facing the earth under it’s global conditions we must realize, that we have become a victim of the one-world-one-mankind illusion. the fact is: the opposite is true. under nowadays global conditions we should speak of a billionfold world and mankind. whenever today’s human beings question the world and themselves, they no longer rely on their own unsupported sensory unifying systems, but more and more on science-and technoassisted, from each other independent devices and apparatuses. (cameras, microscopes, telescopes, film,- video-, computer-, netsystems, etc.) the reality check signifies, that human awareness has become more and more alienated by technology from the vision of the human existence as an integral whole. finally, as the human awarness has become substituted by the millionfold of technological devices it has also become obsolete with the most crucial consequence, the individual itself has fallen apart. this has happened following the speed and need of the scientific- technological progress of differenciation and specialisation. as a result, in the science- ans technology driven world the individual becomes splitted further and further into millionfold of fragments, pieces and bits which are already dispersed and distributed worldwide by the same technology. this kind of millionfold, fragmented in_dividual has become today’s contradiction to further speak of one world, one mankind and one universe.
just as the in_dividual has become manyfold fragmented, so has the one_world. to this fragmentation we owe the high level efficiency to differenciate the science-based technologies which have become the leading force to solve the deepest enigmas of our external and internal nature. but instead of the glorious mission for deeper insights we finally are the witnesses, that the opposite is true. we become aware, that the scientific and technology driven mankind has experienced a backslash. instead of further upgrading our understanding of nature by differenciation, science has led to disorientation in nature on a global scale. the high potential of the scientific efficiency to differenciate hasn’t led to integration but to fragmentation, and finally to a split of science itself. technique and technology have become autonomous spinn offs with the reverse effect: for the sake of science’s own progress, science has become dependent on technique and technology. leaving behind it’s original mission to overcome fragmentation and disorientation, science has transformed to become the deepest fragmentation and alienation of man and environment ever. the scientific rational insight into the universe has brought forth more gaps and fragments to mankind as ever before in history, and has generated the split of mankind versus environment on a global magnitude. in the age of planetary reality the millionfold of fragmentation has consequently become today’s reality. the further autonomous technology develops, the deeper the fragmentation of the in_dividual and one_world becomes in step with the overall disorientation. unfortunately it isn’t comprehended yet, that climate change, airpollution, animal extinction, ozon hole, water shortage, etc. is the external consequence of a broken up internal order, of the fragmentation of the in_dividual per se. on a personal, political, economical, etc. level the solution for the outermost critical and horrifying situation of today’s environment must first emerge from solving the innermost situation of today’s science-techno-fragmented in_dividual. it is essential to take up the challenge in it’s far reaching implications to completeness –in imagination as well as in reality. then we must aknowledge, that there is no difference any more between an inner mental fullfillment and an outer global perfection. today’s aspiration to completeness will be realized only as the result of both. but on the scientific-technological level we are operating exactly into the opposite direction. in the need for completeness and orientation today’s human being still trusts the illusion of one’s in_dividuality neglecting the reality of his trancendence to a multi_vidual by his own selfinduced, scientific technological process of differenciation. as long as we rely on science-based technologies only, the fragmenting of our consciousness will proceed. in order to face the technology-driven status of man and environment against fragmentation, we have to focus on evolutionary categories promoting vision, imagination, spirit, empathy, etc as seen in religion and the arts.
the origin of religion, art and science is embedded in a disoriented world of autonomous and hardly uncoordinated splits, gaps, fractions and fragments. according to their different methodologies all three of them are unique methods of coordination, orientation, methods even of imagination to overcome the status quo of an unfinished, imperfect and uncomplete -because fragementized- world. in their historical continuity religion, art and later on science are also competing methods for upgrading differenciation –not specialisation- towards a common denominator in order to unify the given fragments to a completeness. thus, differenciation is the precondition for reality-based imagination, heading towards perfection, towards a permanent upgrading of the holistic vision of reality. in this competition the science concept has taken over the lead on the reality level. we must comprehend, that wirh the uprising of fundamentalism in religion and mainstreaming of outdated painterly arts this competition has not been finished yet and perhaps never will be. because of the failures of science’s mission it is not surprising, that religion and art have come into play. even such unsuitable means is given preference and trust given them to bridge the gaps between todays social, personal and political, external and internal fragmentation into pieces, splits and bits. in the need of orientation people don’t expect solutions from the scientific operating system, and in line with this attitude well established scientific and technological achievments have been cut out. the revert to art and religion –even in their outdated format- must be read in their tradition of orientation and survival strategies. a superiority of art and religion can’t be deduced from this fact but their renaissance can be read as the serious failure of science’s fragmentation against it’s own mission to completeness. for the sake of orientation we propose to update religion and the arts on the basis of the given scientific – technobased environment. we sense their holistic methology for defragmentation and we can’t do without it, also not under global conditions. this artistic and spiritual destiny is not a revert but an invention. art and religion will no longer be beyond the sciences, but beyond the churches and beyond the museums at the heigth of the scientific-technobased power of differenciation and fragmentation. both, the power of differenciation and fragmentation are not a scientific, artistic, religious end in itself, but for the sake of one’s better orientation in the long run. the further the scientific performance of differenciation develops, the greater the pressure will be on art and religion for orientation in space and time.
it’s today’s challenge to cope with the technobased overall fragmentation to overcome the illusion of the one-world, the one-mankind and the one-individual. defragmentation is based on the evolution of the spiritual mission within the standards of religion, art and science melting into each other only on the highest possible level of the scientific and technobased revolution. defragmentation is a response to the millionfold science- and technobased reality of the multi_viduals and multi_verses. defragmentation means to substitute the illusion of the in_dividual by the imagination of the multi_vidual. defragmentation also means, to process the alienated, unalive fragments, particles, pieces and bits to a live-format.
