Читать книгу The Trace Odyssey 1 - Beatrice Galinon-Melenec - Страница 25

Augendre, M., Llored, J.-P., and Nussaume, Y. (2017). La mésologie, un autre paradigme pour l’anthropocène. Hermann, Paris.

Bachimont, B. (2017). Patrimoine et numérique : technique et politique de la mémoire. INA, Bry-sur-Marne, Paris.

Berque, A. (2000). Écoumène, introduction à l’étude des milieux humains. Belin, Paris.

Boltanski, L. and Thévenot, L. (2017). De la justification : les économies de la grandeur. Gallimard, Paris.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, translated by Richard Nice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Bourdieu, P. (1989). La distinction : critique sociale du jugement. Éditions de Minuit, Paris.

Cointet, J.-P. and Parasie, S. (2019). Enquêter à partir des traces textuelles du Web. Réseaux, 2/3, 9–24.

Debord, G. (1967). La société du spectacle. Buchet-Chastel, Paris.

Derrida, J. (1967). L’écriture et la différence. Le Seuil, Paris.

Derrida, J. (1974). De la grammatologie. Éditions de Minuit, Paris.

Derrida, J. (1998). Of Grammatology. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Du Bellay, J. (1568). La défense et illustration de la langue Francoise, par Joachim Du Bellay Gentilhomme Angevin. Imprimerie de Frédéric Morel, M.D.LXVIII, Paris.

Dubois, P. (2016). De l’image-trace à l’image-fiction. Études Photographiques, 34.

Fontanille, J. (2011). Corps et sen. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.

Foucault, M. (2001). Dits et écrits 1976–1988, tome 2. Gallimard, Paris.

Galinon-Mélénec, B. (2008). Penser autrement la communication. L’Harmattan, Paris.

Galinon-Mélénec, B. (2011). L’Homme-trace. Perspectives anthropologiques des traces contemporaines 1. CNRS, Paris.

Galinon-Mélénec, B. (2017). L’Homme-trace. Des traces du corps au corps-trace 4. CNRS, Paris.

Galinon-Mélénec, B. and Martin-Juchat, F. (2008). Le corps communicant. L’Harmattan, Paris.

Ginzburg, C. (1989). Mythes, emblèmes et traces. Morphologie et Histoire. Flammarion, Paris.

Goffman, E. (1973). La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne, 1. La présentation de soi. Éditions de Minuit, Paris.

Goffman, E. (1988). Des moments et leurs hommes. In Goffman, un interactionniste modéré, Winkin, Y. (ed.). Le Seuil, Paris.

Greimas, A.G. (1993). Sémiotique, dictionnaire raisonné de la théorie du langage. Hachette, Paris.

Guszcza, J., Rahwan, I., Bible, W., Cebrian, M., and Katyal, V. (2018). Why we need to audit algorithms. Harvard Business Review. November 28 [Online]. Available: https://hbr.org/2018/11/why-we-need-to-audit-algorithms.

Hall, E.T. (1959). The Silent Language. Doubleday & Company, Inc., New York.

Hall, E.T. (1984). Le langage silencieux. Le Seuil, Paris.

Hempel, J. (2018). Want to prove your business is fair? Audit your algorithm. Wired. May 9 [Online]. Available: https://www.wired.com/story/want-to-prove-your-business-is-fair-audit-your-algorithm.

Jacquet-Andrieu, A. (2012). Langage de l’Homme. De l’étude pluridisciplinaire à l’action transdisciplinaire. Presses académiques francophones, Saarbrücken, Germany.

Jeanneret, Y. (2014). Critique de la trivialité : les médiations de la communication, enjeu de pouvoir. Non Standard, Paris.

Jeanneret, Y. (2020). The Trace Factory. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Jonas, H. (1997). Pour une éthique du futur. Rivages, Paris.

Lassègue, J. (1996). La modélisation informatique et l’intelligence artificielle. Intellectica. 1, 21–65.

Leleu-Merviel, S. (2018). Informational Tracking. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Littré, É. (1956–1958). Dictionnaire de la langue Française, Paubert, J.J. (ed.), 1–4. Gallimard-Hachette, 5–7, Paris.

Montaigne, M.E. (1989). De l’amitié, livre I. Honoré Champion, Paris.

Morin, E. (1996). Vers une théorie de la reliance généralisée. In Voyage au cœur des sciences humaines, de la reliance, Bolle De Bal, M. (eds). Editions L’Harmattan, Paris.

O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction. Penguin Random House, New York.

Peirce, C.S. (2002). OEuvres philosophiques, I. Pragmatisme et pragmaticisme. Éditions du Cerf, Paris.

Perrier, E. (2014). De la simplexité et des systèmes complexes. In Complexité-Simplexité, Berthoz, A. and Petit, J.-L. (eds). Collège de France, Paris.

Reeves, H., Rosnay, J., Coppens Y., and Simmonet D. (1996). La plus belle histoire du monde : les secrets de nos origines. Le Seuil, Paris.

Rey, A. and Hordé, T. (2006). Dictionnaire historique de la langue française : contenant les mots français en usage et quelques autres délaissés, avec leur origine proche et lointaine... Le Robert, Paris.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1986). La pertinence. Éditions de Minuit, Paris.

Watsuji, T. (2011). Fûdo. Le milieu humain. CNRS, Paris.

Watzlawick, P. (1978). La réalité de la réalité. Le Seuil, Paris.

Watzlawick, P., Helmick Beavin, J., and Jackson Don, D. (1979). Une logique de la communication. Le Seuil, Paris.

Weber, F. and Beaud, S. (1997). Guide de l’enquête de terrain. La Découverte, Paris.

Winkin, Y. (1984). La nouvelle communication. Le Seuil, Poche, Paris.

1 1 In this book, the term conséquences-traces is used in its original French to indicate that what is written is integrally bound to the concept of a “trace”, seen through the angle of its consequences. Similarly, each time a phrase includes the term “trace”, it will be written in French, indicating a terminology specific to the paradigm of Homme-trace (Ichnos-Anthropos in Greek, Human-Trace in English). This approach implies an understanding in terms of the interactions of complex systems based on the concept of conséquences-traces. Concepts like Homme-trace, and conséquences-traces are extensively developed throughout the book.

2 2 As is to be seen later in the book, (a) the mathematical dimension of a digital algorithm should not conceal the fact that algorithms are fabricated by human beings with their inherent shortcomings. Hence, by their very nature, algorithms convey the conséquences-traces of their judgments. In short, algorithms are everything but neutral (“unbiased”). As Cathy O’Neil (2016, p. 21) reminds us: “Our own values and desires influence our choices, from the data we choose to collect to the questions we ask. Models are opinions embedded in mathematics”. She also goes on to state that “mathematical models are based on the past, and on the assumption that patterns will repeat” (p. 38); (b) the interaction of the complex systems of digital conséquences-traces can produce unexpected results for human beings. These observations lead Cathy O’Neil to state that algorithms create their own reality. See in French: https://www.liberation.fr/debats/2018/11/16/cathy-o-neil-les-algorithmes-creent-leurpropre-realite_1692515.

3 3 See Chapter 2 of this volume.

4 4 The idea of “computation” is specific to computing in that it is based solely on 0-1.

5 5 Computational traceability must be possible and must allow the results to be traced back, concerning the algorithmic consequences in algorithmic outcomes/consequences, to ethical frameworks that were initially programmed by individual humans. Since some algorithms can be subject to learning loops, the algorithm is self-evolving, which makes traceability increasingly complex and problematic to reconstruct. This is the case for “learning robots”, which use such algorithms to develop an autonomy and consequently raise questions of liability in the case of human safety violations.

6 6 Forecasts for 2020: global web traffic of 2.2 ZB for a broadband connection speed of 47.7 Mbps, carried by mobile devices and Wi-Fi connections that would then represent 2/3 of the traffic, and by connected objects connected to IP networks that would be three times more than the world’s population.

7 7 “Domino effect” is a term we use to signify chain reactions.

8 8 When we focus the illustrations on the concept of “corps-traces” (Volume 2), we use the field of medical diagnosis to illustrate the point.

9 9 As indicated by Yves Jeanneret (in Jeanneret Y., The Trace Factory, ISTE, London and John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2020, p. 35–39), the term indice is often translated into English as “index”. However, these terms are not perfect synonyms. This is why we have kept the French term indice in this book. In the case of Ginzburg, this is all the more justified in Mythes, emblems et traces (1989), where he explains the link between “traces and indicator roots” (idem, p. 139–181).

10 10 As is to be seen later, Carlo Ginzburg also refers to Doctor Giovanni Morelli.

11 11 Later in the book, we stress the ethical dimension to be included in the workings within the ecosystem (Chapter 2). Our thoughts on this point (Galinon-Mélénec, 2017) concur with that of the recommendations of Guszcza (2018), Hempel (2018) and O’Neil (2018), namely that, Algorithm auditing must be interdisciplinary in order for it to succeed. It should integrate professional skepticism with social science methodology and concepts from such fields as psychology, behavioral economics, human-centered design, and ethics. A social scientist asks not only, “How do I optimally model and use the patterns in this data?” but further asks, “Is this sample of data suitably representative of the underlying reality?” An ethicist might go further to ask a question such as: “Is the distribution based on today’s reality the appropriate one to use?” (Guszcza et al. 2018). As part of auditing algorithm, Cathy O’Neill (of O’Neil Risk Consulting and Algorithmic Auditing) created a tool she calls an ethical matrix, a worksheet that helps companies think through the consequences – intended and otherwise – of the algorithm’s results. Across the top of the matrix are a half-dozen traits – accuracy, consistency, bias, transparency, fairness and timeliness. The vertical axis lists that the stakeholders’ Rentlogic must consider in its model: building owners, renters, the company, and NYC officials. O’Neil says the matrix creates “a conversation around what you might need to worry about”. It’s intended to prompt programmers to consider important questions as they work: “Who cares if this algo works? Who cares if it fails?” she asks, “Who gets hurt if it’s wrong?” When these questions reveal ethically problematic consequences like, say, discriminating against a class of people, she flags the yellow or red box (see Hempel 2018).

