Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Future Conservatives Versus The Conceptual Apocalypse

The traditional debate between irrationalism and rationalism, which dates back to Zeno and Aristotle, and earlier if you include religious debate, is now coming to a further head in the resistance to radical development of old ideas.

I have been a kind of spear-front of the resistance to this trend, called Conceptual Apocalyptics or Apocalyptic Avant-Garde. We (or I and my erstwhile followers), have several beliefs:

1. It is possible to iterate Cubism.

2. Metaphysics or something like it is possible.

3. There are real undiscovered classics.

4. In all justice the Renaissance should repeat throughout history.

In contrast to this is people who have abstract ideas about NASA. These, who I call the Future Conservatives, do not believe in a re-envisionment of the past. They hold that, in contrast to the past movements in which the future is dangerous, now the only danger is a re-envisionment of the past.

My view is, clearly there is less thinking involved in the Future Conservatives than in the Conceptual Apocalyptics. Surely this difference expresses (in this case, at least) real differences in values.

1. Where the future conservatives have relied on computers for their jobs, they need to be conservative with computers. In contrast, the potential of the Conceptual Apocalyptics is to do new, radical things with computers. The conservatives are painted as doing things which have a 'new angle' / the Conceptual Apocalyptics have been painted as doing nothing with conservatism. However, there is an obvious mutual dependence.

2. Where the future conservatives depend on new applications which are ultimately conceptual / apocalyptic, the Conceptual Apocalyptics are ultimately conservative, and depend on the advances in computer science. The two are interdependent, and while one is painted as conservative, the other has more 'teeth' about conservatism. Nonetheless: only the Future Conservatives have been painted as having viable potential with computers. Perhaps it is time to re-enstate the viable aspects of classical computing: e.g. the dependence on classicism, even unrealized classicism.

See the following references:

No comments: