WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.001 --> 00:00:15.039
Yeah. Then, then then the word is yours. okay, so yeah, so welcome to to the session. So this is part of our C 35 on conceptual and terminological analysis. It's an Rc. Dedicated to, as the name says to conceptual analysis, to analyze these sociological concepts.

2
00:00:15.040 --> 00:00:46.790
And it's also an Rc that has a particular. So I mean, it's also interested in social theoretical question, naturally. but it has some some some special focus. And one of them is on critical theory. The other focus is on. let's say, marginalized peripheral perspectives within the social sciences. So with that in mind, we just published a book last year which is called the Centering Global sociology, the peripheral term in social theory and research.

3
00:00:46.950 --> 00:01:10.420
And so tomorrow there will be a plenary session with some of the authors of the book, and at the Melbourne Convention Center at 1230, you're all welcome. And also, if you're interested in the Rc. So today, at 7 30 in the evening, we'll have the business meeting. You're welcome to come. There's going to be also the elections of the new board. So

4
00:01:10.760 --> 00:01:11.649
so yeah.

5
00:01:12.640 --> 00:01:27.800
Spyros Gangas: for the thank you. Thank you very much. So. Hello, everyone! My name is Spears Gangos, from the American College of Greece. So I'm the chair for today's session, which

6
00:01:27.960 --> 00:01:35.399
Spyros Gangas: features 5 really exciting exciting presentations and and

7
00:01:35.690 --> 00:01:39.490
Spyros Gangas: pertinent topics. I'll start with the acknowledgment of the country

8
00:01:39.710 --> 00:01:56.469
Spyros Gangas: the place known as Australia comprises the traditional estates of over 250 first nations, language groups. For nearly 50 years now Australia have increasingly formally recognized the importance of country and first nations, people's relationships and protocols for contacting business in the country.

9
00:01:56.510 --> 00:02:10.100
Spyros Gangas: Acknowledging country shows respect for the country and the first nations continuing connections to country. T. As A, and the, I say, 2,023 World Congress. 2. Wish the cultural protocols to be known to all, and observed

10
00:02:10.130 --> 00:02:18.120
Spyros Gangas: the country we meet on for this World Congress is called Narn. It is the home of the cooling nation.

11
00:02:18.810 --> 00:02:21.570
Spyros Gangas: So The

12
00:02:23.360 --> 00:02:35.609
Spyros Gangas: time for each presentation is 15 min, and I would kindly ask all presenters to observe that framework. I will use

13
00:02:35.840 --> 00:02:48.780
Spyros Gangas:  this warning sign. Okay, for Towards the end of the presentation to just let know people that are only 2 min available.

14
00:02:49.240 --> 00:02:50.270
Spyros Gangas: and

15
00:02:50.470 --> 00:02:55.369
Spyros Gangas: once the all presentations are over, we can have

16
00:02:55.810 --> 00:02:58.860
Spyros Gangas: the round of discussion.

17
00:02:59.120 --> 00:02:59.810
Sure.

18
00:03:00.550 --> 00:03:04.309
Spyros Gangas: So I'm wondering if Professor Brown is ready

19
00:03:04.630 --> 00:03:05.320
to

20
00:03:07.540 --> 00:03:14.250
 maybe. Okay, maybe.

21
00:03:23.960 --> 00:03:25.250
No, no.

22
00:03:25.470 --> 00:03:27.190
I'm not gonna show you. Yeah.

23
00:03:27.690 --> 00:03:28.550
Okay. Thanks.

24
00:03:30.940 --> 00:03:33.259
Okay. Hi, thanks for coming.

25
00:03:33.590 --> 00:03:49.750
Spyros Gangas: So Professor Brown. hello! From Professor Brown from the University of Sydney, is going to Talk about capitalist modernity in transition metamorphosis of heteronomous dependency and autonomy. So Professor Brown, the floor is yours.

26
00:03:51.310 --> 00:04:17.339
Okay, thanks for coming. I I I was going to I originally say I was glad that the session was in the convention center, given what I'm going to say, but maybe by being in Crown we can reconcile the theory and practice a lot closer as well with what I'm going to say. So we can actually live it a little bit more intimately.

27
00:04:17.340 --> 00:04:38.680
I think And and maybe I just want to say that I hope that doesn't sound like your donor or for Co. On a bad day as well, today. I I I'm gonna I mean, never. I sort of circumnavigating the question of Can the new be born in many, in many papers and many work piece of work, and I wrote a paper on Utopia, Hope

28
00:04:38.830 --> 00:04:49.540
and Critique. Once that kind of tried to address this question. and whether it was a while ago, anyway. and this this paper takes its

29
00:04:49.660 --> 00:05:02.420
point of reference to a chapter that I'm I'm kind of writing or in. It's a work in progress, overviewing contemporary transition. or what I turn the metamorphosis of capitalist modernity.

30
00:05:02.560 --> 00:05:06.949
What I'm what I'm going to say today is maybe a little bit

31
00:05:07.170 --> 00:05:15.329
independent of what's in that chapter. and maybe I'm going to. Maybe I'll just try a few things that I'll

32
00:05:15.480 --> 00:05:34.640
test out, and if it doesn't work. We can forget it as well. And and really, I'm going to put forward maybe 2 theses in in this paper if I get far enough into it. But, as I said, the first thing is, it's called I'm working on the metamorphosis, and and I always had some like to talk about metamorphosis is a qualified version of the new

33
00:05:35.130 --> 00:05:39.570
 And so there's a strong sense of a reconfiguring.

34
00:05:40.530 --> 00:05:55.469
a reorganization change within the existing structures. If you like. All organizational forms. with new elements, perhaps, but but not not entirely different, completely different

35
00:05:55.620 --> 00:06:14.300
in in a process of metamorphosis, I think, although it can lead to to radical change, I guess, and at the same time and I think something like that sometimes picked up in discussions of like different phases of capitalist, modernity, manufacturing, industrial regulator, whatever that. That's a kind of

36
00:06:14.490 --> 00:06:23.109
sort of attempts to kind of get it. The the in the extension of the old. At the same time, I think.

37
00:06:23.440 --> 00:06:33.640
as one of the things that I try to address a little bit is, I think, that the sheer planetitude of social theory, interpretations

38
00:06:33.710 --> 00:06:39.540
of a new phase of modernity or a new phase of capitalist modernity.

39
00:06:39.550 --> 00:06:50.349
From the 1,900 eightys, let's say onwards, post-industrialism, post-modernism, the risk society, liquid modernity, late modernity.

40
00:06:50.630 --> 00:06:59.689
We could, we could go through many others. The sheer number of these would would kind of indicate that there probably has been some transition.

41
00:06:59.930 --> 00:07:13.869
But I'm gonna at that at that point of time. but in in one. Since then we're the that we're living in a 50, the fiftieth year, perhaps of that phase of the transition. If that if that's what's going on.

42
00:07:13.910 --> 00:07:20.750
And certainly the transition that comes after the period of the post War reconstruction

43
00:07:21.020 --> 00:07:32.579
of the if. We put that with a 30 year period after the Second World War, which now may seem like a period that was once we were transitioning from. But perhaps

44
00:07:32.580 --> 00:07:55.100
that looks more like a kind of anomaly. Perhaps in in the history of modernity, that 30 year period we might be returning more to an earlier kind of phase, or more more more characteristics of of capitalism. But only prior to that or around, that wouldn't be the same, of course. But you see this in argument put forward by people like Thomas Piketty or the Boltanski a little bit

45
00:07:55.190 --> 00:08:02.870
about the distinctiveness of that phase. I would make one other point, which is more of a mythological point. I think in part.

46
00:08:03.260 --> 00:08:31.769
I do think there's been a process of accelerated globalization or a greater sense of interconnectedness that has to be taken into account. today. Whether that's in a sense real or simply at the level of conceptualization, there's certainly a greater sense of the interconnection of developments in different processes as well. And so

47
00:08:32.450 --> 00:08:50.279
in part, this is one aspect of the metamorphosis that's continued, even even though we see some elements of what people are calling today de globalization in the present. And so nevertheless, I think that that tendency still operates fairly, powerfully.

48
00:08:50.290 --> 00:08:51.840
Okay,

49
00:08:52.310 --> 00:09:02.770
now, it's been some. And I'll section this about the transition a little bit since the global financial crisis. I think in in in terms of this. Now I'll put for my first thesis and

50
00:09:03.130 --> 00:09:06.390
 I guess

51
00:09:06.520 --> 00:09:11.119
the new is being born, and it is to stop the new being born

52
00:09:11.830 --> 00:09:34.909
so in that sense, that's the first to do so. There is a kind of, in a sense, it's should, I repeat that thesis? It's clear to people. So so it's just that there is there. There are developments of the new is actually being created. But it's to block in a sense, a certain it's it's to it's to prevent, or its its implication is to stop radical change or radical alterity

53
00:09:35.260 --> 00:09:49.879
occurring as well, so that if there is a kind of newness in the way that that the possibilities of of transformation are being stymied if you like, or undercut or undermined as well.

54
00:09:49.990 --> 00:09:57.570
And so I think this is one of the. This would be one of the things that's developing as well. And why? Perhaps

55
00:09:57.720 --> 00:10:09.580
it's a it's a problem. It doesn't mean that there won't be new new developments, and there there isn't contestation going on. But nevertheless, there are probably processes that

56
00:10:09.780 --> 00:10:28.250
might be outstripping it. or maybe even anticipating it already. So, and I think I try to kind of indicate one of the themes I use in this. The the written part of this would be that I talk about the what I term the arc of transition.

57
00:10:28.620 --> 00:10:46.309
And so we see, I think at the outset of the period I was talking about, it comes. After all, it comes as a consequence, or it's bound up with a period of so so socially progressive contestation of the late 1960 s. Particularly, and into the 70 s.

58
00:10:46.440 --> 00:11:08.779
And so you see a move towards increased autonomy, perhaps, or at least arguments for it. Opposition to hierarchy, regulation, authoritarianism, tradition, and things like that. And so if you were looking at society, future developments from that standpoint, you would think that things would be continuing to progress.

59
00:11:09.220 --> 00:11:21.920
And I do think in 1 one sphere at least, that has progressed, or there is a big difference in that transition, and I would say there has been a change at the level of the moral order of social integration.

60
00:11:22.290 --> 00:11:40.230
and that that is still something that's working itself out. But there have been some rather significant and substantial changes at the level of family relationships, for instance, gender relationships, and so on, that that are part of a

61
00:11:40.320 --> 00:11:48.770
a different moral order, I think, and and also in parent children, relationships and all sorts of things at the level of even basic social interaction. There may be changes

62
00:11:48.870 --> 00:12:02.570
going on in the in the moral order of those things as well. At the same time, I would say they've become more politicized as a consequence, so that they were once upon a time. perhaps fairly stable, almost traditionalistic.

63
00:12:02.600 --> 00:12:05.940
And therefore they've been opened up to contestation a lot more.

64
00:12:06.060 --> 00:12:29.639
As a consequence of that. That's why we see also potential arguments about the backlash against these changes that are progressive in that domain. But I think I think the one where is the most evident, almost easy to illustrate. This arc of transition is in relation to the arguments about information technology in the network society. And I think I think in one sense this is kind of exemplifies it, because.

65
00:12:29.720 --> 00:12:53.449
although they were originally both Utopian and Dystopian projections about what that would be. The consequences of the the Internet, the network society, and so on of the world web. And one of these things there was a sense that the basic institutional structure of them were were incompatible with certain aspects of capitalism, and that this would produce a kind of

66
00:12:53.800 --> 00:13:05.749
a Utopia in certain people's minds, because it was difficult to see how knowledge or information could be totally private property in one sense, or totally appropriated.

67
00:13:05.780 --> 00:13:07.480
And if you even

68
00:13:07.520 --> 00:13:31.540
there read the the paper, I, with Simon Susten on the and the austerity movements where we drew on a manual. Cassell's argument about this, you'll see this kind of Utopian discourse about how people with the kind of experience of these practices would be more voluntaryistic self organizing. They'd be based on mutuality and network that, and so on rather than a hierarchy.

69
00:13:31.540 --> 00:13:43.410
And so we kind of see the kind of Utopian projections that that were made about about this sphere. And I think there's been subsequently a massive shift.

