November 28, 2023 Johannes Bongers / Boolean Works.

technotlogyManifesto

ABSTRACTOnce, art and technology were lovers as poiesis and techne. In their creative union, poiesis — the process of bringing being and truth into existence — and techne — the revealing of the essence of things and the knowledge and craft of making — seamlessly intertwined, blending the artistic ideal with the purpose of the object. However, over time, this relationship unraveled. As techne increasingly rationalised, the once balanced partnership shifted, leading to the current dominance of modern technology, science and the marginalisation of art. This rise of technology, fuelled by the exploitation and distribution of all available resources and energies gave birth to capitalism. Reason and hierarchies has, oh the irony, caused a tremendous chaos. It has led to a systemic collapse of the coherence between the psyche, the social, and the environment, paving the way for monotony and violence to infiltrate every aspect of life in a cascade of crises and catastrophes.Technotlogy emerges as a transformative paradigm, redefining the relationship between life, milieu and time, and art and technology. Technotlogy can be best understood as a freedom-practice bridging two extensions: the reintroduction of Joseph Beuys' concept of Erweiterte Kunst, Expanded Art, which embodies a pan-ecological and political practice, and its counterpart, a new expanded understanding of technology; Expanded Technology. This Expanded Technotlogy builds upon the continental philosophies of time and technology and how technology has manipulated the temporalities of the psyche, the social and our understanding of being in milieu. Technotlogy adds a radical speculative concept of causation – Causa Futura – for a new understanding of the temporal dynamics causing the predicament.Unsurprisingly for a 'technology platform', the architecture of Technotlogy consists of an operating system, an OS built upon various theoretical and philosophical kernels and Apps – applications that are artistic-political projects. This dynamic framework is Open, is inherently relational, ethical-aesthetic, political, antifascist and collaborative, offering a radical approach to support the increase of singular and collective agency.Interested or contact?

Content

Intro
Preview AppsKernels, 8's, vectors, loops & diagrams
1. Technology needs Technotlogy
2. Inside / Outside asymmetry
3. BioMilieu and the figure 8
4. Technology and Expanded Art
5. Expanded Technology
6. Pan-Technology: Three Layers of Technotlogy
7. Pan-Ecology: The Three Ecologies
8. Boolean Technology is divisive
9. Excessive Communication and the Loss of Diversity
10. Private means robbed from the public
11. Entropy, Complexity, and Sameness
12. Boolean Technology and the Rise of Totalitarianism
13. AI and the Triumph of Reason (March 2024)
14. Pan-Temporality:
Part 1: The AND of Time (Time is relation, not relative)
Part 2: Causa Futura
Part 3: The Three Anxieties of Time"Jeder Mensch wird ein Künstler"Praxis
- Technotlogy OS
- Technotlogy AppsColophon

Intro

What is Technotlogy?

Technotlogy.com is not a commercial enterprise; it is a common good. Technotlogy offers a new concept of art and technology and reintroduces Joseph Beuys' concept of 'Erweiterte Kunst' (Expanded Art) intertwined with a new Expanded concept of technology.Joseph Beuys proclaimed that 'only art can change the world,' implying that the essence of humanity lies in using one's creativity and thought to shape their personal and social environment. However, the once collaborative forces of poiesis and techne have now diverged. Technology, emancipated from craftsmanship and aided by science, has evolved into a technical and rational mentality. Art retreated into its shell and engages with the world performatively. Art has become equal to artworks and the art world, not about renewing the world by using one's artistic-political potential. Meanwhile, technology's omnipresence has distorted the world and everything on it. Today technology realises the unimaginable with a revolutionary dedication that was the cultural driving force up and to and including Beuys.Technotlogy is art, disguised as technology, aiming to transform the mentalities of both art and technology from the inside. The need to reverse the current situation screams for a new understanding of technology, especially since it has invaded and homogenised our minds, social structures, and environments. But alongside technology, art must also reconnect with its 'Erweiterte Kunstbegriff' (expanded concept of art), where artists – that is, all of us – come into contact with their creativity. Not the creativity of the creative industry, but the kind that lies at the foundation of every person to give shape to themselves and the world. Creativity is not production, on the contrary, it is a freedom practice.Technotlogy's power is unleashed only when the dangers and hidden potentials of technology are exposed. Only by dispelling this ignorance can technology and art both truly support in renewing the world. And when art awakens to renew the world, be prepared.

+ Today

Before Sam Altman was ousted by OpenAI's board in November 2023, his final speech on AGI focused on pushing back the veil of ignorance and advancing the frontier of discovery. However, the board deemed his approach too risky for humanity and briefly severed ties before investor demanded his return. This episode is pivotal: the sequence of discovery versus ignorance must be reconsidered.Technology, driven by a utilitarian rationale, has sidelined the artistic and vital impulse, funneling personal and communal energies – oil, animals, enslaved persons, women and child labor, data, social relations – into private domains and has subsequently ruined all ecologies. A.I. represents this culmination, where it has been permitted to scrape and rob the entire written and creative output of all human intelligence to commodify it. Our future potential has not only been privatised and commodified, but on top of that, this technological appropriation suppresses the diversity and potential agency of future individuals and communities.In this era, marked by political cruelty, propelled by the limits of technology and massmedia, inscribed by the horrors of mental depression induced by social media and disguised child labor, and the Palestinians facing the cybernetics of occupation, we find ourselves drowning in homogenisation. 20 political parties in parliament, 20 times sorry, 20 flavours of peanut butter, 20 streaming providers, one topic per media cycle, 20 people drown each day in the Mediterranean Sea. Against this backdrop, suffering from the decoherence between mind, social and milieu, and responding to Sam Altman's call, Technotlogy emerges to lift our ignorance by turning the frontier of discovery towards trying to renew the world.

++ Architecture

Technotlogy is conceptualised as an Operating System (OS) alongside a suite of Apps, merging the transformative powers of art, theory, and technology. At its core, the OS is structured around a series of foundational kernels, vectors, loops / 8's and diagrams, forming the bedrock of Technotlogy’s philosophy. The Apps, designed as aesthetic-political projects, aim to revitalise individual and collective agency in a world stripped of it. Technotlogy stands as a collective call to newness, inviting those who wish to explore and redefine the interplay between life and art. You are encouraged to contribute your insights to Technotlogy’s structure and to develop your own apps.The existing Apps cover a diverse range of artistic-political structures. Examples include Gemeente Nieuwe IJssel and ANDSTERDAM, the artistic-political movement SOOOS, and the newly conceptualized organism Per~son, we offer the Pentalemma Game, a color experiment to overcode capitalism, and various other apps, each embodying our commitment to blending life, art and theory into technotlogy.

Preview Apps
We have heard that readers are interested in the theory, as well as in the practice, which is addressed in the last part of this Manifesto. To provide a glimpse, without the context, what follows is a preview of the Apps, illustrating the application of Technology. Links to the projects are in the descriptions.

Kernels, 8's, vectors, loops & diagrams

The landscape of Technotlogy transcends the traditional boundaries of life, milieu, technology, art, time, and philosophy. At the heart of our system lie the foundational elements – kernels, vectors, 8's, and diagrams – representing core principles that guide the philosophy and 'functionality' of Technotlogy as an Operating System (OS) that drives Technotlogy's Apps.

