RICOEUR: AND THE WORK OF "FORGETTING"

click link:  http://www.mediafire.com/listen/ayyw7mgh99348ik/ricoeur4b.mp3

VOLUME THREE:  “FORGETTING”

The over-arching intent of Ricoeur’s phenomenology is to outline the significance and demand for each individual to be involved in writing the “truth” of the intentionality of history.  Therefore he posits “forgetting” as the third moment in his triad because it designates the moment of “return” and the demand to revise our discriminations, in order to write a better posited model that specifically addresses the need to overcome human guilt; which Ricoeur perceives as the fundamental problem facing humanity.

Therefore, in this volume, Ricoeur first takes us through the moment of “reflexive-return”, which wants to correct a “LACUNA”, a “gap” in the collective of traces that has been grasped.  But before we return to re-evaluating “traces “and revising our model; we must first pass through the unconscious “body-state” that is undergoing its own “odyssey of development”. (Yes; we must continually tune our hearts). 

Within the “explored” or “active” unconsciousness, we can evaluate this motivational body-state, and its desire for reaching “FORGIVENESS”; which means our on-going “mournful-struggle” of the work of writing history in a way that will transform other selves into overcoming their guilt and loss-of-self against the uncertainties of living today. 

This “forgiveness” has content and an absolute referent:  Ricoeur is a Christian.  Therefore the absolute referent is the kerygma-of-Christ; but without the necessity of formal church or religion.  And is crystallized in the categorical imperative “to love”. 

When the self takes-up this motivational-base of “LOVE”, it is ready to enter the “reserve-of-forgetting”.  That’s right:  previous culling and filtering has been retained in memory.  Nothing has been permanently discarded.  We can still re-evaluate previous motivational-work.  We do so through three layers of traces:  the material, the structural, and the psychical trace. 

We end up with a new assortment of revised “images”, and can then re-engage ourselves with the semantic work of writing the trajectory of the truth of history.  The cycle continues; because history always interrogates us; and human-guilt always confronts us as the key existential problem. 

In a way, volume three was the most enjoyable for me.  Volume two probably gave the reader the most “content”, but volume three and its centeredness on “motivation” is a challenging treat. 

This book is a challenging venture for graduate-level or post-graduate level interest.  But, it should not be ignored.  Ricoeur died in 2005.  These were his dying-words and his legacy.    5 stars for certain.  Good luck on your reading.

RICOEUR: "HISTORY"; OR WRITING THE TRAJECTORY OF HISTORY

click link:  http://www.mediafire.com/listen/qfcvsyt03c4ullg/ricoeur3.mp3

A GLOSSARY FOR PART “TWO”  OF RICOEUR’S PHENOMENOLOGY:  “WRITING PHILOSOPHY FROM AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ; OR “HISTORICAL-GAZE:  “8” concepts:

1.  "KOROS-KATOIKEO":                "inhabited-space" of verbal testimony is defined as an atomic unit of meaning.

2.  "OIKOUMENE":                           "inhabited-world" of verbal testimony is defined as a compound unit that combines "inhabited-space" and “cosmic-time”; and then enlisting the motivation "EIKON" of the self to form a "historiographical thought-picture of the truth of verbal testimony.

3.  "METREO":                                    "being measured by one-another at the dokounta communal threshold.  Where intersubjective critical questioning results in labeling the proposed content as

"Accredited" and then “thought-materials" are ready for shaping into the "atomic-archival-document".

4.  "ISORIKOS-BIBLIZION":            "historical-document" as written document. 

5.  "PHARMAKON":                         "pharmacy-mixture" of a "remedy".  Intentionality of document is copied to consciousness with its praxis possibilities.

6.  "ATENIDZO-PRAXIS:  "GAZE".  Very important for Ricoeur and all post-modern phenomenologists.  The GAZE is the self's point of view while “standing-in” at the "composition-threshold" where the proposed written "book" will be written.  Atomic-documents assembled into compound-unit-book.

7.  ATENIDZO-SYLLOGIKE':            "INTERSUBJECTIVE-GAZE".  This is what shapes the configuration of "logos" at the historical level.  Everyone has their own "scale" that is applied to their evaluation of events of history.  Borrowed from cartography or map-making.  These various "scales" or modalities and points-of-view can contribute to a "collective" of traces (as in his discussion of memory.  He is remaining consistent here).

8.  BIBLION - BOOK:                         the final representation is to be critiqued by the categorical imperative of "JUSTICE"; and the criterion to define the "being-of-identity".  But we are not finished.  Because the self has raised the structure of history to scholarly written discourse.  And it needs to run through the process again and again.  So we never really finalize the process.  History continues to be interrogated for its meaning.  The end!

RICOEUR'S SYSTEMATIC PHENOMENOLOGY, VOLUME ONE

click link:  http://www.mediafire.com/listen/gsd6d8bhk44yi8w/ricoeur2.mp3

RICOEUR'S SYSTEMATIC PHENOMENOLOGY: IN 3 VOLUMES:
This singular book is actually an inclusive three-volume set of Ricoeur's entire phenomenology. I will review the volumes in order:
VOLUME ONE: MEMORY:
In this volume Ricoeur takes the reader through a second journey through his phenomenology, after its first presentation in the 1976 volume by TCU PRESS on "interpretation theory". Therefore we are dealing with the "remembered" on this second journey. And that is why volume three addresses "forgetting".
Beginning in the unconscious, Ricoeur tells us that we are initially engaged in "PATHEMA", OR ENDURING THE SENSATE LIFE AND ITS PRESENTATIONS. Our goal is to eventually form a tupos-model of ideation that can be imprinted within the self and actualized through praxis-based positing. We get a little assistance from counter-blow (Hegel's term) of returning influence from previous phenomenological and semantic experience. Ricoeur calls this the body-state "iconicity". The "EIKON" is rarely let loose of by Ricoeur; and as a body-state, that is experientially the case.
We next move on to "GRAPHE", which is the inscribing of the self with the "pathe-enduring" as a "thought-picture", as a "PHANTASMA" founded on the influence of "EIKON". But it represents a singular kinetic-event.

Up we go to the communal influence next, to the "dokounta-threshold", where the encounter of a succession of kinetic-events is considered. There is the "arising" of a deeper encoded descriptive-model as a result.

Entering into the realm of "volition" and true-subjectivity; we first reach the actual "imprinting of the "TUPOS", as "virtual-ideal-notion". In other words, signs have been named. From here, we "copy" the ideal, while at the same time acquiring the praxis-based possibilities for a "practical-tupos".

From here we enter the cognitive consciousness and the work of semantics. The key moment to realize here is Ricoeur's invention of the concept of "logos-of-indebtedness". We owe those who have gone before us. This underlies all semantic positing and return. The second key aspect of the semantic work is the concept of "collective-consciousness", which constitutes the "surpassing-moment" of transcendence. This is our stepping-up to the "composition-threshold", where we acquire the collection-of-traces" from shared "witnessing-of-truth". Propositional-content & illocutionary-form are exchanged; the "self" is refined to a greater level of understanding. We are ready to return to the unconscious-EIKON and begin again.

Ricoeur's 8 Greek moments of Memory are: 0. [ EIKON ] 1. PATHEMA. 2. GRAPHE. 3. PHANTASMA. 4. TUPOS-TECHNE. 5. TUPOS-PRAXIS. 6. ORTHOS-LOGOS. 7. OPHEILOS-LOGOS. 8. SULLEGO-ICKNE'.

