maybe the real Posthumanism was the friends we made a long the way.

@pepesilvia3490

3 жыл бұрын

I also came here from watching Jreg

@pepesilvia3490

3 жыл бұрын

@@MarcillaSmith go watch jreg. Or don't. The way I see it is your life will be the same either way.

@Pduarte79

2 жыл бұрын

That's One Piecism lol

@rebeccar685

2 жыл бұрын

Lol

@Sirzacharia

Жыл бұрын

Maybe the real friends was the humans we made along the post.

I find Stiegler's claim pretty profound. The fact that we use tools for prolonged memory and thought is what makes us human. From this perspective I would also say that - trying to destroy a people's writings and arts, and thus their history - is an absolute crime against humanity.

@Lambda_Ovine

3 жыл бұрын

Genocide, perhaps?

@mksybr

3 жыл бұрын

Spiders also offload cognitive processes to their tools (as web).

@ismireghal68

3 жыл бұрын

@@mksybr spider-web and written language are exterior effects of something there is a cognitive basis for, but you find that everywhere (e.g. ants carrying stuff to make an anthill), but They do not really dynamically evolve.

@swagmund_freud6669

3 жыл бұрын

@@ismireghal68 yeah. Anthills have not really changed much over the last few million years. But the structure of human societies have changed drastically In just the past 100 years.

@ismireghal68

3 жыл бұрын

@@swagmund_freud6669 yes and they also differ in quality. A writing has no apparent usefullness (now of course its obvious that it had but i mean back then) Your web catches you flies, but a note to your future self... like where the hell did that come from, and why does it evolve so rapidly? Because there are no selective pressures, no threats? I thought selective pressure IS what drives evolution on the other hand when it comes to creative expression you are way better of at evolving that stuff alone in a safe space with a white canvas in front of you than out in a dark forest with predetors where you dont give a fuck about expression because youd rather hide and be efficient. There has to be something in us, a creative drive, that is the reason why even early people made ornaments on their weapons... I like the idea btw. that we interiorized language. Like many signaling cells put into one bigger organism can become a nervous system, many talking humans put into one more evolved mind who interiorizes the outer chatter silently could become inner dialogue, but thats very vague speculation and doesn't account for written language either. But writing could be the alternative to sound for the mind silently having language inside.

A day with new plasticpills is always a good day

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Valentine

Well that was the best thing I've seen on YT in a while.

this is soooooo so so useful. I've been trying to use haraway to analyze the type of "vision" created by UAVs but struggled to get to the core of the broader philosophy around her work. Thank you!

Great channel, thanks for the hard work and the attention to detail -btw, it would be great to see one around Technics (from Prometheus to Leroy-Gurhan and Simondon to Stigler). Thanks a lot keep and pushing that rock up the mountain!

How does this channel not have more views, like, and comments?! This is SO valuable! I hope you know how much your work is appreciated. I know I’ll keep coming back for more!

You give such wonderful and lucid explanations. These videos are very much needed. Please keep up the good work. Loved your videos.

Thanks a ton for this little crash course! Much appreciated! :)

Being new to Philosophy, a self taught "student", so to speak of two years, this video essay, being the first as well only that I've viewed of your work, have found it amazingly insightful as well as garnering, for me, a new direction or path for my thoughts to pursue, and that's what I've found to be one of the main ideologies or "staples" behind Philosophy, that make it one of, if not "the" most intense intellectual discipline that's available to humanity, your approach is a novel and more insightful way of thought into viewing humanity, reality....etc. Also learning about new Philosophers, other than the well known greats, such as Bernard Stiegler and the other lady whose name I'm drawing a blank on as of right now, I did download her "Cyborg Manifesto" essay and as well, I'm planning on learning as much as I can on Stiegler's Philosophy, due to the fact that his concept that the only thing that gives humans relevance as opposed to all other creatures, is the fact that we've created a way of preserving our thoughts through written history, literature, social media...etc. Great stuff and I'm planning on checking out more of your work, thanks again. Also, where did you receive your education, and who are some of your favorite contemporary Philosophers, and books you recommend for rookie guys such as myself, the ones who've fell in love with this discipline and are wanting to dive deep into it as possible?

