Jos de Mul. Uncle 'Sim' wants you! Playful warefare. Lecture and contribution to the Panel Discussion of the conference Videogames, War High Culture Bari: October 17, 2022.

Jos de Mul. I giochi come vero Organon della filosofia. Ontologie ludiche: Schelling, Huizinga, Borges e oltre. In: Marco Accordi Rickards & Fabio Belsanti (Ed.) Homo Cyber Ludens. Bari: Idra Editing, 101-129.[1] Also availble as Kindle edition in Italian and English.

Introduzione

Uno spettro ludico si aggira per il mondo. Dagli anni '60, in cui la parola "ludico" è diventata popolare in Europa e negli Stati Uniti per designare comportamenti e oggetti inerenti il gioco, la ludicità è diventata sempre più una caratteristica fondamentale della nostra cultura. Nei primi decenni del XXI secolo si può persino parlare di una «ludificazione della cultura» globale (Raessens 2006). Forse la prima cosa che viene in mente in questo contesto è l'immensa popolarità dei videogiochi (Frissen et al. 2015). Ma sebbene forse più visibile, la cultura dei videogiochi è solo una manifestazione del processo di ludificazione che sembra penetrare in ogni dominio culturale (Neitzel e Nohr 2006). Nella nostra attuale economia dell’esperienza, ad esempio, la ludicità non caratterizza solo il tempo libero (shopping “divertente”, giochi televisivi, parchi divertimento, uso ludico di computer, internet e smartphone), ma anche quegli ambiti che un tempo erano seri, come il lavoro (che oggi dovrebbe essere soprattutto divertente), educazione (serious games), politica (campagne ludiche) e persino guerra (wargames digitali e simulatori virtuali di battaglie sul campo). Secondo Jeremy Rifkin, «il gioco sta diventando importante nell'economia culturale quanto il lavoro lo era nell'economia industriale» (Rifkin 2000, 263). La cultura postmoderna nel suo insieme è stata descritta come «un gioco senza uno scopo generale, un gioco senza una destinazione trascendente» (Minnema 1998, 21). E secondo il sociologo Zygmunt Bauman, anche l'identità umana è diventata un fenomeno ludico. Nella cultura ludica, sostiene, la ludicità non è più limitata all'infanzia, ma è diventata un atteggiamento permanente: «Il segno dell'età adulta postmoderna è la volontà di abbracciare il gioco con tutto il cuore, come fanno i bambini» (Bauman 1995, 99).

Di conseguenza, i fenomeni del giocare e del gioco sono osservati e studiati con sempre più attenzione dalle scienze naturali, le scienze sociali e le scienze umane. Si può pensare, ad esempio, all'implementazione della teoria dei giochi in biologia (Sigmund 1993), economia (Von Neumann e Morgenstern 2007, Leonard 2010) e antropologia culturale (Bateson 1977, 1955). Oltre al crescente interesse per  l’attività ludica, che in queste discipline era preesistente, negli ultimi decenni – motivato dalla crescita sostanziale del tempo libero e dalla crescita della ludoindustria e del ludocapitalismo (Dibbell 2008), diversi nuovi campi interamente dedicati allo studio di giochi e videogiochi sono emersi (es. Raessens e Goldstein 2005, Fuchs et al. 2014).

Come dobbiamo intendere questa “ludificazione della cultura”? Cosa dice della nostra vita e della nostra visione del mondo all'inizio del XXI secolo? In ciò che segue presenterò un'interpretazione di questo fenomeno della ludificazione con l'aiuto di due libri: il Sistema dell’idealismo trascendentale (System of transcendental Idealism, 1800) di Friedrich Schelling e Homo ludens (1938) di Johan Huizinga, insieme a un racconto di Jorges Luis Borges intitolato La biblioteca di Babele (The Library of Babel, 1941). Sosterrò che questi lavori, quando li collochiamo nel contesto dell'ontologia dei database che caratterizza la nostra epoca informatica, offrono una prospettiva illuminante sull'ontologia ludica che sta alla base della ludificazione della cultura.

Svilupperò la mia argomentazione in tre passaggi. Nei primi due presenterò alcune delle idee chiave che si possono trovare rispettivamente nel Sistema dell’Idealismo trascendentale di Schelling e nel saggio Homo ludens di Huizinga. Discuterò il loro comune desiderio romantico di trascendenza immanente mediante l'estetizzazione del mondo, così come la loro comune – e non meno romantica – avversione verso la tecnologia moderna. Tuttavia, come sosterrò nella terza e ultima parte del mio intervento, contrariamente a quanto credevano sia Schelling sia Huizinga, è proprio nelle moderne tecnologie dell'informazione che si realizza l’ontologia ludica che cercavano. Usando La biblioteca di Babele (e facendo anche riferimento a simulazioni ludiche di questa biblioteca su internet), questo mi porterà alla conclusione che la svolta ludica della tecnologia trasforma il gioco per computer (i videogiochi) nel "vero organon della filosofia".

Jos de Mul. Games as the True Organon of Philosophy. Playful ontologies: Schelling, Huizinga, Borges and beyond. In: Marco Accordi Rickards & Fabio Belsanti (Eds.) Homo Cyber Ludens. Bari: Idra Editing, 97-124.  Also availble as Kindle edition in Italian and English.

Introduction

A playful specter is haunting the world. Since the 1960s, in which the word ‘ludic’ became popular in Europe and the US to designate playful behavior and artifacts, playfulness has increasingly become a mainstream characteristic of our culture. In the first decades of the 21^st century, we can even speak of a global ‘ludification of culture’ (Raessens 2006). Perhaps the first thing that comes to mind in this context is the immense popularity of computer games (Frissen et al. 2015). But although perhaps most visible, computer game culture is only one manifestation of the process of ludification that seems to penetrate every cultural domain (Neitzel and Nohr 2006). In our present experience economy, for example, playfulness not only characterizes leisure time (fun shopping, game shows on television, amusement parks, playful use of computers, internet and smartphones), but also those domains that used to be serious, such as work (which should above all be fun today), education (serious gaming), politics (ludic campaigning), and even warfare (video games like war simulators and interfaces). According to Jeremy Rifkin “play is becoming as important in the cultural economy as work was in the industrial economy” (Rifkin 2000, 263). Postmodern culture as a whole has been described as “a game without an overall aim, a play without a transcendent destination” (Minnema 1998, 21). And according to sociologist Zygmunt Bauman, even human identity has become a playful phenomenon. In ludic culture, he argues, playfulness is no longer restricted to childhood, but has become a lifelong attitude: “The mark of postmodern adulthood is the willingness to embrace the game whole-heartedly, as children do” (Bauman 1995, 99).

As a result, the phenomena play and game have gained strong attention in the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities. One can think, for example, of the implementation of game theory in biology (Sigmund 1993), economics (Von Neumann and Morgenstern 2007, Leonard 2010) and cultural anthropology (Bateson 1977, 1955). In addition to the increased interest in play and games in these already existing disciplines, in the last decades – motivated by the substantial growth of leisure time and the growth of ludo-industry and ludo-capitalism (Dibbell 2008), several new fields entirely devoted to the study of play and (computer) games have emerged (e.g. Raessens and Goldstein 2005, Fuchs et al. 2014).

How should we understand this ‘ludification of culture’? What does it say about our life and world view at the beginning of the 21^st century?  Today I will present an interpretation of this phenomenon of ludification with the help of two books - Friedrich Schelling’s System of transcendental Idealism [System des transzendentalen Idealismus] (1800) and Johan Huizinga’s Homo Ludens. A Study of the Play-Element in Culture [Homo Ludens. Proeve ener bepaling van het spel-element der cultuur] (1938) and one short story, Jorges Luis Borges’ ‘The library of Babel’[‘La biblioteca de Babel’] (1941). I will argue that these works, when we situate them in the context of the database ontology which characterizes our computer age, offer an illuminating outlook on the playful ontology that underpins the ludification of culture.

I will develop my argument in three steps. In the first two I will present some of the key ideas that can be found in respectively Schelling’s System of transcendental Idealism and Huizinga’s Homo ludens. I will discuss their shared romantic desire for immanent transcendence through aesthetization of the world, as well as their shared – and no less romantic - aversion toward modern technology. However, as I will argue in the third and last part of my talk, contrary to what both Schelling and Huizinga expected, precisely in modern information technologies the playful ontology they were after, is realized. Using ‘The Library of Babel’ (and also referring to playful simulations of this Library at the internet), this will lead me to the conclusion that the ludic turn of technology turns the computer game into the ‘true organon of philosophy’.

Jos de Mul. Panel discussion Artificial Intelligence: promises and public concerns. Trust in Science Conference. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, June 13, 2022.

