Fwd: [-empyre-] On Gamer Theory

[Aliette G.C.]

Hello Brian! Hello Eduardo!

I am tired but ready to try an answer below.

Sorry, my pop account even the one of my subscription to the list never 
reaches the list from google mail interface...
so I forward to other account on thunderbird and answer from here:)

Before answering I want to thank Nicholas for the link to online Gamer 
Theory as book, as game, as dialectical discussion online to tribute a 
collective cognition. That is important as well the subject as well the 
means to reach a pedagogic objective in real time of the learning, 
through a collective understanding in progress of reciprocities, at 
work. What can learn on the means of the fights from the cognitive but 
empiric process for now. Thus the special chapter: Atopia (on Vice City 
-- may be our topic on the a-topological evil --wherever the country).

The site is the base of the published book from a collective critical 
reading of the first writing from Ken. He submitted it to the 
discussion. He better knew from the sources. They better knew from the 
game. So here is an emergent gamer strategy of the game of thinking by 
the way of a criticism of the computer games. Here is a thinking game 
(the game itself thinking at last and beyond all, the game as 
environment which contains us and of which we are a part).

http://www.futureofthebook.org/mckenziewark/discussion/viewtopic.php?p=454

A great ergonomic site that I really enjoy as well the plasticity as the 
adapted visual and dynamic design which have not taken age since more of 
two years from now -- may be developed by artist and computer programmer 
Alex Galloway himself, friendly following the demand of Ken? It is an 
art installation to tribute the real time of the dynamic reading, of the 
dynamic thought, of the pluri time answering; an organic installation as 
experiment, as critical formation beyond Education. The question could 
be that students were not interested enough in theorical studies by the 
way: not enough to reach the critical level of learning from it to the 
cognitive society. But they were passionate computer gamers all. The 
idea from Ken was to throw a defy of dialectical discussion with them, 
as much questions from their part to receive explanations from him as 
much critical arguments from their logical gamer view to contribute the 
relevance of the text.  Toward an intellectual territory of subversion 
of the game by accomplishing it -- excessing it by the social knowledge 
at work in each simulated situation formed an hypertreelike critical 
narration...

The virtual simulation in real time was a real game at the moment the 
end will show emergent winners whose contributing discussion will last 
by convince relevant modifications or answering integrations into the 
textual plasticity, till the print work by the author himself.

A sort of transeducation that we appreciate so much because it increases 
the mind from the practice -- the better sharing thing between all on 
earth.

Ken to his students to has choosen th publicity of their discussion by 
this way -- that increase it.

I remind that on idc list Patrick Lichty told of a similar experiment 
from his part to students in second life.


 > De: brian whitener <iwaslike at hotmail.com <mailto:iwaslike at hotmail.com>>
 > Asunto: RE: [-empyre-] On Gamer Theory
 > Para: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au 
<mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>>
 > Fecha: viernes, 9 de mayo de 2008, 2:01 pm
- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -
 > Hi aliette,
 >
 > thanks for your post. i just wanted to ask three follow up
 > questions about ti. in what way woud you call wark's
 > work "post political"?

from my part (probably that Ken may be would not answer the same): after 
the political economy --as economy of the production in a progressive 
relationship with history and this economy being a disposition of 
dialectical relationship between the different components of the 
production as reproduction of the system and of the society as system of 
reproduction of the system of equivalence of the value from the 
materialist realities.
 >
 > what is atopia (for you, or for wark)?

for Wark: for prevent misunderstanding it can better to read the chapter 
Atopia (on Vice city)

for me that shows the dead point of the progressive society from 
tradition to modernity (Habermas), the end of the social project in 
progress through the extensive tech world (question of ecology) and of 
the production (as entropy of the nature). Nowadays money does not 
mostly increases from the productive economy in the frame of the 
political economy, you know it perfectly.

As well economy as well ideology. There is for another hand the very 
good book from Nicholas The metaphysics of Capital installing the 
renewal system as out of invention --limited by its reproduction--of 
these dispositions.

At the moment the cold war stopped from the USSR by the disappearence of 
the dictatorship it was the realization of this old concept of decay of 
the Sate inheritaed from Anarchists that Marx had rebooted to justify 
the dictatorship: the decay of the dictatorship --by entropy. But that 
was certainly not a prediction of the realization of the supranational 
global liberalism: what has happened as an opposite of the communist 
society. Because the materialist history and the dialectical materialism 
both felt down from their respective horizons through the question of 
the universal equivalence of the money (as extreme point of abstraction 
of the progress which was supposed to free humans from the reality of 
material equivalences -but both making free the capitalism of its proper 
pact of equivalence in the society of production).

If we are in Atopia: there is no future that is the evil. Of course 
there will be a to-morrow world but not available to the representative 
issue -- as representation of a project of society. That is in Atopia 
the return of Utopia as definitive concept out of materiality --but 
reality of the thought. Here future cannot be a social project but 
properly a fiction. And Utopia properly a thought having reached the 
point where it is not necessary to related it to the city of God because 
having become an emergent abstraction from the former modernity.

Push out all the "re" as reproduction of the machinic process to free 
humans from their productive force, and push out the collective progress 
as entropy of the well. From this point, as Baudrillard said me at the 
moment of the referendum when I came to him with a translation from 
Zizek against the constitution... 'But Aliette: we have broken down all, 
those having make it are us (theorists and critical people) we are not 
to refound and reproduce what we have destroyed!" I answerred that 
anyway i shall vote "no" specially cause the abolishing of the human 
rights in the annexes linked to the patriot act following a conception 
of the rights from 1955 in Rome, at the moment the government of 
liberation were all dismissed.... At last and seeing that I persisted he 
said: "they" [?] have sacrified all, so what have we to sacrify from our 
part front of their proper sacrifice" (problematic of the fight as 
equivalence of disposition of the gift and gift back that is not a 
dialectical conception of the fights) --he said and then "here is the 
question. The day we will know what: "they" will disappear [as power].

The question is to find the means in Atopia. having yet taken place the 
end of the project as reason to justify the resource of power as means.

That is my personal answer (as responsibility) and of course that is not 
the one from Ken.

Sorry for my calamity English,-)
>
> > Canetti's Crowds and Power can stay currently lightening in the
> > situation of several countries in South America, and more between
> > South America and the USA and between the USA and the rest of the
> > world --included its allied "variety".
> >
> > >From Gamer Theory that is exactly the question of surviving in bare
> > life as emergent bare situation in the vectoral post-liberal world,
> > but inheritated culture (rule, education, comportments to safe oneself
> > toward and after the value) wherever can be the site (I mean whatever
> > it would be or not be of the back level of industrialization and  of
> > culture of the production).
> >
> > Something not universal --the actual question being the local question
> > --but something mathematic depending of the disposition of the game
> > cannot be solved or following an abstract rule of mathematic
> > plasticity of the chaos as condition of the game. Which paradigm after
> > alll? Very simply Statistics?
> >
> > The question is not more of the value as line of project. The question
> > is that one of otherness beyond the rule.
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stay in touch when you're away with Windows Live Messenger.
> http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_052008_______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>