{"title":"On the Amateur and the Critic and the Double Factoring of the Pandemic","authors":"Virgilio A. Rivas","doi":"10.25138/15.2/a2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores Bernard Stiegler’s reformulation of Kant’s aesthetics concerning his radical concept of the amateur vis-à-vis the critic. These conflicting agencies have staked out different modalities and forms of engagement and resistance against the broader historical background of what Stiegler calls the proletarianization of sensibility drawn from the experience of today’s algorithmic governance. COVID-19 has rendered this global technicalization of experience more insidious. Or, invoking Derrida, the grammatization of the subjects’ gestures and behavior, making their protentional capacity and their power to dream inoperable through pre-selected aprioris for social consumption, or worse, biopolitical control. Stiegler identifies the radical promise of exposing this techno-determinism with the amateur's unprincipledness, whose non-conformism, compared to the critic, the conventional expert, draws more from the autonomous function of art. In this context, the amateur aligns herself with the worker in terms of their capacity to dis-individuate from the manifold, leading to a common approach to the pharmacology of the Spirit. Pharmacology stands for the relative plasticity of a specific historical time, not without the pathogen that troubles its metastability – its openness to critique. Nonetheless, the task of unraveling this pathogenic content can no longer be assigned to the critical subject of reason © 2021 Virgilio A. Rivas","PeriodicalId":41978,"journal":{"name":"Kritike-An Online Journal of Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kritike-An Online Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25138/15.2/a2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
论业余者和批评家与流行病的双重因素
本文探讨了斯蒂格勒对康德美学的重新表述,涉及他对-à-vis批评家的激进的业余概念。这些相互冲突的机构在更广泛的历史背景下展示了不同的参与和抵抗的模式和形式,斯蒂格勒从今天的算法治理经验中得出了感性的无产阶级化。COVID-19使这种全球经验的技术化变得更加阴险。或者,引用德里达的话,主体的姿态和行为的语法化,使他们的保护能力和梦想的力量通过预先选择的社会消费的先验而无法操作,或者更糟的是,生物政治控制。斯蒂格勒将揭露这种技术决定论的激进承诺与业余爱好者的无原则性联系在一起,与批评家、传统专家相比,业余爱好者的不墨守成规,从艺术的自主功能中汲取了更多的东西。在这种情况下,业余爱好者与工人结盟,就他们从多方面分离的能力而言,导致精神药理学的共同方法。药理学代表了一个特定历史时期的相对可塑性,而不是没有困扰其亚稳态的病原体——它对批评的开放性。尽管如此,解开这种致病内容的任务不能再分配给理性的关键主题©2021 Virgilio A. Rivas
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。