Abstract This article is an attempt to interpret Yuk Hui’s ambitious and promising project of cosmotechnics and technodiversity as a kind of “critical synthesis” of the philosophies of technology of Martin Heidegger and Bernard Stiegler, arguably his most important interlocutors besides Gilbert Simondon, whose crucial influence will have to remain undiscussed here unfortunately. It argues that the cosmotechnics–technodiversity project – motivated foremost by the concern for the relentless destruction of planetary diversity in all its forms (biological, ecological, ethnic, psychological, sociological, cultural, etc.) engendered by a globalized “mono-technological” technosphere originating from Western technology – criticizes but also aims to do justice to both Heidegger’s ontological or onto-historical understanding of technology as a singular yet universalizing imperative or claim driving the development of concrete technologies [Gestell or enframing], and Stiegler’s organological understanding of technology as an evolutionary process of technical exteriorization or exosomatization fundamentally conditioning any ontological and cosmological opening of anthropos, i.e., of what Heidegger called Dasein. Hui’s plural cosmotechnics critically acknowledges yet pluralizes both perspectives, thus teaching a pluri-ontological and pluri-cosmological conditioning of technology as well as a pluri-technological conditioning of the ontological and the cosmological. Using terms derived from Peter Sloterdijk’s interpretation of Heidegger’s “ontokinetics,” it is shown that it thus gives due to both a “vertical,” Heideggerian or “spiritual” dimension and a “horizontal,” Stieglerian or “materialist” dimension to the question concerning technology. This new and original, cosmotechnical perspective on these two fundamental views on the question concerning technology allows Hui to engage philosophy of technology in the overdue debate with contemporary anthropology’s so-called ontological turn, increasingly urgent in today’s age of the Anthropocene.

中文翻译：

---

其他转弯

摘要 本文试图将 Yuk Hui 的宇宙技术和技术多样性的雄心勃勃和有前途的项目解释为一种对马丁·海德格尔和伯纳德·斯蒂格勒的技术哲学的“批判性综合”，可以说是他最重要的对话者，除了吉尔伯特·西蒙东，他的重要影响不幸的是，这里将不得不继续讨论。它认为，宇宙技术——技术多样性项目——的首要动机是对各种形式（生物、生态、种族、心理、社会、文化等）对地球多样性的无情破坏的关注。) 由源自西方技术的全球化“单一技术”技术圈产生——批评但也旨在公正对待海德格尔对技术的本体论或本体历史理解作为单一但普遍化的命令或主张推动具体技术的发展[Gestell或框架]，以及斯蒂格勒对技术作为技术外化或外体化的进化过程的器官学理解，从根本上调节了人类的任何本体论和宇宙学开放，即海德格尔所谓的此在。回族的多元宇宙技术批判性地承认并多元化了这两种观点，从而教导了技术的多本体论和多宇宙论条件反射，以及本体论和宇宙论的多技术条件反射。使用派生自 Peter Sloterdijk 对海德格尔“本体动力学”的解释的术语，它表明，由于“垂直”、海德格尔或“精神”维度和“水平”、斯蒂格勒或“唯物主义”维度来解决有关问题技术。对这两种关于技术问题的基本观点的这种新的、原创的、宇宙技术的观点，使回族能够将技术哲学投入到与当代人类学所谓的本体论转向的迟来的辩论中，这在当今人类世时代变得越来越紧迫。” 关于技术问题的斯蒂格勒主义或“唯物主义”维度。对这两种关于技术问题的基本观点的这种新的、原创的、宇宙技术的观点，使回族能够将技术哲学投入到与当代人类学所谓的本体论转向的迟来的辩论中，这在当今人类世时代变得越来越紧迫。” 关于技术问题的斯蒂格勒主义或“唯物主义”维度。对这两种关于技术问题的基本观点的这种新的、原创的、宇宙技术的观点，使回族能够将技术哲学投入到与当代人类学所谓的本体论转向的迟来的辩论中，这在当今人类世时代变得越来越紧迫。