In this response I will attempt to touch on specific issues engaged throughout Castells speech at Bill Mitchels Symposium on November

10th while trying to link them to colloquiums protagonist for this semester, Heidegger, not necessarily to his essay The Question Concerning Technology (as I dont find any significant common ground between those two) but rather to the ideas expressed throughout the rest of his book Being and Time. Finally I will try to illustrate a hypothetical ideal society envisioned by Castells relying on two speeches and a film of his as well as Ryans analysis. Technology: Heidegger vs Castells There is a profound difference between Castells approach to technology and that of Heideggers. The latter places humanity against the polemic of technology and raises the question of how should we use it as an external force in order to shape humane societies harmonious to our real nature and surroundings. On the other hand Castells identifies technology as innate feature of the human nature. He specifically refers to human nature as something that is not permanent and since tied together, along changes technology. Technology and communication Since our means of communication are absolutely linked to the available technology, communication is also an ever-changing condition. Trying to give an answer to all those voices still condemning synchronous communication technology as merely responsible for the de-socialization of our culture, Castells reminds us that Every communication technology in history has changed the pattern of sociability [1]. Nonetheless he strongly objects to the argument of desocialization, stating that nowadays is clear that the major communication tool of our era, which is the Internet, clearly increased our networking capability and capacity. The Ideal Future society? Let me go back to Ryans prompt to imagine this new urban model derived from Castells thinking. These new spatial forms of urban culture, outlined in the initiation above become clear in Castells project film, Homentage A Catlaunya II [2], where 14 collective best practices are presented as examples of collective activism that penetrates all levels of social structure. From production and trading to consumerism and education. The film constitute a study of the social impact of the economics/economies that do not follow the patterns of the market, where the profits are the priority, and that have the satisfaction of the needs and the desires for the persons as a goal. After watching Castells speech on Network Theories of Power at the University of Southern California in 2010 [3] it becomes clear that even though globally established networks are those controlling current social structure, smaller groups of individuals with seemingly insignificant range of power can actually resist and impose their own interest by either ignoring or opposing against those networks in power. I believe that a generalization of Castells collective best practices within our cities could potentially be the answer to the question of how an ideal society would look like. And taking this back to the concept f networks, the two examples that Castells brought up during his speech are not coincidental. He

referred to the urban farming and the idiginados/occupy movements. Both cases share a common element, which is the traditional notion of the urban environment. It is not surprising that both use the city as a point of reference. And while urban farming could arise as a decentralized practice of communal growth, protest movements were always anchored over city centers. However, the indignados/occupy movement introduced this idea of local committees referring to one General Assembly, usually occupying the most central part of the city for symbolic and logistical reasons. And finally we reach to the scale of the individual. Castells claims that in this sea of multi-tasking activity, multifunctional and multi-meaningful spaces there lays the individual multi-layered hypertext. Hypertext is linked to all levels of personal perception of time, space and interests and is strictly addressed separately to each individual. Specifically about time, Castells explains, human species are characterized by the conscious anticipation of time. . You anticipate the future to change in your own terms [4]. However that fact does not exclude the possibility of a group of individuals to form collectives that best expresses their current pursuits. Or, in his own words, Individualization is not individualism.[5] And this is the point where one could imagine a dialogue between Castells and Heidegger who criticized modern lifestyle in a profound and prophetical way, stating that most of us live a life of one, and one is not I. According to French philosopher and Heideggers scholar Miguel Beistegui. Existence for Heidegger is nothing but this stretching where we are constantly projecting ourselves into the future, always expecting things, always hoping things[6], and I think that concludes this chain of events that could compose an ideal society; individuals with hopes that form collectives with goals that buils networks able to interact with other networks, always, in favor of all the members that constitute them. [1] Manuel Castells. City of Bits, Spaces of Flows Bill Mitchell Symposium Keynote Lecture. Cambridge, MA. November 20, 2011 [2] Joana Conill, Manuel Castells and lex Ruiz, "Homage to Catalonia II", documentary film, IN 3 Research Institute of the Open University of Catalonia. 2010, http://www.homenatgeacatalunyaii.org/en [3] Manuel Castells, Network Theories of Power, University of Southern California, February 20, 2010, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skcUYhRaEas [4][5] Manuel Castells. City of Bits, Spaces of Flows Bill Mitchell Symposium Keynote Lecture. Cambridge, MA. November 20, 2011 [6] Miguel Beistegui, Human All Too Human: Heidegger, BBC, 1999.