These are the five disintegrating categories of the Diagram, following the five misintegrating ones.
Pro 1: He binds consciousness by matter: “Man is himself a phenomenon. His will has an empirical character, which is the empirical cause of all his actions” (Kant, 2010, p. 326). Then, he speaks like a true materialist: “[…] it must not be supposed that any beginning can take place in reason; on the contrary, reason, as the unconditioned condition of all action of the will, admits of no time-conditions, although its effect does really begin in a series of phenomena – a beginning which is not, however, absolutely primal” (ibid.).
Pro 2: “Our endeavour to reach, not the unconditioned causality [of God], but the unconditioned existence, of substance [i.e., matter, atoms, particles]” (Kant, 2010, p. 329).
Pro 3: “Reality, in the pure conception of the understanding, is that which corresponds to a sensation in general; that, consequently, the conception of which indicates a being (in time [filled]). Negation is that the conception of which represents a not-being (in time [empty]). […] Now every sensation has a degree or quantity by which it can fill time, […] until it vanishes into nothing (= 0 = negatio). Thus there is a relation and connection between reality and negation, or rather a transition from the former to the latter, which makes every reality representable to us as a quantum […] [W]e descend in time from the sensation which has a certain degree, down to the vanishing thereof, or gradually ascend from negation to the quantity thereof” (Kant, 2010, p. 123).
Kant, Immanuel. (2010). The Critique of Pure Reason. [PDF file]. Trans. J.M.D.Meiklejohn. An Electronic Classics Series Publication. Retrieved in 2014 from https://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/kant/critique-pure-reason6x9.pdf
Pro: “The movement is everything, the final goal is nothing.”
Pro: “Physics is mathematical not because we know so much about the physical world, but because we know so little: it is only its mathematical properties that we can discover” (qtd. in Koestler, 1959, p. 534).
Koestler, A. (1959). The sleepwalkers: a history of man’s changing vision of the Universe. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Pro 1: “I do feel strongly that this is nonsense! . . . all this superstring stuff is crazy and is in the wrong direction” (quote).
Pro 2: “I have a limited intelligence and I’ve used it in a particular direction” (quote).
Pro 3: Reduction of life into matter: “living things / masses of atoms / DNA, protein . . .” and reduction of everything into mind and matter like in Kant: “atoms with consciousness” and their relation: “matter with curiosity” (quote).
Pro 4: “in order to progress we must recognize our ignorance and leave room for doubt” (quote).
Pro 5: “In that same period there was Newton, there was Harvey studying the circulation of the blood, there were people with methods of analysis by which progress was being made! You can take every one of Spinoza’s propositions and take the contrary propositions and look at the world–and you can’t tell which is right. Sure, people were awed because he had the courage to take on these great questions, but it doesn’t do any good to have the courage if you can’t get anywhere with the question…” (quote).
Pro 6: “It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge what energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. It is not that way” (quote). It’s like Kantian Noumenon.
Pros: His devotion to mere (historical) ideas led him to mix Lenin with Stalin and Stalin with Trotsky.
Pro: Film depiction.
Pro 1: “living a self-sufficient life surrounded by friends”, “friendship as an important ingredient of happiness”, “friendships as ramparts for pleasure and denied them any inherent worth” (wiki).
Pro 2: “enjoying little things like food, the company of friends, etc” (ibid.).
François de La Rochefoucauld
Pro 1: “Nos vertus ne sont, le plus souvent, que de vices déguisés” (Our virtues are most frequently but vices in disguise) (quote). “Nous essayons de nous faire honneur des défauts que nous ne voulons pas corriger” (We try to make virtues out of the faults we have no wish to correct) (ibid.). Non-A is non-A.
Pro 2: A great influence on Nietzsche.
Pro 3: “Dans toutes les professions chacun affecte une mine et un extérieur pour paraître ce qu’il veut qu’on le croie. Ainsi on peut dire que le monde n’est composé que de mines” (In all professions we affect a part and an appearance to seem what we wish to be. Thus the world is merely composed of actors) (ibid.). And many other statements made to deprecate people.