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Hey James, you're well on your way to being a philosopher with this wall of text, lol. I will say that my approach is not novel, as all I am doing is rehashing and simplifying shit that people may not encounter outside of postgrad programs--glad that's working for you. Maybe someone else has an idea of the type of intro books that you're looking for, but my position is that there aren't shortcuts in real education (and I don't mean academic education either, though that helps). Anthologies with intros to the different authors can be helpful, I use this one amzn.to/37RAYLu when I have to reread something quick. May be worth starting with something like that? Otherwise I would say browse around until you find methods/styles that you connect with, and starting reading who they read, and read others who read them. I read all the comments on my vids (doesn't take long, there aren't a lot) so if you find something elsewhere in the channel that you want more info on then ask away.

Brilliant.Many thanks for doing all the hard work ' reading and organising ' that I was far too lazy to do.

OH MY GOD! THANK YOU!!! This sums up a point that I heavily agree with: "You are only creative and free as external and internal stimuli allow you to be". This concept of "freedom" should not have any metaphysical, or some spiritual value. Instead, its existence should be examined at the material lense. We observe freedom, not because we have this inherent quality of being free, but because of the external forces that affect our internal states that allow us to make those choices.

@truebomba

4 жыл бұрын

it is the potentiality of freedom that should be taught as metaphysical. When the humans have the material condition the actualization of freedom becomes possible. Metaphysics is important to hold at last if we want to remain humanist. I don't think physicalism can make any case for such a concept.

@Impaled_Onion-thatsmine

3 жыл бұрын

Well that's not good enough he knows you aren't synthesizing the words its blabber blend and hand language they become hostage then you are free to do as needed then they come out with their politics he is threatening you with his body Mind synthesis that knowledge that isn't properly synthesized it's an affective treatment that obligates you

I just finished watching "The Ister" so this was a nice find, thanks.

loved it man, keep making these vids

I have to pause most of your videos several times to scream. Thank you for all the great vids.

Loved this video, explains so much in such a short time

the background noise , the desire to sell , the ability to draw attention , to create a being in Being that can question

i think this is one of my favorite videos on your channel. I love your approach to this technological post humanism. I think its innacurate to say that the transhumanist future will look like "cyborgs" made of non human and human, but it's the fact that humans have always and continure to determine their evolution and entanglement with nature. genetic modification within the human body seems like a machine-like existence when we think about it, but it's actually not as abruptly introduced to us as we imagine, but its the result of the progress we've made up until this point to alter the nature of our bodies. We use surgery and modern medicine to improve our physical wellbeing, but this way of altering our "self" is not as different from the posthumanist future. we have always determined our own nature and our own fate because it is in our nature to do so. the technology we use is not some other worldy- phenomenon, but it is the nature surrounding us that we have utilized to modify our existence.

Alright, you got me interested. I'm totally up for a video now about Accelerationism and it's relation with posthumanism. So, uh, pretty please?

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Special order coming up for you lol

@catharinelaude3905

2 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills (Not original commenter) Thanks for putting that one up, these vids have formed a really solid series. Newly subbed!

Finally find someone that explains this well. Human arrogance prevents so many from looking at this. It’s is so obvious once you are willing to think about it. This explanation is lays it out amazingly well. Nietzsche knew this long before the rest of the world.

@nova8091

7 ай бұрын

Well why should I even care about the non human? Okay cool I’m not special but I’m still me there no reason to care about your weird materialistic cult

@acht2849

7 ай бұрын

Is it arrogance or just anxiety, the need for controll?

