Research
My current research focuses on three distinct yet interrelated areas:
- Evaluating the political and ethical implications of socially disruptive technologies
- Examining how historical and diverse philosophical and multidisciplinary perspectives can inform contemporary debates in the philosophy of technology
- Developing a pluralistic normative approach to these issues.
|
|
My current book project, Work, Leisure, and the Technopolitical Condition: Bernard Stiegler and Contemporary Philosophies of Digital Life, engages in timely debates around the impacts of new and emerging technologies on cultural and philosophical conceptions of work and leisure. The project involves expanding my dissertation’s engagement with the work of Stiegler by situating his thought in relation to other major theoretical tools in the philosophy of technology, such as the postphenomenological concept of mutual co-evolution, instrumental rationality from critical theory, and the posthumanist cyborg. I also build on Stiegler’s normative approach to these themes through an intersectional engagement with the capabilities approach to justice, the role of habituation and community in virtue ethics, and care and contextuality in feminist care ethics. I contend that rethinking work around structures of caring (for other humans, non-humans, social and political institutions and technology) can help address pressing global issues like automation, climate change, and inequality.
Peer-Reviewed Articles
“Overcoming Simondonian Alienation: A Critique of the Dichotomy Between the Psycho-physical and the Politico-economic.” Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 26, no. 2 (2022), 232-256. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne2022727161
This paper engages in an interpretation and critique of Simondon’s approach to technical objects through his concept of alienation. I begin with his argument for why the fundamental source of alienation is “psycho-physical” and explain his critique of politico-economic analyses of alienation. I then explain his proposal for reducing alienation by rethinking work as “technical activity.” I then argue that while Simondon’s analyses of the internal functionality of technical objects provide important contributions to the philosophy of technology, he also overemphasizes the psycho-physical and in turn underestimates the role of politico-economic factors in the ontogenesis of technical objects and production of alienation. Both the psycho-physical and politico-economic, I claim, must be thought together as necessarily interconnected conditions of the ontogenesis of technical objects. On that basis, it becomes possible to engage in philosophical critique of and education about the inner functionality of contemporary technologies and their accompanying risks.
“Derrida’s Pragmatism: The Political and Pedagogical Implications of Derrida’s University to Come in a Teletechnological World.” Derrida Today 15, no. 2 (2022), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0288
This paper focuses on the intersections between Jacques Derrida’s thinking of teletechnology, virtualisation, mondialisation and the role that education and the ‘university to come’ can play in coping with the changing landscapes of our increasingly digitised world. This analysis also addresses what I call the pragmatist critique of Derrida, which accuses deconstruction of being incapable of offering any prescriptive norms for how we can actually achieve systemic political change and what those changes should look like beyond a vague or unrealistic utopian hope for an undefinable, unanticipatable ‘event’ to come. I argue, in contrast, that Derrida’s thinking on teletechnology provides one of many examples of the practical implications of deconstruction and can help explain Derrida’s account of how the politico-economic outside functions and conditions the university. Moreover, I explain Derrida’s argument that the ‘how’ of interrupting or breaking the vicious cycle of technoeconomic power structures cannot be solved by a mere list of preprogramed objectives and thus must necessarily be left open to uncertainty, further determination and the possibility of the unknown. At the same time, however, this resistance to preprogramed objectives does not entail an outright rejection of political resistance or education about the power structures at work within various domains of life.
“Technology, Freedom, and the Mechanization of Labor in the Philosophies of Hegel and Adorno.” Philosophy and Technology 34, no. 4 (2021), 1263-1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00458-3
This paper investigates the compatibility of Hegel’s analyses of the mechanization of work in industrial society with Hegel’s notion of freedom as rational self-determination. Work as such is for Hegel a crucial moment on the way to a more complete realization of human freedom, but, as I maintain with Adorno, the technological developments of the last two centuries raise the question of whether the nature of work itself has changed since the industrial revolution. In his Jena lectures, Hegel recognized significant problems that the mechanization of work poses for human freedom that—on my assessment—his later, mature thought does not sufficiently address. One finds, however, a more comprehensive depiction of the same worries that Hegel mentioned in his Jena lectures in Adorno’s critique of the dominant forms of labor in contemporary society and his understanding of technological rationality, which according to Adorno, dominates the contemporary world. I suggest, furthermore, that juxtaposing Hegel’s and Adorno’s thoughts on technology and the mechanization of work reveals Adorno’s philosophy of technology to be an extension, rather than a critique, of the spirit of Hegel’s own philosophical project as immanent critique of the necessary entailments of any given concept.
