Notes for “Transcendental Arbitration” #5

Firstly, what is the status of proposition-making in general? Simple: it is done through language. So, what is the status of language? Simple: seemingly circular. How does one assert language’s validity without the usage of language? How does one justify language without using language? It seems it cannot be done.

Of course, secondly, various transcendental arguments such as the necessary conditions for the denial of language is an affirmation of language itself will be employed to counter this. The ultimate issue with this is that it is a strawman. The problem being identified is that those very transcendental conditions, the affirmation of language, lead to its denial. The transcendental response, in the sense of transcendental arguments, is one that misunderstands that the problem is that an immanent contradiction is contained within all systems that are discursively and/or conceptually analyzed, or analyzed in other manners, and so on… Our problem is the very fact that these systems are immanently and thus inherently self-undermining. That one’s basis can defeat itself only leads to a response of laughter. Yet there are no jokers.

Thirdly, the consequence of the typical transcendental argument as “the transcendental fallacy,” as we will call it, is not nihilism. The association of nihilism with the state we are in(?) is the failure of all past philosophy. Not even nothing is adequate to describe what belief is a vector heading toward.

Fourthly, the book will probably not be written unless some form of demon seizes one of us revealing the secrets of everything and nothing to one of us, or if divine intervention from God takes place, or maybe if (Plato’s) the Good, which, remember, is beyond Being itself, becomes intelligible to our blind eyes. This is all to say, it isn’t looking likely. Hopefully, Erik and I can find a way out of this, or find someone who can. It seems that hope is all we have left… but it’s fading fast (though it will always be there).




How sweet terror is, not a single line, or a ray of morning sunlight fails to contain the sweetness of anguish. - Georges Bataille

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

The Inward Idiot

Stratification of Society as a Function of Average Rate of Information Exchange

In Praise of HODL

Science Does Not Provide Us With Truths

Good Quote #2

The Shadow Dance

My personal quest against ignorance.

Exit the 3D Recycling System

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Evan Jack

Evan Jack

How sweet terror is, not a single line, or a ray of morning sunlight fails to contain the sweetness of anguish. - Georges Bataille

More from Medium

Notes for “Transcendental Arbitration” #4

Althusser and “Fahrenheit 451”

American Psycho and Ayn Rand’s Ethics; The Patrick Bateman Problem

Theory of Bloom — An Interpretation