File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2001/heidegger.0101, message 31


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 ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005