Lefebvre's Terrorist Society and Certeau's Poetics of Everyday Life - Essay Example

CHOOSING PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF THE EVERYDAY DISCUSS IN TERMS OF HENRI LEFEBVRES NOTION OF THE TERRORIST SOCIETY AND MICHEL DE CERTEAUS POETICS OF EVERYDAY LIFE. Name Tutor’s Name Course: Institution: Date: This essay chooses the scope of free will like the particular aspect of every day. The paper discusses the concept with reference to Henri Lefebvres perspective of the terrorist society as well as Michel Certeaus poetics of everyday life. Lefebvre’s work acquired more relevance within the 20th century as well as during the World War II based on the leading French intellectuals while writing on broader scopes of subjects with transgressed disciplines and with special relations to philosophy and social sciences. The author argues that the confinement in knowledge is opposed to disciplinary conventions. For the longest time, Marxists and sociologists have instrumental valuations on philosophy and social sciences in terror with his writing translated to classify existing disciplinary predispositions. Further, paradoxical fate led to the Cold War era (Lefebvre, 2010). As a Marxist, he became excluded from the mainstream commentary and academic establishment in the US rendering him incapable of contributing views to social creativity. In most of his writings, he appropriated as a fit to the conventions and disciplines resulting from the classified comfort in designation and distortion of the society state of security (Tse, 2013). Lefebvre discusses in the nature of terrorism within the modern world. The book argues that the society has an oppressive state that looms overhead. Source: (Lefebvre, 2010) The author illustrates that it is in all areas where the time gives illusion of having freedom and oppressing the opposing thoughts. The goal includes eliminating aspects of critical thinking. The bureaucratic admixture of the society is controlled through consumption’s oppression as well as simultaneous of the illusory freedom for rebel indicating that rebellion allows for increased impossibilities. The focus also renders the theoretical constructs for rebel impotent (Certeau, 2011). The initial face of the problem diversifies the possibilities of the emerging trends. The subject can be driven across the acting policy. In case people have an inability of understanding each other, the misgivings of social order are facilitated (Lefebvre, 2010). The bureaucratic society allows for controlled consumption that also seeks to have placates on people within the auspices of democracy and entertainment through expenditure. However, there are developments of necessity that do not satisfy the ways of life and living where the alternatives are presented (Harris, 2012). The author warns that the scope of capital cannot be altered to sate the requirements created. This is because it drives the ever developing amounts of production. Bureaucratic societies for controlled consumption develop their counterculture based on avenues of market populism and hip consumerism that channel rebellious impulses among unsatisfied customers to affirm capital of consumption (Lefebvre, 2010). Other than doing hard political works that try to alter the issues of the world, more consumers have an imploration of commercials for buying certain cell phones within issues. Developed countries play online games of sending aid to poor countries while advancing preferences to ironic policies to impact awareness on everyone about how their discontent and jaded feelings (Certeau, 2011). The things have an actual solicitation of change where existing orders have a way of accomplishing compliant meaningful goals such as developing rice within impoverished countries as a good thing. However, market participation and consumption appears to be the sole available channel. Market’s elevation for moral regimes with absolute believers complicates issues for achieving meaningful alternatives and true dissent among the emergence (Tse, 2013). This delivers cause for ease in declaring the end of history in the Cold War other than reevaluating the rebellious politics. Persons who establish esthetic dimensions liberate themselves based on art and seek to negate the scope to achieve a better world. This is otherwise impossible due to the rebellious impulses that are sublimated through reworking of people’s place from bureaucratic society and controlled consumption (Lefebvre, 2010). The issues have a relative construction for rebellion as well as design. This is because the focus on rebellion possibilities is borne from formation of esthetic dimensions (Harris, 2012). It is critical to free the subject’s actions through a label of actions from proper rebellion, as well as other improper aspects. The author argues that the conditions are sufficient. This does not seek to overwrite rebellion textbooks. The possibilities present a perverted idea about the focus of rebels in the construction. The rebel does not have simple variation about persons with unsatisfied daily lives. People also seek to advance the expressions by themselves. Rebels are not individuals without freedom (Lefebvre, 2010). Rebels solicit for the freedom and ability to consolidate spaces of the rebellious subjectivity. The author’s argument is that the formation allows for liberalization of esthetic dimensions. For Lefebvre, the society is one of the sites that advance crucial conditions for reproduction of various relations in terms of production. The colonization from the state, as well as the economic relations, avail answers of the questions of survival and capitalism within the 20th century. This has a precise proposition that Lefebvre defends in the writing through state and production of absolute space and works. There are lessons of the illustration of 20th-century deviations with absolute forms of socialism and changes in state forms (Tse, 2013). However, this is an abolished private property from critical production sectors with alternative large scale enterprises failing to have a penetration of capitalist domination roots. Lefebvre’s core