We Cannot Get Off The Subject We Want To Change

We Cannot Get Off This Subject Because Language Is A Product Of Logos, Of The Subject We Want To Change

Future Time



“You’re possessed,” said MV

“What?”

“That thing you call freedom;” replied MV, “with you its blinders and dark sunglasses. It doesn’t matter what you see-its all the same. You could be looking out from prison bars, and you’d still see freedom. You’re possessed!”

“A devilish voice in my head says I’m possessed. Hubba, hubba, what am I to think? What can I say? I’m speechless!”

“Good,” responded MV, “at least I won’t have to listen to your obsession anymore, listen to that shit you pass off as divine structuralism. Why didn’t your Professor stop you before you wasted so much time? Hell, you could have been out partying, or knowing you, at least reading a good book, but no, I guess you just like wasting time. How many ways can you dress up an obsession anyway? Well, I’ve had it. I hate déjà vu. It’s time to pack it in, you’re coming with me and not too soon I might add!”

“Hold on,” I said, “how many guises do you entertain in order to get your way? Do you whisper in every ear, I’m the devil, follow me? I think not. Your reputation for guile and cunning precedes you. Tell me I’m wrong!”

“Hmmm, this is not getting us anywhere,” replied MV, “why don’t you just shut up and come with me. It’s going to happen anyway. Why put it off?

“Unfinished business,” I said, “You know as well as I do that ‘truth’ travels in mixed company. Sometimes it’s up front, sometimes it’s hidden, but, if it’s there, it will eventually surface. And I guess you could say the same for evil too, right!”


“Don’t get me started,” MV responded, “you’re just trying to change the subject, and this subject is not going to change. Listening to you rattle on about freedom is the last thing I want to do. Comprende!”

“But you’re contradicting yourself. Surely the devil is a better communicator than that,” I replied, “or has my admiration for you –what little admiration I have for you, -- been off the mark.”

“What do you mean, contradiction, I’m not contradicting myself,” said MV, “your crazy.”

“Well how can the subject change, or not change for that matter, when the subject is freedom and you are on record as saying you won’t listen to that subject anymore. I believe that’s a contradiction, and, when you get right down to it, no matter what’s talked about, it’s still freedom talking—it’s a structural thing.”

“Stop putting words in my mouth,” sneered MV. “You know damn well what I’m saying, but you twisted it to make it sound like a contradiction.”

“That’s not exactly true,” I said, “remember, if reality is, ultimately, Logos, and if Logos is freedom, then anything that we say or can say is about freedom. We cannot get off this subject because language is a product of Logos, of the subject you want to change. I repeat, because this subject is the condition of the possibility to communicate anything whatsoever, we cannot change this subject.”

“Oh, please! I can’t take it anymore, you’re worse than the devil,” said MV, “and that’s unthinkable.”

“Wait, it’s not that bad,” I responded, “especially if you let me finish. Actually, I think the Professors on my committee, felt the same way you do about this, but they left me alone and everybody was better off for it. You are right, though, there are many ways to express what you call ‘my obsession.’ When it came to writing my thesis, in the beginning, it wasn’t clear how I could hook up my topic, prejudice, with my freedom ideas, but after an extensive literature survey, it all came together for me. First I wrote a short paper about my thesis-the prospectus, which helped my committee members better understand my intent, and then, in my thesis, I not only fleshed out my subject matter, prejudice, I was also able to show how the ‘innate structuring capacity of all structures’ and prejudice are related, but, in doing so, I changed the language from “innate structuring capacity of all structures’ to ‘the implicative affirmative of the not-me-self,’ and I titled my thesis –Prejudice: Empirical Data Beckoning Toward A Theory Of Self, Ambivalence, And Tolerance.”