An extraordinary covid testament.

[Lou Gold]

This is newsworthy, not partisan, and about as metaphysically nuanced as I can imagine for the practical world. It is poignantly personal. It also illustrates what I mean in thinking that it is events that change minds, initiatory events.

I believe that the NYT does not have a paywall for covid articles. If you are blocked, I hope you'll find one of the alternative ways of access. Please check it out.

"Emerging From the Coronavirus Pandemic"

[SanteriSatama]

I don't want to give NYT any clicks, as that would be misuse of my attention. Instead, let's discuss Events from metaphysical point of view, as that is your stated intention.

Perhaps not the best article on what Badiou means by Event, but first that search brought up:

Sometimes Badiou portrays the Event as purely random – an effect of chance. The word he usually uses is hasardeux (haphazard). It is chance in the sense of a possible encounter or dysfunction. Sometimes he portrays it as an act of creation out of nothingness (creatio ex nihilo). At other times, he treats it as a kind of structural necessity, which will happen sooner or later. Yet it is outside the normal structures of social control. An Event interrupts the continuity of determinism. It allows something completely new to come into existence.

An Event has no definite foundation – especially no legal foundation. It is founded simply in a type of attachment, experience, or belief which Badiou terms ‘Truth’ (see below). If it turns out that the Event can be classified in terms of earlier criteria, it wasn’t a true Event to begin with. An Event cannot provide any binding justification for itself. One either accepts an Event or rejects it. At one point, Badiou expresses the idea of an Event in terms of a rewriting of the “social contract”.

https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/alain-badiou-event/

Badiou's description of where from and how Events originate is very messy. The messiness basically means that Events are materialistically non-deterministic; but that opens a nice bunch of questions in idealist ontology. Events can be archetypal, but also births of new and fresh archetypes.

[Lou Gold]

This is newsworthy, not partisan, and about as metaphysically nuanced as I can imagine for the practical world. It is poignantly personal. It also illustrates what I mean in thinking that it is events that change minds, initiatory events.

I believe that the NYT does not have a paywall for covid articles. If you are blocked, I hope you'll find one of the alternative ways of access. Please check it out.

"Emerging From the Coronavirus Pandemic"

I don't want to give NYT any clicks, as that would be misuse of my attention. Instead, let's discuss Events from metaphysical point of view, as that is your stated intention.

Perhaps not the best article on what Badiou means by Event, but first that search brought up:

Sometimes Badiou portrays the Event as purely random – an effect of chance. The word he usually uses is hasardeux (haphazard). It is chance in the sense of a possible encounter or dysfunction. Sometimes he portrays it as an act of creation out of nothingness (creatio ex nihilo). At other times, he treats it as a kind of structural necessity, which will happen sooner or later. Yet it is outside the normal structures of social control. An Event interrupts the continuity of determinism. It allows something completely new to come into existence.

An Event has no definite foundation – especially no legal foundation. It is founded simply in a type of attachment, experience, or belief which Badiou terms ‘Truth’ (see below). If it turns out that the Event can be classified in terms of earlier criteria, it wasn’t a true Event to begin with. An Event cannot provide any binding justification for itself. One either accepts an Event or rejects it. At one point, Badiou expresses the idea of an Event in terms of a rewriting of the “social contract”.

https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/alain-badiou-event/

Badiou's description of where from and how Events originate is very messy. The messiness basically means that Events are materialistically non-deterministic; but that opens a nice bunch of questions in idealist ontology. Events can be archetypal, but also births of new and fresh archetypes.

I believe my intention was well-stated. If you'd like to discuss Badiou with those more philosophically prepared than I am, please do. I will possibly learn a lot by listening to the discussion. I might even get drawn it. Who knows?