“Growth means the constant expansion of capital, of property, of the world of things. But we do not need more things; we need more time. We do not need more property; we need more joy. The collective intelligence, the social organization of collective brain, has created the possibility of creating everything we need without more exploitation.”
Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi: After the Future: http://vimeo.com/25367464
“But the analogy between economy and language should not mislead us: although money and language have something in common, their destinies do not coincide, as language exceeds economic exchange. Poetry is the language of non-exchangeability, the return of infinite hermeneutics, and the return of the sensuous body of language.”
“Can it be an accident that a word signifying difference has two ‘p’s’ facing and mirroring each other across the weak divide of a syllable break? Opposite superficially, but internally, where it counts, the same.”
June 1st at 3pm: Chris Csikszentmihalyi, Mary “Missy” Cummings, and Thomas Keenan will debate the future of drones.
Csikszentmihalyi is an artist working on technologies that rebalance power between citizens, governments, and corporations, and founded and directed the Center for Civic Media at MIT. Cummings is one of the Navy’s first female fighter pilots and director of the MIT Humans and Automation Lab. Keenan is director of the Bard Human Rights Project.
The debate is a part of Triple Canopy’s Speculations (“The future is___”), fifty days of lectures, discussions, and debates about the future in EXPO 1: New York.
(before going on to articulate his own reading of Christianity, based, as it were, on one Hegelian Slip-of-the-Tongue):
“The key doctrinal division between Orthodoxy and Western Christianity (both Catholicism and Protestantism) concerns the procession of the Holy Spirit: for the Latin tradition, the Holy Spirit proceeds from both Father and Son, while for Orthodox it proceeds from the Father alone. From this perspective of the ‘monarchy of the Father’ as the unique source of the three ‘hypostases’ (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), the Latin notion of double procession introduces an all too rational logic of relations into God: Father and Son are conceived as relating to each other in the mode of opposition, and the Holy Spirit then appears as their reunion, not genuinely as a new, third, Person. We thus do not have a genuine Trinity, but a return of the Dyad to One, a reabsorption of the dyad into One. So, since the principle of the sole ‘monarchy of the Father’ is abandoned, the only way to think the Oneness of the divine triad is to depersonalize it, so that, in the end, we get the impersonal One, the God of philosophers, of their ‘natural theology.’”
Slavoj Žižek, The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic?
I’m too alone in the world, yet not alone enough
to make each hour holy.
I’m too small in the world, yet not small enough
to be simply in your presence, like a thing —-
just as it is.
I want to know my own will
and to move with it.
And I want, in the hushed moments
when the nameless draws near,
to be among the wise ones—
I want to mirror your immensity.
I want never to be too weak or too old
to bear the heavy, lurching image of you.
I want to unfold.
Let no place in me hold itself closed,
for where I am closed, I am false.
I want to stay clear in your sight.
thanks for the Sunday Reading nod (“Fact and Fetish”)!
… [Francis Bacon] never even considers evaluating individual technical projects on their merit, but simply argues for an all-out affirmation of technology in general. It is right to pursue technological action, never mind the consequences. Intuitions of uncertainty are jettisoned in the name of revelation.
The contemporary theological notion of the human as using technology to prolong creation or cocreate with God depends precisely on the reinterpretation of Genesis adumbrated by Bacon.” —Philosopher Carl Mitcham discussing Bacon’s role in shaping the Renaissance/Enlightenment mode of being-with technology. One interesting aspect of Mitcham’s discussion is his observation that Bacon’s certainty and zeal derives in part from his theological justification for the technological project — “the kingdom of man, founded on the sciences [is] not much other than … the kingdom of heaven” — and that this move in turn reconfigures subsequent theological discourse. (via frailestthing)
One more from Juliet Fleming:
“But the uncanniness of the profound surface whose primary figure is the skin is not new in modernism: indeed, one might consider it to be one result of the replacement of the ‘flat’ plane of medieval representation with the perspectival space of the Renaissance. So Michelangelo’s famous portrait of the artist as a flayed skin on the wall of the Sistine Chapel, and Juan de Calverde’s drawing of an anatomized figure carrying his own pelt seem, today, to be freighted with surplus violence, one that resides in the revelation of two specific facts. The first, revealed by the successive removal of surfaces that comprises the art of anatomy, is that the body is nothing but surface. The second is that while death happens in three dimensions, the skin, in two, can survive. Within this new, Euclidean space, the two-dimensional skin functions as a material remainder that haunts the ‘objective’ spatial depth within which the Cartesian subject is driven to locate itself.
The uncanny aspect of the skin as something that is always both dead and alive - the dead but sensate surface from which all psychic experience is finally derived - may be confronted in the comparatively recent story of Alfred Corder, sentenced to be hanged and dissected for his notorious murder of Maria Matern in 1828. After death Corder’s body was skinned, tanned and used to bind a presentation copy of the printed account of his life and crime. So treated, the skin becomes the material embodiment of abjection. When, in tattoo, the skin gives its own strange half-life over to a newly ‘living’ image, it similarly asks and complicates the question of what becomes of our mortal envelope, either at the Resurrection or at the morgue.”
Juliet Fleming, Graffiti and the Writing Arts of Early Modern England