“I spoke of the continuing meaning of Cubism. To some degree this meaning has changed and will change again according to the needs of the present. The bearings we read with the aid of Cubism vary according to our position. What is the reading now?”
“Theories about the artist’s inspiration are all projections back on to the artist of the effect which his work has upon us. The only inspiration which exists is the intimation of our own potential. Inspiration is the mirror image of history: by means of it we can see our past, while turning our back upon it. And it is precisely this which happens when a piece of music begins. We suddenly become aware of the previous silence at the same moment as our attention is concentrated upon future sequences and resolutions in which we can share.”
What is the difference between humans and animals? Is there a difference.
Do animals have a voice inside their head that is speaking to them the same way that we do? -Perhaps the only thing that separates humans from animals is language. However, how can this be proved? We don’t see animals studying English and then Arabic, etc. but we also cannot know if they have their own language of their own?
Animals have enough cognitive function and intelligence to know what is fair, how to remember things to survive (ie. instinctual memories for food etc). however humans have the ability to ask ‘why’? Do animals too have empathy?
Can there be humanity without technology? Yes.
Can there be technology without humanity?
‘Techne’ a Greek word which refers to technology. What makes us human is the lack of division between technology and human -> Technohuman.
What makes us human is our relationship and existence with techne. What are the implications with this?
-Steigler said that ‘technology is becoming a being’ and that ‘humans are becoming inextricable from technology’ -we are becoming more entangled with technology than ever before.
-Autistic kids’ relationship with Siri vs. a non-Autistic kids’ relationship with Siri
-What is the human’s relationship with techne then? We treat the technology as if it were human but with slight tweaks – similar to how an autistic person conveys with Siri.
-Technology tends to isolate us from each other while connecting us to others at the same time too which is ultimately detrimental. Technology becomes the middle man so the point of interacting becomes human-machine-machine-human which affects our natural way of conveying with one another.
-The dissociative aspects which technology is able to have on us. – The willingness to overlook the longterm affects which technology has on us.
-How does technology relate to the soul? In MY opinion, I think it corrupts it.
Conclusion: There is no true answer to this/these questions.
1) The technology is dependent on us, but we are dependent on the technology. So the dependency of technology only exists in one way.
2) Technology exists outside of humans but it also seems to exist outside the animal world.
3) Technology is outside of plants – it seems to be an outstanding system of existence outside of plants and our universe.
-Technology has a logic to it of how it operates – what then, is technology? Because it seems to be everything.
-How as an artist do you navigate the world? How do you understand the world with your relationship to technology with these understandings then?
What is about those people that can tell the future? Those who are visionary??
Humans, ultimately, have started to live fully – they are not reliant on technology like most others.
-Maybe technology is another species which has taken manifestation through us? It is in our power and our drive to make something that connects us to our egos….
Favourite passage from “What is Human” assignment reference list:
From “The Unabomber Manifesto:”
We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behaviour that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions.
Notes from last couple weeks (sorry for late posting):
Favourite passage from ‘Language as Symbolic Action” by Kenneth Burke
The Designation of man as the symbol-using animal parallels the traditional formulas, “rational animal” and Homo sapiens-but with one notable difference. These earlier versions are horrific, whereas the idea of symbolicity implies no such temptation to self-flattery, and to this extent is more admonitory. Such definitions as “two-footed land-animal” (referred to in Aristotle’s Topics or “featherless biped” (referred to in Spinoza’s ethics) would be inadequate because they would confine the horizon to the realm of motion.
Burke’s sociological symbolic Interactionist approach to define man and language successfully articulates the notion that language is largely responsible for shaping our understandings of not only just our world, but also the way we think about ourselves. I especially appreciate this passage because its speaks to the different definitions we have put on ‘man’ or ‘humans’ and how this shapes the way we think about ourselves, ie. by thinking about other living mammals as ‘animals’ while we are simply ‘people’ which cannot also be constituted as an animal and how such an outlook likely contributes to how anthropocentric our own trait of thought has become and as a result how that shapes our own exterior world around us (ie. technology, the natural world, regard for animals, etc).
The importance and significance of this passage (to me) is that Burke forces us to ask ourselves what our current status quo conceptions and uses of languages are confining us to in the way that we think about ourselves. Today’s ‘scientific’ labels often times leave out the spiritual aspect of the person (ie confining people to the realm of motion) which also shapes the spaces we live, and perhaps, arguably contributes to the neglect of the spiritual aspect of the being which appears to be a growing problem globally. I appreciate this excerpt most because Burke directly confronts the reader by calling on them to rethink the current linguistic status quo to avoid confining our current horizons, although we appear to have already done so. If terminology could be extended to reach a place which incorporates both motion AND spirituality (both physical and metaphysical) then our perceptions, and perhaps even actions would shift radically I believe [for the better].
for next visual text essay:
-try to incorporate more text into projects – either self-generated or from the readings (directly, indirectly, or as inspiration)
-use visuals which you have generated form the readings and course work, inspiration from others
-you are creating a body of work that nobody can discern and writing things that ‘nobody’ is going to read/an exercise that doesn’t matter, so how can we overcome this without losing our readers? Use this opportunity as a time to take risks.
-not about simplifying
-notion that as technological advances increase we become more out of control of our social issues, ask the question of whether technology is increasing freedom for people or decreasing it (even if this is not conscious)?
-technological colonialism – whether we should propagate it or fight it? Which will do less harm to those who are still remaining ‘disconnected?’
“I spoke of the continuing meaning of Cubism. To some degree this meaning has changed and will change again according to the needs of the present. The bearings we read with the aid of Cubism vary according to our position. What is the reading now?”
