Bio-Política & Bio-Poder

Bio-Política & Bio-Poder Espacio de difusión de las actividades alrededor del estudio de autores clásicos como : Foucault, Nietszche, Freud, Deleuze...

03/02/2026

Iain McGilchrist: 'This is a highly original and stimulating book, the best I have read on one of the greatest of English poets. Blake’s thought cries out to be understood in the light of cerebral asymmetry.'

Philip Pullman: 'Absolutely fascinating - in fact both revelatory and thrilling.'

Dr. Mannie Sher, Director of the Group Relations Programme: 'This book promotes a form of learning that stimulates the growth of connections between the two cerebral hemispheres of the brain and allows people greater access to their creative, intellectual and emotional selves. I found this book profoundly engaging, through its thesis that both individually and collectively humans in our social systems have privileged left hemisphere functioning (information processing, domination, atomising, rationalising, and mechanising) over more imaginative and intuitive apprehensions of reality, involving creativity and the discovery of meaning.'

'The God of the Left Hemisphere explores the remarkable connections between the activities and functions of the human brain that writer William Blake termed 'Urizen' and the powerful complex of rationalising and ordering processes which modern neuroscience identifies as 'left hemisphere' brain activity.

The book argues that Blake's profound understanding of the human brain is finding surprising corroboration in recent neuroscientific discoveries, such as those of psychiatrist and philosopher Iain McGilchrist, and the influential Harvard neuro-anatomist Jill Bolte Taylor, and it explores Blake's provocative supposition that the emergence of these rationalising, law-making, and 'limiting' activities within the human brain has been recorded in the earliest Creation texts, such as the Hebrew Bible, Plato's Timaeus, and the Norse sagas. Blake's prescient insight into the nature and origins of this dominant force within the brain allows him to radically reinterpret the psychological basis of the entity usually referred to in these texts as 'God'.

In the second part of the book the author extends Blake’s understanding of Urizenic activities and functions into a broader discussion concerning the place of both religion and rationality in contemporary culture. Blake’s presentation of Urizen as the 'Holy Reasoning Power' succinctly captures what he saw as the underlying rationalizing processes of orthodox religion as well as the religious and largely unconscious nature of much post-Newtonian science.'

To find out more about the book please click here: https://www.karnacbooks.com/product/the-god-of-the-left-hemisphere-blake-bolte-taylor-and-the-myth-of-creation/32946/

27/01/2026

| Vecinos, activistas y colectivos realizaron este domingo la Primera Caravana Mundialista en la Ciudad de México para apoyar a los comerciantes que se encuentran en los pasos a desnivel de la calzada de Tlalpan, frente a los riesgos de desalojo y desplazamiento forzado provocados por el evento deportivo que comenzará en junio de este año. https://buff.ly/NsEEdRs

27/01/2026

Tal vez los sigues desde hace meses. Te aparece su contenido entre fotos de amigos, trends virales y noticias de última hora. Recomiendan marcas, vlogean de su día, posan frente al espejo. Nada parece fuera de lugar. Y, sin embargo, algunos de los influencers más populares de internet no son personas reales.

Uno de los casos más conocidos es Lil Miquela, una influencer virtual creada por la empresa Brud. Según ha documentado The New York Times, ha trabajado con marcas como Prada y Calvin Klein, participando en campañas globales y consolidando una presencia estable en redes sociales. Aunque su origen artificial es público, miles de usuarios interactúan con ella como si se tratara de una persona más dentro del ecosistema digital.

Más información en: https://terceravia.mx/2026/01/los-influencers-que-sigues-no-existen/

28/11/2025

'In this intriguing book, the discipline of psychology itself is screened through the twin dynamics of Marxism and psychoanalysis. David Pavón-Cuéllar asks to what extent the terms, concerns and goals of psychology reflect, in fact, the dominant bourgeois ideology that has allowed it to flourish.

The book charts a gradual psychologization within society and culture dating from the nineteenth century, and examines how the tacit ideals within mainstream psychology – creating good citizens or productive workers – sit uneasily against Marx and Freud’s ambitions of revealing fault-lines and contradictions within individualist and consumer-oriented structures.' To find out more about the book, please click here: https://www.karnacbooks.com/product/marxism-and-psychoanalysis-in-or-against-psychology/39982/

It was Marx who was the great analyst of alienation I think, showing how capitalist economics generate alienation as part of its very fabric or structure - showing how, for instance, alienation gets ‘lost’ or ‘trapped’, embodied, in products, commodities - from the obvious examples (such as Nikes made in sweatshops, and sweatshops embodied in Nikes) - to a wider and much more pervasive sense that the whole system of production and creation is somehow alienating.

