RSS
 

Arquivo para a ‘Information Science’ Categoria

The crisis of Reason: the dissent

21 Oct

Much has been written about it, but usually without leaving it, it’s like postmodernity, everyone shudders at the term, but any serious thinker knows we’re in the end of the modern, which will come later only crystal ball, but read The signs and understanding what changes we are experiencing can help a lot.
First I explain the prison we live, years ago when reading Horkheimer’s book the “Eclipse of Reason”, original from 1947, that Editora Unesp did a good translation of German, the author analyzes the technoscientific signs of modernity, but as instruments of More than those who can take dangerous and arduous tasks out of the hands of workers, the economic subjugation of course continues, which will lead to a mechanistic analysis of the digital universe, which is something other than Fordism and Toyotism.
In the philosophical aspect the work is between “objective reason” and “subjective reason”, which is basically the realization of human potentials as ends, with the development of practical instruments that enable such goals, the “means”, without escaping beyond rationalism. of ideas of progress.
It was another work that aroused my analysis beyond rationalism and development and progress at all costs, a compendium parading several national authors on “The Crisis of Reason”(Companhia das Letras, 1996), among several interesting essays highlighting the Jacques Rancière “The Dissent” and Gerard Lebrun’s “About Technophobia”, written in 1996.
Rancière makes a correct analysis based on the idea that “the currently dominant discourse that identifies political rationality to consensus and the consensus to the very principle of democracy” (Rancière apud Novaes, 1996, p. 367), and made his criticism pointing out three paradoxes.
The first paradox is soon after the fall of the former Soviet Union its opponents while celebrating its fall, resumed the “objective necessity”, ie the idea of resuming the productive forces of development in full swing, emptying the alternatives, thus established the “consensus” democracy as “the pure regime of economic necessity” (idem).
The second paradox is the mismatch of political wisdom, criticizes the discourse “which glorifies the actor, the individual who argues, who hires, who acts” (idem), the less things are to be discussed, “the more the ethics of the discussion are celebrated. , of communicative reason, as the foundation of politics ”(idem), is not what he says, but paradoxically when there is less ethics and less dialogue.
The third paradox is almost a prophecy, which Rancière calls “the national consensus of political parties and the advent of the great supranational spaces, reappear the brutal, more archaic forms of ethnic wars, exclusion, racism, xenophobia” (Rancière apud Novaes, 1996, pp. 368), it should be noted that the text is old, but this revival of the “national” was already evident.
His discourse is more complex as the text progresses, highlighting a passage that I consider important about consensus: “In its ordinary statement, consensual wisdom is presented as a thesis on the evolution of the politician summarized in the following idea: The old form of politics, that of conflict, has lapsed. The modern form is that of covenant, to deal between responsible partners…” (idem, p. 378), that is to say, it is not consensual, therefore, the dissent.
Ranci{ere, J.  (1996)O dissenso. In: NOVAES, A. A crise da Razão. Sâo Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1996.

(in Picture, between among several paintings in text, I chose the Divine Freedom of Goya).

 

Burnout Society 2: Procrastination

16 Oct

Several references to Byung Chul Han’s book have already been posted here: The Society of Burnout the Pressure of Performance, the “Disciplinary Systems”, but especially the excess of activism leads many people to fall into borderline situations: mental tiredness, panic syndrome can reach Burnout’s syndrome, but only the simple “contemplative vita” solves, I don’t think so. 
One effect of when our life around us begins to become disorganized, it is impossible to always stay organized, is that the difficulty of knowing where to start can lead to procrastination. So both contemplation and action must come with some rationality that does not limit both of extending their limits in the positive sense, having passion in action, and having “emptiness” and breathing in contemplation, it is very common that neither are in fact well done.
One of the reasons that day to day can be driven to procrastination is because activity becomes totally routine and blaming the machines for this is entering the Fordist system, where activities and attitudes are routine and there is no creative way to do it. them.
Also creativity can be misleading, if we have to make a cake every day, of course it is possible to improve, but we must remember that our “cake” is well made in a way, so what is needed is to put a dose of satisfaction, of love and even greater care than before, for example, make it more hygienic, adjust sugar and salt, choose the best flour.
Contemplation too, I discovered after many years of reading, had the technique of making it paused and without “gluttony”, but I discovered very recently that I skipped “passages” that I didn’t like or disagree with, now I see that they are the most important for me they make me think.
I read these days, because I received the Nobel Prize of Literature a thought from Austrian writer Peter Handke: “A good thing, all of a sudden, forgetting the story, the past, stop feeling that present happiness is threatened by what it used to be.”
This means that I should not just focus on reading what I like, I must also leave the attachments and longings of the past, to live the present happiness, it is not just the hurts or joys we have from the past, we really need to cut and live the gift.
Thus we can organize the demand for what is disorganization, combat the abatement and procrastination of what we have to do, and finally do each action as a meditation, that is my addition to Byung Chul Han’s deep thinking, the action can be contemplative.

