Arquivo para a ‘Information Science’ Categoria

Pass to through the narrow door

23 Aug

The time of liberality, the time at all seems easy and then complicated, the door of wisdom is great and ignorance is great, “the client wants ease,” but then.
Everyone who knows, likes the poetry Portuguese Sea of the Fernando Pessoa, so let’s see: “Was it worth it? Everything is worth it Who wants to go beyond the Bojador It has to go beyond the pain ”.
The Bojador was a cape off the coast of Africa where many ships sank, many sailors stopped a voyage to the Indian Ocean, one soul is not small beyond pain.
The easy movement of idealism, the little reflection in favor of impulsiveness, the adherence to the new populism, and a broader crisis the cultural feature of our time, and the navigation in our deepest systems, but the internet browsing, the web browsing.
Web without compasses helps, but is not a determinant, a determinant is ignorance.
To get an email-like paradise, Edgar Morin, and many people who see the planet as a cohabitation, or a co-immunity like Peter Sloterdijk, also watching the psychopower that time, the information bombing, that comes from long before the time when Karl Kraus (1874-1936) claimed the newspaper that propelled a Europe into a Crisis, at the same time as the science europeans crisis.
It said Karl Kraus in This Great Time that you can go to speak of the tired of War is stupid : ”so the fatigue of war is actually a state of which there has to be no salvation. Tired of war must always be, not after, but before the war has begun. War fatigue must not cause war to be ended, but no war. ”

The door of wisdom is the same and ignorance is wide, “the customer wants facilities,” but then. Everyone who knows, likes the poetry Portuguese Sea Fernando Pessoa, let’s do what is most important, the best way to choose freedom, democracy and freedom of choice. It is !!!, to help humanity to go to a homeland of all, a diversity and tolerance.

A biblical worldview has a beautiful expression for this Luke 13:34: “Do your best to enter the narrow door. Because most theologians and exegetes see only the rights and possibilities of a minority, then one is left with a self-applied humanity. Before it’s too late, before we say, “We’re tired of the war,” we let it go.


Idealism and the wide door of misconceptions

22 Aug

At the same time discovered as quantum physics, holography, and a new worldview of the universe emerge, there are those who believe that the earth is flat and that we were never the moon. These are too many specific problems to be dealt with, but philosophy in general contemporary rather than neoliberal, this is its pragmatic economic aspect.
It is idealistic and even philosopher-youtubers who discourse on philosophy follow it. Kant is complex, but his central point is the dichotomy between subject and object, as they cannot be separated, at least in terms of theory of knowledge, he created the analytical and synthetic judgments.
The analytic judgment is that the predicate is within the subject, and so it specifies its logic, and this logic comes from a physical-mathematical view of knowledge in modernity. It exemplifies using geometric figures such as the triangle and the square, of course it has four sides, but this is not a deduction but a tautological, circular definitions.
The synthetic judgment, on the other hand, cannot be contained in the subject, so it adds reasoning as something completely new, that is, the novelty is the predicate.
It is very simplified, but essentially develops a logic where Being and Entity are confusing and dismantles the possibility of an ontology, even if it is partial, and imagined with this throwing away all the “superstitions”, the famous “Sapere audi”, dare to know.
As reason alone was not enough, it was necessary to introduce the idea of empiricism, which came from David Hume’s arguments (1711-1776, so judgments may a priori, which already exist in the subject, and a posteriori, experimentally acquired.
Schlick (1882-1936), who founded the Vienna Circle neologicist school, criticized the idealistic basis of a priori knowledge, claiming that since statements have a logical truth, they are neither analytical nor synthetic as they are. Kant argued because it was paradoxical; and that if the truth depends on the factual content, the statements are therefore a posteriori and not a priori, since the facts must happen, Schlick was assassinated by Nazism.
In the circle of Vienna were present Kurt Godel, Karl Popper, Hans Kelsen and others.
The same proposition can be known by cognitive agents both a priori and a posteriori, using the same example as Kant, a creation only knows that the square has four sides after learning to count, while for an adult it seems “inductive.”
The video is a short discussion about idealism of Kant to Hegel:


