8ouple is perhaps that o Sopho8les versus Aes8hylus+ the tragi8 deadlo8k versus a !e6
order- terror versus a !e6 harmo!y7
2 2a8Nues .a8a!- .e sAminaire! .ivre 6II8 .Athi<ue de la psychanalyse- Caris+ Seuil 1%&'- p7
"07
" FreudIs voti!g preere!8es @i! a letter- he reported that- as a rule- he did !ot voteEthe
e?8eptio! o88urred o!ly 6he! there 6as a liberal 8a!didate i! his distri8tA are thus !ot just a private
matter- they are grou!ded i! his theory7 The limits o Freudia! liberal !eutrality be8ame 8lear i! 1%"(-
6he! Goluss took over i! Austria- imposi!g a 8orporate state- a!d armed 8o!li8ts e?ploded i! Vie!!a
suburbs @espe8ially arou!d 5arl Mar& 0of- a big 6orkers housi!g proje8t 6hi8h 6as the pride o So8ial
Gemo8ra8yA7 The s8e!e 6as !ot 6ithout its surreal aspe8ts+ i! 8e!tral Vie!!a- lie i! the amous 8aLs
6e!t o! as !ormal @6ith Goluss prese!ti!g himsel as dee!der o this !ormalityA- 6hile a mile or so
a6ay- soldiers 6ere bombardi!g 6orkersI blo8ks7 9! this situatio!- the psy8hoa!alyti8 asso8iatio!
issued a dire8tive prohibiti!g its members rom taki!g sides i! the 8o!li8tEee8tively sidi!g 6ith
Goluss a!d maki!g its o6! small 8o!tributio! to the 4aUi takeover our years later7
( 2a8Nues .a8a!- JFadiopho!ie-K i! +utres Acrits- Caris+ Seuil 2001- p7 ((27
# 2a8Nues .a8a!- JDo!Lre!8es au? )SA-K Scilicet '>$ @1%$'A- p7 1#7
' 4i8olas Fleury- .e rAel insensA8 Introduction K la pensAe de Cac<ues*+lain Miller- Caris+
1ermi!a 2010- p7 1"'7
$ 9bid7- p7 %&7
& 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- J.a psy8ha!alyse- la 8itL- les 8ommu!autLs-K .a cause freudienne '&
@February 200&A- p7 11&7
% 9bid7- p7 10%7
10 Fleury- .e rAel insensA- pp7 %"X(7
11 ,iller- J.a psy8ha!alyse- la 8itL- les 8ommu!autLs-K pp7 10%X107
12 Fleury- .e rAel insensA- p7 %# @Nuotatio!s rom ,illerA7
1" 9bid7- p7 %' @Nuotatio!s rom ,illerA7
1( Fredri8 2ameso!- -he Seeds of -ime- 4e6 5ork+ Dolumbia )!iversity Cress 1%%(- p7 %%7
1# 2oseph de ,aistre- ]claircissement sur les sacrifices- Caris+ .I=er!e 200%- p7 $+ J9l e?iste
des mystLrieuses lois NuIil !Iest pas bo! de divulguer- NuIil aut 8ouvrir dIu! sile!8e religieu? et
revLrer 8omme u! myst`re7K
1' 2ea!:Cierre Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- Caris+ Dar!ets 4ord 200&7
1$ .ouis Gumo!t- 0omo 0ierarchicus- 4e6 Gelhi+ H?ord )!iversity Cress 1%&&7
1& As Gumo!t demo!strated- lo!g beore Dhristia!ity- this parado?i8al reversal is 8learly
dis8er!ible i! the a!8ie!t 9!dia! Veda- the irst ully elaborated ideology o hierar8hy+ the 8aste o
prea8hers is i! pri!8iple superior to the 8aste o 6arriors- but- 6ithi! the a8tual po6er stru8ture o the
state- they are de facto subordi!ated to 6arriors7
1% H 8ourse- or the partisa! o the J8ritiNue o ideology-K this very !otio! o religio! se8retly
