Agony Of Eros Quotes

Psyche did not think the feeling running through her could exist, it was too powerful, too profound and pierced her soul in a way that was a beautiful agony.

Yes, happiness is the proof that time can accommodate eternity

The society of positivity, from which negativity has disappeared, is a society of bare life, which is exclusively dominated by the concern to make sure of survival

Today, love is being positivized into a formula for enjoyment. Above all, love is supposed to generate pleasant feelings. It no longer represents plot, narration, or drama - only inconsequential emotion and arousal. It is free from the negativity of injury, assault, or crashing. To fall (in love) would already be too negative. Yet it is precisely such negativity that constitutes love

Separation cannot kill love, as you know, but it is an agony nonetheless.

Such crises make it plain that capitalism - counter to widespread belief - is not a religion. Every religion operates with both debt (guilt) and relief (pardon). But capitalism only works with debt and default. It offers no possibility for atonement, which would free the debtor from liability.

Today’s narcissistic “achievement-subject” seeks out success above all. Finding success validates the One through the Other. Thereby, the Other is robbed of otherness and degrades into a mirror of the One—a mirror affirming the latter’s image.

A successful relationship with the Other finds expression as a kind of failure. Only by way of being able not to be able does the Other appear

Under conditions of a truly human existence, the difference between succumbing to disease at the age of ten, thirty, fifty, or seventy, and dying a "natural" death after a fulfilled life, may well be a difference worth fighting for with all instinctual energy. Not those who die, but those who die before they must and want to die, those who die in agony and pain, are the great indictment against civilization. They also testify to the unredeemable guilt of mankind. Their death arouses the painful awareness that it was unnecessary, that it could be otherwise. It takes all the institutions and values of a repressive order to pacify the bad conscience of this guilt. Once again, the deep connection between the death instinct and the sense of guilt becomes apparent. The silent "professional agreement" with the fact of death and disease is perhaps one of the most widespread expressions of the death instinct -- or, rather, of its social usefulness. In a repressive civilization, death itself becomes an instrument of repression. Whether death is feared as constant threat, or glorified as supreme sacrifice, or accepted as fate, the education for consent to death introduces an element of surrender into life from the beginning -- surrender and submission. It stifles "utopian" efforts. The powers that be have a deep affinity to death; death is a token of unfreedom, of defeat. Theology and philosophy today compete with each other in celebrating death as an existential category: perverting a biological fact into an ontological essence, they bestow transcendental blessing on the guilt of mankind which they help to perpetuate -- they betray the promise of utopia.

Foucault señala que el homo oeconomicus neoliberal no mora en la sociedad disciplinaria, que, como empresario de sí mismo, ya no es un sujeto obediente; pero queda oculto para dicho autor que este empresario por cuenta propia en realidad no es libre, sino que simplemente creer serlo, cuando en verdad se explota a sí mismo. Foucault adopta un tono afirmativo frente al neoliberalismo. Acepta sin crítica que el régimen neoliberal, como “sistema del Estado mínimo”, como “administrador de la libertad”, posibilita la libertad del ciudadano. Se le escapa por completo la estructura de poder y coacción que hay en la proclamación neoliberal de la libertad. De esta forma, la interpreta como libertad para la libertad: “Voy a producir para ti lo que se requiera para que seas libre. Voy a procurar que tengas la libertad para ser libre”. La proclamación neoliberal de la libertad se manifiesta, en realidad, como un imperativo paradójico: sé libre. Se precipita al sujeto del rendimiento a la depresión y al agotamiento. En Foucault, la “ética del sí mismo” ciertamente se opone al poder político represivo, así coma la explotación por parte de otros, pero es ciega ante aquella violencia de la libertad que está en el fondo de la explotación de sí mismo. El tú puedes produce coacciones masivas en las que el sujeto del rendimiento se rompe en toda regla. La coacción engendrada por uno mismo se presenta como libertad, de modo que no es reconocida como tal. El tú puedes incluso ejerce más coacción que el tú debes. La coacción propia es más fatal que la coacción ajena, ya que no es posible ninguna resistencia contra sí mismo. El régimen neoliberal esconde su estructura coactiva tras la aparente libertad del individuo, que ya no se entiende como sujeto sometido (subject to), sino como desarrollo de un proyecto. Ahí está su ardid. Quien fracasa es, además, culpable y lleva consigo esta culpa dondequiera que vaya. No hay nadie a quien pueda hacer responsable de su fracaso. Tampoco hay posibilidad alguna de excusa e expiación. Con ello, surge no solo la crisis de culpa, sino también de la gratificación.

