I suspect this was writing produced while participating in Fadi Abou-Rihan‘s seminar on Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus. Jaspers on Kant i.e. synthetic versus analytic judgements. Introducing the quotation, I wrote at the time that “I think that this distinction may help with explicating the empiricity of Oedipus.”
Analytic judgements are present in thinking apart from experience, where we discern nothing new and merely clarify things that were known unclearly. Synthetic judgements, on the other hand, are present in all our empirical knowledge. By perception and observation we find out what belongs together, what follows what.”
I have in my print out of this quotation an arrow sketched in pencil and leading to this statement (also in pencil): narrativity passes through perception. And then back to the thread (my previous comment on the quotation is typewritten): “The question may then become one of whether Oedipus is a product of a synthetic a posterieri judgement. Then how does one move to the universality of Oedipus (or any given structure) as a product of a synthetic a priori judgement.”
Scrawled along the bottom of this prose are two lines in a large and generous hand:
The marker of novelty
new vs clarification
Interesting re-juxtaposition of terms. [Not a single question mark dots the page of this relentless questioning].
And so for day 728