Heidegger and Deleuze on Technology

[@gaiamoonduncan2985]

Amazing. Thank you.

[@lsnnlmg]

Thank you

[@JohannesNiederhauser]

You're welcome. We're teaching an online course on Deleuze and Heidegger here courses.theotherlifenow.com/p/deleuze-vs-heidegger

[@JuanRodriguez-tr6st]

thank you, I follow you on IG. I love this explanation

[@JohannesNiederhauser]

Juan Rodriguez thank you!

[@clumsydad7158]

outstanding discussion, thank you

[@Californiansurfer]

I remember 1993 Cerritos college computer lab when I made internet connection on Unix system with Canadian students. We humans will always matter not ai. We are it.

[@JohannesNiederhauser]

Frank Martinez exactly

[@noahthiel703]

Wrestled for Cerritos. Falcons rule

[@kbeetles]

Yessss!

[@EcstaticTemporality]

In technology, one’s essence or thus comportment is reduced to energy. Consider that all.

[@mrothe23]

What chapter from a Thousand Plateaus are you referring to?

[@pinosantilli3371]

efficiency = more money = more Power...my friend

[@TheSchleimBonze]

If you say we have to explore our history again, yes thats true - and the nice thing is, we also can make art with it :)

[@Deletedvirus404]

why is this paradigm the prominent culture

[@TheSchleimBonze]

If you say, time is flatend on the internet - how can it be that the internet is a netwerk with a (physical) topography and alimit of datarates. If we think of time as movment the internet is just an imagery of a technological time. Now why is it that you come to the conclusion that the intesitiys of speeds there are flat? Isnt't the image itself a part of time which has be interupted? So as I have to think (I poste an Image), before i poste. that is clearly a diffrenciation of flow and energy affecting a medium of technology which, as i said, does tun on limits in the physical and geographical sense.

[@JohannesNiederhauser]

Thanks. You’re not listening well enough. The time by which the Internet operates is flat, which is the only way in which you can access any website at any time from anywhere. What you may do before you post something is utterly insignificant.

[@r.c.roberts1413]

@ClassicalPhilosophy, I have a few questions, if you have the time of course. First is, your reference to Harari, you are referring to Yuval Noah Harari, author of "Homo Sapien" and "Homo Deus", correct? I am asking because I have read his work as well and, if you are referencing him, I appreciate you doing so, given his opinions on death and technology. Second, if you do not mind going into the theoretical for a second: is Being, in Heideggerian terms, something one can lose? Having a synthetic philosophical viewpoint myself (A synthesis of Sartre, Heidegger, and Nietzsche), I would argue that it isn't possible to lose and the next best consideration of analysis is Being in relation to a technological future of mankind. Thank you for your time.

[@Thomas_Kempis]

Why do you ask why?

[@kbeetles]

Thomas - "why" assumes a meaningful connection between things/phenomena, it assumes coherence versus falling apart- which is not just chaos ( in my understanding) but nothingness. I am open for any other ideas.....

[@Kenbomp]

Yes always have a exit plan

[@minodoraruschita9715]

Esența tehnicii (kzbin.info/www/bejne/qJymZ4Wfi86EkMU) după Heidegger.

[@TheSchleimBonze]

As well, by calling difference an it you make it an agenda of an absolut. That is a religion of faith and there is no need to action thought in any way because you hand over responsbility to machines Why you couldnt rethink this notion more balanced? As we are happy to find functions for concepts, technolgy is a way to explore space. Dont pump it up just with negativity, space is expanding as yourself is.

[@TheSchleimBonze]

PS: Nick Land is just sad and we have to take the right to help him out of that spektrum...