The concepts of "genius"
8 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
"Genius is a construct made by those of relatively lesser ability, capacity or intelligence, gathering together, and comparing themselves to their betters, as mediocre persons tend to do.
Proof of this is the fact that the actual concepts of "genius" and its necessary relatives "mediocrity", and "ineptness", themselves, in conjunction, create a self-perpetuating false trichotomy—the mediocre trichotomy.
Paradoxically, "genius" is a notion born from mediocrity itself.
This is not denying the existence of talent, nor the possibilities of certain kinds of innate predisposition; but is stating that the notion of "genius" is spurious, and entirely relative to a presupposed lesser standard—a standard set by the self-regarded "mediocres" themselves.
Since the notion of "genius", "mediocrity", and "ineptness", are relative to each other, they are mutually inextricable, therefore to affirm "genius" equals to affirm "mediocrity" and "ineptness"—it is a negative trichotomy—it emphasises negative correlation, and difference, rather than positive correlation, and similarity.
The notion of "genius" is ultimately detrimental since it entails the perpetuation of the sub=par elements in a society; the "mediocre" and the "inept"—a society that regards the notion of a "genius" as something desirable, or something that ought to be achieved, is an ignoble society.
9 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
I can't get a whole lot of discussion going on in my other clubs, so I'm starting yet a new one to pander to /lit/'s interests. This club will start with Hegel and end with Zizek, it will include the major Marxists and psychoanalysts (and Giovanni Gentile, since I'm damn well going to fit at least one book of my ideology in). There's good reason to start with Kant if you're going to read Hegel, or Adam Smith if you're going to read Marx, but ultimately this keeps tracing back until you wind up with the Greeks. So I decided to start with where I can get guaranteed interests, and that is Hegel, the first work being The Science of Logic. There will be amble discussions, if you need help just ask about stuff you know, and if you know something others should know, spit it out.
The pace will be moderate, so don't worry about that. I want to start this Sunday.
If any of you are interested or have comments or suggestions, leave them here.
15 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
I always visualize him sitting on his wooden bench outside his Black Forest house, alongside his wife who, with her perverse knitting enthusiasm, ceaselessly knits winter socks for him from the wool she has shorn from their own Heidegger sheep.
I cannot visualize Heidegger other than sitting on the bench outside his Black Forest house, alongside his wife, who all her life totally dominated him and who knitted all his socks and crocheted all his caps and baked all his bread and wove all his bedlinen and who even cobbled up his sandals for him. Heidegger was a kitschy brain….. a feeble thinker from the Alpine foothills, as I believe, and just about right for the German philosophical hot-pot. For decades they ravenously spooned up that man Heidegger, more than anybody else, and overloaded their stomachs with his stuff. Heidegger had a common face, not a spiritual one, Reger said, he was through and through an unspiritual person, devoid of all fantasy, devoid of all sensibility, a genuine German philosophical ruminant, a ceaselessly gravid German philosophical cow, Reger said, which grazed upon German philosophy and thereupon for decades let its smart little cow-pats drop on it….
Heidegger is the petit-bourgeois of German philosophy, the man who has placed on German philosophy his kitschy nightcaps, that kitschy black night-cap which Heidegger always wore, on all occasions. Heidegger is the carpet-slipper and night-cap philosopher of the Germans, nothing else.