Marquis de Sade
Pro 1: “Your body is the church where Nature asks to be reverenced.”
Pro 2: “…there is a sum of evil equal to the sum of good, the continuing equilibrium of the world requires that there be as many good people as wicked people…” (quote).
Pro: His The Art of Being Right inspiring online trolls (see Phillips, This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things, p. 125).
Pro: The Gabrieliad‘s vulgar radicalism and antireligion.
Pro: “The effect of Feuerbach’s conception [of an abstraction inherent in a particular individual] is that he takes as his point of departure the individual in his species-characteristics, and reduces the tie between human beings to a natural tie” (Kołakowski, 1978, V. 1, pp. 142 ff.).
Kołakowski, L. (1978). Main Currents of Marxism (3 volumes). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Thomas Henry Huxley
Pro 1: “Huxley never going quite so far as to say he thought Darwin was right” (wiki). He didn’t want to believe in evolution.
Pro 2: “Huxley was comfortable with comparative anatomy, at which he was the greatest master of the day. He was not an all-round naturalist like Darwin” (wiki).
Pro 3: Compare “The great end of life is not knowledge but action” and “vital action is nothing more than “the result of the molecular forces of the protoplasm which displays it”” (wiki and wikiquote).
Pro 4: He caused “the secularization of British society” and is considered “the father of antitheism” (wiki). Thus he used Darwin’s theory as his ‘bulldog’ to fight the Church.
Pro 1: “Die Astrophysik hat unsere Weltanschauung im großartigsten Maßstabe erweitert, indem sie uns im unendlichen Weltraum Millionen von kreisenden Weltkörpern nachgewisen hat, größer als unsere Erde, und gleich dieser in beständiger Umbildung begriffen, in einem ewigen Wechsel von ‘Werden und Vergehen'” (Astrophysics has expanded our view of the world on the grandest scale, recognizing in the infinite space millions of circular world-bodies, greater than our earth, and, like this, in a constant transformation, an eternal change of ‘becoming and passing away.’) (quote). Like Epicurus.
Pro 2: His recapitulation theory is about body reflecting evolutionary history (“ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”), thus making body into the context.
Con: His racism.
Pro: “There is more wisdom in your body than in your deepest philosophy.” (quote).
Pro: Lord Henry and Dorian Gray as Wilde’s alter egos.
Con: His reception into the Catholic Church.
Pros: “The destruction of the atom seemed to me to be the same as the destruction of the world” (quote). Something as everything. Abstract painter, a predecessor of Picasso and Pollock.
Pro: the promotion of Judas over John the Apostle in his essay “Иуда Искариот” (1907) (Judas Iscariot).
Pros: He was the general of the Russian revolution and very much of a ‘Marxist’ bearing of Paul Lafargue and Georges Sorel. Essential conflict of positions with Stalin.
Pro: The circular Nietzschean poetic structure with no meaningful center in “Ночь, улица, фонарь, аптека…” (Night, street, street-light, drugstore,…).
Pro 1: “…черные и мистические краски (я — мистический писатель), в которых изображены бесчисленные уродства нашего быта, яд, которым пропитан мой язык, глубокий скептицизм в отношении революционного процесса…” (… black and mystical colors (I am a mystical writer), which depict unbounded ugliness of our everyday life, the poison, which imbues my language, deep skepticism about the revolutionary process…) (quote). The character of his work is ‘poisonous,’ not mystical.
Pro 2: Depiction in Morphine (2008).
Pro: His poem A Cloud in Trousers (Облако в штанах).
Pro 1: He believed in ‘permanent revolution’ and opposed bureaucratic ‘conservatives’ in the Chinese Communist Party even though they took the power while he was alive. He was as similar to Trotsky as he was different from Stalin.
