Search results

The phenomenon of power is implicit in numerous critiques of modern sciences and their methods, resulting in the crisis of rationality. Our analyses will follow two intentionalities, the vertical and the horizontal, showing that the modern scientific rationality assumes principles which exclude the vertical. By "intentionality" we mean a way of experiencing the world at the exclusion of other ways. Thus, intentionality is not a private affair but can be carried from generation to generations. For example, scientists invariably will say "let us look at the world mathematically," proposing a quantitative mode of perception over poetic, ritualistic, etc. The latter, while equally intentional, will be discarded by science.Thus the scientific conception of mathematical method, as a way of mastering the material world, intimates also a restriction of linguistic sign systems and uses to specific modes, mathematical discourse, at the expense and exclusion of other discursive forms. If not deliberate, there is a specific "bracketing" that was performed by the philosophies and sciences of the modern age that allotted the primacy of all understanding to language, and indeed to a specific language. The result of this development is manifested in the current claims by the semiotics and the deconstructionists that language or discourse is the primary power in all domains of human experience and praxis. While at first sight outlandish, this claim is well justified on the basis of most concrete analyses of modernity, with its ontology and scientific method.Our approach will trace out "bracketing" and show what phenomena become discarded and what phenomena remain in order to be constitutive of power. It is hoped that the result of this investigation will reveal specific formations which belong to no one, are nowhere, and yet comprise the very modalities of our modern awareness. What is meant here by awareness consists of specific noetic practices ruled by, and expressive of, a set of intentionalities. In addition, the noetic practices constitutive of power are also ruled by a specific form of transcendence lending such practices their autonomy. The latter is expressed in numerous ways across various socio-political, economic and scientific formations, aims, and imageries. It lends an appearance of a total transcendental arbitrariness to the noetic practices at all levels. The phrase "noetic practices" encompasses what the human actually does in relationship to the world of objects of whatever type and at whatever level of posited objectivity. ; Šiame straipsnyje glaustai nagrinėjami galios sampratos formavimosi ypatumai modernioje Vakarų mokslo kultūroje. Teigiama, kad kitų tradicijų įtraukimas į intelektinę diskusiją suteikia pagrindą platesniam ir gilesniam požiūriui į diskursyviosios galios raišką ir politinės retorikos kilmę. Galios samprata neatsiejama nuo moderniųjų mokslų ir jų metodų kritikos, kuri baigiasi racionalumo krize.Todėl čia vadovaujamasi dviem intencionalumo kryptimis – vertikalia ir horizontalia, parodant, kad modernusis mokslinis racionalumas įtvirtina principus, kurie atmeta vertikalumą. Teigiama, kad mokslinė matematinio metodo koncepcija, kaip būdas konstruoti medžiaginį pasaulį, teikia kalbinių ženklų sistemų suvaržymo pavyzdį. Kad ir nesąmoningai, moderniosios filosofijos ir mokslo formos "išskliaudžia" kalbinės raiškos formas suteikdamos pirmenybę specifinei kalbai.Šio straipsnio paskirtis – atskleisti specifinius darinius, kurie lyg ir niekam nepriklauso, tačiau jie sudaro moderniojo supratimo modalumus. Modernioji galios samprata remiasi savita duotybės sandara, pateikiama kaip transcendencija, kuri yra neprieinama tiesioginei intuicijai. Modernusis filosofinis ir mokslinis mąstymas teigia, kad matematika, ar kiekybinės procedūros, yra ne tik metodologinės gairės, bet pagrindžia teorinį mąstymą. Specifinė tokių procedūrų sandara rodo, kad jos apima struktūras ir taisykles, kurios gali būti formuluojamos neatsižvelgiant į santykį su intuityvia, t.y. kokybine, tiesioginio suvokimo sritimi.Kad šios procedūros ir struktūros įgytų pagrįstumą, remiantis šiomis procedūromis, turi būti sukurtas objektyvus pasaulis. Pirma, procedūros turi būti indiferentiškos suvokimo intuicijos atžvilgiu; jos perteikia visus įvykius kaip iš esmės homogeniškus. Antra, pagal šiuos reikalavimus – teoriškai-metodologiškai reikalaujamo homogeniškumo vardu – apibrėžiama intuicijos, tiesiogiai duotos suvokimui, sritis. Moderniojo amžiaus mąstytojai, siekdami rasti vietą formaliai sričiai, išranda "talpyklą", pavadindami ją protu. Čia tariamai gyvena minėtikiekybiniai ir formalūs komponentai, kurie priklauso subjekto imanencijai.Postmodernioji semiotika daro prielaidą, kad, viena vertus, nėra "vietų", kuriose įsikūrusi galia, tačiau, kita vertus, ji visur ir visada įgyvendinama pasitelkiant diskursą. Nors tokia prielaida yra tinkama, vis dėlto svarbu suprasti pagrindžiamuosius galios suvokimo principus. Kaip įrodinėja Edmundas Husserlis, technologizacija numato formalias operacijas, visiškai nepaisydama gyvenamojo pasaulio prasmės struktūrų. Toks formalizmas, suporuotas su homogeniška ir indiferentiška tikrove, galiausiai baigiasi dviem struktūriniais procesais. Pirma, visiškai nepaisoma konkrečių gyvenamojo pasaulio prasmių ir jų horizontų, o antra, formalūs ir technologiniai principai atsiejami nuo konkrečių intencionalumo formų, kurios susieja subjektą su gyvenamojo pasaulio morfologijomis.Kultūra gali stiprinti savo šeimininkavimą ir praktinę kontrolę plėsdama formaliosios diferenciacijos žymenis ir technologinį aplinkos suvaržymą, stiprindama materialiųjų išteklių vartojimo efektyvumą. Tačiau tai – krizės pagrindas, nes mokslas įtraukiamas į žmonių gyvenimą remiantis technologiniu materialiųjų išteklių "vartojimu", įgyvendinant tas pačias operacijas, kaip ir gamtos pasaulio atžvilgiu.

