EUROAMERICANISM
Subjec & Chaos
Ma cus S einweg
S aa liche Akademie de Bildenden Küns e Ka ls uhe / A Academy Ka ls uhe,
Ka ls uhe, Ge many
Abs ac
Philosophy always uni es he di ided: he ini e and in ini e, a homable and
un a homable, c ea ed and c ea o , Man and God. Whene e I hink, my hough uni es
wha mus emain di ided: immanence and anscendence, consis ency and
inconsis ency, Eu opean o iginali y and Ame ican ho izon ali y. A and philosophy
indica e he con ingen na u e o eali y. They gene a e esis ance agains es ablished
eali ies and he disposi i es ha o ganize hem. Thei aim is no o lee om eali y bu
a he o in ensi y con ac wi h eali y by main aining a dis ance o i .
Keywo ds: Happiness, Con inemen , Enligh enmen , Cou age, Pa hos and S inging
Eyes.
Happiness
F ançois Jullien demons a ed ha he idea o happiness was among he leas
ques ioned p emises in Wes e n hough . As long as his idea emains ied o a
ision o a goal in o de o insc ibe i sel in a eleology wi h a happy ending, i
will belong o he Eu opeanism o he happy li e, which “singled ou he idea o
happiness om he con inui y o p ocess and se i o h as ‘ he desi able’ pa
excellence.” As always, Jullien app oaches he decons uc ion o one o he co e
ca ego ies o he Eu opean his o y o ideas om he ou side, aking a de ou
h ough China, which did no unde go he sepa a ion o day- o-day li ing and
he desi e o happiness in o de o nu u e li e independen o happiness.
Nu u ing li e away om happiness means li ing i wi hou any pa icula idea o
happiness, beyond he d ama u gy o un ul illed desi e, wi hou he
Ma cus S einweg, EUROAMERICANISM. Subjec & Chaos
240
oman iciza ion o happiness. One hing ha ’s no able abou his compa ison
be ween Eu opean goal-o ien edness/pu pose ulness and Chinese
pu poselessness/goallessness is ha i lea es unmen ioned he eme gence o a
concep ion o happiness wi hin he ield o Wes e n philosophy ha is eed om
he ca ego ies o sense, om de e mina ion, and om elos. Nie zsche
eac i a ed he an ique and Spinozis ic he i age o an immanence o bea i udo in
he ma e ialis ic ho izon o exis ence. Spinozis ic/Nie zschean a i ma ionism,
saying yes o li e in i s unli eableness, would be ano he s ain o Wes e n
hough ha loca es happiness wi hin i s incommensu abili y—ins ead o
cons uing i as beyond li e. Being happy simply means li ing. The e is no li e
beyond li e, beyond i s iolence and unli eableness.
Con inemen
Has anyone e e done mo e iolence o logos han o con ine i in he p ison
known as logic? And wha i he speech, language, o eason known as logos
we e con ic ed o he inconsis ency o i s p omise known as logic? Among
he e ics, an exac ingness caused by excess is p ope o hough , which emp s
logos o b eak wi h i s p inciples. Thinking means showing logos i s own agili y.
Enligh enmen
Should we call enligh enmen he hing ha sp eads “ ace elemen s o eason
... h ough he wo ld,” o is i “ ace elemen s o chaos ... ha b ing o h
enligh enmen ”? Alexande Kluge di ec s his ques ion a Heine Mülle , who
ecognizes ha i is he “pu pose o in elligence” “ o c ea e chaos” in o de o
“ques ion all illusions, all coali ions, and all alliances.” Ul ima ely, he poin is o
complica e he opposi ion be ween eason and chaos. Wha else does eason do
han b ing chaos in o he wo ld, and wha does chaos p oduce i no he
hype easonable ques ioning o his chaos o eason, which is a ionalis ic
o alism? The dialec ic o enligh enmen causes eason and chaos o in e ac in a
way ha does no p i ilege ei he side. We’ e go en used o desc ibing he bi h
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
241
o logos ou o chaos o my h as he emancipa ion o hough om he i a ional.
