Appropriation is the original project grounding the for-itself’s relation to the slimy
Evidence
It is at this point that we encounter the similarity to scientific research: the known object, like the stone in the stomach of the ostrich, is entirely within me, assimilated, transformed into myself, and it is entirely me; but at the same time it is impenetrable, untransformable, entirely smooth, with the indifferent nudity of a body which is beloved and caressed in vain. It remains outside; to know it is to devour it yet without consuming it. We see here how the sexual and alimentary currents mingle and interpenetrate in order to constitute the Actaeon complex and the Jonah complex; we can see the digestive and sensual roots which are reunited to give birth to the desire of knowing. Knowledge is at one and the same time a penetration and a superficial caress, a digestion and the contemplation from afar of an object which will never lose its form, the production of a thought by a continuous creation and the establishment of the total objective independence of that thought. The known object is my thought as a thing This is precisely what I profoundly desire when I undertake my research—to apprehend my thought as a thing and the thing as my thought. The syncretic relation which provides the basis for the ensemble of such diverse tendencies can be only a relation of appropriation. That is why the desire to know, no matter how disinterested it may appear, is a relation of appropriation. To know is one of the forms which can be assumed by to have. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1354 (
#expands, via linked claim)
Here we can see the symbol which abruptly discloses itself: there exists a poisonous possession; there is a possibility that the In-itself might absorb the For-itself; that is, that a being might be constituted in a manner just the reverse of the “In-itself-For-itself,” and that in this new being the In-itself would draw the For-itself into its contingency, into its indifferent exteriority, into its foundationless existence. At this instant I suddenly understand the snare of the slimy: it is a fluidity which holds me and which compromises me; I can not slide on this slime, all its suction cups hold me back; it can not slide over me, it clings to me like a leech. The sliding however is not simply denied as in the case of the solid; it is degraded. The slimy seems to lend itself to me, it invites me; for a body of slime at rest is not noticeably distinct from a body of very dense liquid. But it is a trap. The sliding is sucked in by the sliding substance, and it leaves its traces upon me. The slime is like a liquid seen in a nightmare, where all its properties are animated by a sort of life and turn back against me. Slime is the revenge of the In-itself. A sickly-sweet, feminine revenge which will be symbolized on another level by the quality “sugary.” This is why the sugar-like sweetness to the taste—an indelible sweetness, which remains indefinitely in the mouth even after swallowing—perfectly completes the essence of the slimy. A sugary sliminess is the ideal of the slimy; it symbolizes the sugary death of the For-itself (like that of the wasp which sinks into the jam and drowns in it). — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1403 (
#expands, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: The slimy reveals itself only within the appropriative project as an opaque, dense meaning; The slimy symbolizes the In-itself absorbing the For-itself — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1403; Knowledge is a form of appropriation by the for-itself (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- The slimy symbolizes the In-itself absorbing the For-itself
#expands(0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1403 - Knowledge is a form of appropriation by the for-itself
#expands(0.85) - The desire to know is ultimately a relation of appropriation
#expands(0.85) — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1354 - In possession the for-itself seeks to become its own foundation as in-itself
#expands(0.80)