Indian Sociology-Land

' It is the privilege of philosophy to choose such expressions from the language of ordinary life, which is made for the world of imaginary representations, as seem to approximate the determinations of the concept. There is no question of demonstrating for a word chosen from ordinary life that in ordinary life too the same concept is associated with that for which philosophy uses it, for ordinary life has no concepts, only representations of the imagination, and to recognize the concept in what is otherwise mere representation is philosophy itself. It must therefore suffice if representation, for those of its expressions that philosophy uses for its definitions, has only some rough approximation of their distinctive difference; it may also be the case that in these expressions one recognizes pictorial adumbrations which, as approximations, are close indeed to the corresponding concepts'. GWF Hegel- Science of Logic The concepts of Hegel's Science of logic (SOL) are not synt...

Each of these short posts on Marx's Capital I and Hegel Science of Logic should not be read as summaries but precisely as the title suggests as a way of 'reading dialectically' through a series of arguments that are canonical to the Hegel-Marx event, which should, all humour aside, have its own geological timestamp. What I am attempting to trace here are short arguments between these thinkers that produce a convergent series: that basically produce a pure relata which negates the terms of the relation, on which the second chapter of the Science of Logic will produce a similar short engagement, later on, on this blog.  By 'reading' here I mean the most basic act of reading a landscape, as much as reading a book, that is the act of carving out a territory of thought. One can even take dialectics in the most basic way, through Marx, to mean 'a tradition of argumentation'. Consider for example a religious text. Drawn apart from its tradition of argumentation, it...

 'that there is a worse kind of disorder than that of the incongruous, the linking together of things that are inappropriate; I mean the disorder in which a large number of possible orders glitter separately, in the lawless and uncharted dimension of the heteroclite; and that word should be taken in its most literal etymological sense; in such a state, things are "laid," "placed," "arranged" in sites so very different from one another that it is impossible to find a common place beneath them all. Utopias afford consolation: although they have no real locality there is nevertheless a fantastic, untroubled region in which they are able to unfold; they open up cities with vast avenues, superbly planted gardens, countries where life is easy, even though the road to them is chimerical. Heterotopias are disturbing, probably because they secretly undermine language, because they make it impossible to name this and that, because they shatter or tangle common n...