1. Technology needs Technotlogy
For something as powerful and dominant as technology, you would expect it to operate within its own binary opposition, similar to how nature has culture. A binary that opposes technology and provides a framework for critical reflection. Do we need a non-technology to understand technology, as François Laruelle suggested for art, science, and philosophy? Is the absence of a non-technology the reason modern technology is so powerful and dominant? "Philosophy needs a nonphilosophy that comprehends it; it needs a nonphilosophical comprehension just as art needs nonart and science needs nonscience." To which Deleuze and Guattari added: "They do not need the No as beginning, or as the end in which they would be called upon to disappear by being realized, but at every moment of their becoming or their development."

2. Inside / Outside asymmetry
"To ask for the origin of life is to ask for the origin of the environment. Living organisms are inscribed in their environments much like patterns woven into a carpet. The two cannot get apart, and yet there seems to be a distinct asymmetry in their relation" (Jesper Hoffmeyer, 1998).

3. BioMilieu and Technics as the Figure 8
"In virtue of their dissimilarity, perhaps a crossing, a twist, a helix, a figure 8 is even formed between the two centres." (Deleuze, D&R, 1968)The organism and its environment, though understood as separate, are fundamentally born as one: BioMilieu. Nurture one, and the other flourishes. Destroy one, and the other is destroyed.BioMilieu represents a single, unified process, where Technics forms the relation—the figure 8—between Bio and Milieu. Therefore and in response to Heidegger and Stiegler, we assert: BioMilieu-genesis is Technogenesis.

4. The essence of technology is not technical (Heidegger, 1954). ‘Gestell’, or enframing, is Heidegger’s term for the way modern technology and science organize and reveal the world, transforming everything into a resource for exploitation and distribution. This framework dictates how entities are perceived and valued, primarily in terms of their utility, leading to the systematic exploitation of resources for human purposes. The ultimate danger of which Heidegger speaks is that Gestell projects itself onto the 'being' of 'human being' itself, onto the human essence, a warning that has not stopped the development of AGI. But Heidegger says, quoting the poet Hölderlin: "Where danger is, grows also the saving power", "Wo aber Gefahr ist, wächst / Das Rettende auch". Here Heidegger refers to art, which withdraws from the rational, scientific and exploitative mentality of Gestell. Art is the saving power, but he again warns, in 1954, that the signs that art is also bent to Gestell have already been observed.To reinstall the transformative power of art against Gestell – art changed over the decades in commodity, market, massmedia, spectacle and lost its potential to change the world – we reintroduce Joseph Beuys' 'Erweiterte Kunstbegriff' (Expanded Concept of Art).In 1980 Joseph Beuys was asked: Kunst kann das Leben verändern? "Ja, Ich gehe weiter. Ich sagte: Nur Kunst kann das Leben verändern. Nur Kunst".

By extending the concept of art to include all forms of creative, social, political and ecological engagement, Beuys positioned art as a driving force for societal transformation. The traditional concept of art, though, has proved that it lives inside a niche within human society. Modern art's design concept – 'gestaltungsbegriff' –cannot be applied by all people and to all problems that lie before us. "Creativity that is not free, is a contradictio in terminis. Human creativity is in essence a freedom practice", Beuys argued. This practice is pan-ecological and therefore critical and political, and its mentality opens the potential of art and being an artist – meaning everybody – in surprising and unforeseen ways. Technotlogy's critique on modern art goes further, art became part of the status quo, in doubling the performative act of engagement, that is cloaked as social and political, while the symbolic image/art product is a communication product to remain the status quo. Technotlogy's expanded concept of art is a 'psychic, social and environmental sculpture', which resonates with the three ecologies and our background as sculptor.Today's predicament, needs artists rather than artworks, and with artists we mean everybody. But instead of 'Jeder Mensch ist ein Künstler, we prefer the becoming nature, different from identity and stasis, expressed in "Jeder Mensch wird ein Künstler.

5. Expanded Concept of Technology
The Expanded Concept of Technology presents an understanding of technology that moves beyond traditional definitions. Defining this expanded view was challenging, primarily because of the pervasive and unbounded nature of technology. Much like consciousness, technology operates with a complexity that resists simple categorization or understanding. One of the initial insights is that technology lacks a clear binary or cultural opposition. Technotlogy was our first response to this lack.Where art finds a counterpart in reason and order—typically expressed through mathematics and utility—the question arises: what, if anything, opposes technology? Traditional dualistic logic, which separates and categorizes, fails here. Technology, as a monolithic force, functions beyond the typical separations and oppositions, suggesting it may not just be an entity but a hyperontology. Its influence derives not from fitting into existing categories but from transcending them entirely. This hyperontological nature allows technology to operate within a distinct temporal framework, contrasting sharply with the scientific or measured time embraced by continental philosophy.Continental thinkers have often viewed technology as inherently dualistic, a source of rupture or division. Plato’s concept of the Pharmakon—something that is both poison and cure—was revived by Derrida and later by Bernard Stiegler, who framed technology as a Pharmakon. Yet, this framing only captures the ambiguity inherent in all human constructs, which merge positive and negative through an inevitable conceptual breakdown. The essence of technology, therefore, lies not in this duality but in its capacity to exceed these human categories and oppositions.The Expanded Concept of Technology is fundamentally a temporal and productive force. Rather than conforming to modes of ordering, controlling, exploiting, and redistributing—characteristics of Heidegger’s Gestell—this expanded technology crosses boundaries, opens up potentials, and, crucially, orients itself towards life as an interactive process between organism and environment. This concept is transversal and pan-ecological, moving fluidly across domains and thus positioned to address what we call the "Three Anxieties of Time," stemming from digital technology’s dominion over the past, present, and future.At its core, Expanded Technology establishes a new temporal framework. Concepts like TimeSpace, The AND of Time, and Causa Futura form this framework and actively challenge the temporal colonization imposed by semio-capitalism, seeking to reclaim both individual and collective agency.Hyperontology and Temporal Autonomy
Technotlogy, understood as a hyperontology, derives its power from existing within a distinct temporal order. This unique structure allows technology—when intertwined with capital—to exert an influence that is independent from the natural temporal flows of biological, psychological, and cultural evolution. Functioning outside these temporal constraints, technology as semio-capital attains a self-contained autonomy, continually accelerating and redefining its scope and impact.

