Wed, Mar 31, 2010
Big bang machine? Isn't it very far away from the big bang in terms of energies and states of matter, as the closer you get the energies rise exponentially? Anyway, I'm a little bit disappointed by the recent success as continuous failure would have proven, or rather have supported the notion of the
The first line of your post is really interesting as it addresses the last lines of your post, and thus the future. But it also shows how easily we can be wrong, as the first lines of a essay can be last for its writer.
The LHC reminds me of the end of
. I don't remember too well, but I think in a far away place aliens were trying to rip apart reality itself. That's what we're doing today as well. It's a brute force approach. Right now this is a great method, as it produces valuable and important data. But it may also be the only hope we have in the far future.
It's right that we've come a far from the first signs of cooperation in our distant evolutionary past, towards a world-wide collaboration to tackle reality itself. And I'm sure this will all converge. We're heading towards a tipping point of cooperation that will likely result in the creation of effective meta-beings, connected but uninhibited by spatial boundaries.
That said, it's pretty tough stuff. I assume I'll have to read everything else you wrote and read up on a lot of concepts being mentioned.
What I want to object, or rather question, is that
Knowmads are not consumers and cannot be looked upon as capital
. How is that? There surely are those systems outside of any given open system who might make use of its output, i.e. make use of the whole infocology. You might call it Infological mechanics as analog to
Fri, Apr 2, 2010
:"What I want to object, or rather question, is that Knowmads are not consumers and cannot be looked upon as capital. How is that?"
The answer to that is pretty simple actually, Knowmads are inherently active seekers of new opportunities and therefore cannot be looked at as consumers in the regular sense of the word, Knowmads do not consume but provide fresh elaboration on initial concepts, in that they cannot be looked upon as a capital or resource of the actual infocology in which they exist.
From a different perspective I have strong objections in using the language of economics to imply upon our minds hyperconnectivity, I truly think that part of the problems we are facing is in the language we are using in our process of self description. If the Knowmad was to be described as a capital the whole infocology argument would disintegrate for the very fact of being described as a resource speaks about usage. The Knowmad is not a user in the regular sense of the word as well; she is a multidimensional representation of a complex emergent property of networks and therefore operates more as a hub and transducer (what I referred to as a multi-sensorial modality).
Finally let me say that the future I perceive is one in which the age of abundance will prevail, in this case the whole point of resource and capital, consumption and use become moot. What we will have is different dimensions of existential modalities co-depending and co-evolving into multiple and concomitant realities, some of which will interact with others, some of which will not. As a rule of thumb I think that terminologies that find their basis in matter (assets, consumption,capital etc.) are a hindrance in understanding the motion of the infosphere.
Fri, Apr 2, 2010
I like the word Knowmad, though I must admit I did not manage to correlate the 6 conceptual sketches presented into stable relation(s) with each other. It seems to deconstruct a certain process of individuation, or, if you prefer, to deterritorialize the current conception of the individual, but it feels unclear what is the alternative offered, if there is an alternative offered. I could ask, for example, a state of who or what is the knowmad and it is very difficult to even address the question, given the extreme fluidity implied by the descriptions.
In a previous post, you mentioned self mapping, hinting (i think) to a self generated emergent motion of becoming. Also there, a sense of deterritorialization of identity is apparent, but it is not clear how territory (be it fleeting as it may) is regained. How emergence takes place, or how embodiment as extension/expression of being takes place? I do not think you wish to describe a virtuality with ever diminishing actuation, but perhaps I do not understand where it goes...
Reading it as a whole leaves me with two options: either a knowmad is a state that anchors its fluid identity in a majority of 'lesser' (less knowmadic and therefore less advanced), more stable self-identical states (this is a problematic kind of freedom), or alternatively, the whole dynamics converges to a global brain/mind scenario where knowmads are differences (or intensities as Deleuze would call them in this case :-)) which cannot be identified as distinct and significant processes of individuation. In the latter option, significant states are possibly identified only at the level of a global mind to which we the knowmads have no access more than a single neuronal bundle can access a holistic state of consciousness. I do think that a narrative in as much as it suggests a reconfiguration of minds, needs to offer a whole swing of deterritorialization and reterritorialization. Otherwise, there are plenty of stories and descriptions that can hijack this motion and trap it in old conceptions.
Sun, Apr 4, 2010
First let me say that I appreciate the problems you have encountered, since by the very definition of the new state I am trying to describe, instability reigns supreme.
Indeed the very process we are engaged in is one of deterritorialization, a motion towards fluidity.
Knowmads unbundle, Knowmads deterritorialize in fact the confines of the old sovereign (idea of a coherent) individual into multiplicities and reterritorialize as a multiple state. Therefore the Knowmad is both a state of affairs of mind in general and the particular mind of a so-called individual (you could say that it is both a cultural state of affairs as well as a neuronal state of affairs ). Indeed the descriptions are fluid and dynamic and do not lend themselves, easily, to the commonly accepted description of oneness (either of one self or otherwise) however the whole point is that the alternative must be built, by ourselves, by our culture, by our polytopian existence. A multiple selves reality existing simultaneously in a multidimensional reality is an approximation to a possible description of this new state of affairs referred to as the Knowmad state.
In my next post I will try and exemplify what this knowmadic state consists of, however at this point let me give an intro into three possible extensions to the knowmadic state :
A Knowmad is continuously busy in an aesthetic engagement that can be seen as the creative act of the self-mapping hyperconnected mind. This will come forth as a:
Sun, Apr 4, 2010
A question and a point to be made:
The question: Why does the concept of hyperconnectivity occupies such a large role in this development of ideas? It seems to me that hyper connectivity is at best an anecdotal and temporary effect within the complex unfolding of relations between one kind of network (biological - neuronal) and another kind of network (electronic). As organisms, our sensory surface is multi modal. We see (the street through the window), hear (music in the radio), taste (chilli) and feel (the smoothness of the table) (among other things) simultaneously. Neeless to mention that these sensory signals originate from very diverse and unrelated sources. Do we gain anything extra by relating to this situation as being hyperconnected?
The point: In any complex open ended system or state of affairs, we can observe a deep structure of alternating layers of stability and instability that converge and diverge together while bringing forth their complex behaviors.
Here are two examples: a living cell and a computer chip. In a living cell, atoms and molecules are a stable layer on account of being regulated by fundamental physical forces. On the next layer, relations between organic molecules are largely unstable because many random circumstances such as temperature, chemical instabilities within chemical reactions etc. On the next level, higher regulative mechanisms appear that constrain this instability into ordered patterns of autopoietic functions. But also here the stable functions operate within another layer of instability that is induced by the dynamic circumstances external to the living cell such as the excess or lack of certain essential compounds, penetration of viruses etc. This is of course a simplified description but it makes the point. On a silicon computer chip we can see similar kind of layering: molecular stability, within the quantum induced instability of semi conductors which in turn is constrained by the structure of transistors, which yield in turn regular yet fluctuating electric potentials and currents, that are patterned into stable ones and zeros that in themselves are in complex dynamic relations with each other that yield a pseudo random unstable activity of ones and zeroes which is again ordered into higher order stable computational patterns so that 2+2 is always 4 etc.
There are many other examples of this interesting layering which seems to be inherent in any complex system and state of affairs. It is remarkable to note that there is no fundamental asymmetry (or symmetry) between the stable and unstable layers of a complex state of affairs. There is rather an interplay: layers of stability and instability that converge and diverge, fluidity and self identical entities that emerge from them while harboring within themselves new kinds of instability and therefore new potentials for patterning... It is the interplay of ordered and chaotic elements that signifies emergence of complex open ended phenomena. The knowmad if it is to become, is to partake in the interplay of multiple layers of instability and stability. I am still missing some grasp on the latter. This, I hope, might further clarify my previous comment.
Tue, Apr 6, 2010
Wildcat, thank you for an inspiring post.
Couple of questions that I've been thinking quite a bit lately (and according to my interpretation are touched in this post as well, at least in an implicit manner):
In the age of hyperconnectivity, how do we distinguish the connections (or knowledge) that really matter, that make the difference (when it comes to our personal/collective past/present/
)? How do we recognize the things and entities that are necessary or somewhat significant for us and our social sphere/society?
As it seems, we can continue expanding and mapping the
/inter-relational connections ad infinitum (or can we?)… So, what are the practical and beneficial mechanisms or processes that help us to cope with the new state of hyperconnectivity (more connections, more information, more interpretations, more responsibilities… etc.), and/or help us to become more ourselves through self-expression and self-reflection. How can we use/harness (?) the emerging (personal and collective) interpretative processes (to be used) for the benefit of the whole humanity?
It seems that I'm all about rather open questions today. I hope we'll continue the mapping of these emerging territories of thought. Looking forward to continue the dialogue.
Wed, Apr 7, 2010
: "The question: Why does the concept of hyperconnectivity occupies such a large role in this development of ideas? It seems to me that hyper connectivity is at best an anecdotal and temporary effect within the complex unfolding of relations between one kind of network (biological - neuronal) and another kind of network (electronic). As organisms, our sensory surface is multi modal. We see (the street through the window), hear (music in the radio), taste (chilli) and feel (the smoothness of the table) (among other things) simultaneously. Needless to mention that these sensory signals originate from very diverse and unrelated sources. Do we gain anything extra by relating to this situation as being hyperconnected?"