Literally THE BEST CHANNEL❤️

@palakarora0612

3 жыл бұрын

@@vals4207 there are many... I just commented

Create content and well done. Sad there are not millions of subscribers

I wonder if anyone has updated Steigler to account for the new discoveries that many other organisms on earth do start with memory and do have ways of recording memory using tools. Humans still are probably exceptional in the extent to which they do this, but I think the more we learn about other plant and animal organisms, the more and more we'll be surprised at the tools and methods they employ.

This video is special and deserves multiple viewing..

added to watch later, can't wait for premiere

Nice video. However, I would argue that technology is not "parasitic" but "symbiotic." I am reminded of mitochondria's relationship to host cells. This is a minor point.

Maybe the best video so far

the only part missing in this was reference to Heidegger's Question Concerning Technology. Otherwise, well done with this!

Your videos are the best, and I'm honestly baffled you get so little views.

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

I could probably market better, but I'm just glad yall are here!

@guiomar-jijiflorez-flowers9180

4 жыл бұрын

We can help share! Do a little terrorism to Instagram Influencers...haha!

"What is this white woman shit" - that floored me!!! Very good!

What song was playing at 3:40?

I love you, greetings from Colombia.

Great use of the BwO

Your channel is amazing ! Thank you so much !

this is some good shit, hope you keep going, man!

In the beginning was the Word... (and nope not the World). It also was not necessary to type this down and share it with "the World" but I did it anyway ;)

Friedrich Krotz' concept of the historic mediatization process would fit perfectly at the end there to update McLuhan. McLuhan is considered too technologically deterministic in contemporary Media and Communication Science, and mediatization solves that problem. It aknowledges media logics (Altheide & Snow) and affordances that influence us, while still giving humans enough agency to negotiate and influence media and technology.

Does anyone know what the painting at 5:22 is called?

@remotefaith

2 жыл бұрын

thomas doughty, romantic landscape with a temple

Another fantastic video!

What is the music used around the 3:15 mark ? Please 🙏🏼

I love the heart wrenching background music coloring man's freefall into eternal nothingness. Very poetic of you lol

Yep. Ok this was really well done and would take a long time to put together. Well done crew. I’ve been reading anti oepidus today in bafflement, mostly, but this helped a couple of ideas for me. Also, as a designer, art teacher I have become aware, independently, of the texts mentioned, and taught, how technology has driven human endeavours, both regarding tools, meaning these lines in ink on paper indicate symbols which indicate signs which indicate human thought, and yet in time become surrogates for human thought. Also, in art, technologies, such as quarrying new stone or developing tube paint influence methods, also influence content. As the French impressionists painted plein air because of the tube paint and Monet painted “blurry” for a number of reasons also including the experience, the first time in the history of the human, to travel so fast as on a train and therefore see in a observable way movement at that speed. Technology creating human, human inventing technology. All is interrelated and inseparable. The deluezian machines of human or machine, who has hierarchy? It’s all a shifting territories and we create our selves in the moment, in relationship with the multiplicities and across the territories through the flows, meaning both regarding and disregarding context, and in a subjective phenomenological sense - meaning, own your space and produce. ....that’s a beginning.

Do you do your own beats for these videos? They're dope dude

Great stuff pills. Does anyone know the name of the music or band that is playing in the minute 14?

Thank you very much!

This guy makes phil actually fun to watch

thanks for the video, it's so informative but the background music was so destructive!

I'm a posthumanist but absolutely despise transhumanism, insomuch that its mainstream conceptions generally don't get out of the anthropocentrism trap.

Which book or essays of Steiglar have these concepts? I wanna read

Could you do a video specifically on transhumanism?

Stigler is obviously compelling, but i also think about McLuhan who insisted we are essentially the sex organs for machines. Would be interesting to "compare and contrast" the two.

@jasonarnett5487

9 ай бұрын

I came into the comments to see if anyone mentioned Mcluhan. I'd actually never heard of Stigler but is sounded similar to Mcluhan

This is phenomenal. Fantastic introduction to Posthumanism, which is new to me. In-depth, logical, practically presented, exciting, super helpful. Thank you!

