Search

Bifurcating means: reconstituting a political economy that reconnects local knowledge and practices with macroeconomic circulation and rethinks territoriality at its different scales of locality; developing an economy of contribution on the basis of a contributory income no longer tied to employment and once again valuing work as a knowledge activity; overhauling law, and government and corporate accounting, via economic and social experiments, including in laboratory territories, and in relation to cooperative, local market economies formed into networks and linked to international trade; revaluing research from a long-term perspective, independent of the short-term interests of political and economic powers; reorienting digital technology in the service of territories and territorial cooperation.\ud \ud The collective work that produced this book is based on the claim that today’s destructive development model is reaching its ultimate limits, and that its toxicity, which is increasingly massive, manifest and multidimensional (medical, environmental, mental, epistemological, economic – accumulating pockets of insolvency, which become veritable oceans), is generated above all by the fact that the current industrial economy is based in every sector on an obsolete physical model – a mechanism that ignores the constraints of locality in biology and the entropic tendency in reticulated computational information. In these gravely perilous times, we must bifurcate: there is no alternative.

L'article vise à montrer comment le concept de Capitalocène implique un ensemble de cartographies, qui sont non seulement géopolitiques et économiques, mais aussi symboliques, philosophiques et épistémologiques, et dont le fonctionnement a changé à travers l'histoire. L'essai questionne le passage de la sphère politique proprement écologique et économique du Capitalocène en tant qu’écologie-monde à la dimension technocratique du présent, incarnée par le capitalisme de plateforme., The article aims to show how the concept of Capitalocene implies a set of cartographies, which are not only geopolitical and economic, but also symbolic, philosophical and epistemological, and whose functioning has changed throughout history. The essay questions the shift from the strictly ecological and economic political sphere of the Capitalocene as an ecology-world to the technocratic dimension of the present, embodied by platform capitalism.

This note aims first to provide a general insight into the key theoretical questions on which are central to the Real Smart City project , and then to elaborate on the salient concepts or analysis of each paper of the collection “Guayaquil Archipelago: Epistemological steps towards a Real Smart City”. The most relevant issues, such as smartness, noesis, public space and control, compose the set of critical tools by which we attempt to deconstruct the technoideology of the very idea of “Smart Cities”. A second goal is to provide an alternative to the image of the network, through which one thinks social relations and the transmission of information and knowledge within digital societies. This is the image of the archipela go, mediated by archipelagic thinking. While the first part of the collection of papers focuses on the relation between the digital and the territory, the second part attempts to deepen the concept of archipelagic thinking and to raise some methodological points inspired by real archipelagos.

One can easily affirm that Bernard Stiegler has always criticized both the concept of immaterial – starting from the sense and the theoretical meaning of the exhibition Les immatériaux organized by Lyotard in 1985 – and the same signifier, stating on several occasions that what we refer with this term actually calls always a material dimension. The immaterial would therefore always be hyper-material, that is to say the expression of an organized mat-ter as an active support for any type of memory, cognitive, symbolic etc. On the other hand, his attitude towards the Stoic-Deleuzian concept of incorporeal – with the conceptual chain that accompanies it in The Logic of Sense: event, quasi-cause, counter-effectuation – is certainly different, given that Stiegler, at least starting from the mature phase in its pharmaco-logical perspective, seems to have adopted it as a tool for analysing the current political economy and the hyper-industrial context (therefore not at all post-industrial) of platform capitalism. Adopting the incorporeal then means transforming it, in the sense of its radical technologization. Thus, from the Stieglerian point of view, the incorporeal becomes the hyper-material expression of exosomatization, that is the technical externalization of memory and bodily gesture that accompanies humanity since its prehistory, while the Deleuzian control societies become society of hyper-control, that is, of the control that hyper-material exerts on us. The aim of the paper is then to show originality, intuitions and limits of Stiegler’s conceptual adoption, examining its effects in relation to both the reactivation of the Deleuzi-an concept of incorporeal and the same process of composition of the Stieglerian perspective.

The paper aims to draw a kind of geophilosophical dialogue between Caribbean literature (Glissant, Benítez Rojo, Brathwaite), French contemporary philosophy (Deleuze, Guattari, Stiegler), political ecology (Moore) Amerindian cosmologies (Viveiros de Castro ) and decolonial thinking in order to face some key ecological and political issues of our time. The image of the archipelago is thus mobilized as a conceptual tool to rethink both the relation humanity environment (and so Culture and Nature) and social re lations within contemporary digital capitalism.

