When I think about the passage of time, the process of time, I have to think about Aristotle. Maybe Heraclitus. And the fact that we live in the here and now. Here we pause for a moment in the ephemeral. And invite you on a journey into summer.
All pics ©by Zenvampires
Text ©by Marek Gajdziński
Pics by Copilot
“Listen to this,” she says, reading from the magazine she has been reading for the last hour or so. “Can Never go hand in hand with Always? Never, says Never. Always, says Always.”
She looks at him. He shows no interest. Instead, he continues reading a newspaper he has been reading for the last hour or so.
“Have you heard me?”
“Yes, I’ve heard you. What about it?”
“This was what they call flash literature or something, a short story called ‘Never Says Never, Always Says Always’.”
“Indeed, a very short one.”
“But don’t you think this funny?”
“I may think it stupid, if you really insist on my opinion.”
“Well then, hear this. The story was submitted to the editor of a certain literary magazine by a writer from Argentina. On the same day the editor received a very similar contribution from another writer from Iceland. This other story is tilted ‘Never Says Always, Always Says Never’ and reads: Can Never go hand in hand with Always? Never, says Always. Always, says Never.”
She looks at him. Again, he shows no interest.
“Have you heard me?”
“Yes, I’ve heard you.”
“And what do you say to this? Don’t you think this is, you know…”
“That’s the end?”
“Yes.”
“Well, then,” he stops reading what he has been reading and looks up at her, “I say there’s nothing to it”.
“What do you mean?”
“I mean this shit happens day and night, and will, till hell freezes over”.
He goes back to his newspaper. She looks at him as if she wanted to say something but finally decides otherwise and focuses on her magazine. They are both reading for some time. The silence grows.
Then he puts down the newspaper, gets up and leaves the room, heading for a bathroom or kitchen, who knows. While passing through the corridor, he suddenly freezes in an awkward position. He utters some hardly distinguishable sounds that may form a female name, or a part of it, “Barb”, or something. The woman hears the call and answers while reading on:
“Yes, David?”
He collapses to the floor. There he rests supine, undisturbed, unable and unwilling to produce any more sounds, his chest motionless for the first time in his life.
What is the movie about? There is the classical way of film criticism. It consists of counting the minutes, and the subjects that take up the most time in a movie are the subjects of the movie. I think in this case it would be trees. A movie about trees? But that answers the question. The movie is slow. And maybe we would say, well, yes, Asian cinema is slow per se. But that’s not the point here. It’s also compelling. In the discussion after the screening, we also talked about the fact that the movie had scary parts.
But that’s not what I felt at all. It’s more the way time passes. And anyway, what is time? “The only thing that promises time is a clock” or something like that. One of the lines in the movie. And in general. Sentences. The movie, which shows trees, rain, and the sky, lives from the sentences that are spoken. Even if you’re not allowed to speak. Or are allowed to sit with their backs to each other.
2. philosophy
“To look at art is also to enjoy the space, the air, not just the picture”. Another sentence from the film. But there are many more. And the heat and boredom suddenly become a reflection of life. And about the world. And also about philosophy. And also about philosophy. And it doesn’t matter which. Because it’s about thinking and not about following a direction.
3. plot
What is the movie about? Well. I don’t know. Maybe the heat of summer in Japan. About the old woman and the little girl and all the trees I saw. Or maybe it’s about something else. All I know is that the movie captivated me. And I will think about it for a long time.
They are still there after the rain
By Pan Junhua
2022
It’s true. Today’s article was written by our favorite AI. But instead of asking it more questions about itself, we looked at the influence of AI on the topic of phenomenology.
The views offered by an AI are not really original. On the other hand, they are the collected views of humanity (since the AI is fed with knowledge from the Internet).
And maybe that’s why it’s interesting to think about how humanity itself thinks about the changes in phenomenology regarding AI.
Propmts ©by Zenvampires
Text by Copilot
Pic ©by Zenvampires Collective
Phenomenology, a philosophical movement founded in the 20th century by Edmund Husserl, has always grappled with the experience of consciousness and the perception of the world. With the advent of technology, and particularly artificial intelligence (AI), the question arises as to how this discipline can contribute to the interpretation and understanding of this new reality.
Phenomenology emphasizes subjective experience and the meanings we assign to the world. In the context of AI, this raises interesting questions. Can an AI have a phenomenological experience? Can it assign or interpret meanings? Most would argue that this is not the case, as AI, no matter how advanced it may be, is still a product of human construction and programming. It can process data and recognize patterns, but it does not “experience” the world in the same way a human being does.
Postphenomenology, an evolution of phenomenology, offers a useful perspective on the relationship between humans and technology. It views technology not as a neutral tool, but as something that shapes and changes our perception of the world and our interaction with it. In the context of AI, this means that we should not only think about what AI can or cannot do, but also how its existence and use changes our experience of the world.
The Kyoto School, a philosophical movement in Japan, offers another, but complementary perspective. It emphasizes interpersonal connectedness and the importance of context, prompting us to think about the social and cultural impacts of AI. How does AI change our relationships with others? How does it influence our society and culture?
Phenomenology, postphenomenology, and the Kyoto School offer valuable insights into understanding AI. They remind us that technology cannot be viewed in isolation, but is always in relation to us and the world. They challenge us to think about the impacts of AI on our experience, our relationships, and our society. And they invite us to reflect not only on what AI is, but also on what it could be and what it should be.
What is art?
The question is reminiscent of Walter Benjamin. But we are not going to deal with it. The question posed in the film Yannick is also reminiscent of the fundamental question of capitalism and the consumer. Because what does it mean to consume art? Or rather, what does it mean if I am not satisfied with the art offered to me?
Quentin Dupieux poses this question in his film Yannock. Or he asks many questions. But we won’t write about all of them.
What is art?
There are many ways to answer this question. But that’s not what we want to write about here. More interesting for us is that Dupieux’s movie reminds us of it. What is theater? There are people who march unsuspectingly through the European Biennial. Later, they post pictures of it on social media or send photos to their friends. And they are proud to have been at the Venice Biennale. Or the Documenta. But what did they see? What did they experience? Was it good? We never find out. The experience of art is to have been there. And to have experienced “art” or what someone understands it to be.
What is the meaning of art?
Of course, we could think about what art wants to achieve. We could go back in time and take an anthropological approach. We could look at religious, social, and other meanings. And we could also think about the fact that Europeans, having discovered that you can make a lot of money with “art” (if we are not mistaken, this idea was born in Amsterdam, but perhaps much earlier, in one of the Roman villas). In the end, we may come to the conclusion that art, in its present form, should entertain. We as viewers, or rather consumers, should, well, consume art. In the end, we don’t care what ideas the artist had when creating the work. We are supposed to… be entertained. Surely there are other meanings of art in society. Especially in such a complicated society that calls itself European. There are still the political, religious and aesthetic aspects. But the consumer should consume. A good consumer is always good for the economy.
The Movie
The movie would be told quickly. But what is Wikipedia for? Despite the rather boring description on Wikipedia, the movie touches on exactly these metaphysical problems. What happens to the viewer when the art shown to him does not meet his expectations? Is he now a consumer? Do they have “rights”? Like a consumer who can simply return the goods? Or have they simply not understood the demands of the creator? What happens if he disagrees with the work of art? What happens to a bad piece?
What is the point of art?
Dupieux does not give answers. He asks questions, in a rather short film. “Yannick. Just look for it in the cinemas near you. Or on the Internet. And think about the fact that you might not like the movie.
We have already shown the first part of Piotr Millati’s phenomenal photos here. But there is more. And we didn’t want to withhold them.
Machines operate according to the laws of physics. Electronic music is also created according to the principles of physics. It is an electronic processes that we set in motion through programming. On the other hand, mathematics, which describes physics in its language, also belongs to metaphysics (at least according to Aristotle, but we don’t want to start a big philosophical discussion here). But if we think of mechanics as a man-made thing, then it belongs to metaphysics, just like music. And here is our answer to the philosophical dilemma.
Hic sunt dracones
Metaphysics
What changes for metaphysics? Nothing at all. At first sight. I don’t want to propose the poetic theory that metaphysics is the area “behind” physics. In other words, to take a border between physics and metaphysics as a concept and then redefine it. This is about shifting boundaries within the concept of metaphysics. We have reported here that Imgarden describes human mental activity as metaphysics. Seen in this light, human beings constantly and incessantly produce metaphysics in the form of thought, politics, and history. At the time, we also asked what would happen if not only humans but also computers took over the production of thought, politics, and history.
The Robots
The Thoughts
So what happens when bots listen to music made by other bots? Nothing at first. Not much, at least. What happens when they have to decide which music to listen to? That brings up another question. A question that (we’re back to war, but maybe because that’s where development usually goes the fastest) people have only decided ethically. But what else happens?
There is a part of philosophy, experimental philosophy, that deals with things like “free will”. If machines were to make their own decisions, we would have to revisit that question. Then we would be getting closer to the question of “being”.
There is a second metaphysical question (perhaps we should abandon metaphysics and leave it entirely to the machines, because the field is quite complicated, as poststructuralism has already established). The question we have not yet asked is what is the instance of collected human knowledge to which the AI refers. Because humans like to create instances. Like the “swarm intelligence” that got us nowhere. Or Plato’s “third man”. Or the dragons.
The text was created by humans. But the images are not.
by Sopocki
We have already presented Sopocki’s music here. In his development, the artist works on the elaboration of a certain tension. Tension between the fast beat and slower elements. But it is too superficial to speak of tension. Because art is always about more than just that, it’s not about the technique of how tracks are created. It’s about the fact that we also feel something when we listen. And that these feelings are evoked in us.
Here you can find his new EP (external link):
https://soundcloud.com/300bpmboysclub/sets/boot-it-ep
1.
The experiment means that limits are explored. The limits of human action or the limits of what is possible. Perhaps also the limits of art. But limits do not necessarily mean setting out into something new. This is a modernist idea of the 19th century (perhaps some countries that are good at making diesel engines are afraid of technology, they still think they are in the 19th century).
We are not concerned with limits at all. It’s about what experimentation might mean. It’s about exploring the new. And the joy of development.
2.
It is not a new development that computers help people to produce music. Especially in electronic music, which is created entirely with the help of computers. Perhaps it is also nothing new that artificial intelligence helps in the production of music. The question that remains unanswered is always how deeply AI intervenes in the production process. If music is programmed, as in our case, the AI can create tracks. In our case, it was not. But the AI has already done a lot of work on some of the tracks. In this case, it has also become part of the Zenvampires Collective.
3.
Metaphysics has taken on different meanings over time. We will not discuss the term at this point. But if AI intervenes so deeply in the manufacturing process, it can also determine our metaphysics. It influences how we perceive music. It is still a metaphysics of metaphysics (AI learns from humans, it is the overall knowledge of humanity and therefore cannot be better than humans). The question is what happens when we enter the world of nonhuman metaphysics? Here is the first step.
©Zenvampires 2022