Refugee Drama and Italian Government

21 Aug

Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, because of controversy over accepting refugees, with his deputy Matteo Salvini, resigned Tuesday in the Italian parliament, and said he would inform President Sergio Mattarela on the same day.
Along with Salvini is the 5-star heiress of blogger and comedian Beppe Grillo, who came to the government as M5S, which in the last elections had 33% of the votes and has 229 deputies, was a government ally, but sometimes controversy with Mattarela’s “league” are united to prevent immigrants from reaching the country, without Conte the right can “turn back”.
In his speech in parliament Conte sharply criticized his deputy for saying he wants to anticipate the elections, which is “irresponsible” and “despises parliament”, and throws Italy into a “dizzying spiral of political and financial instability”.
Salvini is one more who wants to leave the European Union, it seems that every extreme right in the world has only one program, recreating the nations from an economic point of view is a catastrophe, also in England Boris Johnson’s speech about leaving the European Union , is already voted but without possible agreement, show that chaos is not what says these new “nationalists” were of time, is the chaos that they themselves implant, the UK that says so.
Portugal will have elections this year, there the program seems the opposite, the right-wing parties say “we are Europe”, although they do not say clearly what this means, because during the Salazar period there was a speech of “proudly alone”, Salazar was resurrected in other countries maybe.
Spain is a case, I had no good impression of the Catalans until I went there, noting that it is the central government that is the rightmost, and that Catalonia’s nationalism is similar to many small countries in Europe where ethnicities were massacred.
Without taking sides of course, I think the Catalans would wish to continue in the Europa zone, but as independents.
Also Italian, the philosopher Giorgio Agamben described these stateless and dispossessed men of the earth as Homo Sacer, the fringe of qualified political life, man as a political subject, and unlike many interpretations there was the zoo, which was treated as a slave by domains of war, or for living an almost animal life, not for their desire


Dialogue and not-power

16 Aug

A true dialogue: not being able From Nietsche, with its will-to-power category, to Schopenhauer and others, to Foucault’s biopower and Byung Chul Han’s psychopolitics, power implies resistance and somehow difference, and it does not always admit diversity.

There would be a form of no power, or at least a counterpoint for those who believe that power is necessary, of course here there is no talk of authority, it will always exist, but the type of authority is fundamental, for example, when discussing state violence. and its limits.

In the field of psychology, this is what Arendt calls the ‘space of appearance’, and we explained in the previous post that it is a ‘between’ who speaks and who acts, just as both Arendt and Byung Chul Han explain the complementarity between working life and the contemplative life.

It was Paul Ricoeur, in our view, who made Arendt’s most beautiful synthesis on this point: Paul Ricoeur, “almost all the discussions raised by Arendt’s political thought can be reviewed when presenting the conceptual power-violence pair” (Ricoeur 1989, p. 142), and Arendt herself sums it up by stating: “If we turn to discussions of the phenomenon of power, we quickly realize that there is a consensus among left-to-right political theorists that violence is so -only the most blatant manifestation of power ”(Arendt, 2001, p. 31), so if a counterpoint is desired one must think non-power.

The first form of non-power is attentive and capable listening to an “epoché”, that is, a void so large where there are no categories or dogmas, care is not lack of principles as this would also be a violence, and the second is admit a truth above the dialogue.

Thus the difference remains in the field of the false “epoché” common in many dialogues where the speaker begins to dominate the theme and does not admit counterpoints, while in the distinction makes it possible that what differentiates does not become an obstacle to dialogue, manifesting from the Other.

It has not been possible to overcome forms of violence to this day because power has been and still is needed, but the return to state violence through many governments across the planet brings us to the phenomenon of homo sacer, war criminals, refugees and others without fundamental rights, concept worked by Agamben.

But in philosophy, history, and religion there is a figure that awakens a powerlessness, the figure of Willendorf’s Venus, carved in limestone with shades of reddish paint, in the years between 28,000 and 25,000 BC, obesity and short arms. some scholars reject the idea of ​​the mythological goddess Venus, goddess of beauty, who was the fruit of love between earth and heaven, would say that the religious metaphor is perfect, between the mystery of the Infinite and the feet on the earth’s ground.

Mary, a mythical Christian figure who also causes controversy among scholars, has an unmistakable biblical passage of her dialogical role, is in Lk 1.43: “How can I deserve the mother of my Lord to come to visit me?” The discussion of which Lord she speaks, but it is undoubtedly in her is a dialogue between heaven and earth, between the divine and the human.