The paper attempts to stress the concept of immanence, as it has been developed by Deleuze and Guattari through Spinoza, in order to provide a critique of the so called platform capitalism. The digital dimension of economy and politics in fact represents a sort of a counter-attack versus Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophical perspective of emancipation and the goal of the paper becomes to re-activate such a perspective by reading the works of two important contemporary scholars: Frédréric Lordon and Antoinette Rouvroy. While Lordon represents a powerful way to reactivate Spinoza’s immanence in order to provide a new affirmative politics, Rouvroy shows to what degree contemporary capitalism, through its «algorithmic governmentality», is short-circuiting some of the concept developed by the French Theory (from Simondon’s transinvidual to Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizome and plan of immanence). With the help of these authors and of Benjiamin Bratton, the paper finally shows Immanence’s symptoms of weakness in front of such a capitalism, and it attempts to recharge or reload the very immanence taking care of “ingenium”, conceived as the fundamental concept of a new micropolitics.

The paper attempts to read Antoinette Rouvroy’s concept of algorithmic governmentality as the main subject of what Bernard Stiegler called computational nihilism. Taking one of the giants of the Web, Amazon.com, as a symptom of such a nihilism whose process has been empowered by neo-liberalism, the paper tries to elaborate a new kind of relationship between technology, environment and social ties alternative to the accelerationist perspective. Eduardo Viveiros de Castro’s anthropological work provides some key elements in order to elaborate this kind of new political ecology based on Amazonian perspectivism. Starting from this consideration, political ecology could be presented as a kind of nomadology, while the latter could be understood in its turn as a way of placing Nietzsche’s perspectivism in the Amazon.

In this paper I address the issue of the transcendental in Deleuze's thought, with particular emphasis on his reading of Nietzsche, Proust, and Artaud. Deleuze's core argument is that the practice of genealogy allows for a reconsideration of violence, power, décadence, geniality, foolishness, and even stupidity as transcendental components of thought. Indeed, from Deleuze's perspective of transcendental empiricism, thought is generated by the violence of signs, namely those forces which may determine its creative strength or its weakness. Notably, in Deleuze's reading of Nietzsche there emerges how stupidity is in a position of deconstructing the logical locks of the metaphysical conception of truth., Philosophy Kitchen - Rivista di filosofia contemporanea, N. 1 (2014): Il prisma trascendentale. I colori del reale

Spherical aggregates of microcrystals filling hydrothermal cavities or earthy masses with pale lavender color of probable phosphosiderite were found by one of the authors (F.V.) in the dumps of the Malpensata pegmatite mine. This hydrated Fe phosphate had been identified by means of electron microprobe in wavelength dispersive mode (WDS) and powder Xray diffraction analysis (XRPD). Chemical analyses (Table 1) revealed the following empirical formula (Fe1,02Mn0,02)?1,04(PO4)?2,08H2O, and the XRPD analysis gave the following unitcell parameters a = 5,301(4) Å, b =analysis gave the following unitcell parameters a = 5,301(4) Å, b = 9,778(6) Å, c = 8,726(4) Å e ? = 90,3(1) ° in close agreement with those reported for this mineral species.

L’articolo mira ad analizzare le relazioni tra le misure biopolitiche per la gestione della pandemia di Covid-19 e le contromisuretecnologiche delegate alle piattaforme digitali per garantire un controllo sistematico degli individui. Individua nella nozione di captologia la forma principale di questo iper-controllo nel quadro della governamentalità digitale, mostra come esso sia unariattualizzazione del dispositivo di potere moderno e delle sue funzioni di estrazione e cattura, e analizza infine i molteplici livelli (cognitivo, affettivo, relazionale e politico) in cui si esercita, nonché i suoi pericoli. The paper aims to analyze the relations between the biopolitical measures for the management of the Covid-19 pandemic and the technological countermeasures delegated to digital platforms to ensure a systematic control of the individuals. It identifies the notion of captology as the main form of this hyper-control within the framework of digital governmentality, shows how the latter is a re-actualisation of the modern power apparatus and its functions of extraction and capture, and finally analyses the multiple levels (cognitive, affective, relational and political) in which it is exercised, as well as its dangers.

What is an artist? An artist is an exemplary figure of individuation — understood as process of psychic and collective individuation where a “I”is only inside of a “we”, and where a “we” is constituted at the same time by the saturated potential and strained by the preindividual backgroundthat it supposes….it is an operator of transindividuation of available preindividual: it creates the works, that is to say the artifacts…which typically open up the future as the undeterminedsingularity by an access to the repressed which contrives the power of the noeticsoul as its possibility — which is only by irregularity– of passing to acts. Bernard Stiegler Who envisions this image of evolutionary alternative, has a clear fundamental understanding of the SOCIAL SCULPTURE which is formed by MAN AS ARTIST. Who says that there must be a change, but instead skips over the “revolution of concept” and runs against the external manifestations of ideology will fail. He will either resign, or be content with reforms or end up in an impasse of terrorism. All three forms are the victoryof systems’ strategy. When it is finally asked: WHAT CAN WE DO? so that we can each the goal of the reorganization of the foundations, then we must make it clear:there is only one way [nonviolent transformation] to change the status quo– but these require a wide rangeof measures.