首页> 外文学位 >Ontoterrorem; or, power, ontological-terror & protestation: (Re)conceptualizing language, thought & the body as structures of possibility.
【24h】

Ontoterrorem; or, power, ontological-terror & protestation: (Re)conceptualizing language, thought & the body as structures of possibility.

机译:本体恐怖或者,权力,本体论恐怖和抗议:(重新)将语言,思想和身体概念化为可能的结构。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

"Ontoterrorem; or, Power, Ontological-Terror & Protestation" attempts a (re)conceptualization of Language, Thought & the Body as structures of possibility. While I feel it is utterly impossible to 'definitively' frame the 'narratives' of each of those terms, these concepts are nevertheless critical components of philosophical ideas & 'poietic' expressions. Poiesis is distinct from 'poetics;' poiesis is rooted in the acts of creation that result from 'poetic' explorations & expressions. As such, in any analysis &/or reading of existence, it becomes crucial---if not inevitable---to explore Language, Thought & Body as they have extended across various & often radically distinct 'poietic' expressions. In the language & consequent thought of Deleuze & Guattari, it can be said that my dissertation attempts a 'noology'---a 'line of flight' that incises the history of representation of the 'images of thought' being explored in Language, Thought & the Body. It is, in a sense, impossible to encapsulate these concepts in such a way as to 'define' them---to give them specific, pre-determined 'forms' & static signification & 'sense.' This work attempts precisely the opposite; it strives to identify the inherently transient & dynamic nature of each of these concepts, as well as the consequent possibilities that emerge from their structural relationships with one another. It is my contention that Language, Thought & the Body cannot truly be thought of, examined or explored in absentia of the others; rather, they must be considered with regards to the possibilities of 'Becoming' that emerge once they are conceptualized anew as (what I call) structures of differentiation.;Of course, it is impossible to do so in an 'absolute' or (in a sense) transcendent fashion. For this reason, my intention is to present a possibility of conceptualizing these notions. As they are not attempts at 'definitive' statements, they avoid the sedimentation & 'framing' of the possibilities contained within the creative 'forms' themselves, as well as the aforementioned concepts of which they 'speak.' Without doing so, I fear that my work---indeed any exploration---may inevitably descend into the very same inherent oppression at the hands of 'form' & 'stasis' that this work so feverishly acts-against. How can one consider & navigate these poietic-possibilities, without first abandoning the very vessels that carried them into the contentious spaces that bellowed for uprising against Language, Thought & the Body? It is these spaces & bellows of uprising that are explored in the work.;I argue that rather than literally objectify these concepts, we instead think of & through them as constructs possessive of constitutive elements---& explore the zones created within such structures . These are zones of possibilities, for within their spaces there is perpetual differentiation between, through & against these constitutive elements. Their differentiation & thus their possible-existentiality as both concept & actualized-'thing' occurs on the level of the rhizome---as constellations & amalgamations of connections & nodes, thus avoiding 'linear,' 'directionalized' or pre-determined pathways. As a result, Language, Thought & the