Our last seminary: Heidegger and the Question Concerning Technology (and others)

Yesterday we held the seminary we announced about Martin Heidegger. It is possible it would be one

of the last readings we make this course because we have to focus on our papers and congress (next post will be about some very good news we have about it!). 

By the way, the last read we will make is about Giorgio Agamben (we will post it soon). 

For this session, we read "The Question Concerning Technology", "Science and Meditation" and "The thing". Here the seminary about Heidegger with the most interesting comments:

Heidegger introduces the difference between the ontic and the ontological (being): between the object and its essence. The true essence of each object is different from the object itself.

Essence of technology -> to become the world existences: What makes the technique is to convert everything that exists in the world in existences. Existences in Spanish means the existence of something, but also the amount of one thing we have stored (stock).

What is relevant is whether, originally, the title was "the question of technique" or "the question after the technique." (In English is the Question Concerning Technology, but in Spanish is more complex to understand this preposition).

At the end of the text, the technique can be a hazard if it becomes all in existences (including ourselves and if we don't make anymore questions), but we can also save us. The questions are necessary because if we fall into the trap that we can control the world and we know everything, we are abandoning our possibility of freedom, and freedom is the existential condition of life itself. Freedom is achieved precisely asking the questions because them give us the possibility to question how things are.

Freedom is the right question for the unveiling. We are free when we asked for the essence of things, not its ontological being. The thingness of the thing is co-link, to join (the pitcher joins the cuaternity itself, as connections heaven and earth, technical and object, etc).

The thingness of the thing is coligar, join (the jar joins the cuaternidad itself, as connections between heaven and earth, technics and object, etc). Interest in the concept of obstancy. This way of being present for the Romans is called obstancy.

About the sentence "The essence of science is that it is the theory of the real" (p. 34):

-Science: Contemporary Science, embedded from poetry and classical Greek art.

-Real: in Greece: The real fills the region of the effective, that which works. Work means doing (by man or nature), but also bring (a presence) and pro-duce. Reality therefore is what brings-there-front (dassein); the reality, that brought-there-before, in un-hidden and remains unconcealed. Later in Rome, the real becomes result (that is, that which precedes a cause that caused this result is reality) that follows from an act: real is what has been achieved (p. 36). It this way, the real is true, sure, what we take for granted; apparently as mere opposition or mere opinion (but still present in some different way than in Greece. This way of being present for the Romans call obstancia).

-Theory: in Greece, to watch the aspect under which the present appears. Through this vision, to stay fit him watching (p. 37), is the respectful attention to the state of unconcealment of the present, the "the look that selther the truth ". In Modernity: It comes from Rome with contemplatio: separate, divide. The theory is an elaboration of the real; but also prevail however what the presence (as theory Science, provokes the real itself in view of its obstancia). It is a represent that makes sure everything real in your prosecutable obstancy (represent = to keep this in any particular way and no other). Therefore, modern science as a theory of reality, it is not obvious.

Gestell in Heidegger structure site, but now is translated as disposition, the same translation of "agencement" in Deleuze. In Bourdieu so does the habit, which is also a translation available. It is what makes the bring-there-before (brought from far away).

The essence is not infinite, is the en-durance (the recurring endure), which remains when we reveal the essence. Each essence reveals something of the hidden. For example, today, what reveals a PC or a Mac? Heidegger focuses on objects that have a very long duration in history (a pitcher, art ...) but not in recent-creation objects.

In Heidegger, we are caught in classical ontology, he tries to break it but he still stayy within it because his question is the classic question of being. However, in other philosophers focus on the becoming or the difference left the classical ontology. In Heidegger, there is always an essence that remains (in the first computer, in a normallaptop and in a brand-new mac. The Rhine river does not change by putting a dam or a mill. Deleuze says that what we call essence is changing, the eternal return never brings to the same (in the line of Heraclitus). The Rhine river changes by putting a dam or a mill.

Photo Credit: Alex Brown

Grants time!

Spring is (almost in Spain) the data where grants, funds and other kind of funding are opened by severals both public and private institutions. In this sense, POBICS are applying to some of this grants and we want to show what are them in order to you could apply when the call would open:

-FPU 2015: This grant is a predoctoral grant and is addressed to young researchers (not groups). It has two phases: one with your average score in your grade studies; and another one with the achievements of your research group, your senior lecturer (your director) and again your average score and CV (publications, conferences, books, etc.). One of our doctoral students has applied recently although last year it was denied. If someone achieve this grant, it is possible to make a stay in other country with other researchers.