70
00:13:43.590 --> 00:14:05.469
Or is this an arc in which those Utopian projections are now much more downplayed, and much more the Dystopian dystopian view, I suppose, of of that sphere is much more prominent, I think. I think, if you look at the book by Shoshana Zupov on surveillance. Capitalism is a good example of this kind of

71
00:14:05.470 --> 00:14:31.949
shift in in perspective, and particularly showing that what what might have looked like it was going to be kind had some more emancipatory potential, and in it, at least in certain people's mind, has now seen to be more offering, more pervasive forms of control, regulation, surveillance, and so on like that. And so I think I think that would be one area of erosion, but we could see other. Where is like the public sphere? A little bit, certainly, in terms of newspaper readership.

72
00:14:31.950 --> 00:14:41.389
But that's sort of declining. So the argument, if we were to have a massive, we'd say the the possibility of a critical public sphere is probably under threat a little bit to some extent.

73
00:14:41.450 --> 00:14:51.909
We also see, as I said, some authoritarian reactions to progressive domains, particularly, as I said, in terms of areas of social integration

74
00:14:51.980 --> 00:14:55.129
at the same time. So we see both

75
00:14:55.290 --> 00:15:04.450
kind of reactions to the, to progressive developments of that period as well, or the the outlook as well. I think I think the other thing that's also

76
00:15:04.730 --> 00:15:17.719
interesting, or at least one way of looking at this is also the the tendency that people have picked up for them, to be for them to persist, and to some sense be enacted, but to have not not be institutionalised

77
00:15:17.750 --> 00:15:20.750
in the terms in which the people expected them to be

78
00:15:20.770 --> 00:15:33.180
so. In that sense, I think about Boltanski and Chipello's analysis of the new spirit of capitalism in which they try to show how what a discourses of kind of emancipation we're in one sense

79
00:15:33.740 --> 00:16:02.080
modify it. Adopted, but modified in the process by capitalism to sustain the motivational basis of people working and things like that. Now, another example. This, I think, is Nancy phrase's argument about the ambiguous legacy of feminism one since, and and and if you, if you don't know for his argument about this, which which I don't have time to go into here, But but if you do know it, you'll see that she talks about how, in how, in one sense,

80
00:16:02.150 --> 00:16:21.360
arguments about increasing autonomy in the family were would intersect with also developments within the sphere of capitalist social relations. And so, therefore, we could, you could have some level of emancipation at one level, but also in one sense the undermining of it at another level.

81
00:16:21.700 --> 00:16:41.529
as well, or undermining of other forms of existing solidarity or or social rights that existed. So you can see this kind of ambiguity in the develops. What does this tell us about the theories of a transition, and what we can learn about the limitations? I think the the first thing is that the theories of transition, I think, reflect the initial phase

82
00:16:41.530 --> 00:17:05.440
of the processes of the of the time, and that transition, and so where where they it did look like the new would be born for them and in different ways, and that was also they emphasize the contingencies. I think they use categories a lot like liquidity, contingency, flexibility, post-ordism, and all of these kind of things.

83
00:17:05.450 --> 00:17:07.570
and I think in one sense

84
00:17:07.630 --> 00:17:19.830
we would see that subsequently this the structural factors have come back, and becoming more significant than they than they may have expected as well, not not never in quite the same terms, of course.

85
00:17:20.070 --> 00:17:41.299
but that would be one thing about it that those that they were out, that often their their frameworks reflected that as well. The second thing is, even though many of them recognize the crisis of the welfare state in one sense, at that point of time, and how it was undergoing. I don't think they really understood the possibilities of how far it would be undercut

86
00:17:41.300 --> 00:18:05.219
in many cases, and what the implications of that would be as well. So I think, if you look at this, you can see today that the quite different forms of analysis have been put forward about the rise of the role of class, and so on. But if you look at it also, you can see, like, if you compare the 2 arguments about the problems of legitimation crisis. If you compare, they have a mass scenario in the book.

87
00:18:05.370 --> 00:18:07.610
a legitimation crisis.

88
00:18:08.100 --> 00:18:14.510
and and the Latin. The more recent version of the argument about legitimation crisis by Manuel Costelles in his book Rupture.

89
00:18:14.620 --> 00:18:43.560
And you can see that time of the same basic developments have produced different responses to them at different point conjunctions of time as well. so this suggests it's all much more mixed and complicated, right? That that was, that's not what what I'm really here to say. I suppose I should say my second thesis, and not just keep you waiting on that. So I should. I may interrupt it. Just put up the sign for 2 min. it's it's up. I've seen it, I've it's great, fantastic. Sorry. Yes, sir.

90
00:18:43.700 --> 00:18:55.700
I do think. And what what is. What I would say is that I've tried to develop a things which I won't really be able to go into, but I call it corporate incorporation.

91
00:18:55.970 --> 00:19:15.229
And so in that sense, it's a certain corporate form which is not just present within capitalism. I think you can find it also, perhaps in in Chinese modernization elements of it, too. and and a certain kind of including cooperation, of course, comes from the the demand for autonomy in some sense.

92
00:19:15.300 --> 00:19:29.919
And so it's it's it's incorporating on the basis of assumptions of meeting some sort of normative assumption about the need to make claims for autonomy. At the same time it's mechanisms of corporatization are undermining them.

93
00:19:29.930 --> 00:19:56.439
And I think I think this is the kind of principle that's going on in capitalist mood. I don't have time to go into it now. But I think I think this is a principle that's going on today. And so this is a kind of it's going to. One of the one of the underlying assumptions of this kind of incorporation is what's termed reflexive control. And it's unlike other forms of control in which you kind of regulate things. The reflexive control is to use information to anticipate what's going to happen in the future.

94
00:19:56.780 --> 00:20:08.399
And so where the other one was to try and minimize people's participation and and to to regulate it. The new form of corporate incorporation is to actually get you to participate.

95
00:20:08.400 --> 00:20:28.770
to volunteer to to engage in surveys, to confess whatever it is in this sense to to, to, to, to give off information, whether it's true through through purchasing things, whether it's to participating in things. And it's then to use that information, to regulate in advance.

96
00:20:28.770 --> 00:20:34.530
to make future predictions on the basis of that. And I think the capacity for doing that is has grown exponentially.

97
00:20:34.750 --> 00:20:44.970
And so this form of corporate, cooperating corporation they want you to participate. But in my book, critical social theory. I say alienation today is compelled but thwarted participation.

98
00:20:45.220 --> 00:20:52.019
So you you're you're kind of obligated to participate and be involved. and to sign up to things.

99
00:20:52.090 --> 00:20:56.990
but on the assumption that you're going to this is going to enable you to become more autonomous.

100
00:20:57.060 --> 00:21:20.150
That's how it's presented to people. but in reality it's going to undermine that possibility, and out of that they will, of course, come in all sorts of frustration, discontent, and and and but but also demoralization. So it's ambiguous what the consequences this will be. But the the depth of this, I think, is part of what's being born today, and it will block the new, the real new being born.

101
00:21:20.220 --> 00:21:24.470
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much, Professor Brown, and this is a concluding you, Mark. Thank you for

102
00:21:24.590 --> 00:21:53.639
Spyros Gangas: Observing the the timeframe, and I would like to kindly ask Professor, when of from the University of Frankfurt to come to the podium he will talk to us about the standpoint of the proletariat today. it kind request. Try, please, not to have your notes in front of the Go fixed podium camera so that I can see you rather than sure. I just need to. I don't know how to set up my my Powerpoint.

103
00:21:53.990 --> 00:21:59.020
right? yes, we just okay.

104
00:21:59.700 --> 00:22:01.970
no. But sure

105
00:22:03.810 --> 00:22:04.540
you

106
00:22:10.340 --> 00:22:11.300
it. Great.

107
00:22:12.660 --> 00:22:14.350
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much.

108
00:22:17.210 --> 00:22:18.330
Like this is.

109
00:22:23.760 --> 00:22:25.260
okay. Thanks. A lot.

110
00:22:25.660 --> 00:22:30.550
Spyros Gangas: Okay. yeah, you can. Yes, so thank you very much. Thank you.

111
00:22:30.690 --> 00:23:00.049
Thank you very much. Speedos. thank you all for being here. And so what I will. What I will present today is a chapter written for this book that I was talking about earlier the centering global sociology. So so right, what I tried to do in this chapter is to reconsider, to reinterpret your glucose notion of the standpoint of the proletariat, which he articulated, together with the notion of verification in history and class consciousness. A book published exactly 100 years ago.

112
00:23:00.050 --> 00:23:09.179
And so, yeah, so I mean, my intention is to to think via this notion possible struggles, social struggles today.

113
00:23:09.180 --> 00:23:11.909
And so, okay, 1 s.

114
00:23:14.660 --> 00:23:38.389
okay, good. So why is this? Why do I think this is interesting? So I think in relation to the history of critical theory. There are 2 things that can be pointed out on the one hand, so the notion of verification has become very central to critical theory. Almost every major author in critical theory, since Lucas has had the notion of verification, it has given a specific interpretation of that notion. On the other hand, the notion of the standpoint of the proletariat.

115
00:23:38.390 --> 00:24:03.389
It has the contrary, the the the inverse Or a very different destiny has been subjective to harsh criticism. So What happens here is a sort of paradoxical situation, if we consider Lucas's view on this, because for him these 2 notions should come together, I mean they are in strictly connected. So, on the one hand, if we understand the contradictions of capitalist verification.

116
00:24:03.390 --> 00:24:30.950
we're also able to understand what are the potentials for struggles for overcoming verification, namely, struggles driven by collective subjects, such as the proletariat which would be able to overcome the fragmentation, the exploitation of capitalist verification, and to provide unity to this fragmented world. Now, what we see recently, I mean, and there are, of course, the notion of

117
00:24:30.950 --> 00:24:55.889
the standpoint of the proletariat was, I mean, it was correctly criticised. There were many problems that I won't be able to go into detail here, but then we reach a sort of paradox, because, on the one hand, we have several theories of verification today that analyse what is the rayfied subjectivity. What is Rafide live? On the other hand, some of these theories also provide images of what is a non rafide life. What is a non rayfite

118
00:24:55.890 --> 00:25:19.349
subject? But I think that in. In most of these theories you have a sort of gap between these 2 dimensions. We have, we know what is verification. We know what it's not, but how can we get from one to the other? That's much less clear. And I would say that in many cases is not neither even addressed so, for. So I think it would be very important to address this question, namely, how can collective struggles against capitalists? Verification

119
00:25:19.350 --> 00:25:27.919
emerge on the basis of the very contradictions of capitalist society. How can we see the potentials in reality for overcoming verification?

120
00:25:28.030 --> 00:25:49.289
So first, a couple of words about verification, I won't be able to go very deeply into this, so I would claim that there are 2 dimensions to verification. On the one hand, there is the concealment of the concrete by the abstract, so the world loses its concrete, qualitative, organic aspect, and take on an abstract, quantitative, mechanical character. And so

121
00:25:49.470 --> 00:26:01.630
I think, if we stay here, I mean. This is an important dimension of verification. But, however, if we stay here, there are certain risks, and and I think that some of the theories of verification that are being presented nowadays

122
00:26:01.660 --> 00:26:21.160
are actually very close to this. Risk. That, then. Well, then, what is the solution? Well, a return to some sort of forgotten essence, a connection with the earth connecting with nature, that was, you know, prevalent in other societies, pre-modern societies, or non-mander societies. But there's a risk here of a certain reactionary critique of modernity.

123
00:26:21.240 --> 00:26:46.239
Then there's a second dimension of the critique of Verification, which is The notion that verification conceals Rafide forms concealed themselves as historical products, so they appeared as something passively given to us, not something that we act actively produce. And so this is, I think, an important notion to be held together with the first dimension. But also it can lead to certain certain problems if we think

124
00:26:46.240 --> 00:27:03.699
only of verification. Okay, we need to be active. We need to not be passive anymore. It can lead to certain forms of let's call it subjective imperialism. So we need a strong subject that will take hold of the world, dominate nature and finally grasp, you know. So my idea here is that we need to keep

125
00:27:03.700 --> 00:27:08.639
in mind these 2 dimensions together and in their tension, because, as we see

126
00:27:08.880 --> 00:27:37.140
both of them, I mean, each of them point to a different direction. The first of them we can say, Well, it's a sort of kind of reconnecting with nature, and the second one we can say with domination of nature, and so I don't think we need to choose between them. But we need to keep both together. And let's see if if what I see in in the following indicates something of that. So I will focus here on how Lucas understands the process of emergence

127
00:27:37.140 --> 00:28:02.009
of a revolutionary subject. We might think of an emancipatory subject or emancipatory processes. So and I will I I reconstructed in in terms of several steps, so to speak. So the first step is the one that you know bourgeois consciousness, the ideal, the ideology of capitalism. And what happens here, according to Lucas, is that you have an active subject. You have individuals that think of themselves as active subjects

128
00:28:02.010 --> 00:28:26.009
who are able to dominate the world which you know. Just do it, you can. You can make it, etc. So these subjects attempt to dominate the world by providing it with a rational form, and, on the other hand, you have passive objects expected to comply with such a rationalization. So you have a nature as may or matter, that you can, you know, give the form whatever that you like, or any sorts of other objects that are

129
00:28:26.010 --> 00:28:49.300
that you can. submit according to your will. You know you can change the world, break paradigms, and so on and so forth. So the problem here is that this individual does not see itself as a material being which is bound to the object. You know it. You have an active, calculating subject which is capable of abstraction, and you have mer stuff in the world that you give rational form to. So this is.