“Theories about the artist’s inspiration are all projections back on to the artist of the effect which his work has upon us. The only inspiration which exists is the intimation of our own potential. Inspiration is the mirror image of history: by means of it we can see our past, while turning our back upon it. And it is precisely this which happens when a piece of music begins. We suddenly become aware of the previous silence at the same moment as our attention is concentrated upon future sequences and resolutions in which we can share.”
Link to Assignment 1 – Cubist Approach
https://zoehertzphotography.weebly.com/visa-481—assignment-1-cubism.html
Class Discussion – January 26th
What is the difference between humans and animals? Is there a difference.
Do animals have a voice inside their head that is speaking to them the same way that we do? -Perhaps the only thing that separates humans from animals is language. However, how can this be proved? We don’t see animals studying English and then Arabic, etc. but we also cannot know if they have their own language of their own?
Animals have enough cognitive function and intelligence to know what is fair, how to remember things to survive (ie. instinctual memories for food etc). however humans have the ability to ask ‘why’? Do animals too have empathy?
Can there be humanity without technology? Yes.
Can there be technology without humanity?
‘Techne’ a Greek word which refers to technology. What makes us human is the lack of division between technology and human -> Technohuman.
What makes us human is our relationship and existence with techne. What are the implications with this?
-Steigler said that ‘technology is becoming a being’ and that ‘humans are becoming inextricable from technology’ -we are becoming more entangled with technology than ever before.
-Autistic kids’ relationship with Siri vs. a non-Autistic kids’ relationship with Siri
-What is the human’s relationship with techne then? We treat the technology as if it were human but with slight tweaks – similar to how an autistic person conveys with Siri.
-Technology tends to isolate us from each other while connecting us to others at the same time too which is ultimately detrimental. Technology becomes the middle man so the point of interacting becomes human-machine-machine-human which affects our natural way of conveying with one another.
-The dissociative aspects which technology is able to have on us. – The willingness to overlook the longterm affects which technology has on us.
-How does technology relate to the soul? In MY opinion, I think it corrupts it.
Conclusion: There is no true answer to this/these questions.
1) The technology is dependent on us, but we are dependent on the technology. So the dependency of technology only exists in one way.
2) Technology exists outside of humans but it also seems to exist outside the animal world.
3) Technology is outside of plants – it seems to be an outstanding system of existence outside of plants and our universe.
-Technology has a logic to it of how it operates – what then, is technology? Because it seems to be everything.
-How as an artist do you navigate the world? How do you understand the world with your relationship to technology with these understandings then?
What is about those people that can tell the future? Those who are visionary??
Humans, ultimately, have started to live fully – they are not reliant on technology like most others.
-Maybe technology is another species which has taken manifestation through us? It is in our power and our drive to make something that connects us to our egos….
Visual Essay:
https://zoehertzphotography.weebly.com/visa-481—technohuman.html.
Favourite passage from “What is Human” assignment reference list:
From “The Unabomber Manifesto:”
We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behaviour that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions.
Notes from last couple weeks (sorry for late posting):
Favourite passage from ‘Language as Symbolic Action” by Kenneth Burke
The Designation of man as the symbol-using animal parallels the traditional formulas, “rational animal” and Homo sapiens-but with one notable difference. These earlier versions are horrific, whereas the idea of symbolicity implies no such temptation to self-flattery, and to this extent is more admonitory. Such definitions as “two-footed land-animal” (referred to in Aristotle’s Topics or “featherless biped” (referred to in Spinoza’s ethics) would be inadequate because they would confine the horizon to the realm of motion.
Burke’s sociological symbolic Interactionist approach to define man and language successfully articulates the notion that language is largely responsible for shaping our understandings of not only just our world, but also the way we think about ourselves. I especially appreciate this passage because its speaks to the different definitions we have put on ‘man’ or ‘humans’ and how this shapes the way we think about ourselves, ie. by thinking about other living mammals as ‘animals’ while we are simply ‘people’ which cannot also be constituted as an animal and how such an outlook likely contributes to how anthropocentric our own trait of thought has become and as a result how that shapes our own exterior world around us (ie. technology, the natural world, regard for animals, etc).
The importance and significance of this passage (to me) is that Burke forces us to ask ourselves what our current status quo conceptions and uses of languages are confining us to in the way that we think about ourselves. Today’s ‘scientific’ labels often times leave out the spiritual aspect of the person (ie confining people to the realm of motion) which also shapes the spaces we live, and perhaps, arguably contributes to the neglect of the spiritual aspect of the being which appears to be a growing problem globally. I appreciate this excerpt most because Burke directly confronts the reader by calling on them to rethink the current linguistic status quo to avoid confining our current horizons, although we appear to have already done so. If terminology could be extended to reach a place which incorporates both motion AND spirituality (both physical and metaphysical) then our perceptions, and perhaps even actions would shift radically I believe [for the better].
Notes // things to remember:
for next visual text essay:
-try to incorporate more text into projects – either self-generated or from the readings (directly, indirectly, or as inspiration)
-use visuals which you have generated form the readings and course work, inspiration from others
-you are creating a body of work that nobody can discern and writing things that ‘nobody’ is going to read/an exercise that doesn’t matter, so how can we overcome this without losing our readers? Use this opportunity as a time to take risks.
-not about simplifying
-notion that as technological advances increase we become more out of control of our social issues, ask the question of whether technology is increasing freedom for people or decreasing it (even if this is not conscious)?
-technological colonialism – whether we should propagate it or fight it? Which will do less harm to those who are still remaining ‘disconnected?’
Week 8 – New Assignment:
http://newhive.com/zoe101/2018_03_09
NEW ASSIGNMENT – WEEK 8:
http://newhive.com/zoe101/2018_03_09
Week 8 Response – New Project
Technological Advancements in Limiting Our Freedom
http://newhive.com/zoe101/2018_03_09