This week my blog has been focusing on the idea of the cyborg and whether the addition of superhuman parts makes them less human. Is this physical addition stripping the human of what Muris (2003) refers to as physical embodiment – the spirit, conciousness and identity? I don’t think that this is so as in essence it is the addition of a physical peice, but perhaps the person who has the addition to their body may experience feelings of alienation because of their difference to others? This may then effect their own feelings of embodiment with the part of the body that has been replaced? Pickering (2005) discusses academics carving up the sciences into human and non human and suggests the addition of non human to human creates non human. Pickering wants to focus on the interface between the human and non human – where they overlap. This suggests that the body part is not actually human if it is a prosthetic, however it is being controlled by the same spirit and conciencse that the other parts are being controlled by – so why is this so. What can be judged as human ability and what as non human and where is the line drawn? In the case of the Olympics size of the prosthetic affected what was classed as non human ability. “In a post-race interview Pistorius said it was “an unfair race” because Oliveira was wearing elongated running blades which added about four inches to his height and, more pertinently, his stride length.An IPC spokesman says the blades of all the athletes were measured prior to the Games and all were deemed to be within the rules” (a)

Is the fact that the body part is controlled by humans mind what makes it a human body part? The artist Stelarc experimented with the idea of the body as obsolete and allowed others to electrically control his muscular movement. If he were to compete in the Olympics but his body and muscles were controlled by others would he be allowed to participate in the “normal” olympics or the paraolympics and would it be considered as an equal competition?

I am not sure where this all fits in but my mind is going crazy with ideas and with the most conceptually difficult of readings

I have also been focusing more on the idea of the meme, which links in well with this discussion on what is and isn’t human. I have looked at he idea that the meme has an identity and this identity can be parasitic or enhancing. But how is the meme supported? Do we have an actual part in our brains which supports the replicator. And if so how human is the meme?

Muri, A. (2003). Of Shit and the Soul: Tropes of Cybernetic Disembodiment in Contemporary Culture. Body & Society, 9/3
Pickering, A. (2005). Asian eels and global warming: a posthumanist perspective on society and the environment. Ethics and the Environment, 10(2), 29-43
(a) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/paralympic-sport/9517576/Oscar-Pistorius-controversy-Alan-Oliveiras-blades-dont-look-right.html

Superpowers: Real-World Powers | Main Page | Obsidian Portal.

This is a game about a hero who began as a normal human but has had parts of his body replaced by artificial devices.

The player determines what parts are artificial, using the randomly generated Abilities and Powers as a guide. For example, Strength of Rm or better suggests the limbs and skeleton are artificial. Hyper-Running or Hyperspeed could come from a leg-replacement. Vision Powers seem to require at least 1 man-made eye. Although this is a very random game idea and I am not sure how long I could play this game for!!
I did read an article recently about whether when people have limbs or body parts replaced due to injury, illness or accident, should they be given super human abilities? One of the doctors suggested that if they were given these kind of abilities it would change what it is to be human – but is this actually true? (must check reading to define this) It depends on what we value as essentially human attributes and I don’t see the ability to jump higher as non human.

Scientists build the One Million Dollar man – Telegraph.

This week I have been blogging about technology and meme’s, I have been reading and tweeting about Posthuman and moving onto cyborgs. I am not sure if there is a difference between the two – more of a concept -post humanism / cyborgs appear to be all about the blurring of boundaries between humans and materials

Haraways – confusion over boundaries, why do we have to end at the skin
Hayles – post human is the removal of self will
Edwards – entangling of the human subject with the object world
ANgus – connections between humans and materials – situated knowledge, cyborg ontologies, border pedagogy
Muri – human body is vanishing – interfaced with machine, robbed of spirit, consciousness or identity.

The questions that arise are about human essence – whether it actually represents the human , whether it is vital as a representation, if it is removed or preserved in the melange of human and machine, whether it is a separate unit

and about Interactions

I don’t know what else to say really!

Now to work out what transhumanism is? – (?) when the body is no longer useful or has deteriorated through age illness of accident and has prosthetics to preserve it or enhance it but the human essence prevails, in comparison to posthumanism which blends human essence with technology through its interactions.

The race to create 'insect cyborgs' | Science | The Observer.

The insect cyborgs have crossed this boundary, where does the insect end and the technology start. The question is who is in control of which part and is the boundary flexible when someone else is taking charge.

Haraway, Donna, (2007) “A cyborg manifesto” from Bell, David; Kennedy, Barbara M (eds), The
cybercultures reader pp.34-65, London: Routledge