Does capital itself remain human, necessarily?
-
-
Replying to @Ab__Elba @meta_nomad and
Capital was never human, but only symbiotically engaged with the human.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness @meta_nomad and
Capital can refer to the class or to the assets it mobilizes along certain lines—but the latter doesn’t have the character of capital outside the former
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Ab__Elba @Outsideness and
autonomic minds are capable of replacing the necessary human will (and already are, e.g. in the stock market)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HopefulAbandon @Outsideness and
They’re capable of mobilizing things according to certain human dictates of value that cannot be approach heuristically, and they aren’t consumptive in the same sense—the relevant sense. Nobody to sell to, really.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Ab__Elba @HopefulAbandon and
This is extremely close to
@EBBerger 's argument. It's ultimately about the limits of abstraction for the capitalist mechanism.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @HopefulAbandon and
Right. I guess you could argue that capitalism could just become transaction amongst capitalists, or totemistic masturbatory production for production’s sake (tho that places too many bets on nonmaterial factors if you ask me)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Ab__Elba @HopefulAbandon and
The notion that production-for-production is "masturbatory" is a somewhat bizarre consumerist prejudice.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Outsideness @HopefulAbandon and
It’s more of a thermodynamic question for me—what are the accrued gains and to whom do they accrue?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Ab__Elba @Outsideness and
Action for action’s sake w/o any accrued gains lacks telos (Which capital has) And is in that sense masturbatory.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The notion that it is preferable (or more purposeful) for something to have a goal outside or beyond its self-cultivation IS transcendent metaphysics.
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness @HopefulAbandon and
Sure, which I endorse. Self-cultivation is unintelligible to my mind without at least some sort of Tao. In what sense does the human-host engage in self-cultivation, then? I’m assuming it doesn’t.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Ab__Elba @HopefulAbandon and
Much room for speculation. I tend to think Musk's "biological boot-loader for machine intelligence" gets the human role roughly right.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 14 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.