domi!ati!g a!d 8o!trolli!g so8ial lie is a! ideologi8al illusio! par e?8elle!8e7
20 H!e 8ould- o 8ourse- argue that the higher status o the priest is o!ly a! ideologi8al illusio!
tolerated by 6arriors to legitimiUe their a8tual po6er- but this illusio! is !o!etheless !e8essary- a key
eature o the 8harisma o po6er7
21 Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- p7 1"7
22 9bid7- p7 1("7
2" 9bid7- p7 1#17
2( 9bid7- p7 1'17
2# ,o!iNue Da!to:Sperber- JGevo!s:!ous dLsirer la pai? perpLtuelleMK i! Cean*)ierre Dupuy8
Dans loeil du cycloneF ,ollo<ue de ,erisy- ed7 ,ark A!spa8h- Caris+ Dar!ets 4ord 200&- p7 1#$7
2' A! e?ter!ally imposed order o so8ial roles i! 8lear 8o!tradisti!8tio! to the imma!e!t higher
or lo6er value o i!dividualsE9 thereby e?perie!8e my lo6er so8ial status as totally i!depe!de!t o my
i!here!t value7
2$ The 8riti8o:ideologi8al pro8edure 6hi8h demo!strates that relatio!s o superiority or
i!eriority are !ot ou!ded i! merito8ra8y- but are the result o obje8tive ideologi8al a!d so8ial
struggles+ my so8ial status depe!ds o! obje8tive so8ial pro8esses- !ot o! my meritsEas Gupuy puts it
a8erbi8ally- so8ial demystii8atio! Jplays i! our egalitaria!- 8ompetitive a!d merito8rati8 so8ieties the
same role as hierar8hy i! traditio!al so8ietiesK @.a mar<ue du sacrA- p7 20&AEit e!ables us to avoid the
pai!ul 8o!8lusio! that the otherIs superiority is the result o his merits a!d a8hieveme!ts7
2& The same me8ha!ism- o!ly 6ithout its so8ial:8riti8al edge+ our positio! o! the so8ial s8ale
depe!ds o! a !atural a!d so8ial lotteryElu8ky are those 6ho are bor! 6ith better dispositio!s a!d i!to
ri8h amilies7
2% Superiority or i!eriority depe!d o! a 8omple? so8ial pro8ess 6hi8h is i!depe!de!t o
i!dividualsI i!te!tio!s or meritsEor e?ample- the i!visible ha!d o the market 8a! 8ause my ailure
a!d my !eighborIs su88ess- eve! i 9 6orked mu8h harder a!d 6as mu8h more i!tellige!t7
"0 Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- p7 2117
"1 See the most amous e?ample+ Fobert A?elrod- -he Evolution of ,ooperation- 4e6 5ork+
3asi8 3ooks 1%&(7
"2 2ea!:2a8Nues Fousseau- 7ousseau! Cudge of Cean*Cac<ues8 Dialogues- =a!over+ Gartmouth
Dollege Cress 1%%0- p7 '"7
"" See 2ea!:Cierre Gupuy- )etite mAtaphysi<ue des tsunamis- Caris+ Seuil 200#- p7 '&7
"( Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- p7 22(7
"# 9 take this e?pressio! rom Alai! 3adiou7
"' 17 *7 Dhesterto!- $rthodo&y- Sa! Fra!8is8o+ 9g!atius Cress 1%%#- p7 (#7
"$ 9 o6e this data to 0ri8 Sa!t!er7
"& Gupuy- .a mar<ue du sacrA- p7 2(07
"% 9! a homologous 6ay- the da!ger o !a!ote8h!ology is !ot o!ly that s8ie!tists 6ill 8reate a
mo!ster 6hi8h 6ill start to develop out o @ourA 8o!trol+ 6he! 6e try to 8reate a !e6 lie- it is pre8isely
our aim to bri!g about a! u!8o!trollable sel:orga!iUi!g a!d sel:e?pa!di!g e!tity @ibid7- p7 ("A7
(0 ,ark A!spa8h- J)! philosophe e!tre Ta!tale et 2o!as-K i! Cean*)ierre Dupuy8 Dans loeil
du cyclone- pp7 10X117
(1 9bid7- p7 1%7
(2 Gupuy- JGe lIoeil du 8y8lo!e au poi!t i?e e!dog`!e-K i! Cean*)ierre Dupuy8 Dans loeil du
cyclone- p7 "1"7
(" 1iorgio Agambe!- [uest*ce <uun dispositif?- Caris+ Cayot i Fivages 200$- pp7 2'X$7
(( 9bid7- p7 "07
(# 9! GeleuUia! terms- livi!g bei!g is a substa!8e- 6hile the subje8t is a! eve!t7
(' Agambe!- [uest*ce <uun dispositif?- pp7 ('X$7
($ 9s every bio:politi8s !e8essarily bio:theo:politi8s- as .ore!Uo Dhiesa has suggestedM 5es- but
