+
From: michaelP <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 06:53:02 +0100
> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--MS_Mac_OE_3132370382_240106_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
MichaelE:
Truth is managed by allowing certain images to be transmitted and by
forbidding other
images from being transmitted. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand
words (tells lies without mediation).
michaelP:
but, the way in which images promote their 'reality effect' even though they
are nothing but images, i.e., precisely not real,
MichaelE
No, I think that the images are really real. The weight of being has shifted
historically to the tele-images through which the world discloses itself.
The world has to be set up in the technological mode to be seen and
believed. What doesn't get into the TV camera's eye no longer really exists.
michaelP:
Michael, the images-as-images are surely "real" in the sense that they are
beings too, but this is surely (?) different from their 'reality-effect',
that is their power to be images-of-something, to (in the case of visual
images, say) be like something else, to be similar to some other being, to
convincingly re-present something not present itself; or (in the case of
linguistic images) to conjure up the deferred not-present being in (say)
descriptive prose or poetic imagery. Are you actually [sic] suggesting that
historically the being being represented or imaged [sic] and the being of
the image itself have collapsed their traditional difference (images and
appearances have traditionally been thought as images-of {something-else},
as appearances-of {something-else}? If so, we can no longer even speak of
"images" or "appearances" or "representations" (etc) at all since they have
lost their power to image, to appear, to represent: something else! to be
what they are -- "media", if you like: mediation itself has then shrunk to
an invisible, to a nothingness, vanished and banished, and we are left with
{an apparent [sic]} immediacy -- this now feels like a total submission to
the most dominant forms of conventional appearance that even Nietzsche could
not have dreamt of in his chatracterisation of the last men as the blinking
ones (who might just unendingly unblinkingly goggle at the flickering
screens like those in Plato's cave...)
Your characterisation of "reality" and "existence" I find truly [sic]
disturbing along with your apparent embrace of capitalism (in other posts);
in both it seems you have gone along with a possible strange consequence of
following Heideggerian gelassenheit and Nietzschean amor fati if not just
'fashion': to passively embrace-without-embracing (submit to) the most
dominant historical forms (as if they were being itself, rather than ...
just loud beings?).
Hopefully misunderstanding everything
michaelP
--MS_Mac_OE_3132370382_240106_MIME_Part
Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: teletruth</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#00FFFF">
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF">MichaelE:<BR>
</FONT> Truth is managed by allowing certain images to be transmitted and b=
y forbidding other<BR>
images from being transmitted. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand w=
ords (tells lies without mediation).<BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF">michaelP:<BR>
</FONT>but, the way in which images promote their 'reality effect' even tho=
ugh they are nothing but images, i.e., precisely not real,<BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF">MichaelE<BR>
</FONT>No, I think that the images are really real. The weight of being has=
shifted historically to the tele-images through which the world discloses i=
tself. The world has to be set up in the technological mode to be seen and b=
elieved. What doesn't get into the TV camera's eye no longer really exists.<=
BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF">michaelP:<BR>
Michael, the images-as-images are surely "real" in the sense that=
they are beings too, but this is surely (?) different from their 'reality-e=
ffect', that is their power to be images-of-something, to (in the case of vi=
sual images, say) be like something else, to be similar to some other being,=
to convincingly re-present something not present itself; or (in the case of=
linguistic images) to conjure up the deferred not-present being in (say) de=
scriptive prose or poetic imagery. Are you actually [sic] suggesting that hi=
storically the being being represented or imaged [sic] and the being of the =
image itself have collapsed their traditional difference (images and appeara=
nces have traditionally been thought as images-of {something-else}, as appea=
rances-of {something-else}? If so, we can no longer even speak of "imag=
es" or "appearances" or "representations" (etc) at =
all since they have lost their power to image, to appear, to represent: some=
thing else! to be what they are -- "media", if you like: mediation=
itself has then shrunk to an invisible, to a nothingness, vanished and bani=
shed, and we are left with {an apparent [sic]} immediacy -- this now feels l=
ike a total submission to the most dominant forms of conventional appearance=
that even Nietzsche could not have dreamt of in his chatracterisation of th=
e last men as the blinking ones (who might just unendingly unblinkingly gogg=
le at the flickering screens like those in Plato's cave...)<BR>
<BR>
Your characterisation of "reality" and "existence" I fi=
nd truly [sic] disturbing along with your apparent embrace of capitalism (in=
other posts); in both it seems you have gone along with a possible strange =
consequence of following Heideggerian gelassenheit and Nietzschean amor fati=
if not just 'fashion': to passively embrace-without-embracing (submit to) t=
he most dominant historical forms (as if they were being itself, rather than=
... just loud beings?).<BR>
<BR>
Hopefully misunderstanding everything<BR>
<BR>
michaelP<BR>
</FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>
--MS_Mac_OE_3132370382_240106_MIME_Part--
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
