Now, that we have spent almost all semester on thinking about how we might think of subjects/selfs/humans beyond the liberal self there comes the final blow: Posthumanism. I have not done a lot of work myself on the subject and I admit to having been sidetracked. Basically, I got stuck finding out more about a “crazy” roboter scientist who might be considered an extremist in the field from our point of view but, in fact, has a much better understanding of robotics than all of us. hence it might have a point. But lets take one step at a time.
What is posthumanism? From what I understand it a strand of thought that considers the cyborg much more than just an imaginative resource. The self here is defined informationally. That means, the self exists independently of the body, which is merely a prosthesis of some kind (and which could be of another kind, i.e. a machine) (Hayles 1999: 3). This truly is the stuff of science fiction, but in terms of theories of the self it isn’t actually so far out there. The relationship between consciousness, body and identity is one of the basic problems of philosophy. This question was prominently raised, for example, by John Locke and René Descartes. I cannot here go into sufficient detail but let me give it to you in two sentences: Descartes argument, often summarized in the statement “I think, therefore I am.” believes the self to be situated in the soul – and therefore to be immaterial and at least theoretically independent of the body. John Locke in defiance of this view argues, what is called a “psychological continuity” position: We are one and the same person because our consciousness is continuous. Suffice to say, philosophical debates become more complicated from there.*
Posthumanism builds on the idea that the self is only loosely coupled with the body – a body which limits the self. Which is why technology and bio-engineering are so great – they may soon make it possible to transcend these limits and give us the “homo evolutis”:
Being a little cyborg may be a weird idea – but transcending being human in a biological and consequently philosophical sense? To me, that is a bit scary. Is that just because it is so new? Or is there something to be scared of. Posthumanism is not mainstream, but many of the proponents are very influential in the technology scene. Silicon valley start ups (read: global technology companies) might simply create a posthuman world without asking around for our approval first. So, there is why I got sidetracked. Did you?
Badmington’s text sets out to answer another question, namely how such development might theorised. He draws on ideas of reiteration and repetition that we have encountered before, so there is a lot to discuss. But will it be enough to keep us from going extinct just to rethink who we are?
*Olga kindly drew up a reading list of philosophical literature relevant to the idea of the self as well as an excerpt regarding Fichtes work. Thank you very much for all the effort, it is much appreciated!
LINK: Now, I have not watched all of these videos, but as an entertaining option for learning more about the philosophical discussion, you my try the short videos in chapter 6 of this introductory online course to philosophy. Make sure you check all info, though ;-).
Tags: cyborgs, performance, Posthumanism, subject, technology
Die