I recommend watching the Chinese original first. It has EN subs, it takes a bit to adapt to the pace, designs, and acting styles, jokes, etc. but I guarantee it will be a blast. It was produced by CCTV, Tencent Video, Three-Body Universe, Migu Video, and Linghe Culture and represents a primer in Chinese TV productions. It is fast-paced and edgy, reminding us how similar and cinematic are manhua‘s (or manga/manhwa) and how easy it is to use it as a movie storyboard.
I am tying not to be a purist or a cultural essentialist, od making the case for China’s exceptionalism but let us pause the Netflix inevitability in order to enjoy the original. Yes, it’s spectacular & entertaining, but I think that the UK or Netflix adaptation should be viewed critically on 3 accounts, considering how previous adaptations were quite shallow in comparison with the non-Western Asian originals (not to mention various Techno-Orientalist trappings)
Taking into account the previous Hollywood adaptations of Asian horror classics – say The Ring, The Grudge, The Eye, that are not only watered-down, Westernized versions of the original, but they all enact a sort of deletion (becoming canonic) instead of the turning more attention to the original material. Accordingly, this appropriation and adaptation is mostly triggered by money- and catering to Western tastes, ignoring its historically materialist setting – as part of the Japanese Miracle and “Confucian Belt” Tiger Economies (Ju-On, Ringu, Gin gwai respectively) propped up but also disciplined by the US. The same I would argue for the Liu Cixin Remembrance of Earth’s Past – the decision of the producers to place it in the UK rather than China speaks volumes. I mention this while agreeing with the fact that internationalizing such productions is essential to growing their core audience, especially for getting Chinese SF more popular abroad. So, while agreeing it is good to decontextualize the Chinese original, I think that the source material should get more visibility.
The original Three-Body (三体) was originally free of charge and available on the YT channel, and it was hailed by some cultural critics as one of the most accurate, adult and canonic SF series ever made. Three-Body (三体) was in complete contrast with the usual (very entertaining but also quite infantilizing) Disney-Lucasfilms SF productions (SW extended universe – think The Mandalorian). Charles Mudede in particular was very vocal in making clear that a Hollywood adaptation would not invest money in a book trilogy that is so complicated, so dark and so complex and stick to it, especially because it “provides a solid introduction to the key ideas of a discipline that went into decline in the US around the mid-1970s, physics.” Well now that series is here, it is time to go for the original.
Again, as mentioned previously on Timespacewarps we should not narrow down the scope of our cultural opening. During the XX century the West celebrated China’s “opening up”, which meant opening up to US/Europ-Atlantic liberalism and its financial institutions (see admission into WTO and Clinton’s China Trade Bill speech), but also buying into democratic values, and eventually becoming the World’s Shopfloor. This is not to say we should encourage Chinese exceptionalism. Yet it’s most banal and easy to mold everything into Anglo – American topoi. Ehy try to expunge differences, divergences, and specificities in order to make more of the same for the home market? It the aim – as was the original aim of its producers and ths crazy story behind it – is to produce a similar IP to the Lucasfilm SW, then go ahead – expand the universe! It’s anyway a very narrow and incestuous media world we’re living in. I say this also in regard to the Hollywood Dream factory record of casting incredibly discriminatory and stiff characters in the roles of Asians, Arabs, or Soviets agents during the Cold War. Do we need more Western versions of Asian movies/series or should we help translate or disseminate existing productions more throughly? What the hell happened to Own Voice.
So here is episode 1 of the original Chinese series with pretty decent EN subtitles. It is very high quality and it has a very good cast. The whole story is woven around an interplay btw history (or historical materialism), the natural sciences, and ideology – a debate inaugurated one might say by the paper of Boris Hessen at the 1931 Second International Congress for the History of Science in London where he delivered “The Socio-Economic Roots of Newton’s PrincipiaMathematica”.
