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 95
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
Hello World
In a sense, she reads the
Husserlian transcendental ego
back into Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology.