This week I did a free-write to try and stimulate my mind on writing a prescriptive cyborg rhetoric. I took a look a Burke’s ideas on rhetoric and this is what I began to somewhat generate:
How will humanity reach its pinnacle of destruction? Kenneth Burke suggests that part of being human is to be rotten with perfection (bradley.edu). To its fault humanity has turned to technology in its quest for perfection, and will eventually evolve into the cyborgs, which will then become the new human. As a result, technology has acquired the use of language, and strives to be human, for that is its idea of perfection. A modern day example is the database programs, which try to convince its user that it is human, but fails, for it lacks identity, even through it maybe flawless in its persuasion.
Burke also suggests that rhetoric is based on identity, and that identification allows for individuals to divide others into “us verse them” categories (bradley.edu). Bicentennial Man, is a fictional demonstration, which illustrates this phenomenon in the future. A household appliance learns to use language to persuade that it is human, but before the argument is accepted, a transition takes place where the appliance must find a suitable flesh form. It is only when it develops the ability to age and dies, does society consider its identity that of human; hence, while humanity strives for perfection, it is an unattainable ideal, for immortality is not within the identity of human.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Cyborgs and Language
Discussing cyborgs and language leads to the on going question of what is cyborg-rhetoric? From an essentialist point of view, a cyborg is a human incorporated with technology, rhetoric is language; hence, cyborg-rhetoric is the language of humans ingrained with technology. Intriguingly, when flesh is blended with technology, then the essence of human begins to change. Kenneth Burke says that rhetoric is a human agents use of words to achieve certain attitudes, or actions in other human agents (bradley.edu). Ironically, if this is to hold true then the cyborg is human.
The transformation of what is considered human then changes the definition of what is cyborg-rhetoric. It cannot be looked at as an A to Z conversation, but A to Z, as well as Z to A. This means cyborg-rhetoric not only addresses language with humans interacting with technology, but also when technology uses language to pass its embodiment off as human.
The Bicentennial Man is an example of the Z to A discussion. The advance kitchen appliance learns to use language to pass itself off as human. Through time the appliance takes measures to appear physically more human, embracing Burke’s concept that rhetoric emerges from identity. Identity derives from the social context, which labels our being based upon physical appearance. Before the machine can be considered human it must obtain an identity, which is accepted as human, before it can use Aristotelian persuasion to make the argument that it is human.
Henceforth, when Hayles addresses the end of human nature by technology, it is not the A to Z evolutionary pattern, which will be the end of our demise, for this is a pattern of replication and made in the present. Technology’s conquest of human nature will occur in the Z to A evolutionary pattern, which is a mutation of randomness within the present, meaning disruption of societal norms, and destructive Armageddon as portrayed in the Terminator series.
The transformation of what is considered human then changes the definition of what is cyborg-rhetoric. It cannot be looked at as an A to Z conversation, but A to Z, as well as Z to A. This means cyborg-rhetoric not only addresses language with humans interacting with technology, but also when technology uses language to pass its embodiment off as human.
The Bicentennial Man is an example of the Z to A discussion. The advance kitchen appliance learns to use language to pass itself off as human. Through time the appliance takes measures to appear physically more human, embracing Burke’s concept that rhetoric emerges from identity. Identity derives from the social context, which labels our being based upon physical appearance. Before the machine can be considered human it must obtain an identity, which is accepted as human, before it can use Aristotelian persuasion to make the argument that it is human.
Henceforth, when Hayles addresses the end of human nature by technology, it is not the A to Z evolutionary pattern, which will be the end of our demise, for this is a pattern of replication and made in the present. Technology’s conquest of human nature will occur in the Z to A evolutionary pattern, which is a mutation of randomness within the present, meaning disruption of societal norms, and destructive Armageddon as portrayed in the Terminator series.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Mind and Body
Hayles suggests that the mind without the body does not exist (246). This means that the body contains some value, a contradiction to the Matrix, where if the mind dies the body as its servant also perishes. This is a continuous debate, but how does this relate to the study of rhetoric?
The mind is credited with a higher value than that of the body, for the mind is the language epicenter. It makes use of language either as the generator, or interpreter. In an Aristotelian sense, it is the mind that uses language for persuasion; hence, the perception of it having greater value than that of the body. On the other hand, from a Burkean point of view, language is generated as a form of identity. In today’s world it is the body, which gives us our identity. In the social context, we not only read, but we are read (Lefebvre 95). Our identity is based upon gender, race, religious preference, sexual orientation, and other socio-political-economic factors. These categories thingify our identities, which in-turn affects how we interact within the institutions of society. In this sense, the body is more valuable than the mind.
