Cuatro Categorias Discursivas

El discurso es vulnerable a la manipulación en la medida que posee autoconsistencia y bien delimitada existencia. Esto le permite, de forma simultánea, una unidad ontológica, una preditcibilidad de uso y una libertad para insertarse en múltiples gramaticas de uso. Es como un martillo. La existencia efectiva de un martillo es impredecible en tanto hace parte de un entorno impredecible, sin embargo su autoconsistencia y nítida delimitación hace que su existencia abstracta se presente como arma efectiva. Si bien esta vulnerabilidad lo hace potencialmente apolítico, igualmente le confiere una cualidad de objetividad, es esta la objetividad de la técnica. Si deseamos blindar, asegurar el contenido político del discurso abstracto, hacerlo inmune a la manipulación, debemos atacar alguna de estas características. Al atacar la autoconsistencia, se diluye la unidad ontológica del discurso, nos quedamos con una colección esquizofrénica de elementos cuya existencia efectiva esta sujeta a la tradición pura. Si decidimos atacar la nítida delimitación del discurso abstracto, tenemos dos estrategias a seguir: i) atacar la finitud del objeto del discurso, lo que conlleva al discurso cosmológico, y ii) atacar la nitidez de la delimitación, lo que nos lleva a los discursos ó teorías abiertas. Estas 4 cualidades potenciales del discurso se constituyen en elementos de análisis. Los discursos, al presentar en mayor o menor grado una combinación de estas cualidades, determinan su función y devenir social.

Socio-cognición

Cuando me veo como otro, no soy yo.

La ausencia de coordinación entre la conjugación del sujeto que escribe, la conjugación del sujeto escrito y la conjugacion del sujeto que lee es la causa de las dualidades cognitivas. Esta ausencia es absoluta en cuanto no existen referentes lingüísticos absolutos que permiten la coordinación entre emisor y receptor.

Todo lo útil se reinventa, así pues no me canso de reflexiones pos-estructuralistas. Los dejo con este fragmento de un pionero:

...language refers to the position of the listener and the speaker, that is, to the contingency of their story. To seize by inventory all the contexts of language and all possible positions of interlocutors is a senseless task. Every verbal signification lies at the confluence of countless semantic rivers. Experience, like language, no longer seems to be made of isolated elements lodged somehow in a Euclidean space... [Words] signify from the "world" and from the position of one who is looking.

Lévinas, Signification and Sense, Humanism of the Other, tr. Nidra Poller

Illustration by Marcel Duchamp

On Marx discourse: two readings...

Marx in his earlier writings (see Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844) sees the coming of a postcapitalist socialist society as a result of the consciousness of the alienation imposed by the capitalist society to the proletariat class. This alienation is based on the lack of ‘humanist sense’, seen by Marx, as the lack of control over the means of production. One may argue that the control over the means of production elevated to the universal category of a ‘humanist sense’ is an essentialist view; therefore, critics on essentialism of the human condition may deconstruct the critic of capitalist economy based on alienation. In fact, from a materialistic point of view, alienation may be seen as a critic coming from a past system of values developed in earlier stages of society in contrast with a new socio-economic order. Nevertheless, the essentialist posture has one more ace under the hand: every change made by human will, is understood, and sometimes even originated by an essentialist conception of man. Therefore, human will as a historical tool is tied, in practice, by essentialist postures. Criticism on Marxist alienation based on criticism over essentialism would lead to the confrontation of the historical power of human will, as formulated by humanist philosophy, against the historical extension of structural social evolution.

The humanist and therefore idealistic philosophical nature of alienation as a critic of capitalism was probably the reason why Marx abandoned this point of view for a more structural critic of capitalism (see Capital) replacing it by the intensification of class struggle as a result of the growing ‘exploitation of the proletariat’. It is worth noting that, while the first argument, based on alienation, is more attractive to well remunerated workers, which in modern capitalistic societies comes to be a large piece of the population. The latter argument, exploitation, is attractive to the lower class workers in conditions of exploitation, characteristic of earlier capitalistic societies. Therefore, alienation is an attractive motive and argument in ‘developed countries’ where large pieces of the population has specialised and well remunerated labour, while ‘exploitation’ is the case for developing countries where labour conditions get closer to the earlier stages of capitalism.

001

Aquí adentro solo existen los genios, ellos son los mortales, aquellos que tienen el privilegio de la muerte. Lo otro es lo anónimo, lo inmortal; la tierra de labranza de los genios. Recuerdo cuando tenía nombre, fué antes de aprender la palabra de los dioses, cuando el tiempo eran gotas de sangre. Me dejé seducir por la inmortalidad, por el poder sobrenatural de sus palabras. Ellos nunca conocieron mi nombre, nunca les interesó, solo deseaban mis átomos. Ahora busco mi nombre, pero solo encuentro letras desordenadas.

A criticism of Marxism

"it is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence that determines their consciousness." (Marx, in the Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.)
Hence, universality of consciousness concerns to what is universal in the social existence.

The purpose is to specify what Marx means by "social existence" in a synthetic way. In particular seeing it as a "measure" of a more general 'social existence' of men and this last concept, at the same time, seen as a particular 'existence' for men, which may have 'existences' other than social. Finally, not just for men but for a more general category: CAS.

'Objective' is an agents universal distinction over the context being used. Example: "some say love is luck, others say is not". In the latter statement 'love' as a feeling condition, constitutes the object regarding to the agents 'some' and 'others' (which themselves constitutes objects under some existence condition regarding to the receptor of the statement), while in the statement: "some say love exists others don't", 'love' as a feeling condition don't constitute an object because there is no consensus regarding it's existence as a feeling condition. Of course we have assumed in the interpretation of the last two statements that 'some' and 'others' are referring to 'love' as a feeling condition, in case of the last statement, of arguable existence. Note that in the second statement, 'love' as a semantic condition constitutes an object. But even as a semantic condition we can find a no semantical object, as is the case in the statement: "some say kapush is a word others don't".
In order to address a 'distinction' in a given set of agents, from a sociocognitive dynamics, there must be a condition of existence to which this 'something' constitutes an object (within the set of agents). In 'kapush', if we assume it as an oral utterance, the 'object condition' has to be traced down up to a phonetic consensus, assuming both distinguishes uniquely the oral utterance: kapush!. Interesting questions depart from above; what other existence conditions can we find in the social use? what are the relations between the diverse existence conditions (developing useful schemes)?
'Subjective' is an agent dependent distinction over the context being used. From a sociocognitive dynamics, the existence of an 'object' (of at least one existence condition) precedes that of a 'subjective' distinction.
As opposed to 'objects', 'interpretation' refers to agent dependent increasing distinctions over objects.
If we read carefully the definition of 'objective' we will notice we defined 'objective' using the concept of 'distinction'. At the same time in the next paragraph we state that from a sociognitive dynamics, 'objectivness' precedes 'distinction'. This is the kind of paradoxes which arises in communication theory where one has to use communication to talk about communication. Interestingly, this is a problem you also find in cosmology, in the roots of the 'anthropic principle'. Looking closely to the paradox as found it in our disscusion of 'objects' and 'distinctions', we find that actually when we said 'objects' are precede by 'distinctions' this is an analytical precedence: a definition, an the opposed precedence is a dynamical relation: sociognitive dynamics. Es dificil no pensar en 'Ouroborus' como símbolo de esta paradoja, sin embargo, creo que una mejor analogía es la de pensar en la instancia de un lenguaje, topológicamente igual a un círculo y tal que analíticamente se lee en una dirección y dinámicamente en la dirección opuesta. Más aún, si pensamos en que el pensamiento analítico es en sí un fenómeno dinámico, podemos resolver esta nueva contradicción, distinguiendo la representación de los espacios físicos en que transcurre el pensamiento analítico y en que transcurre la dinámica social o física ah! e aquí de nuevo la paradoja, nos enfrentamos realmente Ouroborus!.

Existence concerns to all the different categorizations of experience for a CAS: Synchronic and diachronic experience. The first one, enforced by repetition and leading to time independent reality schemes; a static interpretation of objects. The second one, enforced by unpredictability leading to a historical or singular interpretation of objects. In order to have an equivalence between the concepts of time and space in replace of synchronic and diachronic we will talk of globally temporal and locally temporal. Analogously we may introduce the concepts of globally spatial and locally spatial. Given the cognitive nature of our subject of study, is important to clarify that whenever we speak about time or space in this context, actually what we mean by that is CAS time as for example anthropological time, and CAS space, meaning a CAS context or surrounding. The concept of local time as origin of singular interpretations doesn't has much sense if is not attached to the concept of local space. Because is precisely the notion of local time what allows, in a dynamic sense, the existence of local time as a social experience. Therefore we speak of spatiotemporal locality.

After all this we can state an hypotesis about the latter citation from Marx: he refers to 'social existence' as a globally temporal experience, which lead us to the conclusion that, either he underestimate or doesn't considers local spatiotemporal experiences as origins of consciousness on men.

Signos de vida...

Tratando de revivir el blog -si es que alguna vez estuvo vivo.
El problema es que nada de lo que tengo escrito quiero ponerlo aquí. Si es no es técnico, si apela al sentimiento no lo pongo porque... bueno, he secuestrado mis sentimientos escritos y quiero que me pagen, de una u otra forma, por liberarlos. Y si son técnicos... bueno ya me di cuenta de que mis escritos "técnicos" solo los entiende el autor -no precisamente un buen indicio... Se me ha ocurrido poner esta lista de peliculas que recomiendo para ver (el orden no refleja nada):

- Basquiat (la película)
- Rushmore, por Wes Anderson
- Oleanna, por David Mamet
- Ninyinski, por Paul Cox
- Election Day (comedia americana)
- Box of moonlight
- Minnie y Moskowfiz

Bueno eso es todo por ahora.

El Sujeto como Objeto

La deconstrucción del animismo, y en particular del sujeto como hipótesis epistemológica fue probablemente la herencia intelectual más importante del siglo XX en el campo humanista. La deconstrucción del sujeto se realizó bajo un programa más amplio; la crítica de la hipotesis metafísica en el discurso intelectual. Sin embargo a finales del siglo XX y comienzos del nuevo siglo el movimiento postmodernista imprime un aire renovado a la hipotesis del sujeto, ya no como consecuencia de un planteamiento metafísico, pero como objeto histórico; objeto provisto de memoria.