A he same ime, we know ha he eme gence o eason in he p e a ional
sphe e o chaos ep esen ed a iolen e en ha gene a ed chao ic e ec s.
T ansla ed in o he sys em o na u e/cul u e, ha means ha we dis ance
ou sel es om he my h o a cul u e ha subs i u es o “wild” na u e, and
canno simply swi ch o e o an opposing ideology o na u e obbed o i s
“innocence” by cul u e. Na u e isn’ wild, pu e, o innocen ; no is cul u e
ci ilizing o iolen . To o mula e i as p imi i ely as possible: one isn’ be e
han he o he . Na u e isn’ good, cul u e isn’ bad; no ice e sa.
Enligh enmen begins wi h he suspension o hese an h opomo phisms.
A icula ing onesel beyond good and e il is pa o complexi y. The in e es -
o ien ed, s a egic, o i a ional iolence, b u ali y, and ho o ha happen in he
name o (gene ally ascis ic) na u alism and (ideological, eligious) cul u alism is
he p oduc o he subjec ’s exi om he dialec ic o enligh enmen . Ins ead o
ac ing a he le el o i s wo ld’s complexi y, i educes his complexi y in a o o
one-sidedness ha i calls u h o jus ice. Should i make sense o speak o
u h o jus ice in his con ex , hen he dialec ic o enligh enmen eaches us
ha hey a e on he side o complexi y a he han one-sidedness.
Cou age
In Kan ’s essay Wha Is Enligh enmen ? (1784), Michel Foucaul ecognized a
“call o cou age.” The amed challenge—add essed o all o humani y— o eme ge
om imma u i y implies a sape e aude: he cou age o hink, he emancipa ion
om subjec ion o he hinking o o he s. Kan is ouching on he human abili y
o become conscious o one’s own he e onomy in o de o—g adually— ee
onesel om i . In he con ex o u he conside a ions ha s ay om Kan ,
Foucaul spoke o he “cou age o he u h,” which is an amoun o his
de ini ion o philosophical hough . The cou age o he u h u ns ou o be he
cou age o hinking. The ac o hinking—which includes p ocessuali y and
in e minabili y—includes wo king on he u h, “analysis o he ela ions be ween
he subjec and u h: ha o ela ions o powe and hei ole in he in e play
Ma cus S einweg, EUROAMERICANISM. Subjec & Chaos
242
be ween he subjec and u h.” The cou age o u h mus ques ion he
ins umen aliza ion o he u h and i s usion wi h es ablished powe . Fa om
dismissing u h as a me aphysical concep —and wi h and wi hou Kan —
Foucaul de ines he ask o his hough as he analysis o he u h. Cou age
demands his analysis, i only because as a c i ical p ojec , i canno us any
simple solu ions— as a as he alliance be ween knowledge and powe goes, o
example. S ic ly speaking, i can’ us any hing. The cou age o u h is
inhe en in he adi ion o enligh enmen no only in he o m o a challenge,
bu also as p oblem and apo ia. You could call Foucaul he hinke o his
inhe ence. His en i e body o hough exp esses consciousness o he apo ia o
hough conce ning he u h. This is why i is hough —because hinking doesn’
mean sea ching o solu ions. Thinking means wo king h ough p oblems ha
elude sol abili y. Kan was also clea on his. The subjec is in a bind. Tha ’s
wha he subjec ’s humani y consis s in: being in con ac wi h ques ions and
p oblems ha i can nei he dismiss no sol e. And ha ’s wha equi es cou age.
