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).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)