Biological Thinking

42 – “Biological Sovereignty” – E. Thacker

Eugene Thacker argues the topic that is the security of life itself – Biological Sovereignty. This sovereignty is a term of relationship between the health of the population and the security of the state. The public health are the biologically sovereign that is shifting from the geopolitics to the “biopolitics”. There are two main aspects of biopolitics: “the naturalistic articulation of a new entity of governance, the ’population’ and the development of mathematical and statistical means for managing the population” (Pg. 5). Those two aspects are stitched together by an emerging “race war” that is a binary division within society either the threat or being threaded. For example, The SARS is a very strange case that happened abruptly and spread rapidly. There are so many information about the SARS is a virus of rare war. However, the threat is not only a nation or population, but the control system of circulations: “processes of infection, replication, transmission, endemicity and epidemicity” (Pg.18).

Biology sovereignty is the relationship between sovereignty and life, and it does not only define a single bare life, but also the dynamic between specific and general life. Disease has no boundaries, as the space that can be limited or cannot be limited.
 
Questions:
1. The national boundaries are broken by the biopolitics. Does it mean the architecture have the same properties that can exceed the space boundaries?
2. Does the architecture have any characteristic of sovereign?

 

 

41 – “Ideal Genesis of Matter” – H. Bergson

Bergson discusses the creation of the universe i in a chapter of his book entitled Creative Evolution.  He talks about how our consciousness is brought to us, and how is in the past. Bergson believes that “our consciousness must detach itself from the already-made and attract itself to the being-made” (Pg. 230).  We experience the creation that is just a simple action in our mind, and actions have only been a pause that instead of continuing into a news creation. The author notes, “Whether we speak of creation or posit an uncreated matter, it is the totality of the universe that we are considering at once” (Pg. 232). We have the idea of creation that is always obscure, as we habitually do as the understanding cannot help doing. However, the creation is not a mystery and is so conceived as that: “That new things can join things already existing is absurd, no doubt, since the thing results from a solidification performed by our understanding, and there are never any things other than those that the understanding has thus constituted” (Pg.240).

The creation should have a scientific view that means we need to connect between science and creation. The science helps us generate more and more creative things and carry out the creative idea.

Questions:
1.How does the consciousness relate to the architecture?
2.Can we merge the consciousness into the science?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: