“Doubtless one must not, in certain situations, suspend the imperative of moral or political judgement, that is, that of an ‘immediate’ – or nearly so – ‘presentation’… [We are asked] not to ‘present’ thought ‘immediately’, not to condemn a thought too quickly as if its presentation, and also its appearance before the law, was immediately possible without disaster, as if one knew what thought is, what it is presently, all things considered. (But what can I know of this, and how many today still pretend they know in order to free themselves, without waiting, from a task of thinking or from an ubearable nearness?)
What is called ‘thinking’? Without even knowing, even less than Heidegger, what content to give this word beyond science and philosophy, I propose to call ‘thought’ here what keeps the right to ask for, I am saying only to ask for just that: not the immediate acquittal for whatever may present itself, immediately or nearly, but the right to the experience of the disaster, to that risk at least for thought… The most violent mistake [meprise], and scorn [mepris], isn’t that to require from thought its immediate presentation, to refuse it the endurance of another duration?”
Jacques Derrida “How to Concede, with Reasons?” trans. John Leavey Diacritics v19 n3-4 (1989)
So, a blog, a space for the immediate presentation of thoughts, hoping to be a place for the slow risking of thinking. This will be a very occasional consideration of things, literally, of things as the materialisation of thinking, always already political things (in Bruno Latour’s sense), the philosophising that is design.