By Abe Lo, Jason Hung, Serena Chung
The presentation will be mainly based on the reading of Katherine Hayles, "Flesh and Metal: Reconfiguring the Mindbody in Virtual Enviorments". As regard to the reading, Hayles had defined 'Posthuman' as a construction that participates in the world with cognition spread throughout the body and the environment. This is a different concept from the cyborg ones, as it suggests that posthuman will not only simply a combination of a flesh body and wires, but having a interaction with the intelligent environment we live and work in.
Here the two main arguments will be briefly introduced in order to support this posthuman saying. They are the embodied experiment and the symbiotic relationship between human and technology respectively.
For the embodied experiment, it is a characteristic which always being neglected in the history of cybernetic. According to Hayles, our embodiment is an internal experience like feelings, emotions and sensations, this kind of experience is not merely an interplay of brain and viscera, but actually a result of our constant engagement with the environment around. Therefore, as living in the high-technical world nowadays, it will shift our habits, postures, enactments and perceptions.
Driving is an example that technology had changed and formed our habits. Since we are already very familiar of how to control a vehicle, our controlling of the vehicle seems to be habitual that we can deal with the road situations with the relevant functions of the car without conscious decision.
3D technology is another example of embodiment as with the 3D technology, it helps human to have a new visual experience which also confuses our perception.
For the symbiotic relationship of human and technology, nowadays the cognition is not only take place in human brains, but also embedded in the environment by technology. Human and technology live so close together and need to depend on each other in particular ways, while both of them are getting benefits from each other as well.
Technologies such as hearing aid, cardiac pacemaker and the human heart produced in lab, can all be an example to show how human is being convenience and having a healthy life with the use of technology, whereas technology also being advanced by us.
Hence, human are difficult to live without technology in the posthuman age.
After presenting the concepts of posthuman listed above, our group would like to have a discussion of the following issues:
1) Is there a line between human and technology?
2) Will there be a possibility that technology's cognition will over and control the human ones in the future?
3) Can you accept to remain harmony with the unnatural creatures (critters), which is created by us with advanced technology?
In our group's opinion, we think it is too arbitrary to say that there is a boundary between human and technology, as this line will shift with times. In the past, human was the creator and controller of technology. Nowadays, it seems the status among both of them become parallel. Also, the act of trying to find a boundary line to divide human and technology as two separate and different things is actually a result of the binary thought. We always define what is natural, biological between human and technology. Even a technological creature seems to be a biological organism (like the human heart created in lab), we would argue that it can't be counted into an organism since it is not from nature. However, is there necessary to find a line between human and technology, especially in the technological environment of today? Instead of thinking with the binary relation in between, maybe we can see human and technology as a whole, that technology is a thing that help human to connect to the world, environment and the spirits.
thank for your presentation today.
ReplyDeleteabout your first question, in my opinion, there should be a line between the human and technology. everything own its origin and feature. therefore, it is reasonable that every different things can be distinguished even they are combined.
however, technology has changed the society. it is hard for people to define what the line is and where the line is for human and technology.
just a simple example, people who have myopia cannot live without their glasses nowadays. this proves that the boundary has been blur and hard to define in today society.
for your third question, i can accept to remain harmony with the unnatural creatures. Animals have got cognition. Human can live with animals harmoniously in the world, because there are symbiosis for both human and animals.just like the unnatural creatures that are created by people, i believe the same situation can appear in this case.
Thank you for your commments, kit:)
ReplyDeleteHere I would like to discuss the first question to you. In my opinion, I don't think that there should be a 'line' between human and technology in nowadays. In the past, maybe there is, but now, there isn't. In the past, human not really depends on those technology, and also we can say that we can live without it. But can we say that in nowadays? Impossible. People are always turn on their computer when they back to home, it seems that human and technology is indivisible. Therefore, I think the 'line' does not exist now. And also, we can not think that we are natural, organic and technology is artificial and no life. It is a fallacy. Actually, human, technology and environment have a very deeply interaction in the world. Human should not seen as individual. It also combined with the technology and environment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do think there is a line between human and technology. Technology is what we human invented and made. Human may try the best to make something very "human".
ReplyDeleteBut there are still many differences between us and technology. Use robot as an example, the outlook of robot could be made very alike as a human; human could make a robot to do humans’ favors like helping us to do housework or other jobs; emotions, facial expressions could be added in the programs while making the robot. All these could humanize a robot, however, not turn a robot as a complete human.