As clinical psychologist David Smail notes, 'the nineteenth-century theoretician who best understood the relation of people to their world, and what this meant … for their conscious as well as unconscious understanding of themselves, was Karl Marx.'

David Pavon Cuellar explores and develops this sense of alienation within capitalism in very interesting ways in his book, 'Marxism and Psychoanalysis' - especially the section on the 'Psychology of Alienation', where he observes that: 'Marx was the first to realise that this alienation actually gets contained and incarnated in things - in "commodities"':

'Marx paid great attention to the process by which we get lost in commodities,' he notes, 'This process of alienation makes it possible to better understand the psychological substrate of fetishism in later Marxian reflections. Fetishized commodities seem to retain and promise to return, when consumed, the subjective-social part lost by those alienated while producing them. The alienated have lost what they imagine [or hope] to find in what is fetishized.'

In this sense, as he observes, 'Marx founded a socio-psychological theory of alienation,' one rooted in the idea that 'the “social” is not external but very much internal too and penetrates the innermost being of the individual personality' - an interactive process, therefore, that of course group analyst S.H. Foulkes was much later to highlight and develop.

18/10/2025

¿POR QUÉ NO HABLO MIXTECO? Josué Emmanuel Barrios Vázquez en Ojarasca de octubre.

REFLEXIONES COMPARTIDAS SOBRE LA INTERRUPCIÓN EN LA TRANSMISIÓN INTERGENERACIONAL DE LAS LENGUAS MATERNAS EN MÉXICO

Nací en el Distrito Federal (hoy CDMX) en la delegación Xochimilco, a finales de la década de los setenta del siglo pasado. En mis primeros años de infancia nunca supe de mi origen. Sólo recuerdo que en pocas ocasiones mamá y papá hablaban extraño, un lenguaje que no podía comprender.

En esos años, mis padres regularmente me llevaban al rancho. Recuerdo que algunas veces viajábamos apretujados en camionetas con redilas cerradas y en mal estado. No teníamos muchas opciones, la economía de mis padres era modesta. El camino siempre se me hizo interminable. Sin embargo, los olores a tierra mojada combinados con algunos cantos de aves y tufos de comida me avisaban el final del viaje. El recorrido: unas diez horas.

Con los años comprendí que ese rancho era San Bartolomé Yucuañe, una comunidad localizada en la Mixteca Alta y a una hora de Tlaxiaco, Oaxaca.

Recuerdo que, en las frecuentes visitas a la comunidad, volvía a escuchar ese lenguaje extraño que a veces mis padres utilizaban para comunicarse en casa. Pero ¡ahora más personas hablaban igual! Aún siento la alegría de mi madre al llegar y poder hablar su lengua. Su cara se iluminaba, su sonrisa era interminable y hablaba como si estuviera cantando. Sus interlocutores radiaban lo mismo. Era como si sus corazones conectaran a través de su lengua.

Yo nunca entendí nada. Pero me sentía contento al verla así. La cadencia de su hablar terminaba cuando se dirigía a mí en español:

–Josué, trae las demás bolsas; apúrate que casi anochece y no hay luz; deja eso y ve con Felipa a traer unas velas, dile que le pago al rato. Mientras obedecía, pensaba:

–¿Por qué no hablo así? ¿Qué hay de malo en hablar así? ¿Por qué mis papás no me enseñan? Las respuestas a estas incógnitas las fui encontrando con los años.

En una ocasión, antes de ir a la escuela (cursaba el sexto de primaria), reclamé serenamente a mi madre por qué no hablaba mixteco. Su respuesta, sin mucha explicación y ánimo, se limitó a decir:

–No te sirve que hables así. Mejor apúrate a leer y a escribir. Anda, vete a la escuela. Aprende a hacer cuentas. Quiero que seas alguien.

En ese momento, mi curiosidad quedó resuelta a medias. Recientemente comprendí (hace una década) que por esa época hubo un intento de minorizar las lenguas originarias, instalando en el ideario común que hablar alguna lengua originaria era signo de atraso y no tenía ninguna funcionalidad. Lo importante era hablar español. Mi caso no fue el único, hasta el día de hoy existe esta tendencia ideológica, en la que se han incluido lenguas dominantes como el inglés.

No obstante, esta minorización lingüística no fue lo único que provocó que yo no hablara mixteco. También la discriminación hacia los hablantes provocó que muchos de ellos dejaran de hablar en espacios públicos y, por lo tanto, dejaran de transmitirla.

