I am enrolled to study MA Philosophy in University of Sofia, Bulgaria, online course because I am so interested in Philosophy. And it's cost is cheap for Europeans.
From an ethics standpoint, this sounds roughly like society has been transitioning from _static social role_ to _dynamic social contract._ In the former, any deviation from one's _externally_ defined role is punished. In the latter, one builds his or her own personal prison through specific contracts, or privileges.
I realized I posted a comment a year ago that the overthink podcast inspired me to get my master’s in philosophy. Now I’m studying Deleuze this semester.
I love this channel. You are able to provide simple but accurate introductions to some very complex ideas, and you make is seem easy. We have such a need for strong lecturers like you who can convey these provocative ideas impartially.
Explained perfectly, thank you! Please consider doing an entire series on Deleuze- at this level of clarity, you could easily start a Deleuzian revival
This is almost exactly where my observations of modern life have been taking me over the past few years. How many times have I written on my blog: 'Our lives are being more and more controlled by the corporate world and bureaucracies'? I greatly dislike it, but feel impotent when it comes to doing anything about it (apart from refusing to deal with Amazon and eBay any longer because of their nefarious methods of trying to push (and even cheat) me into a position commensurate with their interests rather than mine. It's a small step, but what else can I do. I'm glad to discover, however, that somebody of genuine influence - as opposed to the social media version of the term - has written a book about it.
Yeah, our Western "democracies" are fictional pacifiers, the corporate world is a top-down control mechanism of the capitalist logic. I encourage you to read works such as The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly...
There is a lot more that you can do than you might think, especially with technology. For example if you don't already use one, you can try using a free (as in freedom) operating system and replace some of the other software you use with free alternatives. It might require gaining a bit of technical knowledge but there are resources online for audiences of every kind. You might only be interested in regaining control over your digital life and not the technical stuff, and you can choose your learning journey accordingly. Of course having more technical knowledge will give you more power, but even if you don't want or have the time to invest, you can still achieve greater freedom using the amazing work and resources available
@@hexwell hostile data-surrender behaviour will only take you to the next surveillance level. Different dogs, same leashes. Tech is all over us, cornering our freedom more by the hour, and there is not much you can do. You have a cell phone, your privacy is no longer yours. Open source OSs have lead us to a very powerful and sneaky system whose main function is personal data assimilation. Do not be fooled: if something is free YOU are the product, and if it has a voice will work for the system. Be well.
This reminds me a lot of the main differences between school to prison pipeline schools and other institutions, or a blue collar job and a white collar job. The first being discipline dominant and the second being control dominant. They are two styles used to subjugate the lower and “middle” classes, respectively (we are all the lower class, to the ones in power)
I think Deleuze's "Post-Script..." is really interesting. I'll definitely be subcribing to your podcast. A response to the "resonance" of the word control: it's rather simple and not a matter of translation or what is lost. Control, Deleuze probably recognized this, is within the domain of cybernetics. This brings me to a thought developed by ecologists Eugene and Howard Odum. From the organism down, organs, tissue, cells, systems are regulated by homeostatis. However, above the organism, populations, communities, ecosystems, landscapes, biomes, and finally the ecosphere, systems are regulated by homeorhesis, that is a pulsing paradigm. Further analogies can be drawn to Deleuze's flows. However, Deleuze doesn't recognize these distinctions, rather there is perhaps no distinction, everything is machinic. Well, ok, but some regulated equilibrium or statis, while the other pulses.
Great talk. Absolutely loved your depth of technical thoughts. Now all the active forces of environmental both internal and external are simultaneously under the relational sheaths surface deep layered skinny largest organ of human body cellular anatomy.
Passwords are required for information which can become knowledge when we have it, yet I do not know of any passwords needed to gain access to our hope. We would not be stuck in this system of control if rather seeking knowledge, we sought hope in its place. The idea of seeking hope in place of knowledge is Richard Rorty’s idea, but I have hope that it helps more and more people find happiness when they make such a substitution of a searching for hope rather than for knowledge. Thanks again for your well-put presentation.
