ju - fizičnemu, estetskemu, seksualnemu - kot ga lahko razberemo v njunem pisanju, kot tudi strukturnemu razmerju med le-tem in revolucionarnimi politikami kot načinom življenja. Esej si poskuša zamisliti trajnostni levičarski vir »uma plus užitka«, ki zmore misliti proti kapitalu, hkrati s tem, ko ohranja brezpogojne zahteve posplošenega libidi-nalnega upora. Rosa + Emma = smrt levemu puritanizmu!
Laurence Simmons Reasoning the Disaster
Key words: time, catastrophe, Jean-Pierre Dupuy, Slavoj Žižek, Jacques Derrida
How do we think the disaster? Think towards or against the coming disaster? Natural disaster, industrial and technological disaster, moral disaster, and now economic and financial disaster. This paper starts from the issue of our relationship with catastrophes that have not yet happened and it is based on the work of cultural theorist Slavoj Žižek and French philosopher Jean-Pierre Dupuy. The essence of catastrophe has become normal for what Žižek calls our Western administered world - we now govern according to scenarios of war, terror, ecological disasters etc; the normal run of our societies is continually threatened by these things. However, since he insists that catastrophe involves the notion of "luck" can it be reasoned? It would appear not because we can only answer when we learn the outcome of some event. So are we justified in taking pre-ventative action against global warming? If we do the catastrophe might not occur? But can we be sure that it would have anyway? And if we don't take action will it occur? We know that the catastrophe is possible, probable even, yet we do not believe it will really
<
^^ happen. Can we make a rational choice before the apocalypse? If we are to confront the threat of a catastrophe Dupuy believes we need to break out of a historical, linear notion of time. The new notion of time (what Dupuy calls "the time of a project') is not a line between past and future; it is a closed circuit. The future is casually produced by our actions in the past but the way we act is determined by how we anticipate the future, 336 and how we react to this anticipation. As he thinks through the relationship between the crisis of the sacred and our inability to imagine and avoid a catastrophic future, Dupuy develops the idea of an enlightened catastrophism as an alternative to the principle of reasoned precaution.
Laurance Simmons Mišljenje katastrofe
Ključne besede: čas, katastrofa, Jean-Pierre Dupuy, Slavoj Žižek, Jacques Derrida
Kako mislimo katastrofo? Bi morali misliti v smeri prihajajoče katastrofe ali proti njej? Naravna katastrofa, industrijska in tehnološka katastrofa, moralna katastrofa, in sedaj
ekonomska ter finančna katastrofa. Pričujoči prispevek se opira na delo kulturnega teoretika Slavoja Žižka in francoskega filozofa Jeana-Pierra Dupuyja in izhaja iz problema našega odnosa do katastrof, ki se še niso zgodile. Bistvo katastrofe je postalo nekaj normalnega za naš, rečeno z Žižkom, zahodni upravljani svet, ki ga trenutno upravljajo po scenarijih vojne, terorja, ekološke katastrofe itn., ki nenehno motijo normalno delovanje naše družbe. Glede na to, da avtor vztraja, da katastrofa vključuje pojem »sreče«, ali lahko katastrofo sploh mislimo? Zdi se, da tega ne moremo, saj lahko svoj odgovor damo šele, ko poznamo izid določenega dogodka. Smo torej upravičeni do sprejemanja preventivnih ukrepov proti globalnemu segrevanju? Ali to pomeni, da v primeru, da jih sprejmemo, do katastrofe ne bo prišlo? Lahko z gotovostjo povemo, da bo do katastrofe vseeno prišlo? In, ali bo v primeru, da ne ukrepamo, do nje prišlo? Vemo, da je katastrofa možna, celo verjetna, vendar pa ne verjamemo, da se bo zares zgodila. Ali lahko sprejmemo racionalno odločitev pred apokalipso? Če naj se soočimo z grožnjo katastrofe, moramo, kot verjame Dupuy, izstopiti iz našega historičnega, linearnega pojmovanja časa. Novo pojmovanje časa (tisto, čemur Dupuy pravi »čas projektov«) ni črta med preteklostjo in prihodnostjo, temveč zaprti krog. Prihodnost je naključno proizvedena z našimi preteklimi dejanji, način kako delujemo, pa je določen z načinom, kako anticipiramo prihodnost in kako se odzovemo na to anticipacijo. S tem, ko Dupuy misli razmerje med krizo svetega in našo nezmožnostjo predstaviti si in izogniti se ka-tastrofični prihodnosti, razvije idejo razsvetljenega katastrofizma kot alternative načelu razionalne previdnosti.
Jelica Šumič Riha
Est Deus in nobis or the Will to Enjoy
Key words: Sade, Epictetus, desire, will, prohairesis, reason, jouissance
In "Kant with Sade", Lacan stages two incompatible couples, incompatible precisely to the extent that they bring together reason and jouissance: Kant and Sade on the one hand and Sade with Epictetus on the other. If Sade is coupled with Kant in order 337 to reveal a hidden driving force behind Kant's moral law, Epictetus' joining Sade is revelatory of Sade's deficiency as a desiring subject. Following Lacan's indications concerning the radical change of the status of the subject resulting from the establishment of an unheard of relationship between desire and will at the end of analysis, this essay examines two modalities of the subject's confrontation with the Other's will to enjoy: Sade's and Stoics'. Insisting on a few crucial points of convergence and divergence of these two modalities of the subject's coming to terms with the will to jouissance, the author aims to explore the conditions of possibility of an ethics without the Other, an ethics of the drive, to be precise, that allows for a non-perverse transgression of the pleasure principle.