The Melting World

This week we read about cyborg theory, a recent view that life as we thought we knew it (as the individual animal/human as a separate cohesive entity) is a myth and that all life forms are really collectives: we are each composed of many living organisms (cells, bacteria, amoebas, etc.), chemicals, electricity, and now technologies and their effects (Murphie & Potts, 129). This seems reasonable to me in the sense that we are actually a combination of all sorts of living matter, each unique somewhat in our DNA code patterning, but the theory fails to explain consciousness and free will to me (to them these are probably chemical concoctions or nonexistent?): cyber theorists see all life as an event not an entity…

Cyborg theorists then push this idea beyond the individual, and see the entire world as collective information being processed: living organisms that network and communicate and self-generate. They include machines and the technologies used by the living into the realm of the network (as part of life). To them, we have reached at state where machines/technologies are imbedded inside us and we inside them. In sum, they seem to see all of us as mere interconnected cyborgs (are we then one big planetary, galactic organism?), and they argue we cannot survive anymore without our machine technologies. I think this view of the human as a mere information being processed as limited and too dependent on the limiting computer metaphor to to explain a much more complex world.

Well, I guess I tend to take a broader picture also of what they see as technologies. A sharp rock, a spark to start a fire inside a cold cave are technologies and, yes, I think humans need such things to survive, but I also know that the vast majority of people on this planet live quite well without the so-called ‘high’ technologies. I think people enmeshed in the cyberworld always forget that important point. The cyberworld is really a tiny space inhabited by a few privileged(?) folks, and the investigation of DNA is in its infancy and has yet to provide us any real answers about what life is…and I fear with Bill Joy (M&P, 140-141) that researchers might be acting with too much confidence & without any foresight or ethical concerns about the consequences of their bumblings in the dark.

Thus, they, as in those very few who are obsessed with the latest technologies, are maybe in some ways part-machine, because of their constant interaction with them, and those of us mildly involved in using latest technologies might be convinced we are now interconnected with the machines, but probably about 80% of the world population is not so involved in a world of machines or technologies beyond the hoe and bicycle. I guess you could argue that they are impacted by those technologies and those who use them….mostly in adverse ways, too, unfortunately.

Yes, we are all interconnected, but nature, animal/human life, and the machines are not so evenly held in importance for the majority of humans. The patterns in nature are not so well understood, but computers are (at least by their makers). I think the imbalance between humans and the natural world has caused the increasing dependence on technologies to try to correct or control the imbalance we manufactured in the first place. Machines are our band-aids, but they are no match for Nature’s need to find balance. Humans will not outwit nature, I believe, because they haven’t the foresight and they can’t control their greed.

But has it reached a point where some of us need the computer and it needs us for survival? Certainly one hooked up to a lung machine needs it to survive, but is that the quality of survival we wish for ourselves? Is such technology really wonderful if that person can’t stand up and climb a mountain? I guess it is for that person to decide ultimately. Is being plugged into a computer 24-7 a worthwhile existence? For those who are, perhaps it is valuable (addictive), but isn’t it more of a virtual existence?

Does the difference between life and virtual life really matter? We could argue that reality is not real anymore: perhaps the world has turned into Baudrillard’s Simulacra (the world bears no relation to reality whatsoever, merely a sign for another sign)? With all the mediaspeak and sound bites, are we truly sure what is going on? If virtual reality is all that remains, then those of us who have ‘become one’ with such technologies will need to find an alternative to physical bodies because our bodies will wither away (or float-bloat) away. Computers are fun, fascinating, and challenging, but a lot simpler than the ecosystem of a forest. Cyborg theory falls short of theories based on bio-diversity, it sees life as interconnected information processes, but it doesn’t acknowledge the damage humans and their technlogies have had on the natural environment. We need to admit that humans are the major actors creating the many natural imbalances occurring.

In sum, reading about cyborg theory helps me re-think, re-evaluate how I live my life…to tell the truth…thinking about all of this made me choose the bicycle over the car this morning. I, for one, prefer to have my physical self united with my mind, even if that means embracing my fragile mortality! 🙂

Murphie, A. & Potts, J. (2003). Culture and Technology. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.