Technology of Jouissance.pdf (original) (raw)
Related papers
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND PROGRESS IN CAPITALISM
In his work A Dialética do Esclarecimento (The Dialectic of Enlightenment) (Zahar Editora, 1985), Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, philosophers linked to the Frankfurt School, argue that the supremacy of science and technology paved the way for political derangement for the benefit of market capitalism. Being global and omnipresent, market capitalism has the necessary technology, provided by science and technology, to make men's gears of their engine annulling them. Capitalist economics, science and technology, now merged as if they were a single instance, consolidate their supremacy over contemporary society, determining their course with the same lack of effort and impersonality of an invisible hand, according to Adorno and Horkheimer.
Introduction: The Entangled Histories of Science and Capitalism
This volume revisits the mutually constitutive relationship between science and capitalism from the seventeenth century to the present day. Adopting a global approach, we reject the notion that either science or capitalism can be understood as stages of modernity that emerged in the West and subsequently engendered a “Great Divergence” with the rest of the world. Instead, both science and capitalism were historical institutions that arose in an imperial context of global exchange and whose entanglement has been continuously remade. Rather than seek to explain either the development of modern science as a product of economic forces or the divergence of capitalist economies as a result of technical innovation, we want to emphasize the knowledge work that has been a central feature of both modern science and capitalism across the globe.
HEIDEGGER AND MARX ON TECHNOLOGY
Mabini Review, 2013
Contemporary human life is critical. The entire human world is faced with challenges universal in nature, such as global ecological issues that situates our crucial bearing in the world, the unending social conflict in every part of the earth that suggests inherent human incapacity to create a society defined by a sense of humanity, principles of justice, and genuine peace, in effect questioning the nature and development of social formation and transformation, and a global political economy that describes and prescribes the dynamics of productive forces and relations of production given the existing neocapitalist paradigm of social progress primarily characterized by alienation and money fetish. Moreover, such human world allows for incommensurable comprehensive doctrines and conflicting perspectives to thrive and flourish. Such pluralism is exemplified by various philosophical interpretations of the world, moral beliefs in various moral situations, and religious views that serve as basis of one's world view constituting one's human action. Reality, in this case, is no longer univariate. One‟s conceptions and principles are being challenged by other critical perspectives. One‟s moral identity as a subjectivity is challenged by one‟s social identity. His rationality poses and de-poses social reality. Contemporary human life is in the age of technology. Human life cannot be imagined without things, tools, and machines. Technology has become the extension of man. It sets apart all human activities. Human work is always conceived with it. Technology constitutes human life. Human civilization is said to be progressing because of the innovation and development of machines that assist human work. The human world is a world of machines. Technology, as an extension of human nature, becomes human exteriority. Technology assumes as a form of human fetishism. The whole world is enframed by technology. Contemporary human life is in the age of neocapitalism. Neocapitalism advocates the use of technology in all social, political, economic, and cultural institutions to broaden the distribution of shared benefits and burdens in the society. Technology becomes a medium of regulation and restriction, an instrumentality of human flourishing, and an agency of effective governance and management. Hence, technology becomes everywhere. It constitutes man's way of life. Technology shapes human existence. The problem in technology arises when technology as instrumentality of human life shapes human thinking; when human reason loses its control of technology to the extent that technology controls reason. Technology becomes not a human endeavor; man in a sense becomes an activity of technology. The paper then intends to advance the idea that the machines, as technology in the neocapitalist mode of production, are the full realization, the height or climax, of Enframing, as a result of alienation, which can only be resolved through creative labor, by way of meditative thinking, as the dialectics and revelation of Dasein.
This paper proposes a reading of Marx's exposition of the forms of the real subsumption of labor to capital -in particular, the system of machinery of large-scale industry -as constituting the dialectical presentation of the determinations of revolutionary subjectivity. The proposition that real subsumption constitutes the ground of revolutionary subjectivity is the concretization of that insight about the most general determination of the process of "natural history" constituting the development of humanity that Marx expounded in the Paris Manuscripts in 1844. According to that early text, the content of the history of the human species consists in the development of
The most effective way to silence criticism is a justification on the very terms of the likely critique. When an action is rationally justified, how can reason deny its legitimacy? This paper concerns critical strategies that have been employed for addressing the resistance of rationality to rational critique especially with respect to technology. Foucault addressed this problem in his theory of power/knowledge. This paper explores Marx's anticipation of that approach in his critique of the " social rationality " of the market and technology. Marx got around the silencing effect of social rationality with something very much like the concept of underdetermination in his discussion of the length of the working day. There are hints of a critique of technology in his writings as well. In the 1960s and '70s, neo-Marxists and post-structuralists demanded radical changes in the technological rationality of advanced societies. Marcuse proposed the most developed Marxist theory of alternative technology, based on a synthesis of aesthetics and technical rationality. The concept of underdetermination was finally formulated clearly in contemporary science and technology studies, but without explicit political purpose. Nevertheless, this revision of the academic understanding of technology contributes to weakening technocratic rationales for public policy. A new era of technical politics has begun. It is time to reevaluate the history of technology critique in the light of this unprecedented situation.