Keywords
commons
parapolitics
monism
ontology
How to Cite
Abstract
This text analysis the ways in which monism was depicted as a doctrine situated on the crossroads of European and Asian philosophical traditions. The depiction of monism as monstrous, characteristic of the mainstream of early modern European thought, is set against the wider context of parapolitical critique of the concept of sovereignty and the cosmic horror concept. This juxtaposition is founded on the simultaneous lecture of the entry “Spinoza” in Pierre Bayle’s An Historical and Critical Dictionary and Howard P. Lovecraft’s story The Call of Cthulhu. In the article’s conclusion the author argues that monism should be treated as one of the currents of collectively orientated political ontology. This ontology may provide a basis for a new model of comparative studies, centred around the concept of commons, and critical towards modern cognitive-political framework, sustaining and naturalising the primitive accumulation processes.
References
Azoulay, Ariella Aïsha. 2019. Potential History: Unlearning Imperialism. London – New York: Verso.
Bayle, Pierre. 1826. An Historical and Critical Dictionary. T. III. 4 t. Hunt and Clarke.
Bayle, Pierre. 2000. Various Thoughts on the Occasion of a Comet. Tłum. Robert C. Bartlett. New York: State University of New York Press.
Bednarek, Joanna. 2014. „Emancypacyjna obietnica posthumanizmu.”
Praktyka Teoretyczna 14(4): 171–180. https://doi.org/10.14746/prt.2014.4.7.
Bednarek, Joanna. 2015. „Akumulacja pierwotna i czasowości kapitalizmu.” Praktyka Teoretyczna 16(2): 56–77. https://doi.org/10.14746/prt.2015.2.2.
Bednarek, Joanna. 2018. „«Upojenie jako triumfalne wtargnięcie w nas rośliny»: obietnice i niebezpieczeństwa roślinnej seksualności.” Teksty Drugie 2: 186–205. https://doi.org/10.18318/td.2018.2.12.
Bodin, Jean. 1995. On the Demon-Mania of Witches. Tłum. Randy A. Scott. Wstęp Jonathan L. Pearl. Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies.
Carroll, Noël. 2003. The Philosophy of Horror: Or, Paradoxes of the Heart. New York – London: Routledge.
Charnley, Joy. 1990. „Near and Far East in the Works of Pierre Bayle.” The Seventeenth Century 5(2): 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268117X.1990.10555309.
Federici, Silvia. 2004. Caliban and the Witch: Omen, the Body and Primitive Accumulation. New York: Autonomedia.
Gernet, Jacques. 1973. „La Politique de conversion de Matteo Ricci en Chine.” Archives de sciences sociales des religions 36(18): 71–89.
Janik, Mateusz. 2020. „Imagining Immanent Causality: Depictions of Neo-Confucian and Spinozist Monism in the Works of Matteo Ricci and Pierre Bayle.” Philosophy East and West, listopad. https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.0.0206.
Jensen, Lionel M. 1997. Manufacturing Confucianism: Chinese Traditions & Universal Civilization. Durham: Duke University Press.
Kapoor, Ramesh. b.d. „Comet tales from India”.
Karl, Rebecca E. 2017. The Magic of Concepts: History and the Economic in Twentieth-Century China. Durham: Duke University Press.
Kowalczyk, Agnieszka. 2014. „Mapping Non-human Resistance in the Age of Biocapital.” W The Rise of Critical Animal Studies – From the Margins to the Centre, red. Nick Taylor i Richard Twine, 183–200. London – New York: Routledge i Taylor & Francis Group.
Krzeski, Jakub, i Anna Piekarska. 2017. „Autonomia oporu – Marks, Spinoza i akumulacja pierwotna.” Praktyka Teoretyczna 25(3): 85–112. https://doi.org/10.14746/prt.2017.3.3.
Lamy. 1696. Le nouvel athéisme renversé, ou réfutation de Spinoza.
Lezra, Jacques. 2019. Untranslating Machines: A Genealogy for the Ends of Global Thought. [b.m.]: Rowman & Littlefield International.
Longobardi, Niccolò. 1701. Traité sur quelques points de la religion des Chinois. Tłum. Louis de Cicé. Paris: Louis Guérin.
Lovecraft, Howard P. 2019. Zew Cthulhu. Tłum. Maciej Płaza. Czerwonka: Wydawnictwo Vesper.
Meek, Ronald L. 2011. Social Science and the Ignoble Savage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moeller, Hans-Georg. 2018. „On Comparative and Post-Comparative Philosophy.” W Appreciating the Chinese Difference: Engaging Roger T. Ames on Methods, Issues, and Roles, red. James Behuniak, 31–45. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Moll, Łukasz. 2017. „Sytuując to, co wspólne. De Angelis, Agamben i zewnętrze kapitalizmu.” Praktyka Teoretyczna 25(3): 46–84. https://doi.org/10.14746/prt.2017.3.2.
Mulsow, Martin. 2015. Enlightenment Underground: Radical Germany, 1680–1720. Charlottesville – London: University of Virginia Press.
Mungello, David Emil. 1989. Curious Land: Jesuit Accommodation and the Origins of Sinology. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Norden, Bryan W. Van. 2017. Taking Back Philosophy: A Multicultural Manifesto. Wstęp Jay L Garfield. New York: New York Columbia University Press.
Pagden, Anthony. 1986. The Fall of Natural Man: The American Indian and the Origins of Comparative Ethnology. Cambridge – New York: Cambridge University Press.
Park, Katharine, i Lorraine J. Daston. 1981. „Unnatural conceptions: The study of monsters in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century France
and England.” Past & Present 92(1): 20–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/past/92.1.20.
Park, Peter K. J. 2013. Africa, Asia, and the History of Philosophy: Racism in the Formation of the Philosophical Canon, 1780–1830. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Peng-Yoke, Ho, i Ang Tian-Se. 1970. „Chinese Astronomical Records on Comets and «Guest Stars» in the Official Histories of Ming and Ch’ing and other Supplementary Sources.” Oriens Extremus 17(1/2): 63–99. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43382376
Perkins, Franklin. 2004. Leibniz and China: A Commerce of Light. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polo, Marco. 1975. Opisanie świata. Tłum. Anna Ludwika Czerny. Wstęp Marian Lewicki. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.
Pospiszyl, Michał. 2016. „Anomiczni Żonglerzy. Ciało polityczne i późnośredniowieczna maszyna antropologiczna.” Praktyka Teoretyczna 19(1): 232–264. https://doi.org/10.14746/prt.2016.1.11.
Ricci, Matteo, i Nicolas Trigault. 1617. De Christiana expeditione apud sinas suscepta ab Societate Jesu. Ex P. Matthaei Riccii eiusdem Societatis commentariis Libri V: Ad S.D.N. Paulum V. In Quibus Sinensis Regni mores, leges, atque instituta, & novae illius Ecclesiae difficillima primordia accurate & summa fide describuntur. Gualterus.
Scott, James C. 2010. The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. Singapore: NUS Press.
Shaffer, Ellen. 1952. „Father Eusebio Francisco Kino And The Comet of 1680–1681.” The Historical Society of Southern California Quarterly 34(1): 57–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/41168323.
Silius, Vytis. 2020. „Diversifying Academic Philosophy: The Post-Comparative Turn and Transculturalism.” Asian Studies 8(2): 257–280. https://doi.org/10.4312/as.2020.8.2.257-280.
Szadkowski, Krystian, i Jakub Krzeski. 2019. „Political Ontologies of the Future University: Individual, Public, Common.” Philosophy and Theory in Higher Education 3(1): 29–49.
Tatián, Diego. 2014. „The Potentiality of the Archaic: Spinoza and the Chinese.” Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology 45(1): 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2014.915645.
Thacker, Eugene. 2011. In the Dust of This Planet: Horror of Philosophy Vol. 1. Lanham: John Hunt Publishing.
Tunenberg, Ola. 2009. „Democratic State vs. Deep State.” W Government of the Shadows: Parapolitics and Criminal Sovereignty, red. Eric Wilson. New York: Pluto Press.
Wilson, Eric. 2009. Government of the Shadows: Parapolitics and Criminal Sovereignty. New York: Pluto Press.
Wilson, Eric. 2016. The Republic of Cthulhu: Lovecraft, the Weird Tale, and Conspiracy Theory. Punctum Books. E-book.
License
“Theoretical Practice” seeks to put into practice the idea of open access to knowledge and broadening the domain of the commons. It serves the development of science, thinking and critical reflection. The journal is published in open-access mode under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license (detail available here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/). Articles published in the journal may be freely distributed, stored, printed and utilized for academic and teaching purposes without restrictions.
They should not be, however, used for any commercial purposes or be reconstructed into derivative creations. Access to the journal may not be limited or offered for a fee by any third party.
Prospective authors are obliged to fill in, sign and send back the publishing contract compliant with the CC licencing. [PL.pdf, PL.doc, EN.pdf,EN.doc].
According to this contract, authors grant the journal a non-exclusive right to publish their work under the creative commons license (CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0) without any financial obligation on both sides of the contract.
Before submission authors should make sure that derivative materials they use are not protected by copyright preventing their non-commercial publication. Authors are responsible for any respective copyright violations.