Information Disappointment
Legitimized by forces legitimized for this, (and, as it will be seen, temporarily) the mainline and capricious, legitimized by the same hand, marginality - eternal historical cohabitants and allies, alternately intercepting the complex free will (which, moreover, often refuse this freedom) - must base their relations on the principle of dominance, and nothing else - because it contains the arch key for existential dynamics - the only important development (only development, moreover, not limited to), in relation to which others should take the role of tools, not goals. But what is this world without errors and failures? The perfect car? The perfect program? A city where a person is expressly denied presence. The dominant hugs a person - everything, without exception - subordinating all of its processes, both reflexively-internal and sociocultural, to an elaborate, voluntary deformation. The degree of subordination of a person directly depends on his "morphological" development: the deeper and further developed his processes. Everywhere and everywhere, through the superficial dust of civilization, it will shine through - the center of gravity of human experience, swarming among the rubbish dumped into a heap by which the external culture has not found application.
The researcher does not always have time to keep track of the variable superiority of cultural dominants: now he is loosening the crushed soil of the lawn, filling it with the fresh wind of the era, when it suddenly turns out that he is in the backyard, and the main action has shifted to the west. An inquisitive thought has only just begun to sort out the multilateral, abrupt, modern / postmodern relationship with the supremacy of the latter, as some of the attributes of the former return to the sociocultural scene, as if wishing, moreover, in a reckless manner, to complete self-realization through a violent psychosis of modernization, experiencing the stinging need to replace “building huts”.
A man of an information workshop, an information worker and an employee is an instrument and conductor of the information age, absorbing its ideals and ideology, releasing them from above onto the soil of the consumer flock. If magic is a complexity that cannot be explained / is already explained (it becomes inexplicable), then our world is completely riddled with magic, the hands of which are information producers. In contact with the magic machine, they are forced to absorb its “character” traits (we will not refuse it), try them on ourselves, obey the ritual requirements, which receive clear explanations and legitimacy through the machine itself and for it. These requirements are comfortably rational. But therein lies their key trick, because when combined into unity, they give rise, though technized, to magic. Without them, magic is strewn with holes through which human hands will treacherously shine through. To prevent this, obedience is introduced into the rank of the highest value, and ultimately leads to voluntary deformation and the interweaving of the rules of some areas with the rules of others. The paradigmatic steps that expand, narrow, and fill, drain, proudly act as an epochal nutrient soil for the specified mixing. The result of the process is a person who is forced to make a cultural mistake as an adequate response - to apply progressive (modernist) technologies and gestures that instrumentally serve the soulless machinery of efficiency to a living subject in his role as an existential analog seeker.
Fear. It is difficult to frighten a person of computerization production. A proud pride he meets any, even the most difficult tasks and trials. This is because he is firmly, in an eidotic spirit, aware of the existence of final solutions - demons of formal laws, logical conclusions and clear, phenomenologically solid definitions constantly whisper to him about this. He is ready for tasks of any scale: the time is already coming when he dares to program the process of communicating with the Cosmos and the Universe with the help of language (as if no one had done this before). The noble knight of Heaven and Earth, day and night, unit and zero. Nothing itself fits snugly under the arches of its recursive structure. But he did not yet become a fearless knight of freedom, because there is also something that frightens him and horrifies meaninglessness, that which is expelled from a crude idealistic digital narrative, that does not lend itself to tricks of reduction to the familiar apparatus of the unambiguous "Yes" and "No" . The name of this is Man, this machine flaw, the only important object of the blind-humanitarians, lounging in their self-invented pseudoscientific dreams.
Fear of a person does not dare to fight the all-illuminating beacon of rationality, turning into a mistake processed by pre-standardized designs that bring a soothing wind of answers and “thoughtful” ridicule as mechanisms for mastering the phenomenon. The guarantee of peace of mind and thought cannot be too expensive, even if the price itself is a mistake. A verbal web of answers that give rise to even more questions - a nonexistent trick, boring demagogy without end and edge, tiring, violent, causes an acute desire to conclude an agreement with reason, the subject of which will be that which lies on the surface itself. This is an agreement signed "End!" But this is not the real end: it seems that only now is man beginning.
Conveyor breeding information consumers, a frightened person comes out as an accompanying product, miserably hiding in the anonymous cover of the digital distance: we are closer to the world, but even further away from it than ever; Alienated from analog responsibility for ourselves, we are some reagents-diluents of an immense digital connection. This digital was bold, far from courage, however.
