The Work of Thought in the Age of Algorithmic Reproduction

The Aura of Originality and the Algorithmic Muse

Starting with Walter Benjamin's seminal work, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction," this essay will explore the impact of algorithmic reproduction on thought itself in the 21st century. Benjamin, writing in the 1930s, grappled with the democratization of art through mechanical reproduction, a process that severed art's aura and ushered in an era of mass consumption. Today, we grapple with an even more profound transformation: the algorithmic reproduction of thought itself. I will discuss how cultural production has changed throughout modernity. We find ourselves in this situation of believing we have access to any piece of information imaginable, and also that we are all empowered to express ourselves at very little cost. I will explore current conditions and posit my position that not only is this not true, but cultural production itself, in the form of works of Art and Thought, is impossible, all we are able to do is produce/consume and mindlessly regurgitate the same old algorithmic bullshit.

Benjamin argued that a key feature of traditional art was its "aura," a sense of uniqueness and authenticity tied to its origin and the artist's hand [Here I need to introduce my usage of The Aura, something akin to Concrete Value as opposed to Abstract, and thus fungible, Value, tying it to a Marxian interpretation of Timenergy rather than something like the wishy washy ars gratia artis thing or some simply spiritual bullshit]. Mechanical reproduction, however, severed this connection.  

Similarly, the digital age threatens the aura of originality in thought. Platforms and devices provide instant access to an ostensibly infinite ocean of information, leading to all information becoming flattened and blurring the lines between independent thought and the curation of existing jargon and ideology. Algorithmic recommendation systems further reinforce this, feeding us content similar to what we've consumed before or content designed to drive engagement, creating intellectual echo chambers and online spectacle and pseudo-activity. We become seeming experts at navigating online information landscapes (though we are in fact all being led around by the dick), but originality can become an afterthought [again, originality here is to be undersdtood as something akin to Use Value as opposed to Exchange or Sign Value, I need to find a better way to say this].

The Fragmentation of Attention and the Algorithmic Filter

The human mind excels when it is able to focus its attention. However, the constant barrage of information mediated by algorithms fragments our attention spans. We flit from headline to tweet, article to video, consuming information in bite-sized chunks. This rapid-fire intake hinders deep contemplation and critical analysis. Algorithms, designed to keep us engaged, prioritize spurious novelty and sensationalism over depth, further shaping the way we process information. The filter bubble created by algorithms limits our exposure to diverse perspectives, reinforcing confirmation bias and hindering the development of nuanced thought.

The Democratization of Knowledge and the Power of Algorithmic Curation / The Human-Machine Collaboration: Reshaping the Landscape of Thought

Despite the challenges, the algorithmic age also offers opportunities. The internet has democratized access to knowledge, empowering individuals to become self-directed learners. Algorithmic curation, when used thoughtfully, can connect us with information and perspectives we might not have encountered otherwise. Imagine a student researching a complex topic – algorithms can surface obscure yet relevant sources, saving them valuable time and broadening their understanding. Additionally, AI-powered tools can assist with tasks like data analysis and information synthesis, allowing us to focus on critical thinking and creative problem-solving.

The future of thought lies not in the replacement of human cognition with algorithms, but in a collaborative approach (Maybe introduce the idea that, as language beings, we already are cyborgs, Natural Born Cyborgs by Andy Clark, maybe not though, that might be too tall an order to fit into this…). AI tools can automate tedious tasks and free up individuals to explore unique perspectives, freeing us to engage in higher-order thinking and creative exploration. Just as the printing press revolutionized literacy, algorithmic reproduction demands a reevaluation of how we approach learning, research, and critical thinking. We must learn to navigate the information deluge, cultivate critical thinking skills to assess information quality, and leverage technology to augment, not replace, our own intellectual journeys.

[This section is repetitive as fuck, and also I kinda repeat it toward the end…]

The Responsibility of Cultivation: Nurturing Critical Thinking in the Algorithmic Age / Building Shared Experience in the Digital Age 

The onus falls on educators, parents, and individuals themselves to cultivate critical thinking skills in the algorithmic age. This involves teaching methods for evaluating information source credibility, recognizing bias, and constructing well-supported arguments. Encouraging independent research, exposure to diverse perspectives, and a healthy skepticism towards algorithmic recommendations are essential..

One potential solution lies in fostering collaboration and community building in the digital age.  Online platforms can be utilized to connect artists and audiences in meaningful ways, encouraging dialogue and a sense of collective creation. Curated experiences, whether in the form of online exhibitions or virtual discussions, can offer a counterpoint to the algorithmic echo chamber, exposing audiences to diverse perspectives and challenging them to engage with ideas outside their comfort zone.

Education also plays a crucial role in navigating this fragmented landscape. Critical thinking skills are essential for discerning quality from noise and for understanding the algorithms shaping our online experience. By encouraging students to analyze the sources of information they encounter, evaluate biases, and engage with diverse viewpoints, we can equip them to navigate the ever-changing digital world.

The Captive Muse: Art, Theory, and the Fractured Mass

The challenges extend beyond fragmented attention and the dilution of radical art. French sociologist Jean Baudrillard, building on Marshall McLuhan's work on media and communication, theorized the rise of a "fractured mass" in the age of information overload. Here, shared experiences and collective meaning are eroded as individuals navigate personalized information landscapes. This resonates with the predicament of art and theory in the age of algorithmic reproduction.

