Title a Metaethical Study of Simone Weil's
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Title A Metaethical Study of Simone Weil’s Notion of Attention Through Critical Practical Analogy Type Thesis URL http://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/5254/ Date 2011 Citation Alfier, Dino (2011) A Metaethical Study of Simone Weil’s Notion of Attention Through Critical Practical Analogy. PhD thesis, University of the Arts London. Creators Alfier, Dino Usage Guidelines Please refer to usage guidelines at http://ualresearchonline.arts.ac.uk/policies.html or alternatively contact [email protected]. License: Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Unless otherwise stated, copyright owned by the author A Metaethical Study of Simone Weil’s Notion of Attention Through Critical Practical Analogy Dino Alfier University of the Arts London PhD Thesis February 2011 2 Abstract This research provides an example of art practice employed within a metaethical framework by addressing Simone →eil‘s ethical notion of attention. In this thesis, ‗metaethics‘ is defined as a second order inquiry into first order questions of normative ethics, more specifically, an inquiry into the metaphysical and epistemological premises of →eil‘s discourse on the ethical value of attention. On one hand, I demonstrate how →eil‘s notion of attention can expand the scope of art so as to include metaethics. On the other hand, I use art to widen the current knowledge of Weilian attention. The research projects described and analysed in this thesis are predicated on a method which I designate ‗critical practical analogy‘; this is an analogy which includes art practical operations for the purpose of critical investigation. This method subsumes both theoretical and practical inquiries. I used two analogies: – Normative analogy compares (a) the dualistic relation that Weil postulates between agent and reality in her discourse on attention to (b) the relation that I postulate between my agency through observational drawing and the object of observation. The analogy operates by using →eil‘s assertions on attention normatively in observational drawing. – Imaginal analogy compares (a) →eil‘s use of tautology and contradiction in her arguments for ethical attention to (b) tautology and contradiction considered as argument forms. The analogy operates by giving aesthetic presence to these forms, i.e. by turning them into images through artworks. The analogies obtained the following outcomes: – The normative projects afford a practical knowledge of Weilian attention by interpreting it as an ethical practice of detachment. The projects also demonstrate that, notwithstanding →eil‘s transcendent view of truth, such a practice of detachment is compatible with a subjective notion of truth. – By capitalising on the non-propositional mode of representation which is typical of visual art, the imaginal projects engender a scepticism which favours dialogue and values questions as positive research results. The outcomes indicate the following implications for visual arts practice: – The outcomes of the normative projects demonstrate how contemporary artists who regard notions of universal truth with scepticism need not necessarily disavow ethical intentions in their practice. – Due to its propositional character, theoretical metaethics can reach an impasse from which it can only point discursively to the limits of language. The outcomes of the imaginal projects evidence that art can move beyond these limits non-propositionally. The use of critical practical analogy also indicates a methodological implication for art practical, interdisciplinary research. Critical practical analogy could provide artists with both a heuristic research tool and a template for articulating a discursive representation of art practice which both acknowledges the non-linearity and indirectness of practice-led research and the need for interdisciplinary intelligibility. 3 Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Research aims ........................................................................................................... 15 1.2 Who is this research for? .......................................................................................... 22 1.3 On the use of ‗I‘ ........................................................................................................ 22 1.4 Research difficulties and concerns............................................................................ 23 1.41 Distinction between theoretical versus practical notions of attention ............... 24 1.42 Objective and subjective truth, and subjectivism in art practice ....................... 24 1.43 Weilian transcendentalism and dialogic scepticism .......................................... 26 1.44 Intelligibility of art practice-led interdisciplinary research ............................... 27 2. Methodology ................................................................................................................... 31 2.1 Methodology: Critical practical analogy .................................................................. 33 2.2 What is a critical practical analogy? ......................................................................... 33 2.3 Critical practical analogy subsumes both theoretical and practical research ............ 35 2.4 Critical practical analogies ........................................................................................ 35 2.5 Normative objects and imaginal objects ................................................................... 37 3. Weilian attention ............................................................................................................ 39 3.1 Outline of the objectives of the preliminary subsidiary aim ..................................... 41 3.2 Sub-methodological concerns: Taxonomy of literary sources .................................. 42 3.3 Critique of →eil‘s discourse on attention ................................................................. 45 3.31 Attention as faculty ............................................................................................ 45 3.32 Semethics ........................................................................................................... 51 3.33 Reality as semiotic tissue and reading ............................................................... 52 3.34 The role of attention in semethics ...................................................................... 54 3.35 Free compulsion................................................................................................. 56 3.36 The three orders of Weilian attention ................................................................ 59 3.361 Spontaneous attention ................................................................................. 59 3.362 Voluntary attention ..................................................................................... 60 3.363 The most elevated attention or amor fati .................................................... 62 3.37 Is the most elevated attention intuitive? ............................................................ 65 3.38 The legacy of Alain and Lagneau ...................................................................... 66 3.4 Summary ................................................................................................................... 68 4. Normative critical practical analogy ............................................................................ 71 4.1 Outline of the objectives of the normative analogy .................................................. 73 4.2 Sub-methodological concerns: The subject in attention ........................................... 75 4.21 The hybrid art object .......................................................................................... 75 4.22 The Weilian subject in attention as a practice of detachment ............................ 80 4.3 Normative projects .................................................................................................... 85 4.31 The experience of necessity ............................................................................... 86 4.311 First collaboration with Hephzibah Rendle-Short ...................................... 86 4.312 Collaborative residency with Hephzibah Rendle-Short ............................. 95 4.3121 Ethical feelings and statements of absolute value ............................... 97 4.3122 Propositions and necessity ................................................................... 99 4.3123 Necessity and drawing ......................................................................... 99 4.3124 Gesture and observation .................................................................... 100 4.313 Sin Podium: Speaking of Writing – Speaking/Writing about Drawing .... 105 4.32 Attitude of detachment .................................................................................... 107 4.321 Skull drawings .......................................................................................... 107 4.3211 Waiting .............................................................................................. 112 4.3212 Free compulsion ................................................................................ 114 4.3213 Obedience .......................................................................................... 118 4 4.322 Portraits of Hephzibah .............................................................................