6. The current concept of Technology: Pan-Technology,
Three Layers of Technology
Philosophy's engagement with technology, as influential as it essence is unknown and enigmatic, evolved in the 20th century. Despite a wide range of theories, philosophers consistently focus on the one term 'technology.' In fact Aristotle used two terms, poeisis for creating the new, and techné, for the art of making and craftsmanship; in our intro we suggest poiesis and techné must be understood as lovers. Although in today's philosophy only 'technology' dominates, the interpretations differ significantly. Some, like Marx, the late Heidegger, Ellul, and the Frankfurt School, adopt an ontological perspective, arguing for a metaphysical foundation underlying technology. Others, including the young Heidegger, Derrida, and Stiegler, focusing on 'technical objects,' view technology as an interplay of these objects with human activity and with becoming human. This school views technology as an extension of human capabilities, such as machines extending the body, writing expanding memory, or AI/AGI supporting the mind and replacing creative and productive processes. Underlying the ontologist view and clearly driving the objectivists is the notion that capitalism either supplies the transformative energy for Gestell or accelerates the technological project.It would be an intriguing puzzle if it weren't of the highest urgency to understand what technology 'is,' especially since we find ourselves enslaved by it. In the context of technology being ontological or functional, one must reflect: who are we, or what have we done, to ourselves and others to deserve this?Technotlogy differs from traditional views. Different from all philosophers, and instead of the one term technology, Technotlogy identifies three overlapping strata of technological evolution.Layer 1: BioMilieu Technology
The first layer BioMilieu Technology, began with the simultaneous birth of life and milieu. The idea of organism that is separated from milieu is not supported by empirical observation, and is a result of supreme ignorance of the human organism, finally led to the rise of capitalism and today's climate crisis. "Darwin proposed a theory of natural selection and evolution in which the unit of survival was either the family line or the species or subspecies or something of the sort. But today it is quite obvious that this is not the unit of survival in the real biological world. The unit of survival is the organism plus environment. We are learning by bitter experience that the organism which destroys its environment destroys itself" (Bateson 1972). The separation between organism and environment also gave rise to the idea that technology is expressed through technical objects. In this view technical objects are needed to complement the organism, but this is leaving the environment out of the equation. Instead, organisms and their environments, born simultaneously, are one, a oneness that is mediated by what we call BioMilieu Technology. A key aspect of BioMilieu Technology is to continuously reconsider what 'relation' means. This clearly resonates with thinkers like Spinoza, Hume, Whitehead, Bergson and Deleuze although they never 'materially' fused organism and milieu.Gregory Bateson stated the following: ‘... the evolution of the horse from Eohippus was not a one-sided adjustment to life on grassy plains. Surely the grassy plains themselves were evolved pari passu with the evolution of the teeth and hooves of the horses and other ungulates. ... It is the context which evolves.’ (Bateson 1972) What Bateson calls 'context' is technology as BioMilieu poiesis.Technology predates Homo sapiens, emerging when life itself began. The becoming of 'Being' started when Life, Milieu and BioMilieu began: BioMilieu poiesis = Technogenesis. This equation transversally fuses the – only superficially – conflicting concepts of Heidegger and Stiegler into one concept. 'Being as becoming', BioMilieu poiesis, is a Möbius Strip, a form with a twist that establishes the asymmetry between inside and outside, a precondition for life and agency to evolve.Humans, as organisms, primarily operate as biomilieu poets and technologists. For example, human language can be considered as highly advanced biomilieu technology given birth to the ecology of the social and the ecology of mind. Even though humans have entered – triggered new stages of technology, BioMilieu technology remains foundational.Layer 2: Gestell
With the advent of agriculture around 12.000 years ago, Homo sapiens began to territorialise, emulating the stationary nature of plant life. The departing from nomadism, being free in time and space, required a new understanding of being in time and space, differentiating time from space and separating organism from milieu. This period is marked by the optimisation of the human environment – the exploitation of all Umwelten began – and gave rise to 'Gestell', as Heidegger termed it. Different from Heidegger, we argue Gestell is not ontological, but epistemological, the result of surviving in a new time and space. The settlement of a nomadic organism on one location uncovers the nature of spacetime. The settlement changed the organism/milieu condition, and a new understanding of the spacetime relation. It gave rise to a different experiencing of being a BioMilieu technologist, or poet, of the division of spacetime, and of the exploration of space as measurement without time, and the exploitation of the earth to harvest its potential. The organism splits itself from the milieu. Gestell is this unnatural, or new natural, exploitation and understanding of being that organism. Reason and rationality, that came with Gestell, is nothing different than dealing with this new situation. On the other hand, one could draw this moment also as "The birth of time'.Gestell, following the layer of BioMilieu Technology, is the second layer of Technotlogy. But Gestell is not the replacement but a bifurcation of BioMilieu. The deep engrained laws and unity of life and milieu continues but the understanding of the human being of its relational autonomy changes into domination. Unfortunately, what began as unity of organism and milieu in the BioMilieu technology evolved into the separation of organism from milieu in the Gestell stage. And of the separation of space and time. As it turns out, the next level of technology, Boolean technology, will colonise every aspect of time, in order to tame the human organism into production and consumption. The more the organism is abled to believe in itself, the more it becomes removed from its 'becoming'.Layer 3: Boolean Technology
The birth of Boolean Technology in the second half of the 20th century, ignited by Claude Shannon, based on the divisive Boolean Logic using the AND OR NOT operators in resulting in 1 or 0, marks the third layer of technology, further alienating human interactions from the tangible world. These three technological types – BioMilieu, Gestell, and Boolean – entangled and increasing capitalist's anti-vitality, lead us into today's predicament. The atomistic, homogenizing and divisive impact of Boolean Technology and the relation to its Logical DNA has given birth to Boolean Works from 1991. Today's dystopia of fascism, massmedia, semio-capitalism and the manipulation by technologist billionaires can be rooted back to this Boolean DNA.

7. Pan-Ecology: The Three Ecologies"Now more than ever, nature cannot be separated from culture; in order to comprehend the interactions between ecosystems, the mechanosphere and the social and individual Universes of reference, we must learn to think 'transversally'. Just as monstrous and mutant algae invade the lagoon of Venice, so our television screens are populated, saturated, by 'degenerate' images and statements. In the field of social ecology, men like Donald Trump are permitted to proliferate freely, like another species of algae, taking over entire districts of New York and Atlantic City; he 'redevelops' by raising rents, thereby driving out tens of thousands of poor families, most of whom are condemned to homelessness, becoming the equivalent of the dead fish of environmental ecology."In "The Three Ecologies" from 1989, Félix Guattari builds upon Gregory Bateson's assertion that "there is an ecology of bad ideas, just as there is an ecology of weeds." Guattari expands the conventional understanding of environmental ecology to include the ecologies of mind and the social realm. He argues that each of these ecologies suffers under the excesses of capitalism, leading to a fractured coherence among them. This critical perspective was formed even before the advent of Boolean Technology, which specifically targets the ecology of mind through the exploitation of the social. This Boolean technology diminishes the richness of ideas and diversity, as it parasitically exploits and capitalises on social and public structures. In this context, the milieu or the biosphere, like the human mind and social fabric, is treated merely as a resource to be exploited and distributed.The crisis of the social and climate are on today’s agenda, for what its worth; the one most crucial, though, is politically excluded: the homogenisation of the human mind and the ecology of ideas and thought, the mind without which nothing makes any sense (Gregory Bateson 1972 | Félix Guattari 1989 | Bongers 1991).