12 12 We see later (Chapter 2 of Volume 1), how data is constructed and how it circulates in a viral way, by following the path that leads them to various computer hosts willing to receive them. This multiplier effect produces an exponential storage of data where privacy-invasive connections can be established. This risk leads users to demand the right to keep a private space that is not subject to digital capture, the possibility of access, rectification and opposition to data processing.

13 13 That conception is specific to Galinon-Mélénec’s paradigm of Ichnos-Anthropos and is not exactly equivalent to general uses of “trace”.

14 14 The respondent/investigator relationship is likely to influence the respondent’s responses.

15 15 “[...] this distinction disappears if we consider that at the origin of these two fields is that of theoretical computer science, an autonomous scientific field constituted by the articulation of discrete mathematics, and the logical theory of computability” (Lassègue 1995, p. 21–65, author’s translation).

16 16 By “reality” we mean that which is within the realm of formal human knowledge. In this sense, “reality” can be formally differentiated from the “Real”, with a capital “R”, whereby it is axiomatically assumed that phenomena exist, that are ultimately outside the reach of human knowledge.

17 17 The living cannot be reduced to human beings. Living beings existed before humans, such as triploblastic animals (e.g. worms) and chordates (vertebrates and invertebrates).

18 18 See Chapter 4, Figure 4.4.

19 19 From our point of view, it would be more accurate to say: How Real is Reality.

20 20 Sign: all that can fall within the compass of human understanding. The field of semiotics investigates the nature of signs and the laws that govern them. For example, Jacques Derrida affirms that the signifier and the signified are not fixed. He invented the expression differance to signify the endless postponement of meaning according to their readings in context. For us, there is no sign emerging outside of the conséquence-trace interaction processes between a human-trace in context and a reality-trace.

21 21 See Galinon-Mélénec (2008).

22 22 “At one level, words mean one thing, while at another level, something quite different is communicated” (Hall 1984).

23 23 Digital and paper writing processes differ in many aspects. We note here that a spell-checking or synonym selection algorithm automatically intervenes in digital writing and in translations. It is therefore advisable to enrich this database with useful nuances to avoid confusions that are harmful to communication.

24 24 Milieu refers to the immediate physical and social setting in which anyone lives, or in which something happens or develops. In the rest of the book, we explain, in more detail, the difference between milieu and environment.

25 25 Definitions are provided in the footnotes in each case.

26 26 See Chapter 5 for the evolution of the definitions after the different steps (corresponding to chapters) of The Trace Odyssey 1.

27 27 According to the French dictionary Le Robert, the term “imprint” initially derives from the Latin impremere “to press”, that initially (1250) meant “to mark by pressure on a surface” in Rey and Hordé (2006).

28 28 E.g. this is how computer scientists talk about digital “footprints”; footprints in snow or sand. Hollywood Boulevard is inlaid with handprints and footprints of famous people.

29 29 From its first reference, the word “mark” designates a sign deliberately put on an object to make it recognizable, indicating its main property. See Rey and Hordé (2006).

30 30 E.g. (a) this style is the mark of a great couturier; (b) this adult’s behavior contains the typical markers of a trauma suffered in childhood; (c) from the smell of the perfume, a “nose” identifies Chanel No. 5.

31 31 The word indice was originally associated with the Latin meaning for “denunciation”. Today, it also evokes an apparent sign that indicates something with probability, and then a known fact that constitutes evidence by presumption. It is also associated with the term “index”, which itself means to show, to indicate with the index (finger), a catalogue, a list. See Rey and Hordé (2006).

32 32 Sometimes associated with a faint trace, or one that is imperceptible to the eyes of most people (but that is visible to this or that expert).

33 33 E.g. police investigations or medical diagnoses (in the symptom chart, the “indices” are associated with an illness).

34 34 Note, with Paul Watzlawick, that in a retroactive, circular and open system “[...] the same consequences may have different origins” (Watzlawick et al. 1979, author’s translation).

35 35 See Figure I.1.

