What do you think?
Rate this book
Technics and Time #3
La technique et le temps : 1. La Faute d Épiméthée. 2. La Désorientation 3. Le Temps du cinéma et la question du mal-être
1. La Faute d’Épiméthée — 2. La Désorientation
— 3. Le Temps du cinéma et la question du mal-être
suivis de
Le nouveau conflit des facultés et des fonctions
dans l’Anthropocène
L’objet de cet ouvrage est la technique appréhendée comme horizon de toute possibilité à venir et de toute possibilité d’avenir. La technique constitue ce que l’on a pris l’habitude d’appeler l’humanité – et cependant, tout aussi bien et tout aussi constamment, la technique destitue cette humanité « trop humaine », ne lui donnant son temps qu’en le lui retirant.
Cette question paraissait encore seconde lorsque Bernard Stiegler en esquissa les premières formulations à l’aube des années 1980. Aujourd’hui, elle traverse tous les débats qui se tiennent anxieusement dans l’Anthropocène, quant au changement climatique, quant au transhumanisme, etc. Son énormité s’impose à tous.
Le temps présent est emporté dans les tourbillons de processus dont les principes dynamiques et les tendances demeurent obscurs, et qu’il faut s’efforcer de rendre intelligibles – en vue aussi d’une « nouvelle sensibilité ». L’emportement du temps est d’autant plus paradoxal que, tandis qu’il devrait ouvrir à l’évidence d’un avenir, jamais l’imminence d’une impossibilité à venir n’a semblé si grande.
Le système technique mondial repose désormais intégralement sur les technologies numériques, qui marquent une immense rupture – et rouvrent la question de l’ubris : celle de la démesure – en ce que ces technologies permettent une exploitation systématique de la mémoire, des comportements, des processus de décision, bref de la conscience individuelle et collective. Le fait historique qu’il s’agit de penser est celui de l’industrialisation de l’esprit.
C’est à introduire une pensée nouvelle de ces transformations – inspirée autant par l’archéologie et l’histoire des techniques que par la phénoménologie et sa déconstruction – qu’auront été consacrés les trois premiers tomes de La technique et le temps.
Penser la technique est une tâche de longue haleine, dont il faut avertir de la difficulté et de la nécessité : à son origine même et jusqu’à maintenant, la philosophie a refoulé la technique comme objet de pensée. La technique est l’impensé.
Penser la technique, c’est requalifier le projet philosophique en son entier, et par voie de conséquence, les rapports à la technique de toutes les formes de savoirs.
De La technique et le temps, Jacques Derrida avait annoncé : « Voici une thèse qui fera date. »
— 3. Le Temps du cinéma et la question du mal-être
suivis de
Le nouveau conflit des facultés et des fonctions
dans l’Anthropocène
L’objet de cet ouvrage est la technique appréhendée comme horizon de toute possibilité à venir et de toute possibilité d’avenir. La technique constitue ce que l’on a pris l’habitude d’appeler l’humanité – et cependant, tout aussi bien et tout aussi constamment, la technique destitue cette humanité « trop humaine », ne lui donnant son temps qu’en le lui retirant.
Cette question paraissait encore seconde lorsque Bernard Stiegler en esquissa les premières formulations à l’aube des années 1980. Aujourd’hui, elle traverse tous les débats qui se tiennent anxieusement dans l’Anthropocène, quant au changement climatique, quant au transhumanisme, etc. Son énormité s’impose à tous.
Le temps présent est emporté dans les tourbillons de processus dont les principes dynamiques et les tendances demeurent obscurs, et qu’il faut s’efforcer de rendre intelligibles – en vue aussi d’une « nouvelle sensibilité ». L’emportement du temps est d’autant plus paradoxal que, tandis qu’il devrait ouvrir à l’évidence d’un avenir, jamais l’imminence d’une impossibilité à venir n’a semblé si grande.
Le système technique mondial repose désormais intégralement sur les technologies numériques, qui marquent une immense rupture – et rouvrent la question de l’ubris : celle de la démesure – en ce que ces technologies permettent une exploitation systématique de la mémoire, des comportements, des processus de décision, bref de la conscience individuelle et collective. Le fait historique qu’il s’agit de penser est celui de l’industrialisation de l’esprit.
C’est à introduire une pensée nouvelle de ces transformations – inspirée autant par l’archéologie et l’histoire des techniques que par la phénoménologie et sa déconstruction – qu’auront été consacrés les trois premiers tomes de La technique et le temps.
Penser la technique est une tâche de longue haleine, dont il faut avertir de la difficulté et de la nécessité : à son origine même et jusqu’à maintenant, la philosophie a refoulé la technique comme objet de pensée. La technique est l’impensé.
Penser la technique, c’est requalifier le projet philosophique en son entier, et par voie de conséquence, les rapports à la technique de toutes les formes de savoirs.
De La technique et le temps, Jacques Derrida avait annoncé : « Voici une thèse qui fera date. »
1228 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 17, 2018
About the author
Bernard Stiegler
89 books200 followersBernard Stiegler heads the Department of Cultural Development at the Pompidou Center in Paris and is co-founder of the political group Ars Industrialis. Stanford University Press has published the first two volumes of Technics and Time, The Fault of Epimetheus (1998) and Disorientation (2008), as well as his Acting Out (2008) and Taking Care of Youth and the Generations (2010).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 12, 2026
No reviews is crazy and at the same time understandable. I had to read it for university. It's interesting if you really care about that stuff. Everything above is MY reading of the book, still mostly close to the truth, could be explained better.
Few simple and interesting takeaways that could help other readers in the future:
- television creates global consciousness; television kills the "spirit" and the "culture"
- Americans are obsessed with creating fictions unlike Europeans who are more concerned with the unfolding reality; American directors treat the created (by them) fiction as the reality unfolding
- television (in a way) and cinema (for certain) work just like our consciousness works; this is why they can be dangerous tools in the arms of certain people (Benjamin, "The Work of Art..." tackles this really well)
- we (whoever that we is, the working people/class) serve the machines at this moment, it's not machine helps the person, but person helps the machine - the machine is the individual
- the tertiary retention (which is like a THIRD type OF MEMORY [first two are the memory of the "just has been" or just happened and the second is some long perceived/lived moment; iirc] that takes form in "temporal industrial objects"; basically an object which is "objective" and exists for certain outside our own mind - think of film, picture, literature/books, record of audio and other stuff) could be industrialized, these temporal industrial objects can change the way we perceive things even if they are already perceived; even more simply said - the way we export or create memory/knowledge outside our mind is through these objects, they can alter how our consciousness works
- i already said that TV and cinema work just like our consciousness and that temporal industrial objects can influence how we perceive time and reality - here's the interesting thing - The way our mind works basically has turned into merchandise or something for sale, because of the usage of the way our mind works (TV & Cinema) as a way to sell/advertise something literally means we're being sold our own way of grasping reality. Simply said our consciousness is being sold. Fast forward a bit and there's politics of consciousness which is just politics of technics - 1:1 - it's the same for Stiegler. Using politics as a way to create/form/use technics means also that politics can alter/form our consciousness. Seems obvious but does it?
- the industrialization of "culture" and fabrication of symbols for the sake of culture can turn symbols into something diabolical; a spiritual catastrophe; it's a matter of when, not if
- example of cinema and television shaping our consciousness is how the American way of living and Hollywood have exploited our consciousness (this is possible because our consciousness works like that, like a film or television) - and we know the American life, it's been glorified, it's been shown already; think about Apple devices or the existence of Coca-Cola; they're already "given", established, existing - they are there and we are here, and they are here for us already
There are other 10414 things Stiegler talks about, mostly technoscience, technics, etc.
This volume, and possibly the others, are best read if you've tackled other people before. I haven't.
Also this book is very un-ChatGPT-able, you'll get very little of it if you go for the prompts.
Authors you should maybe (at least) read a little about before reading this book: Kant, Husserl, Benjamin, Adorno and Horkheimer (together), Heidegger, Simondon
Few simple and interesting takeaways that could help other readers in the future:
- television creates global consciousness; television kills the "spirit" and the "culture"
- Americans are obsessed with creating fictions unlike Europeans who are more concerned with the unfolding reality; American directors treat the created (by them) fiction as the reality unfolding
- television (in a way) and cinema (for certain) work just like our consciousness works; this is why they can be dangerous tools in the arms of certain people (Benjamin, "The Work of Art..." tackles this really well)
- we (whoever that we is, the working people/class) serve the machines at this moment, it's not machine helps the person, but person helps the machine - the machine is the individual
- the tertiary retention (which is like a THIRD type OF MEMORY [first two are the memory of the "just has been" or just happened and the second is some long perceived/lived moment; iirc] that takes form in "temporal industrial objects"; basically an object which is "objective" and exists for certain outside our own mind - think of film, picture, literature/books, record of audio and other stuff) could be industrialized, these temporal industrial objects can change the way we perceive things even if they are already perceived; even more simply said - the way we export or create memory/knowledge outside our mind is through these objects, they can alter how our consciousness works
- i already said that TV and cinema work just like our consciousness and that temporal industrial objects can influence how we perceive time and reality - here's the interesting thing - The way our mind works basically has turned into merchandise or something for sale, because of the usage of the way our mind works (TV & Cinema) as a way to sell/advertise something literally means we're being sold our own way of grasping reality. Simply said our consciousness is being sold. Fast forward a bit and there's politics of consciousness which is just politics of technics - 1:1 - it's the same for Stiegler. Using politics as a way to create/form/use technics means also that politics can alter/form our consciousness. Seems obvious but does it?
- the industrialization of "culture" and fabrication of symbols for the sake of culture can turn symbols into something diabolical; a spiritual catastrophe; it's a matter of when, not if
- example of cinema and television shaping our consciousness is how the American way of living and Hollywood have exploited our consciousness (this is possible because our consciousness works like that, like a film or television) - and we know the American life, it's been glorified, it's been shown already; think about Apple devices or the existence of Coca-Cola; they're already "given", established, existing - they are there and we are here, and they are here for us already
There are other 10414 things Stiegler talks about, mostly technoscience, technics, etc.
This volume, and possibly the others, are best read if you've tackled other people before. I haven't.
Also this book is very un-ChatGPT-able, you'll get very little of it if you go for the prompts.
Authors you should maybe (at least) read a little about before reading this book: Kant, Husserl, Benjamin, Adorno and Horkheimer (together), Heidegger, Simondon
June 10, 2013
Perhaps because I'm a film scholar, I found this volume more engaging than Disorientation. The best chapters are the early ones explicitly devoted to cinema while the rest feel more like setting up volume four. Still, highly recommended if dense work.
July 17, 2012
If you can: read it.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews