> > ja: If that were the case, then Badiou's philosophy might as well be
> > theology, wouldn't it? Which would be an owie for the philosophy.


rg;> calling for non-specificity and using capital "I" idea isn't too far
> away from theology in the grand sense. perhaps Manik's point?


>what do you say, Manik?

In this point of conversation only paradox could make hiatus,give chance to=
make some continuity.Just because changing main word in Badiou's text does=
n't make crucial crash in sense{of his idea(l)}our intention became to buil=
d whole statement in Skeptic(Pyrrhoneans)key.We should follow probability, =
opinion, custom,… but without any belief in the essential validity or tru=
th of these criteria."Every reason has a corresponding reason, &c.,"
First paradox./…"Art is the impersonal production of a truth that is addr=
essed to everyone."(Badiou)
Apathy (ataraxia), incomprehensibility(difficult or impossible to understan=
d) and apprehension(ability to apprehend or understand; understanding)are t=
hree condition which demonstrates that it is impossible for a man ever, in =
his researches, to arrive at undeniable truth; since one truth is only to b=
e established by another truth; and so on, ad infinitum. These Skeptics the=
n deny the existence of any demonstration, of any test of truth, of any sig=
ns, or causes, or motion, or learning, and of anything as intrinsically or =
naturally good or bad.Following those premises we could accept "impersonal =
production of truth".
&c.
MANIK