From which text is the excerpt of Nietzsche about the invention of the “end”. I tripped on one of your videos yesterday, lol. Helped me clarify some stuff. Awesome work. What are you studying or studied? If I may ask

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Yo. The first quote is from Twilight of the Idols.

Where is that first Nietzsche quote from?

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Twilight of the Idols

this was thorough and well delivered. loved it

@coryhenshaw8487

4 жыл бұрын

gotta agree. this was a well done video

would you classify max stirner as a post-humanist?

Thanks for more great content!

One rarely hears the name Marx online without an obligatory aside about "discredited" ideas (is there a special definition for that word in a philosophical dictionary?) and millions of corpses left in the wake. What if Heidegger was never referred to as Heidegger, as in this video but as Heidegger the life-long, unrepentant Nazi? This could be pondered in story form, since it's not happening much anywhere else, but who has the energy or time or the drive or the will or is moving along that trajectory? I'm just tossing that frisbee up in the air, not expecting some dog to leap up and chomp down. Or, maybe, Nietzsche can be always referred to as "Nietzsche who died of syphillis".

@Apodeipnon

3 жыл бұрын

The 'millions of corpses' is 'black book of communism' nonsense anyway. The numbers are ridiculously exaggerated, and are being slowly and quietly discredited by serious historians. Not to say that that tendency of anti-communist revisionism isn't still there.

"I think I speak for everyone when I say, 'Huh?!'" - Buffy, vampire slayer If most people don't know about this stuff or understand it, does it matter?

@2tehnik

3 жыл бұрын

That would effectively negate all of non-practical philosophy. It just seems very anti-intellectualist really.

@heartache5742

2 жыл бұрын

@@2tehnik all of practical philosophy too everyone gets by on natural consciousness

Great vid! Its a lot of difficult theory, and you did it. Thank you! One question though: why is existentialism human exceptionalism? It depends probably on which existentialist you aim, but in my understanding existentialism is all about our attitude towards life in the face of seemingly meaninglessness. This is not necessarily a human trait, but more a product of our capacity to reason. Right? So if lets say a dolphin understands he is thrown in the world he would probably also think his life is absurd and has to deal with that. The reason I ask is because i think existentialism is opens a door for post humanism, but im not sure yet..

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Hey benjamin! Great response. My immediate referral is that Sartre wrote "existentialism is a humanism"... the general thought is that there's no "real" meaning in the universe except for what human subjects create. If you accept the posthuman argument, meaning is created all the time, often, everywhere, but modernist humans have restricted its definition to only what matters to us now, when our historicist definition of meaning is as arbitrary as any other

I feel like a philosopher who predicted the end of humanism first was Stirner, Stirner labeled humanism as merely another religion that creates alienation. Stirners idea of the creative nothing is also not necessarily opposed to the post humanist mindset as the creative nothing views themselves as inherently nothing as well as the ability to infinitely create. Stirner viewer higher ideas as artificial separations from reality, turning reality into a sacred ideal behold ant to itself as opposed to the individual, Stirner rejects holding these sacred ideals as sacred and instead assimilating what is useful for your own purpose and abandon what harms you, constantly adapting without alienation.

@CariMachet

3 жыл бұрын

Nestor Makhno hmmmn what’s so horrible about alienation?

I was on board for most of it but I got very lost in the Deleuze stuff

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Sorry, it's pretty hard to summarize deleuze because his shots always change targets. I did try to sum it all up in the end.

@Aihiospace

4 жыл бұрын

The key to Deleuze is not to read him literally but to use his texts as tools for your own concepts and thinking. And this of course applies to all philosophers, but Deleuze was quite explicit about this, and therefore intentionally changing the meaning of his concepts from text to text.