This paper engages in an interpretation and critique of Simondon’s approach to technical objects through his concept of alienation. I begin with his argument for why the fundamental source of alienation is “psycho-physical” and explain his critique of politico-economic analyses of alienation. I then explain his proposal for reducing alienation by rethinking work as “technical activity.” I then argue that while Simondon’s analyses of the internal functionality of technical objects provide important contributions to the philosophy of technology, he also overemphasizes the psycho-physical and in turn underestimates the role of politico-economic factors in the ontogenesis of technical objects and production of alienation. Both the psycho-physical and politico-economic, I claim, must be thought together as necessarily interconnected conditions of the ontogenesis of technical objects. On that basis, it becomes possible to engage in philosophical critique of and education about the inner functionality of contemporary technologies and their accompanying risks.
“Derrida’s Pragmatism: The Political and Pedagogical Implications of Derrida’s University to Come in a Teletechnological World.” Derrida Today 15, no. 2 (2022), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.3366/drt.2022.0288
This paper focuses on the intersections between Jacques Derrida’s thinking of teletechnology, virtualisation, mondialisation and the role that education and the ‘university to come’ can play in coping with the changing landscapes of our increasingly digitised world. This analysis also addresses what I call the pragmatist critique of Derrida, which accuses deconstruction of being incapable of offering any prescriptive norms for how we can actually achieve systemic political change and what those changes should look like beyond a vague or unrealistic utopian hope for an undefinable, unanticipatable ‘event’ to come. I argue, in contrast, that Derrida’s thinking on teletechnology provides one of many examples of the practical implications of deconstruction and can help explain Derrida’s account of how the politico-economic outside functions and conditions the university. Moreover, I explain Derrida’s argument that the ‘how’ of interrupting or breaking the vicious cycle of technoeconomic power structures cannot be solved by a mere list of preprogramed objectives and thus must necessarily be left open to uncertainty, further determination and the possibility of the unknown. At the same time, however, this resistance to preprogramed objectives does not entail an outright rejection of political resistance or education about the power structures at work within various domains of life.
“Technology, Freedom, and the Mechanization of Labor in the Philosophies of Hegel and Adorno.” Philosophy and Technology 34, no. 4 (2021), 1263-1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00458-3
This paper investigates the compatibility of Hegel’s analyses of the mechanization of work in industrial society with Hegel’s notion of freedom as rational self-determination. Work as such is for Hegel a crucial moment on the way to a more complete realization of human freedom, but, as I maintain with Adorno, the technological developments of the last two centuries raise the question of whether the nature of work itself has changed since the industrial revolution. In his Jena lectures, Hegel recognized significant problems that the mechanization of work poses for human freedom that—on my assessment—his later, mature thought does not sufficiently address. One finds, however, a more comprehensive depiction of the same worries that Hegel mentioned in his Jena lectures in Adorno’s critique of the dominant forms of labor in contemporary society and his understanding of technological rationality, which according to Adorno, dominates the contemporary world. I suggest, furthermore, that juxtaposing Hegel’s and Adorno’s thoughts on technology and the mechanization of work reveals Adorno’s philosophy of technology to be an extension, rather than a critique, of the spirit of Hegel’s own philosophical project as immanent critique of the necessary entailments of any given concept.
Book Chapters
“Bernard Stiegler’s Philosophy of Technology in the Digital Age.” In A Brief Philosophical Anatomy of the Digital: Epistemology, Anthropology, Politics, edited by Golfo Maggini and Giannis Perperidis. Athens, Greece: Kardamitsa Publications, forthcoming.
This contribution provides an account of Bernard Stiegler’s conception of the history of technics as a series of “double epochal redoublings” and examines how this framework helps us understand and respond to contemporary digitally mediated ethical and political challenges. I first show how Stiegler’s double methodological commitments to a “general organology” and “pharmacology” of technics underpin his analyses of how technological change disrupts and reshapes society. These methodological commitments, I argue, avoid the pitfalls of anthropocentrism that characterize many other theories of technology. Moreover, because Stiegler’s organology and pharmacology illuminate the constitutive interconnectedness of technical, biological, and social spheres, they provide the foundation for understanding the historical process of technical evolution. This leads to the notion of the double epochal redoubling as a two-phase historical dynamic between technical and cultural evolution. I demonstrate how this two-phase pattern provides a compelling alternative to technological determinist accounts of the relation between culture and technics. I then explain Stiegler’s argument that in our current age, characterized by digital disruption without corresponding cultural integration, we are living in an era without an epoch, insofar as we have thus far failed to initiate the second moment of the double epochal redoubling. I then conclude with an evaluation of Stiegler’s proposed responses to this epochal crisis via his proposals of moving toward the Neganthropocene and an economy of contribution.
