穿越状态:对数字技术的反思与西蒙顿对同质性的批判

IF 0.7 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Michael M. O’Hara
{"title":"穿越状态:对数字技术的反思与西蒙顿对同质性的批判","authors":"Michael M. O’Hara","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2019.1677485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, I examine Simondon's concept of the technical object reflecting on its analogous relationship to digital technology. Intrinsic to such an analysis is Simondon's distinction between the abstract and concrete and his specific critique of the hylomorphic model. In a deeply rich example, Simondon, contra Aristotle, mobilises the process of mould-making as an exemplar of the modulated ensemble of forces that prefigure any formations of matter through form. I analyse Simondon's paradigmatic criticism while at the same time carving out the potential intersections that emerge through the kinaesthetic awareness of the body. By doing so I highlight the implicit relational formation that occurs through the process of object making that is at odds with ontologies that underpin digital technology. Finally, I analyse how the transformation of object making realised through digital fabrication radically transforms our relationship to objects claiming that such technology remains beholden to hylomorphic schemata.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"12 1","pages":"223 - 236"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Traversing states: a reflection on digital technology and Simondon's critique of hylomorphism\",\"authors\":\"Michael M. O’Hara\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735784.2019.1677485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this article, I examine Simondon's concept of the technical object reflecting on its analogous relationship to digital technology. Intrinsic to such an analysis is Simondon's distinction between the abstract and concrete and his specific critique of the hylomorphic model. In a deeply rich example, Simondon, contra Aristotle, mobilises the process of mould-making as an exemplar of the modulated ensemble of forces that prefigure any formations of matter through form. I analyse Simondon's paradigmatic criticism while at the same time carving out the potential intersections that emerge through the kinaesthetic awareness of the body. By doing so I highlight the implicit relational formation that occurs through the process of object making that is at odds with ontologies that underpin digital technology. Finally, I analyse how the transformation of object making realised through digital fabrication radically transforms our relationship to objects claiming that such technology remains beholden to hylomorphic schemata.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Culture Theory and Critique\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"223 - 236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Culture Theory and Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2019.1677485\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture Theory and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2019.1677485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在这篇文章中,我考察了西蒙顿关于技术对象的概念,反映了它与数字技术的类似关系。这种分析的本质是西蒙东对抽象和具体的区分,以及他对形态模型的具体批判。在一个非常丰富的例子中,西蒙东,与亚里士多德相反,动员模具制造过程作为调节力集合的范例,预示着物质通过形式的任何形成。我分析西蒙顿的范式批评,同时通过对身体的动觉意识挖掘出潜在的交叉点。通过这样做,我强调了通过对象制造过程中发生的隐含关系形成,这与支撑数字技术的本体不一致。最后,我分析了通过数字制造实现的物体制造的转变如何从根本上改变了我们与物体的关系,声称这种技术仍然依赖于形图式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Traversing states: a reflection on digital technology and Simondon's critique of hylomorphism
ABSTRACT In this article, I examine Simondon's concept of the technical object reflecting on its analogous relationship to digital technology. Intrinsic to such an analysis is Simondon's distinction between the abstract and concrete and his specific critique of the hylomorphic model. In a deeply rich example, Simondon, contra Aristotle, mobilises the process of mould-making as an exemplar of the modulated ensemble of forces that prefigure any formations of matter through form. I analyse Simondon's paradigmatic criticism while at the same time carving out the potential intersections that emerge through the kinaesthetic awareness of the body. By doing so I highlight the implicit relational formation that occurs through the process of object making that is at odds with ontologies that underpin digital technology. Finally, I analyse how the transformation of object making realised through digital fabrication radically transforms our relationship to objects claiming that such technology remains beholden to hylomorphic schemata.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Culture Theory and Critique
Culture Theory and Critique HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
6
×
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