not

lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt

semiotexte’s Foucault: Fearless Speech (2001)
prednasky v EN @ uni of cal in berkeley z 10-11/83 (dnes som inak komentoval assangeovo video
zeditovane pearsonom v 85

goal:
” My intention was not to deal with the problem of truth, but with the problem of truth-teller or truth-telling as an activity.
By this I mean that, for me, it was not a question of analyzing the internal or external criteria that would enable the Greeks and Romans,
or anyone else, to recognize whether a statement or proposition is true or not. At issue for me was rather the attempt
to consider truth-telling as a specific activity, or as a role. ” Discourse & Truth, Concluding remarks by Foucault.
/ ciel: nie schopnost urcit ci je vyrok pravdivy alebo nie, ale chapat pravdomluvnost ako specificku aktivitu, ako rolu.
” With the question of the importance of telling the truth, knowing who is able to tell the truth,
and knowing why we should tell the truth, we have the roots of what we could call the ‘critical’ tradition in the West.”

CHECK [107] – practice of parrhesia @ human relationships

[p 11-20]
[core] parrhesia = frankness + truth + criticism + danger + duty
– being ‘FRANK’ (instead of PERSUASION), povedat vsetko co mam na mysli, nic neskryvam
parrhesia – 2 types:
– ‘bad’ parrhesia ~ not far from ‘chattering’, saying any/everything one has in mind w/o qualification;
everyone has the right to address his fellow citizens even with the most stupid or dangerous things in the city;
verbal activity which reflects every movement of heart & mind
/ blogging, comments, twitter, ‘kazdy prd’ na youtube, total transparency freak leaking
– [core] positive parrhesia, ‘to tell the TRUTH’ (instead of FALSEHOOD or SILENCE);
p says what he _thinks_ is true [via mind], or does he say what _is_ really true [via ontology] ? —
he says what is true because he _knows_ that it _is_ true [mind+ontology], and he _knows_ that it is true because it is really true [mind+?].
~ there is exact coincidence bwn belief & truth [v grecku sa stretavali verbalne; v dnesnej kartezianskej koncepcii dokazu sa stretavaju mentalne]
/ je pravda, a niektore jej casti poznam.
cize nielenze je uprimny, ale navyse jeho nazor je pravdivy.
[core] cize zaroven tomu veri a zaroven to je pravda.
v grecku je pristup k pravde dany moralkou, ak mam urcite moralne vlastnosti, tak mam pristup k pravde (a tiez k jej odovzdaniu dalsim).
[core] u descarta to je inak, on si nie je isty ci to comu veri, je tiez pravda.
[core] ‘proof’ of sincerity of truth-teller is his ‘courage’
ak clovek povie nieco nebezpecne, je velke podozrenie ze je truth-teller.
vtedy sa pytame sami seba: je naozaj truth-teller? a – ako si moze byt isty ze to comu veri je pravda? (ta druha otazka sa grekov moc netyka, neriesili to)
[core] podmienka pre parrhesiu je pritomnost nebezpecenstva, ‘DANGER’, ze teller nieco riskuje
(napr ucitel povie detom ze ich uci – tym nic neriskuje, ale ked filozof povie tyranovi ze tyrania je zla lebo neni kompatibilna so spravodlivostou, tak riskuje)
[!] tyran neni truth-teller, lebo nic neriskuje
[core] a ten danger vychadza vzdy z druhych stran, nevrham sa do danger sam (napriklad pred sudom povedat nieco co moze byt proti mne zneuzite).
confession to someone who exercises power over speaker, and is able to censure or punish him for what he has done,
[core] takze funkcia p nie je demonstrovat pravdu druhemu, ale kritizovat ho = ‘CRITICISM’ (instead of FLATTERY),
alebo aj criticism sam voci sebe (ale vzdy ked speaker je v inferior pozicii).
[core] vzdy slabsi voci silnejsiemu (nie naopak, napr rodic voci dietatu, ale: filozof tyrana, ziak ucitela, obcan vacsinu)
[core] telling the truth is regarded as a (moral) ‘DUTY’ (instead of SELF-INTEREST and MORAL APATHY)
ked ma nikto netlaci hovorit, ale ja citim povinnost prehovorit, mam ‘FREEDOM’ prehovorit (nie som pod natlakom).
napr kriminal – p neni ked sa prizna pred sudom, ale ked sa prizna dobrovolne z moralnej povinnosti.
kritizovat priatela alebo panovnika – lebo je moja duty mu pomoct (kedze on nevidi jeho wrongdoings).