Arendt, H. (2001)Poder e violência (Power and violence). Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará, pp. 81-94.

Ricoeur, P. (1989) “Pouvoir et violence”. In Hannah Arendt: Ontologie and Politique. Paris, Édition Tierce, pp. 141-159.


From biopolitics to psychopolitics

10 Aug

The form of power, while still centered on the state and its modern concept of state that comes from Hegel and not just the French Revolution, underwent changes in the 19th and 20th centuries, which philosopher Michel Foucault called biopower.
Literally the philosopher elaborates it this way: “The instruments that the government will give to achieve these ends [that are, in some way, immanent to the field of the population, will essentially be the population over which it acts. ” (Foucault, 1978, p. 277-293) that is in his work Microphysics of power, when it addresses the issue of governability.
Many who do not accept Foucault’s philosophy, for lack of reading or understanding, do not realize that what today is called public policy has this idea at its source. However biopower can be thought of more fully, including technologies that act on a local population or particular social demand, but always with the idea of establishing power and control over particular localities or social groups.
Byung Chul Han in three recent works (The Swarm, Psychopolitics, and What is Power) (explains that this form has been superseded by current psychopolitics, where local powers and policies are replaced by elaborate new techniques of power, Foucault also calls them that. With the problems of health, birth, mortality and life estimation (see this theme in welfare reform) the biopolitics aimed to control the “body” as well as the biopower.
Entering the digital age this evolves into psychopolitics, which leads us to a crisis of both freedom and identity, where psychically even one’s own will is struck. Byung Chul Han’s long analysis of What Is Power, returning to Nietzsche and even Kierkegaard (1813 – 1855), the philosopher reveals the subjective aspects that power has been working from the conception of the modern state.
He considers it essential to understand the digital age, even though he has criticism of technological appropriation, and places the latest Big Data technology as a key element in this process, and is therefore very current because it is the technology that reaches the psyche of the social subject, and of the individual ultimately: his interests, desires and worldviews.
I consider it important to return to Kierkegaard, although Chul Han does so on time, the ideas of this existentialist philosopher are deeply related to the concepts of the works of the Korean-German, in particular: the anguish in The Society of Bournout and the pursuit of happiness and pleasure in The agony of Eros.
The social scientist slovenian Renata Salecl’s obsession with choice addresses the issue of Kierkeegard’s updated anguish:  


Power and ignorance

09 Aug

Power can and should be exercised for the common good, for the good of all, but it is not because there is ignorance of the strength and strength of the ignorant who elect as unqualified persons as representatives.
Just as the mad, the different, and those that Nietzsche and Foucault asked for socializing, the possibility of mad ships landing on shores and borders being opened to refugee peoples, so the wall of ignorance must be broken, because it strengthens the powerful arrogant and merciless.
One cannot speak of a society in general, since it is divided and fragmented for the most part by nostalgia of a “good” time without this being explicit to the whole of society.
They close in groups, in “cheering” without opening themselves to society and its real problems, and where the “ships of the mad” cannot dock, but today it is not only for refugees and stateless people, it is also to the people themselves, often one feels strange in one’s home country. In the social sphere there is also the phenomenon of tiredness, the exhaustion of new ideas, the lack of true evolution, the lack of an ideal or an axis.
What occurs in reaction to what Peter Sloterdijk calls “despiritualized asceticism,” an exercise society, but without real elevation.
This is what happens in religious groups of various kinds, as well as some political and social forces, shut down and expel their “crazy”, “different” members who want to recover the originality of the proposal that attracted them to the group.
What happens in the Bible is to give in to hopelessness: “If that servant thinks, ‘My master is taking too long,’ and begins to beat the servants and the maids, and to eat, to drink, and to get drunk” (Luke 12:45), and when the boss arrives he will charge him for this infidelity. It is not just about resilience, but above all we must not separate those we think are ‘crazy’, ‘exaggerated’, ‘revolutionary’, Foucault warned that this was normal in medieval society and modernity until the 18th century.
It is not just about resilience, but above all we must not separate those we think are ‘crazy’, ‘exaggerated’, ‘revolutionary’, Foucault warned that this was normal in medieval society and modernity until the 18th century.
Bad leaders, and the absence of de facto collective communities, are those who have abandoned their own principles and values and have mistreated and authoritated those who wish to remain true to real values.
This is the argument of ignorance, beyond force, the exclusion of the different, the Other and all those who perceive the deviation to authoritarianism and the various forms of drunkenness.