-FPI: This grant is a kind of funding for a research group in order to develop a project. In this case, you have to apply with the whole achievements of the research group (the "IP" leader researcher; but also other researchers), and it is so important the quality and the novelty of the project. Sometimes, this grants have a pre-doctoral grant linked (very similar to the FPU) as a part of the budget. We are applying with some buddies of veterinary as collaborators (and not as leader researchers). POBICS, with Co-DIS, has a three years FPI grant from 2015 as leader researchers.

- European Union grants: Very similar to the FPI grants, in this case is most difficult to achieve this grants, but the budget is quite better. You need some "partners" of other countries on the European Union, and so, each partner has a particular role and research to carry out (i.e. compare results between countries, gather any particular kind of datas, etc.).

-Private grants: There are several calls, like "Fundación La Caixa", that works as a private FPU, with more funding; BBVA grants, addressed to research groups in a very concrete areas of knowledge (arts and humanities, biomedicine, economics...).

Photo Credit: Money on a bed of cash

Next POBICS seminary: Martin Heiddeger & techné

Hi everyone! 

POBICS is here again and in this ocassion we want to announce our next seminary. It will take place on April 26th at 12:30 in the Martín-Baró's room (Psychology Faculty, UAB, Barcelona). Keep in mind this date is next week, and not the present one. This is because this week we have to plan and manage the whole of papers we have sent to congress and journals. 

Furthermore, we are still analyzing the focus group we made at the biginning of this year, and this task is quite slow (anyone needs enough time in order to listen, write and link ideas about the people who are talking along 90 minutes). For this reason, we apologize for not hold a open meeting this week.

If you are interested in the Heidegger seminary, remember it is open and free. We will read three chapters of the book "Coferencias y Artículos": 1) "La Pregunta por la Técnica"; 2) "La Cosa" and 3) "Ciencia y Meditación".

(This chapters are a compilation of different conferences and brief articles that Heidegger wrote).

Photo Credit: Nadya Peek

1st day of Co-Dis & POBICS Workshop

Last monday and tuesday POBICS took part in a workshop with the other team of TECSAL, Co-Dis (lead by the Senior lecturer Miquel Domènech), where all of us participated reading and discuting some differents ideas and points of view about machines, humans, objects, actors and other very interesting concepts related with the Actor-Network Theory. The workshop had a duration of two days and now we want to reflect some ideas about the first day: Simondon, magic and automaton.

The machines have always had a fascination on the human hand (since before the Renaissance automata). In addition, there has always been a need to emulate the human with these devices. Simondon wonders about the primitive magical way, which has to do with the symbolic process of separating and uniting. With the idea of ​​evolution on his time, he discusses the historicity of magic-religion-science. Recompose in magic: the constitutive act of magic is not evolutionary, but have to see what question involves the "how" (How to rebuild what has been broken by magic and technicality?). 

Simondon will tour with the transverse axis of the break & (re) composition and the magical in three times: 

1) Industrial Revolution.

2) Information and cibernetics.

3) This, by the exercise of recomposition of the human by the machine, it is central. The improvement of the tools is a pusher act art. Man feels more powerful when the tool is renewed, because in that act the man feels that fulfills its role more effectively (modernist period, the environmental crisis, social ... with postmodernism). 

In mediation it is when a set of points that are pooled and allow to allow to a first major technical distinction appear: the background / shape difference. The man-machine undistintion (any point is plausible to be in the magical point calculation, every point can be singularity (seminar last week), whether man or machine). Not a tabula rasa, but precisely as an invitation to make the first mark (first mark there ??) ((dice roll in Deleuze)). Simondon makes a privilege of the organization (with a nod to cyber / information): a set of points are privileged to the extent they are organized in a certain way. 

In this vein, if we call technical / machine or man, it is because the magic act has chosen one and has "subjectivized". 

Aesthetics is the recomposition capacity and therefore is able to "breathe" extra energy that is magical. The idea of ​​"breaking" man / half, What is broken? How it breaks? are questions that come after. That game breaking religiously How to create autooorganización / life without resorting to a total principle (God)? At first he uses figures such as the Golem (being linking, blanket and defends the Jewish people from a sequence of letters and clay) or Pygmalion. So the magical act is recomposed at this time and re-use it. In Spain it's the same: in the first experiments in psychology experiments start with magic, esoteric (soul, suggestion); wondering Where does magic come from? 