Body are reconceptualized & represented as the structural-differentiations between, through & against 'poiesis' & ontology. The zone(s) created from such symbiotic-constructs are termed 'ontopoiesis' & the 'ontocorporeal' in my work. Language, Thought & the Body, therefore, are explored in this dissertation through readings of the expressions of 'ontopoiesis' & the 'ontocorporeal,' as well as the 'narratives' they both constitute, & are constituted by.;In such an analysis of these concepts, there is inevitably a confrontation with 'Order;' or as these 'interiorizations' & limitations are applied to our species writ large, in the 'form' of the State. As the primary method of 'State' perpetuation & predomination manifests through power, my work concludes with an exploration into the 'objectifying' or 'limiting' restrictions on & of possible 'ontopoietic' & 'ontocorporeal' expressions through impositions of power. Notably, Language, Thought & the Body affect & are effected by each of these conceptual permutations & their consequent expressions. Ultimately, I argue that the protestation to & resistance towards such effigial impositions is what I name ontoterrorem. It is a dark-energy that infects---as if a virus to a Host---the sites of power & the 'solidifying' & limiting symptoms of its oppressive presence. It is in the dynamic entities of 'shadows,' 'doubles' & duende that this protestational energy manifests & flows---three concepts from the writing of Antonin Artaud & Federico Garcia Lorca that are explored in my work, & that speak towards an 'ontopoiesis' that consumes & immolates stasis & 'forms.' Thus the transient-'forms' embodied by this possibility of protestation are not 'Revolutions' (which are permanent & fixed), but rather uprisings.
机译:“本体恐怖;或者,权力,本体恐怖和抗议”试图将语言,思想和身体(可能)结构(重新)概念化。尽管我认为完全不可能“明确地”界定每个术语的“叙述”,但这些概念仍然是哲学思想和“诗意”表达的关键组成部分。 Poiesis与“诗学”不同; poiesis植根于“诗意”的探索和表达所产生的创造行为。因此,在对存在的任何分析和/或解读中,探索语言,思想和身体已经变得至关重要,即使不是不可避免的,因为它们已经跨越了各种且通常是截然不同的“诗意”表达。在Deleuze&Guattari的语言及其后来的思想中,可以说我的论文尝试了一种“ noology”(一种“飞行路线”),阐明了在Language中探索的“思想图像”的表示历史,思想与身体。从某种意义上讲,以“定义”它们的方式封装这些概念是不可能的,即给它们特定的,预先确定的“形式”,静态含义和“感觉”。这项工作正好相反。它力图确定每个概念固有的瞬态和动态性质,以及因彼此之间的结构关系而产生的可能可能性。我认为语言,思想和身体不能真正地在其他人缺席的情况下被思考,检查或探索。相反,必须将它们重新定义为(我称之为)分化结构后,才考虑出现的``成为''的可能性;当然,不可能在``绝对''或(在感)超越时尚。因此,我的目的是提出一种概念化这些概念的可能性。由于它们并非试图进行“确定性”陈述,因此它们避免了创造性“形式”本身以及上述“说话”概念所包含的可能性的沉淀和“定型”。如果不这样做,我担心我的工作-实际上是任何探索-都将不可避免地陷入“形式”和“停滞”的手中,而这种内在的压迫使这项工作如此狂热地反对。在不首先放弃将它们带入有争议的空间以抗议语言,思想和身体而引起争议的空间之前,人们如何考虑并驾驭这些诗意的可能性?我在工作中探索的是这些起义的空间和风箱。我认为,与其从字面上使这些概念客观化,我们反而认为并通过它们将它们视为具有构成要素的构造-探索在这种结构内创建的区域。这些是可能的区域,因为在它们的空间内,通过和反对这些构成要素之间存在着永久的区别。它们的区别以及因此可能的存在,既是概念的又是现实的“事物”,发生在根茎的水平上,即连接和节点的星座和合并,从而避免了“线性”,“定向”或预定路径。结果,语言,思想和身体被重新概念化并表现为通过和反对“ poiesis”和本体论之间的结构差异。由这种共生结构产生的区域在我的作品中被称为“本体生成”和“本体生成”。因此,本文通过阅读“本体论”和“本体论”的表达以及它们既构成又构成的“叙述”来探索语言,思想和身体。这些概念中,不可避免地要面对“秩序”;或因为这些“内在化”和局限性以国家的“形式”应用于我们物种的巨大发展。当“国家”永存和统治的主要方法通过权力体现出来时,我的工作以探索通过对权力施加可能的“本体论”和“本体论”表达的“客体化”或“限制性”限制作为结束。值得注意的是,语言,思想和身体均受这些概念排列及其结果表达的影响。归根结底,我认为对这种刻意强加的抗议和抵制就是我所说的本体恐怖。它是一种黑暗能量,会感染(就像是宿主病毒一样),权力站点,“巩固”站点并限制其压迫性存在的症状。正是在“影子”,“双打”和“决斗”的动态实体中,这种抗议的能量得以显现和流动-我的作品中探究了安东尼·阿托德和费德里科·加西亚·洛尔卡写作中的三个概念。,并且表示“本体拓扑”,它消耗并体现了停滞和“形式”。因此,这种抗议可能性所体现的短暂的“形式”不是“革命”(是永久的和固定的),而是起义。

著录项

  • 作者

    Maurer, Jamerson Andrew.;

  • 作者单位

    State University of New York at Buffalo.;

  • 授予单位 State University of New York at Buffalo.;
  • 学科 Literature Modern.;Philosophy.;Literature Comparative.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 293 p.
  • 总页数 293
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:44:30

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号