…..
/ !!!!! takze denouncement neni kompatibilny s parrhesiou !!!!
skor truthful criticism of a friend out of duty (risking our friendship), for his own good (and my good too)

[p 20-24]
tracing evolution of parrhesia via r/p/p:
rhetoric (long speech) is in strong opposition to parrhesia (dialogue) @socratic-platonic tradition,
ale neskor sa zacali blizit – parrhesia/freespeech ako retoricka figura (ktora ale nema prikrasy, a neni vlastne figura) & intesifies audience emotions
politics
@ atenska demokracia – which is def as constitution (politeia) in which ppl enjoyed ‘demokratia’, ‘isegoria’ (equal right of speech),
‘isonomia’ (equal part of all citizens in exercise of power), and ‘parrhesia’,
parrhesia appears in agora
@ hellenistic period – it’s advisor’s duty to use parrhesia to help king w/ decisions, and to prevent him from abusing his power (cize je dobra aj pre ludi),
ak ho kral ignoruje alebo tresta, je tyran,
parrhesia doesnt appear in agora anymore (iba medzi kralom a radcami, mimo dohlad ludi)
philosophy @ field of art of life
socrates in plato writings is p,
rel to ‘care of oneself’

[p 104]
[core] care of the self – what i think corresponds to what i say, and it corresponds to what i do (as in case of socrates, ultimate truth-teller) (?)
parrhesia = logos ~ truth ~ bios @ ethics; logos ~ truth ~ nomos @ politics
philosophical (new) parrhesia
– 3 types [p 106]:
1
2
3
– target: not to persuade the Assembly, but to convince someone that he must take care of himself and of others (= change his life)
– not specifically linked to agora or king’s court, but diverse places

lepsie v: http://burundi.sk/dusan/carrythatweight/images/5/51/Pzi.esej.research.txt

