ONTOLOGICAL DESIGN (w/ Daniel Fraga)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2024
- The next Philosophy Portal course focused on the Écrits starts September 3 2023: philosophyport...
Daniel Fraga has just released a book titled "Ontological Design: Subject is Project". Here we discuss the central idea: that design should not be thought as object-oriented, but rather as a recursive feedback loop with subjectivity itself. This way we do not just focus on re-designing our environments, but rather focus on how the re-design of environments necessarily entails a fundamental transformation of subjectivity itself. The human with smart-phone is not the same thing as the human without smart-phone, for example, it is as if we are an entity with a new organ. Consequently, the inherited structures from the previous ages cannot understand subjectivity in the digital age, because subjectivity in the digital age is a type of new emerging being. What was thought of as reality in the past can no longer be taken for granted, can no longer be taken as a given. Reality qua ontology is a design project constituted by a recursive feedback loop. This project points towards the post-human as we push the limits of the structures we have come to identify with as permanent. What emerges from ontological design?
Ontological Design: Subject is Project (the book): www.amazon.com...
Technosocial: / @technosocial3574
Philosophy Portal Freudian Unconscious course: www.philosophy...
Support on Patreon: / cadelllast
Contact:
Website: cadelllast.com
Email: cadell.last@gmail.com
Facebook: / cadellssphere
Twitter: / cadellnlast
Instagram: / lastcadell
Academia: vub.academia.e...
Research Gate: www.researchga...
Google Scholar: scholar.google...
Absolutely excellent discussion, and Fraga’s book is indeed outstanding: I’m on the last chapter and hope to finish it as of 10 minutes from now. The book makes a strong case for why indeed we exist in a “recursive feedback loop” with technology, and if we don’t realize this, we will be designed versus design. It’s very helpful to think that today we can arise to a science for how to design the self and subject, which means we need to either use that science for ourselves or it will be used on us. The language of “interface” is very useful, and indeed technology always changes out “toward-ness”: before the camera, I couldn’t think of a tree as a potential picture, but now I can, and that forever changes how I relate to the tree, for good and for bad. I really like how Fraga understands this change as “political”: that opened a lot of new thoughts for me. Also, I love the tragedy in Fraga, where he emphasizing that “if we can design, we can design falsely.” Exactly right.
I loved the reflections on how truth has the structure of a fiction, as well as your point Cadell how arguably all societies have been “post-truth,” so what does it mean to call ours “post-truth?” That was really great, and the idea that “we go into truth to better relate to fiction” was a bomb going off. Might have to get a tattoo of that one…
I agree with Fraga’s critique of Dugin: indeed, I myself see Dugin as responding to “the meaning crisis” with an act of self-effacement, as hopefully the paper on Putin and Dugin made clear. I also agree that the internet forces upon us a need for Absolute Knowing, and I love the claim that the deepest philosophy happens where “1 = 0.” Fraga was great at the end emphasizing how we are all “amateur ontological designers” already, and how we need to think in terms of “rules of thumb” and “showing up every day.” This made me think of jazz improvisation, a favorite metaphor of mine.
Great work gentlemen! It was a treat to listen to you talk.
That was a great saxophone solo, DG.
@@PhilosophyPortal The G has produced in me a subconscious desire to be Kenny...
Reminds me a lot of William James. The feedback loops are, basically, habits. The subject is a derivative of a variety of these loops -- some of which can be changed by the subject itself -- resulting in a new (still derivative) subject. This is actually a lot of fun too -- we can push on some of the levers of our own minds and then, essentially, pop up as a different person.
Could barely follow anything but somehow still enjoyed it. Thanks for stretching my brain.
This new trend of scholarship is in itself an ontological phenomenon.. throwing out a bunch of old ideas which individually in their original contexts of development are much more profound and illuminating, but you cobble them together through some terminological slight of hand to make them appear as something new! ISIS and college students use the same technologies and objects with the same affordances but they belong to totally different worlds and worldings, in 1917 Russians were sitting in the same kind of buildings, using the same typewriters, and drink their vodka/tea from the same cups as people in London, but their was a universe between their worldviews.. objects have impacts but claiming we are ontologically defined by them is an overstatement that neglects a whole lot of value systems, ideologies, politics, traditions, etc.. unless you expand the term design so much as to include all human mental and physical activity, which will be a doomed project.. and when you use the title ontological design it implies there are other forms of design and ontological is one of them (like biological chemistry), while the theory seems to claim that all design is ontological by nature..
Who is We indeed. Maybe as big a question as Hamlet's. Or Pilate's to Christ: "And what is Truth?"
I'm perhaps most encouraged by Dostoevsky's monologue in
NOTES FROM THE UNDERGROUND, where the protagonist proposes that the human being will destroy the Crystal Palace just to prove that 2 plus 2 = 4 (ain't necessarily so).
PS: Jolly good show, lads!
2 + 2 = 5
@@PhilosophyPortal I know. "It ain't necessarily so" is the punch line.
I was raised on Gershwin and Jewish comedy...so su-me!
I tell ya...I get no respect...no respect at all...take my wife... PLEASE!
@@thomassimmons1950 all good bro, I knew that’s what you were pointing towards. Underground man all day and night ;)
When is Ontological Design?