130
00:28:49.300 --> 00:28:54.320
so to speak, the ideology of capitalism according to Lucas.

131
00:28:54.370 --> 00:29:19.769
So but then I mean, he already points out that the limits of this experience already appear every now and then. So you're trying to transform the world, to dominate, to give form to the objects. However, sometimes you can't. The objects resist, and somehow you're not able to just do it. You're not able to to break paradigms. Sort of. There's a resistance of nature or resistance of materiality.

132
00:29:20.010 --> 00:29:33.140
So it is on the basis of this resistance that. Then we move to the second step. so I'll I'll try to be more clear. So I mean, this tab happens when I mean for Lucas it happens.

133
00:29:33.660 --> 00:29:51.449
especially if not only with the the working class, I mean the worker, the individual worker in the factory. See, he says, so, the capitalist and the bourgeois workers, intellectuals, academics, or he says, the journalists, the but the bureaucrats they tend to hold on to that.

134
00:29:51.450 --> 00:30:07.189
you know, margin, the little margin of freedom that they have, and they can hold the the notion that well, we are active subjects. But he says the worker in the factory can't you know, because and I quote in every aspect of daily life in which the individual worker imagines himself

135
00:30:07.189 --> 00:30:32.170
to be the subject of his own life. He finds this to be an illusion that is destroyed by the immediacy of his existence. So the idea here is that the work in the factory, I mean, it's obvious that he, he, or she is being dominated by forces outside of himself or herself. So So this worker can acknowledge that he or she is normal no more than a cipher reduced to an abstract quantity, a mechanized

136
00:30:32.170 --> 00:31:02.060
rationalized tool. So this is an important step for Lucas, because it makes one acknowledged. You know the domination of these abstract forces of capitalism to some degree, of course this is not sufficient, I mean, how can this be revolutionary? It can lead? It might lead. Only if one stops here. Just well, I'm a passive object. I'm not an actic subject. How can I do some sort of new desperation, nihilism, and so on and so forth, but still is an important step to break that illusion of activity

137
00:31:02.240 --> 00:31:11.669
of our all powerful activity, so to move forward in the process of emergence of an emancipatory subject.

138
00:31:11.990 --> 00:31:26.220
There's a next step. So this is the step where the worker not only acknowledges, and I hear I'm saying the worker, because for Lucas is the worker. But the the whole idea of this reconstruction is to think many forms of of social struggles, not only class struggles.

139
00:31:26.280 --> 00:31:36.780
so at a certain point, the worker might connect. You know the fact that he or she is dominated by these abstract forces

140
00:31:36.780 --> 00:32:00.740
to their own bodily experience. I'll give an example. So some years ago, in sociological research on classes in Brazil, I interviewed one subject about his process of acknowledging or coming to terms with his depression. And so, initially, he didn't actually realize that he was depressed. Actually, he said, well, I used to wake up very early to go to work, and I love my work.

141
00:32:00.740 --> 00:32:09.580
And then I started. I couldn't wake up anymore. I I was waking up every time later and later. And so at this point.

142
00:32:09.580 --> 00:32:34.580
okay, there, this. This brings some difficulties. I mean he has some sufferings in his life, but still I mean the connection to to brother social forces, or even to His work is not really, really, really clear. What he can feel is like this, his body is resisting. To go to work so. But there's a point where he did realize. Well, I exactly. I don't. My body doesn't go to work. I'm depressed because of what's happening

143
00:32:34.580 --> 00:32:39.849
in my job. So this is the point where one connects

144
00:32:39.860 --> 00:33:02.750
one's passivity dominate, being dominated by social forces to one's vulnerability to the fact that one has a body that is suffering these processes. And so at this point, in my own word, so one realizes that one not merely has a body which resists abstraction, but one is a living, vulnerable body which suffers and experiences abstraction.

145
00:33:02.760 --> 00:33:15.309
So at this point, this has some further components that I think are important for social struggles, because at this point, when you recognize that you have a you, you are a vulnerable body, so to speak.

146
00:33:15.310 --> 00:33:40.310
You can realize that you are part of life in general, and there are other living beings that are experiencing these very same processes. So there's a process here where you're no longer an individual, an isolated individual. But you've realized that you're part of a living network of or entanglement of living beings. And so at this point, practices of care might start to develop because I can start caring for myself, I realize that I have a body.

147
00:33:40.310 --> 00:34:07.830
so I need to care for myself, but I also can care for other living beings. And so just. An example of how this can be blocked, so to speak, like the the the person who who goes into burnout doesn't actually realize is that he or she has a body. Of course you might ask the person, do you have a body? Yeah, sure I have. But you know you're not really taking in that into account, because you're working so hard until your body just says, Stop it. So I think this is an important moment.

148
00:34:07.980 --> 00:34:18.240
But of course, I mean, okay, you're passive. You're vulnerable. Then what you know you're taking care of yourself, of each other. But you know How? How can that propel social change?

149
00:34:18.240 --> 00:34:46.709
And that's why I mean the next step. Then. According to Lucas, in my reading so once suffering is perceived as the effect of an abstraction process unto a vulnerable body. The resistances to this process may appear accordingly, as one's own resistances, that is, as the expression of a body's living force. So going again to the example that I gave of the subject that the body is resisting, so at that point the body is resisting. It's not my resistance, something external to myself.

150
00:34:46.710 --> 00:35:08.149
But at this point, if you realize that you have a body, that you are a vulnerable body, that resistance which could appear as a weakness. You know I cannot overcome and go to work. It appears actually a power as a force, it is your body yourself resisting to participate in those processes of domination. And so, of course, if you bring 150,

151
00:35:08.150 --> 00:35:32.469
this power That is appearing as weakness, but it's actually power with other powers from other subjects that you already are, as we saw connected to then. 1 one is now able to see oneself as the bearer of a concrete power or a concrete labor power, if you like, which not only resists rationalization, but also supports it, because at this point one can realize that well.

152
00:35:32.470 --> 00:35:38.199
actually, those processes of abstraction that are dominating my body. I mean, they need my body

153
00:35:38.220 --> 00:35:52.619
to to proceed. They they want to exploit exactly this live in power. So we collectively can resist this by withdrawing this power. So this is one way of understanding a strike. You're withdrawing

154
00:35:52.620 --> 00:36:12.940
your concrete labor living power. and then, of course, then, okay, I'm I'm I'm talking about withdrawal. But it's important. Then okay, if you realize that you have this collective living power to organize it, to give new form to. And then I think this is the point where a new one.

155
00:36:13.030 --> 00:36:33.890
a different notion of activity can come to the fore, so ration activity no longer appears as the act of an isolated subject, but is now mediated by a living force that is collective because grounded in a shared condition of vulnerability. So now a new form of activity can come to the fore and

156
00:36:34.180 --> 00:36:52.069
And so, going back to the 2 questions that I that I raised concerning the notion of verification, I mean my intention here is to to have a notion of so overcoming verification, in which there is at the same time connection with nature, so to speak, and

157
00:36:52.520 --> 00:37:21.960
not sure domination of nature, but some sort of form of activity towards nature, of transformation, not only recognizing that we need to return to to something, but actually being able to transform current conditions on the basis of the recognition that we are part of life. So what I'm again, what I'm trying to do here is to keep those 2 dimensions of the Critique of Verification in the notion of how collective struggles can move forward. And

158
00:37:22.610 --> 00:37:46.859
again, this was based on Lucas. And and and here, I mean, just one more thing, I mean. what is problem? one of the things that we're seeing problematic about Lucas was that? yeah, precisely you have. He's he talked about the identical object subject object of history, you know. Where everything fits together, and what I try to to say here is that

159
00:37:46.860 --> 00:38:00.659
mediation is an important role. So this is a process. It never. It's not, it never ends. It's an ongoing process of reappropriation and dealing with, recognize differences, recognize the limits, resistances, etc.

160
00:38:00.940 --> 00:38:05.989
Spyros Gangas: So I I don't know how much time I have less than a minute, I'm afraid.

161
00:38:06.030 --> 00:38:35.360
Okay, okay, sure. So so very, very briefly. I just want to say, I mean, why does this? May I think? Why? Why am I doing this reconstruction? not based on Only class struggles, I mean, the idea here is that maybe feminist struggles, anti-racist struggles. Other forms of struggle can also be understood in this way, and And my, I mean very brief answer is that I think it makes sense today because of the dissemination of the of of the precarious self-entrepreneur, which is.

162
00:38:35.360 --> 00:38:51.389
I think, a combination of 2 processes of bourgeoisification, where virtually everyone is now in a position to regard oneself as a bourgeois entrepreneurial subject, who can invest and accumulate capitals of one's own, but also a process of proletarization

163
00:38:51.420 --> 00:39:13.879
where this individual accumulation is propelled by an ongoing precarization of the living conditions of ever rather social strata. So I think this leads to sort of aggravation of the subjective contradictions of capitalism, inasmuch as the struggle between the capitalist and the worker is internalized. So one is, one owns boss right

164
00:39:13.880 --> 00:39:25.209
mit Ctl, and I am the one who pushes for the accumulation of surplus value, and I am the one who have to work harder to deliver that outcome. So I think this can lead. I mean, very often we can see that.

165
00:39:25.210 --> 00:39:35.610
okay, this leads to a reinforcement of capitalism and verification because it it's you and and yourself. It's you against yourself. But I think it also leads

166
00:39:35.970 --> 00:40:02.979
to subjective crisis and tensions it might propel the sort of process of emergence of emancipatory consciousness that I was trying to reconstruct a reconstruct before. So, in a way it makes sense. I think I'd I'd I'm probably going to fast here. But we go concluding sentence, please. Yeah. So I'll just leave it at that, and maybe we discuss it afterwards. Thank you very much. Thank you.

167
00:40:05.660 --> 00:40:12.560
Spyros Gangas: May I kindly ask Professor Frank Wells, from the University of Vsburg to come to the podium. Please.

168
00:40:12.850 --> 00:40:13.819
Thank you.

169
00:40:17.550 --> 00:40:21.160
Good that you are here. I had difficulties to find the room.

170
00:40:21.390 --> 00:40:23.980
Spyros Gangas: and if we miss

171
00:40:24.050 --> 00:40:38.520
Spyros Gangas: before you start, if we may sort of like. remove the Powerpoint presentation, which is okay from a Professor Buenos. Previous presentation. So let's make sure we have to use.

172
00:40:44.360 --> 00:40:52.650
Spyros Gangas: Do you have a Powerpoint presentation to to to to upload, or it's just going to give us a number 2.

173
00:40:55.050 --> 00:40:56.460
I have a good presentation.

174
00:40:57.030 --> 00:41:00.239
How? Yeah? But how can you let it see me?

175
00:41:01.980 --> 00:41:03.170
Okay.

176
00:41:04.230 --> 00:41:05.010
no.

177
00:41:09.670 --> 00:41:30.180
I hear you. Thank you. I just correctly. Okay, good. Thank you. That's that's fantastic. So we look forward to your presentation. on critical theory as historical practice, my frame is set. All this critical theory, or Western Marxism in the century from Lukash.

178
00:41:30.210 --> 00:41:51.390
They are not sitting in the same board. This will be my, my, my point. But I will start with a problem. And then with this problem, I can bring in a all, all critical fear theory. Nevertheless, they share, of course, a specific thing that makes them critical theory, but not all, or but they are not sitting in the same board.

179
00:41:51.620 --> 00:42:15.549
the title of this session is found by our 2 bees, brown and Bueno. These 2 guys is a good title, critical theory in times of interregnum, and of course all of you know that they are quoting Gramshi, who said, the crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born.