Thank you for explaining the deleuzian theory so clearly! Your examples used are like 'parables' so that a layman like myself can grasp the complex ideas of the original philosophy being presented. This channel is an absolute trove of Thinking Manna. Alas the 'control' extends (and even intrudes) into the most mundane areas of everyday life whether one likes it or not. I feel that Dasein is inevitably being replaced by Freedom-through-Compartmentalization - the oxymoron not being my cup of tea at all! But maybe this is all just a jittery part of the Grand Design of Evolution for the Human species? :-D
After watching this video I went and listened to the podcast and I kept thinking about Jorge Luis borges and his map parable where an empire develops a map of a territory to such accuracy that it informs the territory. The metaphor is about the dangers of the representation superseding the thing which is represented which was touched upon most directly in the podcast by the discussion of the data double and the the dangers of the "goo" or data coming to describe the flesh and blood body which the data supposedly represents
The prefix of corporation is corpus, which is Latin for dead body. I also see a connection made between the dead body and your description of corporations as having a “spirit” in the sense that they are not enclosed to a physical location like a factory. On the topic of digital control, it’s quite evident how the majority of our interactions with institutions have become abstracted and separate from physical locations: school, work and even legal and mental health institutions have been mediated through Zoom (which was also exasperated by the pandemic).
Deleuze confuses on purpose, it's sophistry really. He's playing with words in a way Wittgenstein would have frown upon. I was a philosophy student in France in the late 80's and early 90's. All my left-wing teachers were in awe of him but his lectures (if you read French) are mostly very incoherent and desperately trying to copy German conceptualisation, aka the chip on the shoulder of all the French "philosphers"/charlatans in the mould of Lacan, Foucault, Derrida and Barthes. They may be considered literary thinkers, psychologists or sociologists not philosophers. Read Raymond Aron instead. Or better, humble yet profound modern German philosophers like Gadamer... PS: Here the play on word is on discipline and contrôle. Trivial .
This is great ! I literally lit up with joy seeing you explaining deleuze since I don't understand most of what he thinks. Do you plan on doing more videos on his ideas ?
Hi, Dr. Anderson here! I get that--he is super tough (luckily this essay is short and to the point, lending itself to this video format more than, say, his Logic of Sense or Difference and Repetition). I'm teaching a Poststructuralism seminar in the fall that will dive into Difference and Repetition, and would love to make a video or two based on that if I have time! Thanks for your support
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy If your intention is teaching the post structuralism then you should take into consideration AntiOedipus and not Difference and Repetition. D&R is still Deleuze’s structuralist phase, and his philosophy becomes post structuralist only with his association with Guattari, in the fourth chapter of AntiOedipus, with the virtual/actual (or molecular/molar) distinction. Namely, structure conflates/flattens these two dimensions and that is the reason that they need a post structuralist conceptualisation of the reality… Btw, taking such a short text as “Control” for dealing with Deleuze reminds me of J. Petersons dealing with Marxism by reading only Communist Manifesto…
@@exlauslegale8534 Hi there. The intention of this video is to go over key ideas from "Postscript on Societies of Control," so there's no claim to deal with Deleuze/poststructuralism by reading only a single short text. It's literally just a short video on a single text. The comparison to Peterson is thus really off key. As for the Poststructuralism syllabus, you make some interesting points, but there are a number of reasons for choosing D&R for my students within the context of a semester-long syllabus. Ideally, we'd have time to read even more work (including Anti-Oedipus), but a semester is only so long. The notion of difference in that text is key for poststructuralist strands of thinking and fits really well alongside the Derrida and Foucault we are reading in the text, even if it doesn't represent a more mature transcending of structuralism. Trust me, narrowing down the reading list in a syllabus is always a struggle for me!
