Skip to main content

Let's Speculate

I keep catching myself thinking about the way that humans interact with technology and vice-versa. Like, I have never once wanted to build a computer. I have never cared to study physics or engineering. I love applying technology, but I don't really want anything to do with how it's created. I have a tattoo of a robot on my thigh. I love robots. I embrace robotics, but I don't scrutinize their innards or whatever.

And for the past couple of days, I've been wondering why that is. What is it about technology that draws us in? Is the mystery of being beyond the layman's comprehension so attractive? Maybe. 

I think, at least for me, that the attraction lies in its closeness to humanity. If we think of technology as a new Kingdom in the tree of life, of lawn mowers, iPhones, and almost illogically cool hover-bikes as species in themselves, wouldn't it be the most interspecial interaction/cooperation on the planet? Humans and technology, I mean. 


From the wheel to the sextant to the now-endangered incandescent lightbulb, humans have been reliant on technology, because it gives us an edge over every other species. But technology, too, relies on humanity to exist and evolve. Like, where would we be without the discovery of the medical applications of penicillin... but where would penicillin be without people? Not in medical textbooks, that's fer sher. 

This symbiotic relationship has led to a kind of extraordinary global culture, one that promises to extend into the distant future, and even probably out of the Milky Way. I'm especially interested, though, in the way that the bridge between humanity and technology is narrowing. Robotic limbs, for example, or contact lenses that monitor your blood-sugar levels. Robots that can interact with us. I'm curious to see the culture that stems from the diminishing physical and metaphysical distance between us and technology. How many parts of a human need to be replaced by robotic part before that human is considered an android or cyborg? Will it be more popular to look at that person as super-human or sub-human? Are we looking at a new type of racism? If robots are integrated more completely into our world, will they be considered super or sub-human? Will a healthy respect or fear (justified or otherwise) of robots bring us closer together as a human species? Or will people just not care?

I don't know. 

Comments

  1. UnknownFebruary 20, 2014 at 8:14 AM

    So when is too far too far? It's an interesting question.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Extended Human

Says Marshall McLuhan: "All media are extensions of some human faculty– psychic or physical." With this, the co-creator of 1967's experimental book on the philosophy of communication, The Medium is the Massage , provides some interesting food for thought. On the following two pages he makes claims about objects and the human body parts from which they extend. The wheel from the foot, the book from the eye, clothing from the skin. And this is a pretty compelling concept: The wheel is like an exo-foot, a re-imagining of the foot that preforms nearly the same function but is many times and in many ways more efficient. Written text provides us vision of people and worlds we cannot see with our eyes alone. Clothing... well, you get the point. I could not have seen Spike Jonze's Her  at a more appropriate time. First of all: excellent film. The movie's about a guy that falls in love with a computer. But the best part is that almost no-one thinks that's ...
1 comment
Read more

Here Comes Everybody

Clay Shirky, the author of Here Comes Everybody , writes, "When we change the way we communicate, we change society." This is the legend on the map. The cypher.  As I'm sitting in a library, I see form influenced by function. Book shelves are lined so that people may pass between them, scanning titles and call numbers. Each shelf has a long, rectangular space in which many books can be placed. Each book is a rectangle folded around flat, rectangular pages. The form or shape of each of these structured objects is a direct result of its function. Things are shaped the way they are because of the task they preform. Chairs must have a surface that keeps our butts off the ground, and their shape falls victim to that aspect of their function.  This opposite true of communication. The form of our communication shapes the function. For instance: a book is a medium of communication. The form of it, the pages and spine, lead to its function as shelf matter. (That's not ...
Post a Comment
Read more