@IndustrialBonecraft

4 жыл бұрын

"I got very lost in the Deleuze stuff." Yes. But machines. Also, rhizomes. That is all.

@mattgilbert7347

3 жыл бұрын

@@IndustrialBonecraft That's as far as I got. Are machines rhizomatic? Idk. Maybe a stupid question. I hope so.

@Apodeipnon

3 жыл бұрын

I think the way he makes up new terms of confusing. Think of the body without organs as the will (like in Schopenhauer or Nietzsche), and the organs as the contradictory forces of the world (like in Hegel or Marxism). I hope I'm not wrong

whats the name of the painting in 5:19 ? Its mezmerizing

@remotefaith

2 жыл бұрын

thomas doughty, romantic landscape with a temple

Amazing video

could you please explain what balai is? as in: There are always done human supplements that balai human interdependence with the world. thank you

@Apodeipnon

3 жыл бұрын

Oh that was a fault with the automatic subtitles. It's 'belie'.

you should do a parallel of these thinkers and buddhism

Is this a Patria Pepe Jacket your wearing?! Looks cool!

Hello! Sorry if i am disturbing you with my questions lol. I am thinking about rationalism with your interpretation of stiegler for a while and i am stuck. I am not a native speaker and any of stiegler's work does not translated to my language (turkish btw) i can't understand what is the main problem with rationalism. Is it just essence of rationalism? What is the main problem with rationalism in that sense? Please answer i am stuck :))

@pygmalion8952

4 жыл бұрын

If you can make a video about deleuze and rationalism it would be my way much easier. So please hehe

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Rationalism has two parts. First, that what it is to be human is to have reason, which can discover the true causes of things. Second, that the world is ordered rationally, either because God made it or it's just a lucky accident. So there are two separate entities: mind + world. Stiegler writes that there are not two entities, only one: world. What we call our mind has been shaped by a history of interacting with the world: from making hammers from stone, to making paint from berries, to making writing in wet clay, or scrolls, to dictionaries, maps, architectural drawings, and philosophical treatises. So the mind is not a special substance in humans, it is a pattern of habits formed by a long history of using tools and technics.

@pygmalion8952

4 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills thanks :))

Most fascinating

Thanks! Fantastic!

Thanks so much for this video, something intellectually stimulating for a change! I need some help and perhaps someone might have a bit of insight here. I'm looking at post humanism as being my theoretical framework because of my research in learning environments. Colleagues have suggested I look at ecologies of practice and Actor Network Theory - I felt that all of these theoretical frameworks were ridiculously similar, if not the same. However, I'm now coming round to the idea that Post Humanism goes much deeper than ANT because ANT predominates the network and does not investigate beyond that. However I'm also considering Ecologies of Practice as a possible theoretical framework. You can see I'm in a bit of a tangle and more so now that you mention at the start of tis video that 'Post humanism encompasses a breadth of theoretical constellations'. Can you please weigh in and provide a steer for me?

@Fryguystudios

Жыл бұрын

I can't give a definite answer, but I just replied to another comment a related answer, and I thought it might be relevant for you: "You might be interested in inhumanism theory as described by Reza Negatistani. The name is misleading, as it's not about being anti-human, but neither is it stereotypically pro-human. Rather, it's complex ambivalent rethinking of the concept of the "human", where reason is an outside irrational -- yes, reason as an irrational natural forced -- that works on and through us constantly deconstructing and reconstructing what it means to be human. Thus, there is no essential essence that characterizes humanity, but that humanity is identified with this force of perpetual development and change."

Is this art and rationality thing connects with anti-oedipus's concepts?

I love this. You have a new fan....🤣

Would anyone recommend a english fictional book to see the post humanism context?

Now that's a great video. Since you bring it up in the description a bit, what's posthumanism's relationship with transhumanism? Maybe I misunderstand transhumanism, but you say it's pretty humanist itself, where I thought it was more simply the concept of human (usually technological) augmentation. As such I thought posthumanism would be alright with it as long as it had the right outlook on the subject.

