Jean-Francois Lyotard Quotes

Liberalism Does Not Preclude An Organisation Of The Flow Of Money In Which Some Channels Are Used In Decision Making While Others Are Only Good For The Payment Of Debts

If We Wish To Discuss Knowledge In The Most Highly Developed Contemporary Society, We Must Answer The Preliminary Question Of What Methodological Representation To Apply To That Society

What Guides Marxism, Then, Is A Different Model Of Society, And A Different Conception Of The Function Of The Knowledge That Can Be Produced By Society And Acquired From It

One Knows That Frontal And/or Profile Photography Is Torn To Pieces... Inversely, What Remains Of The Photograph Must Be Seen As A Fragment Coming To Fill A Gap In The Drawing.

One Can Decide That The Principal Role Of Knowledge Is As An Indispensable Element In The Functioning Of Society, And Act In Accordance With That Decision, Only If One Has Already Decided That Society Is A Giant Machine

He Was Too Tough To Experience Disappointments And Resentments - Negative Affections. In This Nihilist Fin De Siècle, He Was Affirmation. Right Through To Illness And Death. Why Did I Speak Of Him In The Past? He Laughed, He Is Laughing, He Is Here. It's Your Sadness, Idiot, He'd Say.

On The Other Hand, In A Society Whose Communication Component Is Becoming More Prominent Day By Day, Both As A Reality And As An Issue, It Is Clear That Language Assumes A New Importance.

Scientific Knowledge Is A Kind Of Discourse.

What Is Required Of A Working Hypothesis Is A Fine Capacity For Discrimination

Eclecticism Is The Degree Zero Of Contemporary General Culture: One Listens To Reggae, Watches A Western, Eats Mcdonald's Food For Lunch And Local Cuisine For Dinner, Wears Paris Perfume In Tokyo And 'retro' Clothing In Hong Kong; Knowledge Is A Matter Of Tv Games. It Is Easy To Find A Public For Eclectic Works.

Knowledge Is And Will Be Produced In Order To Be Sold, It Is And Will Be Consumed In Order To Be Valorised In A New Production: In Both Cases, The Goal Is Exchange

The Nineteenth And Twentieth Centuries Have Given Us As Much Terror As We Can Take. We Have Paid A High Enough Price For The Nostalgia Of The Whole And The One, For The Reconciliation Of The Concept And The Sensible, Of The Transparent And The Communicable Experience. Under The General Demand For Slackening And For Appeasement, We Can Hear The Mutterings Of The Desire For A Return Of Terror, For The Realization Of The Fantasy To Seize Reality. The Answer Is: Let Us Wage A War On Totality; Let Us Be Witnesses To The Unpresentable; Let Us Activate The Differences.