Authoritarism and antropotechnical
04
Jan
The construction of modern states, essential for a stage in the construction
of modern civilization, we have already said in the previous post, based on the writings of Petr Sloterdijk “Wrath and Time”, but a conference made at the end of the century (not by chance), with the title “Rules for the human park”, made on July 17, 1999, at a conference dedicated to Heidegger and Lévinas, at the castle of Elmau in Bavaria, that the question of antropotechnical, a broader view than sociotechnical and biopolitics, the maturity.
Two points stand out in the reading of this work later turned into a book (Sloterdijk, 2000) in both I also had a personal reaction in the first reading, a totally original humanistic vision of the media, the second special for the Heideggerians (my first reading pre-conceptions), which is a view of the “clearing” incorporating natural and social history, but interpreting the Heideggerian polarity of the ontological dimension on the ontic (Sloterdijk, 1999: 61), which seemed more absurd but not was, the ontic dimension precedes the ontological dimension.
The polemic at the conference, however, was the declaration of the failure of humanism to tame human animality, and he wondered whether a reform of the species’ qualities would not lead to “anthropological technology, an antropotechnical” (Sloterdijk 2000: 45). which of course caused astonishment and a buzz at the conference.
The critique of cynical reason, which seems to be bought even more with recent history: “Bolshevism, fascism and Americanism …” are “three variations of this same anthropocentric force and three applications to a worldly and humanly decorated domain of the world, fascism missed the step by showing, more openly than its competitors, its contempt for pacific educational inhibitory values” (ibid, 31).
The idea that man is a rational animal seemed true, the existential and ontological answer, Heidegger’s clearing, for whom the Self presents itself and the Being chooses for its guard, the search for this pacification, longed for by humanism. and this “listening” of the Being would be capable of leading to a pacification of the human being greater than that achieved by previous humanistic methods, what is disturbing for Sloterdijk is how this society would be organized, forming by listeners of the To be? What would be this new “clearing”.
—
Sloterdijk, P. Regras para o parque humano – uma resposta à carta de Heidegger sobre o humanismo. Trad. De José Oscar de A. Marques. São Paulo: Estação Liberdade, 2000. (brazilian edition)