“Bewegung im Raum in Thomas Manns Der Tod in Venedig als Funktion des inneren Kampfs zwischen dem Apollinischen und dem Dionysischen: Eine phänomenologische Analyse” [“Movement in Space in Thomas Mann’s The Death in Venice as a Function of the Inner Struggle Between the Apollonian and the Dionysian: A Phenomenological Analysis”]. In Raumnarratologie: Studien zur deutschsprachigen Literatur der Moderne und der Avantgarde in der Nachfolge des spatial turn [Narratology of Space: Studies in Modern and Avant-garde German Literature in the Aftermath of the Spatial Turn], edited by Veronica Buciuman, 57-72. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2020.
This paper analyses the connection between the inner world of Gustav von Aschenbach and the outer world that he experiences in The Death in Venice with respect to the chronological development of the descriptions of the city of Venice and Aschenbach’s perception thereof in these scenes. The phenomenological methodology serves as the theoretical approach for this analysis. Aschenbach’s Dionysian transformation as well as the relation between his inner psyche and external space has already been the focus of much scholarly research, but how exactly his transformation occurs in space has been less scrutinized. As such, the following thesis will be maintained: The space in Venice, which the narrative voice describes, reveals the interplay between the internal, subjective spatial experience of the protagonist and the external, depicted space in Venice. Furthermore, Aschenbach’s actual and metaphorical movement in space is always a constitutive element in his struggle against – as well as his transformation into – the Dionysian, to which he ultimately fully succumbs. It thus becomes clear that the space in The Death in Venice, as described by the narrator and experienced by both protagonist and reader, is also significant for the non-spatial aspects of the plot.
This contribution provides an account of Bernard Stiegler’s conception of the history of technics as a series of “double epochal redoublings” and examines how this framework helps us understand and respond to contemporary digitally mediated ethical and political challenges. I first show how Stiegler’s double methodological commitments to a “general organology” and “pharmacology” of technics underpin his analyses of how technological change disrupts and reshapes society. These methodological commitments, I argue, avoid the pitfalls of anthropocentrism that characterize many other theories of technology. Moreover, because Stiegler’s organology and pharmacology illuminate the constitutive interconnectedness of technical, biological, and social spheres, they provide the foundation for understanding the historical process of technical evolution. This leads to the notion of the double epochal redoubling as a two-phase historical dynamic between technical and cultural evolution. I demonstrate how this two-phase pattern provides a compelling alternative to technological determinist accounts of the relation between culture and technics. I then explain Stiegler’s argument that in our current age, characterized by digital disruption without corresponding cultural integration, we are living in an era without an epoch, insofar as we have thus far failed to initiate the second moment of the double epochal redoubling. I then conclude with an evaluation of Stiegler’s proposed responses to this epochal crisis via his proposals of moving toward the Neganthropocene and an economy of contribution.
“Bewegung im Raum in Thomas Manns Der Tod in Venedig als Funktion des inneren Kampfs zwischen dem Apollinischen und dem Dionysischen: Eine phänomenologische Analyse” [“Movement in Space in Thomas Mann’s The Death in Venice as a Function of the Inner Struggle Between the Apollonian and the Dionysian: A Phenomenological Analysis”]. In Raumnarratologie: Studien zur deutschsprachigen Literatur der Moderne und der Avantgarde in der Nachfolge des spatial turn [Narratology of Space: Studies in Modern and Avant-garde German Literature in the Aftermath of the Spatial Turn], edited by Veronica Buciuman, 57-72. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2020.
This paper analyses the connection between the inner world of Gustav von Aschenbach and the outer world that he experiences in The Death in Venice with respect to the chronological development of the descriptions of the city of Venice and Aschenbach’s perception thereof in these scenes. The phenomenological methodology serves as the theoretical approach for this analysis. Aschenbach’s Dionysian transformation as well as the relation between his inner psyche and external space has already been the focus of much scholarly research, but how exactly his transformation occurs in space has been less scrutinized. As such, the following thesis will be maintained: The space in Venice, which the narrative voice describes, reveals the interplay between the internal, subjective spatial experience of the protagonist and the external, depicted space in Venice. Furthermore, Aschenbach’s actual and metaphorical movement in space is always a constitutive element in his struggle against – as well as his transformation into – the Dionysian, to which he ultimately fully succumbs. It thus becomes clear that the space in The Death in Venice, as described by the narrator and experienced by both protagonist and reader, is also significant for the non-spatial aspects of the plot.
Book Reviews
Returning to Judgment: Bernard Stiegler and Continental Political Theory, by Ben Turner, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2023. Philosophy Today 70, no. 1 (Forthcoming, Winter 2026).
Ernst Jünger’s Philosophy of Technology: Heidegger and the Poetics of the Anthropocene, by Vincent Blok, London, Routledge, 2017. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology 51, no. 1 (2019), 91-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2019.1641315
Ernst Jünger’s Philosophy of Technology: Heidegger and the Poetics of the Anthropocene, by Vincent Blok, London, Routledge, 2017. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology 51, no. 1 (2019), 91-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2019.1641315