It is possible to speak, think, cognize a person only with the help of an unpredictable language - a living, mobile, polynomial insect - until the disgust is not fixed, not permanent, elusive, - often included in a relationship of mutual exclusion with a language sufficient to everything else. A man of information production with horror escapes from this thorny jungle, from an unfamiliar Other, naughty fool, to a territory where he is always waiting for a warm embrace of understandable schemes and algorithms, able to calmly motherly say: “Nothing and nothing are one and the same” .
Fixation. The world of the consumer of information products is the world of magic, the absolute game of faith and calculated delusions; the world of the manufacturer of information products - the world of naked units and zeros and their cynical-functionalistic joints, always appearing as they are, without the “childish whims” of transcendental motives, objective spirit or divine particles. Once and for all squeezed between the beginning and the end, the entrance and the exit, squeezed by a utilitarian digital hyperbole, these cubes, by all the rules of the game, strive for a resting position and their ideal fixation. Fixed means saved. Fixed means immersed in the security sphere, giving rise to guarantees of suppression of disruptions and crises. Fixed means being at a safe distance from surprises and redundancy. Finally, fixed means not posing a threat to either himself or others. Some kind of anti-superposition in which they do not require anything unprogrammed: neither destruction, nor creation. Fixed means sporadically sterile.
Fixation is a favorite technique of computerization production that lies at the heart of the continuous build-up of information efficiency. Unfixed by all its “human” roots, strive for loss, for its cozy hut of oblivion deep in the neural forests. It is unacceptable. Everything should be fixed: a sign, a symbol, a metaphor, a person. An uncommitted sign is a lost sign, which means it is a mistake. Unfixed thought is lost thought, which means lost resources for its production. An unrecorded person means a lost person, because the control over his sound entropy and the generic historical structure is weakening. The enduring tradition of Art Nouveau has again found a source of energy. Once again, a person is subjected to fixation violence: to be described and housed in a Bacon-utopian city, where all the streets were born under the dictate of Cogito.
But we already have the experience of insanity: a person is lost not when he is not fixed, but vice versa - a person disappears when some forces manage to capture him in an italic snapshot of a language and code constant. Fixation is the end of man, in the sense that was felt by our pathological conscience in the 20th century. This is a methodological device that in itself carries doubt, this doubt develops and weaves it into the threads of morality, due to which it continues to exist, albeit in a negative empirical manner. Taken in ethical quotation marks, it becomes the ideological foundation of the existence of algorithms, a necessary predicate of the “control point” - a classical tradition of continuous improvement of modernity, transformed into a modern twist.
A man cannot help but rebel against his imprisonment in a fixation prison (no matter what nature it encircles (degenerates): political, economic, ideological, professional, etc.), shaking its walls by means of a continuously rediscovering, verbally and symbolically expressed instrument that approved that is already known and radically deeply used - the unconscious. The clash between the humanitarian and the technical seems to be revolving again in the spiral of its history, which, in a certain light, looks like a process of training arrogant self-confidence. Developing more and more sophisticated and self-confident algorithms - a sequential series of fixations - computerization production, in moments of reassurance, some unfamiliar voluntaristic relaxation, it enters the game with centripetal unity, placing these algorithms in the human shell, taking for the ideal a "program-spirit", striving for a modernist analogy in depth. However, he still failed to hide the leash of guiding logic, even if not clear - still too clearly it gives out in itself nothing more than a psychological act of weakening an equally strong leash. A professional, high-tech illusion of choice - but no more. An archetypal, skillful trick - giving more opportunities, to grasp more tightly and to control the intoxicated creature more deeply. But this is still a narrow corridor in which the “too human” has no place. Once again, a person escapes such a resultant fixation, leaving his cultural manifestos on the walls of the corridor, which, perhaps, are still destined to take their place in the pages of history.
Answers An unanswered question is a burden that always accumulates, overwhelming a muddied mind, immanent to this mind threatening the darkened areas of the human, keeping it in constant tension, far from the postulates of a certain vital economy, which, as they say, we strive for by its very nature. The model of “obedient concepts”, in which everything unfinished, incomplete in some mode, accessible to a limited but obedient sign, is forcibly expelled from internal discourse, recognizes only the category of answers as essential and worthy of attention. Questions are only tools lacking in value. They are the means that exist for, and are always highlighted from this angle. This characteristic dynamics is a necessary restriction for the expansion of controlled freedoms and the “establishment of the language”, the expedient production of both products and people.