In 1984, in his last lectures entitled La Courage de la Verité
http://eipcp.net/transversal/1210/raunig/en
=
multiple forms of truth discourses (from antiquity)
of which three can be seen as figures of imparting knowledge:
/ existuje niekolko foriem diskurzov pravdy, z nich tri su vnimane cez poznanie (ale netyka sa poznania vsetka pravda? wp: poznanie ako prienik medzi pravdou a vierou)
* (classic) teacher
knowledge as techne, as an ability embodied in a practice.
In this mode of embodiment knowledge is owned, passed on from one to another as property, from teacher to pupil in a long chain of tradition, in a hierarchy of generations and a uniform, static order of knowledge.
a rigid striation and separation of the various techniques and disciplines.
the point is to develop a rhetorical practice that seeks conflict and transversal exchange beyond the boundaries of traditions and disciplines.
/ odovzdava sa z pokolenia na pokolenie, je to objekt, property, vec. …nie event!!!!
/ co ma za nasledok delenie na discipliny, napr na uni
/ ciel je zamerat sa na hranicne praktiky, konfliktne body, praktiky ktore sa stavaju nad hranice
* (universalist) wise man
his form of imparting only consists in being a role model, in epitomizing, exemplifying.
disregard for every kind of singularity, specificity, situativity.
/ byt stelesnenim poznania. vnutri seba. ‘ucit bytim’. ale problem je ze tiez nie je event, je to staticke. neviem odovzdat nieco na poziadanie..
* prophet, (charismatic) master-prophet
has the role of an imparter, but at the same time, he does not speak for himself, in his own name.
/ nechapem. zosobnuje poznanie, ale nehovori za seba?? hovori “we”? ako guy a pod a aktivisti v knihach?
/ foucault nema nic o chapani poznania ako eventu? (ma.. nasleduje stvrty typ)
/ toto je asi rozdiel!!!
/ prva cast bola o ‘knowledge that’, dalsia bude o knowledge as an event? nestratim sa v tom ale? nemam sa tu moc o co opriet…
delanda v new philosophy of society ani objekt as event nerozvija… mozno spekulativni realisti…
to je vnimanie objektu cez procesy, cez jeho vlastnosti ktore su v pohybe.
performing the knowledge…. knowledge production wl supplies ‘truth’, media debate enhances ‘belief’, and knowledge is being performed.
knowledge about how our world functions, in a dynamic way, what processes are inherent in the debate.
this is democracy – clash of various (incoherent) worldviews
* parrhesia, truth-speaking = “fearless speach” [rough translation], “frankness in speaking the truth”
fourth form of truth discourse that goes beyond the types of the teacher, the wise man and the prophet.
in 3 variations:
the political truth-speaking of the citizen to the majority of the assembly or the philosopher to the tyrant
/ excluded to the included?; mat prave ten jeden hlas len, voci majorite
ethical truth-speaking as test and exercise leading to care for the self and others. the questioning perfected by Socrates
socrates nie je teacher, wise man, ani prophet.
His craft consists not of teaching and imparting, but rather in a practice of calling-into-question.
Knowledge arises in the movement, which generates a differentiation, “as difference, as distance, attained contrary to general opinion and shared certainties”.
“school of the missing teacher” (“l’école du maître qui manque”)
practice of the Cynics as exercising the scandal of the truth, as “philosophical activism” and as a predecessor of the revolutionary movements of the 19th and 20th century.
this one is most relevant today.
/ assange???

+ moje reci:

; knowledge production, negotiation
na bxl openvideo workshope som povedal: debaty/spory na wikipedii? to je na nej najzaujimavejsie. ostatni stichli a pozreli na mna.
this is the event of knowledge production.

We would like to understand knowledge not as a static property, an object being transmitted from one node to another,
like a file being copied. Filesharing only gives means for knowledge being produced. Participation in the discussion
One may say the actual wikipedia pages are but the detritus of the knowledge. The event of knowledge production
is metasthasised in the wikipedia discussion pages, and in the articles and books being referred to, where it is being negotiated
by the users. We should [pripomenut] that the discussion pages accomodate the private mode of conversation, when the subset
of NPOV rules haunts the discussion.
/ v tom zlyhava log – iba transmituje data, miesto aby bol knowledge production platform
/ na prednej strane prebieha akurat formalna/technicka debata, ak ide o argument tak sa debata presuva do discussion

To Foucault, knowledge exists only where power relations are suspended. To Zizek, this Foucauldian position is false: there is no knowledge that does not presuppose power relations.
There is no place beyond discourse and the power relations that govern them; resistance and change are possible from within them (Zizek: Beyond Foucault, p. 90).
It is this position that colors the primary difference between the political strategies of Zizek over Foucault. To Zizek, revolutionary potential must be sought within the capitalist system of desire, and it must seek to be universalized.
/ takze aj wikileaks ma power
/ task: how to universalize revolutionary potential within the capitalist system of desire, aka je esencia toho co robia wikileaks?
a na zaklade toho – co robia zle?
/ presne takto by som mal pokracovat dalej [riesim teraz otazku transparency]
/ lokalizovat hlavne kontradikcie na ktorych sa pohybuje wikileaks (a s nimi aj globalna debata) a univerzalizovat ich
(v zmysle zizeka/kanta). cize lokalizovat ‘excluded’ – excluded informacie, treba zapojit do commons.
aby sa potom v ramci commons riesili problemy majetku a hodnoty objektu (vratane updatu tychto terminov)
/ scientific journalism – tiez zasadne tuna
/ excluded – otazka – vyradeni z coho? a co je tu commons?