8. Towards a New BooleanThere is a common perception that digital technology is characterised by the binary language of zeros and ones. However, this view hides a more complex issue. Often, what is assumed to be the cause is merely an effect. It is not the digital per se that should be our focus, but rather the underlying logic that leads to digital technology. The nature of this logic, rooted in Boolean algebra, is seldom discussed.Boolean logic, developed through historical milestones – from Aristotle’s early explorations to Leibniz’s Universal Language, and Claude Shannon’s 1937 thesis that paved the way for the transistor –has evolved. What began as a philosophical and mathematical inquiry – an odyssee towards a true logical world – now underpins the information age and forms the DNA of its dystopias. Our argument is that Boolean's fundamental operations–AND, OR, NOT, through intersection, union and complement leading to inclusion, exclusion and negation – cut much deeper, and is intrinsically divisive, than the resulting binary division of Boolean True/False, 1 or 0, driving wedges in our relational understanding of the world, our bodies, minds and the fabric of society. This perversion of Boolean logic serves to divide and diminish, reducing complex identities and relationships into simplified, consumable categories, turns becoming in the stasis of identity and being. The logic of the technological dystopia is inherited from Boolean Logic.At Boolean Works (since 1991), we challenge this mathematical distortion, embraced by tech and missed by theory; completely misunderstood by all.We aim to uncover how Boolean logic, in such a brief span of time, fostered a digital dystopia that has seeped into our cognitive, social, and material realms.
We argue that Boolean Technology and its DNA is troubling precisely because it amplifies this human shortcut, a triad-machinery logic producing a dualistic framework, that fails to capture the actual complexity of reality and nature. Its logical algebra and operators are deeply inadequate for representing the richness of complexity, creativity, and life processes. This limitation have become evident in how today’s technology distort our minds, collectives, life, love, and work. Regulation cannot address these distortions; only designing a new algebra along the lines of synthesis of organism and milieu, as we are exploring in Boolean Works (since 1991), as technotlogy, can genuinely serve life.We learned to interpret the Boolean operators AND OR NOT differently to confront the digital and its inherently fascistic dividing nature: AND as the synthesis within diversity, OR as the expansion within unity, and NOT as the critical edge that fosters, rather than forecloses, transformation. In other words, AND unites amidst diversity, OR diversifies within unity and NOT brings clarity from opposition. These interpretations aim to recalibrate how we perceive identity and existence.Technotlogy is a call to recalibrate identity and being, as do most Technotlogy apps like ANDSTERDAM, S.O.O.O.S to move from a technosphere of divisiveness and stasis, to one of pluralism, manifold, variety, vitality, diversity and becoming.

9. Excessive Communication and the Loss of Diversity
"It is a paradox that diversity, being a creation of communication, can also be destroyed due to excessive communication. Indeed, communication makes Umwelten more similar to each other. Or, in other words, too much communication can be described as a general reason for many ecological problems that lead to homogenization of the world and loss of diversity. This is the case both in biological communities and in cultures" (Kull, 2005, Kull/Maran, 2014).At our 2022 request to elaborate on this passage Kalevi Kull wrote back:"A simple example is from linguistic diversity. Until the 19th century, the number of different languages as well as dialects in any country was seemingly in the maximum in the all history of humankind. After that, long-distance communication and tourism (another form of communication) grew enormously. A result was at least ten-fold decrease in number of languages and dialects.No language, no any semiotic system is closed. This means – for their life, for the diversity, communication with neighbours, with other, is necessary – in some extent. New views, other languages, other ways to express are the source of creativity and innovation to any culture. Until certain limit, it increases diversity. But the increase in diversity is a slow process and requires peace; it is a tendency in case of peaceful life and development.The decrease in diversity as a result of excessive communication includes not only spoken languages. The spatial diversity decreases due to mixing, and due to the attempts to adjust one’s behaviour with the one with whom it communicates. (It also decreases, of course, in case of violence and wars.) Once tourism grew, the hotels that initially were designed as following the local traditions of design, became more and more similar over the world as a result of pressure from tourists to fulfil their needs everywhere in the way as they have accustomed. Stepwise, the many types of meals were turned more and more into the same soup in all corners of the big pot. That is globalisation, and the reason for globalisation is precisely too much communication. Communication is semiotic process.Social media, truly a communicative system, is a good example of how too much communication contributes to the loss of diversity and homogenisation".

10. Private means robbed from the public
In Latin 'Privare' means to rob or steal. During Roman times, the public space in rural villas dominated the house over the family space. Later, the family occupied (robbed) the public space for their own use. A similar robbery of common goods took place in the Industrial Revolution, accelerated by a technical mentality. Just as with Earth's exploitation and the 'privatisation' of human labor, much of Boolean technology has appropriated public resources for private profit. AI/AGI, owned by tech moguls, is harvesting and scraping the ecology of mind, capturing all ideas and thoughts ever published and shared. Data is dead labour. It reflects the same strategy that Silicon Valley capitalists, like Peter Thiel and A16Z and others, used to harvest the richness and potential of global collective communication – social media – to bend public opinion and politics, homogenising human creativity and vitality into conflict and hate. Privately owned Boolean Technology parasitises common energy (Bongers, 1993 - 2023).

11. Entropy, Complexity, and Sameness
Entropy always increases, complexity comes and goes, and sameness grows under capitalism (Bongers, 2021).

12. Boolean Technology and the Rise of Totalitarianism
"The group must not be the organic bond uniting hierarchised individuals, but a constant generator of de-individualisation” (Foucault 1977). This anti-fascist call has been negated by Boolean Technology. Boolean technology, with its divisive logic and as a force of capitalism, energises the group to confine the individual, leaving them atomised in solitary identity. Boolean Technology has equipped the group with tools to individualise individuals, similar to how radio and film contributed to the rise of Nazi Germany, successfully erasing the essential rule Foucault offers, thus paving the way for herd mentality. Observe the developments in the USA, Hungary, India, and now in The Netherlands, where the herd mentality governs. Foucault's anti-fascist call resonates with the biosemiotic perspectives of Maran, Kull, and Hoffmeyer, bridging a vital gap between biology and the humanities.

13. AI and the Triumph of Reason (March 2024)At the heart of the annual GTC event by AI chip giant Nvidia, where all facets of the AI industry converge, the number of participating sectors has now become countless. Nvidia's market value has taken a breathtaking flight, increasing by 60% in just a few months, surpassing the dizzying threshold of two trillion dollars and still rising. Also, at the opening of GTC24 this month, just like in other years, a massive black hole looms large, with CEO Jensen Huang standing small below on stage. On the back wall, texts unfold, all in lowercase letters, projecting with the allure of an intergalactic message à la Star Wars. "i am visionary, i am a helper, i am a transformer, i am a trainer, i am a healer, i am a navigator", and then, subtly and almost casually from the sidelines, as if wrestling itself from the shadows of the stage, "i am ai". The opening of GTC24 turns out to revolve entirely around this last proclamation, "i am ai". This palindrome, this mirror image of itself, represents the loop of being; the entity that declares itself to exist by uttering these words. i am ai, I am artificial intelligence, however, is the mirror image and successor of Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”. This statement departs from human reason, thinking, from which ‘being’ and subjectivity is derived. The preceding 'i am' declarations illustrate the diverse applications of AI, the versatile roles under which technology is generally understood. Helper, transformer, trainer, healer, and navigator – each embodies the supposed functions of technology: instruments that support, that improve. But with the final "i am ai", AI itself takes the word, no longer just a means to an end, but as an entity in itself.In a surprising manner, "i am ai" resonates with the essence of technology as described by Martin Heidegger in 1954 in his 'Question Concerning Technology'. Heidegger warns therein of the true danger of technology, not so much in technological progress itself, but in how modern technology, hand in hand with science, turns against the essence of human being – the 'am' in 'i am'. Technology is not something positive with sometimes a negative effect, but foremost an expression of human reason: everything functions. This reason has turned against us, reflected in the cascade of crises and catastrophes we cause, and has been able to infiltrate the body, our minds, the social, and facts and truth. The order that the Enlightenment was supposed to bring has turned into global chaos. The tragicomic thing is that, because humans think they are rational, and seem to have nothing else at their disposal, they must become more reasonable, function better and better, even into the artificial version of themselves, into AI.Where technology has so far been seen as a tool or application, with the human being itself bearing the responsibility to set limits, Heidegger's foresight from 1954 – often misunderstood as techno-pessimism – reveals a prophetic truth, the "i am a visionary" from the beginning of the GTC24 opening. Another but even more fundamental critique of reason was given ten years earlier by Adorno and Horkheimer in their ‘Dialectic of Enlightenment’ from 1944, to which they added the chapter ‘Elements of Antisemitism’ in 1947. As Jewish-German thinkers who fled from the Nazis, they experienced ‘the rear side of reason’, and the associated rational technology, firsthand. Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman makes painfully clear in ‘Modernity and the Holocaust’ from 1989, that the Holocaust could only take place in a modern, reasonable, and bureaucratic society. “Zygmunt Bauman thereby brings the 'unthinkable' horror uncomfortably close,” wrote Arnold Heumakers in 1998. American historian Daniel Goldhagen, who describes the psychological cruelties of the Holocaust in detail and the German aberration, a book from 1986, “keeps the Holocaust at a distance”, Heumakers wrote. Human reason and modern technology form the dominant reading direction of the palindrome that, read from the other side, hides a human to which we can’t seem to gain access. It is indicative of the fate of a thinking human, who sometimes also wants to act and take action, that Heidegger saw through technology, and also ‘Being’, but that his membership from 1933 to 1934 in the Nazi party NSDAP, as a university administrator, and his antisemitic notes thereafter haunt his legacy to this day."i am ai" proclaims that the human ideal of logic and reason pursued by thinkers and mathematicians like Aristotle, Leibniz, and Boole, and which through the information technologist Claude Shannon and the transistor was reduced to a binary world of zeros and ones, has become reality in 2024. The ultimate dream of logical algebra, where logic, reason, and mathematics converge, has been realized. The Enlightenment Festival, which began in the 17th century with Descartes, reaches its culmination today; humanity has reached its destination. While the reality of AGI still awaits us, and the boundary between AI and AGI remains vague, the era of AI has indeed dawned. Google's recent warning to the Netherlands – not to lag behind in the AI race – and the call from Dutch entrepreneurs to the politicians to immediately allocate resources for applications, underline the momentum now felt. But that the threat of AI will not end in the generally outlined dystopias, against which regulation has been deployed, but in the uncontrolled magnification of a much more disastrous route that was embarked upon centuries ago, that the enlightenment of human reason promised liberation but turns out to be a hell, we hear nothing about.Is that the reason, albeit quite remarkably, that philosophers and scientists, including those from the social sciences and humanities, university administrators, and politicians, all who have contributed to the millennia-old quest of human reason – assumed to be the most distinctive among all organisms – today are not massively trumpeting their horns? One might have expected them to be dancing on the tables, worldwide with their glasses raised, in a festive procession to jointly celebrate "i am ai", the triumph of reason over itself.Johannes Bongers, Gendringen, March 22, 2024.

Stoa (power plant) is the laboratory of the god Hephaestus and Athena, where Prometheus steals the gifts of technical knowledge and fire to give to humans after all other qualities were given to other organisms, and no qualities were left. Fire marks the birth of technology. This glass tube and steel-wire architecture is a colonnaded space as early Greek stoas were open colonnaded temple entrances.

14. Pan-TemporalityPan-Temporality is a concept we developed after studying The Three Syntheses of Time from Gilles Deleuze's 'Difference and Repetition' based on prior work of Duns Scotus, Spinoza, Kant, Hume, Nietzsche, Bergson, Whitehead and Simondon. Firstly, Pan-Temporality is our manifolded answer to the folk concept of time, in which time doesn't reflect the processive nature of time, and more importantly hides the productive nature of time. Think of how the 'Self' and the 'I' are effects rather than causes of temporal processes. Pan-Temporality seeks to illuminate how technological interventions not only modify temporal experiences but fundamentally disrupt the temporal syntheses that underlie subjectivity and collective identity formation. By recognizing the multiplicity and the interactive nature of different temporalities, we better understand how technological impacts go beyond mere interference with cognition or social interaction—they reshape the very conditions under which these cognitive and social processes unfold. In this way, Pan-Temporality provides a framework to critically evaluate the implications of living in a technologically saturated environment, urging a reconsideration of how technologies shape not only the present but also the continuum of past and future possibilities. The first part of Pan-Temporality named The AND of Time is under construction. The second chapter 'Causa Futura' is part of The And of Time and has been added to Technotlogy in October 2024. The third part 'The Three Anxieties of Time' zooms in on how the traditional concepts of time, as time it is commonly understood – past, present and future – are manipulated under semio-capitalism.

