P2P Foundation

Researching, documenting and promoting peer to peer practices


Featured Book

Revisiting Associative Democracy


Book Store



Admin

Subscribe

Translate

Bernard Stiegler on the Immaturity of the Internet Enlightenment (so far)

photo of Michel Bauwens

Michel Bauwens
29th December 2012


Bernard Stiegler is the only philosopher I know who deals directly with the emergence of the new generative logic of the internet and the shock it creates with the prevailing system, and how it is therefore, derailed.

Watch the video here:

FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditShare

4 Responses to “Bernard Stiegler on the Immaturity of the Internet Enlightenment (so far)”

  1. Glistening Deepwater Says:

    Thank you for sharing this amazing mind and his thoughts, I will need to listen to this more than once – when I do, I will take some notes to share.

  2. Glistening Deepwater Says:

    some notes from this address:

    technology for transindividuation
    so far the web has engendered the heteronomy of individuals rather than their autonomisation.
    what type of internet access will bring light rather than shadow?
    grammatisation
    digital technology is an artefact that never stops changing, thus cannot be subject to laws.
    digitalisation must constitute the development of the noetic
    extending the concept of grammatisation, as generally describing all technical processes that enables any fluxes or flows to be made discrete in the mathematical sense, and to be reproduced – including flows which represent human beings speaking words and interacting – this can then be integrated through a planetary system of digitisation
    spacialising time means taking the temporal flow of a living speech act and rendering it in a textual space (much as I am doing in transcribing parts of the address)
    the reduction of dynamic sound to quiescent space
    this stage of materialisation allows analytic and synthetic operations upon the information
    useful for manipulating minds
    becomes a form of tertiary retention (in technical support) – extending on Husserl’s notions of primary and secondary retention which arises through perception and is received in memory
    the conservation of traces of the old is what constitutes circuits of collective individuation (i.e disciplines across time, the transindividual is such an entity, digitally supported)
    hypermateriality of knowledge is beyond matter and form, it must be studied and understood as the transdiciplinary integrating of all forms of academic knowledge, this will involve the study of physical organisms, technical organs and social organisations
    the brain is written by digital writing – the co-evolution of humans and information delivery as a “literate species”
    what must we preserve given that new writing on the brain can rewrite old ones?
    the web constitutes an apparatus of reading and writing founded on automata
    that enable the prediction of meta-data, which effects what is able to be thought by the mind engaged in process with it, literally this effects the geometry upon which thought is founded
    all forms of knowledge are being transformed, along with our neurophysiology
    some circuits being created, others destroyed – again the question is what to preserve
    “we are what we read”
    what we express is that which we read in ourselves
    communities of brains can be created through the capacities developed via writing – social organisations exist for this purpose – social circuitry is essential for this, the digital brain could be short cicuited by automata, rendering it incapable of becoming a rational collective
    we must ensure that the technological layer does not short circuit the neuro-phycholgical and social layers

  3. Michel Bauwens Says:

    I actually don’t think that is true. I believe our realities are messy and tendencies towards autonomisation and heteronomisation are in constant struggle. There are already many aspects of the internet and the web that have increased autonomisation, as well as the opposite. But, as our very social structure is founded on heteronomisation, it is futile to hope that technology alone, can further this autonomisation, it is but a potential affordance, in a broader integrative effort towards autonomisation, engaged in struggle with the oppositive forces. As Stieger says, “I am neither an optimist but a pessimist, but a fighter”.

  4. rcarlson Says:

    “we must ensure that the technological layer does not short circuit the neuro-psychological and social layers”

    well this partially hinges on Adorno & Horkheimer view that the capture of attention by the culture industries is destructive of those Kantian categories that comprise our perception of the world, that are apriori and transcendental to experience. For example the flow of space/time sequences in film coincide with our own cognitive apprehension of the world that allows film to give the illusion that it transpires in “real time” as we watch it. Thus the incessant marketing of the culture industries interrupts our apriori neuro-psychological development as well as shapes social development. While the short circuiting of the long historical circuits of collective memory is to be examined whether Adorno & Horkheimer’s Kantian categories essentially comprise human cognition is also to be interrogated as is the evolution of human modes of “hyper and deep attention”……

    rich

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>