Informatization production determines its own professional, and at the same time, (quasi) existential dynamics through the category of answers. But no questions. The impotence of the questions is that they are demanding of internal dynamics, engaging in a rash confrontation with a vague term of explanation, contradicting and opposing within the framework of the machinery of the effectiveness of its highest value - external, economic dynamics, which leaves its mark on a person in the form of analysis of feelings of alienation. Answers are a measure and gesture of calming, stopping and ending.
But what is the question, if you try to go beyond the latinisms of quaestio and problema? We see that the question is the engine, the core of the dynamization of the human spirit, the metaphor of which is condensed in the harness of horses (even if it is running wildly from the hail burning in flames), the primacy of which is freedom in action (in a pagan spirit). Getting the answer, the question approaches its legitimate death, which is constantly pursuing it, which, at times, it seems, he longs for with all his nature, in places, without disdaining suicide. But the death of the question, is this not the death of man himself, and thus, Death itself? And is this event highly valuable to traditional, cost-effective communication? The economic project is in the affirmative. But the human project in every way objects to this. For a human building, the question is the strength that this building holds together, glues together many disparate, motley names in one wording (however, far from the formula). The question is not even the way of existence of life and its “what was required to prove”, this is, perhaps, life itself, its very flesh, although it is already high-level, but still not amenable to gestures of “academic conscientiousness”. Any other project cannot be built on questions, but they are the only suitable material for a human, humanitarian building. Trying to build a person on answers means asking him, programming him - an ideal move for a technical organism. But programming a person is no longer what the words themselves indicate (or rather, the grammar of the signs), because even before they were realized in the realm of the imaginable, the person was already thrown into the strona, and something else became the object. Human programming is a classic oxymoron and, by and large, sheer nonsense. Here, the gap between the human and the technical (informational, in our case) is highlighted to a colossal scale, in which only He can cross one step. Collective of answers - there is a training of history, the material of which is a faceless, human object captured in the answers. This is the same as denying the “highest question”, and this is exactly what all production is striving for, not excluding the informatization one.
Home space. As we try to show, the modernist return (which, undoubtedly, already has a different name - culture doesn’t like to return to the past, without supplementing it at all) is a kind of sociocultural workshop that nurtures a new person whose dominants are derived dominants of the most dominant culture. The process of unlimited quantitative production improvements (and could it have ended in principle?) Sharply cut off at the “postmodern barracks” - Art Nouveau - naturally continues its path with the help of qualitative improvements, the most suitable tools of which are information and informatization - the guides of a kind of transhuman, technical “inspiration ". Therefore, it seems to us justified to emphasize the person of informatization - the person of informatization production, as a key archetype of sociocultural genesis.
And again * we turn to art - our eternal barometer - sensitively listening to its vibrations. The subject and environmental style, named according to the highest innovative standards of non-violent, independent and valuable designation - high-tech - with its unpopular, short-term, but still seductive history, highlights some of the psychic (not avoiding, moreover, notes of psychologism) human threads. Assuming, and even building his semiotics on the merger of techniques that work effectively in spaces, on the one hand, home and on the other - professional deployment, he uniformly positively, having already entered into an alliance, perceives the directive submission of one another. But the rules of the game of these two spaces often intersect only in an apparently coercive tangent: the house is the time and place of a living person, but work requires a production machine, the boundaries of which must be clearly outlined by the formula for production efficiency. What could be the danger if the requirement to be clearly indicated in the hierarchical structure of subordinates and subordinates will play an important role in a place where a person, taking off all protective masks, takes the most relaxed position, while becoming the most inattentive, dispersed and, thereby, vulnerable ? Without proper study - in essence, and a component of the mental and empirical divide between home and work spaces - this can lead to the displacement of human, family, friendly, personal, etc. relations with relations of workers, hierarchical, subordinate, relations of efficiency and efficiency.
