Comments by "harvey young" (@harveyyoung3423) on "Inside Putin's Mind: His Goals, Motivation & World View -- What The West Needs to Understand" video.

  1. Part 6 There is no determination of that limit from within the abstract function alone the limit is the seeing judge of the harmony of these functions. I have an analogy here: we can think of a gladiator and abstract his abilities into a set of ten decathlon event functions. Now the gladiator can aim at apparent infinite improvement of each decathlon event even competing against themselves without much risk of injury. But of course then decathlon contestant and unlike the 100 meters alone contestant. If they over train one event they lose ability in the others: gain and loss. They must judge to get the balance right and then the idea of the infinite function dissolves away.
    2
  2. Thank you for the interesting discussion, I should like to comment, it’s got a bit long but I thought to leave it in as written. It had to be posted in parts I’m afraid. Part 1 It would seem that Dr. Attila Demko wants to contrast Russia and Europe through the contrast between power and LGBTQ+ rights. This might seem an arbitrary comparison, a choice to pick one part of the European idea and one part of the Russian idea so as to make the difference look asymmetric by pre selection choice designed for rhetorical purpose or telos. there are after all many possible predicates for both. When he says LGBTQ+ is number 1000 on Putin's list it could not be said that power is number 1000 on Europe's list he suggests Europe is waking up the the necessity of power from being asleep in internecine and "angles dancing on the head of a pin" scholastic debates in metaphysics and differences. I want to though follow the rule of this framing of the discussion, and add if I may, that Russian military power here is thought or conceived to be relatively fast in contrast to the slow progress of legal LGBTQ+ right over tradition. The contrast is one between a category of brutal non consenting capture, verses gradual persuasion and adjustment of attitudes towards the idea of justice.
    2
  3. Part 7 I should say I am drawing on Kant heavily here, Kant here particularly read though, Derrida and Deleuze on Genesis and aesthetic judgement on one side and John McDowell’s work on consciousness and externality on the other, but the approach through original functional unity as the diagnosis of the active myth is mine as far as I know. Copyright Harvey Young (a joke on Derrida on Searle on Derrida. Limited Inc.) In those works Derrida and Deleuze confront the problem of context and rule as demanding difference as a condition of their possibly, against the ordinary language tradition that they argue in its seeking the condition of identity has failed to grasp rules require contextual separation indexical risk, structural identity axioms are parasitic on difference rather than difference as parasitic on identity. What is lost though is a proper grasp of the role of the body here, as between virtue and vice as opposed to its modern legal function of in accord with the law and outside the law. For Derrida this space or spaces of possible error mean an opening for interventional genesis the margin becomes the centre. For the old transcendental philosophy of Oxford and Cambridge it is error that has to be removed by closure under consciousness.
    2
  4. Part2 However this is difficult to sustain when we look at other predicates such as Russian gradual and consented to control of foreign gas supply, and the immediacy of legal force of compliance to ever obscure intellectual constructs of "efficient" or "respectful” discourse: perfect languages of communication. The former moves from choice to dependency and the later from law as negative limit to action to positive obligation. The image of a map gives an ectype for both of progress or and or security, we then think the problem is just about geographical boundaries, special determinations clear and distinct, if we can just agree on a limit to both of us. a certain demarcation line a “parallel” of longitude and latitude. But this is to confuse pre-19th century thought dominated by "ideas" with post Kantian thought where in the idea is seen as a function, and as a single function it has the look of an idea when seen as a singular infinite function. Thus power or safety from risk has no end, and equality and right over tradition has no end. Thus this is not a disjunctive between two overlapping ideas, but the encounter of two functions both of which want to or will annul the other is not really an encounter of world views not a hermeneutic but a myopic key hole.
    2
  5. Part 8 In this for me consciousness stands for legitimacy responsibility and authorship. For the left the space of error: the black market, the perfect forgery in Joe 90 xmas episode, the Freudian unconscious, the Marxist super structural ideology the details (possible space of error) that the sovereign does not know (is not there). Are all affordances of intervention or the private use of the public role perhaps? This structure too then has its telos the sovereign wants to know everything the revolutionary wants the realm of shadows expanding: until they get into power of course then it all reverses. Freedom from government becomes positive freedom only on the basis of government. an anarchic sovereign is impossible but as Hobbes outlines in Bemouth the different state functions can becomes autonomous but without unity and legitimacy less than a zombie. i think to be fair this is what happened in breakup of USSR not a atomised civil war bottom up but internecine separate parts with many top down movements. There is much more to be said about this configuration but I’ll end here, and thank you for your time and consideration, and thank you again for the discussion.
    2
  6. Part 3 We think the genesis of both functions is the centre of each that is President Putin’s psychology with his means attached, and the rule of law, legal functions, autonomous and independent, with a sovereign attached. But of course we cannot abstract President Putin’s mind from his governmental apparatus (just as we cannot abstract a mind from its body and environment. We must understand these as functionary inseparable, however these functions can take on an autonomy of their own, and the military could take over the Presidency, and legal functions can create (necessarily) intuitive absurdity when on the ground we have two middle class women walking past a homeless man complaining about inequality. The functions seem to be able to operate in a void, that is they can go into routine, where in the original political and legitimate judgement on policy is left far behind in the tendentious function.
    2
  7. Part 5 My diagnosis is that the genesis is the original political policy judgement, that involves many different functions and institutions thought together, but given time and telos this unity of policy comes apart. This of course can be a foreign strategy of breaking up the body politic, by sow divisions, but it can happen anyway due to the nature of the faculties and functions of policy and the apparent individual autonomy of these functions. I say apparent because although mathematically each function can aim at infinity, in reality this would mean one function operating without effecting and being effected by the others. Only people in one institution can imagine such a thing in their rituals, and they only have this one abstract duty. Anyone with an aesthetic world view on this realises this is not the case for the body politic, that the consciousness awareness and manifold orientation of the judgement all are in paly and in mutual dependence relations with each other. We know that power without understanding is blind and law without power is lame, and this is the case for all the categories of the body politics. It takes a judgement not determined by one functional rule alone then, to get it right and good, an original aesthetic unity, which must understand functions as in such original unity wherein they are at once limiting each other, and only when abstracted from each other do we get the myth of infinite metric of progress.
    2
  8. Part 4 We have functions as sequential non reversible but transitive series (like the conversion of the art of pin making into closed series of simple habits actions of pin making and from there to mechanical representation. A certain dissemination of art to skills and the accompanying deprivation of virtue and judgement that goes with it.
    2