i! a very pre8ise se!se+ the !otio! o Jbare lieK 8a! o!ly emerge 6ithi! the theologi8al horiUo!- as the
ou!di!g gesture o redu8i!g all reality to Jmere lie-K to 6hi8h o!e the! opposes the tra!s8e!de!t
divi!e dime!sio!7 9! this se!se- JmaterialismK ee8tively is a theologi8al !otio!+ it is 6hat remai!s o
theology ater 6e subtra8t rom it the divi!e7 9! 8o!trast to this- the irst gesture o a ge!ui!e
materialism is !ot to de!y the divi!e- but- o! the 8o!trary- to de!y that there is su8h a thi!g as Jmere
@a!imalA lie7K
(& Agambe!- [uest*ce <uun dispositif?- p7 (&7
(% 9bid7- pp7 (&X%7
#0 9bid7- p7 #07
#1 Mutatis mutandis- the same goes or Stali!ist 8ommu!ismEit is se8ulariUed- !ot proa!ed
religio!7
#2 2a8Nues .a8a!- -he Four Fundamental ,oncepts of )sycho*+nalysis- 4e6 5ork+ /7 /7
4orto! i Dompa!y 1%$&- pp7 1%$X&7 /he! .a8a! talks o the body bei!g subje8ted Jto the 8y8le o
se?ed reprodu8tio!-K he does!It mea! biologi8al mati!g- but se?ual diere!8e as the impossible:Feal
o the symboli8 order7 9! brutally dire8t terms+ a!imals 6ho reprodu8e through mati!g do !ot have a
lamella7
#" See 2udith 3utler a!d Datheri!e ,alabou- Sois mon corps8 3ne lecture contemporaine de la
domination et de la servitude che2 0egel- Caris+ 3ayard 20107
#( Sometimes Fou8ault does 8ome 8lose to this i!sightEi! the irst volume o his 0istory of
Se&uality- say- 6here he 6rites that 6e have at last i!ve!ted Ja!other pleasure+ pleasure i! the truth
about pleasure- pleasure i! getti!g to k!o6- a!alyUe- reveal pleasuresK @,i8hel Fou8ault- -he 0istory
of Se&uality! 6olF L8 +n Introduction- tra!s7 Fobert =urley- 4e6 5ork+ Vi!tage 1%%0- p7 $1A7 Su8h
i!sights are- ho6ever- !ot developed i!to a systemati8 rele?ivity o desire7
## Fredri8 2ameso!- -he 0egel 6ariations- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2010- p7 #(7
#' The same goes or .a8a!+ there is a 8o!servative .a8a! 6ho 6ar!s agai!st the dissolutio! o
the 4ame:o:the:Father- e?empliied by Cierre .ege!dreIs 6ork a!d alsely targeted by 2udith 3utlerT
there is a liberal .a8a! e?empliied i! re8e!t years by 2a8Nues:Alai! ,iller- 6ho reads .a8a!Is
a!alysis o the eve!ts o 1%'& as a liberal 8ritiNue o revolutio!ariesT a!d the! there is the radi8al:
revolutio!ary .a8a!- rom Dopje8 a!d 3adiou to the .jublja!a s8hool7
#$ This JdelatedK liberal =egel o re8og!itio! is paradigmati8ally Ameri8a! @although o!e 8a!
argue that it 6as irst outli!ed by =abermas- he 6as !evertheless already i!lue!8ed by the Ameri8a!
pragmati8 traditio!- e7g7- 17 =7 ,eadIs !otio! o i!tersubje8tivity based o! the mutual ide!tii8atio! o
subje8ts- so that 9 8a! see mysel through the eyes o the otherA7 9t is thus perhaps more tha! a histori8al
8uriosity that the irst Ameri8a! =egelia! s8hool 6as- at the origi!s o pragmatism- the Ameri8a!
philosophi8al moveme!t7 9t bega! i! 1&#' 6he! =e!ry Do!rad 3rokmeyer- a Crussia! immigra!t-
retreated deep i!to the ,issouri 6oods 6ith a gu!- a dog- a!d a 8opy o =egelIs Science of .ogic7
Alo!e 6ith this book over the !e?t t6o years- 3rokmeyer be8ame 8o!vi!8ed that =egelIs thought
should be e?te!ded to i!8lude the )S+ =egel 6as right that history has a dire8tio! 6hi8h moves rom
east to 6est- but he lived too early to see the move rom 0urope to the )S7 =istory u!olds i! the
dire8tio! o a 6orld:histori8al 8ity- 8ulmi!ati!g i! a lo6eri!g o reedom u!der a ratio!al state7 0ve!
