Spent weekend in PO. Lucy's MetalMania/get out of jail party. Climbed Green Mountain. Applied on Thursday to Spiro's, applying at Metro market today. Friends of the Library book sale, account at bookstore next to West 5.
Finished The Birth of the Cool, it ended with Warhol, Velvets, Seeger, and Dylan. Good pop culture history, altho the original concept of cool was something unpopular but savy. Cool was no longer cool once it was popular to be cool, you dig?? Same with punk, the rebellious outsider attitude can't exist along with mass acceptance of even the superficial, marketable aspects of the movement. Cool, like punk, was an attitude, and once it was defined, emulated, and commodified it ceased to exist. Thats not accurate though, the statement "punk is dead" is not accurate. It just evolved into new forms. Once punk was popular, it became neccesary to move onto new frontiers in order to maintain its precept of non-conformity. So it is with cool. As image of the hip beret and sunglasses clad jazz musician became trendy, trivial and stereotyped, cool moved elsewhere. Now we have a meaning of cool that is somewhat opposed to the original. What is cool is what is trendy. Once enough people see how cool something in, it isn't cool anymore, but that meaning has been lost.
The really cool people are not labeled as such, they are ahead of the trends. The period between something being cool and countercultural, and the commericialized selling of that image has grown shorter and shorter. But cool lives on, the punk attitude lives on, the visionaries stay one step ahead, and the market continues to coopt countercultual values for maintainence of the status quo.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Human language and self-consciousness - Shepard essay #2 continued
I'm going to finish summarizing the essay On Animal Thinking today and reflect on the observations of the past two days, tying it together. Shepard thinks the key to human language is that the shift from primate scavenging to hominid hunter/gathering. This shift caused to us to combine the predatorial mode of attention to other animals with the primate attention to the group. Primate sociality was not fitted for a hunting creature as it is characteized by pecking orders, infighting and an overall concern with social relations and ranking. What was needed was the carnivore attention to environment and away from themselves, the concern with "...symbiotic relations with prey species." (Shepard, 43)
The vague sense of past and future possesed by primates and carnivores combines in an important way. Primates used their time-sense to establish kinship. Carnivores used it to create knowledge of the ecosystem. When combined in man, "He begins to apply the idea of kinship obligations to the interplay of other species." (Shepard, 44) The neurological nexus of the primate hunter gave birth to mythology, explaining the orgins of our species in relation to the rest of existence. It allowed humans to view our social arrangements in terms of the ecosystem. For the transmission of these abstract idea to take place humans needed speech and its counterparts, song and dance.
For Shepard, song and dance are a conservative force that gives cohesion and continuity to the group, countering the social frictions of primate sociality which undermine the need for cooperative hunting. Speech gives us history, the mythological explantions tie us into the ecosystem and uses its order as metaphors for our own social arrangements. While music gives connectedness and an identity beyond the individual, speech dissects and classifys. In classifying the natural world through observation of similarities and differences, names are given and the use of these linguistic symbols by others, and the basis of human cognition is created.
The use of names to direct our attention to past expierences parellels the searching, comparing, and data integration of the hunt. It allows us to recreate the hunt with speech and give sequence to an otherwise unordered mess of stimuli. Shepard postulates that these early linguistic hominids used the charateristics of named animals to classify and examine human emotion, personality, and social categories. Human culture, which is learned, is full of abstract and intangible notions of past and future, spirtuality, personality, acceptable behavior, social roles. There is no image we can associate these things with, so we use the behavior animals, which do have names and can be visualized, as metaphors.
The vague sense of past and future possesed by primates and carnivores combines in an important way. Primates used their time-sense to establish kinship. Carnivores used it to create knowledge of the ecosystem. When combined in man, "He begins to apply the idea of kinship obligations to the interplay of other species." (Shepard, 44) The neurological nexus of the primate hunter gave birth to mythology, explaining the orgins of our species in relation to the rest of existence. It allowed humans to view our social arrangements in terms of the ecosystem. For the transmission of these abstract idea to take place humans needed speech and its counterparts, song and dance.
For Shepard, song and dance are a conservative force that gives cohesion and continuity to the group, countering the social frictions of primate sociality which undermine the need for cooperative hunting. Speech gives us history, the mythological explantions tie us into the ecosystem and uses its order as metaphors for our own social arrangements. While music gives connectedness and an identity beyond the individual, speech dissects and classifys. In classifying the natural world through observation of similarities and differences, names are given and the use of these linguistic symbols by others, and the basis of human cognition is created.
