Arquivo para a ‘Politics’ Categoria

AI and the Great Leap Forward

02 Oct

The People’s Republic of China made its great cultural revolution from 1958 to 1962, led by President Mao Zedong and the goal was to transform the agrarian economy into an industrial and collective society, that is, the fact that China appears today on the world stage took 70 years. , but many flaws were concealed in fraudulent reporting, concealment of worker oppression, and did not foresee that mass emigration from the countryside could affect Chinese agricultural production, and official data omitted millions of deaths in the “Great Chinese Hunger” that was just this year. At the time of the “cultural revolution”, but they were smart to blame Mao, the historical facts deserve further analysis, of course it was not that simple.

Now a German documentary promises a new “Big Leap Forward”, the video quickly and already has over 135,000 views, Germany would be planning with China a new leap, no doubt China is a great partner for any big nation. .

Already there are algorithms for early cancer detection, prediction and control of Parkinson’s disease, now what analysts want to know is the ability of algorithms to interfere with the economy, control and predict potential disasters, and the documentary travels through breakthroughs in the US, China and the United States. Europe.

According to the documentary one of the ways to record data now will be sound and video making data production faster and more realistic, this will make the world of work more agile and dispense with superfluous activities and professions and what machines can do them.

Also in the field of risk and investment everything will be safer, so loans will have cheaper interest and money goes to actions that can help the economy.

The issue is not only of capitalist interest, but a look at China, the motto itself is the one adopted there, there is an analysis of Joseph Ball, an English socialist activist, who realistically analyzes.

The documentary link is presented below.


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.


Worldview and paradigm shift

21 Sep

Dualism leads to an incorrect view of the separation of body and mind, theory and practice, and consequently matter and soul, although this remains for many in the “department” of religion, it happens to correspond exactly to a worldview, which separated subject from object.

This was the discourse of modernity, that of Heraclitus in pre-Socratic times, in the idea of ​​the fogist (fire substance) and that everything changes, but Aristotle’s “De anima” is the culmination of his natural theory, but a first study of the psyche, and this duality is not justifiable.

Popper was right to return to Parmenides’ primary idealism and say that this view of cosmology, not ontology, would last until 1900, but from Democritus’s atomism and that only with Maxwell’s entropy and now the new view of the quantum universe From the dark energies and masses another vision begins to spring, but the worldview is present and already behind.

Even the double track that plagued Popper, which in our view was only surpassed by the analysis of Thomas Kuhn’s “scientific revolutions,” but Popper’s point is beyond conceptualizing normal science, one that goes “by additions” and conjectures a In the form of change he will defend the idea that Parmenides was not an ontological, but a cosmologist.

And so, the limits of modern idealism are a misinterpretation of the Greek eidos, where thoughts give voice to the soul, or the mind, to those who deny this very metaphysical human essence.

The reason for the opposition to materialism of modernity is not due to idealistic separation, but to the false interpretation of eidos that would not give rise to the soul, but only to knowledge as experience and observation of the world, which from the pre-Socrates is already opposed to This view, which is naive, has neither an ontology nor a cosmology, Popper calls it the “Baconian myth.”

Thus modern materialism does not emerge as a current that merely gives dualism a dichotomy, a tension between subject and object, mind and body, nature and culture, as Bruno Latour proposed in “We were never modern,” the essence of materialist discourse is not. medieval realism, the ‘thing in itself’ of phenomenology, but the ‘unreachable goal’, empiricism as a support, and the scientific and cultural crisis of our time.

One of the most complicated texts for exegesis and biblical fundamentalism is the passage from the administrator who will be dismissed in the parable in Luke 16: 1-13, (moralists will call it dishonest only and fundamentalists smart problem), when in fact the problem is dualism. Knowing that he was about to be fired for squandering his boss’s money, the administrator begins to reflect Luke 16: 3-4: “You will take my administration away.

What am I going to do? To dig, I have no strength; to beg, I’m ashamed. Ah! I already know what to do so that someone will welcome me to your house when I get removed from the administration” and decides to give the boss’s debtors a discount. The boss praises him saying he was clever, and this confuses the biblists, but there is no confusion because this was the way the administrator was always clever, even at the time of resignation, he is consistent retains his posture, and although dismissed the boss praised the “dishonest administrator,” says the biblical text.

He was consistent, but right after it says: “You cannot serve two masters, you will love one and hate the other”, we must follow principles ALWAYS, be faithful in little to be faithful in enough, is the training that we make us who we are.



