The Ontology of Digital Code: From Human to Nonhuman
The article provides the analysis of the significance of digital revolution for technoculture, inspired by the scientism of the modern era. An ontological status of digital code is the purpose of this research. The approach is focused on the role of computer interface in optical media history (F. Kittler), along with the understanding of «picture of the world» (M. Heidegger), within computer image review (F. Kramel, M. Fuller). According to media theorists, the digital (understood in common sense as digital media, culture and technology), is based on a discrete code, typically a binary code (A. Evens). Various positions are presented regarding the ontological status of digital code in conceptions of such theorists as M. Hansen, L. Manovich, J. Drucker. This research also problematizes the relationship between human and non-human. An artwork interpretation of hybrid art “Desire of Codes” by Japanese artist S. Mikama is given in subject-object European worldview disparate to alternative ways of understanding the existence of non-human agents in traditional Japanese religion of Shintoism. Thus, the conclusion is drawn about flat ontologies for analyzing a digital code (L. Bryant), as well as the difference between human and nonhuman (i.e. machine) for research of alternative forms of thinking.
1. Heidegger М. Die Zeit des Weltbildes. Heidegger М. Holzwege. Frankfurt аm Мain, Klostermann, 1950, S. 69– 104 (Russ. ed.: Hajdegger M. Vremya kartiny mira. In: Hajdegger M. Vremya i bytie: Stat’i i vystupleniya. Moscow, Respublika Publ., 1993. S. 41–62).
2. Kittler F. Optische Medien. Merve, Berlin, 2002. S. 331 (Russ. ed.: Kittler F. Opticheskie media. Berlinskie lektsii 1999 g. Moscow, Logos Publ., 2009. 271 p.).
3. Cramer F., Fuller M. Software Studies. A Lexicon. London, MIT Press, 2008. 335 p.
4. Drucker J. Graphesis: Visual Forms of Knowledge Production. Harvard University Press, 2014. 216 p.
5. Evans A. Web 2.0 and the Ontology of the Digital. Futures of Digital Studies: 2. Editors: Mauro Carassai and Elise Takehana, 2012, vol. 12, no. 2. Available at: http://www. digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/6/2/000120/000120.html (accessed 10 February 2020).
6. Hansen M. New Philosophy for New Media. Cambridge, MIT Press, 2004. 333 p.
7. Manovich L. The Language of New Media. Cambridge, MIT Press, 2001. 354 p.
8. Drucker J. Digital Ontologies: The Ideality of Form in/ and Code Storage-or-Can Graphesis Challenge Mathesis? Leonardo, 2001, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 141–145.
9. Bostrom N. Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? The Philosophical Quarterly, 2003, vol. 53, no. 211, pp. 243–255.
10. Vetushinskij А. “We live in a computer game”: metaphor of video game and its metaphysical potential. Filosofskaya mysl’ (Philosophical Thought), 2017, no. 10, pp. 164–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2017.10.24327 Available at: http://e-notabene.ru/fr/article_24327.html (accessed 10 February 2020) (in Russian).
11. Bryant L. The Democracy of objects. University of Michigan Library, Ann Arbor, 2011. 316 p. (Russ. ed.: Brajant L. Demokratiya ob”ektov. Perm’, Gile Press, 2019. 320 p.).