Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 37, No. 341.
        Department of Digital Humanities, University of Cologne
                      Hosted by DH-Cologne
                       www.dhhumanist.org
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org




        Date: 2023-12-08 13:44:50+00:00
        From: Tanner Durant <kekpenyo@syr.edu>
        Subject: Re : [Humanist] 37.340: the all-or-none?

Congrats to Chris on his new book!

This quote from his post — "Invocational media seem to empower individuals, but
necessarily subject users to corporate and government monopolies of invocation.
They offer many 'solutions', but only by reducing everything to the same kind of
act." — reminds me of some arguments made in the 2019 book, Hush: Media and
Sonic Self-Control, by Mack Hagood, about the false sense of neoliberal autonomy
that informational music apps like Spotify give us. Using the Hagood book for a
paper currently; maybe I’ll wrap Invocational Media into a future paper,
including Willard’s appreciated perspective.

Tanner
________________________________
De : Humanist <humanist@dhhumanist.org>
Envoyé : jeudi 7 décembre 2023 23:17
À : Tanner Durant <kekpenyo@syr.edu>
Objet : [Humanist] 37.340: the all-or-none?


              Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 37, No. 340.
        Department of Digital Humanities, University of Cologne
                      Hosted by DH-Cologne
                       www.dhhumanist.org<http://www.dhhumanist.org>
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org




        Date: 2023-12-08 06:11:36+00:00
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty@mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: how (or when) does the all-or-none matter?

Chris Chesher's new book, Invocational Media, raises an interesting
argumentative question: how does the all-or-none origin of
computationally produced phenomena matter? Jim Keller, in his interview
with Lex Fridman, talks about the extraordinary effort and ingenuity
required to transcend the quantum phenomena in silicon microcircuitry to
produce the deterministic machine. Similarly, equally extraordinary
engineering makes it possible for us to ignore the digital--or, to use
von Neumann's term, the all-or-none--output of the deterministic
machine, and so turn to Chris' invocational metaphor. But I am left
wondering whether it is wise to pretend and declare that (as Brian
Cantwell Smith once also argued) the digital doesn't matter.

Would it not be better, more productive to ask in what areas of human
experience and thought does it make absolutely no difference, in what
others is it significant?

Comments?

Yours,
WM
--
Willard McCarty,
Professor emeritus, King's College London;
Editor, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews;  Humanist
www.mccarty.org.uk<http://www.mccarty.org.uk>



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php