180
00:42:16.160 --> 00:42:35.650
But what's he left out? This is a critical message, and this is the the Gramshi sentences longer. Come. She's added in this indirect number a great variety of morbid symptoms appear morbid symptoms. And what are these morbid symptoms in social theory?

181
00:42:35.680 --> 00:42:47.720
I think it's nicely articulated by Nicholas Luma, Lumen said, look, fellows, the introduction of the so-called implicit methods

182
00:42:47.970 --> 00:42:57.720
produce the Theoe disaster in sociology, and I think you will agree, and this will make you happy. It is that Lumen, with sharp eyes, has seen that

183
00:42:57.920 --> 00:43:02.040
the theory disaster in sociology, because of the implicit methods

184
00:43:02.230 --> 00:43:11.700
and the contribution of critical theory is for my understanding the contribution of all the theories that all of us know. Do times message that

185
00:43:11.780 --> 00:43:25.860
without a frame we are split into small pieces without a frame for theory we cannot catch the whole. This is to a crime all fear. With jealous but critical theory she has an additional point, and this is

186
00:43:25.860 --> 00:43:45.380
critical theories. No theories know that the categories we use are not simply describing the world they are in acting in it. Yeah. And this is my starting point, that the task of theory is deconstructing and replacing the viral and categories that they are out there, violent in society

187
00:43:45.940 --> 00:43:48.230
and mainstream pathology.

188
00:43:48.290 --> 00:44:17.340
not in this conference, but in other conferences, that I attend 3,000 papers, and I think mainstream is 2,800 is mainstream. What should they do? They have to do this in political researches. And in a way, my point is, all of my opinion is that sociology usually, although the mindset of the of all our collects is very critical. But the practice is sociology reproduces the functioning of the system. Yeah, because they don't consider the categories which role they play.

189
00:44:17.360 --> 00:44:30.940
They'll hear about migrants and identity and this and that, and then we use the categories and go and take measures. It's a huge problem. But but critical theory, not critical theory, is, knows about the the role categories play out there.

190
00:44:31.450 --> 00:44:32.830
So

191
00:44:33.790 --> 00:44:47.980
first, I I distinguish between 2 ways the analytical way and the historical way. And or, as Weber said, there are new little ways, the canteen ways, a historical way. It's a Hegelian way. As Mark saber said.

192
00:44:48.480 --> 00:45:05.820
there are only 2 ways of seeing things. I have a heal or our way. My way is the other one heckle in way. Yeah, well, can't and wevers, they start with basic concepts. Otherwise there would be a chaos of a political event. So we need basic concepts

193
00:45:06.410 --> 00:45:20.469
the other way. The Higg can be, starts in history, and if they they have, say they follow the phenomenological idea that all our theories, all our concepts, are always theories of something which makes a huge difference.

194
00:45:20.600 --> 00:45:31.089
So later on, I'm saying, blue Cards to Hornet. Not all of them are on the same board theories. Their theories will lead to very specific societies more or less. Yeah.

195
00:45:31.390 --> 00:45:49.580
they are always theories of something, and not of anything, not of the whole world. The one tradition goes from kind neo-continism to the early German sociology, Weber and Simmer, and the other way it goes from Hegel Marx, Frankfurt School to Foucault and Wuji in my understanding.

196
00:45:50.880 --> 00:45:51.820
Okay.

197
00:45:54.500 --> 00:45:56.830
And now, my, my 3

198
00:45:57.430 --> 00:46:03.010
examples are Theodo, Adono, Havamas, and Hahmood Rosa.

199
00:46:03.640 --> 00:46:06.749
The first 2 of them. I put them under the.

200
00:46:07.250 --> 00:46:15.299
I explained later. I put them under the Kinesian welfare capitalism. Yeah, without this we can't understand them

201
00:46:15.620 --> 00:46:24.579
earlier. I always tried to apply a donor for for to day. But now I understand. Oh, my God! This theory was conceptualized in a different society, more or less.

202
00:46:25.270 --> 00:46:34.910
I I apply 3 short points on Arnold, his epistemology. There is no first, he does not start with individual experience.

203
00:46:35.250 --> 00:46:53.599
his ontology. He sees a totality. There are many, many appearances, appearances, many social phenomena, but they are all together. As for the philosophy, Hegel, by essence, what is the essence? The essence is a value, form, commodity, exchange that produces his totality. This is

204
00:46:53.600 --> 00:47:11.399
I don't know, as you will well know. And why is this very critical? Because it supposes it shows us a picture of a historical society. It's not just any society. Yeah, with basic concepts we apply to any society. It's historical. A society produced by this value form.

205
00:47:12.330 --> 00:47:16.450
I will leave out the criticism of

206
00:47:16.460 --> 00:47:17.560
I don't know.

207
00:47:18.720 --> 00:47:33.760
And now, usually Havomas and Hornet and these more recent theorists, they said, I don't know they there he is, missing the normative grounding, and therefore Havamas was sticking deeper and found normative grounding of political theory.

208
00:47:34.120 --> 00:47:35.320
I think

209
00:47:35.750 --> 00:47:41.059
there's a very strong normative point in a Donald, and this is the following.

210
00:47:41.600 --> 00:47:51.150
why is this? He's saying human beings are above all, and without exception, not yet themselves.

211
00:47:51.230 --> 00:48:00.100
How can you see this? How can you speak like a philosopher. He was partly a part-time philosopher, and human beings are not yet themselves.

212
00:48:00.490 --> 00:48:16.050
Sociologists would never say this, but for what I think, I think this is deeply normative. And what he's saying, why is he building a theory that is so much exaggerating things? He's saying there is a value form. And this determines everything.

213
00:48:16.070 --> 00:48:35.159
everything in all niches of society, economization in all ages of society. And then Havomas and Hornet and all of us say, no, it's not the case. Human beings are active, they are creative, they they form culture, they. There is persistence and protest. But why is this gentleman exaggerating this so strongly?

214
00:48:35.420 --> 00:48:54.330
I think he's exaggerating because he has a normative ground, and this is, he thinks, under the conditions of the Canadian welfare state in the sixties he thinks there is still a point that we can counter that we can address. There is a state and we can address, and we can change this. He thinks the system can be changed.

215
00:48:54.370 --> 00:49:09.880
and society can be addressed as it can be addressed, and therefore he's trying. He's exaggerating for opening our eyes so that we can intervene. So this is very normative, but it's also he is intentionally exaggerating

216
00:49:10.220 --> 00:49:19.400
our usually we don't. We don't do this, we say, I know we should be descriptive, we should be empirical. We should not be philosophers, you know this is Ad. On this is the background.

217
00:49:19.460 --> 00:49:21.280
Now I come to have a mass

218
00:49:23.170 --> 00:49:38.970
still Kinetian welfare. Capitalism. Havomas is Kantian. He starts with in knowledge and interest, with 3 forms of knowledge, then with labor interaction system on life world Tun, because he he puts his his approach on basic concepts.

219
00:49:38.980 --> 00:49:43.970
But then he's sticking deeper. He finds the basic norms of rational discourse

220
00:49:44.830 --> 00:50:02.049
in in this approach with basic concepts. Kantian. There is no historical order. Adono is describing the historical capitalism in his times. Haver must not have a masses open. He builds a empirical open theory. Their system possibly intervenes in life, field or not.

221
00:50:02.220 --> 00:50:07.799
And why is this critical? Not because anything happens out there, but because

222
00:50:07.910 --> 00:50:15.579
harvest was sticking deeper, and find the potential of communicative rationality as Brown and bueno. Our colleagues outlined.

223
00:50:15.690 --> 00:50:26.759
I think, by all I am asking, why is Havana's not exaggerating? As I don't know it. Why doesn't he do it? Why is he so implicitly open? Because

224
00:50:26.940 --> 00:50:53.010
he, under the conditions of the German welfare state in the sixtys seventys. When he built up his theories. he said he he also wrote about this. He said, it's Lumen wrote you, you must say yes to capitalism, and ha! Amass is clearly saying yes to capitalism. He accepts the order he does not like to accentuate and say, Look here, you can intervene. You should intervene. He does not do this. He accepts your order under the welfare state conditions.

225
00:50:53.750 --> 00:51:13.059
so his social world is not discovered as a given, but his social world is invented. If you em uses Kantian categories, you think about the world, how it could be. There's a potential of rationality. There's a potential of the life world. And we could do this and makes it society more democratic. Democratic, public fear.

226
00:51:13.730 --> 00:51:16.960
Of course, you know the criticism against Havomats, which is

227
00:51:17.370 --> 00:51:23.889
the problem is in the world, and not just in postulating counter-factual principles.

228
00:51:24.690 --> 00:51:29.910
Now I come to the this is very short. But just to sum up my argument

229
00:51:29.980 --> 00:51:40.489
to a new form of capitalist order since the 80 S. There's all, all of you know best explained by Foucault. We live in a neoliberal society, and

230
00:51:40.600 --> 00:51:50.679
from the eighties on, as we also noticed all our theorists, Havomas, main partly mainly Giddens Peck. They give up.

231
00:51:50.710 --> 00:51:57.429
They suspended the analysis of the economy. Why? Because in the newly booked order.

232
00:51:57.820 --> 00:52:06.960
as also Lumen, articulated very nicely, but very with big acceptance of capitalism. In this order there are many systems.

233
00:52:07.090 --> 00:52:08.489
New Months order

234
00:52:08.540 --> 00:52:31.030
and the the system of politics can no longer and should also not, cannot. It's a technically impossible intervene in the system of the economic, of economics, of of the economy and law also not, and science not they, are separated systems. And this is exactly the liberal, the neoliberal world, that you can no longer intervene. And now.

235
00:52:31.030 --> 00:52:54.110
when you live under this new conditions, their politics, law, science, they are playing their games. We are playing our games with 4,000 papers. All of them are the playing. Their games been. Not not one single system can intervene in the other one. According to Lumen, this neoliberal world, that you can no longer address. What should we do? What can we do then? You need a different theory. I'm not saying that is good, but I'm explaining why Hahmood Rosa

236
00:52:54.110 --> 00:53:04.310
has chosen a different approach in his approaches with his theory of resonance. I think, in epistemological terms he is spacing his approach on

237
00:53:04.380 --> 00:53:06.180
on a phenomenology.

238
00:53:06.320 --> 00:53:22.340
It's no longer he's not discussing and describing the analyzing the economy. He's describing the relationship of human beings to the world, as he calls it, a form of world relation in which subject and world meet and transform each other.

239
00:53:22.750 --> 00:53:36.609
If acceleration, horizontal whites is a problem, then resonance is a solution, it's a world relationship between me and the world like falling in love, you know. Do you feel like as a nuns of the world? And this is

240
00:53:36.760 --> 00:53:48.439
giving up the analysis of the economy of the things there, because we can no longer. We can no longer address the criticism. It's only mobilizing and activating individuals

241
00:53:48.550 --> 00:53:54.329
fits very well to the neoliberal World Order. So in his phenomenology

242
00:53:54.490 --> 00:54:08.880
there is no ontology, as in all phenomenology, there are no forces adorno and Alpha. They talked about forces in society, lucrative forces in society, but now they are no longer forces. They are no longer structures and mechanism.

243
00:54:09.310 --> 00:54:14.400
So you know this photo girl. I'm afraid ontology. My conclusion is

244
00:54:15.240 --> 00:54:16.740
theories.

245
00:54:17.070 --> 00:54:29.410
If they officially explain and and base their work on normative categories like Havamas, or if they not, don't talk about normative things.

246
00:54:29.510 --> 00:54:34.589
Audomo said. Auschwitz, is so strong I must not talk about normativity.

247
00:54:34.620 --> 00:54:42.350
I would you feel it or not, you know. So whether they talk about this or not. Theories are normative social practices.

248
00:54:42.680 --> 00:55:06.480
I don't know. created a theory as a kind of weapon, as a tool, as a intervention in the world. He does not claim that everything must correct, that you cannot protest. There is no college, really he I I I believe he does not, does not think that. No, but he is exaggerating for enabling people to understand the world and intervene. So critical fear is a way as always aware, I think in all forms

249
00:55:06.480 --> 00:55:16.220
that their conceptual apparatus is a part of the world and is intervening in the world. But whereas all ivos oscelogy gave up, and it's just empirically

250
00:55:16.640 --> 00:55:20.479
it producing the given. This is my point. Thank you very much.

251
00:55:22.460 --> 00:55:37.200
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much, Professor Wells, and also for observing the timeframes I would like now to kindly ask Professor Gregor Bogart from the the University of Dewsburg to come to the podium.

