從日常生活到可程式性以十九世紀魔術舞台探討斯蒂格勒理論之後人類潛能

From Everydayness to Programmability a Discussion of the Posthuman Tendency in Stiegler's Theory via the Nineteenth Century Magic Theatre

斯蒂格勒（Bernard Stiegler）在《技術與時間》（Technics and Time）中提出一項重要論點，即此有（Dasein）的可程式性（programmability）。斯氏認為是這樣的可程式性確保了人性／動物性，人性／技術性的接合，但此有也因此在現今工業化的記憶之中失去珍貴的殊異性。此一論點的基礎其實是來自海德格（Martin Heidegger）在《存有與時間》（Being and Time）當中對此有之平均日常生活（average everydayness）概念所作的闡述，在這本巨著中，海氏重新思考技術與歷史，並對傳統人本主義作出批判；《技術與時間》便是從海德格對技術的創見出發，但斯氏更基進地將歷史的起源歸因於技術而非此有的意識，是技術開啟了時間，展開了此有的歷史，比起海德格思想可謂更具有後人類論述（posthuman discourse）的潛能。本論文將耙梳從海德格到斯蒂格勒的思想脈絡，並針對斯氏之可程式性作出回應，筆者認為斯氏對現代記憶技術抱持的態度較為悲觀，主應該是在於他在觀察以數字和抽象為基礎的現代科技時，過度強調其精確性和紀實性，卻忽略了現代化科技－光電技術－在早期是用來探索另一個非理性、非真實的世界。筆者認為斯氏對精確和紀實的偏重，將大幅限縮了其理論當中強大的後人類倫理論述潛能，因此在本論文當中筆者將試著檢視十九世紀魔術，並視其所運用之技術為現代電影的前身，藉此魔術－電影技術史，希望說明光學與電磁技術本身即帶有不可靠的非真特質，此一特質雖會減損現代記憶技術之精確記錄現實的功能，另一方面卻可對斯氏略顯負面之可程式性概念作出詮釋的轉向。

Programmability is one of the most important concepts in Bernard Stiegler's Technics and Time. Thanks to the programmability of Dasien, the articulation between humanity/animality or humanity/technicity is guaranteed, but not without disadvantages. Stiegler gives a negative outlook on modern memory technology, concerning that it would lead to the obliteration of individual singularity. In this study, I will deal with the idea of programmability in order to examine the posthuman tendency in Stiegler's theory. I will show that the foundation of programmability is the average everydayness in Martin Heidegger's Being and Time, in which the philosopher considered the being of equipment and attempted to remediate humanistic tradition. Based on Heidegger's insightful reflection on Dasein's relation to beings-present-at-hand, Stiegler makes a radical move to declare that it is technics, rather than Dasein's consciousness, that inaugurates history. This, I argue, has a strong potential to develop ethics related to posthumanity. In the first part of the essay, I will try to delineate the trajectory from Heidegger's everydayness to Stielger's programmability, with the hope that the negative implications of modern mnemo-technology can be redeemed. I believe that Stiegler's pessimistic perspective is the result of his overemphasis on the function of exact recording of modern technology. According to him, the tendency of mathematicalization and abstraction of modern memory industry can document ”that was” with exactitude. However, an investigation of its history will reveal a story quite different at the inchoate stage of optic and electromagnetic technology. Instead of recording the happenings in reality, early optic/electromagnetic devices were used to communicate with the dead or to testify the existence of the spiritual world. To neglect this, I argue, would undermine considerably the strong posthuman potential in the idea of programmability. In order to explicate my own position, I will examine the cultural history of the nineteenth century magic theatre. By viewing it as the precursor of modern cinema, I will argue that the production of un-realistic and in-exact images by optic/electromagnetic props in magic would shed light on a more positive interpretation of modern memory industry and thus excavate a stronger posthuman potential in Stiegler's Technics and Time.