社会免疫时代的爱抚:触觉、科技和神圣

IF 1.5 Q1 CULTURAL STUDIES Journal for Cultural Research Pub Date : 2021-06-25 DOI:10.1080/14797585.2021.1942944
João Nunes de Almeida
{"title":"社会免疫时代的爱抚:触觉、科技和神圣","authors":"João Nunes de Almeida","doi":"10.1080/14797585.2021.1942944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p>The emergence of new norms of sociability has historically compromised with segregation of entire communities that enforced certain ways of experiencing reality. Historically speaking, social segregation in capitalist western societies abounds with restrictive norms of touching beings and things in times of viral crisis. This article puts into perspective such paradigms of exclusion by critically addressing the role of haptic technology in promoting social segregation. Firstly, the article historically contextualises the haptic paradigm of social exclusion in two critical moments that define our contemporary regime of tactility: the immunity crisis in sixteenth-century Venice that led to the formation of the Jewish Ghetto and the capitalist secularisation of Protestantism. Drawing on this historical context, the second section starts with Baudrillard´s example of the ‘boy in the bubble’ to reflect on the anaphylactic paradox of authoritarian utopias based on total immunity. Following this discussion, the article critically analyses the haptic device <i>PULSE</i> in the light of the anaphylactic paradox of killing with excess of immunity and advances the relevance of the Levinasian caress to ethically question the role of haptic technology in preventing intersubjective responsibility amongst beings.</p>","PeriodicalId":44587,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Cultural Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caressing in the age of social immunity: haptics, technology and the sacred\",\"authors\":\"João Nunes de Almeida\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14797585.2021.1942944\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p>The emergence of new norms of sociability has historically compromised with segregation of entire communities that enforced certain ways of experiencing reality. Historically speaking, social segregation in capitalist western societies abounds with restrictive norms of touching beings and things in times of viral crisis. This article puts into perspective such paradigms of exclusion by critically addressing the role of haptic technology in promoting social segregation. Firstly, the article historically contextualises the haptic paradigm of social exclusion in two critical moments that define our contemporary regime of tactility: the immunity crisis in sixteenth-century Venice that led to the formation of the Jewish Ghetto and the capitalist secularisation of Protestantism. Drawing on this historical context, the second section starts with Baudrillard´s example of the ‘boy in the bubble’ to reflect on the anaphylactic paradox of authoritarian utopias based on total immunity. Following this discussion, the article critically analyses the haptic device <i>PULSE</i> in the light of the anaphylactic paradox of killing with excess of immunity and advances the relevance of the Levinasian caress to ethically question the role of haptic technology in preventing intersubjective responsibility amongst beings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44587,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for Cultural Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for Cultural Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2021.1942944\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Cultural Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2021.1942944","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要社交新规范的出现在历史上与整个社区的隔离相妥协,这种隔离强制了某些体验现实的方式。从历史上看,西方资本主义社会的社会隔离充满了在病毒危机时期接触人与物的限制性规范。本文通过批判性地解决触觉技术在促进社会隔离中的作用,对这种排斥范例进行了透视。首先,本文将社会排斥的触觉范式置于两个关键时刻的历史背景中,这两个关键时刻定义了我们当代的触觉制度:16世纪威尼斯的免疫危机导致了犹太人聚居区的形成,以及新教的资本主义世俗化。在这一历史背景下,第二部分从鲍德里亚的“泡泡里的男孩”的例子开始,反思基于完全免疫的专制乌托邦的过敏性悖论。在此讨论之后,本文根据过度免疫杀死的过敏性悖论批判性地分析了触觉装置PULSE,并提出了列文式爱抚的相关性,以质疑触觉技术在防止人类之间的主体间责任中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Caressing in the age of social immunity: haptics, technology and the sacred

ABSTRACT

The emergence of new norms of sociability has historically compromised with segregation of entire communities that enforced certain ways of experiencing reality. Historically speaking, social segregation in capitalist western societies abounds with restrictive norms of touching beings and things in times of viral crisis. This article puts into perspective such paradigms of exclusion by critically addressing the role of haptic technology in promoting social segregation. Firstly, the article historically contextualises the haptic paradigm of social exclusion in two critical moments that define our contemporary regime of tactility: the immunity crisis in sixteenth-century Venice that led to the formation of the Jewish Ghetto and the capitalist secularisation of Protestantism. Drawing on this historical context, the second section starts with Baudrillard´s example of the ‘boy in the bubble’ to reflect on the anaphylactic paradox of authoritarian utopias based on total immunity. Following this discussion, the article critically analyses the haptic device PULSE in the light of the anaphylactic paradox of killing with excess of immunity and advances the relevance of the Levinasian caress to ethically question the role of haptic technology in preventing intersubjective responsibility amongst beings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal for Cultural Research
Journal for Cultural Research CULTURAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: JouJournal for Cultural Research is an international journal, based in Lancaster University"s Institute for Cultural Research. It is interested in essays concerned with the conjuncture between culture and the many domains and practices in relation to which it is usually defined, including, for example, media, politics, technology, economics, society, art and the sacred. Culture is no longer, if it ever was, singular. It denotes a shifting multiplicity of signifying practices and value systems that provide a potentially infinite resource of academic critique, investigation and ethnographic or market research into cultural difference, cultural autonomy, cultural emancipation and the cultural aspects of power.
期刊最新文献
“Trauma scrambles things, trauma fragments…” A cross-cultural conversation with Corban Addison in the context of A Walk Across the Sun Revolutionary women, body, and the limits of nationalist ideology in colonial Bengal: re-reading the memoirs of Bina Das and Kamala Dasgupta Re-membering plant personhood: syntropic entanglements between Indigenous Naga vegetal ethos and Critical Plant Studies in Temsula Ao’s The Tombstone in My Garden The internalisation of cruelty: Nietzsche, Dostoevsky, Masoch Dealing with fear: what dangers do incantations ward off?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1