Page 155 - Culture Technology Communication

138 Herbert Hrachovec

“Virtuality” is an intriguing concept and real started with a pro-
longed discussion of how digitalised representation should be distin-
guished from “reality” and “possibility.” The spectrum of contributions
was fairly broad, ranging from physics to postmodern theory and self-
referential comments on the “virtual” nature of the list itself. Cooper-
ative philosophical explorations seemed to be possible within this
framework. But when the topic of “virtuality,” after two months’ time,
had lost its attraction, the list could not maintain its initial momen-
tum. It did never, in particular, produce the kind of group-conscious-
ness that had been a hallmark of give-l.
The highlights of real occurred when—for some generally un-
predictable reason—an issue or an event caught the imagination of
several participants, leading to a short, intensive exchange which
usually broke off as abruptly as it had begun. And when I tried to re-
peat my attempts at teleteaching, arranging for two groups of stu-
dents from Vienna and Weimar to share the list for mutual
comments on lectures I had given in both cities, the proposal did not
meet with any significant interest. Mailing lists are, according to
this experience, of only limited use in supporting comparatively
high-focused academic cooperation. This seems to be the opposite
side of their very informality. It is precisely because they enable peo-
ple to react to other people’s interventions quickly and sponta-
neously that they do not easily provide an environment conducive to
doing “serious” philosophy.
My notions of seriousness can, of course, be challenged at this
point. A certain species of “media philosophy” is intent on explicitly
rejecting the traditional professional standards that I am implic-
itly invoking here. 11 According to their pronouncements, future
philosophical efforts should make the most of multimedia, hyper-
textualized technology, breaking free from the confines of one-step-
after-the-other linear argument. I do not deny the attractions of
those manifestos and tend to follow their advice—once in a while.
But I am not prepared to overlook the severe limitations imposed
on academic endeavours by technologically-mediated, uncon-
strained exchange of opinions.
Mailing lists are a valuable tool as long as having an equal voice
and communicating with a minimum of administrative hassle are
the most important requirements. It is not impossible to employ
them for bona fide educational purposes like tutorial guidance or
careful slow readings of classical texts. Yet, the inherent egalitari-
anism of the procedural substratum of mail aliasing seems to be
somewhat at cross-purposes with attempts to build the stable,