Pro 2: “Mao was like a father to me” (quote by the 14th Dalai Lama).
Pro 3: His rebellion against reading too many books and against academic intellectuals is similar to Marcuse’s.
Pro 1: “There are many kinds of gods. Therefore there are many kinds of men. … To talk about religion except in terms of human psychology is an irrelevance” (quote).
Pro 2: “Never give children a chance of imagining that anything exists in isolation. Make it plain from the very beginning that all living is relationship. Show them relationships in the woods, in the fields, in the ponds and streams, in the village and in the country around it. Rub it in” (quote). Disintegration through sarcasm.
Pro: His poem “Распад атома” (Disintegration of the Atom) with elements of subjective theology, also discerned in poets of his generation and tradition (Blok, Yesenin, Vysotsky). His poetry is more ‘objective’ than the subjective poetry of the likes of Mayakovsky, who is more aligned with abstract painters like Picasso.
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Pro: His melancholy in “The Crack-Up.”
Pro: He was a prominent theoretician of the New Left and its ‘sexual revolution’ of the 60s.
Pro: “when one sees one of my pictures, one asks oneself this simple question, ‘What does that mean?’. It does not mean anything, because mystery means nothing either, it is unknowable” (wiki). Not genuine mystery but nonexistence.
Pro: “I am nature” (quote). Body is Environment, level 8.
Pros: “…the basic illusion that man and nature, the organism and the environment, the controller and the controlled are quite different things” (The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are, 1989, Ch. 2), and “each organism is the universe experiencing itself in endless variety” (ibid., Ch. 5); “the only real atom … is the universe” (ibid., Ch. 6). Body is Environment, and something is everything.
Pro: “there is only one principle that can be defended under all circumstances and in all stages of human development. It is the principle: anything goes” (quote). His conflict with Karl Popper.
Arkady and Boris Strugatsky
Pro: “одн[а] из основных тем дальнейшего творчества Стругацких — нравственный выбор человека, оказавшегося в тяжёлом положении, когда выбирать нужно между плохим и очень плохим вариантами” (One of the main topics in Strugatskys following works is the moral choice of the person caught in a difficult situation when you have to choose between bad and worse) (wiki). Like in Andrzej Sapkowski’s works.
Pro 1: “Nothing, therefore, would be more pleasant, or more inexact, than to conceive of this historical a priori as a formal a priori that is also endowed with a history: a great, unmoving, empty figure that irrupted one day on the surface of time, that exercised over men’s thought a tyranny that none could escape” (1972, p. 144).
Pro 2: “the great game of contradiction” (1972, p. 170).
Pro 3: “[My discourse] is trying to deploy a dispersion that can never be reduced to a single system of differences, a scattering that is not related to absolute axes of reference; it is trying to operate a decentring that leaves no privilege to any centre” (1972, p. 226).
Foucalt, M. (1972). The Archeology of Knowledge. Tavistock Publications Limited.
14th Dalai Lama
Pro: “I think I am farther to the left than the Chinese leaders” (wiki). Like Trotsky, and also in Buddha Gautama’s tradition.
Pro: He is a “militant Freudian atheist,” especially with movies like Match Point (2005) and Irrational Man (2015) (quote).
Pro 1: “Many of the reasons for such failure fall under the heading of what economists and other social scientists term “rational behavior,” arising from clashes of interest between people. That is, some people may reason correctly that they can advance their own interests by behavior harmful to other people. Scientists term such behavior “rational” precisely because it employs correct reasoning, even though it may be morally reprehensible. The perpetrators know that they will often get away with their bad behavior, especially if there is no law against it or if the law isn’t effectively enforced” (2011, Ch. 14).
Pro 2: “A frequent type of rational bad behavior is “good for me, bad for you and for everybody else”—to put it bluntly, “selfish.” As a simple example, most Montana fishermen fish for trout. A few fishermen who prefer to fish for a pike, a larger fish-eating fish not native to western Montana, surreptitiously and illegally introduced pike to some western Montana lakes and rivers, where they proceeded to destroy trout fishing by eating out the trout. That was good for the few pike fishermen and bad for the far greater number of trout fishermen” (ibid.).