 

At exam or the butterfly flight

15 Oct

Byung Chul Han wrote in “Ar the Exam” talking about the influence of social media today on our thoughts and actions, which he calls psychopolitics, that the “gift of power reduces the improbability of accepting my selection of course, my decision willingness on the part of others ”(Chul Han, 2013, p. 17), which can lead to lack of reflection and swarm.

He wrote of this reflection that: “The word of power suddenly eliminates the noise that inflates. It produces a silence, namely, the space for action. ”(Idem). He also wrote, from reading Flusser’s “Digital Turn”: “that the human being is… an artist who designs alternative worlds. The difference between art and science disappears ”(p. 82).

It dislikes and is strange that Flusser’s “new anthropology” is grounded in the “Judeo-Christianity” that “sees in human being only dust” (Flusser apud Chul Han, p. 83) which I like and refer to. It is precisely in this line that he will say “There is no subject and no object: we can no longer be subjects, for there are no more objects to which we could be subject, and no hard core that could be subject to any object” (quoting Flusser from “Media Culture ”, P. 213s).

Dislikes and does not accept Flusser’s messianism and says that “it does not do justice to the current topology of the digital connection” (Chul Han, p. 83), but I like both and I fully accept Han’s idea that in the Digital Swarm we lose perspective of reflection, or how he likes contemplation for action, I counter the idea of ​​the butterfly.

The butterfly because of the butterfly effect of E. Lorenz, his famous thesis that “butterfly wing beating can influence the weather in Texas”, ie small individual or group actions can generate the reverse effect of the swarm, but this effect exists and became evident with the modern digital media that Flusser little knew, died in 1991 the Web was just born.

Flight of the erratic and disconcerting butterfly nevertheless has direction and meaning, its birth is also curious it is born dragging like a larva and when it leaves the cocoon it is prepared for flight, dresses in multiple colors and shapes, it is less noted that the bees, but also does her “work”, I would say she is the artist of nature, performative and colorful.

The comparison with the swarm is because, as Han wrote, again quoting Flusser: “we too are ‘digital computers’ with buzzing punctual possibilities,” but then makes a harsh criticism of Flusser, there is an alternate digital where the butterfly takes flight, the art meets contemplation, and the birth of the present “active” world without reflection is not from now, see our previous post about a 1909 writing.

 

 

Fear of machines is justified

14 Oct

In 1909, the British writer published the novel The Machine Stops ((England, Archibald Constable), spoke of a dark future in which we would be controlled and serviced by machines, so the fear is not of today.

Little or nothing is said about the educational gap around the world, the ignorance that classroom backgrounds have pushed ahead of social media and come to power in many countries, it is not unique to Brazil or the United States, nor is it even focused on the powers that be.

If there is social support, if there is social support, it means that there is a basis for this, and we analyze and explain this dystopian future.

Thus, it is not the exclusive problem of machines entering the industry, the so-called Revolution 4.0, but of an educational gap that can even be reversed using social media, artificial intelligence and the organization of information using technology, Web 3.0.

On the other side in 2018, Brand Smith and Harry Shum, respectively Microsoft President and Vice President (available in PDF The Future Computed: Artificial Intelligence and Its Role in Society) who said while sleeping, the virtual assistant, be it Cortana, Siri or Alexa Connected to other virtual devices in a “smart home” ensures that when you wake up there will be a breakfast to your liking, is still imaginary, as in general the devices and environments change.

I mention the case of a mouse designed for engineering and architecture that took the place of the promised light pen, which seemed to be the most suitable device for personal computers, also not promised in many futuristic essays.

Another case is the Semantic Web, which with users’ adherence to Web 2.0 (blogs, twitters, websites), has led to a scenario of growing misinformation, but that Web 3.0 could reverse the course.

We can and will be ready for a Web 4.0 with artificial intelligence helping to filter and organize information in the very near future, what relationship may with intelligent machines the holographic future with avatars and social multi-presence is uncertain but will come.

It is more worthwhile to think about preventing the dangers and looking forward with hope, to imagine that it is possible to block or end an initiated stage of technological development.

There are dangers, yes, there have always been, but the danger of a new world war is more related to great world interests than machines, of course they can and are already used by them.

In 2011 a documentary about Machine Stops was made and it talked about war, not about machines controlling men, but about human warfare.

 

 

 

 

Common sense and gratitude

10 Oct

The common sense from which Popper wrote is not the simple objectivity or subjectivity developed by idealist philosophy, or the intersubjectivity that connects the subjectivity of individuals or discourses, is the possibility of attaining knowledge of things, situations and people that leads to knowledge. in a way of knowing that they have cultural, social or even beliefs that lead them to proactive attitudes.
So you take acts done in isolation into a virtuous circle of attitudes, of course Popper did not speak of gratitude, but Marcel Mauss wrote in the 1920s the theory of giving, or the “gift” of simply rewarding or rewarding positive attitudes, But there is no problem in having remuneration, this is its idealistic aspect, even in this case there may be gratuity if made as a gift to those who receive the service.
What leads to gratitude rather than reward is how the word etymological origin is the notion of gratuitousness that must accompany even those acts for which there is just compensation, without being an instrumentalized or corrupting form of that act.
Thus collaboration, cooperation and even totally free actions that may involve values, such as paid wages, which should be thought of as acts of brotherhood and compassion as those involved in that act.
Just as continuous acts lead to an attitude, so continuous gratitude can lead to gratitude, can and should not because there is a difference in both cases that it is the fact that if it does not become an act and a social gratitude, even though attitude and gratitude can getting lost and leading to discontinuity of acts and gratitude, this is a problem in certain cultures.

 

Gratitude, the question of science and common sense

09 Oct

A person may be grateful without understanding the goals of gratitude, but they will not understand the goals if they do not know the true motivations of gratitude, that is, remaining in gratitude can be free of knowledge, but have gratitude (make it a habit healthy) requires going beyond the simple gratuitous act, knowing it and cultivating it to work in society.
Thus, it is necessary to separate appreciable common sense from objective knowledge, which is to dissect the object of knowledge that can be done both inductively and intuitively, both paths are valid, so it is not necessary conventional but intentional science.
To talk about science we need to talk about Karl Popper, he also speculated about being things, said about common sense is valid, but upholding the truths of it is something bigger. But objective knowledge, he said, was an eternal pursuit of his life, in his words: “The essays in this book break with a tradition that can be traced back to Aristotle – the tradition of this common sense theory of knowledge.
I am a great admirer of common sense, which I claim is essentially self-critical ”, But to uphold it as truth requires more: “… if I am willing to uphold to the end the essential truth of common sense realism, I regard the common sense theory of knowledge as a subjectivist blunder.
This blunder has dominated Western philosophy, ”as understood by feelings, passions, and even sustaining nonobjective questions.
He goes on: “I have been trying to eradicate it and replace it with an objective theory of knowledge, essentially conjectural. This may be a bold claim, but I do not apologize for it ” (Popper, 1975, p. 07).
Popper’s division into three worlds shows a weakness in his theory by separating knowledge into three worlds: P1 the world of nature (or physical in the sense of physis), the world of minds (World 2) and the world of ideas (World 3), prioritizes the latter.
In a solution to a problem, people can attack or accept the solution found, but not the person who presented it, so it gives a greater value than the world of ideas (World 3) has to Popper, rather than the World of minds (World 2) who developed them.
Gratitude is just the opposite, because the minds that develop solutions to the problem (World 2) are more important than the ideas that drive them (World 3), although subjectivism, which is proper to the subject, may also have weaknesses.
What embraces these three distinct aspects: Nature, Knowledge and Ideas, are ontological aspects, for the three are proper to Being, gratitude is one of these aspects.

Popper, K. (1975) Conhecimento objetivo (Objective Knowledge). Brazil, São Paulo: Editora da Universidade de São Paulo.

 

The foundations of the idea concept

26 Sep

Following Sloterdijk’s reasoning, in which the fundamentals must be thought and in function of them one can return to the principle and preconception of each thought, one can revise idea with the Greek “eidos”.

