War, Disease and Aesthesis.
Instead of a critical attitude of Modernity this article establishes naivety as a means to describe transformations that human experience is forced to undergo being affected by hybrid (in Latour’s terms) and nonhuman agencies. To compare the image of the modern war with a new type of conflict that has developed over the past decades in terms of space-time it attracts allies such as Gilles Deleuze, оbject-oriented ontologists, S. Shaviro and Alfred Whitehead. The new type of conflict in question is the terrorist activity guided by the doctrine of Taqiyya, or strategic (dis)simulation, described by Reza Negarestany in his essay The Militarization of Peace: Absence of Terror or Terror of Absence? The reason for this choice of objects for comparison is the fact that this new wave of terrorism decomoses the space-time framework of war established by Modernity proliferating like a virus and functioning according to the “bottom up” principle. That’s why it is potentially the most successful – and therefore dangerous – for it actively exploits the “biological” analogy of society and the tree internalizing itself into the structure of the political body and causing an excessive allergic autoimmune reaction on its part and then destroying the political body from the inside. In this respect the logic of its unfolding repeats at the macro-level of society the logic of spreading the virus at the micro-level of the individual's body, as described by Eugene Tucker in the essay Nosos, nomos, and bios. In the face of these threats, definition of the spatial and temporal framework for the functioning of terror and viral infection becomes a necessary condition for survival. Such a definition, in turn, requires a revision of the modern concept of space-time with it’s notions of the fundamental locality of actual entities, the linearity/discreteness of time and the relations of internal/external. In other words, it requires a revision of our concept of aesthesis.