argument involves state as well as economic outcomes for each day. There are differential briefings that are mentioned through Lefebvre, as well as arguments of priority outcomes of daily life across modes of production. However, there are relevant aspects of understanding that such arguments have historical specificity (Harris, 2012). The overall aspects of built daily life advance the basis of daily life. The Marxist thesis issues variation for relations of production while productive forces form a ‘basis’ for political and ideological superstructures. The author adds that the fact that states ensure administration of the society, there is an opposition to allowing social relations blend with markets. The implication is blinded forces that take course-this reductionist and inadequate perspectives to actions (Bergson, 2012). The major events and conflicts have scheduled domination and reproduction relations of the relations with wrested priorities over the production relations involving the containments. On the contrary, the considerations for a critical element of “superstructure” are reflected on the economic bases and layers of economic infrastructure as well as the state. The society constitutes lived experiences of the world of alienation. Alienation is the essential mode for capitalism and state socialism in most cases (Campbell, 2013). The societies that have an overwhelming scope of economic relations advance the state of determination of social life. Lefebvre insists that the daily lives are elevated through critical thinking with possibilities of discerning actual relations to processes of reproduction. The perspectives allow for totality of the society’s life while appropriating moments of determination. The production modes have successful “programs” on a daily basis where there are reproduction relations for terror. Lefebvre’s is evidenced by the implications of endless Marxist predictions of capitalism’s death (Highmore, 2006). The author declines classical economic infrastructure and superstructure models due to the inevitability of communism or socialism. The cyclical capitalism crises and permanent war in which the society lives provides absentee grounds for predictive days and arrival of capitalism’s general crisis. For Lefebvre, determination theories should consider the multiplicity of various relations bearing events such as the struggle forms undertaken to classes of the oppressed and exploited. The scope includes the discovery of how people are made to achieve the so-called objective forces. The conditions which constrain social praxis dominate creativity of all human action makes it one of the empirical questions (Bergson, 2012). The constraints have dominant implications through difficulties in positing possibility for change. However, there are referrals of contradictions in systems of constraints. The inevitability praxis discourse is determined in History. Human beings lack true creativity but are mere agents of external forces. Therefore, there distinguishing aspect of Lefebvre’s philosophy is based on objectivism through elevation of underdetermined objectivity to critical thinking (Harris, 2012). The case of culture is not a reference point for the accepted representations and academic disciplines. The focus is constituted through alternative forms of society’s control. The scope of evanescent, unstructured as well as playful nature is not warranted. The state of things needs further analysis as well as motivation for Certeau’s approach. The issues are not treated as practice aspects in the objects of study while reflecting on methodologies of knowledge-making disciplines. The focus on the study allows for Everyday life poetics with specified inventions of practices on common man and invention of concepts of daily research. The approach teeters across the different forms of techniques (Erasmus & Luther, 2013). For Certeau, the implications readings are based on the possible holding of the time. This is due to the ways of conceived culture for plays and inventions. The other aspect includes reflection on works of historiography and science while producing realities permanently delivered through writing. Tension is persistent throughout the book to establish genuine expression for the practice phenomenon and his reflections regarding limits of theory. Certeau seeks to reconcile different aspects of history through the conception of social events. Everyday life poetics grows through the existing conditions such as occasions of intervened those redirections of future developments (Williams, 1980). The author does not imply initial deliberations of the concept of such events. The historical conception of the roots of opening enables the common man to engage an intervention of the fabric for pre-existing structures. The focus also to transforms prescribed rationality for personal and individual culture expressions. Certeau’s work from historiography allows for investigative practice for writing through the production of reality, as well as the establishment of an authoritative ground (Kane, 2011). The practice underlies various academic disciplines. Gestures of writing allow for the creation of a complete break through past interventions of the blank pages as constituted through tabula rasa of the facts. One discerns the irrelevance of accomplishing the movement of negation through literature’s invention of the start and completion of signs and quality. The writer presents a manner of writing that replaces the prior production of the new start on voluntary rupture of the story. Certeau utilizes Freud’s illustration to advance his writing procedures while varying the proper placement of ambiguity of the society. There is clarity of the operation for the subjects. The focus also allows for the produced texts put the fragments and materials through the ordered basis of rules and procedures (Williams, 1980). Traces on each page have trajectory for the operations while the chains are advanced through an outlay of paths that the world absents received subjects of representations. The morality and folklore process are seen as aspects that should