"No matter what the subjective will may want to transcend the relations of the socio-economic structure, the 'individual' is still the product of the relations." -Marx, "Das Kapital"

"Various relationships" remind us of many ideas emphasized by structuralism. The so-called "individual" is shaped by different linguistic logics, social systems, cultures, and neurophysiology, and its own subjectivity is actually minimal. On the other hand, in order to understand the operation and occurrence of people and things, we cannot just look at the events and the parties themselves, but we must study and analyze the general "structure" and "system principles" underlying individuals and events. Just like the way sociology or physics and physiology study society, nature, the human body.

However, although human knowledge has made great progress, although there are many theories and structural models to explain the so-called "various relationships", they appear ambiguous when entering personal experience. It is difficult for us to really think that human beings There is no own subjectivity, no idea organized by oneself. But on the one hand, we don't know what the so-called "self" is, as if the birth of this concept can only come from the indoctrination of external software, and we cannot find any deep inner source. The differences between people, and the relationship between individuals, how do they become "groups"? In what way does the group become the so-called "structure", "system" and "society"?

Thinking about how to re-understand the "relationships" in society, that is, the "social structure", is Michel. Michel Serres's starting point for the book The Boarder: The Origins of Human Relations, Noise and Order. His point of view - "sending food" - is extremely simple, but it can completely change people's rigid and heavy image and perception of "society" and "structure". Such purging is necessary because it is this feeling that keeps us from seeing that there is a truly open and pluralistic relationship between people.

"Sending Food" as a Reflection on "Civilization"

The so-called "various relationships" should not be understood as consisting of many stable and unchanging structures, but a host-host relationship that changes at any time. Sometimes I feed the whole "group" by obeying the laws of doing business, and the "group" in turn maintains it through my taxes and compliance.

How bold! How dare you describe the human beings who have created a great civilization and have wisdom as humble existences like microbes! Even the parasites that have no place to return and depend on others!

If someone has such an idea, it is probably because human beings have created many complex, high-end, powerful technologies, technologies and social systems (morality, rule of law, culture, art, etc.), right? However, let's go back and think about the history of man himself.

Humans are a strange species, which can be seen from the birth of newborns. When many creatures are born, most of the organs and tissues of the body have matured, and they can walk on their own and know how to forage. However, our brains are not fully developed until the early twenties. When human babies are born, they can't even walk, they can't take care of themselves, they just cry all the time.

Just think...how can such a creature survive in the ecology of the weak?

Bernard Stiegler, a scholar of philosophy of technology, once wrote in his great book, Technology and Time: "Human beings are missing creatures, and therefore become technological beings." For the sake of Survival, the weak human ancestors observed and studied the different properties of things, and combined things that had no relationship to make tools, weapons, fortresses, etc. to protect their own safety and clothing. We find out the laws that may work in nature, and block them from them, blocking the parts we need, like digging reservoirs in the mountains to collect rainwater for agriculture, or using the breeding rules of livestock eggs to let us feast.

Saiho therefore said: "Man is the sustenance of all things, and everything around him is his lodging place... He has distorted the logic of exchange and gift out of selfishness."

People do not rely on their own rationality, technology, and technology to become the master of nature. On the contrary, people rely on acquired knowledge and technology to enable their weak self to live in a crisis-filled ecology. Even, "host food" and "parasitism" are the most basic technologies and interactions for human survival. The so-called "civilization" is a huge and complex "feeding system". The "knowledge" he uses, in addition to being responsible for understanding the world, is also responsible for performing the functions of "analyzing, paralyzing, and catalyzing". These are also the three most important abilities of the host.

Thinking about the relationship between people and nature with the idea of hosting food makes us fully aware of the complexity under the "relationship". It also allows us to rethink the issues of environmental protection and the ecology of the earth. Humans, as the strongest predators in the ecosystem, are best at "changing the flow of things" (like the reservoir above). And this change is by "sowing chaos and sowing the seeds of a new order."

Such a "new order" is created by disrupting the original cycle. Just like the French used by Saihe in the book - parasite not only means diners, parasites, but also refers to the interference noise during communication. In books, it is sometimes translated as "noise". He changes the direction of the flow of matter and energy, and flows to the interception pipes set up by the sustenancers for his own use. In other words, the development of civilization must constantly rely on the introduction of noise, strange otherness, "noise". Just like the semiconductor manufacturing process, silicon must be used as a conductor, and two kinds of pentavalent and trivalent electron atoms, arsenic and boron, must be doped into it as impurity. This is why, one must constantly study the reasoning behind the unknown. Everything is ultimately about making the most of it. Thoroughly implement the instinct of feeding and parasitic. Consignment not only constitutes our relationship with nature, but also our social relationship with others.

Consignment as Subversion of Subject and Object

"Sibs are also our parasitic objects, among whom we live. That is, they constitute our milieu. We live in this black box and call it a 'group'. We live through him, through him, and live in him."

Humans cannot survive without intercepting and absorbing the substances and energy that people need from the natural environment. Likewise, no one can survive alone without maintaining some kind of "relationship" with "others". However, the relationship between humans and nature is not only more complex, but also more implicit than the relationship between humans and nature.

There has been such an idea in history: people do not write themselves through language. Rather, it is language that writes and mutates itself through the author. Because language masters the way people think, as long as you switch the language you speak, you will easily find that you have different logical perceptions of the same thing. But on the contrary, through the expression of outstanding literature and poetry, we also found that people can express and construct their own "language" and thoughts through language, and then lead to innovation in society.

Language, law, money... these are all ways that society feeds individuals. He enables people to unite into a "group" because of these institutions, and at the same time allows individuals to exercise their will (or so-called rights) in these set fields. From a certain perspective, power maintains its own order by feeding on individuals, but individuals also survive by parasitizing groups.

From this point of view, the establishment of the huge structure of the feeding relationship and the feeding civilization even needs to rely on differences. If there are not so many differences between people, there is no way to achieve such a complex social civilization, because there are too few things that can be exchanged and obtained.

From a certain point of view, the so-called subjectivity is the difference of people. Even, it is something that people can use to exchange and send food with the "group". That's why Saihe said, "The subject is the stake."

But Saihe also wants to tell us that, like people who can't stand without mobile phones, technology itself is feeding us, whether it is for groups or individuals. For example: "Money takes the place of the host, and even the host itself; he is the thing that is expelled, but always comes back."

In this state, whether a thing has subjectivity or not has nothing to do with whether it has a will or a mind. Rather, it depends on the difference between his own characteristics and other things in a system. Therefore, a book, a Amazon jungle, money, a mobile phone, a house, the Internet of Things, the earth... these things may have what Saiho calls subjectivity, because some of his own qualities can govern the way we rely on them . And in turn, the way they are controlled (objectivity).

Although machines, money, mobile phones, and the Internet do not have the ability of will, freedom, and choice, through the way they are used in society, they seem to have acquired an ability that is even more terrifying than "will", making people unable to resist them at any time. The "order" issued. Because we are already deeply dependent on them. It seems that they are no longer "objects", but a kind of "subject" that feeds us deeply. On the other hand, although many people in society have the so-called will, freedom and ability of choice, they seem to be only "objects" exploited by these money, mobile phones, and the Internet. Either they work hard for the "master" of money, or they are hollowed out by forged information on the Internet, they have no ability to reflect, and they will only be constantly stimulated by these "information" that flow in from time to time, turning the master's order " Press Like" and "Share" to go out. But he didn't realize how exaggerated, wrong, and hilarious information he was sharing. He also blindly believes that he is a perfect "subject", rather than an "object" that is used and fed by a "subject".

A thing has the quality of "subject" only when its differences can be thought or discovered. This change in the concept of subject and object is Sai He's greatest subversion in "The Consignor". Because he is trying to tell you that the concept of subject should not be thought with the will and freedom without choice, but if you want to think deeply about your own subjectivity, you have to think about your own differences. To speak for a certain non-verbal "subject" or "object", such as: trees, air, animals, nets, tables... one has to think about how their "parasitic relationship" in the world works, from this The operation sees the way they use their uniqueness, and in turn how their differences are manipulated by society, in an attempt to redefine their "subjectivity" and "objectivity".

Subjects/objects, groups/individuals, systems/monads... have never been antagonistic ideologies, but intermingled and feeding relationships. Although it seems to be stable, it has a certain structure, shape, protocol, and system, but it is full of noise and differences. From a certain point of view, "The Host" has changed our cognition of subject and object, that is to say, we are not individuals who are unilaterally repressed by the system, but exchange and transform by creating new orders and systems. , transforming and conveying its own subjectivity and objectivity. In this case, the subject and object are not active or passive, but are just chips that people use to exchange and send food with the society. You can even say the other way around, there is no so-called subject or object, there is only food for others and provision of food. The chips for consignment may be created by some of their own uniqueness, or they may be resources found by themselves according to social rules. However, most of them use their own creativity to find ways to find usable chips in the stipulated conditions. Even use these chips to reshape the original social regulations and conditions.

I don't know if this kind of thinking counts as an elegiac under capitalism that begins to emphasize differences because of competition. It seems that in this era, people must live out their "uniqueness" as their exchange value. But on the other hand, perhaps only by rethinking one's own differences can people rethink and resist those things called "standard" and "abnormal". In other words, learning to regard difference as the essence of existence, not just as an extension of life, will, and freedom, is the new thinking that needs to be developed most in this era. In this way, people can be awakened to rethink their relationship with all things. And the difference is the mind of the subject, and it will even completely change our definition of "everything".

(The article is simultaneously published on the Fanggezi blog platform: The Laboratory of Literature )

https://vocus.cc/1111/home