Nancy Fraser: «Is the hijab debate similar to the one on abortion?»

[@kingofaikido]

The paradox of the empty set means, objectively speaking, immanence and transcendence in one.. Perhaps that's why Levinas employs eros as a bridge as it were. We do seem to have transcendental experiences if Abraham Maslow is correct.. but I'm not sure of the hierarchical aspect. Shall we argue over absolutes all over again like in the 17Century, or replay the so called 30year war (which lasted actually about 100)?

[@gorgeoushammer]

Yup, she's right.

[@kingofaikido]

Well, the post-modern is itself a shifty/shifting signifier, isn't it? so yeah, you could be right there re: Saussure's abiding influence, but then there's also Wittgenstein's language games, phenomenology, George Lakoff and his cognitive linguistics crew. I'm a bit behind on Gidden's structuration, wasn't that a sort of abstract version of Piere Bourdieu's social capital theory, an English version of Roland Barthes semiotics, a way of explaining, in short, the symbolic reproduction of society?

[@fcblaugrana0]

@kingofaikido what power? comprised of whom exactly? i agree they are not ontological but can you deny there are inherent conflicts?

[@kingofaikido]

@fcblaugrana0 1) read Foucault. 2) read Levinas on the importance of the 'face' in his ethics beyond reason..(secular religion?) 3) conflicts exist as fictions. Like film, the media make us feel pseudo-feelings, picture the world in unreal terms. The secular view is what Baudrillard said is now orbital, running on parallel lines that never meet. Everything is already dead, and we're only playing back the tapes. We're living the secular illusion of communication, democracy, politics, life.