En una tarde, platicando con mi padre, le pregunté por qué había sido negativo hablar mixteco. En un tono melancólico y desventurado, acotó:

–Llegué al D.F. cuando tenía unos 14 años. Batallé en esta ciudad. No hablaba español, sólo mixteco. Entré a trabajar y todos los compañeros se reían por mi manera de hablar. Me decían: “hablas chistoso”, “hablas como indio”, “deberías de hablar bien” y cosas de ese estilo. Fue duro enfrentar todo ello. No te niego, hubo gente que me defendía, pero la mayoría nos trataba mal y nos decían de todo. Por eso, no creí conveniente que aprendieras. No quería que pasaras por esto.

Quería que aprendieras otras cosas, en lugar de mixteco. Hoy comprendo que de alguna manera mi padre me protegió en contra de esta discriminación hacia los hablantes de lenguas originarias. No obstante, siempre me llamó la atención que mi papá y mi mamá coincidieran en que no aprendiera mixteco porque era mejor “ser alguien”. Como si hablar la lengua obstruyera mi andar en la vida.

Para mi mamá y mi papá, ser alguien era ser todo, menos indígena. Frecuentemente, tengo presente la insistencia de mi padre por estudiar. Siempre me dijo que fuera a la escuela, que ser una persona “cerrada” era triste. Sus argumentos los llevo todos los días:

–Ve a la escuela. Yo no tuve oportunidad de ir. Llegué hasta sexto de primaria. Es muy feo no saber. Lo de hoy es hacer cuentas y aprender a hablar bien para tener que comer. Tener los varos es lo importante. Lo del pueblo no sirve aquí.

Para él, ser alguien era entrar a los discursos de la modernidad. Tener era sinónimo de ser y en ello olvidar lo que era fue imprescindible para lograr una aceptación en un lugar ajeno a su origen.

A la fecha, lo tengo claro: factores como la minorización lingüística, la discriminación hacia los hablantes y el impulso de discursos modernizadores provocaron que no hablara mixteco. No obstante, no soy el único. Muchos descendientes de hablantes atravesaron y atraviesan lo mismo. Las reflexiones son compartidas. Y tal parece que esta interrupción en la transmisión intergeneracional de las lenguas originarias en México está imparable. Los diagnósticos no son alentadores. Muchas de ellas están en riesgo de desaparecer.

Hoy, la variante de tu’un savi de la comunidad de mis padres está en peligro de extinción. Estamos perdiendo hablantes. La población cada día es menor debido a los procesos migratorios internos y externos. Además de que las nuevas generaciones no lo hablan, incluso ni la conocen. El panorama es desolador. Varios especialistas en el tema reconocen que al extinguirse una lengua no sólo ésta desaparece, sino también todo un cúmulo de cultura, saberes y formas de comprender el mundo.

En mi opinión, es momento de que no sólo el Estado garantice su permanencia, sino la sociedad en general debe de interesarse por su mantenimiento y continuidad. De no ser así, en unas generaciones más las lenguas originarias quedarán sólo en la historia de este país.



A Alicia Vázquez Cruz (†) y Erasto Barrios Martínez
Hablantes de Tu’un Savi, variante
de San Bartolomé Yucuañe, Tlaxiaco, Oaxaca.
__________

Josué E. Barrios Vázquez, con maestría en Ambientes Interculturales de Aprendizaje, es investigador en la Secretaría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación, Universidad Intercultural del Estado de Puebla.

https://ojarasca.jornada.com.mx/2025/10/09/por-que-no-hablo-mixteco-7702.html

*
Juxtlahuaca, Oaxaca, 2025. Foto: Mario Olarte.

05/09/2025

The brilliant Adam Curtis returns with his new psychological-political documentary 'SHIFTY', showing 'how over the past 40 years in Britain extreme money and hyper-individualism came together in an unspoken alliance'. It's a fascinating and destabilising account, mixing - or perhaps 're-mixing' he'd say - the psychological and the political, monetarism and individuation, self-help and Thatcherism, the culture of the self and the loss of self. As he notes, 'there was a significant internal shift in consciousness. We are very different creatures from the human beings of 1978. The new individualism that rose up ate away at the foundations of political democracy.'

This interview, with Frieze magazine, sums up a lot of what the new series is about:

Sean Burns: I’ve always felt that your filmmaking is driven by the idea that the conditions of the past contribute to the mess of the present. Could you speak to how Shifty engages with the political landscape of 2025?

Adam Curtis: I didn’t start making it just because of the political landscape, but because of the broader landscape – how people are living and feeling today. There’s a pervasive uncertainty, an overwhelming feeling that those in power lack any real vision for the future, that they’re just kind of flailing. They might try out good ideas, but they don’t seem to have a clear sense of why.
And they know that we know that.

