Elie During

Metaphysics rotating around a series/set of grand problems which do not need to be completely redefined, just refined, made precise > Bergson.

Intensification/Generalization: in- philosophy, could provide a more articulated epistemology of what the physicist is already doing vs. gen- philosopher as specialist of analysis may provide a synthesis to take possession of principles to increased levels of generality towards a unification of knowledge > logical positivist variety. No single theorist can lay claim to the whole or ultimate synthesis of scientific knowledge, & even if this were possible it would be useless to philosophers. Bergson: not a matter of progressing farther than or parallel to science but to use it as a crucible to advance higher fidelity instruments of thought, as filters or percolators to extract new intuitions to expand or complicate new philosophical inquiries.

Poincaré: science simplifies the real, deals with the projection/image upon the plane of thought: abstraction is a precondition for conceptualization: experience must first be stripped of its experiential resistances. "Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house."

Philosophy should get past world views to deal with the real. Scientists try to slow down experience upon the formalized plane - the time of conceptual elaboration. What needs to be recovered is the rich potentialities of the formal field itself; requiring relief, dissociation, "to see things sideways to see new figures/patterns in the carpet," to extract a philosophical intuition ambivalent to the will of the scientist, a process of pilfering perspectives from the scientist.

Bergson's analytic gaze: a vague intuition, an underwater wreck spotted by the pulley in the air: we must dive in and deal with the bits & pieces: demonstration of the shift in time, to palpate with the wreck & derive artifacts to help describe the wholeness of everything at once.

The "brangle" of time (Barkley): a quarrel

Underlying projective structure of the double-come model of space time

Trivial simultaneity:

Single space point

Coexisting within the same space time block: eternity

Regional simultaneity: twins coursing one of multiple possible trajectories through the light cone of space-time: coexistence

Proper simultaneity: hyperbolic simultaneity, leaving a single point at unique speeds to describe a hyperbolic curve of time

Contemporaneity: spacelike separated events are indeterminate as to their space time order because they cannot possibly influence each other causally. Coexist, yet radically disconnected without being able to ever be connected (Whitehead).

Benjamin Bratton:

Manifest, latent (scientific), synoptic images. Alienation: towards an allocentric view, to view the condition more positively. The tumult: how do we make models which represent the embeddedness, also as extensions of or manifestation of this tumult. Philosophy & science are something that matter does (in relation to the anthropocene). Geologic processes manifesting itself. Language from tools, related to anthropogeny. Language technology in relation/reaction to tool use. Mechanical relation to the corporeal substrate (founding of the primary mechanized projection being sourced from the substrate itself, expressing agency on to the world). Nested parasitism: the question of bio- or abio- genesis: symbiotic relationship of animals within animals: related to terrestrial colonialization nested psychology. Matter/relations: Harmon/DeLanda debate: the intimacy that one has to something exterior to oneself. Lithium - mines in Bolivia & the Musk-ification relayed to limited supply, ingesting lithium to quiet the voices in your head. Mineral intelligence: AI at landscape scale. Scale & abstraction: the condition to allow for conceptualization, how to reduce a system at one scale & how it may apply to the conditions of a system above or below. Art had a unique capacity for abstraction: a lateral abstraction. Human as a diagrammatic effect more than cause (or protagonist). Affect of the concept, concept of the functive, always in relation to an other. Anthropogeny & Anthropolysis: how something that was not quiet human becomes human, and how things that were human became something else. Thanotonic arc: predisposition/predestination: how does the motivation towards one anthropological state anticipate or predispose towards others. Folkish festivals of fear: "ethical reintroduction": to make the world & be subservient to myth. The promiselessness implications of ecological indifference to cultural traditions: by rituals of public voice: an anthropocenic puzzle of how to get beyond our own prejudice may also be how we undermine the ecological substrate in general. "Because of the measurement capacities..." The relationship between oil & deep time. By pursuing the illusion as of it were true, we discovered, as a by-product, that it was false, but the by-product of doing so is that we made it true. The medium through which the planet thinks: "4.6 billion" The earth recently figured out its own age. A Faustian bargain to top all: "what would make it worth it?" Is knowledge worth the Holocenic disequilibrium? To form function into abstraction & back again: to fashion into meta cognition: inherent to the medium itself.