Essentially, this plays out in the study of rhetoric, because a writer strives to be heard, to establish a voice. This voice comes from identity, and identity lays the foundation by which language will be used as a means of persuasion. Therefore, Hayles is correct to say that the mind is not the mind without the body (246).
The mind is credited with a higher value than that of the body, for the mind is the language epicenter. It makes use of language either as the generator, or interpreter. In an Aristotelian sense, it is the mind that uses language for persuasion; hence, the perception of it having greater value than that of the body. On the other hand, from a Burkean point of view, language is generated as a form of identity. In today’s world it is the body, which gives us our identity. In the social context, we not only read, but we are read (Lefebvre 95). Our identity is based upon gender, race, religious preference, sexual orientation, and other socio-political-economic factors. These categories thingify our identities, which in-turn affects how we interact within the institutions of society. In this sense, the body is more valuable than the mind.
Essentially, this plays out in the study of rhetoric, because a writer strives to be heard, to establish a voice. This voice comes from identity, and identity lays the foundation by which language will be used as a means of persuasion. Therefore, Hayles is correct to say that the mind is not the mind without the body (246).
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Disrupting the System
“That is not how a boy walks, or how a girl sits!” As Hayles would claim, these are significant verbal injunctions which illustrate, or act as inscriptions for how an individual should act within society (200). Thinking of the statement that is not how a girl sits transcends to a movie scene from Basic Instinct.
Sharon Stone’s character is brought into a police station for questioning, under suspicion for murdering her boyfriend. As she is being question, Stone sits as a “lady should sit,” as inscribed by society; however, when the officers leave the room and are talking amongst themselves, watching through the hidden glass, she knowing they are watching breaks society’s norm. Her act of defiance is uncrossing her legs and sitting like a guy for a split second, then retuning to sitting with her legs crossed. To our dismay she is wearing no undergarments.
This in turn represents the physical force and aggression spoken of by Johnson (206). In breaking away from the system, Sharon Stone’s action asserts her sexuality over the male officers; hence, she gains power in the situation through her aggressive behavior. The system is forever changed.
Sharon Stone’s character is brought into a police station for questioning, under suspicion for murdering her boyfriend. As she is being question, Stone sits as a “lady should sit,” as inscribed by society; however, when the officers leave the room and are talking amongst themselves, watching through the hidden glass, she knowing they are watching breaks society’s norm. Her act of defiance is uncrossing her legs and sitting like a guy for a split second, then retuning to sitting with her legs crossed. To our dismay she is wearing no undergarments.
This in turn represents the physical force and aggression spoken of by Johnson (206). In breaking away from the system, Sharon Stone’s action asserts her sexuality over the male officers; hence, she gains power in the situation through her aggressive behavior. The system is forever changed.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Music as Immersion
I was pondering this week what an immersive text was, and if I have ever been truly immersed. That is to say has mind and body ever completely engaged in the virtual realm to which is spoken. As I addressed the issue within the framework of the class’ blackboard discussion this morning, I only addressed the textual world of books and movies, to which my reply is no. This afternoon I was reminiscing over the wedding I attended this weekend, and remembered music. This is what I am writing about this week; however, not just music as a textual world, but karaoke, or karaoke under the influence.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
The Undervalued Body
When society speaks of cyborgs and rhetoric, or cyborgrhetoric, the conversation is based upon two concepts, the prosthetic body and language, which is created of the mind. As Hayles states, information cannot exist apart from its embodiment (49). Ironically, society’s discourse of the topic is surrounded by the Hollywood perspective of the cyborg-being. This causes a focus upon the technological side of the conversation where inevitably humankind will destroy itself. As a result the discourse of the conversation has taken focus on the mind, while devaluing the body. In order to understand why this happens, an exploration of mind and body need to take place.
When talking of the mind, one must ask what is cyborgrhetoric? In short, it is language, but really it is a combination of Aristotelian persuasiveness and Burkean identification. However, language cannot exist unless it has a body to inhabit. The body also gives it its identity, may it be human or machine.
