Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 06:42:22 -0600
Subject: Re: Homo Prosthesis


Hugh,

What about culture and language?  Are they not always already a form of
prosthesis?


eric


hbone wrote:
> 
> Steve/All,
> 
> Is a cyborg  a human with mechanical parts?  Arms, legs, hearing aid,
> pacemaker, heart?
> 
> A computer-brained robot  that behaves like a human?
> 
> A designer human contrived by manipulation of DNA?
> 
> Prostheses, rocket launched nukes, sticks and stones, bows and arrows,
> swords and battering rams,  how could humans have become what they are today
> without them?
> 
> Non-cyborgian self-evolution happens to species who don't use tools, for
> they change their habits when their environment changes, or become extinct.
> 
> regards,
> Hugh
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Eric/All
> >
> > Some comments....
> >
> > EXcept we are not self-evolved any more than an amoeba is... and the
> > imagery is deeply delusionary. Perhaps, as I said in the cyborg posts,
> > some idiot will start experimenting, probably with disastrous
> > consequences, with human dna/rna and the results will be inherited by
> > its descendents.At this point some human beings will deserve the term
> > 'self-evolved' but not before....
> >
> > Your definition of cyborg is interesting because all you appear to be
> > doing is substituting the word 'cyborg' for 'human'  - as if the human
> > is the authentic subject and the cyborg is the human in cultured state.
> > But this definition of the cyborg is deeply different from the normal
> > post-modern definition which incorporates the non-human into the
> > definition of the cyborg, because unless I am mistakern your
> > understanding is rooted in the human. I'll return to my dissagreement
> > with your reading of the inhuman which you seem to be attempting to read
> > as something that would approve of  your notion of your becoming a
> > 'cyborg', in a later note. I, of course, deny that I am a cyborg. I am
> > however someone who functions in, and understands the nature of the
> > socio-economic system. Curiously my take on Badiou was that his project
> > is precisely to put philosophy and ethics into the position you require.
> >
> > Not all avant-garde movements failed - some were so successful that they
> > changed the world and/or changed the way we look at the world.  Damian
> > Hirst  is simply exchange value written large across the cultural frame
> > - the reterritorialisation of the avant-garde.
> >
> > Incapable of thinking.... its almost christmas... and late..
> > regards
> > steve
> >
> >
> > Mary Murphy&Salstrand wrote:
> >
> > >All,
> > >
> > >Let Hugh's words stand as the emblem here- "this self-evolved
> > >anthropoid, the hairless ape who walks erect, reaching for the stars."
> > >
> > >>From Johann Gottfried Herder to Desmond Morris, such imagery has been
> > >commonplace. As Hans Joas points out in his book "The Creativity of
> > >Action" Herder early on emphasized the glorious weakness of being human.
> > >Joas writes about Herder's theory as follows:
> > >
> > >"The human being is initially regarded as a deficient creature, in that
> > >he is inferior to the animals in terms of strength and reliability in
> > >his instincts. The corollary of this inferiority, however, is that the
> > >sensuality of the basic drives of the human being are concentrated less
> > >exclusively on a particular segment of the world. The opportunity of
> > >being open to the world is a consequence of being less specialized."
> > >
> > >I believe it is possible to develop an anthropology from this that sees
> > >both technology and indetermination as being the fundamental
> > >characteristics setting the human apart.  From this perspective,
> > >technology no longer appears as an external tool such as a hammer, a
> > >vaccine shot or a computer interface, technology is immanent in who we
> > >are as human beings.
> > >
> > >An analogy might be made with the crab that periodically extrudes her
> > >shell. Humans create a "plastic shell" composed of language and culture
> > >that allows them to remain indeterminate, yet this shell is not so much
> > >extruded as it is attached.  That is why the human might be better
> > >described as Homo Prosthesis.  It is also the reason why we have always
> > >been cyborgs.
> > >
> > >Recognition of this condition allows us to revision the old religious
> > >stereotypes, embrace our indetermination and through the aesthetic
> > >(which is not merely art) extend the nodes of our perceptions as we
> > >intensify our experimentation. The Avant-Garde is not merely a history
> > >of failed movements and manifestos; it is a shift that witnesses the
> > >event because it does not attempt to program time. "Being prepared to
> > >receive what thought is not prepared to think is what deserves the name
> > >of thinking." That is what Lyotard means by the avant-garde.  Not Marcel
> > >Duchamp; not John Cage; not even Damien Hirst!
> > >
> > >Lyotard, in "The Inhuman" implicitly recognizes this condition of being
> > >human described above. He writes: "We should first remember that if the
> > >name of human can and must oscillate between native indetermination and
> > >instituted or self-instituted reason, it is the same for the name of the
> > >inhuman.  All education is inhuman because it does not happen without
> > >constraint and terror."
> > >
> > >We all bear the marks, the scars, the ravaged tissue of where the
> > >prosthesis has been inscribed and implanted upon us. That is why we will
> > >always be cyborgs.  In bearing witness to this fact and to the "infans"
> > >within us who has never been humanized, we can begin to confront the
> > >complexity which now ravages the planet and whose ill effects Hugh has
> > >described so well.  Today's politics can start from no other place and
> > >neither can ethics.
> > >
> > >eric
> > >
> > >
> >
> >