Art, once envisioned as a catalyst for social change and a platform for shared understanding, risks becoming a tool of capital in this fractured landscape. Walter Benjamin, in his undelivered address to The Anti-Fascist Club titled "The Author as Producer," argued for artists to be self-aware of their position within the cultural production process. Artists, he cautioned, could unwittingly produce "reactionary" or "fascist" art if they fail to critically analyze the societal forces shaping their work. Benjamin advocated for the "author as producer," an artist actively engaged in social critique by presenting his work in its totality as social commentary rather than relying on ideological tricks to make the audience believe they were engaged in something more than passive entertainment [explain this more?]

However, the algorithmic age presents a new challenge. The very democratization of creative tools and the proliferation of user-generated content blur the line between artist and audience. Everyone becomes a potential creator, and meaning becomes fractured across countless personalized realities. In this context, it becomes increasingly difficult to create art with lasting significance or theory that transcends individual perspectives. We are all constantly creating, but this very act of creation, in the absence of shared meaning, risks inadvertently supporting the very structures Benjamin critiqued.

Jean Baudrillard's concept of simulation further underscores the challenges of creating art and theory in the age of algorithmic reproduction. The third-order simulation of today’s postmodern world refers to the fact that representations have become detached from any underlying reality. In a world saturated with images and information, the distinction between the real and the simulated becomes increasingly blurred. Art, once rooted in lived experience, becomes a mere simulation, mimicking past styles or catering to pre-existing expectations. Theory, similarly, can become trapped in a web of self-referential discourse, disconnected from the social and political realities it seeks to analyze.

[Talk about the reproduction of Jargon and Ideology? Hans Georg Mueller/Luhmann… I don’t know if this goes here, or somewhere else!?! I don’t know if any of this fucking matters anyway!]

[Add a section here discussing Luhmann’s second order observation, we no longer see ourselves as people who can act in and on the world, but as actors on someone else’s stage, we are just characters in a rotating cast via social media, our sense of self has been replaced by a misrecognized reflection from someone else’s point of view - this adds to alienation and atomization, emphasizing the need for shared structures. We are all always under pressure to perform, so we can’t publicly agree with someone who is wrong, because our life and livelihood depends on our excellence. We are all living in little hyper-curated worlds where we are always already right about everything, so being wrong, a precondition for learning, is something that just cannot happen, that is unless someone we want to think of ourselves as aligned with is seen doing so, then it’s safe jump on the train!]

Creating New Milieus for Genuine Thought

This predicament necessitates a fundamental shift in our approach to art and theory. The fragmented landscape demands a renewed focus on building shared experiences and fostering critical engagement. Instead of viewing art and theory simply as individualist expressions, we must strive towards collaborative creation and collective understanding. This aligns with Karl Jaspers' vision in "The Idea of the University," where he emphasizes the university as a space for the "unification of knowledge" and the pursuit of truth and The Universal through dialogue and collaboration. However, Jaspers' ideal university seems increasingly distant in today's world. Many universities have become, in effect, captured institutions, their academic endeavors tethered to the demands of economic and political power structures. Critical thinking and genuine intellectual exploration take a back seat to careerism and the production of marketable research.

The solution, then, lies not in a return to some pre-digital past, but in the creation of new milieus, spaces for genuine thought and meaningful engagement. These milieus can exist online and offline, in the form of collaborative projects, online communities dedicated to critical discourse, or independent educational platforms that prioritize intellectual exploration over profit. Imagine, for example, a hybrid physical/virtual space where learners from diverse backgrounds can co-create works of thought, fostering a dialogue about shared experiences and challenging assumptions. Or, picture a network of curated online forums where students and scholars engage in critical discussions of complex topics, free from the pressures of standardized testing and vocational training. These are just a few possibilities for creating the conditions necessary for the production of genuine art and theory in the age of algorithmic reproduction.

The Call to Reclaim the University and Reimagine the Future of Thought

The challenges presented by the algorithmic age are significant. However, by recognizing the limitations of our current approaches to art and theory, and by actively fostering collaboration, critical thinking, and the creation of shared meaning, we can pave the way for the flourishing of art and theory that contributes to a human future. This journey starts with reclaiming the university as a space for critical inquiry and the pursuit of truth. Universities can embrace interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches to learning, fostering dialogue between artists, theorists, scientists, and technologists. They can create online and offline spaces for collaboration and critical engagement, and integrate discussions about algorithms, information bias, and the ethics of online discourse into their curriculum. By reclaiming their role as hubs for the production of genuine knowledge, universities can play a vital role in nurturing the next generation of critical thinkers and creators. [Fuck! Make this better!!]

The future of thought in the age of algorithmic reproduction is not predetermined. It is a future that we can actively shape through our choices, our actions, and our commitment to building a world where technology serves humanity, not the other way around. By…

-this draft is like seventy-percent there. It’ll show up in fininshed form in one of the upcoming Theory Underground volumes, but for now, I figured I’d throw it up here on Substack. Substack is interesting, there is a lot of hype about it, there are a lot of haters about it, and then there is little old me, just kinda sitting in the wings not really paying much attention to anything. I want to get on some regular schedule with my writing, and I think creating some pressure to post, by publicly posting and interacting with people on a platform like this, is one possible way to do this for myself. Also, I’m listening to the convo we recently had at Theory Underground with Michelle and Ian and I forgot how well this piece goes along with what we talked about! Anyway, I would love critical feedback if you got any! Stay classy, san diego.