This series is incredibly paced, and it contains some incredible scenes from the Observatory during the Cultural Revolution – it is really a good way to get acquainted with what would be termed the geo-military concept Third Front – of trying to industrialize China’s rugged interior and agricultural regions, in the midst of a double whammy: the fear of that China’s industrial and military infrastructural core would be vulnerable in the event of invasion by the Soviet Union or air raids by the United States (yeah after the Sino-Soviet split things looked very differently). The series is also an exception in the way it depicts a multiracial, multinational planetary governance that is trying to respond to this alien threat.
After the US rapprochement and as national defense considerations waned, the pace of building up the interior according to guiding principles of “Close to mountains, dispersed, hidden” (kaoshan, fensan, yinbi) declined and many plants went bankrupt in the 1980s (of course many got built in a hurry and were as a consequence quite defective). This does not mean some of them got an afterlife as private enterprises.
Anyway, it is important to watch such a series and the first batch of 30 eps (!) – out of consideration for its impact in China itself, where the Netflix adaptation is not streaming. Liu Cixin fans and Three-Body fans applauded the TV series on Douban (Rotten Tomatoes and Letterbox in one), where 449,000 viewers gave the show a high rating of 8.7. Below are some posters made for the anniversary edition -combined SF with traditional, vertical Chinese landscape painting, “shanshui hua” (literally painting of mountains, rivers, and cliffs).
Probably one of the most disconcerting things about Whitheadian process philosophy (or the philosophy of organism – as Whitehead called it) was its “theological” reception and transmission via American process theology (particularly Charles Hartshorne mentioned in this talk several times). It is a historically incontestable fact, that Whitheadian process philosophy survived in that milieu in mid XX century, although overall the chapter dedicated to God in ANWs magnum opus Process & Reality: An Essay in Cosmology is rather small. It almost feels like an afterthought.
I publish this here for anyone wanting to hear a contemporary discussion about inner and outer relations. This talk is a crash course of sorts through the difficulties (if completely unfamiliar with Whiteadhead’s metaphysics) but also a proof of the vivacity and constant evolution of process philosophy in today’s world. One could of course pick and choose favorite morsels about cells, agency, causality, and organizational levels – from this talk. To conclude with the conclusion of Bonnitta – the best of contemporary science and especially new contemporary scientific advances have to inform our metaphysics and philosophy – the same way the scientific advances of Whitehead’s time (quantum formalism and general relativity) were inspiring and reshaping those insights.
Whiteheadian Marxists like Steven Shaviro have taken another route entirely than the usual process theologians (check the pdf God, or the Body Without Organs from which I will quote heavily) and bringing forth Whitehead’s own criticism of both Leibniz’s and Spinosa’s notion of God, even if their positions are closer to him than anyone else. But like all thinkers of the last 2000 years (to quote Shaviro) they allow “ethical and religious interests. . . to influence metaphysical conclusions” (173). This Kantian Whitehead or critique of religion is indeed a different beast that we have become acquainted with (through let’s say essential immanentist readings like Isabelle Stengers’s Thinking with Whitehead). His criticism of religious belief is from a transcendental position rather than an immanent, Spinozian one. Rather than eliminating God (Shaviro underlines) like Nietzsche he seeks to accomplish a “the secularization of God’s functions in the world” (1929/1978, 207). This startling attempt is part of the Enlightenment project, but with a twist, because it does not seek to eliminate religion, only diminish its importance. Whitehead seeks to establish a God without religion as he wants to respect the findings of physical science without supporting “science’s reductionist positivism or tendentious separation of facts from values.” This secularized God is God as the Principle of Concretion. Coherence is here the most important thing and Shaviro continues to explain why in a passage from 2008 that is both memorable and crystal clear (coherence- a notion that is not so much logical as ecological):
The principle of coherence stipulates that “no entity can be conceived in complete abstraction from the system of the universe” (3). In order to exist, a given entity presupposes, and requires, the existence of certain other entities, even though (or rather, precisely because) it cannot be logically derived from those other entities, or otherwise explained in their terms. Coherence means, finally, that “all actual entities are in the solidarity of one world” (67).