For Aristoteles there were universal principles, not as Kant later thought, but from the idea of ​​the one (tó hen), what is (tó on) and the genres (animals, plants, living beings), while essence (eidos) does not. would be a universal, but something common (koinos) to multiple things, there is therefore not in Aristotle the idealistic dualism, but the separation between universals and essence.

In Plato this dualism is accentuated, the sensible world and the world of ideas (still in the sense of eidos, essence), this separation will be troublesome to the modern idealists, who will unite it, but without a necessary philosophical reflection. the dichotomy subject and object never reunited as a being.

Ontology, and the method of philosophical hermeneutics, is an attempt to bring these fields together, although they remain distinct and under tension, but with possibilities of clarification beyond the classical separation.

Gadamer in his work matter “Truth and Method” vol. II, picks it up like this: “Hermeneutics is the art of understanding. It seems especially difficult to understand the problems of hermeneutics, at least as unclear concepts of science, criticism, and reflection dominate the discussion.

And this is because we live in an age where science is increasingly dominating nature and governing the management of human coexistence, and this pride of our civilization, which relentlessly corrects the lack of success and constantly produces new tasks of scientific inquiry, where once again progress, planning, and damage removal are grounded, develops the power of true blindness. ”(Gadamer, 1996: 292).

Gadamer after explaining that the return to Being proposed by Heidegger is a return to the hermeneutic method, which was neither to develop a theory of the sciences of the spirit (as idealism did, and the German in particular) nor to propose a critique of historical reason, as Dilthey did, and which Gadamer will clarify in his book “The Question of Historical Consciousness” to say that it is not even historical romanticism.

Its ultimate goal is expressed by stating: “what I did was put dialogue at the center of hermeneutics” (Gadamer, 1996, p. 27), but its dialogue is neither idealism (would be absurd) nor any form of philosophical blindness, it is precisely the rescue of philosophical hermeneutics.

Therefore, their dialogue is neither idealistic dogmatism, but nowadays theory has become ahistorical dogmatism, but rather the identification of preconceptions, from which it is possible to merge horizons as well as to accept worldview distinctions.

Gadamer, Hans Georg. Verdad y Metodo (Truth and method) v. II. Salamanca: Sigueme, 1996.2v.

 

Because idealism is bad

25 Sep

Like many criticisms that use idealism, they may seem exaggerated, or those that fall into the purely “theoretical” field, such as those that practice without foundation, or often empirical, but not quite, there are serious human diseases.

One of them is individual (in the plural, there is more than one type, eg, or group), criticized by the idealists, as it is not caught in the bud, not reprehensible, as in Popper and already commented on posts from previous weeks, but Sloterdijk is clearer: “Enlightenment, which strives to replace and objectify the saber, the silence, or the physiognomic world.

The price of objectivity is the loss of proximity” (Sloterijk, 2012, p. 200), despite a discourse on individualism, the idealist does not deviate from it, there is no proximity.

Distance exists because we are separate from objects, it is easy to argue the object “to itself”, it seems neutral or little “human”, but the damage or harm is caused by any object that is inherent to the subject that invokes or uses, or that it is inseparable from “physiognomic” objectivity.

The author says what kind of wisdom it produces, that which is linked to empiricism as it has historically happened, says Sloterdijk: “or love of wisdom inevitably to its objects and attenuates a coldness of purely objective saber.

A science that annihilates [or tries] in the last vestiges of philosophy under the guise of a lens also breaks the last strands of the sense of closeness and intimacy that bind things (idem), is easier to understand by insistent discourse against “objects”, and not a form of production, use and consumption.

But there are also opposing discourses, intimacy or intimidation, which manifest themselves here: “as an atmosphere, a moral-psychological vibration that does not find our civilization” (ibid.), Says the simple pronunciation of this word leads people to think of records, moods, and experiences, and is said to “aim in a mirror.”

There is a point not addressed by Sloterdijk that I also identify with idealism, comes from Parmenides and Plato’s World of Ideas, is the beyond the mirror, the perfectionism that is taken to extremes in our time, beyond the inherent narcissism, perfectionism leads the hype in the treatment of objects, food and consumer goods, and worst of all, there is no shortage of “reality shows” to propel these psychopathies.

On the other hand, Sloterdijk will say that the cynicism arising from this current thinking is also the one that leads us to see how ‘unhappy modern consciousness faces itself,’ I say, collapsing ever near nihilism.