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy Unfortunately, Difference and Repetition is not yet Deleuze’s poststructuralist phase, it is the last great structuralist book. Deleuze’s essay “A quoi reconnaît-on le structuralisme?” begins with “Nous sommes en 1967.”, and in D&R he writes: “La structure est la réalité du virtuel.” (page 270, ed. P.U.F.), something that no poststructuralist would ever say. It is true that those are, together with Raymond Ruyer’s La cybernétique et l'origine de l'information, or Simondon’s L'individu et sa genèse physico-biologique, proto-poststructuralist works, especially Ruyer’s book, but hélas, they still belong to structuralism. The main new element for ps, which Guattari brings into play, is the machinic which overturned the paradigm of the mechanical, closed upon itself and not productive, unlike the machine. Only now can the virtual machine-like produce the actual while remaining real all along… Deleuze’s process of differenTiation of the virtual in the Idea, and of differenCiation of the actual don’t have much in common with Derrida’s Différance, moreover, Derrida misunderstood Deleuze, and it is not me that is saying this, it is his friend who even co-authored one book with him, Bernard Stiegler, as his very long seminary with the bad audio and even worse english shows: ruclips.net/video/ch_OgoR0WPs/видео.html Imo, the concept of the virtual, that has its “dark precursor” in Aristotle’s definition of movement (not his definition of time!), is much more essential for poststructuralism than the concept of difference, at least in the Deleuzo-Guattarian poststructuralism. I would even go so far to say that Derrida’s poststructuralism (turned more towards language than to the conceptualisation of reality) is more some kind of a “nihilist structuralism”, but that’s just me… I pity your students who will experience just the foreplay without the fornication…
As always informative. Thank you. I got to thinking about "desiring machines," an over-determination in pursuit of trying to escape control. We end up with this klunky apparatus trying to accomplish our goals.
"The Empire never ended" (Philip K. Dick). Maybe today it has just more elegant tools of control hidden behind the illusive freedom that is painted right on the walls of a prison, built with bricks called Discipline and Control. And thank you for this great video.
such a great show, can you do some anarchists such as Max Stirner, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, and/or Peter Kropotkin? It’s kind of a stretch but maybe also Emma Goldman? I feel like I will never understand anarchism fully until I hear you explain it!
I really like the podcast. But the video needs better color calibration. Current images look weirdly gray. A simple post processing filter should fix this.
just for your videos it seems like some of them are shot with log and then don't go on to be color-corrected. Feel free to let me know. There's usually a default LUT you can add. (I do post)
To back this video, 'The age of Surveillance Capitalism' by Zuboff is super prevelent; in a society of control we provide personal data in return for access. Our data is capital, our specific tastes are markets. By sharing our data, capitalists can identify new markets via trends. Eventually our whole lives become marketable; think of how the Apple Watch has access to your blood readings and can recommend products to supplement or counter various blood readings; this is surveillance capitalism.
I think you can even look at it logically: the giving of information in these cases is never free, because it's an aspect of the control itself. It is in fact a non-negotiable *requirement* - you are required (not in an absolute sense, of course, but if you want the purported benefit) to give the information, or you will be denied the perk. So by definition it's an act arising out of a requirement of control, and you're therefore (if you agree) being controlled to do it, even if subjectively you might feel that your desire to do so is in positive alignment with the requirement. I think the fact of the code to some degree is a separate issue. I think that's more a compliance with the control after the fact, a lesser intrusion because in that case the potential sense of personal violation is not so relevant: it's a behavioral control largely without identity cost or investment. You've also already consented (or acquiesced?) to being subjugated by that point, whereas before you gave the information you had not.
But control and surveilance both kind of use surveilance. I believe that Philosophy Tube once made a theatrical video on this. It's about surveilance, and it said that 'as long as there's one individual surveiling another, while the subjected doesn't notice it, one is always leveled over the other/there's a power-hierarchy'. Or something like that.
I still am green with envy at all the Routledge Classics on your shelves. Must catch up. What would D have to say about that? Am sharing your mini-lectures with friends interested in ideas but ignorant of philosophy. Agree totally about education. But control is displacing not just 'discipline' as in the panopticon or monarchical society but 'discipline' going back to early mediaeval and classical periods. A lot of these were also collegial - as in cathedral chapters, collegiate churches, monastic life and the old universities, public school common rooms etc. derived from these. But also the collegiality in civil society: legal profession, civil service, army, skilled occupations with apprenticeships, etc. king Arthur and the ROUND TABLE.
I get this, but discipline vs control is a bad turn of phrase, discipline is a method of control. It’s more direct control vs indirect control. The notion of the methods of control being more corporatised is interesting as effectively the power balance between corporation and state is incrementally shifting in favour of corporate interests, so the fact that methods of control mirror corporate structures is a telling one.