Pan-Temporality Part 1:
The AND of Time (Time is relation, not relative). A first sketch.'It is not the elements or the sets which define the multiplicity. What defines it is the AND, as something which has its place between the elements or between the sets. AND, AND, AND - stammering.' — Gilles Deleuze and Claire Parnet, DialoguesFrom 2018-2023 we developed the concept The AND of History, where we applied Walter Benjamin's historiography vs. the lineair concept of history, in a postcolonial intervention in the city of Amsterdam. After 'The AND of History', a particular artpiece, we further inquired and explored how temporality shapes mental, social, political, and environmental processes. The AND of Time is the result of this and connects two different concepts of AND: the Boolean AND, one of the three operators in our art and theory for over 30 years, and the Power of AND, embodying the essence of Deleuze's and other’s thinking, covering numerous influences and inspirations on relations and becoming, an AND that is crucial for understanding and acting upon today's predicament.Bergson, Einstein, Whitehead and Deleuze
In 1911 Paul Langevin illustrated Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (STR) by introducing 'The Twin Paradox': the differing aging processes of twins, each with a calibrated clock, where one travels near the speed of light and ages slower than the twin who remains on Earth. The aging difference is real (ontological), not a measurement effect, and rooted in the nature of spacetime, though purely hypothetical due to the physical limitations of the human (astronaut) body at such immense high speed. Bergson's concept of time – duration – from 1898, opposes the concept of clock-time, as it spatializes time and converts it into a mechanical process. In a public intellectual debate between Einstein and Bergson in 1922, physics (science) clashed with philosophy, with the then clear winner Einstein. Later, Bergson published an argument against the Twin Paradox*, demonstrating a misunderstanding of the ontological nature of the aging difference between the twins. This turned out disastrous for Bergson's reputation, but more importantly, it tipped the balance between natural science and the humanities, favoring science: in 1945 Bertrand Russell in his 'The History of Western Philosophy' named Bergson's theory anti-intellectual. This debate marked the end of a long period of philosophy and creativity standing against the rationality of the Enlightenment. This shift has substantially contributed to further driving apart different ontologies and epistemologies, science and the humanities, continental vs. analytic philosophy, US vs. EU, which today is reflected in the scattered perspectives on current crises and catastrophes. The debate contributed to capitalism's uncontrolled growth and the rise of technology in the 20th century. Thanks to Whitehead and later Deleuze, Bergson became fully rehabilitated and plays an constituting role in 21st century's Technotlogy and The AND of Time.*Bergsonian Steve Robbins argues the effects of the aging process cannot attributed to The Twin Paradox, since in a relativistic universe the one who remains on earth and the astronaut who with a rocket accelerates near the speed of light and back are indistinguishable; from a third person's perspective the one on earth can speed back and forth with the near speed of light from the twin in the rocket.In his essay 'What Bergson Should Have Said to Einstein' about the nature of time and the Twin Paradox, Steven Savitt concludes with "My minimal hope is to convince the reader at least that Bergson’s denial of the clock paradox is a dead element of his thought. My maximal hope is that reflection upon the clock paradox and STR will lead those who are sympathetic to Bergson’s ideas to look more sceptically on his privileging one side of a deeply complex phenomenon (time only as psychological time) to a balanced appreciation of the whole (time as experienced and the same time as measured by clocks)." — Steven F. Savitt, 2019Regarding the notion of Bersonian time as only psychological, Bergson's concept of time applies to both the mind and the outside world as there is no difference; he imagined perceptual reality as a holographic field whereof perception is the reference wave. His problem with perception and the brain could be described as: Where is the image of the external world? In the mind? Really, all the leaves moving and the stirring cream in the coffee?In the final sentence of Savitt’s essay the notion of 'the same time' is quintessential: there is no 'same time', the concepts are oppositional. For Bergson, rather than dealing against the Twin Paradox, another approach might have been more fruitful: in the context of SpaceTime and the laws of physics, the distinction between time moving forward or backward is absent, the time reversal invariance of elementary physics. In the laws of physics, no such difference exist, leaving the arrow of time and its traces of entropy to be noticed only by living organisms; thus making time and causality subjective, no matter if you are a bug, a physicist or artist. This suggests that we are dealing with two fundamentally different concepts of time—SpaceTime, spatialized time as described by physics, and the forward oriented experiential time of living beings — two conceptions that should not be conflated under the same term 'time'.In response to the Bergson-Einstein debate, Alfred North Whitehead, a renowned mathematician turned groundbreaking philosopher, intervened with an additional argument – a scientific one – against Einstein. Mastering both the domains of mathematics and philosophy, he questioned Einstein for relying on one single geometry (Euclidian curved spacetime) and questioned the type of measurement apparatus that must also be curved to operate within such a system of mass and space; essentially, a not-so-rigid ruler to measure the Universe. For measuring in Einstein's curved spacetime, "We first have to know everything before we can know anything," Whitehead argued. Whitehead effectively transformed the Twin Paradox into a Measurement Paradox that science still grapples with today. The ontology, the metaphysics grounding relativity, remains unknown.With the invention/discovery of SpaceTime, science gained a virtual playground for theoretical exploration but simultaneously lost sight and contact with Time as the essence of life, evolution, and creativity. With the world as whole and the phenomena as deeply and transversally related. The flows of Time though – some fast, some slow, some inner, others outer, and all intersecting – are as real as the Twin Paradox within the realm of scientific virtual reality. The inner experience of time is even more real, as the Twin Paradox, while a compelling thought experiment, cannot be executed in reality due to the physical limitations on human life at such high velocities.Time as experienced and time as measured by clocks are not the same; there is not a single, unified concept of time. There is no such thing as Savitt's the same time. Einstein's great discovery that, in physics, there is no time, only SpaceTime, separates Living Time from SpaceTime; actually Einstein himself surrendered in the Bergson-Einstein debate before it started by introducing STR, redefining and renaming 'Time' into a unique time concept SpaceTime. Therefore the paradox between the young and the old twin is not a paradox but the consequence of the relativity in SpaceTime. The true paradox lies in the nature of human cognition and consciousness being both material and psychic. A true paradox, Deleuze argues, is always productive. Being the syntheses of time (encompassing habit, memory, perception and spiralling into the new), cognition and consciousness are temporal phenomena among human beings that do not align with the spatialization of time as measured in SpaceTime. Time is relation, not relative. This is covered by The AND of Time, as the concept of time(s) in Technotlogy which connects the thinking and creativity of Spinoza, Bergson, Whitehead, Simondon, Deleuze, Stengers and Haraway with the deadlocks and the predicament we're in.*Thanks to Matthew D. Segall

Pan-Temporality Part 2: CAUSA FUTURAI'Future Cause' is a term first used by Alfred N. Whitehead in 1926 which was referenced by Brian Massumi in his analysis of Simondon's Technical Mentality in 'Gilbert Simondon, Being and Technology'.Causality is, after being and time, the most crucial concept in philosophy and science. However, from Aristotle's causality – derived from the making of an object and carrying the essence of the Greek concept of Being – to Hume, who locates causality as an a priori principle, and Hegel's triadic causality of dialectics, causality has remained dominant in philosophy and science. Strangely enough, it does so without acknowledging its own cause.Although causality is not inherently related to the Arrow of Time – since the laws of nature are time-invariant – causality is ‘proven’ by the traces the present leaves in the past. This retrospective validation creates a paradox: it suggests that effects in the present retroactively imply their causes in the past, aligning with a spatialized and deterministic model of time.However, regarding the topic at hand – the devastating consequences techno-capital has on our present and its decreasing of variety and diversity in the future – causality as the dominant power driving this process seems absent or inadequate. Traditional causal models fail to explain how future-oriented forces exert influence on the present, shaping outcomes that have not yet materialized but are already shaping our world. This discrepancy reveals a critical shortcoming in our understanding of causality.The only domain where technology could have this kind of impact is in our memory systems and in phenomena that approach the temporal limit, where the present – produced through a feedback loop with memory – enters what Deleuze called ‘empty time.’ It is this temporal area where continental philosophy of technology is operating, from Plato, to Husserl, Derrida and Stiegler. In this state, time becomes detached from its conventional markers and operates more as an open, uninhabited potentiality that techno-capital exploits. This is the domain where speculation becomes a tool, hijacking the future’s uncertainty and turning it into a resource for manipulating the present. It is where Causa Futura as a concept emerges to describe these future-oriented causes that dictate outcomes before they unfold, bypassing the classical model of causality entirely.
IIBy introducing Causa Futura, Technotlogy aims to hijack the speculative tools that capitalism monopolizes to invest an astronomical amount of capital – understood as information and the capacity for surprise – to colonize the present. Capitalism’s advantage lies in its ability to leverage speculation, an informational practice that anticipates and shapes futures before they materialize, thus giving it a temporal control that people do not have. Capital, in this framework, is more than just money; it’s a force of information capable of creating surprise, unexpected shifts in the present.Causa Futura uses this same speculative power to invert capitalism’s strategy, offering a new perspective on the present – a conversion and a mirror that reveals its mechanisms. It serves as the ultimate tool for detecting and analyzing the epistemological crises that underpin our current predicament.Causa Futura is introduced as the sixth cause, succeeding Causa Prima (God) and Aristotle’s four causes. It redefines causality, expanding upon Heidegger’s rejection of causality as the essence of technology causing Gestell in his 'The Question Concerning Technology', as a potential cause behind the pan-ecological dystopia. Gestell though does not explain why people would willingly and unpaid contribute to it, resulting in homogeneity, depression, and violence. However, unlike traditional causes that follow the Arrow of Time, Causa Futura emerges from the future. This future-oriented cause explains why technology appears inevitable and beyond regulation; it operates from an unexpected, previously unknown direction.Instead of approaching the temporal limit from the direction of the Arrow of Time, as Stiegler does with the third retention or Yuk Hui's tertiary protention that nearly reaches the limit to grasp the unprecedented power of technology over the present, Causa Futura takes a temporal leap to capture not merely 'technology' but the techno-semio-capitalist complex operating from this speculative HQ-operative temporality. Causa Futura is no more speculative than what it analyzes; it hijacks the speculative nature of the systems it critiques.By redefining the genesis of technology as emerging from the BioMilieu – life interwoven with its environment and with technics as an intrinsic relation – evolving through Gestell and Boolean Technology, Causa Futura extends Technotlogy’s temporal canvas from a new beginning into the future.

