Emotional Life in a Neurobiological Age: On Wonder
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- In the light of the most recent neurobiological research on the emotional brain, Catherine Malabou, professor of Modern European Philosophy at Kingston University (UK), proposes to replace Deleuze's statement about Spinoza,"inspiring sad passions is necessary for the exercise of power," with "inspiring indifference has become necessary for the exercise of power."
The July 16, 2013 lecture, "Emotional Life in a Neurobiological Age: On Wonder," was sponsored by the School of Criticism & Theory.
Malabou inspired me to write.
Profound comments on sadness as a political tool used to keep us down. Brilliant talk!
Brilliant talk! So many continental philosophers are useful for social workers and mental health workers but are not taught in our field.
Also the description of “bipolarity”, and the experience of “mania” as the self-generated antidote to “depression.”
... I would like to see a correlation between societal apathy & self-medication.
Gabor Mate' speaks much on this aspect our mal-being
It’s interesting that the word “depression” doesn’t come in to the talk, which is maybe a very smart choice.
Malabou has easily convinced some philosophers that she is an authority on neuroscience by just saying she is. Has anyone asked any neuroscientists about this? Because the ones I spoke to at Kingston University reckon she's bluffing. Also she doesn't know why plastic explosive is called that - it's not because of what it does, but because of what it's like as a substance. Has nobody else noticed this? It's pretty common knowledge.
Continental philosophy has finally twigged that it can't continue to ignore the findings of empirical science. But it's a disingenuous engagement. At present it's just misappropriating scientific developments for their discursive "bling" value.
If neuroscientists at Kingston, or elsewhere, are unhappy about her use of the science why don't we ask them to comment? Or is your comment, once again, a way of critiquing the person and not the content.... ? Typical of unsound argumentation
technical mastery is not necessary for philosophical interpretation.intuitive understanding is more powerful and more relevant than the musings of thinly veiled corporate alienists propagating barbaric scientism.
simon bill, your whole comment is devoted to gossip and is totally devoid of anything relevant to neuroscience and philosophy. Thus Malabou is miles beyond you in terms of engaging in anything worthwhile thinking and talking about.
Did you see the video? She’s discussing the implications of neurobiology for philosophy and psychoanalysis by referring to other neuroscientists like Antonio Damasio. She’s not doing neuroscience, she’s engaging with it, and she’s doing it with the help of people who are somewhat authorities on the subject. How you can interpret this as bluff is completely beyond me, but it strikes me as an extremely dishonest evaluation of her discussion and work.
Such that it makes me believe you’re not very knowledgeable on current philosophical topics or are probably some of those sectarian academics still stuck in 20th century rivalries. Or maybe just a STEM lord who likes to troll humanities and social sciences.