+ moje reci k wikileaks:

otazka ludskeho poznania – chcu vytvorit intellectual/ record of how civilisation works in practise; our decisions are based on what we know.
je to nieco niekde, ktore mame odhalit a dostat k nemu pristup.
proste kopa, ktora je pod zamkom.
to snad ide do epistemologie – foucaultove pisanie o poznani spada pod nu?

; filesharing
? obmedzit cely clanok na filesharing? kludne.. filesharing in the context of political economy
mozno vysvetlit aj veci okolo, ale povedat ze ich nebudem teraz rozvijat

; propositions via potentialities
podla whiteheada potom pri cables pre nas nie je otazka ci su skutocne alebo falosne (pre wl tim bola otazka,
ci ich releasnu – to ci su prave bola len jedna z veci na zaklade ktorej zvazovali).
ale aky otvaraju v kulture potencial. W: “proposition points to a potentiality [..]
propositions are possible routes of actualization, vectors of nondeterministic change.
The “pri- mary role” of a proposition, Whitehead says, is to “pave the way along which the world advances into novelty.”.
^ takto citaj dokumenty ktore releasuje wl, a ktore obsahuje wp, a ktore siri tpb
vsetky tri su platformy, ktore maju podobne ambicie (aku hlavnu premisu ma tpb?)
=
task: open up access to excluded knowledge

; epistemology / knowledge that+how+acq
epistemologia – knowledge that [classical propositional knowledge = prienik medzi truths and beliefs], knowledge how, acquaintance knowledge…
ze 2 a 2 su 4. ale ze ako sa rata.
pozeram okolo na veci viem povedat ze su a kolko ich je.
ale o vacsine z nich neviem ako vznikli, ako stali sebou.
kutili su deleuziani.
viem ze nie co je, viem o vela veciach ze su.
ale viem len o malo z nich ako vznikli.
teda ake procesy v nich prebiehaju.
lebo sa menia dalej.
nie su fixne, nedorazili z buducnosti aby ostali rovnake, ani neplanuju ostavat rovnake s vyhladom do buducnosti.
menia ich ich procesy.
ktore ich formuju.
napr flasa vina… ako to ze je flasa vina? proces vyroby flase, proces vyroby vina, vinica, pestovanie vinica, distribucia, sklad, predaj, spotreba
recyklacia flase na inu flasu.

??
you are not an individual. Rather, you are a host of ‘dividuals’
(Deleuze 1 994: 258), effected by the social conjunction as an event.

In 1977, Michel Foucault suggested that political philosophy must
detach itself from the problem of sovereignty and the problems of law
and prohibition. ‘We need to cut off the King’s head’, as he famously put
it (Foucault 1980: 121).
Late in his life, Deleuze sensed the emergence of
a stratification that seemed to proceed from a radicalisation of this suggestion,
and which would eventually reconfigure the disciplinary societies
that Foucault analysed. Deleuze termed this new stratification ‘the
societies of control’ (Deleuze 1995 ) . In this formation, your identity is
not dependent on your narrative as a subject, whether of sovereignty or
of discipline, whether as citizen, consumer or family man. Rather, your
self is to be abstracted from databanks, registers, tests and focus group
interviews, and the data is to be personalised in the ‘security’ of passwords
that you memorise. You will be asked to carry out this abstraction
yourself. The ultimate test of ‘being human’ is not the question of
whether you are currently in or have ever been in prison, gone to school,
or been in the army. The ultimate test is: do you currently have a paid
job and which paid jobs have you had? The decisive technologies of our
age are the technologies of the labour market where a decoded flow of
labour joins up with a decoded flow of capital (Deleuze and Guattari
1984: 3 3 ) . Some of these technologies are no more complicated than a
folded piece of paper, a pamphlet.
(to sa mi nezda – preco prave ze ci mas job??)