IANUS ('Inspiring and ANchoring trUst in Science, research and innovation') is a Horizon Europe project funded by the European Commission. Our aim is to strengthen warranted trust in science by fostering participation in research as a co-creative and inclusive process, sensitive to societal values, concerns and needs. We believe that trust must be inspired by transparency and trustworthiness of knowledge production, and anchored by actively involving and serving society, as part of the modus operandi of science. The complexity and urgency of societal challenges has rapidly intensified, and trust in science is an important requirement to address these challenges effectively.

On the 13th of June 2022, the IANUS project will be launched during a public conference, involving prominent speakers and panel discussions on open science and populism; science, pharmaceutical companies and global political tensions (lessons from the COVID pandemic, and promises and concerns regarding AI. 

Link to the audio recording of the whole conference. (The panel on AI and Public concerns starts at 3:37)

Jos de Mul & Alberto Romele. Imagination, Images, and Imaginaries. A Dialogue with Jos de Mul, In: José Higuera Rubio, Alberto Romele, Sarion Ridrighiero & Celeste Pedro (eds.) From Wisdom to Data. Philosophical Atlas on Visual Representations of Knowledge. Porto: University of Porto Press, 2022, 35-44.

1. Imagination

Alberto Romele: The first part of this dialogue is focused on the notion of imagination. It is from your work (to which I would add the work of Paul Ricoeur) that I have learned that (1) imagination is not creatio ex nihilo, but rather recombination and (2) imagination is always technologically (and digitally) externalized. I am thinking, for instance, of your 2009 article “The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Recombination”. Could you tell me a little bit more about your understanding of imagination, its relationship with technology, and the importance you attribute to authors like Kant, Dilthey, and Cassirer in your research?

Jos De Mul: I have been writing a new book on database for some time now. The reason why the book is still not finished is that it completely went out of hand in a way when I rediscovered Cassirer. I wrote an additional chapter on Cassirer and it's about 90 pages now, so it's almost a complete book on Cassirer now. But it was important for me because all things fell in that place. The first chapter of my book is called “The Medialization of Experience”. And I start with Kant in the book.

Jos de Mul. From mythology to technology and back. Fourfold Hermeneutics. De Mul on Prooi on Kiyozawa on Epictetus. March 28, Online workshop. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. 5.30 PM Hong Kong time. 

Jos de Mul. From mythology to technology and back. Human‐animal combinations in the era of digital recombinability. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, March 28, Online lecture, 4PM Hong Kong time. 

In Greek mythology, we come across wonderful human-animal combinations: the Centaur, the creature with the upper body of a human and the lower body and legs of a horse; Medusa, the woman with eyes of stone, from whose head snakes grow instead of hair; Chimaera, the monster with the head of a lion, the body of a goat and a snake for a tail? They sowed death and destruction. Quite comforting that they don’t exist.

Or should we say: did not yet exist? Because human-animal combinations are among us again, and this time not as creations of mythological imagination, but as products of contemporary biotechnology, such as cybrids and chimeras. Think of mice with sizable pieces of genetic code that originated from the human genome, used in cancer and pharmaceutical research, or pigs with a human heart, that are grown for medical applications.

Such biotechnological creations evoke a lot of discussions and resistance in public debates. This resistance is partly based on rational arguments, such as health risks, but often strong emotions, like feelings of disgust, play a major role as well. Why would that be the case? All things considered, contemporary biological insights inform us that human beings, like all species, actually are already polygenomic organisms, and for that reason, fundamental biological concepts such as ‘individual’ and ‘species’ deserve considerable nuance. On closer inspection, the mythological human-animal combinations appear to contain more truth on this point than nineteenth-century biology, which was strongly driven by a separative cosmology, which still haunts common sense conceptions of life today.

In his lecture De Mul will discuss recent developments in postgenomic molecular biology from the perspective of the interconnective cosmology of Greek mythology. Not in order to claim the ‘eternal truth’ of this ancient cosmology, but to show that it contains insights that help us to better understand contemporary postgenomic biology and philosophical anthropology and to situate them in a broader world-historical context.  

Full text of lecture

Jos de Mul. The Total Turing Test. Robotics from Japanese and European perspectives [Translation of the Japanese original: ジョス・デ・ムル . 総合的チューリング・テスト ─日本的観点およびヨーロッパ的観点からロボティクスを考える─  Ritsumeikan Studies in Language and Culture. Vol.31 (2020), Vol.32, no.2, 95-107.]