Pro 3: “[I]rrational behavior” . . . [is] behavior that is harmful for everybody. Such irrational behavior often arises when each of us individually is torn by clashes of values: we may ignore a bad status quo because it is favored by some deeply held value to which we cling. . . . It is painfully difficult to decide whether to abandon some of one’s core values when they seem to be becoming incompatible with survival. At what point do we as individuals prefer to die than to compromise and live?” (ibid.)
Diamond, J. (2011). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. Penguin Books.
Pro: the reduction of idealC to mat8 in his novella “Behold the man” (1966).
Pro: “Oh well I like to think of myself as a good person. Well, we all like to think of ourselves as good people: atheists do, Jews do, Muslims do. So when you meet somebody who claims to be Christian, mock them, ridicule them in public” (video). Like Feuerbach.
Pro: “our perception of reality is fragmentary … it’s totally normal to not describe reality as something whole” (wiki). His postmodernism, like in the movie Funny Games (1997)
Pro: “Only cinema narrows its concern down to its content, that is to its story. It should, instead, concern itself with its form, its structure” (quote). As in the ‘valid’ “purpose of not serving a purpose,” so is the materialist form of formlessness and structure of the lack of structure shown to be on the top in contrast to the role of content and story in films by idealists like Spielberg and Kubrick (ibid.).
Pro: His ‘spiritual matter’ expressed in movies The Last Temptation of Christ (1988), Kundun (1997), and Silence (2016), in which Judas and Judas-like characters are aggrandized.
Pro: His pessimism, like in To the wonder, cannot be matched by any idealist.
Pro: Chapter 10 of A History of the World in 10½ Chapters.
Pro: The circular plot structure with no meaningful center in The Dark Tower series.
George R. R. Martin
Pro: “Tolkien made the wrong choice when he brought Gandalf back. Screw Gandalf. He had a great death and the characters should have had to go on without him” (quote). An attack on Tolkien’s mysticism.
Pro 1: An egoist of vulgar kind as seen in this exposé.
Pro 2: A thinker much less ‘integral’ than at first may be imagined (e.g. criticism).
Pro 3: His favorites are Freud and Buddha, in the same category with him.
Pro: Watchmen is framed by deaths.
Pro: “without God, what’s to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero” (quote).
Pro 1: This looks like a cross to someone who doesn’t think of penises all day.
Pro 2: His movie A Single Man (2009) is framed by deaths.
Pro 1: “Тысячами незримых нитей обвивает тебя закон. Разрубишь одну — преступник, десять — смертник, все — Бог” (The law wraps you in a thousand invisible threads. If you break one – you are a criminal, ten – a death row inmate, all – God.) (Keeper of Swords – Хранитель мечей, Book 1).
Pro 2: The antichristian portrayals of the Savior figure in the last books of the Keeper of Swords saga.
Pro 1: From her Goldfinch: “And as much as I’d like to believe there’s a truth beyond illusion, I’ve come to believe that there’s no truth beyond illusion. Because, between ‘reality’ on the one hand, and the point where the mind strikes reality, there’s a middle zone, … the polychrome edge between truth and untruth.” Wildean aesthetics, Derridean deconstruction.
Pro 2: Non-A meaning non-A, also from The Goldfinch: “That Nature (meaning Death) always wins but that doesn’t mean we have to bow and grovel to it.” A bit of postmodernism and Nietzscheanism.
Pro 1: His movies are known as “cinema of the body” (“cinéma du corps”). And he is a nihilist. (wiki)
Pro 2: The most consistent and nonaccidental example, considering he was the director, producer, editor, and screenwriter, is the movie Love (2015). His other movies, however, are quite similar, with the negativity especially clear in his grotesque debut I Stand Alone (1998).