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Props @Enki, in terms of internet time, we're old friends by now. Posthumanism is a theoretical position that goes back to Nietzsche. Transhumanism is something of an imaginative stance considering what could be technically possible, but they don't reflect on what the conscious subject itself is, and whether or not that is a coherent model. I said transhumanism was humanist because they accept that model and then look to building superbodies and cloudminds. If this capacity would be pursued as a benefit to humanity (as an end) then it might be considered humanistic. If it were supposed to be something humans can just do, so why not? That feels more posthumanist, or even accelerationist. But transhumanism and posthumanism can't be directly compared in my mind, because they don't accept the same premises.

@Fryguystudios

4 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills I admit, I'm mostly interested in their relationship because I like cyberpunk fiction too much. I think part of me wants to square the circle by thinking Deus Ex is cool while also recognizing the reality of posthumanism. With that in mind. I don't think the humanist standpoint is inherent to transhumanism. If transhuman ideas were to be explored and advanced from a posthuman perspective, wouldn't it create a form of posthuman transhumanism? Sorry for this dumb question

@Ale-su7xs

3 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills by saying that "this capacity would be pursued as a benefit to humanity that can be considered Humanistic"...Then you could say the same to humans inventing writing as a mean to fix memory and important things for living better. This is also a benefit so it might be considered humanist as well. Right?

Suicide could be defined as humans rejecting humanism. Humanism: scarecrow wishing he had a brain, Post-humanism: scarecrow wishing he didn't wish to have a brain.

Where does Georges Bastille fit in tho?

Posthumanism is so staggeringly broad that no matter how much I look into it I'm still confused. It covers waaaay too much stuff in my opinion - especially things that don't seem like they should fall under the same bracket.

Great video but honestly surprised you didn't include Max Stirner who effectively wrote The Unique and Its Property as a response to Ludwig Feuerbach's Essence of Christianity which can be seen as a kind of manifesto for secular humanism. But beyond that, a great deal of Stirner's critiques and concepts are very similar to those in the video (with some arguing that he influenced Nietzsche and was an inspiration for Deleuze). The most explicit example of Stirner's posthumanism in my opinion being this: "But whoever is full of sacred (religious, moral, humane) love loves only the phantasm, the “true human being,” and persecutes with dull relentlessness the individual, the actual human being, under the phlegmatic legal title of proceedings against the “inhuman monster.”" That being said, I can understand that you may consider egoism as more of its own topic. In which case, are you planning to maybe do a video on egoism at some point?

@olderpig

4 жыл бұрын

Stirner isn't a post-humanist. He isn't a humanist. If one gets Stirner, he can clearly see that "post-humanism" is merely just another spin of mongolism, and as such they remain within theology, that is, occupied with Spirit. Stirner, on the other side, "gets behind" the Spirit and there finds himself only, just as Ancients found spirit when they got behind the world. Stirner's dialectical triad of finalizing Hegel is unrelated to this petty reorganization of what being human is.

@CariMachet

3 жыл бұрын

stari haram what ? “Ancients find spirit when they get behind the world” NOOOOoo and this points to a problem in the focus on words which are insufficient at best >>>>> there are different dimensions we exist in that’s as close as we can get now to explaining anything

damn that hits hard

Okay i have been reading neurology and its philosophy in a phenomenological context. I found you are right. What i can't understand is how we can decide suicide? Any thoughts or popular work about it that could be translated to Turkish?

Is Stiegler's conception of human any different from Marx's idea that human is an objective being, in the sense that its essence belongs outside of it, in the realm of objects? I think he just expanded on this idea he found in 44 Manuscripts

Comment for Algorithm. Thank you so much for making this Pills

Okay these technic works are memories but it is important that how a flint could be a memory-image to particularly us?