There is no such thing as data-driven thinking. Only calculation is data driven. The negativity of the incalculable is inscribed in thinking. As such, it is prior and superordinate to "data" which means "things given"...Data-based positive science, which amounts to merely balancing out and comparing data, is putting an end to theory of emphatic sort.

Eros and depression are opposites. Eros pulls the subject out of itself, toward the Other. Depression, in contrast, plunges the subject into itself

Capitalism’s compulsive accumulation and growth is specifically aimed against death, which counts as absolute loss.

Today’s ego, with its “endless capacity to enunciate and refine criteria in mate selection,”10 does not desire.

Catastrophic fatality abruptly switches over into salvation.

Eros does not aim at happiness. We may think he does, but when he is brought to the test it proves otherwise. Everyone knows that it is useless to try to separate lovers by proving to them that their marriage will be an unhappy one. This is not only because they will disbelieve you. They usually will, no doubt. But even if they believed, they would not be dissuaded. For it is the very mark of Eros that when he is in us we had rather share unhappiness with the Beloved than be happy on any other terms. Even if the two lovers are mature and experienced people who know that broken hearts heal in the end and can clearly foresee that, if they once steeled themselves to go through the present agony of parting, they would almost certainly be happier ten years hence than marriage is at all likely to make them—even then, they would not part. To Eros all these calculations are irrelevant—just as the coolly brutal judgment of Lucretius is irrelevant to Venus. Even when it becomes clear beyond all evasion that marriage with the Beloved cannot lead to happiness—when it cannot even profess to offer any other life than that of tending an incurable invalid, of hopeless poverty, of exile, or of disgrace—Eros never hesitates to say, "Better this than parting. Better to be miserable with her than happy without her. Let our hearts break provided they break together." If the voice within us does not say this, it is not the voice of Eros.

Sex means achievement and performance. And sexiness represents capital to be increased. The body - with its display value - has become a commodity. At the same time, the Other is being sexualized into an object for procuring arousal. When otherness is stripped from the Other, one cannot love - one can only consume.

Science and psychotherapy have also done much already to liberate us from the prison of isolation from nature in which we were supposed to renounce Eros, despise the physical organism, and rest all our hopes in a supernatural world [...]. This liberation is, in other words, a very partial affair even for the small minority which has fully understood and accepted it. It leaves us still as strangers in the cosmos-without the judgment of God but without his love, without the terrors of Hell but without the hope of Heaven, without many of the physical agonies of pre-scientific times but without the sense that human life has any meaning.

The wholesale absence of negativity is degrading love into an object of consumption, a matter of hedonistic calculation. The desire for the Other is giving way to the comfort of the Same. The aim is to procure the comfortable, and ultimately, dull immanence of the wholly identical. Modern love lacks all transcendence and transgression.

El amor, en el curso de una positivación de todos los ámbitos de vida, es domesticado para convertirlo en una fórmula de consumo, como un producto sin riesgo ni atrevimiento, sin exceso ni locura. El sufrimiento y la pasión dejan paso a sentimientos agradables y a excitaciones sin consecuencias. En la época del quickie, del sexo de ocasión y distensión, también pierde toda negatividad. La ausencia total de negatividad hace que el amor hoy se atrofie como un objeto de consumo y cálculo hedonista. El deseo del otro es suplantado por el confort de lo igual. Se busca la placentera, y en definitiva cómoda, inmanencia de lo igual. Al amor de hoy le falta transcendencia y transgresión.

Today, we live in an increasingly narcissistic society. Libido is primarily invested in one’s own subjectivity. Narcissism is not the same as self-love. The subject of selflove draws a negative boundary between him- or herself and the Other. The narcissistic subject, on the other hand, never manages to set any clear boundaries. In consequence, the border between the narcissist and the Other becomes blurry. The world appears only as adumbrations of the narcissist’s self, which is incapable of recognizing the Other in his or her otherness — much less acknowledging this otherness for what it is. Meaning can exist for the narcissistic self only when it somehow catches sight of itself. It wallows in its own shadow everywhere until it drowns — in itself. Depression is a narcissistic malady. It derives from overwrought, pathologically distorted self reference. The narcissistic-depressive subject has exhausted itself and worn itself down. Without a world to inhabit, it has been abandoned by the Other. Eros and depression are opposites. Eros pulls the subject out of itself, toward the Other. Depression, in contrast, plunges the subject into itself. Today’s narcissistic “achievement-subject” seeks out success above all. Finding success validates the One through the Other. Thereby, the Other is robbed of otherness and degrades into a mirror of the One — a mirror affirming the latter’s image.