Ele trabalhava em como a burguesia burocrática controlava pessoas por dinheiro, regalias pessoais e no caso, câmbio de moedas. Por isso que pessoas começaram a virar índices de dolarização.
It seems some like to be controlled, to the point where they're advocating the control "hey those persons are in control! over there" someone exclaims, "you better listen" so they're telling me to listen to them. Well I don't want to listen to them. Folks are saying "you have to" "you can't do that" I can't do that" .. you can renew someone's library card with an id and information off their cell phone even after 6pm or whatever cause the original library is closed, something like that I don't remember. My point is, when someone says "we can do that,,, its legal" and there's a Bwahahahahaha after it, people shouldn't be engaging in that activity.
Atualmente, livros sagrados são o único câmbio sólido de lei. É uma lógica de salvar pessoas através da morte de controle de quem as disciplina por chantagem.
The expansion of control/surveillance is evident in urban centers like Chicago where traffic cameras and ShotSpotter (acoustic threat detection) technology can autonomously process environmental data and coordinate responses from authorities. Add to this the vast number of sensors embedded in our mobile phones, smartwatches, and computers (and their ability to coordinate this with other nearby data sources) and our remaining delusions of privacy should be thoroughly shattered. Have a nice day 😆
What are your personal observations, thoughts, insights, philosophy about reality? Isn’t it basically a mystery? You can read people’s musings about reality but isn’t it true that no one knows the truth?
Hi, Dr. Anderson here. I share my views in my publications (which you can check out on my website or academia.edu page), as well as in our audio podcast (which you can listen to here, or anywhere you get your podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/overthink/id1538249280) Since the Continental Thought lectures originated as short introductory videos to prepare my students for class discussion, they're just meant to be quick expositions inviting students to think and discuss ideas from some key thinkers/texts
If course ninety percent of surveillance cameras don't work. I was thinking of making kachina dolls for the Meganational corporations. They are making us eat glyphosates and we are just a statistic to them .
Is it possible for someone to be MORE pretentious? Please just get over yourself. Say “Right?” one more time. It makes you sound so much more intelligent and engaging.
Lovely video but (unfortunately) sometimes I can not understand what u are saying due to fastness of your speech. Just a suggestion can u please speak a little bit slower? It will make you more understandable for people like me (whom english is their second language).
contrôler means manage in French (business context), 'oversee' more generally, and perhaps verify/validate in science. So this presentation is right to focus on the centrality of the corporation in life within developed economies over the past 40 years. It's just that the text has always seemed badly translated and too Foucauldian - the idea is more interesting our lives are managed now rather than overseen by various disciplinary dispositifs.
This channel is one of the reasons why I’m taking my postgrad in philosophy. Thank you!
@@justanothermind4972 that may be true, but it's not worth doing anything else if they're not interested in it
I am enrolled to study MA Philosophy in University of Sofia, Bulgaria, online course because I am so interested in Philosophy. And it's cost is cheap for Europeans.
I wasn’t sure whether to watch this, because I’ve heard about the idea before, but then I realised I had nothing deleuze ;) (plus I love this channel)
From an ethics standpoint, this sounds roughly like society has been transitioning from _static social role_ to _dynamic social contract._ In the former, any deviation from one's _externally_ defined role is punished. In the latter, one builds his or her own personal prison through specific contracts, or privileges.
I realized I posted a comment a year ago that the overthink podcast inspired me to get my master’s in philosophy. Now I’m studying Deleuze this semester.
Thanks!
I love this channel. You are able to provide simple but accurate introductions to some very complex ideas, and you make is seem easy. We have such a need for strong lecturers like you who can convey these provocative ideas impartially.
People have been so put off by punctilious philosophy professors that is is a shrinking field. What a change !
Explained perfectly, thank you! Please consider doing an entire series on Deleuze- at this level of clarity, you could easily start a Deleuzian revival
This is outstanding. I always had trouble reading Deleuze and now Professor Ellie has tempted me to try reading him again. Thanks!
