File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0312, message 236


From: "bob scheetz" <rscheetz-AT-cboss.com>
Subject: Re: gestell etiology 
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:00:49 -0500



john foster writes:
> Mal-wart, n, WacDonalds, when they merge they can use the same Capital
> letter, just turn it the right way. Interesting you note the 'contagion'
of
> the genetic engineering fad. The bio-tech, genetic engineering, business
has
> not taken off well in much of the world, except in the US, Argentina. It
> appears the technology does not work very well. It is a bit of huge scam.

well that's something, John, ...but what about the low-bio-tech?
like the chicken, pig and fish factories? a restaurant meal now genreally
consists of a meat quick-raised on franken-grains from iowa, hormone and
anti-biotic, in a n carolina factory, killed, froze, stored in a wharehouse
in jersey for an average 3 yrs, then shipped on order to a distributer in
ohio who supplies a whole tri-state region of eateries from the same batch,
microwave thawed for 3 min.s, grilled 8 for flavor, and served to the lucky
species at the "top" of the chain.

a hyper-real, de-natured existence; and it's already the norm. and this
transformation is a accidental function in aggregate of tens of thousands of
big to little independant kapitals whose manic concentration is fixed only
on a profit.

...or take sports: olympians, home-run kings, race-horses,...all, like
ahnold, farmacologically engineered "athletes"; and again, incidental to
captialist colonization of pop-cult.

instantiation proliferates daily.

...and what is capitalism but the historical form of the darwinian physis of
our era, ...pt being, the life force has already made the evolutionary leap
from natural-man to tech-man.   ...like foucault (who himself doped in order
to be super-star fr thinker) sez, we're already dinosaurs

bob



> One of the features of 'enframing' or Gestell, is that some have called it
a
> 'device paradigm' culture we live in globally.
>
> The paradigm <paradigmata> is a pattern, and the device refers to a
> component or sector within the political economy which is capable of
solving
> a technical problem. But technical problem solving does not save
> communities, nor ecosystems, it saves the 'industry' for a short time.
> Therefore when there are a series of cascading problems associated with
> modern technology, there will be a reliance automatically on solving the
> problem using the same or similar technological experts. This creates a
> reliance on the knowledge and competencies on to fewer and fewer experts.
> The idea of the device is meant to be as innovative as practical, and the
> more practical and immediate the device application is, the more rapidly,
> and forthwith the technical solution. The device optimally is meant to
'plug
> into', or 'replace' a flaw in the sector. In software language these are
> called 'patches'....which on ontological grounds attest to increasing
> isolation. Then they invented linux operating system.
>
> Of course with Dasein there are no ontological grounds for Being, just
> 'abgrund'....I just don't think the Others any longer fully trust. Why
> should they? I don't trust anyone anymore. I trusted one person, and look
> what happened to me! I am too trusting of Others. Any how...
>
> The primary problem therefore in the western special situational sense is
> that it is too easy to simply devise another device, plug or patch and
> continue on the same path toward some more serious 'system
> failure'....whether that be ecosystem failure, or political and social
> failure.
>
> Example, several oil and gas experts, including the University of Calgary,
> all predict that the oil and gas supply will peak around 2005. One thing
> though is sure, the peak in supply may have already occurred in 2000,
since
> then world production has declined. So that means one thing. Those with
the
> capacity will need to secure what is not already allocated, especially in
> Iraq. Hence the need to find a 'technical innovation' to solve the problem
> of getting it before others get it, and get it soon.
>
> The easiest 'device paradigm' ongoing is currently in the Middle East in
> Iraq and in Afghanistan. 'Shock and awe'  happened less than one year ago,
> but thinking about this 'expression' it appears more likely that it was an
> attempt to 'impute' a technical solution to a very old problem; the
pattern
> repeats itself as 'bomb cities', then 'enter with large amounts of
> firepower', then 'wait and slowly reconstruct', but it is still less than
> one year ago that the cities were bombed, and tens of thousands of
civilians
> were killed or wounded.
>
> What kind of guilt motivates the 'device minded' militarist anyway? Is it
> the same guilt which motivates non-militarists? Guilt is 'failure'....so I
> guess we all feel like we have failed to become what we could have become,
> well not all people, but at least we all experience a sense of failure
after
> we decide that we could not be what we wanted in 'every case' to be.
>
> The militarist therefore would experience failure in a completely
different
> way, than most. Because a militarist must win *regardless* much like a
> medical doctor must heal the sick, and deliver babies, the militarist will
> use political coercion, and lie to obtain the best weapons, even if these
> weapons do not work, nor actually help the militarist win.
>
> If war was redefined as 'winning' the hearts and minds' of the stranger,
or
> foreigner, in their own lands, then conventional bloody minded wars would
be
> rare indeed.
>
> spater,
>
> johnF
>
>
>
>
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005