Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 21:16:31 +0000
Subject: Re: more on cyborgs and the inhuman




hugh/eric

The Tomb of intellectuals - is to imagine that they know more than 
others but also - once 'intellectuals were more like thinkers situating 
themselves in the position of man, humanity, the nation, the people, the 
proletariat, the creature, or some such entity. That is to say they are 
thinkers who identify themselves with a subject endowed with a universal 
value so as to describe and analyse a situation or a condition from this 
point of view and to prescribe what ought to be done for this subject to 
realise itself...'

Don't feel like a machine myself, and can't imagine 'how to build a 
mind' , but since Lyotard was so concerned and convinced of the danger...

regards
steve

hbone wrote:

>Eric/All,
>
>The role of the intellectual is to change the minds of others.  Philosophers
>attempt the taak with words, but who knows what they mean?  Humpty Dumpty
>told Alice they meant what he meant them to mean, no more and no less.
>
>As for dualisms:  organism/environment, actor/concept, seem obvious as
>breathing out and breathing in, but there may be as many interpretations as
>there are people who give thought to those terms.  In another sense, they
>are only words.
>
>I can't imagine how machinic anthropology would relate to today's social
>problems.  Organisms are living machines, environments sustain and destroy
>them.  Can't imagine either without the other, but await your exposition.
>
>regards,
>Hugh
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>>hbone wrote:
>>
>>>     Computers, satellites, and rockets have cyborgian elements
>>>     which assure diabolical
>>>     and  accurate means of delivery, not to mentioned perfectly
>>>     programmed religious fanatics for whom martydom is the path
>>>     to Paradise.
>>>
>>Hugh,
>>
>>One of the things I want to emphasize here is that my interpretation of
>>what I am calling the cyborg isn't along these lines. I see it as
>>immanent (we have always been cyborgs) and not external or new.
>>
>>This leads back to your earlier post and the comments you made. I don't
>>think dualism is necessary in terms of actor/concept -
>>organism/environment. Also the question for me isn't eliminating greedy
>>person or refuting the philosophy of neo-liberalism, but how do we
>>transform the existing structure. I think the machinic anthropology I am
>>proposing may help work through some of these issues.
>>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>Cyborgs are a late development of the process of mankind assisting its own
>evolution.  From Stone Age to Computer Age, clever inventions helped the
>species evolve into conditions of comfort, culture and power that gave
>supremacy over all other species.
>
>But the A-bomb, completed about the same time that Computers were born, was
>one of the
>first clever inventions that could threaten  homo sapiens on a global basis.
>Evolution could  become devolution.  Now we have an severla nations possess
>and unbelievably large arsenal of nuclear weapons, plus chemical and
>biological weapons which singly or in various combinations can destroy
>populations, cities, lands, and make air water and food unfit for human
>consumption.
>
>A less onerous but distressing outcome of cyborgian technology is the
>Communications and Entertainment complex which envelops the Globe as
>Spectacle, pollutes minds, wastes time, energy, money, and increases the
>flow of wealth from poor to rich
>
>
>
>
>

HTML VERSION:

Eric/All,

The role of the intellectual is to change the minds of others.  Philosophers
attempt the taak with words, but who knows what they mean?  Humpty Dumpty
told Alice they meant what he meant them to mean, no more and no less.

As for dualisms:  organism/environment, actor/concept, seem obvious as
breathing out and breathing in, but there may be as many interpretations as
there are people who give thought to those terms.  In another sense, they
are only words.

I can't imagine how machinic anthropology would relate to today's social
problems.  Organisms are living machines, environments sustain and destroy
them.  Can't imagine either without the other, but await your exposition.

regards,
Hugh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

hbone wrote:

     Computers, satellites, and rockets have cyborgian elements
     which assure diabolical
     and  accurate means of delivery, not to mentioned perfectly
     programmed religious fanatics for whom martydom is the path
     to Paradise.

Hugh,

One of the things I want to emphasize here is that my interpretation of
what I am calling the cyborg isn't along these lines. I see it as
immanent (we have always been cyborgs) and not external or new.

This leads back to your earlier post and the comments you made. I don't
think dualism is necessary in terms of actor/concept -
organism/environment. Also the question for me isn't eliminating greedy
person or refuting the philosophy of neo-liberalism, but how do we
transform the existing structure. I think the machinic anthropology I am
proposing may help work through some of these issues.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Cyborgs are a late development of the process of mankind assisting its own
evolution.  From Stone Age to Computer Age, clever inventions helped the
species evolve into conditions of comfort, culture and power that gave
supremacy over all other species.

But the A-bomb, completed about the same time that Computers were born, was
one of the
first clever inventions that could threaten  homo sapiens on a global basis.
Evolution could  become devolution.  Now we have an severla nations possess
and unbelievably large arsenal of nuclear weapons, plus chemical and
biological weapons which singly or in various combinations can destroy
populations, cities, lands, and make air water and food unfit for human
consumption.

A less onerous but distressing outcome of cyborgian technology is the
Communications and Entertainment complex which envelops the Globe as
Spectacle, pollutes minds
, wastes time, energy, money, and increases the
flow of wealth from poor to rich