User:Emily/Thematic Project/Trimester 03/05: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 09:27, 15 May 2015

Garcia --> everything is a thing | speculative ontology (talking about 'thing' instead of object)
Heidegger --> material based | ontological view (also talking about thing)
Latour --> function (chains, cybernetic-feedback system)| systematic view

fundamental problematic

thing vs object

onto-monism sculpture

functional

THING

Undefined

- sculpture/self-supported

- colloquial(intimacy?)

reserved from previous mind map: (encountered<->not encountered) (anything<->every word) (tangible<->intangible) (no matter what from Carcia) (nothingness<->being) (subjective<->objective)

- divided<->undivided

(i.e. evolutionary algorithm, fractal)

OBJECT

Defined

- systemic functional / part of flow

- set themselves against us

- technical(distance?)

reserved from previous mind map: (interaction?) (function?) (value?)

-correlated to subject (through encounter/interaction) (i.e. Boston dynamics (military robots) --> object object correlation) --> encounter directly or indirectly --> can an object be subject? even without correlation?

- John von Neuman (computer architecture) self-replicating machine (http://reprap.org/)

Anthropocene or Anthropocentric

most human cognition involves reducing a thing to one of those two roots: (if someone asks you what something is)

what it is made of

you tell them what it does

the literal and the theatrical

art whose aesthetic character hinges on our human response to it

formalism

art object and the human exist outside the artwork, but there is no artwork if either of these components is missing

The centre of philosophy moves slowly, it's always a hundred years behind schedule.

They are sticking with the famous two tables of A.S. Eddington, the scientific and manifest tables, whereas I’ve argued in print that a third table in between these two is the real table.

‘…we don't have to renegotiate our position every day. Latour's interesting idea is that inanimate objects are what usually perform the stabilizing function for us.’

modern political dualism of Truth vs. Power.

Power politics, the other side of the dispute, is the notion that there isn't really any truth. Crudely put, whoever wins decides what the truth is: ‘history is written by the winners’.

Truth politics, which comes in both Left flavors (Rousseau, Marx) and Right flavors (Leo Strauss) is the idea that we basically already know what the political truth is. Let's say that I think know the political truth is egalitarianism. By nature we're all equal, yet we're not equal now. Therefore, something must have gone wrong: somebody must be exploiting us, or some privileged social class has an interest in suppressing us.

The scientist’s job is to detect inanimate objects that the political sphere has not yet taken account of.

Links:

http://sonicacts.com/portal/anthropocene-objects-art-and-politics-1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eiv-rQw1lc

Art and Objecthood in 1967

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 fundamental problematic
 :thing vs object
-::onto-monism sculpture
+:onto-monism sculpture
-::functional
+:functional
 <div style='width:47%;border:1px solid #ccc;padding:11px;float:left'>
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 reserved  from previous mind map: (encountered<->not encountered) (anything<->every word) (tangible<->intangible) (no matter what from Carcia) (nothingness<->being) (subjective<->objective)
+- divided<->undivided
+(i.e. evolutionary algorithm, fractal)
@@ Line 27: / Line 30: @@
 Defined
-- systemic(functional)
+- systemic functional / part of flow
 - set themselves against us
 - technical(distance?)
+reserved  from previous mind map: (interaction?) (function?) (value?)
+-correlated to subject (through encounter/interaction)
+(i.e. Boston dynamics (military robots) --> object object correlation) --> encounter directly or indirectly --> can an object be subject? even without correlation?
+- John von Neuman (computer architecture) self-replicating machine (http://reprap.org/)
 </div>
+[[File:Ill objectthing philosophies.jpg|300px]]
+====Anthropocene or Anthropocentric====
+most human cognition involves reducing a thing to one of those two roots: (if someone asks you what something is)
+: what it is made of
+:you tell them what it does
+the literal and the theatrical
+:art whose aesthetic character hinges on our human response to it
+formalism
+art object and the human exist outside the artwork, but there is no artwork if either of these components is missing
+The centre of philosophy moves slowly, it's always a hundred years behind schedule.
+They are sticking with the famous two tables of A.S. Eddington, the scientific and manifest tables, whereas I’ve argued in print that a third table in between these two is the real table.
+‘…we don't have to renegotiate our position every day. Latour's interesting idea is that inanimate objects are what usually perform the stabilizing function for us.’
+modern political dualism of Truth vs. Power.
+:Power politics, the other side of the dispute, is the notion that there isn't really any truth. Crudely put, whoever wins decides what the truth is: ‘history is written by the winners’.
+:Truth politics, which comes in both Left flavors (Rousseau, Marx) and Right flavors (Leo Strauss) is the idea that we basically already know what the political truth is. Let's say that I think know the political truth is egalitarianism. By nature we're all equal, yet we're not equal now. Therefore, something must have gone wrong: somebody must be exploiting us, or some privileged social class has an interest in suppressing us.
+The scientist’s job is to detect inanimate objects that the political sphere has not yet taken account of.
+Links:
+:http://sonicacts.com/portal/anthropocene-objects-art-and-politics-1
+:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eiv-rQw1lc
+Art and Objecthood in 1967