MAX SCHELER: EMPIRICAL PSYCHOLOGY FOR HEIDEGGER'S POSITION

click link:  http://www.mediafire.com/listen/c1ryipm3ndbxbfo/schelerpm.mp3

SCHELER’S “GESTALT-PSYCHOLOGY” TRANSFORMED HEIDEGGER:
We all know that Husserl radically mentored Heidegger’s thought and caused Heidegger’s radical reading of Hegel. But for Heidegger, the overwhelming drive to stay centered in the unconscious and sensate existence, goes to Scheler. Scheler proposed that the existential hermeneutical range of “exchange, transformation, and metamorphosis” all can be understood by examining “lower-being” as it, itself climbs up through “higher-being”. And not the other way around where higher-teleology influences lower-being. There is no teleology for Scheler. Heidegger adopted this in full force.
Therefore, since Heidegger has almost been universally adopted by post-modern thinkers (especially in France); it is imperative to understand Heidegger’s own emergence. That means understanding SCHELER.
EXCHANGE:
Scheler moves through the unconscious in moments of “ecstatic-impulsion” that display “force-centers” like expression, instinct, and association. This leads to an evolving “world-open-self” as a proto-subjectivity. “Spirit” makes its first appearance here. The existential-self engages in transforming environment for the first time; by forming a spirit-centered thought=picture where feeling-percepts are arranged in a first-value-order.
Scheler next moves to the dokounta-threshold of “a-priori-insight” and “turning”. We turn away from the sensate world and toward intersubjectivity. “essential-aspects” of the first thought-picture” are refined, by referring to a-priori essential ideas that we already carry, in our being “human”.
TRANSFORMATION:
When Scheler copies the dokounta-image to the axis-threshold, he announces the triad of negation, conversion, and ingathering. In “negation”, the existential- self unveils the essential categories of value in the current model which seeks conceptualization and positing. In conversion, the partitioned concepts are constrained and concentrated to create the “ascetic-ideal”. In “ingathering”, spirit becomes “manifest”; the “notion-of-the-true” is ingathered within the self’s realm of ideation; ready for positing. But this “notion” is a “subjective-steering”, not an “objective-teleology”.
METAMORPHOSIS
Welcome to the self’s work of cognition:
“Positing” is “posited-steering”; where value-structure is posited in front of the sensate “life-of-drives”
“logos” is equated with “sublimation”; a temporal “gestalt-pattern” of emerging spirit makes itself known in subjective phantasmic-vision. Vision is coupled with “steering” and positing is directed toward this entrance-node in the emerging-event. The result is the presence of an “idea-conditioned” drive-driven-tendency”. Or LOGOS
“absolute-turn of metamorphosis” is the spirit-centeredness when drive-driven-tendencies are enchained into a greater whole. Sensate-world “turns” to service of “structure-of-life”.
HEIDEGGER LOVED IT; AND OPENLY PRAISED IT.
This was written in 1928, toward the end of Scheler’s life. A Brief departing monograph of “brilliance”.

PAUL RICOEUR: SYNTHESIZES WITTGENSTEIN AND HUSSERL

click link:  http://www.mediafire.com/listen/ac96cbeq4q9r8i3/ricoeur.mp3

RICOEUR SYNTHESIZES HUSSERL AND WITTGENSTEIN:
From 1976, when post-modern thinking was emerging like a volcano; Ricoeur developed the unique position of combining phenomenology with linguistics. This is similar to Badiou’s reading of Wittgenstein, which also helps to inform this text. Ricoeur pivots off the axis-threshold, but does not rely almost exclusively on the dokounta-threshold of unconsciousness. Instead, he introduces a healthy balance of the composition-threshold of consciousness. And you will appreciate his attentiveness to “LOGOS”. He offers a profound articulation of the three key aspects of “logos” that allow it to be rendered “objective”, and not merely “subjective”.
His treatment of “counter-blow”, or Husserl’s “fringe”, as a contribution during the initial acquisition of atomic-propositions, is significant also. The “balance” within Ricoeur’s work allows it to excel in post-modern offerings. With all of the emphasis on “writing” today, concerning the composition-threshold, and the desire for “recognition”; Ricoeur addresses: RANGE, SIGNIFICATION, GENRE, and METAPHOR as essential aspects to cover at the threshold when “speech-act” transitions to “writing-act”. Given at Texas Christian university, from the lecture halls of Brite Divinity School; you will find these essays accessible, enlightening, and inclusive for defining Ricoeur’s position. 5 stars for certain. These lectures remove a great deal of ambiguity concerning the author’s position.

APOSTLE JOHN'S PHENOMENOLOGICAL "LOGIC-OF-SUBJECTIVE-SPIRIT": REVELATION 1-3

click link:   http://www.mediafire.com/listen/824r248yqe3rh4l/revelph.mp3