http://www.egs.edu/ Alain Badiou lecturing about mathematical logic in relation to Aristotles book 4 of the Metaphysics, in particular on the proposition of the excluded middle and its relation to the event as creative novelty. He proposes that of the four types of logic it is the fourth type of negation—the negation that obeys neither the principle of non-contradiction nor the principle of the excluded middle—is in fact the total destruction of any power of negativity. It is the null point of the first three propositions in which negation finally exists only as the negated. Badiou uses this proposition to illustrate his ontology that a thing—be it physical, biological, scientific, philosophic or juridical— is a pure multiplicity without any qualifying determination. The laws of the world are not laws of things themselves but instead laws between the relationships of things. Public open lecture for the students and faculty of the European Graduate School EGS Media and Communication Studies department program Saas-Fee Switzerland Europe 2006 Alain Badiou.
Alain Badiou teaches at the École Normale Supérieure (ENS) in Paris and holds the Réné Descartes chair of Philosophy at the European Graduate School (EGS) in Saas-Fee, Switzerland. Though renowned for his extensive contributions to philosophy, Badiou has also written several plays, novels and political essays. Badious political life has been greatly formed by the events of 1968 and its aftermath; he remained a committed Maoist until the end of the 1970s. In 1985 he formed along with Sylvan Lazarus and Natacha Michel, L'Organisation Politique, a post party organization dedicated to direct popular intervention and the representation of the unrepresented. His book, The Meaning of Sarkozy, addresses directly the significance behind the election of the vulgar by a reactionary public.
Badious philosophy begins with the event—seen as a break with a world highly ordered and structured and which is constituted by language and determined by relations to power—that allows one, or many, to free themselves from commonly held beliefs or assumed truths, doxas, if only momentarily. Through this brief event however, through its taking up, one gives the event the chance to persist—indeed, there is the formation of an ethical obligation here—and allows one the opportunity to move beyond mere knowledge, doxa, and into the field of truth. Truth, for Badiou, is the passionate, all consuming process of searching taken up by a subject fleeing the ordinary, state of affairs, the standard.
Different however from the ethics of previous thinkers, Badious ethics is not devoted to turning us all into good people. Instead, it is an ethics which desires what is good, moves towards what is good. In describing an event, or in persisting in an event, Badiou subscribes to what could be called three virtues—discrimination, perseverance, and moderation—in an attempt to stave of the evils of betrayal or misunderstanding. To fail to discriminate is the first ethical pitfall; to assume that a historical occurrence like National Socialism is an event is to not see the self serving aspect of the belief. National Socialism galvanized one set of people while leaving another—or several others be they Jew, Gypsy, Homosexual—out in the void. One must identify an event instead as free from set criteria and without verification procedures; the event must be open. The second pitfall is the lack of perseverance; ethics acts as a a support for a subject during its investigation of an event. Ethics entreats a subject forward in persisting. Finally, ethics also acts to keep the subject from going too far; the subject in its enthusiasm, seeks to name the entire situation, to make the multiplicity singular, inevitably closing down all other situations, conversations, opinions, dialogues. For Badiou, philosophy is always under the condition of art, science, politics and love. Ethics is the means by which each condition pursues its unique truth. The task of philosophy is to work under these truths, to seek, and to identify within the limits of these truths.
Alain Badious english translations are Deleuze: The Clamor of Being (1999), Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil (2000), On Beckett (2003), Being and Event (2005), Number and Numbers (2008), Logic of Worlds: Being and Event, Volume 2 (2009), Pocket Pantheon: Figures of Postwar Philosophy (2009). His most recent book, Theory of the Subject was released in July 2009.
Loading...
13 videos
What he misses is the contradiction within Stalin who deployed biological agents of massive killing power on both p and q and z, in so much as z are those troops that are -p because Stalin does not keep them as his own but makes them neither his or the enemies in so much as he orders their slaughter along with the enemies (at the very moment that order goes out he performatively creates part of p = -p = z. z is both copresent with p (Hegelian) and has its transcendental hypostasis in p (intuit).
ThewildRageofGordon 1 year ago
@DarkDDexter He is not using the example to prove the excluded middle, but to explain how the war situation looks under that logical framework. The example runs on the unstated gloss that ~P entails or is equivalent to Q, i.e. non-occupation by your army entails that another occupies it. Badiou runs with this hypothetical scenario, occupation-situation: if a place S is occupied at a time T, then under intuitionistic logic it trivially follows that if ~P then ANY other power occupies it.
Krelianx 1 year ago
The example put forth at the beginning of this video to disprove the excluded middle is, itself, not valid. The law of excluded middle does not apply if the propositions aren't in a perfect dichotomy, either P or ~P. Because he brings up the example of stalingrad, here is the situation, either your troops are occupying the city or they are not, that makes no judgements upon what the enemy or a neutral country is doing, and has no impact on the excluded middle.
DarkDDexter 1 year ago