timespace coordinates: present-day China \ mostly in the province of Sichuan
I have mentioned this movie in a post in 2022 on the SFitze substack. It came to my attention after a post by respected geek and translator Xueting C. Ni’s TW below:
…at last, the kind of contemporary work I've been waiting for from mainland China. A #scifi retelling of Journey to the West. About a magazine editor going to a village to investigate mass UFU sightings, meets a poet there and they embark a journey (of self discovery) #filmpic.twitter.com/tWVnuSt6qD
He recommended watching it with some good tea or some good booze in a warm, cosy place. And this I did. I do not pretend to know why this small-budget funny, melodramatic, nostalgic ‘first contact’ weird movie made such a big impact on him or his peers or why he scored 8.4 out of 10 score on Chinese movie/book/music recommendation network Douban. But I will try to say why you should watch and search for a subbed version of this small serendipitous gem.
What is the merit of such a movie in a country that tries so much to vaunt its role as a leader in scientific and technological breakthroughs? What is the value of small-budgeted SF films in an era when bombastic productions dominate the market? We expect a contemporary cinema audience to be dissatisfied or nonplussed if it does not get its portion of stellar battles, kaboom FX and wandering planets jumping from their orbit. This movie begs to differ and carves a niche for itself. Important to to mention that The Wandering Earth director Guo Fan aka Frant Gwo makes a cameo. He’s the one who buys the damaged cosmonauts costume – it’s almost self-ironic in a sense. How do these big productions get made with money trickling from the successful ones or is it more like we need attention for big ones so small ones can also co-exist?
On the technical side: the movie starts with a VHS report from 1990 – with a youngish Tang Zhijun, the editor of the popular science magazine Universe Exploration Magazine obsessed with aliens talking about the importance of first radio transmission of Berlin Olympics and SETI. Flash forward and we get this aging and completely Absent-Minded Professor like figure with the remaining contributing odd-ball members of the Universe Exploration Mag in their rundown bureau. It’s an image of funny helplessness with even a Hello Kitty vaporizer ij the room. There’s the unmistakable sense they are unable to wade through a world full of attention economy traps and accumulating bills. They rent out their old Soviet cosmonaut costume for an advertising campaign for an energy company called “Apollo”. They are the first to fall for the exploitative viral media advertising extra sensory phenomena with click bait sensationistic news. They seem to be at the bottom end of the economic system having to eke a living on the underbelly of a booming, technologically competitive, attention grabbing and gimmicky world. Such mags existed all over the whole East bloc, but they had to either close down or try and reinvent themselves in order to survive in an era of boom and bust, and a constant defunding of the research institutions they depended on. It is for me very easy to relate to something like this. Some became allied to the start-up world and others had to try hard to keep up with various technological hypes.
The movie uses a lot of faux documentary material, and has the feel of a digital phone recording with a selfie stick – almost like small TikTok reels. Nevertheless, this does not represent an instantly clickable bait-click material. Media and especially old (dead) media is present in a very direct way – snow crash TVs (the Poltergeist effect), radio and even an ominous Giger Counter are all present and waveform receivera. But they are channeling somehow the background radiation of the universe not radioactive fallout or TV news. They are also channeling the inner worldof these characters.
These old 20th century technologies, no matter how dated, or even Cold War tech they seem, have gotten other uses. In a sense ufologists have been re-engeering them for their own (higher) purposes.
So now imbibed with some new meanings, extraordinary energy or hidden power, they are ways to access the very basis of reality and a dreamworld that escapes the rest. A reality that throughout the movie is most unreal, surreal or anti-real. The movie is considered by some as “literary science fiction” – and this might instantly label it as something pretentious or nostalgic, which is completely at odds with a lot of hard SF popular in China. But if you want to consider it literary SF – then it is so by its appeal to a sort of lyrical, poetic and evocative power that SF irradiates in comparison with realist, mimetic fiction. It is not literary in its bookish immediate sense. The most salient characters are somehow all neurodivergent (even it does not get an explicit mention as such). Characters have lived trough various troubles, have various sensibilities and somehow stay open to the outside, no matter how unimaginable or even incredidble. These ‘specially endowed’ persons in the movie do not allow us just access to parallel worlds, multiverse, portals, aliens visitors or UFO landings like in the traditional SF narratives. They are very much linked to embodied realities, to the very dirty, muddy countryside, the sort places where these encounters happen apparently. The boy with the metallic pot on his head (a sort of blessed fool character almost) is a dictionary carrying poet, not just shaman (poisoned mushrooms also have an important role) but also some sort of spoken word performer in the middle of fields and a Taoist inchoate landscape. He is closer to the “cosmic” and the “comic”, a dramatic creature close to an embedded SF reality that does not get mentioned in many SF on-screen narratives.
One of my favorite characters is the trolley bag – carrying madame. For most of the movie she seems the only realist (sane?) person in the movie. But I think she is the true Sun Wukong. She is the Money King. I say this based on the fact that she is the only one that pulls faces and pokes fun at the elderly ufologist nincompoop master Tang Zhijun. If you read the original recently you will understand what I mean. I did not ask my Chinese friend what he thinks, but this is my feeling. I also take my conclusions from the above poster that makes her hold a selfie stick – the only up-to-date person in a whole ufologist team that does not feels technologically out of place in the contemporary world.
She complains all the time but she also carries the batteries for his Giger counter in her trolley. Isn’t that enough? These are my cue for the Monkey King, that is always an unwilling member in the original 16th century epos attributed to attributed to Wu Cheng’en. Like the legendary monkey, she is forced and incarcarcerated by Buddha in the original Journey to the West and obliged to follow the witless and frankly easy to poke-fun-at monk Xuanzang (602–664), the Buddhist sutra translator. She is the practical person, she is the one that is always debunking and always telling things how they stand: “A lunatic grand party”.
Of course there are several contenders for that role – even the character of the drunk could very well be the monkey but he is mostly the pig in my view, but why not think of the Monkey King like a sort of distributive or collective character, since this is what it was. I believe in the original reading from the Maoist era or even earlier this may have been an embodiment of the voice of the people, the voice of the masses and also of the unrepentant and the tricksterish.
With that in mind, she might be the only one having a bit or reason or some sort of materialistic compass in a place of illusions and near-hallucinatory experiences. I really like the fact that she always is the one to question the whole quest, and also the one to remind us about the harsh laws of thermodynamics under the market economy (and energy scarcity): someone has to pay for the heating, someone has to pay for the repairs and for the upkeep! I of course like the Red Cap guy, the one that travels in his childish UFO car and has met Tang at some earlier phase and is now a mysterious meteorite hunter.
In the 1990 your entrepreneurial plans did not guarantee you will be a winner later on. Having a great idea did not guarantee it will become a commercial success. Following the “everything goes” mantra of the 1990s, why not thinking that you could live off selling telescopes, because how cannot one not look above? Yes, but increasingly throughout the decade the push to encourage curiosity about new discoveries became second fiddle to other priorities or it pure and simply made some people appear like complete loosers of the market economy. Is it great to make your passion something competitive, or at least transforming a telescope into another commodity – like TV sets, radios, mobile phones etc. There is something eminently ridiculous in using cosmonaut suits to sell products – but we are living in this world. Daily I see adverts for banks, various products, shoes superimposed on CGI imagery with cosmonauts, or Black Friday adds on the moon.
There is here an obvious hint at how some of these pops sci dreams of the 1990s did not played out. Or even the mystery, weird, fringe Fortean things came to be transformed into conspirative thinking. Maybe there is also a kind a moralistic play here. The movies shows a lot of missing pathways, a lot of possible venues that did not bear fruits, a lot of missing opportunities and questions. How did those initial drives, the early naive belief in the basic science popularization got abandoned for more commercial or more infotainment pursuits?
There is also the possibility that this Journey to the West talks about larger issues that bedevil those that got really involved in the China Dream at this historical moment. There is an immense need for diverting more investment into its social sector (the percentage of the GDP allotted to social issues is very small compared to even its nearest economic competitors). All in all, the scope of alleviating poverty AS WELL as raising its education and reskilling its still unskilled rural population are looming big. No mean task, because China has still a lot further to go. At the same time the movie presents some sort of “Science Wars” between humanities (understood as non-math, poetry, even sentimentalism) and a different approach to math or physics (thinking about the entire Sokal hoax affair and what Andrew Ross said at the time about how positivism opened up a second front – beside the anti-superstition campaigns).
Superstition or what one might call folkloric beliefs, including signs and remains of residual village belief systems–are tolerated, but also considered deviations. This has been the whole deal about modernization from the May Fourth Movement on – of overcoming superstitions that are slowing down China, old ideas and old ways hamper it joining modernity. The result is that there is a new hybrid – in the way ufology overlaps with these living folkloric traditions brings about a sort of whimsical, millenarian expectations about first contact which have been pointed out by researchers of UFO religions previously. But it’s unjust to call it just ufology as superstition – it’s also hidden even more profound meanings regarding nature or the natural world as a place of encounters, of odd adventures that lead back to very banal and worldly happenings. Happenings such as erring newlyweds in search of best shooting spots in nature or photographers lost in the wilderness while searching for such commercially ideal spots.
But there is new High Weirdness out there. Hard-to-believe scams (think canned Martian sand for sale online) and doughy aliens frozen inside homemade freezers are everywhere. This is not Area 51. They appear to be the product of a wish to attract some city tourists to the remote corners of the land, areas in need for cash and a bit of attention.
Isn’t this worthy in itself? What could be devious in bringing a group of hapless alien seekers to the most unmodern, and underdeveloped areas? In places where they could also listen to the locals’ needs, while initially following the “carrot” of stories mentioning preposterous things? Journey to the West (in Sichuan) may the difficult travels out of the precarity of local pop sci initiatives to the remote precarity of villager life, where mostly women and odd figures live, places that have been left behind by migrant laborers traveling in search for work in the big cities. What is the carrot?! Is it baitclick? Is the carrot the UFO? Is the carrot some lingering SF feel?
That does not mean that you can pay your electricity or heating bills by doing these UFO scoops. Some will of course complain that the ufological is getting politicized, but there is no way around it, ufology was birthed during Cold War and America’s paranoia around Soviet technology.
In this geopolitical historical sense the Sputnik was instrumental in garnering the funds for the establishment of DARPA and Darpanet. So, ultimately, this new Journey to the West is in a sense a Journey along ideological encampments as well. Inside capitalism, you had various critical ufologies as well as conservative ones. There is the bizarre Posadist end-of-the-world Trotskist World Revolutionary visions. Others leaning towards the conservative, highly anthropocentric, modeled on the capitalist model. Do not know if “right-wing” and aliens go together, it is almost a contradiction in terms – should not aliens be different from what we already have?
If stock Independence Day aliens are just advanced (read rapacious or exterminist) humans in search for more planets and species to enslave, Tang appears then a diverging view akin to the radical ufologies (here I would put Italian art pranksters Men In Red). For Tang advanced species cannot be predatorial but somehow akin to some socialist ideal of universal peace. There is also another version – a more Taoist one maybe, where the first contact results not in answering all the existential problems but in recognizing the universality of such questions as well as the impossibility of a straight 0 or 1 answer.
I get how somehow the Fuxi or Fu Hsi (伏羲) Chinese creation myth rhymes so well with the entire Human Genome Project so that the Journey to the West director or scriptwriter could not let go of it. But for me and maybe others following closely the history of biology, DNA is such a 20th century imagery (or even mid-20th c or at least 2000s). Instead, it would be interesting to see how SF movies overcome such hurdles in an age of epidemics, epigenetics, metabolomics, microbiomics and viromics, proteomics, metagenomics or synthetic life. But of course, who can deny that a plethora of biotech companies have entrenched this evocative double helix imagery, including the early 1990s Jurassic Park movies. In this new Chinese movie at the end the universe, DNA is a ladder to the stars, the macro reverses into the micro of the DNA. Although even this may be secondary to the main search for love.
“In this episode we have the important job of finding out what Panpsychism is all about, and why the philosophical position is gaining more and more traction in philosophy, but even with physicists and other scientists. The idea that consciousness is the fundamental nature of the physical world is by no means a new one, and it does seem to resolve some of the problems of how consciously experiencing lifeforms could have evolved out of non-conscious non-living material. But most materialists balk at the idea and consider it absolutely bonkers, for reasons we’ll find out as we attempt to pay respect to the criticisms of the position too.”
