Terrible interview, very annoying to listen to, had to turn it off several times in order to make it through the whole thing. I say this with great love and affection - I generally enjoy the podcast - but you came off like a total autist, giggling like a schoolgirl at the same jokes repeated over and over. I understand wanting to branch out and try new things, but this was the opposite of a success imo.
Generally been enjoying the blog posts and interviews though. Please keep up the good work!
Brian, your speech is accompanied by a high-pitched ringing sound. I hope you can fix the issue before your next interview - I had a hard time listening.
I like how he forced you down to a 4th grade (non)reading level. That's the mark of a good Jew, totally illiterate. Breaking the spell of terminal wordcelery that has plagued his forefathers for millenia, you love to see it.
Land is obviously R/acc mate, he is just camouflaging to utilize the hype of tradcathery to his advantage atm.
No one is post left. There is just the latest iteration of neocons aka the most recent revolutionaries who got pushed out of the revolution. I didn't leave the left the left left ... yuk
this episode was exactly what I expected it would be, its just a little bit of fun chaos and a little brain vacation! great, except for the audio issue at the start
I tried reading him a couple of times and it was just indecipherable. I gave up after a few chapters each time. I came away with the impression that for whatever reason his works had gained scriptural status within certain political circles, and that as scripture people could read whatever they wanted into it.
I tried a bit of Googling around to see if there were some quick explainers that cited his actual text, and couldn't find much. Hilariously, the first source I found to do so was a "Key Concepts" page at michel-foucalt.com: https://michel-foucault.com/key-concepts/. For most everything else the concepts are explained without citing Foucalt directly. However, under "eventalisation" it just says "For a definition by Foucault see first paragraph here."
That first paragraph:
"[Eventalisation] means making visible a singularity at places where there is a temptation to invoke a historical constant, an immediate anthropological trait or an obviousness that imposes itself uniformly on all. To show that things weren't 'necessary as all that'; it wasn't as a matter of course that mad people came to be regarded as mentally ill; it wasn't self-evident that the only thing to be done with a criminal was to lock them up; it wasn't self-evident that the causes of illness were to be sought through individual examination of bodies; and so on. A breach of self-evidence, of those self-evidences on which our knowledges, acquiescences and practices rest: this is the first theoretico-political function of eventalization. It means uncovering the procedure of causal multiplication: analysing an event according to the multiple processes that constitute it. As a way of lightening the weight of causality, 'eventalization' thus works by constructing around the singular event analysed as process a 'polygon' or rather a 'polyhedron' of intelligibility, the number of whose faces is not given in advance and can never properly be taken as finite. One has to proceed by progressive, necessarily incomplete saturation."
I guess even the Foucalt fan(s) that run michel-foucalt.com found the task of summarizing this too daunting.
Terrible interview, very annoying to listen to, had to turn it off several times in order to make it through the whole thing. I say this with great love and affection - I generally enjoy the podcast - but you came off like a total autist, giggling like a schoolgirl at the same jokes repeated over and over. I understand wanting to branch out and try new things, but this was the opposite of a success imo.
Generally been enjoying the blog posts and interviews though. Please keep up the good work!
Brian, your speech is accompanied by a high-pitched ringing sound. I hope you can fix the issue before your next interview - I had a hard time listening.
I like how he forced you down to a 4th grade (non)reading level. That's the mark of a good Jew, totally illiterate. Breaking the spell of terminal wordcelery that has plagued his forefathers for millenia, you love to see it.
Land is obviously R/acc mate, he is just camouflaging to utilize the hype of tradcathery to his advantage atm.
stop laughing and think. you're coping.
underrated opinion: this is a wonderful episode
No one is post left. There is just the latest iteration of neocons aka the most recent revolutionaries who got pushed out of the revolution. I didn't leave the left the left left ... yuk
this episode was exactly what I expected it would be, its just a little bit of fun chaos and a little brain vacation! great, except for the audio issue at the start
For God's sakes how do you drone on for two hours doing nothing but reading off people's Wikipedia articles?
Does Foucault ever make any coherent statements?
I tried reading him a couple of times and it was just indecipherable. I gave up after a few chapters each time. I came away with the impression that for whatever reason his works had gained scriptural status within certain political circles, and that as scripture people could read whatever they wanted into it.
I tried a bit of Googling around to see if there were some quick explainers that cited his actual text, and couldn't find much. Hilariously, the first source I found to do so was a "Key Concepts" page at michel-foucalt.com: https://michel-foucault.com/key-concepts/. For most everything else the concepts are explained without citing Foucalt directly. However, under "eventalisation" it just says "For a definition by Foucault see first paragraph here."
That first paragraph:
"[Eventalisation] means making visible a singularity at places where there is a temptation to invoke a historical constant, an immediate anthropological trait or an obviousness that imposes itself uniformly on all. To show that things weren't 'necessary as all that'; it wasn't as a matter of course that mad people came to be regarded as mentally ill; it wasn't self-evident that the only thing to be done with a criminal was to lock them up; it wasn't self-evident that the causes of illness were to be sought through individual examination of bodies; and so on. A breach of self-evidence, of those self-evidences on which our knowledges, acquiescences and practices rest: this is the first theoretico-political function of eventalization. It means uncovering the procedure of causal multiplication: analysing an event according to the multiple processes that constitute it. As a way of lightening the weight of causality, 'eventalization' thus works by constructing around the singular event analysed as process a 'polygon' or rather a 'polyhedron' of intelligibility, the number of whose faces is not given in advance and can never properly be taken as finite. One has to proceed by progressive, necessarily incomplete saturation."
I guess even the Foucalt fan(s) that run michel-foucalt.com found the task of summarizing this too daunting.
Schizo and nonautist internet examples:
- dril
- ctrlcreep
- cher