The hi-tech style, which has not received high worldly popularity, has certain grounds for growth now, in the era of the deployment of deeply penetrating informatization, in the era of limitations for the unlimited - that of constantly striving for an artificial microcosm, not limited to simple observation. Information design, highlighting with its nobility all other types of design, here, having not yet learned selectivity, can become a powerful factor in mixing, including inappropriate, anti-historical and, in the end, dehumanistic and aggressive. Informatization, if I may say so, has not yet figured out in itself, the result of which should be, in particular, a theoretical statement of its types and subspecies. In the meantime, informatization is one for everything: for the home, and for what is outside of it.
Mistakes A program is this fixation of certain relations in terms endowed with a transparent, unambiguous meaning, devoid of any lyrics of “too human”. Ambiguity is the first and key source of errors included in the discursiveness of things in the most fundamental way. As far as Man cannot be investigated, understood (of course, by means of concepts) without taking into account the mistakes made by him - an integral part of his being - so intolerantly he writes errors into his own models of the Other, which extends beyond it, including those like him.
Informatization production, like any other (unless we slip into the spirit of being charged with “everything” formulas, with regard to the expression “human production” into reductionism), does not accept mistakes as a factor that openly threatens efficiency and, therefore, it itself "Materialized" existence. On the contrary, a man without errors cannot think fully and sincerely, not having the opportunity to break with losses and gains - with some thickening engines of inspiration and gestures of openness granted to him by the mistakes themselves. Perhaps there is nothing closer and more humane (no one, even with its transcendental “side”, makes mistakes) than errors, as there is nothing more distant and intolerant than errors.
An inextricable connection, both physical and that on the other side, between a person and errors is objectified at an existential level in the phenomenon of openness, do we mean any structure, or weave it into the flesh of the very possibility and conditions of existence (even and artificial). The “voice” of openness always sounds like the voice of freedom, giving a person a legitimized potency for highlighting his existence, bringing it to the limit in an extreme (vitally desirable and even manic) form of error (already in a different, transcendental form) - a borderline situation. The production motive is different: in the limit, expel the Error from its discourse, and then close the "black box", providing a magical, sterile function, as the highest official value.
The strategy of informatization production is as follows: to capture the object in the grasping embrace of the result, close its poetry in a final and clear utilitarian pose and finally achieve a voluptuous modernist ideal - a module (without history and context, according to P. Kozlowski), tended to endless reuse. A person and the culture created (constantly created) by him act differently, which in the eyes of the aforementioned force does not constitute anything but naivety and helplessness - to rediscover what is already known. And this does not apply to the turns of the technological spiral - here we are talking about the rediscovery of exactly the same that was already known with full confidence that sooner or later the achieved will cease to be an achievement and historically slip away.
Openness is always openness to error, and openness from error (to something imposed by this error). The voice of errors should never be silent, because this is the voice through which a person hears himself, recognizes himself and identifies himself. Openness is the Danaidov barrel - meaningless, painful work, the value of which is that it never ends, it is at home, and always will be, without danger of being stolen, torn off, without danger of being lost and, in the end, closing.
So, erecting the final thesis, let’s say: a person permanently concludes an alliance with the fact that he acquires his formal legitimation through mechanically related fallacy. Human life is life through mistakes: we grasp, fix a person, and already at the next moment we are mistaken in trying to get an idea about him. Such a psychic, or rather, existential, design delay in the framework of Man, even in terms of some kind of anthropology, is fundamentally unavoidable before he is eliminated ...
Man. In conclusion.
Human life protected by repetition is essentially unique.
J. Derrida:
“Repetition separates power, presence, life from themselves. This separation is an economical and calculating gesture of putting oneself aside in order to save oneself, saving for later and giving way to fear. ”
Repetition through a violent embrace of a word serving in the Office of the Logos.
Further, Derrida:
“The word is the corpse of psychic speech ...”
Replacing incomprehensibility - the source of fear through danger - with a fictitious softness of comprehension (opposition) is a favorite trick for all technical, and in particular, informational modernity, the second ideal of which, perhaps, advocates reuse, which clarity takes as the basis of its movement.
“Peer at a thing - your Self is reflected in it. Listen to others - you say them yourself.” Such re-discoveries and their poetization were originally born from some kind of rift (whether it is historical or anthropological), from conventionality, from some kind of mistake that treads in one place and cannot be resolved by any forward movement. Such a rediscovery is a failure in the efficiency machine, which constantly appeals to the formula “they have already talked about this” if it is not addressed to the highest turn of the spiral.
