Technocriticism: Catastophism & Collapsology Flashcards
Eschatology, modernity, and ecology
A. Hans Jonas pt 2: we shouldn’t think of the future in positive or utopian terms → we should think of a negative future due to destruction caused by technology
1. Does think about thinking about protecting the future of children but still negative
B. Christian theology: the future is when God comes back to Earth, Christians are very concerned about the future
1. Waiting for the final judgment
2. Discourse about saving humans
3. Ludwig Feuerbach
4. Christian theology and modernity share a common hope for the future → Hans Blumenberg → modernity is not about the absence of religion, it’s about reinterpreting religious terms in modern ways
a) Some of the promoters of secularization were Christians → we need to understand the permanence of religion in modern terms
5. Discourse on progress and modernity → the way we think about modernity today is the way that Christians thought about the end of time before
a) Modernity is closely tied to the idea of progress
Progress & the future
C. We will inevitably move towards international peace because of progress → at the core of progress lies the development of reason
1. Kant: more and more people will be able to reason as humanity progresses and so we will reach peace
D. Hegel: the future will provide something that we don’t have in the present because of progress
1. The phenomenology of spirit - stresses the importance of progress for peace and the development of mankind
2. Struggle for recognition is the strongest force/incentive one can have in the world → leads us to impose those ideas at the state and international level
3. Progress is inevitable
4. War is a driver for progress; wars can be considered as clashes between old and emerging ideas and thus are part of the evolution of humanity
Dystopian ecologism
A. Ecologists hate the idea of progress bringing good things
B. Progress could potentially lead us to collective suicide → nuclear bomb shows the extent of the power that we have now to destroy our planet
1. Beginning of the cold war: a new generation of thinkers who fight against nuclear proliferation
C. A strong tradition of utopianism in political theory → we can imagine futures in a positive way; in order to think better about the present as well
1. Ways to think more positively about the present and our political institutions
2. Thomas More talks about current times and how we should improve political institutions
3. Dystopias provide a vision of the future that also allows you to think about the present by presenting a future that is a sum of the errors that we commit
D. Hope should be the guiding principle of collective action: Bloch
E. Hans Jonas: the future will bring destruction so we should take action now to prevent the negative consequences of technological developments
Ideology & Utopia
F. Ricoeur: ideology is about distortion, it presents you with a distorted view of real life
1. Its about legitimation of domination → ideologies are always put at the service of a given authority and present themselves as the narrative of that given authority
2. Ideology is the integration of a social narrative: connected to a specific context and works so well because they resonate with a given social or political community
G. First logic of utopia: the presentation of an alternative society
1. Exercise of the imagination and the expression of the potentialities to change the existing society
H. Second: utopias legitimize a given power; they show you how power could be exercised differently
I. Third: utopia is a logic of all or nothing
1. There are no shades of gray; presents an image of how to be that is very perfectionist → this is why you cannot reach a utopia
J. There is a utopian dimension in all ideologies and all ideologies present a utopia
1. How to establish scenarios and find possibilities to reach those futures
2. We could argue that an ideology is to a certain extent, a politicized utopia → used by a given power to legitimize its existence and permanence → we should fear utopias as they could potentially lead to unwanted regimes and unwanted ideologies
K. Jacques Ellul: believed that we need to move away from utopia when it comes to technology and that dystopia was the way to go
1. Dystopia shows all of the flaws in the technological projects
Gunther & the Promethean gap
L. Gunther Anders: a German philosopher who emigrated to the US during WWII; depressed as fuck
1. BFFs with Hans Jonas and a student of Carl Jaspers
2. Began his interest in the atomic bomb
3. Fear should be the fueling passion that we have when it comes to technology → we should be afraid of technology if we want to do it right
4. 1956: published one of his biggest books “The obsolescence of Man”
a) About the mechanization and industrialization of humanity
b) Believes that there is fundamentally a growing gap between humanity and technology: the Promethean Gap
(1) The growing asynchronously between the world that is produced by technology and the worker himself
(2) Very Marxist of him
c) Creates a new technology that is beyond the worker
d) At the core of this process is the atomic bomb → the bomb creates a new reality: the possibility of annihilation, our contemporary experience is composed within that idea of annihilation