Pa hos
Thinking ha hinks i sel — he sel - e lec ion o he logos, he cogi o, o he
subjec —implies he e i able pa hos o eason. The e is no doc ine o eason
ha is no a doc ine o emo ion. The easoning subjec canno hink i sel
wi hou being con on ed wi h i s own agmen a ion, he pain ha belongs o
sel -awa eness. The Ancien G eek e b páschein means o su e o o endu e—
and wha is su e ing o he han an expe ience ha pushes he subjec o i s
limi s? Pa hos exp esses he expe ience o un esol able con lic , which is why
he e is no philosophy ha isn’ pa he ic in his sense. I may be a ma e o he
disc ee pa hos o ma hema ical hinking, o lines o a gumen s ained o hei
b eaking poin . I may be he polemic pa hos o eason un io , which we a e
amilia wi h om Nie zsche’s inal books and A aud’s s iden in ec i es ( om
his “animalis ic and supe human, sh ieking, sh ill, b u al” speech). The pa hos o
d y subjec s, abs ac ion, sob ie y, and coldness also exp esses he pain o
hough , in which i “loses i sel ,” as Hegel says. Thinking means ge ing los
NOTES ON EUROPE. The Dogma ic Sleep
P oceedings. Po o, Oc obe 29-31 2019
243
again and again. The sel g inds i sel down on i s con lic s ins ead o
syn hesizing hem dialec ically. The mo emen o eason aces i s es lessness.
Thinking is a passion ha makes he subjec emble in he ace o u hs ha
unde mine i s eali ies.
S inging eyes
To look u h in he ace— ha is he cliché o hough because i can only do so
in he ace o a u h ha emains aceless. “Wha hing,” asks Jean-Luc Nancy,
“can be looked a di ec ly in he ace? I looking some hing ‘in he ace’ means
seeing i s ‘ u h’ o ‘e idence,’ hen he e is ne e any di ec ace- o- ace. E e y
ace is a bedazzlemen , e ible and ma elous.” We know ha Lacan calls he
aceless ace o he u h he eal. F eud speaks o he unconscious, Heidegge o
being ha collapses in o no hingness as nonbeing. The e is no philosophe who
hasn’ ound hei own e m o he u h wi hou a ace. Pla o e okes he image
o he shining sun. Bu ning ligh ha s ings he eyes. The sun in lames and
i i a es he subjec . I i does no cause blindness, hen a leas i bedazzles.
Like F eud’s unconscious, Lacan’s eal, and Heidegge ’s being, i does no gi e o
i sel ully; i wi hd aws and wi hholds i sel . I doesn’ di ulge i sel di ec ly. The
subjec communica es wi h hese en i ies only a he cos o ela i e blindness.
The u h gene a es a subjec wi h s inging eyes. You can also e e o “ eddened
eyes,” as Ranciè e does in a commen a y on Deleuze. Wi h Deleuze, chaos
blinds he subjec and causes i o slide. Wha Deleuze and Gua a i, oge he
wi h Nie zsche, call chaos can be in e p e ed as a ansla ion o he Lacanian eal
in o he disposi i e o immanen hough . The planes o immanence lie like a
il e o a “sc een” o e chaos. They mu le he con ac wi h no hingness. Jus as
he an ique logos al eady ep esen ed a neu alizing igu e o he alogon, he
immanence il e lies o e he aceless chaos o u h in o de o gi e i a ace
ha s ings he subjec ’s eyes less. To look u h in he ace means assen ing o
being blinded, which p omises some minimum o insigh . This pe haps
impossible p omise is he p omise ha philosophy makes o i sel .

Ma cus S einweg, EUROAMERICANISM. Subjec & Chaos
244
Au ho iden i ica ion
Ma cus S einweg. Bo n in 1971, li es and wo ks as a philosophe in Be lin. He is a
P o esso a he A Academy K als uhe. His ecen books include: "Du as" (wi h
Rosema ie T ockel, Be lin: Me e 2008); "Poli ik des Subjek s“ (Zü ich/Be lin: Diaphanes
2009); "Apo ien de Liebe" (Be lin: Me e 2010); "Kuns und Philosophie / A and
Philosophy" (Cologne: Wal e König: 2012); "Philosophie de Übe s ü zung" (Be lin:
Me e 2013), "Inkonsis enzen" (Be lin: Ma hes & Sei z 2015), "E idenz e o " (Be lin:
Ma hes & Sei z 2015), "G amsci Thea e " (Be lin: Me e 2016), "Spli e " (Be lin:
Ma hes & Sei z 2016), "Subjek und Wah hei " (Be lin: Ma hes & Sei z 2018). Some o
his books a e published in english by The MIT P ess