Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

February 06 2013

September 11 2012

Philomag - Dossier - Pourquoi nous n'apprendrons plus comme avant

Avec Nicholas Carr // Salman Khan // Michel Serres // Raffaele Simone // Bernard Stiegler // Jean-Philippe Toussaint // Maryanne Wolf
"La révolution numérique n'est plus un slogan. Chaque jour, nous naviguons un peu plus, délaissons l'imprimé pour l'écran, stockons nos connaissances, vérifions sur Internet ce que nous dit un interlocuteur… ou un enseignant. Comment apprendre, lire, nous souvenir, transmettre, emportés par ce flux que nous maîtrisons encore mal ? Le danger de perdre la concentration et la mémoire, de négliger l'étude, de ne plus pouvoir enseigner, est réel. Mais le basculement de Gutenberg à Google porte aussi en lui l'espoir d'un esprit enfin libre – puisque des machines s'occupent de l'intendance – de se consacrer à l'essentiel : la pensée créatrice. Comme en son temps l'imprimerie, il n'est pas impossible qu'Internet fasse éclore un nouvel humanisme."

// lisez en plus: http://www.philomag.com/article,dossier,pourquoi-nous-ne-lisons-plus-comme-avant,1845.php





Reposted from02myhumsci-01 02myhumsci-01

The Missing Links | 3ammagazine - 2012-09-08

How to say nothing. * A performance of 4’33″ by the BBC Symphony Orchestra. * More tributes to John Cage. * Charles Ball R.I.P. * Great piece by Brian Dillon on John Stezaker. * The Biographical Dictionary of Literary Failure. * Nicholas Rombes on his Blue Velvet Project. * Tom McCarthy interviewed on France Culture. * Male anxiety and the female reader. * Scott Esposito responds to Lars Iyer‘s death-of-the-novel anti-manifesto. * “Writing isn’t a career choice in this visual age. We’re a dying breed.” Lee Rourke. * On an early interview with Malcolm McLaren, 1975 [see picture of Jordan above]. * Joe Stevens‘s photography (including an iconic shot of McLaren). * Jon Savage on Dennis Browne‘s 1978 fanzine, Dat Sun. * Bret Easton Ellis dismisses David Foster Wallace as “a fraud”. * “David [Foster Wallace] was special & the purity of his commitment to his readers & his interest in their well-being was seductive.” D.T. Max interviewed. More here. * Gabriel Josipovici on why Kafka isn’t understood. * The King’s Road music and fashion trail. * The speech Obama won’t give by Steve Almond. * How artists fell in love with chess. * Chris Killen‘s spanking new website. * Matthew Newton on the end of the suburban dream. * Jean Cocteau reads six poems (via UbuWeb). * Why Faulkner, Fitzgerald & other literary luminaries hated Hollywood. * Aleksandar Hemon on the Wachowskis. * “Spaces for contemplation & deliberation have been greatly reduced. Most people don’t spend two or three hours thinking or reading. Books seem to be artefacts from a slower time.” Junot Díaz. * The enduring saga of The Smiths. * Ludwig Wittgenstein‘s passion for looking, not thinking. * Adam Kotsko deconstructs the theories of popular philosopher Slavoj Žižek. * Internet connectivity error, Johannes Lichtman on Joshua Cohen’s Four New Messages. * Marcel Aymé, where have you been all my life? * See something say something, Ben Graves on Alfredo Jaar, bin lids & Mo Tucker. * Jarvis Cocker narrates a documentary on Ziggy Stardust. * Simon Reynolds on Roxy Music‘s debut. * Who was Humbert Humbert? * The New York Dolls in Paris, 1973. * Jayne Joso interviewed. * Midnight tourism with Badaude. * How Google & Apple’s digital mapping is mapping us. * Photoblending the 1906 San Francisco earthquake with today. * “I’m not interested in clubbing together behind some flag of the avant-garde.” Zadie Smith. * And Zadie Smith on the Subaltern podcast. * Geoff Dyer explores representations of reality through the lens of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.

