May 2024 Weekly Update

Scholarly and amateur texts are mixed here, and not all publication years are provided.

本周读了

1 ブリコラージュ、進化、メーティス :文化と自然の統合

2017

出口顯 / 吴佩桦译

This paper delves into the concept of “bricolage” and its related ideas, including “affordance” and the role of bricolage in evolution. It also examines “Metis” as a specific aspect of bricolage. Bricolage refers to the creative assemblage of existing materials to solve problems. Affordance concerns the potential uses of a subject, while Metis involves the tactics and strategies employed in bricolage.

The author explores the presence of bricolage in biological evolution, the animal kingdom, and various human societies, including our own. Ultimately, the paper proposes constructing a bridge between nature, as interpreted by modern science and medicine, and culture, as understood through the cosmologies of hunter-gatherer societies. This bridge will be built through the similar bricolage practices across different societies.

2 Dark Anthropology and Its Others: Theory since the eighties

2016

Sherry B. Ortner

The essay introduces the concept of “dark anthropology,” which focuses on the harsh and brutal aspects of human experience. Tracing the history of anthropology, it highlights the 1980s as a pivotal period marked by the influence of Marx’s and Foucault’s theories, which defined the shift towards “dark anthropology.” This approach examines worlds through the lenses of power and inequality, addressing dark subject matters such as neoliberalism and colonialism. Neoliberalism is explored both as an economic system (e.g., outsourcing) and as a form of governmentality (e.g., the war against the poor).

After reviewing the concept of “Anthropologies of the Good,” the author employs the term “Resistance” to encompass various modes of anthropological engagement with political issues, including “activist research” and “cultural critique.” Ultimately, the essay underscores the coexistence of critical studies of the existing order (pessimistic) and the envisioning of possible alternatives (optimistic).

Neoliberalism 太重要了。

3 加速赛博世：对《神经漫游者》中反乌托邦的批判

白芮

赛博空间，赛博世，加速主义；深度一般，但写的非常decent。

4 Post Capitalist Desire：The Final Lectures（第一讲选译）

Mark Fisher / 阈限雷达译

如何想象后资本主义？是否有可能保留资本的某些欲望和技术基础，并超越资本？

一门课程的 Intro，将会涉及后资本主义相关的理论。

5 机械身体-编码生命：后人类生物权力技术异化的批判

白芮

生命政治内在地催生出死亡政治
后人类生命政治中异化的赛博格主体
- 偏向科技畅想，很过瘾但是不怎么可信 ; )
- 再无生命政治和死亡政治的区别
超越人类例外：人类世下生命政治的生态转向
- 经典 Haraway 和 Tsing
- 既是生态转向，也讨论"赛博格政治"带来的未知可能性

写很好，很好读，和上一篇一样的三段式论述。

6 On actor-network theory: A few clarifications

1996

Bruno Latour

说实话文章一复杂我就不敢在这里瞎写了
先详解 “Network”
然后详解 “Actor”
- 三大 “preoccupations” 以及其他细节（这段最巧妙）
  - semiotics and extanding it to more than text
  - explanations emerge by themselves from the associations
最近 (2023) 出版的一本ANT作为主要理论的 Ethnography: To Save Heaven and Earth: Rescue in the Rwandan Genocide by Jennie E. Burnet；嗯，上学期课上要读，但现在脑海里只剩下一些微妙的细节了…
往前可以读Latour’s Science in Action (1986)，STS领域的必读（？citation needed）
往后可以看下STS的转向（Haraway? 变成研究 anthropocene 和 ecology 了嘛？）

7 读书笔记｜《凯列班与女巫》:妇女、身体与原始积累

姥姥树蛙

本身就是非常简短读书笔记了。一本历史视角，马克思主义女权主义的书。似乎很值得一读。

本周听了

1 人工智能文学是人类的照妖镜（上）

作为 译诗者 Podcast的一集

Some interesting points:

Rationalism vs Experientialism in AI (I am not 100% comfortable with the dichotomy)
Perspective of human-machine collaboration: subject of creation
Lack of affection in AI’s work
Authorship and copyright
Human-AI workflow
Rethink: reader/writer centered text
AI in the future, purely ai generated contents that cannot discerned from human work.
Deleuze’s “creative becoming” (Not sure about this)
- History and Becoming: Deleuze’s Philosophy of Creativity
Unconsciousness in text

Philosophy of mind: monist’s view on AI

More by GPT 4o:

（刚刚在上面忍住没有放 GPT 4o 给的 ANT 的例子，这里忍不住了）

In the philosophy of mind, monism is the view that there is only one kind of substance or fundamental reality, which contrasts with dualism (the view that there are two kinds of substances, such as mind and body). Your question about text, AI, and the mind can be explored from this perspective.

You can indeed argue that text is an assembly of various signs (words, symbols, etc.) that influence the mind, and that AI creating texts is not fundamentally different from humans creating texts. Here are some points to consider:

1. **Symbol Manipulation**: Both humans and AI manipulate symbols (words, sentences) according to certain rules. For AI, these rules are encoded in algorithms and models trained on large datasets, while for humans, these rules are learned through experience and education.

2. **Production and Interpretation**: The production of text by both AI and humans involves generating sequences of symbols that convey meaning. The interpretation of text by a human mind involves understanding these symbols based on prior knowledge and context. From a monist perspective, this process might be seen as purely physical or computational, whether done by a brain or a machine.

3. **Functionalism**: In the philosophy of mind, functionalism is the idea that what matters for the mind are the functions and processes it performs, not the specific physical substrate that performs them. According to functionalism, if an AI performs the same functions in generating and understanding text as a human does, then there is no fundamental difference in this aspect of their operations.

4. **Information Processing**: Both human minds and AI systems can be viewed as information processors. The creation of text by AI can be seen as an advanced form of information processing, similar to how humans process and generate text based on their neural architecture.

5. **Emergent Properties**: One might argue that the emergent properties of human thought and creativity are different from AI's text generation, which is based on patterns in data rather than subjective experiences. However, from a strict monist and functionalist viewpoint, these emergent properties are still the result of underlying physical processes, whether in neurons or in silicon.

In conclusion, from a monist perspective, it is plausible to say that AI creating texts is not fundamentally different from humans creating texts, as both processes involve the assembly and manipulation of symbols according to certain rules and functions. However, this view can be debated, especially when considering the subjective experiences and consciousness associated with human text creation.

三种梦
三重梦在游戏内的体现
“破算工具” 和生成式AI的幻觉 - AI是梦的机器
游戏也是梦的机器，由其黑暗面体现

把人，机器，AI的梦混在一起谈，强调从 unpredictability 中涌现的 possibility。嗯… 我也对AI持有乐观情绪。

Last modified on 2024-05-22