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

The central point is a contrast with rationalist phenomenology, which supposes as a premise that the mind is a sort of self-identical set of processes distinct from the rest of the world. Stiegler's point is that what we call our mind is implicated with a long history of technics, all the way back to stone tools. Our minds are historically relative to the particular properties of the non-human objects with which we interact, all the way back to stone tools, but most significantly with the material traces of thought, which is why writing is such an important example.

@pygmalion8952

4 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills oh thanks :) i will read stiegler.

You forgot Sartre; "Existence precedes essence."

Bergson is actually respectable

Honestly it sometimes still stound anthropocentric, that citation of Nietzsche about the world acquiring colour but we are the colourists shows it. We are still the agents among the "cold indifference of the cosmos". Doesn't that look like a traditional modernist outlook that some will say is the one of natural sciences (Even though that may not be true) ? What about the world being the colourist and giving us colours ? It's a two way process, for sure. I kind of like Latour's views because it acknowledges both that facts are constructed by us, while acknowledging the agentivity of non-human entities too. Well I think that's also found in Deleuze and Harraway, but Nietzsche and Stiegler seem still very confident about human power.

@CariMachet

3 жыл бұрын

So on point > I didn’t line up with the color quote either > anthropocentricity is the perceptional issue that blocks life force and connection to creating

@Ale-su7xs

3 жыл бұрын

I think that what he was trying to say is that the mutual relation human-tool has gone way far that we didn't even realize the fact that we were the ones who engaged with "non human" e let mechanisms overwhelm us

I will have to confess that my initial reaction was OH HAYUHL NAW, but once I got over the hipster persona there was actually a lot of good information and discussion here. Subscribed. :)

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

Hipsters were people too

This is my latest parasocial relationship and I am in paralove. Love the way you do a _pace_. Love your use of emoji. And of course, love your distillation of all of that prose. Thank you for this.

@PlasticPills

4 жыл бұрын

So you're cheating on your other parasocials? I am a parasocial monogamist so I hope you're ready to settle down.

@blastthisstupidthing

4 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills So entitled. But ok, anything for you

@watcher8582

4 жыл бұрын

@@PlasticPills Just to run contra to that poster, I don't think many people find the cow noises helpful.

@mattsandell3792

3 жыл бұрын

@@watcher8582 I did.

Why the heck ignoring MAX STIRNER ? . . . isnt it amazing that even Peter Watson rejected Stirner in his book about famous germnans ?

Could you make a whole episode on what you say about carving oneself out of the world? Especially what you say about first having essence under a particular stage is interesting - do you mean that we as a species have this essence? Or that we in our lives are able to create one? How exactly would this be a bad thing, if we refrain from using essence as a form of identity - thus making it imovable?

nice

I have like no time to write a Lit paper on zombies as post humans and now I've disappeared

This reliance on “our history of technics” and the focus on our material world sounds exactly like something Marx would say.

@staysomemore

2 жыл бұрын

You really have a point, but it is also important to note that one of the debates of the whole post-humanism/post-humanities mess is that the dialectical nature of historical progression; since it is conceived to be transcendent. For post-humanities, there is no inherent engine, -ie. total liberation of human kind or class struggle as the primary motor of history- but theories borrowing conepts from cybernetics, mathematical models of complexity etc. to disregard the concept of "class". Further reading may include "neo-materialism", who actually includes same post humanists. :)

Was doing my posthumanism research & chanced upon this channel. Bro the logo of the pill looks just like your face, in terms of color. It is a complement.

Trying to explain why I didn’t text back or haven’t given equal effort towards this potential relationship with plastic pills links like

SORRY --SO MUCH EDITED OUT - DELETED - FOR THE BEST I SUPPOSE.

Spinoza? Oh give me a break Deleuze, Giordano Bruno was the real first posthumanist.

I see pics of Nietzsche, Derrida, & Beckett and I'm like: they had great hair.

Okay but what about Max Stirner.

@AL_THOMAS_777

2 жыл бұрын

👍👍👍