[Synapse elist] cymbiosis

[Miguel Santos]

Dear Leonel and all,

I have a few concerns with some of the things suggested:

First, even if  'the human' is an entity defined by the attributes  
you named 'flesh, machines and information fluxes' i do not see how a  
notion of artificiality can be used and even if you still think that  
is an appropriate tagging, calling it artificial raises concerns on  
what is left as non-artificial entities.

Second, it seems to me that when Shuhei is talking about cyborgs and  
Leonel about 'cymbiosis', they are following McLuhan's the medium is  
the message. When McLuhan talks about the medium he is talking about  
technology or ‘any extension of ourselves,’[i]when McLuhan talks  
about the message he is talking about ‘personal and social  
consequences of any medium.’[ii] When McLuhan is suggests that the  
medium is the message he is saying that any technology has personal  
and social implications along side the technological implications,  
which according to the Andy Clark’s Extended Mind is an ontological  
proposition. Also, a medium is only a medium because it is charged  
with meaning, and as Wittgenstein suggested the meaning of something  
is defined by its use.[iii] Following McLuhan’s line of thought it is  
possible to revert his propositions to: the content is the medium, or  
the meaning of a technology being determined by its use, in the same  
way that the medium is the message; and that the message is the  
content, or that time determines how things are used, new  
technologies are used in a different way than old technologies.
In short, those propositions serve as over generalised observations.

What Leonel calls 'cymbiosis' generates a specific problem, it sounds  
like you are referring to God; 'is everywhere', or maybe nowhere.

best,

Miguel



[i] Marshal McLuhan, Understanding Media: The extensions of Man.  
London: Routledge, 2001, p. 7.
[ii] Marshal McLuhan, Understanding Media: The extensions of Man.  
London: Routledge, 2001, p. 7.
[iii] Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations; trans. G. E.  
M. Anscombe, Oxford: Blackwell, 1968.







>
>
> My last comment was probably too short and raised some  
> misunderstandings.
>
> 1.
> The human is an artificial entity made out of
> flesh, machines and information fluxes. A tool
> can be viewed as a machine. Language too. I have
> no problem with cyborgs, though I would suggest
> the term cymbiosis (cybernetic with living)
> because it implies some form of cooperation.
>
> Most animals share these same characteristics.
> Tool making is common in many life forms.
> Language too. So, cymbiosis is everywhere.
>
> I didn´t refer to the cockroaches project. But in
> general I agree with Mari that we should leave
> life alone. Additionally I believe to be more
> interesting to learn from cockroaches and try to
> simulate some components of their behavior in
> machines, than to subject these creatures to an
> ordeal rooted on typical anthropocentric views.
>
> Cymbiosis must benefit all the partners. In this
> case I don't see what a cockroach gain with
> having a small computer on its back. But it may
> be some cases where animals enhance their
> capacities by cooperating with machines. A dog
> without a leg enjoys having prosthesis.
>
> 2.
> Researchers and artists work at the edge of
> knowledge. We work in that tiny border between
> facts and ignorance. Many times it is difficult
> to distinguish a good idea from a stupid one. And
> art because it is always true (as opposed to
> science that it is only true until proven
> otherwise) is more vulnerable to stupidity.
> Particularly today. Seen the decadence and lack
> of imagination of mainstream contemporary art and
> the recurring use, to the point of boredom, of wittiness.
>
> As we are manipulating live, expanding
> bio-technologies, creating more and more
> sophisticated robots, generating implausible
> combinations between organisms and machines, it
> is inevitable that artists will exploit these new
> fields. Not always in a clever manner. Stupidity
> is already an important trend in contemporary
> art; it will be much more predominant in the art of the 21st century.
>
>
> Wikipedia: stupidity denotes an incapability or
> unwillingness to properly consider the relevant information
>
> _______________________________________________
> elist mailing list
> elist at synapse.net.au
> http://lists.synapse.net.au/mailman/listinfo/elist

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.synapse.net.au/pipermail/elist/attachments/20080416/b155ab79/attachment-0001.html