Pan-Temporality Part 3: The Three Anxieties of Time
Boolean technology has reshaped our experience of time, giving rise to 'The Three Anxieties of Time', a concept we coined in 2023. The Three Anxieties of Time aligns with Bernard Stiegler's concept of proletarianization, especially after the production and exploitation of user data by social technologies and surveillance and control systems and and more recently, by the scraping of all creative production to feed AI LLM's.Each of the three anxieties echoes a fading temporal dimension: of the past, present, and future. Loosing the inner-experience and control over each temporal segment, and over their interrelation, affects – we're not educated psychologists – our Being in Time, bends our conscious and unconscious being and accelerates various cultural processes into alienation and depression. The three modes of time – past, present and future – is essentially a folk concept, clock time, inauthentic time. Other temporal concepts such as Bergson's 'duration' or 'intuition' and Deleuze's 'quasi-causality', the future as empty time filled with untamed vitality or the recursive time of cybernetics, highlight essential penetrations between the traditionally strict divisions of past, present, and future. Although understanding this temporal complexity is essential to grasp why 'being' dominates over 'becoming', to appreciate the nuances of Causes after the fact, or the temporal Möbius strips that the psyche produces when in trauma, the clear and distinct segmentation of time into past, present, and future remains predominant.It is precisely this deeply ingrained separation between past, present, and future, upon which the difference between history and historism or the narrative nature in film and literature is built, that made it possible that the three time-ecstasies of past, present and future have been appropriated and colonised by Boolean technology. They have been transformed in such a way that, while they were understood as the temporal essence of human experience, humans have now become dependent on and addicted to them, in fear of losing control and even of losing being itself.

+ The Anxiety of the Past

In today's Boolean Era, the Anxiety of the Past emerges as our personal history is overshadowed by an onslaught of digital data. Our memories, once vivid and personal, have now been supplanted by the immediacy of experience and are submerged in a sea of commodified digital footprints, losing their narrative richness. And as the past is actualised in the present through memory, the Anxiety of the Past erodes the vitality and richness of the here and now. Be reminded, as we also will argue for the Anxiety of the Future, a declining variety and richness in memory and subsequently in the present, affects the pool that feeds the present and subsequently future variety and diversity. In environments with ever decreasing variety, and with tensions and stress, conflict and violence is always near. We see the growing symbiosis of nationalism and religion, two believe systems becoming one, as a result of the pool being less diverse.The Anxiety of the Past is first and foremost the fundamental uncertainty of our human status among other organisms, and of our understanding of 'being' when this leads into the predicament that is pan-ecological [mind, social, milieu], pan-technological [BioMilieu, Gestell and Boolean] and as turns out pan-temporal [past, present, future]. So the Anxiety of the Past is grounded in a both ontological and epistemological doubt.The Anxiety of the Past is not a new phenomenon. Philosophy's main concern was about memory and how memory - and through memory our onderstanding of the present – is manipulated by technology. In continental philosophy there is a dominant narrative about the relation between speech, writing, memory and thought that runs from Plato to Derrida and Stiegler.Plato himself feared that 'writing' would impair the development of knowledge, as it serves as a form of memory that supplants actual speech and thought. The invention of the printing press marked another significant milestone in the history of the memory and added to the Anxiety of the Past. The main concern was that the reliance on written records would lead to the disappearance of oral history. In the 1970s, the advent of the calculator and the digital watch was the first broad public introduction of the impact that digital technology would have on the brain, the calculator and watch preceded the iPhone.Derrida's 'différance' is a response to Plato. In différance, difference with an a, writing proofs its domination over speech since only writing expresses the context of language, where speech wrongfully claims to own the truth.Writing externalises the mind, and there is a school of philosophy, associated with Bernard Stiegler, which posits that technology involves the externalisation of mind and body to such an extent that technology, manifest in technical objects, assists the human being in becoming what nature alone could not facilitate. To us, this wide spread theory assumes:
1. the organism 'human being' is separated from the milieu from the beginning, {organism} AND {milieu}, to express it in Boolean style. The organism, though, is not separated from milieu: being = becoming.
2. the organism that becomes through technology is able to protect itself against the destructive nature of it. This is a paradox, the organism can not protect itself against something that constitutes it.

++ The Anxiety of the Present

The Anxiety of the Present is more than just digital distraction, even though 'news', updates, and notifications keep consumers on a tight temporal leash. The Anxiety of the Present is primarily an existential fear of non-existence, as the relentless digital flow stirs unsettling uncertainty about our ephemeral 'now', leading to an existential version of the Fear Of Missing Out. This unease arises not only from the digital content itself but also from its ongoing reminder of our transient presence.Boolean technology demonstrates, through its profound manipulations of the three syntheses, that Tech's Business Development often grasps - unknowingly unknowing - the nature of reality at a deeper, more fundamental level to make it productive (a knowing that Aristotle understands as techne) and is therefore able to manipulate its construction, than the reality that is served by biology, social science, economics or psychology. Within three decades, supported by the networks that electric and paper mass media had built, Boolean technology invaded the ecology of mind and the ecology of the social by interfering and injecting news, updates and notifications [conflicts and oppositions] in the social and psychic streams of thought. Boolean technology has colonised our deepest duration.The 2011 invention of Facebook's timeline reshaped psychic and social temporality, the structure and content of social relations. We were forced to live along this timeline, attached to it and never free. The Facebook timeline is a technological concept, an invention cloaked as discovery. All important technical inventions are temporal reversions, they execute their future potential in the here and now.From an information-theoretical and thermodynamic standpoint, Truth can be seen as the energy required to prove its contrary. The amount of communication (= energy) that is therefore needed is so vast that it can be interpreted as an attempt to reverse the arrow of time, the same arrow that generated entropy. Therefore, to understand Truth and Post-Truth, recognising its temporal and negentropic nature is crucial.There are 256 published articles about social media and mental health in the US. "We have overprotected children in the real world and underprotected them in the virtual world" (Jonathan Haid, sociologist in his 2024 book 'The Anxious Generation'). Teens are constantly online, submerged in this dystopia, with their minds being polluted and rewired, primed for future data production and distribution. Until recently, such practices would have been condemned as child abuse and child labor, offenses for which parents could have faced imprisonment (Bongers, October 2023).The Anxiety of the Present is about the existential realisation that comes with the recognition of our own temporality, of Heidegger's 'Being-towards-death', heightened by the digital age's rhythm and its ongoing demand for our attention. Given that race, ethnicity, and household income play a critical role in The Anxiety of the Present, acting as a proxy for the future, it becomes clear that the 'Technology of the Present' colonises and proletarianises at the expense of mental health, social peace and the actualisation of the 'living present' and future.