I will restrain from commenting in depth – since I am neither a philosopher of mind nor able to summarize or disentangle all the various positions presented in this talk by Philip Goff.
So here are some small and very inconsequential personal observations about panpsychism. Talking about or even debating panpsychism was a no-no for a long time and scientific materialism (matter and material electromagnetic processes is all there is) is till the dominant view. Speculative philosophers lying outside the major traditions of philosophy (analytical and continental) such as Alfred North Whitehead and his “philosophy of the organism”- you might say occupy a lateral or transversal position in the history of philosophy since his process philosophy rhymes with a panpsychist or panexperientialist (everything has or is some form of experience) view of fundamental reality. It is also interesting that he did not espouse such a view early on, but gradually after his (and Bertrand Russell’s) groundbreaking work on Principia Mathematica lead him into trouble (Gödel’s incompleteness theorem), he gradually arrived at panpsychism as a way out of the bifurcation of nature that had split reality in separate realms, each endowmed with different degrees of reality. Isabelle Stengers in her opus – Thinking with WhiteheadA Free and Wild Creation of Concepts begs to differ – she’s more interested in how ANW dodges the psyche – and the de-psychologizing – noting that like William James je didn’t affirm that electrons “think like we do”, nor did attribute to the actual occasion a “psychology”, a “subjectivity” or “emotions”. Thus he avoids making human intelligence or psychic powers inevitable privileging human experience, something that happens in the case of a tract ny Russian cosmist Tsiolkovsky “Panpsychism, or Everything feels”.
Caught as we were between the dry certitudes of scientific materialism (matter is all there is) and dualism (separation of questions relating to mind from matter or mind stuff being different from mind/brain stuff), we never even got to entertain a third possibility that seemed too outlandish or too quixotic. This third possibility arose at a specific juncture – with William James being familiar with both new advances in physiology as well as the new (at the time) theory of natural selection and evolutionary descent with modification opened up new and extincting venues that reshaped philosophical questions. Closer to us science came to re-cognize (there is that word again) that there are other minds, and that a mind is not so exotic or such an unique appendage and a privilege. Minds arouse not out of non minds but gradual process. Rudimentary fuzzy, mind-like characteristics abound. This contrasted strongly with a view usually supported by X-Risk thinking circles, one betting on the rarity of human minds and consciousness. Reflexive thinking is according to such a view is an island in a desert of cosmic mindlessness. Panpsychism is a view of plenty – of minding and mindful abundance. This was the weakness of that line of argument.
Do not expect a light-bulb Aha! moment of conscious experience. A more gradualistic explanation derived from biology, especially natural history paleontology and ethology makes us see quorum sensing not very different from nervous cells communicating between themselves. So there’s Emergentist Panpsychism, but also Rusellian Monism (of which Goff might be a proponent if I got that right – not what matter does but what matter is) and panprotopsychist, or say Cosmopsychist or Micropsychist varieties. Let a hundred panpsychisms bloom!
Some sort of agency maybe subtends any form of sentience or responsiveness. In order for minds to be natural we have to adopt an evolutionary, gradual (without gaps or sudden jumps) appearance of consciousness. Clearly this chips at our privileged developed reflexive consciousness. It even leads to even a few apparent paradoxes, such as life as a phenomenon being not primary but ulterior. So mind first and life second. In this frame mind is being a question of degree not of kind! To make it clear, this is a bit more radical than just saying that plants or so-called lower organisms (such as crustaceans to bees) exhibit sentience, this is about even particles exhibiting some form of rudimentary experiential quantum. A lot of this feels a question of language, of finding the proper descriptive level of talking about quantitative (mass, speed, etc) and qualitative qualities (the notorious qualia).