An informatization worker is the savage of the future, on the crest of the World Spirit’s intention, regressing to a certain sarcastic mythopoetics of sunset, fear, surprise - all that is not served by programmatic inversion and, possibly, degeneration. Ready-made templates and power over information are his eternal companions, who never cheat on him, in contrast to unhappy, annoyingly interrogative speech activity. He says, and in his voice echoes a digital incredulity to everything different from her, a kind of digital, binary cynicism, which, however, has yet to be in its place, pages of unconscious, ever-returning schemes.
*Cm. habr.com/en/post/452060
The researcher does not always have time to keep track of the variable superiority of cultural dominants: now he is loosening the crushed soil of the lawn, filling it with the fresh wind of the era, when it suddenly turns out that he is in the backyard, and the main action has shifted to the west. An inquisitive thought has only just begun to sort out the multilateral, abrupt, modern / postmodern relationship with the supremacy of the latter, as some of the attributes of the former return to the sociocultural scene, as if wishing, moreover, in a reckless manner, to complete self-realization through a violent psychosis of modernization, experiencing the stinging need to replace “building huts”.
A man of an information workshop, an information worker and an employee is an instrument and conductor of the information age, absorbing its ideals and ideology, releasing them from above onto the soil of the consumer flock. If magic is a complexity that cannot be explained / is already explained (it becomes inexplicable), then our world is completely riddled with magic, the hands of which are information producers. In contact with the magic machine, they are forced to absorb its “character” traits (we will not refuse it), try them on ourselves, obey the ritual requirements, which receive clear explanations and legitimacy through the machine itself and for it. These requirements are comfortably rational. But therein lies their key trick, because when combined into unity, they give rise, though technized, to magic. Without them, magic is strewn with holes through which human hands will treacherously shine through. To prevent this, obedience is introduced into the rank of the highest value, and ultimately leads to voluntary deformation and the interweaving of the rules of some areas with the rules of others. The paradigmatic steps that expand, narrow, and fill, drain, proudly act as an epochal nutrient soil for the specified mixing. The result of the process is a person who is forced to make a cultural mistake as an adequate response - to apply progressive (modernist) technologies and gestures that instrumentally serve the soulless machinery of efficiency to a living subject in his role as an existential analog seeker.
Fear. It is difficult to frighten a person of computerization production. A proud pride he meets any, even the most difficult tasks and trials. This is because he is firmly, in an eidotic spirit, aware of the existence of final solutions - demons of formal laws, logical conclusions and clear, phenomenologically solid definitions constantly whisper to him about this. He is ready for tasks of any scale: the time is already coming when he dares to program the process of communicating with the Cosmos and the Universe with the help of language (as if no one had done this before). The noble knight of Heaven and Earth, day and night, unit and zero. Nothing itself fits snugly under the arches of its recursive structure. But he did not yet become a fearless knight of freedom, because there is also something that frightens him and horrifies meaninglessness, that which is expelled from a crude idealistic digital narrative, that does not lend itself to tricks of reduction to the familiar apparatus of the unambiguous "Yes" and "No" . The name of this is Man, this machine flaw, the only important object of the blind-humanitarians, lounging in their self-invented pseudoscientific dreams.
Fear of a person does not dare to fight the all-illuminating beacon of rationality, turning into a mistake processed by pre-standardized designs that bring a soothing wind of answers and “thoughtful” ridicule as mechanisms for mastering the phenomenon. The guarantee of peace of mind and thought cannot be too expensive, even if the price itself is a mistake. A verbal web of answers that give rise to even more questions - a nonexistent trick, boring demagogy without end and edge, tiring, violent, causes an acute desire to conclude an agreement with reason, the subject of which will be that which lies on the surface itself. This is an agreement signed "End!" But this is not the real end: it seems that only now is man beginning.
Conveyor breeding information consumers, a frightened person comes out as an accompanying product, miserably hiding in the anonymous cover of the digital distance: we are closer to the world, but even further away from it than ever; Alienated from analog responsibility for ourselves, we are some reagents-diluents of an immense digital connection. This digital was bold, far from courage, however.
It is possible to speak, think, cognize a person only with the help of an unpredictable language - a living, mobile, polynomial insect - until the disgust is not fixed, not permanent, elusive, - often included in a relationship of mutual exclusion with a language sufficient to everything else. A man of information production with horror escapes from this thorny jungle, from an unfamiliar Other, naughty fool, to a territory where he is always waiting for a warm embrace of understandable schemes and algorithms, able to calmly motherly say: “Nothing and nothing are one and the same” .