Reposted from02myhumsci-01 02myhumsci-01

September 06 2012

The Missing Links | 3ammagazine 2012-09-02

Christopher Hitchens is a hard act to follow. * Slavoj Žižek on the politics of Batman. * Žižek in conversation with Jonathan Derbyshire. * Full Stop continue their ‘Thinking the Present’ series with an interview with Albert Toscano. * Judith Butler responds to the Jerusalem Post‘s claims of anti-semitism. * What Pussy Riot taught the world. * Hanging out vs. being hanged, HTMLGIANT interview Jarett Kobek. * Niven Govinden interviewed. * You could spend your whole life making films & not invent a character as complex or endearing as Werner Herzog. * From Beatrix Potter to Sebald, Patrick Keiller chooses 10 books whose images are intrinsic to the work. * The accidental history of the @ symbol. * Steven Pinker explains the neuroscience of swearing. * Some 3 million books & countless artifacts were destroyed when Sarajevo’s National Library was burned to the ground 20 years ago. It was a clear attack on the cultural identity of a people. * How time is measured by memory. * Sven Birkerts‘ essay on Sebald’s Vertigo. * Teju Cole on Rubens as a compendium. * And Teju Cole in A Room for London. * Harry Mathews on finding Marie Chaix. * A critic’s manifesto. * 10 things Martin Amis loves to hate. * Against acknowledgments (& Helen DeWitt‘s defence). * This Space on the new Paul Auster. * George Saunders interviewed. * On promiscuous reading. * “The reader is taking these splotches of ink & making them real…a good reader is an artist.” Ron Rash. * The melancholy worlds of Béla Tarr. * Brian Dillon on Barthes (via @TheWhiteReview). * “I seek out subjects that plug into my own weaknesses & my own past.” John Jeremiah Sullivan.

Reposted from02myhumsci-01 02myhumsci-01

September 02 2012

02mydafsoup-01

Short commentary: The gift shift - what’s social about social media?


If a picture’s worth a thousand words, the cover art of the July 23rd issue of the New Yorker is a critical disquisition. A middle class family poses for a photo on a sunny tropical beach.

read more: https://philosophyforchange.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/the-gift-shift/

------------------------------------------------------------

// oAnth's commentary:

What a nice Sunday reading (after church), could be even a sermon (they speak about love and friendship, etc. etc.), alas, for heaven's sake, inconveniently too close on the mainstream understanding of the subject: they mix in Fb and some social media buzz words to their argumentation as examples of "gift culture" (to their solemnly benediction); just tons too much PR and in no way an independent manner to speak about social media and its major historical and timeless motivation as basic propelling force: altruism. Ok, I admit, you may also read some well intended lines about hacker culture, but, how to put it? - I had continuously the impression that this article is thought for some sceptic evangelical GOP members, which are hardly to convince that water boarding wouldn't be an adequate treatment for 'potential terrorists' like occupiers, Assange and Manning. Plus, I should not fail to add maliciously that for me as a German reader, there is quite an unmasking homonymy in the basic noun of this reading:


'Gift', feminine - engl.: gift, vs. 'Gift', neuter - engl.: poison.


Please, don't get it wrong. I am using social networks as an indispensabel part of my daily life, and I even go to church.

February 25 2012

02mydafsoup-01
nunatak

 Sorry, hab ihn doch gelesen. Lohnt sich. RT @ChristophKappes Diesen Text von @Peterglaser bitte NICHT lesen, http://t.co/iM6aWq07

-----------------------

// quote by oAnth -


Peter Glaser1957 als Bleistift in Graz geboren. Lebt als Schreibprogramm in Berlin und begleitet seit 30 Jahren die Entwicklung der digitalen Welt. Ehrenmitglied des Chaos Computer Clubs, Träger des Ingeborg Bachmann-Preises und Blogger. futurezone-Kolumnist.
39 Artikel mit dem Tag "Peter Glaser"


Peter Glaser: Zukunftsreich 2Die allgewaltige Ablenkungsmaschine
 
In der digitalen Welt fällt die Orientierung schwer – es geht nicht mehr nach vorne, sondern überallhin. Es gibt auch keine Mitte mehr, sondern ein neues Nichtzentrum. Und die ganze Richtungsverwirrung ist äußerst lustbetont: Was gibt es schöneres als Ablenkung?weiterlesen


[...]