This is almost exactly where my observations of modern life have been taking me over the past few years. How many times have I written on my blog: 'Our lives are being more and more controlled by the corporate world and bureaucracies'? I greatly dislike it, but feel impotent when it comes to doing anything about it (apart from refusing to deal with Amazon and eBay any longer because of their nefarious methods of trying to push (and even cheat) me into a position commensurate with their interests rather than mine. It's a small step, but what else can I do. I'm glad to discover, however, that somebody of genuine influence - as opposed to the social media version of the term - has written a book about it.
Yeah, our Western "democracies" are fictional pacifiers, the corporate world is a top-down control mechanism of the capitalist logic. I encourage you to read works such as The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly...
what's your blog addresss?
There is a lot more that you can do than you might think, especially with technology. For example if you don't already use one, you can try using a free (as in freedom) operating system and replace some of the other software you use with free alternatives. It might require gaining a bit of technical knowledge but there are resources online for audiences of every kind. You might only be interested in regaining control over your digital life and not the technical stuff, and you can choose your learning journey accordingly. Of course having more technical knowledge will give you more power, but even if you don't want or have the time to invest, you can still achieve greater freedom using the amazing work and resources available
@@hexwell hostile data-surrender behaviour will only take you to the next surveillance level. Different dogs, same leashes. Tech is all over us, cornering our freedom more by the hour, and there is not much you can do. You have a cell phone, your privacy is no longer yours.
Open source OSs have lead us to a very powerful and sneaky system whose main function is personal data assimilation.
Do not be fooled: if something is free YOU are the product, and if it has a voice will work for the system. Be well.
This reminds me a lot of the main differences between school to prison pipeline schools and other institutions, or a blue collar job and a white collar job. The first being discipline dominant and the second being control dominant. They are two styles used to subjugate the lower and “middle” classes, respectively (we are all the lower class, to the ones in power)
I think Deleuze's "Post-Script..." is really interesting. I'll definitely be subcribing to your podcast. A response to the "resonance" of the word control: it's rather simple and not a matter of translation or what is lost. Control, Deleuze probably recognized this, is within the domain of cybernetics. This brings me to a thought developed by ecologists Eugene and Howard Odum. From the organism down, organs, tissue, cells, systems are regulated by homeostatis. However, above the organism, populations, communities, ecosystems, landscapes, biomes, and finally the ecosphere, systems are regulated by homeorhesis, that is a pulsing paradigm. Further analogies can be drawn to Deleuze's flows. However, Deleuze doesn't recognize these distinctions, rather there is perhaps no distinction, everything is machinic. Well, ok, but some regulated equilibrium or statis, while the other pulses.
I looove this short introductions… thanks!
Great talk. Absolutely loved your depth of technical thoughts. Now all the active forces of environmental both internal and external are simultaneously under the relational sheaths surface deep layered skinny largest organ of human body cellular anatomy.
Passwords are required for information which can become knowledge when we have it, yet I do not know of any passwords needed to gain access to our hope. We would not be stuck in this system of control if rather seeking knowledge, we sought hope in its place. The idea of seeking hope in place of knowledge is Richard Rorty’s idea, but I have hope that it helps more and more people find happiness when they make such a substitution of a searching for hope rather than for knowledge. Thanks again for your well-put presentation.
Thank you for explaining the deleuzian theory so clearly! Your examples used are like 'parables' so that a layman like myself can grasp the complex ideas of the original philosophy being presented. This channel is an absolute trove of Thinking Manna. Alas the 'control' extends (and even intrudes) into the most mundane areas of everyday life whether one likes it or not. I feel that Dasein is inevitably being replaced by Freedom-through-Compartmentalization - the oxymoron not being my cup of tea at all! But maybe this is all just a jittery part of the Grand Design of Evolution for the Human species? :-D
Great video! Thanks Ellie!!!
Mam u r great . Ur way of communicating is mazing
Ellie, Would you please make a video on the essay 'The Autonomy of Affect' by Brian Massumi? Thanks!
Great lecture as always....
Maybe you can also discuss on Dialogic Pedagogy of Paulo Freire
LOVE to see this.
these are great! do you guys take requests?
Super cool. Learned from this. Thanks.
Thanks! Very interesting thoughts.
Love this videos, keep ‘em coming!
What I gathered seems to be: a disciplinary society is like puppies in a box, whereas a society of control is like the puppies are on a leash.
