Cornelius Castoriadis and Jacques Ellul on the dilemmas of technical autonomy

IF 1 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Nikos Nikoletos
{"title":"Cornelius Castoriadis and Jacques Ellul on the dilemmas of technical autonomy","authors":"Nikos Nikoletos","doi":"10.1177/07255136241256984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Shortly before the end of his life, Cornelius Castoriadis turned to radical political ecology, which he seemed to consider the only way to de-colonize the technicist, capitalist imaginary ( imaginaire), into which the totality of modern philosophy and praxis is, to use a Heideggerian concept, (heteronomously) being-thrown. Castoriadis’ critique of the capitalist imaginary, the imaginary of the unlimited extension of rational mastery, is in a state of eclectic affinity with the unsurpassed critique of the autonomous Technique by the French theologian and sociologist Jacques Ellul. Ellul had highlighted the necessity of demythologizing the spirit of technicism since the 1940s, when he was working on the uncontrollability of modern technology, which in his work is depicted as the societal manifestation of the Ge-stell.The Weberian ideal type of formal rationality runs through the critique of both thinkers. For Ellul, technology, or technique, is intrinsically rational. However, when technique is in contact with social and cultural milieus which belong to a non-technical formation and organization, paradoxes and irrationalities are inevitable. In turn, Castoriadis emphasizes the irrationality and autonomy that characterize the modern sphere of techno-science, which leads, with mathematical precision, to the ecological, and also the anthropological, destruction of the Anthropos. Therein lies the central problem of modernity’s technology. Is there a way out? Castoriadis envisions the foundation of a true democracy, nowhere near theocratic, which, nonetheless, must learn to limit itself politically and technologically. Ellul, on the other hand, highlights the ethics of non-power, an essentially spiritual and idealistic attitude that Hans Jonas will adopt a few years later, talking about the heuristics of fear.","PeriodicalId":54188,"journal":{"name":"Thesis Eleven","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thesis Eleven","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07255136241256984","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Shortly before the end of his life, Cornelius Castoriadis turned to radical political ecology, which he seemed to consider the only way to de-colonize the technicist, capitalist imaginary ( imaginaire), into which the totality of modern philosophy and praxis is, to use a Heideggerian concept, (heteronomously) being-thrown. Castoriadis’ critique of the capitalist imaginary, the imaginary of the unlimited extension of rational mastery, is in a state of eclectic affinity with the unsurpassed critique of the autonomous Technique by the French theologian and sociologist Jacques Ellul. Ellul had highlighted the necessity of demythologizing the spirit of technicism since the 1940s, when he was working on the uncontrollability of modern technology, which in his work is depicted as the societal manifestation of the Ge-stell.The Weberian ideal type of formal rationality runs through the critique of both thinkers. For Ellul, technology, or technique, is intrinsically rational. However, when technique is in contact with social and cultural milieus which belong to a non-technical formation and organization, paradoxes and irrationalities are inevitable. In turn, Castoriadis emphasizes the irrationality and autonomy that characterize the modern sphere of techno-science, which leads, with mathematical precision, to the ecological, and also the anthropological, destruction of the Anthropos. Therein lies the central problem of modernity’s technology. Is there a way out? Castoriadis envisions the foundation of a true democracy, nowhere near theocratic, which, nonetheless, must learn to limit itself politically and technologically. Ellul, on the other hand, highlights the ethics of non-power, an essentially spiritual and idealistic attitude that Hans Jonas will adopt a few years later, talking about the heuristics of fear.
科尼利厄斯-卡斯托里亚迪斯和雅克-埃卢尔谈技术自主的两难处境
科尼利厄斯-卡斯托里阿迪斯(Cornelius Castoriadis)在其生命结束前不久转向激进的政治生态学,他似乎认为这是使技术主义、资本主义想象(imaginaire)去殖民化的唯一途径,用海德格尔的概念来说,现代哲学和实践的全部都(异质地)被抛入了这一想象之中。卡斯托里亚迪斯对资本主义想象的批判,即对理性主宰无限延伸的想象的批判,与法国神学家和社会学家雅克-埃卢尔(Jacques Ellul)对自主技艺(autonomous Technique)的无与伦比的批判有着兼收并蓄的亲和力。埃卢尔从 20 世纪 40 年代起就强调了将技术主义精神非神学化的必要性,当时他正致力于研究现代技术的不可控性,在他的著作中,现代技术被描绘成 "Ge-stell "的社会表现形式。在埃卢尔看来,技术或技巧本质上是理性的。然而,当技术与属于非技术形成和组织的社会和文化环境相接触时,悖论和非理性就不可避免。反过来,卡斯托里阿迪斯强调了现代技术科学领域的非理性和自主性,这种非理性和自主性以数学上的精确性导致了生态学以及人类学意义上的 "人 "的毁灭。现代技术的核心问题就在于此。有出路吗?卡斯托里亚迪斯设想建立一个真正的民主国家,尽管它远非神权国家,但它必须学会在政治和技术上限制自己。另一方面,埃卢尔则强调了非权力伦理,这是一种本质上的精神和理想主义态度,几年后汉斯-乔纳斯(Hans Jonas)在谈到恐惧启发式时也会采用这种态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Thesis Eleven
Thesis Eleven SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Established in 1996 Thesis Eleven is a truly international and interdisciplinary peer reviewed journal. Innovative and authorative the journal encourages the development of social theory in the broadest sense by consistently producing articles, reviews and debate with a central focus on theories of society, culture, and politics and the understanding of modernity. The purpose of this journal is to encourage the development of social theory in the broadest sense. We view social theory as both multidisciplinary and plural, reaching across social sciences and liberal arts and cultivating a diversity of critical theories of modernity across both the German and French senses of critical theory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信