Hauptsache ist, was am Bildschirm zu sehen ist

In der digitalen Welt heißt es auch nicht mehr "Der Weg ist das Ziel", sondern "Die Ränder sind die Mitte". Wir lernen eine Sache kennen, wenn wir uns in ihr befinden - wenn wir sie von innen sehen. Heute sammeln wir Informationen nicht nur, sondern hüllen uns in sie ein. Information strahlt immer stärker jenen Anspruch aus, den Religion und Politik seit Jahrhunderten erheben: den der zentralen Wahrheit. An Wahrheiten gibt es aber noch viele andere, gleich bedeutende, und der Computer mit seinem leuchtenden Altarfenster erklärt nun im Stillen alles, was auf dem Bildschirm zu sehen ist, zu Hauptsachen. Er ist jetzt das Wesentliche. Dieses neue Nichtzentrum aber liegt nicht mehr in der Mitte.

Das Feuer im Zentrum der Aufmerksamkeit

In der Dämmerung sieht das menschliche Auge seit jeher Dinge, die von außen in den Rand des Blickfelds geraten, in einer rätselhaften Schärfe – eine Überlebensfähigkeit aus ferner, stammesgeschichtlicher Vergangenheit. Heute finden so Intuitionen ihren Weg ins Bewußtsein. Während die Aufmerksamkeit auf etwas anderes fokussiert und abgelenkt ist, kann sich fast beiläufig Neues einschleichen, können sich Lösungen andeuten.
 
[...]
via oAnth @ Friendica.eu - http://futurezone.at/tag/178-peter-glaser.php

September 08 2011

02mydafsoup-01

“Traditionalist” Islamic activism | The Immanent Frame - Barbara D. Metcalf - 2011-09-07


This essay is one of nearly three dozen original contributions to be included in
10 Years After September 11, a forthcoming digital collection being produced by the Social Science Research Council. In the days immediately following 9/11/01, the Council invited a wide range of leading social scientists to write short essays for an online forum. Ten years later, these same contributors have been asked to reflect on what has changed and what remains the same. The result is an extraordinary collection of new essays to be posted later this week at SSRC.org, with contributions from Rajeev Bhargava, Mary Kaldor, David Held, Olivier Roy, Saskia Sassen, Veena Das, Richard Falk, and many others.—ed. 

September 07 2011

02mydafsoup-01

August 21 2011

02mydafsoup-01
Opposition to the system can no longer articulate itself in the form of a realistic alternative, or even as a utopian project, but can only take the shape of a meaningless outburst. What is the point of our celebrated freedom of choice when the only choice is between playing by the rules and (self-)destructive violence?
Slavoj Žižek · Shoplifters of the World Unite · LRB 19 August 2011
Reposted frommatthiasr matthiasr viakrekk krekk
02mydafsoup-01
‘You call on us to consume while simultaneously depriving us of the means to do it properly – so here we are doing it the only way we can!’ The riots are a demonstration of the material force of ideology
Slavoj Žižek · Shoplifters of the World Unite · LRB 19 August 2011
Reposted fromekelias ekelias viakrekk krekk
02mydafsoup-01

August 15 2011

02mydafsoup-01
[...]


It was Pico who first made explicit the connection between displacement and the Humanist project. His touchstone was the phrase, “Man is his own Maker,” which appeared in his brief essay “Oration on the Dignity of Man,” written, it is now thought, while Pico was in prison. Pico imagines God as “the master-builder [who] by the laws of his secret wisdom fabricated this house, this world which we see.”2 But God, whom Pico calls the “Master Artisan,” then created mankind as a “work of indeterminate form.” Pico imagines God the Master Artisan speaking to Adam, his unfinished creation, as follows, “in conformity with thy free judgement, in whose hands I have placed thee, thou art confined by no bounds; and thou wilt fix limits of nature for thyself.”3 These words had the personal meaning to Pico that, as a displaced person, he would have to make up a life for himself.