The phenomenon of power is implicit in numerous critiques of modern sciences and their methods, resulting in the crisis of rationality. Our analyses will follow two intentionalities, the vertical and the horizontal, showing that the modern scientific rationality assumes principles which exclude the vertical. By "intentionality" we mean a way of experiencing the world at the exclusion of other ways. Thus, intentionality is not a private affair but can be carried from generation to generations. For example, scientists invariably will say "let us look at the world mathematically," proposing a quantitative mode of perception over poetic, ritualistic, etc. The latter, while equally intentional, will be discarded by science.Thus the scientific conception of mathematical method, as a way of mastering the material world, intimates also a restriction of linguistic sign systems and uses to specific modes, mathematical discourse, at the expense and exclusion of other discursive forms. If not deliberate, there is a specific "bracketing" that was performed by the philosophies and sciences of the modern age that allotted the primacy of all understanding to language, and indeed to a specific language. The result of this development is manifested in the current claims by the semiotics and the deconstructionists that language or discourse is the primary power in all domains of human experience and praxis. While at first sight outlandish, this claim is well justified on the basis of most concrete analyses of modernity, with its ontology and scientific method.Our approach will trace out "bracketing" and show what phenomena become discarded and what phenomena remain in order to be constitutive of power. It is hoped that the result of this investigation will reveal specific formations which belong to no one, are nowhere, and yet comprise the very modalities of our modern awareness. What is meant here by awareness consists of specific noetic practices ruled by, and expressive of, a set of intentionalities. In addition, the noetic practices constitutive of power are also ruled by a specific form of transcendence lending such practices their autonomy. The latter is expressed in numerous ways across various socio-political, economic and scientific formations, aims, and imageries. It lends an appearance of a total transcendental arbitrariness to the noetic practices at all levels. The phrase "noetic practices" encompasses what the human actually does in relationship to the world of objects of whatever type and at whatever level of posited objectivity.

The discussion follows the logic of Western modern metaphysics (mathematical) and ontology (atomistic materialism) in order to demonstrate how scientific discourses assumed a power to construct the environment. A discourse of any discipline is constructed on the basis of its value to be applied on the material, homogeneous environment, to yield desired technical products, including genetic, chemical, electronic, physiological, etc. Thus, each discourse contains the 'power' to remake the environment in accordance with its rules. The result is the following: environment is a discursive construct. Such constructivism is accepted by post-modern writers who claim that all discourses are a power which determines how we understand and treat the environment.

The essay is designed to investigate the foundations of the conjunction of modern/postmodern premises that the world is a construct of discourses and their power. Such premises require the exclusion of the world of perception, including the lived world, and the appearance of the modern subject and its specific interpretation of reality. The question is as follows: how must the modern subject access such reality when it is assumed that such reality is not accessible to direct, perceptual intuition? Here we encounter the way how the subject must construct methodological and theoretical discourses which do not represent, but 'make' modern reality.

Big Tech companies have power. One element of this power is discursive power, including in the public sphere, a cornerstone of democratic societies. In the current digitalized society, the public sphere has a significant online component. Discursive power may continue to grow, fuelled by AI developments, unless checked. To shape a possible legal response – we focus on European competition law – requires understanding the complexity of this power. Though competition law is focused on market power, we argue that it can and should have a role to play in curbing discursive power too, despite some inherent limitations.

Contemporary media systems are in transition. The constellation of organizations, groups, and individuals contributing information to national and international news flows has changed as a result of the digital transformation. The "hybrid media system" has proven to be one of the most instructive concepts addressing this change. Its focus on the mutually dependent interconnections between various types of media organizations, actors, and publics has inspired prolific research. Yet the concept can tempt researchers to sidestep systematic analyses of information flows and actors' differing degrees of influence by treating media systems as a black box. To enable large-scale, empirical comparative studies aimed at identifying interdependencies and power relationships in contemporary media systems, we propose the concept of discursive power. This describes the ability of contributors to communication spaces to introduce, amplify, and maintain topics, frames, and speakers, thus shaping public discourses and controversies that unfold in interconnected communication spaces. We also provide a theoretical framework of how structural features of organizations and media systems contribute to the emergence of discursive power for different types of actors in various contexts. This adds to the theoretical toolkit available to researchers interested in the empirical analysis of contemporary media systems.

Abstract
The study focuses on the phenomenon known as internet memes and their possible use in the creation and re-creation of media discourse. The main materials used are photos of Vladimir Putin and the famous Situation Room photo released by the White House. The stance taken in the study is based on the familiar and simple assumption that thanks to the new media we are facing the end of classical photography, sometimes described as the post-photography era. In post-photography, the connotations and context are more important than the content itself. Internet memes, a phenomena typical for the new media, can then also be used in a political context, where the "original" photographs of politicians and political events, usually officially released by PR departments, are altered not only to change the content, but above all the connotations. While regarded by most as jokes and puns, user-generated re-interpretations of Vladimir Putin and Obama's war on terror can also have deeper meanings and impacts

Recently, business representatives have begun to create networks that contribute to shaping the sustainable development agenda by influencing the establishment of norms, institutions and discourses. At the same time, there is a wide consensus that the power of transnational private actors in global governance has been neglected by scholars of International Relations (IR) and International Political Economy (IPE). In the past few years, new theoretical frameworks have been developed in order to identify different dimensions of business power in global governance. These approaches commonly observe the growing importance of the discursive power of business representatives and the lack of studies in this field. This paper refers to the research gap and explores how multinational companies implement discursive power in order to shape the discourse on sustainable development. Furthermore, it is argued that the specific social constructions of the concept of 'sustainable development' demonstrate ambivalences that the corporations have to deal with.

This article argues that, contrary to its detractors, essentialism is a necessary concept in understanding resistance to managerial discourses. The article first suggests that essentialism, under a critical realist framing, need not suffer from the reductionism or determinism found in many 19th and 20th Century essentialized accounts of the self, arguing instead that the concept adds analytical power to explanatory theorizing. Next, taking three common post-Foundational presentations of resistance to managerialist discourses, the article proposes that, despite protestations to the contrary, each relies on essentialist representations of both discourse and the self. The article then seeks to tackle the 'problem' of essentialism head-on by showing its potential for both framing resistance and building bridges between the post-Foundational, realist and natural worlds.