This continues from this post on Bryant's pan-correlationalism. Even though he admits correlationallism in that all machines have at
least partial access to the thing in itself (TII), still the TII cannot
be reduced to that access, even if we add up all such accesses (itself
an impossible task). In that sense the TII subsists and is not dependent
on another machines access to it. In that regard recall this discussion
on how kennilingus approaches subsistence, the TII, the Causal, and
access.
Another point is Bryant realizes we cannot just lump all human access
into one universal access. It depends on all sorts of factors, from
gender, class, education, work, tech etc. While kennilingus might not
emphasize these differences enough it does include, even if lopsided,
cognitive and other stages based on empirical observation and
testing. And it is in this regard that OOOers can refine their own
notions of how humanity can increase its access to the TII, while still
not claiming to total access via some nirodha state equivalent to the
withdrawn Causal TII.
And to reiterate, having progressed beyond a modernist
anthropic correlationism we can return to a more evolved anthropic
access, for it is only through that sort of access that we can remedy
the devastation created by a less evolved anthropos on the environment.
It is questionable that the damage we've done can fix itself at this
point, unless by fix we mean such dramatic climate change that humanity
and most forms of complex life are eliminated. Earth may survive but it
may never give birth to these life forms again.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.