i! the )S itsel- the spirit moves rom the east to the 6est- to6ards the biggest Ameri8a! 8ity 6est o
the ,ississippi+ St7 .ouis7 3rokmeyer applied to the )S =egelIs !otio! o history progressi!g through
8o!li8ts+ religio! versus s8ie!8e- abolitio!ism versus slavery- up to St7 .ouis versus Dhi8ago7 Ater St7
.ouis 6as d6ared by Dhi8ago- the disappoi!ted 3rokmeyer moved urther 6estEit 6as said- i! the
last years o his lie- he 8o!du8ted a =egel:o8used ki!dergarte! 8lass or the Dreek 9!dia!s i! their
Hklahoma territory7 3ut his i!lue!8e persisted- rea8hi!g D7 S7 Ceir8e- the ather o pragmatism7 See
*erry =o6ley- J=egel =its the Fro!tier-K -he Daily @,ay 1%- 2011A7
#& 17 /7 F7 =egel- )henomenology of Mind- se8o!d rev7 ed7- tra!s7 27 37 3aillie- ,i!eola+
Gover 200"- p7 1107
#% Adria! 1olds6orthy- In the ame of 7ome- .o!do!+ Hrio! 3ooks 200(- pp7 '%X$07
'0 3utler a!d ,alabou- Sois mon corps- p7 &7 The me8ha!ism des8ribed by 3utler as the
disavo6ed i!ju!8tio! J3e my bodyRK @a ,aster orders me to beEto a8t asEhis body- but i! a
disavo6ed 6ay+ 9 should prete!d that 9 am !ot really that- but 8o!ti!ue to be a ree i!depe!de!t
i!dividualA seems to 8o!8er!- mu8h more tha! bodies- the moder! relatio!ship o domi!atio! i! 6hi8h
the serva!t has to a8t as ree a!d 6illi!gly a88ept the subordi!ated role+ the moder! masterIs order is
that his serva!t prete!d to be ree rather tha! a serva!t7 Take the role o the 6ie i! a marriage i! 6hi8h
patriar8hal values 8o!ti!ue to have a subterra!ea! e?iste!8e+ the 6ie has to serve her husba!d- but i!
the 8o!te?t o a ree a!d eNual relatio!shipT this is 6hy the irst a8t o rebellio! is to ope!ly pro8laim
o!eIs servitude- to reuse to a8t as ree 6here o!e is de a8to !ot ree7 The ee8ts o su8h reusal are
shatteri!g- si!8e i! moder! 8o!ditio!s- servitude 8a! o!ly reprodu8e itsel as disavo6ed7
'1 A! e?emplary 8ase o the material po6er o ideology is -he Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders @GS,A- published by the Ameri8a! Csy8hiatri8 Asso8iatio!7 9ts goal is to
provide Ja 8ommo! la!guage a!d sta!dard 8riteria or the 8lassii8atio! o me!tal disorders7 9t is used
i! the )S a!d i! varyi!g degrees arou!d the 6orld- by 8li!i8ia!s- resear8hers- psy8hiatri8 drug
regulatio! age!8ies- health i!sura!8e 8ompa!ies- pharma8euti8al 8ompa!ies- a!d poli8y makers7 There
have bee! our revisio!s si!8e it 6as irst published i! 1%#2- gradually i!8ludi!g more me!tal
disorders- although some have bee! removed a!d are !o lo!ger 8o!sidered to be me!tal disorders- most
!otably homose?ualityKT the !e?t @ithA editio!- GS,:#- is due or publi8atio! i! ,ay 201"7 @See the
/ikipedia e!try or JGiag!osti8 a!d Statisti8al ,a!ual o ,e!tal Gisorders7K 9 rely here o! the 8riti8al
a!alysis by Sarah *ame!s7A The role o the GS, is 8ru8ial be8ause hospitals- 8li!i8s- a!d i!sura!8e
8ompa!ies ge!erally reNuire a GS, diag!osis o all patie!ts treatedEa!d si!8e the health:i!dustrial
8omple? i! the )S tur!s arou!d t6i8e as mu8h mo!ey as the !otorious military:i!dustrial 8omple?- o!e