e) Because of this reality of the possibility of annihilation, we need to think beyond what technology offers us → it offers improved quality of life, but because of the possibility of annihilation, we need to think differently because technology hides the fact that it can destroy us
(1) Idea of progress and improved conditions of life, but we need to think beyond this and about what other tools we could use
5. Dystopian way of thinking about technology
6. We have a responsibility to act → there is room in the present to impose limitations on the development of technology
7. Believes technology will destroy the planet and will destroy the human experience of life
Catastophism
III. Thinking about the “end of times”: catastrophism
A. 1980s: two major catastrophes that showed teh world the potential for technological progress to cause destruction/catastrophes
1. Chernobyl
2. Bhopal gas tragedy: explosion of a factory that produced pesticides for agricultural purposes and one of the biggest catastrophes
B. Showed how technology leads to planetary catastrophes
C. Ulrich Beck: Risk Society
1. Modernity brings new risks and is about producing new risks
2. We can see a clear connection between the development of industrial civilization and the proliferation of risks
a) As industries are growing and getting more powerful, catastrophes are becoming more and more possible and can have increasingly powerful consequences
3. WE need an alternative way to think about the future: catastophism
a) Proposed by georges cuvier: we need to focus more on catastrophes and periods of extinction to better understand how species evolve and disappear
Dupuy and Catastophism
IV. Jean-Pierre Dupuy: french philosopher who believes that we should change the way we think about the future; wants to think about the future in catastrophic terms
A. Now we know that most technologies will have a negative impact on the environment or humanity at some point; we know there is a risk associated with any technology
1. The problem is that modern thinkers tell us that we will always be able to manage those risks
2. If we don’t think about hte possibility of risks not being managed, we forget existential parts of reality → catastrophes happen every year
3. We should anticipate and include catastrophe as a normal thing in our reasoning → normalize catastrophe by having a rational way to anticipate catastrophes
a) When considering nuclear power, we should always anticipate a catastrophe. If we do that we will inevitably find ways to prevent potential hazards
b) Catastrophes should be at the very center of your reasoning about technology → the tool that he promotes to deal with those catastrophes and think about htem is the precautionary prinicple
(1) The best way that we could use our power to control our technology is the precautionary principle: once there is even a bit of uncertainty about the potential for a catastrophe with a piece of technology, we should abolish that tech
B. How to Think About Catastrophe - Dupuy - talks more genrelay about environmental catastrophes → encourages the same way to think in those areas
1. Always have the potential for an impending catastrophe in mind → only by thinking about an impending catastrophe will we be able to find solutions → catastrophes are a way to mobilize
a) Ex: environmental activists
Collapsology
V. Thinking about the “end of times”: Collapsology
A. About collapse
B. 1972 report: The Limits to Growth
1. Probably one of the most quoted reports in IR regarding environment
2. If you look at the scenarios we have where you try to connect industrial output, everything will basically collapse if you follow the business as usual scenario
3. The industrial system is not sustainable and will collapse at some point → we wont be able to provide enough goods to the population and the environment will suffer
4. Very connected to Malthusianism
C. Jared Diamond: wrote a book in 2006 entitled Collapse: How societies Choose to Fail or Survice
1. Presents collapse as a historical trend → all societies at some point experience collapse
a) Mayan empire, Easter Islands
2. Due to military and ecconomic prssure, disintegration of alliances, poor government choices, climate change, and resource depletion
3. Says that our current civilization is threatened by those 5 factors → if they combine again, we’ll see the collapse of our current civilization
D. Collapsology 1: accepting the collapse
1. Collapse is inevitable (catastrophists think that we can avoid catastrophes if we think about them soon enough - vital difference between the two) so there is no need to mobilize people, talk about fear or reason → we just need to accept the reality and try to adapt/deal with it
2. Mourning of our society allows us to accept our condition and find new ways of living → because we accept that industrial civilization will collapse, we’re able to explore new ways of living and living together
a) Don’t fight, just create communities where you can find new ways of living outside of polities and industries
3. Collapsology (2): experiments and resistance → Collapsologists try to create new industries around the world where they are autonomous and independent and outside of the polity → the main theme is resistance
a) Why should we follow the rules of society if they’re just going to collapse?
b) Technology won and led us to collapse → we have no power or leverage over this but by accepting this our emancipation begins adn we can emancipate ourselves from technology