J. K. Rowling
Pro 1: Her novel The Casual Vacancy, in which “behind every nondescript face lay a wild and unique hinterland,” is framed by deaths.
Pro 2: “I don’t believe in magic” (quote).
Pro 3: “Voldemort was nowhere near as bad [as US presidential candidate Donald Trump]” (ibid.).
Pro 1: “The trees exist because they are matter and energy in the world, outside of my head, right? In other words, if, if I’m, if I am struck by a meteor the trees all still exist, right? But if-if I am thinking of the word forest or I am thinking, I’m mulling over a forest as a concept and the meteor hits me, the forest is gone because it’s just a concept in my head, but the trees are all still there, right? … When we are talking about a forest as an aggregation of trees, well, the trees all individually exist, right? And the forest, as an aggregation of trees, we are accurately describing the aggregation of trees, the concept only exists within our own mind. In other words, when someone first thought of using the word ‘forest’ and the concept ‘forest,’ nothing changed in the forest. Nothing changed outside the mind of the first person who could think of the word ‘forest.’ So, given that we now have a concept, but nothing has changed in the outside world, we cannot say that the creation of the concept ‘forest’ has created anything outside our heads or altered anything outside our heads or taken anything away outside our heads [except electromagnetic emissions from the forest ecosystem?]. That’s what I mean does not exist outside our heads. The concept can be valid or invalid, but it does not alter anything [what about inside our heads?]. If all human beings vanish from the world tomorrow, nothing would physically change outside the absence, I mean in the instant, it would be vacuum or whatever, you know what I mean, right? … The trees are aggregations of atoms. [etc., clear versus unclear boundaries, etc.]” (video). I.E. forests don’t exist.
Pro 2: “[Viewer:] Because government is a concept, it doesn’t exist in the real world. [Molyneux, after a pause and a sharp breath:] Right.” (ibid., 37m33s). A disintegrative epistemology.
Antony Garrett Lisi
Pro: The circular theoretical structure with no meaningful center.
Pro: his characters in Irrational Man (2015) and The Master (2012).
Pro: her mocking of religion, especially in the second part of the first book in the Vol’ha witch series and some quasi-quantum views in the first part there.
Pros: “And a tree is what it is / Nothingness / It’s ok to be that, its what we really are” (Bali Blog, P. 5, Ch. 14), “there is no end of fear” (ibid., Ch. 17). So even love is fear, and all leads to nonexistence.
Pro: her mocking of religion and equalizing humans and animals in the beginning of Beyond the Brain: How Body and Environment Shape Animal and Human Minds.
Pro: He was neither in the tradition of Democritus nor of Epicurus because he wanted to change reality rather than merely describe it. However, he indeed described reality but that of capitalism, top-down, and he viewed all people as classes that make up societies.
Pro 1: «Непоследовательны, конечно, и те рабочие, которые остаются христианами, которые веруют в бога, и те интеллигенты, которые являются сторонниками (тьфу! тьфу!) мистики» (To be sure, those workers who remain Christians, who believe in God, and those intellectuals who defend mysticism (fie upon them!), are inconsistent too) (Lenin, 1967, V. 12, p. 65; V. 10, “Our Tasks and the Soviet of Workers’ Deputies”). As seen through this quote, Lenin was against religion and mysticism. He was a devout follower of Karl Marx, defending orthodox Marxism and adding his own ideas to it.
Pro 2: His fundamental idea was of building the Party from the bottom upward (партия строится сверху вниз) (ibid., V. 8, p. 394 n.). And the Soviet state was built the same way.
Lenin, V. I. (1967). Polnoye Sobraniye Sochineniy [Complete Works] (5th ed.; 55 Vols.). Moscow: Political Literature Publishing House.
Pro 1: Was on the board of directors of 52 organizations or committees (wiki). A social-centeredness.