Mediocracy and ignorance

16 Sep

Mediocracy is one that brings “middle” knowledge above all, always has a ready opinion, based on “doxa” never in epistemy, and if it has episteme (much of classical epistemology this is) it is a set of rules and schemes that treat an object but ignore its fundamentals.
Shortly after World War II, it was Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull who developed this, and I was glad to see the quote in daily El Pais, which is: “systemic processes [that] enable those with average levels of competence to rise to positions. of power, driving both the supercompetent and the totally incompetent out of their way, ”can be seen in schools, political and religious groups where“ rebels ”are dismissed.
Also now Youtubers who speak of politics, philosophy and even theology, are many theologians of apocalypse and puritanism of false morals, while good readings and deepening are dispensed with on any subject.
But El País newspaper cites an author and a principle he did not know, “the secondary illiterate,” an expression coined by Hans Magnus Enzensberger, who uses this for people who have a wealth of useful knowledge that, however, does not lead him to question the intellectual foundations that produced that knowledge.
I insisted with my students and in various posts here the discussion of the foundations, especially of idealism and enlightenment that guide much of the reasoning and the “best minds” of this “secondary illiteracy”, make catch phrases, judge context by isolated facts, or refer to some extraordinary theoretical principle, generally know only the principle and not the text from which it originated, they take away unprepared minds and hearts, eager for something new.
I have not, never had, and never intend to exhaust the fundamentals, but we must go in search of these, warns Edgar Morin in the book “In Search of the Lost Fundamentals”, the great architect of the complexity method, applauded but badly read.
Also reading the novels, it is possible that some have read Stendhal, Balzac, Tolstoy, and even more contemporary Albert Camus, or Oscar Wilde’s “Portrait of Dorian Gray,” but few know or read a worthy representative of Generation X, Bret Easton Ellon, or Paul Auster who wrote “In the Land of Last Things” showing a sober future of valuelessness, unrestrained consumption and a constant search for death or whatever. This is not an exercise in arrogance, without naming names I see successful authors (perhaps cites Paulo Coelho) who sell millions of books and that the time spent reading this is the same to read something that speaks more about the contemporary world and its realities. Haruki Murakami, for example, explains why young people feel tortured, is a Nobel candidate. But all this is not new, to take apart the easy speech of… now with the new media… Robert Musil, in “The Young Törless,” speaks of cruelty as he moves into adulthood at a military school, where he learns cruelty. , morality and sexuality. His is the phrase used in the quoted report from El País: “If stupidity […] did not perfectly resemble progress, skill, hope and improvement, no one would want to be stupid,” said this before World War I. World, almost a prophecy.


New worldview and future

06 Sep

Tied to preconceptions and the worldview that is gradually overcome by reality can do little or nothing to make the future come true, the crisis is wider than the economic warns us Edgar Morin, is not the problem of technique, but of Being , to see the Other that is not the same, to leave worlds limited by limited worldviews and that admit no others.
This means abandoning many things that are dear to us, not the principles, but the ability to review them for even greater principles that include EVERYONE and not just the self or US of selfish, closed groups.
Quantum physics, dark bodies and energies (not holes, but still unknown matter and energy), show how limited our worldview is.
It is not about wisdom or phrases made superficial, theologies made by careful analysis of reading the text, the hermeneutic circle is precisely the possibility of a textual reading from the admission of preconceptions, seen here positively, the Indeed, we can accept another worldview with a different preconception from mine.
Invited to participate in the nascent Christian community, Jesus was also asking his disciples to abandon the ancient worldview of family attachments, work, and riches, but despite the growth of Christianity over millennia (now in reverse), this view has been misunderstood and misunderstood. by the exegetes.
In Luke 14.27: 30, the Master invites them to leave behind their worldviews to follow him: “He who does not carry his cross and walk behind me cannot be my disciple.
In fact, which of you, wanting to build a tower, does not sit first and calculate the expenses, to see if it has enough to finish? Otherwise, it will lay the foundation and will not be able to finish.
And all who see this will begin to mock, saying, “This man began to build and was unable to finish!”, But the contemporary step is bigger.
Yellow September requires that you see the Other not as someone with the same rights as US.