The use of names to direct our attention to past expierences parellels the searching, comparing, and data integration of the hunt. It allows us to recreate the hunt with speech and give sequence to an otherwise unordered mess of stimuli. Shepard postulates that these early linguistic hominids used the charateristics of named animals to classify and examine human emotion, personality, and social categories. Human culture, which is learned, is full of abstract and intangible notions of past and future, spirtuality, personality, acceptable behavior, social roles. There is no image we can associate these things with, so we use the behavior animals, which do have names and can be visualized, as metaphors.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Evolution of Intelligence - Shepard essay #2
Continuing with Shepard, today's speculations on the essay On Animal Thinking traces the evolution of intelligence and addresses the anthropocentric tendency to see human intelligence as seperate from the rest of existence. His thesis is that "Progressive intelligence is the evolutionary sharpening of mind due to the interplay between animals." (Shepard, 28) He begins by pointing out that modern life is increasingly devoid of wild animals. A major aspect of Shepard's thinking is that animals play a large role in the ontogeny (development after birth) of human beings. He argues convincingly elsewhere that animals play a role in "...the shaping of personality, identity, and social consciousness" but that is not the main topic of this piece. (Shepard, 22) Its just the presupposition he states to give relevance to the argument to come.
Along with the presupposition noted above, Shepard offers an alternative to the view of evolution as a hierarchical process leading the pinnacle of human intelligence. This flawed notion of transcendent humanity leaves us viewing the others (rest of life on earth) with resentment. The alternative to this ingrained notion is that mind is universal, expressing itself in many forms. Human intelligence emerged from a framework of organs and mechanisms we share with other creatures.
Shepard traces this framework back to flowering plants and insects, whose interaction created the literal ground from which the mammalian mind evolved. This symbiotic relationship (plants as food, insects as pollinators) gave earth the layer of organic soil that is the basis for the complex ecological arrangements to follow. It also produced the nutritious seeds needed for larger life forms to evolve. The diversity of plants is the primary factor in the diversity of ecosystems, the complex nervous systems of later creatures has its basis in the complexity of plant/insect communities. Shepard lists five types of intelligence found in the world at the time of primate evolution. First is the insect, characterized by instinctual behavior based on fine tuned sensory apparati and hive social activity. Second is birds, who possess integrated audio/visual systems. Third and fourth are large predator and prey mammals, and Fourth is primate intelligence. We discussed yesterday how primate intel developed in tropical jungles, but today we will concentrate on the hominid habitat of grasslands and the large mammal predator/prey bond.
The evolution of large mammals and large brains took place most dramatically on grasslands, because there was plenty of available energy to exploit in this ecosystem. Grasslands produce very rich soil which creates plants with plentiful yields of high protein seeds, grain, and vegetable matter readily available for digestion (as opposed forests of trees which require fungi and bacteria to slowly break down woody indigestible matter). Initially brain size increased only to accommodate larger body size. At some point a specialized adaptation of the brain began in carnivores who developed hunting skills like tracking, stalking, and group coordination. Before this they had followed innate reflex, now they used "....combined sensory modalities, memory, experience, and skill." (Shepard, 31)
As predators evolved killed hunting, the pressure of natural selection produced elaborate escaped tactics in herbivore prey such as utilizing geography for protection, acting as decoy to protect most vulnerable, group defensive maneuvering. The result of this is an "....upward spiralling of intelligence..." (Shepard, 32) From our perspective this selection for intel seems an inevitable progression, but there are costs. More brains requires more food and a longer period of infant dependency, and instincts are sometimes better suited than more complex thinking. Only 5 of 20 mammalian orders have gone this route (primates, marine mammals, even and odd toed herbivores, and carnivores). Shepard believes that the number of species with specialized thinking is limited by the number of smaller brained creatures in an ecosystem, a ratio of sorts.
We now concentrate on the type of intelligence found in this predator/prey adaptation. It is defined by a vigilant awareness, an attention to sensory details. The mind places stimulus in the context of past experience, and can cause arousal Arousal in prey releases fear-inducing adrenaline. Arousal in predator releases norepinephrine which causes aggression. This leads us to the omnivores, our selves included, who combine aspects of both mentalities; the cunning of predator and the caution of prey. To find what distinguishes us from other omnivores we need to look at how primates evolved out of nocturnal mammals.
Nocturnal mammals developed heightened hearing and smelling abilities, which were integrated in the mind, forming awareness of time and space (where did that sound or smell come form?When did it occur in relation to other sounds and smells?). This process is known as the "...encephalization...of tissues for storing information" and is characterized by the ability to perceive patterns and create order out of sensory inputs. (Shepard, 39) When this hardware is placed in the context of diurnal arboreal mammals, images could likewise be stored and placed in a spatial/temporal context. This allows the ability to perceive past (recalling image) and future (prediction based on experience), making human consciousness dependent on particular brain adaptations and function that precede primates. Evolution is not as straight forward as it is commonly understood, it involved rewiring older adaptations for new purposes.
Along with the presupposition noted above, Shepard offers an alternative to the view of evolution as a hierarchical process leading the pinnacle of human intelligence. This flawed notion of transcendent humanity leaves us viewing the others (rest of life on earth) with resentment. The alternative to this ingrained notion is that mind is universal, expressing itself in many forms. Human intelligence emerged from a framework of organs and mechanisms we share with other creatures.
Shepard traces this framework back to flowering plants and insects, whose interaction created the literal ground from which the mammalian mind evolved. This symbiotic relationship (plants as food, insects as pollinators) gave earth the layer of organic soil that is the basis for the complex ecological arrangements to follow. It also produced the nutritious seeds needed for larger life forms to evolve. The diversity of plants is the primary factor in the diversity of ecosystems, the complex nervous systems of later creatures has its basis in the complexity of plant/insect communities. Shepard lists five types of intelligence found in the world at the time of primate evolution. First is the insect, characterized by instinctual behavior based on fine tuned sensory apparati and hive social activity. Second is birds, who possess integrated audio/visual systems. Third and fourth are large predator and prey mammals, and Fourth is primate intelligence. We discussed yesterday how primate intel developed in tropical jungles, but today we will concentrate on the hominid habitat of grasslands and the large mammal predator/prey bond.
The evolution of large mammals and large brains took place most dramatically on grasslands, because there was plenty of available energy to exploit in this ecosystem. Grasslands produce very rich soil which creates plants with plentiful yields of high protein seeds, grain, and vegetable matter readily available for digestion (as opposed forests of trees which require fungi and bacteria to slowly break down woody indigestible matter). Initially brain size increased only to accommodate larger body size. At some point a specialized adaptation of the brain began in carnivores who developed hunting skills like tracking, stalking, and group coordination. Before this they had followed innate reflex, now they used "....combined sensory modalities, memory, experience, and skill." (Shepard, 31)
As predators evolved killed hunting, the pressure of natural selection produced elaborate escaped tactics in herbivore prey such as utilizing geography for protection, acting as decoy to protect most vulnerable, group defensive maneuvering. The result of this is an "....upward spiralling of intelligence..." (Shepard, 32) From our perspective this selection for intel seems an inevitable progression, but there are costs. More brains requires more food and a longer period of infant dependency, and instincts are sometimes better suited than more complex thinking. Only 5 of 20 mammalian orders have gone this route (primates, marine mammals, even and odd toed herbivores, and carnivores). Shepard believes that the number of species with specialized thinking is limited by the number of smaller brained creatures in an ecosystem, a ratio of sorts.
We now concentrate on the type of intelligence found in this predator/prey adaptation. It is defined by a vigilant awareness, an attention to sensory details. The mind places stimulus in the context of past experience, and can cause arousal Arousal in prey releases fear-inducing adrenaline. Arousal in predator releases norepinephrine which causes aggression. This leads us to the omnivores, our selves included, who combine aspects of both mentalities; the cunning of predator and the caution of prey. To find what distinguishes us from other omnivores we need to look at how primates evolved out of nocturnal mammals.
