Although Gilles Deleuze never explicitly developed what might be considered a ‘philosophy of technology’, this article nonetheless attempts to outline the rudiments of a Deleuzian approach to technology by proposing a series of interrelated concepts: (1) prosthesis (technological artefacts are externalised organs); (2) proto-technicity, or originary technicity (but this technicity already exists in Nature, all the way down, and precedes any ‘theory’); (3) exodarwinism (the fact that evolutionary time has bifurcated, and technology evolves in a faster and accelerating time scale); (...) (4) de-specialisation or de-differentiation (what conditions the externalisation of organs is their deterritorialisation); (5) motricity (the link between the brain and the hand/mouth is primarily one of movement); (6) inscription, or graphism (the link between mouth and hand takes place through phonetic writing, when the hand reproduces speech in graphic inscriptions); (7) maker's knowledge (we know the organisations of matter found in nature through the organisations of matter that we ourselves have created); and finally, (8) totipotence (like a stem cell, the body is capable of externalising an almost unlimited number of forms and functions; it is itself an abstract and the source of abstractions). (shrink)

Du mode d'existence des objets techniques (1958) demeure une oeuvre singulière dans l'horizon philosophique. Toutefois, tout au long de sa carrière, Gilbert Simondon s'est exprimé sur la technique. L'originalité de ses travaux est d'analyser les machines en tant que matière organisée. Cette orientation renvoie à la divergence entre les recherches française et allemande sur la technique au xxe siècle. Simondon couple la mécanologie à une psycho-sociologie des techniques. En vue d'une réactualisation opératoire, ces deux approches sont mises à l'épreuve du (...) grand collisionneur de hadrons (LHC) et du « halo » psychosocial des nanotechnologies. (shrink)

This essay explores the lines of thought focused on the relationship between gesture and technique, examining the theories which have conceptualized the transfer of gestural matrices into inert matter, and understood technique as a result of this process. Although associated mainly with the writings of the palaeontologist André Leroi-Gourhan, this thought actually predates his work, and consists of multiple branches: having first taken root at the end of the nineteenth century, it became diffused throughout the following decades in different forms. (...) These nevertheless shared a constant reference to cinema, both as a privileged place that captures gestures, and as a technique that can absorb their quintessence. From Espinas to Simondon, via Jousse and Eisenstein, the theory of gestural transmission breaks down various polarities, such as body and environment, organic and inorganic, animated and inanimate, performativity and inner life. It foregrounds the imaginative logic of the body and the many forms of somatic thinking developed by man. Such forms lie at the heart of the creative processes and have found their highest appreciation in cinema, as a machine that, from its very origins, has been grafted not only on the eye but on the whole body. (shrink)

The photographic apparatus whose emergence is located in the mid-nineteenth century has not been perfectly located within the history of technology, sometimes considered as a simple tool or instrument whose utility was mainly in the field of scientific research, other times giving it the status of machine, accentuating this time the automatism of its operation. Both visions seem insufficient to us since both one and the other present a certain partiality in the understanding of the apparatus, which should not be (...) reduced to its mere optical character or to its automatism, since this is also a form of recording, of memory. Our interest will focus on demonstrating how photography should be thought of as “apparatus”, that is, as a complex element within the history of technology; that not only was able to perfect our vision considered as deficient, but at the same time was able to grant a new temporality and a specific type of perception to an entire era. (shrink)

The existence of a French philosophy of technology is a matter of debate. Technology has long remained invisible in French philosophy, due to cultural circumstances and linguistic specificities. Even though a number of French philosophers have developed views and concepts about technology during the twentieth century, “philosophy of technology” has never been established as a legitimate branch of philosophy in the French academic landscape so far. This book, however, demonstrates that a community of philosophers dealing with various issues related to (...) technology and built up on the legacy of the previous generations has emerged. In gathering scholars with quite diverse theoretical backgrounds and matters of concern, this volume outlines a coherent, albeit heterogeneous, philosophical trend. Five chief characteristics are identified in this introduction: a close connection between history and philosophy, with a focus on the temporalities of technology, the prevalence of the anthropological approach to technology whether it be social anthropology or paleoanthropology, a focus on technological objects that we characterize as a “thing turn” à la française, the dignification of technoscience as a philosophical category, and a pervading concern with ethical issues based on the anthropological interpretation of technology and quite distinct from current trends in applied ethics. (shrink)