252
00:55:38.920 --> 00:55:53.999
Spyros Gangas: I'm here. Hello! May I kindly request that you either deliver your presentation seated, or at a sort of like slightly greater distance from the camera, so that we can see your face rather than your chest. That's perfect.

253
00:55:54.060 --> 00:55:56.090
Spyros Gangas: Thank you.

254
00:55:56.110 --> 00:55:59.509
So that's better. I think so I can.

255
00:55:59.730 --> 00:56:02.940
So where is my presentation? It's the first problem I have.

256
00:56:03.570 --> 00:56:07.049
I have to up to to load my presentation. Can I

257
00:56:07.280 --> 00:56:08.949
have some time, please?

258
00:56:22.100 --> 00:56:23.920
I'm sorry. Yeah, we need to.

259
00:56:26.620 --> 00:56:27.450
Just

260
00:56:31.650 --> 00:56:34.130
so, actually, your says that it's

261
00:56:34.190 --> 00:56:36.850
some of the yeah, this one.

262
00:56:37.040 --> 00:56:38.470
yes.

263
00:56:50.370 --> 00:56:57.569
so, and good afternoon. The first, and thank you for the invitation from the organizers

264
00:56:57.840 --> 00:57:02.050
to get me the opportunity to talk here in Melbourne today.

265
00:57:02.580 --> 00:57:25.559
 the the problem is in the world. I think that's a point I will make with my little presentation, which is a lot more than a sketch. Some thoughts I want to share about a phenomenon which is in the world which was observable, I think. Why, during the

266
00:57:25.810 --> 00:57:29.030
pandemic in the last 3 years

267
00:57:29.420 --> 00:57:30.920
and

268
00:57:31.280 --> 00:57:40.440
What was this phenomenon is a problem for critical theory and for democratic society, one can say.

269
00:57:40.880 --> 00:57:55.559
starting I have to apologize for the text loading presentation with a bit, but it's it's it's text. Or if, if because it helps me, I think, more than you when you read it. But maybe it's helpful for for both of us. Okay.

270
00:57:55.610 --> 00:57:57.130
my starting point is

271
00:57:57.550 --> 00:58:14.490
that critical theore, and it's a strong hypothesis, I think, but I can make it plausible in regards to many approaches, draws on a cuts concept of a major subject or a major actor.

272
00:58:15.110 --> 00:58:25.930
At least it draws on. That's a concept as a regulative idea which is reachable by enlightenment. And now I

273
00:58:26.270 --> 00:58:31.550
quote, can't maybe not the best translation. Here, in the

274
00:58:32.040 --> 00:58:36.799
a presentation, enlightenment as a non-age

275
00:58:36.900 --> 00:58:40.749
enlightenment. The idea of enlightenment

276
00:58:41.030 --> 00:59:03.400
from Kant the quote is not age or immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This is a quote from what is enlightenment from Emmanuel Kant. Therefore maturity is the ability to use one's own understanding without another guidance. That is the idea from enlightenment, and of a nineteenth century, as you all know.

277
00:59:03.820 --> 00:59:14.459
 you just

278
00:59:15.180 --> 00:59:16.000
of

279
00:59:16.170 --> 00:59:17.940
the mouse where the mouse

280
00:59:23.020 --> 00:59:23.960
on the screen.

281
00:59:24.250 --> 00:59:31.529
Oh, no, no! What do you mean? I don't see mouse, and don't see you. Oh, that's that's it's like you.

282
00:59:32.140 --> 00:59:32.920
Thank you.

283
00:59:33.280 --> 00:59:37.750
So this ability that's also known to common knowledge

284
00:59:37.890 --> 00:59:51.350
of using our one-on-one's understanding isn't innate. It's quiet and it's acquired by education. And the problem I want to pay and point out in most Western and democratic societies, is

285
00:59:51.530 --> 01:00:11.599
as we produce with in our etc., systems of education, and within the school education, actors which think themselves of as auto numbers and actors which are alighted in this sense. In this strong sense, you know.

286
01:00:11.990 --> 01:00:24.429
they do use their own consciousness, they do use their own understanding to build an opinion about society, about situations in which they are cited.

287
01:00:24.760 --> 01:00:25.990
and so on.

288
01:00:26.370 --> 01:00:39.430
with that, the outcome of a successful school. Education is then a citizen that's the aim or the aim of school education to produce citizens in this sense as mature

289
01:00:40.680 --> 01:00:41.910
actors.

290
01:00:43.730 --> 01:00:47.560
 no.

291
01:00:48.540 --> 01:01:00.210
a little bit catchy, articulated theaters. Times have changed dramatically, especially regarding media, because these, the actors who

292
01:01:00.460 --> 01:01:07.879
experience themselves as autonomous actors, live in a world of social media in the recent years.

293
01:01:07.940 --> 01:01:14.740
which they don't understand. And so they don't understand the ways

294
01:01:14.770 --> 01:01:32.729
information is selected and the information they use as autonomous actors to build up an opinion about society, about the world, and so opinion which leads their actions

295
01:01:37.460 --> 01:01:40.459
as a as a contrast to classical mass media.

296
01:01:40.830 --> 01:01:51.869
where conventional mass media is controlled and checked by editors of the information disseminated by conventional nice media are controlled and checked by editors or journalists.

297
01:01:51.900 --> 01:01:57.689
I mean today also by fact checkers, information, and knowledge.

298
01:01:58.100 --> 01:02:01.400
therefore, is checked. The major

299
01:02:01.820 --> 01:02:07.829
subject can trust this process of fact checking this is underlying the the information.

300
01:02:07.990 --> 01:02:25.020
and it can build up an opinion, at least it is possible to compile a set of edited and very first and public related opinions by a prior press or other other media to build on a differentiated own opinion.

301
01:02:26.470 --> 01:02:28.440
And in a way.

302
01:02:30.460 --> 01:02:39.540
the mass media replace the school education after the autonomous autonomous actor is sculptured by education.

303
01:02:40.170 --> 01:02:41.559
That's an idea. So

304
01:02:41.720 --> 01:03:00.530
in contrast, we have social media today. Under the audited and uncontrolled information, is disseminated. We have a highly individualized selection of information and production of information. We have problems in the the

305
01:03:01.170 --> 01:03:08.500
Opinion building, because false assertions can become facts and German

306
01:03:08.860 --> 01:03:33.010
erez agmoni German researcher. said, while the pandemic that was to talk about a false balance, for instance, between scientific knowledge, facts, and simple assertions which are disseminated by a social media. We had an opinion of one person, one person which which a great audience in one

307
01:03:33.060 --> 01:03:37.919
don't know, a certain Facebook or telegram, or whatever.

308
01:03:38.550 --> 01:03:43.520
and his opinion or her opinion was equal to in the

309
01:03:43.670 --> 01:03:57.620
the reception of his audience, equal to findings of the scientific community which is international community with thousands of researchers.

310
01:03:59.980 --> 01:04:06.010
So the social media are recognized as alleged sources, the autonomous actors

311
01:04:06.120 --> 01:04:12.429
by education-produced autonomous actors. Juice sees social media as alleged sources.

312
01:04:12.440 --> 01:04:25.230
and not only as legitimate source or legitimate source, but also as a better source. And now but why? It's a question, because now we have a turn to something like a conspiracy idea.

313
01:04:26.200 --> 01:04:34.959
Their narrative holds that mass-made media is regulated by political parties, so media, which are not mass media which are not

314
01:04:35.060 --> 01:04:50.220
checked, which are not edited, are better because they produce an alternative view on the world and on a reality, and this alone is is a reason enough to align more and to to have

315
01:04:50.570 --> 01:04:55.910
to consider these a media more trustworthy than the conventional media.

316
01:05:00.190 --> 01:05:05.050
So we have the problem that the autonomous subject

317
01:05:05.360 --> 01:05:14.079
has not proposed for such a media situation the desire to obtain a consistent narrative, for the complex phenomena of recent society

318
01:05:14.160 --> 01:05:26.010
leads to an orientation towards sources that seem to provide that kind of consistency, while conventional media don't deliver a consistent view on reality, as I showed before.

319
01:05:26.110 --> 01:05:37.609
conventional media produce different opinions to same subjects, but different opinions which are checked before so.

320
01:05:38.820 --> 01:05:52.850
and the cell which experiences itself as autonomous interact with the social media, and that has as an effect the production of what I called tentatively here fake maturity.

321
01:05:53.740 --> 01:06:02.050
False maturity consists in believing itself to be autonomous. So while at the same time, being influenced by social media and its algorithm and protagonists

322
01:06:02.170 --> 01:06:04.289
that

323
01:06:04.760 --> 01:06:18.479
I had to to go into deep. But it's not possible here how algorithms work to produce, to filter information and to to to observe

324
01:06:18.680 --> 01:06:26.749
the behavior of actors using social media, and so on. And what we get is a circle of experience

325
01:06:27.460 --> 01:06:33.989
as kind of a permanent validation of one's individual opinion, but the use of social media. And

326
01:06:34.140 --> 01:06:36.150
and you on the social media

327
01:06:36.420 --> 01:06:45.210
use the individuals by algorithmic selection of information shaped for the specific or particular integral individual user

328
01:06:45.770 --> 01:06:48.729
conclusion or a kind of conclusion. It's not a real one.

329
01:06:49.050 --> 01:06:59.949
Critical theory relies on the idea of a major subject who, under certain circumstances can become enlightened and autonomous. Experiences of music, experiences of art.

330
01:07:00.200 --> 01:07:07.569
or a participation at ideas, situations of communication in the sense of Havana, and so on.

331
01:07:07.790 --> 01:07:19.029
The autonomous subject is over able to express a critical opinion appropriate to the observed situation guided by shared values. Okay.  that is

332
01:07:19.990 --> 01:07:36.620
problem. Nothing changes in this field as a critical actor with regard to the phenomenon of fake maturity. But the problem of achieving real maturity has become a serious. So yeah. And the difference between between fake maturity and real whatever this means in particular.

333
01:07:36.820 --> 01:07:46.219
not the idea is we have. do have a problem. To enlight people who think of themselves that they are already unlighted.

334
01:07:47.000 --> 01:07:48.720
And this is because

335
01:07:48.800 --> 01:07:53.410
these subjects consider themselves as autonomous and mature. Already

336
01:07:55.680 --> 01:08:01.480
modern actors do Western, at least in Western societies.

337
01:08:01.500 --> 01:08:10.650
in the sense, I am told, before are able to use their own understanding without guidance, and they have the courage to do so.

338
01:08:11.260 --> 01:08:21.439
The problem. Now that the courage and the willingness to use one's understanding come up against a situation that is not understood on the other, anonymous use, especially of social media sources

339
01:08:21.680 --> 01:08:39.430
to form an opinion again gains the conviction that one is mature, and it gains the conviction to be a critical, thinking, spirited questions. The so-called mainstream. Thinking of the classical mass media example in Germany was a movement called

340
01:08:39.850 --> 01:08:49.730
 think there are thinkers and better thinkers than their site. For example, the scientific thinkers

341
01:08:50.020 --> 01:09:02.659
international, the Q. A. And bicycles and all conspiracies. The theories could be named here all movements of a group of people who think that they

342
01:09:02.700 --> 01:09:09.779
see behind the reality the surface of reality, which is a mainstream and a controlled and a biased reality.

343
01:09:09.810 --> 01:09:12.369
and confines the real

344
01:09:12.680 --> 01:09:25.480
ere

345
01:09:25.720 --> 01:09:29.379
that they are real thinkers, and they

346
01:09:29.470 --> 01:09:36.590
are thinking against the background of scientific knowledge and scientific methods.

347
01:09:36.860 --> 01:09:39.950
And so they are an obstacle

348
01:09:40.350 --> 01:09:42.490
for something. But one could

349
01:09:42.510 --> 01:09:45.089
call real maturity.

350
01:09:46.530 --> 01:09:48.110
So so, in short.

351
01:09:48.690 --> 01:09:55.160
what I tried to sketch out is that this situation is a kind of simulation of the mature subject, and the critique

352
01:09:55.260 --> 01:09:58.719
and critique in the sense of enlightenment and critical theory.

353
01:09:58.760 --> 01:10:06.190
what is the solution? Do we have one little optimistic, I wrote in the end. It's about more enlightenment.

