on why theoretically savvy love always becomes stupid love, dice la Ronell

You said whaaaat?

Love signals the ‘permission granted’ status of shared stupidity, a descent into the bestial abandon of an ecstatic language. As sheer surrender, loves opens the channels for the imbecilic effusions of being-with. Laws legislating social intelligence and sense-making operations are suspended for the duration of language-making scenes of love. This could also mean that you have to get real down and prodigiously stupid to fall for love, or that stupidity is a repressed ground of human affectivity that only love has the power to license and unleash*.

Stupidity, Avita Ronell

*Igual de estúpido que citar a alguien para decir que el amor es siempre estúpido.  Senda tontería. Pero esta señora me da gracia.

eve, the first western scientist, dixit la Ronell

¿Qué se le habrá perdido?, preguntaría mi difunta abuela.

Eve is evil because she wants to know, she wants to investigate, and yet she is shown to have made a stupid mistake for which we are still paying. Her stupidity resided in her need to know, which has been depreciated into mere curiosity. Eve was the first knowledge seeker; her need to know exposed her as stupid because what she did not know or understand was the prohibition placed on knowing by her husband and his maker. Eve, for her part, knew she was barefoot and ignorant—but it would have been even smarter not to let on that she knew or saw the limit. She discovered and named the limit; she experienced the limited, even at home base in paradise. Sher was always already Madame Bovaryy thethered to Charles, the man.

Revealing the audacious and necessary transgression inherent in knowing, Eve would not play stupid, displaying an unwillingness or incapacity (a stupid mistake) for which she has been definitely punished. Indeed, if you are not willing to play stupid, you are making incredible deals with the devil.

de Stupidity,  Avita Ronell (jugando con Nietzsche)