Bruno Latour, Aramis, or the Love of Technology, PDF - Dss-edit.com

not only determined the laws according to which the world works butis also required to correct them constantly. For my part, I'd prefer asystem more in conformity with that of Mr. Leibniz, one in whichGod's creatures would contain the complete recapitulation of all possibleactions. It would suffice to enter all predicates in the software. So,for example, if the creature Julius Caesar' were opened up, an infiniteintelligence could read everything he will necessarily do-from his birthand adoption to the Rubicon and the Ides of March. In the same way,by opening up the prototype creature, you could deduce all degrees ofspeed, all bridge crossings, and all station stops. The prototypes, liketrue monads, would have no doors or windows. ""A serious drawback for the passengers, don't you agree, Father?""There is the problem of the passengers, of course [he chucklesmonkishly] ... But then, wouldn't a project like that be more worthyof God's greatness and perfection than your Malebranchean universe,which achieves harmony only through constant repair? Whereas Iwould achieve it through perfect calculations, and all the prototypeswould go their own ways because of the preestablished harmony intheir software; they wouldn't have to see or know each other. Don'tyou agree, my son, that this world would correspond more closely tothe picture that piety should draw of God? ""Of God, no doubt, Father, but how about Matra? Even an inertialplatform couldn't keep its fixed point without being reinitialized fromtime to time. You're asking too much of human beings. ""And you, my son, are not asking enough of God. ""But what do you do about freedom, Father? Why not allow thevehicles enough knowledge to take care of harmonizing the laws of theuniverse-fixed by God-with the little adjustments that human imperfectionand sin have put in Matra, in the chips as well as in the tiniestlittle fleas? Why not open up our monads? Let's give Aramis moreautonomy, as befits a divine creature, after all; for won't God's workbe judged all the more beautiful to the extent that His creatures aremore free? Instead of making them automatons, as you do, I'd makethem living creatures. They'll know how to repair themselves, andthey'll get their bearings from one another. Instead of communicatingabstractly with their Creator, as you propose, they'll find a new harmonyowing to their freedom. Yes, Father, they'll be connected by avinculum substantiale. Nothing material will link them together to keepthem on the right path. They'll have to make independent decisions,check themselves, connect and disconnect, in conformity with the lawsI S ARAMIS FEASIBLH