One could appreciate Derrida and learn from the “Hof-Konzert” that acting morally means to act for the sake of the other. All of this can be discussed, tried out, and experienced in the light of hospitality.
With regard to theistic religions the question is, whether there is an absolute good, almighty, and all-knowing God when there is the evil, physical as well as moral maladies. The intellectual defence of this God in face of physical and moral maladies are the different forms of what is called theodicy. However, in course of time, I got dissatisfied with and dismissive of this approach.
In order to put attention on themselves, so as to increase their own popularity, once in a while artists make use of the logic of scandal. And to be specific, by provoking. — However, I found my self being bored to death by this. Why?
In “More of The World Viewed” of his The World Viewed Stanley Cavell claims that movies provide the myth of lived democracy against the myth of ruled democracy. But they cannot provide it by showing democracy at work, since that would made it a mere utopia. He explains this by referring to the 30ies’ comedies.
Cavell heightens this statements about movie stars into a very surprising, worth of thinking about and challenging one. He writes: The stars “realized the myth of singularity” (p.35), wherefore “movies have an inherent tendency toward the democratic, or anyway the idea of human equality” (p. 34). – What are his reasons to state such a daring thesis?
Creative demolition of a hyper-controlled conduct of life and risking blush by living one’s live as a work of art. How? A conversation between David Eugene Edwards, Wim Vandekeybus and Michel Foucault.
Wie der Betreff bereits breitschultrig ankündigt: Ich habe die Empfehlung eines Freundes beherzigt und mir in einer gemütlichen Minute Milarépa zum Besten gegeben. [Improvisation] Hmm, wie soll man aber zu […]