It’s a great honor and pleasure to be here again at the Graduate School of Sociology of Ritsumeikan University. I have wonderful memories of my 2016 stay in Kyoto as a guest professor.[1] It was a privilege to work with my Japanese colleagues – especially Yuko Nakama, with whom I have collaborated in the past decade in different projects about landscape and space – and to discuss with the students who attended my course at Ritsumeikan, on the relevance of Greek tragedy for understanding the human condition in our present, high-technological world. During my stay in 2016 I also spent quite some time researching android robotics in the Kansai region. Especially interesting were the visits to the Hiroshi Ishiguro Laboratories in the Advanced  Telecommunications  Research Institute International (ATR) in Kansai Science City.

Although the subjects mentioned – landscape, tragedy, and robotics – seem to be quite diverse, my research in these fields share a comparative approach, bringing in dialogue Eastern and Western, more particularly Japanese and European perspectives in these three domains. In each of these domains we find striking similarities as well as fundamental differences. In my lecture today I hope to demonstrate  this, taking the so-called Turing Test as starting point for a reflection on the similarities and differences of Asian and Western perspectives on and attitudes towards robotics.

In the first part I will analyze three recent Western science fiction movies in which the Turing test plays a prominent role. Although all three movies are fiction films, they reveal some important characteristics of the Western view on robotics. In the second part I will contrast the Western approach with the way the Turing Test is approached in Japanese robotics, more particular in social android robotics. Hiroshi Ishigiro’s ERICA (ERato Intelligent Conversational Android) will be my main example. In the third and final part I will I will argue that, in the final analysis, the difference in approaches in Western and Eastern robotics is closely connected with different religious worldviews, which even in a secularized world still inform robotics and AI research at a fundamental level.

Jos de Mul. From mythology to technology and back. Human‐animal combinations in the era of digital recombinability. In: Bruno Accarino, Jos de Mul und Hans-Peter Krüger (Hrsg.). Internationales Jahrbuch für Philosophische Anthropologie. Band 10 (2020)/ International Yearbook for Philosophical Anthropology. Volume 10 (2020) Katharina Block &Julien Kloeg (Eds.). Ecology 2.0 - The Contribution of Philosophical Anthropology to Mapping the Ecological Crisis.  Berlin: De Gruyter, 2021, 79-97.

Who does not know the wonderful human-animal combinations in Greek mythology?[1] The Centaur, the creature with the upper body of a human and the lower body and legs of a horse; Medusa, the woman with eyes of stone, from whose head snakes grow instead of hair; Chimaera, the monster with the head of a lion, the body of a goat and a snake for a tail? They sowed death and destruction. Quite comforting that they don’t exist.

Or should we say: did not yet exist? Because human-animal combinations are among us again, and this time not as creations of mythological imagination, but as products of contemporary biotechnology, such as cybrids and chimeras. Think of mice with sizable pieces of genetic code that originated from the human genome, used in cancer and pharmaceutical research, or pigs with a human heart, that are grown for medical applications.

Such biotechnological creations evoke a lot of resistance in public debates. This resistance is partly based on rational arguments, such as health risks, but often strong emotions, like feelings of disgust, play a major role as well. Why would that be the case? All things considered, contemporary biological insights inform us that human beings, like all species, actually are already polygenomic organisms, and for that reason, fundamental biological concepts such as ‘individual’ and ‘species’ deserve considerable nuance. On closer inspection, the mythological human-animal combinations appear to contain more truth on this point than nineteenth-century biology, which was strongly driven by a separative cosmology, which still haunts common sense conceptions of life today.

In this essay I will discuss recent developments in postgenomic molecular biology from the perspective of the interconnective cosmology of Greek mythology. Not in order to claim the ‘eternal truth’ of this ancient cosmology, but to show that it contains insights that help us to better understand contemporary postgenomic biology and philosophical anthropology and to situate them in a broader world-historical context.  

Bruno Accarino, Jos de Mul und Hans-Peter Krüger (Hrsg.). Internationales Jahrbuch für Philosophische Anthropologie. Band 10 (2020)/ International Yearbook for Philosophical Anthropology. Volume 10 (2020) Katharina Block &Julien Kloeg (Eds.). Ecology 2.0 - The Contribution of Philosophical Anthropology to Mapping the Ecological Crisis.  Berlin: De Gruyter, 2021, 318 p.

Philosophical anthropology reflects on the human condition, which is put into urgent question by today’s ecological crisis. An Ecology 2.0 has developed to meet this challenge. In this volume, contributing authors probe both theoretical approaches to ecology and the tradition of philosophical anthropology itself. The tradition bears fruit and stands to be extended beyond its usual textual bases, mirroring the sense in which questions of human existence as such take on an intensified role.