Nocturnal mammals developed heightened hearing and smelling abilities, which were integrated in the mind, forming awareness of time and space (where did that sound or smell come form?When did it occur in relation to other sounds and smells?). This process is known as the "...encephalization...of tissues for storing information" and is characterized by the ability to perceive patterns and create order out of sensory inputs. (Shepard, 39) When this hardware is placed in the context of diurnal arboreal mammals, images could likewise be stored and placed in a spatial/temporal context. This allows the ability to perceive past (recalling image) and future (prediction based on experience), making human consciousness dependent on particular brain adaptations and function that precede primates. Evolution is not as straight forward as it is commonly understood, it involved rewiring older adaptations for new purposes.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Irie Eye - Shepard essay #1
Got the Paul Shepard reader yesterday, bringing my attention back to an issue that I haven't explored in some time, the evolution of human consciousness. Shepard's main idea is that we are endowed with the genetic heritage of our Pleistocene ancestors. Our minds, bodies and genes are adapted to the hunter/gatherer lifestyle. In his essay titled The Eye, Shepard explores how the human eye evolved and the possible influences our unique vision had and has on our unique mental ability's and artistic proclivities.
He starts by talking about how what became the primate eye evolved mainly in the Sea, before the first amphibians. This sea-eye was carried by reptiles and early mammals, who for the most part neglected vision while emphasizing smell (think of a dog, with its nose in front, dominating the face). The emphasis on one organ, the nose, lead to an "elaboration of the cerebrum....whose enlargement was begun for receiving, mixing, analyzing, and storing information from the nose." (Shepard, 2) This elaboration is a step towards to the explosive growth of the human cerebral cortex. When the first arboreal primate ancestors evolved, they put the mammalian eye back in a context similar to that of the sea. Gravity is used for orientation, sensed by the eye and endolymphatic fluid in the labyrinth of the ear. Horizontal lines are used as guides (the seafloor and surface, the horizon and branches) for both marine and arboreal creatures.
Once adapted to the trees, early primates evolved stereoscopic vision; the snout shrank and the eyes came to the fore as the dominate organ. You can get an idea of the process by looking at the lemur, who is in between a tree shrew and a monkey as far as dominance of eyes and recession of nose. Stereoscopic vision allows good depth perception through the mechanism of the ciliary muscles which can tilt the lenses in our eyes to focus on objects at varied distances. (Shepard, 6)Color vision evolved the allow us to discern bright fruits in an other wise monochrome world. The keen eyes of these creatures lend themselves to the ability of acute observation, foresight (should I approach it or not) and remembrance of past events. Primate eyes are freed from instinctual signal response, and allowed to examine and interpret its whole environment.(Shepard 11)
The next step is the use of vision by arboreal primates to acquire information from one another. Primates could develop social organization that is learned rather than inherited. This began the process of delaying development to allow for a longer learning period. Communication through para language (body language) developed, with much concentrating on the eyes (tears, furrowed brows, squinting when angry, eyes wide open when concerned, rolling eyes). Movement in the three dimensional arboreal realm required quick decision making and planning ahead by prediction based on past experience. This development will allow terrestial man to develop cultural traditions.
Shepard also discusses how the stereoscopic vision we inherited can explain some of our aesthetic sensibilities. Our affinity for horizontal and vertical lines and our tendency to follow them can be related to concentration on horizontal (horizon, branch) and vertical (tree trunk) that were necessary for balanced movement in the trees. Children enjoy climbing and it seems to be natural. The artist is highlighting or manipulating an image or part of their environment that creates an emotional reaction in their nervous system. This reaction may be felt by others observing it.
He closes with an explanation of how vision works like the other cycles of ecology. Sight begins when energy (light) penetrates our retinas. This energy is translated into "...an electrochemical code of impulses to the brain." (Shepard, 18) This translation is powered by energy we obtained from food which originated in photosynthesis. So our eyes evolved to observe the world and the order in it, which structures our brains and allows us to reflect this order in our art.
Good stuff, Eh?
He starts by talking about how what became the primate eye evolved mainly in the Sea, before the first amphibians. This sea-eye was carried by reptiles and early mammals, who for the most part neglected vision while emphasizing smell (think of a dog, with its nose in front, dominating the face). The emphasis on one organ, the nose, lead to an "elaboration of the cerebrum....whose enlargement was begun for receiving, mixing, analyzing, and storing information from the nose." (Shepard, 2) This elaboration is a step towards to the explosive growth of the human cerebral cortex. When the first arboreal primate ancestors evolved, they put the mammalian eye back in a context similar to that of the sea. Gravity is used for orientation, sensed by the eye and endolymphatic fluid in the labyrinth of the ear. Horizontal lines are used as guides (the seafloor and surface, the horizon and branches) for both marine and arboreal creatures.
Once adapted to the trees, early primates evolved stereoscopic vision; the snout shrank and the eyes came to the fore as the dominate organ. You can get an idea of the process by looking at the lemur, who is in between a tree shrew and a monkey as far as dominance of eyes and recession of nose. Stereoscopic vision allows good depth perception through the mechanism of the ciliary muscles which can tilt the lenses in our eyes to focus on objects at varied distances. (Shepard, 6)Color vision evolved the allow us to discern bright fruits in an other wise monochrome world. The keen eyes of these creatures lend themselves to the ability of acute observation, foresight (should I approach it or not) and remembrance of past events. Primate eyes are freed from instinctual signal response, and allowed to examine and interpret its whole environment.(Shepard 11)
The next step is the use of vision by arboreal primates to acquire information from one another. Primates could develop social organization that is learned rather than inherited. This began the process of delaying development to allow for a longer learning period. Communication through para language (body language) developed, with much concentrating on the eyes (tears, furrowed brows, squinting when angry, eyes wide open when concerned, rolling eyes). Movement in the three dimensional arboreal realm required quick decision making and planning ahead by prediction based on past experience. This development will allow terrestial man to develop cultural traditions.
Shepard also discusses how the stereoscopic vision we inherited can explain some of our aesthetic sensibilities. Our affinity for horizontal and vertical lines and our tendency to follow them can be related to concentration on horizontal (horizon, branch) and vertical (tree trunk) that were necessary for balanced movement in the trees. Children enjoy climbing and it seems to be natural. The artist is highlighting or manipulating an image or part of their environment that creates an emotional reaction in their nervous system. This reaction may be felt by others observing it.
He closes with an explanation of how vision works like the other cycles of ecology. Sight begins when energy (light) penetrates our retinas. This energy is translated into "...an electrochemical code of impulses to the brain." (Shepard, 18) This translation is powered by energy we obtained from food which originated in photosynthesis. So our eyes evolved to observe the world and the order in it, which structures our brains and allows us to reflect this order in our art.
Good stuff, Eh?
Monday, September 22, 2008
I'm here. Come get to know the digital me.
The theme I've been exploring lately is Futurism/Cyberpunk.What comes next??Where will our technology take us??I Started with William Gibson's Pattern Recognition and Spook Country which are more properly called post-cyberpunk. The original genre of Cyberpunk is extinct since the type of world envisioned in books like Neuromancer where Corporations have superseded Nation-States as the primary force in shaping social/political/economic is already with us. In fact, Huey Newton was arguing that this was a fact back in the early seventies with his notion of Intercommunalism. Our technology has already surpassed the then-fantastic ideas of highly intelligent computers, biometric surveilance, nanotechnology, and biosensors.
So gone are the historic conditions from which this genre arose, the early days of computing and the Internet. Really cyberpunk is just a period in the history of Sci-fi, which has alwaysponders the future while reflecting the conditions of the society at that particular time. Much of it has a darker vison then what came before it, but all of it deals with pertinent issues of the period from the early 80's to the mid 90's. The word was first used in 80, Bladerunner was out in 82, Neuromancer in 84. The most basic defintion of Cyberpunk is Postmodern Science fiction, but I think its fairly accurate, as accurate as a concept like postmodernism can get, but it fits.
Ray Kurzweil's book The Age of Spiritual Machines is an example of modern futurism that sees the inevitable growth of computing power to the level of self-consciousness and beyond as a benevolent event. To be fair, Kurzweil acknowledges that tech is a double-edged sword, but thinks we can direct the growth of tech to our advantage. I think his hypothesis that computers will become more human as humans merge with computers is accurate. The most interesting part of the book was the beginning where he explains how the evolution of technology follows the pattern of evolution in general. Natural selection gave humans larger, more complex brains with ever-increasing computation ability, and computers are just an extension of this, but can take to the next level. The question is not whether technology will continue to evolve, but what our fate in all of it will be.
Our intelligence has obvious shortcoming (Nuclear weapons, pollution), so perhaps the evolution of an intelligence above our own will help correct these self-destructive tendencies. But what will a correction of human failings look like?? This question is explored in sci-fi movies like Appleseed and I, Robot. I feel the intellectual speculation behind these Sci-fi scenarios is actually the most relevant philosophical investigations we can undertake.