36 36 For example, those whose main purpose is the phenomenon of “information”. Note that, for our part, we will not use the term “track” (Leleu-Merviel 2018), which in its modern sense means pursuing animals without leaving them with a way out (18th Century), and more recently (1945), in the figurative sense, “pursuit, manhunt”, even though in the police context, which we often refer to, the term could sometimes be perfectly suitable (Le dictionnaire historique de la langue française, op. cit., p. 3899).

37 37 Freely illustrated from the situation described by Watzlawick et al. (1979, p. 95).

38 38 For the importance of attention in understanding and memorizing perceptions, see Jacquet-Andrieu (2012, pp. 60–69).

39 39 Translated from the English (United States) and edited by Claudine Tiercelin and Pierre Thibaud.

40 40 Processus traçuels: author’s own terminology (= trace-process).

41 41 Axioms: initial statements that serve as a starting point for observations and analyses of the paradigm (or theory) presented.

42 42 Derrida (1974).

43 43 Perrier (2014) in Petit et al. (2014).

44 44 Bateson, Goffman, Hall, Watzlawick, texts in French collected by Yves Winkin in La Nouvelle communication, Paris, Seuil, Poche, 1984.

45 45 This starts from the maternal cytoplasm and does not exclude epigenetic traces of the lineage.

46 46 As was previously mentioned, when a semiotic process occurs it is because one goes from what one defines as the Real to what one defines by the term reality.

47 47 In semiotics, “the body is not one field of analysis among others. The embodiment of signifying processes provides them with a substratum that imposes itself on all cognitive and emotional elaborations: interacting bodies preserve in their flesh or on their body the imprints of these interactions, and it is these imprints that must be identified, extracted, deciphered and interpreted” (Fontanille 2011).

48 48 A.J. Greimas in “l’être-là”, a presence in the world that identifies itself in part with the concept of semiotic existence (Greimas 1993, p. 290).

49 49 According to Tetsurō Watsuji, op. cit.

50 50 This proposal stems from relatively recent epigenetic research that we presented in the series L’Homme-trace published by CNRS Éditions (see Galinon-Mélénec (2011)). Epigenetics is not the only approach. Psychology also questions related issues by discussing the idea of the transgenerational. Interdisciplinary can be established on the basis of the following definitions: “trans-from the Latin trans (beyond), a prefix that enters into the composition of a certain number of words, to add to their meaning the idea of “beyond”, “through”, etc.; generational, what is specific to a generation and to relations between generations, humans”. See É. Littré, Dictionnaire de la langue française, volume 7, p. 1220.

51 51 To take “white for black” is an expression by Joachin du Bellay’s, who already stated it in 1549, in Chapter 6 of La Défense et l’illustration de la langue française (about translators, but this also applies to reading – which as we shall see later, is a “lettrure”).

52 52 This term is translated more generally as Ichnos-Anthropos (ichnos: trace; anthropos: human). The hyphen (-) here, as in corps-trace and signe-trace, distinguishes this terminology from other terms and refers the reader to the systemic paradigms it symbolizes.

53 53 For our part, we rely on the publications of Augustin Berque and we consider that the environment is a space within which the conditions of life are permanently determined and reciprocally generated in a “flow of relations that inseparably link subjects to objects, and these likewise to each other”, see Berque A., Écoumène, introduction à l’étude des milieux humains, Belin, Paris, 2000.

54 54 Traces of a person’s milieu are present in them through their language, their culture, their way of approaching reality. Traces of the history of their species as well (the genetic structure and the reproduction system of their species are in them).

55 55 Op. cit. p. 368–369.

56 56 See the conclusion in Chapter 3.

57 57 The person’s body is also continuously in contact with the Real, whose existence human beings are not aware of.

58 58 By using the term différance with an “a” instead of the usual “e” in the spelling “difference”, we wish to refer the reader to the text by Derrida (1967).

59 59 The reference here is Foucault’s definition: “Hypnomnemata, in the technical sense, could be account books, public registers, individual notebooks serving as memory aids”. See Foucault (2001, p. 1237).

60 60 The French term “reliance” has two meanings. It implies the action of reconnecting (relier in French), or it means to connect both oneself and the results of this connection of the Self. In sociology, the reliance is defined as the creation of links among separated social actors, of which at least one is a human being. For Edgar Morin (1996), a well-known French philosopher, the reliance is inseparable to the interaction of complex systems.

61 61 See Chapter 3, Figure 3.3: “The role of humans in the digital ecosystem apparatus”.

62 62 The Trace Odyssey 1 also provides an opportunity to discover well-known authors in anthropology, philosophy, sociology, psychology and general human sciences (including Bateson, Barthes, Bourdieu, Derrida, Eco, Goffman, Hall, Kant, Jonas, Peirce, Ricoeur, Varela and Thomson, Watsuji, Watzlawick, etc