be shunned due to their resistance to progress and contribution towards it. The suppressed and displaced forms of writing advance criticism of dominant representations while making political points as shared through Marxist theory (Erasmus & Luther, 2013). The author makes a philosophical point on the scope of everyday life poetics representation. Certeau adds the peculiar representation due to place absentia. The reference of representative foundations is grounds for legitimacy. The overall relationship has a necessity in ethics as it indicates obligations to human beings and matters of discipline. The everyday life poetics representation maintains openness in filtering out the illusory of production and the totalizing knowledge (Erasmus & Luther, 2013). These are some of the dangers and triumphs in structuralism approaches. It is important to advance ordering material through auspices of disciplines and institutions of the society through achieving value-neutral and harmless engagements. Source: (Certeau, 2011) Certeau appropriates the stance where everyday life poetics is essentially critical in imposing procedures and categories on the members. The focus also describes educational and medical practices through modernity for alternative ways that institutions render control, shape and visible behaviors. Certeau perceives the society as one of the spaces that power is rationality wielded and imposed. The form of rationality changes across time even with the singular annotations forming presentation of images based on unified societies and membership. Certeau makes defense for culture through homogenization (Campbell, 2013). The book emphasizes on relativity based on perspectives as well as legitimacy of the alternative life forms in the society. The inclusion explains the resistance to instituted French demographics categories (Highmore, 2006). The article engages study from popular culture. The focus also defines the essence of knowledge-making practices which are suspect to the issues of visible drawing and pre-existing categories. The focus also permits for processing the reinforcement articles. The service also determines the institutions of a given society as compared to other specific groups which have more influence on the elites (Campbell, 2013). The issues reproduce the society based on the image developed. The panoptic procedures include universally built socio-technical apparatuses. Other social aspects escape control of overall systems. The issues do not have a turn-around effect for moment’s notice where the powers have the embedded physical environments. The focus also links to habit and mental makeup of human counterparts. Disposition deliver desired regulated behavior products. Certeau appropriates the sense of the established opening for tactical practices by a common man (Kane, 2011). Free will remains an illusion. This is because instituted apparatus cause constraints to the availed pathways (Highmore, 2006). The society also instills membership of the values and motivation with consistency with the reproduction cycles. The cases have societal control mechanisms that operate under the political awareness and individual choice radar. Members of a given society feel perfectly free to choose the procedures. Certeau is in agreement with the society’s interests even though he denies the total control notion. Certeau also advances the argument towards ability of the common man escaping from total control through showing the Spielraum play is in the society’s prescriptions (Bergson, 2012). Procedures of such a system have an elected reinforcement where different sets of procedures are stated. Alternatives have an equal feasibility for composition of the society’s sets of personified aspects. The society can comprise of various fore-grounded practices such as organizing normative institutions for innumerable minor practices. However, lack of an organized discourse and preservation approach to the start is different for institutional and scientific hypotheses in Everyday life poetics (Williams, 1980). The fore-grounding apparatus is part of the repertoire dominant apparatuses. The logics and procedures are availed to users while offering scattered practice polytheism. In conclusion, the institutions have a stealth colonization system that disciplines and controls the daily influences of other procedures. People view the concept as one of the newness and innovation ways emerging from recombination of the existing parts. The case includes societal realms that both Lefebvre and Certeau turn logic of visibility to accommodate panoptic society strategies that dictate the sole preparations of sight. The issues also blind the faces of practice while appropriating the positions as well as means of using them achieves different ends. The components comprise of new paths where the divergence does not require noting through the systems of restricted reading and behavior of dominant procedures. The panoptic procedures allow for the production of personified mirage of knowledge from certain visibility areas resulting in blind spots of the system to the outside world. Society then uses the authority of intellectuals to legitimate this unified representation and to confer power on this knowledge. Bibliography Bergson, H. 2012. Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness. New York: Courier Corporation. Campbell, J. K. 2013. Free Will. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Certeau, M. 2011. The Practice of Everyday Life. New York: University of California Press. Erasmus, D., Luther, M. 2013. Discourse on Free Will. New York: A&C Black. Harris, S. 2012. Free Will. New York: Simon and Schuster. Highmore, B. 2006. Michel De Certeau: Analysing Culture. New York: A&C Black. Kane, R. 2011. The Oxford Handbook of Free Will: Second Edition. New York: Oxford University Press. Lefebvre, H. 2010. Everyday Life in the Modern World: Second Revised Edition. New York: A&C Black. Tse, P. 2013. The Neural Basis of Free Will: Criterial Causation. New York: MIT Press. Williams, C. 1980. Free Will and Determinism: A Dialogue. New York: Hackett Publishing. Read More