Fixation. The world of the consumer of information products is the world of magic, the absolute game of faith and calculated delusions; the world of the manufacturer of information products - the world of naked units and zeros and their cynical-functionalistic joints, always appearing as they are, without the “childish whims” of transcendental motives, objective spirit or divine particles. Once and for all squeezed between the beginning and the end, the entrance and the exit, squeezed by a utilitarian digital hyperbole, these cubes, by all the rules of the game, strive for a resting position and their ideal fixation. Fixed means saved. Fixed means immersed in the security sphere, giving rise to guarantees of suppression of disruptions and crises. Fixed means being at a safe distance from surprises and redundancy. Finally, fixed means not posing a threat to either himself or others. Some kind of anti-superposition in which they do not require anything unprogrammed: neither destruction, nor creation. Fixed means sporadically sterile.
Fixation is a favorite technique of computerization production that lies at the heart of the continuous build-up of information efficiency. Unfixed by all its “human” roots, strive for loss, for its cozy hut of oblivion deep in the neural forests. It is unacceptable. Everything should be fixed: a sign, a symbol, a metaphor, a person. An uncommitted sign is a lost sign, which means it is a mistake. Unfixed thought is lost thought, which means lost resources for its production. An unrecorded person means a lost person, because the control over his sound entropy and the generic historical structure is weakening. The enduring tradition of Art Nouveau has again found a source of energy. Once again, a person is subjected to fixation violence: to be described and housed in a Bacon-utopian city, where all the streets were born under the dictate of Cogito.
But we already have the experience of insanity: a person is lost not when he is not fixed, but vice versa - a person disappears when some forces manage to capture him in an italic snapshot of a language and code constant. Fixation is the end of man, in the sense that was felt by our pathological conscience in the 20th century. This is a methodological device that in itself carries doubt, this doubt develops and weaves it into the threads of morality, due to which it continues to exist, albeit in a negative empirical manner. Taken in ethical quotation marks, it becomes the ideological foundation of the existence of algorithms, a necessary predicate of the “control point” - a classical tradition of continuous improvement of modernity, transformed into a modern twist.
A man cannot help but rebel against his imprisonment in a fixation prison (no matter what nature it encircles (degenerates): political, economic, ideological, professional, etc.), shaking its walls by means of a continuously rediscovering, verbally and symbolically expressed instrument that approved that is already known and radically deeply used - the unconscious. The clash between the humanitarian and the technical seems to be revolving again in the spiral of its history, which, in a certain light, looks like a process of training arrogant self-confidence. Developing more and more sophisticated and self-confident algorithms - a sequential series of fixations - computerization production, in moments of reassurance, some unfamiliar voluntaristic relaxation, it enters the game with centripetal unity, placing these algorithms in the human shell, taking for the ideal a "program-spirit", striving for a modernist analogy in depth. However, he still failed to hide the leash of guiding logic, even if not clear - still too clearly it gives out in itself nothing more than a psychological act of weakening an equally strong leash. A professional, high-tech illusion of choice - but no more. An archetypal, skillful trick - giving more opportunities, to grasp more tightly and to control the intoxicated creature more deeply. But this is still a narrow corridor in which the “too human” has no place. Once again, a person escapes such a resultant fixation, leaving his cultural manifestos on the walls of the corridor, which, perhaps, are still destined to take their place in the pages of history.
Answers An unanswered question is a burden that always accumulates, overwhelming a muddied mind, immanent to this mind threatening the darkened areas of the human, keeping it in constant tension, far from the postulates of a certain vital economy, which, as they say, we strive for by its very nature. The model of “obedient concepts”, in which everything unfinished, incomplete in some mode, accessible to a limited but obedient sign, is forcibly expelled from internal discourse, recognizes only the category of answers as essential and worthy of attention. Questions are only tools lacking in value. They are the means that exist for, and are always highlighted from this angle. This characteristic dynamics is a necessary restriction for the expansion of controlled freedoms and the “establishment of the language”, the expedient production of both products and people.
Informatization production determines its own professional, and at the same time, (quasi) existential dynamics through the category of answers. But no questions. The impotence of the questions is that they are demanding of internal dynamics, engaging in a rash confrontation with a vague term of explanation, contradicting and opposing within the framework of the machinery of the effectiveness of its highest value - external, economic dynamics, which leaves its mark on a person in the form of analysis of feelings of alienation. Answers are a measure and gesture of calming, stopping and ending.