To Anthropology, to know you have to believe (any knowledge is based on a belief / I assume it, that is the same as believing). But I could be wrong, so I could not call knowledge.

The separation of the magic that is not going in the direction of Religion (I think so because, without foundations), but in the direction of the technical mediation. in improvable, in the possibility that it is known. Mediation not only separates, also recomposed. Recomposition league affectivity, a commitment and a will to that union. This binds us closer to the "warm" as they speak only mediation, mediation and mediation as a process of restructuring would be too "Frankenstein". 

We can make a historicity 1) of the elements, their perfection or 2) under the grouping of these elements into clusters as goldsmiths, then the industrial space. To explain the role of the affective (most "warm"), it has not been evacuated, but what has been evacuated is the playfulness that before did exist in the function of the machine (today an automaton of a duck inside to see the digestive system as described by Alfredo Aracil, it does not generate playful affection, but rather affections related reproduce nature, the macabre, the Frankenstein, etc) 

Photo Credit: kay

On the Government of the Living part I. Last seminary by POBICS

Yesterday, in POBICS we held a new seminary. In this case, as we have noticed last week, we read the last book published in Spanish written by Foucault: "Del Gobierno de los Vivos" (On the Government of the Living in English). In this post, we will offer some thoughts, notes and comments about the first part of the book (the second part will take place next wednesday, at 11:00 on Social Psychology Faculty of the UAB, Barcelona. Open and free for you!)

Here the comments:

Government truth = governmentality.

Idea of ​​aleturgia = reflection incorporated about the truth in the notion of ritual. The truth is not only a matter of knowledge, but also it must be complemented by other elements: the ritual of truth.

The proposal of truth is in the complete work of Foucault, and it was very important, but Deleuze not collected it in his course about Foucault.

The truth today has to do with knowledge neither with the ritual of the procedure to reach the truth. Here, there is an epistemic change: now the ritual is assumed to reach the objective knowledge.

The discovery as a way to find the truth in Oedipus, is an interweaving of medicine and law. It is a judicially aleturgia with an a medical (p. 78)

The question of power through demonstrations of the subject for the truth. Deleuze will question us: How subjects are created?

Foucault, here: How really regimes (not true  itself) of true  are created ?, that is, the types of relationships that link the manifestations of truth with its procedures (how they work); and subjects that are its operators, his witnesses and eventually his subjects. The person is not only the subject of truth, but also their witness and their operators (truth not only create subjects, but also has other roles). Normally the emphais is put on the paper that Foucault gives to subjectivity; but what he really wants to do is a story of the power of truth: how truth becomes something that has power, the power of truth. The main mechanism by which the truth is maintained and operates is subjectivity.

Are there truth processes without subjectivity?

 In Christianity, so to speak, we use the truth. In Oedipus (an older historical formation), I do not need to understand the truth (it is owned by the gods who are those who have the truth). Act of truth: the part that touches the subject in aleturgia processes, defined by the role of the subject as a spectator, as operator and as object.

 From Christianity, and especially from the liberalism version of the XX Century, the object of the persnon in the act of truth is more dominant than the other two (witness and subject). It is possible a new truth or way to present the truth in our work? It would not have to do with the classical risk calculation, but it is focuses on the present. We do a role-playing and present a hypothetical future, projected into the future (what we called scenarios).

 And what now...? Are scenario concept out of phase? We want to propose the ecologies of security.

Photo Credit: Stefan Perneborg

New interesting post-graduate course on UAB: One Health

Next course, the faculty of Veterinary of our university, the Autonomous University of Barcelona will begin a new master called: "Official Master's Degree in Zoonoses and One Health". This master is lead by our colleagues we are currently collaborating in some projects like focus groups o a possible joint-project.

You can acces to the master's webpage here. In this page you will find how to apply to the admission, what is about it (content, teaching staff, etc), grants and a lot of more things. We leave a little sample from the official page:

The Master's Degree in Zoonosis and One Health is a professionally oriented programme that responds to a need for professionals with a well-rounded, multidisciplinary training encompassing human, animal and environmental health, who can work effectively and collaboratively on the prevention, control, management and communication of biological hazards and threats. This is the concept behind the new term "One Health". It means seeking to defend and improve the health and welfare of all species (humans, animals and plants) through greater cooperation between professionals working in public health, animal health and environmental health, and so to promote a multidisciplinary approach to health risk at the interface between humans, animals and the ecosystem.
 
