The Future of Indeterminacy: Datification, Memory, Bio-politics

未来不再是开放的。一方面，它被认为是不稳定的，另一方面，它被认为是技术上的过度决定。经济的不确定性、风险社会的兴起、恐惧文化和新自由主义的死亡政治--“制造和让死亡”的政治（Mbembe 2003）--被视为一个严重的威胁。虽然风险社会将所有危险都归因于人类的决定，但恐惧文化培养了灾难化的倾向。新自由主义的死亡政治以一种不可逆转的方式将技术与自然和社会保护区的开发结合在一起，创造了一种封闭和厄运的感觉。这个跨学科项目不是哀叹“被取消的未来”（Berardi 2014）的不确定性，也不是哀叹大数据预测引发的“自由意志的终结”（Han 2017），而是逆转了这个问题。它问：不确定性的未来是什么？最初源自哥德尔的不可判定性和Stengers和Prirogine的非线性动力学，其中秩序从混沌系统中自发出现，不确定性是一种自我延续的变化动力学。它没有开始或结束，没有空间或时间的恒定性。它颠覆了现有的结构和僵化的权力制度，这就是为什么它在20世纪60年代被视为一种解放力量，并再次被20世纪90年代的艺术家和理论家，如凯奇，Fluxus，Xenakis，德里达，Guattari，Hayles和Varela所接受，他们都试图在各自的领域在思想和行动中实施不确定的程序。在数字时代，在加速的信息资本主义中，情况大不相同。首先，永久性的改变是规则。其次，艺术、文化和政治不再是分离的，它们融合在位于信息圈的文化圈中。由互联网、文化生产、数据化、算法预定、符号和情感机制组成的信息圈改变了思想和行动的语言和形式。它也改变了现实的结构。重新动员Poggioli的先锋派的概念，在其他艺术形式，重要的是，在主流文化（1972年）中固有的可复制性，这个项目将通过四个不同的研究活动，对艺术不确定性与当前文化实践的关系进行新的理解：1。20世纪60年代和90年代的不确定实践的案例研究（Fluxus，Situationists International，etoy和Knowbotic Research），这些实践破坏了语义，视觉，听觉和动觉的顺序和规范性，以了解他们的方法对当今艺术和文化实践的全面影响。将这些分析与2010年代破坏跟踪和数据收集的不确定性进行比较，即：在Nissenbaum，Cardenas，Cates，Menkman，Norby，Szauder，Biggs和Fujihata等艺术家活动家的作品中发现的故障，混淆，数据库和耗散网络，通过扰乱文化记忆来重新配置（虚拟和实际）存在空间。在这里，案例研究将与实践研讨会相结合。3.通过一系列艺术科学讲座、国际会议和列奥纳多的特刊（麻省理工学院出版社），形成关于（快速变化的）数字无意识与未来媒体生态的关系的假设，这些假设与媒体深刻的身体、社会和文化工作有关。重新评估艺术不确定性对因果关系，部分和整体关系的解构，鉴于其“大问题”，从超现实主义者克雷文20世纪20年代的“冲动生活”实践到戴维斯2018年的随机遗传编码工作一直存在的问题，即：序列（线性，圆形或模式）是构建知识的唯一方式吗？将事件与经验档案（个人和文化身份）不断联系起来是必要的吗？或者，我们能独立于任何整体性和恒定性来处理异质性吗？这些问题将在一本专著中加以探讨。

The future is no longer seen as open. It is seen as precarious on the one hand and technologically over-determined on the other. Economic uncertainty, the rise of the risk society, the culture of fear and neoliberal necropolitics - the politics of 'making and letting die' (Mbembe 2003) - are seen as a serious threat. While the risk society attributes all hazards to human decisions, the culture of fear cultivates the tendency to catastrophise. Neoliberal necropolitics welds technology to the exploitation of natural and social reserves in an irreversible way creating a sense of closure and doom. Instead of lamenting the uncertainty of a 'cancelled future' (Berardi 2014) or the 'end of free will' induced by big-data's predictions (Han 2017), this interdisciplinary project reverses the question. It asks: what is the future of indeterminacy? Initially derived from Gödel's undecidability and Stengers and Prirogine's non-linear dynamics in which order emerges spontaneously from chaotic systems, indeterminacy is a self-perpetuating dynamic of change. It has no beginning or end, no spatial or temporal constancy. It upsets the existing structures and ossified power regimes, which is why it was embraced as a liberating force by the 1960s, and, again, by the 1990s artists and theorists such as Cage, Fluxus, Xenakis, Derrida, Guattari, Hayles and Varela, all of whom sought to implement indeterminate procedures, in thought and action, in their respective fields. In the digital age, in accelerated, informational capitalism, the situation is very different. First, permanent change is the rule. Second, art, culture, and politics are no longer separate; they are fused in the cultural sphere located in the infosphere. Consisting of the internet, cultural production, datification, algorithmic predetermination, symbolic as well as affective regimes, the infosphere has modified the language and forms of thought and action. It has also modified the structure of reality. Re-mobilising Poggioli's concept of the avant-garde as inherently reproducible in other art forms and, importantly, in mainstream culture (1972), this project will develop a new understanding of the relationship of artistic indeterminacy to current cultural practices via four distinct research activities:1. Case studies of the 1960s and 1990s indeterminate practices (Fluxus, Situationists International, etoy and Knowbotic Research) that disrupt semantic, visual, aural and kinaesthetic ordering and normativity in order to understand the full impact of their methodologies on present-day artistic and cultural practices.2. Comparing these analyses to the 2010s indeterminacy that sabotages tracking and dataveillance, namely: glitching, obfuscation, databending and dissipative networks found in the work of such artists-activists as Nissenbaum, Cardenas, Cates, Menkman, Norby, Szauder, Biggs and Fujihata, which reconfigure (virtual and actual) existential spaces by dis-ordering cultural memory. Here case studies will be combined with hands-on workshops. 3. Forming hypotheses about the relationship of the (rapidly changing) digital unconscious to future media ecologies as related to media's profound somatic, social and cultural working via a series of art-science talks, an international conference, and a special issue of Leonardo (MIT Press).4. Re-evaluating artistic indeterminacy's deconstruction of the cause-effect, parts-and-wholes relationship in light of its 'big questions', questions that have persisted from Surrealist Craven's 1920s practice of 'impulsive living' to Davis's 2018 work with chance-operated genetic coding, namely: Is sequence (linear, circular or patterned) the only way of constructing knowledge? Is the constant linking of events to the experience archive - personal and cultural identity - a necessity? Or, can we engage heterogeneity independently of any whole-ness and constancy? These questions will be explored in a monograph.