But what is the question, if you try to go beyond the latinisms of quaestio and problema? We see that the question is the engine, the core of the dynamization of the human spirit, the metaphor of which is condensed in the harness of horses (even if it is running wildly from the hail burning in flames), the primacy of which is freedom in action (in a pagan spirit). Getting the answer, the question approaches its legitimate death, which is constantly pursuing it, which, at times, it seems, he longs for with all his nature, in places, without disdaining suicide. But the death of the question, is this not the death of man himself, and thus, Death itself? And is this event highly valuable to traditional, cost-effective communication? The economic project is in the affirmative. But the human project in every way objects to this. For a human building, the question is the strength that this building holds together, glues together many disparate, motley names in one wording (however, far from the formula). The question is not even the way of existence of life and its “what was required to prove”, this is, perhaps, life itself, its very flesh, although it is already high-level, but still not amenable to gestures of “academic conscientiousness”. Any other project cannot be built on questions, but they are the only suitable material for a human, humanitarian building. Trying to build a person on answers means asking him, programming him - an ideal move for a technical organism. But programming a person is no longer what the words themselves indicate (or rather, the grammar of the signs), because even before they were realized in the realm of the imaginable, the person was already thrown into the strona, and something else became the object. Human programming is a classic oxymoron and, by and large, sheer nonsense. Here, the gap between the human and the technical (informational, in our case) is highlighted to a colossal scale, in which only He can cross one step. Collective of answers - there is a training of history, the material of which is a faceless, human object captured in the answers. This is the same as denying the “highest question”, and this is exactly what all production is striving for, not excluding the informatization one.
Home space. As we try to show, the modernist return (which, undoubtedly, already has a different name - culture doesn’t like to return to the past, without supplementing it at all) is a kind of sociocultural workshop that nurtures a new person whose dominants are derived dominants of the most dominant culture. The process of unlimited quantitative production improvements (and could it have ended in principle?) Sharply cut off at the “postmodern barracks” - Art Nouveau - naturally continues its path with the help of qualitative improvements, the most suitable tools of which are information and informatization - the guides of a kind of transhuman, technical “inspiration ". Therefore, it seems to us justified to emphasize the person of informatization - the person of informatization production, as a key archetype of sociocultural genesis.
And again * we turn to art - our eternal barometer - sensitively listening to its vibrations. The subject and environmental style, named according to the highest innovative standards of non-violent, independent and valuable designation - high-tech - with its unpopular, short-term, but still seductive history, highlights some of the psychic (not avoiding, moreover, notes of psychologism) human threads. Assuming, and even building his semiotics on the merger of techniques that work effectively in spaces, on the one hand, home and on the other - professional deployment, he uniformly positively, having already entered into an alliance, perceives the directive submission of one another. But the rules of the game of these two spaces often intersect only in an apparently coercive tangent: the house is the time and place of a living person, but work requires a production machine, the boundaries of which must be clearly outlined by the formula for production efficiency. What could be the danger if the requirement to be clearly indicated in the hierarchical structure of subordinates and subordinates will play an important role in a place where a person, taking off all protective masks, takes the most relaxed position, while becoming the most inattentive, dispersed and, thereby, vulnerable ? Without proper study - in essence, and a component of the mental and empirical divide between home and work spaces - this can lead to the displacement of human, family, friendly, personal, etc. relations with relations of workers, hierarchical, subordinate, relations of efficiency and efficiency.
The hi-tech style, which has not received high worldly popularity, has certain grounds for growth now, in the era of the deployment of deeply penetrating informatization, in the era of limitations for the unlimited - that of constantly striving for an artificial microcosm, not limited to simple observation. Information design, highlighting with its nobility all other types of design, here, having not yet learned selectivity, can become a powerful factor in mixing, including inappropriate, anti-historical and, in the end, dehumanistic and aggressive. Informatization, if I may say so, has not yet figured out in itself, the result of which should be, in particular, a theoretical statement of its types and subspecies. In the meantime, informatization is one for everything: for the home, and for what is outside of it.
