Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 22:43:53 +0100 From: artefact-AT-t-online.de (Michael Eldred) Subject: Re: Wollt ihr das totale Engineering? Cologne 08-Jan-2001 Henk van Tuijl schrieb Mon, 8 Jan 2001 12:28:58 +0100: > From: "Michael Eldred" <artefact-AT-t-online.de> > Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 3:57 PM > > Michael, > > You wrote: > > I wonder whether there can be godliness without god and gods. > > Replace "god" by "being", to know the answer - and you will notice that the > next question will be: can there be god and gods without God? Henk, I would never replace god by being. Without being there is nothing. > > As for the question: Wollt ihr das totale Engineering?, it translates into > > Heidegger's thoughts of the totalization of cybernetics. If technology, > which > > is essentially a fore-seeing knowing, strives for total cybernetic > control, > > then those areas of knowledge, notably economics, which elude (outplay) > > predictive calculation become especially interesting. The essence of > economics > > is not cybernetic. But today's economics does not know this. > > Is _total control_ a concept in cybernetics? No, but it is a thought in thinking through the being of cybernetics. All castings of the being of beings are tendentially totalizing. That does not mean that total control is realized, but rather, that total control inheres in the essence of modern scientific thinking as Vorausberechenbarkeit (calculable predictability). > Or is cybernetics the art of > "governing" complex systems by means of calibration and feedback? Yes, that is correct, but it is not the truth of cybernetics (seen as mode of being, i.e. a way in which the totality of beings is disclosed). > It is true that the essence of economics is not cybernetic, nor is the > essence of technology. We disagree here. That is what my _Capital and Technology_ is about. The difference goes back as least as far as Plato: _technae poiaetikae_ and _technae ktaetikae_, the art of producing, and the art of acquisition (_Sophistaes_ 219c). It is a distinction to which, in my view, Heidegger did not pay enough attention. In taking up this distinction, it is crucial to (learn to) see the dimension of value, i.e. value as a mode of being. Michael _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-_-_- artefact-AT-webcom.com _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005