While speaking of difference (we have already stated the preference for distinction), “the knowledge of the cynics belonging to the lords class (Herrenzynikers) rests on a false superiority” (Sloterdijk, 2012, p. 203), springs from a “false smile, ”suggest“ empathy, ”and other ways of concealing the appeal to ignorance, hypocrisy, and the reversal of real feeling.

This is beyond the malaise of civilization, says Sloterdijk, and invokes the offensive of Diogenes’ kynikê (cynical in archaic Greek) who, by proposing to “merge the coin again”, made the proposal to change sides definitively and provide to the powerful a philosophy of resourcefulness (see the picture of Goya “you will not find it” quoted by the author), of accepting dishonesty.

Nothing more contemporary than Diogenes, the Cynic, and the search “during the day” with a flashlight to find the honest man, cynicism reigns, there is little honesty in various environments, looking for it would be crazy, says the cynic.

Sloterdijk, P. (2012) Crítica da Razão Cínica * Critique of Cynical Reason). Brazil, São Paulo: Estação Liberdade.

 

(Português) Percepção, imagens e psicopoder

24 Sep

Sorry, this entry is only available in Brazilian Portuguese.

 

Idealisms and science

17 Sep

The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were marked by scientific, technical achievements due to the Industrial Revolution, with a world-wide expanding and flourishing trade, which gave rise to confidence that humanity seemed to flourish and history ruled by Reason, as the Enlightenment alike triumph.

With few dissonant voices, Kierkegaard first and then Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, the rest seemed to flow in a full and satisfying turn, the colonies were not spoken, and the Arab and Eastern world seemed to submit to the Western order, but there was something to disturb the colonial struggles. and the danger of war, which would see its outbreak in the 19th century. The science that seemed to do so much had an Achilles heel, had not yet solved the problem of social disputes, not only that which subjected workers and colonies, but especially the trade wars and disputes that came to subject the defeated.

It was the exacerbation of nationalism, which now returns, the trade war between nations, now between the US and China, but also between Iran and Saudi Arabia, that made the first to be called war of war, with 10 million dead. Amid the two wars emerged the Vienna Circle, neopositivism and neologicism, among several other names a prominent scientific name was Karl Popper, among others, such as Godel, Carnap, Hans Kelsen and Moritz Schlick.

In the scientific field besides Husserl who criticizes the method, Popper will also propose that the positivist inductive method presented itself to science as a volatile knowledge, which could not guarantee anything about the constancy of observed facts, and it is not possible to affirm that any assumption is the truth. with absolute precision, what Heisenberg physics already said.

But his return to Parmenides is more essential, where idealism began, and there is its ontological root: ‘being is’ and ‘non-being is not’, there is no contradiction or third hypothesis.

By stating in the previous post the return to root, it will not be in its heyday of German idealism, or even Hegel’s sacralization, Marx will say that there are new against old Hegelians, but in the origin we will find something essence to the idealism and enlightenment described by Karl Popper .

In the book “The World of Parmenides: Essays on Pre-Socratic Enlightenment” (Popper, 2014) that we find several pearls of idealistic foundations, the first in the preface by editor Arne Friemuth Petersen, he states that he gave the lecture quoting “To be or not Of Hamlet, to which Popper himself interrupted, stating more or less this:

“You see, Parmenides was neither a language analyst nor an ontologist, but a cosmologist. Your “Being” has nothing to do with ontology. ”(Popper, XIII, 2014).

I was also amazed to read this right from the preface to the book that speaks of the worldview at the origin of idealism and also of the Enlightenment, not only in Parmenides, but according to Popper himself also in Xenophanes cosmology and Parmenides epistemology (page XV). , which comes to clarify a non-rational origin, as one might suppose, he will propose that Heraclitus (everything changes) and Parmenides (nothing changes) “were reconciled and combined in modern science” (p. XX), and thus faces of it. currency.

In the notes of the Brazilian post-impression, fragments found after printing, there are several notes by Popper, the seventh that says: “Historical hypothesis: Tales is the inventor of the rational discussion method”, new surprise, but the Enlightenment was born there. back.

POPPER, K. O Mundo de Parmênides: ensaios sobre o iluminismo pré-socrático (The World of Parmenides: Essays on Pre-Socratic Enlightenment), trad. Roberto Leal Ferreira, São Paulo UNESP editor, 2014.