Freedom, then, to do anything and to become anyone? Informality and spontaneity as the ends of life? Pico emphatically rejected this. Born indeterminate, he says, human beings have to find unity in their lives; a person must make him or herself coherent. In Renaissance Humanism, this quest meant uniting conflicting ancient ideals by bridging the Hellenic and the Christian mindset; in Pico’s own philosophy, it meant making the one and the many cohere, or as philosophers would put it today, discovering unity in the midst of difference. Spinoza, two centuries later, was grounded in just this Humanist project.

[...]

In Burckhardt’s own time, the nationalism nascent in the nineteenth century seemed to the historian to usher in the “age of brutal simplifiers,” nationalism denying the mixture of peoples and the multiple identities of individuals in each nation. The paradox appears because the nineteenth century was also the great age of industrial development, of productive technology. His paradox connected these two developments, technology and nationalism, with industrial technology tending to the complex and nationalism tending to the brutally simple.

If radios had existed in Burckhardt’s time, the stark us-against-them language on right-wing American talk shows would have served him to define “crude”; if Burckhardt could have web-surfed, he would have found similar evidence in blogs of all political persuasions all over the world. We could use another value-soaked word to understand what Burckhardt was getting at: society becomes more primitive, the more people see themselves categorically, in terms of fixed identities.

Whether social relations were once more complex is a question we should set aside; it is an exercise in nostalgia. We should refocus this paradox just as a proposition in itself; refocused, it suggests most simply that technical innovations run ahead of people’s ability to use the innovations well. This simple version has been true through the history of technology: human beings have invented new tools before they knew what to do with them. There is, though, a sharper version of the paradox: the first impulse in using a new tool is to simplify the social relations that existed before.

[...]



Several entries concerning Sennet's essay also with Pico della Mirandola's complete text "De Hominis Dignitate" in translations from Latin to English and Italian

http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/pico/


via link compilation
http://www.pearltrees.com/02myprltr01/dignitate-02myitrenhum/id3233436

—   Humanism  by Richard Bennet | Institute for Advanced Studies In Culture: Publications - The Hedgehog Review - www.iasc-culture.org - Summer 2011

May 24 2011

02mydafsoup-01
[...]

[Den] ... Essay scheint eine übergeordnete Fragestellung zu beschäftigen: warum vollziehen sich politische Veränderungen in der aktuellen Gesellschaftsformation so schleppend langsam oder kommen erst gar nicht zur Entfaltung? Warum halten die Menschen scheinbar freiwillig an einem offensichtlich gescheiterten Wachstumsparadigma fest?
Auf diese Frage ließen sich zwei Antworten formulieren: Erstens gibt es Strukturprinzipien in dieser Gesellschaft, die derart totalitär wirken, als dass die Hinterfragestellung dieser Prinzipien uns als Subjekte selbst hinterfragen würde. Zweitens basiert die kapitalistische Gesellschaft im Wesentlichen auf der konstruierten Zustimmung der Menschen zu diesem System.

[...]
Max Pichl: Die Revolutionierung des Subjekts « Wie das Wachstum in unser Denken kam | boellblog.org 2011-05-24

November 14 2010

02mydafsoup-01

The essay tradition blossomed in English-speaking countries only after being invented by a sixteenth-century Frenchman, Michel Eyquem de Montaigne. His contemporary, the English writer Francis Bacon, also used the title Essays, but his were well-organized intellectual inquiries. While Bacon was assembling his thoughts neatly, the self-avowedly lazy nobleman and winegrower Montaigne was letting his run riot on the other side of the Channel. In his Essais (“Attempts”), published in 1580 and later expanded into larger editions, he wrote as if he were chatting to his readers: just two friends, whiling away an afternoon in conversation.

Montaigne raised questions rather than giving answers. He wrote about whatever caught his eye: war, psychology, animals, sex, magic, diplomacy, vanity, glory, violence, hermaphroditism, self-doubt. Most of all, he wrote about himself and was amazed at the variety he found within. “I cannot keep my subject still,” he said. “It goes along befuddled and staggering, with a natural drunkenness.” His writing followed the same wayward path.

Reposted bysigalonsoupcollect sigalonsoupcollect

September 04 2009

Trevor Potter and Floyd Abrams

Is campaign finace reform unconstitutional?
Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl