Convergence as a Technology of Social Production The convergence we are witnessing in our social reality is not merely convergence of the media channels, content and technologies; it is even more so convergence of social technologies, infrastructures and entities. Convergence and like phenomena began the liberalization of the society and its process, however it seems the infrastructure which was supposed to liberalize the social infrastructure failed to accomplish its task, since yet again it collapsed back into the social contract and its rigid infrastructure.
Suppressed InfrastructureNot only that the system that came out of six-degrees-of-separation theory (social networking) is dead, it neverutilized the power of network distribution, as well asidiosyncratic and whimsical property of the network/neuralsystem. Furthermore, social media turned superior systeminto suppressed infrastructure, which turned socialdevelopment retrograde instead of pushing it forward.
Zapped out HypermodernizamThe medium as such, even with thetrendy atomization of the audienceand the hyper-multiplication ofchannels, accomplishes its prophetrole and it religious provenience. Ifit is possible to turn any medium,or even any message into a format,what we have is not only theatomization of the channels,rendering the ideology of everyoneis a prophet, we could have theutter deconstruction of all and anyelements of the medium, format,metatext and even the text.
Can the message cancel itself ifthere is no motive tocommunicate it and there is nodesignated course of itsdistribution? Is there a chance fora hypermessage to gain a body,interaction and infrastructure?Can we claim that the(hyper)mutiplications of formats,channels and messages, contrary Zero Pointto Baudrillard’s mantra couldactually be a method to cancelmedia and finally arrive at thebare information and the systemwithout a reference? Can weactually emanate a hapax, asystem with high level of entropywith no reference, which couldendlessly reproduce without anyrecollection of the previoussystem?
MutationSystem that originated from media/technology/socialconvergence and network system(s) created a rupture insocial infrastructure and social institutions, althoughpseudo, it brought to light or emanated a mutation as apossible technology for a social development andabatement of the social contract.
The media with no motive to communicate themessage (as one of the technologies of the media thussocial construction or a deconstruction) where possibleimplosion of value-chain occurs, is respectively creatingan infrastructure wherein systems emanate constantlywithout any reference of recollection of the previouslyrealized system; in such a system the information couldbe detected as an entity which has no relation to itsinterpretation, as it is recognized without a mediator,making the mediator obsolete. Canceling the Media
DeconstructionDeconstruction of the retrograde socio-political systemshould be accomplished through liberalization of theproperties of the system, or via absolute realization of thenetwork/neural systems through mutation of the socialreality and revisiting the virtual environment and itsinteraction with the social. What we could see in such ascenario is not only the erasing or skewing of the bordersbetween media and the social body, we could perceive themain elements of the both systems being deconstructedsimultaneously.
The New SyntaxCreation of the new social infrastructure andcanceling the social contract could beaccomplished through the new syntax, or thenew language (a subliminal one perhaps);furthermore via distribution of the informationthat is partial, but merely accomplishescomprehension through ad hoc grouping in amultifaceted environment (for the first phase),until the absolute cognition is accomplished.
Free Will and Physics (the excerpt for movie Waking Life) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vejSAt-MgAM .If one chooses to be a gear in a deterministic machine (as the guy in the video does), one chooses to relinquish ownfree will, which does or does not constitutes a free will, since the only accomplishment of the free will is thedecision to relinquish the free will in order to become a part of, if I may say so, rather retrograde system.On the other hand, if one “decides” to recognize oneself as a random swerving of the particles one could gainabsolute freedom since such a choice deconstructs and abates identity, causality, and needless to say a Will as such.However, how could anything be created if there is no will to do so? Could we then shift the creation and the will toconsciousness and the actualization of the random particles or entities. Furthermore, what if we say that so called“randomness” isnt randomness at all and it is executed by the complex system, which we couldnt even begin tocomprehend?
CausalityCan we comprehend causality as arigid infrastructure which stops thedevelopment of a humankind, andhalts our understanding of thecosmos and our place in it? However,if the causality is not existent, howdoes it relate to particles or entitiesas well as their actualization? If all isjust a random swerving withoutactualization, there is noconsciousness which could beequipped for the creation ofanything. Therefore there should be,or there is a system of immensecomplexity, which assumes self-consciousness and self-actualizationof its objects/particles/entities and inwhich the causality is the mostrestricted system.
The New SystemThe system has to be quirky and Paradoxically, Suprasystemunstable, with the high level of entropy, is not superordinate to anyin order to utilize all of the properties other system.of the system. Properties: Wobbly Fluid Infrastructure constantly evolves Intelligent enough to adapt to any number of variables and their interactions Able for constant (self)upgrade Able to create environments Able to create realities
The connection between social reality and cosmology is in theSocial and Cosmology phenomenon in which only some physicist gurus are leading the development and forcing the scientific community to comply with the dualism, measurement and other mantras; which means we could have some serious development in physics and cosmology if it weren’t for the social adaptation phenomenon, and if the science would care to go into ontology, and even more into cognition as such (as Heidegger calls it “fundamental ontology”, prior to logic, theory or thought). Thus the main Problems are: • The scientific community became a bureaucratic apparatus • The only way we could understand universe in this stage of development is through fundamental ontology. • The syntax we use in creating our reality is inapt to give the answer to the question of Being (the leading questions of the ontology (Heidegger). • Human development and the evolution are halted by the inadequate philological development, which respectively leads to a rigid social system (or falling back into the social contract) unable to employ all its productive, creative and intellectual forces, and vice verse. • Clinging to causality, as its disappearance or transformation is an “uncomfortable” notion for the physicist and the humanity at large. The same goes for the quantum suppressed infrastructure, and the perception of the physical and simulational reality.
And... We should reassess Kantian necessity, possibility, actuality and causality rigid infrastructure, as well as the categories which define time and space as inner and outer perception of the “world”. Furthermore, we need to abate Cartesian or any other dualism, and try not to divide the Being from its environment and itsWhat can we get if we break actualization.loose from the mentionedcategories? For Baudrillarddialectical stage is alreadyempty! Can we arrive to thepure information, essence,Being, with absolutecognition; and/or can wefinally indulge the Being inenvironments of high levelof entropy, parallel universesand multiple existences.
Definite need for the new syntax we can find in the factthat the leading question in philosophy and ontologyby Heidegger; - What is Being of Being?, has manyphilological problems, especially in English. In whichone definition of Being stands for what is the Being asis, and the other for what is the understanding of Beingas is; bringing us to the conclusion that the Heidegger’smain question is not ontological but a predominantlyphilological one.It is interesting that some “small” languages (e.g.Croatian), have the distinction between those twoBeings, not only greatly conveyed but respectivelyoffer almost instantaneous cognition or a recognitionof the differences of the two idioms/entities. The Reason
The Arbitrariness and the Absolute• The other night when watching a show on Discovery channel, the series on parallel universes, my friend and me were screaming of laughter hearing the theories of the cosmologists; the first comment my friend had was – our drunken friend has better theories. My comment was: oh yeah, the universe is a pile of membranes that float in pure reason. It was a joke, however, the theories physicists are trying to convey are completely arbitrary, and the measurements inadequate and even more so, redundant, yet they are programmed not to go into fundamental ontology or cognition.• Thus my joke: the universe is a pile of membranes which float in pure reason, could be a plausible theory. The same as: the universe is an idea, a thought, and became by the cognition of self, which is undividable either from its environment either from its actualization. Nikola Tesla calls it the Cosmic Reason, Absolute that created everything and at the same time it doesn’t assume any action.• But still we need to arrive at the Cosmic Reason without theory, logic, dialectics etc., and become the one with it.
The SolutionAlthough the solution for the evolutionary quantum leapcannot be administered as a cough syrup, we cannot moveforward without cognition. Is it a new syntax which is ableto transcend math symbols and philological ones the toolthat could bring us to pure information, and a hapax, asystem without a reference, a new language, a subliminalone, that makes recognition and cognition instant?Sumerian language, as well as their comprehension of thesyntax, symbols, cosmos and their relation, came close tothat ideal. No matter if the new syntax is a cause or result(or both) of the brain-to-brain communication, it could leadto instant cognition and an evolutionary quantum leap andthe fulfillment of human and neohuman potential as thefirst phase of the new evolution.
Evolution – the excerpt for the movie Waking Life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93JkzfCW2yA “The new evolution stems from information, and it stems from two types of information: digital and analog. The digital is artificial intelligence. The analog results from molecular biology, the cloning of the organism. And you knit the two together with neurobiology. Before on the old evolutionary paradigm, one would die and the other would grow and dominate. But under the new paradigm, they would exist as a mutually supportive, noncompetitive grouping...”
In the theory mentioned inthe previous slide theevolutionary quantum leap is hapaxassumed through theinformation; DNA as ananalogue information and AIas the digital information, andits intertwining throughneurobiology in order toachieve superior social system(at least in the first phase ofdevelopment). The theoryassumed in this presentationpresupposes generating thenew syntax which wouldbring us to instant cognition(without gene or othermanipulation), and asuprasystem which is going tomake us achieve thefulfillment of cosmicpotential, or an actualizationper se.
References • Systems theory (von Foerster, 1960) • Chaos theory (Gleick, 1991) • Network Theory (Buchanan, 2003; Newman, Barabasi, Watts, 2006) • Media extension of human body (McLuhan, 1964) • Network vs. Hierarchical infrastructure (Galloway, 2002; • PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2002) • Hyperreality (Baudrillard, 1981) • The Mirror of Production (Baudrillard, 1975) • The Attention Economy (Davenport & Beck, 2001; Goldhaber, • 1997; Barbrook, 1997; Berman & McClellan, 2001; Ghosh, 1997) • Mass vs. Individual media (Kompare, 2002) • Convergence (Forman & Saint John, 2000) • Autopoiesis (Maturana & Varela, 1987) • Knowledge Economy (Leadbeater, 2000) • Gift Economy (Barbrook, 1997) • Self-management (Petras & Veltmeyer, 2002) • And much, much more1/4/2013 One of Three LLC / The New Paradigm 20
Author Ana Soric / MA in Communications / CEO @ One of Three LLC / / +385 91 9080666 / +385 92 1475491 / email@example.com / www.oneofthree.biz / mindbanking.co1/4/2013 One of Three LLC / The New Paradigm 21