I was always wondering how panpsychism stands in regard to historical materialism or Marxism, and if – General Intellect – can be made to fit with explanations of a more pervasive kind, that puts sapience in perspective and encourage us towards more-than-human intellectual adventures or even seeing our own social being as part of the world, not just an add-on. In fact in the former East Bloc context where scientific materialism was the rule, particularly in Socialist Romania in my own case, the ‘intelligence of matter’ briefly made headlines as psychologist and neurologistDumitru Constantin Dulcan published his book of essays Inteligenta Materiei (Intelligence of Matter, Editura Militara 1981). Even now it is really interesting to read the responses from various corners (including well-known mathematician Solomon Marcus). Still I wonder if there isn’t also a residue of mystical materialism a la Tsiolkovsky here.
Nuff said – panspychism (as Goff will prove!) has become again salonfähig as the Germans say it. You can talk about panpsychism not only athistory of consciousness humanities departments, but also at laboratories and in a scientific context and I swear nobody will call you a nutcase, plain gaga or a fringy lunatic slightly sickish new-age or animist type. That odor that Nagel was calling “the faintly sickening odor of something put together in the metaphysical laboratory”s is apparently gone. Perfect Proof to that is a considerable number of new videos, talks, debates, podcasts on YT and TW. What to choose? Well, I would go for the most passionate and ardent supporters – such as Philip Goff from the University of Durham. Important to add that there is also non-cognitivist position or rather a discognitivist position that try to decenter the brain or the central nervous system in order to get panpsyschism right and not try to priviledge (again) conscious experience or human cognition (for this check Steven Shaviro’s extraordinary book of essays). I think that such fine distinguishing lines (was what separates sentience from sapience? or what have substrate independence and simulation theory have to do with each other?). Another way to see this is by reading Science Fiction – and acknowledging that some of the most incredible ideas about sapient aliens and shipminds help us to think about consciousness too. The ‘Tentacle of Empathy’ seems to be everywhere these days. It also might be that ALL explanations of consciousness might sound crazy one way or another – this is the crazyist position of philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel.
Maybe this is the moment to observe that in the case of Tsiolkovsky, a ln avowed panpsychist akd pioneer of space travel. For me though, he’s basically a kind of militant ‘pansapientist’ monism – using a theory of the psyche (rational, intentional, reflexive, etc) that depreciates or dismisses other modes of thought as inferior. Recognizing that the world feels might not mean automatically that we’re more responsive or tuned to it. Stengers in her inspiring book Thinking with Whitehead from 2002 – in particular Entrée en Métaphysique Chapter explains why this is not the path taken by Whitehead (Tsiolkovsky is not mentioned but contrasting the two helps a lot). Tsiolkovsky recognizes that the universe is alive and feeling, but this not an opening for other ways of becoming or opening up the question to what os it like to he an atom, a body, a tissue etc. It leaves not much room for other modes of thought. We might call this a psychic or cognitive terraforming of the universe, something very close to the X Risk incentive to protect & spread human intelligence in the Cosmos and make sure it will use and unmake every other mind that doesn’t conform to the maximal potential for joyfulness. This gives rise to a sort of ultra-sapient chain of being with atomic adventures inside various organismic (a body, tissues, stones etc see below), and in each one (except if it inside the human) the full potential gets never achieved. Locked up in the unconsciousness and deep unthinking sleep of other lesser modes, they just await the consciousness light-bulb to raise them up to the level of human experience so that their limited notion of past and future can expand. This is what i understand from this fragment:
“In terms of mathematics, the entire universe is alive, but the power of its sensitivity is manifested in all its brilliance only among the higher animals. All atoms of matter feel in keeping with the environment. Finding itself in highly organized beings, atoms life their life and feel their pleasure and pain. If they find themselves in the inorganic world, they sleep, as it were, immersed in a deep state of unconsciousness, in nothingness.Even in a single animal, as they wander around its body, the atoms live the life now of the brain, now of the bones, hair, nails, epithelium, and so on. Meaning that atoms now think, now live like atoms imprisoned in stone, water, or air. Now they sleep, with no awareness of time; now they live for the moment, like the lower beings; now they are aware of the past and paint a picture of the future. The more organized the being, the farther this notion of future and past extends.”― Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, Panpsychism
A remarkable trip to the universe of what was to become the Royal Society. A few cursory notes -are how diverse the preoccupations at the time were, and how studying Saturn went very well with studying or perfecting ways to better draw and analyze fleas and flies. The microcosms were in many ways much closer and more accessible than the macrocosmos – and at the time all optics and telescopes were so poor as to make optical aberrations, errors, and mistakes unavoidable. The universe itself was quite small, and distances were not properly understood, still C. Wren had tremendous fun trying to figure out the surface of the moon and make a model of it. Another example was the temper and gracious nature of Wren – who compared with many other researchers, then and now, was very uninterested in tying his name to a discovery or really an influencer that did not strive to be an influencer.