Pro 2: “Я думаю, интересы и спасение России сейчас в победе большевизма” (I think that the interests and salvation of Russia now depend on the victory of Bolshevism) (ibid.). He was pro Bolshevism.
Pro 3: His views were based around biosphere.
Pro: “I know only one Church: it is the society of men” (quote).
Pro: “Развитие производительных сил, в конечном счете, определяет характер общественных отношений и образ жизни людей. Но производительные силы – это сами люди и созданные ими средства производства” (The development of productive forces ultimately determines the nature of social relations and the way people live. But the productive forces are the people themselves and the means of production created by them) (Ойзерман, 2009, p. 130).
Ойзерман, Т. И. Метафилософия: теория историко-философского процесса. Москва: Канон, 2009.
Pro 1: “Emotions are superfluous to the task” (1:28:50) from The Choice is Ours (2016).
Pro 2: “The word love will disappear in the future and be replaced by a newer definition called ‘extensionality’, meaning it enhances one another’s lives” (1:29:43-54, op. cit.). So ‘love’ will be all about function, as in being, in Fresco’s words, “functionally selfish” (1:25:20).
Pro 3: “We can never achieve consciousness . . . without instrumentation” (1:31:00).
Pro 4: “Loyalty to the Earth [translates to] the pledge of allegiance to methodology” (1:33:50-34:07).
Pro 1: His focus on social and cultural reality and its creation (Lakoff, 1990, p. 208; cf. Engels qtd. in Lenin, 1967, V. 18, p. 100). His social welfare stance in favor of taxation (Lakoff, 2014, Ch. 16) and specifically for the poor working class as exemplified at the end of Moral Politics (Lakoff, 2002, pp. 420 ff.). His unorthodox religious/spiritual view reminds one of Jeremy Rifkin’s biosphere/Gaia beliefs.
Pro 2: Here is evidence that Lakoff’s main argument is directed against objectivism as idealism: “In the objectivist tradition, it is assumed that there is an objectively existing Platonic realm of numbers, and there is no problem with models that have an uncountably infinite number of elements” (Lakoff, 1990, p. 258). Only materialism is in conflict with idealism. In Lakoff, empiricism is materialism: “To me, as a cognitive scientist, the empirical reasons are the most important ones” (ibid.). “[W]e will try to show how to keep the sensible aspects of realism, and to avoid the pitfalls of idealism . . . [because] there can be no objectively correct [i]description[/i] of reality from a God’s eye point of view” (Lakoff, 1990, p. 259).
Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago UP.
Lakoff, G. (2002). Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. (2014). The ALL NEW Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Pro: racism as the basis of philosophy.
Pro 1: The essence of his philosophy was “die Begegnung der planetarisch bestimmten Technik und des neuzeitlichen Menschen” (the confrontation of planetary technology and modern humanity) (wiki).
Pro 2: Stated by Karl Popper (int-8): “I appeal to the philosophers of all countries to unite and never again mention Heidegger or talk to another philosopher who defends Heidegger. This man was a devil. I mean, he behaved like a devil to his beloved teacher [i.e., Husserl ], and he has a devilish influence on Germany. … One has to read Heidegger in the original to see what a swindler he was” (quote).
Pros: demeaning Pushkin as a ‘nigger’ (video). And elsewhere he says that his father (race) is god.
Pro 1: “The lobbyists connected the dots. That is, they brought together all of the disparate commercial forces and melded them into a set of relationships that became an embryonic template for a new economic organism” (Rifkin, 2011, Ch. 4, “Seeing the big picture”). Metaphor Society is Nature.
Pro 2: His mystical side is reflected through his support of the Gaia Hypothesis.
Pro 3: His ‘synthesis’ of capitalism with socialism (e.g. video). He uses “non-A is A is non-A” logic. In other words, we start with us now (non-A), create an “empathic” civilization (A), and then focus on “biosphere consciousness” (non-A). A vehicle of such integration in order to disintegrate is a “sharing economy.”
Rifkin, J. (2011). The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.