+++ The Anxiety of the Future

In concluding 'The Three Anxieties of Time,' we arrive at the Anxiety of the Future, a pivotal aspect. Beyond being a mere repository for hope and the unknown, the future, where 'Time is out of joint,' represents a realm where only memory and the present seem to 'exist.' Yet, the future, as the 'third synthesis of time,' evolves from memories actualised in the 'living present.' It is 'empty time,' destined to be filled with potential, but it risks becoming an abyss if not enriched with diversity and 'untamed vitality.' As our memories and the present become more homogenised and conflicted, largely due to a surge in communication, this once-promising domain remains barren and cold.Boolean Technology, imposing a reductive and divisive logic on our life experiences, strips this future of the necessary diversity, leaving it void and inhibiting its vibrant actualisation in the present. This void affects social dynamics – the struggle – as a queue leading up a hill, where the Dream awaits just beyond the top. In this line, people stand patiently, only to see others, perceived as less deserving, bypassing them, fuelling a sense of injustice and betrayal. But many of the by-passers are refugees and victims of violence and poverty themselves, trying to escape their own predicament. Social technology, privately owned, and populist politics, fuel these conflicts for their own goal.The Future Anxiety, by Boolean Technology and its technical mentality and social divisiveness, is amplified and deepened by the climate crisis, a manifestation of Gestell. Since World War II, Boolean Technology and the peak of Gestell have formed a destructive alliance: one suppressing the future and agency of individuals and groups, the other threatening humanity's very existence. Technology, thus, occupies two Orders of Magnitude of the Future, eradicating both personal prospects and those of humanity at large, eroding the coherence between mind, society, and environment. We are led to an existential emptiness, where, at the summit of our long climb, instead of the promised dream, we face the abyss.Our anxieties extend beyond the future politics that Bruno Latour suggests will be equal to climate politics. It is not the politics but the politicians, seizing opportunities as seen in the US, India, the EU, and the Netherlands, who stoke these anxieties. They mirror the sentiments where the political elite overlooks the struggles of the ordinary while advancing policies that seem disconnected from their realities. It’s a world where distrust grows as people feel bypassed in their own journey towards a better future.

As mentioned earlier, 12.000 years ago the initial split of space and time marked the birth of 'Gestell'. Now, with Boolean Technology on steroids, finally time itself becomes elusive, reshaping our material understanding and our inner-, intra-, inter-, trans- and outeractions as biomilieu technologists.We find ourselves not just cut off and outside any milieu but in a triadic-techno-nexus that redefines our existential reality. The ‘Three Anxieties of Time’ reflect a radical shift in our temporal reality as humans. We're not just living in time; we're increasingly losing our temporal agency to the overwhelming influence of technology, which commodifies our moments and modes of time, alienating us from the narrativity of our own stories.

Sketch in the process of becoming Causa Futura

"Jeder Mensch wird ein Künstler"

Martin Heidegger's statement "Only a God Can Save Us" from his 1966 Der Spiegel interview, points at the limitations of philosophy in addressing the crises of civilisation. He predicted philosophy would be replaced by 'cybernetics'. This viewpoint underscores today’s need to think beyond traditional frameworks.Human beings, failing to understand themselves as unified with their milieu, as one, and considering themselves superior after detaching from 'nature,' have become susceptible and vulnerable. Modern technology, as capitalist technology, exploiting this disconnect, has manipulated humanity into a state of slavery and serfdom.In this epistemological crisis it is hard to rethink a future path and mode of being for this organism. Following the three ecological modes: alone, the organism dies. Seeking solace together, it loses the richness of 'single person perspective' and may fear the opening of the gate for the herd mentality. Lastly, escape and immerse into pure biomilieu mediation, floating in being one, effectively further impoverishes other organisms' Umwelten, ironically leading in decreasing diversity. Here we are.To solve this puzzle, at Boolean Works we first deconstructed Boolean Logic AND, OR, NOT, later expanded Félix Guattari's 'The Three Ecologies' with a technological dimension, but it turned out this wasn't good enough. Also technology itself, as a concept, needed to be unraveled for a better understanding of the overall condition. In this search it became clear technology is at least triadic with at its basis, BioMilieu Technology as the organism-milieu mediation; mediating oneness. The other two, Gestell and Boolean Technology, being logical systems of (private) capital, have deprived humans first of their spatial being, later of being in time, of diversity and richness and finally the threat of capturing human 'being' altogether.Technotlogy affirms Beuys statement 'Jeder Mensch ist ein Künstler' but adapts it, according to the drastic psychic, social and environmental change since, and in remembrance of our temporal inspirators Bergson and Deleuze, into Jeder Mensch wird ein Künstler, Each human becomes an artist. Technotlogy spans a becoming that synthesises the pan-technological, pan-ecological and confronts the pan-temporal takeover of The Three Anxieties of Time. In this new style of becoming artists in a organism=milieu mode – a technotlogical future among other organisms might emerge.Technotlogy invites you to participate and contribute to both its foundational ideas and knowledge and new Apps.

PRAXIS

Technotlogy OS
Operating System supporting aesthetic-political Apps

Technotlogy's architecture is analogous to the 'iPhone diagram', where the Operating System (OS) and Applications (Apps) are distinct, yet the OS supports and facilitates the Apps. Technotlogy's OS is not a typical operating system, and its Apps are not standard technical applications. To draw an analogy with a different domain, such as a business or organisation, their OS comprises long-standing concepts, like Finance and IT. On top of this are the Apps – products, branches, divisions, or projects, varying in size and scope. The OS is long-lasting, while Apps quickly adjust to new conditions. The OS of Technotlogy is composed of various kernels, vectors and diagrams, and does not contain one single idea or ideology but a set of interconnected insights. Many focus on rediscovering and organising personal and collective agency. The Apps in Technotlogy are 'projects': personal, social, material, political, ranging in scale, even forming cosmologies of their own, like fungi, all supported by the OS architecture of Technotlogy.

Technotlogy Apps

Colophon

Johannes Bongers
Founder of Technotlogy.com
Gendringen / Amsterdam, The Netherlands© 2024 Concept, text, works, diagrams and photos by Johannes Bongers / Boolean Works (since 1991).Boolean Works and Transversality
Over three decades at Boolean Works, we interpreted technology as a unique route, distinct from art and science yet deeply informed by their perspectives. Unlike art, technology is governed by principles of temporality and new notions of time, which we studied intensely. Working across various disciplines, we have adopted a transversal approach, a term introduced by Félix Guattari. Transversality crosses boundaries and encourages connections between different fields, creating a foundation for tackling complex, interconnected issues that transcend any single domain of expertise.

Contact, join or contribute to Technotlogy.

Thanks, have a nice day and keep safe!

We keep you informed on Technotlogy.

• Continue

2024 Technotlogy, DENKMAL, PER-SOON, SOOOS, ANDSTERDAM, Gemeente Nieuwe IJssel and Pentalemma are initiated by Stichting Nieuwe IJssel / Boolean Works. All rights reserved.