Looking at Slavoj Zizek’s Book (2024) “Christian Atheism” (Part 25 of 33)

0258 Chapter five is titled, in translation, “Neither Human nor Divine nor Nature”.

To start, I ask, “Where have I been?”

0259 Zizek is great fun to read. And, examinations should be fun as well.  Examinations may contact touchy subjects, in a medical prostatic protocol sort of way.  “Touchy” is what Zizek does best.

I now count to ten.

0260 At first, I intuitively arrive at a nested form as an initial guess.  Here is a picture.

0261 Second, I figure out that Christ3c can be replaced by a Relativist One3c.  Or maybe I should use the label, “Qualifying One3c“, as the one who sets the qualifications3c.  The Qualifying One3c operates on the potential of ‘synthetic truth’1c.

Third, I suspect that Lacan’s term, “jouissance”, associates to the potential of ‘synthetic truth’1c.

0262 Fourth, in when discussing how Lacan is not a Buddhist, a law of economics constellates as a situation-level nested form.

Here is a diagram.

0263 Fifth, when discussing quantum mechanics, the content-level comes to nothingness in a weird sort of way.  At first, the content level, like the noumenon, is meant to be disregarded. Then later, when it can no longer be ignored, it turns into something like a model substituting for the noumenon.  Then, the content-level accommodates a projection from the perspective level.

Lacan uses the term achose (no thing or “a” thing) to label this content-level simulacra2a.

0270 Sixth, for Zizek’s configuration of Christian atheism, the previous points may be expressed as a three-level interscope.

Which makes me wonder, “How can the content-level dyad of {raw materials [construct] specified product}2a be a projection of the perspective-level dyad of {capital & acquisition [wealth and power] social & exercise of order}2c?”

Seventh, am I wondering about the objet a writ large?

0271 Of course, Zizek does not come close to describing the interscope pictured above.

He does not imagine an objet a writ large.

Instead, this examiner suggests that the above interscope is within the spectrum of Zizek’s wide ranging discourse.

All that I am doing is making associations and discussing implications.

Zizek’s text overflows with raw material.

The above interscope is like a specified product2a.

0272 Eighth, I ask, “What is the advantage of the above permutation of the interscope for [wealth and power]2c?”

Well, the interscope portrays three levels for something very close to economics in our current Lebenswelt.

0273 Ninth, the next figure presents a similar “economics-oriented” interscope characteristic of the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.

Note how the potentials resonate across Lebenswelts.

0274 What does this imply?

The interscope for our industrial age recapitulates the interscope for the Acheulean stone age.  Consequently, the elements that Lacan labels may well be hominin adaptations.

0275 Tenth, this examination associates jouissance to potential on all three levels.  The perspective level is paradigmatic.

0276 On top of that, objet a and petit objet a belong the perspective level.  These objects are writ small.

Here is a picture of the objets a writ small for an example provided by this examination.

The same relational beings are present in the entire interscope as writ large.

0277 Okay, that where I have been, counting one to ten.