Mistakes A program is this fixation of certain relations in terms endowed with a transparent, unambiguous meaning, devoid of any lyrics of “too human”. Ambiguity is the first and key source of errors included in the discursiveness of things in the most fundamental way. As far as Man cannot be investigated, understood (of course, by means of concepts) without taking into account the mistakes made by him - an integral part of his being - so intolerantly he writes errors into his own models of the Other, which extends beyond it, including those like him.
Informatization production, like any other (unless we slip into the spirit of being charged with “everything” formulas, with regard to the expression “human production” into reductionism), does not accept mistakes as a factor that openly threatens efficiency and, therefore, it itself "Materialized" existence. On the contrary, a man without errors cannot think fully and sincerely, not having the opportunity to break with losses and gains - with some thickening engines of inspiration and gestures of openness granted to him by the mistakes themselves. Perhaps there is nothing closer and more humane (no one, even with its transcendental “side”, makes mistakes) than errors, as there is nothing more distant and intolerant than errors.
An inextricable connection, both physical and that on the other side, between a person and errors is objectified at an existential level in the phenomenon of openness, do we mean any structure, or weave it into the flesh of the very possibility and conditions of existence (even and artificial). The “voice” of openness always sounds like the voice of freedom, giving a person a legitimized potency for highlighting his existence, bringing it to the limit in an extreme (vitally desirable and even manic) form of error (already in a different, transcendental form) - a borderline situation. The production motive is different: in the limit, expel the Error from its discourse, and then close the "black box", providing a magical, sterile function, as the highest official value.
The strategy of informatization production is as follows: to capture the object in the grasping embrace of the result, close its poetry in a final and clear utilitarian pose and finally achieve a voluptuous modernist ideal - a module (without history and context, according to P. Kozlowski), tended to endless reuse. A person and the culture created (constantly created) by him act differently, which in the eyes of the aforementioned force does not constitute anything but naivety and helplessness - to rediscover what is already known. And this does not apply to the turns of the technological spiral - here we are talking about the rediscovery of exactly the same that was already known with full confidence that sooner or later the achieved will cease to be an achievement and historically slip away.
Openness is always openness to error, and openness from error (to something imposed by this error). The voice of errors should never be silent, because this is the voice through which a person hears himself, recognizes himself and identifies himself. Openness is the Danaidov barrel - meaningless, painful work, the value of which is that it never ends, it is at home, and always will be, without danger of being stolen, torn off, without danger of being lost and, in the end, closing.
So, erecting the final thesis, let’s say: a person permanently concludes an alliance with the fact that he acquires his formal legitimation through mechanically related fallacy. Human life is life through mistakes: we grasp, fix a person, and already at the next moment we are mistaken in trying to get an idea about him. Such a psychic, or rather, existential, design delay in the framework of Man, even in terms of some kind of anthropology, is fundamentally unavoidable before he is eliminated ...
Man. In conclusion.
Human life protected by repetition is essentially unique.
J. Derrida:
“Repetition separates power, presence, life from themselves. This separation is an economical and calculating gesture of putting oneself aside in order to save oneself, saving for later and giving way to fear. ”
Repetition through a violent embrace of a word serving in the Office of the Logos.
Further, Derrida:
“The word is the corpse of psychic speech ...”
Replacing incomprehensibility - the source of fear through danger - with a fictitious softness of comprehension (opposition) is a favorite trick for all technical, and in particular, informational modernity, the second ideal of which, perhaps, advocates reuse, which clarity takes as the basis of its movement.
“Peer at a thing - your Self is reflected in it. Listen to others - you say them yourself.” Such re-discoveries and their poetization were originally born from some kind of rift (whether it is historical or anthropological), from conventionality, from some kind of mistake that treads in one place and cannot be resolved by any forward movement. Such a rediscovery is a failure in the efficiency machine, which constantly appeals to the formula “they have already talked about this” if it is not addressed to the highest turn of the spiral.
An informatization worker is the savage of the future, on the crest of the World Spirit’s intention, regressing to a certain sarcastic mythopoetics of sunset, fear, surprise - all that is not served by programmatic inversion and, possibly, degeneration. Ready-made templates and power over information are his eternal companions, who never cheat on him, in contrast to unhappy, annoyingly interrogative speech activity. He says, and in his voice echoes a digital incredulity to everything different from her, a kind of digital, binary cynicism, which, however, has yet to be in its place, pages of unconscious, ever-returning schemes.
*Cm. habr.com/en/post/452060
All Articles