henceforth the emerging bio-aesthetic art must be comprehended as the metaphor and reality check of the externalisation of the internal mind, when imagination of the given fragmented internal and external status become one idea in reality. on the reality level the bio-electric “living acitivity” the brain is being used to control a cursor on a computerscreen the brain itself (EEG) is being brought into action by techno-assisted imagination. the brain-computer-interface (BCI) not only provides an interface to the physical world on an in_dividual scale but to the social world on the multi_vidual’s scale as well. finally, the mental-digital cursor steers reality. it transcends from a tool of imagination to a tool of reincarnation, to bring alive the alienated, split, dead parts, bits and fragments of the in_dividual in the “gestalt” of the multi_vidual. thus defragmentation is the visionary compass to completeness of the multi_vidual within the multi_world, it is a strategy to counteract the scientific-techno based splitting, fractionizing, particulizing the human being, mankind and world. defragmentation is the art to create coherency, to bridge the inner mental world with the outer physical world, and the gaps between techno and bio in order to interface human imagination and scientific engineering to imagineering. on the horizon we already expect networked fragments in a holistic vision i.e. an emerging bio-aesthetic science and art fusion in it’s original evolutionary destiny of being the diffusion of wholeness. [see the ongoing project of richard kriesche “datawork : man. http://iis.joanneum.at/kulturdata. since 1999]
today’s subject matter, generated by science and technology, has become the multi_vidual and the mult_verse. the metaphorical and paradidgmatic figure is the handycaped, disabled human being. this paradigmatic human figure with mental and physical handycaps is based and wired on today’s information- and communication technologies. on the reality check the disabled person represents the visionary forefront for the advancement of the new planetary figure of our times, the bioelectric loaded human being. the handycaped figure is today’s metaphorical persona yet to become everybody’s status by the evolution of the scientific-, techno- technological fragmentation. the handycaped figure has become today’s avantgarde in being the manifestation of the technobased fragmenting process. the scientific technobased handycaped person has returned to the origin of man –in line with the mission of religion and art- for defragmentation towards perfection and completeness. the disabled person has become the authentic ‘leitmotif’ and ‘lead-figure’ to deal with the fragmented world on the reality level. nobody else but the disabled person is our authentic representative of the information based environment. as the disabled person stands for the global body it also stands for everybody’s internal and external global awareness, the environment as a whole. in this sense, the disabled person has become the object of scientific research and “gestaltung” for the art, and has become the subject of research and “gestaltung” in oneself as well. [the unifying process per se; the true origin of the science based technoassisted ‘gesamtkunstwerk’.] within the notion of defragmentation the disabled person has become the issue to generate a wholeness by imagineering the multi_vidual. the disabled person has become the first artist of the new bioelectric era, as he/she is just an interface to defragmentize awareness and reality, the original mission of religion, art and science.
the artist [richard kriesche] is situated in a closed circuit videoenvironment opposite to a videomonitor, which presents his portrait live. the parameters of the portait are steered by the artist’s own brain bioelctric activities. the data of this mental activity are being fed into a specific biofeedback apparatus. according to the brainwaves’ functionality i.e. when the artist opens his eyes to register his portrait, the videoportrait immediately disappears. and in revers whenever the artist closes his eyes, the videoportraits will appear to maximum size. in this videoinstallation of an artist’s selfportrait, the artist is disabled by his own brainwaves to ever see himself.
installation with a BCI –brain computer interface-. after a training period with the BCI for more than 30 minutes members of the public are conditioned to steer the „lego“-train either in one direction or the other. the bioelectrical acitivity of the brain (EEG) is being used to control a cursor on a computerscreen, i.e. to communicate with the outside world. the BCI has to be fed with imagination of the right and left hemisphere of one’s own body to steer the legotrain either in the right or in the left direction. inside and outside, body and train become an integrated whole. this installation demonstrates imagination in it’s true creative sense and in the archaic spirit “to make alive”. the average percentage of proper directions was more than 70 percent in the 6 months period of the exhibition.
“the handycaped artist’s group”; (2000-2006)
five handycaped persons –blind, paralized, fixed to wheelchair, etc.- communicated during a period of 6 months with each other via the internet. on another terminal integrated in the installation the public could take part in the communication as well. out of these communication data in the 6 months period. the five handicapped persons have generated in contradiction to their own fragmented bodies a “perfect and complete” virtual body – the first multi_vidual” body ever. (see far right)
prof. gert pfurtscheller, dr.christa neuper, di. dr. christoph guger. (technical university, graz) prof. werner schmeiser, franz ammer, oskar kalamidas, hans krameritsch, otto lechner, (all private). dieter tschermernig, di. franz höller (joanneum research, graz)
 kriesche, r., konrad,h.: “kunst, wissenschaft und kommunikation” (art, science and communication) graz 2000. springer wien, new york. (2000)
pfurtscheller, g., neuper, c. : “motor imagery and direct brain-computer communications” proceddings IEEE, vol. 89/7:1123-1134 (2001)
 guger, c., schlögl, a., neuper, c., walterspacher, d., strein, t.,
pfurtscheller, g. : “rapid prototyping of an EEG-based brain-computer-interface (BCI)” IEEE trans-rehab.engng. Vol.9, No.1:49-58 (2001)
 schlögl a., neuper c. pfurtscheller g. : “estimating the mutual information of an EEG-based brain-computer-interface.” biomedizinische technik 47(1-2): 3-8 (2002)