PERCOLAÇÕES

@Gabriel_Anaya
Entusiasta, Histórias, Espaços, Ciências, Jogos de Ficção, Realismos Especulativos, Aikido.

My job as a philosopher is not to describe the probable but, rather, to activate the possible.

- Isabelle Stengers

http://knowledge-ecology.com/2012/02/24/slow-thinking-slow-science-cosmopolitics-and-ecological-ethics/

nedroidcomics:

maybe

nedroidcomics:

maybe

elsrj:

Bruce Lee, Krishnamurti and Jeet Kune Do.

É uma ilusão acreditar que a história do conhecimento tenha tão pouco a ver com o conteúdo da ciência quanto, digamos, a história do telefone com o conteúdo das conversas telefônicas: pelo menos três quartos, talvez a totalidade, do conteúdo das ciências são condicionados e podem ser explicados pela história do pensamento, pela psicologia e pela sociologia do pensamento.

Fleck, 2010 [1935], p.62

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

ANNO ZERO - fool

1 month ago

“YOU CANNOT MAKE YOURSELF THE WAY YOU ARE”

BLVR: Well, let’s move on to the argument then. There’s a famous saying of Schopenhauer’s that goes like this: “A man can surely do what he wants to do. But he cannot determine what he wants.” Is this idea at the core of your argument against moral responsibility?

GS: Yes—and it’s an old thought. It’s in Hobbes somewhere, and it’s in Book Two of Locke’s Essay, and I bet some ancient Greek said it, since they said almost everything.

Full interview

“Assim como posto por Whitehead, reconhecemos a vida específica de um objeto a partir do reconhecimento da natureza de sua relação com o evento que o situa”
             -Milton Santos (A Natureza do Espaço - 2006, p.61)

“Assim como posto por Whitehead, reconhecemos a vida específica de um objeto a partir do reconhecimento da natureza de sua relação com o evento que o situa”

             -Milton Santos (A Natureza do Espaço - 2006, p.61)

We are responsible for the world of which we are part, not because it is an arbitrary construction of our choosing but because reality is sedimented out of particular practices that we have a role in shaping and through which we are shaped

Karen Barad - Meeting the Universe Halfway (2007: 203)

[…] a natureza não é um ser que se encontraria no mundo – ou antes, na qual nós, os humanos, teríamos de nos inserir. A natureza (toda a história das ciências, das mentalidades e toda a antropologia nos mostra isso) é um modo histórico de pensarmos as nossas relações com os objectos e relações políticas entre nós. Como Philippe Descola mostra num livro que será ditado no próximo Outono, «La Nature des cultures», a maior parte das civilizações não conhecem ou não têm necessidade da noção de natureza. Esta noção só emerge no século XVII como um meio de definir a matéria, as leis do universo e um certo vazamento das actividades políticas.

- Bruno Latour

Entrevista retirada do hors-série nº 49, Luillet-Août 2005 da revista Sciences Humaines via http://pimentanegra.blogspot.com.br/2005/07/bruno-latour-preciso-repensar-ecologia.html

For Whitehead, the experimenter cannot be separated from the experiment, because they are both present in the world in the same manner. I cannot observe other entities any differently from how I observe myself. There can be no formal, permanent distinction between the observing self (the self as transcendental subject, or subject of enunciation) and the self being observed (the self as object in the world, or subject of the statement). Therefore there can be neither phenomenology nor positivism, and neither cognitivism nor behaviorism. Whitehead underscores this point by using the same vocabulary to describe the biological world, and even the inorganic world, as he does the human world. He suggests that categories like will, desire, and creation are valid, not just for us, but for nonhuman (and even nonorganic) entities as well.

SHAVIRO, Steven. Without Criteria: Kant, Whitehead, Deleuze and Aesthetics. Cambridge/London: The MIT press, 2009, p.26.

Sacred Dirt - Malfeasance (Serres, 2010) book review

lareviewofbooks:

SUSAN STEWART

on Michel Serres’s ecological philosophy.


Michel Serres
Malfeasance: Appropriation Through Pollution?

Stanford University Press, September 2010. 104 pp.

If only the magical etiologies of consumerism were true — oranges grow in the produce aisle, milk flows from the dairy case, shirts and shoes emerge online. However, a deeper look into the origins of these products is sure to darken your view. Take, for example, the cell phone. Its battery and other parts have likely been manufactured in the Special Economic Zone of Shenzhen, China, an area once known for its fertile, hilly farmland. The Shenzhen landscape has been bulldozed flat; the rain runs black with acid and, despite recent experiments with electric taxis, and state propaganda promising the greening of the city, it is often not safe to breathe outdoors. The air inside the enormous complexes, where cell phones, tablets, and other electronic devices are assembled for a variety of brands — including Apple, Hewlett Packard, Dell, Motorola, and Nokia — likely isn’t any safer. Migrant workers from the countryside reside in company-provided dormitories. Their performance is measured in seconds. The only way they can make a living above a subsistence level is by taking on illegal amounts of overtime. One worker perished of exhaustion after a 34-hour shift. At least 17 workers committed suicide in 2010 and 2011; one, as I write in late July, as recently as a few days ago. China’s overall suicide rate is high compared to other countries, but the factory owners’ decision to string nets around the upper stories of these industrial complexes indicates a different kind of business as usual.

Beyond this grim point of origin, your phone is likely to have a troubled afterlife. Use it in public in confined spaces and you’ll be sure to get attention from other people: you’ll be keeping them distracted when they would like to concentrate and awake when they would like to rest; your conversations at a distance will take precedence over their face-to-face conversations. Even if such “mental pollution” does not trouble you; your physical health will be answering to your phone. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology issued a report this spring describing how cell phone signals can disorient bees and may be the primary cause of the widespread catastrophe of colony collapse that has been progressing since the 1970s. Sad for the bees, you might think, and you may even realize it has been a while since you have seen a honeybee. Some might argue that constant non-ionizing radiation next to the brain does not conclusively cause brain cancer or change brain glucose metabolism (counter to a recent announcement from the World Health Organization), but you and your fellow animals nevertheless need to eat to live: honeybees fertilize 70 percent of the 100 crops most often used for human food.

Finally, when a cell phone is traded in for a new one, consider where the plastic, lead, and lithium of the old one will go; someone is going to arrange for the outdated phone’s disposal — you may even yourself take the time to deliver it to a recycling center, but where and how will the recycling come about? If you take your old phone to a responsible organization, you could help reduce the disastrous environmental and human consequences of mining throughout the world; if you let it fall into less scrupulous hands, it may end up dumped in Nigeria or back in China.

Read More

(Source: lareviewofbooks)