The land as homeland, the power and the mad

08 Aug

Foucault in History of Madness addresses the work The Nau of the Fools by the Dutch painter Hieronymus Bosh (1450-1516), which is in the Louvre collection in Paris, where he arrived on 1918.

The important point is that before the empire of reason, in Foucault’s prophetic view of the refugee boats of our time, these “crazy” people could stop in various places, and even the people who steal the food on the table. , are barely noticed, while today’s vessels suffer numerous embarrassments.

The face of madness was for that normal time, today it is in focus at various borders and the refugees, those that Agamben calls “homo saccer”, and who is a good “microphysics” (Foucault) or “psychopolitics” (Chul Han) of power.

This is not the case only within the framework of the state structure, although Hegel is the great precursor of the defense of ‘normality’, but it is also the rejection of everything that is ‘strange’, ‘different’ or in a more up-to-date language. It belongs to the “Other”, it is also rejected.

Small and large communities, as a form of prejudiced defense, accuse what is not proper of crazy, abnormal or any other form of “expulsion from the other” (Chul Han).

Modern subjectivity, precisely because it seeks normalcy or what is socially considered normal, eliminates the possibility of the different, the “mad” or those who escape a certain standard, this is the argument of “modern” legalists and fundamentalists.

Foucault goes to the extreme in referring to the eighteenth century as the one who built man’s “subjectivity”, since the “Cartesian” subject of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries cannot in any way be committed to any form of the “different” of “ “strange”.

Finally something that is not the ideal subject imagined by modernity, so the “crazy” has nowhere else to dock, the ship of the crazy is destined to sink on the high seas, dying for various kinds of deprivation, this is the idealistic model taken to the extreme.

In terms of art is what Byung Chul Han calls “smooth”, “polished”, the absence of deformity, arises an art with no negativity in the broad sense of the word.

Thus ethical values ​​are also aesthetic, it is a whole culture that goes from politics to art, through religiosity, cyberculture and the culture present in everyday life.

In a rather rare interview, German philosopher Fons Elders prepares for the debate between Foucault and Noam Chomsky, made for Dutch television on November 28, 1971.



Psychopolitics and power

07 Aug

In reading Byung Chul Han’s book, I came across the idea that I couldn’t talk about his arguments without going back and commenting on his psychopolitics of power. In his book Psychopolitics – neoliberalism and the new techniques of power (figure), the Korean-German philosopher demonstrated that the techniques of oppression used now.
It is not those that were politically thought out by Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism, so we talk about him last week, or Big Brother’s super-surveillance (not the unreal reality show), but what he called smartphone surveillance.
It states verbatim: “The confession obtained by force has been replaced by voluntary disclosure,” i.e., “Smartphones have been replaced by torture chambers.”, And it is not that the tortures have disappeared in Guantanamo or Venezuela.
It is possible by rereading (in the case of this blog a reading, as we have not done so) of Nietzsche’s will to power and the microphysics of Power that Chul Han does in his pamphlet “What is power” (HAN, 2019).
It rereads the word by saying that the meaning of things is not a “is-so,” but the meaning is given “as you name things, determining yours where and for what” (Han, 2019, p. 56). ), until the truth is ultimately “is allied with power” (Han, 2019, p. 57) thus being “the victory and the duration of a certain kind of truth” (idem) by quoting Nietzsche himself.
After quoting Foucault he will say “power is ultimately what it represses” (p. 62), and makes a brief historicity of this concept by stating that Hegel was the first to see it like this (I make a note with the state as an idolatry). ), then Freud and Reich, in my point in a stricter sense, that of psychology.
But he will object to an ever-negative view of power, in his right consideration: “power, however, is not based on repression” (Han, 2019, p. 63), and quoting Foucault himself, “power is productive, and produces the real ”(HAN, 2019, p. 64).
As he notes, it is a rarely referenced note by Foucault, for he “distrusts” a “nature” or an “essence” (p. 65), which the author deepens.