After watching this video I went and listened to the podcast and I kept thinking about Jorge Luis borges and his map parable where an empire develops a map of a territory to such accuracy that it informs the territory. The metaphor is about the dangers of the representation superseding the thing which is represented which was touched upon most directly in the podcast by the discussion of the data double and the the dangers of the "goo" or data coming to describe the flesh and blood body which the data supposedly represents
The prefix of corporation is corpus, which is Latin for dead body. I also see a connection made between the dead body and your description of corporations as having a “spirit” in the sense that they are not enclosed to a physical location like a factory. On the topic of digital control, it’s quite evident how the majority of our interactions with institutions have become abstracted and separate from physical locations: school, work and even legal and mental health institutions have been mediated through Zoom (which was also exasperated by the pandemic).
Deleuze confuses me 95% of the time, but this made sense.
Deleuze confuses on purpose, it's sophistry really. He's playing with words in a way Wittgenstein would have frown upon. I was a philosophy student in France in the late 80's and early 90's. All my left-wing teachers were in awe of him but his lectures (if you read French) are mostly very incoherent and desperately trying to copy German conceptualisation, aka the chip on the shoulder of all the French "philosphers"/charlatans in the mould of Lacan, Foucault, Derrida and Barthes. They may be considered literary thinkers, psychologists or sociologists not philosophers. Read Raymond Aron instead. Or better, humble yet profound modern German philosophers like Gadamer...
PS: Here the play on word is on discipline and contrôle. Trivial .
Great video. One of my favourite thinkers. Dividuals a bit like dividends too.
Control = capital.
This is great ! I literally lit up with joy seeing you explaining deleuze since I don't understand most of what he thinks. Do you plan on doing more videos on his ideas ?
Hi, Dr. Anderson here! I get that--he is super tough (luckily this essay is short and to the point, lending itself to this video format more than, say, his Logic of Sense or Difference and Repetition). I'm teaching a Poststructuralism seminar in the fall that will dive into Difference and Repetition, and would love to make a video or two based on that if I have time! Thanks for your support
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy If your intention is teaching the post structuralism then you should take into consideration AntiOedipus and not Difference and Repetition. D&R is still Deleuze’s structuralist phase, and his philosophy becomes post structuralist only with his association with Guattari, in the fourth chapter of AntiOedipus, with the virtual/actual (or molecular/molar) distinction. Namely, structure conflates/flattens these two dimensions and that is the reason that they need a post structuralist conceptualisation of the reality…
Btw, taking such a short text as “Control” for dealing with Deleuze reminds me of J. Petersons dealing with Marxism by reading only Communist Manifesto…
@@exlauslegale8534 Hi there. The intention of this video is to go over key ideas from "Postscript on Societies of Control," so there's no claim to deal with Deleuze/poststructuralism by reading only a single short text. It's literally just a short video on a single text. The comparison to Peterson is thus really off key.
As for the Poststructuralism syllabus, you make some interesting points, but there are a number of reasons for choosing D&R for my students within the context of a semester-long syllabus. Ideally, we'd have time to read even more work (including Anti-Oedipus), but a semester is only so long. The notion of difference in that text is key for poststructuralist strands of thinking and fits really well alongside the Derrida and Foucault we are reading in the text, even if it doesn't represent a more mature transcending of structuralism. Trust me, narrowing down the reading list in a syllabus is always a struggle for me!