This leads me to a field of study that I could devote a lot of time to researching, which is the effects of technology on culture and society. Looking at the historic record, studying the direction of tech growth and speculating and how future society will function. What I really want to get at is that we don't need to be passive observers of social change. We can ask ourselves what we want our future society to look like and then focus our tech developments on that. We have the tools and the intelligence to create a society we find more fitting, but the power to direct change is concentrated in the hands of people who have another sort of vision. It is the vision of using tech to further control society and stifle human potential.
As long as we are alienated, jaded, and sedated consumers, we will not take the steps to create the world we want to live in. As long as our idea of human nature is a Hobbesian world of selfish individuals stabbing each other in the back for egotistic gain, we will accept coercive control and a society that has been hacked apart to create autonomous consumers seeking satisfactions not in human relationships, but in products. So I want to study how tech has impacted society and show how the use of tech and the changes engendered have not been the natural outcomes of the tech, but the result of direction in manners benefiting the ruling class. (That may sound dangerously Marxist to some, but we should get over that linguistic taboo. Marx's critique of capitalism was quite valid and we would be fools to ignore it. You don't need to be a Marxist to realize that. Marx himself is quoted as saying he was not a Marxist, but I digress)My point is that tech changes society (tip of the hat to McLuhan) but the uses of technology are many and the resulting changes are conditioned by the objectives of those creating and controlling them.
An example of the effects of tech on society is found in another book I'm reading, The Birth of the Cool which explores the links between Bebop, the Beat movement in literature, abstract expressionism, and Zen Buddisms introduction to the west. I feel all these phenomenon adress the fear and uncertainty of life after the invention of atomic weopons. Bebop and abstract Exp. take the fractured world of cubism to a new level of frantic excitement and confusion. They try to give order to the disorder and incongrous world we found ourselves in as americans after WWII. Zen buddism enters western consciouness at the time we need it most, a time of irrationality and frenzied emotional reaction to the development of the technology neccesary to make our planet uninhabitable. Seeing the effect that the bomb had on society, most now feel Nuclear weapons should be abolished. The demand is there to use tech in a wiser manner, but the political power to do so is lacking. That doesn't say much about democracy in America, but if you still believe that our government is democratically accountable you have probably stopped receiving any news about what has gone on the last 50 years or you just have turned off your criticial thinking abilities and bought the lies they sold ya, but hey, its easier that way.
This issue combines my interests in political science, economics, (our poli-systems are run by the biggest players, corporations) history, media studies, and anthropology. We should remember at all times that we are talking about is how to change things to make life more satisfying for us, our families, and those that live around us. The idea of satisfaction I'm talking about is basic; enough food, clean water, health care, education, and social interaction thru viable communal institutions to function as human beings. By viable I mean created by members of a community to satisfy the needs of the community, rather than to satisfy the needs of any dominate group. We know what we want, we have to tools to achieve it. What we're lacking is the will. As long as our minds are shackled by corporately controlled media, government by big business, and an indoctrination system that tells us capitalism and the individual are the only valid concerns in our lives, the will to create change, even if its a small scale alternative to the structured way of life, is not present in any significant amount.
The will is there, in all of us, or at least he knowledge that something about the way we are living is wrong. Its just buried by layers of egotism, distrust, and a negative concept of human nature. We are taught that what I'm saying is childish crap, we can't change the system, its the only way to prevent us evil humans from murdering one another. If you look at history with a mind that can see through some of these ideological filters you see that the only thing that ever has effected positive social change has been small groups of dedicated people, and that our systems of state control has lead to the most murderous era in human existence.
If any of this strikes you as being true or if you feel that it is bullocks, please let me know.
The only way to get anything done is to share ideas, and that is my intention.
So gone are the historic conditions from which this genre arose, the early days of computing and the Internet. Really cyberpunk is just a period in the history of Sci-fi, which has alwaysponders the future while reflecting the conditions of the society at that particular time. Much of it has a darker vison then what came before it, but all of it deals with pertinent issues of the period from the early 80's to the mid 90's. The word was first used in 80, Bladerunner was out in 82, Neuromancer in 84. The most basic defintion of Cyberpunk is Postmodern Science fiction, but I think its fairly accurate, as accurate as a concept like postmodernism can get, but it fits.
Ray Kurzweil's book The Age of Spiritual Machines is an example of modern futurism that sees the inevitable growth of computing power to the level of self-consciousness and beyond as a benevolent event. To be fair, Kurzweil acknowledges that tech is a double-edged sword, but thinks we can direct the growth of tech to our advantage. I think his hypothesis that computers will become more human as humans merge with computers is accurate. The most interesting part of the book was the beginning where he explains how the evolution of technology follows the pattern of evolution in general. Natural selection gave humans larger, more complex brains with ever-increasing computation ability, and computers are just an extension of this, but can take to the next level. The question is not whether technology will continue to evolve, but what our fate in all of it will be.