8a! imagi!e the ar:rea8hi!g i!a!8ial 8o!seNue!8es o seemi!gly margi!al 8ha!ges i! the GS,
8lassii8atio!s7
'2 0d Ayres- (ods .ast $ffer8 egotiating for a Sustainable Future- 4e6 5ork+ Four /alls
0ight /i!do6s 1%%%- p7 '7
'" 9bid7- p7 1(17
'( Fredri8 2ameso!- 7epresenting ,apital- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 2011- p7 1(%7
'# Fredri8 2ameso!- 6alences of the Dialectic- .o!do!+ Verso 3ooks 200%- pp7 #&0X17
'' 2ameso!- 7epresenting ,apital- p7 1(%7
'$ *arl ,ar?- -he Eighteenth /rumaire of .ouis /onaparte- tra!s7 Saul *7 Cadover- ,os8o6+
Crogress Cublishers 1%"(7
'& 2ameso!- 6alences of the Dialectic- p7 #&07
'% 2ameso!- 7epresenting ,apital- p7 1#07
$0 9bid7- p7 1#17
$1 Ay! Fa!d- +tlas Shrugged- .o!do!+ Ce!gui! 3ooks 200$- p7 &$17
$2 2ameso!- 6alences of the Dialectic- p7 #'&7
$" 9bid7
$( This is 6hy it is all too simple to 8riti8iUe ,a!dela or aba!do!i!g the so8ialist perspe8tive
ater the e!d o apartheid+ did he really have a 8hoi8eM /as the move to6ards so8ialism a real optio! i!
that parti8ular 8o!te?tM
$# The legal 8areer o 2a8Nues Verges represe!ts a 8lear 8ase o this se8o!d mistake i! pra8ti8e7
=avi!g re8og!iUed the hypo8risy o the /ester! legal system @i! 1%(#- havi!g deeated as8ism i! the
!ame o huma! reedoms a!d rights- the /ester! po6ers pra8ti8ed brutal 8olo!ialist oppressio! i!
Algeria- Viet!am- et87A- Verges e!ded up dee!di!g those a88used by the /est o terrorism- rom *laus
3arbie to Col Cot7 Although his goal is to u!mask the hypo8risy o the /ester! liberal legal system-
su8h a pro8edure is u!able to propose a!y alter!ate system o justi8e7
$' For a more detailed elaboratio! o this J3artleby:politi8s-K see the last pages o my -he
)aralla& 6iew- Dambridge- ,A+ ,9T Cress 200'7
$$ 2a8Nues .a8a! at Vi!8e!!es- Ge8ember "- 1%'%+ J,e K <uoi vous aspire2 comme
rAvolutionnaires! cest K un MaYtreF 6ous laure2FK
$& ,arti! =eidegger- J/hy Go 9 Stay i! the Crovi!8esMK tra!s7 Thomas Sheeha!- i!
0eidegger8 -he Man and the -hin"er- ed7 Thomas Sheeha!- Dhi8ago+ Cre8ede!t Cublishi!g 1%&1- p7
2%7
$% 2oh! 3erger- JAter6ord-K i! A!drey Clato!ov- Soul and $ther Stories- 4e6 5ork+ 4e6
5ork Fevie6 3ooks 200$- p7 "1$7
&0 See Alai! 3adiou- JThe Three 4egatio!s-K ,ardo2o .aw 7eview- Vol7 2%- 4o7 # @April
200&A- pp7 1&$$X&"7
&1 17 *7 Dhesterto!- Whats Wrong with the World- .o!do!+ Dassell 1%10- p7 "'7
able of Contents
9!trodu8tio!+ 0ppur Si ,uove
CAFT 97 T=0 GF94* 30FHF0
1 JVa8illati!g the Sembla!8esK
/hat 8a!!ot be said must be sho6!9deaIs appeari!gFrom i8tio!s to sembla!8esGiale8ti8al
gym!asti8sM 4o- tha!ksRFrom the H!e to de!J4othi!g e?istsK1orgias- !ot Clato- 6as the ar8h:Stali!istR
2 J/here There 9s 4othi!g- Fead That 9 .ove 5ouK
A Dhristia! TragedyMThe big HtherThe death o 1odThe atheist 6agerJGo !ot 8ompromise your
desireK.a8a! agai!st 3uddhism " Fi8hteIs Dhoi8e
From Fi8hteIs 98h to =egelIs Subje8tThe Fi8htea! 6agerA!stoss a!d Tat:=a!dlu!gGivisio! a!d
limitatio!The i!ite AbsoluteThe posited presuppositio!The Fi8htea! bo!e i! the throatThe irst
moder! theology CAFT 997 T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ =010.