Her curious fingers paused before dipping below the soft hair. When she encountered the feminine folds, she gasped. Dorian stopped breathing. She tested that place lightly, finding a place that quivered and pulsed at the apex of that pliable skin. Awe speared Dorian as her feminine muscles clenched in the exact rhythm his own loins did. He could see them working through the skin unique to her sex. Her hips rolled with instinct little movements, her breaths catching on sighs of appreciation. If Dorian was a lesser man, unused to patience, torment, and agony, he would have released his seed then and there. But he grappled his orgasm back down, thinking of her hands on his repulsive flesh, letting the fear throw ice into the flames. Then she parted the inner cleft, dipped inside, and let out a moan that could have aroused Eros, himself. Her finger came away glistening as she pulled it back toward the nub that seemed to demand more attention than anywhere else. Where she swiped the moisture across it, her muscles all tensed, and she threw her head back onto the counterpane, letting loose a sound so visceral Dorian's will snapped.

Eros concerns the Other in the strong sense, namely, what cannot be encompassed by the regime of the ego. Therefore, in the inferno of the same, which contemporary society is increasingly becoming, erotic experience does not exist. Erotic experience presumes the asymmetry and exteriority of the Other. It is not by chance that Socrates the lover is called atopos. The Other, whom I desire and who fascinates me, is placeless. He or she is removed from the language of sameness: “Being atopic, the Other makes language indecisive: one cannot speak of the Other, about the Other; every attribute is false, painful, erroneous, awkward.” Our contemporary culture of constant comparison leaves no room for the negativity of what is atopos. We are constantly comparing one thing to another, thereby flattening them into the Same, precisely because we no longer experience the atopia of the Other. The negativity of the atopic Other refuses consumption. Therefore, the society of the consumer endeavors to eliminate atopic otherness in favor of consumable —heterotopic— differences. In contrast to otherness, difference is positive. Yet today, negativity is disappearing everywhere. Everything is being flattened out into an object of consumption.

Philosophy is the translation of the Eros into Logos

Por eso, en el infierno de lo igual, al que la sociedad actual se asemeja cada vez más, no hay ninguna experiencia erótica.

Eros'un Istırabı Bugün aşk cinselliğe, kendisi de başarı emrine tabi olan cinselliğe dönüşerek pozitif bir hal alıyor. Seks başarmaktır. Ve seksilik çoğaltılması gereken bir sermayedir. Beden sergilenme değeriyle bir metaya benzer" (20). Her şeyin mümkün olduğu, her şeyin insiyatif ve projeden ibaret olduğu, Becerebilme'nin egemenliğindeki başarı toplumunda ise incinme ve tutku olarak aşka geçit yoktur. (21)

Eros concerns the Other in the strong sense, namely, what cannot be encompassed by the regime of the ego. Therefore, in the inferno of the same, which contemporary society is increasingly becoming, erotic experience does not exist. Erotic experience presumes the asymmetry and exteriority of the Other. It is not by chance that Socrates the lover is called atopos. The Other, whom I desire and who fascinates me, is placeless. He or she is removed from the language of sameness: “Being atopic, the Other makes language indecisive: one cannot speak of the Other, about the Other; every attribute is false, painful, erroneous, awkward.” Our contemporary culture of constant comparison leaves no room for the negativity of what is atopos. We are constantly comparing one thing to another, thereby flattening them into the Same, precisely because we no longer experience the atopia of the Other. The negativity of the atopic Other refuses consumption. Therefore, the society of the consumer endeavors to eliminate atopic otherness in favor of consumable —heterotopic— differences. In contrast to otherness, difference is positive. Yet today, negativity is disappearing everywhere. Everything is being flattened out into an object of consumption.

Who knows why people do what they do? The point is they do it, and we can track and measure it with unprecedented fidelity.

Eros is the drive for union and reproduction in the biological realm. Even in the birds and animals, we see the "desire of procreation," and they are "in agony when they take the infection of love, which begins with the desire of union." Human beings are changing all the time—hair, flesh, bones, blood, and the whole body are always changing. Which is true not only of the body, but also of the soul, whose habits, tempers, opinions, desires, pleasures, pains, fears, never remain the same. Now in all this change, what binds the diversity together? It is eros, the power in us yearning for wholeness, the drive to give meaning and pattern to our variegation, and integration to counter our disintegrative trends. It is a dimension of experience which is psychological and emotional as well as biological. This is eros.