354
01:10:06.820 --> 01:10:16.800
Possible solution is more enlightenment through research and education, based on at least a better, at best fundamental understanding of the changes in society leading to

355
01:10:16.880 --> 01:10:31.089
communication environments with new roles of communicators generated by the new media based on technologies such as algorithms. And Ii, a big, massive research task, I think, which

356
01:10:31.350 --> 01:10:42.240
I cannot deliver. But I don't think we have another way to to handle such a situation. Okay, that's it. Thank you.

357
01:10:46.730 --> 01:11:01.400
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much, Professor Bonker. It's also for observing the the timeframe. Our last speaker is Professor Kishi Shogi who is joining us from the University of of Tokyo. and

358
01:11:01.960 --> 01:11:12.090
Spyros Gangas: he will talk about sociological ways to create human society network contacts and harmony with the planet.

359
01:11:13.630 --> 01:11:16.580
Kokichi SHOJI: So oh, yes, yeah.

360
01:11:18.160 --> 01:11:23.920
Rachel. Oh, may I show my presentation. Now.

361
01:11:32.030 --> 01:11:44.259
Kokichi SHOJI: okay, my presentation. My presentation is social, sociological ways to create a human society on networks contact. And how many with the planet?

362
01:11:44.870 --> 01:11:48.030
Kokichi SHOJI: Okay? And

363
01:11:48.660 --> 01:11:53.540
Kokichi SHOJI: it takes 40 to 50 min

364
01:11:54.310 --> 01:12:05.810
Kokichi SHOJI: to Talk about the original apart point I, I have a shorten the my, the original version of Powerpoint.

365
01:12:06.330 --> 01:12:07.890
Kokichi SHOJI: No

366
01:12:08.360 --> 01:12:36.649
Kokichi SHOJI: A large context is required. In order to adequately understand our contemporary society, we must create this context through a careful reading of the history, especially at that of the past 5 centuries. we must make a basic context based on the first premise that the present of our system, which was established through the trans Atlantic Revolution by European and American white people.

367
01:12:36.650 --> 01:12:49.699
Kokichi SHOJI: Erez Agmoni has been fundamentally changed by national independence movements and new society buildings for home to buy people who had to previously be made, subordinated or colonized, 150

368
01:12:49.990 --> 01:13:06.399
Kokichi SHOJI: in countries such as the in the United States. White people have been proud that they liberated black slaves and cigarettes, indigenous people, and they have been advancing toward societies of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

369
01:13:06.480 --> 01:13:29.760
Kokichi SHOJI: On the other hand, they are now heating pressures from that safe lumination movement of subordinate, and to colonize the peoples such as they are now experiencing feelings of our desk and frustrations about being a traffic band. Movement of white supremacism and Populism have been expressions of this sentiment.

370
01:13:30.190 --> 01:13:38.989
Kokichi SHOJI: Japan join the European and the American powers as we is there to all. it's modernization in the right to nineteenth century. but

371
01:13:38.990 --> 01:14:01.329
Kokichi SHOJI: what's stripped of it's imperialist and colonies to colonialist attempts in World War 2. After the war Japan came to be evaluated quite highly on the account of its successful economic growth, but as the fading to take a leadership and moving towards the more information and large society it has been losing its own way.

372
01:14:01.330 --> 01:14:04.610
Kokichi SHOJI: while previous to the G. 7. As a member.

373
01:14:06.610 --> 01:14:28.329
Kokichi SHOJI: European and American-centered world systems have been created by civil societies to become civil as being a pathway to civilization in the changing world system here after societies will be basically multi- ethnic and variable in terms of gender and sexuality. Age, the degrees of disability. One

374
01:14:28.330 --> 01:14:37.850
Kokichi SHOJI: mit Ctl, and that you to say, societies will become multiple ones, which are not only multi-ethnic but also variable in many other aspects as well. 150.

375
01:14:37.870 --> 01:14:50.679
Kokichi SHOJI: It's nicely, and the States based on them will remain, but States will be gradually less independent, more like Japanese prefectures than like American States

376
01:14:52.940 --> 01:15:22.500
Kokichi SHOJI: and the industrial revolution. Civil societies change from agriculture societies to industrial. Once, while agriculture and the handicraft. So far this repeat production and the consumption on the basis of that, you know, cycling industrial ones produce, consume, and the dispose of materials neglecting natural cycling and including waste, which do not to return into nature while decreasing natural resources, such as Cov. And the oil.

377
01:15:22.500 --> 01:15:30.219
Kokichi SHOJI: moreover, emitted Co. 2 pirates up in the year, and cause pollution and warning and and warming

378
01:15:30.460 --> 01:15:44.660
Kokichi SHOJI: this phenomena called environmental dis disruption began to exceed limits, and dispers from cities to villages, in major countries, and even in developing countries, from cities to all over the countries.

379
01:15:44.780 --> 01:15:58.590
Kokichi SHOJI: The at the same time the air itself began to be more and more polluted by emitted gas. Here, by hindering sheet from going outside to space, and as a result making temperatures arise.

380
01:15:58.590 --> 01:16:19.079
Kokichi SHOJI: The population of the ocean and the air has been aggravating the climate aggravating the climate globally, with the result causing islands to submerged and making their hands narrower. A climate change becomes climate crisis, humankind with increasing population.

381
01:16:19.080 --> 01:16:22.750
Kokichi SHOJI: we'll find it more and more difficult to survive

382
01:16:25.290 --> 01:16:36.679
Kokichi SHOJI: mit Ctl. And by including the destiny of communication in these processes of expanding and becoming more urbanized, industrial societies have been becoming information societies one.

383
01:16:36.680 --> 01:17:00.469
Kokichi SHOJI: The communication by means of paper media, such as books, magazines, and newspapers that have been commerce Since that Gutenberg revolution came to be challenged by the communication by means of electric media in the nineteenth century. And they became a huge global networks of radio movies and television. In the later half of the twentieth century.

384
01:17:00.830 --> 01:17:09.940
As computers were developed in the middle of the twentieth century, our ability to process information was expanded almost infinitely.

385
01:17:09.940 --> 01:17:34.940
Kokichi SHOJI: The combination of the binary method with information technology improved at the technological level of that of the electric to the electronic era, making it possible to deal with information of all quantities and qualities to support all kinds of sciences, technology, and finally enable both the industrial society and the information

386
01:17:34.940 --> 01:17:37.399
Kokichi SHOJI: and society at the same time.

387
01:17:37.490 --> 01:18:02.760
Kokichi SHOJI: Although material basis, it was surprising societies are still limited. Our ability to deal with all kinds of information. And there, after all kinds of mixtures of of information and materials have been accelerating infinitely so that we will be able to meet, waste and perform many things in a limited time

388
01:18:02.760 --> 01:18:20.929
Kokichi SHOJI: mit Ctl, and why the interested society is still basically a world of material production and consumption. The information and knowledge society will reshape it in terms of its forms and meanings, allowing us to explore infinitely expandable new World one.

389
01:18:20.930 --> 01:18:36.830
Kokichi SHOJI: The Information and Marriage society is developing words of virtual reality from the inside of the of the Us. At all. All the of the cosmos, in order to infinitely expand the possibilities of a human client.

390
01:18:37.730 --> 01:18:56.640
Kokichi SHOJI: Information processing based on the binary method and integrated circuit systems have become universally used by humankind with electrically. And the electronic develops computers in smaller sizes and smartphones. following you machines of this mail. And you, this mail systems.

391
01:18:56.920 --> 01:19:17.159
Kokichi SHOJI: hereditary information, a process of all lives is also said to be based on the binary system. Calculation is the basis of humans. All the of the world. And languages are also basis of humans ordering of the world as well as They award a construction of reality and virtuality.

392
01:19:17.260 --> 01:19:34.080
Kokichi SHOJI: by inputting all kinds of languages into computers. Any kind of translation among them is becoming a spectrum in the near future. In the process of spreading out all over the world. Humankind develop different languages.

393
01:19:34.080 --> 01:20:01.909
Kokichi SHOJI: and that made communication so difficult to cause a conflict among ethnicities. Now a perspective is developing where we can communicate to each other as a ethnicities using different languages. If a translation technologies develop among us, a perspective is impact developing for human kind to have a common language, using small computers, such as smartphones

394
01:20:01.990 --> 01:20:14.230
Kokichi SHOJI: with a common language groups such as ethnicities. We will understand each other more and more in our difficult cultures, and we deeply understand humankind itself more and more.

395
01:20:15.390 --> 01:20:31.799
Kokichi SHOJI: The acquisition of a common common language will not only make it easy to exchange information, but also to disperse and share knowledge, so as to weaken various factors which have a cause, discrimination, and sufficient and and human kind.

396
01:20:31.850 --> 01:20:51.990
Kokichi SHOJI: The largest factor that has made human kind. Script has been ethnicity as a basis, it is a characteristics of the human body. A common language will not simply dissolve discrimination and suppression. The same can be said about the differences of gender and sexuality. Asian disability.

397
01:20:51.990 --> 01:21:16.110
Kokichi SHOJI: These are also a characteristic human bodies. They 2 will not be simply dissolved by the acquisition of a common language. However, language is not only a means to recognize the world, but also our means to express and induce emotions, and that means to convey integration of knowledge and sentiment, nothing to say. Our will.

398
01:21:16.640 --> 01:21:26.609
Kokichi SHOJI: and at the real moves our body. We operate your body with our will our body is moved when the will is rooted in our body.

399
01:21:26.610 --> 01:21:49.959
Kokichi SHOJI: the acquisition of a common common language. We work to promote the synthetic formation of a marriage sentiment, and will, so as to build a morality towards the formation of a widespread human consciousness. Moreover, this strengthened this will strengthen our consciousness as part of the global ecological system.

400
01:21:59.070 --> 01:22:04.199
Kokichi SHOJI: Excuse me, I had to skip a lot of things.

401
01:22:08.520 --> 01:22:34.470
Kokichi SHOJI:  Japan was defeated in both from the Japan, China War to World War 2. Then Japan dived as a paste nation with this Constitution, proclaiming no use of war to dissolve international conflicts and made continuous economic growth so as to become even superior to the United States in the 19 eighties.

402
01:22:34.470 --> 01:22:42.559
Kokichi SHOJI: In this process it's civil society under the new Constitution became one of the major industrial societies in the world.

403
01:22:42.560 --> 01:22:56.040
Kokichi SHOJI: But in spite of many possibilities it has gotten in this process, Japan has not yet become one of the leading information and largest authorities. That also decade has been prolonged into the 20 first century.

404
01:22:56.050 --> 01:23:21.079
Kokichi SHOJI: Our China has been growing rapidly. Japan has been put inside the conflict between the Us. And China. In the Korean Peninsula tensions have been including since, while a South Korea has rapidly, grown economically and politically after its democratization. In the 19 eighties, North Korea has been concentrated on the military expansion with nuclear arms and research.

405
01:23:27.040 --> 01:23:30.580
Kokichi SHOJI:  So all

406
01:23:30.640 --> 01:23:55.230
Kokichi SHOJI: by apologizing repeatedly from the hurt of the damaging East Asia. In the British, the agent goal Japan should develop diplomatic relations with the Korean Peninsula and China to make East Asia a key point for the establishing the world peace. By doing so Japan would include North Korea in the industrializing world and create a new information

407
01:23:55.230 --> 01:24:03.459
Kokichi SHOJI: and Irish Society in the 20 first century connect by connected Japan, the Korean Peninsula and China

408
01:24:03.730 --> 01:24:22.760
Kokichi SHOJI: the East will foster the movement which previously came from the West by accepting and approving it in various aspect. East Asia must accept the role of our system, everything by industrial and information and knowledge, society helping me to advance.

409
01:24:22.760 --> 01:24:47.750
Kokichi SHOJI: for that each stage I must use it, not mechanical but organic view of nature, which it has been keeping since before it accepted the western ways of modernization, and thinking that to make you so empty that produce the conception of 0 that led to information processing on the basis of the binary method, and it can reduce circuits

410
01:24:47.930 --> 01:25:00.019
Kokichi SHOJI: introducing quantum mechanics will produce an opportunity for that. We have to understand the cosmological meaning with the the introduction of go down computers.

411
01:25:01.530 --> 01:25:25.999
Kokichi SHOJI: It is question as to whether or not over 8 billion people can survive on the globe or we are environmental. Disruption and warming are being worsening. The world system have built have been built by the Western civil society through industrialization, and it's a reconstruction tool and information that large society we have to improve it

412
01:25:26.000 --> 01:25:38.709
Kokichi SHOJI: with the organic view of nature, activating the meaning of empty toward a new system which overcome the a vicious circle of production consumption. And dumping.

413
01:25:38.720 --> 01:25:49.570
Kokichi SHOJI: we have to deform, industrialize the information and large societies into networks of human bodies living with a system of global ecology.

414
01:25:49.710 --> 01:26:15.439
Kokichi SHOJI: we have to stop the global warming, a divide that principles of ecology and decorate meaningful circles of food production and exhibition dumping. We have to rebuild industrial production on this basis, and we form it as interconnected to be cycles. We have to make the most and best use of products of the information and marriage society.

415
01:26:15.580 --> 01:26:44.440
Kokichi SHOJI: a human society that's still split conflict with each other according to ethnicities, gender and sexualities, ages, degrees of disabilities. We have to change these discrepancies into varieties of liberty, equality, and fraternity. In a social and ecological system which is reorganized as on the basis of a unification of global ecology and human societies.

416
01:26:44.960 --> 01:27:01.830
Kokichi SHOJI: This new social and ecological system will establish harmony with the nature and lead it to new light in all direction. So we will create. We will rebuild a system of

417
01:27:02.610 --> 01:27:08.539
Kokichi SHOJI: liberty, equality, fraud, andkey and harmony. Thank you.

418
01:27:14.760 --> 01:27:29.849
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much, Professor Soj. For your presentation, and for observing the time the timeframe. What a fascinating group of presentations! all of them, in a sense

419
01:27:30.130 --> 01:27:48.069
Spyros Gangas: addressing the prospect of a Utopia in various shapes! And how can spaces of Utopia be sort of coordinated and synchronized? in search of mediations

420
01:27:48.430 --> 01:27:56.840
Spyros Gangas: critical reflection on our say theoretical categories in phase of

421
01:27:57.210 --> 01:28:23.040
Spyros Gangas: processes of ratification system, complexity and distorted communication. Now I would like to renounce the chest privilege to ask the first question, and what I propose is this, let us, because we only have, like 20 min full for questions. I propose that for the next 5 min we gather questions for

422
01:28:23.040 --> 01:28:43.519
Spyros Gangas: presenters and then each presenter can then take the floor and briefly respond to the questions. So I ask for short questions and not interventions, please. From from the audience, and please introduce yourselves as you as you pose a question.

423
01:28:44.520 --> 01:28:49.260
Spyros Gangas: We gather the questions first and then presenters respond.

424
01:28:51.630 --> 01:28:55.339
Hi, my name is James Santos from Brazil.

425
01:28:55.530 --> 01:29:07.009
I have 2 brief questions. for Professor Bueno and Professor Wells for Professor Bueno. When you're describing your process of

426
01:29:07.400 --> 01:29:09.969
from passive to active

427
01:29:10.040 --> 01:29:14.899
in your description, you implied another

428
01:29:15.000 --> 01:29:37.429
individual in the process of realization of one's potential. And I ask, what's the what's the part of this other individual? Because if you consider Amy Alice's attempt of transference and hermit Rosa's alienation resonance, there's always an implied other.

429
01:29:37.430 --> 01:29:54.230
There's always so. And for for Professor Wells, your insight on Professor Rosa is very interesting. Do you think that his particular alienation resonance view is a cop out

430
01:29:54.300 --> 01:30:09.429
for not talking capitalism straightforward? Or does does it provide a unique perspective towards the critique of capitalism as an accelerary, as a multiplier of acceleration. Thank you.

431
01:30:09.830 --> 01:30:15.649
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much for your questions. Professor David, the Straker has.

432
01:30:15.840 --> 01:30:16.990
Spyros Gangas: we used to hunt.

433
01:30:17.840 --> 01:30:39.990
David Strecker: Okay? that is back up from Rc. 35. I also got a very similar question to alter Bleno. considering how the transformation is supposed to be working, how are gaining consciousness and the way you wanted to should go ahead and My question there is in how far

434
01:30:39.990 --> 01:30:50.730
David Strecker: dialogue this course, etc., would play a role. Wouldn't that actually be the proper response also to both of these

435
01:30:50.740 --> 01:30:56.609
David Strecker: and aspects of a reification you've distinguished first of all, and

436
01:30:57.070 --> 01:31:05.209
David Strecker: emphasizing what is relevant right, not covering up the particular, but the general. The the response must.

437
01:31:05.210 --> 01:31:28.209
David Strecker: does not have to be a re, a centralizing. It could be having discourse about what is relevant, and the same goes for a constituting subjectivity. It doesn't have to be about establishing dominance could be about constituting who can go about. In which way? So how and how forward does dialogue and discourse

438
01:31:28.210 --> 01:31:29.360
David Strecker: your role here?

439
01:31:30.850 --> 01:31:31.830
Spyros Gangas: Thank you.

440
01:31:33.950 --> 01:31:38.769
Spyros Gangas: other questions from the audience, for

441
01:31:39.160 --> 01:31:40.850
yep, you can come.

442
01:31:41.800 --> 01:31:46.650
Spyros Gangas: We're professor. We have 2 more questions here. Great. Okay, thank you.

443
01:31:47.950 --> 01:31:49.430
3 3

444
01:31:50.040 --> 01:32:14.089
very brief. My name is Lauren Langman. You can tell from my accent or from the States. I had a not too long ago, was really a journalist metaphysics, and which he very strongly. He spends half the time had wasted but criticizing Aristotle, and then going for his historical argument. My question, though in terms of the point that I hadn't read about humanity not being fulfilled, or whatever it was stated.

445
01:32:14.300 --> 01:32:48.579
As he was speaking, I was reminded of what Mark said. In 1,944 about species being, and part and parcel of species being is imagination. and one of the, you know. He makes the point elsewhere about the difference between the bees and the humans, and that the architect can imagine a building, and it also has to do with imagining of of selfhood. And I do think that in terms of that historical thing, that there's a theme in March it's not clearly developed, as some of the people that write about human nature, including myself and and gigas and people like that. But you know, when I read marks, especially some of the writings that were very, very

446
01:32:48.580 --> 01:33:06.109
limited knowledge about the prehistory of primitive communism or equality, and things like that take place. I was sort of reminded of the fact that to a certain extent that fulfillment of the future. For Marx's vision is a vision of equality, freedom, and the kind of things that existed.

447
01:33:06.110 --> 01:33:26.299
It's sort of in, you know, in the Rousseau, not not the Social Contract, but the notion of you know the state of nature being much more tranquil. I don't believe in the you know, Social Contract stuff. So I do think that this is an important point in terms of the possibility of human becoming. And I think that Marx basically anticipated that, especially in his concept of species being.

448
01:33:26.890 --> 01:33:32.619
Spyros Gangas: Thank you, Professor Ludman, along. But I guess this is the question address to Professor Gwen, or am I? Am I right?

449
01:33:33.660 --> 01:33:36.060
Great. Thank you.

450
01:33:39.140 --> 01:34:02.379
Hi, I'm William Bradley from Ricoka University, Japan. 2 quick questions. One is to is it Greg? Or at the end? And I wondering why it's necessary to introduce the concept of fake maturity? I mean it. It seems to resemble false consciousness or ideological

451
01:34:02.410 --> 01:34:24.710
misconceptions and and obviously false consciousness been critiqued a lot. But It seems quite similar that what? What you're introducing and the other question is, to? sorry I didn't get your first name, but Professor Welt, and I'm a little confused by your conclusion, or maybe

452
01:34:24.820 --> 01:34:46.570
depressed. It sounded as if the The power of the forces. I mean that you're referring to in the first 2 presentations is no longer possible, or that the critical approaches are been dispersed. And so maybe just to clarify the the conclusion to your fascinating talk. All the talks were excellent. I love.

453
01:34:47.890 --> 01:34:49.040
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much.

454
01:34:50.930 --> 01:34:52.279
Spyros Gangas: Next question.

455
01:34:52.550 --> 01:35:01.230
actually, it. Yeah, I feel I felt like the immediate reaction to Gregor's notion. So could you. Could you please introduce yourself?

456
01:35:01.300 --> 01:35:05.350
Oh, Hi, I'm Carlos.

457
01:35:05.510 --> 01:35:16.920
 so yeah. Gregor's notion of fact maturity definitely. It kind of strikes that sense of Oh, it's like Paul's consciousness. But then I was thinking through the discussion of verification.

458
01:35:17.080 --> 01:35:25.200
and my background is not so much on the classical critical theory I apply mostly like focalian stuff, where

459
01:35:25.520 --> 01:35:50.879
you try to think of what's the thing that you're criticizing, but stay negative effect in society, and it tends to always come down to ratification like who calls spoke so much about normalization. But at the same time for him. when you think about it, he's talking about power, as let's say, the historicity of norms and so ratification is actually part of social live, and how it mediates all of our agency, at least from that perspective.

460
01:35:50.880 --> 01:35:59.119
so like when he says that power is not evil, so we have to kind of manage it, and also to go back to

461
01:35:59.170 --> 01:36:00.200
Gregory.

462
01:36:00.410 --> 01:36:20.970
I don't know if everyone's from, or someone's familiar with Mary Povy, and they history the history of the modern fact where she she has this nice. It's kind of very simplifying, but it's kind of a nice framework where she says, any critical verification can only be understood from the epistemology of the mother. In fact, where we are aspiring to say that something

463
01:36:20.970 --> 01:36:37.160
she basically says that something is a fact only if is actually part of a theory. But there is an ambivalence where we actually use facts or evidence for the theory, yet both have to be related. We cannot just take a bottle and say that that's a fact. It has to be part of a broader construct.

464
01:36:37.450 --> 01:36:38.730
So

465
01:36:38.860 --> 01:36:42.459
My point was more that if we think of

466
01:36:43.050 --> 01:36:49.130
Frank. Sorry I was gonna go to Frank's point about empirical sociology, and you're almost like

467
01:36:49.220 --> 01:37:02.180
taking the point of view of the more the classical, I think Ari's Italian Epistemology, or at least in Mary, previous framework. She speaks about like the Moller and the epistemology and the classical one, where it's more a deductive model instead of an inductive one.

468
01:37:02.270 --> 01:37:08.029
So where we actually agree that we need to come up with with the best concepts, deductively

469
01:37:08.389 --> 01:37:22.789
 erez agmoni and a little bit. Gregor's point is also similar with social media like you're saying that social media now, everyone has an opinion, so we can all kind of give a little piece of reality. Our and 101

470
01:37:22.969 --> 01:37:25.190
kind of inductively a

471
01:37:25.389 --> 01:37:36.529
supposedly we're going to arrive at the truth. But you're criticizing that. So in a sense, if we go back to the classical epistemology, we can start to think. Oh, okay, we can speak and agree with fake maturity.

472
01:37:36.690 --> 01:37:44.229
 without having to criticize it from the focalian or all the critical theory perspective of verification.

473
01:37:45.480 --> 01:37:56.990
I'm not sure what the question is for Arthur, I guess, is, how do you see if a verification is necessarily a negative concept in itself? And yeah, and I hope I helped Gregor's.

474
01:37:57.049 --> 01:38:18.680
Spyros Gangas: Well, well, thank you very much. I I will now sort of like reclaim my my privilege as a chair, and ask to select brief questions for Professor Brownie, first of Brown and Professor Soji, and then we can sort of like Try to bring this to a close with with brief responses.

475
01:38:18.760 --> 01:38:35.390
Spyros Gangas: Greg, I was that was actually fascinated very much by by what you said. But then my question is more of it. Sort of like epistemological nature. I'm wondering, as to the adequacy of the of the term metamorphosis compared to the term mediation, which keeps.

476
01:38:35.469 --> 01:38:51.859
Spyros Gangas: which also keeps us more in contact with with, with the traditional critical theory and and dialect it. In other words, why, what does metamorphosis add to the the understanding of the

477
01:38:52.450 --> 01:38:56.040
Spyros Gangas: dialectics between progression and regression

478
01:38:56.250 --> 01:39:05.589
Spyros Gangas: compared to the standard notion of dialectical mediation. And for professional soji.

479
01:39:05.680 --> 01:39:20.519
Spyros Gangas: this is sort of like a really fascinating image of global harmonization. And I was, I was actually, as I was listening to your presentation. I could not sort of like help. But think of

480
01:39:21.219 --> 01:39:43.839
Spyros Gangas: this sort of like Catholic project of harmonization that one finds in people like Max Sheller. I mean you. You. You seem to to to visualize a model of global balancing out in mutual adaptation and convergence of differences in various prawns. Ethnicity, potentially class.

