tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-580858575824175258.post538292884597834156..comments2018-06-03T01:07:48.962-04:00Comments on The Prickly Pears: Universal Love vs. True LoveUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-580858575824175258.post-9839094393885372392011-02-04T11:28:36.410-05:002011-02-04T11:28:36.410-05:00It has to do with Lacan's formulae of sexuatio...It has to do with Lacan's formulae of sexuation and the logic of the universal with its constitutive exception: the truth of a universal affirmative such as “there is nobody that I do not love,” requires the existence of the particular negative “I do not love you all." Basically, any universal proposition postulates its own exception. <br /><br />Quoting from Žižek again:<br /><br />The truth of the universal proposition "Man is mortal" does not imply the existence of even one man, while the "less strong" proposition "There is at least one man who exists (i.e. some men exist)" implies their existence. Lacan draws from this the conclusion that we pass from a universal proposition (which defines the content of a notion) to existence only through a proposition stating the existence, not of the singular element of the universal genus which exists, but of at least one which is an <i>exception</i> to the universality in question.PJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02151402524450678069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-580858575824175258.post-72876076745593500152011-02-04T05:50:40.979-05:002011-02-04T05:50:40.979-05:00wait how does "there is nobody that i do not ...wait how does "there is nobody that i do not love" emerge out of "i do not love you all,"?????? i get the rest of it i think.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00867553193373461899noreply@blogger.com