( 9s 9t Still Cossible to 3e a =egelia! TodayM
=egel versus 4ietUs8heStruggle a!d re8o!8iliatio!A story to tellDha!gi!g the desti!yThe o6l o
,i!ervaCote!tiality versus virtualityThe =egelia! 8ir8le o 8ir8les 9!terlude 1+ ,ar? as a Feader o
=egel- =egel as a Feader o ,ar?
# Carata?is+ Figures o the Giale8ti8al Cro8ess
9! praise o )!dersta!di!gChe!ome!a- !oume!a- a!d the limitThe diere!d4egatio! o the
!egatio!Form a!d 8o!te!t4egatio! 6ithout a illi!g 9!terlude 2+ Dogito i! the =istory o
,ad!ess
' J4ot H!ly as Substa!8e- but Also as Subje8tK
Do!8rete u!iversality=egel- Spi!oUa O a!d =it8h8o8kThe =egelia! Subje8tAbsolute *!o6i!gThe
9deaIs 8o!stipatio!MThe a!imal that 9 am 9!terlude "+ *i!g- Fabble- /ar O a!d Se?
$ The .imits o =egel
A .ist4e8essity as sel:sublated 8o!ti!ge!8yVarieties o sel:relati!g !egatio!The ormal
aspe8tAuhebu!g a!d repetitio!From repetitio! to drive CAFT 9997 T=0 T=941 9TS0.F+ .ADA4
& .a8a! as a Feader o =egel
The Du!!i!g o Feaso!The .a8a!ia! prosopopoeia.a8a!- ,ar?- =eideggerThe Jmagi8al or8eK o
reversalFele8tio! a!d suppositio!3eyo!d i!tersubje8tivityGrive versus /illThe u!8o!s8ious o sel:
8o!s8ious!ess 9!terlude (+ 3orro6i!g rom the Future- Dha!gi!g the Cast
% Suture a!d Cure Giere!8e
From diere!tiality to the phalli8 sig!iierFrom the phalli8 sig!iier to objet aSibeliusIs sile!8eThe
pure diere!8e 9!terlude #+ Dorrelatio!ism a!d 9ts Gis8o!te!ts
10 Hbje8ts- Hbje8ts 0very6here
Subtra8tio!- protra8tio!- obstru8tio! O destru8tio!The objet a bet6ee! orm a!d 8o!te!tVoi8e a!d
gaUeThe gra!dmotherIs voi8eThe ,aster a!d its spe8terThe t6o sides o a!tasy9mage a!d
gaUeCrese!8eJThe pi8ture is i! my eye- but me- 9 am i! the pi8tureK.eave the s8ree! emptyR
9!terlude '+ Dog!itivism a!d the .oop o Sel:Cositi!g
11 The 4o!:All- or- the H!tology o Se?ual Giere!8e
Se?ual diere!8e i! the dise!8ha!ted u!iverseThe real o se?ual diere!8eFormulae o se?uatio!+ the
All 6ith a! e?8eptio!Formulae o se?uatio!+ the !o!:AllThe a!ti!omies o se?ual diere!8e/hy
.a8a! is !ot a !omi!alist4egatio! o the !egatio!+ .a8a! versus =egelMJThere is a !o!:relatio!shipK
CAFT 9V7 T=0 D91AF0TT0 AFT0F
12 The Foursome o Terror- A!?iety- Dourage O a!d 0!thusiasm
3ei!g>/orld>0ve!tTruth- i!8o!siste!8y- a!d the symptomal poi!tThere is !o huma! a!imal3adiou
agai!st .evi!asFrom terror to e!thusiasm3adiou a!d a!tiphilosophy 1" The Foursome o
Struggle- =istori8ity- /ill O a!d 1elasse!heit
/hy .a8a! is !ot a =eideggeria!=egel versus =eideggerThe torture:house o la!guageA! alter!ative
=eideggerFrom 6ill to driveThe !o!:histori8al 8ore o histori8ityFrom 1elasse!heit to 8lass struggle
1( The H!tology o Wua!tum Chysi8s
The o!tologi8al problem*!o6ledge i! the FealAge!tial realismThe t6o va8uums5Ia de de!
Do!8lusio!+ The Coliti8al Suspe!sio! o the 0thi8al