For the second discussion question, in my opinion, it is possible that technology's cognition will over and controls the human ones in the future. Though it sounds horrible to me, I think it is possible since in my mind, many technologies are based on many different mathematics formulae. The computers are complicated version of calculators; I think one day in the future they are able to calculate some formulae that we human have not discovered. If it really happens, the computers, there is no longer any reason for the technologies to follow or obey to human, eventually control human instead of being controlled by us.
In response to your first question, in my opinion i do think that there is a boundary between human and technology, and we need that boundary. if we dont have a boundary between human and technology, that how can we identify ourself? and what should us call ourself? if there is no such boundary it represent that human can be machine and machine can be a human. Machine is a thing created by human, it dont have a soul which is the most important thing for a human being, even if it look and act like a human, it was only its programme told it to do so .But i have to admit that with the advance of technology, that boundary became blur. its not a easy thing to separate human and technology anymore, but we have to protect the boundary in order to protect our human identity.
ReplyDeleteFor the second question you raise up , i think its possible but terrible. i believe that one day when the science become so advance that machine can have their own "thought", but it is very danger because you will not know are they on the right track or not and that is hard to control. machine do have a chance to over control human only when human lose ground.
Technology used to be defined as something invented by human, however nowadays, the relation between human and technology has changed. It's no longer just a tool in our daily lives instead it become more likely part of our routines, part of our needs. The boundary line between us is very unstable, as we discussed in class, will there be a chance that one day technology's cognition might over and control the human ones in the future? To me, its a very tough question to answer, nothing is impossible and since the development of technology has been expanded that fast in recent decades, i believe that one day it will be a serious concern to human coz no matter how well we invent technology, there is always risk while using them. No one should have relied on it. And to the unnatural creatures which is created by human with advanced technology,i think its quite hard for me to accept, despite the purpose of use or the appearance of it, the world is a bit too crowded to hold more creatures except the natural ones, and to create creatures like that is just another way to raise the chance or possibilty letting technology over and control the human, totally unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteThe new idea on human was clearly presented and it's great to consider the inspiring questions. :)
ReplyDeleteFor Q1,it seems that we are discussing two kinds of line here. One refers to the difference betweeen human and technology while the other refters to how close our relationship with techonology is.
Let's discuss it one by one.
It is obvious that machines can't be human nowadays. Although robots share more and more similarities with human, they don't have their own mind. I'd refer this to the self-consciousness of human, which is defined as being conscious of oneself as oneself in a book by Dr. Alexandra Zinck called (http://mentis.de/download.php?media_id=00004730). We, human, may recall this consciousness by looking into the mirror. We may be familiar with ‘us’ in the mirror now. When was the first time that you look into the mirror and recognize that the one in the mirror is ‘you’? I believe that was the time we have a strong feeling of self-consciousness. Can robots possess this unique feature of human? I believe i.robots in the films do but not in reality. Human can input chemicals and programmes into a robot but cannot give self-consciousness to it.
When we discuss our closeness with technology, I’d go to the side that the line doesn’t exist. Hayles gives us a new dimension to see the relationship of human and machines upon Haraway’s cyborg theory. Machines are seen as advanced technology existing in the environment closely connected with human rather than being incorporated into individual human bodies. From the examples mentioned above, we can see that technology, ranging from simple technology like glasses to advanced one like cars, has become an important part of our daily lives. We are closely connected with it. And the unconsciousness rubs out the line between us and technology.
For Q2, it seems that being controlled by technology threatens our lives. For me, technology is just a tool invented by human. Human command it and control it. It’s hard to imagine a day when robots become our bosses and tell them what to do. However, technologies can do something that human can’t do. For example, after the nuclear explosion in Japan, robots were sent to the nuclear plants for accurate radiation measurement (http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110429p2a00m0na009000c.html). This illustrates the ability of technology surpassing human. What’s threatening is that technology would be out of control sometimes. Take the same incident as an example, the destruction that the nuclear technology brings is clearly what the scientists can’t control. I think the ones that are threatening should be human controlling advanced technology.
For Q3, I think I’ll try to live harmonious with the creatures if they want to live harmoniously with human. :)
Thanks for your group presentation. It is an interesting but a difficult topic, right?