Bergson in body-mind relationship

05 Aug

To discuss consciousness and the relationship between body and mind must necessarily go through a contemporary philosopher who was Henri Bergson (1859-1941), who proposed a relationship between this one that is one of the roots of classical dualism, because contemporary is the object and the subject. Bergson opts in this sense for subjectivism, in our view remains a dualism, but his solution was very important for thinking at the turn of the nineteenth to the twentieth century.
He will study life from the evolutionary process of life, and the study of memory, related to the humanities and biological sciences, in our view is close and very related to ontology and not by chance he will touch the subject. of Being and Time, a dear subject to Heidegger, though it has no direct relation to this philosopher.
The study of the brain and the psyche has gained enormous relevance in our time, I highlight two current thinkers, the Portuguese Antonio Damásio (Descartes’ error) and the American Terrence Deacon (Incomplete Nature).
Neuroscience was nascent in Bergson’s time, so his studies were grounded in psychology and evolutionary biology, but his insights were profound and still current, as he rereads the problems of the theory of knowledge of metaphysics.
Their metaphysical problems range from classic themes to the extent to which we are free, how we can overcome mechanistic worldviews, who is remembrance, and other essential questions of life, including life itself and what it really is.
The questions that interest us in particular, Being and Time, will be clarified by the Brazilian philosopher Leopoldo Leopoldo da Silva, explaining that time is not the linear scale as we know it, although the concept is different from Einstein’s theory of relativity. ceases to be contemporary.
Time in the sense of life happens what is called duration, and also knowledge as we conceive is not linked to this kind of life-time or Being, so Bergson will choose to understand the exercise of intuition,
The historian of science Jimena Canales tells the relationship Einstein and Berggson about Time:


Utilitarianism, philosophy and goods

31 Jul

Utilitarianism essentially sees social logic only for the goods they produce, as well as many currents of modernity, what is important is objectivity, the actual relationship with objects, and the essence of Being, its relation to the Other, and its culture. .

It thus becomes a dispute for power, money and mobilizing forces for the production of goods, no matter how these goods are distributed among different people, in different positions on the social scale, from different religious or cultural postures.

Professor Julia Markovits of Cornell University’s class, which gives an introduction to the moral aspects of utilitarianism, explains that one of the reasons that a simple disappointment of football fans together could produce a greater devaluation than a person’s pain would mean loss of values ​​associated with the soccer team, while the pain is only of the person.

He explains that according to philosopher Robert Nozick, the “utility monster” can transform an extremely good person, who transforms resources in direct relation to happiness, when more money and food we give to this person, the happier he is, but in the limit this It does not transform all ordinary people into a happy “general collectivity” because of utility.

The answer to utilitarianism is that this will not happen, because the opposite is true, the more resources we have the less impact any additional resources will have on our happiness.

If we think about accumulation this is not what happens, how much impact it has on a mega tech company account, while the same $ 100 can make a difference to a child in a poor region of the planet.

The subject may seem psychological or even sociological, but Robert Nozick was interested in the discussion of the state, so his book is called “Anarchy, State and Utopia” (2011), its original version is from 1974, so long before the fall of the Berlin wall, changes in Russia and the western world.

Nozick’s unique argument is that man chose to leave the “state of nature” and set up a kind of state whose existing morality consists of a future Minimum State, where some “laws” would work automatically, since of course it is no longer possible.

Apart from Martha Nussbaum’s recent book on “The Monarchy of Fear,” little or no literature penetrates the current conjuncture about the return of states as a force of repression and “order” to re-establish possible harmony.

He says of victims of injustice, including those practiced by the state: “What is permissible for victims of injustice to do in order to rectify the injustices committed against them, including the large number of injustices committed by people acting through government? I do not know of a complete or theoretically sophisticated approach to these issues. ”(NORZICK, 2011, p. 195).

He is the only author to criticize John Rawls’s utilitarianism on the issue of distribution and the only author to include in his critique Bernard Williams’s text on the fact that the state’s only action on inequality is the question of disease, curiously. Obama’s health plan that was attacked by Donald Trump. Addressing even Utopia, Nozick states that: “Life is not a race where everyone competes for a prize pre-set by someone…” (NOZICK, 2011, p. 305).

NOZICK, Robert. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Sao Paulo: WMF Martins Fontes, 2011. The following video explains these arguments, the 3rd. Julia Markovitz’s class about utilitarism: