The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Technics and Time, 3: Cinematic Time and the Question of Malaise
Abstract
What is a technical object? At the beginning of Western philosophy, Aristotle contrasted beings formed by nature, which had within themselves a beginning of movement and rest, and man-made objects, which did not have the source of their own production within themselves. This book, the first of three volumes, revises the Aristotelian argument and develops an innovative assessment whereby the technical object can be seen as having an essential, distinct temporality and dynamics of its own. The Aristotelian concept persisted, in one form or another, until Marx, who conceived of the possibility of an evolution of technics. Lodged between mechanics and biology, a technical entity became a complex of heterogeneous forces. In a parallel development, while industrialization was in the process of overthrowing the contemporary order of knowledge as well as contemporary social organization, technology was acquiring a new place in philosophical questioning. Philosophy was for the first time faced with a world in which technical expansion was so widespread that science was becoming more and more subject to the field of instrumentality, with its ends determined by the imperatives of economic struggle or war, and with its epistemic status changing accordingly. The power that emerged from this new relation was unleashed in the course of the two world wars. Working his way through the history of the Aristotelian assessment of technics, the author engages the ideas of a wide range of thinkers—Rousseau, Husserl, and Heidegger, the paleo-ontologist Leroi-Gourhan, the anthropologists Vernant and Detienne, the sociologists Weber and Habermas, and the systems analysts Maturana and Varela.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Politics and Poetics of Infrastructure
Larkin, B. (2013) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-092412-155522 · Cited by 4,095
The Affective Turn: Political Economy, Biomedia and Bodies
Clough, P. T. (2008) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276407085156 · Cited by 722
Blackman, L., & Venn, C. (2010) · Body & Society · doi:10.1177/1357034x09354769 · Cited by 380
Glitchy vignettes of platform urbanism
Leszczynski, A. (2020) · Environment and Planning D: Society and Space · doi:10.1177/0263775819878721 · Cited by 322
Cyborg intentionality: Rethinking the phenomenology of human–technology relations
Verbeek, P.-P. (2008) · Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11097-008-9099-x · Cited by 315
Metadata
- Authors
- Stiegler, B.
- Venue
- Stanford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Stanford University Press
- Published
- 2020-08-19
- OpenAlex
- W2798349024
- Cited by
- 1,511
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.94
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Technics and Time, 3: Cinematic Time and the Question of Malaise. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1515/9780804799362
- The paper
- Stiegler, B. (2020). Technics and Time, 3: Cinematic Time and the Question of Malaise. Stanford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804799362
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.