P harmakon is the Greek word for cure, but also poison.
in Bernard Stiegler's book " of the biopolitics of psycho power " We encounter this from Plato borrowed and Derrida's concept changed again and again.
The drug is, according to Stiegler also the reason that capitalism is still somewhat to function: It has its place, this substance not only in pharmacies, but also and especially in the media, advertising, especially on television.
The drug denotes everything that can restrict the attention and people to draw a certain direction. The drug is a metaphor above all for a very broad entertainment industry, which emerged in the book only gradually. Broad, because it also includes different things such as television and heroin. It is the grease from the gears to request units: Everything that acts on the engine of the economy, people can be counted to above all, of course, the modern marketing tools.
order the term "pharmaceutical agent" circling, Ziegler is a present diagnosis, linked to a philosophically sophisticated, the time of the ADHD and the crisis in financial markets. is against the book in itself no objection: But his juggling is a very pronounced philosophical jargon, unnecessary for the topic basically.
The point is to find a way to promote emancipation through education, without ending up in forming the training and it fails to put in the service of the consumer society. And it's also about awareness through reading and Write to recover, and thus again be able to adapt to long-term goals. And of course this - well-known - to throw the TV out the window.
But are these claims under a thick layer of hidden philosophical considerations which do not contribute much to the point - you move within a fairly closed academic discourse, what the issue is really a pity. That seems to be a false or at least bad strategy.
Such were some of the first chapter, in which he attempts to illustrate how Foucault its failure to come from the bio-politics to the psycho power, quite negligible. Ultimately, it comes with a concern for oneself but also again to Foucault back to the Greeks ajar terms.
As mentioned in the introduction, the term is ambiguous: A book (Plato drug) can help to understand himself or his environment better, or it may lead to the wrong path and blind. But what would be positive? Anything that undermines the short attention spans, which are taught us and do everything that a custody order, which then reinforces a concern for the "we" leads.
This involves a return to the late Foucault and the Greek polis, but this time in relation to the neurological research: Stiegler mixes and thus a theoretically sophisticated cocktail of Schirrmacher's concern for the brain and Sloterdijk imperatives, which leads to a demand for a Noopolitik, a policy which are devoted mainly to the promotion of intellectual knowledge. Noopolitik The decision does not finally more to the "left" or "right", but for those who do not care and those who have concerns.
in Bernard Stiegler's book " of the biopolitics of psycho power " We encounter this from Plato borrowed and Derrida's concept changed again and again.
The drug is, according to Stiegler also the reason that capitalism is still somewhat to function: It has its place, this substance not only in pharmacies, but also and especially in the media, advertising, especially on television.
The drug denotes everything that can restrict the attention and people to draw a certain direction. The drug is a metaphor above all for a very broad entertainment industry, which emerged in the book only gradually. Broad, because it also includes different things such as television and heroin. It is the grease from the gears to request units: Everything that acts on the engine of the economy, people can be counted to above all, of course, the modern marketing tools.
order the term "pharmaceutical agent" circling, Ziegler is a present diagnosis, linked to a philosophically sophisticated, the time of the ADHD and the crisis in financial markets. is against the book in itself no objection: But his juggling is a very pronounced philosophical jargon, unnecessary for the topic basically.
The point is to find a way to promote emancipation through education, without ending up in forming the training and it fails to put in the service of the consumer society. And it's also about awareness through reading and Write to recover, and thus again be able to adapt to long-term goals. And of course this - well-known - to throw the TV out the window.
But are these claims under a thick layer of hidden philosophical considerations which do not contribute much to the point - you move within a fairly closed academic discourse, what the issue is really a pity. That seems to be a false or at least bad strategy.
Such were some of the first chapter, in which he attempts to illustrate how Foucault its failure to come from the bio-politics to the psycho power, quite negligible. Ultimately, it comes with a concern for oneself but also again to Foucault back to the Greeks ajar terms.
As mentioned in the introduction, the term is ambiguous: A book (Plato drug) can help to understand himself or his environment better, or it may lead to the wrong path and blind. But what would be positive? Anything that undermines the short attention spans, which are taught us and do everything that a custody order, which then reinforces a concern for the "we" leads.
This involves a return to the late Foucault and the Greek polis, but this time in relation to the neurological research: Stiegler mixes and thus a theoretically sophisticated cocktail of Schirrmacher's concern for the brain and Sloterdijk imperatives, which leads to a demand for a Noopolitik, a policy which are devoted mainly to the promotion of intellectual knowledge. Noopolitik The decision does not finally more to the "left" or "right", but for those who do not care and those who have concerns.
astonishing and yet seems almost a little ridiculous even then, that at the end Stiegler can be seen in figures such as Al Gore and Nicolas Sarkozy, the champion against indifference. And so basically the preceding 170 pages ad absurdum, it is here but not just for the torch bearers of knowledge and enlightenment.
Too bad I would have expected more - especially because the issue was in itself much too important to let it gather dust in the university.
0 comments:
Post a Comment