Philip Beesley:

Frame it by Teilhard de Chardins hopefulness & eugenics! Form coming from the aether, dissapative forms, underlying luminosity within all things. Delirious coterminous between beings, before one knows they are a person, as a place to locate the emergence of consciousness & which to focus the locus of architectural potential, a place of sharing.

Beesley reciting poetry to accompany the documenting images of his work! Makes me want to compose music in response to the fluttering of his structures, & also to propose a shared workshop for the Lunga school, based in body & architecture & participation against the classical notion of resistance & the requirement to defend boundaries, a festival of fragility that might offer a renewal or contribution.

Gabriel Catren:

Matter = a point of obstruction to the unfolding of a formalism of experience that makes possible the extension of a subject & transcendental extensions (to language). Transcendental subjectivity is always already in motion in the k-space being produced out of matter. Matter provides degrees of freedom in this k-space. The existence of t-limits is the very condition of possibility of the infinitization of experience.

Life: obstruction-sublating process. Speculative: any experience enveloping motions in k-space. Experience is necessarily framed, but we can modify, move, & deform that frame. Discursive: we cannot position in the absolute, but there is no limit we cannot transgress.

"What is (in front of) a speculative subject drifting/walking in a shamanic k-space?"

The solutions of any proposed problem is found within the variables defined by the limits of the language of that problem's perspective. The problem doesn't have a solution, rather a profession of phantoms (phenoumenon) of correlative solutions.

Objectivity is defined to the world that is being defined, with a speculative science defining the shifting of frames between multiple worlds. Understanding between worlds "translates" as analogous morphic structures.

The implications of working within a world-worlding/word-wording structural logic delimiting the boundaries it is itself attempting to transcend beyond: the inherently tautological, recursive, self-castrating/impotent logic while declaring (or at least insinuating) its own impotence. Describing the limits of Kantian logic by illustrating through more or less detailed diagrams the articulation of its own boundaries of potential transcendence: is this a tragic or comedic scenario? Which is closest to the center, which (perspective) moving farther to the periphery of the frame? How can we begin to understand an articulation emanating from the void itself - a voice no longer aligned to the discursive procession of logic (steps of the Devils staircase), or as Beesley proposes to lay a self-defining fundament of tenuous, vulnerable, precarious position? To speak from the void is to speak without reason, a seer of worlds without coherent language, & to this extent rationally illegitimate. The real question is in articulating the limits of interest in discussing such a topology, & therein (perhaps) lies the limits of tragedy in the philosophical agenda itself. The voices of this conversation - including those of dissent arising from the audience/chorus/dithyramb - must be put in relation to each other as a Dionysian dialogue, utilizing the "primary, real, transcendental, shamanic, etc." languages as points of ricochet/nexus/convergence in descriptions of the meta-ph/form-ical aspects of reality-proper. All of these equational implosive forces, algorithms of existential dissonance, will enraptured trough the voice of a "transcendental rationalist" character.

Alisa Andrasek / BIOTHING:

Superhuman intuition instead of superhuman cognition. Unseen/wonder/beyond conceptions/limits of perceptions. Beauty as superperformance: to create wonder amidst complexity. Deep data being embraced by human sensibility sculpting new cognition (or intuition?). Quentin Meillassoux: "speculative materialism provides the conceptual resources to think a reality that is independent of thought." Ancestrality, arche-fossil, dia-chronisity. Luciana Parisi - automated scripting. Elie During - Kantian models of time, simultaneity is relative, temporal but not successive. The occasional rapture observed in swarms. Discretisation, voxelization, cellularization (cellular automata), parametrics = defined strategies of "complexity" or complexification for architectural material substrates. To remove humans from the design aspects & fabrication process - via deep learning & supervised learning - towards an automated AI (autopoietic or sympoietic)?

Designers speculating on AI & new materials are entrenched within ease, release of responsibility/accountability, motivated/relegated by pure functionalist/aesthetic considerations - purely subjective to this extent? The terrors of "automating modes of production." This is the essence of the antihumanist/post-ethical debate that I want to avoid.