Definitely, we gain a large advantage by relating to this state of affairs as hyperconnected, for a few reasons:
1. Hyperconnectivity defines the number of connections a mind has with other minds via the grid, the Internet and phones, no other terminology relates directly to this modern day state of affairs.
2. Hyperconnectivity is a new state of affairs in which a communication status and procedure is always on
3. Hyperconnectivity defines a new space that never existed before, a space of information and knowledge that has no parallel not in the human brain and not in the physical universe.
4. Hyperconnectivity redefines our capability as minds in the form of amplification of sense thought of ideas and of motives.
5. Hyperconnectivity externalizes the mythological collective subconscious into a manifested reality.
6. Hyperconnectivity allows for a new form of distribution of knowledge and information that bypasses the physicality of the individual into a virtuality of interests.
7. Hyperconnectivity implies upon the market and economy of the new world by democratizing the process of mutual co-existence and intersubjective co-dependence.
8. Hyperconnectivity both trivializes the (apparently) sacred and important and elevates the inconsequential and apparently irrelevant, this creates new sources of mutations of both knowledge and information, this can also be looked upon as evolution of thought.
:" There are many other examples of this interesting layering which seems to be inherent in any complex system and state of affairs. It is remarkable to note that there is no fundamental asymmetry (or symmetry) between the stable and unstable layers of a complex state of affairs. There is rather an interplay: layers of stability and instability that converge and diverge, fluidity and self identical entities that emerge from them while harboring within themselves new kinds of instability and therefore new potentials for patterning... It is the interplay of ordered and chaotic elements that signifies emergence of complex open ended phenomena. The knowmad if it is to become, is to partake in the interplay of multiple layers of instability and stability. I am still missing some grasp on the latter. This, I hope, might further clarify my previous comment."
I could not agree more, the Knowmad as you say:” is to partake in the interplay of multiple layers of instability and stability.” Which is exactly the point of why we should strive to create a coherent and up to date philosophy of mind that may allow us this very interplay that is so apparent in complex systems.
The interplay of order and chaos is definitely the border line of existential virtuality we are entering and manifesting, this is no easy matter for it demands of us the realization that our own instability as systems is maintained by an increased dependence on the other, that is where I see the hyperconnected individual co-existing and co-dependent on the infocologies she exists in becoming a Knowmad.
As I see it the Knowmad is the proactive stance of the hyperconnected player in the infosphere, she moves, he surfs, we collaborate, we actively engage and indeed pattern new potentials into new forms of existence.
Thank you spaceweaver for this comment as it enhances my own understanding of the very concept of the Knowmad and will (and in fact already does) influence the next step of my comprehension and therefore I see this as the very backbone and meaning of what being a hyperconnected Knowmad is.
Finally allow me to state that for me this very happening right here right now is the very form by which the new aesthetics of engagement become real and extend my mind into a new multiplcity. Isnt that the very meaning of the interplay between dimensions you have pointed at?
Thu, Apr 15, 2010
post updated with four more (7- 10) defining characteristics of the knowmadic state
Fri, Apr 16, 2010
The secrets of the quantum physics discovered on an old album...
Sat, Apr 24, 2010
Thanks, Wildcat, for this post, seminal to me and a main reason you all read this. I had glanced it over the day before graduating myself as a knowmad. And thanks for your comment on my
Here is the test for a knowmad that occurred to me walking home from public transport on a coldish spring city night in Asia. What I can write does not do justice to the vibratory perception, invoke it on your own with a few bits of your high-voltage imagination :-)
If you have never heard the word 'knowmad' do you seek for its meaning by feeling it out in your mind?
Did you read up on what a 'knowmad' could be to your own satisfaction in understanding? (Note: asking the likes of "do you get it" would be counterproductive.)
Do you want to be a 'knowmad' even before knowing what exactly that means?
Are you aware of your personal reason for wanting to be a 'knowmad'?
In the face of what could be called an overwhelming amount of information and ambiguity do you 'know', however foggy the notion, one thing you wish to do next?
Do you feel able to add a question related to 'knowmad' to expand this list? You don't have to. Are you fine with this?
After answering all questions to your own satisfaction, in whatever time it may take, you may feel you want to graduate as a knowmad. Congratulate yourself. Now you know. Share some.
Tue, Apr 27, 2010
Hi. I read your list of questions. I suppose that if you ever wished you stay a student and a hobbyist, then you are a knowmad? The term sounds to me very similar to an "open-minded enthusiast" and I appreciate the idea.
Tue, Apr 27, 2010
Thanks, gamma. I suppose if you are a pro at something and realize you are a beginner at something else, you are an enthusiast, too?
Wed, Apr 28, 2010
The point is to integrate the human energy in different situations in which the man is a different person. I use the integration as the strategy of behavior which collects the notions into a universal model. By using the strategy, I encounter the surprises in a certain way, maybe with more expectation.