[FoRK] A Theory of Products: Magic, Alchemy, Science... and Beyond?

rob van kranenburg kranenbuster at gmail.com
Sun Feb 7 00:40:32 PST 2010


Hi John,

"As fabricated externalities increasingly affect our shared existence, do
they free or enable great new states of consciousness or non-material being
(the last thing the world needs more of, is materialism), or do they deaden
and supress individual actuation (not necessarily a bad thing)?"

I think this is a key question and only 'resolvable' by act of will. If you
believe living is about a sustainable system of shopping, being quiet,
safety - as in nothing 'happening' - as a default, having some fun at
designated drinking times and in the right places with the approved drugs of
the period then this is fantastic as it will ensure that this will remain
'normaility'.

In a world that has become a permanent revolution there is no more need of
the future as it is becoming evenly distributed (Gibson) and thus also there
is no more need of visionairies or people who are 'change'. It may become
easy for a society to keep their 'normality' by taking out the intelligences
that are known to offer alternatives.

It seems that "newborn babies in the United States are routinely screened
for a panel of genetic diseases. Since the testing is mandated by the
government, it's often done without the parents' consent, according to Brad
Therrell, director of the National Newborn Screening & Genetics Resource
Center."

"It's really a black mark against her, and there's nothing we can do to get
it off there," Brown says. "And let's say in the future they can test for a
gene for schizophrenia or manic-depression and your baby tests positive --
that would be on there, too." (
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/04/baby.dna.government/index.html)

I believe intelligences should vary and be distributed so as to make life.
That is what makes love and shame possible, some sense of striving and
dignity. Some people march do not march to a different drummer, no - they
create a new tune. Every tribe should have one.

I agree that this is my external fabrication that I would to script into the
backbone and the tcp/ip's of IoT, distributing insecurity as a default, as
that would 'ensure' a notion of flow and permanent change that is life to
me.

But it might not be so for other intelligences that vastly outnumber this
perspective.

> All because for a younger generation the qualities of connectivity are > >
intrinsic to what they perceive as the object. For us it is still an
'add-on', for them it is the thing itself.

>
> As new generations evolve the world with these forever altered perceptions,
> does it still breed for survival (i.e. is this survival positive or
> negative)? Does it even matter?
>

In a way, no it does not matter. Life goes on, the planet will just keep
adapting and is not troubled by us or climate change and humans, well, if I
were an intelligence from outside this universe I would think 'good
riddance' at the sight of a species that can not even collaborate when their
existence is threatened as a whole.

We are at this crossroads where this altered state of relationship between
us and objects and environment can be very rich (magic, fairytale,
solidarities through generic infrastructures, a new politics)  or very poor
(logistics, anti-theft, efficiency, safety......). Everything is geared for
the poor option. This ensures that future generations will have less chance
of dealing with the unexpected, with fallbacks, sudden events, as the poor
option scripts in the shortest possible route from an action to some
satisfaction, or at least some possibility of attaining a state of being
'happy' (vastly overrated), where everything is aimed at making the distance
between wanting someting and 'having it' as short of possible. Learning and
adapting means prolonging these states as long as possible.

I think the point is that they do not ''evolve' as they no longer work with
all the options - as a particular sense of normality has been scripted in as
the for-ever-ontological-normal, and that they are - as we already - a very
very easy bird for any cat of catastrophe. We already can no longer fix our
own cars, and have to trust that food in trucks will come into our European
cities every two days.


> What's plan B? Will we like it? :-)
>

It still needs a lot of articulation so I have to get back to you on that
later, but yes I think, I hope, you will like it,

Greetings, Rob


More information about the FoRK mailing list