Subjects and bodies

Throughout history, the transformative subject, schooled in symbolic computation and metamodel construction has wielded power – soft power – over bodies. This is partly due to the leverage lent to a host body when it permits the subject to embed these capacities within its system: advantages gained within the wider war-market economy of physical competition. One group will have an advantage over another if it has its accountancy in order: all other things equal, the competitive edge is gained by optimal GDP, taxation, inventory management, etc.

The host body welcomes this capacity to calculate within itself: the subject will not effect change without an invitation. And as the capacity requires a sound metamodel, the transformative subject enters the host from the outside, always a stranger.

A stranger subjecthood hired from where? From heaven, from god? No: from another body, another organisation. Not objectivity of a heaven external to organisations, but an objectivity gained from its dynamic passage, its “trajectory of desire”, an organizational continuum-heaven.

It is in this sense that prophethood as a catalyst for change is utterly human but not humanitarian.

Because the transcendence of prophecy isn’t religious: it’s sociological and power oriented. Fundamentally, precisely a functor between the reorganisation of the body and the thinking subject’s power of desire that is the continuum across bodies.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s