A very good introduction to the history of astronomy, ethics in science, and the pleasure of discovery, even when one does not have the proper tools or the best of conditions.
A Trip to Infinity is a new 2022 documentary film directed by Jonathan Halperin and Drew Takahashi, in their feature-length debut, which explores the concept of infinity through interviews with mathematicians, physicists, and philosophers around the world. (wiki)
God how I hated math in high school! What we all missed was this hallucinatory trip across various infinities (some larger than others) not the bad infinities of boring long ours. It is an invitation to getting pleasurably mindfucked by some of the most interesting physicists (including Carlo Rovelli) and thinkers around (talking heads) around while they get probed with silly questions by the documentary makers. Forget about daily troubles, let us discuss the bizarre and important implications and paradoxical outcomes of encountering endless numbers!
I appreciate how animation has come fully into its own with this documentary. Maths and geometry and all that are all good and fine on a piece a paper, not to mention calculus have to get out, start moving, swirling. High-level abstractions are not made for our heads and animations can give them life, make these realities tangible using all sorts of time-worn techniques from the entire history of animation. This documentary is truly the work of several studios and knowingly uses techniques ranging from stop motion, ahand-drawn paper cutout animations to motion graphics, CGI, animated medieval manuscript drawings, and even retro vintage-looking (Fleischer Bros) examples (such as the Infinite Room Hotel sequence).
It is a wonder and pleasure to watch it just to see how these various sequences work out seamlessly, all part of a larger circumference. It is also one of those rare science documentaries that go beyond the limits of current science and dabble into the metaphysical. Not only that, but such documentaries make us well aware that even if science does not have all the answers, it will not stop. We are likely to be more akin to the cat in the cartoon, trying to teach ourselves quantum mechanics under the auspices of human (or cat) finitude. A trip to Infinity makes us become more aware perhaps of what is going beyond the limits of any scientific theory or how imagination tries to come to the rescue when the experiment is not just too expensive, but totally beyond anyone’s reach.
For me this video has some metaphysical dimensions – and you will perhaps pardon me for that. There is something very encouraging (even if with micro-catastrophist repercussions) in the fact that there is this flippancy of bits all around us, or the fact that all the Mars rovers are using some old hardy tech in order to minimize or become resilient in the face of the chaotic, unpredictable behaviour or highly energetic particles. Most of the time life here down below is kind of disconnected from the above (outside the realm of critical astrology or the like). This video exemplifies in a very specific way the proximity of the realms, of the so below as above, the fact that effects somehow overrun causes, that we cannot deal with a unicausality, and particles energized by black holes at the center of our galaxy actually reach us and somehow – influence or may affecteven results of e-elections. There is also these proof of vibrant materialism all around in the words of Jane Bennett, something that the micro processor industry had to deal with since the beginning. This enlarged affectibility (panexperientialism?!) – the affectations of matter in the Spinozist terms are all around, and even ultra rare events such as antimatter collisions highlight an invisible universe that is made visible via all sorts of glitches, via gaming impossible feats. Visionary artists such as Hilma af Klint that participated actively in the feminist occultures (like Theosophy that acted like a feminist liberation theology) around 1900 where also increasingly sensible to the insensible and the invisible realms and with the discovery of various ends of the spectrum – and new theories of “quanta”, “fields” and rediscovery of atomism, became also the artists to try and imagine and represent our first modern art abstractions.
It is important to keep thinking how the discovery of cosmic rays impacted our pop culture – even in the origin story of superheroes such as the Fantastic Four.
TimeSpace Warps 