Before I get into it, I would first like to mention (as a reflection on this course so far) that WOMN2205: Self.Net: Identity in the Digital Age has been a, more than average, mind altering experience. We go through Uni and we get exposed to so many concepts, so many points of views, and so many genres of thinking and while we go on exploring these areas, in no way can I admit that any unit has ever evoked a passion in my way of thinking about a topic. For the first time ever, I have been so challenged and confronted and in a way I never imagined possible. So much so that, I find myself dedicating a lot of my thinking time to the topics we have been exploring and very seriously establishing myself and my point of view in relation to them. For that reason, I feel excited and although I may not necessarily welcome the possibilities of technology in relation to our [human] identities, I truly love this course. This is so new to me, to be so stirred by a subject to the point that I bring it up to the conversation table whenever I see an open door. I particularly think about the future of Identities in the Digital Age, I think about how much technology has gone from enhancing and complementing our lives to reforming them. I freak out, quite a bit, about the possibilities of cybernetics. As interesting as the ideas are, they still scare me. Nevertheless, I am still up for the challenge.
While I have been preparing for my presentation on Post-Human Conclusions, I have come across a living example of a Post-Human. I actually came across this man a while ago (Blog entry: Feeling Scared) and when I typed Identity in the Digital Age into the Google search bar to find a news story, Kevin Warwick turned up again. This man is haunting me. ;)
Technofascism Blog is a journalism-type weblog that is freely available and run by semi-anonymous Tony who reports current news on what he terms; The Rise of the Machine. So any new inventions, ideas or releasing of products in robotics or cybernetics, he reports on them but more descriptively than critically. All we know about the author is that Tony is Tony and no other information relating to his credentials exists. We don’t know if, where or how he was educated on a tertiary level. This makes it extremely difficult to reference his discussions with any scholarly authority. However, the blog provides links to the original sources for his discussions which have more credibility and allows us to access those articles for better scholarly research. Tony’s Blog is very current, updated every few days and published by WordPress; the entry I read was posted on 22 September 2010.
The blog entry of interest is Kevin Warwick: Interview with a Cyborgist and Tony summarizes Warwick’s position on the future of cybernetics and his latest developments. Professor Kevin Warwick is attempting to connect his central nervous system to a computer with the hypothesis that this would enhance our sensory and perceptual experiences. Lately, Warwick has been building robots with home-grown biological brains out of rat neurons. Optimistically, Warwick claims that the future is with growing brains based on human neurons. Ultimately these new creations (robots) will think for themselves; already they can navigate a maze and stop trying when the task is too difficult. It is described here that these new creatures will develop a superior intelligence to human intelligence. Warwick warns that the intelligence of such creatures will put humans at a large disadvantage unless humans “upgrade” themselves through cybernetic implants.
Really? This bothers me. My view is that the cybernetic future and its possibilities are undeniably, very intelligent ideas. I mean, can you imagine what it will do for the future of prosthetics and disability aids and also how advanced life support machines would be, for example. I think the possibility of this in particular is extremely positive. In practice however, I find difficult to accept the idea of creating superior intelligences. The one question that preoccupies my thoughts in response to this is; how is it intelligent to create a new species that has the potential to put its creator at a disadvantage? And then… Why do this? Why not limit it to enhancement of life, why take it so far?
There is a link on the blog to a page about a man called Dr. Hugo De Garis, who is responsible for promoting the idea of “upgraded humans” and the rise of singularity. Singularity is a time in the very near future (decade) when a superior intelligence will dwarf humans in a way our human mind cannot imagine, or so it is proposed.
Dr. De Garis describes that three groups will emerge in this time; The Terrans: who are the resisters of development of intelligence robots (IO). The Cosmists: those who desire to build IO to merge with them in hopes of attaining immortality and The Cyborgists: Who believe that the only way for some form of human to survive is to upgrade themselves with technology. The consequences? The Artilect War: During the singularity period when the three groups battle it out; battle between humans and superior intelligences.
Sometimes I have to remind myself that we are exploring issues in a woman’s study unit. We discuss so much on identity in relation to new technologies but I find that not much is explored with gender incorporated in the discussions. Especially in my upcoming topic on Post-Human, gender is hardly talked about and so I wandered about gender in relation to Post-Humanism/ Transhumanism.
I thought about what gender would mean when considered in the light of the blog entry on Technofascism Blog and the rise of the “upgraded human.” I wandered where gender fits into all of this and thought that maybe with the rise of Cyborgs, Singularity and proposed The Artilect war that perhaps there are bigger things to contemplate and debate, worry about and fight for etc… than identities in terms of gender. That is, what place would gender have in the state of singularity or the proposed Artilect War between [Hu]man and machine? Maybe (and perhaps somewhat idealistically) that this battle between the groups might itself disintegrate the male/female boundary. Maybe it will be the war, more than the metal, that would/could force human beings to look at what is similar between them as opposed to what divides them. If it means that human beings will have to come together to fight for the survival of their species, it makes me imagine that gender inequalities would seem trivial. I wander whether, at that proposed time, if the status of male and the status of female will be more important than the status of human….
If you had to imagine that these three groups did emerge, and that they battled it out in the Artilect War, what role do you think gender would have? Assuming you consider yourself a Terran, Do you think gender inequality would take a back seat if it meant survival of your species as a human?
If you had to classify yourself, which of the three groups best describes your position on the future of cybernetics and the Post-Human?
Peacockchick.
No comments:
Post a Comment