Underneath all that, I sensed a kind of melancholy. Those of us who lived through this period experienced something that was equal parts exciting, extraordinary and horrible – and, somehow, we’ve ended up here, in this uncertain place. We can’t see the future and we constantly replay the past to ourselves. That’s where I started: with a sense that something is ending.

I wanted to go back into the past and look at it with fresh eyes, to better understand the roots of this uncertainty. What I began to find was twofold: first, there were major shifts in power during the 1980s and ’90s – primarily away from politics and mostly toward finance, though also other areas. Second, there was a significant internal shift in consciousness. We are very different creatures from the human beings of 1978. The new individualism that rose up ate away at the foundations of political democracy.

SB: ‘Shifty' explores this theme of rampant individualism. At times, it seems as though you’re critiquing the cultural emphasis on self-improvement and self-care.

AC: I don’t think I’m critiquing it: I’m trying to trace the waystations individualism passed through during this period. One thing I was very aware I needed to do – since I grew up in that era – was to show it was both exciting and frightening. We still don’t fully understand the dimensions of the change that occurred, both outside and within us.

Toward the end, where the series takes a darker turn, I wanted to show that being a self-contained individual – someone who believes that what drives you comes from within rather than from what pompous elites tell you – can be incredibly liberating and exhilarating when things are going well. But, since the late 1990s, when things aren’t going well, that same individualism can leave you feeling very lost and alone. I try to suggest in this – and it’s a difficult area, because you’re dealing with people’s real worries and anxieties – that, when there’s a sense you can no longer change the world outside or put mass pressure on lawmakers, you inevitably turn inward.

SB: It feels like we’re in a heightened moment of the condition you’re describing and, at such times, the body is one thing people feel they can control.

AD: That’s often all you have left to control – which doesn’t mean it’s wrong to do so, something that lots of anti-wellness people go on about. If you can’t change anything else, you may as well try to make the thing you do have control over better. But I’m trying to point out something subtler: yes, that is power, but it’s only one kind of power. What you have lost is the countervailing power against the forces outside of your body, which may also have a negative effect on it. I’m an optimist; I think people will begin to realize that it’s not wrong to turn inward, but there are other things as well.

SB: You often move between broad, expansive narrative segments – such as Stephen Hawking’s research into the galaxy – and more specific, personal stories. Could you speak to the interplay between the micro and the macro?

AC: A lot of factual history, whether on television or in writing, tends to fixate on a particular genre. Political history is always about high politics, which is why it’s often boring. I wanted to show the interplay between political events and what was happening inside our own minds. We were transforming and experiencing a shift in how we saw the world while the world was being transformed by massive shifts in power.

The reason I’m interested in Hawking is that there is a parallel between him and Thatcher. They were both people who really believed that rationality – in Thatcher’s case, the logic of money – could make a better world. She didn’t like the fuzzy ideologies of socialism or a planned economy. Hawking I saw as a tragic figure who really wanted to find a unified theory of the entire universe. He sought to achieve that through the rationality of mathematics. As I gently show in the films, it often led to absurd ideas, of which his wife was the best critic.

SB: A recurring spectre in Shifty is the danger of technology – particularly surveillance technology – when it falls into the wrong hands. It feels as though we’re at a critical moment with the advent of AI.

AC: I have a problem with talking about AI because absolutely no one knows what it’s going to be. It’s a blank screen onto which we project our dark fears or techno-optimistic fantasies. I think two things about AI: the person who writes the first line of code is the ideologist. There’s nothing neutral about AI.

The other thing I know is that – rather like we’re still obsessed with the Beatles – it’s obsessed with the past. AI haunts us with our own dreams, fantasies and the absurd drunken things we’ve said one night. It mashes them up and plays them back to us like a weird avalanche of phantasms. From a political point of view, we’re waiting for someone to show us how to escape our obsession with the past. One of the things this age might suddenly realize – and I’d be out of a job – is that it’s time to stop looking back and replaying the past, and to build something genuinely new.

Read the full Frieze interview here: https://www.frieze.com/article/adam-curtis-interview-2025

Or the series itself is available own YouTube or the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m002d2jv/shifty

04/09/2025

A recent paper argues that psychoanalysis can aid left-wing political struggles as “preparatory work for revolution.”

Dirección

Ensenada
22813

Teléfono

6469472322

Página web

Notificaciones

Sé el primero en enterarse y déjanos enviarle un correo electrónico cuando Bio-Política & Bio-Poder publique noticias y promociones. Su dirección de correo electrónico no se utilizará para ningún otro fin, y puede darse de baja en cualquier momento.

Atajos

Compartir

Categoría