481
01:39:43.840 --> 01:40:01.380
Spyros Gangas: certainly, historical historically, that historical legacy. So, for example, you, you mentioned obviously Japan's militarism and the transition obviously to to to pacifism. So I'm just wondering, how much do you see this project as being tied to

482
01:40:01.737 --> 01:40:20.349
Spyros Gangas: to this sort of like cosmopolitan, ecumenical metaphysics that one finds in in people like mark shelter. So that? That's the sort question. And I'm just wondering if because there were quite a few questions addressed to Frank Wales. So I'm just wondering if Frank would briefly take the floor.

483
01:40:28.530 --> 01:40:29.350
Kokichi SHOJI: Well.

484
01:40:30.520 --> 01:40:59.999
thank you. I got wonderful questions, very helpful for clarifying my things, and I more or less completely agree to your points. First I learned from I I will start with the first question I learned from you as I understood it. There's inductive approaches in in political research and teductive approaches, and possibly we should be Of course we should frame our results. We should not go only inductively and reproduce the reality, but you frame it and explain it so deductively.

485
01:41:00.000 --> 01:41:19.559
But my point would be if I understood you properly, that, in addition, not just framing the phenomena deductively, but you should also be, or a critical fee must always reflect the role of this frames and the the category as we use the role of them in society. But it's a long discussion.

486
01:41:19.720 --> 01:41:30.830
The other point was from Mr. Santos, from Brazil, he said. Bill Hahmood, Rosa, really avoid to talk on capitalism. I think he

487
01:41:31.230 --> 01:41:46.820
more or less he avoids that, but I am sure that he, as a human being, is very much open, and understands all of that better than I do. You know, he, in a sense that he is reading, that he is inviting the scholars, but he avoids to talk on this, and possibly exactly. This strategy

488
01:41:46.820 --> 01:42:04.609
made him so popular. If he writes a books on capitalism, then who will invite him in the main media? But so with resonance? And are you in alienation. P. This phenomenological view, human world relation. This is a good scholarship. But so what should I say? It's in in a way, both. It's both.

489
01:42:04.930 --> 01:42:26.029
And finally Professor Bradley made a very important point. And I also agree. You said, Okay, you could listen to it, and it's rational. You can follow the conclusion. But there is This end result is, we are depressed because there is no longer an analysis left over, and I think you are right and my target. My aim was

490
01:42:26.130 --> 01:42:43.680
There's critical theories.

491
01:42:43.800 --> 01:43:06.360
What's the final result? I agree to you. It's a debt end. Then this fear is, how can we intervene? So possibly we should, you should develop a create a new theory, and I as the other fellow I am following. Partly. Possibly, therefore, I slipped a little bit from Marx to foul, and I'm integrating that, and I think we should go the next step. I don't know where the next step is.

492
01:43:06.490 --> 01:43:10.650
but I I share your feeling that it's a bit too blessing. Thank you.

493
01:43:10.730 --> 01:43:20.580
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much. may I ask Professor Bonkards to come to the podium, and briefly respond to the questions. Address again.

494
01:43:22.870 --> 01:43:29.939
Yes, thank you for the questions. I think those questions were very similar. I hope I understood right at the right.

495
01:43:30.070 --> 01:43:31.970
And so I

496
01:43:32.230 --> 01:43:35.170
I suppose at the same time hopefully.

497
01:43:35.540 --> 01:43:50.080
Nothing new in the sun. That was one the thing it's, it's it's it's it's. It's clear that that something comes to mind like a false consciousness. And it it has similarities.

498
01:43:50.120 --> 01:44:20.379
sure. But I think it's more general that the thing I wanted to point out wanted to to point out that here's a consciousness which itself, experience with which which experiences itself as autonomous, as as reflexive, as educated, and so on. Yeah, so something that's it's more than a general ideologist consciousness. So that that was what was my my aim and

499
01:44:20.460 --> 01:44:29.279
 the for its consciousness. It's more general fake. Maturity is more specific, and I thought of it

500
01:44:29.800 --> 01:44:37.879
rather as a kind of a variation of adornis theory of see my education, or to help build on in German.

501
01:44:37.930 --> 01:44:45.120
So we have educated people, educated consciousness, but they are educated

502
01:44:46.020 --> 01:44:52.950
so in a way educated that they don't see that they aren't. So that's a problem. I think

503
01:44:53.140 --> 01:44:54.220
so. I hope

504
01:44:54.330 --> 01:45:00.689
this is okay. I don't know if I get your question right? Well answered it. Really.

505
01:45:00.950 --> 01:45:14.389
 if if we can. Okay, okay, you wasn't sure. 10. It's okay. Okay, quick. Okay.

506
01:45:15.840 --> 01:45:41.050
Spyros Gangas: okay, great. Thank you very much, Professor Professor. Bueno There were a number of questions for you. If you just keep your responses very short, because we only have 3 min until the end of the of of the session. So just please come to the podium. Okay, okay, thank you. Thank you very much for all the questions. They're really interesting. Let me see if I can give a brief answer to each of them. So the first 2, so the place of the other and the place of discourse.

507
01:45:41.050 --> 01:46:08.350
So I mean the way that I conceive of this. transition is like it's it's consciousness, consciousness, acknowledging what it, what those things that constitute those processes that constitute it. So in the beginning, you're thinking of yourself as an isolated actor. But then, at certain point, you realize that you're part of life. So then the other is already coming, coming into into the picture as another living being, for instance, and so, and

508
01:46:08.600 --> 01:46:33.580
also then I think to David's question, then, at certain point, when when later on, when you act, it's also The realization that you have always been practical all along, as well as the realization of the other. The other was always there. It's just that consciousness does not realize yet. So I'm talking about consciousness all the time, but that consciousness is practical and is oriented to the other

509
01:46:33.710 --> 01:46:48.779
all the time, but at certain point it it. It realizes that, and so the place of discourse, I mean very briefly, I haven't written about that. But in that that's an important point which for me, in the in the transition from from power to activity.

510
01:46:48.780 --> 01:47:11.030
And and then I think maybe there's an element, because I think Haber Mas is in the background of this question. So I think there's an element there that I mean I think it's not so present in haberma's, and it's an adorian element where you realize or acknowledged the non identical, the resistance of matter to being taken into into a C by discourse, etc.

511
01:47:11.030 --> 01:47:12.080
So

512
01:47:12.190 --> 01:47:37.189
But yeah. Species being, what can I say about the species opinion I'm I'm sorry. I thought it was for Franz I. I might have lost, but we can talk about it later would be very happy to So I mean the way that I understand species being, I mean, a productive way of understanding species being in Marx would be to read it with the eyes of the late mark, so to speak, not as something always given, but all as an ontological ground, that at some point

513
01:47:37.190 --> 01:48:01.029
and struggle appears necessary for us to understand our place in capitalism. So that's so at at certain point. Yeah, I think I'll leave it at that. And then another another important elements that I think, at least in my reading. I think Marx's notion of species being, has this sort of subjective imperialism sort of man taking control of the world. And that's another element that seems problematic for me. But

514
01:48:01.030 --> 01:48:06.399
yeah, I mean, I would be happy to talk more about this later. I think this

515
01:48:06.480 --> 01:48:31.129
under time time pressure it's very difficult. And then I think, the last point with verification in Foucault. How much verification was already part of life, I would say that it's important to distinguish between objectification and capitalist rification. So of course, we're always creating norms or concepts that you know are external to us, and at certain point you might even think well, you might even feel attached to them.

516
01:48:31.130 --> 01:48:46.469
but As long as you can always reappropriate them and and feel that you can transform them. It's fine, but as long as you feel that you cannot transform them, that they are eternal, they are given and they are dominating you. Then

517
01:48:46.470 --> 01:48:50.400
I mean very briefly, that's where you go into verification.

518
01:48:50.400 --> 01:49:04.889
Spyros Gangas: I think I think that's it. thank you very much, Professor Bernard. So Professor Soji is is is is the cool for a planetary harmonization to met a physics? Yes, thank you very much for your comment.

519
01:49:04.890 --> 01:49:31.820
Kokichi SHOJI: I have been very, Interested in discussions of critical sociology but today I'm not ready to discuss on the abstract programs of sociology. so I think, learning a lot from the discussions of cryptocurrency.

520
01:49:31.820 --> 01:49:50.570
Kokichi SHOJI: I have been trying to build a a critical theory, a with which we can analyze the contemporary world the world, the global world at the global Society where we live now.

521
01:49:50.580 --> 01:50:15.330
Kokichi SHOJI: And my, my, at the point of my presentation is that they. when they said, liberty equality and fraternity in the late eighteenth century. they just thought of only the human kind.

522
01:50:15.370 --> 01:50:27.299
Kokichi SHOJI: they don't think they didn't think. The world in which the humankind used to leave it.

523
01:50:27.420 --> 01:50:54.059
Kokichi SHOJI: So I think we have to build a social salary from the daily basis of the social, social social thinking. And I think the liberty equality, and fraternity and harmony.

524
01:50:54.060 --> 01:51:10.260
Kokichi SHOJI: Yeah. And I think this is the most important thing to build a social a with these full concepts. that is the a major point of my presentation. Thank you.

525
01:51:10.510 --> 01:51:13.069
Spyros Gangas: Thank you very much, Professor Brown.

526
01:51:15.220 --> 01:51:34.090
I'll I'll avoid the indulgent and pretentious answer. But but Very briefly, this is project is from a book the books called the Dialect of Control and in that book, of course, the term mediation is probably overused. But but just to explain why why I may talk about

527
01:51:34.240 --> 01:51:42.290
metamorphos in this context, which relates to probably the points that have been made in one sense, I think indirectly, by the others.

528
01:51:42.450 --> 01:51:57.350
I talk about the metamorphosis of contemporary capitalist majority. And this is A. This section will be framing it. And then I will talk about it in 3 spheres. Basically one of social integration, one wage labor and capital and one in political forms.

529
01:51:57.360 --> 01:52:18.189
And I think that I I haven't thought about this enough. So I thank you for the question, but I I thinking, months since I wanted to move away from the idea of a unitary subject in, In, in relation to the the way those mediations change in those fears. And then when they interact together, it's more a process of metamorphosis between them. Of course, it's a matter of layering that's going on there.

530
01:52:18.270 --> 01:52:32.390
In that sense I'm not I. I wouldn't say that one. It's one concept over the other, but I do think that if you're going to move away towards a more, what did Frank say about the more do once you've given up the kind of more more

531
01:52:32.390 --> 01:52:56.189
totalizing category that the door no use. And you're gonna look at the the dynamics and the different spheres a little bit, and how they interact it. It will. The then the the more traditional film of talking about this, I think, has to has to change as well. But you use the I for me. I, you still use the category of mediation a lot. And and, as I said, the the concept of the dialect in control, the central to

532
01:52:56.190 --> 01:53:01.700
what's being being done there, but I think I think it is to show the the

533
01:53:01.750 --> 01:53:07.040
and to use a metaphor about this, about to show how how how things get reconfigured

534
01:53:07.280 --> 01:53:14.860
in the process of changing them. And it doesn't mean that there's one dynamic going on in all of them at the same level of temporality.

535
01:53:15.060 --> 01:53:42.529
So so changes within the domain of social integration might have a different order of temporality to the changes that are going on in in wage labor and capital, or in the political form. And I think this kind of this kind of mixed temporality, if we want to use that that that phrase is, is maybe not as well captured by mediation, but it might be better captured by metamorphosis as well. But it obviously is to to point to an argument that gains arguments for for rupture.

536
01:53:42.600 --> 01:54:02.620
you know, because you're never going to get entirely beyond the problem. One of the problems. The basic problem is is one of interdependency in my analysis. And so it's not a a movement beyond that interdependency. And so, of course, the mediations are already, in one sense, but to capture. How? How it intersects and overarches in certain ways I use the category metamorphosis.

537
01:54:03.380 --> 01:54:30.260
Spyros Gangas: Thank you. Thank you very much. Professor Browning. Thank you. Everyone for this really fascinating set of presentations that sort of like a complemented complemented each other. Thanks for the thanks to the audience, too, for sort of like really brilliant questions, and for keeping the project of critical Utopia a live through your work and interventions. I wish you to have a

538
01:54:30.260 --> 01:54:35.059
Spyros Gangas: great great great conference, and I'm sure you you need to

539
01:54:35.060 --> 01:54:41.570
Spyros Gangas: catch the next one in in 4 min all the best for me. thanks everyone, bye, bye.

540
01:54:51.290 --> 01:54:56.000
and thank you. Speedles, for the great mediating role. Thank you very much. Fantastic panel.