This looks good. https://www.urbanomic.com/book/ques tion-c

>urbanomic
art-right pls go and stay go

>Chinese academics

I wonder how many Western professors were plagiarized to write this

Some of the table of contents does it make it look interesting. I just wish I could find it anywhere without buying it. Yale and Harvard libraries have it, and of course someone has it out for a year at either.

A lot of Chinese stuff seems to rest on the fact that "Chinese stuff" is inherently novel, so they just sort of skim over Heidegger proficiently enough and then say "now check out Taoism, man......." and it ends inconclusively. But this looks kind of neat. He does OOO stuff elsewhere and I'm not sure if that worries me or interests me. Again, lots of potential, but most people actually talking about OOO that I've seen are trendy assholes.

I'd read it and proselytize it if I liked it, but I'm not going to order it for $25 and cross my fingers unfortunately.

File: e093be31-efbc-43c6-b70c-e78165d63508.jpg (38KB, 200x250px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 200x250px

>>9161624
It matters what the guy looks like?
>it does not matter what the guy looks like.

>>9161630
Urbanomic is fucking awesome. As for art-right, they just did a special on Mark Fisher, who was left af. It's hardly Richard Spencer and Friends.

>>9161641
My guess would be zero.

>>9161677
That's how I feel also...but hot diggity I want to read this.

I think I'm in on a lot of OOO/spec-real stuff right now. I posted Negarestani's essay 'The Labor of the Inhuman' a few days ago but it didn't attract much attention. I'm coming around to it.

I think the reason why I think I'm going to like pic related is because a lot of the OOO/spec-real stuff (and this includes super-late Marxism of the Nick Land variety, or Ben Woodard, or whoever) is just so unremittingly *dark.* There's nothing inherently wrong with darkness, of course. I just don't think that being Grim As Fuck necessarily correlates with interesting thought. There is, of course, probably no way to be super-duper-ultra-nihilistic in the way that Brassier is and still come out cheerful...so maybe that's why I like the Chinese/Eastern aspect of this stuff. Beyond a certain horizon being ecstatically devoured by Cthulhu just starts to seem ridiculous to me.

Pic related is Mou Zongsan, who I just found out about. Apparently he was a big admirer of Kant and wanted to reconcile his thought with Confucius'. Stuff like that gives me the warm fuzzies.

>>9161745
Double pic related in there...duh. The first refers to the pic in the OP.

>>9161745
>As for art-right, they just did a special on Mark Fisher, who was left af. It's hardly Richard Spencer and Friends.
art-right is not the same as alt-right...

>>9161874
the article on mute is funny, bc that magazine obviously is choke full of art-right tendencies too

>>9161677
>and then say "now check out Taoism, man......." and it ends inconclusively

isn't that exactly what Heidegger did?

File: pa_laser.jpg (345KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1280x720px

>>9162043
Not that anon, but yes, kind of.

Heidegger's 'inconclusivity' doesn't derive solely from his inability to draw conclusions, though. He's just extremely sensitive to the technological mode of understanding, the tendency to enframe things, seal them off, and hand the world over like an alchemical sandbox to artist-metaphysicians. It's there in his distinction between technical artifacts and artisanal work, the notion of allowing a thing to reveal itself rather than stamping a mold on it. I happen to think that is insanely profound. Perhaps you're familiar with all of this already, though.

Now Check Out Taoism, Man really doesn't sound like such a terrible idea, particularly if you lend some credence to the Landian idea that technology is accelerating itself whether you are for or against it. Consumer desire feeds the big machine, but the Tao might be interesting to think about because - as even Heidegger says - the point is not to stand outside the circle, but to come into it in the proper way. I'm kind of a sucker for that kind of thought.

There's so much interesting stuff out there to think about.

>>9162198
>There's so much interesting stuff out there to think about.

how much drugs do you take, girardbro?

>>9162217
Seriously, this is getting embarrassing.

To answer your question: when that was my thing, I ticked off as many of those boxes as I could. Generally speaking had very good times. These days not so much. Just scotch.