Stiegler’s Rigour: Metaphors for a Critical Continental Philosophy of Technology

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Dominic Smith
{"title":"Stiegler’s Rigour: Metaphors for a Critical Continental Philosophy of Technology","authors":"Dominic Smith","doi":"10.1080/20539320.2022.2059980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay claims that Stiegler’s sense of metaphor gives his work an overlooked rigour. Part one argues that La Faute d’Epiméthée’s key claim (that technics is philosophy’s “unthought”) opens an excess of potential that threatens to overwhelm Stiegler’s work. Part two looks at two metaphors (the pharmakon and organ). Part three argues that a focus on Stiegler’s technique of metaphor mitigates suspicions that his work is trivial or jargonistic, and allows it to emerge as a counterbalance to a positivistic tendency in contemporary philosophy of technology. This tendency is the legacy of an “empirical turn” in philosophy of technology in the late 1990s; it is problematic, I argue, because it threatens to turn philosophical engagements with technologies into endorsements of Zeitgeist-seizing artifacts (smartphones or social media, for example), to the detriment of what Stiegler’s sense of metaphor allows him to address as the broader “pharmacological” and “organological” implications of technologies for society.","PeriodicalId":41067,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aesthetics and Phenomenology","volume":"8 1","pages":"37 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aesthetics and Phenomenology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20539320.2022.2059980","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This essay claims that Stiegler’s sense of metaphor gives his work an overlooked rigour. Part one argues that La Faute d’Epiméthée’s key claim (that technics is philosophy’s “unthought”) opens an excess of potential that threatens to overwhelm Stiegler’s work. Part two looks at two metaphors (the pharmakon and organ). Part three argues that a focus on Stiegler’s technique of metaphor mitigates suspicions that his work is trivial or jargonistic, and allows it to emerge as a counterbalance to a positivistic tendency in contemporary philosophy of technology. This tendency is the legacy of an “empirical turn” in philosophy of technology in the late 1990s; it is problematic, I argue, because it threatens to turn philosophical engagements with technologies into endorsements of Zeitgeist-seizing artifacts (smartphones or social media, for example), to the detriment of what Stiegler’s sense of metaphor allows him to address as the broader “pharmacological” and “organological” implications of technologies for society.
斯蒂格勒的严格性:批判大陆技术哲学的隐喻
摘要本文认为斯蒂格勒的隐喻意识赋予了他的作品一种被忽视的严谨性。第一部分认为,La Faute d‘Epiméthée的关键主张(即工艺是哲学的“无意识”)打开了一个巨大的潜力,可能会淹没斯蒂格勒的作品。第二部分考察了两个隐喻(药孔和器官)。第三部分认为,对斯蒂格勒隐喻技巧的关注减轻了人们对他的作品琐碎或对立的怀疑,并使其成为当代技术哲学中实证主义倾向的制衡。这种趋势是20世纪90年代末技术哲学“经验转向”的遗留问题;我认为,这是有问题的,因为它有可能将对技术的哲学参与转化为对时代精神攫取文物(例如智能手机或社交媒体)的认可,从而损害斯蒂格勒的隐喻感,使他能够将技术对社会更广泛的“药理学”和“器官学”含义。
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信