Then why is the body devalued? To understand this one must understand the conscious involuntary and the unconscious voluntary. The conscious involuntary refers to the components of brain operation over the body, which occur automatically and one is aware that such functions are occurring; such as breathing, or heartbeat. The unconscious voluntary is acts, such as reaching for a cup. One voluntarily reaches for the cup, but they are unconscious of brain activity, which says reach for the cup. This realm is the odd space, where if someone smiles, an individual may return the smile. In a sense this is not language, for it is neither persuasive nor presents identity. In short, while this gets as close to engaging the body into language, it falls short; hence, in the overall conversation of cyborgrhetoric the body is undervalued, and really seen as a servant of the mind. It may be fair to say that true engagement of body and language may never be a reachable action.
Due to the body’s servitude another question is raised. Is language the cyborg of which is spoken, or is it a parasite in nature, and seeking to destroy humankind? When society speaks of cyborgs, the conversation centers on humans and technology; however, each acts with language on their own; hence, language is a cyborg. However, when we look at language as the entity that brings human and machine together to develop a new identity, then language is actually a parasitic host looking to carry out Hollywood’s vision of Humankinds end.
When talking of the mind, one must ask what is cyborgrhetoric? In short, it is language, but really it is a combination of Aristotelian persuasiveness and Burkean identification. However, language cannot exist unless it has a body to inhabit. The body also gives it its identity, may it be human or machine.
Then why is the body devalued? To understand this one must understand the conscious involuntary and the unconscious voluntary. The conscious involuntary refers to the components of brain operation over the body, which occur automatically and one is aware that such functions are occurring; such as breathing, or heartbeat. The unconscious voluntary is acts, such as reaching for a cup. One voluntarily reaches for the cup, but they are unconscious of brain activity, which says reach for the cup. This realm is the odd space, where if someone smiles, an individual may return the smile. In a sense this is not language, for it is neither persuasive nor presents identity. In short, while this gets as close to engaging the body into language, it falls short; hence, in the overall conversation of cyborgrhetoric the body is undervalued, and really seen as a servant of the mind. It may be fair to say that true engagement of body and language may never be a reachable action.
Due to the body’s servitude another question is raised. Is language the cyborg of which is spoken, or is it a parasite in nature, and seeking to destroy humankind? When society speaks of cyborgs, the conversation centers on humans and technology; however, each acts with language on their own; hence, language is a cyborg. However, when we look at language as the entity that brings human and machine together to develop a new identity, then language is actually a parasitic host looking to carry out Hollywood’s vision of Humankinds end.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
The Reality of Cyborgs and Hollywood
A week ago I had no idea that such entities as databases, which you could communicate with existed; their purpose to see if they could trick you into thinking they were human. To further elaborate on these devices, over time they gain the ability to add to their memory and develop new responses. This exploration has made me considered the reality of the fictional technology films of Hollywood. These films would include Bicentennial Man, iRobot, and the Terminator series.
Bicentennial Man is essential a movie about a household appliance, which evolves to be near human. The company that built the robots programmed them with a standard program and limited responses for communication. However, one robot distinguishes the ability to learn expanded responses and through a series of lessons, even learns the concept of humor. Ironically, in this movie the evolution of the robot is harmless, but the potential of danger lies close on the horizon.
iRobot and Terminator are such examples where the database learns new responses and develops over time. Eventually these databases become so advance that they throw their human controllers to the side, and proceed to take over the robotic operations on their own, which projects the threat to the end of humankind.
The destruction of humankind is what is most disturbing. It is not far off, or unrealistic to think that the current databases can evolve to actually throw humans to the waste side, take over modern technology, and send us into extinction. The question is how far do we go in our experiment with technology, or do we ignore the possible dangers, and meet our inevitable end.
Bicentennial Man is essential a movie about a household appliance, which evolves to be near human. The company that built the robots programmed them with a standard program and limited responses for communication. However, one robot distinguishes the ability to learn expanded responses and through a series of lessons, even learns the concept of humor. Ironically, in this movie the evolution of the robot is harmless, but the potential of danger lies close on the horizon.
iRobot and Terminator are such examples where the database learns new responses and develops over time. Eventually these databases become so advance that they throw their human controllers to the side, and proceed to take over the robotic operations on their own, which projects the threat to the end of humankind.
The destruction of humankind is what is most disturbing. It is not far off, or unrealistic to think that the current databases can evolve to actually throw humans to the waste side, take over modern technology, and send us into extinction. The question is how far do we go in our experiment with technology, or do we ignore the possible dangers, and meet our inevitable end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)