Has anyone read Virilio's "Negative Horizon"?
I'm really enjoying it so far, especially these first chapters on Mounts and zoophobia/zoophilia. I think the insight that the "female vehicle" is the model for all future animal husbandry is pretty insightful. I also like his argument that the Horse was the reason mesoamerica fell so quickly. Other anthropologists always seem to argue for smallpox/influenza or guns. But neither of those effects would destroy an empire without the rapid movement of horses to overtake the mesoamerican cultures.
Still, I'm trying to keep an open eye for hypothesis that are "too perfect" or "too convenient". For starters, it seems like you could invert all of his ideas into a philosophy of inertia instead of a philsophy of speed (maybe it's the same idea in the end, moving without moving, moving by prosthesis), but I'd also be keen to understand what actual anthropologists make of Virilio's arguments.
Nobody huh? I at least expected to get trolled by anti-pomo types, but I guess Virilio doesn't have the same name recognition of Foucault or Derrida.
Haven't read this, but enjoyed reading Virilio a few years back (Speed & Politics, Imformation Bomb, some other stuff...somewhat hazy now). /lit/ would probably like him if they were more familiar with his thought and basic ideas.
>and frankly so would i, since I've become an inestimably lazy shitposter since finding this place, to the point where i would prefer someone else manipulate my brain for me at this point and basically rub philosophy into my head as if i were seasoning a steak
>tfw maybe i have learned at last how to write about philosophy at last, holy fuck, books for the unspeakably lazy
>tfw wow imagine the possibilities
>tfw meh maybe ill do it later
>>9205172
well neat, at least someone else has read him.
Get some motivation! Go write something!