Content-Manager, Administrators
19
edits
Difference between revisions of "Virilio"
m
gramma
(added) |
m (gramma) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Virilio was a french sociologist and continental philosopher, and not very commonly read in debate. He is most well known for his theorization about military conflict, technology, speed, and society and how they relate to each other, and developed these ideas after being affected by the Second World War. In debate, his arguments can be read in a variety of ways, which can be more philosophical or critical depending on which parts of his theory are being used. However, it is most commonly read as a critical affirmative, or an affirmative that defends the topic using a critical literature base. | Virilio was a french sociologist and continental philosopher, and not very commonly read in debate. He is most well known for his theorization about military conflict, technology, speed, and society and how they relate to each other, and developed these ideas after being affected by the Second World War. In debate, his arguments can be read in a variety of ways, which can be more philosophical or critical depending on which parts of his theory are being used. However, it is most commonly read as a critical affirmative, or an affirmative that defends the topic using a critical literature base. | ||
== Speed == | == Speed == | ||
For Virilio, speed is one of the defining features of modernity. He is highly critical of capitalism's tendency to produce things that go faster. For example, in the beginning, there was a horse and buggy. Due to capitalism, methods of transportation have evolved. Now, there are cars that can accelerate from 0-60 in less than 2 seconds, bullet trains that travel at nearly 200 miles per hour. Still there are more inventions being looked into, such as hyperloops, that seem to suggest that faster is better. In a similar vein, this type of acceleration can happen with both technology and politics. | For Virilio, speed is one of the defining features of modernity. He is highly critical of capitalism's tendency to produce things that go faster. For example, in the beginning, there was a horse and buggy. Due to capitalism, methods of transportation have evolved. Now, there are cars that can accelerate from 0-60 in less than 2 seconds, and bullet trains that travel at nearly 200 miles per hour. Still there are more inventions being looked into, such as hyperloops, that seem to suggest that faster is better. In a similar vein, this type of acceleration can happen with both technology and politics. | ||
His overall thesis suggests that humans can only process so much - our phenomenological capacities are limited by time. As the world speeds up, the ability for people to process it diminishes to the point that it becomes impossible to relate to the world properly, and people become empty subjects. Because it is not possible to relate to the world, people become observers to their own lives, unable to really process much of anything. This makes a very useful preclusive claim when extended in later speeches, because it is often not addressed in the opponent's speech, making it a prerequisite to accessing their arguments. | His overall thesis suggests that humans can only process so much - our phenomenological capacities are limited by time. As the world speeds up, the ability for people to process it diminishes to the point that it becomes impossible to relate to the world properly, and people become empty subjects. Because it is not possible to relate to the world, people become observers to their own lives, unable to really process much of anything. This makes a very useful preclusive claim when extended in later speeches, because it is often not addressed in the opponent's speech, making it a prerequisite to accessing their arguments. | ||