Digital Food Garden

Digital Food Garden

BACKEND

Reading and Pulling Quotes

FRONTEND

Annotated Quotes

Merleau-Ponty

Butler

Butler 95 (exegesis)

Butler 95 abstract subject, concrete experience (exegesis)

Butler 96-97 Master-Slave (exegesis)

Butler 97-98 Flesh (exegesis)

Butler 98 Genderless Subject (exegesis)

Butler 98-99 Feminist Appropriation of MP (exegesis)

Lecture Outlines

Merleau-Ponty Lecture

Pulled Quotes

Merleau-Ponty

Butler

Butler 95 abstract subject, concrete experience

Butler 96-97 Master-Slave

Butler 97-98 Flesh

Butler 98 Genderless Subject

Butler 98-99 Feminist Appropriation of MP

Reading Notes

Merleau-Ponty

Kruks

Kruks 27 M-P assumption of a male body

Kruks 29 Far from advocating

Kruks 30 human existence is first and foremost

Kruks 30 third genus of being

Kruks 30-31 The One impersonal perception

Kruks 31 Perception as social

Kruks 31 Temporal perception

Kruks 31-32 intentional arc

Kruks 32 place of unrest

Kruks 34-35 Intersubjectivty

Kruks 35-37 Anonymous embodiment

Kruks 37-38 Embodied art of intentionality

Kruks 40 Domination is a material relationship

Kruks 40-41 Vulnerability Boomerang

Kruks 41 Solipsism

Kruks 42 Body not a shortcut to common ground

Oliver

Oliver 198 Also in contrast to Sartre, Merleau-Ponty argues that

Oliver 198 Merleau-Ponty insists that radical alterity requires neither that

Oliver 198 Touching Eyes Merleau-Ponty's later phenomenology of perception will

Oliver 199 At this point, Merleau-Ponty suggests the radical notion

Oliver 199 Flesh makes communication possible because, as Merleau-Ponty says

Oliver 199 For Merleau-Ponty, the body itself mediates the

Oliver 199 I have a different relation to my own

Oliver 199 Merleau-Ponty goes so far as to suggest that

Oliver 199 More than this, I can feel their effervescence

Oliver 199 Rather than reject any philosophy of subjectivity, Merleau-Ponty

Oliver 199 The body is both subject and object because

Oliver 199 The skin is a boundary, but a permeable

Oliver 199 The thickness of flesh and permeability of skin

Oliver 199–200 This opening of the boundary It is precisely

Oliver 200 He insists that “space is no longer what

Oliver 200 It is that the thickness of the flesh

Oliver 200 Merleau-Ponty does not accept the Cartesian conception of

Oliver 200 Rather, for Merleau-Ponty distance is enabling and vision

Oliver 200 Unlike Lacan’s gaze that either cuts us off

Oliver 200–201 While for Lacan the anonymity of vision makes (2)

Oliver 200–201 While for Lacan the anonymity of vision makes

Oliver 201 For him, vision is part of a system

Oliver 201 For Merleau-Ponty the corporeality of the visible world

Oliver 201 He describes palpitations of the eyes as analogous (2)

Oliver 201 He describes palpitations of the eyes as analogous

Oliver 201 He insists that the notion of the separation

Oliver 201 Humanity is the intertwining of being and meaning

Oliver 201 Humanity is the reversibility of flesh, an openness

Oliver 201 In addition to describing vision as part of

Oliver 201 In this way, vision never works merely through

Oliver 201 More than this, the so-called mind’s eye or

Oliver 201 One fundamental reason why Merleau-Ponty can imagine vision

Oliver 201 The senses translate each other and work together

Oliver 201 While Lacan insists that meaning and being are

Oliver 201–202 Rather, the mirror image is perceived through a

Oliver 202 As Merleau-Ponty says, It is more accurate to

Oliver 202 For Merleau-Ponty the distance necessary for vision is

Oliver 202 I do not see the world; I see

Oliver 202 I live in it from the inside; I

Oliver 202 Influenced by Gestalt psychology, both Merleau-Ponty and Gibson

Oliver 202 Merleau-Ponty criticizes Descartes' conception of space as having

Oliver 202 Rather, vision is movement, more like a caress

Oliver 202 Space is not made up of Cartesian points

Oliver 202 There are no gaps between us and the

Oliver 202 We are not separated from ourselves, others, and

Oliver 203 And his theory of a vision-touch system in

Oliver 203 His notion of the flesh of the world

Oliver 203 If the eyes are flesh-porous membranes-and not solid

Oliver 203 If various interconnected, interacting elements-air, light, waves, par

Oliver 203 In a sense, she reads the Husserlian transcendental

Oliver 203 Luce Irigaray challenges Merleau-Ponty's attempt to think the

Oliver 203 Rather than stage a dialogue between Irigaray and

Oliver 203 She argues that Merleau-Ponty's emphasis on the reversibility

Oliver 203 She argues that the notion of reversibility reduces

Oliver 203 She claims that he reduces touch to vision

Oliver 203 Stephen Melville nicely describes the trajectory of Merleau-Ponty's

His notion of the flesh of the world is provocative in its implications for reconceiving of space as full rather than empty.