Our intelligence has obvious shortcoming (Nuclear weapons, pollution), so perhaps the evolution of an intelligence above our own will help correct these self-destructive tendencies. But what will a correction of human failings look like?? This question is explored in sci-fi movies like Appleseed and I, Robot. I feel the intellectual speculation behind these Sci-fi scenarios is actually the most relevant philosophical investigations we can undertake.
This leads me to a field of study that I could devote a lot of time to researching, which is the effects of technology on culture and society. Looking at the historic record, studying the direction of tech growth and speculating and how future society will function. What I really want to get at is that we don't need to be passive observers of social change. We can ask ourselves what we want our future society to look like and then focus our tech developments on that. We have the tools and the intelligence to create a society we find more fitting, but the power to direct change is concentrated in the hands of people who have another sort of vision. It is the vision of using tech to further control society and stifle human potential.
As long as we are alienated, jaded, and sedated consumers, we will not take the steps to create the world we want to live in. As long as our idea of human nature is a Hobbesian world of selfish individuals stabbing each other in the back for egotistic gain, we will accept coercive control and a society that has been hacked apart to create autonomous consumers seeking satisfactions not in human relationships, but in products. So I want to study how tech has impacted society and show how the use of tech and the changes engendered have not been the natural outcomes of the tech, but the result of direction in manners benefiting the ruling class. (That may sound dangerously Marxist to some, but we should get over that linguistic taboo. Marx's critique of capitalism was quite valid and we would be fools to ignore it. You don't need to be a Marxist to realize that. Marx himself is quoted as saying he was not a Marxist, but I digress)My point is that tech changes society (tip of the hat to McLuhan) but the uses of technology are many and the resulting changes are conditioned by the objectives of those creating and controlling them.
An example of the effects of tech on society is found in another book I'm reading, The Birth of the Cool which explores the links between Bebop, the Beat movement in literature, abstract expressionism, and Zen Buddisms introduction to the west. I feel all these phenomenon adress the fear and uncertainty of life after the invention of atomic weopons. Bebop and abstract Exp. take the fractured world of cubism to a new level of frantic excitement and confusion. They try to give order to the disorder and incongrous world we found ourselves in as americans after WWII. Zen buddism enters western consciouness at the time we need it most, a time of irrationality and frenzied emotional reaction to the development of the technology neccesary to make our planet uninhabitable. Seeing the effect that the bomb had on society, most now feel Nuclear weapons should be abolished. The demand is there to use tech in a wiser manner, but the political power to do so is lacking. That doesn't say much about democracy in America, but if you still believe that our government is democratically accountable you have probably stopped receiving any news about what has gone on the last 50 years or you just have turned off your criticial thinking abilities and bought the lies they sold ya, but hey, its easier that way.
This issue combines my interests in political science, economics, (our poli-systems are run by the biggest players, corporations) history, media studies, and anthropology. We should remember at all times that we are talking about is how to change things to make life more satisfying for us, our families, and those that live around us. The idea of satisfaction I'm talking about is basic; enough food, clean water, health care, education, and social interaction thru viable communal institutions to function as human beings. By viable I mean created by members of a community to satisfy the needs of the community, rather than to satisfy the needs of any dominate group. We know what we want, we have to tools to achieve it. What we're lacking is the will. As long as our minds are shackled by corporately controlled media, government by big business, and an indoctrination system that tells us capitalism and the individual are the only valid concerns in our lives, the will to create change, even if its a small scale alternative to the structured way of life, is not present in any significant amount.
The will is there, in all of us, or at least he knowledge that something about the way we are living is wrong. Its just buried by layers of egotism, distrust, and a negative concept of human nature. We are taught that what I'm saying is childish crap, we can't change the system, its the only way to prevent us evil humans from murdering one another. If you look at history with a mind that can see through some of these ideological filters you see that the only thing that ever has effected positive social change has been small groups of dedicated people, and that our systems of state control has lead to the most murderous era in human existence.
If any of this strikes you as being true or if you feel that it is bullocks, please let me know.
The only way to get anything done is to share ideas, and that is my intention.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)