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy Unfortunately, Difference and Repetition is not yet Deleuze’s poststructuralist phase, it is the last great structuralist book. Deleuze’s essay “A quoi reconnaît-on le structuralisme?” begins with “Nous sommes en 1967.”, and in D&R he writes: “La structure est la réalité du virtuel.” (page 270, ed. P.U.F.), something that no poststructuralist would ever say. It is true that those are, together with Raymond Ruyer’s La cybernétique et l'origine de l'information, or Simondon’s L'individu et sa genèse physico-biologique, proto-poststructuralist works, especially Ruyer’s book, but hélas, they still belong to structuralism. The main new element for ps, which Guattari brings into play, is the machinic which overturned the paradigm of the mechanical, closed upon itself and not productive, unlike the machine. Only now can the virtual machine-like produce the actual while remaining real all along…
Deleuze’s process of differenTiation of the virtual in the Idea, and of differenCiation of the actual don’t have much in common with Derrida’s Différance, moreover, Derrida misunderstood Deleuze, and it is not me that is saying this, it is his friend who even co-authored one book with him, Bernard Stiegler, as his very long seminary with the bad audio and even worse english shows: ruclips.net/video/ch_OgoR0WPs/видео.html
Imo, the concept of the virtual, that has its “dark precursor” in Aristotle’s definition of movement (not his definition of time!), is much more essential for poststructuralism than the concept of difference, at least in the Deleuzo-Guattarian poststructuralism. I would even go so far to say that Derrida’s poststructuralism (turned more towards language than to the conceptualisation of reality) is more some kind of a “nihilist structuralism”, but that’s just me…
I pity your students who will experience just the foreplay without the fornication…
As always informative. Thank you.
I got to thinking about "desiring machines," an over-determination in pursuit of trying to escape control. We end up with this klunky apparatus trying to accomplish our goals.
I am curious about your opinion on the late Mark Fisher's; Capitalist Realism
"The Empire never ended" (Philip K. Dick). Maybe today it has just more elegant tools of control hidden behind the illusive freedom that is painted right on the walls of a prison, built with bricks called Discipline and Control.
And thank you for this great video.
such a great show, can you do some anarchists such as Max Stirner, Pierre Joseph Proudhon, and/or Peter Kropotkin? It’s kind of a stretch but maybe also Emma Goldman? I feel like I will never understand anarchism fully until I hear you explain it!
It's great to hear you ma'am. Deluze et al essay MACHINE, please simplify this essay in an intelligible way.
Good lecture
I really like the podcast. But the video needs better color calibration. Current images look weirdly gray. A simple post processing filter should fix this.
Thank you, you're right! Unfortunately we can't re-upload the vid, but will fix for future ones
just for your videos it seems like some of them are shot with log and then don't go on to be color-corrected. Feel free to let me know. There's usually a default LUT you can add. (I do post)
Hello doc! Is overthink on spotify?
Yes!
open.spotify.com/show/4aIlXHTDz5vrc78DyjFg66
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy thank you! Love your lectures!
In which books does he talk about control society and biopolitics?
To back this video, 'The age of Surveillance Capitalism' by Zuboff is super prevelent; in a society of control we provide personal data in return for access. Our data is capital, our specific tastes are markets. By sharing our data, capitalists can identify new markets via trends. Eventually our whole lives become marketable; think of how the Apple Watch has access to your blood readings and can recommend products to supplement or counter various blood readings; this is surveillance capitalism.
nice..my other half is a philosopher that lives at the opposite site of the globe.just perfect
I think you can even look at it logically: the giving of information in these cases is never free, because it's an aspect of the control itself. It is in fact a non-negotiable *requirement* - you are required (not in an absolute sense, of course, but if you want the purported benefit) to give the information, or you will be denied the perk. So by definition it's an act arising out of a requirement of control, and you're therefore (if you agree) being controlled to do it, even if subjectively you might feel that your desire to do so is in positive alignment with the requirement.
I think the fact of the code to some degree is a separate issue. I think that's more a compliance with the control after the fact, a lesser intrusion because in that case the potential sense of personal violation is not so relevant: it's a behavioral control largely without identity cost or investment. You've also already consented (or acquiesced?) to being subjugated by that point, whereas before you gave the information you had not.
But control and surveilance both kind of use surveilance. I believe that Philosophy Tube once made a theatrical video on this. It's about surveilance, and it said that 'as long as there's one individual surveiling another, while the subjected doesn't notice it, one is always leveled over the other/there's a power-hierarchy'. Or something like that.
Bravo
Kind of reminds me of the idea of zk-snarks in computing
I think of Loyalty Cards used in Retail.
"datafied" 👍🌟
I still am green with envy at all the Routledge Classics on your shelves. Must catch up. What would D have to say about that? Am sharing your mini-lectures with friends interested in ideas but ignorant of philosophy. Agree totally about education. But control is displacing not just 'discipline' as in the panopticon or monarchical society but 'discipline' going back to early mediaeval and classical periods. A lot of these were also collegial - as in cathedral chapters, collegiate churches, monastic life and the old universities, public school common rooms etc. derived from these. But also the collegiality in civil society: legal profession, civil service, army, skilled occupations with apprenticeships, etc. king Arthur and the ROUND TABLE.