The University Master's degree in Zoonosis and One Health will serve to train up highly qualified professionals to work in both the public and the private sector, with a multidisciplinary vision of One Health, in line with the requirements of the major international health bodies, like the World Health Organisation (WHO), the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). It is the first official master's degree in One Health in the whole of the Mediterranean area.

For anyone that does not know anything about One Health, it is a concept related with the creation of a unique-single health, composed by animal, human, public and any other kind of health. In this vein, borders between species, disciplines or realms of knowledge are proposed to be broken.

From wikipedia: "One Health has been defined as "the collaborative effort of multiple disciplines — working locally, nationally, and globally — to attain optimal health for people, animals and the environment"

Photo Credit: Syed Asad Ali

Andrés G. Seguel Seminary: and anthropological view of 2009 H1N1 pandemics

As we announced in our webpage, this week took place the seminary by one of our recurrent Andrés G. Seguel, recently came from Chile. In this ocassion, Andrés has tell us some ideas about his current work and thinkings: influenza, subjectivity, and the emergence of singularities. 

colleagues,

Here our report:

Andres beguns with our famous reading about the work of Deleuze by Foucault (you can read more about it here and here) about the relationship between knowledge and power (and also subjectivity). He came this theories to the symbol/sign relationship, and also wanted to split the substrate from the object (ANT and Foucault never achieved this). How he does that? With the "fold" concept: in a fold, we have captures that allows that some particular object enacts as it is (and not as anyother is), but this enactment is never definitive, but temporal and made from a joint of points.

A singularity is a "indent" in that fold. But, how emerges this singularity? between the relationship and the tension between the different points. The "logoi" concepts allows us to explain it: a logoi is a place where a logic is represented by his tension. When this tension is stabilized, we find a temporal object.

This is related with the subjectivity explained by Deleuze and Guattari in the book "La Subjetivación", but this two authors propose something quite different about subjectivity:

Deleuze: It offers a fold, more large in time, less autonomous, and less changing (more procesual).

Guattari: It offers not a fold, but a "indent", and this indent is faster, more autonomous and more changing and emergent.

In the H1N1 case, technology acts as a key element to the emergence of a singularity: pandemics. It was a very important controversy in 2009, but why?

In 2009, WHO changed the classical definition of a pandemics (two outbreaks in two isolated places one from the another) to the emergence of a new influenza virus against human population has not immunization (we recommend to read the book "Pandemics Perhaps" by Carlo Caduff).

About the relation between information and how works CDC/ECDC and physicias that must alert about suspected cases of flu, this two elements are articulated from:

-Platforms like HealthMap.

-Panoramas (Latour concept).

-Medical platforms where they can predict the number of case of a particular strain of flu.

-Medical protocols.

-Google Flu Trends.

All of this elements makes H1N1 visible, and this is so important to Foucault when he is explained by Deleuze (go to the post linked at the biginning of this post). 

Visibility, then, allows to emerge a particular subjectivity, and this, at the same time, has some concrete afects.

Photo Credit: Jose Ramon Pato

New possible collaboration: POBICS & Veterinary

Along our work last months with Focus Group, we contacted with some researchers of the Veterinary's Faculty in our university. It was a very interesting task because it was a very different participants and due to his expertise, he offered a lot of important information. Furthermore, they was so interesting too in our work because they were carrying out a project in farms with vets and farmers about risk perception and biosecurity. 

In this vein, they said us they have found they need a psychosocial aspect in order tu fulfill their knowledge, because some questions related with why (or why not) farmers apply biosecurity mesures in their farms. 

Now, a few months later, we are preparing a new project with this great people in order to learn from them and collaborate in the kind of tasks they need. 

As quick as we can, we will post more information about the particular objectives and what will be our particular role within this project. We are planning some consensus conference with farmers and vets in order to design and improve a tool to risk analysis; and also we could prepare some focus groups and ethnography in this farms in order to know how biosecurity is conceived and practised in this places. 

We will cross fingers, it would be a very interesting work!

Photo Credit: Random Drift