Change thinking and teach to live

05 Sep

When we propose a model that is not that of the world of life, Husserl made a philosophy of it, his Lebenswelt, Habermas made it a sociology, Heidegger and Gadamer incorporate it in his thoughts, but the end that is life if not learning.
The central problem of seeking a “clearing” is that we create models too far from life, from its defense including nature, dignity and living itself, we are in a Yellow September, whose theme is none other than to say that it is worthwhile. It is worth living.
Clinging to already outdated methods and models, logicists and neopositivists, it is not pointed out “the nature of knowledge, which itself contains the risk of error and illusion” (MORIN, 2015, p. 16).
The great complexity theorist proposes, first of all, a return to philosophy (in the sense of primary thinking) in its Socratic condition of dialogue, Aristotelian (in the sense among others, of the organization of information), Platonic (questioning of appearances), and even pre-Socratic (questioning the world, inserting knowledge in modern cosmology), finally cannot teach life without knowing that it has dilemmas, errors and options.
Morin, who could boast of wisdom by age, by intense intellectual activity, from the pedestal of those full of certainties, no doubt or misconceptions that we see parading through the gyms and public stands of devouring and unquestioning media.
Morin seeks to “conceive the instruments of a thought that is pertinent because it is complex” (Morin, 2015, p. 23), and we see the barbarism of dogma and little elaborated certainties.
Ready-made phrases, self-help manuals, (mainly economic) laissez-faire, rudeness, and ideological hysteria deepen today’s cultural, humanitarian, and social crisis.
It scares me that book readers are so sure with so little thought, in fact criticism of thought grows and the praise of ignorance seems to win any argument.
Morin encourages us and brings us to a still visible and possible future, his lecture at the Frontier of Thought (2016) is a hope and a deepening that sheds new light.

MORIN, Edgar: Ensinar a viver: manifesto para mudar a educação. Trad. Edgard de Assis Carvalho e Mariza Perassi Bosco. Porto Alegre: Sulina, 2015


Techné, technique and current technology

03 Sep

The technique is as old as home, just as its “wisdom”, if we consider it as thoughts, the emergence of philosophy was nothing other than to create what as the word says “friends of wisdom”, these two concepts never were so important because of the current contradictions on these issues and for a “cynical reason” that was born.
The technique of “making” from the making of chipped stone in instruments can be said to be ontological, proper to being, which made man have a relationship with nature that distinguishes him from it, however it does not differentiate him because they too came and are part of nature, “you are dust, and after you return,” so that there are no mystical appeals.
Martin Heidegger maintains both terms (episteme and techné) interconnected, which is not entirely wrong, since Plato used them thus, but the specificity of modern technique is that it is not the technician, whereas the former requires a socio-anthropological conception, the technician requires a particular set of knowledge for a given “ know how to do”.
The great epistemological misconception of establishing the science + technique = technology formula is precisely the confusion between technique, which requires social contextualization and technology, which is the application of devices within an established context, without understanding technique we have become slaves. technology, which should be a means to support life.
To put it more clearly, the formula creates world order of factors, technique = technology – science, so the misconception is evident, technique requires a little meta-physis effort.
One of the people who did it consciously but not enough was Martin Heidegger, in his text he goes no further than the language and technical issues behind modern equipment, he analyzed Radio and TV.
But Heidegger’s text Question of technique (pdf) is an essential text about technique. different to the essence of the technique.
This video explains any his ideas about its:


Pride and vanity

29 Aug

The word pride (orgulho in Portuguese) originates from Catalan orgull, perhaps few know it, but if we look at its synonyms we can see that it can mean positively: pride, dignity, and in the negative sense: superb and pundonor (doesn’t exist in English, it would be something like a hint of honor), depends on context haughtiness can be positive or negative, finally the word depends on the context.
Pundonor instead of Castilian, punt d´honor, meaning a certain rigor or modesty, also decorum, perhaps all this has fallen into disuse, and it strikes me that excess literature, philosophy treats it little and its connection with vanity is not correct . It may be said that Sloterdijk’s era of cynical reason is not only right for big themes, but for these smaller, smaller ones because they have become cynicism perhaps not in literature but in thought, to the point of making the negative expression of “sins”.
Now becoming even greater pleasures, including theft and lies, is not the time for fake News, but a long way from the absence of a clearing where themes like these can be clarified.
Pride driven to exaggeration is an exaggerated concept of itself, which brings it to a point of contact with vanity, but vanity beyond cynicism has become the pride of media philosophy, not just memes and fake ones.
News, but the in-fact views of the media. Reversing the true meaning of things serves the arrogant and proud of skepticism that responds little or nothing to a reality of obscurantism and unclearness.
The vanity of a king can be exemplified in a tale, where close observation clarifies it, although Hans Christian Andersen’s Tale of the Emperor’s New Clothes can also be used in reverse, but the popular saying “the king is naked ”clarifies what it is, we have already posted that the“ state is naked ”and now we could say“ the statesmen are naked ”: