Re: Hägglund

[robert <http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert>]

 > From: Noelle <noelle>
 > Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 09:12:14 -0800 (PST)
 >
 > I thought this sounded familiar, his book reviewed in The Nation
 > 
 > https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/martin-hagglund-this-life-socialism-secularism-book-review/

The below quote in the review is an interesting counterpoint.

However, if you ignore the death theme, looking at "time" itself as
something must be kept precious for the individual is still compelling.

The other thing that bothered me about the
https://www.thedigradio.com/podcast/this-life-with-martin-hagglund/
interview is that there was no mention of the use of roles for power
relations.  I think he made that leap, there would be a need to question
not just capitalism and the capitalists, but all authority, including the
state, even if the state were completely community-driven.

 But is it only death that gives life meaning?  Though he returns to this
 assertion throughout his book, Hagglund never truly offers a clear
 explanation as to why finitude confers value.  Suppose you tell me that
 global warming will overtake the earth within a year and that nothing we
 can do will prevent the catastrophe.  The sense of inevitability might
 not encourage action but instead awaken feelings of disabling fatalism.
 Finitude, it seems, is hardly a necessary condition for caring about
 life; it might even inhibit me from caring at all.  Now suppose I believe
 in karma: Even the simplest act in my current life will bear upon who I
 will be in the life to come.  In this case, it seems that a belief that
 points beyond my death might very well encourage me to care a great deal
 about each and every aspect of my present conduct.