I get this, but discipline vs control is a bad turn of phrase, discipline is a method of control. It’s more direct control vs indirect control. The notion of the methods of control being more corporatised is interesting as effectively the power balance between corporation and state is incrementally shifting in favour of corporate interests, so the fact that methods of control mirror corporate structures is a telling one.
Better organization for excelent content ;)
The Sweetest Name in the 🌎 is Mother 👩🏻🦰
Ele trabalhava em como a burguesia burocrática controlava pessoas por dinheiro, regalias pessoais e no caso, câmbio de moedas.
Por isso que pessoas começaram a virar índices de dolarização.
But the gain in illusory freedom is not a loss of actual freedom, right? Isn’t the very idea of freedom always an illusion from the get go?
Freedom in itself illusiory? Why?
It seems some like to be controlled, to the point where they're advocating the control "hey those persons are in control! over there" someone exclaims, "you better listen" so they're telling me to listen to them. Well I don't want to listen to them. Folks are saying "you have to" "you can't do that" I can't do that" .. you can renew someone's library card with an id and information off their cell phone even after 6pm or whatever cause the original library is closed, something like that I don't remember. My point is, when someone says "we can do that,,, its legal" and there's a Bwahahahahaha after it, people shouldn't be engaging in that activity.
Atualmente, livros sagrados são o único câmbio sólido de lei.
É uma lógica de salvar pessoas através da morte de controle de quem as disciplina por chantagem.
The expansion of control/surveillance is evident in urban centers like Chicago where traffic cameras and ShotSpotter (acoustic threat detection) technology can autonomously process environmental data and coordinate responses from authorities. Add to this the vast number of sensors embedded in our mobile phones, smartwatches, and computers (and their ability to coordinate this with other nearby data sources) and our remaining delusions of privacy should be thoroughly shattered. Have a nice day 😆
What are your personal observations, thoughts, insights, philosophy about reality? Isn’t it basically a mystery? You can read people’s musings about reality but isn’t it true that no one knows the truth?
Hi, Dr. Anderson here. I share my views in my publications (which you can check out on my website or academia.edu page), as well as in our audio podcast (which you can listen to here, or anywhere you get your podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/overthink/id1538249280)
Since the Continental Thought lectures originated as short introductory videos to prepare my students for class discussion, they're just meant to be quick expositions inviting students to think and discuss ideas from some key thinkers/texts
@@OverthinkPodcastPhilosophy Thanks. I will check out the publications and podcasts.
Deleuze tem um trabalho sobre lei e reversão.
If course ninety percent of surveillance cameras don't work. I was thinking of making kachina dolls for the Meganational corporations. They are making us eat glyphosates and we are just a statistic to them .
Hello from Egypt ❤️
Pleaaase do a video for the will of Schopenhauer
they both touch on this in episode 19 of their podcast which covers 'genius', great episode in itself also :)
Beyond good and Evil full idea of what you believe? Please!
Temple of Hip Hop.
Thikns
People like Deleuze et al. are one reason why philosophers bloviate fluff.
Corporation are cybernetic “persons” not biological ones
💕💕💕
❤️
🌷😇🌷
Is it possible for someone to be MORE pretentious? Please just get over yourself. Say “Right?” one more time. It makes you sound so much more intelligent and engaging.
Ah ah, is the way you say "contrrrôle" supposed to sound French ?
It's the age of Aquarius!!!!
Lovely video but (unfortunately) sometimes I can not understand what u are saying due to fastness of your speech. Just a suggestion can u please speak a little bit slower? It will make you more understandable for people like me (whom english is their second language).
contrôler means manage in French (business context), 'oversee' more generally, and perhaps verify/validate in science. So this presentation is right to focus on the centrality of the corporation in life within developed economies over the past 40 years. It's just that the text has always seemed badly translated and too Foucauldian - the idea is more interesting our lives are managed now rather than overseen by various disciplinary dispositifs.
Thanks!
Thanks!