Deflection from the Existential Stakes
Let’s workshop this poem about the delusion, peddled too often in philosophy-lite podcasts, that—to speak by analogy—solving our financial problems is as simple as redefining one dollar as a million.
scent of the day: Portrayal Man, by Amouage.—A bohemian-dandy fragrance (think: Oscar Wilde’s signature scent) I see (despite its aquatic and green elements) as a pastel purple like mauve or lilac (purple due to the emphasis on violet, but pastel due to iris-leather combo being extremely recessive compared to what we see in its electric-amethyst brother Imitation Man or in the plum-eggplant Black Knight by Franchesca Bianchi), Portrayal Man—a wispy watercolor when its comes to its many Bel-Ami-reminiscent easter eggs (BO cumin, licoricey carraway, peppery carnation, woody nutmeg, damp patchouli, lactonic sandalwood, even perhaps Overture Man cognac) while at the same time deserving of the nickname “the violet beast”—rages with a long-lived ozonic presence (watercress dew and metallic musk, almost an oil-soaped rubberized leather suggestive of Nishane’s Suede et Safran)—the tarry cade oil and vegetal vetiver and bitter violet leaf and soapy violet flower, which altogether yields a gasoline accord stronger than its designer predecessor Fahrenheit and more photorealistic than in Gucci Guilty Absolute, transporting the wearer to some northwest metropolis on a foggy day (right, in fact, to a rain puddle whose surface is iridescent with gasoline just like the stunning bottle).
Deflection from the Existential Stakes To say that the free will Spinoza rejects is not the “right” notion— only arising as it did with capitalism (private property and rights), and Christianity’s confession booths— does nothing beyond words, despite how dolts talk, to make actions any more up to us.
"Deflection from the Existential Stakes" critiques the philosophical tendency to shift discussions of free will into historical or conceptual abstractions while neglecting the core existential implications. The poem begins by referencing Spinoza’s rejection of free will, framing it not as a timeless philosophical insight but as a critique tied to specific cultural and historical constructs—capitalism, private property, and Christianity’s confessional practices. These systems, the poem implies, shaped and codified notions of individual autonomy in ways that may not align with the metaphysical "truth" of free will. However, the poem challenges attempts to dismiss Spinoza’s critique by reframing free will as a historically contingent idea. Such deflections, while academically sophisticated, fail to address the existential stakes: whether our actions are genuinely "up to us." The poem highlights the futility of linguistic or conceptual maneuvers in mitigating the practical implications of determinism, a reality that remains unaltered by intellectual reconfigurations. The closing lines suggest that the essential question of autonomy and agency cannot be dissolved into word games, no matter how complex the discourse around them.
Spinoza, free will, determinism, existentialism, agency, autonomy, capitalism, private property, confession booths, historical constructs, philosophical critique.