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, to be frank, it is hard to separate technology and our daily life. Due to the advanced technology, we have already relied on the technology while we are developing and controlling the technology. However, in my opinion, there is still the line between human and technology. Undoubtedly, the boundary between human and machine tends to be blurred. For the posthumanism suggested by Donna Haraway, it is attempted to break down the dualities in order to open up the possibilities and transitioning. However, I do not agree that the duality between human and machine can be broken down in our society. Certainly, the dualities are constructed by our society. Just take an example, when you bring a computer to Ethiopia, the people even don’t know what it is and they do not need it indeed. They only need food and water. They do not rely on technology in their daily life. Thus, we cannot escape from the so-called construction by the society. Yet, it can only say that there is a certain relationship between the technology and human, I think.
For the following questions, it indeed shows the fear to our future under the great impact by the technology. No one like to be controlled by the other, thus when asking if there will be a possibility that we are controlled by technology, we will worry and fear. In my opinion, nothing is impossible but if it is possible, it could be horrible. This is because it means that human cannot predict and control anymore about the technology. Therefore, honestly speaking, this leads to my resistance to accept the unnatural creatures because I am still living in a constructed society.
Thanks for your presentation.
ReplyDeleteYour presentation give me a chance to think about the relationship between human and technology. when your group asked the first question about is there a line between human and technology. My respond is yes, definitely yes! However, when I start to think deeply on this issue, I found it is very hard for us to find the line out. For example, we always tend to apply the reality norms on the virtual world and we think the rule in the virtual world should be as same as the reality. BUT, is virtual world work exactly the same as the reality? It seems that virtual world and reality world is remind literally different. we human only literally called the virtual world as a "not existing space", but we treat it as a real space mentally. Therefore, we can see that the line between technology and human is very complicated. we cannot define oneself is cyborg or not easily.
I would like to answer your question 3 as well. (Can you accept to remain harmony with the unnatural creatures (critters), which is created by us with advanced technology?) I think this is a very interesting imagination if there is an unnatural creature stay besides me. because I do not know what is it look like. In addition, if there is a unnatural creature appear in front of me. My first reaction
or feeling must be very scared, because I know nothing about it. I think it will take a lot of time to let human to accept the unnatural creatures to live with us. Maybe government should resent the unnatural creatures in other way. They can present them as a new specie who live in Africa or North America or anywhere that human think it is a mysterious place. The main principle is tell them it is a new specie of animal in somewhere but not created by technology. Then, I think the situation will totally change.
First of all, thank you the presentation for the week 12 on Thursday!
ReplyDeleteThe overall presentation was very concise and you guys were able to present the idea of post-human and embodiment which I was very appreciated that. Besides the presentation part, I like the discussion as well as the question is really relevant the topic and it is interesting enough to bring out the issue and let the classes mates to get involve the whole discussion.
For the first question, I think is very hard for us to really draw a line between human and technology. As we are now so rely on the technology, we actually could not live without that, however, I think the main question is to find out how the boundary or human and technology has blurred rather than to define or clearly cut the boundary of human and technology.
For the second question, nothing is impossible, therefore, once the human being want to develop the technology, we should consider the problem of safety, we should neglect this issue because it could really harm us. However, I think it is time for all of us to re-think the meaning of technology, technology is something that created by human so it is ironic that we are afraid technology will over or even control the human ones in the future. Besides, we should not overly used or rely on technology, such as not only communicate with friends on facebook or msn all the time, try to meet them in person and try not to do research for our essay only on Internet (it’s so hard to me which I need to confess it..)
Lastly, it is so hard for me to answer the last question because the question is too abstract, as we have disused during the discussion, it all depends how it looks and whether the “creatures” is aggressive or not but the question is interesting which created many possibilities to us when considering the fearl that the technology may bring to us!
The following is a statment quoted by Dr. Haraway where I found it quite useful for us to understand more about "posthuman":
ReplyDelete"In critical theory, the posthuman is a speculative being that represents or seeks to enact a re-writing of what is generally conceived of as human. It is the object of posthumanist criticism, which critically questions Renaissance humanism, a branch of humanist philosophy which claims that human nature is a universal state from which the human being emerges; human nature is autonomous, rational, capable of free will, and unified in itself as the apex of existence. Thus, the posthuman recognizes imperfectability and disunity within him or herself, instead understanding the world through context and heterogeneous perspectives while maintaining intellectual rigour and a dedication to objective observations of the world. Key to this posthuman practice is the ability to fluidly change perspectives and manifest oneself through different identities. The posthuman, for critical theorists of the subject, has an emergent ontology rather than a stable one; in other words, the posthuman is not a singular, defined individual, but rather one who can "become" or embody different identities and understand the world from multiple, heterogeneous perspectives."
Reference: Haraway, Donna J, "Situated Knowledges" in Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. Routledge, New York: 1991