olivier auber on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:00:59 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Pascal Zachary: Rules for the Digital Panopticon (IEEE) |
Felix said : "ban-opticon" ? or "anopticon" ? the anopticon [from the Greek "a" (without) and "optiké" (vision)]. the is opposite of the "panopticon" [from the Greek "pan" (all)].. In a certain manner, the "anopticon" also differs from the concept of "holopticon" [from the Greek "holos" (whole)], which "consists of a physical or virtual space whose architecture is intentionally designed to give its players the ability to see and perceive all that occurs there "(2). If we consider the opposition of the Greek roots, we could even believe that there is a radical antagonism between anopticon and holopticon. It's not quite the case: if the anopticon and holopticon "are designed to give to each individual a modeled representation of space [...] in which he operates", the anopticon mourns for the idea that the "totality" of this space is the "objectivity" of its representation, it insists instead on the arbitrary and subjectivity of the points of view that govern the models and on the rules that determine them. For the anopticon, human relationships are not reducible to the establishment of a cybernetic feedback loop between the group and the individual: the essential is forever invisible to us. The mourning of objectivity is made bearable by the fact that everyone is potentially the author of the points of view and the actor of the implemented rules and codes. In this way, the anopticon would be the legitimate shape of a "digital perspective" (3) occuring within social systems. This perspective is reflected in practice, by anoptic actions. In this context, the "collective intelligence" of a group can only grow if: each individual has access to at least one form of representation of the group's activity, everyone can locate himself in this representation, and can change his/her position by his/her actions, this representation is considered legitimate by everybody. These collective representations change with the group's activity. They are their dynamic maps, and they are made from certain points of view. The condition of legitimacy can only be fulfilled if: everyone is aware of the reducing character of the maps and of the arbitrary of the points of view that govern it, everyone can act on the rules of making the maps, and on the point of view that governs their design. (1) EnWikiPedia:Panopticon (2) TheTransitionner: Holoptisme (3) http://digital-perspective.net Olivier On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Felix Stalder <[email protected]> wrote: > > The concept of the panopticon has been very popular ever since Foucault > elevated it to the rank of a central metaphor for modernity in > "Discipline and Punishment" (1975). And the NSA revelations seem to > confirm its usefulness once again. <...> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]